Loading...
Min 08/20/1968 1259 Wichita Falls, Texas Memorial Auditorium Building August 20, 1968 Items 1 4 2 The Board of Aldermen 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 7:30 o'clock P.M. , with the following members present: Kenneth Hill Mayor Harrison h. Taylor X James M. Davis X Dick Darner X Max Kruger X Cletus C. Schenk X Jack Davis City Manager Malcolm Hughes Assistant City Attorney Wilma J. Thomas City Clerk Don Wills Absent The invocation was given by Alderman Davis. f Mayor Hill welcomed the visitors, and also expressed appreciation to the Council and Staff for postponing the last meeting due to his mother's and the City Clerk's brother's deaths. Item 3 Moved by Alderman Darner that the minutes of the meetings held July 23, and August 6, 1968, be approved. Motion seconded by Alderman Kruger, and carried unanimously. i s ' Item 4a The public hearing on the 1968 Assessment Paving Program was opened on August 6. / Moved by Alderman Davis that the hearing be re-opened. Motion seconded by Alderman Taylor, and carried unanimously. Mayor Bill requested that each participant limit their remarks in order that everyone may be heard. Mr. G. E. Denman, 1226 Tulip Street, stated that the people in his neighborhood were pleased with the paving program. Mr. C. C. Durkee, 1010 Harding, stated that the paving was a great improvement to Wichita Falls; that it made property worth more. He explained that it would be expensive to him, but is glad it is being done. Mr. 1. E. Burnett, 710 Roosevelt, stated he approved the paving because it is progress. Walter Chain, 910 Stratford, opposed the paving, stating he was not able to pay for it. He also felt it would not improve the drainage in that area. tie stated that water stands on it since North loth was paved; that if storm drainage were installed he would be in favor of it. W. J. Schroeder, 1322 North 9th, stated that he felt that the asphalt street would not hold up without storm drainage. lie objected to the paving, stating he could not afford the amount of money it will cost. Mr. Roark explained that the grades that were established in the building of North Tenth are not the best, but much better than what they had. Storm sewer cannot be installed because of the cost of $300,000 to $500,000. It would have to come up Lamar Street. By paving Stratford it will keep the water from ponding, and permit surface drainage. tie also stated that hot mix asphaltic paving is certainly adequate for residential areas. I 1260 Item 4a, cont'd. Mr. Lynn Raney, 904 North Stratford, explained that Ire would like to get out of the mud, but he objected to the cost, stating that he felt like the City was over- charging him. He later stated he would be in favor of the paving, providing that drainage was available. Mr. Roark explained the paving costs to him, stating that front foot cost is �3.91, side footage is reduced to $2.17, and curb and gutter is �1.55 per foot. Mr. A. B. Carr, 3122 Manchester, explained that he has three rent houses; that water stands after a rain, and if the street is not lower than the property they will be in the mud. He explained that his lots need to be raised. Ile felt that the cost would be too great for him, but that he does not object to the paving. Mr. Roark explained to several of those who appeared that a four-year payment plan could be worked out if necessary. Mrs. Jack Story, 3212 Birch, explained that the east side of the boulevard is not paved, but the west side is. She stated they would like to have this portion paved, and that they were willing to pay for it. Mr. Roark stated that if this property is not included in the program, and the property owners are in favor of it and willing to pay, then the contract can be extended. He agreed to meet with Mrs. Story and try to work out a solution. Eugene E. Temple, 509 Jalonic, stated that all in his block are in favor of the paving. Celestine Scott, 500 Waco Street, stated she was not opposed to the paving, but was just not financially able to pay for it. Susie Arps, 413 Fort Worth Street, appeared regarding paving of California Street, stating that she had no objections to the paving, but was just not financially able to pay for it. Ida Wiist, 1411 Austin, appeared regarding property at 402 North Lamar and also on 15th Street. She stated she had no objection to the paving, but cannot afford to pay for it. Morton Boston, Sr. , 1023 Chance, stated that lie was in favor of the paving. Jack Ballard asked about drainage in Texas and Jalonic Streets area. Mr. Roark explained this matter to him. At the request of the Mayor, Mr. Ballard was escorted from the Council Room for using too much time. I. E. Jesse, 410 East Scott, appeared regarding California Street. He stated he was against the paving; that he does not think it will help anyone. lie stated there is no drainage in that area, but if it would drain he would pay his part. Alderman Schenk explained this was only a step in getting the East Side out of the mud; that paving would improve the entire east side, but that they cannot pave all of it in one year. Mr. R. C. Mann, 2200 Broad Street, appeared regarding paving of 22nd and 23rd Streets, stating they wanted the paving, but were not able to pay for it. lie felt the City should pay for it. Steve Marchand, 3200 Hollywood, spoke for himself and Ralph Piper, 3201 Cumberland, stating they were both in favor of the paving. Elnora Proctor, 611 Dallas Street, spoke in behalf of Dallas Street, stating they were not willing and able to pay for paving; that they had paid for it 22 years ago. She stated they were willing to pay for storm sewer. Mr. Roark explained that the paving and drainage is paid; that the assessment is not for paving, but curb and gutter, sidewalks, and drive approaches. Only on those streets where pavement currently exists are drive approaches and sidewalks being installed, due to prohibitive cost to owners of installation of all of it. Salatha Heartf:ield, 502 }domes Street, stated she was in favor of the paving. Frank Taliaferro, 2417 Carrigan, stated he was in favor of the paving. 