The URL can be used to link to this page

Min 07/20/1999 493 Wichita Falls, Texas Memorial Auditorium Building July 20, 1999 Items 1 & 2 The City Council of the City of Wichita Falls, Texas met in regular session on the above date in the Council Room of the Memorial Auditorium Building at 8:30 o'clock a.m., with the following members present: Kay Yeager - Mayor Arthur Bea Williams - Councilors Dan Shine - James Esther, Jr. - Johnny Burns - Bud Beaty - James Berzina - City Manager Greg Humbach - City Attorney Lydia Torres - City Clerk Bill Altman - Absent Mayor Yeager called the meeting to order. Invocation was given by Paul Kuykendall, Chaplain, Wichita Falls Fire Department Item 3 Ms. Sharon Jackson, Clerk Typist III, Sanitation Department, was recognized as Employee of the Month for the month of July. Mayor presented Ms. Jackson with a plaque, a City pin, dinners for two, transit passes, and a check. Daughters and sons of City employees who graduated from high school this last school year were recognized and each were presented with a gift from the City of Wichita Falls. Their parents were also recognized. Lee Templar, Reporter for the Times Record News, who has covered the City beat for three years was recognized. Mr. Templar will be moving to Arizona where he will cover the Mesa-Chandler area. He was wished well by all and appreciation was expressed for his fairness and accuracy in covering the City. Item 4 Janie Hill, 777 Peterson Rd. North referred to the library books and thanked Council for following proper procedure and for allowing citizens' voices to be heard. The citizens fulfilled your polices by turning in copies of the petition to the Library and we want to encourage you to be faithful as the people have been. She asked Council not be afraid of the ACLU's attack, not to go back on their resolution, and not to compromise. Daniel Hill Neal, 777 Peterson Road, North, stated that the Liberty Legal Institute is offering the City two attorneys free of charge to assist the City upon request. He added that the ACLU has no case because the books are only being moved to another area in the Library, not being banned, censored or removed from the Library. Petition signers are simply saying that the books are age inappropriate for children and should be placed so parents have more involvement in what their children read. This is more than a book issue. The homosexuality act is against the Penal Code in Texas and by introducing our children to this abnormal deviant lifestyle we are teaching them to break the law. Sodomy is against God and man's law, and we have a right to protect our children. He stated that under the first amendment of the Constitution the federal government has no jurisdiction over religion, public speaking, books 494 (Item 4 continued) published or public and private meetings and is forbidden to make laws relating to these issues, even protective laws. In this case it is the people's sole responsibility. Also, it is up to the municipal government or the wishes of the people where books are placed. The State has left it to the City. Ruth Hill Neal, 777 Peterson Road, North, mentioned that several organizations have teamed up to start Liberty Legal Institutes in many states. Texas received theirs last year. Qualified Constitutional attorneys are available for Wichita Falls at no cost to defend our City. They protect cities free of charge but cities must ask them to help. This will save the City any additional expense. She asked Council to uphold the policy that many worked very hard for. Debby Meyer, 9810 Elsation Ave., Castroville, Texas, is a children's teacher and has read the two library books which she feels are on a low reading level. She stated that the subject matter is inappropriate to discuss in Council and in her classroom. She thanked the Council for the opportunity to have a resolution and for parents to have an opportunity to decide what is appropriate for their children. Kathryn McKinney, 4707 Pawnee Pathway referred to the East Side Boys & Girls Club and asked Council to support this organization with CDBG funds. Item 5 The Minutes were approved as distributed. City Manager gave a briefing on the items listed under the Consent Agenda. Items 6a-6c Moved by Councilor Williams that the consent agenda be approved. Motion seconded by Councilor Burns and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Items 6a-6c Minutes of the following Boards & Commission meetings were received. a. Wichita Falls Sales Tax (4B) Corporation, October 19, 1998 & June 15, 1999 b. Helen Farabee Regional MHMR Center Board of Trustees, May 27, 1999 c. Board of Electrical Examiners, June 10, 1999 Item 7a A final public hearing was held to receive comments on the proposed use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Program funds under the Consolidated Plan. Mayor declared the public hearing open. Mr. David Clark expressed appreciation to the three Council members who served on the City Council Subcommittee on Outside Agency Funding - Councilors Williams, Shine, and Altman. Mr. Clark informed that the City will receive $1,795,000 for the 1999-2000 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement grant, and $561,000 for its HOME Investment Partnership Act (HOME) grant. 495 (Item 7a continued) He mentioned that this public hearing was the final of two on the Action Plan of the Consolidated Plan to use these funds. He enumerated the proposed funding and projects for the one year Action Plan. Councilor Williams commented that she had discussed with Mr. Clark the possibility of setting up a fund out of that CDBG so that we can consider some "for-profits" that fit within the category where their monetary guidelines are and their promotion of small businesses for the community in general. Hopefully by the next time this comes up we will have created a program that the "for-profits" can at least apply under with equal footing against each other. Mayor expressed appreciation to the Council Subcommittee who worked on these requests and for their time and commitment spent on the outside funding. It is not an easy job with the number of requests that come in. Tom Holquist, 4622 Trailwood, Staff President YMCA, thanked the Council for their past considerations to the YMCA. He informed that the block grant funds have provided child care at the East Branch YMCA for forty children and paid employees have been increased from three to thirteen. Operating budget has gone from $80,000/year up to over $160,000 year and is paying its own way. This is community development. He mentioned that some of the things that have been added at the YMCA are the Free Lunch Program, Food Bank Harvest Program, and Pre-School Program. He introduced Mr. Doug Simmons who is the new Executive Director at the East Branch YMCA and Mr. Claude Foster, Chair of the East Branch YMCA Advisory Committee. Claude Foster, 4932 Bayberry, thanked City Manager for bringing up the availability of these funds. We requested $44,000 for a parking lot because to us it is about a health and safety issue. Because of the Council's generous efforts the YMCA is a very active facility both with young and elderly people. He expressed their concern for those accessing the facility. The East Branch YMCA does not receive entitlement funds. He asked that Council take another look and reconsider funding a parking lot for the East Branch YMCA. He also noted that there were no signs informing that there are children at play in that area and mentioned that Mr. Simmons will be contacting the City about that. Kathryn McKinney, 4707 Pawnee Pathway, said she was not on the board of the East Side Boys & Girls Club but she has been a financial supporter of that Club. That Club has grown and taken on a leadership role in that area. We appreciate the recommendation of $12,000 for the storage building and would like to reiterate that $17,700 is needed for a parking area. Parking does not sound as glamorous to the citizens but it is a very important issue. Improvement means improvements to the area. The parking lot, which was estimated for 5000 square feet, could also be a play area for the children. We appreciate the recommendation for the money for the storage building but would also like to ask Council to reconsider funding the parking lot. Barbara Green, 1612 Parkdale, Executive Director East Side Boys & Girls Club, thanked Council for the funds for the storage building and added that they need to have a parking lot for these children. We have a lot of children on a daily basis and we have no gymnasium or open space for the children to participate in such art activities as dance and ballet. She asked that Council reconsider funding a parking area. Mayor called for additional comments and there being none, Mayor declared the public hearing closed. Councilor Esther suggested using the Job Training Program which is funded by CDBG funds to do those parking lots being requested by the East Branch YMCA and Eastside Boys & Girls Club. Mr. Bonnett stated that a typical parking lot would be beyond the capability of Job Training Program participants. It would take a skilled crew to lay curbs and gutters to grade. This Training Program is flat work, a rudimentary type of work and we are utilizing it to hire people that normally do not have those skills. It is literally a training program. Councilor Esther suggested letting them do the flat work and hiring professionals to do the other part. Mr. Bonnett said that was a possibility. 