Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Rockwall City Council 15 March

III. Consent Agenda.

1 & 6 pulled by Matt Scott. Rest approved 7-0, including the new sign ordinance which is comprehensive and will not at all create any issues for those needing signs at their businesses.

1. Minutes from meeting Matt Scott missed.

6. Replat of an area that is part of Pebblebrook Apartments for the purpose of building more apartments as allowed by the current zoning of Multi-family. Seems a couple people who live in a house nearby oppose the idea of more apartments or the way the apartments were going to be built. Planning and Zoning approved. Council is trying to play peacemaker by trying to get the HOA and the apartment to agree on the replat. Seems as though council can't really stop this, and the replat will automatically go throuhg by virtue of the P&Z approval in less than 30 days.

Motion to postpone/table passes 6-1, Glen Farris opposed.

IV. Appointments.

1. P&Z Chairman Michael Hunter spoke of the public hearings on the agenda. Regarding the first public hearing, the applicant withdrew the case.

The second public hearing was for a proposed 7-11. That was tabled as P&Z could not come to a decision to allow a business to bring employment and taxes to Rockwall, or deny a business bringing employment and taxes to Rockwall. P&Z will hear again and then once again back to council.

The 7-11 wants more than 2-pumps (as allowed by the current Planned Development), and somehow the types of brick and roof pitch affect how the number of pumps decision.

The 7-11 has met the masonry standard, not asking for any building or landscape variance, and have gone above and beyond and met all the architectural demands the P&Z had asked for that caused the denial the first time.

Rockwall welcomes all businesses.



Matt Scott further expressed that the 7-11 will increase the number of people (kids) at the 3097/Tubbs crosswalk, and that the street lights are inadequate.

VI. Action Items.

1. Glen Farris loves social media and wants the city to love it too. The city has started the process of looking into what possibilities can be considered when they get around to utilizing social media.

There is a lot of training available for government employees to learn how to use Facebook, Twitter, etc. I suggest hiring 14-year old girls to run the Facebook page, sounds a lot cheaper and most are experts already. A "not free, but not cheap" conference has piqued the interest of staff that will offer training on how to use social media. Seems it's all about how to do stuff, and not legal type stuff.

Glen then (again) reminded people how awfully wrong the "blogosphere" is in Rockwall. And that misinformation was rampant from the blogs about Rockwall. Especially that report of $150,000 lights that weren't approved by council, YET.

FROM THE TOP OF THIS BLOG: ...and report a biased opinion of what I witness.

Of course if it wasn't for misinformation, there would be no information coming out of council meetings.

Glen Farris also mentioned that Ustream could be utilized to broadcast the meetings for free, and would only require a small purchase of a web cam or two. Quite a sensible difference than the estimated $40,000-$80,000 estimate from a while back!

The discussion also delved into policy, what can and cannot be posted and who would control, etc. David Sweet mentioned that something popped up on the REDC Facebook, but he wasn't sure what was on there and if it was or wasn't something. I think he's talking about this:

No city staff saw anything wrong with an official arm of the city (essentially the City of Rockwall) joining Facebook pages advocating the election of a candidate or two, even if one of those candidates sits on the board of the REDC. Well, no staff except the city attorney who recommended the removal of those from the REDC Facebook page, even though he didn't think anything was wrong (legally) with it.

New improved page:



I seriously doubt either candidate knew that some rogue REDC employee had done such things.

3. The new Tom Thumb shopping center (that's what normal people will call it, but it's really "The Shops at Stone Creek") needs a sign plan approval, because what they want and need will exceed the allowance by the sign ordinance. They would like to add 2 useful signs to the property, but due to the sign ordinance they are required to have signs they don't want or need that read "The Shops at Stone Creek" and the number of signs allowed will be exceeded with the approval of the two additional signs. Doh!

Margo Nielsen thinks even the number of allowed signs seemed like too many.

Glen hates signs.

David Sweet and Matt Scott thought that two more signs were "overkill".

Glen Farris wanted to know if certain signs could be combined, but during the sign ordinance discussions both council and P&Z said no to that idea.

Glen then made a motion to deny the request.

Mark Russo noted that the city's sign ordinance is what is causing the conflict!

The land can get a replat and get one of the signs without having to jump through any unnecessary hoops and fully comply to the ordinance. I'll be that's what they do...

One councilman (forgot which) asked if the council could block that move, and P&Z Director Robert LaCroix said no.

Motion to deny the "Shops at Stone Creek" the ability to advertise, thereby increasing revenue and taxes paid to the city denied 4-3. Mark Russo, Mayor Ceci,l and Councilman Sevier opposed the idea of denying the "Shops at Stone Creek" the ability to advertise, thereby increasing revenue and taxes paid to the city.

"The most pro-business council I have ever seen" I was once told by a sitting councilman.

4. Parks Department director Brad Griggs presented a plan for the Northshore Park located north/adjacent to Reinhardt. It is an expansion of the existing park with some upgrades and new equipment. Total cost $145,000, with money coming from the Park Development Fund. Will be completed by July.

5. San Jacinto Street between Rusk Street and Washington Street will be closed off every 2nd Saturday from May to October for a arty/crafty sale. All property owners affected were ok with the idea. Motion to approve passed 7-0.

Cliff Sevier gave a shout-out to the downtown coordinator for all the work she has done to revitalize downtown and helping businesses grow. I can't wait to see the hard numbers that I am sure the city has been keeping to verify that!

I wonder why the city didn't just hire a dedicated code enforcement officer to force people downtown to comply with the vision the city has for the area. Worked for Lake Rockwall (or did it??)!

6. Put in some radio stuff for the city's Radio Communication System so code enforcement and police can respond more quickly to parking violations at the Park at Fox Chase passed 7-0.

5 comments:

  1. "A "not free, but not cheap" conference has piqued the interest of staff that will offer training on how to use social media."

    Fabulous! City staff have found a way to pay for something that millions of children manage to do for free. Gotta salute that bureaucratic ingenuity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This appears to be the ramblings of a disgruntled individual who hasn't taken the time to understand the issues before the Council. Perhaps volunteering to serve on one of the Boards or Commissions might open some eyes and provide the education necessary to be informed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Now Bob here has an interesting idea.

    Cure a disgruntled individual who hasn't taken the time to understand the issues by putting him on a Board or Commission where his lack of understanding and his disgruntled behavior can have an official forum. Brilliant. I guess that might explain some things...

    ReplyDelete
  4. No! What that does is give the individual an opportunity to learn and experience first hand the myriad of matters facing the city. That's a great way to begin the learning process and to prepare for additional service. Attempting to jump into the midst of things without understanding leads to nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Assuming that said person would be choosen to serve on a committe by the city (council?)

    ReplyDelete