1i. J. Patterson, 601 Dallas;Street, stated he felt it would not be right for him to pay for paving when he has already paid for it. It was explained to him that the City is not charging him again for paving, but for sidewalk, curb and gutter and drive approach. 1261 Item 4a, cont'd. Mrs. Boyd, 1903 Perigo, stated that she felt that paving one and one-half blocks will not help them at all; that the paving will extend only 125 feet past her house, and will serve eight people. Mr. I:oark stated that the property owners were not in favor of the paving past her house. Mr. C. F. Boyd, 1905 Perigo, explained that he was also representing his sister, Hazel Vaughn, who has purchased his property. Iie stated he did not know of the paving until he started to sell his house. In response to his question, Mr. Roark explained where the paving would stop. Arsula Jones, 904 Chance, stated she was in favor of the paving. Millard Curvay, 514 Juarez, stated he had paid for paving his street before. Mr. Roark explained that he would only be assessed for what he had. He has property on Redwood also, and stated he was in favor of paving Juarez, but not Redwood. Alma Mitchell, 1201 Smith Street, stated that Smith Street was dedicated to the City, and the property owners did not own it. Also, that Smith Street was included in the bond program, and not the assessment paving. It was explained to her that all city streets are dedicated. Mr. Roark stated that Smith Street was not included in the bond program because it is a residential street. City Manager Jack Davis explained that Smith Street was being paved to facilitate Flood Street drainage project, but was not included as part of the bond project or advertised as such. Mary Sanders, 510 Bonner, stated she was in favor of the paving. Harold Henry, 1214 Monroe Street, spoke for himself and Joe Bussey, stating they were in favor of the paving. Their property is located on Avenue C. Leona Dinwiddie, 1022 Woods Street, explained that she wanted the paving, but did not want them to take four feet off her lot because it would take up her trees. Mr. Roark stated they would check into this matter with her, but they show no record of requiring additional right-of-way at this time. Elnora Stevenson, 1020 Woods Street, stated she is in favor of the paving. Herman Basham, 1811 Collins, explained that he owns the property at corner of 24th and Holliday, and that it was paved before. Mr. Roark explained that if it had been paid for once then they would not assess the property owners again. He stated that they would meet with him to discuss it further. Wilda Mae Woodard, 1019 Woods, stated she was in favor of the paving. Joe Geter, 1013 Woods, stated he was in favor of the paving,. James Long, 1017 Chance, stated he was in favor of the paving. Mary Watkins, 1301 Smith, stated she is in favor of the paving of her properties on Woods, Homes, and Smith streets. U. S. Wesley, 1305 Smith, inquired about the City owning Smith Street. Mayor Hill stated that all streets are owned by the City. Alderman Schenk stated that this street was not in the capital improvements program. Mr. Wesley stated he was in favor of the paving. City Manager Jack Davis explained that the City does not buy any street, nor pay for paving in new subdivisions. Streets are dedicated by someone in all cases. Mr. Bernard C. Cofer, 703 Dallas Street, asked whether this street will be con- crete or asphalt. Mr. Roark explained the method of paving, sidewalks, drive approaches, and curb and gutter. He explained that the asphalt will be six inches thick, and no similarity as to the type of present surface. Mrs. Lula Hubert, 814 Roosevelt, stated she is in favor of the paving. Mrs. Jewell Jackson, who owns property at 813 and 818 Roosevelt, stated she is in favor of the paving. Mr. Elias Chavez, 409 Tulsa, stated he is in favor of the paving. 1262 Item 4a, cont'd. Mr. Faustina Escouar, 314 Offutt, inquired if sidewalks would be included in his neighborhood. Mr. Roark stated they would not be included. W. E. Williams, 1116 Amber, who owns property at 3rd and Burnett, asked how much paving was :included. Mr. Roark stated that it would be only one block, as they had only received a petition for one block. Mr. Williams stated he would be for the paving if it is solid for one block. Mr. Roark stated that it would be. Alderman Davis noted that most of the property owners on Stratford Street did not wish it to be paved, and wondered if they might consider postponing this paving. Mr. Roark stated that it should have been paved at the time North loth was paved; that it is to the benefit of the property owners. ORDINANCE NO. 2436 ORDINANCE CLOSING HEARING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR PART OF THE COST OF IMPROVING STREETS FOR THE 1968 ASSESSMENT PAVING PROGRAM AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, FIXING CHARGES AND LIENS AGAINST ABUTTING PROPERTY THEREON, AND AGAINST THE OWNERS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS AND THE ISSUANCE OF ASSIGNABLE CERTIFICATIONS IN EVIDENCE THEREOF; RESERVING UNTO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN TIIE RIGHT TO ALLOW CREDITS RE- DUCING THE AMOUNT OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT TO THE EXTENT OF ANY CREDIT GRANTED; DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ENGROSS AND ENROLL THE ORDINANCE BY COPYING THE CAPTION OF SAME IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, AND BY FILING THE