Loading...
1982 10 14 CC Minutes, Special21014 -1 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN October 14, 1982 The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in regular session on Thursday, October 14, 1982, at 5:30 p.m. in the Administration Building of the U. S. Steel plant site with the following attendance: Absent: Fred T. Philips Jimmy Johnson Perry M. Simmons Mary E. Wilbanks Roy L. Fuller * Allen Cannon Emmett 0. Hutto Fritz Lanham Larry Patterson Randy Strong Eileen P. Hall Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilman Mayor City Manager Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Clerk The meeting was called to order with a quorum present and the invocation was offered, afterwhich the following business was transacted: Hold Public Hearing on Proposed Annexation of U. S. Steel Properties Mayor Hutto opened the public hearing on the proposed annexation of U. S. Steel properties. A map was provided which depicted the area being proposed for annexation and the Administration had service plans available for any interested party to review. Approximately 1,955 acres are being proposed for annexation which include the plate and pipe mills, along with the property between the City limits and the plant. Mayor Hutto inquired if there were any interested parties present who desired to speak. Fritz Lanham, City Manager, mentioned that he had been notified by George Bradford, Manager of Taxes for the Southern Area U. S. Steel Corporation, that the company intended to sign the Industrial District Contract. Mayor Hutto stated that he was pleased to learn that U. S. Steel is willing to execute the contract. He emphasized that it was not the desire of Council to annex the U. S. Steel properties because Council felt that the Industrial District concept is in the best interest of the City of Baytown, as well as industries. Mayor Hutto stipulated that Council is aware of the economic situation and the problems that the company is facing. He suggested that the time to address those problems would be in January before the Industrial District Review Board. Since there were no other persons present desiring to speak, the public hearing was closed. Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk *For correction see page 21028 -1 21014 -1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN October 14, 1982 The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas met in regular session on Thursday, October 14, 1982, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Baytown City Hall with the following attendance: Absent: Fred T. Philips Jimmy Johnson Perry M. Simmons Mary E. Wilbanks Roy L. Fuller Allen Cannon Emmett 0. Hutto Fritz Lanham Larry Patterson Randy Strong Eileen P. Hall Councilman Councilman Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilman Mayor City Manager Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Clerk The meeting was called to order with a quorum present and the invocation was offered, afterwhich the following business was transacted: Presentation of Fire Prevention Poster Awards Terry Ewing, Volunteer Fireman, was present as a represen- tative of the Volunteer Fire Department of Baytown to present fire prevention poster awards. Mr. Ewing stated that the Volunteer Firemen sponsored the fire prevention poster contest with the help of the Goose Creek Consolidated Independent School District. The posters were judged by fire chiefs and fire fighters outside the City of Baytown. Winners were present to receive their awards. Mayor Hutto with the aid of Mr. Ewing presented awards to the students who placed in the competion. Minutes Councilman Simmons moved for the approval of the minutes for the Council meeting held September 23, 1982; Councilman Fuller seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Receive Petitions No petitions were presented. 21014 -2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Citv Manager's Report Houston - Galveston Area Council - Councilwoman Wilbanks has been elected Second Vice President of the Association of Regional Councils. Mayor's Summer Job Program - Over $10,000 had been contributed by local business firms in Baytown toward the Mayor's Summer Job Program which enabled the City to employ supervisors and two park workers to assist seventeen CETA workers in cleaning streets and rights of way during the summer months. Budweiser Cleanup - Council's attention was directed to the announcement at the Council table regarding the October 23 Budweiser Cleanup which is a joint project with the Baytown Clean City Commission. Workmen's Compensation - The Administration has been advised by the workmen's compensation carrier that the City's safety efforts have been paying off in dollars, as well as saving loss time due to injuries, by reduction in the City's experience modifier from .90 to .68 for next year which will result in approximately $74,000 savings. Wooster Volunteer Fire Department - The Administration has been advised that the Wooster Volunteer Fire Department did vote at its meeting on September 23 to disband due to lack of membership and increased vandalism. The volunteers in a letter forwarded to the Administration thanked Council for its cooperation and support. Baytown Cultural Arts Council - Council has been furnished with a letter from the Baytown Cultural Arts Council which urges Council to begin planning for the State of Texas 150th Birthday. Council requested that an item in this regard be placed on the next Council agenda. Harris County Flood Control District - Harris County Flood Control District has awarded a contract to make improvements in Goose Creek Channel north of Baker Road. There has been erosion in that area and the county has contracted for the amount of $234,000 to have those repairs performed. Houston Lighting and Power Rate Case - Randy Strong, City Attorney, reported that as matters currently stand, the hearings examiner will probably be issued a finding in late November. In the meantime, the bonding date for placing the rates into effect by HL&P is October 20. The company has indicated that those rates will be placed into effect under bond based on an increase of approximalely $248,000,000. That level was selected because that is the level recommended by the Public Utilities Commission's staff, including recovery for the Allen Creek Plant. There will be a hearing on HL&P's proposal to place those rates into effect under bond. The City of Houston will have representatives present at that hearing to represent the Coalition of Cities. The City Attorney stated that unless Council desired his presence at this hearing, he would not plan to attend. The other matter on which the City Attorney requested guidance from Council concerned purchase power service of HL&P. There were questions as to the tariff on purchase power service and by agreement of all parties involved, this issue was severed from the rate case to be heard as a separate matter. Since the City of 21014 -3 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Baytown has no generating capacity, the City Attorney felt that probably Council would not deem it necessary for Baytown to be represented. However, if Council had an interest in the Legal Department of the City of Baytown being present at either of these hearings, he would make every effort to attend. Council expressed no desire to have a representative at these hearings since the City of Houston's position is the stance that the City of Baytown would take. West Sewer District - The West District Sewage Treatment Plant is now operational and the Lakewood Plant is being dismantled. Sliplining - The sliplining contractor has done most of the cleaning and a large portion of the televising which was necessary prior to installation of liner. On October 18, the sliplining procedure will begin. Sanitary Sewer at Thompson Road and I -10 - The contractor has begun work on the sanitary sewer project at Thompson Road and I -10. Caldwell Street - The contractor on the Caldwell Street Project has placed a 29 foot wide concrete street between Robin Road and the curb near Baytown Junior School. 1982 Street Improvement Program - The contractor on the 1982 Street Improvement Program is sixty -five (65 %) percent complete on the job. Some work has been performed on practically all the streets covered by the contract. Craigmont /Ponderosa Water Line Replacement - The contractor on the Craigmont /Ponderosa Water Line has laid 3400 feet of new pipe. Drainage - The Brownwood Drive drainage work has been completed. Drainage work on Crow Road, East Homan, Azalea and Cedar Bayou east of Cedar Bayou Junior High has been completed. Drainage work on Cabaniss is eighty (80 %) percent complete and the project in the vicinity of Barcelona Circle and Cedar Bayou Road is ninety (90 %) percent complete. Questions /Comments of Council Councilman Fuller stated that he felt good about the private sector helping on the Mayor's Summer Job Program and requested that a resolution be prepared to officially recognize those businesses that contributed to this program. Mayor Hutto mentioned that on behalf of City Council he had forwarded letters of appreciation to the various businesses. In response to an inquiry from Council concerning the temporary school zone on Bayway Drive, Mr. Lanham explained that that matter had been referred to the Baytown Traffic Commission. If the Commission recommends that a school zone be established, an item will be placed on the next Council agenda in that regard; however, if the Commission elects not to recommend the establishment of the school zone, the signs will be removed with no item for Council to consider. 