HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-09-11 (Retreat) Special Meeting of the La Porte City CouncilLOUIS RIGBY
Mayor
JOHN ZEMANEK
Councilmember at Large A
JOHN BLACK
Councilmember at Large B
MIKE MOSTEIT
Councilmember District 1
CHUCK ENGELKEN
Councilmember District 2
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
DARYLLEONARD
Mayor Pro Tem
Councilmember District 3
TOMMY MOSER
Councilmember District 4
JAY MARTIN
Councilmember District 5
MIKE CLAUSEN
Councilmember District 6
Notice is hereby given of a Special Meeting of La Porte City Council to be held Saturday, April 09,
2011, at 8:30 a.m., at the La Porte Police Department in the Training Room, located at 3001 N. 23rd
Street, La Porte, Texas, regarding the items of business according to the agenda listed below. All
agenda items are subject to action. The City Council reserves the right to meet in a closed session
on any agenda item should the need arise and if applicable pursuant to authorization by Title 5,
Chapter 551, of the Texas Government Code.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION — The purpose of this meeting is to discuss and formulate City
Council and staff plans, operations, policies, and future projects, including the following:
A. Financials — Michael Dolby
B. Council Initiated Items
- a. 3rd Ambulance — Councilman Moser/Ray Nolen
b. Council Chambers Voting System — Mayor Rigbv/Melisa Boaze/Jeff Sugqs
c. Lomax Park/Arena Roof Improvements — Councilman Mosteit/Stel3hen Barr
d. Lighting Neighborhood Parks — Councilman Martin/Stephen Barr
e. Drainage Projects for FYI 1-12 — Councilman Mosteit/Tim Tietiens
f. 100 Acres next to Pasadena Convention Center — Councilman Engelken/Tim Tietjens
g. Council Travel/ Business Expenses/Technology Equipment — Mayor Rigby/Patrice
Fogarty/Jeff Suggs
C. Staff Initiated Items
a. Streaming Public Meetings — Jeff Suggs
b. Automated Solid Waste Pilot Program — Dave Mick
c. Dog Park — Stephen Barr
d. New Animal Shelter — Ken Adcox
e. Depot Parking & Bayshore Drive — Stephen Barr
E RFC Land Acquisition — Stephen Barr
g. Klein Retreat & Happy Harbor Properties — Stephen Barr/Ron Bottoms
h. Air National Guard Building — Ron Bottoms
L City Charter Review — Patrice Fogarty
3. Receive Direction from City Council on upcoming 2011-2012 Fiscal Year Budget
4. Executive Session — The City Council reserves the right to meet in a closed session on any agenda
item should the need arise and if applicable pursuant to authorization by Title 5, Chapter 551, of the
Texas Government Code.
Page 1 of 2
April 09, 2011, City Council Special Meeting Agenda
5. Reconvene into Regular Session and Consider Action, if any, on items discussed in Executive
Session.
6. Adjourn
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of La Porte City will provide for reasonable
accommodations for persons attending City Council meetings. To better serve attendees, requests should
be received 24 hours prior to the meetings. Please contact Patrice Fogarty, City Secretary, at 281.470.5019.
CERTIFICATION
I certify that a copy of the April 09, 2011, agenda of items to be considered by the City Council was posted on the City
Hall bulletin board on April 4, 2011.
Patrice Fogarty, City Secretary
certify that the attached notice and agenda of ite s to be considered by the City Council was removed by me from
the City Hall bulletin board on the a day of 12011.
Title:
c�
Page 2 of 2
April 09, 2011, City Council Special Meeting Agenda
City of La Porte
City Council Retreat
Financial Overview
Update Revenues,
Expenditures (FY 10-11)
14,000,000
13,000,000
12,000,000
11,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
7,000,000
Property Tax Growth
General Fund Current Tax Collections
10 Year History
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Certified Revised
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11
11,000,000
10,500,000
10,000,000
9,500,000
8,500,000
8,000,000
7,500,000
7,000,000
6,500,000
In -Lieu of Taxes Trends
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 Revised
2010-11
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
Sales Tax Trends
Historical Growth -10 Years
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
General
Fund
General Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
For the Fifth Month Ended February 28, 2011 with Comparative Data for the Prior Year
42% of Year Lapsed
Current Year
Actual
Percent of
Budget
Year to Date
Variance
Budget
REVENUES
Property taxes
$ 13,489,885
$ 12,834,066
$ (655,819)
95.14%
Franchise taxes
2,175,391
893,384
(1,282,007)
41.07%
Sales taxes
2,866,451
1,423,915
(1,442,536)
49.68%
Industrial payments
10,000,000
10,144,367
144,367
101.44%
Other taxes
89,321
19,750
(69,571)
22.11%
Licenses and permits
569,824
95,418
(474,406)
16.75%
Fines and forfeits
1,692,440
681,627
(1,010,813)
40.27%
Charges for services
5,234,682
1,960,972
(3,273,710)
37.46%
Intergovernmental
2,000
3,330
1,330
166.51 %
Interest
162,500
28,080
(134,420)
17.28%
Miscellaneous
42,000
6,839,008
6,797,008
16283.35%
Total revenues
36,324,494
34,923,917
(1,400,577)
96.14%
Prior Year
Actual
Percent of
Budget
Year to Date
Budget
$ 12,021,871
$13,251,842
110.23%
2,151,309
991,176
46.07%
2,892,980
1,231,973
42.58%
8,718,883
10,631,873
121.94%
86,218
18,316
21.24%
601,785
157,413
26.16%
1,523,886
717,608
47.09%
5,296,912
1,937,246
36.57%
3,500
242
6.91%
225,000
69,181
30.75%
30,000
12,622
42.07%
33,552,344
29,019,492
86.49%
General Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
For the Fifth Month Ended February 28, 2011 with Comparative Data for the Prior Year
42% of Year Lapsed
EXPENDITURES
General Government:
Administration 1
Finance
Planning & Engineering
Public Safety:
Fire and Emergency Service
Police
Public Works:
Public Works Administratic
Streets
Health and Sanitation:
Solidwaste
Culture and Recreation
Parks and Recreation
Total expenditures
Current Year Prior Year
Actual Percent of Actual Percent of
Budget Year to Date Variance Budget Budget Year to Date Budget
5,581,229
2,121,143
3,460,086
3,105,554
1,196,843
1,908,711
2,062,008
725,839
1,336,169
4,504,156
1,718,881
2,785,275
9,978,823
3,961,592
6,017,231
360,581
120,314
2,458,160
873,884
2,206,753
885,524
38.00%
2,932,692
1,123,937
38.54%
3,315,465
1,097,830
35.20%
2,046,192
768,129
38.16%
4,490,194
1,737,715
39.70%
10,052,853
3,900,520
240,267 33.37%
385,324
1,584,276 35.55%
2,542,604
1,321,229 40.13%
2,251,641
3,984,147 1,405,185 2,578,962 35.27%
34,241,411 13,009,205 21,232,206 37.99%
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
expenditures 2,083,083 21,914,712 19,831,629
134,428
872,818
892,217
38.32%
33.11%
37.54%
38.70%
38.80%
34.89%
34.33%
39.63%
5,229,025 1,828,518 34.97%
33,245,990 12,356,112 37.17%
306,354 16,663,380
1 Includes Admin, Community Investment, HR, MC, Purch, MIS, City Secr, Legal and City Council.
General Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
For the Fifth Month Ended February 28, 2011 with Comparative Data for the Prior Year
42% of Year Lapsed
Current Year Prior Year
Actual Percent of
Budget Year to Date Variance Budget
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers in 397,269 165,529 (231,740) 41.67%
Transfers out (2,576,508) (1,073,545) 1,502,963 41.67%
Total other financing sources (us (2,179,239) (908,016) 1,271,223 41.67%
Net change in fund balances (96,156) 21,006,696 21,102,852
Fund balances —beginning 12,104,489 12,104,489 -
Fund balances —ending $12,008,333 $ 33,111,185 $21,102,852
Actual Percent of
Budget Year to Date Budget
513,271 213,863 41.67%
(1,109,581) (462,325) 41.67%
(596,310) (248,462) 41.67%
(289,956) 16,414,918
13,954,029 13,954,029
$13,664,073 $ 30,368,947
General Fund Long Range Financial Plan
Assumptions - Revenues
Property tax at 97.5% collection rate
-3.00%
(FY2011-12 projecting a decrease of 3% based on information from
Harris County appraiser Fiscal years 2012-2021 percentages based on current
economic conditions and historical growth rate in the out years — 2%-4%)
Industrial Payments (In Lieu) 1.00%
(FY2011-12 decline based on the loss of revenue from lower inventory levels)
Sales tax
2.00%
Franchise Fees Range of 1.00% to 3.00%
(Vary based on type. Electrical payments based on contract)
Miscellaneous Taxes (Mixed Beverage Tax) 2.00%
Licenses and Permits 2.00%
Fines & Forfeits 2.00%
Charges for Service 2.00%
Interest Earnings 2.00%
(FY2011-12 projections based on current economic conditions
and the low overnight rate; out years projecting 2% growth)
Assumptions - Expenditures
Personal Services — average growth
Supplies
Maintenance
Capital Outlay - no growth built
Budget Requests —Merit
1.50%
3.00%
4.00%
in as requests vary from year to year
3.00%
Projected Revenues and Expenditures
Original
Amended
Projected
FY
10-11
10-11
11-12
12-13
13-14
14-15
15-16
16-17
17-18
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
Total Revenues
36,721,763
42,920,979
35,709,070
36,478,771
37,082,784
37,828,158
38,767,048
39,688,398
40,638,108
41,617,183
42,626,660
43,667,620
44,741,182
Total Expenditures
36,384,425
36,641,763
35,733,622
36,452,218
37,889,656
38 971450
39,951,887
40,757,664
41,497,173
42,332,972
43,215 623
44 136,611
45,095,524
A fund balance
337,338
6,279,216
(24,552)
26,553
(806,873)
(1,143,292)
(1,184,838)
(1,069,267)
(859,064)
(715,789)
(588,963)
(468,991)
(354,342)
46,000,000
45,000,000
44,000,000
43,000,000
42,000,000
41,000,000
40,000,000
39,000,000
38,000,000
37,000,000
36,000,000
35,000,000
34,000,000
33,000,000
32,000,000
31,000,000
30,000,000
29,000,000
O P� 4to�G
—FTotal Expenditures —4---Total Revenues
Utility Fund
Utility Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
For the Fifth Month Ended February 28, 2011 with Comparative Data for the Prior Year
42% of Year Lapsed
Op erating Revenues:
User fees
Operating expenses:
Personal services
Sup p lies
Other services and charges
Total operating expenses
Operating income
Nonoperating revenues (expenses):
Interest income
Debt Service Principal and Interest
Income before contributions and transfers
Transfers in
Transfers out
Current Year
Prior Year
Actual Percent of Actual Percent of
Budget Year to Date Variance Budget Budget Year to Date Budget
$ 8,092,600 $ 3,138,380 $(4,95
38.78% I $ 8,453,732 $ 3,210,081 37.97%
2,898,710
1,128,141
1,770,569 38.92%
242,326
104,292
138,034 43.04%
4,605,173
1,283,209
3,321,964 27.86%
7,746,209
2,515,642
5,230,567 32.48%
346,391 622,738 276,347
11,600 2,572 (9,028) 22.17%
(316,496) (291,953) 24,544 92.25%
41,495 333,357 291,862
1,006,679 419,450
1,506,308) (627,628
2,686,266 1,076,945 40.09%
247,111 93,008 37.64%
3,802,098 1,417,694 37.29%
6,735,475 2.587.647 38.42%
1,718,257 622,434
34,200 6,951 20.32%
(326,314) (296,861) 90.97%
1,426,143 332,524
(587,229) 41.67% 1,016,496 423,540 41.67%
878,680 41.67% (1,621,304) (675,543) 41.67%
Change in net assets (458,134) 125,179 583,313 821,335 80,521
Net assets- beginning of the year 31,998,172 31,998,172 - 31,370,488 31,370,488
Net assets - end of the year $ 31,540,038 $ 32,123,351 $ 583,313 $ 32,191,823 $ 31,451,009
Projected Revenues and Expenditures
Original
Amended Projected
FY 10-11
10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19
19-20
20-21
21-22
Total Revenues 7,895,250
7,914,811 8,096,226 8,338,908 8,588,870 8,846,330 9,111,514 9,384,653 9,665,985 9,955,757
10,254,222
10,561,641
10,878,281
Total Expenditures 7,885,956
7,885,956 8,321,419 8,675,727 8,877,247 9,067,906 9,001,476 9,209,557 9,426,854 9,648,923
9,877,302
10,114,466
10,358,832
fund balance 9,294
28,855 (225,193) (336,819) (288,377) (221,575) 110,038 175,096 239,131 306,834
376,920
447,175
519,450
15 00
0,000
14,000,000
13,000,000
12,000,000
11,000,000
10,000,000
40
411
9,000,000
8,000,000
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
—11- Total Expenditures -W- Total Revenues
Other Enterprise Funds
Airport Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
For the Fifth Month Ended February 28, 2011 with Comparative Data for the Prior Year
42% of Year Lapsed
Op erating Revenues:
User fees
Operating expenses:
Supplies
Other services and charges
Total operating expenses
Operating income
Nonoperating revenues (expenses):
Interest income
Income before contributions and transfers
Transfers in
Transfers out
Change in net assets
Net assets - beginning of the year
Net assets - end of the year
Current Year
Actual
Percent of
Budget
Year to Date
Variance
Budget
$ 52,782
$ 24,487
$ (28,295)
46.39%
1,600
-
1,600
0.00%
119,950
7,015
112,935
5 85%
121,550
7,015
114,535
5.77%
(68,768)
17,472
86,240
2,000
448
(1,552)
22.38%
(66,768)
17,920
84,688
-
-
-
0.00%
(518)
(216)
302
41.67%
(67,286)
17,704
84,990
3,315,661
3,315,661
-
$ 3,248,375
$ 3,333,365
$ 84,990
Prior Year
Actual Percent of
Budget Year to Date Budget
$ 49,475 $ 23,953 48.41%
- - 0%
21,850 4,588 21.00%
21,850 4,588 21.00%
27,625 19,365
2,400 1,036 43.18%
30,025 20,401
- - 0.00%
(518) (216) 41.67%
29,507 20,185
3,442,113 3,442,113
$ 3,471,620 $ 3,462,298
La Porte Area Water Authority Fund
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
For the Fifth Month Ended February 28, 2011 with Comparative Data for the Prior Year
42% of Year Lapsed
Operating Revenues:
User fees
Operating exp ens es :
Sup p lies
Other services and charges
Total op erat ing exp ens es;
Op erating income
Nonoperating revenues (expenses):
Interest income
Debt Service Billings
Debt Service Principal and Interest
Income before contributions and transfers
Transfers in
Transfers out
Change in net assets
Net assets - beginning of the year
Net assets - end of the year
Current Year
Actual Percent of
Budget Year to Date Variance Budget Bu
$1,205,511 $ 455,759 $ (749,752) 37.81%
Prior Year
Actual Percent of
Year to Date Budget
$ 1,207,571 $ 328,682 27.22%
8,700
2,545
6,155
29.26%
16,600
1,522 9.17%
969,296
295,122
674,174
30.45%
896,369
243,276 27.14%
977,996
297,667
680,328
30.44%
912,969
244,798 26.81%
$ 227,515 $ 158,092 (69,423)
13,500
3,345 (10,155)
689,488
293,040 (396,448)
689,488)
- 689,488
241,015 454,477 213,462
18) 36.706
178,091
428,259 250,168
6,624,684
6,624,684 -
$ 6,802,775
$ 7,052,943 $ 250,168
24.78%
42.50%
0.00%
294,602 83,884
20,200 8,326 41.22%
740,456 252,844 34.15%
(740,456) - 0.00%
314,802 345,054
0.00% 1 - - 0.00%
41.67% (61,576) (25,657) 41.67%
253,226 319,397
6,407,496 6,407,496
$ 6,660,722 $ 6,726,892
timates
Y
MICU licensed ambulances staffed by
}
a rained ics 24/70
...........
• $� Supervisor (Paramedic), 1st
g� ,s Wye
e ode eh icle ALS equipped,, ed, 24/7.
�
�� ea ra med is 1st
�
�Reso erne S equipped, 8a7 -5
FY 2008-09
FY 2009 10
Fr 2007-08
Fr 2008-09
Fr 2009-10
..».
1�� Z39
2447
2265
2278
9
g10
710
695
{
xWa14�
134
123
-� 2
3
4
1IN
..,.ffl� �� 48 FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10
•:� Combined time that both on duty ambulances are
+ Time covered by EMS Spur; EMS Chief & 1st Resna
r. 76 74 79
62
4 4s
FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10,
r
L ■ Requested of La Porte
e A, ,
1
Response' Criteria
. respiratory Difficulty MVC —Severe Injury
,] ry
Che Pain w/Dyspnea Trapped Victims
� a rd�ac�Arrest
Unconscious/Unknown
ttiChok�ng Multi Casualty
MA
Lift Assist
• Driver Assist
• 3rd� 4th� Sth Out Calls
ue Assist / Aiqr
FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10
362 377 341
462 415 383 r
34 124 101
w e
of .. 119 120h .
11 - .I " ® i 6 1
r.$ 8 01 0 0 0
ki1'
is -II Positions - $208,375-83
gvAl 061239m8l
re only 146 EMS calls out of 3120 (4.7%) that consisted
ills and they were responded to immediately by either,
EMS Chief and/or 1st Responders at which time
atient care was delivered in an effort to stabilize
f either a LPEMS ambulance arriving back intli Vince o,.-,.,
being summoned.
II/Unit Rate of
)nse Time of 5
nuously and aggressively stepping up their level
:ervention capabilities which may decrease
won in the future.
r
Interoffice Memorandum of
tt m
To: Mayor and Council
rex�s
From: Melisa Boaze
Date: April 9, 2011
Subject: Council Chambers Voting System
The City contacted two vendors that may be able to provide equipment and/or software for a
voting system for City Council meetings. The information provided will show a couple of options
for your consideration and direction on moving forward.
