Loading...
1980 05 08 CC MinutesThe regular Council members Absent: 00508 -1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN May 8, 1980 City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in session on Thursday, May 8, 1980, at 6:30 p.m. in the Chamber of the Baytown City Hall with the following in attendance: Fred T. Philips Jimmy Johnson Perry M. Simmons Allen Cannon Emmett 0. Hutto Fritz Lanham Dan Savage Scott Bounds Eileen P. Hall Mary E. Wilbanks Eileen Caffey Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilman Mayor City Manager Assistant City 11anager City Attorney City Clerk Councilwoman Councilwoman The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hutto and the invo- cation was offered by Mayor Hutto. Ordinance - Authorizing Issuance of City of Baytown Certificates of Obligation for the Amount of $100,000 Mr. Lanham explained that the City had advertised to issue $1,100,000 City of Baytown Certificates of Obligation -- $1,000,000 to finance a portion of the cost of the West District Sewer Treatment Plant and $100,000 for the City's share of the costs of the water line out to Gentry School. The City is able to delay the sale of the $1,000,000 but the $100,000 is needed because there is an item on the agenda to award that contract tonight. In order to provide this service when it is needed and the fact that the City has been holding the bids for 25 days when the bid is only good for 30 days, are the reasons that the Administration felt it necessary to sell the $100,000 in Certificates of Obliga- tion. As Council will recall, this was a negotiated sale because the proposals were taken by telephone. Two proposals were received. Citizens National Bank bid 7% and Underwood, Neuhaus & Company bid 6 -1 /2%. The Administration felt that the bid of Underwood, Neuhaus & Company at 6 -1 /2% was a good bid and the Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Philips moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. Certificate for Ordi- nance and Ordinance No. 2887 follow: 00508 -2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 CERTIFICATE FOR ORDINANCE THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTIES OF HARRIS AND CHAMBERS § CITY OF BAYTOWN § We, the undersigned officers of the CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS (the "City "), hereby certify as follows: 1. The City Council of the City convened in regular meeting on the 8th day of May, 1980, at its regular meeting place thereof, within the City, and the roll was called of the duly constituted officers and members of the City Council and the City Clerk, to -wit: Emmett 0. Hutto Perry M. Simmons Jimmy Johnson Eileen Caffey Allen Cannon Fred T. Philips Mary E. Wilbanks Eileen P. Hall Mayor Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member City Clerk and all of said persons were present, except the following absentees: Eileen Caffey and Mary E. Wilbanks , thus constituting a quorum. ol Whereupon, among other business, the flowing was transacted at said meeting: a written ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF $1,100,000 CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, WATERWORKS AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 1980; AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT (the "Ordinance ") was duly introduced for the consideration of the City Council and read in full. It was then duly moved and seconded that the Ordinance be adopted; and, after due discussion, said motion, carrying with it the adoption of the Ordinance, prevailed and carried by the fol- lowing vote: AYES: All members of the City Council shown present above voted "Aye ". NAYS: None. 2. That a true, full and correct copy of the Ordinance adopted at the meeting described in the above and foregoing paragraph is attached to and follows this certificate; that the Ordinance has been duly recorded in the City Council's minutes of said meeting; that the above and fore- going paragraph is a true, full and correct excerpt from the City Council's minutes of said meeting pertaining to the adoption of the Ordinance; that the persons named in the above and foregoing paragraph are the duly chosen, qualified and acting officers and members of the City Council as indicated therein; that each of the officers and members of the City Council was duly and sufficiently notified officially and personally, in advance, of the date, hour, place and subject of the aforesaid meeting, and that the Ordinance would be introduced and considered for adoption at said meeting, and each of said officers and members consented, in advance, to the holding of such meeting for such purpose; that said meeting was open to the public as required by law; and that public notice of the date, hour, place and subject of said meeting was given as required by Vernon's Article 6252 -17, as amended. SIGNED AND SEALED this 8th day " City Clerk (SEAL) of i :0 61 �� 1�_ mayor �� - i 00508 -3 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 ORDINANCE NO. 2887 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF $1,100,000 CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, WATERWORKS AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 1980; AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTIES OF HARRIS AND CHAMBERS § CITY OF BAYTOWN § WHEREAS, the City Council of the CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS (the "City "), authorized the publication of a notice of inten- tion to issue certificates of obligation to the effect that the City Council will adopt an ordinance authorizing the issu- ance of certificates of obligation, payable from City ad valorem taxes and revenues of the sanitary sewer system of the City, for the purpose of evidencing the indebtedness of the City for all or any part of the cost of extending and improving (1) the sanitary sewer system of the City (a maximum principal amount of $1,000,000 of Certificates of Obligation to be issued for this purpose) and (2) the waterworks system of the City (a maximum principal amount of $100,000 of Certificates of obliga- tion to be issued for this purpose), respectively, and the cost of professional services incurred in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, such notice was published at the times and in the manner required by the Constitutions and laws of the State of Texas and of the United States of America, respectively, particularly Article 2368a.1, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, as amended; therefore BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN: Section 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct. Section 2. The City's negotiable certificates of obliga- tion, to be designated CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, WATERWORKS AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 1980 (hereinafter called the "Certificates "), are hereby authorized to be issued and delivered in the principal amount of $1,100,000 00508 -4 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 for the purpose of providing $1,000,000 for extending and im- proving the sanitary sewer system of the City, including the cost of professional services incurred in connection therewith, and $100,000 for extending and improving the waterworks system of the City, including the cost of professional services in- curred in connection therewith. Section 3. The Certificates shall be dated June 1, 1980, shall be numbered consecutively from 1 through 220, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, and shall mature serially on February 1 of each of the years, and in the amounts, re- spectively, set forth in the following schedule: YEAR CERTIFICATE NOS. AMOUNT 1982 1 -20 $100,000 1983 21 -40 100,000 1984 41 -60 100,000 1985 61 -80 100,000 1986 81 -100 100,000 1987 101 -120 100,000 1988 121 -140 100,000 1989 141 -160 100,000 1990 161 -180 100,000 1991 181 -200 100,000 1992 201 -220 100,000 Section 4. Certificates Nos. 201 to 220, both inclusive, shall bear interest from their date to maturity or redemption at the rate of 6.5% per annum, evidenced by interest coupons which shall appertain to the Certificates and which shall be payable on the dates indicated in the FORM OF CERTIFICATE set forth in this ordinance; Certificates Nos. 1 to 200, both in- clusive, shall bear interest at a rate, or rates, to be autho- rized by a subsequent ordinance, or ordinances, to be adopted by the City Council. Section 5. The Certificates, and the interest coupons ap- pertaining thereto, shall be payable, shall have the character- istics, and shall be signed and executed (and the Certificates shall be sealed), all as provided and in the manner indicated in the FORM OF CERTIFICATE set forth in this ordinance. -2- 00508 -5 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Section 6. The form of the Certificates, including the form of registration certificate of the Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas to be printed and endorsed on each of the Certificates, and the form of the aforesaid inter- est coupons which shall appertain and be attached initially to each of the Certificates, shall be, respectively, substan- tially as follows: NO. FORM OF CERTIFICATE: $5,000 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF TEXAS COUNTIES OF HARRIS AND CHAMBERS CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, WATERWORKS AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION SERIES 1980 ON FEBRUARY 1, 19_, the CITY OF BAYTOWN (the "City"), in the Counties of Harris and Chambers, in the State of Texas, promises to pay to bearer the principal amount of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS and to pay interest thereon, from the date hereof, at the rate of % per annum, evidenced by interest coupons payable February 1, 1981, and semiannually thereafter on each August 1 and February 1 while this Certificate is outstanding. The principal of this Certificate and the interest coupons apper- taining hereto shall be payable to bearer, in lawful money of the United States of America, without exchange or collection charges to the bearer, upon presentation and surrender of this Certificate or proper interest coupon at Texas, which shall be the paying agent for this series of Certificates. THIS CERTIFICATE is one of a series of negotiable, coupon certificates, dated June 1, 1980, numbered consecutively from 1 through 220, in the denomination of $5,000 each, aggregating $1,100,000, issued in accordance with the Constitution and laws -3- 11 1: • Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 of the State of Texas, particularly Article 2368a.1, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, as amended, for the purpose of providing $1,000,000 for extending and improving the sanitary sewer system of the City, including the cost of professional services in- curred in connection therewith, and $100,000 for extending and improving the waterworks system of the City, including the cost of professional services incurred in connection therewith, and pursuant to an ordinance (the "Ordinance ") duly adopted by the City Council of the City, which Ordinance is of record in the official minutes of the City Council. IT IS HEREBY certified, recited, and covenanted that this Certificate has been duly and validly authorized, issued, and delivered; that all acts, conditions, and things required or proper to be performed, exist, and be done