Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1979-02-26 Minutes 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. FEBRUARY 26, 1979 - 7:30 P.M. 1. Mayor Faram called the meeting to order February 26, 1979, at 7:30 p.m. 2. Present: Dick Faram Denver Mi 11 s Jim Wood John Michener Sidney Cavanaugh Dave Freeman Jim Cato Lena Mae Reeder Councilwoman Mayor Councilmen CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Thomas Paul Jeanette Moore Rex McEntire Dick Perkins Allen Bronstad Gary Caldwell Chuck Wi 11 i ams Bobbie McCorkle Tim Moore City ~1anager City Secretary City Attorney City Eng i neer Director Utilities Code Enforcement Officer Police Chief Court Clerk Civil Service Commissioner 3. The invocation was given by Mr. Charles Brinkley 4. Councilman Mills moved, seconded by Councilwoman Reeder, to approve the minutes of the February 5, 1979, regular meeting. Motion carried 6-0; Councilman Michener abstaining due to absence from the meeting. Mayor Faram stated he would now depart from the agenda for an announcement by City Manager Paul. Mr. Paul introduced Mr. Chuck Williams, Police Chief. Mr. Paul stated Chief Williams would take office March 5, 1979. 5. Mrs. Randy Freudiger, 6601 Circleview Court, North Richland Hills, appeared before the Council. Mrs. Freudiger stated that during the two years she had lived in North Richland Hills she had found a lot of inconsistencies in her water bill. Mrs. Freudiger stated it had come to the point that she felt it was a dis-service to her and was being systematically over charged. Mrs. Freudiger stated she went to the Water Department and picked up her water records for the last two years. Mrs. Freudiger stated one bill she was questioning was the November, 1978, bill. INVOCATION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 5, 1979, REGULAR COUNCIL r'1EETING APPROVED CITIZEN PRESENTATION r·1RS. RANDY FREUDIGER CONCERNING WATER BILL February 26, 1979 Page 2 Mrs. Freudiger made the following comparison: The bill for 1-30-77 - 755 cubic feet - 1-30-78 - 1449 cubic feet. On 2-1977 - 649 cubic feet - 2-1978 - 330 cubic feet. On 3-1977 - 612 cubic feet - 3-1978 620 cubic feet. Mrs. Freudiger stated that in April, 1977, she used 665 cubic feet and this was not 30 days, on 4-30-77 she used 665 cubic feet. Mrs. Freudiger stated that was 100 cubic feet more than she used in the same period the previous year, but for less days. t1rs. Freudiger stated that in September of 1977 she used 12975 cubic feet and 1018 in September 1978. The bill was adjusted down to 3044 cubic feet. Mrs. Freudiger stated there were four people that lived in her house, they drank the same amount of tea, take the same number of showers and flush the commode the same number of times. Mrs. Freudiger stated it was physically impossible, in her view point, that the water usage could vary so much. Mrs. Freudiger stated the question she was having now and the bill she would like for the council to help her with, was the bill for November, 1978. They were charged with 3793 cubic feet, in October she was charged with 821 cubic feet and in December 826 cubic feet. Mrs. Freudiger stated when she questioned this bill the Water Department told her it was correct and she would have to pay it. There was one alternative, the Water Department could remove the meter and have it checked. They removed the meter and had it checked and it was correct. Mrs. Freudiger stated she went to the City Manager with her problem. He was very nice and helpful, since that time the City Manager has been replaced. Mrs. Freudiger stated she spoke to the replacement who was very nice and helpful but there was nothing he could do. Mrs. Freudiger stated the City Manager suggested she write a letter to the Mayor requesting to be placed on the Council Agenda. Mrs. Freudiger stated just for everyone's information she had converted the cubic feet to gallons and 821 cubic feet for October came to a little over 6,000 gallons. The cubic feet for November came to about 22,000, which means she used 15,000 gallons of water, according to the city, more water than she used in October. Mrs. Freudiger stated she asked for an adjustment to be made on the bill. However, seeing how it would be difficult to make a fair adjustment on the bill, Mrs. Freudiger asked that her bills of the total year of 1978 be averaged together and let her pay an average bill for the year. Mrs. Freudiger stated she felt this would be fair to the city and to her. February 26, 1979 Page 3 Mayor Faram asked Mrs. Freudiger if she was furnished copies of the certification that the meter was correct. Mrs. Freudiger stated yes, she was sent a letter. Mayor Faram asked Mrs. Freudiger if it was possible for her to have had a leak. Mrs. Freudiger stated they had someone check for leaks and they told her if it leaked one month it would leak the next month. Mrs. Freudiger stated the man in the Water Department told her when he compared her bill with the month of August, at which time they were on vacation, 947 cubic feet of water was used. Mrs. Freudiger stated the man said it looked like the meter was under-read because 1928 cubic feet was used in July and 1018 in September. Mayor Faram asked Mrs. Freudiger if she was suggesting the city average the bill for the total year. Mrs. Freudiger stated this was the only fair way to do it. Mayor Faram asked Mr. Bronstad if the meters were read every month. Mr. Bronstad replied yes, but the bills were estimated in December, 1977 and January, 1978 because of bad weather the meter readers could not get out and read them. Councilman Freeman asked Mrs. Freudiger if the Water Department had given her a comparison as to what her neighbors used, Mr. Boyd and Mr. Polster. Mrs. Freudiger stated the Polster's lived down the street and they had a swimming pool. Councilman Cato stated. an analysis showed that in 1977 she used a total of 19,968 cubic feet and in 1978 14,662 cubic feet, 5,000 cubic feet less. Mrs. Freudiger stated that in the month of July, 1977, she was charged with 