Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1970-08-24 Minutes "- MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD AT THE CITY HALL, 4101 MORGAN CIRCLE, AUGUST 24, 1970 - 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills was called to order by Mayor Marion L. Massey at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Mayor: Councilmen: Marion L. Massey M. E. Riddle Dick Faram. W. F. Polster Tom E. Newman J. F. Cato Charles L. Owen STAFF PRESENT: City Manager: City Secretary: City Attorney: City Engineer: Jack D. Russell Evalyn R. Huston Dennis Morrow William R. Ratliff ABSENT: Councilman: J. R. Hubbard INVOCATION The invocation at this City Council meeting was given by Mayor Marion L. Massey. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS Re~ar City Council Meeting - August 10, 1970 Councilman Faram moved, seconded by Councilman Owen, that the City Council approve the minutes of the regular City Council Meeting of August 10, 1970 as presented. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0; Councilman Newman abstaining due to absence from the meeting. Special City Council Meeting - August 20, 1970 Councilman Polster moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, that the City Council approve the minutès of the special City Council Meeting of August 20, 1970 as presented. The JOOtion carried by a vote of 5-0; Councilman Owen abstaining due to absence from the meeting. CITIZEN PRESENTATION Mr. Thomas B. Connell ANNUAL REPORT OF SUMMER RECREATION PROORAM Mr. Thomas B. Connell, Director of the Summer Recreation Program gave the following report to the City Council concerning the Summer Recreation Program: Participation was very good in the following locations: Holiday Heights Elementary, North Richland Junior High and Richland High School (night program) The program. at Smithfield Elementary was closed on July 3, 1970, because of lack of attendance. HOliday Heights had 346 children registered with an average daily attendance of approximately 90. North Richland Junior High had 430 children registered with an average daily attendance of approximately 120. Crafts was presented at each location for the seven week program, participation good. Art was presented at each location for last three weeks of the program, participation fair. Richland High School had the following participa- tion: ~ Basketball & Volleyball Tennis Weight Lifting July Basketball & Volleyball Tennis Weight Lifting Budget Money: Salary $3,200.00 Supplies 200.00 475 119 275 šb9 1080 365 740 2m Expense: $2,825.00 200.00 Balance: $ 375.00 - 0 - Arts and Crafts sales money balance 8-69 80.45 Sales: 1970 121.05 Cash purchases 1970 misc. supplies and craft materials 134.55 CASH BALANCE FOR 1971 66.95 "RECOMMENDATION FOR 1971 WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS: USE THE SAME BUOOET OF $3,400.00 WITH FOUR LOCATIONS OPEN FOR A SIX WEEKS PROORAM." On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Massey expressed thanks to Mr. Connell for directing the Summer Recreation Program again for the City this year and accomplished good results with the program. ORDINANCE NO. 330 DEFINING A COMMON BOUNDARY BETWEEN NORTH RICHLAND HILLS AND HURST AND AGRE!l}ŒNT, ESTABLISHING THE CæMON BOUNDARY. Mayor Massey presented Ordinance No. 330 to the City Council for consideration, which is an ordinance as follows: "AN ORDINANCE DEFINING A CCIofMON BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE CITIES OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS AND HURST; RELINQUISHING AND QUITCLAIMING TO THE CITY OF HURST ALL AREAS LYING EAST OF A LINE HEREIN DE- FINED; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY." A copy of descriptive map as prepared by the City Manager is attached to the original ordinance for permanent record. RESOWTION 70-11 After review by the City Council, Councilman Riddle moved, seconded by Councilman Faram, that the City Council approve and adopt Ordinance No. 330 as presented. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. Mayor Massey presented Resolution 70-11 to the City Council for consideration, which is a Resolution as follows: "A RESOWTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A BUOOET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR OF OCTOBER 1, 1970 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1971." WHEREAS, an annual operating budget for the fiscal year of October 1, 1970 through September 30, 1971 has been prepared by the City Manager for the City of North Richland Hills, Texas; and, WHEREAS, said budget has been presented by the City Manager in accordance with the charter; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing is required by law with adequate notices to the public being given. BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, THAT: The 14th day of September, 1970 is hereby set as the date for a public hearing on a budget for the fiscal year of October 1, 1970 through September 30, 1971 in accordance with the City Charter and the laws of the State of Texas." Councilman Faram moved, seconded by Councilman Polster, that the City Council approve and adopt Resolution 70-11 as presented. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. CIP INVOICE 3-301 - Contract No.1, Estimate No. 9 FINAL RUFE SNOW DRIVE Texas Bitulithic Company ~20,608.53 The City of North Richland Hills received the following transmittal from Mr. R. L. Knowlton, P.E., of Knowlton-Ratliff-English-Collins, which was presented to the City Council for consider- ation: "Enclosed is a copy of Estimate No. Nine (9) and Final, dated August 13, 1970, made payable to Texas Bitulithic Company, in amount of $20,608.53, for materials furnished and work performed as of August 13, 1970. A final inspection of this project was made by the undersigned on August 13, 1970, along with Dick Ballenger of the City, Gene Reynolds of Texas Bitulithic Company and Leon Barrow of our firm. We concurred that the project was in condition for final acceptance; therefore, the City's check in the amount of $20,608.53 should now be mailed to Texas Bitulithic Company, P.O. Box 1807, Fort Worth, Texas 76101. The two year maintenance ..period provided in the contract and covered by the maintenance bond is now in effect, and will terminate August 13, 1972. It was agreed at final inspection that notices to the Contractor of any such required maintenance will be channeled through the City's Director of Public Works. It was also particularly recognized that the sealing of the cracks that are characteristic of H.M.A.C. streets on flexible base will be included in the maintenance. /s/ R. L. KNOWLTON, P.E." Councilman Owen moved, seconded by Councilman Faram, that the City Council accept the recommen- dation of the Engineers and authorize payœnt of final estimate on 3-301, Rufe Snow Drive, to Texas Bitulithic Company in the amount of $20,608.53 as presented. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING Re-plat - Block 42, Richland Terrace Addition PS70-7, Royalty Properties Vera Cruz Limited City Engineer, William. Ratliff, reported to the City Council that two additional core samples on this project have been received as they instructed at the time this item was tabled at the regular City Council meeting of August 10, 1970. The samples received on the thickness of HMAC paving is 20 feet from Maplewood indicating .a thickness of 1.64 and 1.42. The City Engineer recommended to the City Council that this matter be tabled an additional two weeks and authorize the City Engineer to secure at least five addi- tional samples to be located every 200 feet on Cloyce Drive. Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilman Faram, that consideration on this item be tabled until the next regular City Council :meeting of September 14, 1970. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING SECOND READING PZ 70-19 - rocK roTTON To rezone 0.446 acres, being portions of Lots 27 and 28, Block 2, Odell Addition, from IF-9 One Family Dwelling to Commercial Mayor Massey declared the City Council meeting to be in public hearing for consideration of this zoning case and asked for interested persons in favor of approval of this zoning case to appear before the City CounciL The fOllowing persons appeared asking for favorable approval of this zoning case: Mrs. Barbara Dutton, 8204 Odell Street Billy Bob Allen, 8225 Odell Street Upon a call from the Mayor, no other person appeared before the City Council to speak in favor of approval of this zoning case. Mayor Massey asked for persons interested in speaking before the City Council asking for dis- approval of this zoning case to appear. The following appeared before the City Council asking for denial of this zoning case: Mr. Clyde Marshall, Attorney Mr. Marshall asked for disapproval of this zoning case in behalf of his clients, Mr. and Mrs. V. L. Gibson and Mr. and Mrs. J. C. Hukill. Upon a call from the Mayor, no other person appeared before the City Council to speak against the approval of this zoning case. MAYOR MASSEY DECLARED THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Mayor Massey called for a vote on PZ 70-19 as follows : For the approval of the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approval of the zoning application of Dock Dutton, PZ 70-19: Councilmen voting for: None Against the approval of the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and denial of the zoning application of Dock Dutton, PZ 70-19: VOTE FOR DENIAL: Councilmen: M. E. Riddle Dick Faram W. F. Polster Tom E. Newman J. F. Cato Charles L. Owen REZONING DENIED: VOTE OF 6-0. MAYOR MASSEY RECOONIZED THE PRESENCE OF FORMER MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL PRESENT AT THIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND WELCOMED THEM TO THE MEETING: Former Mayor: Former Councilman: Former Councilman: Calvin F. Luper J. B. Sandlin Joe Barnett PLANNING AND ZONING PZ 70-18 JOHN BARFIELD PUBLIC HEARING to rezone 62.3849 acres out of the John Barlough Survey from Agriculture to IF-7 One Family Dwelling Mayor Massey declared the City Council meeting to be in Public Hearing on PZ 70-18, John Barfield. The Planning and Zoning Conunission recommended denial of the approval of this zoning case. and Mr. Barfield made appeal to the City Council for public hearing, which was granted and proper notice given. Upon a call from Mayor Massey for interested persons to appear before the City Council asking for approval of this zoning case, the following appeared: Mr. John Barfield Mr. Kenneth Whiteley, Attorney; Whiteley and Boring Mr. George Boring, Attorney; Whiteley and Boring No other persons present appeared to speak for approval of this zoning case. Upon a call from Mayor Massey for interested persons to appear before the City Council asking for denial of this zoning case, the following appeared: Mr. Wendell Williams, 8132 Newman Drive Mr. Joe Barnett, 6000 Davis Boulevard Mr. Charles Mangham Mrs. Hazel Fetner, 7033 Crabtree Lane No other persons present appeared to speak against approval of this zoning case. Mayor Massey declared the Public Hearing closed. Mayor Massey called for a vote from the City Council to approve the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny approval of PZ 70-18; VOTE: FOR APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING Coon:SSION FOR DENIAL OF APPROVAL: Councilman Riddle Councilman Faram Councilman Newman Councilman Cato AGAINST APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR DENIAL OF APPROVAL: Councilman Owen Councilman Polster By vote the City Council upheld the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny approval of PZ 70-18. The application to rezone failed by a vote of 4-2. CITIZEN PRESENTATION Joseph W. Barnett 6000 Davis Boulevard Re: IF -7 Zoning Mr. Barnett covered his presentation when he appeared before the City Council to speak against the John Barfield zoning case, PZ 70-18. FIVE MINUTE RECESS Mayor Massey asked the City Council for consider- ation of adding the proposed contract between the City of North Richland Hills and Lakeside for acquisition of Tarrant County Water Supply Corporation properties to the City Council agenda. Councilman Riddle moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, that this item be added to the City Council agenda. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. ITEM ADDED TO AGENDA CONTRACT BETWEEN CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS AND LAKESIDE City Attorney, Dennis Morrow, presented prepared contract to the City Council for review between the City of North Richland Hills and Lakeside for acquisition of Tarrant County Water Supply Corporation properties necessary to their respective systems. A copy of this contract is attached to these original minutes in detail for permanent record. After review and dis- cussion by the City Council, Councilman Faram moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, that the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract as presented. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. ITEM ADDED TO AGENDA APPOINTMENT Mayor Massey asked the City Council for con- sideration of adding the appointment of a Chairman of the Library Commission to the agenda. Councilman Riddle moved, seconded by Councilman Newman, that this item be added to the City Council agenda. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. Mayor Massey informed the City Council his recommendation and appointment as Chairman of the Library Commission, as provided by ordinance, is Mr. Charles Brinkley. There was no opposition to this appointment from any member of the City Council, therefore, Mayor Massey declared Mr. Brinkley as Chairman of the Library Commis- sion. ADJOURNMENT There being no further items on the agenda for consideration, Councilman Cato moved, seconded by Councilman Riddle, that the City Council meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. ~ TRANSCRIPT - A PORTION OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF AUGUST 24, 1970, RELATItG TO PZ 70-18, JOHN BARFIELD .... . MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Item No. 10 on the -- Correction, Item No. 11 on the agenda is Planning and Zoning PZ 70-18. All those who want to be dismissed are allowed to leave, please do so, and at this time I will correct an item which I have been remis on. We have with us today the former Mayor of the City of North Richland Hills, Mr. Calvin Luper. Glad to have you Mayor Luper and fonœr City Councilman John Sandlin. Mr. Sandlin, glad to have you folks with us. Who? Where's Joe Barnett? Former City Councilman, Joe Barnett. Excuse me, Joe. Glad to have you. Item No. 11 on the agenda is Planning and Zoning PZ 70-18, a Public Hearing granted to Mr. John Barfield wherein the Planning and Zoning Co:mm:i.ssion recommended dis- approval of a rezoning from Agriculture to IF-7, so that would go to one-family dwelling. The City Council either one or two weeks ago. It's a 4.03 acres. JOHN BARFIELD: That is a typographical error -- should be 61. 2, the 4.03 is the portion that is excluded. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Okay. Sixty one point what? JOHN BARFIELD: POINT 2. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: I believe that two meetings ago the Council granted Mr. Barfield an additional hearing in this matter and we will now have that hearing on PZ 70-18. Mr. Barfield you may have the floor. 