The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986-02-04 Joint Meeting _ 1 � � � � ,! � I j i I I I � a I AGENDA ' ' CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS { SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL i & ; � PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ! TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1986 AT 7: 30 P.M. � COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 413 MAIN STREET ' i ; ; I . CALL TO ORDER � ` II. INVOCATION: Council Member Shane Wilbanks � I �; III . JOINT PUBLIC HEARING i � ; City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission to conduct a public hearing relative to proposed amend- ments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (Section 26, Highway Commercial District) . '� IV. END OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING i i : A. Planning & Zoning Commission to recess to the ' Conference Room, 413 Main Street, to consider other published agenda items. B. City Council to remain in session to consider further business . IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6252-17, V.A.T.C.S. , AS AMENDED BY CHAPTER 227, ACTS OF THE 61ST LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SES- SION, THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 1986 AT 3 : 00 P.M. City Secretary , � ; � � � � � , Si 1 AGENDA a CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS � REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ; TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4 , 1986 AT 7:30 P.M. j COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 413 MAIN STREET j � , � � V. CITIZENS REQUESTS � � i VI . CONSENT AGENDA � Consent items are deemed to need little Council delibera- tion and will be acted upon as one business item. Any � member of the City Council or member of the audience may ! request that an item be withdrawn from the consent agenda � and placed before the Council for full discussion. ; Approval of the consent agenda authorizes the City Manager, i � or his designee, to implement each item in accordance with ! Staff recommendations. ; � A. Consider a resolution establishing population for the City of Grapevine at 22, 864 as of January 1 , 1986 . _ Public Works Director recommends approval. � B. Consider award of the bid for the purchase of one � pickup for the Public Tn�orks Department. Assistant City , Manager recommends award to the low bidder in the � amount of $9,060 . 00 . � � C. Consider authorizing City Manager to execute agreement with North Texas Commission relative to membership from ' December 1 , 1985 to December 1 , 1986 and authorizing � �i payment of annual dues in the amount of $1,568. 00. � Assistant City Manager recommends approval. ( D. Consider authorizing City Manager to execute agreement i with Corps of Engineers relative to summer patrol of � Lake Grapevine by off-duty police officers . Police { Chief recommends approval. + � E. Consider an ordinance amending Section 11-46 of the � City Code relative to public hearings required for � , service station permits. Director of Community � Develo ment rec mm � o ends a roval. P PP l F. Consider award of the bid for the purcY�ase of microfilm equipment. Public Works Director recommends award to the low bidder in the amount of $53, 095. 00 , authorizing 48-month lease purchase agreement ($1, 274. 28/month) , and authorizing a maintenance agreement. VII . PUBLIC HEARING � City Council to continue a public hearing relative to � levying an assessment for the paving and improvement of � Dove Loop Road. VIII . OLD BUSINESS A. City Council to consider Ordinance No. 86-05 on second � reading, Lone Star Gas franchise renewal. B. City Council to consider Ordinance No. 86-10 on second � reading, Zoning Application Z86-02 submitted by Mr. Bill Deacon (from R-20 to R-7.5) . C. City Council to consider the replat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 2 of the Pecan Gap Addition and Lots 6 & 7, Block 1 of the Harwell Addition, Phase 2. � f � � � � � � D. City Council to review contract negotiations relative � to installation of a high service pump at the water treatment plant and take any necessary action. IX. NEW BUSINESS ' � � A. City Council to consider an ordinance levying an � assessment for the paving and improvement of Dove Loop Road. B. City Council to consider an ordinance accepting the improvements made to Butterfield Street. C. City Council to consider a resolution approving the updated Tarrant County Community Development Block Grant program. D. City Council to consider a variance (requested by Mr. Wilbur Goltz) to Section 20-44 of the City Code relative to driveway criteria and take any necessary action. E. City Council to review construction conflicts with General Telephone Company and take any necessary action. F. City Council to consider an ordinance relative to � utility line relocation on City construction projects and take any necessary action. � E X. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS A. City Council to consider the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission relative to proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance � (Highway Commercial District) and a subsequent ordi- nance if a licable. , PP B. Cit Council to consider a resolution instructin the Y g City Staff to take all necessary action for con- sideration of proposed amendments to Section 47, Site Plan Review and Section 53, Landscaping Regulations of � '' Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 82-73, and setting a � public hearing date. C. City Council to consider the recommendation of the � Planning & Z-oning Commission relative to the final plat i of Lot 1 , Block 2 of the A. F. Leonard Addition. j , '� D. City Council to consider the recommendation of the � ; Planning & Zoning Commission relative to the prelimi- � ' nary plat of Lakeridge Farm. � �� XI . MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS AND/OR DISCUSSION XII . ADJOURNMENT � i IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6252-17, V.A.T.C.S. , AS AMENDED � BY CHAPTER 227, ACTS OF THE 61ST LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SES- � SION, THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED � �I AND POSTED ON THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 1986 AT 3 : 00 � i P.M. ; I ; i i �, Cit Secretary j � i ' i __ � i i I : ; f � i i � II � � I I AGENDA CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS SPECIAL PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1986 AT 7 : 30 P.M. E - CONFER NCE ROOM 413 MAIN STREET i i i � V. NEW BUSINESS � jA. Planning & Zoning Commission to consider proposed ' amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (High- way Commercial District) and make a recommendation to the City Council. ! B. Planning & Zoning Commission to consider making a i recommendation to the City Council relative to a public I hearing date for proposed amendments to Section 47, Site Plan Review and Section 53, Landscaping Regu- i lations of Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance No. 28-73 and take any necessary action. VI . OLD BUSINESS A. Planning & Zoning Commission to consider the final plat of Lot 1 , Block 2 of the A. F. Leonard Addition and make a recommendation to the City Council. B. Planning & Zoning Commission to consider the prelimi- nary plat of Lakeridge Farm and make a recommendation to the City Council . VII. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS AND/OR DISCUSSION VIII . ADJOURNMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6252-17, V.A.T.C.S . , AS AMENDED BY CHAPTER 227, ACTS OF THE 61ST LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SES- SION, THE SPECIAL PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 1986 AT 3 : 00 P.M. City Secretary � � � � I � I ; � i � i i � � � i � � I , EMERGENCY AGENDA � CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS " REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING � TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4 , 1986 AT 7:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 413 MAIN STREET � � � C XA. EXECUTIVE SESSION i A. City Council to recess to the Conference Room to � discuss pending litigation and personnel pursuant ( to Article 6252-17, V.A.T.C.S. , Subsections (e) & i (g) . B. City Council to reconvene in the Council Chambers and take any necessary action relative to pending litigation and personnel. II, THIS EMERGENCY AGENDA WAS PREPARED BECAUSE IMMEDIATE ACTION IS NECESSARY TO INSURE THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND GENERAL WEL- FARE OF THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS. ' IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6252-17, V.A.T.C.S. , AS AMENDED BY CHAPTER 227 , ACTS OF THE 61ST LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SESSION, THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING EMERGENCY AGENDA WAS PRE- PARED AND POSTED ON THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1986 AT 3 : 15 P.M. � Ci y Secretary � � � � � � � � ¢ � � � l �; � �r STATE OF TEXAS � � i' COLRVTY OF TARRANT � � CITY OF GRAPEVINE € � �, The City Council and Planning & Zoning Ccam�ission of the City of Grapevi.ne, '" Texas met in Special Joint Session on this the 4th day of February, 1986 at � 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 413 Main Street, with the following members 'a of the City Council present to wit: � � Tom Powers Mayor Ted R. Ware Mayor Pro Tem ; Marion Brekken Council Men�r � Ron Dyer Council Member � Jim Glynn Council Member Sharron Spencer Council Member ' C. Shane Wilbanks Council MPSnber constituting a quorum, with the follawing m�_mbers of the Planning & Zoning � Comnission: � � Richard L. Atkins, Jr. Chairman ¢' Ron Cook Vice Chairman Harlen Joyce Member Peggy Engholm M�nber � Catherine Martin Nlember � Larry Atchley M�ember � i constituting a quorum, with Comnissioner ponald A. Florence absent, with the � following members of the City Staff: .� � r James L. Hancock City Manager � Kelvin Knauf Assistant City Manager ; John F. Boyle, Jr. City Attorney � Karen Spann City Secretary � � CAI� TO ORDER ` ' €; � Mayor Pawers called the meeting to order. � INVOCATION � � The Invocation was given by Council Member Shane Wilbanks. 4 � x k' CITIZENS REQLTESTS The following persons then addressed the City Council in opposition to ; regulations prohibiting the parking of boats in the front yards of residences: � 1) Mr. Paul Conventry, 3721 Oakw�od Drive (representing the Grapevine Yacht # � Club) , 2) Mr. Jackie Mayfield, 3619 High Drive, and 3) Mr. Dennis Ground, 2408 � Lakeshore Drive. � # Brief discussion ensued, after which the City Council directed the Planning & � Zoning Cammission to review that portion of the zoning ordinance prohibiting the parking of recreational vehicles within the required front yard. All � citations issued for violation of this section w�ere ordered to be held pending the review. 4 � fi PUBLIC HEARING, COMPREI-�1SIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AN�TDMENTS ; SEC'I'ION 26, "HC" HIGHV�IAY C�RCIAL ZONING DISTRICT � The first order of business was for the City Council and Planning & Zoni.ng � + Cammission to conduct a public hearing relative to proposed am�enc�nents to the � Co�rehensive Zoni.ng Ordinance (Section 26, Highway Ccx�mercial District) . ' � � Mayor Powers declared the public hearing open. 5 Director of Ccanmunity Develognent H. T. Hardy reviewed the proposed am�endment � to Section 26.D.2, Limitations of Uses in the Highway Coim�ercial District. He k noted the amenc�nent was written to better apply the intent of the section and would require property zoned Highway Cormlercial to have access and frontage ; s � � i I a , 3 ; � � . � � 02/04/86 � � � 5 � only on an arterial highway, excepting those tracts platted or subdivided � prior to passage of the amencfinent. The proposal also provided for additional x access on corner lots if a concept plan is properly filed and approved. There being no discussion amongst Council or CcxYmissioners, Mayor Powers asked � if there were guests present who wished to offer comnents. There were none. j No correspondence had been received relative to the proposed change. ; � � A motion to close the public hearing was then made by Coirmissioner Martin and f seconded by Cc�mnission Member �gholm. The motion prevailed by the ensuing � � vote: � Ayes . Atkins, Cook, Joyce, Engholm, Martin, & Atchley ` Nays . None � Absent: Florence � , Council Member Brekken also made a motion that the public hearing be closed. � Mayor Pro Tem Ware offered a second to the motion, which prevailed by the � ensuing vote: � i Ayes . Pavers, Ware, Brekken, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � Nays . None � Absent: Dyer � � � ZONING CONII�IISSION REIC,E'SS ' : � � The Planning & Zoning Co�ani.ssion then recessed to the Conference Rocin to � deliberate other agenda it�ns. The City Council remained in session in the � Council Ch�mbers. � i CONSENT AGIIVDA = _ � The ne� order of business was for the City Council to consider the consent � agenda items, which were deemed to need little deliberation and were acted � upon as one business item. Mayor Powers asked if there was any member of the = � audience or the City Council who wished to reinove an it�n fran the consent � agenda for full discussion. � Council Ntember Glynn requested that Consent Item F relative to award of the � bid for the purchase of microfilm equignent be withdrawn for additional t deliberation. The matter was reassigned on the agenda as New Business Itesn G. � � Resolution, Population Upd.ate � � � Public Works Director rec�nded approval of a resolution establishing the � population for the City of Grapevine at 22,864 as of January 1, 1986. � , � The caption of the proposed resolution was presented for the record. � Nbtion by Council Member Wilbanks and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware to � approve as recommended prevailed by the ensuing vote: � i Ayes . Powers, Ware, Brekken, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks q Nays : None � Absent: Dyer � � � RFSOLUTION NO. 86-03 � A RESOLUTION MAKING OFFICIAL THE FINDING �` � AND DETERMINATION AS TO Tf� POPUI�ATION & � N[JMBER OF INHABITANTS OF AND WITHIN TI� � CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, AS OF JANUARY 1, � 1986 � � Bid Award, Public Works Dept. Pickup ° �: Assistant City Manager rec�nded award of the bid for the purchase of one � pickup for the Public Wbrks Department to Jack Williams Chevrolet for their � low bid amount of $9,060.00. � ff Motion by Council Member Wilbanks and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware to � approve as rec�nded prevailed by the ensuing vote: � � . �: � (2) � � , _ � � � � � 02/04/86 � ;;, ; � , , 1 � { Ayes : Fawers, Ware, Brekken, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � � Nays . None � Absent: Dyer � f: £ North Texas Commission Annual Contract & MemUership Dues � Assistant City Manager recam��ended authorizing the City Manager to execute an � agreement with the North Texas Comnission relative to membership fran ; December 1, 1985 to December 1, 1986 and authorizing payment of annual dues in � � the amount of $1,568.00. �` � � Motion by Council Member Wilbanks and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware to � approve as recannended prevailed by the ensui.ng vote: � Ayes . P�rs, Ware, Brekken, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � � Nays . None � � Absent: Dyer f � Corps of Engineers Contract for Stmmer Lake Patrol P i � ; � � Chief of Police recammended authorizing the City Manager to execute an � � agreement with the Corps of Ehgineers relative to sL�r patrol of Lake � , Grapevine by off-duty police offers fran May through September, 1986. Funds � � allocated by the Corps for reimbursem�ent to the City not to exceed $18,000. � � ; �: � Nbtion by Council Nlember Wilbanks and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware to f approve as recce�mended prevailed by the ensuing vote: � � ` Ayes . Powers, Ware, Brekken, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � Nays . None � P,bsent: Dyer � � # ; Ordinance, Amend Service Station Permit Public Hearing Require�ne.nts � k � E, i Director of Cc�munity Develogrrznt recc�m�ended approval of an ordinance amend- ,' � ing Section 11-46 of the City Code waiving service station permit requirements � ? when service station has been approved as a conditional use in accordance with � � Section 48 of the Co�rehensive Zoning Ordinance (Appendix D of the City �: � � � coae) . � � � The caption of the proposed ordinance was presented for the record. � � Nbtion by Council MP.mber Wilbanks and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware to � approve as recomnended prevailed by the ensuing vote: � � Ayes . Pawers, Ware, Brekken, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks k Nays . None � ; Absent: Dyer � � ' ORDINANCE N0. 86-12 � AN ORDINANC� AN�VDING TI� CITY CODE OF THE � CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS BY AN�tDING ? ? C�3AP'I�,R 11, ARTIQ,E III RELATING TO FIRE € PROTEX,TION AND PREVEN'I'ION BY AMENDING � S�CTION 11-46(c) (1) ; PROVIDING A PIIQALTY � NOT TO EXC� Ti� SUM OF TWO HUNDRID � � DOLL�ARS ($200.00� AND A SF�ARATE OF'F'ENSE � ' � SFIAL�I� BE DEII�IED CONY�IITTID UPON EACH DAY � DURING OR ON WHI(�i A VIOLATION OCCCTRS; � .; PROVIDING A SEVEF2ABILITY C�ITJSE; PKOVIDING ° a AN EEF'ECI'IVE DATE AND DEQ.ARING AN = t II�RCC�3�TCY � PUBLIC HEARING, PROPOSID ASSESSN�1'I' DOVE I�OOP RUAD STREEI' IMPROVII�]TS ] The next order of business was for the City Council to continue a public r � hearing relative to levying an assessment for the paving and improvement of � i Dove Loop Road. r; � i' � Public Works Director Jim Baddaker advised the public hearing had been opened , on January 7, 1986 and continued to this date. Al1 property owners had been � :� � f (3) i .� ' :��, i 02/04/86 properly notified of the proposed assessment. Mr. Baddaker referenced a ! letter received fran Mr. Joseph Ryan, 2416 Dove Loop, and addressed some of the questions raised. � Mr. Bill Deacon, 315 W. Hudgins, Grapevine, gave test�mony as a realtor I familiar with the market value of land in the area. Mr. Deacon repeated his ' camments given on January 7 that the abutting properties had been enhanced as a result of the road improvements, although the effect of the increased land value varied. His recanmendation was as follows: I 1. For single family residences with front yard abutting subject street - assessnent of 100� of the curb and gutter cost. 2. For single family residences with side yard abutting subject street - � assessment of 50� of the average curb and gutter assessnent for ' houses fronting on the same street. � 3. For single family residences with rear yard abutting subject street - no assesscn�ent reccx�mended. 4. For crxrmercial, duplex, townhome, apartment, or mobile home park uses abutting subject street - assessment of 100g of the curb and gutter cost. 5. For raw land abutting subject street - assessment of 100$ of the curb and gutter cost. NOTE: Council Member Dyer arrived at the meeting during these deliberations. Questions and c�anents frcan the Council ensued, after which Mayor Pow�ers opened the floor to members of the audience who wished to speak. Mrs. Billie N1cGuire, 1335 La Guna Vista, inquired about the assessment process and calculation of the proposed fees. Mr. Larry McGuixe, 1335 La Guna Vista, cam�ented relative to contractors equiFanent being moved during the night. The following letters were then read by the City Secretary: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 7, 1986 City Council Grapevine, Texas 76051 Re: Dove Loop Road assessment for part of the cost of the street � improvements € We oppose the plans to levy an assessment against the property owners on north Dove I�oop Road. The street was improved to accoamlodate the developer of Dove Crossing and assist in the i marketing of the subdivision. We resent having to pay for the road � w�ork for the anticipated and unwanted traffic in our neighborhood. The burden of the cost should be borne by the developer. � The Dove Crossing project is not for the benefit of the Grapevine � ccnmunity; it is a money making venture and should be treated as such. The widening of Dove Loop Road was made at the request and encouragement of the developer not by the needs of the existing caranunity. Any money that the existing homeavners pay for the Dove Loop Road work will be additional profit for the developer, since this cost should be an expense of a money making investment (Dove Crossing) . The road w�rk that was ccxnpleted adjacent to our property was, obviously, not for the benefit or convenience of our family: � 1. We had a driveway into our back yard accessible fran Dove Loop Road (as indicated by the double gate opening) . This was totally ignored and cemented as sidewalk. 