Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1987-11-23 Agendas I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I ',1 .....'.'.....,.'..,.,.,..,....1 -:'.,"", I !,..,...,.'.'.........,...,.....··,····1,·, ...'" .-'-' -'~::¡!)-'i_-·,~~;t"';;- ,,--~o:~,:<~~-~:,~,-,:'-;-~~~:~1;?: ?~-~:-"~~~~----~~~~~~-,-;-~~--:;_..._~ ~~',:r.~-~_-<r:--.,-~--';;::->ri·:_--·_~} --'~:'-:-7,_¡:'~ "h:.,~,? ,,~. :",. ',,,-," '. -~·""-:1-.t :-~'-S.f': -:~ ~~,",,"(_';:__ ''''., '0"""''',.':'"'.'''''> '>",,<', ~"".">' CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS PRE-COUNCIL AGENDA NOVEMBER 23, 1987 - 5:45 P.M. For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall Council Chambers, 7301 Northeast Loop 820. NUMBER 1. PZ 87-20 PS 87-38 ITEM ACTION TAKEN Ordinance No. 1506 (Request of Burk Collins to Rezone Lots 44 & 45, Block 2, W.E. Odell Addition from R-3 Single Family to I-2 Industrial (Agenda Item No.7) and Request of Burk Collins Investments for Replat of Lots 2R and 3, Block 2, Culp Addition (Agenda Item No. 10) (15 Minutes) 2. GN 87-143 Approval of Proposal for Project Coordination and Financial System Design to Implement Senate Bill No. 336 (Agenda Item No. 16) (20 Minutes) 3. GN 87-141 North Park Baptist Church Request for Median Opening in Front of the Church on Watauga Road (Agenda Item No. 14) (15 Minutes) I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I ·1 Page 2 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 4. GN 87-142 State Department of Highways and Public Transportation Establishment of Precinct Line Road as a Farm-to-Market Highway Project (Agenda Item No. 15) (15 Minutes) 5. GN 87-140 McKee Water Service Request for Rate Increase (Agenda Item No. 13) (10 Minutes) 6. *Executive Session (20 Minutes) Review of Progress on Land Acquisition 7. Possible Work Session (5 Minutes) 8. Other Items (5 Minutes) *Closed due to subject matter as provided by the Open Meetings Law. If any action is contemplated, it will be taken in open session. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA NOVEMBER 23, 1987 For the Meeting conducted at the North Richland Hills City Hall Council Chambers, 7301 Northeast Loop 820, at 7:30 p.m. The below listed items are placed on the Agenda for discussion and/or action. NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN I. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Invocation 4. Minutes of the Regular Meeting November 9, 1987 5. Removal of Item(s) from the Consent Agenda 6. Consent Agenda Item(s) indicated by Asterisk (8, 9, II, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 & 27) 7. PZ 87-20 Ordinance No. 1506 (Request of Burk Collins to Rezone Lots 44 & 45, Block 2, W.E. Odell Addition from R-3 Single Family to I-2 Industrial (Located at 8336 Odell Street) (Postponed from 11/9/87 Council Meeting) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 2 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN * 8. PS 87-33 Request of Burk Collins Investments for Replat of Lots 1-4, Block I, North Hills Village Addition (Located on the Southwest Corner of Loop 820 and Grapevine Highway) * 9. PS 87-37 Request of James F. Schwend for Replat of Lot 6R, Block 23, Kingswood Estates Addition (Located on Acts Court off Starnes Road) 10. PS 87-38 Request of Burk Collins Investments for Replat of Lots 2R and 3, Block 2, Culp Addition (Located on the East Side of Davis Boulevard Between Northeast Parkway and Odell Street) *11. PS 87-40 Request of Lamar Savings for Replat of Tracts 4A and 4B, N.R.H. Industrial Park Addition (Located on the South Side of North Park Drive East of Rufe Snow Drive) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 3 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN 12. PS 87-41 Request of Richmond Bay Development for Final Plat of Lots 42 through 45, Block 3, and Lot I, Block 10, Meadow Lakes Addition (Located on the South Side of Meadow Lakes Drive and East of Dory Court) *13. GN 87-140 McKee Water Service Request for Rate Increase 14. GN 87-141 North Park Baptist Church Request for Median Opening in Front of the Church on Watauga Road *15. GN 87-142 State Department of Highways and Public Transportation Establishment of Precinct Line Road as a Farm-to-Market Highway Project *16. GN 87-143 Approval of Proposal for Project Coordination and Financial System Design to Implement Senate Bill No. 336 *17. GN 87-144 Revision of Operating Budget for 1987/88 *18. PU 87-46 Award of Bid to First Responder in the Amount of $53,630 - Type I 1988 Ambulance I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 4 NUMBER ITEM ACTION TAKEN *19. PU 87-47 Approval to Advertise and Solicit Bids for City Vehicles *20. PU 87-48 Award of Bid to EBM in the Amount of $12,142.62 - Police Department Video Equipment *21. PU 87-49 Award Bid to Contech in the amount of $8,195 - Heat Lamp Vacuum Applicator *22. PU 87-50 Award of Bid to Motorola Communications in the Amount of $54,765 - Police Communication Console *23. PU 87-51 Award of Bid to Collins Ambulance Sales and Service in the Amount of $26,740 - Remount of Type I Ambulance *24. PU 87-52 Award of Bid to Kustom Electronics in the Amount of $6,000 - Dash Mounted Radar Units *25. PU 87-53 Change Order to Calvin Baker _ Tom Gilmore in the Amount of $39,768; Purchase of Furniture not to exceed $13,000; Contract with Phillip Swager and Associates in the Amount of $11,935 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 5 NUMBER ACTION TAKEN ITEM *26. *27. 28. 29. PW 87-35 PW 87-36 Watauga Road Improvements Change Order III Wastewater Contract Between the City of North Richland Hills, the Trinity River Authority and the City of Fort Worth Citizens Presentations Adjournment I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I I. I I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD IN THE CITY HALL, 7301 NORTHEAST LOOP 820 - NOVEMBER 9, 1987 - 7:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Echols called the meeting to order November 9, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. Present: Dan Echols Dick Fisher Richard Davis Marie Hinkle Mack Garvin Virginia Moody Jim Ramsey Linda Spurlock Staff: Rodger N. Line Dennis Horvath Jeanette Rewis Rex McEntire Lee Maness Gene Riddle Richard Royston Ri-chard Albin Don Bowen Members of the Press Absent: John Whitney 2. ROLL CALL Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilwoman Councilman Councilwoman City Manager Assistant City Manager City Secretary Attorney Finance Director Public Works Director Director of Planning City Engineer Planning & Zoning Member Director of Support Services 3. INVOCATION Councilwoman Hinkle gave the invocation. 4. PRESENTATION BY MAYOR OF AWARDS FOR BICENTENNIAL CONTEST Mayor Echols made the following presentation of awards for the Bicentennial Contest. 12th Grade Essay Contest: First Place, $100 Savings Bond - Steve Horstman Second Place, $75 Savings BOúd - Jeff Knollenberg Third Place, $50 Savings Bond - Lisa Wood I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 2 11th Grade Essay Contest: First Place, $100 Savings Bond - Daniel Gray 10th Grade Essay Contest: First Place, $100 Savings Bond - Patricia Vuillemot Elementary School Art Contest (entered only by students from Foster Village): 1st Grade: First Prize, $10.00 - Bryan Higgins Third Grade: First Prize, $15.00 - Kayla Wood Second Prize, Ribbon - Cherie Emerson Third Prize, Certificate - Helen Kim Fourth Grade: First Prize, $15.00 - Adrian Spears Second Prize, Ribbon - Marisa Huber Third Prize, Certificate - Terry Bogan Fifth Grade: First Prize, $25.00 - Lisa Cole Second Prize, Ribbon - Maly Xaykosy Third Prize, Certificate - Lucas Niell Thomas Sixth Grade: First Prize, $25.00 - Eric Anderson Second Prize, Ribbon - Josh Watkins Third Prize, Certificate - Mike Davis 5. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 26, 1987 APPROVED Mayor Pro Tem Fisher moved, seconded by Councilman Davis, to approve the minutes of the October 26, 1987 meeting. Motion carried 5-0; Councilwoman Hinkle and Councilman Garvin abstaining due to absence from the meeting. 6. REMOVAL OF ITEM(S) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA Councilwoman Moody removed Item No. 14 from the Consent Agenda. 7. CONSENT AGENDA ITEM(S) INDICATED BY ASTERISK (15, 16, 18, 19, 20 & 28) APPROVED Councilwoman Moody moved, seconded by Councilman Ramsey, to approve the Consent Agenda. I Ie I I' I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I November 9, 1987 Page 3 Motion carried 7-0. Councilman Davis moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to move Item No. 17 to this point on the Agenda. Motion carried 7-0. 17. GN 87-129 CANVASSING CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTION, ORDINANCE NO. 1509 APPROVED Councilman Ramsey made the following statements: "Since I was opposed to Proposition 13, I may be criticized for making this motion. However, I feel that there may have been confusion about the issue. I also realize my oath of office, which was very ethically pointed out to me. I am ready to fully accept what might have happened in the election and am fully going to accept the motion I am going to make." Councilman Ramsey moved, seconded by Councilman Davis, that Ordinance No. 1509 be passed and approved with the following changes: Section 1. The above canvass be, and is hereby, approved as to Propositions I through 12. Proposition 13 is excluded. Section 2. (As written) Section 3. Propositions 2 through 12 are declared to have been approved by the voters. Section 4. City was: The canvass shows that the total number of votes cast in the 5,317. Councilman Garvin stated 'this was possibly one of the hardest and controversial decisions that had come before the Council since he had been seated. Councilman Garvin stated he was not in favor of four year terms and voted against the amendment knowing what he was voting for. Councilman Garvin stated it was obvious in talking to a large number of people that there was a lot of confusion over the wording of Proposition 13. Councilman Garvin stated the people he had talked with thought they were voting to maintain two year council terms. Councilman Garvin stated there seemed to be a question on whether or not the Council had an option on not canvassing Proposition 13. He had only heard hearsay suggestions from different people and legal advisors and had received conflicting opinions; therefore, he was going to support Councilman Ramsey's motion. Councilwoman Spurlock stated she would like to say she was one of the ones that did not read carefully and voted wrong. Councilwoman Spurlock stated voting wrong was not her problem, her problem was with the motion not to canvass. Councilwoman Spurlock stated that to her canvassing was not placing judgment on whether something was worded correctly or incorrectly. Councilwoman Spurlock stated she had also received a lot of advice and wanted the question resolved. Councilwoman Spurlock stated I ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 4 failure to canvass was failure to say there was an election and the number of votes that was cast. Councilwoman Spurlock stated it needed to be resolved by law in District Court and that was the only way it could be resolved. Councilwoman Spurlock stated she also felt that failing to canvass was failing to take care of the problem which was what she wanted done. Councilwoman Spurlock stated she felt that by failing to canvass there would be a precedent set that anytime there was an election from now on it could be said that it wasn't understood and the canvass refused. Councilwoman Spurlock stated she wanted to see it resolved and she felt that it should be resolved in District Court where the judge would decide, hopefully in the favor that it was worded incorrectly and poorly. Councilwoman Spurlock stated she felt the judge was the only one that could set aside the judgment. Councilman Davis stated that for the benefit of the voters of the City he would like to acknowledge the fact that he made a mistake by letting the wording that was on the ballot be approved. Councilman Davis stated he felt the Council and himself did not edit or proofread as closely as they should have. Councilman Davis stated the wording in the brochure that was sent to all the households did explain it. Councilman Davis stated there was some very concerned businessmen in the community that sent a mail out as late as the day before the election that was clear in explaining Proposition 13. Councilman Davis stated he wanted the citizens to know a mistake was made and he intended to try and face the mistake. Councilman Davis stated he felt it was in the best interest of the City not to have four year terms and would support Councilman Ramsey's motion because he felt that was what the voters wanted. Councilwoman Hinkle stated she believed that there had been confusion and she also wanted to resolve the problem. Councilwoman Hinkle stated she also had talked with a lot of people and legal advisors and in her. opinion felt canvassing the vote was a legal process. Councilwoman Hinkle stated the Council did not want and and does not want victory that was gained through confusion. Councilwoman Hinkle Rtated she did not want the Council to do something as a City that would haunt them later and wanted to do it right. Councilwoman Hinkle stated that from what she could understand, it was not legal for the Council not to canvass the vote. Councilwoman Moody stated she felt it was important that the people know that it was not the intention of the Council to mislead the citizens in anyway. Councilwoman Mooqy stated she felt the wording on the ballot was done very poorly. Councilwoman Moody stated from the personal contact she had, some of the citizens were telling her they voted in error. Councilwoman Moody stated she thought that what the Council was trying to do tonight was to tell the voters that the Council was going to correct the problem whether this was the right way or the wrong way. Councilwoman Moody stated the Council had been given legal advise and legal opinions in both directions and she felt the important thing was that the people know that the Council would correct it and that the wording was not done intentionally. Mayor Pro Tem Fisher stated he understood Proposition 13 and voted against it, but he felt it was the Council's obligation to canvass the votes. Mayor Pro Tem Fisher stated he felt that if the Council did not canvass I Ie I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 5 there would be long time repercussions. Motion carried 4-3; Councilwoman Moody, Councilmen Ramsey, Davis and Garvin voting for and Councilwomen Spurlock and Hinkle and Mayor Pro Tem Fisher voting against. 8. PZ 87-20 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _ REQUEST OF BURK COLLINS INVESTMENTS TO REZONE LOTS 44 AND 45, BLOCK 2, W.E. ODELL ADDITION FROM R-3 (SINGLE FAMILY) TO I-2 (INDUSTRIAL) (LOCATED ON SOUTH SIDE OF ODELL STREET EAST OF DAVIS BOULEVARD) Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. Mr. Jackie Fluitt, representing Burk Collins Investments, appeared before the Council. Mr. Fluitt stated they were requesting a zoning change from R-3 Single Family to Industrial on Lots 44 and 45 of Odell Addition. Mr. Fluitt stated it was basically the two remaining lots of their last request, which at that time they did not have these two lots under contract. Mr. Fluitt stated they now have these lots under contract and were requesting the zoning change. Mr. Fluitt stated he would answer any questions the Council might have. Councilman Davis asked if negotiations were still going on with the property owners on the north side of Odell Street. Mr. Fluitt stated as far as he knew they were. Councilman Ramsey stated.he also had the same question because the minutes of October 8th stated yes they had made an offer to all of them and asked if that was still correct. Mr. Fluitt stated he believed offers had been made to all of them. Councilman Ramsey asked if they had received any rejections and counter offers. Mr. Fluitt stated they had received some rejections on the price they had offered and he was not sure about the counter offers. Councilman Ramsey asked if he could supply some dates. Mr. Fluitt stated they had been dealing through real estate agents and he did not know the exact dates of the offers. Councilman Ramsey stated he had a lot of confidence that Burk Collins Investments would work this out. Mr. Fluitt stated they were going to do their very best. I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I November 9, 1987 Page 6 Councilman Ramsey stated that actions speak better than words. Councilman Ramsey stated it was now November and nothing had been resolved since the last Council Meeting, other than the Council had received some other information. Mayor Echols called for any wishing to speak in opposition to the request to please come forward. Mr. V.L. Gibson, 8333 Odell Street, appeared before the Council. Mr. Gibson stated he did not know what he could say to the Council that he had not already said. Mr. Gibson stated that Burk Collins Investments had not contacted any of the property owners on the north side since the last meeting. Mr. Gibson stated they had spent many hours and had come to Planning & Zoning Commission, Council, City Staff and other meetings to ask for fair treatment concerning this impossible situation. Mr. Gibson stated that Mr. Collins promised he and his wife that he would buy everybody out on both sides of the street. Mr. Gibson stated Mr. Collins said that if no one wanted to sell, he would drop it. Mr. Gibson stated that Mr. Collins had not tried to buyout the property owners on the north side. Mr. Gibson stated he asked Mr. Royston where the warehouse traffic would enter and exit. Mr. Gibson stated that Mr. Royston answered, without hesitation, Northeast Parkway. Mr. Gibson stated that at the last meeting Mr. Collins said that the owners of Haverty's would say which street would be used. Mr. Gibson stated he did not believe that Mr. Collins would ever reach an agreement with the property owners on the north side, and this would leave he and his wife and Mr. and Mrs. Odette facing the warehouses. Mr. Gibson stated they were asking that the Council vote no on this request. Councilwoman Moody asked if he and Mrs. Odette were the only two that had not been negotiated with on Odell. Mr. Gibson stated Mr. Co+lins pad given him an unacceptable offer. Councilwoman Moody asked if Mr. Collins offered what he considered in his opinion to be a fair 'offer, would he be opposed to this rezoning. Mr. Gibson stated they would have to hear the offer again. Councilwoman Moody stated this was merely a housekeeping task that was taking place tonight; everything else around it was complete. Mr. Gibson stated it should not have been approved to begin with. Councilwoman Moody stated her question was did he opposed to this simply because in his opinion he had not received a fair offer on his property. Mr. Gibson stated if he received a fair offer he would sell it to him because his word was his bond. Mr. Gibson stated if one person refused to sell it should have been stopped then. Mr. Gibson stated his neighbors said that Mr. Collins was not going to buy the north side. Councilwoman Moody asked if anyone representing Burk Collins had been in I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I November 9, 1987 Page 7 touch with him since the last Council Meeting. Mr. Gibson stated yes, Mr. Collins came by and told him they were in Court in Dallas and he would try and get back in touch with them. Councilman Ramsey stated he felt the record should show whether Mr. Collins or his representatives had been in contact with Mr. Gibson. Councilman Ramsey stated that concerning the traffic it was his opinion based upon the last Council meeting that for anybody, Staff, Council, or a representative anywhere to assume what was going to happen on Odell Street right now was extremely premature until the platting process was reached. Councilman Ramsey stated he felt the Council had the assurance that Odell Street was going to be addressed in the platting process. Mr. Gibson stated he did not believe that Mr. Collins was going to buyout the north side and be out a million dollars when he already had what he needed on the south side. Mayor Pro Tem Fisher stated he believed that Mr. Collins was an ethical businessman and that he would pursue making an offer to Mr. Gibson for his property. Mayor Pro Tem Fisher stated he felt it was after the fact now, two houses would not keep Mr. Collins from going ahead and bUilding the warehouse. Ms. Hazel Odette, 8337 Odell, appeared before the Council. Ms. Odette stated she lived opposite from the zoning request. Ms. Odette stated she did not want to look out her front door at warehouses. Ms. Odette stated that if Mr. Collins offered them a decent price they would sell, but no one had contacted them at all. Ms. Odette stated there was two that she knew of that had been contacted on the north side. Ms. Odette stated they were beginning to believe that Mr. Collins never intended to buy the north side. Mayor Echols asked Ms. Odette if she was never approached by a real estate agent representing Mr. Collins. Ms. Odette stated they had been approached by no one. Councilwoman Spurlock stated from reading the Planning & Zoning notes, Mr. Collins was quoted as saying that he had made and offer to all on the north side. Councilwoman Spurlock asked if that was correct. Mr. Fluitt stated he was under the impression that everybody had been contacted. Mr. Fluitt stated it was possible that Ms. Odette was at the hospital and had been missed. Councilwoman Spurlock stated these notes were taken on October 8th and asked when the hospitalization took place. Mr. Fluitt stated he was not sure. Councilwoman Moody stated Mr. Collins assured the Council that the north I ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 8 side would be negotiated with and he would buy the north side and the Council was going to hold him to it. Councilwoman Moody stated the Planning and Zoning notes were from October 8th and Ms. Odette said she has not been contacted. Councilwoman Moody stated plenty of time had lapsed and someone should have contacted Ms. Odette, her daughter, and everyone that lives on the north side. Mr. Fluitt stated he believed the Odettes were under contract. Councilwoman Moody stated she did not know why Mr. Odette would say she had not been contacted. Councilwoman Moody stated the Council was not here to negotiate real estate, but it was hard to do what was best for everybody when one person needed to be taken care of and that one person represented everybody on the north side of Odell. Mayor Echols asked if it was correct that Ms. Odette or her husband had not been contacted. Ms. Odette said no one had been near her house. Ms. Jonie Ruppel, 7013 Stoneridge Drive, appeared before the Council. Ms. Ruppel stated that Odell Street was not a Tara Plantation or a Norwood Drive and these people were not looking for an offer that would make them millionaires. Ms. Ruppel stated she was asking the Council to table this motion to get Mr. Collins rolling to take care of these people and then start the construction of the Haverty's warehouse after these people have been taken care of. Ms. Linda Madden, 8620 Amundson, appeared before the Council. Ms. Madden stated she was also in favor of tabling it. Ms. Madden stated she could not believe the Council could do this when their only financial security was their home.. There being no one else wishing to speak in Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing. 9. ORDINANCE NO. 1506 POSTPONED Councilwoman Moody moved, seconded by Councilwoman Hinkle, to table Ordinance No. 1506 until the next Council meeting. Attorney McEntire advised that it would have to be published fifteen days prior to the meeting. Councilwoman Moody amended her motion, Councilwoman Hinkle amended her second, to postpone Ordinance No. 1506 until December 21, 1987. Councilman Ramsey stated there were two lots left and because of this some of the Council voted against the zoning the last time because they did not feel the whole package was together. Councilman Ramsey stated that whether the zoning of these two lots was approved or not, in his personal I Ie I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I Ie I I November 9, 1987 Page 9 opinion he did not feel that it would stop the development. Councilman Davis stated he appreciated the problems that Ms. Odette and Mr. Gibson had in trying to negotiate whether or not to sell. Councilman Davis stated he felt that the best and highest use of the property was industrial. Councilman Davis stated he liked to take a man at his word. Councilman Davis stated he was not changing his mind on the fact that he felt the zoning should be industrial, but he wanted the developer to keep his word and he had no problem with postponing it for that length of time. Councilwoman Moody stated she was not opposed to the housekeeping that this rezoning represented, but she was opposed to what appeared to be Mr. Collins lack of effort to negotiate with the north side of Odell. Councilwoman Moody stated she felt the Council should have a progress report from Mr. Collins' office as to exactly what he was doing on the north side. Councilman Davis called for the question. Motion carried 7-0. 10. PZ 87-21 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _ REQUEST OF WILLIAM E. PASTEUR AND WALTER ELLIOTT, JR. TO REZONE A PORTION OF TRACT 5, WILLIAM COX SURVEY, ABSTRACT 321, FROM R-7 MF (MULTI-FAMILY) AND C-I (COMMERCIAL) TO R-8 ZERO LOT LINE SINGLE FAMILY (LOCATED EAST OF CENTURY DRIVE, SOUTH OF STARNES ROAD AND WEST OF SMITHFIELD ROAD) Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak in favor to please come forward. Mr. Bill Pasteur, owner, "appeared before the Council. Mr. Pasteur stated this request consisted of 18 acres, ten acres was zoned commercial, and they felt that was too much commercial. Mr. Pasteur stated they felt R-8 zoning would be more productive. Mr. Pasteur stated the property was not zoned multi-family and R-8 zoning would reduce the density. Mr. Pasteur asked for rebuttal time if necessary. Mayor Pro Tem Fisher asked if the houses would be larger than 1,200 square feet. Mr. Pasteur stated the houses probably would be larger, it was hard to answer at the present time. Mr. Pasteur stated they were building in other areas and were building 2,000 square feet and would probably build 1,400 square feet houses on this property. Councilwoman Moody asked if he would have a problem with the stipulation of 1,500 square feet. Mr. Pasteur replied he would have a problem with a 1,500 square feet stipulation. I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I ~i I I November 9, 1987 Page 10 Councilman Ramsey stated to keep in mind that apartments could be built here and they would only have to be 750 square feet. Councilwoman Hinkle stated she would prefer to keep as many apartments out of North Richland Hills as possible. Councilman Garvin stated he felt the City needed to have homes the young people could afford. Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to please come forward. Mr. Jim Claunch, 817 Penn Street, appeared before the Council. Mr. Claunch stated he did not like 1,200 square foot homes and had just as soon leave it multi-family. Mr. Claunch stated that to build small houses" they would end up rent houses. There being no one else wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing. II. ORDINANCE NO. 1507 APPROVED Councilman Ramsey moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to approve Ordinance No. 1507. Motion carried 6-1; Mayor Pro Tem Fisher, Councilwomen Moody and Spurlock, Councilmen Ramsey, Garvin and Davis voting for; Councilwoman Moody voting against. RECESS - Mayor Echols called a recess. BACK TO ORDER Mayor Echols called the meeting back to order with the same members present as recorded. 12. PZ 87-22 PLANNING & ZONING - PUBLIC HEARING _ REQUEST OF BURK COLLINS INVESTMENTS TO REZONE BLOCKS 6 AND 7, AND PORTIONS OF BLOCK 2, 3 AND 5 STONYBROOKE SOUTH ADDITION, FROM R-5D (DUPLEX) TO R-8 ZERO LOT LINE SINGLE FAMILY (LOCATED EAST OF NORTHEAST PARKWAY, NORTH OF THE ST. LOUIS AND SOUTHWESTERN RAILROAD, A~~ EAST OF DAVIS BOULEVARD) Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. Mr. Jackie Fluitt, representing Burk Collins Investments, appeared before I ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page II the Council. Mr. Fluitt stated they were requesting the R-5-D zoning be changed to R-B Single Family. Mr. Fluitt stated the lots would be 5,000 square feet. Councilman Davis asked what the change in density would be. Mr. Fluitt stated the density would change from 150 duplexes to 94 single family lots. Mayor Echols called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this request to please come forward. Mr. V.L. Gibson, 8333 Odell Street, appeared before the Council. Mr. Gibson stated he was not actually in opposition to the request. Mr. Gibson stated this property was located below where he lived and asked- how the traffic would come out. Mr. Fluitt stated the traffic would use Northeast Parkway and Steffanie out of the subdivision. Councilwoman Spurlock stated that according to the Planning and Zoning Minutes, Mr. Gibson had stated he was not in opposition. Mr. Gibson stated he was not really against the request, but he had rather see R~8 instead of duplexes. Mayor Echols called for anyone else wishing to speak to please come forward. There being no one else wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing. 13. ORDINANCE NO. 1508 APPROVED Councilman Moody moved, seconded by Councilman Garvin, to approve Ordinance No. 1508. Motion carried 7-0. 14. GN 87-126 PARTICIPATION IN NORTHEAST TARRANT COUNTY FREEWAY STUDY APPROVED Councilwoman Moody moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Fisher, to approve GN 87-126. Motion carried 7-0. I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I Ie I I November 9, 1987 Page 12 *15. GN 87-127 FINANCING OF UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR MARTIN AND STARNES APPROVED *16. GN 87-128 APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR TRENCH SAFETY PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS FOR STARNES ROAD AND HIGHTOWER DRIVE CONSTRUCTION 17. GN 87-129 CANVASSING CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTION, ORDINANCE NO. 1509 APPROVED Heard earlier in the meeting. *18. GN 87-130 SCHOOL CROSSING FLASHING LIGHTS FOR 1988 CONSTRUCTION APPROVED *19. GN 87-131 SMITHFIELD ROAD PRELIMINARY PLANS APPROVAL APPROVED *20. GN 87-132 MACKEY CREEK PHASE II DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION APPROVED 21. GN 87-133 DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON STARNES ROAD, ORDINANCE NO. 1510 APPROVED ; Councilman Davis asked to be excused from this discussion because of possible conflict of interest. Mayor Echols read the following caption: " ORDINANCE NO. 1510 AN ORDINANCE DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR AND ORDERING AND PROVIDING FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF A PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING STREET: STARNES ROAD FROM SHADY HOLLOW LANE TO CRABTREE LANE IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUCH IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING ITS EXECUTION; MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING THE INDEBTEDNESS THEREBY INCURRED; MAKING PROVISIONS FOR THE LEVYING OF ASSESSMENTS AGAINST ABUTTING PROPERTIES AND THE OWNERS THEREFORE FOR A PART OF THE COST OF SUCH IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR METHODS OF PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF ASSIGNABLE CERTIFICATES IN EVIDENCE OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FILE A NOTICE OF THE ADOPTION OF THIS ORDINANCE WITH THE COUNTY CLERK OF TARRANT COUNTY, I Ie I I I I I I I -- I I 'I I I I Ie I I November 9, 1987 Page 13 TEXAS, DECLARING THAT THIS ORDINANCE AND ALL SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS RELATIVE TO SAID STREET IMPROVEMENTS ARE AND SHALL BE PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 1105b OF VERNON'S TEXAS CIVIL STATUTES; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO ENGROSS AND ENROLL THIS ORDINANCE BY COPYING THE CAPTION OF SAME IN THE MINUTE BOOK OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND BY FILING THE COMPLETE ORDINANCE IN THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE RECORD OF THIS CITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Councilman Ramsey moved, seconded by Councilwoman Moody, to approve Ordinance No. 1510. Motion carried 6-0. 