Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - Regular - 4/24/1986181 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 24, 1986 The City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas met in regular session on the 24th day of April, 1986 in the City Council Chambers, first floor, City Hall, 1625 13th Street, Lubbock, Texas at 9:00 a.m. Present: Mayor Peck McMinn, 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 McMinn called the meeting to order at 9:00. 86-45-181-279 ( 1.) 86-45-181-280 ( 2.) 86-45-181-281 ( 3.) 86-45-181-282 The Invocation was given by City Manager Larry J. Cunningham. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was given in unison by those in the Council Chambers. PROCLAMATIONS "Student Leadership Week" April 20-26, 1986 "Hispanic Association of Women's Week" April 26 - May 3, 1986 "Beta Sigma Phi Week" April 28 - May 2, 1986 "Better Speech and Hearing Month" May, 1986 "Foster Parent Month" May, 1986 "Music Week" May 4-11, 1986 "Nurses Week" May 4-10, 1986 ( 4.) Motion was made by Councilman Patterson, seconded by Councilman Nash to approve the Minutes of the Special Called Meeting of April 3, 1986 and the Regular Meeting of April 10, 1986 Regular City Council Meeting as written. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays 86-45-181-283 ( 5.) ORDINANCE #8781--Abandoning and closing a portion of 7th Street between Avenue T and Avenue U in the City of Lubbock. ORDINANCE #8781 ORDINANCE NO. 8781 AN ORDINANCE ABANDONING AND CLOSING A PORTION OF 7TH STREET BETWEEN AVENUES T AND U IN THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE BODY OF THIS ORDINANCE; DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO MARK THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY TO REFLECT SAID ABANDONING AND CLOSING; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. This street to be closed is the 60.0 feet by 600.0 feet east -west street directly south of Pioneer Park and north of the proposed L.I.S.D. elementary school. The propo- nent of this closure is L.I.S.D. The area to be closed is 36,000' (.826 acre). The area to be closed will be rededicated as a drainage easement. The Lubbock County Appraisal District has the lots along the south side of 7th Street valued at $3,800 each. This figure equates to 60¢ a square foot. A more reasonable figure for the school district is 20t a square foot for the land. Since the street will be dedicated as a 60 feet drainage easement, the value will be placed at 10t a square foot 182 April 24, 1986 86-45-182-284 ( 6.) for the land (36,000' x 10t = $3,600). All utilities are in agreement with this closure. The first reading was June 14, 1985. The final plat has been filed and all costs have been paid. Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Councilman Patterson, seconded by Councilwoman Trejo passing on second and final reading Ordinance #8781 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. ORDINANCE #8900--Abandoning and closing a portion of an east west alley between Lots 21 and 22, and Lots 39 and 40, Gatewood Addition. ORDINANCE #8900 ORDINANCE NO. 8900 AN ORDINANCE ABANDONING AND CLOSING PORTIONS OF A 20-FOOT ALLEY IN THE GATEWOOD ADDITION TO THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE BODY OF THIS ORDINANCE; DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO MARK THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK TO REFLECT SAID ABANDONMENT AND CLOSING; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Motion was made by Councilman Patterson, seconded by Councilwoman Trejo passing on second and final reading Ordinance #8900 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 86-45-182-285 ( 7.) ORDINANCE #8870--Abandoning and closing a portion of a 20 alley in the Woodland Park Addition. ORDINANCE #8870 ORDINANCE NO 8870 AN ORDINANCE ABANDONING AND CLOSING PORTIONS OF A 20-FOOT ALLEY IN THE WOODLAND PARK ADDITION TO THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE BODY OF THIS ORDINANCE; DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO MARK THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK TO REFLECT SAID ABANDONMENT AND CLOSING; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Motion was made by Councilman Patterson, seconded by Councilwoman Trejo passing on second and final reading Ordinance #8900 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF LUBBOCK Before me Dorothy Russe I I a Notai personally appeared Twi I a Aufi 1 I + Accot pers Corporation, publishers of the Lubbock Aval being by me duly sworn did depose and say that sai than fifty-two weeks prior to the first insertion of No. 74904C ed copy of the Legal Notice is a tr Avalanche -.Journal on the following dates: Ap t Account Manager LUBBOCK AVALANCHE -JOURNAL Southwestern Newspapers Corporation M2320-R170 bbock County, Texas on this day — of the Southwestern Newspa- iing, Evening and Sunday, who published continuously for more y, Texas and the attached print - and was printed in the Lubbock Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9 day DOROTHY R11SSM tr.wir In end For be'Stale DIYexA,' April 24, 1986 183 86-45-183-286 ( 8.) ORDINANCE #8912--ZONE CASE #1811-C (8211-D a Public Hearing on the request of Wayne R Animal Clinic) for a change of zoning from Speciof Lot 2, Iris Gardens Addition. ORDINANCE #8912 Indiana) --Hold ai ns�for Cox 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. 1811-C; A SPECIFIC USE ZONE CHANGE, FROM C-2 TO C-2 SPECIFIC USE PERMIT UNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 29-24(c)(14) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, FOR A VETERINARY CLINIC ON LOT 3 AND THE SOUTH 15' OF LOT 2, IRIS GARDENS ADDITION, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 29-31(a) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Wayne Robins, representing Cox Animal Clinic, presented this request is for a veterinary clinic which is an allowable use in a C-2 zone by specific use permit. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - Existing commercial retail South - Existing commercial service East - Existing commercial service West - Existing commercial retail The case is surrounded by C-2 commercial retail and service businesses and should be considered to be a routine case, subject to meeting the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for veterinary clinics in C-2 districts. Since writing "noise standard" limits into the Ordinance for this type of use in a C-2 district, there have been several cases approved and so far no problems have been reported. P & Z approved the case and the Staff recom- mended that the City Council uphold the Commission. No one appeared to speak in opposition to this request. Motion was made by Councilman Nash, seconded by Councilman Patterson passing on second and final reading Ordinance #8912 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. ( 9.) ORDINANCE #8913--ZONE CASE #2558 (Located north of 66th Street and on the east side of University Avenue) --Hold a Public Hearing on the re uest of Wayne Robins for Short Stops Restaurant for a change of zoning from R-1 to C-4 Specific Use under provisions of Section 29-29 of the Code of ordinances on a tract of land out of Section 3, Block E. ORDINANCE#8913 ORDINANCE NO. 8913 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. 