[1. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RESOLUTION NO. R2023-03-08 SETTING A DATE, TIME, AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS BEING AN APPROXIMATE 16.84 ACRE TRACT BEING A PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF US HWY 380 GENERALLY BETWEEN THE 1400 BLOCK THROUGH THE 1600 BLOCK OF US HWY 380 BY THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO HAVE PUBLISHED NOTICE OF SUCH PUBLIC HEARINGS; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO PREPARE A SERVICE PLAN.]

DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023-03-08, ON THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 100 OR 16.84 ACRES.

DO YOU HAVE A REPORT ON THAT?

>> THIS IS ONE OF THE ANNEXATIONS THAT WE HAD TEED UP FOR STAFF REQUESTS TO PROCEED WITH ANNEXATION ON RIGHTS OF WAY AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM.

THIS IS THE ONE OF THE POLEMIC TRAILS ANNEXATIONS, AND IT'S A PIECE OF THE HIGHWAY 380 AS IT'S SPECIFIED HERE, GENERALLY BETWEEN 1,400 BLOCK AND 1,600 BLOCK OF US HIGHWAY 380.

IT GOES WITH THE POLYMER TRAILS DEVELOPMENT.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? IF NONE, WE WILL CONSIDER THAT.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

>> YES.

>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION ART 2023-03-08.

>> WE HAVE A SECOND MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN.

THAT PASSES.

ITEM 2, THIS IS A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE ANNEX.

[2. CONSIDER FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED TERRITORY IDENTIFIED AS BEING AN APPROXIMATE 1.747 ACRE TRACT KNOWN AS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF COUNTY ROAD 4127 ADJACENT TO 3472 S US HIGHWAY 287, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS, EXTENDING THE BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY SO AS TO INCLUDE THE DESCRIBED PROPERTY, AND ADOPTING A SERVICE PLAN.]

ANNEXING APPROXIMATELY 1.747 ACRES.

DO WE HAVE EARL?

>> HI THERE. HI, EVERYBODY. THIS ANNEXATION IS A PIECE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY.

IT'S COMMONLY CALLED COUNTY ROAD 4127 [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT OF WAY.

>> ALL RIGHT, EARL. THANK YOU FOR HANGING ON THERE FOR A SECOND. GO AHEAD.

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY?

>> YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU VERY WELL.

MAYBE TAKE A FEW STEP AWAY FROM THE MIC.

>> THIS IS A ROAD PROBABLY.

IT'S COMMONLY CALLED THE COUNTY ROAD 4127, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY [INAUDIBLE] AND IT'S ADJACENT TO THE TA TRAVEL SOONER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT THAT'S IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW.

THIS ANNEXATION IT ALLOWS US TO APPLY THE CITY SOME TRIANGULATION INVOLVING [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S WHY WE CONSIDER IT IMPORTANT TO ANNEX THIS RIGHT OF WAY.

>> VERY GOOD. DOES ANYBODY FROM COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, EARL. APPRECIATE IT.

THAT IS OUR FIRST READING.

IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT,

[3. CONSIDER A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS, REPEALING ORDINANCE 2022-09-23 AMENDING THE CITY OF DECATUR SCHEDULE OF FEES AND ADOPTING A NEW CITY OF DECATUR SCHEDULE OF FEES AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT “A”; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ANIMAL CONTROL FEES; WATER DEPARTMENT TAMPER FEE; FIRE AND PUBLIC SAFETY FEES; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE FEES IMPOSED FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICE TO BE EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023.]

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 3.

CONSIDER A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE 2022, 0923, AMENDING THE CITY INDICATORS SCHEDULE OF FEES.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, AS YOU'RE AWARE, GENERALLY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, WE UPDATE FEE SCHEDULES.

THIS ONE IS PRETTY LARGE BECAUSE IT TAKES ON FIRE MITIGATION FEE UPDATE THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE IN QUITE SOME TIME.

