Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:04]

>> NOW FOR MCALLEN CITY HALL, A MEETING AT THE MCALLEN CITY COMMISSION.

[MUSIC]

>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. WELCOME TO TONIGHT'S CITY COMMISSION MEETING.

THE DIAMONDS IS 507, AND WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.

WE'LL START WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE FOLLOWED BY INVOCATION BY COMMISSIONER CABEZA DE VACA.

[CALL TO ORDER]

>>

>> BOW YOU HEADS. HEAVENLY FATHER, WE COME TO YOU TODAY, ASKING FOR YOUR GUIDANCE, WISDOM, AND SUPPORT AS WE BEGIN THIS MEETING.

HELP US TO ENGAGE IN MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION, ALLOW US TO GROW CLOSER AS A GROUP AND NURTURE THE BONDS OF COMMUNITY.

FILL US WITH YOUR GRACE, LORD GOD, AS WE MAKE DECISIONS THAT MAY AFFECT THE CITIZENS OF MCALLEN.

CONTINUE TO REMIND US THAT ALL THAT WE DO HERE TODAY, ALTHOUGH WE ACCOMPLISHED IT FOR THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH, FOR THE GREATER GLORY OF YOU, AND FOR THE SERVICE OF HUMANITY.

WE ASK THESE THINGS IN YOUR NAME. AMEN.

>> AMEN

>> BEFORE WE BEGIN, JUST IN CASE WE DON'T SEE HIM.

WE HAVE A BIRTHDAY BOY IN THE COMMISSION.

COMMISSION ZAMORA HAS A BIRTHDAY WELL BEING AUGUST THE 25TH.

WELL, HAPPY BIRTHDAY, COMMISSIONER [APPLAUSE].

>> PUBLIC HEARING.

WAS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING?

>> YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS.

[AGENDA ITEM PUBLIC COMMENT (Individuals wishing to speak regarding an agenda item on today's agenda, please contact City Secretary before 5:00pm)]

[1. PUBLIC HEARING]

TONIGHT WE HAVE FIVE CUPS, AND THREE REZONINGS UNDER ROUTINE, AS ALWAYS IT COME WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING AND RECEIVED NO OPPOSITION.

HOWEVER, IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THEM SEPARATELY, THEY CAN.

[A) ROUTINE ITEMS]

>> I THINK WE MAY HAVE SOME.

>> I WOULD PICK THEM SEPARATELY.

>> AT LEAST NUMBER 3.

>> OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY REGARDING IN PUBLIC HEARING? OH, IS THIS ONE TAKEN WITH MR. WALLACE?

>> THAT'S ANOTHER ONE.

>> THAT WAS ANOTHER ONE.

>> OKAY. THAT'S ANOTHER ONE. THEN?

>> YEAH, I THINK WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THESE ITEMS, RIGHT?

>> WE HAD A BUNCH OF PAPERWORK TODAY, SO IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING.

>> YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH THE LIST?

>> YES, [OVERLAPPING]

>> WE HAVE A REZONE FROM C1-C2 AT 2408 AND 2416 SOUTH MCCALL.

THERE IS A REZONE FROM C3-R3T AT 2700 TRENSON ROAD.

THERE'S A REZONING FROM R1-R3A AT 1500 NORTH BENSON.

THERE'S A CONDITIONER USE PERMANENT FOR LIFE OF THE USE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MCALLEN AT 100 HIGHWAY 83.

THERE'S A CUP FOR LIFE ON THE USE FOR ALYSSA CAMINO AND RAY UPPER VALLEY, INSTITUTIONAL USE AT 504 AND 508 HARVEY DRIVE.

THERE'S A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR LIFE OF THE USE FOR GASOLINE STATION IT SHOWS THE 2408 AND 2416 SOUTH MCCALL.

THERE IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ONE YEAR FOR AN EVENT CENTER AT 3501 STATE HIGHWAY 107.

THERE IS A REQUEST FOR AN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE AND REPAIR FOR LIFE OF THE USE AT 7500 NORTH 23RD.

THOSE ARE THE ROUTINE ITEMS THAT WE'RE PRESENTING TODAY.

>> OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST ANY OF THESE ITEMS?

>> YES, SIR.

>> WHAT ITEM?

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> OKAY.

>> DO YOU WANT TO VOTE IN THE OTHER ONES, MAYOR? [OVERLAPPING]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS, MAYORS.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE].

THIS MEETING THAT WAS HELD ON AUGUST OF 3RD FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING,

[3. Rezone from R-1 (single-family residential) District to R-3A (multifamily residential apartment) District: 0.544 acre tract of land out of Lot 1, Resubdivision of Lots 15 and 16, Block 2, C. E. Hammond’s Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 1500 North Bentsen Road.]

NONE OF US COULD MAKE IT BECAUSE AT 3:30 IN THE AFTERNOON.

I WANT TO REMOVE MY MASK IF IT'S OKAY.

NOW THAT THE PLANNING HAS APPROVED, BECAUSE IF THERE'S NO OPPOSITION ON THIS ITEM.

THE SAME ITEM THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, WERE HERE BUT SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

WE HAVE THE SAME NEIGHBORS AND THE SAME CONCERNS AND THE SAME EVERYTHING, EXCEPT THAT THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED IS THE SIZE,

[00:05:04]

THE DIMENSION OF THIS PROPERTY.

YOU PROBABLY HAVE A COPY OF THE SURVEY.

THIS IS A VERY IRREGULAR SHAPE OF LOT.

THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED [NOISE] SINCE SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND NOW, IS THAT THEY HAVE WIDEN BENSON ROAD.

AS A RESULT, THE CITY HAS ACQUIRED 10 FEET ON THE WEST SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY.

ALSO, THEY CREATED A 20-FOOT EASEMENT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY, WHICH MAKES THE LOT EVEN SMALLER.

THIS IS A LOT WHO IS ZONE R1, AND THIS IS A LOT THAT HAS CHALLENGES.

BUT THE THING THAT THEY WANT TO DO HERE IS THAT THEY WANT TO PROPOSE SIX APARTMENTS.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SIZE OF LOT HERE IS NOT FEASIBLE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THE TREND THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE NORTH OF 495 ALL THE WAY UP NORTH TO BENSON ROAD IS ALL RESIDENTIAL.

THERE'S NO SINGLE APARTMENT IF YOU GO THROUGH THERE.

THE ONLY APARTMENTS THAT WE SEE NOW ARE THE ONES ON SOUTH OF 495.

THE TREND IS ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED THERE, IT HAS BEEN R1.

I HAPPEN TO OWN LOT NUMBER 11, WHICH IS ACROSS THE STREET ON BENSON ROAD, LOT NUMBER 11, AND LOT NUMBER 10.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF [NOISE] ALSO OF MY NEIGHBORS.

WOULD YOU MIND TO STAND MY NEIGHBORS? THESE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT WERE HERE LAST TIME, BUT SEVERAL YEARS AGO, AND WE STILL HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS.

IF YOU DECIDE TO CHANGE THIS TREND OF REZONING IT FOR APARTMENT USE, IT WOULD DEFINITELY DISRUPT THE LIVELIHOOD OF OUR NEIGHBORS.

I DO NOT HAVE A HOME THERE YET, BUT THESE ARE NICE, SPACIOUS LOTS.

MY PLAN IS TO EVENTUALLY BUILD A HOME THERE TO WHERE I'M NOT SO CLOSE TO MY NEIGHBORS WERE I CAN TURN ON THE TV IN THE EVENINGS AND NOT LISTEN TO THE DOGS BARKING, OR HAVING CARS PARKED ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.

THESE ARE PRETTY GOOD SIZE LOTS.

IF YOU GO THIS ROUTE BY BUILDING APARTMENTS THERE, I TRIED TO KEEP UP WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

THESE NEIGHBORS ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS, HARD WORKING NEIGHBORS AND THEY KEEP THEIR GROUNDS.

I DON'T HAVE A HOME ON EITHER THE LOTS, BUT I TRY TO KEEP MY LOTS TRIMMED, AND IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME I'M ON MY GRASS, I HAVE TO PICK UP SOME EITHER TRASH, PAPERS, PLASTIC BAGS, AND SO FORTH.

IN DOING SO, IF YOU ALLOW THESE DISRUPTION TO TAKE PLACE, IS GOING TO INCREASE THE TRASH, THE TRAFFIC, AND IT WOULD INCREASE THE NOISE.

JUST THE OTHER DAY, WE HAD A YOUNGSTER THAT WAS TRYING TO SHOW OFF HIS STEREO SYSTEM.

BUT OF COURSE THERE WAS NO MUSIC COMING OUT AT ALL.

ALL YOU COULD HEAR IS THAT, BOOM SOUND.

WE'RE JUST AFRAID THAT THIS MIGHT HAPPEN TO US.

SO WE JUST HUMBLY ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AS TO KEEP IN THIS R1 INSTEAD OF INVITING PEOPLE TO BUILD APARTMENTS.

I HAVE SOME OTHER NEIGHBORS HERE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE, BUT THIS IS OUR CONCERN WHEN WERE HERE SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

LIKE I SAID, THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED IS THE DIMENSIONS OF THE PROPERTY.

YOU CAN SEE HOW THE CITY ACQUIRED 10 FEET ON THE WEST SIDE.

THEN NOW THERE'S AN EASEMENT, WHICH IN THE PAST THERE WAS NO EASEMENT THERE.

SO IT'S CHALLENGE INTO BUILDING A SINGLE DWELLING, MUCH LESS FOR SIX APARTMENTS.

THAT'S OUR CONCERNS.

[00:10:01]

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.

>> IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WITH ANYTHING DIFFERENT?

>> MY PROPERTY BORDERS [OVERLAPPING]

>> YOUR NAME, PLEASE.

>> BERTON HERR, 1432 NORTH BENTSEN.

MY PROPERTY BORDERS THE PROPERTY THAT'S TRYING TO BEING DEVELOPED.

WE HAVE ENOUGH NOISE WITH PEOPLE RACING UP AND DOWN BENTSEN ROAD, WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE, AND IF IN THOSE APARTMENTS, I ASSURE YOU IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE KIDS, I HOPE IT'S GOING TO BE FENCED IN BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS GOING TO DIE.

EVERY NIGHT, IT'S LIKE AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY, AND A RACE, PEOPLE COMPETING HOW FAST THEY CAN GET FROM BENTSEN TO NOLANA.

ALSO THE TRASH PROBLEM, I HOPE IF THE DEVELOPER WILL BUILD A FENCE OF SOME SORT TO KEEP TRASH FROM BLOWING ONTO MY PROPERTY BORDERING IT.

I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TRASH NOW, WELL, EXCEPT FOR PEOPLE GOING BY AND THROWING THEIR BEER CANS OUT AND ABOUT.

I USUALLY TRY TO PICK THEM UP.

THAT'S THE ONLY TRASH PROBLEM WE HAVE.

BUT, HOWEVER, I KNOW THIS PROPERTY BEING DEVELOPED, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THE TRASH CONTAINERS WAY DOWN, AND I DON'T THINK PEOPLE ARE TOO AMBITIOUS TO WALK THAT FAR TO PUT THEIR TRASH INTO WHERE THE TRASH CONTAINERS ARE GOING TO BE.

I DON'T KNOW. WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH THEIR TRASH THAT THEY DON'T PUT IN THERE BLOWING ONTO OUR PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BENTSEN ROAD.

THAT'S THE ONLY OBJECTION I HAVE IS ABOUT THE TRASH, AND I HOPE THERE'S GOING TO BE A SECURITY FENCE OF SOME SORT AROUND THAT PROPERTY.

