Loading...
Min 06/17/1997 558 Wichita Falls, Texas Memorial Auditorium Building June 17, 1997 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 a .m. , with the following members present : Kay Yeager - Mayor Don Johnston - Councilors Angus Thompson - Bill Daniel - J. W. Martin - Harold Hawkins - Jim Berzina - City Manager Greg Humbach - City Attorney Lydia Torres - City Clerk Dan Shine - Absent Mayor Yeager called the meeting to order. The invocation was given by Rev. Dr. Raymond Permar, Church on the Rock. Mayor Yeager welcomed Aaron May and Brad May, boy scouts from Troop 261 who were working on their community and citizenship badge . Item 3 Brenda Downing, H.C. 51, Box 60, Henrietta, Texas, stated that she lives at the lake and she was cited for having a mosquito tent and wanted to know what they were supposed to do about the mosquitoes out there . She was directed to discuss this with Mr. Clark. Rod Brennan, Interim Executive Director of the Helen Farabee Center, informed that the proposed merger with the Rolling Plains State Operated Community Services, which he mentioned to the Council in March, is a step closer. The concerned parties are in the process of obtaining information from the various councils as to their approval or disapproval on the merger. A formal agenda item on the merger will be presented to the Council at their July 1 meeting for action. Merger information has been provided to Council . 559 Item 3 cont ' d. Tom Allensworth, Attorney representing Larry Laughlin and Jerry Hodges, 1401 Holliday, Suite 316 , asked that Council reconsider Mr. Laughlin' s waiver request on the single wide trailer located on Seymour Highway. He said that his clients were not notified that their request was on the agenda, and he requested that this be placed on the July 1 Council agenda for reconsideration. It was his understanding that three Council members could place an item on the agenda for reconsideration. He understood that Councilors Hawkins and Thompson voted to approve the waiver request and Councilor Shine, who will be back ' on the 20t'', may be interested in the motion for the reconsideration. If this item is reconsidered and his clients have an opportunity to present their side, he asked that Council approach it with an open mind. He asked for any questions . Mayor informed that in accordance to Council procedure under "Public Comments" Council does not get into a question and answer or debating situation. We understand your concerns . City Attorney explained that an item can be put on the agenda for reconsideration by the City Manager when requested by either the Mayor or three Councilors . Mr. Allensworth said that he understood. Items 4 Mayor pointed out that under Item 13b the word "that" was deleted, the second sentence was changed slightly, and the third sentence was deleted. Minutes were approved as corrected. Items 5a-8b Moved by Councilor Martin that the Consent Agenda be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston and carried by the following vote . Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Thompson, Daniel, Martin and Hawkins Nays : None Item 5a RESOLUTION NO. 87-97 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR DESIGN AND INSPECTION OF SANITARY LANDFILL CELL XI, FINAL COVER PROJECT 560 Item 5b RESOLUTION NO. 88-97 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH HNTB COMPANIES FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES AT MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Item 6a RESOLUTION NO, 89-97 RESOLUTION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL OF MULTIPLE LABORATORIES TO PROVIDE LABORATORY SERVICES FOR THE FEDERAL INFORMATION COLLECTION RULE Item 7a RESOLUTION NO, 90-97 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER 2 FOR SOUTHWEST LIFT STATION AND FORCE MAIN PROJECT Item 7b RESOLUTION NO. 91-97 RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT THE CDBG TRAVIS STREET DRAINAGE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE FINAL PAYMENT TO DUKE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Item 7c RESOLUTION NO. 92-97 RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT THE KEMP PUBLIC LIBRARY REROOF PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE FINAL PAYMENT TO ARMORED ROOFING COMPANY Item 8a-8b Minutes of the following board and commission were received. a. Wichita Falls Traffic Safety Commission, May 7, 1997 b. Wichita Falls Park Board, May 22 , 1997 Item 9a A public hearing was held considering approval of an amendment of the Proposed Use of Funds in a previously approved Consolidated Plan by increasing the funding level of the Rehabilitation Project at the East Branch YMCA and approving funding for a Housing initiative . Mayor Yeager declared the public hearing open and allowed for public comment . Councilor Hawkins commented that this shows we are using the money carefully and are being good stewards of the CDBG funds . He mentioned that the Spudder Park Shelter and Fire 561 Item 9a cont ' d. Station No. 3 Projects were complete . Canceled projects are Child Care, Inc . renovations and Southside Girls Club re- roofing. The new projects would be East Branch Y re-roofing ($53 , 000 . 00) and a housing feasibility study ($5, 000 . 00) , leaving $2, 780 . 06 unappropriated. Mayor allowed for additional comments . There being none the Mayor declared the public hearing closed. �w Item 10a A proposed ordinance was presented amending Article VII, Storm Water Runoff, of Chapter 32 of the City Ordinances . Moved by Councilor Thompson that proposed ordinance be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston. Mayor stated that this item and item 10c were items which were discussed at length at the Council retreat . Councilor Johnston suggested that Council hold a worksession on these items in order to have more exchange with the people who will be impacted by this . Moved by Councilor Martin that items 10a and 10c be tabled and that a worksession be held Tuesday, June 24 , 1997 at 10 : 00 a.m. to discuss these items . Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston and carried by the following vote . Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays : None It was noted that this would be an open session and would be televised. Item 10b ORDINANCE NO. 56-97 ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION Moved by Councilor Johnston that Ordinance No. 56-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson. Mr. Bob Parker informed that there was an error in the ordinance which reflected the budget year as 1997-1998 . He requested that this be amended to read 1996-1997 budget year. 562 Item 10b cont ' d. Moved by Councilor Hawkins to amend the motion to read 1996-1997 budget year. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston and carried by the following vote . The vote was on the motion as amended. Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays : None Item 10c This item was tabled under Item 10a. Item 10d ORDINANCE NO 57-97 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS; CONSENTING TO THE ANNEXATION OF A CERTAIN 296 . 88 ACRE TRACT OF LAND BY THE TOWN OF DEAN, ALL OR A PORTION OF WHICH LIES WITHIN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Martin that Ordinance No. 57-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston. Kerry Roach, Attorney representing the town of Dean, stated that the town of Dean has an opportunity for growth. There is a land developer who has interest in developing some ranchettes on a 300 acre tract around the town of Dean. We ask for favorable consideration of this ordinance . Councilor Johnston stepped out of the Council Chambers . Motion carried by the following vote . Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays : None 563 Item lla RESOLUTION NO. 93-97 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF THE PROPOSED USE OF FUNDS IN A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONSOLIDATED PLAN, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO AMEND THE CURRENT CONTRACT, FINDING AND -DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Hawkins that Resolution No. 93-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson and carried by the following vote . Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays : None Item llb RESOLUTION NO. 94-97 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF THE PROPOSED USE OF FUNDS IN A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONSOLIDATED PLAN, row ALLOCATING FUNDING TO A NEW PROJECT, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS PASSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Hawkins that Resolution No. 94-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson. Councilor Johnston returned to the Council Chambers . Motion carried by the following vote . Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Thompson, Daniel Martin, and Hawkins Nays : None Item llc A proposed resolution was presented amending Resolution No. N" ` 151-96 at Section 6 . 4 , "Other Business" , concerning Rules of Procedure for the City Council Moved by Councilor Daniel that proposed resolution be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Martin. 564 Item llc cont ' d. Mayor called a point of order. She said that the original Resolution adopting the Rules of Procedure states that you have to have two readings before a change can be adopted, and she asked if this needed to be put off until the next Council meeting. City Attorney replied that it requires two votes and it will be on the agenda again at next Council meeting. Mayor commented that this amendment clarifies rules of procedure on how items can be placed on the Council agenda. Councilor Daniel felt that discussion was needed on this . His understanding is that people have approached this Council with matters of concern to them, and people were surprised that Council did not act on their requests at that time . People are not familiar on how a matter can be brought to a vote by the Council . In fact, there has been confusion by some Council members on that . What we are trying to do in this resolution is to streamline this procedure . He asked that the City Attorney explain the process . City Attorney stated that this specifies how an item gets on the agenda, procedurally, either through the request of the Mayor or three Councilors . As far as action items are concerned, they are covered by the Open Meetings Act . The reason action cannot be taken when someone comes before the Council seeking Council action, is that the item has to be placed on the agenda and posted 72 hours before Council can take action in accordance with the Open Meetings Act . The Open Meetings Act is not addressed by this Resolution, it is a separate piece of Statute . This Resolution formalizes a procedure for the Council getting items on the agenda. Obviously, a routine matter as a required Council action is placed on the agenda through the City Manager' s office . Councilor Daniel stated that if a person signs up to speak about an item, Council is not going to act on it at that time . We are taking it under advisement and we may ask Staff to address and bring it to the Council . City Attorney replied that he was correct and at that time Council also has the option if three Councilors feel strongly about an item and feel it needs some action on behalf of the Council, City Manager can be directed to put it on a future agenda for action. Councilor Daniel understood that it would not be done at the beginning of the meeting, but might be done during the closing Council comments . At that time, we could get a consensus and ask that it be put on the agenda. City Attorney concurred. Councilor Hawkins was concerned that the amendment says that if a person wants something on the agenda that they come to the City Manager before 10 : 00 a.m. Tuesday before the next Tuesday Council meeting. Councilor Hawkins felt it should be broadened to read: "any person who wishes to address the Council on the regular portion of the agenda. " Our agenda is broken down into more than one section. We are discussing having an item in the regular agenda, which has to be there the Tuesday before the Council meeting. To me, it needs to be broadened to the regular agenda because to everybody else this is a regular agenda, and what we are discussing is the action portion of the agenda. For instance, Mr. Allensworth' s request to place Mr. Laughlin' s waiver regarding the mobile home back on the agenda. If they had gone before the City Manager before 565 Item llc cont ' d. last Tuesday requesting another hearing on this, and he chose to place it on the agenda, we could have heard and acted on it today. Mayor said she understood Councilor Hawkins' point that to most people the regular agenda means the whole thing. I think we need to exceed to the legal point . City Attorney stated that he did not