2 JOHN BARFIELD: Gentlemen of the Council and ladies and gentlemen of the audience, ....... I would like to make a sort of freeway presentation here by myself and two of :my associates if I have time within that limit there. I would also like to request if possible that the Council since this is the first hearing on this that they invoke the emergency clause and go ahead and vote on this matter tonight, so that we might dispose of it. Of course, that is up to you gentlemen's discretion. I am applying for IF-7 zoning on approximately 62.3 something acres of land in the City of North Richland Hills. Now, for you who are not familiar with IF-7 zoning calls for seven thousand square feet of land useage or lot useage and one thousand square foot of living area in your house. I feel that it is the best and highest useage of this particular piece of property because of its location and because of the items of property that are surrounding it. I bought the property based on that premises, and I have felt all along that this is the best use. I would like to point out a couple of things here and if I hurry along -- just realize with me that ten minutes is not a very long time and that three of us want to bring forth some points. If you gentlemen will hold this up so that they can see and then for the City Council to see. This is the property right here in mind. There are approximately thirty five lots right here in the old Newman tract that is already zoned for incidentally nine hundred square foot houses possibly frame, but we are 3 not interested in building those. We want to build larger houses. This land on - this side is zoned industrial, this on this side is zoned mbile homes. This is industrial and this portion here is local retail and this right here is multiple family. So, you can see that we feel that this particular piece of property is locked in, which excluding one section here which is Mr. Newman's hOJœ, 4.03 acres. We feel that this is definitely locked in situation here, and we feel that filling this out that it would be the highest and best useage of this particular land, and we have laid that out in approximately two hundred forty lots in the layout. I would also like to hold three of these up and let them see them. This is the type of houses that weare interested in building. They are not slum houses at alL They are all one thousand square feet of floor space and up. I already have one permit from the City for three bedroom, two car garage, air conditioned, electric kitchen and soforth, with one thousand square feet in on one of the lots on Pearl Street that's already developed. So, this is the type housing that we are talking about. I am. afraid, that in the past, some people have gotten ideas perhaps that we are going to build a slum. Well, we are not going to be. I would like to bring to your attention a couple of items here. As you're all aware, we are in a area of rising costs in construction. Every year it has gone up, up, up, and the latest statistics out of Washington show that in 1949 a house cost $12.27 4 a square foot to build that house, land, financing and soforth. In 69 it was $15.66 a square foot or an increase of 27.6 %. Now here's one item I would like for you gentlemen to get and you folks in the audience too. The actual cost of the construction of the house itself was $10.31 a square foot in 49, it's $10.20 in 1969, There has been no increase. So, the use of different types of materials, legislative passages and soforth, the supplies and the builders and the sub men have been able to keep the price of the house itself down. But, here is your problem, land in 1949 accounted for 11% of the total price package, it was 24% in 69 or 319% increase. Now there is nothing as I, a builder, can do about the price of land. You just have to pay what people ask or forget it. Financing went 5% of the total package in 49 to 11% in 69 or a total of 324% increase. There is nothing that I can do about finances. I don't have the mney to do it all out of my pocket so you got to borrow the stuff, so you know it costs. But, nevertheless, you can see from that that almost the total increase in housing has been two items, land and finances. Since I can't do anything about financing, we will just have to forget that and just except it; and land, the only thing I can do there is make a mre intelligent use of the stuff and there is where our >- problem is, in the IF-7 zoning that I'm asking for in this I will get two hundred forty lots. We've platted it out on the preliminary basis and making the lots 5 there sixty five feet wide and up, and if I go IF-9, as has been suggested before, that's two hundred five lots. I'll loose thirty five lots, total lose of thirty five lots. Now just remember this, we've got the same land cost, that did not vary at all. We've got the same aJOOunt of streets that go through that stuff and we got the same aJOOunt of utilities with exception of your service taps on that thirty five lots -- that's all we save. So you see, we've got to get a better utilization and deal out of that land or pretty soon we're just out of the develop- ment and building business. We've got to bring the price of these houses down some way. Now, one other item I would like to bring to your attention is the type people that I'm talking about for this particular subdivision, I have some information for instance from the City of North Richland Hills which gives the salaries of all of your City employees, everyone of them, from the Firemen, Police Department, all of your street department, your City employees, all of them. And, for information of the people that don't know that runs from the fifteen hundred something dollars to about thirteen thousand for the top salary. Now, I have that for a reason, of course, that's to show you what that individual could qualify for in the way of house on today's market. We also have information from the school system here. Your teachers start at sixty eight hundred and fifty dollars, with a bachelor's degree 6 they go up to eighty three ninety. A master's degree starts at seventy one fifty with a top fair of ninety six hundred seventy dollars. Now, for instance, in the Birdville School System there has been I know six hundred individuals, probably quite a few IOOre -than that, but we have lots of people in this area who make salary range something like that, anywhere from five thousand to ten thousand dollars. So, for this particular addition I am aiming at the man that makes from seven thousand five hun~ed to eleven thousand dollars. That's a particular calssification of individuals. And here I have information from the loan companies showing what a man can qualify for, how :much house. If he makes seven thousand four hundred eight dollars a year he can qualify from thirteen nine to fifteen seven. See, that depends on his non-effective income. If he has this seventy four eight and does not owe any- body anything and no kids, he can qualify for fifteen seven, but if he owes lOOney and several children, they set this thing down. So, he could have to go down as low as thirteen nine ~ That goes all the way up on my scale here to eleven hundred twenty three dollars -- that individual can qualify for eighteen thousand five hundred fifty dollars to twenty three one hundred fifty dollars. The houses that I plan to build in this addition I was hoping to hold anywhere from sixteen thousand dollars up to twenty thousand dollars. So, you can see that individuals here would have to get on up to around nine thousand dollars a year in order to move into one of these 7 houses. Gentleœn, that's the housing situation of today. I am afraid that people so many, they don't realize that even though they are in a house now that cost fifteen thousand dollars ten years ago, now that house will bring twenty five thousand dollars to thirty thousand dollars, and JOOst people can't afford to live in them. So we've got to do soœthing, somewhere or other, we got to build some houses that these people can qualify for and as you can see from this they are not slum houses. They are nice homes that most young couples and most any of your teachers and so forth can at least begin their housekeeping career and then later on perhaps