[3B. Update from the City Council and Management: Financial Position, Major Projects, Operational Issues, Upcoming Dates of Interest and Items of Community Interest.]

VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: WE WILL NOW MOVE ONTO OUR NEXT PRESENTATION ITEM, 3B UP DATE FROM CITY COUNCIL AND MANAGEMENT, FINANCIAL POSITION, MAJOR PROJECTS, OPERATIONAL ISSUES, UPCOMING DATES OF INTEREST AND ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST.

THE OFFICES WILL BE CLOSED FRONTLINE THE 22ND, THROUGH THE IT 1ST. MONDAY, DECEMBER 25TH, GARBAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED.

ALL EMERGENCY SERVICES, OF COURSE, WILL BE IN OPERATION.

FROM OUR ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, THE COMMUNITY'S SURVEY FOR THE DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PLAN IS LIVE NOW THROUGH FEBRUARY 12TH, 2024, AND PROPERTY OWNER ARE VISITORS ARE INVITED TO PROVIDE INSIGHTS ON SEVERAL TOPICS TO HELP SHAPE THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN ROWLETT. MORE INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND AT

[00:10:05]

ROWLETT.COM. IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE DIVERSITY AND EQUITY AND INCLUSION PROJECT, THE MARTIN LUTHER KING CELEBRATION LASTLY, FROM OUR LIBRARY, JOIN THE LIBRARY'S WINTER READING PROGRAM BEFORE IT ENDS ON DECEMB DECEMBER 30TH GRANT APPLICATIONS ARE BEING ACCEPTED FOR CULTURAL ARTS GRANTS FOR NON-PROFITS AND ARTS AND EDUCATION GRANTS FOR SCHOOLS. VISIT ROWLETT.COM/ART GRANT OR ROWLETT.COM TO ACCESS

INFORMATION FOR BOTH GRANTS. >>> AND NOW AN ANNOUNCEMENT FROM

MAYOR PRO TEM DEB SHINDER. >> THIS IS MACHIATTO, SHE'S OBVIOUSLY ITALIAN. SHE NEEDS A LOVING, FOREVER HOME. SHE'S HEART WORM POSITIVE BUT TREATMENT WILL BE SPONSOR WOULD BY FROST WHEN SHE'S ADOPTED FROM THE SHELTER. SHE'S A KID FRIENDLY, DOG FRIENDLY DOG. AND SHE HAS A MEDIUM ENERGY LEVEL.

WALKS WELL ON A LEASH. SHE'S A DARLING GIRL WHO IS SO LOVED BY STAFF AND THE VOLUNTEERS. SHE CAN BE SHY WITH NEW PEOPLE BUT SHE OPENS UP ONCE SHE KNOWS SHE COULD TRUST YOU, SORT OF LIKE ME. BELLY RUBS ARE A FAVORITE OF HER'S, SHE LOVES ANY KIND OF ATTENTION AND SHELL LAY IN YOUR LAP JUST SOAKING UP THE LOVE.

SO, IF YOU ARE IN NEED OF A WONDERFUL COMPANION, PLEASE, CHECK HER OUT. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MEET HER OR ANY OTHER ADON'TABLE ANIMALS, PLEASE CONTACT ANIMAL SERVICES AT 972-612-4109 OR COME TO THE SHELTER FROM 10:00 A.M. TO 5:00 P.M. TUESDAY-SATURDAY. AND I WANTED TO SAY THAT THIS IS THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING OF THE YEAR, AND THIS YEAR REALLY WENT BY QUICKLY. 2023 WAS A GREAT YEAR FOR ROWLETT. WE HAD SOME CONTROVERSIES, WE HAD SOME PLANS THAT DIDN'T QUITE WORK OUT AS PLANNED. WE HAD SOME UPS AND DOWNS. BUT, MOST OF THE CHANGES THAT WE SAW WERE POSITIVE. THEY BROUGHT US NOT ONLY A NEW CITY CITY COUNCIL WHO WAS SWORN IN TONIGHT, BUT, ALSO A NUMBER OF NEW CITY EMPLOYEES AND STAFF MEMBERS IN VERY KEY POSITIONS AND OUR CITY MANAGER HAS PUT TOGETHER A REALLY GREAT TEAM HERE. I JUST WANT TO WELCOME ALL OF THEM, AND SAY I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING THEM AND TO REPRESENTING ALL OF YOU IN 2024.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, ANY OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS? DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM WINGET?

>> MAYOR PRO TEM SHINDER THAT WAS A GREAT SEGUE THAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. AND THAT IS THAT WITH HE HAVE A NEW ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, MS. REBECCA, SO, WELCOME BACK TO THE CITY, WE'RE

[4. CITIZENS’ INPUT]

GLAD THAT YOU ARE HERE. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS? >> WE'LL NOW MOVE TO CITIZENS' INPUT. AT THIS TIME COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN FROM THE AUDIENCE ON ANY TOPIC AND NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL

DURING CITIZENS' INPUT. >> WE HAVE DAVE HALL.

>> COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE FOR THE RECORD AND YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

>>> DAVE HALL ROWLETT. THESE OPEN RECORD DOCUMENTS SHOW INFORMATION ABOUT THE REQUESTED DRIVE FROM MILLER ROAD. THEY SHOW CONFUSION AND INFORMATION WHICH WAS WITH HELD FROM ME AND COUNCIL, EXHIBIT 1, PROJECT ENGINEER FOR PHASE TWO IS CONFUSED AND CAN'T FIND CORRECT LOCATION FOR 6917 MILLER ROAD.

NEXT, ENGINEER USED THE WRONG SPEED OF 45 MILES PER HOUR.

NEXT, CONFIRMS BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, THAT'S MY INFORMATION, IT APPEARS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTRO APPLIANCE AND SHOWS THE APPEARNESS FOR THE LINE OF SIGHT. HC RECOMMENDS A CULVERT AT THE TOP OF THE HILL WHICH WAS REMOVED IN CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN ME AND OLD STAFF. EXHIBIT TWO, MORE ENGINEERING CONSULTING WORK BY HZ, MORE BILLABLE HOURS, ROWLETT ALL STAFF STATE THE MILLER ROAD IN FRONT OF 6917 WILL BE LOWERED AND WIDENED. THIS WILL MAKE THE LINE OF SIGHT LESS SAFE. WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO MAKE IT LESS SAFE THAN IT IS NOW. THE NEW BRIDGE ACROSS LAKE RAY HUBBARD SHOULD BE HIGHER NOT LOWER TO ALLOW BOAT TRAFFIC AND DALLAS POLICE TO TRAVEL VERSE UNDER THE BRIDGE. ACROSS REMEMBER EXHIBIT 3 AND 4, THESE ARE TWO

[00:15:02]

ADDITION HALL HZ LINE OF STUDY AND LINE OF SIGHT ANALYSIS DONE BY HZ, SO, NOW WE HAVE THREE BILLABLE HOUR TASKS REQUESTED BY OLD STAFF OF ROWLETT. I SUBMITTED AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST FOR THE AMOUNT THAT BILLED FOR HZ TASKS.