see a problem with the wording. The City Manager has the discretion of whether he is going to put an item on the agenda. All this is saying is that if you want to put an item on the agenda you have to contact the City Manager' s Office by that time . Councilor Hawkins said that this does not say the City Manager' s discretion. This says that if someone wants an item on the agenda in that regular meeting portion of it, all they have to do is to go to the City Manager' s Office . Mayor commented that what Councilor Hawkins is trying to do is provide some defense for the City Manager so that he is not inundated with requests to put on the agenda. City Manager stated it does read that way and I think it should be clarified that it is still discretionary. Persons can always come to me and if I do not put it on the agenda, they can ask Council to put it on the agenda. Councilor Thompson asked if a citizen in the audience could ask that an item on the consent agenda be brought down to the regular agenda for discussion. City Manager assumed that Council would bring an item down for discussion if requested by someone in the audience . Mayor commented that she had not been asking the public only the Council if they wanted to move an item down from the Consent Agenda . Councilor Martin commented that citizens have the right to question, whether it is on the consent agenda or the regular agenda . Councilor Daniel said that the mechanism is there for someone to approach Council to have something put on the agenda, but it is confusing. They may sign up on Tuesday morning, the day of the meeting, thinking that they are going to get action from the Council, however, we cannot act on it unless it is on the agenda. The mechanism is there we just need to better explain. Councilor Hawkins stated that the City Manager sets the agenda and we as elected officials should be able to direct him to put something on the agenda. The Mayor has the right to direct him to put something on, but, how do the citizens get something on the agenda. They think they need to go to the City Manager' s Office and expect him to do it . Councilor Daniel said that we do not want to put the City Manager in a position of having to decide what should or should not be put on the agenda because it could be a matter for revising an ordinance . He has to be able to turn to the citizen and say if it is of sufficient concern to the Mayor or three Councilors they will ask to put it on the agenda. Councilor Hawkins said that under Section 6 .4 . 1 (a) where it says "to be considered" it should say "to be discussed" because if you consider it you act on it . City Attorney stated that was implied. Councilor Hawkins commented that if we discuss it we 566 Item llc cont ' d. don' t have to act on it, we can direct Staff at that point to bring us back an item to be voted on. Councilor Daniel commented that Sec . 6 .4 . 1 (a) is talking specifically about action agenda items . Councilor Hawkins concurred and he added that any person who wishes to address the Council on a regular agenda item needs only to advise the City Manager' s Office of that fact on a specific subject matter and it goes on the agenda. People in the audience have more say than I do. Councilor Hawkins said that Sec . 6 .4 . 1 (a) can be changed by adding the following: the City Manager, Mayor, or three Council members may direct that an item be put on the agenda as a consideration item. Mayor clarified that what Councilor Hawkins was trying to change is the permissive language of Section (a) which needs some further restriction, and I concur. Moved by Councilor Daniel to table this item for consideration at the July 1, 1997 Council meeting. Motion seconded by Councilor Hawkins and carried by the following vote . Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays : None Item lld RESOLUTION NO, 95-97 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF THE FIXED BASE OPERATOR' S LEASE AGREEMENT FROM BEST AVIATION SERVICES, INC. TO BLACKBIRD AVIATION, INC. ; FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION WAS DISCUSSED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW Moved by Councilor Thompson that Resolution No. 95-97 be passed. Motion seconded by Councilor Johnston. William D. Orcutt, 938 Kiowa, Burkburnett, Texas, stated that his focus would be to continue the improvements which he has jointly made with the City' s help. An additional focus is that most new business which comes to Wichita Falls comes through his facility, and their first impression is formed by Blackbird Aviation or Best Aviation. Working together on that focus is good not only for my new company but for the City as well . Councilor Hawkins questioned if the lease should be reviewed for any problem areas which needed to be addressed at this time . Mr. Robert Parker did not feel there was anything which needed to be addressed in this lease assignment . Motion carried by the following vote . 567 Item lid cont ' d. Ayes : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Nays : None Item 12a Moved by Councilor Martin to reject all bids for fuel containment facility at the Wichita Falls Municipal Airport and to re-bid. Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson. Councilor Hawkins stated that the rules were being changed by voting in the negative instead of the positive . The motion should be made to accept the bid. Councilor Martin withdrew his motion and Councilor Thompson withdrew his second. Moved by Councilor Martin to accept the bid from Jim Marshall Construction, Inc . for fuel containment facility at the Wichita Falls Municipal Airport in the amount of $198 , 684 . 00 . Motion seconded by Councilor Thompson and failed by the following vote . Ayes : None Nays : Mayor Yeager, Councilors Johnston, Thompson, Daniel, Martin, and Hawkins Item 13a Discussion of waivers on curb and gutter requirements of Appendix A, Subdivision 9 (B) (2) (a) of the Code of Ordinances was held. City Manager explained that at the Council retreat it was decided that waivers would be discussed at one Council meeting and voted on at the following meeting. Mr. Bill Parker, City Engineer provided information on the waiver requests . 