Sealy City Council members unanimously agreed Jan. 8 to offer a 1.093-acre tract of land to Austin County at its appraised value of $143,000 or $3 per square foot. The land would be used for an Emergency Medical Services facility.
Council members Sandra Vrablec and Chris Noack were not present.
The tract is at Highway 90 and Rexville Road flanked by the city’s police station and fire department.
Austin County Commissioners Court met Monday and after an hour-long closed session, opted to table the matter until its Jan. 28 meeting, but expressed interest, asking questions about drainage and setback requirements.
Assistant Sealy City Manager Warren Escovy reported during last week’s meeting that this would be a “straight-deed sale” with no specific requirements on construction. The county would have to provide drainage and submit plans for the city to review as any other developer would. The city could require that the building conform to a look similar to the police and fire departments and that it is used only for an EMS station, Escovy said, in response to questions from council members Dee Anne Lerma and Jennifer Sullivan.
“If that is something you want to do as part of the restrictions when we sell it, we should do that now, because I don’t want to lose the opportunity of them going with another site,” Escovy said.
Lerma suggested adding the right of first refusal should the county want to sell the building. Issues of access to Highway 90, a potential private road from 90 to Rexville, drainage in the area and the need for a detention pond also have discussed extensively. The police station regularly floods, according to city officials. Councilman Larry Koy also suggested a walking trail.
“I think some of these provisions should be in there just to make sure they conform to the police and fire department, how they look,” Koy said. “Maybe the size [should not be] way off or out of proportion.”
Escovy said the provisions for first right of refusal, location and access road can be added as provisions in the offer.
“The one thing I would be careful about is the size,” he said. “As long as we’re not being too restrictive, that’s OK. You don’t want to tell the county how to develop the property.”
Escovy added that if too many restrictions are imposed, the county may opt to go with another property.