The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes - City Council - Regular - 12/20/1984December 20, 1985 815` REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 20, 1984 The City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas met in regular session on the 20th day of December, 1984 in the City Council Chambers, First Floor, City Hall, 1625 13th Street, at 9:30 a.m. Present: Mayor Alan Henry, Mayor Pro Tem George Carpenter, Councilman T.J. Patterson, Councilman E. Jack Brown, Councilwoman Joan Baker, Councilwoman Maggie Trejo, Councilman Bob Nash, City Manager Larry J. Cunningham, City Attorney John C. Ross, Jr., and City Secretary Ranette Boyd. Mayor Henry called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. 84-43A-815-1288 ( 1.) 84-43A-815-1289 ( 2•) 84-43A-815-1290 ( 3.) 84-43A-815-1291 ( 4.) 84-43A-815-1292 ( 5.) 84-43A-815-1293 ( 6.) 84-43A-815-1294 ( 7•) The invocation was given by Assistant City Manager Rita P. Harmon. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was given in unison by those in the Council Chambers. Receiving: James Lee Gorsuch Civil Service Commission AIRMAN OF THE MONTH Receiving: AFC Sherwin Jones, November NCO OF THE QUARTER Receiving: Sgt. Diana R. Brzozowski-Reynosa Motion was made by Councilman Nash, seconded by Councilwoman Trejo, passing the Minutes of the December 13, 1984 Regular City Council Meeting as written. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. Consider Ordinance #8693 amending Ordinance #8190 to provide for the installation of a traffic signal at the ORDINANCE #8693 ORDINANCE 8693 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE 8190 OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO AUTHORIZE A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF F.M. HIGHWAY 2528 (FRANKFORD AVENUE) AND F.M. HIGHWAY 2255 (4TH STREET) IN THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT TO BE EXECUTED BY THE CITY OF LUBBOCK AND THE STATE OF TEXAS RELATING TO SAID TRAFFIC SIGNAL; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. 84-43A-815-1295 ( 8.) Consider Ordinance #8694 amending Section 8-4 of the Code of Ordinances with regard to City Voting Precincts. ORDINANCE #8694 816 December 20, 1984 ORDINANCE NO. 8694 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, TO PROVIDE FOR VOTING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK AND PROVIDING DESCRIPTIONS OF SAID VOTING DISTRICTS; PROVIDING FOR AMEND- MENT OF BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS OF VOTING PRECINCTS TO ACCOMMODATE AREAS NEWLY ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF LUBBOCK; PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION OF TWO NEW VOTING PRECINCTS AND PROVIDING BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS OF SAID PRECINCTS; PROVIDING A MAP OF THE VOTING PRECINCTS AND VOTING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK; PROVIDING THAT ALL PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 8 NOT HEREIN AMENDED SHALL REMAIN THE SAME; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. 84-43A-816-1296 ( 9.) Consider Ordinance #8691 amending Section 27-5 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lubbock, Texas, with regard to operation of taxis, limousines and buses at the Lubbock International Airport. ORDINANCE #8691 ORDINANCE NO. 8691 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 27-5 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, WITH REGARD TO THE OPERATION OF TAXIS, LIMOUSINES AND BUSES AT THE LUBBOCK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Councilman Brown, authorizing Ordinance #'s 8693, 8694, and 8691 on second and final reading. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-816-1297 (22.) Consider recommendation from the Lubbock Municipal Arts Committee for a Guideline for the Placement of Art in the new City Hall. The Lubbock Municipal Arts Committee has approved a plan for the placement of works of art in the new City Hall. The interior design of the new building provides an opportunity to display a collection of works of art in a unique setting. Works of art which are complimentary to the design can greatly enhance the physical image of the building and the City of Lubbock. With this in mind, an overall concept and plan for the placement of art in the new municipal complex has been drafted, with the assistance of Karen Wiley, Director of The City of Lubbock Fine Arts Center. The plan has been approved by the Lubbock Municipal Arts Committee and was submitted to the City Council for approval on December 20, 1984. With City Council approval, the plan will serve as a guide for placement of art within the building and identify those areas which are most visible to the public. The lightwell would serve as a focal point for a collection of art objects and would set the tone for the objects to be placed in areas surrounding the lightwell on the first and second floor and lower level. It is suggested that four large tapestries or weavings be placed in the lightwell and a variety of prints, watercolors, oil acrylics, sculptures, earthenware plates and possibly glass be considered for the areas identified. Since works of art are not a budgeted expenditure, any art displayed would likely be donated pieces. The Lubbock Municipal Arts Committee would view donated works to determine the appropriate location according to the overall plan. The plan would function as a guideline and the Committee would need to modify the plan based on what objects become available. The plan does not include departmental conference rooms, private offices or interior corridors. Wall hangings in these areas would be governed by our internal administra- tive procedures currently in effect. The Committee and Staff recommended that once the plan is approved by the Council, that the Arts Committee be permitted to view objects, determine the appropriate location and direct the installation without bringing each piece back to the Council for approval. Objects December 20, 1984 817 that are obtained from grant funds would be reviewed by the Council through the normal procedures for grant applications. Objects which have significant values, $5,000 or more, Or which may be considered controversial by some, could be presented to the Council for approval prior to the installation. Staff recommended that the City Council approve the plan presented by the Arts Committee and that the Committee be granted the authority to proceed with implementation. Motion was made by Councilwoman Tr 'O, seconded by Councilwoman Baker, accepting the reCO002Od8tiOOs from the Lubbock Municipal Arts Committee for a Guideline for Placement of Art in the new City Hall, as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; O Nays. 84-43A-817-1298 /23.\ Consider a Resolutionhif hsign a Contract for Court Reporter services. RESOLUTION #I90I RESOLUTION #I901 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: THAT the Mayor Of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized and directed to e%8CVt2 for and on behalf Of the City Of Lubbock d Contract for Professional Services between the City of Lubbock and Curtis D. Ruff, Court Reporter, attached herewith, which shall be spread upon the minutes Of the Council and as spread upon the minutes Of this Council shall constitute and be 8 part of this Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 20th day of 08ce0ber,1984. MAYOR/s/ Alan Henry ALAN HENRY, ATTEST: Runette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Massengale/s/ Robert Robert Massengale, Assistant City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: /s/ Ken Johnson Ken Johnson, Assistant City Attorney CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THE STATE OF TEXAS & COUNTY OF LUBBOCK § THIS CONTRACT, entered into on this the 20th day of December, 1985, by and between the City Of Lubbock, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Curtis D. Ruff, Court Reporter, hereinafter referred to as "Reporter". WITNESSETH: City and Reporter mutually agree as follows: I. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Reporter hereby agrees and binds himself to furnish to City one Certified Court Reporter who will provide necessary court reporting services to the Citv's Municipal Court of Record established in accordance with Art. 1200gg, Vernon's Annotated Texas Statutes. 818. December 20, 1984 In addition. Reporter agrees in those instances where more than one reporter is needed to adequately perform the services herein contemplated, that he will upon request provide an additional court reporter to City. 2. COMPENSATION City hereby agrees to compensate Reporter at the rate of $9,600.00 per year for a full-time reporter furnished to the City as hereinabove pro- vided. It is further agreed that in the event that an additional court reporter is required, Reporter agrees to provide such services at no additional cost to the City. 3. PERIOD OF CONTRACT This contract shall take effect on its date of execution hereinafter set forth and shall remain in effect until termination by either party as hereinafter provided. 4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Nothing contained herein shall be construed as creating the relationship of employer and employee between City and Reporter, and the Reporter shall be deemed at all times to be an independent contractor. 5. INDIGENT DEFENDANT In the event that the court orders the Reporter to prepare a record on appeal without charge to the defendant, the City shall pay for the record at the same rate that is charged for the same service in the County Courts at Law of Lubbock County. 