21014 -4 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Another traffic matter that Council requested be given consideration by the traffic commission is the establishment of a more uniform speed limit on Baker Road. Mr. Lanham informed Council that that item is on the agenda for the commission to study, along with the school zone on Bayway. Councilman Cannon requested that since the Planning Commission must consider any revision to the Subdivision Ordinance that the commission consider an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance which would provide the commission with the authority to require more than one entrance /exit for apartment or subdivisions if the commission deems necessary. Mr. Lanham explained that the Planning Commission had been reviewing the Subdivision Ordinance to make recommendations to Council with regard to changes. Councilman Cannon requested that the Commission give this particular item special consideration so that Council could consider this matter as quickly as possible. Councilman Simmons requested that a resolution commending the Wooster Volunteer Fire Department be placed on the next Council agenda for consideration. Ed Vanegas Will Appear Ed Vanegas appeared before Council to present a proposal with regard to chartering the Goose Creek Ski Club to be located on Goose Creek in the vicinity of West Texas and Market Street Bridge. There is a problem with the water quality of the creek between Mile 1 near West Main and Mile 10 near I -10. The proponents of the club wish to dredge the creek to 6J to 7 feet. The sponsors of this club would like to implement the club for the enjoyment of Baytown residents and to have the ability to have AWSA tournaments and exhibitions on Goose Creek. Presently, George Chandler, a local attorney, is helping the group to charter the Goose Creek Ski Club. What the group is proposing is to take the creek and widen it by 150 feet and lengthen the channel to 1600 feet long, 3 feet deep. This would represent 31,000 cubic yards of material which fill material would be placed along the banks to beautify the area. What the group is requesting from the City of Baytown is for the city to act as a sponsor in order for the group to obtain Corps of Engineers' permit. It is almost impossible for a group without an entity as sponsor to obtain such a permit. A Board of Directors has been named for the club of which Mr. Vanegas is a member. The club will require membership dues for facility use which funds will be utilized to maintain the facilities. Mr. Vanegas stated that the Board of Directors is interested in obtaining support and guidance from the city. In response to an inquiry from Council regarding whether Baytown residents would be allowed to use this facility, Mr. Vanegas stated that the club itself would be open to City of Baytown residents; however, access to the creek itself is limited. Mayor Hutto stated that this is a very ambitious project, but he could see some problems. Therefore, he suggested that the City Attorney research the matter. 21014 -5 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Councilman Johnson addressed the problem of pollution of the creek and explained that with the creek receiving water from up north, he doubted that the creek would ever be pollutant free. Mayor Hutto also pointed out that the creek is subject to tidal water. Councilman Fuller said that the idea has some problems but implementation of this club would cleanup an area of the community that really needs attention, an area that will need to be addressed at some point. Hold Public Hearing on Proposed Annexation of U. S. Steel Properties (7.00 p.m.) Mayor Hutto opened the public hearing on the proposed annexation of U. S. Steel properties. He informed those in attendance that anyone desiring to speak during the hearing should sign the register provided in the hallway. Several copies of a service plan for the area had been prepared by the staff and anyone interested was encouraged to take a copy. No one had signed the register. Fritz Lanham, City Manager, referred to a map posted in the Council Chamber which depicted the area being proposed for annexation. Total acreage involved is approximately 1,955 acres which includes the plate and pipe mills, along with the vacant land between the city limits and the plant. A service plan is on file for the area being proposed for annexation. The Administration has been notified by George Bradford, Manager of Taxes for the Southern Area U. S. Steel Corporation, that'U. S. Steel has determined that they will sign the Industrial District Contract. The Administration expects to have that executed contract for Council consideration at the next regular meeting. If that contract is presented prior to the first reading on annexation, annexation proceedings would cease. Mayor Hutto stated that he was very pleased to hear that U. S. Steel has determined to sign the contract because it was not the desire of Council to annex the property. Council feels that the concept of an industrial district agreement is in the best interest of U. S. Steel Corporation, as well as the City of Baytown. Mayor Hutto continued that Council is cognizant of the economical situation and the problems that U. S. Steel is currently facing, but the time to address that situation would be in January during the appraisal review process. Since there were no persons present expressing a desire to speak, Mayor Hutto declared the public hearing to be closed. Discuss Development of Bay Terrace Apartments on Nolan Road Councilman Cannon stated that he would like to recap events that had transpired with regard to the development of Bay Terrace Apartments on Nolan Road. On July 9, 1982, City Council discussed the development of Bay Terrace Apartments on Nolan Road and sent a message to the Planning Commission by unanimous vote that the Council was concerned with the safety of this project. At that same meeting, Council 21014 -6 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 discussed obtaining an Attorney General's opinion as to whether a public hearing should have been held concerning the location of this project. On July 13, Randy Strong, (For cor- City Attorney, forwarded a letter to the Attorney General see e Pg. requesting this opinion. The City Attorney was informed a s short time after that the Attorney General will not render 21028 8-- 1) an opinion for a municipality, but an opinion would be rendered for a state legislator. The City Attorney then transmitted the request to State Representative Ed Emmett's office, but the request was delayed in Representative Emmett's office. On August 17, the letter went back to the Attorney General. On September 13, an opinion based on an occurrence similar to this was issued by the Attorney General's Office regarding the Westbury Project in Houston. Now, the City of Baytown has received a letter from the Attorney General's office dated September 29, addressed to Ed Emmett which makes reference to this opinion. In that letter the representative of the Attorney General states that Attorney General Opinion MW -515 was recently issued which deals with a related question. A copy of that opinion was enclosed. However, the Attorney General by State statute may only issue opinions to Chairman of legislative committees -- not legislators. Councilman Cannon stated that although the letter does not specifically say that Baytown's project is illegal, the opinion referred to states that the Westbury project was illegal. Opinion MW -515 sets forth that public notice must be given for final approval of construction of housing projects if the vote for final authorization was held after September 1, 1981. In the minutes of the July, 1982 Council meeting, Mr. Allen, representing Brockman Developers, replied to a question by Councilman Johnson concerning the reason that a special meeting of Council was necessary to act on this project, that there was no hurry until final approval was granted. Therefore, Councilman Cannon deduced that final approval was not granted until 1982 and would fall under this September 1, 1981 requirement. Councilman Cannon stated with regard to the question whether this development would fall under the definition of housing project, the statute defines housing project to mean any work or undertaking: (1) to demolish, clear, remove buildings from any slum area; such work or undertaking may embrace the adaption of such area to public purposes, including parks or other recreational or community purposes; or (2) to provide decent, safe, and sanitary urban or rural dwellings, apartments, or other living accomodations for persons of low income... By that definition, Councilman Cannon felt that there could be no question as to whether this was a housing project. Another point mentioned in the opinion was that an incorporated city or town or other political subdivision of the State may not issue a permit, certificate, or other authorization for the construction or occupancy of a housing project under this Act unless the housing authority has complied with the requirements of this section. For this reason Councilman Cannon felt that it was illegal and that it was encumbent on the Administration to pull the construction permit until the matter is resolved. Representative Emmett was quoted as having stated that he had no doubt that this project required a public hearing. 