Turning Technologies does not have exactly what would meet our needs, but the research team
is evaluating how they could meet the City's needs.
International Roll -Call offers a basic system the City could utilize and is capable of expanding
future functionality. The attached quote is $15,700.
The school district has a light up/scoreboard type system in their board room that may be an
option. During the research staff was told that it's an outdated system and an LED display board
similar to that one would cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $30,000-$40,000.
All the features of the ResponseCard RF, but with an LCD screen for visual confirmation.
Streamlined components and improved speed of responses make this keypad an excellent
choice for presenters and participants
What does the RF LCD offer over competing products?
Key selling points include:
• Maintains credit card size with inclusion of LCD screen
• Screen displays remaining battery life, average 12 months
• Current channel setting is displayed as a constant reminder
• Answer is confirmed on screen in addition to green light
• Self -programming, can manually enter new ID number
• Even easier user interface with LCD screen to confirm answers
• Slight increase in price from RF, with added value of LCD screen
• Same advantages as our RF model, but with addition of LCD
Specifications
Enclosure:
• Dimensions: 3.3" L x 2.1 "W x 0.3" H.
• Weight: 1.0 oz (with batteries).
User Input:
• 12 key (1 /A - 10/J, Ch/Channel, ?)).
• Answer Key -answer transmitted automatically.
Power & Power Management:
• Powered by two coin cell CR2032 (3.OV) Lithium Batteries.
• Always in deep sleep mode - only uses power when a button is pressed.
RF Technology:
• Available Channels: Up to 82 sessions can be running at
one time in close proximity without interference.
• Fully FCC, CE and Industry Canada certified.
• Will not interfere with other technologies.
• The most reliable and scalable offering available.
Teucrhn01ningogles
bt
umf
ResponseCard'RF
Ica
•
0
G
0
411®®
®
0
0
19
O�
o
w .TurningTechnologies.com
RF Receiver
• Available Channels: Up to 82 sessions can be running at
one time in close proximity without interference.
• Fully FCC, CE and Industry Canada certified.
• Will not interfere with other technologies.
• The most reliable and scalable offering available.
Range:
• 200 foot range (400 ft coverage) with either RF Receiver
or ResponseCard AnyWhere receiver.
I
• Dimensions: 1.1 "W x 3.7" L x 0.4" H.
• Unit Weight: 1.0 oz.
Contact the Global Leader of Audience Response Solutions:
255 W. Federal Street, Youngstown, OH 44503
Toll -Free: 866-746-3015 • Fax: 330-259-7615
Intl: +1 330 746 3015 • www.turningtechnologies.com/worldwide.cfm
www.TumingTechnoiogies.com r` Turning Technologies, LLC. All Rlght, 13--d.
• Encourage community and public participation
• Obtain opinions instantly and anonymously
• Conduct paperless surveys that provide instant data
• Assess retention of material by individual or groups
• Collect demographics, evaluate data in real-time
• Train police officers and firefighters in the classroom and the field
• Quick and efficient reporting to prove outcomes
Past Performance
Our response systems are in over half of all U.S. colleges and universities. Millions of keypads are in use today. Numerous
government agencies including the DoD, FAA, FDA, FBI and USDA have employed our technology. The following are a few of
the State and Local agencies that use our systems in a variety of functions:
• Hidalgo County, Texas
• City of Vancouver, Washington
• New York Department of Health
• Texas Department of Public Safety
• Allegheny County Airport Authority
• Minnesota Department of Corrections
• Fairfax County Fire and Rescue Academy
• Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning
• Massachusetts Department of Children & Families
• Alexandria, VA Department of Planning and Zoning
mr.
Differentiators
• No proprietary software and no additional licensing
• Solutions for any environment using a variety of devices
• Software for use with PowerPoint or any PC or Mac program
• Distance learning solutions including web -based polling
• Live, expert phone support and online tutorials available
• Online training available via WebEx and onsite option
• User community, webinar series and user conferences
1t)Teucrhn01ningogles
255 W. Federal Street, Youngstown, OH 44503
Toll -Free: 866-746-3015 • Fax: 330-259-7615
Intl: +1 330 746 3015 - www.turningtechnologies.com/worldwide.cfm
www.TumingTechnologies.com €�Tuming Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
8346 Old Richfood Road • Mechanicsville, VA 23116
Phone: (804) 730-9600 • Fax: (804) 559-9334 • www.roll-call.com
March, 30 2011
Dear Ms. Boaze,
Please find herein a quote for a voting system for the city of La Porte, Texas. Functions
or software modules not included in this quote are available for purchase at a later date.
As with all of IRC's voting systems, it is a technological foundation which can be built
upon to further streamline the city legislative process.
Basic Voting System Functionality
• Members will have three button voting stations for Yea, Nay, Abstain.
• System supports display of votes and item information to the existing center 50"
LCD display.
• Voting software supports importing a standard template Agenda from a
Microsoft Word file as well as editing and adding to the Agenda on -the -fly
within the voting software.
• Voting software allows Operator to open and close the vote.
• Motion taken on an Agenda item can be easily applied and shown on the center
display.
• All recorded votes are stored in the system and accessible under the acted -on
component of the voting system.
• As per La Porte's specification, the system will provide for the Mayor to be able
to vote only in situations where the vote on an item is tied.
• Provides for print out of "roll -call sheet" vote summary of each item voted on by
the council.
• Voting system has future expandability to provide additional software features,
applications and hardware (see Expanded Future Functionality section below).
Expanded Future Functionality
• Addition of microphones and Request to Speak software will enable the RTS
function of system.
• Presiding officer software on laptop to view vote and control members wishing
to speak on an item.
• Debate timer to control length of debate on an amendment or Agenda item.
• Export of votes taken during meeting to website as a PDF file.
• Export meeting vote totals and/or member names to minutes program.
• Adding Vote Reporter internet application to give members the ability to
generate their own voting records from home or office.
TiN
• Providing remote access to voting system software on the Clerk's office computer
for building agendas and accessing recording vote information from the Clerk's
office.
• Installation of automatic camera control software through request to speak
software.
• Provide tagging data to video and or audio system so video and audio can be
searchable if provided on the internet.
• Chamber automation providing agenda information to Council Member's
laptops.
• Legislative Tracking System provides the following components and is
integrated with the Voting System:
o Database and configuration system
o Agenda preparation
o Meeting minutes creation
o Amendment building
o Creation of Ordinances and Resolutions
o Building of various reports for posting to public internet
o Tracking status of Ordinances and Resolutions
o Committee assignment and agendas
The City of La Porte shall provide:
^^ • Installation of system on -site, including mounting of components and placement
of cables, with assistance from IRC technicians via phone and remote log -in. This
installation option does not necessitate an IRC technician on -site and therefore
keeps the overall system cost down significantly.
• Any and all necessary millwork or woodworking.
• Power available at designated locations.
• All computers. (Specifications to be provided by IRC) Peripheral electronics such
as printers, etc.
• Well -ventilated storage space for the System Control Unit.
IRC shall provide:
• 9 (+1 spare) 3 button member voting stations (Yes, No and Abstain) for the
council, including the Mayor. These stations provide for member votes to be cast.
Each station is a black plastic enclosure with push -buttons mounted inside. The
enclosure is designed to sit atop the member desk.
• Output of vote information, including member votes, totals and item
information, to the existing center 50" LCD display.
• System Control Unit (SCU) containing proprietary electronics for system control,
manages the flow of votes from members to software.
• IRC's Local Government Voting Software: Used to import the daily agenda, run
the voting process, collect votes, store votes, manage membership, and display
vote results as well as provide for specified functionality as detailed above.
IRC
• Necessary cables to connect SCU and member voting stations. If La Porte wishes
to move forward with the project we would seek measurements from the
mounting point of the SCU to each member desk location to determine proper
cable length.
• Training for staff via telephone conference and remote log -in to Voting
Operator's computer.
• System documentation to be provided within 30 days.
Price....................................................................................... $15,700.00
Optional Technician On -Site:
If the City of La Porte so desires, IRC can provide a technician on -site to assist with the
installation and training on the use of the system This would be billed separately and
would encompass all travel costs (estimated at around $3,000.00) plus an hourly
technician rate of $100.00 per hour.
Payment Schedule
40% Upon receipt of purchase order
50% Upon arrival of technician on -site
10% Upon system acceptance
Warranty: There shall be a one-year parts and labor warranty on all components of the
system provided by International Roll -Call.® An annually renewing insurance
maintenance contract shall be made available for $2,500.00 annually. The insurance
maintenance plan includes toll -free access to IRC technicians, corrective hardware
support at a discounted rate of 30% off, remote support services, discounted rate for
requested software changes, spare part replacement, access to client folder for
download of updates. These are some of the highlights of a maintenance and support
plan. More detailed information may be made available upon request.
This quote is valid for 60 days.
Sincerely,
David A. Ward, Jr.
Operations Manager
International Roll -Call Corp.
City Council Retreat, April 9, 2011
Lomax Rodeo Arena Roof Replacement
Overview
The City asked for and received a report and recommendation for the roof at the Lomax Arena.
According to our engineering firm, Dunham Engineering, the existing columns and rafters and
purlins were installed with primer paint only and have rusted. The roof screws were installed
too tight, damaging the roof panels and causing leaks. The purlins have rusted considerably
and will require replacement, as will the roof (see below). The City budgeted and is in the
process of repairing the roof leaks with patch material and an epoxy coating, and epoxy coating
each screw head. This repair will provide a good, solid patch and prevent problems for the
Arena roof for the next five years. The engineer does not anticipate any permanent danger to
the columns or rafter through this delay.
Engineer's Recommendation
The consulting engineer, Dunham Engineering, recommended the current patch as a stop -gap
measure, and is recommending that the City strongly consider, at the end of the approximate 5
year period, removing the existing roof and purlins, sandblasting the columns and rafters,
applying an epoxy paint/coating to exposed surfaces, and installing new purlins and Galvalume
roofing material. Estimated cost for this process is approximately $400,000.
Summary & Options
One option is to earmark $100,000 in the Fund 15 CIP account each year, over the next four
years to prepare for this future need, much as the City does for major equipment purchases. In
a tough budget year, setting aside this large an expenditure may be a larger burden than is
possible.
Another option would be to wait until the end of the expected current repair life cycle, and
then re-evaluate the need. At that time the entire repair amount could be funded. The engineer
did say that he would not recommend putting the repairs off any more than 5 years, as the
support purlins may not go past that timeframe.
The current repair gives the City the option to spread the costs out and make it more practical
to accomplish this needed repairs, or to wait and fund the repairs in a lump sum. Once
accomplished, this major repair will result in an Arena structure that will continue to serve the
citizens of La Porte for the next 30-40 years.
City Council Retreat, April 9, 2011
Lomax Park Improvements
Overview
Lomax Park is home to the La Porte Livestock Show and Rodeo Association (LPLSRA). The park
was also, for many years, home to the La Porte Girl's Softball Association. In 1999 the Little
Cedar Bayou Girl's Softball home was established and the LPLSRA inherited the old softball
concession stand, storage facility and restrooms. The LPLSRA also has a shipping container on
site that they have used for many years for equipment storage.
Current Status
Both the concession stand and storage facility are in excess of 30 years old and in need of
replacement. The storage container represents a City code violation and the LPLSRA is ready to
address that issue. After this year's Livestock Show the LPLSRA is proposing to have the
container hauled off and consolidate storage in the old softball storage facility. That will solve
._ one initial problem temporarily. Another issue is the lack of meeting space for the LPLSRA's
meetings.
The LPLSRA is proposing a new building that would have storage capacity, restrooms, and
concession building. They would also like to consider a building that could be expanded in the
future to accommodate a meeting room/show hall as well. The LPLSRA is proposing a joint
venture in which the City provides building materials for construction and that the LPLSRA
provide labor to perform the actual construction. Several local companies, including Oates
industries, have offered support to provide labor toward this joint project. Any construction
would be completed according to the City's building codes, rules, regulations, etc.
Summary & Options
The City has the option of moving forward with formalizing the proposed plan for a new
building at Lomax Park. The City has participated in two previous major joint ventures with
sports associations (soccer and LPLSRA). The project would require design by an architect or
engineer, or be a prefabricated building that is already engineer stamped and approved.
The estimated cost to build such a building, with mechanical, plumbing, and electrical (MPE) to
finish out the restrooms, concession, and storage, would be approximately $550,000. That cost
-- to the City could be cut in half by having the LPLSRA provide the labor for construction and
finishing. All MPE work would have to be supervised by Master craftsmen as is required by City
Lomax Park Improvements Page 1 of 2
Code. The new building would eliminate the need for the existing restroom/concession, the
old storage facility, and allow those to be demolished. This project would be economical, and
meet a large community need for La Porte.
A second option would be to move forward with an agreement, and construct a building that
would meet the storage needs initially, and then could be expanded to meet the concession,
restroom needs, and meeting needs based on priorities as the LPLSRA and City determine.
Costs could then also be spread over a longer period of time, and the two entities could reach
the goal of meeting the community needs for La Porte.
Lomax Park Improvements Page 2 of 2
AT
City of La R
s Parks & Recreations
I
April 9, 2
2011 Googlc
Imagery Date V4+2010 a 1944 29'41'0243" N ,95s04.18 09" W elev 21 ft
rtment
Eye alt 1034 ft
Y t
Lomax:Y 3
Originals -
Park Lomax
City Hall
r
Option #2x ,
Location`
m
Option #1�R.
t
r
Location
Replacing
storage
Existing RR/ k Container
• Old 'Girl's i Concession
Gobs Away
Softball
Storage
y
Goes Away
;J 2011 Google
Imagery Date 142010 1944 29"41'02 43 N„95Q4'1$ 09" W elev 21 it Eye alt 1,034 ft 'W;e
City Council Retreat, April 9, 2011
Lighting Neighborhood Parks
Overview
There are thirteen parks listed as Neighborhood Parks, in the City's park inventory (see below).
Chapter 50- 2 of the Code of Ordinances establishes the hours of operation for Neighborhood
Parks from 7:00 am until 9:30 pm daily. These neighborhood parks are generally placed in
specific neighborhoods and do not have extensive sports facilities or amenities that lend
themselves to use at night. The parks are designed for family uses, such as picnics and play
equipment for younger children and are not designated for use after 9:30, primarily for safety
reasons, which is why the City has not lighted these parks in the past.
Staff has identified a number of possible lighting options for Council considerations and these
are discussed below. Should the Council choose to proceed with lighting, Council may want to
amend the park ordinance to revise park hours.
Option #1
Use of the San Jacinto Trail light fixtures as night lighting for neighborhood parks would be very
expensive. The fixtures are $3,600 each, plus the cost of meter and conduit installation;
approximately $4,000 per park up front. The minimum monthly charge for electrical service
varies, with a charge of around $6 plus "80% of the max demand charge for the previous 11
months until the demand charges fall to the minimum", per our electric service carrier. So, the
annual operating costs minimally, would be approximately $200, and the City would maintain
the light.
Option #2
CenterPoint also offers a Security Light that is available for installation for about $700, with a
monthly charge of about $16 per month. These are available anywhere that there is existing
electrical service. This option would have an up -front cost of $700 and annual costs of again,
about $200 per year, per installed security light and CenterPoint maintains the light.
Option #3
The City's streetlight program is available for lighting parks that are on paved streets or trails.
The standard cobra head streetlights are installed at no charge to the City if there is an existing
pole, and cost approximately $17 per month for service. For decorative lighting, the City would
.. pay the difference in cost from a cobra head light, which ranges from $300 to $1,000 per light,
and the standard monthly fee. Operating costs per installed light would be approximately $200
per year. CenterPoint maintains the light.
City of La Porte Code of Ordinances
Sec. 50-2. Parks and park areas defined.
The parks, park areas, park related facilities, and rental facilities which comprise the City of La Porte Parks System
are listed below and their location within the city established.
(1) Parks, Neighborhood:
Name of Park
Location
Bay Oaks Park
254 Dwire
Brookglen Park
3324 Somerton
Creekmont Park
700 Willow Creek
Wood Falls Park
3800 Driftwood
"D" Street Linear Park
200-800 North "D" Street
Fourteenth St. Park
500 North le Street
Glen Meadows Park
5100 Valley Brook
Ohio St. Park
300 South Ohio
Pete Gilliam Park
200 North Holmes
Pfeiffer Park
900 South Virginia
Seabreeze Park
1322 Bayshore Drive
Spenwick Park
19225 Carlow
Tom Brown Park
300 South Lobit
74-mrsTm.- :IsTt
L
�rwr pf
1 1tti
Cobra Head
Street light
K �, a �'''+q''' ,}e. " .►� V+'�;a � '�, � �-
';.,�.
a`
rig. y
i F
M
Location Benefiting
Description
* Trapezoidal, earthen channel (Grass); Length 5275 ft; Excavation Volume: 17.0 ac-ft; Maximum Top Width: 66 ft; Typical SS: 3:1
Bay Front to La Porte, San Jacinto Homes
* Mitigation Pond (340' x 340') (Including 30' berm); Excavation Volume: 19.1 ac-ft
* Trapezoidal, (Concrete) Channel; Length: 5459 ft; Excavation Volume: 58.3 ac-ft; Maximum Top Width: 114 ft; Typical SS 1:1
Brookglen
*Mitigation Pond (575' x 575') (including 30' berm); Excavation Volume: 65 ac-ft
Meadowcrest, Creekmont, Glen Meadow, Fairmont
Park, Fairmont Park West
* Dimensions: (700' x700') (including 30' berm); Excavation Volume: 228.5 ac-ft
36-03
Brookglen
Diversion of B112-02-00 to B109-03-00
:. to be determined
Location
Spencer Highway *Trapezoidal (Concrete) Channel with Bottom Width: 1 ft & Typical Depth: 3 ft;
)1-05 * Dimensions 410' x 410' (including 30' berm); Excavation Volume: 23.0 ac-ft
Lomax Garden, Residents along L St. Dimensions 450' x 450' (including 30' berm); Excavation Volume: 29.0 ac-ft
• - - . - 1 k 14 lei"s
,
s
.w»
Li
r
.,vA
-00
o
- k[
w.
