Oct 24, 2024 Regular Council

THANK YOU NELLIE, WE HAVE DANIEL LUNSFORD.

DANIEL. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

COMPLETED IN 1936 THE HOUSE IS LATIN COLONIAL STYLE, IS THE HOME OF GALVESTONIANS LOUIS FOX JR.

AND WIFE CATHERINE.

IT WAS BUILT BY MOORE AND LLOYD, A HOUSTON ARCHITECTURAL FIRM WHICH ALSO WORKED EXTENSIVELY IN RIVER OAKS.

THIS IS LIKELY WHY THE HOUSE CLOSELY RESEMBLES WORKS BY GALVESTON ARCHITECT JOHN STAUB, WHO WAS WELL KNOWN FOR THIS LATIN COLONIAL STYLE AND WHO ALSO WORK IN RIVER OAKS.

THE HOUSE RETAINS A HIGH DEGREE OF, EXCUSE ME, ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY AND AUTHENTICITY EVEN TODAY, AS THE HOUSE LIES OUTSIDE OF A HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION WOULD FURTHER PROTECT IT FOR GALVESTON RESIDENTS TO ENJOY IN THE FUTURE.

WE HAVE A PHOTO HERE ON THE SCREEN, AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

THANK YOU, DANIEL. COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. LUNSFORD? IT IS 5:48 P.M..

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8A.

IS THERE ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS? HEARING NO RESPONSE.

IT IS 5:48 P.M..

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8A AND BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ACTION.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

HAVE A MOTION COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

I'D LIKE TO APPROVE THIS HOUSE LOCATED AT 4404 AVENUE O AS A GALVESTON LANDMARK AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

VERY GOOD. LET'S WE'LL GET YOU ON THE SCREEN HERE, PLEASE.

THERE WE GO. THERE WE GO.

ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

THANK YOU. ITEM 8B NELLIE.

[8.B. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending The Code Of The City Of Galveston, As Amended, The 2015 Galveston Land Development Regulations, By Amending “Article 6: Subdivision Design And Land Development”, Regarding Fiscal Security; Making Clarifications As Applicable; Planning Case Number 24ZA-006; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject.(T. Tietjens)]

ITEM 8B CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, AS AMENDED.

THE 2020 THE 2015 GALVESTON LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BY AMENDING ARTICLE SIX SUBDIVISION DESIGN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGARDING FISCAL SECURITY, MAKING CLARIFICATIONS AS APPLICABLE.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 24ZA-006 MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

AND THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, TIM TIETJENS.

TIM. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

GOOD EVENING COUNCIL.

THIS IS A TEXT AMENDMENT TO OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

THIS IS ONE ONE THAT KIND OF FALLS INTO THAT CATEGORY OF REDUCING BUREAUCRATIC INTERVENTION WHERE POSSIBLE? THIS BASICALLY IS IN REGARD TO SECTION 6.205 OF OUR LDR, WHICH IS THE GUARANTEE OF INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS IN A SUBDIVISION.

WE REQUIRE THAT DEVELOPERS SUPPLY A GUARANTEE OF FISCAL SECURITY WHEN A SUBDIVISION IS CONTEMPLATED THAT REQUIRES CONSTRUCTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE.

[00:50:06]

BUT THE AMOUNT OF THAT DEPENDS UPON THE TIMING OPTIONS CHOSEN BY THE DEVELOPER.

SO A DEVELOPER, FOR EXAMPLE, COULD OPT TO FRONT ALL THAT AND CONSTRUCT IT BEFORE THEY RECORD THEIR FINAL PLAT, OR IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO A DIFFERENT OPTION, WHICH IS THEY CHOOSE TO FILE THAT PLAT SOONER IN THAT PROCESS WE REQUIRE A FISCAL GUARANTEE.

AND SO WHAT THIS REALLY DOES IS ALLOWS FOR WHEN THE DEVELOPER COMPLETES PORTIONS OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVAL PLAN OF OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, I'M SORRY, ENGINEERING DIRECTOR, THAT THAT CAN BE RELEASED TO THEM, THAT THE FISCAL SECURITY CAN BE RELEASED AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO CARRY THAT ON THEIR BOOKS.

SO BASICALLY WHAT YOU WERE SEEING HERE IS WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22ND THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AT THAT POINT.

STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THESE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS, WHICH CLARIFY THAT TIMING UNDER THE MULTIPLE SCENARIOS THAT ARE OUT THERE.

AND I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT WE DO THAT SUBJECT TO A FLOOR AMENDMENT.

I HOPE YOU GOT MY MEMO.

OKAY. AND OTHER OTHER THAN THAT, I'M READY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYBODY MIGHT OTHERWISE HAVE.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. TIETJENS? THANK YOU TIM.

APPRECIATE IT. IT IS 5:51 P.M..

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8B.

ANY RESPONSE OR ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? HEARING NO RESPONSE.

IT'S 5:51 P.M..

I'M GOING TO BRING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ACTION.

MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE WITH THE AMENDED LANGUAGE.

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE ITEM WITH THE AMENDMENT.

THAT IS SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN.

IT WAS MADE BY MAYOR PRO TEM ROBB.

ANY DISCUSSION? YES, BOB. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, OFTEN THE CITY STAFF AND THE CITY HAS BEEN ACCUSED OF HAVING A TOUGH, PROCESS TO GO FORWARD FOR DEVELOPERS.

AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE HERE OF MAKING IT EASIER BECAUSE IT HELPS THE CASH FLOW FOR THE DEVELOPER THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.

SO THIS IS, I THINK, A GOOD EFFORT TOWARDS MAKING DEVELOPMENT IN GALVESTON A LITTLE EASIER FOR PEOPLE.

VERY GOOD. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? I JUST WANT TO COMMENT.

IT'S WEIRD THAT MY MOTION THAT MY NAME ISN'T ON THE SCREEN, IT'S SHOWING ON HERE.

WEIRD. LISTEN, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THE MOTION WAS MADE BY MAYOR PRO TEM MARIE ROBB AND SECONDED BY BOB BROWN.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES, COUNCIL.

OKAY, NOW IT'S ME HAVING A BUTTON PROBLEM.

OKAY. NOTHING'S HAPPENING.

YAY! OKAY.

WELL, WE KNOW YOU SAID WE KNOW.

YOU SAID WE KNOW. WERE YOU IN FAVOR? LET'S DO A MANUAL.

EVERYBODY IN FAVOR ON THAT? THAT IS UNANIMOUS BUT FOR COUNCILMAN FINKLEA, WHO IS NOT HERE.

ITEM 8C, PLEASE.

[8.C. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Changing An Urban Neighborhood (UN) Zoning District To A Residential, Single-Family (R-3) Zoning District, On Property Commonly Known As 1001 Winnie / Avenue G, And Which Is Legally Described As M. B. Menard Survey (310-0-0), Block 310, And Portion Of Adjacent 11th Street, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas; Planning Case Number 24P-035; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; And Providing For An Effective Date. (C. Gorman)]

ITEM 8C CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, CHANGING AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY.

ZONING DISTRICT ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1001 WINNIE AVENUE G AND WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS NB MENARD SURVEY BLOCK 310 AND PORTION OF ADJACENT 11TH STREET IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS PLANNING CASE NUMBER 24P-035, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

VERY GOOD. HAVE, MISS GORMAN.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT SITE IS THE LOCATION OF ROSENBERG SCHOOL, WHICH IS OWNED BY GALVESTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.

THE SCHOOL HAS BEEN CLOSED STARTING WITH THIS SCHOOL YEAR.

WITH THE SCHOOL NO LONGER IN USE, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE SITE MIGHT BE SOLD OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT.

THE GISD BOARD OF DIRECTORS DIRECTED THEIR STAFF TO APPLY FOR THIS ZONING REQUEST.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN AREA THAT HAS BOTH R-3 AND URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICTS.

THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ARE ZONED R-3, WHILE THE PROPERTIES TO THE EAST AND WEST ARE ZONED URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF THE SUBJECT SITE IS MADE AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT, THE R-3 ZONING DISTRICT WILL PROVIDE FOR DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.

THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO ZONING DISTRICTS IS THE ABILITY TO DO MULTI-FAMILY.

YOU CAN HAVE MULTI-FAMILY OF UP TO EIGHT UNITS IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD, AND R-3 IS REALLY JUST A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

[00:55:02]

VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS GORMAN? COUNCIL? YES, MA'AM.

SO WHAT IS MOST OF THE AREA AROUND IT ZONED.

IT'S ON A SORT OF A BOUNDARY WHERE THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, EAST AND SOUTH ARE MOSTLY R-3, AND THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST ARE GENERALLY URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO IT'S RIGHT ON A BOUNDARY THAT IT'S AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR R-3.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? IT'S 5:55 P.M..

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8C.

ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? SEEING. YES, SIR.

COME FORWARD. GOOD. GOOD AFTERNOON MATT.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS MEETING ANY LONGER THAN IT HAS TO BE, BUT WE DO WANT TO JUST THANK THE CITY FOR CONSIDERING THIS PROPOSAL.

WE HEARD A LOT OF COMMUNITY INPUT.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION APPROACHED THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND, IN RESPONSE TO THEIR DESIRES, HAVE BEEN SEEKING THIS REZONING TO, AGAIN, JUST BETTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE REALIZE THAT WE ARE SHRINKING OUR FOOTPRINT AND TRYING TO BE RESPONSIBLE WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS AS A SCHOOL DISTRICT.

AND SO THAT MEANS WE ARE HAVING TO RELEASE SOME PROPERTIES FROM OUR PORTFOLIO.

BUT IN DOING SO, WE WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT WE SERVE.

AND SO WE FEEL LIKE THAT THIS IS AN EASY ASK AND AN EASY YES TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH SOMETHING THAT THE RESIDENTS THEMSELVES HAVE ASKED US TO DO.

SO WE APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS MS. BEATON, COME FORWARD.

HELLO. HELLO, I'M ELIZABETH BEATON AND I'M THE SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE FOR THE DISTRICT WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED.

AND I'M HERE IN SUPPORT.

AFTER THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNOUNCED THAT ROSENBERG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WOULD CLOSE, THE EAST END HISTORIC DISTRICT ASSOCIATION ASKED THE SCHOOL BOARD TO REQUEST THE CITY TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO PROTECT THE PROPERTY FROM INAPPROPRIATE FUTURE USES.

THE SCHOOL BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO DO SO.

THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED ON THE SOUTH, NORTH AND WEST BY R-3 ZONING.

ON THE EAST IT IS URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING, BUT ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SCHOOL IS SINGLE FAMILY.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS FUNDRAISING TO DONATE FUNDS TO BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON, IN THE HOPE THAT THE CITY WILL BE ABLE TO ACQUIRE THIS PROPERTY TO ADD TO ADOUE PARK.

BUT THAT EFFORT MAY OR MAY NOT SUCCEED.

IF IT DOES NOT, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT MAY SELL THE PROPERTY TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER, IN WHICH CASE THIS REZONING WILL BECOME VERY IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? HOW ARE YOU? HI. I'M REBECCA JAWORSKI AND I AM A NEIGHBOR OF ROSENBERG SCHOOL, WHICH WE I MISS THE KIDS BEING THERE. OF COURSE, AROUND PICKUP TIME IT'S A LOT CALMER, BUT I WANT TO EXPRESS SERIOUS SUPPORT AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS HAVE BEEN MEETING AND GETTING TOGETHER AND TRYING TO COME UP WITH A PLAN.

BUT BOY, THIS FIRST STEP OF CHANGING THE ZONING IS SUPER IMPORTANT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.

ALSO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF GISD AND TO THE GISD BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR BEING CONCERNED ABOUT BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU REBECCA.

VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NO MORE RESPONSE.

IT'S 5:59 P.M..

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8C BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

YES, SIR.

SECOND. OKAY.

MOTION TO APPROVE THE CHANGE IN ZONING FOR THE ROSENBERG PROPERTY AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS.

BROWN WAS THERE AND THEN WENT AWAY.

SO ANY DISCUSSION? YES. I'D LIKE TO THANK THE, I LIVE A BLOCK AWAY FROM THIS PROPERTY.

AND SO IT WAS A CONCERN OF MINE AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT I'D LIKE TO THANK THE GISD BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND SUPERINTENDENT.

BUT I'D ALSO LIKE TO COMMEND THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THIS SCHOOL IS SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY A NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC DISTRICT, NEIGHBORHOOD OF SINGLE

[01:00:02]

FAMILY HOMES. AND I'D LIKE TO COMMEND THE STEADFAST NEIGHBORHOOD ADVOCACY SHOWN BY THE EAST END HISTORIC DISTRICT ASSOCIATION.

WHEN THEY LEARNED THIS WAS HAPPENING, THEY HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE PROPERTY, BUT THEY DID KNOW THAT IT WAS ZONED DIFFERENTLY FROM THEIR PROPERTY OR THEIR.

THE EAST END HISTORIC DISTRICT IS R3 WITH A HISTORIC OVERLAY.

AND THEN THIS PROPERTY WAS UN.

IT HAS DIFFERENT THINGS THAT YOU CAN BUILD THERE, BUT THEY WANTED TO DO WHATEVER THEY COULD TO TRY TO INFLUENCE WHATEVER HAPPENS THERE TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEY SHOWED UP AT THE GISD MEETINGS AND MET INTERNALLY AND TRIED TO DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO PRESERVE THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

I THINK IT'S A FINE EXAMPLE OF A STRONG GALVESTON NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP THAT ADVOCATES FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT HERE.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 8D PLEASE.