5357 cubic feet, June 1630 cubic feet and August 4096, after an adjustment was made. Mayor Faram asked City Attorney McEntire if in the interest of whatever was just and fair, did the Council have the authority to make an adjustment on Mrs. Freudiger's bill. February 26, 1979 Page 4 City Attorney McEntire replied that if the Council $tarted adjusting bills on anything except a reading, the Bonding Company would be running the Water Department. Mr. McEntire stated the Council did not have the authority to say whether or not the money was owed. It has to be based on a metering device. Mayor Faram stated he felt the Water System belonged to all the people of the city and based on the certified letters stating the meter was correct, there was no recourse the Council could take. Mayor Faram called for a motion as to the disposition of this request. Councilman Freeman stated he would suggest Mrs. Freudiger get with Mr. Bronstad and look at the neighbor's in comparison, at her selection, to see if her total comparison was different from the people adjacent to her. Councilman Michener moved that the Council honor Mrs. Freudiger's request subject to further investigation and make an adjustment after the investigation. Councilman Cato asked Councilman Michener if his motion was stating to let the city go into a system of averaging the bills until the meters could be checked. Councilman Michener stated in this case only. Motion died for the lack of a second. Councilman Cavanaugh moved, seconded by Councilman Wood, to table this request and for Mr. Bronstad to investigate the total system. Councilman Cavanaugh stated he understood that air running thru the lines will make meters read like it was water. Due to the water problem the city has had this could be the situation. After an investigation from the Water Department and evaluation of the total neighborhood on both sides of the street, let Mrs. Freudiger come back and re-present her case. Motion carried 5-2; Councilmen Wood, Cavanaugh, Cato, Freeman and Councilwoman Reeder voting for; Councilmen r1ills and Michener against. . 6. Mayor Faram read the following ordinance: "BE IT ORDAINED by the City Counci 1 of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, that: 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to exhibit, sell, possess or distribute any literature, film, prints, pictures or other material which is pornographic in nature within the City limits of North Richland Hills. 2. "Pornographic in nature" is defined as exhibition of a nude human body or nude portions of a human body or bodies or exhibition of human beings or any animals engaged in real or simulated sexual intercourse or copulation. 3. February 26, 1979 Page 5 CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE CONCERNING PORNOGRAPHIC LITERATURE, FILMS, PRINTS, PICTURES, OR OTHER MATERIAL APPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 734 Any person violating any portion of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not in excess of $200. 4. No city permits or licenses shall be issued for any person, firm or corporation to engage in any activity prohibited therein. Mayor Faram stated this ordinance is being considered because there had been inquiries about the possibility of obtaining a permit to put in a distribution center and distribute pornographic films with a viewing room. Mayor Faram stated nothing could be found in the City Code of Ordinances that prohibits this type of center. Mayor Faram stated he asked the City Attorney to draw-up something that the City might have grounds to hold these people back. Mayor Faram stated he had some requests from citizens wishing to speak on this item. Therefore, he would depart from the rules and let them speak. Mr. David Wells appeared before the Council. Mr. Wells stated he was speaking on behalf of some of the citizens, of North Richland Hills and he was for the passing of this ordinance. Mr. Floyd Jones appeared before the Council and stated he backed this ordinance 100%. Mr. Jones stated he would be for making the ordinance stricter if possible. Mr. Marvin Reed appeared before the Council. Mr. Reed stated he had wanted to come before the Council about two years ago and request an ordinance of this nature. Mr. Reed stated he was very proud of the Council for considering this ordinance and he was willing to help in any way he could. Mr. Johnny Kramer appeared before the Council. Mr. Kramer stated he was under the impression someone had bought some property in the city and was ready to build a pornographic shop. Mr. Kramer stated he was here to fight for the ordinance. Mr. Kramer stated he did not want this type of place in the city. The churches in the city were also for this ordinance. Mrs. E. S. Byrd appeared before the Council. Mrs. Byrd stated she was thankful that there were city officials that were trying to enforce this type of ordinance. Mrs. Byrd stated she hoped the city would do everything they could to clean-up the city. Mrs. Byrd stated she appreciated what the Council was trying to do but felt the $200.00 was not enough. Mr. Jesse Holmes appeared before the Council. Mr. Holmes stated he appreciated the opportunity to present a citizens idea on this ordinance. Mr. Holmes stated he was glad the Council was proposing to pass this ordinance. Mr. Holmes stated as a citizen he was interested in what was going on in the city. Mr. Holmes stated he was for passing this ordinance and as a citizen he would do whatever he could to help. Mr. Holmes stated he would also like to see the fine set higher. Mr. A. King appeared before the Council. Mr. King stated he was for the ordinance being passed. Mr. King stated The penalty should be higher. City Attorney McEntire stated the penalty was the maximum, you cannot have a closed in penalty. Mr. James Eager appeared before the Council. Mr. Eager stated he was very pleased with the way the ordinance was written. Mr. Eager stated he had a petition with over 140 signatures and a letter from Davis Boulevard Methodist Church