496 (Item 7a continued) Mr. Clark informed that the amounts requested had been more than doubled. He noted that the East Side YMCA had received $500,000 in funding for their building repair project. He hoped that the public would respond to their need and assist both organizations in the development of the parking lots. Item 8a ORDINANCE NO. 61-99 ORDINANCE MAKING AN APPROPRIATION OF $3,000 IN THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR GRANT REVENUE RECEIVED FROM THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT ACCEPTING SAME; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Williams that Ordinance No. 61-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Beaty. It was noted that the amount in Section 1 of the proposed ordinance should read $3,000 instead of$38,150. Moved by Councilor Beaty that Section 1 of proposed ordinance be amended to reflect the amount of$3,000 in place of$38,150. Motion seconded by Councilor Beaty and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None .. The original motion as amended carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 8b ORDINANCE NO. 62-99 ORDINANCE MAKING AN APPROPRIATION IN THE GENERAL FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $13,500 FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CONDUCTING A CITY ELECTION TO BE HELD IN AUGUST OF 1999; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Ordinance No. 62-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None 497 Item 8c ORDINANCE NO.63-99 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 53-99 REPLACING ELECTION OFFICIAL FOR THE AUGUST 14, 1999 SPECIAL ELECTION; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Esther that Ordinance No. 63-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 8d ORDINANCE NO. 64-99 ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 12-6, CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, ESTABLISHING A MUNICIPAL COURT TECHNOLOGY FUND; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Esther that Ordinance No. 64-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 8e ORDINANCE NO. 65-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, ADDING SECTION 12-7 TO CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, ASSESSING A COURT COST OF FIVE DOLLARS ON EACH PARKING VIOLATION FOR FUNDING ASSISTANCE OF SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Esther that Ordinance No. 65-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Beaty. Judge Gillen informed that the average ticket is $9.00 and with the $4 technology fee plus the $5 parking violation court cost, the total amount would be $21.00. Councilor Shine expressed concern about the amount being added to parking tickets. He asked if there was another option to fund the City's portion of the school crossing guard program. Mr. Jim Dockery commented that it would cost approximately $58,000 to fund this and the WFISD pays 50% of that cost. This assessment would assist with approximately $15,000 of the cost to fund the City's share of the school crossing guard program. Judge Gillen noted that by law the $4 technology fee only has a six year life span. 498 (Item 8e continued) Councilor Beaty clarified that if this was passed, those convicted of an offense would pay for the court fees, however, if they do not pay these fees the taxpayers would pick up the tab. City Manager asked what a reduction would do to the technology fund. Judge Gillen replied that he anticipated $20,000426,000 if the technology fee was not applied to the parking offenses. Moved by Councilor Burns to lay the motion concerning the $5 court cost on parking violations on the table. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Moved by Councilor Burns to amend Ordinance No. 64-99, Section 12-6 to read as follows: "All persons convicted in municipal court of a non-parking violation shall be assessed a four dollar technology fee. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Moved by Councilor Burns to take from the table the motion relating to the $5 court cost on parking violations. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Jerry Lueck, 309 Cartwright, stated that a lot of the people who get parking tickets are not paying for them but are sitting them out in jail. We are supporting these people who are sitting out their tickets and getting $50-100 a day credit on their ticket. He did not think the $4 or$5 additional fee was going to benefit the taxpayers. The original motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 8f ORDINANCE NO. 66-99 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PARKING REGULATIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Ordinance No. 66-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None 499 Item 8g ORDINANCE NO. 67-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS; AMENDING APPENDIX C OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AT SECTION 6465, ENTITLED "AIRPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT," TO PROVIDE FOR TERMS OF OFFICE, BOARD COMPOSITION, AND STAGGERED TERMS OF SAID BOARD, PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Williams that Ordinance No. 67-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Esther and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 8h ORDINANCE NO. 68-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS; REPEALING ORDINANCES 3847 AND 3759 CONCERNING THE CLEAN COMMUNITY COMMISSION, WHICH ORDINANCES HAVE BEEN SUPERSEDED BY ORDINANCE 92-84; ADDITIONALLY REPEALING ORDINANCES 1706, 2387, 2837, 3187, AND 3806 CONCERNING THE COMMISSION ON HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE NEEDS, WHICH ORDINANCES HAVE BEEN SUPERSEDED BY ORDINANCE 142-95; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Ordinance No. 68-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 8i ORDINANCE NO. 69-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, ESTABLISHING A WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION; DEFINING ITS COMPOSITION, OBJECTIVES AND FUNCTIONS; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Shine that Ordinance No.69-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None 500 Item 9a RESOLUTION NO. 72-99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 31-89, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Williams that Resolution No. 72-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None City Councilor recessed at 10:10 a.m. and reconvened and 10:30 a.m. Item 9b RESOLUTION NO. 73-99 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE PROPOSED USE OF FUNDS IN THE ACTION PLAN OF THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1, 1999 TO SEPTEMBER 30, 2000; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Resolution No. 73-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Shine and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 9c RESOLUTION NO. 74-99 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SERVICE PLAN FOR ANNEXATION OF THE REILLY ROAD AREA AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Esther that Resolution No. 74-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Beaty. Mr. Dave Clark provided information on the Riley Road Area. He corrected the acreage as being 3293 acres not 2947 acres as referenced in the introduction and in the field notes. Also, for clarification purposes, in the Service Plan under "Development" the following - language is to be added in both Item 1 and Item 2: "Municipal Code". Jerry Luek, 309 Cartwright, stated that the Service Plan does not include sewer lines as required by State law. He did not see how the City Council could accept an illegal Service Plan that is contrary to Texas State law. Mr. Luek stated that they do not want to be annexed. Assistant City Attorney Bill Sullivan stated that he has not looked at the specific provision that Mr. Luek referred to but the issue of sewers is one we have looked at on other annexations and we are satisfied that the Service Plan meets State law. 501 (Item 9c continued) Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 9d RESOLUTION NO. 75-99 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SERVICE PLAN FOR ANNEXATION OF THE NORTH PLEASANT VALLEY AREA AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Resolution No. 75-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Beaty. Mr. Dave Clark provided information on the North Pleasant Valley Area which contains approximately 111 acres. Mr. Clark outlined the annexation process. Councilor Shine asked if the service plan could be amended after this resolution is adopted. Mr. Clark replied in the affirmative. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 9e RESOLUTION NO. 76-99 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SERVICE PLAN FOR ANNEXATION OF THE CITY VIEW AREA AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Resolution No. 76-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Esther. Mr. Dave Clark provided information on the City View Area which contains approximately 555 acres. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 9f RESOLUTION NO. 77-99 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SERVICE PLAN FOR ANNEXATION OF THE FM 367 AREA AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW 502 (Item 9f continued) Moved by Councilor Esther that Resolution No. 77-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams. Mr. Dave Clark provided information on FM 367 Area which contains approximately 1079 acres. He informed that this area will require purchase of water rights because the Wichita Valley Water Supply Corporation serves a part of this area and that will need to be resolved during this process. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Mayor noted that there was a consensus of the Council during their retreat that these four areas be looked at for possible annexation. These four resolutions today begin the annexation process and there will be an opportunity for the Council as we go through the public hearings to change the service plans, if needed. There will also be an opportunity for anyone in the proposed areas to raise questions and address the Council and Staff during the public hearings that are required by the process. Item 9g RESOLUTION NO. 78-99 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FY 1999-2000 BUDGET FOR THE WICHITA FALLS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (4A SALES TAX); DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Shine that Resolution No. 78-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Burns and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 9h RESOLUTION NO. 79-99 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FY 1999-2000 BUDGET FOR THE WICHITA FALLS (413) SALES TAX CORPORATION; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Burns that Resolution No. 79-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None 503 Item 9i RESOLUTION NO. 80-99 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH , BUNDY, YOUNG, SIMS, AND POTTER, INC. FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE LIBRARY; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Shine that Resolution No. 80-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Burns and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 90 RESOLUTION NO. 81-99 RESOLUTION TO PURSUE FUNDING OPTIONS NECESSARY TO FINANCE THE MPEC COLISEUM AND TO REQUEST THE MPEC BOARD TO WORK WITH THE ARCHITECTS TO COMPLETE THE FINAL CONSTRUCTION PLANS; DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Shine that Resolution No. 81-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams. City Manager explained where the City, MPEC, and the County found themselves on this project at this point and where we could possibly go in the sense of completing the project as was talked about in 1992 and 1993 when it was first authorized by the public. We still need approximately $19 million to finish the proposed coliseum building. City Manager gave a brief history on MPEC and informed that the new MPEC Board had voted unanimously to inform the Council and Commissioners Court that this is the Board's number one selection project. This resolution instructs the City Manager to begin the process of putting in form and bringing back to Council some funding mechanism as we go toward construction of the Coliseum. Some of this funding is outside the scope of Council. The Mayor and I would be taking Council direction to approach one or two other boards or bodies that would be influential to make sure that this project comes about. He informed that about 85% of the design necessary for this facility has already been completed and paid for, as well as the site being acquired. What is needed is for the Architects to go back, update and finish those plans and make certain that all the materials, furnishings, etc. to the buildings that were specified are still current and available and that we have the most updated construction cost estimate for this project. What I am proposing with this is that the City would basically have to take the lead share to finance this facility. I am hopeful that those who are involved in this project will continue to be a three part funding mechanism to accomplish this task. I am proposing that the City can raise approximately $9.6 million with Council's appropriate legislative action along with one or two other groups as mentioned earlier. Also, that there be two other partners with us as have been from the beginning - the County and the private sector. We are in discussions with the County as to when they can put some funds into this project. They have recently voted that this is a project they are interested in and want to fund but they have a timing problem as to when they can bring money to the table. The third partner would be the private sector, but until there is a commitment in terms of intent, it is difficult to go to the private sector and ask them to contribute to this project that for the past several years has been on the shelf. 504 (Item 9j continued) There is about $5.6 million that could be available with Council action, and I anticipate those funds coming from the following: Construction Fund Balance - $1.1 Million (MPEC Construction Fund) Debt Service Fund Balance - $1.5 Million (Council Action) TIF Fund Balance - $379,000 (Council approval to request from TIF) West Texas Utility Fund Balance - $1.6 Million (Council Action) Revenue Sharing Balance - $138,000 Hotel-Motel Tax Fund - $195,000 (In excess of$400,000 fund balance) Fund Raising Balance - $785,000 (Private Sector) Remaining Pledge - $750,000 (To be paid over time) This totals $6.5 million which could be available with the noted actions. City Manager added that in terms of potential financing he would like to ask the TIF Board to consider funding a ten year certificate of obligation for about $3.4 million. It would take approximately $95,000/year from an estimated $120,000/year revenue. We would also propose bringing back to Council at some point a certificate of obligation authority to use the balance of the West Texas Utility money to float $2.4 million worth of revenue for this. It would take the remaining $500,000/year from the $320,000 you are presently paying or about $190,000/year to do that certificate of obligation. The other two funding sources being the County and the private donations. City Manager emphasized that it is important to move on this project relatively soon because every year that we wait boosts the cost of this project up $800,000 to $1 million. One reason we do not have the money to do the project now is that the passage of six years has escalated the price and cost of the project. There is a strong desire from the County to remain a strong partner in the neighborhood of$3 million. That effort is being looked at by the County. This will also tell the MPEC Board to proceed with the Architect's Plans. Regarding the 4-B Sales Tax, I am hopeful that we can do this project without going to the 4-B Board unless there is something needed to help make the project go over. City Manager stated that if the County does not join the City then the question is "How do we finish this project?" We will need to look at the Power Plant funds which will not be here for a couple of years. Mayor stated that estimated time of construction of the project is eighteen months. If everything goes accordingly we will be looking at a completion date of two years or less from now. This does allow the County an opportunity to look for their resources and to come in and support the project. It would be my hope that the County does find a way to participate in this. It is an outstanding example of cooperation between two governmental entities and also the private sector from their financial commitment. Mayor reiterated that every year that goes by continues to increase the cost of this building. Jerry Lueck, 309 Cartwright, stated that in 1992 we were told you would not use tax money to build this project and I think you should not use taxes for this. If they want to finish it they should do fund raisers. Mayor clarified that when this project was started the comment was made that we would not raise property taxes to build this project and to date we have not raised property taxes for that project, nor in the proposed funding sources that the City Manager just outlined is there any talk at all of a property tax increase. That has been carried out to date and will continue to be. Councilor Beaty stated that during the Council retreat it was indicated that before using 4B funds we would go to a referendum election to ask the voters for this use. Mayor read a statement from Councilor Altman, who was out of town today on business. It has become apparent to Councilor Altman that there is widespread interest in and support for building the coliseum. Careful management of our public