2. Large portions of our front lawn w�ere dug up, turned over and filled in with dirt. (4) � � � 02/04/86 � , � � � I �� 3. The strip of land between the sidewalk and the street is to � be cared for by whom? Will the developer or city care for � and mow this section? No, an additional burden to the �'' hcaneowners. � � � I , � 4. There was a total lack of consideration for our property during construction: a. A road barricade was left on our property totally blocking our driveway. I notified the city and it was hours before it was removed. � � ;� b. Our water was shut off for a period of approximztely � 7 hours during one day. There was some water pipe work � going on I was told, after a series of phone calls to I the city. The homeowners were nnt warned nor could we get a realistic indication as to the length this w�uld � go on (we have an infant at home) . � c. The amount of construction debris and litter scattered across our front lawn everyday was another indication ' of the lack of consideration of our property. d. The drinking water was discolored and not fit for cons�unption. Our clothing were stained in the wash because of the pollution in our water supply at this � time. � e. The noise levels w�ere intolerable. Not only the �: machinery also, loud radios and shouting by the � ? construction workers. Machinery was moved in the � ' middle of the night. � i ' f. Our house and our health were abused by the dust, snoke � and pollution caused by the adjacent construction work. � ' � We strongly oppose any assessment regarding the north Dove I�oop Road � w�rk. We are insulted that the City of Grapevine would consider the �' wishes of a profit hungry developer over the tax-paying residents of � the city. � Janice Nishi Santiago � l 1344 Mulholland Drive � i � ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ � � ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ � � February 2, 1986 �; � The Honorable Mayor and City Council � Grapevine, Texas 76051 '" � ; E .� Dear Mayor and City Council: My occupation dces not permit me to attend your coming council � meeting so I am trusting that this paper will be noted during the � ' course of the meeting. :� i f I do not question the right of the Council to make an assessment on � property in the city for certain causes. I would like to have the � following questions considered before you vote an assess�uent to property holders along Dove Loop. � � ' 1. There was a bond election which raised funds for this ; ; extension of the area with curb, gutter and side walks on � the northern most portion of Dove Loop. Did this bond � proposal include the possibility of an assessm�_nt? � � j 2. I beliewe the minutes of earlier Council meetings will show � there wnuld be a surplus in the budget for the Dove Loop � project due to approval to gradually narrow the street for � i safety reasons. Where was this surplus used? (5) 1 1 E � � s 02/04/86 � : '�� ; �; 3. Has there been any instance in which curbs, gutters or , ; sidewalks have been constructed and for which no assessment � ; was made? � It is my feeling these questions should be answered and the public ` at large informed before such an assessment is voted on by the City Council. i r i ; Respectfully yours, � � , � � Joseph C. Ryan � € 2416 Dove Loop Road � ; � ps Our neighbors, William Froeba at 2410 Dove Loop did not receive ' notice fran the City Engineer on his requested assessment? How ' many others were not notified? '' ! � ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ � i � � Mr. Baddaker offered additional c�ments concerning the project. � � There being no other persons who wished to speak, a motion to close the public ', hearing was offered by Council Member Spencer. Council Me.mber Brekken ; seconded the motion, which prevailed by the ensuing vote: � Ayes: Powers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � Nays: None �, � PLI�NNING & ZONING CONA�tISSION RECONY�lIIJDATION ' PROPOSID AN�IDMELVTS TO COMPRII-IETTSIVE ZODTING ORDINANCE, HIC�iWAY CONIl�RCIAL � . � � The next item considered by the City Council was the recoimiendation of the � Planning & Zoning Ccatmission relative to proposed amendments to the Canpre- € hensive Zoning Ordinance (Highway Commercial District) and a subsequent � ordinance, if applicable. � i Planning & Zoning Comnission Chairman Rick Atkins advised the Comnission � i recamnended approval of the proposed changes to the Highway Conmercial � ' District requiring access fran an arterial. Their vote was 5 to 1. � � � '� The caption of the proposed ordinance was presented for the record. � , Lengthy Council deliberation ensued. Discussion centered around clarifying � the intent of the regulations, which was to limit heavy vehicle traffic on side streets. The definition of "corner lot" was also discussed. � � � Mayor Pro Tem Ware then made a motion that the proposed amendments to the � Highway C�rcial Zoning District be reconsidered by the Planning & Zoning � Cammission for additional review and clarification. Council Nlember Brekken � seconded the m�tion, which prevailed by the ensuing vote: � Ayes: Powers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks ; Nays: None 3 k' E { RESOLUTION, AU'I�iORIZING PROCIDURE FOR AMENDME[�T`I5 TO COMPREE�ISIVE ZONING � ORDINANCE, SITE PLAN RE�TIEW AND LANDSCAPING REGUI�P,TIONS � The next order of business was for the City Council to consider a resolution � instructing the City Staff to take all necessary action for consideration of E � proposed amenc�nents to Section 47, Site Plan Review, and Section 53, � Landscaping Regulations, of Ccmprehensive Zoning Ord3nance No. 82-73, and � setting a public hearing date. � � � Chairman Atkins reported the Planning & Zoning Conm.ission rec�nded setting � a public hearing date for February 18, 1986 to consider proposed amenc�ients to � the Site Plan Review and Landscaping Regulations sections of the Canprehensive = Zoning Ordinance. ; � City Secretary Karen Spann read the caption of the proposed resolution. � � � � � � � € � � (6) �: � i � � � 02/04/86 a � � 1 � ' There being little discussion, a motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Ware that � the resolution be adopted and the public hearing date be set for February 18, � 1986. Council Member Spencer offered a second to the m�tion, which prevailed by the following vote: � Ayes: Pow�ers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � Nays: None , I RFSOLUTION NO. 86-04 � , . ! A RESOLUTION INSTITUTING A NEW ZONING CASE 1 OR CASFS IN ORDER TO CONSIDER AMII�iDING AND �� CEIANGING THE CITY'S COMPREEiII�TSIVE ZONING ORDIlVANCE, ORDINANCE N0. 