AND THAT'S THE BASICS OF THE FEE UPDATES.

THERE IS SOME CONCERN ABOUT ANIMAL FEES THAT NEEDED TO BE UPDATED, BROUGHT UP TO SPEED AND THE CHIEF IS STANDING BY IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO ANY OF THE FIRE ITEMS.

[00:05:05]

>> I'M ASSUMING THIS IS AT THE RECOMMENDATION OF ADMINISTRATION.

>> YES, SIR.

>> VERY GOOD. DOES ANYBODY IN COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> IT SEEMS LIKE COMMON SENSE TO ME.

>> OR COMMENTS. OTHER COMMENTS? HEARING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4,

[4. CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON A CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND BROWN REYNOLDS WATFORD ARCHITECTS, INC. FOR DECATUR LIBRARY RENOVATIONS.]

CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON A CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR FOR THE DECATUR LIBRARY RENOVATION.

>> MAYOR, COUNCIL, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, IN THE LAST BOND PACKAGE THAT WE ISSUED, THERE WERE SOME FUNDS FOR RENOVATION OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY.

THIS IS THE FIRST STEP IN A SERIES OF STEPS TO GET THE BALL MOVING ON THOSE RENOVATIONS.

DONG IS HERE TO ANSWER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, BUT WE'RE LOOKING FOR YOU TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT FOR THE ARCHITECT SO WE CAN GET TO WORK ON SPECIFIC PROJECTS.

YOU SHOULD HAVE A PACKET IN FRONT OF YOU DETAILING SOME OF THE PROJECTS AND THE ONLY THING THAT WAS UNINTENTIONALLY LEFT OUT OF THAT IS A FULL UPGRADE TO THE FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM.

THAT BUILDING IS NOT EQUIPPED WITH THE FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM.

MYSELF OR DONG ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ARCHITECT IF YOU HAVE THEM.

>> DOES ANYONE ON COUNCIL HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> YES, SIR. I BELIEVE IT IS ON PAGE [NOISE] THERE WE GO. JAKE, IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE 56, AGAIN, WE'RE ONLY ASKING FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES WITH THIS REQUEST TONIGHT.

THAT'S THE FIRST STEP TO GET THE BALL MOVING.

A BASIC SERVICE FEE OF 71,000 AND THEN DEPENDING ON WHAT WE NEED FROM THEIR ENGINEERING TOP O, SO ON AND SO FORTH, UP TO 35,000.

HOPE THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.

>> THIS IS UP FOR ACTION.

IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? WITH PROMOTION? [NOISE]

>> I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND BROWN REYNOLDS ARCHITECTS INC FOR THE LIBRARIAN RENOVATION.

>> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN. THAT GETS US TO ITEM 5,

[5. DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN AGREEMENT WITH SALTUS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC FOR PURCHASE OF THE DIGITICKET ELECTRONIC CITATION SYSTEM FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT6. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, HEAR COMMENTS, AND CONSIDER TAKING ACTION REGARDING A REQUEST TO FINAL PLAT LOT 2A, BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION, BEING APPROXIMATELY A 0.30 ACRE TRACT OF LAND IN THE CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING A REPLAT OF PART OF LOTS 2 & 3, BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 249 EAST WALKER STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY IS FOUND ON THE PLAT EXHIBIT LOCATED IN THE STAFF REPORT. (APPLICATION RP2023-01—MR. TOMMY BURKS, ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER PAT MILLER) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL 6-0.) RP2023-01.]

DISCUSS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING TICKET ELECTRONICS CITATION SYSTEM.

>> YES. MAYOR AND COUNCIL LAST COUNCIL SESSION, YOU APPROVED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT-.

>> DIGIT TICKET.

>> DIGIT TICKET. YES. I THINK YOU APPROVED THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS TO MOVE FORWARD ON REPLACING THEIR COMPUTER-AIDED DISPATCH SYSTEM. THAT WAS THE FIRST STEP.