in favor of this ordinance. Mr. Dean Bingham appeared before the Council. stated he was very pleased with the ordinance. stated he had a question of the City Attorney. Mr. Bingham asked Mr. McEntire if this ordinance passed would some of the literature that is presently being sold in the convenience stores be unlawful to be sold. Mr. Bingham Mr. Bingham February 26, 1979 Page 6 Mr. McEntire stated he did not want to mislead anyone. This is a lot more compl ex than everybody real i zes. Mr. t1cEnti re stated the ordinance did not mean it would not be unlawful to sell the literature. Mr. McEntire stated the ordinance that was read is unconstitutional, it has been held to be unconstitutional. The word pornographic in nature, pornographic is not only lawful it is a protected right under the First Amendment, freedom of speech. Mr. McEntire stated that obscenity was unlawful. Mr. McEntire stated he had drawn another ordinance which deals with this on a zoning basis which would attempt to zone it as Fort Worth and Dallas has done. The new ordinance will keep it more than 1,000 feet away from church, a public or private elementary or secondary school, or a district restricted to residential. Hopefully there are few places in the city that this type of place could go. Mr. Bingham stated he would do all he could for the ordinance. Mr. McEntire stated he and Councilman Cato had devised an ordinance tonight which will adopt the definition of obscenity in the Zoning Ordinance and make it prohibited just long enough to get one in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. John Green appeared before the Council. Mr. Green stated he had heard a lot of people tonight speak against pornography and one thing that bothered him was it would not do any good to have this ordinance if the parents did not help. If parents paid more attention to their children and had more control a shop of this kind would not last long. Mr. Green stated he did appreciate the Council taking a stand on this. Mr. Hal Brooks, Pastor North Richland Hills Baptist Church appeared before the Council. Mr. Brooks stated it was his understanding that the Supreme Court, months ago made a judgement that local communities are going to be given more responsibility to determine the cultured and moral climate of the community. Mr. Brooks stated he would like to say that the 2,500 members of North Richland Baptist Church stand in full support of this Council and the ordinance which they propose. Councilman Cato stated to deal a little more realistica~ly with the problem, as Mr. McEntire pointed out, pornographic is a protected right whereas obscenity is left to the local communities to define and hopefully to legislate on. Councilman Cato stated the change in the ordinance would be changing the word pornographic in nature to obscenity and go on to more specific defines on what is considered obscene which may stand a better chance of holding up in the courts, until the Zoning Ordinance could be :hanged. February 26, 1979 Page 7 February 26, 1979 Page 8 Mayor Faram asked Mr. McEntire if the change could be put in the proposed ordinance. Mr. McEntire stated if the Council passed the ordinance that he and Councilman Cato recommended it was stronger than the ordinance that was read. The new one defined obscenity. Mr. McEntire stated that if the Council was going to pass something they may as well pass something that could be defended in court. Mr. McEntire stated the ordinance that was read tonight he could not defend and he could defend the one proposed by Councilman Cato until the Zoning Board acted on the ordinance that was to be put in the Zoning Ordinance. Councilman Cato stated that under the ordinance that was read it makes it unlawful to sell Playboy magazine. If we tried to stop the sale of Playboy magazine we would most assuredly be in court. As Mr. McEntire pointed out this ordinance will .not hold up in court. With the new definition we cannot attack the convenience stores for the softcore magazines they sell, it stands a chance of the ordinance holding up until the Zoning Ordinance can be changed. ~1ayor Faram asked the City Attorney to read the ordinance that he proposed. City Attorney McEntire read the following ordinance: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas, that: 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, corporation to exhibit, sell, possess or distribute any literature, films, prints, pictures or other material which is obscene within the City limits of North Richland Hills. 2. Obscene if hereby defined as: (1) Offering for a consideration physical contact in the form of wrestling or tumbling between persons of the opposite sex; or (2) Offering for a consideration activities between male and female persons and/or persons of the same sex when one or more of the persons are nude or semi-nude; or February 26, 1979 Page 9 (3) Displaying for sale a book, magazine, newspaper, picture, movie, film, photograph, drawing, or other printed or pictorial material which explicit)y depicts: (A) human genitals in a state of sexual arousal; or (B) acts of masterbation, sexual intercourse or deviate sexual intercourse. 3. Any person violating any portion of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not in excess of $200. 4. No city permits or licenses shall be issued for any person, firm or corporation to engage in any activity prohibited herein. Mayor Faram asked Mr. McEntire if he felt he could defend this ordinance in Court. Mr. McEntire stated he could defend the ordinance. Mayor Faram stated he would depart from the rules and let Mr. David Wells speak. Mr. Wells appeared before the Council and stated he would like for the Council to state in the ordinance that no permit could be issued without an election. Mayor Faram stated it would cost the city too much to have an election. City Attorney McEntire stated the city would not issue a permit. Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilwoman Reeder, to approve ordinance 734, with the deletion of pornographic and substitute the word obscene in paragraph one and the deletion of paragraph two in its entirety and substitute the attached. Motion carried 7-0. Mayor Faram called a fifteen 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. BACK TO ORDER 7. Mayor Faram read the following Resolution. WHEREAS, the City of North Richland Hills is obligated to adequately supply water to its current customers, and WHEREAS, the City of North Richland Hills in recognition of this obligation will attempt to judicially monitor and limit the addition of new water customers in order that the water system shall not acquire more customers than its ability to adequately supply, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The following allocation procedure will be established: (1) The City will limit new water meter sets to ten (10) per month for each marketing entity (any firm where sales, advertising or marketing efforts are conducted through a single parent company name). Each marketing entity may apply for no more than three (3) month allocation in advance. (2) New meter sets will be limited to serve no more than 100 apartment units (apartment units as defined as occupancy for one family) until the 2.0 MG overhead storage tank is placed in service, then an additional 100 until new water source (TRA) is acquired and placed in service. (3) Total number of water customers shall not exceed 12,500 until 2.0 MG overhead storage tank is placed in service, then the total shall not exceed 14,500 water customers until new water source (TRA) is acquired and placed in service. (4) All applicants for zoning and/or platting shall be furnished a copy of this resolution at time of application. Mayor Faram stated he had a letter from the Builders Association in support of this resolution. Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilman Wood, to approve Resolution 79-3. Motion carred 7-0. 8. Mayor Faram advised the Council the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this request with the stipulation that Lots 10 & 11, Block 1, Lots 6 & 7, Block 2, Lot 6 & 7, Block 3 and Lots 11 & 12, Block 4, be 1,800 square feet of living space. Mr. Marion Massey, 2701 Airport Freeway, appeared before the Council to present this case. February 26, 1979 Page 10 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION TO MONITOR AND LIMIT THE ADDITION OF NEW ~JATER CUSTm1ERS APPROVED RESOLUTION 79-3 PUBLIC HEARING PZ 79-1, REOUEST OF FENIMORE, DUKE & BAILEY, TO REZONE FROM 1F-12 to 1F-9 Mr. Massey stated this tract contained approximately 23 acres. It is bounded on the east by Rufe Snow Drive, on the south by Victoria and the west by Lariat. Mr. Massey stated the tract of land to the east of this property is now under development and is zoned 1F-8 with a minimum floor space of 1,700. To the south of this property is 1F-9 with 1,500 minimum square feet of living area. To the west is Meadow Lake which is 1F-12 and where most of the people live that oppose this zoning request. Mr. Massey stated the Planning and Zoning Commission approved this request. The lots to the west of this property would remain 1F-12 and they back-up to 1F-12 lots, the lots to the south would be 1F-9 and would back-up to 1F-9 lots. The lots that the 1F-9 lots would back-up to have 1,500 square feet of living area and the lots being rezoned would have 1,700 square feet of living area. Mr. Massey stated Lots 10 & 11, Block 2, Lots 6 & 7, Block 2, Lots 6 & 7, Block 3, and Lots 11 & 12 Block 4, would be 1,800 square feet of living area. Mr. Massey stated he felt they had met most of the complaints of the opposition Mr. Massey stated it was his understanding that Phase II of Meadow Lake has a portion of lots that were going to be zoned 1F-9. Mr. Massey stated that even though the Planning and Zoning Commission approved this request as having 1F-9 lots except for the ones excluded, a minimum of 1,600 square feet of living space, they were prepared to agree to putting 1,800 square feet homes thru out the subdivision, but would request the lots to be 1F-9 zoning. Mr. Massey stated the Land Use Map of the city, not only to the east of Rufe Snow, but to the west, which includes their property, is high density residential. Councilman Mills asked if the extra line across the bottom of the plat excluded the property that is already zoned and was not asking for a re-zoning on. Mr. Massey stated the entire tract was now zoned 1F-12. Mayor Faram called for those in opposition to speak. Mr. Jim McCracken President Homeowners Association, appeared before the Counci'. February 26, 1979 Page 11 Mr. McCracken stated he represented the people whG would be directly affected by the request for re-zoning. Mr. McCracken stated the overall emphasis that had been asked of the homeowners in Meadow Lake, the overall riding influence has been that inflation is causing the builders to ask for re-zoning. Mr. McCracken stated the builders do not feel like they can buil'd the same size houses that a 1F-12 size requires and for this reason they ask for re-zoning. Mr. IMcCracken stated there were basically three items among the homeowners. One was economics concerning the present homeowners. Mr. McCracken stated that even with 1,800 square feet homes on a 1F-9 lot is still around $70,000.00 to $80,000.00 homes and that is still $15,000.00 to $20,000.00 lower than the Meadow Lake homes. Mr. McCracken stated there was a development above Meadow Lake called Holiday Hills and there was basically a separation between the two by an incline and a hill. Mr. McCracken stated he felt the homeowners of Meadow Lake were being asked to possibly suffer the $15,000.00 to $20,000.