>> GM, WITH RESPECT TO THE COST INVOLVED, THOSE HOURS IF THEY WERE BILLED AT ALL WERE MIX D IN WITH HOURS WITH CONSTRUCTION AT THE TIME. MILLER WIDENING VOICES. THE INVOICES FROM HZ DO NOT HAVE SIGNIFICANT. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY ENGINEER, THANK YOU, THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS? OLD STAFF HAD UNLIMITED BUDGETS FOR RESIDENTS TO THROW UP ROAD BLOCKS WITH NO ACCOUNTABLE OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WASTEFUL EXPENSE OF THE TAX DOLLARS. OLD STAFF NEEDED TO DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

AS A RETIRED CPA, CMA AND WITH MANY OTHER CHARACTERS AFTER MY SIGNATURE, IN MY OPINION YOU HAVE AN INTERIOR INTERNAL CONTROL ACCESS WHICH NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: THANK YOU. NEXT COMMENT?

>> YES. ARJES TRAVERI AND HE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT 5E.

>> HELLO, I'M ARJES TRAVERI. I DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THIS BUILDING UNTIL THIS MORNING SO I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO PUT UP THE PHOTOGRAPHS BUT PROBABLY GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY, I CAN SHOW YOU THE PHOTOGRAPHS. THERE IS A DISCHARGE OF THE WHAT WOULD YOU CALL IT, THE RAIN WATER THAT DRAINS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT.

THE DEVELOPMENT HAS GOTTEN TWO HALVES, ONE HALF THAT SLOPES ON THE OTHER SIDE AND THE OTHER HALF OF THE DEVELOPMENT SLOPES TOWARD HUBBARD SIDE. ALL OF THAT RAIN WATER WAS INITIALLY LEFT ON THE SURFACE AND IT ERODED A WHOLE BUNCH OF LAND, ESPECIALLY RIGHT BY THE INTAKE AREA AND THE LAKE. AND THIS WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE CITY AND THE ENGINEERS WOULD COME THERE, AND, I WAS OFTEN TOLD THAT SOME SOLUTION WOULD BE FOUND. NOW, I'M INFORMED THAT THE WATER THAT WAS DISCHARGED ON THE SURFACE IS GOING TO BE TIED I FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY TO THE TAKE AREAS TO A DISCHARGE THAT LEAS TO THE LAKE. ABOUT A YEAR BACK, THE COUNCIL MET AND DECIDED THAT THE CONVERSATION WAS THAT THERE WOULD BE RAIN WATER WHICH ROSE FROM THE OTHER PROPERTY. OR THE STORM WATER WOULD END UP INTO HUBBARD SITE.

AND THAT IS WHY THE ROAD WHERE SUNRISE IS WAS NOT CONNECTED WITH THE STORM WATER FROM THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. NOW, INSTEAD, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CONNECTING THE STORM WATER AT THE BACK GOING THROUGH THE DECK AREAS INTO THE OUTLET TO THE LAKE.

SO, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT IF AT ALL, THE COUNCIL CAN GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE PLANS ALL OVER AGAIN AND ENSURE THAT THE STORM WATER IS DIRECTLY DISCHARGED INTO THE LAKE PUTTING UP A HEAD OR A SEA WALL OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD BOTH PREVENT EROSION AT THAT POINT AND AT THE SAME TIME NOT LINK THE WATER FROM THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, THE STORM WATER INTO THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

THAT WOULD REALLY BE GOOD. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ARE YOU THE

APPLICANT FOR 5E? >> I'M THE ONE WHO IS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN THERE.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: UNDERSTOOD. >> AND THE WAY THE EROSION IS COMING IN IS MEANS PROBABLY I CAN E-MAIL YOU THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE LAND. THE LAND IS TOTALLY CAVING IN AND SLOWLY THERE'LL BE NO TAKE AREA LEFT THAT LEAVES BACK IF THE EROSION CONTINUES AND IF THE STORM WATER IS ALLOWED TO GO DIRECTLY OR OTHERWISE. THE BETTER OPTION WOULD BE TO POSSIBLY PUT A HEAD INTO THE LAKE AND RELEASE THE STORM WATER STRAIGHT INTO THE LAKE. I KNOW THAT I'VE NOT GOTTEN THE PHOTOGRAPHS TO YOU, BUT, I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE THEM E-MAILED TO WHOEVER WOULD, TO THE ENTIRE COUNCIL IF THERE IS SOME WAY TO E-MAIL PHOTOGRAPHS.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: CITY COUNCIL@ROWLETT.COM.

>> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> THERE'S NO ONE ELSE. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: NO ONE ELSE?

>> WE DID NOT HAVE ANY ONLINE PUBLIC INPUT.

[5. CONSENT AGENDA]

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: OKAY. SO NO ONLINE CITIZEN'S INPUT.

>>> ALL RIGHT, THE NEXT ITEM IS CONSENT AGENDA. THE FOLLOWING MAYBE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION, A CITY COUNCILMEMBER MAY ASK AN

[00:20:07]

AGENDA ITEM. ITEM 5 E AND F HAVE BEEN PULLED FOR CONSIDERATION. ANY OTHER PERSON WANTING TO PULL AN ITEM FROM CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM 35A, CONSIDER ACTION APPROVING THE

MINUTES. >> 5B, RECEIVE THE INVESTMENT

REPORT. >> 5C, CONSIDER ACTION AMENDING THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE CITY'S TEXPOOL ACCOUNT.

>> ITEM, 5D, CONSIDER ACTION APPROVING THE PAYMENT TO THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND 5G, CONSIDER ACTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GRANT

OF AN EASEMENT TO ATMOS ENERGY. >> ALL RIGHT, CITY COUNCIL,

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> MAYOR PRO TEM SHINDER?

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS AS

READ. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS:

COUNCILMEMBER BRITTON? >> I SECOND.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT, MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM SHINDER AND SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BRITTON, CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER BOWERS AND BRITTON. ALL RIGHT. THAT ITEM PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ARE APPROVED.

>> ALL RIGHT, WE WILL NOW MOVE ONTO OUR INDIVIDUAL

[5E. Consider action approving an Escrow Agreement with Cambridge Homes.]

CONSIDERATION ITEMS, WHICH IS ITEM 5E, CONSIDER AN ACTION TO APPROVE AN ESCROW AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, TEXAS AND CAMBRIDGE LAND LAKE PARK LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,003,237 AS A FINANCIAL GUARANTY TO SECURE THE INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPREACHILYS TO SERVE THE LAKE PARK SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

>> THANK YOU, IT IS YOURS. >> THE PURPOSE IS TO CONSIDER AN ACTION TO EXECUTE AN ESCROW AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, TEXAS AND CAMBRIDGE LAND LAKE PARK, LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,323 AS A GUARANTY TO SECURE THE INSTALLATION OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE THE LAKE PARK SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. HERE IS THE LOCATION, AS YOU COULD SEE IT'S SOUTH OF MILLER, EAST OF GEORGE BUSH, ADJACENT TO THE HARBOR SIDE NEIGHBORHOODS. THIS IS PART OF THE SIGNATURE GATEWAY CAMBRIDGE HOMES IS DEVELOPING THIS PROJECT. IT IS A 35-ACRE PROJECT WITH 142 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS. AND, AGAIN, EAST OF GEORGE BUSH AND SOUTH OF MILLER ROAD. BRIEF TIMELINE OF THE CONSTRUCTION, UP TO THIS POINT IN JUNE, CAMBRIDGE HOMES RECEIVED A CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. IN JULY THEY BEGAN EARTH WORK.