precedent to or in the issuance and delivery of this Certificate, have been per- formed, existed, and been done in accordance with law; that annual ad valorem taxes sufficient to provide for the payment of the interest on and principal of this Certificate, as such interest comes due and such principal matures, have been levied and ordered to be levied against all taxable property in the City and have been pledged for such payment within the limits prescribed by law; that this Certificate shall be a debt of the City within the meaning of Article XI, Sections 5 and 7 of the Constitution of Texas; and that, when delivered, this Certifi- cate shall be deemed and construed (i) to be a "Security" within the meaning of Chapter 8, Investment Securities, Uniform Commercial Code (Chapter 785, Acts of the 60th Legislature, Regular Session, 1967), and (ii) to be an obligation of the City within the meaning of Chapter 784, Acts of the 61st Legislature of Texas, Regular Session, 1969. IT IS FURTHER CERTIFIED, RECITED AND REPRESENTED that the revenues to be derived from the operation of the sanitary sewer system of the City, after the payment of all operation 1XIM 00508 -7 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 and maintenance expenses of said system, are also pledged to the payment of the principal of and interest on this Certifi- cate and the series of Certificates of which it is a part to the extent that said taxes levied and collected for same may ever be insufficient or unavailable for said purpose, the said pledge of revenues being in all things junior and subordinate to the existing pledge of and lien on said revenues for the payment of the interest on and principal of all of the out- standing water, sewer and gas system revenue bonds of the City, all as set forth in the Ordinance. THE CITY HAS RESERVED THE RIGHT TO ISSUE ADDITIONAL PARITY CERTIFICATES, and said certificates may be payable from the same source, secured in the same manner and placed on a parity with this Certificate and the series of which it is a part, all as set forth in the Ordinance. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Certificate of Obligation and the interest coupons appertaining hereto have been signed with the facsimile signature of the Mayor and countersigned with the facsimile signature of the City Clerk of the City, respec- tively, and the official seal of the City has been duly im- pressed, or placed in facsimile, on this Certificate. COUNTERSIGNED: xxxxxxxxxx Mayor xxxxxxxxxx CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS City Clerk CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS (SEAL) FORM OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE: COMPTROLLER'S REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE:' REGISTER NO. I hereby certify that this Certificate of Obligation has been examined, certified as to validity, and approved by the Attorney General of the State of Texas, and that this Certifi- cate of Obligation has been registered by the Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas. M7= 1 l 1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 WITNESS my signature and seal this (SEAL) xxxxxxxxxx Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas FORM OF INTEREST COUPON: NO. $ ON 1, 19 , the CITY OF BAYTOWN, in the Counties of Harris and Chambers, State of Texas, promises to pay to bearer the amount shown on this interest coupon, in lawful money of the United States of America, without exchange or collection charges to the bearer, upon presentation and surrender of this interest coupon, at 01 1 Texas, said amount being interest due that day on the Certifi- cate of Obligation bearing the number hereinafter designated of that issue of CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, WATERWORKS AND SANI- TARY SEWER SYSTEM CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 1980, dated June 1, 1980. Certificate No. xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx City Clerk Mayor Section 7. A special fund or account, to be designated the "City of Baytown, Texas, Waterworks and Sanitary Sewer System Certificates of Obligation, Series 1980, Interest and Sinking Fund" (hereinafter called the "Interest and Sinking Fund "), is hereby created and shall be established and main- tained by the City at an official depository bank of the City. The Interest and Sinking Fund shall be kept separate and apart from all other funds and accounts of the City and shall be used only for paying the interest on and principal of the Cer- tificates. All ad valorem taxes levied and collected for and on account of the Certificates shall be deposited, as collected, to the credit of the Interest and Sinking Fund. During each year while any of the Certificates or interest coupons apper- taining thereto are outstanding and unpaid, the City Council -6- 00508 -9 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 of the City shall compute and ascertain a rate and amount of ad valorem tax which will be sufficient to raise and produce the money required to pay the interest on the Certificates as such interest comes due and to provide and maintain a sinking fund adequate to pay the principal of the Certificates as such principal matures but never less than 2% of the original prin- cipal amount of the Certificates as a sinking fund each year; and said tax shall be based on the latest approved tax rolls of the City, with full allowance being made for tax delinquen- cies and the cost of tax collection. Said rate and amount of ad valorem tax are hereby levied, and are hereby ordered to be levied, against all taxable property in the City for each year while any of the Certificates or interest coupons appertaining thereto are outstanding and unpaid; and said tax shall be assessed and collected each such year and deposited to the credit of the Interest and Sinking Fund. Said ad valorem taxes sufficient to provide for the payment of the interest on and principal of the Certificates, as such interest comes due and such principal matures, are hereby pledged for such payment within the limits prescribed by law. Section 8. The revenues to be derived from the operation of the sanitary sewer system of the City, after.the payment of all operation and maintenance expenses of said system, are hereby pledged to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Certificates as the same come due to the extent that the taxes mentioned in Section 7 of this ordinance may ever be insufficient or unavailable for said purpose, provided that this pledge of said revenues is and shall be in all things junior and subordinate to the existing pledge of and lien on said revenues for the payment of the interest on and principal of all of the outstanding waterworks and sanitary sewer system revenue bonds of the City. -7- 00508 -10 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Section 9. Immediately following delivery of the Cer- tificates to the purchaser thereof the accrued interest shall be deposited in the Interest and Sinking Fund. Section 10. The City certifies that based upon all facts and estimates now known or reasonably expected to be in exis- tence on the date the Certificates are delivered and paid for, the City reasonably expects that the proceeds of the Certifi- cates will not be used in a manner that would cause the Certifi- cates or any portion of the Certificates to be an "arbitrage certificate" under Section 103(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and the regulations prescribed there- under. Furthermore, all officers, employees and agents of the City are authorized and directed to provide certifications of facts and estimates that are material to the reasonable expecta- tions of the City as of the date the Certificates are delivered and paid for. In particular, all or any officers of the City are authorized to certify for the City the facts and circumstances and reasonable expectations of the City on the date the Cer- tificates are delivered and paid for regarding the amount and use of the proceeds of the Certificates. Moreover, the City covenants that it shall make such use of the proceeds of the Certificates, regulate investments of proceeds of the Certifi- cates and take such other and further actions as may be required so that the Certificates shall not be "arbitrage certificates" under Section 103(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and the regulations prescribed from time to time thereunder. Section 11. The Mayor of the City is hereby authorized to have control of the Certificates and all necessary records and proceedings pertaining to the Certificates pending their delivery and their investigation, examination, and approval by the Attorney General of the State of Texas and their registra- tion by the Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of -8- 00508 -11 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Texas. Upon registration of the Certificates, the Comptroller of Public Accounts (or a deputy designated in writing to act for the Comptroller) shall manually sign the Comptroller's Registration Certificate prescribed herein to be printed and endorsed on each Certificate; and the seal of the Comptroller shall be impressed, or placed in facsimile, on each of the Certificates. Section 12. Certificates Nos. 201 to 220, both inclusive, are hereby sold and shall be delivered to Underwood, Neuhaus & Company, Inc. for the par value thereof and accrued interest thereon to date of delivery, sub- ject to the unqualified approving opinions, as to the legality of the Certificates, of the Attorney General of the State of Texas and of Vinson & Elkins, Houston, Texas, market attorneys; and it is hereby officially found, determined, and declared that the Certificates are sold on the best terms and for the best price possible. Certificates Nos. 1 to 200, both inclu- sive, shall be sold pursuant to an ordinance, or ordinances, to be adopted by the City Council. Section 13. The Mayor and all other appropriate officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to do any and all things necessary or convenient to carry out the provisions of this ordinance. Section 14. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Section 15. It is hereby officially found and determined that the need of the City for such financing creates an emer- gency and an urgent public necessity for the holding, at the scheduled time, of the meeting of the City Council at which this ordinance is adopted and for the adoption of this ordi- nance; and the NOTICE OF MEETING relating to said meeting and heretofore posted by the City Clerk, and the posting thereof, 00508 -12 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 is hereby authorized, approved, adopted and ratified. PASSED AND APPROVED this 8th day of May, 1980. ATTEST: /s/ Eileen P. Hall City Clerk CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS (SEAL) /s/ Emmett 0. Hutto Mayor CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS -10- a 00508 -13 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Minutes Councilman Johnson moved for approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of April 24, 1980 and the special meeting of April 30, 1980; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Receive Petitions Fred Elmo, a resident of Central Heights Subdivision, presented a petition to Council with 57 names requesting that the City add a basketball court and goals for the smaller children or make a larger court for adults and let the small children use the existing courts which are smaller in size, at the park in the Central Heights Addition on Atlantic Street. The baseball field is not in use because of the limitation of the playing field which was caused by the building of a new church, and therefore, a court could be built on part of the field. Councilman Johnson moved to accept the petition and asked that the Parks and Recreation Department come back to the Council with a recommendation; Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Councilman Philips stated that in connection with this request, he had been approached previously about the activity level in this park. He stated that the playground equipment is in heavy use and the use pattern of the park has been changed because of the church. Councilman Philips moved that Council request the City to look into enlarging the park by land ac- quisition. There is vacant property surrounding the park. Mayor Hutto requested that the Administration check this possibility and come back to Council with a recommendation. Ordinance - Amending the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 18, Article IV, "Stopping, Standing and Parking" to Prohibit Parking in Areas Designated For Handicapped Persons' Use Council received copies of letters that the Administration had received from people representing various groups in the com- munity indicating their interest and concern about the lack of handicapped parking spaces in Baytown. The Administration has also been contacted concerning not only the lack of spaces, but the fact that even where spaces exist, if it is on private property, without the proposed ordinance, the Police Department has no authority. The proposed ordinance provides for parking of vehicles which transport the handicapped and defines physically handicapped for purposes of this ordinance. The ordinance also provides that a person commits an offense if they stop, stand or park a vehicle in a parking space that has been designated as a parking space for handicapped on private or public property unless the person operating or using the vehicle is handicapped. The ordinance definition of the physically handicapped includes any person who has sustained an amputation or permanent material disability of either or both legs or who has been otherwise permanently disabled in any manner rendering it difficult or burdensome to walk. The Administration had received copies of ordinances from other cities and the proposed ordinance follows 00508 -14 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 the general pattern that other cities have. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson felt there is no question of how much this ordinance is needed, but inquired as to how will a policeman know if a person who is parked in parking spaces for handicapped, is really a handicapped person? Mr. Lanham explained that many cities have a system of identifying the cars by stickers, and felt that the City will need to develop that type of system. Councilman Philips suggested that the stickers be limited for a one -year period so that if a car is sold, it does not continue indefinitely to be carrying a valid sticker. Scott Bounds, City Attorney, explained that if the City were to establish a registration system, the Council would need to come back and establish it in the ordinance. A lady from the audience explained that stickers are avail- able through the state which sticker costs $1.00 and the sticker is good for an indefinite period of time. The.sticker can be removed very easily upon sale of the vehicle. Councilman Philips stated that in any event, the Council should amend the ordinance to require a sticker. Mr. Lanham explained that the Administration would add this provision to the ordinance and come back to Council at the next meeting. In response to a question from Council, Air. Bounds explained that the City Council would have to amend the ordinance to pro- vide that it would be an offense to park in a parking space without a sticker. Councilman Cannon suggested that a 60 -day grandfather clause be added to the ordinance because it will take some time for the handicapped to obtain such sticker. In response to an inquiry from Mayor Hutto, an individual from the audience explained that it takes approximately 30 days to obtain a sticker from the state, Mayor Hutto suggested that a 30 -day grandfather clause, plus 10 more days already in the ordinance would be sufficient. In response to a question from a lady in the audience, Mr. Bounds explained that at the present time, under the City's off - street parking requirements and Building Code, 2% of all off - street parking must be specifically marked and reserved for handicapped. This has to be approved by the Building Inspector and it is designated by the property owner. Mr. Lanham explained that the Administration is contacting the owners of the shopping centers in regard to parking spaces for the handicapped. A number of the owners have voluntarily indicated a willingness to comply. Dan Savage, Assistant City Manager, explained that Jack Cramer, Building Inspector, has talked with a number of property owners and one thing that needs to be kept in mind is that the City Code was adopted in 1977, and it was his understanding that any facility in existence prior to that time would not be re- quired to comply with the regulation. There are a number of stores that have been built since the Code was adopted in 1977 that need to comply. A lady from the audience stated that she is somewhat dis- turbed by the Administration's definition of the handicapped because there should be a temporary disabled clause put in the ordinance wherein a person could come to the City Hall to get a sticker if they have a broken leg or are on crutches. 00508 -15 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Councilman Philips stated that he could see many problems with the wording "temporarily disabled" for persons who are con- tinuously going through a period of healing. There is a great difference between permanent and temporary. He felt that the City could be criticized for being unable to administer a tem- porary disability clause. The City would be constantly accused of issuing stickers to individuals who are abusing the system. A permanently disabled person is not in that category. Council- man Philips further stated that he hates to impose something on the Police Department that is so difficult to regulate that in fact it breaks down. Mayor Hutto commented that the Administration can check with other cities in this regard and they can come back to the Council with a recommendation. An individual from the audience suggested that the handi- capped parking spaces be identified by signs. Larry G. Carter Will Annear Larry G. Carter stated that the Council had received a copy of a memorandum from the Julie Ann Villa Civic Association with regard to a new subdivision to be located one mile south of Interstate 10 on Highway 146 in Chambers County. Mr. Carter read a small presentation which requested that Council develop codes to protect the residents of Julie Ann Villa from being flooded by the development of this new subdivision. Mr. Carter mentioned that water had crested Highway 146 three times in seven years and that Chambers County Engineer, R. T. Pinchback, is of the opinion that if this subdivision is built without proper steps taken to insure adequate runoff, Julie Ann Villa Subdivision will have major flooding problems. The residents of Julie Ann Villa are presently trying to get Chambers County involved in developing standards for subdivisions, but this subdivision is part of Baytown's extra - territorial jurisdiction and the residents are asking Baytown to protect their homes from flooding by future development. Mr. Bounds explained that just recently he had briefed the Planning Commission about their authority as far as reviewing development outside the City limits with regard to drainage, and thought that they had recently taken action on Lake Municipal Utility District. Basically, the Planning Commission will be looking at all of the developments within Baytown's extra- terri- torial jurisdiction and they will be looking at the drainage of the proposed developments as it affects existing communities or existing parts of the communities both within the City and out. They can take the appropriate action to insure that the develop- ment does not worsen any flooding conditions that exist. Part of the problem that the Julie Ann Villa Subdivision may have is an existing problem because they have had flooding in the past. Mr. Bounds further stated that he is not sure that the City of Baytown can do much to relieve that situation but felt that the Planning Commission can look to see that the proposed develop- ments do not worsen the situation. Councilman Johnson inquired if the Planning Commission had received a plat in this regard. Mr. Bounds responded that it is his understanding that the plans are to form a Chambers County Municipal Utility District and that action would have to come to Council. Mr. Carter inquired as to how would a municipal utility district affect the Julie Ann Villa Subdivision. Mr. Bounds explained that it probably will not directly affect the subdi- vision since the utility district will not provide the subdivi- sion with water or sewer service. Julie Ann Villa Subdivision could contract with the utility district for water and sewer services. Basically, the utility district will be formed to provide those services for the property within the utility dis- trict. 00508 -16 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Mr. Carter explained that the Julie Ann Villa Civic Associ- ation is not against the development of surrounding area. In fact, Julie Ann Villa is part of the development. The Civic Association would like for new development to enhance the area; not to de -value the area. Mr. Carter explained that the land where the new subdivision is to be located is directly across from Julie Ann Villa Subdivision. The highway has culvert drainage underneath the highway which comes across south of the subdivision to a natural drainage. There is no utility easement. The developers of that property are trying to buy a strip of land which will give them utility easement rights to the bayou. Mayor Hutto suggested that the Julie Ann Villa Civic Associ- ation watch the local newspaper for notice of any activity re- garding development in that area. Councilman Cannon commented that Council has gone on record as to the City's concern of flooding on Interstate 10. He further stated that the Council does not want to create any problems for any existing areas. Public Hearing On Benefits On Park Street Paving Improvements (7:00 p.m.) Mayor Hutto called to order the public hearing concerning paving assessments on property abutting Park Street. Everyone desiring to testify at the hearing was asked to sign the register in the lobby since that register provided the speaking order for the hearing. Those desiring to testify were asked to stand and were sworn. Mayor Hutto explained that approximately six months ago, City Council initiated a street improvement assessment program as provided by state law. Since that time, City Council has ap- proved plans for improving Park Street and has