1) Norman Nelson Addition, Block 1 This is on the south side of Seymour Highway and there is ° no curb and gutter in that vicinity. The nearest curb and gutter is at Lakey' s, west of this site . Also, there is curb and gutter on the northwest side of Seymour Highway going into Tanglewood, and curb and gutter at Berend Brothers . It is feasible to construct curb and gutter at this site and staff recommends disapproval of waiver. Councilor Hawkins asked if this property owner was required to put in curb and gutter, how are we going to get curb and gutter next to it? Mr. Bonnett replied that curbs and gutters 568 Item 13a cont ' d. are a function of the Subdivision Ordinance and a property being vacant would not be a part of the Subdivision Ordinance; there would be no requirement . The only opportunity to get curb and gutter under the current Ordinance is at the time a property is platted. If it is platted it can sit fallow for one or two years and someone else can build on it, as long as the property limits are not changed, without being exposed to the curb and gutter requirement . 2) Eden Housing Addition, Block 1 Waiver request is for curb and gutter adjacent to the property on the south side of Morgan Lane . Morgan Lane is 22 ft . wide within a thirty foot wide right-of-way. There is not sufficient right-of-way at this point even with the addition of 10 ft . of right-of-way being required by Planning. Lots are not contiguous and construction of curb and gutter would require reconstruction of the street within limited right-of-way. Staff recommends approval of waiver request . Councilor Daniel asked if they did not want to ask for curb and gutter because the City would be required to put in the street . Mr. Parker replied in the affirmative . Councilor Daniel questioned if the City was backing away from its responsibility. Mr. Bonnett replied that we do not have the availability of dollars to address, under the current Ordinance, what is now or would be the City' s responsibility. The curb and gutter in a rural cross section cannot, generally, be installed without the full street . We are in a catch 22 environment, but, there is an option to create a corpus of funds so that we can build the street with curb and gutter. Curb and gutter is only about $15/lineal ft . , but half a street would run approximately $80/lineal ft . Curbs and gutters are a minor portion of the issue . Councilor Daniel asked what the City' s goal was in regards to the streets and curbs and gutters and are we being consistent in meeting that goal? Mr. Bonnett replied that, in his opinion, City' s goal should always be curbs and gutters and streets in every urbanized environment . Councilor Daniel commented that Council is in a quandary because we require citizens to put in curb and gutter, however, the City waits to put in streets . Mr. Bonnett said that the issue is do we assign those costs to the abutting property owner or to the property owners at large? There is nothing wrong with doing it either way, but, we have to be prepared to do it . Councilor Daniel posed a question to City Manager. If we had a revised ordinance which required the developer to build the street, and we were facing the same waiver, what would our stance be? City Manager replied that he would be required to build the street . Councilor Daniel commented that our intent is to have the developer build the street but the City is not willing to do that now. He added, that he understood it was because of a lack of funds . City Manager said that there was a further dimension we needed to look at . We can keep going as we are now, continue with the waivers and continue to not get the streets or we can get the streets and it is a matter of how to pay for it . 569 Item 13a cont ' d. Councilor Hawkins asked if there was some other way. Will Bill 366 allow us to put the money up for later development? City Attorney agreed that it could be set up for later development . There is an Attorney General' s opinion which came out last month which would allow a city to require the cost of the curb and gutter and roadway to be placed in escrow for future development . Councilor Hawkins was concerned that we were going to end up with a "hodge podge" . City Manager agreed that is what could happen and that is why it would be better to waive these things and not put in the streets than to construct a "hodge podge" . He has asked the City Attorney to check to see if money once deposited could be used elsewhere satisfying the City' s most urgent priorities . Councilor Hawkins mentioned that when alleys and sidewalks were put in years ago, the abutting property owners were taxed. He asked if that was illegal now. Mr. Bonnett explained that those were put in as a part of a utility. It was not a formal assessment, but was driven by the garbage fee and if the assessment was not paid, water was terminated to the property. Under a normal assessment you can put a second lien to the property and sell assessment bonds to pay for the improvement . However, in Texas for personal property that second lien cannot be established, rather it is a personal debt with the property owner of record at time of assessment . That has been done here and our collection rate is dismal, and it is not an economically viable way to install the improvement . Councilor Hawkins asked if it was possible that we could fit under the Homestead Law changes . City Attorney replied no, it only changed for second mortgage, for improvements, and that kind of thing. It is not going to affect the ability of us to create a lien on the homestead and foreclose it for a paving project . Practical matter is the only time you collect that amount is when the property owner voluntarily pays it when the house is up for sale or sold. Councilor Hawkins felt that was better than all the waivers . (3) Kemp Subdivision, Lots 1-4 , Block 5 This is outside City limits on Barnett Road and Kovarik Road. There is no curb and gutter on west side of Barnett Road, and TXDOT has recommended for maintenance purposes that curb and gutter not be required, therefore, Staff recommends approval of this waiver. Councilor Hawkins asked if the County Commissioners had been asked their opinion on this . He suggested inviting the County Judge and the County Commissioners to attend Council' s worksession next Tuesday. Mr. Bonnett informed that he had talked to several of them on this issue . It is his opinion that we would have to coordinate the specific improvement with each and every commissioner for their respective district in order not to exacerbate their maintenance problems . I have a hard time envisioning a commissioner refusing a new road with proper