Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Property Sale topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Developer urges council not to reject sealed bids for Milwaukee Avenue parcels; council takes no motion on item 6.9

Lubbock City Council · June 9, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A developer told the Lubbock City Council the lone bid for five Milwaukee Avenue parcels understates costs because the tract sits in a floodplain and would require substantial cut-and-fill; staff said the city received one bid around $100,000 versus an appraisal of $360,000 and the council made no motion to approve item 6.9.

A developer urging the Lubbock City Council on June 9 said the single high bid for five city-owned parcels on Milwaukee Avenue is the most realistic offer given severe physical constraints and asked councilors not to adopt a resolution to reject bids.

"The tract is completely in the floodplain," Gary Andrews of Graco Real Estate told the council during the public-comment period. Andrews said an appraisal the city obtained was hypothetical because it assumed nearly an acre could be reclaimed for development and that the site would require drainage studies, additional engineering and a substantial cut-and-fill program. He estimated the import of fill at roughly $125,000–$150,000 per two feet and said raising the site an average of 3.5–4 feet would cost on the order of $300,000.

Assistant City Manager Mr. Rino briefed the council that staff received an appraisal valuing the five parcels at $360,000 and noted the appraiser included an estimated $141,000 for cut-and-fill. Rino said the city received a single bid "a little over $100,000," and described the resolution before council as one to reject bids so staff could list the parcels with a broker or return with a sales contract.

Council did not move to approve item 6.9. The mayor said the motion "fails for lack of a motion," and the item remained unresolved at the close of the agenda.

Andrews asked the council to "move to improve" the sale rather than reject bids, arguing his offer was the highest practical price given the floodplain and the expense of making the land developable. City staff said next steps if council rejects bids would include listing the properties with a broker or returning with a proposed sales contract.

No formal vote on a sales contract took place June 9. Staff told the council that any further action would be brought back to a future meeting.