taken bids on the proposed work to be done on Park Street. Tonight's hearing is for the purpose of determining the amount of assessment, if any, to be levied against the property abutting the proposed street improvements and the owners thereof. The City may assess the abutting property and its owners for the special benefits and the enhanced value to be derived from the proposed improvements to that street. For the benefit of those present desiring to testi- fy, Mayor Hutto explained that representatives of the City would first present a brief summary of the proposed project and its benefit in enhanced value to the abutting property. After completion of testimony, members of the Council, abutting prop- erty owners, or their representatives may ask questions of those persons concerning testimony given. In other words, peculiar to this hearing, all witnesses are subject to cross examination. After the City's representatives have testified, the abutting property owners or their representatives will then have the opportunity to testify. State law pertaining to assessment provides that those who may be heard are the owners of property or owners of interest in property abutting the roadway. Those persons may be heard on the following matters: Any matter to which hearing is a constitution of prerequisite to the validity of any assessment authorized by the act or to contest the amounts of the proposed assessment, the liens and liability under the liens, the special benefits to the abutting property and accura- cies, sufficiencies, regularity and the validity of the pro- ceedings. Mayor Hutto then requested that the City Attorney proceed with the summary to be offered by City representatives. Scott Bounds, City Attorney, asked that Jim Hutchison briefly explain the paving project and what the proposed street would look like. Mr. James P. Hutchison of the firm of Busch, Hutchison & Associates, Inc., Consulting Engineer for the City of Baytown on the Park Street Project, testified in response to the request of the City Attorney that his firm is under contract with the City to perform engineering work for projects such as this. He stated that the Mayor had mentioned that bids were taken a few weeks 00508 -17 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 ago. The low bidder was Marathon Paving and Utility Construc- tors, Inc. The low bid was $535,532.50 for the total project. Mr. Hutchison had placed on two sides of the Council Chamber a strip map which designated the lay -out of Park Street, the abutting property owners and the front footage which they pos- sess. The front footage projected was derived from various title reports, deeds, etc. that had been collected by the consulting engineers. In some cases, the engineers were not able to get the most accurate information from those sources and therefore, measured these areas on the ground and have represented what was found to be in place on these maps. Mr. Hutchison explained that the right of a city to assess abutting property owners is given by state law which states that rN the maximum allowable assessment is 1000 of the concrete curb. In this case, the low bidder's bid for concrete curb was $2.00 per front foot and 100% of that cost is assessable. The rate for concrete pavement is 90% of the cost of one -half of the street width and in this case, said cost includes excavation, lime stabilization and concrete pavement. These accumulative costs for paving amount to $40.35 per front foot. Therefore, the total maximum allowable assessment is $42.35. The City Council has the option to assess any rate less than the maximum. The project was bid as approximately 3,600 feet of street from Pruett to the Goose Creek Stream Bridge. The street is to be 39 feet in width, back to back with curb. There will be a concrete curb and curb inlets with storm sewer and appurtenances built throughout the length of the street. The portion of Hor- rell Park between Garth and Pruett already has curb on the north side; therefore, there will be no assessment for curb in that area. On the south corner at the intersection of Park and Pruett, there is one hundred fifty feet of frontage where curb already exists. The northwest corner at the intersection of Garth and Park will not be assessed because of its narrowness and the fact that there will be no access from Park Street. The only access will be allowed from Garth Road. The concrete pavement is six inches thick, reinforced concrete with a six inch concrete curb. Mr. Bounds then requested that Gerald Teel approach the stand and explain to Council the method that he used in deter- mining the proposed assessment rate for the property abutting Park Street. Mr. Gerald Teel stated that he is an independent real estate appraiser with the firm of Dominy, Ford, McPherson & Teel in Houston, which firm had been retained to take a look at the bene- fits, if any, which might be derived by abutting property owners due to the Park Street Improvement Program. On April 8, 1980, Mr. Teel forwarded a letter to Mr. Bounds which set forth his reasoning on the proposed assessments. Mr. Teel stated that after considering the improvements and the tracts of land, it was originally decided that three tracts would not benefit, but later a fourth tract was added due to the access problem, the Stipe's tract at the northwest corner. This tract was just mentioned by Mr. Hutchison. There are three tracts that would have no benefit due to elevation. On the roll, Tract No. 1, on Goose Creek Stream would have no benefit due to its elevation. The property is at a low elevation. Parcel #8, the R. F. Stipe tract which shows on the assessment roll as having a benefit, has been changed to reflect no benefit. Parcel #12, Grant Terrill, is single - family residential property. The majority of the prop- erties along Park Street are commercial in nature. Park Street is a commercial thoroughfare; however, there are some existing single - family residences along there; therefore these people will not derive the same benefit because residential properties would not have the same value increase. Whatever the commercial rate might have been for the parcel, 50% was assessed for those prop- erties that are currently used as residential. Councilman Philips inquired if this was just an arbitrary number, since he was thinking that it should be zero. 00508 -18 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Air. Teel responded that the residential properties would derive some benefit with a wider thoroughfare and improved ac- cess. The property is being improved insofar as its commercial aspects at some future date. Some benefit is being derived although, Mr. Teel felt that it would not be anything near what the commercial properties would be deriving. Councilman Philips inquired if this is a standard figure or one chosen for this situation? Air. Teel responded that his firm had not had the latitude to appraise each particular parcel, but the reasonableness of the assessment, 100 feet at $1,350 appears to be adequate, that is the lot is being improved in value by some $1,300. Then if you come back and say, has that indeed been improved to that degree, by looking at lot values in the City as far as curbs and non - curbs, and the wider asphalt street versus concrete streets, the City has contributed that amount of value to the tract of land at that point. Parcel #15 which is a single - family residence has been reduced by 50% to $1,012 from $2,025. Mr. Teel stated that as far as going in and assessing the kind of benefits to be derived from the Park Street Improvement, basically, some 15 sales in the Baytown area were considered in an attempt to derive what kind of benefits could be derived by going to a wider two lane concrete- curbed thoroughfare. Looking at those sales, as well as coming back in and considering a standard lot for commercial usage, those properties along Park Street would have a value somewhere in the range of $2.00 to $2.50 per square foot. Basically, at $25.00 per front foot on 100 feet of depth, 250 per square foot would be added to that particular land value and that would be an increase in value of some 10% at $2.50 up to 12�% at $2.00. Using the $25.00 per front foot on a standard lot of 100 feet of depth, there is an increase of some 10 to 12 %, which is again reasonable in the opinion of Mr. Teel and the properties would benefit to that degree. Mr. Teel went on to point out that there would be some variance as depth is decreased, because then the utility of that particular parcel of land is decreased. Thereby, decreasing its benefit up to a point of some 70 feet of frontage and once you have less than that, you really are not deriving any benefit because you have a problem using the land anyway. That comes into play also along the south line. Mr. B. B. Williams, Parcel #26, is assessed no benefit due to a very limited depth, as well as the fact that there is a drainage ditch through the central portion of the property. The property has less than a 70 foot depth, therefore value is very limited in the first place, even before the improvements and with the improvement, he receives no benefit due to the limited depth on that tract. On Page 2 of the letter, there is a schedule using a standard lot as 100 feet of depth. A range of 96 feet to 105 feet is 100% or $25.00 per front foot; 95 feet of depth, 95%; 80 to 89 feet of depth, 900; 70 - 79 feet, 85%. This means the $25.00 decreases to a low of $21.25 on 70 feet of depth. Inversely, an increasing depth which is going to benefit somewhat more than the properties that can only utilize the streets to 100 feet of depth. As that depth increases, you would have a proportion of the amount of increase up to 120 feet, 105,%; 120 - 150 feet, 1107o; and 151 feet and beyond, 115% or up to a total of $28.50 which includes the $1.50 for a curb. The $25.00 represents $23.50 for paving and $1.50 for curb. Are there any questions? Councilman Cannon inquired if Mr. Teel had figured that property to be worth $2.00. Mr. Teel responded that he had figured a range from $2.00 to $2.50 per square foot, but emphasized each individual tract was not appraised. The standard lot size was determined and then applied to a depth ratio table. Mr. Teel, in response to Councilman Cannon's inquiry con- cerning sales, stated that some 15 sales were considered. None of these were directly on Park Street, but there are some just 00508 -19 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 off Park Street on Garth Road, which are in excess of that amount, like $3.00 to $4.00 a square foot. Councilman Fred Philips stated that he understood Mr. Teel to be saying that the improvement will increase the value of land about 250 per square foot. Mr. Teel responded that with the standard lot being 100 foot of depth, that would be right, but as depth increases, you wouldn't have the same increase per square foot. As a mean, on 100 foot of depth, 250 a foot which would equate to $25.00 a front foot of assessment for benefit in value except in those instances where there is some specific physical factors such as elevation along Goose Creek, narrow depth, and denial of access. Mr. Teel mentioned that after he had submitted his findings, he and the City Attorney went over the property to determine the reasonableness of the assessment and at that point, some adjust- ments were made. There were no further