1�,�- � - -- � � .� ...y '� ; �`v'7' � va' � � •— �` � � Psi � f 4. Ai
Sru r r •
y _
,t
t4, ". � ,H<9w z» 'sue � t '� ,�.y.g�yy „•�i
p4(1wd J 4 I �v0. i• i ► i
',a x _.a� '� � 11 ,r.:i • • • i • e l . - • • �
.. ,� PRIOR v
r
-P
r
77
`P7�
17,
-bk-
r �
JUiin!
� �;�. '. �.. '�"'�'r ..,,,,,�'t.e + i �ii '�'S i ♦�_ . 3, g �' 1; r _W � p !gt
. t i
p - �—
� �� ,"' ® s •: �� .. .-ram # � g _ ..
gg 1 � hlpt
3l.�t'^.y 't-L'i "� ii Y}y '°+[-.:.^x '7•'G.✓.4 nf�k E
—
� 1.. X
i f a:-,a� I) 7'i��c. 3�. .w-':.�f�' �'ic ' xW,
r • a
s
'
�
�,
�-� �. �
�,�
rlFir. $tint ttt�F.�,}�''.tP�fll`' tlkt'3'= �"` '�.
+
t i •
tt
r
y
,-
L 7K rj
0
0
a
r �� --
T .4-- � •; r`� """a... ,1r��s 'T '� r'Ar°4`'.:°; 3° • � f� ��a .�•: i'�i,. � .i � � L,:
a.
- � : � .'-ter � _ � ; � x� �• � `
.y
.-� "` �`e r�;e ®®i r� 1/ •�. a x„ [.�' �(+ r f ,tf Fi`` 1 ai ,�.. - `' -
�4„
5
a �, 'y� �.. J!¢�'>�M� _: z ,�-� �.�t �T ate. t :.!' '�•-���+'.
.d.7=« � "Lm4'a .,.,� � .-� M*^""" .e. "` `.'\`� ad'g` ."d t .+Y''4" t ,►i'r .. '`
"
.w
a
TIN
} t d
Iola
1 1 a, ,,, a •; T` e '. Y n ,++ � 1F' i, } 1.- „�,�., �"
• <1
y.., ,� '�•� X . T a,-0 ^:^"i¢ ^'+ } ,AWl
> -..+ r ^< L a, s.r,` C�*. r^,�,., Y ° v .;.-s e+'y"�•sa s• �' s �* d� .. , d,> .31
m
«
j : r
s ✓
.is:a. i � ,♦ .,� ' Ryr ',�'s ` . ,as;. i t ice% ''Y, �. 'aye{ .,.i+$ y.`k� .r.�
, v::% r sia,•_:: _>... w -c. a `` .'a -^«,a. _ . ^.}� « Y3 .. A i";,'; .S^ - �..,..'r....,� s: . 's:'.".aao-�. =r�'h ?' i �_ � `".`.a �•y``'.i•. _
1
d
j�
-a Z
t1(� SIC
-'� }
f i
..y _..
d _�. 11
lal
Co- uction
ation Benefiting I Modification Type Description10,11 Coststs
(See Table 4-1 & 4-2 for Additional Details) M
Relief Swales
Construction Estimated Land Recomme For
Total Losses Cost Per Loss Acquisition Ral._
Removed Removed Area Implementation
(#) M (acres)
L.nannei imnrnvemenrc ann urverunn vnnnc
• Trapezoidal, earthen channel (Grass); Length: 2350
ft; Excavation Volume: 3.2 ac-ft; Maximum Top
Width: 41 ft; Typical SS:1;2:1
at Park, Fairmont Park
•`Channel Improvement
• Mitigation Pond (240' x'240') (including 30' berm);
Studies and F
• Mitigation Pond
Excavation Volume: 4.0 ac-ft
$781,000 34 $23,000 2,5
-
resulted in nc
al Construction Estimated Land Recommr For
Co._ _ u is Total Losses Cost Per Loss Acquisition Rat).•.
ation Benefiting Modification Type Description Costs Coststs Removed Removed Area Implementation
(See Table 4-1 & 4-2 for Additional Details) ($) (#) ($) (acres)
Channel Improvements and Diversion Ponds14
• Trapezoidal, (Concrete) Channel; Length: 5459 ft;
Excavation Volume: 58.3 ac-ft; Maximum Top
Width: 1l4 ft; Typical SS: 1:1 Channel Imp:
• Channel Improvement • Mitigation Pond (575' x 575') (including 30' berm); constructed s
len • Mitigation Pond Excavation Volume: 65 ac-ft $5,494,000 187 $29,400 12.4 - multiple dete:
• Trapezoidal (Grass) Channel; Length: 40000 ft; Channel Imps
Excavation Volume: 5.3 ac-ft; Maximum Top Width: constructed s
round Estates, 77 ft; Typical SS: 3:1 recently acqu
ive, Residents along P • Channel Improvement • Mitigation Pond (250' x 250') (including 30' berm); Land acquisii
• Mitigation Pond Excavation Volume: 7 ac-ft $849,000 19 $45,000 1.4 - vond.
• Dimensions 410' x 410' (including 30' berm);
Excavation Volume: 23.0'ac-ft
Garden, Residents • Dimensions: 450' x 450' (including 30' berm); This project i
St._ ` • 2 Diversion Pond Excavation Volume: 29.0 ac-ft $1,092,000 22 $50,000 8.5 - CIP Budget.
• Trapezoidal, earthen Channel (Grass); Length: 1608
ft; Excavation Volume: 4.2 ac-ft; Maximum Top
Width: 78 ft; Typical SS: 3:3,
• Channel Improvement • Mitigation Pond (255' x 255') (including 30' berm); Channel lmpi
liver • Mitigation Pond Excavation Volume: 6.0 ac-ft $361,000 6 $60,200 3 constructed s
• Dimensions: (1290' x 1290') (including 30' berm);
len • I Diversion Pond, Excavation Volume: 313.5'ac-ft $11 324,000 187 $60.600 38.2 - Proiectis an
tit Park, Fairmont Park -:Dimensions: (700' x 700') (including 30' berm);
• 1 Diversion Pond " Excavation Volume: 75.0 ac-ft $2,794,000 34 $82,00011.2 - Project is an
Ncrest, Creekmont,
eadow, Fairmont Park, • Dimensions: (700' x 700') (including 30' berm);
at Park West • 1 Diversion Pond Excavation Volume: 228.5 ac-ft $8,314,000 95 $87,500 29.3 - Pond Site is t
• Trapezoidal (Concrete) Channel; Length: 9225 ft;
Excavation Volume: 7.9 ac-ft; Maximum Top Width:
13 ft; Typical SS: 1:1
Garden, Residents
• Channel Improvement
• h
St.
• Mitigation Pond '
Ex
•T
Ex
Wi
• IN
Ncrest, Creekmont,
• Channel Improvement
Ex
eadow, Fairmont Park,
• Mitigation Pond
• E
tit Park West
• Diversion Pond
bet
ration Pond (340' x 340') (including 30' berm)
rtion Volume: 10.0ac-ft $2,378,000 22 $108,000 8.9 - " Project is an
,zoidal (Concrete) Channel; Length: 4320 ft;
rtion Volume: 40.4 ac-ft; Maximum Top
110 ft; Typical SS: 1:1
;ation Pond (540' x 540') (including 30' benm;
rtion Volume: 48.0 ac-ft
lion Pond (1060' x 1060') (including30'
Excavation Volume: 207.0 ac-ft $11,752,000 95 $123.700 36.4 Proiect is an:
al Construction Estimated Land Recommld For
Co- .. uction Total Losses Cost Per Loss Acquisition Rah..,;
ation Benefiting Modification Type Descriptionlo"' Costs15 Removed Removed Area Implementation
(See Table 4-1 & 4-2 for Additional Details) ($} (#) ($) (acres)
Channel Improvements and Diversion Ponds14
Proiects Previouslv Prepared by Others Recommended for imnlementntinn
• Length: 10,560 ft, Lower flowline from SH 146 to
Sens Rd, SS: 3:1
Channel Imp:
• Channel Improvement
• Inline Detention, Length: 2,720 ft, Excavation
constructed s
e
• Inline Detention Pond
Volume: 131 ac-ft
$3,200,000
15
$213,000
12.4
-
multiple deter
any or me norea rrnprovemems ror atuo-uo-uu rot me same nenerrts. values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
any of the noted improvements for B 112-00-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
any of the noted improvements for B 106-05-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
any of the noted improvements for F101-03-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
any of the noted improvements for F101-00-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel,
any of the noted improvements for A104-12-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
any of the noted improvements for B 106-00-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
any of the noted improvements for F216-01-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
any of the noted improvements for F212-00-00 for the same benefits. Values in parenthesis is an alternate project for the channel.
ion ponds are labeled as mitigation, diversion, or regional detention, they are essentially the same type of structure. The different labels are merely used to convey
The purpose of a mitigation detention pond is to mitigate the adverse impacts of a channel improvement, a diversion detention pond serves to handle the flows diverted from
f a regional detention pond is to serve the additional run-off from future development.
tes not include maintenance berm.
hat can be rapidly implemented by the City but might require limited coordination with HCFCD.
;ewer (a specialized relief structure), please see Project ID 45 in Table ES-2. Figures XXX shows the location of this drainage improvement.
ponds are longer -term projects that will require significant coordination with HCFCD and other entities for their implementation.
G
Completed D
Current Drail
Future Drain,
Projects by o
SUGAR � REE AL-L-EY-VIEW-DR— JAMIE T z z
o
TONE -REEK -DR' EAD W-PL-AGf-DR JO KWAN'LU
1
KINGWILUAMSDR GL- NVAL-LE-Y-DR Z
MEA OW=GREST-DR ai
m
REEKVIEW-DR
SPEN6Eq HW a W-MAIN
OL-D-ORCHARD-RD` q�_ �m 14 A'104=OT=00
W
pNRRIM-► N
y-
�� BE�FPS��RD a .�•��� �W
[O /.----- k SPRU6E2
DR—
R W: Cq � ?) i141, o
'4'
2D [
WINDING TRAIL D C R[O.H, BE FqS �-GRAYWO D•GT
TOR DOGWOOD D
ID , IDLEWOOD-DR EWOOD CT
QUIET -HILL- D ( PI
`MUL-DR
DR 1
RUSTICGGATEE-RGATER SEWOOD CT
QV/
E•T Gi L-L-WGSWOOD-DR
-'RUSTIG-ROC R RV N/[[ RID) p�
BIR(:I FD BIRC.H
�0 o R ST/GR v MESQUITE•D
B,106-02-00
OCK-R0�=�'O`N �o j�NF[�,KR4�w g -� •
RQcK'� Ma -oR m R t RacK R o P CAnr D
a
gyp\ fC}cNO�`O Q SPRINGWO D-D
EF w�iD w Y
Ho[[OlVc,R a a REDBUD-DR
PARKWAY R
i
iUGA R'CREEK DR— m VAL-L-EYVIEW-DRa a o
—J
iTONE•CREEK-DR -A —MEADOW-PLACE-DR—JOSH WAYLLu
GLENVAL•L-EY DR z g
4KIN(rWILLIAMSDR ui
z g
z a CL
c w w
MEADOW CREST DR z
IL
CREEKVIEW-DR oCP
SPENCER H �
a W-W
—OLI3-ORCHARD•R{3 A%04=07=00
�OLD•ORCHARD`RDAF
w
_--ANfTRhM-L•N QAT4TTlk/ k* Q o m
_CATI:ET-T LN Q o
BEL-FAST-RD SPRUCE DRI
44 j �R�M�N LL
CARL•OWL-N Q f THORNWO�D-DR
UNW
At�T 1
�v OOD CT
�v�Ry�<tR �� gREow, BE�Fgs �l—cwavwo D'e
CN R T--`(1
DOGWOOD - DR --DOGWOOD'CT
HILL-RIDGE•R N0./N� � "'�.J I J
RAJ LEWOOD•DR-IDLEWOOD•CT PIINEWOOD-IT
QUIET'HILL RD Q� RUSTIC GA RDUNoSw00a0CE
ULBERRYDVOLLINGSWOOD-D
MULBERRYCT — OSEWOOD•CT
____---RUST
�~R'
1`R(/S•nQGq�ROBIRCH DR BIRCH
7.7a
MESQUFFED
ROCA-R o B•106-0.2-00
SyE
*RD de
—o PE7N-DR,—rQC3 4lfY804 zo mSPRINGWO j D•DR�'W- CH RRY•CT 6 o o
TRyFyO<CCL
SAPPL•E-TREECIR 0w'Q)? Z
0
PARKWAY -DR
AUG-03-2010 TUE 09:18 AM FAX NO. P. 05
CITY OF LA PORTE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
604 Wc;sl Fairmont Parkway, La Paco, TX 77571
Offices 291.A71.6020. F= 261.470.5005
www,laportelkgov
APPLICATION for ADDRESS, UTILITY VERIFICATION & DRIVEWAY CULVERT
(Note: Complete NTfo. in dashed box only. Partial or incomplete information will delay processing of your application)
.'►. „I
1 i'ROPFRTY OWNER•_ .... _ _ _ .... — — — — — " OWNER'S AGENTS .. _ _ .» , .. _ — — — — -- "' I
Name: ....—.— Name;
! Phone #:� �[� Phone #
Fax #:_�� 78 3 . } Fax #:—
E-Md: MAO 4em _All�& C, , PASAD
I j?ROPFRTY INFORMATION: I
I
Current Properly Address (f exisiingj: _ _ _ A I t2 At o Al _ PA t2 K ja _ I
1 HCAD Acct. No. of Properly (13 ftits): z?L4q
I Legal Description of Properly
I •SITE PLAN INFORM .�. ^ �•� !
ATION ffor silo Wan submittal oni� I
1
I Dcvolopment Name:
Description of Project:_ �L�j.� AA5 t 5 I
I New Building or Expansion?:
I `lltote: Api#icant mu t sidw* 6 copies ofseto plan to City+ $100 Site Flan fee forup to 5Acres t 55.00!reach ad*iorlal aae j
MY W111.1 RFOUIRE. check Applicable : I
ADDRESS mckaix Survey. Skch:h Plan or Site Plan illustratin sub' o
y 9 1� fx p hd existing 8 proposed irnprovarnenls) f
1 f7 UTILITY VERIFICATION Include Survey, f
1 l cy, ..ketch Plan or Site Plan illustrating subjcict properly wl existing & proposed Mnprovemcnrs) 1
C7 'DRIVEWAY CULVERT SIZE (include Survey, Skotch Plan orSile Pion i6ustraling subject property w/ existing & proposed improvements) I
1
! I
r Note., FAr Driveway Culvert on HAAS CwWyRoads, call- 2BL 452.7598 r
For Driveway (7u/ve11 on TXDOT Roads, Ck 287.4625503)
Street # � ' St. Prefix:
Loc ID t
uYi4rfvvtlFicnnoN t ci
St. Name:
Coi#W asi clo(plaAvagsecror. _ 7nrrir>g[)isc
Water Available to Pl-opt:rip: ❑ Yes
Location of Nearest Water Main:
Sanitary Sewer Available to Property?: 0 Yes
Location of Nearest Sewer Main:
�1)RIVFWAY CtIIUFRT SIZE tby CaNI: Data Culvert Sized:
L.F. of RCP
'Upna purchase and d-A"aldri✓ewvy advert cm,'Dcr 0e Cdy.5 Pobkc
ftks Dqp v mvrret (!81) 0714M to schedule restdcnbal &tadatW on
Cdr I'vk t and It[ L a*..
No d Extension Required
CI No ❑ Extfnsiori Required
.. `` •tom..
.Size:
Size:
KEY DATFS , win. o„nr. :
Date Request Received: _
Date Address Assigned:
Date U.V Sent to P.W ��—`—�• '*
Date U.V Received from P.W _
Date Appbcant Notified:—.—,,. 7.:
on
kt
T7AV-Kw A,,-!
I
0
0
0
3701
3625
8401 I t 8400
0
0
0
0
0
0
7 F
0 0
01,
R,iY'',„,�.._
HARRIS COUNTY
DRIVEWAY & CULVERT PERMIT APPLICATION
1. APPLICANT INFORMATION (Please print or type)
Applicant Name V 1% I AN
Applicant Mailing Address I J L)AW 5 S7?EEr City P MENA StateTDt Zip so
Home Phone Daytime Phone :11.3- L/75..79 j Fax 1f ._ — q'jL-j 77'alter
Property Owner Name tw I T 4 (1 I' -M"} k. () FAN A
Property Owner's Mailing Address i 1 j L4 p AV L5 5MET City
2. LOCATION OF PROPERTY
Subdivision Section Block Lot Reserve
Street Address !� Site Zip Code
Survey Name Abstract Number 482 - akEcAcreage 9,56 SF
Property Tax Account Number Da 90 00-
3. D WAY INFORMATION (Site Use and Proposed Construction)
Site Used for Single Family Dwelling Site Used for Other Than Single Family Dwelling Site is for Agricultural Use
Driveway Curb Cut Driveway With Culvert Circle Driveway
Driveway Width Type Of Surface Material
4. CULVERT INFORMATION
Culvert Length kb
Name of the Nearest Cross
Driveway Width 12V r Type of Surface Material A CT
D n `JTWO T"
Distance From Cross Street 2P0 ' EMT j-f ' 4ge or Miles Direction from Cross Street (circle one) East West North uth
ATTACH TWO SrM PLANS OR SURVEYS (to scale) SHOWING THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY(S) AND CULVERTS FOR
PRELIMINARY REVIEW, MORE DETAILED DRAWINGS MAY BE REQUIRED BEFORE A PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED.
All driveway construction must be completed in accordance with the Regulations of Harris County for the Construction of Driveways and/or
Culverts on County Easements and Rights of Way.
The Applicant hereby acknowledges and agrees to be strictly bound to Commissioners' Court of Harris County in ensuring that all provisions,
conditions and requirements attached to the issuance of the driveway permit(s) under the Regulations of Harris County for the Construction of
Driveways and/or Culverts on County Easements and Rights of Way will be faithfully and fully complied with.