82-73, AS AN�1DID, SP,ME ALSO BEING HIVOWN AS APPIIWIX "D" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF � CITY ? OF GRAPEVINE, TEX��S BY AN�IDING SDCTION 47 i � REL�TING TO SITE PLAN REVIEW AND SECTION � 53 RII,ATING TO I�ANDSCAPING REG[TI�ATIONS; � AUTHORIZING THE ADVEI�rISII��NT FOR PUBLIC ; HEARINGS PURSUANT TO TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. � ANN. ART. 1011a-1011e; AND PROVIDING AN EFFFX.�'IVE DATE � � PLANNING & ZONING CODM�IISSION RECONA�IDQDATION � 4 FINAL PLAT, I� 1, BIACK 2, A. F. I�:ONARD ADDITION � { , The next item before the City Council was to consider the recamnendation of � '� the Planning & Zoning Ccanmission relative to the final plat of Lot 1, Block 2 � '' of the A. F. Leonard Addition. � � . � � Planning & Zoning Ccat�nission Chairman Rick Atkins noted the applicant had � ; requested this final plat be withdrawn. A n�w plat was being prepared for the � subject tract located on the northwest corner of Dooley Street and East Wall � ' Street. The Cammission had accepted the withdrawal request. � � � No formal action was taken by the City Council. � � PI�ANNING & ZONING CClNIl�1ISSI0N RECONII�[�IDATION, PRII�IMINARY PLAT, LAKERIDGE FARM �' � � The next order of business was for the City Council to consider the recom- k mendation of the Planning & Zoning Conmission relative to the preliminary plat � 1 of Lakeridge Farm. � ; € ' This proposed preliminary plat includes property located on the north side of ' the intersection of Kimball Road and Snakey Lane. Chairnian Atkins advised the � ' plat had been tabled by the Ccxm�ission until March 18, 1986, at which t�me it � would be considered in public hearing. k � � No formal action was taken by the City Council. _ .� RDCFSS & REC.'ONVIIVE ` � � { Mayor Powers then announced that a brief recess wnuld be taken before j considering further business. Upon reconvening moanentarily in the Council � � ' Chambers, all members of the Council and Staff were present. � ; � J ORDINANCE NO. 86-05, SDCOI�ID READING, IANE STAR GAS FRANCHISE RENEWAL " ; � ' The ne� order of business was for the City Council to consider Ordinance � � No. 86-05 on second reading, Lone Star Gas franchise renewal. � � ; The caption of the proposed ordinance was read by the City Secretary. � � � City Manager Jim Hancock advised the ordinance was considered on first reading � on January 7, 1986, at which time certain changes were rec�nded prior to � second reading. The ordinance presently before Council for consideration d ? w�uld grant a 20-year franchise to Lone Star Gas Company and require quarterly � ;, payment of franchise fees. In addition, the ordinance provided for formal acceptance by an officer of the campany. Relocation of utility lines on City £ construction projects was to be considered by separate ordinance and was not � � included in the franchise. � 1 9 � `�� { � i I 02/04/86 � � I � � � � � There being little discussion, Council Member Glynn made a motion that the � ordinance be adopted. Council Niember Spencer seconded the motion, which � prevailed by the following vote: � � ; Ayes: Powers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks I Nays: None � � ORDINANCE N0. 86-05 k � AN ORDINANCE GRANTING Z+0 LONE STAR GAS - ` ' CONIPANY, A DIVISION OF EL�TTSERCH CORPO- E RATION, A CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND � ASSICTIS, A FRANCHISE TO FURNISH AND SUPPLY ; GAS � TI� GIIVERAL PUBLIC IN THE CITY OF � GRAPEVINE, TAR�NT COUNTY, TEXAS, F'OR THE j 'I�2ANSPORTING, DELIVERY, SALE, AND DISTRI- � BUTION OF GAS IN, OUT OF, AND 'I�IROUGH SAID � MUNICIPALITY FOR ALL PURPOSES; PROVIDING = FOR TF� PAYMEN'I' OF A FEE OR CEIARGE FOR THE � , USE OF THE STRFE.TS, ALL�EYS, AND PUBLIC � L�YS; AND PROVIDING THAT IT SH�I.L BE IN � LIEU OF OTHER FEES AND CHARC�S, EXCEPTING � AD VAIARIl�I TAXES; AND REPEALING ALL PRE- � VIOUS GAS FRANCHISE ORDINANC,ES � E ORDINANCE NO. 86-1D, SECOND RFI�DING, Z86-02, MR. BILL DEACON � 3 The n�t it�n before the City Council was to consider Ordinance No. 86-10 on j second reading, Zoning Application Z86-02 su�niitted by Mr. Bill Deacon (from ? R-20 to R-7.5) . City Secretary Karen Spann presented the caption of the proposed ordinance. � The subject tract is 19.697 acres in size and is located along the southern � City limits line with Colleyville, east of Countryside Estates and west of Roberts Road. The zoning change request was considered in public hearing on � January 21, 1986, at which time rezoning fran "R-20" to "R-7.5" Single-Family � Dwelling District was approved by a 5-2 vote of the Council, thus requiring a � second reading. � � � Council Me.mber Dyer offered a motion, which was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem � Ware, that the ordinance be adopted. The motion prevailed by the ensuing vote: � � Ayes: Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, & Wilbanks � Nays: Pow�ers & Spencer # j ORDINANCE NO. 86-10 � l � AN ORDINANC� ANIELVDING ORDINANCE NO. 82-73, j TI� COMPREf�TSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE ' CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, SANIE BEING ALSO � KNOWN AS APPENDIX "D" OF Z�iE CITY CODE OF � GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, GRANTING A ZONING CHANGE � ON A TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBID AS BEING A ; I,OT, TRACT, OR PARCEL, OF I,AND LYING AND BEING SITUATID IN TARRANT COUN`I'Y, TEXAS, �� BEING A PART OF TI� G. W. MINTER SURVEY, ° � ABSTRACT NO. 1034, IN Tf� CITY OF GRAPE- � VIlVE, TEXAS, MORE FULLY AND COMPLE,'I�'.L�Y � DFSCRIBID IN THE BODY OF THIS ORDINANCE; � ORDERING A CHANGE IN THE USE OF SAID � PROPFRTY FROM "R-20" SINC�E-FANlILY E DWII�ING DISTRICT TO "R-7.5" SINGLE-FAMILY � DWELZING DISTRICT; CORRECTING Tf� OFFICIAL � ZONING MAP; PRESERVING ALL 0'I�iER PORTIONS � OF Tf� ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A f C�F,USE RII�P,TING TO SEVERABILITY; DETER- � MINING THAT TF� PUBLIC INTERFSTS, NIORALS � �� (�FNF'RAT, y�,FARE DEMAl�ID A ZONING CH�NGE � AND AME[QDMENT Z'HII2EIN MADE; PROVIDING A � �' � s �8� � ; 1 �. 