AND IN AUGUST, THEY BEGAN INSTALLING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH WERE COMPLETE BY DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR THEY BEGAN THE PAVING AND THAT PAVING WAS COMPLETED IN MAY AND IN NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR, JUST LAST MONTH THEY CALLED FOR A FINAL INSPECTION WITH ENGINEERING, PUBLIC WORKS AND PLANNING. AND THEY PUNCH LIST IS COMPLETED AS OF DECEMBER 15TH. SO, CAMBRIDGE HAS COMPLETED ALL THE ON-SITE INFRASTRUCTURE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE PIECE OF IMPROVEMENT WHICH IS A STORM DRAIN THAT WILL COLLECT STORM WATER FROM A PORTION OF THE FACILITY OF THE PROJECT AND OUT FALL THROUGH THE INTAKE AREA, EXTENDING IT INTO THE TAKE AREA AND TURNING NORTH AND CONNECTING IT TO AN EXISTING CITY STORM PIPE. CAMBRIDGE HOMES IS REQUESTING AN ESCROW AGREEMENT TO DEPOSIT FUNDS IN ESCROW AS A FINANCIAL GUARANTY TO SECURE THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE HERE IS AN IMAGE OF THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE IS IN YELLOW, AND THE EXISTING CITY INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN RED. SO, THAT ESCROW FUND AS A GUARANTY WILL BE GOVERNED BY AN AGREEMENT WHICH ALLOWS A

[00:25:03]

FINAL PLAT TO BE RECORDED. THAT PLAT WAS APPROVED BY PLANNING AND ZONING AT THE DECEMBER MEETING. IT HAS NOT YET BEEN RECORDED. THE VALUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION IS $72,000 PLUS, AND, THE CODE REQUIRES A 15% CONTINGENCY. SO, THE ESCROW FOUND WILL BE $83,323 AND THE AGREEMENT WILL ALLOW FOR 270 DAYS. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS ARE THAT THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT HAVE ANY FINANCIAL OR BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS, THE DEVELOPER WILL DEPOSIT 115% OF THE ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST AND WHEN THE DEVELOPER DOES COMPLETE THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE CITY CAN REFUND THOSE ESCROWED FUNDS IF THE DEVELOPER DOES NOT COMPLETE THE IMPROVEMENTS, THEN, THE CITY WILL USE THE ESCROWED FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. AND THE AMOUNT OF THAT ESCROW IS BASED ON CONTRACTOR QUOTES ON THE ACTUAL WORK. SO, RECOMMENDED SAX IS TO MOVE TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, TEXAS AND CAMBRIDGE LAND LAKE HOMES LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,323 AS A FINANCIAL GUARANTY TO SECURE THE INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE THE LAKE PARK SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. WITH THAT I'LL

ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: DEPUTY PRO

TEM WINGET? >> THANK YOU, I REQUESTED THIS ITEM TO BE PULLED BECAUSE I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE LOGISTICS AND THE REASONING BEHIND THIS PARTICULAR ESCROW AGREEMENT.

NUMBER ONE, I HAVE A QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THE STAFF REPORT VERSUS WHAT THE ESCROW AGREEMENT SAYS. THE STAFF REPORTS SEEM TOSS INDICATE THERE'S 180 DAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO COMPLETE THE, UM, IMPROVEMENTS, BUT, THE ESCROW AGREEMENT SHOWS 270 DAYS.

>> I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, IT SHOULD BE 270 DAYS, THAT'S WHAT

WE PUT INTO THE AGREEMENT. >> SO, THEY HAVE NINE MONTHS,

EFFECTIVELY TO COMPLETE THAT? >> YES.

>> ASIDE FROM THE ESCROW AGREEMENT AND THE ADDITIONAL 15%, WHAT PENALTY WILL THERE BE TO THE DEVELOPER FOR NOT COMPLETING THAT WORK, OR, IS IT JUST THE COST OF THE ESCROW AND

THAT'S IT? >> I DOM BELIEVE THAT THE AGREEMENT DOES CALL FOR COS TO BE HELD UNTIL WE ACCEPT THE

INFRASTRUCTURE. >> THAT IS REALLY A QUESTION

FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. >> THE AGREEMENT ITSELF CAN'T IMPOSE PENALTIES. THE INTENT BEHIND THE ESCROW IS TO ENSURE THE COMPLETION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, IF IT FAILS TO COMPLETED WE'LL HAVE THE CASH TO COMPLETE IT OURSELF. IF THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T COMPLETE THEN THE STANDARD REMEDIES THAT WE HAVE STILL EXIST, WE'LL SUSPEND APPLICATIONS, WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES TO PRESENT THE DEFAULT. BUT, THE INFRASTRUCTURE STILL GETS COMPLETED. WE DON'T RUN THE MARKET, THAT'S UP TO THE DEVELOPERS BUT, BY AND LARGE, WE NEED TO BE SURE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE SO WHEN THAT IS DEVELOPED. IT CAN BE SERVED BY THE RESIDENTIAL

AREA. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: AND THAT IS CONCERNING ANY OF THE LOTS? > YEAH, WE DON'T ISSUE BUILDING PERMITS OR AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION, THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS, BUT, BY AND LARGE, AS A RULE, WE DON'T ISSUE BUILDING PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION UNTIL ALL THE

INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: OKAY.

>> I'M SORRY? >> WILL YOU ADDRESS THAT?

>> YEAH, THE AGREEMENT IS FOR THE CONSTRUTION, THE PULLING OF BUILDING PERMITS AND DOING CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO THIS

INFRASTRUCTURE BEING COMPLETE. >> IT IS TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION PENDING THE COMPLETION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS FOR EVERYTHING THAT THEY WANT. ORDINARILY, YES, THE ESCROW AGREEMENTS CONTAIN LIMITATIONS ON THE AGREEMENTS ISSUED. WE'RE ALLOWING TO GET THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR AND GENERATE INCOME FOR DEVELOPING PROPERTIES. THIS ALLOWS THE DEVELOPER AND WE'VE DONE THIS DOZENS OF TIMES.

>> YES. AND THIS IS A VERY ATYPICAL IN THAT THERE IS JUST

[00:30:06]

THIS ONE PIECE OF INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH IS LEFT. AND THIS IS OFF-SITE, EVERYTHING ON-SITE IS COMPLETE.

>> WE CONSIDERED SIMILAR ARRANGEMENTS AND HAVE DONE IT FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL PROJECTS, IT MAKES SENSE TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO BEGIN THE CONSTRUCTION INSIDE PENDING THE FINAL COMPLETION OF ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE AS LONG AS WE HAVE SOME FORM OF INSURANCE WHETHER IT'S A PERFORMANCE BOND OR IDEALLY, AN ESCROW TO COMPLETE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IF THE DEVELOPER WALKS AWAY.

