Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
1986 03 05 CC Minutes, Special60305-1
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN
March 5, 1986
The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in
special session on Wednesday, March 5, 1986, at 6:30 p.m. in
the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall with the
following attendance:
Fred T. Philips
Jimmy Johnson
Perry M. Simmons
Ron Embry
Roy L. Fuller
Emmett 0. Hutto
Fritz Lanham
Larry Patterson
Randy Strong
Eileen P. Hall
Absent: Gerald Dickens
Councilman
Councilman
Councilman
Councilman
Councilman
Mayor
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
Councilman
The meeting was called to order with a quorum present,
afterwhich the following business was transacted:
Consider Request of Butch Cook, to Hold Trail Ride on
March 8 and 9
Council had considered
a trail ride on March 8 and
day ride due to the proposed
two-day ride at Memorial and
has arranged to camp at the
Drive as had been suggested
Philips moved to approve the
trail ride on March 8 and 9;
motion. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members
Embry and Fuller
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
the request of Mr. Cook to hold
9, but had only authorized a one
location of the camp site for a
Park. Since that meeting, Mr. Cook
old Ford dealership on Decker
by council. Therefore, Councilman
request of Mr. Cook to hold a
Councilman Simmons seconded the
Philips, Johnson, Simmons,
Receive Report on Texas Avenue Project
Mayor Hutto explained to those present that at this
time council will only be receiving the report from Mr.
Arnold or his representative and that no decision of any
sort will be made, nor will there be any discussion of the
report. Any decision to be made on the report will be made
at another time.
60305-2
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
Mayor Hutto called upon Councilman Embry who explained
that a very preliminary report was presented last week, and
at this time a more comprehensive report would be given.
The purpose of this meeting is to receive information.
Council asked that everyone present consider the information
very carefully and asked that those present provide feedback
and input on the results of Phase I of the study.
Councilman Embry reviewed for those present that council
had authorized a study to be made on the feasibility of
redevelopment of the Texas Avenue area. The study was to be
divided into three parts. Each phase cost approximately
$60,000 for a total cost of $180,000; however, council
reserved the right to consider the progress of the study at
the end of each phase. City Council would then consider
whether to and if so, on what basis to proceed on the next
phase of the study. That will be a decision that the council
will be making in the next session or so; however, today,
council only desires to receive the results of Phase I. No
action will be taken today. Council wants the public to
hear the results of the study, consider those results, and
let council know what you think. With that introduction,
Councilman Embry introduced the prime contractor for the
study, Mr. Charles Arnold, President of Arnold Development
Company.
Mr. Arnold stated that his firm was retained by city
council to perform a study of what they refer to as the old
downtown area or a ten block area of Texas Avenue which was
depicted by a map posted in the chamber. The idea was to
make a decision in terms of marketing demographics, population
movement and existing retail as to what could be done to
revitalize the area. The contract indicated that the contractor
would need to report back to city council at three different
periods to consider what had been determined, to discuss
that and receive input. Mr. Arnold stressed that this is an
interim review. The most important thing that the contractor
has done at this stage of the study is to look at Baytown,
look at the demographics, look at the population movement,
look at the traffic, look at the location of the retail and
commerce, and make some initial analytical judgements based
on what exists in Baytown. The report is what the findings
of the contractor are. The critical part of this kind of
process is the data gathering, deciding what the problems
are, and then solution to the problem. Like any kind of
building, if the foundation is bad, the rest of the building
will be bad. One of the things that was very very important
was for the contractor to understand what the problems were.
He emphasized that this is an interim report; therefore, it
is likely to change as the process is continued.
One of the things that Mr. Arnold asked the audience to
keep in mind is that ghettos, slums, rundown areas and urban
decay are not something that occur overnight. It takes a
long time to develop, and its problems are normally of
greater magnitude than the run down buildings on Texas
Avenue. The solution to those problems are frequently more
complex than what appears on the surface. If a coat of
paint or a refurbished building would solve the problems of
60305-3
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
the slum areas in the country, there would be no problems
with urban decay. Therefore, one of the things that the
contractor felt strongly about was that they discover all
the problems that exist here.