financial resources coupled with private contributions can provide the necessary funds to build the coliseum. Thirdly, all our citizens will benefit for decades to come by our affirmative action. He supports this resolution and if present would vote for it. Motion carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None 505 Item 9k RESOLUTION NO. 82-99 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, RATIFYING THE WORK OF CITIES' STEERING COMMITTEE IN PUC DOCKET NO. 20285 AND APPROVING SETTLEMENT OF TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY'S FUEL RECONCILIATION PROCEEDING FOR REFUNDS OF $52 MILLION AND CERTAIN ACCOUNTING CHANGES THAT WILL BENEFIT FUTURE RATEPAYERS; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Williams that Resolution No. 82-99 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Esther and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 10a Moved by Councilor Beaty that the meeting time for the September 7, 1999 Regular City Council meeting be rescheduled from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Motion seconded by Councilor Williams and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None Item 10b Councilor Beaty commented that this was Lee Templar's last Council meeting and he was going to be missed. He expressed appreciation to Mr. Templar for his manner of reporting by exhibiting fairness and honesty in every issue and giving everybody fair and equal treatment. I am sad to see him leave. Lee is a great reporter and deserves the opportunities to move forward and in that regard I wish him well. Mayor announced the Official Public Community Day for the Dallas Cowboys at Jaycee Park would be on Wednesday, July 28. Mayor informed that the Convention Visitor Bureau, Councilor Williams and she were successful in bidding for the Mayors, Councilors, and Commissioners Conference for the year 2001. Item 10c(1) City Manager concurred with Councilor Beaty's comments about Lee Templar and added that he has always treated the City fairly. It has been a real privilege to watch you work and we are all going to miss you. You were just the best. This is the first time I have seen a Council praise a reporter as they leave. You set a high standard for those who follow you and we appreciate what you have done. Mr. Kerry Maroney, Biggs and Mathews made a presentation on the Master Wastewater Plan Study. A copy of the Study is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 506 Item 10d The City Council went into Executive Session at 12:25 p.m. as authorized by Section 551.074 of the Government Code, and reconvened at 12:40 p.m. Item 10e(1) Moved by Councilor Shine that Mr. Ernest Dover, Place 9, be reappointed to the Helen Farabee Regional MHMR Center Board of Trustees with term to expire August 31, 2001. Motion seconded by Councilor Beaty and carried by the following vote. Ayes: Mayor Yeager, Councilors Williams, Shine, Esther, Burns, and Beaty Nays: None The City Council adjourned at 12:51 p.m. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of a 4- , 1999. 4KA HRYN A. tAGV MAYO ATTEST: Lydia Torres City Clerk MASTER STEWATER PLAN 2000 =2050 City of Wichl* ta b Fa s k exas AA Prepared by � � - Ce Biggs & Mathews, Inc. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 10c(1) June 1999 JULY 20, 1999 MA MASTER WASTEWATER PLAN YEAR 2000 to 2050 City of Wichita Falls, Texas Prepared bylot � w i • w i D. MARONEY ' Biggs & Mathews, Inc. ;'�:"'""""" *'"* '- 2500 Brook Avenue <<0;• FcIsT�9 Wichita Falls, Texas 76301 y�"i ! /Ccstl'l'u 61- O10 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of Plan ................................................................. 1 1.2 Scope of Work................................................................... 1 1.3 Description of Plan Area ..................................................... 2 2.0 DEVELOPMENT TRENDS.......................................................... 2 2.1 Historical Growth Trend...................................................... 2 2.2 Future Growth Trend.......................................................... 2 3.0 GENERAL PLANNING APPROACH ............................................ 3 3.1 Delineation of Drainage Basins............................................ 3 3.2 Population Density and Land Use ........................................ 3 3.3 Wastewater Flow Rates ...................................................... 3 4.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING FACILITIES ...................................... 4 4.1 Wastewater Treatment Plants ............................................. 4 4.2 Wastewater Collection System ............................................ 5 5.0 RECOMMENDED SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ............................. 5 5.1 Wastewater Treatment Expansion ....................................... 5 5.2 Collection System Expansion............................................... 6 6.0 ESTIMATED COST OF IMPROVEMENTS................................... 9 7.0 PLAN CLOSURE AND GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ........... 13 Appendix"A" Figure 1 Future Sewer Service Basins Figure 2 Wastewater Treatment Plant Service Area Figure 2A Phase 1 Future Wastewater Treatment Plant Figure 3 Future Sewer System Expansion Recommendations Figure 4 Lift Station Termination Recommendations Appendix "B" Table 1 - Basin Flow Analysis Data Planning Schedule 2000 - 2005 MASTER WASTEWATER PLAN YEAR 2000 to 2050 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Wichita Falls currently has a population of approximately 102,000 people and covers over 35,000 acres of land within its city limits. The City continues to attract outside industry and development within the City and growth has been steady over the last ten years. In addition, the City has recently annexed selected areas adjacent to their west and north city limit lines. As these and other new areas are incorporated into the City, planning for future wastewater services is imperative. To meet the demand for wastewater service throughout the Wichita Falls metropolitan area, the City has requested that a Master Wastewater Plan with a fifty year horizon be prepared for the years 2000 to 2050. 1.1 Purpose of Plan The purpose of this plan is to provide a strategic planning vehicle for the orderly development and installation of adequate sanitary sewer collection and wastewater treatment facilities within the Wichita Falls metropolitan area. Though the primary focus of this plan is to provide wastewater services to undeveloped areas contiguous to the City of Wichita Falls, a secondary benefit of this effort is to identify methods to reduce surcharging and overloading of the existing collection system along with minimizing the number of lift stations within the system. 1.2 Scope of Work In coordination with the City engineering staff, a specific scope of work was defined to provide for a fifty year plan. Included in the development of this master plan were the following elements: • Define the boundaries of the Master Plan • Delineate drainage basins and/or sub-basins for the plan area • Calculate current and projected wastewater flows from each basin or sub-basin • Recommend major trunk mains to serve each delineated basin and/or sub-basin • Recommend expansions and modifications to the existing wastewater collection and treatment system • Consider Re-Evaluation and Re-Scheduling of EPA SSES Projects • Recommend improvements/methods to reduce system surcharging • Recommend improvements to reduce and/or minimize the total number of collection system lift stations • Prepare budget cost estimates for recommended improvements 1 1.3 Description of Plan Area The overall planning area, known as the Wichita Falls Metropolitan Area, is bounded on the north by East Road, on the east by Hammon Road, on the south by F.M. 1954 and on the west by Peterson Road. The bounded area encompasses over 90,000 acres, and is shown in Figure 1, Appendix "A". Also, consideration was given to the possibility of the City of Wichita Falls providing regional wastewater services to the surrounding area communities. 2.0 DEVELOPMENT GROWTH AND TRENDS In preparing this Master Plan, the historical growth patterns and growth rates within the Wichita Falls area were reviewed and evaluated. This information was not utilized to plan the sequence of any future developments, but only used as a guide to aid in identifying potential areas which may require wastewater services within the fifty-year planning period. 2.1 Historical Growth Trend Since the early 1960's the total population of the Wichita Falls area has not increased substantially. In 1960 the population was 101,724 and the population for the year 2000 is projected to be approximately 103,713. (As adopted by Regional Water Planning Group - May, 1999) However, over these same forty years, there has been a dramatic shift or redistribution of the population from the central and eastern portion of the City to the south, southwest, and western sectors of the Wichita Falls area. The re-distribution of population was encouraged by the development of vacant land in the area and generally this sprawling, often non-contiguous development occurred without the sewer trunk main capacity being adequately expanded. Consequently, portions of the collection system has become overloaded. 