THIS IS A FOLLOW-ON STEP TO ALLOW THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS HAVE A CONTRACT WITH SALTERS OF DIGIT TICKET FOR THE FUNCTION OF THEIR TICKET WRITERS.

THIS IS JUST A FOLLOW ON TO THAT PROJECT TO KEEP IT MOVING.

CAPTAIN [INAUDIBLE] IS HERE FOR CHIEF CAMPBELL IF THERE'S ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS RELATIVE TO THE OPERATION OF THAT SYSTEM.

>> ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION MAYOR TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITH SALTERS TECHNOLOGY LLC FOR THE PURCHASE OF DIGIT TICKET ELECTRONICS CITATION SYSTEM FOR THE POLICE STARTED.

>> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN. THAT PASSES.

WE'LL OPEN UP INTO A PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME FOR ITEM 6,

[6. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, HEAR COMMENTS, AND CONSIDER TAKING ACTION REGARDING A REQUEST TO FINAL PLAT LOT 2A, BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION, BEING APPROXIMATELY A 0.30 ACRE TRACT OF LAND IN THE CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING A REPLAT OF PART OF LOTS 2 & 3, BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 249 EAST WALKER STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY IS FOUND ON THE PLAT EXHIBIT LOCATED IN THE STAFF REPORT. (APPLICATION RP2023-01—MR. TOMMY BURKS, ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER PAT MILLER) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL 6-0.) RP2023-01]

HEAR COMMENTS AND CONSIDER TAKING ACTION REGARDING APPLICATION RP 202301.

>> GOOD EVENING.

>> THIS IS MR. TOMMY BURGS REQUESTS ON BEHALF OF MR. PAT MILLER TO FINAL PLAT LOTS 2A BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION.

THIS IS AN APPROXIMATE 0.30-ACRE TRACT OF LAND.

IT'S THE REPLANT OF LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION.

THE REASON FOR THE RE-PLOT, THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE.

[00:10:01]

THE PROPERTY IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 249 EAST WALKER STREET.

WE DID NOTIFY 17 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET AND WHILE THERE WAS ONE PROPERTY OWNER THAT SPOKE AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, HE DID NOT SUBMIT A FORM.

HE HAD SOME CONCERNS.

HE IS THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE SOUTHWEST OF MR. MILLER'S PROPOSED LOT.

HE HAD SOME CONCERNS THAT SOME OF HIS PROPERTY WAS BEING TAKEN OVER AND WE HAD TO EXPLAIN TO HIM THAT BASED ON WHAT THE SURVEYOR PROVIDED IS WHAT WE HAVE TO GO WITH.

IF HE HAS ISSUES WITH THINKING THAT SOME OF HIS PROPERTY IS BEING TAKEN, HE NEEDS TO HIRE A REAL ESTATE ATTORNEY AND TAKE THAT UP AS A CIVIL MATTER.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY CAN RESOLVE FOR HIM. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS THE PLAT EXHIBIT AND LIKE I SAID, MR. RIVERS'S PROPERTY IS TO THE SOUTHWEST OF THIS TRACT.

NEXT SLIDE. THE PLAT DOES MEET OUR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, AND DESIGN STANDARDS, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. THAT'S IT.

>> ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL? ACTION?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I MOVE.

WE APPROVE APPLICATION RP 2023-01.

>> SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT OR ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR THAT MOTION SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT, AND THAT PASSES, AND WE WILL CLOSE OUR PUBLIC HEARING.