WE ALSO HAVE THE DRAINAGES BEHIND OUR PROPERTY, WHICH LOTS OF RODENTS AND EVERYTHING [LAUGHTER] COMING UP, BUT WE JUST FEED THEM POISON.

[LAUGHTER] THAT'S THE BEST WE CAN DO.

I TRY TO MAINTAIN MY PROPERTY THE BEST I CAN.

I'M RETIRED NOW BUT I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE FOR 20 YEARS, AND I RAN A BUSINESS OUT OF THAT HOME, BUT I WAS ON THE GROUND [INAUDIBLE] AND FINALLY, I HAD TO RETIRE BECAUSE OF MY AGE.

NOW I'M RETIRED AND, WELL, I GOT SO SKETCHY COMING IN AND MY WIFE IS SO SKETCHY.

SHE'S A HOMEMAKER. NEITHER OF US WORK ANYMORE.

I JUST HOPE THEY'LL KEEP IT IN MIND.

WHEN THE CITY DECIDED TO PUT AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY THERE, DOWN THERE, TOOK PART OF MY PROPERTY, IT REALLY DEVALUED IT.

I KIND OF BELIEVE THE ONLY REASON THEY MADE THAT FIVE LANE HIGHWAY BENTSEN ROAD, WHEN WE MOVED THERE, THERE WAS ORCHARDS ON BOTH SIDES, AND IT WAS ALMOST LIKE A DIRT ROAD, BUT NOW THERE'S AN INTERSTATE HIGHWAY AND I THINK THEY BUILT IT JUST FOR THE SERVICE CENTER THAT'S NORTH OF US.

THEY WIDENED IT AND, WELL, THEY TOOK PART MY PROPERTY, BUT IT WASN'T A LOT.

I'M NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT.

I ALREADY SETTLED WITH THE CITY FOR THAT AND THAT WAS YEARS AGO, AND THAT'S THE LAST TIME THEY WERE GOING TO DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY.

WE UNDERSTAND THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE SECTION 8 HOUSING THERE, AND WE DEFINITELY DID NOT WANT SECTION 8 HOUSING THERE.

>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION IN A LITTLE BIT, SO WE'LL SEE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, BUT DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING DIFFERENT?

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> OKAY. [OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

>> [OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, GENTLEMEN. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPER FOR THIS PROPERTY.

DID THEY ALL LEAVE? [BACKGROUND] THAT'S A DIFFERENT GROUP.

[BACKGROUND] [LAUGHTER] OKAY.

ARE WE STILL DISCUSSING THE SAME PLACE?

>> [OVERLAPPING] YES. [LAUGHTER]

>> WHAT DO WE NEED TO DISCUSS THOUGH?

>> WHATEVER YOU HAVE.

>> WELL, I'M FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, OBVIOUSLY, RIGHT, BUT IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THEY MAY HAVE THAT I NEED TO ADDRESS?

>> [OVERLAPPING] HOW MANY APARTMENTS ARE YOU GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO IN THAT PROPERTY, SIR?

>> DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN WITH YOU?

>> YES. YES.

>> YEAH.

>> PRETTY MUCH THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO, SIX.

>> SIX APARTMENTS?

>> WE HAVE ENOUGH FOR THE PARKING SPACES, TWO HANDICAP SPACES AS WELL, AND WE EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT PUTTING A BASKETBALL COURT NORTHSIDE.

>> DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS? THEY TALK ABOUT, ALONG BENTSEN ROAD, IT'S A FOUR LANE ROAD, THAT'S HAZARDOUS FOR THE APARTMENTS, [OVERLAPPING] THE NOISE AND THE TRASH.

>> I MEAN, THE NOISE, THE TRASH, I CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THERE.

I MEAN, THEY WANT PROMISES, BUT WE REALLY CAN'T.

I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND DEVELOP IT TO KEEP WITH THE STANDARDS OF THE CITY.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR WALL DIVIDING,

[00:15:02]

ESPECIALLY THE SOUTH NEIGHBOR, AND ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS SET BY THE CITY, BUT WE CAN'T GUARANTEE WHAT TYPE OF NEIGHBORS YOU'LL HAVE, NO ONE COULD DO THAT.

>> HOW LONG AGO DID THE OWNER PURCHASE THE PROPERTY?

>> THAT PROPERTY HAS BEEN WITH THE OWNER FOR QUITE A WHILE.

WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS, BUT THEY KEEP CHANGING THEIR MIND AS TO WHAT KIND OF USE IT'S GOING TO BE.

IT WAS GOING TO BE INITIALLY TWO RESIDENTIAL LOTS BUT THEN THEY CHANGED IT BECAUSE OF THE APARTMENTS THAT ARE GOING UP ON THE SOUTHSIDE OF 495, RIGHT IN THAT CORNER.

THEY TOOK IT TO ADVANTAGE, TRYING TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR THAT PROPERTY THAN JUST TWO LOTS.

>> ANYTHING ELSE, ANYBODY ELSE? FOR OR AGAINST, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING TO THE ENTRANCE FOR THAT [INAUDIBLE].

IS THAT ENTRANCE GOING TO BE ON BENTSEN ROAD WHERE YOU DO HAVE THAT EXTRA TRAFFIC FLOW?

>> IT WORKED THAT THE ENTRANCE HAS TO BE FROM BENTSEN.

>> AND WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO TRY TO MINIMIZE [OVERLAPPING] DISRUPTION TO TRAFFIC FLOW OVER THERE?

>> MY QUESTION IS, ONE, HAVING AN APARTMENT ZONING IS OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THAT PARTICULAR AREA AS YOU ALREADY KNOW.

BECAUSE EVEN ON THE FORESIGHT PLAN, IT'S ZONED FOR R1 OR AUR, AUTO URBAN RESIDENTIAL, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, AND SO I UNDERSTAND THAT EVERY OWNER SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT, AND THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP AS SEE FIT.

HOWEVER, THAT'S WHERE YOU COME IN THROUGH ZONING, AND WE'RE ALREADY HAVING CONCERNS ABOUT THE APARTMENTS FITTING INTO THAT PARTICULAR AREA.

A CONCERN THAT I HAVE AS WELL IS HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THE INTERSECTION, AND IN TERMS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS, THAT IT MAY CAUSE PROBLEMS, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE POINTS OF CONFLICT.

IF YOU'RE HEADING OUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND YOU'RE HEADING SOUTHBOUND, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CROSS SEVERAL LANES OF TRAFFIC, AND AS YOU ALREADY KNOW, BENTSEN ROAD IS THE WESTERN PART OF THE CITY, IT'S DEVELOPING, HENCE, THE REASON WHY YOU'RE HERE.

HOWEVER, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO HOW WILL PLACEMENT OF THE ENTRANCE HERE NOT AFFECT TRAFFIC FLOW OR INTERFERE WITH THE FLOW IN BENTSEN?

>> THE TRAFFIC, WE TRY TO LINE IT UP IN THE STREET THAT'S ACROSS FROM THE PROPERTY IF WE JUST GO BASED ON WHAT THE CITY REQUIRES.

AS FAR AS THE TRAFFIC FLOW, WE PREDICT IT'S GOING TO BE MINIMAL.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO BACK THAT UP, BUT YOU UNDERSTAND THE TRAFFIC.

ALREADY, YOU GOT MORE TRAFFIC WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ON 495, SO IT'S JUST THAT WE'RE GOING WITH WHAT'S GOING AROUND THAT AREA.

IF THAT'S ALREADY INCREASING AND THEN YOU'VE GOT MORE INCREASING PROPERTY FROM THE RESIDENTIALS, NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE NORTHSIDE TOO, AND SIX APARTMENTS, SIX UNITS IS NOT GOING TO BE MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE FROM WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE.

I UNDERSTAND THEIR CONCERNS. THAT'S WHERE I WAS.

I LIVED ON THE NORTHSIDE ON LARK, THEN THREE NEIGHBORHOODS SHOWED UP OUT OF NOWHERE AND TRAFFIC INCREASED, BUT WE LEARNED TO LIVE WITH IT AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE TWO LANES.

HERE ON BENTSEN, YOU HAVE FIVE.

IT'S A BEAUTIFUL STREET, I LOVE BENTSEN.

I LOVED THE WARE ROAD JUST AS MUCH, BUT THESE IMPROVEMENTS WORK FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY BECAUSE THE ENGINEERS PREDICTED THAT DEVELOPMENT WAS GOING TO COME AND THEY WERE READY FOR IT.

I THINK BENTSEN IS READY FOR IT, THE WAY THE INTERSECTION IS DEVELOPED THERE, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO HAVE MUCH OF AN IMPACT FOR THIS SMALL DEVELOPMENT.

IF WE HAVE TO REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE DEVELOPMENT FROM SIX TO FOUR, WE'RE MORE THAN WILLING TO HEAR THAT ALSO.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOME RINKY-DINK APARTMENTS, WE'RE TRYING TO GET UPSCALE STUFF.

>> IT COULD BE WHATEVER IT IS.

>> YES, THAT'S FINE.

>> I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE ZONING STUFF. [OVERLAPPING]

>> THE ZONING, YES.

>> I'LL FINISH ONE LAST THING AND I'LL LET THE OTHER COMMISSIONER SPEAK.

I LOOK AT BENTSEN AT LEAST BETWEEN THE PARAMETERS OF, I GUESS IT'S 4 SOUTH, 495 ALL THE WAY TO THREE MILE LIKE BICENTENNIAL.

WE HAVE ALL THE RESIDENCES ON ONE SIDE AND YOU HAVE A CONTINUOUS FLOW ALL THE WAY THROUGH 7, AND OF COURSE YOU HAVE DAFFODIL, OF COURSE YOU FINALLY HIT MILAM AND OF COURSE YOU FINALLY GET TO THREE MILE LINE.

I THINK HAVING DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST SIDE HAMPERS THAT IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE FLUID MOBILITY ON BENTSEN.

BECAUSE THERE'S A REASON WHY BENTSEN ROAD WAS BUILT TO FOUR LANES AND A CONTINUOUS EXTERNAL LANE.

BECAUSE OUR CITY WAS SMART ENOUGH TO ACQUIRE RIGHT AWAY OR RATHER TEXAS DID AND THEN MAKE THE ROAD WIDER BECAUSE NOWHERE ROAD, NO SIX LANES, MEDIAN, BENTSEN ROAD AND INEVITABLY TAYLOR WILL HIT THE SAME.

AS FAR AS 23RD AND 10, THAT'S FOREGONE CONCLUSION, BUT THE CITY WAS LOOKING FORWARD, SO THAT'S WHERE THE GROWTH WAS GOING TO BE.

YOU'LL WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE STREETS AND ROADS, THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE PEOPLE FROM THE SOUTH TO THE NORTH.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK INITIATING THIS ONE DEVELOPMENT HOPEFULLY WOULD NOT PRECIPITATE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT NORTH OF THERE, BUT I'M AFRAID THAT IT WOULD, AND SO THAT'S A CONCERN THAT I HAVE.

>> WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT STRIP OF LAND, WHAT CAN YOU DEVELOP? THAT'S THE ONLY PIECE THAT'S ON THE EAST SIDE.

[00:20:01]

YOU HAVE NIKKI ROWE AND THEN THE FACILITIES THERE, THAT'S ALREADY DONE ALL THE WAY THROUGH AND EVERYTHING'S ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED ON THAT SIDE ON BENTSEN.

IF YOU TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT IT, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN GET MUCH ANYMORE ON THERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE DITCH.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE.

WELL, THAT'S THE WAY WE LOOK AT IT.