>> I HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE FACT THAT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO WAIT AN ADDITIONAL NINE MONTHS BEFORE COMPLETING THAT CONSTRUCTION, WHEN WE CLEARLY HAVE THE ISSUES THAT MR. SEVERI SHARED WITH US ALL. WHY WAS THIS A CHANGE ORDER. I SEE THE CHANGE ORDER REQUEST IN THE PACKET THAT WE'RE MAKING AN ADJUSTMENT TO WHAT WAS GOING TO BE ORIGINALLY DONE. WHAT CAUSED THIS CHANGE ORDER WITH THE PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT.

>> SO, IT IS THE EROSION THAT WE OBSERVED DURING OUR SITE VISITS. UM, THIS PARTICULAR OUTFALL, WHERE IT WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED, IS ALL OF THE OUTFALLS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT ARE DISCHARGED TO THEIR OWN PROPERTY ONTO THEIR PROPERTY AND THE WATER FLOWS OVER THEIR PROPERTY SOME DISTANCE AND THEN INTO THE TAKE AREA AND EVENTUALLY TO THE LAKE. THIS PARTICULAR OUTFALL IS RATHER CLOSE TO THE LAKE SHORE EVEN THOUGH IT WAS STILL ON THEIR PROPERTY, IT WAS CLOSE. AND, THE OTHER OUTFALLS DO NOT HAVE AS NEARLY AS MUCH EROSION PROBLEMS THAT THIS PARTICULAR OUTFALL DOES HAVE. SO, WHEN WE NOTICED THAT, WE DECIDED THAT IT WOULD BE BEST IF THE DISCHARGE WAS TAKEN UNDER GROUND AND PIPED INTO THE LAKE DIRECTLY RATHER THAN ALLOW IT TO FLOW OVER LAND.

>> SO, ADMITTEDLY, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT, I'M CURIOUS HOW WE COULD TAKE ALL THE WATER THAT WOULD COME FROM ALL THE ROADWAYS AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AND FUNNEL THEM TO OUTFLOW AREAS.

IS THERE CERTAIN DISCHARGE RAINS WHERE THE WATER IS FLOWING INTO

THE LAKE? >> THERE ARE CERTAIN DISCHARGE WATER SHEDS, LET'S PUT IT THAT WAY. WHEN YOU ENGINEER A SITE, ANY SITE, YOU DEVELOP A NETWORK OF STORM DRAINS AND THOSE STORM DRAINS DRAIN PARTICULAR WATER SHEDS AND YOU DESIGN FOR THAT.

THIS PARTICULAR OUTFALL DRAINS A PORTION OF THE SITE, IT'S NOT A VERY BIG PORTION, YOU COULD SEE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS VERY LIMITED AS OPPOSED TO SOME OF THE OTHER DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE FURTHER SOUTH. AND SO THAT, THAT IS ESSENTIALLY THE METHOD OF DESIGNING DRAINAGE, YES. THERE ARE SEVERAL WATER SHEDS THAT DRAIN THE SITE AND THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT HELP DO THAT.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. WITH REGARDS TO THE CHANGE REQUEST, OR THE CHANGE ORDER, WHO PERFORMED THAT PRICE ASSESSMENT? WAS THAT THE DEVELOPER'S CONTRACTOR?

>> YES. >> HAVE WE VETTED THAT NUMBER

AND IF SO, HOW? >> NOT IN ANY SENSE OF THE VETTING OTHER THAN LOOKING AT IT AND SEEING THAT IT IS REASONABLE. AND THAT THOSE ARE THE PRICES. WHEN THESE DEVELOPERS DO THIS KIND OF PROJECT THEY SUBMIT ESTIMATES OF CONSTRUCTION FOR VARIOUS REASONS NOT JUST FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS. SO, WE HAVE RECORDS OF WHAT THEY ARE CHARGING FOR DIFFERENT SIZED STORM PIPES AND THEY MATCH.

>> AND, WHAT WERE TO HAPPEN IF THE COST OF THE IMPROVEMENT EXCEEDS THE 115% WHICH IS ALLOTTED FOR THE ESCROW?

>> CAN I DEFER TO OUR ATTORNEY? >> ASSUMING, HYPOTHETICALLY, THE WORST CASE SCENARIO, THE DEVELOPER ABANDONS THE PROJECT AND IMPOSES THE BURDEN ON THE CITY TO COMPLETE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, IT'S AT OUR EXPENSE, WE CAN BILL THE DEVELOPER FOR THE BALANCE BUT THE REASON THAT WE HAVE THE EXTRA 15% OVER THE 100%, IS TO GIVE US A BUFFER, AN ASSURANCE THAT IF THEIR OPINION OR PROBABLY CAUSE WAS INCORRECT THAT WILL SUFFICIENT FUNDING TO DO IT. IN THE WORST CASE IS

[00:35:02]

CASE SCENARIO, IF IT BECOME AS REAL EXPENSIVE BUT IT IS A POSSIBLE, WE'LL BILL THE DEVELOPER AND HOPEFULLY, WE'LL SUE THEM AND COLLECT. BUT, IF IT'S MORE THAN 115%, THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO IS WHATEVER COST ABOVE THAT WILL BE ON OUR

NICKLE. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS:

COUNCILMEMBER SCHUPP? >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> JUST A QUICK QUESTION, MR. SEVARI SPOKE EARLIER AND DID SEND A LETTER TO COUNCIL. I'M NOT COMPLETELY SURE EXACTLY WHAT HE NEEDS TO ADDRESS HIS ISSUES. BUT, THIS SEEMS TO BE VERY MUCH IN PROXIMITY TO IT AND DOING THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT IN THAT AREA. DOES THIS DRAINAGE PROJECT AS IT EXISTS DOES IT ADDRESS HIS AND HIS NEIGHBORS' CONCERNS OR IS THAT A SEPARATE

ISSUE. >> THERE IS EROSION HAPPENING AT THE LAKE SHORE PROXIMATE TO THIS DISCHARGE. SO, IT DOES HELP ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. I WOULD BE WRONG TO SAY THAT IT COMPLETELY ADDRESSES THE ISSUE, EROSIONS ALONG THE LAKE SHORE IS

JUST AN PART OF IT. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: MAYOR PRO

TEM SHINDER? >> I UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT'S PRESENTED HERE IS ONLY THE APPROVAL TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO ESCROW THIS MONEY TO GUARANTY THE COMPLETION OF THIS DRAINAGE

PROJECT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES.

>> IN THAT CASE, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR DISCUSSION THAT WE APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN ESCROW AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROWLETT AND CAMBRIDGE PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,323 AS A FINANCIAL GUARANTY TO SECURE THE INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE THE LAKE PARK SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: THERE'S A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: MAYOR PRO TEM SHINDER MAKES A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND COUNCILMAN SCHUPP MAKES A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?

