Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:03]

GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

[Transportation Infrastructure Mobility Committee Meeting on June 22, 2021.]

IT IS 5:02 PM ON JUNE 22ND, 2021.

THIS IS THE MEETING OF THE CD OF GIRL AND CITY COUNCIL, TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND MOBILITY COMMITTEE.

I AM THE CHAIR RICH ALBANY.

I HAVE WITH ME, THE COUNCIL MEMBER, ROBERT JOHN SMITH.

WE ARE AT THIS MOMENT, THE ONLY TWO MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE, UH, WITH, UH, UH, WITH THE RECENT ELECTION.

SO WE'RE WAITING ON GETTING ANOTHER MEMBER, OTHER LUMINARIES.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.

FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS GOING TO BE APPROVAL OF THE MAY 18TH, 2021 MEETING MINUTES.

BUT I GUESS I SECOND THAT ALL IN FAVOR, AYE APPROVED.

UM, JOHN, I, I WHAT'S THE FIRST ITEM MAY NOT HAVE ON THE AGENDA.

I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.

I DON'T HAVE THE CURRENT AGENDA OR SOMEONE HAS HASN'T MR. MAKER DISCUSSION REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS FOR DRAINAGE PROJECTS.

UH, SO THIS IS AN ITEM THAT I BROUGHT FORWARD.

I'VE HAD A BUNCH OF CONSTITUENT REQUESTS ASKING ABOUT WHEN, UM, SATURN SPRINGS AND SOME OF THESE OTHER DRAINAGE PROJECTS GET GOING.

IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDING SIDEWALKS INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS.

AND I THINK THAT BEGS A LARGER QUESTION OF, OF WHAT OUR POLICY SHOULD BE AS WE DO THESE STREET RECONSTRUCTIONS AND OTHER MAJOR PROJECTS IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS.

AND, UM, I THINK PROBABLY THE EASIEST PATH GOING FORWARD WOULD BE TO ACTUALLY HAVE A POLICY ABOUT THAT.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF HAS ANY THOUGHTS OR OPINIONS ON THAT.

UM, OBVIOUSLY WOULD INCREASE THE SCOPE OF SOME OF THESE PROJECTS, UH, FOR SOME OF THEM WOULD BE SOMEWHAT SIGNIFICANT.

UM, IN, IN THERE'D BE, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE SOME DEGREE OF NEIGHBORHOOD SLOT, SOME NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF HAS ANY INPUT ON THAT OR COMFORTABLE WITH ALSO LET YOU KNOW RICH ON, ON SOME PROJECTS THAT WE'VE DONE ON SPECIFICALLY.

I THINK IT WAS ROCK CREEK AND THOSE ONES OFF THE TOP OF A GARLAND AVENUE THERE BY THE SCENT, JUST SOUTH OF CEMETERY, WE WERE SPECIFICALLY, WE'RE GOING TO PUT SIDEWALKS IN SPECIFICALLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD DIDN'T WANT THEM.

SO WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T PUT THE MAN.

AND I KNOW THERE WAS ANOTHER LOCATION ON HAVE THEY WERE SHARING THAT THERE WERE MAILBOXES BRICK, FLOWERPOTS EVERYTHING IN THERE.

WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO TEAR ALL THOSE OUT TO PUT SIDEWALKS IN THAT WE DID WHEN WE CAN PHYSICALLY PUT A SIDEWALK IN, ON A STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT WHERE ONE DOESN'T EXIST.

WE, WE TEND TO DO IT UNLESS THERE'S NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION.

OKAY.

COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH MENTIONED HIS IPAD OVERHEATED, AND HE'LL BE REJOINING SHORTLY.

UM, THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR HAVING IT OUT ON, I GUESS, I DON'T THINK HAITIAN OUT IN THE DESERT, UM, CON CONCERNING, UH, COUNSELING CONCERNING THE, UM, UH, CIP PROJECTS, LIKE, LIKE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH, WITH RESPECT TO SATURN SPRINGS AND SOME OF THESE OTHER RESIDENTIAL LARGER DEVELOPMENT OR LARGER SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, UH, STRICTLY THE INFORMATION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE STUDIES, UM, FROM BACK, I GUESS BACK IN THE MID TWO THOUSANDS, I BELIEVE IS WHEN SOME OF THOSE STUDIES WERE CONFIRMED.

IT WAS A STRICTLY ABOUT THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE ITSELF AND WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO ACTUALLY RECTIFY THAT IT WASN'T ACTUALLY, SOME OF THEM DID INCLUDE REPAVING SOME STREETS LIKE WE DID IN PARK MONT.

UM, AND WITH THAT, WE REPLACED THE SIDEWALKS, THAT TYPE OF THING.

AND, BUT IN MOST CASES, IT'S, IT'S JUST ABOUT GETTING THE CORRECT DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE.

UH, AND BASICALLY PUTTING BACK WHAT'S THERE TO, HEY, IF WE, IF WE RIP OUT SOME SIDEWALKS, WE'D DEFINITELY REPLACE THEM.

BUT LIKE YOU SAID, IN THE CASE OF, OF SATURN SPRINGS, THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS IN A LOT OF THOSE AREAS.

SO AT THIS POINT THAT WAS NOT FACTORED IN NOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE UPDATED, UM, FINAL STUDY YET ON THAT AREA TO, TO SEE WHAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE, ARE PROPOSED TO BE.

UM, BUT WHEN WE, IT MAY INCLUDE SOME REPAVING THE STREETS AND IF IT DOES, UM, ARE WE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE DECISION THAT WE'LL HAVE TO MAKE? ARE WE GOING TO CURB AND GUTTER, OR IS THIS GOING TO BE DESIGNED TO, TO, UH, ACCOMMODATE WHAT THE STREETS ARE TODAY, WHICH IS BASICALLY AT ASPHALT WITH BAR DITCHES AND

[00:05:02]

THE INFRASTRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO BE IN PLACE TO DO THAT? I WOULD ASSUME THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE IN THERE.

