Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-07-10 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of La Porte City Council1�1 FA1 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING OF THE LA PORTE CITY COUNCIL July 10, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Alton Porter at 6:00 p.m. Members of City Council Present: Mayor Alton Porter, Council members Tommy Moser, Mike Mosteit, Barry Beasley, Chuck Engelken, Howard Ebow, Mike Clausen and Councilmember Louis Rigby. Members of Council Absent: Peter Griffiths. Members of City Executive Staff and City Employees Present: City Manager Debra Feazelle, Assistant City Manager John Joerns, Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins, Public Works Director Steve Gillett, City Secretary Martha Gillett, Assistant City Secretary Sharon Harris, Fire Chief Mike Boaze, Planning Director Wayne Sabo, Assistant to the City Manager Crystal Scott, Fire Marshal Cliff Meekins, EMS Supervisor Gary Griffin, Assistant Fire Chief Champ Dunham, Inspector Mike Kirkwood, Temporary Inspector Cindy Griffis, Building Official Debbie Wilmore and Chief Police Richard Reff. Others Present: B.L. Worsham, Sue Gail Kooken, Jack Oliphant, and other citizens. 2. B.L. Worsham of Second Baptist Church of La Porte delivered the Invocation. 3. Mayor Porter led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. PRESENTATIONS / PROCLAMATIONS There were no presentations or proclamations presented at the meeting. 5. Consent Agenda A. Consider approving Minutes of the Regular Meeting of City Council held on June 26, 2006. B. Council to consider approval or other action regarding awarding a bid PE2 and PE4 Aggregate for Surface Treatment in the amount of $42,504.00 and contingency not to exceed budgeted funds of $45,000.00. C. Council to consider approval or other action regarding awarding a bid for police uniforms and body armor in the amount not to exceed $40,640.00. D. Council to consider approval or other action regarding an ordinance amending Chapter 42 of Appendix B-Fines, of the Code of Ordinances, setting a fine of $500 for each violation of Sex Offender Residency. E. Council to consider approval or other action approving and authorizing proposed rate increase of 3.5% for collection of containerized commercial solid waste by AlliedBFI Waste Services of Texas. City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 2 F. Council to consider approval or other action regarding an ordinance approving an alcohol permit for Baytown Seafood. Motion was made by Moser Council member to approve the consent agenda as presented with item 8 not including Councilmember Chuck Engelken voting on item 8. Second by Council member Clausen. The motion carried. Ayes: Mosteit, Moser, Engelken, Beasley, Rigby, Ebow, Clausen and Porter. Nays: None Abstain: None 6. PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND CITIZENS AND TAX PAYERS WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM POSTED ON THE AGENDA. There were no citizens wishing to address Council. 7. Discuss recommendation for approval by Planning & Zoning to approve Special Conditional Use Permit #SCU 06-002 for proposed development of office/warehouse to be located in the Underwood Business Park. Open Public Hearing - Mayor Porter opened the Public Hearing at 6:11 p.m. Review by Staff — Director of Planning and Community Development Wayne Sabo provided an overview. Public Input — None Recommendation of Planning and Zoning — Unanimously, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended City Council consider approval of Special Conditional Use Permit #SCU 06-002 for proposed development of office/warehouse to be located in the Underwood Business Park. The Public Hearing was closed at 6:13 p.m. 8. Council to consider approval or other action regarding Ordinance 1501-05 & SCUP 06-002 Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 1501-05- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, CHAPTER 106, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, BY GRANTING A SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #SCU06-002 FOR THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO -WIT: 9.046 ACRE TRACT OUT OF +207 ACRES OF LAND (ALONG OLD UNDERWOOD ROAD SOUTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 225 AND UPRR) IN THE ENOCH BRINSON SURVEY, ABSTRACT-5, LA PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN OFFICEIWAREHOUSE FACILITY IN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONE; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 3 Motion was made by Council member Beasley o approve Ordinance 1501-05 & SCU 06- 002 as presented by Mr. Sabo. Second by Council member Ebow. The motion carried. Ayes: Mosteit, Engelken, Moser, Beasley, Ebow, Clausen, Rigby and Porter. Nays: None Abstain: None 9. Discuss recommendation for approval by Planning & Zoning to approve ordinances condemning (13) substandard structures. Open Public Hearing - Mayor Porter opened the Public Hearing at 6:15 p.m. Review by Staff — Building Official Debbie Wilmore provided an overview. Public Input: Vic Driscoll — 1040 Heights Blvd, Houston TX 77008 — against Ord 2904, 202 Forest Richard Harrison — 4545 Elm, Bellaire TX 77401 — against Ord. 2904, 202 Forest Jack Oliphant — 101 Garfield, La Porte TX 77571 — against Ord. 2904, 202 Forest Russell Harrison — 5014 Cheena Drive, Houston TX 77096 — against Ord. 2904, 202 Forest Recommendation of Staff — move forward with each condemnation. The Public Hearing was closed at 6:49 p.m. 10. Council to consider approval or other action regarding ordinances condemning (13) substandard structures. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2902 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON Tr.5B; Abst.30; ADDITION W.P. Harris, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Terramedica, Ltd.%Dr. Marcus M. Acquino IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATEOF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 4 Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2903 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 12, LOTS 11, 12, BAY OAKS, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT William P. Felscher IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2904 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 15, LOTS 1- 3, SYLVAN BEACH, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Richard H. Harrison IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2905 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 44, LOTS 3- 4, La Porte, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Sybil Fry, % Stanley D. Sherwood IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 5 DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2906 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 92, LOTS 2 - 5, BUfront, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Colleen M. Applebe, %Russell Applebe IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2907 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 105, LOTS 29-30, SYLVAN BEACH, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Joe Booker, % East Texas Investment Group IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing -July 10, 2006 Page 6 REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2908 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 89, LOTS 25-26, La. Porte ,HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Loretta Y. Walker Adrianne Walker Carmen Walker Cara L. Walker, & Brandon Walker IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2909 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 88, LOTS 1- 2, La Porte ,HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Daniel Baker IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDINGS) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2910 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 80, LOTS City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 7 13-14 La Porte ,HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Estella Monroe IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(I 0) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2911 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON BLK 66, LOTS 7- 8, La Porte ,HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Callie Mae Wade Sims % Georgia Mae Hughes IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2912 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON Tr 277 A-2, La Porte Outlots, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Carol A. Maedgen IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 8 EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2006-2913 AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATION ON PT, TRS. 284C & 285B, La Porte Outlots, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TO BE IN FACT A NUISANCE; ORDERING SUCH BUILDING(S) CONDEMNED; FINDING THAT Richard H. Harrison IS THE RECORD OWNER(S) OF SAID PROPERTY; ORDERING THE SAID OWNERS(S) TO ENTIRELY REMOVE OR TEAR DOWN SUCH BUILDINGS(S); ORDERING THE SAID OWNER(S) TO COMMENCE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN TEN(10) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND TO COMPLETE SAID REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, ORDERING THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD TO PLACE A NOTICE ON SAID BUILDING(S), ORDERING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FORWARD A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO SAID OWNER(S); PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SAID BUILDING(S) BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE IF NOT REMOVED BY SAID OWNER(S) IN THE MANNER PROVIDED HEREIN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; AND FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. Motion was made by Council member Beasley to approve Ordinance 2902 2903 and 2905 through 2913 and to continue public hearing as to Ordinance 2904 at the first meeting in September 2006 at which time Ordinance 2904 will be re -considered. Second by Council member Engelken. The motion carried. Ayes: Mosteit, Engelken, Moser, Beasley, Ebow, Clausen, Rigby and Porter. Nays: None Abstain: None 11. Council to consider approval or other action regarding the first reading of an ordinance adopting a franchise agreement with Center Point Energy, Inc. Chuck Engelken obstain from item due to conflict of interest. City Attorney Clark Askins presented summary and recommendation and answered Council's questions. City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 9 Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2914 - AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO CENTERPOINT ENERGY HOUSTON ELECTRIC, LLC THE RIGHT, PRIVILEGE AND FRANCHISE TO USE THE PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY AND TO USE, LICENSE, OR EXPLOIT THE COMPANY'S FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY TO CONDUCT AN ELECTRIC DELIVERY BUSINESS IN THE CITY AND FOR SUCH OTHER BUSINESS PURPOSES AS THE COMPANY MAY DESIRE FROM TIME TO TIME, SPECIFICALLY INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE GRANTING OF ACCESS TO THOSE FACILITIES FOR THE DELIVERY OF BROADBAND OVER POWER LINES OR SIMILAR SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS. Council discussed and considered the first reading of Ordinance 2914. 12. Council to consider approval or other action regarding an ordinance authorizing a Tax Abatement agreement between the City of La Porte and Packwell, Inc. for Real Property located in the La Porte Reinvestment Zone `B". City Manager John Joerns presented summary and recommendation and answered Council's questions. Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read: ORDINANCE 2915— AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING A TAX ABATEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA PORTE AND PACKWELL, INC., A TEXAS CORPORATION, FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE LA PORTE REINVESTMENT ZONE A; MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Motion was made by Council member Rigby to approve the Ordinance 2915- as presented by Mr. Joerns. Second by Council member Clausen. The motion carried Ayes: Mosteit, Moser, Engelken, Beasley, Ebow, Clausen, Rigby and Porter. Nays: None Abstain: None 13. Discuss updates on Barbours Cut/Transportation issues. Mayor Pro -Tern Tommy Moser and Councilmember Mike Mosteit provided update. 14. Administrative Reports City Manager Debra Feazelle reminded council La Porte hosting the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership at Sylvan Beach on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 at 4:00 p.m., the Budget Meetings will be held August 14 — 18, 2006 and August 9, 2006 is the Breakfast with the Stars at Sylvan Beach Pavilion. 15. Council Comments Moser, Beasley, Ebow, Engelken, Mosteit, Clauen, Rigby and Porter had comments. City Council Regular Meeting and Public Hearing —July 10, 2006 Page 10 16. EXECUTIVE SESSION — PURSUANT TO PROVISION OF THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW, CHAPTER 551.071 THROUGH 551.076, 551-087, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY, DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, DELIBERATION REGARDING PROSPECTIVE GIFT OR DONATION, PERSONNEL MATTERS, DELIBERATION REGARDING SECURITY DEVICES, OR EXCLUDING A WITNESS DURING EXAMINATION OF ANOTHER WITNESS IN AN INVESTIGATION, DELIBERATION REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS) 551-074 —(PERSONNEL MATTERS) — CITY MANAGER'S EVALUATION. 551-072 — (LAND MATTER) — DISCUSS LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY Council retired to Executive Session at 8:55 p.m. 17. There was no action taken during Executive Session Council returned to the table at 8:56 p.m. 18. There being no further business to come before Council, the Regular Meeting was duly adjourned at 8:57 p.m. Res ctfully submitt d, Mart a Gil ett, City Secretary Passed and approved on this 24"' day of July 2006 Mayor A o E.Porter REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested July 24, 2006 Requested By: Martha fflett Department: Cit3zSecretar3 'soffice Report: Resolution: X Ordinance: Exhibits: Resolution Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YES NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The Economic Alliance Houston Port Region is requesting each City adopt a Resolution supporting Project Stars and appointing a representative to the Technical Advisory Committee. The City Manager is recommending Parks and Recreation Director Stephen Barr be appointed to the Technical Advisory Committee. Action Required by Council: Recommendation is to approve the resolutions supporting Project Starts and appointing Parks and Recreation Director to the Technical Advisory Committee. J--/Q -0 Date RESOLUTION NO. 2006- I A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS TO PARTICIPATE IN PROJECT STARS AS SPONSORED BY THE ECONOMIC ALLIANCE HOUSTON PORT REGION BY ENDORSING CONCEPTUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL CORRIDOR STANDARDS, TO PARTICIPATE IN A GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE TO BE KNOWN AS THE PROJECT STARS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND TO APPOINT A REPRESENTATIVE TO SAID COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, the economic Alliance Houston Port Region created a Quality of Life Task Force to enhance the image and quality of life of it's 17 membership jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Quality of Life Task Force identified numerous historic, cultural and natural amenities unique to our region; and WHEREAS, certain conceptual corridor design standards were recommended as a mutually beneficial means to provide a unified sense of place within the region, and for those corridors linking the amenity sites; and WHEREAS, using certain consistent features and universal standards in the regions corridor designs will contribute to a prominent and unified sense of place on a scale not otherwise conveyed by individual member jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: SECTION 1. That the City Council, on behalf of the citizens of the City of LA PORTE, supports Project Stars and hereby expresses its intent to participate in the development of corridor design standards as sponsored by the Economic Alliance Houston Port Region by endorsing the goals and strategies attached hereto as exhibit A. SECTION 2. That the City of LA PORTE hereby its intent to participate in a governance structure to be known as the Project Stars Technical Advisory Committee, and appoints a representative to said committee for the purpose of providing local input and reporting project status to the Mayor or Chief Executive Officer. SECTION 3. That the City Council officially determines 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 confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 26th day of July, A.D., 2006. ALTO PORTER, MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY Martha Gillett CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS CITY ATTORNEY Knox Askins CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS 0 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: 07/24/06 Requested By: D. Wilmore 0%4k Department: Planning Department Report: X Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: List of Dangerous Buildings Exhibits: Dangerous Building Inspection Reports Exhibits: Slide Presentation Budget Source of Funds: General Funds Account Number: 001-9092-524-6021 Amount Budgeted: S63MOO Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YES NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The Dangerous Building Inspection Board was created by Article VIII; Section 82-472 of the City's Code of Ordinances. The Board is comprised of Debbie Wilmore, Chief Building Official; Mike Boaze, Fire Chief and Clif Meekins, Fire Marshal. The Board has inspected seventeen (17) structures at sixteen (16) locations and found them, as defined by Section 82-471, to be a "dangerous building'. Council is asked to review the Board's findings and then authorize a public hearing for the purpose of possible condemnation and ordering demolition of these structures. A public hearing date of August 28, 2006 is requested. On May 24, 2006, the Accounting Department confirmed the $63,000.00 fund balance in account #00 1 -9092-524-602 1. Staff anticipates adequate demolition funds for the recently condemned structures in Group 1 as well as structures located within the newest group (Group 2) currently under review by Council. The bidding process follows the condemnation of the structures. Action Required by Council: 1. Review findings of the Dangerous Building Inspection Board 2. Authorize a public hearing date for all seventeen (17) structures being considered. Awroved for City Council Agenda j I IA,k, ).-,q v--a� Debra B. Feazelle, City Manager j Date POTENTIAL DANGEROUS BUILDINGS Summer 2006, Group 2 Update: July 13, 2006 1) 210 Edgewood Zoning: R-1 Use: Dwelling (Mobile Home) Legal: Blk. 2; Lots 7,8; Crescent Shores HCAD: #061-061-002-0007 Tax Roll: J. H. Smith - P. O. Box 913 - La Porte, Tx 77572-0913 Deed: Paul Robert Bonner & Wanda Elaine Bonner - P. O. Box 913 - La Porte, Tx 77572-0913 Other: J. H. Smith % Elaine Bonner - P. O. Box 913 - La Porte, Tx 77572-0913 Other: Paul R. Bonner - P. O. Box 1128 - Montgomery, Tx 77356 (Son) Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed 2) 202 Edgewood Zoning: R-1 Use: Dwelling (Mobile Home) Legal: Blk. 2; Lots 5,6; Crescent Shores HCAD: #061-061-002-0005 Tax Roll: Paul Bonner % Elaine Bonner - P. O. Box 913 - LaPorte, Tx 77572-0913 Deed: Pino Candelari & Filomena Uguccioni - Unknown Address (Lot 6) Deed: Unable to locate title document on Lot 5 [From 1953 to date] Other: Paul R. Bonner - P. O. Box 1128 - Montgomery, Tx 77356 (Son) Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed 3) 1911 Roscoe Zonin : R-1 Use: Single Family Dwelling LeSal: Blk. 24; Lots 31-36; Bayfront HCAD: #006-114-000-0031 Tax Roll: C. D. Wilkinson - 23 Bahama Dr. - Rockport, Tx 78382-3703 Deed: Charles D. Wilkinson, III - P. O. Box 27559 - Houston, Tx 77027 Other: C. D. Wilkinson - 23 Bahama Dr., Ivey Allegro - Rockport, Tx 78382-3703 Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed Potential Dangerous Building List Summer 2006, Group 2 Page 2 4) 513 S. Virginia Zoning: R-1 Use: Single Family Dwelling Legal: Blk. 240; Lots 8, 9 & S. 7' of Lot 7 & N. 4.58' of Lot 10 & Adj. Strip; San Jacinto Homes HCAD: #069-099-006-0007 Tax Roll: City of La Porte Deed: Paul Schaider & Elaine Schaider — 1608 Roscoe Ave. — La Porte, Tx 77571 2006 Tax Resale: Paul J. Schaider - 1608 Roscoe - LaPorte, Tx 77571 Taxes: $7,349.65 (As of July 2006) Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed 5) 521 & 521 '/2 N. Broadway (521: Liquor store @ road; 521 V2: Smokehouse building @ club) Zoning: GC Use: Commercial Legal: Blk. 108; Lots 25-28; La Porte HCAD: #023-218-008-0025 Tax Roll: Arthur Walker, Jr. & Joseph L. Walker - 8718 Berndale — Houston, Tx 77029 Deed: Arthur Walker, Jr. & Joseph Lee Walker — 9525 Collingdale — La Porte, Tx 77571 Other: NIA Taxes: $2,233.40 (As of July 2006) Mowing/Clean-up Liens: $25.00 VOLUNTARY CONSENT TO DEMOLISH (Smokehouse @ 521 V2) 6) 213 N. 2nd Street Zoninu: R-1 Use: Single Family Dwelling Legal: Blk. 63; Lots 26,27; La Porte HCAD: #023-196-063-0026 Tax Roll: Lillie B. Warren - P. O. Box 451 -La Porte, Tx 77572-0451 Deed: Idell Warren & wife, Lillie B. Warren — 213 N. 2nd St. — LaPorte, Tx 77571 Other: Lillie B. Warren % Lisa Anderson — 417 Spencer Landing West - LaPorte, Tx 77571 Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed Potential Dangerous Building List Summer 2006, Group 2 Page 3 7) 505 N. 4th Street Zoning: R-2 Use: Single Family Dwelling Legal: Blk. 104; Lots 19-22; La Porte HCAD: #023-216-004-0019 Tax Roll: Rev. Joe Durden - 505 N. a St. - LaPorte, Tx 77571-3307 Deed: Wilson James Majors, Jr. — 505 N. e St. — LaPorte, Tx 77571 (Grandson) Other: N/A Taxes: $858.07 (As of July 2006) Mowing/Clean-un Liens: $165.00 8) 129 N. 5" Street Zonin Main Street District Use: Single Family Dwelling Leal: Blk. 55; Lots 30-33; La Porte HCAD: #023-188-000-0030 Tax Roll: Alfonso Gutierrez Jr. & Maria N. - 129 N. 5' St. LaPorte, Tx 77571-3425 Deed: Alfonso Gutierrez Jr. & Maria N. - 129 N. 5 h St. LaPorte, Tx {sic] 77571 Other: Alfonso Gutierrez, Jr. & Maria N. — 7403 Comanche Street — Baytown, Tx 77521 Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: $894.00 VOLUNTARY CONSENT TO DEMOLISH 9) 628 N. 5'h Street Zonin BI Use: Single Family Dwelling Legal: Blk. 331; Lots 3,4; La Porte HCAD: #024-039-031-0003 Tax Roll: Andrew J. Mrhring - 628 N. 5' St. - La Porte, Tx 77571-3312 Deed: Enrique Rodriguez — 628 N. 5 b St. — La Porte, Tx 77571-3312 Other: Andrew J. Mehring — 911 Richvale Ln. — Houston, Tx 77062 Taxes: $197.28 (As of July 2006) Mowing/Clean-up Liens: $345.00 Potential Dangerous Building