>> YES. >> YES.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM, I APPRECIATE YOUR MOTION, AND I WISH THAT I HAD ONE MORE QUESTION TO ASK, BECAUSE, I DO SEE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE DEVELOPER IN THE BACK, MR. ORR, AND I WAS GOING TO ASK HIM A QUESTION WHICH I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO THE DISCUSSION. AND A MOTION'S BEEN MADE, SO, ADMITTEDLY, IT'S A LITTLE LATE FOR THAT. BUT, THE QUESTION THAT I WAS GOING TO ASK AND THAT I HOPE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER IS THAT THE DATE ON THIS CHANGE ORDER IS MAY OF 2023, AND I'M REALLY QUESTIONING WHY THE DEVELOPER WOULD, IN MAY OF 2023, SEEK A CHANGE ORDER ON THE AGREEMENT AND THEN WAIT UNTIL LATER IN THE YEAR, PRESUMABLY NOVEMBER/DECEMBER BEFORE BRINGING THIS BEFORE COUNCIL. IN THAT SIX-MONTH PERIOD, IT SEEMS LIKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS COULD OR SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE AND AT THIS POINT, YOU WOULD HAVE APPROVED YOUR PNZ AND GET THE PLAT DONE. INSTEAD WE'RE IN A POSITION WHERE WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THIS, AND UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T FEEL LIKE I HAVE THE FULL STORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE. I CAN NOT VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM WITHOUT HAVING ALL OF THAT

INFORMATION. THANK YOU. >>> SO, WE CAN STILL HAVE DELIBERATION. IF THERE'S A CALL TO QUESTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE, THAT CHANGES IT. IF NOT THEN WE CAN CONTINUE IN DELIBERATION.

SO, IF THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD AND ANSWER HIS QUESTION

AND JUST COME UP TO THE MIC. >> SO, I'M CHRISTOPHER ORR AND I'M THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER. THE MAY CHANGE ORDER, IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE PRICE PER LINEAR FOOT OF THAT STORM DRAIN YOU'LL SEE ITS $223 FOR THAT FOOT. AND SO, THEY'RE PAYING FIVE TIMES MORE TO ACCOUNT FOR THE DIFFERENCE. WE'RE WAITING FOR A CITY OF DALLAS PERMIT TO DO SO WHICH ONLY COMES THROUGH

[00:40:03]

YOU GUYS AND YOUR CITY. SO, THIS PROCESS START IN MAY AND AS OF TODAY, CAMBRIDGE HAS NOT RECEIVED PERMISSION TO INSTALL THOSE FACILITIES, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD HAVE.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: UNDERSTOOD. THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION, I THINK. DID WE, STAFF, I THINK WE'RE GOOD RIGHT NOW. STAFF, DID WE RECEIVE THE APPLICATION? AND, ARE IS WHAT HE SAID TRUE, AND ARE WE GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

>> WE RECEIVED IT IN A TIMELY FASHION AND WE FIRST MADE OVERTURES TO DALLAS BACK IN MAY, JUNE, AND FOR THE MOST PART, IT'S NOT THE DESIGN AS MUCH AS THE EASEMENT, THE FORM OF THE EASEMENT LANGUAGE THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN OBJECTION TO AND WE'VE GONE AROUND A FEW TIMES. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I PUSHED A LITTLE LAST WEEK AND THIS WEEK AND GOT THEM TO AT LEAST ADMIT THAT THE DESIGN IS SATISFACTORY TO DALLAS.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: SO, CAMBRIDGE HAS THE AUTHORITY BY

DWU TO BEGIN THE WORK? >> I WOULDN'T GO THAT FAR.

THEY HAVEN'T ACTUALLY GIVEN ME THE AUTHORITY TO START WORK.

THEY HAVE TOLD ME THAT THE DESIGN IS ACCEPTABLE.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: SO, WE'RE STILL AWAITING DWU?

>> I AM. >> .

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: AND I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION EARLIER AND I JUST WANT TO ASK BEFORE I FORGET, WILL THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS DRAINAGE INCREASE THE LEVEL OF EROSION THAT IS SEEN THERE

WERE IT'S PROPOSED? >> I DO NOT EXPECT THAT TO HAPPEN. I EXPECT THE REVERSE OR THAT WE WILL MINIMIZE AND REDUCE THE CAUSE OF THAT EROSION. BUT, IT WILL STILL NEED TO BE

ADDRESSED. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: OKAY. AND,

UM, MAYOR PRO TEM SHINDER? >> YES. UM, AND I MADE THE MOTION BECAUSE I DO HAVE A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS. AND, AGAIN, I'M AWARE THAT PLANNING AND ZONING APPROVED THE FAME PLAT FOR THE PROJECT AT THEIR DECEMBER 12TH MEETING AND THAT WE AS A COUNCIL DON'T HAVE SAY IN THAT AND I'M AWARE THAT THE ISSUE BEFORE US TONIGHT IS ONLY IN REGARDS TO THE ESCROW, HAVING THE DEVELOPER PUT UP THE ESCROW FUNDS TO GUARANTY THE COMPLETION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE. BUT, LAKE PARK ABUTS THE HARBOR SIDE DIVISION WHICH IS WHERE I LIVE, AND MY NEIGHBORS AND I HAVE BEEN WATCHING THE PROGRESS ON THIS PROJECT FOR A LONG TIME, AND HOW IT WILL IMPACT THE HARBOR SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT WILL ESPECIALLY IMPACT THOSE AT THE SOUTH END OF SUNRISE DRIVE.

THIS PROJECT WAS APPROVED PRIOR TO MY ELECTION TO COUNCIL, AND PRIOR TO THE ELECTION OF MOST OF THE SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY QUESTION IS WHY GO THROUGH THE TAKE AREAS TO DO THIS WHEN IT'S A LONGER DISTANCE. AND I KNOW WHAT YOU SAID, THE STORM DRAIN CURRENTLY OUTFALLS ON TO THE PROPERTY BELOW SUNRISE DRIVE BUT ITS REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN TO THE TAKE AREA TO AVOID FOR IT TO BE INTO THE LAKE SHORE. IF EROSION IS THE ISSUE, WOULDN'T THE BETTER SOLUTION FOR THAT WOULD BE TO HAVE THEM MAKE CONSTRUCT AN EROSION WALL? ALL OF THE HOME OTHER THANES ON SUNRISE WHO ACQUIRED THE TAKE AREAS WERE REQUIRED TO PUT IN TAKE WALLS.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HISTORICALLY, I KNOW THAT WE CAN'T IMPOSE THAT AT THIS TIME, BUT, HISTORICALLY, I WANTED TO KNOW WHY THAT WAS NOT DONE IN THE INITIAL APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT IF YOU KNOW. AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF TURNOVER IN PERSONNEL, AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY'S EVEN HERE WHO WAS

INVOLVED IN THAT? >> WELL, I'VE BEEN HERE THROUGHOUT MOST OF THIS PROJECT, YES. AND, I, AT THE TIME, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT QUESTION REALLY WAS RAISED IT, WHEN I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, THIS EROSION WAS A PROBLEM BEFORE THIS PROJECT EVEN WAS CONCEIVED. UM, IT'S IN THE TAKE AREA, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT OUR CODE MAY SAY ABOUT OUR ABILITY TO REQUIRE SOMETHING