22. GN 87-134 PUBLIC HEARING ON STARNES ROAD ASSESSMENTS APPROVED Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak to please come forward. Mr. Richard Albin, City Engineer, appeared before the Council. Mr. Albin outlined the scope of the project and explained to the Council the nature of the improvements. Mr. Gene Riddle appeared as a witness and further explained the nature of the project. Mr. Riddle testified that each parcel of land on the assessment roll would be increased in value by virtue of the project in an amount of at least the amount of the assessment in each case. Mr. Riddle explained that the completion of the project would allow the undeveloped tracts to be developed into housing additions which would increase the value of each parcel. Mr. John Lutz, 5425 Davis Boulevard, appeared as a witness before the Council. Mr. Lutz testified as to his qualifications as a real estate dealer and appraiser and that he was familiar with the assessments shown on the assessment rolls and was familiar with the tracts of land being assessed. Mr. Lutz further testified that, in his opinion, Starnes Road Project would cause the assessed value of each assessed tract to have and increased value at least in the amount of the assessment shown on the assessment rolls for that tract. Mr. Jim Claunch, owner of the property at 7440 Starnes, appeared before the Council. Mr. Claunch testified that his property was agriculture, that it had a residence on it, the side of which faced Starnes Road. Mr. Claunch testified that his property, for the purpose of the assessment, should be considered as side residential. Mr. Claunch further stated that in his opinion the project would not increase the value of his property. , ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 14 that he bring an appraisal in Councilman Ramsey Suggested to Mr. Claunch for consideration by the council. t Mr. Claunch then Mr Claunch replied that he had his appraiser p:esen · called Mr. Jack . hi 1 tner who 1n turn presented Lonnie Obeidin, s aw par ' Carlie as a witness for Mr. Claunch. Mr Car lie testified as to his qualifications as an appraiserban~ that he wa~ familiar with the Claunch tract. In answer to questions y rh Obeidin, Mr. Car lie testified that the project would not enhance t e Claunch tract to any extend but would actually cause the tract to be depreciated in value. The Council Members questioned Mr. Carlie concerning his opinion that the property would not be enhanced in value by the project. He was asked for his opinion as to the number of houses that could be built upon the tract when it was developed. Mr. Carlie stated he could not answer the question without more of a detailed land plan. Other members of the Council questioned the City Engineer concerning the earthen tank that was on a portion of the property. Mr. Randolph Caruthers, 7349 Post Oak, appeared before the Council. Mr. Caruthers stated his concern was regarding the assessment on Lot 2, Block 12, Briarwood Estates. Mr. Caruthers testified that he did not see why the City should pay one million dollars to fix Starnes Road. Mr. Caruthers testified that he did not feel it would increase the value of his property. Mayor Echols. advised Mr. Caruthers to turn in an appraisal to the City. , Councilman Garvin asked how much of the 1.1 million dollars was being paid by the assessments. Mr. Albin advised that 40 percent of the total cost would be paid by assessments and the rest by the City. Mr. F.E. Griffin appeared before the Council. Mr. Griffin testified concerning the assessment on Lot 1, Block 16, Briarwood Estates and stated that he had paid $11,999 in assessments and felt the assessment was unfair. Mayor Echols asked Mr. Griffin if he owned two lots. Mr. Griffin advised he developed the piece of land. Mr. Albin advised that the assessment for this tract had already been paid during the platting process and at that time the anticipated assessment was about $67 front feet. Mr. Griffin was given a top figure for the assessment at the time of platting and that if the actual front foot rate I ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I .. ... November 9, 1987 Page 15 would have amounted to more than the figure paid then the property owner would still be limited to the amount shown in the agreement at the time of the platting. Mr. Griffin objected on the grounds that he had made an overpayment. Mr. Jackie Fluitt, representing Stembridge and Associates in connection with Tract 3, Abtract 311, J. Condra Survey on the assessment roll, appeared before the Council. Mr. Fluitt testified that a preliminary plat had already been approved and that the plat showed that Starnes Road abutted only rear and side yards. Mr. Fluitt testified that although the property was zoned residential, in view of the fact that it had not yet developed, the assessment should be for 327 feet at non-residential rear rates and 118 feet at non-residential side rates. Mr. Darryl Pringle, 7608 Parkway, appeared before the Council. Mr. Pringle appeared in connection with Lot 3, Block 4, Kingswood Estates. Mr. Pringle stated that he did not feel that the project would help him in any way and asked for consideration in reduction of his assessment. Councilman Ramsey pointed out that it may well be that rear lot property owners who would sign a covenant that they would never seek access to the rear and that the assessment might be waived. Mr. Pringle stated that he had an entrance through the rear of his property. Mr. John Lynch appeared representing Bill Pasteur in connection with the Century Oaks. property. Mr. Lynch pointed out his views on the approach the Council should take in using the front foot rule in this assessment proceedings. Mr. Lynch stressed that the Council should take into consideration the equities as they affect each tract. Mr. Lynch stated that the commercial tract would involve 533 feet near the intersection of Smithfield-Keller Road and Starnes Road and should be assessed as planned at the rate of $62.66 per front foot. Mr. Lynch submitted that the Council should recognize the site plan which was submitted and approved earlier in the meeting showing a change of a portion of their platted property to R-8 Single Family zoning. Mr. Lynch felt that the total frontage of the R-8 property, being 500 feet, should be assessed at the non-residential rate for side yards. Mr. Lynch testified that this would show that the Council was taking into consideration the fact that this was an undeveloped piece of property but that the recently approved plat showed that the lots adjacent to the street would abut as side yards. Mr. Lynch also pointed out that the developer had already paid the sum of $53.85 per front foot for a portion of the property in question. Mr. Lynch asked that the developer be given credit for the difference between the $53.85 per front foot and the lower assessment rate which he had previously suggested. Mr. Lynch congratulated the City on its plan for the development of that portion of I -- I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I '-- I I November 9, 1987 Page 16 the City through the Starnes Road Project. RECESS Mayor Echols called a ten minute recess. BACK TO ORDER Mayor Echols called the meeting back to order with the same members present as recorded. Mayor Echols called for any other persons who wished to present evidence in connection with the Starnes Road Project to please come forward. There being no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing. 23. GN 87-135 CLOSING HEARING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON STARNES ROAD, ORDINANCE NO. 1511 APPROVED Mayor Echols read the following caption: "ORDINANCE NO. 1511 ORDINANCE CLOSING HEARING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR A PORTION OF THE COST OF IMPROVING A PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING STREET: STARNES ROAD FROM SHADY HOLLOW LANE TO CRABTREE LANE IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS; FIXING CHARGES AND LIENS AGAINST THE OWNERS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE . COLLECTION OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS AND THE ISSUANCE OF ASSIGNABLE CERTIFICATES IN ~VIDENCE THEREOF; RESERVING UNTO THE CITY COUNCIL THE RIGHT TO ALLOW CREDITS REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT TO THE EXTENT OF ANY CREDIT GRANTED; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO ENGROSS AND ENROLL THE ORDINANCE BY COPYING THE CAPTION OF SAME IN THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, AND BY FILING THE ORDINANCE IN THE ORDINANCE RECORDS OF SAID CITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Councilman Ramsey moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Fisher, to approve Ordinance No. 1511. Motion carried 6-0. Councilman Davis-returned to the Council table. 24. GN 87-136 DETER}IINING THE NECESSITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON HIGHTO~~R DRIVE, ORDINANCE NO. 1512 APPROVED I -- I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 17 Mayor Echols read the following caption: " ORDINANCE NO. 1512 AN ORDINANCE DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR AND ORDERING AND PROVIDING FOR THE I}œROVEMENT OF A PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING STREET: HIGHTOWER DRIVE FROM MEADOW CREEK ROAD TO BRIARWOOD ESTATES IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUCH IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING ITS EXECUTION; MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING THE INDEBTEDNESS THEREBY INCURRED; MAKING PROVISIONS FOR THE LEVYING OF ASSESSMENTS AGAINST ABUTTING PROPERTIES AND THE OWNERS THEREFORE FOR A PART OF THE COST OF SUCH IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR METHODS OF PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF ASSIGNABLE CERTIFICATES IN EVIDENCE OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO FILE A NOTICE OF THE ADOPTION OF THIS ORDINANCE WITH THE COUNTY CLERK OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, DECLARING THAT THIS ORDINANCE AND ALL SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS RELATIVE TO SAID STREET IMPROVEMENTS ARE AND SHALL BE PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 1105b OF VERNON'S TEXAS CIVIL STATUTES; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO ENGROSS AND ENROLL THIS ORDINANCE BY COPYING THE CAPTION OF SAME IN THE MINUTE BOOK OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND BY FILING THE COMPLETE ORDINANCE IN THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE RECORD OF THIS CITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Councilwoman Moody moved, seconded by Councilman Ramsey, to approve Ordinance No. 1512. Motion carried 7-0. 25. GN 87-137 PUBLIC HEA~ING ON HIGHTOWER DRIVE ASSESSMENTS Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing on Hightower Drive Assessments. Mr. Richard Albin, City Engineer, discussed and explained the nature and extent of the Hightower project. Mr. Gene Riddle appeared as a witness and pointed out to the Council the Hightower Project differed from the Starnes Project in that Hightower would be four miles. Mr. Riddle testified that the Hightower Project would increase the value of each parcel shown on the assessment roll in an amount at least equally the amount of the assessment. Mr. Riddle explained to the Council that in his opinion that the Graham tract should be given a consideration of a reduction in the amount of $810 because of variance in the purchase price of right-af-way in the area. Mr. John Lutz appeared as a witness before the Council. Mr. Lutz testified as to his qualifications as an appraiser and real estate dealer in the North Richland Hills area. Mr. Lutz testified that he was familiar with the assessment rolls and the property shown on the I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 18 assessment rolls. Mr. Lutz further testified that the Hightower Project would increase the value of each tract on the assessment rolls and further that his opinion was that the increase in value would at least equal the amount of the assessment in each case. Councilman Garvin interposed a question concerning the drainage problem on the Bellomy tract. Mr. James Bellomy, 6912 Little Ranch Road, appeared before the Council. Mr. Bellomy protested the assessment of his tract. Mr. Bellomy testified that because of the drainage problem that he had on the tract, that the property really had no available usage except for raising horses. Members of the Council advised Mr. Bellomy concerning the need for him to have his position substantiated by an appraiser~ The Mayor called for other persons who wished to testify in connection with the Hightower Project. No other person appeared to testify. 26. GN 87-138 CLOSING HEARING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON HIGHTOWER DRIVE, ORDINANCE NO. 1513 APPROVED Mayor Echols read the following caption: "ORDINANCE NO. 1513 . ORDINANCE CLOSING HEARING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR A PORTION OF THE COST OF,IMPROVING A PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING STREET: HIGHTOWER DRIVE FROM MEADOW CREEK TO BRIARWOOD ESTATES IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS; FIXING CHARGES AND LIENS AGAINST THE OWNERS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS AND THE ISSUANCE OF ASSIGNABLE CERTIFICATES IN EVIDENCE THEREOF; RESERVING UNTO THE CITY COUNCIL THE RIGHT TO ALLOW CREDITS REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT TO THE EXTENT OF ANY CREDIT GRANTED; DIRECTING THE CITY SECRETARY TO ENGROSS AND ENROLL THE ORDINANCE BY COPYING THE CAPTION OF SAME IN THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, AND BY FILING THE ORDINANCE IN THE ORDINANCE RECORDS OF SAID CITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Mayor Pro Tem Fisher moved, seconded by Councilwoman Garvin, to approve Ordinance No. 1513. Motion carried 7-0. I -. I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I ~ I I . November 9, 1987 Page 19 :,,_ 27 . GN 87-139 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE REVISED SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 1514 Mayor Echols opened the Public Hearing to consider the adoption of the revised Subdivision Ordinance and called for anyone wishing to speak to please come forward. There being no one else Wishing to speak Mayor Echols closed the Public Hearing. *28. PW 87-34 STREETS TO BE RESURFACED UNDER THE 1988 COUNTY PROGRAM APPROVED 29. CITIZEN PRESENTATION MR. CHARLES SCOMA RE: "ALIGNMENT OF WATAUGA ROAD-Sl-fITHFIELD ROAD TO PRECINCT LINE ROAD" Mayor Echols advised he would let the citizens present speak at this time that were interested in speaking on the Charter Revision Election. Mayor Echols called on Dr. Tom Duer. Councilman Garvin stated Dr. Duer was one of the Charter Commission Revision Members. Councilman Garvin stated he felt the Commission had done a very good job on drafting the charter amendments. Councilman Garvin stated one of the things they considered drafting was the proposition for Council' to run for four year terms and the Commission chose not to recommend that proposition to the Council after months of studying the revisions. Councilman Garvin stated that the Council appreciated their efforts and Proposition 13 was placed on the ballot by the Council. Councilman Garvin stated this was done by the Council as a whole, not necessarily everyone was in favor, but the majority was. Councilman Garvin stated it was decided to put it before the voters to let them make the decision. Councilman Garvin stated that unfortunately the wording was not right. Councilman Garvin stated he wanted to thank the people involved and the Charter Commission and get it on the record that the Charter Commission did not recommend the proposition, as some of the news media had printed. Dr. Tom Duer, 7312 Londonderry, appeared before the Council. Dr. Duer stated that in some of the newspapers it was stated by one particular City Official that the Charter Commission worded the ballot and he would like to go on record that the Commission did not word the ballot. Dr. Duer stated that if someone did serve the community he, as well as nine others on the Charter Commission, did not appreciate the articles that were appearing in the newspaper by the City Official that the Commission was the ones responsible. Dr. Duer stated he would like I ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 20 for the Mayor to clarify this fact. Mayor Echols stated that to the best of his knowledge the Charter Commission did not prepare the wording on the ballot; that it was generally the duty of the City Attorney to prepare the ballot. Ms. Myrtis Byrd, 7312 Hialeah Circle, appeared before the Council. Ms. Byrd asked what could be done to keep this confusion from happening again. Ms. Byrd stated she would like for a show of hands of the Council that were for the four year terms. Ms. Byrd stated she knew who they were but was concerned with the newspaper statements from Councilmen Davis and Ramsey. Councilman Ramsey called for point-of-order. Ms. Byrd stated the ones that were for it was on record and the statements in the newspaper stated who were against it. Mayor Echols advised the majority of the Council did vote to have the proposition on the ballot. Ms. Byrd stated she was interested in the City in every phase and just wanted the Council to be honest with the citizens. Councilman Davis stated he was in favor of placing Proposition 13 on the ballot because he felt the voters should make the decision. Councilman Davis stated he did not vote for the four year terms because he felt it was not in the best interest of the City and wished the wording could have been clearer. Councilman Ramsey stated that had it not been for an agreement there would be no campaigning for or against, he would have lead the charge against the four year terms. Mr. V.L. Gibson, 8333 Odell, appeared before the Council. Mr. Gibson stated he appreciated the way the Council had handled this situation and hoped no one objected to the way it was done. Mr. J.D. Benoit, 8237 Irish Drive, appeared before the Council. Mr. Benoit stated there was a lot of confusion over Proposition 13 by his neighbors. Mr. Benoit stated the City Attorney had not voiced his opinion and he felt that it should be made part of the record. Mr. Benoit stated that as far as he knew there was only one way that this could be addressed, and that would be by filing suit. Mr. Benoit stated it appeared to him that the City should committed funds in that regard. Mr. Benoit stated the suit had to originate with the citizens and thought the City Attorney should go on record concerning the issue and make a recommendation. Mr. McEntire stated he had been in the position before where he had been asked a question in a public meeting and had to meet the same answers on I ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I ..... November 9, 1987 Page 21 the end of a lawsuit. Mr. McEntire stated the City had lost because someone forced him to answer the question in public and that was the reason for Executive Meetings. Mr. McEntire stated there was no Executive Meeting posted for tonight. Mr. McEntire stated he had discussed this matter with all of the Council with the exception of one and was unable to contact that Council person. Mr. Charles Scoma, 8300 Cardinal Lane, appeared before the Council. Mr. Scoma stated he did not need to take a great deal of the Council's time but did have a proposition and petition that outlined the details of what they were asking for. Mr. Scoma stated he was going to leave the booklet with the petition and proposition with the Council. Mr. Scoma showed a map on the proposed Watauga Road alignment. Mr. Scoma stated that in the bond issue it was stated that Watauga Road would only go as far as Smithfield Road because there was not funds available to extend it west. Mr. Scoma stated funds would be provided by developers or someone else for the extension. Mr. Scoma stated one of the concerns was the routing of Watauga Road. Mr. Scoma stated it was changed in late 1985 because of the E-Systems development. Mr. Scoma stated their concern was that the road now made a major bend to the south and would run behind houses on Pearl Street. Mr. Scoma stated they were very concerned about the impact this would have on the subdivision. Mr. Scoma stated the way the road turns in now is probably the worst place on Davis Boulevard because it is between two curves. Mr. Scoma stated his proposal was that Watauga Road be rerouted according to the original plan, down Cardinal Lane and reintersect with the original plans at this point. Mr. Scoma stated the other proposition was related to the Main Street expansion. Mayor Echols reminded Mr. Scoma of the three minute time limit under Citizens Presentation. Councilman Davis stated that Mr. Scoma had stated that the line going to the south was to E-Syste~s an4 asked if that was what was shown on the present Master Plan. Mr. Scoma stated all of the lines on the map were on the Master Thoroughfare Plan and showed the southerly route. Councilman Davis stated that to change the Master Thoroughfare Plan the Planning and Zoning Commission was the only body that could make a recommendation to the Council. Mr. Scoma stated they had discussed this with City personnel and was told that the Council was the only one that could change it. Mr. William Schott, 6309 Freida Lane, appeared before the Council. Mr. Schott stated there were homes located next to Watauga Road and felt it would affect the value on all of the homes in the area if Watauga Road was not rerouted. Mr. Schott stated there had been no communications with the people in the area nor did he see any notice in the newspaper on the plan being changed in any way. I ~ I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~ I I November 9, 1987 Page 22 Mayor Echols explained that there had been several notices on public hearings on the Master Thoroughfare Plan that was being held by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mayor Echols stated he did not know what the subdivision was not aware of the public hearing. Ms. Katheryne Robinson, 6463 Chilton, appeared before the Council. Ms. Robinson asked if Main Street would be expanded to four lanes. Councilman Garvin stated he saw no reason to change Main Street to four lanes. Councilman Garvin stated anything other than a two lane residential street would be pointless. Ms. Betty Tatum, 8221 Pearl, appeared before the Council. Ms. Tatum stated she did not want a six lane street behind her house and asked the Council to consider rerouting. Councilwoman Moody asked if this could be turned over to the City Engineer to look into the possibility of rerouting Watauga Road. Mr. Robert Marks, 8224 Pearl, appeared before the Council. Mr. Marks asked the Council to seriously consider the rerouting of Watauga Road. Councilman Davis advised the Council could ask the Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation of the rerouting of Watauga Road. Mr. Scott Stewart, 5640 Newman, appeared before the Council. Mr. Stewart stated he was on the Bond Committee and remembered Watauga Road running along Cardinal Lane. Mayor Echols advised that the Bond Committee had met in 1984 and at that time the original plan showed it to go down, Cardinal. Mr. Kirby Cox, 8601 Cardinal, appeared before the Council. Mr. Cox stated he felt E-Systems was responsible for the situation. Mr. Cox stated one of the problems was the lack of communication with the people involved. Dr. Tom Duer, 7312 Londonderry, appeared before the Council. Dr. Duer asked if notices could not be placed in the Star Telegram as well as the Mid-Cities. Councilwoman Moody stated the City would be discussing means of legal advertising in the near future. Ms. Delores Goodson, 8225 Pearl, appeared before the Council. Ms. Goodson stated her neighborhood was being surrounded with major I -. I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I ~. I I November 9, 1987 Page 23 thoroughfares and asked the Council to consider rerouting Watauga Road. Ms. Don Beckelman, 6205 Shirley, appeared before the Council. Ms. Beckelman stated she felt the widening and present route of Watauga Road would cause more traffic in the subdivision and asked the Council to reconsider the rerouting. Ms. Alice Scoma, 8300 Cardinal, appeared before the Council. Ms. Scoma stated that she had attended Planning and Zoning Meetings and had been in touch with City Hall for the last two years and was told the City had no plans for Watauga Road. Mr. Peter Cheese, 8212 Pearl, appeared before the Council. Mr. Cheese asked the Council to do the right thing and consider rerouting Watauga Road. Mr. Bill Lindsey, 5632 Newman, appeared, before the Council. Mr. Lindsey stated E-Systems might be the problem but the City needed to take an overall view of all streets and get a plan people could live with. Mr. Edward Reising, 6204 Gail Court, appeared before the Council. Mr. Reising asked the Council what they intended to do about the rerouting of Watauga Road. Mayor Echols stated that when the City Engineer advised the Council the cost of changing the plan the Council would made a decision. Councilman Davis asked the Council to direct the City Engineer to look at the overall project, including the costs and possibility of making a change in the alignment from Smithfield Road to Davis Boulevard on Watauga Road. 30. ADJOURNMENT Councilwoman Spurlock moved, seconded by Councilman Ramsey, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. Mayor ATTEST: City Secretary °1 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Planning and Development 11/23/87 - Council Meeting Date: Request of Burk Collins, Investments to Rezone Lots 44 and 45, Block £, W.~. Udeii Add1t10n from R-3 to I-2. Ordinance No. 1506 PZ 87-20 Agenda Number: This rezoning request is presented on two existing residential lots located on the south side of Odell Street east of Davis Boulevard. The requested rezoning is from R-3 Single Family Residential to 1-2 Industrial. The property involved is two lots which were not included irt an earlier request by the applicant. The earlier request basically proposed industrial zoning on all the lots on the south side of Odell Street. The Commission had given a positive recommendation on the larger request noting that the two lots would present a problem in the development since the two lots were basically surrounded by the proposed industrial use. The applicant indicated that purchase of the subject property was being negotiated. With the satisfactory purchase contract being completed the applicant submitted the current zoning application. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that Zoning Application PZ 87-20 requesting rezoning on Lots 44 and 45, Block 2, W.E. Odell Addition from R-3 to 1-2 be approved. . The City Council should act on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Finance Review Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available ¡e fl ~. . Finance Director City Manager CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of 1 11' It I I I I I I I rtt I I I I I I ~ 1 I - TO: City Council City of North Richland Hills =~ DATE: I /-/1- ~" TIME: =- 8: I~ CASE NO.I."~ J'í1~~ We, the undersigned property owners of the City of North Richland Hills, living within 200 feet of the subject property, hereby object to the rezoning of said tract for the following reasons: This rezoning would not be conductive to the public safety, health, convenience, comfort, prosperity, or general welfare of the present neighborhood. SIGNATURE: DATE: ADDRE_~ ~ ~. ~.:t: ß;/~ 1/- /&- 37 &333 tJ2~ ý-:7':~ ) TX' ~~~ h~ 1/-/Y-~1 ?33~~t:~--TlJ~:k flbl<?'O ~~ ~~J //-/R-~7 ?4c37 .~ ::~~-t. .?¡;('~ .~ ~~ "/ "t..-r-z ~J)zð?46; __ . ~ 7/.~ ·v ~ð R-3 1090 I I I l I I , I I ' \ \, \ , \ , \ " , \ \ \ \ .......... \ t F.P , I I-I SU R-3 I I-I AG I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I -- I I -.. CALL TO ORDER OATH OF OFFICE ROLL CALL ( ( MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS OCTOBER 8, 1987 - 7:30 P. M. Richard Royston administered the of office to Ron Lueck, new alte member of the Commission. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Don Bowen, at 7:30 P. M. PRESENT: Chairman Vice Chairman Member Alt. Members on Bowen Mark Wood George Tucker Manny Tricoli Ron Lueck ABSENT: John Schwinger Carole Flippo CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 24, 1987 I. PZ 87-16 2. PZ 87-20 Mr Wood made the motion to approve e minutes as written. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tricoli and the motion carried 4-0 with Mr. Lueck abstaining since he was not present at the meeting. Request of R. D. Blackard to rezone Tracts 4Bl & 4C2, William Mann Survey, Abstract 1010, from their present classification of R-1 Single Family to R-8 Single Family Detached Zero Lot Line. This property is located on the north side of Chapman Road at Little Ranch Road. This request was postponed at the September 10th meeting. The applicant requested this case be postponed until further notice. Request of Burk Collins Investments to rezone Lots 44 & 45, Block 2, W. E. Odell Addition, from their present classification of R-3 Single Family to 1-2 Industrial. This property is located at 8336 Odell Street. Chairman Bowen opened the Public Hearing and called for those wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I ~ I I Page 2 p & Z Minutes October 8, 1987 ( ( Jackey Fluitt with Burk Collins Investments came forward. He said they now have a contract on these last two lots to square the property up for a distribution warehouse. Mr. Wood asked if they had made any contacts with the property owners on the north side of Odell Street. Mr. Fluitt said they had made them all an offer. Mr. J. H. Baker, 8336 Odell Street, came forward. He said this is his property and they have made a satisfactory agreement with Mr. Collins. Mr. Baker said he is in favor of this request. Chairman Bowen called for those wishing to speak in opposition to this request to please come forward. v. L. Gibson, 8333 Odell Street, came forward. He said he is still on the wrong side. He said he had talked to Mr. Collins, but they had not come to an agreement. Mr. Gibson said lot 44 of Block 2 is across the street from him and lot 45 is across the street from Mr. and Mrs. Odette. He said there are six families living on the north side of Odell Street. He said if approved, it would be a continued nuisance. Mr. Gibson said they don't have anything in writing as to the traffic or a masonry wall. He said this is illegal. Mr. Gibson asked the Commission to reject this request to build a warehouse in his front yard. He said h~ had lived there 37 years. He said it is unbelievable to think they are going to put a warehouse across the street from his house. Mr. Gibson said they are all retired people on Odell and he requests the Commission turn down this request. I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I ~ I I Page 3 p & Z Minutes October 8, 1987 ( PZ 87-20 APPROVED 3. PZ 87-21 ~~ ( Hazel Odette came forward. She said she lives across the street from this property. She said her husband is disabled and they moved there because it was quiet, but now they have to put up with noise. Ms. Odette said unless Burk Collins contacts her, she will not sell. Chairman Bowen closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Tricoli made the motion to approve PZ 87-20. This motion was seconded by Mr. Wood. Mr. Tucker stated the Commission had set a course which was difficult for them. He said the Commission had already made their recommendation for approval of the adjacent property and this is just good planning to go ahead and recommend approval on these two lots that were left out. Mr. Tucker said the City Council would made the final decision. Chairman Bowen said this property joins I-2 Industrial and these two lots would complete the property. The Motion carried 4-0 with Mr. Lueck abstaining since he is not familiar with the history of the area. Request of William E. Pasteur and Walter A. Elliott, Jr. to rezo portion of Tract 5, Willi ox Survey, Abstract 32 rom its present classification R-7-MF Multi-Family and C-l C ercial to R-8 Single Fam- Detached Zero Lot Line. This roperty is located east of Century Drive, south of Starnes Road, and west of Smithfield Road. Chairman Bowen opened the Public Hearing and called for those wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. I I ..I ~ . ' Ie I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I Ia I I ( ( KNOWL TON-ENGLISH-FLOWERS, INC. CONS.Ul TING ENGINEERS / Fort Worth-Dallas September 22, 1987 Planning and Zoning Commission City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Texas 76180 RE: 3-002, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ZONING CASE PZ 87-20 REVIEV LETTER, ZONING FROM R-3 TO 1-2 REF. UTILITY SYSTEM GRID SHEET NO. 70 Ve have received the referenced zoning case for our review and . find that we could adequately locate this property on the Zoning Hap as required for updating should this case be passed by both the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council. ~(þ~ w. ~ RICHARD V. ALBIN, P.E. RVA/ra Enclosures cc: Hr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager Hr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Vorks Hr. Greg Dickens, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Yorks Hr. Richard Royston, Director of Development Zoning Review PZ 87-20 Page 1 1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD. TEXAS 76021 , 917/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367 I Ie I I I I I I I I_ I I I I I I I _ I I , , ~~~~,~ D4VIS 131..VD . p z ! 7- r1 ð ~~, .. o o ~ '-.... ,..s -1 ~ ,..s 1- C:JÞ 0- ~ ~ r: '" 0 -- ~ ~ ."a \Þ ~ I ~ I , '~ ~ er ~~~ q, ~~ tö- 'P " ~ ~-,c ~ ~~ "~~ ~ o C ITI r- .... '..... r ( ~ e~ C!.-""' ~e~~ "\., ~ - -. - I ~ I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I. I I . ORDINANCE NO. 1506 AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION XXVIII, AMENDMENTS, OF ZONING ORDINANCE #1080 OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, JANUARY 9, 1984 AFTER APPROPRIATE NOTICE AND PUBLIC HEARING THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: RESOLVED that on Case No. PZ-87-20 the following described property shall be rezoned from R-3 to 1-2. BEING Lots 44 and 45, Block 2, W. E. Odell Addition, an addition to the City of North Richland Hills, Tarrant County, Texas, as recorded in Volume 388-C, Page 68, Deed Records, Tarrant County, Texas. This property is located at 8336 Odell Street. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZON G COMMISSION THIS 1987. ~ SECRETA Y PLANNI~NING OMMISSION BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ACTING IN REGULAR SESSION THAT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY IN CASE NO. PZ-87-20 IS HEREBY REZONED I-2 THIS DAY OF ATTEST: MAYOR CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS JEANETTE REWIS, CITY SECRETARY CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: ATTORNEY CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Planning and Development 11/23/87 Jepartrnent: _ Council Meeting Date: ~Ubject: Request of Burk Collins Investments for Replat of Lots A d N b PS 87-33 I through 4, lHoCk I, North H1.11.s v~llage Addition. gen a urn er: This Replat Application is presented for consideration of Lots 1-4, Block 1, North Hills Village Addition. The property is located on the southwest corner of Loop 820 and Grapevine Highway. (Highway 26). The purpose for the proposed replat is to create a lot for the use of a Two Pesos Mexican Restaurant, Lot 1, and to identify the remaining unplatted lots situated along the Grapevine Highway frontage of the subject tract. In the review of the proposed plat the Staff noted to the Commission that several existing easements are within the boundary of the property. The applicant's engineer has been working with the Public Works Department to identify and isolate the unused easements. The configuration of the current plat eliminates the unused easements and shows only those easements currently in use or proposed for use in the development of the property. The major easement on the site is the location of Calloway Branch. The applicants are currently constructing an underground facility in this easement which is removing the entire property from the flood hazard zone. As noted in the Staff memo additional drainage facilities are required to be constructed along the Grapevine Highway frontage. These facilities have been included in the plans submitted by the applicant's engineer. These proposed facilities must also be approved by the Highway Department and the applicant has made those submittals for approval. e RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Replat Application PS 87-33 for Lots 1-4, Block 1, North Hills Villag~ Addition as submitted. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) _ Operating Budget .at Finance Review Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available «fII~ Head Signature ' City -- anager- CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM . Finance Director - Page 1 of I li~''H1F~\ \, v~ L-' zg--D-t;} R-7- MF '~t·!:':-i.fili:jfi.~1 ~=~~ - '. ~-3 -~IE :~"7~F ~'~ I P~-¡-~~ ~ D ~L5'T--=rr-r--: ~:r= ~ì'::""~~"" À , ( \ ~ ...nD I A <; .:.....3Ir- ~ \'... ¡---- ,~ ~.... '~~ý -i C-I II _ f'- 'MORIC" PAR' ~~........__ ""-', · f -.....1 C ,,~ _ \ ........ ... 2 -~ ,~ / I :~ ~ = ~~ i~ì.¡ "1~ ~~ If .~\ ~!I c-í.. ~ \ =rr ~ / - ,\J - - ~~ ~ :=-r;+i'i't;.:::-< :: \ ' su.... ' " ....~ jJ \; ",-~ '-- ~ J=l-j~- t./"10.. -< ~ R-7 _ MF ',~~290 I I \ ~ / ~ c I~ L--1" 1(1j ~ ::::: _ ~ 0 ...r R-2 \ '-1 'k / Q" ~~ ......:= I _ >- ..0 I \~ \ , 1--"-. - 7~R-7-M,. ,,_ ~ 0" \' " F.P. I C I I l ~ I I 1"1 3 R-6-T 1>_ = \,Q , ' I rT1 ~ I ~.' , 1 '--~~ ~~ == - I-- ~ \. L I: ~ \l ~-:-l)-: ::.----- J I _U... 1197 !if::: '== ===15! n _ ~ I I I X~...~. \ ~H ~jpHOLO"Y ~-.c .. C-2~ ;=~~:(J",--t::1 rn.... ~ ..I¡ C-I -r-v--4 '~~ I~ 7:âÞ."uRC~, ~ T l:-G~ "£IGHTS ~U ;[~ R I 'I HI: ~ g I~ ... M<AU' '- I ~ I'''' I ~~' i nL.... þ ~ I ; rTT I PM t:. . ac ,.. ,. 1"'- :;6~ : >-if=1 tí r I f1tfl ,. C.-I _, 011 / '.0 I fI:' \ I =- :R·'<"I _ _ ~ _:::: " m _ ~~I '- 1 '..n I 1 ì I~ I II i ii' 1\ ' II :Q r l~ = "', =1' ~t~.1 '7 ~ ~ ~;: Cü +-Ð- "TXmI' "r I ~J" TT r"'" ~I ~A,_ ~ -.-, 1_ I-- 0' 0" _ j¡ijj'~ /........ "..::~=--n , -1- ( I \' I h, IH :j-j 1 1 _ '-~., >- II~ _ 1 rï1 I r+1~ 05l1,ft ~....:¡ t- -I r 1--f---<-I '- =... ~ .,' >- C -I: V t nJ t p-ç rc~' LDLD ..... .-... I I ~ [ L Þwnmr ~~\V,~~~ 1§=~~cqn't 03¡itl ~~~fFJ" ....~-II//1___ =:.: =::: ='"""" ~ ,!'.... ~ "<-- ~ = - -<-< I U f-L1 ~ ,.. -,,'t-.6..J -<_ _ .' __ ~~ :0. · = - == - -'- 1 L...---< ~ c...· .:!C~- _ " f '. ~ ,,~ J ~ ..-~ f!)i ~)rf ~ c-.. _ ~ ___ ..j t= .~f' -Ë ..... =:= -J- I-- R-7-MF ....._ _ - \v ...; I I 1/ _ :::;::: = _ ~ _ 1----# ~ ~ "" 'I- - =:::::: = . PO . < C- f- 1" -1 'EI=- = -~;\?A ;; ~I ~ \ I ~ "l::I~ C~2 I~:... c-'S~\.:~ '- - .,. "~,':::: ~= _. !nl f- , f\ , \ ~ C-2 '- ~ .. 'f't ~o >-' \Ir ~ ' ¡ I cl..'9 ~ >- h 1 ",' 1087 := ~= =- ,¡0LR S U ,; .\~ ~~ -r;'....... ..¡.. ~r ~ Ii ~~8,!\ "' - ~ - + "'.~ C-'.. > -;- "I 12 H _ ('fr:: '~F F I I I 1-k~-»6J . I-- ~ ::: sC- õ'" ,..MI... r 1'/ St.- ~f ~ H ~~ U.~ H~ I) ¡ro: w .,. llTT iii Jr c- - ." I' 11 ì \" 1 I 1 I I r r LRSU ';,o~ HWI.... S . ." 1217 I "~_I ...~ L.c;,....~f . ~,,~ , . ~~rrr- rn~ ~ '.... l· ~.: ,I \.... ~I "'C.IS u~~~ ~ I I r.I I I = :::: 1"-.." (. ....... c; "'G"",~~ I!R 'Co, \v':' C-2 CŠIU:) ~ c- . , 11 1.1 -, I '\ C;f,/" p .... su" suo +- 820 SUe ~' --H I f41 - 1«,-- ~ ~ ,.,." i~' .:...- S~~:2 . ~~ C-2S · ~'\\ vl,:: l"m~ìÌÄ ~\ T 1 0 '~ \ \ ~ (, CHO.S,.. C - 2 I .J """ -., >- - C-2 327 \ 1 \ I I I 1'- r- ~ -- "o~. . \ , I _ _ t-- ~ ~\ ~: .. '(\ >-- ~.¡iVI< "_ _, . ,. rT1::J r- , ....~ . ~ r II I r: I 1.lluLiG= .~' '~~ , C-I ,;~I U \ .. t ~ 0 w, . R'-r7 ~ ,\J" ~ " '_~ - I.. \)..-- ~ '"- ....... SANGU _ HA IS \ \ -4. I ~ f.l ~- 'C-2 \ f- ....-' I ~ ~ ,.J s u· 'Þ-l \, ~' I> ~ N Jd,..j,;,~ ~ f\"~ B ~ ~' c.::J 1275 0 ,; r. 1-->_ ...,..,' T 7 L.- . v, c- I" 1"1 _ +'-+-<_ V ,\ 'lUJ ~ -~ f-- · 1;::;- 1 c- ~ C, C-I ~ 1\ FP, -: =J Q:::;::: =:= = R-7-MF mil,. I 't-1), ~ HI ~,. \ \ rm ~ ::= =~ ~ o~'f.~ II \ ~ : II \ \ >- == =:=:= i "P ,; I Ie". ~«I I \ '. LUJ := '- ~J ~o'fo i ~ ~ L R 'L 0 =.:r 01 ~ ~ ~~ I r 'm~ ~~ ~... V' .~.,,- u .... c:- ~ 1';1 ; .... L R ./ ,""-- ~ ... - ~~ rr 3ff .--;¡;~ 11 r-- :;1 _ ~ I ¡, 14. . _ ~ 1276 l ~- I I I~:;n' . - frO If 7 'è-2 ~¡;/. o~ : ~ I~, ~ ~: C -( F P F P .. -2 ~ ~ ~ C\ ~ _456. - ~ I ...~ ~ ~:..",. : 1- - - - ~ . - - I ~ - , ~ I. .'" J'.('.~ ......;'.¡.,~...._/....~..._ ~ _ ~..~:'.;.