List Summer 2006, Group 2 Page 4 10) 632 N. 5 h Street Zoning: BI Use: Single Family Dwelling Le&al: Blk. 331; Lots 1,2; LaPorte HCAD: #024-039-031-0001 Tax Roll: Addie Mathews - P. O. Box 24 - 632 N. 5' St. — La Porte, Tx 77571-3312 Deed: City of La Porte — Tax Cause #2004-38206 (06/07/05 Filing Date) Other: N/A Taxes: $12,845.36 (As of July 2006) Mowin Clean-up Liens: None Owed 11) 305 N. Oh Street Zoning: R-1 Use: Single Family Dwelling Legal: Blk. 78; Lots 19,20; La Porte HCAD: #023-203-078-0019 Tax Roll: Gertie Pinkney - 305 N. 66' St. - La Porte, Tx 77571-3203 Deed: Gertie Pinkney - 305 N. a St. - La Porte, Tx 77571 Other: N/A Taxes: None Owed Mowin Clean-up Liens: None Owed 12) 1306 N. 10t' Street Zoning: BI Use: Commercial Legal: Tr. 27, Blk. 27; & Tr. 28, Blk. 28; & Tr. 3; Abst. 5, E. Brinson HCAD: #027-083-000-0001 Tax Roll: Oak Park Trading Ltd. - 1400 N. l0a' St., Trlr. 100 — La Porte, Tx 77571-3231 Deed: Oak Park Trading Ltd. - 1400 N. 100' St., Box 100 — La Porte, Tx 77571 (1/2 Interest) Unable to Locate Deed on remaining '/Z Interest Other: Oak Park Trading Ltd. % Hal Lawler — 911 Oak Leaf - La Porte, Tx 77571 Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed Potential Dangerous Building List Summer 2006, Group 2 Page 5 13) 502 N. 11'j' Street Zoning: GC Use: Salvage Yard Legal: Blk. 98; Lots 15,16; La Porte HCAD: #023-213-098-0015 Tax Roll: Calixtro Castillo - P. O. Box 831 - LaPorte, Tx 77572-0831 Deed: Calixtro Castillo — 502 N. 1 lth St. - La Porte, Tx 77571 Other: Calixtro Castillo % Calixtro Castillo, Jr. — 721 Princeton — Deer Park, Tx 77536 Other: Calixtro Castillo, Jr. —10815 N. L St. — La Porte, Tx 77571 (Son) Taxes: $2,443.11 (As of July 2006) Mowin Clean-up Liens: $195.00 14) 10911 North L Street, Trailer #7 Zoning: MH Use: Dwelling (Mobile Home) Legal: Tr. 426B, W. 1/2 of E. 1/2; La Porte Outlots HCAD: #023-140-000-0523 Tax Roll: Linda Dickerson - 5901 Gateshead Dr. - Austin, Tx 78745-3528 Deed: Glennwood Enterprises — 4056 North Duck Creek Rd. — Cleveland, Tx 77327 Other: Glenn Brown dba Glennwood Enterprises - P. O. Box 5309 Pasadena, Tx 77508 (Park License) Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-Lip Liens: None Owed VOLUNTARY CONSENT TO DEMOLISH 15) 10911 North L Street, Trailer #8 Zoning: MH Use: Dwelling (Mobile Home) Lestal: Tr. 426B, W. 1/2 of E. '/2; La Porte Outlots HCAD: #023-140-000-0523 Tax Roll: Linda Dickerson - 5901 Gateshead Dr. - Austin, Tx 78745-3528 Deed: Glennwood Enterprises — 4056 North Duck Creek Rd. — Cleveland, Tx 77327 Other: Glenn Brown dba Glennwood Enterprises - P. O. Box 5309 Pasadena, Tx 77508 (Park License) Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed VOLUNTARY CONSENT TO DEMOLISH Potential Dangerous Building List Summer 2006, Group 2 16) 10911 North L Street, Trailer #26 Zonin : MH Use: Dwelling (Mobile Home) Legal: Tr. 426B, W. '/2 of E. '/2; La Porte Outlots HCAD: #023-140-000-0523 Page 6 Tax Roll: Linda Dickerson - 5901 Gateshead Dr. - Austin, Tx 78745-3528 Deed: Glennwood Enterprises — 4056 North Duck Creek Rd. — Cleveland, Tx 77327 Other: Glenn Brown dba Glennwood Enterprises - P. O. Box 5309 Pasadena, Tx 77508 (Park License) Taxes: None Owed Mowing/Clean-up Liens: None Owed VOLUNTARY CONSENT TO DEMOLISH SACity Planning ShareUNSPECTION DIVLSIOMALL OTHER STUMCode Enforcement0ang Buildings12006 Summer Group 2.doc City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 7-5-06 STREET ADDRESS: 210 EDGEWOOD HCAD OWNER: J. R SMITH - P O BOX 913 - LA PORTS TX 77572-0913 DEED OWNER PAUL ROBERT BONNER do WANDA ELAINE BONNER - P. O. BOX 913 - LA PORTS TX 77572-0913 OTHER: J. H. SMITH %ELAINE BONNER - P. O. BOX 913 - LA PORTS TX 77572-0913 OTHER: PAUL R. BONNER (SON) — P O BOX 1128 — MONTGOMERY. TX 77356 LEGAL: BLOCK 2 LOTS 7-8: CRESCENT SHORES OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: R 1 NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: 1 VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: J 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less thaw it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 4 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property, 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof; is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 4 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is moperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a ba-rd to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; �_4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #2: (NOT REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CUTS DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, AS ADOPTED. AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS ITS GUIDE IT IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS BUT NOT REPAIRABLE AND SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED. THIS BUR DING DOES NOT PROVIDE T IE BASIC MINMW HOUSING STANDARDS DEEMED ESSENTIAL FOR SAFE AND HEALTHFUL LIVING FOR A RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY AND IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY. HEALTH AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF LA PORTS A uu',* BUADNG OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X r % FIRFO�HAL'9 FFICE D4A Ffttt'CS OFFICE ATE Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL. COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings N/A b. Sills N/A c. Joists N/A B. Walls 1. Exterior D EXT. WALLS ON ROOM ADDITION HAS ROT & HOLES: MH EXT. SKIN IS ADEQUATE 2. Interior D ROT, HOLES IN INT. WAILS OF ADDITION & MH Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior D MISSING. DAMAGED ON ADDITION & MH b. Exterior A 2. Porches, Steps, Mrs D PORCH/STEPS FOR REAR OF MH IS MISSING 3. Windows D BROKEN WINDOWS IN ADDITION & MH D. Roof 1. Rafters N/A 2. Deck, Shingles UNK MH METAL ROOF- UNABLE TO INSPECT, ADDITION ROOF - UNABLE TO INSPECT E. Ceilings 1. Joists D ROTTED, DAMAGED ON ADDITION & MH 2. Ceiling D MISSING DAMAGED ON MH F. Floors D BUCKLED, HOLES, DAMAGED ON MH G. Other N/A U. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entance & Pant D NOT TO CODE 2. Wiring D NOT TO CODE 3. Lights, Switches D MISSING, BROKEN IN MH 4. Outlets D MISSING. DAMAGED IN MH 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink UNK NO PLBG IN ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH b. Lavatories UNK NO PLBG IN ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH c. Water/Closets UNK NO PLBG IN ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH d. Shower UNK NO PLBG IN ADDITION, UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH e Water Heater UNK NO PLBG IN ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH 2. Water Piping UNK NO PLBG IN ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK NO PLBG IN ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH 4. Sewer/Septic tank D INT. SEWER -UNABLE TO INSPCr: EXT-BROKEN SEWER LINE 5. Gas System LINK UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating UNK NO HEATING IN ADDITION,• UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH 2. Air Conditioning UNK NO A/C IN ADDTTION:UNABLE TO INSPECT IN MH III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds D 3. Other D DEBRIS. WEEDS METAL CARPORT- HOLES IN METAL ROOFING Comments: * ROOM ADDITION IS ON SLAB & MOBILE HOME METAL UNDERCARRIAGE HAS BLOCKS ON EXISTING SLAB. MOBILE HOME HAS BEEN DECLARED AS AN ABANDONED NON -CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN AN R-1 ZONE, SACPShare\INSPECTION DIVISIONIAU OTHER STUFF\Code EnforcemeMOang Buildings\D B INSP FORM 210 EDGEWOOD.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 7-5-06 STREET ADDRESS: 202 EDGEWOOD HCAD OWNER PAUL BONNER %ELAINE BONNER - P. 0. BOX 913 - LA PORTE, TX 77572-0913 DEED OWNER: PINO CANDELARI & FILOMENA UGUCCIONI — UNKNOWN ADDRESS (LOT 6) DEED OWNER: #2: UNABLE TO LOCATE TITLE DOCUMENT ON LOT 5 [FROM 1953 TO DATEI OTHER: PAUL R BONNER — P.O. BOX 1128 — MONTGOMERY, TX 77356 (SON) LEGAL: BLOCK 2: LOTS 5-6: CRESCENT SHORES OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: R-1 NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER: YES SEWER: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: VACANT: ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREIv1ENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; q 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; . 4 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereot because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereot is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buddings Inspection Form Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 4 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 2. J Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a bazard to life, health, property or safety; J 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; J 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #2: (NOT REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CTTY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. AS ADOPTED, AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS US GUIDE IT IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS, BUT NOT REPAIRABLE. AND SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED. THIS BUILDING DOES NOT PROVIDE THE BASIC NfNRVR M HOUSING STANDARDS DEEMED ESSENTIAL FOR SAFE AND HEALTHFUL LIVING FOR A RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY AND IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY. HEALTH AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF LA PORTE. X';�4l�L� � 7 �o BUILDNG OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE FIRE 'S OFFICE X1.4 Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLLST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings N/A b. Sills N/A c. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH B. Walls 1. Exterior D ROOM ADDITION - EXT WALLS HAVE HOLES, ROT: MH - EXT. _ WALLS OK 2. Interior D ROOM ADDITION INT. WALLS HAVE ROT, DECAY: MH INT. WALLS OK Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior A b. Ex'fererior A 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D ROOM ADDITION HAS STEPS BUT NO LANDING: REAR DOOR OF MH DOES NOT HAVE STEPS OR LANDING. 3. Windows D BROKEN GLASS ON ROOM ADDITION & MH D. Roof 1. Rafters N/A 2. Deck, Shingles D METAL ROOF OVER ADDITION & MH DAMAGED. HOLES & LEANING SUPPORT POSTS. E. Ceilings 1. Joists D ROT IN ROOM ADDITION 2. Ceiling D ROOM ADDITION - MISSING. DAMAGED BY WATER F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT - DEBRIS IN HOME G. Other(ADDN) D ROOM ADDITION - FLOOR HAS ROT, DECAY U. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink LINK NO PLBG IN ROOM ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH b. Lavatories UNK NO PLBG IN ROOM ADDITION UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH c. Water/Closets UNK NO PLBG IN ROOM ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH d. Shower UNK NO PLBG IN ROOM ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH e Water Heater UNK NO PLBG IN ROOM ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH 2. Water Piping UNK NO PLBG IN ROOM ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK NO PLBG IN ROOM ADDITION: UNABLE TO INSPECT ON MH 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK POSSIBLE SEPTIC TANK ON SITE 5. Gas System UNK POSSIBLE SEPTIC TANK ON SITE C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Air Conditioning UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds D 3. Other 5- DEBRIS, WEEDS COVERED AREAS (METAL) - DAMAGED. HOLES Comments: MOBILE HOME HAS BEEN DECLARED AS AN ABANDONED NON -CONFORMING STRUCTURE IN AN R-1 ZONE. SACPShareUNSPECTION DIVISIOMALL OTHER STUJFF1Code Enforcement0ang Buildings\]) B INSP FORM 202 EDGEWOOD.doeO7-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-22-06 STREET ADDRESS: 1911 Roscoe HCAD OWNER: C. D. WILKINSON - 23 BAHAMA DR - ROCKPORT. TX 78382-3703 DEED OWNER CHARLES D. WILKINSON III - P. O. BOX 27559 - HOUSTON_ TX 77027 OTHER C. D. WILK NSON - 23 BAHAMA DR - KEY ALLEGRO - ROCKPORT, TX 78382-3703 LEGAL: BILK 24, LTS 31-36, BAYFRONT OCCUPANCY'EYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: R-1 NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER: YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OFDWELLINGUNITS: (1) VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CTY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered"dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 4 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; �--_3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; J 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building, (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 4 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1, Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is iaoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 4 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety, 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; J 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #1: (REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CTrY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. AS ADOPTED, AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CrrY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS rrS GUIDE, rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS, BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REQUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CrrY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF THE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WPIHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VUL SECTION 82-478, Tr IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. x 'a' '% GF1.� ) `7c CE'r'0 BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X 7Q FIRE OFFI DAlt X Ac FtffCI-AEFS OFFICE DATE Dangerous Budding Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings D UNEVEN SETTLEMENT b. Sills UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C.-Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT B. Walls 1. Exterior D ROT. HOLES 2. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior A 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D BACK PORCH NOT SUPPORTED 3. Windows D ROT AT FRAME: MISSING GLASS D. Roof 1. Rafters UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Deck, Shingles D DECK ROTMOLES: FACIA ROT E. Ceilings 1. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other N/A II. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel D PANEL NOT TO CODE 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Lavatories D OLD, POOR CONDITION c. Water/Closets D OLD, POOR CONDITION d. Shower/Tub D OLD, POOR CONDITION e Water Heater UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Water Piping UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning A WINDOW UNITS M. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds A 3. Other Comments: & CPSUareUNSPECTION DMSIONIAI,L OTHER STUFFC4& Enforcement0ang Buildings\D B INSP FORM 1911 ROSCOE.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 513 S VIRGINIA HCAD OWNER CITY OF LA PORTE DEED OWNER PAUL SCHAIDER & ELAINE SCHAIDER -1608 ROSCOE AVE- LA PORTE, TX 77571 OTHER: 2005 TAX RESALE: PAUL J. SCHAIDER - 1608 ROSCOE - LA PORTS TX 77571 LEGALMILK 240, LTS 8. 9 & ST OF LOT 7 & N 4.58' OF LOT 10 & ADJ. STRIP, SAN JACINTO HOMES OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: R-1 NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER: YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: (1) VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CTTY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREViENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; J 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 4 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property, 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof; because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; J 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a Sae hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; d 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) Suilty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #2: (NOT REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CrrY' S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AS ADOPTEDAMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND 096-2079- DEEMED ESSENTIAL FOR SAFE AND HEALTHFUL LIVING FOR A RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY AND IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY HEALTH AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF LA PORTS BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE O ��W-0��_ # r �WHAVS • / i R der • ' . . Dangerous Building Inspection Foam Page 3 BUELDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMtvvfENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings D UNEVEN SETTLEMENT b. Sills D ROT c. Joists N/A B. Walls 1. Exterior D GARAGE WALL INCOMPLETE 2. Interior N/A N/A C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior N/A N/A b. Exterior NIA N/A 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs N/A N/A 3. Windows N/A N/A D. Hod' 1. Rafters D ROT 2. Dedc, Shingles D HOLES.ROT E. Ceilings 1. Joists A 2. Ceiling N/A F. Floors N/A N/A G. Other N/A IL MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel D NOT TO CODE 2. Wiring N/A N/A 3. Ligb% Switches N/A N/A 4.Outlets N/A N/A 5. Other NIA- B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink N/A N/A b. Lavatories NIA N./A c. Water/Closets N/A N/A d. Shower/Tub N/A N/A e Water Heater D POOR CONDITION 2. Water Piping N/A N/A 3. Drain, Waste & Vent N/A N/A 4. Sewer/Septic tank N/A N/A 5. Gas System UNK N/A C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A N/A 2. Air Conditioning N/A N/A M. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds D DEBRIS 3. Other Comments: DEMO PERMIT #06-85 ISSUED 1-19-06: 95% COMPLETE SACPSham\INSPECTION DIVISIOMAU OTHER STUFFWode EnforcementM=g BWdinp\D B INSP FORM 513 S VIRGINIA.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-22-06 STREET ADDRESS: 521 N. BROADWAY (OLD LIQUOR STORE A ROAD) HCAD OWNER: ARTHUR WALKER JR & JOSEPH L. WALKER - 8718 BERNDALE - HOUSTON, TX 77029 DEED OWNER ARTHUR WALKER JR & JOSEPH LEE WALKER - 8523 COLLINGDALE - LA PORTE. TX 77571 LEGAL: BLK 108 LTS 25-28 LA PORTS OCCUPANCY TYPE: COMMERCIAL ZONING: GC NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: ABANDONDED N/C STRUCTURE FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: VACANT: YES OCCUPIED:. AS REQUIItED IN THE CrJyS CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VUL THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERN4DIED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction, (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Bwldmgs Inspection Form Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; N/A 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating appaiatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; J 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety, 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #3: (NON-RESIDENTIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS ADOPTED AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079 B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS TTS GUIDE IT IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REQUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WTTH ALL APPLICABLE CITY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF THE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VM SECTION 82-478 rT IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED -6ff-DING • OFFICE DATE Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMiv1ENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings N/A UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Sills N/A UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Joists N/A UNABLE TO INSPECT B. Walls 1. Exterior D BLOCK SEPARATION, HOLES 2. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT — C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior D BROKEN 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs N/A 3. Windows D GLASS MISSING D. Roof 1. Rafters D ROT 2. Deck, Shingles D HOLES, ROT E. Ceilings 1. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling D CEILING MISSING ( VISIBLE THRU WINDOW) F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other N/A 11. NIEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel D NOT TO CODE 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink b. Lavatories c. Water/Closets & Shower/Tub e Water Heater 2. Water Piping 3. Drain, Waste & Vent 4. Sewer/Septic tank 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNK UN- C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning D III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds A 3. Other Comments: UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT (2) WINDOW UNITS_ POOR CONDITION & CPS6sreUNSPECTION DIVISIMAU OTHER STUFMode EnformmentVang Buildmgs\D B INSP FORM 521 N BROADWAY.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-22-06 STREET ADDRESS: 521 1/2 N. BROADWAY (OLD SMOKE HOUSE AT CLUB) HCAD OWNER ARTHUR WALKER JR & JOSEPH L. WALKER - 8718 BERNDALE - HOUSTON, TX 77029 DEED OWNER: ARTHUR WALKER JR. & JOSEPH LEE WALKER -8523 COLLINGDALE -LA PORTE. TX 77571 LEGAL: BLK 108 LTS 25-28 LA PORTE OCCUPANCY TYPE: COMMERCIAL ZONING: GC NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER: YES SEWER YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: VACANT: ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 4 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof; is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; N/A 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fife hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 4 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; J 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #3: (NON-RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CrTY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE. AS ADOPTED, AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079 B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS rrS GUIDE. rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING WITHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VM SECTION 82-478, rr IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. UP VLa4_h-) 7'/V —o BUILDING OFFIC 'S OFFICE DATE X 60 Ali L !A—TEZ o S FFICE �WD � ME CHIEFS OFFICE Dangerous Birildurg Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable L STRUCTURAL COMMENT/EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings N/A UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Sills N/A UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Joists N/A UNABLE TO INSPECT B. Walls 1. Exterior D BLOCK SEPARATION HOLES 2. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT — C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior D BROKEN: ROTTED 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs N/A 3. Windows D ROT AT FRAME D. Roof 1. Rafters D ROT 2. Deck, Shingles D ROT SHINGLES IN BAD CONDITION E. Ceilings I. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other N/A II. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel 2. Wiring 3. Lights, Switches 4. Outlets 5. Other B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink b. Lavatories c. Water/Closets d. Shower e Water Heater 2. Water Piping 3. Drain, Waste & Vent 4. Sewer/Septic tank 5. Gas System D UNK UNK UNK N/A NOT TO CODE UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNK UN C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning N/A III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds A 3. Other Comments: UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT SXPShareWISPECriON DMISIOMALL OTHER STUFF\Code EnforcemeW Dang BuildmgsND B INSP FORM 521.5 N BROADWAY.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-26-06 STREET ADDRESS: 213 N 2ND ST. HCAD OWNER LILLIE B. WARREN - P O BOX 451- LA PORTS TX 77572-0451 DEED OWNER: IDELL WARREN & WIFE - LILLIE B. WARREN - 213 N 2ND ST - LA PORTS TX 77571 OTHEKLILLIE B. WARREN % LISA ANDERSON - 417 SPENCER LANDING W - LA PORTS TX 77571 LEGAL: BLK 63 LTS 26-27 LA PORTE OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: R-1 NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER: YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: (11 VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: J 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; J 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property, � 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof; because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 4 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 4 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or hearing apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; J 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety, 4 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, heath, property or safcty. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF TILE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #2: LNOT REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WrM THE M Y'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AS ADOPTEDAMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS ITS GUIDE rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS._ BUT NOT REPAIRABLE. AND SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED. THIS BUILDING DOES NOT PROVIDE THE BASIC 1y NMJM HOUSING STANDARDS DEEMED ESSENTIAL FOR SAFE AND HEALTHFUL LIVING FOR A RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY AND IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY HEALTH AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF LA PORTE. X Z a ZJ;, j j?-t�► -0 b BUMDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE � d FIRE OFFI ATE x xv �: � flo -; r� FIKE CHIEFS OFFICE DATE Dangerous Building inspection Form Page 3 BUELDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a Footings UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Sills UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT B. Walls 1. Exterior D FIRE DAMAGED 2. Interior D FIRE DAMAGED C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior D FIRE DAMAGED b. Exterior D FIRE DAMAGED 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D FIRE DAMAGED 3. Windows D FIRE DAMAGED D. Roof 1. Rafters D FIRE DAMAGED 2. Deck, Shingles D FIRE DAMAGED E. Ceilings I. Joists D FIRE DAMAGED 2. Ceiling D FIRE DAMAGED F. Floors D FIRE DAMAGED G. Other N/A IL MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel D PULLED AWAY FROM WALL 2. Wiring D FIRE DAMAGED 3. Lights, Switches D FIRE DAMAGED 4. Outlets D FIRE DAMAGED 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtrues a. Sink UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Lavatories UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Water/Closets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT d. Shower/Tub UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT e Water Heater UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Water Piping UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning UNK III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1, Accessory Structures D 2. Condition of Grounds D 3. Other Comments: FIRE: MARCH 4 2006 WINDOW UNIT - POSSIBLE FIRE DAMAGE GARAGEISHED FIRE DEBRIS. WEEDS SACPShareUNSPECTION DIVISIONWLL OTHER STUFFCode Enforcemeot\Dang Buildings\D B INSP FORM 213 N 2ND.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-22-06 STREET ADDRESS: 505 N. 4TH ST. HCAD OWNER REV JOE DURDEN - 505 N. 4TH ST - LA PORTE, TX 77571-3307 DEED OWNER: WILSON JAMES MAJORS JR — 505 N 4TH ST — LA PORTE, TX 77571(GRANDSON) LEGAL: BLK 104 LTS 19-22 LA PORTE OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: R-2 NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER: YES SEWER: YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: (1) VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIM THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: J 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location, 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; q 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; e 2 Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page J 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 4 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; J 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating appaiatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; J 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #1: 1REPAIRABLE — RESMENTIALI IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. AS ADOPTEDAMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS rrS GUIDE rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS. BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REOUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF THE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VIIL SECTION 82-478, rr IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE x A /Z/ , /1'; 11, -7 FIRE MICE DATE 1{ / lZ94 GRIEFS OFFfCE DATE Dangerous Building Inspection Fann Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings D UNEVEN SETTLEMENT b. Sills UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C.-Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT B. walls 1. Exterior D ROT 2. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior A 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D FRONT PORCH STARTED; PORCH ROOF SUPPORTED BY (2) 2X4'S 3. Windows A D. Roof 1. Rafters A 2. Deck, Shingles A E. Ceilings 1. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other N/A II. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel UNK INSIDE- UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Lavatories UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Water/Closets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT d. Shower/Tub UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT e Water Heater D N T& P LINE 2. Water Piping UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating UNK 2. Air Conditioning A III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures D 2. Condition of Grounds D 3. Other Comments: WINDOW UNITS (2) ACCESSORY BUILDINGS BUSHES OVERGROWN, WEEDS, TREE LRVIBS DEBRIS S:WPShare\INSPECTION DIVISIOMAU OTHER STUFF\Code EnforcementTang BOdings\D B INSP FORM 505 N 4TA.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 129 N. 5TH ST HCAD OWNER ALFONSO GUTIEREZ, JR. & MARIA N. -129 N 5TH ST. - LA PORTE, TX 77571-3425 DEED OWNER: ALFONSO GUTIERREZ, JR & WIFE. MARIA N -129 N 5TH ST - LA PORTE(SIC), TX 77571 OTHER: ALFONSO GUTIEREZ JR & MARIA N - 7403 COMANCHE ST - BAYTOWN TX 77521 LEGAL: BLK 55 LTS 30-33. LA PORTE OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: MSD NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 4 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; J 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 2 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating appaiatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or fiunction as originally intended; 4 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety, 4 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #2: (NOT REPAIRABLE - RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CTTY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, AS ADOPTED. AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079 B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS TTS GUIDE rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING X_ A wiliv,41A, I-.(e--C 6 BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE raLi �3 • •�•• Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUnMING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings D UNEVEN SETTLING b. Sills D UNEVEN SETTLING c. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT B. Valls 1. Exterior D ROT 2. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Porehes, Steps, Stairs D NO LANDING OR STEPS naREAR: NO STEPS AFRONT PORCH 3. Windows UNK D. Roof 1. Rafters D ROT 2. Deck, Shingles D HOLES: ROT: FACIA ROT E. Ceilings 1. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other N/A 11. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel D NOT TO CODE 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches D EXT. - LIGHT HANGING DOWN. INT - UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Lavatories UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Water/Closets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT d. Shower/Tub UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT e Water Heater D LAYING ON GROUND 2. Water Piping LINK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain., Waste & Vent UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning N/A III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures A (1) SHID 2. Condition of Grounds D WEEDS, 3. Other Comments: BOARDED UP BY CITY OF LA PORTE ON MAY 18, 2006 SACPSha=e NSPECTION DIVISIONIAI.L OTHER STUFF\Code EnforcementDang BaildmpV) B INSP FORM 129 N 5TH.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 628 N. 5TH ST. HCAD OWNER ANDREW J. MRHRING - 628 N 5TH ST - LA PORTE. TX 77571-3312 DEED OWNER ENRIQUE RODRIGUEZ - 628 N 5TH ST. - LA PORTE, TX 77571-3312 OTHER ANDREW J. MERRING - 911 RICHVALE LN - HOUSTON, TX 77062 LEGAL: BLK 331 LTS 3-4 LA PORTE OCCUPANCY UPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: BI NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: ABANDONED NON -CONFORMING FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YE5 GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: (1) VACANT: YES OCCUPIED:, AS REQUIRED IN THE CTPY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE Va THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFORM4ENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A- Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 46. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; J 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #1 • (REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CrrY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AS ADOPTEDAMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS TrS GUIDE rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS. BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REQUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF THE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VIIL SECTION 82-478, rr IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE ,. �&ALSOFF. .. W491- •DAM Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 A = Adequate I. STRUCTURAL A. Foundation 1. Slab 2. Pier & Beam a.Footings b. Sills c. Joists B. Walls 1. Exterior 2. Interior C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a idmior b. Exterior 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs 3. Windows D. Roof 1. Rafters 2. Deck, Shingles E. Ceilings 1. Joists 2. Ceiling F. Floors G. Other II. NIEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel 2. Wiring 3. Lights, Switches 4. Outlets 5. Other B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink b. Lavatories c. Water/Closets d. Shower/Tub e Water Heater 2. Water Piping 3. Drain, Waste & Vent 4. Sewer/Septic tank 5. Gas System BUILDING EVALUATION CHEMIST D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable COMMENT / EXPLANATION N/A - A A A D D TERMITE DAMAGE: HOLES D SOME MISSING D POOR CONDITION D FRONT PORCH SEPARATING FROM HOUSE: SPRINGY. NO LANDING & STEPS FOR NORTH DOOR D FRAME ROTTED A NEW WORK DONE WITHOUT PERMIT A NEW WORK DONE WITHOUT PERMIT A D SOME MISSING A REPAIR STARTED WITHOUT PERMIT N/A A RE -WIRING STARTED WrTHOUT PERMIT D RE -WIRING STARTED WnHOUT PERMIT D RE -WIRING STARTED WITHOUT PERMIT UNK RE-WnUNG STARTED WrIHOUT PERMrr N/A N/A NONE N/A NONE D ON -STYE. NOT INSTALLED D ON -SITE, NOT INSTALLED N/A NONE UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning N/A M. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds D 3. Other Comments: WEEDS SACPShareT4SPEMON DIVISIMALL OTHER STUMCode Enforconent\Dang BuildiagslD B INSP FORM 628 N 5TH.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 632 N. 5TH ST. HCAD OWNER- ADDIE MATHEWS - P O BOX 24 - 632 N 5TH ST. - LA PORTS TX 77571-3312 DEED OWNER CITY OF LA PORTE - TAX CAUSE # 2004 - 38206 76/07/05 FILING DATE) LEGAL: BLK 331 LTS 1-2 LA PORTE OCCUPANCY ZJTE: RESIDENCE ZONING: BI NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: ABANDONED NON -CONFORMING USE FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER: YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CTTY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VM THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFORa4ENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building, (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 J 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; J 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #1: (,REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CrrY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AS ADOPTED AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS rrS GUIDE rT IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILD INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REQUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF THE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VIM SECTION 82-478 rr IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X0o% FIRE S OFFICE DATE X r %C• �1 /a a6 S OFFICE DATE Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Sills UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT B. walls 1. Exterior D ROT HOLES 2. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Inferior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior D ROT AT FRAME 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D NO LANDING ON REAR DOOR 3. Windows D FRAME ROTTED - BROKEN GLASS D. Roof 1. Rafters D ROTTED 2. Deck, Shingles D FACIA ROTTED E. Ceilings 1. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other N/A IL MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel 2. Wiring 3. Lights, Switches 4. Outlets 5. Other B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink b. Lavatories c. Water/Closets d. Shower e Water Heater 2. Water Piling 3. Drain, Waste & Vent 4. Sewer/Septic tank 5. Gas System C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating 2. Air Conditioning III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS D UNK D UNK N/A NOT TO CODE UNABLE TO INSPECT EXTERIOR PORCH LIGHT MISSING UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPCET UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT A WINDOW UNIT 1, AccessoryStructures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds A 3. Other Comments: SXPShame NSPECTION DIVISIOMAf i.OTHER STUFF\Code Enforcement0ang Build np\D B INSP FORM 632 N 5TH doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 305 N. 6TH ST HCAD OWNER GERTIE PINKNEY - 305 N 6TH ST. - LA FORTE TX 77571-3203 DEED OWNER GERTIE PINKNEY - 305 N 6TH ST. - LA PORTE, TX 77571 OTHER LEGAL: BLK 78, LTS 19-20, LA PORTE OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE ZONING: R-1 NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: (1) VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE C1TY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 4 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; J 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; J 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous BWdmgs Inspection Foam Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; J 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard- B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; J 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #1: (REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE M Y' S DANGEROUS BUII.DING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AS ADOPTED AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS US GUIDE. rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS. BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REQUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF THE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VHL SECTION 82-478. rr IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. x J�).L4k v9 k)_ n,,gAd 7/0- V 6 BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X (0. Z_ - �V_ /' - FIRE 'S MICE DA X� Z2 tz�f l0 OG HIEF'S OFFICE bATt Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECI"T A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Sills UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Joists D FLOORS SPRINGY B. Walls 1. Exterior D ROT ON SOUTH SIDE 2. Interior D HOLES, ROT, MOLD C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior A b. Exterior D ROT AT FRAME 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D NO LANDING FOR NORTH DOOR 3. Windows D ROT AT FRAME D. Roof 1. Rafters D ROTTED 2. Deck, Shingles D DECKING, FACIA ROT E. Ceilings 1. Joists D ROT 2. Ceiling D COLLAPSED F. Floors D SPRINGY: HOLES G. Other N/A II. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel A 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches D FIXTURES HANGING DOWN: COVER PLATES MISSING 4. Outlets D COVER PLATES MISSING 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink A b. Lavatories A c. Water/Closets A d. Shower/Tub A e Water Heater D POOR CONDITION 2. Water Piping UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Air Conditioning A WINDOW UNIT III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds D WEEDS 3. Other Comments: S:\CPShare\INSPECTION DIVISION\AU OTHER STUFF\Code EnforcemenADang Buildings\D B INS? FORM 305 N 6nLdoc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 1306 N. 10TH ST HCAD OWNER- OAK PARK TRADING LTD. -1400 N. IOTH ST., TRLR 100 - LA PORTE, TX 77571-3231 DEED OWNER ---OAK PARK TRADING. LTD. -1400 N. IOTH ST., BOX 100 ~LA PORTE_ TX 77571 (1/2 DMEREST): UNABLE TO LOCATE DEED ON REMAINING 1/2 INTEREST OTHER: OAK PARK TRADING, LTD. % HAL LAWLER — 911 OAK LEAF — LA PORTE, TX 77571 LEGAL: TR 27 BLK 27• & TR 28 BLK 28• & TR 3• ABST. 5 E BRINSON OCCUPANCY TYPE: HALFWAY/GROUP HOME ZONING: BI NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER: YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: N/A VACANT:. YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CTTY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 4 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 4 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; 4 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buddmgs Inspection Form Page 2 4 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; N/A 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; J 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating appaiatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fine hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: J 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 4 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; q 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; � 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION; OPTION #3: (NON-RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY' S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, AS ADOPTED. AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CTTY ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079-B USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS ITS GUIDE rr IS THE OPINION OF TBE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS BUT STILL REPAIRABLE ALL REQUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF TBE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN THE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VIIL SECTION 82-478 rr IS THEN TBE OPINION OF THIS_ BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISBED. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X. 7 t? G+�� S CE DATE X r ! CHIT 'S OFFICE DA Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings N/A b. Sills N/A c. Joists N/A B. walls 1. Exterior D UNEVEN SEITLEM NM HOLE 2. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Inlerior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior D DOOR FRAMES ROTTED 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs A 3. Windows UNK BOARDED UP D. Roof 1. Rafters N/A 2. Deck, Shingles D FALLEN IN: HOLES E. Ceilings 1, Joists D PORCH JOISTS ROTTED. INTERIOR JOISTS ROTTED 2. Ceiling D PARTIALLY COLLAPSED F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other N/A H. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel D DAMAGED Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Lavatories UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT c. Water/Closets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT d. Shower UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT e Water Heater UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Water Piping UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning N/A III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Stmctlues N/A 2. Condition of Grounds D DEBRIS 3. Other Comments: SXPShareI NSPECTION DMSIONIALL OTBER STLJMCo& Enforcammt\Dang Buildtngs\D B INSP FORM 1306 N 10TELdoc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 502 N. I ITH ST HCAD OWNER: CALIXTRO CASTILLO - P 0 BOX 831 LAPORTE TX 77572-0831 DEED OWNER CALDCTRO CASTILLO - 502 N. 11TH ST. - LA PORTS TX 77571 OTHER CALDCIRO CASTILLO %CALIXTRO CASTILLO JR. -721 PRINCETON - DEER PARK TX 77536 OTHER#2: CALIXTRO CASTILLO JR -10815 N. L ST. - LA PORTS TX 77571 LEGAL: y BLK 98 LTS 15 16 LA PORTE OCCUPANCY TYPE: SALVAGE YARD ZONING: GC NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: ABANDONED NON -CONFORMING USE FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER: YES SEWER: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: VACANT: YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIM THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFORENIENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 4 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; J 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; J 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof; because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 4 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buldmgs inspection Form Page 2 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, -faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire h9ard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 4 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; J 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #3: QQN-RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE M Y'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS ADOPTEDAMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079-B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS ITS GUIDE_ rr IS TBE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REQUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CTTY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF TBE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WrM _WTTBIN TBE TIMETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VIM SECTION 82-478, rr IS THEN TBE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE FIRE OFFICE DA yElm Dangerous Building Inspection Form BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST Page 3 A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab A 2. Pier & Beam a.Footings N/A b. Sills N/A c. Joists N/A B. Walls I. Exterior D FIRE DAMAGE, WALL COLLAPSING 2. Interior N/A C. Meags of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior N/A b. Exterior N/A 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs N/A 3. Windows N/A D. Roof 1. Rafters D FIRE DAMAGE 2. Deck, Metal D METAL PANELS - RUST. POOR CONDITION E. Ceilings 1. Joists N/A 2. Ceiling N/A F. Floors N/A G. Other N/A Il. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel A 2. Wiring N/A 3. Lights, Switches N/A 4.Outlets N/A 5, Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink N/A b. Lavatories N/A Water/Closets N/A d. Shower N/A e Water Heater N/A 2. Water Piping N/A 3. Drain, Waste & Vent N/A 4. Sewer/Septic tank N/A 5. Gas System N/A C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating N/A 2. Air Conditioning N/A III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures A (1) STORAGE BLDG ON SKIDS 2. Condition of Grounds D DEBRIS, WEEDS. JV'S, TIRES 3. Other D 2) COVERED AREAS - ROOFS IN POOR CONDITION Comments: FIRE DATE: 2-15-01 & CPShamUNSPECTION DIVISION\AU OTHER STUFF1Code EnforcementTang BOdingsT B INSP FORM 502 N I ITH.doc07-2004 Rev City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 10911 NORTH L ST. #7 HCAD OWNER: LINDA DICKERSON - 5901 GATESHEAD DR AUSTINTX 78745-3528 DEED OWNER GLENNWOOD ENTERPRISES - 4056 NORTH DUCK CREEK RD. - CLEVELAND TX 77327 PARK LICENSE - GLENN BROWN dba GLENNWOOD ENTERPRISES. P O BOX 5309 PASADENA- TX 77508 LEGAL: TR426B WI/2 OF E1/2 LA PORTE OUTLOTS OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE - MOBILE HOME ZONING: ME NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: N/A FACILITIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER: YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: 1 VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CTTY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: See. 82-473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; J 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; (VACANT/CLOSED UP FOR 1 YEAR) 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction, taulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hg2ard, B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 1. ..Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety, 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #1: REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CrrY'S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, AS ADOPTED AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B USING TBE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS rrS GUIDE. rr IS THE OPINION OF TIE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS. BUT STILL REPAIRABLE. ALL REOUIRED REPAIRS OR ALTERATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY OF LA PORTE CODES AND ORDINANCES. IF THE REPAIR OR ALTERATION ORDER IS NOT COMPLIED WITH _WTTHN THE TB4ETABLE SET OUT IN ARTICLE VHL SECTION 82-478. rr IS THEN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING BE DEMOLISHED. X i)Jqw A R4 "IJ 7-/e--ec BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X i Kff"IMMCE A X 'i/moo/G S OFFICE ATE Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Sills N/A c. Joists N/A B. Walls 1. Exterior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2, Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Exterior D FRONT DOOR SEPARATING: 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D MISSING ON FRONT DOOR: NO LANDING ON REAR DOOR 3. Windows D BROKEN GLASS D. Roof 1. Rafters N/A 2. Deck, Shingles UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT E. Ceilings 1. Joists UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT F. Floors UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT G. Other D SKIRTING DAMAGED II. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Lavatories LINK UNABLE TO INSPECT Water/Closets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT d. Shower UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT e Water Heater UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Water Piping UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain, Waste & Vent UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Air Conditioning UNK WINDOW UNITS III. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds D WEEDS, STANDING WATER 3. Other N/A Comments: S:\CPShare\INSPECn0N DIVISION\ALL OTHER STUMCode EnforcemeMDmg Buildmgs\D B INSP FORM 10911 N L ST#7.doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 10911 NORTH L ST. HCAD OWNER: LINDA DICKERSON - 5901 GATESHEAD DR. AUSTIN TX 78745-3528 DEED OWNER GI.ENNWOOD ENTERPRISES - 4056 NORTH DUCK CREEK RD. - CLEVELAND, TX 77327 OTHER: PARK LICENSE - GLENN BROWN dba GLENNWOOD ENTERPRISES. P O BOX 5309 PASADENA. TX 77508 LEGAL: TR426B W1/2 OF E1/2, LA PORTE OUTLOTS OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE - MOBILE HOME ZONING: ME[ NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: FACIIZMS AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: 1 VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CTTY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIII, THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECITON OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: a Sec. 82-473. Declanat ion of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: J 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; J 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; � 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof; because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay, (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof; is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 � 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; 4 7. Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; (VACANT/CLOSED UP FOR 1 YEAR) 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction,,faulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire heard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: 4 1. ..Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 4 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety; J 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; J 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #2: (NOT REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CUTS DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AS ADOPTED AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS US GUIDE rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS. BUT NOT REPAIRABLE, AND SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED THIS BUIIAING DOES NOT PROVIDE THE BASIC MINIMUM HOUSING STANDARDS DEEMED ESSENTIAL FOR SAFE AND HEALTHFUL LIVING FOR A RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY AND IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY HEALTH AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF LA PORTE. .j& ' L A 91 V '7 k--C6 BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X /f ? /,//// - e' O DA FIRE CHIEFS OFFICE IrlDATE Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 A = Adequate I. STRUCTURAL A. Foundation 1. Slab 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings b. Sills c. Joists B. Walls 1. Exterior 2. Interior C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior b. Exterior 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs 3. Windows D. Roof 1. Raisers 2. Deck E. Ceilings I. Joists 2. Ceiling F. Floors G. Other 11. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel 2. Wiring 3. Lights, Switches 4. Outlets 5. Other B. Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink b. Lavatories Water/Closets d. Shower e Water Heater 2. Water Piping 3. Drain, Waste & Vent 4. Sewer/Septic tank 5. Gas System BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable N/A A N/A N/A D D D D D N/A D D D D N/A UNK UNK D D N/A N/A D A UNK UNK UNK UNK UNK UNK C. Heating & A/C 1. Heating UNK 2. Air Conditioning N/A III, PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds A 3. Other N/A Comments: COMMENT / EXPLANATION ROTTED STUDS HOLES FRAME ROTTED MISSING RAILS BROKEN GLASS COLLASPED BROKEN FALLING IN FLOOR SPRINGY ROT HOLES UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT LIGHTS NUSSIN• WIRES EXPOSED COVERS MISSING MISSING POOR CONDITION UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT UNABLE TO INSPECT SXPShereUNSPECTION DMSIONV LL OTHER STUFF\Code Enforcemmt\Dang Buddings\D B INSP FORM 10911 N L ST#8doc07-2004 Rev. City of La Porte DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION FORM DATE: 6-21-06 STREET ADDRESS: 10911 NORTH L ST. #26 HCAD OWNER LINDA DICKERSON - 5901 GATESHEAD DR-AUSTIN. TX 78745-3528 DEED OWNER GLENNWOOD ENTERPRISES — 4056 NORTH DUCK CREEK RD. — CI.E\7EI AND TX 77327 OTHER: PARK LICENSE - GLENN BROWN dba GLENNWOOD ENTERPRISES_ P O BOX 5309 PASADENA�TX 77508 LEGAL: TR426B W 1/2 OF E 1/2 LA PORTE OUTLOTS OCCUPANCY TYPE: RESIDENCE - MOBILE HOME ZONING: MH NON -CONFORMING ISSUES: FACII,TPIES AVAILABLE: WATER YES SEWER: YES ELECTRICAL: YES GAS: YES NO.OF DWELLING UNITS: 1 VACANT: YES OCCUPIED: AS REQUIRED IN THE CTIYY'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 82; ARTICLE VIM THE BOARD OF INSPECTION MADE AN INSPECTION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTY, AND DETERMINED THE BUILDING LOCATED THEREON, IN THEIR OPINION, IS IN FACT A DANGEROUS BUILDING, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: Sec. 82473. Declaration of Public Nuisance and Hazard. A. Dangerous or Substandard Buildings or Structures. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: J 1. A building that is vacant, and is not up to current building code standards. These vacant buildings can be either open to trespass or boarded up; 4 2. Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood, or by any other cause to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the building code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location; 4 3. Whenever any portion or member or appurtenance thereof is likely to fail, or to become detached or dislodged, or to collapse and thereby injure persons or damage property; J 4. Whenever the building or structure, or any portion thereof, because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) the removal, movement or instability of any portion of the ground necessary for the purpose of supporting the building; (d) the deterioration, decay, or inadequacy of its foundation, or (e) any other cause, is likely to partially or completely collapse; J 5. Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof; is manifestly unsafe for the purpose of which it is being used; Dangerous Buildings Inspection Form Page 2 6. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (a) a public nuisance, (b) a harbor for vagrants, or as to (c) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; T Whenever a building or structure, used or intended to be used for dwelling purposes, because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, decay, damage, faulty construction or arrangement, inadequate light, air, or sanitation facilities, or otherwise, is determined by the Board to be unsanitary, unfit for human habitation or in such a condition that is likely to cause sickness or disease; (VACANT/CLOSED UP FOR 1 YEAR) J 8. Whenever any building or structure, because of obsolescence, dilapidated condition, deterioration, damage, inadequate exits, lack of sufficient fire -resistive construction,Saulty electric wiring, gas connections, or heating apparatus or other cause, is determined by the Board to be a fire hazard; B. Dangerous or substandard electrical, plumbing, or mechanical installations. A building or structure shall be considered dangerous or substandard whenever it is determined by the Board, that any or all of the following is applicable: d 1. .Whenever any protective or safety device specified in The Electrical Code and of this title is not provided or is inoperative, defective, dilapidated, or deteriorated so as to threaten to fail or function as originally intended; 4 2. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof because of (a) dilapidation, deterioration, or decay; (b) faulty construction; (c) obsolescence; (d) inadequate maintenance, which in relation to existing use constitutes a hazard to life, health, property or safety, 3. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof which is damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, flood or any other cause so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety; 4. Whenever any installation or any portion thereof was constructed, installed, altered or maintained in violation of the building code and/or fire code so as to constitute a potential hazard to life, health, property or safety. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD OF INSPECTION: OPTION #2: (NOT REPAIRABLE — RESIDENTIAL) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE M Y' S DANGEROUS BUILDING REGULATIONS AND THE 2003 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. AS ADOPTED, AMENDED AND ENACTED BY CITY. ORDINANCE #04-2700 AND #96-2079- B. USING THE REGULATIONS AND CODE AS ITS GUIDE. rr IS THE OPINION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING INSPECTION BOARD THAT THIS BUILDING IS IN FACT DANGEROUS, BUT NOT REPAIRABLE. AND SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED THIS BUILDING DOES NOT PROVIDE THE BASIC MINIMUM HOUSING STANDARDS DEEMED ESSENTIAL FOR SAFE AND HEALTHFUL LIVING FOR A RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY AND IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF LA PORTS Xk I W) BUILDING OFFICIAL'S OFFICE DATE X FIRE S F DA X &��/ 1&17(Q FM CHIEPS OFFICEbAlt Dangerous Building Inspection Form Page 3 BUILDING EVALUATION CHECKLIST A = Adequate D = Deficient N/A = Not Applicable I. STRUCTURAL COMMENT / EXPLANATION A. Foundation 1. Slab N/A 2. Pier & Beam a. Footings D NONE mumER ON WHEELS) b. Sills N/A c. Joists N/A B. Walls 1. Exterior D HOLES SIDING MISSING 2, Interior D ROTTED STUDS C. Means of Egress 1. Doors a. Interior b. Exterior D MISSING.FRAME ROTTED 2. Porches, Steps, Stairs D MISSING AT BOTH DOORS 3. Windows D MISSING, ROT AT FRAME D. Roof 1. Rafters N/A 2. Deck, shingles UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT E. Ceilings 1. Joists LINK UNABLE TO INSPECT 2. Ceiling D VISIBLE LEAKS F. Floors D ROT. HOLES G. Other N/A 11. MEHCANICAL SYSTEMS A. Electrical 1. Service Entrance & Panel D NOT TO CODE 2. Wiring UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Lights, Switches D EXTERIOR LIGHT HANGING 4. Outlets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Other N/A & Plumbing 1. Fixtures a. Sink UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT b. Lavatories UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT Water/Closets UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT d. Shower/Tub IM UNABLE TO INSPECT e Water Heater D UNLEVEL: ILLEGAL HOOK-UP 2. Water Piping UNK_ UNABLE TO INSPECT 3. Drain, Waste & Vern UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 4. Sewer/Septic tank UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT 5. Gas System UNK UNABLE TO INSPECT C. Heating & A/C I. Heating IM 2. Air Conditioning N/A M. PROPERTY CONDITIONS 1. Accessory Structures N/A 2. Condition of Grounds A 3, Other N/A Comments: UNABLE TO INSPECT S:\CFShwe\INSPECnQN DIVISIOMAI.L OTHER STUFF\Code Enforcement\Dnng Buildings\D 13 INSP FORM 10911 N L ST#26doc07-2004 Rev. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: July 24, 2006 Requested By: Debra Feazelle Department AdmCnicirnt*oa Report: Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: Memorandum and Rackun Dated March R, 2006 Exhibits: Memorandum and Backup Dated July 6, 2006 Exhibits: Appropriation Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YVS NO SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION I met, in March, with La Porte Police Officers Association's President Matt Novosad and Richard Aman, CLEAT Attorney, regarding Meet & Confer. I provided City Council the handout materials distributed to me as well as some information from a TML presentation. I re -circulated the same information on July 6, 2006. Recently, some of City Council has shown an interest in visiting this topic. Councilmen Mosteit, Engelken, and Rigby have volunteered to serve on a committee to review this information. Receive direction from Council regarding a new committee to review this police issue. Approved for City Council Agenda Debra B. Feaze le, City Manag Date Meet and Confer La Porte City Council July 24, 2006 Discussion of State Legislation Prould,od 6y: nyW+ NavuSm Outline of Presentation ❑ What is Meet and Confer? ❑ General Provisions ❑ Police Petitions ❑ City Council Options ❑ Advantages ❑ What's Happening in Other Cities ❑ Strategies/ Resources ❑ Discussion Questions What is `Meet and Confer?' ❑ Meet and Confer is an opportunity for cities and certain employees to contract the setting of salaries and other conditions of employment, including state civil service regulations General Provisions ❑ Texas Legislature passed Meet and Confer bill for Police effective Sept. 1, 2005 ❑ Laws apply to Cities over 50,000 or those that have adopted Chapter 143 (Civil Service). La Porte voters have previously adopted Civil Service for police General Provisions .. . ❑ City and Association may negotiate salaries, benefits, hours and conditions of work, labor disputes, and grievances ❑ Legislation does NOT REQUIRE City or Associations to meet and confer or to reach agreement on any issue ❑ Acts maintain state strikes law prohibition against General Provisions ... ❑ Meet and Confer agreements must be in writing ❑ Grievance procedures may be established to resolve disputes, including binding arbitration m3 o � General Provisions ... ❑ Meet and Confer agreements pre-empt other conflicting laws, including state statutes, local ordinances, executive orders, legislation or rules adopted by a City, and Civil Service provisions General Provisions ... Agreements must be: ❑ Ratified by City Council by majority vote ❑ Ratified by a majority of police officers covered by agreement Police Petitions ❑ La Porte Police Officers Association may submit a petition signed by a majority of the employees covered by meet and confer Petitions.. . ❑ If submitted, the Association seeks: ■ Recognition of Meet and Confer process by majority vote of City Council ■ Recognition of the Association as sole and exclusive bargaining agent for non- exempt Police Officers Petitions.. . ❑ Deadline for City Council to take action on a petition is 30 days after receiving it Options for Council Action... l ❑ Council has 30 days from submission to: 1. Grant recognition and determine that City may meet and confer without conducting a Certification Election or General Election OR Council Options. 0 0 2 2. Order certification election to determine whether Association represents majority of police officers. If Association election passes, Council may ❑ Grant Recognition or ❑ Defer recognition and order an election by voters for next regularly scheduled general election for municipal officials OR Council Options . * 0 3 3. Defer recognition and order election by voters at next regular City election Council Options ❑ If Council chooses to recognize Association for Meet and Confer, Council may withdraw recognition following a 90-day written notice NO a ICE! a Advantages to City ❑ City & Association may negotiate new terms for hiring and promotions,, rather than basing them solely on Civil Service test scores, which might help minority recruiting and promotions in Police and Fire Departments ❑ City and Association may negotiate new terms for discipline and appeals to streamline process Meet & Confer in other Cities ❑ Other Cities: ■ Austin has had Meet & Confer since 1995 ■ Abilene: Police and Fire Associations recognized by Council ■ Balch Springs: Police Association recognized by Council ■ Big Spring: Fire Association withdrew petition ■ Cedar Park: Police Association recognized by Council ■ Del Rio: Police Association recognized by Council ■ Denton: Police & Fire Associations recognized by Council ■ Forest Hill: Police Association recognized by Council Meet & Confer in other Cities ■ Houston: Police have bargained under separate meet and confer statute since 1997 ■ Longview: Police Association withdrew petition ■ Pharr: Police Association petition sent to voters by Council - Association circulated petitions for collective bargaining and both issues passed by voters in May, 2006. ■ San Marcos: Police and Fire Associations recognized by Council ■ Waco: Police Association recognized by Council ■ Wichita Falls: Fire Association petition sent to voters and passed in May,2006 9 City of La Porte Interoffice Memorandum Ok To: Mayor & City Council From: Debra Brooks Feazelle, City Manager Date: July 6, 2006 Subject: Police Meet & Confer In early March this year I sent information obtained from a meeting with Matt Novosad, LPPOA President, regarding Meet & Confer (for your convenience I have attached some of the information previously sent). I understood from him that they had been meeting with individual Council Members. Having not received any feedback on this matter, staff has not put time into further research. As a follow-up to our meeting, last week Matt Novosad sent a letter to City Council regarding a request to meet with a committee of Council Members to discuss this matter with them. I spoke with Councilman Mosteit yesterday and he would be interested in serving on a committee. If there are other Council Members interested or would like more information from either LPPOA or Chief Reff, please advise. I can put this item on Workshop if you desire. DBF/db Attachments c: John Joerns Cynthia Pearson Chief Reff Matt Novosad (President, La Porte Police Association) OF A City_ of La Porte M rEX^s Interoffice Memorandum To: Mayor & City Council From: Debra Brooks Feazelle, City Manager Date: March 8, 2006 Subject: Meet & Confer As mentioned in an email, 1 met last week with the La Porte Police Association's President Matt Novosad and one of the CLEAT attorneys. They advised that they would continue meeting with City Council to discuss their desire to have Meet and Confer at La Porte. They left a flyer and some articles (attached). They also mentioned a presentation made at TML; Crystal printed for our review (see attached). I will ask Chief Reff and Robert Swanagan to check with their professional organizations for more information and will be happy to provide additional information as available. FO&WRI c: John Joerns Cynthia Alexander Civil Service Board Chief Reff Robert Swanagan Issues. L'o-' l he vision of local Leaders is embraced by the permissiveness of Texas' New Meet & Confer law. In one city, local leaders believe they can save taxpayer dollars and hire fewer officers by rearranging the workweek. In another part of the::state smaller cities are forced to competqv- ,. for officers from larger, .betterw`,paying police departments and would Iike to change the age restriction, s to increase the size of theghiring pool.. Just down the road a0growing p41� department wants tp add assistant police ahief ,r All of these L. "TTIMat@ I W—Pneeirls can, .now .be metrrthcough'.Meet & Confer. / Th-e worid'of Texas policing has just of en;,-Olwhole lot better for both ;c es:, nd officers. Talking is Allowed With Texas'- new Meet & Confer law, the old archaic language prohibiting agreements between police and local governments has been removed. Talking is allowed and all the rules are locally decided. largestCLEATis the state's law enforcement ... WWWAeat.org RV rvsues No F}o�ige pp R e4 Act t � >F {{+ t Requires .A►n Of Congress / .:, The CIof San rNlarco andw� Hbuff I1 iV yo�c $ I White atlTitiiiisters oath`�of officers expCored �th`e''ide'a of pa'slsrr%g° � t 5"ff " �� office to t a Het�stvz�;PoT ce.