[I. CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:02] MY CLOCK SAYS 5:30 AND I WILL CALL OUR BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION TO ORDER ON AUGUST 31ST, 2026. WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS HERE AND THAT DOES REPRESENT A QUORUM. I WILL FIRST HAVE AN OPEN FORUM AND I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. YOU'LL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES AND THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACT AND BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION IS RESTRICTED FROM DISCUSSING OR ACTING ON ANY ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. LARGE GROUPS INTERESTED IN THE SAME MATTER SHOULD CHOOSE A SPOKESPERSON. COMMENTS SHOULD BE MADE TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION RATHER THAN TO INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS AND NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION. [III.1. 3021 S College Avenue - (Code Case No. 26-0154) The Commission to hold a public hearing, consider and take action to determine the condition of structures as prescribed by City of Decatur Code of Ordinances, Article IV Unsafe, Dangerous or Hazardous Buildings and Structures, Section 10-105 Proceedings of the Building Standards Commission, (b) Criteria for Determining Substandard Condition, of property owned by Drew Anthony Richard and Julia B. Richard, located at 3021 S College Avenue, City of Decatur, Wise County, Texas also described as Lot 25R Block F South Martin Branch Phase I. If the structure is determined to be substandard, the Commission shall take action according to the City of Decatur Code of Ordinances, Article IV Unsafe, Dangerous, or Hazardous Buildings and Structures, Section 10-105 Proceedings of the Building Standards Commission, (d) Action by the commission: Time Frames. ] FIRST ACTION ITEM, 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE, I WILL OPEN IT UP TO YOU MR. SMITH. BEFORE WE DO PRESENT, WE WILL NEED TO GO THROUGH AN OATH OF WITNESS IF YOU ARE PRESENTING ANY ITEMS RELEVANT TO OUR CASE TODAY. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THIS TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE ON THE MATTER NOW BEFORE THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. THIS CASE DOES HAVE TO DO WITH CASE NUMBER 260154, IT'S A SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE CASE AT 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE AND THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S INVOLVED WITH THIS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME? IT IS 531 AND I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF THERE IS ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS COMMENTS NOW, YOU ARE WELCOME TO COME UP. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER OUR AGENDA AND TESTIMONY, YOU ARE WELCOME TO DO THAT AS WELL. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME UP NOW? NOW I WILL CONFIRM WITH PAM WITH THIS, BUT IF YOU HAVE ITEMS REGARDING THE SPECIFIC AGENDA, WE MAY NEED TO SWEAR YOU IN. IS THAT THE CASE? YES. OKAY, SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND PREPARE, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. THANK YOU. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE IS ON THE MATTER BEFORE THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO. THANK YOU. BREN WILLIAMS, 3028 TIMBER TRAIL DRIVE, DECATUR, TEXAS, WE ARE ASKING THE BOARD TO PLEASE CONSIDER THE VERY REAL AND ONGOING IMPACT OF THE DELAY IN REPLACING OUR RETAINING WALL. BY THE TIME OF THIS MEETING, IT WILL HAVE BEEN 311 DAYS SINCE THE RETAINING WALL FELL. FOR 311 DAYS, WE HAVE NOT HAD SAFE ACCESS TO OUR BACKYARD BECAUSE THE WALL REMAINS UNREPAIRED. THIS IS NOT SIMPLY AN INCONVENIENCE OR A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN NEIGHBORS. THIS HAS DIRECTLY AFFECTED OUR ABILITY TO SAFELY USE AND ACCESS OUR OWN PROPERTY FOR NEARLY A YEAR. WE HAVE BEEN PATIENT AND MADE EVERY EFFORT TO ALLOW THIS SITUATION TO BE RESOLVED, BUT WE CANNOT CONTINUE INDEFINITELY WITHOUT SAFE ACCESS TO OUR BACKYARD. WE ARE SIMPLY ASKING THE RETAINING WALL TO BE REPLACED SO THAT OUR PROPERTY CAN BE MADE SAFE AND WE CAN REGAIN NORMAL SAFE ACCESS TO OUR BACKYARDS. 311 DAYS IS FAR TOO LONG TO BE WITHOUT SAFE ACCESS. IT'S FAR TOO LONG FOR THE CHILDREN INVOLVED TO HAVE BEEN WITHOUT THE ABILITY TO PLAY IN THEIR YARD. IT'S FAR TOO LONG FOR ALL THE DOGS TO BE WITHOUT SPACE TO ROAM FREELY. AND LAST, IT HAS CAUSED HOMEOWNERS TO HAVE TO DELAY THE SALE OF THEIR HOMES. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD TO TAKE ACTION AND ALLOW THIS MATTER TO BE RESOLVED. SINCERELY, BRENNAN AND ANDREA WILLIAMS, AMANDA WILLIAMS ON BEHALF OF ELAINE MASON, JANET LUNSFORD, SHARON MEYER, GAREN RAVEN-BACHMAN, PHILLIP AND WENDY BLEVINS, LARRY AND KERRY WITTENBERG. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE AS WELL. AND YOUR ADDRESS. 