YOU NEVER KNOW [OVERLAPPING] THAT HAS ACCESS TO THE STREET.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M CHECKING RIGHT NOW.

YOU CANNOT BUILD ANYTHING TO THE EAST.

YOU HAVE A BIG BUFFER WITH BENTSEN ROAD ALREADY EXPANDED TO THE WEST.

YOU CANNOT GO AND DO ANYTHING TO THE NORTH, AND THEN YOU HAVE A C-2 ALMOST RIGHT THERE.

SOMETIMES THE TRENDING, COMMISSIONER ZAMORA, IT DEPENDS A LOT ALSO WITH THE CHARACTER OF EACH LAND.

SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE INTO THAT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'M PLEASED WITH RIGHT NOW IS THAT ISN'T GOING TO BE A SECTION 8 APARTMENTS LIKE IT WAS BEFORE.

I REMEMBER THIS ONE WHEN I WAS AT THE PNC [NOISE] BEFORE.

SIX APARTMENTS, THEY HAVE TO DO IT AS AN R-38 BECAUSE IT'S MORE THAN FOUR, IF NOT IT WILL BE AN R-2, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY THING.

SOMETIMES WE NEED TO CHECK IT, THE DENSITY IS NOT MUCH, THE TRAFFIC WON'T BE MUCH NEITHER, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BENTSEN NOW IN A FIVE LANE.

THE IDEA IS NOT THAT BAD AND ALSO FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO KNOW, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SIX ONLY AND THAT'S ABOUT IT.

THEY CANNOT DO ANYMORE AND DO HAVE GOOD BUFFERS AROUND, THAT WILL BE A PROPER PROJECT.

>> I DON'T THINK THE FACT THAT THERE'S SIX UNITS GOING INTO BENTSEN ROAD IS A BIG PROBLEM.

I JUST THINK THAT IT'S GOING AGAINST THE TREND THAT'S ALONG THAT AREA, SO THAT'S MY BIGGEST CONCERN THERE.

>> THE OTHER THING IS THERE'S NO TREND TO THE NORTH ANY MORE BECAUSE IT STOPS THERE.

>> YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. BUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS CREATING A SIX UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX SETS.

THERE'S NO OTHER APARTMENT COMPLEXES NORTH 495 ON BENTSEN ROAD.

IT JUST DOESN'T MATCH THE THE FLOW, THE AESTHETICS OF THAT AREA.

FOR THAT REASON, I THINK WE'VE HEARD PROS AND AGAINST ALREADY.

FOR THAT REASON, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE REZONING BASED ON THE COMMENTS FROM THE RESIDENTS, MY DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM, AND BASED ON WHAT I THINK IS APPROPRIATE THERE IN THAT AREA.

>> ONE MORE THING THOUGH, KEEP IN MIND THAT RIGHT DOWN SOUTH OF THAT PROPERTY, THERE'S A COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT THERE, A CHURCH ALSO AND THE VFW ACROSS THE STREET.

WE'RE KEEPING STUFF ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE LANE.

>> THERE'S A VFW IN THE CORNER, ONE'S A COMMERCIAL LOT, I BELIEVE.

>> I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN OF LOUD NOISES, BUT YOU'VE GOT TO PARK RIGHT DOWN THE STREET THERE.

>> WE HAVE C-2S OVER THERE.

>> THAT'S IT. [OVERLAPPING] I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST VFW, I'M LIKE WHAT'S GOING ON.

BUT IT'S JUST SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS AREN'T REALLY FOR ADVANCEMENT IN DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY.

>> WELL, NO ONE'S PROHIBITING YOU FROM DEVELOPING IT.

YOU CAN STILL PUT RESIDENTIAL, SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT FLAWED.

YOU CAN STILL DEVELOP IT.

>> YEAH, THE RESIDENT, BUT THE GOAL WAS TO BE THE APARTMENTS.

>> WELL, I AGREE BUT THE TRIANGULAR SHAPE AND THE NARROWNESS OF 97 FEET IS THE LARGEST AND THEN IT TRIANGLES TO BE MUCH, MUCH NARROW WITH ALL OF THE TRAFFIC THAT GOES ON BENTSEN.

I JUST CONSCIOUSLY WOULD NOT THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO DEVELOP A DENSE, A FOUR TO SIX RESIDENCE THERE INSTEAD OF ONE TO TWO AS A RESIDENTIAL.

I THINK IT COULD BE VERY DANGEROUS.

>> NOW, WHEN WE TRY TO DO THE RESIDENTIAL, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME CONCEPT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS COMING IN AND OUT OF BENTSEN.

FOR THE COMMERCIAL, I'M GOING TO HAVE ONE DRIVEWAY.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT PART OF IT.

>> ACTUALLY IT WAS GOING TO BE FOUR DRIVEWAYS, THE CITY REQUIRED THAT WE HAD TO DO A TURN IN AND OUT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> MAYOR, COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE MAYOR AND THE COMMISSION.

>> THIS IS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING BUT THEN YOU'D HAVE TO WAIT MA'AM.

>> AGAIN, THAT'S MY CONCERN.

WHEN YOU SAY FOUR OR SIX AND THEN COME DOWN TO FOUR, AT SIX FOR SURE I WOULD JUST DEFINITELY SAY NO. [OVERLAPPING]

>> THEY SAID THEY'LL CONSIDER R-2.

>> MAYOR, I BELIEVE THERE'S BEEN A MOTION MADE IN A SECOND.

>> OKAY. WELL, ACTUALLY I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE'RE DOING IT WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE?

[00:25:01]

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> COME FORWARD MA'AM.

>> MAYOR, WE WOULD ASK THAT SHE WOULD IDENTIFY HERSELF FOR THE RECORD PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU. I LIVE IN THAT SAME AREA.

MY NAME IS ILEANA RODRIGUEZ, I'M RIGHT ACROSS ON ORANGE STREET.

I WOULD JUST LIKE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER AS YOU SAID THAT IT WOULD BE A SAFETY CONCERN.

YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT WHEN WE HAVE APARTMENTS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE CHILDREN AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SCHOOL BUSES SO CLOSE TO THE CORNER.

REMEMBER THAT IF A SCHOOL BUS IS DROPPING OFF, THEY HAVE TO DROP OFF ON THE RIGHT SIDE AS THEY'RE UNLOADING.

YOU'RE GOING TO, A STOP TRAFFIC SO CLOSE.

[NOISE] IN ADDITION TO BEING SO CLOSE, YOU'RE GOING TO BACK IT UP ON THE OTHER SIDE OF BENTSEN, WHERE WE ALREADY HAVE TRAFFIC FLOW FROM IDEA.

THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC GOING IN ALL DIRECTIONS ON THERE.

IT WOULD BE A SAFETY [NOISE] HAZARD FOR THE CHILDREN THAT WOULD RESIDE IN THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX.

AS YOU WERE SAYING, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE MULTIPLE DRIVEWAYS EVEN IF YOU HAD ONE OR TWO RESIDENCES.

HOWEVER, IF YOU CONSIDER THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT EACH, EVEN HOME HAS, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN APARTMENT, EVEN IN A FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA YOU HAVE THREE OR FOUR CARS PER APARTMENT UNIT.

IF YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH THAT NEW ESTABLISHED SUBDIVISION WITH THE APARTMENTS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PECAN, JUST DRIVING THROUGH THAT AREA, [NOISE] YOU SEE THERE ARE SO MANY CARS, NOT JUST IN THEIR CAR PORTS, BUT ALSO IN THE STREET BECAUSE THERE IS AN OVERFLOW. [OVERLAPPING]

>> THANK YOU MA'AM. I THINK IT'S THE SAME MEASURES WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING.

>> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND AND THE MOTION WAS TO DENY THE, COMMISSIONER ZAMORA.

>> THE REZONING. [OVERLAPPING]

>> YOU WON'T CONSIDER EVEN R-2?

>> I SECOND THE MOTION.

>> NOW WE HAVE A MOTION TO-

>> NO, I'M SAYING, AND IT'S FOR RECONSIDERATION ONLY.

>> I DON'T KNOW. THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT BACK. [OVERLAPPING]

>> THEY HAVE TO REAPPLY FOR AN R-2, WE'LL TAKE WHAT WE CAN GET.

>> WELL, SOMETIMES YOU DON'T HAVE TO REAPPLY, I THINK THAT IT CAN BE BY THE COMMISSION TO SAY NOT TO R-38. [OVERLAPPING]

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO DO THE NEGOTIATIONS HERE UNDER THE SIDE. I THINK WE HAVE A MOTION. [OVERLAPPING]

>> WHY DON'T WE TABLE, TAKE IT TO STAFF SO THEY CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT OR?

>> MAYOR, RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, SO WE NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT MOTION.

>> OKAY, A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ALL AGAINST?

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> TONY.

>> AYE. I VOTE AGAINST.

>> OKAY. NOW WE NEED TO RAISE HANDS BECAUSE WE'RE CONFUSED.

>> RIGHT.

>> OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF DENYING.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> 1, 2, 3.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> AYE.

>> OKAY.

>> COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, I VOTE AGAINST IT.

>> OKAY.

[INAUDIBLE]

>> APPRECIATE IT.

>> YES, SIR.

>> I NEED THE MOTION FOR ITEMS 1 THROUGH 8, MINUS OF COURSE THREE, WE'RE ALREADY TOOK [OVERLAPPING]. ALL IN FAVOR.

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST. MOTION CARRIES.

[NOISE]

>> REZONING.

>> MAYOR, I WILL RECUSE MYSELF FROM ITEMS 1B1,

[B) REZONINGS]

1B2, 1B3, 1B4, 1B5 AND 1B6,

[1. Rezone from R-3C (multifamily condominiums) District to R-3A (multifamily residential apartment) District: 3.842 acres consisting of 3 acres out of Lot 15, southeast ½ Section 7 out of Hidalgo Canal Company Subdivision and 0.842 acres out of Lot 16, and the west 109 ft.of Lot 14 out of Hollenbeck Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 2105 South 10th Street.]

WHICH IS WHERE ALL OF THEM HAS TO DO WITH THE SAME PROJECT.

>> YEAH.

>> AS COMMISSIONER GERSON MENTIONED, B1-B6 ARE ONE DEVELOPMENT.

I MAY MAKE REFERENCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE.

BUT AGAIN, I'LL TAKE THEM ALL SEPARATELY.

FIRST OFF, WE HAVE 2105 SOUTH TENTH.

THIS IS REZONED FROM R3C-R3A.

THIS SPECIFIC PROPERTY CONSISTS OF TWO SEPARATE TRACKS FOUND ON THE SOUTHSIDE OF [INAUDIBLE], APPROXIMATELY 900 FEET EAST OF SOUTH TENTH.

IN TOTAL, THIS SECTION MEASURES 3.8 ACRES.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING R3A ZONE AS PART OF A TDHCA, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, MULTIFAMILY TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS APPROVED BY TDHCA FOR 102 UNITS.

JASON SONY AND IS C3 TO THE WEST AND SOUTH, R2 TO THE NORTH AND R3T TO THE EAST.

DEVELOPMENT TRENDS ALONG THIS AREA ARE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, DUPLEXES, CONDOS AND TOWN HOMES.

THIS PROPERTY, AGAIN, IS PART OF A GREATER DEVELOPMENT TOTALING SEVEN ACRES.

THE REZONING WAS HEARD AT THE AUGUST 3RD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING WHERE THERE WERE RESIDENTS OF LOS AMIGOS TOWN HOMES WHO SHOWED UP CONCERNED ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES, TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE AND SAFETY.