they can step to something larger, but there is nothing wrong with this type of housing. I would like to put up Mr. Ken Whiteley now to say a few words. KEN WHITELEY: Gentlemen of the Council, my narœ is Ken Whiteley. I practice law under the firm name of Whiteley and Boring at 300 Bedford-Euless Road in Hurst. I wanted to just briefly hit on a couple of items. I based of the fact that this matter has substantially the same form been presented to this Council on a previous occasion. At that time, the matter had been approved by your Planning and Zoning Board and it came before a different Council than the one that is constituted here tonight, but that Council voted to deny the zoning change, and at that time there was considerable discussion as to why this particular zoning should be denied and 8 the basic reason that was discussed and the reason for turning down the zoning was that it would bring an undesirable type of people to the North Richland Hills area. I would create what someone termed an instant slum. Now JOOre recently when the matter was reagain submitted to the Planning and Zoning Conmrl.ssion where it was rejected this time, the reason stated by that party was that under the IF-7 housing that the density of population would be too great. Now I would like to just briefly talk about zoning in general for a minute. I think that we all know that the power to zone comes under the general power of the City that we commonly refer as the /, Police Power. Whereas, the City can legislate in areas where it is necessary to do so for the health, welfare and so forth of the citizens of the City and usually these zoning laws will be upheld so long as they reasonably appear to be for the health and welfare of the citizens of the City. Now, I would assume that the City body acting at the time that the IF-7 portion was added to your comprehensive zoning ordinance had this particular thing in mind in that they were acting in behalf of the citizens of this City for the health and welfare of those particular citizens. The fact that this ordinance that contains the IF-7 zoning was passed by the governing body of the City at that time and that it is still in full force and effect, that I think this creates a prestmlption that the ordinance was created for the 9 welfare of the citizens of North Richland Hills. Now, if we get to talking about density and so forth, we have to go back and realize that when this ordinance was passed and they made a distinction between IF-7 and IF-9 -- it was a matter of simple arithmatic to figure that if you had a tract some sixty two acres that you would have thirty five JOOre lots than the IF-7 zoning, so we must assume that the City considered the density bit of this at the time the ordinance was passed. So, I don't think we can say off hand that IF-7 zoning in and all itself is bad for the citizens of North Richland Hills, because by the law it has been said to be for the benefit of those citizens. So, it's not a matter here tonight whether or not IF-7 is desirable or acceptable, but the question is that whether or not it is for the best use for the land that we have in question. Now, on this matter the courts have consistantly held that in determining the best use and that whether or not the zoning ordinance should be followed that you must consider the adjoining property -- what effect this would have on adjoining property, whether or not it would depress the value of adjoining property. I would point out in this case, I can't see that IF-7 zoning would depress the value of any of the surrounding properties here. It is completely locked in by what developers would really call detrimental type zoning to further residential development needs. We have an airport, we have a trailer park, 10 we have industrial, we have apartments and we have an area over here that is priced for a lesser type house than the IF-7 zoning. I feel that if there was ever an area in North Richland Hills that would justify the use, what you might call your least restrictive form of residential zoning that this would be it. Now, at the Zoning Conunission there was only one man there to speak against this and he owns industrial property and I can't see how this could decrease the value of his industrial property at all. I would say that if you deny the zoning in this area that in essence the Council is saying that we don't have any areas in North Richland Hills that we feel ought to be IF-7 zoning, because I think this would certainly be a natural for that. I feel that if this Council should choose to consider the two factors that have been mentioned in previous hearings here -- that being the type people that would bring in and the density problem. I think that those are consider- ations that should not be considered because I don't think that this has anything to do with it. I think this was decided when the IF-7 zoning was inacted. As for as setting a precedent -- I don't think this would be setting any precedent in your City as to approve this zoning request and because I think that each zoning matter will stand on its on two feet. If you find another one that is land locked by all these undesirable areas here, I think it would be a proper place for this particular 11 zoning. I think that this is decided on the basis of the type of people that would come here or the density and soforth that would run into an area that there are several matters now pending in Court having to do with the zoning of the express purpose of excluding a particular type of people. For example, there was one case in Pennsylvania where the City did not provide for apartment zoning. This went to the Supreme Court of that State -- it was held that if there is a need for apartment zoning in that area that the City must provide within their area for apartment zoning. Of course, taking into consideration it would have to be in a place where it would , not be detrimental to other property and soforth. other cases have held that it will be presumed that the exercise of the police power has been reasonable in these cases. By that, it has been overcome and if there appears to be no reasonable basis for denying. Certainly in this case I don't think that Agriculture is the best zoning for this area as it exists at this time and that with all these other factors surrounding this area I certainly feel that it would be a mistake of the Council to try to upgrade it and make it a higher class of residential zoning. I would respectfully request the Council consider these matters and type of trend in the zoning in reaching their decision and would certainly ask you not to consider these factors that have been considered before by the former Council and the Zoning Board because I do not feel that this is a proper consideration in light of the fact that 12 you do have a ordinance that provides for this type zoning which in my opinion creates the presumption that this zoning is desirable for the City of North Richland Hills under proper circumstances and I think that we have a circumstance of that nature here tonight. Thank you. GEORGE BORING; Mayor Massey and gentlemen, in sunnnary if I may to cover the items that had intended to be covered from showing the national trend and other aspects of development, I will only say that the trend is definite --- it's coming. How soon it will hit us, this area, I do not know any JOOre than you do, but I am concerned in that I am presently a City Attorney. I formerly served for another city as its City Attorney and the problems that confront you and that confront my City will confront others in the future. The Federal Government is conducting survey after survey after survey to determine how can we get the best use of land. Now, there's lots of barren land and virgin land in the country, but unfortunately we need the virgin land, the land for development close to the cities such as this City and all metropolitan area. There's a very interesting article that shows some of the new concepts. This is released and based upon the most recent government survey, setting forth four houses per acre up to a maximum of fourteen houses per acre. It is interesting to note that in this particular area the four houses per acre would ....