21014 -7 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Randy Strong, City Attorney, stated that he still felt that it was not clear as to whether this is a housing project as defined by State statute. The Attorney General's opinion addresses whether a public hearing is required for a housing project on which final approval was given after the effective date of the statute. The question on the Nolan Road project is whether this project would fall under this statute since a private corporation was formed to sell bonds and oversee development of the project. Therefore, the City Attorney felt that the opinion issued in the Houston case, was not necessarily pertinent to the Baytown case. The City Attorney pointed out that this project does not appear to be public housing, but a privately owned development which development ' is receiving a subsidy or grant from HUD to reimburse them for the costs of renting these apartments out to low income individuals. Councilman Cannon pointed out that the developer could not be proceeding if it were not for HUD or the housing authority, and he stated that the Attorney General's office had forwarded the opinion concerning the City of Houston's case, indicating that it would apply in this case. The City Attorney stated that he would question whether the staff in the Attorney General's office really understood the request of the City of Baytown because in his opinion there is no comparison. In response to an inquiry from Council regarding what procedure could the city follow in order to receive an opinion in this case, Mr. Lanham stated that Representative Emmett had indicated that he had talked to the Speaker who is authorized to obtain opinions. The Administration expects to receive a response shortly. Council inquired what could be done if the project con- struction were to begin while waiting for the Attorney General's opinion. Mr. Lanham responded that if the Attorney General's opinion is that the housing authority should have held a public hearing on the project, then the City of Baytown is not authorized to issue the permit and the permit will be withdrawn. Councilman Cannon reiterated that he felt that the city had the authority to withdraw the permit now based on Attorney General Opinion MW -515. Mayor Hutto requested that the Administration forward a letter to the Speaker requesting that this opinion be expedited. Councilman Cannon inquired what if the permit were pulled and an injunction was requested? The City Attorney stated that he felt that there would not be significant exposure for personal liability of Council by taking any action one way or the other because the statute is ambiguous. The builder or someone could come in and sue the city for a large sum, but the Attorney did not feel that anyone could show that kind of loss in order to recover from the city. 21014 -8 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Mr. Lanham stated that if Council wished the Administration could put this item on the agenda for the next Council meeting. Councilman Cannon pointed out that the item is on the agenda and could be considered, but if it is illegal to issue the permit to begin with, the Administration would not need Council authorization to withdraw that permit. Mr. Lanham pointed out that at this point nothing has changed since the Council first considered this matter. At that time the Administration indicated that unless Council took action to prohibit the issuance of a permit, there would be no choice but to issue a permit. However, no materials have been delivered to the site, and it is doubtful that work could begin in two weeks. Therefore, Mr. Lanham inquired if Council would like to have an item on the next agenda to determine whether the permit should be withdrawn. Councilman Fuller stated that he felt that this item should be on the next Council agenda because of the indefinite nature of the situation. If the opinion is received in the interim, Council will then be on firm ground to make a decision. Councilman Johnson moved to have an item placed on the next Council agenda to consider whether to withdraw the foundation permit for Bay Terrace Apartments on Nolan Road; Councilman Fuller seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Abstained: Councilman Simmons (Councilman Cannon absent from meeting.) Consider Proposed Ordinance, Selecting a City Depository Citizens Bank and Trust bid +.30 over the Treasury Bill rate on city deposits, while Texas National Bank bid +.60 over the Treasury Bill rate on city deposits; therefore, the Administration recommended that Texas National Bank be selected as city depository for a two -year period. Councilman Simmons moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks and Fuller Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3472 AN ORDINANCE SELECTING A CITY DEPOSITORY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST TO A CONTRACT WITH THE SELECTED DEPOSITORY; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. N 21014 -9 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Consider Proposed Ordinance, Second Reading on General Telephone Company of the Southwest Franchise The Administration recommended approval of the proposed ordinance on second reading, authorizing a franchise agreement with General Telephone Company of the Southwest for a 25- year period with 2% franchise fee and 5 -year re- opener clause. Councilman Fuller moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks and Fuller Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3464 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING THE RIGHT, PRIVILEGE AND FRANCHISE TO GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF THE SOUTHWEST, GRANTEE, AND ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, TO CONSTRUCT, ERECT, BUILD, EQUIP, OWN, MAINTAIN AND OPERATE IN, ALONG, UNDER, OVER AND ACROSS THE STREETS, AVENUES, ALLEYS, BRIDGES, VIADUCTS AND PUBLIC GROUNDS OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, SUCH POSTS, POLES, WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS AND OTHER APPLIANCES, STRUCTURES AND FIXTURES NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT FOR RENDITION OF TELEPHONE AND OTHER COMMUNICATION SERVICE AND FOR CONDUCTING A GENERAL LOCAL AND LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE BUSINESS; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION; FOR PERIOD OF GRANT; FOR ASSIGNMENT; FOR METHOD OF ACCEPTANCE; FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND FOR PARTIAL INVALIDITY. Consider Proposed Ordinance, First Reading on Proposed Annexation of BAWA Plant Property, Reading Buick and Love's Truck Stop A public hearing was held on the proposed annexation of BAWA plant property, Reading Buick and Love's Truck Stop with no public participation. The Administration recommended adoption of the ordinance on first reading. Councilwoman Wilbanks moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Fuller seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks and Fuller Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3473 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, AND THE ANNEXATION OF LOVE'S TRUCK STOP, READING BUICK, AND THE BAYTOWN AREA WATER AUTHORITY PLANT SITE AND ADJACENT LAND WHICH SAID TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMITS FOR THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS. 21014 -10 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Consider Proposed Ordinance, First Reading on Proposed Annexation of West District Wastewater Treatment Plant and I -10 Rest Stop A public hearing was held on the proposed annexation of West District