ITEM 7 IS CONSIDERED A SECOND READING FOR AMENDMENT TO

[7. CONSIDER SECOND READING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING AN AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX “D,” “COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS, TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE CITY, FOR AN APPROXIMATE 5.061 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED NORTH OF US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS AND BOTH EAST AND WEST OF VALCIK STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS, AND AN APPROXIMATE 0.873 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED TO THE CENTERLINE OF WEST US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS, AND AN APPROXIMATE 0.092 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED TO THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTH VALCIK STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS, FROM TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD (TN) AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (PSLI) LAND USE DESIGNATIONS TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) LAND USE DESIGNATION. THE PROPERTIES, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 404 PARK WEST COURT, 405 PARK WEST COURT, 407 PARK WEST COURT, 408 PARK WEST COURT, 1700 W. US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS, 1606 W. US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS AND 408 VALCIK STREET, ARE LOCATED NORTH OF US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS AND BOTH EAST AND WEST OF VALCIK STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION 2023-01—MRS. BREANNA SMITH, ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNERS MARK DUNCUM, DAVID FULLER, GARY SHELTON, DEBBIE HEARRELL, SUE ANN DENTON AND RON AND SUE WESTBROOK) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND DENIAL 6-0. OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION HAS REACHED 29.5%. PER SECTION 4.4.7.D. OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, A FAVORABLE VOTE OF THREE-FOURTHS (3/4) OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE ANY CHANGE IN ZONING WHEN A WRITTEN PROTEST SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF AT LEAST TWENTY (20) PERCENT OF EITHER (1) THE AREA OF THE LOTS OR LAND COVERED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE; OR (2) THE AREA OF THE LOTS OR LAND IMMEDIATELY ADJOINING THE AREA COVERED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE AND EXTENDING TWO HUNDRED (200) FEET FROM THE AREA, HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE CITY SECRETARY, AND MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 211 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. CP2023-01]

APPLICATION 2023-01 TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> YOU GUYS HAD THIS SEVERAL MEETINGS AGO.

THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES SINCE THAT TIME.

>> ALL RIGHT, SO ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT THAT I WISHED I WAS HERE TWO WEEKS AGO WHENEVER THIS DISCUSSION WAS HAPPENING, SO HAPPY TO PUT THIS DEBATE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION. YES.

>> CAN I MAKE ONE OTHER THING THAT I DON'T WANT THE PERCEPTION THAT WE AS CITIZENS AND AS A CITY OR PRO-BUSINESS SO I'M ALWAYS HAPPY TO HAVE WHEN A NEW BUSINESS WANTS TO COME ALONGSIDE OF US.

BUT I THINK THE OCCASION MAYBE ISN'T THE BEST FIT.

I THINK THAT THE EDC IS WORKING ON A NEW VENTURE OR A NEW LANDSCAPE.

I CAN'T CONFIRM OR DENY THAT.

YEAH. THAT'S IT. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING [INAUDIBLE].

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT, WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION.

>> IT'S GOT TO BE UP TO ME.

>> DO YOU HAVE A MOTION?

>> I DO.

>> WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT.

>> SUPREME LEADER, I WISH TO MOVE CPE 2023-01 AND ZC 2023-02.

[OVERLAPPING] ONE AT A TIME. MR. MAYOR, I WISH TO RECANT THAT STATEMENT AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> YES.

>> YOU MOVE AND APPROVE CPE 2023-01.

>> YOU'RE APPROVING THE DENIAL OF THE

>> MOVE TO APPROVE THE DENIAL PLACED ON, YES, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT MOTION? LOOK FOR A SECOND.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN. RIGHT, AND THAT PASSES.

ITEM 8, I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO BE THE SAME WITH NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