OKAY.

I WOULD HOPE SO.

I MEAN, AT SOME POINT, AND I THINK FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE AS A CITY, AS WE'VE BEEN MOVING TOWARDS A DISCUSSION OF SIDEWALKS BEING, UM, MORE MOBILITY, IT'S LESS OF AN AMENITY AND MORE OF A, A MOBILITY AND AN INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, THAT, THAT I WOULD AT LEAST THINK THAT WE NEED TO START MAKING THAT A PRIORITY, THAT WE START ADDING SIDEWALKS IN AREAS THAT DON'T HAVE THEM.

AND I KNOW THAT IN A LOT OF CASES, THAT'S GOING TO ADD TO COST FOR SOME OF THESE PROJECTS.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE DOING DRAINAGE OR WHEREVER IT IS, YOU KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE DOING PROJECTS THAT INVOLVE MAJOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION OR WHATNOT, UM, THAT WE LOOK AT ADDING SIDEWALKS ON AT LEAST ONE SIDE OF THE STREET, UM, IF NOT BOTH, UM, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS.

I MEAN, MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS AN EXAMPLE, SAT IN SPRINGS.

THE STREET I LIVE ON DOES NOT HAVE SIDEWALK TO THIS PART, DITCHES PARTS OF IT, BUT THEN THERE ARE SOME HOUSES THAT DO HAVE SIDEWALKS.

AND SO IT'S KIND OF HIT OR MISS, UH, SOME OF THE INTERSECTING STREETS HAVE SIDEWALKS, SOME DON'T, UM, AND IN THE LONG TERM, I THINK IT, IT, IT PROVIDES IMPACTS, YOU KNOW, IT IMPACTS OUR MOBILITY AND OTHER THINGS.

AND I THINK AT SOME POINT MAYBE THE EASIER ANSWER IS RATHER THAN PUTTING STAFF OR CAMPBELL, EVEN COUNCIL IN THE MIDDLE IS TO ESTABLISH POLICY THAT SAYS THIS, JUST WHAT WE DO.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IT MAY BE DISRUPTIVE, BUT IN THE LONGTERM FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE FUTURE RESIDENTS AND WHATNOT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED SIDEWALKS.

IT'S NOT GARLAND, ISN'T REALLY COUNTRY ANYMORE.

HASN'T BEEN FOR A LONG TIME.

UM, THOSE, THOSE ARE GREAT POINTS AND, AND, AND YOU MIX SOME WORDS IN THERE THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT.

UM, LIKE MICHAEL SAID, IF, IF, IF A LOT OF TIMES THE FLOODING DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS JUST SOME PIPE HERE AND THERE, AND MAYBE MAKING A COVERT BIGGER, UM, THE, WITH REALLY NOT MUCH STREET RECONSTRUCTION.

AND THEN IN SOME CASES IT DOES INVOLVE STREET RECONSTRUCTION, OR IT'S THE FIX TO THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT FAR REMOVED FROM ADDING SOME SIDEWALKS.

AND IF, IF IT'S OKAY, WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT A POLICY THAT WOULD SORT OF ADDRESS ALL THAT.

AND, AND COME BACK TO THE COMMITTEE WITH SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL LOOK, WE'LL LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO INCREASE MOBILITY, RECOGNIZING THAT COST IS AN ISSUE.

AND, UH, BUT, BUT THERE IS, THERE'S A WAY TO GO FORWARD WHERE WE, WHERE WE CONSIDER BOTH OF THOSE THINGS.

AND WE REALLY WANTED TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT TODAY.

AND, UM, I THINK FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD AND STEVE PAUL AND MICHAEL FEEL FREE TO SPEAK UP, I THINK WE CAN GO BACK AND START WORKING ON A POLICY THAT WE CAN PRESENT TO YOU AT A LATER DATE THAT ADDRESSES JUST WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, FRANKLY, ALL THE, ALL THE DRAINAGE PROJECTS RIGHT NOW ARE FOCUSED ON SOLVING THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM.

SURE.

YEAH.

AND THAT, I THINK WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING, WE CAN COME UP WITH SOME WORDS THAT WE COULD CONSIDER AND ULTIMATELY INCORPORATE INTO OUR PROJECT PLANNING.

WELL, I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND JUST MAY INCLUDE ME OR NOT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, SATURDAY SPRINGS AS BEING ABOUT A $13 MILLION DRAINAGE PROJECT, UM, SO THE THOUGHT IS THAT THAT IT'LL INCLUDE SOME SRI RECONSTRUCTION.

AND THEN FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, YOU GET THAT MIX OF SOME PEOPLE LIKE THE BAR DITCHES, CAUSE IT GIVES THEM THE COUNTRY FEEL.

AND OTHER PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT THERE'S A RIVER, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF TIMES A YEAR RUNNING DOWN, YOU KNOW, RUNNING DOWN ALONG PARALLEL TO THE STREET, UM, IN THE, IN PERHAPS IN THE BETTER WAY TO FRAME, IT IS NOT SO MUCH THAT, UH, THAT EVERY DRAINAGE PROJECT NEEDS TO REPLAY SIDEWALKS, BUT THAT PROJECTS WHERE WE'RE DOING STREET RECONSTRUCTION WORD INVOLVES THE STREET RECONSTRUCTION, BECAUSE THE THOUGHT HERE IS THAT, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG ABOUT THIS.

I WOULD IMAGINE IT'S CHEAPER TO PUT IN SIDEWALKS WHEN YOU'RE ALREADY THERE DOING EVERYTHING ELSE WHEN YOU'RE ALREADY THERE TEARING UP THE STREET, REPLACING STREETS AND WHATNOT AND REGRADING AND OTHER THINGS,

[00:10:01]

UM, YOU KNOW, AND THAT WOULD BE A BETTER USE TO THE EXTENT THAT WE USE OUR NEW SIDEWALK USE.