As with most redevelopment, one of the problems in
Baytown is that there is a reversal trend backward in terms
of economics and population movement in the Texas Avenue
area. In 1980, there were more people in the Texas Avenue
area than today. In 1980, there were more businesses and
more things thriving than there are today. What the develop-
ment team's process required was determining a way to stop
that trend. For this reason, Arnold and Planning and Design
Resources felt it was necessary to engage as a member of the
development team, the best demographic study person possible.
That is the reason that Laventhos & Horwath were engaged to
conduct a market feasibility study of Texas Avenue. They
were asked to go in as a team member, under the direction of
Arnold and PDR, and define the development objectives;
assess the overall market as it relates to the retail, the
office market and the residential market; project a demand
for the area, if it existed; identify the kinds of potential
competitors for the area; decide what could be done in terms
of raw numbers and in terms of the ability to draw business
from the people who live in the area.
L&H's original report back was encouraging in one
aspect, but discouraging in another. what they said
basically was that there is also a gigantic area with
problems that is going backward. This is being compounded
by the creation of a new road system. The consensus of the
development team is that once Loop 201 is completed, the
blighted area will not only be the Texas Avenue area, but
the area will be made larger by the outflow of commerce from
Alexander Drive to the north. The completing of Loop 201
will have a negative impact on the entire downtown area in
that it will increase the backward trend. All of the
population movement and commercial movement is north toward
San Jacinto Mall and away from the downtown area. The good
news is that because of the population existing in Baytown
and because of the recreated traffic patterns, the team
feels that there is a market demand for approximately
150,000 square feet of new retail development that would
encompass the characteristics of a neighborhood center and
community center. The team felt that there was approximately
11.5 million dollars worth of market share for the neighbor-
hood component and approximately 4.9 million dollars worth
of market share for the community shopping center component.
What all that means in simple terms is that the team felt
that there are enough people and enough movement for a
shopping center of 150,000 square feet. However, because of
the compounding effect of abandoning on Alexander Drive and
the existing downward trend on Texas Avenue, a retail
development of that size put in the middle of Texas Avenue
would be swallowed up by the remainder of the blight and
would not sufficiently change the trend. That caused
tremendous concern.
60305-4
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
The team's reaction was mixed. Some of the members
decided that this would not work. What needed to be done
was to take the market demand and go north. Some of the
team felt that the team needed to look at the situation
again because the objective is to resolve the Texas Avenue
area problems. The team went back to L&H and said that they
liked what they had been told in one respect, but did not
like the other side. In discussing the issue, the consensus
was reached that there is sufficient importance in the Texas
Avenue area. However, to make it work, the team would need
to solve more problems than exist in the ten block geographical
section.
To solve the problems, it was necessary to go beyond
the ten block area and expand the study area to a greater
portion of Baytown. The team felt like they needed to
include the part of Baytown in this area that had the
strongest nexus of commercial viability. The simple answer
was the hospital, in fact the hospital is expanding.
Therefore, the team felt that if the study area were ex-
panded to include that portion of Baytown as well, this
could be the solution.
Another thing that the team considered that is apparent
to a person who does not live here is the issue -- what is the
nicest amenity to downtown Baytown. One of the things that
people in this area have that cities across the country and
Texas would like to have is water. The City of Baytown, in
its development, has basically turned its back on that
really exciting amenity. Therefore, the team felt that by
expanding the study area to include not only Texas Avenue,
but also the water amenities and somehow trying to capture
what is going on with the hospital would be the backbone to
make the whole thing work. There is one chance to make this
work; therefore, it is very important that once the data is
gathered that the right decision is made. Economic viability
is important, but without some indication that what you
build will work, you've wasted your time.
Another important factor is the ability to turn the
trend around and change it having the first part of the
development act as a catalyst to make the rest of the project
work. The team believes that exists by taking advantage of
the commerce that exists at the hospital and the amenity on
the water.