ÕO loss. Mr. McCracken stated he did not feel the homeowners should have to bear the burden of the inflation problem the builders may have. Mr. McCracken stated the second area was that of another section of land that ties into the land for re-zoning, and would back up to Roaring Creek, which is the entrance to Meadow Lake that is presently for sale and he had been in contact with some people interested in buying the property as long as it stayed 1F-12. Mr. McCracken stated the people wanted to put 2,000 to 2,400 square foot homes on the property. Mr. McCracken stated the third area was basically one area the homeowners were misled on, a ntlmber of the homeowners presently in Meadow Lake, when they bought the property it was exposed to them that the property was zoned 1F-12 and a very good potential it would stay 1F-12. Mr. McCracken stated the homeowners had gone to great length with the developer of Meadow Lake to make sure they had very nice residential property. Mr. McCracken stated the homeowners felt the possibility of financial loss was a great one and that is why they were asking the Council to take into consideration the possible loss to the homeowners and not approve this change in zoning from 1F-12 to 1F-9. Councilman Mills asked Mr. McCracken if he had something to show how many people he was representing. February 26, 1979 Page 12 Mr. McCracken stated there were two petitions on file that represented the homeowners that were directly affected and within 200 feet of the property that is asking for re-zoning. Mr. McCracken stated the other petition was signed by people within Meadow Lake Association. Councilman Mills asked Mr. McCracken if he knew how many names were on the petition. Mr. McCracken stated the initial mailing that went out was about 50 names, 30 to 35 people signed the one surrounding the 200 feet and 15 to 20 signed the one that was not within 200 feet. Mr. Massey stated he thought he spoke correctly when he said that Mr. McCracken did not represent the people on the south of Meadow Lake. Mr. Massey stated he understood the Homeowners Association were the people that lived in Meadow Lake, which would be the people to the west that live on Lariat. Mr. Massey stated he had made every effort to answer the Homeowners Associations complaints and felt he had made considerable progress and each time there had been a new goal for him to meet. Mr. Massey stated he felt he had gone as far as he could. Mr. McCracken stated the origina~ petition that was sent out a lot of people that signed lived in the Holiday Hills area and they were against the re-zoning. Mayor Faram asked McCracken if he submitted the petition prior to the Planning and Zoning hearing. Mr. McCracken replied yes. Mayor Faram stated the Planning and Zoning Commission did not recommend passing the original zoning, with that in mind, did the Homeowners Association still oppose the zoning. Councilman Freeman stated there were two petitions submitted, one when 1F-8 zoning was asked for and one when 1F-9 zoning was asked for. Mr. Massey stated substantial changes had been made since the petition was dated. Mayor Faram asked Councilman Freeman if both petitions were dated prior to the Planning and Zoning recommendation. Councilman Freeman replied yes, one was dated before the 1F-8 request and before the 1F-9 request. Mayor Faram stated there had been changes recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mayor Faram asked if the petitioners still objected. February 26, 1979 Page 13 Mr. McCracken stated they still objected to the re-zoning. Mayor Faram asked the City Attorney if the petition was still valid since there had been changes made on the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. City Attorney McEntire stated the petition was still valid. Mayor Faram stated that if the petition was valid it would require 3/4 vote of the Council. City Attorney McEntire stated that was correct. Mr. D. C. Prewitt, 6633 Victoria, appeared before the Council. Mr. Prewitt stated he had fought this zoning change as hard as anyone. Mr. Prewitt stated he had some second thoughts and reached the conclusion that they were better off with 1,800 square feet homes on small lots because of the water situation. Mr. Prewitt stated since the developer agreed to build 1,800 square foot houses he withdrew his objection. Mr. Forrest Grubb, Planning and Zoning Member, appeared before the Council. Mr. Grubb stated he was a little disappointed because Mr. McCracken stated the night the Planning and Zoning Commission approved this case, he could live with it. Mr. Grubb stated there were consideration~ that this property backed up to Rufe Snow, a main thoroughfare and the Commission looked at it from the standpoint that no one would want next to a main thoroughfare. Mr. Grubbs stated the other factor was that every good planning has a buffer zone and the Commission planned the buffer zone with the builder, he went along with it and we thought this was a livable deal. Mr. Grubbs stated you could not drive down the street and say whether a lot was 9,500 square feet or 12,000 square feet. Mr. Grubb stated that 2/3 majority of the people representing the homeowners that were at the Planning and Zoning meeting approved of what the Commission was doing. Councilman Wood stated that in the Planning and Zoning minutes of January 25, 1979, page 7, stated that Mr. McCracken informed Mr. Grubb the Meadow Lake Homeowners Association authorized him not to accept the compromise. Mr. Grubb stated he spoke with Mr. McCracken and he indicated he and not the Homeowners Association would not accept a compromise. Mayor Faram closed the Public Hearing. February 26, 1979 Page 14 9. Councilman Mills moved, seconded by Councilman Cato to approve Ordinance No. 735, PZ 79-1 subject to the restriction that the minimum house would be 1,800 square feet of living space. Councilman Wood asked Mr. Massey to go over where the buffer zone would be. Mr. Massey stated all the lots that back up to a 1F-12 zoning will remain 1F-12. Mr. Massey stated the only changes to a 1F-9 zoning do not abut or touch a 1F-12. Councilman Wood asked what size houses he planned to build. Mr. Massey stated a 1F-12 house on every lot in the subdivision. Councilman Cavanaugh asked if any of the houses would be over 1,800 square feet. Mr. Massey stated he was saying no house would be under 1,800 square feet. Motion to approve failed by a vote of 4-2; Councilmen Michener, Cavanaugh, Cato and Wood voting against; Councilman Mills and Councilwoman Reeder voting for; Councilman Freeman abstaining. Mayor Faram asked Councilman Freeman why he was abstaining. Councilman Freeman stated he was abstaining on the advice of the City Attorney because he signed the petition and lived across the street and was very much opposed to the re-zoning. 10. Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilman Wood, to approve PS 78-37, contingent on the requirements outlined in the City Engineers letter of December 8, 1978. Mayor Faram asked Mr. Bronstad how long the sewer on this property had been in existance. Mr. Bronstad replied the sewer had been in existence for several years. Mayor Faram asked if the sewer was put in prior to the City acquiring the Water System. Mr. Bronstad replied yes. Mayor Faram asked if the water line had been put in prior to the acquisition of the Water System. Mr. Bronstad replied yes. Mayor Faram stated the Council was not getting through that they needed these items taken care of before they got to the Council. Mayor Faram stated this person was having to pay for the water and sewer twice. February 26, 1979 Page 15 ORDINANCE CONCERNING PZ 79-1 ORDINANCE NO. 735 DENIED PS 78-37, REQUEST OF LYNN A. BOYD FOR FINAL PLAT OF LOT 3, BLOCK 2, MCMURRAY ADD. POSTPONED 1-22-79 APPROVED February 26, 1979 Page 16 Mr. Bronstad stated that if the Council would give the authorization to the Department Head that anyone tying on to the existing water and sewer, as long as it is not a developer, not to charge them pro rata. Mayor Faram stated that on items II and III, pro rata for water and sewer, the Council had approved previous cases without pro rata. On item I, pro rata for future street improvements, the city did not need anything. Councilman Wood asked if a covenant should be signed on the future street improvements. Mayor Faram stated he did not think they should have to sign a covenant. If this street was ever put on the Bond Program they would be assessed when the street was built. Mayor Faram stated he thought specific instructions had been given to the Staff to have these items cleared before it came to the Council. Councilman Freeman stated for the Staff to be able to clear these things, the ordinance would have to be changed. City Attorney McEntire stated the reason these items came up was because of the way the ordinance was written. Mayor Faram stated he wanted a recommendation brought forth from the Staff. The Council needs to know if a sewer line or water line was already in existence. Councilman Cavanaugh stated the problem was the Staff could not determine the variance in the Ordinance. The Staff has to go by what the ordinance says. The Council agreed at one time to change the ordinance. Mayor Faram stated the Staff could tell the Council in the notes to the Council that these items have been complied with or not complied with. Councilman Cato stated he felt what the Council was missing was the recommendations from the Staff. The Council has the recommendations of the City Engineer, what the Council is looking for if the ordinance is not going to be changed, is the Staff, Engineer and the individual involved, get together and work the problems out and come up with a set of recommendations. The Staff can not deviate from the ordinance as it is written. Mayor Faram stated he would like to have the recommendations from the Staff until the ordinance could be changed. Councilman Cato asked the Staff if they had read the letter from Mr. Stembridge pertaining to this case. Mr. Bronstad replied he had read the letter. Februa~y 26, 1979 Page 17 Councilman Cato asked Mr. Bronstad if he had any agreements or disagreements with Mr. Stembridge's answers to the City Engineer's requirements of December 8, 1979. Mr. Bronstad stated he had no disagreements with Mr. Stembridge's answers. Mr. Delbert Stembridge representing Mr. Lynn Boyd appeared before the Council. Councilman Cato asked Mr. Stembridge if he was entitled to make decisions for Mr. Boyd on this property. Mr. Stembridge replied yes. Councilman Cato stated on item I where the Engineer is requiring pro rata for future street improvements, did he have any objections to signing a covenant. Mr. Stembridge stated he objected to signing a covenant, the reason being when the street is improved this property be assessed like everyone else on the street. Councilman stated the street would be assessed if the city did not have the letter of covenant. However, the letter of covenant takes some of the pressure off the city and also passes with the land to the next owner so he is aware this is going to be a future debt before he is assessed. Mr. Stembridge stated in this case he did not think Mr. Boyd would object to signing a covenant. Councilman Cato stated concerning item II, the 18 inch sewer line in Harmonson; Councilman Cato asked Mr. Bronstad if this lot had sewer service for sometime and already paid for a sewer tap. Mr. Bronstad replied the sewer had been there for many years and tap had been paid. Councilman Cato asked the City Engineer to comment on the $4.00 a lineal foot for the 10 inch water line in Harmonson Road and how it will effect the property. Mr. Perkins stated the $4.00 per lineal foot was not based on the 10 inch line its self, it is based on the rate for pro rata right now. Mr. Perkins stated it was his understanding when he wrote the letter, he was not familiar with the fact water and sewer service existed. Mr. Perkins stated it was his understanding the lot was vacant, no construction on it whatsoever. Councilman Cato stated Mr. Stembridge stated they did have water service it was an oversight on his part and he has taken care of it. Councilman Cato asked the City Engineer if he was aware ther~ was a water line existing there now. Mr. Perkins stated he had not seen any plans showing the water line. Mr. Stembridge stated the water line had been added to the final plat. Councilman Cato made a substitute motion, seconded by Councilman Wood, to approve PS 78-37 conti gent on the signing of a letter of covenant for the pro rata share of Harmonson Road and Dawn Drive. Motion carried 7-0. 