Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1974-08-12 Minutes MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD AT THE CITY HALL, 4101 MORGAN CIRCLE, MONDAY, AUGUST 12, 1974 - 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Dick Faram called the regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council of North Richland Hills to order at 7:30 p.m., August 12, 1974. PRESENT: Mayo r Councilmen Dick Faram Jim Wood George Conant, Jr. John Lamond Tom E. Newman JoAn Goodnight ROLL CALL Councilwoman CITY STAFF: City Manager Ci ty Secretary Ci ty Attorney Gene Riddle Anna Lee Caudry Ti m Truman ABSENT: Councilmen City Engineer Norman Ell i s Jim Cato Dick Perkins INVOCATION City Attorney Tim Truman gave the invocation. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of July 8, 1974 Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilman Wood, to approve the minutes of the regularly scheduled Council meeting of July 8, 1974. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0 with Councilman Conant abstaining due to absence. CITIZEN'S PRESENTATION Mr. Bob Harvey Re: Collective Bargaining Petitions Mr. Harvey was not present and this item * was passed. * not considered -' Page 2 August 12, 1974 CITIZEN'S PRESENTATION Mr. Richard Woodard, 7501 Mike Drive Re: Permission to Drill Well Mr. Woodard appeared before the Council to request permission to drill a water well on his property, 3.697 acres of the S. Richardson Survey, Abstract 1266, Lot 2A-1, on Green Valley Drive. Mr. Woodard intends to use the water for human consumption as well as outside purposes. City water is not available to serve this tract of land and probably will not be for two or three years. Mr. Riddle stated the County would have to check to see about the placement of the well versus the placement of the septic tank. . Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilman Conant, to grant permission to Mr. Woodard to drill a well on the stated property subject to the Engineers recommendations and with County approval. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. CITIZEN'S PRESENTATION Mr. H. M. Grizzle, 8513 Rumfield Road Re: Back Taxes, Penalties and Interest Mr. Grizzle appeared before the Council to request waiver of penalty and interest charged to him since 1967 in the amount of $148.27. When the City began collecting its taxes separate from the school district, Mr. Grizzle's tax statements from the City were returned by the Post Office and his mortgage company did not request his statements. The American National Mortgage Company has paid the taxes, penalty and interest and has billed the total to Mr. Grizzle. REPORTS After much discussion, Councilman Wood moved, seconded by Councilwoman Goodnight, to waive the penalty and interest of $148.27 on Mr. Grizzle's property, Abstract 1266, 13A of the Stephen Richardson Survey. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. Park and Recreation Report Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilman Conant, the report from the Park and Recreation Commission be tabled until August 26, 1974. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. Page 3 August 12, 1974 ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Faram announced that Item 10, Appeal Hearing for O.D.S. Construction, Item 11, Appeal Hearing for Wayne Richardson and Item 12, Specific Use Permit for Stop N Go, all required six (6) affirmative votes for approval and due to the absence of two Council members, this would be impossible. Therefore these three cases would be postponed until the August 26, 1974 meeting. ORDINANCE Consideration of Ordinance Concerning Sale of Alcoholic Beverages Mayor Faram asked City Attorney Tim Truman to review the letter from Riley Fletcher, General Counsel for the Texas Municipal League. Mr. Truman stated Mr. Fletcher's opinion is that a city does not have the legal authority to change the distance requirement between a place selling beer and a church, school or hospital. After discussion by the Council, Mr. Steve McGowan of the Davis Boulevard Baptist Church asked if the measurement was specific. He was told it is. Mr. Jim Odell, also from Davis Boulevard Baptist Church, asked whether the law had been tested in court. Mayor Faram assured him it had and gave Mr. Odell a copy of the letter from Mr. Fletcher which cites court cases. A copy of Mr. Fletcher's letter is attached to these minutes as permanent record. After further discussion by the Council, Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilwoman Goodnight, to table this item for further study. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. PLANNING & ZONING ORDINANCE 546 Consideration of PZ 74-26, Request of Helen Bailey to rezone Lots 1 and 2 of Block 33, Nor'East Addition, Local Retail, Tabled at the June 24, 1974 Meeting Mayor Faram opened the Public Hearing on PZ 74-26, the request of Helen Bailey to rezone Lots 1 and 2 of Block 33, Nor'East Addition. Page 4 August 12, 1974 Mr. John Lutz, owner of Constructo, Inc., has purchased from Mrs. Bailey the property in question and is assuming her role in the zoning. Mr. Lutz stated that he wanted to run his real estate office from the location and that he felt they would make good neighbors. He is agreeable to Specific Use zoning, rather than the requested Local Retail zoning. He owns both lots; one with a house on it and the other one vacant. The vacant lot will be used for parking. Mayor Faram called for those opposed to come forward. Mrs. Wayne Cox, 5420 Randol Drive, appeared to oppose the zoning. Her property is within 50 feet of this subject property and she feels the granting will lower the value of the property. The property in this area is covered by deed restrictions until 1985 that restricts useage to one family dwellings. Mrs. Cox feels that if this zoning is allowed, all the others on Davis Blvd., who had been previously disapproved will come back asking for Local Retail Zoning. Councilwoman Goodnight asked the City Attorney to explain the relationship of zoning to deed restrictions. Mr. Truman explained that deed restrictions were conditions of land use by the seller that were similar to a contract enforceable in a court provided the circumstances had not changed. Zoning is a police power given the City by the State so that orderly, planned development of the community can take place. Mr. Charles B. Renfro, 5421 Randol Drive, stated his opposition as he feels this zoning will lower the value of his property. Mrs. Lewis Haynes, 5416 Randol Drive, also stated her opposition. Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilwoman Goodnight, to disapprove PZ 74-26. Page 5 August 12, 1974 After lengthy discussion, the motion failed by a vote of 2-3. Councilmen Newman and Conant voted for and Councilmen Lamond, Wood and Councilwoman Goodnight against. Councilman Lamond moved, seconded by Councilwoman Goodnight, to approve the request for Specific Use - Real Estate Office only on case PZ 74-26, subject to plat showing solid 6 foot sight bearing fence on west property line with existing building and proposed parking. The motion carried by a vote of 3-2 with Councilwoman Goodnight, Councilmen Lamond, and Wood for and Councilmen Newman and Conant against. RECESS Mayor Faram called a five minute recess at this time. APPOINTMENTS Mayor Faram called the meeting back to order. The same Council and Staff were present after the recess as were present at the begining of the meeting. Consideration of Appointments to the Park and Recreation Commission and Planning and Zoning Commission Mayor Faram announced that he would suggest the appointment of Mrs. Hal Brooks (Paula), Mr. Bill Polster and Mr. Everett Hays for three year terms and Mr. Berl Whitford for a two year unexpired term of the Park and Recreation Commission. Councilman Wood moved, seconded by Councilman Conant, to approve the appointments to the Park and Recreation Commission as stated. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. Mayor Faram asked the approval of Mr. Wayne Staples to the Planning and Zoning Commission with the term to expire in May 1976. Councilman Conant moved, seconded by Councilman Wood, to approve the appointment of Mr. Wayne Staples to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. Mayor Faram instructed the City Secretary to notify these people of their appointments. Page 7 August 12, 1974 Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilman Conant, to approve Resolution 74-10. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. RESOLUTION 74-11 Approval of Resolution Appointing Director and Alternate Director to Conet It was recommended that John Lamond be made the Director and Gene Riddle be made the Alternate Director of Conet. Councilwoman Goodnight moved, seconded by Councilman Conant, to approve Resolution 74-11 which appoints John Lamond, Director, and Gene Riddle, Alternate Director of Conet. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. RESOLUTION 74-12 Consideration of Release of Easement at La Quinta Motel Councilman Wood moved, seconded by Councilman Lamond, to approve Resolution 74-12 releasing the City's utility easement on La Quinta Motel property. This easement was originally granted to Tarrant County Water Supply. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. SIGALIZATION OF GLENVIEW AND BOOTH-CALLOWAY Approval to pay for One Half the Cost of Signalization at Glenview and Booth Calloway City Manager Riddle stated the cost of signalization of the intersection of Glenview and Booth Calloway would be approximately $700.00 for the City. This is a joint project between North Richland Hills and Richland Hills. This signalization will replace the crossing guard of which the City currently pays half the cost. Councilman Lamond moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, to approve the signalization of Glenview Drive and Booth Calloway. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. POLICE CHIEf'S CAR Consideration of Proposal on Police Chief's Car Councilwoman Goodnight asked Mr. Truman if the City could legally accept the offer of Page 6 August 12, 1974 APPROVAL OF PAYMENT Approval of Payment to Texas Bitulithic Company on CIP Contract No. 13, Estimate #5 in the amount of $47,246.95 Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilman Conant, to approve payment to Texas Bitulithic Company on Contract 13, Estimate #5 in the amount of $47,246.95. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. APPROVAL OF PAYMENT Approval of Payment to Crookham & Vessels, Inc., on Walker Branch Outfall Sewer Line, Estimate #8 in the amount of $72,989.91 Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilwoman Goodnight, to approve payment to Crookham & Vessels, Inc., on Walker Branch Outfall Sewer Line, Estimate #8, in the amount of $72,989.91. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. CIP PROGRAM Consideration of Proceeding with Streets in CIP Program City Manager Riddle requested permission to instruct the Engineers to proceed with the preliminary work on Contract 14 which will include at least the streets through Lynn Terrace on the memo from Ray Britton which is attached as permanent record. Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilman Wood, to approve the processing of work plans on CIP Contract 14 which will include the streets through paragraph A of Ray Britton's memo. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. RESOLUTION 74-10 Approval of Resolution Authorizing Participation in the Little Bear Creek Outfall Sewer Line City Manager Riddle asked approval of Resolution 74-10. The City Council had previously agreed to commit $100,000.00 to this project. Mayor Faram explained that in a recent meeting it had been determined that an addiUonal $100,000.00 was necessary to implement this project. North Richland Hills share of the additional cost is $33,000. CITIZEN' S PRESENTATION ADJOURNMENT ATTEST: a~uJ~NA/j &UA:d/LÝ Anna Lee Caudry - City ~ecretary Page 8 August 12, 1974 Kircher Pontiac on the 1974 sedan for $3,807.29. Mr. Truman asked for some time to study the question before he had to rule. Councilman Newman moved, seconded by Councilman Conant, to table action on the Police Chief's car until August 26, 1974. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. None Mayor Faram adjourned the regular City Council meeting at 10:15 p.m., August 12, 1974. L~m/ Dték Faram - Mayor /7 ... -:- ';t " I KNOWLTON-RATLlFF-ENGLlSH-FLOWERS, INC. ENGINEERS-ARCHITECTS-PLANNERS/ Fort Worth - Dallas ¡ TC3 comp;¡n., August 2, 1974 fIr. Ray Bri tton Director of Public Works City of North Richland Hills 4101 Morgan Circle Fort Worth, Texas 76118 Subject: 3-007, CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, CAPITAL H1PROVEÞ1ENTS PROGRAH PROJECTIONS In accordance with your recent request, we have compiled preliminary estimates for the streets mentioned in your memorandum to Hr. Riddle on June 19, 1974. These cost estimates indicate that all streets in Group A and those streets through Deville Drive in Group B should be able to be completed under Contract 14 of the Capital Improvements Program. Not all of the $880,000.00 still remaining in the CIP fund shoul d be expended for these projects; hm'iever, we have i ncl uded a conservative amount for remaining design, construction administration7 1field layout, right-of-way, etc. We would recommend that if these projects are selected for Contract 14 that the City allow us to incorporate into the Contract Documents sufficient wording so that streets could be either added or deleted depending upon the final amount bid on this project. This would allow some flexibility in assuring the Ci~ that no more than the $880,00Q.00 available would be expended on this project. . Should you have any further questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call. ~Ic~.9~ JRP-hr CC: Hr. Gene Riddle, City Manager 600 FIRST STATE SANK SL.OG. . s::::;=o::¡o. ïEXAS 76021 . 