Permitting questioned at city council meeting

ANAHUAC— City Council recently addressed a dispute over permitting a structure inside the city limits and its status remains in the air.

For months, the owner has sought approval for her trailer to be within city limits, and she was nearing the end, but after an Anahuac City Council special meeting on Wednesday, March 19, plans seem to have halted.

The item was brought due to a request for a variance, but a discussion of the validity of the original permit quickly came into play.

The resident originally received a permit for the building to be within city limits because city staff considered it a manufactured home.

For this meeting, the council asked Anahuac Attorney Richard Baker to present a report on the issue.

During his report, Baker said the permit was invalid due to no proof of ownership and no proof of the type of structure, leading to the original permit being invalid.

Baker noted that to check if the home is a manufactured home, staff should have checked the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs website. Manufactured homes should have a seal with a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development label and serial numbers for verification purposes.

Anahuac Secretary Julie Harvill explained the website was checked, but nothing came up. Richard said if nothing came up it’s because the structure is not a manufactured home.

“It should be no mystery because this is not rocket science if you just follow the basic rules,” Baker said.

The structure in question was labeled as a 2008 trailer, with the label stating, “This vehicle conforms to all applicable U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.”

Baker said, in his opinion, the structure is an RV due to labeling and the size of the structure.

If labeled as a recreational vehicle, it would need to be in an RV park per the city’s ordinance code.

There is also a difference in construction standards and regulations for the two. Manufactured homes are built to standards provided by HUD. Additionally, after 1976, HUD began labeling mobile homes as manufactured homes.

The same item was previously tabled at the regular meeting on Monday, March 10. During that meeting, the resident, Lucia Morales, said she has tried for months to get the structure approved. She began the process on Nov. 16, 2024, and received her first permit on Dec. 31, 2024.

Harvill said staff asked Morales for proof that the structure was a wind zone two structure, meaning it was able to withstand wind speeds of 100 mph.

Morales contacted HUD, and HUD sent an engineer to inspect the structure.

In the letter, the engineer said the structure met minimum requirements for wind zone two but did not definitively prove it was a manufactured home.

“The engineer’s letter is a mystery,” Baker said. “That fella had no business sending this letter unless he knew it was a manufactured home."

Later in the meeting, Morales presented a bill of sale, which was not previously provided to Baker. In the bill of sale, the previous owner categorized it as a mobile home, which is a mislabel since it was built after 1976.

Baker said when searching the model number on the structure’s label, it came back as a 2009 park model trailer.

Alderman Nathan Trahan expressed concern over the appearance of the structure compared to its labeling.

“But this thing walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, but it’s saying it’s something else on the fine print,” Trahan said.

“This is not a mystery. It’s the federal law,” Baker said, replying to Trahan. “By law, it is a recreational vehicle. I don’t care what it looks and smells like.”

“Everybody in our front office easily can be deceived by the way this vehicle looks like. This looks like a FEMA trailer,” Trahan replied.

After some discussion, Baker said, “Staff’s job is not to guess. Staff’s job is to make sure that you’re not faced with these impossible situations. That she’s not faced with this impossible situation.”

Trahan later said he believes Morales was “acting in good faith” and didn’t want to “hold her feet to the fire.”

Mayor Pro Tem Janice Jircik agreed with Trahan’s sentiment, but said the structure can’t stay where it is.

After more discussion, the council passed a motion to refund $325 spent on the manufactured home permit application and to bring the item back for the next regular session. If Morales proves it is a manufactured home, they will resubmit the permit.

Speaking on behalf of Morales, Bryant Arteaga said the $325 “isn’t really helping anything” because Morales has spent significantly more on purchasing the structure and having it moved into city limits.

According to Morales, she has spent about $14,000, including $900 on the engineer to inspect the building.