[8.D. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Creating A Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay Zoning District In A Central Business (CB) Zoning District To Construct A “Restaurant, No Drive-In/Through” And “Electric Vehicle Charging Station”, On Property Commonly Known As 101 14th Street, 1405-1415 Harborside Drive, And Which Is Legally Described As M.B. Menard Survey, Lots 4, 5, 6, And The North 70 Feet Of Lot 7 (7-1), Block 674, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas; Planning Case Number 24P-037; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; And Providing For An Effective Date. (C. Gorman)]

ITEM 8D CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

CREATING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT TO CONSTRUCT A RESTAURANT.

NO DRIVE IN THROUGH AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 101 14TH STREET.

1405 THROUGH 1415 HARBORSIDE DRIVE, IN, WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS MB MENARDS SURVEY LOTS FOUR, FIVE, SIX AND THE NORTH 70FT OF LOT SEVEN, BLOCK 674, IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 24P-037, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

CATHERINE. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, A PUD TO ESTABLISH A RESTAURANT DRIVE THROUGH.

I THINK THERE WAS AN ERROR IN THE CAPTION.

IT SHOULD BE RESTAURANT DRIVE THRU AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION LAND USES IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS POD IS TO ALLOW FOR THE LAND USE OF RESTAURANT DRIVE THROUGH, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT TO DEVIATE FROM THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS STIPULATED IN SECTION 2.3 TO 6.5 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF STACKING SPACES FROM 8 TO 7.

ORIGINALLY REQUESTED WAS ELIMINATION OF THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT ALONG HARBORSIDE DRIVE.

ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT HAS REMOVED THAT REQUEST AND ELIMINATION OF INTERIOR LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL FOR REASONS THAT ARE STIPULATED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THIS REQUEST AND IS ALSO RECOMMENDING DENIAL.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS GORMAN AT THIS POINT? YES, BOB. THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THIS WOULD BE BUILT AS TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS.

WHAT IS THAT? CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS? WHAT THAT MEANS? IT'S PROBABLY A BETTER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

THEY MAY BE TWO PHASED PROJECTS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE CONTEMPLATED TO HAVE SEPARATE OWNERSHIP OR NOT.

OKAY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT, WE MAY COME BACK TO YOU, CATHERINE.

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8D.

IT IS 6:03 P.M..

DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE? REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT.

COME FORWARD PLEASE.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

GOOD. MICHAEL GERTNER, REPRESENTING DOCTOR FREDRICKSON AND HIS WIFE, KATHY, THE OWNERS OF THE CURRENT PROPERTY.

AND HOW DO I CAN I ADVANCE OR ARE YOU GOING TO DO IT? I CAN YEAH, LET'S GO.

SO THIS CASE IS TO ALLOW ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING.

AND THE IDEA IS TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DRIVE THEIR ELECTRIC VEHICLES TO GALVESTON FOR A VARIETY OF PURPOSES.

BUT CLEARLY ONE OF THOSE IS CRUISE SHIP PARKING.

THERE WILL BE ABOUT 630,000 PASSENGERS ON ROYAL CARIBBEAN IN A YEAR.

AND SO THAT'S A LARGE NUMBER OF CARS.

WE COULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DRIVE ELECTRIC CARS AND REDUCE POLLUTION AND CARBON FOOTPRINT ET CETERA.

SO I WANT TO SCOOT DOWN TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

SO THESE WERE UPDATED LAST AUGUST.

AND IT DESCRIBES WHAT AN ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATION IS.

AND IT IS A PLACE, AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, WHERE YOU CAN PLUG IN YOUR CAR AND GET A CHARGE.

AND I ALSO WANT TO BECAUSE THIS IS AN AREA OF SOME CONCERN SHOW YOU THE DEFINITION OF WHAT A COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING AREA IS, AND THAT WOULD BE WHERE YOU CHARGE SOMEONE TO PARK FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

SO WHEN YOU'RE PAYING TO PARK, THEN YOU ARE A COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING AREA.

THIS IS THESE ARE ELECTRIC SERVICE.

THESE ARE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS.

YOU'RE GOING TO PAY TO CHARGE NOT TO PARK TO CHARGE.

[01:05:02]

SO WITH WITH THAT SAID WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS JUST GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THIS PROPERTY AND I'M GOING TO ASK DOCTOR FREDRICKSON TO COME UP AND TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HIS PROPERTY BEFORE WE MOVE ON.

CHRIS. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, FOR HEARING US.

SO I'M CHRIS FREDRICKSON, I'M A NEUROSCIENTIST AND A RECOVERING PROFESSOR.

MY WIFE AND I MOVED TO GALVESTON TO LAUNCH OUR START UP COMPANY IN 98, I THINK IT WAS, AND WORKED PART TIME AT UTMB. WE STARTED OFF IN THE SEALY SMITH PROFESSIONAL BUILDING, WHICH LOOKED LIKE A WONDERFUL PLACE TO LAUNCH A COMPANY. A YEAR LATER, THEY ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO TEAR IT DOWN.

SO WE WENT, UH OH, AND FORTUNATELY FOR US, LEON WAS JUST IN THE MOOD TO SELL HIS SECOND BARBECUE, WHICH HAD BEEN A RESTAURANT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, FOR ABOUT 40 YEARS PRIOR TO HIS BUYING IT.

HE CONTINUED THE THEME, BUT WAS, AS HE PUT IT, NOT GETTING ANY OF THE MONEY IN THE CASH REGISTER.

SO HE SOLD IT TO US.

AND IN 2019 OR OR SORRY, 2000.

AND WE GOT IT THEN FROM LEON AND HE TOLD US THAT WE WOULD PAY HIS ASKING PRICE OR HE WOULD RAISE IT.

THOSE WERE THE TWO OPTIONS.

SO WE BOUGHT IT. WE HAVE USED IT FOR 20 YEARS.

WE LOVED IT. THE RESTAURANT AND THE PARKING LOT WERE A PIECE.

WE GRADUALLY BOUGHT THE TWO LOTS NEXT TO US WITH THREE RENT HOUSES, BECAUSE WE HAD SO MANY POSTDOCS COMING OVER FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD, AND THEY NEEDED PLACES TO STAY.

SO WE JUST TOOK PART OF THEIR SALARY AND USED IT TO PAY FOR THOSE PLACES FOR 20 YEARS.

AFTER IKE, WE RESTORED ALL BUT ONE OF THE BUILDINGS, AND OUTSIDE, THEY'RE ALL RESTORED, BUT NOT INSIDE.

WE ARE NOW MOVING OUR CENTER OF ACTION UP TO U OF H, CLEAR LAKE, WHERE I'M GOING TO BE IN THE LAB OF ONE OF MY FORMER STUDENTS WHO'S NOW A PROFESSOR THERE.

SO WHEN THE LIGHTS GO OUT, I TELL HIM TO CALL ME WHEN IT'S FIXED.

IT'S GOING TO BE A GOOD DEAL, BUT WE NEED TO SELL THE PROPERTY.

NOBILITEA, THIS COMPANY THAT'S SORT OF FOR STARBUCKS, BUT FOR TEA.

WHAT STARBUCKS IS FOR COFFEE.

WANTED TO DO A DIRT LEASE AND COME IN AND PUT UP A LITTLE TEA PLACE FOR ALL THE PASSENGERS COMING AND GOING, AND ALSO WITH A LITTLE DRIVE THROUGH PORTION, WE HAD THAT DEAL ALL SET. THEY COULDN'T FIND THEIR MONEY AND SO IT KIND OF FELL INTO A PAUSE.

WHEREUPON JASON JASON HAYES, WHO IS THE PARKING MAGNATE OF GALVESTON, OFFERED US MONEY TO BUY THE WHOLE THING AND TAKE OVER THE LEASE FOR THE TEA COMPANY.

AND WE SAID, THAT'S GREAT, WE HAVE A PRICE NOW, WHICH IS PROBABLY HALF WHAT IT'S ACTUALLY WORTH, BUT IT'S STILL A LOT MORE THAN WE PAID FOR IT IN 1999.

SO WE'RE HOPEFUL TO SELL IT.

BUT HE DOES NEED THE ZONING CHANGE.

IT'S BEEN A PARKING LOT AND A RESTAURANT FOR 40 SOME ODD YEARS.

AND SO THAT IN MY MIND IS NOT REALLY A CHANGE.

THE THREE HOUSES ARE IN SUCH NEED OF REPAIR THAT SOMEBODY'S GOT TO DO SOMETHING.

AND I THINK THAT MR. HAYES HAS A GOOD IDEA.

THANK YOU. QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.

QUESTIONS FOR MR. FREDRICKSON. YES, BOB.

I'D ASK THIS QUESTION A LITTLE BIT EARLIER IN THE REPORT, IT SAID THEY MAY THIS PROJECT MAY BE BUILT AS TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS.

I GUESS THE TEA'S, THE DEAL I HAD WITH THE TEA OWNER WAS WE WERE GOING TO OWN THE WHOLE THING AND HE WAS GOING TO DO A GROUND LEASE.

TRIPLE NET DIRT LEASE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF DEAL HE'S TALKING ABOUT WITH JASON.

IT'S PROBABLY THE SAME THING.

SO WHILE THERE'LL BE THE TENANTS, THEY'LL HAVE ONE OWNER.

OKAY. YEAH.

VERY GOOD. SO WE DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOING TO GET THERE FIRST.

[LAUGHTER] SO MY SUSPICION IS THAT THEY'LL PROBABLY BE FINISHED PRETTY CLOSE TO THE SAME TIME.

THERE'S A LETTER OF INTENT WITH NOBILITEA TO OBVIOUSLY CONTINGENT ON LOTS OF DIFFERENT THINGS TO TAKE THE SPACE, AND AS SOON AS THEY KNOW THAT THEY CAN GO AHEAD, THEY'LL START DESIGNING.

THEY HAVE A PROTOTYPE.

SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE REAL HARD FOR THEM TO GET IT DESIGNED AND READY TO GO.

SO AND, AND I KNOW THAT JASON WOULD LIKE TO MOVE AHEAD WITH THE EV CHARGING, SO THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAPPEN PRETTY QUICKLY TOO.

BUT WHICH ONE WILL GET FINISHED FIRST? IT'S ANYBODY'S GUESS.

HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE? HOW LONG WOULD A CAR BE THERE FOR TO CHARGE, I GUESS.

WELL, I'M GOING TO GET INTO THAT IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME.

BUT THERE'S DIFFERENT KINDS OF CHARGING.

SO LET'S GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

I WANTED TO YOU'VE ALL SEEN THIS IN THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE RECEIVED, BUT BASICALLY IT'S COVERED PARKING FOR APPROXIMATELY 40 SPACES WITH FOUR SPACES SET ASIDE FOR NOBILITEA.

DURING THE COURSE OF NEGOTIATIONS, THEY MAY REQUEST ADDITIONAL PARKING, WHICH THEY WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY RECEIVE.

[01:10:04]

THE INDICATION IS MAYBE AS MANY AS SEVEN SPACES THAT WOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE TEA COMPANY.

LET'S GO ON. AND THIS IS A RENDERING OF THEIR PROTOTYPE STORE.

LET'S GO ON. AND THIS IS A PLAN VIEW OF WHAT THE SITE LOOKS LIKE WITH THE COVERED PARKING, THE FOUR SPACES WHERE YOU COME IN OFF OF HARBORSIDE AND WHERE YOU EXIT ONTO 14TH STREET.

AND THEN THIS IS THE EXISTING PARKING LOT THAT'S ON THE SITE NOW.

LET'S GO. THIS IS THE PARKING ALONG HARBORSIDE DRIVE AND THE LITTLE GREEN SQUARE RIGHT THERE IS THE SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO COMPARED TO THE VAST AMOUNT OF CRUISE SHIP PARKING, THIS IS A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF PARKING.

LET'S GO ON. FOR THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS IN THIS AREA THERE, THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO.

LET'S GO BACK. THERE ARE CURRENTLY FOUR PARKING LOTS WITHIN 200FT OF THE RESIDENTIAL LAND USES IN THIS AREA.

THE FIRST ONE BEING THE SITE IN QUESTION, WHICH I'M NOT GOING TO.

YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN THAT.

SO LET'S GO NOW TO NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS THE PARKING THAT'S IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET TO THE EAST, WHICH CATHERINE TOLD YOU THIS MORNING WAS GRANDFATHERED AND IS ALLOWED.

AND THAT'S CRUISE SHIP PARKING, PROBABLY MAYBE 200 CARS, I DON'T KNOW.

NEXT ONE. THIS IS THE BAR, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THE TWO RESIDENCES ON 14TH STREET AND IT'S ADJOINING PARKING LOT.

AND THEN THIS IS SOME KIND OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESS AT THE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF 14TH STREET.

SO THOSE ARE THE EXISTING PARKING LOTS, ALL WITHIN 200FT OF THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THEN BOB, YOU ASKED ABOUT CHARGING TIMES.

SO THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT KINDS OF CHARGERS.

AND ANYBODY HAVE AN EV? ANYBODY ON CITY COUNCIL HAVE EV? I DON'T HAVE AN EV.

I HAVE A CLIENT WHO HAS AN EV.

SO SHE DRIVES DOWN FROM HOUSTON AND SHE'S GOT A CHARGER.

HER ELECTRICIAN PUT A CHARGER IN AT HER HOUSE.

SO SHE COMES DOWN ON FRIDAY AND SHE PLUGS IT IN.

SHE UNPLUGS IT TO DRIVE AROUND, RUN SOME ERRANDS AND STUFF.

BUT BY SUNDAY AFTERNOON, WHEN SHE'S READY TO GO BACK, IT'S JUST ABOUT FULLY CHARGED.

SO THAT'S TAKING ABOUT TWO DAYS TO GET IT CHARGED.

