Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1981-03-09 Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD IN THE CITY HALL, 7301 NORTHEAST LOOP 820, MARCH 9, 1981 - 7:30 P.M. 1. Mayor Faram called the meeting to order March 9, 1981, at 7:45 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 2. Present: Dick Faram Jim Kenna J. C. Hubbard Wiley Thomas Dave Freeman Sharyl Groves Mayor ROLL CALL Councilmen Councilwoman Staff: Dennis Horvath Jeanette Moore Richard Albin Rex McEntire Assistant City Manager City Secretary City Engineer City Attorney News Media Present Absent: Jim Wood Chuck Williams Councilman City Manager 3. The invocation was given by Mr. Don Pressley of Smithfield Methodist Church. INVOCATION 4. Councilman Hubbard moved, seconded by Councilman Kenna, to approve the minutes of the February 23, 1981 meeting. Motion carried 5-0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1981. APPROVED 5. Mrs. Barbara Calhoun, Group Leader, Camp Fire Girls, 2nd Grade, Holiday Heights and Mrs. Joyce Tucker, Group Leader, Camp Fire Girls, 4th Grade, Holiday Heights, presented the Council with a birthday cake celebrating Camp Fire Birthday Week. PROCLAMATION CAMP FIRE WEEK Mayor Faram presented the Groups with a proclamation declaring the week of March 15-21 as National Camp Fire Birthday Week in the City of North Richland Hills. 6. Mayor Faram presented a ten year pin and service award to Kathy Drake of the Police Department. PRESENTATION OF TEN YEAR AWARD AND SERVICE PIN TO KATHY DRAKE OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT 7. Mayor Faram advised the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval subject to the Engineer's letter. All engineering comments had been met. Councilwoman Groves moved, seconded by Councilman Kenna, to approve PZ 81-6. PS 81-6, REQUEST OF J.D. GRIFFITH FOR FINAL PLAT OF LOT 29 BLOCK 11, GLENANN ADDITION APPROVED March 9, 1981 Page 2 Motion carried 5-0. 8. Mayor Faram advised the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval subject to the Engineer's comments. All comments had been met. Councilman Freeman moved, seconded by Councilman Thomas, to approve PS 81-7. PS 81-7, REQUEST OF CLARK BROTHERS FOR FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 1-22, BLOCK 34, HOLIDAY HEIGHTS ADDITION, SECTION A APPROVED Motion carried 5-0. 9. Mayor Faram advised the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval subject to the Engineer's comments. Mayor Faram asked if the comments had been met. Mr. Horvath stated there were still some questions on the construction plans. The plat had been cleared up. PS 81-8, REQUEST OF CLARK BROTHERS FOR FINAL PLAT OF TRACTS 1, 2, & 3, NRH INDUSTRIAL PARK ADDITION APPROVED Mr. Gordon Swift, Consulting Engineer, 309 West 7th, Fort Worth, appeared before the Council. Mr. Swift stated he had been in contact with Mr. Horvath and Mr. Albin and to the best of his knowledge all the problems had been taken care of. Mr. Swift stated he was in full agreement with the City Engineer. Mr. Albin stated he had not fully reviewed the construction plans, but there were no problems with the plat. Councilman Hubbard moved, seconded by Councilman Kenna, to approve PS 81-8, subject to the Engineer's comments. Motion carried 5-0. 10. Mayor Faram advised this request was denied by the Council January 26, 1981, and on February 9, 1981, it was brought up for reconsideration. Mayor Faram opened the public hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak in favor of the request to please come forward. PUBLIC HEARING - PZ 80-36, (RECONSIDER- ATION) MARVIN SMITH TO REZONE LOT l5R2, RICHLAND OAKS ADDITION FROM IF-12 TO LOCAL RETAIL Mr. Marvin Smith, 7609 Douglas Lane, appeared before the Council. Mr. Smith stated he proposed to build a professional building at this location. Mr. Smith stated there was adequate parking, there would be landscaping and a sprinkler system installed. The lot would be filled in and a small retaining wall at the back of the lot. Mr. Smith stated there had been a lot of opposition to what he was planning and he thought most of what was being opposed to was the retaining wall and filling in of the lot. Mr. Smith stated that if you took into consideration that the March 9, 1981 Page 3 property was located on a six lane street, when the lot was purchased originally in 1964 to build a house on. The city came in shortly thereafter, widened the street and made a main thoroughfare, took about 30 feet off the front of the lot and assessed it at commercial rate on curb and gutter. Mr. Smith stated the lot was not big enough to build a house on and no one would want a house on a six lane thoroughfare. Mr. Smith stated he thought the main concern was that if a building was built there the people behind the property was going to have to look at a retaining