~~,~'. __.a I Ie I I CALL TO ORDER I ROLL CALL I I I I Ie I 1. PS 87-33 I PS 87-33 APPROVED I 2. PS 87-37 I I I Ie I I - ( ( MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS NOVEMBER 12, 1987 - 7:30 P. M. The meeting was called to order Chairman, Don Bowen, at 7:30 PRESENT: Chairman Vice Chairman Secretary Members Don Bowen Mark Wood John Schwinger George Tucker David Barfield Manny Tricoli Richard Royston Wanda Calvert · Member ire Planning/Dev. P & Z Coordinator ABSENT: Carole Flippo Ron Lueck Mr. Tricoli made the motion to approve the minutes as written. This motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and the motion carried 4-0 with Mr. Schwinger and Mr. Tucker abstaining since they were not present at the meeting. Request of Burk Collins Investments for replat of Lots 1 thru 4, Block 1, North Hills Village Addition. Mr. Wood made the motion to approve PS 87-33. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tricoli and the motion carried 6-0. Request of James of Lot 6R, Block Addition. wen opened the Public ng and called for those wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. Mr. Schwend came forward and requested approval of his replat. I Ie I 2309 ROOSEVELT DR. UNIT C ARLINGTON. TEXAS 78018 I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ( ( JOHN D. ZIMMERMAN P · E., R. P. S. REGISTERED PUBLIC SURVEYOR (817) 481-0188 Novemœr 4, 1987 Ci ty of NJrth Richland Hills, Texas 7301 N.E. Loop 820 P. o. Box 18609 North Richland Hills, Texas 76118 Attn: Planning & Zoning Comnission Re: PS 87-33 North Hills Village, lots 1, 2, 3. & 4, Block 1 IÆar Sir; I offer the following response to PWM-0065-87, Gregory W. Dickens, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Works as follows: The property now being platted is Tract 3R, all of Block "B" and a small portion of Block A. Items: (i) (j) 2. 3. 4. 5. l(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) ~tes and bounds corrected. All of Tract 4R has been reIIDVed from this plat. Current Zoning shown. Requested..dimensions .shown. Current ownership and recording information shown. Building lines shown. Metes and boill1ds sho\\1J1. The old drainage easements are being abandoned and flew drainage easements created. The box culvert is on the northerly property line against Loop 820 R.O.W., therefore the requested 10 feet is only on the southerly side. The 100 year flocx1 plain is contained wi thin the box culvert. Corrected. Corrected. The owner will address the pro rata cost. Fire hydrant coverage shown on separate drawing. Plans have been provided for approval from the City and State. Construction plans for all si te improvements for lot 4 are being provided by De\'æY and Associates and I am currently preparing drainage plans for this platted area. sincere~ ~Z' P.E. ,R.P.S. I ( ( City of J(õrth Richland Hills, Texas ~l ~~ ;~- 'r September 21, 1987 Ie I I I REF: PWM-Q065-87 Memo to: Planning & Zoning Commission I From: Gregory W. Dickens, P.E. Assistant Director of Public Works I Subject: PS 87-33; NORTH HILLS VILLAGE; Lots 1 & 2, Block 1; Replat I We have reviewed the referenced material and offer the following comments. I Ie I. On the replat, note or provide the following items. a. Correct bearing in the sixth paragraph of the metes and bounds description to match the bearing shown on the plat drawing, or vice versa. b. Portion of Tract 4R excluded from replat must be included. I c. Show current zoning of rep1at. I d. Show dimensions from centerline of Grapevine Highway to property corners and the respective total width of right-of-way. I e. Show correct ownership and volume and page notation for the National Pride Equipment, Inc. tract. I f. Note building line setbacks. I g. Show metes and bounds of existing IS' utility easement across proposed Lots 1 & 2. I h. One (1) large drainage easement should be shown across the replat to cover the proposed box culvert by at least ten (10') feet either side. The old drainage easement where the channel no longer exist should be abandoned. The proposed 100 year flood plain boundary should be shown if not contained in the proposed drainage easement. Ie I I (817) 281-0041/7301 N.E. LOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76118 I PS 87-33; NORTH HILL~ILLAGE Page 2 September 21, 1987 ( Ie I i. In the title use "REPLAT SHOWING" instead of "REPLAT OF". Also add reference to the survey, such as, "OUT OF THE W. W. WALLACE SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1606". I j. Replat could be of approximate lots and blocks of the Richland Terrace Addition instead of North Hills Village. I 230 feet x $5.50 = $1,256.00 3. Show fire coverage from fire hydrant to the west. 2. Pro rata on the existing 8" sanitary sewer is due. I 4. Provide construction plans for street, drainage and water improvements along the Grapevine Highway as required to complete a "curb and gutter" section across the replatted frontage. State approval of plans will be necessary. I I 5. Provide construction plans for onsite drainage improvements. I Ie I kens, P.E. ector of Public Works Ids I CC: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development I I I I I Ie I I ... CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Planning and Development 11/23/87 Jepartment: _ Council Meeting Date: ... Request of James P. Schwend for Replat of Lot 6R, PS 87-37 Subject: JHock L3, Kl.ngswood Èstates Addition. Agenda Number: This Replat Application is presented for consideration of Lot 6R, Block 23, Kingswood Estates Addition. The property consists of two existing residential lots located on Acts Court off Starnes Road. The purpose for the proposed replat is to combine the two existing lots in to a larger lot in order to construct a residence. The Staff had no negative comments on the proposed replat. As required by the applicable State Statute, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on the proposed replat. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Replat Application PS 87-37 on Lot 6R, Block 23, Kingswood Estates Addition as submitted. e Finance Review Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) _ Operating Budget .Ot r ed~ ' - City Manager CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM , Finance Director Page 1 of 1 I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ( ( MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS NOVEMBER 12, 1987 - 7:30 P. M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 22, 1987 1. 2. PS 87-37 PRESENT: Chairman Vice Chairman Secretary Members The meeting was called to order by th Chairman, Don Bowen, at 7:30 P. M. Alt. Member Dir. Plannin p & Z Coor nator Don M ohn Schwinger George Tucker David Barfield Manny Tricoli Richard Royston Wanda Calvert Carole Flippo Ron Lueck Tricoli made the motion to approve minutes as written. This motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and the motion carried 4-0 with Mr. Schwinger and Mr. Tucker abstaining since they were not present at the meeting. Request of Burk Collins Investments for replat of Lots I thru 4, Block 1, North Hills Village Addition. Mr. Wood made the motion to approve PS 87-33. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tricoli and the motion carried 6-0. Request of James P. Schwend for replat of Lot 6R, Block 23, Kingswood Estates Addition. Chairman Bowen opened the Public Hearing and called for those wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. Mr. Schwend came forward and requested approval of his replat. I Ie I I I I I I I Ie ( Page 2 p & Z Minutes November 12, 1987 PS 87-37 APPROVED 3. PS 87-38 I I I I I I Ie I I ( Chairman Bowen called for those wishing to speak in opposition to this request to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Tricol! made the motion to approve PS 87-37. This motion was seconded by Mr. Barfield and the motion carried 6-0. Request of Burk Collins Investments for replat of Lots 2R & 3, Block 2, Culp Addition. Chairman Bowen opened the Pub Hearing and called for thos ishing- to speak in favor of this equest to please come forward. Jackey Fluitt with rk Collins Investments came orward. He requested appr a1 of the rep1at for a distribution arehouse. Mr. Fluitt had addressed all the comments. Mr. ucker said there is a question a ut Odell Street. He asked if they ad plans to use Odell Street for access. Mr. Fluitt said they do. He said they are trying to purchase the property on the north side of Odell Street. He said they would construct Odell Street. Chairman Bowen said he has a problem with Industrial traffic on Odell Street. Mr. Fluitt said they would make every effort to purchase all the property on the north side of Odell Street. Mr. Tricoli asked if they have an alternate plan. I Ie I 2309 ROOSEVELT DR. UNIT C ARLINGTON, TEXAS 76016 I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ( ( JOHN D. ZIMMERMAN P.E., R.P.S. REGISTERED PUBLIC SURVEYOR OCTOBER 8. 1987 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS o( P.O. BOX 18609 NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS 76180 ATTN: WANDA CALVERT PLANNING AND ZONING COORDINATOR RE: PS 87-37 REPLAT OF LOT 6R, BLOCK 23 KINGSWOOD ESTATES DEAR WANDA: WE HAVE MADE THE APPROPRIATE CORRECTIONS AND/OR CHANGES ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED PLAT AS REQUESTED IN LETTER DATED OCTOBER 2, 1987 FROM GREGORY W. DICKENS. WE" ARE ALSO SENDING 10 BLUELINE CORRECTED PLAT, ,AS PER YOUR REQUEST. COPIES OF o P.E., R.P.S. CC: JAMES SCHWEND (817) 461-0188 I· Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ( ( City of JXórth Richland Hills, Texas October 2, 1987 REF: P'~-0070-87 Memo to: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Gregory W. Dickens, P.E. Assistant Director Public Works Subject: PS 87-37; KINGSWOOD ESTATES Lot 6R, Block 23 Rep1at We have reviewed the referenced material and offer the following comment. 1. Note in title for rep1at that the property is "OUT OF THE W. D. BARNES SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 146". \ Gregory Assist?t. t vi Ids Works cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development (817) 281-0041/7301 N.E. LOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHlAND HillS, TX 76118 .. I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS I Planning and Development 11/23/87 Department: _ Council Meeting Date: Subject: Request of Burk Collins Investments for Replat Agenda Number: PS 87-38 of Lots 2R and 3, Block 2, Culp Addition. I I This Replat Application is presented for consideration of Lots 2R and 3, Block 2, Culp Addition. The subject property is the industrial property located on the east side of Davis Boulevard between Northeast Parkway and Odell Street. The purpose for the proposed plat is to combine the existing residential type lots recently rezoned for Industrial use with the Industrial tract in place to create the parcel on which to place the Haverty's Furniture Warehouse complex. I II The Staff, in reviewing the proposed rep1at, had several comments for the Commission's consideration. A. The proposed replat covers only the property in the initial rezoning request submitted by the applicant. As was noted previously, Lots 44 and 45 in the Odell Addition are also under consideration for rezoning to Industrial with the intent to include these in the project site. It would seem advisable to include the two lots in the proposed platting. B. In the discussion relating to the development of the warehouse tract the is~ue was raised as to whether the traffic generated by the proposed project should have access to Odell Street. The Staff noted to the applicant that a decision would need to be made regarding the access. The applicant indicated in his correspondence to the Commission that some access to Odell Street is desired. However, in discussions with with the City Council at Wednesday's work session the applicant did agree that, in the initial deveiopment of the Haverty's project, access to Odell would not be required. The Staff suggested to the Commission that the existing street is not adequate to handle Industrial traffic and if access to Odell is approved the applicant should be required to reconstruct the street for the heavier traffic. C. The inclusion in the proposed replat of the section of Stonybrooke South requires the vacation of Tradonna Street. The Staff noted that there are existing utilities in place in the street which were constructed ,to serve the individual lots when the layout was to be a duplex development. AddItional easements in lieu of the street rlght of way have been provided on the plat to accommodate these facilities. D. A portion of the drainage from this project flows south and east to the existing open channel on Railroad property. The applicant has not resolved the Railroad approval of this proposed drainage system. Approval by the Railroad will be required in order to complete the project. The applicant has presented for the City Council's consideration a revised plat proposing to close Northeast Parkway on the east end of the industrial project and construct a cul-de-sac. This proposal comes as a result of discussions between the Finance Review Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available ~Ifl¿~ City Manager CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM ./,// , Finance Director Page 1 of 2 I I I I applicant and his client, Haverty's. The intent of this proposed change is to isolate the two use areas, the industrial and the residential, so that no interference traffic is generated. The Planning and Zoning Commission was not provided with this alternative proposal. Therefore, the deliberations and actions of the Commission are not addressed to this modification of the plat. I RECOMMENDATION: I The Planning and Zoning Commission was deadlocked on a motion for approval of Replat Application PS 87-33. The Commission's intention was to approve the Replat. The issue which created the deadlock was approval or disapproval of the applicant's requested use of Odell Street for access to the Industrial project. I The applicant is requesting that the City Council consider the revised plat showing the cul-de-sac construction on Northeast Parkway and take action on that version of the replat. I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Page 2 of 2 A-G I-I R-3 1090 / I I I \ \ \ , , \ \ \ , '" I AG I-I SU R-3 I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Page 2 p & Z Minutes November 12, 1987 ( ( Chairman Bowen called ose wishing to speak· pposition to this request to se come forward. re being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Tricoli made the motion to approve PS 87-37. This motion was seconded by Mr. Barfield and the motion carried 6-0. 3. PS 87-38 ' Request of Burk Collins Investments for replat of Lots 2R & 3, Block 2, Culp Addition. Chairman Bowen opened the Public Hearing and called for those wishing to speak in favor of this request to please come forward. Jackey Fluitt with Burk Collins Investments came forward. He requested approval of the replat for a distribution warehouse. Mr. Fluitt stated they had addressed all the engineer's comments. Mr. Tucker said there is a question about Odell Street. He asked if they had plans to use Odell Street for access. Mr. Fluitt said they do. He said they are trying to purchase the property on the north side of Odell Street. He said they would construct Odell Street. Chairman Bowen said he has a problem with Industrial traffic on Odell Street. Mr. Fluitt said they would make every effort to purchase all the property on the north side of Odell Street. Mr. Tricoli asked if they have an alternate plan. I Page 3 ( P & Z Minutes Ie November 12, 1987 I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I I' - I I ( Mr. Fluitt said they must have a way out. He said it would only be bob tail trucks, the larger trucks would go on Northeast Parkway. Mr. Tucker said if you make a cut, all trucks could use the street. Mr. Schwinger asked Mr. Fluitt if they would be willing to put in a concrete street. Mr. Fluitt said they would comply with the city requirements of either concrete or 8" asphalt. Chairman Bowen called for those wishing to speak in opposition to this replat to please come forward. Chairman Bowen stated this is a replat; the zoning is already approved, and the citizens are only to speak regarding the replat. v. L. Gibson, 8333 Odell Street, came forward. He said he is against the plat and against using Odell Street altogether. Mr. Gibson said if bad comes to bad, could they request a screening fence like the one on Strummer. He said he had lived here 37 years. He said it would be an impossible situation to use Odell Street as a Commercial street. He said it is not practical to mix residential with industrial. Mr. Gibson said he thinks Haverty's would be a real good thing and he feels something can be worked out. Mr. Wood asked Mr. Gibson if he was negotiating the sale of his property to Mr. Collins. Mr. Gibson said yes. He said he had been talking with Burk's Real Estate salesman. He said it is not talk now, they have made an agreement. Mr. Gibson said all the people on Odell are willing to sell. I Page 4 ( P & Z Minutes Ie November 12, 1987 I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I ~ I I ( Mr. Wood asked Mr. Gibson if he did not want the deal with Haverty's to go through. Mr. Gibson said he is in favor of the warehouse and in favor of him buying everyone out. He said they are working together to accomplish this. Mrs. Mildred Allen came forward. She said she doesn't want heavy traffic on Odell Street. She said she is not against the replat, just the traffic. She said Mr. Collins has contacted her daughter to buy her out. Gladys Sparks, 7908 Odell Street, came forward. She asked what they plan to do with the traffic. She said the fire trucks come down her street now. Chairman Bowen asked if she was located on Odell Street, west of Davis Boulevard. Ms. Sparks said she was. She asked if they would be bothered with truck traffic. Chairman Bowen said they wouldn't, the trucks would turn on Davis Boulevard. He said Davis is to be made 7 lanes. Chairman Bowen called for anyone else wishing to speak to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Tucker said he can not support truck traffic on Odell Street as long as it is residential on the north side. He said they can approve the replat with stipulations and if Mr. Collins makes the deals on the north side, he could replat to accommodate the traffic. I Ie I I Page 5 P & Z Minutes November 12, 1987 I I I I I Ie I I I I I I ~ I I PS 87-38 DEADLOCKED . ( ( Mr. Tucker said he agreed with the zoning, but not using Odell for access. Mr. Barfield said this issue should have been addressed at the time of zoning. He said he did not feel it would be fair to refuse them access to Odell Street. Mr. Tricoli said he agreed with Mr. Barfield. Mr. Wood said he also agreed. He said Mr. Collins stated at the time of the Zoning hearing that they needed access on Odell Street. Mr. Wood made a motion to recommend approval of PS 87-38. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tricoli. Chairman Bowen said he disagreed with Mr. Barfield, Mr. Tricoli, and Mr. Wood. He said it is still a residential street and he feels they should protect the residents on the north side of the street. The motion was deadlocked 3-3 with Schwinger, Tucker, and Bowen voting in opposition. Mr. Royston stated they could call for another motion or send the deadlock on to the City Council. Mr. Wood asked Mr. Fluitt why he was having to replat at this time. Mr. Fluitt said they are running out of time with Haverty's. He said if they don't get the south side of Odell for Haverty's, they will not want the north side. Mr. Tricoli said if they don't get the replat, they could blow the whole deal. I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Page 6 p & Z Minutes November 12, 1987 ~ ~ Mr. Wood said Mr. Gibson stated both parties are working together to purchase the property on the north side. He said the developer has done everything he has ever said he would do; he said he would build the street. Mr. Wood said we are going to fool around and lose this and that would mean losing 450 jobs. Mr. Wood said he, as a citizen, is in favor of the warehouse. Mr. Wood recalled a motion to approve PS 87-38. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tricoli. Mr. Tucker said they have a large industrial street they could use and we could deny access on Odell. Mr. Wood said that Mr. Collins stated they needed the access; he said if he had not needed it, he would have said he would wall it off. Mr. Wood said this is going to ruin the sale. Mr. Fluitt said the city is restricting access on Davis Boulevard to every 500 feet. Chairman Bowen called for a count. The motion was deadlocked 3-3 with Schwinger, Tucker, and Bowen voting in opposition. Mr. Royston stated this is not the approval or denial of the replat, they are in favor of the replat, but against the access. Chairman Bowen said that is true. 4. PS 87-39 Request of Forbes Development preliminary plat of Ap Addition. Chairman Bowen stated there were several stipulations on the zoqing of this property. I· Ie I 2309 ROOSEVELT OR. UNIT C ARLINGTON, TEXAS 7ð01e I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ( ( JOHN D. ZIMMERMAN P.E., R.P.S. REGISTERED PUBLIC SURVEYOR (817) 481-0188 City of North Richland Hills, Texas 7301 N.E. Loop 820 P.O. Box 18609 North Richland Hills, Texas 76118 Attn: Gregory W. Dickens P.E. Assistand Director of Public Works Re: PS 87-38, Lots 2R & 3, Block 2, Culp Addition (Submitted initially as Northeast Business Park Lot 1,2 & 3, Block - 2 - Replat). Dear Greg; Wanda Culvert and Richard Royston informed us that the proxmity of a previously filed Northeast Business Park was not close enough to this tract for Northeast Business Park to be used. so the addition name was returned to the Culp Addition. ,The response to comment items are as follows: l(a,b.c.d.e.f,g,h.i.j.k & 1). corrected or revised. l(m). letters are being sent to utility companies requesting abandonment of easement on southside of Lot 31-43 Odell Addition and easement between Lot 2 Culp Addition and Block 4 of Stonybrooke Addition~ l(n). Requesting that Tradónna be abandoned by leaving water and sewer in place and providing a 10' easement for each. 2. Pro rata for water and sewer- in Odell Street will be addressed by the owner. 3. Culvert shown. 4. Corrected high point on Northeast Parkway. 5. The plans for the improvement will be submitted prior to requesting bUilding permits for this site. The plans for the exact drainage provisions cannot be detailed until the configuration of this facility is confirmed. I" Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I I_ I I ( ( 6. The plan for the reconstruction of the Tradonna Lane intersection will be submitted prior to the request for a BUilding Permit. The existing 54" RCP currently discharges into the drainage channel in the Railroad R.O.W. The channel in the Railroad R.O.W. was cleaned to provide the necessary capacity but no agreement was reached with the Railroad to concrete line the channel. It is requested that plans for the channel improvements or extension of 54" RCP be deferred until the site configuration is determined, as rail service may be required for the site. The drainage improvement will be resolved and the necessary plans submitted prior to request of Building Permits. 7. Lot 1 and Lot 2 have been removed from the plat and access from Davis Blvd. (FH 1938) is not being requested at this time. 8. Access from Odell Street is improvement of Odell Street request for BUilding Permits. desired and plans for the will be submitted prior to the 9. Not required at this time since no access is being requested at this time. 10. Plat name of Culp Addition is being retained. P.E. ,R.P.S. I 1" ~ Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I - ( (\ City of j\(örth Richland Hills, Texas October 8, 1987 REF: PWM-0072-87 Memo to: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Gregory W. Dickens, P.E. Assistant Director of Public Works Subject: PS 87-38; NORTHEAST BUSINESS PARK, Lots 1, 2, & 3, Block 2 Replat and Plans We have reviewed the referenced material and offer the following comments. 1. Correct the following on the plat, sheet I of 3. a. Add the following phrase to the end of the replat title "OUT OF THE J. M. CROCKETT SURVEY, A-273 AND THE FRANKLIN WOOD SURVEY, A-1625". b. Show dimension for total width of right-of-way for Davis Boulevard at the northwest and southwest corners of the replat. Show dimension for total width of right-of-way for Odell Street at all north corners. c. "Block 1" should be designated as "Lot 1, Block 1". d. Show survey lines on replat. e. Show clearly what is adjacent to the replat along the south boundary. f. In paragraph 3 of the metes & bounds description, correct bearing N OOI7'41" W to match bearing shown on plat layout. g. In paragraph 5 of the metes & bounds description, correct distance 255.64" to match radius shown on plat layout. h. In paragraph 17, revise notation "northeast corner of Lot 44..." to "... northwest corner of Lot 44...". i. In paragraph 18, revise notation" easterly line of said Lot 44 ... the southeast corner ..." to "... westerly line of said Lot 44 ... the southwest corner " (817) 281-0041/7301 N.E. lOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHlAND HillS, TX 76118 I., NORTHEAST BUSINES~'~K Page 2 October 8, 1987 ( Ie I j. Note type and size of easements adjacent to proposed plat in the W. E. Odell Addition. k. Dual label Davis Boulevard as F. M. 1938. I I. Show existing drainage or drainage & utility easements to remain. I m. If existing easements in Stonybrooke South Addition are to be abandoned, provide letters from utilities stating they have no existing facilities in the easements and do not object to the abandonment. I n. If Tradonna Lane is to be abandoned, the existing water and sanitary sewer will need to be removed and plugged or appropriate easements provided. I I 2. Pro rata for water and sanitary sewer in Odell Street will be due. Water: Sewer: 778.66' x $5.50/L.F. 778.66' x $5.50/L.F. $,4,282.63 = $4,282.63 I Ie 3. Show existing culvert under Northeast Parkway at Davis Boulevard on sheet 3. 4. Correct outline of Drainage Area #3 on sheet 3 to coincide with high point in Northeast Parkway. I 5. Note that all replat area on east side of Tradonna Lane must drain to the south and west and not to the east. I 6. Provide plans for Tradonna Lane intersections reconstruction. Also show plan profile of 54" RCP storm drain extension adjacent to the St. Louis Southwestern Railroad right-of-way in a 20' wide drainage easement to intercept the existing 30" RCP and extend offsite to an appropriate point of discharge. I 7. No driveway access to Davis Boulevard will be allowed the replatted area except between proposed Lots 1 & 2, Block 2. All other access to the property will be from Northeast Parkway. I I 8. If access to Odell Street is desired, then Odell Street will have to be improved from Davis Boulevard to the west side of existing Stonybrooke South. The improved street will have a minimum of 8" HMAC on 8" stablilized subgrade (4011/sy of lime) or 7" reinforced concrete on 8" stabilized subgrade (4011/sy of lime). I Ie I I I NORTHEAST BUSINES~ \RK Page 3 October 8, 1987 ( Ie I 9. Provide plans on culvert installation for common access to Davis Boulevard between Lots I & 2, Block 2 and acquire driveway permit from State. I lOa Rename plat due to existing platted area named "NORTHEAST BUSINESS PARK" to the north. I I I CC: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Planning and Development 11/23/87 ~epartment: _ Council Meeting Date: Subject: Request of Lamar Savings, Inc. for Replat of Tracts Agenda Number: PS 87-40 4A and 4B, N.R.H. Industrial Par t~on. This Replat Application is presented for consideration of Tracts 4A and 4B, N.R.H. Industrial Park Addition. The property is located on the south side of Industrial Park Drive east of Rufe Snow Drive. The purpose for the proposed replat is to subdivide Lot 4A, located immediately east of the developed property fronting Rufe Snow Drive out of the major tract for development. The Staff noted to the Commission the earlier discussions related to the lack of commitment from the applicants for the future extension of Industrial Park Drive north across the Railroad to connect with Watauga Road. In the deliberations by the Commission on the previous platting the Commission made the stipulation that no further plats would be accepted which did not contain the provision for funding the Railroad crossing. When the previous plat was under consideration by the City Council the further stipulation was added requiring that the dedication of the right of way for the future extension of Industrial Park Drive south and east to connect with Holiday Lane must also appear on any additional platting. Lamar Savings appeared before the City Council to request that a variance be granted relieving the applicants from the requirements of the stipulations for this one additional replat. The City Council agreed that the requirements did not have to appear on the plat if the applicants would provide covenant documents obligating to both stipulations irrespective of any further platting. These documents have been executed ~and have been provided to the Staff. These covenants also require action by the City ..,Council. Approval of the proposed plat should be accompanied by action agreeing to the covenants presented by the applicant. In the Staff comments on the plat the lack of definitive dimensions are noted on the easements along the easterly boundary of the property which relate to the drainage channel and the sanitary sewer main. The engineer responded that the plat was developed from records in this area and the information was incomplete. It is the observation of the Staff that the future users of that portion of the tract will be required not only to define and specifically locate the-needed easements but also construct any necessary facilities to be located in the easement. Only the smaller lot nearest to Rufe Snow Drive is proposed for development. On that lot the applicants engineer has provided all the required information and easements. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission approved Replat Application PZ 87-40 on Tracts 4A and 4B, N.R.H. Industrial Park Addition as submitted. It is recommended that the City Council take action on the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission on the replat and if approved authorize the Mayor to execute the covenant agreements presented regarding the future dedication of the street right of way and the construction of the Railroad crossing. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) ~ Opera' Budget .., Ot Page 1 of 1 Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available R~ City Manager CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM . Finance Director I I I I I I I I ~ I 1 1 I 1 I 1 ~ 1 '1 I I 1 I Ie I I Page 10 P & Z Minutes November 12, 1987 ( c Merle Campbell, 6701 Meadow Road, forward. She said they purch this property in August. She a they have two acres and a use and she wants to zone so will all be the same zoning an Bowen called for those shing to speak in opposition to this request to please come forward. There being no one wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Tricoli made the motion to approve PZ 87-24. This motion was seconded by Mi. Tucker and the motion carried 6-0. 8. PS 87-40 Request of Lamar Savings for replat of Tracts 4A & 4B, N.R.H. Industrial Park Addition. PS 87-40 APPROVED Mr. Wood made the motion to approve PS 87-40. This motion was seconded by Mr. Schwinger and the motion carried 6-0. ADJOURNMENT Planning & Zoning Commission etary Planning & Zoning Commission I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I Ie I I q=/CARTER & BURGESS,INC. ~L c::3 ENGINEERS · PLANNERS· SURVEYORS November 9, 1987 Ms. Wanda Calvert City of North Richland Hills NE Loop 820 P.o. Box 18609 North Rlchland Hills, Texas 76180 RE: PS 87-40 Dear Ms. Calvert: I am in receipt of your letter of November 6, 1987. I have also reviewed the City Engineer's comments on the åbove referenced pro- ject and respond as follows: 1. I have shown all easments to the best of my ability. I had only the previous plats to guide me and no metes and bounds was indicated, therefore I was unable to place geometries on the easements. I have shown the width of the drainage easement. 2. As is 111 above, I have no knowledge of the curve data and therefore cannot show it. 3. Revised on the plat. 4. Revised on the plat. 5. Revised on the plat. 6. Covenant agreement.has been prepared. 7. Covenant agreement has been prepared. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. JFK/lab Sincerely, Inc. ~~. Kasson, R.P.S. C&B No. 870529-0102 1100 MACON STREET / FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102 / (817) 335-2611 MAILING ADDRESS / P.O. BOX 2973 / FORT WORTH, TX 76113 FORT VVORTH · HOUSTON · DALLAS · AUSTIN I Ie I I I I I I I i' I I I I I I Ie I I ( ( City of JX8rth Richland Hills, Texas ~~ November 4, 198t REF: PWM-0085-87 Memo to: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Gregory W. Dickens, P.E. Assistant Director of Public Works Subject: PS 87-40; N.R.H. INDUSTRIAL PARK ADDITION, Tracts 4A & 4B; Replat We have reviewed the referenced material and offer the following comments. 1. All easements shown which are not parallel and adjacent to a property line should be tied to property corners and/or metes and bounds given to clearly define their location. Width of drainage easement along east property line should be shown from east property line to the west easement boundary. 2. Show curve data for west drainage easement line along east property line near northeast corner of Tract 4B. 3. Dot print "TRACT 4" 1avel shown to signify previous legal description of this tract. 4. Show ownerßeve1oper's telephone number. 5. Add "BEING A REPLAT 'OF TRACT 4,'N.R.H. INDUSTRIAL PARK ADDITION ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 388-211, PAGE 2 of the P.R.T.C.T." to the title in the appropriate place. 6. Show proposed extension of Industrial Park Boulevard eastward across Tract 4B then south adjacent to the drainage easement to the south property line or provide a covenant agreement with the City per Council instructions. 7. Covenant agreement between owner/developer and the City shall be required stating that the owner of Tract 4B will pay his 25% of the costs to be incurred in design and construction of the railroad crossing of Industrial Park Boulevard north with the St. Louis & Southwestern Railroad. éregory/w.¡ ic cc: ~o~ r N. Line, City Manager Mr. Ric ard Royston, Director of Development (817) 281-0041/7301 N.E. lOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHlAND HillS, TX 76118 I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I Ie I I COST SHARING COVENANT (Railroad Crossing) This Agreement is entered into by and between the CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, Texas and LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION. WIT N E SSE T H : WHEREAS, North Richland Hills Industrial Park Addition, an addition to the City of North Richland Hills, Tarrant County, Texas, was replatted by a plat approved by the North Richland Hills City Council on July 14, 1986; and WHEREAS, as replatted Industrial Park Boulevard is shown to extend across the right-of-way line of the st. Louis and Southwestern Railroad; WHEREAS, it will be necessary in the orderly development of the City of North Richland Hills for a railroad crossing to be installed over the st. Louis and, Southwestern Railroad tracks and right-of-way; and WHEREAS, certain owners of North Richland Hills Industrial Addition are willing to pay their pro rata share of the cost of installing said railroad crossing and street and storm drainage extension in accordance with specifications to be determined (the "Crossing Improvements"); NOW, THEREFORE, in connection with the aforestated replatting, and as a part of the consideration therefore, the parties have agreed as follows: 1. The City of North Richland Hills hereby agrees to contract with the st. Louis & S.W. R/R for the construction of Crossing Improvements over the st. Louis and Southwestern Railroad tracks and right-of-way. 2. Lamar Savings Association, owner, of Tract #4 as shown on the attached replat of tracts 4, 5 and 6 N. Richland Hills Industrial Park Addition as prepared by ARS Engineers ("Tract 4") hereby agrees to pay twenty-five percent (25%) of the cost of installation of the Crossing Improvements up to a maximum amount of $62,500.00; provided that, Lamar Savings Association shall not be required to pay more than $62,500.00 in connection with the Crossing Improvements regardless of the total cost thereof. The amount payable by Lamar Savings Association shall be paid to the City of North Richland Hills, Texas not more than sixty (60) days following final completion of the Crossing Improvements. 3. Lamar Savings Association agrees that if it sells Tract 4 prior to the completion of the Crossing Improvements, Lamar Savings Association will require that the purchaser of Tract 4 assume the obligations under this Agreement and thereafter, Lamar I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I Ie I I Savings Association shall have no further liability with respect to this Agreement. 