WHAT WE CALL DESTINATION CHARGING COULD TAKE ANYWHERE FROM 2 TO 3 DAYS TO FULLY CHARGE A VEHICLE.

SO THAT MEANS THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A CAR THERE FOR A WHILE.

WHO DOES THAT WORK FOR? IT WORKS FOR A VARIETY OF PEOPLE, BUT ONE THAT COMES TO MIND RIGHT AWAY IS IT WORKS FOR CRUISE SHIP PASSENGERS BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE GONE FOR A LITTLE WHILE AND NOT NEED THEIR CAR. SO THIS IS A GOOD FIT FOR THIS PARTICULAR KIND OF EV CHARGING.

WE THINK THAT PROBABLY THREE QUARTERS OF THE PEOPLE THAT COME WILL USE DESTINATION CHARGING.

THE OTHER TEN PARKING SPACES WOULD BE RESERVED FOR RAPID CHARGING FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED TO GET A QUICK CHARGE, MAYBE SPEND 30 MINUTES OR AN HOUR OR, YOU KNOW, MAYBE EVEN SPEND 20 MINUTES JUST TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF A CHARGE TO MAKE IT ONTO THEIR NEXT TO THEIR NEXT PLACE.

SO WE COULD ALSO SEE DESTINATION CHARGING BEING USED BY THE CRUISE ON THE COAST GUARD VESSELS, BY PEOPLE WHO'VE COME DOWN FOR A CONFERENCE AND ARE NOT GOING TO BE USING THEIR CARS FOR A FEW DAYS.

SOMETIMES HOTEL GUESTS, IF THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING ELSE AND NOT GOING TO NEED THEIR CAR.

A LOT OF HOTELS DO NOT HAVE CHARGING STATIONS, AND THE PEOPLE WHO WORK OFFSHORE FOR THE.

OBVIOUSLY FOR THE RAPID CHARGING, YOU HAVE A MUCH BROADER RANGE OF PEOPLE THAT YOU CAN ATTRACT.

SO ANY TOURISTS, RESIDENTS, MEDICAL SCHOOL PATIENTS AND STAFF AND OF COURSE STILL EVEN SO, CRUISE SHIP PASSENGERS.

SO I DELIVERED YESTERDAY A MEMO WHICH I THINK JANELLE DISTRIBUTED TO YOU GUYS.

AND I ADDRESSED A LOT OF DIFFERENT TOPICS IN THE MEMO.

AND I'M PREPARED NOW TO DISCUSS ANY OF THOSE THAT YOU MAY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT.

THERE HAVE BEEN LOTS OF ISSUES RAISED ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, AND WE HAVE TRIED TO ADDRESS, IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER, ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED.

FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH TXDOT ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY AND THE TRAFFIC COUNT AND THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL THAT'S THERE.

WE'VE WORKED WITH THE ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS ABOUT DRAINAGE.

[01:15:03]

SO BASICALLY WE YOU KNOW, WE'VE TRIED TO ADDRESS EVERYTHING AND YOU'VE HOPEFULLY HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THOSE ANSWERS, BUT I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR AMPLIFY ANY OF THE ANSWERS THAT WE'VE GIVEN PREVIOUSLY, IF YOU NEED THAT.

SINCE MR. GERTNER IS PRESENT RIGHT NOW, CATHERINE, I WANT TO CLARIFY SOME THINGS MR. GERTNER IS MENTIONING THAT WE THERE COULD BE FOR CRUISE SHIP PARKING.

THAT WOULD BE LONG TERM THERE.

I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IS THAT COVERED IN THIS APPLICATION? AND IF IT'S NOT WHAT IS THE PROCESS.

SO WE CONSIDER LONG TERM PARKING TO BE THE OTHER LAND USE OF PARKING LOT COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING AREA THAT'S NOT BEEN LISTED.

THAT'S NOT PERMITTED IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS ZONED AND HAS NOT BEEN LISTED IN THE LIST OF DEVIATIONS.

SO FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, THIS LONG TERM, THIS IDEA OF LONG TERM CHARGING IS NOT ALLOWED.

AND IF THE APPLICANT CARES TO ADD THAT INTO THE LIST OF DEVIATIONS, IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW PROCESS.

I JUST WANT TO GET THAT CLARIFIED.

SO MIKE, YOU HAD COMMENTS ON THAT.

I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK CATHERINE TO CITE THE SECTION OF THE LDR WHERE THAT'S DESCRIBED.

WELL, YOU SHOWED ON THE SCREEN THE DEFINITIONS OF BOTH OF THE LAND USES THAT WOULD BE THE PLACE THAT WE WOULD GO TO DO OUR DETERMINATION.

OKAY. SO IN THE LAND USE, IF YOU'RE PAYING FOR PARKING THEN IT'S COMMERCIAL PARKING.

BUT IF YOU'RE PAYING FOR CHARGING YOU'RE PAYING FOR CHARGING, NOT FOR PARKING.

REGARDLESS OF HOW LONG YOU STAY AT THE CHARGER, WHETHER YOU STAY THERE FOR 30 MINUTES OR THREE DAYS, YOU'RE PAYING FOR CHARGING, NOT PARKING.

THAT'S NOT TRUE. WE LOOKED AT IT TODAY.

IT WAS A SECTION 19 AND IT'S OVER 48 HOURS.

THAT'S CONSIDERED LONG TERM PARKING.

AND THIS IS A DETERMINATION.

I'M SORRY. NO, NO, THAT YOU KNOW, THIS IS YOU KNOW, I YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS THERE'S A SALE ATTACHED TO THIS, AND THERE'S MONEY ON THE LINE HERE.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO DO WAS, YOU KNOW, PROPOSE A LIMIT TO THE LONG TERM PARKING.

BUT AGAIN, THIS LETTER THAT WAS SENT AT 4:30 YESTERDAY DIDN'T GO TO OUR, PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND DIDN'T EVEN GO TO LEGAL IT WENT STRAIGHT TO COUNCIL. THE ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED WAS IN SOMETHING THAT I WANTED TO PROPOSE WAS ADDING THE RESTRICTION TO NOT TO EXCEED. THAT SEEMS TO BE WHAT ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES THAT PLANNING COMMISSION HAD.

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I THOUGHT COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH LEGAL AND THROUGH OUR PLANNING.

IT SAYS THAT WE CANNOT ADD THINGS TO A PUD.

WE CAN ONLY SUBTRACT THINGS TO THE PUD BECAUSE THIS WAS WHAT WAS PRESENTED PUBLICLY.

I THINK THAT IT NEEDS TO GO BACK THROUGH TO OUR PLANNING COMMISSION AGAIN, AND I DO APOLOGIZE TO THE PARTIES INVOLVED. BUT I MEAN, IT'S WE CAN'T DO SOMETHING THAT LEGALLY, OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDS OF WHAT OUR PUD PROCESS SAYS AND OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDS OF WHAT OUR STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION BOTH RECOMMENDED AGAINST.

JUST I MEAN, IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A TECHNICALITY, BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED AT THE APPLICANT'S, YOU KNOW, BEGINNING OF THIS PROCESS.

SO YOU KNOW, AND EVERY SINGLE SLIDE THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT, IT'S BEEN LONG TERM PARKING.

THE LONG TERM PARKING WAS DEFINED AS OVER 48 HOURS.

AND I THINK THIS IS AN ISSUE WHERE MR. HAYES IS THE BUYER, WHERE THAT WOULD NOT WORK FOR HIS BUSINESS MODEL.

AND IF I'M INCORRECT, THEN WE CAN PROCEED AS IS.

BUT I WANTED TO DO THINGS THAT WORK FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.

WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, MIKE, IF THIS, I'D LIKE TO CONTINUE TO GET PUBLIC INPUT ON THIS.

AND THEN WHAT WE COULD DO IS THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND LET COUNCIL DISCUSS THIS ITEM HERE.

YES. COUNCILMAN RAWLINS.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS, MR. GERTNER, THAT I'M MOST A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT BECAUSE I WAS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE WAY THAT THAT YOU PRESENTED IT WAS YOU PRESENTED ALSO WITH THE BUSINESS MODEL OF NON CHARGING VEHICLES WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO LONG TERM PARK THERE, WHICH I FEEL LIKE YOU'VE DONE A DISSERVICE TO YOUR CLIENTS BECAUSE THAT WASN'T EXPLAINED.

YOU'RE THE KNOWLEDGEABLE ONE ON OUR RULES.

AND IF THAT HAD BEEN SET OUT FROM THE BEGINNING, I THINK THIS WOULD HAVE GONE A LOT MORE SMOOTHER.

[01:20:03]

SO IT'S REALLY A QUESTION OF MANAGEMENT.

SO THE WAY THAT THIS WOULD WORK IS THAT IF SOMEBODY CAME AND PARKED IN ONE OF THOSE SPACES AND DID NOT CHARGE A VEHICLE, IT'S PRETTY HARD TO POLICE THAT. I MEAN, I'M SURE THAT THERE'S PROBABLY A WAY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT.

BUT REALLY THE PRACTICAL QUESTION IS WHEN THERE'S LITERALLY THOUSANDS OF PARKING SPACES CLOSER TO THE CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL AND CHEAPER, WHY WOULD YOU SEEK OUT AN EV CHARGING STATION TO PARK YOUR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE VEHICLE? I MEAN, WOULD YOU EVER DRIVE INTO A PARKING GARAGE.

YOU JUST STATED THAT YOU'RE NOT CHARGING FOR PARKING, YOU'RE CHARGING FOR CHARGING, WE'RE CHARGING FOR CHARGING.

AND SO WHY WOULD YOU PAY TO CHARGE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T NEED CHARGING? THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS STATED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I DO UNDERSTAND.

SO THAT STORY HAS CHANGED, IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

DO YOU AGREE TO THAT? I FRANKLY, I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.

I DO. AT PLANNING COMMISSION. HOWEVER WE DID NOT KNOW HOW BIG AN ISSUE THIS WOULD BE, AND WE REALLY WERE NOT CLEAR ON HOW THE SPACE, HOW IT WOULD OPERATE AT THE TIME.

AND SO I PROBABLY MISSPOKE ABOUT THAT.

BUT BE THAT AS IT MAY, IT'S NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE PARKING SPACES.

IT'S INTENDED ONLY TO PROVIDE CHARGING SPACES.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S GET CONTINUE.

IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, MIKE, WE MAY COME BACK.

I'M SORRY, BUT I MEAN, YOU SAY THAT.

AND THEN IN THE MEMO, IN NUMBER FOUR, IT SAYS CRUISE SHIP PARKING.

I MEAN, IT SAYS LONG TERM PARKING.

CORRECT. BUT PARKING.

I MEAN, HE'S IN THE PARKING BUSINESS, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO HURT HIS BUSINESS MODEL.

MY POINT IS, THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO BE CRUISE SHIP PARKING SO MUCH AS IT'S INTENDED TO BE DESTINATION CHARGING.

AND THOSE ARE TWO THOSE ARE DIFFERENT THINGS.

WOULD A CAR BE THERE FOR MORE THAN ONE DAY? YES. WOULD IT BE CHARGING THE WHOLE TIME? YES. LET'S JUST CALL A SPADE A SPADE.

I MEAN, LET'S JUST SAY THAT'S LIKE TRYING TO PLAY WORD GAMES WITH I MEAN, WE'RE ALL PRETTY SMART PEOPLE HERE.

LIKE, LET'S JUST GO AT IT AS LONG TERM PARKING SO JASON CAN BUY HIS PROPERTY AND MOVE ON INSTEAD OF HAVING THIS THING THAT IS A CONVOLUTED PROCESS THAT CHANGES EACH TIME WE TALKED. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S COUNCIL LET'S GET OUR FINISH OUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND LET'S DISCUSS THIS AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL WITH STAFF.

IF I COULD I HAVE A FEW MORE POINTS I'D LIKE TO MAKE AFTER THE.

YES, SIR.

GO AHEAD AND FINISH UP.

CAN I DO IT AFTER YOU HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC? IF YOU WANT, GO AHEAD AND FINISH MIKE.

ARE THEY JUST A FEW THINGS TO MENTION.

OKAY. YEAH.

AND SO I'M JUST GOING TO REITERATE I CAN FIND NOTHING IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT SPEAKS TO LONG TERM PARKING.

IF IT'S IN THERE, I'D LIKE TO BE DIRECTED TO THE CHAPTER SO THAT I COULD READ IT.

ALL RIGHT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS AND WHAT WE HAVE TO REQUEST FROM CITY COUNCIL.

AND SO THERE'S A LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS.

AND IF YOU GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE ITEMS A THROUGH P, THE VERY LAST ITEM IS NUMBER P, WHICH IS ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THESE REGULATIONS OR AS CITY COUNCIL MAY DEEM APPROPRIATE.

SO WHATEVER YOU, AS CITY COUNCIL DEEM APPROPRIATE CAN BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF REQUIREMENTS TO THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. AND WE'LL JUST STOP WITH THAT ONE.

ALL RIGHT. I'M SORRY.

MIKE, WAS THAT YOU FINISHED THEN? YEAH, BUT I WOULD. IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS AFTER THEY'RE DONE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANY GOING TO CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

I HAVE TO AGREE WITH MR. RAWLINS THAT I WAS AT THAT PLANNING MEETING, AND IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT SITUATION THERE.

THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW THEY WERE GOING TO CHARGE THE CARS, AND IT WAS GOING TO BE NO LONG TERM PARKING.

NOW IT'S COMPLETELY THE REVERSAL.

I SEE THIS AS SPOT ZONING.

IT'S A MATTER OF WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO GO IN AND REZONE AN AREA.