~~. constitute about what Mr. Barfield is asking for. It is also interesting to note 13 that they are projected to be on much smaller lots than the seven thousand square feet. The big question is the three letter word of why not? Why not F-7? Why not F-9? Cost, gentlemen, the cost of a IF-9 home for your City would run twenty to twenty four thousand. You would thereby exclude all the firemen, all the teachers, all your City personnel, with m~be one or two exceptions. You have no other place within your City presently for new homes where people who are in this economic category can go and buy a home. There's none. It is a need that this builder and this developer wishes to fill. One which would be only an asset to your City. The density factor is not a factor. A sixty to seventy foot lot, seven thousand square feet -- I predict to you that within ten years a lot that size would be considered mammoth in size except for the very wealthy. I hope I'm wrong, but every survey indicates that this is the coming situation. One other comment and it is regarding to the upgrading of property. How can IF-7 hurt industrial, multi-family, mobile home, industrial? It can't, there's no way. How can it hurt here? It can't because it's an upgrading. Now there are some homes in this area of comparable size, some of them are frame. The lot that Mr. Barfield is building on, has permit on, is right here. It will be one thousand square feet. These also will be developed. It will be merely a continuation of that which exists. It will be carrying out and providing an area where people in an economic bracket -- people, young people, old 14 people in this economic bracket would have an opportunity to buy and own a new home and I think that this is the right that you gentlemen can help and should help to come to pass. But in the event that one should see fit to deny this request for zoning, I would simply point out to you and would want to simply know why not. I think the need, the text of the need is here and certainly without question a showing of highest and best use is here and I can only add that Mr. Barfield's reputation as developer and builder speaks for itself. He's been in the business a long time and he couldn't have been in a long time and stayed if he hadn't been good. He builds a good house -- not because he's my client, but go look at his houses, and he stands behind that which he builds and to my knowledge in your City and the other neighboring cities, Mr. Barfield has never built anything that would be even closely resembling an instant slum. Thank you. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: All those present that are in support of Mr. Barfield's request for rezoning, let it be known by the right hand please. Thank you. How many of those that are in support of Mr. Barfield live within the City of North Richland Hills? Mr. Morrow would you please check to see upon what circumstances we vote tonight and by what majority we must pass Upof.4 Check those procedures if you already don't know that. DENNIS MORROW, CITY ATTORNEY: Since we have a denial from the Planning and Zoning 15 Commission, it takes four fifths to overturn their denial. It has to be six out of six to vote to rezoning. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Now, is that four fifths of those present and voting or four fifths of the governing body? DENNIS MORROW, CITY ATTORNEY: Four fifths of the governing body. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Okay, all six will have to vote to overturn. Is this a first reading or a second reading proposition? DENNIS MORROW, CITY ATTORNEY: Well, actually under the special hearing it is a one-time deal. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: One-shot thing. All those who wish to - We will now hear from those who wish to speak against Mr. Barfield's application to rezone and in- effect would be in support of the findings of the Zoning Board recommendation. Those who wish to speak against Mr. Barfield's application have twenty two minutes to do so and those who wish to speak please identify yourselves and tell us your name and address. WENDELL WILLIAMS: Well, I'm kinda speaking for the rest of them -- they asked me to, except for Mr. Mangham. MY name is Wendell Williams, I live at 8132 Newman Drive. I don't know Mr. Barfield very well. I've seen some of his houses. I'm not talking about anybody, builders. I'm one of the ones that lives out on 16 Newman Drive. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Point that out to us, please. WENDELL WILLIAMS: Would be Lot 3 -- it's a one hundred fifty front footage. The lot next to it is -- Well, the smallest lot we got there is eighty three feet for the frontage of all these houses that are built right now and the houses around, there's one there that is one thousand square foot and the rest of them run up to two thousand square foot, and I just can't see that where we come up building a small house in our area where houses are already larger than what he is asking you to build. I don't know, I don't think that he or any builder would go into an area and buy a lot and expect to build a smaller house than what is already there. Talk about running cost of things down. Well, I don't know what my house is valued at, but it's all I got and the rest of them are the same and I just can't see that we can come in there and add and I just can't hardly see that he can come in there and ask you all to zone something smaller than what is there. As an average, it looks like to me that an average should rule an area not the smallest and several of the others there are interested in adding on to their houses, but they don't know now whether they want to add on now or not. They don't know what they will be adding on to. This is all new to me. I didn't even know what the zoning was until I started calling around and trying to find out what that was and I really became 17 interested then. If there is anything you all want to ask me or if I can answer for you, I'll try. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: You still have some time, does anyone else want to speak? JOE BARNETT: I'm Joe Barnett, 6000 Davis Boulevard. Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, I feel rather humble tonight standing up here. I feel kinda like I'm in an American Bar Association Meeting. All these City Attorneys and Judges and people in the legal profession around. I would like to point out a few inaccuracies in the initial presentation tonight, and I would like to set the record straight. First, I would appreciate it if you would, Mr. Mayor, call for a show of hands who are supporting this developers rezoning application who live within the legal limits, legal noti- fication limits, and I wonder if we could have a show of hands -- we had a show of hands first of those supporting and then who are residents of North Richland Hills, and I wonder if we could see who are in the legal limits. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: We already asked for those who live within the City of No~th Richland Hills. Those who live within two hundred feet of this area that Mr. Barfield is asking to be rezoned, would you raise your hands? That are in support of Mr. Barfield. Those of you who live within that two hundred feet who are here in opposition to that zoning would you raise your hands? JOE BARNETT: I would also like to go on record for my father who is in surgery tonight and also for legally notified as well as a brother who is a property owner. 