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