[00:45:05]

LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT THEIR PROPERTY, IT'S THE TAKE AREA AND AS FAR AS TAKING THAT PIPE THROUGH THIS EROSION ZONE, UM, WE FELT IT WAS BETTER TO AVOID THAT ALL-TOGETHER, NUMBER ONE, AND NUMBER TWO, TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF OUTFALLS THAT ARE DISCHARGING TO THE LAKE. AND, SO THAT WAS THE DECISION PROCESS

THAT WE WENT THROUGH. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. AND, IN ADDITION TO MR. ZEVARI'S COMMENTS, I HAD A NEIGHBOR WHO WROTE TO ME ABOUT THIS AS WELL. AND THE OUTFLOW PIPES THERE ARE ON BASICALLY COME OUT AT HER TAKE AREA. SO, SHE SAID THAT THERE IS A VERY STRONG FLOW NOW WITH THE AMOUNT OF RAIN WATER WHEN THERE'S A HEAVY RAIN, IS THIS PIPE GOING TO BE SUFFICIENT TO HANDLE THE ADDED RAIN WATER FROM THE LAKE PARK DEVELOPMENT?

>> ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS, IT IS SUFFICIENT.

WE LOOKED AT THE CAPACITY OF THE PIPE, AND WE LOOKED IT AT THE HYDRAULIC RATE LINE TO BE SURE THAT IT DID NOT RISE ABOVE OBJECTIONABLE LEVELS, SO, YES, IT WILL FUNCTION AS EXPECTED.

>> OKAY. AND AGAIN, I REALIZE THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE COULD DO ABOUT IT NOW. I WISH THIS HAD BEEN DONE DIFFERENTLY, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT I WISH HAD BEEN DONE DIFFERENTLY, I WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD AND IF THERE'S ANYWAY THAT WE COULD MINIMIZE THE IMPACT TO THE ZEVARI'S AND THE OTHER NEIGHBORS AS THIS IS DONE, I HOPE THAT WE WOULD DO THAT.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: COUNCILMAN WINGET?

>> JEFF, SORRY, ONE MORE QUESTION: DO WE HAVE ANY LEEWAY TO AMEND THE ESCROW AGREEMENT AS IT'S WRITTEN CURRENTLY, TO MAYBE REDUCE TO, OR MAYBE, DAVID, REDUCE TO SAY, 180 DAYS. BECAUSE, I'M READING THE AGREEMENT AND IT'S X-NUMBER OF DAYS FOLLOWING THE RECEIPT OF THE CITY OF DALLAS APPROVAL.

>> WELL, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO GET THE CITY OF DALLAS APPROVAL. YOU TACK THAT ON IN ADDITION TO THE NINE MONTHS, I'M THINKING YOU'RE PROBABLY WORST CASE SCENARIO, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A FULL YEAR. I WOULD LIKE TO TIGHTEN UP THAT TIMELINE SO THAT WE COULD SOLVE THESE ISSUES THAT ARE BEING

RAISED MORE EXPEDIENTLY. >> YOU COULD APPROVE THE CONTRACT WITH THAT CHANGE IN IT, I'M NOT SURE THAT THE DEVELOPER'S GOING IT AGREE TO IT, THOUGH. IF THEY'RE HERE AND THEY CAN SAY THAT THEY WOULD, THEN...

>> WHAT WAS THE PROPOSED CHANGE?

>> REDUCHENNE THE 270 TIME FRAME TO 180 DAYS. FROM NINE MONTHS TO SIX MONTHS. YOU COULD MAKE THE MOTION IT APPROVE THE RESOLUTION WITHOUT AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT. WE ASSUME THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL AGREE TO IT, BUT I'M NOT SURE AND IF THEY DON'T AGREE TO IT, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THIS ON THE AGENDA IN

JANUARY. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: WELL, CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT THE DEVELOPER'S AMENABLE TO THAT REQUEST? HAVE YOU HEARD THE REQUEST? YOU CAN COME UP TO THE MIC, PLEASE.

>> PETER GOMEZ, CAMBRIDGE HOMES, FRISCO U TEXAS. I'M THE LAND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER FOR CAMBRIDGE HOHOMES, SPECIFICALLY LAKE PARK I HEARD THE AMENDMENT FOR 180 DAYS. THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL. WE HAD ORIGINALLY SENT BACK RED LINES FOR THIS ATTACHMENT, THE BIGGEST AREA OF CONCERN, AS CHRISTOPHER POINTED OUT IS DALLAS COUNTY. WE WERE READY AND WILLING TO INSTALL THIS WHEN IT WAS APPROVED. TO YOUR POINT MATERIALER, JEFF, WE WERE READY IN MAY, JUNE, WE SUBMITTED MAY 23RD AND RECEIVED COMMENTS NOVEMBER 9TH, WE RETURNED COMMENTS NOVEMBER 11TH, AND THAT IS ONLY REASON THAT WE'RE HERE ASKING FOR AN ESCROW AGREEMENT, WE'RE DOING IT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.

WE HAVE SUBMITTED MODEL PERMITS. MY BIGGEST AREA OF CONCERN IS, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE 180 DAYS, WHAT HAPPENS IF DALLA

[00:50:01]

APPROVAL. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT'S GOING TO TAKE.

>> WELL, IT'S SIMPLE, THE 180 DAY OR 270 DAYTIME FRAME DOESN'T BEGIN UNTIL DALLAS' APPROVAL. IT WON'T TAKE THAT LONG, YOUR TIME FRAME DOES NOT BEGIN UNTIL DALLAS FORMERLY APPROVES IT.

>> WHAT ABOUT THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY VERBIAGE IN THE ATTACHMENT? I CAN BUILD A MODEL IN THAT TIME FRAME.

>> OTHERWISE, THE AGREEMENT SAYS WHAT IT SAYS. ASK JEFF ABOUT THAT, BUT, I THINK IF THE AGREEMENT IS APPROVED AND YOU DEPOSIT FUNDS INTO ESCROW, I BELIEVE STAFF WILL PROCESS APPLICATIONS FOR BUILDING PERMITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ESCROW AGREEMENT. THE PURPOSE IS TO DO THAT FIRST.

>> SO, IF I GET MODEL ACCEPTANCE, BUILD THE MODEL AND DALLAS COUNTY HAS NOT YET APPROVED THE TAKE AREA PERMIT, I MAY STILL PROCEED WITH THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, IS

THAT CORRECT? >> YOU COULD PROCEED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION THAT THE ESCROW AGREEMENT ALLOWS YOU TO PURSUE.

>> OKAY. >> WHATEVER THAT SAYS.

>> OKAY. >> .

[LAUGHTER] >> I'LL ASK THE OBVIOUSLY

QUESTION, WHAT IS THE TIMELINE? >> WELL, YOU WERE SUFFICIENTLY VAGUE AS AN ATTORNEY SHOULD BE. BUT, NOW I'M GETTING MORE

SPECIFIC. >> I WANT TO REMAIN VAGUE.