wall and a fence. Mr. Smith stated if a house was built on the lot you would still have to fill the lot in and build a fence. Mr. Smith stated that in his opinion the people behind the lot would be better off with the proposed building there. Mr. Smith stated there had been some concern that if the building was built, the people's houses behind would be flooded. Mr. Smith stated his Engineer did a study on the drainage and there was 5.100%, if all the water drained into the ditch, it would not even be measurable. Mr. Smith stated that according to the City Engineer and his Engineer there would be no drainage problems. Mr. Smith stated he did not know of anything else this lot could be used fo~ therefore, the office building was the best use of the property. Councilman Kenna asked which way the paved parking lot would slope. Mr. Smith stated the lot would be paved all around the building. Everything from the front of the building should drain out to Harwood Road and everything to the east of the building should drain into the drainage ditch. Councilman Thomas asked if there would be a problem in draining all of the paved area to the east or to Harwood. Mr. Smith stated there would be no problem. They were not going to pave a part of the lot, there would be grass and trees there. A small portion on the west side of the building would be hard to drain to Harwood or the east. Mr. Smith stated there should be no problem in draining everything in front of the building to Harwood. Mr. J. Lunsford, 3816 Diamond Loch East, appeared before the Coun~il. March 9, 1981 Page 4 Mr. Lunsford stated he was presently the owner of the property and would like to reserve his comments until after the opposition had spoken. Mayor Faram granted Mr. Lunsford rebuttal time. Mayor Faram called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition of this request to please come forward. Mrs. Aubrey Chaffin, 5144 Jennings Drive, appeared before the Council. Mrs. Chaffin stated she lived right behind the property that was being reconsidered to be rezoned. Mrs. Chaffin stated she would like to point out that you could not put the drainage on to Harwood Road since Harwood sloped back to Grapevine Highway. Mrs. Chaffin stated that in the city's plat book it stated that certain portions of this plat lay within designated portions of the flood plain. Mrs. Chaffin stated the flood plain maps were made by the National Flood Insurance Program. Mrs. Chaffin stated if this property was zoned Local Retail there were 65 different types of businesses that could go in. There were things that were undesirable that could go in their backyards. Councilman Hubbard stated that Mr. Smith had lived in this city all his life, did she really feel he would build something that was undesirable. Mrs. Chaffin stated she hoped Mr. Smith would consider the people living there. Mrs. Chaffin stated there were vacant buildings in all the area shopping centers and she felt they would rent to anyone that would pay rent. Mr. Gene Burroughs, 5132 Jennings, appeared before the Council. Mr. Burroughs stated his property adjoined to the back of the property in question. Mr. Burroughs stated he had appeared before the Council on January 26, 1981, and his requests against the property being rezoned were still the same. Mr. Burroughs stated the neighbor- hood was zoned to be single family residents. Mr. Burroughs stated that the last time it rained he lost approximately 150 cubic feet of his yard. Mr. Burroughs stated they were trying to raise their families in that neighborhood, it was single family and they wanted it to stay single family. Mr. Burroughs asked for rebuttal time. March 9, 1981 P ag e 5 Mrs. Myrtis Byrd, 8520 Little Dude Court, appeared before the Council. Mrs. Byrd stated she wanted to go on record as still opposed to this zoning request. Mrs. Byrd stated the residents of the area had discussed pooling their money to buy the property and donate it to the city for a park, that was how bad they wanted to keep it single family. Mrs. Byrd stated that anything that would add to keeping the water from being spread out was going to put it deeper in someone's yard. Mrs. Byrd stated that when it started flooding the whole neighborhood was going to deteriorate. Mrs. Byrd stated that Mr. Smith had said he would build some thing real nice there, his building on the Access Road was not something she would want in her neighborhood because of the swimming pools setting out. Mrs. Byrd stated that every time she came by there, there were about five cars parked on the Access Road and she thought that was a violation of the law. Mrs. Byrd stated she would like to go on record as saying one reason she was against this rezoning was she was sure the city did not have the manpower to do what needed to be done to enforce the zonings