WE TAKE FUNDING FROM THE NEW SIDEWALK BUCKET OF THE, UH, OF THE BOND PROGRAM.

WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO STRETCH IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IF WE'RE DOING IT IN PLACES THAT, UM, UH, THAT ARE ALREADY GETTING SOME KIND OF MAJOR RECONSTRUCTION.

YUP.

I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND COME BACK WITH SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE FOR EVERYBODY.

COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.

DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? ARE YOU HERE? NO.

I MEAN, YOU, YOU SUMMED IT UP.

WELL, I APPARENTLY PUTTING THE IPAD ON THE DASHBOARD WILL CAUSE IT TO OVERHEAT PRETTY QUICKLY, BUT, UH, CUT MY FEET FOR A MOMENT, BUT YEAH, YOU'RE NEVER GONNA MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY WITH THE BARGAINS QUESTION.

UH, AND WE'VE HAD NO REAL MOVEMENT ON TRYING TO SWAY POPULAR OPINION IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS AND NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

SO YEAH, LET'S JUST, UM, LET'S CREATE A POLICY POINT.

THAT MAKES SENSE IF WE'RE DOING THE STREET RECONSTRUCTION OR IF WE'RE MOVING TO UNDERGROUND, UH, YOU KNOW, WALK DRAINAGE, UH, THEN YEAH.

YEAH.

I THINK OUR DEFAULT SHOULD BE, WE WANT MORE SIDEWALK AS OPPOSED TO LAST THOUGH.

THAT'S ALL I GOT.

I MEAN, IN THE LONG RUN, THE BENEFITS OF GO AHEAD, MICHAEL, DID YOU HAVE SOME, OKAY.

UM, THE BENEFITS TO THE OVERALL, TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND INTO THE COMMUNITY WHO HAVEN'T SIDEWALKS FOR, FOR SAFETY, FOR MOBILITY, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW THEY SCORE PARKS, UH, IN THE CITY, A LOT OF IT IS HOW MUCH, UM, HOW, HOW FAR OUT, HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN GET TO YOUR PARK BY USING THE SIDEWALK BY USING, WELL, WHY DON'T YOU LET US LOOK AT IT AND PUT OUR HEADS TOGETHER AND COME BACK WITH SOMETHING AT A LATER DATE.

OKAY.

ALISA IS RUNNING THE MEETING REMOTELY FROM FLORIDA, AND WE APPRECIATE HER TAKING TIME OUT OF HER DAY, BUT SHE JUST SENT THE, THE AGENDA BY EMAIL.

THANK YOU.

YEAH.

AND THANK YOU FOR TAKING TIME OUT OF WHAT I HOPE IS YOUR VACATION, ALL OF YOU ALL ON VACATION.

I THINK THE ONLY OTHER ITEM THEN LET'S MOVE ON TO THAT.

THE ONLY OTHER ITEM THAT WE HAD, UH, THIS TIME ROUND WAS, UM, DRAIN IT.

W WE WERE GONNA DISCUSS THE DEVELOPMENT OF A VOLUNTARY BUYOUT PROGRAM.

OH, THE FLOOD-PRONE PROPERTIES PROGRAM.

OKAY.

YEAH.

MR. POLO CHECK HAS I HAD TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO UNMUTE MYSELF ONCE I SHARED MY SCREEN.

I COULDN'T UNMUTE.

UM, I GUESS, ARE YOU SAYING MY, THE PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE UP? YES, SIR.

ALL RIGHT.

VERY GOOD.

UM, WE KIND OF BRIEF SOME OF THIS AT THE LAST AGENDA OR THE LAST MEETING AND JUST KIND OF SUMMARIZING CODE A, B AND C.

AND THEN, UH, AND THEN THE, UM, COMMITTEE ACTUALLY GAVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN UPDATE TO THE COUNCIL, BUT, UH, WHEN WE GOT TO THE END OF THIS, WE HAD SOME QUESTIONS ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WANTED TO TAKE CODE D OR EXCUSE ME, CODE E AND CODE C, WHICH IS THE PONDING WATER IN THE STREET IN AND GIVE THE COUNCIL THE UPDATE.

AND WE CHOSE NOT TO AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, BUT KIND OF REHASHING THESE REAL QUICKLY AGAIN, UH, TIM COMMITTEE REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED TO THE COUNCIL, UM, INCREASING THE ALLOCATED AMOUNT OF 25,000 PER PROPERTY FOR LOCAL FLOODING REMEDIATION PROJECTS.

AND, UH, THAT WAS ALL THAT WENT THROUGH WITH FLYING COLORS.

OBVIOUSLY THERE WERE SOME AREAS THAT WILL STILL REQUIRE A LARGER SCALE, UM, REMEDIATION BOND PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE THE PARK MONT AND GARLAND HEIGHTS, FREEMAN NIGHTS, AND THOSE TYPE OF SITUATIONS.

JUST WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A FEW MINUTES AGO, UH, CODE B EROSION ISSUES TO CONTINUE THE DRAINAGE PARTICIPATION PROGRAM FOR PROPERTIES THAT QUALIFY AS IT, AS IT'S WRITTEN TODAY.

AND THEN THERE WAS, UM, THERE WILL BE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION FOR PROPERTIES THAT DO NOT QUALIFY UNDER CURRENT THAT WE'LL GET TO HERE IN A FEW MINUTES, THE CURRENT CRITERIA BY EXCEEDING 50% OF THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY, OR POSSIBLY TOO COSTLY FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER.

UM, W WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A FEW MORE MINUTES.

AGAIN, PONDING WATER IN THE ALLEY AND STREET

[00:15:01]

WAS SELF-EXPLANATORY CODY AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT HERE IN A FEW MINUTES, AND THEN, UM, CODE E THE GROUNDWATER ISSUES.

