Loading...
14 Council Minutes (05/30/02)MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL May 30, 2002 The City Council ofthe City ofParis met in special session, Thursday, May 30, 2002, at 6:00 P. M., Paris Junior College, 2400 Clarksville Street, Room 1016, Paris, Texas. Mayor Michael J. Pfiester called the meeting to order with the following Council Members present: John F. Bell, Richard Manning, Joe E. McCarthy, Willie J. Weekly, Sr., Francine Neeley, and Benny Plata. Also, present were City Manager Michael E. Malone, City Attorney Larry W. Schenk, and City Clerk Mattie Cunningham. Mayor Pfiester announced that the first item on the agenda was a presentation by Code Inspection staff regarding substandard buildings. Millie McDonald, Code Inspector, came forward presenting a visual presentation of dilapidated structures in different locations throughout the city. Mike Alexander, Code Inspector, was responsible for preparing the list. Mayor Pfiester declared the public hearing open to receive citizen input regarding an amendment to the Code of Ordinances of the City of Paris repealing Article III of Chapter 7, Section 7-46 through 7-53 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Paris, entitled "Hazardous Buildings"; adopting a new Article III, Section 7-46 through 17-55 entitled "Substandard and Dangerous Buildings"; adopting Article IV of Chapter 7, Sections 7-81 through 7-89, entitled "Secured Building Permit"; and establishing a Building and Standards Commission. Mayor Pfiester invited those who wished to speak regarding this matter to come forward. Ken Kohls, 3935 Brandon Place, came forward saying that Mr. Malone has stated that these facilities cannot be addressed with the current regulations. Mr. Kohls said these are dilapidated building and wanted to know why they could not be addressed. City Attorney Schenk advised that the ordinance in use was adopted more than thirty years ago and is not consistent with state law. The City Attorney stated that the purpose of this proposed ordinance was City Council Meetrng May 30, 2002 Page 2 update the present ordinance to conform with current state law and pointed out that the first part of Article III in the proposed ordinance is based almost exclusively on state law. Vickie Hime, 308 W. Washington, appeared before Council, passing out a handout entitled "INTER CITY ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD RENEWAL PLAN" containing suggestions that she would like to see implemented in the historic areas of Paris. Ms. Hime read this plan to the City Council and it is attached to these minutes as Exhibit A. She stated that she supported restoration of the historical homes in Paris. Ms. Hime told the City Council that the City of Paris is a diamond in the rough and these historical homes and buildings could be turned into a great asset to the community. Charlene Mulligan, 226 W. Washington, appeared before the Council stating that asbestos on the outside of houses is a big problem, and that there are all types of federal laws to abate this problem. Ms. Mulligan discussed this process with the City Council. Another thing that Ms. Mulligan was concerned about was the Gibraltar HoteL Ms. Mulligan stated that the old hotel had no sentimental value to her, but felt sure that it did to others. She said this building is just sitting out there like a skeleton and it is very ugly. Phillip Cecil, 3120 Clark Lane, appeared before Council stating that he had addressed the Council in the past about dilapidated property and said that all were concerned about a well-kept community. He believed the City Council should take steps to expedite the process of ridding the city of dilapidated structures. He thought the concept of the ordinance was good but that it might need some degree of tweaking. Susie Harper, 545 Johnson Woods Drive, appeared before Council and distributed a handout containing a copy of the state statute on which the proposed ordinance is based. The materials she presented also contained an article talking about what Paris has and what an asset our downtown area is. Ms. Harper said she was here to support the efforts of the City of Paris to clean City Council Meetrng May 30, 2002 Page 3 up hazardous and unhealthy houses. Ms. Harper commended the city for continuing the beautification of Paris that began with Mayor Charlie Neeley. She stated that Mr. Neeley fought hard and successfully to keep the Post Office as part of the city, and noted that he also wanted to preserve the old Post Office as a public building. She referred to the progress being made in Arlington as was pointed out from an article in the materials she presented. She observed that Arlington had thought they were doing a good thing when they leveled four square downtown blocks to get rid of dilapidated buildings. Ms. Harper said the state statute on which the city is basing this proposed ordinance talks about the value of historical property. It has a section devoted to the preservation of historic and substandard buildings and it talks about ways that cities can persevere these buildings. Ms. Harper pointed out that section is not included in the proposed ordinance. She said that Mr. Schenk added words on page six of the proposed ordinance, which are well