questions of Air. Teel. He was dis- missed. Scott Bounds, City Attorney, mentioned that a notice of the hearing on proposed street improvement benefit was published in the newspaper on April 16, 23 and 30, and said notice was also mailed to the owners of all the properties abutting Park Street as shown on the tax roll. The notice provided information that the estimated assessment varied with the depth of the tract and that from 70 to 79 feet, the total assessment was $21.25 up. As in the past, the notice also contained the total estimated cost or total maximum permissible assessment. Individual land owners were not sent the dollar amount proposed to be assessed against their individual tract and there are some tracts, as has been pointed out by Mr. Teel, where there is no assessment proposed. Air. Bounds introduced two letters as follows: Mrs. Sadie Mayfield, owner of Parcel #10, writes as follows: "Dear Mayor Hutto, please accept this letter as my testimony that I favor the improvement of Park Street and I am willing to pay the assessment for enhancement of my property. Sincerely, Sadie Mayfield." Attorney for owner of Parcel #1 writes: "To the Honorable City Council, my clients are the owners of the Thomas L. Winfrow, et al tract ad- joining Goose Creek, consisting of .86 acres fronting about 475 feet on the north side of Park Street, being the Harvey Whiting Tract #91. They wish to protest the improvement of this street on the basis outlined in the notice as it would be confiscatory and outrageous. The tract is narrow and crescent - shaped and is appraised at about $2,500. The total assessment would amount to over $21,000. Please consider this a formal protest as to the proposed paving improvement. Respectively yours, T. E. Kinderly." Air. Bounds pointed out that this is one of the tracts assessed no benefit due to elevation. Councilman Allen Cannon inquired if the property owners had been notified of the actual amount to be assessed? City Attorney, Scott Bounds, responded that the property owners had not been notified of the actual assessment amounts being proposed because that was just prepared in the last week. By law, the notice must be mailed over three weeks in advance. However, the proposed assessment on a front foot basis was for- warded so that a property owner knowing front footage and depth could calculate the maximum assessment that the City would be proposing. The maximum assessable would be the $28.50 per front 00508 -20 Minutes of the Regular Pieeting - May 8, 1980 f oot . Councilman Allen Cannon inquired if the property owners had had ample time to get their own appraisal, to which Mr. Bounds responded, "They have had ample time." The Mayor announced that at this time, the abutting property owners or their representatives would be heard according to the register that had been signed. That testimony follows: B. B. Williams of 305 Forrest Street, stated that he was very familiar with property along Park and that he had noticed several persons listed on the assessment roll who no longer own property on Park, but he was not going to get involved in that direction. He stated that he was present to ask the Council to reconsider or to consider not charging the people anything for paving a county road or improving a truck route - -a road that has over 20,000 cars going over it and people from everywhere going to work all over the country utilizing it. Mr. Williams felt that the project would not improve any property along Park Street. He felt that two or three parcels would be greatly hindered because curb and gutter, along with a driveway would virtually eliminate parking. Again, Mr. Williams requested that City Council reconsider this project as an assessment project since it is a thoroughfare used by many. He requested that someone make a motion in that regard. He stated that he was present to represent himself, along with a few other property owners. lie described certain parcels and stated who owned the parcels to substantiate his familiarity with the street. Mr. Williams ended his testimony by stating that he felt that the property owners should not be assessed to improve Park Street. Air. Robert F. Stipe, owner of abutting property on Park, stated that he had been assessed once on Garth Road and that he was not against the improvement, but that he definitely was against being assessed again on that corner. He stated that he had noticed that the City was not going to assess anything on Tract #8, which he was grateful to hear. However, Mr. Stipe expressed concern that the appraiser for the City had mentioned that on the other corner, there would be no access to Park Street. Mr. Stipe made mention of the fact that the City had acquired part of that property to improve Garth Road. Mr. Stipe said if the City took access to Park away, he would be forced to protest that action. He further emphasized that the City had already caused a problem out on the corner by taking a portion to improve Garth Road and that he did not intend to be blocked off. Mr. Stipe concurred with Mr. Williams in that he feels Park is a thoroughfare and the property owners should not be assessed. Because Park Street is a thoroughfare, everyone uses the street. Mr. Dan T. Savell, owner of property along Park, yielded to Mr. Garrett. Mr. E. Garrett, owner of property abutting Park, stated that he just wanted to mention a flood control ditch that runs through Tract No. 3 and that there is City property in front of his property. Mr. Dennis M. Trigg testified that he owns property at the corner of Park Street and Rice Street. He stated that he had not had an opportunity to look at the plans for the project, but if the City would be taking any of his property for this improve- ment, the improvement would not help him as a landowner or busi- nessman. Mr. Trigg stated that an extensive expansion program was just completed at this location to make a convenience store out of the operation and to take any of that property would put him totally out of business there. Mr. Trigg suggested that Park Street did not need to be improved and requested that City Coun- cil vote not to effect this improvement program. Mr. IHutchison responded to Mr. Trigg's concern that a por- tion of his property may be required for right of way by stating that the City has sixty (60) feet of right of way for the project and no additional right of way will be required. 00508 -21 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Mr. Trigg responded that the reason for his concern was that in 1978, the City came in with a topping program which changed the elevation of his property and placed a burden on his business. Mayor Hutto inquired if anyone else desired to testify. There was no response to his inquiry. Mayor Hutto then inquired if Council wanted to act on the ordinance, closing hearing on Park Street Improvements and set assessments, or have the Admin- istration gather information from comments made by those who testified and come back to Council either in a work session or at the next Council meeting with the information and a recommenda- tion. Mr. Lanham stated that the Administration would like to have an opportunity to make corrections, for example, Mr. Garrett mentioned a ditch across his property and the Administration needs to check to determine if that is included in the footage. Mayor Hutto stated that the Administration needed to check all the information that had been brought to Council's attention. Councilman Johnson inquired if this would include contacting the correct land owners? The City Attorney responded that state law requires that the notice be mailed to the property owners and assessment be made in the name of the property owners who are listed on the tax roll. The Administration is aware that there is a discrepancy between the owners as shown on the tax roll, the owners as shown in the deed records, and in some cases, the person claiming ownership of the property. The assessment roll reflects the names of persons listed on the tax roll. Mr. B. B. Williams mentioned that the ditch on his property which has been referred to as a flood control ditch, was in fact, a man -made ditch. Mr. Williams stated that he had scheduled a meeting with Mr. Green lof Harris County Flood Control District to discuss this ditch and would be happy to cooperate with the City to solve the problem. Councilman Simmons inquired if Park Street is a designated truck route, to which Chief Turner replied that he believed it is. Mayor Hutto stated that the Administration will gather all the facts and present same to Council. Mr. Dan Savell, who had yielded the floor previously, testi- fied that he owns property on the other end of Park Street. He made the point that the City had paved the opposite end of Park Street approximately four years ago and had replaced curbs and gutters with no charge to the abutting property owners. There being no further testimony to be heard, Mayor Hutto closed the public hearing. City Manager's Report Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation - The Administration received a letter from Mr. Omer Poorman, District Engineer for the State Department of Highways and Public Trans- portation, calling attention to a public meeting that will be held in Baytown on June 4, 1980, regarding State Highway 146, Houston Ship Channel bridge. The hearing will be in the Commu- nity Building at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of discussing a high level bridge crossing of the Houston Ship Channel to replace the present Baytown Tunnel. Conceptual designs and environmental assessment of the proposed improvements will be displayed at that meeting. Mr. Lanham expressed his hope that the Council would be able to attend this public meeting. Park Street Improvements - Councilman Philips requested that 00508 -22 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 the Administration develop cost estimates for the next Council meeting on resurfacing Park Street as it is today. In response to a question from Councilman Johnson, Mr. Lanham explained that the City had awarded the contract for the Park Street Improvement which contract is pending. Councilman Philips stated that the City could cancel that contract or change it to an asphalt resurfacing. The City Attorney explained that at the present time the City has a valid contract which limits the City somewhat. Councilman Philips stated that he would also like to get the cost of cancelling the contract and emphasized that he is inter- ested in some alternatives. Keep America Beautiful Day - The annual clean -up effort for Keep America Beautiful Day was quite successful in that 260 tons of trash was removed in the eight hours. This was a commendable accomplishment on the part of the Solid Waste crews, the firemen at the various fire stations, the citizens of Baytown who parti- cipated, and the Clean City Commission who was primarily respon- sible for the program. Councilman Johnson mentioned that he had gone out to the landfill on that particular day and had talked with Gene Hazel- wood who was all for the program. Councilman Johnson felt that the City needs to hold a Keep America Beautiful Day more than once a year. Mr. Lanham explained that the approximate cost to the City was $1,250 which included overtime and additional landfill charges. Council felt this was nominal since the day was so successful. East District Trunk Sewer - The City had to delay receipt of bids for the East District Trunk Sewer Project because adjust- ments in right of way are necessary. Apartments on Rollingbrook Drive - At the last meeting, the Administration was asked to check on the status of the incomplete apartments on Rollingbrook Drive. The foreclosure process is expected to be completed on June 3. Meanwhile, the bank that holds the mortgage, indicated work would be in preparation for completing the apartments. Heliport - The Federal Aviation Administration had received an application from the Baytown Medical Center for a permit to construct a heliport at the Medical Center. Those applications no longer require City approval. Decker Drive Water Well - The water well on Decker Drive is pumping an excessive amount of sand. The City is going to have to pull the pump and jet the excessive sand out of the well to televise it to determine what the problem is. It will probably be necessary to install 94 feet of 8 -inch slotted wall pipe inside the existing 14 -inch screen. The estimated cost of that work is $21,000. It is something that has to be done. Mr. Lanham ex- plained that it will take approximately 7 days to make repairs assuming that the Administration's calculations of the problem are correct. Councilman Philips stated that he would like the Administra- tion to take a look at the pumping rate and see if the City might be causing a sand shift by over pumping the well. He asked that a consultant be contacted in this regard. 