�t lcexs' Union N law to change age requirements ;,tii Board o 7lire�tQrsr � `a their police hiring pool W'th Meet.&,nfet�1 t� Ir��4��'eas' ::they can -handle it (acally ,. .Largest 6Y F Meaty& Coni"er worked 'well=.and offer � The City of fort WorfKand the;:Fort' opportunities for both manageme it Worth PoUce:;{fFicers Assoaation wanted,,a rank3and.frle:officers to come to r t compressedrwork'week Because;theydid not agreemeit.on. many employmr° #r = es haveMeet & Gonfer, the city'had :fo lobby state lawmakers and change state law to -, Meet 8 make the: issue legal' and binding. �.:: _ N.. VyA.Meet &-Gorifer locol Iheaders,ttri� Po&e . .has al -lowed the r Ahsscciaf�ons'vi1l/rQ;i9ri,jf neepto pas*Iavi� f; • Capital City to;push ' f �� f•..N .� /wry/r� 1sr A!/ aQ' ' ((lj/ 4 I r/r. r� oca e it s� N �,,;, ! =r; Via. j kforward -a ne)r ��� ( 71 f cy, ar. lice Chief •')�1. I "}'d.rM14 V a I'��i � 1 1 �ih �Y+, � y� !� % A lYF>j ! 'Y# wti yj F.p64 /y ���y� �CF t0 Chas igV�Stbtte;CIvl��hL`f1aI1o' rr,N, z}t> dts�.:Ip�lJn ;t sues issue t�.;.:. u ° `t13i1 S;Of d611arS AtiMayorWillWynn �G �I„ > Subject: San Marcos: Police, firefighters gain right to meet and confer > http://www.sanmarcosrecord.com/articles/2006/02/09/news/newsl.txt > Police, firefighters gain right to meet and confer > By BRAD ROLLINS - Staff Reporter > Posted: Thursday, Feb 09, 2006 - 04:02:05 pm CST > The city's police and firefighters associations will represent employees > in > "meet and confer" negotiations starting this year following their formal > recognition by the city council this week. > More than 90 percent of firefighters and 78 percent of police officers > signed a petition asking leaders to designate the groups as the exclusive > bargaining agents for those departments' rank -and -file employees. > Council members voted unanimously to extend the recognition, but not > without some voicing concern that the process could become political and > polarizing. > With an eye on Austin where meet and confer was used for years before the > law allowed it in most other cities, some members said they feared salary > demands could strain the municipal budget. > "We have a great relationship with police and firefighters and I don't > expect that to change. But things do change," Mayor Susan Narvaiz said. > "'...If it gets to the point where we meet with you and you're asking us to > make decisions that aren't fair to other employees, it's important for you > to know we can undo it." > The associations' officers said major wage and work condition grievances > were not the catalysts for their efforts. > "There aren't issues or concerns we have where we feel we're being treated > unfairly," said Daniel Arredondo, the San Marcos Police Officers > Association president. "We just want the opportunity to sit and talk. It > doesn't mean we have to agree." > James Frye, the San Marcos Professional Firefighter Association president, > echoed the cooperative tone. He said his group's issues center on > "operational and structural" topics such as civil service system under > which hiring and promotions are tied to performance on a general aptitude > test. > "We just want to take our relationship to the council to the next step," > Frye said. "This is just another avenue of communication." > Since 1949, it has been illegal for governing bodies to bargain with > employee associations or unions. There have long been exceptions for > police > and fire employees in large cities, but a law passed by the Legislature > last year extends the option to smaller departments. > The discussions aren't binding on decision makers but the change does > represent something of a modest innovation in a state that has > traditionally sought to limit the influence of labor unions, especially in > the public arena. > Eleven cities have adopted meet and confer negotiations since Sept. 1, > said > Frank Sturzl, the Texas Municipal League executive director. He said the > system allows communication without the regimented proceedings - and > binding arbitration - common to collective bargaining. > "Collective bargaining comes along with the requirement that you must > bargain and if you reach an impasse, it gets decided by third party. It's > not what I would call a come -let -us -reason approach," Sturzl said. "This --Ea presents an opportunity for employees to sit down with the council and be > heard out." n a•Chron.com I News, search and shopping from the Houston Chronicle Page 1 of 4 SEARCH I IN 1,Chron.com , •, ` HOUSTON CHRONICLE ARCHIVES Paper: Houston Chronicle Date: Thu 02/02/2006 Section: A Page: 1 Edition: 3 STAR To fill jobs, HPD finds a bonanza in county / Lured by more pay and better benefits, 53 Harris deputies have applied By MONICA GUZMADN Staff Houston police have searched nationally to fill their thinning ranks, traveling as far as Detroit and Pittsburgh in hope of luring experienced officers to the Bayou City. But it turns out the most eager applicants are right next door. Fifty-three Harris County sheriff's deputies have applied to join the Houston Police Department through an abridged academy set to begin in March - making up nearly a third of all applicants. Dozens more have asked about the job, HPD officials said. The deputies have come for the higher pay, better benefits and career opportunities their department may not be able to match. "A lot of guys are going to wait and see how this first group goes through," said Deputy Robert Goerlitz, a board member with the Harris County Deputies Organization, a union that represents deputies, jailers and other county law enforcement personnel. "If it turns out to be positive ... there's going to be a flood." County Judge Robert Eckels said that, despite the draw, there were no plans for big changes in the county's pay structure. "We think our pay is competitive," Eckels said. "We will watch the situation. But at this time, I'm not alarmed." Many deputies disagree and say they plan to picket an upcoming Harris County Commissioners Court meeting. "Right now we're in a precarious imbalance," said Richard Newby, president of the Deputies Organization. "Everybody's hurting, nobody's well, and everybody wants a fix. Everybody wants a fix right now." s V ra 'k1ftV//UnxnXT rhrnn rnmM'" A iinGn7A1 1 i1 ,Chron.com I News, search and shopping from the Houston Chronicle Page 2 of 4 Staffing issues Indeed, the sheriffs department has manpower problems. Meeting the law enforcement demands of a growing population while staffing the state's busiest jails is challenge enough, with about 100 vacant positions. To keep up, officials have had to disband "hot spot" response teams and postpone an academy class originally scheduled for March. HPD's tempting offer is not helping. Newby said Harris County deputies make about $3,600 less per year than they made three years ago, but they could add an average of $12,000 to their annual salaries if they move to HPD. "The city has a deeper tax base, they have deeper pockets, they can afford to pay that," said sheriffs Lt. David Guarino, who oversees recruiting for the department. With 2,544 certified personnel, including 800 patrol deputies and 490 detention officers, Harris County has the third -largest sheriffs department in the country and the largest in the state. Still, Guarino acknowledged, "Maybe it's time for a raise." Both agencies have relatively comparable base salaries, particularly for starters; a first -year HPD officer makes a minimum of $36,022, only about $300 more per year than a starting deputy. The real perk is in the extras. "The benefits package there makes it much more lucrative," Newby said. "They get unlimited overtime that we don't get; they get shift differential that we don't get; they get weekend pay that we don't get; they get stress days, training days, physical fitness days. These are things that we don't get." Lost investment Along with the deputies' experience, the department stands to lose an investment of $45,000 per deputy. Thus, 53 departing officers could walk away with nearly $2.4 million worth of department - funded training. The last time HPD offered a modified -entry class, in 2002, only two of the 29 cadets who enrolled came from the Harris County Sheriffs Office. Union officials say the situation this year is a much -needed wakeup call. "Here we are, we've invested thousands of dollars in people's training, and we're basically giving it away," Goerlitz said. "We're wasting taxpayer's money by not offering enough to them to keep them here. It's like throwing money down a well." The Commissioners Court could consider a salary hike at its budget session in February, but union officials said they aren't holding out much hope. "We have to do what we can afford, and we can't do any more than we can afford," said county budget officer Dick Raycraft. "There's a lot of competition for dollars (in the county). Sometimes the county's t,t+r.•1/�=n,n,. mot„ ,.. . ,.,./!`Tl A /.,,.,,1 :.,, /--- 1,:..,.....-1c):a-11nnc nncnni$ - 1, ,, -- ,Chron.com I News, search and shopping from the Houston Chronicle Page 3 of 4 ahead, and sometimes they're behind." Recruitment officials said the staffing problem could be overrated, pointing to the thousands of rA©sumA©s they receive every year from people interested in joining the department as detention officers. "We are not seeing this mass exodus that everybody's trying to project," said Capt. Mark Wrobleski. He called the loss to other departments "acceptable and gradual" - at least for now. But Goeriitz, at a recent job fair, came face to face with a younger, more ambitious generation. "We were getting left in the dust," he said. "Once they found out the benefits we had compared to everyone else, they basically walked away. "Our pay and benefits have gotten to the point where we're the last on the totem pole for anyone wanting to come to us." Cut in block grants Good retention goes hand in hand with good recruiting, but managing both can be a lot to ask of agencies outside big cities, said Elaine Deck, who tracks recruiting for the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Since 2001, the federal government has cut law enforcement block grants that helped communities with police funding, she said. Now, Deck said, "communities that don't have a strong tax base are not going to be as competitive as communities that do." One of the 53 deputies applying to HPD, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of retribution at work, thinks the county could do more. "It doesn't really seem like they care about keeping them," said the deputy, a seven-year veteran who has been accepted for the modified academy. "If they paid their people right and treated us right, it wouldn't be an issue. If they gave us a nice raise, I'd stop on a dime and not go over there (to HPD). I'd probably reconsider." The deputy said the move to HPD gets him an extra $11,000 per year and much better health insurance. The pay increase and education incentives allow him to leave his three off -duty jobs, giving him up to 25 hours more a week to spend with his wife and two young sons and to work toward getting a college degree. HPD's planned $7,000 signing bonus for in -state transfers will only be "icing on the cake," he said. But the deputy regrets having to leave his buddies behind. ,thron.com I News, search and shopping from the Houston Chronicle Page 4 of 4 "If I made this decision with my heart, I'd stay with the county," he said. "But I have to look at this from a business standpoint. Where would I be better off in the next 10 years, here or there? Right now, the answer is there." HPD RECRUITS To date, there are 163 applicants. The top five sources of new recruits: Harris County Sheriffa€T"s Dept. 53 Texas Municipal Police Depts. 34 Harris County Constable Precincts 16 Other Texas Sheriffa€TMs Depts. 16 College and University Police Depts. 9 There are 10 applications from out of state officers. (They would have to take the TCLEOSE test on their own. If they successfully obtain TCLEOSE certification on their own, they would be processed In the same manner as Texas peace officers). Copyright notice: All materials in this archive are copyrighted by Houston Chronicle Publishing Company Division, Hearst Newspapers Partnership, L.P., or its news and feature syndicates and wire services. No materials may be directly or indirectly published, posted to Internet and intranet distribution channels, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed in any medium. Neither these materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Place an Ad I Houston Chronicle I Copyright Notice & Privacy Policy I Contact Us I Technical Support Houston Chronicle Classified - 713-224-6868 llumit NIA I,++_.//.<.<.,.<..t„ .«...—-./('1Tl n /--- 1,;­_/.,,.,.U.— ....—MA-7nn4 nncA )42 n i, v..,.. Chron.com I News, search and shopping from the Houston Chronicle Page 1 of 2 Paper: Houston Chronicle Date: Tue 02/14/2006 Section: B Page: 1 MetFront Edition: 3 STAR HPD, union agree on incentives for seasoned officers / Program would offer higher salary and bonus to s come here By ALEXIS GRANT Staff The Houston Police Department may soon have a new tool to entice experienced officers to come work in Houston. HPD and the Houston Police Officers' Union have agreed on a financial incentive program to help the department hire officers from outside the city, the groups announced Monday. The program would offer a $7,000 bonus and a higher salary to officers who join the city's police force after working would also allow newly hired experienced officers to complete a 13-week training course instead of the 26-week clas: novice officers. City Council is expected to consider the program Wednesday. Police Chief Harold Hurtt has said his department is understaffed and has trouble recruiting new officers because the paid jobs in the private sector. He echoed these concerns during a "State of the HPD" presentation to the City Counc Public Safety and Homeland Security. "It's a chess game every day," Hurtt said, as he described how officers have to prioritize which emergency calls to ar others. "For the long-term health of the city, we have to commit to a hiring program." With 4,800 officers, HPD has about 2.2 officers for every 1,000 people - that includes newcomers from Hurricane Kai with the national average of 2.8, Hurtt said. He wants to train 700 new officers over the next three years, which wou ratio in line with the national average by late 2008. Craig Ferrell Jr., the department's lawyer who briefed the committee on the program, said HPD will to try to hire as r it can afford to train and pay. "The most cost-efficient way of doing that is to attract already trained, highly qualified officers from around the state and put them through the academy, and it's half the training cost," Ferrell said. Houston officers who were hired with experience in the last several years would not be forgotten - they, too, would r raise under the proposed system. The 35 officers with less than five years under their belt, including experience in ai Houston, would qualify for the pay raise, since officers with six or more years of experience are already in a higher s. That part of the program would cost the city $110,000 over the next five years. Hans Marticiuc, president of the HPOU, said he is satisfied with the compromise. "You're not going to bring anyone in at a higher pay than people who are currently there," he said, "That was our coi 1�4fr�•/hxn:rzv r'krnn nntnICrIA/�r�hivoo/o.n1.;<>0.....tO:a—nnn� tntnni i - - Chron.com I News, search and shopping from the Houston Chronicle Page 2 of 2 HPD had proposed a similar program earlier in the year that did not include rewards for current officers, while the un to increase pay for about 100 officers with experience at a cost of $910,000. Councilwoman Ada Edwards said the city needs to fund schools and create jobs to decrease crime before putting moi the streets. "I am not interested in developing a police state here," she said. 'i Chron.com I Harris County proposes raises to keep deputies from HPD Page 1 of 2 Feb. 22, 2006, 2:04AM County hopes money talks Big pay raises are proposed to keep deputies from joining HPD By BILL MURPHY Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Harris County will spend millions of dollars this year on Sheriffs Department raises to try to prevent the Houston Police Department from luring deputies away, top county officials acknowledged Tuesday. To retain its more than 500 jail detention officers and attract new ones, the county is considering spending $3 million this year to increase their pay by 20 percent to 30 percent. Less hefty raises also likely will be given to as many as 3,700 sheriffs and constable's deputies to keep them from leaving the county for HPD and other agencies in the region. "The commissioners have said we are concerned about public safety, and we will do what we need to do," said County Judge Robert Eckels. "I'm not going to tell you our guys will be making more than anybody in the region. But it will be a competitive salary." More than 50 sheriff's deputies have applied recently to join HPD, seeking higher pay, better benefits and career opportunities. County detention officers are among those being recruited by law enforcement agencies in the region, said Mike Smith, one of two chief deputies in the sheriffs department. A starting detention officer is paid $24,396, excluding overtime. An officer with nine years on the job receives $34,344. Those salaries are not competitive with other large departments, Smith said. The county is weighing raising starting detention salaries to $30,250. Officers with nine years' experience would be paid $42,408. The proposed salaries could change as the county factors in how much it will spend on salary increases for sheriffs and constable's deputies and on a proposed 3 percent cost of living raise for other all county employees, said Dick Raycraft, director of the county's management services and budget office. The Commissioners Court will revisit deputy salaries and other budget issues at its next meeting March 7. Spurring the county to retain its detention officers is a finding last year by the Texas Commission on Jail Standards that the jail was in noncompliance, in part because as many as 1,900 inmates were sleeping on mattresses on floors. As many as 50 inmates were held in dormitory -like pods with 24 beds. Some slept on mattresses placed under dining. tables and next page 2 Of 2 keep deputies from �D roposes raises to .,bron•oom County p to toilets• as enough The Jail hace to reduce pvercrowd,n9 ` but the sheriffs s the department lacks all manpower to Open all At jail cells and p the tirne of the Jail commissions year, inspection last Y tw° floors at the Street jail Bakewere r there closed because h were not enouq ervise them. Sosup e of that th been art et - space has since sheriff's deP months. And ►t likely opened court in the fall authorized the r Raycraft said. CO over several yea , Commissioner; loe� 6� of be hired later officers in to hire 60 add attracting new anoth county Isn t attup with attrition• authorize that the keeping Smith said, though,and is barely mile Probation Center, the numbers needed' county Juv onths� the �5S million Juvenile Justice neXt few Months th will be kept. Aver the will move. uveniles hire detention artment tts need to h ex ected to pep many detained j e artmen Court is P where Ve Is the d Com►Ytissionerdetention officers at a Complicating the the o facility• ile new many 60 juven officers to runhirin I of as 10 million annually• authorize the cost of bill. rr►urPhy@chron.corn 1 RECEIVED �e t anQrife b and s to1ed.in Chapter kcal overr�men-God &-wTWs iUWllow.iNwlw ovees of s t ate with city officiR hey t n e , ..O.A wants to m; 9iN' 2006 hard Aran. . . u - Saito e y ;ity lVlan er n thi me g �� Nave concernul �- � - d nfe err��ssu The ABC"s of Meet and Confer And Collective Bargaining Bettye Lynn Lynn Pha m & Ross, LLP 1320 S. University Drive, Suite 720 Fort Worth, Texas 76107 © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Meet and Confer Petition Received ■ What does City do now? ■ Options ■ Best option for your City © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Making Agreement with Association Regarding Details of Election ■ What should be covered in such an agreement? ■ Drafting agreement with Association for Certification election of the Union © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Getting Started With Meet and Confer r Who calls who first? © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Preliminaries ■ What preliminary steps should the city be taking while waiting for the letter requesting to start meeting? —City Manager appoints meet and confer committee © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Who should serve on M&C Committee for City? ■ City Manager ■ HR Director ■ Finance Dept. Representative ■ Police or Fire Chief ■ Elected representative? ■ City Attorney ■ Outside Negotiator EI © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Other Members of Bargaining Team ■ Operating expertise ■ Costing specialist ■ Note taker ■ Language draftsperson © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 WHAT ABOUT THE CITY MANAGER? ■ Employer's Chief decision maker--, i.e., city manager -should not sit at bargaining table ■ Management places itself at serious disadvantage by having chief decision - maker at bargaining table — Loss of unseen authority — Negotiator has flexibility of declining proposal on basis it is not acceptable to the city manager — When city manager present, failure to immediately respond will be seen as sign of weakness or indecision © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Choosing Chief Negotiator ■ Insider v. Outsider ■ Question is whether negotiator is qualified to do the job ■ Experience is important ■ Choose experienced outsider 8 © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Pros and Cons of Having Outside Negotiator ■ Not afraid to say no ■ Takes heat away from city officials who will have to work with the employees ■ Cost ■ Experienced in dealing with Association/Union tactics © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Advantages of Outsider: ■ Experience- knowledge of bargaining techniques, traps and union negotiators' techniques; ■ Ability to draft contract language ■ Known track record ■ Knowledge of industry operating and labor practices ■ Ability to draft contract language ■ Knowledge of union negotiators' techniques ■ Knowledge of industry operating and labor practices ■ Labor contracts of other employers in same industry ■ Size of workforce may influence decision whether to hire outsider. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Advantages of Insider:0 ■ Familiarity with organization and its personnel and mgmt style ■ Higher level of loyalty to employer ■ Cost savings ■ Greater creclibili spokesperson is management ty and authority when member of © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Use of Law Firm or Consulting Firm ■ Use of attorney in negotiation of first contract is more valuable than at any other time. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 What to Look for in a Negotiator ■ Ability to persuade ■ Ability to express managements positions clearly ■ Ability to resolve stalemates ■ Ability to control temper © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 c ■ r 0 W O L Q ^L� O V LJ L Ln Ln Q � @!me 4 f 46 46 ic,,c=: Of dcv-�--We 0 Ground Rules for Management Committee ■ Only the Chief Spokesperson speaks — Except where chief spokesperson asks another to speak ■ Determine Method for calling caucuses — Caucus at any time ■ Learn pre arranged signals ■ No communications with Union © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Role of Caucuses During Negotiations ■ Separate meeting of each party ■ Meet &Confer says not open to public ■ Consider proposal or counterproposal ■ Open discussion ■ Permits hiding of true feelings at table ■ Resolve disagreements among team © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 U N U V 0 0 Ul o c� v 0 W 75 0 ME Effective Use of Caucus ■ Can be used to tactical advantage or disadvantage ■ May reveal weakness on part of party ■ Timing and length of caucuses may be telling ■ Don't call too many caucuses ■ Caucuses should be called only by chief spokesperson - can get notes from other members requesting caucus. ■ Spokesperson must manage caucus ■ Have definite reason for calling and plan how assignments will be accomplished ■ At end of caucus -review all items and decisions made and negotiation plan to be followed. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Important to Determine Negotiator's Authority ■ Who does spokesperson report to in management? ■ How frequently does spokesperson make reports? ■ Any union proposals that are totally unacceptable to management? ■ What is the range within which management wants to see settlement? ■ Anyone else in the City who needs to see or approve proposals, language offers, etc. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 General Rule: ■ Give negotiator as much authority and flexibility as possible within overall guidelines established prior to negotiations. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Preparation and Choice of Bargaining Items ■ ANALYSIS - What is negotiable under M&C? ■ Only what the City agrees to discuss - What is negotiable under Chapter 174 ■ Wages, Hours and Conditions of Employment - Neither side is required to compromise on its stated position © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Management Role in Demands ■ Usually a responding Role ■ Exception for Civil Service Cities © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Other Items to Review to Prepare for Bargaining or Meet and Confer ■ Past grievances/gripes ■ Rates of absence, tardiness and turnover ■ Exit interviews ■ Attitude surveys ■ Talk to first line supervisors -but remember they are in the union here © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 City "Demands" ■ Committee determines what City might want in return in Meet &Confer —especially if civil service. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 What might City want from the Association? ■ Civil Service changes: — hiring changes — promotional changes — assessment center — increase number of appointed Assistant Chiefs —especially fire — wage levels for entry level hiring ■ Look at Austin © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Preparation ■ Develop sets of pessimistic,, realistic and optimistic objectives © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Unionkfs Source For Proposals ■ Grievances/Gripes ■ Other cities' agreements all are public ■ Unlike private sector © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Subjects The Association May Raise In Its Proposal ■ Pension and insurance benefits ■ Wage increases ■ Work schedules ■ Overtime premiums ■ Lunch and rest periods © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Association's Subjects (font...) ■ Employment security — Hiring — Probationary period — Seniority — Job -bidding procedures — Promotions — Transfers — Discharge — Contracting out work ■ Job performance ■ Association security ■ Grievance procedure ■ Association rights © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Planning for Meeting and Conferring ■ Anticipate Association's Requests and develop responses ■ Prioritize objectives and develop settlement range ■ Prepare overall strategy for negotiations © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ City must establish realistic objectives for Association ■ Look at patterns and trends in other cities ■ Look at cost of living increases © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Comparison of Comparables ■ Make sure that data is really comparable ■ Don't compare apples and oranges © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Developing Information Base ■ Revenue and Cost Information ■ Basic Employee Information © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Considerations in Strategy ■ Personalities of negotiators ■ Current financial position of Association ■ Current political position of Association ■ Outside influences —public support © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Agenda ■ Develop agenda for discussions and incorporate into ground rules ■ Association first ■ City second —with non -economic items ■ Hold economic proposals until non- economic items TAed © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Is there a Duty to Provide Information? ■ Under PIA —YES ■ Under Meet & Confer Statute —NO © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 EM u W 4-J L 0) fa 0-1 cr fu 4— W^ 0 � "0 O � Q fa % 0 0 N a J J vi 06 a C C J 0 Bargaining Techniques ■ Distributive Bargaining — "Win-lose" situation —Threats and deception are common — Real and contrived emotional outbursts — Bluffing — My "last and final" proposal — Take it or leave it © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Responses by the Parties ■ Ads for replacement workers ■ Picketing ■ Newspaper ads ■ Letters to the editor © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Principled Negotiations ■ Getting to "Yes" ■ Separate people from the problem ■ Attack the problem —focus on interests of parties not positions ■ Identify options ■ Develop objective criteria © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Collective Bargaining by Objectives ■ Provides discipline and system for negotiator's actions ■ Recognizes adversarial nature of collective bargaining ■ Each party establishes priorities ■ Easier to delegate to the bargaining team ■ Must preserve confidentiality of information re priorities and range of objectives © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Pressure Bargaining ■ Determine costs associated with negotiations ■ What is cost of agreeing or disagreeing during bargaining process ■ Party determines range of accepted settlement ■ If range not met — the other party applies pressure © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Avoiding Pressure Bargaining ■ Use bargaining notes to record log of discussion ■ Start with areas of common agreement ■ Present multiple choices to other party ■ Keep bargaining sessions issue centered., not people centered ■ Use subcommittees and caucus time to defuse heated situations © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 How to Make Bargaining Process Work Better ■ Be prepared and organized ■ Don't underestimate the other side ■ Understand the City"s priorities and long term interests and the price it is willing to pay for them ■ Don't give away anything unless you receive something in return ■ Make sure the Union understands what items are City"s priority and why How to Make Bargaining Process Work Better (Continued) ■ Contract negotiations are tedious and slow ■ Patience is important ■ Always ask for clarification of proposal ■ Listen carefully ■ Don't issue ultimatum unless you mean it ■ Resolve tension by reviewing accomplishments Skills at the Bargaining Table ■ Listening ■ Communicating ■Writing/drafting language ■ Thick skin —to survive barbs and attacks ■ Personal integrity and courage —word or handshake is basis for agreement © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Adversarial Nature of Collective Bargaining ■ Will meet and confer be different? ■ Is interest based bargaining the answer? © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 "Rule #8; The morality of a means depends upon whether the means is being employed at a time of imminent defeat or imminent victory. Sim ly stated by Alinsky, ""ethics are determined by whet er one is losing or winning.,What may be considered immoral acts by one facing assured victory would be considered moral by those clesperately trying to avert defeat. An often repeated quote among police labor leaders in Texas when facing insurmountable odds is,, ""We'll just drop the bomb and live in the ashes. If the city leaves the association no other avenues to resolve the issue, then the organization must be willing to use whatever is its ultimate weapon (strike, slow downs, blue flu, referendums, political action, etc.)." Excerpt above taken from: ]ohn Burpo, Ron DeLord and Michael Shannon,, 71MA i�A N�MAM�7�.AN ■ A ■"N AA m fnr f-hm © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 a,IN 01Ww AA "Endorse a candidate, and once endorsed, give the candidate your strongest support. One of the greatest sources of power that a police association has is in the political arena. It is the only place where the playing field is level between the police association and its usual opponents, that is, the public employers and state Municipal Leagues." Excerpt above taken from: John Burpo, et al., supra at 96 © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 rl 4W .. m O C y 0 � Q. � L 4 CL co (U _ W n W O O N d J J vi E a c c J 0 u "When You Get in a Fight with City Hall., Escalation Is the Key" "Your goal must be to set up such a flood of events and distractions that the pressure becomes unbearable. You want for city hall to become so frustrated that the political leaders will give in or agree to negotiate just to have some peace." Excerpt above taken from: John Burpo, et al., supra at 131, 132 © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 "Three Types of Public Pressure with a High Likelihood of Success"" X% ... #1: Embarrassment" AX ... #2: Political Pressure" IN ... #3: Drama" Above taken from: John Burpo, et al., supra at 135-137 © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 01 M m Q y 4W 0 a L m s 0 n E 0 L w m 0 m a 0 0 N a J J vi O w cz E cv L d J MI N 4w y 0 CL L m C s 0 r, E 0 L 4- R 4w 0 a ko 0 0 N d J J V) ig O6 E fu a C J Climate for Bargaining ■ Get to know the union you are dealing with ■ Review traditions, personalities, sources of power, institutional characteristics ■ Keep the pressure on — — Any time that the police association is in a fight with the city or county, the group must keep coming with a new tactic until the fight is over. One tactic in and of itself will not do the trick; there must be constantly changing actions that will drive the employer crazy to the point of capitulation. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Spokesperson Must be a Good Listener ■ Maintain eye contact with speaker ■ Note tone,, facial expression when words delivered ■ Ask questions about unclear points ■ Rephrase statements ■ Say, "I see" © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Spokesperson Must be a Good Listener ■ Don't make instant judgments ■ Hear out speaker instead of thinking of rebuttals ■ Don't mentally criticize speaker ■ Recognize and dismiss irrelevant material quickly © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 VIP ■ Listen to comments made by other members of Union bargaining team ■ Direct questions to other members of union"s team other than spokesperson © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Attributes of Successful Negotiator: ■ Sets clear objectives ■ Doesn't hurry ■ When in doubt, calls for caucus ■ Is prepared ■ Remains flexible ■ Continually examines why other party acts as it does ■ Respects face-saving tactics used by opposition ■ Tries to ascertain real interest of other party ■ Active listener © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Attributes of Successful Negotiator:5 (font...) ■ Builds reputation for being fair but firm ■ Controls emotions ■ Evaluates each bargaining move in relation to all others ■ Measures bargaining moves against ultimate objectives ■ Pays close attention to wording of proposals ■ Knows compromise is key to successful negotiations; understands no party can afford to win or lose all ■ Tries to understand people ■ Considers impact of present negotiations on future relationship of parties Characteristics of Effective City Spokesperson ■ Well prepared ■ Knows the territory - knows City's business ■ Patient ■ Inspires confidence ■ Doesn't burn candle at both ends ■ Congenial ■ Organized ■ Straight talker ■ Positive ■ Recognize own ignorance ■ Has integrity © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Negotiating First Labor Agreement ■ Most important negotiation ■ Sets dominant tone of relationship for years to come ■ Establishes basic provisions and language of labor agreement -will stay largely intact for years to come ■ Assume that whatever is in first agreement will stay there forever ■ No contract expiration -and no natural deadline — Termination date of agreement also undetermined ■ Negotiations may be strained because of how Union got to the table © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Special Preparation for First Contract ■ Research union ■ Research other contracts ■ Prepare draft contract., as City would like to have it © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Special Preparation for First Contract ■ Work from City's draft contract. ■ Always refer to the City"s draft contract ■ Less language is usually best ■ Avoid undue specificity ■ Include strong management rights clause ■ Avoid mutual agreement clauses ■ Don't agree to automatic escalators ■ Always include a Zipper clause ■ Avoid negotiating detailed health and welfare clauses © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 What to Expect at the First Meeting? ■ Negotiate Ground Rules ■ Opening Statements?? © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Subjects of Ground Rules ■ Number and names of representatives ■ Number of meetings for Association to bring forth proposals and for City to reply ■ Status of Association members on M&C Committee re pay or leave ■ Association should assume cost of employees doing the bargaining ■ Limit number of days or hours paid by City ■ Communications with the media — Contact only on a joint basis — Hard to police — Don't bargain in the media ■ Communication with the Council and association membership ■ Frequency and duration of meetings ■ Date, time and location of future meetings © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Subjects of Ground Rules (Cont...) ■ Who are Chief spokespersons and their authority to speak for the teams ■ Other members speak when called upon ■ Replacement of representatives on bargaining teams ■ Role of TA's ■ Ratification process upon reaching tentative agreement ■ If mediation agreed to jointly, then parties must agree jointly on selection of mediator ■ Note taking —official or not ■ Tape recording ■ How bargaining agenda will be determined OO Lynn Pham &Ross, LLP 2006 GROUND RULES ■ Order of addressing issues — Resolve language then deal with money issues © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 POSTURING ■ First sessions —usually monologues ■ Presenting list of demands ■ Interdependent goals ■ Expect concealment of real goals and objectives © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Opening Statement by City ■ Sets tone and theme for discussions ■ Management takes negotiations seriously ■ Management will seek to be fair throughout negotiations ■ Management won't put burden on citizens or the City ■ Address big picture © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Advance Receipt of Union"s Proposal ■ Advisable ■ Union won't always provide in advance ■ Can assist City in preparing its own proposals © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Understanding and Clarifying Union"s Proposals ■ City negotiator asks what's purpose of proposal ■ What is justification for the proposal? ■ Be careful of questions, which may make Union"s proposals broader than they are ■ Don't seek justification of obviously unacceptable union proposals © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Avoid Immediate Substantive Responses ■ Never make concession until considered and discussed in management caucus. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Evaluating Union"s Non -monetary Proposals ■ What change actually being proposed? ■ Reasons offered by union for change ■ Do claimed problems really exist? ■ Is Union"s proposal best way to accomplish objective? ■ What other information is needed about the proposal? ■ What is impact on City"s operation? ■ How important is proposal to Union? ■ What should City's ultimate position be on this issue? ■ What should City"s first response be on the issue? © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 City"s Response to Union"s Proposal ■ Agenda is unrealistic ■ Total cost is too much ■ Negative reaction to proposals which would reduce city's rights to effectively manage the Department ■ Failure to be critical may be misinterpreted by Union that proposals not so ambitious or outrageous © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 City"s Response to Union"s Proposal (Cont...) ■ Respond to every non -economic proposal ■ Do not reveal bottom line position on issues at early stage of negotiations ■ Acceptance early on of significant union proposal must be linked somehow to acceptance of management's proposals ■ Initial response should be clear and unequivocal -no bluff or posturing if totally unacceptable. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Management's Proposals ■ Wait until receipt of union's proposals ■ Propose entire contract ■ Work from City"s document ■ Explain and justify each proposal ■ Do not suggest concessions may be made ■ Hold back some of your justifying points and arguments for later discussions © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 The Negotiation Process ■ Setting the agenda for discussions ■ Who actually talks at the table and how do they know what to say? ■ Demeanor during negotiations © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Setting Proper Tone During Bargaining ■ Tone usually set in first hour of negotiations ■ Dealing with abusive language from Union negotiator ■ Management should set positive tone © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Avoid ■ Extreme statements ■ Answering without having ■ Accusing other side of bad ■ Blaming carele facts faith ss supervisors ■ Interrupting union's spokesman ■ Using abusive or profane language ■ Sounding like preacher ■ Becoming emotional/losing self control © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Choose words carefully when rejecting Union's proposal ■ Soft no"s v. hard no's ■ Tone and volume of voice ■ Facial expressions ■ Context of negotiations © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 PERSUASION ■ City's Spokesperson is a Persuader ■ Persuasion is what collective bargaining is all about ■ One of most import roles of management negotiator is that of persuader ■ Convince Union reps they should change their minds and positions ■ Effective persuader: — Knowledge of subject matter and workplace factors being discussed — Familiarity with nature and problems of work involved — Know terminology or shop talk — Have knowledge of City's economics — Know background of union's negotiators © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Bargaining ■ Start by asking for unattainable ■ Reach settlement through large number of compromises © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Presenting an Offer or Proposal ■ Written offers carry more weight ■ Read written offers ■ Explain City"s position and considerations on key elements ■ Accentuate positive ■ Expect acceptance ■ Invite questions © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 STRATEGIES ■ Packaging of proposals ■ Negotiating ""chips" -throw away items ■ Flexibility —be careful not to immediately reject a proposal ■ Respond with many proposals —accept or have a counter offer © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 COMPROMISE ■ Key to successful negotiations ■ Win -Win situation at end of negotiating © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Order of Agreements ■ Agreement first usually on less important items ■ Non -economic items ■ Economic items —usually packaged not individual © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 How to Make Concessions ■ Don't concede a point unless sure it is still an issue ■ Never make concession without consideration and/or caucus ■ Always try to get something in return ■ Don't give all when half might suffice ■ Make union earn concessions ■ Save major concessions for last. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Role of TA"s ■ What happens if the parties reach agreement on something? © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 rm 0 Role of Side Bar Discussions Use of Side Bars ■ Be careful ■ Need for trust to be established beforehand © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 4 u kD 0 0 N d J J V) V) E a c c ra Specific Clauses ■ Management Rights —found in almost all contracts — long v. short — residual, implied or reserved rights © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 �ld L--J fu E O ca �� � V V1 � fu � 'O C� LL �0� CD N a J J U) C2 E J 1 0 U 3► i.- y N ul cn 0 IN u (W� ■s r �■ V I r� i rwm� > O ■ • cD O O N J J C CO e N co V O N J J N 66 s co a J C How to Arrive at Wage Proposals ■ Ability to pay ■ Job analysis or evaluation ■ Wage survey ■ Maintain internal and external equity © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Problems in Using Job Survey Data ■ Difficult to agree on which sources contain comparable data ■ Sizes of cities affects wages ■ Which cities are comparable © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Roll Up or Creep ■ What is it? ■ Don't forget to include it in all calculations © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Strategies for Bargaining Over Economics ■ Auction or traditional bargaining ■ Predominant form ■ Initial offer followed by successively higher offers ■ Commonly used ■ Allows parties to feel each other out © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 O 4- O V Q N � O .i O ■ LT, Boulwarism—Single First and Final Offer ■ Take it or leave it ■ Usually leads to confrontation ■ Ballpark Offer ■ Initial offer close to final position ■ Leave enough room to make minor improvement or rearrangements in offer © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Timing of First Offer ■ Resolve contract language issues before economic items ■ Must make enough time in advance of expiration of current agreement ■ First offer must include elements City feels are vital to final settlement ■ First offer must be credible ■ First offer tests basic premises of Citys desired final settlement ■ Key element is length of contract © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Evaluating First Offer ■ Make careful cost estimate ■ Discuss its impact on negotiations ■ Does City have enough maneuvering room left? © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 „J 0 0 N a. J J U) Ln 06 E L d C C J M 4- O O L r E MI u Uniontfs Response to First Offer ■ Don't be surprised by rejection ■ Serious problem of no counteroffer presented ■ City should not bid against itself © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Continue tradition offer/counteroffer sequence ■ City should try to lower union's expectation through its counteroffers ■ Explain why union counteroffer is unsatisfactory ■ Successively signals union position smaller increases in offers that City reaching its final ■ Vary counteroffers by moving money around © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Trade Offs ■ Don't use too early in negotiations ■ Consider side -bar for discussing trade offs ■ Trial balloon ■ Term of contract is one of most critical factors in coming to agreement over economic items © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Re Openers ■ Long-term contract with certain subjects reopened ■ Usually wages only ■ City left with not much to trade off for ■ Often the subjects of bargaining get enlarged at the table © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Tip on Re Openers ■ Make language as specific as possible ■ List Article numbers © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Bringing Negotiations to an End ■ Contract expiration date is important in timing ■ Withdrawal of numerous demands from union"s agenda is signal union is ready to settle © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Moving to Conclusion ■ Final Offer — Make this when relative positions of parties are so close that final offer will be acceptable or union would not call impasse over the difference. ■ Keep credibility or "final offer"' will lose its meaning © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Piecemeal Approach ■ Deal with economics item by item ■ Contingent on agreement being reach on all unresolved issues ■ Accurate costing very important with this method © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Private Meetings ■ Common at this phase of bargaining ■ Attended by 2 spokespeople only ■ Means to remove roadblocks ■ Meetings not illegal or immoral ■ Permits exploration of possible concessions and areas of settlement ■ Make notes after the meeting © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Bringing Negotiations to a Close ■ Apply pressure to settle ■ Set deadline for acceptance of City proposal ■ Set deadline for offer of retroactivity ■ Add benefit for acceptance by deadline ■ Break off negotiations ■ Eliminate dues deductions ■ Get commitment from Union it will sell agreement to membership ■ Don't give in to last-minute union demands for add ons © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Make sure union ratifies agreement before taking to City Council for approval ■ Don't prematurely implement contract terms before completely ratified and signed. ■ Never leave bargaining table without written and signed memorandum of agreement, if you don't already have TA"s on all articles © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 C: (1) E c- Q� L L � � Q W 4-0 =3 V ■ �D 0 0 N a J J Ob E co L d C C J M) u Duration of Agreements ■ Single or multi -year contracts ■ Defer wage increases ■ Predict labor costs further into future ■ Front-end load v. equal spread of raises ■ Back- loaded —lower wage adjustment i n first year © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 COLA's —Advantages and Disadvantage ■ Is real wage eroded by inflation ■ COLA is escalator clause ■ Spell out inflation index ■ CPI-W most commonly used ■ Cents -per -hour for each point increase ■ Percentage increase equal to percentage increase in CPI ■ When to apply COLA? ■ Specify maximum COLA increase ■ Increases taken for granted ■ Fewer contracts have COLAs because of low inflation rates ■ Job security greater concern than COLAS © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Multi -year contract with wage re openers © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 What percent of contracts are resolved without a job action? ■ More than 95% 100 90 80 70 60 50 U ti �y � 40 30 20 10 0 2,0 2.5 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Impasse ■ Interests not reconciled ■ One party has no intention on settling ■ Move parties closer together 0 © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Options to Deal with Impasse ■ In Meet & Confer —fold up tent and go home ■ Mediation ■ Fact-finding ■ Interest arbitration ■ Final offer ■ Mediation/arbitration ■ Continue old agreement ■ Work without agreement © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 r, CD om � is wolom �d u cp 0 1.0, m c 0 7 0 ig C31 coo •L uo O N J J 66 O- J 0 Options to Deal with Impasse ■ Political pressure - City council/mayor — Citizens — Business people — Newspaper © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Drafting of Contract ■ Most important step ■ City should control ■ Work from City Proposal ■ City should draft all proposals and counterproposals arising during discussions ■ Use examples in drafting difficult concepts © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Drafting Contract Language ■ Draft language during negotiation s or shortly thereafter ■ Must be drafted proposed and agreed upon contemporaneously with negotiating process ■ City"s spokesperson should draft contract language ■ Have another attorney review contract language -second set of eyes ■ Do not accept language proposed by Union ■ Write language for the readers of the Agreement ■ Make words clear and simple ■ Don't change language of old agreement unless change in meaning or application is intended © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Guidelines for Drafting Language ■ Avoid different terms for same person or entity ■ Avoid different meanings for same term ■ Avoid redundant or needless phrases ■ Avoid legalisms ■ Using headings where possible ■ Be precise in use of numbers and units of time — Example calendar days and work days ■ Clarify references to other contract provisions ■ Enumerate multiple terms ■ Insert new provisions in proper locations ■ Use consistent sequential number of paragraphs ■ Use examples or charts for difficult provisions © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Drafts -person should be asking ""What if..." ■ Avoid certain phrases, such as in case of emergency or whenever possible ■ Try to include hedge language ■ Make contractual restrictions as narrow as possible ■ Keep the Contract as short as possible ■ Watch out for language borrowed from other cities' contracts ■ Be careful about using catchall terms, such as etc. © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Be careful of mutual agreement clauses — Most of these work against management ■ Avoid agreements to agree ■ Avoid window dressing -example -friendly terms between city and union ■ Make sure and pinpoint effective dates-i.e., salary increases ■ Consider whether language change will impact any other section of the Agreement ■ Date and Label every proposal and counterproposal received from Union and given by the City © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Sidebar agreement may be useful --- memorandum of agreement ■ May be incorporated by reference into the contract ■ Sidebar must not conflict with terms of agreement ■ Sidebar usually has termination date ■ Don't put anything in sidebar City would not put in the main agreement © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 ■ Hold Informational Meetings for Management and Supervisory Employees ■ Explain new contract provisions © Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 The End Bettye Lynn Lvnn@LaborCounsel.net Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 1320 S. University Drive, Suite 720 Fort Worth, Texas 76107 (817) 332-8504 @ Lynn Pham & Ross, LLP 2006 Questions & Answers H. B e 304 The Municipal Meet & Confer Law Prepared by CLEAT June 2005 Table of Contents Q&A About Texas Collective Bargaining and Meet & Confer Laws 3 Appendix A - Statistical Tables xx ❖ Municipal Police & Fire Depts Covered by H. B. 304 x ❖ Cities Under 50,000 & Over 10,000 Without 143 ❖ Texas Fire & Police Bargaining Units xx Appendix A - An Analysis of H.B. 304 Appendix B - Statistical Tables Appendix C - Glossary of Labor Terms xx Questions & Answers About H. B. 304 The Municipal Meet & Confer Law WHAT IS THE HISTORY BEHIND THE LAWS PROHIBITING TEXAS PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FROM COLLECTIVELY BARGAINING OR MEET AND CONFERRING? During the Industrial Revolution of the late 1800's craft unions in the American Federation of Labor (AFL) and industrial unions in the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) competed to organize private sector employees, and in the early 1900's public employees. The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) was formed in 1918. In 1919 the infamous Boston police strike deflated the police labor movement for another 50 years. The CIO was dominated by socialist and communists and fear of the CIO reached Texas during the 1940's as the CIO organized workers in several cities. A CIO led strike of electric street car workers in Houston in 1946 caused the Texas Legislature in 1947 to enact a number of laws to prohibit the unionization of public employees. Article 5154c, Texas Civil Statutes (now codified in the Labor Code) prohibits all state, county, school, municipal and special district employees from being recognized for the purposes of collective bargaining by a public employer and prohibits any contracts between public employers and unions. The some law did grant all public employees the right to belong or not belong to a labor union that does not advocate the right to strike. This law has been amended for fire fighters, police officers and now Houston city employees, but has not been repealed for all non -excluded employees. During the 1947 session the legislature also adopted Article 1269, Texas Civil Statutes (now codified as Chapter 143, Local Government Code), that created municipal civil service if adopted by the voters. WHEN DID THE LAW CHANGE TO GIVE POLICE OFFICERS AND FIRE FIGHTERS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS? In 1973, the Texas Legislature passed Article 5154c-1, Texas Civil Statutes, creating an exception to the prohibition against public employee collective bargaining that was contained in Article 5154-c. "The Texas Fire and Police Employee Relations Act" (now codified as Chapter 174, Local Government Code) applies to fire fighters and police officers all political subdivisions of the state where the voters have adopted the act. Only officers in municipalities and counties currently have bargaining rights although the Act would include officers in school districts and other special districts. This Act is commonly called the "collective bargaining law." HOW MANY MEET AND CONFER LAWS HAVE PASSED? There are currently EIGHT similar but slightly different meet and confer laws: o Chapter 143, Local Government Code, Subchapter H - In 1993, Houston fire fighters were granted meet and confer without any requirement for a public referendum. The fire fighters' union obtained a meet and confer agreement but it later expired. In 2003, the fire fighters' union won a collective bargaining election under Chapter 174. Chapter 143, Local Government Code, Subchapter 1 - In 1995, Austin police officers and fire fighters were granted meet and confer rights without any requirement for a public referendum. Austin police officers are operating under a meet and confer agreement. Austin fire fighters obtained a meet and confer agreement but it expired, in 2004, the fire fighters' union won a collective bargaining election under Chapter 174. o Chapter 143, Local Government Code, Subchapter 1 - In 2001, Fort Worth police officers and fire fighters were granted meet and confer rights under the some section as Austin police and fire, but a requirement of a public referendum for adoption was added. Fort Worth police officers are currently circulating a petition to force a public referendum. o Chapter 143, Local Government Code, Subchapter J - In 1997, Houston police officers were granted meet and confer rights without any requirement for a public referendum. Houston police officers are operating under a meet and confer agreement. o Chapter 457, Metropolitan Rapid Transit Authorities Act - In 2001, Houston -Harris County Metro Transit Police (transit authority) were granted meet and confer rights. As of this date the transit authority has chosen not to meet and confer with the Combined Metro POA. The 2005 session of the Texas Legislature passed three separate but compatible meet and confer bills allow the city to adopt the law or set it for a public referendum: o Chapter 146, Local Government Code - H.B. 2866 by Rep. Bailey (D-Houston) & Sen. Mario Gallegos (D-Houston) granted meet and confer rights to all Houston city employees (non -fire and police). o Chapter 742, Subchapter B, Local Government Code - H.B. 2892 by Rep. Vilma Luna (D-Corpus Christi) & Senator Mario Gallegos (D-Houston) granted meet and confer rights to all fire fighters in cities over 50,000 population and in cities covered by Chapter 143. Chapter 142, Subchapter B, Local Government Code - H.B. 304 by Rep. Robert Talton (R-Pasadena) & Senator Bob Deuell (R- Greenville) granted meet and confer rights to all police officers in cities over 50,000 and in cities covered by Chapter 143. WHAT ARE THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING LAW AND MEET AND CONFER LAWS? Collective bargaining Under Chapter 174 - Chapter 174 is a COMPULSORY collective bargaining law that includes all cities, counties and political subdivisions of the State (state officers are excluded). o Once the law is passed by the voters, the public employer must adopt the Act within 30-days after the next fiscal year. o The police officers in the department then petition the public employer for recognition as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all officers except the head of the department and the recognition is mandatory. o Only members of the association are allowed to vote for ratification of a new contract pursuant to an A.G.'s opinion. o The recognized association gives notice to the public employer at least 120-days before the next fiscal year and the public employer must bargain in good faith for at least 60- days before declaring an impasse. o "Good faith" means the duty to bargain collectively means a public employer and an Association shall: (1) meet at reasonable times; (2) confer in good faith regarding compensation, hours, and other conditions of employment or the negotiation of an agreement or a question arising under an agreement; and (3) execute a written contract incorporating any agreement reached, if either party requests a written contract. Note - Corpus Christi Fire Fighters Association v. City of Corpus Christi, 10 S.W.3d 23 (13th District Court of Appeals, Corpus Christi, 2000), the fire fighters' union argued the city violated the provisions of the contract by unilaterally implementing revised grooming standards and revisions to the City's Vehicle Accident Review Board procedural rules. The Court of Appeals held against the union and ruled that the issues were not conditions of employment and within management's prerogatives. As a general rule, the courts have interpreted the meaning of good faith as "meeting with the aim to secure a fair and reasonable agreement." Chapter 174 clearly states "this section does not require a public employer or an association to: (1) agree to a proposal; or (2) make a concession." o If an impasse is declared, the parties may seek federal mediation. If the parties are still at impasse, the association and public employer may mutually agree to binding arbitration (has not happened since 1976) or seek redress of the issues in the state district court. One Texas court of appeals held the judicial review unconstitutional and another court held it was constitutional. o The Act does contain a citizen's petition process to call for a repeal of Chapter 174 which has occurred in a number of cities. Meet and Confer Laws - All of the meet and confer laws except one apply to municipalities and have one common dominator - they are PERMISSIVE. o H.B. 304 meet and confer covers all officers in cities over 50,000 population and all cities that have adopted Chapter 143, municipal civil service. o Neither the police officers' association nor the city is required to meet and confer; if they meet and confer the parties are not required to act in good faith; there are no time deadlines to reach an agreement; and there is no statutory impasse procedure. o All of the laws have a citizen's petition to repeal a contract between the officers and the city. The 2005 meet and confer bills also contain provisions for the city to seek a repeal of the Act if it was adopted by a public referendum. o If the majority association has a ratification vote under H.B. 304, ALL officers of the department except the chief of police and exempt officers, and not just the association members, have a right to vote. WHAT DOES THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING LAW AND H.B. 304 MEET AND CONFER LAW HAVE IN COMMON? Basically, the common elements are - o Who in the police department is covered by a contract - Sworn police officers are the only employees covered by either law. Chapter 174 states the term "police officer" means a paid employee who is sworn, certified, and full-time, and who regularly serves in a professional law enforcement capacity in the police department of a political subdivision. The term does not include the chief of the department. H.B. 304 Meet and Confer states the term "police officer" means a person who is a peace officer under Article 2.12, Code of Criminal Procedure, or other law, and who is employed by a municipality. o Recognition - Both laws allow the police association that represents the majority of the officers to be recognized by the public employer as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all officers in the department. Chapter 174 covers all police officers except the chief of police. H.B. 304 Meet and Confer defines the bargaining unit as all police officers except the head of the agency and the employees exempt under Chapter 143 or by mutual agreement. o Questions about majority representation - Chapter 174 and H.B. 304 Meet and Confer state that if there is a question as to whether or not an association is the majority representative, a fair election must be held either by agreement of the parties or by the American Arbitration Association. The public employer does not have to negotiate a contract with an association that does not represent the majority of the employees of the department. Note - Texas is a right-to-work state and employees do not have to belong to a labor organization even if they have bargaining or meet and confer rights. However, as long as a majority of the officers desire the association to act as their bargaining agent, the association is not required to actually have a majority of the officers as members. o Binding Agreements - While agreements under Chapter 174 are commonly referred to as "collective bargaining agreements" (CBA) and agreements under meet and confer are commonly referred to as "memorandums of understanding (MOU), it is just a matter of semantics since both CBA's and MOU's are final and binding on the association, officers and city. o Superseding Provisions - Chapter 774 states "this chapter preempts all contrary local ordinances, executive orders, legislation, or rules adopted by the state or by a political subdivision or