No preview available
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