Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-23-90 TC Min107 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS A Special Meeting of the Board of Aldermen of the Town of Westlake, Texas was held on the 23rd day of May at 7:00 p.m., at the Dudley Ranch in the Town of Westlake, Texas. The following were present: Dale L. White, Mayor Howard Dudley, Alderman Alvin Oien, Alderman ,Sherry Dudley, Alderman Jerry Moore, Alderman Carroll Huntress, Alderman Gerry White, Secretary Paul Isham, Town Attorney Bud Hauptmann, Town Engineer Scott Bradley, Chairman, Planning and Zoning Also attending the meeting were several people representing the State Highway Department and the Lyda Hunt Bunker Trust. Mayor White called the meeting to order at 7:17 p.m. Minutes of the previous meeting were read by the Secretary and approved as read. The Mayor read a letter the Town had received from Mr. W. L. Wimberley, P.E., District R.O.W. Engineer with the State Highway Department regarding acquisition procedures of right - of way property. (copy of letter is attached to these minutes) The Mayor also made a short statement regarding highway 114 and proposed highway 170. Agenda item #1. Consider a Resolution authorizing the con- demnation of approximately 41.715 acres of land for highway right-of-way in Tarrant and Denton Counties. Motion was made by Alderman Alvin Oien, seconded by Alderman Carroll Huntress to pass and approve Resolution #2-90, a resolution determining the necessity of acquiring approximately 41.715 acres of land located in Tarrant and Denton Counties. Follow- ing discussion, Motion was voted on and carried unanimously. Agenda item #2. Consider a Resolution authorizing the con- demnation of approximately 0.886 acres of land for highway right-of-way and 2.359 acres for drainage easements in Denton in Denton County, Texas. Motion was made by Alderman Sherry Dudley, seconded by Alderman Carroll Huntress to pass and approve Resolution #3-90, a resolution authorizing the con- demnation of approximately 0.886 acres of land for highway right-of-way and 2.359 acres for drainage easements in Denton County, Texas. Following discussing motion carried by unanimous vote. 148 Agenda item #3. Executive Session: The Board convened in executive session at 9:05 p.m. to consult with its attorney in regard to the lawsuit filed by R. Carter Pate,Liquidating Trustee against the Town. The Board reconvened in open session at 10:03 and the fneet- ing was adjourned. Approved: Dale L. White, Mayor Attest: Gerry White, Secretary WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 23, 1990 MAYOR WHITE: The meeting will come to order, Will the secretary please read the minutes of the last meeting? MS, GERRY WHITE: The regular meeting of the board of Aldermen in the town of Westlake, Texas, was held on the 7th day of May, 1990, at 7:00 P,m, at the Dudley Ranch in the Town of Westlake, Texas , The following were present: Dole White, Mayor; Howard Dudley, Alderman; Sherry Dudley, Alderman; Alvin Oien.,. Alderman; Carroll Huntress, Alderman; Jerry Moore, Alderman; Paul Isham, Town Attorneyj Bud Hoffman. Scott Bradley, Chairman of Planninu and Zoning; Gerry White. Secretary, Also attending the meeting were several gentlemen representing the Lyda Hunt -Bunker Trust, the Perot Group and Praffic Consultants. incorporated, The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 700 p.m. Minutes of the previous meeting were read by the secretary and approved as read. Item number 1. counts of the returns of the election held an May 5. 1990, The secretary read the results of the election. For Mayor Dole White, 14 votes. For Alderman Sherry Dudley. 14 votes. ForAlderman Howard Dudley. 14 votes, Item number 2, adminstered oath of office to the successful candidates. The secretary administered the oath of WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING office to the candidates, Item number 3, the Board of Aldermen convened in executive session at 7:20 pm. The board reconvened in regular session at 8:05 pm. Item number 4, considering agreement between Hillwood Freeway Limited and the town of Westlake for reimbursement of the cost and acquisition expenses for the right-of-way, for the construction of State Highway 170 and the relocation of U.S. Highway 377 and authorizing the Mayor to execute same. Motion made by Alderman Alvin Oien to pass and approve resolution number 1-90 as amended, a resolution approving an agreement with Hillwood Freeway Limited for the acquisition of right-of-way for State Highway 170 and U.S. Highway 377 and authorizing the Mayor to sign the same. Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard Dudley. VOted on and carried unanimously. Item number 5, consider resolution authorizing the condemnation of approximately 41.715 acres of land in Tarry and Denton Counties. Presentation by Albert Huddleston, Art Anderson and Robert Grammar representing the Luda Hunt-Bunker Trust. Mr. Huddleston displayed maps, and the group voiced their opposition to proposed resolution. Mr. Hayes Linsley -- I guess that's right -- and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ib lb 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 4, 25 WHESTIAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mr. Plichael Weaver representing the Racatv6reup voice0slQ111 Malion made by Alderman Carroll Hvatrovv, seAoAded by j0derman Alvin,,.-.,, that the Board of Alderman not take any laction on itemnumber 5 and item number 6 at this time. A very lengthy discussion followed, Motion was made I by -- seconded by Alderman Howard Dudley, voted on and carried 1 Ur!0nin10LJSlY Motion made by Alderman Carroll Hufrs t I mmlx bo that the Board not to action on the condemnation resolutions tonight; that we authorize the town attorney to !convey offers to purchase right -of -Hay to the trustees of the !Lyda Hunt -Bunker Trust and the H,B. Hunt Liquidation Tr'pis t,4w* A.1herr Motion was secoo4ed by Alderman Howard Dodley, Alderman Carroll Huntress, Alderman Howard Dudley, Alderman !Sherry Dudley and Alderman K Oien voted for the motion, majority. Aid 4 abstelved. Motion carried by item number 7, consideration of an ordinance I Motion was made by ,abolishing a conservation and reclamation district in Tarrant ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES — DALLAS, TEXAS f2l4-744-17601 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING M # and Denton County and in the Town of Westlake and known as Lake 2 TUrner Municipal Utility District Number 2 of Tarrant County 1; and Denton Countygxgxx. 4 Motion sed=ed by Alderman A! 816n, After 13 discussion, motion was voted on and 6 item number 8. consideration of -- consider an 7 ordinance a. -A k, -IFLi m t, 13 Motion was made 8 by Alderman Howard DQA!e-.y to adopt e 1023 a n, 9 ordinance abolishing a conservation and reclamation district in 10 Tarrant and Denton County and in the Town of Westlake and known ii as Lake Turner Municipal Utility District Number 3 of Tarrant 12 County and Denton County, Texas. 13 Motion was sacented by Alderman Al :,r , M o1l"a"ue 14 voted on a n d --umv* metv'si, 15 Item number 9, appoint a Motion by 16 Alderman Howard Dudley to appoint Alderman A1%@!#n2Moyor 17 pro tem. Motion seconded by Alderman Sherry Dudley, Voted on 18 and carried unanimously. i9 There being no further business to come before the 20 Boord, the meeting was adjourned. 21 MAYOR WHITE: Any corrections? 22 (No response,) 23 MAYOR WHITE: Minutes stand approved as read. 24 Just to bring up the history of this highway system, 25 i'd like to read a little section that I've prepared here, FNGIFDOW A AAAACTATFA - DWAR. TFXAR F214-744-17601 S 2 3 33 7 8 9 l 11i j3 12 3 V 15 '§ 1 18 1 0 1 22 ! S"?s +tea E CITY COUNCIL r1"°"r' MEETING Starting with some of the functions of the lost meeting, and hat is during the regular ar i a es..3,n of May 7. 1990. he Board of "kidermen agreed F., wait t.. Ri condemn i.. 1. L.. "...E" i n properties {.kii,.%. to e r the May 11th decisionof the State I i and Public Transportation t ion t accept Albert Hudd yes a ' s proposal or not. And then I received a letter dated May the 14th. 1990,i i 4� from Mr. W.L. Wimberley.District s t ..... ' , 2 L " s� s i "." W a y Engineer of the i State Department Highways and Public Transportation. FI! just E read part of ,the letter here, i I f "Dear Mayohit it now appears that t th subject i I rimit-of-way parcel will need to be acquired by the town of OestiaKe, We are authorized to initiate aeoulsitl4b proceduresI 0 s 1which comply Nith state a n federal guidelines for right-of-way a t The appraisal 'ipp reports prepared ¢^mayed Mr, ["{ o (" g m } submitted to this office by Mr. !sham are in substantial compliance wt these guidelines, i And further the history of the highway system in this 3 area. Several years o m 3 Y Town f Westlake a ? dd IBM, s McGuir homers, and Mr, N,B, Hunt awo;"ked on a plan to update H i g h w a y 114 t o a e�. � �=�` � ..����.�� � - a � � � . , � � �� Y� JR realized that that development in this area without =a supe io a 5 highway s yt m would cr" tmonster, s monster that we could not Live with Nos} , i'1 dvii z ANSWATFS "'iA f s AV T, H?b s . 3 a r 4fid. 1 7s 3 3 Ly 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 i3 I Lf 15 16 17 1, 8 19 20 21 22 237 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Roanoke by-pass to the north and the Highway 170 to the south around Roanoke. both extending to i-35, just sweetens the pot. This just might be the first time a highway system was built before the need. And I do think that this highway will actually be built prior to the true need of it.''' However, due to the nature of the matter, tb,�, �,pv,a ­* a " go, utn�A� --a Vart1m And we shall now start with item 1 V44'? MR. PATE: Thank you, Mayor, MR, ISHAV Before -- Mayor, excuse me. Before Mr. Pate addresses the Board, it may be be worthwhile for me to mention to the Board this, in light of what you did at your last meeting, i did contact the highway department and talked to both Roger Welch and Bill Wimberley on Monday, May 14th, to inqUire c v�,w te Ae, fr A n d t h e y i n f o r m e d m e t h a t t h a C's Therefore, on the some day, Monday, May 14th, I hand -delivered to the various parties at interest, as it pertains to Westlake, both the NBH Liquidating Trust, as well. as the trustees for the Lyda Hunt -Bunker Trust, Hritten offers RGIFDOW a ASSOCTATFS - DAILAS. TFXAS F214 -744-17601i 1 2 3 4 5 b WESTLAS's E CITY COUNCIL MEETING to acquire the property, And those were delivered, as i say, on May IL�th, h-64 *6&-c ff*ffjr il?