THE DEVELOPERS AGENT RESPONDED TO THOSE CONCERNS, AFTER WHICH P&Z UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

>> I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE.

DO ALL OF THESE COME WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION?

>> THIS ONE? YES. THEY ALL DO SIR.

B1 THROUGH B6.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? CAN WE TAKE THEM ALL UP? [OVERLAPPING] [INAUDIBLE]

[00:30:03]

>> YOU COULD TAKE THEM TOGETHER, MAYOR.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> ANYBODY REGARDING THESE ISSUES. YES SIR.

>> COME FORWARD.

>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MARK BOSS AND I'M REPRESENTING MY PARENTS, GLEN RONI AND ENRIQUE RONI.

THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT I'M FIXING TO DISCUSS IS THAT 800 AND VALIDATE WOULD BE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE ENTRANCE FROM THE NEW APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT'S GOING UP, IT'S 102 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX.

THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY HAS BEEN IN OUR FAMILY FOR 50 YEARS.

ACTUALLY LEARNED TO RIDE MY BIKE UP AND DOWN NEW VALLEY.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE BEEN THERE LATELY.

IT'S NOT A VERY BUSY STREET.

IT'S AN EXTREMELY NARROW STREET, AND IT IS A DEAD END STREET.

WITH A 102 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX, WHICH WE ALL KNOW THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED SOME WAY IN SOME FASHION, ALONZO IS NOT GOING TO KEEP IT FOREVER.

A 102 UNITS IS NOT AN UNREASONABLE REQUEST.

THE ISSUE COMES ABOUT IS THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT ON E VALLEY THAT'S GOING TO BE USED FOR A 172 PARKING SPOTS, THAT GOES WITH IT.

A 102 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX.

WELL, IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, YOU HAVE A 172 PARKING SPOTS, IF YOU HAD A 172 VEHICLES, IF THEY ALL LEFT ONE TIME A DAY, THAT'S A 172 TIMES DOWN AND A 172 TIMES BACK, WHICH IS 344 TIMES UP AND DOWN THAT STREET.

WHAT HAPPENS TO A NICE QUIET STREET? IT JUST BECOMES NOW CONGESTED.

IT HAS TO GO OUT ONE WAY TOWARDS 10TH STREET AND IT BECOMES A MAJOR PROBLEM.

I WENT AND LOOKED AT IT BEFORE, I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT BEING SOLELY ON E VALLEY.

ALONZO HAS THE COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE RIGHT THERE.

I DROVE UP AND LOOKED AT AND IT HAS A MEDIAN RIGHT THERE AND I SAID, ''WOW, THIS IS GOING TO BE A GREAT SPOT FOR A BEAUTIFUL GATE." ENTRANCE, EXIT COMES RIGHT ON THE 10TH STREET, DOESN'T AFFECT NEW VALLEY.

NEVER SUSPECTED THIS THING WOULD GO ON E VALLEY STREET.

I FIGURED, THIS MIGHT BENEFIT ALONZO.

YOU CAN HAVE MORE RESTFUL RESTAURANTS IN THERE FOR THE APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT COME IN AND OUT, MORE SHOPS, HE NEEDS TO RENT THAT AREA.

IT'S NOT READY VERY WELL.

LOOKING AT THE PLOT, DON'T GET ME WRONG, IT'S VERY NICE.

THE PROPERTY SLOPES FROM BACK TO FRONT.

THEY WANT TO USE THE FRONT AS THE RETENTION PALM, WHICH I FULLY UNDERSTAND.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT A BETTER WAY TO DIRECT TRAFFIC AROUND THIS THING.

PILING ALL THIS ON E VALLEY. YES, SIR? I THOUGHT YOU HAD A QUESTION. WAS THERE A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE? I DON'T KNOW. I'VE ASKED ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS I NEVER RECEIVED IT, NEVER HEARD IF WE HAD A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE.

IF THERE IS, IT'D BE NICE TO SEE IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE HAS BEEN.

AGAIN, I THINK THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF TRAFFIC FLOW.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THAT MANY CARS ON THE SLEEPY LITTLE STREET, THAT HAS A DEAD END, WE'RE ASKING FOR PROBLEMS AND EVEN KIDS CAN'T RIDE THEIR BIKES UP AND DOWN THE STREET.

LIKE I SAID, I LEARNED HOW TO RIDE MY BIKE ON THE STREET.

I'LL JUST ASK YOU TO JUST PLEASE TAKE A STEP BACK, RECONSIDER THE ENTRANCE AND EXITS OF THIS PROPERTY FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE HOMEOWNERS AND RESONANCE. THANK YOU.

>> THANKS.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COMMISSION.

MY NAME'S MARIO RINA, FOR THE RECORD.

MARK, I HAD A CHANCE TO VISIT WITH THEM BEFORE THIS MEETING, AND I APPRECIATE HIS PROFESSIONALISM AND HIS CONCERNS.

BUT I TOLD HIM WHAT YOU HAVE HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS JUST TO CHANGE THE ZONE.

THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION, A SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, WORK ON TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, DRAINAGE AND COMPLY WITH EVERYTHING PRIOR TO GET INTO A BUILDING PERMIT.

THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED RIGHT NOW, IS CORRECT WE ARE A POINT OF INGRESS, EGRESS IS SOLELY E VALLEY.

WE DO HAVE A RECORDED ACCESS EASEMENT GOING DOWN TO WICHITA.

WE WOULD NOT LIKE TO USE IT UNLESS WE'RE FORCED TO BY STAFF DURING THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS.

BUT ACCESS THROUGH ALONZO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'LL CONSIDER AND WE'LL VISIT WITH HIM ABOUT.

BUT AT THIS TIME, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY.

SOME THINGS I'D LIKE TO NOTE, [INAUDIBLE] HAS BEEN VERY INVOLVED THROUGH THIS REZONING PROCESSES.

HE'S ACTUALLY ASKED ME TO CALL A NUMBER OF NEIGHBORS AND WHAT I'D SHARE IT WITH THE NEIGHBORS IS ALONZO INITIAL PLAN WAS TO DO A 122 CONDUITS AND AN EIGHT STORED APARTMENT COMPLEX.

WHEN WE INITIALLY APPROACHED, WE SAID WE ONLY WANT THE FOUR ACRES, WE COULD DO A 102 UNITS IN THE FOUR ACRES, AND HE TOLD US ALL OR NOTHING.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE BUYING THIS AMOUNT OF LAND.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN,

[00:35:01]

IT WAS DONE WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND OUR FUTURE RESIDENTS.

QUALITY LIFE IN MIND.

THERE IS LARGE OPEN GREEN AREAS, AMENITIES, POOLS, DOG PARK, PLAYGROUND.

WE HAVE A LARGE DETENTION POND ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO DETAIN MORE THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF MCALLEN.

I'D REALLY BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> ANYBODY?

>> YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT IN TERMS OF THE SIZE OF THE MENTIONED DEVELOPMENT IS OUT OF SCALE WITH THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENCES?

>> I DON'T. I THINK WE'RE ACTUALLY UNDER.

FOR THIS TRACK OF LAND, I THINK THE NUMBERS ARE IN YOUR PACKET.

WE COULD DO ALMOST TRIPLE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO.

>> I'M TALKING ABOUT SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT'S DWARFS THE SURROUNDING SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND TOWNHOUSES?

>> MAYBE IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF US. [OVERLAPPING]

>> COULD YOU SPEAK LOUDER, MARIO?

>> YES, SIR. NOT IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF US, BUT IN THE GENERAL AREA, THERE IS APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT ARE SIMILAR SIZE.

>> BUT THEY'RE INDIVIDUAL LOTS, THEY'RE NOT ONE PART OF ONE LARGE DEVELOPMENT LIKE THE ONE THAT YOU PROPOSE, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT.

>> WITH REGARDS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH MR. BOSS'S REPRESENTATION, THAT'S IT'S KIND OF A SLEEPY STREET?

>> IT IS SOME HOW A SLEEPY STREET.

LIKE HE MENTIONED, IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED ONE DAY.

WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE ACTUALLY DOWNSIZING THE DEVELOPMENT.

WE HAVE A COMMITMENT FROM HUD FOR THE FINANCING FOR THIS, SO WE CAN'T CHANGE A 102 UNITS.

I THINK IF WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO A DECELERATION LANE, THE SECOND OF INGRESS/ EGRESS, WE WILL DO THAT.

>> MY CONCERN AGAIN IS, WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS AND PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOODS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I STRONGLY BELIEVE.

WE HAVE SEVERAL RESIDENTS WHO HAVE MADE A SUBSTANTIAL OR NOT SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN THEIR HOMES.

THERE'S SOMETHING TO BE SAID, SOMETIMES YOU CAN'T PUT A PRICE TAG ON SERENITY AND TRANQUILITY.

I'M NOT THAT FAMILIAR WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I DID HAVE A CHANCE A COUPLE OF WEEKS BACK WHEN IT WAS FIRST PRESENTED AT THE PROWLING ZONING HEARING TO ACTUALLY DRIVE THROUGH THERE AND I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THAT 63 WENT THROUGH THE BACK.

[LAUGHTER] IT GOES NOWHERE BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY JUST BETWEEN E VALLEY AND 63 TO A DEAD END STREET.

BUT ONE THING I DID NOTICE IS THAT THEIR HOMES ARE ABOUT 40, 50, MAYBE EVEN 60 YEARS OLD.

THERE'S A NICE ROW OF TOWN HOMES TOWARDS THE REAR.

TO SERINE IS A GOOD ADJECTIVE TO USE TO DESCRIBE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS THE IMPACT OF HAVING X NUMBER OF APARTMENT UNITS AND THAT'S WHY I SAY DWARF.

BECAUSE IF YOU COUNT THE NUMBER OF LOTS AND BASED ON YOUR PROPOSAL ON THE DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE UNITS THAN THERE ARE LOTS.

THEY ARE BEING SURROUNDED AROUND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

MY CONCERN IS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENTS WHO ARE GOING TO LIVE THERE AND THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC.

BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU ONLY HAVE ONE INTERSECTION AND THAT'S ONE TRAFFIC LIGHT. [INAUDIBLE]

>> WHAT I CAN SAY TO THAT IS WE WENT THROUGH THIS EXERCISE AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AND I ACTUALLY DISCUSSED THIS WITH EDGAR.

OUR PEAK AM, PM TRIPS PER HOUR IS 70.

THERE'S 70 TRIPS PER HOUR A PEAK.

I DID A TRIP GENERATION ON IT.

IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT CAN BE DONE RIGHT NOW AND WHAT ZONED COMMERCIAL, IT'S ALMOST TRIPLE.

I THINK THIS IS A GOOD USE FOR THIS AREA.

I THINK WHEN IT SPEAKS TO TRAFFIC, IF WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO A TRAFFIC STUDY, WILL HAPPILY DO THAT, WHICH IS THE CASE MOST OF THE TIME.

BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING A LOT LESS THAN WHAT COULD BE CURRENTLY DONE WITH THE CURRENT ZONING.

>> IF I MAY. THE HISTORY OF THIS PIECE WAS THE FAIRWAY HOTEL, WASN'T IT MASLOW?

>> YES, SIR. IT WAS 122 CONDOS AND AN EIGHT STORY HOTEL.

>> SO IT WAS AN ACTUAL MOTEL HOTEL IN THAT AREA?

>> YES, SIR.

>> SO WHEN PEOPLE DEVELOP THEY WERE DEVELOPING WITH A HOTEL MOTEL THERE?

>> YES, SIR AND THEY'RE BOTH ZONE FOR THE CURRENT USES THAT HE WAS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP.