ORDINANCE IN THE ORDINANCE RECORDS OF SAID CITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, PROVIDING SUNDRY MATTERS INCIDENT THEREOF, AND DECLARING AN EMLRGENCY. Moved by Alderman Schenk that Ordinance No. 2436 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Davis, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 4b The public hearing on demolition of buildings was reopened. Charles Aston, 1648 Keeler, appeared regarding the property at 601 Lee, listed under the owner of H. E. Crain. He explained that one duplex has been removed, and another duplex is in the process of being cleared. Jessie Marceleno, 100 Third, stated that he planned to remove the building at 210 Patterson, and repair the one at 208 Patterson, but that he was short of funds at this time. It was agreed to drop him out of this ordinance, and perhaps come back to this property at a later date. ORDINANCE NO. 2437 ORDINANCE CLOSING HEARING AND FINDING CERTAIN BUILDINGS AND/OR STRUCTURES TO BE DANGEROUS; COMMANDING PROPERTY OWNERS TO REPAIR, VACATE, OR DEMOLISH SAID BUILDING AND/OR STRUCTURE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Moved by Alderman Kruger that Ordinance No. 2437 be passed, deleting Mr. Marceleno's property. Motion seconded by Alderman Darner, and carried by the following vote: . Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 4c The public hearing on the school sidewalk assessment program was reopened. E. L. Luckett, 1140 Ridgeway, stated he had nothing against the sidewalk, but had received no notice prior to assessment. Ile inquired where it would be placed. Mr. Roark explained that it will be adjacent to the curb. Ray Pavlick, 3809 York, inquired if sidewalks were for the benefit of Our Lady Queen of Peace School, and if there would be sidewalks on both sides. It was explained that there would be. One side is in the first priority, and one in the 1263 Item 4c cont'd. second priority. Mr. Pavlick stated that he did not feel that he had an obligation to provide sidewalks for students, and objects to having children in his front yard. Lee Ikard, who owns property on Van Buren, asked if it would be possible to place sidewalk next to the curb on Van Buren. Mr. Roark explained that it was possible. Mr. Ikard stated lie was in favor of it if it could be placed next to the curb. James H. Lucius, 4518 Lindale, stated that he did not think the sidewalk would benefit him personally, and inquired whether it is for the benefit of the property owner. It was explained that there was a joint benefit to the property owner and school children. Mr. Lucuus felt that sidewalks would benefit the community as a whole. ORDINANCE NO. 2438 ORDINANCE CLOSING HEARING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR PART OF THE COST OF CONSTRUCTING SIDEWALKS ALONG CERTAIN STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND/OR AVENUES IN THE CITY OF W'ICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, FIXING CHARGES AND LIENS AGAINST ABUTTING PROPERTY THEREON, AND AGAINST THE OWNERS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS AND THE ISSUANCE OF ASSIGNABLE CERTIFICATES IN EVIDENCE THEREOF; RESERVING UNTO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN THE RIGHT TO ALLOW CREDITS REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT TO THE EXTENT OF ANY CREDIT GRANTED; DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ENGROSS AND ENROLL THE ORDINANCE BY COPYING THE CAPTION OF SAME IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, AND BY FILING THE ORDINANCE IN THE ORDINANCE RECORDS OF SAID CITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, PROVIDING SUNDRY OTHER MATTERS INCIDENT THERETO, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Moved by Alderman Taylor that Ordinance No. 2438 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Kruger, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 5 A proposed appropriation ordinance was presented for interim auditor payment. ORDINANCE NO. 2439 AN ORDINANCE MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED GENERAL FUND TO ACCOUNT NUMBER 11-021-4504, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Moved by Alderman Kruger that Ordinance No. 2439 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 6a A proposed ordinance regulating the construction of sidewalks was presented. J ORDINANCE NO, 2440 AN ORDINANCE SUPERSEDING SECTIONS 27-26, 27-27, 27-28, and 27-29 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, REQUIRING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS ON CERTAIN LOT OR LOTS ABUTTING ON A CITY STREET, REQUIRING A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT SUCH SIDEWALK. Moved by Alderman Darner that Ordinance No. 2440 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Kruger, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: Alderman Davis - - - - - - - - - - M f Item 6b A proposed ordinance was presented increasing the refuse rate on certain properties is ', 1264 Item 6b abutting new alley paving. ORDINANCE NO. 2441 ORDINANCE SETTING REFUSE RATES ON CERTAIN PROPERTIES ABUTTING ALLEY PAVING PROJECTS. Moved by Alderman Schenk that Ordinance No. 2441 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Davis, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 6c Roy Wilshire, Director of Planning and Traffic, presented a request from resi- dents on Deans Lane to change the street name to Fairfax Avenue. The Planning Board has recommended approval of this request. } , ORDINANCE NO. 2442 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE NAME OF THAT PORTION OF DEANS LANE, FROM BURKBURNETT HIGHWAY (SH-240) TO EDEN LANE, A STREET WITHIN THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, TO FAIRFAX AVENUE; AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, OR