AGAIN, WE HAVE A CURRENT POLICY OF WORKING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THOSE ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND THE STREET DEPARTMENT FOR UNDERGROUND OR FOR GROUNDWATER ISSUES WITHIN CITY, RIGHT OF WAY.

WE WE'VE PERFORMED SOME OVER THE YEARS.

PLUS WE HAVE A DETAIL WHERE PROPERTY OWNERS CAN DAYLIGHT THROUGH THE CURB.

AND, UM, IF THEY, THEY HAVE GROUNDWATER ISSUES ON THEIR PROPERTY, THEY CAN, UH, TAKE THOSE OUT TOWARDS THE ROADWAY.

UM, SO WITH THAT, THAT'S JUST A BRIEF SUMMARY.

NOW, STILL TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE THINGS, A WATER IN HOUSE, THERE'S STILL AN OUTSTANDING ISSUE OF PROJECTS, IF YOU WILL, UM, THAT SOME LOCAL FLOODING AND ADDRESSES ARE STILL TOO COSTLY TO CORRECT EVEN WITH A CIP PROJECT CASE IN POINT, UH, WE HAD SENTARA DRIVE A FEW YEARS AGO, FLOODED, I BELIEVE IN 2016 OR 17.

AND THE CURRENT PROTECTION FOR THAT SUBDIVISION IS ROUGHLY A 75 YEAR STORM EVENT TO ACHIEVE PROTECTION FOR A HUNDRED YEAR STORM EVENT.

UM, FOR THE FOUR OR FIVE ADDRESSES THAT ARE, THAT ARE FLOODING IS EXTREMELY COST PROHIBITIVE.

SO THIS IS ONE ITEM, UM, THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE REALM OF, UH, OF, UH, OF AN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT LIKE PARK MUTT TO GO OUT THERE AND CREATE, UM, A VERY LARGE SCALE PROJECT FOR ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE ADDRESSES THAT FLOODED TO PROTECT THEM FROM ADDITIONAL 25 YEARS FOR THE STORM EVENT.

UM, MOVING ON TO COBY THE EROSION ISSUES OF LAW CREEK STREAMS AND CHANNELS, UH, BRIEFLY SUMMARIZING THE SPRING CREEK AND ITS TRIBUTARIES ARE PROBABLY THE MOST PROBLEMATIC AREAS IN THE CITY FOR THESE CREEK EROSION PROJECT.

A LOT OF HOUSES ARE BUILT RIGHT UP ON THE CREEK BANKS.

THEY'RE VERY STEEP, THEY'RE ALL ROCK AND WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING.

THEY'RE VERY DEEP CHANNELS THAT HAVE BEEN CARVED OUT OVER OVER MANY, MANY HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS, PROBABLY, BUT VERTICAL CREEK BANKS WATER DOESN'T TYPICALLY EXCEED THE TOP OF THE STREAM BANK.

SO IT ERODES FROM UNDERNEATH, BUT THEN THE WATER TENDS TO ERODE AND THE ROCK BANKS COLLAPSE CAUSING MORE OF A SUDDEN AND EVEN LARGER LOSSES OF PROPERTY IN CASE IN POINT IS, IS, UM, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY OWNERS DON'T QUALIFY UNDER THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THEIR HOUSE MAY BE SET BACK TOO FAR, OR IT EXCEEDS THE 50% TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY, UH, FOR THE LAND AND IMPROVEMENTS.

AND THEN ANOTHER PROBLEM THAT WE'VE HAD OVER THE YEARS IS, IS THE PROPERTIES MAY QUALIFY.

HOWEVER, THE EXPENSE OF IT IS STILL NOT AFFORDABLE BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THEY MAY BE ON A LIMITED BUDGET OR FIXED INCOME IF THEY'RE RETIRED AND THEY JUST CAN'T AFFORD TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM.

SO A COUPLE OF PROJECTS HERE RECENTLY, UM, COUNCILMAN SMITH IS OBVIOUSLY PROBABLY FAMILIAR WITH THIS ONE.

THIS IS OVER OFF OF EDGE DRIVE WHERE THERE'S AN EXISTING RETAINING WALL THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED.

I BELIEVE WE, WE DATED IT BACK TO THE FORTIES AND, UH, BEST WE CAN TELL THAT WAS PROBABLY BUILT BY TXDOT OR SOMEONE ELSE.

CAUSE THIS WAS ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THE CITY ANNEX IN THIS PROPERTY OR THIS AREA INTO THE CITY OF GARLAND.

YOU CAN SEE THAT WE HAVE PERFORMED SOME REVETMENT WITH THE RAT BAG WALLS OVER TO THE, TO THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PHOTO, UM, TO TRY TO KEEP THAT BANK FROM ERODING.

WHEN WE, WHEN WE PERFORMED, UM, I BELIEVE WE WIDENED THE CUL-DE-SAC THERE WITH THE STREET DEPARTMENT PROJECT A FEW YEARS BACK INTO TO PROTECT THAT BANK.

WE PUT IN SOME ADDITIONAL RATBAG WALLS THERE, BUT THIS IS ONE WHERE THE COST EXCEEDS 50% OF THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY TO ACTUALLY REMEDIATE THIS PROJECT.

AND IT WOULD NOT QUALIFY UNDER TODAY'S, UM, STANDARDS OR TODAY'S CRITERIA, ANOTHER PROPERTY.

UM, THIS WAS A NUMBER OF YEARS.

OKAY.

I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT YEAR OF THIS, UH, BUT IT WAS QUITE A WHILE BACK IN THE MID 2000 OR 2007, 2008, I BELIEVE WHERE THIS WAS OFF A GLEN CANYON DRIVE AGAIN, WHAT I WAS EXPLAINING TO YOU WHERE THE CREEK DOESN'T GET OUT OF THE CREEK BANKS, BUT THE EROSION OCCURS AT A LOWER LEVEL UNTIL IT ERODES UP UNDERNEATH THE ROCK.