[8. CONSIDER SECOND READING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING AN AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX “B,” “ZONING,” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY, TO REZONE AN APPROXIMATE 5.061 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED NORTH OF US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS AND BOTH EAST AND WEST OF VALCIK STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS, AND AN APPROXIMATE 0.873 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED TO THE CENTERLINE OF WEST US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS, AND AN APPROXIMATE 0.092 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED TO THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTH VALCIK STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS, FROM OFFICE (C-O) ZONING DISTRICT TO THOROUGHFARE BUSINESS (C-2) ZONING DISTRICT. THE PROPERTIES, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 404 PARK WEST COURT, 405 PARK WEST COURT, 407 PARK WEST COURT, 408 PARK WEST COURT, 1700 W. US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS, 1606 W. US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS AND 408 VALCIK STREET, ARE LOCATED NORTH OF US HIGHWAY 380 BUSINESS AND BOTH EAST AND WEST OF VALCIK STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS ITEM IS SUBJECT TO THE CITY COUNCIL’S APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT. (ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION 2023-02—MRS. BREANNA SMITH, ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNERS MARK DUNCUM, DAVID FULLER, GARY SHELTON, DEBBIE HEARRELL, SUE ANN DENTON AND RON AND SUE WESTBROOK) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND DENIAL 6-0. OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION HAS REACHED 29.5%. PER SECTION 4.4.7.D. OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, A FAVORABLE VOTE OF THREE-FOURTHS (3/4) OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE ANY CHANGE IN ZONING WHEN A WRITTEN PROTEST SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF AT LEAST TWENTY (20) PERCENT OF EITHER (1) THE AREA OF THE LOTS OR LAND COVERED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE; OR (2) THE AREA OF THE LOTS OR LAND IMMEDIATELY ADJOINING THE AREA COVERED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE AND EXTENDING TWO HUNDRED (200) FEET FROM THE AREA, HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE CITY SECRETARY, AND MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 211 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. PER SECTION 4.4.7.E. OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, A VOTE OF THREE-FOURTHS (3/4) OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED TO OVERRULE A RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THAT A PROPOSED CHANGE TO A REGULATION OR BOUNDARY BE DENIED) ZC2023-02]

[00:15:01]

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> DOES ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION?

>> LEANING ON IT A LITTLE BIT, YOU THINK THAT NOW WOULD BE A GOOD TIME FOR THAT?

>> I THINK UNLESS THERE'S OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL.

>> SURVEY SAYS, MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY MOVE TO APPROVE THE DENIAL OF ZC2023-02.

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION IN A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR THAT MOTION SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT, THAT PASSES. ALL RIGHT.

[9. CONSIDER TAKING ACTION ON A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM CHAPTER 2, SECTION 201, “STREET IMPROVEMENTS (CURB/GUTTER),” OF THE CITY OF DECATUR’S DESIGN STANDARDS ON APPROXIMATELY 76.5 LINEAR FEET OF PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG EAST WALKER ST., WHERE ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF LOT 2A, BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION, AND MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 249 E. WALKER STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS FOUND ON THE PLAT EXHIBIT LOCATED IN THE STAFF REPORT. (APPLICATION V2023-01—MR. TOMMY BURKS, ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER PAT MILLER) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND DENIAL 6-0.) V2023-01]

THAT GETS US TO ITEM 9.

CONSIDER TAKING ACTION ON A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION, V2023-01.

>> EARL IS GOING TO GIVE THE PRESENTATION ON THIS.

>> PARDON ME?

>> EARL WILL GIVE THE PRESENTATION ON VARIANCE.

>> GREAT, LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING EARL.

>> AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER 9 AND 10 ARE TWO BANKS IS NUMBER 9 IS 2023-01 IS FOR A CROP VARIANCE ASSOCIATED WITH THE REPLANT THAT WAS JUST APPROVED, AND THEN AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10 IS THE VARIANCE, 2023-02 FOR SIDEWALKS.

THIS IS A PROPERTY AT 249 EAST WALKER.

NEXT SLIDE, SO TO GRANT THE VARIANCE, WE HAVE TO ASK THE FOUR QUESTIONS AND I'M JUST GOING TO PARAPHRASE MY FINDINGS.

THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

THIS PROPERTY APPEARS ON THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY DATED 1959, CERTAINLY PRIOR TO THE CITY HAVING A SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE BASED ON THE INFORMATION ON THE HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, AND AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THIS LOT HAS ALWAYS BEEN VACANT.

PROPERTIES BEING REPLATTED.

