Garland staff brief council on Shiloh Road property purchases, relocation assistance ahead of vote

City staff told the Garland City Council on April 14 that purchase agreements and relocation packages are in place as the city proceeds with property acquisitions for the Shiloh Road expansion between Kingsley and Miller.

The project, approved previously by an omnibus resolution in 2022, is now at the acquisition stage, the presenter said. He said the city has completed appraisals and surveys, sent introductory letters and is negotiating purchase agreements through the acquisition firm McCarthy Partners. “This acquisition consists of a purchase agreement as well as a relocation assistance package,” the presenter said.

Why it matters: the expansion will require full takings of seven properties and will displace residents on those parcels; the council must approve individual purchase agreements and associated relocation assistance to allow closings to proceed.

Details provided: the presenter identified two agenda items for immediate council consideration. Agenda Item 2 is 2329 Procter Street with a purchase price of $240,000 and a current relocation assistance aggregate of $289,900 (the presenter described a $49,900 housing supplement plus the purchase price; additional relocation costs such as mortgage differential and incidental closing costs were described as to be determined when replacement housing is chosen). He said mortgage differentials could be “0, or it could be up to $30,000,” incidental expenses estimated at $500–$5,000, and moving expenses estimated between $5,000 and $20,000.

Agenda Item 3 was described as the Alcantara family parcel (E43) with the same $240,000 purchase price and up to $50,000 in replacement housing assistance; the presenter gave an approximate aggregate to date of $290,000 for that parcel, not including mortgage differential and incidental expenses. The presenter said the property owners involved had agreed to the purchase price.

Timing and next steps: staff said it hoped to have signed agreements and earnest money sent to the title company by the end of that week, and that contracts include a feasibility period of 110 days to allow relocation processes. The presenter noted a statutory minimum of 90 days for relocation notice and added the city can offer more time to facilitate back-to-back closings. He said those two items were scheduled for formal consideration at the council’s next meeting the following day.

Council questions focused on timeline, agreement terms and whether owners had agreed; Councilor Williams asked for the timeline and the presenter described the schedule above. The presenter confirmed ownership agreement on terms when asked.

Ending: staff paused for additional questions and confirmed the items would be on the formal agenda the next night for council action.