Wastewater Treatment Plant and I -10 Rest Stop with no public participation. Chief Henscey, Chief of Police, obtained information regarding calls made by Harris County Sheriff's Department in that vicinity covering the period January 1 through July 31, 1982. There were no statistics related only to the I -10 rest stop. The area covered by the report covers approximately one mile by one - half mile of I -10 with a total of 12 calls. The Administration feels that this area should be annexed because the treatment plant is located across from the rest stop with employees at the plant on a 24 -hour basis. Councilman Johnson inquired if the city would still allow people to utilize the rest area as in the past? Mr. Lanham stated that he felt that the city would want to continue to allow the facility to be utilized for overnight use. Chief Henscey stated that the Administration may want to recommend that an ordinance be adopted to prohibit persons from sleeping on the ground, but the Police Department would have no problem with individuals utilizing the park to sleep in trailers or vehicles. Councilman Fuller moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, and Fuller Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3474 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, AND THE ANNEXATION OF THE WEST DISTRICT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND I -10 REST STOP AND ADJACENT LAND WHICH SAID TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMITS FOR THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS. Consider Proposed Ordinance, Second and Final Reading of Proposed Annexation of Goose Creek Shopping Center The Administration recommended approval of second and final reading on annexation of Goose Creek Shopping Center. Councilman Johnson moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, and Fuller Mayor Hutto Nays: None 21014 -11 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 ORDINANCE NO. 3454 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, AND THE ANNEXATION OF GOOSE CREEK SHOPPING CENTER AND ADJACENT LAND WHICH SAID TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMITS FOR THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS. Consider Proposed Ordinance, Amending Section 7 -4.1 of the Code of Ordinances to Provide for Variances for Planned Unit Developments (Councilman Cannon present.) In 1978, City Council adopted an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance which provided the authority for the establishment of planned unit developments. The purpose of that section is to encourage the appropriate development of tracts of land of sufficient size to allow comprehensive planning and to allow flexibility in the application of certain regulations in a manner consistent with the general provisions of city regulations. Planned unit developments may deviate from the standard for residential subdivisions in minimum lot size which can be smaller than that required in a standard single - family residential subdivision. Lots may be 5,400 square feet, but any outdoor space that is provided can be taken into account in computing that. Formation of an association of homeowners for the purpose of maintaining all common areas is required. The Planning Commission's authority is limited to what would be called site development. Their authority does not involve construction of improvements. There are several reasons why providing flexibility for this type development would be important. The cost of housing is one factor since this concept allows the developer to use less land. Secondly, and more impor- tantly there are a number of people who wish to live in • single family residence, but who do not want to maintain • large yard. In the administration of the planned unit development provisions of the subdivision ordinance, the Administration found that there is a need for flexibility in the application of the building code, particularly with respect to such things as parking, curb openings and joint use of driveways. There may be other things that a developer of a planned unit development would like to request but because of city requirements other than the subdivision ordinance are not allowable. What the Administration is proposing is specific authority for the City Council to grant variances for planned unit development in addition to those that the Planning Commission considers. In a planned unit development where there is a conflict between the building plans and requirements of the city code, the developer may petition the City Council for a waiver or variance from any such requirement. City Council may grant the waiver or variance of any such requirement, when, in its opinion, such waiver or variance shall not compromise the health, safety, or general welfare of the citizens of Baytown. In granting a waiver or variance, the City Council shall prescribe any condition or conditions that it deems 21014 -12 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 necessary or desirable considering the public interest; in making its findings, the City Council shall take into account those factors enumerated in Article RI, Section 27 -62 of the Code of Ordinances and utilized by the Planning Commission in determining plat variances. Therefore, the Administration is recommending this amendment as an extension to what Council has already acted on in permitting planned unit developments. This amendment is not intended to permit what might be called substandard materials going into building. What is being considered here are the type things that do not deal with the quality of the construction itself. The city would be responsible for maintenance of sewer and water lines since these were in dedicated public easements, if the streets are dedicated the city would be responsible. If the streets are not dedicated, then the homeowners association is responsible for maintenance. In some instances, agreements must be worked out between the city and the planned unit developments. For instance, there may need to be an agreement for the city to handle garbage pickup for the area by utilizing the fire lane easements. In some instances, where the streets are not dedicated, the planned unit developments may elect to fence the development and restrict access. Norman Dykes, Director of Public Works /City Engineer, stated that the planned unit development concept is new for Baytown, but this is not a new concept in other areas of the state. The main thing is to be flexible. In the public works field and other areas of city regulations, there is a demand from the public for different types of living conditions than the norm. In the past, there have been specific guidelines for residential construction and development had to fall within those guidelines. Mr. Dykes stated that the main concern is to keep standards high on construction and provide for safety of the public. Any development over one acre must comply with drainage requirements of the city. Councilman Cannon stated that he would have the same reservations regarding a single entrance and inquired if this would provide a safety hazard. He stated that he could see that there is some difference in a planned unit development and public housing. In public housing, those people may not have any choice. Mr. Dykes stated that for each planned unit development that comes before Council, Council will see different requests. In some of these developments, the people want control. Mayor Hutto pointed out that all of these restrictions will be in place when these houses are placed for sale so that the individual who purchases one of these homes will know what those restrictions are. Councilman Simmons moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None 21014 -13 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 ORDINANCE NO. 3475 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 7, "BUILDINGS ", SECTION 7 -4.1, BUILDING CODE -- AMENDMENTS, BY ESTABLISHING A VARIANCE PROCEDURE FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS; REPEALING CON- FLICTING ORDINANCES,; CONTAINING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Consider Request of Mission Viejo Subdivision for Certain Variances to City of Baytown Ordinances " The Mission Viejo Subdivision has requested certain variances to the City of Baytown Code of Ordinances Section 7 -4.1. The variances are: 1. Allow front door and garage door openings at the zero lot lines. 2. Allow off street parking at numerous locations on private property. 3. Allow common driveways for cluster homes. 