3028 DENVER, GEORGIA. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. HI, MY NAME IS DELANEY WILLIAMS. I'M EIGHT YEARS OLD. I HAVE A SIX-YEAR-OLD SISTER AND A FOUR-YEAR-OLD BROTHER. WE CAN'T PLAY OUTSIDE IN THE BACKYARD BECAUSE WE HAVE NO FENCE AND IT IS VERY DANGEROUS. WE WOULD LIKE TO PLAY OUTSIDE, BUT WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SINCE OCTOBER OF 2025. I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR A RETAINING WALL TO BE FIXED SO THAT IT WON'T BE DANGEROUS FOR MY BROTHER AND FOR ME, MY BROTHER AND SISTER PLAYING IN THE BACKYARD LIKE KIDS OUR AGE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO DO. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK [00:05:01] DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING? HEARING NONE, MR. SMITH? YES, SIR. HERE YOU SEE AN AREA OF THE INTEREST MAP FOR THE AREA THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH. IT'S THE AREA BETWEEN TIMBER TRAIL DRIVE AND SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE JUST OFF OF MARTIN BRANCH ROAD, THIS RETAINING WALL THAT RUNS IN BETWEEN THESE EIGHT PROPERTIES ON THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE WISE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE IS SITUATED IN THE CITY LIMITS OF DECATUR, TEXAS AND IT'S OWNED BY THE RESPONDENTS DREW ANTHONY RICHARD AND JULIA B. RICHARD. THE PROPERTY IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 25R, BLOCK F, SOUTH MARTIN BRANCH, PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION. AND ON AUGUST 8, 2026, THE CITY DID RECEIVE A OWNERSHIP AND ENCUMBRANCE REPORT. THE REPORT IDENTIFIED THE RESPONDENTS AS THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND IDENTIFIED THAT THERE WERE NO LIENS OR JUDGMENTS WITH THE REPORT. SOME HISTORY OF THIS RETAINING WALL AND THE DAMAGE THAT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THIS PROPERTY IS ONE OF EIGHT PROPERTIES THAT ARE LOCATED IN BETWEEN SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE AND TIMBER TRAIL DRIVE. THIS WALL EXTENDS ACROSS ALL EIGHT OF THESE PROPERTIES THAT ARE THROUGH THERE. ON OCTOBER 24, 2025, PORTIONS OF THIS RETAINING WALL AND THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES IN THIS 03,000 BLOCK WERE DAMAGED DURING A STORM EVENT THAT HAPPENED. THE OWNERS OF SEVEN OF THE PROPERTIES HAVE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CONTRACTOR TO PERFORM COORDINATED REPAIRS. THE RESPONDENTS DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THAT COORDINATED REPAIR, BUT THEY STILL HAVE NOT PROVIDED THE CITY WITH ANY PATH FORWARD ON REPAIR OF THE RETAINING WALL ON THEIR PROPERTY. THE CITY HAS MAINTAINED CONTACT DURING ALL THIS TIME THROUGH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND THROUGH CONTRACTORS THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS ALONG THE WAY, MONITORING PROGRESS AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. AND SO WE'VE KEPT THAT LINE OF COMMUNICATION OPEN AND DURING ONE OF THOSE CALLS, WE REALIZED THAT WE'D COME TO AN IMPASSE AND THAT WE COULDN'T MOVE FORWARD ANYMORE AND THIS WASN'T GETTING TAKEN CARE OF. SO AT THAT TIME, WE RECEIVED AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION. IT WAS AN ENGINEERING SAFETY LETTER THAT WAS PERFORMED AT THIS LOCATION. AND IN THAT ENGINEERING EVALUATION, IT DOCUMENTED THE CONDITION OF THE FENCE AND THE CONDITION OF THE RETAINING WALL IN AND AROUND THAT PROPERTY AND DESCRIBED IT AS VISIBLY LEANING WITH PORTIONS OF THE FENCE AND THE RETAINING WALL. IT CONCLUDED THAT WITH OR WITHOUT ADDITIONAL WEATHER EVENTS, PORTIONS OF THE FENCE WERE SUBJECT TO FUTURE COLLAPSE AND POTENTIALLY RESULTING IN ADDITIONAL DISTRESS ON THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF THAT RETAINING WALL. IT ALSO CHARACTERIZED THOSE OBSERVATIONS AS A LIFE SAFETY HAZARD REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ACTION AND RECOMMENDED REMOVAL OF THE DEFORMED, DISPLACED FENCING AND LIMITING THE ACCESS TO THE RETAINING WALL TO REPAIR PERSONNEL. SO THE CITY, ONCE WE HAD REVIEWED THAT SAFETY LETTER THAT WE RECEIVED ON JULY 17TH, WE WORKED THROUGH A PROCESS OF GETTING ACCESS INTO THE PROPERTY AT 3021. WE WERE ABLE TO GAIN ACCESS TO ALL THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THROUGH THERE. AND THEN ON AUGUST 7TH, 2026, THE RESPONDENTS ALLOWED THE CITY TO ENTER ON THE PROPERTY AND INSPECT AND TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE REMAINING PORTION OF THAT RETAINING WALL. DURING THAT INSPECTION, WE DOCUMENTED WHAT WE FOUND ON THAT AND WHAT WE DID FIND WAS VISIBLE CRACKING AND SEPARATION THROUGH MORTAR JOINTS AND BETWEEN STONE COMPONENTS OF THAT RETAINING WALL. WE DID NOTICE SOME APPARENT MOVEMENT AND DISPLACEMENTS WITHIN PORTIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL ASSEMBLY, SEVERELY LEANING, DISPLACED AND DEFORMED WOOD FENCING ABOVE OR ASSOCIATED WITH THE RETAINING WALL. THE FENCE POSTS, RAILS AND PANELS WERE VISIBLY OUT