3: � 02/04/86 ; I fl � � i PEDTALTY NOT TO �CEm THE SUM OF ONE ; THOUSAl�ID DOLI,ARS ($1,000.00) AND A SEPA- r RATE OFFII�TSE SHAIZ BE DEII�D CONY�lIT1�D � � UPON EACEi DAY DURING OR ON WHIC�i A VIO- i LATION OCCURS; AND DECZARING AN II�RGII�TCY �` � REPLAT, PECAN GAP ADDITION & HARWELL ADDITION, PHASE 2 � k The next order of business was for the City Council to consider the replat of � Lots 1 & 2, Block 2 of the Pecan Gap Addition and Lots 6 & 7, Block 2 of the � ; Hazwell Addition, Phase 2. �' j The purpose of this replat is to relocate lot lines on two lots in the Pecan �' Gap Addition and tw� lots in the Harwell Addition. These adjacent single- g' family subdivisions are located north of Dove Road and east of Kimball Road. � The Planning & Zoning CaYmission recannendation given January 21, 1986 was for � approval. � � � Public Works Director Jim Baddaker addressed concerns of the Council relative �' ? to develognent of the property to the north of the subject tract. He noted € ; that property boundary lines had already bePn established and rec�nded � approval of the replat. � Following brief deliberation, Council Member Wilbanks made a mption that the � replat of Lots 1 & 2, Block 2 of the Pecan Gap Addition and Lots 6 & 7, Block 1 of the Han�ell Addition be approved. A second was offered by Council M�ember � Brekken, and the motion prevailed by the ensuing vote: P` f ? Ayes: Paw�rs, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks k ; � Nays: None � � j RE�7IE�V, CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS, HIGH SERVICE PtJN� INSTALL�TION �;' i � ; The next order of business was far the City Council to review contract � ; negotiations relative to installation of a high service pLUnp at the water � treatznent plant and take any necessary action. � � D'r r B r revi ne otiations with Weitzul � , Public Works i ecto Jim addake ewed g Construction Ccxnpany relative to installation of the high service pimtp. He � detailed items of the proposed agreement for ccenpletion of the project (see � Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof) . City Attorney John � a Boyle concurred with the rec�ndations and encouraged favorable Council ; � consideration. � a x ? The ensuing discussion included cam�nts concerning proposed liquidated � damages to be collected by the City. � k .I 4 j Mayor Pro Tem Ware then made a motion to authorize the Staff to proceed to � , resolve the issue pursuant to the proposed agreement (�hibit "A", attached) . � ; Council Nlember Glynn offered a second to the �tion, which prevailed by the � � following vote: � � � €: �� A es: Powers Ware Brekken Dyer G1 S cer & Wilb�-inks � Y � . . � Y�, P� � � � Nays: None � ; ORDINANCE, LEVYING ASSFSSN��VT, DOVE LOOP ROAD s � ; � j The next itesn before the City Council for consideration was an ordinance � j levying an assessm�ent for the paving and improvement of Dove Loop Road. � � � ' Since the public heari.ng relative to this matter had been held earlier in the ? ; meeting, the caption of the proposed ordinance levying an assessment for the � ' improvement of Dove i�oop Road was naw read by the City Secretary. � n # Council Me_mber Dyer made a mr�tion to adopt the ordinance levying the � assessrnent on Dove Loop Road and taking into consideration testinx�ny given � relative to variable property enhancement: (1) Si.ngle-family rear lots, no � assessm�nt, (2) single-family side lots, 50$ of the average assessment for houses fronting on the same street, (3) single-family front lots and all other � land uses, 100$ assessnent. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware and � � prevailed by the ensuing vote: � � � � � � � �g� � � � � � � 02/04/86 j � � � � ' Ayes: Powers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks c � Nays: None � ORDINANCE NO. 86-13 ' ' AN ORDINANCE LF.VYING ASSESSN�ITS FOR PART i OF TF� COST OF IMPRpVING PORTIONS OF A ' ' C�'�FtTAIN STREE�� IN THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, � ' TEXAB, TO WIT: DOVE I�OOP ROAD NO1�I FROM ; TI� SOL]TH PROPERTY LINE OF DOVE CROSSING ° � i SUBDIVISION TO Tf� SOUTH PROPERTY LINE OF ; TF� UNITID STATES ARN1Y CORPS OF E[�TGINEERS � PROPEF�i'Y; FINDING THAT NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HF�IRING HAS BF�IIV MAILID AND ! PUBLISHED AS REQUIRID BY LAW; FIXING CHARGFS AND LIII�iS AGAINST Tf� REAL AND � TRUE OWNERS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR CAL- � L�CI'I�1 OF SUCEi ASSFSSN�]TS; AND PROVIDING Wf�1 THIS ORDINANCE SHALL TAKE EFFEC.`I' ORDINANCE, ACCEPTING IMPROVII�iTS Z►0 BUTI�RFIEL�D SZ�2F�E'!' � The next order of business was for the City Council to consider an ordinance accepting the improvements made to Butterfield Street. Public Works Director Jim Baddaker advised the street improvements to Butterfield, frc�n the north rightrof-way line of Wildwr�od Lane north 585 feet, � did meet the plans and specifications of the City. He reco�mtended approval of an ordinance fornially accepting the street improvements as the last step in the assessment process. The caption of the proposed ordinance was presented for the record. A motion was made by Council Member Brekken and seconded by Council Nl�nber Wilbanks that the ordinance be adopted. The motion prevailed by the following vote: Ayes: Pavers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks Nays: None ORDINANCE N0. 86-14 AN ORDINANCE OF TI� CITY OF C-=F2APEVINE, � TEXAS, ACC:EP'I'ING THE IMPROVII�N'I'S ON , BU'ITEl�FIELD STRE�I' FROM THE NORTH RIG�iT- � OF-4�,Y LINE OF WILDWt�OD I�ANE NORT�I 585 � FEE'r; DECLAR.ING AN II�lERGII�TCY AND PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL TAI� EFFECI' � IMNIEDIATELY UPON ITS PASSAGE � RE.SOLUTION, UPDATE CODM�ICTNITY DEVIIAPMENT BLOCK GRANr PROGRAM 1 i The next order of business was for the City Council to consider a resolution � approving the updated Tarrant County Conmunity Develognent Block Grant � Progr'am• � Assistant City Manager Kelvin Knauf reviewed the proposed Community Develop- ment Block Grant Program, as noted in public hearings held on Decem�r 17, 1985 and January 7, 1986. Year 1 of the plan (1985-86) was to conduct an assessment of the utility, street, and housing rehabilitation needs in the target area. Ftiinding for the second and third years w�uld address those needs. He reviewed funding requests and rec�nded approval of a resolution updating the three-year plan as proposed. Following brief discussion, the caption of the proposed resolution was pre- � sented by the City Secretary. A motion to adopt the resolution was then made by Council Member Wilbanks and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware. The motion prevailed by the ensu.ing vote: Ayes: Pawers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks Nays: None (10) E � � ;! i i , � 02/04/86 , � � ! � RESOLUTION N0. 