MY CLIENT, MR. JONES, WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO COME AND GO THROUGH ALL THE STEPS THAT WERE REQUIRED TO BUILD HIS PARKING LOT ACROSS THE STREET.

HE'S CONFORMED TO ALL THE RULES OF THE CITY.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY SHOWED IN THE PICTURE WAS THAT THERE'S CURRENT PARKING THERE.

THERE'S NO CURRENT PARKING THERE.

THEY PARKED THEIR CARS WHEN THEY COME IN FOR THE BUSINESS.

THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES ON THAT CORNER FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND PUT IN A REALLY NICE RESTAURANT OR SOME TYPE OF A BUSINESS, BUT TO THINK THAT YOU WOULD PUT, YOU KNOW, A DRIVE

[01:25:02]

THROUGH AT THE CORNER OF THE BUSIEST INTERSECTION IN GALVESTON 4 OR 5 DAYS A WEEK, ONCE THE NEW TERMINAL GETS GOING.

AND THAT YOU WOULD ALLOW IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

I WENT BY JIMMY JOHN'S OR WHATEVER IT IS DOWN HERE.

THEY GOT AUTOMATIC HOOKUPS DOWN THERE FOR THE ELECTRIC CARS.

NOBODY'S THERE.

NOBODY'S PLUGGING THEM IN.

PEOPLE THAT USE THEIR CARS, THEY USUALLY KNOW HOW FAR THEY CAN GO.

I KNOW THERE ARE FEW PEOPLE THAT COME FROM OUT OF TOWN THAT DO USE THEM, BUT THE STATIONS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, THEY'RE NOT EVEN BEING USED, BUT TO THINK YOU'RE GOING TO PUT 31 OF THEM IN. AND THEN THE BIGGEST FACTOR IS THE SAFETY FACTOR, WHICH THE LDR.

LDR REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 200FT AWAY FROM THE APPARATUSES THAT ARE USED.

THESE ARE WITHIN 50FT OF HOMES WHERE PEOPLE LIVE.

AND I DID TALK WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL TODAY AND THE CHIEF, THE FIRE CHIEF, ABOUT IT.

THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF RESEARCH THAT'S GONE INTO COMBATING THESE TYPES OF THINGS THAT BECOME FLAMMABLE.

AND THERE'S A THERE'S A DANGER TO THEM THAT THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW EXACTLY WHICH EXTINGUISHER WORKS THE BEST.

HE SAID THE POWDER ONES ARE THE ONES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED.

BUT TO THINK THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PUT 31 OF THESE, OR OVER 30 OF THEM IN ONE ISOLATED PLACE TO ENHANCE PARKING.

AND, YOU KNOW, I'VE GONE OUT ON THEM A FEW TIMES, AND SOMETIMES I'M RIGHT AND SOMETIMES I'M WRONG.

BUT THIS IS NOTHING BUT TO BUILD A PARKING LOT.

THAT'S ALL. AND IF THEY FALL UNDER THE GUIDELINES TO BE ABLE TO BUILD A PARKING LOT.

I AGREE WITH YOU JUST COME FORWARD AND SAY THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD DO THE ZONING CHANGE LIKE THAT.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU ALL DOING YOUR JOB.

AND I RECOMMEND GOING ALONG WITH THE STAFF.

I THINK THE STAFF HAS DONE A GOOD JOB.

AND I THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION THOROUGHLY LOOKED AT THIS MATTER AND VOTED IT DOWN.

THANK YOU. FIVE SECONDS LEFT.

THANK YOU. THEY GOT A LITTLE EXTRA TIME.

THAT OTHER TEAM COME FORWARD.

GLAD TO HAVE YOU.

HI. MY NAME IS GINA WATSON.

I'M HERE ON A WHOLE OTHER MATTER.

BUT THIS.

DO YOU KNOW THAT ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND WATER DON'T MIX? ESPECIALLY SALT WATER.

THAT STREET FLOODS.

IT CAN TAKE 60,000 GALLONS OF WATER TO PUT ON AN EV ONE EV CAR.

AND THEN YOU GOT TO BURY IT.

THAT IS TOXIC WASTE.

DO WE REALLY WANT TO PUT THAT RIGHT THERE AND BE KNOWN AS ONE OF THE TOP CRUISE DESTINATIONS IN THE WORLD.

WE ARE BECOMING ONE OF THE TOP CRUISE DESTINATIONS IN THE WORLD, AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT THAT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET AND HAVE THAT HAPPEN.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THIS COME FORWARD.

GOOD EVENING COUNCIL.

GOOD EVENING. SO I WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER THE NEW OWNER TEA COMPANY RIGHT ON THE CORNER PARKING SPACES TO SUPPORT THE TEA COMPANY.

THE BACK PART OF THE PROPERTY EV LONG TERM, SHORT TERM.

WHOEVER WANTS TO SCAN THAT BARCODE AND TURN ON THAT EV CHARGER AND PARK THERE WOULD BE AVAILABLE.

I HAVE PLENTY OF DIFFERENT TYPE OF PARKING LOT I SUPPORT.

WE HAVE OUTDOOR INDOOR COVERED PARKING PARKING ON THE YOU KNOW, EAST AND WEST OF 25TH.

I HAVE MULTIPLE LANDOWNERS THAT I SUPPORT AND REPRESENT.

THIS IS JUST ONE MORE PRODUCT.

I HAVE DOWNTOWN PARKING LOTS.

YOU GO TO PACOS, YOU PARK THERE.

I PLAN ON PUTTING TWO CHARGERS THERE, TWO AT 25TH, TWO AT 24TH AND EXPAND THOSE.

EVS ARE COMING.

I WAS IN THE PAPER 5 OR 6 YEARS AGO WITH THE CHARGER IN MY HAND SAYING, HEY TESLA, WE HAD EIGHT CHARGERS THERE.

SEALY SMITH GOT THE PROPERTY.

WE'RE THERE DEMOING IT.

WE HAD TO TAKE THOSE EIGHT CHARGERS OFFLINE.

CHECK THAT THE PORT.

FOR SOME REASON, I DON'T KNOW WHY I DON'T YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T TALK TO ME ABOUT IT, BUT THEY TOOK OFF A BUNCH OF BRAND NEW CHARGERS ACROSS THE STREET.

AND THEY DID HAVE SOME.

THEY'RE OFFLINE. I'M SURE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THOSE UP SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT I DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY CRUISE PARKING ADVERTISING FOR THIS LOT.

IF I TURN ON 40 TESLA CHARGERS ON THEIR MAP, IT'S GOING TO BE A PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE.

THEY'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE A RESERVATION.

SO IF IT'S CRUISE PARKING OR IF IT'S LONG TERM, GOING ON A HOTEL OR ANYWHERE ELSE WE'RE GOING TO COME.

IS THERE GOING TO BE CRUISE PARKING? YES, I AM SURE THERE WILL BE.

WILL I BE TARGETING THAT CUSTOMER? NO, I DON'T HAVE TO. AGAIN, AS SOON AS THOSE TURN ON, THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE.

IT'S GOING TO SET A STANDARD FOR PARKING.

YOU GOT COVERED PARKING.

AND YOU HAVE EV.

YOU'RE ABLE TO MAKE A RESERVATION THAT'S NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW.

SO IF YOU HAVE AN EV, I'M GETTING CALLS.

HEY, WHERE CAN I CHARGE? WHERE CAN I CHARGE? IS YOUR PARKING LOT STILL OPEN AT 20TH AND HARBORSIDE?

[01:30:01]

NO, SIR. I'M SO SORRY.

IT'S NOT. AND I TRY TO FIND THEM A GOOD PLACE TO GO.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE NOT TRYING TO [INAUDIBLE] YOU ON ANYTHING.

IT'S JUST NOT. IT'S THAT SIMPLE.

I JUST TURN THEM ON AND PEOPLE WILL COME IN.

THEY'LL PARK THERE.

AND IT'S THE FUTURE. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING.

I MEAN, WE HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN FOR FOR EV CARS FOR THE CITY.

YOU KNOW, I KNOW SOME PEOPLE ARE NOT THEY DON'T LIKE THIS PROJECT, BUT THIS IS THE BEST THING I CAN DO WITH THIS CORNER, AND I THINK IT WILL BE A PRETTY PROJECT.

THE 30 SPACES ON THE BACK, THAT'S FOR LOT.

YOU'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO SEE THOSE.

YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE TEA COMPANY.

AND THOSE TEA COMPANIES ARE GOING TO NEED SPACES TO SUPPORT THAT.

TEN SPACES MIGHT NOT BE ENOUGH.

I MIGHT HAVE TO RELEASE SOME MORE SPACES.

SO THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL I GOT, GUYS.

HELP GUIDE ME IF WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS NOT WHAT YOU YOU WANT.

I MEAN, I WAS JUST UNDERNEATH THE GUIDANCE THAT WE DIDN'T NEED TO SPELL ANY MORE OUT BECAUSE OF THE SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THIS PROJECT? VERY GOOD. DON, I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION HERE.

CAN WE COME BACK IF WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IF WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AGAIN, CAN WE COME BACK AND QUESTION THAT APPLICANT OR SHOULD WE? HOW DO WE DO THAT? YES YOU CAN. OKAY.

VERY GOOD. FOR THE TIME BEING, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:31 P.M., AND I'M GOING TO BRING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION. I'M GOING TO START THIS DISCUSSION OFF.

IN MY OPINION, THE WAY I SEE THIS IS THAT THE APPLICATION STARTED OUT WITH HAVING CHARGING THERE FOR INDIVIDUALS OR VEHICLES THAT WERE NOT LONG TERM AND WERE NOT CRUISE ORIENTED VEHICLES THAT WOULD BE THERE FOR A LONG TERM.

THAT HAS KIND OF EVOLVED INTO THAT AREA THERE.

THE APPLICATION UNFORTUNATELY DOES NOT, ACCORDING TO OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DOES NOT SUPPORT LONG TERM PARKING THERE.

AND IF WE NEEDED TO PURSUE LONG TERM PARKING, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM.

BUT WE NEED TO COME BACK AND WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE STRUCTURE AND HOW WE WOULD APPLY FOR THAT, POSSIBLY GOING BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. THIS CASE COULD BE SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THAT ADDITIONAL DEVIATION.

THIS CASE COULD BE COMPLETED TODAY, AND THE APPLICANT COULD REAPPLY FOR A SEPARATE PUD THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE COMMERCIAL PARKING.

LET'S OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.

I HAD ONE THING.

YES, SIR. AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT NUMBER FIVE SAYS THE DEVELOPER SHALL SUBMIT A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY SHOWING THAT THE DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS DO NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE AT THIS INTERSECTION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT.

THE PORT OF GALVESTON SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I GUESS, HIRED A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANT TO DO AN IMPACT STUDY BECAUSE OF THE NEW CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL GOING IN AT PIER 16.

AND THAT BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A WHOLE LOT OF TRAFFIC ON THAT ROAD.

AND THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR PASSENGERS AND CLIENTS TRYING TO GET THERE WEREN'T IMPEDED BY ANY KIND OF TRAFFIC JAMS, THAT KIND OF THING.

AND THEY DID THIS TRAFFIC STUDY AND IS GOING TO RESULT IN ANOTHER TRAFFIC LIGHT AT 16TH STREET AND MORE, MORE TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AT 14TH STREET, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO BE ENTERING THE NEW CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL.

AND IT WOULD.

AND I'M A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS ABOUT THE REDUCTION IN THE QUEUING SPACES OR THE STACKING AS IT WAS CALLED, BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT ENOUGH, THEN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S IT'S GOING TO INTERFERE WITH THE TRAFFIC TRYING TO GET TO THAT CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL ONE OF THESE DAYS.

SO I WOULD AMEND THAT NUMBER FIVE RECOMMENDATION TO COORDINATE YOUR TRAFFIC STUDY WITH THE ONE THAT THE PORT HAS DONE, BECAUSE I'M SURE THEY DIDN'T ANTICIPATE ANYTHING BEING ON THAT CORNER WHEN THEY DID THEIR TRAFFIC STUDY.

JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, I VISITED WITH ROB WINIECKE, THE CITY ENGINEER, THIS AFTERNOON, AND HE SAID THAT IF THIS PROJECT IS APPROVED AND THE TIA IS REQUIRED, THEN HE WOULD WORK WITH THEIR ENGINEER AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY COORDINATE WITH THE PORT.

GREAT. SO HE'S AWARE OF THAT.

PERFECT. THANK YOU. VERY GOOD.

YES. I THINK MR. HAYES IS FAMILIAR.

BUT JUST SO WE CAN ALL LOOK AT THE DEFINITIONS OF OUR LONG TERM PAID PARKING IS SECTION 19-133.

AND IT SAYS THAT ANY PARKING LOT OVER 48 CONSECUTIVE HOURS FOR WHICH THE LOT RECEIVES COMPENSATION.

AND I'M SURE MR. HAYES IS FAMILIAR WITH IT, BECAUSE HE PROBABLY PAYS THE CITY A LOT OF MONEY WITH THE LONG TERM PARKING.

[01:35:02]

SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T LIKE THE, YOU KNOW, OH CHARGING AS A TECHNICALITY ASPECT OF THE ARGUMENT.

I THINK IT CIRCUMVENTS IT.

AND IF EVERYONE HAD A TECHNICALITY, WHY EVEN HAVE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS? CATHERINE GAVE US HER PRESENTATION THIS MORNING AND SHE WAS UNAWARE OF THE MEMO THAT CAME IN.

AND I THINK THAT JUST BREEDS MORE OF THE CONFUSION OF WHAT WE ALL EXPERIENCED BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING FOR STAFF TO GUIDANCE AND, WELL, THEY'RE NOT EVEN GETTING WHAT WE'RE GETTING.