4. Allow maximum curb opening of more than thirty - five feet. Councilman Johnson moved to grant the requested variances; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Consider Proposed Ordinance, Approving Industrial District Contract with Chemical Exchange Industries Officials of Chemical Exchange Industries have executed the Industrial District Contract which was drafted in accordance with the City of Baytown's Industrial District Policy. The Administration recommended approval of the contract. Councilwoman Wilbanks moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3476 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST TO AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENT WITH CHEMICAL EXCHANGE INDUSTRIES AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. 21014 -14 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Consider Proposed Ordinance, Approving Industrial District Contract with Gulf Oil Corporation Officials of Gulf Oil Corporation have executed the Industrial District Contract which was drafted in accordance with the City of Baytown's Industrial District Policy. The Administration recommended approval of the contract. Councilman Simmons moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3477 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST TO AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AGREEMENT WITH GULF OIL CORPORATION AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Consider Proposed Ordinance, Authorizing Agreements with Various Pipeline Companies for Adjustments and /or casing Pipelines that Cross Rollingbrook Drive Protect It is necessary for the City to agree to reimburse pipeline companies for any adjustments that must be made to pipelines for the Rollingbrook Drive Extension Project. The figure shown in the preface was $66,000, but should have read $99,000. The ordinance reflects the $99,000 figure. Money is available in the bond fund for this purpose. The Administration recommended approval. Councilwoman Wilbanks moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3478 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF $96,765.00 TO VARIOUS PIPELINE COMPANIES AS THE COST OF ADJUSTING AND /OR CASING UNDERGROUND PIPELINES CAUSED BY THE EXTENSION OF ROLLINGBROOK DRIVE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY COMMITMENTS; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. 21014 -15 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Consent Agenda The Administration requested that Item "g" be removed from consideration since railroad property abuts one side of the street right of way for which abandonment is being requested. The railroad has requested time to consider the prospect of abandonment more carefully. In response to an inquiry from Council concerning Item "f ", Mr. Lanham explained that the project has not been completed. There are two small items that need to be completed -- installation of the lower portion of the two backstops' wire mesh fencing and the checking of the night time setting of the field lights. Since both of these items are minor and can be corrected within a few days, the Administration recommended approval with the understanding that final payment would not actually be made until the corrections are made. Norman Dykes, Director of Public Works /City Engineer, stated that with regard to the Community Development Project on Cypress and Magnolia Street Improvements, an inspection will be made approximately ten (10) months from final payment to be certain that the work is still satisfactory. City Council considered the Consent Agenda as follows: a. Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -10, will authorize the final payment for the Community Development Projects on Cypress and Magnolia Street Improvements. The original contract amount was $478,079.51. Three change orders totaling $6,733.75 were approved, bringing the adjusted contract total to $484,813.26. The actual cost and total work performed amounted to $503,424.06 which included $2,000 of extra work not originally included for labor and equipment to provide an asphalt surface and drainage at the south end of Cypress Street along the west side. The final cost represents an overrun of $18,610.80. The major contributor to the overrun was the area of paved driveways which exceed the original estimate. The final payment is in the amount of $27,648.80. All points raised by the Baytown Community Development Committee have been satisfied and the contractor has been reminded of the general guarantee section of the contract related to the one year warranty on materials and workmanship. We recommend approval of Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -10. b. Proposed Ord contract for Units. Only bid of Varda We recommend awarded this finance No. 21014 -11, will award the the purchase of Silent Radio Stakeout one bid was received. That was the Company who bid the amount of $13,020.21. the low bidder, Varda Company, be contract. 21014 -16 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 C. Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -12, will award the contract for the annual Police and Fire Uniform contract. Seven bids were received on thirteen items. The low bids are as follows: Items 1 - 3, 5, 6, 8, & 9 were the bids of Martin's Uniforms; Items 4, 7, 10, 12, and 13 are the bid of J. B. Battle and Item 11 is the bid of Factory Sales. The total bid amount is $20,488. We recommend the low bidders of Martin Uniforms, J. B. Battle and Factory Sales, on the appropriate items, be awarded on these contracts. d. Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -13, will award the annual Traffic Paint contract. Five bids were received. Pinkley & Associates submitted the low bid of $13,012. Council had budgeted $14,000 for this purchase. We recommend the low bidder, Pinkley & Associates, be awarded this contract. e. Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -14, will award the contract for the installation of steel sheet piling. Two bids were received. Baytex Construc- tion Company submitted the low bid of $5,400. We recommend the low bidder, Baytex Construction Company, be awarded this contract. f. Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -15, will authorize final payment for the construction of the North Little League Park. The referenced project is substantially complete. Two items remain to be finished. These items are the installation of lower portion of the two backstops' wire mesh fencing and the night time setting of the field lights to check for guaranteed illumination levels. All other aspects of the job have been approved by the Parks and Recreation Department and Busch, Hutchinson & Associates. The final payment amount is $75,040.75 which will result in a total contract price of $220,005.10. This represents an underrun of $1,011.90. We recommend that the final payment of $75,040.75 be made contingent upon the satisfactory completion of the two items specified. 21014 -17 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 h. Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -17, will authorize the approval of a contract between BAWA and the Harris County Municipal Utility District No. 3. This is a standard contract executed between BAWA and other municipal utility districts with one exception. During the MUD's development stage, we will charge them $1.00 per thousand gallons until their daily usage becomes 10,000 gallons, at which time they will be billed for a minimum of 10,000 gallons per day. We recommend approval of Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -17. Councilman Cannon moved to adopt the Consent Agenda as presented with the exception of Item "g "; Councilman Fuller seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3479 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT TO ANGEL BROTHERS, INC. FOR 1981 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM; STREET & DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO CYPRESS & MAGNOLIA STREETS - JOB NO. 8107 -01; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. (Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -10) ORDINANCE NO. 3480 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE BID OF VARDA COMPANY FOR SILENT RADIO STAKEOUT UNIT AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT BY THE CITY OF BAYTOWN OF THE SUM OF THIRTEEN THOUSAND TWENTY & 21/100 ($13,020.21) DOLLARS. (Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -11) ORDINANCE NO. 3481 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE BIDS OF J. B. BATTLE, MARTIN' UNIFORMS AND FACTORY'S SALES FOR THE ANNUAL POLICE AND FIRE UNIFORM CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT BY THE CITY OF BAYTOWN OF THE SUM OF TWENTY SEVEN THOUSAND FIFTEEN & 50/100 ($27,015.50) DOLLARS. (Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -12) ORDINANCE NO. 3482 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE BID OF PINKLEY & ASSOCIATES FOR THE ANNUAL TRAFFIC PAINT CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT BY THE CITY OF BAYTOWN OF THE SUM OF THIRTEEN THOUSAND TWELVE & N01100 ($13,012.00) DOLLARS. (Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -13) 21014 -18 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 