4. This covenant shall run with the land and shall be an obligation and charge against Tract 4 and its owner at the time the Crossing Improvements are completed. WITNESS OUR HANDS this ð;(tiday OfØz~~-t-(Í 1987. LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION BY: Joe ~ ð. ßØt- . Mann, Senior Vice President CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS BY: Its: STATE OF TEXAS } } COUNTY OF TRAVIS } On this day personally appeared Joe B. Mann who acknowledged . to me that he executed the above document in the capacity therein stated on behalf of La!Jtr Savings ~~tion to certify which witness my hand this 3~ day of ,\~~ , 1987. ,Name( rint): Notary Public the state of Texas J. My Commission EXPires:~ STATE OF TEXAS } } COUNTY OF TARRANT } On this day personally appeared ,who acknowledged to me that he executed the above document in the capacity therein stated on behalf of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, to certify which witness my hand this ____day of , 1987. Name (Print): Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission Expires: 1/ Ie 1 I 1 1 1 I I {' I I I I I I Ie I I . COVENANT PERMITTING RE-PLAT AND LIMITING DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION is the owner of certain property si tuated in the Ci ty of North Richland Hills, Texas, described as follows, to-wit: BEING Tract 4, N.R.H. Industrial Park Addition to the City of North Richland Hills, as recorded in Volume 388/211, Page Z, County Records, Tarrant County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property"). WHEREAS, LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION has requested that the aforedescribed property be re-platted into two tracts to be known as Tracts 4-A and 4-B, N.R.H. Industrial Park Addition, a subdivision to the City of North Richland Hills, Texas; and WHEREAS, the City of North Richland Hills has agreed to accept said re-plat of the subject property provided that development of the portion thereof described as Tract 4-B, N.R.H. Industrial Addition, be limited as hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION is agreeable to such limitations. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the suffi- ciency of which is hereby acknowledged, LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION and the CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS have agreed as follows, to-wit: (1) The City of North Richland Hills will accept are-plat of the Subject Property so that the same may be divided into two parcels to be (upon recordation of such re-plat) hereafter known as Tracts 4-A and 4-B, N.~.H. Industrial Park Addition, a subdivision to the City of North Richland Hills, Texas. (2) Lamar Savings Association, on behalf of itself, its SUccessors and assigns, upon the filing of such re-plat shall by these presents impose a restriction upon that portion of the Subject Property known as Tract 4-B, N.R.H. Industrial Park Addition, a subdivision to the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, prohibiting any further re-plat, development, and/or bUilding -1- 1/ Ie I I I I I I I i' I I I I I I Ie I I . - permit of said Tract 4-B prior to the dedication to the Public of the necessary right-of-way for the extension of Industrial Park Boulevard eastward across said Tract 4-B so as to connect the same with Holiday Lane, all in accordance with the Master Thoroughfare Map of the City of North Richland Hills as of the effective date hereof, the exact location of the right-of-way to be agreed upon by the parties prior to said dedication by Lamar Savings Association. (3) The foregoing Covenant shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land binding upon Lamar Savings Association, its successors and assigns. /-eL EXECUTED effective as of the (0 day of November, 1987. LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION By: að ~k--- / "tk<!-f ) ~ -4 J '~-?r ~ , Its CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS By: , Its THE STATE OF TEXAS \('O-.\)\S COUNTY OF~TARRAUT~ ) This instrument was acknowledged before me ~ (Q~1 1987, bY~h-e .B .f'<"'\ú.~t'¡ , the \f'"\(e Y(t"',-<,.ì.dt-<\-~ LAMAR SAVINGS ASSOCIATION, a Texas Corporation, on behalf corporation and in the capacity ~rei~ stated. .<5 My c~mmission Expires: NO PUBLIC, STATE OF :1;- ~ \-C\ \ ~tary I s Pr in ::~ flame: ~~\)\Ù ~f\~(c\ {\ou. , -= of of said TEXAS THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 1987, by , the of CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, a Municipal Corporation, on behalf of said corporation and in the capacity therein stated. My Commission Expires: NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF TEXAS Notary's Printed Name: RMDJr:sb:l1.3.87 9442-3:2nd -2- " '~ - "}4 .~ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Planning and Development 11/23/87 ~epartment: Council Meeting Date: Subject: Request of Richmond Bay Development for Final Plat A e dAb.I ber" PS 87-41 of Lots 42-45, Block 3, And Lot 1, filock 10, Meadow LaK~ ~~I~~n. . This Final Plat Application is presented for consideration of Lots 42-45, Block 3, and Lot 1, Block 10, Meadow Lakes Addition. The property is located on the south side of Meadow Lakes Drive and east of Dory Court. The subject tract is currently zoned R-2 Single Family Residential with the stipulation that no lot be less than ten thousand four hundred (10,400) square feet in size with no residence being less than two thousand (2000) square feet in size. The proposed plat would create a total of five (5) lots in conformance with those criteria. The Staff noted that the applicants had recently submitted a rezoning case on the subject tract with the intent of re-adjusting the boundary of the zoning districts to create a specific configuration of the lots. That rezoning request was ultimately rejected by the City Council. The current submittal reverts back to the existing zoning configuration and adheres to the Preliminary Plat previously approved. All of the Staff comments have been satisfactorily answered. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Replat Application PS 87-41 on Lots 42-45, Block 3, and Lot 1, Block 10, Meadow Lakes Addition as submitted. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) _ Oper . ng Budget _0 er Finance Review Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available f£ 'J¡fL~ ent Head Signatüre ' City 'ijánager t CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM . Finance Director Page 1 of 1 1. - £ I R-7- MF Ie I C-2 1450 C-2 I I I !I I Ie I I I I I a: o <It 'IIC .. o I Ie I I I I I Page 7 P & Z Minutes November 12, 1987 ( PS 87-39 APPROVED 5. PS 87-41 PS 87-41 APPROVED I I ~ I I I I I I Ie I I 6. PZ 87-23 ( Mr. Tricoli made t on to approve PS 87-39 e stipulation that the and lot sizes be put on the final plat. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tucker and the motion carried 6-0. Request of Richmond Bay Development for final plat of Lots 42 thru 45, Block 3, and Lot 1, Block 1, Meadow Lakes Addition. Mr. Tucker made the motion to approve PS 87-41. This motion was seconded by Mr. Tricoli ~nd the motion carried 6-0. Request of Alan W. Hamm to rezone Lot - B-R, Block 11, Clearview Addition, from its present classification of C Commercial to C-2 Commercial. Th property is located at the nor est corner of Grapevine Highway d Colorado Boulevard. Chairman Bowen open the Public Hearing and call for those wishing to speak in f or of this request to please com orward. mm came forward. He stated t property borders an auto supply, lskey's Bar-B-Q, office supply, and a shopping center. Mr. Hamm stated he has had a number of requests for several uses in C-2, one being a tire store similar to a Firestone, and a nursery, similar to a Wolf's nursery. Mr. Wood asked Mr. Hamm if he would be willing to block off access to Standley Street. Mr. Hamm said he would. Mr. Wood said he would also have to have screening. I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie 116800 Dallas Parkway Suite 1 50 Dallas, Texas 75248 214 / 248-0126 I ( ( WORRELL & ASSOCIATES, INC. engineers · planners November 4, 1987 . Mr. Richard Royston Director of Planning CITY OF r~ORTH RICH LAND HilLS P. O. Box 18609 North Richland Hills, Texas 76180 ' // RE: Plat Application PS 87-41 Our File': 8105 Dear Richard: We have reviewed your comments concerning the Final Plat and Construction Plans for Meadow Lakes, Block 3, Lots 42-45, Block 10, Lot 1. Items 2 and 3 have been incorporated into the Final Plat. Items 1 and 4 thru 17 will' be completed prior to final approval by City Council.' Thank you for your time and effort in expediting this project. If you have an.y ques~ions, please feel 'free to call me. Sincerely, WORRELL & ASSOCIATES, INC. hn F. Hutchen's Project Manager J FH : jf I; ( ( City of Xrth Richland Hills, Texas ~~ I-~ \1 Ie I I November 4, 1987 REF: PWM-0083-87 I Memo to: Planning & Zoning Commission I From: Gregory W. Dickens, P.E. Assistant Director of Public Works I Subject: P,S_..87~41; MEADOW LAKES ADDITION, Lots 42-45, Block 3 & Lot 1, Block lO Final Plat & Plans I We have reviewed the referenced material and offer the following comments. I -- 1. Provide appropriate cover sheet for plans. 2. Show zoning on the referenced property. 3. Side building line on corner lots in R-2 zoned property is 20 feet. Correct 15' notation on Lot 42. I 4. Show vertical curve on sheet 2 at Station 1+ü0 in thê profile. Vertic1e curve not necessary if change in grade is less than 1%. I 5. Revise "end of pavement" notation in profile on sheet 2 from Station 5+44.45 to Station 4+31.09. I 6. On typical cross-section detail on sheet 2 add notation of "30 lbs/sq. yd. minimum" under "6" LIME STABILIZED SUBGRADE". Also note crown to be 6" instead of 4". I 7. Include attached "General Notes" and details in appropriate places in the plans. I 8. Provide engineer's certification verifying the accuracy of topography, drainage study, and delineation of drainage areas on sheet 3. I 9. Note with flow line parallel to west property line of Lot 1 that drainage from said lot will have to be directed to the street via driveway or lot grading. Ie I I (817) 281-0041/7301 N.E. LOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76118 1-' 4 Ie I I I I I I I I" I I I I I I Ie I I MEADOW LAKES ADD:I(" IN Page 2 November 4, 1987 ( 10. Trench safety plans and specifications sealed by a registered professional engineer licensed in the State of Texas will be required for a trenching deeper than five (5') feet. II. Change notation of "City of Haltom City" in note at top of sheet 4.to "City of North Richland Hills". 12. Remove note 4 on sheet 4. Attached detail should be included in plans. 13. Note 5 on sheet 4 should read "Gate valves shall conform to ANsr/AWWA C509-87. 14. On sheet 4, remove notation to cleanout at Station 3+75 and note manhole to be constructed will rim elevation. C1eanouts are not currently allowed in North Richland Hills. 15. Note dimension from property line to sewer service for Lot 45 on sheet 4. 16. Cover for proposed 8 inch water mains should be approximately 3.0 to 3.5 feet. 17. On sheet I of 1 for Riviera Drive cul-de-sac, please note or revise the following items. a. Add note to "Remove & reconstruct top of sip:bion vault. Removal must be by saw 'cut. Salvage a minimum of 12" of reinforcement steel to splice". b. Construct retaining wall outside street right-of-way. c. Show construction of concrete valley gutters at least 10 feet wide to carry ;flow across cul-de-sac where you have shown it to flow per your grading plan. d. Concrete flume should be "5" - 3000 psi reinforced concrete wi 6" x 6" x No. 6 wi're mesh". e. Show concrete flume from wall to existing structure instead of rock rubble. f. Show existing top of curb grades at 50 feet and 100 feet upstream of the proposed construction on Riviera Drive. cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Development ci ..."''''...,.". I ~ Ie I I I I I I I -- I I ) ~I ~ ~ -~ , ~, Ç}" · '0 Ç)~~~ ~Ç)~~ ~ Ie) .. .. ~ ~ '" ~ : ~J ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~""'~ ~ :1 I I --. ~-- I ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ) ( II. ", 0.... .~ Q.~O. °W4l(p.- ~>Ocø Z-'a:~ O=»cnW ...UW-, ZXZw laIoæ ~CD~ ::) ,.. ~ Z~ en ~O .. ~~...J~ ~øI: 2 ·..JO 4(~1IJ %a;~.... V ·0 ~ Z~<tU ill Wo f!) 0::C.... '" \Ù 't- <:t... ~ ~ ~ of, Q\('\ c-:2.,. c <:) "3_ ~"t- cx:..o - \ù ~~. -').,. \<'~ -s.c;:)~ 'ù~~ ,," -:2.. ~ _ '- ~ ---:z.. -:t:.~ ~ q.~~~ a ~ () ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "'"' . ---- (.. '-'. ~ f '-' ..... s:: .... ..., t) J: «S ....0 'tJ .c.cer1 II C .IJ lG ..d J...... .fJ:I CIJ '0.... ..., > 'tJ CD :s QJ 'tS U) 'C s::: .... s::: en CD CD -ri ::I tØ 'W .... to r-f en +I -r1 4J C -Pi GJ (I) (I) ¡., en ( ) -r4 'cG · Jot ~ Q -ri ... "' .,., GJt:> ~~CD ~ t»QJ >-¡"Q'C Q «' a GJ'C GJ GJCŒJ>=.c~~ ". s::: .... ~ ns +J ..., a c ... ns ~ ..c: CD 0 GI C»J.i:J' . C:J .. s: ,., tJ' 'tJ en 0 en as a- u QJ C·rot .... r-1 t) fðJ.ecUJ: ø..( ) r-f .... ~.þI '0 JJ dS .c ~ "" ~ , s::.....:3 ¡:: ...., Œ) J: tU..... CD o .t:: 11 as .,... 'tS ~ '(I) Ñ Ñ Cl)GJ+t 'tJ.¡J4JGJ ( ) J.i,.., 4J C :> c. Q «'..0 CD Qla 0 ~c. ;SE.... ~~; s!:~~c. c. c. ... 0·... -c .c \ .:;:s cu 0) «S GJ tr ~ :3 >.µ (UQJÑO .. ns IV 0 S. Ñ 0 ¡.. . GJ J:r-f H ~.c Ö) tÐ >-0'O...,¡:: 't1 'Q)..., 'H .... en ..... .... ( ).c .... s::: "' erf 'tS c: M fØ.IJ 0·... (I).c: aI r: ..a~ "'.µcø e 4).Q cu 0 .t: s:: r-t GJE-4.þ1.c:-ri'µ~QJc. ..., ....µ .t: "rof ~ E CI) ~ ~ a. ~.,.. Q) C o 'W m c...... 0 ..., QJ 0 J.. QJ 0 a..... J..t GJ 0 tJ) 0 r-1 Ei.., 4J .µ c: tU 0 t: Q .... 0 .c tØ "' .... C. ItS > ::s ..... 'µ"r1 Ñ 0 "~ Q Q) ,.. aJ(I)r-tQ .J.J.....'C.c~ Q c.+I c. en Gle.....Q)E~c:s:: -.coJ....c:oomo .....¡J U _o.µ u~ 0 0 ....-, .." . ~ l;r.. ·O/Y ':.1.$#/1' - A,/1 ð'n!í:: x o,:} -. "" hi I¡;ë ·Oh' :.t.r;g¿, - A..i1/1ð'n.i;:···ï;i;ë,rvO::J fYHor I Ie I I I I I I I t" I I I I I I Ie I I 'YALVES WITHIN ROADWAYS OR OTHER PAVED VALVES IN YARDS OR OTHER AREAS OR SURFACED AREAS . · _ NOT SUBJECT TO TRAFF I C WATER VALVE & BOX DETAILS '" '3 BAR ~ I __, I 1/ /;-~ " r ( r,¡;g,)) J \ \~~~ / L'~~~ EXISTING 1" DEEP CONTRACTION CONCRETE JO I NT WI TH CRACK PA V94EHT SEALER . CD , . 6" TIt I CK CLASS "A" CONCRETE BASE VALVE BOX & COVER TO BE BASS & HAYS '3110-1 6" THICK CONCRETE BASE -' -c ~L.LI om :Ie -c . a: ~~ VALVE ==== CONCRETE 'T1iRUST BLOCKS ( #3 BAR 1'-6" ,,--, I I / ~-:..-:... '<', /I~/ ~\\ , I, I' , . \ '\~I. / I \ \~'/ . L "':.~;;/ ~ . CD .' ... GRADE K CD -' L¡J i ~ ~ ~ a: . c ~ > VAL VE BOX & COVER 10 BE BASS & HAYS 1J 31&0-1 ~ . (,.) :C~9 L.LI tEa U) or: U) (,.) u.I czen d8~ 6W AWtlA C-900 DR 18, CLASS I 50 P VC VALVE WATER LINE NOTES: 1. CLASS "A" CONCRETE SHALL HAVE 5 SACKS OF CEMENT/C.Y., MAXIMUM SLUMP OF 5 INCHES, AND A 3000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AT 28 DAYS. 2. ALL ITEMS SHOWN INCLUDED IN VALVE & BOX UNIT PRICE, COMPLETE I N PLACE. CONCRETE THRUST BlOCKS CONCRETE FOR THRUST BlOCKS SHALL BE CLASS "B" TYPICAL THRUST BLOCK DETAILS WATER VALVE AND THRUST BLOCK DETAILS CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HilLS, TEXAS . KNOWLTON-ENGlISH-FlOWERS.INC. n....'U'''''- t~'I~ tg'VllunIl ,..... OntGN.o .., "'VISlONI O.Ut JULY, 1987 DAn I" I"MeO~ OR AW" . Y ~ lItO CHIClttD I" ""II , ..0 01 I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I Ie I I 2 CU.~ FT.~ M IN.' GRA V~~_ FILL POURED CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK- PROTECT DRAIN OPEN'I NG ( FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL ( NOTE: DE~TH OF HYDRANT . LEAD AND BURY OF HYDRANT SHALL CONFORM TO COVER OF PIPE AS SPEC I FI ED //-" , . GRADE [2" TYP I CAL () 0 o 0 0 D ø 0 0 0 () 0 ø () 0 " D ø ~ . ø 0 () 0 z 0 c::Þ :E 0 0 o"í .- () c ø co " " 0 (\? 0 0 ø . () 0 ð " 0 () ø 0 0' o ø o ð 0 0 o () ,0 o 0 o PRECAST CONCRETE BLOCK OR BRICK BASE SLAB FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS,TEXAS . ~~~,:,~~H-FLOWERS. .INC. 01....0 IY' WD OAAMI IY: S K oa:::::" DAn: JULY 1987 JOe Il1O' CHlCltIO IY: ...., Il1O ~ I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I 'I I I I Ie· I I ( ( MISCELLANEOUS TRENCH EMBEDMENT AND BACKFILL DETAILS NOT TO SCALE NATIVE TRENCH MATERIAL (NO ROCKS OVER 3" IN OIA.) U) ..... a: c =- CUSH ION h SAND NORMAllY AWA C-900 DR-18 ClASS 1 50 PVC WATER U) " ..... a: c =- NORM~J.l Y ASlM C-76 RCP NATIVE TRENCH MATERIAL ,(NO, ROÇKS OVER 3" IN OIA.) . ~ ..(I) &.AI a: c :> CUSHION SAND NORMALLY SOR 35 PVC SANITARY SEWER NATIVE TRENCH MATERIAL (NO~ LARGE ROCKS) SAND TO SPRING LINE WASHED ROCK I F TRENCH BOTTOM NOT CUT TO GRADE STORM DRAIN GENERAL NOTES: 1. ' IF PIPE IS UNDER PAVEMENT, CUSHION SAND BACKFILL AND EMBEDMENT WILL BE REQUIRED TO THE BOTTOM OF PROPOSED SUBGRADE. 2. ALL TRENCH BACKFILL TO BE COMPACTED TO 95% STANDARD PROCTOR DRY DENS IlY (ASTM 0-698) PEA GRAVEL OR SMALL DIAMETER NON-ANGULAR WASHED ROCK SHALL BE SUBSTITUTED FOR CUSHION SAND UP TO THE SPRING LINE WHERE UNSTABLE OR MUDDY TRENCH CONDITIONS EXIST. MISCELLANEOUS TRENCH EMBEDMENT AND BACKFILL DETAILS CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HilLS, TEXAS . KNOWlTON-ENGLISH-FLOWERS, INC. (~'N. lloIl.Ht" tOft~" t..... Dlltc¡"IO IY GWD O"A.... IV SPK ". v, ilONa DAnIVIY~ DATI JULY, 1987 .. NO CHIC.'O IV IHUTNO Of I Ie I I I I I I I re· I I I I I I Ie I I ~ IDARD CAST -IN-PLACE CONCR~ MANHOLE ~:~:E;:~ ~~{~~OE~~~~N NOt TO SCALE 2- 'TYPE -D- HMAC PAVEMENT 11IICKNESS MANHOLE RING EXISTING HMAC & COVER AS PAVEMENT SHOWN BELOW 6" THICK 3000 PS I CONCRETE - N 1 '-10" o ", I I . " q'-O" INSIDE DIAMETER . . ,: :o~': .. . . . , . ;.: .e . CI) L&J 0::: c:( > . . . . .:~ .: :: : ' ,"., . e. . . . . . e.- I · .. ~ ~ : '0;: , . , , ,0 00 :: :. " .' .. :þO .:, ; '.: : :: '. . .' :' j ,'. ....:.: . . '. MONOLITHICALLY PLACED CLASS " " CONCRETE I: N 6'-0" MINIMUM L¡. 4 . ...J Or::: L&J A. >- c:( A.. c:( CI: .... >< L&J I: o I - Lt) CI: L&J > o :c I- a.. L&J Q ...J c:( z: o .... c c c:( 1 '-10" PROVIDE PRECAST ADJUStMENT RINGS OR CLAY BRICK & MORTAR OR COMBINATION 1" DEEP CONTRACTION JOINT WITH CRACK SEALER MANHOLE TOP FOR STREET INSTALLATION CAST IRON MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER (TO BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR) BASS & HAYS PATTERN N300-2~ WITH PICK BARS OR EQUAL MARKED "SANITARY SEWER" ,- / 4 . NOTES: 1: STANDARD CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE MANHOLE TO BE USED WITH SEWERS 8 INCHES THROUGH 36 INCHES IN DIAMETER WHERE SPEC IF IE D.- 2~ THE CONNECTION OF THE SEWER PIPE TO THE MANHOLE SH~LL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY USING MANHOLE COUPLING OR RUBBER RING WATER STOPS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PIPE MANUFACTURER. 3. CLASS "A" CONCRETE SHALL HAVE 5 SACKS CEMENT/C.Y., MAXIMUM SLUMP OF 5 INCHES, AND A 3000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AT 28 DAYS. STANDARD CAST-iN-PLACE CONCRETE MANHOLE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS,TEXAS . ~..~~~":~~?~.:.E~~~~H-FIOW[R<;; I~c: OU'GIlfID'. GWD D"A.... .., SPK "I ",.StOHI DAn JULY, 1987 OA U .., SYMeOl JOe IIfO CHIC.ID I" SMII' ..0 0' I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I Ie I I ~ WATER SERVICE CONNECTION~1NGLE 50' STREET R.O.W. USUAL OTHER WI DTHS SIMILAR CENTER METER 36" BACK OF CURB AND SERVICE LINE 1~" BELOW TOP OF CURl TYPICAL STREET SECTION METER BOX I I I CUSTOMER SERVICE liNE NOT I' --CUMTRttr I" .f" TYPE "K" SOFT COPPER ------ ------ - In N'" METER INSTALLED BY CITY WATER MAIN 36W PLAN VIEW I ~ ~·x3· THREADED B I . . z Z . ::t- I"~" TYPE "K" SOFT COPPER I~" OUTS I DE I.P. · }" P' 'in CORPORATION . ·mp H-I5000 PROFILE ,VIEW SERVICE LINE WHEN MAIN IS ON OPPOSITE SIDE OF STREET NOTE: IF SERVI CE I S I NSTALLED AHEAD OF CURB & GUTTER, CUT & SHAPE PIPE TO FIT POSITION SHOWN BUT BEND DOWN ABOUT 5" TO MINIMIZE CHANCES OF DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION OF CURB' GUTTER. SERVICE LINE COVER MINIMUM 2~", UNDER STREET SUBGRADE AND MINIMUM 12" UNDER BOTTOM OF CURB , GUTTER. BRONZE DOUBLE STRA SADDLE OR TEFLON COATED SADDLE WITH WIDE STAINLESS STEEL BAND WATER SERVICE CONNECTION -SINGLE- CITY OF NORTH RICHlAND HillS, TEXAS . ~~?.N.:.E:.è.~H-FlOWERS. I~. OIIUINIO IV GWD OIIA'" IY SPIC "IV'.ONI DATI IY IY~ OAT.!: JULY, 1987 .101 NO: Ct4lalO IY' IHIITNO, Of I Ie I I I I I I I f' I I I I I I Ie I I ~ SEWER SERVICE CONNE~JNS Pl g,.' -6" .TYPICAL . I . . ". .' - . .. . . ... " " .., . . . " .. . . . .. . ," .'. . ., . . . . . . . ' c = SEWER (I) cr ¿ (1)- MAIN ~" . BEG I N PAY + ITEM FOR ij" SEWER SERVICE PIPE Pl STANDARD SEWER SERVICE 9'~6" I TYP I CAL I .' . :. " . . .. .: . . .' '.: ij" SERVICE LINE . .. . " . .' . .. " . . '..', ". : . " . .' .... WHERE CUSTOMER SERVICE LINE IS NOr I NSTALLED~ PLUG SEWER· WlTH. PLASTI C V.C. STOPPER AND DRIVE 2xQ REFERENCE STAKE AS SPECIFIED~ BEND AND STACK PIPE BY CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE INCLUDED IN PRICE BID FOR DEEP SERVICE CONNECTIONS: BEGIN PAYt ITEM FO~ ~" SEWER SERVICE PIPE~ L&J a:: o :r: 6" OF CL."A" CONCRETE AROUND WYE AND BEND AS SHOWN: THIS CONCRETE WILL BE INCLUDED IN PRICE BID FOR DEEP-CUT SERVICE CONNECTIONS: SEWER MAIN DEEP-CUT SEWER SERVICE NOTES: 1 e. TOP OF SERV I CE STACK SHALL BE SUFFICIENT DEPTH TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE FALL FROM THE FACILITY TO BE SERVED: 2. CLASS "A" CONCRETE SHALL HAVE 5 SACKS OF CEMENT, MAXIMUM SLUMP OF 5 INCHES, AND 3000 PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AT 28 DAYS. SEWER SERVICE CONNECTIONS CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HillS, TEXAS . ~~?.:~~ ~~~.:~~~~H-FLO\\'FRS..lNC 011'0"10 I., GWD O"-'MII I" SPK "IV...o-.l DATI I" ..,~ DATI JULY 1987 JOe NO CMtc:aIO I" IHUTIiIfO, M I Ie I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I Ie I I { ( CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS * GENERAL NOTES * 1. All construction to be in accordance with the City of North Richland Hills' standards and specifications. 2. All water, sanitary sewer, and storm 'drain trenches to be jetted from the bottom up with proper equipment ,as outlined in the City specifications. Jetting to be every fiye (5') feet horizontal. 3. Utility Contractor and Street Contractor are to notify a City Inspector, Bill Rutledge or Larry Jones, @ '581-0511 at least 48 hours p~ior to begi~ning·construction. 4. All sanitary sewer pipe shall be SDR 35 PVC (ASTM 3034) or extra. strength vitrified clay (ASTM 200-65T or latest revision thereof). ,/-/-" 5. All storm drainage pipe should be ASTM C-76, Class III reinforced concrete, unless noted otherwise. 6. All water mains shall be either ductile iron ANSI/AWWA-CI50/A21.50, .class 59 with 8 mil pOlyethYlene tube wrap and cement lining according to ANSI/AWWA-C104/A21.4 or PVC AWWA-C900, DRI8, class 150. 7. All water and sanitary sewer trenches under curb or pavement are to be backfilled with sand up to the bottom of the proposed subgrade. 8. The Contractor shall be responsible for the cost of a maximum ,number of passing field density. tests on lime stablized subgrade equal to the ratio of 1 per 100 linear feet of street and all failing density tests and -fequired mOisture-density curves. 9. All fill within street ri~ht-of-way to be compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by the Standard Proctor Method (ASTM D-698) . 10. Warp water lines around storm drain inlets with a minimum of 12" clearance out-to-out. 11. "Curb ramps" are to be constructed on al] permanent curb returns at intersections of collector or arterial streets. 12. All construction barricading to be in accordance with the current "Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways". I Ie I I I I I ( ( I - I . '. Þ-: ". " I . ~ , I t' I I I I I I Ie I I , I , - - - -~ 0' , t2=20-o'J NO I!/n,I) L q, . .. . Iv()R/n " ¡$: I . ". .- I I 1 I '-- . þ . ,qC~/"? \' C" . . 4 ,~ .. I 0 ~ - 0"/ PL~~ c'UR PJ ~ GU1TE:"~,' ~c.a..\e·. Y4-1' -= \ '-0" l 4" ~ ' .. T , / I /I..IIe Cð X (¿, ""'6 W/A.e M;:~r4 IN MA1/;.) (():(~, 3~'Q? @ (ß" .;J".e.uJ.) £~~¿-hL~~_ ~ OT"TO G:CL L.~ C IT'( OF IJorl.TH fZlC.f4LM1) 4ll.L~ ,151 ~ ßlJ¿Qf!:;> ð2A/L'1 P Ð tc,~' L-- · -_..~ Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) _ Operating Budget - Other6~ ~ ~ ([ZlJQ¿ /J Department Head Signature (¿~~ger CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM e ........ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS , ~ Department: Utility _Ubject: McKee Water Service Request for Rate Increase Council Meeting Date: 11-23-87 Agenda Number: GN 87-140 When the city annexed the northern area of the city around Shady Grove Road, McKee Water Service was serving water to customers in this area. Most of the 28 customers are living in non-conforming mobile homes. The city has a water main nearby but because of the cost of extending service and the fact that we would be condoning a non-conforming use, we would suggest that McKee Water Service continue to serve this area until we have more orderly development in this area. In July of 1987, Mr. McKee's engineer requested from the Texas Water Commission a water rate increase with a minimum bill of $18 for 3,000 gallons and then $1.75 per 1,000 over 3,000. Using an average of 10,000 gallons per month per household this amounted to $30.25 average bill per month. I have enclosed a copy of a letter where I answered that request to the Texas Water Commission. Since that request Mr. McKee has resubmitted his request to the Texas Water Commission and to the City of North Richland Hills for a minimum bill of $15.00 for the first 2,000 gallons and $1.50 per 1,000 gallons after that. This rate would create an average bill per household of $27.00. The City of North Richland Hills' average bill based on 10,000 gallons useage is $19.20. Mr. McKee's average bill at the present time is $12.70. As you can see, Mr. McKee's present rates are probably too low but the requested rates are probably too high. I feel like Mr. McKee should be allowed the same rates as the City of North Richland Hills which is a $6.00 minimum for the first 2,000 gallons and then $1.65 per 1,000 gallons after that minimum. Mr. McKee only has 28 customers in the City of North Rich1and Hills but I feel these customers are people who cannot afford the high minimum bills. The tap fee that Mr. McKee has requested is $250. The reconnect fee is $25.00 and a returned check fee is $15.00 and the meter installation fee is $10.00. The tap fee, returned check fee and installation fee seems to be reasonable but the $25.00 reconnect fee should not be allowed. Recommendation: The staff recommends to approve the following rate for McKee Water Service in the City of North Richland Hills: $6.00 minimum water bill for the first 2,000 gallons and then $1.65 per 1,000 after that. A tap fee of $250; a returned check fee of $15.00; and a meter installation fee of $10.00 Finance Review Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available , Finance Director Page 1 of 1 I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Land Developmefìt Consultant Project Management 4420 'Nest Vickery Suite 201 PO. Box 331025 Fort Worth, Texas 76163 817/763-0127 Wm. L. Boomer, PE. President LandCon Inc. November 4, 1987 Gene Riddle Public Works Director City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 Fort Worth, Texas 76118 Certified Mail No. P 185 804 988 Re: McKee Water Service Co. Dear Mr. Riddle; Enclosed is notice of a system wide rate increase we have filed with the Texas Water Commission on behalf of McKee Water Service co. This increase covers approximately twenty-eight customers within the City of North Richland Hills. Also enclosed is a copy of the full application as filed with the Texas Water Commission. This will serve as our petition to the City fo North Richland Hills for approval of the new rates. Please advise when this application will be heard before the City Council. Should there be any questions, please call. Yours truly, LandCon Inc. ~"'I~ ~ I! · I I , C /~~~ William L. Boomer, P.E. President cc: D.C. McKee I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I NOTICB OF RATE CHAllGB BEQUEST D.C. McKee which operates County(1es) has filed a rate/tariff in Tarrant and Hood ~ change application with the Texas Water Commission. The proposed effective date of the rate/tariff change is January 1, 1988 . The requested increase in annual revenues over adjusted test year revenues is S 50.971.01 l215%}.· This change will ~ffect all customer classes. . The utility proposes the following rate structure: Meter Size 3/4" Minimum Bill to $15.00 Gallonage Charge $1.50/1000 gallons over 2,ÒOO Tap Fee $250.00 Reconnect Fee $25.00 Return Check Fee $15.00 Meter Installation $10.00 : These rates apply to· service received after the effective date listed above. If, within 60 days ot the effective date, the Texas Water Commission receives a complaint from any affected municipality, or from the lesser ot 250 or 10 percent of the ratepayers, a hearing will be set to determine it the rates are reasonable. Complaints should be mailed to the Rates Section, Water Utilities Division, Texas Water Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. Unless complaints are received from 250 or 10 percent of the customers or the Texas Water Commission sets a hearing on its own motioD, DO bearinK will be held. In the event that the application is set for hearing, the specific rates requested by the utility may be decreased or increased by order of the Commission, but in no case will the total amount at rate relief exceed the total amount included in this notice. If the Commission orders a lower rate to be set, the utility may be ordered to refund or credit against future bills all sums collected during the pendency ot the rate proceedini in excess of the rate finally ordered plus interest. ,I '.f -4- -..-. -.. ~... -. .,. ..-.. -...-------.. I..· j Wat~r utilities Division I Texas Water Commission ~ustin. Texas 78711-3087 (512)463-8235 I I I I I I I (Commission use only) File No. Effective Date RATE/TARIFF CHANGE APPLICATION Class 8 . C Water aDd Sewer Utilities 1. Applicant D.C. McKee (individual, ~~~~»~~XX»~*»~*~~*~~ Utility Name McKee Water Service Co. ' Applicant is a(n): -X Individual Corporation (Charter Number) _Partnership Sub Chapter-S Corporation Other, please explain Oak Hills. Cross Timbers. Southwood. Rock Harbor. Smithfield Street Address or Location 11566 CCN Number Route 21, Box 126 (Business Address) Fort Worth, Tarrant - (City & County) ~ Texas 76180 (817) 281-1304 I..,(state and Zip Code) (Business phone) Contact Person: William L. Boomer, P.E.; LandCon Inc.; (817) 763-0127 (Name of Person to be Contacted) (Area Code-Telephone Number) I P.o. Box 331025 (Address) I 2. I I 3. I I 4. Ie I I Ft. Worth, Texas (City) (State) 76163 (Zip Code) List the complete schedule applicable tariff provision, reconnect fees, etc., if any. 'of the present rate structure including membership, tap, or and See Attachment nAn List the proposed rate structure or tariff change and the percentage increase in gross revenue that the utility expects the proposed rate structure to furnish as opposed to that furnished by the existing rate structure. (Items shown in 2 above that are not being changed should be listed again as unchanged.) See Attachment RB" On what date does Applicant intend the proposed rate structure or tariff change to take effect? Januar'( 1 19ª-ª--. (Please note: The date must be at least thirty days after the filing date of the application with the Texas Water Commission in order to satisfy the statutory notice requirements). TWC-0794 Page 1 of 16 I·, . \ Ie I I I I I I I 8. Ie 9. I I 10. I I I I I· e I I 51 Applicant [] (has) 0 tfùi~ been granted a certificate of convenience and necessity: Certificate No. 11566 . . 6. In which county or counties does Applicant serve? Ta r ran t and Hood Please list each subdivision affected by this rate change. Rock H a r bo r, Sou t hwood, Smi t hi i e ld, Oak Hills, Cross Timbers .. 7. Does Applicant serve within the corporate or town limits of any municipality? No x Yes If yes, which municipality or municipalitiesl North Richland Hills, Keller, SouthLake If yes, how many of Applicant's Customers 8re located within such limitsl 94 If yes. has Applicant filed a concurrent petition to change its rates with the governing body of the municipality or municipalities? x Yes No If No, explain How many customers do you presently have in each of the following classes: 320 Residential Industrial Commercial Business Cities Others (Please Explain) Total Number Determine a Test Period (the most recent 12 -month period for which information is available ending on a calendar quarter). The Test Period twelve (12) months ended Dec. 31 The preceding twelve (12) month period ended Dec. 31 , 19 85 ,1984 Please list below the licensed operator~ employed by the utility, and current level of certification (A, B, C. or D), and average hours. Name Level of Certification Weekly Hour. Worked 40+ D.C. McKee B TWC-0194 Pege2of18 I·" . Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I 't,. Complete Schedule A below. Note: If both w.ter and ..wer rat. or griff clNange. ... requeated, ..par.. lChedule. must be completed for each ayatem. SCHEDULE A-INCOME STATEMENT The amounts entered should only be ,clua' recorded amounts. If the amounts are allocated between water and sewer or between the utility and another business, provide the Commiaaion with the allocation. and method used to allocate. Do not enter Mti..-ted or budget .mounta. If the company uses the NARUC system of accounts, comparative NARUC accounts can be substituted for the following Commission prescribed accounts. Please use the balie formet indicated below. 12 Month. Preceding the Teat Period Operating Revenues: Sales (Water or Sewer) Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages (Schedule A-' ) Cont~act labor (Schedule A-' ) Purchased water for sale to customers Chemicals and treatment of water Utilities (electricity) Rep~irs and maintenance (supplies)(Schedule A-2) Office expenses Accounting and legal fees (Schedule A-3) Insurance Regulatory expense (Rate Case) Misc. Expenses (if any, itemize on Schedule A-4) TOTAL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (sum of b through I) Other taxes (payroll, ad valorem, etc.) TWC gross receipts assessment Depreciation and amonization Federal income taxes NET OPERATING INCOME (a - m - n - 0 - p - q) Other Income: fees (connect, tap, etc.) (Schedule A-6) Other (interest income, etc.) TOTAL OTHER INCOME (sum of s + t) Other Expenses: Interest expense on long and/or shon-term debt Costs relating to fees (connect, tap, etc.) (Schedule A-6)· Other expenses (non-utility operations) TOTAL OTHER EXPENSE (sum of v + w + x) NET INCOME (r + u - y) -If accounted for separately from items b through I. a 40,585 19,250 b c d e f g h 99 15,794 750 1,171 150 j k I 6AO m 37,894 n 1,124 , 0 p 2,534.30 q r (967.30) 4,225 . t 4,225 u v w 4,225 x 4,225 ( 96/.30) y z 1WC.Q794 "30118 '2 Month Teat Period 40,304 19,250 99 15.985 900 1,326 150 7/1 38,433 1,923 2,534.30 ( 2 . 586 . 3 0) 4,183 4,183 4,183 4,225 2,586.30 ) I·, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I l~. Complete Schedule 8..1 and 8-2 SCHEDULE B-1-BALANCE SHEET-ASSETS The amounts entered should onlv be actual recorded amounts. If the amounts are allocated between water and sewer or between the utility and another business. provide the Commission with the allocations and method used to allocate. Do not enter eatim.ted or budgeted .mounD. FIXED ASSETS Utility plant (original cost) (Schedule B-3) (page 8) Less: Accumulated depreciation TOTAL UTIlITY PLANT (a - b) Non-Utility plant Less: Accumulated depreciation TOTAL NON-UTILITY PLANT (d .. e) Construction work in progress Plant åcquisition and adjustment (positive or negative) Less: Accumulated amortization of plant acquisition adjustment) Net unamortized plant acquisition adjustment (h - i) CURRENT ASSETS Cash in bank Petty cash Cash reserve account Material and supplies (inventory) Accounts receivable Less: Allowance for uncollectables Other TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS (k through q) DEFERRED ASSETS Prepaid insurance Other TOTAL DEFERRED ASSETS (s + t) TOTAL ASSETS (c + f + 9 + j + r + u) lWC·0794 P.40f 18 D.te: J an 1. 19 8 5 Beginning of Test Year . 76,500.00 b 21,345.10 55,154.90 c d e f g h - 0 - k I 8,712.33 - 0 - - 0 - 250.00 - 0 - m n o p q r 8,962.33 s u v -0- 64,117.23 D.te: Dee. 3.119 85 End of Test Year 86,500.00 23,904.40 62,595.60 - 0 - 10,001.71 - 0 - - 0 - 250.00 - 0 - 10,251.71 -0- 72,847.31 I·. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I ,I I I I Ie I I SCHEDULE B-2-BALANCE SHEET-LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL D.'-: Jan 1 . 