2558; A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R-1 TO C-2 ZONING DISTRICT UNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 29-29 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK ON A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 13, BLOCK E, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 29-31(a) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Wayne Robins, on behalf of Short Stop Restaurants, presented this request for a drive-in restaurant with no inside dining facilities. The adjacent land use rela- tionships are as follows: North - A non -conforming drive-in theater South - Small retail strip center East - Non -conforming drive-in theater West - Existing single-family development The request is fairly consistent with the City's Compre- hensive Plan. Staff takes no issue with the restaurant use being compatible in this district, but the main question is whether or not the drive-thru aspect (park and eat) would complement the existing and proposed land 184 April 24, 1986 86-45-184-288 (10.) use patterns. Another issue is to determine whether or not a drive-in restaurant is acceptable in the neighbor- hood and to the neighbors that must live around it. The applicants were required to file for a C-4 (Heavy Commercial) district since restaurants with no inside dining facilities are only allowed in a C-4 district. One issue to be considered here is whether or not the likeli- hood of the park -and -eat type situation would be detri- mental to the neighborhood or the adjacent shopping center. The Staff advised the Planning Commission that when the Zoning Ordinance Revision Committee specified that drive-in restaurants would have to go into C-4 zones, it was because of the blowing trash, accumulation of automobiles in excess of required parking, and outside speakers taking and announcing orders. Another issue with regard to the C -4 zoning district is that of paying careful attention to the styling detail in making the above determination and considering architectural style and site as a key factor in the case. This type of restaurant facility usually always requires its own free-standing building and separate building site, and usually does not come in any kind of compatible architec- tural style. This might be fine in the requested location, but might not be at all appropriate or compa- tible in any other location in town. As the Planning Commission considered the case, they determined the restaurant use was appropriate but that the C-4 district and Specific Site Plan offered were not appropriate and did not grant the C-4 specific use as requested, but gave the proponent C-2 which would allow restaurants with sit-down facilities with the drive - through aspect as only an incidental use. Ideally, the redevelopment potential for the drive-in would be greater with more exposure to University Avenue; however, the Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission. No one appeared in opposition to the request. Motion was made by Councilman Brown, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter passing on first reading Ordinance #8913 as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. ORDINANCE Street an request o Investmen Spec 9 AST`( #8914--ZONE CASE Iola Avenue Larry E. Bri s -fora chan se and R-2 un 4 and 29-29 ract oT iana out o ORDINANCE #8914 1970-B (Located at 24th d a Public Hearing on the geman for Ben Barnes e of zoning from R-1 to C-4 der provi of the Co ction 44. sions of Section de of Ordinances Block A-K. ORDINANCE NO. 8914 on a 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. 1970-B; A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R-1 TO R-2 ZONING DISTRICT AND C-4 SPECIFIC USE PERMIT UNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 29-24(c)(25) AND 29-29 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, FOR MINI WAREHOUSES ON A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 44, BLOCK A-K, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS; SUBJECT TO CONDI- TIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 29-31(a) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Larry E. Bridgeman appeared on behalf of Ben Barnes Investments to speak in favor of this case for a proposed mini -warehouse development immediately behind an existing apartment complex and includes an R-2 buffer fronting onto Iola Avenue. The mini -warehouse request is an allowable use in the C-4 district by virtue of a specific use permit. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - Existing apartment complex South - Vacant R-1 zoning East - Existing apartment complex West - Proposed extension of an R-2 district Although the case is not totally compatible with the Land Use Plan, the proposed use is acceptable in the given situation with a Specific Use Permit. Being off the major thoroughfare and sandwiched between duplexes and an apartment complex, with frontage onto a minor residential April 24, 1986 185 street, the mini -warehouse function as small storage compartments generally fits into the adjacent land use pattern. The case also proposed to extend the existing R-2 zoning north of the case to the south to 24th Street, which will complete the R-2 buffer. With the R-2 buffer in place, the only measurable impact would lie with the property south of 24th Street which is under the same ownership as the proponent of this zone case. The Planning and Zoning Commission was asked to find something unique about this situation or about this property that would support the finding that conditions have changed and it is unlikely that additional apart- ments will be built on this parcel. The Commission did make that finding and did approve the case with the following condition that a brick masonry fence or Durastone (tradename) be installed along the 24th Street property line at 6' tall except where the gates might be installed. The Staff recommended that the Planning Commission be upheld. No one appeared in opposition to this request, and Mr. Bridgeman did read a letter from Arch Lamb, an adjacent property owner, in which Mr. Lamb stated that he does not object to this request. Motion was made by Councilman Brown, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter passing on first reading Ordinance #8914 with the stipulation that a 6' brick masonry fence or Durastone (tradename) be installed along the 24th Street property line except where the gates might be installed. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 86-45-185-289 (11.) ORDINANCE #8915-- ZONE CASE #1131-L (Located at 3225 50th Street) --Hold a Public Hearing on the request of Development Services to amend the Site Plan under provisions of Section 29-29 of the Code of Ordinances on the north 575-7of Tract D, Monterey Addition. ORDINANCE #8915 ORDINANCE NO. 8915 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. 1131-L; CHANGE THE NORTH 575 FEET OF TRACT D, MONTEREY ADDITION, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS TO AMEND THE SITE PLAN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 29-29 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 29-31(a) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Mark Barron presented this request for Site Plan Amend- ment, which would allow for additional retail to be located at an existing shopping center by amending the previously approved Site Plan. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - Monterey High School South - Vacant retail and existing mini -warehouses East - Vacant C-3 zoning West - Existing grocery store and banking facilities The proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Plan in this area. The issue of equity in setback had been identified by the Staff was addressed in resolving this case. The redevelopment proposal is to demolish a certain portion of the existing shopping center building and then replace it with a new building closer to 50th Street than any other building on the development tract is now. The two "out" parcels, one at Indiana and one at Gary, estab- lished the setback line back in the early 60's when the site plan was originally approved. The current proposal would allow a building about 40' closer to 50th Street than would normally be allowed. However, if the site were built on today, the Zoning Ordinance would allow a building to within 43' of 50th Street, which would be virtually the same as the suggested Site Plan. 186 April 24, 1986 As the Planning and Zoning Commission deliberated the case, they felt that there would not be any hardship on either adjacent parcel by allowing a new building to sit at the 43' setback position on 50th Street. With the frontages on each tract, particularly the vacant tract immediately east, there is in excess of 500' of frontage existing there now. Another factor was that there are four instances in the immediate neighborhood where other buildings are as close as 43' to 50th Street. The Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission. No one appeared in opposition to the request. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter passing Ordinance #8915 on first reading as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. Sa M11138914134010 (12.) ORDINANCE #8916--ZONE CASE #2400-A (Located at the northeast corner of North Quaker and Loop 289 --Hold a Public Hearing on the request of Harold C. Wellborn for Lester Moore and Omer Sharp for a change of zoning from R-1 to IDP Industrial Park District under provisions of Section 29-29 of the Code of Ordinances on a tract of land out of Section 18, Block A. ORDINANCE NO. 8916 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. 