drainage . Councilor Thompson wondered which direction we were going. Mayor commented that the question is are we going to draw the line, and when and where . Mr. Bonnett suggested that Council 570 Item 13a cont 'd. move deliberately and insure that the community is supportive in the long term of what you choose to do. You should get input from the broadest field of the community to insure whatever standard you establish is one with which the community will stay. It is not an economically viable environment to start and stop because it creates too many inequities to property interest . We are affecting property values significantly as well as options and we need to be cognizant of those folks . I can' t tell you where we are going; I can give you suggestions and options, but, ultimately the community needs to speak, and they can speak through this body. Councilor Daniel commented that it is not a matter of us standing still, it is whether or not we are going to change roads . Mayor said that in this light, she would like to request that Staff send notices to those people, such as developers, Planning and Zoning Commission members, etc . , who need to be included in next Tuesday' s discussion. She urged any citizen who feels strongly about this subject to be present next Tuesday or call any Council member to express their concerns and interest on these two issues . Mr. Bill Parker resumed to the same tract on Kovarik Road. There is no curb and gutter on south side of Kovarik Road and in order to install curb and gutter, reconstruction of a portion of Kovarik Road would be needed and installation of storm sewer facilities . Therefore, Staff recommends approval of this waiver. (4) Parkhill Road Addition, Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 . Parkhill Road and Seymour Highway. Parkhill Road is 20 . 5 feet wide and it is not technically feasible to construct curb and gutter at this site, therefore, Staff recommends approval of this waiver. Tract on Seymour Highway is technically feasible to construct curb and gutter, although it would require drainage improvements and reconstruction of Parkhill Road. Staff recommends approval of waiver. Councilor Hawkins asked if the proposal to be discussed on Tuesday were passed, would it require that person to put the culvert in and everything else in the road. Mr. Bonnett replied that it would and that would establish the full urban cross section in order to get a reasonable transition for drainage and traffic . Item 13b. Discussion was held of waivers on sidewalk requirements under Section 27-30 of the Code of Ordinances . (1) Expressway East Addition, Lot 2-B, Tract 2 . U.S . 287 service road east of Hammond Road and Production Blvd. Tract is 100 ft wide and would require sidewalk on Production Blvd. and along Central Freeway. It is technically feasible to construct sidewalks and Staff recommends disapproval of waiver. Councilor Hawkins asked if Lot 1 is vacant . Mr. Parker replied that it was and we are spinning off Lot 2-B. He said that there are curbs and gutters on both Production and on the frontage road. They can build a sidewalk adjacent to the curb. This request came from purchaser of Lot 2-B and the plat was 571 Item 13a cont ' d. required in order to spin off of that lot . This is a building permit issue not a platting issue . Mayor stated that this is an opportunity to require the curb and gutter on the west side of Lot 2-A. Mr. Parker stated that it is going to affect the purchaser of Lot 2-B and that will be discussed on Tuesday. (2) Parkhill Road Addition Parkhill Road and Seymour Highway is technically feasible to construct a sidewalk, therefore, Staff recommends disapproval of this waiver. Councilor Thompson said that for a long time the low income communities have not had the benefit available of sidewalks and paved streets until revenue sharing. I wonder if we are going to retreat to yesterday, since we do not have a corpus of funds . Also, we are talking from the engineering point if this is feasible or not . Mr. Bonnett did not say how this would come together and how it would impact the City. This, along with housing, needs to be discussed next week. Mr. Bonnett provided information on the two ordinances which Council will discuss next Tuesday. He informed that one relates to storm water and storm water management and the second relates to boundary streets . Mr. Bill Parker said they were given the task of storm PW water management to maximize downstream protection and minimize developer cost, and the ordinance you are going to discuss on N Tuesday has done that . We have stayed with the original ordinance and volume of detention facility will stay the same, and no additional land area needed. Emphasis is on outlet structure which will require a little more engineering scale . It will provide the downstream protection which citizens have been asking for. This is not to say that we will not have hydraulically challenged sites with which to deal . This is a straightforward ordinance . Councilor Daniel commented that the reason we are looking at this is that there are areas of town that have experienced flooding for years and areas which are experiencing new flooding, and we want to make sure that is minimized or eliminated if possible . Mr. Bonnett provided information on boundary streets, waivers and sprawling developments . He urged Council to move cautiously and with community support . He did not feel it made sense to pass an ordinance then either rescind or waive it . City Council recessed at 10 : 20 a .m. and reconvened at 10 :40 a.m. Item 14a Discussion on lake lot leasing policy. 572 Item 14a cont ' d. Mr. Dave Clark stated that when we talk about lakes we are talking about our principal water supply and this is with that in mind. We consider the use of living environment and recreational facility as secondary. Mr. Clark presented their proposal . 1) Do not re-lease lots which have become vacant . He reported that there is a sanitation issue, especially at Kickapoo, and the size of lots is also an issue . At both lakes, if more is built out there more services will be required. The City has taken a loss on the lake lot leases . 2) Advance payments - People are given the opportunity to pay in advance but in one year. We need to have knowledge of the property and this provides that opportunity. 3) Lake Arrowhead does not have crappie houses and they should not . 