6. TERMINATION This contract may be terminated by either party upon the giving of 30 days written notice of said party's intention to terminate this contract. Notices shall be sufficiently given if they are addressed to: City of Lubbock, Texas, Legal Department, P. 0. Box 2000, Lubbock, Texas, 79457, and to Reporter at: Curtis D. Ruff & Associates, Certified Shorthand Reporters, 1014 Broadway, Lubbock, Texas, 79401. EXECUTED as of the date hereinabove first written. ATTEST: /s/ Ranette Boyd Ranette Boyd, City Secretary /s/ John C. Ross, Jr. John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS /s/ Alan Henry ALAN HENRY, MAYOR CURTIS D. RUFF & ASSOCIATES BY: /s/ Curtis D. Ruff Curtis D. Ruff The City of Lubbock is currently operating under an Agreement with Curtis Ruff for Court Reporter services. This Contract renews automatically annually. The current Contract calls for an annual amount of $16,000. We decided to enter into a Contract like this about four years ago when the Court became a Court of Record. We were required to furnish Court Reporter services and it was not feasible to hire a full-time Court Reporter when we could have the services on demand for $16,000. Since the activity at the Court has fallen off, and since we have only one Judge on duty full time now, it is apparent that the current Contract is not appropriate. Walt Stueck, Court Administrator, has contacted Mr. Ruff and given him thirty days notice to cancel the Contract so that we can enter into a new Contract. \ December 20, 1984 319~i The Contract that we are presenting is for $9,600 per year. We believe that it is more in line with the actual Court Reporting activity that we need and Mr. Ruff has agreed to this new arrangement. The Contract still contains d thirty -day notice provision s0 that we can respond in case the activity changes at the Court to the extent that this Contract does not provide the approp- riate services. The Contract presented, in 3taff/s opinion, is in the best interest of the operation of Municipal Court, and will provide an dDDUal savings Of $6,400. Staff recom- mended MVtiOM was made by COUDci70OD Patterson, seconded by Councilwoman Tr 'O authorizing Resolution #I901 OS 58t out above. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-819-1299 /24.\ Consider Resolution approvian assignment Of Private Activity Bond Cap (Central Freight Lines). RESOLUTION #I902 RESOLUTION I902 ASSIGNMENT OF PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND CAP WHEREAS, the City Council Of the City of Lubbock, Texas, (the "Unit"), On November 8, 1984, adopted d resolution entitled ''Re80lUtiOO Approving Bonds and Approving d Resolution By Lubbock Industrial Development Corporation Providing for the I5sUDOc8 of $3,000,000 Lubbock Industrial Development Corporation Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Central Freight Lines Inc. Project) Series 1984" (the "Resolution"); WHEREAS, Section 5 of the Resolution authorizes the Mayor and City Secretary Of the Unit to execute and deliver Such endorsements, instruments, certificates, documents, or papers necessary and advisable to Carry out the intent and purposes of the Resolution; WHEREAS, it is necessary and advisable to Carry out the intent and purposes of the Resolution that this Assignment of Private Activity 80Dd Cap be executed and delivered; now, therefore: Acting pursuant to the authority conferred by Section 5 Of the Resolution, the Mayor and City Secretary of the Unit, for and On behalf of the Unit, and the Unit, by and through its duly authorized representatives, presently assign to the Lubbock Industrial Development Corporation for the bonds approved by the Resolution, the UOit's allocation (whether in existence on the date hereof Or hereafter acquired) of the Private Activity Bond Limit with respect to such bonds. The assignment herein made is irrevocable and is effective OO the date shown below as the date this assignment is executed and, if not effective On such date due to any provision of law, is effective on the first date possible under law. The undersigned certify under penalty of perjury and to the best of their knowledge and belief that the assignment made hgr8hv and the 5llOCdtiOD for the bonds approved by the Resolution were not made in consideration of any bribe, gift, gratuity, Or direct Or indirect political contribution to any political campaign. Executed this 20th day of December, 1984. (CITY ATTEST: Ciffy Secretary, City of Lubbock, Texas Lubbock,/s/ Alan Henry Mayor, City of Texas AS O result Of an IRS regulation published in November, the current method of all¢CdtƒOO for volumes of Indus- trial Development 80DdS by the G0V8rDOr/S Office has been ChOD08d. The current allocation method is first come, first serve, by specific bond issue. Allocations are to be g1Y2D only to gUV8rD08Mtal units who have sponsored Industrial Development Bond issuing organizations such as the Lubbock Industrial Development Corporation. Because of this recent regulation change, it is now necessary for the City Council to dssig0.dD allocation to the Central Freight Lines, Inc. project that the City Council has previously approved. The Governor's Office has already specifically allocated d $3,000,000 d0VuOt to the City of Lubbock for this particular project. The latest information from the Bond Attorneys is that allocations in 1985 will be dVA8 the same way in order to comply with the IRS regulations. This action appears to be necessary according to the Bond Attorneys, and since the City Council was agreeable with the Central Freight Lines, Inc. Project On a previous action, and Staff recommends approval Of the Resolution. Motion was made by 0UUdlmdn Brown, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, authorizing Resolution #1902 as Set out above. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; O Nays. 84-438-820-I300 (25.) Consider Re607Uti0O approving an assi t of Private ActiVi-tyBond Cap (Solid Waste Recovery Plant). RESOLUTION #1903 RESOLUTION 1903 RESOLUTION CONCERNING ISSUANCE OF BONDS TO FINANCE A PROJECT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RESOURCES, INC. WHEREAS, the City Of Lubbock (the "Unit"), d municipal corporation of the State Of Texas, has, pursuant to the Development Corporation Act Of 1979 Article 5190h Vernon'sT��d� ��Y�� tdtUt�5 O3 amended (the � ^, , ` "Act"), approved and Created the Lubbock Industrial Development Corporation, a nonprofit industrial development corporation (the WHEREAS, the Issuer, on behalf Of the Unit is empowered to finance the COSt Of projects to promote and develop industrial and manufacturing enterprises to promote and encourage employment, the pUb]1C health, and the public welfare by the issuance of obligations Of the Issuer, which projects will be inside the UDit'S boundaries. WHEREAS, Environmental Pr0t2Ct10O Resources, Inc. (the "User") has filed an application which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made d part hereof for all purposes (the described in the Application (the "Project") within the boundaries of the Unit and further that the Issuer adopt this Resolution with respect to the acquisition, construction, and installation of the Project; WHEREAS, the User has advised the Issuer that a contributing factor which would further induce the Issuer to proceed with providing for the acquisition and construction of the Project would be d C000it0eOt and agreement by the ISSUe[ to issue industrial development revenue h0DdS pUrSUdOt to the Act (the "Bonds") to finance and pay for the Project; WHEREAS, in view of rising construction costs and the necessity of compliance with administrative regulations, it is considered essential that construction of the Project be completed at the earliest practicable date but, at the same time, the User wishes to begin construction of the Project after satisfactory d33UraOC9S from the Issuer that the proceeds of the sale Of the Bonds, or Other obligations, Of the Issuer in an amount necessary to pay the costs Of the Project will be available to finance the " Pr- , '8�t^ WHEREAS, the Issuer finds, intends, and declares that this Resolution shall constitute its official binding commitment, subject to the terms hereof, to issue 80OdS° Or other obligations, pursuant to the Act in OD 8Xp8Dd the proceeds thereof to acquire, construct, and install the Project and to pay all expenses and costs of the ISSU8r in connection with the iSSUOOCe of the BOMdS^, and WHEREAS, the Issuer finds, considers, and declares that the issuance and sale of the Bonds in the amount and for the purpose hereiDObOV8 Set forth will be appropriate and C0nSi5t8Ot with the objectives of the Act, and that the adoption of this Resolution is and constitutes and is intended as /i\ an inducement to the Issuer to proceed with providing for the acquisition and construction of the Project and (ii) the taking Of affirmative official aCt10D by the Issuer, acting by and through its Board of Directors, towards the issuance Of the QO0dS within the meaning Of federal income tax law with respect to interest on the Bonds to finance certain facilities to he financed by the iSsUODC8 Of exempt small iSgU2 bonds or exempt facilities, including Treas. Reg. [I.I03-8 /a\ /5\; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE LUBBOCK INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION THAT: will: Section 1. Subject to the terms hereof, the Issuer agrees that it (d) Issue the Bonds, and if the User and the Issuer agree, other eVid8DC8S Of indebtedness providing temporary financing of the Project which will be fSSU8d after the date hereof and be refunded by the Bonds pUrSUdDt to the Act, Or any other Texas legislation heretofore Or hereafter enacted which may provide d suitable method of financing in addition to Or in substitution for the Act. (b) Cooperate with the User with respect to the f5SUdOC8 of the 80ndS° and, if arrangements therefor satisfactory to the User and the Issuer can be made, the Issuer will take such action and authorize the execution Of such d0CU0eOtS and will take such further action as may be necessary or advisable for the authorization, execution, and delivery of any contracts or agreements deemed necessary or desirable by the User Or the lSsV8r in COnO8CtiOO with the iSBUdOc2 of the Bonds (collectively, the "Contract"), providing d0OOg other things for payment of the principal of, interest On, redemption premiums, paying agents' charges, and Trustee's fees, if any, On the Bonds; payment Of fees and charges of the Issuer and the Unit; acquisition, C0DStrUCtfOn, and improvement Of the Project; payment of fines and penalties; and use, operation, and maintenance of the Project(and the execution of any appropriate and necessary guaranty agreements), all as shall be authorized, required, or permitted by law and DS shall be mutually satisfactory to the Issuer, the Unit, and the User. /c\ If the proceeds from the Sale Of the Bonds are insufficient, take such actions and execute Such documents as may be necessary to permit the iSSVOOC2 from time to time in the future of additional bonds OO terms which shall be set forth therein, whether OO D parity with other series Of bonds Or otherwise, for the purpose of paying the costs Of completing the acquisition, construction, and installation of the Project, as requested by the User and