817/:283-6:211 ::J'----r~. ":_..____._.--.______d_..__~-_-_..--------... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ "'-"~..N':", "8/197'3" ·...al T. J.. P (C" 11.) -9c' lJ2.pJ..~ .u~:Jro\~e¡:!en... rogra;:¡ on~rac1:.-,-,+ ---~~ ¡ . . i:.E. Riè.àle r "l:ë...'U.ger --------------------~----------------------- FRo~·r: Ray H. Britton DATE: 19 Ju....1"le 74 Director of Public Works -'.';: As you, instructe.d àurin,g our recent discussion regard.:ing above subject progr2J!I. ~~r2.ctI ha-....e sur'\,.-e;yeè. 2J.l streets lThicn have not been co:¡pleted or placed under contract !.:t lie::oe origi.~ included :in the progra.ll. 2.. After discussion 1ri.th Dick Perkins and Floyd HcCall1.lIJ. I recor:t!3.end that the streets ;¡ted ;n sub;.-paragraph é!.. belo¡.¡ be. reconstructed on a Irfirst" priority basis" essentiz1J.y' the. order listed. Streets listed in·.paragraph b. 'are recom:nended :for reconstr-lction on 'second:! priority basis; -', . ,...- a.. " Hoods Lane" '" Sayers L2ne ~ Colorado. Bl~.~ 'BabDr.·' " "\ Cl2.rk St. , . "Stë.nd1.ey St.. (Co~or2.do to Joreen) (Not· inc:luded. in C:œ) 'V" , .- .... l1ïckey St. (RŒ'[ rèquired) .- . "" Payte-Cross Dr.. . _ , ' , , ' , \l·:ain St. (S.-nithîieJ.d Rd. to .A!:rcmdson E..)- , '\, !Janey Lane ,.' , , ' _ ' " Short St. \ Glenis I2.ne " "\ Holiday l2..'"le (Hi veria. to 820) ~ Oalcl.2.nd Lane (Bla.'1.ey to Eo:Liday) "Oalcidge Terrace ' '" Vn...'"1ce (Riveria to' Higm·¡ay l21.) ''\, Grove (T;'-r.y lane to Bedford Euless Rd.) ~ Honey lane. / ob..."- 4'T7!1D. Terrë!!.ce (?2ry Frances to, 820) i . .Hand..Le Dr. .' -- ._ .~ 1·:a.r:r Francés I.ane Lazy Lane Rd. 1-!a.ple . lTyo'ï; t1.g Trail. ( India Trail to Bedford EuJ.ess Rd..), El Dor2.do Dr. Ken Ì'iLchael Ct.. DeViJle Dr. ' - - &J.ley Dr.. Hike St. Redondo (SÌ1..auna. to Corona.) Tu...--ner (Blaney- to Èigh-.;·12.Y J2l) , Cl1=:-:il1..gs Dr. E. (Blaney to Turner)- CO:ï:"I2ett Ave. \DeGver Dr. Jz...""letta Dr. (E. of Susan Lee to end) ..... ~ \.::' , . '- .",-. ,: - 4"' . , . . , ... , , - .' ......;. .....: , . . ...-.. .", .- .:. ... '. - - . , " '" , " . -.... , . . - ,-- -:,',".'. L-: ....- . .' .;- ".- '...' I i Î , . . - . , ' 'O. ...... . - ". e. : - _""0 ..C· , '. ,- , ---------------,-----------------~----~~--------~ .... ,~ - . ._--_. -_. --- _.- ----- ----- ,_,t TMI. ~~~~o~U~!~~~~kj LEAGUE (512) 478-6601 August 7, 1974 Al vlftle/ ?V- ¿' þJ/t {1.- 'Î Mr. Tim Truman, City Attorney City of North Richland Hills 20th Floor - Continental Life Building Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Dear Mr. Truman: . Thank you for your letter of July 19, asking whether it would be legal for the city to enact an ordinance prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages for a greater dis- tance than 300 feet from a church, public school, or public hospital. Article 666-25a, Penal Auxiliary Laws, provides: .r' "The Commissioners' Court of any county in the territory thereof outside incorporated cities and towns and the governing authorities of any city or town within the corporate limits of any such city or town may prohibit the sale of slcoholic beverages by any dealer where the place of business of any such dealer is within three hundred (300) feet of any church, public school or public hospital, the measurements to be along the property lines of the street fronts and from front door to front door and in direct line across intersections where they occur. " The Texas Liquor Control Act, Articles 666-1 et seq. and 667-1 et seq., Penal Auxiliary Laws is a comprehensive Act and, among other things, covers every phase of licensing the manufacture and sale of intoxicating beverages. Art. 666-2 provides: "This entire Act shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the State for the protection of the welfare, health, peace, temperance, and safety of the people of the State, and all its provisions shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of that purpose. " Art. 667-2 provides in part: " . "Unless otherwise herein specifically provided by the terms of this Act, the manufacture, sale, distribution, transportation, and possession of beer as herein defined shall be governed exclusively by the provisions of this Article. . . ." ( ( Mr. Tim Truman, City Attorney North Richland Hills, Texas 2 August 7, 1974 In Munoz v. City of San Antonio, 318 S. W. 2d 