once they were rezoned because right behind her, the O. D. Stewart place that has been in court, is suppose to be zoned residential, but they are operating a business there right now. Mrs. Byrd stated there were several cars from several states parked there and they stayed there day and night. Mrs. Byrd stated she did not care if they operated a business there, but it was the filthiest place she had ever seen. Mrs. Byrd stated she had been trying to get something done about it for over a year and a half and had not succeeded yet. Mrs. Byrd stated a building was put up in front of their business and it was not completed and the lot was not paved, but they were operating a garage sale out of it. Mrs. Byrd stated that Barbara, who operated the Beauty Shop, told her she was not allowed to open her doors until the lot was paved. Mrs. Byrd stated what she was pointing out was that once something was rezoned it seemed like the citizens were not being protected. Mrs. Byrd asked who would protect the residents if Mr. Smith decided not to finish his building. Mrs. Byrd stated the residents in the neighborhood had hired an attorney, they had Deed Restrictions and they were going to fight the rezoning if they had to go all the way to Washington. March 9, 1981 Page 6 Mayor Faram asked for the address where the garage sale was being conducted. Mrs. Byrd stated it was right next to the New Dimensions Beauty Shop, on the Grapevine Highway. Mayor Faram instructed Mr. Horvath to look into the matter. Mayor Faram called for anyone wishing to speak in opposition. There being none, Mayor Faram granted Mr. Lunsford rebuttal time. Mr. J. Lunsford appeared before the Council. Mr. Lunsford stated to set the record straight, he bought the property not for an investment but to build a home on. In 1965, when Tarrant County Junior College announced the voters had approved the plans for TCJC and in late October when they purchased the property across from Harwood Road to handle traffic in the area. Mr. Lunsford stated at that time the city indicated they would need 30 feet off his property, none from the other side. Mr. Lunsford stated he received $788.00 for 13,140 square feet of land which in effect took 30 feet off the front of his property. Mr. Lunsford stated that after the 30 feet was taken he was not interested in building a home there. Mr. Lunsford stated the assessment for the curb and gutter was rendered, he anticipated a rate of $2.50 a foot, which was residential rate at the time, he was assessed at the rate of $5.50 a foot which totaled in the neighborhood of $2,400. Mr. Lunsford stated he was not afforded any relief from the assessment. Mr. Lunsford stated he just wanted relief from the financial burden he had experienced with the property. Mr. Lunsford stated he felt Mr. Smith had the best use for the property and it would be an asset to the city. Mr. Lunsford stated he did not feel this was residential property. Councilman Hubbard asked Mr. Lunsford if he had received a letter from Mr. Doug Hudman. Mr. Lunsford replied no. Mr. Smith stated he understood the feelings of the residents, but he felt this property was no longer residential property. The residents were opposed to commercial, but no one had offered any alternative for the property. Mr. Smith stated he felt it was distress property and there was no one interested in purchasing it. March 9, 1981 Page 7 Councilman Hubbard asked Mr. Smith if he had any intentions of putting in a business that would be open 24 hours. Mr. Smith replied no, he had no intention of putting in any kind of retail business. Mr. Smith stated Mrs. Byrd had mentioned the property he had on the Access Road, he had informed the leasee more than once to remove the tubs. Mr. Smith stated that he had in fact advised him that if they were not removed he was going to evict him. Councilman Hubbard stated five units had been referred to (on Harwood), was 1100 square feet adequate parking space. Mr. Smith stated there would be adequate parking. Mayor Faram granted Mr. Burroughs rebuttal time. Mr. Burroughs stated the residents had no guarantee that once the property was rezoned local retail, what type of business it was going to be. Mr. Burroughs stated a letter was mentioned from a specific law firm. A letter did go out because the residents did intend to uphold their Deed Restrictions and see that it stayed single family. Mr. Burroughs stated he would ask the Council to consider the people that lived in the neighborhood. Mrs. Chaffin appeared before the Council. Mrs. Chaffin stated she would like to know more about the retaining wall. The retaining wall would be behind her. Mrs. Chaffin stated the lot was already higher than her property and if it was filled in it would be about seven feet higher than her property, that meant all the water would