meaning, but they are very unspecific. They do not spell out how a historic building out of compliance will be handled. There is no differentiation made between hazardous houses and deteriorated but very historic brick buildings in downtown Paris. Ms. Harper said she was here to ask that the highlighted section be added verbatim to the proposed ordinance. This provision requires that the city become a certified local government first, which is a process that will take approximately ninety days. Ms. Harper said she feels that it can be expedited, but it is a certification that this historical city needs. Ms. Harper also asked that two members of the Building and Standards Commission be members who demonstrated a commitment to historic preservation in Paris. The proposed composition of the Commission specifies members with backgrounds in health, fire, and safety, but none who can provide historical vision to what will be a very powerful group. Pike Burkhart, 524 South Church, appeared stating that he supports the efforts of the City of Paris to clean up these houses, but that he does not support the proposed ordinance that is being considered. Mr. Burkhart said the ordinance does not differentiate between the houses that are historic and commercial City Council Meetrng May 30, 2002 Page 4 property. Mr. Burkhart said Section 214.00 of State law gives additional authority to preserve substandard buildings with historical value. Chip Harper, 545 Johnson Woods Drive, was present telling the City Council that he and others had done extensive research on this ordinance and he was concerned because the city needs to do more investigation of what other cities are doing with this ordinance. Mr. Harper said that the two sections of the model state ordinance should be added for historical preservation. He said he had worked with Sulphur Springs, Bonham, and Clarksville who have demonstrated a commitment to historical preservation. He felt that City Council should put additional thought into this ordinance and adopt Section 214.00 of the model ordinance so the city can preserve the town and increase the tax base. He supports the removal of the houses that need it. He does not support the ordinance as it is written. Curtis Fendley, 554 Church Street, appeared and commended the City Council for considering this ordinance at this time. It may need tweaking but it is a start and the city needs to move forward. Mary Clark, 3160 Allen Street, came forward stating that it was not until today that she had any indication of specific changes that the groups represented at this meeting tonight wanted. Ms. Clark expressed support for the need to preserve the heritage of Paris. She stated her concern about taking ninety days to become a certified local government. If the city decides to postpone adopting the ordinance and pursues the certification, she hoped there would be someone pushing that effort. Ms. Clark felt that if this is not done, it can get lost very easily. It has taken a long time to get the proposed ordinance before the CounciL Ms. Clark advised that last year she appeared before the City Council and urged them to place more money in the budget for removal of dilapidated structures, and the city has been unable to spend the money for removal of the structures. Ms. Clark said she was really worried about further delay in holding up the proposed ordinance and taking as long as ninety days to become a certified local government, and enacting the additional ordinances City Council Meetrng May 30, 2002 Page 5 that have to be adopted under law and establishing a historical program. Ms. Clark said this is a good program, but the City Council needs to say yes, it is a good idea and they will support and be a part of it. Ken Kohls came forward again stating that the city needs to differentiate from the historical homes and the dilapidated homes. Mr. Kohls wanted to know if it was equitable to give the owner of a historical home two years to make repairs or remove it and give the owner of a dilapidated home only ninety days. City Attorney Schenk advised that the reason that is not in the current ordinance is because the city is not a certified city. This specific language in the state statute applies only to a municipality that has been designated as a certified city by the Texas Historical Preservation Officer provided in that Section of the U.S.Code. He said for the city to include this in the ordinance and to enforce the provisions, Paris would have to be a certified city. City Attorney Schenk said that the way he understood it his charge was to bring the City Council an ordinance that would address these houses that we are talking about at this time. He said this particular status was not an option in view of our cause because we were not currently a certified local government. He pointed out that there had been previous testimony concerning historical preservation and that is why the language was added to allow input into the Commission on historic preservation issues. At such time as the city becomes a certified local government, this provision can be added to the ordinance. He said the City Council can wait to adopt the ordinance until the City of Paris becomes a certified city. By not adopting the