1980 Street Improvement Program - Brown and Root expects to start work on the 1980 Street Improvement Program next week. West Texas Avenue Park - In connection with the development of the West Texas Avenue Park, the Service League had purchased a plaque to be placed at that park. It is a very attractive 19 00508 -23 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 plaque that explains how Goose Creek originated. Drainage Work - The City is enlarging the ditch west of the Hollaway Addition along the east side of the railroad between Massey Tompkins Road and Bob Smith Road. This work is approxi- mately 40% complete; East Schreck storm sewer - 95% complete; Douglas Street - 75% complete; Abbott Street - 10% complete. Harris County - Harris County has begun installation of additional pipe at driveways along the northside of Baker Road from the west side of Pumphrey School east to Goose Creek. They are installing an additional pipe there which should relieve the drainage problem that the City has been experiencing in that area and that is approximately 90% complete. Since Harris County Flood Control District has opened its facility in Baytown, there has been a significant increase in the amount of brush clearing. The brush has been cleared along the Woodlawn ditch, the Adams Street ditch and crews are now clearing the flood control ditch between Arbor and Wooster Streets. Ward Road Storm Sewer Project - The Administration has an item on the agenda with regard to the storm sewer project on East Ward Road. The consulting engineer has the study in progress on the east end of Ward Road at Kilgore Road and East Fayle at Danubina. Questions and Comments Regarding the City Manager's Report Councilman Johnson inquired who was responsible for cleaning the front of the lot on East James, did the City do that work or was it the landowner? Mr. Lanham responded that he was not certain, but he would check. Councilman Philips inquired if the Administration has heard anything with regard to the Baker Road project. Mr. Lanham inquired if the City had gotten any further word from the pipe- line companies that the City had contacted regarding Baker Road at Bayway. Mr. Dykes explained that the City is still receiving feedback on it. Councilman Philips requested that the City Manager include this as part of his report to Council on an automatic report basis so that the Council can pursue this work. He stated that his goal is to try to get something in place this year at that location. Councilman Johnson stated that he would like the Administra- tion to look at Ferry Road near the church. He stated that this area was quite littered a few days ago. Councilman Johnson inquired about the picture of the ditch that was in the Baytown Sun tonight. He stated that he is very aware of that ditch also and it has always been hard to clean that ditch. Mr. Lanham explained that the City cleaned that ditch a few years ago. Councilman Cannon stated that in the past, he had brought up the problem of dividers on Interstate 10, and he noticed that the Highway Department is putting up temporary dividers on that road- way. Ordinance - Awarding Contract For Water Main to Cedar Bayou - Lvnchbura. S_iolander and Archer Roads Area Twelve bids were received for the construction of a water main to serve the Gentry Junior School north of the City limits. This is the project that is to be jointly funded by the City and Goose Creek Consolidated Independent School District. Council received a copy of a letter from Jim Hutchison of Busch, Hutchi- son & Associates regarding these bids. In his letter, Air. Hutchison indicates that JaHo, Inc. is the low bidder meeting 00508 -24 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 specifications at a total cost of $191,620.00. The City's share of this cost is $102,530.60. The school district will pay the remaining $89,089.40. This contract will involve the construc- tion of a 12" water main east along Cedar Bayou- Lynchburg Road, north along Sjolander, and west along Archer Road. With the sale of certificates of obligation which action had been taken ear- lier, the City will have the funds to pay its share of the cost. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Cannon moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2888 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST TO A CONTRACT WITH JAHO, INC. FOR CONSTRUC- TION OF A WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM; AND MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO. For bid tabulation, see Attachment "A." Ordinance - Awarding Contract For Ward Road Drainage Project Twelve bids were received on the Ward Road drainage project. McKey Construction and Equipment, Inc. is the low bidder at a total cost of $246,570.00. Bond funds from the 1975 Bond Program will be used to finance this project. The Administration recom- mended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2889 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE BID OF McKEY CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIP- MENT, INC., FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WARD ROAD DRAINAGE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE CONTRACTING OF INDEBTEDNESS BY THE CITY FOR THE SUM OF TWO HUNDRED FORTY -SIX THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY AND N01100 ($246,570.00) DOLLARS WITH REGARD TO SUCH AGREEMENT. For bid tabulation, see Attachment "B." Ordinance - Amending the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 17, to Add Section 17 -4.2, to Prohibit Use of Roseland Park From 10:00 P.M. Through 5.00 A.M. The City has received numerous complaints regarding acti- vities in Roseland Park, especially late in the evening. Council received a copy of a letter from Duke Dicus regarding some of the problems. In order to correct some of the problems, it will require the expenditure of a considerable amount of money such as extensive paving which is needed to solve the dust problem. One of the problems called to the City's attention is the activity there late at night. The City can partially alleviate that problem at very little cost and that is the cost of putting signs up at the entrances of Roseland Park. Mr. Lanham explained that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board recommended that this ordinance be passed which would prohibit the use of Roseland Park from 10:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. Mr. Lanham felt that the 5:00 a.m. 00508 -25 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 opening time is needed for the benefit of the fishermen and joggers. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Philips moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2890 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, MAKING IT UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON TO ENTER ONTO OR UPON ROSELAND PARK FROM 10:00 P.M. TO 5:00 A.M.; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN DIRECT CONFLICT; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PRESCRIBING A MAXIMUIW'PERAL'TY OF TWO HUNDRED AND N01100 ($200.00) DOLLARS; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Authorizing Final Payment For 1979 Sanitary Sewer Sliplining to Channel Construction Company Channel Construction Company has completed work on the 1979 Sanitary Sewer Sliplining contract. This work has been inspected by the engineering department and has been found to be satisfac- tory. Total contract amount with change orders is $201,714.20. A final payment in the amount of $19,872.80 remains to be paid. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2891 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE SLIPLINING OF SANITARY SEWER LINES BY CHANNEL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. FINDING THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE CON- TRACT; ACCEPTING THE CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF FINAL AC- CEPTANCE; AUTHORIZING THE FINAL PAYMENT TO THE SAID CHANNEL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Assigning C. A. Wright Subdivision to the Proper Council District C. A. Wright Subdivision, which is located north of Massey Tompkins Road on Chaparral Drive, needs to be assigned to a Coun- cil district. The proposed ordinance assigns the subdivision to Council District No. 5. This subdivision does not border on any other Council district. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None 00508 -26 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 ORDINANCE NO. 2892 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN ADDING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO COUNCIL DISTRICT NO. 5; REPEALING ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Awarding Final Payment to Foster Fence Company For Construction of the Fence at Newcastle Street Park Foster Fence Company has completed the construction of the fence at Newcastle Street Park. This work has been inspected by the City staff and has been found to be completed in accordance with specifications. Total cost of this contract is $11,413.00. Final payment for the total amount of the contract remains to be paid. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Philips moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2893 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE FENCING OF NEWCASTLE STREET PARK BY FOSTER FENCE CORPORATION FINDING THAT THE IMPROVE- MENTS ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT; ACCEPTING THE CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE; AUTHORIZING THE FINAL PAYMENT TO THE SAID FOSTER FENCE CORPORATION AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Ordinance - Appointing Board of Equalization and Setting the Time and Date of the First Meeting This will be considered during executive session. Ordinance - Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Amendment to the Mutual Aid Law Enforcement Agreement to Include Brazoria County in Said Agreement Council has received a copy of a letter from Dennis Gardner, Senior Assistant City Attorney for the City of Houston. In his letter, Mr. Gardner indicates that Brazoria County would like to be included in the Mutual Aid Law Enforcement Agreement, in which the City of Baytown participates. Mr. Lanham explained that he cannot foresee anything that might happen that would require the City of Baytown to go to Brazoria County or for them to come here. Since the City of Baytown is part of the contract, it is necessary that the City of Baytown sign this along with the other cities. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons, and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2894 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST TO AN AMENDMENT TO THE MUTUAL AID LACY EN- FORCEMENT AGREEMENT AUTHORIZED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2622 TO INCLUDE BRAZORIA COUNTY IN SAID AGREEMENT. 00508 -27 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Ordinance - Closing and Vacating the Utility Easement in Lot 64, B1gCk 4 of Eva Maud Subdivision, Section 1 The Administration explained that the sale of a parcel of property is pending Council action to close and vacate an utility easement in the vicinity of Bay Plaza Shopping Center. Mr. Bounds explained that sale is pending on property near the Bay Plaza Shopping Center which fronts on Highway 146, and backs up to the private road that runs from Bay Plaza Shopping Center over to Richardson Lane and Lacy Drive. The utility ease- ment would be that portion of a six foot utility easement that runs behind the lot that the private road is built on. It would be 103.82 feet of a six foot easement from Lacy Drive back up to that existing private road. Mr. Lanham explained that the City does not have any util- ities in it. Neither do any of the other utility companies. The Administration recommended that the ordinance be approved subject to the City getting letters from other utility companies saying that they have no objection to the abandonment. In response to a question from Council, Mr. Lanham explained that apparently a sale of the land is contingent upon approval of this ordinance. The City's appraisal of the value of that ease- ment is $375.00. In response to a question from Council, Mr. Lanham explained that the City has no future use for that property and if the owners want to build something that requires utilities, the owners will have to dedicate an easement or make arrangements for sewer. Councilman Philips moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. Councilman Cannon inquired if the City Council can handle this type of thing as an emergency item? Mr. Bounds explained that the City Council can handle this as an emergency item because it came to the Administration's attention too late to be put on the regular agenda and due to the circumstances that the matter needed to be handled immediately, it was appropriate to add as an emergency item. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon 1:4ayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2895 AN ORDINANCE CLOSING AND VACATING THE UTILITY EASEMENT IN LOT 64, BLOCK 4, OF EVA MAUD SUBDIVISION, SECTION 1, AND PROVIDING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF SAID PROPERTY. Resolution No. 733 - Appointing Alternate Representative to Houston- Galveston Area Council This item will be discussed during executive session. Recess and Reconvene Mayor Hutto recessed the meeting into executive session to discuss personnel matters and pending litigation. When the open meeting reconvened, the following business was transacted: 00508 -28 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Ordinance - Appointing the Board of Equalization and Setting the Date and Time of the First Meeting Councilman Philips moved that the Board of Equalization con- sist of 0. L. Clevenger, Dot Vidrine, and Tommy Clayton and that the first meeting be set for the 2nd day of June, at 4:00 p.m., Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 2896 AN ORDINANCE APPOINTING A BOARD OF EQUALIZATION TO SERVE FOR THE YEAR 1980, FIXING THE TIME OF THE FIRST MEETING OF SAID BOARD, AND AUTHORIZING SAID BOARD TO EXERCISE THE POWER AND FULFILL THE DUTIES CONFERRED UPON IT BY THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN. Resolution No. 733 - Appointing Alternate Representative for the Houston - Galveston Area Council Councilman Simmons moved that Councilman Allen Cannon be appointed as the alternate voting delegate of the City of Baytown to the Executive Committee and the General Membership Body of the Houston - Galveston Area Council; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None RESOLUTION NO. 733 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ALLEN CANNON AS THE OFFICIAL ALTERNATE VOTING DELEGATE OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP BODY OF THE HOUSTON - GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL. Consider Selection of Mayor Pro Tempore Councilman Johnson nominated Allen Cannon by acclamation to be Mayor Pro Tempore. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Philips, Johnson, Simmons Appointments to Planning Commission Councilman Cannon moved for the reappointment of the exist- ing members whose terms have expired and those being Leslie Couch, Leon Cox, H. J. Tarski and Perry Walker; Councilman John- son seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None 00508 -29 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - May 8, 1980 Appointments to Council Wrecker Committee Councilman Johnson moved to appoint four of the five members of the newly reconstituted Wrecker Committee and the fifth person is to be appointed at a later date, and those persons being Jack Kimmons, Bill Blake, Rex Couch, and Robert Walton; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Philips, Johnson, Simmons Appointments to Baytown Housing Authority Mayor Hutto reappointed Tony Campos, Mrs. Norma Wilder, David C. Gunn and appointed for the unexpired term of Reverend E. D. Reed, Vernon Shields to the Baytown Housing Authority. Appointments to Baytown Housing Finance Corporation Councilman Philips moved that the Baytown Housing Finance Corporation members be appointed as follows: Tony Campos, David C. Gunn, Mrs. Norma Wilder and the fourth member to fill the un- expired term of Reverend E. D. Reed, Mr. Vernon Shields; Coun- cilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Philips, Johnson, Simmons Consider City Manager's Appointment of City Attorney Mr. Lanham requested City Council approval of his selection of Randy Strong to be City Attorney at an annual salary of $27,552. Councilman Johnson moved for approval of Randy Strong as City Attorney at an annual salary of $27,552; Councilman Philips seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Philips, Johnson, Simmons and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Adjourn With no further business to be transacted, Mayor Hutto adjourned the meeting. aren Petru, Deputy City Clerk APPROVED: '&"� '0' ",/" Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk ';IT PRICES BIO FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A WATER LINE ON CEDAR BAYOU- LYNCHBURG ROAD, SJOLANOER ROAD AND ARCHER ROAD - JOB N0. 80 -2205 Item JAHO, INC. TUNNELING CO. McKEY CONSTRUCTION PASTEX CONSTRUCTION � ;o. Item uantit Unit Unit Price Tota Unit Price Tota Unit Price Tota Unit Pa ce Tota 1. 12" Class 150 A.C. Waterline, Open Trench Construction, Com lete -in- lace 11160 L.F. $ 12.00 $133,920.00 $ 14.00 156 240.00 14.50 161 820.00 5 la. 6" Class 150 A.C. Waterline, Open Trench Construction, Com lete -in- lace 11160 L.F. $ 6.76 $ 75,441.60 $ 10.00 $111,600.00 $ 9.10 $101,556.00 $ 9.77 $109,033.20 2. 12" Class 150 A.C. Waterline, by augered construction, Com lete -in- lace 350 L.F. $ 45.00 $ 15,750.00 $ 21.00 $ 7,350.00 $ 32.00 $ 11,200.00 $ 23.00 $ 8,050.00 2a. 6" Class 150 A.C. Saterline, by augered construction, Com lete -in- lace 440 L.F. $ 32.00 $ 14,080.00 $ 15.00 $ 6,600.00 $ 24.00 $ 10,560.00 $ 16.50 $, 7,260.00 3. 12" Class 150 A.C. Waterline cased, open trench construc- tion, Com lete -in- lace 290 L.F. $ 32.00 $ 9,280.00 $ 14.00 $ 4,060.00 $ 34.10 $ 9,889.00 $ 42.20 $ 12,238.00 3a. 6" Class 150 A.C. Waterline cased, open trench construc- tion, Com lete -in- lace 290 L.F. $ 19.00 $ 5,510.00 $ 10.00 $ 2,900,00 $ 23.25 $ 6,742.50 $ 28.75 $ 8,337.50 4. 12" Schedule 40 steel, flanged waterline under box culvert, Sta. 45 +60 to Sta. 46 +80, � Com lete -in- lace All Lump Sum $11,00.00 $ 11,500.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $13,200,00 $ 13,200,00 $13,000.00 $ 13,000.00 4a. 6" Schedule 40 steel, flanged waterline under box culvert, St�i. 45 +60 to Sta. 46 +80, Lump $ 8,200.00 $ 8,200.00 Com lete -in- lace All Sum $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 9,600.00 $ 9,600.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 7,000.00 5. 8" Class 150 A.C. Waterline, augered construction, .. . Com lete -in- lace 90 L.F. $ 30.00 $ 2,700.00 $ 20.00 $ 1,800.00 $� 25.60 $ 2,304.00 $ 20.00 $ 1,800.00 a m U d' �rIT PRICES BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A WATER LINE ON CEDAR BAYOU- LYNCHBURG ROAD, SJOLANDER ROAD ANO ARCHER ROAD - JOB N0. 80 -2205 Item JAHO, INC. TUNNELING CO. McKEY CONSTRUCTION PASTEX CONSTRUCTION � ;o. Item uantit nit Unit Price Tota Unit Price Tota Unit Price Tota Unit Pa ce Tota 6. 30 "x12" Tap by Gifford -Hill Ameri ran C�,rnpany i n exist- Lump in 30" PCCl7 water Line 1 Sum $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 4,260.00 $ 4,260.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 26.00 $ 2,340.00 7. 12" Gate Valve w /Valve Box Com lete -ire- lace 13 Each $ 600.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 600.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 600.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 525.00 $ 6,825.00 8. 8" Gate Valve w /Valve Box Com lete -in- lace 1 Each $ 340.00 $ 340.00 $ 300.00 $ 300.00 $ 330.00 $ 330.00 $ 295.00 $ 295.00 9. 6" Gate Valve w /Valve Box Com lete -in- lace 2 Each $ 235.00 $ 470.00 $ 240,00 $ 480.00 $ 225.00 $ 450.00 $ 210.00 $ 420.00 10. 4" Gate Valve w/ Ualve Box Com lete -in- lace 7 Each $ 230.00 $ 230.00 $ 160.00 $ 160.00 $ 220.00 $ 220.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 11. 12 "x8" C.I. Tee, Complete - in- lace 1 Each $ 260.00 $ 260.00 $ 250.00 $ 250.00 $ 260.00 $ 260.00 $ 220.00 $ 220.00 12. 8 "x4" C.I Tee, Complete -in- lace l Each $ 140.00. $ 140.00 $ 160.00 $ 160.00 $ 135.00 $ 135.00 $ 120.00 $ 120.00 13. 6 "x6" C.I. Tee, Complete - in- lace � 1 Each $ 115.00 $ 115.00 $ 110.00 $ 110.00 $ 105.00 $ 105.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 14. 8 "x6" Reducer, Complete -in- lace 1 Each $ 85.00 $ 85.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 82.00 $ 82.00 $ 75.00 $ 75.00 15. 12 " -22 1/2° C.I. Bend, Com lete -in- lace 1 Each $ 180.00 $ 180.00 $ 175.00 $ 175.00 $ 170.00 $ 170.00 $ 165.00 $ - 165.00 16. 