HUD has taught development a number of lessons over the
last 15 years. Unfortunately, it has taken HUD 15 years to
learn some of the lessons. What they have taught is that
urban redevelopment does not work if undertaken by the city
government or the municipal authority alone. The local
government is not equipped to be property managers. Urban
redevelopment has categorically and emphatically failed when
done by private developers because private developers can't
come in and control the permitting system or the infrastructure
system. The only successful redevelopments that have occurred
in this country to the team's knowledge have been those
undertaken by a public/private effort. This is where the
city, the private developer and the citizens all work together.
60305-5
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
It is the opinion of the team that what Baytown needs
to do to make this work is to finalize the market study
and put in in a farm available for anyone to look at. A
comprehensive development plan needs to be put together
that has architectural uses, land uses, location, archi-
tectural recommendations and review processes for people
who want to develop in the development area. A redevelop-
ment corporation needs to be organized as a subdivision of
the economic redevelopment foundation that is currently in
process that has the single responsibility of looking at
this urban redevelopment area. This corporation needs to
be composed of local business people who are influ-
ential and a selected number of elected officials. It needs
to be a small board of directors who are willing to work
on the development of the area. This organization needs to
have a specific set of bylaws and procedures whereby any
development that takes place in this redevelopment area must
be coordinated through the redevelopment corporation. That
accomplishes a number of things. It gives the individual
landowner mass. That corporation needs to compile all the
data available on federal, state and local funding that can
prompt and help redevelopment in this area. There needs to
be a review committee to look at all new development that
takes place in the redevelopment area. One of the most
critical issues that needs to be resolved is that the whole
area is going down, and if something is not done, it will
continue to go down. The area will not turn itself around.
It will not turn around in the near future because of the
current trends north of town and the Loop 201 connector.
Mr. Arnold asked Joe Powell, President of PDR, to talk
about how the team arrived at different uses; where those
uses are located and talk about the market for those uses.
The economic conditions, household conditions, and expendible
buying power were basically studied in three different areas
in town. He had a map posted depicting the primary, secondary
and tertiary market areas. Basically, what the charts say
is that in the primary market area which is Texas Avenue
the population has decreased and is projected to further
decrease. Population in the other areas is projected to
have a slight increase.
Another map indicated where the existing retail centers
in the city are, the size of the centers, the anchor tenants,
square footage, etc. The bottom line is that the existing
retail is on Alexander, while the development is on Garth
with a small amount on Decker. The interesting thing that
the team learned is that the overall occupancy rate for
retail centers in the Baytown area is 53%. On the surface
that would say that no further retail development would be
reasonable. If you look closely, there is some retail
development that is reasonably new and is not working at all.
Other retail development is reasonably new and is 95% occupied.
The critical conditions are clearly location and amenities.
That tells the team that if one wants to look at retail
development in the study area, one needs to look at amenities
very carefully.- If something is to be done in this area, it
has to be a very strong attraction. The same process was
followed concerning super markets and department stores.
All the super markets in town are either on Garth or
Alexander except for two.
60305-6
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
Given the fact that in order to do something economically
viable for the downtown area, the economics must be there.
What the team learned is that something that is unique must
be done, something with impact. When the team looked at
Baytown, they become most excited about the water. Of 50
major redevelopment efforts performed in this country, all
the successful ones have involved water. Every community
in which that occured, however, considered their water area
to be a general blight. The citizenry of Baytown do not
think about Goose Creek as being a lovely, scenic place
where they would want to recreate. However, it is a marvelous
amenity and one that should be taken advantage of. A map
also depicted the area of Goose Creek closest to downtown
that the team felt it made sense to consider.
Mr. Powell emphasized the fact that this is not the
task of one developer, nor for the city, but a combined
effort that will take a considerable amount of time to
accomplish. He too mentioned the formation of a community
development corporation that would be empowered by the city
council to encourage private redevelopment in the redevelop-
ment area. The team is suggesting that the jurisdictional
boundary for the private community development corporation
include downtown, along Goose Creek to the bridge. This
corporation should encourage new development to come to
the area and to encourage the existing landowners to redevelop
their own properties.
One of the things that would be nice if the corporation
did exist is to give the area a common look. The way to
give the area a common look is to have consistent land-
scapings, consistent paving schemes, consistent exterior
lighting schemes and consistent signage schemes.