2.2 Future Growth Trend Based on the most recent population projections, it is anticipated that the Wichita Falls area will experience moderate and steady growth through the next fifty years with a projected population of 121,432 by the year 2050. TABLE A CITY OF WICHITA FALLS POPULATION PROJECTION 2000-2050 Adopted by Regional Water Planning Group May, 1999 YEAR 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 POPULATION 103,7 108 977 113,8 116,847 119 117 121 432 2 Also, it appears that the growth and development will most likely continue to the south, southwest, west, and northwest regions of the planning area. As development expands westward, the demand will increase for adequate wastewater facilities to service the new areas. In addition, with the City of Wichita Falls annexing adjacent lands to the west and northwest of the City, it is imperative that a comprehensive plan be developed to address the future wastewater service needs in an orderly and thoughtful manner. 3.0 GENERAL PLANNING APPROACH The basic components used in determining the future wastewater flows are per capita wastewater discharge, population density, and land use area. These calculated flows from the various areas are then used to identify facility requirements that will meet the service needs of the planning area through the design year of 2050. 3.1 Delineation of Drainage Basins Having analyzed the City's historical growth rate and development trends over the last forty years, eleven areas or drainage basins were identified which have the most likely potential for growth and will therefore require substantial wastewater improvements within the fifty year planning period. These basins are shown in Figure 1, Appendix "A", and for the most part are areas in the south, southwest, west, and northwest that abut existing gravity sewered areas. However, a few of the potentially high growth basins may not be served by a gravity system, but they most definitely should be considered in the Master Plan due to the high probability of growth and development in those basins. 3.2 Population Density and Land Use From the 1990 Wichita Falls Population Census, it was determined that a typical value for persons per dwelling unit in a residential development is near 2.6. In addition, a typical modern day residential development is designed for approximately 3.5 lots per acre. Therefore, a population density of 9.1 persons per acre can be predicted assuming the land is fully developed as a typical residential subdivision. However, it should be recognized that land use will be restricted in each basin due to topography, floodplains, or simply economic constraints. Therefore, for the purpose of this plan, a Land Use Factor (LUF) was assigned to each basin area that represents the percentage of developable land within that specific basin. Table 1, Appendix "B" shows the LUF assigned to each Basin/Sub-Basin. 3.3 Wastewater Flow Rates The Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Study (SSES) provided by Biggs & Mathews, Inc. in 1995, was used as a basis for determining typical wet weather design sanitary sewer flows for use in the plan. 3 From the SSES and as previously adopted by the City of Wichita Falls, the following sanitary sewer flow rates were adopted and utilized in this plan to calculate sewer flows from each basin. Average Daily Per Capita Flow Rate = 125 GPCD Peak Wet Weather Flow Rate (Design) = 250 GPCD NOTE: GPCD = Gals. Per Capita Per Day 4.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING FACILITIES As a part of this planning effort, the existing wastewater treatment facilities and the wastewater collection system were analyzed. The analysis' were performed utilizing the existing plant flow records, the SSES Model prepared in 1995, and the most recent flow monitoring assessment results completed as a part of the collection system rehabilitation program. 4.1 Wastewater Treatment Plants The City of Wichita Falls currently owns and operates two treatment facilities. The largest plant known as the River Road Wastewater Treatment Plant (RRWWTP) is an activated sludge plant located on River Road in the far northeast sector of the City. This plant serves the majority of the City and has been upgraded within the last five years to a rated design capacity of 19.9 MGD. With current average daily flows into the plant being 12.5 MGD, this facility has approximately 7.4 MGD reserve capacity of which a portion could be utilized to accommodate future growth within the planning area. The smaller treatment plant, known as the Northside Wastewater Treatment Plant (NSWWTP) is an extended aeration type plant located adjacent to State Highway 240 in the northern sector of the City near Sheppard Air Force Base. This plant serves approximately 30% of Sheppard Air Force Base in addition to a limited industrial and residential area near the facility. The rated design capacity of this plant is 1.5 MGD, with current average daily flows into the plant of 0.5 MGD. This facility has approximately 1.0 MGD of reserve capacity of which a portion could be utilized for future industrial or residential growth in the northern part of the City. Though the RRWWTP and the NSWWTP have reserve treatment capacity as cited above, State Regulations dictate that only a portion of those reserves may be utilized prior to being required to expand the treatment facilities. The state regulation known as the 75/90 rule requires the owner/operator of the treatment facilities to initiate final engineering design plans when the average daily flow for three consecutive months exceed 75% of the related design capacity. Subsequently, when the average daily flow exceeds 90% of the rated design capacity, construction of the expansion facilities must be initiated. Therefore, based on the 75/90 rule, the existing reserve treatment capacity of the RRWWTP is reduced to 2.4 MGD and the existing reserve treatment capacity of the NSWWTP is reduced to 0.62 MGD. Based on the population density of 9.1 persons per acre and an average daily flow rate of 125 GPCD utilized for this plan, it is anticipated that the RRWWTP could adequately treat 4 wastewater flows from an additional 2,108 developed acres and the NSWWTP could adequately treat wastewater flows from an additional 545 developed acres. 4.2 Wastewater Collection System Based on the "General Planning Approach" outlined in 3.0 of this Master Plan, the average daily wastewater flows and the peak wet weather wastewater flows were determined for each of the eleven delineated basins. These calculated flows are shown in Table 1, Appendix "B" and were utilized to recommend future wastewater facility improvements as each basin area develops and the demand for wastewater service dictates. 5.0 RECOMMENDED SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Having evaluated the wastewater treatment capabilities and from the analysis of the wastewater collection system, it is recommended that the City consider and plan for certain wastewater system improvements throughout the 50 year planning period. Depending on the City's growth rate and development pattern it is anticipated that additional treatment facilities along with upgrading and expanding the collection system will be required. 5.1 Wastewater Treatment Expansion The estimated area within the eleven delineated potential high growth basins totals approximately 42,239 acres, with 4,418 acres being in the southeast portion of the City and the remaining 37,821 acres being in the far southwest, west, and northwest part of the City. Considering the regulatory reserve capacity of the RRWWTP is only 2,108 acres, it is recommended that the City plan for expanding its wastewater treatment capacity by constructing a new treatment plant to serve the western portion of the planning area as shown by Figure 2 - Appendix "A". A new plant located in the northwest part of the City would accomplish three major objectives. • First, it would allow for the reserve capacity remaining at the RRWWTP and the NSWWTP to be utilized to accommodate the future growth in the areas closest to the existing plants. Specifically, these areas include all the east and southeast drainage basins, downtown and central portions of the City, and all of the Sheppard Air Force Base area. • Secondly, the new plant would be utilized to treat wastewater flows generated from the future growth areas in the far west and northwest portions of the City, subsequently preserving the capacity at the RRWWTP. Some of this area has been recently annexed by the City and it is anticipated that future annexations and growth will occur within these drainage basins. • Finally, the new plant would assist the City in meeting their Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandate of requiring the elimination of all collection system overflows. By diverting future flows to the new plant, relief would be provided for a large 5 portion of the existing system nearing capacity within the 50 year planning period. This would significantly reduce the risk of collection system overflows due to line capacity constraints. The new treatment facility could be constructed in phases as dictated by growth and development, with the first phase being approximately 4 MGD. Current wastewater flows from the Allred Prison, the southern portion of the Plum Creek basin (Old Iowa Park Road area), and the Tanglewood Subdivision (Lift Station 47) area could be diverted to the new plant under the first phase as shown in Figure 2A - Appendix "A". 