OF PLUMB WITH PORTIONS OF [00:10:02] THE FENCE SYSTEM NO LONGER MAINTAINING STABLE ALIGNMENT. PORTIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL THAT WERE REMAINING AT 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE WERE NO LONGER CONTINUOUS WITH THE ADJOINING PORTIONS OF THE WALL THAT HAD FELLED OR COLLAPSED. COLLAPSED PORTIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL HAVE DISRUPTED THE CONDITIONS NECESSARY TO CONTROL RETAINED SOILS IN BETWEEN PROPERTIES AT THE DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS. THE ELEVATIONS ALONG TIMBER TRAIL ARE FOUR TO SIX FOOT HIGHER THAN THOSE ALONG SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE. CITY STAFF FURTHER DETERMINED THAT IF THESE CONDITIONS ARE NOT CORRECTED, CONTINUED EROSION AND LOSS OF RETAINED SOIL HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING FOUNDATIONS OF STRUCTURES LOCATED ON THE HIGHER ELEVATION PROPERTIES. THE CONDITIONS DOCUMENTED DURING THE AUGUST 7 INSPECTION WERE CONSISTENT WITH THE TYPES OF HAZARDS IDENTIFIED IN THE ENGINEERING SAFETY LETTER THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US IN JULY. AND THESE DO WARRANT PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND CORRECTIVE ACTION. WE DO PRESENT NINE PHOTOGRAPHS INTO THE RECORD FOR THE PROPERTY AT 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE. IN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU CAN SEE THE VISIBLE CRACKING AND SETTLEMENT ON THE WALL. WE ALSO PRESENT 14 ADDITIONAL PHOTOGRAPHS INTO THE RECORD DOCUMENTING THE CONDITION OF THE REMAINDER OF THAT WALL THAT HAS COLLAPSED FURTHER DOWN THAT WALL SEGMENT. THESE PHOTOS DO DOCUMENT THAT SOIL MIGRATION THAT'S HAPPENING FROM THE HIGHER ELEVATIONS TO THE LOWER ELEVATIONS AND THE DAMAGE THAT ENDANGERS PROPERTY AND PEOPLE. SO THE APPLICABLE ORDINANCE PROVISIONS AND STRUCTURAL STANDARDS THAT WERE CITED IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION THAT WAS SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS INCLUDE SECTIONS FROM ARTICLE 4, SECTION 10-111A, MINIMUM PROPERTY STANDARDS. THAT DOES PROVIDE THAT AN OWNER SHALL AT ALL TIMES MAINTAIN HIS PROPERTY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE MINIMUM STANDARDS SET FORTH HEREIN, AS WELL AS WITH ALL THE BUILDING, PLUMBING, MECHANICAL, RESIDENTIAL, HOUSING, PROPERTY MAINTENANCE, OR FIRE CODES AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY. SECTION 10-111A1 SPEAKS TO HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS AND REQUIRES THAT AN OWNER ELIMINATE AN OBJECT OR CONDITION ON THE LAND THAT IS REASONABLY CAPABLE OF CAUSING INJURY TO A PERSON. SECTION 10-111A4 DEALS WITH DRAINAGE AND REQUIRES AN OWNER TO PROVIDE DRAINAGE SUFFICIENT TO PREVENT STANDING, WATERING, OR FLOODING ON THE PROPERTY. WHILE THIS IS STILL A STANDING PORTION OF RETAINING WALL AT THIS WALL, IF IT DOES FAIL, IT WOULD CREATE A FLOODING ISSUE. WE DO HAVE FLOODING AND DRAINAGE ISSUES WITH THE REST OF THE WALL NEEDING TO BE REPAIRED. THE STRUCTURAL STANDARDS CAN BE FOUND IN THE ADOPTED 2021 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE UNDER CODE SECTION R4044, WHICH ESTABLISHES THE STRUCTURAL STANDARDS AND DESIGN FOR RETAINING WALLS, AS WELL AS THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, SECTION 1807.2, WHICH PROVIDES THE STRUCTURAL STANDARDS FOR RETAINING WALLS AND THEIR DESIGN STANDARDS. THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AFTER WE DID OUR INSPECTION AND WERE ABLE TO EVALUATE THE CONDITIONS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE ENGINEERING SAFETY LETTER THAT WAS PROVIDED. AND ON AUGUST 17TH, THE CITY STAFF MAILED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION IN ORDER OF CORRECTIVE ACTION TO THE RESPONDENTS AND ALSO GAVE THEM NOTICE THAT WE INTENDED TO PROCEED BEFORE THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION. ON AUGUST 18TH, A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING WAS MAILED TO THE RESPONDENTS AND IT WAS ALSO PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER ON AUGUST 20TH, 2026. THE CONDITIONS AT THAT LOCATION ARE DEGRADING AND THE CONCERN HAS TO DO A LOT WITH WHAT'S COMING. WE ARE HISTORICALLY A LITTLE BIT WETTER AS WE MOVE INTO [00:15:02] SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER, AND THOSE CONDITIONS WILL EXASPERATE THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE ON THE GROUND THERE. AT THIS TIME, OUR ORDINANCE AND STATE LAW DOES REQUIRE FOR AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, AND SO I'D LIKE TO OPEN THAT UP AT THIS TIME FOR THAT. YES, IF THERE IS ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND ADDRESS, PROPERTY OWNERS OR OTHERWISE, PLEASE COME UP. AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. STEVEN BOOKER FOR JULIA AND DREW RICHARD, 824 SHEPPARD ROAD IN BURKBURNETT, TEXAS. THANK YOU. NEED TO BE SWORN IN. OKAY. OFFERING TESTIMONY NEEDS TO BE SWORN IN. AND PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND FOR ME. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE ON THE MATTER NOW BEFORE THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? YES. I JUST WANT TO BE BRIEF. MY CLIENTS HAVE NEVER SAID THAT THIS WALL DOESN'T NEED TO BE FIXED. THE ISSUE CAME IS UP AROUND APRIL 24, 26 IS THE FIRST TIME THEY KNEW THAT ANY OF THE OTHER HOMEOWNERS HAD REACHED OUT TO WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS SMBDLP, WHO IS THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION OF THE HOMEOWNER, THE DEVELOPER OF THIS PLACE. IF YOU PULL THEIR DECLARATIONS, COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, IT SAYS THAT THE ASSOCIATION SHALL MAINTAIN ALL RETAINING WALLS. AND I DON'T WANT TO INTRODUCE THIS AS AN EXHIBIT, BUT IF YOU READ THE DOCUMENT THAT DON'T FOLLOW WITH THE CITY AND WITH THE COUNTY, IT MEANS THAT THE ASSOCIATION HAS TO RETAIN THE WALLS AND ALSO THE UPPER OWNERS ARE ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WALL. AND IF YOU LOOK AT MY CLIENT, THE PICTURES THAT YOU'VE BEEN PROVIDED HERE IS MY CLIENT HAS THE LOWER PART OF THE AREA AND THE UPPER PART, SO ACCORDING TO THE AOH OR THESE STANDARDS HERE, THEY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE. MY CLIENT'S NOT SAYING IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE FIXED. WHAT THE QUESTION IS IS THEY HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WITH A SETTLEMENT OR AN AGREEMENT WITH THIS SMBD THAT BASICALLY THEY QUESTION BECAUSE IF YOU READ IT, ONCE THEY SIGN THIS AGREEMENT TO FIX THE WALL AND LET THEM HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR PROPERTY, IS WITHIN 30 DAYS IF SOMEBODY COMES IN THERE AND IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT WHEN IT HAS TO BE COMPLETED AND YOU CAN READ IT TO MEAN THAT IF ANYBODY COMES ON THAT PROPERTY, SMBD, SUBCONTRACTOR, THEY'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR IT. SO THAT'S THE ONLY HOLDUP IN THIS WHOLE THING. AND I'M WORKING WITH A REPRESENTATIVE FROM SMBD TO GET A RELEASE, AN AGREEMENT THAT MY CLIENTS WILL BE COMFORTABLE WITH. BUT RIGHT NOW, I MEAN, WHAT'S BEEN SIGNED? IF SOMEBODY COMES ON THERE, SUBCONTRACTOR, THEY SWING AROUND, BECAUSE IT IS A SMALL AREA I'VE BEEN OUT THERE, THEY SWING AROUND THERE, HIT THE HOUSE. SMBD, WHAT THE OTHER HOMEOWNERS SIGNED, THEY CAN SAY, SORRY, IT'S YOUR FAULT YOU RELEASED US. SO THAT'S THE ONLY ISSUE. WE'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY. WHOEVER NEEDS TO BE WORKED WITH IS TO GET THIS THING FIXED. SO WE JUST WANT TO WORK IT OUT WITH WHO'S GOING TO FIX IT AND WE WANT TO KNOW WHO THE CONTRACTOR IS GOING TO BE. AND I GUESS NOW WITH THE CITY INVOLVED, IT WILL BE UP TO PERMIT. IT LOOKS LIKE IT WASN'T PERMITTED LAST TIME. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN THE PUBLIC FORUM BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 549. MR. COMMISSIONER, STAFF HAS SOME RECOMMENDATIONS OFF THIS. AND SO CITY STAFF WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION CONSIDER THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DETERMINE WHETHER RETAINING WALL ASSOCIATED FENCING AND CONDITIONS LOCATED AT 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE CONSTITUTE A SUBSTANDARD OR UNSAFE STRUCTURE OR CONDITION UNDER THE CITY OF DECATUR CODE OF ORDINANCES. IF THE COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION ORDER THE RESPONDENTS TO CORRECT THE HAZARDOUS OR SUBSTANDARD CONDITION WITHIN A COMPLIANCE [00:20:02] PERIOD ESTABLISHED BY THE COMMISSION BASED UPON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THE HEARING. CITY STAFF RECOMMEND THAT REPAIR, STABILIZATION, RECONSTRUCTION, REPLACEMENT, OR REMOVAL OF THE RETAINING WALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS, WITH PLANS PREPARED AND SEALED BY TEXAS LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AND ALL REQUIRED CITY PERMITS AND REQUIRED INSPECTIONS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. CITY STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS THAT CORRECTIVE WORK BE COORDINATED WITH REPAIR ACTIVITIES ON ADJOINING PROPERTIES TO ENSURE THAT DEMOLITION, REMOVAL, EXCAVATION, OR OTHER CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES DO NOT UNDERMINE OR ADVERSELY AFFECT REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL, ADJACENT STRUCTURES, OR IMPROVEMENTS. REPAIR SEQUENCING AND CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE COORDINATED TO ENSURE THAT THE COMPLETED WORK PROVIDES AN EFFECTIVE TRANSITION AND CONNECTION BETWEEN THE RECONSTRUCTED PORTIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL ACROSS THE AFFECTED PROPERTIES. THIS IS A CONTINUOUS RETAINING WALL THAT DEPENDS ON THE ENTIRETY OF THE WALL IN ORDER TO REMAIN STABLE THROUGHOUT. THE ENGINEERING DESIGN SHOULD ADDRESS STRUCTURAL STABILITY, LATERAL SOIL RETENTION, DRAINAGE, AND HYDROSTATIC CONDITIONS, EROSION, ASSOCIATED FENCES, AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PORTION OF THE RETAINING WALL LOCATED AT 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE AND THE ADJOINING PORTIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL. WE DO HAVE AN OPTION FOR MOTIONS UP THERE. YOU CAN COME UP WITH ONE OF YOUR OWN ALSO. THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I HAVE, THE RICHARD'S ATTORNEY HAD MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT A RELEASE NEEDING TO BE SIGNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER PENDING AND THEY'RE WORKING WITH THE OTHER PARTY. DOES THAT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON OUR DECISION TODAY? ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, I MEAN THE TIMING OF THAT. NO, YOU'RE ONLY DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THE WALL IS, THE STRUCTURE IS SUBSTANDARD AS YOUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS. ANY ORGANIZATION, ENTITY, PERSON THAT THE RESPONDENTS WOULD HIRE, IF YOU DO MAKE THAT FINDING, THAT WOULD BE AT THEIR CHOICE. IT JUST NEEDS TO MEET THE PLANS FOR THE STABLE WALL TO BE PUT UP. UNDERSTOOD. ANY PENDING LEGAL ACTION FURTHER FROM THIS POINT WOULD NOT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE CONDITION OF THE WALL. I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. WHETHER OR NOT THE WALL MEETS SUBSTANDARD. RIGHT. I'M ON THE SAME THING. IN BETWEEN THAT'S BETWEEN THEM, RIGHT? RIGHT. I'M JUST DECIDING THAT THE RETAINING WALL IS SUBSTANDARD. BASED ON THE EVIDENCE THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED BETWEEN THE PICTURES, THE LETTERS THAT YOU'VE BEEN PROVIDED, THE TESTIMONY HERE TODAY, IF THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT THAT WALL IS SUBSTANDARD. THANK YOU. AND COMMISSIONERS, I KNOW IN THE PACKET I HAVE I'VE GOT THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND YOU ALSO HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ARE PART OF THE RECORD. OKAY. WAYNE, DID YOU WANT TO SHOW THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS? WE SURE CAN. SO THIS IS THE PHOTOGRAPHS FOR EXHIBIT 1. THIS IS THE 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE. YOU SEE IN THIS PORTION OF THE RETAINING WALL, IT IS STILL STANDING AT THIS POINT. HOWEVER, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE RIGHT PICTURE IN THIS SLIDE, YOU DO SEE THAT CRACK THAT'S TRAVELED THROUGH THAT MORTAR LINE ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH THERE. YOU SEE THE FENCE THAT IS DISLODGED IN THE RIGHT HAND PICTURE AND THAT IS LEANING, PULLING THAT RETAINING WALL FORWARD. THE PICTURE TO THE LEFT IS A CLOSER UP PICTURE OF THAT CRACK THAT RUNS ALONG THAT WALL. THAT GAPPING IS GETTING PRETTY SIGNIFICANT IN THERE. TRIED TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT TO THE LEANING OF THE FENCE AND THE WALL ON THERE IN THAT RIGHT HAND PHOTOGRAPH AND THE LEFT HAND PHOTOGRAPH ON THIS. THOSE ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME ANGLE, JUST A LITTLE BIT CLOSER UP. AND THEN THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL ONE IN THAT SAME DIRECTION. EXHIBIT NUMBER 2 HAS TO DO WITH THE OTHER PROPERTIES OUTSIDE OF 3021. AND SO YOU SEE HERE THAT THAT WALL IS COMPLETELY COLLAPSED IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT IS THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE 3021 [00:25:05] PROPERTY WHERE YOU SAW THAT FENCE LEANING OVER AND PULLING OVER. AND YOU CAN SEE THE BENT FENCE POST THAT'S IN THERE AT THE SAME TIME ON THAT. THESE ARE PICTURES ALONG THE BACKSIDE OF THAT RETAINING WALL DIRECTLY ABOVE THAT 3021. YOU CAN SEE HOW IT HAS ALREADY PULLED THAT WALL AWAY FROM THAT IN THERE. THAT HAS OPENED UP A GAP IN BETWEEN THE RETAINED SOIL AND THE RETAINING WALL. SOME OTHER PICTURES, YOU SEE HOW THAT SOIL HAS MIGRATED DOWN OFF OF THERE. IT'S GOING TO TAKE QUITE A BIT OF EXCAVATION IN ORDER TO GET THIS BACK INTO A SPOT WHERE IT WILL RETAIN THIS AND GET BACK TO A STABLE CONDITION. THESE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL PHOTOS OF THAT. AND THEN AGAIN YOU SEE THE RIGHT-HAND PICTURE SHOWING THAT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THIS 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE. ANY QUESTIONS, DANNY? RYAN? I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DETERMINE THE PROPERTY STANDARDS. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE OPTION TWO, THE STRUCTURE OF SOUTH COLLEGE. IT DOES MEET THIS CRITERIA FOR SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE. MAY I CLARIFY THAT'S 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE? YEAH, 3021. SECOND THAT MOTION. WE HAVE A MOTION FROM DANNY, A SECOND FROM RYAN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. NONE OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ONCE THE ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN TO DETERMINE THAT THE STRUCTURE IS SUBSTANDARD, THE COMMISSION NOW HAS TO SET A TIMEFRAME FOR REPAIRS ON THIS. THAT'S FOUND IN SECTION 10105D, ACTION BY THE COMMISSION, UNDER TIMEFRAMES. THERE ARE, BY STATE LAW AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE, WE HAVE THREE OPTIONS ON THIS. YOU HAVE AN OPTION FOR COMPLETION WITHIN 30 DAYS. YOU HAVE AN OPTION FOR COMPLETION WITHIN 90 DAYS. IF YOU CHOOSE THE 90-DAY OPTION, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXTRA REQUIREMENTS THAT COME INTO PLACE ON THAT. THAT IS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER MUST ESTABLISH AT THE HEARING THAT THE WORK CANNOT REASONABLY BE PERFORMED WITHIN THE 30 DAYS. THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION SHALL SET A SPECIFIC TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE COMMENCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. AND THE OWNER SHALL SECURE THE PROPERTY IN A REASONABLE MANNER FROM UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY. SO YOU CAN SET THOSE REQUIREMENTS FOR WHEN THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORK SHALL BE BEGUN AND HOW LONG IT SHOULD TAKE TO COMPLETE THAT. THE THIRD OPTION IS COMPLETION IN A PERIOD EXCEEDING 90 DAYS. THERE'S A LOT MORE REQUIREMENTS BY STATE LAW AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTING A TIMEFRAME EXCEEDING 90 DAYS. AT THIS HEARING, THE PROPERTY OWNER MUST SUBMIT A DETAILED PLAN AND TIME SCHEDULE. THE PROPERTY OWNER MUST ESTABLISH AT THE HEARING THAT THE WORK CANNOT BE REASONABLY COMPLETED WITHIN 90 DAYS. AND THAT THE OWNER SHALL ALSO MAKE REGULARLY, MUST REGULARLY SUBMIT PROGRESS REPORTS TO THE CITY TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE TIME SCHEDULES ESTABLISHED FOR COMMENCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THEY ALSO HAVE TO SECURE THE PROPERTY IN A REASONABLE MANNER FROM UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY. THE COMMISSION MAY ALSO REQUIRE A BOND IN CASES OF MORE THAN 90 DAYS. HOWEVER, WE DO NOT HAVE A DETAILED PLAN TO EXCEED THAT 90 DAYS THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AT THIS POINT. SO AT THIS POINT, IT WOULD BE UP TO THE COMMISSION TO LOOK AT THEIR OPTIONS ON THE TWO OPTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE GENTLEMAN? OPTION ONE, IT'S GOT TO BE DONE AND COMPLETED. THAT IS THE WAY THAT READS, YES. [00:30:01] NOW OPTION TWO DOES ALLOW FOR THE COMMISSION TO SET A COMMENCEMENT DATE FOR THE REPAIRS TO BE COMMENCED ON. AND IF THERE'S A VIOLATION OF THAT ORDER AT ANY POINT ALONG THE WAY, THEN WE WOULD BRING IT BACK. BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, THE 30 DAYS THAT THEY'VE GOT TO GO GET ENGINEERING PLANS PERMITS, THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE FOR THEM. IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN. WE NEED TO MAKE THIS DECISION TODAY. YES, THIS IS A DECISION THAT WOULD BE MADE TODAY. I TEND TO AGREE WITH BRIAN, 90 DAYS IS REASONABLE. RIGHT, OPTION TWO. WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE RESPONDENTS? WOULD I NEED TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AGAIN? NO. IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP TO ADDRESS THE TIMELINE, IF YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE. WELL, THE FIRST THING I DON'T UNDERSTAND, IT IS A CONTINUOUS WALL. I THINK EVERYBODY AGREES ABOUT THAT. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY MY CLIENTS ARE BEING TARGETED BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR ANOTHER THIRD PARTY TO BEAT IT, I MEAN TO FINISH IT. I DON'T KNOW, MR. SMITH SAID IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF EXCAVATING, A LOT OF WORK. IT'S COMPACT IN THERE. I LOOKED OVER THE FENCE ALL THE WAY DOWN THE NEIGHBOR'S THING. YOU GIVE US 90 DAYS, WE CAN MAYBE FINISH OURS IN 90 DAYS, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY CAN DO THE WHOLE THING, WHICH IS A WHOLE WALL, NOT JUST MY CLIENT'S SECTION IN 90 DAYS. SO THAT'S THE ONLY IMPRACTICAL THING I'M SEEING HERE. SO THAT'S MY POINT ON THAT. UNDERSTOOD, THANK YOU. WAS THERE ANY TIMEFRAME PROVIDED BY ANY OF THE ENGINEERS THAT HAD BEEN OUT THERE FOR ANY OF THE INSPECTIONS, ANYTHING LIKE THAT? SO WE HAVE A SUBMITTAL FOR THE REPAIR OF THIS WALL. AND WHENEVER YOU RECEIVE A SUBMITTAL ON A RETAINING WALL, IT GIVES YOU TYPICAL DETAILS. IT DOESN'T DRAW OUT THE WHOLE WALL. IT GIVES YOU TYPICAL DETAILS ON WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW. THAT'S WHAT WE INSPECT ON OUR SIDE OF IT. SO THE WORK WOULD HAVE TO BE ALL BE GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE REPAIRING ONE PIECE OF A WALL AND THEN MOVING ON TO ANOTHER SECTION AND ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER, ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER. IT ALL NEEDS TO BE POURED CONTINUOUS WITH THAT REBAR, CONTINUOUS THROUGHOUT IT SO THAT IT MAINTAINS THAT LEVERAGE THAT THAT RETAINING WALL USES TO RESIST TOPPLING. WAYNE, DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THIS TIMEFRAME OF COMPLETING THE WALL FROM ANY OF THE ENGINEERS? NO, NOT AS FAR AS A SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME. A RETAINING WALL LIKE THIS WOULD GENERALLY BE 30 TO 45 DAYS WOULD BE A TYPICAL TIMEFRAME ONCE CONSTRUCTION HAS STARTED ON IT. THERE'S SOME EXCAVATION THAT HAS TO COME OUT OF THERE. THERE'S SOME WEATHER EVENTS THAT YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO PLAN FOR ALONG WITH THAT. BUT IF EVERYTHING WAS EQUAL, 30 TO 45 DAYS WOULD BE A TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION TIME FOR A WALL THIS SIZE. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? DANNY? I'M GOOD. BASED ON THE TESTIMONY, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR OPTION B TO ALLOW 90 DAYS FOR REPAIR AND COMPLETION. I SECOND THAT MOTION. I DO HAVE A MOTION UP THERE THAT IS VERY SPECIFIC TO SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE COORDINATION IN BETWEEN THERE. AGAIN, YOU CAN PICK, CHOOSE, CREATE YOUR OWN. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SET A COMMENCEMENT DATE NO LATER THAN 60 DAYS? I THINK THAT SOUNDS FAIR. I AGREE. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THAT OPTION B AND COMMENCEMENT DAY WITHIN 60 DAYS. DANNY? THIS IS MOTION ONE. I THINK THIS IS TWO. MOTION TWO. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I [00:35:01] UNDERSTAND ON THAT. WHEN YOU SAY COMMENCEMENT, THAT'S FOR THEM TO START WORK WITHIN 60 DAYS? THAT IS MY INTENT. THIS IS MOTION TWO. I BELIEVE IT WAS MOTION TWO. YES. THIS IS MOTION TWO THAT'S UP THERE. I WILL CAUTION. PAM, YOU CAN TELL ME IF I'M STEPPING OUT OF LINE HERE. I WORRY ABOUT ADDITIONAL RAIN CREATING ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS ON THESE PROPERTIES AS WE MOVE FORWARD. AGAIN, THE COORDINATION, THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO CHOOSE THEIR OWN CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE THE REPAIRS ON THEIR PORTION OF THE WALL. HOWEVER, THAT CONTRACTOR IS GOING TO HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH THE OTHER CONTRACTOR TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE DEMOING THIS OUT, THAT EVERYTHING IS BEING COORDINATED SO THAT IT DOESN'T CREATE OTHER DAMAGE DOWN THE LINE WHILE ONE CONTRACTOR IS WAITING ON ANOTHER TO DO A PORTION OF THIS OR THAT ONE CONTRACTOR IS CUTTING THE OTHER OFF FROM ACCESS INTO CERTAIN AREAS ON THAT. NOW, IS THAT SOMETHING WE NEED TO SPECIFY IN OUR MOTION? IS THAT PART OF THIS MOTION? SO I DO HAVE SOME INFORMATION IN THERE THAT SHALL BE COMPLETED TO INCLUDE REPAIR REMOVAL. YES, AND SO THE ENGINEERING PLAN SHALL ADDRESS STRUCTURAL STABILITY AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE RETAINING WALL AT 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE TO THE ADJOINING PORTIONS OF THE WALL. WAYNE, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU MIGHT HAVE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF WHEN WORK SHOULD COMMENCE, IF I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE A PERMIT WITHIN 30 DAYS? I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PERMIT WITHIN 30 DAYS. THAT'S WHY WE PUT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN HERE FOR PLANS TO BE PREPARED AND SEALED BY A TEXAS LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AND SUBMITTED THE CITY NO LATER THAN A DATE SPECIFIC FOR THAT. ALL REQUIRED CITY PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED NO LATER THAN AND PROVIDE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THAT. AND THEN CORRECTIVE WORK SHALL COMMENCE NO LATER THAN A DATE AND THEN CAN BE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN. AT THIS POINT, I MEAN, A LICENSED ENGINEER TO SIGN OFF ON THOSE, AGAIN, THEY ARE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. THEY ARE NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS. THERE IS A GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, BUT ALL OF THE PROPERTIES AT SOUTH MARTIN BRANCH ALREADY HAVE A GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY THAT CAN BE USED TO DESIGN THE WALL. THERE IS A WALL THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DESIGNED FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION BASED OFF OF THAT GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY. SO I DON'T THINK THAT IT WOULD TAKE THAT LONG TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THOSE PLANS IN THERE. I WOULD RECOMMEND HAVING THE SUBMISSION AND PERMIT COMPLETED WITHIN 30 DAYS. THAT'S REASONABLE. SO AS FAR AS OUR DATES, I SEE FOUR THAT NEED TO BE FILLED, SUBMISSION AND PERMITS WITHIN 30 DAYS, COMMENCEMENT WITHIN 60 DAYS AND COMPLETION WITHIN 90 DAYS. HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE YOU TO TURN THE PERMIT BACK AROUND, 24 HOURS? IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, BECAUSE OF THE HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS THAT ARE AT THIS LOCATION AND THE POTENTIAL, WE WILL TURN THIS AROUND IMMEDIATELY. IF YOU WAIT ANOTHER 30 DAYS, YOU ALSO