One of the critical things that the redevelopment agency
needs to do is develop a comprehensive redevelopment plan.
It is not a good idea to invite private developers to come
in and all existing landowners to come in and do whatever
they want. They should have some guidelines. Therefore,
a comprehensive redevelopment plan would need to be
developed. The group had a drawing depicting such a plan.
The drawing indicated a decrease in the density with parking
behind the stores. There were consistent paving patterns
shown and a general refurbishing of the front. The idea
is to have private development which would be encouraged
by the community development corporation.
There appears to be a demand for about 150,000 square
feet of retail if it is in a special place and does some-
thing special. The idea is to have retail occur on Goose
Creek. Clearly, within the boundaries of the redevelopment
agency's jurisdiction somewhere between Loop 201 and the
bridge is where the development would occur. The team had
a drawing which depicted what such a site might look like.
There is no specific site recommended by the team, but it
should be a site that would pay some homage to the water,
60305-7
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
and encourage recreation and community activities. To
compare the 150,000 square feet of retail, Mr. Powell said
that the mall contains 1,500,000 square feet.
Margie Hartrick commented that the retail area near the
water would be pretty except during hurricane season. Mr.
Powell stated that for the most part the water area has been
neglected. Everything turns its back toward Goose Creek.
This is a common condition in communities that have turned
their back to the water, but in communities that have reversed
the trend, they have done so very successfully. The problem
of hurricanes would have to be considered.
(10"11 Allen Cannon asked if the impact of the Grand Parkway
had been addressed. Mr. Powell stated that it had not been
addressed, but the team is aware of the discussion surrounding
the Grand Parkway and the alternate route that it may take.
At this point in time, it has not had a material effect on
what is being considered. He emphasized that this is an
interim report which could be summarized by saying that the
condition with downtown Baytown is reversible. It is not
reversible by anyone except the citizens of Baytown. The
revenue is possible if the community development corporation
is set up and if a comprehensive development plan is developed,
and the proper government interface takes place with private
development.
Dina Stucker inquired why the market area for Texas
Avenue would include an area north of Loop 201 and not
include an area that was across the street.
In response, Mr. Powell said that the charge was to
look at the possibility of development in this area.
Generally, the data according to L&H, the market study
people, indicates that the people who live here do not do
their neighborhood shopping in this area. These people do
their neighborhood shopping along Alexander. Therefore,
they are in fact in a different market area. Neighborhood
centers are generally defined as those where you do your
convenience shopping. That is where your grocery store,
cleaners, etc. are. Community centers are those that have
comparison type shopping in them-- places where you go to
compare price or features. That is the logic behind the
market areas depicted.
Ambrose Rios, Jr. stated that most cities in this
country develop to the north and that Baytown is no exception.
He wondered if the study is saying that developing Goose
Creek will solve a problem several blocks down. Mr. Powell
responded that he was not convinced that all cities develop
to the north. Usually, what happens, the major factors have
to do mostly with employment, which drives residential
development, which drives retail development, which drives
car access to all of it. There is no desire to arrest
Baytown's growth to the north. There is only the desire to
try to create something nice here which historically is in
the heart of the town.
60305-8
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
Again, Mr. Rios pointed out that the study is suggesting
solving the problem quite a distance from where the problem
exists. Goose Creek is quite a distance from that portion
of Texas Avenue which includes downtown. Mr. Powell concurred.
He said that that was an astute observation on Mr. Rios'
part and that he wouldn't say that the plan would work
either. What the team is saying is that they would like to
do something to get Texas Avenue brought up to speed and
that the water is a marvelous amenity which should be utilized.
Begin with the existing amenity and see if that can be
parlayed with the community redevelopment corporation into
something positive. However, if Mr. Rios' concern was that
this may be a tenuous connection, Mr. Powell agreed.
Mr. Rios inquired if Baytown would not have to have a
population explosion or major companies to bridge this 53%
vacancy rate that is already present. Mr. Powell responded
not according to the market study.