within then applicable limitations. /d\ Take or cause to be taken such Other actions as may be required to implement the aforesaid undertakings Or as it may deem appropriate in pursuance thereof. The Bonds shall specifically provide that neither the State Of Texas, the Unit, nor any political issuer, subdivision, or agency Of the State Of Texas shall be obligated to pay the Same or the interest thereon and that neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Texas, the Unit, Or any political issuer, subdivision, Or agency thereof is pledged to the payment Of the principal Of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. Section 2. It is understood by the Issuer and the Unit, and the User has represented to the Issuer, that in consideration Of this Resolution and by filing the Application, and sUhigCt to the terms and COnd1t1OOs hereof, the User has agreed that: /a\ Prior to Or contemporaneously with the Sale of the Bonds in one or more series or issues from time to time as the Issuer and the User shall hereafter agree to in writing, the User will enter into the Contracts with the Issuer under the terms of which the User will obligate itself to pay to the Issuer (Or to O Trustee, as the case may be) S0nS sufficient in the aggregate to pay the principal of, interest on, redemption premiums, paying agents' fees, and Trustee's fees, if any, on the Bonds, as and when the same become due and payable, with such contract to contain the provisions described in Section l hereof and such Other pr0Y13i0Os as may be required Or permitted by law and to be mutually acceptable to the Issuer and the User . 822 December 20, 1984 (b) The User will (1) pay all Project costs which are not or cannot be paid or reimbursed from the proceeds of the Bonds and (2) at all times, indemnify and hold harmless the Issuer and the Unit against all losses, costs, damages, expenses, and liabilities of whatsoever nature (including but not limited to attorneys' fees, litigation and court costs, amounts paid in settlement, and amounts paid to discharge judgments) directly or indirectly resulting from, arising out of or related to the issuance, offering, sale, or delivery of the Bonds, or the design, construction, installation, operation, use, occupancy, maintenance, or ownership of the Project. Section 3. It is understood by the Issuer that all commitments of the Issuer and the User with respect to the Project and the Bonds are subject to the condition that the Bonds shall have been issued no later than December 31, 1986, or such other date as shall be mutually satisfactory to the Issuer and the User. Section 4. It is recognized and agreed by the Issuer that the User may exercise its rights and perform its obligations with respect to the financing of the Project either through (i) itself in its own name; (ii) any of its wholly -owned subsidiaries; (iii) any "related person" as defined in Section 103(b) (6) (C) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended; or (iv) any legal successor thereto, respectively, and in cooperation with other entities providing equipment for the Project, all subject to approval of the Issuer's bond counsel and, provided that suitable guaranties necessary or convenient for the marketability of Bonds shall be furnished, if required by the Issuer, and all references to the User shall be deemed to include the User acting directly through itself or any such approved entities. Section 5. The adoption of this Resolution, as requested in the Application, shall be deemed to constitute the acceptance of the User's proposal that it be further induced to proceed with providing the Project and the Application and this Resolution shall constitute an agreement between the Issuer and the User effective on the date that this Resolution is adopted, and this Resolution is affirmative of official action taken by the Issuer towards the issuance of the Bonds. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR ASSIGNMENT OF PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND LIMIT CARRY FORWARD ELECTION WHEREAS, the City of Lubbock, Texas (the "City") is an "issuing authority" pursuant to Section 103(n) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended (the "Code"), and Treas. Reg. §1.103(n) - 3T and is a "general purpose governmental unit" as defined therein; WHEREAS, the City desires to exercise its power to issue certain private purpose bonds through its City -sponsored industrial development corporation being the Lubbock Industrial Development Corporation (the "Corporation") which is a "constituted authority" empowered to issue private activity bonds on behalf of the City; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED AND KNOWN THAT THE CITY hereby assigns its rights to issue the private activity bonds for the purpose of design, construction and acquisition of a 400 tons per day solid waste resource recovery facility the owner of which shall be Environmental Protection Resources, Inc. (Tax I.D. No. 76-0095201) generally located near the intersection of highway 87 and Municipal Drive (a site commonly referred to as "Municipal Hill") in the approximate amount of $45,000,000 as permitted in Article 5190.6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, as amended, to the authorized official of the City and a record of this Assignment shall be maintained by the Corporation for the term of such private activity bond it issues, and further that the City assigns to the Corporation any election to carry forward such project under Section 103(n) of the Code. PASSED AND APPROVED this 20th day of December, 1984. ATTEST: /s/ Ranette Boyd Secretary CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS /s/ Alan Henry Mayor December 20, 1984. 823 The Company that the City Council designated for the Staff to negotiate with VO d Solid Waste Recovery Plant (Environmental Protection R2D0UrCe5\ is requesting that we take this action in an effort to Obligate O portion of the current year's Industrial Revenue Bond Cap to the Solid Waste Recovery Plant. This information has been totally prepared and provided by the Attorneys for EDY1r0mneDtd| Protection Resources. It is our understanding that this may or may not work toward dSSUriOg tax exempt financing for the Solid Waste Recovery Plant. This is an effort to secure financing for a Project that we are all interested in and it has been the City COUnCil/s direction to pUrSU8 this Project. If Council approves this Resolution there would be OV obligation OD behalf of the City to follow through with O Solid Waste Recovery Plant should the Council determine that is not feasible; this action would 'VSt provide the legal means by which these funds could be used if the company SO chooses and if it proves to be feasible. This action could be instrumental and Very important in the financing of the Solid Waste Recovery Project; therefore, Staff recommended approval Of the Resolution. Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, seconded by Councilwoman Baker authorizing Resolution #I903 as Set out above. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; O Nays. 84-43A-823-130I (26.) Consider a Resolution related to natural gas supply. RESOLUTION #1904 RESOLUTION 1904 WHEREAS, EO2rgas Company has filed a complaint with the Railroad Commission Of the State Of Texas wherein EMergaS Company complains of the calculations of the cost of gas charged to Energas Company by Westdr Transmission Company.; and WHEREAS, EO8rgD5 Company has requested OD accounting of the calcula- tions of such gas cost from Westar Transmission Company; and WHEREAS, W8Stdr Transmission Company has to date refused to provide such accounting; and WHEREAS, the cost of gas Charged by W2stdr Transmission Company to EnergaS Company has a direct affect OD the gas utility bills of customers Of EOergas Company within the City of Lubbock and Other cities served by EAergds Company's West Texas System; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City Of Lubbock deems it to be in the best interest Of the citizens Of the City Of Lubbock to '8iO with the other cities served by EDerga6 Company's Nest Texas SvSt80 and intervene in the proceeding pending before the Railroad Commission of the State of Texas: NOW THEREFORE: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: SECTION I. THAT the City of Lubbock '0iD with the other sixty-three cities Served by Energas Company's West Texas System and retain legal counsel and all experts necessary to properly represent the interest of the Cities in the matter of the complaint filed by Energas Company against WeStdr TrdDS0iSSiOn Company pending before the Railroad Commission of the State Of Texas. SECTION 2. THAT legal counsel 3U retained be entrusted to intervene VO behalf Of all cities VR the West Texas System in the matter Of the complaint above mentioned. 824 December 20, 1984 SECTION 3. THAT legal counsel be further instructed to review the current gas rate being charged by Westar to Energas and if appropriate take action to establish a fair and just rate. Passed by the City Council this 20th day of December, 1984. ATTEST: /s/ Ranette Boyd Ranette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: /s/ Robert Massengale Robert Massengale, Assistant City Manager for Financial Services /s/ Alan Henry ALAN HENRY, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO FORM: /s/ John C. Ross, Jr. John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney On December 13, 1984, the Steering Committee of the cities served by Energas' West Texas Distribution met with representatives of Energas. The purpose of the meeting was to inform the Steering Committee of problems Energas is having with Cabot Corporation, who on October 1, 1984 acquired Westar Transmission (Energas' gas supplier) from Pioneer Corporation. From the purchase date of Westar Transmission until November 21, 1984, Energas held several meetings with Cabot Corporation to discuss their Contract, gas costs, and operating procedures. Energas representatives indicated these meetings with Cabot were constructive. Cabot informed Energas that they intended to use the least expensive gas available, thus reducing the gas costs to Energas. However, when Energas received its first billing from Cabot on November 21, 1984 for October's gas, there was a 6.21¢ per MCF increase in the cost. Energas did not receive prior notice of the increase. Upon receipt of the bill, Energas began trying to get from Cabot an explanation for the