4) We believe docks should be inspected and permitted so that we can have record of that and the quality. 5) Docks should be principally attached to residential lease properties that back up to the lake . 6) There are squatters at both lakes, some who have constructed crappie houses with no permission, and they should be removed. We have provided a phase schedule for that type of removal . 4) Shoreline management - Everything should be handled by a lease with continual management . Councilor Daniel asked if we were building Lake Arrowhead today instead of thirty years ago, would we say that it is water supply and we are not going to lease any land? Mr. Clark felt that was a policy question that would need to be established at that time . I think what happened is that decision was not made at that time . The regulations and standards were not put in place to the degree that they should have been. In today' s environment I do not know if it is worth it . Councilor Daniel asked if the recommendation would be not to lease lots . City Manager replied that the recommendation would be not to lease lots . If you look at what the City has put in as far as costs you will never recover that in a lease . Looking back, I would not do it, but I would set up recreation facilities to use at the lake but not as a residence . Mayor stated that coming into play would be preservation of the lake as a water supply and the control of it . Councilor Johnston said that you would not lease it at that price but could consider it . Councilor Hawkins mentioned that that issue had been addressed in the past and have, hopefully, put in some safeguards . The lease is no longer 25 years; they are renewed on a 5 year basis . Glenda Newcomb, Lake Lot Coordinator informed that there are no new leases, except at Lake Kickapoo, which terminate in the year 2019 . They have a 25 year renewal option and have a 5 year review clause . Councilor Hawkins asked if we decide to build Lake Ringold, are we going to say no or are we going to try to put in place changes that we have done recently to try to bring sufficient income to help off-set this and pay for this? Are we going to 573 Item 14a cont ' d. stop because the property was poorly maintained in the past? I do not agree . If we need to increase the size of the lots, let' s do it . City Manager explained that Lake Kickapoo was without benefit of a survey. Councilor Hawkins clarified that he was referring to Lake Arrowhead on re-letting of the lots and if lots are too small they should be increased. Mr. Clark stated that if Council considers increasing development at Lake Arrowhead you need to consider the long term development of the roads, sewers, increase in clean water supply, garbage service, etc . That is where we have real reservations - the costs of doing that . Mr. Clark stated that this recommendation is from Staff and we believe in it . Councilor Thompson stated that you have to anticipate EPA regulations 5 to 10 years from now and it could be astronomical . City Manager said that Councilor Hawkins' question was based on why not and I question why. What is the City' s advantage to lease those lots if you are striving for a break even, at best . Councilor Johnston said that we have talked about the quality of life here, and the lakes are a beautiful asset out there . If we are not going to use money to support leases out there we surely are not going to spend money to support more parks and areas out there . In any lake development there are only so many parks you can put around them. Leasing those lots where they pay for themselves speaks to the quality of life . We need to let the leases pay for themselves . Lakes and water recreation in this area are a premium. People want to , use those lakes . Being able to rent a lot out there is a plus for this community. City Manager clarified that what we are saying is that we do not have enough lots out there to rent and you are not going to get enough money to put in the improvements you want . What you are doing is upping the risks of at some point having high costs, not to mention if EPA gets involved in this . It is not worth the gamble . You will not get enough revenue, but, if you do you will need to improve the facility. Councilor Johnston commented that you do not think there would be enough people to develop those lots, but I think if you turn those lots over to a developer you would see all kinds of houses developed out there and within a cost effective method. City Manager said that they need to remember there is a judge who sits in Clay County that talks about the quality and condition of the roads, and that is going to fall back on us . If our concern is the quality of life, I suggest that you will not get enough revenue from that resource to do it without the cost factor. If that is where we want to go then improve those facilities, but, I would not do it at the expense of upping the residence numbers at those lakes . Councilor Johnston felt it was an asset we can develop and use . Councilor Thompson asked if we could look at development from another fashion rather than becoming a residential area. He felt that moving in a direction which is going to encourage the building of houses, permanent structures, is going to be a risk on behalf of the City. Not everyone in Wichita Falls feels you should build houses . A lot of people feel it should be recreational; not everyone can take advantage of building houses . There are a lot of people who would rather see the 574 Item 14a cont ' d. parks improved than to see houses put out there . A lot of people resent the way it was put together and that only a select few are able to live out there . Councilor Hawkins questioned if we were going to live in the past forever. Mr. Clark commented that when you are talking about re- leasing you are actually talking about 40 leasable lots at Lake Arrowhead and 15 at Lake Kickapoo. Those are the numbers you are really talking about re-leasing, and potential new income . Councilor Daniel asked if he was proposing to terminate existing leases . Mr. Clark said that those who have a current lease and maintain their property, and if they want to transfer it, they can do that . That is done constantly. Mrs . Newcomb informed that leases at Lake Arrowhead expire between 2017 and 2022 . A few will go beyond that . The new $480 leases at Lake Arrowhead expire in 2019, and are for those who failed to make their payment . We still have another 