>> RIGHT NOW IT'S ZONE COMMERCIAL?

>> PORTION OF THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE CONDO [INAUDIBLE]

>> PORTRAIT CONDO.

>> YES SIR, AND THEN THERE IS FOUR HOMES THAT ARE ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY, WHICH WE ARE BUYING AND DEMOLISHING.

>> HOLD ON. ARE YOU DONE?

>> I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT ARISE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

[00:40:01]

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> JUST REAL QUICK. I SEE YOU HAVE THAT AMIGOS TOWNHOUSES.

YOU HAVE ALL THE TOP STUFF AROUND.

WHAT'S THE AQUIAGE OF THIS?

>> ABOUT SEVEN ACRES.

>> SEVEN ACRES. OKAY.

>> YES, SIR.

>> MY NAME IS OSCAR PALACIOS AND I LIVE AT 824 [INAUDIBLE].

I HAVE A CONCERN.

I ECHO WHAT MR. VALL SAID.

I DON'T KNOW HIM, BUT I LIVE THERE.

I TRIED TO WALK AND I CAN'T WALK.

THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS.

THE STREET IS NOT THAT WIDE AT ALL.

WE WERE AT A DEAD END.

THE TRAFFIC THAT GOES EAST HAS TO COME BACK WEST.

I SEE BIG TRUCKS AND THEY HAVE A LITTLE BIT HARD TIME COMING BACK, TURNING AROUND.

AGAIN, THE CONCERN OF SAFETY WITH WALKING, WE REALLY HAVE LIMITED SIDEWALKS, VERY LIMITED.

JUST ALONG [INAUDIBLE] BUSINESS ACTUALLY.

WALKING UP AND DOWN WICHITA, TORONTO, OR UVALDE YOU'RE DEALING WITH TRAFFIC.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO PUT 102.4 UNITS, WHATEVER IT IS.

THAT'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE TRAFFIC FOR US TO DEAL WITH.

OF COURSE, THE BIGGEST THING IS THE DEVALUATION OF MY HOME.

IT WAS A BIG INVESTMENT AND I DON'T WANT TO LOSE MONEY ON THAT.

JUST ASKING FOR YOU ALL TO RECONSIDER AND THINK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH ALL THAT TRAFFIC UP AND DOWN THE STREET.

>> MR. PALACIOS.

>> YES, SIR.

>> ON UVALDE, AT THE VERY END NEAR THE 600 BLOCK IS THAT A DEAD END OR DOES IT INTERSECT WITH THE OTHER TOWN HOMES OF LOS AMIGOS TOWNHOUSES?

>> THERE'S A TURN THAT YOU CAN GO RIGHT BUT IT DOES AN EXIT TO WICHITA. IT'S JUST BLOCKED.

>> OKAY.

>> I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GOAL TO GO IN AND OUT.

>> OKAY, BUT ARE PEOPLE FROM THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ALLOWED TO GO THROUGH THAT GATE AND DRIVE ON UVALDE?

>> NEGATIVE. AS FAR AS I KNOW, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED.

>> OKAY.

>> NO.

>> THE PEOPLE FROM THAT SUBDIVISION CAN COME OUT ON UVALDE, CORRECT? THEY CAN EXIT THEIR GATE ONTO UVALDE.

>> YEAH.

>> THEY CAN.

>> THERE'S NO GATE FOR THEM. THEY CAN COME BACK UP.

>> OKAY.

>> SO REALLY, NO WAY TO GET OUT.

IF THEY COULD DEVELOP ANOTHER ENTRANCE OR SOMETHING, THAT WE DON'T GET ALL THE TRAFFIC AND THEN YOU HAVE THAT PROPERTY SITTING THERE.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE DRAINAGE.

HE SAYS THAT THE 100 PERCENT HE'S GOT IT UNDER CONTROL BUT WHEN IT RAINS, WATER POURS DOWN THE STREET.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS APARTMENT AND YOU'RE JUST GOING TO ADD MORE WATER COMING DOWN.

IT'S JUST A CONCERN.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.

>> THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR.

>> I SEND IN THE FORM SO I COULD SPEAK ON THE SUBJECT.

I'M AN OWNER AND RESIDENT OF LOS AMIGOS RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOMES.

I SPOKE ALSO ON THE PREVIOUS MEETING ABOUT MY OWN CONCERNS AND I CONCUR WITH MARK ON YOUR REFERENCE TO OUR TRAFFIC AND ALL OF THAT.

BUT YOU MUST BE AWARE THAT LOS AMIGOS CONSISTS OF TWO TOWNHOME ASSOCIATIONS, WHICH IS 88 UNITS.

THERE'S CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THERE FROM THE OWNERS AND LIKE SOMEONE MENTIONED BEFORE, THERE'S EGRESS DIGRESS, THE MAIN ENTRANCE IS ON WICHITA, RIGHT OPPOSITE THE COUNTRY CLUB AND THERE'S EGRESS DIGRESS ON UVALDE.

IT'S A GATED COMMUNITY.

NOW, FROM 10TH STREET UP TO OUR GATE ON UVALDE, IS NOT EVEN TWO BLOCKS.

WITH [INAUDIBLE] COMPLEX BEING PROJECTED THERE, THERE'S GOING TO INCREASE TRAFFIC WITH A VERY NARROW STREET AND THERE'S ONLY ONE TRAFFIC LIGHT AT 10TH IN UVALDE.

IF YOU WERE TO USE THE OPTION OF USING LA PLASITA'S ENTRANCE TO A DIFFERENT ENTRANCE, THERE'S NO TRAFFIC LIGHT THERE ON TENTH AT LA PLASITA.

THERE WOULD BE A CONSIDERABLE CONGESTION.

BEAR IN MIND THAT 10TH STREET [INAUDIBLE] ON

[00:45:03]

THE EXPRESSWAY SOUTH TO MEXICO, TO THE BORDER.

IT'S A STATE HIGHWAY AND IS HEAVILY COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC.

EIGHTEEN WHEELERS, FUEL TANKERS ARE CONSTANT THROUGH THAT SECTION.

YOU PUT IN THAT COMPLEX, THAT APARTMENT, WHETHER IT'S CONDO OR APARTMENTS, IT'S GOING TO INCREASE TRAFFIC CONSIDERABLY AND THAT'S OUR CONCERN.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THE TRAFFIC PRIMARILY AND AGAIN THE AMOUNT OF THE INCREASE IN POPULATION IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, WHICH WOULD BE A HANDICAP FOR AND ALSO SECURITY NOT ONLY FOR THE ADULTS BUT FOR KIDS ALSO.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. I THINK WE ALWAYS HAVE [INAUDIBLE] TOUGH DECISIONS TO MAKE BECAUSE WE GENERALLY, AS A MUNICIPALITY, DON'T WANT TO STUNT GROWTH.

WE WANT GROWTH. WE WANT DEVELOPMENT.

OF COURSE, ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES SOMETIMES WILL COME WITH TRAFFIC.

THAT'S JUST PART OF THE PROGRAM.

I THINK THE COMMISSION HAS TO BALANCE OUT THE INTERESTS OF THE PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS, THE DEVELOPERS, THE PEOPLE AROUND THE AREA AND REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT WE WANT TO DO.

SOMETIMES WE GET THE ISSUES OF I WOULD LOVE, YOU GUYS ARE TOO OLD FASHION, YOU ALL NEED A MIX IT UP A LITTLE BIT, AND THEN SOMETIMES PEOPLE SAY NO, WE GOT TO KEEP IT THE WAY WE ARE.

GOING TO BE A LITTLE MORE OLD-FASHIONED HAVE RESIDENTIAL, HAVE COMMERCIAL.

MIX IT UP. WHAT ARE THE WISHES OF THE COMMISSION?

>> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY ITEMS AS REQUESTED UNDER 1B_1 THROUGH SIX.

>> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> 1B_1, WHICH ONE WAS IT?

>> 1B_1, 1B_2, 1B_3, 1B_4, 1B_5, AND 1B_6.

>> OKAY. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> YEAH. I SECOND IT.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ALL AGAINST?

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OKAY. MOTION FAILS.

DO WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION?

>> THIS IS [INAUDIBLE] MAY I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE?

>> OKAY. NOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> OKAY. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION UNDERSTANDING THAT IN THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS IT PLACE, AN EMPHASIS ON TRAFFIC NEEDS AND INGRESS, EGRESS, SIDEWALK, THINGS OF THAT NATURE THAT WILL BENEFIT THE AREA.

>> CORRECT. THEY'RE BEING OF A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR TO APPROVE?

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OKAY. AYE RAISE HANDS BECAUSE THIS WAS A LITTLE DIFFICULT, 3, 4 MOTION PASSES.

OKAY. [OVERLAPPING] NUMBER 7.

>> MAYOR, ITEM B7 AND B8 HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO BE TABLED BY THE DEVELOPER.

[7. Initial zoning to R-3A (multifamily residential apartment) District: 17.043 acres out of Lot 445, John H. Shary Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 9000 North Shary Road.]

>> MOTION TO TABLE 7 AND 8.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> ALL AGAINST? MOTION PASSES.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS.

>> MAYOR, C1 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.

[C) CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS]

[1. Request of Norma S. Pimentel, on behalf of Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley for a Conditional Use Permit, for life of use, for an institutional use (respite center) at W. 90’ of Lots 13 and 14 & All of 15 and 16, Block 12, McAllen Addition Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas, 111 South 15th Street.]

>> OKAY.

>> C2 IS READY TO GO.

THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ONE YEAR FOR A BAR AT 5204 NORTH 10TH.

[2. Request of Liza Salinas, for a Conditional Use Permit, for one year, for a bar at Lot 1, A & A Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 5204 North 10th Street.]

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 10TH AND ZINNIA.

IT IS ZONE C3 ADJACENT [INAUDIBLE] ONE TO THE EAST, C3 TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST.

ADJACENT USES INCLUDE BUSINESSES, OFFICES, SOME RESTAURANTS AND THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE A RESTAURANT THAT WILL NOW BE A BAR FROM THE 3600 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 5:00 PM TO MIDNIGHT.

THE ITEM WAS HEARD AT THE AUGUST 3RD PLAN AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING WHERE THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION AND IT WAS DISAPPROVED WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

SINCE THEN, STAFF DID RECEIVE ONE EMAIL FROM THE OWNER THE DANCE ACADEMY AND THE ADJACENT PLAZA TO THE NORTH SIGHTING SAFETY CONCERNS OF PARENTS AND CHILDREN IN HER ACADEMY.

I WILL SAY THAT THERE IS NO DIRECT CONNECTION BETWEEN THE PLAZAS.

YOU'D HAVE TO GET BACK ON 10TH.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING A RULE.

>> OKAY. DO WE HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED?

>> I'LL MOVE.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST?

>> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES, OKAY.

>> ITEM C3 WILL STAY TABLED.

[3. Request of Mario A. Reyna, on behalf of Riverside Development Service, LLC, for a Conditional Use Permit, for life of the use, for a planned unit development at the 26.663 acre tract of land out of Lot 45 and 52, La Lomita Irrigation and Construction Company’s Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 8300 North Ware Road. (Tabled)]

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY MCALLEN?

>> I'LL MOVE.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

[D) Amending the Zoning Ordinance of the City of McAllen.]

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST? MOTION PASSES.

OKAY. ITEM D, PUBLIC HEARING AND [INAUDIBLE] PROVIDING FOR ANNEXATION OF 17 ACRES.

[00:50:03]

>> JUMPED THE GUN THERE. THAT GOES SAME WITH

[E) Public Hearing and Ordinance providing for the annexation of 17.043 acres out of Lot 445, John H. Shary Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 9000 North Shary Road.]