AND THEN THE, THE ROCK JUST BASICALLY COLLAPSES AND CAUSES LARGE CHUNKS OF PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, FIVE FEET, FOUR FEET AT A TIME, UH, THAT THESE PROPERTY OWNERS LOSE AT A TIME.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THESE ARE BOTH THE SAME ADDRESS AND JUST DIFFERENT VIEWS FROM THE PHOTO OF THAT.

SO THESE, THIS IS ANOTHER PROBLEMATIC SITUATION

[00:20:01]

THAT WE HAVE WHERE THE REMEDIATION IS EITHER TOO COSTLY OR EXCEEDS THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY.

AND THEN OFF OBVIOUSLY CODE D WATER AND HOUSE DUE TO CREATE FLOODING.

CURRENTLY WE HAVE 154 PROPERTIES, CITY WIDE THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO THE CITY AS FLOODING ALONG THESE CREEK BANKS.

UM, WE ESTIMATE APPROXIMATELY 405 ADDRESSES, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN THE FLOOD PLAIN.

AND WE ESTIMATE ABOUT ANOTHER 81 COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN.

BUT, UH, TO DATE WE'VE ONLY HAD A TOTAL OF A HUNDRED AND FORTY FIFTY FOUR PROPERTY, EXCUSE ME, 154 PROPERTIES REPORTED IT AT THIS POINT, DUCK CREEK AND ITS TRIBUTARIES ARE OBVIOUSLY THE MOST PROBLEMATIC CREEKS FOR, FOR FLOODING.

MOST OF THIS AREA WAS DEVELOPED BACK IN THE FORTIES, FIFTIES, AND SIXTIES.

AND THAT WAS PRIOR TO ANY KIND OF FEMA MAPPING THAT WAS, UM, ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO SHOW THAT THESE AREAS FLOOD.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE MOST OF OUR PROPERTIES EXIST TODAY, AS FAR AS CREEK FLOODING.

UH, ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THIS, THIS WAS TAKEN, I BELIEVE IN 2015, 16, I BELIEVE IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

NO, IT WAS, IT WAS PRIOR TO THAT, IT WAS ABOUT 2008 OR NINE.

UH, THIS, THIS STREET, THIS IS OVER OFF OF VALLEY COVE DRIVE, WHICH IS JUST, JUST ADJACENT TO ABANDON ROAD.

AND A LOT OF THESE HOMES FLOODED BACK THEN THERE, I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW MANY ADDRESSES WE HAD FLOODED THERE, MUST'VE BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN HOMES IN THIS RE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION THAT, THAT HAD SOME SORT OF WATER DAMAGE IN THEIR HOMES.

AND, UH, THE ADDRESS THERE WHERE THE RED VEHICLE IS, I BELIEVE THAT HE SUSTAINED 18 INCHES OF WATER WITHIN THEIR HOME.

NOW, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE HAD MORE THAN THAT ON DUCK CREEK WHERE THE, IN MORE RECENT STORMS WHERE WE'VE SEEN UP TO SIX FEET IN SOME PEOPLE'S HOMES.

SO WITH CREEK FLOODED HOMES, IT'S, THAT'S WHAT THAT FUNDING WAS CREATED FOR THE 2019 BOND PROGRAM.

SO POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSION TOPICS THAT WE HEAR IS TO CONTINUE TO PUBLICIZE FLOOD INSURANCE IS AVAILABLE FOR ALL TYPES OF FLOODING, NOT JUST THE FLOOD PLAIN, BUT ALSO LOCALIZED FLOODING.

AND THEN ALSO TO CREATE A POLICY OR ORDINANCE FOR VOLUNTARY BUYOUT PROGRAM.

NOW, WHAT WOULD THE STAFF IS SEEKING TODAY IS FROM THE TIM COMMITTEE, IS CONCURRENCE IS CONSIDERING ELIGIBILITY FOR THE CODE, A B AND D, WHICH IS AGAIN, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT, THE, THE CODE WHERE WE HAVE TO HARD TO DO ARE TOO EXPENSIVE, UM, FOR LOCAL FLOW FLOODING REMEDIATION PROJECTS, SUCH AS THE SENTARA DRIVE, UM, ALSO CODE B, WHICH IS THE EROSION ISSUES THAT WE S THAT WE SEE WHERE IT'S, WHERE IT'S TOO COSTLY FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER AND, OR THEY DON'T QUALIFY AS IN THE EDGEBROOK PROPERTY.

AND THEN CODE D, WHICH IS THE WATER IN HOUSE, ALONG THE CREEK BANKS.

AND WE'RE, WE'RE ASKING THE TIM COMMITTEE THAT ALLOWS STAFF TO GO BACK AND WE HAVE A BELIEF SEVEN OR EIGHT DIFFERENT, UM, BUYOUT PROGRAMS THAT WE'VE, THAT WE'VE ACCUMULATED FROM HARRIS COUNTY, AUSTIN, AND A FEW OTHER CITIES THAT ALREADY HAVE SOME OF THESE POLICIES IN PLACE.

AND I BELIEVE FIVE OR SIX OF THEM ARE VOLUNTARY.

AND THEN THERE ARE A COUPLE IN THERE THAT WERE FOR A SPECIFIC AREA THAT WERE MANDATORY BUYOUT PROGRAMS. UM, WE OBVIOUSLY ARE GOING TO BE CONCENTRATING ON THE VOLUNTARY, AND THEN WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS READ THROUGH THOSE, PULL SOME INFORMATION TOGETHER AND TRY TO CREATE OUR OWN FROM THAT INFORMATION.

