Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Navasota council extends public hearing on repair or demolition of two downtown buildings
Summary
After the buildings' owner described financing delays and said he had invested about $600,000, the Navasota City Council voted to continue a public hearing on potentially demolishing two deteriorating downtown buildings to May 11 and asked the owner to present a bank-backed timeline and monthly progress reports.
Mayor Bert Miller opened a public hearing on orders to repair or demolish substandard buildings at 201 and 203 South Railroad. The owner, Mr. Lester, told the council he has invested "to the tune of $600,000" in planning, demolition and other work and asked for more time while financing closes.
Staff described a prolonged code-enforcement history and told the council state law limits discretionary extensions and requires a firm remediation timeline for any extension. A staff representative said the council could grant up to a 90-day remediation period but that any request for more time must include "a firm timeline, with steps and milestones" and monthly progress reports to the council.
Mr. Lester said he had difficulty securing construction financing after his prior lender failed, that he is now in underwriting with a bank and that he would submit revised, simplified permit plans once financing is in place. He showed renderings and a term letter from a lender and said he could return with a clearer schedule in two to four weeks. He told the council: "If I can't get the money to do it, I'm just gonna sell them." He also said he and his wife bought the properties because they "saw history" and want to preserve it, but acknowledged some structural remediation is needed.
Council members pressed for specific bank confirmations and a construction schedule tied to concrete milestones. As staff explained, the municipal process includes notices, municipal-court steps and waiting periods; if the council grants an extension it expects a detailed, bank-backed plan, not only general intentions.
Council member Holt moved and Council member Harris seconded a motion to extend the public hearing to May 11 so the owner could present a more detailed timeline; the motion passed unanimously. Council staff asked Mr. Lester to provide financing documentation and a milestone schedule ahead of the next meeting and to provide monthly updates if an extension is granted.
The hearing remains open; the council will revisit the matter on May 11 with the additional documentation.