741; application for writ of error dismissed for want of jurisdiction, 321 S. W. 2d 573, it was held that a city cannot provide for a city beer license, since the Texas Liquor Control Act does not authorize a city license. On the other hand, the power of a Home Rule City has been upheld in certain instances. The City of Amarillo is a wet area under the Texas Liquor Control Act. Under the City Charter, the city council has the power to provide for the establishment of dis- tricts and limits, within the city where saloons for the sale of spiritous, vinous and malt liquors may be located; and to prohibit the sale of suçh liquors or the location of such saloons without such defined districts or limits. Although not mentioned in the case, this is somewhat in line with authority granted Home Rule Cities in Art. 666-24. The city council passed an ordinance prohibiting sale of liquor at locations in the city save and except adjacent to and facing certain designated streets. In Discount Liquors No.2, Inc. v. Texas liquor Control Board, 420 S. W. 2d 422 (Tex. Civ. App., 1967, error refused, n. r. e.), the applicant was denied a permit for a specific location because it did not face one- of the designated streets. The court upheld the denial of the permit. The same result was reached in Louder v. Texas Liquor Control Board, 214 S. W. 2d 336 (Tex. Civ. App., 1948, error refused, n. r. e.). The Port Arthur Charter defined the area within the city where spiritous, vinous and malt liquors could be sold, and prohibited the sale in all other areas. The appellant had a license for a location outside the city limits. When his property was annexed to the city, it be- came a part of the city, but was outside the zoned area defined in the charter. When his current license expired, the Board refused to renew the license. The charter provis ion was upheld. In Hewlett v. Texas Alcoholic Beverag;e Commission, 492 S. W. 2d 686 (Tex. Civ. App. , 1973, no writ history), the appellant was the holder of a Mixed Beverage Permit in West University Place, a Home Rule City in Harris County. He made application for a Mixed Beverage Late Hours Permit, as authorized in counties over 300,000 popu- lation, to sell mixed drinks at his club up to 2 a. m. The permit was denied because the city had an ordinance prohibiting the sale of mixed drinks within the corporate limits after 12 midnight. The court upheld the ordinance. Art. 667-10 1/2, Penal Auxiliary Laws, specifically authorizes a city by ordinance to prohibit the sale of beer in the residential districts of the city. Under this authority of this provision, an ordinance specifying certain locations where beer could be sold, and making it illegal to sell beer in any other location, has been upheld in City of Clute .. ( ( Mr. Tim Truman, City Attorney North Richland Hills, Texas 3 August 7, 1974 v. Linscomb, 446 S. W. 2d 377 (Tex. Civ. App., 1969, no writ history). In Eckert v. Jacobs, 142 S. W. 2d 374 (Tex. Civ. App., 1940, no writ history), it was held that the Texas Liquor Control Act has no application to a city's zoning ordinance. While Home Rule Cities have broad powers under their charters as authorized by Article XI, Section 5, Texas Constitution; nevertheless, this same constitutional provision states that no charter nor any ordinance enacted under it may be incon- sistent with the Constitution or the general laws of the State. The Texas Liquor Control Act is one of the general laws of the State. The Texas Supreme Court has held in Forwood v. City of Taylor, 214 S. W. 2d 282; State ex reI. Rose v. City of La Porte, 386 S. W. 2d 782; and in City of Sweetwater v. Geron, 380 S. W. 2d 550, that.a Home Rule City looks to the Constitution and statutes not for grants of power to such cities but only for limitations on their powers. I feel that a city may be able to accomplish its goal with regard to location of al- coholic beverage retail establishments through zoning. But when the restrictions on the location of such establishments is measured in feet from a church, public school or public hospital, and the ordinance attempts to set some figure greater than 300 feet, as authorized by the statute (for example, 500 feet, or 1,000 feet), the ordinance would be "inconsistent with the Constitution or general laws of this State, " and prohibited by Article XI, Section 5, Texas Constitution; Art. 1165, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes. Thank you again for your letter, Mr. Truman; please call on us any time we may be of service to you. ~~ur~ ,-t~_ _ Riley E. Fletcher Genera.l Counsel REF/jp