BUT OBVIOUSLY THE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE'D BE LOOKING AT ARE ESTABLISHING A MAXIMUM VALUE FOR CITY PARTICIPATION, ESTABLISHING MINIMUM PHYSICAL AND TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR ELIGIBILITY IN THE PROGRAM, THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, EXAMPLES, AMOUNT OF PROPERTY, DAMAGE, COST OF REPAIRS, FREQUENCY OF DAMAGE, DEPTH OF FLOODING, ET CETERA, ALL OF THESE WOULD BE CONSIDERED, UM, OBVIOUSLY PRIORITIZATION OF MULTIPLE REQUESTS.

IF YOU GET A BARRAGE OF THEM IN ONE BIG STORM EVENT, HOW DO WE HANDLE THE PRIORITIES PRIORITIZATIONS OF THE REQUESTS? WOULD IT BE DEPTH OF FLOODING IN THE HOUSE OR FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS? THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD GO BACK AND RESEARCH THESE, THESE, UM, OTHER BUYOUT PROGRAMS TO SEE HOW THEY PRIORITIZE THEM.

AND THEN ALSO QUALIFY MATT FOR MATCHING FUNDS FROM FEMA.

UM, WE'VE ALREADY RESEARCHED THIS AND THE CITY MUST HAVE AN ADOPTED ORDINANCE OR BUYOUT POLICY FOR US TO EVEN APPLY FOR MATCHING FUNDS FOR BUYOUT PROGRAM.

AND THEN, UM, OBVIOUSLY, UH, THERE'S A CREATE EVALUATION PROCESS FOR CODE B EROSION PROPERTIES.

UM, THOSE ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN THAT FROM A BUY-OUT SITUATION,

[00:25:01]

THEY HAVEN'T FLOODED, BUT THEY, THEY HAVE DAMAGE TO THE PROPERTY.

SO THERE'D BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT CONSIDERATION FOR THE CODE B EROSION PROPERTIES.

SO WITH THAT, I'VE KIND OF GONE THROUGH ALL THIS.

IS THERE SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT AND, AND DISCUSS? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING, DO YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE, YEAH, JUST, JUST A FEW COMMENTS.

UM, AND I, I UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THE BUYOUT PROGRAM, UH, MAKES A LOT OF SENSE IN SOME CASES, I GUESS, WHERE I'M CONCERNED THOUGH, IS, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THAT WE GO AND BUY A PROPERTY OUT AND IT DOESN'T, OF COURSE IT DOESN'T SOLVE THE EROSION ISSUE.

RIGHT.

WE'RE JUST BUYING OUT THE PROPERTY AND SAYING, OKAY, WHEN THEY BULLDOZE THE, THE HOME AND GET IT OUT OF THE WAY.

SO IF THE THING DOES COLLAPSE, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO, NO DAMAGE TO LIFE OR PROPERTY, BUT THEN WE STILL HAVE A COLLAPSED BANK AND WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S FURTHER GOING TO COMPROMISE OTHER CITY OR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND SO I WONDER AT WHAT POINT, WHAT POINT DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO ARMOR THAT BANK AND PROTECT EXISTING PRIVATE PROPERTY FIRST TO KEEP IT ON THE TAX ROLLS, BUT SECOND TO, TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT SURROUNDS IT.

SO I THINK ABOUT THE EDGEBROOK THING, WE'VE GOT A COL-DE-SAC THERE THAT WE BUILT THAT WE KNOW IF THAT OTHER SECTION OF THE BANK GOES, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO THREATEN THAT PARTICULAR CHUNK OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

UM, AND I DON'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR DOWN THIS RABBIT HOLE, BUT I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, ABOUT PROGRAM IS A GREAT THING TO HAVE.

WE NEED IT OBVIOUSLY FOR THE FEMA REASONS WE NEED TO GO ESTABLISH THE POLICY.

THIS IS A GOOD PATH TO GO DOWN, BUT AT WHAT POINT DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO GO DOWN THE PATH OF, YOU KNOW, EXTENDING THE STORMWATER FEE AND PUTTING IN A, UH, A BANK CONTROL AND PROTECTION TYPE PROGRAMMING AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

SO, UH, BUT THE DIRECTION WE'RE HEADED IS A GOOD DIRECTION.

I JUST THINK WE NEED TO TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER SOON.

YEAH.

UM, THANK YOU.

UH, I LOOK AT IT.

I MEAN, I, I SEE THEM AS TWO VERY SEPARATE THINGS.

UM, ONE BEING THE STRAIGHT UP FLOODING, AND I THINK WE'RE HEADING DOWN THE RIGHT PATH THERE.

UM, AND IT, AND I THINK THE GOAL REALLY IS ON THAT.

I MEAN, PART OF THAT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE.

THE CITY ENDS UP EXPENDING A LOT OF MONEY OR DID IN 2015, DEALING WITH FLOODING AND EXTRACTING PEOPLE FROM FLOODED HOUSES AND PUTTING OUR OWN FOLKS AT RISK IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCE AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

ONLY TO HAVE THOSE HOUSES GET, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE MOVE OUT, THEY COME BACK ON THEM, YOU KNOW, THE INSURANCE COMPANY BUYS THEM OUT, PUTS THEM BACK ON THE MARKET AND THEN WE REDO THE CYCLE AGAIN.

UM, AND THE DUCK CREEK FLOODING, I MEAN, FROM PEOPLE I TALKED TO IT'S LIKE EVERY FIVE TO 10 YEARS.

AND SO THAT'S THE FREQUENCY THAT'S, THAT'S PRETTY EMPTY.

I MEAN, JOHN, I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE FIRST CONVERSATIONS YOU AND I HAD WHEN I GOT ON COUNCIL.

UM, CAUSE ONE OF THE FIRST CALLS WHEN I GOT ON COUNCIL WAS A WOMAN ASKING IF WE COULD PLEASE FIX DUCK CREEK.