THOSE THREE ZONINGS THAT WE JUST TABLED THE DEVELOPERS REQUESTS TO TABLE BOTH.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

>> I'LL MOVE.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> ALL AGAINST? MOTION PASSES.

ITEM F THE SAME?

>> YES, SIR.

>> [INAUDIBLE] OKAY. HAS ANY PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA THAT WE NEED TO PULL OUT OR ANYTHING?

>> ITEM J. I DON'T NEED TO PULL IT OUT.

[2. CONSENT AGENDA]

I JUST NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF.

>> OKAY. ITEM J. ANYBODY ELSE? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS 2A THROUGH J WITH MR. [INAUDIBLE] NOT VOTING ON ITEM J.

>> [OVERLAPPING] I MOVE.

>> IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> ALL AGAINST?

>> AYE.

>> MOTION CARRIES. CONTRACTS.

>> MR. MAYOR, 3A IS CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 FOR THE MCALLEN PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN OFFICE.

[3. BIDS/CONTRACTS]

[A) Consideration and Approval of Change Order No. 1 for the McAllen Public Works Administration Office Renovations Project.]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR COMMISSIONED.

THIS CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 CONSISTS OF SEVERAL SEPARATE ITEMS THAT WERE REQUESTED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS TO THEIR BETTERMENT FOR THE PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,817.

A BUDGET RE-CLASS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND APPROVED.

THIS AMOUNT IS BUDGETED FOR THE PROJECT.

DBR ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS AND CITY STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,817 FOR REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $172,817.

>> QUESTION, COMMENTS?

>> IF NOT DO I WOULD HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. [FOREIGN]

>> IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

>> THANK YOU.

>> DO WE [INAUDIBLE] THE WORK CONTRACT FOR TOWING SERVICES? [OVERLAPPING].

>>YES, SIR. ITEM 3B.

>> MAYOR, CITY COMMISSION.

PUBLIC WORKS IS SEEKING APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE CONTRACT OF TOWING SERVICES AN EXCESS OF $6,487.26 AND THE OPTION TO EXTEND THE CONTRACTS WITH [INAUDIBLE] FOR LIGHT VEHICLES AND [INAUDIBLE] TOWING FOR [INAUDIBLE],

[B) Award of Contract for Towing Services - Automobile/Light, Medium & Heavy Duty Trucks/Equipment.]

TAXES FOR MEDIUM, AND HEAVY TRUCKS AND EQUIPMENT FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO YEARS AND ONE-YEAR INCREMENTS WITH CITY MANAGER APPROVAL IF AND WHEN PRICING REMAINS THE SAME.

HISTORICALLY, THESE SERVICES HAVE REMAINED BELOW THE $50,000 THRESHOLD.

THIS YEAR, THERE WAS AN INCREASE OF 32 PERCENT IN REQUESTS FOR TOWING SERVICES OF HEAVY TRUCKS AND EQUIPMENT THUS CAUSING THE AMOUNT TO EXCEED THE THRESHOLD BY 6,487.26.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

>> I'LL MOVE.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST? MOTION PASSES.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ITEM 4A ORDINANCES.

>> 4A IS AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR MIDYEAR REVENUE AND EXPENSES.

[4. ORDINANCES]

[A) Ordinance providing for a Budget Amendment for Mid-Year Revenue and Expenses Adjustments for Various Funds.]

MAYOR WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THIS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HERE THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.

IN FACT WE USUALLY DO THE MIDYEAR BUDGET AMENDMENT A LITTLE EARLIER, PROBABLY IN THE JUNE TIME FRAME, SOMETIMES AS FAR AS JULY, BUT USUALLY JUNE.

BUT WITH THE UNUSUAL YEAR THAT WE'VE HAD, MOSTLY POSITIVE, WE'RE WAITING TO SEE IF THE TREND ON REVENUES CONTINUED.

THEN THE BIG ONE, OF COURSE, IS THE REVENUE THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

WE ARE ONE, MAKING SURE THAT WE KNEW THE AMOUNTS AND TWO, HOW TO BUDGET THEM.

AS YOU'VE HEARD THE LAST FEW WEEKS, WE'VE HAD TO DO SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS IN ORDER FOR US TO STAY WITHIN THE GUIDELINES.

YOU'VE GOT A SPREADSHEET IN YOUR PACKET THAT SAYS BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM.

IT'S GOT A LOT OF ITEM NUMBERS ON IT.

I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH IT VERY QUICKLY AND THEN I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

THIS IS WHAT I'M GOING TO BE FOLLOWING.

CITY MCALLEN BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST FORM.

ON THE REVENUE SIDE, I'M GOING TO START WITH THE GENERAL FUND.

ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE DID WAIT WAS BECAUSE SALES TAX WAS DOING VERY, WELL.

WE WANTED TO GET AS MANY MONTHS AS WE COULD SO THAT WE COULD PROJECT THE REST OF THE YEAR AND NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

AVALON TAXES, WE'RE RECOMMENDING AN INCREASE OF $717,000 TO THE BUDGET.

THE NEXT ITEM WE'RE RECOMMENDING 7.4 MILLION INCREASE TO OUR ESTIMATED SALES TAX.

THE NEXT ITEM IS ALSO SALES TAX REVENUE, BUT WE SEPARATED BECAUSE IT'S INSIGHT.

WE ARE ESTIMATING THAT WE WILL RECEIVE $1.1 MILLION ADDITIONALLY FROM INSIGHT AND THEN WE'RE REDUCING THE EXPECTED REVENUE FOR INTEREST AND ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE ON DEPOSITS BY

[00:55:04]

636,000 BASICALLY BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING NO REVENUE FROM INVESTMENTS UNFORTUNATELY.

THE NEXT ITEM IS A TRANSFERS IN FROM THE TOLL BRIDGE.

AS YOU KNOW, THE BRIDGE LAST YEAR SUFFERED TREMENDOUSLY.

WE ARE REDUCING OUR PROJECTION BY $772,000.

THAT'S A TRANSFER OF THAT COMES FROM THE INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE TO THE GENERAL FUND.

THE LAST ONE THERE FOR GENERAL FUND REVENUE IS HAVING TO DO WITH THE STIMULUS MONEY.

BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING, INSTEAD OF PUTTING THE ENTIRE SLOG THAT CAME IN LAST YEAR AND IT'S GOING TO COME IN NEXT YEAR.

WE'RE ACTUALLY PROJECTING HOW MUCH WE HAVE MADE ELIGIBLE ALREADY, AS WE TOLD YOU DURING BUDGET, THAT'S GOING TO BE AN ONGOING PROCESS AS MONEY BECOMES ELIGIBLE, WE WILL ACCOUNT FOR IT.

THIS 24 MILLION, 756 IS PART OF THE 41 OR 42 MILLION.

BUT WE'RE BASICALLY SAYING THIS IS HOW MUCH WE PROJECT SO FAR AS A REVENUE LOSS TO THE GENERAL FUND.

YOU STILL GOING TO HAVE THAT BALANCE MOVING FORWARD.

REMEMBER, WE'VE GOT THREE YEARS TO GET ALL THAT MONEY.

ANY QUESTION ON THE REVENUE OF THE GENERAL FUND? ON THE EXPENDITURE AGAIN, STILL ON THE GENERAL FUND DISASTER EXPENSES, THE $97,000 HAS TO DO WITH EXPENSES FROM ALL OF OUR FUNDS ARE ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENTS IN THE GENERAL FUND.

THE NEXT ONE IS HUMANE SOCIETY.

THAT IS BASICALLY OUR PROJECTION ON ACTUAL THROUGH THE CONTRACT.

WE ACTUALLY DIDN'T CHANGE THE NUMBER ACCORDING TO THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE SIGNED WE'RE CORRECTING THAT MOVING FORWARD.

THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND IMPROVEMENTS, THAT'S A NEW FUND WHERE WE'RE PUTTING ALL OF THE MONEY THAT I JUST DESCRIBED FROM THE STIMULUS.

THAT'S NUMBER IS EXACTLY 24 MILLION 756 PLUS THE 5.2 THAT YOU HAD TRANSFERRED FOR [INAUDIBLE].

THEN THE TERSE 1 AND 2, THAT'S THE MONEY THAT COMES OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND AND GOES INTO THE TERSE WE COLLECT IT AND THEN PUT IT INTO THE TERSE ACCOUNT.

THEN THE LAST ONE THERE IS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND.

WE'RE INCREASING IT BY ONE MILLION DOLLARS DUE TO TWO THINGS.

ONE IS INSIGHT AND GAS AND ROYALTIES.

ON THE NEXT PAGE, THE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION TRENDS ARE SIMILAR.

ON SELLS AND USE TAX WE'RE PROJECTING ALMOST $2.5 MILLION MORE GOING INTO THE DEVELOPMENT CORP DUE TO SALES TAX REVENUE.

THE SECOND LINE IS AGAIN TIED TO INSIGHT.

THIS IS THE AMOUNT THAT GOES INTO THE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.

WE'RE PROJECTING 386,000 ADDITIONAL MONEY.

THE NEXT ONE WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT IN A WHILE, BUT THIS IS THE REFUNDING THAT WE DID FOR SIMON.

WE'VE GOT BETTER RATES AND WE'RE ABLE TO REFUND OR REFINANCE SOME OF THE PARKING GARAGE.

WE HAVE TO SHOW AN IN AND OUT.

THE 4.4 MILLION IS THE REVENUE COMING IN FROM THE BONDS.

THEN RIGHT BELOW IT IS THE 4.28 MILLION PLUS THE ISSUE AND COSTS, WHICH IS 4.4 MILLION.

ON THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, YOU'VE GOT INFRASTRUCTURE AND IMPROVEMENTS, SAME NUMBER THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, EXCEPT THAT WE'RE SHOWING THE REVENUE.

THE NEXT ONES ARE VERY, IMPORTANT.

THESE ARE PROJECTS THAT YOU'VE APPROVED THROUGH BUDGET FROM THE STIMULUS FUNDS THAT WE ASKED FOR A GREEN LIGHT TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE US SOME TIME TO RAMP UP AND DO.

ALL OF THESE ARE COMING FROM THAT FUND.

THAT'S THE FIRE STATION NUMBER 8 IN NORTH MCALLEN, THE FIREFIGHTER TRAINING FACILITY CENTER, FOR 3.3 MILLION, THE FIRE TRUCK ASSOCIATED TO THAT FIRE STATION AND AS YOU KNOW, TAKES 12-16 MONTHS TO RECEIVE THAT $675,000 TRUCK.

THE ENGINEERING DRAINAGE STUDY WHICH YOU ALL APPROVED ALSO TO MOVE FORWARD.

THE BEAUTIFICATION ON BICENTENNIAL, WHICH WE ACTUALLY STARTED TURNING DIRT YESTERDAY.

THE CROCKETT ELEMENTARY, WE CALL IT MASTER PLAN, BUT IT'S REALLY INVOLVING TWO PROJECTS.

ONE THAT IS ABOUT TO BE AWARDED.

ON THE NEXT PAGE IS THE AIRPORT AND HAS TO DO WITH CARES ACT FUNDS, WERE GOING TO RECEIVE AN ADDITIONAL $2,620,000 AND ON THE EXPENSE SIDE, WE'VE GOT $38, 000 OF EXPENSES FOR COVID.

ON THE TOLL BRIDGE, SAME AS WE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE GENERAL FUND.

WE HAD PROJECTED $11 MILLION OF REVENUE.