� W - -401000 Lipab Las ohyvrwert ton And earlier this evening i had a discussion with representatives of one of the four beneficiary trusts of the Lydo Hunt -Bunker Trust, that being the Halovw*uddlesta BRneficiarm0rult, about some of the issues in acquiring that right -of -way, But i wanted the Board to have that background before !you received public comment, MAYOR WHITE: Okay, RRvQ*TV Mayor, Board of Aldermen, and Secretary sS White and citizens of Westlake, I don't come here to have any comment about tonight's procedures and have none, Since I was ,not aware of the lost hearing that you had concerning the action that was taken on the property of the Circle T with regards to MUD 2 and 3 and wasn't able to speak at that, i Aanted to, And thank you for the time to make this comment to 1 you, i am Carter Pate, I am the trustee of the N,B,H, Liquidating Trust, As you have been previously advised, the NBH Liquidating Trust is now the owner of Circle T Ranch, And We understand that the Town of Westlake, purporting to ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS, TEXAS 1214-744-17601 7 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2LI 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING act through its Board of Aldermen, recently enacted Town Ordinance No, 181 and 182 which purport to abolish Lake Turner Municipal Utility Districts number 2 and number 3. Please bed vised that your action toundial erally declare those districts dissolved is without legal authority, Your attempt to dissolve the districts are in direct conflict with specific legislative requirements governing the terms and conditions under which those districts may be dissolved, Your purported factual findings, with respect to need for the districts and the best interest of the residents and property in the district, contains no factual basis whatsoever and are deerned by the trust to be further evidence of your illegal and unlawful efforts to prohibit reasonable development of the Town of Westlake in general, and the Circle T Ranch in particular, We are also concerned with the extent to which youi- =W-z actions may have violated the Texas Open Meeting Laws, :14 yqont to MR. PATE: 1 was not specifically looking for a FNG!Fnnw & ASSOCTATFS - DAHAS. TEXAS 32l4-744-17601 V pi thereby reinstating Lake Turner Municipal Utility Districts No. 2 and 3, And i thank you for your time. MAYOR WHITE: We have a letter just about verbatim to that. Should we respond? MR, !SHAM: i don't think it's necessary, unless you yqont to MR. PATE: 1 was not specifically looking for a FNG!Fnnw & ASSOCTATFS - DAHAS. TEXAS 32l4-744-17601 19 20 ZI 22 , j 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING response, M A,-Yy,-,-QRNW*@T Of—S+, 73MN; s0messio4p. And it's very difficult to sit here and swallow !that, MR. PATE: i understand. Mayor, MR, OIEN: Keep in in it wouldn't make any difference. MAYOR WHITE: Consideration of a resolution authorizing the condemnation of approximately 41,715 acres of 10nd for highway right-cf-way in Tarrant and Denton Counties, MR, WILLIAMS: Mayor. may i speak? MAYOR WHITE: N"OtlYS y Q� 1- im MR, WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you, MAYOR WHITE: This is the resolution, The resolution determining the necessity of acquirino approximately 41. 715 acres of land located in the William Huff Survey A648. Tarrant County. approximately 40,930 acres. and the William Huff Survey A519, Denton County, approximately .785 acres for right-of-woy Purposes. and approximately 2,94 -- 294. correction. acres of land located in the William Huff Survey A519, Denton County, for drainage easements, all in the Town of Westlake. Texas. Whereas, the Town of Westlake approves the Stote of ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS 1214-744-17601 io 11 12 13 14 ". 5 16 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation Minute Order 86417, dated October 28. 1987in regard to construction of State Highway 170 and the relocation of U.S. Highway 33,E And whereas, the State of Department -- the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation has requested that the Town of Westlake provide the right-of-way and easements required by the construction project within the Town's corporate limits; And whereas, the Town of Westlake desires to acquire said right-of-way and easement as described on the exhibit attached hereto, Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Board of Aldermen and the Town of Westlake, Texas, that it has been determined that public necessity requires the acquisition of certain interest in land needed for the construction of State Highway 170 and the relocation of U.S, Highway 377, to -wit: Approximately 41.715 acres of land located in the William Huff Survey A648, Tarrant County. Approximately 40,930 acres in the William Huff Survey A519. Denton County, n4piaroximately .785 acres for right-of-way purposes. And approximately 2,294 acres of land located in the William Huff Survey A519. Denton County for drainage easements. all in the Town of Westlake. Texas. as described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. for all intents and purposes, it is hereby determined by a bona fide offer. that a WAIMAW R AMEATFA — nAHAs; , MAR F21U-744-17sn-,,,, I 2 3 IF 5 6 7 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Acna fide offer has been made by the town attorney to the following owners or interest holders, Paul Hope Trustee - these will all be Lyda Hunt -Bunker Trust, Paul Hope. Trustee; 0H, mercer. Trustee; F,C. Vickers. Trustee; Gerry Ann Coleman, pTrustee; Bob over, Trustee. and Mary& Huddleston. Trustee, And that if the Town attorney acting on behalf of the �Town of Westlake and such owners or interest holders or, Interest holders cannot agree and are unable to agree as to the value of said property and to damages legally allowed by low, said property shall be deemed as authorized below, The authority to as said offer is in all things approved. ratified and confirmed. The Town of Westlake hereby determines to appropriate and condemn the interest described in Section 1 of this resolution for the purposes so stated by the exercise of the power of eminent domain as set forth in Chapter, 21 of the Property Code. V,T.C.A. and the constitution and statutes of the State of Texas authorizing the condemnation of property, nie town Ottorney is hereby authorized to file the necessary suits and take whatever action necessary for the prompt acquisition of above d.scribed interest in said property, This resolution shall take affect immediately upon its passage as provided by low, is there anyone that would like to speak in reference FNQFnnw v 8QQnCTATFQ — Mist TFass Q T91Li. —ML -179n''! IL 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 i8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING to this item? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. Mr. Mayor. My name is Kirk Williams. My address is 4100 First City Center. Dallas, And i'm here at the request of the trustees of the Lyda Hunt -Bunker Trust for the benefit of Mary M, Hunt, Some of the references have been made to Albert Huddleston, I simply want to clear for the record that Albert Huddieston is neither a trustee, nor is he a beneficiary under that trust, And the trustees are the ones that have empowered me to come here and make a few comments insofar as the city counsel is concerned, i think most of you are familiar with the history because we had meeting two years ago, when we talked about the Plinute Order that was adopted by the Highway Commission, That being Minute Order 86417, The Minute Order called for a relocation of U.S, 377 for a distance of approximately a mile and a half, moving VS, 377 to the east, in conjunction with the construction of that interchange. That was something that was not precipitated by the property owners, it was precipitated by a conversation from an engineer over in District 2, by the name of the Gary Treach, who is now working with the highway department in Austin. Due to safety considerations and the railroad that Pmopmw P AoonPTATPQ — nAii8o TPYAQ TAL—ML-17MI WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING runs adjacent to U.S, 377 and the fact that under ultimate design and ultimate construction of subsequent roads, that there needed to be. from a safety standpoint. the removal of 377 because of the grade separation between the railroad and 377. that there needed to be a removal of 377. so that automobiles could safely traverse or ultimately go under the railroad. And that's how the relocation issue come to be. and it was part of the Minute Order. It is my understanding that. although. I was not at your last city council meeting. that representations were We I that attempts were underway to convey right-cf-way to the State !Highway Department, There wos a trigger date of May 11th, at which time the State had requested that the right-of-way be made available, 1 want to let you know that the trust that 1 am representing tendered to the State, at no cost to the State or to others, their undivided one-fourth interest in the property that's consistent with the original Minute Order that wos approved back in 1987, We made that tender to the State with approximately $60,000 worth of engineer drawings that were consistent with that alignment, And we stand ready to make that some offer to the city this evenineo . To convey at no cost that right-of-way, that undivided one-fourth right-cf-way of the trust that i represent. provided it consistent with the realignment. the one PNAipnnw i AmonrTATPq . M!Aq TPYBT MU.MU.17pnl, 0 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 H 12 13 lit 15 IN ow 2 2 23 L. Lj 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING and a half mile realignment of U5, .tea 7V if you elect not to accept that right-of-way. then i think it's important in making your decision that you, understand what affect it has. And Vve got a couple of models. if i could show you very briefly, The affect that it tics because it will have some affect insofar as the damages on to property would be concerned. i've got two of them. And one is under the alignment, the new alignment. and one is under the aid, For information purposes. the north is toward me, The alignment -- and by the way. Carroll Lilly who was with Graham a Associates. the engineer who has been working with us and who designed these models is present. So if there's questions from an engineering standpoint. we'll try to answer them. i'm certainly not an enuineer, But the original design called for U.S. 377 -- and i'm talking about under the mile and a half relocated 377, And the Minute Order of '87 required U,S. 377 -- with north being this direction. Obviously. west being that direction, Required the relocation of VS, 377 to the east, And you can see that it has a flat brick surface, and then it was going to continue, in essence, for a straight line for a mile and a half, basically parallel to the railroad track. This is the railroad track, and these are the one foot contours, FNsiPnnw a AqRnrTATFT . DAHAR, TFUR FAL.W4.17GAI K 5 I 12 i 5 14. 