25-30 years left under the old rates at Lake Arrowhead. Councilor Hawkins commented that persons who want to lease available lots next to theirs should be allowed to do so with a building restriction. Maybe we need to work with the other counties involved in regards to Lake Kickapoo. Councilor Daniel asked Councilor Thompson what the point of resentment was? Councilor Thompson replied that it was the low rates and that people can live dirt cheap out there, and also to some degree are subsidized by all the citizens with only a few benefiting. In addition, we all have to pay for the roads to be maintained but only a few have the use of it . Councilor Martin believes that this Council is trying to correct something that a council did at Lake Arrowhead years ago. We were supposed to have a building committee with a building code out there, but that has not been followed. Over the years, we, the Council, are the ones responsible for the condition that lake is in now. I think we should look at moving forward in some leases with an adequate rate . Let' s quit living in the past . We should develop a building code to make sure that junk does not go up out there . Mr. Clark assured the Council that the Building Code is being applied out there and there has been a complete change out there . Councilor Martin said that with development of the Lake, if we decide to go into leasing the lots, we should adopt other cities ' requirements, such as building so many feet from the water edge before they can have a septic tank. If they build close, within 500 feet, from the shoreline require a holding tank, which is not as contaminating to the soil as a septic tank. Mr. Clark said that current standards for septic systems are applied, and with lease transfers there is still some new construction that goes on out there . Councilor Martin stated that we do not have one good park out there, only a State park. The only park is Shoshonee and it is not maintained. Councilor Thompson said that if that is the case, it needs to be corrected. Councilor Martin questioned why 575 Item 14a cont ' d. that Park was not being developed. City Manager said that we do clean up and some roads have been resurfaced. He saw the Park in the spring and it looked pretty good. Councilor Martin asked why other lakes were not included in this discussion. Mr. Clark said that they had only been charged with the management of Lake Arrowhead and Kickapoo. Councilor Johnston asked if boat docks and crappie houses were permitted in current leases at Lake Arrowhead. Mr. Clark replied that they are not mentioned at all . We believe an inspection and permitting process should be established for the docks . We believe crappie houses are a compromise to the water supply because they apparently have a potential contamination ability, and we believe they should be removed. There are some that are not related to residential leases, they are just put there . Councilor Johnston agreed that any dock attached to a lease should be up to standards . However, he has a problem with private docks because it cuts off the shoreline from public access . Nevertheless, they should be permitted and inspected. Mr. Clark informed that Possum Kingdom Lake has removed all their crappie houses . Councilor Johnston asked what, besides the cost, was stopping us from removing those non-permitted crappie houses and docks that are on non-leased lots . Mr. Clark replied that there was not anything. We have identified at Lake Kickapoo a number of crappie houses that have no benefit of leases . That is a part of the presentation to your policy making as to where to go from here . If you support the premises of what we have submitted to you we will proceed forward. Councilor Johnston asked about the surveys at the lakes . Mr. Clark informed that Lake Arrowhead has been surveyed and the lots are identified. Lake Kickapoo was never surveyed and we cannot identify the lots by metes and bounds, only by lot and block. Councilor Hawkins suggested that when there was a change of ownership that a survey be required along existing fence lines . Councilor Johnston said that if you do not have metes and bounds you have to start somewhere with some boundary. Mr. Clark said that at some point it may not be necessary to do a survey. Councilor Hawkins suggested using the boundary from one fence to another fence to establish a reference point . He said he did not accept the idea of no new leases . I think we need to look at continuing to lease properties . We need to take advantage of those that are not leased to produce revenue to help pay for the streets and other improvements . Councilor Johnston asked if on transfer of leases, the City had an option of whether to approve or not approve . Mrs . Newcomb replied no, unless there is a situation which would prohibit the re-leasing of a lot, it is automatic . Mr. Clark said that Staff made proposals on crappie houses and docks, and we would like some direction. Councilor Hawkins said he agreed with the docks and crappie houses ; but they should be registered. He asked that the City Attorney have someone who specializes in real estate law to look into this to determine what we are able to do on lease renewal and lease transfers at Lake Arrowhead and Lake Kickapoo. City Attorney 576 Item 14a cont ' d. stated that Lake Kickapoo had already been addressed. Councilor Hawkins said that we need to tighten it up even more at both lakes; let more leases, but tighten it up more . Councilor Johnston asked if there was any legal problem with removing existing crappie houses and docks . City Attorney replied that there was not because to begin with they were not authorized. Mr. Clark asked Council what direction they wanted him to take . Councilor Martin said he agreed with the recommendation of the docks and crappie houses; they need to be addressed. He would like the Lake Lot Coordinator to continue with the clean up out there and to clamp down on the Building Code . Regarding payment of leases, he could not see why people cannot pay two or three years in advance since we inspect out there, and the inspector can tell if anyone has moved in or out . Councilor Hawkins said he agreed because the lease can be canceled if it is being violated. Mrs . Newcomb said that it is very difficult to tell whether they are moving in and out and it is difficult, on a transfer, to keep up with the payments if they pay in advance . It is more efficient