5.2 Collection System Expansion Based on the data collected and the analysis performed on each delineated collection system basin, it was determined that portions of the existing system will require additional capacity during the planning period. Also, in order to provide adequate service for each basin, major trunk mains must be extended into the service areas as they develop. Following is a summary description of the recommended improvements for each of the eleven drainage basins. A map showing proposed expansion improvements is included as Figure 3 — Appendix"A". Also, a map is included as Figure 4 —Appendix"A"which shows various existing lift stations which may be eliminated, as gravity collection systems are extended to provide sewer service to the basins. It is estimated that approximately $15,000 per year in maintenance and operation could be saved for each station eliminated. As the basins develop and final design is done for each basin, it is possible that the trunk mains could be downsized depending on the slope of the selected route. Preliminary routes for the proposed lines were selected primarily along existing drainage features to facilitate gravity flow and the lines were sized based on minimum design grades to convey the peak wet weather flow from each basin. Quincy (toad Basin The Quincy Road area drains to the north and should be served by the existing 12"sewer line that runs parallel and north of Central Freeway. This line currently operates at approximately 70% of its capacity during peak wet weather events. The existing capacity of the 12" line is one (1) million gallons per day (MGD) with an existing peak design wet weather flow of 0.65 MGD. The peak developed flow from Quincy basin will add approximately 0.90 MGD for a total developed flow of approximately 1.6 MGD. The existing 12"trunk main will need to be upsized to an 18" line once development in Quincy Road basin reaches approximately 40%. Midwestern Basin This basin is currently served by an 18"to 27"sewer line adjacent to Henry Grace Freeway, that has adequate capacity based on 2050 population estimates. This basin also drains the Deer Creek, Kickapoo Airport and Rathgeber basins, and based on 2050 projection has adequate capacity to accommodate all future flows. 6 Deer Creek Basin The existing major subdivision in this basin is Bonny Homes that is sewered by an 8"line along Bonny Drive. Additional residences in the basin include large 5 acre tracts with septic systems along Deer Creek Road and the Woodhaven Addition which is currently served by Lift Station 40. This basin is currently about 30% developed with some potential for future growth. As this basin becomes more fully developed a new 12"trunk main is recommended along the creek immediately east of the Bonny Homes Subdivision. This trunk main location would provide for future upstream development in the Rathgeber basin as well as for the elimination of Lift Station 40 and 43. The large 5 acre tracts along Deer Creek Road could also be served by this trunk main. Rathgeber Basin This small basin currently has very little development although a small manufactured housing addition is being constructed along the west side of Highway 281 and will be served by Lift Station 40 until a gravity system becomes available. Future development in this basin would be served by the trunk main proposed for the Deer Creek basin. Kickapoo Airport Basin This basin currently contains the Kickapoo Airport that contributes very little flow to the collection system. Development of this basin is not anticipated in the near future, however, adequate sewer service would be provided by the existing Midwestern basin trunk main since drainage of the basin is primarily to the northeast. The southern portion of the basin may require service utilizing the existing Lift Station 40 and ultimately the Deer Creek basin main in the future. However, preliminary analysis shows that the entire basin could be conveyed directly to the Midwestern basin trunk main, subsequent to the construction of a proposed 10"line along the eastern portion of Kickapoo basin. State Hospital Basin The only entity presently contributing sewer flows within this basin is the State Hospital which is served by an existing 12" line. The line has adequate capacity for the current sewer flows, however, capacity of the trunk main downstream of this basin cannot adequately convey wet weather flows. Additionally, with a large development being proposed in sub-basin 1 it is anticipated that the existing 12" line will need to be upgraded. In order to provide adequate future sewer service for development within this basin and to accommodate downstream wet weather flows it is recommended that a 24" line be extended from near Lift Station 25 along Holliday Creek to the south side of Southwest Parkway. In addition, a 21"/15" line is recommended for service into the State Hospital basin. Immediately downstream of the State Hospital basin is the Southmoor area that has historically experienced overflows due to capacity constraints. In conjunction with the State Hospital basin improvements it is recommended that the existing 12" line along Lake Park Drive be upgraded 7 to a 21"and that a 12"gravity diversion line be constructed along Weeks Drive to eliminate the Southmoor area overflows. These improvements would provide a more economical solution for the Southmoor area than was originally proposed in the 1995 SSES Study. Sisk Road Basin A trend that is not anticipated to change in the near future is the rapid development of the southwest area of Wichita Falls including the Sisk Road basin. Unfortunately, this basin is also the most difficult basin to provide sewer service through existing or planned system expansions, due to its proximity and drainage course to Lake Wichita. The presence of Lake Wichita necessitates the use of lift stations to convey sewage around the Lake and into the existing treatment system. Since sewage from this basin must be pumped regardless of its final disposal point, it follows that all flows from the basin could be collected at a primary lift station and pumped to the proposed new treatment plant at a minimal increase in construction and operating costs. The Kovarik Road basin collection system has been designed, therefore, to convey flows from the entire Sisk Road basin. It is recommended that a major lift station be constructed at a location in the basin so that a gravity system can be utilized to service the majority of the basin. The force main from this lift station would convey flow into the proposed 42"trunk main designed for the Sisk Road basin and the Kovarik basin downstream of the Sisk Road basin. Generally, the Sisk Road basin would be served by the 24"/18"/15"/12"/10"gravity lines from the various sub-basins into the proposed lift station. Also, it is anticipated that Lift Station 23, 51, and 57 would be eliminated as the gravity system was constructed for sub-basin 1 and 4. Kovarik Basin This basin is sparsely populated with a few sizable residences having been constructed in the past five years. With the growth of southwest Wichita Falls, this basin is anticipated to develop more rapidly in the near future. The basin drains to the Wichita River and thus would benefit greatly from the addition of a wastewater treatment plant located along the River. It is recommended that this basin be served by a proposed 48"/42"trunk main along Barnett Road with 15'�12'�10" lines serving the various sub-basins. In addition the 48"/42"trunk main will convey the wastewater flow from the Sisk Road basin along with the Kovarik basin into the proposed wastewater treatment plant. As the gravity systems are constructed for sub-basin 2 and 3, it is anticipated that Lift Station 24, 52, 53 and 61 will be eliminated. Wichita Valley Basin This basin could be an area that develops very slowly. However, it is recommended that as development occurs, the basin be served with 36"/33"/30"/27"/24"/21"trunk main. Also, the flows from this basin will be treated at the new wastewater treatment plant. 