12 " -45° C.I. Bend, Complete - in- lace 5 Each $ 180.00 $ 900.00 $ 175.00 $ 875.00 $ 170.00 $ 850.00 $ 165.00 $ 825.00 17. Fire Hydrant, 4' Bury, Com lete -in- lace 1 Each $ 700.00 $ 700.00 $ 700.00 $ 700.00 $ 650.00 $ 650.00 $ 600.00 $ 600.00 U;'IT Pf�ICES BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A WATER LINE ON CEDAR BAYOU- LYNCHBURG ROAD, SJOLANDER ROAD AND ARCHER ROAD - JUk3 NU. tSU -LLUS Item JAHO, INC. TUNNELING CO. McKEY CONSTRUCTION PASTEX CONSTRUCTION No. Item uantit Unit Unit Price Tota Unit Price Total Unit Pace Tota Unit Price Tota 18. Timber ordered left in trench b En ineer 1000 5 BdFt 400.00 7 800 0 80.00 400.00 00.00 100.00 500.00 19. Road Shell or limestone for temporary crossing repa�'rs, drives, as directed by the Engineer (Delivery Ticket Basis Com lete -in- lace 200 Tons $ 13.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 14.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 16.00 $ 3,200,00 $ 15.00 $ 3,000.00 20. Cement stabilized sand for protective fill not other- wise specified as directed by the Engineer, Delivery Ticket Basis, Complete -in- 50 Tons $ 13.00 $ 650.00 $ 18.00 $ 900.00 $ 18.00 $ 900.00 $ 15.00 $ 750.00 lace BASE BID exclude Items la,2a,3a, & 4a) $191,620.00 194 920.00 217 565.00 2 9 8 0 BASE BID(exclude Items 1,2,3,4, & 5) 121 701.60 144 570.00 ��= �� 147 610.50 148 065.70 ADDITIONAL BIDDERS: � � �• ••• • REDDICO CON. N.M.BROWN H.T.HOLLAND� BELLA CO. R.T. B�SHOP'�6 &T CONTRACTING S &C CON. BELLEWOOD Base Bid (exclude Items la,2a,3a, & 4a) $222,240.00 224,704.00 240,068.00 242,580.00 253,670.00 253,706.00 260,924.50 314,125.00 Base Bid (exclude Items 1,2,3,4, & 5) $152,010.00 $164,750.00 $166,187.60 $146,010.00 $151,160.00 $149,487.50 $169,004.00 $233,145.00 �t�IT PRICES BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWERS ON WARD ROAD FROM AMY DRIVE TO HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DITCH AND ON NARCILLE STREET FROM WARD ROAD TO TAFT DRIVE - JOB N0. 79 -1533 Item �� McKEY CONSTRUCTION S &C CONSTRUCTION BAYTEX CONSTRUCTION R.T. BISHOP CONSTRUCTION Unit Price Tota Unit Price Total Um t Price Total Unit Price Tota c1o. Item uantit Unit � 1. Salvage and realign existing 54" CMP including removal & replacement of 7" reinforced concrete pavement and cs�rb, Class 6 backfill, Complete -in- lace 34 L.F. $ 90.00 $ 3060.00 $ 19.50 $ 663.00 $ 140.00 $ 4760.00 $ 130.00 $ 4420.00 la. Same as Item 1 except install new 16 gage 54" diameter CMP, asphalt coated per AASHO M190 corrugations to be 3 "xl ", in- cluding 6dnds and bolts per AASHO M36, Com lete -in- lace 34 L.F. 120.00 4080.00 53.00 1802.00 150.00 5100.00 180.00 6120.00 2. Remove and replace 7" rein- forced concrete pavement, Com lete -in- lace 725 S.Y. 25.00 18125.00 35.50 25737.50 20.00 14500.00 35.00 25315.00 3. Remove and replace 4" rein - 1 forced concrete pavement, Com lete -in- lace 450 S.Y. 20.00 9000.00 32.00 14400.00 16.00 7200.00 18.00 8100.00 i . 4. Remove and replace 6" rein- ; forced concrete driveway, . Com lete -in- lace 150 S.Y. 22.50 3375.00 35.00 5250.00 17.00 2550.00 33.00 4950.00 5. 66" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Joints, Class "B" Backfill, ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts ���� �� Com lete -in- lace � �� 190 L.F.' 86.00 16340,00 X00.00 X9000.00. 817.00 22230.00 140.00 26600.00 5a. 66" Diameter 16 gage CMP, asphalt coated per AASHO M190 corrugations to be 3 "xl ", in- cluding bands and bolts per AASHO M36 Com lete -in- lace 80 L.F. 88.00 7040,00 100.00 8000.00 102.00 8160,00 130.00 10400.00 as U +� �� as U +� l,'�IIT PRICES BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWERS ON WARD ROAD FROM AMY DRIVE TO HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DITCH AND ON NARCILLE STREET FROM WARD ROAD TO TAFT DRIVE - JOB N0. 79 -1533 Item McKEY CONSTRUCTION S &C CONSTRUCTION BAYTEX CONSTRUCTION R.T. BISHOP CO�STRUC ION Unit Price Tota Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Tota too. Item uantit Unit 6. 60" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Joings, Class "B" Backfill, ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace � 680 L.F. $ 72.00 $ 48960.00 $ 85.00 $ 57800.00 $ 100.00 $ 57800.00 $ 120.00 $ 81600.00 7. 48" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. � Joints, Class "B" Backfill, ' ASTM C16, Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace 610 L.F. 50.00 30500.00 54.00 32940.00 80.00 48800.00 76.00 46360.50 8. 36" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Joints, Class "A" Backfill, ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace " '520 L;F; 47.00 24440.00 60.00 31200.00 57.00 27640.00 61.00 31720;00 9. 36" RCP St. Sewer.Pipe R.G. Joints,�Class "D" Backfill, ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace 240 L.F. 28.00 6720.00 34.00 8160.00 50.00 12000.00 43.00 10320.00 10. 30" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Joints, Class "A" Backfill . ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts .... .... ..... ...... ..... ...... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...... ..:........... ... ..... ... ... Com lete -in- lace 130 C:F. 35.00 4550.00 42.00 5460.00 52:00 6760.OQ " 49:00 �� - 637Q:00' 11. 30" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Joints, Class "D" Backfill, ASTM C76 Class III all cuts, - --� -� i Coin lete -in- lace 260 L.F. 22.00 5720.00 27.OQ ��7020:00 42.00 10920.00 34.00 8840.00 i 12. 24" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Joints, Class "A" Backfill � { ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts Complete -'n- 80 .F. 33.00 2640.00 45.00 3600.00 41.00 3280.00 42.00 3360.00 Ui {IT PRICES BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWERS ON WARD ROAD FROM AMY DRIVE TO HARRIS COUNTY FL000 CONTROL DITCH ANO ON NARCILLE STREET FROM WARD ROAD TO TAFT DRIVE - JOB NO. 79 -1533 Item McKEY CONSTRUCTION S &C CONSTRUCTION BAYTEX CONSTRUCTION R. .BISHOP CONSTRUCTION Unit Price Total Unit Price Tota Unit Price Total Unit Price Tota tto. Item uantit nit 13. 24" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. • Joints, Class "D" Backfill, ASTM C76, Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace 32 L.P. $ 22.00 $ 7150.00 $ 22.00 $ 715Q.QQ $ 34.00. $ 11050.00 $ 27.00 $ 8775.00 1G. 21" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Jonts, Class "A" Backfill, ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace 50 L.F. 29.00 1450.00 43.00 2150.00 41.00 2050.00 40.00 2000.00 15. 18" RCP St. Sewer Pipe, R.G. Joints, Class "A" Backfill, ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace 60 L.F. 26.00 1560.00 42.00 2520.00 38.00 2280.00 39.00 2340.00 16. 18" RCP St. Sewer Pipe R.G. Joints,�Class "0" Backfill ASTM C76 Class III, all cuts Com lete -in- lace 80 L.F. 19.00 1520.00 14.00 1120.00 30.00 2400.00 24.00 1920.00 17. Manhole for 66" St. Sewer i e, Com lete -in- lace 1 Each 900.00 900.00 1150.00 1150.00 775.00 775.00 2200.00 2200.00 lB. htanhole for 66" St. Sewer pipe N /10' inlet Complete - in- lace 1 Each 1400.00 1400.00 1500.00 1500.00 1300.00 1300.00 2000..00. 2000,00' 19. Remove and replace existing inlet with new inlet w /10' opening for 66" st. sewer pipe Complete -in -place 1 Each 1400.00 1400.00 1650.00 1650.00 1400.00 1400.00 2300.00 2300.00 20. Remove and replace existing inlet with new inlet w /10' opening for 60" St. Sewer Pi e, Com lete -in- lace 00 1400.00 2300.00 2300.00 1 OIT PRICES BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWERS ON WARD ROAD FROM AMY DRIVE TO HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DITCH AND ON NARCILLE STREET FROM WARD ROAD TO TAFT DRIVE - JOB NO. 79 -1533 Item McKEY CONSTRUCTION S &C CONSTRUCTION BAYTEX CONSTRUCTION R.T. BISHOP CONSTRUCTION Unit Price Tota Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Tota rao. Item uantit Unit 21. Inlet with 10' opening for 60" St. Sewer Pipe, Complete-in-place 1 Each $ 1400.00 $ 1400.00 $ 1525.00 $ 1525.00 1100.00 $ 1100.00 $ 2000.00 $ 2000.00- J 22. Manhole w /standard top for 60" St. Sewer Pipe, Complete-in-place 1 Each 900.00 900.00 1160.00 1160.00 775.00 775.00 2000.00 2000.00 23.I Remove and replace existing inlet with new inlet w /10' 4 for " St. Sewer opening 8 Pipe Completer 48" in-place 4 Each 1400.00 5600.00 1525.00 6100.00 1100.00 4400.00 1700,00 6800.00 24. Manhole with inlet top w /10' opening for 48" St.Sewer Pipe, Complete-in-pipe 1 Each 1400.00 1400.00 1325.00 1325.00 11500.00 1150.00 1700.00 1700.00 25. Manhole with standard top for 48" St. Sewer Pipe, ' Complete-in-place 1 Each 700.00 700.00 1100.00 1100.00 700.00 700.00 1500.00 1500.00 26. Remove and replace existing I inlet with new inlet w /10' Iopening for 35" St. Sewer Pipe, Complete-in-place 1 Each 1400.00 1400.00 1200.00 1200.00 1075.00 1075.00 1500.00 1500.00 27. I Manhole w /std . top for 36" St. Sewer Pipe, Complete- in-place 2 Each 700.00 1400.00 850.00 1700.00 650.00 1300.00 1200.00 2400.00 28.I Manhole with inlet top w /10' opening for 36" St. Sewer f Pipe 1 Each 1400.00 1400.00 1150.00 1150.00 775.00 775.00 1500.00 1500.00 29. j Remove Land replace existing inlet with new inlet w /10' t iopening or 30" St. Sewer Pipe Complet p e -i_n- place__ 2 Each 1 1400.00 2800.00 1100.00 1 2200.00 1 1150.00 2300.00 1500.00 300Q.00 t,�t;IT PRICES BIO fOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWERS ON WARD ROAD FROM AMY DRIVE TO HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DITCH ANO ON NARCILLE STREET FROM WARD ROAD TO TAFT DRIVE - JOB N0. 79 -1533 czm I McKEY CONSTRUCTION SbC CONSTRUCTION BAYTEX CONSTRUCTION R BI H ° ST TI t;o. � Item uantit Unit Unit Price Tota Unit Price Total Unit Price Tota Unit Price I Tota 30. Manhole with Std. top for 30" St. Sewer Pipe, Complete -in- pl ace_.______ __ __ _ __ - 1 Each $ 700.00 $ 700.00 $ 800.00 $ 800.00 $ 650.00 $ 650.00 $ 1200.00 $ 1200.00 31. Inlet with 10' opening for 24" St. Sewer Pipe, Complete - in- lace 6 Each 1400.00 8400.00 1030.00 6180.00 1150.00 6900.00 1200.00 7200.00 32. Inlet with 10' opening for 21" St. Sewer Pipe, Complete -in- lace 3 Each 1400.00 4200.00 1030.00 3090.00 1150.00 3450.00 1200.00 3600.00 33. Inlet with 10' opening for 18" St. Sewer Pi e, Com lete -in- p p 4 Each 1400.00 5600.00 1030.00 4120.00 1150.00 4600.00 1200.00 48U0.00 lace 34. Special Junction Box, Complete -in- lace 1 Each 1800.00 1800.00 2700.00 2700.00 1300.00 1300.00 1900.00 1900.00 35. Standard Junction Box for Sanitary Sewer Crossing as detailed on Plans, Complete- 6 Each 1400.00 8400.00 2200.00 13200.00 1000.00 6000.00 1700.00 10200.00 in- lace 36• Road shell or limestone for temporary crossings, repair of drives as directed by the Engineer, (Delivery ticket basis Com lete -in- lace 10 C.Y. 20.00 200.00 15.00 150.00 25.00 250.00 21.00 210.00 37, Timber Ordered Left in Trench 1000 b En ineer, Com lete -in- lace 5 B t 200.00 000 00 00.00 500.00 400.00 2000.00 1 � U:ibT PRICES BIO FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWERS ON WARD ROAD FROM AMY DRIVE TO HARRIS COUNTY FL000 CONTROL DITCH AND ON NARCILLE STREET FROM WARD ROAD TO TAFT DRIVE - JOB N0. 79 -1533 - Item too. Item uantit Unit McKEY CONSTRUCTION S &C CONSTRUCTION BAYTEX CONSTRUCTION R.T. BISHOP CONSTRUCTION Unit Price Tota Unit Price Tota Unit Price Total Unit Price Tota 38. Cement Stabilised sand as re- quired by the Engineer, other than specified backfill, - Com lete -in- lace � $ 50 C.y`. $ 20.00 $ 1000.00 $ 21.50 $ 1075.00 $ 25.00 $ 1250.00. $ 26.00 $ 1300.00 TOTAL BID EXCLUDING ITEM 1 246570.00 289034.00 $300270.00 $348760.00 TOTAL BTD EXCLUDTNG TTEM la $245550.00 $287895.00 $299930.00 $347060.00 AODITIONAI BIDDERS: BELLEWOOD CONSTRUCTION $364680.25 ANGEL'S EQUIPMENT $369110.00 TEXAS STERLING $352520.00 CHISOLM TRAIL CONSTRUCTION $396339.00 GALIN CONSTRUCTION $430855.99 HASSELL CONSTRUCTION $431764.00 WHITELAK, INC $476680.00