PORTIONS THEREOF, IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. Moved by Alderman Darner that Ordinance No. 2442 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Davis, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None w Item 6d An ordinance annexing certain lands was presented for adoption. ✓,J / ORDINANCE NO. 2434 AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, BY ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS ADJACENT TO TIIE SOUTHEASTERN TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, WHICH LANDS ARE DESCRIBED IN THIS ORDINANCE (TEXCOLOR LAB AND EXPRESSWAY 287 RIGHT OF WAY; EXPRESSWAY 287 AND EXPRESSWAY 281 RIGHT OF WAY AND LANDS NORTH AND WEST OF EXPRESSWAY; EXPRESSWAY 281 AND LOCH LOMOND SUBDIVISION AREA) . Moved by Alderman Schenk that Ordinance No. 2434 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Darner, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 7a A proposed resolution was presented authorizing proposals to property owners on Plum Creek drainage, and the City-County Health Unit under the 1967 Capital Improve- ments Program. RESOLUTION NO. 834 WHEREAS, it is necessary to acquire the property hereinafter described for construction of the listed projects in the 1967 Capital Improvements Program, and, WHEREAS, such property has been appraised by an independent appraiser employed for this purpose by the City, and the amount of the appraisal has been studied by the Board of Aldermen, and is now in the possession of the Director of Public W orks and/or Assistant City Mlanager. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF WICHITA F ALLS, TEXAS, TIIAT: 1265 Item 7a cont'd. i SECTION 1. The projects and propoerties are as follows: City-County Health Unit Project 50-061-5101 i Property Part of Lot 11, Blk. 1, Blakely N. 71.3 Lot 1, '1'ri Lot 2, Blk. 1, Blakely (Also 206 Brook Rear $ 208 Brook) Lot 12 Less ROW, Blk. 1, Blakely N 1/2 Lot 130 Blk. 1, Blakely S 1/2 Lot 13, Blk. 1, Blakely N 1/2 Lot 140 Blk. 1, Blakely S 1/2 Lot 14, Blk. 1, Blakely N 1/2 Lot 1, Blk. 2, Blakely S 1/2 Lot 1, Blk. 2, Blakely Lot 219 Blk. 2, Blakely Lot 39 Blk. 2, Blakely Lot 41 Blk. 2, Blakely Lot 5, Blk. 2, Blakely Lot 60 less ROW, Blk. 2, Blakely Lot 719 less ROW, Blk. 2, Blakely .06 AC Abstract 300, J. A. Scott 18 Lot 26, Blk. 242, Orig. T. Lots 24, 25, Blk. 242, Orig. T. Lot 23, Blk. 242, Orig. T. Lot 22, Blk. 242, Orig. 1'. Plum Creek Drainage Project 52-083 Property A 40 ft. wide by 221.5 ft. long tract of land, being part of the Donata Leona Survey, A-176 as recorded in Vol. 918, Page 175, Wichita County Deed Records. A 29 ft. wide by 620 ft. long tract of land, being part of and out of the Donata Leona Survey, A-165 as recorded in Volume 723, Page 71 and Volume 745, Page 387, Wichita County Deed Records. A 30 ft. wide by 315 ft. long tract of land, being part of and out of the Donata Leona Survey, A-165 as recorded in Volume 763, Page 368, Wichita County Deed Records_. The West 20 feet of Lot 6, Block C, Ray Massie Subdivision of Ed Woodall Subdivision in the City of Wichita Palls, Texas, as recorded in Volume 999, Page 414, Wichita County Deed Records. Combined total of appraisals approved in this resolution - $69,315.00 I SLCTION 2. The appraised value of such properties are hereby approved and the City Manager is hereby authorized to purchase, by Warranty Deed or by Easement, such tracts of land as shown on said right-of-way map. The authorized price to be paid for each tract is the appraised value as determined by the independent real estate appraiser by the City. SECTION 3. In the event the City Manager is unable to purchase any such tract or tracts for such appraised values, he is hereby authorized and directed to cause to be instituted condemnation proceedings to obtain such tracts. Moved by Alderman Davis that Resolution No. 834 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None r ✓ Item 7b It was requested by Roy Wilshire, Director of Planning and Traffic, that an ease- ' 1 i ment for an overhead line be granted to Texas Electric Service Company for the fire drill tower. i 1266 Item 7b cont'd. r RESOLUTION NO. 835 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, THAT: That certain distribution easement and right-of-way dated July 23rd, 1968, wherein the City of Wichita Falls grants to Texas Electric Service Company an ease- ment of right-of-way for an electric distribution line across Block 1 of Unit 2 of the Arrowhead Industrial District# is hereby approved, and the City Manager .is authorized to execute the same for the City of Wichita Falls. Moved by Alderman Schenk that Resolution No. 835 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Darner, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen 'Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 7c A proposed resolution was presented establishing the policy to be followed in f the drainage ditch improvement program as discussed with the Council on July 23, 1968. / RESOLUTION NO. 836 WHEREAS, the unimproved drainage channels within the City of Wichita Falls constitute undersirable health conditions due to erosion, ponding and possible contamination of surface water, and uncontrolled vegetation; and, WHEREAS, a large number of citizens owning residences abutting on unimproved drainage channels have requested a means whereby the City of Wichita Falls and the abutting property owners can jointly share in the cost of improvements in the drainage channels; and, WHEREAS, it is considered desirable, both from the viewpoint of improving undesirable health conditions and improving flow characteristics in the drainage channel, to institute a program of channel improvements with the participation of the abutting property owners. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, THAT: The following policy is hereby adopted governing the improvement of open drainage channels in the City of Wichita Falls, Texas. When some of the property owners in a block abutting an open unimproved drainage channel desire to participate in the improvement of said drainage channel, they shall indicate their desire by letter to the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall conduct the necessary engineering studies to determine the material cost of improve- ments, which costs shall be considered the property owners share. Design of the improvements shall be based on the following criteria: 1. No project shall be considered which does not extend the full extent between existing culverts on cross streets or between an existing culvert on a cross street and a previously improved section of drainage channel. 2. The minimum design for concrete channel lining shall be that depth and design of channel lining which will carry within the concrete channel lining the runoff from a two-year design frequency rainfall. 3. Should conditions require a minimum cross section of concrete channel lining beyond that required for a two-year design frequency rainfall, the entire cost of materials for the required cross-section shall be considered the responsibility of the abutting property owners. 4. The back slopes of the drainage channel abutting the concrete channel lining shall be designed in such a manner as to permit maintenance and upkeep by the abutting property owner without undue hardship. 5. Each minimum section of drainage channel shall be considered separately and the City Engineer shall accomplish a specific design for each minimum section. 1267 Item 7c cont'd. Upon completion of a design section, the City Engineer shall prepare estimates of cost of labor, material and equipment and shall use the total material cost to determine an abutting foot rate of cost to the abutting property owners. The City Eng- ineer shall then submit to the requesting property owner the necessary drawing to adequately describe the proposed channel improvements, a copy of this resolution, a map showing the extent of the proposed improvements with the dimensions of each lot abutting the drainage channel, the abutting foot rate, and total cost to the property owners for the improvements, and a letter explaining the procedure. Upon receipt of the total amount of the property owner's share, the City Engineer shall deposit the funds in the account designated by the Director of Finance and shall notify the Street Department of the City of Wichita Falls that the project has been approved and ready for construction. Construction will be accomplished by City forces during the sub- sequent summer months. Moved by Alderman Davis that Resolution No. 836 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman 'Taylor, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 7d This item concerning M. 0. Rife contract was passed over. r Item 7e r A proposed resolution was presented setting the date for public hearing on dem- olition of certain buildings in Area 4. i ✓ RESOLUTION NO. 837 WHEREAS, the Building Inspector of the City of Wichita Falls, acting under the provisions of Ordinance No. 2388 enacted by the Board of Aldermen of the City of Wichita Falls on February 12, 1968, notified in writing by certified mail the following listed owners of the property shown that the building or buildings on the premises had been classified as a dangerous building and that certain corrections were needed to be made or the building demolished. OWNER ADDRESS C. Hamilton Lot 3, Blk. G, Granger £, Ballow Anna W. Offutt 112 Bonner Bernado Rangel 408 Bonner William Allen 411 & 413 Bonner I. E. Burnett 412 Bonner Quirino Rodriquez 415 Bonner Arthur Cooper 402 Cleveland Robert Andrews 508 Edison D. V. Miller 612 Edison W. A. Turner 613 Edison Anna IV. Offutt 312 Flood G. Rodriquez 313 Flood Mrs. Victoria Ramos 412 Flood Mrs. Beatrice Williams 500 Homes M. T. Williams 603 Humphrey Henry Ben Roberts 622 Humphrey Joe Hawkins 707 Humphrey Atanacia Martinez 410 Juarez Ida Taylor 416 Juarez (rear) Dorothy Taylor Murcherson 418 Juarez Willie Pride 420 Juarez Milton C. Easley 502 Juarez Violet Beardsley 305 Lake George Perkins 612 Lake Benny Ray Simmons 402 Marconi Zena Louise Amos 704 Marconi Justina Cooper 810 Neff Rex Gates & IV. H. Garner 300 Park Jessie & Beulah Johns 311 Park Aurur a Garza Luera 333 & 335 Park 1268 Item 7e cont'd. OWNER ADDRESS West Texas Real Estate 611 Park Elizabeth P-1. Smith 902 & 903 Park Erma Jean Johnson 405 Sullivan (rear) LaNella Carro l 1 500 Sullivan Nabor Hernandez 317 Tulsa Publo Mart inez 413 Tulsa V. Rodriqu e z 411 Tulsa Jesus Perez 415 Tulsa Mary Lee Watkins 425 Wood (rear) J. W. Charles 509 Wood Sadie Dixon 812 Wood Richard Powell 1009 Wood Swanson Bennett 1023 Wood and, WHEREAS, such property owners above have not complied with the directive of the Building Inspector within the sixty days allotted in Ordinance No. 2388. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, THAT: The Public Hearing shall be held before the Board of Aldermen of the City of Wichita Falls, acting in its capacity as Building Commission, on September 3, 1968 at 2:30 P.M. and the Building Inspector shall so notify the above listed property owners by certified mail to appear before the Board of Aldermen to show cause why the building or structure reported to be a dangerous building should not be re- paired, vacated, or demolished in accordance with the Statement of Particulars set forth in the Building Inspector's notice. Moved by Alderman Davis that Re-solution No. 837 be passed, setting the public hearing on September 3, at 2:30 P.M. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 8 It was recommended by Ben Shelton, Director of General Service, that the low bid of Chemical Supply Company of Wichita Falls be accepted in the amount of $18,396.00 for 180 tons of chlorine for water treatment. f, Moved by Alderman Schenk that the low bid be accepted as recommended. Motion seconded by Alderman Kruger, and carried unanimously. Item 9 John J. Roark, Director of Public Works, recommended acceptance of improvements in the 1968 slurry seal program for a total amount of $20,877.00. The low bid of East Texas Paving Company amounted to $18,060.00, which was lower than the amount of budgeted funds for this project. Certain other streets which had a No. 1 priority ✓ were added to the contract, for a total amount of $20,877.00. Moved by Alderman Darner that these improvements be accepted, and the contractor paid in full. Motion seconded by Alderman Taylor, and carried unanimously. Item 10a, b, c Moved by Alderman Schenk that minutes of the meetings of the following boards and commissions be received. a. Planning Board - July 10, 1968 b. Traffic Commission - July 16, 1968 C. Electrical Advisory Board - July 9, 1968 Motion seconded by Alderman Darner, and carried unanimously. 1269 Item lla Moved by Alderman Schenk that water reimbursement contract payment in the amount of $307.28, and sewer reimbursement contract payment in the amount of $95.80 be approved in a total amount of $403.08, as follows: R. D. Montgomery, Water, LeFall Heights Addition, Section No. 2, from July 15, 1967, to July 15, 1968; $307.28 R. D. Montgomery, Sewer, LeFall Heights Addition, Section No. 2, from July 15, 1967, to July 15, 1968; $95.80 Motion seconded by Alderman Darner, and carried unanimously. Item llb Roy Wilshire, Director of Planning and Traffic,g presented a request from John C. Stuckey for a sidewalk waiver at 2620 Chase. Approval was recommended since there are no sidewalks in this area, and this is one of the last remaining lots available. Moved by Alderman Davis that Mr. Stuckey's request for sidewalk waiver be granted. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried unanimously. Item llc Appointments to the Citizens Advisory Committee were postponed. i I_tem 1, Supplemental Agenda Roy Wilshire, Director of Planning and Traffic, presented a request from Mr. Oscar Cox, manager of Mead's Bakery, for permission to construct a loading dock for semi-trailer trucks on the right-of-way at the rear of the bakery along Fort Worth Street. This construction would eliminate an existing hazard on East Scott since they must block this portion while maneuvering and backing into the existing loading area. Moved by Alderman Darner that permission be granted to construct the loading dock, conditional upon them removing it if requested to do so by the City. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried unanimously. Item 2 Moved by Alderman Schenk that minutes of the meetings of the following Boards and Commissions be received. a. Planning Board - August 14, 1968 b. Traffic Commission - August 13, 1968 Motion seconded by Alderman Davis, and carried unanimously. - - - - - - - - - - 1 Item 3 v Authority was requested for the City Manager to execute an easement for electrical service at Sanitary Land Fill to Texas Electric Service Company, RESOLUTION NO. 838 THAT:BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, That certain distribution easement and right-of-way, wherein the City of Wichita Falls grants to Texas Electric Service Company an easement of right-of-way for an electric transmission line across the land owned by the City at the site of the sanitary land fill where the scales for the Sanitation Department are located, is hereby approved, and the City Manager is authorized to execute the same for the City of Wichita Falls. Moved by Alderman Davis that Resolution No. 838 be passed. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried by the following vote: 12i0 Item 3, cont'd. Ayes: Aldermen Taylor, Davis, Darner, Kruger, and Schenk Nays: None Item 4 U Ben Shelton, Director of General Services, recommended award of the low bid to Waukesha-Pierce Industries of Wichita Falls in the net amount of $2,900.00 for f an air compressor for the Street Department. Moved by Alderman Darner that the bid be awarded as recommended. Motion seconded by Alderman Davis, and carried unanimously. r Item 5 ✓ Approval of final estimate for 24-inch water main on Beverly Drive was requested. Extra work on the contract with Panhandle Construction Company was required in the amount of $3,556.85 for grouting work under the expressway to prevent leakage. Moved by Alderman Kruger that the extra work and final estimate be approved. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried unanimously. Item 6 Moved by Alderman Schenk that water reimbursement contract payments in the amount of $890.31, and sewer reimbursement contract payments in the amount of $2,269.48, be approved for a total amount of $3,159.79 as follows: W. B. Hursh Estates, Water, Hursh Estates Subdivision, Section Two, from July 1, 1967, to July 1, 1968; $218.41 Wichita Building Corporation, Water, Sikes Estate Addition, Section D, from July 8, 1967, to July 8, 1968; $671.90 Hughes Development Company, Sewer, Southern Hills, Section of Dittoe Heights Addition, from July 25, 1967, to July 25, 1968; $424.43 E. E. Cloer, Sewer, Ditto Heights Addition, from July 31, 1967, to July 31, 1968; $631.69 Wichita Building Corporation, Sewer, Sikes Estate Addition, Section D, from July 8, 1967, to July 8, 1968; $154.53 C. W. L. Dennis and Elmer L. Dennis, Dennis Construction Company, Sewer Section A-5 of University Park Subdivision, from July 27, 1967, to July 27, 1968; $230.10 Larry Moore, T. E. Hill, Jr. , and A. R. Dillard, Jr. , Meadow Lake Company, Sewer, Section A, Meadow Lake Addition, from July 25, 1967, to July 25, 1968; $405.60 C. W. L. Dennis and Elmer Dennis, Sewer, Section One, Lake View Manor Addition, from July 21, 1967, to July 21, 1968; $423.13 Motion seconded by Alderman Davis, and carried unanimously. Alderman Davis expressed appreciation to Mr. Roark for his invaluable assistance during the public hearing. Moved by Alderman Kruger that the meeting be adjourned. Motion seconded by Alderman Schenk, and carried unanimously. The Board of Aldermen adjourned at 11:10 P.M. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 1968. • ATTEST: M yor City Clerk Clj- jr'Lll TO: Dir. . jack Davis, City Manage,,: DATE: August 15, 1901; FRUN John J . Roark, Director of Public Works suBjcm Attached Suqxany of Statements Made by individuals at Benefit Bearing on August 6, 1968. Attached hereto are copies for ieview by the Board of Aldermen of the sur"ary of thn statements madc by individuals during the Benefit Hearing on August 6, 1968, which will be continued on August 20, 7968. JJR:nlm BENEFIT HEARING--1968 ASSESSMENT PAVING PROGRAM August 6, 1968, 7:30 p.m. Memorial Auditorium, City of Wichita Falls The following property owners appeared to make a statement in conjunc- tion with the Benefit Hearing, which statement would be presented to the Board of Aldermen to consider in the continuation of the Benefit Hearing on August 20, 1968: 1. MRS. G. W. ANDERSON, 2500 Broad, Wichita Falls, Texas, appeared in regard to tie asessment on 2.5th Street between Princeton and Broad. The total assessment against Mrs. Anderson was $525.60. Mrs. Anderson made the statement that she was a widow, receiving less than $100 per month income and that she could not see any way that she could make the payment on the assessment. She stated that she did not feel that she could do it, but that she did not want to register a complaint. MR. H. P. HODGE, City Attorney, replied to Mrs. Anderson to the effect that her statement would be submitted to the Board of Aldermen. 2. MR. WARREN_G. YARBROUGH, 601 Fort Worth Street, appeared to question the assessment in the amount of $311.65 on Dallas Street. Mr. Yarbrough stated that he owned fifty (50) feet on Dallas Street and had paid for the paving in the price of the lot, and requested information as to the purpose of the assessment on Dallas Street. Mr. Yarbrough also questioned the assessment on Colorado Street in the amount of $637.25. Mr. Yarbrough stated that it was his understanding that Colorado was to be improved under the 1967 Capital Improvements Program and that the property owners were not to be assessed for the additional pavement. Mr: Yarbrough also questioned the proposed width of the Rosewood- Colorado Extension, stating that the stakes adjacent to his property fell behind his residence. He questioned as to whether additional right-of-way would be required. MR. JOHN J. ROARK, Director of Public Works, replied to Mr. Yarbrough that in the case of Dallas Street, the assessment was for curb and gutter, sidewalk, and drive approaches and that no paving cost was included in the assessment. Mr. Roark ex- plained that Dallas Street had been previously paved with sub- standard paving and was proposed for reconstruction to supplement Benefit Hearing August 6, 1968 Page 2 the Rosewood-Colorado Extension. The paving for which Mr. Yarbrough previously paid would not be assessed against him on Dallas Street, inasmuch as this cost was to be borne by the City of Wichita Falls. Mr. Roark also explained to Mr. Yarbrough that in the case of Colorado Street, which is a portion of the Rosewood-Colorado Extension under the 1967 Capital Improvements Program, only the curb and gutter, sidewalks, and drive approaches were to be assessed against the abutting property owner. No paving was included in Mr. Yarbrough's assessment. It was also explained to Mr. Yarbrough that the pro- posed width of the Rosewood--Colorado Extension would be exactly as that carried in the local newspaper, prior to the election. in Sep- tember 1967, and that no additional right-of-way would be required. Mr. . Roark volunteered the services of the Engineering Department to meet with Mr. Yarbrough the following day at his home address to explain the stakes which he had seen. It was explained to Mr. Yarbrough that in this area some of the homes are built within the dedicated right-of-way which could be the case in this instance. 3. MR. W. W. HEFFINGTON, Heffington Oil_ Co. , 301 East Scott, appeared to question the assessment on Dallas Street in the amount of $1,159.55. Mr. Heffington stated he would have a representative present on August 20, but requested that the Engineering Department check to see that sufficient right.-of-way existed for the proposed construc- tion. Mr. Heffington stated that he had a building which was on the property line and'did not want the building disturbed. Mr. Heffington also raised the question of declining property values in this area and the inability of many of the property owners to rent the existing buildings. 11R. JOHN J. ROARK replied to Mr. Heffington that no additional right-of-way would be required on Dallas Street and that the building would not be disturbed; however, it would be checked prior to the meeting on August 20. Mr. Roark 2xplained to Mr. Heffington that the assessment was for curb and gutter, sidewalk, and drive approaches on Dallas Street and that no paving was being assessed. Mr. Roark commented to Mr. Heffington that it had been his experi- ence that whether property declined in. value or increased in value depended to a great extent on whether the streets in the area were paved or unpaved. Mr. Roark explained that it was the intention of the City on area paving of this nature to provide the impetus for an increase in property values so that the property could be properly utilized. Benefit Hearing August 6, 1968 Page 3 4. MR. STANLEY TAYLOR appeared in regard to the assessment against Ester J. Taylor, Box 226!