11. Councilman Wood moved, seconded by Councilman Freeman, to approve PS 78-98. Councilman Cavanaugh asked if the Developer had agreed to the Engineer's recommendation on item 1, the concrete drainage pipe. Mayor Faram stated there was some disagreement on this item. Councilman Freeman asked the City Engineer to comment on Mr. Massey's letter of January 31, 1979. Mr. Perkins stated he had recommended that underground storm drainage pipe be installed at the rear of these three lots, in compliance with the Sub-division Ordinance. Mr. Perkins stated it was Mr. Masseys contingent that the Bond Program in 1967 provided for the construction of 175 Feet of storm drainage pipe from Tourist Drive in an easterly direction across the rear portion of a part of these lots. Mr. Perkins stated it was Mr. Masseys conti gent that he would prefer the city pay for this as part of the original Bond Program. Mr. Perkins stated as he understood it Mr. Massey would still request the water not be placed in underground pipe but be placed in an open channel from the portion in which the city ends their construction, continuing easterly until it discharges into Big Fossil Creek. Mr. Perkins stated he did not agree with the open channel, it should be put in according to the ordinance. Drainage should be put underground when possible. Mr. Perkins stated that on item III of his letter of January I!, 1979, he had not seen an easement for the sewer line. Mayor Faram stated he would depart from the Rules and let Mr. Massey speak on this request. Mr. Massey stated the dotted line on the plat indicated the easement. The easement goes west to Tourist Drive, at Tourist Drive there is a storm sewer, it has been dumping water out of an open pipe and running across Alco's four lots. Mr. Massey stated in all fairness Februa~y 26, 1979 Page 18 PS78-98, REQUEST OF ALCO DEV. CORP. FOR FINAL PLAT OF LOTS 4,5,&6, BLOCK 14, NORTH HILLS ADD., POSTPONED 1-22-79 APPROVED of treating everyone the same, as he understood that on the Bond Program there was to be a storm sewer from Tourist Drive down to 175 feet east of Tourist Drive. Mr. Massey stated this was private property but he understood it was to be done at taxpayers expense. Mr. Massey stated the drainage had been draining across private property for some time. Mr. Massey stated they would like to have a concrete ditch for the drainage. Mr. Massey stated that if the city could not put in the ditch then he would ask that the city consider participation in drainage. Mayor Faram asked Mr. Massey how many lots were behind his three lots that the water would drain on. Mr. Stembridge stated it was vacant property below the water tower. Mayor Faram asked if the water ever got on anyone elses property. Mr. Stembridge stated no, the water has been running open for several years. Councilman Cavanaugh asked Mr. Perkins what the cost would be for the city to participate in the drainage. Mr. Perkins stated it would cost quite a bit if it were put in by its self. If the city could put it in with some other type of drainage work or possibily combining it with the developers it would cost less. Mr. Perkins stated the 175 feet of pipe was going to be quite expensive. According to the Sub-division Ordinance the developer is required to put the drainage underground. Councilman Mills stated he would like an estimate of what it would cost the city. Mr. Perkins stated the cities portion would be in the neighborhood of $5,000. Councilman Wood withdrew his motion. Councilman Cavanaugh moved to approve PS 78-98 with the stipulation the city participate in the 18 inch drainage on the city portion of the property up to $5,000. Motion dies for the lack of a second. Councilman Wood asked the City Engineer if the Council waived the stipulations of his letter and allowed the developer to build an open ditch, what about flooding and handling of the water problem. February 26, 1979 Page 19 Mr. Perkins stated he felt if an open ditch was allowed sooner or later the citizens would be coming to the Council wanting it put underground. Councilman Cavanaugh moved, seconded by Councilman Cato, for the city to participate in the drainage 175 feet and the developer be responsible for putting his drainage underground to the end of his property to the extent of $5,000.00 to the City of North Richland Hills. Make sure solid pipe is ran from where it ends now to where it is going to end and no opening in the middle. Councilman Freeman asked where the funds would come from to pay the $5,000. Councilman Cavanaugh stated funds to pay the $5,000.00 come from the CIP Fund. Motion carried 4-3; Councilmen Mills, Cavanaugh, Cato and Councilwoman Reeder voting for; Councilmen Wood, Freeman and Michener voting against. 12. Councilman Wood moved, seconded by Councilman Freeman, to approve PS 79-1. Motion carried 7-0. 13. Mayor Faram stated the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this request. Councilman Michener moved, seconded by Councilman Cato, to approve PS 79-2. Council Cato asked the City Engineer if he checked the plat over to see if the revision still complied with the zoning on the property. Mr. Perkins replied yes, all that had been done was remove some deadend streets. Mr. Perkins stated according to the plat it shows only 30 feet for drainage and utility easement not the additional 10 feet for Bell Telephone. Mr. Sisk, Northeast Construction Company, stated the 10 foot easement would be filed with the plat. Councilman Cato moved to amend his motion, seconded by Councilman Cavanaugh, to approve PS 79-2, subject to the 10 foot easement be added to the plat and an up-to-date plat be presented to the city prior to signing of the plat. Motion carried 7-0. February 26, 1979 Page 20 PS 79-1, REQUEST OF J. D. SCOTT FOR REPLAT OF LOT 13AR, BLOCK 11, NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ADD. AND LOT 1R, EDGLEY ADDITION APPROVED PS 79-2, REQUEST OF J. B. SANDLIN NORTHEAST CONST. CO. FOR REPLAT OF BLOCK 1R, HOLIDAY WEST ADDITION APPROVED Mayor Faram called for the vote on the original motion as amended. Original motion as amended carried 7-0. 