ordinance, the city will not be able to address the current issues of hazardous buildings. City Attorney Schenk said the answer to Mr. Kohls' question is yes regarding the way a property is treated if it is historic as opposed to a property that is not historic because State Law says it can be. He assumed that is why the prerequisite is to be able to vote these provisions is to be a certified city so that you can make the distinction on how you handle those particular properties as opposed to other properties. The City Attorney also discussed the time factor City Council Meetrng May 30, 2002 Page 6 that it would take for something to be done to a building and he read a portion of page nine of the proposed ordinance regarding the time factor. Chip Harper appeared again before the City Council stating that the City of Paris needs to become a certified city and that it would take approximately seventy-five days to complete the process. Mr. Harper said it only addresses buildings. Mr. Harper said Section 214.00 of state law does not exempt any houses, but what it does do is give a process to look at these historical buildings. He said this could be pushed through very quickly. Mr. Harper advised that he talked to the Lt. Governor and he will support this effort by the City of Paris. Mr. Harper told the City Council that this would open up opportunities for grants and other funding possibilities for the community. He pointed out that this would be an economic drive to make this community a success. Mr. Harper said that if the City Council will endorse becoming a certified city, he will put his resources and efforts to make sure that it gets done expeditiously. City Attorney advised that if the city becomes a certified city, the City Council will have to create another board called the Historic Preservation Board with whatever standards are set out in those particular Federal Laws. That Historic Preservation Board will review the issue of whether or not a building should go forward for consideration for removal under the ordinance, or whether it should be further reviewed with regard to historic preservation issues before it comes back for consideration by the Building Standards Commission. Barbara Wilson, 3110 Stacy, came forward stating that she has restored three public properties that are very historic in the city that would have been torn down. Ms. Wilson said there are three historic districts in the city. Ms. Wilson asked if it would be possible to exempt those on a short term exemption, go forward with the proposed ordinance, apply for the certified designation and then place the three historic districts back into the ordinance after receiving the City Council Meetrng May 30, 2002 Page 7 certification. Ms. Wilson said by doing this, the historic districts have been protected. Vickie Hime came forward again stating that she agreed with Ms. Wilson. Ms. Hime said ninety days is not that long to wait and that, by being certified there will be grants available for restoring the historical buildings. No one else appeared, and the public hearing was declared closed. Mayor Pfiester called for consideration of and action on an ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances of the City of Paris to repeal Article III of Chapter 7, Sections 7-46 through 7-53 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Paris, entitled "Hazardous Buildings"; adopt a new Article III, Section 7-46 through 17-56, entitled "Substandard and Dangerous Buildings"; adopt Article IV of Chapter, 7, Sections 7-81 through 7-89, entitled "Secured Building Permit"; and establish a Building and Standards Commission. City Attorney Schenk suggested going ahead and adding the language for implementing these provisions and making them effective the date that the City of Paris becomes a certified city. City Attorney Schenk said that if City Council exempts the three historical districts it would be unable to touch a house in that district that is not historical but is a real risk of danger to children and residents. Mayor Pro Tem Manning mentioned that one thing that has not been addressed is the health and safety issue. He felt that there is a need to preserve our history of our city, but not at the expense of someone's life. It was the consensus of the City Council to allow City Attorney Schenk to add Section 214.00 of state law to the proposed ordinance and bring it back to the City Council at the June 10, 2002, meeting. City Council Meetrng May 30, 2002 Page 8 After discussion, it was the consensus of the City Council that the Building and Standards Commission have seven members with one member being from each of the seven districts, if not waived by that district's Council Member, or that the slots be filled as near as practical. The City Council suggested that there be at least four alternate members and that there be at least one member that has experience in historic preservation. A motion was made by Councilman McCarthy, seconded by Councilman Weekly, to table action on the proposed ordinance and bring it back to the City Council at the regular meeting in June, 2002. The motion carried 7 ayes, 0 nays. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. MICHAEL J. PFIESTER, MAYOR ATTEST: MATTIE CUNNINGHAM, CITY CLERK