- , on Dallas Street in the amount of $949.90. Mr. Taylor raised the following .quest:ions: a. Whether the assessm-nt was deductible and staged that he had talked with the Internal Revenue people, who had assured him that the assessment was not deductible. b. Whether the property taxes would be increased after the paving? c. The purpose of sidewalks on Dallas Street at this time? d. The drainage design, as to whether the property could be drained? He stated that some problem now exists with the drainage in his area and wondered whether_ the storm sewer proposed should be extended west beyond Colorado. MR. JOHN ROARK replied that the assessment on Dallas Street was for curb and gutter, sidewalk, and drive approaches and no paving cost was included in the assessment. Mr. Roark explained that the assessment was valid only in the amount to which the paving increased the value of the property. He explained that the reason the assessment: was not deductible was because it was considered an investment, and must be such, to be a valid assessment. Mr. Roark explained that the sidewalk locations were determined by the School Traffic Safety Committee. Also a policy had been recommended to the Board of Aldermen that sidewalks be assessed on all capital improvement projects and all reconstruction pro- jects such as Dallas Street. Mr. Roark stated that sidewalks were not included i,-!ith new paving in which the property owner bore a portion of the cost of the paving, inasmuch as the assessment rate would be such as to be a financial burden to most property owners. Mr. Roark stated that Mr. Earl Deland, City Engineer, would investigate the problem of drainage to make sure that drainage from all property lines would be to the curb and gutter and that water would not be ponded. Mr. Roark stated that drain- age design indicated that surface drainage could be handled with- out storm sewer west of Colorado Street and that in most cases, paving of the streets in flat areas eliminated many of the drain- age problems which had existed prior to the paving. Benefit Hearing August 6, 1968 Page 4 5. MR. LOUIS GONZALES, 2708 Strong Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas, appeared in regard to the assessment against Ysid.oro V. Gonzales, on Homes Street and Tulsa Street in the total amount of. $915.20, the property being a corner. lot, 100 feet by 110 feet at the corner of Homes and Tulsa Street. Mr. . Gonzales stated that his father had passed away about one year ago and he was present in regard to his mother's interest in the property. Mr. Gonzales stated that they had attempted to sell the property which was rented at the present time. Mr. Gonzales also stated that his mother was a diabetic and for that reason had high monthly expenditures for medicine. He stated that she was in need of the $25 to $30 a month rent on the property and his condition was such that he could not assist her in an additional investment on the property. MR. JOHN J. RO.ARK replied that it was the experience of the City that the property would continue to decline in value until such time as the streets in the area were paved. Mr. Roark explained that paving one street in an area many times does not: increase the property value or prevent the decline. However, area paving in which all of the streets were paved generally halts the decline in value, provided the property is maintained. Mr. Roark explained this was the anticipated benefit of the paving in this area. It was also explained to Mr. Gonzales that it was not the intention of the City of Wichita Falls to create financial hardships upon the property owners. Mr. Roark explained to Mr. Gonzales that the present policy provided for forty-eight (48) monthly installments to property owners who would sign a mechanic's lien for the improve- ments. Mr. Roark requested Mr.. Gonzales to met with Mr. A. D. January, to determine the minimum monthly installments that could be arranged. Mr. Roark emphasized that it was the policy of the City of Wichita Falls to be as lenient as possible and to do what was right in each instance. Mr. Roark also explained that the payment on the paving would not be required until such time as the pavement had been completed and had been accepted as being constructed in accordance with the Stand7ard Specifications of the City of Wichita Falls. 6. MRS. CLEO FISCHER of. Route 3, Box 298, appeared in regard to an assessment on Hudson Street between Sherman and Baltimore in the amount of $558.80. Mrs. Fischer stated that she had attempted to sell the property and could not do so and that the paving would not increase the value of the property to the extent that she could Benefit Hearing August 6, 1968 Page 5 sell it. Mrs. Fischer stated that she knew that it would do no good to appear at the Public Hearing, since the. City would go ahead and do what they wanted to, but she decided to appear any- way. MR. JOHN J. ROARK explained that the paving was in response to a petition submitted by fifty percent (50%) of the abutting prop- erty owners. MR. H. P. HODGE stated that the assessment proceedings were accom- plished in accordance with the State Statutes of the State of Texas and to be valid must not levy an assessment greater than the increase in value to the abutting property owner. Mr. Hodge stated that the question to be resolved was how much increase in value resulted in the pavement. If it did not equal the amount of the assessment, then it was not a valid assessment in the total amount. MR. II. P. HODGE asked if anyone else were present to make a com- ment. None were present and the meeting was closed by Mr. Hodge at 9:00 p.m.