SO I THINK THE WAY TO DO IT AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN I WATCHED PLANNING THERE WAS ISSUES ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING. IS IT GOING TO BE DILUTED OR NOT.

AND MR. HAYES HAS BEEN PRETTY FORTHCOMING TO ME ABOUT INFORMATION.

THAT'S KIND OF HOW I FORMULATED MY WHAT I WOULD WANT TO DO.

SO I SUGGEST THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU BRING IT BACK FOR A PUD.

UNFORTUNATELY, I KNOW IT'S TIME CONSUMING TO EVERYBODY, AND I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT, BUT I GOT TO DEFER TO MY LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND MY PLANNING STAFF.

BUT, YOU KNOW, PUT IN THERE THE LIMITATION NOT TO EXCEED 30 PARKING SPACES.

ALSO PUT IN THERE THE, YOU KNOW, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, YOU KNOW AND THEN I THINK THAT EVERYTHING ELSE SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE REGULAR LIKE THE LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS THAT I'M SURE THAT WOULD BE MET AND JUST KIND OF OUR STANDARD LDRS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY, I WISH I WANT TO APPROVE IT TODAY, BUT MY LEGAL STAFF AND EVERYBODY SAYS I CAN'T SO I, YOU KNOW, WOULD JUST HAVE TO GO TO THAT.

AND WHEN THE MOTION COMES UP, WE'LL MOTION TO DEFER IT OR HOW DOES THAT WORK NOW.

WELL I'M GOING TO.

IF I WOULD, WOULD IT BE A MOTION TO DEFER OR OR WOULD IT BE DENY.

I THINK YOU COULD DEFER IT.

THE EFFECT IS THE SAME TO ME.

I THINK A MOTION.

I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE MY OPINION.

I THINK A MOTION FOR DEFERRAL WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE SITUATION IN THIS TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO SIT DOWN WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT THE APPLICANT IS WANTING, AND TO WORK OUT THE BEST POSSIBLE APPROACH TO ACQUIRE THAT THROUGH THE CITY PROCESS. I ALSO THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT, AND EVEN THE PLANNING SAID THAT THEY WERE TORN ON WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO, BECAUSE ON ONE HAND, YOU HAVE STAFF WITH THE CONCERNS AND THE LONG TERM PARKING ASPECT THAT CAME INTO IT.

AND THEN YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE FACT AND EVEN, YOU KNOW, JIM NONIS MIGHT STRANGLE ME, BUT, YOU KNOW, HE WAS AGAINST IT.

AND THEN HE HEARD IT AND TALKED TO MR. HAYES AND HE'S, YOU KNOW, BEGAN SUPPORTING IT AT LITERALLY AT THE MEETING.

SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT AND IT REALLY CLEANS UP THE AREA.

THAT'S WE.

COUNCILMAN RAWLINS.

I THINK DEFERRING WOULD ACTUALLY HURT MR. HAYES. BECAUSE I STILL REGARDLESS IN SPEAKING WITH PLANNING TO DEFER IT AND TO MASSAGE IT TO A POINT THAT IT KIND OF HAS ALREADY BEEN THAT WAY AND IT'S GONE BACK AND FORTH.

IT'S CONFUSING. IT'S BEEN REPRESENTED A COUPLE DIFFERENT WAYS, THREE DIFFERENT WAYS, ACTUALLY.

YOU KNOW, DEFERRING IT AND THEN REPRESENTING IT TO SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE I MEAN, THAT'S NOT WITHIN THE WAY WE DO THINGS LIKE IT'S NOT THE WAY TO ME, THE APPLICATION IS WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US TODAY.

TO AMEND THAT APPLICATION IS CIRCUMVENTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

WELL, WE WOULDN'T BE AMENDING THE APPLICATION.

WELL, THAT'S WHAT YOU HAD MENTIONED.

THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID DEFERRING IT.

WELL, I WANT THEM TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS A CONCERN ABOUT THIS IS LONG TERM PARKING AND THAT IS NOT COVERED IN THIS APPLICATION.

SO THEY NEED TO GET WITH THE APPLICANT, AT LEAST IN MY MIND, AND WORK THAT OUT.

NOW, IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BRING IT BACK TO US AS IT IS PERSONALLY, THAT'S NOT GOING TO PROBABLY WORK REAL WELL.

BUT IF THE APPLICANT UNDERSTANDS THIS, THEY MAY WANT TO CHANGE THE WAY THEY APPROACH THIS ENTIRE PROJECT.

THAT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT.

YEAH. WHICH I WOULD HAVE TO SAY, I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS, BECAUSE DEFERRING IT IMPLIES WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT UP AGAIN.

DENYING IT MEANS THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED IS DENIED AND THEY COULD START ALL OVER AGAIN.

SO I'M GOING TO DO A MOTION TO DENY.

[01:40:01]

OKAY. HAVE A MOTION FOR A DENIAL.

IS THERE A SECOND? COUNCILMAN RAWLINS, MOTION FOR DENIAL.

NOW, LET ME ON THE DISCUSSION ON THAT CATHERINE, IF THIS MOTION FOR A DENIAL IS APPROVED, THEN THE APPLICANT COME BACK AND GO THROUGH BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN.

IS THAT CORRECT? THEY COULD LET ME CONSULT WITH MY COLLEAGUE.

OKAY. SO IF IT'S A DIFFERENT PROJECT, IF THEY ADD IN THAT ADDITIONAL LAND USE, CONSIDER THAT ADDITIONAL A NEW PROJECT AND THEY CAN REAPPLY.

IF IT'S THE SAME PROJECT THEY CAN'T REAPPLY FOR SIX MONTHS.

SO THE DENIAL WOULD ALLOW THEN IF IT'S THE SAME IF THEY DECIDE WE WANT TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL BECAUSE WE STAND BY WHAT WE WANT TO DO HERE, THEY COULD NOT DO THAT IF WE DENY THAT.

MY COLLEAGUE.

THAT HAS AN ISSUE.

OKAY. YES.

ANGEL, MY TRUSTED ASSISTANT HAS CONFIRMED THAT.

YES. IF IT'S THE EXACT SAME PROJECT, THEY CAN'T REAPPLY FOR SIX MONTHS.

IF WE DENY THIS, THEN THE ONLY WAY THEY COME BACK IS HAVE A DIFFERENT APPLICATION WITH A DIFFERENT CRITERIA IN THE APPLICATION.

WHICH THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO ANYWAY, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T PUT LONG TERM PARKING IN.

SO THE ONLY THING THAT MAKES SENSE IS TO DENY WHICH WOULD BE THEIR FASTEST PROCESS.

THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY TRUE.

THEY MAY STAY WITH THE APPLICATION THEY HAVE.

CLEANER WAY TO DO IT. I DOUBT THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND DO THE SAME EXACT THING.

UNLESS I DON'T KNOW.

THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF INSANITY, BUT IT'S TO KEEP ASKING FOR THE SAME THING AND EXPECTING A DIFFERENT OUTCOME.

BUT IT'S I THINK IT'S CLEANER FOR THEM TO HAVE CLEAR DIRECTION ON WHAT TO DO, AND IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THEY WOULDN'T COME BACK UNLESS THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE IT.

WELL, I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THAT DECISION FOR THEM, BUT WE WOULD BE.

WOULD Y'ALL COME BACK IF YOU CHANGED IT? WELL, NO, NO, WE CAN'T ASK THAT.

WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SHARON. I JUST NEED CLARIFICATION ON I HEAR PARKING AND THEN I HEAR SPECIFIC FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES.

DO WE HAVE ORDINANCE OR WHATEVER THAT ADDRESSES ELECTRICAL VEHICLES SINCE WE'RE IN THE AGE OF THAT? SO WOULD THERE BE ANYTHING THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE SPECIFIC ELECTRICAL VEHICLES BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PARK THE CAR TO CHARGE IT.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING.

GIVE ME THE DEFINITION.

PARKING IS PARKING.

AND IF YOU PARK A CAR, WHETHER YOU'RE CHARGING IT OR NOT, FOR MORE THAN 48 HOURS, THAT'S LONG TERM PARKING.

SO MY QUESTION IS THAT'S LONG TERM PARKING.

DOES THAT ALSO APPLY TO AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE? BECAUSE I'VE NEVER OWNED ONE, BUT I'VE CHARGED ONE.

AND IT TAKES DEPENDING ON THE KIND OF CHARGING SYSTEM THAT'S THERE.

IT COULD TAKE AN HOUR.

IT COULD TAKE MUCH LONGER THAN THAT.

SO WHAT DETAILED INFORMATION ARE WE PUTTING ON ELECTRIC VEHICLES? DO WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE OR ANYTHING THAT ADDRESSES THAT? I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION.

THERE'S INFORMATION IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS REGARDING VEHICLE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING.

THE REAL POINT OF CONTENTION HERE IS THE AMOUNT OF TIME THOSE CARS ARE REMAINING IN PLACE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW TO CONTROL THAT THOUGH.

IF IT'S AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE PARKING.

BOB. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S PARKING.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT SOMETIMES IT TAKES A LONGER TIME.

SO AT WHAT POINT DO WE DEFER, I MEAN, OR MAKE A DIFFERENCE THAT IT'S PARKING VERSUS CHARGING? AND I KNOW THE CAR IS PARKED THERE.

JUST A QUESTION.

IT'S AT 48 HOURS OKAY.

AND HE HE HAD IT ON THE ONE SIDE.

SOME OF THEIR CHARGERS WOULD BE THE QUICK CHARGERS, WHICH TAKE A COUPLE HOURS.

THE OTHER ONES WOULD BE MULTIPLE DAYS, WHICH THEN FALLS UNDER LONG TERM PARKING, WHICH IS MORE THAN THE 48.

BOB. SO SO IF WE DEFER, IT KIND OF IMPLIES, I THINK, THAT THIS WOULD NOT HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, TYPICALLY WHEN SOMETHING IS DEFERRED.

BUT IF THIS RESULTS IN A SEPARATE LAND USE REQUEST, WHICH IT LOOKS LIKE IT MAY, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND IF IT WAS DEFERRED IN THAT TIME PERIOD, WE WOULD TAKE IT BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION IF THE APPLICANT ADDED IN ANOTHER LAND USE.

OKAY. WHETHER IT'S DEFERRED OR DENIED.

WHAT. EITHER EITHER WAY.

WELL IF IT'S DEFERRED, IT'S THE SAME CASE.

AND IT JUST KIND OF CIRCLES AROUND.

IF IT'S DENIED IT, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE UP TO THEM TO REAPPLY.

IT WOULD BE A BRAND NEW CASE.

SO I GUESS THEN THE QUESTION IS WHAT'S THE MOST EXPEDIENT, GIVEN WHAT WE KNOW, WHAT WE SUSPECT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS THERE WILL BE ANOTHER LAND USE REQUEST.

[01:45:09]

I DON'T KNOW, HALF A DOZEN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

IT REALLY IS. I MEAN, THE POINT OF THE DEFERRAL IS TO SEND IT BACK TO PLANNING.

IF YOU DENY IT, IT'S GOING TO GO BACK TO PLANNING.

WELL NOT NECESSARILY.

SO THERE IT IS.

YEAH. IF WE DEFER IT, EITHER ONE IS IS FINE.

I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THE SAME POINT.

I'M JUST SAYING IF WE DEFER IT, THEN IT GOES BACK TO PLANNING.

IF WE DENY IT, THEN IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT IF THEY WANT TO BRING IT TO PLANNING AGAIN.

EITHER WAY. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MY SUGGESTION THAT THE MOTION BE TO DEFER IT PENDING FURTHER ACTION AND REFINEMENT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, CONSISTENT WITH THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF DURING THIS MEETING.

THAT IMPLIES AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE CURRENT APPLICATION.

IF WE DENY IT IT HAS TO BE A WHOLE NEW APPLICATION.

YES. OKAY.

BUT IT WOULD BE THE SAME APPLICATION WITH THE ADDITION OF LONG TERM PARKING.

BUT IT WOULD GO THROUGH PLANNING WITH, AS WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT THEY WOULD MAKE TO BRING BACK THE SAME THING.

I GUESS WE'RE ALL IN THE SAME.

DENIAL IS CLEANER.

SO THAT WOULD IMPLY A WHOLE NEW APPLICATION IS CLEANER THAN.

THEY WOULD. AN EXISTING APPLICATION.

YES. OKAY. WITH A DENIAL.

IT WOULD. YES.

OKAY. VERY GOOD.

ANY OTHER FURTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR DENIAL OF THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

WE HAVE FOUR IN FAVOR.

SO THIS APPLICATION IS DENIED.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THEN AND FILE A NEW APPLICATION AND NEW FILING FEES AND ALL THAT.

OKAY. VERY GOOD.

LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

[8.E. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Changing The Zoning From Commercial (C) To Heavy Industrial (Hi) Zoning District On Property Commonly Known As 1802 - 1920 Harborside And Which Property Is Legally Described As, Lots 8 – 11, Block 738; Lots 8 – 14, Block 739, And Part Of Adjacent 19th Street, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Planning Case Number 24P-034; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (A. Montalvan)]

ITEM 8E, PLEASE.

ITEM 8E CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

CHANGING THE ZONING FROM COMMERCIAL TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT ON PROPERTY, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1802-1920 HARBORSIDE, IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 8 THROUGH 11.

BLOCK 738 LOTS 8 THROUGH 14.

BLOCK 739, AND PART OF ADJACENT 19TH STREET IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 24P-034.

MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

AND, ADRIEL NICE TO SEE YOU.

YES, SIR. THIS IS A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM COMMERCIAL TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

THE APPLICANT'S INTENT IS TO DEVELOP A PROPERTY AS A PARKING LOT.

COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING.

LAND USE. STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CHANGE OF ZONING APPROVAL CRITERIA.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THE REQUEST ON SEPTEMBER 17TH, AND IN THIS CASE BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST.

THAT CONCLUDES STAFFS REPORT.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MONTALVAN? IT IS 6:48 P.M..

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? COME FORWARD. YES, SIR.

HEY, STEVE. MAYOR.

COUNCIL MEMBERS, MY NAME IS STEVE SCHULTZ.

I AM REPRESENTING HARBOR PROPERTIES, WHICH IS A SUBSIDIARY OF THE SEALY AND SMITH FOUNDATION.

THAT PROPERTY WAS TWO SEPARATE PROPERTIES UNDER ZONING.

THE HARBORSIDE DRIVE PROPERTY IS COMMERCIAL.

THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT FACES KATIE'S AND EVERYBODY ELSE, THAT'S HEAVY INDUSTRIAL SINCE 2015.

AND THE CHANGE FROM THE ZONING STANDARDS TO THE LDRS.

YOU CAN'T HAVE A COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING LOT THAT'S NOT PART OF THE USE OF THE OTHER USE OF THE PROPERTY.

AND SO HARBOR PROPERTIES IS ASKING THAT THE HARBORSIDE DRIVE HALF BLOCK, BE ZONED THE SAME AS THE BACK BLOCK.

AND THAT'S HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, IN WHICH COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING IS AN ALLOWED USE AS A MATTER OF RIGHT.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY OF THE OTHER MACHINATIONS THAT I JUST LISTENED TO IN THERE.

IT'S SIMPLY THEY WANT TO DO A COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING LOT, AND THEY WANT TO DO IT ON BOTH HALVES OF THE BLOCK.

[01:50:02]

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU STEVE.

ANY OTHER INPUT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? YES, SIR.

GOOD. GOOD EVENING.

COUNCIL AND MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE SEALY SMITH FOUNDATION, I'M A DIRECTOR, AND I THINK THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS IN THE APPLICATION ABOUT WHAT OUR FUTURE USE OF THE PROPERTY IS.

WE'VE DECIDED AT THIS TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT IN THE PARKING LOT BUSINESS, BUT IT'S THE IDEAL USE FOR IT.

WE'LL BE WORKING WITH THE PORT AND WITH SOME OTHER LOCAL FOLKS TO TRY TO SATISFY SOME NEEDS IN THAT AREA.

YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT OUR LONG RANGE VISION.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE MITCHELL FOUNDATION TO, WITH THEIR VISION TO BEAUTIFY THAT AREA SO LONG TERM.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE MUCH GRANDER PLANS FOR THIS.

BUT AT THIS TIME, IT'S THE CORRECT USE.

SO THAT'S I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? IT IS 6:50 P.M.

AND I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8E.

MAYOR, I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.

WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM MAYOR PRO TEM ROBB, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? YEAH. YEAH.

I'D LIKE I APPRECIATE THE POINT THAT WAS JUST MADE ABOUT THE LONG TERM PROSPECTS FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, BECAUSE IT IS IN A ZONE THAT PRESENTS A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE.

AND THIS PARTICULAR USE IS A GOOD WAY TO BANK THAT LAND AND MAKE IT PRODUCTIVE WHILE PLANNING IS GOING ON.

SO THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.

I AM I AM A LITTLE BIT INTERESTED.

MAYBE ADRIEL CAN HELP ME WITH WHAT OTHER USES ARE CONTAINED IN HEAVY INDUSTRIAL? WELL, WE CAN GO DOWN THE LIST.

I THINK THAT'S PART OF YOUR ATTACHMENT C.

WE CAN JUST GO DOWN THE LIST AND SEE ALL THE ALLOWABLE USES UNDER THAT DISTRICT.

QUITE A FEW. YEAH.

JUST PICK A FEW THAT MIGHT, FOR INSTANCE, WIND UP BEING PART OF A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THERE A LONGER TERM PROSPECT.

LET'S SEE HERE.

I GUESS THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS, WOULD WE BE PRECLUDING SOMETHING ELSE FROM DEVELOPING IN THE FUTURE THAT WOULD ENHANCE THAT AREA IF IT BECAME SOMETHING OTHER THAN A PARKING LOT? WELL, THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS, IS IF THIS IS APPROVED, ALL OF THOSE PERMITTED USES IN THAT ZONING CATEGORY WOULD BE ALLOWED.

THAT'S RIGHT. AND SO WHAT I'M GETTING AT.

YEAH. I MEAN, SO YEAH, I MEAN, THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT IS IT'S VERY GENEROUS IN TERMS OF USES.

AND THERE'S A LOT OF SIMILARITY WITH THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

IN FACT. SO SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE SUBJECT LOCATION AS WELL, IT'S GOING TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING VICINITY, PRETTY MUCH WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE USES LISTED UNDER THAT DISTRICT.

YEAH, THAT WAS KIND OF MY POINT WAS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MAY NOT BE AS RESTRICTIVE AS IT SOUNDS.

WHEN YOU LOOK INTO IT. THERE'S A LOT OF USES THERE THAT WOULD BE CONDUCIVE TO DEVELOPING THAT AREA, YOU KNOW, FOR ENTERTAINMENT OR TOURIST DESTINATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

QUITE POSSIBLY. IT'S JUST.

AND IT'S HARD TO PREDICT THE FUTURE.

YEAH. OKAY.

VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

LET'S CAST YOUR VOTES, PLEASE.

WE HAVE THAT IS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY THOSE THAT ARE HERE.

[8.F. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Creating A Planned Unit Development (Pud) Overlay Zoning District In An Urban Neighborhood (Un) Zoning District To Construct A “Restaurant, No Drive-In/Through”,, On Property Commonly Known As 3818 Avenue S, And Which Is Legally Described As West 41-4 Feet Of Lot 12, East 10-10 Feet Of Lot 13, And South ½ Of Adjacent Alley (2012-1), Southwest Block 135, Galveston Outlots, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas; Planning Case Number 24P-038; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; And Providing For An Effective Date. (A. Montalvan)]

ITEM 8F, PLEASE.

ITEM 8F CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS CREATING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY.

ZONING DISTRICT IN AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

ZONING DISTRICT TO CONSTRUCT A RESTAURANT.

NO DRIVING THROUGH ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 3818 AVENUE S AND WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS WEST 41-4 FEET OF LOT 12, EAST 10-10 FEET OF LOT 13 AND SOUTH ONE HALF OF ADJACENT ALLEY 2012-1 SOUTHWEST BLOCK 135 GALVESTON OUTLETS IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 24P-038.

MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

MR. MONTALVAN.

YES, SIR. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD TO ESTABLISH A RESTAURANT.

NO DRIVE THROUGH LAND USE AND THE UN ZONING DESIGNATION OR ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE WILLIAMS BORDEN NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE PURPOSE OF THE PUD IS TO ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, TO DEVIATE FROM THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, AND TO DEVIATE FROM THE HOURS OF OPERATION NEAR RESIDENTIAL.

STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED RESTAURANT, NO DRIVE THROUGH USE, IS GENERALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES IN THE AREA.

[01:55:07]

AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THIS REQUEST SEPTEMBER 24TH, AND BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFFS REPORT.

THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MONTALVAN? VERY GOOD.

IT IS 6:55 P.M..

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8F.

IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE COMMENTS, MR. GERTNER COME FORWARD, SIR.

GOOD EVENING. BY THE WAY, I FORGOT TO SAY WELCOME TO THE NEW CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ENERGY.

AND YOU'RE GROSSLY UNDERPAID FOR THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO IN THIS POSITION.

[LAUGHTER] BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT AS A COMMON, EVERYDAY CITIZEN, WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE TIME AND ENERGY THAT YOU SPEND MAKING OUR CITY A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR IT PERSONALLY.

THIS SHOULD BE PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD CASE WHEN THE ZONING WHEN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WERE WRITTEN, THIS WAS OMITTED FROM THE ALLOWED FROM THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE COMMERCIAL USE.

IT HAS CONTINUOUSLY BEEN A COMMERCIAL USE PROPERTY SINCE 1929.

AND WE HAVE A CLIENT WHO WOULD LIKE TO OPEN A SMALL CAFE HERE.

IT'S ABOUT 1700 SQUARE FEET.

AND THEY ARE LESS THAN 200FT FROM RESIDENTIAL ZONING, WHICH WOULD BE AT THE CORNER OF 39TH STREET AND AVENUE S, IT'S ABOUT 115FT TO THAT VACANT LOT.

IF YOU DRIVE DOWN THAT STREET VERY MUCH ON THE CORNER IS MANUEL'S BODY SHOP.

IF THAT PLACE IS IT FOR YOU? I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS MAY HAVE.

ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. THANK YOU MIKE.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM 8F ON OUR AGENDA.

IT IS 6:56 P.M.

AND I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8F.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM.

MOTION. COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS.

OH.

I'M SORRY. GO RIGHT AHEAD.

GO AHEAD SHARON.

BROWN SECONDED.

IT'S BEEN A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS AND I, MAYOR HAS SECONDED THAT.

ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

I'LL BE CHANGING [INAUDIBLE].

ITEM 8G CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

[8.G. Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider for Approval A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Directing Staff To File All Necessary Documents Required For A FY25 Brownfield Cleanup Grant Application, (EPA-OLEM-OBLR-24-11 RFA), To Address Remediation Of Shield Park, Located At 3228 Church Street, In The City Of Galveston; Authorizing The City Manager To Execute All Required Documents Necessary For The Grant Program; Providing For Findings Of Fact And Providing For An Effective Date. (B. Sanderson)]

ITEM 8G, PLEASE.

DIRECTING STAFF TO FILE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR A FISCAL YEAR 25 BROWNFIELD CLEANUP GRANT APPLICATION TO ADDRESS REMEDIATION OF SHIELD PARK, LOCATED AT 3228 CHURCH STREET IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE GRANT PROGRAM.

PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF FACT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH BARBARA.

MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS THAT'S REQUIRED IN THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

THE EPA AND THE GRANT APPLICATION DOES WANT US TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS IS NECESSARY TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AT CITY COUNCIL AND A PUBLIC MEETING IN ORDER TO APPLY FOR THIS, AND IT HAD TO BE DONE 14 DAYS BEFORE THE GRANT APPLICATION WAS DUE.

WE WERE WORKING WITH VISION GALVESTON, CHRISTINE BRYANT ON THIS APPLICATION, AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE THIS APPROVED TO MOVE FORWARD IN ORDER TO APPLY FOR THE GRANT, TO HAVE THE PARK CLEANED UP SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD FURTHER, ALONG WITH FURTHER RESERVATIONS.

THANK YOU. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS SANDERSON? I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I HAVE A COMMENT.

YES, MA'AM.

I'D LIKE TO ALSO GIVE A SPECIAL THANK YOU SHOUT OUT TO VISION GALVESTON TO CHRISTINE BRYANT.

WHAT YOU DO IN DISTRICT ONE, WHAT ALL OF Y'ALL DO, SHIELDS PARK HAS BEEN LIKE THAT FOR SOME YEARS, AND WE ARE READY TO TAKE SOME ACTION AND MAKE SOME GOOD THINGS HAPPEN THERE.

THANK YOU, BARBARA AND YOUR STAFF.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU BARBARA.

I WOULD SECOND THAT.

I DON'T I'M NOT SURE THIS PROJECT WOULD MOVE AS FAST AS IT HAS MOVED WITHOUT THE INPUT AND GUIDANCE AND PARTICIPATION OF VISION GALVESTON.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

ALL RIGHT. IT IS 6:59 P.M..

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8G.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? HEARING NO REPLY AT 6:59 P.M..

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

BRING IT BACK FOR MOTION.

I MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND. COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS FOR APPROVAL.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN FOR A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

[02:00:03]

LET'S MOVE TO ITEM NINE, PLEASE.

[9. PUBLIC COMMENT]

ITEM 9 PUBLIC COMMENT A AGENDA ITEMS B NON-AGENDA ITEMS. VERY GOOD. THIS IS A TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA OR NON-AGENDA ITEMS. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO GIVE YOUR COMMENTS.

FOR THOSE THAT HAVE NOT DONE THIS BEFORE, COUNCIL CANNOT RESPOND TO YOU IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT I NEED, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, PLEASE NEED TO GET A FORM FILLED OUT FOR YOU AND I WILL CALL FOR YOU THEN ON THOSE BASED ON THOSE FORMS. FIRST WE HAVE CHRIS FREDRICKSON.

I THINK CHRIS HAS ALREADY LEFT, SO I DON'T THINK HE WILL BE PARTICIPATING.

I HAVE CARL KELSO.

CARL. YEAH.

YEAH. CARL. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR BROWN.

COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT.

I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.

I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE PETITION THAT'S BEFORE YOU TO ALLOW LASKER PARK TO BE OPEN 12 MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR.

I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION THAT, AS YOU MAY KNOW, DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS, IT'S VERY POPULAR PARK USED BY A LOT OF GALVESTON RESIDENTS AND MANY OTHER, YOU KNOW, FRIENDS, FAMILY MEMBERS, WHATEVER.

I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.

YOU MAY NOT ALSO BE UNDER THE IMPRESSION OR KNOWLEDGE THAT THE PARK IS ALSO USED FOR SCUBA DIVING, SCUBA TRAINING.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THE PETITION.

OR AT LEAST MAKE IT AN AGENDA ITEM THAT CAN BE SUBMITTED FOR YOUR APPROVAL TO ALLOW THE PARK TO BE OPEN 12 MONTHS FOR THE YEAR.

WHILE THE POOL.