18 85 D.te:Dec. 31.18 85 Beginning of Test Year End of Test Year h TOTAL LONG-TERM LIABILITIES (h + i) 0 CURRENT LIABILITIES Accounts payable k Notes payable (less than 1 year) (Schedule 8-4) I Customer deposits m 250.00 Taxes payable n Other current and accrued liabilities 0 - 0 - TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES (k through 0) p 250.00 DEFERRED LIABILITIES Accumulated deferred income taxes q Accumulated deferred investment tax credits r Other s TOTAL DEFERRED LIABILITIES - 0 - (q through s) CONTRIBUTIONS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION u - 0 - TOTAL CAPITAL AND LIABILITIES v 55,404.90 (g + j + p + t + u) (Should agree with Total Assets) .t CAPITAL Ownership equity (Sole Proprietorships or Pannerships only) . Shareholders investment (Sub Chapter-S) Members investment (Cooperatives only) Common stock (Corporations only) Retained earnings Other TOTAL CAPITAL (a through e) LONG-TERM LIABILITIES Notes payable (more than 1 year) (Schedule B-4) TWC-0194 Pave 6 of 18 a 55,154.90 b c d e f 9 55.154.90 62.595.60 62,595.60 o 250.00 - 0 - 250.00 - 0 - - 0 - 62,854.60 I·. Ie I 1 I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ..113. For line b. (Salaries & Wages) and line g (Repairs and Maintenance) of the Income Statement the percentage of dollars expended for 1) service lines, meters and customer billings and collections, 2) major mains, storage facilities and utility plant, and 3) wells, pumps and chlorinators: 1) service line.. 2) IMjor m.in.. 3) well.. pumpa. meter.. etc ROgge. etc. ete. TOTAL Salaries and wages 99 " 5 "- 5 "- =100% Repairs and 45 "- 10 "- 45 "- =100% Maintenance 14. For the following categories of expenses shown on the Income Statement, list all items over one hundred (.1 (0) dollar. and either complete the following lines or attach a copy of the invoices for each item: If the company used the NARUC system of accounts, please provide the listing or invoice copies grouped by the appropriate NARUC expense account. SCHEDULE A-' Employee D.C. McKee Salaries, Wages, It Contract Labor Amount Paid $19,250.00 Explen.tion of Duti.. Maintenance. Operation Meter Reading, Billing TOTAL '" $19,250.00 SCHEDULE A·2 Date of Invoice Repairs and Maintenance (Supplies) Pay.. 1985 TOTAL TWC-Q794 P-ee I of 18 Amount $900.00 Explanation of Item Leak Repair, Replace Controls, Service Motors, Pumps, Level Indicators, etc. I ..oJ . . Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Date' of Invoice Annual Payee Tom Jenness .. TOTAL SCHEDULE A·3 Accounting and Legal Amount Type of Service 150.00 Annual Accountinq SCHEDULE A-4 Date of Invoice Pay.. Miscellaneous Expense, Amount ,Qa5 ~~Y n~pt nf Hp~lth 1985 TOTAL $ nt)O 00 Explan.tion of Item Tp~t;n~ of Wdtpr ~dmplps $ 73.00 Couplings, Tees, Etc. 15. List total actual costs of servi~e and complete Schedule A-6 with information from the Test Year. ACTUAL EXPENSES Cost of labor Cost of parts & equipment Other costs TOTAL TEST YEAR ACTUAL COSTS TEST YEAR FEES CHARGED TO CUSTOMERS Fees to cover actual costs of parts and labor Additional fees collected (i.e. membership, etc.) Total fees for taps, disconnects, etc. SCHEDULE A-& Miscellaneous Fees T.p Reconnect. Other · 1 R11 00 2350.00 · 4183.00 · 4183.00 · 4183.00 (A) Should equal item w on the income statement. (8) Should equal item a on the income statement. T oul 1833.00 2350.00' 4183.0~A) 41 8 3 · 0 ~B) 4183.00 16. If items (A) and (8) above are not shown on the income statement on lines sand wand in the same dollar amounts as (A) and (8) above, plea88 indicate where in the financial statements they are located, and at what dollar amounts. NA 17. If, in Schedule A-6 actual costs differ from the costs charged to customer., please explain why. Actual Cost Equal Cost Charged Customers TWC-0194 Pege 7 of 18 I·. .:). 18. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Construction and Expansion Program-Please explain fully: t a. Have you made a water service demand forecast, and do you have a proposed expansion project of program related to this forecast (projection)? Yes No X If yes: (1) What is the population projection? . Not Available (2) What is the growth potential for your ar8a in the next two years; what factors will influence it? Not Ava-ilable- b. What plans do you have for system expansionl Please provide a copy of the engineering report, if available. Expand as required to meet demand c. Have you retained a consulting engineer to make a study of or plan for your areal If so, who is he (or what firm)l No d: What capability do you have with your present facilities to serve future growth (demand) or your systeml Presently have excess well capacity and storage e. What construction work, if any, is in progressl None 19. Method used to compute depreciation x straight line other (please explain) 20. Complete Schedule 8-3W. Provide an inventory and description of company facilities used and useful in providing utility service and the original cost and date of installation of each item. If the Applicant provides sewer service, please complete Schedule 8-35. a. Please provide documentation to support the plant items and installation dates listed on Schedule B-3W and 8-3S unless they have been established in a prior rate case. Please provide documentation for plant additions since the last rate case. This material has been established in a prior rate case. P.U.C. Docket No. 2569 b. If no documentation is available, provide a detailed description of each item, including sizes, lengths, materials, etc., and approximate installation dates. Refer to schedule B-3W 'TWC.Q794 Peg. 8 of 18 I·. . Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I .j. ~ j CW) m .t w ~ ... :) ! fa ~ :c 'õ U r U) ¡ ::J 1WC.o7M ...... of 11 "i- {it )f 00 oU') . . o r---- M~ MN o o . o r---- I: J 00 00 . . o ion ~ co a.n ~ r---- r-f o o . o ~ qt I~I 00 Jt. MM I~ o JIJ. ~ 1.& ~ ì~J Q 8JI i z 00 00 o U') ... ... o r---- .....-t o o U') ... M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o >too r-f 0'\ ::Jr-f t-:> ~ r---- 0'\ .....-t ro ....... Q) -r-f lI-4 .c ~ .r-f E C/) I ' I I tI- ~ ~ .!I'5 t s :! I ! 8 E ~ i .- f f I ~ rl ¡ f I ¡ J I I ! I i ~ ~!J¡IIIJ 11 lit·' i c: :: .c:: J s:. ~ Þ .. ... _ ._ . "" H~ :.:J",u6cnCJ~wocnc ¡ ~ 2 C') ~ B Eaa~~¡~~ ë · K '3 i ~ · · !! ~ c ,~ . c l.i! . ,D ~ 5 . .I I 1 i :v j f ~ fI) % LO r---- ~ \.0 o o , . LO \.0 a.n 0'\ 5~ ! $:J a:": ~m ;-1 ~I oU) =~ CW w% Ii; ~ en o C w U en (J ~ au Z ë3 ~ ~ æ III ID o .. III ~ = ~ .- ::) II. ~ :I 0 ..at- g~ 1-6. W I- o Z ~ .;: :) ~ ¡ 3 r a: '& c .2 l .. .... .. c .2 · z ~ ï ë5 .... · oS S .- .,. · . U ." C · ! ª s · ;; .! at ,~ 'i ~ i c: 'i¡ -8 .! >- . E tit ë :J 8 ~ g N o c..! g 0 ~ª g ~ f oS i ; ~ 'j - ~ I ë 0 8 cL K ~ . .. g '5 'if >- .- ! ~ c S . I·.. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ., ~ j CW) cD .~ w ! 5 - ° fa i 2: '5 U r en 11 :J 1WC-CmM '-I of 11 I· I "i· B ·1 1.1- if 1~I 0 !J~ M o o I~ § o .... lC) I,} ~ .fl.s .; ì~J ~ c æ 8)1 i z o lC) . \0 \0 r-i o o . o M M .... M . . . CI) ~ Q) ~ , ¡ç ..,if ~ .~ I Ji .i 8 .~'.!I ï U è) I :5 , i ~ . .. ! I Go I It .- ~ ~ -I :J e-s J i~ It ·~j'II!1 J ~ , ~ ~ wuOcn,,1t ~ ~ ~ o o . o I'" o o . o r-i N o lC) o o . o o lC) .... M . . . . . . . . M ex:> ~ r-i .. c . .. E c: Q. ~ 2 °i c: i ã: ~ . i : : i IIÎïiIIJ'! ¡¡;QcZ2æ8~cnl .. f't ~ &ð R~f't~ ~ ¡ ~ ! o Ll) . \0 M N ~~ §~ a:': ~.. ;~ ~I oel) :;;~ CW w% tñ 2 eI) o c w U (I) U ~ 1&1 Z a ~ ~ æ W ID o CD &AI ~ t; ~ .- :;) I&. ~ ~ 0 ~t- ~z ~~ Iii t- o Z ~ 5 ~ ii :; r IX 'õ c o 0'- l -. .... .. c o ..- ... z t °i ~ ! · .c ... S i · . U "0 C · .f :¥"' ; · ! .!!. ca o~ OJ ~ i c O¡ -8 .! >- . E .,. ë :J 8 ~ Š N o U g 0 °i è 0- 0 x ~ -8 :ë .- ... . -5 ~ OJ :! ~ i § 0 § cL . ~ . ii S 'õ OJ >- o- r E 0( ð . I·. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I .,. ~ J CW) iii .~ w !. 5 ! fiJ ~ :x: 'õ (.) r en ¡ ::J 1WC.o7M 1· J 'Ii· tit )1 I~ê !J! I~ o t,j .f 1·1i ~ i~J ~ c 8JJ i j o 0 LO C1\ . . \.0 C1\ \.0 C1\ r-i o 0 o t'- . . Lf') 0"\ \0 0"\ \0 N , r-i o 0 o 0 . o 0 o 0 o 0 , , LO M . . . M :>100 (Ö 0"\ :E ...-t .µ en o '8 U ..... -I ~r-ttl. ~ ~ .~ i [ .1 .! & ..-t .!! I I .~ è)1'§~! , ~ ~ . .. ~ I I .- &so.¡ :J e- !I r 0- ¡~;fl J'I~!i ó6a~¿: ~ ~ ~ . . . . . . . . l .DA_ B I ! f !- 15 ~ ! Ii o~ e. ! j ø . .- .~ ¡ !!.z~ ë . E Q. os i ! . ! · :J ë ,~ · c i~ s:. 8 · 0- ¡¡ 5 . .I I 1 i ~ j i ~ en :z: Raæ~~i~! o ~ . \.0 '-0 N o t'- . qt \0 0"\ , r-4 o o o o o · , 00 5~ ! §:a a:': ~ m ;-1 ..,,1 c ~ ... u oel) =t C w wX tñ ~ en o C w U en U ~ &II Z 6 ~ ~ æ W III o · III ~ = ~ ... :) &&. ~ ~ 0 .."... g~ t-... W t- O Z ! 5 ~ . 3 r a:: '& c .2 J. " 4.. -¡ c o 0';: · z ö c o¡ .2 o -- · -5 S .. vt · U 'a C .. J ~ o~ :J · ;; ~ ca oS °i ~ i c '¡ ¡ .! >- · E '" ë :J o U ~ Š N ... o ~ g Q ~ª g ~ ~ ~ &. CIa · .. -= ~ .j ì ~ ð cø § 0 § 0.: · ~ . 7i g 'õ 1: >- 0- ~ ~ c c3 . I,. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I . .. . -- . - .. - . :) ~ j CW) :: f. 5 I fa ~ :r: '5 (.) r en ¡ :J ~ ,-¡. i-I ·1 I 1~ ¡1~ g III~ 1 J o J~ g o LO , r--- "-' :>1 "" o 0 LO LO . . r--- \0 qt \D N ...... o LO o o . r--- o N , qt . M M M o M o o . o o o , LO . . . ,..... r--- ~ III ; J'I.Ii · ì~1 ~ Q 8)1 a z ..¡J C/} o U) u ~ r-t .r-f res :I: . r-f -" ~ è3 c: H qt ex> 0'\ ,..... '1l 1 i E" 8 i ¡ ·1 ~ II ~ I \ R ~ o o . o I'- o o . o qt r-t o LO o o . o o LO , M . .. . . . . . . . . qt ex> 0'\ r-t .Iii I r .- i 5~;fl~ i .D Ii) ) u~cnCJ w a §I ë . it E c: a. O¡ 0:; E i' ¡ J t I ~ ! .§! ~.è i¡;i~ !cZ~~~ I Iii ~ j ( > en ~ Ra~~~~i! o o . ~ ex> qt o Ln . o co \0 qt o o . o o o , \0 ,..... 5~ §~ a:.. ~. c ..I ~ :I ~] C Co) ~en ... -. Cl)t; cw wx Iñ ~ en o C w U en U ~ w Z Õ ~ ~ æ w CD o · w ... ... x ~ eft t- o :) II. ... 2 0 ~.... cz ....~ ~A. ~ o z ª 5 ~ .. ... 3 r a: o c 02 j. ~ 0,. Ii c: o 0.. .. z èit c: '¡ .2 :2 . £ g .. VI ... U "0 c: .. I ª -; . ~ !!. at ~ "¡ :t i c O¡ .g .! >- . e .. ë :J o u ~ Š N o U g 0 ~ª g ... & ~ c : ~ -5 ~ O¡ i i š 113 § 0 § cL . è .. ¡¡ ä o 0: >- .- ~ ~ c S . I·.' .\ Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I 'MIC..o7M P.ot ø of 18 ~ P) . CD W .... :) Q w % U en 'Bi- 8 ·1 i.i· )1 I~l 'Ill g ...t- j .~ ! - .. ~ '8 r ¡ :J t,j ~ 11-' ~ ì~J ; c ,.... ~ 8JJ i ~ o 0 o 0'\ . . o Cf\ M Cf\ M 1: J o o o f' . <:) f' 0'\ , N . 0'\ 0'\ N o M o o . J~ g o Ò ,....f o o . o o o , M . . . . M co 0'\ ,....f L.I E ,.... m :r::: ~ u ~ ~ I 8 r ~ l 3fIIJ¡~ .µ - ~. .D :! oD OM .!!. U'- i ~ïJ3¡¡;§Ô o ~ ~ 2 f') 0000 0000 . . . . U1U100 N Nf"U1 r-4 r-4 r-t 0000 0000 . . . . U1U100 ~ Nr-iln M r-t N ....-t o 0 N U1 0000 0000 . . . . 0000 0000 U1LnU1Ln , , , , NNI'-I'- . . . . . . . . . . MlnMU1 CX) CX) ex) <X) 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ r-t r-t r-t r-4 J! c . E I f t !I ! t.D ¡Ii i I i ~ ð at .. c 11 'ï c - - !! ~ ! r I ~ ! s ~ J j 5 ~ OJ o~ ~ Q eX ë · E a. ":; i ! · · ... . ::I i "2 . t .2 ~ ; .~ ~ ~ 5 I . .- I 1 i I j t > en % ~~ Ra~~~¡i~ o 0'\ . 0'\ 0'\ co o ['- . 0'\ N ,....f , ~ o o . o o o , M M 5~ §~ cc.. ~cD c.! ~ i ~ -5 0(1) :;r: Cw w% tñ ~ U) o C ~ u en Z ~ w ~ (; ~ c æ w CD o CD W -4 I- X ~ en I- r- ::) "- ~ :I 0 -'I- g~ "'0. W I- o Z ~ 0;; ::» ~ o .. -; ~ a: 'õ c .2 I. .. '0. .. c, .2 · z èå c O¡ .2 :s · oS S .. .. · "ü "a C .. t ª s · ;; .! at "~ O¡ ~ i c .i ~ .! >- .. E . ë ::I o U ~ g N o cj o§ c ã. g "ä ~ . ~ "0 us . .. oS ~ O¡ i ~ ¡ § 0 R 0..: lS .. ... ... . .. ~ .... . f¡ o . >- °ë 8" E ~ c3 . I·. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I :1 I I I Ie I I " .. :! CI) 'J CW) ..:.. .~ MIl :¡¡ W ::» ..J j I C e. W U) % .... (J 0 en ga ¡ :J TWC.Q794 Page lOot 18 .....:- °a" .8 È ~ Jji J~l Ë- I !!~ ä 8 :1 ! .~ :1-- ¡ r &¡. co C!c . .- o~j ! 0 . Q U-J :) c: a:!e c8::1 zcz !I II i-l it J~ JI ·rü o .. . . .. .. .. .. CI) ... c CD ~ E 8 ·S ~ ... . ~ ~ r ë ~iii·1 ! ~ ä ~ ! :J .- .- .- c g i ¡ .~ .- ~~~=§~ ~ U) a c3 a:: Q. fa ;Z i ü) ~ r:: i C') C') C') C') C') C') C') ~ ø:: ~ IL1 ~ ~ ~ 1LJ < CJ) 8 0 o z z CI) 1LJ o Q . .. . ¡ ~ =s -a c... . c ... CD c: E CD Q. E .- ... ~ Ii ... ... .. :I i c .!! § :; "ë :.§ -a c r! I... ~ i I .!! E = Q. Q. ~.gii ä: 0 Õ èD ~ m C') C') C') . . .. .. ... c CD E Q. '3 i -a c . CD ... ~ "ë fit .= = § ! u 8- ~ i ci ic;;~~ C') C') C') C') .... (I) o u -' ~ z ë (; ~ æ Q. 0 .:; ;J. i ~ ~ ~ . CD :z: ~~ ::::;. -c: 5::1 11:": W· ~ID wJ! (1):1 ..,1 ~ii oU) .....: enw C(W w% ~U) CW cnU wZ :z:j "'c WID IDw t-:z: ent- ::::»u. :10 ..It- ~z o~ ...0. W I- o Z ~ o ... ca eo; aa a: 'õ c: o ''; ca '§ ~ ëii c o 0'; ca z Q c "¡ .2 15 -- CD .J::. ... o ... i ca U 't:J c: ca ! ~ ".; ~ CD ... ftI l! Q c: :~ ~ :>. eO i c:: -¡i -8 .! f~ EN 6'-' ge :ë .J::.o ...& 'õ 05 c.J::. .2 :: .ª~ "- .. 1A~ ~cø ca)( -S~ °ic ; a..: Eu; ... "- "'CD C:C :So §~~ ..!!E tiE --0 °u :>.~ 8"= ce5 . I·. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I , 21. ~ttach a summary of an complaints received and interruptions of ..rvice during the I... twelve (12) month, (immediately preceding the filing of this application). None 22. Wa,e, Utlli,¡..: Attach a copy of the most recent survey lener from the Texas [)ep8rtment of Health. See Attached Sswe, Utilities: Attach a copy of the applicable wa.te dilCh.rge permit from the Teu. Water Commission end results of the most recent inspection. N.A. 23. List all shon-term and long-term Notes Payable (debt): SCHEDULE 1·4 Date of I..... Date of Maturity 1. None 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7~ 8. TOTAL Purpose/Use of each Loan: Outatllnding PrincilNl' At End Of Telt Y..r lntef88t Rat. . -Must agree with total of Notes Payable on Balance Sheet, Schedule B-2. (Notes Payable more than one year + Notes Payable less than one year) 1WC'()794 Pee- 11 of 1 e Annua' Payment Principal and Intere8t Payable to Whom I·. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I 24. 8. Cash in bank balance as of rate filing = $ 5, 0 0 0 . 0 0 b. Reserve account/time deposits as of rate filing = . - 0 - 25. Complete where applicable: 8. Total Water Purchased b. Total Water Pumped c. Total Water Consumed d. Total Water Customers Served e. Total Water Customers Served f. Average per Customer Consumption 8.530.6 = gallons during test year. = 2 9 , 12 7 , 000 gallons during test year. = 2 8 , 253 , 190 gallons during test year. .258 at beginning of test year. 276 = = at end of test year. gallons/month for 3/4 inch or smaller meters. g. Is test year annual growth representative of future annual growth? Yes x No If no, explain why growth will increase/decrease in relation to the test year. Economic conditions vary. Growth will fluctuate with general economic conditions of central Texas. h. Average monthly consumption per customer (3/4 inch or smaller meter) for each of the two years prior to the test year = 850 0 gallons per month. - = 8 5 0 0 gallons per month. Please explain the reasons for significant variations in usage over these years. 26. How many customers used less than the gallonage included in the minimum monthly bill during the months of: November h 4 , December 6 4 , January 6 4 , and February 6 4 1 27. a.· Test Ve.r Water Customer Breakdown Meter Size Number of Customer. Total V.ar Ended Customer. Added During reat Ve.r Cuatomer. LOlt During Teat Ve.r 5/8" 3/4" 258 18 276 1" 1-1/2" 2 (other) Dry Taps TOTALS b. If sewer service is provided, attach a similar customer breakdown for sewer customers. Not provided c. Do variations in meter size reflect variations in consumption demand? If no, explain. X Yes No. All 3/4" Meter 28. Is applicant and/or its owner(s) engaged in activities other than providing water and/or sewer service? X Yes No. If yes, explain. Provide well service, construction, repair and operation for water systems owned by others. TWC-0794 Pege 12 of 18 I,', . Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I ,I I I I Ie I I ~9. In 8 situation where a company has added or lost 8 lubst.ntiel number of cUltomers during or subsequent to the telt vealr, it is appropriate to base the increase requested on reateted revenues. " r....ted r.venue, ar. used in thia application. plea58 answer thi. question: Using the formula below, provide a computation for restated te.t year revenue. assuming that the current number of customers had been served throujl~out the test yea,. . 320 . . . Current number of customer. Test year monthly minimum r.t. + 12 = . month. See Attachment "C" 30. Using the proposed rate structure, what change in annual operating revenue i. reque.ted? Provide detail, of calculations including: . Annual Operating Revenue at Proposed Rates (Should equII item 31. line a, column C) Operating Revenue during Test Period per Books or Restated Test Year Rt!venue8 from item 29 (Revenue should be excluaive of fee.) Projected Change (Should equal increase in revenues per proposed published notice) . . . . Average monthly usage per customer above the minimum .... 1,000 Current number of customers Test year gallonage rate Restated teat year revenue. 12 months = . . 44,247.55 · 95,218.56 · 44,247.55 · 50,971.01 Explain how annual operating revenue at proposed ratel was determined, including computation. 320 . Number of customers 15.00 , ~equested minimum rate . . . + 320 Number of customers 1.50 Requested gallonage rate 6,531 Average monthly usage per customer above the minimum 1,000 . . . . 1WC-Q794 '.130118 12 months 57,600.00 Revenues from minimum bill = . 12 months = ~7,618.50 Revenues from exc... gallonage .95,218.56 Annual operating revenue at propoaed rat... I·. .' Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I I . e I I 31. Explain in detail why a rate change is needed. Be specific. Provide documentation and date of changed circumstances which ceused you to file for a rate change. For example. if purchased water coats increased during the test period, provide an amended contract and effective date of change. If unusual operating expenses have been experienced, provide receipts of work performed or details of the cost end nature of unanticipated expenses. In o,d., for CO$ts to IHI applop,iate/'lIlCcounted lOT, thellpp/ic.nt should plQvide inlOl'IIM,ion so that actual and expected CNt. a,. known and fTH lIslHabl. in do"", terms .. The following schedule should be completed showing how the additional revenues are to be used. Column A will be the same as Schedule A with the exception of 8 and t. which should coincide with Schedule 8-4. Column B is used to show increases or decr.a..s in expenses due to chang.. which occur .fte, the test period .nd .re known IInd measurable. Column C should be the sum of A 8& B which would reflect. test period including all changes in levels of expenses to the date of the rate filing. Amounts shown in Column B should be fully explained and computations shown. For example. if purchased water rates increase on the day after the te.t period. compute the annual coat for the amount purchased at the new rate and show the total amount in Column C, the incr.... over the te.t period amount in Column Band the test period amount in Column A. If the company uses the NARUC system of accounts. the appropriate NARUC expense accounts may be substituted for the following account classifications. Note: If both w.ter and sewer rate or tariff chans- .... ....ueated. ....te lChedula muat be com...... for uch -vetem. Operating Revenues: Sales (Water or Sewer) Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages Contract labor Purchased water for sale to customer. Chemicals and treatment of water Utilities (electricity) Repairs and maintenance (supplies) Office expenses Accounting and legal fees Insurance Regulatory expense (Rate Case) Miscellaneous expenses TOTAL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (Sum of b through m) Other Taxes (payroll, ad valorem. etc.) TWC Gross Receipts Asse8sment (1/6 of 1 % of annual revenues) Depreciation and amortization Federal income taxes NET OPERATING INCOME = RETURN (a - m -n - 0 - p - q) Principal Payments Interest Payments TWC-Q794 PIIge 14 of 18 A 12 Month Teâ Period ,40.304.00 b19,250.00 c 'II . 99.00 ,15,985.00 g 900.00 h 1,326.00 I 150.00 j It I 723.00 m38,433.00 n 1.923.00 () p 2.534.30 q r (2.586.30) I t . C Known .nd Adjuated U.......bIe Amounta Ch.ng.. A.Ø 54.914.80 95.218~56 23,565.60 42,815.60 15.00 114.00 500.00 16,485.00 2,500.00 3,400.00 4.134.00 5,460.00 400.00 550.00 1,400.00 1.400.00 2.500.00 2,500.00 250.00 973.00 35.264.60 73.697.60 3,584.00 5,507.00 58.70 158.00 333.00 2,867.30 1.000.00 1.000.00 14.574.26 11,987.96 I·· Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I 32. This space is provided for the explenation(s) and comput8tion(a) of the chenge(l) reflected in Column B .bov.. An.ch adåitional sheets. it nece...ry. The principle charge relates to addition of staff and overhead to provide for smooth and continuous operation of the system. 33. Complete the following IChedule for new inveated cepital. 01 rete be..: Note: If both water and ...., rete or .rIff ..... .. ~. .....- eched..... mu8t be completed for MCh eyñIm. . Plant in service Less: Accumulated depreciation Net plant in service Ca-b) Construction-work-in-progreas Working cash allowenc8 (= to 1/8 operations and mainte..nc8) Materials and supplies inventory Prepayments Less: Deferred feder.1 income tax.s D.ferred investment tax credits Contributions in aid of constr,uction Net Invested Capita. (Rate Base) Cc + d + e + f + g - h - i - j) 86,500.00 23,904.40 62.595.60 8. · b. C c. · d. · 8. · f. · g. · h. ( Î. ( j. ( k. · 9,212.20 500.00 72.307.80 34. Please indicate the rate of return desired on net invested cepital to produce the amount requested for net operating income/return on line r. column C in item 31. Pi.... exp"in why thi, rate of return ¡a appropriate for the utility. Fifteen percent Mr. McKee has invested all cash into system and feels that this is a fair rate of return for the risk involved. 36. Plea58 make any additional comments you f..1 are neceaaary to support this epplication. including unique characteristics of the lyMem not covered .IHwher. in thi. .ppIiCfltion. Mr. Mckee has personally operated the systems since they were constructed, performing the maintenance, operation and con- struction himself. The bookkeeping and billing were done by family members. The systems did not pay normal cost for these operations, but instead benefitted from the work that McKee performed at reduced rates. Mr. McKee also performs well service work and other water related construction for other systems. This work was charged to the water systems at a rate only to recover the cost of materials and not normal reasonable labor rates. Increase cost of materials and electric power through the "." last ten years have caused the cost of operation to increase to the point that the systems no longer support themselves at the current rate, even with the benefit of Mr. McKee's reduced cost of labor and maintenance. Mr. McKee is contemplating retirement and is no longer in a position to perform all the work himself. A 'rate increase is necessary to provide the capital needed to properly operate and maintain the systems, and provide continuous service. The last rate increase obtained by McKee Water Company was in 1976 1WC-0784 Pete 16 of " I,. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I AFFIDAVIT STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF Tar rant I, D.C. McKee , being duly sworn, file this application as the Owner of the Applicant, and in that capacity I am authorized to file and verify all data in this application. I am personally familiar with the books and records from which information herein wa. secured. I personally computed or supervised the preparation of this application. All maner...t forth are true and correct, and accurately repr...nt the financial condition of Applicant. ~~~M~ AfFIA SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, a Notary ,Public in and for the State end County above named, this \ 0 ~~ day of - .. tiO\JcL\A. ~~ . 19 ð ., My Commission expire.: ú-l0 --8& (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC in and for ~ (Yd ~ County, Texas ~ t\ \\ð~ \...<1(L¡ ~ No .. ,¿ TWC-0784 p.... 11 of 11 10, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ATTACHMENT wA" Existing Rate Structure: Rock Harbor o - 3,000 gal. 3 - 6,000 gal. 6 - 10,000 gal. 10 - 14,000 gal. Over 14,000 gal. Reconnect Fee Tap Fee $ 6.50 $ 0.90/1000 $ 0.80/1000 $ 0.70/1000 $ 0.45/1000 $ 10.00 $250.00 Southwood, Smithfield, Oak Hills, Cross Timbers o - 3,000 gal. 3 - 6,000 ga,.l 6 - 10,000 .gal. Over 10,000 gal. Reconnect Fee Tap Fee Meter Installation $ 7.00 $ 0~90/1000 $ 0.75/1000 $ 0.90/1000 $ 10.00 $250.00 $ 10.00 I. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ATTACHMENT "an Proposed Rate Sturcture: o - 2,000 gal. in excess of 2,000 gal. Tap Fee Reconnect Fee Meter Installation Returned Check $ 15.00 $ 1.50/1,000 $250.00 $ 25.00 $ 10.00 $ 15.00 I·, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ATTACHMENT ·C· Restated Test Year Revehues: Aver~ge consumption: 8,531 gal./Conn. Current Number of Customers - 320 Rock Harbor 64 x $6.50 x 12 = $ 4,992.00 64 x 3 x $0.90 x· 12 = $ 2,073.60 64 x 2.53 x $0.80 x 12 = $ 1,554.43 Sub total $ 8,620.03 Others 256 x $ 7. 00 x 12 = $ 21,504.00 256 x 3 x $0.90 x 12 = $ 8,294.40 256 x 4.53 x $ 0 . 7 5· ' X 12 = $ 5,892.12 Sub Total $ 35,627.52 Restated Test Year Revenues $ 44,247.55 I·. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ATTACHMENT "D" . . ANTICIPATED CHANGES IN EXPENSES b. Anticipated Sa¡aries and Wages: Certifies Operator Office Personal (20 Hr/Wk) ($8.00/Day) (52) Maintenance, Meter Reader (40 HE/Wk) ($8.00/WK) (52) Sub Total F.I.C.A., Taxes, Holidays, etc. Total g. Anticipated Repairs & Màintenance Southwood Well Repair Smithfield New 15,000 Ground Storage Tank One Booster pump, Rework Manifold Cross Timbers- Repair Ground Storage Tank New 7~ H.P. Well Pump New Master Meter Oak Hills Repair Ground Storage Tank Repair Well Total $ 14,000.00 5,200.00 16,640.00 35,840.00 3 , 7 50 -·0 0 42,815.60 $ 1,500.00 10,000.00 500.00 3,900.00 150.00 100.00 500.00 $ 16,650.00 I·. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I h. Office Expense Rent 12 mo. @ $275.00 Office Supplies 12 mo. @ $25.00 Phone 12 mo. @ $30.00 Answering Service 12 mo. @ $55.00 Postage 12 mo. @ $70.00 = $ 3,300.00 = 300.00 = 360.00 = 660.00 = 840.00 Total $ 5,460.00 I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I T exa~ Department of Health Robert Bernstein, M.D., F.A.C.P. Commissioner November 21, 1985 1100 West 49th Street Austin, Texas 78756 (512) 458-7111 Robert A. Maclean, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Professional Services Hermas l. Miller Deputy Commissioner Management and Administration Mr. Daniel C. McKee, Owner McKee Water Service Company Route 21, Box 126 Fort Worth, Texas 76180 Subject: Public Drinking Water Supply Rock Harbor Estates (I~ #1110024) Hood County, Texas Dear Mr. McKee: On October 3, 1985, our repre~entative, Mr. Glenn R. Heath. Jr., P.~., in company with Mr. Bob Hundley, completed a sanitary survey of the subject water system. As . a result of this survey, your attention is directed to the following items of non-compliance with State Statutes and this Department's regulations: 1. Monthly Reports of Water Works Operation must be compiled and a copy submitted regularly each month to the Division of Water Hygiene. Texas Department of Health, 1100 West 49th Street, Austin, Texas 78756. 2. Well #2 unit must be protected by an intruder resistant fence or enclosed in. a locked, ventilated well house to exclude possible contamination or damage to the facilities by trespassers. 3. The McKee Water Service Company must have an agreement with each water customer that would allow an inspection of the individual water facilities prior to providing service-to insure that no substandard material was used and to prevent any possible cross-connections or other undesirable plumbing practices. In conclusion, we wish to express the thanks and appreciation of our representa- tive for the courtesies extended him during this survey. Should clarification of any of the items listed above be desired. please contact Irvin J. Turner, P.E., Regional Director for Environmental and Consumer Health Protection, 2561 Matlock Road, Arlington, Texas 76015, AC 817/460-3032. Sincerely, ~fC),J~þ James E. Pope, P.E., Chief Surveillance and Technical Assistance Branch Division of Water Hygiene GRH/pgb cc: Hood County Health Authority Public Health Region 5 I·. ' Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Texas. Department of Health Robert Bernstein, M.D., F.A.C.P. Commissioner 1100 West 49th Street Austin, Texas 78756 (512) 458-7111 May 3, 1982 Robert A. Maclean, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Professional Services Hermas L. Miller Deputy Commissioner Administration and Management Mr. Daniel C. McKee, Owner McKee Water Service Company Route 21, Box 126 Fort Worth, Texas 76180 Subjec't: Public Drinking Water Supply Smithfield - Briscoe Addition (ID #2200021) Tarrant County, Texas Dear Mr. McKee: On March 16, 1982, our representative, Mr. Herman K. Clark, P.E., in company with you, made a sanitary survey: of the subject water system. As a result of this survey, the following items are transmitted for your favorable consideration-so that your water system may be operated and maintained in accordance with the requirements for the Department's current "Rules and Regulations for Public Water Systems". 1. The chlorination facilities must be operated gO as to maintain a chlorine residual of 0.5 mg/l in the far reaches of the distribution system at all times. 2. Monthly Reports of Water Works Operation must be compiled and a copy submitted regularly each month to the Division of Water Hygiene, Texas Department of Health, 1100 West 49th Street, Austin, Texas 78756. 3'. A concrete sealing block extending at least 3 feet from the well in all directions, with a minimum thickness of 6 inches and sloped to drain away from the well at not less than 0.25 inches per foot, must be provided around the well head for Well #2. 4. Well #2 must be provided with a screened casing vent, which is faced downward and located and elevated so as to minimize the drawing of contami- nants into the well. The screening must be l6-mesh or finer corrosion resistant screen. s. The roof hatch on the ground storage tank at Site #1 must be kept locked at all times to prevent any contamination from entering the water supply from outside sources. 6. The overflow pipe on the ground storage tank at Site #2 must be protected by 16-mesh or finer corrosion resistant screening. I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Texas .Department of Health Robert Bernstein, M.D., F.A.C.P. Commissioner June 29, 1984 11 00 West 49th Street Austin, Texas 78756 (512) 458-7111 Robert A. MacLean, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Professional Services Hermas L. Miller Deputy Commissioner Management and Administration Mr. Daniel C. McKee, Owner McKee Water Service Company Route 21, ßox 126 Fort Worth, Texas 76180 Subject: Public Drinking Water Supply Southwood Addition (ID #2200108) Tarrant County, Texas Dear Mr. McKee: On April 24, 1984, our representative, Mr. Herman K. Clark, P.E., in company with you, made a sanitary survey' ,of the subject water system. As a result of this_ survey, your attention is directed to the following items of non-compliance with State Statut~s and this Department's regulations: 1. Monthly Reports of Water Works Operation must be compiled and a copy submitted regularly each month to the Division of Water Hygiene, Texas Department of Health, 1100 West 49th Street, A~stint Texas 78756. 2. The chlorination facilities must be operated so as to maintain a chlorine residual of 0.5 mg/l in the far reaches of the distribution system at all times. 3. The well units must be protected by an intruder resistant fence or enclosed in locked, ventilated well ;houses to exclude possible contamination or damage to the facilities by trespassers. In conclusion, we wish to express the thanks and appreciation of our representa- tive for the courtesies extended him during this survey. Should clarification of any of the items listed above be desired, please contact L. D. Thurman, P.E., Regional Director for Environmental and Consumer Health Protection, 701 Directors Drive, Arlington, Texas 76011" AC 817/460-3032. Sincerely, ~~~ (~ C/}//df!It.,v A James E. Pope, P.E., Chief Surveillance and Technical Assistance Branch Division of Water Hygiene HKC/pgb cc: Tarrant County Health Department Public Health Region 5 I I I I I I Ie I I I I 'I I Ie I I Texas Department of Health Robert Bernstein, M.D., F.A.C.P. Commissioner 1100 West 49th Street ' Austin, Texas 78756 (512) 458-7111 Robert A. Maclean, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Professional Services Hermas l. Miller Deputy Commissioner Management and Administration June 15, 1984 Mr. Daniel C. McKee, Owner McKee Water Service Company Route 21, Box 126 Fort Worth, Texas 76180 Subject: Public Drinking Water Supply Oak Hills Mobile Home Park (ID #2200109) Tarrant County, Texas Dear Mr. McKee: On April 24, 1984, our representative, Mr. Herman K. Clark, P.E., in company with you, made a sanitary survey_of the subject water system. As a result of this survey, your attention is directed to the following items of non-compliance with State Statu~es and this Department's regulations: 1. The chlorination facilities must be operated so as to maintain a chlorine res~dual of 0.5 mg/l in the far reaches of the distribution system at all times. 2. The well unit must be protected by an intruder resistant fence or enclosed in a locked, ventilated well house to exclude possible contamination or damage to the facilities by trespassers. 3. Your water system fails to meet this Department's "Minimum Water Quantity Requirements for Public Wa~er Systems". These requirements include the following: a pressure tank capacity of SO gallons per connection In conclusion, we wish to express the thanks and appreciation of our representa- tive for the courtesies extended him during this survey. Should clarification of any of the items listed above be desired, please contact L. D. Thurman, P.E., Regional Director for Environmental and Consumer Health Protection, 701 Directors Drive, Arlington, Texas 76011, AC 817/460-3032. Sincerely, J E. pope~.E~~ Surveillance and Technical Assistance Branch Division of Water Hygiene HKC/pgb cc: Tarrant County Health Department Public Health Region 5 I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Texas .Department of Health Robert Bernstein, M.D., F.A.C.P. Commissioner June 15, 1984 1100 West 49th Street Austin, Texas 78756 (S12) 458-7111 Robert A. Maclean, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Professional Services Hermas L. Miller Deputy Commissioner Management and Administration Mr. Daniel C. McKee, Owner McKee Water Service Company Route 21, Box 126 Fort Worth, Texas 76180 Subject: Public Drinking Water SURply Cross Timbers Addition (ID #2200019) Tarrant County, Texas Dear Mr. McKee: On April 24, 1984, our representative, Mr. Herman K. Clark, P.E., in company with you, made a sanitary survey ?f the subject water system. As a result of this survey, your attention is "directed to the following item of non-compliance with State Statut~s and this Department's regulations: The chlorination facilities must be operated so as to maintain a chlorine res~dual of 0.5 mg/l in the far reaches of the distribution system at all times. In conclusion, we wish to express the thanks and appreciation of our representa- tive for the courtesies extended him during this survey. Should clarification of the item listed above be desired, please contact L. D. Thurman, P.E., Regional Director for Environmental and Consumer Health Protection, 701 Directors Drive, Arlington, Texas 76011, AC 817/460-3032. Sincerely, Ja s E. pope~E~~~ Surveillance and Technical Assistance Branch Division of Water Hygiene HKC/pgb cc: Tarrant County Health Department Public Health Region 5 I·· Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ì ,~, . . , :. ,. ... ô '" . . u CJ ! z CD c( GJ x ,... . . u u en ". e> )( c( t' . ~ x w , . : '- ~ t- " G) ë z" en CL t- w cr.: '- ~ i It) 0 ~ --- &AI to- G 0 u cr.: (þ : ~ :; 0 M ~ ~ It) &AI , u) '" U . w ;:) e~ ~ CD '" <II( --- &AI 0 ~ u :J w , CD g I . cr.: I: W CJ Ii; z : Õ <II( .... Z w ~ i I III : " ~ : - : ~---._--- . ~ Ò~ª Z-fØ_ - .- .... 1ft >=:e~~ a:~.ë* O.ëð· CJð~! ~~~:; CJ ~ ti .., .ø(þ~: Z·;;N ......ti) J:)(Wc-t O~8'" u ~ I! õ [J ] .. i ~ 1 'ë a ~ f e H .J t;¡ ì 1 1 "I r :§ u ~ . .. --. .... --..- .-.. w w \ - Õ o VJ > g rf) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \'6:E ~ ,,0 ff: " > <II( CL W U) -",', <II( w ~ Q. ---------.- ~ ~IUiJ 'i~~ ~I ¡IH, "~iï Ii lei; hh~ ,9! s.. It J ! I 81 ;- f'li! ¡f I~I CI Jf~¡ 191~a ,Iii! HH! ,;¡~!J ï'lfi=' I ·11 , 0 I~I - :f ¡of a z:! II ili !;!'" IIJ~ fax: ';11 ~ ... '. ~. '.' . :-., " .! *' ,- '.. . '. . ' .. :: ~ .... ...., .. .... ..' :...... ..; , " -.- ...,.. . . . , . - . U') :.' .~ :>'~. C\J :~~:. . . -. ... "~..' ~ ~:~. .~ .... .. I·, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I 0 9LJ ~ ~I c -ë ¡ Jš li j; ::E ... > CD 0 lie au III Ž ~ « ~ 2 .. = 0 ... ..J u ~ Go- c( U ~~~ ... « ow ... CD ~ ~4(::: ... -'X' en ..~~~ '" ;:) 2 ... en !