>> THE AGREEMENT PROVIDES FOR THE RELEASE OF THE PLAT. I DON'T SEE IT AND I'M LOOKING AT JEFF, BECAUSE, I WAS NOT ASKED TO REVIEW THIS CONTRACT BEFORE IT WAS PART OF THE AGENDA

PACKET. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: IT SAYS THAT IT MAY RELEASE BUILDING PERMITS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES FOR LOTS RECORDING THE PLAT PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT IS WHAT IT SAYS.

>> RIGHT. OKAY. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: THAT'S WHAT

IT SAYS IN THERE. >> OKAY.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: IS THAT GOOD? 180 DAYS?

>> 180 DAYS. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: THEN, IS THERE AN AGREEMENT TO AMEND THAT MOTION? MAYOR PRO TEM SHINDER?

>> (INAUDIBLE) >> I WAS PROPOSE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO MAYOR PRO TEM'S MOTION TO ADJUST THE ESCROW AGREEMENT TIMELINE TO BE 180 DAYS IN SECTION 1.4 PARAGRAPH B.

>> AND I WILL ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT, COUNCIL WITH THE UNDERSTANDING.

AND WHO MADE THE SECOND? OR, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT

AMENDMENT? >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: YES.

>> I SECOND WITH THE AMENDMENT. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: OKAY.

>> DO YOU THIRD THAT? >> IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING WHERE WE'RE AT. AND WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION, THEN, I WILL CALL THE VOTE.

>>> THANK YOU. >> YOU HAVE TO HIT THE BUTTON

AGAIN. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT,

THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >>> ALL RIGHT, MOVING ONTO OUR

[5F. Consider action amending the Fiscal Year 2023 Adopted Budget.]

NEXT ITEM FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, ITEM 5 F.

CONSIDER ACTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 ADOPTED BUDGET.

AND I THINK THIS WILL BE BRIEF, JUST TO GO OVER WHAT THE

AMENDMENT IS. >> OKAY. THE AMENDMENT PROPOSED TONIGHT IS TO THE DEBT SERVICE FUND DUE TO THE OFF CYCLE 2023 MAY BOND ELECTION ISSUANCE. OUR LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICE EXPENDITURES EXCEEDED BUDGET.

SO, THE AMENDMENT PROPOSED TONIGHT INCREASES OUR EXPENSE BUDGET BY $5,000. AND INCREASES OUR REVENUE BUDGET BY $5,000 AS WELL TO OFF SET THE INCREASED EXPENSES WITH THESE TWO INCREASES, THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT TO FUND BALANCE.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: UNDERSTOOD. COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, WITH THAT I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER BRITTON?

>> YES, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE

FISCAL YEAR 2023 ADOPTED BUDGET. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: DEPUTY MAYOR

PRO TEM WINGET? >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT, MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BRITTON, AND SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WINGET? ANY DISCUSSION? MAYOR

PRO TEM SHINDER? >> YES. I ASKED THAT THIS BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA NOT BECAUSE I HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT, BUT, BECAUSE I WANTED THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY

[00:55:03]

WHAT IT WAS, I HAD QUESTIONS FROM CITIZENS WHO WERE UNSURE OF WHETHER WE, THE CAUSE OF OUR GOING OVER BUDGET ON THIS ITEM WAS BECAUSE OF THE UNPLANNED OR AND DECEMBER ELECTIONS, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS

PERTAINED TO. SO, THAT'S IT. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, CALL THE VOTE.

[6A. Consider action to approve a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Construction Manager At Risk contract with Speed Fab-Crete Corporation and accepting the Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal in the amount of $10,632,740.00, with a contingency of $225,000.00, for construction services for the construction of the Rowlett Sapphire Bay Public Safety Facility located at 1301 Easy Street.]

>>> ALL RIGHT, THAT ITEM CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW, MOVING ONTO OUR LAST ITEM FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, ITEM 6A, CONSIDER ACTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK CONTRACT WITH SPEED FAB-CRETE CORPORATION AND ACCEPTING THE GUARANTIED MAXIMUM PRICE PROPOSAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,632,740 AND WITH THE CONTINGENCY OF $225,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROWLETT SAPPHIRE BAY PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY LOCATED AT 1301 EASY STREET.

>> IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,632,740 FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROWLETT SAPPHIRE BAY PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY LOCATED AT 1301 EASY STREET. AND THERE YOU COULD SEE THE LOCATION OF THE PUBLIC FACILITY, PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY, LOCATED IN THE SAPPHIRE BAY DISTRICT SOUTH OF I-30, AND THAT'S SAPSAPPHIRE BA IS THE ENTERTAINMENT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT SOUTH OF I-30. A LITTLE TIMELINE, THE BOND ELECTION IN MAY OF '21 VOTERS APPROVED A DESIGN FEE OF $950,000 TO DESIGN THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING IN SAPPHIRE BAY, IN JUNE OF '22 COUNCIL AWARDED THE DESIGN CONTRACT TO ICON CONSULTING GROUP. AND THAT FEE WAS $700,000. AND IF FEBRUARY OF '23, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE ISSUANCE OF INTEREST BEARING CERTIFICATING OF OBLIGATION TO FUND THE $12 MILLION WHICH WAS BUDGETED FOR CONSTRUCTION. THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION METHODING AVAILABLE AND WE HAD. WE ELECTED TO GO THAT ROUTE AGAIN. THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER IN THIS FORM OF CONTRACT ASSUMES MOST OF THE FINANCIAL RISKS. RFPS, REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS WERE PUBLISHED ON MARCH 1ST, AND MARCH 8TH. WE RECEIVED FIVE PROPOSALS AND THOSE PROPOSALS WERE EVALUATED BY A SIX MEMBER TEAM CONSISTING OF THE CHIEF, THE ASSISTANCE CHIEF, THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE ASSISTANT MANAGER.

THE EVALUATION TEAM SELECTED SPEED FAB-CRETE CORPORATION TO BE THE RISK BASED ON THEIR EXPERIENCE, AND APPROACH TO THE PROJECT, THEIR COMMITMENT TO QUALITY CONTROL AND THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE AND INNOVATIONS AND THE ASSURANCE THAT THE $12 MILLION BUDGET WAS SATISFACTORY. WE LOOKED AT THEIR FINANCIAL STABILITY AND NEGOTIATED A FEE FOR PRE-CONSTRUCTION FEE SERVICES WHICH INCLUDED MEETINGS WITH THE DESIGN TEAMS SO THAT THEY COULD PROVIDE FEEDBACK, REPORTS AND SCHEDULES. THIS HELPS TO HASH OUT THE DESIGN DETAILS TO STAY WITHIN BUDGET.