come down on her lot. Mr. Albin, City Engineer, stated he was not concerned about additional run-off from the building up off the property. Mr. Albin stated his concern was about the retaining wall. Mr. Albin stated he had talked with Mr. Perkins about this. Mr. Albin stated that when he saw the construction plans he would make sure it was in conformance. Councilman Freeman asked Mr. Smith if he would be agreeable to cleaning out the ditch and making it wider. March 9, 1981 Page 8 Mr. Smith stated he would be agreeable to cleaning out the ditch. Councilman Freeman asked Mr. Smith if it would be feasible that he might clean the ditch out, widen it and make it deeper down to the large outlet. Mr. Smith stated that would be no problem. Councilman Freeman asked if that would not improve the situation. Mr. Albin stated yes, this property was in the flood plain and must comply with the Flood Ordinance. Mayor Faram closed the public hearing. 11. Mayor Faram advised the Council there was a legal petition and would require four affirmative votes for approval. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE FOR 80-36 APPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 879 Councilman Hubbard moved seconded by Councilman Kenna, to approve PZ 80-36, Ordinance No. 879. Councilman Freeman moved, seconded by Councilwoman Groves, to amend the motion to state "Mr. Smith would work with the City Engineer to improve the drainage." Amended motion carried 5-0. Original motion as amended carried 5-0. 12. Councilman Hubbard stated that in view of the fact that Mr. Henderson was going to be out of the city for the next month he moved to approve the Mayor's appointment of Mr. Szol to the Civil Service Commission. Councilman Kenna seconded the motion. Councilman Thomas stated he was not against the appointment of Mr. Szol, he was opposed to the way the vacancy was being declared. Councilman Thomas stated it appeared to him there should be two motions. Since there was only one he could not vote for it, yet he did not care to vote against Mr. Szol. Mayor Faram stated that in view of the Rules of Procedure he would be required to vote. Motion carried 4-1; Councilmen Kenna, Freeman, Hubbard and Councilwoman Groves voting for; Councilman Thomas voting against. Mayor Faram announced he had received Jim Ramsey's resignation from the Civil Service Commission and the Council would be asked to approve an appointment at the next meeting. Mayor Faram declared a ten minute recess. Mayor Faram called the meeting back to order. The same Council Members and Staff were present as recorded at the beginning of the meeting. 13. Mr. Horvath stated the bids for the computer were opened on February 18, 1981. The Council had a work session on March 4th and discussed the various options, bid requirements, service requirements, the hardware-software availability and maintenance reliability of the various systems. Mr. Horvath stated the Coucnil and staff recommended that the bid of IBM be accepted in the amount of $95,049.50 and the software be provided by Municipal Software for approximately $19,900. Councilman Hubbard moved, seconded by Councilman Kenna, to accept the bid of IBM in the amount of $95,049.50 and the software to be provided by Municipal Software. Councilman Freeman asked if there would be a maintenance contract, $7,092.00 was left out of the motion unless it was included in the $95,049.50. Mr. Horvath stated it was not included in the $95,049.50. Mr. Donald French, 3312 Denberry Drive, Fort Worth, representative of FMG Corporation, appeared before the Council. Mr. French stated FMG was one of the bidders on this proposal. Mr. French stated he had a few questions in regard to this bid. Mr. French stated the initial specifications said the city was accepting bids for a municipal base system including hardware application program, hardware/software services. At the original bidders meeting it was stated they wanted a turn-key package. The turn-key package was a complete computer system supplied by one manufacturer for one company, not buying hardware from one place and software from some place else. Mr. French stated that when you bought it separate if there was a failure in the system it was going to come down to who was at fault, hardware or software. Mr. French stated FMG Corporation presented its bid with a capacity greater than what they felt the city needed. Mr. French stated FMG could have presented a smaller bid, but felt that putting a complete package together to meet the city's current and future needs was best. March 9, 1981 Page 9 RECESS BACK TO ORDER March 9, 1981 Page 10 Mr. French stated all he wanted was for the Council to make sure that when they approved a system they were looking at the current and future needs of the city. Mayor Faram asked Mr. French if the cost on Data General was considerably higher than the IBM. The Data General was projected at $189,550.00 and the IBM at $163,489.50. Mayor Faram asked Mr. French if he had a difference with this. Mr. French stated he agreed with the calculations. He was questioning the capacity that the city needed. Motion to accept the bid of IBM carried 5-0. 