_ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Regular Meeting April 13, 1967 10:00 Α.Μ. Council Chamber, City Hall The meeting was called to order with Mayor Palmer presiding. Roll call: Present: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Absent: None Present also: W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager; Doren R. Eskew, City Attorney; Reuben Rountree, Jr., Director of Public Works; Robert A. Miles, Chief of Police Church. Invocation was delivered by REVEREND HAROLD H. ZIRKEL, Crestview Methodist The Council at 10:00 A.M. opened bids on Contract GD-105 Decker Creek Miscellaneous Dam Construction - Roads, Bridge, etc., as follows: BIDDER BID BOND BASE BID AMIS CONST. CO. $10,000 $104,705.00 BEGIN WORK CALENDAR DAYS 5 AUSTIN PAVING CO. 10,000 72,809.00 10 J. C. EVANS CONST. COMPANY 10,000 77,656.26 10 The bids were referred to the Director of Electric Utilities and Consulting Engineer, Brown & Root, Inc., for review and recommendation to the Council. Councilman Long inquired if the Parks and Recreation Department plans were being built around these roads. The City Manager stated they were familiar with what is being done. One of the roads is a replacement of Hogeye Road which will be submerged, the other is a boundary road. Later in the meeting, the City Manager submitted the following recommendation from Brown & Root, Inc. in which both he and the Director of Electric Utilities concurred: "April 13, 1967 "Mr. W. T. Williams, Jr. City Manager City of Austin Austin, Texas April 13, 1967 CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS "Subject: Decker Creek Dam Contract GD-105 Our Job CA-2 "Dear Mr. Williams: "Brown & Root, Inc. has examined the bids opened by you at 10:00 A.M., April 13, 1967, in open council meeting for the Decker Creek Dam, Contract No. GD-105. "Bids were submitted by: Amis Construction Company Austin Paving Company J. C. Evans Construction Company, Inc. "On the basis of the lowest and best bid, it is recommended that a contract for the Miscellaneous Additions, Decker Creek Dam be awarded to Austin Paving Company at the base bid of $72,809.00. "Yours very truly, BROWN & ROOT, INC. BY: S/ C. W. Weber C. W. Weber Project Engineer "APPROVED: s/ D. C. Kinney D. C. Kinney, Director Electric Utility City of Austin" Councilman Long moved that the City Manager enter into a contract with AUSTIN PAVING COMPANY at the base bid of $72,809.00. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The Council welcomed MRS. DOLLAR and seven special education students from the Austin State School. PAVING LYONS ROAD Councilman White moved that MR. GEORGE GUERRA be heard. The motion was seconded by Councilman LaRue. Roll call showed a unanimous vote. MR. GUERRA regarding paving on Lyons Road, stated a petition was filed many years before. The paving was not done, due to the area's being in an Urban Renewal project. A parochial school was opened, but the streets were not paved. He stated traffic had increased, the bus uses Lyons Road, and there is an unhealthy, dusty condition for the people in the area. Councilman Long explained this was in the Glen Oaks Area and it would be four more years before anything could CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 be done. She said after discussing this with the City Manager and Public Works Director, she thought some relief could be given. The City Manager reviewed the paving program in Austin, from 1930 until after 1950 when practically no paving was done. In 1950 a program was started to try to catch up on the paving. In 1955 80% of the streets in Austin were unpaved. Even with the tremendous growth of the City and numerous streets were added now better than 80% of the streets in Austin are paved. When people petitioned for paving, with no engineering problems involved, the streets were paved. Some streets that involved excessive maintenance were paved without petitions. The particular problem on Lyons Road is that it is a part of the Glen Oaks Urban Renewal Project, Phase 2, which is several years hence. The drainage problem is the principal difficulty, as a pipe is to be located in Lyons Road in connection with the whole creek valley. The solution is several years away. Where there is a petition on the desire of the property owners to pave, and it is being held up due to an engineering problem as exists in this case, he suggested that a temporary type of paving might be done now, and it would not require heavy maintenance or repeated watering. MR. GUERRA complimented MR. ROUNTREE, Director of Public Works, as being very cooperative and he had applied oil and sprayed the streets, but this treatment does not last long. He said there had always been cooperation when he requested something. The City Manager stated the actual cost of placing the light surface on the existing street would be no greater than the maintenance. Councilman Long asked about Tillery. Mr. Guerra stated it was heavily traveled, and he pointed out another drainage problem from MAUDE to WEBBERVILLE Street, suggesting that a ditch be made from the low point into a back water sewage treatment system. Councilman Long reported a call from one on Ramos and Castro Street, stating the water does not drain. MAYOR PALMER stated the City Manager would be asked to look into this and see what can be done to give relief. Councilman Long stated the City Manager had recommended a light topping on the street until the drainage is worked out in the whole area. Mr. Guerra said they would be pleased with that and wait for something better. DRAINAGE COUNCILMAN LONG asked if in the vicinity east of Zaragosa Park a small ditch would be made in the area of Ramos and Castro for draining the water. The Director of Public Works stated he noted this and it would be checked out. COUNCILMAN LONG reported another situation on MANCHACA ROAD in front of JERRY JOSLIN SCHOOL where water is standing about a foot deep. The Director of Public Works said he would check on this also. Mayor Palmer noted for eight months there had been no rain and everyone was grateful for this rain, inspite of the inconveniemes MINUTES Councilman LaRue moved that the Minutes of March 30, 1967 be approved with typographical error on zoning case noted. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None - CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 TRACOR COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC STUDIES MR. FRANK McBEE announced TRACOR, INC., had been invited by the National Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences of the National Research Council to bid on a project entitled "Optiminizing the Flow of Existing Street Networks." The intent is to study existing streets in their present format to see what could be done to increase their traffic carrying capacity. Limited experience has proven that substantial improvements could be achieved by changing speed, turning, parking, one way streets, intersection control, etc. This study is not designed for developing a sophisticated system of computer control, which will be discussed also. It was specifically set out that the development of a system of computer control and electronic guidance was being studied elsewhere, and would not be included in this project although this study would use computer techniques. Councilman Long asked if this study were free to the City. Mr. McBee stated in essence it is. He explained different effects would be tested, and field observations would be made to prove up whatever optiminizing studies would show. The project is limited to cities from 250,000 - 600,000 and Greater Austin fits in nicely. Funds available from the National Research Bureau are $1,000,000 for 24 months. Mr. McBee's goal was City approval for Tracor to work with the City Staff and that it make the studies and other information that the Traffic Engineer, MR. KLAPPROTH, and his associates have gathered available to TRACOR which would like to assign one of their staff somewhere near his operation so they could get to these studies and information. He explained there may be experiments conducted where they might want to block off a particular street for a period of time. Their intent and proposal would be to fix a sum that would represent whatever costs the City might have out-of-pocket over and above its normal operations, and the rest of the costs would be borne by TRACOR and reimbursed by the sponsors of the project. Councilman Long asked if they had experts in these matters, or was this a package of criteria which would be fit into Austin Mr. McBee said there would be experts in all phases. Mayor Palmer referred to their specific request that the City approve this effort, anticipating City approval and implementing, Tracor's suggested changes in the use of traffic control systems, lights, timing, etc., and asked if Mr. McBee thought this would be a cost item to the City. Mr. McBee said his attitude was it would not impose on the City any cost over and above what it would normally spend in this area. They were requesting funds whereby they would reimburse costs. Mr. McBee stated whether TRACOR was successful bidder or not, that AUSTIN has an excellent opportunity to be involved in this study, as the National Research Council has an interest in Austin due to the activities of MR. KLAPPROTH as he has a wealth of material available. Councilman Shanks noted this Parent Organization respected the records that Mr. Klapproth had been keeping, despite recent publicity. The City Manager reported another request from PHILCO-FORD CORPORATION had been received in regard to this same study. The general nature of the work, as a by-product, might improve the local situation; but the study is for national use, and the local streets of Austin would be used to help prove out the principles and concepts developed in computer processes. Austin could well benefit from the study, but it is not designed solely for the purpose of benefitting Austin. Austin would be used to develop principles which could be applied to cities the size mentioned. Mr. McBee said this was very well stated. MAYOR PALMER asked what type of commitment would be needed. Mr. McBee explained the arrangements made by the City would need to be definied, and a statement by the Council that the City would cooperate in everyway possible would be sufficient for their submitting CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 their bid. The Mayor asked if this same thing would be done for other bidders. The City Manager stated that was possible; however, it may be that one would be all with which the City would join. Councilman Shanks said the Council would have to hear from the other bidders. Councilman Long said all would want the same thing. She said the City would want to cooperate with TRACOR first, but if they should fail the City would want to have the benefit of another one. Councilman Long moved that the City Manager be instructed to write a letter setting out an agreement with TRACOR in regard to their request. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None : REPORT ON PROPOSED COMPUTER CONTROLLED TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM Traffic & Transportation Department The City Manager said a synopsis of the report which Mr. Klapproth had prepared was sent out with the Agenda in connection with a traffic controlled computer system. Basically it describes the present signal systems and controls for those systems, noting there are 14 district systems involving 165 intersections. The study indicates it would be well in order to provide a smoother flow of traffic through the system to reduce the number of systems to six and to enlarge those six to provide not only for the present 165 locations but additional intersections, thus placing more intersections under a common control. Councilman Long asked if the lights would all change at a particular time. The City Manager stated the flow of traffic through the intersection would be worked out and timed by the computer and it would not mean that all signals would change simultaneously but by a planned program they would all function together within the program. The advantage would be the provision for a more even flow and larger area of coordination. There would be one master computer of the whole system. The City Manager listed the six basic systems--CENTRAL, UNIVERSITY, BURNETLAMAR-CONGRESS, AIRPORT, EASTSIDE and EXPOSITION and the number of intersections in each system, totaling 208 intersections. Councilman Long inquired if this anticipated working with the State on the Interstate Highway. The City Manager said this would be coordinated where applicable. There is only one crossing in the University system and that is on 19th and Interstate Highway 35; and that the State would certainly work with the City as it developed this plan. Mayor Palmer stated this would synchronize all the lights, and this is what everyone in Austin is favoring. Councilman Long stated the flow of traffic was no better than the programing. The City Manager stated the program had to be set up to begin with; and if the program anticipates all the possibilities and takes them into account, then the computer can do the rest. Councilman LaRue inquired as to why the University Area was considered first rather than the Central Section. The City Manager described the University System as being the one where the greatest problems in flow exist. It would not involve as many controls. The Mayor noted many of the complaints were in getting into the downtown section, and the free flow of traffic moving in and out of the central section was important. The City Manager stated 19th Street and 24th and Lamar were in the University system. The City Manager pointed out the estimated costs of such a program, referring to the last page of the synopsis of the report. There are several types of computers, and some of which would require the use of an additional computer for each project. One computer would not only take care of the University System, but all the other systems could be added. (Under Column "D") Shown are estimates _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 from the manufacturers as to the probable costs. This schedule is not a bid tabulation, but estimates of costs. The City Manager explained the schedule of "Preliminary Estimate of Cost" stating in Columns "A", "B" and "C" the University System would have to be supplemented by the difference between those costs and the "All Systems" costs in the next column, if a computer were purchased to take care of the University only. If a computer were installed now to take care of all systems later, it would cost considerably more money now, but less in the long run. He compared the various costs per manufacturer designated by a letter. Councilman Long stated the "all system" computer could be purchased now and then start programming it if all could not be done at once, because the programming is more expensive than the computer itself. Her opinion was it would be the least expensive in the long run. The City Manager pointed out the break-down the computer only, the conversion of traffic lights, loop detectors, etc., and the communication system. The Mayor stated in the Five Year Bond Program it was anticipated about $130,000 a year over the next five years for doing something in the traffic field and this money is already planned. The City Manager stated this could be financed. If the computer that will take care of the ultimate requirements is purchased now it will take part of this year's and next year's funds. He pointed out there had been very little reason to bring this matter up previously until they got to the point of getting a delivery date where it could be paid for out of both years' funds, and that is why it was brought in today. The City Manager stated it was their recommendation that a computer which would take care of all systems at once be acquired. It can be financed now if specifications are drawn along that line, bids taken, delivery made around the end of the fiscal year, and part of current funds and part of next year's funds being used. Detailed specifications are not ready, and he stated they needed guidance from the Council whether it agreed that the "All System Computer" is the route to take so the specifications can be completed, specifying the capacity and everything that would take care of all systems. Councilman Long asked if all cities were going to computer control devices now. The City Manager stated quite a few were working on it. He said it would take several years to make the complete installation, putting in one system at a time. Mr. Klapproth estimates it would take four or five years. DR. S. L. SIMON, Tracor, stated there were at least five cities that had these computer systems, the largest in Montreal. In answer to Mayor Palmer's question, DDR. SIMON stated he would recommend that Austin go into this computer system, and it should be studied very carefully. Councilman Long said the system would be no better than the programming and asked who was to do this. It was pointed out the manufacturers who supply the computer, would provide the programming, and the program could be changed at a moment's notice. Councilman Long ask- ed if these people did not know the City very well, how would they work it out. Dr. Simon stated the City was well documented and he was surprised to see some of these volumes that the City of Austin has put out. He believed that was one of the reasons Austin was a desirable City for the study discussed earlier. MR. J. C. HUMPHREY, Tracor, discussed the programming and the ability to change it. MR. AL MCQUOWN stated one advantage of the Central computer concept is as time goes on and problems change, and the city grows, it is easy for the program to be changed without purchasing new equipment. Money invested now is money well spent. MR. BILL RASCO from Tracor was also present. Councilman LaRue moved to authorize the City Manager to draw up plans and specifications based on the "ALL System" Computer system as laid out in Item "D" and call for bids. (Page 10 of the report) The motion, seconded by Councilman Long, carried by the following vote: April 13, 1967 CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS- Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None Item "D" is as follows: All Systems (6) 1. Computer $101,000 2. Master Controllers 3. Alarm Indications & Failure Data Logger 4. Misc. Computer Components 11,700 • 5. Totals (Computer Only) $112,700 6. Conversion of Local Controls 11,600 7. Loop Detectors 30,000 8. Equipment Retirement Credits 9. Totals (All Control Equipment) $154,300 10. Communications 102,000 11. Display Board & Contingencies 25,700 12. Total Cost (Prelim. Est.) $282,000 The City Manager submitted the following: "April 11, 1967 "TO: Mr. W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager SUBJECT: Brackenridge Hospital Construction, Phase 1A "We are transmitting therewith copies of bid tabulation for Brackenridge Hospital Construction along with a letter of recommendation from Brackenridge Architects dated April 11, 1967. "We join with Mr. Tobias and the Brackenridge Architects in recommending that a resolution of intent to award contracts be acted upon by the City Council as required by the State Health Department as follows: "The representative of the Hospital Services Division, Texas State Department of Health, has informed us that contracts for the construction of our hospital project cannot be signed until after Part 4, Application for Project Construction, is signed by the Surgeon General. "It is the intent of this Council to award the contracts to the low bidders on this project as soon as Part 4, Application for Project Construction, based on the figures reflected in the following low bids and other necessary hospital costs, is approved by the Surgeon General. General Construction CITADEL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. $2,480,000.00 H.V.A.C. & Plumbing J. M. BOYER, INC. Electrical Elevators $ 575,150.00 AA ELECTRIC COMPANY $ 274,202.00 HUNTER-HAYES ELEVATOR COMPANY $ 124,800.00 TOTAL $3,454,152.00 _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 "Construction time for substantial completion is stated in the proposals as 660 calendar days. "FROM: A. M. Eldridge, Supervising Engineer Construction Engineering Division SIGNED A. M. Eldridge "April 11, 1967 "Mr. W. T. Williams, Jr. City Manager Municipal Building Austin, Texas "Attention: Mr. A. M. Eldridge "Reference: Brackenridge Hospital Development Phase LA "Dear Mr. Williams: "On April 4, 1967 at 2 P.M. in the City Council Room bids were publicly opened and read for the construction of Phase 1A of Brackenridge Hospital Development. Proposals were received from four general contractors, three heating, air conditioning and ventilating contractors, two plumbing contractors plus two addit- ional contractors who bid only on a combination of plumbing, heating and airconditioning, four electrical contractors and three elevator contractors. The following were the low bidders: "General Construction Citadel Construction Company, Inc., San Marcos, Texas Base Bid $2,480,000.00 "Heating, Air-Conditioning, Ventilating & Plumbing Combination J. M. Boyer, Inc., Austin, Texas Base Bid $545,150.00 plus $30,000.00 for centrifugal water chiller Total $575,150.00 "Electrical A. A Electric Company, Austin, Texas Base Bid $204,402.00 plus $68,000.00 for nurse-call system & $1,800.00 for Total paging and sound system $274,202.00 "Elevators Hunter-Hayes Elevator Company, Dallas, Texas Base Bid $124,800.00 "The total of all low bids is $3,454,152.00 which is $270.533.00 less than the estimate of cost which was prepared and submitted to you prior to the receiving of bids. "You will note that in each of the above listed proposals for electrical work there is included a separate amount for each of three nurse-call systems and paging systems. Each of these systems is presently being reviewed for conformance CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 "with the specifications. This review will require additional time but to expedite the beginning of construction we have included the maximum amounts in our tabulation of bids and recommend that these amounts be included in the electrical contract with the understanding that when the review has been completed, the contract may be adjusted by change order without loss to the City to reflect the bid cost of the system to be used. This procedure has been discussed with Mr. Nuhn of the State Health Department who agreed that this would be acceptable with his Department. "It is recommended that contracts in the amounts set forth above be awarded to the aforementioned low bidders subject to approval of the State Health Department and the Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service. "This office has investigated the qualifications of each of the low bidders and finds them completely acceptable. "Yours very truly, BROOKS, BARR, GRAEBER & WHITE BARNES, LANDES, GOODMAN & YOUNGBLOOD By s/ Howard Barr Howard R. Barr By s/ Robert P. Landes Robert P. Landes" "BID TABULATION BRACKENRIDGE HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT PHASE LA ALT. NO. 3 FOURTH FLOOR ALT. NO. 1 ALT. NO. 2 BIDDER BASE BID EXCAVATION DEDUCT TUNNEL DEDUCT DEDUCT General Construction Citadel Construction Co. Inc. 2,480,000.00 -38,000.00 94,000.00 97,000.00 J. C. Evans Construc- tion Co. Inc. 2,519,132.00 -50,000.00 -103,000.00 99,000.00 B. L. McGee Construc- tion Co. 2,529,000.00 -56,000.00 -112,000.00 -119,000.00 Stokes Construction Co. 2,650,000.00 -56,681.00 -150,531.00 93,122.00 Heating, Air Conditioning & Ventilation Air Conditioning Inc. 252,500.00 N. C. 318.00 10,427.00 J. M. Boyer Inc. 261,582.00 N. C. 300.00 12,000.00 H. L. Arnold Co. Inc. 278,800.00 N. C. 270.00 11,700.00 CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS April 13, 1967 "ADD AMOUNT CENTRIFUGAL WATER CHILLER CARRIER TRANE Air Conditioning Inc. +40,000.00 +41,400.00 J. M. Boyer Inc. +30,000.00 +30,000.00 H. L. Arnold Co. Inc. +31,500.00 +31,000.00 ALT. NO. 1 ALT. NO. 2 BIDDER BASE BID EXCAVATION DEDUCT TUNNEL DEDUCT ALT. NO. 3 FOURTH FLOOR DEDUCT Plumbing J. M. Boyer Inc. 294,588.00 -1,600.00 -7,300.00 -1,450.00 V. R. Wattinger Plumbing Co. 303,000.00 300.00 -5,000.00 -4,000.00 Heating, Air Conditioning Ventilation & Plumbing J. M. Boyer Inc. 545,150.00 -1,600.00 -7,600.00 -13,450.00 Porter Plumbing and Heating Co. 552,083.00 287.00 -6,308.00 -11,944.00 C. Wallace Plumbing Co. 620,000.00 -1,400.00 -7,500.00 -19,000.00 ADD AMOUNT CENTRIFUGAL WATER CHILLER CARRIER TRANE J. M. Boyer Inc. +30,000.00 +30,000.00 Porter Plumbing and Heating Co. +31,575.00 +32,445.00 C. Wallace Plumbing Co. +30,975.00 +32,445.00 "BIDDER CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 BASE BID ALT. NO. 1 EXCAVATION DEDUCT ALT. NO. 2 TUNNEL DEDUCT ALT. NO. 3 FOURTH FLOOR DEDUCT Electrical A A Electric Co. 204,402.00 N. C. -1,200.00 -1,856.00 W. K. Jennings Electic Co. Inc. 209,981.00 N. C. 592.00 -1,518.00 Graham & Collins Electric Co. Inc. 21.9,900.00 125.00 -1,375.00 -2,650.00 Dean Johnson Inc. 250,250.00 94.00 -2,864.00 -1,966.00 ADD AMOUNT - AUDIO VISUAL NURSE CALL EDWARDS CO. EXECUTONE STROMBERG- CARLSON A A Electric Co. W. K. Jennings Elec. Co. Inc. +64,000.00 +68,000.00 +59,500.00 +70,023.00 +61,212.00 Graham & Collins Electric Co. Inc. +80,500.00 +84,500.00 +76,000.00 Dean Johnson Inc. +70,854.00 +74,645.00 +66,547.00 ADD AMOUNT PAGING & SOUND SYSTEM EDWARDS CO. EXECUTONE STROMBERG CARLSON A A Electric Co. + 1,200.00 +1,800.00 +1,000.00 W. K, Jennings Electric Co. Inc. +1,913.00 + 878.00 Graham & Collins Electric Co. Inc. + 2,050.00 +2,750.00 +1,600.00 Dean Johnson Inc. +3,090.00 +1,105.00 BIDDER _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS BASE BID April 13, 1967 "ALT. NO. 1 EXCAVATION DEDUCT ALT. NO. 2 TUNNEL DEDUCT DEDUCT TUNNEL EL. DEDUCT 4TH FL. EL. Elevators Hunter-Hayes Elevator Co. 124,800.00 10,000.00 -5,700.00 Otis Elevator Co. 129,977.00 12,512.00 -5,512.00 Westinghouse Elevator Corp. 161,295.00 16,357.00 -8,017.00 The City Manager stated the Council would declare only an intent to award the contracts. The Mayor noted the contracts would be awarded subject to the approval of the Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service. Councilman Long was not willing to award a contract on the communication systems, as there was a difference of about $10,000 in the low bid and the high bid. There is a reservation made, but she was not going to accept the high bid. It was recommended that it be held for further study, and she wanted it to come back to the Coun- cil. The City Manager stated the recommendation is that the bids and proposal be studied to determine whether or not the lower one meets the specifications. Councilman Long wanted it to come back before the Council. Councilman LaRue pointed out these bids came in $200,000 less than the estimate which is wonderful and speaks very highly of the Architects, Engineers, and City contractors. MR. BARNES and MR. LANDIS, Architects were present, and both stated they were very pleased with the way the bids came in. The City Manager stated as soon as the contract was worked up and approved by the Surgeon General, that work would begin, and it is estimated it would start within the next 30 days. Councilman Long moved that the Council have a change to review the communication system bid and offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, bids were received by the City of Austin on April 11, 1967, for Brackenridge Hospital Construction, Phase 1A; and, WHEREAS, the bid of Citadel Construction Company, Inc. in the sum of $2,480,000.00 for general construction; the bid of J. M. Boyer, Inc. in the sum of $575,150.00 for H.V.A.C. & Plumbing; the bid of AA Electric Company in the sum of $274,202.00 for Electrical work; and the bid of Hunter-Hayes Elevator Company in the sum of $124,800.00 for elevators, were the lowest and best bids therefor, and the acceptance of such bids have been recommended by the Supervising Engineer of the Construction Engineering Division of the City of Austin, and by the City Manager subject to approval of the Surgeon General of the United States and the Texas State Health Department; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the bid of Citadel Construction Company, Inc., in the sum of $2,480,000.00; the bid of J. M. Boyer, Inc., in the sum of $575,150.00; the bid of AA Electric Company, in the sum of $274,202.00; and the bid of HunterHayes Elevator Company, in the sum of $124,800.00, be and the same are hereby accepted, and that W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager of the City of Austin, be and he is hereby authorized to execute contracts on behalf of the City, with Citadel Construction Company, Inc.; J. M. Boyer, Inc.; AA Electric Company and =CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS April 13, 1967 Hunter-Hayes Elevator Company, subject to approval of the Surgeon General of the United States and the Texas State Health Department. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None Councilman Long offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, a certain easement was granted to the City of Austin for drainage purposes in, upon and across a part of Lot 5, Block E, Royal Oaks Estates Section Seven, a subdivision of a portion of the D. Simpson Survey No. 27 in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, according to a map or plat of said Royal Oak Estates Section Seven of record in Book 18 at Page 75 of the Plat Records of Travis County Texas; and, WHEREAS, the owners of the above described property have requested the City Council of the City of Austin to release the hereinafter described portion of said easement; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the hereinafter described portion of said easement is not now needed and will not be required in the future; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the City Manager of the City of Austin be, and he is hereby authorized to execute a release of the following described portion of said drainage easement, to-wit: A strip of land sixteen (16.00) feet in width, same being out of and a part of Lot 5, Block E, Royal Oak Estates Section Seven, a subdivision of a portion of the D. Simpson Survey No. 27 in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, according to a map or plat of said Royal Oaks Estates Section Seven of record in Book 18 at Page 75 of the Plat Records of Travis County, Texas; said strip of land sixteen (16.00) feet in width being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at the point of intersection of the west line of Thames Drive with a line fourteen (14.00) feet south of and parallel to the north line of said Lot 5, Block E, Royal Oak Estates Section Seven, said point of beginning is the northeast corner of the herein described tract of land, and from which point of beginning the northeast corner of said Lot 5 bears N 13° 25' W 14.12 feet; THENCE, with the said west line of Thames Drive, S 13° 25' E 16.13 feet to a point in a line thirty (30.00) feet south of and parallel to the north line of said Lot 5 for the southeast corner of the herein described tract of land; THENCE, with the said line thirty (30.00) feet south of and parallel to the north line of said Lot 5, S 83° 58' W 115.99 feet to a point for the southwest! corner of the herein described tract of land; CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 THENCE, N 13° 25' W 16.13 feet to a point in the aforesaid line fourteen (14.00) feet south of and parallel to the north line of said Lot 5 for the northwest corner of the herein described tract of land; THENCE, with the said line fourteen (14.00) feet south of and parallel to the north line of said Lot 5, N 83° 58' E 115.99 feet to the point of beginning. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None Councilman Long moved that MR. JASPER GLOVER be heard. The motion was seconded by Councilman LaRue. Roll call showed a unanimous vote. MR. GLOVER discussed three subdivisions, Lincoln Gardens I and II and Green Valley, which could be three of the prettiest subdivisions in Austin. Some investors are trying to buy up these 359 lots, and put structures of about 318 square feet with two rooms and a bath on these lots. This will make it hard to get a loan in that section to build a nice house. The lots belong to numerous individuals, and the subdivision has no restrictions whatsoever. Mr. Glover asked the Council to do something to require that houses be 600 square feet at least, with all utilities. Otherwise these subdivisions will be slums. These 318 square feet houses will sell for $3,500. The Mayor asked since there were no deed restrictions, could the property owners get an injunction? The City Attorney said all of the owners had the same right to put restrictions on the lots as the original owner had. All of the people could agree that there would be certain types of restrictions. Mr. Glover said many people who had purchased lots were out of state. The City Attorney stated the City could exact under its policy power that these houses have the minimum standards under the existing ordinance. He stated the property owners could place any restriction on the property they wanted to; if the City places a restriction, it must be city wide. In discussing the minimum square footage, Mr. Glover stated the minimumshould be 500-600 square feet and should have two bedrooms, a bath and kitchen, to prevent their becoming slums. Councilman Long asked how many permits had been granted within the last year to permit homes under 560 square feet. The Building Official reported none for individual homes; but there had been permits issued for apartment units. The City Manager pointed out there would be a problem as to whether or not it would be a violation to say a family could live in 240 square feet in an apartment house, but it could not live in 240 square feet in a separate building. The City Attorney stated the minimum square feet could be raised, but it would have to apply city wide and there would be non-conforming uses unless they were declared to be otherwise. Mr. Glover explained these developers were trying to locate the out of town owners, and offer them $300-$400 for the lots, thus enabling them to build these houses for sale at $3,500. Otherwise the lots run from $700 to $1,500. The Building Official knew of no houses constructed or moved that ran 240 square feet. In discussing apartments, he stated the minimum square feet for efficiency apartments was 400 square feet. The Mayor asked if Mr. Glover thought these developers would be able to acquire all of this property. Mr.Glover said it could be stopped if they could get out publicity about selling the property, mentioning the value of the property had changed. Councilman Shanks sug- gested Mr. Glover write this information all out and turn it over to the newspaper Mr. Glover said he would be glad to do it. - CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 MR. NORMAN LEACH, PARKING OF AUSTIN, local citizen who submitted a proposal, asked if the pay-parking is to be placed into effect that he be given equal opportunity for consideration. The Aviation Director reported he had asked four different companies to submit proposals. No specifications were drawn up. Each company was told that there would be a free parking lot for employees and one for rent-a-car operations and was asked to submit a proposal; and that no one would know what they proposed. Mr. Leach's proposal was signed on March 7th. MR. FRANK MONTGOMERY pointed out the people voted to build and improve the facilities, making transportation better for the public not only to those coming into Austin but for the citizens living in Austin. Those who travel are entitled to park near the terminal for convenience in getting their luggage in or out of the terminal. There are a lot of cars parked at the Airport every day, at all hours. He was willing to pay for parking privileges, and would welcome a paid car storage area. The City Manager recalled the proposal for valet parking, stating the proposal was based on there being no competition in the way of free parking. Mr. LaRue asked if paid parking were not the common practice in other Airports. Mr. Montgomery stated airports of cities the size of Austin have pay parking. Councilman LaRue stated the City leased a part of its parking lot at the American-Statesman Building, and the remainder is pay parking; and it would be amiss unless free parking space all over the city were furnished for all the various facilities. Mayor Palmer pointed out 52% of the people coming in and out of Austin by common carrier come through the Airport. It is the convenience of the traveling public for which they were primarily concerned, and these people are willing to pay for parking their car. Councilman Shanks stated the only reason for having an airport was for the traveling public, and he hoped that Councilman LaRue would put into motion the deciding of the theory. Councilman LaRue expressed concern that the method or means by which the proposals were secured would be reviewed, and that specifications be drawn up and put out for bids. He would be in favor of the theory of the practice of charging for space at the airport. The City Manager stated the proposal would include what the person making the proposals would pay the city, would establish the rate to be charged, the time he would charge for those rates. Councilman Long wanted to see the specifications before they were sent out. Councilman LaRue moved that the City Manager be requested to have specifications drawn and circulat ed for bids making available paved parking for a fee at the Airport, and that the specifications require setting aside free parking space for the employees at the Airport. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Shanks, Mayor Palmer Noes: Councilmen Long, White Councilman Long made the following statement concerning her vote: "I do not think Austin has reached its proportions in its size, or its coldness to people coming and going and its citizens, to go out and charge for parking when there are acres of land that is not being used for anything else." The City Manager submitted the following: "April 10, 1967 "TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. - CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 AIRPORT PARKING RECOMMENDATION The City Manager stated the Council had reviewed briefly last week the Aviation Director's recommendation on parking requirements and the need for additional parking at the Airport; and some proposals submitted by various opera- tors, to furnish parking lot facilities. It was recommended instead of the City's spending money for enlarging the parking facilities, that it could be paid for by parking lot operators as is done elsewhere. Councilman White inquired how many parking spaces were available; and if all were ever filled. COLONEL MURPHY stated there were 358, and the parking has been constant for the last 3 months. He recommended that one parking lot for employees and the small west lot for the rent- a-car leasees be provided free of charge. The center lot would be enlarged south to take in the area toward Manor Road. The charge would be 25 the first hour; 104 each additional hour, or a maximum of $1.00 for each 24 hours. Councilman White was concerned over those meeting passengers coming in from the plane. The Aviation Director stated if the parking lot were used, there would be a charge; but the loading and unloading zone in front of the terminal is available at no charge. Councilman Long was opposed to charging for parking, as there was a lot of area not being used. She said the overflow parking by used car lots could be controlled. She was not in favor of contracting with I.T. & T. an outside company She suggested the City could set up its own lot and make its own money, rather than contracting with someone else. Councilman White reported a call from a mother with three small children, who enjoyed going to the airport to watch the planes, but could not afford to go out there and pay for parking. Councilman LaRue said this recommended theory seemed to be in keeping with the use of other City facilities, in letting those people who use the facilities pay for them. This is followed for the swimming pools, and most of the other City facilities; and he felt this to be the proper method of handling this parking rather than paving additional space with City funds, and using City funds to police the area, when all of this could be accomplished through the contract method. He was not suggesting acceptance of any proposal today, but that this method be used. Councilman Long was not for charging; but if a charge is to be made, she would be for the City operating its own parking lot. Councilman White inquired if this would help the restaurant. The Aviation Director had discussed this with the restaurant operator and he stated they were in favor of the parking; as the people who go out there to eat cannot find a place to park, and leave. He stated only 10% of the people used the Airport, and it is a question of whether or not all taxpayers should invest more money for parking or only those who use the airport. MR. CHARLES GOULDIE, Weather Bureau, filed a petition opposing a parking fee to be charged employees who park in a designated parking area, as such a fee would be unjust since city tax dollars paid by the citizens supported the building of the parking area, and there is no other available parking area in the vicinity; and requested the proposal be denied. He said the problem was one of regulation. Hundreds of University students park their cars over the week end, and they are gone. There is no regulation limiting the parking time. Some people leave their cars for six months. The employees have to fight for a place to park. Discussion of regulation was held. Councilman Shanks noted that citizens who used facilities! were willing to pay for the services rendered. MR. IRVIN SHANNON talked about valet parking in other cities, and the demand for such service. Councilman Long had no objection to valet parking, but she wanted a free parking place for the public. _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS_ April 13, 1967 "SUBJECT: Bids for furnishing and installing Library Equipment at Oak Springs Branch of the Austin Public Library. "Sealed bids were opened in the office of the Purchasing Agent at 2:00 P.MΜ. April 5, 1967 for furnishing and installing Library Equipment at Oak Springs Branch of the Austin Public Library. Invitations to bid were advertised in the Austin American-Statesman on Sunday March 19 and Sunday, March 26, 1967. "The bids received are as follows: Bidder Total John E. Sjostrom Company, Inc. Taylor Manufacturing Company Remington Rand Library Bureau $19,448.00 *13,209.00 15,789.25 *Taylor Manufacturing Company failed to comply with our general conditions requiring the bidder to state in writing in their proposal and illustrate plainly in brochure form the equipment they proposed to furnish. "This tabulation is submitted with the apparent low bid meeting the City of Austin specifications and conditions underscored." MR. BALDER ARNOLD, Austin, representing Taylor Manufacturing Company, manufacturer of Science furniture, explained he did not follow the specifications but exceeded them, and bid less. He displayed a sample of the shelving. He did not send in a brochure, and his shelving was not veneered, as called for. Councilman Shanks pointed out the solid shelving would have a greater warpage. In dis- cussion of the specification, the Mayor asked Mr. Arnold if in the bid form, it were stated that the type of shelving would be furnished in writing along with a brochure. Mr. Arnold explained they were in the furniture manufacture, and had just gone into the library line and they were not in a position to put out a brochure capable of describing their product yet, but that their furniture was superior to what the others had bid. The City Manager listed seven prospective bidders to whom invitations were sent, and said the instructions definitely stated that the bid be submitted on the form furnished with the specifications included. In this particular bid, the sheets were removed, and only the quotation sheet was submitted. The form on which they were asked to bid was not used. The brochure requested to be submitted in addition to the bid, giving data on the equipment to be supplied did not cover all the items. This was a formal bid opening, advertised for a specified time, and all of the requirements should have been submitted by all the bidders at that time, and not subsequently. Miss Mary Rice, Librarian and Mrs. McCurdy, Assistant Librarian, explained the variations and the difference in construction from those the specifications called for. Councilman LaRue pointed out one problem was the fact that Mr. Arnold's company could not be held responsible for producing what was called for in the specifications. Councilman Long explained when the specifications were sent out, the bidders were supposed to state what they had and put it in the brochure rather than try to prove it out after the bids were opened. Mayor Palmer said the Council was interested in saving every dime it could; but it must also save the bidding procedures. Mr. Arnold was asked why he did not protest this matter before the bid opening as the bidder is told in the specifications that he would have so many days prior to the bid opening to make inquiries in writing. After lengthy discussion, Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, bids were received by the City of Austin on April 5, 1967, for the furnishing and installing of Library Equipment at Oak Springs Branch of the Austin Public Library; and, WHEREAS, the bid of Remington Rand Library Bureau in the sum of $15,789.25, was the lowest and best bid therefor, and the acceptance of such bid has been recommended by the Purchasing Agent of the City of Austin, and by the City Manager, Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the bid of Remington Rand Library Bureau, in the sum of $15,789.25, be and the same is hereby accepted, and that W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager of the City of Austin, be and he is hereby authorized to execute a contract, on behalf of the City, with Remington Rand Library Bureau. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None TAX TITLE DEED MOSBY The Council had before it for consideration the authorization of the execution of a deed to J.E. MOSBY and wife (Tax title property). The City Attorney stated this was property that was foreclosed for non-payment of taxes, and the Mosbys had offered to pay the amount of the appraised value. This is a situation where the City is the trustee for the School District and for the County. It was sold by the Sheriff about a year and a half or two years ago. Councilman Long asked if the owners were indigent people. Mrs. Mosby named the owners, stating no one had lived in the house for several years. Councilman Long inquired if the owners made any attempt to pay the taxes and save their property. Mrs. Mosby knew of no effort they made to do so, but that they could redeem the property within two years if they desired. Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, by virtue of an order of sale issued out of the 53rd District Court of Travis County, Texas, in Cause No. 149,967, styled City of Austin vs. David B. Hill, et al, the hereinafter described property was sold to the City of Austin for taxes by the Sheriff of Travis County, Texas, by deed of record in Volume 3239, Page 199, Deed Records of Travis County, Texas; and, WHEREAS, James E. Mosby and wife, Eva Marie M. Mosby are desirous of purchasing the above described property; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That William T. Ward, be appointed as Commissioner, and he is hereby authorized to execute a quitclaim deed on behalf of the City of Austin and as Statutory Trustee for the State of Texas and County of Travis and Austin Independent School District conveying all of their right, title and interest in and to the above described property to James E. Mosby and wife, Eva Marie M. Mosby. April 13, 1967 CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The City Manager submitted the following: "April 11, 1967 "TO: Mr. W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager SUBJECT: Flight Training Center Tabulation of Bids "We are transmitting herewith copies of bid tabulation for the proposed Flight Training Center at the Municipal Airport along with copies of letter from Campbell and Patterson, Architects, dated April 11, 1967. "Architects' cost estimate for the construction was approximately $60,000.00. "We join with Col. Murphy and the Architects in recommending the award of contracts as follows: General Construction J.C. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY H.V.A.C. & Plumbing PORTER PLUMBING & HEATING COMPANY Electric $44,115.00 ($44,495 less Alternate GC-3$380.00) $10,790.00 A. C. BIBLE, JR. ELECTRICAL $ 7,765.00 COMPANY TOTAL OF ALL CONTRACTS $62,670.00 "Construction time is 130 calendar days. "FROM: A.M. Eldridge, Supervising Engineer Construction Engineering Division "SIGNED A. M. Eldridge "11 April 1967 "Mr. A. M. Eldridge Construction Engineering Department City of Austin P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas "Dear Mr. Eldridge: "Campbell and Patterson, architects, received the bids for the proposed Flight Training Center for the Municipal Airport on April 11, 1967 at 2:00 P.M. "We make the following recommendations as to the selection contracts as interpreted from the bid tabulation form. A copy of the bid tabulation is included in this letter. _ CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS April 13, 1967 "I. GENERAL CONTRACTOR J. C. Construction Co. BASE BID $44,495.00 ALTERNATE BID GC-3 DEDUCT TOTAL GENERAL CONSTRUCTION -380.00 $44,115.00 II. PLUMBING & HEATING, VENTILATING, and AIR CONDITIONING COMBINATION Porter Plumbing and Heating III. ELECTRICAL A.C. Bible Electric TOTAL OF ALL CONTRACTS $10,790.00 $ 7,765.00 $62,670.00 "Sincerely, ARCHITECTS, CAMPBELL & PATTERSON s/ James M. Patterson James M. Patterson AIA "TABULATION OF BIDS FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FOR THE FLIGHT TRAINING CENTER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 11 APRIL 1967 ACKN. ADD ALTERNATE ALTERNATE ALTERNATE BID ENDUM GC-1 GC-2 GC-3 NO. CONTRACTOR BOND NO.1 BASE BID (Glass) (Alum.Fin.) (Brick) DAYS J.C. Construc- COMB:65,195.00 E-1-600.00 -600.00 -380.00 130 tion Co. * * BASE: 44,495.00 47.00 C & H Construc- tion Co. Reich Construc- tion Corp. * * * 49,852.00 85.00 -435.00 +705.00 150 Starfield Con- structors, Inc. Sam Gore S & G Construc- tion Co. Bonnet Const. Co. Floyd Gibson Harold Eitze Const. Co. * * * * * * 45,768.00 85.00 -615.00 N.C. 150 46,059.00 85.00 -610.00 -366.00 160 COMB:56,000.00 Omit Elec. & HVAC BASE: 52,678.00 85.00 -435.00 -200.00 240 COMB:69,031.00 E-1-720.00 * * * * BASE: 49,700.00 47.00 -224.00 +413.00 120 48,049 - 80.00 -450.00 +432.00 180 * 49,877 47.00 -600.00 +550.00 150 CONTRACTOR = CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 "TABULATION OF BIDS FOR MECHANICAL CONSTRUCTION FOR THE FLIGHT TRAINING CENTER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 11 APRIL 1967 BID ACKN. PLUMBING HVAC ELECTRICAL ALTERNATE COMB. BOND ADDENDUM BASE BID BASE BID BASE BID E-1 BASE BID NO. 1 Fox-Schmidt Porter Plumbing & Heating Sam Gore Capitol Plumb. & Heating Co. Strandtmann Air Conditioning, Inc. Brady Air Cond. * * * * * * * * * 9,026 -720 HVAC & Plumb. 10,790 * 3,422 3,265 8,900 Fox & Hearn, Inc. B & B Electric Walter E. Johnson * * * * * * HVAC & Plumb. 12,158 8,340 * 8,862 * 7,980 -700 Electric * Kanetzky Electric * Ahr Electric Co. * A.C. Bible Electric Co. J & J Electric * * * * * * 8,392 -600 8,672 -658 9,324 -600 7,765 -377 * 9,696 -740 Councilman Long asked for information about the Flight Training Center, and this building. The Director of Aviation stated this building would belong to the City, and that the City would collect $500.00 a month rent initially. The building will be used for a pilot training center. There are 22 planes now that are used full time for training, by the Longhorn Flying Club. These 22 planes use between 500-600 gallons of gasoline every day and the City collects four cents in addition to the rental. This operation will be added into Ragsdale's basic contract which was readjusted the first of March to reflect the cost of living index, and it will be readjusted each five years based on that consumers index. The rent increased 10.4%. Colonel Murphy stated this was just a beginning for this operation and it was hoped that the University of Texas would see its way clear to give credit toward graduation for Pilot Training, as many other Universities do. If such were to develop, this flight training program would triple overnight. Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, bids were received by the City of Austin on April 11, 1967, for the construction of the proposed Flight Training Center at the Municipal Airport; and, - CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 WHEREAS, the bid of J. C. Construction Company in the sum of $44,115.00, for the general construction; the bid of Porter Plumbing & Heating Company in the sum of $10,790.00 for H.V.A.C. & Plumbing; and the bid of A.C. Bible, Jr., Electrical Company in the sum of $7,765.00 for electrical work, were the lowest and best bids therefor, and the acceptance of such bids have been recommended by the Supervising Engineer of the Construction Engineering Division of the City of Austin, and by the City Manager; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the bids of J.C. Construction Company; Porter Plumbing & Heating Company; and A. C. Bible, Jr., Electrical Company in the sums recited above, be and the same are hereby accepted, and that W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager of the City of Austin, be and he is hereby authorized to execute contracts on behalf of the City with said companies. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None : BUILDING PERMIT 31ST AND LAMAR In regard to the request of W. K. GRIFFIS for a building permit on West 31st Street west of Lamar, the Building Official stated Mr. Griffis wanted to build an office building on his tract. He displayed a plat showing the City's 10' strip outside of the right of way. Lamar is one of the thoroughfares adopted in 1950, which required a set back of 25' from the proposed right of way. The proposed width was 80' for Lamar at this location under this thoroughfare plan. The Traffic and Transportation Study calls for 70-100' in width of Lamar Boulevard. In this location it was 80'. The only question is, the set back is not 25' back from that proposed right of way line, but is 20'. The Building Official recommended that the permit be allowed, because the property is not on the corner but faces 31st Street and has no access to Lamar. The City Manager stated the Resolution was designed to give the City an opportunity to protect future widening; and in this case, no right of way is needed. Councilman White moved that MR. GRIFFIS be granted permission to build as recommended. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The Council recessed until 2:30 Ρ.Μ. RECESSED MEETING: 2:30 Ρ.Μ. At 2:30 P.M. the Council resumed its business. The Council heard the MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL RETARDATION COMMITTEE. MR. ED BRIDGES, Chairman, thanked the Council for the humanitarian manner in which it had accepted the challenge of the underprivileged in Austin and Travis County. He explained the purpose of the recently established Mental Health and Mental _ CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS April 13, 1967 Retardation Center Board of Trustees was to create in Austin and Travis County a complete, comprehensive total program for the mentally ill and mentally retarded from birth to death. It is hoped to have a Master Plan developed so that in a few years this program will be accomplished. The important thing is the community must accept the challenge of this program and responsibility of carrying it out with the City of Austin's assuming a great deal of this cost. He pointed out that this center would be an asset in drawing the research and higher type of industry. Present were MR. HUFF BAINES, Chairman of the Fiscal Advisory; MR. GROVER SHAUNTY, Program Developer and MRS. CHESTER SNYDER, Past President. MR. GROVER SHAUNTY stated the Board of Trustees was composed of nine people through the Council's appointment of its committee, which has come up with what is needed in the community, what it will cost, and where the funds can be obtained. He explained the Mental Health Mental Retardation Center was a complex of services, a cooperative arrangement and alliance of all of the services in this special field. By bringing together all agencies into one complex, better utilization can be made of what is available, and there would be an instrument through which State and Federal Funds could flow to enhance the quality and quantity of services avail able. He referred to the report distributed to the Council members wherein there is a summary of the needed services; In-patient service, out-patient clinic services, rehabilitation, and a sheltered work shop. The agencies delivering services are unable tomeet the needs as they do not have the staff and financial resources. This Board has agreed to serve as the centralized standard-setting and funding agency for all of these agencies. MR. SHAUNTY stated the projected cost was $1,250,000 in new money; and there are Federal funds available on a decreasing schedule, providing $694,000 for staffing the first year, and decreasing over four years to $300,000. The State will provide a stable proportion of approximately 50% of the operating costs of the Center, after the Federal grants are deducted. The State amount will increase from $279,000 to $475,000. Insurance covers inpatient care; but very little of the out-patient care. This represents about $198,900. MR. SHAUNTY discussed the costs of the community. Councilman Shanks said he was impressed with the way the community was defined--City, County, Schools, and the University of Texas, and asked when the cost to the community was spoken of if it still referred to this composite group. Mr. Shaunty answered it could represent this group and other agencies, such as the United Fund. Councilman Shanks said it was his impression the cost was a total community responsibilitynot just the city--but the whole community. Mr. Shaunty pointed out the best methods of delivering the service had not been determined yet, and several alternatives are possible--for instance where will the in-patient care be better hand- led--in the State Hospital, Brackenridge Hospital, or a private hospital. Councilman Long pointed out the Committee had this $81,000 which they hoped to be provided by the four agencies--County, City, Schools, and the United Fund and the State would probably have $700,000 for the in-patient funding. For the first 30 bed unit, the State would participate $370,000. Mr. Shaunty stated within 30 days, the Board would present a complete plan showing the agencies involved, where the money will be going administratively, who would be responsibile for the expenditure of the money and how all the services will be coordinated. Then it will be shown who will provide certain costs, and the other $81,000. Mayor Palmer noted these were operating costs. Mr. Shaunty discussed the "in kind" payments. Equipment could be counted only for one year. Space costs and personnel would be continuing operational costs. Since this was not a new agency, but an integration of services, the United Fund that is already funding the agencies can count as a part of the community share. _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 MAYOR PALMER asked after all the agencies are put under one heading, what particular phase is lacking that is not being performed. Mr. Shaunty said there are no "partial hospitalization services" in this community. It is necessary to add treatment services in a day hospital, from 8 to 5. For in-patients, Austin has to depend on the State Hospital. Some resource is needed for local people to receive intense short-term care in a local hospital. Mrs. Snyder stated no intensive treatment is received at the Austin State Hospital. The cost would be the same for six months in the State Hospital as it would be for six weeks in a local hospital. There is no out-patient service for adults in Austin. The clinic at Brackenridge cares for some and the out-patient clinic at the State Hospital cares for former patients. The need for this community is for facilities to serve 1200 people a year. This would be a preventive and early intervention program. The 24 hour a day service is included in the emergency services so a potential suicide would have access to professional help, and people working with crime could use this service. Councilman Shanks discussed the community participation, and asked what would happen if it could not be obtained. He inquired about the money that was to be contributed--not the "in kind" services. He stated this was a community responsibility, and the community as a whole should shoulder up to the responsibility. The Mayor pointed out the Schools were participating heavily in the Special Education Field, contributing to the staff. The $81,000 includes the cost of staffing, but not the cost of hospital beds. Mayor Palmer pointed out even with State and Federal funds, the city must look four or five years hence to provide some $277,000 annually. The $1,200,000 is operating money. MRS. CHESTER SNYDER said there were 19 community boards set up over the state, 12 of which have community program developers working, and they will be asking for State funds. If Austin does not support this Board, the State tax dollar will go to the other 19 communities. MAYOR PALMER pointed out the City must know how much money will be involved in July, the next year, and the following years. It should be known if the other three agencies named are going to pay their part. Councilman Shanks noted that the County, if it is going to participate, will have to put up some cash; and that 82% of the County is the people of Austin. Councilman LaRue asked again about the "in kind" contributions in that perhaps many of these things could be given without cost to the City. He said on specifics it was shown that about the only thing the City contributed would be the nurse's time, which the city pays for in cash. In the O.E.O. programs, the City can contribute "in kind", and it works out well. Mr. Bridges said someone had to furnish 30 beds at no charge, and this is not included in their budget. The "in kind" would include office space. Councilman Long stated it was more orless assumed the City would take care of about 50% of the cost plus 30 hospital beds. Regarding the Hospital beds, Mr. Shaunty stated they could contract with a private hospital and give it the $370,000 operational cost for an in-patient unit, or they could contract with the City and it could operate it. MAYOR PALMER asked about the west wing of Brackenridge Hospital as a possible offer for these 30 rooms. Mr. Bridges stated this was to bechecked on next week. It was pointed out the west wing was not included in the first phase of the construction of the hospital addition. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 MAYOR PALMER read a letter from MR. TOM MCCRUMMEN, JR., Chairman, Central Texas Comprehensive Health Planning Commission, stating the program as proposed was certainly needed and should be meshed with other health programs of the indigent. The services are needed by many low income people who are routine patients at Brackenridge. With the service at Brackenridge, the patient may be referred easily and actually go to the center. Being treated properly may remove many persons from the indigent roll. The inclusion of both in-patient and out-patient services in the Brackenridge area will be a step toward efficiency and economy. Other services should follow creating a Health Center as the years progress, using Federal Funds that are available under the Mental Retardation Facilities and Community Mental Health Centers Construction Act of 1963. These could complement the Brackenridge Hospital Plan. The City has provided the only indigent medical services in the County. Federal and State Governments are providing funds for this purpose now, and it seems wise to keep the service in Brackenridge rather than giving such a windfall to the other hospitals. Mr. McCrummen had committed the Commission's support to the Mental Health Mental Retardation Program, and opposed the use of local tax funds to start a service in a private institution if those services could be provided at Brackenridge. He recommended that the City Government support the Mental Health Mental Retardation Center and appropriate portions of the services be located in or near the City owned Hospital. The City Manager stated this would be no "windfall" to the City, but an added cost. COUNCILMAN LARUE suggested that this be kept in Brackenridge Hospital and construction funds would be available to Brackenridge. Mr. Bridges stated Brackenridge would be an assurance that there would be a top quality of in-patient service, and would meet the standards set up for Federal or State participation under their regulations. MAYOR PALMER asked if the City came up with its one-fourth participation, would that help; could they carry on any kind of an effective program; and if Mr. Bridges would have any objections to the City's basing its commitments on all other commitments' coming through. Mr. Shaunty stated certain areas would be cut down. Mr. Bridges asked that the Council made a commitment today; that it would influence the new Council, and the other agencies. Councilman LaRue was concerned over the furnishing of the beds, stating the Booz and Allen Report recommended 30 or 40 beds for psychiatric uses. The City Manager stated these could be in the present hospital facilities after the new one is built. Councilman LaRue stated one of the bases for the entire report was for the collection and assimilation of all the health facilities in one general area. COUNCILMAN SHANKS asked for a breakdown in the Budget as proposed to be participated in by the various agencies. Mr. Bridges stated the City's part would be $40,500; the County's, $16,000; the Schools $10,000; United Fund $10,000 and various contributions $6,000. Councilman Shanks asked why the County's part was so much smaller than the City's, as after all, Travis County, in reality is Austin. Mr. Bridges asked if 30 beds at Brackenridge Hospital could be committed for Mental Health Mental Retardation Center, effective September. The City Manager stated only 26 beds were closed down, because they did not have the staff. They are getting some personnel to reopen a part of this section. The Medical Staff wants these beds available for the general staff patients. Mr. Bridges stated they would take the responsibility for staffing this 30 bed program with qualified nurses. Mayor Palmer stated before 26 beds at Brackenridge are committed, the Council should check with the Hospital Board, the Medical Staff and the Administrator. Councilman Long stated the beds should be in Brackenridge. _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 After discussing the breakdown again, Councilman Shanks stated the new Council would need to obligate itself for $81,000 for next year. Councilman Shanks was willing to favor a commitment of participation based on participation on the other agencies of the community; but in reality, the two incumbents and one of the incoming Council should shoulder up the responsibility, as they would be the ones to find the money. The Mayor pointed out to Mr. Bridges it was not the little amount of money that each one asked for, but it was the profusion of them that amounted up. There are all kinds of requests for "small amounts" of money. MR. HUB BECHTOL, represented the Austin Child Guidance Center and the Austin Evaluation Center, which are Health and Welfare Agencies of the Community that are heavily supported by the City. He had served on the Community Council Committee that recommended the establishment of the Evaluation Center which is under grant from the Childrens Bureau of the H.E.W. through the State Health Department. This is a five year grant of $50,000 annually, to allow for expansion and establishment of evaluation services for children in the community, with the expectation at the end of the five years that the community will participate more heavily and the Health, Education and Welfare less heavily. The City provided the house for the Evaluation Center. He was a member of the Austin Childrens Guidance Center. This is the only children's psychiatric service available in the community today. The City has been one of its best supporters throughout its 15 years of existence. The money has come from the City through its Health Department, the State Health Department, the Schools, United Fund, and from fees. They are unable to expand their staff. The Guidance Center budget is $86,000. He reported their demand was so great, that they had to close their emergency service intake, and their staff should be three times as large as it is. Right now they need $200,000 at the Child Guidance Center rather than their $86,000 just budgeted. He had not received any explanation on the M.H.M.R. program that such an expansion could be brought about. He wanted to point out that the Guidance Center also needed to expand its program. They would cooperate to the extent to be housed with the other agencies, and be under one board, as they are an integral part of the community, and this service must be funded more heavily than it is now. Mr. Bridges stated there was no conflict at all; that the purpose of the M.H.M.R. is to fund this service, if it is part of the M.H.M.R. No autonomy would be taken away from any facility. The M.H.M.R. would contract with these facilities to do this service for the community. Mr. Shaunty said their budget included $301,000 for childrens' services, and they would ask the Child Guidance Agency if they would be the contracting agency for the $301,000. Mr. Shaunty stated $60,000 was set up for day care for the Mentally Retarded; $238,000 available for increased evaluation, treatment, for in-patients and out-patient cases for children. MAYOR PALMER pointed out there were so many services to which the City continuously contributes, and he asked if there would be any way of measuring the results and effectiveness so that it could be shown beyond any shadow of doubt if the program should be continued or not. Mr. Shaunty said there would be an on going evaluation which would be important to the local community, State and Federal Government; and their plan calls for self evaluation and a formal evaluation of the effectiveness. They will report to the City Council. The Mayor stated a future Council should have a report when it is considering the budget to see how effective the program is, and what it is accomplishing. Mr. Bridges stated this should be done perhaps every quarter. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967. COUNCILMAN LARUE brought up again the breakdown of the amount to be paid by the various agencies, and asked upon what basis it was decided. Mr. Shaunty stated it was arbitrary. When they came to what was left from possible contributions from the Schools, County, United Fund, that amount was designated to the City. Councilman LaRue stated his second concern was that this be placed in the Brackenridge complex, as better coordinating could be obtained if it were at Brackenridge with all the other facilities the City provides as far as health is concerned. His third question concerned coordination of all the health facilities for which the City is responsible. The public would accept this as a responsibility if it had some reason to believe that everything possible had been done to bring all of these facilities together under one head to make it as effective and efficient as possible. Mr. Shaunty said they would submit to the Council a formal arrangement of services, showing relationship with what the City is funding now and how that fits in with this program. COUNILMAN LONG inquired about the Cerebral Palsy Center. Mr. Shaunty stated this center would not be included because they are not defined as a Mental Health Mental Retardation Agency. The Child and Family Service is not certain they would fall into this program as they are not a medically oriented agency. i MAYOR PALMER stated if this is a local problem there should be a definite effort to handle the problem on a local level. This program involves over 6,000 people. The Mayor stated the new Council coming in next month is the one that will have to find the money in the budget. Councilman Long stated the Mayor had her commitment. Councilman LaRue stated there was no question about his feeling about the program, but there are some mechanics that should be firmed up better. If the starting breakdown is 40% for the City, 16% for the County, 10% etc., he doubted if within two years that any of these cooperating agencies would up-grade their responsibility and give the City an opportunity to reduce its contributions. What is started out, will be continued as a minimum percentage basis. He wanted to see a reappraisal of this and that one or two of the other contributing entities up their contributions. Councilman Long stated the County does not have cash to put in; the Schools have their child guidance program and they will have to step that up, and the United Fund can not do any more than 10%, and the City is the main body to participate. Councilman Shanks understood the County was responsible for the indigents, and the County is 82% of the City of Austin-- with Austin money in the County, and Austin money in the City. He thought anything concerning the City should originate with the incumbents. Councilman Lakue stated last September, in order to obtain $65,000 for additional 15 policemen, the tax rate had to be increased one cent, making a total of 12d tax increase. His opinion was that the other agencies should be approached again, because the City is almost at the point it can do little more, and the breakdown should be adjusted on a more equitable basis. Councilman Shanks pointed out there was only 8 left in the tax limitation. Councilman LaRue asked Mr. Bridges to look this over and come back to the Council. He noted Councilman Long had stated it was her firm conviction this is a responsibility of the City and he did also under the following conditions: (1) if the public can be assured that all the agencies would be coordin- ated and brought under one head; (2) that it will be under the Brackenridge complex; (3) and that there is a fair and equitable distribution of the load. Coun- cilman Shanks said since there were two incumbents on the Council, this should originate with those two. Councilman Long stated the reason for this Board was to set up a coordinating board, to report and to work out this program so that there would be no overlapping, thus saving money as well as services, so the No. 1 is there. Under (2), the County may turn it back to the City stating it will not do anything until it is determined what the City will do. She thought the bed program should be in Brackenridge, but that is outside the immediate problem. : April 13, 1967 = CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Councilman LaRue stated this should be part of the overall program. MAYOR PALMER announced the Council was not ready to make a decision today. He thanked Mr. Bridges and those present with him for discussing this big program with the Council. The City Manager noted from the report that about 8,300 square feet of floor space for various other activities was needed besides the bed space. Mr. Bridges outlined his schedule of meetings with other agencies for presentation of this community program. The Council wanted to meet with the Brackenridge Hospital Board, the Medical Staff, and the Administrator. Councilman Long invited Mr. Bridges and Mr. Shaunty to attend this board meeting. Councilman LaRue asked that the City Manager submit the general information needed in writing to the Hospital Board and Staffs. The Council requested that this meeting be scheduled with the Hospital Board at its regular meeting on April 28th. Mayor Palmer introduced the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE ORDERING A CHANGE IN USE AND CHANGING THE USE MAPS ACCOMPANYING CHAPTER 39 OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODE OF 1954 AS FOLLOWS: THE NORTH 60 FEET OF LOTS 1 AND 2 AND THE NORTH 71.33 (AVERAGE) FEET OF LOT 3, OF THE SPECKELS AND STAEHELY ADDITION, FROM "A" RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO "O" OFFICE DISTRICT; SAID PROPERTY BEING SITUATED IN AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS; AND SUSPENDING THE RULE REQUIRING THE READING OF ORDINANCES ON THREE SEPARATE DAYS. The ordinance was read the first time and Councilman LaRue moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its second reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the second time and Councilman LaRue moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its third reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the third time and Councilman LaRue moved that the ordinance be finally passed. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been finally passed. April 13, 1967 =CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Mayor Palmer introduced the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE ORDERING A CHANGE IN THE USE AND CHANGING THE USE MAPS ACCOMPANYING CHAPTER 39 OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODE OF 1954 AS FOLLOWS: THE SOUTH 81' OF NORTH 106' OF LOT 11, SAM HUSTON HEIGHTS ANNEX, LOCALLY KNOWN AS 3117 EAST 12TH STREET, FROM "C" COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO "C-2" COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; SAID PROPERTY BEING SITUATED IN AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS; AND SUSPENDING THE RULE REQUIRING THE READING OF ORDINANCES ON THREE SEPARATE DAYS. The ordinance was read the first time and Councilman Long moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its second reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the second time and Councilman Long moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its third reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the third time and Councilman Long moved that the ordinance be finally passed. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been finally passed. MAYOR PALMER recognized MR. MICKEY MOORE, Junior Chamber of Commerce, who was interested in the proposal of getting the Texas Headquarters moved to Austin. Councilman Long was not ready to act on this request at that location, as the property is too valuable. Councilman LaRue hoped that something could be worked out, but he did not want to commit himself to furnish the area for a State Association, as there would be many other State Associations who would insist they qualified equally as well for land. Councilman Shanks stated an association working hand-in-hand for the welfare of the City should be considered, and he would be in favor of letting them have this area. Councilman White stated if you want something done, turn it over to the Junior Chamber of Commerce. Mayor Palmer noted there were two statements by the two incumbents; and by the time of negotiating the Council would have changed, and they would be misleading the Jaycees to say three of the members favored this. Councilman Long moved to welcome the State Headquarters to come to Austin, and the City would do all it could to make it pleasant for them; but in view of the 275 other State Headquarters that had moved here, and the City had not furnished them land for their facilities, and that the Council regretted it could not furnish this association or group property. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None =CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 Mayor Palmer made the following statement concerning his vote: "I feel that the objective and the achievements of the Junior Chamber, and the very nature of their work is decidedly different from any other State Organization as such, and I would hope that we could find a suitable location to lease to them, I do want to welcome you and hope we can do something to try to influence you to come here." The City Manager submitted the following: "April 10, 1967 : "Mr. W. T. Williams, Jr. City Manager Austin, Texas "Dear Mr. Williams: "Sealed bids for the WATER MAIN IN SPEEDWAY were received until 11:00 A.M., Friday, at the Office of the Director of the Water and Sewer Department for the installation of approximately 1080 feet of 16-inch concrete steel cylinder water main in Speedway from East 19th. Street to East 21st. Street. This project was required due to the University of Texas building a dormitory over area (Inter Mural Field) traversed by our 14-inch water main. It became necessary to replace this main with a 16-inch concrete steel cylinder water main in Speedway. The bids were publicly opened and read in the Council Room, Municipal Building. "The following is a tabulation of bids received: FIRM Walter Schmidt Construction Co. Ford-Wehmeyer, Incorporated. Bland Construction Company City of Austin (Estimate) AMOUNT WORKING DAYS $18,954.00 30 days after receipt of pipe 20,074.20 60 20,692.80 60 17,753.00 -- "It is our recommendation that the contract be awarded to the Walter Schmidt Construction Company on their low bid of $18,954.00 with 30 working days. "Yours truly, s/ Victor R. Schmidt, Jr. Victor R. Schmidt, Jr. Director, Water and Sewer Department" Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, bids were received by the City of Austin on March 31, 1967, for the installation of approximately 1080 feet of 16-inch concrete steel cylinder water main in Speedway from East 19th Street to East 21st Street; and, _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 WHEREAS, the bid of Walter Schmidt Construction Company in the sum of $18,954.00, was the lowest and best bid therefor, and the acceptance of such bid has been recommended by the Director of Water and Sewer Department of the City of Austin, and by the City Manager; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the bid of Walter Schmidt Construction Company, in the sum of $18,954.00, be and the same is hereby accepted, and that W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager of the City of Austin, is hereby authorized to execute a contract, on behalf of the City, with Walter Schmidt Construction Company. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None AMENDMENT TO HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING CODE FEES The Building Official stated the Ordinance was passed on gas fired equipment, and the fees are based on BTU'S or equivalent, not taking into consideration heat pumps, and electric heating processes. Detailed technical discussion was held. The City Manager explained the fee is already fixed in the present ordinance on the BTU input; but some items do not have a rated BTU; and it is proposed that a provision be made that where the installation involves a non-rated device that the heat input shall be calculated based on 25 BTU per hour per square foot of building. For a 10,000 square foot building, the equivalent of BTU input would be 25,000 and for that amount the fee would be $7.50. Mayor Palmer introduced the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 38 OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODE OF 1954 BY AMENDING SECTION 38.13 THEREOF PERTAINING TO INSPECTION FEES ON HEATING AND AIR CONDI- TIONING EQUIPMENT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The ordinance was read the first time and Councilman LaRue moved that the The motion, rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its second reading. seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the second time and Councilman LaRue moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its third reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the third time and Councilman LaRue moved that the ordinance be finally passed. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been finally passed. _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 BUILDING PERMIT FOR R. H. BOWMAN, WEST AVE. & W. 12TH The Building Official in submitting the request of R. H. BOWMAN for a building permit on West Avenue and West 12th, stated West Avenue was one of the Arterial Streets in the new Transportation Study, requiring 120'. They propose a 2000 square foot building on their property line. Other buildings in the area are on the property line. It is the opinion of the Planning and Public Works Departments that right of way would have to be taken from the north side of this location. The applicants will construct the small building with parking coming off of West Avenue and since it is not a large structure, he would recommend the building permit. Councilman White moved that MR. R. H. BOWMAN be granted a building permit at West Avenue and West 12th, as recommended by the Building Official. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None SETTLING TANKS GOVALLE TREATMENT PLANT & DRY CREEK INTERCEPTOR Councilman White offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Austin, Texas, has reviewed the procedures, conditions and assurances as furnished in the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration's correspondence (with Attachments 1, 2, and 3) dated March 23, 1967, necessary to meet the requirements set forth in Section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for reimbursement from appropriations which may be made by Congress at some future date. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Austin, Texas fully understands that there is no commitment or obligation on the part of the United States to provide funds to make or pay any grant for project WPC-TEX-475 Dry Creek Interceptor Contract No. 3, unless the Congress appropriates the necessary funds and the State authorizes the actual obligation of funds to this project at some future date. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Austin, Texas is in agreement with the aforementioned terms and conditions and hereby accepts said terms and conditions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Austin, Texas has or will procure a fee simple or such other estate or interest in the site of the project, including the necessary easements and rights-of-way, as to assure undisturbed use and possession for the purposes of construction, operation and maintenance of the works for the estimated life of the project; and that in the event such title, estate, or interest in such site, easements or rights-of-way may in the future be contested, the City of Austin, Texas will defend and maintain its title in such site and hold the United States Government blameless in such action; and that before any federal payment is requested pursuant to said grant, said City will provide certification as to the sufficiency of such estate or interest. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None : CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967. Councilman White offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Austin, Texas, has reviewed the procedures, conditions and assurances as furnished in the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration's correspondence (with Attachments 1, 2, and 3) dated March 23, 1967, necessary to meet the requirements set forth in Section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for reimbursement from appropriations which may be made by Congress at some future date. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Austin, Texas fully understands that there is no commitment or obligation on the part of the United States to provide funds to make or pay any grant for project WPC-TEX-474 (Additional Primary Settling Tank for the Govalle Sewage Treatment Plant) unless the Congress appropri ates the necessary funds and the State authorizes the actual obligation of funds to this project at some future date. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Austin, Texas is in agreement with the aforementioned terms and conditions and hereby accepts said terms and conditions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Austin, Texas has or will procure a fee simple or such other estate or interest in the site of the project, including the necessary easements and rights-of-way, as to assure undisturbed use and possession for the purposes of construction, operation and maintenance of the works for the estimated life of the project; and that in the event such title, estate, or interest in such site, easements or rights-of-way may in the future be contested, the City of Austin, Texas will defend and maintain its title in such site and hold the United States Government blameless in such action; and that before any federal payment is requested pursuant to said grant, said City will provide certification as to the sufficiency of such estate or interest. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None BUDGETING METHODS DISCUSSED Councilman Long inquired about and discussed the methods of budgeting where Federal Funds were available in utility projects, State Health Department Funds, Hill-Burton Funds, Open Space Funds, Airport Construction, etc. The City Manager reviewed the various methods in detail; that in some cases the City is reimbursed, and some were carred as "in kind". SOUTHWEST SWIMMING POOL FEES Councilman White moved that the Council establish fees at Southwest Park swimming pool as follows: Adults $ .35 Minors (high school) .20 Children under 12 .10 Season tickets for adults 10.00 (40 swims) April 13, 1967 CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS : The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: Councilman Long Councilman Long stating she did not believe in charging for swimming. AMBULANCE SERVICE CONTRACT Councilman LaRue wanted to discuss the ambulance service and encourage the Council to move on as rapidly as possible on this matter, as it had 90 days to come up with a solution. The Council had before it a draft of Specifications and Invitation for Proposals for Ambulance Service. Councilman Shanks stated the specifications should include something about the character background of the operators. The Mayor stated the Council, when it set the 90 days, publicly announced it hoped to settle this problem before the new Council came in. If bids are to be taken, two weeks must be allowed; but if the incumbents wanted to delay this until the new Council took over, he would be agreeable. The Council had been put on notice by May 5, that there may not be any ambulance service in the City. The City Attorney stated the ordinance is largely the Taxicab Ordinance in the City of Austin which was incorporated into an ambulance ordinance of the City of Houston; the Ambulance Ordinance of Houston, Dallas, and Grand Prairie covering the type of equipment; and a portion of the U.S. Public Health Service Model Ordinance covering type of equipment and types of requirements. This draft is not a recommendation or suggestion, but just an outline to start with. He had been asked if it were better to operate under a licensing ordinance or under a franchise. Upon research later, it was apparent that on a franchise situation the City could control the rates charged to the general public and have more rigid controls over the types of service rendered, how the patients are treated, and what could be done regarding collection procedures. There could be far more controls under a franchise than under a license. One ordinance authorizes what can be done under a franchise, and the other is what is to be contracted to be done. The City has the unquestionable authority to make an exclusive contract to provide certain service--contracting that the Police and Fire Departments, Brackenridge Hospital and the Tuberculosis Sanatorium have the exclusive right to call only a certain company for ambulance service. Everyone had agreed it would be more economical for a person to provide the same ambulance equipment and personnel that would serve under the contract basis to serve the general public. would probably want a franchise to serve the general public, and would want a contract with the City by which the Company would be guaranteed the receipts of certain calls originated by the City. This is what will be bid upon. The Council reviewed the specification. A company Councilman Long brought up for discussion the paragraph in the contract on RATES, suggesting the City set the specified rate. The City Manager pointed out the way this was set up in this plan, the bidder would set the rates he would charge to anyone, and the City would agree to pay that same rate for the indigent cases. Alternatives would be to set the rate for the general public, and let the parties bid on the rate they would charge the City for the indigent patients; or to fix the rate on general charge for transporting an individual under emergency conditions, and let the company bid on transporting the indigent patients--perhaps their taking them without charge, or a small amount. Councilman Long suggested setting a charge of $20.00 for transporting one person; $15 each for two, $10.00 April 13, 1967 CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS : each for three or more; and for transporting one individual not under emergency conditions, $17.50. The City Manager pointed out the amount the bidder is permitted to charge for the private patients will have a lot to do with a lesser amount they might charge the city for its calls. He recommended that the rate be fixed for the private patients, and receive bids for transporting indigent patients. Councilman LaRue was interested in what the bidder would charge for the services he performed for the City. The City Manager submitted statistics showing 2% of the patients hauled by the ambulance to the emergency room have clinic cards at Brackenridge Hospital, and 20% are classified as charity patients the next day. They would not have a card, but are found eligible for charity within 24 hours. Twenty-two percent of all emergency cases hauled to the Hospital are charity cases, and will be what the city is paying for at whatever rate will be bid. Two percent more of the ambulance calls at the hospital are staff transfer cases. So 24% of the calls will be paid for by the City. Councilman LaRue suggested that the bidder bid on all the services to be furnished to the City, and the City establish a rate for the person who calls in privately. If the company is going to receive money from the City, they should bid on the contract in its entirety. The Council under the franchise would establish the rate on charges for private patients. He asked if the bids could be called on what the city is going to pay for, differentiating between the City calls and those for which the City is to pay. The City Attorney asked if the suggestion was that the bidder shall state the rates to be charged for performing the services for persons who qualify for medical and hospital services as staff patients at Brackenridge Hospital or at Austin-Travis County T.B. Sanatorium. The Council agreed to change the paragraph on RATES to read "The bidder shall state the rates to be charged for performance of services outlined in his proposal for persons who qualify for medical and Hospital Services as staff patients of Brackenridge Hospital and Austin-Travis County T.B. Sanatorium". The bidder would set out the rates and would bid on oxygen or other special equipment. The Council would set the other rates in the franchise. Councilman Shanks stated under this plan, the City would be subsidizing the general public. The Assistant City Manager stated there were two things that would influence the types of bids received: (1) the passage of the regulatory ordinance regulating anybody in the business that comes in; (2) whether or not there would be a misdemeanor ordinance in effect. Councilman Long was not for a misdemeanor ordinance. The Mayor stated the bidders may bid one way if the penal ordinance were passed; and another way without it. Councilman Shanks suggested getting two prices--one with a Penal Ordinance, and one without. Councilman Long said she would not put it up as a proposition, because she was not for that. The City Manager pointed out the City should make sure there would be enough ambulances to meet the demand that would be created by City originated calls. The Council informally agreed that the bidder should have five manned ambulances for the week end from 3:00 P.M. Friday through 3:00 A.M. Sunday, and four manned ambulances during the week. Councilman LaRue pointed out the contracting company was being required to have so many manned ambulances, which is set at more than is being used now; and yet there will be other companies operating under the franchise. Councilman Shanks stated the franchise would be granted based only on convenience and necessity. There were no changes on Pages 4, 5 and 6 of the draft. April 13, 1967 _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Councilman Long discussed the liability. The City Attorney stated the liability was the same as required in other contracts with the City. Discussion was held on others qualifying for a franchise. Councilman Shanks suggested letting the one who had the contract take care of all of the public and wait until it is determined if there is a need for anyone else to be granted a franchise. Councilman Long hoped there would be two or three people. The Council added a provision that the City reserve the right to reject any or all bids. AMBULANCE FRANCHISE DRAFT In the Ambulance Franchise Draft, Councilman Long wanted to delete the provision that the applicant for a franchise had to live in Austin for one year, so if an outside firm wanted to bid, it could. The Council had no objection to deleting that phrase (1) on page 2 of the ordinance draft. On Councilman Long's suggestion, the Council changed Section 31.105(2) to read, "The books and records of the holder of a franchise shall be open for inspection by the City Manager or any City official designated by the City Council." On Page 8, under Sec. 31.112, Qualifications and Application, the age of the ambulance drivers was discussed. Councilman Long stated the age should be set at 18; and if the company decided they were too young, they would not hire them. No maximum age was set. The City Manager pointed out the company would need insurance and the companies make a heavier charge for young people. The company would have additional concern of what age these people were that they were hiring. On Page 9, of the Draft, Sec. 31.116, Rates for Service was added. The rate was set at $20.00 for one person $15.00 each for two persons $10.00 each for an excess of two $17.50 for non emergency calls Discussion was held on the solicitation provision, but no change was made. Councilman White moved that the Council set 11:00 A.M., April 27, 1967, as a date for public hearing on the Ambulance Franchise Ordinance and bid opening. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None Present but not voting: Councilman Shanks Councilman Shanks made the following statement: "I refuse to vote on such a 'jumbled up mess' that we propose as specifications, which I do not believe that anybody could intelligently construe as something to use to adequately bid on." : _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 The City Manager stated notice would be run in the American Statesman to the effect bids would be taken for Ambulance service for indigent patients. Councilman Long moved to instruct the City Manager to advertise for bids on ambulance service in the American Statesman; to notify the Ambulance Companies in Fort Worth, El Paso, Houston, Dallas and San Antonio and also to notify the Ambulance Association of the Council's intent to offer bids for ambulance service for the City of Austin. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: Councilman Shanks Mayor Palmer introduced the following ordinance; AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE AUSTIN CITY CODE OF 1954 BY ADDING TO CHAPTER 31 A NEW ARTICLE PERTAINING TO AMBULANCES. The ordinance was read the first time and Councilman LaRue moved that the ordinance with the amendments be passed to its second reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: Councilman Shanks ZONING TEXT Councilman LaRue moved to reset the date to hear the amendment to the Zoning Text where the Council determines off street parking to 11:00 A.M., May 4, 1967. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None Councilman LaRue moved that the Council set the following zoning application for public hearing at 10:00 A.M., May 4, 1967: A. E. COCKE 4305-4307 Caswell From "A" to "BB" DECKER AREA RELOCATION The City Manager stated relocation services were something the Housing and Urban Development requires. There is a contract with the Urban Renewal Agency to do the relocation for the City in the Decker project and this requires the City to make certification to the Government to get reimbursed. There were very few occupants by the time the City started purchasing the property. = CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) The resolution of the City Council of the City of Austin adopted September 8, 1966, relative to the Fixed Relocation Payments Schedule, is hereby amended so that the same shall hereafter read as follows: (It is affirmed and ratified as to all matter which remains unchanged.) RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of Austin has contracted with the Austin Urban Renewal Agency for the provision of relocation services in accordance with Letter No. OS-5 in connection with Open-Space Application TEX-OS-8; and, WHEREAS, the Austin Urban Renewal Agency has compiled a FIXED RELOCATION PAYMENTS SCHEDULE (Exhibit A), and a SCHEDULE OF AVERAGE ANNUAL GROSS RENTALS FOR STANDARD HOUSING IN LOCALITY (Exhibit B); and, WHEREAS, such Exhibits A and B dated September 8, 1966, have been reviewed and found to be satisfactory and in keeping with existing Urban Renewal Relocation Payments Schedules for the City of Austin; and, WHEREAS, the goals of the relocation program can best be carried out if claims for relocation payments are prepared by the Executive Director of the Austin Urban Renewal Agency and forwarded to the City of Austin for approval on behalf of the City of Austin; and, WHEREAS, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and regulations of the Housing and Home Finance Agency effectuating that Title, provide that no person shall, on the ground of race, color or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied from benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination in the undertaking and carrying out of Urban Renewal Projects assisted under Title I of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That: 1. Exhibits A and B attached hereto be, and the same are hereby, approved. 2. The United States of America and the Housing and Home Finance Administrator be, and they are hereby, assured of full compliance by the City of Austin with regulations of the Housing and Home Finance Agency effectuating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 3. Doren R. Eskew, City Attorney of the City of Austin, is hereby designated to approve all claims for relocation payments after the same have been forwarded to him for payment by the Executive Director of the Austin Urban Renewal Agency, actual payments to be made by the City of Austin. 4. There exists in the locality an adequate amount of decent, safe, and sanitary housing which is available to persons displaced as result of the open space land project, at prices which are within their financial means, and which are not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities than the dwellings of the displaced individuals and families, and it is the sense of this body that such displacees, if any, will be assisted in April 13, 1967 - CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS relocation by the Austin Urban Renewal Agency. PROJECT LOCALITY Austin, Texas Housing and Home Finance Agency URBAN RENEWAL ADMINISTRATION PROJECT NAME (S) Decker Lake Recreation Reserve PROJECT NUMBER(S) : FIXED RELOCATION PAYMENTS SCHEDULE TEX OS-8 INSTRUCTIONS: Prepare original and 3 copies for HHFA if the Schedule is proposed for only one project. Prepare an additional copy for each additional project. A. TYPE OF SUBMISSION AND APPLICABILITY OF SCHEDULE (X) This is the original Schedule and is proposed to apply to the project(s) identified above. ( ) This is an amended Schedule (amending the one approved by HHFA on ) for the purpose of: (Date) Revising the fixed amounts of Relocation Payments. Adding additional project(s) to those covered by the previous Schedule. Such new project(s) is (are) numbered ( ) Other (Explain) B. REQUEST AND SCHEDULE Approval is requested to pay to eligible individuals and families the fixed amounts of Relocation Payments indicated in the Schedule below. The amounts indicated in the Schedule have been developed, and the Payments will be made, in accordance with the Regulations Governing Relocation Payments. Eligible individuals and families will be given the option to claim the applicable approved fixed amounts or reimbursement for actual moving expense and any direct loss of property. ITEM SCHEDULE INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES OWNING FURNITURE AND OCCUPYING: 1. Proposed fixed amount of Re- 1 Room 2 Rooms 3 Rooms 4 Rooms 5 Rooms 6 Rooms (d) (e) (a) (f) (৮) (c) 7 7 Rooms Rooms (g) location Payment$9.00 $18.00 $27.00 $36.00 $45.00 $54.00 $63.00 1 Individuals Families Not Owning Furniture Not Owning Furniture (h) (1) $5.00 $10.00 April 13, 1967 __ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS ITEM 2. Lowest normally 1 Room 2 Rooms 3 Rooms 4 Rooms 5 Rooms 6 Rooms 7 Rooms1 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) available moving cost per hour $9.00 $9.00 $9.00 $9.00 $9.00 $9.00 (g) $9.00 3. Average (Ι.Ε., median) number of hours re- quired 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Attach separate sheet and continue Schedule if provision is to be made for individuals and families occupying more than 7 rooms. C. BASIS FOR PROPOSED FIXED PAYMENTS (Explain in sufficient detail to justify how the amounts proposed in the Schedule were determined, including the source of the amounts for lowest normally available moving cost per hour and the basis for the estimated average number of hours required. Use additional sheets if needed.) Basis of fixed payment same as used by the Urban Renewal Agency as approved October 10, 1963. After conference with the Urban Renewal Agency this schedule for fixed payment is current. Submitted by: (Date) (Signature of authorized officer) (Local Public Agency) (Title) SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF HHFA D. APPROVAL Approval is granted to the Local Public Agency identified above to pay, in accordance with the Regulations Governing Relocation Payments and on the basis indicated in Block B, the fixed amounts of Relocation Payments indicated in Line 1 of the Schedule for expenses and losses incurred on or after the date of this approval for the project(s) identified above, except as provided for below: HOUSING AND HOME FINANCE ADMINISTRATOR By (Date) Regional Director of Urban Renewal, Region =CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS April 13, 1967 Housing and Home Finance Agency URBAN RENEWAL ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE OF AVERAGE ANNUAL GROSS RENTALS FOR STANDARD HOUSING IN LOCALITY PROJECT LOCALITY Austin, Texas PROJECT NAME(S) PROJECT NUMBER(S) Decker Lake Recreation Reserve Open Space TEX OS-8 INSTRUCTIONS: Prepare original and 3 copies for HHFA if the schedule is proposed for only one project. Prepare an additional copy for each additional project. Prepare 2 additional copies if LHA concurrence in the schedule is required. A. TYPE OF SUBMISSION AND APPLICABILITY OF SCHEDULE (X) This is the original schedule and is proposed to apply to all projects being carried out by the LPA, as identified above. ( ) This is an amended schedule (amending the one approved by HHFA Date ) for the purpose of: ( () Revising the amounts of the average annual gross rentals. ) Adding additional project(s) to those covered by the previous schedule Such new project(s) is (are) numbered ( ) Other (Explain) B. REQUEST AND SCHEDULE (Attach a statement explaining in detail how the amounts shown on the schedule were derived. In localities where a PHA-approved schedule is being used by the LHA, and the LPA proposes to adopt that schedule, the statement shall so indicate, and no further explanation of how the amounts were derived is required.) Approval is requested to the following schedule of average annual gross rentals, including utilities (as defined in Urban Renewal Manual, Section 16-3-2), for a decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling of modest standards in the locality. The schedule will be used in determining the amount of the Relocation Adjustment Payment to be made to families and elderly individuals who are eligible for the payment, in accordance with the Regulations Governing Relocation Payments. SCHEDULE OF AVERAGE ANNUAL GROSS RENTALS REQUIRED IN LOCALITY FOR DECENT, SAFE, AND SANITARY DWELLING OF MODEST STANDARDS O BEDROOMS (Housekeeping Unit) 1 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOMS 3 BEDROOMS 4 BEDROOMS 5 OR MORE BEDROOMS $744.00 $ 936.00 $1068.00 $1284.00 $1476.00 $1680.00 C. COORDINATION WITH LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORITY (To be completed by the LHA in localities where there is or will be federally assisted low-rent public housing. Instructions to LHA: Complete Block C, conform all copies, retain one, and return remainder to LPA). Check one, and complete if appropriate: ( ) The schedule in Block B was approved by PHA on and is being used Date by the LHA. April 13, 1967 =CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS (X) The schedule in Block B is concurred in by the LHA. Date Local Housing Authority SUBMITTED BY: Date Local Public Agency Date submitted to LHA: Signature of authorized officer Title Signature of authorized officer Title Date submitted to HHFA: THIS SIDE OF FORM FOR HHFA USE APPROVAL (If PHA concurrence is required (see below), complete this block after the concurrence has been obtained, and submit 1 copy of approved Form H-6148 to the PHA Regional Office.) The schedule set forth in Block B is approved and may be used by the LPA for the purposes set forth in Block B. Regional Director of Urban Renewal Date CONCURRENCE OF REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HOUSING (Required only for schedules to be used in localities where there is or will be federally assisted low-rent public housing and the amounts shown in Block B have not previously been concurred in by the Regional Director of Public Housing. Instructions to PHA Regional Office: Complete this block, conform all copies, and return all copies to HHFA Regional Office.) The schedule set forth in Block B is concurred in. The amounts shown on the schedule are the same as those used or to be used by local housing authorities in the locality making Relocation Adjustment Payments to eligible families and elderly individuals displaced from public housing sites. Regional Director of Public Housing Date The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None : April 13, 1967 _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Mayor Palmer introduced the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE ΑΝΝΕΧΑTION OF CERTAIN ADDITIONAL TERRITORY CONSISTING OF 7.16 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF THE JAMES MITCHELL SURVEY AND THE GEORGE W. DAVIS SURVEY IN TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, AND 8.21 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF THE JAMES P. WALLACE SURVEY NUMBER 18 IN TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS; WHICH SAID ADDITIONAL TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, IN PARTICULARS STATED IN THE ORDINANCE. (Westover Hills, Section 3, Phase 3) Councilman LaRue moved that the ordinance be published in accordance with Article 1, Section 6 of the Charter of the City of Austin and set for public hearing on April 27, 1967 at 10:30 A.M. The motion, seconded by Councilman Long, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None AUDITORIUM The Mayor asked if the Council wanted to take up the matters at the Coliseum on which they had asked for a report concerning the use of the Auditorium basement. The Assistant City Manager stated no one was ever refused rentals of the Auditorium or any portion thereof that did not conflict with another event. The Auditorium Manager will not obligate the basement of the Auditorium for a year ahead of time, and he had contacted this gentleman and arranged for additional dates. WORKABLE PROGRAM The City Manager reported the Planning Director and staff were preparing the report on the Workable Program for this year. The Recertification expires June 2nd. The City made certain commitments in connection with recertification last year as to what it was going to do, and the Federal Government added some additional requirements. Mr. Osborne wants to review the status and get the guidance of the Council. The Planning Director stated the City had committed itself to adopt Health and Sanitation Codes in the current workable program and the Council has adopted six such codes or amendments. There is the probability of five or six additional amendments or additions to codes and approximately eight new Health and Sanitation Codes. The five codes to probably be amended are as follows: 1. Water and Toilet Facilities for Construction Workers and Open Public Assemblies. 2. Septic Tank Cleaners Regulatory measures, which deals with matters of locations of where dumping would be done, and licensing. 3. Vending Machines 4. Milk Ordinance (prohibiting no raw bottled milk) =CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 5. Septic Tank Requirements (within the subdivision area limits of the City) The Council set hearings on these ordinances for April 27th. Mayor Palmer asked that the Committee and people interested be notified, and Councilman Long suggested that at least one legal notice be given. Councilman Long moved that the City Manager be instructed to get out special news releases next week and the next week concerning these ordinances that are to be heard. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, Mayor Palmer None Absent: Councilman White Councilman Long moved to refer the Lake Sanitation and Pollution Ordinance back to the Health Committee for restudy in view of the new State and Federal Regulations. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, Mayor Palmer None Absent: Councilman White The Director of Planning stated the Air Pollution Study which had been authorized was included in the report. MR. HERBERT HARGIS, Representative from the AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY HEALTH UNIT, reported that the Citizens Committee on Public Health Ordinances had reviewed the health ordinances and approved them in their present form. Councilman LaRue moved to approve the Health Committee's findings on the following ordinances 1. Meat Inspection Law 2. Poultry Inspection Law 3. Vital Statistics Ordinance 4. Massage Parlor Ordinance 5. Food Handlers Registration Cards Ordinance The Planning Director reported the following items for Council attention: 1. Housing for displaced families, relating in one sense to the agreements concerning Decker Lake Project. The Planning Director said statements from the Federal Government are that arrangements must be made for such a service to be provided by the Local Public Agency (Urban Renewal Agency) with the cost to be paid by the City or other agencies causing displacement before next application for recertification. Relocation services of the same quality as that offered to Urban Renewal Project displacees, except for the relocation payments, should be made available to all displaced families. The City is contracting with the Urban Renewal Agency for Open Space. The contract needs to be extended to include April 13, 1967 : : : _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS any person displaced by City Governmental action. (Highway programs, etc.) After discussion, Councilman LaRue moved that the City Manager be authorized to negotiate with the Urban Renewal Agency and contract for all relocation services for the City of Austin. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, Mayor Palmer None Absent: Councilman White 2. Citizens Committee The Planning Director discussed the Citizens Committee, listing the functioning of some of the subcommittees, particularly the one working with the Building Official on the Intensive Code Enforcement in South Austin. He stated perhaps there would a restructuring of the whole committee, and a definite assignment of functions by the City Council. His suggestion for the Committee would be: (1.) A representative from each of the Boards--the Urban Renewal Board, Planning Commission, Housing Authority Board, Parks and Recreation Board, School Board, City Council and the Human Opportunity Board, Community Council Board, Minimum Building Standards Commission. These representatives would constitute one facet of the Committee. (About 9 or 10 people) (2.) Approximately 15 citizens chosen by the Council. (3.) Ex Officio Members or the Directors of Agency Heads for each of the operations--Housing Authority, Urban Renewal. Agency, City Manager, Planning Director, etc., plus the Health Officer, who has no permanent Board. This would be a committee of 30-35 people which would be combination of the public, members of the present boards or various community boards, and executive officials. He suggested that the Council draw an ordinance setting up specifications for this Committee, including that it meet once each quarter and review a quarterly progress report on the Workable Program, as well as the final report. The Administrative Officer, whomever he be would have the responsibility to give a quarterly progress on the Workable Program. Councilman Long asked about including people from the Neighborhood Referral Programs. It was stated these would be a part of the 15 or more citizens chosen by the Council, and would be a reasonable and desirable thing to do. Mayor Palmer asked if the Planning Director would discuss this with the Regional Office and see if this suggestion will meet the criteria, and state that this is the approach that will be taken during the coming year. The Planning Director asked if the Council would like to spell out a set of general _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 duties for this committee and set up an ordinance to provide for periodic meetings and for terms of office for those people appointed by the Council. The Planning Director stated a draft of most of the material could be available in about a week which would cover 90% of the items. He was to check with the appointment of the 15 citizens, when he discussed the committee with the Regional Office. One more item would be the completion of the review with the Building Inspector of the Heating and Air Conditioning Code, and a report submitted to the Council. The Planning Director listed the accomplishments--the adoption of revisions to the Zoning Ordinance; adoption of the Cooperation Agreement with the Housing Authority for 1,000 additional units; began construction of the addition to Brackenridge Hospital; completed the Capital Improvements Program; acquired a considerable amount of parks and recreation land as well as engaged in park and recreation development; reviewed and incorporated the Expressway and Major Arterial Plan as a part of the Austin Development Plan; and the progress with respect to the various Urban Renewal Projects. In General Code Enforcement, extensive activity has been done throughout the community in all income areas. The Minimum Standards on Commercial Buildings Ordinance is included in the report. On the Intensive Code Enforcement Project, no report has been received from the Federal Government on the Meadowbrook Project yet. Mayor Palmer asked that all the items necessary be brought before the Council as soon as possible. REAL ESTATE The City Attorney submitted the request of MR. H. G. WEST to lease some land on Ben White Boulevard and Banister Lane and showed the location of the City property. Mr. West wants an option to purchase the property at $21,000. The Church gave the City, without cost, the land for Ben White Boulevard right of way, and have expressed an interest in buying the balance of their property. He pointed out the property Mr. West wanted to lease for $100.00 a month on a five year lease with three five year options, increasing the rent $25.00 a month. Councilman Long moved that the request be DENIED. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, Mayor Palmer Noes: None Absent: Councilman White Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Austin has found that public necessity requires the widening and improvement of U.S. Highway 290 East from Interstate 35 to Mira Loma Drive in the City of Austin, to provide for the free and safe flow of traffic in said area within the City of Austin; and, _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 WHEREAS, the City Council has found and determined that public necessity requires the acquisition of the hereinafter described tract of land for right-ofway to permit the widening and improvement of such Highway 290 East in the City of Austin; and, WHEREAS, the City of Austin has negotiated with the owners of said land and has been unable to agree with such owners as to the fair cast market value thereof; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the City Manager be and he is hereby authorized and directed to file or cause to be filed against the owners and lienholders, a suit in eminent domain to acquire fee simple title for said purposes to the following described tract of land, to-wit: 0.417 of one acre of land, more or less, same being out of and a portion of the James P. Wallace Survey which lies within the corporate limits of the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, which was conveyed to Thomas Lee Young by deed dated March 1, 1949, of record in Volume 968, Page 108 of the Deed Records of Travis County, Texas, said 0.417 acre tract of land being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at the Southeast corner of above mentioned Thomas Lee Young property in the existing North right of way line of U.S. Highway 290, said corner being S 7° 33' E, 340.30 feet from the Northeast corner of said property and also being N 7° 33' W, 60.48 feet from Highway centerline station 81+63.78; THENCE, along the existing North right of way line of U.S. Highway 290 being a curve to the right having a radius of 5,669.65 feet, the chord bears S 77° 47' W, 98.95 feet, having an arc length of 98.95 feet to the Southwest corner of this tract; said point being at right angles to and 60.00 feet left of centerline station 80+69.22; THENCE, N 4° 19' W, 210.85 feet along the West line of the Young tract, same being the East line of that tract conveyed to L.A. Fry in Volume 880, Page 548 of the Deed Records of Travis County, Texas, to a pin set in the proposed North right of way line of U.S. Highway 290; THENCE, S 83° 24' E, 89.44 feet along said proposed right of way line to a pin set in the West line of that tract conveyed to Nash Phillips and Clyde Copus, Jr. in Volume 1594, Page 123 of the Deed Records of Travis County, Texas, for the Northeast corner of the tract herein conveyed; THENCE, S7° 33' E 180.60 feet along said West line of Nash Phillips and Clyde Copus, Jr. property, same being the East line of aforesaid Thomas Lee Young tract, to the place of beginning. (Tommy Lee Young, et ux) The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, Mayor Palmer Noes: None Absent: Councilman White April 20, 1967 _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the City Clerk be authorized and instructed to record this finding in Section 33.39 of the Traffic Register. DEMOLITION OF HOUSES Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, bids were received by the City of Austin on April 17, 1967 for the sale of two (2) houses that Urban Renewal has turned over to the City for disposal by demolition; and, WHEREAS, the bids of August Heyer in the sum of $15.00 for the house located at 1810 New York, and in the sum of $25.00 for the house located at 1705 New York, were the highest and best bids therefor, and the acceptance of such bids has been recommended by the Building Official of the City of Austin and by the City Manager; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the bids of August Heyer in the sums of $15.00 and $25.00j be and the same are hereby accepted, and that W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager of the City of Austin, be and he is hereby authorized to execute a contract on behalf of the City with August Heyer. The motion, seconded by Councilman Long, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None STREET PAVING ORDINANCE Mayor Palmer introduced the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE NECESSITY FOR AND ORDERING THE PAVING AND IMPROVEMENT OF PORTIONS OF CERTAIN STREETS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR SUCH WORK, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS, DIRECTING THE PREP- ARATION OF ESTIMATES, INVOKING THE ALTERNATE PROCEDURE PROVIDED BY ARTICLE I, SECTION 5 OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND CHAPTER 106 OF THE ACTS OF THE FIRST CALLED SESSION OF THE 40TH LEGISLATURE OF TEXAS, DETERMINING THAT THE COST OF SUCH IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE PAID BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN, PROVIDING A METHOD OF REIMBURSING THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR A PORTION OF SUCH COSTS BY ASSESSMENT OF A PORTION OF SUCH COSTS AGAINST THE PROPERTY ABUTTING SUCH STREETS OR PORTIONS THEREOF TO BE IMPROVED, AND FOR THE FIXING OF A LIEN TO SECURE PAYMENT OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS, STATING THE TIME AND MANNER PROPOSED FOR PAYMENT OF ALL SUCH COSTS, DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO CAUSE A NOTICE OF THE ENACTMENT OF THIS ORDINANCE TO BE FILED IN THE MORTGAGE OR DEED OF TRUST RECORDS OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. April 20, 1967 _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS The motion, The ordinance was read the first time and Councilman Long moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its second reading. seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the second time and Councilman Long moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its third reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilman LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The ordinance was read the third time and Councilman Long moved that the ordinance be finally passed. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, White, Mayor Palmer Noes: None The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been finally passed. TAXICAB FRANCHISE HEARING Mayor Palmer opened the public hearing scheduled for this time on a taxicab franchise for Mr. Sabatino Sconci for the ABC Cab Company located at 10th and Red River. Attorney Bradley Bourland, representing the ABC Cab Company, and Frank Denius of Clark, Thomas, Harris, Denius and Winters, representing Roy's Taxicab Company, appeared before the Council to argue the merits and demerits of the franchise. After a considerable amount of discussion, Councilman Long moved the Council close the public hearing and deny the request for a taxicab franchise for Mr. Sabatino Sconci for the ABC Cab Company. The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, White Noes: Councilman Shanks, Mayor Palmer ANTI-TRUST SUIT SETTLEMENT Councilman LaRue offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Austin, Texas that James W. Wilson, the special attorney previously employed by the City to prosecute its anti-trust claims for damages growing out of purchases of aluminum conductor cable, be and he is hereby authorized and empowered to compromise and settle the City's said claims for a total recovery of notless than $91,270.00. • _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 Councilman Shanks offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Austin has found and does hereby find that the public necessity requires the acquisition and maintenance of a large recreational reserve to permit the creation of parks, playfields, camp grounds, golf courses, piers, wharves, together with the construction of a large water reservoir, and also to permit an addition to the electric light and generating system of the City of Austin, and the construction of certain roads and public ways; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has found and determined that the public necessity requires the acquisition of the fee simple to the hereinafter described tract or tracts of land for such purposes; and, WHEREAS, the City of Austin has negotiated with the owners of such land and has been unable to agree with such owners as to the fair cash market value thereof; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the City Manager be and he is hereby authorized and directed to file or cause to be filed against the owners, and lienholders, a suit in eminent domain to acquire fee simple title for said purposes to the following described tract of land, to-wit: All that certain tract, situated in Travis County, Texas, and being a part of the Philip McElroy Headright League of land being all of Lots 5, 6 and 7, out of the Tract No. 3 of the Original Partition of said McElroy Leagues according to the map or plat of said subdivision of record in Plat Book 1, Page 15, of Records of Travis County, Texas, containing 154 acres of land, more or less, and Being the same lands as Tracts 1 and 2 conveyed to John Bergstrom by J.G. Carlson, et ux, by deed dated September 21, 1901, of record in Vol. 178, page 90, Deed Records of Travis County, Texas, and the same land conveyed to John Bergstrom, by Andrew Berkman, et ux, by deed dated June 16, 1897, of record in Vol. 147, page 271, Deed Records of Travis County, Texas. (Elmer E. and C. R. Nygren) The motion, seconded by Councilman LaRue, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen LaRue, Shanks, Mayor Palmer Noes: Councilman Long Absent: Councilman White • _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS April 13, 1967 The City Attorney stated the Council fixed a six months period within which sales of the lots in Rimrock Heights could be set and fixed the prices. New prices which the Tax Assessor recommended to be established are shown. One person has come in after the six months' period has elapsed and offered to pay the price the Council authorized during the six months, for the most desirable of the lots and is worth $250.00 more than the others. Councilman Long moved to accept the $2,250.00 and offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That W. T. Williams, Jr., City Manager of the City of Austin, be and he is hereby authorized to execute a warranty deed on behalf of the City of Austin, conveying to Donald R. Laymon the following described property, to-wit: All of Lot 8A of Rimrock Heights, a resubdivision by the grantor herein of a portion of Marlo Heights Section One, a subdivision of a portion of the Henry Warnell Survey in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas according to a map or plat of said Marlo Heights Section One of record in Book 5 at Page 85 of the Plat Records of Travis County, Texas, a map or plat of said Rimrock Heights being of record in Book 28 at Page 26 of the Plat Records of Travis County, Texas. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, Mayor Palmer None Absent: Councilman White The City Attorney stated the two small lots pointed out on the plat of Rimrock Heights should be reduced in price as they would not bring the amount for which the price was set. Councilman Long said this could wait a while since there were no offers. There being no further business, Councilman LaRue moved that the Council adjourn. The motion, seconded by Councilman Shanks, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Councilmen LaRue, Long, Shanks, Mayor Palmer None Absent: Councilman White The Council adjourned at 8:45 P.M. subject to the call of the Mayor. ATTEST: Momoe Mace Asst. City Clerk APPROVED いいんて Mayor