THE CLOSEST SIDEWALKS ABOUT A BLOCK AWAY, AND CURBS DO EXIST IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.

QUESTION 2 IS THE VARIANCE NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND ENJOYMENT OF SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.

LIMITED SIDEWALKS EXIST, ALTHOUGH THE ADDITIONAL SIDEWALK SHOULD NOT AFFECT THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF THE OWNER.

CURBS DO EXIST BUT ARE LIMITED ALSO WE'LL SEE THOSE ON MAP.

QUESTION 3, GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTY IN THE AREA, AND WE'LL SEE THAT LIMITED SIDEWALKS DO EXIST.

ALSO, CURBS ARE LIMITED.

THERE'S NO RECORD OF PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENTS SO WE COULD SAY THAT THE ABSENCE OF SIDEWALKS HAS NOT NECESSARILY ADVERSELY IMPACTED PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

THIS IS CONSIDERED A LOCAL STREET AND THEREFORE WOULD NOT BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE DECADE OF 2050 LONG-RANGE MASTER PLAN EPIGRAM VARIANCE FOR GRANTED.

P&Z RECOMMENDED THAT.

HERE'S THE MAP THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THE MEMO.

THE RED LINES REPRESENT EXISTING CURBS AND THE YELLOW LINE REPRESENTS EXISTING SIDEWALKS, AND YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS FAINTLY HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.

I WOULD ADD THAT THE MAP FAILED TO SHOW ON THE MAP THE PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF HATCHER, NEW PD WHERE OR CHERYL HAS THE CURSOR THAT'S IN PROCESS OF BEING DEVELOPED, THE NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING, AND THERE WILL BE CURBING AND SIDEWALK INSTALLATION ALONG THEIR PROPERTY LINE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THAT CHURCH STREET THERE.

P&Z FOR VARIANCE AND BOTH VARIANCES ARE TO BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.

P&Z FOR THE CURB VARIANCE, WHICH IS 2023-01, RECOMMENDED DENIAL AND PREFERS TO SEE THE CURB GET BUILT, AND THEN AGENDA ITEM 10, WHICH IS THE SIDEWALK VARIANCE, THEY APPROVED A RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>> I GOT TO ASK BECAUSE YOU TALKED THROUGH BOTH OF THOSE.

I WISH MAYBE WE COULD HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT ONE AT A TIME.

>> OKAY.

[00:20:01]

>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, JUST LOOKING AT ITEM 9, WHAT WAS THE REVIEW FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE?

>> ITEM 9 HAS TO DO WITH CURBS, PUT THE MAP BACK CHERYL, PLEASE.

THE RED LINES REPRESENT THE EXISTING CURBS.

YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A PIECE OF CURB ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPERTY, RIGHT THERE.

BUT THERE ARE NO EXISTING CURBS TO TIE TO.

HOWEVER, IN THIS LOCATION, IT'S FAIRLY FLAT.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE ADDITION OF CURBS CREATE ANY ADVERSE DRAINAGE ISSUES OR ANYTHING.

I DON'T SEE THE CURBS OR SIDEWALKS WILL CAUSE ANY SIDELINE ISSUES.

>> I DON'T THINK THAT CURBS AND GUTTERS HELP PROTECT THE RIGHT CORRECT?

>> WE LIKE CURBS BECAUSE THEY DO PROTECT THE EDGE OF THE STREET AND THEY ARE DRAINAGE CONVEYANCE.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> THEY ASSIST WITH THE DRAINAGE.

>> EARL WHAT YOU JUST SAID THAT YOU DON'T SEE THAT CURBS OR SIDEWALKS OF THIS PROPERTY WOULD AFFECT IT IN A POSITIVE WAY, CORRECT?

>> WELL, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD CAUSE ANY ADVERSE CONDITIONS AS FAR AS DRAINAGE IS CONCERNED.

>> THE ADDITION OR NOT DOING IT WOULDN'T CAUSE ANYTHING WITH THE DRAINAGE.