agent of the state, including a personnel board, civil service commission, or home -rule municipality." "A state or local civil service provision prevails over a collective bargaining contract under this chapter unless the collective bargaining contract specifically provides otherwise." Subsection (b) states, "a civil service provision may not be repealed or modified by arbitration or judicial action but may be interpreted or enforced by an arbitrator or court." Subsection (c) states, "this chapter does not limit the authority of a municipal fire chief or police chief under Chapter 143 except as modified by the parties through collective bargaining." In effect, when the existing contract expires or the Act is repealed, state civil service remains in effect for those cities covered by Chapter 143. H.B. 304 Meet and Confer states a written meet and confer agreement ratified under this subchapter preempts, during the term of the agreement and to the extent of any conflict, all contrary state statutes, local ordinances, executive orders, civil service provisions, or rules adopted by the head of the law enforcement agency or municipality or by a division or agent of the municipality, such as a personnel board or a civil service commission. o Negotiable Issues - Both collective bargaining and meet and confer laws allow for negotiations over wages, hours of work and conditions of employment. That includes amending Chapter 141, 142, 143 and other police -related labor laws. o Open Deliberations - Chapter 174 requires all deliberations pertaining to collective bargaining between the Association and the public employer or any deliberation by a quorum of members of an association or by a member of the public employer to be open to the public. Chapter 143, Subchapters H, 1 & J (Houston, Austin and Fort Worth) do not require open deliberations but H.B. 304 does require open deliberations except for private caucuses. o Unlawful to strike or slow down - Chapter 174 sets forth severe penalties for strikes or slowdowns by fire fighters and or police officers. In the case of an Association, the automatic fine is one - twenty-sixth (1 /26th) of the total amount of annual membership dues, but not less than $2,500 or more than $20,000. In addition, the court shall order forfeiture of any membership dues check -off for a period of time not to exceed 12 months. H.B. 304 Meet and Confer states a police officer employed by a municipality may not engage in a strike or organized work stoppage against this state or the municipality. A police officer who participates in a strike forfeits any civil service rights, reemployment rights, and other rights, benefits, or privileges the police officer may have as a result of the officer's employment or prior employment with the municipality. This section does not affect the right of a person to cease work if the person is not acting in concert with others in an organized work stoppage. o The Duty of Fair Representation in a right-to-work state - Texas is a right-to-work state which does not mean that unions are prohibited from bargaining contracts that bind members and non-members. Basically right-to-work means the association cannot negotiate a "union shop" clause which mandates an employee belong to the union in order to work; or an "agency shop" clause which mandates a non-member to pay a fee to the union for the costs of bargaining and administering the contract. Both Chapter 174 and H.B. 304 Meet and Confer allow one association to become the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all covered police officers. Court cases based upon national labor law and the law of agency require the association to have a duty of fair representation (a duty not to be arbitrary and capricious) to all members of the bargaining unit. The bargaining unit consists of all police officers covered by the law in the department with the exception of the Chief of Police and any exempt officers. As a general rule, if the association's grievance committee approves a contract violation for any member of the bargaining unit (whether an association member or not), the association has the duty to represent the grievant. If the contract allows any officer to appeal disciplinary actions, the association has no duty to provide the non-member of the association with an attorney or to pay for the costs of arbitration. In fact, the association and the city may agree to make non -association members post a cash bond to appeal to arbitration. C GENE GREEN 1202 8c ❑ 256 N. sAr.n_ °Te 29d P�rw. c.e ' Tgvast of 44-pusvit flue J `IOUSTON, TE�As 77060 1 (,� j�%j� j �' `� (2811999-5879 wF sh'iTl. ton, .JAY 21951.7�-3G9 ❑ 11811 t-10 EAST SUITE 430 HOUSTON, TExAs 77029 (713) 330-0761 June 12, 2006 ❑ 10 N. GAILLARD BAY -TOWN, TEXAS 77520 (281) 420-0502 APAW HOUSE. GOV/GREEN The Honorable Alton E. Porter Mayor �"I'a CT ._n L.ity Vl LaToree 604 W. Fairmont Parkway LaPorte, Texas 77571-6215 Dear Mayor Porter: COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE _�CDIJLr.ITTEE �N H=.�.- e, UECOMM177EE JNr IF;OtiI , 7 t�D +4 DCVS IJ C. I�iS FU6 OMIei E JN COMA `RA,DE LN ;ONSUr,4ER Pr OTECTION COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT DEMOCRATIC SENIOR DEPUTY WHIP DEMOCRATIC REGIONAL WHIP I write to request your support for efforts currently underway to establish a Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area to bring national recognition to our area and its contribution to the historic and economic development of our nation. In 2002, Congress passed legislation I sponsored authorizing the National Park Service (NPS) to study the suitability and feasibility of establishing a Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area. To be considered suitable as a National Heritage Area, the study area must be deemed historically, naturally and culturally significant on a national level. While the initial boundaries of the study area stretched from Shepard Drive in Houston to the Turning Basin, the National Park Service has determined that our area's contribution on a national level stems from our energy industry and the historic events that took place during the Battle of San Jacinto. With the support of the Port of Houston Authority, we have expanded the study area to include the Ship Channel and determined the theme of the proposed heritage area to be "The Energy Capital of the World." Local government and industry support for this effort is essential, as National Heritage Areas are locally -run and require the support and coordination of local stakeholder groups to be successful. Upon the NPS's favorable completion of the study, I will draft the implementing legislation with significant input from local stakeholders. The Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area: The Energy Capital of the World would be locally -managed, with federal involvement limited to technical and financial assistance. Designation would bring up to $1 million per year for ten years for heritage area activities. However, no federal land protection or additional federal restrictions are provided by a National Heritage Area designation. For -your reference, I have included slides from a presentation the NPS delivered to the leadership of the Port of Houston Authority upon receiving its support for this project. PRINTED OIL RECYCLED TAPER ,An rage June 12, 2006 Our office is currently working to gain support for this project from communities and industries along the Houston Ship Channel, including the East Harris County Chemical Manufacturers' Association (EHCNLk). To ensure that all major stakeholder interests are represented in the activities of the heritage area, I have pledged that the heritage area's management entity be comprised of local government, industry and community stakeholders. To that end, I would invite you or a representative of the LaPorte City Council to sit on the heritage area's management entity. I would also request that the LaPorte City Council approve a resolution to show the city's formal support of the establishment of the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area. Thank you in advance for your consideration of these requests. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this issue further, please do not hesitate to contact me; or Lantie Slenzak of my Washington, DC staff, at (202) 225-1688. Sincerely, Gene Green Member of Congress GG:Is I 1 The First National Heritage Area Illinois and Michigan Cana' G! 5 A grassroots movement A strategy and plan that assists local, regional,: a and federal governments and non-profit organizations in: — Identifying cultural and natural resources - Conserving historical natural and scenic resources" — Creating interpretive exhibits — Developing recreational opportunities 4 — Restoring historic structures — Increasing public awareness of cultural and natural resources Heritagem n Became the "Silicon Valley of the early 20t' century s ? -Perfected the'assembly line and.. mass production of vehicle manufacturing •Generated thousands. of design; technological and production 'innovations that impacted industry on a global scale -Benefited generations of Americans in pursuit of the American Dream 7 I ff�Exjpae�rience Your America 10 Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area Study Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area Study Act Passed Congress on December 16, 2002 v�} The study remained unfunded until FY 05; to date the study includes: v `' • Statement of National Historic Importance and national historic themes = f • Survey and Inventory of Cultural Resources • Survey and Inventory of Natural Resources- draft • Survey of Recreational Resources- draft • Survey of Ethnographic Resources- draft 11 12 IC REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: July 24, 2006 Requested By: Debra Feazelle Department: Administration Report: Resolution: Ordinance: Exhibits: Memorandum and Allocation of Money for 4 yrs. Exhibits: Map and List of Candidates of Overlay Streets Exhibits: Map and List of Candidates of Concrete Streets Appropriation Source of Funds: Account Number: Amount Budgeted: Amount Requested: Budgeted Item: YFIS No SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Staff has worked on the funding and priority lists for the street maintenance program. The lists for both overlay and concrete streets are prioritized according to need. Michael Dolby and Steve Gillett will present this information in a workshop at the July 24 City Council Meeting and will be available to answer any questions Council may have on this item. Action Required by Council: Receive direction from Council on how to proceed with this program. Apuroved for City Council Agenda Ah,41_ Debra B. Feazelle, City Mana Date Meg -Rio To: Debra Feazelle, City Manager From: Michael Dolby, CPA, Assistant Finance Directo r4L- CC: Cynthia Pearson, Assistant City Manager Date: July 18, 2006 Re: Street Maintenance Sales Taxes According to your directives, I have attached a schedule that will show funding for the anticipated total investment of $2,494,716 over a four year period at 4.5% (percent) interest rate from 4B (Economic Development Corporation) for the street maintenance program. Funding will be received incrementally and repaid within the same year. Thanks (1) Attachment City of La Porte Allocation of Street Maintenance Sales Tax Year One 2007 $2,418,153.00 General Fund (.01) 604,538.25 Total 12 months 503,781.88 ten months street maintenance sales tax collections 62.11 per day interest cost per day@4.5% 18,881.47 interest cost for ten months 522,663.34 Total amount owed from Street Maintenance to 4b Year Two 2008 $2,466,516.06 General Fund (.01) 616,629.02 Total 12 months street maintenance sales tax collections 76.02 per day interest cost per day@4.5% 27,748.31 interest cost for ten months 644,377.32 Total amount owed from Street Maintenance Fund to 4b Year Three 2009 $2,515,846.38 General Fund (.01) 628,961.60 Total 12 months street maintenance sales tax collections 77.54 per day interest cost per day@4.5% 28,303.27 interest cost for ten months 657,264.87 Total amount owed from Street Maintenance Fundto 4b Year Four 2010 $2,566,163.29 General Fund (.01) 641,540.82 Total 12 months street maintenance sales tax collections 79.09 per day interest cost per day@4.5% 28,869.34 interest cost for ten months 670,410.16 Total amount owed from Street Maintenance Fund to 4b $2,390,913.31 Total Principal $103,802.38 Total Interest $2,494,715.69 Total Payments Assumptions Sales Taxes are based on a two percent per annum increase. Interest cost is based on our city pooled investment rate of return. Interest cost is based on an annual balloon payment; therefore, interest cost may be lower since we intend to make monthly payments. 2:46 PM7/18/2006\\CityHall\dolbym$\My Documents\streetmaintenance.xls Legend Candidate for overlay Street 0 t'soo 3,000 6.000 P4 et Candidates for Overlay Street Name Sq. Yds. Cost 1. Robinson Rd — N. P to Houston 8,103 $42,542.00 2. Houston — Robinson Rd. to Hiway 225 8,413 44,170.00 3. Carlow — Underwood to Canada 7,500 39,375.00 4. W. I — S. 2nd to S. 74' 3,691 19,378.00 5 W. H — Broadway to S. 8`" 5,879 30,864.00 6. S. Virginia — Main to Park 10,693 56,140.00 7, S. 1't — Fairmont to W. B 9,069 47,612.00 8. N. e — Main to Barbours Cut 6,147 32,270.00 9. South 50' — Main to West I 9,717 48,936.00 10. N. 2nd — Main to W. Madison 6,216 32,634.00 11. South 7d' — Main to Fairmont 9,856 51,742.00 12. N. Shady Ln. — Broadway to dead end 6,200 32,550.00 13. S. Shady Ln. — Broadway to dead end 5,333 29,050.00 14. South 2nd — Main to West D 6,980 36,645.00 15. South 2nd — West D to Fairmont 5,889 30,917.00 16. West B — 146 to Broadway 6,576 34,524.00 17. N. 11`h — Main to Barbours Cut 6,000 31,500.00 18. W. F — Broadway to S. a 6,067 31,850.00 19. Bois D'Arc — Robinson to Santa Anna 6,014 31,573.00 20. Santa Anna — Houston to Bois D'Arc 3,250 17,063.00 21. Deaf Smith — Robinson to Santa Anna 6,254 32,836.00 22. San Jacinto — Robinson to Santa Anna 5,787 30,380.00 23. South Holmes — Main to Park 6,089 31,967.00 24. South Utah — Main to Park 5,951 31,243.00 25. South Kansas — East B to Park 6,331 33,238.00 26. South 6d' — Main to Fairmont 10,817 56,787.00 27. S. Carroll — Main to East E 5,867 30,800.00 28. S. Idaho — Main to East E 5,813 30,520.00 29. S. Holmes — Main to East E 5,390 28,298.00 30. Little Cedar Bayou thru Park 5,867 30,800.00 Candidates for Overlay Page 2 Street Name Sq. Yds. Cost 31. Andricks - Underwood to Carlow 5,356 28,117.00 32. South Brownell - Main to East E 4,933 25,898.00 33. West A -146 to South 3d 4,840 25,410.00 34. S. Nugent - Main to East E 4,889 25,667.00 35. E. G -Broadway to San Jacinto 3,933 20,650.00 36. Montgomery - Underwood to Ridgefield 4,700 24,675.00 37. Valley View - North L to North P 4,907 25,760.00 38. N. 23rd - Spencer to N. C 4,087 21,456.00 39. Belfast - Underwood to Clarksville 4,067 21,350.00 40. Bayer - Carlow to Spencer 3,867 20,300.00 41. E. G - San Jacinto to S. Ohio 4,632 24,319.00 42. South 4d - Main to west B 3,400 17,850.00 43. South 4 h - West H to Fairmont 2,139 11,229.00 44. North 74' - Main to West Madison 4,279 22,465.00 45. East C - San Jacinto to S. Idaho 3,850 20,213.00 46. Crescent Shores - Complete circle 3,567 18,725.00 47. Hillsdale - Spencer to Belfast 2,978 15,633.00 48. Catlett - Underwood to Andricks 2,944 15,458.00 49. Clarksville - Spencer to Carlow 3,922 20,592.00 50. Monument - Houston to Santa Anna 3,867 20,300.00 51. Battleview - North D to North end 2,333 12,250.00 52. Ridgefield - Spencer to Hillsdale 2,333 12,250.00 53. Montgomery - Bernard to Clarksville 1,544 8,108.00 54. South e - Fairmont to Post Office 1,100 5,775.00 55. N. 18'h - Main to North End 2,163 11,357.00 56. W. Polk - N. 16t'to N. 18a' 1,979 10,389.00 57. W. Polk - N. 16''to East end 1,120 5,880.00 58. Easy Street - Houston to North end 1,480 7,770.00 59. Mossy Street - Houston to North end 1,187 6,230.00 60. West D - South 160' to South 18"' 1,956 10,267.00 61. South 3rd - Main to West A ( 55 ft. wide) 2,567 13,475.00 Candidates for Overlay Page 3 Street Name Sq. Yds. Cost 62. Crandall — Carlow to Catlett 1,511 7,993.00 63. Belfast — Clarksville to Bernard 1,567 8,225.00 64. West A — South I e to South 17fl' 782 4,107.00 65. South 17'' — Main to West A 880 4,620.00 66. Creel Circle — Carlow to dead end 889 4,667.00 67. Flintlock — Battle View to West end 2,053 10,780.00 68. Fieldcrest — Sens Rd. to dead end 2,627 13,790.00 69. Plainbrook — Sens Rd. to West end 2,653 13,936.00 70. Texas — Fairmont to East G 2,400 12,600.00 71. Texas — Fairmont to West K 1,800 9,450.00 72. Oregon — Fairmont to West K 1,800 9,450.00 73. Little Cedar Bayou — S. 80' to 146 2,178 11,433.00 74. Little Cedar Bayou — S. 8 h to end 1,833 9,625.00 75. South 15'h — West B to dead end 1,844 9,683.00 76. Park Trail — N. Shady Ln. to S. Shady 720 3,780.00 77. South 12h — Main to West A 860 4,515.00 78. South Carroll — East E to Park 867 4,550.00 79. South Nugent — East E to end 1,369 7,187.00 80. Bernard — Carlow to Montgomery 3,144 16,508.00 81. North C —North 23rd to Sens Rd. 2,560 13,440.00 82. North C — North 23rd to East end 1,787 9,380.00 83. S. 11t' — Main to W. C 3,089 16,217.00 84. W. Madison — Broadway to N. 7t' 4,944 25,958.00 85. N. D — Sens Rd to West end 8,853 46,480.00 86. South 1e —Main to West B 860 4,515.00 87. West A — South P to Broadway 4,011 21,058.00 88. South Lobit —Main to Park 6,640 34,860.00 89. South 3rd — West A to Fairmont 9,385 49,275.00 90. S. Blackwell — Main to Park 5,189 27,242.00 Total cost for overlay $2,022,198.00 lli11111111111111111111 Me- I 119k PQ sal 9 AM Legend Concrete Street Repair Street 0 1, ,Mlz ESTIMATE OF CONCRETE STREET REPAIRS BY PRIORITY February 23, 2006 Estimate of Concrete Street Repairs Priority Location Description Sq. Yards Total Cost Including Curbs 1 Valley Brook Old Orchard to Catlett 4089 $239,615.00 2 Catlett Dead end at Big Island Slough to 6533 $392,933.00 3 Old Orchard Valley Brook to Farrington 3889 $233,889.00 4 Antrim Lane Farrington to Piney Brook Dr. 3556 $208,356.00 5 Piney Brook Dr. Old Orchard to Carlow 2800 $168,400.00 6 Old Orchard Piney Brook to Farrington 2209 $132,849.00 7 Collingswood From Farrington to Valley Brook 1200 $70,800.00 8 South Iowa From 208 to East `B". 1634 $97,710.00 9 Scotch Moss 3323 Scotch Moss 892 $53,076.00 10 South Iowa From East "B" to East "C". 1217 $72,757.00 11 East "F" From South Iowa to Kansas. 933 $55,813.00 12 Collingswood From 10414 Old Hickory to Farrington 902 $54,262.00 13 Winding Trail From Hillridge to Farrington 1182 $71,102.00 14 South 411 Street South 4th & West "C" to West "D". 638 $38,358.00 15 West "G" West "G" from Broadway to South 1st' 1222 $71,622.00 16 West "G" West "G" from South 1 st to South 2" d. 1267 $74,245.00 17 West "G" West "G" from South 3`d to South 4th. 1289, $75,529.00 18 Belfast From Valley Brook to Farrington 638 $381370.00 19 Rustic Gate From Old Hickory to Farrington 420 $25,260.00 20 Carlow 10207 Carlow to Valley Brook 498 $29,950.00 21 Carlow From Valley Brook to Farrington 560 $31,120.00 22 North 6th Street Intersection of West Tyler to 1184.4 $71,702.00 23 North 6th Street Start at 704 '/Z West Main at second 1011 $56,150.00 24 North 61h Street Start @ intersection of West Polk, north 1011 $56,150.00 25 West "G" West "G" from South 2nd to South 3`d. 1289 $75,529.00 26 West "D" West "D" & South 1 st intersection. 400 $22,320.00 27 West "D" West "D" & South 5th intersection. 400 $22,320.00 28 Belfast 10318- - 10326 Belfast 311 $18,711.00 Estimate of Concrete Street Repairs Priority Location Description Sq. Yards Total Cost Including Curbs 29 South 4th Street West side of street from 302 to 332 444 $26,663.00 30 West "D" West "D" & South 6 h intersection. 400 $22,320.00 31 Shady River Drive From 805 to bridge, both sides of street. 363 $22,123.00 32 Shady River Drive From west side of bridge, go west to 231 $13,991.00 33 West "D" West "D" from South 4th to South 3rd' 288 $17,308.00 34 West "G" West "G" and South 3rd intersection. 334 $19,170.00 35 West "G" West "G' and South 4th intersection. 334 $19,170.00 36 Quiet Hill 10102 Quiet Hill 125 $7,484.00 37 Quiet Hill 10030 Quiet Hill 250 $14,969.00 38 Wilmont Street 10126 Wilmont Street at Rustic Gate 250 $14,969.00 39 Hillridge Hillridge & Roseberry intersection 187 $11,227.00 40 Roseberry 3703 — 3707 Roseberry 156 $9,380.00 41 Rustic Rock From Farrington to dead end at 10403 124 $7,484.00 42 Belfast 10238 Belfast 156 $9,380.00 43 West "G" West "G" and South 2°d intersection. 334 $19,170.00 44 West "G" West "G" and South 1st intersection. 334 $19,170.00 45 South 4th Street South 4' from 508 to West "E" 560 $33,680.00 46 West "D" West "D" from South 3rd to South 2°d. 226 $13,566.00 47 North 6th Street Intersection of N. 6th & Tyler. 433 $24,175.00 48 North 6 h Street Intersection of N 6th & Madison. 433 $24,175.00 49 North 6th Street Entire intersection @ North 6th & 447 $24,806.00 50 North 3rd Street The approach at North 3rd and East 80 $4,370.00 51 North 3rd Street 116 North 3rd, the section between the 142 $8,846.00 52 North 3rd Street 115 North 3rd from the expansion joint 133 $7,813.00 53 North 3rd Street 120 North 3rd from second expansion 133 $7,813.00 54 North 0 Street The approach at East Main north to first 80 $4,370.00 55 South 4th Street South 4th & West "C" intersection. 400 $22,320.00 56 South 4th Street South 4th & West "D" intersection. 117 $6,737.00 Estimate of Concrete Street Repairs Priority Location Description S . Yards Total Cost Including Curbs 57 West "D" West "D" from South 6t'to South 5th . 257 $15,437.00 58 Winding Trail 380 feet east of Hillridge 78 $4,678.00 59 Rustic Gate 9926 Rustic Gate 125 $7,484.00 60 Rocky Hollow 9947 Rocky Hollow 30 $1,794.00 61 East "F" East "F" and Kansas intersection. 400 $23,200.00 62 South Iowa South Iowa and East "H" intersection. 800 $45,200.00 63 South Iowa South Iowa and East "G" intersection. 400 $23,200.00 64 South Iowa From 613 to S. Iowa and East "F" 567 $33,887.00 65 South Iowa South Iowa and East "F" intersection. 400 $23,200.00 66 South Iowa From East "C" to 402 — 409 South 400 $23,920.00 67 South Iowa From 513 to S. Iowa and East "E" 300 $17,940.00 68 East "D" From Kansas to South Iowa. 467 $27,907.00 69 East "D" East "D" and South Iowa intersection. 400 $23,200.00 70 East "D" East "D" and Kansas intersection. 400 $23,200.00 71 East "D" From Utah to Kansas. 367 $21,927.00 72 South Iowa South Iowa and East "B" intersection. 400 $23,200.00 73 South Iowa South Iowa and East "C" intersection. 184 $10,964.00 74 3109 Bayou One section, both sides 285 $15,805.00 75 Parkmont Between Antrim and Catlett 75 $4,557.00 76 East "F" From intersection of Utah on east side 184 $11,000.00 77 Bandridge Street 8723 Bandridge Street 68 $4,012.00 78 Brookwood 3423 Brookwood 40 $2,560.00 79 Brookwood 3614 Brookwood 100 $6,012.00 80 Fern Rock 3211 Fern Rock 134 $7,850.00 17—Fl Old Hickory From dead end to Rocky Hollow 31 $1,865.00 I TOTALS 1 $393999546.00