Loading...
1966 08 08 CC Minutes, Special (2)4178 Absent: MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN Augus t 8, 1%6 Patrick Ball C. M. Massey Don M. Hullum A. M. Braswell Albert Fanestiel Raymond T. Donnelly Seaborn Cravey Fritz Lanham Richard Park Edna Oliver George Chandler Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilman Mayor City Mangger Ass' t City Attorney Ci ty Clerk City Attorney The Mayor called the meeting to order, the Invocation was offered, afterwhich the following business was transacted: Adopt Ordinance - Authorizina Issuance Refundina Bonds - Waterworks and Sewer System Councilman Donnelly moved to adopt an ordinance authorizing the issuance of $784,000 Waterworks and Sewer System Refundings Bonds. Councilman Ball seconded the motion. The vote follows.: Ayes: Councilmen Ball, Massey, Hullum, Braswell, Fanestiel and Donnelly. . Mayor Cravey Nays: None The caption of the ordinance follows: ORDINANCE NO. 806 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $784,000 WATERWORKS AND SEWER SYSTEM REFUNDINGS BONDS, SERIES 1966; PRESCRIBING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF; LEVYING TAXES FOR THE PAYMENT OF.PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST THEREON; CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT; AND PROVIDING THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL TAKE EFFECT UPON AND AFTER ITS ADOPTION. Recessed Public Hearing Mom Spur - Resumed Mayor Cravey resumed the public hearing upon the recent request of MPRR to cross certain streets within the City of Baytown in order to construct a spur to the U. S. Steel mill site in Chambers County. Representatives of both the MPRR, and SPRR together with representatives of U. S. Steel have been invited to attend the meeting in order to give further information to the Council and the public, in general, relating to the application with possible alternates which have been proposed by the City Council heretofore. At this point, the Mayor asked for any petitions or resolution. Jim Ainsworth - Junior Chamber of Commerce Jim Ainsworth, representing the Junior Chamber of Commerce, presented a resolu- tion with petitions bearing 1792 signatures, favoring the acceptance of the proposed route of Mopec and urged the Council to accept it at the earliest possible date. 1 Councilman Braswell moved to accept the petitions. Councilman Ball seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Councilmen Ball, Massey, Hullum, Braswell, Fanestiel and Donnelly. Mayor Cravey Nays: None 4179 Citizens Petition & Wooster Chamber of Commerce Robert Chase, 104 Graham Street, presented additional petitions from residents of Wynnewood, Harper, Lawndale, Lamar Courts and Roseland Oaks Addition petitioning the Council to oppose the planned spur through the southeast section of the city; to offer the MpRR the privilege of crossing six streets in the path of a spur to the North side of the city. Richard King, president of the Wooster Chamber of Commerce, urged the Council. to approve the proposed route. Councilman Massey moved to accept the petitions of both Bob Chase and Richard King, respectively. Councilman Ball seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Councilmen Ball, Massey, Hullum, Braswell, Fanestiel and Donnelly. Mayor Cravey Nays: None Milton Stewart - East Harris County Bar Association Milton Steert, representing the East Harris County Bar Association, presented a resolution, which has been passed by a unanimous vote of those present, that the Association Welcomes United States Steel to Baytown and so that U. S. Steel may start their plant in the Baytown area at the earliest possible time, the Council was urged to accept the MPRR's proposed extension through Baytown. Councilman Ball moved to accept the resolution as submitted. Councilman Braswell seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Councilmen Ball, Hullum, Massey, Braswell, Fanestiel and Donnelly. Mayor Cravey Nays: None Earl Mallick, U. S. Steel Earl Mallick, Vice- President of the U. S. Steel Corporation, expressed his appreciation in behalf of U. S. Steel for the fine welcome they had received in. Baytown and referred to the problem which is to be discussed here this evening. Once again, he used 'a portion of the address made to the Baytown Chamber of Commerce on July 29th. He realized that the railroad situation is very much on the minds of many Baytown citizens, and he made it clear that if the-problem cannot be solved there is no point in further comment from him. If the U. S. Steel is to proceed with plans to build the Texas works, they most be.served by two railroads. U. S. Steel In tervened on behalf of the Missouri Pacific. T o of their top executives testified that the Steel company could not proceed unless this matter is resolved. For service and competitive reasons the availability of both railroads is essential. There must be a satisfactory route for the Missouri Pacific's industrial spur to the plant. He pointed out that It-was extremely important to the steel