15 16 17 ib 19 20 21 22 23 2 L; 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING So you can certainly see that if 377 is left adjacent to the railroad, it calls for having people stop on the railroad, in or to manuever those crossings, is something that design of new highNays does not it sense, if you pull the roadway back, this sort of configuration can happen, This is what we are attempting to support. it leaves I our property in a much more developable format because of the relative contours of the property. And it allows for subsequent roadways to the south, to be able to function I adjacent to the railroad, That's the best alignment, That's the one that was really pushed by the State Highway Department, Gary Treocn and the people at District 2, and that's what was under consideration when the Minute Order was approved in 1987, Now, what we have is the alignment, as I show you here, U.S, 377 has been pulled closer to the railroad, By pulling it closer to the railroad -- ff MR, HUNTRESS: How much closer? Seventy feet? MR. LILLY: Seventy to 100 feet. MR, HUNTRESS: You said 70 the lost time, MR, LILLY: Seventy to 100 feet, Since the bridge MR, WILLIAMS: I think it is about 70 feet closer, here, i mean 70 feet closer here. 100 here, Because it's put (it an anglEl. Also Zve tried to show with this -- and these are, as FNG!FDOW A ARRACTATFA — DAHW T'sem XAK F914-744-17oni, 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING I indicated again. one foot contours, You're going to see that this bridge structure is now becoming super elevated. When you, elevate the bridge and you pull it closer to the railroad tracks. in order to have the service roads go over that bridge, they have to climb substantially quicker, And as you can see you've got some tremendous slopes that are created at this location. You've got some tremendous slopes that are created at this location. Rendering some of these damages under a condemnation type concept. where you have to pay for the property being taken, but you also have to pay for damages to the remainder. if you eliminate access, i just simply say there's that potential, and 1 have visited with Mr, Isham about that in some discussions we had. By pulling the roadHay over at this configuration, you render obviously no access from 170 into this piece of property because you're super elevated and on a curve coming off of a bridge in that direction. i question the accessibility to this property and you're starting to get squeezed by the topography of the railroad at this location. So we've got some real concerns about whether mea.. either one of those tracks is rendered developable, in addition to the topography that's involved, Again, as I indicated this is the preferred alignment, This; is the one that was discussed by the State Highway Department a long time before there was any personal interest PWGIFDnW a AssnCTATF9 - DAHAT, THAS f214-744-17601 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING interjected. it was the one that was suggested by the State Highway Department. They were the driving force, And as a result, it is a better alignment, It's the one that we really didn't embrace originally, but we're convinced that this is the safest, and this was the best alignment, The right-of-way that we tendered to the State Highway Department and that we are tendering to you is the right-of-way that would allow for the development consistent with the original Minute Order, I hope that this demonstrates at least some of the concerns. That we're not trying to be unreasonable in our concerns regarding having a super elevated bridgethat's set on an angle that creates some fly -overs of service roads, that make adjacent property virtually undevelopable, Those are concerns that we have, We would like for YOU riot to authorize to condemnation at this time, We offer to continue to work with you, to come up with the appropriate alignment. As i had indicated, we have attempted to work off of this alignment. We furnished some engineering drawings, $60,000 worth to the State Highway Department, We believe there are some alternatives that are available. But this alignment, as it is, creates some tremendous problems, not only for the property being taken by AGIFDOW A ARSOCTATFS - DAHAR. 3FYAK f214-744-17in-i 4 5 6 7 10 11. 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21 2 2 23 2 is 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING way of condemnation, And I'm not arguing whether or not there is that right. I think there's still a legal question as to whether or not you can condemn for private purposes or whether it's public But setting that discussion aside, there are some additional considerations insofar as the developubility of she sites, i would think that would have a very dramatic impact insofar as an entryway into the City of Westlake. what can happen here. the values of the properties. ultimate tax bases and those sorts of things. We don't understand why. if there's no cost to the city involved -- if there's no cost to the city. why the right selection. the best selection. that functions best for the trust, that functions best for the city is not being allowed to work. And Hhy the one that creates problems from a trust standpoint, in my opinion, creates some development problems from the city's standpoint, and i would like to think that the city wants to see this being an entryway from a major development to the west, that this entryway that literally puts the City of Westlake 's front door in a hole. without it being oble to be developed. doesn't seem to make such sense. if there's no cost involved insofar as the city is concerned, I'll be glad to answer any specific questions you may FNG!Fnnw z ARRUTATFA - nAHAS. THAR F714-744-17601 2 3 6 7 I 0 10 ii 12 1.3 .Z ""Y is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING h 'r ave. We have worked with Mr. Blane, who 1 recognize is here. We have worked with Mr. Welch and his people at the State Highway Department as recently as May 11th. when the deeds were tendered from the only property we can control, And that was the trust property of Mory's, i hope this graphically shows some of the concerns we've got, I have had conversations with the people at the Fort Worth Star Telegram, and I took issue with whether or not we're the ones being obstructionists. i think if any of Y'all oNned this property and if you new that in a vacuum, a long time before there Here other personalities or other things interjected into a roadway alignment, the State Highway Department says, this is where we should be. That this alignment should not be proceeded with or pursued without a complete resolution. That this alternative ."joes not make any sense, I'll be giad to answer any questions, Again, as I ii-idicated, we're here willing 9.1 tender theright-of-way for one - fourth, And again, it's not all of it, And i can't represent the other three trusts, that have not hired me to be here, But the trust that I represent has made an offer to the �State and is willing to make that same offer to the city, to convey the right -of -wan But it is going to have to be consistent with the approved Minute Order in 1987 and to the best of my knoVedge, 00FDOW A ASROCTATFS - DALLAS, T3AS F214-744-17601 WESTL;tel KE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1 it's the only approved order. This alignment clearly violates 2 the mile and a half relocation that's specifically stated in 15 that Minute Order, 11 1 And 1 appreciate you giving me the opportunity at 5 least to explain why we've gotten to where we are. The fact 6 that we have tendered to the State all the right-of-way that we 7 can control for the longer alignment and will help at least to 8 explain why. in a condemnation route and from a city 9 development standpoint. we believe this is a much more costly 10 alternative. without any benefits from the city's standpoint. 11 And i appreciate you letting me explain those 12 situations there. We do have. Carroll Lilly. who's an engineer 13 who was involved. if there are technical considerations. he ILp can address those. { But i thought it was important for you at least to 16 understand the situation. There's been a lot of discussion 17 about the alignment and really what it means and what affect it 18 tics. I think this shows graphically a little bit more to 19 concerns we've got, I appreciate your time, 20 MAYOR WHITE:Anyone else want to speak on it? 211 (No responsez) 22 MR, OIEN: Is there anybody here from the majority of 2 3 the trust? 24 MAYOR WHITE: i don't think so, Mr, Stone, i know you 25 and i don't see you, ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS, TEXAS [214-744-17601 1 2 3 0 8 9 13 1 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Z Z 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR, WILLIAMS: i don't know that -- MAYOR WHITE: I don't see him. MR, WILLIAMS: i don't know that there is a majority of the trust. There are four different trusts with sets of trustees. I don't know that there is a consensus insofar as !the other three, The only thing that I can represent is Mary's, and the trustees have authorized me to come here this evening. MR. OIEN: And my understanding is that 75 percent of thern are agreeable to the plan, And Albert's the only one that's taken issue, MR. WILLIAMS: Again. Albert is not a trustee. Albert is riot a beneficiary. And i want to make that clear. that !An here on behalf of the trustees in that instance, And you'd have to ask the other trusts directly because 1 do not know what their position is in that situation, 11 just don't represent them, so i can't make any public stcytements MR. HUNTRESS: You only represent one-quarter of them? MR. WILLIAMS: I only represent one trust Nhich is an undivided 25 percent owner in that property. MR, OIEN: Do we have any draNings from the State? MAYOR WHITE: is Mr. Stone here? MR. HUNTRESS: Mr, Bio ne is here, MAYOR WHITE: Would you like to come up here and help ENGLEDOW a ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS 1214-744-17601 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 i/ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 us out? WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR, BLANE: i think perhaps the reproductions. 1 have not seen them before. of course. or drawings that the department have been reviewing, And, of course, this one i believe as indicated as one that had been prepared much earlier, This is one that was prepared a little bit later, insofar as either desion, we found that either of those were acceptable to our department. Mayor and members of the Council, This one, of course, does have a bridge on a curve, it does create some grade problems, of course, You'd have to seek the grades on a little bit different scale than this. But certainly, these grades are acceptable as we come out from underneath the railroad, And, of course, as we come out onto level ground here. Either design is acceptable with our department. This one, of course, is acceptable, insofar as the Minute Order is concerned, our administration has viewed the Minute Order as a one and a half mile length, They view that as acceptable because it is less than the one and one-half mile length. So, therefore, this design is acceptable in accordance with the Minute Order. I think perhapsinsofar as the two designs, of course, either of those would be acceptable to us, This one has tnree curves insofar as the realignment ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS, TEXAS f2l4-744-17601 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3 1 14 15 16 17 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING is con1 erned. if you'd use the design where you oo back into existing 377. south of the 170 crossing. then. of course. if YOU could go back in. say. within the 7.900 feet or the one and one-half miles. you would hove four curves normally, Si there are four curves on this onet three curves on this one. So insofar as curvature is concerned. there is a little bit differential in the number of curves that you would negotiate, But either of those are safe, So we have no problem with the safety of this facility, Our department would be willing to approve this one or this one. But this one appears to be one that is supported. at this time at least. by the people that would be buying the right-of-way, So we have to have all of the right-of-way, And i believe an May the 11th, we did riot have all the right-of-way, And that was a condition. 