HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-02-01Special Called Workshop of City Council
.
.
e
e
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CALLED WORKSHOP
OF LA PORTE CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 1, 1999
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Norman Malone at 6:00 p.m.
Members of Citv Council Present: Council persons Guy Sutherland, Chuck Engelken,
Deotis Gay, Charlie Young, Jerry Clarke, Peter Griffiths, and Mayor Norman Malone.
Councilperson Howard Ebow arrived at 6:05 p.m. and Councilperson Alton Porter
arrived at 6:35 p.m.
Members of Council Absent: None
Members of City Executive Staff and City Emplovees Present: City Manager Robert T.
Herrera, Assistant City Manager John Joerns, Assistant City Manager Jeff Litchfield,
City Attorney Knox Askins, City Secretary Martha Gillett, Director of Public Works
Steve Gillett, Planning Director Doug Kneupper, Director of Administrative Services
Louis Rigby, Police Chief Bobby Powell, Director of Parks and Recreation Steven
Barr, Administrative Assistant Carol Buttler.
Others Present: David Hawes, Joe Brown, David Toone, Bob Klassen, and David
Rodriguez
2. Councilperson Deotis Gay delivered the Invocation.
3. Council considered approving the minutes of the Special Called Meeting on January 19,
1999.
Motion was made bv Councilperson Engelken to approve the minutes of the Special
Called Meeting on Januarv 19. 1999 as presented. Second by Councilperson
Sutherland. The motion carried.
Ayes: Gay, Young, Clarke and Mayor Malone.
Nays: None
Abstain: Griffiths
Arrived after vote: Ebow and Porter
4. PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND CITIZENS AND
TAX PAYERS WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL
There were no citizens wishing to address City Council.
5. The following items were discussed:
A. DISCUSS POLICY MATIERS DEALING WITH THE CREATION OF A TAX
INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE - R. T. Herrera
e
_
City Council Minutes 2-1-99 - Page 2
B. DISCUSS REQUEST FOR POTABLE WATER SERVICE FROM SAN JACINTO
STATE PARK - S. Gillett
C. DISCUSS UTD..ITY SERVICES FOR INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS OUTSIDE CITY
LIMITS - D. Kneupper
D. RE-EVALUATE THE DECISION TO BUILD THE SOUTH LA PORTE TRUNK
SEWER PROJECT - J. Joerns
Mayor allowed Council to take a fifteen-minute break at 8: 15 p.m.
Council returned from their break at 8:30 p.m.
E. DISCUSS CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PROCEDURES SIGNS AT CITY PARKS
- R.T. Herrera
Council proceeded to Item 9.
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION - PURSUANT TO PROVISION OF THE OPEN
MEETINGS LAW, CHAPTER 551.071 THROUGH 551.076, AND 551.084,
TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, - (CONSUL TA TION WITH
ATTORNEY, DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY,
DELIBERATION REGARDING PROSPECTIVE GIFT OR DONATION,
PERSONNEL MATTERS, CONFERENCE WITH EMPLOYEES
DELIBERATION REGARDING SECURITY DEVICES, OR EXCLUDING A
WITNESS DURING EXAMINATION OF ANOTHER WITNESS IN AN
INVESTIGATION)
A. 551.071 (LEGAL MATTER) MEET WITH CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY
MANAGER TO DISCUSS A POSSIBLE CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY.
Council retired into executive session at 8:50 p.m. under Section 551.071 (LEGAL MATIER).
Council returned to the table at 9: 10 p.m., with no action taken.
Mayor re-convened the Special Called Workshop Meeting at 9: 12 p.m. Items F and G were
discussed after the Executive Session.
F. DISCUSS THE GROWTH OF PARKS AND RECREATION F ACD..ITY NEEDS
- J. lLitchfield
G. DISCUSS GIRLS SOFTBALL RELOCATION - S. Barr
6. The workshop Meeting was adjourned at 9:43 p.m.
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
City Manager Robert T. Herrera reminded Council of the following items:
A. Risk Management Plan Meeting - February 4, 1999 at the Pasadena
Convention Center.
e
e
City Council Minutes 2-01-99 - Page 3
B. Risk Management Plan Dinner - February 23, 1999 at the Sylvan Beach
Pavilion.
C. Open House for Mike Jackson and John Davis - February 25, 1999 at the
Sylvan Beach Pavilion.
8. COUNCIL ACTION
Councilpersons Sutherland, Engelken, Ebow, Griffiths, Porter, Gay, Young and Clarke
brought items to Council's attention.
10. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ITEMS CONSIDERED
IN EXECUTIVE SESSION
There was no action taken on Executive Session items.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before Council, the Regular Meeting was duly
adjourned at 9:50 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
'-1Yl~ a,)fJ1JfJl
Martha A. Gillett
City Secretary
Passed and approved on this 8th day of February 1999.
~~
e
_
I
e
e
A
e CITY OF LA PORTE e
January 28, 1999
TO:
FROM:
Mayor and City Council
.fo R.Robert T. Herrera, City Manager
SUBJECT.
Further Consideration of a Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ)
At the Council workshop of December 9, Council suggested that staff return in late
January to discuss the possibility of moving forward with the study of creating a Tax
Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ).
As discussed in earlier workshops, a TIRZ may be an opportunity to promote
development in certain areas by capturing the "tax increment" to pay for public
infrastructure and amenities to serve developments and the community at large.
There are two documents attached for Council's review. One is a draft schedule and
the second is draft guidelines for the creation of an investment zone.
Staff felt that Council would benefit by an early discussion of guidelines that may result
in a fonnal policy statement. Some of the information in the draft guidelines is general
in nature and has been previously presented to Council during earlier discussions of
TIRZ. Council, however, did not get to a point where there was a discussion and
determination of eligible project costs. By using this draft and inviting input from
various sources (owners, developers, Council, public) there is opportunity to produce
a plan that is more favorably accepted by the Council, local developers and the
community .
Also note that the Council sub-committee, at key points, is brought into the
development of these guidelines. If Council is interested in pursuing a TIRZ, we offer
this draft schedule and guidelines as an initial framework for discussion.
DRAFT CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXS
NCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE CREATION SCHEDULE
TAX
DRAFT
e
e
1. Submit TIF Schedule and Draft TIF Policy Guidelines to City Council 2/1/99 Staff/ Consultant
2. Conduct Property Owner and Developers' meetings to receive input on TIF 2/2/99 - 2/16/99 Staff/ Consultant! Council
Policy & Development Projects; Conduct Staff, Consultant & Council Committee/ Prop.
Committee Meetings with regard to input. Owners/
Developers
3. Prepare City of La Porte TIF Policy Guidelines & TIF Feasibility Analysis 2/2/99 - 3/1/99 Staff/Consultant! Council
Committee
4. City Council considers Resolution that establishes TIF Policy Guidelines, 3/8/99 City Council
Staff Report on TIF Feasibility
5. City Council passes resolution to set hearing date & authorize publication 3/8/99 City Council
of notice (Set date for 5/24/99)
6. Prepare Preliminary Financing Plan 3/9/99 - 3/22/99 Staff/Consultant! Council
Committee
7. City transmits Preliminary Finance Plan to other taxing jurisdictions, 3/23/99 City Manager
requests appointment of representative
8. Meet with other taxing jurisdictions' representatives to inform of TIF and 3/29/99 - 4/16/99 Staff/ Consultant
planned projects; receive input
9. Report Status of Taxing Unit meetings to City Council 4/26/99 Staff/ Consultant
10. Revise Preliminary Financing Plan in accordance with input, Work with 4/9/99 - 4/30/99 Staff/ Consultant
other taxing units to gain support
11. Make Formal Presentations to other Taxing .Units 5/3/99 - 5/21/99 Staff/ Consultant
12. City Secretary publishes public hearino notice 5/15/99 City Secretary
Page 1
,
DRAFT CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXS
INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE CREATION SCHEDULE
TAX
City Counci
5/24/99
considers TIF creation Ordinance
City Counci
13.
City Counci
5/24/99
Authority
Approves Resolution creating Redevelopment
City Counci
14.
City Counci
5/24/99
Boards
City Council appoints Board Members to TIF & Redevelopment
15.
-
Consultant
5/24/99 - 6/11/99
16. I Prepare Project Plan and Reinvestment Zone Financing Plan
TIF Board
City Co unci
6/14/99
6/25/99
Approves Project Plan & Reinvestment Zone Financing Plan
City Council considers approval of TIF Project Plan & Reinvestment Zone
Financing Plan
Board
17
18.