increase, and after several phone conversations, a meeting was set up to discuss the problem. Energas states that Cabot would not give an explanation for the increased gas cost and that Cabot indicated their documentation was not in a form to be given out. Extended back -and -forth conversation did not result in Energas finding out anything regarding their increased gas cost, they paid the bill under protest (letter attached) on November 30, 1984. When given the protest letter, Cabot indicated that they would not be able to provide documentation for the increase until January 1985. On December 12, 1984, another meeting was held to discuss the increased gas cost. At this meeting Cabot informed Energas that Westar's production and gathering facilities had been transferred to an affiliated company of Cabot. Energas indicated that the effect of this could be the assignment of gas supplies previously dedicated to Energas to other areas and assignment of other Cabot affiliated supplies to Energas, thus increasing gas costs to Energas. Since Cabot will not discuss these matters with Energas, it was the intention of Energas to file a Complaint (attached) with the Railroad Commission on Tuesday, December 18, 1984. At the same time the Railroad Commission receives the Complaint, Energas will be delivering copies of the Complaint and a News Release (draft attached) to the cities on the West Texas System. The Steering Committee feels that since the cities have charged Energas with providing information regarding increases in gas costs, it is important to support Energas in their efforts to obtain the information they need to develop the information required by the cities. Therefore, it is the Steering Committee's recommendation that cities pass a Resolution of their intentions to intervene in the matter. It was also recommended that as many of the larger cities as possible pass their reso- lution by Friday, December 21, 1984. This would allow the interventions to be given to the Railroad Commission, thus, providing immediate encouragement to the Railroad Commission to docket the matter. December 20, 1984 825 r, a, Since it will not be possible for EDergas to provide dOCUmgOtdtiOD Of gas costs without appropriate infor- mation from Cabot, Staff recommended that the City Of Lubbock intervene in this matter. Motion was made by COVOCflmaD Nash, seconded by Councilman Patterson, that the City Of Lubbock intervene and to pass Resolution #1904. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-825-I302 /27.\ Consider Resolution approvi lease financing d authorizing the Mayor to sign necessary documents. RESOLUTION #1905 RESOLUTION #I905 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: THAT the Mayor of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized and directed to execute for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock a Lease Purchase Agreement and Associated OOCU0eMts for equipment and Vehicles between the City of Lubbock and American Finance Group, Inc., attached herewith, which shall be spread UpUD the minutes Of the Council and as spread UpOD the minutes Of this Council shall constitute and he a part of this Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 20th day Of December, 1984. MAYOR/s/ Alan Henry ALAN HENRY, ATTEST: Ranette Boyd, y Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Massengale/s/ Robert Robert Massengale, Asst. City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Donalddi Donald G. Vandiver, Asst. City Attorney In late September Of this year, Council received O memo concerning the proposed lOt8rO87 Lease Financing Program. At that time, Staff explained that the City planned to take proposals for lease financing equipment that is included in the current budget and also request addi- tional funds that would replace some of the current City leases that are t00 costly. The total amount of \8Ds8 financing for proposal was $2,000°000, and the major portion of this amount is $1°500,000 for d main frame computer and the remainder would be for miscellaneous word processors, micro -computers, copy machines and printing equipment. While studying experiences Other cities have been having with this type Of lease -financing arrangement, we found that the cost Of money under these proposals was con- siderably lower than the cost of money that we generally pay for General Obligation Bonds and also considerably lower than the rate of return that we receive On invest- ments. ID anticipation of the possibility that we might want to acquire additional equipment that we have in the Budget (sanitation containers, large trucks and other pieces Of large equipment) under this method, Staff also requested OD option for an additional $1,000,000. 326 December 20, 1984 Fourteen proposals were received and this was considered by Staff to be an excellent response to the request. The cost of the proposals was, as expected, much lower than our traditional cost of money. Listed below are the proposals, both for the $2,000,000 proposal and the $3,000,000 proposal, the total payback over the life of the Lease, and also the effective rate of interest. CITY OF LUBBOCK LEASE PROPOSALS ORGANIZATION $2,000,000 EFFECTIVE PROPOSALS American Finance Group $2,213,527 3.56% Municipal Funding Corp. 2,232,110 3.87% Prudential 2,292,000 5.84% Public Leasing Corp. 2,319,010 5.32% First Continental Leasing Corp. Underwood, Neuhaus & Co., Inc. 2,391,360 6.52% Municipal Investor Service, Inc. 2,359,581 5.99% Municipal Leasing Services, Inc. 2,354,187 5.90% First Continental Financial Corp. 2,365,872 6.10% Gelco 2,439,278 7.32% American Leasing Services, Inc. 2,446,467 7.44% Maryland National 2,539,370 8.99% First Municipal Leasing Corp. 2,537,127 8.95% First Chicago 2,587,446 9.79% $3,000,000 EFFECTIVE PROPOSALS INTEREST RATE American Finance Group $3,336,893 3.74% Municipal Funding Corp. 3,360,725 4.01% Prudential 3,361,620 4.82% Public Leasing Corp. 3,420,083 4.67% First Continental Leasing Corp. 3,504,199 5.60% Underwood, Neuhaus & Co., Inc. 3,519,823 5.78% Municipal Investor Service, Inc. 3,528,186 5.87% Municipal Leasing Services, Inc. 3,547,888 6.09% First Continental Financial Corp. 3,560,606 6.23% Gelco 3,631,278 7.01% American Leasing Services, Inc. 3,695,969 7.73% Maryland National 3,810,966 9.01% First Municipal Leasing Corp. 3,812,194 9.02% First Chicago 3,849,477 9.44% INTEREST RATE Staff had evaluated the proposals based on the total cash outlay or total debt service that the City will exper- ience. The interest rates illustrated above are calcula- ted recognizing credit for investments of funds in the trust accounts until they are expended. It is important that the Council understand that the pieces of equipment financed under this Program will be purchased by the City in our regular purchasing proce- dures. At the time we receive the equipment, then the Leasing Company will take title to the equipment and the equipment will be paid for out of an Equipment Fund that will be set up with the Trustee. For all practical pur- poses, the equipment will be purchased with the intent of the City to use the equipment for its entire usable life. There is not an option to trade the equipment out with the company who is lease -financing the equipment for US. The opportunity to do this financing is possible because of a State Law allowing leasing of equipment. This type of financing is not available for purchase of land or other public works expenditures, such as paving of streets. Some schools have used this procedure to purchase buildings. The low rates of interest on this money are made possible by the fact that the interest is considered to be tax exempt as a municipal obligation and the financing company also gets some income tax advan- tages by using the investment tax credit on the equip- ment. / \ / December 20, 1484 P27 77, Maintenance of the equipment purchased under this program will be acquired under separate Agreement. This is a new program for the City of Lubbock. We believe that it will be a significant money saving process for us. The lowest cost proposal under our evaluation is American Finance Group at a cost of t213,527 /3.56% for D $2,000,000 proposal) or $336,893 /3.74% for d $3,000,000 proposal). There is enough equipment in the budget that could be acquired with these funds to Use Up the optional $I,000,000. It was 3tdff/s r8cO00enddt/OD that Council accept the $3,000,000 proposal and proceed to use these funds to acquire large rolling Stock pieces of equipment as well as the main frame computer and the other office type pieces Of equipment. Motion was 0dd2 by Councilwoman Trei0, seconded by Councilman Nash, authorizing Resolution #1905 as 58t out db0V8, and authorizing the $3,000,000 amount. Motion carried: 5 Yeas; 2 Nays --Councilwoman Baker and Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter. 84-43A-827-1303 /28.\ BID #8I90 R20odeliD Conference Room, and authorize 5d0e T—Health Building). RESOLUTION #1906 RESOLUTION #I900 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: THAT the Mayor of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized and directed to execute for and OD behalf of the City of Lubbock d Contract between the City of Lubbock and M & S Construction CO., to finish d COOf8r8DCe room and library for the City Of Lubbock Health Department, attached herewith, which Shall be spread Up0D the minutes of the Council and as spread upon the minutes Of this Council shall constitute and be O part of this Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 20th day of December, 1984. /s/ Alan Henry ALAN HENRY, OR ATTEST: Ranette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Gene EddS, Purchasing Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney M&S Construction, Lubbock, Texas --Finishing Conference R000 and Library--$I6,487. 84-43K-827-I304 /29.\ BID #8200--Sprinkler repair parts (Parks). U'To0l Plastic Pipe, Lubbock, Texas --Lot various irriga- tion and sprinkler pDrts--$40,894.52. / \ / \ 828December 20, 1984 � 84-43A-828-1305 /30.\ BID #8247--Retr8Od Landfill vehicle tires (Garage). C8prOck Tire, Lubbock, TeXa3--10 each full retread OO each tire size 29.5" X 29" to be used on Landfill Equipment. Tread to be super rock grip deep tread Or equal --minimum of 64/32"--$16,060. 84-43A-828-1300 /31.