CAUSE IT HAD FLOODED HER HOUSE 10 TIMES IN THE 50 YEARS SHE'D LIVED THERE.

UM, BUT AT SOME POINT IT JUST MAKES MORE SENSE, PARTICULARLY IF WE CAN LEVERAGE FEDERAL DOLLARS OR THAN ASTRONAUT OR HOWEVER WORKS WITH THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM, THAT IF THEY'RE BUYING OUT A HOUSE, MAYBE, MAYBE WE BUY IT, NOT FROM THE HOMEOWNERS, BUT WE BUY IT FROM THE FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.

UM, YOU KNOW, AND THEN THAT CREATES A YEAH, THAT CREATE, THAT CREATES A PROCESSING THING KIND OF TAKES THE HOMEOWNER OUT OF IT A LITTLE BIT.

UM, BUT CERTAINLY THE FREQUENCY AND THE DEPTH OF FLOODING IS, IS A CONCERN WHEN YOU GET, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT WAS MY PREDECESSOR.

I THINK IT WAS BILLY MACK HAD LIKE EIGHT FEET OR SIX FEET OF WATER IN HIS HOUSE.

SOMETHING LIKE THAT WHEN HE DECIDED HE WAS GOING TO GET UP INTO HIS ATTIC, WHICH IS ABOUT THE WORST PLACE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO GO.

UM, BUT YOU KNOW, HE WAS UP IN HIS ATTIC AND THE 2015 FLOODS.

UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, A WAY TO TARGET THOSE HOMES TO FREE SOME KIND OF COMBINATION OF FREQUENCY AND DEPTH OF FLOODING.

UM, AND THEN EVENTUALLY WE'LL TURN THOSE INTO IN THE PARKS.

I MEAN, I ALREADY HAD A DISCUSSION WITH, WITH PARKS IS THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING HERE.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FLOODING IN THE CREEK AND YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH PARKS ABOUT, ABOUT PUTTING TRAILS ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH THE CREEK.

UM, YOU KNOW, BUT THERE WERE, THERE'D BE AREAS WHERE YOU COULD COME OUT OF THE CREEK AND HAVE A REST

[00:30:01]

AREA AND OTHER THINGS.

AND MAYBE THAT'S WHAT SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES WILL BE FOR.

I LOOKED FROM THE EROSION PERSPECTIVE.

I LOOK AT THOSE, THIS IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.

UM, YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME ON THE ONE HAND, YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE WITH RESPECT TO IMMEDIATE LIGHT SAFETY ISSUES AND HAVING TO SEND, YOU KNOW, CREWS IN TO RESCUE PEOPLE OUT OF THE HOUSES AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

UM, BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, I THINK THAT'S A MUCH LONGER TERM AND IN SOME WAYS, A MUCH BIGGER PROGRAM LOOKING AT WHAT SOME OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE TO PROTECT THESE BANKS, THESE CREEK BANKS FROM EROSION, THERE MAY NOT BE MUCH THAT YOU CAN DO OTHER THAN ARMORING, UH, THE BANK FOR SOME OF THESE AREAS WHERE IT'S JUST DOWN THERE, JUST CHEWING THROUGH THE LIMESTONE UNTIL EVERYTHING ABOVE IT COLLAPSES.

UM, BUT, BUT I FEEL IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY ELSE'S STORMWATER IS ERODING YOUR PROPERTY.

YOU KNOW, THESE CREEKS ARE NORMALLY VERY LOW AND WHEN IT RAINS, YOU'RE GETTING SOMEBODY ELSE'S STORMWATER.

SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH, WITH, WITH A SECOND PROGRAM.

AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, UH, ON DEALING WITH EROSION ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES.

UH, AND THAT MAY BE FOR SOME AREAS THAT MAY MEAN ARMORING THE BANKS AND FOR SOME AREAS IT MAY MEAN SOMETHING ELSE.

I THINK WE TALKED BEFORE.

I, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT, BUT I KNOW THAT EVERYBODY'S BEEN SUPER BUSY, BUT I THINK IT'S AUSTIN THAT HAS ABOUT SIX DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF, OF ACTION THAT THEY TAKE.

UM, WITH RESPECT TO EROSION ISSUES IN SOME OF THESE CREEKS, YOU KNOW, RANGING FROM WE'RE GOING TO COME PLANT GRASS TO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN FULLY ARMOR THE BANK.

THOSE, THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT, THAT WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT.

UM, ONE PERSPECTIVE I I'D LIKE TO THROW OUT THERE IS OF ALL THE PROPERTIES WE HAVE, MICHAEL IS LIKE ABOUT 300.

UM, THEY'RE ALL, THEY'RE ALL PRE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THEY, THOSE HOMES WOULD NOT ALLOW, THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO BE BUILT UH, TODAY.

AND SO IT'S, IT'S REALLY RETROFITTING, UM, IN TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THE OLDER PARTS OF TOWN THAT THE STUFF'S JUST WEREN'T AT THE CREEK BANKS WERE ERODING IS SO, SO THE MESSAGE I'M TRYING TO CONVEY IS WE, WE, WE NOW HAVE POLICIES IN PLACE TO HOPEFULLY ENSURE THAT WE WON'T BE IN THIS SITUATION WITH NEW PROPERTIES, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK BACK AND FIND WAYS TO OFFER RELIEF TO PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THESE, THESE PROBLEM AREAS.

AND FRANKLY, WHEN WE HAVE, WHEN WE HAVE A HUGE RAIN OR A BIG CHUNK OF LIMESTONE FALLS OFF, WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER THESE PEOPLE.

AND THAT'S THE HARD PART, UM, AS STAFF AND AS A COUNCIL.

UM, THOSE EITHER REMEMBER THE, I THINK IT WAS 2017.

WE HAD THE HUGE RAIN STORM.

THE ANSWER WAS, I'M SORRY, SIR, I'M SORRY.