ž tñ%~ « Q c 4(....e 8 > _wa:¡ C) at ~ =~ ' S c ò Z au S a: a: a: 0 :> ... ~ w i a: 0 z « en ~ . ë 0') -' ("t') u I. ..J 0') 0 -' 11 z s « 1.1) a: ~i a: ~~ 0 N ~ C ¡ U « N ---- ...--- -~ -.-------.- -----__·.~~____..~_._4__._._ ~ ; ~ ~ "- ~ :> ci S « "" z ... w u 0 > ~ .. 0 ...: ~ 0 ~ .... ø:G: ~ - 0 ""au 0 r--- w oj ~ U ::~ 0- cr:> '> Q~~ 0- Oz >t i ~ <en· LU ø.. ~~~ a:w U ø.. z~~ r 11 ~~ õ ~ ~ -:II It.., rn Ocr > o;¡5 ð~ ~ ~ <~ «w uo~ .« ÞOOO4 õ~~ ....:I g¡f-c":' ~ ~~ ~ ::> ~~ CI) QO < I ~ ~ < ./ ~ j ~ : i : Q coo ~ ~ 0 ~ i ¡ ~ t š õ ~ : t ~ 1 ¡; ... ,0 - ;.;g[~ ~.. o-"'...c .oc:¡u >- a!'o~. ...u~ 41 ¡¡¡!! ¡ õ~Eo- -~~. ¡1;~¡~ ~ÕCO~ Ë am if ~ ~~~i~ ~~ Z ~~t~~ O~ a c u 0 V ~g ~ fH~~ g ;~6ÞG"" ~; ~~~õ~· ~; i~~!~ 00 =',~(- ;! ;!fl¡ !i O.c~. g~ ~~!3: it ¡¡I!! ii ~~i~~ ªi i~~~£ ð! I ~~: I I; ~=i~!.~! õoø~"'.·.. ~;:;~=:~: ~~~~~~·ë~ . Q& J~£..CJ .; .. .. . I·, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I ~ ~ " ~ I ci z w ~ 0 > I ~ ~ I ~ o too- t.) :::g: >e Q~~ ~ ~~o w ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ zc.:J~ I Õ of-ot&.1 > 00 ~~:& ~ ~ u~'" Or-- ..... -~~ ~ ~f-o- e:: Qq~ I ::> ~~ en aQ ~ < Ie I I ,...--- .....--. .---_. ---.. --.. ... ~~ !h Ç) , DC I ' . ( In I ¡ , c.. I) I 000 \. " , I - r--- '.... ~ , , I I I "5' I . ..i ~ :l r.~ Ee ~~ ,,! I ... . J;: QJ , \ I ... H r\ I I~ el' \ ~. :- : _L ~ ~ ~ ~I '0 ......... § or1 -.-4 .... ~'\ :~ p ~ 1\ \ Q:~~ ~I .... I p. -U ~ - § a (. u to ~ r ~ '") "t ' i-f Q ,~ I 1J ~: ~ , r\ ~ ~ :;l- (\ I ~ '..) ë ..- ,', ; .s .. t - 'U I.. n ~ . 0- ~" a IJ 1-: .. ~ ~ .( I ~ I'l' ~ I 11 , I . . - ~ : It~ .J ,Q >< ... ~ 11 ... tJ J..t IV :i (' ) &J "t:I ..; ~ .. " II I f; ....... ~ h' .0< P \'} > II ë. ~ I -* . ~ ~ {I N "f:"1 ~' ~ I ~ ~ . , ~ ¡ rl , ~d -' 'I ~ ~ ~ wI" . I I I ! I; f1L~ ~ ~ ~ i -Ii ~ III ~- ~C'J o.q- ~o ~ 8 i ~~~ cn¡~ ~ ~Ñz ~ ....... ~ ~rx ~~~ ~ t: x ....~-- _...'.. - ~. . , I ~ I 0 It ~ cD q ..... 0 mffi j' ..... 0 w ~~ . Q.. !!: Oz ~ I en I ïl !J ~a: ð~ 1('" . lit I III u .. - ,.. .. . ... . w' .. ... --. . . .. w . .. Jo4 .. 0 " . .. CO .. - ,. - .. - " Õ t .. .¡ . . ' , r, ~:j .'J} .. , .., " ~ ! : ; c - .:It g I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. u v v .. ~ i ë ~sg~. : I "; ~ ¡; ... ,,, s ;.;gf~ ~ I¡fli ! ~~~~~ ~ ~~Ë~! ~xfi~ !g~3~ n~~~ if ~ ~~:!J~ ~~ ~ WHH ~ mnn oa.... . -. ;~~¡~ £~ ~~~Ë~ ~i nm !i o~c~. .,s ;~¡~; æ¿ ..~o_~~ª; ~; --.. f; m~~ ~~ ~~~'~~ ~i .~I&1 :,E ~ 0 . .... c ~ I ~~: I I; ~~j~!.E~ :;~~õ;;~ i~i~~~f~ 1£ a.. J....:II. V .; .. .. . 4~·· .~! 1· I·. f I """;1 ¡ .. I.. Ie '\ ;~ I,.,' 1 "; \ ',J , ....¡.:i~~ .-¡< ": ~ , I~~,.:·'i g ~ I :\'F~ . ~- J ' ~~ ..... ~. ! '" ~':;: ... 8;i' : t; ii >' ~'~ i! Ð ~ ~ ~¡~~' ~ g_ ~. ~ .tiL,.: Z ~,.~giç ¡:.. ~~ IIt- ' ~': :~~ ~'. ~ ~ ~ 'j' 'oj. ~II _'! r{~:~\ 'I' .:f> -. '(~..: : o t- o W Q. Go i I I I I I I Ie o i ~ · :'~'\ t .' \ ~ ·0 I- ---9' U ~ . . .. ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I 0 Z w ~ 0 I :> ~ S 0 I ~ I- .... 0 0 t--.... L&.I U :::?J Q. ~~Ð ~ ~ :I: Þ-J en I W p.. ~~~ (J êJ Z~~ r õ ~ ~f¡J > en ~ ~ U~~ ". AJ ÞOO-4 -~~ ~ ~E-4- I ÞOO-4 E-4 ~~ =::> : rn eo ~ W ~ · .... .. Ie < · .... .. .. ~ .... · . .., · .... .. ..' " -: · · : I .. .. ~ .. .. -- .. .. . I ~ , - . .... I 0 9U ~ r : wi U .. .... · · ., .. t" . e- N . · ... s ~ .. ..... ., 0 . · a - w - w .... ... .. .. u e- o It . ------..------- ïl " ,..!. :) , \. .. .' 4 \, .' r ': 'i '" t ~.: 1 ..: , lJ ," ~ ~ '... . ¡ .. . >- Q c: tI I,) ~ ~ ; ; .. .. ð ~ ~ s ~ : !.~ ~ ~ g~~ ~.- ;;~&:!~ ~ .~c.v > ~~~4~ ï nm: '~~.:~: i 52Ër; ~ ,~i~~l ; ~~F.~1 ~ ~!~~~ ~g:~~ nm il ~~~¡~ ~~ >- ~~ji~ go Ô ceo:¡u ~~o~ U ~QCr.· _ ... ~... c: n."c~ ~~ ¡~~~~ . ;~..~~ :!:: ..r~~ñ~ ;.~ ~ ~ f. i~ 2 O. :J~1:E_ öc_c...:!.o~ ~~ o u ~~ m ~o: ~..: ... ~,~~...3 ò;;~~.· C õ ~ C' u ..,;;',' ..(~. ~8 :~~ _ - ,Qa. ~i~~: r; u..~ !~ ihU ~i " .~~I&r;~ ~~!!7 ~~ R~iJ!.ii lo,,~ .!a E!ii~;¡i iili!t!~ ..: .. " .. '0 .. ~ . ~ r u ~ c ~ : t:I tI . c: '~ ~u¿ , t -; t ! t ~ . £. ;;>~ ~~~~f a~oJ" Hm .~;; ~..,; ~ 5.~ ~ ~ ~ m~~ o:cF~· ~}:;~~ ~g:2~ E 1_ :8"'",<.~, ~~. ~I-~ ~ ~ oJ . ~~ c( ~~~~f ~g ã ~~1£~ ;'4 ëë :...:m~_qi 0 t.~ ~~~i~ 2~ '~~f. ~~ ~£~;ò ~r ¡I~~¡ ii ; ô ". \~ ~ ~ ~ !~:(5" ,; 1¡lii ~i ..~I:ii ~~ :t£Z;1- 0\1 ~¡~~~ .i~ iñJ~J~¡¡: "._;::'õa~2 f2~i-~~Ë !~liI~~~ .; .. .. .. I·· Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I U) w .... c( U) % UJ c( U S .;t ~ .;t ... (g co ;'1 1 w' 2 . z ~ ,¡! ð m u .¡: .... u>. .!ã. CDc. U):J '-0 CD - ca CD -c ~ ~ to Z ~ ::j>ë ~~ II: Q :J: t- &.LID: e ~~ i u t- ELL 1 :1 I¡ co ~i ! II ! I... co Q S IS; & ÞOo4 S&n&Q &muJ-t- ~ ('tj .0 ai 'P4 ... &n(\J &-t- .,;<Ù .. LLI U ~ ~ U) ~ ~ o ~ i o z :> "- w Œ ~~ Q ~ ¡¡; u I ~:¡.~ I~! t f!h I~~~ .~~¡ J;!- ~¡i: &!.¡ ~'FEt -·'81 g~11 .i~~~ "'Iii .i~I~ ~¡l~ ,!,§ ! > ~ .... 0 .. 0 ~ ffi .. ~ o ~ en ~ o . ~ 0 z w ~ 0 ~N > N ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ .... 0 0 t-.-4 W U :::~ Q. Q. >- ~~5 % ÞOJ ~~~ en W ~ U ~ Z~f04 r õ ::J §:è~ > rn æ ~ fo4.. u~~ ...... -~ t=3 ~ fo4/.... E-e ~~ => ~~ en GO ~ ~ w - þ · < ~ · w - '* · .. teÞ W - .. - tit . · ¡ ~ '.. . . · 0:' 'gLJq, ~ ererera: wwww SInQQ QQ,.....,..... ~o.i 'P4 ... ';'-- * · CD · U · <I (g D:M t-ILLlUJ Z:>(J)OO ....um:J:J ~1""l1.LL m Q nJ UJ-"zz Q soo t- (\J 0: a: wa:...t-t- ...J I ww a~Q.(J)OO (J)Œ(\J::J:J & LLLL Z4'Q (I)...JMQ/SI a (IJ (\J I'J ~1 u-s.ot-t- CJCI . OO( ) .Q~U1(1) *CJO:J:J * (I)( )IXaa, :J: ( ) .JU Ma:l co....>< \DO a U'l1-t- _ma :Jt- XUJE U W :t: :I: t- U.œ .0 0*3 ÞOo4* a:..... t1.l1. · · · · * · :gl " U1 & "- I() & \D co ......cnN ... CD a: Q ~&&& ...J M 1\1 M (\J "J to- .... &1SI(fJUJ CO:J:J 00"'"' --.------. ! : ~ c: "" ~ ~ 0 c ¥ 0 : ~ . C i -u~ >- ¡ ~ : I 1 Co ...." - 2 .g~~ ...~ " -: II' ~ c: .tlc.;v >- ~~Ol" ...u~ Q J ¡¡Iii ; ~i~~~ 0 ~~Ë~! -!~ ~X!¡~ Jgi~~ Ë · ~~m ti ; ~?:~.! E ~ ":i ~~~i~ ~~ ~ ~~j£&~; ä: '~~~~~ ~ð 0 ,¡~~~~ fª ;;~..ð~ .... o~tõc:· :~ ~~~!~ E; :J~~E: 2: 8~5.~õ ~~ ~~il¡ ii ~"-Utl !f ~~~~~ ~; ~~~:~ ~~ ;UH U ~~~~~ =.. ·10 ;e.... lð.~Æ 0" 1 ~~: 1 I; l~¡~!.~& :;~~õ;~2 i~!~Ë~;~ = l¿ i:~~5 I··· Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I .w......,...._ JDWL ~ 4 .. ~.. A.lW411O MUIOII d4 a..... u.:) ~"I 4 X "8 OJ¡\I):)3H '~ . uon::tnpa.td .'f' u, ,oe,.... ,.eCSeJ ~~~,. ~~:~:~,~:~~~ :1.~~~~.:: ~~:: :: '~, 'tJ.~:~'i ,,~:: ..n '01 PMIht~d .... ..oq. .... .w." .'f' '.'f' '.'1'''.:) peue,. Áq.'.14 .141 , · . '~III aINIIft.UW NO ....M~ tIIIt.:)Cu.lall .walftlOWW IØO IAWO II MIM1IM r.:NOA-. 11111 MUM ØlNlYtllIO:):)W . ømr o....nu.. JlIOWYtD..all AWY ,,- -,,' r ) 9~: '-i ç ~~ '. " ~: £-~: Z~¡ "1 ~ ~: ,- j O~¡ '1 6; 8~~ L_ ~ :j t 1 ~I '£ 1 -\: '- r- . /' .". SS1HtSnS ttno" " :,' 3lYr.)ia:lcldY ; ,"t ~ .. , :4l1UOS' ;!r"~ HOSnOlt1.:1 \"tit~~ I'" ':- ~ "I"" ,'.. " '( ~;¡' , I,..... ", ~... .. 'ON ~Ot\N .' ',' ~, . :>:' 03Sd3.:1 j(. ' \f:~;~~,"" rj 6 S t G ·ON , , , "~QYO ONWcUHS ~t 0' ~ J. " ·;.t ,,' 'J~ ¡ð.l. dlH5 ~ :,r)( \, j'1¿ -. :;:. ,¡.' , ' , ,.' ~,,:,~, LO£IL SYX31 'ST1Y:I Y 1JH:KM / (/ ;~. I ·':::::'~NMI~_¡~ii··~·~:~::fi¡~~ŠI"1-'d·W·ñ¡:¡i~i;~3. Ol OìOS r- ------......~_._. _.., -J 4 '2 ë æ c ---l- to -( , " ú o o ~ ~ ~ Hd ~~~~~ , ~. r-. ~~ ,¡ ~~C¡~ F~:~ < c~'~ ~~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ;, :' ..... 'to .L~ ; a;..~~ ~ ~ ~' ¡ ~, gn t: :. .~ -: :.." .... ...... ~J::' S ,': ~:~~f '-~ ~ ~ ~ ~.J ~ ~ ~£:~,i~ i:~ , ~ .. 0" ;,. ? r ( ~. ~ iim ~: f::'~;ò ~~ _~,_~ ~.'.~, F.~;, ~...:.. ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: :, ~ ~ t .' . r- "" ....., ~~~i~ ..~ ~t]:~~ ~~ ~W~ '~~ ¡;¡iim II: c.6. ~... ~ ... u ~I~ I I LI I' :- ! I · 6 z w U 0 > ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ .... 0 0 r-- w U -~ 0... ~ch ~ ~ 9 t- C'~ I . en "1' en ...J ~~~ w a.. ~ a.. Š~~ I 0 :::> r.n en . ..e > 0:: X ~ ~ <~ UO:::II) o t~ :3 õ~:,\ ~ ~~g ~ tL. I- t· ~ en 00 < ~ ~ ...J ~ .. < · .. . ~ ~' · . .. · ... - - . I- · · ø · - 4 ~ - ~ '" .. - . .. '. . · . 0 .... 9 LJ '.'. Q ~ I 11 ~~ I hl ~ \)1 " I ~ ~I o¡ ~ I ~ r~ t)! 'c , I~I~I ~JI~i\1 ~I ~ ~ i~ I '. }I~! ì~l! ~ ~ . ....... ~'v t"'( I·" Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I N w i 0 fW) w ~~ S 0 CD ~ r() d > "- ~') \ J) õ ~ i ~ a i Q > ~~ N ',) Gv C' ('() ~ ~) ~ ~ ~ i ~~ i ci q ~ ~ tf) ~ . -J ~~ (!) ~~ () ~ V'\ to- ~ l'1)~ cd ~ ? 0; u ~ > fit 8 c( r ~ w ~ W ..J i A. ~ (.., ~ Ii aa u~s Z-- _G - - .... >:e~ u:~¿ O¿5 CJ ~~ ~~~ CJ &A. ." .. at ~ C. ...;;;~ , .... . J. :I:)(W" o.g8" u ~ . II: CW) >- III P) & CD en u ~ ~ ffi Z N ::!: III 0 Š ~ ~ > oð u ! U ~ u~ª Z-CD_ --.....,. >~~= a:~.ë~ O.ë~· CJ~~g ~~e&:¡ CJ'L." 1IØ(IÞ~c. Z;·:: .....J. %)(Wf') ocB8'" u ~ Ii õ o b.. ~ " ~ ~ ~ :~ Q) ~ ~ Q ~. " t- o~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~(1)~ ~ - 0 2. rt\ ). <t. ~ '- ¡QaL\L~ ~ , -I; ð E~/ ~ i:; /0 ~ 0-' ~ I it' j ,), .&'1tal ¡IIi. · Iii! IUd BSII~ II 11 i ~'is~ fit! î il :fl- ItS¡ )'1, J~. ~15il il~i!1 ~I.I 8 ¡¡¡Ell ·~fIH III!!! , 11··1- ~~ ~ :t M J r1 ri ~ffi dUll (I):J: '1 -£ \; àÎ [I , '-i ) I , ~ I ~ ..z- ;?- ,~ :¡:. ~ -. - ~ )< ~ ~; :0-... ~, N - ....-M' ~ \ \ (v)-- ~ f';- C\ Ç)~c\c1r{ C' ':)- <J""- \' . C" \1' ~ ,~ - .....:: , ~ \ñ w 0 W l\ ~ 0 õ > ,") ;;; ~ -J \ ... ~ ;! ~') ... 0 ~~ .... 0; &&. >- i c( A- u w 1 ~ W ..J A. ~ " (Y'\ ~ ",,) a ~ Ot'~(V) "':j- ~ ":j- , - ..., ~ II "6 1'"'6 r"( t"E. ('( ~ <1 :f- ~ ~ - -4. I ~ i~ ~ ~ e ~ HUt 1.&'''IJ 15JI~t is.)! , f~ i I Isl!) 115 'J ¡II: fili) 1IItš f'l! ! iI:il I~S¡ JJi~a 15JJ~! ' Iltjll I ~ ~. I~~II ·.flll lIi!h 'sic,.! Zw 1~ll: ~ ffi I' ill J I. en]: ~.. 'to < '" ~ o \ I f~ ~ " ~ )l ~ ..,:) z ........-. o ;: ~ & : Q Il ~~ II \ , \ It :: ~ , " \ I I I rJ ~ ...,.. ~ ~ <1\ :" , :r ":' z~ ã3 ~~, I", Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I '\, ... ( Y) ; en :J .. Z N III U 0 .~ 00 æ () , G Ù~ª Z..-CÞ_ --......" >=~~~ a:~.ë~ O.c:ð· CJS~g ~~~¡ ii CJ éCl') ",m~at Z··1: ....·th %)(WCl') o c8 ~ CI') u ~ I! õ , ~ ~.. . "';'- ..) t' ~ ~ ~~~o --- ~ ")( ~ '-J 0 )- ~ .i , ~ '0 i <,; 3 ~- ~ ... )- ~ .D~ ~ ~ ~- ~ Æi u .... ~ r- M ~-~ 8 ~ S. ~ :;) '- U r \\ Ltc..,) , - ~~ V\ ~~"~ ~r \-::-r ~L \ I "'- "- , -~ -¡) I e , ~ ;> ø \" L ~ i I J ~ i i ;~ ;- : ~ ~:3)( " '- ~ ó)~~ ~~'i & r i ~~'; " '" ~r f\') Q f) å1 '" o t')o z ..... ~ .~ UJ ~ w 0 ~ > ~ ~ ! m~ ~ ~~ E ~~ II: I&. ~ -c L &II ~ &II ~ 0.. g e.: I - 3 ~ ~ ~ . " !. ~~l '::> ~ -....... - ~\) C to ~ ~ '>'- ') 0 J rl' ~ ,,-.. ~ ~ ~ . ~ . Ji fÍ) ~ ~ ag, , Zlll CJA: -III ·z - I ~ t ~\ ~ ~ 2 f~!1 ¡III! .. få ·'1 Ii !ij tu~ IIJll ,. . fl¡~1 SJ ";15 I ¡~'I If!1 J«!¡ Jsl~' ..llil I t-il I'~!~! ·!jln Ih!il If~!) tihtl "llil w . ...-t u II: >- t 00 C)\" " w Õ III (W) Q.. 2 0 ~~ 0 ! -:t- III en U .. Õ :I 3 z Cò ~ ~ r- ~) \f~ \') ~ ~ ~ ~ > ("" ;;; ~ a: 1 ~ g ~ j w C' \oJ'" - . ,,\'\\ ~ -" ,~ ~~ z N ~ c " .... 0 i~ i ~ ' ,:' ~~ ~"'~:\{, ~ , ~ III t- - C\~ u C) 0 en a \)- ~ ,~ Õ :J \1\ :::~ oð u > ...J ~ IL. æ U > ! ~ tt/. ~ . r 0 w e.: ~ i w C ~ ~ i -:t 3 l\ ~ ... r:! '..") ¡ ~ Øt ú~ª Z..-G_ --......" ..~ ~ ~ ~ ~.ë* o .t:. CJ~~~ ~~~¡ or¡:.CI') IllS CJI ~ at Z;..= .....·tb x)(u.t~ o cß It) o ~ r1("\M I ~ ¡ ~ IUH i " !jut Ii!)! ,Iiil islJi 1- i il~ s¡o~ '1Iji !§ti-1' rl, . 01 r.;, · ¡ iÞ- - I.~ f I I!S¡ IS}~' ,Iiil i'lii¡ il!~h J~h¡ nUh ~ Ircf1l1 Zlll 1111i1 S!ffi II ¡a i J. CI)% 'Jllil ~a c~ '1 - - - ~ aá ~ rr'\ __ rr\ ~ , ~ -... ~ :~ u... ~ I ..... , z 1. < "- 0 t~· ~ : ~1. .:> I \ '" ii "" ............ u 1- J 10 ~ J III \I' t{ ° A\' 0 Q) "- <J fv' t"n ~ x 11 * ~'J ~ v d) Þ- ~ «t ~~ ~ ~ .;¡;... - 2t\ 3 ~ J! q\- \- ð ~Ddu.. ZO 2 ãg ~ t; z ~§, 0 III! a I,·, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I ,·f~~· /" ¡,~ {\.~ '\~ ~I \;/ 1· '1 ; ',-,I ." ,. % , .. '.. , .......... ...... ...... _ ........ IOU .... ......,....... '-'" ....·f.....,oN ,............ I/O............... "' ~ to ............ ~ ~- ....... JOt -......~ '..... 01_.,... ."1 '\ßØ.~.. ~....... '" etQWA....1IIQ I'f "'" eA~ oc '11".' ,......., ''''-' eftO ..... _.-A*Ø"," _A ... ,.. Ot...... ...- Je4 '14 t ð .&Jett~.~ '" ~ eu- ~ ... ..... .., AuW Ollluo UClO 0' IN9 ÞICN 1I'CNIf'I' eOuw\p 0' ~tQft. ~ '...-s 10 UCM....1eCt lnoqll. we':' lOt ~ 1/IJ1Uft.' e UOtI...:JUr.I '8ðuaø .... 0I13eIIIM ION ... to r.JIUO ........ to "Mudd. 01 pefQft. "'''O.U ÐtO^NI 'YJ.OJ. (;'/ 8Ç'1 /11'/ !7'þ -e ç'~ ~&I> r5'~ g~ '/ 't;g'~ 1NnOIW UN ~& 9& JH::IH NÐIS ... 1-, .J 1\ £ ')( ~11 \ "I, r '- r '7_. q f) J ttS) C' "1 ~) 0; o:OW I' 'NVOO 'ow )f:)'1/8 ~ J:)IIW ~ ..0114'..0.10 AdO:) H3W01Sn:> St6t~ С~ .,iI.llnN 1I~IOANI o ~ I ? L .' 1 .1 ~ '.2 r""' ~ r:IY~ÇJ ,t'..L.cJ d ,,-J J/J rv tiQ ~ J ~ 010105 Ot UN 0 "'L-er;" OJ,e" eeeZ-fl:C tcnoL Xl. '41JOM 'I;t 'e"v ...3 9081 aLtO-u 19l Xl. '41J0M 1:1 8L.L xog e:)NI 'AHOÐ3HÐ If NHO~ .r I #" ~ ~ I I I I I I I ,- I I I I I I Ie I I City of Xrth Richland Hills, Texas July 20, 1987 REF: PWL-0062-87 Director of Water Rates and Services Division Texas Water Commission P. O. Box 13087 Capital Station Austin, Texas 78711-3087 Dear Sir: The City of North Richland Hills tèceived a rate change request': to the Texas Water Commission from·Mr. D. C. McKee on this date. r had talked to Mr. McKee's engineer, rtt. William L. Boomer, at an earlier date concerning this request and he had stated that he was going to request that the City Council of North Richland Hills consider this rate increase. r informed Mr. Boomer at that time that the City would require more information than Mr. Boomer had given to me at the earlier meeting. I also indicated to Mr. Boomer that the Council may want a certified audit of Mr. McKee's system. Since that time I have not received anything from Mr. McKee or Mr. Boomer until I received this notice of rate change request. Based on an average use of 10,000 gallons per meter for domestic purposes, the request would increase rates to 2~ times Mr. McKee's present rates. I would ask that you postpone this request until Mr. McKee has officially petitioned the City Council of North Richland Hills for this rate increase and produce any documentation that he might have to justify an increase of this magnitude. Since his service area within the City of North Richland Hills is also considered the service area of the City, I feel like we should have the right to consider any rate increases he might ask for in order to protect the citizens of the City of North Richland Hills from excessive rates. s~~ G-ene Riddle Director of Public Works/Utilities Ids cc: Mr. D. C. McKee Mr. William L. Boomer, LandCon, Inc. (817) 281-0041/7301 N.E. LOOP 820/P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TX 76118 I .~. ~ I I I I I I I t' I I I I I I I. I I Land DevelopmeGt Consultant,. ~roject Management i· , ~~2C \.\/est Vickery, SUite 201 ::;¡J Bex 331025 ;:Ir: ',J/crtr, ~exas 76163 8~7(7'ê3-C~27 V/nl. L. Boomer) P,E, PreSident LandCon Inc. July 16, 1987 Gene Riddle Public Works Director City of North Richland Hills 7301 N. E. Loop 820 Fort Worth, Texas 76118 Re: McKee Water Company Dear Mr. Riddle: Enclosed is a notice of request for a rate change for McKee Water Company which is being filed concurrently with the Texas Water Commission. This request is for a system wide increase for McKee Water who has several customers located in the CIty of North Richland Hills. Should there be any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, LandCon Inc. ,/Íl - ¡ I ,;) . -¡Þ1 ! i P;IL. ~ l' ,~/ tl"l tJ.~!/l/UL./t..__./ William· L~ '"Boomer, P.E. President cc D. C. McKee I \,', ~ I I I I I I I rt' I I I I I I Ie I I l . Notice to be Provided to Customers and Other Affe~ted Parties. NOTICE OF RATE CHANGE REQUEST D. C. McKee J which operates in Tarrant and Hood County(les) bas filed a proposed rate/tariff change applieation with the Texas Water Commission.' The proposed effeetive date of the rate/tariff change 1s August 24, 1987. The requested inerease in annual revenues over adjusted test year revenues is $24,842.24 (66~)ThI8 change will affect all customers. In the Rock Harbor, Southwood, Smithfield, oak Hills and Cross Timbers Additions. The utility proposes the following rate structure: Meter Size Gallonage Charge $ 1.75 per 1000 gal·. over 3,000 gal. 3/4" Residential - $ 18.00 Min. Bill Tap Fee $ 250.00 Reconnect Fee $ 25.00 Return Check Fee $ 15.00 "The specific rates requested by the utility may be decreased or increased by order of the commission. but in no case will the total amount of rate relief exceed the total amount included in this notice. Persons who wish to complain of this proposed rate change or request a hea~ing on the matter should notify the Texas Water Commission within 30 days of the effective date of the rate change. A request for hearing, 8 complaint. or 8 request for further information should be mailed to the Director. Water Rates and Services Division, Texas Water Commission, P.o. Box 13087, Capitol Station. Austin, Texas 78711-3087." Il,'r ~ I I I I I I I " I I I I I I Ie I I RATE/TARIFF CHANCE APPL fION Class B & C Water and Sewer Utilities File No. Effective Ðate I "t 11" . 1. Applicant D. C. McKee i8 a(n): (Utility Name) ),~ Individual Corporation Member Ownedv WSC -- Partnersbip -- Other Non-Profl~Corporation Other, plea8e explain = Sub Chapter-S COrporation Business Address Business Telephone (81 7) 2 81-1 304 (Area Code-Number) Route 21, Box 126 (Street address must be entered here--P.O. Box may also be entered) Fort Worth ( City) Tarrant (County) Texas 76180 (State and Zip Code) Contact Person: William L. BóoMer: P.E. I.JandCon Inc. (817) 763-127 (Name of Person to be Contacted) (Area Code - Telephone Number) P. O. Box 331025 (Address) Fort Worth (,City) 76163 (Zip Code) Texas (State) 2. List the complete schedule of the present rate structure or applicable tariff provision, including membership, tap, and reconnect fees, ete.. if any. Rock Harbor Southwood, Smithfield, Oak Hi1 First 3000 gal. - $ 6.50 & Cross Timbers 3 - 6000 gal. - $ 0.90 /1000 First 3000 gal. - $ 7.00 6-10,000 gal. - $ 0.80 /1000 3-6000 gal. - $ 0.90 / 1000 10-14,000 gal. $ 0.70 /1000 6-10,000 gal. - $ 75 / 1000 o v e r 14, 000 gal. - $ o. 4 5 / 100 0 0 v e r 1 0 , 000 gal. - $ o. 90,/1 000 Reconnect Fee $ 10.00 Reconnect Fee $ 10.00 . Tap Fee $ 250.0? Tap Fee $ 250.0Q,Meter I~î5·; Li~ttfté ~ðieldliãWrsttud-t.Q¡!'QOor tariff change and the percentage increase · in gross revenue that tbe utility expects the proposed rate structure to furnish as opposed to that furnished by the existing rate structure. (Items shown in 2 above. that, are not being changed should be listed again as unchanged). 3. First 2000 gallons - $ 18.00' allover 2,000 gallons - $ 1.75 / 1000 Tap Fee $ 250.00 Reconnect Fee $ 25.00 Meter Installation $ 10.00 Returned check charge $ 15.00 4. On what date does Applicant intend the proposed rate structure or tariff change to take effect? Äl1g)1!":t- ?4 198.l.- (Please note: The date must be at least thirty-five days after the filing date of the application with the Texas Water Commission in order to satisfy the statutory notice requirements. Applications which do not specify such a date will automatically be asigned an intended effective date thirty-five (35) days from the date the application 1s filed.) Page 1 1'41,. ~ I I I I I I I ,. I I I I I I Ie I I ,. , ~ 11. Complet~ ~~hedule A below. NOTE: If both water and sewer rat or tariff changes are requested. separat~ schedules must be completed for each system. . .. SCUgnULR ^ - INCOME STATRMENT Thc~ aluounts entered should only he actual recorded amounts. If the amounts are allocated between water and sewer or between the~util1ty and another business, provide the Commission with the allocations and method used to allocate. Do not enter estimated or budgeted amounts. If the company uses the NARUC system of accounts, comparative NARUC accounts can be substituted for the· following Commission prescribed accounts. Please use the basic format indicated below. s 4,225 t u 4,225 debt v -O- w 4,225 x y 4,225 Operating Revenues: Sales (Water or Sewer) Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages (Schedule A-l)(See page 6) Contract labor (Schedule A-i) Purchased water for sale to customers Chemicals and treatment þf water Utilities (electricity) Repairs and maintenance (supplies)(Schedule A-2) Office expenses . Acco~nting and legal fees (Schedule A-3) Insu~ance Regulatory pxpense (Rate Case) Misc. Expenses (if any, itemize on Schedule A-4) TOTAL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (sum of b through 1) Other taxes (payroll, ad valorem, etc.) TWC gross receipts assessment Depreciation and amortization Federal income taxes NET OPERATING INCOME (a - m - n - 0 - p - q) Other Income: Fees (connect, tap, etc.) (Schedule A-5) Other (interest income, etc.) TOTAL OTHER INCOME (sum of s + t) Other Expenses: Interest expense on long and/or short-term Costs relating to fees (connect, tap, etc.)(Schedule A-S)* Other expenses (non-utility operations) TOTAL OTHER EXPENSE (sum of v ~ w + x) 12 Months Preceding the 12 Month Test Period Test Period a40.585 40.304 blq,?c;n ,q,?c;n c d e 99 115 flS,7g4 15,g85 g 7t)O gOO h I 1 71 - 1 r 1 2 '6 1 1 c; n lc;n j k 1 5Q 73 m -37,.264 37,7·99 n1.124 1,923 0 p 6,200 7388 q r V. . () ~ 1ì (n, ~O7> 4,183 4,183 -0- 4.183 4,183 . NET INCOME (r + u - y) :r-4w0 ~ \ *If accounted for separately from items b through 1.· .~ Page 3 <6,807> CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Church Reauest for Median Opening Agenda Number: on Watauga Road 11-23-87 GN 87-141 Public Works Council Meeting Date: Enclosed are maps and previous reports concerning this matter. The CIP Committee recommended the design numbered 4 with the closing of driveway #3, and the staff has previously recommended against allowing the median opening. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council take action on the request for a median opening at North Park Baptist Church. Finance Review Acet. Number Sufficient Funds Available RIJIl~~ City anager CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM , Finance Director Page 1 of 1 t·: I, I I I I I I' I' I' I I I I I I Ie I I 1J l2-j/~7 INFORMAL REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ~o. IR 87-005 ,/ --- November 5, 1987 Date: ~. . . ~ ~~3, Watauga Road Improvements North Park Church Median Study Subject: The CIP Committee requested that the City Engineer study alternatives for a median cut or other access to the North Park Baptist Church on Watauga Road. There are several plans attached to this memo with the City Engineer's report and recommendation. Plan #1 is considered to be the safest plan as it does not allow any median cuts whatsoever. Plan #2 is a plan submitted by the church and is considered to be the most hazardous by the City staff. d'';*" ~, .~';' /- Plan #3 is a plan submitted by the church also and it is considered to~e safer than Plan #2 but still not an ideal plan as far as eliminating an¥ traffic hazard. .~ ,- Plan 64 is a plan submitted by the City Engineer ånd if a "median cut is allowed, it is considered to be the safest of any of the plans. ^- In addition, driveway #3 shown on Plan 64 ~hould be closed and not used. Plan #5 shows that no median cut would be allowed and that the church could possibly purchase a residential lot in the subdivision next to the church for the purpose of constructing a driveway into their parking lot. This was mentioned in the CIP Meeting to the People representing the church and they stated that they did not have funds for this purpose. Another consideration is that during the process of obtaining right-of- way for Watauga Road the owners of other property along Watauga Road had requested median cuts also and they were told that t~ere would be no median cuts for private driveways for this project. It is felt that if this median cut is allowed the owners of the other property will be before the City Council requesting median cuts also. The staff recommends that the request for a median cut as North Park Baptist Church be denied and -that they consider using Plan #5 for better access to their parking lot. Gene Riddle Public Works Director - ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER NORTH RICHlAND HillS, TEXAS r ~b l@t I I I I I I I -- I I I I I I Ie I I Jt KNOWL TON-ENGLISH-FLOWERS, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS / Fort Worth-Dallas November 2, 1987 ? Mr. Rodger Line, City Manager City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Tex. 76180 Re: 3-336, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS VATAUGA ROAD IMPROVEMENTS NORTH PARK CHURCH MEDIAN STUDY As instructed by the ClP Committee at the October 27, 1987, Meeting, we have prepared a study of the recommended median changes on Yatauga Road by the North Park Baptist Church. Attached are ~xhibits showing: 1. Median Design Standards (NRH) 2. Existing Median Design 3. Proposed Median Alternate 1 (NPBC) 4. Proposed Median Alternate 2 (NPBC) 5. Alternate Median Design (KEF) 6. Alternate Median Design Detail 7. Possible Driveway at Yarmouth Ave. The following is a discussion of each exhibit: 1. Median Design Standards - The minimum length between median openings "A" is 300-feet. Turn lane stacking minimum for intersecting collector streets "C" is 100-feet and minoi arterials is 150-feet. The median turn lane transition "B" should be a minimum of 90-feet. The following are design standards for some other area Cities: LENGTH BETYEEN OPENINGS U-Turns S tac.king Desirable Minimum Permitted (Normal) Fort Vorth 600' 400' Yes 150' Arlington 600' 400' Yes 150' Richardson 760' 660' Yes 350' 2. Existing Median Design - The existing median design on Vatauga Road is 1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367 I '., -, I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I. I I November 2, 1987 Watauga Road Median Study 2 Page based on providing openings only at intersecting side streets as directed by the City Council and Public Yorks Department. Ye understand that developers and property owners along Yatauga Road, who dedicated right-of-way for construction of Yatauga Road, were told that this policy would apply to all existing and future developments along Yatauga Road from Rufe Snow to Davis Blvd. Any change in this plan would be a departure from the presently . established Council Policy. The length of the Existing Median Design between Sunset Road and Yarmouth Avenue is 1,038-feet. No opening is provided for any of the three driveways along the North Park Baptist Church frontage. The stacking lane length tIC" for left turns into Yarmouth Avenue and U-Turns to the Church driveways 1s- 150-feet. No left-turn stacking lane is provided for a possible future extension of Sunset Road southward from Vatauga Road. 3. Proposed Median Alternate No.1, by North Park Baptist Church - This plan provides for an opening of about 240-feet along the frontage of the Church property centered between the two most westerly driveway openings. We do not recommend that plan because: a. The median opening "D" should be limited to 50-feet. Traffic criss-crossing within this median opening could increase the probability of accidents. b. The median length between the proposed opening and Yarmouth is only 245-feet. The minimum length "A" should be 300-feet. 4. Proposed Median Alternate No.2, by North Park Baptist Church - This plan provides for an opening at the existing central driveway. The plan also provides for closing the .~ost easterly driveway opening near Yarmouth. The proposed median between the driveway and Sunset Road has stacking lanes for left turns into the driveway and for left turns to a future Sunset Road extension southward from Vatauga Road and for U-Turns at Sunset for east-bound Watauga Road traffic. We do not recommend this plan either because: a. The median length between the driveway opening and Yarmouth is only 264-feet. The minimum length "A" should be 300-feet. b. Cars could stack up in the Church entrance lane southward into Yatauga Road from the Day Care building. If traffic could be routed into the most westerly driveway, there would be more parking lot storage area for stacking. 5. Alternate Median Design by KEF - This plan provides a median cut at the most westerly driveway opening. The distance of the opening from Sunset Road I' Ip I I I I I I I I~ I I I I I I I. I I ~, . November 2, 1987 Vatauga Road Median Study Page 3 is 582 - feet ,which exceeds the.. 300 - foot___mioimum requirement, and the distance of the opening from Yarmouth Avenue is 434-feet, which also exceeds the 300-footminimumrequirement. This plan includes routing inc6ming Day Care traffic clockwise around the parking lot to provide for more stacking area within the Church parking lot, thus less median storage stacking is required. The 100-foot median stacking lane could be lengthened if necessary. One drawback to this plan is that traffic exiting from the Church parking lot at the central, driveway opening may- try to U-turn at the median opening at the westerly driveway entrance in order to go back to the east on Yatauga Road, instead of making the U-turn at Sunset as provided. A "NO U-TURN" sign should be placed at the median driveway opening for east-bound traffic from the church. 6. Detail of Alternate - This exhibit is a blow-up of the alternate median design with_an opening p~ovid~d ,~tt__ themQs,t \T~~t~~_.ly_ driY.~T,t(,ªy~,_,Note the proposed location of a "NO U-TURN" sign at the median opening just east of the driveway. The nose of the median east of the driveway opening should be positioned to discourage east-bound traffic which might exit from the west driveway and attempt to cross the median at that location. 7. Possible Driveway Entrance at Yarmouth Ave. - This plan would require purchase by the North Park Baptist Church of one of the lots on the west side of Yarmouth between Yakefield Road and Yatauga Road. A driveway could then be constructed on the lot. Such driveway construction may require removal of the existing house on the lot. Yith this plan no median opening along the frontage of the North Park Baptist Church would be required. - - Regarding the problem of safety, none of the plans listed above are completely safe. Any time automobi¡es are forced to cross thoroughfare traffic lanes accidents can occur. In 'terms of safety, Plan 7, is probably the best alternative. Ve will be available to discuss this study with the Council at the next regular Pre-Council meeting of November 9, 1987. Meanwhile, please call if you have any questions. IJ/. .~ RICHARD V. ALBIN, P.E. RVA/ra, Enclosures cc. Mr. Dennis Horvath, Assistant City Manager Mr. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Yorks Mr. Greg Dickens, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Yorks Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Planning Mr. Ken Matheson, City Inspector I Ip I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I. I I ^ .L33~.LS r 0 <: i q: en ~ 4( 1 )( ~I t- w W ~ a: t- 't UJ ::t ~ I . I ~ 4.11 Q .. I \:( L <-~ l( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R i ¡ - - . . ;¡;; . " . l- e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w It) It) It) It) It) It) It) It) W LL ~ :J: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t- o 0 &t) 0 CD &l) It) 0 co ~ C\I ,.. . ~ ,.. ,.. ,.. z w -' 0 0 0 0 co 0' 0 0 0 ~ 0) 0) 0) 0), .-(7) Q) 0) 0) :J ~ Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ < 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 ~ CW) CW) ('f) CW) CW) ('f) (I) - CD - CD as as - ... .. > - ... L. ea - .~ .. as cu CD 0 > as CD 0 .~ w .- 0. ... ... Q. ... ... w ... u .. .. 0 ... Q. W u < CD a. u < .! a. > .5 :::: c: :::: l- e: L. - .- .. as t- .. 0 0 ea ... 0 0 c.. 0 0 a. 0 u t- (fJ c 0 t: 0 .- w :E -' ~ .J W a: t- en ~ z t- o - - - - w as as as as en )( .- .- .~ - - - - ... ... ... a: t- as as as ea CD Q) CD Q) w .9- .s- .e- 0. .. .. .. .. w ... ... ... ... t- W 0 0 0 u < < < < Z t: .5 .5 .5 a: .- ... ... ... ... - t- ... ... ... ... 0 0 0 0 UJ Q. 0. D- o. t: C c: t: .- .- :E ::E ::æ :E .. _. & - ~ en Q c: « c z . « ~ f- en w Z c: :J ~ ~ - - en LL W C Z « - ~ C ~ W I oW ~ ... w ... ~ ~~ W -J a: CD 4( c CJ w z (/) ~ .c; I- m en ~ w w c z > .. ~ W N - "" % ... (/)-J (.) w< J: c- % ... a: OUj ~ 0 -t- ~ a: " ... ~4( w 4( ~a: w w 00 u- a: wz 4( 0- co :i w + CJ Wo % ..: Wz t- " ~.c; c 0 :z:..J - t- ~ cn~ ...< t- co. z:) -0 w a:~ 3:z w ::)- a: t-Z za: ... ,!. ~ ~ c(o. (/) 0" u... ~ Wy- WQ 0 ..J... ~u. .. . . -.. ...... U ""-..4... r- O-U) I; . ". 0 0 Ux Zw ::)-...J 0 W 0 ¿Q.. > ¿ I, - 00 0 0:: 0 .t-U 0 0 w 0 I ~ 0 I 0 (/) <{ ~ 1 '0 u 0 -~ z « 0 -I 0 1 e3^V Hl.nO~~VÁ 1 0 Q ~ ~ 0.0 . ,...... 1 if) - 0 Cl) '~ Q I ~ ~ cd I · ,...... ~ lJ Cl) I' ~ ~ .. - 000000 co ~ 0.0 I") q I - ~ ~ · ,...... ~ I ,\) 0 ~ rn · ,...... t ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ I 0 0 0 I 0 w D 0 ô T > 0 .£: ~ (k: 0 cñ 0 0 ~ Q) I w 0 D ~ 0 ! 0 U) . 8 G:' I £r 0 0 C"'I .c. VI 0 Z en "- ~ 0 := ~ I :J ~~ ~.s¡ (/) D a"\> w C\ 0 ig I~ c: 0\ ~\ ~ . 2.s, Ie ~ - ~ .Ii 0 s~~s 0 ~ "3 t o rn c: § ti 00 · 0 ~ U II! I . I a I I ...., · L-- I~ . ".' of- } $ 1.4 1'\$ I 0 I, ' I p 1:1 0 '" ~ I ~~~ \,) 0 ci ~ ...~ ~ ~ I I ~~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ i 0 J ! I ~ ~"t,,\) t' I 0 ~ \) -;.......... ~ ... \A \... ~ I I t~~:.1 ~ 0 ~~ ~r-1 1 II Q ~~1 ~ i I I t! ~¡I >2 I I : I I I I '::t' I : I I I ~\ I ~ ~~ I I I I ... 1 \)lu ~- - I I .. - 0 ,,~ I I 0 ~ I' ù ~<: ~ I I ~~ '" I I ~ I- ~~ I I ~~ '" I ~~ I I ~, I I -' ~~ ~ . ... ~ ,,~ ., . \) I I I ! I I ~~ , i 1 ::t~ III I I . II !'~ t---\f\ I Q(\J ! I I <:)\:\. J :1 ~~ ~ ~ I I I ~ ~ I I I. I I I IT aD ODD :>- ~ .... eo:> + ..£ I I 1 I 1 Do .,. 0 \. o :..¿ [J I .,. I 0 . 0 I I \I . . ~ G. I I I 1 I I 1- I~ - I 1 I I ~ "" ~ ~. , - ""' "I... ~ iV"\ ....... ~ ~ ~ . "/ :.:C( ~ ~ ~, .....s;: '\.""'--t"\.) ~ ~~ ~ ~~~""" ~ ~ \1\ ~ ~\J\ '. \: V)~" ~ ~ " t.1 ~ .:s~ ~\ ~?Z \/\ ('~ "- ~ <:) '-<... ' ~ " I I I I~ I I ::>-â'-fo- -+..£ I I I . - cO ø ~ Ù \r) IT ' · · ~ ." - .,. ) S 1.1 "'S ~ T I, " " t I 1'.- ~ I ~ I I ' 0 , I' 0 1 ,II'~ g . " fll 0 I T ~ II 0 ,~. I · ~ c I; ~ ~ 'i I ~ I r Ii -f: \-.~ - ' ~ ~ ~ ~ II I ~+ I ' ~ ~ ~. I I; '- ~ ~ ,...J I i I I , I. ~ ~ ~, I t I I ~ ~ III ' '; ~ ~ I I I ~ 5t ~ )~ I I ~ ~ ~.~ ;t ~ Ill, ;:,. ## ~ ~ TI I ~l\. I ~ ~ -111 ~ I i I ! I 1:1 I ~- 11- 0 ODD 0 I I ~ v '- :) ~ \.) 0 ~~ 1 . ~ ,> I Q...c.n I 1 Ux 0 I 0 '; 1 1 Zw I :::>-.J 1 I 0 'w 1 0 ~Cl.. I, :> . ~ 1_1 00 0 I~ 1 0 \ ·.--U 101 , " I 1 1 I I D' IW: 0 '" :~ 1 / I ~ I-I I II I 0 I 0 1(1) : I t I I : <{ I ~ I IU I 0 1 0 I :Z I I I <{ : I I 0 1-11 0 I I I 1 I : I J \ J \ ----'" '--~----~---~-~~ ,~~--- e3^V Hl.nO~~VA. ----, ~------------------------- I \ I 0 I Q ~ I I 10 I Ql) /<f{1 ~ 101 . ...... I I ~I rn I / 0 0 (J) I I o /~/ Q ~ßI ~ I II~, I ~T'I 0 ~ --____ .,,1 ,I ------- - / «> ro ---' . ...... I 0 ~ r-o J: 0 (J) I' ... ~ a: 0 z ~ (J) 000 ~ -+--J I ro .----------__ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ -- \) ~ I ------- 0 (J) ------- -, '- -+--J --~ ,- " ;, ~ 0 " ''\ ~ , \ 0 0 < 0\ \ \ \ I \ \ I , ' 0 0 IN 0 I I~ I I 0 I 0 IW 0 Ò , :> I- I £ ~ 1(( 0 0 1 0 :0 rl cñ ~ 4) I I D. ~ IW 0 0 ! 0 I(f) :S 8 ¡¡: I-I I- I ~ I 10::: I 0 0 ¡L .£:. ~ ~ o IZI (~~ ~ " I I::> 1 g.~¡ 1 I IV) I 0 / -..~ W a- 1 1 ~~ i§ 1t5 OJ: /~§/ '" \ I C 0' ¡ 1 2.6, I I "," ~ '" . } I I. \ ,," ~"\ ",'" ~ -~I o \ \ "'~S '" 1 , ~ :; ) '_/~~",/ 0 I I o fn I I c 5 II I 1 0 ~Orl. //\) I , '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 · I 1 I I I , '" '" ,," I I ",'" ," '. I I~I i / I / \ ,/ I ,,----- r,.. ,/ 1 . --- I '" . ·lO~~V' ^ I --- --- --- I, ]OD 0 0 ~ 1 I 1 ~ ~ 1 0 ~ 1 ~ - 1 :( I l? u ~ 1 Q:: 0:: « :J ~ I· (L.I U ~ t ~ I f- 1 ~ /- (f) (r f- 1 o (L z ~ 1 ~ ~tu ~~ \u~~ I \J~< <t " ~~"' ~~ ~ I I I I --1 I n I Ie I I I , I ~t- CL(f) Üx Zw ~-.J ¿Cl. ¿ 00 ·t-U u o ·0 o ~ 0 o ~ 0 o ~ 0 D~O D~O <( D~D .,. I ", .. · .1 , .. ,. I, I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I Ie I I ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ "'~ 'u ~~ ~ ~~~~ ,~~ "'~~~ \I\.....~o ~~\a1~ lrj / ~ ~~ A bD ~ ~ -.-4 ~ [ß ~ o Q ~ ~ ~ o ::J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. -~ ~ '\J ~ Q) ~ ~ .~ '- bDQ ~ ~ :;j<: r/) .