GET INTO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER INTO THAT WHERE WEATHER COULD BE IMPACTING YOU. IF WE CAN HAVE THAT PERMIT WITHIN 30 DAYS, THE SUBMISSION, AND GET IT TURNED AROUND ON THAT, THE CITY WOULD BE VERY CONDUCIVE TO TURNING THAT AROUND AND HAVING IT SUBMITTED. SO IF YOU ADD AN ADDITIONAL FIVE TO TEN DAYS, FIVE WORKING DAYS IN ORDER TO COORDINATE THE BEGINNING DATE ON THAT. LET'S SAY SEPTEMBER 30TH. WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE MOTION FOR 30 DAYS. THERE WILL STILL BE OPTION TWO? YES. SO FAR FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE RECORD, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY MOTION YET. I THINK YOUR FORMULA, YOU'RE DISCUSSING WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE AND THEN SOMEONE WILL BE MAKING, WILL BE MOVING. [00:40:09] SO IS 30 DAYS IN THIS MOTION? YES. SO COMPLETION WILL BE WITHIN 90. THAT'S THE ULTIMATE OPTION B, WHICH WE ARE ON. THIS IS MOTION TWO? YES. FOR 90 DAYS TOTAL TO BE COMPLETE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR OPTION TWO AND THEN SET THE DAYS AFTER. SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO PROCEED WITH OPTION TWO. DO WE NEED TO SPECIFY THOSE DATES IN THE MOTION, I'M ASSUMING? I THINK THAT IF YOU FIND THE SUGGESTED LANGUAGE FROM WAYNE, BECAUSE I BELIEVE WHAT HE DID HERE WAS PUT ALL OF THAT INTO MOTION LANGUAGE. OF COURSE, THIS IS YOUR MOTION, NOT WAYNE'S. SO, IF ANY OF THAT IS NOT HOW YOU WANT IT MOVED, YOU NEED TO MOVE IT HOW YOU WANT IT. BUT REVIEW THAT AND THEN DECIDE HOW YOU WANT THAT TO BE MADE. AND KEEP YOUR DISCUSSIONS ON THE RECORD, PLEASE. YEAH, NO PROBLEM WITH THE DISCUSSIONS. JUST KEEP THEM ON THE RECORD. SO JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE AS FAR AS THE TIMELINE IS CONCERNED. ALL REQUIRED CITY PERMIT SHALL BE OBTAINED NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS. YOU SAID YOU NEEDED FIVE POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL DAYS AFTER THAT. WAS THAT AFTER THE NEXT STEP? FIVE BUSINESS DAYS. OKAY, SO THEN WE WILL SAY 35 DAYS FOR ALL REQUIRED CITY PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED. WE WILL SAY 60 DAYS FOR COMMENCEMENT. NO. I WOULD THINK AT THAT POINT WE GO FIVE DAYS AFTER THE PERMIT IS ISSUED FOR WORK TO COMMENCE. 40 DAYS FOR COMMENCEMENT. AND 90 DAYS FOR COMPLETION. SO IN THE DATES THAT YOU SEE PROVIDED, WE HAVE 30 FOR THE FIRST PERMITS REQUIRED. 35. OH, EXCUSE ME. I'M GETTING OUT OF ORDER. I MISSED THE FIRST ONE. SO, EXCUSE ME. 30 FOR PLANNED, PREPARED, SEALED, TEXAS LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY. ALL REQUIRED CITY PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED NO LATER THAN 35 DAYS. CORRECTIVE WORK SHALL COMMENCE NO LATER THAN 40 DAYS. AND SHALL BE COMPLETED, INSPECTED, AND APPROVED NO LATER THAN 90 DAYS. ARE WE IN FAVOR? YEAH. OKAY. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEP. I'M OPPOSED. 90 DAYS TOTAL. YES. FROM THE START TO COMPLETION. I WOULD MOTION OFF OF THOSE. JUST READ OFF THE DATES, THE LAUNCHES OF THE DATES FOR THE MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION FOR OPTION TWO. THE PLANS PREPARED AND SEALED BY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS FROM TODAY. THE CITY PERMIT SHALL BE OBTAINED NO LATER THAN 35 DAYS. CORRECTIVE WORK SHALL COMMENCE NO LATER THAN 40 DAYS. AND ALL WORK COMPLETED, INSPECTED, AND APPROVED NO LATER THAN 90 DAYS FROM TODAY. AND THAT'S REGARDING THE PROPERTY AT 3021. 3021 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR MR. THOMPSON. CAN I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. NONE OPPOSED. THIS MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE'VE ALWAYS GOT THE SECTION ON FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN ORDER OF THE COMMISSION THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT ON THIS. WE WILL GIVE YOU PROGRESS REPORTS AS WE HAVE OUR ADDITIONAL BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION MEETINGS. IF THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL BECAUSE OF THE HAZARDS THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH THIS AND THE DANGERS THAT WE'RE FACING WITH THIS, IT MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SPECIAL MEETINGS THAT WOULD COME INTO PLAY ON THIS. OTHERWISE, WE WOULD JUST BE GIVING YOU PROGRESS REPORTS AT YOUR STANDARD BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION [00:45:02] MEETINGS, WHICH IS THE THIRD MONDAY OF EVERY MONTH. GOOD. IT DOES NOT APPEAR WE HAVE ANY [VI. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS] CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS TODAY. IN THE FUTURE, OUR NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2026 AT 3:30 P.M. DO WE HAVE ANY CURRENT APPLICANTS, PAM? NO. I'M AWARE OF, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER ITEMS TO DISCUSS, I WILL ADJOURN OUR MEETING TODAY AT 6:15. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.