2400-A; A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R-1 TO IDP (INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT) UNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 29-29 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, ON A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 18, BLOCK A, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 29-31(a) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. Mr. Harold Wellborn, on behalf of Lester Moore and Omer Sharp, spoke favoring this request for open industrial park (IDP) zoning, with no specific land uses in mind at this time. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - Vacant R-1 zoning with scattered heavy industrial (non -conforming) uses along U.S. Highway 84 South - Loop 289 East - Vacant IDP zoning and scattered M-2 industrial uses West - Existing R-1 development and vacant R-1 zoning This request is generally consistent with the City's Land Use Plan. The land area in this zone case is shown on the Land Use Plan as industrial, due to the influence of the existing industrial development along U.S. Highway 84 and the various M-1 land uses that are contained within the triangle of Quaker Avenue and Loop 289 and U.S. Highway 84. In recent months, both the Planning Commission and the City Council denied a commercial zone case request on the west side of Quaker Avenue, based on an assumption that the western side of Quaker Avenue would still develop in residential land uses, since an "industrial park" type buffer east of Quaker Avenue would help check the spread of open M-1 uses. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the 2005 Committee recognized North Quaker as one of several major entry corridors into the City and they placed an emphasis on making the corridors look neat and attractive and well planned. The industrial park designation will help to achieve the goal of cleaning up the entryway corridors. With some debate about the pros and cons of certain development standards, the Planning Commission approved the case with the following conditions: 1. No curb cuts shall be allowed on Quaker Avenue for any lots that front onto or side onto Quaker Avenue except for Lot 45, which may have access directly to Quaker. April 24, 1986 187 2~ That there Shall be a total of lU% landscaping UO all lots that front or side Quaker Avenue. 3° That there shall be a 50/ setback from Oudh2r AV8DVe for all of those lots adjacent to The Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission. Speaking in opposition to this request was Thomas Nystal. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by C0VnC1l0dD 8r0N0 to uphold the Planning and Zoning CV0m1sSiOD recommendation as follows: l° No Curb cuts be allowed on Quaker Avenue for any lots that front onto or Side onto Quaker AV8OUp except for Lot 45, which may have OCCesS directly to Quaker. 2. That there shall be d total of lO% landscaping on all lots that front or side Quaker Avenue. 3° That there shall be d 50/ setback from Quaker Avenue for all of those lots adjacent to UUdk2r" Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 86-45-187-291 /I3"\ ZONE CASE #2458-B--(Located at Itasca Street and North Knoxville Avenue) --Hold a Public Hearing on the request of P.L. Payne, Jr. and Stephen Payne (for P.L. Payne and Producing Royalties, Inc.) for a change of zoning from R-1 to R-1 Specific Use for a mobile home park under provisions of Section 29-24(c)(15) of the Code of O—rdinances on a tract of land out of Section 18, Block A. Mr, Paul Payne, Jr. spoke in favor of this request 00 behalf of P.L. Payne and Producing Royalties, Inc. The request is for proposed mobile hmn8 park with adjacent CO00erC1dl development fronting onto [O0p 289~ It was basically the same Case heard in 1984 and conditions in the surrounding neighborhood have not changed. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - Loop 289 South - Tech agricultural land East - Vacant R-1 zoning Assistant City Manager Jim Bertram Stated that in March, 1984, the Planning and Zoning C000iSSiOD on 8 Split vote and with 20% written opposition, approved the case for R-1 Specific Use for d mobile home park with the condi- tion of Site Plan approval prior to obtaining d building permit. Council heard this and 52Dt it back to P&Z for study and after study, P & Z voted unanimously to approve the COSg as R-1 Specific Use or O Mobile Home Park. There were UO special conditions to their approval. City Council heard the Cd5e on first reading on June 28, 1984 and deliberated under the 4/5 rule as in the first CdSe° Council approved the CdSe stipulating that mobile home access would not be permitted at the ItdSCd entrance. On second reading at the July 20, I984 meeting, Council denied the case. Mr~ Bertram Stated that as far as the Comprehensive Plan in concerned, the request is consistent with the Plan. Conditions in the planning unit have not changed and are not likely to ChdDg2 in the near future; therefore, the medium to high density land use as shown on the Plan is Still valid. As with the previous case, the density of the proposed mobile home park is less than the Code would allow 5V in d sense, this zone change request could be considered d "down zone." The charge to the Planning and Zoning CVmmi351OD was to determine if the proposed use was acceptable to the neighborhood, and whether or not it would be detrimental to other improvements 0dd2 in that neighborhood. The zoning presently is R-}» and the Case attaches d Specific Use Permit which would allow development of three hundred units On 59,2 acres, an overall density of l unit to 8,595 square feet, or 5 units per acre, where the current Ordinance allows Up to O mdKi0V0 of 7 units per acre. 188 April 24, 1986 Also included on the Site Plan is a buffer of 2.5 acres along the 1/2 section line street which is Memphis Avenue. Speaking in opposition to this request were Ralph Brock and Foy Anderson. Also, Mr. Bertram informed Council that 6 affirmative votes would be needed to pass this Ordinance on first reading because of receipt of written protests to the change signed by owners of 20% or more of the land joining the proposed change. Motion was made by Councilman Brown, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter to pass Ordinance #8916 on first reading. Motion failed: 4 Yeas --Councilman Brown, Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, Councilman Nash and Mayor McMinn; 3 Nays --Councilwoman Baker, Councilwoman Trejo, Councilman Patterson. :: •4 (14.) ORDINANCE #8917--ZONE CASE #2161-B--(Located at 82nd Street and Elkridge Avenue) --Hold a Public Hearing on the continued request of Burl Masters for Furr s Inc. for a change of zoning from R-1 to GO Garden Offices), A-1, C-2, and C-3 under provisions of Section 29-29 of the Code of Ordinances on a tract of land out of Section 13, Block E-2. ORDINANCE #8917 ORDINANCE NO. 8917 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. 2161-B; A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R-1 TO GO, A-1, AND C-3 ZONING DISTRICTS AND C-2 ZONING DISTRICT, LIMITED TO PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, UNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 29-29 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK ON A TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 13, BLOCK E-2, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 29-31(a) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. This request is for a retail grocery store operation, related retail office, shopping center complex, and also includes some residential development as a buffer. The adjacent land use relationships are as follows: North - Existing commercial retail and professional offices South - Vacant R-1 zoning East - Existing commercial retail West - Existing R-1 development As originally submitted a month ago, the proposed development plan was fairly inconsistent with the Comprehensive Land Use planning policies. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the proponents debated policy issues for quite some time and the Commission continued the case to the April P&Z Commission meeting. During that time, the Commission directed the Staff and the applicant to work out a viable compromise, being mindful of City of Lubbock development policies, and to coordi- nate efforts with the homeowners in the area who pro- tested the original filing. The Planning Commission forwarded to City Council a favorable recommendation due to the compromises reached by the applicant and the Staff, and agreed to by the surrounding residents in the area. The Staff emphasized to the Planning and Zoning Commission that they felt that the Commission should make a finding of some particular change in conditions in the immediate area to warrant acceptance of even the compro- mised Development Plan. Therefore, a position paper and recommendations to the Commission were prepared and delivered to the Commission verbatim. Those comments are as follow: "Within the constraints of Lubbock's Comprehensive Plan policies, every attempt should be made to accommodate the necessary zone changes to permit an acceptable office site for the Furr's Corporate Headquarters and for a neighborhood shopping center to accommodate a Furr's Emporium and associated retail development. 189 Since the original retail request was approximately 3.4 times the d00Unt in the Comprehensive Plan Policy, 3002 finding of the Commission is advisable in terms of peculiar or unusual circumstances that would warrant a substantial departure. In all fairness to the combined objectives of economic growth and proper land use planning, the following are issues for consideration: I. Lubbock is seeking d more /r0UDd8d-UUt/ development pattern. This location is along a line between d 'rapid -growth' Sector 4 and d 'slow -growth' Sector 3° Encouraging a 'large-scale' -investment in 8 /m0derate risk' location may justify 'cutting the developer some slack'. 2, Approximately 20 acres of land is proposed for dedication as park land. If the developer works closely with the Parks Board on the cut and fill and possibly fronting some initial development funds, it would help justify recouping investment costs. 3. Because of the Size of the Emporium as an 'anchor store', the typical 10-12 acre, C-3 Site may be crowded, OS Seen at 82nd and 3lide, City Staff met with developers several times and addressed the following issues: l° The residential/apartment relationship on the west side. (Considerable oA~l" zoning has been eliminated and replaced with "R-Iv zoning). 2. The boulevards with awkward intersections have been scaled down and right-angle intersections are proposed. 3~ The configuration Of the "C-2o on 82nd Street has been changed and reduced in acreage. It still reflects "strip commercial" along 82Od 4° The "C-2 limited" site for the corporate headquarters is reconfigured and approximately the same size. 5~ The "R-1"/"C-2" limited interface will probably prompt d townhouse/patio home zone change at d minimum in the future. 6. "Net" differences in acreages between the FUrr"8 revised plan and the revised staff plan are attached. Staffrecommended that this case be approved with con- sideration to carrying some variation Of the following condition: I. Subject to the revised plan Signed by the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman. 2, 3Uhi2ct to an approved plat reflecting the street layout with boulevards included or excluded by Council action. 3. 3Ubi2Ct to Parks Board approval of the proposed park and associated G0 pdrCe|S~ 4° Subject to d Site Plan on the oC-3n tract, including building elevations showing materials, color, and texture, Shall be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council UD the entire tract Under this zoning ordinance, prior to the issuance of a building permit". D}DiDg District/Land Use Analysis Zone Net District Masters PldnniD Difference ����������� C-3 24°58 14.49 - 5°09 C-2 8°00 O^OO - 8"00 C-2 Limited 14.96 1I.36 - 3"60 GU 15.91 20.17 4.20 A -I 6~80 0.18 - 0.62 OS 22°60 21.05 - 1"55 R-l/ROW 07,15 81"75 14°60 TOTAL 160.00 160.00 Total Comm. 32.58 19.49 -I3°09 Total Office 30^87 31.53 0.06 The Planning Commission debated the above stated position paper and finally approved the case, SUbi8Ct to condi- tions. The Planning and Zoning C000iSsi0O reCV008Od9d approval of a Strip of «G0" (Garden Office) on 82nd Street instead of "C-2x zoning as requested by propo- nents, by a YOt8 of 8-0° An initial 0Uti0O to approve the plan with '/C-2o was not approved because of an amended 00tinA for "GO" on 82Dd which passed 5-1" Mr" Masters stated that the proponents have DV problem with the restrictions placed On this request by P&Z, except for the approval Of the Strip of xGO" instead of C-2 on B Parcel on 82nd Street. He requested that Council consider allowing C-2 zoning for this Strip because the developer feels it is important to have the option to develop this as retail OS opposed to being held to "GO". He Stated that holding them to the "GO" would mean about $I,000,000 in toddy's retail market values. In response to questions by Mayor McMinn, Mr. Masters said that the Food Emporium will employ some 300 full time workers, and additional part-time workers. Assistant City Manager Jim Bertram Stated that even though this request 'for retail acreage is in GmCeSs Of Comprehensive Plan Policy, analysis Of this request showed that the area in question is between d rapid growth area and d slow growth area and a project of this magnitude could be d "shot in the arm" for this part of the City" Also, Mr. Bertram stated that the developer is proposing to dedicate 20 acres of land for a park adjoining this parcel to the south. There was discussion regarding maintenance of the boulevard area and provisions for landscaping in this request, and Mr. Masters indicated that it is the intent of FVrr8, Inc. to maintain the boulevard area and provide the landscaping, as well as installation Of d subsurface Sprinkler system for the landscaped area. The Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning CU00iSSi0D. Motion was made by C0UOCilw00aO Baker, seconded by C0U0Cil0aD Patterson to uphold P&Z, except that Parcel B be zoned C-2 as requested by Proponents rather than G0 as recommended by P&Z, stipulating that the proponent maintain the boulevard area, provide for landscaping and install 8 subsurface sprinkler system; and allowing a d2Vidt1OO from the Comprehensive Plan Policy in this Cd3e for the following reasons: l~ Such an exception is necessary to encourage development in the Southeast section Of the City, which will help balance out the growth pattern. 2" This case will ensure d major CON0it0eOt from FUFrS Inc. at this lOCdti0O and serve as d catalyst for further development in this area. 3^ This will provide adequate acreage which will prevent Site crowding, as it the Cds8 at the 82nd and Slide Road Food Emporium. Motion carried: 7 Yed5`, 0 Nays. �-^ 86-45-190-293 /23,\ Consider Resolution #2297 naming thei Reservoir area. RESOLUTION #2297 April 24, 1986 191 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, obtaining a third major water source for the City of Lubbock is a matter of utmost importance to the citizens and economy of the City of Lubbock; and WHEREAS, the proposed Justiceburg reservoir project, which is the only viable alternative for a third water source, was the subject of dispute and litigation; and WHEREAS, it appeared that such proposed project might be delayed for many year; and WHEREAS, the Lubbock City Council under the leadership of former Mayor Alan Henry has worked hard and tirelessly for the proposed project; and WHEREAS, the Lubbock City Council with the leadership of former Mayor Alan Henry obtained an equitable and timely settlement of the litigation involved in the project, which will allow a completion date many years in advance of the anticipated completion date; NOW THEREFORE: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: THAT the proposed Justiceburg project reservoir be named Lake Alan Henry in honor of the Mayor who with the Lubbock City Council demonstrated tireless and visionary efforts toward resolving litigation that might have delayed completion of the project for many years. Resolved by the City Council this 24th day of April, 1986. ATTEST: /s/ Ranette Boyd Ranette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: >. 'Q O OJ v 3 E` J) �� o. c 0 0 '1) U y a o s x m g L� r C _ �. a . -� 7 ro o a a L L� ro C c� pro^ -o �— UtLc. c IN ) �c -C) E �r c U v` o ro /s/ B. C. McMinn B. C. McMINN, MAYOR :n c? v � W a� g v. F- G A � z E .. c V x a. ¢ 3 3 Z a ¢ c � O torney f Mayor McMinn, a Resolution had been lly designate the name of the Lake Alan Henry. acilities, the advisory board respon- Facility to be named submits three it for consideration. However, in > no advisory committee or board within Council prerogative to if this lake. Staff stated that there c areas, such as the recreational iceburg lake area, that could chose and which would not interfere ing of the lake area. ayor Pro Tem Carpenter, seconded by uthorizing Resolution #2297. Motion Vays . lending the Overton Land Use Plan, 19th Street, University Avenue, a Revised Land Use Plan for North ned by the Lubbock Redevelopment Dup is chaired by W.R. Collier and the banking community, business Nners in the Overton District.Mr. )mmendations of the Association to his presentation that Dr. George by the group to develop a revised y, and that in doing so, Dr. Peng hood meetings to achieve a balance esidents' desires, and the needs of Assistant City Manager Jim Bertram stated that at a special called meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 17, 1986, the Commission unanimously approved a proposed Amendment to our Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the North and South Overton neighborhoods. The proposed Amendment, commissioned by the Lubbock Redevelopment Association, Offers the following major components: I. A north -south corridor from 4th Street to I9th Street between Avenue T and Avenue U. This corridor will provide an open space/school/ Overton Center /Sp8Cidltv retail/community center) as a north -south dDChOr for redevelop- ment efforts in C0D'UOcti0D with Broadway as an east/west anchor. 2. Additional retail/residential (from high density residential) is proposed between I3th Street and 18th Street from the alley west of Avenue 0 to Avenue S. 3, In the northwest quadrant of Overton North, d concept for Student oriented apartments is highlighted but remains consistent with the current A-2 (high density) policy in North UYertOO" 4, A 12 block area from 5th Street to Main between Avenue U to Avenue N is currently medium density with an A-2 policy for sites adjacent to existing apartments. The proposed plan would indicate only medium density, with no A-2 potential. 5° A proposed new street between 13th Street and 15th Street from Avenue X to University Avenue to provide d distinct division between commer- cial and residential. 6° Numerous street closures and two new streets are proposed. The Lubbock Redevelopment Association stresses that these are associated With private redevelopment Under 00nOal code procedures. NO immediate public action or cost is indicated. Mr. Bertram reported that the C00miG5i0O was in session over three hours hearing testimony from residents of the area and recognized interest groups, virtually all of whom were very close to full agreement OD the proposal. After a series Of motions and amendments, the Commission finally voted 7 to O to accept the Plan OS amended and presented by the Lubbock Redevelopment Association. Also speaking in behalf of the Amendment were Redevelopment Association members J.T. TalkiDgt0O, Jack Thompson (who also was speaking OO behalf Of the Lubbock Apartment A5S0CiatiO0)" Residents Of the area who spoke were: Ken Hyatt, A.B. Watkins (President Of the Overton North Association), Kelly Hand, Doris Fletcher, Agnes Hicks (President of the 0V8rtVO South Association), Bella Leonard, Ken Hdrgishe{0er, Ted Hogan, Roger Settler, and Nancy Hdrgi3hGi0er~ Most of these individuals favored most Of the plan, but some Of their major objections seemed to be to the greenbelt ar2dS~ The Staff recommended that the City Council uphold the Planning and Zoning Commission. It was C0DSeDsUS of Council for Staff to further study the recommendations made by the 0Vert0O residents at the hearing. Motion was 0ddS by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by [0UDcil0aD Patterson to hold the action On the Plan until May 8 to give Staff adequate time to look at the Citv/S commitment if the Plan is adopted. Motion carried: 0 Yeas; O Nays --Councilman Nash absent from the Council Chambers. April 24, 1986 193 THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF' Lt.JBBOCK M2320—RiS2 Before me a Notary Public in and for Lubbock County. Texas on this day rl personally appeare of the Southwestern Newspa- pers Corporation, public ers of e .ubboc Avafanc e-. ourK'gnal — Morning. Evening and Sunday, who being by me duly sworn did depose and say that said newspaper has been published continuous] f^� than fifty-two weeks prior to the first insertion of this N No. 31!78 at Lu"o coke oun y, exas and the att ed copy of the is a true copy of the original and was printed in tq�rd Avalanche Journa on the fol owing dates: t................. . Account t4anag4f LUBBOCK AVALANCHE-JOt]RNAL Southwestern Newspapers Corporation Subscribed and sworn to before me this 22nd day of A„F11 19 36 th, of %ems FORM 58-10 �� �.>� � � � � �� Mi �� 86-45-193-295 (16.) Hold a Performance Evaluation Session for the Second Year of the Franchise Agreement with Cox Cable Lubbock, Inc. Assistant City Manager Rita P. Harmon reported to City Council that on March 22, 1984, the Council awarded a 15-year Non-exclusive Franchise to Cox Cable Lubbock, Inc. Ordinance #8554, the enabling Ordinance, originally specified in Section 30(a) that a Performance Evaluation shall be held within thirty (30) days of the first, second, third, sixth, ninth, and twelfth anniversary dates of the Franchise Award. This Ordinance was amended in August, 1985 by Ordinance #8809, which specifies that the City may hold performance evaluations on the above - mentioned anniversary dates. Because Cox Cable proposed a rebuild and expansion of the capabilities of the present cable system during the first two years of the Franchise Agreement, this Performance Evaluation was scheduled to review the status of the project. The Cox proposal called for a complete reconstruction of the existing system. Items targeted for replacement included all trunk lines, feeder cables and signal amplifiers with the exception of the 22 miles of cable plant built to the new standards in 1983 and 1984. Approximately 60% of all apartment and residential drops would be replaced during the rebuild. The reconstruction began in October of 1984 and was to be completed in three 6-month phases. To help make the construction more manageable, these three major phases were subdivided into 17 sub -phases. Phase I, scheduled from October, 1984 through April, 1985, reached 43% of all homes in an area bounded by Texas Tech University campus on the north, Brownfield Highway on the west, Avenue Q on the east and Loop 289 on the south. Phase II, scheduled for April, 1985 through October, 1985, an additional 30% of all homes in the remaining area inside Loop 289 and those homes beyond Loop 289 to the north. Phase III, scheduled for October, 1985 through April, 1986, serves the remaining 27% of the homes which are located south and west of Loop 289. Phase I and II are complete and the customers have been converted to the new system. The construction on Phase III will be complete before the end of April and customers will be converted to the new system by late June 1986, as specified by Ordinance. There are 7,464 customers yet to be converted to the new system. Although the number of complaints received by the City has increased from 40 during the previous year to 95 this year, many of these complaints have been associated with the rebuild. In addition, the City received 16 petition letters in late February and early March, 1986 containing 107 signatures of persons complaining about various components of the new system. The majority of the 95 complaints concerned problems getting through to Cox by telephone, reception problems, billing problems and complaints about the rebuild contractor. As complaints are received by the City, Cox is notified of the problem. Often times, Cox is in the process of resolving the problem when notified by the City. Response time to these complaints has been prompt. 194 April 24, 1986 There was an analysis prepared by Cox of the complaints received OO the petition letters. Bob Coleman made a presentation at the Performance Evaluation session. He reviewed the highlights of the major activities for COX, and was available to respond to questions from Council Members and citizens present. Mr~ Coleman Stated that Jeff Davis had been hired as C000UDitv Programming Director, a new position at Cox. He stated that response time OO CU0pldiD has improved from h hours and 18 minutes to 30% of complaints being answered within 3 hours of being turned he. He went on to say that COX has purchased d new phone system which should handle the calls Once the rebuild is completed and the system normalizes (sometime in JUn8\° Those appeared to ask questions or make St8t208ntG regarding the service Of Cox were: Norman Williamson, Jim Spikes, and Beverly Ellis~ The hearing was closed and Council asked for a legal opinion regarding the implications of Clause 34~8 of the contract. 86-45-I94-296 /I7.\ Consider Resolution #228 accepting pavingimprovement constructed by Kerr Construction Company in Santa Fe Park Addition, Lots 2 and 3. RESOLUTION #2298 RESOLUTION RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS ON PORTIONS OF STREETS AND AVENUES AS LISTED BELOW: WHEREAS, in CO0fOr0dOCe with the paving requirement provisions of City Ordinance 133I, the subdivider Of Santa Fe Park Addition made arrangements with Kerr Construction Company for the COOstrUCtiO0 Of paving improvements on certain streets dedicated in Said subdivision under the provisions of said Ordinance prior to the recording of the 3VbdiYi310O plat of the above -mentioned addition including the following streets: Huron Avenue from its intersection with the North lip line of 45th Street to its intersection with d line 691 feet North of the North lip line Of 45th Street known and designated as New 3UhdiYiSi00 Sub -Unit Number 99 of Unit Number 2031. 42rd Street from its intersection with d line 13°5 feet West of West property line of Ironton AY8DUe to its intersection with the West end of street stub at Huron Avenue known and designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 00 of Unit Number 2032" 45th Street from its i0t8rSSCti0D with the East lip line of lro0000 Avenue to its intersection with the North lip line Of Brownfield Highway known and designated as new Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 01 of Unit Number 2032. Ironton Avenue from its intersection with the South lip line of 43rd Street to its intersection with a line I3°5 feet South of South property line of 45th Street known and designated as New Subdivision Sub -Unit Number 02 Of Unit Number 2032~ WHEREAS, the construction of the above improvements on the above - mentioned streets was performed under the supervision of the City Engineer, and said improvements have been completed and have been inspected and found to have been constructed in dCc07daDC8 with city 3D8CificJtiODS and in accordance with the pr0ViSiODg of City Ordinance 1331; NOW THEREFORE: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: SECTION l. THAT the improvements OD said portions of the above - mentioned streets be and the sd08 are hereby accepted and the City Engineer be and he is hereby authorized to notify the Developer of acceptance by the Lubbock City Council. , April 24, 1986 }95 SECTION 2. THAT this Resolution shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. Passed by the City Council this the 24th day of April, 1986. McMinn B. C. MCMlNN, MAYOR ATTEST: RdDettS Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Hoffman Larry V. Hoffman, City Engineer j APPROVED AS TO FORM: John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney � CONSOLIDATED FINAL ESTIMATE 3ANTA FE PARK ADDITION Accepted April 24, 1986 QUANTITIES Unit & Sub -Unit Location 203I-99 Huron Ave. from NLL of 45th 5t° to 691/ North of NLL of 45th St. 2032-00 43rd 3t^ from 13.5/ West of WPL of Ironton Ave. to Nest end of stub at Huron Ave. 2032-0I 45th 3t~ from EL[ of Ironton Ave. to NLL of Brownfield Hwv, 2032-02 Ironton Ave. from SLL Of 43rd St. to 13^5^ South of SPL Of 45th 3t° S.Y. Paving 6" Base S.Y. L.F. Drain. C&G Chan. 3,658^07 1,406°54 7»120°00 2,568^00 S.Y. Val ley Gutter 6I~43 53~34 14*356.19 5,336.68 899.01 114.76 5,187~78 1,801^44 2,032.00 44.05 30,322.64 11,172.66 3,531.61 273.58 COST DISTRIBUTION Unit & Contract Developer Sub -Unit Cost Cost 203I-99 $ 32,871°40 $ 32,87I.46 2032-00 61^625.05 61,625"05 2032-01 142,310°88 142^310°88 2032-02 94,099^60 94,699.00 TOTAL COST ESTIMATE 30,322.64 S.Y. Paving 6" Base @ $ 6~45 1I,I72.66 L.F. Curb & Gutter @ 5^68 273.58 S.Y. Valley Gutter @ 20.90 3,53I~0I S.Y. Drainage Channel @ I8°90 CONTRACT COST $I95,581^03 63,40U°7l 5,7l7^82 5h,747°43 This is a routine acceptance of street paving and drainage ChdDD2l improvements required at the time Of platting Of this new subdivision and also includes additional streets outside the actual platted lots as optioned by the developer. The Santa Fe Railroad has 196 April 24, 1986 completed the structures (bridges) under the Lehman Spur and the McCoy Lumber Company Spur, and these improvements include the concrete drainage channels through these two new structures. The drainage structure now in place under the Lehman Spur represents the solution of a long-standing drainage problem in the area north of Lehman Spur (some 272 acres). The developer paid Santa Fe Railroad to install the two bridges. There are three railroad track crossings on 45th Street that are to have rubberized crossings installed by Santa Fe as per the agreement between Santa Fe and Lubbock Development, Inc. Lubbock Development, Inc. has paid Santa Fe for these three rubberized crossings. There is no City cost due the Contractor on this project. This new subdivision is situated west of Loop 289 and north of the Brownfield Road (Sam's Wholesale Warehouse area). Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Councilman Nash, seconded by Councilman Patterson authorizing Resolution #2298 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 86-45-196-297 (18.) Consider Resolution #2299 accepting drainage channel improvements constructed by Frank Limon in Whisperwood Office Park Addition, Lots 1-7. RESOLUTION #2299 RESOLUTION RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS AS LISTED BELOW: WHEREAS, in conformance with the paving requirement provisions of City Ordinance 1331, the subdivider of Whisperwood Office Park Addition, Lots 1 thru 7 made arrangements with Frank Limon for the construction of drainage improvements in said subdivision under the provisions of said Ordinance prior to the recording of the subdivision plat of the above -mentioned addition including the following condition: Concrete drainage channel from North property line of Lot 7 to 379 feet South known as new Subdivision Number 2032-18. WHEREAS, the construction of the above improvements was performed under the supervision of the City Engineer, and said improvements have been completed and have been inspected and found to have been constructed in accordance with City specifications and in accordance with the provisions of City Ordinance 1331; NOW THEREFORE: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: SECTION 1. THAT the improvements be and the same are hereby accepted and the City Engineer be and he is hereby authorized to notify the devel- oper of acceptance by the Lubbock City Council. SECTION 2. THAT this Resolution shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. Passed by the City Council this 24th day of April, 1986. ATTEST: /s/ Ranette Boyd Ranette,Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: /s/ Larry V. Hoffman Larry V. Hoffman, City Engineer APPROVED AS TO FORM: /s/ John C. Ross, Jr. John C. Ross, Jr., City Attorney /s/ B. C. McMinn B. C. McMINN, MAYOR April 24, 1986 197 CONSOLIDATED FINAL ESTIMATE WHISPERWOOD OFFICE PARK ADDITION Lots 1 - 7 Accepted April 24, 1986 QUANTITIES Unit & Sub -Unit Location 2032-18 Concrete drainage channel from NPL of Lot 7 to 379' South of NPL of Lot 7 COST DISTRIBUTION Unit & Contract Property Sub Unit Cost Owner Cost 2032-18 $2,080.00* $2,080.00 *Lump sum contract 86-45-197-298 S.Y. Drainage Channel This is a routine acceptance of drainage channel improve- ments required at the time of platting. There is no city cost due the contractor. This new subdivision is situated north of 4th Street and east of Utica Avenue. Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Councilman Nash, seconded by Councilman Patterson authorizing Resolution #2299 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. (19.) Consider Ordinance #8918 to abandon and close a 15' alley in Section 8, Block B, extending west of I-27 right-of-way to Avenue J on the south side of Buckner Girls Home Addition. ORDINANCE #8918 1' 1 ' i 2• S AN ORDINANCE ABANDONING AND CLOSING PORTIONS OF A 15-FOOT ALLEY IN SECTION 8, BLOCK B TO THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE BODY OF THIS ORDINANCE; DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO MARK THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK TO REFLECT SAID ABANDONMENT AND CLOSING; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. This closure is the first closure as the result of I-27 construction. The request is by the Lubbock Regional Mental Health and Mental Retardation Center, and is located between 38th and 40th Streets and Avenue J and I-27. This organization is a private organization and not part of the State of Texas. It is partly funded by the Texas Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation. The center is being squeezed by I-27 and they are having to rebuild. They own land on both sides of the alley. There are no utilities in the alley. The area is 234.92 feet x 15 feet, 3,534.25 square feet or 0.08 acres at 25t per square foot = $881.00 compensa- tion to the City. There were no indicated problems with this closure. Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Councilman Brown passing on first reading Ordinance #8918 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 198 April 24, 1986 86-45-198-299 (20.) Consider Ordinance #8919 to abandon and close a 2' Underground Utility Easement between Lots 144-A and 144-B, Whisperwood Addition. ORDINANCE #8919 AN ORDINANCE ABANDONING AND CLOSING A PORTION OF AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED IN THE WHISPERWOOD ADDITION TO THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE BODY OF THIS ORDINANCE; DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO MARK THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK TO REFLECT SAID ABANDONMENT AND CLOSING; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. This closure was requested by Tara Land Company, the owner of both lots. The easement, located at the northeast part of Whisperwood Circle, is not being used and is not needed. The proponent is also the dedicator, so the easement will go back to them at no cost. No problems are indicated. Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Councilwoman Baker, seconded by Councilman Brown passing on first reading Ordinance #8919 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 86-45-198-300 (21.) Consider Resolution #2300 authorizing the Mayor to execute a Supplemental Agreement with the FAA for additional navigational aids at the Airport. RESOLUTION #2300 RESOLUTION 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 Supplemental Agreement #1 to Lease Agreement #DTFA07-83-L-01011 which provides for two additional navigational aids at Lubbock International Airport, 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 a part of this Resolution as fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 24th day of April, 1986. /s/ B. C. McMinn B. C. McMINN, MAYOR ATTEST: /s/ Ranette Boyd Ranette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: /s/ Marvin Coffee Marvin Coffee, Director of Aviation APPROVED AS TO FORM: /s/ Michele Hart Michele Hart, Assistant City Attorney The existing Lease Agreement #DTFA07-83-L-01011 with the FAA provides the right-of-way for a number of naviga- tional aids at Lubbock International Airport and runs through September 30, 1992. The Federal Aviation Administration now proposes to add two additional navigational aids and has submitted, for our consideration, a Supplemental Agreement #1 which provides for the installation, at U.S. Government expense, an Omni -Directional Approach Lighting System (ODALS) on Runway 35L and a Runway End Identifier Light (REIL) on Runway 8. April 24, 1986 199 The Airport Board has reviewed this and recommended this Supplemental Agreement #1 to the City Council. Motion was made by COVOCil0dO Patterson, SeC0Od8d by COUDCi]w0maO Tr '0 authorizing R8S0lUtƒOO #2300 as recommended by the Airport Board. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 86-45-194-301 /22"\ Consider Resolutionh iithe Mayor to Lubbockexecute a Grant Agreement by and between the City of and the Federal Aviation Administration. Grant Agr8ement in Files ^ RESOLUTION #2301 RESOLUTION 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 a Grant Agreement between the City of Lubbock and the FAA for C0DStrVCtiO0 of Airport Field Maintenance Building, acquisition of O Rapid Intervention Vehicle, and a Joint & Crack Seal Of existing concrete, 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 d part Of this Reso- lution as fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 24th day of April, 1986. McMinn B. C. McMINN, MAYOR ATTEST: Ranette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Marvin /s/ Michele Hart Michele Hart, Assistant City Attorney The Federal Aviation Administration has included funding for the construction of an airport field maintenance building, the acquisition of a rapid intervention vehicle, and d joint and crack seal Of existing concrete pavement. This will be accomplished 00 d 90% Federal, 10% local ratio except for some ineligible items. All these terms are in approved capital projects. The total grant will be for $2,994,034» with the City share to be $332,670^ for a total project C0St of $3,326,704~ The City share will be funded by existing General Obligation Bonds. The rapid intervention vehicle represents $250,000 of the total project. The joint seal work will use Up the remaining funds after the maintenance building cODStrUCtiUO and rapid interven- tion vehicle. This will be the last project with the existing Federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP). The funding for the federal Share Of this comes from User fees of the trust fund using airport eOpldDemeOt alloca- tions. Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Councilman Patterson, seconded by C0Unoflw0m8D Tr 'O authorizing R9SOlVti0D #2300 as recommended by the Airport Board. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 200 April 24, 1986 80-45-200-302 /24"\ Consider Ordinance iOrdinance #8859 concerning the personnel operations of the B.C.D. ORDINANCE #8920 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-4I2 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK PROVIDING FOR STAFF PERSONNEL FOR THE BOARD OF CITY DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE. The purpose Of this Ordinance is to provide another option to the Board of City Development in the hiring of their employees. The City Charter would make all employees of the Board of City Development City employees if they were not hired by another corporation. Ordinance #8859 stipulates that the Board will contract with d corporation, governmental entity, etc. to hire their employees. However, due to the potential difficul- ties in obtaining liability insurance for officers of corporations, the Board may want the ODti0O of having their employees be City employees. Therefore, the Staff prepared an Amendment to Ordinance #8859 which clarifies the City'S relationship with the Board of City Develop- ment if the employees Of the B.C.D. are City employees. This Ordinance would amend Section 2-4I2 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lubbock. Three new sections are added to this particular section. Sections I/f\, /g\, and /h\ authorizes the Board to seek out and recommend the employment, by the City, Of a Director of EC0O0miC Development, which recommendation shall be given serious and immediate attention by the City Manager. It further provides that ODCe the Director of Ec0A*OiC Development is selected, he Shall be responsible to the Board and shall act as the Board's Chief administrative officer and shall assist the Board in carrying Out the duties of the Board as specified in this Ordinance. The Amendment further provides that the Board shall make pr0ViSiODS for his salary in its annual budget" In addition, the Ordinance in Section I(g)^ provides that the Director Of Economic Development, 0DCe Selected, Shall be responsible for the hiring Of the O8C8SSary e0p(0ySp; to fulfill the terms of the Ordinance and wishes of the BCD. The original Ordinance required the Director of Economic Development to hire three Assistant Directors. This Amendment removes that restriction but does require the Director to hire the necessary Staff to fulfill the functions of business retention and expan- sion, new business formation and new business attraction or recruitment. The Board may recommend the r80OYdl of the Director Of ECVDU0iC Development by the City, provided such recommendation is consistent with current City personnel policy. A new S8CtiVD, l(i), was added to clarify that Sections l/f\, /g\ and (h) applied only if the Director Of Economic Development and Other p0plVy88S are hired as City employees. The language of new Section I g\ has been changed from its Original wording by removing the words "but not limited to" from it, The Staff also considered the