14. Mayor Faram stated he had been advised that Mr. Griffith was not present. Mayor Faram asked if Mr. Griffith was aware he was on the agenda. Mr. Horvath stated Mr. Griffith was aware he was on the agenda. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST OF J. D. GRIFFITH FOR A VARIANCE FROM BRICK ORDINANCE (POSTPONED JANUARY 12, 1981) DENIED Mr. Horvath stated that Mr. Griffith had come in for a variance to the Brick Ordinance because his garage was not 75% brick and when he appeared before the Council it was discovered that his property had never been platted. The Council asked that Mr. Griffith plat his property first and postponed the issue of the Brick Ordinance. Mayor Faram asked if Mr. Griffith made it known that he was unable to attend the meeting tonight. Mr. Horvath replied no. Councilman Hubbard moved, seconded by Councilwoman Groves to deny the request of Mr. J. D. Griffith. Councilman Kenna stated he thought someone had gone out and looked at the building. Mr. Horvath stated that he and City Manager Chuck Williams went out on Friday and looked at the building. Mr. Horvath stated that a month ago he would have said the building looked acceptable, however, Friday when he was out there the wood on the front was buckling and did not look acceptable at this time. Councilman Kenna asked how much brick would have to be put on the building to meet the code. Mr. Horvath stated the front would have to be bricked. March 9, 1981 P ag e 11 Councilman Freeman asked what the city would require Mr. Griffith to do if the request was denied. Mr. Horvath stated he would be required to brick the building. Mayor Faram asked how the permit got issued to start with. Mr. Horvath stated the permit was issued and stated the building would be 75% brick. Mayor Faram asked that during the inspections if it was not noticed the building was not 75% brick. Mr. Horvath stated thp building was never inspected. Councilman Kenna asked if there was any brick on the garage at all. Mr. Horvath replied no. Motion to deny carried 5-0. 15. Councilman Freeman moved, seconded by Councilman Hubbard, to approve Ordinance No. 880. Motion carried 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE ON HA.l'{DTCAP PARKING APPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 880 16. Councilman Freeman moved, seconded by Councilman Kenna, to approve Resolution No. 81-5. Mayor Faram asked the.City Secretary if the signatures had been verified. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CALLING FOR REFERENDUM TO BE PLACED ON BALLOT FOR SPECIAL ELECTION APRIL 4, 1981 APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 81-5 Mrs. Moore replied yes. Mayor Faram read the following information that would be placed on the ballot: "FOR the adoption of the Firemen's and Policeman's Civil Service Act (to apply to Police Department only) "AGAINST the adoption of the Firemen's and Policeman's Civil Service Act (to apply to Police Department only) Motion to approve carried 5-0. March 9, 1981 Page 12 17. Councilman Freeman moved, seconded by Councilman Kenna, to approve Resolution No. 81-6. Motion carried 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CERTIFYING BALLOTS FOR APRIL 4, 1981, ELECTION APPROVED RESOLUTION 81-6 l7a. Mayor Faram read the following memo from Assistant City Manager Dennis Horvath: The City's Public Officials Liability Insurance expires March 16th. The insurance company will not bind for a one month period. (All other insurance is covered until March 24th. EMERGENCY ITEM ADDED PUBLIC OFFICIALS INSURANCE The city has three options: 1. Renew the Public Officials liability for one year then accept a bid on the 23rd, may cancel the remainder of the year. This option potentially may be far to expensive. 2. Do without this insurance until bids are awarded on the 23rd. 3. Accept one of the following bids at this time. (Public Officials liability only) A. CMI (Crawford, Mitchell, Thomas) 1. $500 deductible per official, $2,500 per occurrence ($2,000,000) - $6.393.01 2. $500 deductible per official, $5,000 per occurrence B. Alexander & Alexander $2,500 deductible 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 $5,959 $8,341 $9,533 $10,427 $11,022 Councilman Kenna moved, seconded by Councilman Hubbard, to approve the bid of Crawford, Mitchell, Thomas, Option one. Motion carried 5-0. 18. Mayor Faram adjourned the meeting of March 9, 1981. ATTEST: Jeanette Moore - City Secretary Dick Faram - Mayor March 9, 1981 P ag e 13 ADJOURNMENT