works that the matter be resolved promptly and, because of the ability of the railroad representatives, the steel company would rely on the judgement of these representatives for the most feasible route. He concluded, however, with the assurance to the people of Baytown that the officials of U. S. Steel will give their support to have any improvements made which become necessary in the future to avoid traffic problems ;.this the MPRR has promised to do if it is deemed necessary. Missouri Pacific Representative - Ben Sewell . Mr. J. A. Austin introduced Mr. Ben Sewell who expressed his thanks and apprecia- tion-to those who had supported the Railroad Company in the matter of the application to cross certain streets in Baytown. They have listened with attention and respect to the arguments opposing their proposal as the interests are valid and deserve the support of those who have submitted their alternate-proposals but the MPRR is in a serious position presently because of the request of U. S. Steel for their service and the litigation which has been instituted against them by SPRR in an effort to prevent MPRR from providing this service. In his opinion. this matter has been given full testimony at previous meetings and all has been said that can be said and the time has now come to vote as there are serious legal reasons why no change can now be made from the route which has been selected. 4180 B. T. Sines - Vice President - Southern Pacific RR B. T. Sines, Vice - President of SPRR, made several statements relative to the pod - tion of his company, in the matter which the Council is being urged to-.vote upon tonight. His company assisted Jones & Laughlin in aquiring its proposed site in 1956 as it has assisted U. S. Steel. At this time the Company built its track into the Cedar Point area and when the Jones & Laughlin complex failed to materialize, SPRR has been deli - gent in its efforts to interest major industry in this area. When it was learned that U. S. Steel was interested in the site. SPRR told them that it was expected that only one railroad company would serve the area - that would be.SPRR. Also, in November. 1%5, the U. S. Steel representives met with.SPRR representatives and said they would have to have a $30 rate to move the steel from Cedar to Houston, SPRR representatives.told them they could not accede. The Steel Company representatives then a* MPRR to give them a $30 rate and they agreed; thereafter.it has suddenly become important that two railroads serve the Cedar Point area. That is the principal consideration here, not the Council vote to grant the application as presented. In his opinion, a $54 or $55 rate would be a fair and compensatory rate as against the $30 rate per car. He also stated that when the MPRR requests, from the Texas Railr¢ d �ommission, authority to use a $30 rate. SPRR will protest it. Also possibly some /886$finies in Houston will file protests. Searls - Attorney U. S. Steel in Behalf of MPRR Mr. Searls, Houston Attorney representing U. S. Steel reported that over 14,000 acres is under option to U. S. Steel in his name; the rate questions will be brought before the Texas Railroad Commission in propertime. He reviewed details of the recent trial in Houston and the ruling of Judge Ingraham that MPRR's request was not in extension but a spur track. Should an alternate be,accepted. SPRR would have:a much better case against MPRR as it would mean a new law suit, new evidence and higher costs as the case which has already been tried would have no significance should another route be chosen. He urged the Council to make its decision at this meeting . Sines - Rebuttal Mr. Sines submitted a rebuttal to some of the statements of Mr. Searls and when asked the length of time it would normally take a request of this type to clear through ICC and would SPRR protest any alternate request. Mr. Sines could give no definite i statement as to the length of time due to the procedures to follow but he assured the Council that SPRR would protest. Councilman Ball questioned Mr. Sewell. MPRR. relative to the inclusim of an if and when clause, relative to installation of grade separation facilities on two of the main thoroughfares in Baytown extending south as set for th in the original proposal for Tri -City Beach Road since some concern has been expressed over the additional thoroughfares,which the Company already cross_ but is proposed in the major Comprehensive Plan as major North -South thoroughfares. Mr. Sewell assured him that the Company would pledge its support as the need cannot be foreseen at this time but it would honestly and sincerely work with the City to meet the traffic problems, if and when, they arise. He made no monetary commitment but stated the Company was prepared to give its assistance in working with the City to solve traffic problems at the proper time. Coments - Manor Craven For the benefit of those attending the meeting, Mayor Cravey commented on the information which has been supplied the City Council heretofore and at this