ORDINANCE NO. 3483 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE BID OF BAYTEX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR INSTALLATION OF STEEL SHEET PILING AND AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT BY THE CITY OF BAYTOWN OF THE SUM OF FIVE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED & N01100 ($5,400.00) DOLLARS. (Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -14) ORDINANCE NO. 3484 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT TO ANGEL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTH LITTLE LEAGUE PARK; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. (Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -15) ORDINANCE NO. 3485 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE BAYTOWN AREA WATER AUTHORITY'S CONTRACT WITH HARRIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 3, FOR THE SALE OF TREATED WATER. (Proposed Ordinance No. 21014 -17) (For tabulations, see Attachments "A" through "C ".) Discuss Steps to be Taken for the Realignment of Council Districts The Charter.of the City of Baytown requires that Council districts be realigned after the publication of each federal census. The City Attorney stated that there were no defined procedures ascribed by law. He mentioned that the population figures from the last census were available and he asked that Council look at those figures to see what the population is for each district. Council will need to equalize population between the six districts. Council could consider looking toward single member districts; however, if Council is not interested in working in that direction, the lines may be drawn irrespective of any existing voting precinct or census tracts. If Council desires to attempt to develop single member districts, Council would need to maintain voting precinct lines in order to avoid splitting a voting precinct. Under the law, actually the county should redraw voting lines to follow city council districts or wards so if Council did ignore voting precinct lines, the county would have to redraw the county lines. Council needs to keep the districts as close to the same size as possible. Total deviations which is the difference between the largest district and the smallest district should be kept within ten (10%) percent of the size of an ideal district. If the ideal district had 9,000 population, ten (10 %) percent of that would be 900 so the difference in population between the largest and smallest district should only be 900 or less. Once the lines have been drawn by the City Council, it would be a good idea to hold a public hearing to receive citizen input. This is not required by the Charter, but this would be important in showing the Justice Department that the City of Baytown did receive public input. The Texas Legislature does provide an opportunity for citizens to address the legislature or the Legislative N 21014 -19 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Redistricting Board. After that, Council may adopt the new districts. These new districts must be presented to the Justice Department for pre - clearance prior to any election. Since this would be a significant change, the sooner that this can be submitted the better. There is a requirement that any changes must be submitted at least 60 days prior to an election. For this reason the City Attorney stated that it would be wise to complete the redistricting process and submit the proposed changes to the Justice Department prior to January. The population figures as of April 1, 1980 show a variance in population of Council districts from a low of 6,668 to a high of 12,042. Council requested that the Administration develop plans for redistricting which would be consistent with the guidelines mentioned by the City Attorney. At that time Council will review the information and make decisions on the desired plan and set dates for public hearings. Consider Authorization to Advertise for Bids for Glen Meadow Subdivision Drainage Improvements After the floods of three years ago, there was flooding in the Glen Meadow Subdivision and Council placed Glen Meadow Subdivision Outfall on the drainage improvements list. At present all the drainage in the subdivision goes to Bob Smith Road and from there to North Main Street. North of Glen Meadow Subdivision is a Harris County Flood Control Ditch which ditch crosses North Main near the Chevrolet dealership and travels east for a short distance and then turns north and crosses Massey Tompkins Road. This large drainage ditch is north of the northwest corner of Glen Meadow Subdivision. The engineering department is proposing to run a relief or outfall pipe, connect to the existing drainage in the Glen Meadow Subdivision and run this relief pipe north to the Harris County Flood Control Ditch. This is the project for which right of way has already been purchased. The estimated cost to perform this project is $112,000. The Administration requested authorization to advertise for bids. Councilman Cannon moved to authorize the Administration to advertise for bids for Glen Meadow Subdivision Drainage Improvements; Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None 21014 -20 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Consider Proposed Ordinance, Authorizing Reimbursement to Houston Lighting and Power Company for an Amount Not to Exceed $2,500 for Relocation of Utility Pole to Perform Glen Meadow Drainage Project This item is related to the Glen Meadow Drainage Project. The Administration recommended approval of the ordinance. Councilwoman Wilbanks moved for adoption of the ordinance; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None ORDINANCE NO. 3486 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF UP TO TWENTY FIVE HUNDRED & N01100 ($2,500.00) DOLLARS TO HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY AS ITS COST FOR THE RELOCATION OF A HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER POLE IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CITY DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Consider Authorization to Advertise for bids on 750 Feet of Ten (10 ") Inch Sanitary Sewer from Garth Road Lift Station to Payless Cashway A Payless Cashway store is to be constructed on Garth Road between Baker Road and Lynchburg Cedar Bayou. It is necessary for the company to construct a sewer line to serve this location and the company has requested that the City of Baytown take bids which is consistent with city policy. The ten (10 ") inch line would be large enough to serve others in the future and one reason that the company is electing to have the city take bids is so that later the company may be able recover some of its costs as others tie on. Councilman Cannon moved to authorize the Administration to advertise for bids on 750 feet of ten (10 ") inch sanitary sewer from Garth Road lift station to Payless Cashway; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Consider Authorization to Advertise for 1982 -83 Sanitary Sewer Project - Phase I The City Manager reported to Council concerning a letter received by the Administration from the Texas Department of Water Resources in answer to a letter written by the staff setting forth specific questions concerning Brownwood. Several months ago the city requested that construction of a new sewer 21014 -21 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 system in Brownwood be added to the grant for the West District Sanitary Sewer. The Texas Department of Water Resources has responded that the Brownwood Subdivision Project is assigned a separate grant number and will be considered separately. Grants are no longer available solely for Step 2 services. Thus, the design services for this project must be funded by the City and an allowance, to be based on the construction cost, will be paid to the City if a Step 3 grant is awarded. Therefore, if the City continues with plans for the sewer system which specifies that pumps will be placed throughout the area, the City would have to pay the costs of Step 2 services and if a grant is received for construction, the City might be paid for that. At this time no assurances are being given that the collector sewers will be eligible at some future date. Under the recently approved priority system, Baytown will not be eligible for a construction grant until the plans and specifications are approved and Baytown is ready to proceed to Step 3. Thus, if the City desires to pursue Federal funding, plans and specifi- cations must be completed, as well as all other requirements prior to Step 3. Then, when the City is high enough on the priority list to be placed on the fundable portion the eligibility determination will then be made. The amendment will not preclude Baytown from being placed on the priority list fundable portion. However, a grant cannot be offered until eligibility of the project is determined. Even