WE ARE NOW BUDGETING 7.6 MILLION, A LOSS OF 3.4MILLION AND THAT'S WHERE THE TRANSFERS TO OUR GENERAL FUND AND TO THE CITY OF HIDALGO WILL BE REDUCED FOR A TOTAL OF 3, 000, 395.

ON THE EXPENDITURES, [LAUGHTER]

[01:00:01]

THE DIRECT CHECKS THAT WE SENT TO THE CITY OF HIDALGO WILL BE REDUCED BY $866,000 AND THE ONE COMING TO THE GENERAL FUND BY 1.45 MILLION.

THEN ON THE BOTTOM, ANZALDUA CIP, WE RECEIVED A GRANT FROM TECHSTAR TO THE MPO TO DO THE IMPROVEMENTS AT THE ANZALDUA'S NORTHBOUND AND THE BOTTOM IS THE EXPENSE FOR THAT PROJECT AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER.

>> I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST THE MOTION PASSES, ITEM 4B. HERE WE GO.

[B) Consideration and possible approval of updates to the mobile food vendor ordinance.]

>> HERE WE GO.

>> UPDATES ON ON MOBILE FOOD VENDOR, MOTION TO APPROVE. [LAUGHTER]

>> LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, WE DISCUSSED REQUIRING SOME INFORMATION ON THE FRONT END TO AVOID SOME CONFUSION IN THE BACK-END, WHAT WE'VE DONE IS INCLUDED IN THIS DRAFT THAT THEY HAVE APPLICANTS FOR MOBILE FOOD VENDING PERMITS HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL PRIVATE PROPERTY COVENANTS AND DEED RESTRICTIONS.

IT'S BEST TO PUT THAT ON THE APPLICATION, AS WELL AS NOTICE ON THE FRONT END, BUT NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRE THE APPLICANTS TO GO PULL RECORDS AND PRESENT THOSE DEEDS.

THE OTHER THING THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING BASED ON THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION AT THE LAST MEETING IS A PROBATIONARY PERIOD.

SO IF SOMEBODY WOULD BE OPERATING IN A SHARED PLAZA, THERE WILL BE 90 DAY PROBATIONARY WINDOW WHERE THE OWNERS WHO INITIALLY GAVE THEIR APPROVAL COULD THEN WITHDRAW THAT APPROVAL OR CHANGE THEIR MIND TO BASICALLY BASED ON HOW THE OPERATIONS ARE GOING.

WE FINALLY REACHED A GOOD COMPROMISE BASED ON EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE HEARD WHICH ALLOWS THE MOBILE FOOD VENDORS TO HAVE A STREAMLINED APPLICATION PROCESS, BUT STILL GIVE REMEDIES TO THOSE WHO ARE END SHARED COMMERCIAL PLAZAS.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> QUESTIONS, COMMENTS.

>> REAL QUICK ON SECTION FOR THE UPDATED ORDINANCE WILL ALLOW CURRENT MOBILE FOOD VENDORS TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE WITHIN 30 DAYS, RIGHT?

>> I WOULD REQUEST THAT WE DON'T DO THE GRACE PERIOD BECAUSE THERE'S NO NEED TO.

IT'S JUST WE'LL CHANGE THE APPLICATION IMMEDIATELY BASED ON THIS, YES WE HAVE REMOVED THAT GRACE PERIOD.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST.

>> NAY.

>> OKAY. FORTUNATELY, MOTION PASSES.

FORTUNATELY, THIS IS IT.

>> THANK YOU ALL.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK [OVERLAPPING] GOOD WORK.

>> ON 5A GOT [INAUDIBLE] COMING UP.

WE'VE GOT A DISCUSSION OF THE 2021 PROPOSED TAX RATE.

WE MUST TAKE THE RECORD VOTE AND SCHEDULED A PUBLIC HEARING MAYOR,

[5. MANAGER’S REPORT]

[A) Discussion of 2021 Proposed Tax Rate, Take a Record Vote and Schedule Public Hearing.]

AND THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE NEW RULES FROM AUSTIN.

WE'RE PROPOSING TO KEEP THE SAME PROPERTY TAX RATE.

>> YES. GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.

LIKE MR. RODRIQUEZ STATED, THE RATE FOR FOR THIS YEAR IS PROPOSED AS 0.4956000 PER 100 VALUATION.

IN ORDER TO FOLLOW PROCEDURES, YOU ALMOST TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON WHO'S FOR AND WHO WAS AGAINST IT.

AFTER PROPOSING THE RATE, WE WILL PUBLISH A NOTICE OF PROPOSED RATE, AND WE WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE MUST HOLD ONE PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED RATE IS THE SAME RATE AS LAST YEAR'S TAX RATE, THE PROPOSED RATE DOES EXCEED THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE OF 0.473627, AND YOU WILL FIND THAT RATE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE.

TODAY, ONCE YOU DO APPROVE OR VOTE FOR, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER THE 27TH AT 05:00 PM HERE IN THE SAME ROOM.

LAST YEAR, THE SENATE BILL 2, WHEN I HAD NOT DERIVED THE GOVERNING BODY TO HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING AND VOTE ON THE PROPOSED RATE ON THE SAME MEETING.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT TOOK EFFECT LAST YEAR BEFORE WE WOULD HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.

SO WE WOULD HAVE THREE MEETINGS ACTUALLY BEFORE WE WERE ADOPT A TAX RATE.

THEY HAVE CHANGED THAT, WHICH THAT MAKES IT A LOT BETTER.

BUT WE DO HAVE TO PUBLISH THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC INCREASE, THEN HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING AFTER THAT, AND VOTE ON THE TAX RATE.

>> RIGHT NOW WE DO NEED IT IN A MOTION.

>> RIGHT NOW WE NEED A MOTION OF WHO IS FOR AND WHO IS AGAINST THE HAS TO BE A ROLL CALL.

>> WE HAVE A RATE OF 0.4956000?

>>THE 0.495600 THAT IS CORRECT.

>> OKAY. I GUESS WE NEED A MOTION.

>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE TAX [OVERLAPPING] SUPPORT.

>> [OVERLAPPING] YES, SIR. SO NOW WE'VE GOING TO GO ONE-BY-ONE.

>> APPROVE.

>> APPROVE.

>> APPROVE.

>> APPROVE.

>> APPROVE.

>> OKAY.

>> THE MOTION PASSES.

>> COMMISSIONER, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ ON.

>> COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ.

>> I ALSO APPROVE.

>> THANK YOU.

[01:05:01]

>> OKAY, WE WILL SCHEDULED THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27TH, AND WE WILL VOTE ON THE TAX RATE ON THE SAME DAY. ALL RIGHT.

>> THANK YOU, BECKY.

>> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. ITEM B, I THINK WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF?

>> YES, SIR.

>> ITEM C, I THINK WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF, D ALSO.

[B) Status Report on Parks & Recreation Projects.]

[C) Project Status Report through July 31, 2021.]

DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ON E?

[D) Subdivision Monthly Report.]

>> YES. HE'S GOT THE LATEST REPORTS.

[E) Immigration and Respite Center Report.]

>> HONORABLE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS.

BACK ON AUGUST THE 9TH, WE REPORTED AN ALL TIME HIGH OF 11,026 IMMIGRANTS DROPPED OFF BY CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION THAT WEEK HERE IN MCALLEN.

I WAS AN AVERAGE OF ABOUT 1,575 PER DAY THIS LAST WEEK, OUR NUMBERS WERE DOWN QUITE A BIT FROM THAT.

IN FACT DOWN BY OVER 40 PERCENT.

WE HAD 6,320 DROP-OFFS THIS LAST WEEK FOR AN AVERAGE OF ABOUT 900 PER DAY.

THE AVERAGE DAILY COVID POSITIVE RATE ALSO WENT DOWN FROM CLOSE TO 15 PERCENT TWO WEEKS AGO, IT ACTUALLY WENT UP TO ABOUT 15.9 LAST WEEK.

THE WEEK BEFORE AND THEN THIS LAST WEEK WAS 14.7 PERCENT.

WE CONTINUE TO WATCH THAT NUMBER CLOSELY.

FORTUNATELY, THIS WEEK SO FAR IT'S RIGHT AROUND THE 12 PERCENT RANGE, SO WE'RE PLEASED TO SEE THAT NUMBER GOING DOWN.

WORK CONTINUES AT ANZALDUA WAS PARK IN COOPERATION WITH HIDALGO COUNTY AND HIDALGO COUNTY PRECINCT THREE.

THE CAPACITY AT THAT SITE CURRENTLY IS ABOUT 2200 IN TERMS OF CAPACITY.

WHILE AT ONE POINT LAST WEEK WE HAD CLOSE TO 2100 INDIVIDUALS IN THE FACILITY.

THAT NUMBER HAS NOW DECREASED SIGNIFICANTLY DUE TO SEVERAL FACTORS, INCLUDING AN OVERALL DECREASE IN FEDERAL RELEASES OVER THE LAST 10 DAYS OR SO, AND SOME INCREDIBLE WORK THAT CATHOLIC CHARITIES HAS BEEN DOING TO CONNECT MANY OF THESE INDIVIDUALS WITH FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE THEN TAKING THEM ON THEIR FINAL DESTINATION SO THAT THEY CAN COMPLETE THEIR QUARANTINE AND RECOVERY AT THAT LOCATION.

TODAY, THE SITE HOLDS JUST A LITTLE BIT OVER 300 INDIVIDUALS.

IN TOTAL, CATHOLIC CHARITIES CURRENTLY ESTIMATES THEY HAVE ABOUT 900 INDIVIDUALS IN QUARANTINE THROUGHOUT THE AREA.

WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT NOT ALL OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE NECESSARILY COVID POSITIVE.

WE STILL AWAIT NEWS FROM THE NATIONAL LEVEL, BOTH ON TITLE 42 AND NOW ALSO ON POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE MIGRANT PROTECTION PROTOCOLS OR MPP, WHICH COULD COME AS SOON AS TOMORROW IN ANY OF THOSE CHANGES, OF COURSE, WILL POTENTIALLY HAVE A DRAMATIC IMPACT ON OUR NUMBERS HERE.

AS GOES ALMOST WITHOUT SAYING, WE CONTINUE TO WORK BOTH WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND COUNTY AGENCIES AS WE GO THROUGH THIS RAPIDLY CHANGING SITUATION AND I HAVE A LIST OF PEOPLE WHO'VE WORKED HARD WITH US THAT GETS LONGER AND LONGER EVERY TIME.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> QUESTIONS, COMMENTS.

>> IS THE REASON WHY THE RESPITE CENTER THE ITEM THAT WAS BEFORE US TODAY, THE REASON THAT IT WAS REMOVED, IS IT BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING THAT'S VOLUME OR WAS IT REMOVED FOR OTHER REASONS?

>> I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

>> I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW.

>> SO IS IT HARD TO SAY IF THE REDUCTION IN THE VOLUME IS GOING TO CONTINUE? IS IT DIFFICULT TO SAY THAT?

>> I REALLY DON'T KNOW, COMMISSIONER, THAT'S THE QUESTION WE ALL HAVE.

SOME OF THE REDUCTION COULD HAVE BEEN DUE TO WEATHER FORECASTS.

I KNOW A HURRICANE COMING TOWARDS THE AREA PROBABLY HAD SOME PEOPLE ON THE WAY HERE CHANGING PLANS.

WITH SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE WITH FEDERAL ABILITY TO MOVE PEOPLE DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS THAT MAY HAVE HAD AN IMPACT AS WELL.

WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST LEADS US TO BELIEVE THAT THIS COULD BE SIMPLY LOWER AND THE NUMBERS MAY GO BACK A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.