EXCUSE ME? THE POOL. WHILE THE POOL IS OPEN WE USE IT FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR THE TRAINING OR WHATEVER, BUT WHEN IT CLOSES IN THE FALL, WE'RE OUT OF LUCK.

WE HAVE TO FIND SOME OTHER POOL SOMEWHERE TO USE.

HAVING THIS POOL OPEN WOULD BE HUGELY BENEFICIAL FOR US AS SCUBA INSTRUCTORS AND TRAINERS.

AND IN ADDITION, WE WOULD HAVE A POOL, A LOCAL POOL TO BE ABLE TO TRAIN AND EXERCISE AND USE FOR OUR OWN USE. SO FOR THAT, YOU KNOW, COMMENT, I JUST WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR OPINION, YOUR APPROVAL OF THAT PETITION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT.

YEAH. THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE] OPEN THE POOL YEAR ROUND.

WE HAVE, I THINK, GINA WATTS.

GINA. YEAH.

GO, GINA.

YEAH. THIS IS WHAT I CAME HERE FOR.

NOT TO TALK ABOUT EVS.

MY NAME IS GINA WATTS.

I'M A SWIMMER, AND I LIKE TO DO THE AQUA CLASSES.

I LOVE LASKER POOL, AND I LOVE LIVING IN GALVESTON.

WHAT AN AMAZING, MAGICAL PLACE.

AND WE LIVE IN A SEMI-TROPICAL CLIMATE THAT MANY OF US ENJOY BEING OUTSIDE IN.

AND LOOK AT WHAT A BEAUTIFUL DAY IT WAS TODAY.

POOL'S CLOSED.

COULDN'T TELL.

YEAH. OH, YEAH.

YOU'VE BEEN INDOORS ALL DAY.

WE WERE LOCKED IN HERE ALL DAY.

I MADE A COUPLE OF NOTES OF THINGS THAT I WANTED TO MENTION.

UTMB AND TEXAS A&M BOTH HAVE HEATED OUTDOOR POOLS OPEN YEAR ROUND.

THEY'RE GREAT, BUT THEY'RE NOT NEARBY.

AND THEY'RE NOT COMMUNITY AND THEY'RE NOT INEXPENSIVE.

I KNOW WE'LL HAVE TO COME UP WITH A LOT OF MONEY, AND WE'RE WILLING TO HELP DO THAT.

SO I KNOW THAT'S A BIG STICKLER, BUT THEY DO IT.

WHY CAN'T WE? THAT POOL WAS BUILT TO BE USED YEAR ROUND.

THEY RAISED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO BUILD THAT POOL.

AND IT'S A TREASURE.

THAT POOL IS USED NOT JUST BY OUR COMMUNITY, BUT IT'S A TOURIST ATTRACTION.

I MEET PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE REGION, ALL OVER OTHER STATES, AND MANY OF THEM ARE MEDICAL TOURISTS.

IS THAT THE RIGHT WORD? THEY'RE COMING TO RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OR UTMB FOR EXTENDED THERAPY AND THEIR FAMILIES, AND THEY COME OVER AND USE THE POOL.

IT'S A REALLY GOOD OUTLET FOR THEM AND WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE THEM.

ALSO, THERE'S THE HEALTH AND WELLNESS.

WE LIKE GETTING IN THE POOL AND JUMPING AROUND.

I'M OLDER. I CAN'T RUN ON THE BEACH ANYMORE.

NEVER WOULD WANT TO.

NEVER WANTED TO ANYWAY.

I LIKE THE WATER AND NOT THE I DON'T WANT TO GET IN THE OCEAN.

THERE'S SHARKS IN THERE.

[LAUGHTER] SO THERE'S A GREAT COMMUNITY.

THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE.

WE HAD A PETITION AND PRESENTED THAT TO YOU.

THANK YOU, ALEX, FOR YOUR HELP.

REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

AND CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR UPCOMING NUPTIALS.

I'M SO PLEASED FOR YOU.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE VERY INTERESTED IN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THIS POOL.

SO ALSO FITNESS AND IT'S FUN.

DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE POOL IS?

[02:05:03]

HAVE YOU EVER SEEN IT? IT'S FANTASTIC.

A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK IT'S THE POOL FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL.

NO, IT'S A COMMUNITY POOL.

IT'S FOR US. MAYBE FINALLY, THE PARK BOARD AND THE CITY COULD COLLABORATE ON SOMETHING, SO SUCCESSFULLY WITHOUT IT BEING AN ARGUMENT IN THE PAPER.

[LAUGHTER] THAT'S, I THINK WOULD BE A WIN WIN.

WE COULD DO FUNDRAISERS, SPONSORSHIPS, GRANTS, GIFTS, MEMBERSHIPS.

WE'RE OPEN TO HELPING MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE AND FOUNDATIONS AND THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY HERE, AND WE WANT TO HAVE THIS POOL OPEN AND WE'LL HELP FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT IF YOU LET US AND COME SWIM WITH US, COME DO AQUA CLASSES.

IT'S A AQUA ZUMBA.

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF SUCH A THING? IT'S AMAZING. AND SO I THANK YOU FOR HONORING OUR REQUEST.

THANK YOU, MISS WATTS.

APPRECIATE IT. [APPLAUSE] OPEN THE POOL.

ELIZABETH BEATEN, BUT SHE IS NOT HERE, SO I'M GOING TO MOVE ON.

AND THE LAST APPLICATION I HAVE FOR A COMMENT IS FROM SHEILA BELL.

SHEILA. HEY, Y'ALL.

HOW Y'ALL DOING? HEY, SHEILA.

YOU JUST ALL SO HAPPY AROUND THIS ISLAND? IT'S A BEAUTIFUL ISLAND WE LIVE ON, Y'ALL.

[APPLAUSE] IT REALLY IS.

IT'S THE BEST.

I HAD THE AWESOME PLEASURE OF TAKING A CLASS AT GALVESTON COLLEGE THAT JUST SHOCKED MY MIND.

A BOOK WRITING CLASS.

I'M AN AUTHOR, BUT I HAD NO IDEA ALL OF THAT WAS INVOLVED.

AND IT'S HEADED BY MISS GEORGIE HOLBROOK.

BEST KEPT SECRET ON THE ISLAND.

SHE'S A NEW SECRET.

SHE'S PUBLISHED ALL OVER THE PLACE.

FIVE SELF-HELP BOOKS, 170,000 PODCAST REVIEWS, OVER 16 STATES, 23 NATIONAL MAGAZINES.

BUT SHE MAKES THE ATMOSPHERE FOR LEARNING.

WHETHER YOU'RE AN ACCOMPLISHED AUTHOR OR YOU'RE JUST BEGINNING.

WE WERE ALL ENGAGED.

EVERYBODY WAS TELLING ALL THEIR BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T COME THERE FOR THAT, YOU KNOW? BUT SHE JUST ENCOURAGES YOU.

SO TO WRITE WITH IN A NEW WAY AND A BETTER AND OH MY GOSH, IT'S GOING TO BE SATURDAY.

SO IF Y'ALL WANT TO SIGN UP, YOU SHOULD.

IT'S JUST YOU'RE GOING TO BE SO BLESSED BY THAT CLASS.

IF IT'S NOT TOO MUCH TO ASK COULD WE PLEASE MAKE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION A LITTLE BIT MORE PUBLIC FRIENDLY? FOR INSTANCE PEOPLE CAN COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, BUT THEY CAN'T GET BACK HOME BECAUSE THERE'S NO BUS ROUTES AFTER A CERTAIN TIME.

IT IS THE TOURISTS WHO BOOST OUR ECONOMY, BUT IT'S THE RESIDENTS WHO VOTE.

SO KIND OF MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER FOR THOSE VOTERS.

THE DAMAGED SIDEWALK.

I HEARD A LADY SHE HAD ONE LEG, AND I JUST OVERHEARD HER MENTION THAT SHE COULDN'T GO DOWN 61ST STREET.

AND BECAUSE THE, YOU KNOW, THE PAVEMENT IS THE SIDEWALK IS KIND OF WISHY WASHY, AND SHE COULDN'T GET A WHEELCHAIR OVER IT, AND OTHERS CAN'T EITHER.

SO IF SOMEONE COULD JUST IF IT WOULDN'T BE TOO MUCH TO ASK, COULD SOMEONE TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE IT? IT'S NEAR HOLLAND HOUSE, AND THERE'S TWO PLACES WHERE IT'S LIKE THIS.

YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF AWKWARD.

AND ON VOLCANOES.

I LOVE TALKING ABOUT THE THINGS GOD SHARES WITH ME.

IT'S VOLCANOES THAT ALTER THE CLIMATE, NOT EMISSIONS.

THINK ABOUT THAT.

THERE ARE VOLCANOES ALL OVER THE WORLD.

EMISSIONS HAVE ONLY BEEN HERE ABOUT 100 SOMETHING YEARS.

VOLCANOES HAVE BEEN HERE THOUSANDS OF YEARS SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME.

THEY SPEW OUT GASES.

THEY SPEW OUT HEAT.

ANYBODY HEARD ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE? SO, YOU KNOW, HE GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH.

NOW HERE HE IS TRYING TO HELP Y'ALL.

BUT, YOU KNOW, SCIENTISTS KIND OF HEADED UP.

THEY KIND OF THINK THEY KNOW EVERYTHING ALREADY, YOU KNOW? Y'ALL DON'T KNOW.

Y'ALL DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

THE DISASTERS IN AMERICA HAS PROVEN IT.

THEY'RE HAPPENING.

AND THEY'RE HAPPENING LOTS.

SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO KIND OF YOU KNOW, I'M NOT NO SPECIALIST OR NOTHING ON THAT.

I JUST LOVE THE LORD.

HE SHARES THINGS WITH ME I CAN SHARE IT WITH YOU AND MAKE THINGS BETTER.

GOD BLESS. THANK YOU.

SHEILA. [APPLAUSE] VERY GOOD.

[10.A. Consider an ordinance of the City of Galveston, Texas, amending the total operating budget for fiscal year ending September 30, 2025 Consider an ordinance of the City of Galveston, Texas, amending the total operating budget for fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, by reducing the General Fund budget by one million three hundred six thousand nine hundred nine dollars ($1,306,909), reducing the Special Revenue Funds by two hundred fifty-five thousand eight hundred dollars ($255,800), reducing Enterprise Funds by two million two hundred eighty-eight thousand six hundred twelve dollars ($2,288,612), for a total amount of three million eight hundred fifty-one thousand three hundred twenty-one dollars ($3,851,321) to properly record expenditures related to reductions required for the adoption of a lower tax rate of $0.40885 per $100 property valuation which will not support the Fiscal Year 2025 Adopted Budget; making various findings and provisions related to the subject; and providing for an effective date. (Ludanyi)]

WE'RE GOING TO 10A PLEASE NELLIE.

ITEM 10A CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE TOTAL OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30TH 25.

CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE TOTAL OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2025 BY REDUCING THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET BY $1,306,909, REDUCING THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS BY $255,800, REDUCING ENTERPRISE

[02:10:03]

FUNDS BY $2,288,612, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $3,851,321 TO PROPERLY RECORD EXPENDITURES RELATED TO REDUCTIONS REQUIRED FOR THE ADOPTION OF A LOWER TAX RATE OF 0.40885 PER $100 PROPERTY VALUATION, WHICH WILL SUPPORT THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 ADOPTED BUDGET, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU.

CSILLA LUDANYI , CSILLA.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER TODAY, WE HAVE PROVIDED YOU WITH AN AMENDED BUDGET THAT WILL ALLOW US TO UTILIZE THE LOWER TAX RATE AND FULLY FUND OUR SERVICES.

AT THE SEPTEMBER 19TH COUNCIL MEETING, WHEN COUNCIL APPROVED THE BUDGET, THEY GAVE US FIVE STIPULATIONS.

ONE WAS THE TAX RATE OF 408850.

ADDITIONALLY, THE 5% ACROSS THE BOARD CIVILIAN INCREASE, THE ELIMINATION OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO HEALTH INSURANCE, CO-PAYS AND DEDUCTIBLES, PRESERVATION OF ISLAND TRANSIT SERVICES AT CURRENT LEVELS, AND CONTINUING TO SEEK NON PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.

WE HAVE ACHIEVED ALL OF THESE ITEMS WITH THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT, AND I BELIEVE THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO SATISFY COUNCIL'S GOALS WITH THESE CHANGES. VERY GOOD.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM MISS LUDANYI? YES, BOB. CLARIFICATION.

IN WORKSHOP TODAY, WE TALKED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THIS BUDGET ADJUSTMENT ON CODE ENFORCEMENT.

AND IT WAS MENTIONED THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT IS NOT GOING TO BE PAID OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.

IT'S GOT ANOTHER SOURCE OF FUNDING.

WHAT'S THERE TODAY IS THAT THE EXPANDED CODE ENFORCEMENT YOU GUYS DISCUSSED IS PART OF OUR SHORT TERM RENTAL FEE PLAN THAT WE PRESENTED TO YOU.

THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT, THAT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT IS NOT GOING TO BE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS CUT BACK.

THAT'S CORRECT. CORRECT.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? VERY GOOD.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

SECOND PLEASE.

OF THIS ITEM 10A, WE HAVE A SECOND COUNCILMAN PORRETTO.

CAST YOUR VOTES.

I JUST WANT TO SAY SOMETHING. OH, YES, SIR, PLEASE.

I WANT TO THANK YOU KNOW, CSILLA AND THE GROUP OVER THERE FOR THE WORK THAT THEY DID.