meeting. The Steel Company and both Railroad companies hate problems, operational and legal. A few of the operational problems, he understood vaguely, legal problems were largely beyond him; He had little doubt that the route chosen by MPRR through Baytown is the best route for MPRR, that it is the shortest and the most direct and would be cheaper. Also, it had been pointed out that somplaints constitute a problem to the Council, and though the Council respects those that complain, this is not their problem. Their problem is that a railroad company has proposed to build a track extended on through town and on this railroad tract traffic will grow in the future, traffic on streets will grow, houses nearby will be affected, schools nearby will be affected, churches 4181 nearby will be affected, people who own property which is taken and property contingu- ous to this are affected. The Council's problem is to weigh the impact of the rail- road being built through town now and in the future; the impact it will have on the people of-the community -.that's part of the problem. Another thing that complicates the problem, possibly not as involved as the legal entanglements, is that MPRR has pointed out that they have chosen what appears to them to be the best and cheapest route and they have said rather forcefully and reasons of their own, which the Council respects, that is has to be this way - they have yielded on no point. Maybe they are as nearly infallible as this - they have said our way, street crossings where we say, grade separations where we say and only where we say on one State Highway, bridge at the height we propose even though it is outside the city limits of Baytown. Now, if MPRR is exactly right in all these points, the Council's choice is simple. But it has pointed out a proposed route south of Baytown which would affect no` churches, one or two homes, fewer street crossings, would be less dangerous as the streets they would cross would bear less traffic and would be in an area not growing as residential property. This is the problem - keeping in mind the desire on the part of a great majority of the people to have the steel mill here, where the railroad companies, and he emphasized that he said this deliberately, have gotten themselves in a mess, that we have to get them out of by sacrificing this way - and we may have to do it - but its a harsh and a rather burdensome and, if necessary, nonetheless, un- pleasant task. Councilman Braswell asked Mr. Austin about the proposed routing to the south and he reported that Mr. Baker. of MPRR, had surveyed the area in question and his report had been delivered to the Council with the statement that the route was not feasible. On Friday, August 5th, the Council voted to hire Roy Williams. consulting engineer employed by Humble. as a consultant to the Council,.to iavestigate the possibility of a route regarding physical obstructions through the oilfield, east of Barrymore Drive to a point about midway of Gulf Hill which had already been reviewed by MPRR. He was asked to continue on from this point and see if it was physically possible to get across State Highway 146 and through the oilfield.south of SH 146. Due to the short time allowed him, his report was given to the City Council at 4: P.M. At the suggestion of Councilman Ball. the Council recessed for a few minutes in order to go over the sketch prepared by Mr. Williams with officials of MPRR Company. Statement - Eldon Berry Chamber of Commerce Upon reconvening, Eldon Berry, President of tie Baytown Chamber of Commerce.. introduced a resolution which was- passed by the Board of Directors at a special meeting August 3td, urging the Baytown City Council to approve the proposed route now selected by Missouri Pacific and supported by United States Steel. Others were heard opposing the proposed route afterwhich the Mayor brought the hearing to a close by statements from the Council. Council Councilman Donnelly: "I came to the meeting with an open mind . . I would like to point out a few facts, at least to me are factural. I recognize and appreciate and would help safeguard any body's right to present a petition. I think the Council should take these petitions, give them due weight and consideration but I think they should also bear in mind that most of these petitions are signed on a pure emotional bads by people who are not aware of all the facts surrounding the problem. I think the City of Baytown has been squeezed in the middle over a situation which is not of our doing. I think the big problem. as Mr. Sines pointed out earlier, is a matter of rates. This council has been in a position, if effect, of trying to help determine rates when we have no jurisdiction or right to consider rates. When this first came up, I took two days off, with the gracious consent of my employer, heard every word of testimony that was entered in court, J believed these people when they testified, spent a number of hours on the telephone communicating with some of the people involved. I spent