1 believe. that our administration, had laid down in Austin for the furnishing of the right-cf-way. And then. of course. we had some problems with reversion clauses in the deeds. And the reversion clauses an some of the extensive right-of-way that would have to be perhaps used later on. that would not be used at this time, that was all right, But this section here. if we build this one. then extend this one later to fit this one, then, of course, the reversion clauses on this one, we could not accept. We can't FNGIFDnW A ARROCTATFA - DAHAR. THAN f214-7UU-17sni 3 4 9 10 NM 12 13 14 15 16 17 113 19 20 21 22 23 24 2.5 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING build a highway on right-of-way that might revert out from title to the State. So we have a problem with thot 1 think perhaps that gives you a little bit of the rundown, So maybe the 11th passed, and we did not have signatures an the deeds that conveyed the property to the State free, So our administration sold that we could not go forward with this plan. basically like this. This is a little bit different because we would still have been buildino the bridge at this location and extending out like this. MR. HEN: But the decision hasn't been made as to what configuration you're goino to adopt yet? MR, BLANE: Yes. sir. This is the configuration here, Carroll. let me ask you a question. This is the configuration of the plans that -- reproduced copies of the plans we were f urnished? MR, LILLY: Yes. sir, MR. WILLIAMS: Those were not plans that were drawn by the State. though, Those were plans that were furnished by a third-Porty to the State and that's an he alignment, So if the State were drawing it. when they were telling us what they wanted back in '87. this is what District 2 and District 18 talked to us about. And the alignment at the mile and a half because of those subsequent intersections and because of the safety issues in crossing the railroad tracks, Those issues are not addressed here. And since a FNP; Pnnw a AqqnrTATPA . BAH As TFYAT FRU—MU-17sni 1 2 3 11 5 6 7 14 6 19 20 21 22 Z 5 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING private party is reimbursing for the olionment. the right-of-way acquisition. i can see why they may take some shortcuts, But the shortcuts that are being taken may create and will create safety problems with other crossings further south, as 377 is relocated, And, again. if there's no costinvolved from the city's standpoint. my question to Yall is: Why not do it right? That's the right way. MR, BLANE: The State has approved this alignment here as for as being a safe alignment and is the one me are willing to proceed on the contract with, MAYOR WHITE: Surely meaning that it is safe? MR. BLANE: Yes, sir, MR. OIEN: When is construction anticipated? MR, BLANE: We hope to let the contract in july, I sviii biect to right-of-way acquisition being completed to the I extent that we can proceed forward, And, of course, utility adjustment having been completed to the extent we can proceed forward with the contract. We Nould take bids in july, MR, OIEN: What about a completion time? MR, BLANE: i do not know the exact number of working days that are on this project, Generally speaking, i believe that the working days would probably be consistent with the completion date of about 24 months from noH, Something like that ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS f2l4-744-17601 19 20 0M 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING You've already let the interchange at 35 junction, So this is the second project. And then we have a third project, and that's some time later on in the summer or early fall, that would get us over to 114. Remembering this contract only goes from east of interstate Highway 35-W over to the Tarrant -Denton County line, Then we have to let another contract later on in the fall that would carry us over to State HighHay 114, And two years would be a normal time, since we do have a railroad crossing to build here, And that would take a considerable amount of time, R. DUDLEY: Well, you're saying you approved this because you have the right-of-way, but you wouldn't approve this if you had the right-of-way. MR. BLANE: The plans that were submitted to us by the Hunt Trust Group. It is the Lyda Hunt Trust. MR, WILLIAMS: it's for the benefit of Mary M, Hunt, MR. BLANE: Mary M, Hunt, Those plans were submitted to us. We found those to be satisfactory at the district level, also. So they were acceptable to our department, MRS, SHERRY DUDLEY: That was this? MR, BLANE: This is modeled on that plan. This is -- MR, LILLY: That bridge that was the old alignment, MR, BLANE: This Has -- MR. WILLIAMS: That was the old alignment, FNA!Fnnw i ATRUTATFA . DAIIAR. TFXAR MU.744.17601 9 2 3 Lj 5 E; 7 i9 20 2 1 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR. LANE: That's not really true. Because this was the Plans that were submitted to us. MR. WILLIAMS: This is the old alignment that was done based upon the 1987 plan, We took -- and the deeds that we tendered -- the deeds that we tendered and are offering to you this evening, at least for our interest, assumed that this bridge -- because the engineering work had already been on assumed that this bridge would go in, but then attempted to approach this alignment end run for a mile and a half, And it was with this bridge, with this right-cf-way and with a realigned southerly leg, That's a correct statement, MR, BLANE: i want you to be careful. That's very misleading there. because these were the plans that you prepared for us, So they did prepare plans that would have been used to construct this bridge here at the north end of this , And, of course, we would build a temporary connection here so that later on, we could build the alignment along and parallel to, at a distance sufficient for a grade separation, Could be added under the railroad at various locations. Mayor, any other questions? MAYOR WHITE: I don't think i'm quajified to ask any 1 questions . MR, MOORE: Basically, what we're talking about here ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS, TE1AS [214-744-17601 2 3 4 7 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 17 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING is. that version over there is going to result in less of ta costly impact to the taxpayers, MR. BLANE: That will be somethino 1 think the local governments will have to decide, Remembering that our department is not buying this right-cf-way. as you well know, We're responsible for the construction of this project. That is our part inthis work, We are constructing the project, Local government is to purchase the rights-of-way and they. of course. will have to furnish the adjustment in the utilities that are within the existing right-of-way, And. of course. other utilities are the responsibility of the department. that are outside the right-of-way on their own easement, MR. WILLIAMS: isn't it safe to assume that either Glignment. the construction cost is essentially the some? MR, BLANE: Well. of the two plans. of course, that we were going to build. one of them is concrete and the other asphalt. Is that what you're speaking to? MR. WILLIAMS: But the construction cost from the State standpoint is pretty close to a pusZ MR, BLANE: if we used -- poured the cement and concrete or used asphalt and concrete. pretty close. We're building the some alignment really. is what we're proposing to do, FNGIFDOW A AMOCTATFS - DAHAS. THAN F214-744-17601 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR, WILLIAMS: So the only change is in the cost for the acquisition of the right-of-way. And i'm saying that even on this alignment, even on this bridge alignment, this right-of-way, 25 percent of this right-of-way, 25 percent of this alignment, with that piece being on a temporary basis and with a mile and a half, 25percent of a mile and a half of right -of -Hay from here dow that offer has been made to the State, We didn't control all of it, therefore, we couldn't we couldn't meet the requirements that Mr, Welch put on us. MR. MOORE: if I understand it right, there's been no objection to either plan from the other trusts, MR. WILLIAMS: i can't speak to that regard, I just don't know , But from a cost standpoint, from the State's standpoint of construction, there's really no difference. From a cost to the city, if they're indemnified. if I understood the !agreement. there's no cost. And our suggestion is that the things that we're to comply with is the Minute Order that was approved two years ago. ond that calls for a realignment for a mile and a half, and we're will to give that 25 percent interest that we own,, in this. this and the extension, MR, BLANE: When the time comes to widen U,S. 377 on south of the 170 location, we would probably have to widen in place after He joined back in on this alignment, Keeping in Imind that this is going somewhere down in here, FNGiFDnW A ARROCTATFA - MINA- THAR F214-74U-17sni i 2 3 4 5 E; 7 8 1. 14 15 16 17 113 19 20 21 22 2 3 214 IN WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING So we would then have to widen the road, I think is what Mr. Williams is saying, along and adjacent to the railroad, basically by widening over on both sides of the road over against the railroad and away from the railroad, in the event you were to extend this alignment and this bridge andbring it parallel to, and in out enough so that you could get railroad -highway grade separations on perhaps streets that remain - I believe Kirkwood and Rufe Snow by the city of Fort Worth. Or maybe if you don't have a thoroughfare plan, but recognizing it, But, nevertheless, if you were to do such a thing, then that alignment, of course, would have to be built as a new facility, This one, the old pavement is pretty old. i Houldn't say whether we could retain any of the old pavement or not. i haven't investigated that, I would suspect that probably we would have to do quite a bit of rehabilitation an it. to be able to keep it. But nevertheless. you'd have the some pavement. I think is what Mr, Williams' point is. I concur in that. Yes. we would have the some pavement, length of construction, either way. But from the State'sstandpoint, we're responsible for construction. Not responsible for the acquisition of the right-of-way from c financial standpoint. Of course, we're responsible for all right - of -way, We can build a road unless we get it, That's the problem in contract lets, 3OMW A ASSMATFS - DAHAS. THAS f214-744-17601 i 2 3 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i 8 23 2 4 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR. VICKERS: Mayor? MAYOR WHITE: Mr, Vickers, would you care -- MR, BLANE: if there isn't any ,her questions, I'll sit doNn. i'll get as up, when you want me, MAYOR WHITE: -- to say anything? MR. VICKERS: No, MR, PATE: Mr. Mayor, I have a question when you get around to it, i didn't think I wanted to speak, And this may be directed toward you, if they move back from the second model, back to the original first, does that have any affect on the N.B.H, property that i've already deeded? MR. LINDSLEY: No, it doesn't, Not that i'm oware of, MR, ISHAM: Would it have any impact on the church tracts? MR, LINDSLEY: Yes, it would. Because the property would be condemned to the church tracts is affected by how for the relocation of 377 is, Now, total acreage probably be about the some, but what -- actual and might be different, MR, WILLIAMS: I think the thing that we're focusing on, if we went back to this original alignment, this is not the alignment that we conveyed, that we tendered the deeds to, The deeds that we tendered to the cityj i mean to the State, and that we are offering here are consistent with this and would have, with the exception of -- from this point, really whatever ENGL EDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS, TEXAS f214-744-176011 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 12 H 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING the right -of -Hoy here is, from this point south. But it recognizes the drawings that John Lang has reviewed and that is being proposed here. it recognizes the northern segment. So any condemnation of church property up here would be exactly the same that you have. So the tender of our right-of-way is consistent with this alignment with the exception of pulling back in armanently, It pulls back in temporarily, but to conveys to the city -- i mean, to the State -- a one-half or one-quarter interest in that other mile segment down this, more consistent with the Minute Order. So the deeds that He have offered have taken into consideration this alignment, but this is what was originally considered by District 2 and District 18 back in 1987, This is simply trying to make the best out of whatwe perceive to be a not optimum bridge design and construction. ! don't think John Blone would -- if he had any other choice. 1 don't think his preference as an engineer would be to build a super elevated bridge on a curve. That's just not typically done, Does it meet the engineering standards? i trust his judgment. i've got no doubt that it would meet the engineering criteria in their design manuals. But I don't think that if you have a choice mu automatically build a super elevated curved bridge. but we've RGIEDOW R ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS F214-744-17601 3.7 18 19 20 21 22 J3 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING taken this as a given. We've taken this alignment to the nort'r-, as a given. So it would not -- with the deeds that we have tendered. it would not have an impact on the church property, MR, MOORE: Let me got on board. The deeds you transferred are not for this configuration? R. WILLIAMS: They are not. They are accepting this configuration. except -- MR, MOORE: With the condition that part of it is to revert back at some point of in time to the trust, And that's khe hang-up, MR. WILLIAMS: That's the hang-up, Now. thot's the h0now-up only insofar as the trust that 1 represent, That's not the whole hang-up from the State's standpoint. because the State wanted 100 percent of the right-ca-woy. And i only represent is 25 per interest in it. But it seems to me that if you could get a 25 percent interest that is consistent with this. and all we're doing is trying the comply with the Minute Order, condemning a three -fourth's interest makes a whole lot more sense than condemning 100 percent, And I haven't heard anybody else saying they're 1011ing to give a nickel, None of the other trusts have come up here and said, we've tendered deeds or we're offering tonight, i'm telling you, we're offering. We have in the past to the State, and we're offering again this evening, FNGIFDOW A ASSOCTATFS - DAHAS, THAS F214-744-176011, 2 "3 M 2 21 22 2 2 213 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAYOR WHITE: Okay, What are you gaining out of this offer then? MR. WILLIAMS: h t are we gaining? MAYOR OR W T MR, WILLIAMS: What we are ? iultimately? MAYOR WHITE: The reason for it, t*tip I@ x -� reason n f 3 from our MR, . S WILLIAMS: i..m a.,,. 3. 3 Y 6 1 S` e ;.., P„a w: .d a 9 av � ,L �.. .hJ � +1 � S standpoint is really very simple, And it's two facts, Number 1. it creates better transitions and crossing of the railroad for Subsequent development o V S . w7 , where iigoes in SOUts oly direction, it pulls t4ceroadway back whereit needs to be, I don't think there's any question that that is -- MAYOR WHITE: How will that affect you? MR, WILLIAMS: The other thing that makes it positive is, will then have development on sides of 377. I t H€. uld give us developable opabl land between 377 and between he railroad tracks. That's one of the incentives that we've got i conveying ;M€ 25 percent interest in 40 0 4 ° 0 or f: r acres is because t does appreciate, or it has an economic impact on us, And we believe that by conveying that, there are sada things wcan aha to make this site a better developa e site, From he City of etas t.; a ke standpoint, ultimate base seems to make a lot of sense. t ic.UNREBS: What would that reduce the developable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 i3 14 15 17 A i9 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING it by 70 feet. what would you have? You'd still have developable lots. would you not? MR, WILLIAMS: This shows the reduced area, MR, HUNTRESS: Yeah, MR, WILLIAMS: Right here. This lot wouldn't change MR. HUNTRESS: Uh-huh, That's a given, MR, WILLIAMS: This is a given, And it's still consistent, it doesn't mess up the city or the State or anybody else -- MR, HUNTRESS: Right, MR, WILLIAMS: -- from a condemnation there, And for the short term, for a temporary standpoint, this stays the R�NNRN MR, HUNTRESS: That's going to be the some anyway, MR, WILLIAMS: But under ultimate development, You 1P,ull the roadway back and you've know created a mile strip of I Idevelopment between 377 and the railroad, that we do believe 1has economic value from our standpoint, as Hell as from the -- MR, HUNTRESS: That happens in both plans, though, MR, WILLIAMS: But you've only got it on one side, because if the railroad is here, and you're not in the City of Westlake, But you're not going to have double development on U,So 377) if there's a railroad running along one side. If you pull it back, you can have development on both APHOW A ASSOCTATFS - DAHAS. TFXAS F234-744-17601 1 2 3 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING sides. But if it stays against the railroad, you're not going to have the same economic development, because this tract is going to have to be oriented to some other streets, because they're not going to have dry waste pumped across railroad, particularly when it's elevated as it is, MR, OIEN: Vve got a question for Mr, Blone, MR, BLANE: Yes, sir, MR, OIEN: On this initial layout, you have one and a half mile from -- MR, BLANE: Northernmost point. MR, OIEN: -- the existing -- MV BLANE: Down to the south point. MR, 43 .,l And where is the new layout going to be? instead of a it and a half, how much further? MR, BLANE: i don't remember the exact lengths, 6,000 feet, Something like that. MV LILLY: i think it's 4,800 feet, MR, BLANE: 4,800, MR, HUNTRESS: It's over 6,000, MV BLANE : 4,800, MR, LINDSLEY; 6,300, MR, BLANE: I didn't remember that, But it's shorter, Yes, MR, OIEN: By about -- MR, BLANE: 6,300. And a mile and a half, of course, FNnjFDnw z ARKOCTATFA - MINA, FYAK F914-744-INni l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING is obout 7 .900 so -- MR. 01EN: Shorter by 1.600 feet? MR, BLANE:sir, MR, OIEN: Quarter of a mile, MR. HUNTRESS: is there anything to saya john. that 377 couldn't be moved over in the future? MR. BLANE : Well. once you build this here. at this MR, HUNTRESS: Yeah. MR, BLANE: Once we build this bridge, 1 think the department would be very, very reluctant to spend the additional dollars to move that bridge over this way. MAYOR WHITE: No, No. .-se doesn't mean the bridge. MR. HUNTRESS: Extend - - MR. WILLIAMS: Can you plan that in and do -- MR. BLANE: Of course. that's what MR. WILLIAMS: That's what we've drawn. so it would be 1 done, MR. BLANE: Yes. That's what Mr, William's client looked at. MR, HUNTRESS: On this plan here? MR. WILLIAMS: We took thisplan as a base and did that very thing. And that's how we convinced ourselves that we could convey the right-of-way at no cost for that 25 percent as long as we knew -- PNsiFnnw a AsynrTATPA . nAi!Aq, Ts YA9 F91U.7UU.1,amara ,,,' 2 3 11 5 zv 8 9 13 14 15 16 17 113 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 5 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR, HUNTRESS: in the future -- MR, WILLIAMS: That in the future it was goino to be relocated. And there .z. additional cost from the State's standpoint. MR. !SHAM: Can the revisionary langune in the deed be worked out in a fashion that would be acceptable to the State? MR, BLANE; Well. of course. the main problem we had With the revisionary deed was an this alignment here that we propose to build immediately. the one we want to let in july, The deeds that we were presented with had two clauses in them. One. i believe. 500 something days after the -- after presentation of completed plans for the extension, if we did riot go ahead and have that built by that time or by January of 1995. one of those others. one or the other, whichever. then this, land would go back to the ur property owners, And odepartmt encouldn't accept that because things C(3n happen. We might have -- anything can happen. because we might not have enouuh money to build it, MR, WILLIAMS: There was -- 1 will say that the highmay department worked with -- 1 mean, once they got the deeds and they got language, they looked at it and they said -- an a Friday. they said. wait a minute, There's a concern about this reverter language, And 1 think we got a FAX in our office about 3:00 o'clock - - PNsiFnnw a AsonrTATFA - DAHAR. MAN f214-74U-17sn'� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 17 i6 19 4 U 21 22) 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR. BLANE: 3:00 o'clock Friday. MR, WILLIAMS: -- on a Friday afternoon. an the 1aa_ M saying here's some other language we'd like to you consider, But He had -- trustees had already signed the deeds, We could not -- we couldn't negotiate that reverter language in that, But the State did come back and say, yeah, we'll work [with a tou on some reverter language, We haven't responded to it beCoLlse the time lapsed before we were able to respond to the I reverter language that the State suggested. And are we willing to continue to work? i think john will tell that you we've -- we've done everything in our power to try to make those deadlines. i think we have been able to furnish more information to the State than they expected would be furnished, And we'll continue to work with the State on coming up with some acceptable language in that regard, We just simply don't want the city to preclude this alternative, when it makes a lot of sense long term from the State's standpoint, as well as from the city's standpoint, MR, !SHAM: Let me ask you another question, Curt, Arid i know you can only speak for your client, and you may not be able to answer this tonight. But if somehow both the State and the city were willing to take the right-of-way as you suggest and the other beneficiaries or the other three trusts also agreed to t! at, PNG!Fnnw a AMPTATM - DAIIAN. TFXAR F?14-744-17601 1 2 3 Ll 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 it; 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING WOUld your client be willing to participate in the cost of acquirinu the right-of-way to the north, which would include both the liquidating trust property as well as the two church tracts. which are not in Westlake. but I understand the City of Fort Worth is going forth with acquiring those properties, MR, WILLIAMS: I've not talked to them about it. but it's certainly something I'd be glad to talk to them about, it's just something that's never come up in any of our discussions, But as 1 indicated to you. we've got -- I mean. I think we've got legitimate -- i'm biased. but I think we've got some legitimate concerns. and we've tried to demonstrate why there are some problems here, And if we can come up with a better solution for all Of LIS, it makes sense to do it now as opposed to after there's hard concrete out there. and then have to live with it, MR, DIEN: You are reducing the length of the by-pass by approximately 17 percent. but how much closer to the railroad have you shifted? MR, WILLIAMS: Carroll Lilly from this drawing hoN much have you shifted? R. LILLY: 70 feet, is what I estimate, MR, WILLIAMS: What? From this one drawing? MR, MOORE: From, you're talking about -- you're not PNA!Fnnw z ARRnrTATFR - MIA&. THAR F214-744-17sni 4 b 7 8 9 14 15 16 1 / is WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING talking about changing the configuration, MR, WILLIAMS. I'm not talking about changing this bridge one foot, MR. GIEN: What's the distance from the railroad to the proposed bypass bridge, horizontal? MR, LILLY: There's about -- as the bridge exists I n 0 W MR, WILLIAMS: This is Carroll Lilly with Graham a Associates, MR, LILLY: I'm Carroll Lilly. i'm with Graham & Associates, Engineers, Right now, the distance from the center of this bridge to the railroad track is about 500 f eent The alignment as it went south. as we proposed it to the State, at this point we took and we put a curve and we swung it back out to get it 600 feet away from the railroad I I track, Because that's the optimum distance that's needed to get the roadways underneath the railroad track and then back up 1 to grade to intersect with 37V MR. WILLIAMS: if you're talking about Kirkwood or Rafe Snow, Because that's really what's driving the distance -- from our standpoint rather than having to have every bridge super elevated, you need to be back about 600 feet, FNGIFDnW X ASSWATFS - DAHAT THAR FAU-M-17AAI' 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING You're not back that for here, and that's the reason you've got to put a little twist in it. MR. LILLY: That's why if you look at these two models. the reason this one has come up so much more on these service roads here is that with this bridge moved back toward the railroad track. they can't raise this up. going under the railroad track. They have minimal clearances they have to live with, So that forced these grades on the service road to be steeper. So when they come up and they peaked over the bridge, and in order to get those back down, back over and meet the State reqUirements and not have that drop too quickly, it forced this up in here to come back down. MR. WILLIAMS: If you pull it back -- if you flatten it out and pull it back just a little bit to 600. it optimizes the development of underpasses, it leaves that option clearly available at the other major thoroughfares and entry points into the city, MR. HUNTRESS: To meet your time schedule. john. when do you have to have the right-of-way in place? MR. B' ANE: Of course. the department needs the right-of-way before we advertise for bids. MR, HUNTRESS: Okay, MR, BLANE: Advertisement for bids probably will occur in the early part of the june, i don't know the exact date, FNS!Fnnw a ARSOCTATFS — WIAR. THAR MU-744-17Rini I 12 1-3 14 15 16 17 18 i 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR, WILLIAMS: Even under condemnation, `he reos no way they're going to have the right-of-way by early june, i mean, I'll trust -- MR, BLANE: The administrator can waive that, if they know they're going to get the right-of-way within a reasonable time. It's up to them. of course, That is. our engineer and director. Mr. Welch. and deputy director can waive those, MR. WILLIAMS: That right-of-way. if it's got to go through condemnation. I think Paul will tell you. there's no way that it will be available in early june. MR, BLANE: That's up to the administration. of cot.6, r s e, FNGLEDOW A ASSOCTATFS - DAIIAS. TFXAS F214-744-17601 MR. HUNTRESS: Right, MR. Bi ANE Whether to waive it or not, MR, HUNTRESS: Uh-huh, MAYOR WHITE: Okay, Let's hear from Perot on this r1opq Mr, Lindsley? MR, LINDSLEY: Fm Hayes Lindsley, I work with the Perot Group, and 1 will be brief, This project has a four year �history come june. We've experienced numerous delays through the four year history of the ;,.j roject. We believe that the alternative that is an your all's left is the alternative that will allow this project to move forward as quickly as possible. and that is our primary FNGLEDOW A ASSOCTATFS - DAIIAS. TFXAS F214-744-17601 1 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 11 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING terest, We're also interested in minimizing the relocation of the 377 from the standpoint that we have property that fronts an the other side of the railroad an 377. MR, HUNTRESS: Wait a minute. if it fronts on the other side of the railroad. it doesn't front on 377, MR, LINDSLEY; We attach value to the frontage, notwithstanding the railroad, MR. HUNTRESS: i take exception to that, MR, LINDSLEY: We would ask that the city move forward with resolutions, I'll be happy to ansHer any questions, MAYOR WHITE: Okay, Thank you. This extension south. Not seeing a chart on that, Where does that come as for as the Keller outfit? MR. WILLIAMS: We've got some -- MR, HUNTRESS: You mean, the short extension deal'? MR, WILLIAMS: We've got some longer drawings if you want to get into it, MR, HUNTRESS: The short extension or the -- MAYOR WHITE: Either one. i mean, they"re talking about coming back, MR, HUNTRESS: The short extension would be about two I iles north, MAYOR WHITE: Two miles north of Keller? MR. HUNTRESS: Mayor, two miles, then the long ENGLEDOW A ASSOCTATFS - DAHAS, TFXAS F214-744-176011 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 3 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING extension would probably be less than a mile, half mile maybe, MR, WILLIAMS: Mayor, we have assumed -- in fact, we have been in communication with the property owners in Keller and are attempting to get them comfortable with this realignment, because I think ultimately -- is that Gilliad, Mount Gilliad Circle? Road? Mount Gilliad Road is beyond the city limit of Westlake, but it is logical to take. if you're going to relocate 377, and what we were told by the people at District 2 was, this alignment would ultimately stay about 600 feet away from the railroad. goes south into Keller. 1 think there are two or three property owners, MR, HUNTRESS: Two. MR. WILLIAMS: There are only two property owners on to Mount Gilliad Road, And what we're attempting to do -- if it makes good sense for us to convey that right-of-way, it will make good sense for them, We hopeful that we can help the State Highway Department facilitate even that southerly extension thereon into Mount Gilliad Road. MR, HUNTRESS: Both those properties are for sale. MR. WILLIAMS: i understand, And i do understand whot you're talking about, MR. LINDSLEY: Would that be consistent with the Minute Order? ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS [214-744-17601 1 2 3 5 6 Y t 8 1 DO 1 12 1 L, 15 1 17 B 19 20 .L. 22 23 24 5 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING PEROT REPRESENTATIVE: No, Na R WILLIAMS: it is not inconsistent. because it doesn't address the Minute Order. PEROT REPRESENTATIVE: it's no consistent, WILLIAMS: MR, � , W_? L_LI MS > a. beg to differ with you. MRia_ : Who's pa,ngor " l l this? ha°? MR. L r,NDSL s.. -Y The condemnation? MR. OIEN: No, The purchase of the right-of-way. MR, LINDSLEY: The Perot Group, MR, OIEN: Where's the money coming from? The Perot Group? MR, LINDSLEY: Right, MR, OIEN: They're 3 yr paying for i t . MR. LINDSLEY: That's right, MR, OIEN: They ought to call the shots, Their money, MR, MOORE: What it boils doNn to is, it's going cost the t.. %_§c..xp„..ay!..s more ; 4. o i ” y if Y { don't go Ys ..1., tet» 3 that configuration over there. s that ? F i _,. bottom . „..ini.. MAYOR WHITE: What I'm concerned about is, if that !--377's of to go all the way through Keller and then south, are we going to start doing some S -turning to get back into downtown ,:elle gain? After bringing it out, then H re going to take it back again? MR, BLANE: Mayor, the future plans, I'm not sure of, 6..1nd idon't now hoH the department is goingto address that t T O s �.}y�. =n����� A y���� A=F�z ..,-. ?`,moi ! .� . �:A'� f 2-;� '_� , 1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 -1 19 20 21 22 L2 24 25 WESTLAErr E CITY COUNCIL MEETING from this point south. i only know that. of course. the first drawing we presented. if you remember -- you weren't at the public hearing, I don't believe. i don't believe you made it. MAYOR WHITE: I don't know which one. I was at some MR, HUNTRESS: A! and i were. MR, BLANE: 1 believe you were there. You remember we had two drawings. The one. the longer one was the one i believe that was presented, We said this was the preferred alternative. the one that come in in the shorter distance, Certainly if you wanted to. as you said. later on if you decided that the road should he 600 feet off of the center line of the railroad, if that's what you decided to do. you, COUld bend out -- bend out and move out 600 feet later. you know. by going out through a reverse curve. if that's what you decided to do, i don't have any plans for that, I know that Fort Worth has talked about it, Fort Worth District regarding the Dallas District. This is our responsibility. The reason i'm here tonight is because we're the designers of this project, We're responsible for that. So that's the reason i cari"�e down MRS. WHITE: is this Plan A and this is Plan B? MR, BLANE: Yes, ma'am, i've forgotten the alphabetical numbers, i believe, as i remember at the public FNMFnnw k vAynCTei TF; - DAHW fXAV F?14-744-17M 1 2 3 4 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 0 19 20 21 22 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING hearing, this Has B. I think, and this was A. Well, the bridge was over here a little bit further, Excuse me, The bridge was over a little bit further, about 70 feet over, MR. WILLIAMS: But the trust is -- again we're not talking about this one, The trust is still talking about this one, so we're not -- MRS, WHITE: This is -- MR, BLANE: The plans we reviewed did use this language. MR, WILLIAMS: We're still consistent with that conception of the extension. MR. DUDLEY: Another thing we can think about, Dole, that would give us -- it would give us a strip of commercial property through there with natural boundaries for the future if -- you now, if we wanted a commercial strip anywhere around 377, And it would be -- i mean, it would be isolated, MAYOR WHITE: it would be on the east side for sure, MR, MOORE: Right, MAYOR WHITE: How many -- no one has really said -- at !east I didn't hear anyone actually say how many feet in depth are vie talking about with this, on this plan as it is right here? How many feet are we talking this way? MR. OIEN: 50V MR. LILLY: I can show you, MR. WILLIAMS: And it goes to zero because it goes FNAjFDnw k ARTUTATFA - DA11W TFYAR f?14-744-17601 r 6 7 8 9 1.0 11 iz 5 14 15m � i 7 ef�m, 19 20 21 2 23 2" 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING back into L. 7s e 377 a l „ s�,s" 9 mei 3 l,. : MAYOR WHITE: Wher does it go to zero? MR. OIEN: it would be back into existing 377, MAYOR WHITE: That isn't zero, MR. 01E No. That's still 150 fees, R. BRADLEY: I'm Scott AYkt Bradley. Were there any other i conditions an 3 {..hat deed.other F..i i R a that reverted eve.i.e5...# clai,.4e that the State found unacceptable? I MR. LANE: Definitely, The main problem was we had i corrected e+d a h field notes. And the deeds were acceptable i from h field notes standpoint, i t as the reverted clause that we had she problem with i multiple €MR. WILLIAMS: What we have ender tStatea i a a € temporary easement for this area. and then a permanent t d 6 { easement, 2 5 percent. what we o wn f :ranother mie down here, 1 (General multiple simultaneous ` onve 'sa a. ns € MR. WILLIAMS: Right now there's 100 percent condemnation. :a. assume, :`tea c i.,;'t..a'" sbd y else aoffered.A f u 'seasL we re offering percent, if there's a better deal on the table. i just haven"t heard it, I don't know. There e may be p better deal. 1 just didn't know about it, Would i --- MAYOR WHITE: Isn't 25 percent acc able to she S t t ,..? ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS, TEXAS E214-744-17601 15 16 I/ i8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR, BLANE: On May 11th. we did not have 100 percent. That was the condition -- (inaudible. simultaneous interruptions.) MR, OIEN: We did not hve a 100 percent and that was the condition of the administration, MAYOR WHITE: That's why we delayed. MR. HUNTRESS: That's mhy we had a meeting today. MR, WILLIAMS: Right now there's zero and if you stick with this alignment. Fm assuming there at four. two churches. There are five or six parties that are going to have to have property condemned, So under any -- MR, HUNTRESS: There are only four, MR, WILLIAMS: Well. there are only four here. but there are others through the church property, MR, HUNTRESS: Only the church property. MR. WILLIAMS: And the parish tract, MR. HUNTRESS: And the liquidating trust, MR, WILLIAMS: But I'm just saying there appears to be some condemnation anyway, I'm simply saying that one 25 percent interest wouldn"t have to be condemned. MR, MOOR. : But you're condemning 100 percent of a smaller tract, than if you condemn three-quarters of a larger tract. You're going to wind up -- MR, WILLIAMS: Yeah, I understand, MR, PATE: You keep mentioning that something -- might FNnJFnnw k AvynCTATFA - DWAR, TFXAS F214 -744-17Q, 1 2 3 Ll 5 6 8 9 io 11 12 i 3 14 15 i 6 Im 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 4 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING have to condemn some of the NBH Liquidating Trust. MR. HUNTRESS: You've already dedicated that, MR, PATE: i'm just trying to make sure we don't have G fi e pq - - MR, HUNTRESS: Not that I knoH of, MR. !SHAM: But there are some tracts that we're acquiring from you. MR, AT These are the slivers. MR, ISHAM: Yeah, MR, PATE: The only comment the N.B,H. Liquidating Trust has is that we want to get on with it, one way or another, On this particular subject we do not have a difference of opinion, The Perot Group is withholding acreage pending the outcome of this that I need back, And we need resolution in order to keep the creditors quiet, MR, HUNTRESS: I think it's the feeling of everybody that this thing has been going on for four years now, it's time to fish or cut bait, MR. PATE: We don't care which one you do, is the only comment we have, Make a decision. MR, OIEN: Well, i think we've given everybody ample opportunity to make any changes or suggest any changes, and they haven't performed, We don't have an alternative. MAYOR WHITE: Glenn, do you have anything to say? FNGIFDOW A ASlid TATH — DAIIAS, TF XAS F214-744-176011111, 0 2 3 B 13 10 11 12 33 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING GLENN: Not really. From an engineering standpoint, it's all. you know -- it's all competently designed and reviewed by the State, And there isn't any way i could, you know. see anything to criticize. the design. the alignment or, you know. anything of that nature. MR. MOORE: Okay, Perot is prepared to reimburse us for the condemnation of the short route. but they're not prepared to reimburse us for the condemnation of the long route. is that --- MR, !SHAM: I don't think they've been asked that question. but i assume -- 1 said. I don't think they've been specifically asked that question. but i would presume that their answer is no. MR, LINDSLEY: The answer is no, MAYOR WHITE: Well, do we know if three-quarters of the one is extremely important? One-quarter and three-quarters, MR, MOORE: The pertinent question is. will the other three-quarters donate theirs. if they donate theirs. we're scot-free for the longer route, MR, !SHAM: Not necessarily because i think you have to recognize that the Minute Order said that the developers would donate the right-of-way to the State and would Provide engineering plans to the State. acceptable to the State. And then the State would pay for the cost of the FNsiFnnw a AmsnrTATFA . BMW MAN F?14-744-17sni 23 24 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING construction of the highways, And what .1a.a occurred here, think. is that -- MAYOR WHITE: A little bit of Indian giving, MR. !SHAM: At the time in 1987 that was contemplated, i was `i c o n ta B � p l a i is d by the e p,a r t i e s that a ` l the right-of-way from the respective tracts would be donated. Now in fairness to the Lyda hunt -Bunker Trust, in 1987 170 was configured to go further north and would not. at least the 170 portion. would not be on �.dn _�i u!� �.a,.B�,_.�?�e�" property. a`$;�"€ then was explained earlier when the engineers t involved in designing. th better way to design 7 0 was t j Lyda Hunt-Bunker onnkr '3•p folks inof f ! I- theyhave not been able to work out on arrangement of agreement wherethey would be willing. or at least all of them would be willing. to donate the right—of—way, i 4 Perot has stepped up and said. this is an important project for this area of the county and this region and also to us, A 3 a d that were willing 'e�..E3 foot t 5 e cost o f acquiring 3 A this # �+ right-of-way in order rx to keepk.8sis project a n schedule Pu�". oJul i And so they're n "gymn l.;:a''r willing i o foot t h z i t of 6 f 1acquiring the right—of-way te r?the Lyda "a f t.#ne7 Trust i siproperty. but they're willing to pay the cost for the church tracts and the -- the slivers that will come off the 9 i FNG!Fnnw I A S AT S - DAI J__AS , T S F214-744-176011, 1 2 3 11 5 6 7 B 9 0 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 � 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING liquidating trust property. And so they still have costs involved even if. as you say. we have an agreement an the longer route, The real question to them WOUld be. if all the right-cf-way for the relocation of 377 from north to south including all the tracts was donated, so that the!! WOUld have no cost. would that be acceptable to them? And I don't know what the answer to that question is either, MR. MOORE: Well. the question to the Perot Group is if the lower portion is donated by the other three-quarter percent. is Perot still amenable to acquiring the other properties? MR, LINDSLEY: I think our position simply. for four years we've tried to get this thing done as on commitments that we thought we had, We've been disappointed, There's only one thing we know now. And that is. if we proceed an this condemnation route for the shorter realignment. it can get done and it can get done fast, And there's no room for any misrepresentations, it simply gets done. And that's what we're prepared to do, and that's the only thing we know will happen. MR. OIEN: Gerry. is this No, 183 motion? MR, !SHAM: No, it's a resolution, MR, 01EN: Resolution No, 183, MRS. GERRY WHITE! No. it's 2-90; PmRiPnnw z AvqnrTATFq . nAi!Aq TPYAq MU-MU-17An-i W 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13-1 14 V 16 17 18 i 9 20 21 2:1 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR. DIEN: 2-90 MAYOR WHITE: 2-90 resolution. Okay, You want to toke these? Would you like to take these back? MR. WILLIAMS: Sure, Yes. MR. HUNTRESS: Which one is 2-90? The 41 acres? MR, !SHAM: Yes, MAYOR WHITE: Let's have a motion and then do our discussion. Let's have a motion and then He'll discuss, Has everyone been heard that would like to speak on this? (No response,) Okay. Chair will entertain a motion. MR, DIEM: i move we adopt the resolution, MAYOR WHITE: I need a second, No second? MR, HUNTREISS: P11 second. MAYOR WHITE: We have a second, Okay, Discussion, Why did i get no second, excepj at the lost minute? MR. OIEN: You weren't speaking loudly enough, Us older folks are deaf. MAYOR WHITE: i wasn't talking loud enough. Okay. MR, MOORE: if it a benefit to the city to go the longer route, i think it's a matter of, i guess, a tradeoff for time to get it done or -- MAYOR WHITE: You hit a good point. if this thing had been done, what I call properly, the city would have been involved in this years ago. AGIFDOW R ASSOCTATFS - DAHAN. THAT f214-74U-17AA1 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 12 1-3 14 15 16 17 18 113 20 21 22 23 21-1 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR. OIEN: Years. MAYOR WHITE: And this is what makes me really angry. We get caught at the last minute between a rock and a hard place, trying to make a decision that's a serious, serious decision, And 1 don't think it's -- it's certainly unnecessary Lo be in this position. but that was what certain parties decided to do and not naming manes, but everyone here knows who the party was. and it's backfired because of thatt And now the State tells us, we've got to go. We're going to be late. We've got to let the contracts, And now we've got to make a decision. that's a tough decision, There's good and bad in both of them that i can see, And I'm not an engineer. I can't really -- i'm not qualified to really pass judgment an a beautiful schematic, YOU bring it up and it's a nice piece of art wo3 k. but i'm not qualified to pass judgment on that, I listen to you. it sounds real good. what you say, 1 listen to somebody else. it sounds realgood. what they say, 1 do know this. that we started this 114 study committee many years ago. By we. i mean the Town of Westlake, We got 114 going. We got an the buses down there. We got it moving. And it's been forever. it seems like. We even stopped developing in Trophy Club at the time. We nt a moratorium on development because of the highway wiwnw I AsncTATFS . nAHAS. THAN F214-744-17601 S 2 3 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING jamming. that was being created by the Trophy Club, 1BM was coming in, They were going to put all those people in here, We at least got that going. And 1 really feel like we've got to continue with it, I'm the lost one that would like to condemn land. i personally think. the first one there should have the rights. i've never felt differently than that, But in this case i see no choice. 1 think we've got to have the highway, it's too late. in fact. to back out of this, It's there, That's the way I feel about ita Now. I'd like for the Council to state their opinion, if you'd like. if not. we'll just have a vote. MR. 01EN: Like you said, we've been working on it for several years. And at the lost minute, we're faced with a decision that could delay the project an indeterminate length of time. 1 think that's ridiculous, We should have been approached with these possible changes or choices years ago, Not lost month. with a week to make up our mind. That's nonsense, MAYOR WHITE: Yeah, At least our engineer should have been involved even if we weren't. The engineer committee could report to us, but no one did that. So it was too hush hush, and as i sayj it's backfired, MR. MOORE: So what if this thing is delayed for FNG&DOW & ASSOCTATFS - DAIIAS. TFXAS f214-744-17601 6 ;7 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING another 30 days? What does that really hurt? To give us a chance to work out the longer route. MAYOR WHITE: Mr. Blane. can you respond to that'? MR. BLAND Well. of course. the letting has been set for some time for july. Remembering. our department already has a contract let for the 35-W/170 interchange. And the timing of the contracts is primarily geared so that all contracts would be completed at the some time, The 35-W interchange is probably the most complex piece of work because we have to reroute the 35-W traffic on the interstate system, That creates quite a bit of problem in sequencing, So the jobs that are being let are let according to the complexity and length of time that it would take to perform the contract work an construction involved in each set of the three plans, Insofar as building the job is concerned. of course, we trying to finish it up. We would like to see the job f inished, Insofar as our administration is concerned. i can only speak for them from the standpoint that they have indicated to our district that they wish to move forward with this project at this time. and they would like to let it in july. if the right-of-way could be obtained, of course, And that is tantamount, of course, to being able to FNGIFDOW A ASSOCTATFS - DAIIAK, THAS F214-744-17VI 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING let the project, is having the right-of-way and, of course, the utility adjustments done and the water line, obviously, i'm sure you've heard about that. That is an issue that has to be resolved, The water line that is along and adjacent to U,S, 377. on the east rkht-of-way line of 377, So insofar as the letting the project. it's scheduled for july and that. of course. is based on trying to finish the work up at one time, based an the complexity of the projects. Obviously one month. as we all know. is 30 days. and contractors sometimes delay projects 30 days. I can't tell you that that is a critical period of Lime. but I think perhaps these contracts are set up an that basis. so that they do complete an time. And we have already let one and the contractor. of course. went to work fairly soon of the work order was issued. So that's where we are. MR, WILLIAMS: Do you know if Roger Welch has waived the right-of-way requirement yet? MR. BLANE: No, i do not, MR, OIEN: We were assured on the 7th that all of this would be taken care of by the 11th, MAYOR WHITE: Yeah. That's what Fm afraid of. MR. HUNTRESS: That's why we're here today, MR. DIEN: We scheduled this meeting at that time. MR. DUDLEY: The thing that we did schedule the meetino for that, i personally -- I favor the longer FNS!Pnnw z AsqnrTATFA . W!Aq TFWAq 171U.7UU.17An5 2 3 4 5 6 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 113 1m- 5 5 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING right-of-way and -- MRS, DUDLEY: I do. tao MR, DUDLEY: And I don't know whether that's just a wasted delay or note but i'd be more than w5lling to go until a june meeting, At that time to make a decision on it, to see if jqe could get more right-of-way volunteered or at least give them a lost opportunity to --, MR. WILLIAMS, We'll certainly make the effort with the other trusts. MR, HUNTRESS: Did i not hear that the longer right-of-way wos still a possibility? MRS ,DUDLEY: That's what i was going to ask. MR. HUNTRESS: Isn't that what you heard. or did I hear things? MAYOR WHITE: 1 don't think - -- MRS. SHERRY DUDLEY: That was what 1 was going to ask also. if we did. in fact. condemn this property. then is the longer route just out of the question. or is that still a possibility? Who can answer that? MR. BLANE: Let me be sure I understand what you may be asking me. I'm not sure i'm supposed to answer that, MAYOR WHITE: Respond, MR. 01EN: The four turn route rather than the three turn route, MR. BLANE: Let's see. The three turn route. of Pmnipmgni P BqqnrTRTFT . n8118C TPVAq FT1h.7hh.17gn,, 14 113 16 17 18 19 20 23. 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING course. the bridge is designed. The plans are complete. And the only changes that were made by Mr, Williams' clients were to turn concrete into asphalt actually. so that the asphalt would be easier to remove and perhaps extend on from the bridge in a southerly direction. That was the only change that was required to the plan so you could move asphalt instead of pouring cement concrete, Fm sure all of us know the difference in breaking up concrete, continuously reinforced concrete which has all the steel in it instead of asphalt, MR, HUNTRESS: And the State agrees to that? MR. .,A NE To replace asphalt? MR, HUNTRESS: Yes. MR. BLANE: if all the conditions have been met by May 11th, MR. DIEN: Our original proposal? MR, BLANE: Had agreed to that, Yes. sir. To place asphalt, So that later an then this extended route to the SOUth COUld tie built at the location. which would be compatible with railroad -highway grade separation at Kirkwood and Rufe Snow. Now. 1 think what you heard earlier. though. 1 believe when ne said. if we built it out of concrete. and we brought it in at the shorter distance. south of Highway 170. what we said was you could Possibly bend the alignment out at some future NG! ED & ASSOCIATES - DAHAS. THAS F214-744-17sni 1 2 3 LJ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 V 14 is 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 JIL 22 2,' 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING date if you wanted to, Now. i'm not sure you could fit Kirkwood because it takes quite awhile to get a highway shifted outd as you saw, it takes a while to get back in, if you follow my hands. from 170, MAYOR WHITE: Why are we using the Kirkwood way? MR. BLANE: i'm sorry. Kirkwood is the thoroughfare alignment. I believe. that has been -- and that's the next one down, south of 170, 1 believe that's -- Kirkwood Drive is one. You may want to address it. it's been called Kirkwood by MR. HUNTRESS: That's just a proposal. That's not G - - MR. LINDSLEY: !Vs a proposed road that's shown in the development plans for the trust that would go and bisect through the city, MR. HUNTRESS: That's just a proposed MAYOR WHITE: That's the freebie we're talking about, Forget it, We're not concerned about it, MR. BLANE; That's the first one, The next one is Rafe Snow, MAYOR WHITE: The next street that's built in this Town, the Town will decide where that street goes, MR, BLANE: i understand, MAYOR WHITE: The very next one. Unless it's a state hig!",,way . PNAipnnw a AvqnFTATPR . nAHAR, TFWAT T71U.7UU.17AMI I 17 20 21 2 2 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MR. BLANE: Fm auotiate" from the thoroughfares that have been furnished to us by location, if you want to fit that one, that might be difficult. if you tie back in at the !distance that we're talking about. 1.600 feet south of 170. it could flare out again. Now which one you could serve. you could serve Rufe Snow, or whatever you want to call it, You don't have a thoroughfare there, I know that. Whatever the next thoroughfare is you want to bring across the railroad, 1 don't 1want to get in trouble here between two sisters, So, nevertheless, if you could. then perhaps you might be able to serve another thoroughfare. That's what I believe i Mid, Now the difference in the plans that were reprepared 1were. the poured cement concrete was changed to asphalt. so it could be torn tip, MAYOR WHITE: Thank you, MR, LINDSLEY: John, for that next thoroughfare south, iwou,,ld the State pay for the grade separation at the railroad and that next major arterial? MR, BLSNE : No, The department normally would not be responsible for local thoroughfare crossings at a railroad, This vqould provide the opportunity, (Table discussion between the Mayor and Council Members 2 and 3.) MAYOR WHITE: Any further discussion'? FwnjFnnw z AqqnrTATPq . nAilAq TPYAq r9W.7UU.17An1 I 8 9 io ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING (No response,) Those for? (Council members indicate a vote by raising their hands.) Mr, Oien; Mr, Dudley; Mr. Jerry Mqpre; Qft170s. Sherry Dudley: MAYOR WHITE: It's unanimous. MR, MOORE: Under protest. MAYOR WHITE: Motion passes, The resolution is adopted, MR, PATE: What was the vote, Mayor? Vote count? MAYOR WHITE: Five. MRS, WHITE: Unanimous. MR, MOORE: The city prefers the longer route, MAYOR WHITE: i am to consider a resolution 00horizing the condemnation of approximately 886 acres of land for highway right-of-way and 2.359 acres for drcinage easements in Denton. County. Texas, Resolution, MR. DIEN: 1 move we adopt the resolution, MR. MOOR E: !'I! second it. MAYOR WHITE: All right, it's basically the some -- the some preamble exactly, The difference in the resolution is .886 areas and 2,359 acres, Everything else been the some except it is hereby determined that a bona fide offer has been made by the town attorney to the foiloHing owner or interest holder and, that is, R. Carter Pate, Trustee of the N.B, Hunt FNniFnnw k A&&1.CTA3F4 - DOW. THAR F214 -744-17A01' 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 Zu 21 22 23 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Liquidation Trust. Everything else is the some, Everything else is the some in the resolution with that exception, With those exceptions, MR. ISHAM: Mayor. let me point out that the parties are tolk.gym no and i'm hopeful that an agreement will eventually be reached for the acquisition of the necessary right-of-way from the liquidating trust. but passage of this resolution would allow us to keep an the some time schedule, MAYOR WHITE: i started to say that, MR. ISHAV it doesn't necessarily mean we'll MAYOR WHITE: it doesn't mean we're doing it anyway. in fact. we still hope we don't have to do 10 MR. PATE: Mayor. i'm not trying to be thick. is this a condemnation of the slivers that we're negotiating with right now? MR, !SHAM: But we're going to continue --- MR, PATE: But you're not going to go ahead and c a rn d e miri MAYOR WHITE: MR. 1SHAIP: All this resolution does is authorize us to condemn if we can't come to an agreement, MR, PATE: I understand, Sorry, 1 just want to make sure i understand, MR, !SHAM: The other one did. toc MAYOR WHITE: You follow that too. right? FNGIFDOW X ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS f214-744-17601 1. 2 8 9 10 A -L 12 05 14 15 31 17 18 19 20 21 22 2 37 24 25 WESTLAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ja we'll see you in an hour or so, MR, HUNTRESS: That's the lost item on the agenda, [End of proceedings] ENGLEDOW& ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS f214-744-17601 MR. WILLIAMS: That's correct, MR. HUNTRESS: it's not a condemnation. MAYOR WHITE: All right, Sherry. VI! take a motion, MRS, DUDLE(: i make a motion we accept the resolution that what number is that. please? MRS, GERRY WHITE: C-3-90, MRS. SHERRY DUDLEY: 3-90, MAYOR WHITE: 3-90, Sherry needs a second, MR. HUNTRESS: Second, MAYOR WHITE: Any further discussion? (No response.) Those for, (Council members indicate a vote by raising their hands.) MAYOR WHITE: Five, Motion posses. The resolution is adopted. item 3. at this time Board will convene in executive session pursuant to Article 62-217. Sections 2e and f of the A.T,S. and consult with its attorney in regard to the lawsuit filed by R. Carter Pate. the Liquidating Trustee. ogoinst the Town . ja we'll see you in an hour or so, MR, HUNTRESS: That's the lost item on the agenda, [End of proceedings] ENGLEDOW& ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS f214-744-17601 5 6 7 8 9 1(0 ice, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 M t A 1 1 E i L A i i a X L JANET Q NEEL, CSR, official court reporter in and for the State of Texas. certify that i was the court reporter that took in stenograph notes such hearing and have transcribed the some to the best of my ability as shown by the foregoing 66 pages, and that said transcript is true and correct, This the ist day of june, 1990, JAN K, NEEL. CSR No. K93 The Northern District of Texas Dallas Division !N BANKRUPTCY !My CSR license expires: December 31. 1991 1 lBusiness Address; 1949 Stemmons Freeway, Suite 190 !Dallas. Texas 75207 !Telephone Number: 744-1760 ENGLEDOW & ASSOCIATES - DALLAS. TEXAS [214-744-17601