14. Mayor Faram stated the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this request. Councilman Wood moved, seconded by Councilman Freeman, to approve PS 79-3. Motion carried 7-0. 15. Mayor Faram stated the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this request. Councilman Cato asked if point #4 of the City Engineer's letter of December 8, 1978 had been resolved. Mr. Perkins stated it had been resolved. Mr. Perkins stated the developer would like not to have to pay his pro rata for Chapman Road until the closing March 1, 1979. Councilman Wood moved, seconded by Councilman Cato, to approve PS 79-6. Motion carried 7-0. 16. Mayor Faram read the following Ordinance: AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING VEHICLES FROM BEING DRIVEN ONTO A PUBLIC STREET IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO CAUSE MUD OR DIRT TO BE DEPOSITED ON THE STREET, AND APPROVING A PENALTY. WHEREAS, the dropping of mud on public streets causes dangerous conditions; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS: Section 1. No vehicle shall be driven from unpaved private property, such as a construction site, onto any paved public street if such vehicle tracks, drops, or otherwise deposits mud or dirt on the street. Section 2. Any person, firm, or corporation violating any provision of the foregoing section shall be deemed February 26, 1979 Page 21 PS 79-3, REQUEST OF RICHLAND HILLS FOR REPLAT OF LOTS 1A AND 1B, BLOCK 9 I R ISH MEAD0\4S, SECTION III APPROVED. PS 79-6, REQUEST OF B & L RESOURCES FOR FINAL PLAT OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, NORTHPARK PLAZA, ADD., 2ND FILING APPROVED CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE PROBIBITING VEHICLES FROM CAUSING MUD OR DIRT TO BE DEPOSITED ON THE STREET TABLED -ORDINANCE 736 Guilty of a misdemeanor and upon final conviction thereof shall be fined in an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) Mr. John Parish, Builders Association, appeared before the Council. Mr. Parish stated he would like to request the Council to table this item and get with the Builders Association and see if something could be worked out. After discussion, Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilwoman Reeder, to table this item and the Staff study it further. Motion carried 6-1; Councilmen Cato, Mills, Michener, Freeman and Cavanaugh and Councilwoman Reeder voting for; Councilman Wood voting against. 17. City Attorney McEntire stated there was a typographical error in Ordinance 722. This ordinance needed to be passed to correct the error. Mrs. Bobbie McCorkle, Court Clerk, appeared before the Council. Mrs. McCorkle stated that when the ordinance was typed the speed limit was set at 40 miles per hour on Glenview Drive. Mrs. McCorkle stated she would like for it to be put in the ordinance as 30 miles an hour. Councilman Cato asked Mrs. McCorkle if it was her opinion the speed limit should be 30 miles per hour. Mrs. McCorkle stated she had discussed this with Lt. Williams and they both were of the opinion it should be 30 miles per hour. Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilman Michener, to approve Ordinance No. 737. Motion carried 5-2; Councilmen Cato, Michener, Cavanaugh and Freeman voting for; Councilman Mills and Councilwoman Reeder voting against. 18. Mayor Faram stated he had a note signed by Mr. Oscar J. Houston Pastor Davis Boulevard Baptist Church, Hazel Lawrence and Marvin Reed, stating they were against the sale and consumption of alcohlic beverages in any city park. Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilman Freeman, to approve Ordinance No. 738. Motion carried 7-0. February 26, 1979 Page 22 CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING A PORTION OF SECTION 3.04, ORDINANCE #722 FOR SPEED LIMITS ON GLENVIEW DRIVE APPROVED-ORDINANCE NO. 737 CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE MAKING IT UNLAWFUL TO SELL, CONSUME OR POSSESS ANY ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE IN ANY CITY PARK APPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 738. 19. Mayor Faram stated the Council had the recommendations from the Civil Service Commission on this item. Councilman Mills stated the Council felt the image of the PBX Operator should be raised. The Council felt we needed a better image than we had. We have a person working in that position now that we think carries a good image and we tried to upgrade the job description with some duties that would give her the feeling that she was contributing and was able to use her talents. Councilman Mills stated that he and Councilwoman Reeder met with the Civil Service Commission and tried to add some duties to the job description. We have added typing back on the switchboard we have also added the responsibilty for preparing a monthly newsletter, posting of cititions, alining payroll and putting together a scrapbook. Councilman Mills stated the duties had been upgraded to a point to where the salary needed to be upgraded. The salary has been upgraded to the level of Clerk II, an entry level of $570.00 a month and base $620. Councilman Mills moved, seconded by Councilman Cato, approved the entry level for the switchboard at $570.00 per month and base after six months at $620. Motion carried 7-0. 20. This item was postponed until the March 12, 1979, meeting for more information. 21. Mayor Faram adjourned the meeting of February 26, 1979. Dick Faram - Mayor ATTEST: Jeanette Moore - City Secretary February 26, 1979 Page 23 CONSIDERATION OF UPGRADING THE JOB SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE POSITION OF SWITCHBOARD OPERATOR AND SETTING AN ENTRY LEVEL SALARY APPROVED CONSIDERATION AND AWARDING OF BID FOR PUBLIC OFFICIAL LIABILITY INSURANCE POSTPONED ADJOURMENT