Saturday, September 03, 2005

Attention: Sienna Plantation Developer Waste Treatment & FireStation Issues:

The following communication was included in the city council agenda items for the upcoming September 6th regular session under background for item 5c. Please note that this information is being made available before it has been posted to our resident's association website at SiennaNet.com or in the monthly newsletter (our dues pay for this). Comments on this in the following thread are welcome:

SIENNA PLANTATION MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1
c/o 3200 Southwest Freeway, Suite 2600
Houston, Texas 77027
August 12, 2005
The Honorable Allen Owen City of Missouri City
2022 Masters Lane Missouri City, TX 77459

Re: Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant to Serve Sienna Plantation South and Proposed City of Missouri City Fire Station No. 5

Dear Mayor Owen:

I am writing to you on behalf of the Board of Directors regarding two important projects in Sienna Plantation planned for construction in the next year. Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant The City of Missouri City (the "City") and Sienna Plantation Municipal Utility District No. 1 (the "District") entered into a Wastewater Treatment Services Contract dated April 5, 1999, which requires the City design, construct, finance and operate a regional wastewater treatment plant (the "Plant") to serve the land in what is commonly referred to Sienna South (Sienna Plantation MUDs 1-7). The start of this project has been delayed several times because of an incompatible site location and the bankruptcy of AFG Pacific Properties, Inc. After of the delays in the construction of the Plant (which the District acknowledges were completely outside the control of the City), the District expanded its interim facilities to serve recent development. However, based on the growth projections in Sienna South from Sienna/Johnson and Regent Properties, the District determined it is necessary to start the construction of the Plant as soon as possible. The Board of the District would like to request that the City allow the District, rather than the City, design, finance, construct and operate the Plant. The Board realizes that with the tremendous growth occurring in Missouri City due to the opening of the Fort Bend Parkway and the widening of State Highway 6, the City has limited

time and resources to devote to this project. On the other hand, the District is in a position to devote the appropriate amount of time and resources to ensure that the Plant is constructed in the timeframe that meets the District's requirements. The District would propose to construct an initial phase of 1.5 MGD and the necessary lift station and force main to divert the wastewater from the District's existing interim facilities. The District would also construct the treatment facilities necessary to treat the effluent to Type I standards for reuse as lake recharge and irrigation of the esplanades and common areas in Sienna Plantation. The City would be released of all obligations with respect to the Plant, until the annexation and dissolution of the District when ownership of the Plant would transfer to the City. The District estimates that the initial phase of the Plant would require a bond issue in the amount of $11.25 million. Obviously, under this proposal the City would not need to issue that debt and would free up its bonding capacity for other uses. Fire Station No. 5 The District and the City entered into a Fire Protection Agreement dated March 19, 2002, which provides for the District to construct and convey to the City a fire station comparable to Fire Station No. 4 and a fire truck. The City staff has expressed a desire to work with the District to "oversize" this Fire Station to provide for future expansion to meet the ultimate needs of the City. The Board of the District welcomes the opportunity to work with the City to meet the City's long-range needs in this area. However, the Sienna municipal utility districts received approval from the TCEQ and voted bonds in amount that only allows for the construction of a Fire Station comparable to No. 4. Thus, we have discussed with the City staff the possibility of entering into a cost-sharing agreement with the City to pay for the requested upgrades to the facility. The Board now recognizes that the City is in a better position to design the Fire Station and construct it in a manner that meets the City's needs. Therefore, the Board proposes that the District and the City enter into an agreement whereby the City would design (including site selection) and construct Fire Station No. 5. The District would pay to the City up to $2 million toward the cost of the fire station and a fire truck. The $2 million would be payable in four installments: i) upon site acquisitions; ii) within 45 days of the date the City selects an architect and reaches an agreement on that fee, iii) within 45 days of the date the City receives bids for the construction of thefire station; iv) within 45 days of the date the City approves a purchase contract for a fire truck. The developer in the District would have the right to approve the site selected and would retain architectural approval over the design of the fire station. The City would be authorized to construct a fire station of whatever size and at whatever cost it deems appropriate, however the District's financial obligation would be capped at $2 million. Thereafter, if the City has not yet annexed Sienna Municipal Utility District No. 2, the City and the District would enter into an agreement whereby the District would pay the City the City's actual cost to operate Fire Station No. 5 on an annual basis. If the City Counsel of Missouri City is interested in pursuing the options set forth in this letter, I would suggest the Council authorize the City Manager to enter into contract negotiations with the District's consultants to develop the documents necessary to memorialize these two proposals. If you have any questions regarding the District's proposal, please contact the District's attorney Richard Muller, Allen Boone Humphries Robinson LLP, at (713) 8606415 or myself at (713) 621-0050. The Board of the District looks forward to working with you to accomplish these two important projects for Sienna Plantation.

Sincerely, Carl S. Bowles, President

cc: Sienna Plantation Municipal Utility District No. l
Board of Directors: Robbie Bates, Vice President, Allen Robinson, Secretary Pamela Logsdon, Assistant Secretary James Feuerbach, Assistant Vice President

Michael Smith, Sienna Plantation Development Co. Jim Price, Regent Properties

47 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This looks like a reasonable proposal. I wonder what the cost impact will be in the community and where the location of this treatment plant will be? I am a bit upset that I had to read it on this site prior to seeing it through the normal SP routes though.

5:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are There Any Text Messaging Services for Hurricane Katrina Victims?
We received a note earlier today from Flash Insider blogger Mike Schleifstein, who is from the New ... (9/3/2005) Live from the internet, its your best of Weblogs, Inc.
adipex online - It's my site... Visit it when you have some free time :-)

5:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I noticed the date on the letter which could have been easily added to SiennaNet.com was August 12th. Is this just another over-sight?

6:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you all think they are really trying to improve communications with area residents based on this?

7:02 AM  
Blogger responsible_dvlpmnt said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

7:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Won't this shift of costs from the city back to the district on the $11 million further delay annexation?

7:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sounds plausible. I wonder if the 2 million for the fire station being paid from that district will also contribute to that delay and how much it will actually cost to build that 2nd station and equip it?

10:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've called several MUD board people from area MUDs for possible explanation on this and it does look like it could potentially delay your annexation.

11:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is all very interesting but none of those board members serving on the Sienna MUD live in Sienna. So this is basically between those who appointed them, the developer, and the city, right?

11:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just look at the date on that letter. Why didn't they post this to SiennaNet before it went to the city?

2:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This looks like a continuation of the disclosure strategies they have used all along. I for one would really like to see a more proactive information delivery process. Having to dig for this type of communications in the city records isn't very forthcoming, especially when they have so many avenues open to them to reach the public here in Sienna. Do other neighborhoods under the control of their development group have this same problem?

5:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

8:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We used to live in Silverlake and we pretty much never heard about what was coming. We had a pretty newsletter from our HOA though.

12:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Have you all seen those rows & rows of apartments along hwy 288 in front of Silver Lake?

1:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

4:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder how long the developer's plan on taking on this kind of debt for the residents and delaying annexation?

7:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You mean MUD 1?

9:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The MUD 1 board are all developer appointees. Therefore it is a developer/MUD 1 proposal. Those not represented or communicated to on this are the SP residents.

1:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh, that makes sense now.

3:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm getting just a little tired of MUD board members, who are not elected but appointed by the Johnson crowd, giving such big gifts to the nearby city at our expense.

8:41 AM  
Blogger responsible_dvlpmnt said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1:07 PM  
Blogger responsible_dvlpmnt said...

Re: Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant to Serve Sienna Plantation South and Proposed City of Missouri City Fire Station No. 5



After discussing this with several different MUD sources the debt for this proposed plan should end up being the future residents of MUD 1 in the South Sienna area. We will continue to keep you all posted as this information evolves.

-We do agree that it would have been a public service to have posted something about this to the Sienna residents prior to it going before city council this week in our resident supported (developer controlled) newsletter and websites.

-The proposal passed easily on the initial reading at council on Sept. 6.

-We have a right to know when issues of public safety are being discussed at council that impact our families. Especially when it take a council vote (such as amendments to the SJD DA do).

***Stay informed and keep involved! Visit the thread on the Katrina relief efforts to volunteer your time and resources.


-CRD

1:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Apparently a fairly heated battle insued at council last night, not over apartments or clear cutting, but over a purchase of some property by a local church group in Quail Valley that wanted to host t.v. services. I will try to get more on this and keep this thread updated at regular intervals.

1:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What happened?

6:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sure the paper will have more when it comes out.

3:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

By chance do any posters here know which MUD Anderson Springs is in?

5:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, but i'll check on it and post it here.

5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I heard someone from CRD contacted city council over residents not hearing about this proposal prior to the council vote. Is that true?

5:28 AM  
Blogger responsible_dvlpmnt said...

We have e-mailed council several times on this and similar events that were not made available to us internally in Sienna, like when the 4th amendment to the strategic agreement with the city was passed back in June or the apartment issue came up before council in February, but no notification was posted in our newsletter or on the resident's website. We will continue to confront miscommunications or lack of access to information in this and other communities as they occur.

1:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I live in QV and the only communications we get is on channel 16.

3:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In Sienna we use entouch and don't have the local schools district information or local city access stations.

2:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That can cause public information problems. How have you all been dealing with it?

10:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We haven't.

3:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The latest report on the MUD 1 proposal recently approved by city council is that costs will not be shifted to the other SP MUDS. This should be good news and the confirmation came from a MUD board director.

6:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't MUD 1 taking on excessive debt when you consider they also are involved with the sports complex?

9:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

With no residents living in that area why should the MUD 1 board, appointed by the JDC developers, care?

5:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I heard two of the board members from SPMUD 1 are former city council reps from Missouri City.

1:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It would be too obvious to have current city council reps on the board now wouldn't it?

5:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

. . . ;-)

-I'm sure they would if they could!

6:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's so nice of them to give those "guys/gals" something to do when they retire from the city council. We would hate for them to lose touch with their friends.

11:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They can all ahve a big party down in Sugar Land when the party ends!

4:06 AM  
Blogger Unknown said...

longchamp outlet
rolex prezzi
longchamp handbags
ghd hair straighteners
free running
softball bats
free running
cheap jordan shoes
pandora uk
ugg outlet
2018.3.21chenlixiang

11:23 PM  
Blogger yanmaneee said...

nike cortez
nike cortez men
louboutin shoes
jordan shoes
fila shoes
longchamp
off white nike
coach outlet
bape hoodie
goyard

12:15 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

POLLHOST POLL RESULTS:

POLLHOST POLL RESULTS:

 

Question: Do you trust Allen Owen, mayor of Missouri City, TX, to represent you rather than his Houston corporate backers?

 

Results:

 

3%  participating said yes  (n20)

 

91%  participating said no  (n573)

 

6%  participating responded not sure  (n39)

 

(N) sample =  632

 

Stay tuned as more surveys for coming elections are posted!

Web Statistics
Alienware Computers

This site covers the Missouri City, Texas and local vicinity. Copyright (c) c.calvin 2005-2010 ....you can contact the web-blog coordinator for MCC/CRD at responsible_dvlpmnt@yahoo.com