most of today in Houston, had a conversation with Mr. Sines and others of SPRR. had conversation with Mr. Searls and there may be a lot of factors that I am not yet aware of but I have tried to make a study of them. Initially, .I proposed that MPRR seek a northern route, parallels to Interstate No. 10 with the possibility of sharing facilities with SPRR, but after today's conversations I am convinced that a northern route is totally not feasible. I have not really been sold on the southern route but I have gone through the oil field . . . . . . . . . I thinly it has some merit, I think it would relieve some of our traffic problems on a portion of our streets, but 4182 it would not solve the traffic problem on that portion of our streets that lie west of Goose Creek Stream. Preferably, I would like to cure the whole problem but I have become convinced that, because of the sgeeze.we are in, because of.rate issue that is involved, we are in a position that.we need to make a decision.. Therefore, Mr. Mayor, I would at this time move that we grant approval of Missouri Pacific'.s;applipation to cross North Main, Parkway Dr.. Alexander Dr, Hwy 146 & Tri -City Beach _ Road with. the understanding that the City Council will, immediately after voting.this motion, pass two resolutions; first, Be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Baytown and citizens of Baytown look to and expect Missouri Pacific to adequately compensate not only the individuals whose property they will cross, but those persons who will be disturbed in the use and enjoyment of their property adjacent to the new spur; and Secondly, Be it resolved that the City.Council of Baytown and citizens of Baytown fully expect Missouri Pacific to work closely with the City Council and shere.in -the expenses of any overpasses or underpasses that become necessary in the future because of the increase of automobile traffic or the increase in rail freight traffic." Councilman Massey: "Mr. Mayor, I speak in support of the motion and also the resolutins. I believe the Council has reached the point where we have reached the decision that you mentioned earlier - when we become convinced that.this is the best route that we should actively support it and I believe.that we have reached that point at this time. I felt that even last week and confirmed in the presept week so it isn't just a decision I've com a to at this moment. Realizing the jeopardy in the impact of a slowdown in the planning phase of this mill is just as substantial as one if it were in mid - progress of construction. And even,though.we grant this permit to cross city streets, as applied for, we cannot assure completion.of Mopac track due to the continued interferences and protests, by other bodies in protesting from MP's competitors, so I second Mr.. Donnellly's motion that we accept,the application of MP to cross the five streets names." Councilman Ball: "In consideration of the motion and the resolutions, I would like to make two statements. One, I think any encouragement on the part of SPRR is deliberate in-that I'm convinced that -this would endanger seriously MPRR's. position in their cur- rent court procedure which, so far, has been successful. I think SPRR would encourage us to postpone a decision or approve any route that.would be longer and more costly. I personally am convinced, in this respect, that the majority of the citizens of Bay- town, no, all the majority, are in favor of the industai•al,development of the Cedar Point area. Fortunately, we are getting a second chance. Furthermore, and this is a matter of feeling but I have to consider it,fact, I have talked to a good. number of the customers, in the Baytavn area, of MPRR to determine whether or not, in my opinion, we can rely on MPRR tovark with the citizens of Baytown and the City Council as a member of our community and I have found such significant facts that MPRR has one -third of their crossings and only one signalized. MPRR is working with.us fo,r grade.separa- tion on the major streets to be crossed now, MPRR bas proposed a lower rate structure which, I understand, will include most all goods shipped into the City of Baytown. It was interesting to me to find out that you could ship a carload of sheet rock by rail to La Porte, unload it on the trucks, truck it to Baytown, unload it from trucks cheaper than you could ship it by rail all the way from Houston to Baytown. We are pay- ing for this - I would like to see a lower rate on all goods. My conversations in the way of personal opinions from the customers of MPRR have been highly complimentary of their business relationship and I would support the motion and resolution with full confidence that we will be able to successfully work with MPRR at any time in the future." Councilman Fanestiel: "For the first time tonight, we have gotten .some of the facts that have been missing, and we haven't had a .change to sit down and assimilate, these facts and make a study of everything that is involved. I, for one, would hesitate to make a decision tonight. .I would move that this motion be tabled until.our_. regulat meeting next Thursday when we have had more opportunity to study the facts that have been brought out tonight. I think, certainly „that we can make a more rational decision at that time." Mayor Cravey asked for a second and Councilman Hullum seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Councilmen Hullum, Braswell and Fanestiel Nays: Councilmen Ball, Massey and Donnelly Abstained: Mayor Cravey Maya Cravey asked for any further.statemegt4 before voting on the original motion. 