8 Prison Basin This basin contains the rapidly expanding Allred State Prison facility that currently contributes a substantial quantity of wastewater flow into the system. In addition, this is another area that the City recently annexed and there is an expressed demand for adequate sewer service. Wastewater from the prison is pumped approximately 3.75 miles across two drainage basins and into an existing gravity line that is nearing capacity. It is recommended that this basin, along with the prison, be served with a 36"/33"/30"/21"gravity trunk main and that the flow be directed to the proposed wastewater treatment plant. Plum Creek Basin Portions of Plum Creek are currently served by gravity sewer collection systems. However, as is typical in perimeter city development the flows are pumped to adjacent service areas, thus causing capacity problems in adjacent basins. It is recommended that this basin be served by constructing a 33"/30"/24"/15"/12"gravity trunk main from the proposed wastewater treatment plant north into the plum creek basin. With these improvements, the proposed Old Iowa Park Road Expansion Project as proposed in the 1995 SSES study would be eliminated. In addition, it is anticipated that existing Lift Station 37 and 39 would be eliminated. 6.0 ESTIMATED COST OF IMPROVEMENTS A comprehensive master sewer plan has been defined in the previous sections of this report. With the recommended improvements being dependent on future growth rates and development patterns, it is imperative that the City consider a realistic multi-year financial and implementation plan. To assist in developing such a plan, cost estimates were prepared for all recommended improvements. These costs are presented in the following portion of this report section. Proposed West Side Treatment Plant 4 MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant = $ 8,000,000.00 36" Gravity Sewer Line (Prison Flow) 11,000 LF @ $300/LF = 3,300,000.00 33" Gravity Sewer Line (Prison Flow) 10,500 LF @ $275/LF = 2,887,500.00 * 33" Gravity Sewer Line (Old Iowa Park Rd. Flow) 7,000 LF @ $275/LF = 1,925,000.00 Divert Tanglewood Flow (Lift Sta. 47) LS @ = 262,500.00 Site Development Work (Treatment Plant) = 750,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 17,125,000.00 Land Acquisition (50 acres) = 175,000.00 Engineering = 1,700,000.00 Contingencies = 2,000,000.00 9 Estimated Total Cost = $ 21,000,000.00 * With construction of the 33" Line to the new plant, the "Old Iowa Park Road Interceptor" project as proposed in the 1995 SSES study would be eliminated. That project was estimated at $2,855,000.00. Quincy Road Basin No Trunk Main Improvement Required Midwestern Basin 12"Gravity Sewer Line 6,000 LF @ $125/1-F = $ 750,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 750,000.00 Engineering = 70,000.00 Contingencies = 110,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 930,000.00 Deer Creek Basin 18"Gravity Sewer Line 5,500 LF @ $175/1-F = $ 962,500.00 12" Gravity Sewer Line 4,000 LF @ $125/1-F = 500,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 1,462,500.00 Engineering = 120,000.00 Contingencies = 220,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 1,802,500.00 Rathgeber Basin No Trunk Main Improvement Required Kickapoo Basin 10"Gravity Sewer Line 6,500 LF @ $110/LF = $ 715,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 715,000.00 Engineering = 65,000.00 Contingencies = 100,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 880,000.00 State Hospital Basin 21"Gravity Sewer Line 5,000 LF @ $190/1-F = $ 950,000.00 15"Gravity Sewer Line 7,000 LF @ $150/1-F = 1,050,000.00 10 Holliday Creek Expansion: 24"Gravity Sewer Line 8,500 LF @ $200/1-F = 1,700,000.00 * Southmoor Expansion: Pipe Burst 12"to 21" 4,100 LF @ 150/1-F = 615,000.00 12"Gravity Sewer Line 2,200 LF @ $125/1-F = 275,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 4,590,000.00 Engineering = 390,000.00 Contingencies = 920,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 5,900,000.00 * With this expansion work, the "Southmoor Interceptor Relief' as proposed in the 1995 SSES Study would be eliminated. That project was estimated to cost $2,312,500.00 Sisk Road Basin 24"Gravity Sewer Line 10,000 LF @ $200/1-F = $ 2,000,000.00 18"Gravity Sewer Line 8,000 LF @ $175/1-F = 1,400,000.00 15"Gravity Sewer Line 3,000 LF @ $150/1-F = 450,000.00 12"Gravity Sewer Line 25,000 LF @ $125/1-F = 3,125,000.00 10"Gravity Sewer Line 4,500 LF @ $110/LF = 495,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 7,470,000.00 Engineering = 600,000.00 Contingencies = 1,100,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 9,170,000.00 Kovarik Basin 48"Gravity Sewer Line 12,500 LF @ $400/1-F = $ 5,000,000.00 42"Gravity Sewer Line 11,000 LF @ $350/1-F = 3,850,000.00 15"Gravity Sewer Line 16,000 LF @ $150/1-F = 2,400,000.00 12" Gravity Sewer Line 10,000 LF @ $125/1-F = 1,250,000.00 10" Gravity Sewer Line 3,500 LF @ $110/1-F = 385,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 12,885,000.00 Engineering = 1,000,000.00 Contingencies = 1,900,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 15,785,000.00 11 Wichita Valley Basin 39"Gravity Sewer Line 7,000 LF @ $325/1-F = $ 2,275,000.00 36" Gravity Sewer Line 3,000 LF @ $300/1-F = 900,000.00 33"Gravity Sewer Line 8,500 LF @ $275/1-F = 2,337,500.00 30"Gravity Sewer Line 7,500 LF @ $250/LF = 1,875,000.00 27"Gravity Sewer Line 4,000 LF @ $225/1-F = 900,000.00 24"Gravity Sewer Line 5,000 LF @ $200/1-F = 1,000,000.00 21"Gravity Sewer Line 5,000 LF @ $190/LF = 950,000.00 12" Gravity Sewer Line 9,000 LF @ $125/LF = 1,125,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 11,362,500.00 Engineering = 900,000.00 Contingencies = 1,700,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 13,962,500.00 Prison Basin 30"Gravity Sewer Line 6,500 LF @ $250/LF = 1,625,000.00 21"Gravity Sewer Line 4,500 LF @ $190/1-F = 855,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 2,480,000.00 Engineering = 250,000.00 Contingencies = 375,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 3,105,000.00 Plum Creek Basin 30"Gravity Sewer Line 7,500 LF @ $250/1-F = 1,875,000.00 24"Gravity Sewer Line 5,000 LF @ $200/1-F = 1,000,000.00 15"Gravity Sewer Line 5,500 LF @ $150/LF = 825,000.00 12"Gravity Sewer Line 5,000 LF @ $125/LF = 625,000.00 10" Force Main Relocation 4,000 LF @ $65/1-F = 260,000.00 Estimated Construction Cost = $ 4,585,000.00 Engineering = 450,000.00 Contingencies = 750,000.00 Total Estimated Cost = $ 5,785,000.00 Total Estimated Cost (all basins) _ $ 78,320,000.00 12 7.0 PLAN CLOSURE AND GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS As the City of Wichita Falls continues to slowly grow and the population centroid steadily moves west, it is imperative that the City be guided by a comprehensive master sewer plan to meet the service needs of the community. With annexation of areas to the west and northwest it is assumed that development of these areas will be accelerated and the City will experience an increased demand for adequate wastewater facilities. In addition, there are other areas in the south and southeast portions of the City where development is occurring that will require improvements in order to accommodate the additional sewage flows along with eliminating existing collection system overflows as mandated by EPA. After a thorough analysis and evaluation of the entire metropolitan area, the following conclusions and general recommendations are offered in utilizing the prepared Master Sewer Plan as a guidance document through the 50 year planning period. In addition, based on the following general recommendations, a planning schedule for the years 2000 through 2005 is shown in Appendix "B". • By the year 2001 the City should be prepared to construct the required improvements in the Southmoor area to eliminate wet weather overflows in this portion of the existing collection system as mandated by EPA. • By the year 2001 the City should be prepared to construct the required improvements along Holliday Creek from Lift Station 25 south to intercept/divert flow from the existing 12" State Hospital Line. • By the year 2002 the City should be prepared to construct a new 4 MGD wastewater treatment plant in the northwest portion of the City. • By the year 2003 the City should be prepared to construct the required improvements in the Old Iowa Park Road area to eliminate wet weather overflows in this portion of the existing collection system as mandated by EPA. • By the year 2003 the City should be prepared to construct the required improvements to divert the Tanglewood Subdivision flow into the new treatment plant from the existing Lift Station No. 47. • By the year 2004 the City should be prepared to construct the necessary improvements in the Prison basin area to provide sewer service to the northwest annexed area and to divert the Prison wastewater flow south to the new treatment plant. • By the year 2005 the City should be prepared to construct the North basin Interceptor as recommended in the SSES study to comply with EPA. • As growth and development dictate, the necessary collection system improvements should be provided in general compliance with the Master Plan for each of the delineated drainage basins. • Diverting of wastewater flows from one natural drainage basin to another should be avoided, unless adequate trunk main capacity is available in the receiving basin. • The City should monitor and periodically evaluate the City growth rate and development patterns so as to provide for the necessary wastewater facilities in a timely and orderly manner. 