Mr. Rios inquired if this project were initiated would
it not displace existing space. Mr. Powell responded that
this would not be true according to the market study. This
is obviously something one would consider, and anybody with
any common sense at all would think if you have an area that
is 53% vacant, why in the world would you build something
else. The idea is that you don't if it looks like everything
else. That is why the team felt that if this were possible,
then it was necessary to reach out for a special amenity,
something that might recapture some of the dollars that are
currently being spent in Houston. That is the reason the
team reached to the water front.
A woman in the audience asked about the possibility of
a small convention center. Mr. Powell said that'that was a
marvelous idea. He assumed that that would be an agenda
item high on the list of the community redevelopment corporation.
They would say that they would like to do several things.
They would want to induce some private developers in the
city, bring new developers in, take the existing landowners
and work with them with the idea of community activities.
That is something that can be executed by the redevelopment
corporation.
Becky Brown inquired of Mr. Arnold if during the study
he had talked with any of the property owners who own any of
the existing properties. He responded that the group had
spoken with a whole bunch of people. Ms. Brown inquired who
he had spoken with. Mr. Arnold responded that he had spoken
with a number of people, but he could not recall their
names. He said that he would be happy to sit with her later
and tell her. She then inquired if he had spoken with Mr.
Amad. Mr. Arnold inquired if Mr. Amad owned property on
Texas Avenue. Ms. Brown said that he did not own property
on Texas Avenue, but he did own property on Goose Creek.
Mr. Arnold responded that they had spoken with Mr. Armad.
Mr. Arnold said that if she could name some names, then he .,
could remember the persons he had conversed with. Ms. Brown
said that there were several names that she would be interested
in, but presently, she is most interested in the city council,
60305-9
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
Mayor Hutto specifically. She felt that was happening here
was a blatant conflict of interest. She spoke to the Mayor
directly and said that he was a partner with Mr. Amad and
one of the absent city councilmen is an employee of Mr.
Amad. Mayor Hutto inquired what did Mr. Amad have to do
with receiving the report? Ms. Brown stated that she did
not feel that it has anything to do with receiving the
report, but she felt that it is a conflict of interest that
he would spend city money in this regard. Mayor Hutto said
that that would be discussed at the next council meeting.
Presently, council was meeting to receive the report.
Mr. Rios said that recently in the Wall Street Journal
it was indicated that blighted areas like Texas Avenue have
been successful at resurrection when aquariums such as Sea
Arama have been constructed. He inquired if the team had
considered such an approach. Mr. Powell responded that at
this time, the team has not covered any specific development
ideas, but that is another excellent example of private
development being induced by the public sector. Things like
that would be exactly what Baytown needs if it is in the
community's interest to develop this part of town.
Rusty Slay, property owner along Texas Avenue, stated
that he has a business on Texas Avenue where the building
has been refurbished, and he has not had trouble getting
people to conduct business at that location --corner of Texas
and Commerce. He can operate his business from this location
without as much overhead and asked how that would fit into
the team's plan.
Mr. Powell responded that this is precisely the kind of
healthy business that you want there. It makes for revitali-
zation. Revitalization is not architectural in nature;
revitalization is an economic process. It is encouraging
healthy business like Mr. Slay's to do what they do in that
particular location.
Mr. Slay noted that what Mr. Powell was saying is that
he would like the owners in that particular area to work
toward some common theme. Mr. Powell responded in the
affirmative.
Mr. Arnold said that perhaps the term "theme" is not
exactly correct. What they were actually speaking of is a
common goal --the revitalization of the area.
Jean Shepherd said that about 20 years ago, the Jaycees
attempted to get interest along Goose Creek Stream, and
about 10 years ago, the Bicentennial Committee tried to get
interest along Goose Creek Stream, but no one seemed to be
very concerned about it, especially the city council since
the stream is polluted. Therefore, she inquired if the team
had considered the cost to clean up the creek and whose
responsibility that would be. The response was that that
had not been considered.
60305-10
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
Jean Shepherd then inquired if during the conversations
with property owners along the creek, they had indicated
that they were anxious to develop along the creek. Mr.
Arnold said that the people that they talked with who owned
property along Goose Creek felt that they were crazy. Ms.