ON MAY OF '23, COUNCIL APPROVED THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES FOR A FEE OF $16,000. AND, NOW, WE'RE AT THE POINT OF CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES. THIS IS THE PART WHERE MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, AND LABOR AND OF COURSE, SUPERVISION AND MANAGEMENT ARE USED TO CONSTRUCT THE FACILITY. THE CONTRACT DOES PROVIDE FOR A GUARANTIED MAXIMUM PRICE WHICH IS THE MAXIMUM PRICE THAT THE CITY WILL PAY TO GET THE NEW FACILITY CONSTRUCTED EXCLUSIVE, OF COURSE, OF AUTHORIZED CHANGE ORDERS. THE CITY CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT-RISK CONTRACT ALSO STIPULATES THAT THE RISK OF COST OVERRUNS IS TO BE BORN BY BY SPEED FAB-CE

[01:00:07]

AND THEY MUST PROVIDE A TWO-YEAR WARRANTY. SO, SPEED FAB-CRETE, AFTER THE DESIGN WAS FINALIZED, WENT OUT AND PUBLICLY ADVERTISED, ACCORDING TO STATE LAW, ADVERTISED FOR BIDS, THEY SOLICITED AND RECEIVED THE BIDS AND EVALUATED THE BIDS AND BASED ON THAT, THEY ARE PROPOSING A GUARANTIED MAXIMUM PRICE OF THE $10,632,740. THE PROJECT ACCOUNT HAS JUST UNDER $12 MILLION AVAILABLE. THE PROPOSED AMOUNT IS $10.6 MILLION, SO, THERE'LL BE A REMAINING BALANCE OF ABOUT $1.3 MILLION IN THE ACCOUNT. AND, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT-RISK CONTRACT WITH SPEED FAB-CRETE CORPORATION AND ACCEPTING THAT PROPOSALS IN THE AMOUNT OF 10,632,000, $740 WITH A CON SIN GENTSY OF $225,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROWLETT SAPPHIRE BAY PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY LOCATE THE AT 1301.

>> HAD THERE BEEN THIS STATION, HAD THIS STATION BEEN THERE AT THAT TIME, HOW WOULD THAT HAVE CHANGED THE RESPONSE TIMES AND THE DETECTION OF THE FACT THAT THE FIRE WAS THERE?

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THE DETECTION WOULD HAVE BEEN CHANGED. THE RESPONSE TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN LESS THAN

PROBABLY THREE. >> SUBSTANTIALLY LESS?

>> YEAH. I THINK THAT THIS ILLUSTRATES THE NEED FOR US TO MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS PROJECT AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. DO YOU

RECOMMEND THAT? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> YEAH, I WOULD ADD TO THAT, STATION FIVE IS NOT JUST IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF SAPPHIRE BAY, IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S THE VERY SOUTH PART OF OUR CITY. IT DOES NOT HAVE A FIRE STATION.

REALLY AROUND IT. CLOSEST STATION IS UP ON SHRADY ROAD WHICH IS STATION TWO. THIS WILL ASSIST RESPONSE TIMES TO THE SOUTH PART OF OUR CITY AND I MEAN SALT OF MILLER ROAD. IT'S GOING TO GET BETTER PROTECTION BECAUSE OF THIS STATION'S PROXIMITY TO THEM. ADDITION IT WILL PROVIDE APPARATUS. NOT A WANT BUT A NEED FOR THIS PART OF OUR COMMUNITY. SO, I'M ENTHUSIASTIC TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT TONIGHT. COUNCILMAN

BRITTON? >> I WANT TO PUBLICLY SAY, THANK YOU TO THE CHIEF FOR ALL THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE. AND I WANT TO PUBLICLY THANK OUR SISTER CITIES WHO CAME AND ASSISTED YOU. I KNOW THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT IS TIRED AND YOU HAVE WORKED VALIANTLY AND I REALLY DO APPRECIATE IT.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> THERE'S, IS THAT A QUESTION? >> YEAH. IT'S A QUESTION. SO, FOR SPEED FAB-CRETE THAT A FIRM THAT WE'VE WORKED WITH BEFORE IN

THE CITY? >> YES, SIR. THEY BUILT FIRE

STATION NUMBER TWO. >> THAT'S A GOOD PIECE OF INFORMATION TO HAVE. THAT'S A MAJOR GREEN CHECK MARK ON THEIR

RESUME, THANK YOU. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS:

COUNCILMEMBER SCHUPP? >> YES. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FOR JEFF OR CHIEF, LOOKING AT THE CONTRACT, NOTICE TO PROCEED FOR CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES IS 450 CALENDAR DAYS. AND THE CONSTRUCTION TO PROCEED IS 450 CALENDAR DAYS.

IS THAT A REAL NUMBER? >> THAT'S ABOUT NORMAL.

>> AND IT DOESN'T SOUND, AND AS FAR AS STARTING, WHAT DO WE HAVE, I'M SURE THEY'RE STILL IN DESIGN, BUT, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT TO BREAK GROUND. WE'RE WAITING FOR ONCOR TO REMOVE A

POWER. >> THEY'RE READY TO GO.

>> LOOKING FORWARD TO THE GROUND BREAKING CEREMONY.

[01:05:02]

>> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER

QUESTIONS? >> THEN, I WILL ENTERTAIN A

MOTION. >> MAYOR PRO TEM SHINDER?

>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK CONTRACT WITH SPEED FAB CRETE CORPORATION AND ACCEPT THE GUARANTIED PRIZE PROPOSALS IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,632,740 FOR THE IT ROWLETT SAPPHIRE BAY PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY LOCATED.

>> YOUR MOTION INCLUDED WITH THE CONTINGENCY OF $225,000.

CORRECT? >> YES.

>> I'LL GLADLY SECOND THAT. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT, A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, CALL

THE VOTE. >>> AND THAT ITEM CARRIES

[7. MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REQUEST TOPICS TO BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA FOR A SUBSEQUENT MEETING. ANY DELIBERATION OR DECISION SHALL BE LIMITED TO A PROPOSAL TO PLACE TOPIC ON THE AGENDA FOR A SUBSEQUENT MEETING.]

UNANIMOUSLY, CONGRATULATIONS ALL.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT, OUR NEXT ITEM BEFORE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION IS ITEM 7, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REQUEST TOPICS TO BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA FOR A SUBSEQUENT MEETING AND ANY DELIBERATION OR CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE NOTED TO PLACE THE TOPIC FOR THE

SUBSEQUENT MEETING. COUNCIL? >> YES.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT AT THE SECOND JANUARY OR FIRST FEBRUARY WORK SESSION WE HAVE THE REVISION OF THE BOARD'S AND COMMISSIONS HANDBOOK ON THE AGENDA AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REQUEST AT ONE OF THE JANUARY MEETINGS THAT WE CONSIDER APPOINTMENT OF NEW MEMBERS TO THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE

CORPORATION BOBOARD OF DIRECTOR >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ON RECORD? >> GO AHEAD.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT, MAYOR. >> MAYOR MARGOLIS: ALL RIGHT.

THAT SHALL BE DONE. I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THE EXECUTIVE

[2. EXECUTIVE SESSION]

SESSION ITEM INTO THE RECORD AND WE'LL GO INTO THE CONVERSATION ROOM. IT IS ITEM 2 A, THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING THE WATER VIEW GOLF COURSE AND THE LEASE WITH AMERICAN GOLF CORPORATION. AND WE'LL GO INTO THE CONFERENCE ROOM. AND WE'LL

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

Dec 19, 2023 City Council Meetings

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item