The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda CC 09.13.2004 Workshop• Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Monday, September 13, 2004 J The etown City Council will meet on Monday, September 13, 2004 at 04:00:00 PM at the City Council Chambers, 101 E. 7th Street, at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Streets, Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance. An agenda packet, containing detailed information on the items listed below, is distributed to the Mayor, Councilmembers, and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Saturday preceding the council meeting. The library's copy is available for public review. Please Note: This City Council Meeting will be video taped live without editing and shown on the local cable channel. Policy Development/Review Workshop - Call to order at 4:00 PM A Discussion regarding proposed changes, additions, and deletions to the City of Georgetown Personnel Policies and Procedures — Cada Bourland, Human Resources Director and Paul Brandenburg, City Manager Public Hearing on the 2004105 Annual Operating Plan (Budget) B Public Hearing on the 200412005 Annual Operating Plan as proposed by the City Manager — Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration Executive Session In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chpater 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session that follows. C Sec.551.071: Consultation with Attorney • Pending or Threatened Litigation - Brazos River Authority regarding operations and Maintenance of the Stillhouse Raw Water Pipeline - E.O. Sharp Butane Co., Inc. v. City of Georgetown, Texas, Cause No. A -04 -CA -299 -SS, in the United States District Court, Western District of Texas, Austin Division - Legal Advice Regarding Agenda Items and other Matters D Sec.551.072 Deliberation on Real Property - Discussion regarding acquisition of property on Country Club Road. - Discussion and possible action concerning the purchase of right-of-way and easements for improvements to SH 29 West and CR 265 - Discussion of donation of property for park on west side of Georgetown - Discussion and possible action regarding acquisition of property for city facilities E Sec.551.087 Economic Development - Discussion or deliberation regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from h business stay, or expand in or near me territory of the City and with which the City is prospect that the City seeks to have locate, conducting economic development negotiations Certificate of Posting I, Sandra Lee, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown. Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, and on the bulletin board located outside of the Council City Council Agenda/September 13, 2004 Page 1 of 1 Page Council Meeting Date: September 13, 2004 Item No. EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Discussion and possible action concerning the purchase of right-of-way and easements for improvements to SH 29 West and CR 265. ITEM SUMMARY: City Attorney update on status of right-of-way acquisition of the following Parcels • Parcels 3 & 14 — Lloyd D. ("Doug") Trainer (Georgetown Farm Supply) • Parcel 5 — A -Tex Waterproofing, Inc. (James Roppollo, President) • Parcels 6 & 7 — San Gabriel Storage Systems Venture (Tom Pilgrim, Managing Venturer) • Parcel 13 — Wolf Family ("Gas Station corner") Attached is a diagram of Parcel 13 (part of Lot 9, Wolf Ranch Subdivision) owned by the Wolf Family. Parcel 13 was originally thought to be one of the tracts that would be donated by the Wolf Family. However, at the time of closing on the other donated parcels donated, it was discovered that the Wolfs had already donated the 10' feet of right-of-way and a 20' PUE that they had agreed with Simon Property Group to donate when the mall site was platted. At that time, the road had not yet been designed. During the road design, it was determined that an additional 10' of right-of-way was needed for a right -turn lane onto the southbound frontage road of IH -35. The title company discovered the oversight and brought it to everyone's attention, including the Wolfs. Consequently, the additional 10' of right-of-way needs to be purchased from the Wolfs. Attached is a diagram showing the shift in the right-of-way and easement to allow for the turn lane. Iva Wolf McLachlan has agreed to provide the City with a Possession & Use Agreement ("PUA") for $12/SF, which is the Williamson County Appraisal District's assessed value of the property, in order to give the City an opportunity to obtain an appraisal of the property and make a formal offer to purchase. A resolution finding public convenience and necessity for the acquisition of this parcel is on tomorrow's regular legislative agenda for Council's consideration. ATTACHMENTS: Memo from Kent Sick Parcel 13 & 13E Surveys Diagram of Parcel 13 showing shift of right-of-way and PUE Copy of portion of Wolf Ranch Subdivision plat showing Lot 9 (Parcel 13) Submitted by: Jim Briggs, ACM for Utility Operations Patricia E. Carls, Brown & Carls, LLP O City Attorney •� * * * * * CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT MEMORANDUM * * * * * TO: Georgetown City Council Trish Carls, City Attorney FROM: Kent A. Sick DATE: September 8, 2004 RE: SH29 Update: Pilgrim (Parcels 6&7); Trainer (Parcels 3 & 14); Roppollo (Parcel 5); and Wolf Family (Parcel 13) I am in an out-of-town trial the evening of September 13. Unfortunately, I am thus unable to brief you on these matters in person. At staff's request, though, I have prepared this update for your reference. If any of you have questions or wish further elaboration, feel free to call me anytime on my mobile phone at 512-970-0485. I will make myself available by conference call Monday evening by 6:00 if you desire. Pilgrim (Parcels 6&7). In review, this acquisition involves the removal of 17 storage units from San Gabriel Storage Systems ("SGSS'), along with some physical reconfiguration of the buildings on the site to account for the removed units and a new driving aisle along the frontage. SGSS is represented by its managing partner Tom Pilgrim. The SGSS tract is the last of the original tracts with which the City was charged with acquiring right-of-way ("ROW"); my understanding is that ideally TxDOT wanted us to complete that process by September 1. Access to all the other new ROW has already been secured through either a Possession and Use Agreement ("PUA") or final settlement. Prior Council executive session direction was to accept those portions of Mr. Pilgrim's July 22 counteroffer that were legally compensable under Texas law. Specifically, Mr. Pilgrim had requested both the value of his lost income stream 1 ($105,525) plus his then -undetermined cost -to -cure plus our appraiser Jimmy Vick's valuation of the land and improvements within the taking ($87,503). Council authorized final resolution in an amount total to the lost income stream plus the cost -to -cure, once the cure amount became known. Unfortunately for the negotiations process, Mr. Pilgrim did not supply me with his cost -to -cure figure until August 24`h, Tuesday of the week by which I had been directed by Council to initiate suit if we had not secured possession through a PUA. After reviewing his cure estimate ($41,000) and determining it was reasonable, I phoned Mr. Pilgrim and told him of the City's willingness to settle for the lost income stream and cost -to -cure (a total of $146,525). We spoke several times that week. Mr. Pilgrim maintained that in his view SGSS was entitled to the lost income, cost -to -cure, and lost land value, a total of $234,028. He stated that his partners were upset that the City would not both pay SGSS the full amount of its appraisal plus both his cost -to -cure and lost income figures, did not want to enter into a PUA at our original offer figure ($134,906) and further indicated we may as well just file suit. I did so on Friday, August 27s' The next step in any condemnation proceeding is for the Court to appoint Special Commissioners and for a hearing to be scheduled, with not less than ten days notice to all affected landowners. While the ten-day notice is a theoretical possibility, as a practical matter, it is usually no sooner than four to six weeks after Commissioners have been appointed that an actual condemnation hearing is conducted. I received the Court's appointment of Commissioners on September P. I subsequently visited with Mr. Pilgrim in his office on Friday, August 3 for a face-to-face discussion about our appraisal theory differences. At the end of our 2 .R ,,. \� Y 1'f. _ '�_r,T�� j �Q A O ✓ •� y ' A •,� `• S7URSUFIELD SUR ABSTRACT NG �+►+11 IN WW C( V1N 7 0.33 ACAM A$� `A.,M MATUPROOMft INCL a � �,4 . � � � JAY L. W \ LGT 2 4.00 KARR� vvL 11w">`a GOOA LIJGc 1 , I ` 1` + VOL. 1997,. DOC, 88p1841 I 1 >IRORIIBiIQN 1.88 ACR1:9 \ 1 ' J8 7.21 ACRES GAB, k 6L. Y20� I �i DOC. I999BA524GO � � ,.-..w • gas Aa ayam Am (100 R.O.W.) RJB.A .pO' .� 44Ak�RA1�.E5Yd� '�,/4,*■ �� R.U.E. �. mrow - - Ral P'u'g. zC W E1E orirw LAT 6 w -SL14L� r C4 r LOT 7 � LAT � MAI. _ a11 , T � ¢ J 634 ACRES ' 1.474 +� ACRES f 387 Aovjr' $ K 7 Ss Ng7'38',µ'E AR' 6x C3 02 t ]01.10' mV "M Sl79ii'A4'W i' uuMMlf;Mf j SH.40' I I '0.RFQ AC21E5 Namya MCLF M FOR P .0L K OR 1 12.997 AGES BL= w I 1.....1a' K.5T OMER YARA � • rry A I PORTION OF 412 ACRES SOn36'11'W GUM 7LOT L71 g JAY L. WOLF 1 VOL. 422PG, 84u7 L.: At LAT 6 2.992 ACRES CONSTRUCTION ESMT. VOL. 2715, PG. 112 i Q; APPROX. CENTERLINE—ri AT ENO, TEXAS i POWER h LIGHT ESi VOL. 467, PG. 400 I 1,