if the City is ready to proceed by July 1, 1983, this will in no way guarantee that the city will be placed in the fundable portion. The City's project will be ranked against all other projects in Baytown's population category and only those above the funding cut -off line will be considered fundable. Additionally, the Texas Department of Water Resources' projections show that there will be considerably greater number of projects than funds available for grant offers. The letter went on to state that no assurances could be made that the city would ever receive Step 3 funding. Once the City is ready to proceed to Step 3, the City will be ranked and if its ranking is high enough, a Step 3 grant may be granted. In view of that information from the Texas Department of Water Resources, the Administration has been discussing a possible alternative to the plan which was to replace the sewer lines and install small pumps at each residence. What the Administration is recommending is a pilot project to determine if the lines in that area can be sliplined as a possible alternative to going through the process of drawing plans for complete system replacement with the hope that that would be funded. Norman Dykes, Director of Public Works /City Engineer, explained that there are sewer problems in the Brownwood Subdivision practically all the time. At the present time problems are being experienced with a line between Ridgeway (owl and Katherine Street. The staff has contacted one of the sliplining contractors who is performing work for the city at present regarding the possibility of sliplining in this area. The contractor has looked at the area and in his opinion, sliplining can be utilized, and at approximately the same costs for which the existing contract in the eastern part of the city is being performed. Based on that and the 21014 -22 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 fact that there is a need at the present for help on that particular line, the Engineering staff has put together a project of about 1600 feet of 6 and 8 -inch line. Several caps are involved, plus sliplining of the line. The Administration would like authorization to advertise for bids on this project to determine costs to slipline in that area and to determine once a contract is let, what problems are involved with sliplining in that area. After completion of this project, the City and contractors will know what costs and problems are involved. Perhaps the entire subdivision can be sliplined to solve the sanitary sewer problems in that area. If this works in Brownwood, then when lines corrode in Brownwood, that area can be treated as any other area of the city. There are budgeted funds available to perform this work, plus there is money in the Bond Program for Brownwood. Based on preliminary estimates, the City may have enough money allocated to slipline all of Brownwood. Estimated cost to perform this project is $26,000. If sliplining is possible, there will still be the need later to help eliminate infiltration from yard lines. That is a source of infiltration all through the city, but with regard to city lines, sliplining will cure the problem of corroded pipes. There may be the need to construct lift stations and in some areas "U" lines. Councilman Fuller moved to authorize the Administration to advertise for bids on the basis outlined by the City Engineer; Councilwoman Wilbanks seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Consider Participation with Houston- Galveston Area Council in Solid Waste Management Study The Houston - Galveston Area Council Board has approved a recommendation from one of its subcommittees to seek short and long -term solutions to solid waste problems. H -GAC would like to identify areas and entities with common solid waste disposal problems which could be addressed through joint action, review solid waste disposal technologies, including landfills and other approaches, and recommend joint actions where justified. The City of Baytown has a contract that will be in existence for a few more years. The City's landfill operator may have other sites by the time that this contract ends, but there are no assurances of this. Ultimately, the City will be faced with what to do; therefore, the Administration felt that such a study would be useful and recommended participation. The estimated cost to the City of Baytown would be $2,500 to $5,000 because the board was not certain as to participation. Councilman Fuller moved to authorize participation with Houston - Galveston Area Council in Solid Waste Management Study; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None 21014 -23 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Consider Proposals for Study of Insurance and Risk Management Program The Administration had discussed previously with Council the Attorney General's opinion which indicates that cities should take bids for insurance. Also, the need for Baytown to look at its insurance program, particularly with respect to possible general liability had been discussed. Two firms -- The Wyatt Company and Remco, which firms are in the business of providing cities and others with consulting services in this area were contacted to present proposals. Both companies have very good reputations in the State. The Administration is recommending that the proposal of The Wyatt Company be accepted. The Wyatt Company's proposal sets forth the following objectives: a. To identify any areas in the insurance and risk management program or its administration where significant cost deductions can be realized through the restructuring program, self- insurance, use of alternative insurance markets, the elimination of unnecessary coverages, or changes in administrative procedures. b. To identify any inadequacies in the insurance and risk management program in terms of policy limits, coverage, policy conditions or administration of programs, should such inadequacies exist. C. To aid the City of insurance and risk administration, in effectiveness. In assist the City of and in bidding the Baytown in streamlining of its management program and its the interest of proficiency and addition The Wyatt Company will Baytown in preparing specifications following policies: General Liability, Automobile Liability, and Physical Damage, Umbrella Liability, Property (all types), Crime Coverage, Data Processing Coverage, Public Official Liability Coverage, and Flood Insurance. The fee for this service which includes three trips to Baytown is $7,000. The Administration felt this to be a reasonable fee. Baytown did not request an extensive service as some cities because of the excellent safety program of the city and the work performed by the Insurance Committee. What is being recommended by the Administration is the minimum that is needed in order to obtain competitive bids. Most of Baytown's insurance policies expire in January and more time will be needed. Mr. Bob Beverly has spoken to the insurance companies and feels that the city can obtain 60 to 90 -day extensions. Councilman Simmons agreed that it was necessary to take bids; however, he pointed out that the school district has an agent of record who performs this type analysis at no cost to the district. Bob Beverly is currently the city's agent of record and the company that he represents would have a risk analysis department. 21014 -24 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Pat Tobin, Director of Finance, pointed out that that could represent a conflict of interest since that company would probably want to bid. Neither of the consultants are in the insurance business. Councilman Simmons inquired if these consultants would simply come into the city and utilize the information already provided by the insurance committee members. Mr. Lanham stated that the staff had talked with other cities who have used this consultant and these cities were satisfied with the company's performance. Also, Mr. Lanham has reviewed some of the reports that have been prepared by the company, including specifications which were quite detailed. There may be more companies in the business. These two companies have been utilized by other cities. Councilman Simmons stated that what bothered him was that the school who has many more parcels of property, buildings and transporation vehicles can operate without hiring a consultant. Mr. Lanham stated that he was not certain that school districts have been subjected to the court decisions that cities have been. Cities are becoming concerned with the large number of liability claims being filed against cities where cities are being held liable. Councilman Fuller pointed out that the school district in past years has received considerable criticism because the insurance system for the school system was handled by local businesses. The City would be in a better position if outside consultants were retained to develop