Staff
6/26/99
Transmit TIF Project Plan and Reinvestment Zone Financing Plan to
Taxing Units
19.
e
Page 2
Staff/ Consultant
7/1/99 - 8/31/99
Negotiate and Finalize Participation Agreements with other Taxing Units
20.
DRAFT
e
e
CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS
TAX ~NCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE GUIDELINES
A. Purpose of Guidelines
The purpose of these guidelines is to establish the policy of the City of La Porte
as it relates 10 the power granted by Chapter 311 of the Texas Property Tax
Code (Tax Code) and Article b, Section 1-g of the Texas Constitution (together
cited as the Tax Increment Financing Act) to finance the development and
redevelopment of unproductive, underdeveloped or blighted areas within the City.
State law al~ows a municipality to designate an area as a Tax Increment
Reinvestmen~ Zone (Zone) to promote development or redevelopment of the
area, if the City Council determines that development or redevelopment would
not occur solely through private investment in the reasonably foreseeable future.
There are two different methods of creating a Zone. One is City initiated and the
other is initiated by the property owners. rhe second method has its beginning
when a petition is submitted to the City. While a large portion of the law applies
to both types, there are enough differences in creating the Zones that the two
types will be discussed separately, beginning with the Zone created by petition.
1. Creation of Zone by Petition
The owners of property constituting at least fifty (50%) percent of the.
appraised value of the property in an area, may petition the City for the
creation of a Zone. Such petition is legally required for creation of a Zone
if the Zone contains more than ten (10%) percent residential property
(referred to as a Residential Zone, if less than 10%, it is referred to as a
Commercial Zone).
a. In considering a petition for creation of a Zone, Council will take into
consideration the factors applicable to a City created Zone, which
are described in Section A 2 a. Additional considerations are as
follows:
1. a decrease in the aggregate property value of at least twenty
(20%) percent over the most recent ten (10) years;
2. a substantial absence, deterioration or substandard
condition in the City's infrastructure, streets, water and waste
water lines, and storm drainage; and
3. A statement certifying that "but for" the creation of the Zone,
the reinvestment would not occur.
1
DRAFT
e
_
b. The area within the Zone must be contiguous and be not less than
twenty (20) acres.
c. Documentation required with Petition
Submission of a petition under 311.005(a)(5) of the Tax Code to
create a Zone for the purpose of tax increment financing must be
accompanied by a Preliminary Financing Plan. Both the petition
and Preliminary Financing Plan must be finalized and submitted to
the City on or before September 1, in order for a Zone to be created
and to take effect the following tax year. The plan must include:
1. a description of the proposed boundaries of the proposed
zone, including both a map (showing existing uses and
conditions of real property in the Zone) and a legal
description;
2. tentative plans and schedules for the development or
redevelopment of the Zone, including conceptual drawings
or descriptions of the public improvements proposed to be
financed by the Zone, including a preliminary estimate of the
total costs of the improvements;
3. an estimate of the general impact on the proposed Zone on
property values and the tax revenues of the City and the
other governmental entities levying ad valorem taxes
throughout the life of the proposed Zone;
4. a schedule indicating total appraised values for the proposed
Zone for the previous ten years (if available);
5. evidence that all tax arrearages and public liens on property
owned or controlled by the petitioner has been satisfied; and
5. a statement certifying that "but for" the creation of the Zone,
it would not be properly developed.
2. Creation of Zone by City
An area may be designated as a Zone by the City Council, if it meets the
conditions listed below:
a. The area is determined to substantially arrest or impair the sound
growth of the City because of the presence of:
2
DRAFT
e
_
1. substantial number of substandard, slum, deteriorated, or
deteriorating structures;
2. the predominance of defective or inadequate sidewalk or
street layout;
3. faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or
usefulness;
4. unsanitary or unsafe conditions;
5. the deterioration of site or other improvements;
6. tax or special assessment delinquencies which exceed the
fair market value of the land;
7. evidence of chronic abandonment or demolition of
commercial or residential structures;
8. defective or unusual conditions of title;
9. conditions that endanger life or property by fire or other
cause; or that
10. the area of the proposed Zone is predominately open and
because of obsolete platting, deterioration of structures or
site improvements or other factors substantially impair or
arrest the sound growth in the City.
b. The area within the Zone must be contiguous and be not less than
twenty (20) acres.
c. The area within in the Zone contains ten percent (10%) or less
residential use.
The remainder of the guidelines apply to the Zone, regardless of whether it was
created by petition or initiated by the City.
B. Redevelopment Activities
Redevelopment Activities for the Zone must:
1. be in accordance with redevelopment and land use plans approved by the
Planning and Zoning commission, and consistent with the City's
Comprshensive Plan; and
3
DRAFT
_
e
2. be re81sonably likely to increase the aggregate taxable value of property
within the Zone by at least twenty (20%) percent during the life of the
Zone; and
3. provide adequate infrastructure improvements to serve the Zone, including
but not limited to streets, water and waste water facilities, and drainage
structures, designed and constructed according to City standards; and
4. provide relocation assistance for low/moderate persons resident in the
Zone who may be displaced by the implementation of the project plan (as
defined by 311.002(2) of the Tax Code), and as such persons are defined
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
C. Procedures for Creating a Reinvestment Zone
1. Before adopting and ordinance providing for a Reinvestment Zone, these
actions must occur, in the following sequence:
a. City Council must schedule a public hearing to allow public
comment on the proposed Zone. Notice of this hearing must be
published in a newspaper having general circulation in the City at
least seven (7) days prior to the hearing.
b. At least sixty (60) days before the scheduled public hearing, City
Council must notify in writing the other taxing jurisdictions that levy
real property taxes in the Zone that it intends on establishing a
Zone. This notice must contain:
1. a description of the proposed boundaries of the Zone;
2. tentative plans for development or redevelopment of the zone;
3. an estimate of the general impact of the proposed Zone on
property values and tax revenues.
c. A Preliminary Financing Plan must be prepared and sent to the
other affected taxing jurisdictions.
D. Powers of the Zone
1. The Cily may authorize by ordinance the enforcement of land use controls
authorized by statute subject to the following:
a. Subject to the approval of the City Council, the board of the Zone
may adopt additional powers granted by the provisions of state law
found in Chapter 211, Local Government Code necessary to
4
DRAFT
e
e
implement the Zone Project Plan and Reinvestment zone Financing
Plan.
b. Any additional land use component shall include a description of
the proposed land use regulations, a description of the economic
and financial need for each land use regulation and a description of
the effect of the comprehensive plan on the economic integrity of
the Zone Project Plan and Reinvestment zone financing Plan. The
land use component shall be reviewed annually by the Zone's
board to ensure that both the public and private investment in the
Zone are protected, and if additional restrictions are required, may
approve amendments and changes for City council review and
approval.
c. The Land Use Plan may impose maximum height, minimum square
footage on new construction, maximum lot coverage and bulk
restrictions to provide for sufficient private investment in the Zone's
development or redevelopment to support Zone bonds, notes or
obligations.
d. Lawful nonconforming uses in Zones may be terminated as follows:
1. when then use ceases or is abandoned; or
2. when the primary structure has been demolished or when
rehabilitation in excess of 50% of the assessed value of the
improvement at the time of Zone creation is completed; or
3. when a sufficient period of time has elapsed to allow the
recovery of the owner or owners investment in the
nonconforming use or uses
e. Nonconforming uses may not be altered or expanded in area of
intensity in any residential area in the Zone (e.g. no additional new
smployees, outside storage or parking may be created).
f. Any additional land use controls shall be operative for at least the
life of the Zone, and the Board may, with City Council approval,
provide that a restriction adopted by the Board continues in effect
after the termination of the Zone. If the land use controls continue
after the termination of the Zone, such restrictions shall be treated
as if adopted by the City in the first instance.
g. The Board shall contract with the City for the purpose of
snforcement of any additional land use controls authorized for use
in the Zone.
5
DRAFT
_
_
2. Under current Texas law, the City cannot delegate or extend to the Board
its power of eminent domain. If the applicable state law is amended to
permit the delegation of extension of such power, the policy of the City is
not to authorize the delegation or extension of its power to the Board.
In addntion, the City will utilize its power of eminent domain within the Zone
only if the City Council finds that a public purpose will be served by such
an exercise of the City's power.
If the Board proposes to condemn property for purposes related to
redevelopment or urban renewal, the City will not exercise its power of
eminent domain unless the City Council additionally finds that the property
or the area immediately surrounding that property contains a substantial
number of substandard, slum, deteriorated, or deteriorating structures.
Provided, however, that in no event will the City condemn a residential
homestead for purposes of redevelopment or urban renewal unless City
Council finds that the property proposed to be condemned is, in fact, in a
substandard or blighted condition.
3. The City will hold a public hearing prior to the approval of a Land Use Plan
for the Zone. The Board will provide notice to all property owners within
the Zone by certified mail, return receipt requested not less than fifteen
(15) days prior to the hearing.
4. The City Council by ordinance may authorize the Board to provide for the
management and administration of a public improvement district created
within the Zone, as provided in such district's service plan required by law.
E. Eligible Project Costs
1. In conformance with 311.002 of the Tax Code, the City shall consider the
"but for" requirements required for the creation of the Zone and make a
determination on a case by case basis of the project costs necessary to
implement the Project Plan and Reinvestment Zone Financing Plan. The
City may consider the following project costs but is neither obligated nor
limited to the following:
a. Off-site utilities required to bring utilities to the Zone (e.g. water,
waste water, road and drainage facilities, street lighting and traffic
lights);
b. Upgrade existing infrastructure to advance future development
within the Zone (e.g. lift stations, water and waste water
improvements, turning lanes/intersection improvements, waste
water treatment plant enhancements);
6
e
e
DRAFT
c. Land purchase for public facilities;
d. Infrastructure within the Zone, including water, waste water ,
drainage, street lighting, signage and streetscapellandscape
improvements; and
e. Specialty items that include the construction of sound barriers,
buffering landscape between residential and nonresidential uses,
and common recreation areas.
2. The City may retain funds as provide in Chapter 311.002 of the Tax Code
to be reimbursed for the following:
a. imputed administrative costs, including reasonable charges for the
time spent by employees of the City in connection with the
implementation of the Project Plan and Reinvestment Zone
Financing Plan;
b. the amount of any contribution made by the City from general
revenue for the implementation of the project plan; and
c. payments made at the discretion of the governing body of the City
that the City finds necessary or convenient to the creation of the
Zone or to the implementation of the Project Plan and
Reinvestment Zone financing Plan.
H. Board of Directors
The Composltion of the Board of Directors is determined by the Tax Increment
Financing Act.
For a Commercial Zone, the Board of Directors consist of at least five (5) and no
more than fifteen (15) members. Each taxing unit that levies real property taxes
in the Zone may appoint one member of the Board. City Council determines the
total size of the Board and appoints the remaining members, not to exceed a
total of fifteen (15) members. To be eligible for appointment, individuals will be a
qualified voter in the City or be at least eighteen (18) years of age and own real
property in the Zone.
For a Residential Zone, the Board of Directors consists of nine (9) members.
Each participating school district or county may appoint one (1) member. The
state senator and the state representative in whose districts the Zone is located
are members of the Board. Each may designate another person to serve in
his/her place. The remaining members are appointed by City Council. To be
eligible for appointment, an individual must be eighteen (18) years of age and
7
DRAFT
e
e
own real property in the Zone or be an agent of a person who owns real property
in the Zone.
Board membsrs serve two (2) year terms. The chairman is appointed by City
Council to serve a term of one (1) calendar year.
I. Project Plan and Reinvestment Zone financing Plan
The Zone Board of Directors shall submit a proposed Project Plan and
Reinvestment Zone Financing Plan for the approval of City council. The Plans
must be prepared in accordance with 311.011 of the Tax Code.
J. Use of Funds
1. The tBlX increment or the proceeds of bonds, notes or obligations issued
for any project or projects secured by the tax increment may be used for
any purpose authorized in the Project Plan and Reinvestment Zone
financing Plan.
2. Proceeds shall be used for project facilities and improvements which are
approved by the City and which have an estimated average useful life at
least equal to the life of the Zone or notes financing such improvements, if
any.
3. The funds of the Zone shall be budgeted, expended and audited in the
same general manner as City bond and tax funds with such changes
required by the provisions of state law. The costs of such City financial
controls shall be included in the costs of administration of the Zone. The
Zone budget must be submitted annually to the City finance Department
for approval. A copy of the Zone's Annual Audit must be forwarded to the
City Secretary after Board approval.
8
_
e
B
. CITY OF LA PORTE e
January 27, 1999
TO:
FROM:
Mayor and City Council
Robert T. Herrera, City Manager I
John Jooms, Assistant City Mana~J
FebNa!}' I" Workshop "\11'
Re: Utilities Outside City Limits
SUBJECT:
The February lit workshop meeting includes two reports on requests for utility service outside
the City limits. One report describes a request from Texas Parks and Wildlife, which is
outside the City limits and our ETJ. The second report describes several requests from
owner/developers of properties along SH225 and Fairmont Parkway outside City limits but
within our ETJ and Industrial Districts.
For various reasons outlined in the reports, these requests do not fit our current policy for
utility service outside the City. Recall that our current policy was developed as a response
to specific requests by industry (with IDA's) to provide potable water service for sanitary
needs. The policy was also developed to protect the limited surface water capacity available
to La Porte. Now, because of the LP A W A's recent agreement to secure an additional 3 +
MOD there is more flexibility to consider these requests. In addition, some requests are for
sanitary sewer.
For the projects along SH225 and Fairmont Parkway the provision of utilities may be an
opportunity for Council to establish policy guidelines that would affect both the visual impact
and land use activity along these roadways. Staff offers this because there have been
comments made by P&Z and by the public regarding the beautification of these roadways
through La Porte. One person providing public input during the Comprehensive Plan update
suggested annexation of the property along Fairmont Parkway and SH225. Also, Council
may recall that when the decision to place casings across SH225 was made, there was mention
of the potential to annex a strip along SH225 because the land use and character of these
developments was decidedly different than the larger industries within our Industrial Districts.
These companies do have options. They could apply for a well permit. For the low volume
sewer demands they could install septic systems. For the higher demands the companies in
Bayport have the option of GCWDA. However, in the long run it may be advantageous for
both the City and these developments along the roadways to reach agreement on the utilities
and on some development standards. Then if annexation were considered the provision of
utility service would not be as difficult.
The policy on 1l1tiliti!utside the City limits has always requi.ouncil's approval of each
request and we feel that this should remain a key feature of our policies. Staff also assumes
that the rate of 1.5 times for service will remain along with requirements related to plumbing,
service, etc. However, these recent requests will require refmements to our current policy
if Council wishes to provide service.
SEVERAL KEY POUCY OR SPECIALTY ISSUES ARE:
San Jacinto Battleground
. Does Council wish to consider providing water service to San Jacinto
Battleground (outside City and ETJ)?
. Does Council wish to approve service that guarantees a minimum water
pressure and quality? (Staff does not recommend this.) We suggest that we
deliver water to a storage facility that is owned by San Jacinto Battleground
Park and from that point forward have no responsibility or warranty.
. Does Council wish to provide maintenance for the park's distribution system?
(Staff does not recommend this.)
For prospective businesses along Fairmont ParkwlU' and SH225
. If water and/or sewer service is provided, does Council wish to secure certain
land use agreements?
. Le. setbacks, uses, some landscaping
. Is Council willing to extend limited sewer service to these areas based on
similar provisions contained in the policy for water service?
. At the end of the current IDA's (December 31, 2(00) does Council wish to
preserve the option to consider annexation?
For both current and future water service agreements
. Is Council willing to extend the term of agreements beyond five years?
Finally, our current policy provides for utility rates that are 1.5 times the rate a business in
the City would pay. This rate is sufficient to recover the operating expenses and debt service
requirements of our utility system. I assume that Council is comfortable with this
arrangement without introducing any other capital fees. We also require a one-time
administrative fee of $100/employeee (with a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of
$15,(00). This fee may be perceived as inequitable for requests that are no longer based or
limited by a set employee demand of 5G-gaVper day. If Council desires, we will return with
some other options for their consideration.
_
_
REQUEST FOR POTABLE WATER
SAN JACINTO STATE PARK
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE
BACKGROUNlJ)
The City of La Porte has received an informal request from the Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department to consider providing potable water to the San Jacinto Battleground State
Park. The Department currently produces its own water from a single well. Before 1994,
the Park operated a small package surface water treatment plant. This plant was
abandoned due to poor condition, high maintenance costs and problems retaining
certified surface water treatment plant operators.
Concerns with maintaining the well, distribution system and water quality, as well as a
mandate from the Harris-Galveston Coastal Subsidence District to convert to surface
water, have triggered an evaluation of the Department's alternatives to providing potable
drinking water to Park visitors. Compounding the problem is the extreme fluctuations in
water demand, with low demands during the week and high demands on the weekend.
The Park is on the verge of undergoing many changes to conform to the Park's Master
Plan completed in 1998. The changes will require relocation and/or replacement of much
of the utility infrastructure at the Park. The Department retained Turner, Collie & Braden
to evaluate alternative methods of supplying and distributing water to serve San Jacinto
Park.
REQUEST FOR WATER
On December 22, 1998, city staff met with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department staff
and the Consultant (Tc&B). The Consultant's report, dated October 1998, recommended
the State approach the City regarding the possibility of obtaining treated surface water
from the City of La Porte. At that meeting. the Department inquired into the availability
of water, as well as the city's position on operating and maintaining the transmission line
from SH225, as well as the internal distribution system within Park boundaries.
The Department has requested consideration of a Water Service Agreement to provide an
average daily water service of 19,800 gallons per day, with a maximum daily usage of
105,900 gallons per day. The water service request is for a minimum pressure of 45 psi
at the park entrance or 56 psi at the point of connection at Underwood and SH 225 with a
peak hourly demand of 220 gpm.
The Parks Department understands the need to pay for design and construction of the
proposed transmission system from the point of connection to the Park's take-point. The
proposed system would be approximately 22,000 feet of8-inch pipe and appurtenances,
at an estimated cost of $575,300. Discussions led to the possibility of oversizing the
system to accommodate additional potential customers. It was noted that the City and
Parks knew of no potential customers between the take-point and the Park.
e
e
REQUEST FOR POTABLE WATER
SAN JACINTO STATE PARK
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Page 2
Discussions were conducted regarding the operation and maintenance of the transmission
system from La Porte to the Park. Additionally, the Parks Department raised the
possibility of the City of La Porte operating the entire Park distribution system. It was
noted that the park utility infrastructure would undergo extensive maintenance and
reconstruction prior to this occurring.
Finally, Par~ requested information regarding the proposed rate structure for potable
water. The City supplied them with copies of the current CLP rate ordinance as well as a
sample Water Service Agreement for customers outside the city.
DISCUSSION
The current policy for water and sewer service outside the City was developed at a time
when existing capacity was limited, and the potential for additional capacity was
uncertain. Although similar to prior requests for water service outside the city, when
compared to existing guidelines, this request is unique in several ways.
1. The proposed customer, San Jacinto Battleground State Park, is outside the
City's ETJ, as well as the city limits. Therefore, this request is outside the
boundaries established by council for water service requests outside the city.
2. The Park is requesting water for purposes other than employee use. In fact,
the request is to accommodate a peak of 40,000 persons per day at the site.
This request exceeds the guidelines established by council for water service
outside the city.
3. The proposed maintenance of the transmission line, while within the
guidelines, is significantly different from previous requests due to the sheer
distance, over four miles.
4. The request for operation and maintenance of the distribution system of the
Park is unprecedented.
5. Participation in oversizing would involve significant costs to the City, due to
the distances involved (estimated at 5264,000).
The first three concerns, while different, should not present the city with any difficulties
in terms of cost, operation and maintenance. With the recent purchase of additional
capacity at the Southeast Water Purification Plant, the City of La Porte will be positioned
to consider requests for additional water outside the City. However, the additional
capacity will not be available until December 2001.
_
_
REQUEST FOR POTABLE WATER
SAN JACINTO STAlE PARK
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND wn..DLIFE
Page 3
Although not in tlhe City's ETI, the Park is part of the Bayshore area, with no other
alternative source of water other than well or construction of a new surface water
treatment plant. The transmission line, while lengthy, passes a number of potential
customers that could pay for the development of the line, as well as capital costs for
water capacity.
The amount of water requested is large, but will only be needed for peak visitor periods,
primarily on weekends and holidays. It has been suggested by city staff that the Park
consider construction of storage and pumping facilities, which would reduce the
requested demand, and eliminate pressure and water quality issues associated with the
mixing of ground and surface water.
The request assumes that the Park distribution system would operate on La Porte's
pressure plane, with the need for supplemental pumping and disinfection eliminated.
However, the Park may continue to pump up to 10% of annual usage from groundwater,
creating problems with disinfection and backflow. This situation would be considered a
cross connection, in violation of TNRCC rules and good utility management. It is
recommended that the Park construct storage and pumping facilities, should the City elect
to provide water, to eliminate problems associated with low pressures, inadequate
disinfection, and cross connection control.
The request that tlIte City of La Porte operate and maintain the Park's distribution system
as a part of La Porte's system is not recommended. Additional personnel would be
needed to adequately service this system, and the City would be liable for any water
quality issues associated with the distribution system. The potential for "dead" water due
to stagnation and loss of disinfection is one that needs to be addressed by on-site
personnel.
The City of Deer Park has also requested water at the intersection of SH 225 and SH 134
(new Battleground Road). This will require the extension of water from the existing
terminus of La Porte's water system on the north side of SH 225 and Underwood road
several hundred feet west to accommodate the need for temporary water to irrigate
plantings along SH 225. We are in preliminary discussions with Deer Park staff to
accommodate this request. This extension would also be necessary for the San Iacinto
Battleground request. Some cost sharing of this portion of the proposed line is possible.
Two previous surveys did not identify any potential customers along SH 134
(Battleground Road), but the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District may require firms
with groundwater pumping permits to convert to surface water if the water and
transmission facilities become available. The City may wish to consider oversizing the
line to serve additional customers on SH 134 above the recommended eight inch (8") line
sIze.
_
_
REQUEST FOR POTABLE WATER
SAN JACINTO STATE PARK
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Page 4
POLICY DISCUSSION
Should the City Council wish to consider this request, the staff has the following policy
recommendations.
. Research the status of the San Jacinto Battleground State Park to determine if
any other governmental entity has jurisdiction. If found, require the Park to
obtain courtesy approval for water service provided by the City of La Porte.
. Consider changing the method of calculating the amount of water provided to
eliminate reference to employee numbers. Additionally, require the Park to
install sufficient storage and pumping capacity to reduce ultimate peak water
demands, and eliminate pressure, disinfection and cross connection concerns.
. No consideration should be given to assuming operation and maintenance of
the internal distribution system of the Park.
. Require the proposed transmission line to be a minimum of eight-inch (8"),
with aU costs paid by the State.
. Request the Harris-Galveston Coastal Subsidence District to assist in the
identification of potential customers along the route of the proposed line.
. Consider participation in oversizing the line if sufficient customers can be
found and who are committed to tie on to the line within the next 2 years. The
City of'La Porte would be responsible for these additional costs.
. Current policy requires a connection charge based on employee base. A
possible policy amendment would be to collect a one-time fee based on the
gallons of water committed to or the estimated effort to review requests,
prepare and manage agreements.
e
e
c
_
_
UTILITY SERVICE TO INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS
OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS
BACKGROUND
Over the years, La Porte has received several requests for utility service, especially water,
from industries outside our City limits. In late 1982, because of requests and the need to
have a firmly established policy, the City developed a written policy, which was adopted
by Council in January 1983. The policy was essentially a "Good Neighbor" policy
designed to provide limited utility service to industrial customers. The policy established
minimum requirements for application of service, availability determination, line
extension requirements, special conditions for use of City utilities and approval of an
agreement by City Council.
In 1995, there were again, requests from industry for the City to provide water service.
Industry was responding to TNRCC regulations. Some industrial companies were hoping
to get out of the water business completely and the City received requests for service
ranging from 600 gallons per day (gpd) to 60,000 gpd. The City conducted surveys,
hosted meetings and ultimately adopted a policy that allowed for limited water service for
sanitary purposes. The City recognized that we could not deliver enough water to meet
the very high volume demands for process water. At that time, the City's available water
capacity was limited. The parameters of the current policy are:
. Company needs to have an Industrial District Agreement with the City of La Porte
. Company shall supply a statement of utility demands including:
average daily demand
peak day demand
minimum working pressure requirements
number of on-site employees
. Company shaH supply a site plan showing the total acreage of the tract including
present and proposed improvements
. City will determine availability of utilities based on the number of on-site employees
times an average daily demand of 50 gpd per employee.
. If adequate utilities are not available special provisions are considered including
extensions of the City's existing facilities, which requires approval of a separate
Utility Extension Agreement.
. Company may only use City water for human consumption, washing, etc., and at no
time use water for process of any sort without specific approval of City Council.
. All Company plumbing shall be permitted and shall meet applicable State and City
code requirements. City shall have the right to inspect any and all work related to the
furnishing of potable water to the Company.
. Company shall pay a one-time connection fee ofSl00.00 per employee, with a
minimum ofSS,OOO and a maximum ofS1S,000.
e
_
. Company shan pay 1.5 times the current water rate in effect for customers within the
city limits. For water usage in excess of the established average demand, the
Company shall pay 2 times the current water rate in affect.
. Company shall enter into a contract with the City outlining the provisions for potable
water service. The tenn of the contract will be five (5) years plus any extensions.
RECENT REOUESTS
The City has received requests from potential customers for water service in our
Battleground District and for water and sewer service in our Bayport District. However,
these recent requests do not fall completely within the guidelines of our current policy.
Following is a listing of these recent requests:
. DSI I INITIAlL TRUCKING - New location on Baypark Road - Request for water up
to 20,000 gpd for tank truck cleaning.
. SUNBEL T COMMERCIAL BUILDERS - New location at southwest comer of
Fairmont Parkway and Underwood - Request for water and sewer service for 156-
acre Industrial Park, including water service for fire sprinkler systems.
. JOHN FRANTZ (Developer) - New location at northeast comer of SH225 and Miller
Cut-Off - Request for water service for II7-acre Industrial Development, including
water service for fire sprinkler systems.
. JOHN HENSLEY (Consultant for Tank Truck Cleaning Company) - New location
on Baypark Road - Request water service similar to DSI, however, exact location,
utility use amounts and other information have not been disclosed.
The tank truck companies require consideration in the areas of water use for industrial
purposes, average daily amount, and calculation of Administrative Fee. The water would
be used primarily for the tank truck cleaning process with a small percentage of the water
being used for sanitary purposes. DSI has stated that 20,000 gpd would meet their water
use requirements for tank truck cleaning. Based on the number of employees estimated
for this site (105), and using the methodology established under current policy, DSI
would be eligible for only 5,250 gpd. This is where current policy would require
amendment. A possible amendment would be to allow water use for limited processes up
to an amount of30,000 gpd. Similarly, the calculation of the one-time Administrative
Fee is based on the number of employees (current policy). In the DSI case, the City
would collect $10,500 for a company that would use significantly more than 50
gaVemp/day. A possible policy amendment would be to collect a one-time fee based on
the gallons of water committed to or the estimated effort to review requests, prepare and
manage agreements.
The proposed Industrial Park at the comer ofFainnont Parkway and Underwood has
expressed interest in water and sewer service. The water service would be limited to
sanitary use and likewise the sewage would be domestic in make-up. However, sewer
service is not addressed by current policy and may require the development of a
e
e
companion policy and contract similar to the Water Service Agreement. Also, the
location of this Industrial Park would provide an opportunity for the City to negotiate
land uses similar to our Business and Light Industrial zones and provide a buffer from
heavy industrial uses. In addition, the City might also negotiate for amenities that are
found in our zoning ordinance (i.e. landscaping and berming, building setbacks,
pedestrian sidewalks, decorative fencing/screening, etc.). These development amenities
could also be negotiated with future industrial developments along the south side of
Fairmont Parkway as a condition of utility service. It is of particular interest right now,
that the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee has created preliminary goals dealing
with aesthetics and beautification along Fairmont Parkway and SH225. Another
development related benefit is that regional drainage systems could also be coordinated.
The proposed Industrial Development north of SH225 has only expressed interest in
water service. The water would be used for sanitary purposes and for fire protection. As
stated in the previous paragraph, this might be an opportunity to negotiate for certain land
uses and amenities for this site, and also for future development along the north side of
SH225. In addi.tion, regional drainage systems could be coordinated.
WATER AVAILABILITY
When this policy was last revised in 1995, the City was faced with limited excess water
availability. Soon, after agreements with the City of Houston and Gulf Coast Water
Authority, the City will be gaining 3 million gallons per day in available water. Current
requests, coupled with industry survey results from 1995, would add an additional
250,000 gpd to our current daily water usage.
The attached graph shows 1) current daily water use with a 2% annual increase projected,
2) current contracted water availability with the additional 3 million gallons per day
available December 2001, and 3) a very conservative estimation of future industrial
customers. Based on our assumptions and other available data, the City will have
sufficient water available for the next 2S to 30 years even with the addition of some
industrial customers.
POLICY MODIFICATIONS
To be able to accommodate these recent requests for utility service, the current policy
would need the following modifications as a minimum:
. Allow the use of water for limited processes (examples: tank truck cleaning, fire
protection)
. Establish a maximum daily amount of water use (example: 30,000 gpd)
. Consider an administrative fee that more accurately reflects the quantity of water used
or effort involved in managing these projects.
e
e
. Establish a policy where City negotiates for certain land uses and development
amenities.
. Establish a policy where City negotiates participation in regional drainage systems.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
If the City does not revise the current policy, industrial companies have alternatives that
they can pursue. Wells are still a viable source of water. Although the Harris-Galveston
Coastal Subsidence District discourages the proliferation of wells, they are still available
to companies that have limited or no alternatives. Industrial wastewater service could be
available through a network of pipelines leading to the Bayport Treatment Plant or simple
sanitary wastewater could be treated on-site.
Some industrial companies have already paid for utility extensions. Akzo-Nobel, for
instance, paid approximately $150,000 to install a water line along Baypark Road. Policy
amendments, as described above, would increase the opportunities for Akzo-Nobel and
others to recover some of their expenses associated with the installation of utility lines.
The City is in this same situation. We spent approximately $250,000 to install utility
lines under SH22S at Sens Road and Miller Cut-Off. Again, new policy guidelines as
discussed, might create more opportunities for the City to recover the costs involved with
making utilities available to the north side of SH225.
The proposed industrial parks might create a unique situation with regard to the
agreements required for utility service. In these cases, a developer will be selling tracts
of land to individual companies for them to develop. The individual companies will be
the ones working with the City on the necessary agreements. For example, a 150-acre
industrial park might require 10 or more individual agreements.
Most of the proposed industrial companies seeking utility service would be covered by a
current Industrial District Agreement. These IDAs will be terminating and up for
renewal on December 31,2000. In some locations, the City may want to consider
annexation and not renew the IDA, or continue with these arrangements.
If Council concurs with this approach, staffwill begin preparing draft policies and
agreements for review and consideration.
CITY OF LA PORTE WATER USE PROJECTIONS
9.000
8.000
e 7.000
6.000
5.000
c
C)
:E
4.000
3.000
2.000
e
1.000
0.000
98 99 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
YEAR
I-+-AVG DAY PUMP _TOTAL W/ADD BUSINESS " MAX PUMP ALLOWED I
NOTES: 1. INCLUDES MAX ALLOWED GROUND WATER PUMPAGE. 2. 1998 IS 5 YR AVG. 3. POP. GROWTH ASSUMPTION=2%. BUSINESS
GROWTH ASSUMPTION=5%.
e
_
D
e
CITY OF LA PORTE
e
January 27, 1999
TO:
Robert T. Herrera, City Manager
FROM:
John Jooms, Assistant City Manage
SUBJECT:
Re-evaluation of South La Porte Trunk Sewer
Series 1998 Revenue Bonds
In June 1998 Council authorized the sale of 1.25 million dollars in voter approved but
unsold Revenue Bonds for utility system improvements. In Council workshops leading
up to the sale we discussed using these funds for the construction of a Trunk Sewer to
service developments anticipated in South La Porte (see attached map). The City also
entered into a utility extension agreement with the developer of a proposed 10 acre
apartment complex which the Trunk Main would eventually serve.
This workshop item is to brief Council on the status of this project and to advise
Council on the options available for use of those funds.
Current Status of the proJ>Osed DevelQpment and the Utility Extension Agreement
· Council was previously informed that the developers of the proposed apartment
complex at McCabe and SH146 were not able to secure a temporary Sewer
Service Agreement with Shoreacres that met their needs.
· Also, their Utility Extension Agreement with La Porte has been voided because
certain deliverables were not received (see attached letter).
· If the owners/developers wish to proceed with the apartment complex (or other
development) they will need to return to the P&Z commission as their Special
Conditional Use Permit has expired.
· The recently approved contract with Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority may
present other options for sewage service to the acreage South of Wharton Weems
Road. This option will require some engineering evaluation prior to final
consideration. Where the evaluation involves existing La Porte facilities, staff
mIl recommend some participation in the study and potentially in needed
improvements.
· The owner and developer was and still is interested in the potential for a TIRZ.
_
_
Current Status of Engineering Service Agreement with TC&B
. The contract for design of the Trunk Main has been placed on hold.
. There was some expenditure ($42,340) for surveying geotechnical services and
some preliminary design work (most of this effort can be updated and used at a
later date)
. I have asked Mr. Kneupper to see how much effort and expense it would be to
complete the metes and bounds description necessary for the easements needed
from the Weems Family. If this number is reasonable we may recommend
preparation of the easement documents and solicit the Weems signatures.
. Since the final design and routing is dependent on the proposed devel~ments I
do not recommend that we continue with the design process at this time.
. If Council decides to utilize the funds for other purposes, the City could amicably
terminate the desi~n agreement with TC&B.
Options ~garding use of the 1.25 million revenue bonds.
. Although Mr. litchfield has some further checking to do , he feels that we have
some flexibility in the use of these funds for utility system improvements.
. We do,however, need to spend these funds within three years from the date of
issuance (June 2001).
. I have asked staff to consider major utility system projects that we may want to
complete within the next two years. Some options are:
. If developments in the area are firmed up we could resurrect the Trunk
Main Project.
. If we negotiate with developers to provide sewer service through Gulf
Coast Waste Disposal Authority we may need to upgrade lift Station #40
(Shady River)
. A trunk sewer paralleling the proposed Bay Area Boulevard. (timing could
be a problem)
. Water distribution system outer loop improvements
. Use the funds for our costs to secure additional surface water (since the
stams of the LP A W A refunding will not be known until August 1999)
In any case, we should reach a decision made on the use of these funds by the end of this
year's budget process. We will keep Council informed of our progress on this matter and
of other options.
JJ/cns
_
_
PROPOSED F.Y. '97 II '98 BOND SALE
N. T.S.
GALVESTON
BAY
LEGEND
t:!. DSIIC UIT nA1IlII
~
_ UIT S1AIIa
DISfIC WI',,", SDQt 10M
........ WIT...,. SlWUI lIC
D1S1IlIlSllL___
PIWU!iIEII ~. SIR. I'DIIl:E IIf.
~ -'r~~
SOUTHEAST LA PORTE lRUNK :MAIN
e
e
City of La Porte
Established 1892
0dDber 9, 1998
Catified Letter
Rdum Receipt Rrquested
Mr. Tun CIiflDn, PJesicIent
Bayou Apartments, LP
S103 Covebaw:n Driw:
Dallas, Teas 7S252
BE: utility Ex1eDsion Apeement
Dear Mr. Clifton:
In a September 1.5, 1998 Jdta', Mr. 1C~,,.u, p1!1ftning DircctDr DOtified you tbat tbe Ci1J had DOt
received the deliw:lable9 JIeCtl...,., to move forward with your ~ project.
To date, die City has. still DOt received a dalicatinn of the lift station site, nor confirmaIion and
dclivery of the propated .~ with. die City of.~ Also the ccmcJitioaal approval of the
fiJIaI.phit....bIIirit~orr.delMly of~~ deed-~ aeda"eltr' 1aNJ!JMJ'P- buffer.
You were iDfonned the City WGIIld eansf4eF J8& i& default of die ~ if wedidlK1C seceive-_
needed items or bear fiom you within S days of the SepII:mber IS, 1998leUa'. It bas been ac:arly 30
days since the ~ fiom Mr. KDeupper, and we have not received any documea.ts or been cord8d'ed
to discuss the sjnUltinrn. At this time, the City bas made the decision to consider you in default of the
agreement. "The enginea'"s work bas been stopped, aDd we have no other IeCOIItSe except to raciJld
previous appmvaJs and tamiDat.e the Utility ExteDsion Apeement between you and the City.
If you wish to make a neW application repnling your project, please contact Doug ICneupper,
Planning Ditector.
t City Manager
c: Robert T. Herrera, ~ Manager
Doug ICneupper, ~i"g Dimctor
Knox Askins, City Attorney
P.'''. Bp',; 1115 . bl Pl\rt~. r~."as 775 -> 1.115 . /2~ II -n 1-50::!O
e
e
E
,.
I
CITY OF LA PORTE
~ttttttttttt~t~~~t~~i~~~~~it~j~~~~~~~lj~~r~t~~~~~~~~I~~jl~~~~~j~Jl~j{{{~rrtt~~tttr~~~~
~~j~j~j~jI~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~j~~~!~j~~~~~j~J~~~~~~~tij~~i~~~~~~~~~j~~~~~ii~~~~~~~~t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~it~~i~~~j~i~~~~~~~~~ii~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
e
e
September 30, 1998
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Robert T. Herrera, City Manager
6<.\~
Chemical Emergency Procedures Signs at City Parks
SUBJECT:
The City has been approached by the Local Emergency Planning Committee regarding the
placement of signs at City Parks. Attached is a copy of the wording they propose to put on the
sign. It is our understanding the sign will be approximately 4 foot bv 8 foot in size (about the
size of a piece of plywood).
The purpose of the sign is to provide park visitors with instruction on what to do if a Chemical
Emergency Event should occur while they are in the park. The sign would be customized with
the location of each park being highlighted in the "You Are Here" fashion.
In our interaction with the general public, we have to reach a balance with the responsible
disbursement of information. We need to make sure we provide adequate methods to notify
the public while at the same time, not providing so much information that it makes the public
have an underlying sense of gloom and doom.
After seeing this type of sign in the park of a sister city, I am not sure the message it sends
the general public is worth the negativity associated with the sign and as such, I am
uncomfortable recommending that we accept their offer.
I really would like to hear from the Council on this matter. Perhaps, I am being overly
concerned about the message the sign leaves with people who visit our park sites.
RTH:cjb
Attachment
c John Joerns
Jeff Litchfield
Stephen Barr
e
Chemical Emergency
Procedures
the Warning
If you hear a "Whoop" Whoop" from
Siren* please proceed as follows
1. Go inside the nearest accessible building, OR vehicle.
2. Close all doors and windows.
3. Turn off ALL air circulation equipment (except ceiling fans)
4. Tune radio to AM 830, or AM 740 (KTRH).
5. If directed to do so, you may drive out of the area, or to the
nearest shelter.
6 Do not leave a building until you hear the "All Clear" signal
by siren or radio
t
GALVESTON
BAY
e
routinely tested at noon on Saturdays.
Sponsored by the Local Emergency Planning Committee, the
City of La Porte, the City of Morgan's Point, and the City of
Shoreacres.
* System
-l
o
,~
~
_
e
F
. CITY OF LA PORTE .
January 26, 1999
TO:
Robert T. Herrera, City Manager
FROM:
CC:
SUBJECT:
10hn looms, Assistant City Mane ."-
Land Acquisition (
I.E. Cook property/Old Cemetery' lock 1154
Re: November 18, 1998 memo from Jeff Litchfield
During last Thursday's Executive Staff meeting, we reviewed a December 22, 1997
memo regarding potential uses and acquisition of portions of the I.E. Cook property.
One of the ideas referenced in the memo was the opportunity to promote the
preservation of the "historical" gravesites in Block 1154.
On Friday, January 22, 1999, I was contacted by Sharon Rhomfeld. Sharon is the
daughter of J.E. Cook. She stated that her mother, Mrs. J.E. Cook, has agreed to let
Sharon represent her with regard to the cemetery property. The proposal put forth by
Sharon was deeding the property to the City (or other non-profit organization) in
exchange for a letter that establishes the value of the donation for tax purposes.
Sharon stated that the cemetery and its "state" might soon be the subject of letters to the
Bayshore Sun and possibly Channel 2.
Ms. Rhomfeld believes the condition of the cemetery would have been upsetting to her
father and she would like to see the cemetery cleaned up.
I have scheduled a visit with the La Porte/Bay Area Heritage Society (February 1) to
see if they would be interested in accepting the property and helping to solicit funding
and volunteers to clean and restore the cemetery. If Council agrees, the City could
offer some in-kind services such as legal work, information gathering, brush hauling,
etc. Please advise if you wish to take any other action or visit with Council.
JJ/cns
e
City of La Porte
Interoffice Memorandum
e
To: Mayor and City Councilmen
From: ~ Jeff Litchfield, Director of Finance/ACM
Date: U "January 27,1999
Subject: Workshop on Joel E. Cook Properties
In November of 1998, Decker McKim and Fred Westergren approached the City asking us if we
were interested in purchasing a large block of the property owned by the estate of Joel E. Cook,
who also owns properly under the name of La Porte Land Company. The property is burdened
with a severe amount of delinquent taxes.
Their offer was reviewed by Executive Staff at its staff meeting of November 19, 1998, at which
time their proposal was reviewed in detail. After a couple of months to think about the proposal,
staff again discussed it at their January 21, 1999 staff meeting. After review at both meetings,
staff does not believe 1he City has a use for the entire 10 block area.
It does have an interest in the property located directly behind the Recreation and Fitness Center,
which is Block 1157. La Porte Land Company has 10 of those lots. This property will be the
future site of a maintenance yard for the Parks and Recreation Department and is part of project
753 - Parks Maintenance Yard.
Additionally, staff can foresee it would be advantageous for the City to own both sides of Little
Cedar Bayou for future channel work/expansion or for park trail system. Unfortunately, the
Cook's are not the only property owners of the blocks which are adjacent to the bayou.
Attached is a copy of ttrle memorandum that was shared with the Executive Staff which I would
like to review with you at the workshop.
In conclusion, staff would like to approach McKimlWestergren regarding the purchase of the 10
lots in Block 1157.
e
e
G
e
e
Relocate Girl's Softball Report, page 1
City of La Porte
Parks and Recreation Department
Report on Girl's Softball Field Conversion, Litt'e Cedar Bayou Park
February 1, 1999
A. Historical Overview
Girl's Softball is a growing and vibrant sport here in the City of La Porte. The (La
Porte Girl's Softball Association) has operated girl's softball leagues in the City for
many years. In recent years they have experienced growing pains in their present
location due, in part, to the shared use of Lomax Park with other primary users.
After exploring other options, staff recommended and the City Council approved a
Capital Improvement expenditure of $200,000 to relocate the LPGSA fields from
Lomax Park to Little Cedar Bayou Park in the current FY 1998-99 budget. LPGSA
has also contributed funds totaling $3,500. The initial project included re-aligning
the existing three adult softball fields for youth play (Le. making outfields shorter,
removing grass from infields, installing fences, etc.) and remodeling the existing
concession building to accommodate use by the LPGSA. To accommodate the
expected future expansion of the youth softball program in the City, plans were
made to add a fourth field to the Little Cedar Bayou Complex. This field would be
started under the current capital program, and completed at a later date, as the
need became apparent.
B. Present Status of the Relocation Process
I have attached a spreadsheet that shows our commitments to date, for the
conversion process for Fields 1, 2, & 3. As shown, our expected commitments,
barring any complications, are approximately $209,445. This includes lighting for
Field 3, fence and dugout conversion and replacement for Fields 1, 2 & 3; and the
addition of batting cages for use by youth softball. Also included are modifications
of the concession facility and restrooms to add utility and convenience for the
LPGSA and the end users. Staff has spoken with representatives of Pfeiffer Electric
and Brooks Concrete and they are on-schedule for their major portions of this
project. I am happy to report that, barring any unusual circumstances such as
inclement weather or contractor delays, we believe we will be able to complete all
the ongoing projects by the March 1st opening of the LPG~A season.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank both the Planning Department and the
Public Works Department for their wonderful assistance in moving this project along
toward completion. Without their assistance, we would have been unable to
complete this project in a timely manner. The Parks & Recreation Department, and
I'm sure, LPGSA are very grateful for their assistance on this project.
e
e
Relocate Girl's Softball Report, page 2
c. Proposal to Complete Field 4
As shown in the attached financial status report, the commitments for this project
exceed the available resources by $5,945. The value of the commitments include
a contingency of $9,973, therefore, if the contingency is not needed, a surplus of
$4,028 would exist. Included in the Current Budget are enough funds to bring field
4 online, with the exception of lights. LPGSA has indicated that the addition of
lights to the new field is so important, they are willing to relocate fencing from the
Lomax fields to the new field, which would save an estimated $40,000. Because
of their willingness to do this, we are recommending that the City approve an
additional $45,000 be budgeted for this project (out of the available fund balance).
This would provide us the opportunity to complete Field 4 this year.
At this time staff would recommend Council approve additional funds to complete
the addition of Field 4 for this project. The primary cost would be the work
necessary to provide electricity to the site (see site map showing location of Field
4), This would be the major cost for the project, as the LPGSA has agreed to move
the fencing from a field at Lomax Park to the Little Cedar Bayou location, as a part
of their contribution to the project. In addition, they have agreed to install the
cabinetry in the concession stand and to build scorekeeper's booths at Fields 3 &
4 as a part of their contribution to the project.
The Planning Department has begun work on a grading and drainage plan for Field
4. Public Works has been enlisted to assist with a portion of the drainage work as
their workload allows. The remainder of the work would be Parks and Recreation
force account. If Council agrees to increase the budget for lighting Field 4, we
would be able to proceed with the installation of the lights for Field 4 and have it
operational for their fall season.
D. Summary
The La Porte Girl's Softball Association is an integral part of our community. The
leagues and tournaments they schedule have a very large economic impact on the
businesses in La Porte. Moving them to this more centralized location is a sound,
prudent, and fiscally responsible action. It makes sense to go ahead at this time
and finish the additional field for use by this organization. Future costs for electrical
work, etc. will likely escalate, costing the City more in the long run. The fourth field,
when completed, will begin service immediately as a practice field and for
tournament play. It will allow the LPGSA to bid on regional and national
tournaments as a state-of-the-art facility that few other communities can offer.
e
e
City of La Porte
Parks & Recreation Department
February 1, 1999
Financial Status for Conversion of LCBP to Girl's Softball
Available Resources
City Budget FY 1998-99
Contrubution by LPGSA
Total Available Resources
Commitments
Electrical Service, Field 3 & Batting Cages
Fencing, Dugouts, & Batting Cages
Clearing & Grubbing, Field 4 (complete)
Fill Dirt for Field 4
Finish Sand, Field 4
Finish Grading, Field 4
Irrigation, Field 4
Seed for Field 4
Fencing, Dugouts, Field 4
Electrical Service, Field 4
Sand for Bleacher Pads
Concrete Bleacher Pads
Drainage Pipe
Cabinets for Concession (installed by LPGSA)
Miscellaneous Electrical (oUltlets)
Turface (Soil Conditioner)
Red Clay for Infields (all four fields)
Electrical for Concession (outlets, & vent hood)
Restroom S~II Doors (not purchased)
Scoreboard Brackets and material
Total Commitments, to date
Plus 5% contingency
Total Commitments, with Contingency
Resources vs. Commitments
Current
Budget
Requested
Changes *
Proposed
Budget
200,000.00 45,OqO.00 245,000,00
3,500.00 3,500.00
$ 203,500.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 248,500.00
71,500.00
35,259.53
6,655.00
5,400.00
1,300,00
14,500.00
4,000.00
1,400.00
(40,000.00)
75,000.00
75,000.00
1,064,00
3,000.00
1,512.00
814.69
200.00
1,040.00
8,416,80
710.00
2,000.00
700.00
234,472.02
11,723.60
246,195.62
.71,500,00
35,259.53
6,655.00
5,400,00
1,300.00
14,500.00
4,000.00
1,400.00
40,000.00
1,064.00
3,000.00
1,512.00
814.69
200.00
1,040,00
8,416.80
710.00
2,000.00
700.00
199,472.02
9,973.60
$ 209,445.62
35,000.00
1,750,00
$ 36,750.00 $
$ (5,945,62) $ 8,250.00 $ 2,304.38
* We have reached an understanding with LPGSA that if we will add lights to Field 4 this year, we
can delete funding for fences for Field 4. They have enough good fencing at the Lomax site
to relocate to the new Field 4 and have volunteered the labor to move the fencing.
e
e
, >
February 19 1888
e
l\tIEETING HANDOUTS
e
I
.
e
I
I
I
11663-0 JONES ROAD . HOUSTON, TEXAS 77070
(281) 890-4781 . FAX (281) 890-7116
Proposal for Water and Sanitary Sewer
Service
For
New Industrial Park
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Located South of Fairmont Parkway and
West of the Proposed Extension of
Underwood Road
The General Design and layout of the multi-use proposed
industrial park is shown on the attached exhibit. Features
included are:
· All concrete curbed and guttered streets
. Underground storm drainage system with detention
. 100' setback from F airmont Parkway
. 8' high earth berm along Fairmont Parkway
. No lot access directly to Fairmont Parkway
· Controlled land use by Deed Restriction similar to City of
La Porte zoning
Developer:
Tuffli Companies
Long Beach, California
.
.
Contact for Development:
Bob Klassen, Sunbelt Commercial Builders, Inc.
Kelley Parker, Cushman and Wakefield of Texas
I
-
-
DESIGN-BUILD . ENGINEERING . CONSTRUCTION
e
e
-
SUNBEL T COMMERCIAL BUILDERS, INC.
11663-0 Jones Road
Houston, Texas 77070
TeI281-890-4781 Fax 281-890-7116
-
Water and Sewer Service to
Proposed Industrial Park
Fairmont Parkway at Underwood Road
Proposal Summary
· Water and sewer services are requested from the City of La Porte. In consideration of
land use controls by Developer to provide orderly development of the proposed 156
acre industrial park located at southwest corner of Fairmont Parkway and Underwood
Road.
· A Master Industrial District Agreement I Utility Extension Agreement is proposed to be
entered into by Developer and the City of La Porte describing the utility arrangements
and agreements of both parties. '
Requested Water and Sewer Uses
· It is requested that potable water supply be available for domestic use, fire protection
and landscape irrigation.
· Domestic use is typical sanitary and personal consumption use, no "process" water use
and no process water discharge.
Land Use Controls
· Developer will provide land use controls by way of Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions recorded as part of the development documentation. Each lot owner,
original and subsequent, is required to abide by these "DEJed Restrictions", as they are
an encumbrance that runs with the land.
· Primary development setback from Fairmont Parkway is 100' from the south right of
way line. This consists of the existing 50' Exxon Pipeline Corridor; in addition, a 50'
wide earth berm proposed to be 8' in height above existing ground level. The earth
berm is to provide limited visual screening of the property.
· The proposed Tract "A" and the northern portion of Tract "B" south of the 100' primary
setback is proposed to be business uses similar to BI and LI uses allowed by the City
of La Porte Zoning Ordinances, with limitations on outside storage, Property uses
south from this area is proposed to be similar to what is allowed in HI zoning, with
limitations. Anticipated uses include large rail served tilt-wall warehouse and
distribution facilities, and other industrial uses. Rail serviCe will be limited to the "HI"
area in the south portion of the park, and not extend into the "BI-L1" areas.
· SIC business classification codes will be used to describe, in agreements with the City
and the Deed Restrictions, what business uses are allowed in the various areas of the
industrial park. This is the same method used to control land uses in the existing City
of La Porte Zoning Ordinance.
· Setbacks and lot Building Lines will be established as part of the land platting process,
recorded on the plat, and described in the Deed Restrictions.
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
-
.
e
e
Water and Sewer Facilities
· Water lines will be constructed at Developers expense in accordance with City of La
Porte standards and will be placed in a 10' water line easement adjacent to the
proposed public streets. After construction of the lines and the expiration of the City of
La Porte standard construction warranty period, the water lines will be owned and
maintained by the City of La Porte. Water tap to City of La Porte system will be on the
north side of Fairmant Parkway near the Underwood Road intersection.
· Sewer collection system will be constructed at Developers expense in accordance with
standard practices, and will be owned and maintained as a "common element" of the
industrial park. The main sewer tap will be made to the existing City of La Porte
manhole on the 30" sewer trunk located at the southwest corner of Fairmont Parkway
and Underwood Road.
· Each water-sewer customer will make application to the City of La Porte and pay
meter, tap and front-foot fees as established by City policy. Water meters will be set in
accordance with City of La Porte standard practices.
· Sewer waste stream from each water customer will be required to have a standard City
of La Porte sample wall on their sewer line, available for monitoring by the Public
Works department in accordance with its practices.
· Each water-sewer customer will enter into an Industrial District Agreement (IDA) with
the City, if required, as set forth in the agreements to be established with the City.
F airmont Parkway Access
· No land tract will have direct access to Fairmont Parkway frontage.
· All land tracts in the industrial park will have access to existing public roads by way of
the new internal public streets and the proposed extension of Underwood Road.
- · The only Fairmont Parkway access is one proposed entry street.
Drainage and Flood Control
· The development infrastructure systems will be engineered and constructed as
required by Harris County Engineering,
· Storm water drainage system, including storm water detention, will be engineered,
constructed and approved by Harris County Flood Control District.
Proposed Industrial Park Design and Approvals
· Curbed and guttered concrete streets in accordance with Harris County standards,
· Industrial park to be designed and platted as a "subdivision" in accordance with
community standards as set forth by Harris County, and as approved by the City of La
Porte and other public entities.
--
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
AND ONE-LINE UTILITY SCHEMATIC
DATE. DECEHBER 1990 JOB NUHBER 2901-01
.
EXIST. PECAN CROssING
HEW HEW
IlESIIlfJnut. IE5IDDIlW.
!!!!! 1- -
.
- -
CXISTlNG 24. VAT~ FAIRMONT PARKWAY (250. ROW)
- CXISTING 24. VATCRU
IIlJiTWTMl'-- "-_ -
- . DUSTING PIPD..INC lUlRl
-
-- ~ r
EARTHEN BERM /'
.~
. PROP. 8" ~~~c.~~S
VIITER LINE
tOP. Ir. ,
\NIT MY 'l-\~ PROP. 8"
:\fER 0" SI\NIT MY SEVER
0"
~- 71-' I - = ;;;
H:::
s.c' ~~ 0 48' ... 4 ... " PROP. Ir 48"
...PROP. STDRH VIlTER LINE
SEVER
PROP. STDRH
SEVER H.H. (TYP.)
PROP. 50'
IlRIIINI\GE - -
CHI\NNEL Ie:
EASEMENT I~
.-v; .: ,PROP. 60" R.D. v. ~~c,~ r;i-~S ~~~c,~~S
(TVP .) ~ ~~
r,~ p.S PROP.1r ,,()l 'l-~S)
"4\~~ t-~ .
\q~ 'liTER LINE
PROP. 60" VIDE PUBLIC
~ STREET V/ 41. PAVlNG (TYP.)
SPRIHG a.u. y
60' VUJ(
IlRAINAGC CAS01CHT_ PROP, 0"
SANITARY""
W SEVER
I PROP. STDRH
:5-4' ,.... SEVER PROP.1r
_t~_ 48" ~ ... ~WAT" UN< . , ...
( 0 t 3D'
- (H) -- - ~
\ Ira -;,- c :
g : 0 c
PROP. SANITARY PROP. Ir SNaT M F
SEVER I~'
SEVER H.H. <TVP.) ~~~c'~c.~~S oi
- ,~
_ II. .IOIC SI..IMl', I0-4Il2 . - Iexl' STRP - ClAIlIfNICE 104'.-/ ~~~c'~t-~ff,S \(). to -
- L _ WQ.C, 0-47 - -
'l-'l!P -
IlIlU
SITE
DIY OF IA PanE - ... STRP - CIlCfiIHCE "UI U
- IA PanE NG I'l\SADOfo\ E:Il' lNIS
DIY OF p- - _ SlAP - ClAIlIfNICE 164-'"
PRlP. DRAINAGE
ClWKL
<BY OTHERs)
158
ontgomery & associates
3 NORTHPOINT DRIVE. SUITE 100
HOUSTON. TEXAS. 77060
PH. (281)260-8031: FAX. (281)260-8198
ACRE TUFFLI TRACT
( e
- -
PROP. 24' \fIDE
CDlCRETE RDADVIIY
60' R.D.V.
DEDICI\TIDt
PROP. UNIIEINoml ROAD
".-V/ 24' \lID[ PIIVING. [J'l[-fW.F
[F FUT1JRE 2-24' PIIVING SE~
~ PRIVIlTE ROAD
'" 1IW:r IA
IIEXDlE I'RlXlucIs COWPN<< 10
L'IONDEU. PlIL'I'WIERS CiClRI'OAA1llIN
fN W,14711%
~
-
- II..IOIC lUMY._ -
- L _ WQ.C, Ir-(7
DIY OF "-
NOTEI
~
SCAlE: ,....400.
ALL
~
tp
EXHIBIT A