I KNOW WE KIND OF GAVE YOU A TALL ORDER, AND IT WAS A LITTLE CONTENTIOUS THERE IN SEPTEMBER.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK A LOT OF THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WILL APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE CITY IS DOING TO DO SOME COST SAVINGS, AND I CERTAINLY DO WITH THE COST SAVINGS. AND Y'ALL REALLY, YOU KNOW, PULLED THROUGH THERE AND I APPRECIATE IT.

AND THERE'S A LOT OF TAXPAYERS THAT CAN APPRECIATE IT AS WELL.

ABSOLUTELY. VERY GOOD.

HEAR, HEAR. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? VERY GOOD.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

[LAUGHTER] THAT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY FOR THOSE THAT ARE HERE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO TO ITEM 10B, PLEASE.

[10.B. Consider for approval amending the "City of Galveston, Texas - Code of Ordinances, Chapter 26 - Parks and Recreation, Article V. - Families, Children, and Youth Advisory Board, Section 26-70 - Composition" section to reflect a reduction in the size of the board, to amend term limits and update and make clarifications.]

ITEM 10B CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AMENDING THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 26 PARKS AND RECREATION, ARTICLE FIVE.

FAMILY, CHILDREN AND YOUTH ADVISORY BOARD, SECTION 26-70.

COMPOSITION SECTION TO REFLECT A REDUCTION IN THE SIZE OF THE BOARD TO AMEND TERM LIMITS AND UPDATE AND MAKE CLARIFICATIONS.

WE DISCUSSED THIS AT LENGTH THIS MORNING.

DONNA, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS? WE DID DISCUSS IT AT LENGTH.

AGAIN, THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR REDUCTION.

THAT NUMBER NEEDS TO COME FROM COUNCIL.

SO THAT IS STILL A BLANK.

SO A RECOMMENDATION CAN BE DISCUSSED.

AND WE DID MAKE THAT CORRECTION REGARDING THAT APPLICANTS SHOULD JUST SUBMIT THEIR NAMES TO CITY SECRETARY AND WILL BE PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL JUST LIKE ANY OTHER BOARD.

SO THAT CORRECTION WAS MADE.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING NINE.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FROM COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM.

YES, MA'AM.

APPROVAL. MOVING THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS TO NINE.

YES. ALL RIGHT.

MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS.

SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

ITEM READ THE ITEMS. 11, PLEASE. CONSENT ITEMS. ITEM 11.

[11. CONSENT ITEMS]

CONSENT ITEMS. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHALL BE CONSIDERED FOR ACTION AS A WHOLE, UNLESS ONE OR MORE COUNCIL MEMBERS OBJECTS, THE CITY MANAGER IS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY

[02:15:02]

DOCUMENTS UPON FINAL APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.

CONSENT ITEMS 11A THROUGH 11 UU ARE ON THE SCREEN.

I'M GOING TO, FIRST OF ALL REMOVE ITEM 11 H TO PASS TO DISCUSS INDIVIDUALLY.

IS THERE ANY OTHERS? I'D LIKE TO REMOVE 11 NN.

11 NN ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHERS COUNCIL MEMBERS? THEREFORE, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 11 A THROUGH 11 UU EXCLUDING ITEM 11 H AND 11 NN.

IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT? SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS.

ANY DISCUSSION, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL THE AWARDING OF A CONTRACT TO SLSCO AS THE PRIMARY CONTRACTOR IN GOTHAM'S AS A SECONDARY CONTRACTOR IN RESPONSE TO RFP 24-19 FOR EMERGENCY BASE CAMP OPERATIONS FOR A THREE YEAR TERM, WITH THE OPTION FOR TWO ONE YEAR EXTENSIONS.

[11.H. Consider for approval the awarding of a contract to SLSCO as the primary contractor and Gotham’s as the secondary contractor in response to RFP 24-19 for Emergency Base Camp operations for a three (3) year term with the option for two (2), one (1) year extensions. (B. Frankland)]

READ ITEM 11 H, PLEASE.

ITEM 11 H.

VERY GOOD. WE DISCUSSED THIS THIS MORNING IN OUR WORKSHOP.

WERE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS? WE HAVE OUR FIRE CHIEF HERE THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

COUNCILWOMAN ROBB HAS DECLARED A CONFLICT ON THIS.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 11 H.

I'M GOING TO SECOND. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN PORRETTO.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

OH, EXCUSE ME.

I SHOULD BE. YES.

YES, MA'AM I APOLOGIZE.

ALL RIGHT. SORRY.

[11.NN. Consider for the approval allowing the Fleet Facility to purchase the listed rolling stock and associated equipment from Silsbee Ford through Tips Co-op for a total price of $151,395.75 for Downtown Parking Control and authorize the City Managers staff to execute the contract upon final approval by the City Attorney. (D. Smith)]

AND LET'S READ ITEM 11 NN PLEASE.

ITEM 11 NN.

CONSIDER FOR THE APPROVAL ALLOWING THE FLEET FACILITY TO PURCHASE THE LISTED ROLLING STOCK AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT FROM SILSBEE FORD THROUGH TIPS CO-OP FOR A TOTAL PRICE OF $151,395.75 FOR DOWNTOWN PARKING CONTROL, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER STAFF TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT UPON FINAL APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.

VERY GOOD. COUNCILWOMAN ROBB.

WELL, I HAVE AN ISSUE.

WHEN WE SOLD REVISIONS TO A BUDGET WHERE WE'RE DOING HIRING FREEZES, WHERE WE ARE CUTTING OVER TIME, WHERE WE ARE CUTTING A NUMBER OF ITEMS FROM OUR BUDGET TO ACHIEVE THE TAX RATE THAT WAS APPROVED, THAT WE'RE BUYING THREE BRAND NEW CARS FOR PARKING ENFORCEMENT AT THE TUNE OF $50,000 APIECE.

I JUST THINK THAT'S EXCESSIVE.

AND IT'S FOR JUST THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

NO. WELL, THAT'S WHAT THE ITEM SAYS.

IT'S PAID FOR OUT OF THE DOWNTOWN PARKING FUND, BUT THEY'RE ISLAND WIDE PARKING.

THEY ARE USED ISLAND WIDE SEAWALL.

ALL YOUR PARKING ENFORCEMENT IS DONE WITH THESE VEHICLES.

I STILL THINK IT'S EXCESSIVE.

AND I WOULD TELL YOU THAT IF WE DON'T SPEND THE MONEY, YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND QUITE A BIT REPAIRING AND REHABBING THE CARS THAT YOU HAVE, WHICH SO YOU'RE NOT SAVING THE TAXPAYERS A WHOLE LOT. AND BEYOND THAT, YOU'RE NOT YOU CAN'T USE THIS MONEY FOR OUTSIDE OF THE PARKING ENFORCEMENT GROUP ANYWAY.

SO IT'S YOU MAKE IT SOUND LIKE WE COULD TAKE THIS MONEY AND USE IT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.

WE CANNOT. WE'RE BUYING POLICE READY VEHICLES FOR 50,000.

THAT'S CORRECT. AND I JUST, I JUST I FEEL THAT THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE.

AND I AM NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS.

I DEFER TO OUR FLEET MANAGER AS TO WHY WE BUY THOSE CARS.

AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN, BUT THE LAST F-150S WE BOUGHT, WHICH WERE STANDARD TRUCKS, WERE $53,000 A PIECE.

THESE VEHICLES ARE ROUGHLY 50,465 FOR THE EACH ONE.

TIMES THREE. IT'LL BE PURCHASED WITH PARKING REVENUE MONIES AND NOT THE GENERAL FUND AS WELL.

THE VEHICLES THEY HAVE NOW, THEY HAVE THREE VEHICLES.

THESE ARE REPLACEMENT TO REPLACE THESE VEHICLES.

THERE ARE CURRENT VEHICLES ARE BASICALLY 10.9 YEARS OLD.

THEY HAVE AN AVERAGE OF 100,602 MILES ON THEM.

THIS PARTICULAR VEHICLE, IT IS A POLICE PACKAGE VEHICLE AND THAT'S MAINLY DUE TO THE SUSPENSION BUT MAINLY THE COOLING.

THESE VEHICLES WILL DRIVE AROUND A SLOW SPEED AND IT HAS AN EXTRA COOLING PACKAGE FOR THE ENGINE TO KEEP THAT GOING, AS WELL AS HEAVY DUTY SEATS.

WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WE'VE PURCHASED THESE TYPE OF VEHICLES BEFORE AND THEY ROUGHLY WE HAVEN'T TAGGED IT SEVEN YEARS TO TAKE THEM OUT, OR AT LEAST OUT OF PATROL.

[02:20:02]

I RAN A COMPUTER ANALYSIS AFTER THE MEETING THIS MORNING AND FOUND OUT THESE VEHICLES IN THE PARKING CONTROL AREA WILL PROBABLY LAST ROUGHLY TEN YEARS BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT BE USED AS HARD. I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE MARSHAL BROUGHT FORWARD.

THEY ARE ON A VEHICLE REPLACEMENT PLAN AND THEY ARE TO REPLACE THESE THREE VEHICLES.

I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

AND I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM 11 NN AND COUNCILMAN BROWN, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS.

ANY DISCUSSION? WHEN WE TAKE THESE THREE VEHICLES OUT OF SERVICE I GUESS THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOLD.

WE TWO THINGS WE DO, AND IT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT.

WE CAN TAKE THESE VEHICLES AND REPURPOSE THEM.

QUITE HONESTLY, I'VE ALREADY BEEN CONTACTED BY A DEPARTMENT HEAD WHO NEEDS A VEHICLE.

SO WE LOOK AT THE RECORDS ON THE VEHICLE TO SEE MAYBE IF IT HAD A NEW ENGINE, NEW TRANSMISSION, THE MECHANICAL SOUNDNESS OF IT.

IF IT'S WORTHY, THEN WE DO REPURPOSE IT AND PUT IT IN ANOTHER AREA.

IF NOT, WE CLEAN IT UP AND WE PUT IT ON GOV DEALS.

THESE VEHICLES SELL VERY EASILY.

SO YOU'RE SAYING IT'S A GOOD VEHICLE THAT COULD SELL EASILY.

THAT COULD GO TO ANOTHER DEPARTMENT, BUT INSTEAD WE HAVE TO TAKE THEM AND REPLACE THEM WITH THREE BRAND NEW $50,000 VEHICLES.

I THINK IT HAS MORE TO DO WITH THE INTENDED USE.

I DON'T THINK THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OR OTHERS ARE GOING TO BE LETTING THEM IDLE ALL DAY LONG AND RUNNING AROUND TOWN.

THEY'RE GOING TO GET USED SPORADICALLY BY THE DEPARTMENT'S.

VERY GOOD. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES ON THIS.

THAT IS APPROVED.

LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM 12 A, PLEASE, MA'AM.

[12.A. Consider For Approval A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Supporting The Juneteenth Museum Act Of 2024, Led By United States Representative Randy Weber, To Direct The Secretary Of The Smithsonian Institution To Study The Creation Of A Juneteenth Museum On Galveston Island In Consultation With State And Local Elected Officials And Community Leaders From Galveston Island; Directing The City Secretary To Send A Certified Copy Of This Resolution Randy Weber And To Those Elected Officials Or Representatives In Furtherance Of Their Support; Providing For Findings Of Fact And Providing For An Effective Date. (Brown/Lewis)]

ITEM 12 A CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, SUPPORTING THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM ACT OF 2024, LED BY UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION TO STUDY THE CREATION OF A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM ON GALVESTON ISLAND IN CONSULTATION WITH STATE AND LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS AND COMMUNITY LEADERS FROM GALVESTON ISLAND DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO SEND A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION. RANDY WEBER, AND TO THOSE ELECTED OFFICIALS OR REPRESENTATIVES IN FURTHERANCE OF THEIR SUPPORT, PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF FACT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. VERY GOOD.

WE HAD DISCUSSED THIS THIS MORNING COUNCIL.

I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FROM COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS.

MAYOR. I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THIS RESOLUTION.

THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, SUPPORTING THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM.

I SECOND. I SECOND THAT.

I SECONDED BEFORE YOU.

SORRY. OH.

LET'S DO THIS MANUALLY.

OH, THERE. THERE YOU ARE.

YOU GOT IT. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB AND THE MAYOR CRAIG BROWN.

SO. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT IS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

[12.B. Consider for Approval A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Galveston, Texas Approving And Authorizing The City Manager To Execute An Interlocal Agreement / Contract With The Galveston Park Board Of Trustees Providing For The Collection Of Hotel Occupancy Taxes, (Hot), The Delegation By The City Of Duties Arising Out Of Texas Tax Code Chapter 351, The Delivery Of Hot To Fund Those Duties; Providing For A Specific Date; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject (Legal)]

ITEM 12 B, PLEASE.

ITEM 12 B. CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT CONTRACT WITH THE GALVESTON PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES, PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES. THE DELEGATION BY THE CITY OF DUTIES ARISING OUT OF TEXAS TAX CODE, CHAPTER 351 THE DELIVERY OF HOT TO FUND THOSE DUTIES.

PROVIDING FOR SPECIFIC DATE MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

LEGAL DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM OR DAN OR BRIAN? DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS? DAN, BE GLAD TO MAYOR.

ALL RIGHT.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THANK YOU.

THE CONTRACT WAS AN AGREEMENT WHICH IS RENEWED ANNUALLY TO FOR THE DELIVERY OF HOT FUNDS TO THE PARK BOARD FROM THE CITY OF GALVESTON.

IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AND MUTUALLY AGREED UPON.

AND THAT IS THE ITEM THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU FOR APPROVAL TONIGHT.

THE PARK BOARD HAS ALREADY VOTED TO APPROVE IT ON TUESDAY.

I SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

I MOVE TO APPROVE.

MAYOR PRO TEM ROBB SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE ON THAT.