~ " ~~ ri1~ 000000 \) 0 o 0 0 0 ODD o ~ D 0 o ~ 0 0 o ~ 0 0 D~D 0 o (/) D ~ot-:\) . o ~~'4'\ 0 0° · CD I') 3 Û T ..5 , rñ = ~ C) ~ o I G: I ~ r! I ~ I, c .s I w 0' I~ c: tJ' 2-', - ... I ~ - o i c S II ~Olt 8 c-. ~ o t. 1$'-: . ~ CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Planning and Development 11/23/87 I e~epartment: - Council Meeting Date: Subject: State Department of Highways and Public Transportation A d N b GN 87-142 Establishment of Precinct L1.ne Road as a l,4arm to harket gen a um er: Highway Project I I I I I As the City Council is aware, the cities adjacent to Precinct Line Road and the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation have been considering reconstruction of Precinct Line Road from Highway 26 (Grapevine Highway) to FM 1938 (Davis Boulevard) under the Farm to Market Highway program. According to Mr. J.R. Stone, District Director, the Highway Department will provide funding for construction of the street project upon its official approval and is actively supporting expediting the schedule of the project. At a recent meeting with Mr. Stone, the Mayors and City Managers of Colleyville, Hurst, and North Richland Hills and the Precinct 3 County Commissioner, he indicated that he would recommend a high priority for this project and he asked the aid of cities and the County in expediting the proposed construction. Under the Highway Department's policies the cities in which an FM project is located and the County government are responsible for the acquisition of the necessary right of way and the adjustment of any utilities which might be in the path of construction. I I I I In relation to the acquisition of right of way one significant revision has been made in the scope of the proposed project. When the street was a part of the thoroughfare planning of the cities, it was mutually agreed that the street would be constructed in a five lane undivided configuration requiring a total of one hundred feet of right of way. This design concept was utilized by the cities in dealing with the adjacent property owners, especially in those areas where subdivision development would allow the requirement of street dedication. The Highway Department, in order to meet its requirements for an FM Highway configuration, i.e., a seven lane undivided section, is requiring that the total right of way be expanded to one hundred thirty feet. The City has been provided with a tentative right of way layout strip map indicating where the total right of way would be acquired and noting how the properties which have previously made right of way dedications would be affected by the increased right of way needs. A copy of the strip map will be available for review at the City Council meeting. The State Department of Highways and Public Transportation is requesting that the City acknowledge the revised project -design and approve the tentative alignment for the proposed FM Highway project in order that the local Highway Department office may request the Highway Commission to issue a minute order authorizing the funds for the design phase of the project. The issuance of the minute order will also authorize the County to participate in the acquisition of those rights of way which must be purchased. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the establishment of the Precinct Line Road improvement project as a priority in the SDHPT FM Highway program and authorize the right of way alignment as established by the Highway Department Strip Map for the purposes of acquiring the necessary one hundred ~hirty foot right of way. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Finance Review Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available K(kt~¿ City nager . Finance Director CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of 1 I" - -~ Ie I I I I I I I {I' I I I I I I '- I I " ; __e ..-- ... ./' .'. I '- ... MAR r IN CARO:r..U ~ ~, I it {: ú IJ t" 10\ --", , ( f. FM 3029 (FROM 5H 26 TO FM 1938) ~T?:~.~ PROPOSED FM 3029 OAIC SH -----. NEEDED R.O.W. · ,;"<: :,:-;Y.~t,~ .:\:}\~F:~", , I ::.\:6::::~ ::: I ) · .... .,a. .... ,'..... ,. .',.. . ....... .', · ,. ..'- : ..:~:~.~. ::.:.:::.": ~~ .: : : . ':-:~:.:: ~: . .. . ..' . - .. I· CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS 1 Department: Public Works Council Meeting Date: 11-23-87 Subject: Approval of Proposal for Project Coordination and Agenda Number: GN 87-143 Financial/System Design to Implement Senate Bill No. 336. I I In accordance with our Ordinance No. 1503 passed October 12, 1987, to establish Drainage and Flood Control Impact Fees per Senate Bill 336, we have requested and received a proposal from Reed-Stowe & Company, a Dallas firm. The proposal covers the responsibilities and associated cost for their company to function as (1) Project Coordinator and (2) provide all financial impact fee calculations based on engineering costs estimates and provide and assist with implementation of a system design for the Finance Department's computer accounting program. The cost estimate for these services by Reed-Stowe and Copany are shown below. I I I I. Project Coordinator $ 15,000 II. Financial/Systems a. Impact Fee Determination $ 10,000 b. System Design & Implementation $ 25,000 Total $ 50,000 I With reference to (1) the complexity of the requirements outlined in Senate Bill 336 having to do with the time frame within which the collected fees have to be spent on capital improvements or refunded and (2) the fact that we need to implement this impact fee as quickly as possible, the staff feels that a qualified financial consultant closely familiar with this legislation needs to be hired to assist us. We feel this will greatly expedite the process and help assure that the City adopt an impact fee developed strictly in compliance with Senate Bill 336. 4IÞdditional costs will be incurred by the City for actual computer programming to install the proposed accounting system design and additional engineering necessary. The computer· programming services will be provided by others and an estimate of cost cannot be accomplished . until the accounting system design has been completed. The additional costs for engineering analysis of existing drainage conditions and associated necessary improvements as well as further breakdown and review of future capital drainage improvements will be approximately $75,000. The range of estimated cost shown in the attached Knowlton-English-Flowers' proposal is from $75,000 to $345,000. The upper figure includes additional drainage study analysis costs for areas upstream from the City limits. It is the staff's opinion at this time that the additional analysis for these areas upstream from the City limits will not be required. All engineering services for implementation of these impact fees in accordance with Senate Bill 336 would be provided by Knowlton-English-Flowers, Inc. Because the financial consultants study will be beneficial for implementation of future water and sewer impact fees, funds are proposed to be allocated in a 50-50 basis. Funds for the engineering consultants study are proposed to be allocated from the General CIP Fund only due to their analysis having no effect on any future water and sanitary sewer impact fee study. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other) I GO & REV Acct. Number See next page Sufficie~unds Available -~ ;¡7~~ City Manager , Finance Director nt Head SignatiJre CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of 2 l- Ie I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The costs incurred for these services provided by the consultants can be figured into the impact fee rate determination as outlined in Senate Bill 336. Therefore, these costs would eventually be reimbursed to the Unspecified eIP Funds from Impact Fees collected. Funding Source: As stated above, the proposed funding should be allocated to Utility elP and General elP. The proposed distribution is as indicated below: From 1. Utility eIP - Unspecified 02-09-99-6700 2. General eIP - Unspecified 13-90-99-4600 Total To 1. Impact Fees Study (New) 02-09-88-4200 2. Impact Fee Study (New) 13-00-96-4200 Total Recommendation: $ 25,000 $100,000 $125,000 $ 25,000 $100,000 $125,000 The staff recommends the approval of both the Reed-Stowe & çompany proposal and the Know1ton-English-F1cwers, Inc. proposal with the transfer of funds as indicated above. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS I Ie !I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I <- KNOWLTON-ENGLlSH-FLOWERS, INC. CONsuLTING ENGINEERS / Fort Worth-Dallas November 18, 1987 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Texas 76180 Re: 3-200, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS STREET AND DRAINAGE GEN'L CONSULT. PREL. IMPACT FEE PROPOSAL As instucted, we have prepared a preliminary proposal for performing the _ engineering services required for development of drainage impact fees for the City of North Richland Hills. As in the case of the Drainage Master Plan, which we prepared in 1985, the following analyses are based on the drainage concept of receiving and passing through the City all upstream flows rather than ~he zero discharge increase approach, which is a totally different concept. Since the scope of services required to perform this engineering study has not yet been determined, this proposal is preliminary in form and subject to revision after the engineering scope requirements are determined by the Project Coordination Consultant. The following presents estimated preliminary costs to perform various engineering ,functions which may be included in the comprehensive impact fee study: 1. Update current ultimate development drainage plan based on new land use assumption plan for drainage areas only within the North Richland Hills city limits. This current plan is based on the following assumptions: a. Channels designed for 100-year capacity. b. Storm Drains designed for 5-year capacity. c. Overland relief and street capacities not included. d. No detention storage or other zero-discharge systems included. e. No evaluation of drainage requirements or impact downstream from the city limits of North Richland Hills. The estimated cost to perform this update, including reprinting of maps 1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 · 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367 I- I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I November 18, 1987 IMPACT FEE PROPOSAL Page 2 and other exhibits is $25,000. 2. In addition to "1." above, determine drainage improvements required (based on criteria a. through e. listed above) to serve existing development only within the City of North Richland Hills. The estimated cost to perform these services, including preparation and printing of new maps and other exhibits is $50,000. 3. Same as "1." above, but include evaluation of the ultimate drainage facility requirements to serve upstream watershed areas outside the city limits of North Richland Hills, including Big Fossil Creek and Little Bear watersheds. The following are estimates of extra costs required to evaluate ultimate drainage costs in areas outside the city limits of North Richland Hills which affect ultimate drainage improvements required within North Richland Hills: Vatershed Vatershed Area Upstream from NRH City Limits Estimated Study Cost Big Fossil Little Bear 49.5 square miles 3.0 square miles $ 150,000 15,000 $ 165,000 Total Estim. Cost Ve would note that this additional cost would not be incurred if study within the portion of these watersheds upstream from the city limits of North Richland Hills is not required. 4. Same as "2." above,~but include evaluation of the existing drainage facility requirements to serve upstream watershed areas outside the city limits of North Richland Hills, including Big Fossil Creek and Little Bear watersheds. The following are estimates of extra costs required to evaluate ultimate drainage costs in areas outside the city limits of North Richland Hills which affect ultimate drainage improvements required within North Richland Hills: Vatershed Vatershed Area Upstream from NRH City Limits Estimated Study Cost Big Fossil Little Bear 49.5 square miles 3.0 square miles $ 100,000 10,000 $ 110,000 Total Estim. Cost \Ie would again note that this additional cost would not be incurred if I· . Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I November 18, 1987 IMPACT FEE PROPOSAL Page 3 study within the portion of these watersheds upstream from the city limits of North Richland Hills is not required. In summary, the cost of the engineering services required to perform the Drainage Impace Fee Study could range from about $75,000 to $345,000 depending on the scope of services determined by the Project Coordination Consultants. Yhen the scope has been refined, we will revise our proposal accordingly. Ye will be available to discuss this preliminary proposal with you and/or the Staff at your convenience. Meanwhile, please call if you have any questions. RICHARD Y. ALBIN, P.E. RYA/bvg Enclosures cc: Mr. Rodger N. Line, City Manager Mr. Dennis Horvath, Assistant City Manager ~r. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Yorks Mr. Greg Dickens, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Yorks Mr. Richard Royston, Director of Planning Mr. Lee Maness, Director of Finance I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PROPOSAL TO THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS TO DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES IN COMPLIANCE WITH SENATE BILL NO. 336 NOVEMBER, 1987 I I~S 1~1~1~la-S'I~ta\\'I~ & t~... MUNICIPAL ADV1S0RY SERVICE I I I November 18, 1987 I I Mr. Gene Riddle Director of Public Works City of North Richland Hills ~'. O. Box 18609 North Richland Hills, Texas 76118 I Dear Mr. Riddle: I Reed-Stowe & Co. is pleased to have this opportunity to provide this proposal to assist the City of North Richland Hills in the design and implementation of the proposed Drainage and Flood Control Impact Fee as set forth in the City Council's ordinance dated October 12, 1987. I In our opinion, our firm is uniquely qualified to serve as Project Coordinator and Project Manager responsible for the Financial/Systems components of the project for the following reasons: I * Our s. firm has been agressively monitoring and evaluating B. 336 since its passage. We have conducted seminars the Bill fccr: I on I ** The Research Group of the Texas Association of City Mar-lagers ** The members of the Central Region of the Texas Association of City Managers I ** The members of the Gulf Coast Region of the Texas Government Finance Officers Association I I * In August of this year, the Texas Government Finance Officers Association Newsletter published our summary of S. B. 336 and its effect on Municipalities. .... Mr. Stowe, a partner is our firm, was responsible for the successful design and implementation of Developer Impact Fees for the City of North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. I * Mr. Reed, a partner in our firm, served as Director of Finance for the City of Arlington for twenty-two years and is intimately familiar with the financial responsibilities of municipalities and supporting administrative procedures. I I I (214) 690-0077 9794 Forest Lane, SUite 229 Dallas, Texas 75243 (817) 469-7088 I I * Through our close as~ociatio~s with the law firm of Hutchison, Price, BoyJe & Brooks and the engineering firm of Kimley-Horn and Associates, 1~~., our firm has access ~o technical advise, if requirød, to assist us in discharging our responsibilities as Project Coordinator~ I I The attached proposal, in our opinion, should provide sufficient detail as to our recommended project organization and approach to ensure the successful and expeditious completion of the projec~~ However, if you or your Council should require additional information, we would be pleased to provide same at your request~ I I Again, thank the City of project. you for this opportunity to provide our assistance ·CO North Richland Hills in the conduct of this significant I Very truly yours, /&d-~~& I Reed-Stowe & Co.. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I. I I I. IV. TABLE OF CONTENTS J:'aaes Project Understanding Project Scope Project Approach and Organization Cost Proposal Resumes 1 3 4 6 7 12 13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING On June 20, 1987, the State legislature enacted an Act relating to financing of capital improvements by political subdivisions. As defined within this Act, Capital Improvements mean: "water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities; wastewater collection and treatment facilities; storm water, drainage, and flood control facilities (emphasis added); whether or not located within the service area, or roadway facilities, wit~ a life expectancy of three or more years, owned and operated by or on behalf of a political subdivisic.n. II This twenty-eight page Act commonly referred to as Senate Bill No. 336 or S. B. 336, sets forth stringent definitions and specific procedures which must be adhered to, in order for a political subdivision to enact an ordinance establishing Capital Recovery Fee (Impact Fee) as a methodology of fina~cing capital improvements as defined above. As defined within the Act: II II Irnpact Fee" rneans a charge or assessrneY'.t irnposed by a political subdivision against new development in order ~o generate revenue for funding or recouping the costs of capital improvements or facility expansions necessi- ~ated by and attributable to such new development. As used in this Act, the term lIirnpac't fee" inclLtdes amortized charges as well as lump-sum charges and in- cludes capital recovery fees, contributions in aid of 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I construction, and any other fee which functions as described in this definition. II In order to adopt a ·'Fair Approach" in the fundiY'Q of future capital improvements attributable to development activity within the City of Nor~h Richland Hills (the City>, the City Council adop~ed an ordinance on October 12, 1987 which contained the following instructions: uThe City Council directs the City Manager to immediately cause a s~udy to be done to assure compliance with S. B. 336 in establishing impact fees and/or pro rata agreements ~o finance flood control and drainage projects within the drainage areas set out above, as those drainage areas affect property in the City of North Richland Hills, Tarrant County, Texas. The City Council gives notice of i~s intent to establish impact fees by compliance with ~he procedures set in said S. B. 336.11 It is our understanding that the City wishes to engage a ~eam of qualified professionals to assure that the complexities of S. B. 336 are complied with and that the ultimate adoption of an established impact fee and subsequent asessment would be in compliance with State law. Furthermore, it is our understanding that time is of the essence in the development and adoption of these fees. Based that upon our conversations with City Staff, it is our understanding a portion of the preliminary components of the S. B. 336 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I requiremen~s are complete i.e., Master Land Use Plan, and that the Ci~y consulting engineers (Knowlton-English-Flowers, Inc.) are in the process o~ developing the related Land Use Assumptions as required by ~he Act, ~he results oT which are to be presented in Public Hearing during the month OT December, 1987. 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II. PROJECT SCOPE This section required 'to 336. of our proposal outlines the Project Scope which is assure compliance with the procedures set forth in S. B. A. B. c. Define Service Area The defined service area will be those properties affected by 'the following drainage areas within the City: 1. Big Fossil Creek 2. Callaway Branch 3. Walkers Branch 4. Little Bear Creek S. Mesquite Branch DeveloDment of Land Use AssumDtions within the Defined Service Area 1. Description of current land use 2. Projections of changes in land uses 3. Densities 4. Intensities 5. Population growth projections over a 10-year period DeveloDment of CaDital ImDrovement Plan For 'the defined service area: 1. Description of existing drainage and flood control facilities and the estimated costs to meet existing needs as well as to comply with existing environmental, safety or regulatory standards. 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I D. E. 2. ar.d flood associated to fut..\re 3. A description of the required drainage control capital improvements and their costs, which shall be attributable development activity. Development of definitive impact characteristics (service units>, i.e. acres, area run-off 4. co-efficients, etc. , ur.der the various types of 1 arid uses identified withir. the Land Use Assurnpt ic.r.s. Development of tot a 1 projected service uni ts as identified above. 5. Development of projected demand Tor capital improvements attributable to projected service units over the next 10 years. ImDact Fee Calculation In addition to the capital improvement cost and projected service units as defined above, it will be necessary to develop the following items prior to the calculation of the impact fee: 1. City's Goals and Objectives 2. Assumptions: a. Debt cost b. Inflation c. Investrner.t interest 3. Projected construction lead times in association with growth or service demand Adminis~erinD and AccountinQ System(s) Desian and ImDlementation 1. Review of existing system capabilities and supporting administrative procedures 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a. Impact Fee Funds and related interest income Project costing system including construction b. interest expense (net of interest i nee-me) c. Match i r.g capabilities i. e. , irnpact fee to specific construction project 2. Define system arid procedure requirements necessary to 3. 4. s. comply with S. B. 336. Define Management Information System requirements necessary to monitor impact fee performance. Determine supportive administrative operating procedures including, but not limited to: a. Source documentation b. Responsibility assignments c. Timeliness d. Internal controls Develop and implement required system and procedure modifications and/or enhancements including: a. Programming b. Documentation (flow charting) and Standard Procedure Manual c. Orientation and training 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III. PROJECT APPROACH AND ORGANIZATION Based upon conversations with City Staff and the City's consulting engineers, the complexities inherent in S. B. 336, and to facilitate the project, we would propose a two-pronged approach i.e. engineering, financial/systems, with our firm responsible ~or the overall coordination of the project (see Exhibit 111-1). This approach and organization can be summarized as follows: Proiect Steering Committee We recommend that a Project Steering Committee be designated by the City Council in addition to the required Advisory Committee. We would recommend that this committee be composed of: * Designated City Council member City Manager Director of Public Works Director of Finance * * * The responsibility of this comrni ttee would be tCI provide a II sound i ng board" during the conduct of the pro.j ect and to provide input as to the City's pol icies, goals, and objectives which may affect the ultimate design of the impact fee. In addition, this committee would ensure the quality of communication of the project team's progress to the City Council and Advisory Committee. 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Projec~ Coordinator The responsibilities of the Project Coordinator would include 'the following: A. Coordination and monitoring of the project's progress through completion, including, but not limited to: 1. Working with City's consulting engineers and outside programmers to develop necessary task scheduling with specific milestones to be achieved, project deliverables, and key dates. 2. Conduct weekly project progress meetings with consulting team and designated staff members. The results of which shall be documented as to project st at us. 3. Conduct biweekly project progress meetings with designated Steering Committee to report project status including scheduling compliance or rescheduling requirements and the reasons therefore. 4. Ensure compliance with specific notification, hearing and information availability requirements as defined within S. B. 336. B. Provide project direction to the City's consulting engineers. Such direction may include: 1. Definition of appropriate service units 2. Interpretation of S. B. 336 requirements such as: b. DaTi ni t i ort OT ex i st i rig facilities Defi r.i t ion c.f adequacy of ex i st i r,g facilities De'finition C'T service area ð. c. d. Costs to be included in capital improvements 8 I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3. To obtain a legal review and interpretation of all necessary orders, resolutions, and/or ordinances required to comply with procedures as defined within S. B. 336. In addition, we shall identify and catalog existing ordinances, resolutions, and/or contracts which pertain to developer fees and obtain a legal opinion as to their compliance with the requirements of S. B. 336. The Project Coordinator, if requested, shall be available to attend any specific meetings involving this project or components thereof which the City Staff and/or Council may require. We have proposed a two-pronged approach to this project since the required areas of Engineering and Financial/Systems are not totally integrated and therefore, to facilitate the implementation process. Enaineerina It is our understanding that Knowlton-English-Flowers, Inc. will serve as Project Engineers. Based upon our conversations with their representatives and City Staff, their project responsibilities shall include the development of the following, which shall be in compliance with S. B. 336: A. Service area B. Land Use Assumptions c. Capital Improvement Program 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I D. E. Projected appropriate service units within service area Projected demand for capital improvements required by projected service units Financial/Svstems Reed-Stowe & Co. shall have project responsibility for the financial and systems requirements necessary to comply with S. B. 336. These responsibilities shall include: A. City's Goals and Objectives based upon interviews with the designated Steering Committee and City Staff members to document the City's Goals and Objectives as they may relate to: 1. Full cost recovery from new development versus a shared approach 2. Desired development activity of residential versus commercial and industrial 3. Desired level of development encouragement 4. Etc. B. Impact Fee Calculation Utilizing the Capital Improvement costs and projected service units, to be provided by the consulting engineers, as a foundation, develop an appropriate financial model which will generate a specific impact fee by service unit under various scenarios. The alternate scenarios shall incorporate the following variables and assumptions: 1. City's documented Goals and Objectives 2. Inflation rates 3. Interest expense rates 10 I I I 'I ;1 ;1 , ~I 1 1 "I 1 1 :1 :1 I 1 1 1 :"1 c. 4. Interest income rates 5. Varia~ions in projected growth in service units and related capital improvements 6. Alternative funding System Design City Staff has recognized that the administration of impact fee accountability will require systems enhancements in the accounting of: * Impact Fee collections subject to full or partial refund * Investment Income * Project Cost Accounting To ensure the City's ability to comply with the various requirements of accountability for impact fees within S. B. 336, we shall perform the following tasks including, but not limited to: 1. Review and document current procedures and systems which relate to: a. Impact fee collections b. Capital Improvement Cost Accounting c. Financing Costs d. Investment Income 2. Perform an indepth review and analysis of the S. B. 336 requirements documenting the inherent accountability requirements. 3. Based upon the above review and analysis, prepare a detailed description of system requirements. 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4. Based upon the results of steps 1 and 3 above, meet with City Programmers to determine current software Tlexibility and capability to address system requirements and establish programming parameters. 5. Based upon the results of step 4 above, develop the appropriate system design which: a. Recognizes programming parameters b. Capitalizes on existing programs c. Addresses the system requirements developed in step 3 above. 6. Develop preliminary source documentation (as required) and desired system output as well as supporting flow charts and procedures. 7. Meet with appropriate City Staff and City Programmers to review and discuss preliminary design and specifications and modify as necessary. 8. Deliver modified system design and specifications to City Programmers and establish programming effort and schedule. 9. During programming, if necessary, perform modifications with consent of the appropriate City Staff. 10. Upon completion of the programming effort, finalize and assemble all support documentation including, but not limited to: a. System(s) description and flow charts b. Detailed Operating Procedural Manual c. Catalog and description of all source input and output devices 12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I z o - ~ N - Z <C ," a: o I- U W .., o a: a.. c w en o a.. o a: a.. Exhibit 111-1 0: 0 . ~ Cl)t:J 0 H . CI) >0.. Ht:J Q >...J <'=J Q)04 e:: <0 ...:JH ~ <= ~ . CJtI) ø<1j .......,..J t!) ZH t:J =~ ~ CJ . CI) t:J~ e... :E tzJ e...< ClJo.. ~C,) CI) ,t:.J ~~ I <0 He... C,)CI) C!)tzJ Z · ~Þ-j Z~ Q:: Z HE-t H ~E-t 0 tL. tzJ~ E-t ~~ -< Z E-tO H Cl)t) C C:C Ot::l Ot::l C,)Q:: ....J . H e-.~ C) CJ Z C:J 0 Þ-j 0 0 · . C) Q:: t:.J ~ · ~ C!)~ ~ Z H H · C) Q::C,) t:JZ t:.JH Z -. H · >t~ t!:)tL. Z · ~tzJ t:.Jt:.J O~ · tl)E-t ~ HH >~ Co <C,) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IV. COST PROPOSAL Exhibi~ IV-1 de~ails our es~imated level of effort and associated costs ~o complete ~his project. As shown on this schedule, we would propose the cost of Project Coordinator, as defined within this proposal, to be $15,000. This amount represents a flat fee payable in five monthly installments of $3,000 each beginning the first day of the first month after receiving the Council's approval to proceed. Also shown on Exhibit IV-1 is our estimated level of effort required to complete the Financial/System component of the project, we estimate that 350 professional hours will be required to successfully complete the engagement with the Financial and Systems segments requiring 100 hours and 250 hours, respectively. Reed-Stowe & Co. bills its clients on the 1st and 15th of each month for actual hours worked at stipulated hourly billing rates, plus out-of-pocket expenses incurred at cost. Our stipulated billing rate Tor ~he Financial and System segments of this engagement shall be $100 per hour. As stated within the proposal, actual time spent will be closely monitored. In the event we determine we have underestimated the required level of efffort, we shall notify the City immediately and submit our revised level of effort and supportive reasons thereof. 13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I. EXHIBIT IV-l Project Cost Estimate of Reed-Stowe & Co. Project Coordinator Financial/Systems a. Impact Fee Determination 100 hrs. b. System Design and Implementation 250 hrs. Total Fees $1 5, O()C) * 10,OC)() ** 25.. C)OO ** $5(>.. ()C>O * Flat Fee ** Plus out-of-pocket expenses incurred at cost I I I I I 'I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I RESUMES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I JACK E. STOWE, JR., CPA, CMC Present Position Partner, Reed-Stowe & Co. Mr. Stowe's Public Sector consulting career began in 1975. His career includes YliYle years iYI a "big-eight" public accouy.tiy.g and consulting firm where he held the title of Manager at the time of his resignation. After serving one and one-half years as Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of an International Real Estate firm, Mr. Stowe founded Aries Resource Management as a consulting group dedicated to serving the Public Sector. In 1986 Aries Resource Management entered into a partnership agreement with Reed Municipal Services, Inc. to form Reed-Stowe & Co. Mr. Stowe's experience is highlighted by the major roles he has fulfilled in assisting Public Sector entities in achieving major cost savings through contract negotiations for services and implementation of organization and operational enhancements. A brief example of engagements include: Raw water service contract negotiations between the City of Arlington and the Tarrant County Water Improvement District No.1. Initial contract presented to the City of Arlington was in excess of $.50/1000 gallons. After two years of negotiations a contract price of $.12/1000 gallons was obtained. Wastewater service contract negotiations between the Customer Cities and the City of Fort Worth. Representing ~he twenty-one customer cities of Fort Worth a detailed wastewater cost of service study was conducted to provide ~he foundation for contract renewal negotiations. The acquisition of the Street Lighting System for Texas Electric Service Company by the City of Arlington was consummated after a six month study and purchase negotiations. Purchase pay back is estimated to be achieved within three years with annual operating cost reduction currently accruing at the annual rate of approximately one million dollars to the city. Various phases of the Street Lighting Cost Reduction Study have been completed for the cities of Beaumont and Indianapolis. I I JACK E. STOWE, JR., CPA, CMC (Continued) I I At the completion of a one year study which defined the ~otal water and wastewater facility requirements or the City of North Myrtle Beach under various density assumptions and the related financial impact, a Developer Impact Fee was designed and implemented. The revenues from this fee will provide the city the financial ability to meet future system demands. I I In order to provide a higher quality of electric, wa~er, and wastewater services to the citizens of Weatherford at an economical rate, the city commissioned an operational and organizational study. Implementation of the results of this study reduced service outages, new service installation time, complaint response time, and improved maintenance by as much as 30 percent without increasing the annual operating budget of the utility division. I I I Under a Federal Grant, developed a state-wide Emergency Energy Conservation Plan for the Department of Energy of the State of Oklahoma. The plan designated four levels of impending energy emergencies and provided for various contingent plans of actions which crossed all State Departments including the Governor's office, Civil Defense, Corporation Commission, and Department of Energy. I I Performed Arlington projected discharge improvement alternative. an economic feasibility study for the City of for alternative wastewater diversion. The study population growth within defined service areas, characteristicstes, and related capital requirements through the year 2010 Tor each I I Mr. Stowe has had extensive consulting experience within the utility industry. His experience encompasses not only utility ratemaking under federal, state, and municipal jurisdictions, but also includes significant experience in the following areas: I * Organization and operations for investor owned utilities and municipal utilities; I * Financial projections and operating system requirements; I * Contract negotiations; * Economic feasibility studies. I I I I I JACK E. STOWE, JR., CPA, CMC (Continued) I I Specifically, Mr. Stowe has conducted and/or supervised analyses of rate base, operating income, rate of return, revenue requirements, fully allocated cost of service, and rate design. The results of these studies were generally summarized into expert testimony and presented in rate case proceedings at either the state and/or local jurisdictions. The various jurisdictions Mr. Stowe has performed consulting services for are as follows: I I * Arizona Public Service Commission * Illinois Commerce Commission I * Federal Energy Regulatory Commission * Kentucky Public Service Commission I * Mississippi Public Service Commission I * New Mexico Public Service Commission * Oklahoma Corporation Commission I * Texas Public Utility Commission * Utah Public Service Commission I * Wyoming Public Service Commission I The cities of: * Add i son, Texas * Abi leYle, Texas * Arlington, Texas * Bellai re, Texas * Bedford, Texas * Beaurnc1nt, Texas * Carroll ton, Texas * CleburYle, Texas * Dent on, Texas * Fa rrners BraYlch, Texas * Gal vestoy" Texas * Greey,vi lIe, Texas * Hurst, Texas * HoustCIYI, Texas I I I I I I I I I I * * I JACK E. STOWE, JR., CPA, CMC (COYlt i nued ) Indianapolis, Indiana * Lewisville, Texas * Mesqui te, Texas * Paris, Texas * ShermaY"l, Texas * Waco, Texas * Weatherford, Texas North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina * Piano, Texas I * 'I * * I I I I I I I I I I I I I Sulfur Springs, Texas Westminister, Colorado Wylie, Texas The specific utility companies analyzed by Mr. Stowe are presented below. Many of these Mr. Stowe has investigated on numerous engagements during his career: * Arizona Public Service * Central Power & Light * Canadian River Municipal Water Authority * Dallas Water Utilities * Detroit Edison * Gulf States Utilities * Houston Lighting & Power * Indianapolis Power & Light * Kentucky Power & Light * Kentucky Water Utilities * Lone Star Gas Company * Magnolia Gas * Mississippi Power & Light * Mojave Electric Cooperative * Mountain States Bell * Southern Union Gas Company I I JACK E. STOWE, JR., CPA, CMC (COr-It i Ylued) I * Southwestern Bell Telephone * Southwestern Public Service Company I * San Miguel Electric Cooperative * Texas Electric Service Company II * Texas Power & Light I * Tucson Gas & Electric * Utah Power & Light I * United Telecommunication * West Texas U~ilities I I Mr. Stowe has received his degree in Accounting from North Texas State University. He is a Certified Public Accountant with memberships in the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants. In addition, he is a Certified Management Consultant and former Treasurer of the Dallas Chapter of the Institute of Management Co~sultants. I I Mr. Stowe has recently served as Treasurer for International Investment Advisors, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiaries and was a Director of Evans Laminated Products, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiaries with operations in Dallas, Texas and Phoenix, Arizona. I Publications and Presentations I "Street Li ght i ng Cost Reduct iOYI, a Garne J:'laYI fClr the BC)' s Texas Institute of Traffic Engineers I liThe Irnpact of SeYlate Bi 11 NCI. 336" Research Group of the Texas Association of City Managers Central Region of the Texas Association of City Managers Gulf Coast Region of the Texas Government Financial Officers Association I I Government Finance Officers Association of Texas Newsletter IIA New ChalleYlge fClr MUYlici pal Gas Regul at i c1n" liThe Case of the VaYlishiYIQ Gross Receipts Tax" II Impact of SeYlate Bi 11 336" (Assessr.1eY',t of Developer Impact Fees) "Street Li ght i y.g CClst Reduct iC'Y'1 ThroLlgh MLlYlici pal Ownership" I I I I I KEITH E. REED I Present Position I Partner, Reed-Stowe & Co. I Mr. Reed's professional career has been highlighted by his role as Director of Finance for the City of Arlington, Texas from 1962-1984. During this period the city grew from a population o¥ approximately 30,000 to 225,000. Mr. Reed resigned this position to found Reed Municipal Services, Inc. (RMS), a consulting firm dedicated to the Public Sector. RMS was engaged by two major international accounting and consulting firms to assist them in the development of a Public Sector practice. In 1986 RMS enter into a partnership agreement with the Public Sector consulting firm of Aries Resouce Management to form the firm of Reed-Stowe & Co. I I I Mr. Reed's municipal and consulting career has encompassed a significant number of projects for which he was responsible. A summary of selected projects is as follows: I System PlanninQ Desion and Implementation I I Supervised financial in phases operating were: design and operation and so as not departments implementation of complete automated information system to be implemented to be an operational burden on all simultaneously. Components of system I * General ledger and budgetary expenditure and revenue chart of accounts to be used by all operating departments within all funds of the city. I * Building inspection permit issuance and billings for permits issued by builder name and category of permit. I * Municipal airport billings for processing gasoline sales, hanger rentals, and tie downs. I * Tax revenue billings for both real and personal property by property category within geographic zones. I * Water revenue billings by customer class, consumption bracket and amount. System provides user history to be used in future rate increase analysis. I I * Sewer revenue billings by customer class, usage bracket and amount. System provides user history to be used in ruture rate increase analysis. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I KEITH E. REED (Continued) * Automated vehicle maintenance history system to control parts inventory and provide daily maintenance his~ory on individual vehicles. * Burglar alarm permit issuance automatically bills clients for locations. system. false System alarms at Supervised design, implementation and administration of investment program for city. System provides daily accruals for program. Supervised design, implementation and administration of internal service charges program for all city depar~ments. System includes postage, printing charges, copy charges and other internal service charges. Supervised design, implementation and administration of insurance program for city (excluding employee health and life). System includes all liability and casualty coverages for city operations. Supervised design, implementation and administration of depository contract with major banking insti~ution. Depository agreement provides for investment strategies depending upon various economic conditiccns. Supervised design, implementation and administration of total purchasing and encumbrance system to be used by all operating departments to provide expenditure control after budget approval. Supervised design, implementation and administration of accounting, purchasing, and petty cash procedures manual to be used by all operations of the city. Financial Ocerations and Activities Performed economic feasibility analysis on behal~ of the City of Arlington to evaluate alternative wastewater diversions and their related financial impact. The study identified potential annual operating savings ranging from $500,000 to $1,000,000 in wastewater operations. Coordinated and supervised a $54,700,000 advance refunding of all City of Arlington Waterworks and Sewer System Revenue Bonds. I I KEITH E. REED (Continued) I I Coordinated and supervised issuance of approximately $160,000,000 of additional General Obligation and Revenues Bonds over a period of years in a variety of issues. I Supervised design and administration of cash control procedures and operations at Arlington Stadium. These procedures include revenue generated from parking charges, food and beverage sales, and gift and souvenir sales; approximately $5,500,000 annually. I I Supervised accounting and purchasing control of operating budget in excess of $110,000,000 and capital budget of approximately $25,000,000. I City representative in utility rate cases relating to regulated utilities, i.e., Lone Star Gas Co., Texas Utilities Electric Co. (formerly Texas Electric Service Company>, and Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. I I Supervised reduction excess of operations. design and implementation of streetlight cost plan for city resulting in a cash savings in $325,000 during the first eight Months of I Received a Certificate of Conformance upon the first submission. Certificate has been awarded each year since then with only one exception: that being the year new requirements were imposed and no report was submitted to the city. Certificate was again awarded the following year and in each subsequent year to date. I I Served on employee job description review board. Prepared and reviewed new and existing job descriptions and assessed relative value and assigned to a particular pay grade. I I Prepared job descriptions and assisted in development of job classification and compensation plan for Texas city of 25,000 population. I Prepared Purchasing and Petty Cash Policies and Procedures for various municipalities. Prepared financial analysis records for use in water rate dispute involving two Texas cities. I I I I I KEITH E. REED (Cont i Ylued) I I Prepared financial analysis for preperation of Streetlighting Cost Reduction Plan for an Arizona city. Assisted in financial analysis of city-prepared street ligh~ing feasibility study of a Florida city. I I Assisted in the Natural Gas rate ~ollowing cities: preparat iC'YI cases before and financial analysis of the City Council's of the I Carrollton, Texas Addison, Texas Galveston, Texas Arlington, Texas Euless, Texas Waco, Texas Lewisville, Texas Mesquite, Texas Farmers Branch, Texas Wylie, Texas SherrnaYI, Texas Hurst, Texas Bedford, Texas ¡:'ari s, Texas Flower Mound, Texas I I Education I Arlington State College (now University of Texas at Arl~,ngton), B. B. A., Fi YlaYace I.B.M. Executive Seminars for Governmental Finance Officers (three separate seminars) U.S. Army School of Supply, Material and Logistical Support, Fort Bliss, Texas u.s. Army School of Ordinance Operations, Fort Ord, California I I Professicly.al I I Served on Governor's Tax Committee for three years. Debt Management Award from Municipal Advisory Council of Texas Past President of Texas Chapter, Government Finance Officers Association Member of National and State Chapter, Government Finance Of~icers Association Frequent lecturer at University of Texas at Arlington on governmental accounting and finance Served as program chairman for North Central Texas Council of Governments programs pertaining to Municipal Financial Operations Member of Texas Municipal League Member of Texas chapter, Institute of Traffic Engineers I I I I I I I I I I I KEITH E. REED (COY,t i nued ) Seminars and Publications IIMunici pal Ownersh i p of Street Li ght i 1'".g Systerns - Myth c-r Miracle" CAL-SLA - California Street Lighting Association - 1985 liThe Requirerner.t of S. B. 33611 Study Group of Texas City Management Association Central Region of Texas City Management Association Gulf Coast Chapter of the Texas Governmental Finance Officers Association I I I I I I I Government Finance Officers Association of Texas Newsletter itA New Challenge for Muy.ici pal Gas Regul at ic-yllI ·'The Case of the Var,ishir'Q Gross Receipts Tax" II I rnpact of S. B. 336 II I I I I I I I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Finance 11/23/87 Department: Council Meeting Date: Agenda Number: GN 87-144 Subject: Revision of Operating Budget for 1987/88 Pursuant to the City Council's discussion on Wednesday, November 18, 1987, IR87-006, the following amendments to the General Fund and Promotional Fund Budgets are requested: General Fund Pr'omotional Fund Adopted Revised Adopted Revised Salary $ 45,000 $ 39,250 Salary Related 6,750 5,730 Supplies 650 1,500 Membership Dues, Travel, Training $ 41,982 $ 48,982 (1) 20,000 20,000 Special Services a. Chamber Contract 20,000 20,000 b. Quarterly Newsletter 10,000 10,000 c. 4th of July Fireworks 10,000 10,000 d. Annual Boards, Commission Reception 6,000 6,000 e. Special Studies 16,900 26,900 f. Trinity Arts Council 3,810 g. North East Fine Arts League 3,810 h. Unspecified 5,000 -0- Office Furnishings 6,200 9,500 Reserve for Contingency 100,000 93,000 -0- -0- Revised Promotional Fund Budget $146,500 $146,500 ------- ------- ------- ------- General Fund Adjustments 7,000 ------- ------- (1) The net adjustment to City Council's, budget for annual dues to TML, NLC, COG, per IR87-006. The proposed adjustments will reduce by $9,500 the funding requirement from Hotel/Motel Taxes and allow appropriations to other specific line items as outlined above. A net additional appropriation of $7,000 from City Council's Budget Reserve for Contingency will be necessary to fund the City's annual memberships. Recommendation Approve the revised Promotional Fund Budget and the appropriation of $7,000 from Budget Reserve for Contingency City Council's Membership Account. Finance Review x Acct. Number See Above S~fiCiZS Available -- ~ City Manager , Finance Director Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other // ~ /J:?~~., Department Head Signature CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of ' 1 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Purchasing Award of bid to *First Responder ,in the amount of Subject: $53 ~ 630 - Type I 1988 Ambulance Council Meeting Date: 11/23/87 Agenda Number: PU 87-46 On November 2, 1987, sealed bids were opened far a Type I 1988 Ambulance. The results of the bid are summarized below: Vendor Exceptions Amount 1 . Excellance No Bid No Bid 2. 1st. Response No Bid No Bid 3. Collins 9 $57,627 *4. First Responder 0 $53,630 First Responder 0 $50,630 (alternate) Vendor #1, Excellance, and Vendor #2, 1st Response, submitted a "No Bid" response. Vendor #3, Collins, was the highest bidder with nine (9) exceptions. Eight (8) were acceptable; however" the exception on the exterior compartment locations and dimensions was not acceptable. Vendor #4, First Responder, submitted the lowest bid with no exceptions. The alternate bid offered by First Responder is not acceptable due to the inferior construction strength of galvanized steel. After Council rejected the ambulance bids in September of this year, our second effort to solicit bids resulted in lower bids as well as a stainless steel chassis which has a lifetime warranty. I I Recommendation: Award bid to *First Responder for a Type I 1988 Ambulance in the amount of $53,630. Finance Review x ~ . Finance Director Department Head Signatü CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of I I I I I I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Purchasing Council Meeting Date: 11/23/87 Subject: Approval to advertise and solicit bids for City vehicles. Agenda Number: PU 8]-47 The 1987-88 Budget provides in the Support Services Fund for replacement of vehicles presently in the fleet. Since the budget document did not list the specific equipment to be replaced, the following listing is submitted for City Council approval, and is based on detailed review and consideration by the Support Services Director: Veh. ** Vehicle Type Department Type of Replacement 151 1979 Pontiac Personnel 1988 Chev. Celebrity or Equal 253 1985 Chev. C-10 Inspection 1988 Chev. C-10 or Equal 254 1979 Chev. C-10 Bldg. Maint. 1988 Chev. C-I0 or Equal 255 1984 Chev. C-10 Vehicle Maint. 1988 Chev. C-10 or Equal 401 1986 Plymouth Court 1988 Chev. Celebrity or Equal 511 1986 Chev. C-10 Utilities 1988 Chev. C-10 or Equal 610 1982 Chev. C-10 Street 1988 Chev. C-10 or Equal 618 1977 GMC Parks 1988 Flatbed or Equal 627 1982 Mauldin Roller Pub lie Works 1988 Roller or Equal 702 1979 Chev. Flatbed Parks 1988 Chev. Flatbed or Equal 809 1985 Plymouth Po 1 ice 1988 Chev. Caprice or Equal 819 1984 Chev. C-20 A,.,imal Control 1988 Chev. C-20 or Equal 824 1986 Plymouth Po 1 ice 1988 Chev. Caprice or Equal 832 1986 Plymouth Po 1 ice 1988 Chev. Caprice or Equal 833 1986 Plymouth Po 1 ice CID 1988 Chev. Celebrity or Equal 834 1986 Plymouth Police 1988 Chev. Caprice or Equal 838 1986 Chev. Malibu Police 1988 Chev. Caprice or Equal 842 1986 Plymouth Police 1988 Chev. Caprice or Equal 907 1985 Plymouth Fire Dept. 1988 Suburban or Equal 908 1985 Plymouth Fire Dep t . 1988 Suburban or Equal 921 1979 Pontiac Fire Dep t . 1988 Chev. Celebrity or Equal Recommendation: Authorize the Director of Support Services to solicit bids for the vehicles as outlined above. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Acct. Number N/ A SUffiCZ;~le ~ ,. 1I;f7~ City Manager . Finance Director --x- ~ Department Head Signature CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Purchasing Council Meeting Date: 11/23/87 Award of bid to *EBM in the amount of $12,142.62 - Police Department Video Equipment Agenda Number: PU 87-48 On October 29, 1987, sealed bids were opened for Police Department Video Equipment. A summary of the bids follows: Vendor Exceptions Items not Bid 1 . Victor Duncan No Bid No Bid 2. ECI 2 2 *3. EBM 0 0 4. Padgitt 1 6 Amount No Bid $14,585.23 $12,142.65 $ 7,061.90 /~ Vendor #2, ECI , had two (2) exceptions, two (2) no bids, and was high bidder at $14,585.23. Vendor #3, *EBM, bid on all items with no exceptions and is low bidder at $12,142.65. Vendor #4, Padgitt did not bid six (6) items at a cost of $4,971. Therefore, had Padgitt bid the six (6) no bid items' their bid amount would have been $12,032.90. On the items Padgitt did bid they were, only low bid on one (1) item. In addition, Padgitt did not sign the bid acceptance form which disqualifies their bid. The above mentioned equipment is for' jail security '(60X) and training (40%) and are budgeted items. Recommendation: Staff recommends the low bidder, *EBM, received the bid award in the amount of $12,142.62. ~ Finance Review Acct. Number 13-80-86-6250 Funds A2Iab¿~ . Finance Director Department Head Signature CIT COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Purchasing Council Meeting Date: Award of bid to *Contech in the amount of $8t195 - Heat Lamp Vacuum Applicator Agenda Number: 11/23/87 PU 87-49 On November 10, 1987, sealed bids were opened for one (1) Heat Lamp Vacuum Applicator. The results are summarized below: Vendor Exceptions Amount 1 . 2. 3. * 4. Traffic Supply Roadrunner P.M. Black Co. Contech No Bid $10,800 $ 9,950 $ 8, 1 95 No Bid o o o This equipment will replace an existing, outmoded applicator required for the production of street name and other municipal signs. Recommendation: Award bid to the lowest bidder, *Contech, for one (1) Heat Lamp Vacuum Applicator in the amount of $8,195. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other , Finance Director ~ , ~~ City Manager Department Head Signature CITY OUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of 1 CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Purchasing Award of bid to *Motorola Communications in the . Subject: amount of $54, 765 - Police Communication Console ,I I I 1 1 I Council Meeting Date: 11/23/87 Agenda Number: PU 87-50 On October 22, 1987, at 10:00 a.m., sealed proposals for a new Communication Console were received and opened in the office of the Director of Support Services. As in accordance with the new "Sealed Proposals" state statutes which became effective for Cities September 1, 1987, proposals were opened in a closed door session. This allows the Director of Support Services to negotiate with all parties concerned and obtain the best price and terms most advantageous to the City of North Richland Hills. Under the new statutes, all information is confidential until awarded by Council. Proposals were submitted by Motorola Communications and Console Systems. 80th vendors submitted excellent proposals, Motorola at $67,277 and Console Systems at $71,987. The Director of Support Services has negotiated with both vendors and finds that the best proposal is the one submitted by Motorola, also the lowest in price. Motorola has agreed to certain concessions in their price and a final cost for Motorola equipment of $54,765. Some of the items were also deleted, allowing their purchase from another source at a reduced cost. The net savings as a result of the negotiations cannot be determined until all items are purchased, but they will be substantial. Recommendation: Award *Motorola Communications a contract to fabricate one (1) Custom Communication Console for Police dispatch in the amount of $54,765. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Acct. Number 13-80-86-6250 Sufficient Funds Available ~ . Finance Director Department Head Signature CITY OUNCIL ACTION ITEM City Manager Page 1 of I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Purchasing Council Meeting Date: 11/23/87 Award of bid to *Collins Ambulance Sales and Service Subject: in the amount of $26, 740 - Remount of Type I Ambulance Agenda Number: PU 87-51 On November 12, 1987, sealed bids were opened for the remounting of a Type I Ambulance. The results of the bid opening is as follows: I I I I I I Vendor Exceptions Amount 1. Southern 2. Frontline No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid 3. Eagle Eagle (alternate) o o $33,,552.00 $32,052.00 (1987 Chassis) 4. Cayle-Craft 1 $29,572.69 5 . Co 11 i ns 1 $30,540.00 2~500.00 Trade In $28,040.00 * Collins (alternate) 3 $27,270.00 (1987 Chassis) 2.500.00 Trade In $26,740.00 Vendor #3, Eagle Emergency, was the highest bidder at $33,552 for an "88" Chassis and $32,052 for an "87" Chassis. Vendor #4, Cay Ie-Craft, with one (1) minor exception, was second lowest bid at $29,572.69. No trade-in was offered. Vendor #5, *Collins, had one (1) minor exception and was low bid at $28,040 for an "88" Chassis and $26,740 for an "8711 Chassis. Collins was the only. vendor to offer a trade-in allowance on our old chassis. ~ Staff has eva 1 ua ted the benef i ts of se 1 ec t i ng an, "88 II or "8711 chass is. The key difference will be the wiring on an 118811 chassis would be factory installed and the "8711 would be after market installed. The "87" would be a new vehicle, fully warrantied and immediately avail- able, and the required retrofitting of wiring would cost less than the additional cost of the "88" chassis. Recommendation: Award bid to the lowest bidder *Co11ins Ambulance Sales and Service, for the remount on the Type I Module on an 1987 Chassis in the amount of $26,740. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Budget Other Finance Review Acct. Number 10-60-00-6400 SU~fiCiZdS~ kl1/1__ '_ I City Manager OUNCIL ACTION ITEM , Finance Director Department Head Signature CITY Page 1 of CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Purchasing Council Meeting Date: 11/23/87 Award of bid to Kustom Electronics in the amount of $6,000.00 - Dash Mounted Radar Units Agenda Number: PU 87-52 On November 18, 1987, sealed bids were opened for five (5) Dash Mounted Radar Units. A tabulation of the bids is listed below: Vendor Exceptions Amount 1 . 2. 3. 4. *5. SaSo Stephens G.T. Distributors Lawco Kustom Kustom (alternate) No Bid No Bid o o o 1 (unacceptable) No Bid No Bid $6,730.00 $6,333.30 $6,000.00 $4,110.00 *Kustom Electronics, Vendor #5, was the lowest bid and met all specifications. Their alternate bid at $4,110.00 did not have a lock on device for target vehicles, which is an unacceptable exception. Recommendation: Award bid to *Kuston Electronics, the lowest bidder, for five (5) Dash Mounted Radar Units in the amount of $6,000.00. Finance Review x , Finance Director "' r ~ City Manager UNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of I · I I I I I I I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Department: Purchasing Council Meeting Date: 11/23/87 Change Order to Calvin Baker-Tom Gilmore in the amount of Subject: $39 t 768; Purchase of furniture not to exceed $13 t 000; Agenda Number: PU 87-53 Contract with Phillip Swager and Associates in the amount of $11t93S. . In an informal report to Mayor and Council, IR 87-003, on October 12, 1987, Council was advised of the architects estimate of cost for the proposed new Pre-Council Chambers, an amount of $101,000. The proposal by Don White of Phillip Swager and Associates being an estimate, Council requested the Director of Support Services obtain firm pricing from the present general contractor, Baker-Gilmore, and another independent contractor. Council also advised they felt we should delete the audio/visual portion of the proposal, which can be provided at a later date. The price for the new Pre-Council Chambers are as follows: Independent Baker-Gilmore Construction Furniture Architect Fee $48,145 13,000 11.935 $39,768 13,000 11..935 Total $73,080 $64, 703' Please see attached memo for cost comparison to original estimate. The initial funding for the proposed purchase of furniture was accomplished on July 27, 1987, GN 87-71. The proposed construction and architect fee may be funded from the following sources: FROM: Unappropriated General Fund- Fund Balance $51 ,703 TO: Construction 13-80-86-6250 $39,768 Architect Fees 13-80-86-4200 $11.935 Total $51,703 Recommendation: Authorize the Director of Support Services to issue a change order to Calvin Baker-Tom Gilmore, a Joint Venture, in the amount of $39,768; purchase furniture as needed in an amount not to exceed $13,000; and contract with Phillip Swager and Associates in an amount not to exceed $11,935. Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) Operating Bud et Other Finance Review Acct. Number See Above unds Available , Finance Director CI Y COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Page 1 of I Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I City of Xórth Richland Hills, Texas November 19, 1987 TO: FROM: Rodger N. Line, City Manager John H. Whitney, Director, Support Services ...- , ',If_".'___, '# ~_..,'J'...:.. ......._.)o~......:3IIA--. -.1..- '~.- _.------- SUBJECT: Comparison of Cost between "PSAII and Baker-Gilmore Outlined below is a line item comparison between the architect IS estimate, PSA, and Baker-Gilmore, general contractor. PSA Estimate Carpentry & Demolition Roofing Metal Door Millwork - Door Screens Chalk and Tack Boards Finish Hardware Drywall and Acoustical Carpet and VCT Painting Refrigerator Plumbing Air Conditioning and Heating Electrical Miscellaneous Equipment $ 5,205 1,500 300 4,200 3,400 300 731 2,744 2,605 2,700 200 3,000 7 , 145 20,000 2.000 56,030 o 56,030 D.P. Included in Price Estimate Furn ish. i ng Audio/Visual Architect Contingency 13,820 14,950 11,935 4..265 $101,000 JHW:smm Baker-Gilmore $ 3,719 723 195, 3 , 1 90 2,238 250 432 2,381 2,619 1,798 170 2,425 6,200 7,982 1 . 831 36, 153 3.615 39,768 13,000 o 11,935 o $ 64,703 (817) 281.Q04117301 N.E. lOOP 8201P.O. BOX 18609/NORTH RICHLAND HillS, TX 76180 I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Improvements Change Order #1 Council Meeting Date: 11-23-87 Agenda Number: PW 87-35 Works This is the change order that was received on the day of the last council meeting. The City Manager mentioned in pre-council meeting that he needed to go ahead and authorize this change order so that it would not hold up the contractor on Watauga Road. Objections were not made to this request therefore, the purpose of this being on the present Council agenda is for ratification of the change order. Funding Source: The proposed change order will require funds in excess of those allocated to this contract. Consequently the proposed funding is as follows: From To Unspecified Drainage 1987 GO 13-90-99-4450 $800 Watauga Rd. Construction 13-01-87-6150 $800 Water System Unspecified 02-09-99-6700 $ 87,390 Watauga Rd. Utilities 02-09-87-6700 $ 36,084 02-09-87-6750 $ 51,306 Recommendation: The staff recommends to approve, change order #1 in the amount of $88,155.29 on the Watauga Road Improvements. Finance Review Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) GO & REV _ Operating Budget _ ., Othe~ ~ " 7-'1/1' ß Il ' j) DepartmJnt Head Sign ture CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Acct. Number Suffic' t Funds Available 4. d --6~ See Above Finance Director Page 1 of 1 I ~, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I / _ \ f ' ~ tN ~ KNOWL TON-ENGLlSH-FLOWERS, INC. .. /11 . ", ,I4'L(£}/ ~~/1~1 '1/' ( CONSUL TINC ENCINEERS / Fort Worth-Dallas November 9, 1987 Hr. Rodger Line, City Manager City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Tex. 76180 Re: 3-336, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS VATAUGA ROAD IMPROVEMENTS CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Enclosed is Change Order No. 1 to the referenced project. The Contractor is ready to begin this extra work and has. reques ted tha t this change order be approved as soon as possible. This change order includes construction of an 8-inch sanitary sewer line extension as requested by the Public Yorks Department based on a commitment to some of the property owners who dedicated right-of-way on the east end of the project. Also included are PVC sleeves to be constructed between medians and under the concrete portions of the proposed medians as required for future sprinkler system conduit and electrical conduit runs. Other miscellaneous changes are included as noted on the change order form. The following is a breakdown of the proposed net change order costs: Drain~ge Account Va ter Accoun t. Sanitary Sewer Account S 766.15 36,083.19 51,305.95 Total Change Order Cost S 88,155.29 After Council review and approval of this change order, please have the Mayor sign the enclosed change order form and send a copy to our office . for our files and for distribution to the contractor. Meanwhile, please call if you have any questions. w. RICHARD V. ALBIN, P.E. 1901 CENTRAL DR., SUITE 550 · BEDFORD, TEXAS 76021 . 817/283-6211 . METRO/267-3367 I~ Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I November 9, 1987 Vatauga Road Change Order 1 RVA/ra, Enclosures cc. Hr. Dennis Horvath, Assistant City Manager ~r. Gene Riddle, Director of Public Yorks ~ Hr. Greg Dickens, P.E., Assistant Director of Public Yorks Mr. Lee Maness, Director of Finance Mr. Jim Cook, Assistant Director of Finance Mrs. Donna Heishman, Special Projects Accountant Mr. Ken Matheson, Larry Jones, City Inspectors Page 2 1..-" ~ Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I K-E-F NO. 3-336 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO THE CONTRACT WHICH WAS DATED SEPTEMBER 14 , 1987 Between CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS AUSTIN PAVING COMPANY ( OWNER) ( CONTRACTOR) And For (Description of Project) WATAUGA ROAD - PAVING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Pursuant to the provisions of Section 6 of the General Conditions of the Contract, this Change Order, when fully executed, shall constitute the authority to change the work of the Project as follows: ~ Construct 8-inch diameter sanitary sewer along the north side of Watauga Road as shown on revised Plans. ~ Lower the proposed 12-inch water line under the existing Mobil Gas Lines as shown on the revised Plans. & Upsize and relocate the Proposed storm drain in th F.M. 1938 right-of-way as shown on the revised Plans. £ Install 16-inch diameter welded steel casing in the F.M. 1938 right-af-way as shown on the revised Plans. & Install 6" PVC sleeves for future sprinkler systen, install 2" PVC sleeves for future sprinkler system wiring, install 2" tapped tee, 2" gate valve, 2" PVC WL and meter box for future sprinkler systen. Add the following quantities to existing Contract items: UNIT NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE QUANT. TOTAL lS. 811 PVC Sanitary Sewer Pipe L.F. 11.43 1, 73 5 $ 19 ,831. 05 -' 45. 41 Dia. Sanitary Sewer MH EACH 710. 70 7 4,974.90~ 9D. 33" Dia. RCP L. F. 37.60 87 3,271.20 v 120. 24" Dia. RCP L.F. 28.33 187 5, 29 7. 71 '- 16W. Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings TON 2,472.00 0.28 æ2 .16 ~ 14W. 2" Gate Valve EACH 208.06 2 416.12v &J. 2" D i a. (Sc h. 40) P V C L. F. 3.61 266 960.26 v 43D. Trench Safety Systems L.S. 26,500.00 1 26,500.00 ./ SUB- TOTAL ............. ................. $ 611943.40 Delete the following quantities frOO1 exi sting Contract itens: UNIT NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE QUANT. TOTAL 100. 3D" Dia. RCP L.F. 33.32 80 {$ 2, 665. 60) 130. 21" Dia. RCP L. F. 25. n 88 ( 2,263.5") 14D. 18" Dia. RCP L.F. 24.21 130 ( 3,147.30) 16D. 10' Curb Inlet EACH 1,816.50 1 ( 1,816.50) SUB-TOTAL .... .... .......... .... ... ..... ($ 9,89&.1') / I ~.' ~ ~. Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I Page 2, Change Order No. ,K-E-F No. 3-336 Add the following new items to the Contract: NO. DESCRIPTION -SSe Concrete Cap 24W. Additional Depth for Water Line Under Mobil Pipelines 440. 10' Wide Recessed Curb Inlet 2s.l. 1611 Dia. Welded Steel Casing 2&J. 6" Dia. (DR-35) PVC Pipe UNIT C.Y. UNIT PRICE 93.50 QUANT. 1.4 1,320.00 1 2,090.00 1 41.25 195 ~ 3,065 *- g. 00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER COST ................ L.S. EACH L. F. L.F. EXISTING CONTRACT AMOUNT ............... REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT ................ TOTAL 130 . 90 v 1,320.00 V" 2 ,090 . 00 v- a ,043. 75 ..... 3~. 95 -24,t;to.oo ., $ 8Ø~16'#~' $3,361,596.24 $3,"'9,15/.5& Contract completion time shall be increased by 35 days because of this change. CONTRACTOR'S OFFER OF PROPOSED CHANGE:,' AUSTm P G mMPANY By: C D 'ight C. Sr:'l1tb !\!ana~er. Contract & Admin:s!¡~~~~.. ENGINEE~'S RECOMMENDATION OF ACCEPTANCE: By: ~W, ~ OWNER'S ACCEPTANCE OF CHANGE: By: "* . .8.00 I L.F. BASED o~ D~LET'N(; PIPE BE~Þ~ .- Rwa J J.. Q.-87 Da te : OCT 2 3 198i Da te : 11- q Da te : , 1987 , 198 7 , 198 7 I CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS Utility Council Meeting Date: 11-23-87 Wastewater Contract Between the City of North Rich1and Hills, the Trinity River Authority and the City of Fort Worth Agenda Number: PW 87-36 In June, 1987, the City Council approved a wastewater service contract between the City of North Rich1and Hills and the City of Fort Worth. Since part of our wastewater flows through a line operated by the Trinity River Authority and eventually into the Fort Worth system we must have a four way contract between the City of Fort Worth, Trinity River Authority, City of Hurst and the City of North Richland Hills. The Trinity River Authority had just recently finalized this contract and is expected to adopt the contract in December. It is proposed that the City Council authorize entering this contract, which is the same as approved in June. A copy of the contract is available in the Public Works Department for review if desired by the City Council. Recommendation: e It is recommended that the City Council approve the contract described above. Finance Review I I Source of Funds: Bonds (GO/Rev.) a Operating Budget - ~~ ., Other /)~ ~ -f'f I), " f7 ~ì ~ /(o/Il Þ" · Departm~Head Signature I City' ana~ CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEM Acct. Number Sufficient Funds Available , Finance Director Page 1 of 1 I·, Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I t-e I I Trinity River Authority of Texas Northern Region Office 3410.100 October 27, 1987 Mr. Rodger Line, City Manager City of North Richland Hills P.O. Box 18609 North Richland Hills, TX 76180 Dear Rodger: Subject: Walker-Calloway Wholesale Wastewater Contract with City of Fort Worth Transmitted herewith is a copy of the above referenced Contract for review by you and your respective staff. This Contract will be presented to the Authority's Board of Directors for action in their scheduled December 2 meeting. As you will note in Mr. Sawey's 1etter (copy attached), the Con- tract has been reviewed by the City of Fort Worth1s attorney and is in final form requiring execution by all parties to such. Council action by both the City of Hurst and North Richland Hills is required as parties to this Contract. Also included is an Amendment to the Contract between the Trinity River Authority of Texas and the City of Hurst dated April 18, 1969. This Amend- ment changes the wording of a portion of item (a) of Section 5 paragraph A to allow the use of the new four party Contract to be used for establishing billing rates. This Amendment will also require action by your City Coun- cil as well as the Authority's Board of Directors. Please contact me at your 'earliest convenience when you have established the date that this Contract and Contract Amendment will be presented to your Council. If you should have any questions, do not hesitate to cal I. Sincerely, ~ø HENRY D. CLARK Manager of Operations /vtd Transmittals cc: Warren N. Brewer, Regional Manager, Northern Region Jack C. Worsham, Staff Attorney Richard Sawey, Director of Utilities, City of Fort Worth P.o. Box 240 Arlington, Texas 76010 (817) 467 -4223 I ~.. . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ , 'If FORT ~~':~~I ~~~~~M=~ARTMENT ..:.:.~., FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76101 ADMINISTRATION DIVISION (817) 870-8220 October 13, 1987 r,1r . Warren Brewer General Manager Trinity River Authority P.O. Box 240 Arlington, TX 76010 Dear Mr. Brewer: The wholesale wastewater contract has been revised as a result of discussions between City of Fort Worth attorney Gary Steinberger and l\1r. Jack Worsham. Enclosed is the revised contract for review and approval by the Trinity River Authority, the City of Hurst and the City of North Richland Hills. I respectfully request that upon signing the contract you forward the contract to the cities of IIurst and North Richland Hills for their approval and signatures. Please call me if you have any questions. s~cere y, ~ ~ ard \\1. sawe;V¡ Director R \VS:fb Enclosure I~ Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I I I I Ie I I ~ THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT OF APRIL 1969 BETWEEN CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS AND TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY OF TEXAS I I WHEREAS, on April 18, 1969, the City of North Richland Hills (City) and the Trinity River Authority of Texas (Authority) made and entered into a Contract whereby the Authority provides services for the transportation and disposal of sanitary sewage for the City; and said Contract; and WHEREAS, the City and Authority now desire to amend certain terms of NOW, THEREFORE, know all men by these presents, that the City and Authority in consideration of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained, and the mutual benefits to each other hereby agree as follows: THAT item' said Contra' thereof I~ Ie I I I I I I I Ie I I I 'I I I I I Ie I r ARTICLE II All other provisions, covenants, recitals, terms and conditions of said Contract, which are not expressly amended herein, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto acting under authority of their respective governing bodies have caused this Contract to be duly executed~ in several counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, all as of the day of , 1987. TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY OF TEXAS ATTEST: DANNY F. VANCE, General Manager JACK C. WORSHAM, Staff Attorney (SEAL) CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ATTEST: City Secretary (SEAL)