86-05 � A RESOI�]TION APPROVIl�IG AND II�iDORSING Tf� a PLANNID Tf�2EE-YEAR CONIlKUNITY DEVEiAPMENT , � PROJECT UPDATE FOR Tf� CITY OF GRAPEVINE, 'I�AS � � DRIVEWAY WIDTH VARIANCE, MR. WILBUR GOLTZ � � ; � The next order of business was for the City Council to consider a variance } (requested by Mr. Wilbur Goltz) to Section 20-44 of the City Code relative to � driveway criteria and take any necessary action. � Public Works Director Jim Baddaker advised City Cod.e allawed a m�imiun drive- � way width of 40-feet. The concept plan for a boat upholstery repair � establishment to be located on the northwest corner of Dooley Street and East � Wall Street proposed two driveways on Dooley Street, one being 48 feet and one � being 65 feet. Staff rec�nded denial of the driveway width variance as ? requested due to the possibility of maneuvering vehicles in the street rather � than on private property. � i { A lengthy Council deliberation ensued, Mr. Wilbur Goltz and Mr. Don Fowles � :'; presented the proposed building layout for the subject tract. Topics of � ' discussion included access to the property, traffic flow in the area, and the � need for and use of the driveways. � Council Member Spencer then made a motion to approve the request for the northernmost 65-foot driveway and deny the request for the southernmost 48-foot driveway. It was reco�nded that the southern frontage be paved and curbed, with no driveway, to allow ingress and egress for the service bays. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware and prevailed by the ensuing vote: � Ayes: Po�rs, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � � � Nays: None � j REVIE4V, GIIVERAL TEL�EPHONE CONSTRUCTION CONFLICTS � �' � The next it�n before the City Council was to review construction conflicts { - with General Telephone Cca��pany and take any necessary action. � � Public Wbrks Director Jim Baddaker reviewed the procedure used in notifying � ' utility ccenpanies of needed utility line relocations for City construction � ; �, = projects. s ; �: Mr. Norm Milton, Operations Manager for General Telephone C�zy, introduced � Mr. Joe Moon, and Mr. Ta�eny Robertson, also with Grapevine GTE operations, and ' cannented relative to delays in projects and problems with line relocations. ` j He affiizned the canpany's cooperative attitude in working with the City to � ' resolve such issues. � ; s � Co�mients fran the City Council follow�d, however, no formal action was taken. ' � � :� ORDINANCE, UTILITY LINE RIIACATION FOR CITY CONSTRUCTION PR0.7�(,�S � � The next order of business was for the City Council to consider an ordinance � ', relative to utility line relocation on City construction projects and take any � '' necessary action. � j � � City Attorney John Boyle reviewed the ordinance, which w�uld require utility � � campanies to remove or relocate their lines when requested to do so by the `� City for public w�rks projects. The regulation provided for notice to the ; canpanies by the City, a reasonable time period for cc�npleting the relocation, � t�me extensions, and appeal to the City Council, if necessary. Failure to � i complete the relocation within the required time period resulted in a penalty � I of $1000 per day. He noted the City would also reserve the right to have the � lines relocated if a delay was incurred. ; ' The proposed ordinance was discussed briefly, after which the City Secretary � presented the caption. ; � � � � � j� (11) i 9 1 � i I , 02/04/86 � , I � � ; A motion to adopt the ordinance was made by Council Member Dyer and seconded � i by Council Member Spencer. The motion prevailed by the ensuing vote: � Ayes: Pow�ers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks , ' Nays: None � �� ORDINANCE NO. 86-15 � I i AN ORDINANC,E AMENDING TI� CITY CODE OF Tf� � i CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS, BY AN�IDING � I CHAPTER 25, AF�I'ICLE IV, REL�TING TO � PRIVATE UTILITIES BY ADDING A NEW DIVISION 3 RII�ATING 'PO RELOCATION OF PIPELINES, i LINFS AND EQUIPN�Tr; REQUIRING ALL UTILITY � COMPANIFS OPERATING WITHIN THE CITY TO RELOC'ATE THEIR PIPELINES, LINES AND 3 � EQUIPMIIVT WHIIQ REQjJESTED BY THE CITY; � PROVIDING A PENALTY NOT TO EXC� TI� SUM £ �� oF orr� TxousArm �o�s (sl,000.00) FoR � EACH OFF'EDISE AND A SEPARATE OFFE�L�TTSE SHALL � BE DEENIED CUNIl�IITTID LTPON EAC�i DAY DURING � OR ON WHICH A VIOLATION OCCURS; PROVIDING � A SE�IERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING AN q II�RC�EI�iCY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE � BID AWARD, MICROFIIM EQUIPMIIVT � The next item considered by the City Council was the bid award for the � purchase of microfilm equiFxnent. This it�n had been removed frcm the consent � � agenda. � Public Works Director Jim Baddaker had rec�nded award to the low bidder in � the amount of $53,095.00, authorizing a 48-month lease purchase agreement � ($1,274.28/month) , and authorizing a maintenance agreement. � Council Member Glynn expressed concern for purchase of the equiFxnent and � proposed contracting with a firm to do the microfilming. ° � s Topics of the ensuing discussion included possible long-term use of the j machine and the possibility of contracting the work but purchasing the equip- £ ment needed to make paper reproductions of the microfilmed material. � Although no formal action was taken by a vote of the City Council, Staff was � instructed to pursue infornbal quotes for contracting the microfi]m w�rk to an outside finn. � � i EXECU'I'IVE SESSION � Mayor Powoers then announced the City Council would recess to the Conference ' Roan to discuss pending litigation and personnel pursuant to Article 6252-17, � V.A.T.C.S. , Subsections (e) & (g) . � Upon reconvening momentarily in the Council Chambers with all members present, � the Mayor asked if there was any action to be taken as a result of the closed > session. � g: � � City Manager Jim Hancock announced his retirement effective March 31, 1986 and ; read a letter of resignation to the Council. g � Coimients of appreciation were offered by the Mayor and Council M�e,mbers. � � Council MPSnber Glynn then made the following motion: To accept the City � Manager's retirement notice effective March 31, 1986 and to retain Mr. Hancock � full time fran April 1 to May 31, 1986, or until a new City Manager is � em�loyed. The motion also instructed the City Attorney to draft a personal ' services contract for execution by the Mayor. Said contract to have a four- � year term to expire April 20, 1990 and to retain Mr. Hancock for consultation � and on-call for up to 25 hours per week at a pay rate of $2000 per month with � paid hospitalization. The motzon was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ware and pre- � vailed by the ensuing vote: � � � � � �12� � c t £ � a i � ; 02/04/86 � ; ; � � Ayes: Pau�rs, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � � Nays: None � � �' MISCELI�ANEOUS REPORTS AND/OR DISCUSSION �' Council Member Glynn then reported that the Facilities Conmittee, by a vote of 2 to 1 rec�nded the City continue using Hatfield/Halcomb architects for design of the new civic center facility. He noted the project was estimated to be $2 million, and the architects had agreed to a 6.9$ conmission, not to exceed $138,000. � Council deliberation of the issue ensued, during which reasons in support of the rec�ndation included continuity of the project and tim�e savings. In the alternative, previous projects by the same architects which were under- estimated were also addressed. Topics of concern included the proposed � cca�anission fee and the feasibility of obtaining additional proposals. 