Shepherd said that she did not feel that they were crazy for
suggesting development along Goose Creek. In fact, recently
she had taken a trip on the creek. She inquired if the team
had considered a convention center on Texas Avenue. Mr.
Arnold responded that one of the things that happens with
early revitalization is to start with the right missing
piece to the puzzle. one of the things that you will find
if this occurs with Goose Creek, all of a sudden people are
going to start getting sensitive about polluting and pollution
as it impacts the creek. As the enforcement agencies are
harrassed more and more by the people, the pollution problem
will be resolved.
Elsa Blakely, owner of property along Texas Avenue,
stated that the study may be wonderful, but the success or
failure of a project depends on the timing. However, with
all good intentions, city council has disregarded the timing.
A good poker player knows when to hold and when to run and
now is the time to hold.
Mr. Powell said that the reason that they were not con-
cerned with the timing is that first of all the economy is
not the best right now. The idea to revitalize Texas Avenue
and the Goose Creek area is not a 1, 2 or 3 year project,
but a 20 year process. What the team is saying is that the
machinery should be put in place now. By the time the city
enacts a community redevelopment corporation and by the
time a unified development plan is in place, and all the
ordinances necessary to make this work are in place, and
consultants are hired, some time will have elapsed. Ms.
Blakely responded that in 20 years, the increase in population
will have taken care of the problem.
Mr. Powell responded that although some of those present
would not be the recipients of a revitalized Texas Avenue,
it would be nice for future generations.
Jean Shepherd said that she had asked a question earlier
that was not answered concerning the convention center on
Texas Avenue. The reponse was that the team did not spend
its time thinking about specific uses for Texas Avenue
because one specific use will not turn it around. Ms.
Shepherd interjected that she thought that was the entire
purpose of the study. Mr. Arnold responded that the work is
1/3 complete. Mr. Powell said that what the team is talking
about is a process to redevelop Texas Avenue.
Rocky Rodriguez inquired what will happen to the
property owners along Texas Avenue during this 20 years for
redevelopment. Mr. Powell responded that he would think
that the property owners would be pleased with this idea
because this is a vehicle to encourage and aid in the economic
redevelopment of the area.
Mr. Rodriguez inquired if that would not in essence
eliminate the property owners. He no longer has control
over what the front of his building will look like.
60305-11
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
Mr. Powell said that that was not correct. In
fact, he felt that that would not even be legal in this
country.
Mr. Rodriguez pointed out that he thought that is what
Mr. Powell had said about 20 minutes earlier. You would not
have individuals saying that they were going to do this and
such, but there would be a unified theme throughout.
Mr. Arnold said that perhaps everyone was getting
tangled up with the wording "unified theme." To make an
area successful, he felt that some visual exterior consis-
tency is probably a good idea. He felt that Mr. Rodriguez
would agree with that. Obviously, the powers of the group
will need to be very careful not to step on the rights of
the individual. No one would advocate a group of people
telling others exactly what to do with their stores, but at
the same time some consistency is necessary.
Mr. Rodriguez said that that sounds reasonable, but his
question concerning what will happen to the individual
landowner in the next 20 years was not answered.
Councilman Embry responded that what would happen to
any property owner there is that the owner would continue to
have the right to do what he or she wished to do with their
property. He did not see this development, if it continues
to move, as limiting. He felt that it would benefit the
owners, and in the meantime, they have the right to do what -
every they would like to do within city regulations with the
property.
Mr. Arnold added that what downtown Baytown needs is a
unified goal to accomplish economic viability and what Mr.
Rodriguez is doing is an important part of that. People like
Mr. Rodriguez who stay and try to keep it going are going
to benefit from this effort. Therefore, he suggested that
all this has is an up side. There is no down side. One of
the things that the team has envisioned doing which has
historically been very helpful with these type of redevelop-
ment organizations is that they afford the individual
businessman the opportunity to come in and talk to people
like Mr. Powell who plan millions of square feet every year
and people who are involved in development like Mr. Arnold.
There is no down side.
Councilman Embry encouraged Mr. Rodriguez to continue
with his plans.