MA'AM WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING WE CAN DO FOR YOUR PROPERTY.

AND AT THAT TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE RESOLVE IS WHERE LET'S FIGURE OUT SOMETHING TO DO, AND WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY MONEY.

AND SO WHEN THE MONEY WAS PUT INTO THE BOND PROGRAM, UH, THAT, THAT WAS SORT OF, THE INTENT WAS LET'S FIND A WAY TO OFFER SOMETHING.

IT MAY NOT BE PERFECT AND IT WON'T, IT WORK IN EVERY SITUATION, BUT THERE WILL AT LEAST BE A WAY OUT.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THIS STARTED OUT AS, AND I THINK AS WE GET INTO IT, UH, MR. CHAIR, WE CAN, UM, WE CAN FINE TUNE IT.

WE CAN CERTAINLY GLEAN THE BEST OF OTHER CITIES PRIORITIES OR, UH, UH, POLICIES AND WE'LL FIND THE BEST FIT FOR GARLAND.

AND, UM, WE, WE JUST NEED YOUR PERMISSION TO STEP OFF IN THAT DIRECTION AND START LOOKING FOR WHAT THAT BEST FIT IS.

YOU CERTAINLY HAVE MY SUPPORT ON THAT.

AND I THINK YOU HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER SMITHS AS WELL.

UM, YOU KNOW, BUT, BUT I'M ALSO, IF YOU'D FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE, UM, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I'M HAPPY TO TAKE BACK TO COUNCIL AND GET A LITTLE DIRECTION.

I MEAN, IF YOU FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT US TO PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO A, UM, SOME KIND OF STORM WATER EROSION TYPE FUND, AND THEN HAVE COUNCILS SAY, NO, THANKS.

UM, ON THE FLOOD-PRONE PROPERTIES, I DON'T THINK WE

[00:35:01]

NEED TO GO BACK ON THAT.

SO WE HAVE A FULL POLICY COUNCIL HAVING PUT IT INTO THE BOND PROGRAM.

I THINK COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE CONCEPT AS IT IS.

UM, I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT NEBULOUS FOR SOME FOLKS, BUT I THINK WE CAN START BRINGING THAT INTO SOME, SOME CLARITY, UM, AND START BREAKING THE IN REALLY START BREAK, GIVING YOU, AS YOU SAID, YOU'RE PUTTING IT TO A CERTAIN DEGREE.

IT'S GIVING PEOPLE SOME RELIEF, BUT IT'S ALSO BREAKING THE CYCLE OF THIS.

SO THAT, THAT WE DON'T HAVE, I MEAN, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, JOHN.

IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE WAY WE DEVELOP CITIES NOW IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN HOW IT WAS DONE 70 YEARS AGO.

WHEN A LOT OF THESE NEIGHBORS, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, ALONG GLEN BROOK, THOSE WERE ALL, YOU KNOW, THOSE, THOSE HOMES WERE ALL BUILT IN THE FIFTIES AND MAYBE SOME, MAYBE SOME IN THE SIXTIES AND THE STANDARDS WERE DIFFERENT.

AND IT'S JUST LIKE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH PARKS, MOM AT DECISION GETS MADE THAT IT'S OKAY FOR DRAINAGE TO RUN OVER THE SIDEWALKS BECAUSE THAT'S JUST HOW WE DID IT.

UM, IN 1950 OR SO, BUT THE STANDARDS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT NOW.

WE'D NEVER PUT SOME OF THIS STUFF HERE, BUT HERE IT IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT ALL THESE VERY NICE HOMES ON, ON GLENBROOK IN SOME OF THEM, SOME OF THEM FLOOD PRETTY FREQUENTLY.

WELL, WOULD YOU, UM, WOULD YOU CONSIDER LETTING STAFF COME BACK WITH JUST SOME VERY BASIC INFORMATION AND PERHAPS SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES ON CERTAIN PROPERTIES AND THEN ONCE YOU ALL REVIEW IT, THEN PERHAPS GO INTO THE COUNCIL BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET PAST, WE NEED TO GET PAST THE POINT OF JUST TALKING ABOUT IT.

WE NEED TO GET TO THE POINT OF THEY'LL HEAR SPECIFICALLY WHAT, WHAT WERE THE DIRECTION WE'RE HEADING AND THE SPECIFIC PROPERTY TYPES THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED.

OKAY.

THAT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME.

OKAY.

THAT'S THAT'S THE LAST, UH, MR. CHAIR.

I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH.

THAT'S WELL, THERE IS ONE MORE AGENDA ITEM.

WELL, I DIDN'T WANT TO, I DIDN'T WANT TO GET IN YOUR WAY WITH THAT.

WE, WE, WE ARE DONE, WE'RE DONE A LITTLE BIT EARLY.

UM, AND JOHN, I KNOW THIS IS YOU'RE GOING TO BE YOUR LAST MEETING WITH STEM COMMITTEE.

UM, AND SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK OVER THE YEARS.

I MEAN, THIS IS ALL, YOU KNOW, INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN YOUR THING.

SO, UM, APPRECIATE, I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LIFE'S WORK AND, UH, REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

I KNOW THE CITY AND THE RESIDENTS IN THE CITY ROOM.

APPRECIATE IT.

ALTHOUGH THEY MAY NOT KNOW MOST OF THEM PROBABLY HAVE NO IDEA WHO YOU ARE, BUT IT'S PROBABLY BETTER THAT WAY, THE WAY WE WANT IT.

WELL, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

THE, MY COLLEAGUES THAT ARE ON THIS CALL REALLY ARE THE ONES THAT DO ALL THE WORK.

THANK YOU TO THEM.

ALL RIGHT.

WITH THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU EVERYONE.

PARTICULARLY THOSE OF YOU DIALING IN FROM VACATION.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Speech-to-Text.