BUT WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH OUR FEDERAL PARTNERS TO SEE IF THERE ARE CHANGES TO THAT.

AGAIN, TITLE 42 AND MPP COULD PLAY A ROLE ONE DIRECTION OR ANOTHER.

WE CAN SEE THE NUMBERS GO EVEN FURTHER DOWN OR THEY MAY INCREASE IT.

IT REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THOSE POLICIES.

>> THE WAY WE'RE ALSO WAITING TO SEE WHAT THE COURTS ARE GOING TO DO.

>> RIGHT.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.

>> MAYOR, I WOULD ADD THAT WE LOOK AT DOING A WORKSHOP WITH PVES.

[F) Future Agenda Items.]

I THINK WE'VE SEEN THAT THERE'S A LOT OF NUMBERS AND A LOT OF COMPLEXITY TO THE OVERALL OPERATIONS, THE DYNAMICS OF THE RELATIONSHIP EVEN WITH SURROUNDING CITIES.

I THINK IT'D BE GREAT IF PVES DID A PRESENTATION FOR THE COMMISSION ON ALL THEIR OPERATIONS AND AS THE COMMISSION KNOWS, WE GET A LOT OF COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ABOUT PVES AND THAT MIGHT BE AN AVENUE TOO WHERE WE CAN HAVE THEM ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS.

>> OKAY, ANYBODY ELSE?

[01:10:02]

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.

>> I DIDN'T HEAR IT EITHER.

>> CAN YOU REPEAT THAT COMMISSIONER, PLEASE?

>> YEAH IF WE CAN REVISIT OUR ELECTION PROCESS [INAUDIBLE].

>> ANYBODY ELSE?

>> I'LL DEAL WITH IT.

>> OKAY. TABLED ITEMS. ITEM 6A, FOOD TRUCK, I THINK THAT'S DONE.

[6. TABLED ITEM(S)]

>> TAKEN CARE OF.

>> TAKEN CARE OF. ITEM B, CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE REQUEST.

[A) Ordinance providing for ratification of June 28, 2021 amendment to food truck ordinance updating the minimum distance from a fixed-location restaurant.]

>> MOTION TO REMOVE FROM TABLE.

>> I'LL BE ABSTAINING FROM THIS ITEM MAYOR.

[B) Consideration of a variance request to the ROW dedication requirements for North McColl Road and East Violet Avenue at the proposed BEJ Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 4701 North McColl Road.]

>> DO I HEAR A SECOND TO REMOVE FROM TABLE.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR.

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES, LET'S REMOVE.

>> ALL RIGHT, SO JUST TO RECAP, THIS PROPERTY IS ON VIOLET ON MCCOLL ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER.

WE ARE REQUESTING 20 FEET OF DEDICATION ON BOTH VIOLET AND MCCOLL, AND THE DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING TO DEDICATE 10 FEET ON BOTH STREETS.

LAST TIME THIS WAS PRESENTED, THE COMMISSION WANTED US TO GO BACK AND SEE IF WE COULD FIT A TURN LANE ON MCCOLL WITH THE 10 FEET OF PROPOSED DEDICATION.

THE PROJECT ENGINEER, AS WELL AS STAFF, WENT BACK.

WE ARE ABLE TO FIT A 10-FOOT, A TURN LANE RATHER ON THE 10-FOOT RIGHT AWAY DEDICATION.

THE ONLY THING I WILL SAY IS THAT WHEN WE SHOW THE PROPOSED DEDICATION AND THE PROPOSED VARIANTS TO TXDOT, THEY DID RECOMMEND THAT WE GET ALL 20 FEET, SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO KEEP THOSE 20 FEET ON MCCOLL.

>> IS THAT JUST FOR THAT CORNER OR FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY?

>> FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY.

>> WAS THE REASONING ON [INAUDIBLE]?

>> YOU NEED A MOTION TO SECOND TO GET IT ON THE FLOOR?

>> WE ALREADY DID.

>> WE DID?

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY.

>> MCCOLL IS 120 RIGHT AWAY, ITS PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL, AND SO WE ONLY HAVE 100 RIGHT NOW.

BECAUSE THIS SECTION IS TXDOT, THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE GET IT [OVERLAPPING] THERE'S A LOT MORE, YEAH, BUT IF WE DON'T GET IT RIGHT NOW AND TXDOT DOESN'T NEED IT IN 15, 20, 30 YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR IT AND THAT'S THE CONCERN FROM STAFF.

>> WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT WERE AT 10 FEET? THEY'RE TRYING TO ALIGN.

WHY DIDN'T IT HAVE A PROBLEM IN THE OTHER ONES AND NOW THEY DO? [OVERLAPPING].

>> THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN CHANGED BETWEEN THEM.

THE MOST RECENT SUBDIVISION THAT I CAN POINT TO YOU IS VIA A LADDER WHICH IS LITERALLY ACROSS THE STREET TO THE SOUTH.

THEY GAVE 20 FEET ON BOTH MCCOLL AND VIOLET.

THE DEDICATION THAT WE NEED ON MCCOLL CHANGED AROUND THE '90S.

EVERYTHING THAT CAME AFTER THAT, WE WOULD HAVE ASKED FOR 20.

YES, SIR. [NOISE]

>> OKAY. BUT YOU CAN MAKE IT WORK ON 10 FEET, RIGHT?

>> A TURN LANE? YES SIR.

>> A TURN LANE, AND THAT'S THE ESSENTIAL THING.

THIS WOULD ONLY HAPPEN IF THE WIDENING OF THE MCCOLL.

[OVERLAPPING] RIGHT. ACTUALLY CAN IT BE ANY WIDER? IN MANY CASES TO THE NORTH, IT'S ALREADY BUILT OUT.

>> THAT'S THE WAY I SEE IT. [OVERLAPPING].

>> THAT'S THE WAY I SEE IT

>> PRETTY MUCH.

>> ALL THE WAY TO THE NORTH IT'S ALREADY BUILT OUT.

THIS WOULD HAPPEN IF BY ANY CHANCE IN 20,30 YEARS, THEY WANT TO EXPAND IT.

>> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU HAVE A NARROW CORNER THERE, THAT TAKING ANOTHER 10 FEET WOULD BE ALMOST VERY HARD TO DO.

YOU'RE ALREADY TAKING A CORNER CLIP, IF I REMEMBER.

A CORNER CLIP ON THE CORNER OF VIOLET AND WHATEVER AND THEY'RE WILLING FOR YOU TO TAKE IT.

YOU HAVE AN AREA THAT'S INCOME-PRODUCING, REVENUE-PRODUCING, COMMERCIAL-PRODUCING FOR THE CITY.

SO OUR DECISION HERE IS TO GIVE, BECAUSE THE TURN LANE IS ACCESSIBLE IT CAN HAPPEN BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE REALLY WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH.

I WOULD ABSOLUTELY LOOK AT WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 20 OR 30 YEARS AND IF AT THAT TIME WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING, YOU DO SOMETHING.

BUT I MEAN, I THINK IT'S [OVERLAPPING]

[01:15:02]

>> I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER AGUIRRE BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF THEY WANT TO EXPAND, WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO EXPAND IT? TEN FEET OF ALL THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT'S ALREADY THERE.

THEY CANNOT DO IT ANYWAYS.

>> YEAH SO ALL I'M JUST SAYING IS THAT YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH A DEVELOPER.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION MAYOR?

>> YES SIR.

>> CAN YOU TELL US WHO YOU'RE DEALING WITH IN TXDOT?

>> I DON'T KNOW TO BE HONEST COMMISSIONER.

>> DO YOU KNOW MICHELLE?

>> I AGREE WITH YOU.

IF WE CAN MAKE THE TURN WORK, WE SHOULD JUST DO THAT.

[OVERLAPPING] HOWEVER, WHAT I'LL SAY IS WE DEAL WITH TXDOT ON A DAILY BASIS, AND IT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH OUR RELATIONSHIP SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH.

THEY'D LIKE FOR US TO TAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.

IT'S THEIR ROADWAY.

>> ANOTHER ISSUE IS THAT IF WE DO ALLOW FOR THE 10 FEET THEN LATER ON WE WILL HAVE TO PAY [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE TURN? IS THAT CORRECT?

>> MOST LIKELY WHEN WE DO A ROADWAY LIKE THAT INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS AND WE WANT TO MOVE A PROJECT FORWARD, THEY REQUIRE US TO PURCHASE RIGHT AWAY AND DO UTILITY ADJUSTMENTS. CORRECT.

>> BUT THE RIGHT-HAND TURN CAN BE DONE NOW.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> YEAH.

>> AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING THE UTILITIES.

>> YEAH.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, AND GIVE THE VARIANCE TO 10 FEET.

>> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

>> THANK YOU SIR.

>> YOU APPROVE AS REQUESTED? [OVERLAPPING]

>> TEN FEET.

>> TEN FEET [OVERLAPPING]

>> WE'LL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[7. EXECUTIVE SESSION, CHAPTER 551, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.071 (CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY), SECTION 551.072 (DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY), SECTION 551.074 (PERSONNEL MATTERS) AND SECTION 551.087 (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT).]

[01:56:08]

>> WE'RE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[01:56:11]

THIS TIME IS 7:03.

[01:56:13]

COUNSELORS, ITEM 7A.

[01:56:15]

>> MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 7A,

[01:56:17]

I RECOMMEND THE CITY COMMISSION TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION AND

[A) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal aspects of potential litigation regarding enforcement of ordinances. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

[01:56:19]

AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL LEGAL ACTION APPROPRIATE,

[01:56:21]

INCLUDING UP TO FILING A LAWSUIT WITH RESPECT TO

[01:56:24]

THE MATTER DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> CAN I HEAR A MOTION.

>> [OVERLAPPING] MOVE.

>> OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR?

>> [OVERLAPPING] AYE.

>> ALL AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES, ITEM B.

>> MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO 7B1,

[B) Consideration of Economic Development Matters. (Section 551.087, T.G.C.)]

I RECOMMEND THE CITY COMMISSION ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO EXTEND THE TERMS OF 380 AGREEMENT DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR UP TO 24 MONTHS, AS NEGOTIATED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND THE CITY MANAGER.

>> I'LL MOVE.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> ALL AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM C.

>> MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 7C,

[C) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal aspects of contractual relationship with MedCare EMS. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

I RECOMMEND THE CITY COMMISSION ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH CONVERSATIONS AS DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> APPROVED.

>> FOR BEING A PERSON TO SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> ALL AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES. D.

>> MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 7D,

[D) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal aspects of contractual relationship with Palm Valley Animal Shelter. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

I RECOMMEND THE CITY COMMISSION ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, AND ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE CITY STAFFS TO NEGOTIATE AS DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> IT'S ALL AUTHORIZED AND MOVED.

>> GOOD.

>> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> AGAINST? MOTION PASSES. ITEM E.

>> MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 7E1,

[E) Discussion and possible lease, sale or purchase of real property. (Section 551.072, T.G.C.)]

I RECOMMEND THE CITY COMMISSION ENTERTAIN A [NOISE] MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROCEED AS DESCRIBED IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> I'LL MOVE.

>> FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER HADDAD RECUSED HIMSELF, AND ABSTAINED FROM ANY CONVERSATION ON THAT ITEM.

>> CAN I HEAR A MOTION?

>> SECOND.

>> FOR BEING A FIRST AND SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES [NOISE] ITEM F.

>>I RECOMMEND AND SEEK COMMISSION TAKE NO ACTION WITH RESPECT TO ITEM F.

[F) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal issues related to Border Immigration Matters. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

>> THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS MEETING ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.