The permit applicant understands and agrees that the County Engineer may make scheduled or unscheduled inspections of the property upon the
issuance of the permit. The applicant acknowledges that the driveway construction must be inspected before the concrete is poured and after it is
finished. If the permit applicant is a corporation, partnership or other legal entity other than a natural person, then the undersigned acting as the
authorized representative of said entity will be responsible for ensuring the entity's compliance with all provisions, conditions and requirements of
the development and driveway permit.
I, T&J.! & & k:&LeMAiV , the undersigned, have carefully reviewed this application and my
answers to all questions. To the best of my knowledge, thq answers are all true gpd correct.
SIGNATURE of Applicant/Agent or Attorney f �44A A-Z-1 Date
FOR COUNTY USE ONLY
Date Application Received
Applicant No.
Planchecker
Dwy Width
Culvert Length
Request No.
Culvert Size Requested From
Dwy Material(s)
Culvert Diameter
Property No.
Request for Size Date
Inspections
DL DP
Culvert Type
Clerk & Date
Culvert Size Received From
CT PCr
CODE
Application Rejected
Date Culvert Size Received
Permit Number
3—
NO FACSIMILES PLEASE 10555 Northwest Frwy Ste 120 Houston TX 77092-8236 REV 12-2008
(713)956-3000
p.-VormAapplications receiving arealdwycutv_rcv05-2005.doe
Friday, August 06, 2030
HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT
Tax Year: 2010 REAL PROPERTY ACCOUNT INFORMATION gPrint �e-mall
0431480000279
Ownership History
Owner and Property Information
Owner Name & CITY OF PASADENA Legal TRS 18 18B 18C 19F & 19T
Mailing Address: % CITY SECRETARY Description: ABST 482 W 30NES
PO BOX 672 Property 0 FAIRMONT PKY
PASADENA TX 77501-0672 Address: PASADENA TX 77507
Aaae Class Coat '.drd -Ae t'!+de -%Hanp Class Total Units
Xl -- Governmental Exempt 4600 -- Vacant Exempt Land E O
Land Area Building Area Net Rentable Area Nrlu> a ,;wa Neighborhood Group Market Area Map Facet Kee m„Pll
4,355,956 SF 0 0 5980.24 0 0 4Gi3C 578H
Value Status Information
Capped Account Value Status Notice Date Shared CAD
No Noticed 04/28/2010 No
Exemptions and Jurisdictions
Exemption Type Districts 3urWictions ARa states 2009 Rate 2010 Rate Online
Tax $IN
Total 020 LA PORTe ISO Not Certified 1.325000
040 HARRIS COUNTY Not Certified 0.392240 MKw
041 HARRIS CO FLOOD CNTRL Not Certified 0.029220
042 PORT OF HOUSTON AUTHY Not Certified 0.016360
043 HARRIS CO HOSP OISr Not Certified 0.192160
044 HARRIS CO EDUC D£PT Not Certified 0.006050
047 SAN IACINTO COM COLD Not Certified 0.170800
071 CITY OF LAPORTE Not Certified 0.710000
142 CLEAR LAKE CITY WA Not Certified 0.280000
Valuations
Value as of January 1, 2009 Value as of January 1, 2010
Market Appraised Market Appraised
Land 0 Land 0
Improvement 0 Improvement 0
Total 0 0 Total 0 0
9-Year value History
Land
Market Value Land
Site Unit Size Site Appr 0/R Appr O/R Total Unit AdJ
Line Description Code Type Units Factor factor Factor Reason AdJ Price Unit Value
Price
1 4600 Vacant Exempt Land ACO AC 9.0000 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0
2 4600 -- Vacant Exempt Land ACO AC 90.9990 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 O 0
auitding
Vacant (No Building Data)
ORDINANCE NO.2004-a-ILO
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR TRAVEL AND BUSINESS
EXPENSES BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO MEETINGS; PROVIDING
AUTOMOBILE EXPENSE ALLOWANCES; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN
MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE:
Section 9. The City Council establishes the following guidelines, which shall apply
to attendance by members of City Council at educational meetings for elected officials,
and for automobile expense allowances.
1. A commitment for attendance should be given to the City Secretary at the earliest
possible date so that the lowest possible air fare and other discounts can be
obtained. This will normally be thirty (30) days prior to the event when air travel is
involved. The City Secretary shall aggressively solicit attendance information if
deadlines are approaching and a timely decision Is needed.
2. If arrangements are made later, the difference in cost will be the responsibility of
the Councilperson. When notification is given and attendance does not occur, the
expenses already paid will be reimbursed to the City by adjusting the monthly
check. If there is a good reason for the lack of travel coordination, the City Council
may waive the penalty.
3. The City of La Porte will not pay or reimburse expenses for City Council member's
spouses or other family members. Any exception to this policy shall require prior
approval by City Council. No travel or other arrangements will be made for
spouses or other family members unless that cost has been prepaid. A
Councilperson shall reimburse to the City, any charges made by the hotel, for
additional room guests.
4. Prior to departure each Councilperson will be given a stipend based on their
selection as outlined below per day, or more, if authorized by City Council, to cover
meals and incidental expenses. Parking is not considered an incidental expense,
and must be accounted for with a receipt on the request for reimbursement. City
Council members must elect one of the following methods for travel:
a. IRS per diem;
b. $75.00 daily stipend;
C. Actual receipts; or
d. None
Ordinance No. 2004-at,
Page 2
This election will be signed by each council member annually. Once the election is
made, it is not revocable for the entire year. The year begins January 1 of each
year and ends on December 31.
5. Hotel stay and airport parking will be reimbursed only for the interval from the first
night before the opening general session to the day following the closing meeting.
Additional time will be approved for attendance at meetings where the
Councliperson serves on a committee or is on the program.
6. Taxis may be used between the hotel and the airport if no hotel transportation is
available. Mass transit should be used for intracity travel when available unless
there are time constraints. it is the City Council responsibility to select the most
economical means of transportation.
7. Expense accounts must be submitted within ten (10) days after returning from a
meeting. If the expense report is not received by the City within ten (10) days after
completing travel, the City Manager shall refer the matter to the City Council Audit
Committee for handling. Receipts are mandatory for reimbursement except when
otherwise exempted by this policy. Subsequent trips will not be allowed until a
request for reimbursement has been submitted for all previous trips. The City
Council Audit Committee, or other committee appointed by City Council, shall
review any questionable expenses not complying with established ordinances,
policies, or guidelines to authorize reimbursement, at the request of the Director of
Finance.
8. City Councilpersons traveling on City business to a destination outside Harris
County, by personal automobile, shall be reimbursed for their mileage in
accordance with IRS mileage guidelines. City Council members who receive
$100.00 car allowance will receive mileage reimbursement after the first 50 miles
of travel. City Council members who do not receive car allowances will be
reimbursed for all mileage using City Hall as the travel origination point.
9. The Mayor shall receive an automobile expense allowance of $200.00 each
month, and each City Councliperson shall receive an automobile expense
allowance of $100.00 each month in connection with the performance of their
duties. City Council members may elect one of the following:
a. $100 allowance;
b. Reimbursement mileage; or
C. None
This election will be signed by each council member annually. Once the election is
made, it is not revocable for the entire year. The year begins January 1 of each
year and ends on December 31.
Ordinance No. 2004-q.3
Page 3
10. City Council members may:
a. Elect to have City cell phone;
b. Receive reimbursement for usage of their private cell phone; or
C. Neither.
This election will be signed by each council member annually. Once the election is
made, it is not revocable for the entire year. The year begins January 1 of each
year and ends on December 31.
11. City Council members may, at their discretion, stay and be reimbursed at local
hotels (i.e. Galveston, Conroe, Houston).
12. All items are subject to annual appropriation by City Council in the budget process.
Each City Council member will be allocated funding and provided a monthly report
on the status of the account balance.
Any exceptions to this policy shall be approved by City Council at a regular
meeting.
Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that
a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City
Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hail of the City for the
time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law,
Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public
as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof
has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further
ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall be effective for the fiscal year beginning October
1, 2003, and thereafter, unless amended or repealed by City Council, and it is so ordered.
Ordinance No. 2002-2597, passed and approved on November 18, 2002, is repealed as
of the effective date hereof.
PASSED AND APPROVED, thisQ44ay of May, 2004.
CITY OF LA PORTE
L
Ordinance No. 2004 2
Page 4
ATTEST:
City Secretary
2011 COUNCIL RETREAT
M
Technology Benefits
Council's computers are up for renewal at the end of this year. The leased computers are for a
three year period. We need to consider whether or not to continue leasing Council computers or
to replace them with a similar device such as the iPad or DELL Inspiron Duo. Currently, the
laptops are primarily being utilized for internet use only to access the agenda. The table below
shows a few options and looks at some of the benefits and drawbacks for each device.
Also listed below is a table which compares some of the benefits and drawbacks of regular
phones and smart phones (Ex: iPhone).
Computers/Smart Devices
Laptops
BENEFITS:
• Full word processor
• Replaced every 3 years
DRAWBACKS:
• In most cases, laptops are only being used for
internet access - not fully utilized processor
• More expensive to maintain
$2,500 every 3 years
iPad/Similar Device
BENEFITS:
$500 one time fee
• Quick access to internet and other data
• Multiple applications
• Convenience: mobile business tool
DRAWBACKS:
• Does not have full word processor and other
programs, like a computer
• Smaller screen
Some programs may not work or work differently
j
'
i
(EX: Adobe Flash)
DELL Inspiron Duo
BENEFITS:
$950 one time fee
• iPad type tablet with touch screen integration that
can also be converted for keyboard use
• May allow for more programs than the iPad.
For instance, Microsoft Office and Adobe software
programs may be added.
DRAWBACK:
• Likely to be slower than an iPad or tablet
0 Smaller screen
Phones
Regular Cell Phone BENEFITS: $40 a month
(AT&T Provider) • Less expensive
• Mobile to mobile is free $10 extra for unlimited
• Nights and weekends are free text messaging
Smart Phone $80 a month:
(AT&T Provider) BENEFITS: $40 for service
• More applications $40 for data: email,
• City calendar/email/contacts synced with internet, etc.
phone
• Mobile to mobile is free $10 extra for unlimited
• Nights and weekends are free text messaging
f9C�CITY OF
LAPORTE
y
FFICE
• OF EMERGENCY
MEMORANDUM
u
TO:
RON BOTTOMS/ TRACI LEACII
FROM:
JEFF SUGGS
SUBJECT:
STREAMING COUNCIL MEETINGS
DATE:
APRIL 1, 2011
CC:
MELISA BOAZE
THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR STREAMING COUNCIL MEETINGS LIVE ON OUR
WEBSITE.
The information provided for the Council Retreat is just one company's offering at many different
levels of service. Live streaming does require some equipment to be purchased and associated
monthly or annual costs. To have a firm monitor and record the meetings on Council night is also
another cost. The cost associated with streaming meetings can vary between $5,000- $25,000 annually
depending on the services selected.
If Council decides to move forward with streaming our meetings on the web, City staff would need
to know the following since there are several issues to consider and discuss.
1. Does City Council want meetings streamed or recorded only for playback at a later time?
2. If the option is to LIVE stream on the web does the Council want fixed cameras or accessed
cameras?
3. If more than one camera is used for the streaming does the Council want a firm to monitor
it or have an employee become "production staff"?
4. Does the Council want to rent the equipment or own the equipment and pay a monthly fee?
All of these options are available to LIVE stream the meetings on the website. Once a decision to
move forward or not has been made, the focus will then move to the most cost effective way to use a
service and provide the streaming video of meetings to the public.
((ci)) sw a
always connected
Contact Information:
David Owusu
Director of Streaming Media
214.432.5905
800.573.3160
david@swagit.com
Home Office:
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100
Plano, TX 75074
214.432.5905 Tel
214.750.9513 Fax
www.swagit.com
i
Confidential Documentation
Streaming Services
for Local Government
City of La Porte, TX
604 Fairmont Parkway
La Porte, Texas 77571
CcO�) swagit
always connected
Mr. Suggs,
We would like to sincerely thank the City of La Porte for the opportunity to provide professional
multimedia services to the city, specifically live streaming, agenda and social media integration, as well
as 'hands -free' video on -demand archiving.
Starting from humble beginnings, Swagit began in 2003 with a mission to supply clients an affordable
solution to stream their own content in an overpriced, complicated, hands-on video industry. What
began as a company that specialized in turnaround streams for televisions stations and newspapers,
Swagit has grown significantly to a diverse client list which includes municipalities, newspapers,
television stations, web portals, construction firms, higher education institutes and local consumers.
- Swagit is unique in this industry in that it is a complete video production facility capable of providing
services supporting all of your video capturing, editing, agenda integration and processing.
- With Swagit, all audio/video disk storage, system management and bandwidth intensive delivery tasks
are offloaded to their content network which is actively managed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Next, Swagit is the only vendor that gives you a choice to let our staff edit and process the video that
your city would be streaming. So please note that there is no need to hire any additional employees or
give anyone any new responsibilities, as everything is done remotely the day/night of any of your
meetings. Now I will stress if your staff would prefer to edit their own meeting content and index their
own agenda, we do offer similar products to other vendors, but it is Swagit's preference to be your
service provider ... not a reseller.
We appreciate your consideration in reviewing our proposal and look forward to working with La Porte
on this important project. If you have any questions regarding this proposal or would like any further
information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully,
David Owusu
Swagit Productions, LLC
david@swagit.com
Tel:(214) 432-5905
Fax: (214)750-9513
(800) 573-3160
www.swagit.com
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
2
oc:D)) swag it
always connected
EASE Solution
Swagit puts forward a proposal for a hosted
video streaming solution built around our
Extensible Automated Streaming Engine (EASE)
software framework.
This completely hands -off solution meets the
current and future needs of La Porte without
creating any additional work for the city's clerks
or webmasters.
Built upon years of industry experience, EASE is
a software framework comprised of foundation
and extension modules that work together to
automate many otherwise manually intensive
tasks.
Video Capture and Encoding
In order to minimize impact on La Porte's
network, all disk space intensive storage tasks
and bandwidth intensive delivery tasks are
offloaded to Swagit's Content Network.
The EASE encoding software is deployed on
commodity computing hardware supplied either
by Swagit's preferred vendors, or by La Porte's
existing vendors in consultation with Swagit. In
many cases Swagit is able to repurpose existing
hardware from previous projects (video related
or otherwise) to further reduce up front capital
expenditure.
Key Components of Swagit's 'Hands -off"
Live & On -Demand Streaming for Local Government
Client Premises
Video Feed Metadata
PEG channel
or onfsne only content City council meeting
Content Archiving agendas and minutes
Broadcast
Quality Meeting Docs ,,rh
Swagit's icJJ
Extensible Automated Document
anna auac
Streaming Engine (EASE) Management
1 r Solution
Swagit Premises
'Big 3'
Streaming Servers
_ : f__i `
End Users
Real
One single stream reduces
bandwidth requirements
Live and on -demand
streaming allows time and
location shifted viewing
High bandwidth Internet
connections scale to
thousands of simultaneous
viewers
Emerging Technology
Streaming Servers
Flash Mpeg4 etc.
http:lrwww.swagu.com End Users
Although minimum required system
specifications are dependent on service configuration, the following is typically sufficient for combined live and on-demant
operation:
❖ Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz processor
❖ 1GB of memory
❖ 40GB of disk space
Microsoft Windows XP or 2003 Server
❖ Viewcast Osprey capture card
Once deployed, Swagit's EASE Encoder records content according to your broadcast schedule and stores video
ready for further compression to all major streaming formats or direct authoring to DVD.
At the conclusion of each recording session Swagit's EASE Encoder transfers the recorded audio/video to the
Swagit Content Network via a secure Virtual Private Network (VPN) connection, making it available for on -
demand streaming.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
3
((ca) swagit
always connected
Indexing and Cross Linking
Once the audio/video content tagged for indexing reaches the Swagit Content Network, our video editors are
alerted so they may begin the indexing process. Using your published meeting agendas, or other directions, as a
guide, they annotate your content by adding jump -to points with specific item headings which give users the
greatest possible flexibility to find the specific content they need. With the help of these jump -to points, users
can step through video by searching for or clicking specific items.
If meeting packets or other related information are available online, our editing staff will link to them directly
from the video player for easy access.
Document Management System Integration
Through our partnerships with document and other content management system developers, Swagit is able to
reference and link to materials created prior to or during meetings.
Agenda Integration
. I i�.rea+e : Agaaaa ? d4edtEr� , j 3f�are I l: �uExt �
sow. cony,Pft r j srd, salsa t. �t �;
�a�r �M.wMp w.weNtro �a+ww0.�irowwt. w4+.riMtre a�i4
rv.�'n-' tyO�IRp � ■ QinIN nOQC�L'a1M GCdYfrp �DAe.
iM1.1:!ltlil.e#�4iio•�t,11Sky.'!!1't 61aClS�lUHT4R1�
laoeccPn�e ttmdean �Si 1D s. m. - 1� 00 R. ml i
gern:k
Qftwim w+W i pw�r 1 iz "* of R"s+
Wry'-Askn Am
4 'rw Ws wd f wTft rw4 8nr'c &Wd CmVmbm - at the Regjnt A Wyor
Geri
6 2QQ9G� C-retufar
EXEC URVE SESSION
f Sxllkr r _ '
toot
owatlant min. 212 see. br swa't.c� t 2000
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
4
<<o>> swagit
always connected
Archiving
Client audio/video can be stored securely on the Swagit Content Network indefinitely. Fault tolerance and high
availability is assured through replication of audio/video content to multiple, geographically redundant, Storage
Area Networks (SAN). Our standard packages include 80GB of storage, enough for approximately three full years
of city council meetings.
As clients approach prearranged storage allowances, they may choose to extend those allowances or begin
removing old audio/video content in accordance with a storage horizon plan. Alternatively, Swagit can assist
clients in adding supplemental storage to their Swagit EASE Encoder, directly or externally, to facilitate more
cost effective long-term archiving of content while still maintaining online availability.
Search and Select Archived Videos
Presentation
Once integrated into the linking structure of the city website, the customized video library becomes the portal
through which users access your audio/video content. As new content is added, it automatically becomes
available in the city's library without any work by the city webmaster.