18 Gentlemen, as most of you know, I am a long time citizen, I'm a native of this _. community and I have some strong affection for the municipality. I feel the commonality with each of these citizens here tonight especially you gentlemen that are sitting in a decision making position. I resent as a citizen, professionals coming into our community and conducting a hearing with subjective tactics. We've heard about national trends tonight. We've heard about them at every previous meeting and I must say that this is not a new issue. This is recurring since the time that this gentleman came into this community and purchased this property. We're a small community. Just a small segment of the total national economy, and I very seriously doubt that we can do a great deal to correct the national trends, but there is an issue before us tonight that is of prime importance. The question has been posed by those speaking for the developer as to why this should be denied. I would like to pose that there are three questions which I believe are before this body tonight. One is IF-7 zoning in this specific instance, (2) IF-7 zoning categorically within the municipality of North Richland Hills and the third question is who does this Council have an obligation to, the citizens who have a franchise in this community or speculators who come into this community to make a quick buck and get out. Now, I want to point out some inaccuracies and some corrections. First, you gentlemen are governers here tonight - you are not a jury and as a citizen 19 I resent what I consider an abuse of the elected officials of this community being treated anything less than governers by the acknowledgment of the spokesman of the group wishing this rezoning. This developer is not an amateur, he's a professional, he's - he knows what his business is. He's been at it a long time and to rrw knowledge he's had some mild degree of success. He's built some nice homes, some within this municipality, but this developer did not move in to acquire one hundred and some odd acre tract. of land with his attorneys and his land men without knowing what the situation was on that land. I don't think there's a one of us here tonight that's naive enough to believe this. What he had to do to build the type of homes that he wish to build. He had those homes planned before he invested his dollars in November or December of 1969. Referring to his plat, I'll point out our holdings. These properties here which are long time holdings - These are zoned industrial by request in the overall planning and zoning in this community as a holding pattern for the highest use. This tract was zoned mobile homes for Mr. Hamm and Mr. Sandlin and their expression to me was that their pattern was for long term holdings. The reason they want mobile homes is because they are not sure how the area is going to go and they want to put the highest and best use. Now, fortunately or unfortunately, the property has changed hands since Mr. Sandlin and Mr. Hamm had it rezoned. This area is Mr. Mangham's property - Mangham Airport. There has been a comment in the Zoning Commission meeting that land adjoining small airports was undesirable. 20 Gentlemen, I can show you seven small airports in the Fort Worth-Dallas area where there are forty and fifty thousand dollar homes built adjoining the small airports. Subject was called to the local retail and multiple family dwellings. I would like to point out that this is apart of this gentleman's, this developer's, plan that he make specific request and has it changed to local retail and then to multiple family. So, I think this should be clarified. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Two minutes, Mr. Barnett. JOE BARNETT: The area here you had a spokesman for -- you know the area of large homes here. Gentlemen, the building industry is psychic when at that money market _ it comes and it goes. You have correspondence from me in front of you. I wish that you would read very carefully, not lightly, each of the categories that I have specified in it. I wish that you would consider these, consider the situation next time we come up for bond issue in this municipality, if Standard and Poor's rates us on IF-7 zoning. Consider if you would please landlord ownership, consider the declining values, consider all of these factors which have been specified and none of them lightly. If you should wish supporting evidence, I would be happy to furnish you whatever supporting evidence you require for each of these particular items. The question of higher and best use -- At the Zoning Commission meeting preceding this Council meeting the comment was made by the developer that if he did not get 21 IF-7 zoning he would consider selling that there are a number of buyers who were anxious to buy that property at a profit. I think, gentlemen, that this expresses the fact in essence that this is not the highest and best use for this land. I would consider it a damage to mYself, mY father considers it a damage to him and to his property and the people in this community who have a long term franchise and investment in this community will be done a great injustice if IF-7 development is permitted in this community. There are adequate areas, some contiguous in munici- palities that have no city tax that cater to the particular type individual who buys the two thirty five class homes, and I don't want to pass over lightly that fact that the two thirty five class homes are to be included in this development. Thank you very IIRlch. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Mr. Barnett, show us where your property is in connection with this. JOE BARNEI'T: This gray area. COUNCILMAN W. F. POLSTER: Mr. Barnett, reference your letœr you gave all the Councilmen here, for your information probably a few Councilmen lives in the IF-7 area -- a home that is considerably larger than IF-7 added on. Come down here on the end you got Section 5 -- first of all you are saying that categorically IF-7 should be denied throughout the City in blanket, right? 22 JOE BARNEI'T: This is my opinion, yes sir. CaJNCILMAN W. F. POLSTER: This is what your saying should be done? JOE BARNRI'T: This is my opinion, yes sir, that this is not the plan for development for this municipality. CaJNCILMAN W. F. POLSTER: The particular area that I live in as far as IF-7, we are talking here, and this is pretty standard, low concentration to tax value. I can show you by the assessed value that there is not but about two thousand dollars difference in the valuation of those homes down there that sold for ten thousand five hundred dollars is compared to eighteen and twenty thousand dollar homes here with an assessed value of six thousand dollars. You say that high cost of govern- mental services -- Basically IF-7 gets set back, the City does nothing as the history of our City here - CaJNCILMAN M. E. RIDDLE: Mayor, are you going to have the question or is he going to lecture? CaJNCILMAN W. F. POLSTER: Well, I'm not lecturing. This is the things that the man put out. I'm asking where he gets this information, what I would like to know. Based on what? Low concentration of values, high governmental cost, high fire rate, low income residency. That's all I'm asking. JOE BARNEI'T: Iwwould be happy to furnish you that information or the Council that 23 information. I wish to furnish each one of the Councilmen and the Mayor and if you would like to have the bell calls or alarms in neighborhoods that come within this schedule, and please, Mr. Mayor, accept my apologies, I certainly did not _ _ I tryed to be objective, and I certainly didn't mean to leave an imprint. I live in a house myself that was built in nineteen hundred. It has more square feet, but it certainly would not meet our standards. But if I were building a new home, I wouldn't build a home to the specifications that the older home even though we have done a great deal to improve it. But I certainly didn't mean to make any sort of a inference for any individual or the community they live in. Thank you. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: We have about three or four minutes left for this side of the debate. Anyone else wish to be heard? CHARLES MANGHAM: I'm Charles Mangham. I manage the airport east of this property in question. I have a different idea on this. I feel that North Richland Hills needs an industrial area more than they need these houses and as far as I know we've got a fair¡Y good start on something in that direction and with the airport right in the middle of it, which seems to be desirable for a light industrial area around over the country and if these small houses are allowed to be put in there, the only property we have left for a long enough runway to do this industrial area any good or this community any good will be killed by the protest that will arrive 24 from these homes being out in that flight path with this runway and I feel like '--" that that's grounds enough to turn down this zoning. I feel like we need an industrial area and we got apart of it alreaqy zoned industrial and that's grounds enough out there to refuse it on. Thank you. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: You have about a minute and a half. HAZEL FETNER: I'm Hazel Fetner, Mayor and City Councilmen, 7033 Crabtree Lane. I don't know where it is on this lot, but it's across from Mr. Barfield over here about fourteen or fifteen acres. I sold ten acres several years ago to a Gerald Smith and he built a home that we can just really be proud of. It's, I think, five bedroom, three den - - it's a hugh home, nice home. Dr. Hope is building one right next to it later on and I'm against this because I feel we are going up instead of down. I'm glad Mr. Barfield is keeping up with everyboqy's salaries, but he doesn't know OW salary. I think we should upgrade it a little bit and like Mr. Mangham said let's get a little industrial over here and an executive's airport which is needed badly in this section and if we want to go and be something a little better. Let's don't go down any lower. But I'm not in for this, not for OW own good. I know the more homes you can build on this acreage, of course that's money in Mr. Barfield's pocket. But on the other hand, all around us should be considered and mine is neighborhood retail on Davis Boulevard. I'm against it. I think we should improve 25 instead of going down. Now, I have a daughter who is a teacher and I believe her salary is around nine thousand. She has her Mæter's Degree. I think that we have some that maybe have a little higher salary than this section and besides they won't move in if we build those little homes. They are going to want a little larger home if we get some with a little higher salary, you know. So, I'm really against it. I think for the betterment of North Richland Hills if we want to grow and build something a little nicer and bigger that would be a good start. Thank you. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: Thank you. Gentlemen, do you wish for us to elicit any other information from either side? If not, I'm going to formally close the hearing on the rehearing as has been requested by Mr. Barfield, and if there is nothing further at this time, we will declare the Public Hearing closed and I'll call for the vote at this time. The vote being to approve the recommendations of the Zoning Commission which I understand from our City Attorney to over-turn we must have six votes against. True? DENNIS MORROW, CITY ATTORNEY: Right. MAYOR MARION L. MASSEY: All those in favor of the recommendations of the Zoning Commission which is to deny Mr. Barfield's zoning let it be known by the usual sign. Councilman Riddle, Councilman Faram, Councilman Newman, Councilman Cato voting for the recommendation of the Zoning Commission which would deny the zoning change. 26 All those who wish to overturn the recommendation of the Zoning Commission let it be known by the usual sign. Councilman Polster and Councilman Owen voting for. The Public Hearing for the application to rezone fails. The recommendation of the Zoning Commission is approved. -, I 1 I L' THE STAT E OF TEXAS KJ\TOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF TARRANT THAT THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into on this day of , 1970, by and between the City of North Rich- land Hills, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "NRH", and the Lakeside Village, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lakeside", each of said municipalities ac ting pursuant to duly .--"--<Y--·"="'--'" r< authorized action of its respective City Council and Mayor. WITNESSETH: 1. The contracting parties above stated are members of the Tarrant County Water Supply Corporation, a non-profit corporation, hereinafter referred to as "TC WSC", organized under the laws of the State of Texas, which consists of four municipalities: (1) NRH, (2) City of Azle, (3) City of Richland Hills, and (4) Lakeside. These cities are jointly and mutually bound together by contract that created the corporation and are further bound by a single Indenture of Mort- gage and Deed of Trust and Supplements thereto which has obligated (Î \ the water and sewer properties lying within the and adjacent to the member cities with outstanding municipal bonds in the amount of $5,750,000.00. 2. The contracting partie~, due to lack of funds with TCWSC for extension of lines and necessary improvement as well" as internal "-, ' ,. " 1 difficulties oLrunning said TCWSC, are qesirous of acquiring the water and sewer properties from TCwSC\that lie within their respec- tive cities and such other adjacent properties as shown in Exhibit A that will be necessary to their respective systems. .~ I I I. I I '- 3. The contracting parties understand that the Indenture of Mortgage and Deed of Trust including Supplements, provides that upon the payment and retirement in full of said bonds, that title to the water and sewer properties of TCWSC becomes the properties of the four member cities, being NRH, City of Azle, City of Rich- land Hills, and Lakeside, creating a necessity for this contract in order that each city may control or contract control of the properties in and adjacent to their respective cities that are necessary to their systems. . 4. This contract is entered into contemporaneously with a ," contract between NRH and the City of Azle, and a contract between NRH and the City of Richland Hills, and a contract between NRH and the City of Watauga, all relating to the water and sewer utility systems of said municipalities, and it is understood and agreed that this contract between NRH and Lakeside, and said contracts between NRH and said other municipalities shall be treated as con- temporaneous instruments and shall be construed together to effec- tuate the common purpose indicated thereby. It is further under- " stood and agreed that neither this agreement between NRH and Lakeside, nor any of said other agreements shall be effective un- less and until all agreements have been properly and lawfully executed by the respective governmental authorities of said muni- ( I \ cipalities and all collateral instruments sue;h as utility service \~ contracts, franchises, quit claim deeds and any other collateral instrument that may be necessary to carry out the common pur- pose of this contract have been executed an,d delivered. However, ." ',' '.........:. ','" " , by execution of this contract Lakeside agrees that it will execute and deliver all of the collateral instruments necessary to effec- tuate this agreement. Notwithstanding the above, the parties hereby agree that if at the end of one year ?f the E¡xecution of this agreement that if NRH has not been able to acquire the properties .. ,." _~C' _ ~ --..