to say it is due each year. The point of contact with these people has been tremendous . Councilor Hawkins said that a person cannot sublet without our approval and the money could be earning interest if paid in advance . City Manager mentioned that Councilor Hawkins was talking about one incident, but, we are talking about 400 leases . We would be getting interest from only a few people who paid in advance . Councilor Johnston said that he did not have a problem with one year annual payments . Councilor Martin said they could mail it in, but, what is to prevent them from paying for it and letting someone else live there . Councilor Johnston said how the funds were administered whether one or five years was fine; the main thing is to get the lots cleared up and decide what we were going to do about the leases . Mayor asked if Council was in agreement with the Mr. Clark' s memo with the exception of the lease/re-leasing of the lots . Council concurred. Mayor asked if Council wanted to open up additional land to be leased or restrict it to what is currently available for leasing. Councilor Johnston and Hawkins felt they needed to look at a map before they could answer that . Councilor Johnston thought there is a value of open areas, unoccupied. They did not think opening up new areas should be addressed at this time . Councilor Hawkins referred to new developments . If a developer came in with a plan to develop in an unplatted or undeveloped area he would agree with that, but, not for the City to do that . Councilor Johnston said that should be left up to Mr. Clark but not to aggressively going after a bunch of lots . Councilor Thompson said that if that were done the City would find itself in a class action law suit . He added that Mr. Clark needs to discuss EPA regulations and clean water supply. Mayor added that water supply is an important issue, and at what point of development do you say that a septic system is not going to be a viable alternative . Mr. Clark deferred septic 577 Item 14a cont ' d. systems to Health Department Director B.J. Clements . Mrs . Clements, said she was not prepared to talk about that issue since Mr. Rueben Warren was not present . Mr. Bonnett informed that part of the Information Collection Rule requirement approved today was a virus study and protozoa study. Where we go depends on what type of information we get back from the Information Collection Rule . Do not be surprised if down the road you see a septic system requirement at the lake . Councilor Johnston asked if we are required to put in a sanitation sewer, how does that affect the leases . City Attorney replied that it is not addressed in the lease . Mr. Clark asked for Council direction. He stated that three Council members had implied their interest in re-leasing. Mayor said that there was a suggestion from Councilor Hawkins that this be continued in a worksession. She said there was a consensus of Council on everything in Mr. Clark' s memo except on re-leasing. Mrs . Dorcas Chasteen, Property Management, stated that in their recommendation they had requested that if Council decides to re-lease that it be done by a lottery-type drawing with a certain amount being put up to be in the drawing. Councilor Johnston suggested that the bidding process would be a good way to do that . Councilor Hawkins suggested Council consider buying back some of the leases and move towards the removal of leases on isolated lots . We can give them an opportunity to turn back the leases . City Manager clarified that we are not saying we want everyone off of the lake lots . We do not know what EPA is going to do, but if you re-develop that asset, triggers will start to be pulled. Councilor Martin stated that as long as the people are there, we are going to renew but not do any new leases . Mayor said that this will be taken up again in a worksession at a later date . If any council member wishes additional information they can contact Mr. Clark and request it from him. Councilor Thompson asked that Mr. Jack Murphy provide suggestions on parks out there . Mr. Clark informed that he has scheduled for Council to tour the edges of the community on July 8 at 10 : 00 a.m. unless Council wants to change that . This remained as scheduled. Item 14b Councilor Hawkins asked what the policy was on dirtbikes in ° the parks . Mr. Murphy replied that motor vehicles in parks were prohibited. Councilor Hawkins asked what the plans were to clean up the limbs that were down after the storm. Mr. Bonnett replied that it was the property owner' s responsibility. 578 Item 14b cont ' d. Councilor Hawkins said that extra dirt was being dumped in a storm retention area in Sheppard Heights . Mr. Bonnett will look into this . Councilor Martin suggested that the City of Wichita Falls work on economic development along with other cities which have adopted the half cent sales tax. Also, that our 4A Committee work with surrounding cities' 4A Committees . Councilor Thompson advised that mowing is needed in District 2 . He asked that Mr. Murphy check Shoshoney Park and get it cleaned up and see if there is land that can be used as a park and provide recommendations to the Council . Councilor Thompson expressed condolences to Mrs . Jan Stricklin in the loss of her father. Councilor Johnston suggested that on items of some magnitude, like the ones which were tabled today, that they be put on as a public hearing. Mayor invited anyone interested in these two development issues to attend next Tuesday' s worksession. Item 14c City Manager informed Council of the tour July 8 at 10 : 00 a.m. of the outlying community under waivers and potential annexation. He informed Council that Staff was developing the 3 , 5, and 10 year capital improvement plan for Council consideration. City Manager informed he is in the process of writing a letter to request the radar and once it is received it becomes the City' s asset and cannot be given away. Council concurred with this action. David Briggs, 3700 Onaway expressed his appreciation to the Council for their decision on the radar issue and felt that this was a positive move . Item 14d City Council went into executive session as authorized by Section 551 . 071 of the Texas Government Code at 12 : 05 p.m. and reconvened at 1 : 20 p.m. The City Council adjourned at 1 : 21 p.m. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 1997 . i 579 KATHRY ' A. YEAG R MAYOR ATTEST: Lydia Torres City Clerk