Mr. Rodriguez inquired if this is one-third of the con-
tract. Mr. Arnold responded in the affirmative. Mr. Rodri-
guez then pointed to the fact that the contract stipulates
that the entire contract is to be completed in 4 to 8 months.
The contract is going into the seventh month; therefore, will
the study be completed on time.
Mr. Arnold responded that the timing has not been dis-
cussed, but he would say that that deadline would probably
not be met. What happened is that the problem was a great
deal more complicated than originally anticipated.
60305-12
Minutes of the Special Meeting - April 5, 1986
Mr. Rodriguez inquired if this would then invalidate
the contract.
The city attorney responded that if council elected to
step into the second phase of the contract, then he felt that
Mr. Arnold would want to amend the timing phase of the contract,
and that would be between Mr. Arnold and council.
Mr. Rios inquired what is included in the three phases.
Mr. Arnold responded that Phase I is the study area with
Arnold Development coming in and trying to decide what was
going on; what was causing the problem. Phase II would entail
putting in place the redevelopment corporation. Compiling
a comprehensive land use plan and dealing with legislation
required by city council to put the redevelopment corporation
in place.
Mayor Hutto interjected here that it is fair to say
that council may not elect to proceed with Phases II or III.
Mr. Rios said that proceeding with Phase II would mean
accepting that this is what we are going to do.
Councilman Embry responded that it would be on a very
very conceptual kind of basis. He urged those present to
remember what was said at the beginning that this is very
preliminary. He pointed out that what was posted in the council
chamber is not a definitive statement of what will be in
existence 20 years from now.
Joe Powell responded that obviously this is the case.
One of the decisions that need to be made is do you like
the idea of a community redevelopment corporation? If you
do, is this jurisdictional boundary the one you want to do?
Allen Cannon pointed out that in the original agree-
ment, the cost was an equal 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3, but since the
study area has been expanded, then he would assume that
the cost would escalate or would the original figure be
honored?
Mr. Powell responded that he did not see a problem
with that figure, but in all honesty this is a different
idea than what was considered when they first contemplated
the contract. If city council agrees that they would like
to entertain the idea of going to the next phase, then
the contractor would want to sit down and delineate the
area, the time required, and the cost. He emphasized that
if Mr. Cannon was saying that maybe this represents a
little different change of direction, and maybe we want
to rethink what we are doing, he thinks that is right.
Mr. Cannon interjected cost wise also.
Mr. Arnold said that if city council says that they
want us to do Phase II and Phase III, then we are going to
live by our agreement. The hardest part of the study has
been completed.
60305-13
Minutes of the Special Meeting - March 5, 1986
Jean Shepherd pointed out that the agenda stipulates
to receive the report and that Councilman Embry had asked
to have input from the citizens. Usually, when you are
talking about demographics, marketing and schematics, this
is a published report presented to council. She inquired
if there was such a report for the public to read and study
so that they can give the input at the next council meeting?
Mayor Hutto responded that the report will be available
for purchase through the city clerk's office.
Ms. Blakely suggested renaming and voting again on the
project because the area encompasses more than Texas Avenue.
Perhaps the study should be Feasibility Study of Developing
the Water front. Galveston started 15 years ago and has
made improvements which attract many visitors to the city.
This could be a plus for Baytown so that people who work
here would want to live here rather than Clear Lake. By
renaming the project, this may have a calming effect.
Councilman Embry concurred that that is an excellent
idea. Galveston has added well over a billion dollars
worth of development of various kinds to a city which was
declining. That process started about 15 years ago, and
this has been a real boon to that community.
Mayor Hutto added that the present economic development
manager in Galveston said that when he proposed this economic
redevelopment that the citizens of Galveston were hostile.
Now, however, they can't do enough for him.
Mr. Slay suggested that development of the water
resources may bring in the sailboat enthusiast and trades
that go along with that.
Mr. Powell responded that any kind of human activity
would be generally desirable such as boating, recreation,
etc.
Councilman Philips moved that council receive the
Arnold Development Company report; Councilman Embry seconded
the motion. The vote follows:
Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons,
Embry and Fuller
Mayor Hutto
Nays: None
Adjourn
There being no further business to be transacted, the
meeting was adjourned.
Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk