HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - Regular - 2/11/1993CITY OF LUBBOCK
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 11, 1993
10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas met in regular session on
the 11th day of February, 1993 in the City Council Chambers, first
floor, City Hall, 1625 13th Street, Lubbock, Texas at 10:00 a.m.
Present: Mayor David Langston, Mayor Pro Tem Maggie Trejo,
Councilmember T. J. Patterson, Councilmember M. J. Aderton,
Councilmember Randy Neugebauer, Councilmember Max Ince, Councilmember
Alex Cooke, Acting City Manager Bob Cass, City Attorney John C. Ross,
Jr., and Acting City Secretary Sally Abbe.
Mayor Langston called the meeting to order at 10:15 A.M.
( 1.) The Invocation was given by Councilmember T.J.
Patterson.
( 2.) The Pledge of Allegiance was given in unison by
those in the Council Chambers.
93-52A-95-67
( 3.) Board Appointments
B.J. "Beni" Hemmeline (Civil Service Commission),
Ann Reece (Permit and License Appeal Board), and
Arnold Mincey, Jr. (Plumbing Board) received
certificates of appointment.
93-52A-95-68
( 4.) Special presentation to George C. Wilson for service
on the Board of Directors of the Canadian River
Municipal Water Authority,
Mayor Langston recognized Mr. George Wilson for
service on the Canadian River Municipal Water
Authority (CRMWA). Mr. Wilson served as one of two
Lubbock representatives on the CRMWA Board of
Directors from 1980 to 1992. During this period of
time, Mr. Wilson was a dedicated board member,
rarely missing a meeting even though such meetings
are generally held in Plainview. Mr. Warlick Carr,
one of the two current Lubbock representatives to
the CRMWA, presented a resolution from the CRMWA
Board expressing its appreciation to Mr. Wilson.
( 5.) Motion was made
by Mayor Pro Tem
January 28, 1993
the February 4,
written. Motion
by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
Trejo to approve minutes of the
Regular City Council Meeting and
1993 Special City Council Meeting as
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 96
93-52A-96-69
( 7.) ORDINANCE #9583--Setting the date and ballot
propositions for a Capital Improvements bond
election.
ORDINANCE #9583
AN ORDINANCE ORDERING A BOND ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY OF
LUBBOCK, TEXAS, MAKING PROVISION FOR THE CONDUCT OF THE ELECTION AND
RESOLVING OTHER MATTERS INCIDENT AND RELATED TO SUCH ELECTION.
According to staff memo, corrections have been made
to the ordinance on second reading concerning the
dollar amount of individual ballot issues. The
ordinance itself now conforms to the draft ballot
discussed with Council on first reading at the last
City Council meeting. Other minor technical
revisions were made to the ordinance to conform to
the resolution authorizing a joint election with
Lubbock County on May 1, 1993.
Staff recommended approval of this ordinance on
second reading.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to pass on second and final
reading Ordinance #9583 as recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-96-70
( 8.) Consider Resolution #4074 accepting _paving
improvements constructed by Williams and Peters
Construction Co., associated with King's Park
Addition, Lots 39-131.
RESOLUTION #4074
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS ON PORTIONS OF STREET AS LISTED
119"I ff
WHEREAS, in conformance with the paving requirement provisions of
Chapter 25 of the City of Lubbock Code of Ordinances, in association
with King's Park, Lots 39-131, the subdivider of said Lots has made
arrangements with Williams & Peters Construction Company, Inc. for the
construction of paving improvements on a certain street dedicated and
adjacent to said subdivision under the provisions of said Ordinance
prior to the recording of the subdivision plat of the above -mentioned
Addition including the following street:
The West half of Memphis Avenue from South Loop 289 to
595 feet North of 82nd Street, and drainage
improvements on the East half of Memphis Avenue from
73rd Street to Memphis Drive, known and designated as
New Subdivision Sub -Unit Numbers 28 and 29 of Unit
Number 2035.
WHEREAS, the construction of the above improvements on the
above -mentioned street 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 the
provisions of Chapter 25 of the City of Lubbock Code of Ordinances; NOW
THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
February 11, 1993
Page 97
SECTION 1. THAT the improvements on said portion of the
above -mentioned street BE and the same are hereby accepted and the City
Engineer BE and he is hereby authorized to notify the Subdivider of
acceptance by the Lubbock City Council, and to direct the payment of the
City's portion of the cost in the amount of $29,443.25.
SECTION 2. THAT this Resolution shall take effect and be in force
from and after its passage.
Passed by the City Council this llth day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Larry D. Hertel
Larry D. Hertel, City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Donald G. Vandiver
Donald G. Vandiver, First Assistant
City Attorney
According to staff memo, this is a routine
acceptance of paving improvements constructed in
association with this new subdivision. The
developer chose to divide his paving requirements
into two contracts: this one which provided for his
portion of collector street paving on Memphis Avenue
and a separate contract for the interior streets in
his subdivision. The remainder of the paving
improvements for this subdivision will be accepted
at a later date. The improvements to be accepted at
this time consist of street paving, curb and gutter,
and drainage channels on the west half of Memphis
Avenue from South Loop 289 to 595 feet north of 82nd
Street and reconstruction of a portion of the east
half of Memphis for drainage improvements.
The City Engineer, in cooperation with the developer
of this subdivision, determined to construct a
portion of the east half of Memphis Avenue to
improve the overflow condition from the KFYO or
Kingsgate Lake to Bill Miller Park Lake. The east
half of Memphis had existing paving. The grade of
the east half of Memphis needed to be changed from
76th Street to Memphis Drive requiring
reconstruction of the street and associated drainage
channel work.
The problem which has been experienced with the
overflow crossing Memphis was due to the elevation
of Memphis at 76th Street being lower than the other
portions. This caused water to be deeper at 76th
Street, causing concern from the adjacent property
owners.
February 11, 1993
Page 98
93-52A-98-71
( 9•)
This reconstruction of the east half of Memphis will
provide for a more level street elevation for a
greater distance along the overflow area resulting
in less depth of water overflowing the street. The
alternative to this reconstruction would have been
for the developer to construct his half of Memphis
matching the existing grade. This would have
eliminated the City's cost on the east half but
would have resulted in the possibility of the City
having to reconstruct both the east and west sides
of Memphis in the future to improve the overflow
problem.
The City's participation in the cost of these street
paving improvements is $29,443.25. The developer's
cost for his paving of the west half of Memphis
Avenue is $74,949. The City's cost will be paid
from the Subdivision Paving Capital Project in the
Street Improvement Fund. This capital project was
established to pay for City participation in the
cost of paving.subdivisions which is not
attributable to the developer, such as extra width
on,collector or thoroughfare streets.
Staff recommended approval of this resolution.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize Resolution #4074
as' recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0
Nays.
According to staff memo, this is a routine sale of
property by the Urban Renewal Agency to Spectrum
Construction, Inc., Gary Patton, President, for
$300. This property is to be redeveloped as a
single -family -residence and is properly zoned.
This proposed sale is submitted according to the
Marketing Plan for the Guadalupe Area adopted by the
Urban Renewal Board of Commissioners on October 17,
1989.
Staff recommended approval of the proposed sale.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to accept the price and
conditions of sale of Parcel Number 33500-20-130 at
1104 3rd Street in the Guadalupe area as recommended
by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-98-72
(10.) Consider the price and condition of sale of Parcel
Numbers 93440-36-150 and 93440-36-160 at 2317-2319
Elm Avenue in the Chatman Hill Area.
According to staff memo, this is a routine sale of
property by the Urban Renewal Agency to Stewart
Townsen, dba Construction Consultants, for $1,500
($750 per lot). This property is to be redeveloped
as a single-family residence and is properly zoned.
February 11, 1993
Page 99
This proposed sale is submitted according to the
Marketing Plan for the Guadalupe Area adopted by the
Urban Renewal Board of Commissioners on August 15,
1989.
Staff recommended approval of the proposed sale.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to accept the price and
conditions of sale of Parcel Numbers 93440-36-150
and 93440-36-160 at 2317-2319 Elm Avenue in the
Chatman Hill area as recommended by Staff. Motion
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-99-73
(11.) BID #12112--Traffic arrow panels (Traffic).
Service & Material Division of Flex-O-Lite, St.
Louis, MO--3 ea. Arrow panel trailer mounted; 7 ea.
arrow panel vehicle mounted.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize low bid meeting
specifications. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-99-74
(12.) BID #12313--Annual pricing for playground parts
(Parks and Recreation).
Sports & Rec Products, Laredo
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize low bid meeting
specifications. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-99-75
(13.) BID #12397--Annual pricing for turf equipment repair
parts (Parks and Recreation). '
Jacobsen Turf & Commercial, Carrollton --Jacobsen
Turf Equipment repair parts--10%.
Goldthwaites, Ft. Worth --Toro Turf Equipment repair
parts--12%.
(Note: Bids are stated as a percentage to be
discounted from manufacturer's current suggested
retail price list.)
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize low bids meeting
specifications. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-99-76
(14.) BID #12398--Semi-annual pricing for pesticides
(Parks and Recreation).
Helena Chemical Co.--100 gl. Cythion; 45 lb. Oust.
BWI Dallas, Ft. Worth, Dallas--60 gl. Bensumec; 200
gl. Dormant Oil; 1,000 lbs Dyclomec 4G; 25 lb.
Gallery 75 G; 500 lb. Amdro; 100 lb. Sevin 80 S; 96
lb. Fore (TIE BID AWARDED); 90 lb. Gopher Bait.
Turfco, Dallas--1 gl. Image 1.5 LC; 1 gl. Mavrick
Aquaflow.
February 11, 1993
Page 100
Kitten Fertilizer, Inc., Slaton--50 gl.
MSMA+Surfactant; 20 gl. Diquat-H/A.
Acuff Farm Supply--75 lb. Orthene 75 S.
Wilbur -Ellis Co.--1 ea. Tempo 2 (500 ml); 20 gl.
Hyvar XL; 30 gl. Arsenal; 1 gl. Pentac Aquaflow; 10
gl. Triumph; 100 gl. Blazon Blue Turf Colorant;
5,600 lb. Balan 2.5G.
B & G Chemical, Dallas--10 lb. Avitrol 200; 1 cs.
Talon-G.
Terra International, Inc., Waco--10 gl. Phytar 560;
30 gl. Rodeo; 100 gl. Surflan 4 AS; 50 gl. Trimec; 5
gl. Banvel; 40 gl. Spray -Aide; 155 gl. Aquagro-1;
100 lb. Dy-Syston 15 G; 1,600 lb. Turcam 2.5G; 32
lb. Turcam WP; 96 lb. Bayleton 25; 24 lb. Daconil
2787.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize low bids meeting
specifications and in a drawing by Councilmember
Aderton, awarding tie bid Item #32 for 96 lb. Fore
to BWI Dallas, Ft. Worth, Dallas. Motion carried:
7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-100-77
(15.) BID #12400--Cattle Grazing Rights, and authorize
same (Land Application Site).
RESOLUTION #4075
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 all
Cattle Grazing Contracts hereafter presented which are substantially in
the same form as the Contract attached hereto, 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 if fully
copied herein in detail.
Passed by the City Council this llth day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Ls/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Carroll McDonald by JRM
Carroll McDonald, Assistant City
Manager for Utilities
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Donald G. Vandiver
Donald G. Vandiver, First Assistant
City Attorney
February 11, 1993
Page 101
CONTRACT
STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF LUBBOCK §
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this llth day of February,
1993 by and between the City of Lubbock, County of Lubbock, State of
Texas, acting by and through David R. Langston, Mayor, thereunto
authorized to do so, hereinafter referred to as OWNER, and Seedco Corp.
of the City of Lubbock, County of Lubbock, and the State of Texas,
hereinafter termed CONTRACTOR.
WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the payments and
agreements hereinafter mentioned, to be made and performed by the OWNER
and under the conditions expressed in the bond bearing even date
herewith (if any) the CONTRACTOR hereby agrees with OWNER to commence
and complete the construction of certain improvements described as
follows:
BID NO. 12400--Cattle Grazing Rights (Land Application Site) in the
amount of $14.20 per head per month
and all extra work in connection therewith, under the terms as stated in
the contract documents and at his (or their) own proper cost and expense
to furnish all materials, supplies, machinery, equipment, tools,
superintendence, labor, insurance and other accessories and services
necessary to complete the said construction in accordance with the
contract documents as defined in the General Condition of Agreement.
The CONTRACTOR hereby agrees to commence work within ten days
after the date written notice to do so shall have been given to him and
to substantially complete same within the time specified in the contract
documents.
The OWNER agrees to pay the CONTRACTOR in current funds for the
performance of the contract in accordance with the proposal submitted
therefore, subject to additions and deductions, as provided in the
contract documents and to make payment on account thereof as provided
therein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have executed
this agreement in Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas in the year and day
first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS (OWNER)
/s/ Sally Still Abbe /s/ David R. Langston
Secretary Mayor
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ATTEST:
Seedco Corp.
CONTRACTOR
Secretary
By:
TITLE:
COMPLETE ADDRESS: Seedco Corp.
103 Erskine
Lubbock, Texas 79403
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize Resolution #4075
as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0
Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 102
93-52A-102-78
(16.) BID #12422--Stacking chairs (Civic Center).
Hester's Office Supply--50 ea. stacking chairs Model
22007-G; 440 ea. stacking chairs Model 22000-G.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize low bid meeting
specifications. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-102-79
( 6.) ORDINANCE #9584--Changing the name of Quirt Avenue
to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard.
ORDINANCE #9584
AN ORDINANCE CREATING AN EXCEPTION TO SECTION 24-30 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK BY CHANGING THE NAME OF QUIRT AVENUE
TO DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. BOULEVARD; DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO
REVISE THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY AND THE MAP FOR STREET NAMING TO
REFLECT SUCH CHANGE; REQUIRING THE CITY ENGINEER TO NOTIFY ALL
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES OF SAID NAME CHANGE; REQUIRING THE BUILDING
OFFICIAL TO NOTIFY TO ALL BUSINESSES AND RESIDENCES HAVING A MAILING
ADDRESS UPON SAID STREET OF THE NAME CHANGE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
TRAFFIC ENGINEER TO USE THE APPROPRIATE ABBREVIATION OF DR. KING'S NAME
FOR THE PURPOSES OF STREET SIGNS ALONG SAID BOULEVARD.
Mayor Langston and the Council agreed to allow
citizen comment on this ordinance. Guy Roberson,
owner of Ranger Equipment, 6811 Quirt, appeared in
opposition to the name change and engaged in
spirited exchange with Councilmember Ince and
Councilmember Patterson.
Buddy Mayfield, owner of Mayfield Van Lines at 44th
and Quirt, opposed the name change, citing precedent
of naming parks and buildings for people rather than
naming streets. He asked for a referendum on the
name change.
Max Winn and Cecil Puryear spoke in favor of the
name change.
Bill Clement, owner of a business at 34th and Quirt,
opposed the change and suggested that the name be
changed to that of a person of local significance
rather than Dr. King. Angeles Miranda, Jr. agreed,
questioning why University Avenue is not named for
Senator W.H. Bledsoe, who was responsible for
locating Texas Tech in Lubbock.
Reverend O'Neal and Eddie Richardson spoke in favor
of the name change. Quirt Avenue business owners
James Horn and Treva Jenkins spoke in opposition.
Councilmember Trejo expressed dismay over the
opposition to the name change, and stated her
feeling that the opposition was race -related.
Councilmember Ince said that he did not consider the
opposition "a public outcry" as Mayor Pro Tem Trejo
had stated. He stated that he had only had 6 phone
calls on the issue in 3 weeks, and did not perceive
a negative reaction. Councilmember Cooke concurred,
and termed the citizen comments "an open
discussion."
February 11, 1993
Page 103
According to staff memo, the Martin Luther King, Jr.
Committee met again at noon on February 3, 1993, to
discuss several issues mentioned by Council on first
reading of the ordinance. It was the consensus of
the committee to recommend the following:
1. The official street name and the
street name for street sign purposes
should use the word "Boulevard"
rather than the word "Avenue".
Staff found that there is an
existing King Avenue in East
Lubbock. In order to avoid any
possible confusion of emergency
vehicle responses on these streets,
it was agreed that the word
Boulevard should be used in the
renaming of Quirt. During this
discussion, it was pointed out that
the street is a divided and planted
boulevard between Loop 289 and the
entrance to the airport, and also
from 19th Street to about 28th
Street.
2. While the official name on the
ordinance will use the term "Dr.",
it was agreed that it was not
necessary to use this term on the
street name signs.
3. For the purpose of minor,
non -signalized intersecting streets,
it was agreed that the street name
signs should read "M.L.K. Jr. Blvd."
4. On all signalized street
intersections, the street signs
should read "Martin Luther King, Jr.
Blvd."
The ordinance, reflects these changes, subject to a
final determination by the Council on these
recommendations. Staff recommended passage of the
ordinance with the changes recommended by the Martin
Luther King, Jr. Committee.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to pass on second and final
reading Ordinance #9584 as recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 1 Nay--Councilmember
Aderton.
93-52A-103-80
(17.) ORDINANCE #9585--Zone Case #2255-D (West of
Frankford Avenue between 63rd and 64th Street) --Hold
AK.
ORDINANCE #9585
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
2255-D; A ZONING CHANGE FROM GO TO C-2A ZONING ON A TRACT OUT OF SECTION
36, BLOCK A-K, LUBBOCK, TEXAS; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING A
PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
February 11, 1993
Page 104
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo opened the public hearing at
10:58 a.m.
Henry Huneke appeared on behalf of Lubbock
Development to present this request for a zone
change to C-2A limited to banks, savings and loan
companies, and all GO uses.
There was no opposition.
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo closed the public hearing at
10:59 a.m.
David Jones, Director of Planning, presented staff
comments. He stated that this is a routine case
consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
According to staff memo, the frontage on Frankford
between Spur 327 and 64th Street was zoned Garden
Office to create a buffer for the C-4 to the west.
The adjacent land use relationships are:
North - zoned GO, vacant
South - commercial
East - single-family
West - commercial
The area is designated commercial on the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The primary concern
expressed by at least one neighborhood owner is the
intensity of any use proposed on the site. However,
with the proposed site plan orienting the drive thru
lanes away from Frankford, and with the bank
building next to the street, the branch bank
activity should create very little difference from
what the current Garden Office zoning would allow.
The proposal should have little overall additional
effect on traffic. Frankford is a designated
thoroughfare on the Master Thoroughfare Plan.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of this request by a vote of 8-0 subject to
the following condition:
1. Limited to the following two C-2A
permitted uses:
a. Banks, and savings and loan
companies.
b. Offices.
2. Tied to site plan 2255-D as
presented to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and signed by the
Chairman on December 3, 1992.
3. That a site plan, including building
elevations showing materials, color,
and texture, shall be submitted and
approved by the Planning and Zoning
Commission prior to the issuance of
a building permit for any future
expansion on this tract.
Staff supported the C-2A request limited to a branch
bank only and all GO uses as recommended by the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
February 11, 1993
Page 105
Motion was made by Councilmember Cooke, seconded by
Councilmember Patterson to pass on first reading
Ordinance #9585, with conditions recommended by P&Z
and City Staff. Motion carried: 6 Yeas; 0 Nays --
Mayor Langston absent from the Chambers.
93-52A-105-81
(18.) ORDINANCE #9586--Zone Case #1123-C (5110 29th
Drive) --Hold a public hearing to consider the
ORDINANCE #9586
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
1123-C; A ZONING CHANGE FROM C-3 AND C-4 SPECIFIC USE TO C-4 SPECIFIC
USE TO AMEND SITE PLAN TO INCLUDE BUMPER BOAT POOL AND GO KART TRACT ON
LOT 306-A, MIDWAY PARK ADDITION AND A TRACT OUT OF SECTION 17, BLOCK B,
LUBBOCK, TEXAS; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A
SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo opened the public hearing at
11:01 a.m.
David Goyette appeared on behalf of Putt -Putt Golf
Courses of America, Inc. to present this request for
zone change. He showed the site plan for the
development, noting locations of batting cages,
bumper boat pool and the Go -Kart Track. He stated
that the additional development would double
Putt-Putt's current employment. Patron density and
traffic volumes are projected to be about the same
as those generated by the 18 hole miniature golf
course to be demolished for the new construction.
He characterized the Formula K Go -Karts as very
quiet and well constructed.
Goyette stated that Putt -Putt was willing to accede
to all requests of the Midway Part Town Home
Association except landscaping on vacant property
between the town homes and Putt -Putt that the
developers do not control and a 7' permanent
screening fence. He noted that they would build a
6' fence along Putt-Putt's north property line if it
could be removed when the adjacent property
develops.
Lon Miller appeared in opposition to the case,
representing himself and the board and members of
the Midway Park Home Owners Association. He
expressed concern about the closeness of the new
parking to the town houses, and about access to the
parking from Putt -Putt. He stated that Putt -Putt
had always been a good neighbor, but was coming
closer with more active outdoor recreation. He
presented the following list of five requests from
the home owners association:
1. No alcoholic beverage permit shall
be issued for this parcel.
February 11, 1993
Page 106
2. Putt -Putt shall install a six-foot
chain link fence on the eastern
boundary of its development. Any
gates or openings shall be kept
locked to prevent unauthorized
ingress or egress to the playa lake
area.
3. Putt -Putt shall install and maintain
a seven foot high screening fence
between the proposed parking lot and
the alley south of the Midway Park
Townhomes. The design of the fence
shall be identical in materials and
construction as the existing
seven -foot screening fence located
at the alley north of the Midway
Park Townhouses.
4. A strip of landscape with minimum
six-foot tall Eldrica or Mondale
pines on ten -foot centers shall be
installed on the north side of the
fence required at Item #3 above.
Putt -Putt shall maintain these
trees.
5. Should the Director of Planning of
the City of Lubbock verify a
complaint in writing about noise
generated from the Putt -Putt
property from a resident of a
townhouse or from the Board of
Directors at Midway Park Homeowners
Association, Inc., the operator of
Putt -Putt shall be notified to
conduct noise measurements by a
competent contractor at the south
boundary of the townhome project.
If the process identifies noise
generated at the Putt -Putt facility
at any time of day or night in
excess of 56 decibels ("a" weighted
decibels (DBA)), management at the
Putt -Putt shall take whatever
measures necessary to reduce the
noise to a level at or below 56
decibels.
Mr. Miller asked that these conditions be made part
of the zone case, or that the case be returned to
the Planning and Zoning Commission for further
study.
Mayor Langston closed the public hearing at 11:32
a.m.
David Jones, Director of Planning, presented staff
comments. He noted that the case involved no land
use policy discussion, but centered around whether
the development standards have been met and the use
is appropriate for the site. He stated that the
issues were debated at the Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting and that P&Z felt that the
standards were met and that the noise level would
not be beyond acceptable levels.
According to staff memo, the request continues the
diversification of the Putt -Putt complex for
different outdoor recreation activities.
February 11, 1993
Page 107
The adjacent land use relationships are:
North - vacant zoned C-3
South - water treatment/storage facility
East - playa lake
West - commercial
This area is commercial on the Comprehensive Land
Use Plan. Previous approval of the miniature golf
course and batting cages have established this
compound as an outdoor recreation area. Technical
information provided indicates that noise levels
would not create a problem in the area. The best
example might be that vehicular traffic on York or
29th Drive would create about the same noise levels
as the Formula K go-carts when considered from the
same distance. The carts are muffled and have
fiberglass bodies unlike the carts popular 10-20
years ago.
The expansion includes new parking. The new parking
lot will be between the boat pond and kart track and
the townhomes to the north.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of this request by a vote of 8-0 subject to
the following condition:
1. Tied to site plan 1123-C as
presented to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and signed by the
Chairman on December 3, 1992.
Staff supported the request as approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mayor Langston asked Mr. Miller and Mr. Goyette to
tell the Council where they were in agreement and
where they were not. Goyette stated that his
instructions were to remain with his earlier stated
position. Mr. Miller agreed to delete the
landscaping provision if the 7 foot matching fence
was built. Mr. Goyette stated that his clients did
not want to build a permanent fence in a location
where it would be torn down when the adjacent
property develops. Councilmember Cooke suggested a
7 foot fence without masonry posts, but Mr. Goyette
reiterated his instructions.
Motion was made by Councilmember Neugebauer,
seconded by Councilmember Cooke to pass on first
reading Ordinance #9586, with condition recommended
by PR and City Staff and the addition of Items 1,
2, 3 and 5 from the Midway Park Homeowner's
Association requests, except that the fence will be
a 6 foot wooden screening fence with steel posts set
in concrete, and the fence may be removed when the
adjacent property develops. Motion carried: 7
Yeas; 0 Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 108
93-52A-108-82
(19.) ORDINANCE #9587--Zone Case #2695 (721 45th Street)
--Hold a public hearing to consider the request of
Church of the Nazarene for a zoning change from R-2
to GO on Lot 4A. Nazarene Addition.
ORDINANCE #9587
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
2695; A ZONING CHANGE FROM R-2 TO GO ZONING ON LOT 4A, NAZARENE
ADDITION, LUBBOCK, TEXAS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS
CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
Mayor Langston opened the public hearing at 11:47
a.m.
Jack McQueen appeared on behalf of the Church of the
Nazarene to present this request for zone change.
He asked the Council to uphold the recommendation of
the Planning and Zoning Commission.
No one spoke in opposition to this request.
Mayor Langston closed the public hearing at 11:48
a.m.
David Jones, Director of Planning, presented staff
comments, noting that this removes the
non -conforming status from the office building on
the church tract.
According to staff memo, prior to 1975, the zoning
ordinance allowed church and church related uses in
R-2 Districts. Until recently, this building was
used as an office by the regional Nazarene Church.
The Nazarene Church on the site relocated to South
Loop 289 and Chicago and a new congregation acquired
the church property.
The adjacent land use relationships are:
North
- single-family
South
- church property
East
- church property
West
- single-family
The parcel is noted as public use on the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan, consistent with
churches, schools and governmental activities. The
Garden Office District was designed to act as a
buffer district, similar to R-2 or duplex zoning
acts between single-family and commercial. As a
buffer the request to change this property to GO
would not cause a problem. The structure has been
used as an office since it was built. The property
has adequate parking.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of this request by a vote of 8-0. Staff
supported the recommendation of the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Motion was made by Councilmember Neugebauer,
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to pass on first
reading Ordinance #9587 as recommended by P&Z and
City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 109
93-52A-109-83
(20.)
Mayor Langston opened the public hearing at 11:51
a.m.
Johnny Dailey, President of Dailey Beverage and J&J
Beauty Supply, presented this appeal. He stated
that the request was not for nudity or "hard-core"
entertainment, but for male review shows and
lingerie shows only. He passed out lists of patrons
who signed in support of the request. He then
detailed his life and business history and recent
community support activities. He noted that the
shows will be limited to adults over age 21 who
chose to view them. He stated that this is an
attempt to increase revenues and keep his club from
closing.
Councilmember Patterson asked Mr. Dailey to explain
"male review shows." Mr. Dailey replied that they
are men in bikinis doing dance routines similar to
1960s go-go dancers. He noted that the Villa Club
currently is licensed to do similar shows, and that
no minority owned business has this permit.
Councilmember Neugebauer asked if non -drinking
minors are allowed in the club. Mr. Dailey answered
`— that currently Friday night College and Military
night does, but this license will eliminate that.
Billy Dailey, partner and brother of Johnny Dailey,
noted that this was a business opportunity for the
club. He noted neighborhood concerns about the
proximity to schools, but stated that shows would be
held when the schools generally are closed.
Kevin Dailey, son of Mr. Dailey, noted that the
majority of the opponents are religiously
affiliated. He stated that this is only an attempt
to diversify their business.
Max Winn stated that although he doesn't attend
these shows, he believes that it is people's
constitutional right to attend if they want to, and
that it appears that the Planning and Zoning
Commission is deliberately excluding these types of
businesses.
Gilbert Herrera, evangelist from First Baptist
Church, appeared in opposition, citing religious and
moral grounds. Similar sentiments were expressed by
Gene Martinez, pastor of a church at 201 N. Boston,
Israel Guel, Minister of Neighborhood Ministries in
Lubbock, Texas, Jesus Cisneros, Senior Pastor of
Ministerios Nueva Vida, Angeles Barranda, Jr., and a
youth pastor (who did not identify himself).
February 11, 1993
Page 110
Mae Constancio told the Council that the business
was too close to the residential neighborhoods and
would be bad for the children. She read a letter
from Monsignor Roland Buxkemper in opposition to the
case.
John Trapezano of the Texas Tech Student Association
urged the Council not to consider the case on
economic need but to deny it because that decision
would be best for the city.
Lydia Eubank characterized this request as the first
step to hard core pornography, and suggested that
the Daileys explore other business opportunities.
Mayor Langston closed the hearing at 12:43 a.m.
David Jones, Director of Planning, presented staff
comments. He told the Council that this is the
first zone case considered under the new sexually
oriented business ordinance. He noted the four
items the Council should consider in its
deliberations, and that a decision to override
Planning and Zoning would require a 6/7 vote of
Council.
According to staff memo, recent amendments to the
Zoning Code require sexually oriented businesses to
be approved as a Specific Use in any commercial or
industrial district. No specific distances from any
particular types of land use were incorporated into
the revised ordinance.
The adjacent land use relationships are:
North - commercial laundry
South - single-family
East - commercial
West - commercial
Various measurements to other adjacent properties,
building to building, include:
1. Residential - 80 feet south across
an alley.
2. Schools -
Matthews 1000 feet±
Cavazos 700 feet±
3. Other Commercial -
200 feet to the north
150 feet to the east
4. A small church congregation occupies
a former commercial building
approximately 200 feet to the
northeast.
February 11, 1993
Page 111
Since the property is Commercial at present, no
Comprehensive Land Use Plan discussion exists. The
four review items for evaluation of sexually
oriented businesses established by the zoning code
include:
A. Consideration of testimony that the
proposed use will not be injurious
or otherwise detrimental to the
public health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the general
public. The public comments are the
best indication of the effect on the
general public. Several persons
spoke at the Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing in opposition,
and numerous returns from the 1000
foot mailing were in opposition.
B. Consideration of testimony that
approval of the proposal will not be
injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity
adjacent to the proposed use. The
existing bar has been a fixture in
this area for some time.
C. Consideration of a request shall
take into account the character and
use of adjoining buildings and those
in the vicinity, the number of
persons residing or working adjacent
to the proposed use and the impact
of the proposed use on traffic in
the vicinity. Again, the negative
public comments and return sheets
indicate that the perception is of a
negative effect. The proposal
should have no effect on traffic.
D. Written notices of public hearings
under this section shall be given as
required by Section 29-29 of the
Code of Ordinances and in addition
thereto written notification shall
be given in the same manner to all
owners of real property lying
between two hundred (200) feet and
one thousand (1,000) feet of the
property. This requirement was met.
The proponent requested during the Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting that the business be
limited to two types of entertainment, to be
provided by contract workers: male review shows and
lingerie shows. The staff presumed that would
exclude any of the performers from working as wait
persons.
During the staff presentation at P&Z, several
proposed conditions were reviewed should the case be
considered for approval:
1. Persons appearing in any show shall
not be permitted to perform duties
as wait persons or other employee
duties for a time one hour prior or
one hour after a show.
February 11, 1993
Page 112
2. Show times shall be limited to the
hours between 8 pm and 12 midnight
on not more than two (2) nights per
week. This condition was offered by
the proponent to reduce any show
events being held while students or
neighborhood children might be in
the area, and to reduce the general
perception of the proposal as a full
time sexually oriented business.
Mr. Dailey contends these contract
show personnel are professionals and
he would not allow any perverse or
deviant behavior in his club.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
denial of this request by a vote of 8-0.
The current business at this location is a bar and
popular nightspot. While the proposal does not
offer the full range of activities normally
associated with a sexually oriented business, the
staff would concur with the denial of the Planning
and Zoning Commission based on neighborhood
opposition. A decision to override Planning and
Zoning would require a 6/7 vote of Council.
Motion was made by Councilmember Neugebauer,
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to uphold the
decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission to
deny Zone Case #2694 request by Johnny Dailey.
Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-112-84
(21.) ORDINANCE #9588--Zone Case #2696 (56th to 58th
Streets and Peoria to Nashville Avenues) --Hold a
dwellings with a 20 foot front setback on one tract)
on tracts out Section 8. Block E-2.
ORDINANCE #9588
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
2696; A ZONING CHANGE FROM R-1 TO R-1 SPECIFIC USE ZONING FOR GARDEN
HOMES ON TWO TRACTS AND FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS WITH A 20 FOOT FRONT
SET BACK ON ONE TRACT OUT OF SECTION 8, BLOCK E-2, LUBBOCK, TEXAS;
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE
AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
Mayor Langston opened the public hearing at 1:05
p.m.
David Goyette appeared on behalf of Christ the King
and Craft Development to present this request for
zone case. He showed the site plan and explained
the basic concept for developing garden homes and
conventional single-family residences on the tract
south of Christ The King church and school. He
noted that the developers had agreed to additional
conditions on the garden homes in response to
neighborhood opposition.
February 11, 1993
Page 113
Goyette introduced Bob Goyette, architect for the
project, and Monsignor James Comiskey of Christ the
King Cathedral, who explained the process the parish
and diocese had used in reaching their decision to
develop the property. He stated that the
development was a joint venture between the Diocese
and Craft Development.
In response to questioning from Councilmember Cooke
and Ince, Mr. Goyette explained that under the R-1
zoning currently on the parcel, 64 single family
houses could be built without Council or Planning
and Zoning review. However, the conditions
requested for specific use zoning would limit the
development to 42 homes. All the houses will be
sold, and will all be placed on the tax rolls.
Grace Lasky, a member of Christ the King parish and
parent of students at the school, appeared in
opposition to the case. She expressed concern about
the street configuration, especially the proximity
of 56th Street to the school. She noted that the
parents of students at the school had not seen the
plans before the previous evening, and asked the
Council to hold the case until more people could be
notified.
Tom Walsh, 3805 56th Street, expressed concern about
increased traffic congestion. He also felt that the
aesthetics of the area would be changed by
development of zero lot line homes, and that they
would devalue the adjacent property. He questioned
the number of persons notified about the case.
Mayor Langston asked if Mr. Walsh opposed any
development, or specifically development of garden
homes. Mr. Walsh answered that he opposed building
smaller houses on smaller lots than the surrounding
area.
In response to questioning from Councilmember
Neugebauer, Senior Planner Randy Henson stated that
the development's garden home lots would average
6500 square feet and single family lots would be
approximately 7800 square feet. The standard R-1
zoning on the lot would allow 5,000 square foot lots
without review.
Nancy Sullivan objected that the plan left no room
for the school to expand and that the parents of
school students were not notified of the plans.
Councilmember Neugebauer explained the 200 foot
notice requirements to property owners used for
every zone case. He noted that the responsibility
to communicate with the parents was the school's,
and not within Council jurisdiction.
Klaus Becker, 3810 57th Street, argued that the new
development would change the quality of life for the
surrounding neighborhood. He asked that the garden
homes be set back 20 feet and that no changes in lot
size be allowed without a new zone case.
February 11, 1993
Page 114
Don Longworth, owner of several houses in the area,
objected to the notice area and to the addition of
congestion and traffic. When asked by Councilmember
Neugebauer if he was opposed to zero lot line houses
or any development, Mr. Longworth replied that he
would like residential lots and deed restrictions
like those in the rest of the neighborhood. Jeff
Kennedy, owner of a house on 57th Street, expressed
similar desires.
Gilbert Flores, parent of Christ the King students,
stated that his concern was not the development, but
the lack of information given to parishioners and
school parents. He also asked Council to hold the
case until more of them could be notified. Angel
Miranda, Julia Hannon, and Grace Grajeda expressed
similar concerns. Mrs. Grajeda also expressed
concern that the distance from the south property
line to the wall of the school was too small. Mr.
Goyette answered that the setback will be 60 feet,
same as the setback on Haynes and Irons Schools.
Councilmember Ince stated that he understood the
concerns of the parents, but that the Council has no
right to be involved in the affairs of the church or
school. He and Councilmember Cooke reminded the
audience that Council could only look at the merits
of the case from a land use and development
standpoint.
Mayor Langston closed the hearing at 1:53 p.m.
David Jones, Director of Planning, presented staff
comments. He reminded the Council that conventional
single family housing could be built on the tract
without a zone case, since the property is currently
zoned R-1. He attempted to address concerns about
housing style and size, noting that the houses will
be similarly sized to adjacent properties and differ
in style only that one wall is on the property line.
Noting concerns about rental units, Mr. Jones
pointed out that much of 58th Street is zoned R-2
for duplexes, and that there is no prohibition
against renting any kind of property. The street
plan eliminates hazardous four way intersections and
fits into the existing street system.
In response to questioning by Mayor Langston, City
Attorney John Ross reviewed the notice requirements
set by state law. Mr. Jones assured the Council
that the notice sent complied with that regulation.
According to staff memo, Christ the King Church and
school trustees have determined that 9.5 acres on
the south side of their tract bounded by 54th, 58th,
Nashville and Peoria is more land than needed for
church use, and are proposing a residential
development. To meet some of the market requests of
current home sales, a Specific Use request was filed
to allow for garden home development along Nashville
and Peoria, and standard single-family (with front
setback reduced to 20 feet for non -garage
structures) in the interior.
Adjacent residents have become accustomed to the
area being open space, and several indicated the
belief that the land was tied to church use from now
on. However, the property is and has been zoned R-1
for many years.
February 11, 1993
Page 115
The adjacent land use relationships are:
North
- church
and school
South
- Evans
Junior High
East
- duplex
and single-family
West
- church
and single-family
The request for residential development is
compatible with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
The primary contention of adjacent residents is that
the proposed garden homes on the east and west
boundaries are a style of home not consistent with
the neighborhood. However, the Planning Commission
noted that the block east of Nashville and the block
west of Peoria on the north side to 58th are zoned
and developed as duplex construction and are rental
units. Discussion by the Commission did not satisfy
most of the adjacent owners that garden homes are a
currently popular style of single-family residences,
and that experience to date has shown they do not
deteriorate adjacent property values or otherwise
create a negative influence in neighborhoods.
The interior lots were filed as Specific Use to
allow a twenty foot front setback for non -garage
portions of structures. The subdivision is being
proposed as primarily a rear access project. A
precedent has been established for approval of the
reduced front setback by similar approvals for the
Preston Hills, Encore and Pheasant Run subdivisions.
The Planning and Zoning Commission also approved a
plat that proposes the new streets of the
subdivision as 32 foot "R-IA" paved cross sections
(in a 43 foot ROW) with a five foot curb
sidewalk/parkway. This is one of the "test"
rights -of -way the Commission has approved at several
locations to provide physical examples of whether or
not the public will accept a more narrow street,
reduced parkway with curb back walks, and reduced
front yard setback.
It is the opinion of the Planning staff that the
vote is still out for general acceptance of the
trial right-of-way sections. The total distance
between the fronts of homes across a public street
under standard current development codes is 106
feet. The minimum distance between these proposed
units is 83 feet, a 27.7 percent reduction of open
space created by the shorter yards, a more narrow
street and a reduced parkway. As neighborhoods age
and more vehicles park on the street, the general
congestion increases.
February 11, 1993
Page 116
The final concern expressed by adjacent residents
was an increase in traffic. With three churches and
three schools in the immediate vicinity, traffic is
a problem at times. The plat indicates 42 new lots,
which will certainly add to the congestion. The new
streets are oriented so that the residents have a
maximum number of choices to move east toward
Memphis or west toward Quaker (five east/west
streets each direction). The new east/west street
is located mid -block between 56th and 57th to avoid
creating 4 way intersections on Peoria or Nashville.
This is a style of design promoted by the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Traffic Engineering
principles, although one resident fears the new
residents will continue west or east down an unpaved
alley rather than turn north or south to a paved
street.
By a vote of 6-0, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval of the following changes:
A. Change from R-1 to R-1 Specific Use on
Tracts 1 and 3 subject to the following
conditions:
1. Shall be limited to garden homes.
2. Lots shall have a minimum 50 foot
width.
3. Minimum front setback shall be 20
feet except that the minimum front
setback for a front -entry garage
shall be 25 feet.
4. Minimum side setback on 56th Street
shall be five feet.
5. That the minimum rear setback for
any rear -entry garage shall be 20
feet.
B. Change from R-1 to R-1 Specific Use on
Tract 2 subject to the following
conditions.
1. Minimum front setback shall be 20
feet except that the minimum front
setback for a front -entry garage
shall be 25 feet.
2. That the minimum rear setback for
any rear -entry garage shall be 20
feet.
3. That all other requirements of the
R-1 District shall apply.
With the conditions approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, the staff supported the request.
Motion was made by Councilmember Aderton, seconded
by Councilmember Ince to continue this hearing until
the second Council meeting in March. Motion failed:
3 Yeas; 4 Nays --Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, Mayor Langston,
Councilmember Neugebauer and Councilmember Cooke
opposed.
February 11, 1993
Page 117
Motion was made by Councilmember Neugebauer,
seconded by Councilmember Cooke to pass on first
reading Ordinance #9588, with the correction
concerning setback on 56th Street. Motion carried:
5 Yeas; 2 Nays--Councilmember Aderton and
Councilmember Ince opposed.
93-52A-117-85
(22.) ORDINANCE #9589--Zone Case #2118-T (South of 94th
Street and between Slide Road and York Avenue) --Hold
ORDINANCE #9589
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
2118-T; A ZONING CHANGE FROM R-1 TO R-1 SPECIFIC USE ZONING FOR
TOWNHOUSE/GARDEN HOMES ON A TRACT OUT OF SECTION 15, BLOCK E-2, LUBBOCK,
TEXAS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION.
Mayor Langston opened the public hearing at 2:07
p.m.
On behalf of Lakeridge Country Club Estates, Larry
Teaver requested this zoning change to allow
townhouses/garden homes. No one spoke in
opposition.
Mayor Langston closed the public hearing at 2:08
p.m.
David Jones, Director of Planning, presented staff
comments, stating that the request is consistent
with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
According to staff memo, following a recent zone
change to the east, this row of lots for garden
homes will complete 94th Street toward Slide Road.
The adjacent land use relationships are:
North - residential
South - residential
East - residential
West - residential
The request conforms with Comprehensive Land Use
Plan and zoning policy. The request will have
little effect on traffic.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of this change from R-1 to R-1 Specific Use
by a vote of 6-0.
Staff supported the recommendation of the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Councilmember Ince to pass on first reading
Ordinance #9589 as recommended by Staff. Motion
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 118
93-52A-118-86
(23.) ORDINANCE #9590--Zone Case #2137-A (Southwest corner
of 82nd Street and Toledo Avenue) --Hold a public
Church Addition.
ORDINANCE #9590
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 7084 AND THE OFFICIAL
MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAKING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO.
2137-A; A ZONING CHANGE FROM R-2 TO A-2 ZONING FOR CHURCH RELATED USES
ON TRACT C, TOLEDO UNITED METHODIST CHURCH ADDITION, LUBBOCK, TEXAS;
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE
AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
Mayor Langston opened the public hearing at 2:09
p.m.
Mike Wellinghausen, of Adling Associates, appeared
on behalf of Lakeridge United Methodist Church to
present this request for zone change. No one spoke
in opposition.
Mayor Langston closed the hearing at 2:10 p.m.
David Jones, Director of Planning, presented staff
comments, stating that the case is consistent with
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and development
policies. According to staff memo, the request
would extend proper zoning for the rest of the
property owned by the existing church.
The adjacent land use relationships are:
North - residential north of 82nd
South - zoned A-2, vacant
East - zoned R-2, vacant
West - single-family
The request is consistent with both Land Use Plan,
which recommends that churches be located on
thoroughfares (82nd Street in this instance) and on
the perimeter of neighborhoods. The proposal should
have minimal effect on traffic.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of this request by a vote of 6-0 subject to
the following condition:
1. Limited to church and church
related uses.
Staff supported the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommendation.
Motion was made by Councilmember Cooke, seconded by
Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to pass on first reading
Ordinance #9590, with condition recommended by P&Z
and City Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 119
93-52A-119-87
(24.) Hold a public hearing to consider the creation of
two Enterprise Zones in the City of Lubbock.
Mayor Langston opened the public hearing at 2:13
p.m.
Citizens were asked to express their opinions about
the creation of the Enterprise Zone or incentives
that may be included in the Enterprise Zone
ordinance.
Councilmember Cooke and Councilmember Patterson
excused and recused themselves from participation in
the hearing.
Jim Bertram reviewed the proposed incentives and
boundaries for the proposed zones. He told that
Council that the County Commissioners passed a
resolution supporting the application and creating
the incentive framework; they will consider granting
those incentives on a project -by -project basis. He
noted the need to consider the ordinance in a timely
manner to comply with application deadlines, and
asked Council to set a special meeting for February
18 at 11:00 a.m. for second reading of the ordinance
creating the zones.
Mayor Langston asked that the incentives be reviewed
by as many groups as possible and in comparison to
other cities' incentives to ensure the
appropriateness and viability of the incentives.
Mr. Bertram detailed efforts already taken. Mayor
Pro Tem Trejo noted that the incentives can be
changed later if the application is approved.
Councilmember Neugebauer noted the opportunity to be
innovative and suggested closer review of the
incentives after the application is approved by the
state.
County Commissioner Gilbert Flores asked the Council,
to include Cherry Point in the northern Enterprise
Zone. Assistant Planner David Buckberry explained
why Cherry Point was omitted in the first draft, and
noted that it could be included and still meet the
criteria.
Ed Priest expressed his appreciation to the city
staff, noting the handicap they were forced to
operate under when the state insisted on using 1980
census data.
Councilmember Neugebauer asked what percent of the
total area of the City of Lubbock was included. Mr.
Buckberry replied 30 percent, noting that the larger
area was designed to help employers meet the
employee residence requirements for some state
incentives. Mr. Bertram stated that more specific
areas can be targeted in the guidelines and policies
for implementation.
Ysabel Luna stated that east Lubbock has been
ignored by the City in its development policies.
Councilmember Neugebauer explained that where
businesses choose to locate is not a function of
city policy, but of the marketplace. He also noted
that much C.D. money has been spent in that area.
February 11, 1993
Page 120
Mikel Ward, speaking as an individual, noted her
long-term interest in Enterprise Zones and her
feeling that they present good opportunities for
renewal. She stated that the short-term abatements
will be paid back many -fold and create many indirect
benefits as well.
Betty Etgen, resident of East 4th Street, noted the
lack of grocery stores and other retail
establishments in the area, and her belief that that
can be addressed by zoning. She also noted the
reluctance of banks to lend money for businesses in
that area.
Linda DeLeon, LISD representative on the Task Force,
urged the Council to leave some flexibility in the
Enterprise Zone boundaries.
Councilmember Neugebauer stated that the Council can
set incentives for development, but that relying on
government to get businesses to come to
neighborhoods will not work. Mayor Langston noted
that Enterprise Zones are part of the puzzle for
economic development in north and east Lubbock, but
that it is important for neighborhoods to also be
involved.
Mayor Langston closed the public hearing at 2:58
p.m.
93-52A-120-88
(25.) Consider Ordinance #9591 creating two Enterprise
Zones.
ORDINANCE #9591
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS,
NOMINATING TWO AREAS AS ENTERPRISE ZONES PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS
ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT (TEXAS CIVIL STATUTES, ART. 5190.7); PROVIDING TAX
INCENTIVES; DESIGNATING AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE TO ACT IN ALL
MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE NOMINATION AND DESIGNATION OF THE AREA
DESCRIBED HEREIN AS AN ENTERPRISE ZONE AND REINVESTMENT ZONE (TEXAS TAX
CODE, CHAP. 312); AND FURTHER DESIGNATING A LIAISON TO ACT ON ALL
MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT ONCE DESIGNATED BY THE
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.
Councilmember Cooke and Councilmember Patterson
excused and recused themselves from discussion and
voting on this item.
Assistant City Manager for Development Services Jim
Bertram recommended including Cherry Point and an
area west of the DePauw-McLarty Addition in the
final descriptions of the Enterprise Zones.
According to staff memo, the City of Lubbock has
been looking at the possibility of establishing
Enterprise Zones for several years. An Enterprise
Zone is defined as "an economically depressed area
that is designated to have various incentives to
promote investment and development in the district".
The State of Texas allows Enterprise Zones,
requiring the following:
1. The unemployment rate within the
zone must be fifty percent above the
state-wide average.
2. The poverty rate must be twenty
percent above the city-wide average.
February 11, 1993
Page 121
3. The land area must be below twenty
square miles.
4. The zone incentives which are
established will be effective for a
maximum of seven years.
Following the work session item at the last City
Council meeting, the Enterprise Zone Task Force
reassembled to discuss participation by the Lubbock
Independent School District and the County in the
incentive package to be included in the Enterprise
Zones. The revisions made by the Enterprise Zone
Task Force are:
1. Residential, commercial, and
industrial tax abatement were
separated in the incentive package.
Local residential and commercial
incentives no longer need to qualify
under state definition as a
"qualified project". This would
mean that while there is a limit on
four state qualified projects, there
would not be a similar limit on
residential or commercial projects
that would qualify for local
incentives.
2. For residential and commercial tax
abatement, the City, County, and
Lubbock Independent School District
could participate. The Lubbock
County Commissioners passed a
favorable resolution on February 8.
The LISD Board was expected to pass
a similar resolution at 7 p.m. on
February 11.
3. Local sales and use tax refunds to
"qualified businesses", and refunds
of sales tax for creation of jobs
for "qualified employees" could only
be endorsed by the County, since
Lubbock Independent School District
does not collect sales tax.
4. The Enterprise Zone ordinance
assumes participation by Lubbock
Independent School District and the
County on tax abatement, and the
County on local sales tax refunds to
qualified businesses and for
qualified employees. If official
approval is not received on these
items, the Enterprise Zone ordinance
would have to be amended before
second reading.
If the Enterprise Zone ordinance is passed on first
reading, changes can still be made before second
reading on February 18. Also, specific policies to
carry out tax abatement and sales tax refunds, can
be drafted as official Enterprise Zone policies by
the Enterprise Zone Task Force, and can be
officially adopted by the City Council, Lubbock
Independent School District Board, and County
Commissioners, after proper discussion and hearings.
Staff recommended passage of the ordinance.
February 11, 1993
Page 122
Motion was made by Councilmember Neugebauer,
seconded by Councilmember Aderton to pass on first
reading Ordinance #9591 as recommended by Staff.
Motion carried: 5 Yeas; 0 Nays--Councilmember Cooke
and Councilmember Patterson recused.
The Council recessed at 3:10 p.m. Mayor Langston announced that the
Council would reconvene at 4:00 p.m.
The Council reconvened at 4:07 p.m.
93-52A-122-89
(26.)
RESOLUTION #4076
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
Contract of Sale by and between the City of Lubbock and Southwest Little
League, 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 if fully copied herein in detail.
Passed by the City Council this llth day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Beatriz M. Rodriguez for
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Ed Bucv
Ed Bucy, Right -of -Way Agent
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Harold Willard
Harold Willard, Assisant City Attorney
THE STATE OF TEXAS §
CONTRACT OF SALE
COUNTY OF LUBBOCK §
This Contract of Sale is made by and between the CITY OF LUBBOCK,
TEXAS, a home -rule municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City," and
SOUTHWEST LITTLE LEAGUE, a non-profit Texas corporation, hereinafter
called "Grantor."
February 11, 1993
Page 123
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Grantor has title to a 3.493 acre tract of land in
Lubbock County, Texas, which the City would like to acquire for park
purposes; and
WHEREAS, Grantor desires that capital improvements be made to the
little league baseball fields at Maxey Park in Lubbock, Texas, which
Grantor utilizes from time to time; NOW THEREFORE:
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTRACT HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
I.
CONSIDERATION
Grantor agrees to convey to the City and the City agrees to accept
from the Grantor the 3.493 acre tract of land described in Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein as part of this Agreement,
together with all the rights and appurtenances pertaining thereto and
all improvements thereon, in exchange for which the City agrees to
expend approximately Thirty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($30,000) for
capital improvements to the little league baseball fields at Maxey Park.
However, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as
giving Grantor any right, title or interest in Maxey Park or in any of
the capital improvements made to the little league baseball fields on
park property.
II.
TIME FOR PERFORMANCE
City shall have three (3) full years from the date this Agreement
is executed to complete the capital improvements contemplated by this
Agreement but shall endeavor to construct and install approximately
one-third of such improvements in each of those years unless otherwise
agreed by the parties.
PRIORITY LIST
Grantor has developed for the City a priority list of needed
capital improvements for Maxey Park, which list shall serve as a guide
for the City in determining what improvements should be constructed on
park premises. Such list is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated
hereto as part of this Agreement. Grantor may amend Exhibit B at any
time, but the City shall not be obligated to construct improvements on
park premises in the exact order in which such improvements are
prioritized on Exhibit B or to expend a greater sum for such
improvements than agreed to herein.
IV.
RESTRICTIONS ON CONVEYANCE
The conveyance of the property described in Exhibit A shall be
subject to all written oil, gas and other mineral leases, restrictions,
covenants, reservations and mineral severances and rights -of -way of
record in Lubbock County, Texas, or visible upon the ground, but only to
the extent they are still in force and effect at the time of such
conveyance.
V.
TAXES
All ad valorem taxes for the property described in Exhibit A, if
any, shall be paid by Grantor prior to the date of closing.
February 11, 1993
Page 124
VI.
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
The obligation of the City to consummate this transaction is
subject to the Grantor at or prior to closing, providing to the City
such legal documents as may be required to consummate this transaction,
including a quit claim deed conveying to the City all of Grantor's
right, title and interest in and to that certain tract or parcel of land
described in Exhibit A.
VII.
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
This Contract and all covenants and agreements herein shall inure
to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and upon their
respective successors and assigns.
VIII.
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPERTY
City represents that is has inspected the real property to be
conveyed and agrees to accept such property and all improvements thereon
conveyed AS IS, WHERE IS and WITH ALL OF THEIR FAULTS; and said property
is being conveyed to the City without any warranty as to quality or
fitness, save and except those representations made in the quit claim
deed executed by Grantor.
IX.
FEES
City and Grantor represent to each other that neither party has
retained a realtor or broker with respect to this Contract of Sale and
no realtor or broker fees are due to any party.
X.
CLOSING
Closing shall take place on February 21, 1993, at the office of
the title company selected by the City, or such other place agreed to by
the parties.
XI.
ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Contract of Sale embodies the entire agreement and
understanding of the parties and supersedes any and all prior letters of
intent, agreements, arrangements and understandings relative to the
subject matter hereof.
February 11, 1993
Page 125
XII.
COUNTERPARTS
This Contract may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of
which shall be effective as an original.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract
of Sale, effective this 11th day of February, 1993.
CITY OF LUBBOCK
BY:/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Beatriz M. Rodriguez for
Sally Still Abbe, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Ed Bucv
Ed Bucy, Right -of -Way Agent
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Harold Willard
Harold Willard, Assistant City Attorney
THE STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF LUBBOCK §
SOUTHWEST LITTLE LEAGUE
BY:/s/ David L. True
DAVID L. TRUE, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
/s/ Vickie Blackwell
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for
said County, Texas, on this day personally appeared DAVID R. LANGSTON,
Mayor of the City of Lubbock, known to me to be the person whose name is
subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed
and in the capacity therein stated as the act and deed of the City of
Lubbock.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this 16th day of February,
1993.
/s/ Olivia R. Solis
Notary Public in and for
the State of Texas
THE STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF LUBBOCK §
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for
said County, Texas, on this day personally appeared DAVID L. TRUE,
President of Southwest Little League, known to me to be the person whose
name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me
that he executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein
expressed and in the capacity therein stated as the act and deed of
Southwest Little League.
February 11, 1993
Page 126
1993.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this 12th day of January,
/s/ Robin Golden
Notary Public in and for
the State of Texas
A copy of Exhibits "A" and "B" are filed with Resolution No. 4076.
Jim Bertram, Assistant City Manager for Development
Services, presented staff comments. This resolution
authorizes the Mayor to sign a Contract of Sale with
Southwest Little League for a 3.493 acre tract of
land adjacent to the northeast corner of Clapp Park.
Southwest Little League has agreed to transfer this
land over to the City in exchange for $30,000 in
capital improvements to their Little League baseball
fields at Maxey Park. These improvements include
moving a scoreboard, concrete work around the
concession stand, infield soil, storage/scorer
building, bleachers, and reworking the bull pen
areas, all of which are to be done over the next
three years. The Parks Department has agreed to do
these improvements.
The Appraisal District has the adjacent property to
this tract valued at $1.25 per square foot which
would indicate a value of about $190,000 for this
tract of land. The Right -Of -Way Department values
this tract at around $35,000, considerably less due
to its mostly being in a flood zone. Southwest
Little League hasn't used this field in a couple of
years and it has grown up in weeds and is a
maintenance problem for them. After removing their
existing improvements, staff can easily mow the
acreage and keep it maintained.
Staff recommended the approval of this contract and
acceptance of a special Warranty Deed from
Southwest. The acquisition of this will add more
land to Clapp Park for future development.
Motion was made by Councilmember Aderton, seconded
by Councilmember Cooke to authorize Resolution #4076
as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0
Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 127
93-52A-127-90
(27.) Consider Resolution #4077 approving a Funding
Agreement between the City of Lubbock and Guadalupe
Economic Services Corporation.
RESOLUTION #4077
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
Funding Agreement with Guadalupe Economic Services Corporation for
services under the HOPE 3 Homeownership Program. Said Agreement is
attached hereto and incorporated in this Resolution as if fully set
forth herein and shall be included in the minutes of the Council.
Passed by the City Council this 11th day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
I:10l*11>F
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting City
Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Sandy Ogletree
Sandy Ogletree, Community Development
Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Linda L. Chamales
Linda L. Chamales, Assistant City
Attorney
FUNDING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF LUBBOCK AND
GUADALUPE ECONOMIC SERVICES CORPORATION
THE STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF LUBBOCK §
This Agreement is entered into between the City of Lubbock, Texas,
a home rule municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City" and
Guadalupe Economic Services, a nonprofit corporation incorporated under
the laws of the State of Texas, hereinafter called "Corporation".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City is obligated to do and perform certain services
in its undertaking of the HOPE 3 Homeownership Program; and
WHEREAS, the Corporation is a nonprofit corporation offering
services to families throughout Lubbock; and
WHEREAS, the Corporation and the services it provides have been
found to meet the criteria for funding under provisions of OMB Circular
Nos. A-110 and A-122 for Nonprofit Recipients; and
February 11, 1993
Page 128
WHEREAS, the rehabilitation and conversion of single-family houses
for low and moderate income families is fundable by the Department of
Housing and Urban Development; and
WHEREAS, the provision of affordable housing to low and moderate
income families is the predominant purpose of the transaction;
continuing supervision by the City together with statutory and
contractual requirements provide sufficient assurance that this purpose
will be accomplished; and an audit provides sufficient protection of the
handling of public money;
NOW THEREFORE, the City and Corporation do hereby mutually agree
as follows:
SECTION 1. AGREEMENT PERIOD
This agreement shall commence on
terminate immediately after selection
purchasers under this program.
SECTION 2. MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS
October 6, 1992, and shall
of the second pool of HOPE 3
A. Corporation shall conduct pre -purchase counseling and training
for potential HOPE 3 homeowners. Corporation shall perform all
activities in accordance with the terms of the Revised Memorandum of
Understanding, hereinafter referred to as Exhibit A; the Budget,
hereinafter referred to as Exhibit B; the Applicable Laws and
Regulations, hereinafter referred to as Exhibit C; the assurances,
certifications, and all other statements made by Corporation in its
application for the project funded under this agreement; and with all
other terms, provisions, and requirements set forth in this agreement.
B. In consideration of full and satisfactory performance of the
activities referred to in paragraph A of this section, City shall pay to
the Corporation Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) at the close of the
first phase of the Hope 3 program as defined in Exhibit A, and an
additional Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) at the close of the second
phase of the Hope 3 program as defined in Exhibit A, for a total of Ten
Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00).
C. Corporation shall be responsible for payment of all costs
incurred by Corporation in performance of this agreement, and the total
of all payments and other obligations incurred by City under this
agreement shall not exceed the sum of Ten Thousand and No/100 Dollars
($10,000.00).
SECTION 3. UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND COST
PRINCIPLES
A. Corporation shall comply with Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circulars Nos. A-110 and A-122.
SECTION 4. RETENTION AND ACCESSIBILITY OF RECORDS
A. Corporation shall comply with the retention and custodial
requirements for records specified in Attachment C of OMB Circular No.
A-110.
B. Corporation shall give the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development, the Inspector General, the Comptroller General of
the United States, and City, or any of their duly authorized
representatives, access to and the right to examine all books, accounts,
records, reports, files, and other papers, things or property belonging
to or in use by Corporation pertaining to this agreement for funding
under the HOPE 3 program. Such right shall continue as long as the
records are retained by Corporation.
February 11, 1993
Page 129
SECTION 5. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. Corporation shall submit to City such reports on the operation
and performance of this agreement as may be required by City including,
but not limited to, the reports specified in this section.
B. Corporation shall submit to City an annual performance report.
Such report shall be in a format prescribed by City.
The initial annual performance report is required for the period
ending December 31 following the execution of this agreement, and is due
no later than 10 days after December 31. Corporation must continue to
submit this report annually until all HOPE 3 servicing funds set aside
for Corporation under the total grant budget are expended.
C. In addition to the limitations on liability otherwise
specified in this agreement, it is expressly understood and agreed by
the parties hereto that if Corporation fails to submit to City in a
timely and satisfactory manner any report required by this agreement,
City may, at its sole option and in its sole discretion, withhold any or
all payments otherwise due or requested by Corporation hereunder. If
City withholds such payments, it shall notify Corporation in writing of
its decision and the reasons therefor. Payments withheld pursuant to
this paragraph may be held by City until such time as the delinquent
obligations for which funds are withheld are fulfilled by Corporation.
SECTION 6. MONITORING
City reserves the right to monitor Corporation's compliance with
the terms and conditions of this agreement. City shall provide
Corporation with a written report of the monitor's findings and include
a requirement for correction of such deficiencies within a reasonable
time period.
SECTION 7. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
It is expressly understood and agreed by the parties hereto that
City is contracting with Corporation as an Independent Contractor, and
that Corporation, as such, agrees to hold City harmless and to indemnify
City from and against any and all claims, demands, and causes of action
of every kind and character which may be asserted by any third party
occurring or in any way incident to, arising out of, or in connection
with the services to be performed by Corporation under this agreement,
or by the negligence of its agents or employees. Corporation shall give
to City prompt and timely written notice of any claim instituted which
in any way, directly or indirectly, contingently or otherwise, affects
or might affect City, and City shall have the right to compromise and
defend same to the extent of its own interests.
The Corporation shall not at any time or in any manner represent
that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or
employees of the City.
SECTION 8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
In addition to the requirements of OMB Circular No. A-110 and 24
CFR Part 85, Corporation shall ensure that no person who is an employee,
agent, consultant, officer, or elected or appointed official of City or
Corporation, who exercises or has exercised any functions or
responsibilities with respect to activities performed pursuant to this
agreement, or who is in a position to participate in a decision making
process or gain inside information with regard to such activities, may
obtain a personal or financial interest or benefit from the activity, or
have an interest in any contract, subcontract, or agreement with respect
to the activity or the proceeds of any contract, subcontract, agreement
related to the activity, either for himself or herself or those with
whom he or she has family or business ties, during his or her tenure or
for one year thereafter.
February 11, 1993
Page 130
SECTION 9. LEGAL AUTHORITY
A. Corporation assures and guarantees that Corporation possesses
the legal authority to enter into this agreement to receive funds
authorized by this agreement, and to perform the services Corporation
has obligated itself to perform hereunder.
B. The person or persons signing and executing this agreement on
behalf of Corporation, or representing themselves as signing and
executing this agreement on behalf of Corporation, do hereby warrant and
guarantee that he, she or they have been duly authorized by Corporation
to execute this agreement on behalf of Corporation and to validly and
legally bind Corporation to all terms, performances, and provisions
herein set forth.
C. City shall have the right to suspend or terminate this
agreement if there is a dispute as to the legal authority of either
Corporation or the person signing this agreement to enter into this
agreement or to render performances hereunder. Corporation is liable to
City for any money it has received from City for performance of the
provisions of this agreement if City has suspended or terminated this
agreement for reasons enumerated in this Section.
SECTION 10. LITIGATION AND CLAIMS
Corporation shall give City immediate notice in writing of 1) any
action, including any proceeding before an administrative agency, filed
against Corporation arising out of the performance of any subcontract
hereunder; and 2) any claim against Corporation, the cost and expense of
which Corporation may be entitled to have reimbursed by City. Except as
otherwise directed by City, Corporation shall furnish immediately to
City copies of all pertinent papers received by Corporation with respect
to such actions or claims.
SECTION 11. SECTARIAN ACTIVITY
None of the performances rendered by Corporation under this
agreement shall involve and no portion of the funds received by
Corporation under this agreement shall be used in support of any
sectarian or religious activity.
SECTION 12. CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS
A. Except as specifically provided otherwise in this agreement,
any alterations, additions, or deletions to the terms of this agreement
shall be by amendment hereto in writing and executed by both parties to
this agreement.
B. Any alterations, additions, or deletions to the terms of this
agreement which are required by changes in Federal law or regulations
are automatically incorporated into this agreement without written
amendment hereto, and shall become effective on the date designated by
such law or regulation.
SECTION 13. TERMINATION
A. Notwithstanding the provisions of Texas Civil Statutes,
Article 601f, in the event that Corporation fails to comply with any
term of this agreement, City may, upon written notification to
Corporation, suspend or terminate this agreement in whole or in part and
withhold further payments to Corporation, and prohibit Corporation from
incurring additional obligations of funds under this agreement. City
will provide Corporation with an opportunity to respond before
suspending or terminating this agreement. City shall not be liable for
costs incurred after suspension or termination of this agreement, but
shall be liable for costs incurred prior to termination.
February 11, 1993
Page 131
B. Either of the parties to this agreement shall have the right
to terminate this agreement, in whole or in part, when both parties
agree that the continuation of the activities funded under this
agreement would not produce beneficial results commensurate with the
further expenditure of funds; provided that both parties agree, in
writing, upon the termination conditions, including the effective date
of such termination; and in the case of partial termination, the portion
of the agreement to be terminated.
SECTION 14. AUDIT
A. City reserves the right to conduct a financial and compliance
audit of funds received and performances rendered under this agreement.
Corporation agrees to permit City, the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development, or their authorized representatives to audit
Corporation's records relating to the funds received and performances
rendered under this agreement for funding in the HOPE 3 program, and to
obtain any documents, materials, or information necessary to facilitate
such audit.
B. Corporation shall take such action to facilitate the
performance of such audit or audits conducted pursuant to this Section
18 as City or the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development may
require of Corporation.
SECTION 15. ORAL AND WRITTEN AGREEMENTS
A. All oral and written agreements between the parties to this
agreement relating to the subject matter of this agreement that were
made prior to the execution of this agreement have been reduced to
writing and are contained in this agreement. This agreement supersedes
the Memorandum of Understanding in the Implementation Grant, Exhibit 2C
(pages 34-35) and Exhibit 4 (page 45).
B. The attachments enumerated and denominated below are hereby
made a part of this agreement, and constitute promised performances by
Corporation in accordance with Section 2 of this agreement.
1. Exhibit A, Revised Memorandum of Understanding, 1 page
2. Exhibit B, Budget, 1 page
3. Exhibit C, Applicable Laws and Regulations, 2 pages
For purposes of determining venue and the law governing this agreement,
activities under this agreement are performed in the City and County of
Lubbock, State of Texas.
This agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties; and no
representations, inducements or other covenants between the parties not
included herein shall be of any force or effect.
February 11, 1993
Page 132
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Corporation have executed
this Agreement as of the first day above written.
CITY OF LUBBOCK
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting City
Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Sandy Ogletree
Sandy Ogletree, Community
Development Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Linda L. Chamales
Linda L. Chamales, Assistant
City Attorney
GUADALUPE ECONONIC
SERVICES CORPORATION
/s/ Benny R. Aguilar
CHAIRPERSON, BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
ATTEST:
/s/ No Signature
Secretary
/s/ Richard Lopez
Executive Director
A copy of Exhibits "A", "B", and "C" are filed with Resolution No. 4077.
Jim Bertram, Assistant City Manager for Development
Services, presented staff comments. This Funding
Agreement is pursuant to the City of Lubbock HOPE
III Implementation Grant Application for 1992 passed
and approved by the City Council on March 26, 1992.
The City's HOPE III Application to HUD required the
participation of a local non-profit and Guadalupe
Economic Services Corporation agreed to participate
in the program. A Memorandum of Understanding by
and between GESC and the Community Development
Department of the City was included as part of the
original HOPE III application of the City. This
follow-up action is to set out with more specificity
the expectations as to the extent of services and
scheduling of funding.
The agreement runs from October, 1992 and terminates
immediately following the selection of the second
pool of HOPE III purchases under the program. The
corporation is responsible for conducting
prepurchasing counselling and training for potential
HOPE III homeowners. The City is required to pay
the corporation $5,000 at the close of the first
phase of the program and an additional $5,000 at the
close of the second phase of the program.
The contract also has standard provisions with
regard to the retention and accessibility of
records, reporting requirements, monitoring, etc.
Staff recommended approval of this item.
Motion was made by Councilmember Cooke, seconded by
Councilmember Patterson to authorize Resolution
#4077 as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7
Yeas; 0 Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 133
93-52A-133-91
(28.)
RESOLUTION #4078
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 an
Emergency Shelter Grant Application for the year 1993 and related
documents. Said Application is attached hereto and incorporated in this
Resolution as if fully set forth herein and shall be included in the
minutes of the Council.
Passed by the City Council this 11th day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Sandy Ogletree
Sandy Ogletree, Community Development
Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Linda L. Chamales
Linda L. Chamales, Assistant City
Attorney
A copy of the Grant Application is filed with Resolution No. 4078.
Jim Bertram, Assistant City Manager for Development
Services, presented staff comments. According to
staff memo, the Emergency Shelter Grant Program has
as its goal the directing of funds for the homeless
so that these persons have access not only to safe
and sanitary shelters, but also to the supportive
services and other kinds of assistance they need to
improve their situations. The funding for this
grant for FY 1993 is $38,000. This is a decrease of
32 percent from the fiscal year 1992 allocation of
$56,000. A Request for Proposals will be published
in the Lubbock Avalanche Journal which will invite
non-profit agencies to submit applications for the
funds. In addition, a copy of the RFP will be
mailed directly to area organizations which assist
or come into contact with Lubbock's homeless.
The Emergency Shelter Grant Program may provide
assistance to the homeless through eligible
activities, including the rehabilitation or
conversion of buildings for use as emergency
shelters for the homeless; the payment of certain
operating expenses; the payment of expenses for
essential services in connection with emergency
shelters for the homeless; and development of
homeless prevention activities. No more than 20% of
the grant may be utilized for the payment of
essential services without a waiver from HUD. There
February 11, 1993
Page 134
is a matching component which requires that the City
of Lubbock or a non-profit subrecipient match the
amount of the grant with either direct or indirect
contributions. In addition, the regulations
authorize the use of 5% of the allocation for
administrative costs.
Non-profit organizations will apply for funding and
a public hearing will be held by the City Council in
late April. At that time, program funding will be
considered. For the City of Lubbock to participate
in the ESGP, the grant application must be submitted
to HUD by February 21, 1993.
Staff recommended approval.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Councilmember Aderton to authorize Resolution
#4078 as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7
Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-134-92
(29.) Consider Resolution #4079 authorizing the Mayor to
execute a Land Lease Agreement with the United
States of America for a National Weather Service
Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) unit at
Lubbock International Airport.
RESOLUTION #4079
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 U. S.
Government Lease for Real Property with the United States of America for
a National Weather Service Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) site,
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 if fully copied herein in detail.
Passed by the City Council this 11th day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Bern Case
Bern Case, Director of Aviation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Anthony J. Williams
Anthony J. Williams, Assistant City
Attorney
A copy of the Lease is filed with Resolution No. 4079.
February 11, 1993
Page 135
Jim Bertram, Assistant City Manager for Development
Services, presented staff comments. According to
staff memo, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), which is the Department of
Commerce agency under which the National Weather
Service (NWS) operates, is preparing to install a
NEXRAD radar at the Lubbock International Airport.
This is an upgrade of the present NWS radar that
greatly enhances the amount of information that can
be gathered about local atmospheric conditions. The
most significant enhancement is the ability to
detect wind velocities and wind sheer vectors
through the Doppler effect that will enable the NWS
to observe pretornadic circulations.
This enhancement will add to the warning time
available and accuracy of monitoring these
conditions, which will in turn greatly enhance the
safety of the citizens of the South Plains when
faced with weather -related dangerous situations.
This radar site is being provided to the government
at no charge pursuant to the regulation stipulated
in the Airport and Airway Improvement Act.
Aeronautical studies have been done by the FAA, the
City Attorney has reviewed the lease, and the
Airport Board has recommended to the Council that
the contract be approved for execution. Staff
recommended approval.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilmember Aderton to authorize Resolution #4079
as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0
Nays.
L..
February 11, 1993
Page 136
93-52A-136-93
(30.)
RESOLUTION #4080
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 an
Addendum No. 2 to the Airline Lease Agreement between the City of
Lubbock and Rocky Mountain Airways d/b/a Continental Express, 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 if fully copied herein in detail.
Passed by the City Council this llth day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Bern Case
Bern Case, Director of Aviation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Anthony J. Williams
Anthony J. Williams, Assistant City
Attorney
ADDDENDUM NO. 2
TO AIRLINE LEASE AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS,
AND
ROCKY MOUNTAIN AIRWAYS, D/B/A
CONTINENTAL EXPRESS
WHEREAS, the CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, hereinafter referred to as
"City," and ROCKY MOUNTAIN AIRWAYS, d/b/a CONTINENTAL EXPRESS,
hereinafter referred to as "Lessee," entered into a Lease Agreement on
May 1, 1990, for space and facilities at the Lubbock International
Airport; and
WHEREAS, Lessee requested that it be allowed to relocate its
ticketing operations at the Airport; and
WHEREAS, the Airport Board of the City believes that such
relocation would be in the best interest of the citizens of the City and
recommends that the City Council of the City approve of the relocation
by authorizing the Mayor to execute this Addendum to the May 1, 1990
Agreement;
February 11, 1993
Page 137
NOW THEREFORE, the Certificated Passenger Airline Lease
hereinabove referred to is hereby amended as follows:
1. Article II, Section 2.01 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 2.01 - Description of Exclusive Leased Premises.
The Exclusive Leased Premises shall consist of 3.543
square feet, more or less, in the terminal building of the
Airport.
2. The first sentence of Article VII, Section 7.01 is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Rental for the 3,543 square feet of exclusive leased
space within the terminal building of the Airport, as
described in Section 2.01, shall consist of a fixed fee of
$5.63 per square foot per year (to cover debt service) and a
variable sum for Maintenance and Operation (M & 0) costs.
3. Notwithstanding the date on which this Addendum is executed,
Lessee herein agrees to pay City rentals for the 3,543 square feet
of exclusive leased space referred to in Amended Sections 2.01 and
7.01 as though this Addendum had been executed and became
effective on October 1, 1992.
4. The new location of the Exclusive Leased Premises herein leased to
Lessee shall be designated and set forth on Exhibit A attached
hereto and by this reference made a part of this Addendum for all
purposes.
5. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement entered into
between the City and Lessee on May 1, 1990, except as modified
above and by Addendum No. 1 executed by both parties hereto on or
about September 24, 1992, shall remain in full force and effect to
the extent permitted by law.
EXECUTED this 11th day of February, 1993.
CITY OF LUBBOCK
BY:/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Acting City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Bern E. Case
Bern E. Case, Director of
Aviation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Harold Willard
Harold Willard, Assistant
City Attorney
ROCKY MOUNTAIN AIRWAYS
D/B/A CONTINENTAL EXPRESS
BY:/s/ Sam Ashmore
Sam Ashmore
ATTEST:
/s/ Name Not Legible
A copy of Exhibit "A" is filed with Resolution No. 4080.
February 11, 1993
Page 138
Jim Bertram, Assistant City Manager for Development
Services, presented staff comments. According to
staff memo, Continental Express presently serves
Lubbock with two daily direct flights to Denver to
connect with Continental's banks at the Denver hub.
Continental is serving Lubbock with ATR 42's, which
are 42-passenger jet -prop aircraft.
In an effort to attract more passengers and freight
business, Continental Express has moved into larger
quarters, almost tripling the exclusive space they
rent from the Airport, and increasing the amount of
rent owed to the Airport for exclusive space from
$1,311 per month to approximately $3,600 per month
or a total of $43,200 per year. This agreement will
be an amendment to their existing standard airline
lease.
Airport staff recommended this lease to the Airport
Board, which unanimously approved it in an effort to
provide Continental this new space capability which
could encourage Continental to expand their
operations here. Staff recommended approval.
Motion was made by Councilmember Ince, seconded by
Councilmember Patterson to authorize Resolution
#4080 as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7
Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-138-94
(31.) Consider approval of the proposed Civic Center
marquee on public right-of-way.
Vicki Key, Deputy Director of Operations and
Booking, presented staff comments. She showed plans
and elevations for the proposed marquee west of the
Buddy Holly statue near Avenue Q.
According to staff memo, in April of 1992, the City
Council decided that the hotel/motel tax revenues of
2 1/4 cents devoted to debt service on the Civic
Center would be reallocated for Civic Center
improvements. At that same time, a 5-year plan for
Civic Center improvements was presented and
approved. Funding for the plan was to begin with
fiscal year 1992-93. Several projects were included
in this plan, including the purchase and
installation of a marquee during fiscal year 1992-93
to inform the public of events taking place at the
Civic Center.
The location for the marquee is between Avenue Q and
the fountain on 8th Street. There are three
peculiarities which make this project unique: 1) The
proposed location is not a separate parcel of land,
but a public right-of-way; 2) As a sign in a public
right-of-way, the marquee is not subject to the
zoning ordinance; and, 3) This is a public (or
"governmental") project. For these reasons, this
proposal is being presented to the Council for
review and for approval.
February 11, 1993
Page 139
Representatives from various City departments have
been involved in evaluating the proposed project and
preparing this request. It is the opinion of the
Planning Department that the Zoning Board of
Adjustment does not have jurisdiction in this case.
The zoning code clearly leaves the jurisdiction for
signs in a public right-of-way to the City Council.
Were a proponent from the private sector seeking
approval, the process would typically involve the
approval of a street -use permit. Since the City
does not issue permits to itself, staff requested
that Council review the proposal and take minuted
action.
The marquee will be a two-sided, electronic message
center and will be installed in the existing planter
bed just west of the Avenue Q Fountain. The marquee
itself will contain a message cabinet measuring
19'8" long by 2111" high and will provide for 2
lines of 12-inch high letters for messages. The
message cabinet will then be encased in a frame,
thereby making the total dimension of the marquee
itself approximately 20 feet long by 4 1/2 feet
high. There will be approximately 10 feet of
clearance between the bottom of the marquee and the
top of the planter bed to protect the marquee from
possible vandalism. Including the 5 foot height of
the planter, the total height of the sign will be
approximately 20 feet. If this were a private piece
of property, the marquee would comply with the
guidelines established by the zoning code, except
that the marquee has an electronic message center.
Such electronic reader boards, other than those with
time, temperature, and news messages, are prohibited
from being within 1,000 feet from a street
intersection. The staff feels that messages
regarding public events are "news" as permitted by
the definition noted above.
Based on the premise that this is a public project
located on a public right-of-way and complies with
the guidelines governing signs in a public
right-of-way, staff recommended approval.
Motion was made by Councilmember Neugebauer,
seconded by Councilmember Ince to approve the
proposed Civic Center marquee on public right-of-way
as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0
Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 140
93-52A-140-95
(32.)
RESOLUTION #4081
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the Health Department of the City of Lubbock BE and is hereby
authorized and directed to execute for and on behalf of the City of
Lubbock an application for the WIC (Women, Infant, Children) Nutrition
Program.
Passed by the City Council this llth day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Doug Goodman
Doug Goodman, Public Health
Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Donald G. Vandiver
Donald G. Vandiver, First Assistant
City Attorney
A copy of the WIC Application is filed with Resolution No. 4081.
Doug Goodman, Public Health Director, presented the,
staff comments.
According to staff memo, for the past four months,
the Lubbock WIC (Women, Infants, and Children)
Program has been housed in the City of Lubbock
Health Department. This arrangement was entered
into at the request of the Texas Department of
Health Region 2 Director, with City Council
permission. This arrangement has proven itself to
be satisfactory to the clients, the Lubbock Health
Department, and the Texas Department of Health.
In late December, Ms. Jacquelyn Dosch from the Texas
Department of Health met with the Health Director to
discuss the WIC program. As a result of that
meeting, the Health Department was asked to submit a
proposal to the Texas Department of Health to manage
the Lubbock WIC program for FYE 9/30/93. The
proposal would begin immediately upon completion of
a contract and would end on September 30, 1993. The
Texas Department of Health awards this program based
on the past performance of the applicant. The
specific details of the contract are negotiated
after the contract is awarded. All expenses
associated with the program, including rental of the
space occupied, staff, benefits, supplies,
equipment, and utilities, are reimbursed by the
grant. Once a contract is negotiated, it will be
presented to Council for final approval.
February 11, 1993
Page 141
The budget for the program is determined by a
formula which is based on the number of clients
served. This formula will be developed after the
contract is awarded. Currently, the WIC program
serves approximately 6,000 clients per month and
employs 15 FTE staff. The State estimates that the
Lubbock program should serve 8,000 clients per
month. The Health Department will provide the
services from the Health Department, as well as set
up satellite services as desired by Texas Department
of Health. Those most likely will be at Reese AFB,
New Directions, and other sites as needed. Based on
the past performance, the Lubbock WIC program is
cost efficient.
The continuity of care which would be provided for
the clients; the accessibility of the current
location; and the continued benefits for both the
City Health Department clients and the WIC clients
lead staff to believe that this application is good
for the citizens of Lubbock.
Staff recommended that the City Council allow the
City Health Department to submit a proposal to the
Texas Department of Health; requesting that the
management of the Lubbock WIC program be contracted
to the Lubbock City Health Department.
Councilmember Neugebauer asked if adding satellite
programs would dilute the WIC funding. Mr. Goodman
responded that the state will add employees and
funding to meet the needs of the satellite programs.
Councilmember Neugebauer then inquired whether the
funding for the program was in jeopardy. Mr.
Goodman answered that WIC is USDA funded, and,
thanks to a Texas lawsuit several years ago about
competitive bidding for baby formula, is an
efficient and cost effective program. Councilmember
Trejo commented that children's program would
probably not be cut.
Mayor Langston asked why the City was asked to
administer the program rather than Texas Tech Health
Sciences Center or the Lubbock Community Health
Clinic. Mr. Goodman responded that the request was
made because the City has had contracts with the
Texas Department of Health for several years, has a
good track record of cooperation with community
agencies, and sees large numbers of pediatric and
prenatal clients who would be served by WIC.
Motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo, seconded by
Councilmember Aderton to authorize Resolution #4081
as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0
Nays.
February 11, 1993
Page 142
93-52A-142-96
(33.)
the General Services Commission.
RESOLUTION #4082
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas, pursuant
to the authority granted it by Section 271.083 of the Local Government
Code, as amended, desires to participate in described purchasing
programs of the General Services Commission of the State of Texas; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lubbock is of the opinion
that participation in these programs will be highly beneficial to the
taxpayers of the City of Lubbock through the anticipated savings to be
realized; NOW THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the City of Lubbock hereby requests that the General Services
Commission allow the City of Lubbock to participate in the purchasing
program of the General Services Commission and include its stated need
on the Commission's annual contracts; and
THAT the Purchasing Manager is authorized and directed to sign and
deliver all necessary requests and other documents in connection
therewith for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock; and
THAT the City Council of the City of Lubbock hereby acknowledges
the City of Lubbock's responsibility to pay participation fees
established by the Commission; and
THAT the City will be responsible for submitting requisitions to
the Commission, paying the vendor directly, and for insuring the
vendor's compliance with all conditions of delivery and quality of the
purchased item; and
THAT purchases under this program are deemed by law to be in
compliance with any state laws requiring purchases to be made by
competitive bids; and
THAT the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to
forward a certified copy of this Resolution to the General Services
Commission.
Passed by the City Council this llth day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Robert Massengale
Robert Massengale, Assistant City
Manager for Financial Services
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Donald G. Vandiver
Donald G. Vandiver, First Assistant
City Attorney
February 11, 1993
Page 143
Robert Massengale, Assistant City Manager for
Financial Services, presented staff comments.
According to staff memo, cooperative purchasing is
one of the ways that local governments can save time
and money in their purchasing programs by
coordinating some or all of their purchasing needs
to the mutual benefit of all the entities concerned.
Some of the most common benefits are:
1. Lower costs through increased
volume.
2. Lower (shared) administrative costs.
3. Improved response from vendors.
4. Shared experience leading to better
product specifications.
5. Better compliance with state
statutes on purchasing.
Under provisions of Local Government Code, Sections
271.081-271.083, the General Services Commission
(GSC) has established a cooperative purchasing
program. This program allows a local government to
purchase products available on state automated
purchasing contracts, and allows the state to
solicit bids on the local government's behalf. In
addition to the above -mentioned benefits of
cooperative purchasing, many recycled products are
available through the GSC program to help meet the
purchasing requirements of S.B. 1340, the Omnibus
Recycling Act.
Staff recommended that the City of Lubbock
participate in the cooperative purchasing program of
the General Services Commission and that the City
Council adopt a resolution to that effect. After
the General Services Commission receives the City's
resolution and annual participation fee (currently
$150.00), they will return a complete contract
catalog on microfiche and a supply of order forms.
Motion was made by Councilmember Neugebauer,
seconded by Councilmember Patterson to authorize
Resolution #4082 as recommended by Staff. Motion
carried: 7 Yeas; 0 Nays.
93-52A-143-97
(34.) Consider Resolution #4083 authorizing a joint
election with Lubbock County on May 1. 1993.
RESOLUTION #4083
WHEREAS, the City of Lubbock and Lubbock County are both
conducting elections on May 1, 1993; and
WHEREAS, Section 271.002 of the Texas Election Code provides for
joint elections when an election is required to be held upon the same
day by two or more political subdivisions occupying all or part of the
same territory; and
February 11, 1993
Page 144
WHEREAS, it is deemed to be in the best interest of the citizens
residing in the City of Lubbock and Lubbock County to have a joint
election on May 1, 1993, pursuant to the above cited provision of the
Election Code, NOW THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK AND THE COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF LUBBOCK COUNTY ACTING JOINTLY:
THAT a joint election of the City of Lubbock and Lubbock County be
conducted on May 1, 1993, under provisions of the Texas Election Code
and other applicable laws and in accordance with the following agreed
terms:
1) That common precinct boundaries and voting places shall be
designated by each governing body so far as is practical and expedient.
2) That a single set of election officers shall be agreed upon
and designated by both governing bodies for the conduct of the election
within the City of Lubbock. Such officers must be qualified to serve
for both political subdivisions at those precincts located within the
City of Lubbock.
3) That the election will be administered by the City Secretary
of the City of Lubbock within the city limits of the City of Lubbock
with the County Clerk serving as assistant election officer. The County
Clerk shall administer the election for all areas outside of the city
limits within Lubbock County.
4) That there will be joint early voting conducted April 12,
1993, to April 27, 1993, at the office of the City Secretary, 1625 13th
Street; the office of the County Clerk, 904 Broadway; Alderson Junior
High School, 219 Walnut; and the South Plains Mall, 6002 Slide Road.
Early voting by personal appearance shall be conducted from 8:30 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. on weekdays except official state holidays at the office of
the City Secretary, the office of the County Clerk and at Alderson
Junior High School. Early voting by personal appearance shall be
conducted from 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays except for official
state holidays at the South Plains Mall. Early voting by personal
appearance shall be conducted at all locations on the last Saturday of
the early voting period from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; on the last Sunday
of the early voting period from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.; and on the last,
two days of the early voting period from 8:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m.
5) That the preparation of election supplies, contacting of
appropriate officials and all other routing matters for those precincts
within the City of Lubbock shall be the responsibility of the City
Secretary and the County Clerk acting jointly.
6) That a joint ballot and joint ballot boxes shall be used for
this election.
7) That each political subdivision shall be responsible for
posting its own notices.
8) That the official canvassing of ballots and announcement of
results shall be done individually by each governing body.
9) That the County Clerk shall be the early voting clerk and
custodian of all records pertaining to this election.
February 11, 1993
Page 145
10) That each entity shall pay half of the common costs
attributable to the joint election activities necessary for the conduct
of this election.
Passed by the City Council this llth day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
Passed by the County Commissioners this 8th day of February, 1993.
ATTEST:
/s/ Ann Davidson
Ann Davidson
County Clerk
/s/ Don McBeath
DON McBEATH, COUNTY JUDGE
Sally Abbe, Acting City Secretary, presented staff
comments. She stated that the resolution includes
the technical details of conducting the joint
election with Lubbock County on May 1, 1993, and
that the resolution was approved by the
Commissioners Court on February 8.
According to staff memo, this resolution will allow
the City and County to jointly conduct an election
on May 1, 1993. Sharing early voting, election
officials, election day polling places, and using a
joint ballot will save the City a substantial amount
compared to the cost of the January 1993 election.
All the items in the joint resolution are consistent
with Chapter 271 of the Election Code, which
specifically addresses joint elections.
The staff recommended use of a joint ballot to
lessen confusion among voters and election
officials. The AIS tabulation system used by the
City and County requires the precinct number and
electronic coding to be included on the ballot to
allow tabulation by precinct according to state law.
The ballot for any specific precinct will only
include the candidates or propositions on which
voters in that precinct are eligible to vote.
Therefore, ballots for precincts outside the city
limits will only contain the senatorial election,
while those for precincts inside the city limits
will include both. (Note: There are no precincts
that are partially outside the city.)
Additional items for agreement include joint early
voting polling places, common election officers and
common polling places for the election. Election
worker compensation, LISD custodial fee charges and
other expenses and duties will be shared equally by
the City and County.
February 11, 1993
Page 146
93-52A-146-98
(34C.)
Ann Davidson, Lubbock County Clerk, has agreed to
serve as Early Voting Clerk and general custodian of
records for the election, and the City Secretary's
Office will be designated a Branch Early Voting
polling place. This will allow only one set of
early voting records to be created and will improve
the reporting of early voting information to the
precinct judges on election day. Early voting will
be conducted at the office of the City Secretary
(City Hall), office of the County Clerk (County
Court House), Alderson Junior High School, and South
Plains Mall.
Duties that will not be shared will be preparation
of documents and posting of notices related to each
election and the canvassing of ballots and
announcement of results.
The staff recommended a joint election and a joint
ballot with Lubbock County as detailed in the joint
resolution.
Motion was made by Councilmember Cooke, seconded by
Councilmember Patterson to authorize Resolution
#4083 as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7
Yeas; 0 Nays.
RESOLUTION #4084
WHEREAS, the City of Lubbock has heretofore created a Municipal
Court of Record in accordance with provisions of V.T.C.A., Government
Code, Chapter 30; and
WHEREAS, Section 30.004(h) places the duty to appoint temporary
and substitute municipal judges upon the City Council of the City of
Lubbock; and
WHEREAS, it is advisable that temporary and substitute municipal
judges should be available upon short notice if required in order that
the business of the Municipal Court of Record shall not be impeded by a
temporary need for an additional judge or judges; NOW THEREFORE:
February 11, 1993
Page 147
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the following named person, who meets the requirements to
serve as a Municipal Court of Record judge, is hereby appointed a
temporary and substitute judge of the Lubbock Municipal Court of Record.
RON NcLAURIN
Said person shall serve part-time as required upon the request of
the presiding judge of the Lubbock Municipal Court of Record at the rate
of pay established by the City budget for such services.
Passed by the City Council this 11th day of February, 1993.
/s/ David R. Langston
DAVID R. LANGSTON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
/s/ Sally Still Abbe
Sally Still Abbe, Acting
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
/s/ Bob Cass
Bob Cass, Acting City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Donald G. Vandiver
Donald G. Vandiver, First
Assistant City Attorney
John Ross, City Attorney, presented staff comments.
This resolution appoints Ron McLaurin as a temporary
substitute judge for the Lubbock Municipal Court of
Record, adding him to the night magistrate rotation
with compensation. The night magistrate system is
part of the agreement between the City of Lubbock
and Lubbock County concerning the use of the County
jail for City prisoners.
Motion was made by Councilmember Patterson, seconded
by Mayor Pro Tem Trejo to authorize Resolution #4084
as recommended by Staff. Motion carried: 7 Yeas; 0
Nays.
The Council went into executive session at 4:42 p.m.
93-52A-147-99
(34A.) Hold an executive session, in accordance with
Article 6252-17, Sec. 2(g,). VACS, to consider
appointment of a candidate to the position of City
Secretary.
93-52A-147-100
(34B.) Take appropriate action to appoint a City Secretary
for the City of Lubbock.
No action was taken.
February 11, 1993
Page 148
93-52A-148-101
(35.)
Lubbock DFAS Finance and Development Corporation
Urban Design and Historical Preservation
Commission
Civic Centers Board
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Neighborhood Redevelopment/Urban Renewal Board
The Council reconvened their regular meeting at 5:22 p.m. Mayor
Langston announced that they had discussed the interview process for the
position of City Secretary and the appointment process for DFAS Board of
Directors.
93-52A-148-102
(36.)
93-52A-148-103
(37.)
93-52A-148-104
(38.)
93-52A-148-105
(39.)
93-52A-148-106
(40.)
Consider appointment of five Directors of Lubbock
DFAS Finance and Development Corporation for
inclusion in Articles of Incorporation.
This item was held until a later meeting.
This item was held until a later meeting.
Consider one appointment to the Civic Centers Board
to replace Sammy Ribble, who has resigned.
This item was held until a later meeting.
Consider three appointments to the Zoning Board of
Adjustment. The terms of Jim Mertes, Bertell
Jackson, and Betty Lowder will expire on February
26, 1993.
This item was held until a later meeting.
Scott Badget, and Jimmy H. Smith have expired.
This item was held until a later meeting.
February 11, 1993
Page 149
There being no further business to come before Council, motion was made
by Councilmember Cooke, seconded by rntfrom
H member Patterson to adjourn
the meeting at 5:23 p.m. Motion ca Yeas; 0 Nays--Councilmember
Aderton and Mayor Pro Tem Trejo abs t Counc)l—£fram4ers.
ATTEST:
Sally St 1 Abbe
Acting City Secretary
Read and approved this 25th day of F
ATTEST:
<W�I- `�� 0-601�-
Sally Sti Abbe
Acting Ci Secretary