- -. ... '. ",'r_, ., from TCWSC either jointly with Lakeside or separately or has not I ( made reasonable progress as set forth below then this contract will ì ~- be voidable at the option of Lakeside. 5. NRH agrees to purchase the assets of TCWSC and retire the bonded indebtedness and to cause that certain Indenture of Mort- gage and Deed of Trust, recorded as Chattel Mortgage No. 39221 in Volmne T at Page 29- E, Chattel Mortgage Records of Tlrrant County, Texas; and as Deed of Trust (or Instrument) No. 70732, in Volume 1556, at Page 67, Deed of Trust Records of Tarrant County, Texas, and also recorded as Chattel Mortgage No. 73572 in Volmne 5-2 at Page 73, Chattel Mortgage Records of Parker County, Texas; and as Deed of Trust (or Instrument) No. 3331 in Volume 77 at Page 350, Deed of Trust Records of Parker CO\mty, Texas, and Supplements thereto, to be released in each County; whereupon Lakeside agrees that NRH shall become the absolute owner of the corporation's assets more particularly the water and sewer properties lying within Lakeside's municipal limits and ad- jacent areas as shown in Exhibit B and as agreed upon by and bet- ween Azle and Lakeside in a separate contract; Lakeside hereby agreeing to waive and hereby waiving all of its contingent rights under the aioresaid Indenture of Mortgage and Deed of Trust, and as supplemented and agrees to execute all necessary instruments for this purpose; all however strictly subject to the following \ terms, conditions, limitations and provisions. \-. 6. Lakeside may, at its exclusive option, and at the time NRH purchases the aiSsets of the corporation, purchase its water .' ; ¡ ~.,. -,', . " and sewer system and adjacent propertie~ in consideration for , which the Trustee named in said Indenture of Mortgage and Deed of Trust shall deliver to Lakeside that certain generat warranty deed, held in escrow by it, and corporation shall execute and de- liver to Lakeside an additional general warranty deed conveying title to all water and sewer properties as are not described in the I ", L aioresaid Deed now held in escrow, within Lakeside's corporate limits, together with such additional properties lying outside there- of but adjacent thereto, as shall be agreed upon between Azle and Lakeside Village by separate contract between them. Perimeter plats shall be attached hereto evidencing such division and marked Exhibit 1. 7. Alternatively, Lakeside may at its exclusive option elect to acquire corporation's properties as defined in the next preceding paragraph (those within and without) at some later date, ,', by purchase from NRH, an d to pay for the same in cash, and NRH .' agrees to sell and convey all such properties to Lakeside and to execute and deliver to Lakeside a good and sufficient general war- rant deed thereto at such time as demand is made therefor and the cash consideration is tendered by Lakeside therefor. 8. Provided however, that if Lakeside elects to exercise the alternative option in lieu of the first, then any penalty that may arise or additional cqst in refinancing that may occur will be at the expense of Lakeside and will be so charged. 9. Provided further, that if Lakeside elects to exercise the alternative option in lieu of the first, then and in such event, NRH shall be obligated to operate, maintain, extend and improve said properties as agreed upon in an operational contract that will be signed, executed and made a part of this contract. 10. If Lakeside elects to exercise its first option, herein- ; 1';'-' ,': above set out, then and in such event, the Base Costs, Lakeside's fair or pro rate share of acquisition of its basic system (inside Lake- sides city limits and outside thereof), is agreed and determined to be the \\ l. sum of $180,000.00 plus Lakeside's pro rate share of the Special Reserve Fund (Section 5.04 (a), Second Supplemental Indenture of Mortgage and Deed of 'Trust), represented by the ratio which $180,000.00 bears to $5,750,000.00, which in terms of percentage is 2. 70% of said Special Reserve Fund plus 2. 70% of Inventory, herei!!. called base c<2.ëb which said sum Lakeside agrees to pay to NRH under either option expressed hereinabove. 'The amount on deposit in the Special Reserve Fund and tte value of the Inventory shall be derived from the books of the corporation as of the first day of the month that transfer of properties is accomplished by (. Deed and payment is made for the same. Provided, however, in .' . .~._. . ."' ,".." " 0' . ,_*, case Lakeside elects to take under the second option herein set out, then and in such event, to said base cost herein fixed shall be added the actual cost of subsequent improvements and extensions of the service, but not including anything for normal regular main- tenance. NRH shall keep and maintain adequate records to determine such costs. 11. In the event that Lakeside elects to take under its alterna- tive (second) option, then Lakeside agrees to give NRH a franchise authorizing operation of the water and sewer properties, the parties hereto agreeing, however, that upon Lakeside's exercise of said option that said franchise shall then, there and at the time terminate and be of no further force or effect. \ \. ~ 12. Lakeside further agrees that NRH is given the exclusive· rights to negotiate for and receive all benefits and obligations of re- tiring the present outstanding bonds under the Indenture of Mortgage of 'TC WSC . 13. It is the intent of the parties hereto to join with the other municipal corporations, constituent members and shareholders in ,:..; -""~--/ - .~- the corporation, to acquire their separate systems and to dissolve \... the corporation. It is the specific intent of the parties hereto to allow Lakeside, provided it is unable to meet the financial demands placed upon it under the terms of Lakeside's first option, such additional time, within the limits of the terms hereof, to exercise its second or alternative option and to do so without question or dispute, subject to the terms hereof. If any dispute of any kind arises between the parties hereto, all provisions, terms and condi- tions hereof shall be construed and interpreted consistently with this intent. ~, ('~ 14. It is further agreed that this contract maybe amended ·_e-· ,~..- . ,,' ."",., by a written agreement only duly signed and notarized by both parties. 15. Attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes are properly authenticated resolutions adopted by the City Council of NRH and the City Council of Lakeside marked Exhibits 2 and 3 respectively authorizing execution hereof. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS By: ", ". CITY 0 F LAKESIDE VILLAGE, TEXAS, By: Its Duly Authorized MAYOR THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT BEFORE ME, the undersigne<i authority, on this day personally appeared , known to me to be the ,m _' person and official whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, 1,- ( '- and acknowledged to me that the same was the act of said North Richland Hills, a municipal corporation, and that he executed the same as the act of such corporation for the purposes and consideration therein expressed, and in the capacity therein stated. GWEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE tills the day of , 1970. Notary J?ublic in and for Tarrant County, Texas -. (, -~. ....-...... .--.., -,- THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared , known to me to be the person and official whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instru- ment, and acknowledged to me that the same was the act of the City of Lakeside Village, a municipal corporation, and that he executed the same as the act of such corporation, for the purposes and consideration therein expressed, and in the capacity therein stated. GWEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the day of , 1970. Notary Public in and for Tarrant County, Texas