feasibility Of allowing the Board Of City Development to contract with the City for the furnishing Of Administrative Staff Personnel to the Board Of City Development under the authority of Section 2-412 Of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lubbock. This is the section that allows the Board Of City OeY8lOpDeOt^ with the l of City Council to contract with any appropriate and qualified association, corporation or g0V8rDm8DCdl entity to perform and dis- charge designated tasks which will did Or 8SSi3t the Board in the performance Of its duties" It is LegO|'s opinion that the intent of the section above cited was to give the Board of City Development the ability to contract with another governmental unit not the City of Lubbock itself, because the Board is an intricate part of the City itself and an Agreement between the Board and the City would in effect be d contractwithone's self. However, another reason why Staff has not been able to follow through and develop d scheme of operation under this SC2O3Fi0 is beCdUSB Chapter l, Art. X, Section 4 of the Charter of the City of Lubbock specifically States April 24, 1986 201 that the City Manager shall be the Chief Administrative Officer of the City and that except for certain desig- nated officers, he shall appoint and remove any officer Or employee of the City. In the event that Staff was able to figure out d SC8D8riO where the Board could CVOtrdCt between itself and the City, what would it be contracting for? The answer to this question is that the Board of City Development would be contracting with the City of Lubbock to provide it with administrative services to -wit staff personnel, and the Only way that the City Of Lubbock could provide Such Staff personnel is in accordance with the above Cited Charter provision, whereby they would be hired 'USt as any other City Motion was made by C0VOCilwOm80 Baker, seconded by C0UOCilmdO Patterson passing UO first reading Ordinance #8920~ Motion carried: 7 Yeas; U Nays" 86-45-201-303 /25.\ 8I Lubbock International Ai and authorize same (Aviation Department). CODtratt in Files RESOLUTION #2302 RFS0}UTl0N DE 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 VO behalf of the City Of Lubbock a Contract with Lee Lewis General Contractor, Inc. for i0pr0Ye02Ot3 at Lubbock International Airport, attached herewith, which shall be Spread VpOD the minutes of the Council and as spread UpOD the minutes Of this Council shall constitute and be a part of this Resolution as fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 24th day of April, 1986. McMinn ATTEST: RaOette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Gene Edd5^ Purchasing Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM; Haroldill Harold Willard, Assistant City Attorney Lee Lewis, General Contractor, Inc. --Furnish all labor, materials and equipment required to complete the construction of the Maintenance Building - $2,341^150 Motion was made by Mayor Pro T8m Carpenter, seconded by Councilman Patterson authorizing Resolution #2302 as recommended by City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; O Nays. 86-45-20I-304 /2b°\ BID #8932--Irrigation system repair parts (Parks and Recreation Department). Western Industrial Supply, Amarillo--4 ea. double check valve assembly - $2,920°40; 4 8d~ flanged Mueller resilient S2dt - $025°24; 8 ed. flanged Mueller resilient seat - $1,630.33; 800 pa. Dri-splice couplers - $260~56; 30 ed. RdiDbird 70C3PM full Circle - $956.68; 15 ea. RdiDbird 65PJ-TNT - $495.08 O/TOVl Plastic Pipe C0.--4,500/ Schedule 40 PVC - $1,530 Watermd3ter Irrigation 8upply--800/ Class 200 PVC -$771.48; Buckner quick coupler repair parts - $1,323^98; 48 ea. Dri-splice 5ea\ent - $123°24 202 April 24, 1986 86-45-202-305 (27.) 86-45-202-306 (28.) 86-45-202-307 (29.) Neumark Co.--Weathermatic irrigation parts - $8,094.96; 25 ea. 1" quick coupler key - $357.50 Wipco Wholesale--2 ea. 2" glycerine -filled pressure gauges Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, seconded by Councilman Patterson authorizing low bid meeting specifi- cations on recommendation of City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. BID #8934--Herbicides and pesticides (Parks and Recreation Department). Helena Chemical­24gal. round -up - $1,787.04; 24 gal. Phytar 560 - $409.20; 150 gal. MSMA + surfactant - $1,197; 8 gal. Surfoil - $27.20; 50 gal. Diazinon AG500 - $1,020; 50 lbs Furadan 1OG - $45 Kitten Moseley Fertilizer & Supply--70 gal. rodeo - $5,530; 8 gal. Poast - $664; 25 gal. Banvel 4S - $1,206.25; 100 lbs. Dy-Syston 15G - $88; 12 lbs. Benlate - $138 Tri-Sentry Chemical Corp., Grand Prairie--25 gal. Surflan 4 AS - $1,207; 150 gal. Trimec - $1,785; 9 lt. Atrinal - $399.96; 12 gal. Kelthane E.C. - $189.96; 32 lbs. Guardsman surfactant - $170.56; 20 gal. Dorman oil - $58.80 T.E. Agri. Supply Co., Amarillo--2,000 lbs Ronstar G - $1,434; 10 gal Aqua-gro - $169.30; 3 gal. Funginix - $121.23 Chemical & Turf Specialty, Garland--12 gal. Dursban 4E - $757.44; 160 lbs. Oftanol 5G - $222.40; 12 lbs. Banrot - $215.16 B & G Chemical, Dallas--12 gal. Cythion - $147 Goldthwaites of Texas, Ft. Worth--50 gal. Sevimol 4 - $791.50 Sunbelt Turf Supply--25 gal. Blazon blue turf colorant - $816.25 Tri-State Chemical, Brownfield --80 gal. Promesol - $488 Scott's Pro Turf, Albuquerque, NM--approx. 416 lbs turf insect control - $426.52; approx. 618 lbs turf insect control - $517; approx. 1,604 lbs turf fungicide - $2,688.40; approx. 720 lbs pre -emergence turf weedgrass control-$720.51; pre -emergency turf weedgrass control - $770.80 Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, seconded by Councilman Patterson authorizing low bid meeting specifi- cations on recommendation of City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. BID #8935--Fertilizer (Parks and Recreation Department). Scott's Pro Turf, Albuquerque, NM --Fertilizer 19-0-17 - $542.85; fertilizer 20-0-16 - $1,085.70; fertilizer w/iron 29-3-3 - $789.60; nitrogen w/manganese 30-0-0 - $387.75; turfgrass starter 19-26-5 - $414.54 Chemical & Turf Specialty Co., Garland--354.3 tons fertilizer - $92,924.35 Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, seconded by Councilman Patterson authorizing low bid meeting specifi- cations on recommendation of City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. BID #8949--Water Distribution Main Enaineerina . stem improvements --Avenue P and authorize same Water Utilities RESOLUTON #2303 April 24, 1486 203 MRAIRnwink BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: THAT the Mayor of the City Of Lubbock DE and is hereby authorized and directed to execute for and On behalf of the City Of Lubbock a Contract with Panhandle Construction Company for water system improvements to the distribution main between 82Dd Street and 98th Street on Avenue P, attached herewith, which shall be spread UpO0 the minutes of the Council and as spread Up0O the minutes of this Council shall constitute and be d part of this Resolution as fully copied herein in detail. Passed by the City Council this 24th day of April, 1986^ McMinn B. C. McMINN, MAYOR ATTEST: RaDette Boyd, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Gene EadS, Purchasing Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM; Haroldill Harold Willard, Assistant City Attorney Panhandle C0nst° Co. --Water system improvements - $114,252.25 Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, seconded by CUUOCil0d0 Patterson authorizing Resolution #2303, OO recommendation of City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 80-45-203-308 (30.) BID #8953--Disk Drive Digital Equipment Corp. --Disk drive for computer -aided dispatch system - $16,570 Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Carpenter, seconded by C0UDCil0aD Patterson authorizing low bid meeting specifi- cations on recommendation Of City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. 80-45-203-309 (31.) Consider two appointments to the Permit and License Appeal Board. This item was held for action until the next regular meeting. As 8nn0UDC8d earlier in the meeting, Council held Executive Session to discuss acquisition Of real property 204 April 24, 1986 There being no further business to C00e before the Council, 00tiVD to adjourn was made by Councilman Patterson, seconded by Mayor Pro Te0 Carpenter~ Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays. ATTEST: Ranett"oyd, City Secretary READ AND APPROVED THIS 8TH DAY OF MAY, 1986. ATTEST: B. C. MCMINN, MAYOR ~