By navigating through the video library, user can view a list of meetings chronologically or unleash the power of the
jump -to markers to search for specific points within individual audio/video clips. When it comes time to view these
clips they are presented in a similarly customized player, presenting a consistent look to all aspects of the city
website.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
5
((cD)) swagit
always connected
Video PodCasting, as offered by Swagit, is a great way to extend accessibility and adoption of your audio/video
content. Building on the popularity of Apple's iPod video player, PodCasting technology allows users to subscribe
to automatically published content feeds. New content becomes immediately available in their audio/video
library and is subsequently synched to their portable devices the next time they are connected.
Delivery
In order to deliver on -demand content
to end users in a format that is native to
their computer's operating system, Swagit
can deliver content in all major streaming
video formats: Flash, Windows Media,
QuickTime and Real. Swagit is proud to
support Flash as its default format, which
has proven itself as the format of choice
from such vendors as YouTube,
Google Video, Myspace, ABC and
NBC/Universal.
Our support of Adobe Flash based delivery
allows for innovative inclusion of no click
audio/video players directly on the city
website, optionally allowing end -users to take that content and embed it in their own websites or blogs.
Currently, Flash has a 99% ubiquity rate amongst all the platforms. Swagit can provide Windows Media format
(75% ubiquity) should La Porte prefer to exclude Apple users*.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
6
01:3)) swag it
always connected
By delivering content in a range of frame sizes and streaming bandwidth combinations Swagit ensures your
content is accessible on the widest possible range of platforms and Internet connection types, offering superior
quality to those on high speed DSL, cable or fiber connections and accessibility to those with low bandwidth
devices.
Swagit make!
ric
Our local points of presence ensure your audio/video content is delivered to your citizens and staff in the most
efficient manner, minimizing buffering time and providing optimal viewing quality.
Monitoring and Statistics
Swagit is constantly monitoring all aspects of the Swagit Content Network to ensure its health and availability.
This monitoring extends to cover remote Swagit EASE Encoders deployed on client premises. In the rare event of
trouble our engineers are promptly notified so that they may dispatch a swift response in accordance with our
support procedures.
Swagit collates log files from our streaming servers monthly and processes them with the industry recognized
Google Analytics. Google Analytics generates reports ranging from high-level, executive overviews to in depth
quality of service statistics. These reports help to highlight growth trends and identify popular content.
Support
Beyond our proactive monitoring and response, Swagit offers ongoing, 24/7 technical support for any issues our
clients may encounter.
While our choice of quality hardware vendors and a thorough pre -installation testing phase go a long way
toward ensuring trouble free operation of our EASE Encoders, we do recognize that occasionally unforeseen
issues arise. In the event that our engineers detect a fault, they will work to diagnose the issue. If necessary,
next business day replacement of parts will be completed.
Swagit offers continual software updates and feature enhancements to our services and products for the life of
your managed services contract.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
7
((cD)) swag it
always connected
Swagit BREASE solution
Swagit Brease is a development from Swagit's popular Extensible Automated Streaming Engine (EASE)
product line. Brease is a client controlled video management system for converting, managing and
streaming video on a client's web site without any captial expendentures required.
High -Quality Video
Publish high-bitrate quality videos. No plugin installation needed. Instant playback and seeking
without download. H.264 video conversions utilizing widely accepted Flash format.
Custom Video Players
Control the look, layout and behaviour of your video players. Create skins that perfectly blend
players within your web site. The ability to display multiple content listings in one player.
Custom Playlists
Create playlists by date, subject, tags or popularity. Publish playlists in a player or as RSS feeds.
Generate information for podcasts such as titles, description and duration for syndication.
Simplified Workflow
Upload video of any format, size and duration. Easily set previews, build players and generate
traffic reports. Embed videos and playlists with one line of code. Manage multiply users under a
single company. Upload several video clips at once using FTP client interface.
Statistics Made Easy
Track the popularity of your videos through views. Track the cohesion of your videos through
average watched percentages. Reporting for individual clip traffic usage.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
8
too)) swag it
always connected
Investment -Streaming Video
Streaming Video Hardware
Item Description Type Up -front Cost
Hardware/Software/Provisioning ( 1U Server 1 $3,865.00
Osprey Video Capture Card with Simulstream Software, Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Web
Edition/OS Installation, Swagit EASE, Encoder Software Installation, System Burn -in,
Rackmount Kit (4 posts -universal), AT&T U-Verse Compatible, includes up to 9 internal users
Additional Upfront Costs
Branded Video Library Design, Branded Player Design $960.00
Remote Install (one day) $480.00
Onsite Install Daily Rate $720.00
Streaming Video Monthly Managed Services
Item -Description.
Package 1- (BREASE) Transcode data up to 20GB/year for meetings and other
digital content (does not include LIVE Streaming)
$350.00
-or-
Package 2 - Up To 25 Indexed Meetings per year (EASE) - Includes Media On -
Demand, 24/7 LIVE Stream, Video Podcasting, Mobile Streaming and up to 10 hours
of additional specialty content per month (No staff involvement —Hands Free)
$650.00
-or-
Package 3 - Up To 50 Indexed Meetings per year (EASE) - Includes Media On -
Demand, 24/7 LIVE Stream, Video Podcasting, Mobile Streaming and up to 20 hours
of additional specialty content per month (No staff involvement —Hands Free)
$950.00
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 - Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
9
((c:D)) swag it
always connected
Optional Services
Optional....-
24/7 LIVE Stream — Around the clock stream of PEG Ch.
$250.00/month
Each Additional Edited and Indexed On -Demand Meeting
$150.00/meeting
Remote Switching (Approved Broadcast Systems Only)*
$240.00/event
AT&T U-verse Service (if not bundled with other offerings)
Call for quote
Each Year of Storage Beyond 36 Month Window
$180.00/year
Programming, Development or Design Implementation
$120.00/hour
Closed Captioning Services (if not bundled)**
Call For Quote
Paperless Agenda/Minutes Module
Call For Quote
* Must have approved broadcast system(s) and reliable Internet Connection.
** Service is priced on per event hour, including any breaks/executive session time, and
requires proper closed captioning hardware. Event hour is rounded up to the nearest half hour.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
10
K:3) swagit
always connected
AT&T U-Verse® Integration
Many Public Access, Educational and Government (PEG) channels now have the opportunity to reach a
new group of broadcast subscribers via AT&T U-Verse TV service. To reach these subscribers, U-Verse
requires a 480x480 pixel Windows Media VC-1 stream at 1.25Mbs. Our EASE encoder is not only capable
of creating a live U-Verse compatible stream, but it can also simultaneously encode a video stream, of
your choosing (i.e. Flash, Windows Media, QuickTime, Real, etc.), for Internet distribution.
AT&T U-Verse and Swagit Productions, LLC both have headquarters located within the Dallas, Texas
area. This allows the two companies to work together seamlessly for the betterment of government
transparency. The partnership combined with Swagit's'hands-free' streaming solutions, helps increase
accessibility of government programming. Additionally, adding another form of distribution for content
using a single solution not only saves money, but also makes things easy.
The City of Allen was able to deploy
their content to AT&T U-Verse TV by
leveraging their existing partnership
with Swagit. "We have been using
Swagit for on-line video on -demand
since 2004 and have been very happy
not only with the integrity of the product,
but also with the quality of customer
service," said ACTV Executive Producer Mark
"With the recent addition of Live
streaming services, the opportunity
opened to connect to AT&T's U-Verse
TV network. We knew it was the right
decision as we are constantly trying to
find creative, cost-effective ways to
reach more viewers."
GoMobile Encoder
Swagit streaming encoders offer simplicity of operation in a compact, low-cost, stationary, and when
applicable, portable streaming solution. Encoders from Swagit allow even non -technical personnel to
stream high -quality live video. Its built-in Web interface simplifies system set-up and operation, allowing
complete system control from anywhere on the network. Swagit or the client can set your streaming
parameters from the Web interface and you can begin streaming in multiple resolutions and bit -rates.
Multiple stream technology comes standard with Swagit's portable encoders, which means you can
stream Adobe® Flash° H.264 video in multiple, simultaneous resolutions and bit rates to computers, cell
phones and mobile devices anywhere around the world. It's the ideal low-cost, easy -to -use solution to
help you expand your audience in the digital media marketplace.
Encoding Format Options:
* Adobe® Flash H.264
*Windows Media®
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
11
swa
always connected
Broadcast System- Cosmo's
git
Built upon years of industry experience, Cosmos is a complete package of cameras and pro video -switching
equipment that enables any client to fully outsource the production and operation of a multiple camera
broadcast system to Swagit.
During the meetings or events, Swagit personnel will operate the Cosmos system remotely from their facility
in Plano, Texas. The Cosmos system enables Swagit to control and switch from camera to camera depending
on events taking place. When bundled with Swagit EASE, Cosmos can offer a full end -to -end "hands -free"
solution that requires no client staff involvement for the operation, broadcast and streaming of an event or
meeting content.
Cosmos enables detailed direct camera positioning (pan, tilt, zoom, focus, and more), preset -positions, and
video settings (white balance, backlight, brightness) for the robotic cameras. Additionally, Cosmos
communicates with the switcher to allow direct operation of the 'wipe' function from the camera control GUI.
With this powerful package you or Swagit can control all your cameras individually and switch video sources
on a video switcher locally or remotely. Cosmos is an invaluable integration of camera -control with switcher
operations for use with live production setups like city chambers, churches, meeting rooms, and more.
Cosmos includes 2-4+ robotic (computer -controllable pan/tilt/zoom) cameras and you can
choose from two main types: either single -chip (Sony EVI-D70) or 3-chip (Sony BRC-300)
depending on your needs and budget. These popular Sony robotic cameras have excellent
video quality and performance. The EVI-D70 and BRC-300 has the
ability for panning through wide angles of motion, tilting through
large ranges with superb optical zoom, and dual video output of Y/C
and composite. They also support both RS232 and RS422 (long
distance over 1000 meters) control signals. In addition the EVI-D70
cameras can be mounted either 'up' or'hanging upside down' for your convenience (they
have built-in reversal of the picture and left/right/up/down motion controls).
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
12
K:D)) swagit
always connected
Cosmo's Case Studies
Cosmos Case Study#1: Addison, Texas
Addison's unique solution for a challenging problem was Cosmos. Addison faced three key problems; 1) the
town did not have the staff resources to operate broadcasting and streaming equipment, 2) the town doesn't
have a PEG or any other broadcasting station, and 3) the town wanted a complete hands -free end -to -end
solution for displaying town meetings online.
Swagit's solution for the town provides complete hands -free remote operation of a multiple camera broadcast
system, including a video switcher and audio mixer. In addition to the remote broadcast system (Cosmos) and
with the inclusion of Swagit's Extensible Automated Streaming Engine (EASE), Swagit is able to control,
broadcast and stream town meetings without the need for any Addison staff. It is all done from Swagit's
headquarters in Plano, Texas.
Addison citizens expect the best and latest technology on their town's website. Adding the on -demand feature
will improve citizens' accessibility to videos of town council and planning commission meetings and improve
access to agenda information for these public meetings.
Cosmos Case Study#2: Richardson, Texas
The City of Richardson began live broadcasting of City Council meetings and work sessions as part of a wide-
ranging transparency in government initiative that is included in the City Council's 2009-2011 Statement of
Goals. The live broadcast is available to Time Warner Cable subscribers on channel 16 and streamed on the
City's Web site, www.cor.net.
The City contracted with Swagit Productions, LLC as the video streaming service provider according to
Richardson's Chief Information Officer Steve Graves. "We have installed two wall -mounted cameras in the City
Council Chamber and the work session room," Graves said. "During the meetings, Swagit personnel will operate
them remotely from their facility and can zoom in and switch from camera to camera depending on who is
speaking. The broadcast signal goes through a switch that sends it to Swagit and also to our cable television
channel."
Graves explained that the live Web cast is routed through a City computer server and is recorded as it is being
sent to Swagit.
"If for some reason the live Internet connection is lost, we have a saved copy that can be posted on our site," he
said.
Testimonial from City of Richardson, TX: http://richardsontx.swagit.com/play/09222009-48/0/
As a work session or Council meeting is streaming live on the Web, Swagit employees tag each agenda item. At
the conclusion of the meeting, they create an index on the City's Web site and visitors can choose to view
individual agenda items rather than watch the entire video. Council and work session meetings will be archived
on the site for up to two years. The City's cable channel 16 will replay taped broadcasts.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
13
((C:D)) swag it
always connected
Investment -Broadcast System- Cosmo's
QTY
Item Description
3
Sony- EVI-D70- high quality CCD cameras (48 degree view,
65 degree view option with D100)*
3
Sony- WM-3013- Wall Mount for Sony EVI-D70
4
Sony- EVI DS-Cable- to daisy chain cameras
1
Dell Optiplex 360, Core 2 Duo CPU (2.93GHz 1066FSB) with
Windows XP SP3, 4G6 Ram
1
S-Video + Audio extender via CATS, local & remote monitor
& speakers, up to 600 feet Model
1
Averkey550 compact unit to convert visual output from a
PC to TV
1
Datavideo SE-500 KIT —NTSC Video Switcher with TLM-702
Dual 7" Monitor and monitor holder (HS-500 option)
1
ViewCast Osprey 230 capture card
1
ViewCast Osprey 210 capture card
1
Cosmos 5.3 software
1
APC UPS Remote Power Switch and Management
1
17" Widescreen Black LCD for Optiplex
1
All Cable, Connectors and Hardware necessary for
installation
1
Labor required to install, hook-up and provisioning
Total Cost for Camera System & Installation $19,647.00
Optional CG Chyron for Video Graphics/Titles
$2,695.00
* Different camera types are available w/different horizontal resolution — D70 and D100 = 470 TV lines
Cameras can be controlled locally by the client or remotely by Swagit's staff.
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
14
(((:D)) swag it
always connected
Conclusion
Swagit's proposed solution, backed by our strong industry experience and innovative
approach, presents a sound answer to La Porte's stated video streaming needs, both
now and in the future.
Please view how everything comes together:
http://richardsontx.swagit.com/play/09222009-48/0
850 Central Parkway E. Suite 100 • Plano, TX 75074 • 214-432-5905 • www.swagit.com
15
BUDGET RETREAT DISCUSSION ITEM — RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE COLLECTION
REPORT
PRESENTED APRIL 9, 2011
PURPOSE:
To receive feedback and direction from City Council on the Public Works Department's preliminary
study of automated side loading (ASL) garbage trucks as a potential alternative to the rear -loading
trucks that the City currently uses for residential trash pick-up.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff is looking at the City's residential trash collection operation primarily due to concerns of the
current high employee turnover rate and the potential for injury within the City's solid waste laborer
or
group. The average tenure of the solid waste laborer for the City is less than 13-months. Over the
past five -years, the Solid Waste Division hired an average of seven employees per year to fill nine
laborer positions. The nine positions are rarely if ever entirely filled. Outside "Labor Ready" service
-- and other Divisional personnel are utilized to fill in as needed. It is an administrative treadmill trying
to keep at least twelve of these positions filled at all times.
These concerns are not unique to the City of La Porte. There is a growing trend of municipalities
changing from their conventional labor- intensive operation to an automated collection system that
utilizes a driver -operated mechanical arm to lift a large plastic container (supplied by the city) and
empty the contents into an ASL garbage truck.
While there are a number of real benefits associated with an automated trash collection program, one
drawback is the increased collection cost. An automated trash collection program, if implemented
city-wide, would increase the City's annual trash collection cost by nearly $270,000 assuming
collection two time a week. This is approximately 12% of the total current solid waste budget.
The question for Council's consideration is whether the benefits of an automated collection program
is sufficient enough to merit staff continuing to investigate a twice -weekly automated collection
option with the associated $270,000 increase in the annual solid waste budget. If so, then Public
Work's finalizing a plan for a pilot program and resident survey/education program for Council's
review would be the next logical step.
Budget Retreat Discussion item — Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
INTRODUCTION:
The four main components of the City of La Porte's Solid Waste Program are:
• Residential Garbage (twice a week pick up by the City)
• Heavy Residential Trash (twice a month pick up by the City)
• Recycling (24/7 drop off at the City Public Works building)
• Commercial Trash (pick up per the contractual agreement between the business owner and
the waste management company with franchise rights to operate within the City of La Porte)
This report takes a look at the largest component of the Solid Waste Program: residential garbage
collection. More specifically this report is a summary of staffs preliminary study of utilizing
automated side loading (ASL) trucks with an articulated, mechanical- arm lift to pick up residential
garbage as a possible alternative to the City's current, labor-intensive collection program.
CURRENT COLLECTION SYSTEM:
The Solid Waste Division for the City of La Porte includes 23.5 full-time employees [1] with an
annual budget of approximately $2,200,000 that is primarily funded with $1,850,000 in revenues
w„ derived from commercial and residential garbage fees of $16.00/month and $16.50/month
respectively. The residential solid waste collection component of the overall Solid Waste Division
budget is currently $942,900 annually.
For residential garbage collection, the City now utilizes conventional rear -loader garbage trucks with
a driver and two laborers on the rear of the truck. The residents are required by City Ordinance to
package all of their household garbage in 1.5 mil plastic bags and place the bags within three -feet of
the street between the hours of 5:00 a.m. -- 7:00 a.m. on the date of collection. Laborers employed by
the City manually pickup the trash containers and drop them into the rear of the rear -loading garbage
truck where the trash is compacted and dumped at a private landfill. Garbage left at curbside is
collected from each residence twice a week. Residents are also provided three rolls of 30-gallon bags
twice a year in accordance with City Ordinance Section 58.
The City inventory of rear -loading garbage trucks includes six 25 cubic yard rear loaders (four are
used full time for routes, two are in reserve.):
72-13 2001 Freightliner replacement approved in 10_11 budget
72-34 2000 Ford replacement approved in 10_11 budget
72-38 2002 Freightliner scheduled in 13_14 budget
72-15 2005 Freightliner scheduled in 13_14 budget
72-43 2006 Freightliner scheduled in 15_16 budget
Fa
Budget Retreat Discussion Item -- Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
72-44 2006 Freightliner scheduled in 15_16 budget
[1] The 23.5 Solid Waste employees include one division Superintendent who splits time between
two divisions, one field supervisor over both garbage and heavy trash, thirteen employees in
residential garbage (including one extra laborer to go with four drivers and eight laborers as a
minimum level of staffing), eight employees in heavy trash, and one in recycling. All of these
employees fill in either group as needed.
COLLECTION ALTERNATIVES:
There are a number of different ways to structure residential garbage collection using ASL instead of
rear loaders. The following options are listed as a beginning point for Council discussion.
Considerations for alternatives focused on maintaining the current level of service to residents while
also balancing costs.
Option 1: Automated Twice Weekly Pickup
This option includes the following:
• Six one-man crews (ASL) and one three-man pickup crew (rear loader)
o The rear loader crew is required for the collection of approximately 240 homes near
Shoreacres where the street is too narrow for the ASL trucks.
• City provided plastic trash receptacle (either 95-gallon or 65-gallon)
• Elimination of City -provided plastic bags
Option 2: Automated Twice Weekly Pickup with Contract
This option includes the following:
• Six one-man crews (ASL)
• City provided plastic trash receptacle (either 95-gallon or 65-gallon)
• Elimination of City -provided plastic bags
• Contract with third party to collect the 240 homes near Shoreacres twice per week
COMPARISON OF CURRENT COLLECTION METHOD TO AUTOMATED TRUCK
COLLECTION OPTION:
Benefits of the Current Method:
• Residents are generally satisfied with the current service.
A three -person crew and a rear -loading truck produce the highest number of houses
served per day per route. (The average number of households served per route by the City
of La Porte Solid Waste Division far exceeds typical industry standards.)
3
Budget Retreat Discussion Item — Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
Drawbacks of the Current Method:
• Manual trash pick-up is very labor intensive and the Iaborers are continuously exposed
to traffic and elements. (Staffs experience is that laborers hired in the spring or early
summer often quit before the end of summer. There is a lower turnover among the laborers
that have hired on in the fall or winter and have had an opportunity to get acclimated to the
working conditions before the summer months.)
The turnover rate in the solid waste laborer group is extremely high. (This is typical
across the industry. The average tenure of the solid waste laborer for the City is less than 13-
months. Over the past five -years, the Solid Waste Division hired an average of seven
employees per year to fill nine laborer positions. The nine positions are rarely if ever entirely
filled.)
• Potential for injury to City employees. (Working in traffic, underlying employee health
issues that might be adversely impacted by strenuous activities in the elements, injury from
sharp objects in containers; lower back strains are fairly common.
+ Workers Compensation expense. (The premium rate for automated trash collection is
.— about one-half that of the conventional collection rate. Annual differential cost (conventional
vs. automated) to maintain the current system is $15,000 - $20,000/year. The City's
insurance carrier paid $40,000 in solid waste -related claims over the three-year period
between 2008 - 2010)
The Current City Ordinance is Not Enforceable. (Trash in boxes, garbage cans or any
container other than plastic bags provided by the City is prohibited by ordinance but the non-
compliance rate is estimated to be about 50%. The ordinance also stipulates that garbage is
not to be left at curbside outside of the hours of 5:00 a.m. — 7:00 a.m. on the day of service.)
Benefits of Using Automated Side Loading (ASL) Trucks with Plastic Receptacles:
Plastic Garbage Receptacles are a Convenient and Easy Method for Residents to
Dispose Trash. (While the size of the container is sometimes a concern for the residents
initially, the container itself is generally well balanced and easy to roll. Most municipalities
also offer assistance to elderly or disabled residents.)
• Plastic Garbage Receptacles Greatly Reduce Problems with Rodents and Stray
Animals. (Council might consider expanding the hours that residents can place their garbage
at curbside by City Ordinance.)
4
Budget Retreat Discussion Item -- Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
• Residents in Areas Utilizing Plastic Receptacles Generally Prefer the Appearance of a
Single Container to Multiple Cans, Bags.
One Plastic Container (95-Galion) is Equal to Three or Four Trash Cans. (The City of
La forte disposes approximately 12,000-tons of residential garbage per year. That translates
to an average of 1. 1 -ton/household/year or 421bs. per household per week. The USEPA
estimates that the average weight of residential waste, uncompacted at the curb, is 150-lbs to
300-lbs per cubic yard. Conservatively assuming 1501bs/cubic yard, a 95-gallon container
would hold a minimum of 72-lbs of trash far exceeding the 42-lbs disposed each week by the
typical household in the City. The excess capacity provided by 95-gallon is exaggerated with
twice -weekly collection. And residents can be permitted to purchase a second container if
necessary.)
• ASL Trucks Reduce Labor Costs and Potential for Accident/Injuries. (3-person crew is
reduced to 1-person.)
Greatly Reduced Employee Turnover Rates. (The driver position could also be upgraded
— likely equivalent to a position landing between an Operator II and Senior Operator.)
• Cost of Refuse Equipment Has Been Flat the Last 3 -- 5 Years While Labor Costs Are
Increasing. (ASL trucks costs likely to remain flat or dip slightly as more agencies switch to
ASL trucks.)
Budget Retreat Discussion Item — Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
Drawbacks of Automated Side Loading (ASL) Trucks
Cost of ASL trucks. (ASL trucks cost $65,000 more, have service life 20% - 30% less, and
cost 20% - 30% more to maintain than rear -loading garbage trucks due to the strain on the
mechanical arm system and greatly increased number of stops and starts of the truck for pick
up one side of the street at a time.)
• Cost of Plastic Garbage Receptacles. ($59 for a 95-Gallon container, $52 for 65-Gallon.
Approximate 10-year service life.)
Additional collection routes are needed for ASL trucks. (The production of the City's
residential collection crews with the current system is very high compared to the national
average. Two laborers can collect trash on both sides of the street more rapidly than the
mechanical arm can operate one side of the street at a time. Trash collection routes would
likely increase from the four routes that is now employed to six routes using ASL trucks. )
• ASL trucks are not suitable for all locations. (Steep ditch slopes at the pavement edge,
very narrow roads, vehicles parked along the roadway can be problematic for ASL trucks.
The twice a week ASL collection alternatives provided in this report contemplates the
potential to contract out 240 homes near Shoreacres that would not be suitable for an ASL
truck operation.)
Trash must be contained within the container provided. (However, a 95-gallon container
is usually more than adequate for a typical family as noted in the Benefits discussion.)
Residents must correctly position the trash receptacle. (The object is to keep the
driver/operator in the truck. The container must be oriented correctly and in the right
position with respect to the roadway and obstacles such as parked cars, trees, fire hydrants,
etc. This necessitates a great deal of education and outreach. )
0
Budget Retreat Discussion Item — Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
COST COMPARISON SUMMARY:
Annual Labor
Annual Equipment
Annual Maintenance
Annual Landfill
Contract Services
Total
Increase/(Decrease)
from Current System
[1] Includes trash containers.
CURRENT
Option 1:
SYSTEM
Twice Weekly ASL with
Rear Loader Crew
$437.000
$391,500
$162,600
$349,992
$151,200
$276,000
$192,000
$192,000
$942,900
1,209,492
$266,592
Option 2:
Twice Weekly ASL
with Contract
$299,100
$327,492
225,600
$192,000
$43,200
1,087,394
$144,494
[2] Includes contracted services to pick up 240 homes Pine Bluff, Bayside Terrace, and Bay Oaks
subdivisions where the road is too narrow for ASL trucks.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
The heavy trash collection and recycling programs would remain unchanged.
Two rear -loading garbage trucks were included in the 2011-2012 budget and are on order. These
trucks will be needed with an automated program to serve those areas that are not suitable for an
ASL truck. The next scheduled replacement of a rear -loading truck is in the 2013-2014 budget year
when staff anticipates purchasing two new trucks.
Public Works also considered a complete change to a semi -automation option that would include
plastic containers for the residents and retrofitting a hydraulic lift onto the City's existing rear
loading trucks. However, it is staff's opinion that this option would result in decreased efficiency
and/or increased injury. Either the laborer would wait while the time consuming hydraulic lift was in
operation or they would grab the garbage bags by hand out of the plastic container or lift and tip the
heavier container into the back of the truck. The public and private agencies interviewed by staff
who used semi -automation indicated that the overwhelming majority of the time their crews tip the
95-gallon containers rather than use the lift. So while the residents would benefit from the
convenience and aesthetic value of the plastic containers, staffs concern is that the City would likely
need to add an additional route due to lost efficiency compounding the current labor concerns.
Staff interviewed both Waste Management, Inc and Republic Services, Inc. and asked what they
considered to be their most economical residential trash collection method. Waste Management
responded that they found a 3-person crew and rear loaders to be the most economical for them, but
they also noted that only the driver works for Waste Management. They contract out the laborer
7
Budget Retreat Discussion Item — Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
component to get separate themselves from the staffing and workers comp costs. Republic Services
on the other hand indicated that their business plan calls for moving toward fully automated
collection wherever possible. The caveat is that Republic assumes once a week collection when
considering a fully automated route.
MOVING FORWARD:
If Council elects to further consider a change to automated garbage trucks, some of the items that
would be presented at a later date include:
• Options for Pilot Program and Resident Survey
• Materials for Resident Outreach
• Proposed Schedule and Approach for Phasing in an Automated Program
• Further Research Manufacturer and ASL Model Alternatives
ATTACHMENTS:
Data and Cost Analysis of Rear Loading Collection (2 X Week Collection)
Data and Cost Analysis of Automated Side Loading Truck Collection (2 X Week Collection)
Data and Cost Analysis of Automated Side Loading Truck Collection with Contract (2 X Week
Collection)
Photos
Budget Retreat Discussion Item — Residential Garbage Collection Report (April 9, 2011)
ATTACHMENTS:
SOLID WASTE STUDY UPDATE
AUTOMATED TWICE WEEKLY PICKUP OPTION 1
86% AUTOMATED TWICE WEEKLY PICKUP OPTION
SIX 1-MAN CREWS, ONE 3-MAN CREW
(9 EMPLOYEES TOTAL FOR RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE PICKUP)
LABOR COST:
AUTOMATED TRUCK DRIVERS MONTHLY WAGE $3,750.00
NUMBER OF DRIVERS 6
$22,500.00
SEMI -AUTO DRIVER'S MONTHLY WAGE $3,400.00
NUMBER OF DRIVERS
$3,400.00
LABORER'S MONTHLY WAGE $2,150.00
NUMBER OF LABORERS
$4,300.00
ESTIMATE WORKERS COMP/INJURY COST PER MONTH $450.00
1/2 SUPERVISORS MONTHLY WAGE $1.975,00
TOTAL MONTHLY LABOR COST $32,625.00
EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES COST
REPLACEMENT COST PER SEMI -AUTOMATED TRUCK (12 YEAR
SERVICE LIFE, 1 ROUTE, 2 TRUCKS)
$135,000.00
TOTAL NUMBER OF SEMI -AUTOMATED TRUCKS
2
MONTHLY COST OF SEMI -AUTOMATED TRUCKS (BY 144 MONTHS)
$1,875.00
REPLACEMENT COST PER TRUCK ASL (7.5 YEAR SERVICE LIFE)
$230,000.00
TOTAL NUMBER OF ASL TRUCKS
8
MONTHLY COST OF ASL TRUCKS (DIVIDED BY 90 MONTHS)
$20,444.44
,.� MONTHLY BAG COST
$0.00
CONTAINER COST:
95 GALLON ROLL -OUT (8,314 @ $59. EACH)
$490,526.00
65 GALLON ROLL -OUT (2,772 @ $52. EACH)
$144,144.00
MONTHLY COST OF CONTAINERS (10 YEAR AMORTIZATION)
$5,288.92
TWO PERCENT ANNUAL LOSS
$1,057.78
MONTHLY SUPPLY COST
... $0
TOTAL EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES
$29,166.14
MAINTENANCE COSTS (INCLUDES FUEL):
NUMBER OF TRUCKS (8 ASL, 2 SEMI AUTOMTED) 10
FUEL (AVERAGE PER TRUCK) $1,300.00 $13,000.00
MONTHLY MAINTEANCE PER ASL TRUCK (8) $1,050.00 $8,400.00
MONTHLY MAINTENANCE PER SEMI AUTOMATED TRUCK (2) $800.00 $1,600.00
TOTAL MAINTENANCE COSTS $23,000.00
LANDFILL COSTS (INCLUDES STATE FEE OF$0.40/CUBIC YARD):
2,491CUBIC YARDS MONTHLY @ $6.39/CUBIC YARD (2010) $16,000.00
TOTAL MONTHLY LANDFILL COST $16,000.00
COST SUMMARY:
LABOR PER MONTH $32,625.00
EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES PER MONTH $29,166.14
MAINTENANCE PER MONTH $23,000.00
LANDFILL COST PER MONTH $16,000.00
TOTAL MONTHLY COST $100,791.14
AVERAGE MONTHLY COST PER HOME (11,086 HOMES) $9.09
ANNUAL COST $1,209,493.73
SOLID WASTE STUDY UPDATE
AUTOMATED TWICE WEEKLY PICKUP OPTION 2
85% AUTOMATED TWICE WEEKLY PICKUP OPTION
SIX 1-MAN CREWS CONTRACTOR ASSISTED BAYSIDE
(6 EMPLOYEES TOTAL FOR RESIDENTIAL GARBAGE PICKUP)
LABOR COST:
AUTOMATED TRUCK DRIVERS MONTHLY WAGE $3,750.00
NUMBER OF DRIVERS 6
ESTIMATE WORKERS COMP/INJURY COST PER MONTH
1/2 SUPERVISORS MONTHLY WAGE
TOTAL MONTHLY LABOR COST
EQUIPMENTISUPPLIES COST
REPLACEMENT COST PER TRUCK ASL (7.5 YEAR SERVICE LIFE) $230,000.00
TOTAL NUMBER OF ASL TRUCKS 8
$22,500.00
$450.00
$1,975.00
$24,925.00
MONTHLY COST OF ASL TRUCKS (DIVIDED BY 90 MONTHS) $20,444.44
MONTHLY BAG COST $0.00
CONTAINER COST:
95 GALLON ROLL -OUT (8,314 @ $59. EACH) $490,526.00
65 GALLON ROLL -OUT (2,772 @ $52. EACH) $144,144.00
MONTHLY COST OF CONTAINERS (10 YEAR AMORTIZATION)
--- TWO PERCENT ANNUAL LOSS
MONTHLY SUPPLY COST
TOTAL EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES
MAINTENANCE COSTS (INCLUDES FUEL):
NUMBER OF TRUCKS (8 ASL)
FUEL (AVERAGE PER TRUCK)
MONTHLY MAINTEANCE PER ASL TRUCK (8)
TOTAL MAINTENANCE COSTS
LANDFILL COSTS (INCLUDES STATE FEE OF$0.40/CUBIC YARD):
2,491CUBIC YARDS MONTHLY @ $6.39/CUBIC YARD (2010)
TOTAL MONTHLY LANDFILL COST
COST SUMMARY:
LABOR PER MONTH
EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES PER MONTH
MAINTENANCE PER MONTH
LANDFILL COST PER MONTH
COST OF OUTSIDE SERVICE TO 240 HOMES @ $15 PER MONTH
TOTAL MONTHLY COST
AVERAGE MONTHLY COST PER HOME (10,846 HOMES)
ANNUAL COST
$5,288.92
$1,057.78
$500.00
$27,291.14
8
$1,300.00 $10,400.00
$1,050.00 $8,400.00
$18, 800.00
$16,000.00
$16,000.00
$24,925.00
$27,291.14
$18,800.00
$16,000.00
$3,600.00
$90,616.14
$8.35
$1,087,393.73
City Council Retreat, April 9, 2011
Proposed La Porte Dog Park Sites
Overview
Dog Parks have become a much desired dog exercise and social meeting place for both dogs
and their owners. Other cities in the area, including Houston, Baytown, Deer Park, Pasadena,
etc. have provided dog parks for their citizens. As evidenced by citizen input at a recent La Porte
City Council meeting and through other citizen inquiries, there is a latent demand for a Dog
Park in the City of La Porte.
There is a strict protocol for entering and exiting the park and there are stringent rules to be
followed. Another important factor is parking since generally speaking a dog and owner that go
to a park does so in one vehicle. Dog Parks generally provide a divided area between dogs that
weigh less than 25 lbs. and those that weigh in excess of 25 lbs. Also, Dog Parks are sometimes
perceived as problems in densely populated communities because of odor and noise issues.
They can be labor intensive due to their special needs related to cleanup and odor. Finally, Dog
Park sites are recommended to be in the area of 4-5 acres large dogs, and 3-4 acres for small
dogs or 7-9 acres for the combined facilities.
Potential Doe Park Sites
Staff has examined several sites in the City on existing park or City owned property that could
be used to create a dog park.
Lomax Area — the City owns approximately 1 acre of residual land that was purchased for the
F101 expansion previously. This site was examined for potential as a Dog Park because of the
proximity to water, which is a big draw for dogs and their owners. However, it appears that the
site is too small, and the water access could not be secured.
Pecan Park —the northeast corner of Pecan Park was identified as a potential site for a Dog
Park. Upon review it appears that the area is too small to be a feasible option. Any additional
space would take away from the picnic area on the east side of the park and would be difficult
to isolate. For example, the area just south of the proposed site, contains the electrical
switchgear for the park which could not be isolated within the dog park compound. Another
drawback is the already limited vehicle parking at this site. Additional parking would put a strain
on an already critical parking problem.
Fairmont Park —the old baseball Field #7 at Fairmont Park would lend itself fairly well for a
small dog park, and the adjacent area to the north and west of the swimming pool could serve
Proposed Dog Park Page 1 of 2
as the large dog park. The park is centrally located to the entire city and there is adequate
parking to meet the demand. Negatives for this site are, it's small size, with a total combined
size of 2+ acres for both large and small dog parks combined, lack of water access, and its
proximity to the densely populated surrounding community. In order to create the fenced Dog
Park, approximately 650 feet of additional fencing would be required.
Little Cedar Bayou Park — the area to the south and east of the Wave Pool would work very
well as a dog park. Little Cedar Bayou Park is the flagship park for the City and the location is
well-known and accessible. Although there is also a parking problem at the park during peak
periods (Girl's softball and the Wave Pool operations), this could be relieved by the proposed
parking and trail from the Animal Control facility. There is approximately 7+ acres of available
land, of which approximately % is already fenced (#4 Girl's Softball Field and the Golf Course
fence). This is adequate space for both a small and large dog park. An additional 1,500 feet of
additional fencing would be required to complete the park. The area is very isolated with the
Cook property being the only close residence. The area would require some clearing to provide
a little more open space, but primarily the clearing would be of underbrush, not established
trees, which are a desirable amenity. There is also the Turtle Pond (see slide), which although
not included within the boundaries of the park, could be used by dogs for stick retrieval, etc.
Summary & Options
The Little Cedar Bayou Park site is the most practical one for the City. Costs would be incurred
for clearing, equipment, some concrete work, and fencing with fencing being the most costly.
Estimated cost for the LCB site to prepare would be $45,000 (fencing costs would be
approximately $30,000).
Fairmont Park as an alternate, could be constructed for about $25,000 (fencing costs would be
approximately $12,600), but does have drawbacks as is pointed out above, most notably its
densely populated surroundings and size.
A second option would be to use galvanized chain link fencing and only provide a drinking
fountain and waste control. This would reduce the costs to somewhere around $30,000 for
Little Cedar Bayou, and $15,000 for the Fairmont Park site. Additional amenities could then be
added in future years, as the City's budget allows.
This project would meet a city wide community need for La Porte.
Proposed Dog Park Page 2 of 2
t;
� .At
(p�
rfrfi�r
,. �; �, .s'" a'G n q ~'�;. , ��t�+ ��� tr„C. 4,�4,P�;,''�.1}. .:AM..• �`ay'�
M A - .. � �b" � � k .m,+iri"' � i-t ° `»«�� �i �� ,t- r � '►�i �',�. � ///{{{ r
P Y
�. o
,
r
_.,, _ - z w..r. ,,,, -`+. yam.;,, r,� b.:' , •-.nc:=wz —
"zs
.�:...... , � , :•', .,: ._. ,'^• � ��, n�/ `.. ^�i's4 Y • . ;,Y4, t ;"�r� va ,r . ^,i �. p.%. w s {,�.. ..,r. t
Y r
... � .r ' ;`>. "., .,. ,.- k'�"•.`.;. ".: :. y<•"*�. t _ ;7 s ";q Y•"f.�.; 1� };�}t_`i: p' �•. f4.d' t'1+'. rN
+4.` �"y` - d a� 1 "`r.�• ti, au•`w+. r'- t� C � � #` cr ..5, � y � +s`�'�-..."" .i� � y, i� ,`..
z��{t y r n, •".t `YR�:r'' `tt rt �"" � ;xt., �Ci.-..,,��1 '� -,tYr �. `C ;,t�ii����i{P'�. .r.,,�� .7F .,.,� '1 - �•'�7{;,.
� � � s 7 Pa+' :, r •r, • 'a '
v :..'.ti, ter.. \ ...+,. ,X,�1�e'i, a f •:'- sf°r� t �:.r•,+b w,"F r Ti ;,,ors
>,•.,;: ••.iw ' , t. 1� vv"' {e .+A:j}�*c,t'«» >a,,, er. f.:,sr+btu, �� .�./`.. ESr i,: �! n��,•+.i f'rl,.'si fir,- j 1'i.
a„ are, Irv' Y r, t� "�:".. .t".,"•. t $;',**; ;m-„".'_.:.-,>
�� '•3a :t �'' `:
" Y;rs i.`� :� t � �' s �. G r �j- ;��t k � a .�F t #„e�•'.-�"-C•�+�+c = ..:d.i ,_y..a .. � '� � '�' ; T'' r�,"�`.�� * d
..' « ,' - ,� 4,.:- :��,> +(„ Y` .a^. $,�� d� e� ,f .; � r y �', t a +� & rt 'j. H � ~• �� ` � ° f 7...x��� i�' "+r°Jj' {�i., '""Cif x�.
'•�"' 's,5f,5 io �`�" t ,:: tr
�� �. �� . °�� c t y� � r' :f N .'t., i` t � q � t�iy' a�R,•r, 1 � �%. � � �,y?„ �a F �� '�: �' �wfrr' � � "�wc,
M i � 4 f ' � a � � �. � •y, r t � c ♦ " 'i r , � rs r .,,�, r. y t , v -. ":7' ��"'��'' � r '`�'^'�•"f'.++c�ihs� � X,
"t
' � °.. a •y .r, Y.. n c t'+ {` a� I' 4 t.' j/ ,. \,` f' r��f,t °� d �, '�e-�.•--.
r
''• r
4;
41
r
S
ram,
•
,y<.'!
/y t• lit fr�;... ,., - _ ,p,y t C t=
w
,
'A,
i�Q'-,
Pt
j r
T �
,�r-C',l�t a• ys*Yi to i't
r 1 J T Y
r .3 +s • � ,;. � � 47�6fi'��:'�vt\�� .moo �
;. TTgp{�t f�}�lTe�r... 1 t,•��y �' � �,. r t"i�t, �.,
�: x ��, .yti, �� '".cg � to � ve, .'st � �d . � �:t�t'► �.�.
,• ,� + „ r+.. a
jj vt„
T,4 . � v
+sntk t+z � 1
"�y •.,, .,.,� <�'��}Y, w,Ai•r, 0�tt; Q}?{�}rt f��►�;��a�tcr 'J��R ,1.s�fC° Jr 4v§*,�I�K, r►{0 .
� �.'a- � !.>S -at'!4 �•:a y�. r� A\ i! yam` V M C._a.'°x'.�}. �
,
r e i A's y
•�A , e t
{ b
���,�
'.�. '^✓I -•y" J`.'4+ 'gev'', : N'rr,#;� t �',$ i Y `..4,:, `... ,, +':,.. fS:�.��:"'',A' ►'N'{, A r r ,. x+ # .x
S +'�`,�`~`�" k � ��1 - ^�. +FS •a � x � � h?y'.. g�si iy� �.14, !'�., i'.,A �' � i j, 4
,
,'.` °Y , "^.3 fr�x%�,. .+` t�"'d ,,ra`. . s n",J,k' •` „ , 'i: tM,+,
1`'i��d �� z%.., \ �e .s �'•• # % a S" •. f �Y - _� . � ,�+, +�'�3 .:� ..T°'t 4 ,, 1�. • i"�` 9� qz e �' yes
A_vi�i,..�y .,' �• E." � .'�R ,�,�a } �9 .'�;y�. F x�- !.�'a! _ _.. }� "�F � w�•7 '�. � ' re :.H � .. +Y j a��r '�.swi
BAYAREA o
t:
D PARK •,., �� 7� �w � ��.
� 2 PARK RULES
GENERAL PCT
.
BARK PARK HOURS l • �� w� , .s: � x �; � gip.
00Am TODUSK
q . ALL DOGS MUST BE LEASHED WHEN ENTERING AND UAVING THEpa,_ : •'"•. ��_ , d s� s ,,� `�
• °{ , ALL DOGS N T RAJESSANDALL
US HAVE CURRENT OTHER YAC(AiIOrNS AS
REQUIRED BY THE HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARW AND StKUtD ..
•s °y..�p �, `- = BE HEALTH AND FREE OF CONTAGIOUS DISEASES AND NMS. —
r +t d•i DOGS MUST WEAR CURRENT LICENSE TAGS IN THE BARK PARK . • .
4 - DOGS OWNEASWDLERS MUST CARRY A COPY Of THEIR DOGS WE 'p
1T ` i t. r b ,�•.�i�® a wA r
VACCINATION CEMFICATE WHILE IN THE BARK PARK.
NEVER LEAVE DOGS UNATTENDED. � ♦. J�rr v�"I'j
Its «, . 4r• J�.P'.+t.O.,R ... r'i , +u ,,
1 �� i' \ ` �► �..� DOGS MUST BE IN VIEW OF AND WITHIN VOICE CONTROL OF TNEI; -'
? , 1
e ».e. \r t i ► r �.i > • \ ,. ^,"" OWNERMANOLERS AT ALL ONES • • r ,.A,. s
.• +: 1#�'1.T'; a" • CARRY A LEASH Wiifl THEM AT All^r'�rr'ff ,, ` ♦ ` x
°; i r t t t v t 9, r• •� i . � S DOG OWNEASINANDLEAS MUST
TIMES WHILE IN THE BARK PARK
ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PICKING o . a
DOG OWNEASrHANDLERS THEIR WASTE` '
UP AND DISPOSING OF ALL OF 00 �,r, �► � � '�� � .
T ARE PAONNIfl
s , v DES IN HEAT MUST ��
DOGS SHOWING ANY SIGNS OF THE PARK �����,� I f M1 a x`ahs i't ��►y►�i x r, N '>
s , ROM
BE LEASHED AND IIMEDIA1Et
t S OF AGEARE PROHIBITED, }: Ct, •� p • ,¢
DOGS UNDER 4 MONTHS CAL OFAN �TANDTHEAE f�������.��
T W THE RK PARK AT ANY TfNE�® !� v + s F
ALL DOGS MUST BE BA t r><!�►''�i y i , ,•i
Of 2 (M#,g PER A PARK t.�1►�� j v
° IS A UWTOR DRINK jtWG OR QW) ALLOW"IN THE PARK > ���"• `•'r fl :: < .
'`4" NO FOOD OAAD ROLLEABLADES I 4
��,•�� ND BICYCLES sKArEe !S AT YOUR OWN RISK,
"{Ig BARK PARK IBIEF�;
1 USE OF RESPONS ��0 ►.i?
NERSIHAANDLERSARE AT '►
4 • � . DOG OW 0 DOGS �>r ,�4i 4. ,�,�� �.
i1.;��t;1,i,'•�iip,,tt�tr,��i,'t�s��t�,• BEHAVIOR FTNE(R��`fr;"�$ff3�';#•����:' �s'F
tt`��`'`, THE ACTIONS AND DIAL 911
EMERGENCY D 21.6000 �..x s����
, PARK PAR G 2H1.325.6539 :,��t���. �M
OG PARK I6,4
t GMMISSIONES
MOR
� 'Y� BAN
JACK
l vx �S-
'F3 �VI{ �... $ mob^•: W
o
_ y
Sr R
e �+
�I
t
�g,
rpm
a
r�
7 � 4
a
iL
2011 Europa Technologies
2011 Gocgle
Imagery Date. 3!122010__�1 r 1914 29:40,52�b7=.N•.95'-02'29.68"rW elev 20 iF .r:a: r ...,,,�.,�....,;..,..�.��...
w4eyDate Ggao &.19
't
m
,Goo(2fc-
p,y 1844,
can utilize existing fencing at
Ballfield and Pool
•Some lights on north parking
lot and ballfield ; pool could be `
re -directed to light this area.
*Existing sidewalk could provide
Small Dog Park
(Old Field #7)
•Lighted and fenced,
needs minor work
*Lights on north could be
re -directed to Large Dog
Compound
W,h^�Aver*
y� J
Tree Farm
. 1
-_ Proposed°
Animal
Shelter
I All I
A •,,�.»� : r ,,.�•� ham: ""i' " q � # ` ,:'
ry�
' Shared Parkin
Dog Park, Anim
v,
•
r-
welter & RF
i--j..
y Over`•flow
Imagery Date 3'12r2010 •1 1978 29" 38'52.45'• N 95°01'18.59" VV elev. 15 ft Eve alt 2506 ft
'P-OAN
CNOR THE ANCHOR GROUP, INC. 803 E. Whitney
IVWW ANCHORTExAS.CONI Houston, TX 77022
ANCHOR FENCE ANCHOR ACCESS CONTROL PHONE: 713-699-0723
ANCHOR SECURITY TECHNOLOGIES TEXAS VINYL SYSTEMS FAX: 713-699-2825
3/22/2011
Ronnie White
City of La Porte
1322 S. Broadway
La Porte, TX 77571
Re: Dog Run Fencing
La Porte, TX
Dear Ronnie,
Anchor Fence proposes to furnish labor, materials and supervision to install approximately 500
linear feet of 6' high all black vinyl coated chain link fence as follows:
• Chain Link Fabric:
2" mesh x 9 gauge Class 2B vinyl coated steel
• Terminal Posts:
2 1/2" OD Schedule 40 vinyl coated steel
• Terminal Post Footers:
12" diameter by 36" deep concrete footers
• Line Posts:
2" OD Schedule 40 vinyl coated steel
• Line Post Footers:
10" diameter by 30" deep concrete footers
• Top Rail:
1 5/8" OD Schedule 40 vinyl coated steel
• Tension Wire:
7 gauge vinyl coated steel at bottom of fence
• Terminal Post Bracing:
1 5/8" OD Schedule 40 vinyl coated steel brace rail with bliss rod
and turnbuckle assembly
Install 500 linear feet @ $19.30 per linear foot = $9,650.00.
Tax excluded.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have any questions regarding our proposal.
Sincerely,
Mike Wilson
Approved By
Date
90PANCHOR I THE ANCHOR GROUP, INC.
W1VN.A3NCH0RTEX AS.COlri
ANCHOR FENCE ANCHOR ACCESS CONTROL
ANCHOR SECURITY TECHNOLOGIES TEXAS VINYL SYSTEMS
Print Name
Purchase Order !Number
303 E. Mitney
Houston, TX 77022
PHONE: 713-699-0723
FAX: 7 I3-699-2325
Exclusions: Unless otherwise noted in this proposal otrr exclusions are for concrele e.\pansion f oints,
clearing, grading, stai,eying, layouts, control poillis for elevallon, location of underground Utilities,
permits, engineering, mow strips, core drilling, setting of inserts, grounding and electrical work.
Proposal valid 30 days for putyose of acceptance. Location ofpublic rend private utilities are by others.
4-j
�
«
� � <
� w
�
� »
�
�
.
�
`
C14
�
�
�
�--i C�
4.) N
ct
^� 00 O
N
rn -�
N
�
�
ct
ct
ct
ct
O
bJJ
O
�
N
�
ct
ct
U
ct
ct
ct
ct
ct
A
O
Nct
ctct
cn
bA
ct
b
O ct
CIS
ct
N
ct.,
c;3
bA U
mCIS
c�
0
Cld
ct
CIS
O
� �
cri
cd
t4 -,
�
.�
Cd
a)�O
C.).y
Cr
Ct
cn
U
t�
cri
H
U
Q,
`J L
O O
ct
ct
ct
$=! Ct crj C c�
ct
,C-.4 N
m O �+ C's at
E—+ 4 a� a� �-, o v� -C� " o
cn
03
ct
. �
ct U
U '� �
M O cd c� . V- 4 cld
U •� Cld m 4�
c
0
Q
0
�o
C\
•
•N
Ct
O
4-�
)
O
;Cd—,
..,
cis
U
cd
cd
�
M
4�
•
m
ci
C-+
(�
v
f�
v
ro 4-1
4-J (to
v
M��ov
7:1
� V
O
V bDo
ft
�
� r'
,�
4-,
[--�
cn
F-+ rG u
C6
a
�
Ct
O
;-4
ct
CCUct
O
ct
V
U
r
� v o°CU
cu
p
cu
cuLn
O
aJ cu O '
cu
• cn v aJ-+
a) cu O 0CU cu b1� cn
Ln
Q)
4=J
V
m
L.L
cu
O 4-J
4-J
a-J O
GU V V ''� V •'-� V
4� 4-J
p �, 4,
L
N
M
•
cu
a--►
V
LL.
-
v
0
w
v
Z
u
O
Ln
.�
o
°
4-J
M
�
u
u
o
o
o
f
�
�
y<
ILI
w �
,Statc!L*oopY4�i0
a
Cie
SthtSY'
ti
1 m>>
" y
r
1�
O
N ��., � N
un C .* 6
a) aJ
Zc., .E ram.4 u
}
r
O
r
Z
Up
_fz�
Q
O ct r--�
ctct
bA —+
vs N 4� N ct
ci
U cn
U
cd
cn
p ct N U cc3
coo cf)
cn
N
cn
U W o �
�
M
�
ct
ct
cd
O
ct
.�
O
Ca
Q
a�
bA
•-�
cd
OM
Cd
U
CC
bA
`.
Cd
c�
•�
Cd
o
Cd
Cd
c
U
�
C4
O
U
C�
U
au
bA
7�
CC3
Cld
U�
0 0
O �O
C,d M
r--I
;--I
U
O
N
c
ct
�
�
�
O
O
lc�
�
ct
C6
Q
0
n
0
Q
0
0
N
0
u
0
0
0
o
o
.
ct
.,
o
ct
o
�
o
o
ct
ct
U
O
O
c
p
cn
ct
O+>'C42
•�
ct
C
CA
u
�-- City Council Retreat, April 9, 2011
Proposal for SB Depot Parking & Bayshore Drive
Overview
The La Porte -Bay Area Heritage Society operates the historic Sylvan Beach Depot as a museum,
open to the public approximately 500 hours per year, through their agreement with the City of
La Porte. The Society is primarily made up of La Porte, Shoreacres, and Morgan's Point citizens,
many of whom are retired, and all who have an interest in preserving the heritage of our City.
Issues
There is no parking specifically provided for this facility, although there is substantial parking
available in the Sylvan Beach Park across the street. With the increasing attendance at the
Museum, coupled with the elevated median age of the Society members, staff was asked to
explore the possibility of additional parking adjacent to the Depot to facilitate the use and
utility for the end users, which are Museum visitors and Society members. Staff has explored
some possible solutions that will be presented.
Option #1
The Harris County Sylvan Beach Master Plan calls for the eventual closing of Bayshore Drive
between the Depot and the Park, and includes future parking in the area. Staff is proposing that
the City consider closing Bayshore Drive as a way to meet the parking needs of the Depot
Museum, and to help facilitate the Harris County plan for the park. By closing the northeast
entrance and placing an emergency gate access, the City can ensure a safe, secure area for our
elderly members as well as the ability to provide future parking as the Museum attendance
grows. There is enough existing paved area at the northeast end for a turn -around. The
southwest entrance would be marked with signage and cross -hatching to notify those
transiting, to use the Park Street corridor (there is also internal passage through Sylvan Beach
Park). Cost estimates for the street closure and a single parking aisle, with straight -in parking,
would be $22,000 for approximately 14 new parking spaces. Future parking aisles could be
added as demand grows, at about $16,000 per additional section. Each additional section
would add approximately 14 spaces at 9' spacing. Staff recommends this as the most practical
way to meet the future needs of the Depot Museum as well as to assist Harris County in its
future park usage plans.
Depot Parking and Bayshore Drive Page 1 of 2
Option #2
Another option would be to convert Bayshore Drive into a one-way street, northbound only.
This option would eliminate a lane of traffic and allow it to be used for angle parking. Very little
paving would be required to accomplish this option, just +/- 5 feet of the shoulder. This option
would not seriously interrupt traffic movement. As in Option #1 there is ample room for the
parking spaces, and there are two additional routes in close proximity that are available for
southbound traffic. This option does not meet the Harris County future park use plan, although
it could be viewed as a first step. Angle parking would be preferred so as to allow traffic to exit
the parking area to the north only. Cost estimates for the street closure and a single parking
aisle, with angle parking utilizing one lane, and creating approximately 14 spaces, would be
$7,000.
Option #3
The third option identified, would leave the street untouched, but would require additional
work to provide parking. This option would require culverts along the southwest side of
Bayshore, and straight -in parking up to the fence along that portion of the Depot. This would be
more expensive to provide due to the culverting and additional paving material required.
Because parking would require patrons to back up into traffic to exit, it would require straight
in parking, or parallel parking. Parallel parking would severely limit the number of available
spaces obtained, but would be less expensive. This option does not address the Harris County
future park use plans. Cost estimates for a single parking aisle, with straight -in parking, also
providing approx. 14 spaces, would be $11,000. Cost estimates for parallel parking, would be
$6,000, but would only provide about 8 parallel spaces.
Summary
Option #1 is advantageous if the City wants to move in the direction of preparing for the future.
The cost of Option 1 is the highest at +/- $22,000, but solves the need for any future action and
provides the needed parking for now and for the future.
Option #2 would be less costly at $7,000 and would still provide for current parking needs at
the Depot, and could be an interim measure for the long-term parking needs and the Harris
County future plans for Sylvan Beach Park.
Option #3 is more costly than #2 and provides the current parking needs, but does nothing for
the future needs for additional parking or Sylvan Beach Park needs.
Depot Parking and Bayshore Drive Page 2 of 2
The Master Plan for Sylvan Beach creates a strong park perimeter and approach to the park.
New entry sign walls designate the park and large shade Irees are proposed around the perimeter.
The band shell, in the art deco style, becomes an architectural element reminiscent of the old park
, re
gateway". The stage and plaza area allow for music, dancing and other events which am
to the park.
Visitors can stroll along the seawall promenade and take a nip through the music
of the We and Ws and step down the grand stairs to the newly established
beach. Activities along the waterfront bring to mind the "amusement park° -- -�-..
atmosphere once seen on Sylvan Beach. A new playground and skate park
arc located near the fountain plaza. The "Dancing Watcrs" fountain plaza
serves as an interactive spray park for visitors. A gazebo provides shade 16(RY ENEY"At
for small groups and an elegant setting for weddings and small
celebrations. Visitors can stroll along the seawall step down EUOEAEOA 1
to the re-established beach
Circulation and parking for the existing BRODO'M
pavilion have been revised and the
bait shopleoncession is relocated nearer \*
to the active fishing pier. Parking — , Y
throughout the park is relocated to help - .IAVX
minimize the visual impact and r `. '" AM
PWLD
to provide better access to the park
facilities. Open areas arc preserved for - _,
y
festival fields and group activities.
a �t
Patting is added to the front of the park
in the museum area and pedestrian
access unites the museum area
with the park a�
�.: _.fS:F ...A�A
_ MAw
NM WAWAL4.PRO Aoua
EOOIGROMTO
EETAELIENBBACRAEEA EE'TlTOi7 ERAMIPAY9JON
117[YROEORLOt RE IZAN"ROAQIAND
AOCCUTOMD 1AMIGA7EA
WMIMXLGUN
woo/
■!1'17 EIIEIYALL
DYngnaNT
IAAN.AKOUW 1
" j, 4�.
" NINtWUPAA
WAMCANOl�M y
ENAACAi
MANC NU MA7MW AOU URI
TAI "NAY 4
PIDIJ Lhc)` vs
0MRAYAMAREMALIMO
PURMDOUA DOM
NNNYMIENO"
OONCKUM IrAW
MUM MM
0. : M
City Council Retreat, April 9, 2011
RFC Land Acquisition
Overview
The City began acquiring land behind the La Porte Recreation & Fitness Center in 1999 for
future park expansion purposes. The majority of land was acquired through the delinquent tax
process. Between 1999 and 2007, the Assistant City Attorney assisted in the acquisition of
approximately 12 additional land purchases of individual lots or parcels. In October of 2005 the
City Council passed a Takings Resolution for all the remaining properties at the time, except for
the Cook property because it was occupied. The slide dated 2007 shows the last 4 land
purchases completed, and the 5 parcels that are remaining to be purchased.
Current Status
The remaining five properties are going to be difficult to obtain, given the current conditions:
1. The DeBakey property was owned by Barry DeBakey. He has since passed away
and the property is now shown to be owned by Michael DeBakey (also
deceased), and Lereta Martin.. There are some title issues associated with these
(now two) parcels. The DeBakey portion is .287 acres and HCAD valuation is
$3,125. The Martin portion is also .287 acres and HCAD valuation is also $3,125.
2. Frymore was contacted; they are speculators and have placed an extremely high
value on their property that was priced beyond any reasonable negotiation
levels. It will most likely require condemnation to acquire. Frymore's acreage is
1.4348 acres, and HCAD valuation is $18,750.
3. This property is owned by Sharon Cook Rolmfeld (Ms. Cook's daughter). She is
not interested in selling at this time. Her acreage is .1320 acres, and HCAD
valuation is $11,500.
4. The White property is owned by an absentee owner in Colorado who plans to
possibly retire and build on this property. Even though she was notified that the
property is in the flood plain and is probably not buildable, she is not interested
in selling. Ms. White's acreage is .1435 and the HCAD valuation is $4,688.
5. The Cook property is the only property that contains a building or is occupied. It
is currently not for sale. Upon recommendation by Council, Ms. Cook was
offered a life estate in the property by the City Attorney and asked to negotiate.
She refused and declined to meet further. Her property is 2.295 acres and the
HCAD valuation is $54,598.
RFC Property Acquisition, Page 1 of 2
Total valuation for all of the remaining parcels (HCAD) is $95,786. The total acreage is actually
more than shown above, because it does not include alleys or street rights of way.
Future Development
The City is proceeding with a joint venture with Trees for Houston, for a tree farm directly
behind the Recreation & Fitness Center. It will be approximately % acre and will provide trees
for Trees for Houston for the southeast side of Harris County. Trees for Houston planted
approximately 2,000 trees for the City at Pecan Park this winter and staff expects many more
trees to be planted as a result of this joint venture.
The City is proposing that the new Animal Control Building be placed on the acquired property
as well as additional parking that would serve both the Animal Control facility as well as the
RFC. A new trail will lead to the Little Cedar Bayou pedestrian bridge to provide access to the
proposed Dog Park. This trail will lend itself well to picnic area and nature walk areas in the
property.
Summary
It would seem prudent for the City not move forward with any additional acquisition in the area
until there is a conclusion of the Cook property stalemate. Once that happens, then the
recommendation would be to move forward with acquisition of the remaining tracts and
parcels.
RFC Property Acquisition, Page 2 of 2
VIIUI LI..
Properties 1-5 below remain to be purchased.
10
� r
F
1125 1124 1123
- City not interested in purchase of this property.
W. "L„ Street . ra
CO
r.,
imson �x
Frmore
_r
40 1156 1157
W. "M" Street .1 .., ,
1429 430 1431 1432
rA
Aw,
Colliery
Rol mfeI
Purchase ook�
Ti
W. " N' Street
1440 1439 1438
P4 Gla Tiding
P,.Ar tease
Whit
a
Kk�
1,a
y Ell 1 �,
2009*32315
RESOLUTION NO.200.5
A RES LUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF TRACTS OF LAND FOR
`f PUBLIC PARK LAND PURPOSES IN THE CITY OF LA PORTE; FINDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Porte has found and determined
that public necessity requires the acquisition of tracts of land for public park land
purposes on the hereinafter described real property in the City of La Porte, Harris
County, Texas; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Porte has found and determined
that the tracts of land hereinafter described are suitable and needed for public park land
purposes, and that it is necessary to acquire same for public park land purposes; and
}' WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Porte deems it advisable to
.1.
authorize, and does hereby authorize, John D. Armstrong, Assistant City Attorney of the
City of La Porte, or his designated representative, to represent the City of La Porte in
the acquisition of the hereinafter described property;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
l CITY OF LA PORTE:
I
Section 1. That the said John D. Armstrong, as Assistant City Attorney for the
City of La Porte, or his designated representative, be and he is hereby authorized to
negotiate with the owners of the hereinafter described land, concerning the acquisition
by the City of La Porte, of the tract of land for public park land purposes, located in
Harris County, Texas, said tract of land being more particularly described as follows, to-
wit:
$28.00
Lots 1 through 32, inclusive, in Block 1156, of TOWN OF LA PORTE, a
subdivision in HARRIS County, Texas, according to the map or plat
thereof, recorded in Volume 60, Page 112 of the Deed Records -of
HARRIS County, Texas.
Lots 1 through 16, inclusive, in Block 1157, of TOWN OF LA PORTE, a
subdivision in HARRIS County, Texas, according to the map or plat
thereof, recorded in Volume 60, Page 112 of the Deed Records of
HARRIS County, Texas.
Lots 25 and 26, in Block 1429, of TOWN OF LA PORTE, a subdivision in
HARRIS County, Texas, according to the map or plat thereof, recorded in
Volume 60, Page 112 of the Deed Records of HARRIS County, Texas.
Lots 1 and 2, and Lots 7 and 8, in Block 1430, of TOWN OF LA PORTE, a
subdivision in HARRIS County, Texas, according to the map or plat
thereof, recorded in Volume 60, Page 112 of the Deed Records of
HARRIS County, Texas.
Lot 17, in Block 1431, of TOWN OF LA PORTE, a subdivision in HARRIS
County, Texas, according to the map or plat thereof, recorded in Volume
60, Page 112 of the Deed Records of HARRIS County, Texas.
Lots 14 and 15, in Block 1438, of LA PORTE, a subdivision in HARRIS
County, Texas, according to the map or plat thereof, recorded in Volume
f 60, Page 112, of the Deed Records of HARRIS County, Texas.
Lots 27, 28, and 29, in Block 1438, of TOWN OF LA PORTE, a
subdivision in HARRIS County, Texas, according to the map or plat
thereof, recorded in Volume 60, Page 112 of the Deed Records of
HARRIS County, Texas.
Lots 30 and 31, in Block 143$, of TOWN OF LA PORTE, a subdivision in
HARRIS County, Texas, according to the map or plat thereof, recorded in
Volume 60, Page 112 of the Deed Records of HARRIS County, Texas.
Save and except 10 feet out of Lots 30 and 31, in Block 1438, recorded in
Volume 1145, Page 346 of the Deed Records of HARRIS County, Texas.
at the fair market value for same, and should said City Attorney, or his designated
representative, as the duly authorized representative of the City of La Porte, be unable
to agree with such owners as to the fair market value of such tract of land, then, and in
that event, said attorney be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to file against all
2
owners and lienholders, proceedings in eminent domain to acquire the above described
property, for public park land purposes.
Section 2. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites, and declares that
a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City
Council was posted at a _place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the
time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law,
Chapter 551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the
public as required by law at all times during which this resolution and the subject matter
thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council
further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting
thereof.
Section 3. This Resolution shall be effective from and after its passage and
approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of k-k6ell*- , 2005.
ATTEST:
Ma rth A. Gillett
City Secretary
CITY OF LA PORTE--''
U
By.
Alton E. Porter, Mayor
3
THE STATE OF TEXAS }
COUNTY OF HARRIS }
CITY OF LA PORTE }
I hereby certify that the attached and foregoing is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No. 2005-18 passed and approved by the City Council of the City of La Porte at
a Meeting Council held on the 10th day of October 2005 and at -which meeting a majority of
the City Council was present and voted in favor of the passage of said. Resolution-, and
notice of which meeting was properly posted according to law, prior -to the date of such
meeting, as said Resolution appears on record in the minutes of said- meeting..
To certify which, witness my hand and Seal of Office, this the 13th day of October,
2005.
�,
as
r i
1
!
Sharon Harris,. TRMC
Assistant City Secretary
�a
! a
1 1�. 1607\
FILEDTOR. OR. RE(jORD
8:OO AM
OCT 2 01005-.
Ccu* Clerk, Harris C� exas
MY WON BEN WHO sm ri i p °FARdoOMAW
TEXAS
cauNrtWHARws
t tWby ft insixttn4tlt�+4 ;7 �" tow
#ata acne sinned ber+,�n r►a; a Y 9t
Qtftciat Public Records of }teal Fro �y �! Fib�tl3 11
90 vitas on
,
J G
City Council Retreat, April 9, 2011
Klein's Retreat & Happy Harbor Property
Overview
The Klein's Retreat Property and Happy Harbor Property were purchased for an undetermined
future use. One possible use for a portion or all of the properties is for parkland, to connect the
Seabreeze Park with Sylvan Beach to the southwest. The future land use has not been
determined at this date.
Current Use of These Properties
The Klein's Retreat Property has a Texas General Land Office Coastal Lease (#CE2005-0145)
which was obtained when the new bulkhead was built, shortly after the property was obtained
by the City. The TGLO requires that, if the property is not open to the public, an annual lease
fee must be paid to the Texas School Fund. By keeping the park gates open to the public, the
City has met that obligation.
The Happy Harbor Property has also been open to the public (although neither has been
advertised) since its purchase. Both properties are attractive as they are waterfront and are
available for use as picnic sites, fishing, scenic views, etc.
Future Use of These Properties
There is an issue of the properties becoming "de facto" parks, where the occasional
recreational use becomes the primary activity and could be claimed as the intended use. While
this is a possibility, in order to reserve the final determination of how the land will be used in
the future, the City Attorney's office is recommending that a resolution be considered by the
Council that establishes that the future use has not been determined and that although the
property is available for recreational use, it is not dedicated parkland.
The resolution would not preclude the future use as parkland, should the Council determine
that should be its future use. It would eliminate the claim for "de facto" parkland based on
previous use, should the Council decide some other future use for the land.
IN E T � RE / -JKX T � ;ffHff AK s P N � I
V '%,.t Ly Vl LCl. LUX M:
Parks & Recreation Department
April 9, 2011
-47
R
eift s
Vr,
Retreat
Sylvan Beach
Park
18 acres,
j
'Private
Property
2011 Google
lmagery,'Date 3112 2010 1978 29"39 5'00'26 72*'VV elev 12 It
T; 20 101 GOOSIC
Eye alt 20181t
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 30, 2011
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Ron Bottoms, City Manager
Re: Council Budget Retreat Discussion Item: Future Use of the National Guard Building
The Texas Air National Guard will be terminating their lease on the building located at the La Porte
airport and vacating the building sometime in April 2011. The City has been in communication with the
personnel at the base to begin the process of turning the building over to the City. Staff has taken a
cursory tour though the interior of the building but was not able to ascertain what, if any, improvements
or repairs may be required, such as asbestos abatement or infrastructure upgrades. Additionally, the
National Guard conducted an environmental assessment of the site and there appear to be some
outstanding issues related to underground storage tanks and a potential hydraulic leak. These are all
issues the City will encourage the Guard to abate or resolve prior to the City assuming responsibility for
the building and the site.
Regarding future use of the building, City staff would like to present several potential options and begin
developing a plan to move forward. Each option has benefits and drawbacks and should be considered
with the understanding that, at a minimum, it is likely the City will incur annually recurring maintenance
costs. Moreover, this is not intended to be an exhaustive listing of potential uses. Additional ideas
from Council are welcome and encouraged.
1. San Jacinto College: A representative from the college has contacted the City on a number of
occasions inquiring about future use of the building. The College is very interested in utilizing
the building. Discussions with the college have been preliminary in nature and terms or
conditions of use were not discussed.
2. Utilization by City Departments: Currently, the City uses a number of different facilities for
storage of items, such as documents, auction items, and Christmas decorations. Some storage
utilizes existing city facilities and others utilize rented storage space. The National Guard
building is centrally located and would allow departments to consolidate into a single location.
Additionally, the rental storage facilities could be eliminated to realize some savings.
3. Small Business Incubator Site: This idea is based on the premise that capital costs to construct
a building (one of the largest single expenditures of a start up company) can often determine
whether a small, start-up business is successful or not. Providing office space for small, local,
start-up businesses for a set period of time can help these ventures get on their feet, gain a
client base in the community and the area, and perhaps leverage that momentum into a
permanent site within the City. The building is large enough to have several companies sharing
the available space at one time.
4. Conference/Meeting Center: By taking advantage of the La Porte airport, the City could use the
building as a conference center for businesses and other groups and associations within the area
and throughout the state. With industry located all around La Porte, the airport offers
companies a unique opportunity to fly in and walk directly from the tarmac to the meeting
room.
CITY OF LA PORTE
OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY
Patrice Fogarty, TRMC fogartyp@1aportetx.gov
604 W. Fairmont Parkway Phone: 281-470-5019
La Porte, Texas 77571 Fax: 281-470-5009
Item for April 9, 2011, Budget Retreat
Mayor and Council:
Discussion regarding Council's consideration of
appointing a Charter Review Commission
The last amendment to the City Charter was in 1980. It is typical to review a City
Charter at least every 10 years, or even more often in some cities. A Charter Review
Commission may suggest changes, and it is then up to Council to decide whether to
bring forth proposed amendments for an election.
There are some instances where our Charter is outdated and needs amending. For
example, the Conduct of Elections section should be amended because our Charter
specifically addresses when the general election is held (first Saturday in April), and
it could be changed to state elections "must be held according to state law."
While the City goes about its business diligently complying with the Charter when it
can and State law when it overrules the Charter, it would be beneficial to take a look
at what amendments might be recommended by a Charter Review Commission.
Patrice Fogarty
City Secretary