specifications. Mr. Lanham explained that the local insurance firms have indicated that they will be happy to provide information. The City's Insurance Committee has done a great amount of work. In fact, the committee members have looked at all the city buildings and have recommended values which are used for insurance purposes. As a result of that, the Administration was able to tell the two consulting firms that there would be no need to spend time looking at all the buildings. Mr. Tobin stated that no doubt the consultants would utilize the information provided by the committee members, as well as information on file in city offices. However, cities' exposure is greater than school districts because of water lines, sewer lines, streets, etc. Councilman Fuller moved to accept the proposal of The Wyatt Company; Councilman Cannon seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: Councilman Simmons 21014 -25 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 Consider Revising Qualifications for Senior Citizens Taxi Program Larry Patterson, Assistant City Manager, reviewed a memorandum which he had drafted to the City Manager on recommendation for taxi program guidelines. The Senior Citizens Taxi Program was established in 1976. At that time the guidelines for participation in that program for free fare for one person was zero to $4,000 and for two persons was up to $5,000. Half fare for one person was zero to $6,000 per year and for two persons was up to $7,000 per year. Given cost of inflation in all areas, but specifically social security payments which rose 69.2% during that period and the Consumer Price Index which rose approximately 67%, the Administration recommended an adjustment of approximately 75% of the social security payment increase and that the amounts be rounded for ease of administration to: 1 Person 2 Persons Free Fare 0- $6,000 per year 0- $7,500 per year Half Fare $6,000 - $9,000 per year $7,500 - $10,500 per year Mr. Patterson reported that these suggested figures are not totally arbitrary when considering guidelines for food stamps, media care and poverty levels as issued by the Area Agency on Aging. The Administration suggested that an annual review of the guidelines be made. By revising the guidelines, more senior citizens will be able to participate in the program. Councilwoman Wilbanks moved to approve the guidelines for participation in the Senior Citizen Taxi Program as recommended by the Administration; Councilman Simmons seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Consider Continuing Participation in EPA Grant Program for Central Sewer District The City Council on July 8, 1982, voted to withdraw from the EPA Grant Program. Recent correspondence from the Texas Department of Water Resources has indicated that the SSES and remaining Step 1 documents could be completed under the current Step Grant and will receive 75% funding. The Administration now feels it would be advisable for the city to remain in the EPA Grant Program at least for the completion of the Step 1 portion which is estimated to cost approximately $550,000 since the city needs this information on infiltration that the study will provide. The 1981 Capital Improvement Program provides for $916,000 for the Central Sewage District and a total of $1,166,000 in budgeted funds for sliplining 21014 -26 Minutes of the Regular Meeting - October 14, 1982 throughout the city. In view of the commitment from TDWR that Step 1 work will be funded, the Administration recommended continuation in the program. The City's portion of the costs would be $138,000. Councilman Simmons moved to authorize the Administration to proceed with the EPA Grant Program with regard to the Central District; Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Consider Appointments to Clean City Commission Councilman Fuller moved that Leonard Stasney, Joy Rodda and Maureen Davis be reappointed to serve on the Clean City Commission and that Alan Welsh and Dottie Glass be appointed as new members of the Commission. Councilman Johnson seconded the motion. The vote follows: Ayes: Council members Johnson, Simmons, Wilbanks, Fuller and Cannon Mayor Hutto Nays: None Recess Mayor Hutto recessed the open meeting into executive session to discuss contemplated litigation. When the open meeting reconvened, Mayor Hutto announced that no business had been transacted. Adjourn Since there was no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned. Eileen P. Hall, City Clerk 'TI L L; ANNUAL POLICE E FIRE UNIFORM CONTRACT ;829 -91 DATE- SEPTEMBER 21, 1982 2 :00 P,M. CITY Or 13Ay` OW IV 81D TABULATION Attachment GROSS TOTAL LESS DISC NET TOTA L n f't -r% 11 r&"* 4t :'Liner to the jacket only, i QTY DESCRIPTION B 1 LL STOREY .UNiT EXTENDED R BLAUER MFG. UNIT � EXTENDED P J B BATTLE UNIT f C UNIT EXTENO-wo Ir' A !" U..u! � Fo.r' C .:�': ANNUAL'POLICE AND FIRE UNIFORM ' CONTRACT: I ! 1. 220 SHIRTS, LONG SLEEVE - Police No BID $21.95 $40829.00 I I I I 2. 220 SHIRTS, SHORT SLEEVE - Police f I $18,95 j $4!]69.00. , 3. 200 i SHIRTS, SHORT SLEEVE - Fire ! 9.95 $1,890,00 $9.25 $1,850.00. 4. 10 PANTS Fire $18.95 $189.50 I 5. 440 PANTS - Police $20,95 $9,218.00 6. 10 JACKETS - Fire $52.00 $520,00 7• 50 JACKETS - Police $50.00 .$2,500,00 $56,00 $2,800.00 8. 50 CAPS - Police and $16,95 $847.50 ! 10 Fire $15,95 $159,50 9. i 20 ! COVERALLS -Fire $22',50 $450,00 $23.00 $460.00. ` 10. 100 BELTS - Police and ( $5.95 $595,00 ' ; 10 Fire i ! $5.95 119,00 ]l. ' 100 TROUSERS, WORK - Fire $17,95 $'] :795,00 $13.10 $1,310.00. 12. 20 JACKETS, WORK - Fire $21.95 $439.00 $20.45 ! '$409.00 r 13. 50 LIGHT WEIGHT JACKETS - Police $23,50 $1,175.00 o $10.95 I *x$547.50. I TOTAL: $2,500.00 $29,295.50 $4,576.50. DELIVERY: 45 -60 DAYS 110 -14 DAYS ' *Does not meet specs. *Does no meet specs. Leather ound cuffs. Ike Jacllet -not the style aq last year. GROSS TOTAL LESS DISC NET TOTA L n f't -r% 11 r&"* 4t :'Liner to the jacket only, i TITLE: Silent Radio Stakeout Unit BID: x#829 -92 DATE= September 22, 1982 9:00 a.m. f CITY OF BAYTO WN BID TABULATION Attachment "A" ITEM QTY. DESCRIPTION ARDA CO.. UNIT EXTENDED UNIT EXTENDED UNIT EXTENDED UNIT EXTENDED UNIT EXT NOE PRICE 1. 7 SILENT RADIO STAKEOUT UNITS $1,860.03 $13,020.21 TOTAL: $13,020.21 DEL f VERY . 30 DAYS ' -GKU55 IUINL LESS DISC. N7 TOTAL DELIVERY I-- rI T L IC.- - ANNUAL TRAFFIC PAINT CONTRACT 31 D: _1822-21 )ATE: -September 23, 1982 2:00 P.M. CITY 01c BAYTOW N BID TABULATION , Attachment "C" iEti1 QTY DESCRIPTION ENNIS PAINT MFG. PINKLEY ASSOCIATES SOUTHWESTERN MAT. GULF STATES PAINT SHERWIN WILLIAMS .UNIT EXTENDED UNIT EXTENDED UNIT x NO D UNIT EX7E Z �� urn:r rxr�.�C; RICE' l C l� .1 PI C A I'• ro./•C I ANNUAL TRAFFIC PAINT CONTRACT: s s 'I 1. 1,000 gal.. White Traffic Paint 5.86 1 5,860.00 1 6.22 6,220.00 5.65 5,650.00 f Alternate , i 1 8. 53 g ,53 0.00 2. 1,200 gala Yellow Traffic Paint I 5.96 7,152.00 6.87 8,244.00 6.25 7,500.00 1 Alternate 5.122 6,146.40 r 9.30 �11,160.00 TOTAL: 13,150.00 19,6a0.0( 11,66o,4o 13,012.00 14,464.00 15130 DAYS I DELIVERY: •15 DAYS 30 DAYS 5 DAYS 30 DAYS t Paint Poes not # meet Texa Dept. of Hiways s; lublic Trans- portation specificatI ns I I l r GROSS TOTAL LESS DISC. NET TOTAL r) F!f VFIz `I' i GITY 015 BAYTOW N .rI'TLC -..,. ANNUAL �POLI! CE & FIRE UNIFORM CONTRACT E31D TABULATION i #829 -91 81D: D D: - SEPTEMBER 21, 1982 2:00 P.M. PAGE 2 OF 2 MARTINS UNIFORMS BURKE UNIFORMS FACTORY SALES CO. t • f T EM QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT EXTENDED UNIT t EXTENDED UNIT X ENDED UNIT EXTEU0E- U::: T ^a�r� I ' R r'r Q o c 1 t .i c ,rc p rF ���r... ANNUAL POLICE 6 FIRE UNIFORM ( I CONTRACT CONTINUED: j 1. 220 SHIRTS, LONG SLEEVE - Police $19.80 $4,356.00 $21.25 I $4,675.00 $23.40 $5,148.00 I j $3,916.00 2. i 220 = SHIRTS, SHORT SLEEVE - Police- $17.80 i $18.85 $4,147-00 $21.00 $4,620.00- ' $1,600.00 3. 200 1 SHIRTS, SHORT SLEEVE - Fire $8.00 $12.75 $2,550.00 $17.95 $3,590.00 i $190.00 4. 10 ! PANTS - Fire $19.00 $29.50 $295.00 $24.40 $244.00 5. 440 PANTS - Police $20.10 1 $8,844.00 $25.50 $11,220.00 $28.40 $12,496.00 - $460.00 6. 10 JACKETS - Fire $46.00 $66.00 $660.00 $59.50 $595.00 $2,970.00 7. 50 JACKETS - Police $59.40 $68.00 $3,400.00 $64.00 $3,200.00 8. 50 CAPS - Police and $14.60 $730.00 $19.00 $950.00 $19.50 $975.00 10 Fire .$14:60 _`$146. 00 $19.00 $190.00 $19.50 $195.00 $396.00 9. 20 COVERALLS - Fire $19.80 NO BID $20.25 $405.00 $845.00 10. 100 BELTS - Police and $8.45 $9.00 ii $900.00 $9.75 I $975.00 20 Fire $8.45 $169.00 $9.00 i $180.00 $9.75 1' $195.00 i 11. 100 TROUSERS, WORK - Fire $14.85 $1,485.00 NO BID $12.50 ' $1,250.00 12. 20 JACKETS. WORK - Fire $29.45 $589.00 NO BID NO BID 13. 50 -.Police LIGHT WEIGHT JACKETS .Po 1. 0 $3 3 $ 1 565.00 , $29.95 $1,x+97.50 $27.00 $1,350.00 i TOTAL: $28,261.00 $30,664.50 $35,238.00 DELIVERY: 30-45 DAYS 5 DAYS EXCEP 30 -45 DAYS • ON FIRE IRESS JACKET WILL BE 30 DAYS I GROSS TOTAL LESS DISC. NE-, I"OTA L nrI TtfCn4t