4183 Councilman Hullum: "I represent District 3 which is the district involved -as well as the rest o ,the people in town and this includes the businessmen, members of the Chamber of Commerce, the Junior Chamber of Commerce and all other interested groups. It has been a problem with me to take all of these facts into consideration and weigh them, especially when the emotions and decisions are close to me. possibly closer than tQ some of the other councilmen. I hope, that in making my decision, I weigh all the facts and I come up with the right decision but I feel like the factors that weigh against this thing are too heavy to permit MPRR to come through our area, through this part of Baytown. I,don't feel like that if we vote at this time, we will have re- presented.the people; that we will have gotten for the people the most that we could. I think this is each of our responsibility and I am not just saying the Council - the Chamber of Commerce, the Junior Chamber of Commerce should be working together to.come up with an alternate soluti6na . . . . we could have gotten with the people in this area, we could have talked with these people, we could have assured them that they would have been treated right but from the start, going back into a little history of this thing, I brought this up over two months ago and the people in my are were deeply concerned and I was also. At that time, it did not seem to be a problem with too many people. We met with MP officials, the others.did I was on vacation at the time, and they presented this. At a later date we sent a resolution to MPRR stating that we desired them to look for another route, but in,the meantime they were being taken to court by SPRR. 'We had another meeting and -the Chamber of Commerce, Jaycees, etc were included. At this meeting, I thought or had the impression that something could be worked out and this was what I took back to the people in District No. 3. Since that time, MPRR has given us no alternateive. have given us no choice in the matter, and I guess this might have had some bearing upon my decision but I feel like I am compelled to go with people in District 3 and oppose the proposal of MPRR" Councilman Braswell: "I want to assure U. S. Steel that I. as well as every other councilman here. fully appreciates the necessity and desirability of having you locate adjacent to our cipy. I would also like to assure you that the route will be oked in time. As Mr. Sines has said, this route is-just beginning to make the rounds of the courts so I feel like. myself, that an alternate route would be as timely as the route that MPRR has proposed. I feel like that U. S. Steel would not expect their people decisions without all-the facts and I do not think that this Council has all the facts. for example, this alternate route. We have been told that there is a very good possibility of getting an alternate route in - we don't know for sure. MPRR has never told us, or has not had an opportunity to look into this route that we have laid out. I think that if I were a U. S. Steel executive, I might look with some question at the advisability of investing the sums that they are presumably intending to invest in this community considering that the governing body or the community acted under pressure without adequate facts, without a thorough investigation of all hazardous problems. I would rather vote tonight to OK an alternate route by MPRR, with the assurance that the City would back MPRR in any future suit that SPRR might bring. Also I would like to remind the people of Baytown that if this route as proposed if approved tonight, many of our streets will be impassable in a fairly short period of time - which means that the roads, streets in the remaining part of the city will become over- crowded. You will be faced, in the near future, with bond issues to build new streets to travel through the town. This may be alright, but I just wanted to point out the strong possibility, that you will have to look for other means of transportation. I hate to see a railroad cross as many city streets as this spur would cross. In the past fifteeen (15) years there have been about eight (8) people killed on Baytown streets at railroad crossings by trains. This has been on the basis of two (2) trains per day crossing these streets - I'm just wondering what that picture will be ten (10) or fifteen (15) years hence when we have six (6), eight (8) ten (10) who knows how many trains crossing with the traffic increased to many times what it has been. I don't believe that is the way to plan and develop a city to cross your streets with a railroad. I would sure like to see us postpone a decision tonight, ask MPRR to study seriously, the southern route. I agree they have given us a cost figure on one close to this but they have never looked seriously. I don't believe, at this alternate southern route in which case it would not be necessary to cross any city streets at grade east of Goose Creek. I would like to see a move to decide this tonight postponed. Councilman Donnelly: "Briefly, the matter of crossing the streets of Baytown. I have fully taken this into consideration but I must face up to the fact that MPRR now crosses all of those streets - the difference being that we are going to have increased 4184 traffic. We cannot compel them, even. if they went the southern route, to abandon any of their present trackage and abandon the customers they are now serving. Another point on the alternate route study, I believe, Mr. Sines stated tonight -.I believe its a fact . I believe Mr. Searls and Mr. Sewell will vouch for this that if an alternate route is chosen, even though SPRR has said that they in all probability will not file a temporary injunction suit, they are still in court on the permanent injunction. This would present entirely new facts, it would constitute, in effect, a.complete new law suit. MPRR knows pretty well where they stand now with Judge Ingraham. he had all the facts of this present route presented to him, he had the background, history and based on.those facts he ruled, in effect, that this was a spur and not an extension. No one could expect the Judge to rely on the facts previously heard if they chose an alternate route. So, in effect, we would be putting him in a position of trying an entirely new and separate lawsuit." !Mayor Craven: "I might say, I think the people interested in whatever capacity or whatever way they are interested can feel sure that the members of this Council have approached this problem with an open mind;.that when the decision is made, tonight or some other time, or when it isn't made, that we are relying upon as much information as we can get and still this is insufficient . part of our decision.has to be made on speculation - we don't know if the delay, a week or a year, would imperil the possi- bility of U. S. Steel building near Baytown - we don't know that if we approve this route, the railroad will be built and we don't know that it won't be built., And when this decision is made, if its made tonight, I for one will not-feel at all sure the correct decision will be made - a few years.from now we will know. Theres are a lot of feelings and ideas that cross my mind, one is that. I guess this is too strong a' word but I feel a little resentment at the position that we are in - I feel that in any problem, if a group of people in good faith sit down on both sides and negotiate, there is some yielding on both sides and I have seen yielding on the part of MPRR not to the slightest degree. Whether or not, they are in a position where they can't or whether they are unwilling to, I don't know but we have not had any degre of com- promise - we have had an untimatum. Now, . . . you can believe that everyone here Is doing so in what he, at this time, feels is in the best interest of the greatest number of people in the full awareness that it is detrimental to ethers and to what degree we can't say." Mayor Cravey call for the reading of the motion and the roll call. The vote follows: Ayes: Councilmen Ball, Massey and Donnelly. Mayor Cravey Nays: Councilmen Hullum, Braswell and Fanestiel Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 114 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN GRANTING PERMISSION FOR THE MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY TO CROSS CERTAIN STREETS OF BAYTOWN; REQUESTING AND URGING SAID COMPANY TO MAKE JUST COMPENSATION TO ALL PERSONS OWNING PROPERTY THAT MAY BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE EXTENSION OF THIS SPUR IN A SOUTH AND EASTERLY DIRECTION; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. RESOLUTION NO. 115 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE FACT THAT IT HAS HERETOFORE GRANTED PERMISSION TO THE MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY TO CROSS CERTAIN STREETS WITHIN THE CITY OF BAYTOWN; PROVIDING FURTHER THAT MISSOURI PACIFIC, SHALL BE EXPECTED AND HAS HERETOFORE AGREED TO,FULLY CO- OPERATE WITH THE CITY OF BAYTOWN AND TO SHARE IN THE EXPENSES OF OVERPASSES, UNDER- PASSES, SIGNALIZATION, AND ANY AND ALL OTHER STEPS NECESSARY TO FURTHER THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS AND THE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC OF BAYTOWN; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Adiournment The motion was made and seconded that the meeting adjourn. The ayes were unanimous and the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned. d Edna Oliver, City Clerk