I GUESS NOT DOING IT WOULDN'T CAUSE.

>> YEAH. WHETHER CURBS ARE BUILT OR NOT BUILT, I DON'T THINK CAUSES ANY ISSUES.

>> THANK YOU.

THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO BE CLEAR OF BECAUSE I KEPT HEARING BOTH THINGS, AND MAYBE JUST BE FROM THE READING OF THE P&Z COMMITTEES.

ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM 9?

>> THEY'RE NOT APPLYING FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, CORRECT, THEY'RE JUST REPLATTING.

[INAUDIBLE].

>> THEY WILL APPLY A BUILDING PERMANENT.

BUT THEN, [BACKGROUND] BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN WE ALL MET WITHIN THE GROUP WAS THAT AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT EXPANDING A STRUCTURE, THEY DON'T HAVE TO ADD CURBS AND SIDEWALKS.

EVENTUALLY, BUT THEY'RE NOT RIGHT NOW.

THEY'RE NOT APPLYING FOR ANYTHING RIGHT NOW.

THEY'RE NOT APPLYING FOR A PERMIT RIGHT NOW.

>> BUT THERE'S NOT A WAY TO COME BACK.

ONCE IF YOU APPROVED THIS, THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S GOING TO [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE IT'S NOT PLOTTED, [OVERLAPPING] ALREADY RE-PLOTTED.

>> WE WOULD DENY THE PERMIT BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T HAVE CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALKS BECAUSE NOW THEY'RE PUTTING A BUILDING ON THE PROJECT.

>> IF WE GRANTED BOTH VARIANCES, THEY COULD BUILD IT WITHOUT ANYTHING.

BECAUSE ONCE WE GRANT THE VARIANCE, THE VARIANCE IS THERE.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> BUT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GRANT A VARIANCE ACCORDING TO OUR MEETING IF THEY'RE NOT EXPANDING THE STRUCTURE OUT THERE.

>> BUT THIS IS A DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCE BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A STRUCTURE THERE.

>> I THINK IT IS THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG QUESTION IS WHAT I'M HEARING.

>> WELL, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS WHY ARE WE MAKING THEM PUT CURBS AND SIDEWALK IN NOW INSTEAD OF HOW WE ALL DECIDED, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THOSE MEETINGS PUTTING AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT.

I GUESS IT WAS OFFICIAL, I DON'T KNOW.

MAYBE IT WASN'T OFFICIAL, BUT WE [NOISE] CAME UP WITH THIS LONG DOCUMENT SAYING, IF YOU'RE NOT EXPANDING THE FOOTPRINT OF YOUR HOUSE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT CURBS AND SIDEWALKS.

>> [BACKGROUND] I DON'T THINK WE INTERPRETED IT IN THAT FASHION, JAKE, BECAUSE THERE IS NO STRUCTURE THERE.

BUT BECAUSE HE IS PROPOSING TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING, THEN IT WILL BE CHANGING THE FOOTPRINT OF THE LOT.

THE LOT NOW HAS NOTHING ON IT.

>> EXISTING.

>> HE'D BE ADDING SQUARE FOOTAGE.

>> [BACKGROUND] YES.

>> I'M GOING TO SAY I FEEL LIKE I'M GETTING JAKE HERE.

BUT ULTIMATELY IT IS ADDING WHETHER THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THERE OR NOT.

TO THE POINT, IT FEELS LIKE THIS IS A LITTLE SOONER.

WE'RE SEEING THIS A LITTLE SOONER THAN MAYBE NORMAL, THAT MAYBE WE WOULDN'T, IN THIS CASE. BECAUSE THERE IS NO PRESSURE.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> WHICH IS NOT WHAT WE SEE TYPICALLY.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE SEEING IT NOW.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

[00:25:02]

LOOKING FOR A MOTION?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE VARIANCE 2023-01.

CAN WE DO BOTH OF THEM OR WE'RE JUST DOING ONE AT A TIME?

>> ONE AT A TIME.