13 APPENDIX "A" FIGURE 2A. PHASE I FUTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT RECOMMENDATIONS � 49 I // GRAPHIC SCALE r REILLY RD. I � � 0 1500' 3000' 6000 ® / ( IN FEET ) PRISON ; z PLU 1 inch = 3000ft. ` BASIN CAz CREEK ` 10. o BASIN i \ i w I 281 Ni i toTH I 10 EST FREE I I J P EASAN T��ALLEY I BUS ' O / OO - - 28 8Iw VA I o I LLD I o Wq PKI �. Y PROPOSED TREATMENT jW CD PLANT 120) \ I I i I � � L I LI FT 48 STA.47 -,- --� TH 5T, 001 LLJ KOVAkK Q • LEGEND EXISTING 10" & LARGER SEWER LINE I O I �M0 — — BASIN BOUNDARY SUB—BASIN NUMBER �� *► PROPOSED TREATMENT PLANT 27 r� NEW PHASE 1 SEWER LINE I ---- WITH DIAMETER � / ��•' 82 I � g82 CALL IELD r r r . TEXAS ------------ q .�Md r p , i l aft Q �tJ�ir. �iyy mum rs f'(. ldL tfnewrT MUM C a �. ��M�_!'n !!�'•: +�1�'�►��Win1'. �r0�1��`7� �w � wrrrw ArMww� � p n 1 ii r� � ��t,rc•' *w�+w■*�ww=:r.-wll1llMl�`�•��p�s�p��1��•auLau ..^' �t',•C��'!"�t��QO�Qd;,O��A-0 Q7'vuu�i� � � 'f5s y>>!` '0ii Ui iSA�.�Yaaaaaa:a�1�., p �auu. --- o s atacu�,uuuu�a , Rod Ii.^i�I�♦ �� d rl�t��AC�►1J!'tee Yw7w.w■ >�_ iAlre+MMl .A�irY F � r. ....s� s. �.,� 7777O��da�l7t�ft=7�""�M�If� ` � �a.aaraQy��,, iGGGf�{i oan=�MiYirw� A vi p/1/IR11�,v3'" - W: I �:w'�i.�/�0 Vm�� •---�,�� t�' r GD Y' r Ar .•, � rrr�•Tura • �� a 11 • .� ��a _��li��l��r♦�� ;�fir"' A,rZy �� !!' 'A �� lire" /r ICY► !�� l�i�� 1ts f 1 --TTW o Table 1. Basin Flow Analysis Data BASIN Sub- AREA 50 Year population Design Design Average Average Basin (ACRES) LUF Flow (mgd) Flow(cfs) Flow(mgd) Flow (cfs) QUINCY RD. 1 499 0.8 3,633 0.91 1.41 0.45 0.70 MIDWESTERN 1 1,001 0.8 7,287 1.82 2.82 0.91 1.41 DEER CREEK 1 987 0.8 7,185 1.80 2.78 0.90 1.39 KICKAPOO 1 226 0.8 1,645 0.41 0.64 0.21 0.32 RATHGEBER 1 314 0.8 2,286 0.57 0.88 0.29 0.44 1 589 0.8 4,288 1.07 1.66 0.54 0.83 STATE HOSPITAL 2 802 0.8 5,839 1.46 2.26 0.73 1.13 1 2,841 0.7 18,097 4.52 7.00 2.26 3.50 2 1,134 0.6 6,192 1.55 2.40 0.77 1.20 SISK RD. 3 2,666 0.5 12,130 3.03 4.69 1.52 2.35 4 513 0.7 3,268 0.82 1.26 0.41 0.63 1 1,324 0.5 6,024 1.51 2.33 0.75 1.17 2 1,286 0.6 7,022 1.76 2.72 0.88 1.36 KOVARIK 3 1,123 0.7 7,154 1.79 2.77 0.89 1.38 4 656 0.7 4,179 1.04 1.62 0.52 0.81 5 256 0.7 1,631 0.41 0.631 0.20 0.32 1 1,882 0.5 8,563 2.14 3.31 1.07 1.66 2 878 0.5 3,995 1.00 1.55 0.50 0.77 WICHITA VALLEY 3 1,189 0.5 5,410 1.35 2.09 0.68 1.05 4 925 0.5 4,209 1.05 1.63 0.53 0.81 5 1,857 0.5 8,449 2.11 3.27 1.06 1.63 6 3,334 0.4 12,136 3.03 4.70 1.52 2.35 1 1,361 0.5 6,193 1.55 2.40 0.77 1.20 2 753 0.5 3,426 0.86 1.33 0.43 0.66 PRISON 3 1,471 0.5 6,693 1.67 2.59 0.84 1.30 4 1,640 0.6 8,954 2.24 3.47 1.12 1.73 5 3,598 0.4 13,097 3.27 5.07 1.64 2.53 1 585 0.6 3,194 0.80 1.24 0.40 0.62 2 1,594 0.8 11,604 2.90 4.49 1.45 2.25 PLUM CREEK 3 3,598 0.6 191645 4.91 7.60 2.46 3.80 4 705 0.5 3,208 0.80 1.24 0.40 0.62 5 1 652 0.6 3,560 0.89 1.38 0.44 0.69 * - Land Use Factor(LUF) - developable land ratio NOTICE OF MEETING Regular Meeting Of The Mayor And City Council Of The City Of Wichita Falls, Texas To Be Held In The City Council Chambers Of The Memorial Auditorium On Tuesday, July 20, 1999, Beginning At 8:30 a.m. City Council: Mayor Kay Yeager - Councilors Arthur Bea Williams, Dan Shine, James Esther, William Altman, Johnny Burns, and Bud Beaty 1 . Call to Order. 2. Invocation: 3. Presentations: Employee of the Month 4. Comments From The Public To Members Of The City Council On Items Which Are Not On The City Council Agenda. (The Regular Agenda will begin upon completion of public comments, or no later than 9:00 a.m. Individuals who prior to this Council meeting signed up to speak, but could not be heard before 9:00 a.m. due to time constraints, may speak at the conclusion of the meeting.) 5. Approval of Minutes CONSENT AGENDA 6. Receive Minutes: a. Wichita Falls Sales Tax (413) Corporation (1) October 19, 1998 (2) June 15, 1999 a. Helen Farabee Regional MHMR Center Board of Trustees - May 27, 1999 b. Board of Electrical Examiners — June 10, 1999 REGULAR AGENDA City Council Agenda Tuesday, July 20, 1999 Page 2 7. Public Hearings: a. Final Public Hearing On The Proposed Use Of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) And Home Program Funds Under The Consolidated Plan. 8. Ordinances: a. Ordinance Making An Appropriation Of $3,000 In The Special Revenue Fund For Grant Revenue Received From The Texas Department Of Health And Authorizing The City Manager To Execute Contract Accepting Same. (City Council Bill #140) b. Ordinance Making An Appropriation In The General Fund In The Amount Of $13,500 For Costs Associated With Conducting A City Election To Be Held In August of 1999. (City Council Bill #141) c. Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 53-99 Replacing Election Official For The August 14, 1999 Special Election. (City Council Bill #142) d. Ordinance Adding Section 12-6, Chapter 12 of the Code of Ordinances, Establishing a Municipal Court Technology Fund. (City Council Bill #143) e. Ordinance Adding Section 12-7 To Chapter 12 Of The Code Of Ordinances, Assessing A Court Cost Of Five Dollars On Each Parking Violation For Funding Assistance Of School Crossing Guard Program. (City Council Bill #144) f. Ordinance Amending Section 6200 Of The Zoning Ordinance, Off-Street Parking, Loading And Curb-Cut Regulations And Section 2030, Definitions. (City Council Bill #145) g. Ordinance Amending Appendix C Of The Zoning Ordinance At Section 6465, Entitled "Airport Board Of Adjustment," To Provide For Terms Of Office, Board Composition, And Staggered Terms Of Said Board. (City Council Bill #146) 8. Ordinances (cont'd): City Council Agenda Tuesday, July 20, 1999 Page 3 h. Ordinance Repealing Ordinances 3847 And 3759 Concerning The Clean Community Commission; Which Ordinances Have Been Superseded By Ordinance 92-84; Additionally Repealing Ordinances 1706, 2387, 2837, 3187, And 3806 Concerning The Commission On Highway Transportation Assistance Needs, Which Ordinances Have Been Superseded By Ordinance 142-95. (City Council Bill #147) i. An Ordinance Establishing A Water Resources Commission; Defining Its Composition, Objectives And Functions. (City Council Bill #148) 9. Resolutions: a. Resolution Repealing Resolution No. 31-89, Which Established The Water Resources Commission. (City Council Bill #149) b. Resolution Approving The Proposed Use Of Funds In The Action Plan Of The Consolidated Plan For The Period Of October 1 , 1999 To September 30, 2000. (City Council Bill #150) c. Resolution Accepting The Service Plan For Annexation Of The Reilly Road Area And Calling For Public Hearings. (City Council Bill #151) d. Resolution Accepting The Service Plan For Annexation Of The North Pleasant Valley Area And Calling For Public Hearings. (City Council Bill #152) e. Resolution Accepting The Service Plan For Annexation Of The City View Area And Calling For Public Hearings (City Council Bill #153) f. Resolution Accepting The Service Plan For Annexation Of The FM 367 Area And Calling For Public Hearings. (City Council Bill #154) g. Resolution Approving The FY 1999-00 Budget For The Wichita Falls Economic Development Corporation (4A Sales Tax). (City Council Bill #155) 9. Resolutions (cont'd): City Council Agenda Tuesday, July 20, 1999 Page 4 h. Resolution Approving The FY 1999-00 Budget For The Wichita Falls (413) Sales Tax Corporation. (City Council Bill #156) i. Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A Contract With Bundy, Young, Sims, And Potter, Inc. For Architectural Services For The Improvements To the Second Floor Of The Library. (City Council Bill #157) j. Resolution To Pursue Funding Options Necessary To Finance The MPEC Coliseum And To Request The MPEC Board To Work With The Architects To Complete The Final Construction Plans. (City Council Bill #158) k. Resolution Ratifying The Work Of The Cities' Steering Committee In PUC Docket 20285 And Approving A Settlement Of TU Electric's Fuel Reconciliation Case. (City Council Bill #159) 10. Other Council Matters: a. Motion To Postpone The Starting Time Of The September 7, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting. b. Discussion Of Items Of Concern To Members Of The City Council. c. Staff/Council Discussion. (1) Presentation: Master Wastewater Plan d. Executive Session: (1) Consider Qualifications Of Possible Appointees To The Helen Farabee Regional MHMR Center Board of Trustees As Authorized By Section 551 .074 Of The Texas Government Code. a. Consider Appointments (1) The Helen Farabee Regional MHMR Center Board of Trustees 11 . Adjourn. City Council Agenda Tuesday, July 20, 1999 Page 5 Wheelchair or handicapped accessibility to the meeting is possible by using the handicapped parking spaces, ramp and elevator located off the east parking lot on Sixth Street entrance. Spanish language interpreters, deaf interpreters, Braille copies or any other special needs will be provided to any person requesting a special service with at least 24 hours notice. Please call the City Clerk's Office at 761-7409. CERTIFICATION I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at Memorial Auditorium, Wichita Falls, Texas on the day of , 19 at o'clock (a.m.)(p.m.). City Clerk