1 Staff was directed to place consideration of the Hatfield/Halcomb proposal on a the February 18, 1986 agenda. �: ! The reduced airplane flight level proposed by the Federal Aviation � ; Ac�ni.nistration was discussed briefly. �' � Tlie status of the Pool Road/Bnunlaw intersection realignn�nt at Highway 26 was � +' updated by the Public Works Director, and miscellaneous road projects were � also discussed. Hazardous traffic situations resulting fran construction of the Highway 121 south freeway in the vicinity of Timberline Drive w�re addressed. Staff was � directed to approach the State Highway Department with the possibility of � lowering the speed limit in the area to help reduce the traffic hazards. � AA70URl�1T � � ' The deliberations of the City Council having been concluded, a motion to � adjourn the meeting was offered by Council Member Spencer and seconded by � Council Member Wilbanks. The motion prevailed by the ensuing vote: � a �, ; Ayes: Powers, Ware, Brekken, Dyer, Glynn, Spencer, & Wilbanks � Nays: None � € � � PASSID AND APPROVED BY TI-� CITY COUNCIL OF Tf� CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS on � ' this the 18� _ day of g�r�M, , 1986. � < � �: a � { APPROVED: " � � � '' � � � �� j �y°r # � � � ATl'EST: � � 4' S' � a '� ` Cit Secretary � � �: j � � � � f � � � a � � 1 � , � I � � f (13� I � � � i ' EXHIBIT "A" ; PAGE" 1 TO CI'TY COUNCIL ' � i MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 4, 1986 �' � � � � s r' � I � Hutchison Price Boyle & Brooks ��I A PROFESSIONA�CORPOfiATION �.`-� ATTORNEYS AT LAW �:��. ' 3900 FIRST CITY CENTER AUSTRJ OFfICE: _� 1108 LAVACA STREET.SUITE 400 DALLAS,TEXAS 75201-4622 � � Adrienne C.Leonard (2i4)�Sa-8600 AUSTIN,TEXAS 7 8 7 01-2118 � � (214)754-8612 cs�z)a»-aizi � DALIAS TELECOPY NUMBER: �:.. � January 30, 198G �z�a>>sa-aeao , 1 Mr. G. H. Kelsoe, Jr. � � Kelsoe & Kelsoe �: � 5830 Alpha Road � , Suite 101 ;: i Dallas, Texas 75240 i I � ' RE: City of Grapevine - Weitzul Construction �' �'' Dear Mr. Kelsoe: � This letter is in response to your letter, dated January 28, 1988, regarding � ' the contract between the City of Grapevine (the "City") and Weitzul Con- � � str�ction ("Weitzul"). �. In order to resolve this matter, we are in a�reement with the proposal �' � stated in your January 28, 1986, letter in the foliowin� respects, and will � recommend the same to the City Council at their February 4, 1986, meeting: l � � 1. Gifford-Hill will do the welding on all remaining pipe installed in completion of this job at Weitzul's expense. � 2. A list of peopie who wiil work on the completion of the job, together ;, with their ex erience and references, will be furnished to � ; P ' Mr. Baddaker by Mr. Dismukes of Weitzul. Mr. Baddaker must � ; approve of the peopie who will work on the completion of this job. � � � i 3. Weitzui will pay for a r reese and Nichols, Inc. representative to be � on the job full time af'ter the materials and equipment have been laid �', out and work is to begin at a cost o; �;;50.00 per day based upor an � eight (8) hour day and including travel e�penses. No maximum amount is to be specified although James Baddaker does not � ar,ticipate the cost to exceed 5500.00 assuming the job can be � completed in one and one-half days. � 1 � � ''� 4. All outstanding indebtedness to subcontractors and suppliers shall be � i paid by Weitzul which, per Weitzul, are �Vade Harrell and Smith � ', Pump. A joint check will be issued by the City to Weitzul and �Vade � ' Harrell and to Weitzul and Smith Pump f'rom the proceeds now held � by the City on this job. Accordinb to Weitzul, the full balance due � ' Wade Harrell is $1�,3i6.80, and due Smith Pump is 51,37u.80. Ttiese � � sums would be paid less ten percent (10%) retainage b5� joint check. , � � 5. The remaining proceeds now held by the City on this job after paying '� Wade Harrell and Smith Pump, less ten percent (10°0) retaina�e wili � � continue to be held by the City until the job is completed by �Yeitzul � ,'� � I � � � � .i l � � � i ; € a � � � ; ; I j � EXHIBIT "A" , PAGE 2 TO CITY COUNCIL � MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 4, 1986 k i � ; � { ✓ i = ; . �: , £ ;� � I � Mr. G. H. Kelsoe, Jr. - 2 - January 30, 1936 , � '�� and accepted by the City. At that time, the City will issue a joint �: j check to �Neitzul and Wacie Harrell and to Weitzul and Smith Pump � ; f'or the ten percent (1090) retainabe, and issue a joint check to � ' VVeitzul and Gifford-Hill for the weldin,. After issuance of said joint � ; checks, the City will pay over to Weitzul the remaining monies held � by the City less liquidated damages in the amount of �17,2:,0.00 � (computed in aecordance with the contract provisions at �750.00 per � day for 23 days). �` ' 6. The City and Weitzul will then seek to reach an equita�le agreement + with referenee to the City's claim ior liquidated dama�es. However, if no agreement is reached and litigation is necessar��, the remaining monies will be tendered into the registry of the Court and the Court will order it to be investeo at the highest rate available so that the prevailing party can derive interest durino the period of litigation. �; r 7. A date of completion of the job acceptable to the City must be � provided in writina by Weitzul. 8. �Neitzu: will remove the reaction block at K'eitzul's sole expense. �' It was unclear to me how you arrived at the $30,000.00 figure stated in � item 5 of your letter. However, it is my understandinb the City has retaineci � 541,000.00 Lnder the contract. As I indicated to you by telephone, the City incurred, because of the contractor's delays, actual costs of $11,53G.20 as a result of ha��ing to purchase � additional water from T.R.A. Durin� our initial ne�oiiations to settle this matter, the City was demandin� that a contractor other than �Veitzul finish thE job. Because a substantial increase in cost to finish the job was estimated to � be incurred merel�� by bringin,�, in a new contractor, the City ger�erously offered ' to reduce the amount it would aecept as damages under the contract to � $11,536.20, and later reduced the amount to �i,500.U0, in an attempt to finally � resolve the matter. The �tmount of ciamag�es which the City wiil seek if Weitzui finishes the job is the ful: amouilt of liquidated dam4ges totalling �I i,250.00 which the City believes it is entitled to under the contract. i { We appreciate your eff'orts to work with the City to complete the job an� � ' share y�our desire to reach an equitable settleme►it of the entire matter. � 1 � Ver,� truly �•ours, � HUTCHISON PRICE BOYLE � BhOCIiS � � � ��.�,�,�,�e � � Adrienne C. Leonar� � ACL;d � � ec: hIr. J�,mes Hancock � ': City I19anager �a 1�1r. James Baadaker � I Director of Pub:ic �Vorks � s �1 � � � a , � � � i l � � � � 1 , i