>> NUMBER 9, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE VARIANCE 2023-01.

>> ALL RIGHT. BUT I DO WANT TO BE CLEAR.

ARE YOU APPROVING FOR THE VARIANCE OR YOU'RE APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING?

>> NO, I'M APPROVING THE VARIANCE 2023-01.

>> WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT.

>> I SECOND THAT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE, WHICH IS NOT THE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSED? DID YOU SAY AN OPPOSE? SO THAT'S.

>> THREE.

>> 3-3.

>> THE MOTION DID NOT CARRY.

>> THE MOTION DID NOT CARRY, SO YES.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT. WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE US, WE'D HAVE TO BE.

>> SUPERMAJORITY.

>> YES. IT'S GOT TO BE.

>> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE PLUS ONE. ITEM 10.

>> OPEN DENIAL.

>> YES, SO THEN IT'S DENIED.

DEFECTIVE IT'S DENIED.

>> ITEM 10. WE'VE DISCUSSED.

[10. CONSIDER TAKING ACTION ON A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM CHAPTER 1, SECTION 106, “SIDEWALKS,” OF THE CITY OF DECATUR’S DESIGN STANDARDS ON APPROXIMATELY 76.5 LINEAR FEET OF PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG EAST WALKER ST., WHERE ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF LOT 2A, BLOCK 111, SOUTH DECATUR ADDITION, AND MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 249 E. WALKER STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS FOUND ON THE PLAT EXHIBIT LOCATED IN THE STAFF REPORT. (APPLICATION V2023-02—MR. TOMMY BURKS, ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER PAT MILLER) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL 6-0.) V2023-02]

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THAT? [NOISE]

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE VARIANCE 2023-02.

>> SECOND.

>> ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS NOT GOING WITH THE RECOMMENDATION.

[BACKGROUND] HEY, THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN.

THAT PASSES. THANK YOU.

THAT GETS US TO ITEM 11,

[11. CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DECATUR AND ERIC R. AND LAUREEN B. LANGTO, FOR AN OUT-BUILDING LOCATED IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ON E. PARK STREET, PROPERTY KNOWN AS 1307 S. TRINITY AND AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT.]

CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR AN OUTBUILDING.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THIS IS A STANDARD AGREEMENT THAT WE TAKE ON EVERY NOW AND THEN WHEN A STRUCTURE OF SOME SORT IS IN A EASEMENT THAT THE CITY OWNS.

PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO DO SOME IMPROVEMENT TO THEIR PROPERTY AND IT CREATES A NEED FOR THIS TO BE DONE.

I BELIEVE EARL HAS MORE SPECIFICS.

EARL, IF YOU'RE STILL WITH US, TAKE IT AWAY.

>> THANKS, MAYOR. AS THEY POINTED OUT, THIS IS A STANDARD TEMPLATE THAT WE USE FOR ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENTS WHEN PEOPLE HAVE STRUCTURES LOCATED AT EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS OF WAY.

I ONLY CHANGE THE SPECIFICS AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY OWNER AND SPECIFICALLY WHAT THE ENCROACHMENT INVOLVES.

THIS IS A EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH MR. ERIC LANGTO AND HIS WIFE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1307, SOUTH TRINITY STREET.

THIS IS A CORNER LOT WITH SOUTH TRINITY PARK STREET.

THE ENCROACHMENT IS SHOWN ON THE ENCROACHMENT EXHIBIT A AND I DON'T KNOW, CHERYL, IF YOU HAVE A WAY TO SHOW THAT.

BUT IT IS A BRICK STRUCTURE ALONG THE PARK STREET SIGN, IT ENCROACHES THINGS, THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOUR FEET ON ONE END AND FIVE FEET ON THE OTHER.

LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A NORMAL WAY WE EVALUATE IT WHEN THE ENCROACHMENTS APPEAR, TO SEE IF IT CAUSES US, CITY, ANY CONFLICTS WITH UTILITIES OR PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.