\ BID 8250Sanitary Sewer Line and authorize TFr—enship School District Addition, Tract A)._ RESOLUTION #1907 RESOLUTION #I907 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: THAT the Mayor Of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized and directed to execute for and On behalf Of the City of Lubbock d Contract between the City of Lubbock and Panhandle Construction Company for water and sewer lines for the Fr8n8hip Independent School District, attached herewith, which shall be spread UpVO the minutes of the Council and as spread upon the minutes of this Council shall constitute and be D part of this Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 20th day of December, 1984. ATTEST: Ranette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Gene Eads, Purchasing Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: h John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney 84-43A-828-1307 84-43A-828-1308 /33,\ MAYOR /s/ Alan Henry ALAN HENRY, Panhandle Construction Company, Lubbock, Texas --Installation Of water/sewer lines for FrenShip Independent School District Addition, Tract A--$83,640. BBC Brown D0V8ri, Dallas, Texas--1 each 230 KV Circuit Breaker to [P&L specifications #SE-0201-1-072084; 7 each 1I5 KV Circuit Breaker to LP&[ Specifications; Spare Parts--$458,254. 1000 (more or less) OrthO-N0VU0 1/50` 2000 (more or less) OrthO-NOYU0 1/35; I000 (more or less) UrthO-N0VUm lU/lI; 1000 (more Or less) Ortho-NOVUm 7/7/77; 12 each (more Or less) lippies loop size /6 caDS6\: 24 each (more or less) 11ppie5 (OUp size 6 cases); 24 each K0rg Or less) lippieS loop Size (0 CdS2S); 12 each (more Or less) lippieS loop Size D /6 cases); 3000 each (more or l8SS\ contraceptive foam with applicator; 30 dozen (more or l83S\ MicOndZ0le Nitrate 2% with applicator 47 gr. tube; December 20, 1984 829 5 dozen (more or less) Miconazole Nitrate 200 mg. suppositories; 60 dozen (more or less) Sulfavaginal cream 4 oz. tube w/applicator. Erwin Medical Supply, Lubbock, Texas--10 boxes (more or less) needles 18 G x 1", 100/box; 44 boxes (more or less) needles 21G x 1 1/2" 100/box; 5 boxes (more or less) needles. 23G x 1" 100/box; 10 cases (more or less) instrument wraps 18" x 18" 1000/case; 12 boxes (more or less) Dri-Dot Pregnostican Pregnancy test kits; 4 cases (more or less) sterile cotton tipped applicators 2/pk 2000/case; 30 gross (more or less) microscope frosted end glass slides 1" x3"; 50 boxes (more or less) glass microscope lid cover #2 thickness 22 x 22 MM; 50 each (more or less) copper 7 I.U.D.; 3 boxes (more or less) disposable scapels with #15 blades 12/box; 100 boxes (more or less) tipped applicator 8" 50/box. United Medical Supply, Lubbock, Texas--2 cases (more or less) disposable plastic speculum large 100/cx; 90 boxes (more or less) exam drape sheets 40" x 60" 100/box; 30 boxes (more or less) table paper sheeting economy smooth 18" x 260" 12 rls/box; 10 boxes (more or less) Iodine swab sticks 50 single sticks/box; 500 boxes (more or less) alcohol prep pads 100/box. Whitaker General Medical, Lubbock, Texas--100 boxes (more or less) needles 12G x 1" 100/box; 200 boxes (more or less) cold drink cups 5 oz 100/box; 100 boxes (more or less) vinyl exam gloves, medium, 100/box; 15 cases (more or less); 80 boxes (more or less) profodine iodine wipes 100/box. American Scientific, Grand Prairie, Texas--25 boxes (more or less) syringes with needles 3 cc x 25G x 5/8" 100/box; 40 cases (more or less) sterile specimen collection container with lid 4 oz 100/case; 120 bottles (more or less) uristix 100/bottle; 5 boxes (more or less) steritem ptherometer sheaths 500/box; 25 boxes (more or less) 5 cc luerlock syringes 100/box; 10 boxes (more or less) 10 cc luerlock syringes; 3 boxes (more or less) tuberculin with needle 26 GX 3/8" 100/box. Lederle Laborator, Wayne, New Jersey--15 bottles (more or less) Metronidazole 500 mg tablets 100 tab/bottle; 70 dozen (more or less) prenatal vitamin/mineral preparation with folic acid and iron. Lee Medical Supply, Abilene, Texas--15 cases (more or less) disposable plastic speculum small 100/cs; 5 cases (more or less disposable plastic speculum medium 100/cs; 4 cases (more or less) infant scale liner 12" x 19" 500/case; 200 boxes (more or less) band aid spots 100/box; 6 boxes (more or less) disposable scapels with #15 blade 12/box. 84-43A-829-1309 (34.) BID #8288--Miscellaneous electrical items (Warehouse Stock). Nelson Electric Supply, Lubbock, Texas--2 100 each 5 3/4" x 10" porcelain suspension insulation 15,000 pound rating OUR E-1-23; 600 each staples copperweld with rolled points OUR E-2W-18; 400 each 5 3/8" x 10" procelain suspension insulation 30,000 pound rating OUR E-1-33A. Temple, Inc., Lubbock, Texas--280 each insulator pins 5/8" long shanks OUR E-21-5; 40 each suspension clamp 25,000 pound rating OUR E-3C-24; Elgin B. Robertson, Lubbock, Texas--33 each steel arms for use on 230 KV wood poles OUR E-lH-1; 90 each steel arms for sue on 115 KV wood poles OUR E-lH-2;35 each ridge irons for 13" diameter OUR E-lH-3; 70 each machine bolts 24" OUR E-lH-4; 400 each machine bolts 36" OUR E-lH-5; 120 each 5/8" threadrods 40" long OUR E-1H-6; 60 each 5/8" thread rods 28"long OUR E-lH-7; 500 each curved washer 4"x4" x 3/8" with 17/16? hole OUR E-lH-8; 120 each wood crossarm OUR E-9C-4; 120 pair untreated wood crossarm brace for 10' arms OUR E-10C-8. - 2 - 84-43A-830-I310 /35,\ d authorize (Water Engineering). RESOLUTION #1908 RESOLUTION #I908 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: THAT the Mayor of the City Of Lubbock BE and is hereby authorized and directed to execute for and OO behalf Of the City of Lubbock d Contract between the City of Lubbock and West Texas Mechanical, Inc., for utility dd'USt088ts at Spur 326 and Broadway in accordance with I-27 Highway -' Ct attached herewith, which shall be spread VpOO the minutes of the project, , Council and as spread Up0O the 0iDUt2S of this Council shall constitute and be a part of this Resolution as if fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 20th day 0f December, 1984. Alan Henry ALAN HENRY, MAYOR ATTEST; Ranette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: d Gene Eads, Purchasing Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: John C. Ross, Jr. John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney West Texas Mechanical , Inc, Lubbock, Texas--I-27 Utility dd'VSt0eDtS Spur 326 and Broadway. 84-43A-830-1311 /36.\ BID 8312 Mill l t i equipment supplies NVOD Electric, Lubbock, Texas-- 10 each (more Or less) steel poles 38/ square, 2 fixture yoke -type mounting bracket. 11 gauge steel -bronze. NPl80D Electric, Lubbock, TeXds--15 each (more Or less) fixture high teC TF series Omni Flood 400W metal hDlid with bdlleSt and lamp, aluminum housing, bronze finish /0r approved equal); 15 each (more Or less) fixture high tec TF series 00Oi Flood 400 W high pr8SSUr2 5VdiU0 with bdlle3t and lamp, aluminum housing, bronze finish (Or approved equal). Motion was made by Councilman Patterson, seconded by Councilwoman Baker, authorizing low bids for Bid Item #'s 8190 #28\, 8200 /29\, 8347 (30), 8250 (31), 8271 (32), 8286 (33), 8288 (34), 8290 (35), and 8312 (36), and stipluldting on Bid Item #8250 that it be authorized subject to acquisition of right-of-way. Motion carried: Mayor - 2 - ^ \ \ December 20, 1984 831 84-43A-83I-I3I2 (lO.) Zone Case No. 2500--Request of Charles Bolton (for Bolton Oil Company) to change Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7, Paris Addition, City of Lu bock, Lubbock County, Texas, from R-3 to C-4 Zoning District. (Located at 38th Street and ORDINANCE #8695 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 2500; CHANGE LOTS 4, 5, 6 AND 7, PARI3 ADDITION, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM R-3 TO C-4 ZONING DISTRICT; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE: PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Charles 8OTtOO presented his request which is based on an expansion of C-4 into an R-3 area. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - C-4 South - R-2 East - R-3 N8St - C-4 Staff discussed briefly the fact that the entire area from 38th Street to 34th Street and Avenue P to Avenue O may eventually develop, with O closure of Paris Avenue, in d fashion with better setback from Avenue O off-street parking, and d buffer to Avenue P. However, current ownerships will prevent such OO overall redevelopment for some time. AS a start, the proposal by Mr. Bolton may be headed in the appropriate direction. With regard to the Comprehensive Plan policies, the request for "C-4" is not entirely in order because it is not located On a regional thoroughfare. But, the area did not originally develop Under D Comprehensive Plan and may not be expected to Stand the test of our current Plan. Set -back from 38th Street is reduced on the recommended site plan from 43' to 25/, and there are no Curb CUtS to 38th Street. The Staff recommends the shift Of major parking activities to the north Of the building, and the "front" of the business to Paris Avenue, rather than to the R-2 VO the south. The major Plan test is neighborhood opposition. ID this case, there was none. Staff recommended approval of the case subject to the following: l. Tied to the site plan as submitted 2. Recommended uses: l. C-2 and C-3 uses 2. Automobile and recreational vehicle sales and service and used autos, limited to wholesale dealer. 3. Auto glass shop. 4. Automobile seat C0Y8r and upholstery shop. 5. Bath and bunk house. 6. Barber and beauty Supply dealer. 7. 8Udt and boat trailer sales and service. 8. Builders supply (all materials in d 9 building) 10. Cafe supply dealer --fixtures. IT. Candy plant. 12. Canvas goods shop, tents and awnings. 13. Dairy supply dealer 14. Electrical Supply dealer. 15. Feed store. 16. Frozen food lockers. 17. Janitorial Or cleaning service. 18. Job printing and lithographing. 19. Laboratory, chemical, general analysis. 20. Laundry, commercial. 21. Linen and towel supply service. 832 December 20, 1984 22. Magazine agency. 23. Monument sales 24. Pest control service. 25. Portable buildings sales. 26. Print shop. 27. Signs shops. 28. Store fixture sales. 29. Trailer and truck rental. 30. Trailer and truck sales, rental or service. 31. Upholstery shop --furniture. 32. Wholesale sales, services, display and offices. 33. Warehousing and/or storage in conjunction with wholesale sales and/or services -one space for each two thousand (2,000 square feet) of gross floor area. 3. Unless otherwise specified by the Code, permitted uses shall meet a 1/300 parking ratio. No one spoke in opposition to this request. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the case with conditions and Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Councilman Patterson passing on first reading Ordinance #8695 with conditions as set out above and recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-832-1313 (11.) Zone Case No. 2501-- Bolton Oil Company Addition, City of Lu C-4 to M-1 Zoning Di and Ute Avenue). ORDINANCE #8696 Request of Charles Bolton (for to change Lot 14, Block 7, Clutter bbock, Lubbock County, Texas, from strict. Located at east 48th Street ORDINANCE NO. 8696 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 2501; CHANGE LOT 14, BLOCK 7, CLUTTER ADDITION, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM C-4 TO M-1 ZONING DISTRICT; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Charles Bolton presented this request for M-1 in a C-4 area. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - C-4 South - M-1 East - C-4 West - R-1 The Comprehensive Plan shows this area as industrial. The existing residential in C-4 surrounding areas is legal non -conforming. The greatest test under the Comprehensive Plan is the reaction of the neighborhood. No person appeared against the case. The change in land use (C-4 to M-1) is not particularly significant, especially when the industrial on the Plan is considered. One reason for the written opposition of some of the residents is the Oil Reclamation Plant just southeast of the request. Sights, smells, and noise of the oil operation continue as an irritant to the resi- dences of the area. The Commission approved the request with the following conditions: December 20, 1984 833 1. A solid screening fence (wood or chain -link with slats) on the Ute frontage. 2. No access to the parcel from Ute Avenue. No one spoke in opposition to this request. The Planning Commission approved the case and the Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission. Motion was made by Councilman Nash, seconded by Councilman Patterson passing on first reading Ordinance #8696 with conditions as set out above and recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-833-1314 (12.) Zone Case No. 2502--Request of H.A. Sessions to change a tract of land out of Section 17, Block E-2, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, from R-1 to A-1 and C-2 Zoning Districts. Located at 98th Street and Quaker Avenue). ORDINANCE #8697 ORDINANCE NO. 8697 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 2502; CHANGE A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 17, BLOCK E-2, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM R-1 TO A-1 AND C-2 ZONING DISTRICTS; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Mr. Sessions presented this request is for C-2 and A-1. The adjacent land -use relationships are as follows: North - "C-2" zoning South - Agricultural in "T" zoning East - Agricultural in "T" zoning West - Nursery and vacant in "R-1" and "T" zoning Assistant City Manager Jim Bertram said that the case conforms with the Comprehensive Plan with the exception of standard allotments of ten acres per quadrant at major thoroughfare intersections. The bending of Quaker Avenue and 98th Street around the northwest corner of the intersection to locate all of a playa on the Lakeridge Golf Course, some "natural" boundaries that result, and drainage constraints indicate some justification for an increase in commercial acreage. "Policy" acreage would be 13.3 acres (3.3 acres from the northwest corner plus ten). The northeast corner will have 13.3 under the proposed zoning, and this proposed (southeast) corner, will have 18.6. A 100' diagonal drainage containing two acres plus two other large easements make an actual increase of acreage above "policy" at three acres. The Planning and Zoning Commission agreed with the con- straints of the parcel and to the additional three acres in size. The issue of site plan requirements for the entire tract was discussed at length, including the eventual requirement of elevations, and indications of building materials, colors, etc. The Planning Commission voted to impose site plan restrictions. Thus, with recognition of the site conditions dictating a moderate change in usual Comprehensive Plan ten acre policy, both the Staff and P&Z recommended the case with three conditions: 1. "A site plan, including building elevations showing materials, color, and texture, shall be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council on the entire tract under this Zoning Ordinance, prior to issuance of a building permit". 834, December 20, 1984 2. At the time of submittal of the site plan, the following statement shall be affixed to the plan: "All buildings on the total development tract for this zone case shall be consistent and compatible with the material, color, texture, and elevation submitted with the site plan". 3. Exclude the small area west of Quaker Avenue from this case. No one appeared in opposition to this request. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this case and Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Councilman Brown, passing on first reading Ordinance #8697, with conditions as set out above and recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-834-1315 (13.) Zone Case No. 2011-A--Request of H.A. Sessions to change a tract of land out of Sections 35, 36, 37, and 38, Block AK, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, from R-1 and A-1 to R-2 and M-1 Zoning District. Located at Brown- field Road and Milwaukee Avenue). ORDINANCE #8698 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 2011-A; CHANGE A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 35, 36, 37 AND 38, BLOCK AK, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM R-1 AND A-1 TO R-2 AND M-1 ZONING DISTRICT; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. The Comprehensive Land Use Change hearing will speak to most of the zone case concerns north of the railroad. The request for a land use change from R-1 to M-1 is accompanied by three major items: 1. Existing M-1 to the east 2. A fact that, due to the location of the rail- road, drainage in this area will continue as a major difficulty. Drainage -wise, the M-1 activities are easier to plat and facilitate drainage than residential. Due to drainage problems and a long -pending law suit, a resi- dential use for the area proposed in the early 70's was abandoned. The four tests from the Comprehensive Plan for this change include: a. Will the change complement or benefit existing and proposed land use patterns? West - Agricultural at present South - yes East - yes North - Not without proper buffering b. Is the change generally acceptable to adjacent land owners? Public comments indicated many reservations but not adamant opposition. ' December 20/ 1484 330' C. Conditions have changed which make the proposed use unlikely? This is a dif- ficult issue. The resolution of drainage with the railroad may never be sufficient to allow standard residential. Strictly from a drainage viewpoint, the industrial is an easier land use to solve the d. Major public expense - No. Alternatives considered were: l. No change to the existing Land Use Plan. 2. Consider the 60' easement and 20' alley as 80/ setback and a solid fence plus any other restrictions on lots 40-45. 3. Swing 34th Street south such that D residential buffer (single or double tier) is the burden Of the proponent. 4. Delete the area north of 43rd Street from the zone case, although that would only be delaying the decision making process. Citizen concern included: I. Not allowing heavy commercial Or industrial uses behind the residential to the north. 2. A proper buffer from the residential. 3. Existing drainage problems in Park Lorraine. Our Engineering Department points out that because of d breakYine on the north of this area, very little Of the drainage problems in the residential area are contributed by this plat. 4. The neighborhood should C0m8 to the hearing with a list of exclusions from both the IDP and M-1 areas. As per the outcome of the land -use hearing, Staff recom- mended approval based On: 1. IDP on Lots 88-108 and Lots 42-46. 2. Buffer the area to the north Of the South- western Public Service easement with O minimum of d solid Screening fence on the south line of the power easement. Planning Commission recommended approval sUhi8{t to the following conditions: I. Lots 42-44 - IDP uses Only - not other require- ments of the IDP section. 2. IDP zoning OD [0tS 88-108. 3. Six foot masonry fence on the north of the industrial area. Moody Fnrgy appeared to ask some questions about this case. Motion was made by COuOCil0dO Patterson, seconded by Councilman Brown, approving OD first reading Ordinance #8698, with conditions suggested by Planning and Zoning Commission and further with the following conditions: 1. A 6/ masonry fence shall be C0OStrUCt8d OO the north property line of the industrial area. 2. On Lots 43-45° all outside storage must be screened with a 0/ solid screen fence and no explosive or flammable materials may be stored On premises. Motion Carried: 7 YeOS^, 0 Nays '-~ 836 December 20, 1984 84-43A-836-1316 (14.) Zone Case No. 2504--Re uest of Vin Betenbough (for Monterey Church of Christ) to change Lot 1, Pioneer Park Church of Christ Addition City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, from R-1 to A-2, Zoning District. Located at 3616 58th Street . ORDINANCE #8699 ORDINANCE #8699 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 2504; CHANGE LOT 1, PIONEER PARK CHURCH OF CHRIST ADDITION, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM R-1 TO A-2 ZONING DISTRICT; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Foy Anderson appeared for Vin Betenbough to state that the existing use of this property is Monterey Church of Christ. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - R-1 South - R-1 East - R-1 West - School property At Planning and Zoning Commission meeting Staff gave a brief review of our policy of asking churches to request zone cases to comply with zoning and avoid Zoning Board of Adjustment approval for any expansions, Staff noted that future expansion that is within the Code would be "legal" and require no further hearings. The Plannning and Zoning Commission approved the request with the following condition: A-2 limited to church uses. No one appeared in opposition to this request. Staff recommended that City Council uphold the Planning Commission. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Councilman Nash passing on first reading Ordinance #8699, with conditions set out by Planning and Zoning Commission and approved by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-836-1317 (15.) Zone Case No. 1837-C--Request of Burl W. Masters (for Horizon Properties) to change a tract of land out of Section 1, Block J-S, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County Texas, from C-2 to R-2 Zoning District. Located at Erskine Street and 500 east of Frankford Avenue). ORDINANCE #8700 ORDINANCE NO. 8700 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 1837-C; CHANGE A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 1, BLOCK J-S, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM C-2 TO R-2 ZONING DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Burl Masters appeared to present this request and noted that the land area is now zoned C-2, with the request down -zoning to R-2. December 20, 1984 837 With a brief review of the Comprehensive Plan policy of ten acres per corner, Assistant City Manager Jim Bertram pointed out that any R-2 development now will be with C-2 to the north. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - C-2 South - R-1 East - R-1 West - C-2 Planning and Zoning Commission approved the case, and Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, passing on first reading Ordinance #8700, as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays (16.) Zone Case #2460-B--Request of Warlick Carr (for Paul Rochester Investment Company) to change a tract of land out of Sections 10 and 11, Block E-2, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, to amend site plan. Located at Loop 289 and Quaker Avenue . ORDINANCE #8701 ORDINANCE #8701 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 2460-B; CHANGE A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 10 AND 11, BLOCK E-2, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, TO AMEND SITE PLAN; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. This request is to amend the site plan for the new mall located at the southeast corner of Loop 289 and Quaker Avenue. A recap of the change of zoning titles and overall development standards included: 1. With a reduction of 1 space/175 sq. ft. of floor area to 1 space/200 sq. ft. of floor area (5 space/1000 sq. ft.) parking for the mall, the additional acreage is added to building square footage and parking in the outlying areas. 2. The net increase in building area is 154,200 square feet. 3. The net reduction in parking spaces is 521. 4. Addition of "professional office uses" to "retail" on Tract B-2. 5. Change from "C-2 Specific Use limited to banks and related uses" on Tract C to "C-2 Specific Use" ("Retail" on site plan). 6. Change from "C-2 Specific Use limited to general offices" on Tract D to "Bank/Office and related uses". 7. An additional curb cut not approved on the existing plan between Tracts C and D on the proposed plan, was not approved. 8. Two pedestrian 4 foot fence breaks on Memphis Avenue were withdrawn and not approved because of neighborhood opposition. Following is a recap by tract: 338 December 20, 1984 Proposed Conditions: A. C-3 Specific Use Zoning limited to a Regional Mall. B. Limited to I,000,000 Sq. ft. of gross leasable area for the Mdll. C. Setback line as illustrated on the site plan. Changes: 1. Reduction in parcel SiZ8 Of 12.78 acres. 2. Reduction of 1,292 parking spaces /1/I75 ratio reduced to I/200\. 3. The "loop road" is approximately lOO feet l2SS in radius. Tract B-I Proposed conditions: A. "C-2 Specific Use" zoning limited to C-2 uses. B. Restriction Of CVrh Cuts on Quaker not illustrated on the site plan. C. Setback line as illustrated UO the site plan. Changes: l. Increase in parcel acreage Of .555 acres. 2. Increase Of 24 parking spaces (ratio to remain at 1/I75\. Tract B-2 Proposed conditions: A. C-2A Specific Use" Z0DiOg limited to retail and professional office uses. B. /5\ parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. C. Restriction Of curb CVt3 on 0Udk8r not illustrated 00 site plan. D. No windows permitted above the first floor for building Sides on Quaker. E. Setback line as illustrated on Site plan. Changes: l. Staff recommended "professional offices" addition to "A" above and Planning and Zoning concurred. 2. Increase Of 26,200 square feet to building. 3. Increase of 1.900 acres to parcel, 4. Increase of I20 parking spaces (ratio to remain 1/200). Tracts B-3 and B-4 Proposed conditions: A. oC-2A Specific Use" zoning limited to professional offices. B. (5) parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. December 20, 1984 339 C. NO curb cuts allowed OO Quaker 8V8OUe except as specified on the site plan. D. NO windows be permitted above the first floor for building sides UD Quaker Avenue. E. Setback lines as illustrated On site plan. Changes: l. Increase of I3,000 Square feet to area of buildings. 2. Increase Of 1.252 acres to parcel. 3. Increase of 66 parking spaces. Tract C Proposed conditions: A. "C-2 Specific Use" zoning limited to retail and offices. B. NO curb CUtS allowed OO Quaker AVeDU9 except as specified on the Site plan, eliminate the cut shown OO Quaker between Tracts C and D. C. Setback shall be as Shown on the site plan. Changes: l. An increase of 7,000 square feet to building. 2. An increase Of 70 parking spaces (ratio is reduced from I/I75 to 1/100\. 3. Proposed plan illustrates "Retail (C-2 uses)", rather than "banks and related uses"on the previous plan. 4. Curb cut between Tracts C and D Was not approved by P & Z. Tract D Proposed conditions: A. "C-2 Specific Use" zoning limited to banks/office and related uses. B. (5) parking spaces per I,000 square feet of gross floor area. C. No curb cuts allowed on Quaker Avenue except as specified on the site plan, the Curb Cut shown between Tracts C and D shall not be approved. D. Setback shall be as shown on the Site plan. Changes: l. An increase Of 20,000 square feet to the hU1lding/s\~ 2~ An increase Of I06 parking spaces (ratio to remain 1/200). 3. The title "Bank/Office and related uses" is different from general offices as previously approved. 4. The 0OtOrhdDk structure UD the south side of the tract was a part of Tract «C" on the approved plan. 340 December 20, 1984 5. The curb cut between Tracts "Cx and "D' was not approved. Tract E Proposed conditions: A. That the zoning be approved as ^C-2". B. Setback shall be as shown on the site plan. Changes: I. Increase of 8,000 square feet to buildings. 2. An increase Of 1.20I acres to the parcel. 3. An increase Of 11 parking spaces (the ratio remains at 1/100). NOTE: Any restaurant use with an alcohol permit will require 1/75 ratio rather than the 1/108 noted in #3. Tract F Proposed conditions: A. oC-2A Specific Use" zoning limited to general offices. B. Buildings setback from interior roadway shall be 30 feet. Changes: I. An increase of 120,000 square feet to buildings. 2. An iDCr8dsg Of 11.983 dCrg5 to the parcel. 3. An iDCr8dSe Of 588 parking spaces (the ratio will remain 1/200\. Tracts G-H-J Proposed conditions: A. That Tracts G and J he zoned »K-2 Specific US2^ limited to tUw0hVUS8S. B. That Tract H be zoned R-I. C. An 8 foot tall brick fence shall be built concurrent with the first building permit iS5U8d west of Tracts G, H and J. NV breaks, pedestrian Or otherwise, shall be allowed in the full length Of the fence. Changes: 1. The addition to "Co above will strengthen the residents' stand OD the brick fence. Tract K Proposed conditions: A. "R-1 Specific USe" limited to open Space. Changes: l. Increase of 6~69 acres to the parcel. Wdrlick Carr and Bill 3trdcener presented the case in a brief review Of changes. December 20, 1984 841 The Staff reviewed the case as O Site plan O08Od0eOt with some minor changes in zoning titles or restrictions, but as having no change in zoning classifications. The basic decision for consideration is whether the amendments for parking and increased building area are justified. Existing land use relationships include the following: North - [O0p 289 South - C-3 East - Single family West - Commercial and residential The request is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended, In discussion with Larry Hoffman, Traffic and Transporta- tion Director, the increase of 154,200 ft. of building area will generate as much a; a IO% increase in peak hour traffic demand. However, the Only intersection which D IO% increase will significantly impact, is defined by the impact study as being substandard with the current approval, requiring expansion in the future by the State. Mr. Hoffman advises that the proposed Quaker/Loop 289 revisions would alleviate the already approved plan traffic volumes, plus this potential 10% peak load increase. The Staff reiterated that if the improvements to the Quaker/Loop intersection /dS outlined in the Traffic Study submitted with the original CdS2\ are not completed concurrent with or shortly after the mall opening, serious traffic congestion could occur at that point. Staff recommended approval tied to the items with noted changes reviewed earlier. The proponents disagreed with the exclusion Of the extra curb cut OD Quaker. The 3taff/S reasoning was based On protection of Quaker in this high -volume area OO d curve as Opposed to any potential traffic CoDgeStfOO On adjacent development tracts. One positive element for traffic is that the greatest increase Of building square footage (120,000 ft.) is On the east side of the site, away from Quaker and Loop 289. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this site plan. As with the previous zoning, the Staff recommends that an additional condition be required as f011OWS; oA letter from the proponent shall be filed with the City Council, prior to second reading, stating that they will participate On a 50-50 basis for all costs related to the installation of any future traffic signal equipment installed as warranted by traffic counts." Appearing in opposition to this request were Jerry Nvslar and Ken Hyatt. Motion was made by CVUOCilw00On Baker, seconded by Councilman Patterson passing on first reading Ordinance #8701 to uphold Planning and Zoning with the following conditions added or altered: /{\ That an 8/ tall brick fence shall be built CODCVrr2Dt with the first building permit issued on Tracts A, F, G, H or J. No breaks, pedestrian or otherwise, shall be allowed in the full length of the fence. (See page 10 - Tracts G-H-J, part C of Ordinance 8701. This is an altered condition.) /2\ A building permit must be taken out for O NiOi00O of 400,000 sq. ft. on Tract A prior to May 2° 1980, Or the specific use permit on this tract shall lapse and the zoning shall revert to its previous classification. /3\ A letter from the proponent shall be filed with the City Council prior to the second reading Of this Ordinance stating that the owners shall participate On a 60-50 basis for all costs 842, December 20, 1984 84-43A-842-1319 (17.) related to the installation of any future traffic signal equipment adjacent to this site, and as warranted by traffic counts. (4) Fence will be maintained jointly by the owners of Tracts A & F. Motion carried: 5 Yeas; 2 Nays --Councilman Nash and Councilwoman Trejo. Zone Case No. 2503--Request of Mack Osborne Systems, Inc. to change a tract of land ou 14, Block B, City of Lubbock, Lubbock Count R-1 to AM _Zoning District. Located at 250 Street). ORDINANCE #8702 ORDINANCE NO. 8702 for Blood of Section Texas. from AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 2503; CHANGE A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 14, BLOCK B, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM R-1 TO AM ZONING DISTRICT; SUBJECT TO CONDI- TIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 1-4 OF THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Don Osborne appeared representing Mack Osborne to present request for zone change from R-1 to AM and noted that the AM District is an acceptable buffer between commercial and residential with suitable site treatment. Adjacent site land -use relationships include: North - "R-1" single-family South - Commercial in a "C-4" zone East - AM (Highland Hospital) West - R-1 Assistant City Manager Jim Bertram stated that a majority of the written comments indicated "favorable" for the case, if a suitable buffer is provided. Most letters spelled out a fence similar to the area east of Univer- sity. No opponents spoke at the hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff reviewed two site plans with the Commission. The basis of one plan was access from University Avenue and Akron Avenue, with a 25 foot setback from 48th Street, no curb cuts on 48th Street, and a fence of suitable materials. The second site plan had a 60 foot setback from 48th Street, with a fence broken by two curb cuts. Mr. Bertram reported that the proponents have a good site plan for the west half of the plat, and are willing to be tied to it. The east half will be developed later. The proponent strongly requested two curb cuts on 48th Street and got support from the Commission. The Commission recommended the case to the Council with the following conditions: 1. Tied to the site plan for Tract C. 2. Tracts D-N will be subject to site plan review prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. A limit of two curb cuts on 48th Street -one for Tract C and another for the balance of the tracts. 4. That the 15 foot setback of the building be subject to the AM site plan requirements. No further mention, discussion, or condition was made of the fence at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. The Staff recommended a 4' fence any place along 48th ` Street where a parking lot only exists on the development tracts, and has d development plan which incorporates all Of the discussion. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this request, but Staff still had some concerns about placing unbuf- fered 3d0 Wahl (owns property dCrOsS the street from this request for zone change) spoke in Upp0Sfti0D to the request. NO one else appeared in opposition. Motion was made by C0UDCil0dO Nash, seconded by Councilwoman Baker passing on first reading, Ordinance #8702 as recommended by Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff, and with the following conditions: I° Tied to a site plan for of D 4/ brick fence in parking lots. Fencing landscaping. Motion carried: 7 Yeas 0 Nays. Tract C, with addition front of all off-street to be compatible with Motion was made by Mayor Pro Te0 Carpenter, seconded by Councilwoman Trejo amending the previous 0OtfOn to include the following conditions: l. Tracts D - N will be subject to site plan review prior to issuance Of a bUldiOg permit and site plan will show building plans com- patible with design Of the building UO the west end of the development tracts. 2. The alley should be paved, using standard City design and construction standards for alley - access parking. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; U Nays (l8.) l of Elmer Etgen to change Lots 18 and 19, Block 5, Moore Elliston Addition, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, from R-1 and C-3 to M-2 Zoning District. (Located at 2517 East 4th Street Mr. Elmer Etgen appeared to speak in favor Of his request. He was not Specific about what he planned to manufacture, Or what type of business he planned to have if this zone change were approved. Assistant City Manager Jim Bertram reported that this request is for a manufacturing zone for an existing building On East 4th Street east of Ironwood Avenue. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - Vacant R-I South - Vacant R-1 East - Vacant R-1 West - Existing single-family residence This request is a major deviation from the Comprehensive Land Use Plan since the plan shows this general area to be low density residential. The existing CU00erCidl type building originally housed a steam laundry in the early 50'S and since that time has been used for an assortment Of various commercial type uses. Prior to 1970, d C-4 case was filed on the property but was denied by the Planning Commission. The same proponent filed an M-2 case on the property in 1970 and it was denied as well. However, an appeal was filed with the City Council and ultimately the [0VDCil granted C-2 in 1475. The building had technically lost its non -conforming status at that time but the minutes reflect the Council granted the C-2 zoning since the nature Of the building was commercial and they wanted the proponent to be able to use the building. Zoning records show that as late as July 22, 1975, the building remained unoccupied. 844 December 20, 1984 Not only is this case a major deviation from the Land Use Plan, requiring a Plan change, but it would also be a spot zone in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Additionally, there was over 20% written opposition to the case at the Planning Commission level. The Staff's opinion is "If M-1 is good here, then it is good either side of 4th Street from the Idalou Road to Loop 289". The Planning and Zoning Commission recom- mended that this case be denied. Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission be upheld and this case be denied. Mr. Harold Chatman appeared to speak in opposition to this requested change. After extensive questioning by Council of Mr. Etgen, motion was made by Councilman Brown, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, tabling this request until the January 24, 1985 City Council meeting and instructing Mr. Etgen to get with City Planning and Zoning officials and come up with some specific plans for which he needs this zone change. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-844-1321 (19.) Consider a site plan for Zone Case 2104-B. The Zoning Ordinance for Case 2104-B (between 79th Street and 82nd Street from Slide Road to York Avenue) contained a condition that requires site plan approval by both the Planning Commission and the City Council prior to the issuance of any building permits. This site plan is one of three that had to be approved in this area and as submitted is technically correct in all respects with the Ordinance. Planning and Zoning approved the site plan by a vote of 7-0 with one abstention. Bill Cox was present to present the site plan and answer qustions of Council. Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter approving the Site Plan as presented. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-844-1322 (20.) Consider a site plan for Zone Case 2224-B. The original zone case for this property on Slide Road contained an approval for a site plan that showed 57th Street to remain in its present location with the addition of a cul-de-sac. The new site plan shows 57th Street to be closed and used as access to all the property on either side of where the street was. This is acceptable to the Staff as it was a concept that Staff originally tried to get the developers to use. The closures have now been approved and Staff recommended the site plan for approval. Burl Masters appeared to present the site plan and to answer questions of Council. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Councilman Brown authorizing the site plan as presented. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 84-43A-844-1323 (37.) Consider appointment to the Board of Electrical Examiners to fill the unexpired term of Lee Lewis who has declined his appointment. 84-43A-844-1324 (38.) Consider appointment to the Parks and Recreation Board to fill the unexpired term of Ben Alley, who is moving from the City. I I <m o.0 o c o `� E a a dw' Z CB O NV4 CIO C C C `•" U U j r' u cn i— �C N ^p O cd C? o by C ^p C E 0 � ¢ caQ. tnj OD c �e-1 a> o` U `.L U) Y "C\) 'am V ca -0 -N - , acu n u a O 7, ,aa4b�i zasw>d�uao �z000 a¢aq"ov �c i �'rU uy •".a ill Y d h ,Z il! a c z t m NO.,, !u � out=aQa-u'r'maa'zaa'°�,zr r> �v utF- u z iifu r.. ca t-v' rz i��d�za i m�a �ao�ase r�o; -14 It i--�p''st Ku.�-�U^ZZm'ti-Oe� }>,a:• saa�`s:`. t2a�'pzaa,O��iVaO_O,a Z�Rs`°'iuc sw,'r^w r�,,zaa� aa AW 2a°4a�z�tmtle0>°.0 Gz>- �LLg a2pQj °em4Xse >'o` a�°uczrz w!orr %+, aw�z O1no>w9 zo6 a atazu wain; a� zA>r�'siu=mx> ��ar�m aamg�o°° utoz�souzxat�'Zxs <da °a z LL n �* 3mat5a aa7 YR� LL °`d oU a.Ir aa�tsvR CL • „ v oCLo 0 � xZ CL W M41 41 [i La`z3 i o p O [z7C:) ° 03 cz Q Z tU. CO 2� Q �06 W L Y... C V (� v, > C E.�OC1 o.o.a� a�iQ avn cn Lz. December 20, 1984 95' 84-43A-845-I325 (39.) Consider i to the Board of City Development replace Esther Sepeda who has moved from the City. MOt10D was 0dd8 by Councilwoman Tr `O, seconded by Councilwoman Baker, reappointing H.R. "Doc" 8Und0Ch to the Board of Electrical Examiners; appointing Mel Pope to fill the unexpired term of Ben Alley on the Parks and Recreation Board; and appointing Alan White to fill the unexpired term of Esther 3epeda On the Board of City Development. Mayor Henry adjourned the meeting at 2:00 p.m. ATTEST: C4RANEE BOYD, CITY SECRETARY READ AND APPROVED THIS 10th OF JANUARY, 1985. ATTEST: