Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
February 15, 2000 Agenda
AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL February 15, 2000 After determining that a quorum is present and convening in an open meeting, the City Council will convene in a Closed Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, February 15, 2000 at 5:15 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas to consider specific items when these items are listed below under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. When items for consideration are not listed under the Closed Meeting section of the agenda, the City Council will not conduct a Closed Meeting at 5:15 p.m. and will convene at the time listed below for its regular or special called meeting. The City Council reserves the right to adjourn into a Closed Meeting on any item on its Open Meeting agenda consistent with Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, as amended, as set forth below. 1. Closed Meeting [**Before the Denton City Council may deliberate, vote, or take final action on each of the agenda items posted as a competitive matter in a Closed Meeting under the provisions of TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.086(c), the City Council must first make a good faith determination, by majority vote of its members, that the particular agenda item is a competitive matter that satisfies the requirements of Section 551.086(b)(3). The vote shall be taken during the Closed Meeting and shall be included in the certified agenda of the Closed Meeting. If the City Council fails to determine by a majority vote that the particular agenda item satisfies the requirements of Section 551.086(b)(3), the City Council may not deliberate or take any further action on that agenda item in the Closed Meeting.] Deliberations Regarding Real Property - Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.072. Consideration of the purchase and value of real property located north and south of Hickory Street east of the Union Pacific Railroad and real property on the north side of Oak Street west of Exposition and east of Frame Street. B. Consultation With Attorney - Under TEX. GOV'T. Code Section 551.071. Consider, discuss, and give staff direction regarding potential authorization of litigation against Northeast Mobile Home Park and its owner Philip Clemente, and discuss status of pending municipal courts complaints against same parties. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.086.** Deliberations Concerning Real Property --- Under TEX. GOV'T CODE, Section 551.072. Receive information from Staff, discuss, deliberate, consider, and provide Staff with direction respecting the valuation of, and the possible sale, transfer, assignment, or other divestiture o£ real property pertaining to the City of Denton's electric utility system, including, without limitation: the Gibbons Creek generation facility located in Grimes County, Texas; the Spencer generation facility located on Spencer Road in Denton County, Texas; the two hydroelectric facilities located in Denton County, Texas; City of Denton City Council Agenda February 15, 2000 Page 2 and other components of the City's electric generation assets. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.086.** Consultation With Attorney --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.071. Receive information from Staff, discuss, deliberate, consider, provide staff with direction, and take action as necessary pertaining to issues, problems, and strategies pertaining to: (a) the issuance of future Denton Utility System Revenue Bonds related to Denton Municipal Electric ("DME"); (b) the possible unbundling or restructuring of existing Denton Utility System Revenue Bonds driven by the potential sale or divestiture of all or a part of the DME system; (c) alternatives and options available to DME regarding the future issuance of utility system revenue bonds and the restructuring or unbundling of existing utility system revenue bonds likely to result in the most favorable financial impact upon DME and its ratepayers; and (d) legal requirements and legal advice pertaining to issues (a), (b), and (c) above. Consultation with the City's attorneys concerning the above issues, where to discuss such issues and matters in a public meeting would conflict with the attorneys' duties and professional responsibilities to their client under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. ANY FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE ON A MATTER DELIBERATED IN A CLOSED MEETING WILL ONLY BE TAKEN IN AN OPEN MEETING THAT IS HELD IN COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT SUCH FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE IS TAKEN IN THE CLOSED MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 551.086 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (THE "PUBLIC POWER EXCEPTION"). THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO A CLOSED MEETING OR EXECUTIVE SESSION AS AUTHORIZED BY TEX. GOV'T. CODE, SECTIONS 551.001, ET SEQ. (THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT) ON ANY ITEM ON ITS OPEN MEETING AGENDA OR TO RECONVENE IN A CONTINUATION OF THE CLOSED MEETING ON THE CLOSED MEETING ITEMS NOTED ABOVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION SECTIONS 551.071- 551.086 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, February 15, 2000 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: 1. Pledge of Allegiance A. U.S. Flag B. Texas Flag "Honor the Texas Flag I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one and indivisible." 2. Consider approval of the minutes of November 2, November 9, November 11, November City of Denton City Council Agenda February 15, 2000 Page 3 15, November 16, and November 19, 1999. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS 3. Proclamation for Texas History Month 4. Resolutions of Appreciation a. Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for Mike Bucek. b. Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for Ralph Harpool. CITIZEN REPORTS 5. Receive a report from Willie Hudspeth regarding tree removal from his property. 6. Receive a report from Raymond Redmon regarding bridges. 7. Receive a report bridge from Mildred Hawk regarding bridges. CONSENT AGENDA Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and approval thereof will be strictly on the basis of the Staff recommendations. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the City manager or his designee to implement each item in accordance with the Staff recommendations. The City Council has received background information and has had an opportunity to raise questions regarding these items prior to consideration. Listed below are bids and purchase orders to be approved for payment under the Consent Agenda (Agenda Items 8-21). This listing is provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss or withdraw an item prior to approval of the Consent Agenda. If no items are pulled, Consent Agenda Items 8-21 below will be approved with one motion. If items are pulled for separate discussion, they will be considered as the first items under "Items for Individual Consideration". Consider approval of a tax refund to Nortex Motorsports, Inc., formerly Cycle Center of Denton. The 1999 property tax was overpaid. Resulting in an overpayment. Consider approval of a tax refund to RV World of Texas. The 1999 property tax was paid twice, resulting in an overpayment. 10. Consider approval of a tax refund to Veterinary Medical Clinic. The 1999 property tax was paid twice, resulting in an overpayment. 11. Consider approval of a tax refund to James A. Lampin. The 1999 property tax was paid twice, resulting in an overpayment. 12. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an interlocal ambulance agreement between the City of Denton and Denton County for ambulance services; and declaring an effective date. City of Denton City Council Agenda February 15, 2000 Page 4 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of HVAC Renovation at the Service Center; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 2449 - Renovation of HVAC at the Service Center awarded to BCI Mechanical, Inc. in the amount of $206,800) Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of a Landfill Tree Buffer Zone; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. (Bid 2452 - Landfill Tree Buffer Zone Phase I awarded to A & A Landscape and Irrigation, Inc. in the amount of $149,995) Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for Demolition of Buildings and Clearing of Lots; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 2453 - Demolition Project #30 awarded to JMX Environmental, Inc. in the amount of $18,300) Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor or City Manager to execute an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for road construction for Lakeview Boulevard between the City of Denton and Denton County, Texas; and providing an effective date. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of Lakeview Boulevard; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 2455 - Lakeview Boulevard awarded to Jagoe Public Company in the amount of $798,106) Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with ETTL Engineers and Consultants, Inc. to provide hydrogeological consulting and analytical services pertaining to the City of Denton Landfill as set forth in the contract; providing for the expenditure of fimds therefor; and providing an effective date (PSA 2475 - Professional Services Agreement for Hydrogeological Consulting and Analysis at the Landfill awarded to ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc. in the amount of $46,215.25) Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas providing for, authorizing, and approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of billboard commercial advertising from Daum Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc. respecting Denton Municipal Electric, which pertains to the lease of real estate, and which also is available from only one source in accordance with pertinent provisions of Chapter 252 of the Texas Local Government Code exempting such purchases from the requirements of competitive bidding; providing for ratification and retroactive approval; and providing an effective date (Purchase Order 03166 to Daum Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc. in the amount of $28,200) Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, abandoning and vacating that certain street right-of-way being approximately 0.213 acre of land and being a portion of the right-of-way for Parkway Street located at the southeast coruer of said City of Denton City Council Agenda February 15, 2000 Page 5 street and Carroll Boulevard in the W. Neil Survey Abstract Number 971 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; reserving a utility easement; providing for a quit claim deed; and providing an effective date. PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Detailed Plan for the Robson Ranch Planned Development (PD-173) encompassing approximately 1,361 acres. The property is generally located at the northeast comer of Robson Ranch Road (formerly Crawford Rd.) and Florence Road. Residential development, open space, golf course and residential sales offices are proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) with conditions. (Z-99-102) 22. Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance granting approval of a surface use of a portion of the Denton Branch Rail/Trail approximately 2000 feet north of Shady Shores Road for the installation of a public street in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; providing for the issuance of an easement and providing an effective date. 23. Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance granting approval of a surface use of a portion of the Denton Branch Rail/Trail approximately 2500 feet south of Loop 288 for the installation of a public street in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; providing for the issuance of an easement of an easement and providing an effective date. 24. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance amending Section 1, conditions 5, 8 and 13 of Ordinance No. 96-187. Amendment of condition 5 (maintaining trees larger than 2" in diameter within 10' of the southem property line), condition 8 (removal of a 15 foot bufferyard along the southem property line) and condition 13 (erecting an 8' solid fence along the southern property line) is requested. The 0.456 acre property is located at 2446 Lillian Miller Parkway. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-1) with conditions. (Z-99-071) 25. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Detailed Plan for approximately 10 acres located between Mulkey and Audra Streets north of Paisley in east central Denton. The property is located in the Planned Development 9 (PD-9) zoning district. A D.I.S.D. education facility is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) with conditions. (Z-99-088) 26. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately two acres of land from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial (C) zoning district. The property is located approximately 550 feet north and 1000 feet east of the intersection of West University Drive (US 380) and 1-35. Development of a gas station and mini- warehouses has been proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) with conditions. (Z-99-094) City of Denton City Council Agenda February 15, 2000 Page 6 ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 27. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a contract for the purchase of Medium & Heavy Trucks; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. (Bid 2456-Medium & Heavy Tmcks-Peterbilt Motor Co., in the amount of $139,802) 28. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending Ordinance No. 99-474 as amended by Ordinance No. 2000-017 to extend the term of the moratorium that was established pending the adoption of interim standards for applying policies of the adopted comprehensive plan to certain specified nonresidential development applications prior to adoption of a revised land development code; providing for a savings clause; providing for a severability clause; and providing for an effective date. 29. Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designate to terminate two commercial leases for signboards located near the intersection of Loop 288 and the Denton Rail-Trail (formerly the Denton subdivision of the Missouri Pacific Railroad); and providing for an effective date. 30. Consider approval of a resolution approving a Right-of-Way Use Agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Lakeview Ranch, L.P., a Texas limited partnership; and declaring an effective date. 31. Consider the following requests for relief from the provisions of Ordinance 99-474, establishing a moratorium to apply to certain specified development applications: ao 1504-08 N. Elm Street, Detailed Plan with office uses 1513 N. Locust Street, Detailed Plan with office uses 2225 E. McKinney Street, Detailed Plan with office use 215 First Street, Zoning Case Z-99-090 32. Consider and take action on a request for relief from the Residential Interim Regulations, Ordinance No. 2000-046, filed by Golden Triangle Joint Venture for Zoning Case No. Z- 99-096, PD-93 located at the southwest comer of Ryan Road and Teasley Lane. 33. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, authorizing a special called joint public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council to be held on Thursday, March 2, 2000, pursuant to Texas Local Government Code §211.007 (b), at the City Council Chambers, at 6 o'clock p.m., to consider recommendation and action upon an ordinance creating nonresidential interim regulations for the implementation of the new comprehensive plan of the City of Denton; prescribing notice of the joint hearing pursuant to Texas Local Govermnent Code §211.007 (d); providing for a recommendation by th~ Planning and Zoning Commission; ~uper~edlng the provisions of all ordinances on the same subject matter to the extent ora conflict; and providing for an effective date. 34. Consider nominations and appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions. City of Denton City Council Agenda February 15, 2000 Page 7 35. New Business This item provides a section for Council Members to suggest items for future agendas. 36. Items from the City Manager Notification of upcoming meetings and/or conferences Clarification of items on the agenda 37. Possible continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. 38. Official Action on Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of ,2000 o'clock (a.m.) (p.m.) CITY SECRETARY NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IS ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800- RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE. CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES A0elllJl I~0.__..._,__~...~.__ ~Z;2-/7,z')~ November 2, 1999 Date A~er dete~ining that a quota was present ~d convening in ~ ~en Meeting, the City Co~cil convened in a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, November 2, 1999 at 5:15 p.m. in the Legal Dep~ent Conference Room at CiW Hall. Item 1.A. of the Closed Meeting agenda listed below was presented at a Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Public Utilities Board at the above time and location. The Public Utilities Board had separately posted notice of this Joint Meeting, which commenced at the City Council's regular Closed Meeting time. Once the City Council had determined that a quorum of the City Council was present, and the City Council convened in an Open Meeting, then the City Council convened in a Closed Meeting. Thereafter, after determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board was present and convening in an Open Meeting, the Public Utilities Board convened in a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, November 2, 1999 at 5:15 p.m. in the Legal Department Conference Room at City Hall to consider the specific items listed blow under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. Thereafter, the City Council and the Public Utilities Board commenced their Joint Meeting. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Durrance, Kristoferson and Young. ABSENT: Council Member Cochran 1. Closed Meeting Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities; Competitive Matters --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.086'*; Deliberations Concerning Real Property --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.072; and Consultation With Attorney --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.071. (1) Considered, deliberated, and discussed the valuation sale, transfer, assignment, or other divestiture of real to the City of Denton's electric utility system, limitation: the Gibbons Creek generation facility of and the possible property pertaining inclUding, without located in Grimes County, Texas; the Spencer generation facility located on Spencer Road in Denton, Denton County, Texas; the two hydroelectric facilities located in Denton County, Texas; and other components of the City's electric generation assets. Conducted a consultation with the City's attorneys, including the City's outside legal counsel, the firm of Dickstein, Shapiro, Morin & Oshinsky, Washington, D.C., in order to consider and discuss various legal options and strategies, and to obtain the advice and recommendations of the City's attorneys concerning the above-referenced issues, where to discuss such issues and matters in a public meeting would conflict with the attorney's duties and professional responsibilities to their client under the applicable Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. Following the completion of the Closed Meeting Agenda Item 1.A. the Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Public Utilities Board adjourned. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 2 Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, November 2, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Durrance, Kristoferson and Young. ABSENT: Council Member Cochran 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas flags. 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of September 7, September 14, and September 21, 1999. Beasley motioned, Burroughs seconded to approve the minutes as presented. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS 3. November Yard of the Month Awards Mayor Miller presented the November Yard of the Month Awards to: Ed and Nancy Gibson Laura Kinne David and Janelle Brown Colorado Court Apartments 4. Proclamations Mayor Miller presented a proclamation for Native American Indian Day. CITIZEN REPORTS 5. The Council received a report from Lacey Stokes regarding plastic recycling. A representative for Ms. Stokes stated that it was important to recycle plastics as they were not biodegradable. She encouraged the City to start recycling plastics for the betterment of the community. There was a growing concern for plastic recycling in Denton. 6. The Council received a report from Tom Atkins regarding the City's health insurance. Mr. Atkins stated he represented the individuals in Denton County who were not able to bid on the specifications for health insurance for the City. He felt the insurance agents in Denton City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 3 County were discriminated against because they were not able to bid on the proposal. They were not able to bid as the specifications indicated no one could receive a profit on the proposal. 7. The Council received a report from Ross Melton, Jr. - "A Fish Rots From the Head" - unanswered letters, lawyers, code enforcement. Mr. Melton stated that he was still not satisfied with the replies and communication he was receiving from Code Enforcement. He asked for openness and honesty in government. CONSENT AGENDA Durrance motioned, Young seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. Approved a tax refund to Sierra Title of North Texas for William T. Woolfolk, Jr. in the amount of $792.21. The 1998 property taxes were paid twice. Approved a tax refund to Sierra Title of North Texas for Robert E. Moses in the amount of $746.37. The 1998 property taxes were paid twice. 10. Approved a tax refund to Turner-Young Investments Co. for Thomas Cavanaugh in the amount of $653.42. The 1998 property taxes were paid twice. 11. Approved a tax refund to James E. Browne, Jr. in the amount of $600.09. The 1998 property taxes were paid twice. 12. Adopted ordinances approving interlocal ambulance agreements between the City of Denton and the following cities: A. NO. 99-389 B. NO. 99-390 C. NO. 99-391 D. NO. 99-392 City of Hickory Creek City of Krum City of Sanger City of Shady Shores 13. NO. 99-393 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF CHANGE ORDER ONE TO THE CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND RATCLIFF CONSTRUCTORS, INC.; PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE SCOPE OF WORK AND AN INCREASE IN THE PAYMENT AMOUNT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (BID #2361 - FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY AWARDED TO RATCLIFF CONSTRUCTORS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,998,650 PLUS CHANGE ORDER ONE IN THE AMOUNT OF $108,387) City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 4 14. NO. 99-394 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 69KV TRANSMISSION FACILITIES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (BID #2394 - SPENCER TO LOCUST TRANSMISSION LINE CONSTRUCTION AND BID #2395 NORTH LAKES SUBSTATION US 77/RINEY ROAD TRANSMISSION LINE CONSTRUCTION AWARDED TO GREAT SOUTHWESTERN CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,310,622) 15. NO. 99-395 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A 15/20/25 MVA POWER TRANSFORMER; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (BID #2408 - POWER TRANSFORMER AWARDED TO WAUKESHA ELECTRIC SYSTEM, DIVISION OF GENERAL SIGNAL POWER SYSTEMS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $441,877) 16. NO. 99-396 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS BY WAY OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH TARRANT COUNTY AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF POLICE SEDANS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FILE #2428 - POLICE SEDANS TARRANT COUNTY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT AWARDED TO LEE JARMON FORD IN THE AMOUNT OF $66,141.30) 17. NO. 99-397 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE MAINTENANCE FOR AMERITECH LIBRARY SOFTWARE WHICH IS AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 252 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00251 TO AMERITECH LIBRARY SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $26,570.72) 18. NO. 99-398 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PRESENTING THE SEVEN HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE TRAINING WHICH ARE AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 5 REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00271 TO FRANKLIN COVEY IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,952) 19. NO. 99-399 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF CELLULAR DIGITAL TELEPHONE SERVICE AVAILABLE FROM ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00275 - AT&T WIRELESS IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,332.32) 20. NO. 99-4O0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE 1999 QUARTERLY PAYMENTS BY THE CITY OF DENTON FOR A SOLID WASTE PERMIT FEE CALCULATED AT 3.5% OF REFUSE COLLECTION FEES TO THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (PO #00277 TO TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION (TNRCC) IN THE AMOUNT OF $130,000) 21. NO. 99-401 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF AUTOMATED METER READING TRANSMITTERS AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00665 TO TEJAS UTILITY SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $110,320) 22. NO. 99-402 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING AN ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF POLICE UNIFORMS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (BID #2391 - POLICE UNIFORMS IN THE ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY $45,000) 23. NO. 99-403 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGE TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH JD EDWARDS, A QUALIFIED INFORMATION SERVICES VENDOR FOR THE PURCHASE OF FINANCIAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE PACKAGES, PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR. (ZISV #1841332677000 - JD Edwards - $738,530.00) City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 6 24. NO. 99-404 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ASSIGNMENT PAY FOR ANY POLICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ALSO ASSIGNED DUTIES OF A GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE NATURE IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND/OR THE POLICE CHIEF'S OFFICE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PUBLIC HEARINGS 25. The Council held a public hearing to consider amending the concept plan for a Planned Development (PD-115) encompassing approximately 231 acres. The property was generally located north of Windsor Road between Bonnie Brae and Westgate. The concept plan proposal was for mixed-use development including single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial use open space and a school site. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0) with conditions. (Z-99-061, Smith Tract Concept Plan) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that the applicant had held three neighborhood meetings regarding the concept plan and the detailed plan. It also had been heard at four Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. There were three conditions attached to the proposal from the Planning and Zoning Commission as noted in agenda materials. The 20% rule was in effect as there was opposition to the proposal from more than 20% of the adjacent property owners. There was some question concerning the 20% rule but a last minute submittal placed the proposal in the supermajority vote. The Mayor opened the public heating. The following individuals spoke during the public heating: Tary Arterbum, 3100 McKinnon, Suite 909, Dallas, 76201 - favor Cart Cobb, Burnham Drive, Piano - favor Dillion F. Smith, 3604 Lynwood Drive, Arlington, 76013 - favor John L. Smith, 3309 N. Bonnie Brae, Denton, 76207 - favor Sherry Darby, 2208 Crestmeadow, 76207 - opposition Marla Fullerton, 3015 North Bonnie Brae, Denton, 762-7 - opposition Rebuttal by Arterbum Mayor Miller presented the following speaker cards from individuals who did not wish to address the Council: Shawn Smith, 2291 Wheat Hill Rd., Sanger, 76266 - favor Earla Joyce Smith, 3604 Lynnwood, Arlington, 76013 - favor Dorothy Smith, 3309 N. Bonnie Brae, Denton, 76207 - favor Lanco and Sherry Hassell, 2712 Stephen, Denton 76207 - favor The Mayor closed the public hearing. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 7 Beasley motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance for the concept plan with a limitation of 2 1/2 stories in the SF5, 80% brick exteriors and Parcel D would be SF 7 and not SF-5. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "nay", ICristoferson "nay", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion failed 4-2 as a supermajority vote was needed. 26. The Council was to have held a public hearing and consider approving a Detailed Plan for a Planned Development (PD-115) encompassing approximately 194 acres. The property was generally located north of Windsor Road between Bonnie Brae and Westgate. The Detailed Plan included a school site, open space and single-family residential use. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0). (Z-99-073, Smith Tract Detailed Plan) This item was not considered 27. The Council held a public hearing to consider rezoning approximately 39 acres from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Planned Development (PD) zoning district. The concept plan proposed single-family residential and open space. The property was generally located at the southeast comer of Nowlin Road and Robinson Road. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0) with conditions. (Z-99-065, Kirby Tract) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that the amount of acreage had been reduced to 38.6 acres under the proposed concept plan. There had been a letter of opposition received from a neighboring landowner representing 3% of the total area. The 20% rule was not in effect. The number of recommended dwelling units was 154. The Planning and Zoning Commission had three conditions as noted in the agenda materials. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individual spoke during the public hearing: Robert Prendergast, Eastern Development, Plano- favor The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-405 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PROVIDING FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 170 (PD- 170) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 38.6 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NOWLIN ROAD AND ROBINSON ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to approve the ordinance as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission plus a maximum of 143 units. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 8 Burroughs "aye", Durrance "nay", Kristoferson "nay", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded with a 4-2 vote. 28. The Council held a public heating and considered rezoning an approximately 1.4 acre site from a One-Family Dwelling (SF-7) zoning district to a General Retail (GR) district. The property was located on the south side of Sherman between Elm and Bolivar. The proposal was to allow for possible future redevelopment. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0) with conditions. (Z-99-074) Council Member Durrance excused himself from the meeting due to a potential conflict of interest. Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that the applicant requested rezoning from SF7 to General Retail. General Retail zoning was currently on three sides of this property. The Church wanted to sell the property and General Retail was more flexible for selling. No letters of opposition had been received and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with two conditions as noted in agenda materials. Council Member Kristoferson noted that general retail zoning was very broad zoning. She was not comfortable with that broad of zoning. The Mayor opened the pubic hearing. Jerry Putman, Pastor of Asbury Methodist Church - favor The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-406 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM ONE-FAMILY DWELLING (SF-7) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO GENERAL RETAIL (GR) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 1.328 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1919 NORTH ELM; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission plus any new building would be two stories, as determined from the Elm Street elevation. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked if a friendly amendment could be made to eliminate dormitory, batch plant, sexually oriented business, and a radio/television microwave tower. Council Members Young and Burroughs agreed to that amendment plus the addition of a site plan review by Council prior to any redevelopment other than church use. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 9 On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. Council Member Durrance returned to the meeting. 29. The Council held the first of two public heatings regarding a proposed voluntary annexation of approximately 24 acres located at the southwest comer of Silver Dome and Cooper Creek in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Denton, Texas. The zoning at the time of annexation will be Agricultural (A). (A-96, Silver Dome at Cooper Creek) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, reviewed schedule for annexation. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Christopher Jackson, 600 North Pearl, Suite 650, Dallas, 75201 - favor The Mayor closed the public heating. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 30. The Council considered approval of a resolution casting votes for membership to the Board of Directors of the Denton Central Appraisal District; and declaring an effective date. Diana Ortiz, Director of Fiscal Operations, stated that the City had 173 votes to cast for members of the Board of Directors. There were ten candidates on the ballot. The City had nominated three of the ten candidates. Council decided to vote on each of the three city nominations and then vote for the top two. Council Member Kristoferson nominated Rick Woolfolk Council Member Young nominated Ernest McNeill. Mayor Miller nominated Bill Giese. On roll vote for Bill Giese, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "nay", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "nay", Young "nay", and Mayor Miller "aye". Mr. Giese received three votes. On roll vote for Ernest McNeill, Beasley "nay", Burroughs "nay", Durrance "nay", Kristoferson "nay", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "nay". Mr. McNeill received one vote. On roll vote for Rick Woolfolk, Beasley "nay", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "nay", Kristoferson "aye", Young "nay", and Mayor Miller "nay". Mr. Woolfolk received two votes. Mayor Miller indicated that Bill Giese and Rick Woolfolk were the two top votes. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 10 On roll vote for Bill Giese, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "nay", Durrance "nay", Kfistoferson "nay", Young "nay", and Mayor Miller "aye". Mr. Giese received two votes. On roll vote for Rick Woolfolk, Beasley "nay", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "nay". Mr. Woolflok received four votes. The following resolution was considered: NO. R99-060 A RESOLUTION CASTING VOTES FOR MEMBERSHIP TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Burroughs motioned, Durrance seconded to cast all 173 city votes for Rick Woolfolk. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kfistoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 31. The Council considered approval of a resolution nominating members to the Appraisal Review Board of the Denton Central Appraisal District; and declaring an effective date. The following resolution was considered: NO. R99-060 A RESOLUTION NOMINATING MEMBERS TO THE APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD OF THE DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE Beasley nominated, Kristoferson seconded Barry G. King, J. A. Hinsely, and Larry T. Wilson. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 32. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting two tracts of land in the M.E.P.&P.R.R. Co. Survey, as shown in the dedication instrument executed by Ron Alsup, DBA Ron Alsup Construction attached hereto, for street and utility purposes; and providing for an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-407 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING TWO TRACTS OF LAND IN THE M.E.P.&P.R.R. CO. SURVEY, AS SHOWN IN THE DEDICATION INSTRUMENT EXECUTED BY RON ALSUP, DBA RON ALSUP CONSTRUCTION ATTACHED HERETO, FOR STREET AND UTILITY PURPOSES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 11 Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 33. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance vacating a utility easement recorded in Cabinet H, Page 196 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas, as it pertains to Lot 1, Block A of the Lissberger Addition; and providing for an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-408 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A UTILITY EASEMENT RECORDED IN CABINET H, PAGE 196 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, AS IT PERTAINS TO LOT 1, BLOCK A OF THE LISSBERGER ADDITION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Burroughs motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 34. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance on first reading granting a franchise to Metricom, Inc., for the use and occupancy of the public rights-of-way of the City of Denton for telecommunications purposes; providing for conditions of such use; providing for compensation for such use and occupancy; and ordaining other provisions related to the subject matter. The following ordinance was considered: (First Reading) AN ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO METRICOM, INC., FOR THE USE AND OCCUPANCY OF THE PUBLIC RIGHTS- OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF DENTON FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS PURPOSES; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF SUCH USE; PROVIDING FOR COMPENSATION FOR SUCH USE AND OCCUPANCY; AND ORDAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT MATTER. Kristoferson motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance with the noted change in wording. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 35. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance on first reading granting to Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc., doing business as CoServ Electric, a franchise for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, and using an electric utility system in the City of Denton; regulating the construction work done by the grantee in the City; prescribing the duties, responsibilities, and rule-making authority of the City Manager and the City with respect to administration of this franchise; providing for enforcement of the franchise; prescribing the compensation to be paid the City by the grantee for the franchise privilege; setting forth the term City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 12 of the franchise; providing for a severability provision; providing for acceptance of the franchise by grantee; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: (First Reading) AN ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING GRANTING TO DENTON COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS COSERV ELECTRIC, A FRANCHISE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING, MAINTAINING, AND USING AN ELECTRIC UTILITY SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF DENTON; REGULATING THE CONSTRUCTION WORK DONE BY THE GRANTEE IN THE CITY; PRESCRIBING THE DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND RULE-MAKING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO ADMINISTRATION OF THIS FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT OF THE FRANCHISE; PRESCRIBING THE COMPENSATION TO BE PAID THE CITY BY THE GRANTEE FOR THE FRANCHISE PRIVILEGE; SETTING FORTH THE TERM OF THE FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY PROVISION; PROVIDING FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE FRANCHISE BY GRANTEE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Durrance motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 36. The Council considered adoption of the ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Freese and Nichols, Inc. for engineering services pertaining to the preliminary design phase of the Lake Ray Roberts Water Treatment Plant; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-409 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES PERTAINING TO THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE OF THE LAKE RAY ROBERTS WATER TREATMENT PLANT; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Kristoferson motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 13 37. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract for professional legal services with Wolfe, Clark, Henderson & Tidwell to provide legal services with regard to litigation styled Municipal Administrative Services, Inc. v. · th · · City of Denton, Cause No. 99-50263-367, filed ~n the 367 Dmtnct Court of Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-410 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES WITH WOLFE, CLARK, HENDERSON & TIDWELL TO PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES WITH REGARD TO LITIGATION STYLED MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, INC. V. CITY OF DENTON, CAUSE NO. 99-50263-367, FILED IN THE 367TM DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE Burroughs motioned, Beasley seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "nay", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded with a 5-1 vote. 38. The Couneil considered approval of a resolution authorizing Ezell Aviation, Inc. to sublease the fixed base operator functions of their Commercial/FBO lease agreement to Medallion Flight Group, Inc.; and providing for an effective date. The following resolution was considered: NO. R99-061 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EZELL AVIATION, INC. TO SUBLEASE THE FIXED BASE OPERATOR FUNCTIONS OF THEIR COMMERCIAL/FBO LEASE AGREEMENT TO MEDALLION FLIGHT GROUP, INC.; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Council Member Burroughs recommended Option 2 be considered. Beasley motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance with Option 2. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion can/ed unaxfimously. 39. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance calling a bond election for January 15, 2000, designating polling places appointing election officials; setting forth the proposition to be submitted in the form to be submitted on the official ballot; determining the bonds will be within all legal debt limitations; providing for bilingual notice of the election; ordering that an electronic voting system be used; making additional provisions for the conduct thereof; and providing for an effective date. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 14 The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-411 AN ORDINANCE CALLING A BOND ELECTION FOR JANUARY 15, 2000, DESIGNATING POLLING PLACES APPOINTING ELECTION OFFICIALS; SETTING FORTH THE PROPOSITION TO BE SUBMITTED IN THE FORM TO BE SUBMITTED ON THE OFFICIAL BALLOT; DETERMINING THE BONDS WILL BE WITHIN ALL LEGAL DEBT LIMITATIONS; PROVIDING FOR BILINGUAL NOTICE OF THE ELECTION; ORDERING THAT AN ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEM BE USED; MAKING ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS FOR THE CONDUCT THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Young motioned, Beasley seconded to adopt the ordinance as amended. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 40. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a first amendment to the annexation agreement entered into between the City of Denton and Violet Property Associates, L.P. as a part of the settlement of litigation styled City of Denton v. Denton County Fresh Water Supply District No. lA and Denton County Fresh Water Supply District No. 5 for the purpose of establishing a timeline for construction of the Graveyard Branch extension; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-412 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND VIOLET PROPERTY ASSOCIATES, L.P. AS A PART OF THE SETTLEMENT OF LITIGATION STYLED CITY OF DENTON V. DENTON COUNTY FRESH WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT NO. IA AND DENTON COUNTY FRESH WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT NO. 5 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A TIMELINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE GRAVEYARD BRANCH EXTENSION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Burroughs motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance subject to the conditions as stated in the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 41. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. City Manager Jez did not have any items for Council. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 2, 1999 Page 15 42. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked for a report from the City Manager regarding the insurance information presented by Mr. Adkins. 43. There was no continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. 44. There was no official action on Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. JACK MILLER, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 9, 1999 The Council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, November 9, 1999 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Cochran, Durrance, and Kristoferson. ABSENT: Council Member Young 1. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the November 2, 1999 City Council decision related to Zoning Case #Z-99-061, a proposed Concept Plan amendment to PD-115, a 231-acre Planned Development located north of Windsor Road between Bonnie Brae and Westgate. Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, stated that the question following the vote on the Smith tract concept plan was a late submission of a letter of opposition submitted from Westgate Hills. That letter indicated opposition to the detailed plan, not the concept plan under consideration. The letter was used to change opposition calculations and added enough property to require a supermajority vote by Council for approval of the Concept Plan, rather than a simple majority vote. Council vote for approval of the concept plan was 4-2 but due to the requirement of a supermajority vote, the concept plan was denied. The detailed plan listed on the agenda was not considered. A legal decision indicated that the letter in question should apply only to the detailed plan and the 4-2 vote taken would approve the concept plan due to a simple majority vote. City Attorney Prouty stated that legal statutes and the city code provisions were clear that written notices received before the time of the vote on the proposal were to be considered. The final letter received in opposition referred to the detailed plan and not the concept plan. As a result, it should not have been counted towards the 20% calculations and the supermajority vote should not have been achieved. Instead of failing, the 4-2 vote would pass the ordinance for the concept plan due to a simple majority vote. By Charter there was a 14-day period in which the zoning ordinance would become effective which would be before the next council meeting. He recommended reconsidering the ordinance before the November 16th meeting. Council could amend the ordinance or institute a city initiated zoning application through the Planning and Zoning Commission with noticing in the newspaper. Council Member Cochran felt this was a technicality and changed a vote that was of a concern for the community. The ordinance would only become effective if Council chose to follow the interpretation of the issue. He questioned if he could ask for a reconsideration of the proposal. City Attorney Prouty stated that as Council Member Cochran was not present for the prior meeting, he would not be able to ask for a reconsideration of the proposal. Only someone on the prevailing side could ask for a reconsideration of the issue. Council could vote to suspend the rules and then anyone could make the motion for reconsideration. Mayor Miller stated that in the past when Council suspended the rules to allow for reconsideration after the next regular meeting, the motion for reconsideration was still required from a person from the prevailing side of the motion. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 9, 1999 Page 2 City Attorney Prouty stated that in the past the requirement had been that someone on the prevailing side had to make the motion. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated that she was distressed over the situation. She had made the motion to accept the concept plan and she felt that the citizens at the meeting felt that one decision had been made and now that was overturned. For that reason she felt a reconsideration was in order. City Attorney Prouty stated that if the Council wanted to reconsider the issue, it would have to vote to reconsider, vote to void the prior vote on November 2no, and direct staff to re-notice the entire process. A vote was needed to remove the prior vote on the issue. Council questioned whether the entire process would have to be redone or could a poll be done from the individuals who had submitted opposition to the proposal. City Attomey Prouty stated that the written protests would be the basis for the proposal and would have to be used on the basis of what was indicated. If Council agreed with that, the ordinance passed and would become effective on November 16th. If Council wanted to undo the previous action, it would have to reject that opinion, make another decision and let the citizens dispute what was on the written protest. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley felt that a reconsideration as had been done in the past was in order as the opposition form indicated opposition to the detailed plan and not the concept plan. City Attorney Prouty stated that his ruling included the fact that the form clearly indicated that it was for the detailed plan and not the concept plan. Further outside evidence could not be now brought in regarding that issue especially after taking a vote. Another option was to reconsider the proposal without doing notices but in any case it should be done before November 16th when the ordinance would become effective as a matter of law. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated that the third chose was to reopen the case all the way but declare the previous action null and void and start over at the Planning and Zoning Commission. City Attorney Prouty sated yes to declare the action null and void based on the way the vote was done. After discussion by Council on whether or not to reconsider the issue, the consensus was to proceed with the reconsideration with a rescinding of the prior ordinance. The reconsideration would begin with the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the Fry Street Zoning Overlay District. Dedra Ragland, Small Area Planning Manager, stated the Fry Street Small Area Plan provided a number of recommendations and strategies to address the physical and social concerns identified by Fry Street area stakeholders. The proposed Fry Street zoning overlay district parking and density recommendations exempted all non-residential development from the provision of off- street parking requirements, a 100% building coverage, the floor to area ratio of 2:l and a height City of Denton City Council Minutes November 9, 1999 Page 3 restriction of three stories. She reviewed the recommendation for parking as noted in the agenda materials. Staff was recommending a zoning amendment to create a Fry Street Zoning Overlay District to eliminate all off-street parking requirements and establish building densities and minimum area and height requirements; determine the location and consolidation of solid waste containers; and amend sign regulations for the District. Council Member Cochran stated that he had serious reservations about the proposal to remove all requirements from the area. One reservation was that to take away the parking requirement would increase the density in a compact area. That would create an adverse situation in the surrounding areas due to not enough parking. The neighbors adjacent to the Fry Street area were concemed about the increased density in the neighborhood. This area was adjacent to a very sensitive area of the City and would affect that area with less parking in the Fry Street area. He was in favor of Option 2. Ragland stated that even if parking requirements were relaxed, it would not eliminate the parking demand. A parking demand would be generated with any option and a concern for on-street parking for all areas. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley stated that the neighborhoods were impacted during the day with the parking situations. She questioned if it was the same situation at night or was it more concentrated in the Fry Street area. Review of variances in the past indicated that the Council was not consistent with decisions. Mayor Miller felt there were similarities between the Central Business District and the Fry Street area. He was in favor of Option 1. The Council could not come to a consensus on the proposal. It would be brought back to Council for consideration at a future date. 3. The Council received a report and held a discussion concerning the proposed Water Conservation and Drought Management Plan. Tim Fisher, Assistant Director of Water Utilities, reviewed the provisions of the water conservation plan and the drought contingency plan as provided in the agenda materials. Consensus of the Council was to follow the recommendations as noted in the agenda materials. 4. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the relocation and restoration of the Union Pacific Freight Depot. Ed Hodney, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that the application for a grant and the relocation of the depot were still on schedule. The City should hear in December whether or not it would receive the grant application. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the schedule and to continue to coordinate efforts with the Railroad. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 9, 1999 Page 4 5. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the 1999 tax abatement incentive for United Copper Industries, Inc. Linda Ratliff, Economic Development Director, stated that the tax abatement agreement with United Copper required United Copper to have a valuation of $35 million, employment of 250 employees and an average wage of $34,000. If United Copper failed to meet any of the above thresholds, the abatement would be reduced by the percentage difference between the threshold and the actual amount. The Appraisal District confirmed that land, building and equipment valuations were below the $35 million threshold. Employment at the facility was at 160 employees and the average wage was $31,052. As United Copper failed to meet the thresholds established in the agreement, the City, County and DISD would reduce the amount of tax abatement granted to United Copper. 6. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the City of Denton logo and the proposed Publication Standards and Usage Policy No. 505.02. Betty Williams, Director of Management and Public Information, presented the proposed publication standard and usage policy as noted in the agenda materials. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the proposal. 7. The Council received a report regarding the City's approach and strategy for the 77th Legislature. Julie Smith, Environmental Compliance Manager, stated that a Denton Legislative Committee was formed to address future legislative issues and strategy on a citywide basis. The Committee would coordinate issues and bills as they became available such as transportation and air quality issues. 8. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding results from the Economic Development Workshop and the City's Tax Abatement Policy. Linda Ratliff, Economic Development Coordinator, stated that the City and Chamber sponsored a community workshop to provide information to the participants and to solicit input regarding economic goals and challenges for the next two-year plan. She reviewed the results of that meeting as noted in the agenda materials. Staff was requesting direction on two issues: whether to add categories to be included in the economic development strategic plan and whether to draft another tax abatement policy in January. Consensus of the Council was to not add additional categories to the strategic plan and to draft another tax abatement policy. 9. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding a voluntary annexation schedule, including public hearings, with regard to the proposed voluntary annexation of approximately 9.2 acres located on the southeast comer of Teasley Lane and Nowlin Road in the City of Denton's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). (A-97, 4525 Teasley Lane) City of Denton City Council Minutes November 9, 1999 Page 5 Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, stated that staff was requesting Council approval for the proposed annexation schedule. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the proposed schedule. 10. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the Council 2000 meeting calendar. Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, presented the proposed schedule and possible meeting dates for the Council Planning Session. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the schedule as proposed and to hold the Planning Session on June 2-3, 2000. 11. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding revisions to the draft Comprehensive Plan. Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, presented the revisions to the draft Comprehensive Plan as noted from the last meeting. Council reviewed five major topics that still needed to be addressed regarding the Comprehensive Plan. Consensus of Council was to direct staff to proceed with the interim guidelines as proposed with a joint meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration of the ordinance. Further minor revisions were suggested by Council to be incorporated into the Plan. 12. New Business There were no items of New Business suggested by Council for future agendas. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. JACK MILLER, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 11, 1999 The City Council held an Informational Briefing Session on Thursday, November 11, 1999 at 12:00 noon in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Member Cochran ABSENT: Council Members Burroughs, Durrance, Kristoferson, and Young. 1. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding the progress of the Development Code Rewrite. As a quorum of the Council was not present, minutes were not kept for this meeting. JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1999 The Council convened into a Special Called Meeting on Monday, November 15, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Cochran, Durrance, Kristoferson and Young. ABSENT: None 1. The Council discussed and took action on the reconsideration of the November 2, 1999 City Council decision related to Zoning Case #Z-99-061, a proposed Concept Plan amendment to PD-115, a 231 acre Planned Development located north of Windsor Road between Bonnie Brae and Westgate. Beasley motioned, Young seconded to reconsider Zoning Case #Z-99-061. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 2. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance reconsidering City Council vote on Zoning Case 99-061 pertaining to an amended Concept Plan for Planned Development 115 (PD- 115) zoning district classification and use designation for 230.287 acres of land generally located north of Windsor Road between Bonnie Brae and Westgate; rescinding and revoking Ordinance No. 99-413 and any and all approvals and actions taken by the City Council on November 2, 1999 pertaining to Zoning Case Z-99-061; directing that Zoning Case Z-99-061 be referred back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for further proceedings in accordance with Sections 211.006 and 211.007 of the Local Government Code and Chapter 35 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton. Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development, reviewed the details of the reconsideration as noted in the agenda materials. Sentiment of the Council seemed to be to review the case in order to maintain a fair consideration of the issue. The ordinance under consideration would direct the issue back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-414 AN ORDINANCE RECONSIDERING CITY COUNCIL VOTE ON ZONING CASE 99-061 PERTAINING TO AN AMENDED CONCEPT PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 115 (PD-115) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 230.287 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF WINDSOR ROAD BETWEEN BONNIE BRAE AND WESTGATE; RESCINDING AND REVOKING ORDINANCE NO. 99-413 AND ANY AND ALL APPROVALS AND ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 2, 1999 PERTAINING TO ZONING CASE Z-99-061; DIRECTING THAT ZONING CASE Z- 99-061 BE REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTIONS 211.006 AND 211.007 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND CHAPTER 35 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 2 Beasley motioned, Cochran seconded to adopt the ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley felt that there was a lot of doubt regarding the opposition on this proposal and individuals wondering if the vote would have been different if the super majority had not been in effect. This procedure for reconsideration would eliminate all doubt regarding the issue. Council Member Young stated that he would be voting against the motion as he felt that the staff made the technical mistake and he did not feel it was necessary to punish the developers for the staff's mistake. The developers had complied with all of the requirements placed before them and should not be penalized due to the City's mistake. The following individuals spoke on the issue: Dorothy Smith, 3309 North Bonnie Brae, Denton, 76207 - favor Tary Arterburn, 3100 McKinnon Suite 909, Dallas - favor Mayor Miller stated that the following individuals had presented speaker cards but did not wish to address Council: Dillion Smith, 3604 Lynwood, Arlington, 76013 - favor Earla Joyce Smith, 3604 Lynwood, Arlington, 76013 - favor On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "nay", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded with a 6-1 vote. 3. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, authorizing a joint public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council to be held on December 7, 1999 pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Section 211.007 (b) at the City Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. to consider recommendation and action upon an ordinance creating interim regulations for the implementation of the new Comprehensive Plan of the City of Denton; prescribing notice of the joint meeting pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Section 211.007 (d); and providing for an effective date. Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development Services, stated that this ordinance would allow for a joint public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider and act on an ordinance creating interim regulations for the implementation of the new Comprehensive Plan. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-415 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON DECEMBER 7, 1999 PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 211.007 (B) AT THE CITY City of Denton City Council Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 3 COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 6:00 P.M. TO CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION AND ACTION UPON AN ORDiNANCE CREATiNG iNTERIM REGULATIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF DENTON; PRESCRIBING NOTICE OF THE JOINT MEETING PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 211.007 (D); AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Burroughs motioned, Kristoferson seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 4. The Council considered approval of a revised schedule prepared for the adoption of the City of Denton Comprehensive Plan, including the preparation and adoption of an interim ordinance intended to set development review evaluation criteria until new zoning and subdivision regulations are adopted. Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development Services, stated that the draft would be available for the proposed timeline and schedule. The adoption date had been changed to allow for progress updates to add more information for Council review. The Comprehensive Plan would be adopted and the interim ordinance would be considered that related to plan. Kristoferson motioned, Beasley seconded to approve the revised schedule. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kfistoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. JACK MILLER, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 16, 1999 After determining that a quorum was present and convening in an Open Meeting, the City Council convened in a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 at 5:15 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. Item 1. A. of the Closed Meeting agenda listed below was presented at a Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Public Utilities Board at the above time and location. The Public Utilities Board had separately posted notice of this Joint Meeting, which commenced at the City Council's regular Closed Meeting time. Once the City Council had determined that a quorum of the City Council was present, and the City Council convened in an Open meeting; then the City Council convened a Closed Meeting. Thereafter, after determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board was present and convening in an Open Meeting, the Public Utilities Board convened in a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 at 5:15 p.m. in the City of Denton Council Work Session Room, Denton City Hall. Thereafter, the City Council and the Public Utilities Board commenced their Joint Meeting. 1. Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.086'*; Deliberations Concerning Real Property --- Under TEX. GOV'T. CODE Section 551.072; and Consultation With Attorney ~-~ Under TEX. GOV'T CODE Section 551.071. (1) Considered, deliberated, and discussed the valuation of and the possible sale, transfer, assignment, or other divestiture of real property pertaining to the City of Denton's electric utility system, including, without; limitation: the Gibbons Creek generation facility located in Grimes County, Texas; the Spencer generation facility located on Spencer Road in Denton, Denton County, Texas; the two hydroelectric facilities located in Denton County, Texas; and other components of the City's electric generation assets. Conducted a consultation with the City's attorneys, in order to obtain the advice and recommendations of the City's attorneys concerning the above-referenced issues, where to discuss such issues and matters in a public meeting would conflict with the attorney's duties and professional responsibilities to their client under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. Following the completion of Closed Meeting Agenda Item 1. A. the Joint Meeting of the City Council and the Public Utilities Board adjourned. PRESENT: Mayor Miller; Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Cochran, Durrance, Kristoferson and Young. ABSENT: None Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 2 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas flags. 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of October 4, October 5, October 12, October 13, October 14, and October 19, 1999. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley asked for a correction to the October 13th meeting. Cochran motioned, Beasley seconded to approve the minutes with a correction to the October 13th meeting. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS 3. Awards a. Presentation of the 1999 Excellence in Public Procurement Award to the City of Denton's Purchasing Department b. Presentation of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisers 1999 Programming Award c. Presentation of gift to the Denton Parks Foundation and the City of Denton by Huffines Corporation. 4. Proclamations a. Denton Family Unity Week Mayor Miller presented a proclamation for Denton Family Unity Week. CONSENT AGENDA Cochran motioned, Durrance seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances and resolutions. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 5. Approved a tax refund to Dcntex Title Company for William Sehoen in the amount of $1,500.49. The 1998 property taxes were paid twice. 6. No. 99-416 AN ORDINANCE RESCINDING THE AWARD OF A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT TO GREAT SOUTHWESTERN CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 69KV TRANSMISSION FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 3 $1,310,622 (ORDINANCE 99-394) AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT AND PROVIDING EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION OF A 69 KV TRANSMISSION FACILITIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISION OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00983 - GREAT SOUTHWESTERN CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,393,814.62.) NO. 99-417 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS TO AUTHORIZE PARTICIPATION IN VARIOUS COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS CONTRACTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF VARIOUS GOODS AND SERVICES AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (FILE #2437 - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS) o NO. 99-418 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF COPY MACHINE MAINTENANCE AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND APPROVING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00194 TO DANKA OFFICE IMAGING IN THE AMOUNT OF $26,760 PER YEAR THROUGH JANUARY 2002) NO. 99-419 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF LIFEPAK DEFIBRILLATORS, MONITORS AND PERIPHERALS, AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00972 - MEDTRONIC PHYSIO-CONTROL FOR LIFEPAK 12 DEFIBRILLATORS, MONITORS AND PERIPHERALS AND UPGRADES TO LIFEPAK 10 DEFIBRILLATORS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $98,201.50) 10. NO. 99-420 AN ORDINANCE AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE AS AWARDED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS GENERAL SERVICES COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PO #00974 TO FMS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,490) City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 4 11. NO. 99-421 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO CARROLL BOULEVARD FROM COLLINS STREET TO SHERMAN DRIVE; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 12. NO. 99-422 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO MALONE STREET FROM SCRIPTURE STREET TO U.S. 380; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 13. NO. 99-423 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE CITY OF ROANOKE FOR THE IMPOUNDMENT AND DISPOSITION OF DOGS AND CATS AND THE COLLECTION OF FEES PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SAID AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 14. NO. 99-424 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AMBULANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE CITY OF LAKE DALLAS FOR AMBULANCE SERVICES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 15. NO. 99-425 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A CITY LOGO, TO BE USED AS THE OFFICIAL LOGO OF THE CITY OF DENTON AND ADOPTING A LOGO TO BE USED AS THE OFFICIAL LOGO FOR THE FLAG OF THE CITY OF DENTON. 16. NO. R99-062 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY POLICIES ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF DENTON PUBLICATION AND USAGE STANDARDS REGARDING THE OFFICIAL CITY LOGO, LOGO FOR CITY OF DENTON FLAG, MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC LOGO, AND GRAPHIC IDENTITY MARKERS. ANNEXATIONS 17. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance to voluntarily annex approximately 34.40 acres of land located on the south side of E1 Pasco Drive, between Forrestridge Drive and Montecito Drive, to approve a service plan for the annexed property, to provide a severability City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 5 clause and to provide for an effective date. Second reading of the ordinance. (A-90, Shadow Brook Place) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-426 AN ORDINANCE TO VOLUNTARILY ANNEX APPROXIMATELY 34.40 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF EL PASEO DRIVE, BETWEEN FORRESTRIDGE DRIVE AND MONTECITO DRIVE, TO APPROVE A SERVICE PLAN FOR THE ANNEXED PROPERTY, TO PROVIDE A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Beasley motioned, Kristoferson seconded to adopt the ordinance. Mayor Miller indicated that there were Speaker Cards for this item. Beverly Stephens, 420 E1 Paseo, Denton, 76205 - favor Robert Heilig, 809 Ryan Rd., Denton, 76205 - opposition On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 18. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance to voluntarily disannex and release from the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction approximately 2.1 acres located west of State School Road, north of its intersection with Robinson Road in the Oakmont II subdivision; and to provide an effective date. Second reading of the ordinance. (A-92, Oakmont II) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-427 AN ORDINANCE TO VOLUNTARILY DISANNEX AND RELEASE FROM THE CITY'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION APPROXIMATELY 2.1 ACRES LOCATED WEST OF STATE SCHOOL ROAD, NORTH OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH ROBINSON ROAD IN THE OAKMONT II SUBDIVISION; AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Cochran motioned, Beasley seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 19. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance to voluntarily disannex and release from the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction approximately 16.3 acres located south of Robinson Road in the Oakmont IV subdivision; and to provide an effective date. Second reading of the ordinance. (A-93, Oakmont IV) The following ordinance was considered: City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 6 NO. 99-428 AN ORDINANCE TO VOLUNTARILY DISANNEX AND RELEASE FROM THE CITY'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION APPROXIMATELY 16.3 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF ROBINSON ROAD IN THE OAKMONT IV SUBDIVISION; AND TO PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE Cochran motioned, Beasley seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS 20. The Council held a public heating to consider designating a certain area within the John Davis Survey, Abstract 326, James Perry Survey, Abstract 1040, and Eugene Puchalski Survey, Abstract 996, being approximately 100 acres near Airport Road and Precision Drive and being more fully described in the notice of public hearing as Reinvestment Zone II for commercial/industrial tax abatement purposes. Interested persons were invited to present evidence for or against the designation of the reinvestment zone, the boundaries of the proposed reinvestment zone, whether all or part of the territory described should be included in the proposed reinvestment zone, and the concept of tax abatement. Linda Ratliff, Director of Economic Development, stated that the purpose of the zone was to consider a tax abatement agreement with Peterbilt. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the pubic heating: Ed Soph, 1620 Victoria, Denton, 76201 - opposition Monika Antonelli, 1202 Oakwood, Denton, 76205 - opposition Eva Cadwallader, 3920 Fawn Drive, Denton, 76208 - opposition Mayor Miller indicated that he had the following Speaker Cards from individuals who did not wish to address the Council: Jeffrey Levy, 1610 E. McKinney, #1813, Denton, 76201 - opposition Mark Coomes, P.O. Box 343, Denton, 76202 - opposition Elda Robert Ginn, 3406 Bob-O-Link, Denton, 76201 - opposition Carol Soph, 1620 Victoria, Denton, 76201 - opposition E. Parks Olmon, 4401 E. University, Denton, 76208 - opposition James Rogers, 3000 Santa Monica, Denton, 76205 - opposition Mayor closed the public heating. 21. The Council continued a public hearing from Oct. 19th, 1999, and considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas adopting the Comprehensive Plan as an official policy City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 7 document intended to guide future community growth and development decision-making as authorized by Chapter 219 of the Texas Local Government Code and Charter of the City of Denton; providing for the repeal of all ordinances in conflict herewith; providing a severability clause; providing a savings clause; and providing an effective date. Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development Services, stated that Council decided to continue the public hearing from October 19th which would move adoption of the plan to December 7th. The intent of this meeting was to continue the public hearing to December 7th and to receive additional information from the DISD. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public hearing. Robyn Mulldendore, 1139 Oakhurst, Denton, 76205 - favor Beasley motioned, Burroughs seconded to postpone the public hearing and continue it on December 7th. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 22. The Council held a public heating and considered approval of a resolution that demonstrates compliance with Senate Bill Number 89, effective September 1st, 1999, that requires municipalities to adopt an annexation plan as required by Section 43.052 of the Texas Local Government Code, on or before December 31st, 1999, that becomes effective December 31st, 1999. Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager for Development Services, stated that the resolution complied with the minimum requirements of Senate Bill 89 for annexations. Much of the contents of the bill dealt with annexation of populated areas and did not affect Denton very dramatically. It was proposed to declare that Denton had no land that would add to a mandated 3 year annexation plan. It also directed the web master to post this resolution on the web site as per state law. The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke during the public hearing. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following resolution was considered: NO. R99-063 A RESOLUTION THAT DEMONSTRATES COMPLIANCE WITH SENATE BILL NUMBER 89, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1st, 1999, THAT REQUIRES MUNICIPALITIES TO ADOPT AN ANNEXATION PLAN AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 43.052 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, ON OR BEFORE DECEMBER 31 st, 1999, THAT BECOMES EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31 ST, 1999. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 8 Kristoferson motioned, Durrance seconded to adopt the resolution. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS-ZONING 23. The Council held a public hearing and considered rezoning approximately 47 acres from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Planned Development (PD) zoning district. The property was located on the south side of McKinney Street (F.M. 426), approximately 3,000 feet east of the intersection with Trinity Road. Development of a single-family subdivision with a minimum 5,500 square foot lot size was proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (6-1) with conditions. (Z-99~046, Lakeview Ranch - PD) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that staff had received a fax from the applicant requesting to postpone the public hearings for Lakeview Ranch. He suggested the Council open the public hearing and continue it to a date not yet determined. The Mayor opened the public heating. David Morris, 9842 Angel Bend, Denton, 76208 - opposition Mayor Miller indicated he had the following Speaker Cards from individuals who did not wish to address the Council: Russell Bates, 2185 Wood Hollow, Denton, 76208 - opposition Lanita Morris, 9842 Angel Bend, Denton, 76208 - opposition Ralph Thomas and Gayla Bridges, 8098 E. McKinney, Denton 76208 - opposition Joanna Bates, 2185 Wood Hollow, Denton, 76208 - opposition Pam Mason, 9916 Angel Bend, Denton, 76208 - opposition Darlene Angel, 2086 Wood Hollow Road, Denton, 76208 - opposition Oleta Kate Bridges, 8144 E. McKinney, Denton 76208 - opposition Anna Bell Blackwell Briggs, 9828 Angel Bend, Denton, 76208 - opposition Nina Blackwell Jackson, 313 Windjammer, Wichita Falls, 76308 - opposition James Bridges, Rt. 2, Box 636D, Denton 76208 - opposition Kristoferson motioned, Beasley seconded to continue the public hearing until January 4, 2000. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 24. The Council held a public hearing and considered rezoning approximately 410 acres from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Single-family 7 (SF-7) zoning district on about 133 acres, Single-family 10 (SF-10) zoning district on about 85 acres, and Single-family 13 (SF-13) zoning district on about 192 acres. The property was located between University Drive (HWY 380) and McKinney Street (F.M. 426) east of Mayhill Road. Development of a mix of single-£amily lots and housing types was proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0) with conditions. (Z-99-072, Lakeview Ranch) City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 9 Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that staff had received a fax from the applicant requesting to postpone the public hearings for Lakeview Ranch. He suggested the Council open the public hearing and continue it to a date not yet determined. The Mayor opened the public heating. No one spoke during the public heating. Burroughs motioned, Beasley seconded to continue the public heating until January 4th. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 25. The Council held a public heating and considered zoning approximately 34 acres to One Family Dwelling (SF-16) zoning district and land use classification. The property was located south of E1 Pasco Drive, between Forrestridge Drive and Montecito Drive. Single family residential development was proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (5-0). (Z-99-051, Shadow Brook Place) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that the request was for single family zoning with minimum lot size of 16,000 square feet. Surrounding areas had the same zoning. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with no conditions. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public heating: Beverly Stephens, 420 E1 Paseo, Denton, 76205 - favor Helmut Knefely, 401 San Sabastian - opposition to flood plain proposal and water level Melissa Lux, 400 San Sabastian, Denton, 76205 - opposition Stanley Ratliff, 801 Ryan Road, Denton, 76205 - opposition Roger Nunn, 401 Santiago, Denton, 76205 - opposition Larry Tubbs, 404 Santiago, Denton, 76205 - opposition Myra Crownover, 3710 Granada Trail, Denton, 76205 - opposition Ann Tubs, 404 Santiago Place, Denton, 76205 - opposition Robert Hiley, 208 Ryan Road, Denton, 76205 - opposition Rebuttal by Stephens Kristoferson motioned, Cochran seconded to postpone consideration and continue the public heating until December 7th in order to assess the situation and to try and mitigate what had already been done. Hill stated that the annexation of the area would vest municipal authority and Council could direct staff through planning and utilities to look at options for zoning. Staff could evaluate what currently was on the site and look for methods of restoration of the area. City Attorney Prouty stated that annexation would also vest other city ordinances regarding flood plain, etc. Ms. Stephens suggested a postponement until the engineering study was completed. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 10 Mayor Miller suggested a postponement until a date certain or until the Planning Department was satisfied that the proposal was ready to proceed. City Attorney Prouty suggested continuing the public hearing to a date certain in January subject to the engineering study being completed by that date. If the study were not done by that date, the proposal might have to be readvertised in the paper. Hill recommended a reconsideration date of January 18th subject to the completion of the engineering study. On roll vote to postpone consideration and continue the public hearing on January 18th subject to the completion of the engineering study, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Kristoferson motioned, Young seconded to reconsider the effective date of the annexation ordinance passed on #17. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. Kristoferson motioned, Young seconded to change the effective date of the annexation ordinance passed in Item #17 to November 16, 1999. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Bm'roughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 26. The Council held a public heating and considered amending the Concept Plan for the Planned Development 132 (PD 132) zoning district. The request was to amend the definition of a "front yard" for single-family lots. The intent was to allow porches to extend into the front yard. The 428 acre property was located to the north of Shady Shores Road and on the east side of Swisher Road. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial (5-2). (Z-99- 067, The Preserve) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that this request was to amend the text of the Planned Development to allow for porches to extend into the front yard of the single family lots. A super majority vote by Council was needed for approval as the Planning and Zoning Commission had voted to deny the request. The Mayor opened the public heating. The following individual spoke during the public heating: Marc Footlick, 4000 West Windsor Drive, Flower Mound - favor The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 11 NO. 99-429 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE AREA REGULATIONS AS THEY PERTAIN TO THE DEFINITION OF A "FRONT YARD" OF ORDINANCE 98-394 WHICH APPROVED AN AMENDED CONCEPT PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 132 (PD132) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 427.616 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED TO THE NORTH OF SHADY SHORES ROAD AND THE EAST SIDE OF SWISHER ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDNG FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CLUASE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-067) Cochran motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance with the addition of language in the definitions to preclude having a garage or carport as part of the porch. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "nay", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded with a 6-1 vote. 27. The Council held a public hearing and considered rezoning approximately 4.7 acres from the Planned Development 12 (PD-12) zoning district to Office (O) and Commercial (C) zoning districts. The property was located at the southeast comer of 1-35E and State School Road. The purpose of the zoning change was to develop a cancer treatment clinic and expand an auto dealership. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (6-1) with conditions. (Z-99-076, Denton Cancer Center) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that two zoning districts were proposed. One district for an office and one for commercial zoning. The Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval with conditions. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individual spoke during the public hearing: James Wood, 3906 I35E South, Denton, 76202 - favor with a request to be exempted from the condition of adding additional canopy trees. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-430 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CI-IANGE FROM PLANNED DIgVELOPMENT 12 (PD-12) ZONING DIgTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO OFFICE CONDITIONED (O[C]) AND COMMERCIAL CONDITIONED (C[C]) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 4.701 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF INTERSTATE 35E AND STATE City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 12 SCHOOL ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THERELF; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDNG FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-076) Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission with the removal of condition //6 from the commercial zoning requirements. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 28. The Council held a public heating and considered a Detailed Plan for a Planned Development (PD-178) zoning district. The 1.29 acre property was located at 3020 Country Club Road. The proposal was for a zone change from Light Industrial (LI) to a Planned Development District to build a duplex on the lot. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0). (Z-99-078, Arrington Addition) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that the applicant was asking to change the zoning from light industrial to planned development to allow for construction of a second duplex on the property. There currently was a single story duplex on the property. The Mayor opened the public heating. The following individual spoke during the public hearing: Pauline Arrington, property owner - favor The Mayor closed the public heating. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-431 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM A LIGHT iNDUSTRIAL (LI) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD-178) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 1.29 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 3020 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD AND APPROVING A DETAILED PLAN; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDNG A SEVERABILITYU CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z- 99-078) Cochran motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", tturroughs "aye", 12ochran "aye", Durrance ~aye', I(ristoferson ~aye', ¥otmg ~aye', and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 29. The Council held a public heating and considered a Detailed Plan for an amendment to the Planned Development 35 (PD-35) zoning district. The 7.626 acre property was generally City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 13 located on the comer of U.S. Hwy 377 and the Santa Fe Railway, west of F.M. 1830. The proposal was to amend the original Detailed Plan for PD-35 from a multi-family use of 15 lots with 60 dwelling units to a single-family use consisting of 40 lots. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0). (Z-99-079, Bent Creek Estates) Mark Donaldson, Assistant Planning Director, stated that this request was for an amendment to the detailed plan to change the zoning to single family lots instead of the current multi-family usage. The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individual spoke during the public hearing: D. R. Cameron, 2300 Highland Village Road, Highland Village - favor The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-432 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 97-205, TO PROVIDE FOR A CHANGE IN THE DETAILED PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD-35), BY APPROVING A REVISED DETAILED PLAN FOR 7.626 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF U.S. HIGHWAY 377 AND THE STANTA FE RAILWAY, WEST OF F.M. 1830; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDNG FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-079) Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mayor Pro Tem Beasley suggested a friendly amendment to change the condition to include 75% brick on the exterior of the homes except for the door and windows. Council Members Young and Burroughs accepted that amendment to the motion. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS-ANNEXATIONS 30. The Council held the second of two public hearings regarding a proposed voluntary annexation of approximately 24 acres located at the southwest comer of Silver Dome and Cooper Creek in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Denton, Texas. The zoning at the time of annexation would be Agricultural (A). (A-96, Silver Dome at Cooper Creek) City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 14 The Mayor opened the public hearing. The following individual spoke during the public heating: Christopher Jackson, 600 North Pearl, Suite 650, Dallas, 75201 - favor The Mayor closed the public heating. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 31. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance designating a certain area within the city limits of Denton as Reinvestment Zone II for commercial/industrial tax abatement; establishing the boundaries of such zone; making findings required in accordance with Chapters 311 and 312 of the Texas Tax Code; ordaining other matters relating thereto; providing a severability clause; providing for repeal; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-433 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS DESIGNATING A CERTAIN AREA WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF DENTON AS REINVESTMENT ZONE NO. II FOR COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL TAX ABATEMENT; ESTABLISHING THE BOUNDARIES OF SUCH ZONE; MAKING FINDINGS REQUIRED IN ACCORDNACE WITH CHAPTERS 311 AND 312 OF THE TEXAS TAX CODE; ORDAINING OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDNG FOR REPEAL; ANDPROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. Council Member Cochran Mike stated that he would be voting against the motion as he did not feel that Peterbilt had fulfilled the requirements of the ordinance, in particular the second whereas regarding "to build improvements". He felt that the company should be building improvements to the plant and not just adding new equipment. He was also not sure that establishing the zone would be a benefit to the city. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "nay", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded with a 6-1 vote. 32. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute a tax abatement agreement with Peterbilt Motors Company setting forth all the required terms of the tax abatement agreement in accordance with the terms of Chapter 312 of the Texas Tax Code; setting forth thc various conditions precedent to Peterbilt Motors Company receiving the tax abatement; and further authorizing the Mayor to execute an electric service agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Peterbilt Motors Company; providing for a severability clause; and providing an effective date. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 15 Burroughs motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance. The following individuals spoke on the issue: James Rodgers, 3000 Santa Monica, Denton, 76205-opposition Ed Soph, 1620 Victoria, Denton, 76201 - opposition Eva Cadwallader, 3920 Fawn Drive, Denton, 76208 - opposition The following individuals presented Speaker Cards but did not wish to address Council: Mark Coomes, P.O. Box 343, Denton, 76202 - opposition Jeffrey Levy, 1610 E. McKirmey #1813, Denton, 76201 - opposition Council debated the pros and cons regarding tax abatements. City Attorney Prouty stated that the procedural guidelines require a narrative form be submitted and that may not have been done. He suggested amending the motion subject to Peterbilt complying with all terms of the agreement including Section 2. Council Member Burroughs and Young agreed to include that in the motion and second. On roll vote, Beasley "nay", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "nay", Durrance "nay", Kristoferson "nay", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion failed with a 3-4 vote. 33. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance of the City Council, City of Denton, Texas authorizing the Mayor to execute an amendment to the current Depository Contract with Texas Bank for a period of ninety (90) days and adding a Y2K compliance clause; and providing for an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-434 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT DEPOSITORY CONTRACT WITH TEXAS BANK FOR A PERIOD OF NINETY (90) DAYS AND ADDING A Y2K COMPLIANCE CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Kristoferson motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 34. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the Public Utility Commission of Texas to set the allocation formula that determines what portion of the base amount (annual franchise fee or right-of-way use fee paid by certificated telecommunications City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 16 providers) to be paid the City under HB 1777 is allocated to each category of access line within the City of Denton and declaring an effective date. The following resolution was considered: NO. R99-064 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS TO SET THE ALLOCATION FORMULA THAT DETERMINES WHAT PORTION OF THE BASE AMOUNT (ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE OR RIGHT-OF- WAY USE FEE PAID BY CERTIFICATED TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS) TO BE PAID THE CITY UNDER HB 1777 IS ALLOCATED TO EACH CATEGORY OF ACCESS LINE WITHIN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE Burroughs motioned, Beasley seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 35. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a first amendment to that contract for professional legal services with the law firm of Terry Morgan and Associates adding to the current scope of services legal analysis of the City of Denton Comprehensive Plan 1999-2020, any requested assistance in rewriting the Denton Development Code, and other legal services related thereto; increasing the compensation under the contract to cover these additional services; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; providing for retroactive effect o the agreement; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-435 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THAT CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES WITH THE LAW FIRM OF TERRY MORGAN AND ASSOCIATES ADDING TO THE CURRENT SCOPE OF SERVICES LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE CITY OF DENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1999-2020, ANY REQUESTED ASSISTANCE IN REWRITING THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND OTHER LEGAL SERVICES RELATED THERETO; INCREASING THE COMPENSATION UNDER THE CONTRACT TO COVER THESE ADDITIONAL SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; PROVIDING FOR RETROACTIVE EFFECT O THE AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Durrance motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carried unanimously. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 17 36. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance on second reading granting a franchise to Metricom, Inc., for the use and occupancy of the public rights-of-way of the City of Denton for telecommunications purposes; providing for conditions of such use; providing for compensation for such use and occupancy; and ordaining other provisions related to the subject matter hereof. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-436 AN ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO METRICOM, INC., FOR THE USE AND OCCUPANCY OF THE PUBLIC RIGHTS- OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF DENTON FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS PURPOSES; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF SUCH USE; PROVIDING FOR COMPENSATION FOR SUCH USE AND OCCUPANCY; AND ORDAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT MATTER HEREOF. Beasley motioned, Young seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 37. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance on second reading granting to Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc., doing business as CoServ Electric, a franchise for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, and using an electric utility system in the City of Denton; regulating the construction work done by the grantee in the City; prescribing the duties, responsibilities, and role-making authority of the City Manager and the City with respect to administration of this franchise; providing for enforcement of the franchise; prescribing the compensation to be paid the City by the grantee for the franchise privilege; setting forth the term of the franchise; providing for a severability provision; providing for acceptance of the franchise by grantee; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: (First Reading) AN ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING GRANTING TO DENTON COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS COSERV ELECTRIC, A FRANCHISE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING, MAINTAINING, AND USING AN ELECTRIC UTILITY SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF DENTON; REGULATING THE CONSTRUCTION WORK DONE BY THE GRANTEE IN THE CITY; PRESCRIBING THE DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND RULE-MAKING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO ADMINISTRATION OF THIS FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT OF THE FRANCHISE; PRESCRIBING THE COMPENSATION TO BE PAD THE CITY BY THE GRANTEE FOR THE FRANCHISE PRIVILEGE; SETTING FORTH THE TERM OF THE FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY PROVISION; PROVIDING FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE FRANCHISE BY GRANTEE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 1 § Beasley motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. On mil vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Coehran "aye", Durranee "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 38. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a second amendment to the annexation agreement entered into between the City of Denton and Violet Property Associates, L.P., as part of the settlement of litigation styled City of Denton v. Denton County Fresh Water Supply District No. lA and Denton County Fresh Water Supply District No. 5 for the purpose of establishing a timeline for construction of Highway 377 water line; and providing an effective date. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-437 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND VIOLET PROPERTY ASSOCIATES, L.P., AS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT OF LITIGATION STYLED CITY OF DENTON V. DENTON COUNTY FRESH WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT NO. IA AND DENTON COUNTY FRESH WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT NO. 5 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A TIMELINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF HIGHWAY 377 WATER LINE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Young motioned, Burroughs seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 39. The Council considered nominations/appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions. Council Member Young nominated Evelyn Curry to the Library Board. Beasley motioned, Young seconded to suspend the Council rules and vote on the nomination at this meeting. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. On roll vote for the nomination, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", Durrance "aye", Kristoferson "aye", Young "aye", and Mayor Miller "aye". Motion carded unanimously. 40. Miscellaneous matters fxom the City Manager. City Manager Jcz indicated that a report had gone out to Council regarding the Citizen Report made at the last meeting by Tom Adkins regarding the health insurance bid process. City of Denton City Council Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 19 41. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Kristoferson requested a report regarding the sunsetting of planned developments. 42. Them was no continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. 43. There was no official action on Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:31 p.m. JACK MILLER, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS City of Denton City Council Minutes November 19, 1999 The Council convened into a Special Called Meeting on Friday, November 19, 1999 at 12:00 noon in the Council Chambers of City Hall. PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tem Beasley; Council Members Burroughs, Cochran, and Durrance. ABSENT: Mayor Miller; Council Members Kristoferson and Young 1. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 99- 411, calling a bond election for January 15, 2000; amending Section 13 of said ordinance to change the wording of Proposition No. 2 for the ballot. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 99-438 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 99-411 CALLING A BOND ELECTION FOR JANUARY 15, 2000; AMENDING SECTION 13 OF SAID ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE WORKDING OF PROPOSITION NO. 2 FOR THE BALLOT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Burroughs motioned, Cochran seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Beasley "aye", Burroughs "aye", Cochran "aye", and Durrance "aye". Motion carded unanimously. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:05 p.m. RONI BEASLEY MAYOR PRO TEM CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda. No. ~0 ~00~ Agendalten~- ~ Date_ ~//b-,/'~O ,, February 15, 2000 Fiscal & Municipal Services/Tax Kathy DuBose, Assistant City Manager of Fiscal and Municipal Services~ SUBJECT: Consider approval of a tax refund to Nortex Motorsports, Inc., formerly Cycle Center of Denton. The 1999 tax was overpaid, resulting in an overpayment. BACKGROUND: Chapter 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the goveming body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $500.00. The 1999 tax for Nortex Motorsports, Inc., formerly Cycle Center of Denton, was paid in full on 1/24/00. Then 1/25/00, the tax office received the 1999 VIT disbursement in the amount of $1,690.69, resulting in an overpayment of $1,690.69. All documentation necessary for refund is attached. FISCAL INFORMATION: The tax overpayment revenue fund would be reduced by $1,690.69. Prepared by: Carolene Folse Revenue & Tax Analyst Respectfully submitted: l~i~a Ortlz ' ' Director of Fiscal Operations JAN--25--00 02:5~ AM CYCLE CENTER OF DENTON P. 04 APPLICATION FOR TAX REFUND L;ollec[ing OrllCe name 3TY OF DENTON TAX OFFICE ~'resont mailing a~aress [nurnoer~a710 street) }0t E. H!CKO~'.~g!T~. ~y, [own or pos[ (Trace, state,/1~ code 3E_.NTO..N, TX, 76,205, .......... ~'.o. apply for a tax refund, the tax. payer m_u.s..t..comp!ete the following. uwners Name ~tep 1: Owner's name and address Step 2: Describe the property Step 3: ~ive lhe tax ,ayment nformation Step 4: Sign the form iUOlleCtlng lax Tor: ttaxln lC TY OF DENTON j J"'llgrla [ireagooe ann nui-nDer] NORTEX MOTORSPORTS INC (C.YCLE CENTER OF DENTON INC) r'~u~um ividiiing AUu,~ (numL~u~ diYd ~l,~ut) 516 S 135 EAST uity, town 0r pos~ office, sm~e, ZiP code DENTON TX 76,205,;7,790 [~hone (area code and numoer/ Legal description (or attach copy of the tax bill or tax receipt) MOTOR VEH iNVENTORY Address or location of property: 516 S 135 EAST Account number of property: Tax receipt number: 918629 OR 9904250043 Name Year ' I~ate Amount A~ount f T_axi.ng .U.nil...From W. hiFor Which Refund Of The Of Of Tax Refund r<e~una ~s ~eqpi. r. ea Is Recluested Tax Paym. ent Taxes Paid ReClue..s!~d City of Denl[(~n 1999 ,,, 1/24100 $ ,, 1,~.2,48.64 C_i_ty of Denton 1999 1/25/00 $ 1.690,69 ~ 1,690.{~9 Taxpayer's reason for refund ( attach suppoding documentation): *99 tax was paid in full, then $.1~690,69 was applied in VlT tax from Denton County and dlstrubuted to our office on 1125100 for 1999 tax '1 hereby apply for the refund of the above described taxes and cediS/thai the information I have given on this form Is true and correct tg,,the best of my knowled,~e and belief.* .. '.: J.. ........... p...p,c~ll~on toe taxTe~una: signature sign j~ CYCLEhCENTER ~F DE.,N, TO" luate ora .:' here /"~,"~-,...... I / Any person who makes a false entry upon the foregoing record shall be subjecl to one of the following penalties: 1. Imprisonment of not more that the 10 years nor less than 2 years and/or a fine of not more than $5,000 or both such fine and imprisonment; 2, Confinement in jail for a term up In 1 year or a fine to exceed $2,000 or both such fine and Imprisonment aa set forth in Section 37 10, Pe ua Code. . 2 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda NO.~ Agenda Item February l5,2000 Fiscal & Municipal Services/Tax Kathy DuBose, Assistant City Manager of Fiscal and Municipal Services~ SUBJECT: Consider approval ora tax refund to RV World of Texas. The 1999 tax was paid twice, resulting in an overpayment. BACKGROUND: Chapter 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the governing body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $500.00. The 1999 tax for RV World of Texas was overpaid. The 1999 tax was $8,828.06, however, $11,439.16 was received on 1/25/99, resulting in an overpayment of $2,611.10. All documentation necessary for refund is attached. FISCAL INFORMATION: The tax overpayment revenue fund would be reduced by $2,611.10. Prepared by: Carolene Folse Revenue & Tax Analyst RT~ctfully submitted: Director of Fiscal Operations APPLICATION FOR TAX REFUND ~rr~m~lvmq r,-~ , ~'~ n ...... L;OlleCtlng tax Tor: (,[a)ang units) L;Ollectlngomcename CITY OF DENTON TAX OFFICE CITY OF DENTON Fresent malnng aooress (numoer ano 601 E. HICKORY SUITE F ~none ~.arau cooke aria numuer) DENTONI TX 76205 (~0) 349-8318 To app~ for a t~ refund, the taxpayer must ~mp~e ~e following. . , Step 1: mRv WORLQ.QF rmu~mm[ ~a~m.~g ~uu[~ (nuni~r and Owners name 725 S JUPITER RO~ .... ~none (area c~e one numar} and address GAR~ND TX 75~2-7702 Step 2: Legal des~iption (or a~ch copy of ~e tax bill or t~ re~ipt) PERSONAL PROPER~ - MOTOR VEH INVENTORY 3escribe . )~ ' ' ' ~ ~he prope~ Address or I~tion of pmpe~: 5201 NORTH 1~SE Ac~unt number of prope~: T~ re~ipt numar: 919299 OR 99~250t~0 Name Year uate ~ount Amount f ~[ng UnE From ~hi For ~i~ Re,nd Of The Of Of Tax Refund ~emnd Is Requi~ Is ~ue~ted .. T~ Pa~ent T~es Paid Requested Step 3: l. ~ qf Denton 1999 1~5/00 $ 11 ~439.16 m $ 2,611.10 Give the t~ 2. payment 3 .... information 4. 5. ; Taxpayers reason for re, nd ( affa~ supposing d~men~tlon): '9~ ~ was ~,828.06~ however, $11,439.16 was applied in VlT ~ from Denton Coun~ and dbtrubut~ to our ~ce on 112B1~ fo~ 1999 rqsulfln~ in an ove~a~ment ,, · - , .... ~1 hereby app~ f0t'the reind 0f the above-descHbed't~s and ~ ~at the In~aUon I have gNen on ~is ' Step 4: fo~ is )rue and co~ to~e ~st of m~ knowl~e and ~lief.* ..................... ~igna~re /)' Date ot appmm~uon ~u~ ~ ~m-u: Sign the form [ sign ~ =~'~ 2~' m ~d --~bj~ m ~-- of me follo~ng pone'ties: I ~~on aT.~O, ~n~l Codo. ... ~i~i~i~i~i~i!i!i~ililili!i~i .::::::.:x::x · :::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ii!iiiiiiiii!i!ii~iiii!iii! ~!i~ii::iii!i!iiiiiii!i!iiii :::::::::::::::::::::::::: .............. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~:~:~:~:~ 0 ~ ~ ~:~:~:~:~:~ 0 0 0 ~:~:~:~ w ~ ~ ~:~:~ 0 ~ 0 ~:~:~ ~ ~ ~ ~:~:0 0 w 0 ~:~:~:~:~:~:H ~: : ::::::i::~::::::::::::f~::i::f::::i::!i!:: :~::~::~::~i~::~i~::~!~::f:~i~::~:: ~::~]~::~!~::~::~::~::~i~::~i~::~i~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~::~::~::~::~if:~i~ ~i~::~?:~ ~i ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: f:/::ii:::::~i~i:i.::.i~::i::.i. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda No. Agenda Item February 15, 2000 Fiscal & Municipal Services/Tax Kathy DuBose, Assistant City Manager of Fiscal and Municipal Services~ SUBJECT: Consider approval of a tax refund to Veterinary Medical Clinic. The 1999 tax was paid twice, resulting in an overpayment. BACKGROUND: Chapter 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the governing body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $500.00. The 1999 tax for Veterinary Medical Clinic was paid twice. Two checks for $977.25 each were received on 10/15/99 and 12/13/99, resulting in an overpayment of $977.25. All documentation necessary for refund is attached. FISCAL INFORMATION: The tax overpayment revenue fund would be reduced by $977.25 Prepared by: Revenue & Tax Analyst Respectfully submitted: t~ia~a Ortiz Director of Fiscal Operations Jan-26-00 09:38A - -. API~UCATIOH FOR TAX REFUND HICKORY ir & Step 1. ) 2: Give the lex paymerlt OLD NORTH RD ~[--'-~02 76201-1524 Legal d#clililioe (or 8l~a4~ ~IiY ~ ~te lax bill or leg~ t0115/99 97'/25 meson for refund ( al'~$ch.suN)e~n~ document~Uon): _- !~ Tmz ~ald W .I hereby epply fm the ~4.u~d of the ab~ve<le~Iribed laxe~ and o~tifY that bqe tnf°~e~ I ~eve ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET ~,oenda Item .... AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: February 15, 2000 Fiscal & Municipal Services/Tax Kathy DuBose, Assistant City Manager of Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT: Consider approval of a tax refund to James A. Lampin. The 1999 tax was paid twice, resulting in an overpayment. BACKGROUND: Chapter 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the governing body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $500.00. The 1999 tax for James A. Lampin was paid twice. Two checks for $544.79 each were received on 10/20/99 and 12/31/99, resulting in an overpayment of $544.79. All documentation necessary for refund is attached. FISCAL INFORMATION: The tax overpayment revenue fund would be reduced by $544.79. Respectfully submitted: D~'~a Ortiz ' ~ Director of Fiscal Operations Prepared by: Revenue & Tax Analyst Sent By: DUU Customer Service; 940 349 7211; Jan-26-00 9:41AU; Page 2/2 _APPLICATION FOR TAX REFUND ?TY OF DENTON TAX, OFFICE 601 E. HICKORY SUITE F ,, ,IC ,TT, OF DENTON DENTONI TX 1~6205 To apply for a tax.refund, the taxpayer. ,must Step 1: JAMES A LAMPIN' Ownersnam 3316 DARBY LN and add~ess DENTON TX 76207-1306 ~tep 2: Legal ~e~c~tl~ (~r at*ach o~py of the lax bll~ M tax re;Mpt~ Desc~be (94O) 349-8318 . WE ,~TGATE PARK, BLOCK B, LOT~_~ r me property A~ ~l~ of~,:,~.,~: .3,316, DARBY LN m , Ac~t~ number of prepedy: Tax ~ ~ ~T~F~. ~~. ~ ~' ~T~ Step 3: Give the tax I~aymom inforr~tion 4: the form Taxpeye~'e reason for refund ( attach aupporting.documentation): *1 hereby apply for the relund of the ~e~,J~'i~s' ~'~ It~t:am Inf~'mMien Ihqve Wvon on this ,for~, iS Irue and (F~'r ,e~l lo the best ~ my kno,Medae and belief..' ' fl ! ..... Any mort who makes I lal~e enl~ upon the foregoing record ~ be sub)~d to one MIItO followin~ m~eitte~: 1, Impertinent of not more ~ thl 10 yea~.m~ le~$ than2.yeam and/~ a fine e{ nM roMe.than ~-;~e0 or both such fine and Impri-onment~ 2. Con&,tement M lea lor a tarm up a3 1 year or i t~e m exeee~ $2,000 or both such fine and ImpriBonreont em I.~ m ~ 37.10 ir ~ I..... Il .... j.~r~.-'~ .... ~_?'_=___ ~ ,, Penal Cede. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda Item; /,*~ AGENDA DATE: February 15, 2000 DEPARTMENT: Fire CITY MANAGER:Mike Jez, 349-8307 SUBJECT Consider adoption of Ordinance and approval of an interlocal ambulance agreement between the City of Denton and Denton County. BACKGROUND The interlocal agreement for ambulance service between the City o£ Denton and Denton County began in 1980 and provides for the continuation of emergency medical services to Denton County within our service area. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) Council has approved this agreement since 1980. The revisions being made to the 1999-2000 agreement from last year are: · Population is based on the estimated January 1, 1999, North Texas Council of Government figure. · The number of EMS runs is based on FY 1999 data. FISCAL INFORMATION This will comprise approximately 25% of our total EMS Revenue for this fisca~ year. No other program or department is affected, however, without this agreement we would have to stop service to Denton County. Respectfully submitted: Prepared by: Management Assistant Ross Chadwick Fire Chief ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AMBULANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COUNTY FOR AMBULANCE SERVICES; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I: That the City Council of the City of Denton hereby approves an Agreement between the City of Denton and Denton County for ambulance services, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The Mayor, or in his absence the Mayor Pro Tem, is hereby authorized to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City. SECTION II: That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ., 2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HER_BERT L. PROUTY, CITY. ATTORNEY BY: STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT AMBULANCE SERVICE THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this __ day of , 2000, by and between DENTON COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Texas, hereinafter referred to as "County" and the CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, a municipality located in Denton County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "City". WHEREAS, County is a duly organized political subdivision of the State of Texas engaged in the administration of county government and related services for the benefit of the citizens of Denton County; and WHEREAS, City is a municipality engaged in the provision of ambulance service and related services for the benefit of the citizens of the City of Denton; and WHEREAS, this Contract involves governmental functions that each party individually can perform; and WHEREAS, the amount paid by County for this service is to be made from current revenues available to it and that amount fairly compensates City for the services and functions performed by it; and WHEREAS, City is an owner and operator of certain ambulance vehicles and other equipment designed for the transportation of persons who are sick, infirm, or injured and has in its employ such trained personnel whose duties are related to the use of such vehicles and equipment; and WHEREAS, County desires to obtain emergency medical services rendered by City, as more fully hereinafter described for the benefit of the residents of Denton County, Texas; and WHEREAS, the provision of emergency medical services is a governmental function that serves the public health and welfare and is of mutual concern to the contracting parties; and WHEREAS, County and City mutually desire to be subject to the provisions of V.T.C.A. Government Code, Chapter 791, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, V.T.C.A. Health and Safety Code, Section 774.003 and other applicable statutes and contracts pursuant thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, County and City for the mutual consideration hereinafter stated agree as follows: The effective date of this Agreement shall be the l~t day of October, 1999. The term of this Agreement shall be for the period of October 1, 1999 to and through September 30, 2000. Each party may terminate this Agreement by giving the other party written notice of intent to terminate 60 days after receipt of such notice. As used herein, the words and phrases hereinafter set forth shall have the meanings as follows: A.. "Emergency" shall mean any circumstance that calls for immediate action and in which the element of time in transporting the sick, wounded; or injured for medical treatment is essential to the health or life of a person or persons. Whether the aforementioned circumstances in fact exist is solely up to the discretion of the City. For dispatch purposes only, "emergency" shall include, but not be limited to: The representation by a person requesting ambulance service that an immediate need exists for such service for the purpose of transporting a person fi.om any location to a place of treatment and emergency medical treatment is thereafter administered; and The representation by a person requesting ambulance service that an immediate need exists for such service for the purpose of transporting a person from any location to the closest medical facility. B. "Rural area" means any area within the boundaries of Denton County, Texas and without the corporate limits of all incorporated cities, towns, and villages within said County. C. "Urban area" means any area within said County and within the corporate limits of an incorporated city, town, or village. D. "Emergency ambulance call" means a response to a request for ambulance service by the personnel of the City in a situation involving an emergency (as such word is hereinabove defined) through the instrumentality of an ambulance vehicle. Within the meaning hereof, a single call might involve the transportation of more than one person at a time. A. Services to be rendered hereunder by City are ambulance services normally rendered by City under circumstances of emergency as hereinabove defined to citizens of County. B. The City Fire Department shall respond to all requests for ambulance services made within its designated area of the County, as set out in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. PAGE 2 C. It is recognized that the officers and employees of City have duties and responsibilities which include the rendering of ambulance services and it shall be the responsibility and within the sole discretion of the officers and employees of the City to determine priorities in the dispatching and use of such equipment and personnel and the judgment of any such officer or employee as to any such matter shall be the final determination. The County shall designate the County Judge to act on behalf of the County and to serve as "Liaison Officer" between County and City. The County Judge or his designated substitute shall insure the performance of all duties and obligations of County herein stated, devote sufficient time and attention to the execution of said duties on behalf of County in full compliance with the temps and conditions of this Agreement, and provide supervision of County's employees, agents, contractors, sub-contractors, and/or laborers, if any, in the furtherance of the purposes, terms, and conditions of this Agreement for the mutual benefit of County and City. o City shall ensure the performance of all duties and obligations of City as hereinafter stated, devote sufficient time and attention to the execution of said duties on behalf of City in full compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and shrill provide immediate and direct supervision of City's employees, agents, contractors, sub-contractors, and/or laborers, if any, in the furtherance of the purposes, terms, and conditions of this Agreement for the mutual benefit of County and City. For the services hereinabove stated, County agrees to pay the City a fee of $279,479.00 based on a funding fmmula as follows: First, the readiness sum is .664 per capita based on population, for a maximum of $75,606.00. Second, a sum of $444.00 per ambulance mn, for a maximum of $89,635.00. This stun is based upon the number ofnms made by City in fiscal year 1999. Third, a fixed sum based on size of covered rural area, for a maximum of $114,238.00. The first and third sums are based upon population and mileage figures obtained from the North Central Texas Council of Govemments. The second sum is based upon the definition of an ambulance call for purposes of this Agreement. An ambulance call is defined as treatment and transport of a patient to a medical facility. Payment shall not be allowed for instances in which a patient is not transported. Consisted with the reporting procedures described below, City shall receive payment, regardless of the service delivery area in which the call originated. Requests for payment shall be submitted on the standardized ambulance transportation reporting form approved and provided by the County, accompanied by copies of patient admission/registration forms'as provided by a hospital or medical facility. It shall be the responsibility of the City to fully complete the forms and to provide complete and accurate patient information. Requests for payment shall be submitted timely; that is, within five days of the performance of service by the City. Requests not timely submitted shall not be considered for payment. Requests for payment may be submitted by personal delivery, U.S. mail, facsimile, or computer telephone link to the office of the Denton County Fire Marshal. The date of submission PAGE 3 shall be the date the fully documented request is received in said office. By the signature of its duly authorized official hereto, the County assures the City that the County Auditor has certified that sufficient funds are available within the current County budget to make all payments and meet all the financial obligations of this Contract and these fimds are available to pay the obligation when due in accordance with Section 111.093(c) of the Local Govemment Code V.T.C.A. o County agrees to and accepts full responsibility for the acts, negligence, and or omissions of all County's officers, employees, and agents. City agrees to and accepts full responsibility for the acts, negligence, and or omissions of all City's officers, employees, and agents. 10. In the event of any default in any of the covenants herein conta{ned, this Agreement may be forfeited and terminated at either party's discretion of such default continues for a period of ten days after notice to the other party in writing of such default and intention to declare this Agreement terminated. Unless the default is cured as aforesaid, this Agreement shall terminate as if that were the day originally fixed herein for the expiration of the Agreement. 11. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by either party giving 60 days advance notice to the other party. In the event of such termination by either party, City shall be compensated pro rata for all services performed to terminate date, together with reimbursable expenses then due and as authorized by this Agreement. In the event of such termination, should City be overcompensated on a pro rata basis for all serviced performed to temiination date and/or be overcompensated reimbursable expenses as authorized by this Agreement, then County shall be reimbursed pro rata for all such overcompensation. Acceptance of such reimbursement shall not constitute a waiver of any claim that may otherwise arise out of this Agreement. 12. The fact that County and City accept certain responsibilities relating to the rendering of ambulance services under this Agreement as a part of their responsibility for providing protection for the public health makes it imperative that the performance of these vital services be recognized as a governmental function and that the doctrine of govemmental immunity shall be, and it is hereby, invoked to the extent possible under the law. Neither City nor County waives nor shall be deemed hereby to waive any immunity or defense that would otherwise be available to it against claims arising fi.om the exercise of governmental powers and functions. PAGE 4 13. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and County and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and/or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both parties. 14. This Agreement and any of its terms or provisions, as well as the rights 'and duties of the parties hereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. 15. In the event that any portion of this Agreement shall be found to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties hereto that the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full force and effect to the extent possible. 16. The undersigned officer and/or agents of the parties hereto are the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority to execute this Agreemen~ on behalf of the parties hereto and each party hereby certifies to the other that any necessary resolutions extending said authority have been duly passed and are now in full force and effect. EXECUTED in duplicate originals, this the day of .,2000. COUNTY DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS 110 WEST HICKORY DENTON, TEXAS 76201 CITY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS 215 EAST MCKINNEY DENTON, TEXAS 76201 BY: Kirk Wilson Denton County Judge Acting on behalf of and by The authority of DENTON COUNTY Commissioners Court of Denton County, Texas ~ BY: Jack Miller Mayor Acting on behalf of and by the authority of the CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PAGE 5 ATTEST: ATTEST: BY: Cynthia Mitchell Denton County Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY: Assistant District Attomey BY: Jennifer Walters City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: +// Herbert L. Prou~ CiW A~omey APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: BY: Denton County Fire Marshal BY: Fire Chief PAGE 6 Denton County EMS Districts Map located in City Secretary's Exhibit File AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Materials Management Agenda No. Agenda Item Date Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Howard Martin 349-8232 Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services An Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of HVAC Renovation at the Service Center; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 2449 - Renovation of HVAC at the Service Center awarded to BCI Mechanical, Inc. in the amount of $206,800). BID INFORMATION: This project consists: of replacement of heating and air conditioning ductwork, ceiling grid and tile, lighting, installation of an energy management control system, electrical upgrades and interior painting at the Service Center, 901 Texas Street, Denton, TX. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend Bid 2449 be awarded to the lowest bidder BCI Mechanical, Inc. in the amount of $206,800. . PRINICIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: BCI Mechanical, Inc. 400 E. Oak Street Denton, TX 76201 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Renovations are scheduled for completion in 60 calendar days from notice to proceed or approximately the third week in April 2000. PRIOR ACTION/APPROVAL: The Public Utility Board (PUB) considered this bid recommendation on February 7, 2000. FISCAL INFORMATION: Funds for this project are available from: (1) FY 1999 Service Center Renovation budget (457-032-SVCT-0012-9101) (2) FY 2000 Operations and Maintenance budget (610-105-1051-9350-8301) (620-081-0450-8301) (625-082-0451-8301) (630-024-0801-8301 ) $117,898.72 $ 42,675.00 $ 21,335.00 $ 20,448.00. $ 4,445.00 Agenda Information Sheet February 15, 2000 Page 2 BACKGROUND: The Service Center air condition and heating system has had problems since the building was constructed. The upstairs A/C unit was upgraded from a 40-ton unit to a 60-ton unit in September of 1997. At the time ductwork was not replaced leaving a 40-ton ductwork system and a 60-ton unit. The difficulty of replacing the ductwork while the building is occupied has prevented the project from being completed earlier. By completing the A/C upgrades along with the carpet and furniture replacement previously approved by Council we can temporarily close one side of the building at a time, move staff out and back in to completely renovated spaces. Staff will be housed in the service center training room and meeting rooms and possibly the former garage facility during the renovation. As part of the project we will make the HVAC system much more efficient by adding zones and controls for the various workgroups in the building. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1331 .AGENDA ATTACHMENT #1 TABULATION SHEET Bid # 2449 HVAC RENOVATION@SERVICE CENTER Date: 1/18/00 NoI Qty. I DESCRIPTION VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR Mechanical Mechanical Construction Base Bid $206,800 $297,700 $216,237 1 Addendum #1 YES YES YES 2 Bond YES YES YES 3 . ORDINANCE NO. ~ AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HVAC RENOVATION AT THE SERVICE CENTER: PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2449 - RENOVATION OF HVAC AT THE SERVICE CENTER AWARDED TO BCI MECHANICAL, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $206,800). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, and received competitive sealed bids for the construction of public works or improvements in accordance with the procedures of STATE law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has received and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest respondent for the construction of the public works or improvements described in the bid invitation, and plans and specifications therein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the following competitive sealed bid for the construction of public works or improvements, as described in the "Sealed Bid Invitations", or plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City's Purchasing Agent filed according to the bid number assigned hereto, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids: BID NUMBER. CONTRACTOR AMOUNT 2449 BCI Mechanical, Inc. $206,800 SECTION II. That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bid shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for construction of such public works or improvements herein accepted and approved, until such person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and furnishing of performance and payment bonds, and insurance certificate after notification of the award of the bid. SECTION III. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and Request for Sealed Bids, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION IV. That upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bids and the execution of contracts for the public works and improvements as authorized herein, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds in the manner and in the amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized contracts executed pursuant thereto. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: BID 2449 - CONTRACTUAL ORDINANCE (2-00) AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Howard Martin 349-8232 / Bob Tickner 349-8275 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT: An Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a'public works contract for the construction of a Landfill Tree Buffer Zone; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (Bid 2452 - Landfill Tree Buffer Zone Phase I awarded to A & A Landscape and Irrigation, Inc. in the amount of $149,995). BID INFORMATION: This bid is for the construction of a tree installation and tree irrigation project in a buffer zone adjacent to the City of Denton Landfill on MaYhill Road between Foster and Edwards Road. The project consists of the installation of approximately 525 trees and associated irrigation system. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend Bid 2452 be awarded to the lowest bidder, A & A Landscape and Irrigation, Inc. in the amount of $149,995 and that the deduct alternates for deletion of the staking of trees be rejected. PRINICIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: A & A Landscape and Irrigation, Inc. 13758 Hwy 380 East Farmersville, TX 75442 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Construction is scheduled to be completed in 60 workdays from notice to proceed or approximately the last week of April 2000. FISCAL INFORMATION: The funding for this tree buffer zone is available from account (634-024-CO96-819A-9003). Tom Shaw, C(.P.Mi, 34~-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1329.AGENDA Bid # 2452 ATTACHMENT 1 TABULATION SHEET LANDFILL TREE BUFFER ZONE PROJECT PHASE I Date: 1/25/00 No. I DESCRIPTION VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR ~iii~i~i~ A&A My Gardner American Sprinkle'N Carruthers Landscape Landscaping Landscape Sprout iiSystems & Irrigation Total Base Bid $185,000 $206,423 $157,300 $149,995 $456,517 1 Alternate - Deduct Alternate #1 if $6,000 $1,290 $6,876 $2,340 No Bid 2 deciduois tree not staked Alternates - Deduct Alternate #2 $4,240 $2,355 $12,024 $7,110 No Bid 3 if evergreen plants not staked ORDINANCE NO. ~ AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A LANDFILL TREE BUFFER ZONE; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2452 - LANDFILL TREE BUFFER ZONE PHASE I AWARDED TO A & A LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $149,995). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, and received competitive sealed bids for the construction of public works or improvements in accordance with the procedures of STATE law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee.has received and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest respondent for the construction of the public works or improvements described in the bid invitation, and plans and specifications therein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the following competitive sealed bid for the construction of public works or improvements, as described in the "Sealed Bid Invitations", or plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City's Purchasing Agent filed according to the bid number assigned hereto, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids: BID NUMBER CONTRACTOR AMOUNT 2452 A & A Landscape and Irrigation, Inc. $149,995 SECTION II. That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bid shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for construction of such public works or improvements herein accepted and approved, until such person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and furnishing of performance and payment bonds, and insurance certificate after notification of the award of the bid. SECTION III. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and Request for Sealed Bids, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION IV. That upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bids and the execution of contracts for the public works and improvements as authorized herein, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds in the manner and in the amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized contracts executed pursuant thereto. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS.TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: BID 2452 - CONTRACTUAL ORDINANCE (2-00) AGENDADATE: DEPARTMENT: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Materials Management ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services ~ SUBJECT: An Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for Demolition of Buildings and Clearing of Lots; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 2453 - Demolition Project # 30 awarded to JMX Environmental, Inc. in the amount of $18,300). BID INFORMATION: This bid is for the demolition of buildings and clearing of ten lots see tabulation sheet for locations. The buildings have been determined to be uneconomical to rehabilitate and the neighborhoods are better served if the lots are cleared. Bid Item 8 - 423 S. Bradshaw St. has been demolished by the owner has been deleted from the list. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend ~awarded to the lowest bidder, JMX Environmental, Inc. in the amount of $18,300. PRINICIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: JMX Environmental, Inc. P.O. Box 170297 Dallas, TX 75217-0297 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: The quoted schedule for the demolition of buildings and clearing of specified lots is scheduled for on or before the second week of April 2000. FISCAL INFORMATION: Demolition and Clearing Project # 30 will be funded from CDBG budget funds, account (219-. 059-CD97-8502), in the amount of $3,417.66 and account (219-059-CAA7-8502) in the amount of $14,882.34 total award $18,300. .,~fully s~b~t~, ed: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1334 ,AGENDA Aoendaltem , ~., Questions conceding'this acquisition may be directed to Barbara Ross 349-7235 Bid # 2453 Demolition Project #30 ATTACHMENT 1 TABULATION SHEET Date: ,1/20/00 No. DESCRIPTION VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR BARRETT ENVIRONMENTAL 513 Maddox Street $3,300.00 $10,000.00 $2,200.00 1 719 Wainwright $4,300.00 $10,000.00 $1,400.00 2 525 Lakey $2,650.00 $10,000.00 $1,800.00 3 611 N. Cravvford $2,050.00 $10,000.00 $1,600.00 4 (Garage ONLY) 524 Amarillo $3,450.00 $10,000.00 $1,800.00 5 507R Locust St. $8,255.00 $10,000.00 $1,700.00 6 609 E. Prairie $4,200.00 $10,000.00 $1,500.00 7 (DELETED) 423 S. Bradshaw 8 Street 920 Hill St. $2,350.00 $10,000.00 $1,500.00 9 (Back structure only) 728-730 Alexander $2,700.00 $10,000.00 $2,400.00 10 1114 Duncan $3,500.00 $10,000.00 $2,400.00 11 ORDINANCE NO. ~ AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS AND CLEARING OF LOTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN'i, EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2453 - DEMOLITION PROJECT # 30 AWARDED TO JMX ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,300). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, and received competitive sealed bids for the construction of public works or improvements in accordance xvith the procedures of STATE law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee.has received and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest respondent for the construction of the public works or improvements described in the bid invitation, and plans and specifications therein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the following competitive sealed bid for the construction of public works or improvements, as described in the "Sealed Bid Invitations", or plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City's Purchasing Agent filed according to the bid number assigned hereto, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids: BID NUMBER CONTRACTOR AMOUNT 2453 JMX Environmental, Inc. $18,300 SECTION II. That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bid shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for construction of such public works or improvements herein accepted and approved, until such person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and furnishing of performance and payment bonds, and insurance certificate after notification of the award of the bid. SECTION III. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and Request for Sealed Bids, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION IV. That upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bids and the execution of contracts for the public works and improvements as authorized herein, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds in the manner and in the amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized contracts executed pursuant thereto. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: BID 2453 - CONTRACTUAL ORDINANCE (2-00) AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda No. ~-__~_~__~_~ Agenda Item~__/~ AGENDA DATE: February 15, 2000 DEPARTMENT: Engineering & Transportation CM/DCM/ACM: Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION FOR LAKEVIEW BOULEVARD BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BACKGROUND: Denton County approved funds for the construction of Lakeview Boulevard inside the City of Denton in January 1999 Good Roads Program. This agreement allows the City of Denton to let the contract and inspect the work to insure it meets City of Denton standards. Denton County will reimburse all project expenses. Administrative functions are not covered. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Councii~ Boards, Commission, s) N/A FISCAL INFORMATION Total project costs $798,106.00. Jagoe Public is the low bidder. All construction costs reimbursable by Demon County. Respectfully submitted: Jefkry/IZlark, DJrector Enl~neering & Transportation Memorandom To: Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent ~~ From: David Salmon, Engineering Administrat Subject: Lakeview Boulevard Paving and Drainage Date: 1/31/00 Bids were opened on the Lakeview Boulevard project on January 31, 2000. The low bidder is Jagoe Public with a bid of $798,106.00. The proposed project as bid will construct Lakeview from 1-35E service road to approximately 1600 feet North /Northeast. The project will also include asphalt paving improvements on Shady Shores Road, approximately 400 feet each way from Lakeview. We checked all the bids for accuracy and found no errors that would change the status of the bids. Funding will be provided by the ~Better Safer Roads Program" from Denton County. Please see the attached letter from John Polster. Jagoe Public has successfully completed similar projects for the City of Denton over the years. Based on their bid prices and past experience, I recommend that Jagoe Public's bid for Lakeview Boulevard be accepted. Please call me at ext. 8358 if you have questions. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION FOR LAKEVIEW BOULEVARD BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. The Mayor or City Manager is authorized to execute an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Road Construction for Lakeview Boulevard between the City of Denton and Denton County, Texas under the terms and conditions contained within this Agreement, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION II. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ., 2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY // / / THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS WHEREAS, this agreement is made and entered into by and between the City of Denton, Texas, a political subdivision of the State of Texas, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Denton County, Texas, a corporate and political body under the laws of the State of Texas, hereinafter referred to as "County" for purposes of the completion of certain road construction hereinafter referred to as the "Project." WHEREAS, City and County mutually agree to be subject to the provisions of V.T.C.A., Government Code, Chapter 791, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, and WHEREAS, City and County desire an early completion of the Project; and WHEREAS, City desires the participation of County in the Project as authorized by V.T.C.A., Transportation Code, Section 251.012; WHEREAS, each party paying for the performance of governmental functions as provided for in this agreement, shall make those payments from current revenues available to the paying l~arty; ICA.Denton. Lakeview Boulevard WHEREAS, County has provided funding for several road projects within the limits of City through and as part of the January 1999 Better Safer Roads Bond Program. NOW, THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT is hereby made and entered into by County and City upon and for the mutual consideration stated herein: The term of this Agreement is twelve (12) months beginning on the date of execution of this agreement. This Agreement may be renewed annually by mutual agreement of the parties. II. City hereby requests the assistance of the County in constructing the road project, Lakeview Boulevard. The County hereby requests the City to secure a contract fo~ the construction of Lakeview Boulevard. The City will provide all project inspections and approve all payments, including requested funding from the County, as ROW and construction invoices are received. III. Pursuant to V.T.C.A., Government Code Section 791.011, the parties hereto agree that the purpose of this Agreement is to ensure that certain governmental functions and services in the area of .streets, roads and drainage are performed. The ICA.Denton. Lakeview Boulevard parties hereto further agree that each of them is authorized to perform the functions and services individually. IV. As required by V.T.C.A., Transportation Code Section 251.012 and as evidenced by the signature of the City's representative below, the governing body of City by the execution of and approval of this Agreement, approves the expenditure of county money to participate in the funding of the Project in an amount not to exceed $798,106.00. go City further agrees that it shall be solely responsible for payment, not to exceed $798,106.00 of all expenses related to completion of the Project. City shall seek reimbursement for expenses related to the completion of the Project from County as set forth below. VI. As City proceeds in the completion of the Project, it shall submit to the Denton County Auditor, at 301 East McKinney Street, Denton, Texas 76201, invoices on a monthly basis for reimbursement and County shall reimburse City for all expenditures related to this project within Thirty (30) days of receipt of these invoices. Attached to this Contract is a certification by the County Auditor that the County shall include the sum of Seven Hundred Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred Six ($ 798,106.00) Dollars ICA.Denton. Lakeview Boulevard in its budget and that this amount shall be itemized, set aside and approved by the Denton County Commissioners Court to be expended for the project that is the subject of this Agreement. Reimbursement from County to City shall not exceed the sum of Seven Hundred Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred Six ($ 798,106.00) Dollars. VII. This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part by the County or City upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party setting forth a substantial failure by the defaulting party to fulfill its obligations under this agreement through no fault of the terminating party. Provided, however that no such termination may be affected unless the defaulting party is given: (I) written notice delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested of intent to terminate setting forth the substantial failure to perform; (2) not less than thirty (30) calendar days to cure the failure; and (3) an opportunity for consultation with the terminating party prior to termination. In the even of termination by the County, County shall reimburse the City for all invoices submitted up to and including the date of termination. Notices shall be directed as follows: For City: Jack Miller Mayor, City of Denton 215 E. McKinney St. Denton, Texas 76201 For County: Kirk Wilson Denton County Judge 110 East Hickory Denton, Texas 76201 With a copy to: District Attorney's Office/Civil Division 1450 East McKinney P.O. Box 2850 Denton, Texas 76201 ICA.Denton. Lakeview Boulevard VIII. The covenants, conditions and terms hereof are to be construed under the laws of the State of Texas and are performable by all parties in Denton County, Texas. The parties mUtUally agree that venue for any obligation arising fi.om this Agreement shall lie in Denton, Denton County, Texas. IX. This writing is intended by the parties as a finaI expression of their agreement and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of their agreement. This Agreement can be modified or rescinded only by writing signed by both of the parties or their duly authorized agents. Xo This Agreement is not intended to extend the liability of the parties beyond that provided by law. Neither County nor City waives, nor shall be deemed hereby to waive, any immunity or defense that would otherwise be available to it against claims arising by third parties. XI. In the event that any portion of this Agreement shall be found to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties hereto that the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full force and effect to the extent possible. ICA.Denton. Lakeview Boulevard XII. The undersigned officers and/or agents of the parties hereto are 'the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the parties, hereto and each party hereby certifies to the other that any and all necessary resolutions 'extending said authority have been duly passed and are now in full force and effect. EXECUTED in duplicate originals this, the __ day of 2000, by the City of Denton pursuant to the City Council Resolution passed by the County of Denton pursuant to the Commissioners Court Order #: and COUNTY CITY Denton County, Texas 110 West Hickory Denton, Texas 76201 City of Dentori, Texas 215 East McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 By: By: Hon. Kirk Wilson Denton County Judge Acting on behalf of and by authority of the Commissioners Court of Denton County, Texas Hon. Jack Miller Mayor, City of Denton Acting on behalf of and by authority of the City Council of Denton, Texas Attest: Cynthia Mitchell, County Clerk Attest: Jennifer Walters. City Secretary By: By:. ICA.Denton. Lakeview Boulevard Approved as to form: Approved as to form: Robert Schell Assistant District Attorney HERBERT L. PROUTY, A~ls~t/ant~City Attorney AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that pursuant to Commissioners Court order # , funds will be available in the amount Seven Hundred Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred Six ($ 798,106.00) Dollars to accomplish and pay the obligation of Denton County, Texas under this Agreement. James Wells, County Auditor ICA.Denton. Lakeview Boulevard 10 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Materials Management Agenda No. ~,_~.,~a~.~, Agenda Item ~/~ffO .... Date_ ,~,, , .,. Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Jerry Clark 349-8390 Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Service~,~.... SUBJECT: An Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a'public works contract for the construction of Lakeview Boulevard; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 2455 - Lakeview Boulevard awarded to Jagoe Public Company in the amount of $798,106). BID INFORMATION: This bid is for the construction of approximately 1,500 feet of four lane, urban, divided roadway from IH35E at Post Oak Drive north across Shady Shores to the Preserve at Pecan Creek Development. The project known as Lakeview Boulevard consists of approximately 1.200 feet of storm sewer, 15,784 sq. yds. of 6" subgrade stabilization, 1,668 tons of 6" asphalt paving, 9,864 sq. yds. of 6" concrete paving, 5,130 feet of curb/gutter, excavation, compacted t111 and other related activities. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend Bid 2455 be awarded to the lowest bidder, Jagoe Public Company in the amoum to $798,106 and that the contract signing be delayed until an Interlocal Agreement with Denton County is in place. (See previous item on agenda) PRINICPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: Jagoe Public Company P. O. Box 250 Denton, TX 76202 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Construction is scheduled to be completed in 90 workdays or approximately July 1, 2000. PRIOR ACTION OR/REVIEW: · Denton County Commissioners Court allocated $798.106 from the 1999 Better Sa/bt Roads Program for the purpose of construction of Lakeview Blvd. from I35 to the Preserve at Pecan Creek Developmem. · Denton County Commissioners Court scheduled approval of an Interlocal Agreement for Lakeview Blvd. funding on February 8, 2000. Agenda Information Sheet February 15, 2000 Page 2 FISCAL INFORMATION: This project is being funded by Denton County as a portion of their 1999 Better SaJkr Roads ?rogram. Funds will be made available to the City of Denton as expenses are incurred. See previous Item on Agenda for Interlocal Agreement. BACKGROUND: In December 1999 Denton County Commissioners Court allocated $750,000 in the 1999 Better Safer Roads Program for the purpose of right-of-way acquisition, engineering and construction of Lakeview Blvd. from IH35E to the Preserve at Pecan Creek Development. An agreement was reached that the City of Denton would bid, award and inspect the project and Denton County would reimburse the City for incurred expenses. In January 2000 bids were opened and Denton County revised their commitment to cover the entire cost of the project $798,106. An Interlocal Agreement for Lakeview Blvd. construction is scheduled for presentation to Denton County Commissioners Court on February 8.2000. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M.. 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment I: Tabulation Sheet Attachment 2: Funding Letter for ITS Attachment 3: Interlocal Agreement with Denton County 1330.AOENDA ATTACHMENT 1 TABULATION SHEET BID # 2455 Date: 1/18/00 LAKEVI EW BOULEVARD No.I DESCRIPTION VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR Gilco Richard Carr Sutton & Jagoe Public JRJ Paving Contracting Construction Assoc. Inc. Total Bid Award $798,106.00 $803,811.50 $830,507.30 $950,549.65 $839,610.13 1 Bond YES YES YES YES YES Feb O1 O0 11: i3a ITS, Inc. 8?2-484-4545 ATTACHMENT 2 INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS INC. 2309 Springlake Rd. * Suite 630 * Dallas, Texas 75234 * (972)484-2525 * (972)484-4545 February 1, 2000 Tom Shaw Purchasing Officer City of Denton 215 East McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 RE: Denton County's "Better Safer Roads Program" funding for Lakeview Boulevard Dear Mr. Shaw: This correspondence will serve to in~'orm the City of Denton that Denton County has $798,102 to cover construction cost of Lakeview Boulevard from IH35E frontage road to the Preserw property llne as a 4-lane, urban, divided street. These £unds are available to the City of Denton as the City incurs cxpenses for construction of this roadway. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 972-484-2525. John R Pols'~, President CC: Judge Kirk Wilson Commissioner Jeff Krueger 02/03/00 13:35 FAX 9403498376 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~03 COUNTY OF DENTON ATTACI~qENT 3 WI4EREAS, CiF and County mutually We to be subject to thc p~oviSio~s of V.T.C.A., C}ovemmem Code, C.l~mpter 791, th~ htt~lo~l C~:,~.~om Act, Md WI-IE~AS, City m~d Coumy desLte afl early complefio,~ of6~¢ Pmje,~; m~d WI{ERS~S, CiU desires fl~ participagon of Cour~ty ~ t%e Project ~ au~orized by ¥.T.C.A., Transportation Cc~l,, Section 251.012; ICA.D~nmn. L~kev~ew Bo~¢verd :[~ lb I~T ~TTY Vax :940-565-559~ 02,'03/00 13:35 FAX 9403495376 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~04 --o .... o.=,., roaci projects wkhtn the . ~_. _.' :'.,, $~,luary 1999 BcUer S~r Roa~s Bond NOV,', TI-{~i~FOI~, THIS AGI~MLrlqT is he, by mad~ ~ld ~r~d ~lo by co~ ~d Ci~ ~n ~ for ~e mu~ ~i~on s~ h~: The t=rm of this As~eemont is twelve (12) months lm~innin~ on the date of execution of this al~r~ment. II. City hereby requcst~ th~ assismnc= of ~h~ County in constru~tin~ thc road project, LakeView t~o~¢vard. Thc Coumy h~reby requests thc Cil¥ to scc,~e a conlract for rite conslru~don of Lakeview Boulewrd. The Cit~ vhll vrovide all ins~ectlons and approve all pa~nts, inoludi~ r~qu~st~cl fundi~ from thc Coumy. ROW ~rid co.true,ion invoices m~e received. DEN CO D!$T ATTY Fa×:940-565-5599 ;;~ $ 2000 lJ:J5 P.O~ 02/03/00 13:35 FAX 94034983?6 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~05 IV? A, mqutretl h¥ ¥.T.C.A., Trausl~o~tlstiou Cod~ 8~fian 251.012 ~ ae e~nced ~ ~ sl~ of ~c City'~ r~s~fiv~ b~ow, ~ gov~g body of CiW by ~ ~u~n of ~d ~ of ~is A~m~ ~v~ thc ex~ of co~W money to p~ci~ ~ ~e ~ins of ~6 Proje~ ~ ~ ~0~t nm ~ ex.ed $79R,106.00. City further aSr~ that it ..k.il bm 9ol~ly r~pon.lihle f~' payment, not tn $798.10§,00 of ~ ~x~n~ ~l~d ~ compl~cn of ,~ ~j~t. Ci~ ,~1 reimb~s~mt for ~es rela~ to ~e ~mplc~cn cf~e Project ~om ~ fo~ ~low. As City l~O~eedm i~ tM eoml~lefln~ nC ~e ~ojea, it s~ll submit m ~ D~mn mon~y ~is i~ rc~mcnt ~ ~W s~l ~e Ci~ ~r ~ ~i~s ~lat~ to ~s ~roj~a ~ ~ (30) d~s of ~c~pt of ~e~ ~voiees. A~hed to t~s Con~t is a cc~fica~on by ~ Cc~ A~i~r ~t ~ Cc~ ~1 i~l~e ~e ~ its b~ and ~at ~ smart ~ be i~d, ~t ~s~ ~d ~ov~ by ~e ICA.~n~n.L~iew Bogeyed ~ Feb S 2000 14:45 p.05 DEN CQ DIST RTTY Fax:gix3-E,65-$595 02/03/00 13:35 FAX 9403498376 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~06 of this A~reement. Relrnbure=mcnt ~om County t~ City ~h~l! not exceed the sum Seven Hun/red Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred Six ($ 798,10~.00) Dollars. This A/m-~mcnt may Be tenninate(l in wbnle or in pan by ttte County or City upon thirty (30) clays' written notice to the othe~ pan-y setti~ forth a substantial failure By the defaulting parry to fttl~l its obligations under this sSz,~'m~t through no fault of the zermi~g party. P~vidcd, however ~h~ no such termination _m~, h~ atT.-ned unl~as th~ dcfattlti~e_ l~'t~7 is ~tvetu (t) wril~ noti~ cl~lives~cl by c~.titiecl mail. Te~'a receipt reClUOet~d oF i~t to t~rmin~ se'~tnf~ i'orth tho oubs~Antisl/ailu~= to perform; (Z) not less Lhun ~h/ny (30) cal~nclm' days m cure the i'ailum; uad (3) an opporumi~ for consultation with the terminatinl~ par~ prior to t~,ui-,atian. In the even of Termination by the CO~,-,~, County shall reimburse tha City fm all invoio~ submkted up to and includi~ the date of ~-rmim~on. Notices shall be di~ecr~ as follows: For Ci~: lm~k Miller Ma?or, City of Denton D~nton, T~xaa 76201 For County: Kirk Wilson Denton County Smt6e 1 I0 l~ast Hickory Denton. Texas 76201 With ~ cop~ to' District Annmey' s 0ffic~/Civil Division P.O. Box 28~0 Denton, Texss 76201 ICA.Denton. Lakevi=w Boulev~d ~ DIST ~TTY Fa~:c'~0-565-5598 Feb 3 2000 1~:~ 02/03/00 13:55 FAX 9403498376 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~07 The coverisnts, conditions and terms he=eof are to ~ ~ns~ed ~ ~e laws of t~ S~t~ of Tex~ ~d ~e ~e~o~ble by ~ ~es in D~on County, T~, p~ mu-,-Ily ~ ~ v~ for ~y ub~g~on ~stni from ~s A~cm lie ~ D~o~ Dmzo= ~, T~, Xo This Agr~em~az is not ir~nded ~o extend ~ lia~hty ~ by l~w. Nei~ C~ty ~or Ci~ waives, nor sh~l ~ ~e e~at ~t ~y p~on of ~e A~em~ s~ be fo~d ~ be ~n~ to law, k is ~ in~ of ~ p~i~ h~ ~ ~e ~ ~ s~l ~ v~d ~d ~ ~ fore ~d cff~ ~ ~ ~t possible. ICA,D=n~on, Lakcview Boulevard N CO DIST aTTY. ~ax:940-565-5S98 Feb ~ 2000 la:aS P.O? 02/03/00 13:35 FAX 9403498376 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~08 The undgrsigned offlr~rs ~i/or agents of thc p~r~ies hez¢~o are the ~erl¥ mltha~i~d offieiuh and have the necess~y eutho:ity to exea~te this Ageem~t on b~l~lf of th: part, cs hc:cto eric1 .~ch p~y h~reby c~rti~c~ to the othvr .+,-~ ~.ny and all n¢c~sery reeolufic~ ~xt~ndin~ ~d au~ofity have been du~y ~sscd ~d ~ now in fo~ ~d ~cct. BXEC~ ia duplicam orig~.~!~ ~his, the . daF of 2000. by the City of Denton pursuant to the City Council R~solufion I~ased .., by the County of Demon pur~e.~t to thc Commiaeion=r~ Cou~ Order #; COUNTY D~: County, Texas 110 W**~ ~[ckory D~nton, T~ 76201 CITY C~y of Demon, T~xas Dcntnn, Tex~ 76101 By: Hon. Kizk Wilson Denton County Acting o~. behalf of end by au~o~ of~ Co~ssion~ Cynthia Mitchell, County Clerk 'My: Hon. laok Mill~r Ivl~yor, City of Ac~ing o~ be, half of and by authority of the City Cou~efl ofD~tov~ T~as By; ~CA.D~n~.Lak~vlwv l~oul~ve~d By: 02/03/00 13:35 FAX 9403498376 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~09 to fnrm: Approved as to form: R~he~t Schell A=~/mt~mc City A~torn~y AUDITOR'~ CERTHtlC.~TE I hgreby certify that pursuant to Commmsioa~rs CoRrt ~ ~ , , ~ ~11 be available in the ~o~ Seven H~ N~W B~ ~ On~ Hunted S~ ($ 798,I06,00) ~ to accomplish ~d ~y ~ obhg~ion of B~ton C~, T~ ~er ~s A~ent, ICA.D=uton.Lakev/ew Boul~varct '~ 02/03/00 13:35 FAX 9403498376 DENTON-ENG-DEPT- ~01 City of Denton En§lneerl.n.g and Transportation Department HALL WEST - 221 N. ELM - DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / PHOI~. 940-349-8358 - M~tnO 434-2529 FAX COVER SHEET TO: From: Notes: Nam~ Company Fax Number City of Denton Engineering & Transportation Department 221 N. Elm Denton, TX 76201 Name: Fax NO: Phone: 940-349.8376 940-349-8358 Cnmmitted tn meeting the growing needs and expectations of our Citizens ORDINANCE NO. ~ AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF LAKEVIEW BOULEVARD; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2455 - LAKEVIEW BOULEVARD AWARDED TO JAGOE PUBLIC COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $798,106). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, and received competitive sealed bids for the construction of public works or improvements in accordance with the procedures of STATE law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee.has received and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest respondent for the construction of the public works or improvements described in the bid invitation, and plans and specifications therein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the following competitive sealed bid for the construction of public works or improvements, as described in the "Sealed Bid Invitations", or plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City's Purchasing Agent filed according to the bid number assigned hereto, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids: BID NUMBER CONTRACTOR AMOUNT 2455 Jagoe Public Company $798,106 SECTION II. That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bid shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for construction of such public works or improvements herein accepted and approved, until such person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and furnishing of performance and payment bonds, and insurance certificate after notification of the award of the bid. SECTION III. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and Request for Sealed Bids, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION IV. That upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive sealed bids and the execution of contracts for the public works and improvements as authorized herein, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds in the manner and in the amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized contracts executed pursuant thereto. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS .TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: BID 2455 - CONTRACTUAL ORDINANCE (2-00) AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Materials Management Aoenda No ...... Al~enda Item Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Howard Martin 349-8232 Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT: An Ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with ETTL Engineers and Consultants, Inc. to provide hydrogeological consulting and analytical services pertaining to the City of Denton Landfill as set forth in the contract; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (PSA 2475 - Professional Services Agreement for Hydrogeological Consulting and Analysis at the Landfill awarded to ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc. in the amount of $46,215.25). PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT INFORMATION: The City's expanded Landfill Permit 1590A requires that the Solid Waste Department perform quarterly monitoring of ground water within the Landfill's permitted area. To accomplish this 23 wells have been installed. Each well must be sampled and tested on a quarterly basis. This professionaI'service agreement is for the ground water sampling and analysis of the 23 monitoring weeks at the Municipal Landfill. The sampling is done on a quarterly basis and is a TNRCC requirement of our expanded landfill permit. The Professional Services Procurement Act, Chapter 2254 of the Government Code requires the selection of a Professional Service Provider be determined on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications to perform the services and at a fair and reasonable price. ETTL Engineers and Consultant was chosen for this phase of the project based upon a very successful and satisfactory performance of the first phase of the Hydrogeological Consulting and Analytical Services at the Landfill. The earlier phase included the installation of the 23 wells currently being monitored. The rates for engineers, technicians and clerical assistance compare favorable with other professional service providers under contract to the City of Denton. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this Professional Service Agreement and Purchase Order 03164 to ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc., be approved in the amount of $46,215.25. PRINICPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc. 1717 East Erwin Tyler, TX 75702 Agenda Infommtion Sheet February 15, 2000 Page 2 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Each of the 23 monitoring wells are sampled on a quarterly basis. FISCAL INFORMATION: Funding for this ground water monitoring service is available 'from the FY 2000 budget (630- 024-0803-8502). Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Purchase Order 03164 to ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc. 1332.AGENDA ATTAc~-~IT 1 0 o (33 0 o o o o o (~ t~ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ETTL ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS, INC., FOR HYDROGEOLOGICAL CONSULTING AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES PERTAINING TO THE CITY OF DENTON LANDFILL (MSw PERMIT NO. 1590A); AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PSA 2475 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR HYDROGEOLOGICAL CONSULTING AND ANALYSIS AT THE LANDFILL AWARDED TO ETTL ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $46,215.25). WHEREAS, the City Council deems that it is in the public interest to engage ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc., a'Corporation, of Tyler, Texas (!'ETTL"), to provide professional hydrogeological consulting and analytical services for the City pertaining to the City of Denton Landfill (MSW Permit No. 1590A); and WHEREAS, the City staff has reported to the City Council that there is a substantial need for the above-referenced professional consulting services, and that limited City staff cannot adequately perform the specialized services and tasks with its own personnel; and WHEREAS, Chapter 2254 of the Texas Government .Code, known as the "Professional Services Procurement Act", generally provides that a City may not select a provider of professional services on the basis of competitive bids, but must select the provider on the basis of demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications, and for a fair and reasonable price; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1: That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a Professional Services Agreement with ETTL Engineers & Consultants Inc., a Corporation, of Tyler, Texas, for professional hydr°geological consulting and analytical services pertaining to the City of Denton Landfill; in substantially the form of the Professional Services Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herewith by reference. SECTION 2: That the award of this Agreement by the City is on the basis of the demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications of ETTL and the ability of ETTL to perfmm the services needed by the City for a fair and reasonable price. SECTION3: That the expenditure of funds as provided in the attached Professional Services Agreement is hereby authorized. SECTION 4: That the above and foregoing Professional Services Agreement is hereby ratified, confirmed, and retroactively approved, and shall be effective from and after October 1, 1999. SECTION 5: That except as otherwise provided in Section 4 above, this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this thc day0f ,2000. SACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\OO\ETrL Ehgineers PSA - SW or&doc STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR HYDROGEOLOGICAL CONSULTING AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES PERTAINING TO THE CITY OF DENTON LANDFILL THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the [st day of February, 2000, by and betWeen the City of Denton, Texas, a Texas Municipal Corporation, with its principal office at 215 East McKinney Street, Denton, Texas 76201 (hereinafter "OWNER"); and ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc., a Corporation, with its corporate office at 1717 East Envin Street, Tyler, Texas 75702, (hereinafter "CONSULTANT'); the parties acting herein, by and through their duly- authorized representatives and officers. WITNESSETH, that in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto do mutually AGREE as follows: ARTICLE I EMPLOYMENT OF CONSULTANT The OWNER hereby contracts with CONSULTANT, as an independent contractor, and the CONSULTANT hereby agrees to perform the services herein in connection with the Project as stated in the Articles to follow, with diligence and in accordance with the professional standards customarily obtained for sUCh services in the State of Texas. The professional services set forth herein are in connection with the following described project (the "Project"): Providing professional hydrogeological consulting and analytical services pertaining to the City of Denton Landfill (MSW Permit No. 1590A) for the tWelve-month period beginning on October 1, 1999 and ending on September 30, 2000. ETTL shall serve as the OWNER's consultant relative to all landfill groundwater and methane data accumulation, data review, reporting, and general consulting services, where needed on the Project. ARTICLE II SCOPE OF SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall perform the following Basic Services in a professional manner: To perform all those services as are set forth in the CONSULTANT's final, revised Proposal to the City of Denton, contained in that certain five (5) page letter from Les A. Jeske, Manager of Hydrogeological Services of CONSULTANT to David Dugger, Landfill Superintendent of OWNER, dated January 12, 2000, which letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated herewith by reference. B. If there is any conflict that arises between the terms of this Agreement and the Exhibit attached to this Agreement, then the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control over the terms and conditions of the attached Exhibit. ARTICLE III ADDITIONAL SERVICES Any Additional Services to be performed by CONSULTANT, if authorized by OWNER, which are not included as Basic Services in the above-described Scope of Services, set forth in Article II above, shall be later agreed-upon by OWNER and CONSULTANT, who shall determine, in writing, the scope of such Additional Services, the amount of compensation for such additional services, and other essential terms pertaining to the provision of such Additional Services by CONSULTANT. ARTICLE IV PERIOD OF SERVICE This Agreement is hereby ratified by the parties, and the parties agree that this Agreement' shall be retroactively effective as of October 1, 1999, upon its execution by OWNER and CONSULTANT, and upon the issuance of a notice to proceed by the OWNER, and shall remain in force for the period which may reasonably be required for the completion of the Project, including Additional Services, if any, and any required extensions approved by the OWNER, or until September 30, 2000, whichever event shall first occur. This Agreement may be sooner terminated in accordance with the provisions hereof. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE IN THE PERFORMANCE AND COMPLETION OF THIS AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT shall make all reasonable .efforts to complete the services set forth herein as expeditiously as possible and to meet the schedule(s) reasonably established by the OWNER, acting through its Director of Solid Waste or his designee. ARTICLE V COMPENSATION A. COMPENSATION TERMS: "Direct Non-Labor Expense" is defined as that expense [other than "per diem" expense], based upon actual cost, for any out-of-pocket expense reasonably incurred by the CONSULTANT related to its performance of th/s Agreement, for long distance telephone charges, telecopy charges, messenger services, printing and reproduction expenses, out-of-pocket expenses for purchased computer time, prudently incurred travel expenses related to the work on the Project, and similar incidental expenses incurred in connection with the Project. B. BILLING AND PAYMENT: For and in consideration of the professional services to be performed by CONSULTANT herein, OWNER agrees to pay CONSULTANT, based upon the satisfactory completion of the Basic Services tasks set forth in the Scope of Services ~ shown in Article II above; as follows: CONSULTANT shall perform its work on this Project on an hourly fee basis, Co Do plus reimbursement for all reasonably incurred out-of-pocket expenses, billed monthly. CONSULTANT shall bill fi.om time sheets, in minimum ¼ hour increments of time, at the rates and subject to the terms set forth in CONSULTANT's "Cost Estimate" which is contained in Exhibit "A" heretofore described in Article II. A. OWNER shall pay to CONSULTANT for its professional services performed, and for its Out-of pocket expenses incurred in the Project, a total amount not to exceed $ 46,215.25. 2. Partial payments to the CONSULTANT will be made monthly based on the percent of actual completion of the Basic Services, rendered to and approved by the OWNER through its Director of Solid Waste or his designee. However, under no circumstances shall any monthly statement for services exceed the value of the work perfomsed at the time a statement is rendered. The OWNER may withhold the final ten (10%) percent of the above not-to-exceed amount until satisfactory completion of the Project by CONSULTANT. 3. Nothing contained in this Article shall require the OWNER to pay for any work that is not submitted in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER shall not be' required to make any payments to CONSULTANT at any time when CONSULTANT is in default under this Agreement. 4. It is specifically understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT shall not be authorized to undertake any work pursuant to this Agreement which would require additional payments by the OWNER for any charge, expense or reimbursement above the not-to-exceed amount as stated hereinabove, without first having obtained the prior written authorization of the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall not proceed to perform any services to be later provided for under Article III. "Additional Services" without first obtaining prior written authorization from the OWNER. ADDITIONAL SERVICES: For Additional Services authorized in writing by the OWNER in Article Ill. hereinabove, CONSULTANT shall be paid based on a to-be-agreed- upon Schedule of Charges. Payments for Additional Services shall be due and payable upon submission by the CONSULTANT, and shall be in accordance with Article V.B. hereinabove2 Statements for Basic Services and any Additional Services shall be submitted to OWNER no more frequently than once monthly. PAYMENT: If the OWNER fails to make payments due the CONSULTANT for services and expenses within sixty (60) days after receipt of the CONSULTANT's undisputed statement thereof, the amounts due the CONSULTANT will be increased by the rate of one percent (1%) per month from and after the said sixtieth (60th) day, and in addition, thereafter, the CONSULTANT may, at, er giving ten (10) days written notice to the OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement until the CONSULTANT has been paid in full for all amounts- then due and owing, and not disputed by OWNER, for services, expenses and charges. Provided, however, nothing herein shall require the OWNER to pay the late charge of one percent (1%) per month as set forth herein, if the OWNER reasonably determines that the CONSULTANT's work is not submitted in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, in accordance with Article V. B. of this Agreement, and OWNER has promptly notified CONSULTANT of that fact in writing. Page 3 of 10 ARTICLE VI OBSERVATION AND REVIEW OF THE WORK The CONSULTANT will exercise reasonable care and due diligence in discovering and promptly reporting to the OWNER any defects or deficiencies in the work of CONSUL'EANT. ARTICLE VII OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS All documents prepared or furnished by the CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of service and shall become the property of the OWNER upon the termination of this Agreement. The CONSULTANT is entitled to retain copies of all such documents. The documents prepared and furnished by the CONSULTANT are intended only to be applicable to this project and OWNER's use of these documents in other projects shall be at OWNER's sole risk and expense. In the event the OWNER uses the Agreement in another project or for other purposes than specified herein any of the information or materials developed pursuant to this agreement,' CONSULTANT is released from any and all liability relating to their use in that project. ARTICLE ~ INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT shall provide services to OWNER as an independent contractor, not as an employee of the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall not have or claim any right arising from employee status: ARTICLE IX INDEMNITY AGREEMENT The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and save and hold harmless the OWNER and its officials, officers, agents, attomeys and employees fi'om and against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to court costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the OWNER, and including without limitation damages for bodily and personal injury, death, or property damage, resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of the CONSULTANT or its officers, shareholders, agents, attorneys and employees in the execution, operation, or performance of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create a liability to any person who is not a party to this Agreement and nothing herein shall waive any of the party's defenses, both at law or equity, to any claim, cause of action or litigation filed by anyone not a party to this Agreement, including the defense of governmental inmaunity, which defenses are hereby expressly reserved. ARTICLE X INSURANCE During the performance of the Services under this Agreement~ CONSULTANT shall maintain the following insurance with an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Texas by the State Insurance Board or any successor agency, that has a rating with A. M. Best Rate Carriers of at least an "A-" or above: Aa Bo Do Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence and not less than $1,000,000 in the aggregate, and with property damage limits of not less than $100,000 for each occurrence and not less than $100,000 in the aggregate. Automobile Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $1,000,000 for each person and not less than $1,000,000 for each accident and with property damage limits for not less than $100,000 for each accident. Worker's Compensation Insurance in accordance with statutory requirements, and Employer's Liability Insurance with limits of not less than $100,000 for each accident. Professional Liability Insurance or appropriate Errors & Omissions Insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 annual aggregate. aa CONSULTANT shall furnish insurance certificates or insurance policies at the OWNER's request to evidence such coverages. The insurance policies shall name the OWNER as an additional insured on all such policies to the extent that is legally possible, and shall contain a provision that such insurance shall not be cancelled or modified without thirty (30) days prior · written notice to OWNER and CONSULTANT. In such event, the CONSULTANT shall, prior to the effective date of the change or cancellation of coverage, deliver copies of any such substitute policies, furnishing at least the same policy limits and coverage, to OWNER. ARTICLE )ti ARBITRATION AND ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties will make efforts to settle any disputes arising under this Agreement by submitting the dispute to arbitration or other means of alternate dispute resolution such as mediation. However, no arbitration or other form of alternate dispute resolution arising out of, or relating to this Agreement involving one party's disagreement may include the other party to the disagreement without the other's approval. ARTICLE XII TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, either party may terminate this Agreement by providing thirty O0) days advance written notice to the other party. This Agreement may alternatively be terminated in whole or in part in the event of either party substantially failing to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. No such termination will be effected unless the other party is given (1) written notice (delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested) of intent to terminate and setting forth the reasons specifying the nonperformance or other reason(s), and not less than thirty (30) calendar days to cure the failure; and (2) an oppommity for consultation with the terminating party prior to termination. C. If the Agreement is terminated prior to completion of the services to be provided hereunder, CONSULTANT shall immediately cease all services upon receipt of the written notice of termination from OWNER, and shall render a final bill for services to the OWNER within twenty (20) days al~er the date of termination. The OWNER shall pay CONSULTANT for all services properly rendered and satisfactorily performed, and for reimbursable expenses prior to notice of termination being received by CONSULTANT, in accordance with Article V. of this Agreement. Should the OWNER subsequently contract with a new consultant for the continuation of services on the Project, CONSULTANT shall cooperate in providing information to the OWNER and to the new consultant. If applicable, OWNER shall allow CONSULTANT a reasonable time to transition and to mm over the Project to a new consultant. CONSULTANT shall turn over all documents prepared or furnished by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement to the OWNER on or before the date of termination, but may maintain copies of such documents for its files. ARTICLE XIII RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES Approval of the work by the OWNER shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, or agents, for the accuracy and competency of their work performed pursuant to this Agreement; nor shall such approval by the OWNER be deemed as an assumption of such responsibility by the OWNER for any .defect in the work prepared by the CONSULTANT, its principals, officers, employees, and agents. ARTICLE XIV NOTICES All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under this Agreement shall be personally delivered to; or telecopied to; or mailed to the respective parties by depositing same in the United States mail at the addresses shown below, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, unless otherwise specified herein. To CONSULTANT: To OW2qER: ETTL Engineers & Consultants, Inc. Les A. Jeske, Mgr. of Hydrogeological Services 1717 East Erwin Stxeet Tyler, Texas 75702 Fax: (903) 595-6113 City of Denton, Texas Charles S. Watkins, Director, Solid Waste 901-A Texas Street Denton, Texas 76201 Fax: (940) 349-7303 All notices under this Agreement shall be effective upon their actual receipt by the party to. whom such notice is given, or three (3) days at~er mailing of the notice, whichever event shall first occur. ARTICLE XV ENTIIKE AGREEMENT This Agreement consisting of ten (10) pages and one (I) Exhibit constitutes the complete and final expression of the Agreement of the parties and is intended as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of their agreements, and supersedes all prior contemporaneous 'offers, promises, representations, negotiations, discussions, communications, understandings, and agreements which may have been made in connection with the subject matter of this Agreement. ARTICLE XVI SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Agreement is found or deemed by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, it shall be considered severable fi.om the remainder of this Agreement, and shall not cause the remainder to be invalid or unenforceable. In such event, the parties shall refo,m this Agreement, to the extent reasonably possible, to replace such stricken provision with a valid and enforceable provision which comes as close as possible to expressing the original intentions of the parties respecting any such stricken provision. ARTICLE XVII COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS CONSULTANT shall comply with all federal, state, local laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances applicable to the work performed by CONSULTANT hereunder, as they may now read or as they may hereafter be amended. ARTICLE XVIII DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED In perforn~ing the services required hereunder, CONSULTANT shall not discriminate against · any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age, or physical handicap. ARTICLE XIX PERSONNEL ho CONSULTANT represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required to perform all the services required under this Agreement. Such personnel shall not be employees or officers of, nor have any contractual relations with the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall immediately inform the OWNER in writing of any conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest that CONSULTANT may discover, or which may arise'during the term of this Agreement. OWNER requires that CONSULTANT carefully safeguard all documents, data, and information provided by OWNER to CONSULTANT incident to this engagement. CONSULTANT recognizes that such documents; data; and information; involve sensitive, competitive issues; in some cases, confidential information; and in some cases proprietary information; and the disclosure of such information by CONSULTANT to any third party, without the express written consent of OWNER, is expressly prohibited by OWNER, and would likely cause economic loss and detriment to OWNER. Any such unauthorized disclosure of information by CONSULTANT shall constitute an act of default respecting this Agreement. CONSULTANT represents to OWNER that it will safeguard OWNER's. information and will, upon OWNER'S reasonable request, provide OWNER with CONSULTANT'S policies regarding its procedures for identifying conflicts of interest, and its procedures and safeguards which are in place which would apply to CONSULTANT'S treatment and handling of OWNER'S documents, data, and information during this engagement. All services required hereunder will be performed by CONSULTANT or under its direct supervision. All personnel engaged in performing the work provided for in this Agreement, shall be qualified, and shall be authorized and permitted under applicable state and local laws to perform such services. ARTICLE XX ASSIGNABILITY The CONSULTANT shall not assign any interest in this Agreement and shall not transfer any interest in this Agreement (whether by assignment, novation or otherwise) without the prior written consent of the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall promptly notify OWNER of any change of' its name as well as of any material change in its corporate structure, its location, and/or in its operations. ARTICLE XXI MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, limitation herein contained shall .be valid unless in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged therewith. No evidence of any waiver or modification shall be offered or received in evidence in any proceeding arising between the parties hereto out of or affecting this Agreement, or the rights or obligations of the parties' hereunder, unless such waiver or modification is in writing, duly executed. The parties further agree that the provisions of this Article will not be waived unless as herein set forth. ARTICLE XXII MISCELLANEOUS CONSULTANT agrees that OWNER shall, until the expiration of three (3) years at, er the final payment made by OWNER under this Agreement, have access to and the fight to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of the CONSULTANT involving transactions relating to this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees that OWNER shall have access during normal working hours to all necessary CONSULTANT facilities and shall be provided adequate and appropriate working space in order to conduct examinations or audits in compliance with this Article. OWNER shall give CONSULTANT reasonable. advance notice of all intended examinations or audits. Venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton County, Texas. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. C. For purposes of this Agreement, the parties agree that Les A. Jeske ("Jeske") shall serve as the Project Manager of CONSULTANT respecting this engagement. This Agreement has been entered into with the understanding that Jeske shall serve as thc CONSULTANT's Project Manager and will be the key person serving the OWNER on this Project. Any proposed changes requested by CONSULTANT, respecting Jeske serving as the Project Manager on the Project, shall be subject to the approval of the OWNER, which approval the OWNER shall not unreasonably withhold. Nothing herein shall limit CONSULTANT from using other qualified and competent members of its firm to perform the other services required herein, under its supervision or control. coNSULTANT shall commence, carry on, and complete its work on the Project with all applicable dispatch, and in a sound, economical, efficient manner, and in accordance with the provisions hereof. In accomplishing the Project, CONSULTANT shall take Such steps as are appropriate to ensure that the work involved is properly coordinated with related work being carried on by the OWNER. The OWNER shall assist and fully cooperate with CONSULTANT by placing at the CONSULTANT's disposal all available information pertinent to the Project, including previous reports, any other data relative to the Project and arranging for the access to, and make all provisions for the CONSULTANT to enter in or upon, public and private property as required for the CONSULTANT to perform professional services under this Agreement. OWNER and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT is entitled to rely upon background information furnished to it by OWNER without the need for further inquiry or investigation into such information. The captions of this Agreement are for informational purposes only and shall not in any way affect the substantive terms or conditions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Denton, Texas has executed this Agreement in four (4) original counterparts, by and through its duly-authorized City Manager; and CONSULTANT has executed this Agreement by and through its duly-authorized undersigned officer, on this the day of ,2000. "CITY" CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: Michael W. Jez, City Manager By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY By: ~ "CONSULTANT'. ETTL ENGINEERING & CONSULTANTS, INC. A Corporation ATTEST: 'By: Secretary January 12, 2000 · Tyler, Texas David Dugger Landfill Superintendent City of Denton 901-A Texas St. Demon, Tx. JAN 1 3 2000 CITY OF DENTO~ LEGAL ~Ep~ PROPOSAL HYDROGEOLOGICAL CONSULTING AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES CITY OF DENTON LANDFILL (MSW PERMIT NO. 1590A) DENTON (DENTON COUNTY), TEXAS Dear Mr. Dugger: In accordance with your recent request, ETTL Engineers & Consultants Inc. (ETTL) is pleased to submit the following proposal for providing hydrogeological consulting and analytical services at the City of Denton (the City) landfill for a one-year period commencing October 1, 1999. ETTL will serve as the City's professional services consultant relative to all landfill ground-water monitoring, data review, reporting, and general geological and hydrogeological services, where needed. Scope of Services As we understand it, the work will consist of conducting q-arterly background ground-water monitoring events and reporting in accordance with the existing Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission- (TNRCC) approved Ground-water Sampling and Analysis Plan (GWSAP) and 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) {}330.233-330.241 at the above-referenced facility. The following discussion provides a detailed explanation of the services provided. Hydrogeological Consulting - includes 1) generation and on-going maintenance of a data base of existing ground-water chemical d_a_t~ (collected as part of the first four background ground-water monitoring evems), 2) managemem and direct supervision of ground-water monitoring events, 3) review of analytical data, 4) preparation of quarterly ground-water monitoring report, 4) preliminary investigation of site-appropriate statistical analysis methods, and 5) correspondence with TNRCC regarding ground-water quality issues. The City HOME OFFICE: 1717 East Erwin Street Tyter, Texas 75702-6398 Office: (903) 595.4421 Lab: (903) 595-6402 Fax: (903) 595-6113 ~OClETY MEMSERS~41~: AS.TM. A.C .IL. TEXARKANA: 210 Beech Street Texarkana, P4kan..qas 71854 Office: (870) 772-0013 Fax: (870) 772-0320 LONGVIEW: 707 West Cotto~ Street Longview, Texas 75604-5505, Office: (903) 758-4)402 Fax: (903) 758-8245 TC.E.L.. ,.S.C.E. rSPE. ,S.PE. A.,C.E.A.C.S. ',-.r "A" Mr. David Dugger, City of Denton Jam~sry 12, 2000 Page 2 will be continually informed of all monitoring results and provided on-going recommendations and opinions regarding necessary action, if needed. Analytical Services - includes sampling and analysis of ground-water samples collected at landfill facility in accord,nee with TNRCC-approved GWSAP. A total of 20 monitoring wells, which comprise the ~acility (MSW Permit No. 1590A) ground-water monitoring system, and 3 monitoring wells, which comprise the former facility (MSW Permit No. 1590) system, will be gauged, purged, and sampled using dedicated, low-flow pumps and a Well Wi:,ard® micropurge system. All analyses will be performed using EPA-approved methods at ETI'L's laboratory located in Tyler, Texas; SanitasTM for Ground Water - SanitasTM, a statistical analysis software package capable ofperfo,'adag statistical evaluation of ground-water quality data, will be purchased to aid in performing statistical evaluations. All services provided will be coordinated and performed under the direct supervision of Mr. Les Jeskc, Manager of Hydrogeological Services. Low-flow purging and sampling activities will be conducted using instruments and equipmem owned and mair~ained by the City. In the event the instruments are found in need of repair, we will notify the City promptly to insure minimal delays in completing the scheduled monitoring events. The City wt]l he responm'ble for all costs associated with repairs and on-going maintenance. Cost Estimate Based upon the above scope of services and our understanding of the project, we have prepared the attached Cost Estimate which shows the estimated quantities of work and unit fees. It is estimated that the total amount of this contract for October 1, 1999 - September 30, 2000 should not exceed $ 46,215.25. In the evem additional services are required beyond those detailed in this contract, such will be performed on a time and materials basis. You will be notified if unforeseen conditions are encounters!, or are is a necessity to change the scope of work. Additional work will not be performed without first obtaining your approval of the additional costs. An invoice will be submitted at the completion of each quarterly event. It will be based upon the actual work performed and the unit prices show~ Mr. David Dugger, City of DentOn January 12, 2000 Page 3 in the attached Probable Cost Estimate. If you have any questions after reviewing this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact us. We look forward to working with you in this endeavor. truly yours, ETFL ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS INC. Les A. Jeske Manager of Hydrogeologicai Services Attach: Pmhable Cost Estimate cc: Mike Copeland, City of Denton ACCEPTED AND AUTHORIZED dayof David Dugger, Landfill Superintendent, City of Denton ,2000, Item 1. PROBABLE COST ESTIMATE Hydrogeological Consulting and Analytical Services City of Denton Landfill (MSW Permit No. 1590A) Denton (Denton County), Texas Hydrogeoiogist (construct ground-water chemistry data base) Est. 8 hours ~ $80.00/hour Snnitas for Ground Water Software Liceme (cost +15%) Ouarter _ly Ground-water Monitoring Event: SUBTOTAL ......... $ + Cost $ 640.00 1,190.25 1,830.25 Hydrogcologist (ground-water chemistry, data base update, and report preparation) Est. 8 hours ~ $80.00/hour $ 640.00 CADD Operator (ground-water contour map) Est. 2 hours ~ $35.00/hour 70.00 Environmental Technician Est. ~6 hours ~ $30.00/hour 780.00 Subsistence (lodging and meals) Est. 2 days ~ $70.00/day 140:00 Mileage Est. 300 miles ~ $0.40/mile 120.00 Turbidity Meter Est. 2 days ~ $50.00/day I00.00 VOCs, Metals, and Inorganic Analyses - MSW Permit No. 1590A (Table 5-1 Constituents GWSAP,) Est. 25 samt~les (20 wells & 5 QA/QC samples) ~ $498.00/smnple 12,450.00 - Fom~er MSW Permit No. 1590 (VOCs only) Est. 3 samples ~ $165.00/sample 495.00 QUARTERLY SUBTOTAL ......... $ 14,795.00 ANNUAL TOTAL ......... $ 46,215.25 Page I of 2 PROBABLE COST ESTIMATE - CONTINUED Hydrogeological Consulting and Analytical Services City of Denton Landfill (MSW Permit No. 1590A) Denton (Denton County), Texas Note: It is strongly recommended that the City purchase an ongoing annual maintenance contract for SanitasTM for Ground Water at a cost of $339.25 per year. The cost for this contract would be due 12 months after making the initial sol, ware license purchase. The software license will he purchased during the third calender quarter of 2000. Page 2 of 2 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Electric Howard Martin, 349-8232 Agenda Item Date SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PROVIDING FOR, AUTHORIZING, AND APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF BILLBOARD COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING FROM DAUM OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY, 1NC. RESPECTING DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC, WHICH PERTAINS TO THE LEASE OF REAL ESTATE, AND WHICH ALSO IS AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 252 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING; PROVIDING FOR RATIFICATION AND RETROACTIVE APPROVAL; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (PURCHASE ORDER 03166 TO DAUM OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $28,200) BACKGROUND: A customer survey, conducted by the University of North Texas, concluded that DME customers were not aware they were being served by a customer-owned municipal electric utility, and did not have the desired image or brand loyalty to DME necessary to be successful in a deregulated market. In an effort to build brand identity, and compete with CoServ's aggressive billboard advertising campaign in DME's market territory, DME decided to obtain billboards to build brand awareness. Due to the City sign ordinance, Section 33-93 in the City Code of Ordinances, which does not allow the construction of new billboards, it was determined that Denton Municipal Electric would have to obtain an existing billboard or billboards. Daum Outdoor Advertising, Whitco Outdoor Advertising, and Eller Media Company, the three vendors in the area targeted, were all contacted to obtain information on billboard availability and cost. Billboard availability was low, due to the limited number in the area and the high demand. Companies that were currently renting the billboards had the choice to renew their contracts before the billboard was available to be leased by other organizations. With the high demand present in the billboard marketplace and the low supply available, bidding and price negotiation was not an option. DME reviewed the limited number of billboards available and selected two billboards in the desired locations that allowed for optimum visibility. Denton Municipal Electric contracted with Daum Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc. in April of 1999, for the rental and artwork of one billboard located at 1-35 and Teasley Lane. This location was chosen because it had an 18-hour viewing of 85,000 vehicles thus, reaching a large portion of our current customer base. The cost for the artwork and billboard rental space was divided into two (2) separate $8400 installations, over two (2) separate fiscal years, with a total amount of $16,800 for the 12-month period. The Public Utility Board (PUB) approved this contract on March 15, 1999, and suggested contracting for another billboard in the Corinth area. In response to the PUB's recommendation Denton Municipal Electric contracted a second billboard. The Marketing Division contracted with Daum Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc., the rental and artwork of an existing billboard located northbound on the left-hand side of 1-35 and Shady Shores. The cost for artwork and billboard rental space was divided into two (2) separate installations, in the amounts of $3,300 and $19,800, over two separate fiscal years with a total amount of $23,100. The starting date for the contract was August 3, 1999, for a 14-month period. Both billboards chosen were existing prior to use by Denton Municipal Electric. Therefore, no additional visual impact has been caused. OPTIONS: 1. Approve - Continue to strengthen awareness of the existence of DME market. 2. Reject - The lack of name recognition and awareness of Denton Municipal Electric. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the two promotional billboard contracts. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: 1-35 at Teasley Lane: April 1, 1999 through March 31, 2000 1-35 at Shady Shores-Northmost/Northbound/Left Hand Side: August 3, 1999 through September 3, 2000 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commission): The PUB approved the rental of current billboard at 1-35 and Teasley Lane and requested the rental of another billboard in the Corinth area on March 15, 1999, by a unanimous vote. FISCAL INFORMATION: The cost for the rental and artwork of the initial billboard located at 1-35 and Teasley Lane for the 2000 budget year is $8400. The cost for artwork and billboard rental space for the second billboard located at 35 and Shady Shores-northmost/northbound/left hand side for the 2000 budget year is $19,800. The Marketing Division chose to separate the payments of both billboards into two (2) separate installations over two (2) different fiscal years in order to track the actual fiscal year budgeting process. BID INFORMATION: Daum Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc. is sole owner of the billboard located at 1-35 and Teasley Lane. Daum Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc. is sole owner of the billboard located northbound on the left-hand side ofi-35 and Shady Shores. Sharon Mays Director of Electric Utilities Prepared by: Jessica James Public Information Specialist 1333. AGENDA ATTACHMENT 1: Purchase Order 03166 to Daum Advertising Reviewed by: Tom D. Shaw Purchasing Agent ATTACHMENT 1 O d ,~I ~ ~0 ~0 ~o Xz .~ ~m~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cq 0 0 0 CO O1 0 0 0 ~) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PROVIDING FOR, AUTHORIZING, AND APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF BILLBOARD COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING FROM DAUM OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY, INC. RESPECTING DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC, WHICH PERTAINS TO THE LEASE OF REAL ESTATE, AND WHICH ALSO IS AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 252 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING; PROVIDING FOR RATIFICATION AND RETROACTIVE APPROVAL; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (PURCHASE ORDER 03166 TO DAUM ADVERTISING COMPANY, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 28,200). WHEREAS, in order to compete in an emerging restructured, deregulated, and competitive electric service marketplace, and for the purpose of potentially increasing its market share and presence, Denton Municipal Electric ("DME") has undertaken a plan to advertise in order to improve customer awareness and its market visibility in the greater Denton area; and WHEREAS, DME staff, in order to reach a large portion of its present and potential future customer base, and considering the results of a recent customer survey conducted by the University of North Texas, believes that a cost-effective way to advertise in its market is by the use of existing billboards in strategic, heavily-traveled locations along Interstate Highway 1-35E, in the South area of the City; and WHEREAS, DME staff selected two available locations for suitable billboard commemial advertising, each of which is in a strategic location to achieve the desirable traffic levels, and each of which is the subject of a separate Purchase Order and Display Contract; and both of which billboards selected were in existence prior to the City's use of them, so that no additional visual impact will be caused by the City's action; and WHEREAS, Section 252.022(a)(6) of the Texas Local Government Code provides that procurements of real property need not be submitted to the competitive bid process; and WHEREAS, Section 252.022(a)(7) of the Texas Local Government Code further provides that procurements of certain items or services that are only available from one source, as described therein, need not be submitted to the competitive bid process; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to lease real property and purchase billboard commercial advertising pertaining to Denton Municipal Electric ("DME") from Daum Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc. ("Daum"), of Dallas, Texas, which advertising services and optinmm real estate locations are presently available [rom only one source, and are permitted in accordance with Section 252.022 of the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, THE City Council deems it in the public interest for the City to enter into Display Contract No. 1 and Display Contract No. 2 with Daum to further the advertising program of DME as well as to enhance DME's contribution to the City; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the following purchase of services, as described in the "Purchase Orders" listed below, and on file in the office of the City's Purchasing Agent, is hereby authorized and approved: PURCHASE ORDER VENDOR AMOUNT 03166 DAUM ADVERTISING $ 28,200 SECTION 2. That the acceptance and approval of the above items shall not constitute a contract between the City and Daum submitting the price quotation for such billboard commercial advertising until Daum shall comply with all requirements specified by the City's Purchasing Department. SECTION3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any contracts or other related documents relating to the item specified in Section 1. hereof, and the expenditure of funds pursuant to said contracts or written orders, are hereby authorized. SECTION4. That Display Contract #1 is hereby ratified and retroactively approved, and shall be effective from and after April 1, 1999; and that Display Contract #2 is hereby ratified and retroactively approved, and shall be effective from and after August 3, 1999. SECTION 5. That except as otherwise provided in Section 4 above, this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY By ~ 6 aoc S:\O:ur D~Billboard Ls Ord-rO 0316. ADVERTISING COMPANY, INC. 4455 LBJ Pceeway, Suite 811, Dallas, TX 75244 Telephone #972~980~2500 Fax #972-392~4680 Displ.a}r Contract No. I CONTRACT for Outdoor Advertising One (1) Display(s) DAUM ADVERTISING COMPANY, INC. Jessica James, Denton Municipal Electric Date Advertiser Contract No. 030499-1 City of Denton, Texas 901-ATexas St. Commodity Utilities - Electric Denton, TX 76201 Gentlemen: Start Date: 4/1/99 or installation date of ad copy. 1. For the consideration of the Monthly Rental (Monthly Rental) as stated below paid by the undersigned Advertiser (Advertiser) to Daum Advertising Company, Inc. (Daum) and other good and valuable consideration as stated herein, Daum and Advertiser agree to place in service and maintain outdoor advertising Display(s) (Display) pursuant to the terms and conditions as described on both sides of this Contract(Contrac0 for a period of (the Term): Twelve(12) Months 2. This Contract shall begin on the date (Start Date) as specified above and should the Start Date fall on any day other than the flint day for any given month, the remainder of that month is defined as the proration period. LOCATION and DESCRIPTION CLASSIFICATION SIZES POSTINGS MONTHLY RENTAL 14' x48' 35 @ Teasley Lane Southmost/Southbound/Right Ha~ Paint Bulletin d One(l) $1,400.00 net Early Termination by Advertiser: This is a non-cancelable contract. Advertiser may request to be relieved of their commitment under this Contract prior to the expiration of the Term pending written notice to Daum. Upon receipt of such notice Daum will begin soliciting the Display to New Accounts (New Account), Advertiser will be liable for all Monthly Rental up to the Start Date for any New Account who has contracted with Daum for the Display location and within the Term both of which are defined on the front hereof. Advertiser will pay Daum all costs associated with the Posting for the New Account. Postings provided Advertiser as stated on the front of this Contract and not utiYmed by Advertiser prior to the Start Date for the New Account cannot be used to pay the Posting costs for the New Account. This Contract will terminate at the sole discretion of Danm effective Start Date for the New Account only if all Monthly Rental and New Account Posting costs as discussed above have been remitted to the office of Daum. 3. Illumination: All Displays are illuminated unless otherwise stated. Normal hours of illumination are from dusk until 12:00 AM. 24-Hour illumination will be provided per a quote basis. Advertiser request all~night illumination and agrees to pay an additional monthly charge of $ -0~ per month each month of this Contract. 4. Production: Daum will implement the production of Advertiser's art (Posting) immediately upon receipt of camera-ready art signed and accepted by Advertiser. One "Posting" is one production from one piece of artwork for the Display, whether hand painted or computer generated vinyl. One Posting includes any vinyl or finished production provided by Advertiser or Daum. Danm will provide the number of Posting(s) as shown on the Contract, and any Posting in addition to that shown will be paid by Advertiser, with costs for additional Posting being on a per quote basis. 5. Term: The term of this Contract (Term) shall include any proration period plus the number of months as specified above, the last calendar day of the last month of the Term shall be the expiration date(Expiration Date) of the Contract. 6. Payment Policy: The first Monthly Rental must be submitted prior to Start Data All Monthly Rentals thereafter including any prorated portion are due and payable on the first of each month for the entire Term of this Contract. 7. Expiration: Advertiser agrees to notify Daum in writing ninety (90) days prior to the Expiration Date if it desires to terminate the Contract at the Expiration Date. Unless Advertiser so notifies Daum, the parties agree that this Contract shall remain in force following such Expiration Date until either party thereafter gives to the other sixty (60) days prior written notice of its intent to terminate and, then, shall expire upon the expiration of the sixty day period. 8. Cut-outs: In addition to the forgoing Monthly Rental. Advertiser shall pay Daum for any pictoriai, cut out, embellishment or any other special treatment for the Display within thirty (30) days of its receipt of notice from Dgum of the cost thereof. Said cost shall be calculated at a rate of ($ 9.q 00(n~t) ) per square foot. This Contract island acc~bject to the conditions stipulated on both sides. City of Denton, Texas Signed and accepted by: ' ' Advertiser Jcl'~y r.iDaum, President ~tvertising Company, Inc. Printed Name Michael W. Jez. Gib/. Manager Billing Address City of Denton, Texas /14 ¢-~._..__ / / . 901-A Texas St. Date entered ~ Denton, TX 76201 Mtested: Jennifer Walters, City Secretary Approved as to legal form: Herbert L. Prouty, City Attorney Date signed By: ADVERTISING COMFANY~ INC. 4455 LBJ Freeway, Suite 811, Dallas, TX 75244 Telephone #972~980~2500 Fax #972~392-4680 CONTRACT for Outdoor Advertising DAUM ADVERTISING COMPANY, INC. Jessica James, Denton Municipal Electric One (1) Display Contract Display(s) Date Contract No. 070299-1 Advertiser City of Denton, Texas 901-A Texas St. Commodity. Utilities - Electric Denton, TX 76201 Start Date: 8/3/99 Gentlemen: or installation date of ad copy. 1. For the consideration of the Monthly Rental (Monthly Rental) as stated below paid by the undersigned Advertiser (Advertiser) to Daum Advertising Company, Inc. (Daum) and other good and valuable consideration as stated herein, Daum and Advertiser agree to place in service and maintain outdoor advertising Display(s) (Display) pursuant to the terms and conditions as described on both sides of this Contract(Contract) for a period of (the Term): Fourteen(14) Months 2. This Contract shall begin on the date (Start Date) as specified above and should the Start Date fall on any day other than the fimt day for any given month, the remainder of that month is defined as the proration period. LOCATION and DESCRIPTION CLASSIFICATION SIZES POSTINGS MONTHLY RENTAL Paint Bulletin 14'x 48' One(l) $1,650.00 net 35 @ Shady Shores Northmost/Northbound/Left Hand ~arly Termination by Advertiser: This is a non~cancelable contract. Advertiser may request to be relieved of their commitment under this Contract prior to the expiration of the Term pending written notice to Daum. Upon receipt of such notice Daum will begin soliciting the Display to New Accounts (New Account), Advertiser will be liable for all Monthly Rental up to the Start Date for any New Account who has contracted with Daum for the Display location and within the Term both of which are defined on the front hereof. Advertiser will pay Daum all costs associated with the Posting for the New Account. Postings provided Advertiser as stated on the front of this Contract and not utilized by Advertiser prior to the Start Date for the New Account cannot be used to pay the Posting costs for the New Account. This Contract will terminate at the sole discretion of Daum effective Start Date for the New Account only if all Monthly Rental and New Account Posting costs as discussed above have been remitted to the office of Daum. 3. Illumination: All Displays arc illuminated unless otherwise stated. Normal hours of illumination arc from dusk until 12:9~0 AM. 24-Hour illumination will be provided per a quote basis. Advertiser request all-night illumination and agrees to pay an additional monthly charge of $ -u- per month each month of this Contract. 4. Production: Daum will implement the production of Advertiser's art (Posting) immediately upon receipt of camera~ready art signed and accepted by Advertiser. One "Posting" is one production from one piece of artwork for the Display, whether hand painted or computer generated vinyl. One Posting includes any vinyl or finished production provided by Advertiser or Daum. Daum will provide the number of Posting(s) as shown on the Contract, and any Posting in addition to that shown will be paid by Advertiser, with costs for additional Posting being on a per quote basis. 5. Term: The term of this Contract (Term) shall include any proration period phis the number of months as specified above, the last calendar day of the last month of the Term shall be the expiration date(Expiration Date) of the Contract. 6. Payment Policy: The first Monthly RentM must be submitted prior to Start Date. All Monthly Rentals thereafter including any prorated portion are due and payable on the first of each month for the entire Term of this Conlract. 7. Expiration: Advertiser agrees to notify Daum in writing ninety (90) days prior to the Expiration Date if it desires to terminate the Contract at the Expiration Date. Unless Advertiser so notifies Daum, the parties agree that this Contract shall remain in force following such Expiration Date until either party thereafter gives to the other sixty (60) days prior written notice of its intent to terminate and, then, shall expire upon the expiration of the sixty day period. 8. Cut-outs: In addition to the forgoing Monthly Rental. Advertiser shall pay Daum for any pictorial, cut out, embellishment or any other s~cial treatment for the Display within thirty (30) days of its receipt of notice from Daum of the cost thereof. Said cost shall be calculated at a rate of ($ 26.00(net) ) per square foot. This Contr~ ac. e~o the conditions stipulated on both sides. City of Denton, Texas ~11/~ ~"~ Signed and accepted by: ~/[ _~' _~r,'~.~ -- Advertiser ~[~rry/. _~[um, Pre;ident h Advertising Company, Inc. Printed Name Michael W. Jez, City Manager Billing Address City of Denton, Texas Attested: Jennifer Walters, City Secretary Approved as to legal form: Herbert L. Pcouty, City Attorney 901-A Texas St. Denton, TX 76201 Date signed AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda No.~~.,~~ Agenda Item_. AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: February 15, 2000 General Government Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, abandoning and vacating that certain street right-of-way being approximately 0.213 acre of land and being a portion of the right-of- way for Parkway Street located at the southeast comer of said street and Carroll Boulevard in the W. Neil Survey Abstract Number 971 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; reserving a utility easement, providing for a quit claim deed; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND: During the zoning case for the North Star Bank, representatives of the bank asked to purchase and agreed to maintain the Parkway Street right-of-way. City staff and the bank staff have been working on a value and a quitclaim deed. Because of the easements and flood plain that are involved, we have estimated the value to be $1.00 foot. The bank has agreed to pay that amount for approximately 9278 square feet. OPTIONS: Option One would be to retain the land and maintain it ourselves. Option Two would be to sell the right-of-way to the bank and retain an easement with the bank maintaining all of the property. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff would recommend selling to the bank and retaining an easement. EXHIBITS: Ordinance Quit Claim Deed Deputy City Manager F:\SHARED\DEPT',LGL\Our Documents\Ordinanees\00XParkway abandonment, doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, ABANDONING AND VACATING THAT CERTAIN STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING APPROXIMATELY 0.213 ACRE OF LAND AND BEING A PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PARKWAY STREET LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID STREET AND CARROLL BOULEVARD IN THE W. NElL SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 971 IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; RESERVING A UTILITY EASEMENT; PROVIDING FOR A QUIT CLAIM DEED; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton has received a request for abandonment of certain street right-of-way from Northstar Bank, the owner of property abutting said right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton has deteimined that the right-of-way to be abandoned is no longer needed for street usage; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed abandonment and sale falls under the bid exemptions set forth in Subsections 271.001(1)&(2) of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the fair market value of the street right-of-way has been determined and received by the City as required by Section 271.001 of the Local Government Code; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The street right-of-way being approximately 0.213 acre of land and being a portion of the right-of-way for Parkway Street 'located at the southeast comer of said street and Carroll Boulevard as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto by reference (called the "Property") is hereby abandoned and vacated as street right-of-way for public use; provided however, there is hereby reserved in the Property, a public utility easement for the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, repairing, and maintaining underground utility and drainage facilities; and further subject to a restrictive covenant running with the Property prohibiting the building or construction of any buildings within the Property or any other structures that may impair the use of the Property for underground utility and drainage facilities and further prohibiting the removal of any existing trees on the Property without first obtaining the written consent of the City of Denton, Texas. SECTION 2. By reason of this abandonment ordinance, the Property reverts to the abutting owner, subject to the above mentioned reserved utility easement and restrictive covenant. However, the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a quit claim deed to the abutting owner which is consistent wi'th the terms of this ordinance. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. Page 1 F:\SHARED\DEPTkLGL\Our Doeuments\Ordinances\OO~Parkway abandonment.doc PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day' of 2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: H~ ~T&7OUTY, ~7/TTO~,~,~ By: x:'c~' / ~~/ Page 2 FIELD NOTES 0.213 ACRE 9911317a BEING all that certain lot, tract or parcel of land situated in the W. Nell Survey Abstract Number 971 in the. City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, being a part of that certain tract of land designated as right-of-way on the south side of Parkway Street, a public roadway having a variable width right-of-way, and being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at an iron rod found for corner in the south line of said Parkway Street and east line of Carroll Boulevard, a public roadway, said point being the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block A, of Northstar Bank Addition, an addition to the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas according to the plat thereof recorded in Cabinet Q, Page 290, Plat Records, Denton County,. Texas; THENCE N 01° 34' 08" E, 57.05 feet with said east line of said Carroll Boulevard to an iron rod set for corner in the proposed south line of said Parkway Street; THENCE along the arc of a curve to the right having a central angle of 19° 36' 10", a radius of 600.00 feet, an arc length of 205.28 feet, whose chord bears S 80° 19' 59" E, 204.28 feet with said proposed south line of said Parkway Street to an iron md set for corner; THENCE S 01 ° 06' 32" W, 22.73 feet to an iron md found for corner, said point being the northeast corner of said Lot 1, Block A, of said Northstar Bank Addition; THENCE WEST, 202.50 feet with the north line of said Northstar Bank Addition to the PLACE OF BEGINNING and containing 0.213 acre of land. ~ ' -- · R=600. O0' " =205.2B' ~ .' . ~-~ · kc)< Of CURB · ~ · INLET ' _ ~ ~..,~-"~--.~ ~.. s o~'o~'~" ,.'~ 01'34'08"E ': ~WZTE~ ASPHALT~~ ~~22.73' N 5Z05' ~ U~T[R PARKING / pp ~ ~l~ I~" ~% ~I ~ I ~ ~ I ~ J · ON CONC. SLAB ~j:, , Ill I~ I ' '~,J. '... i III I .~ I IIIII ' J ~NORTHSTAR BANK ADDITIONh ~ , =I· i ~ CAa. ~, ~. Z t. F.H. ~__ , QUIT CLAIM DEED THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT the City of Denton, Texas, a municipal corporation of the County of Denton, State of Texas (the "Grantor"), in consideration of the sum of one dollar ($1.00) and no cents and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by the Northstar Bank of the County of Denton, State of Texas (the "Grantee"), the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does by these presents, QUIT CLAIM unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, all its right title and interest in and to that certain tract or parcel of land lying in the County of Denton and State of Texas, described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part by reference (called the "Property"); subject to the reservation of a public utility easement for the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, repairing, and maintaining underground utility and drainage facilities; and further subject to a restrictive covenant running with the Property prohibiting the building or construction of any buildings within the Property or any other structures that may impair the use of the Property for underground utility and drainage facilities (called "Reservations and Restrictions"). TO HAVE AND TO HOLD all of Grantor's right, title and interest in and to the Property unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, so that neither Grantor ~nor its successors or · assigns shall have; claim or demand any right or title to the Property or appurtenances or any part 'thereof, gave' and except the Reservations and Restrictions. Witness my hand, this the __ day of .,2000. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS By: ACKNOWLEDGMENT THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § This instrument was acknowledged before me on Michael W. J~z, City Manager, City of Denton. Michael W. Jez, City Manager , 2000 by Notary Public, in and for the State of Texas My Commission Expires: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda No. ~~ ~en(la Item Z. I - Om_ ..... AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: February 15, 2000 Planning Department David Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT - Z-99-102: (Robson Ranch Detailed Plan) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Detailed Plan for the Robson Ranch Planned Development (PD-173) encompassing approximately 1,361 acres. The property is generally located at the northeast comer of Robson Ranch Road (formerly Crawford Rd.) and Florence Road. Residential development, open space, golf course and residential sales offices are proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) with conditions. BACKGROUND The applicant has requested to rezone this property to develop a resort retirement community. ~ The subject property is located in a Planned Development (PD-173) zoning district created by Ordinance No. 99-319 on September 7, 1999. ~' The proposed development is consistent with the approved Concept plan. > No property owners were notified. There is no property in the city limits within approximately 1,000 feet of the subject site. Signs were posted on the site January 14, 2000 and notification of the public hearing was published January 16, 2000 and January 31, 2000. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ-99-102: Application Date- December 14, 1999. DRC Date(s) - January 6, 2000. P&Z Date - January 26, 2000. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted and will need to be platted prior to any development. FISCAL INFORMATION Development of this property will increase the assessed value of the city, county, and school districts. It will require no short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city. 1. P&Z RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) of this zoning request with the following condition: 1. That the Club House, Pro Shop and Sale Office site plans and elevations, that were presented at the P&Z meeting, be incorporated into the Detailed Plan. All site plans and elevations have been incorporated into the Detailed Plan and are included in the ordinance as Exhibit B (see Attachment 3). OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions. 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Report, January 26, 2000, Z-99-1002.. 2. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes from January 26, 2000. 3. Draft Ordinance. Respectfully submitted: Douglas S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development Prepared by: Development Review Manager 2 o ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Subject: Robson Ranch Detailed Plan Staff: Larry Reichhart, Development Review Manager Case Number: Z-99-102 Agenda Date: January 26,2000 Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding the Detailed Plan for Planned Development (PD-173) encompassing approximately 1,361 acres. The property is generally located at the northeast corner of Robson Ranch Road (formerly Crawford Rd.) and Florence Road. The proposal is for residential development with open space/golf course and an office site. Pr~ect Location: Size: Filename LOCATION MAP Generally located east of Florence Road approximately 500 feet north of Crawford Road within the boundaries of Robson Ranch. Approximately 1361 acres. e Applicant:/Owner: Robson Denton Development L.L.C. 9532 E. Riggs Road Sun Lakes, AZ 85248 Planned development zoning districts (PD) are intended to provide for the development of land as an integral unit for single or mixed use in accordance with a plan that may vary from the established regulations of other zoning districts forsimilarland uses. They are also meant to encourage flexible and creative planning to ensure the compatibility of land uses, to allow for the adjustment of changing demands to meet the current needs of the community, and to provide for a development that is superior to what could be accomplished in other zoning districts by meeting one or more of the following purposes: (1) Provides for the design of lots or building; increased recreation, common or open space for private or public use; berms, greenbelts, trees, shrubs or other landscaping features; parking areas, street design or access; or other development plans, amenities or features that would be of special benefit to the property users or community; (2) Protects or preserves topographical features, such as trees, creeks, ponds, floodplains, slopes or hills; or (3) Protects or preserves existing historical buildings, structures, features or places. There are three (3) types of plans that may be used in the planned development process; concept plan, development plan and detailed plan. CONCEPT PLAN - This plan is intended to be the first step in the PD process for larger or long term developments. It establishes the most general guidelines, identifying the land use types, approximate thoroughfare locations within the boundaries of the district. DEVELOPMENT PLAN - This plan is intended to be used most often as a second step in the PD process. It includes the same information that is provided on the concept plan, plus details as to the specific land uses and their boundaries. All detailed plans should be in substantial compliance with landscape, sign, subdivision and other regulations of the Code of Ordinances. When concessions from these regulations are requested by a developer, there needs to be corresponding benefits that merit deviation from those regulations. Z.-99.055 P&Z Repr~d: The developer is requesting Detailed Plan approval for this 1361+ acre property to develop 3,269 residential lots, a golf course, open space and an office for the Robson Ranch Planned Development. Staff has conducted an analysis of the proposed detail plan as it relates to the requirements for a Detail plan identified in Section 35-176 of the code of ordinance. Below is a copy of the ordinance requirements in chart form. A ~ indicates that the proposed detail plan has adequately addressed the required information for a Detail Plan. Sec. 35-176. Detailed plan information The detailed plan shall contain the following information: (1) Acreage. 'The acreage in the plan as sl~own by a survey, certified by a registered surveyor. (2) Land uses. Permitted usesl specified in detail as determined by the department, and the acreage for each use. (3) Off-site information. Adjacent or surrounding land uses, zoning, streets, drainage facilities and other existing or proposed off-site improvements, as specified by the department, sufficient to demonstrate the relationship and compatibility of the district to the surrounding properties, uses, and facilities. (4) Traffic and transportation. The location and size of all streets, alleys, parking lots and parking spaces, loading areas or other areas to be used for vehicular traffic; the proposed access and connection to existing or proposed streets adjacent to the district; and the traffic generated by the proposed use. (5) Buildings. The location, maximum height, and minimum setbacks for all buildings, and if nonresidential, the maximum total floor area. (6) Residential development. The number, location, and dimensions of all the lots, the minimum setbacks, the number of dwelling units, and number of units per acre (density). (7) Water and drainage. The location of all creeks, ponds, lakes, floodplains or other water retention or maior drainage facilities and improvements. (8) Utilities. The location and route of all major sewer, water, or electrical lines and facilities necessary to serve the district. (9) Trees and landscaping. The location of all protected trees and a landscaping plan as required by the city's landscape ordinance. (10) Open space. The approximate location and size of greenbelt, open, common, or recreation areas, the proposed use of such areas, and whether they are to be used for public or private use, (11) Screening. The location, type, and size of all fences, berms, or screening features proposed between different land uses or adjacent properties. (12) Signs. Location, type, and size of all signs regulated by the city's sign ordinance (13) Sidewalks and bike paths. Sidewalks or other improved ways for pedestrian or bicycle use, Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Z .gl)05~:~ P&Z Report: o Transportation A. Access Access to the subject property is from Robson Ranch Road (Formerly Crawford Road). B. Road Capacity A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the entire Robson Ranch development is currently being prepared by the applicant. The TIA will identify improvements required to support this development. C. Pedestrian Linkages As per the approved concept plan. 2. Utilities, Signage, Landscaping and Open Space As per the approved concept plan. Drainage and Topography New development will be required to design and construct a drainage system to city standards. A preliminary drainage study will be required with the submission of a preliminary plat. The study must include calculations of the 100-year storm for all drainage areas on this property and any area that drains towards this property. The developer must indicate the method by which the run-off will be carried across the property or stored on the property. 4. Environmental Quality impacts No negative environmental impacts have been identified. August 3, 1999 - The City Council approves the Concept Plan for Robson Ranch. The subject property is not platted and would need to be platted prior to any development. Z-.99-055 ?&Z [Z_eport: Notice of the zoning request was published in the Denton Record-Chronicle on Sunday January 16, 2000. No adjacent property owners were notified of the request. (All adjacent property owners within 200 feet of the subject site are outside the city limits). A neighborhood meeting has not been scheduled The proposed Detailed Plan is in compliance with the Concept Plan and meets all the requirements for a Detail plan as identified in Section 35-176 of the code of ordinance, therefore, staff recommends approval of Z-99-102. I move to recommend approval of Z-99-055. 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions.. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. 1. Detailed Plan 2. Location Plan 3. Draft Ordinance Z-99.055 PS~Z Report: ENCLOSURE 1 ,,I i~ 1 jlll~ J Iii~ (~i , ,.I,1,1~ Ill II I I; I ilJli I il~. IJilJJj ' 8. ENCLOSURE 2 Z-99-102 (Robson Ranch Detailed Plan) NORTH ~ BLAIR ROAD :~. ROAD L I VELY ROAD No. 2449 PROJECT "":"'SITE OLD JUST I N ROAD LOCATION MAP Agenda Date: January 26, 2000 Scale: None ENCLOSURE 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 99- 265, TO PROVIDE FOR THE APPROVAL OF A DETAILED PLAN CONTAINING 1361.3 ACRES WITHIN THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 173 (PD-173) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF FLORENCE ROAD AND NORTH OF ROBSON RANCH ROAD (FORMERLY CRAWFORD ROAD); PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Z-99-102). WHEREAS, on August 3, 1991, by Ordinance the City Council approved a concept plan for Planned Development 173 (PD-173) Zoning District encompassing 2,725 acres of landed, as more particularly described therein; and WHEREAS, Robson Denton Development L.L.C., has applied for a detailed plan for Planned Development 173 (PD-173) containing 1361.38 acres of land; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the detailed plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the detailed plan will be in compliance with the concept plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 99-265 approving Planned Development District No. 173 is amended by approving the Detailed Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "B" for 1361.3 acres more particularly described in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. That a copy of this ordinance shall be attached to Ordinance No. 99-265, showing the amendment herein approved. SECTION 3. All provisions of Ordinance No. 99-265 in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and all other provisions of Ordinance No. 99-265, not in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. 10. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to came the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Il. Page 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ATTACHMENT 2 MR. ENGELBRECHT: We will move on to and that is to hold a pub~ a recommendatio] regarding a acres within a property is gel Robson Ran( Road. COU] I .iled and city Council assing approximately 1,361 173 district. The at the northeast corner of , formerly ~wford Road, and Florence residential developme w~ ith open space, golf and an office site is propo A~.~ this time, and open the public hearing ask Reichhart to rovide us with the staff report. MR. REICHHART: Thank you. We are looking at the Robson Ranch property which is in the far southwest portion of the city, formerly north of Crawford Road which has been changed to Robson Ranch Road. What we're looking at tonight is the detailed plan approval for 1,361 acres that consists of residential development, golf course development, open space, and we do now have -- and a sales office and what you didn't have in your packets -- the detailed plans that we now have for the sales office which I believe is located right in this area of the proposed plan. Here's a little blow-up of that. We have some elevations that you've been supplied with of what the -- this is the main clubhouse which is also being added to PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12. JANUARY 26, 2000 157 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the detailed plan, the information center which is the sales, and then the pro shop and such for the golf course. And, also, in that backup is the site plan which is across the street from the sales center for the clubhouse and the pro shop and all that. All the uses are consistent with the concept plan that was recently approved. All the information, minimum information and then some are on the detailed plans that were submitted. And I think the best thing would be to either answer questions or turn this over to the applicant. And we recommend approval. The only condition on it we would add is that the information presented tonight would be included in the ordinance. MR. ENGELBRECHT: All right. Commissioners, any questions at this time? Okay. Is the petitioner or petitioner's representative present? Sir, would you care to make a statement or a presentation? MR. SARIANO: Do you want to see the color version of the clubhouse site or what you have in front of you is enough? Of the site plan. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Oh, of the site plan, yes. MR. SARIANO: You have a black and white picture up there now. I have it in color if you want to see it. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 13. JANUARY 26, 2000 158 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Sure. MR. MCNEILL: If you came with it and you drew it, show it. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Somebody spent a lot of time putting that together. MR. SARIANO: Yeah. If I don't show it, people get mad at me. We'll have to do it in pieces because it's rather large. Let's flip it around. You have a black and white version in front of you. Is there any one area you want to focus on and I'll show you that frame first? For example -- MR. ENGELBRECHT: request for us. MR. RISHEL: Yes. I think Mr. Rishel has a I was curious what an image tower was so I was trying to get clarification on that. MR. SARIANO: It's just an architectural feature and you see it actually on the front elevation of It's an architectural element to the the building. structure. MR. MCNEILL: start with the amenities. MR. MCNEILL: I have a question. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Yes, Mr. McNeill. The phases are you're going to That's what you're going to build first, the golf course, when are you going ko ~11 houses out there? I'm ready to buy one. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 26, 2000 159 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. SARIANO: You can tell by the yellow cards versus the white cards, there's three new people up on the panel tonight. We phased the whole development. The development is scheduled to take about 20 years. MR. MCNEILL: I understand that. MR. SARIANO: So we phased the development. Our first goal is to obviously get our sales/information center open and to complement the models that attends it. We'd like to start -- we'd like to break ground on those as soon as we can obtain a clearing and grading permit from the city. That means that we hope to have models open January of '01. To meet that deadline, we're hoping that tonight goes well and that our city Council appointment in two weeks goes well. It's will be kind of -- working hard, we think we can get models open in January '01. At that time, we'll have the models, we'll have the sales and information center. But because of seasonal issues, you can only plant the golf course during certain periods because of grading issues, during rainy season versus dry season, those types of issues, the golf course will come on-line after that in 2001. We'll open nine holes first. We'll be working on the second nine holes. We'll get those open. But over a 20-year project, you'll see new PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 15. JANUARY 26, 2000 160 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 amenities come on every three to six months. Maybe one period we'll add nine holes. Next period we'll add the grill that we have an elevation of. The next period we'll add the tennis courts and the pro shop. Maybe the next period we'll add the arts and crafts facility which you see on this site plan. So every three to six months you'll see new buildings coming up within the complex as we develop. MR. MCNEILL: Thank you. Not everybody on here is old enough to move out there. MR. RISHEL: We're looking forward to the rainy season, I want you to know. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Ms. Gourdie. MS. GOURDIE: I just have a question for you. On the artist's conception of your clubhouse and everything, is this for real? Is this what y'all are doing? MR. SARIANO: MS. GOURDIE: Yes, ma'am. This type of -- I'm just saying this is taking my breath away because it's so beautiful. MR. SARIANO: I'm giving it to you on paper and it's going into the -- I don't think that these actually become part of the official. I think the ones that b~om~ part of the official plat are the ~it~ pl~n~ that I've given you. But, yeah, I wouldn't be showing PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 26, 2000 161 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 them to you if we weren't -- I mean, that's -- MS. GOURDIE: or something like that. just want -- MR. SARIANO: MS. GOURDIE: going to do, couldn't we? MR. SARIANO: MS. GOURDIE: this is wonderful. MR. SARIANO: MS. GOURDIE: Well, it's called bait and lure Bait and switch, sorry. And I Don't you guys get to approve -- We could say this is what you're Yeah, we're going to do that. Okay. Please do this because Well, thank you. This is what every person should do out there. So thank you for at least intriging me. MR. SARIANO: Well, hopefully, not everybody will do it so we'll have the competitive advantage. MS. GOURDIE: But you've got to realize, most of Us aren't going to be allowed to be in here so, you know. MR. SARIANO: You can visit. You can play golf there. MS. GOURDIE: Yeah, and break a few windows. Okay. Thank you. I just think it looks really nice. MR. SARIANO: Thank you very much. It's - you're not looking at round 1, you're looking at roun~ 43 so we're pretty far away from that. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 26, 2000 162 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. GOURDIE: Well, I just, you know -- you get lured into seeing beautiful stuff and then, all of sudden, it goes out there and you're thinking, okay, that's not exactly what I remember seeing. So I just wanted to say this is beautiful if you do this. MR. SARIANO: Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Commissioners, other questions? What is the narrowest street width in this particular -- on this site plan? MR. SARIANO: I'm going to make one comment and then I'm going to ask an engineer. The comment is is that these are private streets so there's a different set of rules. But I can either ask you or Jason -- 32 from back of the curb to back of the curb. MR. ENGELBRECHT: All right. And what are the arrangements or what's going on with you and the Parks Department? MR. SARIANO: We actually started working with the Parks Department about a year-and-a-half ago and the issue was that within our -- the objective behind the parks ordinance is to provide adequate open space and recreational area and provide funding for the development of that open space and recreational area as the community is developed. Well, we provide all those a~ part o£ our amenity package, as you see on the site plan here, so we PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 18. JANUARY 26, 2000 163 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 felt that to pay a full parks fee and to provide all those amenities as part of what we deliver to the consumer, we felt that maybe that was double counting or double dipping. So we approached the Parks Commissioner asking for a variance where we wouldn't have to pay the parks fee as we were providing all those things in lieu of. And he's here so I'll let him speak for himself, but that didn't go over so good and there was some -- and he didn't have room within the existing ordinance to grant -- I mean, he did not have the ability to waive parks fees for us. And he didn't seem inclined to do that either even if he had the authority. So we worked with him on different versions and different strategies and how could we still provide the City what they need, what they're entitled to, but still provide the level of amenities inside the community that we would want to provide without double paying. And we reached a tentative agreement, which is subject to your approval and the city Council's approval that the basic, and I think you have the full text of it there, but the basic gist of the agreement is that we would, instead of paying 100 percent of the cash park fees, we would pay 50 cents on the dollar of the cash park fees and then provide a mechanism whereby residents of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 19. JANUARY 26, Z000 164 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 City of Denton would get to make use of some of the private amenities within the gates of the community at a discount or at a reduction or, in some cases, free at the discretion of the City and the Parks and Recreation Director. They can't just come in. The Parks and Recreation Department keeps monitoring on that and provides either the coupons or the ID cards that quantify it. And for the either free use or discounted use that's provided to the residents, we earn credits and those credits can offset the other 50 cents on the park impact fee. So the city still receives 100 cents on a dollar, just a little more creatively. As far as the provisions of the Parks and Recreation Ordinance that require us to dedicate land to the city, we're doing that. We found the site immediately outside our fence that's in an area that some of the departments within the city have expressed interest in getting for satellite services, whether it's police, fire, ambulance, parks, recreation area. And we've got a general area designated and as part of the platting, we would need to then turn over that land to the city which we'll do. That's the parks deal in a nutshell. MR. ENGELBRECHT: All right. Commissioners, any other questions for the petitioner? Okay. Thank you. MR. SARIANO: Thank you. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 26, 2000 165 20. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ENGELBRECHT: I would like to ask Mr. Hodney if he might come down and address a little bit of that. I'd be interested to know precisely, you know, how a resident goes about getting a coupon for the golf course or the swimming pool or the clubhouse. MR. HODNEY: Well, first of all -- MR. ENGELBRECHT: However, whatever the system is. MR. HODNEY: Yeah. And that system still needs to be worked out in detail but let me just address a couple of things. First of all, the park dedication site which is the piece that's associated with platting. And just to reiterate, the park dedication requirements are going to be fully met. They'll get a 50 percent reduction against the requirements because of the private amenities and they're going way and above what would normally be required to get that 50 percent reduction. So they're in full compliance with the dedication ordinance. All right. And then, of course, the ordinance also talks about park development fees, and that's what Steve Sariano was referring to. And we've worked out a deal that's within the administrative -- the confines of the ordinance that's quite unique that seems to meet their needs. And the way a citizen will access that golf PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 21. JANUARY 26, 2000 166 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 course or those services, essentially, is through the Parks and Recreation Department. We can do it a number of different ways and we'll have to flush that out, but the bottom line is if you would normally come to the Parks and Recreation Department for those services, you'll still come to us for those services and then we'll do our deal with Robson. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Ail right. Any other questions, Commissioners? Thank you. Appreciate it. MR. HODNEY: You bet. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Is there anyone present who would like to speak in favor of this petition? Anyone present to speak in favor of this petition? In that case, is there anyone present who would like to speak in opposition to the petition? Anyone present to speak in opposition? Seeing no opposition, the rebuttal period is waived and the public hearing is closed. Mr. Reichhart, any final remarks? MR. REICHHART: Yes. I may have seemed to breeze right through this without giving it a lot of attention to the detail we usually do. This is the full detail plan that we're approving. They went to great extents to make sure everything was addressed. One thing I do want to make sure people realize is that there are some variances associated with PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 22. JANUARY 26, 2000 167 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this detail plan, also; that length of the roads, dead-end roads, streets; drainage; sidewalk, they have a different type of sidewalk plan because of the golf carts. They're incorporated into this detailed plan that we've talked about, at the concept plan that we weren't just going to give them the carte blache details, that we wanted to look at them as they came in. The Fire Marshal has addressed those, Public Safety, have all been addressed. And I just wanted to make sure you realize that. MR. ENGELBRECHT: MR. REICHHART: MR. ENGELBRECHT: questions? Z-99-055. Very good. But we recommend approval. Commissioners, any MR. MCNEILL: Motion. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Sir. MR. MCNEILL: I move to recommend approval of to recommend approval. Yes, Mr. Reichhart. MR. REICHHART: information submitted tonight would be added to the d~tailed plan. MR. MCNEILL: Which is new information? MS. APPLE: Second. MR. ENGELBRECHT: It's been moved and seconded Any discussion on the motion? With the condition that the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 23. JANUARY 26~ 2000 168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. REICHHART: MR. ENGELBRECHT: MR. MCNEILL: MS. APPLE: MR. ENGELBRECHT: and second with conditions. It was new information. That's right. Thank you. Yeah. I add that condition. I'll second the condition. All right. We have a motion Is there any discussion? MR. RISHEL: I'd like to review what the condition is just for note-taking purposes here. The whole package. MR. REICHHART: The package includes the site plan for the sales office and the clubhouse associated with the golf center and the elevations submitted tonight. MR. RISHEL: So it's as submitted in the detailed documents that are presented here at this time. Okay. MR. REICHHART: As submitted in the detailed plan, correct. And that elevation is what they're going to build. I mean, that's part of this detailed plan. MR. RISHEL: Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Any other discussion? I just want to echo before -- I think it is important. Mr. Reichhart's brought up a good point. This is a very large tract that we are looking at tonight. It's not, in any means, the totality of this one developer's tract, but it is a large tract. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 24. JANUARY 26, 2000 169 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 It has gone through quickly but that's because there has been a great deal of work prior to this in public meetings and with the Development Review Committee and behind the scenes and with all the staff. So there's been just a tremendous amount of work that's been going on for a long period of time. So while this may seem like it's going quickly for 1,300-plus acres, it really has been a long process. A lot of people have done a lot of hard work on this. Okay. Any other discussion? If not, vote, please. Motion carries seven to zero. Commissioners, do you want to take five? I thought maybe I saw a couple. All right. Let's take a short break. (Break taken.) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 25. JANUARY 26~ 2000 170 ATTACHMENT 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 99- 265, TO PROVIDE FOR THE APPROVAL OF A DETAILED PLAN CONTAINING 1361.3 ACRES WITHIN THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 173 (PD-173) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF FLORENCE ROAD AND NORTH OF ROBSON RANCH ROAD (FORMERLY CRAWFORD ROAD); PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Z-99-102). WHEREAS}:dn AugUst 3, I991, by Ordinance the City Council approved a concept plan for Planned Development 173 (PD-173) Zoning District encompassing 2,725 acres of landed, as more particularly described therein; and WHEREAS, Robson Denton Development L.L.C., has applied for a detailed plan for Planned Development 173 (PD-173) containing 1361.38 acres of land; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the detailed plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the detailed plan will be in compliance with the concept plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 99-265 approving Planned Development District No. 173 is amended by approving the Detailed Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "B" for 1361.3 acres more particularly described in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. That a copy of this ordinance shall be attached to Ordinance No. 99-265, showing the amendment herein approved. SECTION 3. All provisions of Ordinance No. 99-265 in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and all other provisions of Ordinance No. 99-265, not in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance, shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. 26. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days t~om the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: B y:HERBERT~~~~' P. ROUTY, CI3Y ATTORNEY 27. Page 2 ~" CLOg0RE $~.RT ROB SObl PRELIMINARY 12-14-99 T. BRIDGES EXHIBIT A Al00 PPLAT 89'51'20" 00"08'38" N 33"00'40,, DB ~ S 70'01'14'' RB = N 19"58'46" DC - S 78°43'49'' RA = N 02"33'36" DA = S 87026'24'' $ 87~26,24. 00"10'i3" N 89"51'17" N 00o38,33" DR = N 00"31'25. RB = N 89028'35'' DC = N 05027'38'' RA = S 780~3'19,, E DA - N 11"26'41" E N 73019'28'' W N 00000'47. E S $9°2~'45" W N 06°12'05" E 89057'37'' E 70027'35" E lq 89"24'44" E 00"35'15" W 1 PI1 7 8 9 PC2 PT2 13 16 17 18 19 2O 21 PC3 PI3 PT3 25 26 27 18"14'51" W N 65"22'10" DB = lq 24~37,50. RB = N 65o22'10'' DC = N 33a36'14', RA = S 01~50'19" DA = S 88o09'41'' Al 34~44,15,, Iq 39°10'31- E ~ 7096830.9189 E 2356464.2328 2994.70 ft N 7096838.4641 E 2353469.5460 CCW90~00,02,, 154.51 ft N 7096992.9762 E 2353469-9340 CCW213"09,18- 92.92 ft N 7097070.8943 E 2353419.3117 CCW256~$8,05 T = 42.13 L ~ 83.61 DEL= + 17"25'10" N 7097056.4997 E 2353379.7186 CCW162o34,S0 LC ~ 83.29 R = 275.00 DEG= 20050,05" N 70970S4.6180 E 2353337.6320 CCW180000,00 233~'65 ft N 7097044.1822 'E 2353104.2180 CCW267o36,37,, 204.87 ft lq 7096839.3128 E. 2353104.8267 CCW89~1,04,, 3797.22 ft N 7096848.9447 E 2349307.61~9 CCW89O30,10,, 748.53 ft N 7097597.4267 E 2349316.0080 CCW181o09,55 T = 133.07 L = 265.18 DEL~ ~ 11o58,06'' N 7097730.4957 ~ 2349314.7916 CCW168e01,5~ LC = 266.70 R = 1269.49 DEG= 04°30'48'' N 7097860.9242 E 23~9341.1963 CCW264"46'08" 1015.16 ft N 7098152.2286 E 2348368.7253 CC~10go39,~5. 2395.34 ft N 7100547.5719 ~ 2348369.2684 CCW270~36,02- $33.33 ft N 7100542.1031 E 2347835.9656 CCW83"12'40" 350.53 ft N 7100890.5868 E 23~7873.8317 CCW96014'28" 310.90 ft N 7100890.8026 E 2348184_7335 CCW199~30,02. 399.96 ft lq 7101024.5764 E 2348561.6574 CCW161o02,~1- 437.08 ft N 7101029.05~5 E 2348998.7167 CCW270o00,00. 69.78 ft N 7101098.8357 E 2348998.0011 CCW197~39,36. 113.23 ~t N 7101206.3720 E 2348962.5461 CCW96022~59n 136.00 ft N 7101263.0522 E 2349086.1719 CCW270oO0'00 T = 80.75 L ~ 101.64 DEL= + 116028'09" N 710~336.4554 E 2349052.$179 CCW63"31'51" LC = 8~.02 R ~ ~0.00 D~G= 114~35'30" lq 7101333.8648 E 2349133.2267 CCW237o06'03 68.81 ft ~ 7101390.4129 E 2349172.%374 CCW125019'3~" 133.74 f~ N 7101391.7846 E 2349306.1683 CCW230~1~'t3" 614.03 ft N 7101867.7940 E 2349694.0513 CCW57~48'17'' 28. 28 29 3O PT~ PIS PT5 37 38 39 40 41 PC6 PI6 PT6 PC7 PI7 PT7 49 5O 51 52 53 55 56 57 S 18~37'46'' E N 54°11'18'' E N 75°17'27" W DB = ~ 75017'27" W RB = N 14042'33'' Z DC = N 53~03'31" W RA ~ N 59010'25'' E DA ~ ~ 30o49'35', W N 30°49'35'' W DB = N 30049'35" W RB = N $9010'25'' E DC = N 06040'55'' ~ ~A - S 45048'30'' E DA = N 44°11'30" E N 44011'30'' E S 48°26'08'' E N 76°40'22'' ~. N 69029'57 H 83°31'45" E N 03~10'46'' E DB = $ 88°58'2~'' E RB ~ S 01°01'31'' W DC = $ 84~19'24'' E P~A = S 10°19'41'' W DA ~ S 79~40'19'' S 79°40'19" DB = S 79°40'19'' E R]~ = N 10o19'41'' E DC ~ N 70°05'20" RA = N 50009'02'' W DA = N 39~50'58" N 39050'58" E S 50°56'03" E 06047'43'' E N 7~36'17" E N 67o00'34'' E N 43~39'52" E N 79°5~'52'' R S 89~34'28'' E S 46°56'05" E 502.44 ft N 7101391.6798 ~ 23498~4.5527 CCW19~o36'0S" 431.40 fk ~ 7101030.8259 E 2350090.9725 CCW272o34'48. 631.78 fu ~ 7101~00.4~14 E 2350603.3078 CCW309o28'45- 138.89 ft N 7101435.7580 ~ 2350468.9666 CCW180~00'Q0" T = 69.49 L = 131.93 DEL~ + 44e27'52" N 7101~53.4017 E 2350401.7S65 CCW135°32'CS,, LC = 128.64 R = 170.00 DEG= 33e42'12" N 7101513.0?22 E 2350366.%485 CCW180o00'C0'' 777.52 ft N 7102180.7464 E 2349967.7185 CCW180o00,00,, T ~ 84.43 L - 144.02 DEL= + 75001'05" N 7102253.2514 E 2349924.4517 CCW104058'55'' LC ~ 133.95 R = 110.00 DEG= 52°05'13" N 7102313.7912 .E 2349983.3068 CCW180000'00" 199.97 ft N 7102457.1691 E 2350122.6950 CC~92°37'38" 377.01 ft N 7102207.0372 E 2350404.7783 CCW234~53'30" 184.21 ft N 7102249.5002 E 2350584.0300 CCW187~10'25" 799.07 ~t N 7102529.3517 E 2351332.4952 CCW165°58'12" 324.17 ft N 7102565.8847 E 2351654.6012 CCW260°20'59" 953.57 ft N 7103517.9841 E 2351707.4899 CCW92~09'15" T = 136.04 L = 271.47 DEL= + 09~18'10" N 7103515_5~498 E 2351843.5064 CCW170041'50'' LC = 27~.18 R = 1672.01 DEG~ 03°25'36'' N 7103491.I605 E 2351977.3365 CCW180o00'00" 266.69 fu N 7103443.347~ E 2352239.7023 CCW180~00'00" T ~ 954.27 L = 1727.95 DEL~ - 60~28'43'' N 7~03272.262~ E 2353178.5058 CCW240°28'43" LC ~ 1648.84 R ~ 1637.01 DEG=- 03°30'00" N 7104004.8796 E 2353789.9745 CCW180~00'00'' 609.33 ft N 7104472.6810 ~ 2354180.415~ CCW90047'01" 298.7~ ft N 7104284.%139 E 23~4412.3626 CCW302016'14" 215.18 ft N 7104498-0787 E 2354437.8225 CC~112~11'26" 166.16 ft N 7104542.1894 E 2354S98.0164 CCW187~35'~2'' 68.5~ ft N 7104568.9796 E 2354661.1594 CCW203~20'43" 240.25 ft N 7104742.7768 E 2354827.0367 CCW143~44'5~" 527.85 ft N 7104835.2121 E 2355346.7265 CCW191°17'B0" N 7104861.2380 E 2~55413.1960 CCW158°11'31" 104.31 ft ~ 7104860.463~ E 2355517.4984 CCW137~21'37" 188.34 ft N 7104731.8589 ~ 2355655.0952 CCW139°41'21" 29. 6O 61 62 63 64 65 PC8 PIS PT8 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 1 LENGTI~= 06037'26" ~ 10°34'17" E 41~03'46" E 71"54'48" E 75°36'30'' E 81°28'30'' ~ 02a54'28" E 24"31'58" E 01°5~'47'' E 02002'03" E 87~57'57'' W 16°29'0~" W 5~59'46" W 35~00'14" W 55°04'17" E 29~07'02'' ~ 60~52'58'' E 72~04'4~'' E 76°5~'08" E 8?050'09'' E 77°49'01" E 18~18'13'' R 49~22'46'' E 89°51'48" E 67°50'S0" E 00~01'04'' W 89°48'51" E 00~31'53'' E ~ST ~3~30 ' 01" W 00°28'51" W 38067.78 ft ARF_J~= 859.62 ft N 7103877.9819 E 2355754.2525 CCW183°56'51" 65.16 ft ~' ~ 7103813.9282 E 2355766.2068 CCW210~29,29,, 68.08 ft N 7103762.5951 E 2355810.9288 CCW210~51,02. 70.41 ft N 7103740.7346 E 2B55877.863~ CCW183o41'43- 148.95 ft N 7103703.7141 E 2356022.1372 CCW185o52,00. 72.06 ft N 7103693.0315 E 2356093.~0~ CCW101~25'58" 128.08 ft N 7103565.1129 E 2356099.9020 CCW201°37'30- 53.18 ft N 7103516.7351 E 2356121.9825 CCW157°27'50'' 45.09 ft N 7103471.6691 E 23~6123.5537 CCW180o02'14 T =' 58.62 L = 113.13 DEL= + 37"02'17" N 7103413.0873 E 2356125.63~4 CCW142°57'43 LC = 111.17 R = 175.00 DEG~ 32044'26'' N 710336~.0719 E 2356092.0088 CCW270°04'31 114.86 ft N 7103299.3100 E 2356186.1760 CCW154°02'45" 66.98 ft N 7103240.7904 E 2356218.7706 CCW270°00~00" 281.01 ft ~ 7103377.$294 E 2356464.2684 CCW168°48'17" 108.17 ft N 7103410.8146 E 235~567_1858 CCW175o09'32" 92.19 ft N 7103431.6794 E 23~6656.9720 CCW164~45'17'' 121.40 ft N ~10B427.0949 E 2356778_2920 CCW169~58'53" 102.58 ft N 7103405.4471 E 2356878.5615 CCW263~$2'46'' 98.73 ft N 7103499.1813 E 2356~09-5676 CCW148°55'27'' 94.91 ft N 7103560.9706 E 2356981.6059 CCW139°14'34" 106.61 ft N 7103560.7163 E 2357088.2147 CCW157°59'02" 173.$0 ft ~ 7103~95.2928 E 2357248.9075 CCWl12°08'06" 253.92 ~ N 7103241.3769 E 2357248.8283 CCW270~12'13" 1215.51 ft N 7103245.3170 E 2358464.3290 CCW90~20'45" 4635.17 ft N 7098610.3481 E 2358507.3262 CCW89~28'07" 876.27 ft N 7098610.3481 E 2357631.0585 CCW206°29'59" 1292.53 ft N 7098033.6328 E 2356474.3264 CCW~43°01'10" 1202.76 ft N 7096830.9189 E 2356~64.2228 CCW90~20'11" 59298735. sf 1361.312 Acres 30. EXHIBIT B ,Ii i.. , .~', ii ,., ,:!ii, l,] .:11~ ,~ .__, .. ~,~,,.,,,,.,,..,~~[~ ~, ,. ,,'. ,~., i, ~ 32. ,,,-..i , i.,,1;,I ~ I ~ I~lll ~ ~ ~u ~ r . , 33. ~JjiJj~ ii,~ -/ RD]~SI'IN RANCH ~/ATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 2,6. NORTH ROBSON RANCH WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN SHI~T 7 OF I0 37. l [ 'l: [ I I .il[I -~lfl ': [ii!ti:l[ j; ;I lib PROPOSRr~ TION FACILIT~ PHASe, 3 9. )l'rON, TEXAS .I III ,.," II It I[ ~ijiJ ii, lil l I 41. 42° 43. 44° AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: February 15, 2000 Parks and Re. Department Dave Hill ~'~/-~ SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consider a Ordinance granting approval of a surface use of a portion of the Denton Branch Rail/Trail approximately 2000 feet north of Shady Shores road for the installation of a public street in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; providing for the issuance of an easement and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND: The City of Denton, Engineering and Transportation Department has requested the use of park land for the purpose stated, in order to provide a new Collector thoroughfare, Lakeview Boulevard (see exhibits A-D), which is part of the city's Mobility Plan. This four lane, divided roadway will provide access fi.om from Shady Shores Road to the new Preserve at Pecan Creek development under construction in far southeast Denton. This boulevard will someday connect with a northern section to complete an additional by- pass around the eastern side of the city. Denton County and the developer of the Preserve are providing the $800,000 cost of the project. State law as defined in Chapter 26. Protection of Public Parks and Recreational Lands of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code requires that a "(a) municipality of this state may not approve any program or project that requires the use or taking of any public land designated and used prior to the arrangement of the program or project as a park.unless the municipality, acting through its duly authorized governing body or officer, determines that: (1) there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use or taking of such land; and (2) the program or project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land, as a park, resulting fi.om the use or taking. (b) A finding may be made only after notice and a hearing as required by this chapter." If the proposed public street easement is allowed, a value must be placed on the 100 linear foot section and charged to the City of Denton. The Parks and Recreation Department and the City of Denton Engineering staff have reviewed all other possible alternatives. These alternatives included: · Select another route through the city that would pass across the trail at the Shady Shores Road crossing. This would require many easements be obtained fi'om adjacent property owners at great expense. · Terminate the new Lakeview Boulevard at the rail trail corridor location. This option will not conform to the Denton Thoroughfare Master Plan for the city. · Construct a pedestrian bridge for the trail up and over the proposed new roadway. Estimates for a pedestrian bridge will be in the $350,000 range. Provide a signalized crosswalk for trail users appears to be a more cost-effective alternative. · Construct a highway bridge over the rail trail at this location. Estimates for a highway bridge are $1.6 million at this location. · Construct an underpass tunnel at an adjacent drainage culvert structure and connect to the trail. The Developer has offered to assist in this alternative. Both an at-grade and culvert under pass is advisable for times the underpass structure is not usable. This is the preferred option. OPTIONS: Because other solutions to this issue have proven to be infeasible, the option remains to approve the use as presented or require the City of Denton to begin obtaining easements through and to other city streets and adjacent property owners. RECOMMENDATION: At, er reviewing all other alternatives, staff recommends approval of this use of the Denton Branch Rail/Trail. The City of Denton, Engineering and Transportation Department is proposing to place a properly signed and marked crosswalk at the roadway to accommodate trail users as well as construct the connection to the culvert underpass. There would be no major impact on current park operations or programs. The Parks and Recreation Department have indicated that the City of Denton has investigated all other alternatives and has used reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land. The City of Denton is fully aware of the Federal railbanking law that in the event a railroad or rail transit agency wishes to reclaim the right of way for rail service, the City of Denton may be responsible for removing crosswalk signals and converting to railroad crossing signals and restoring the right of way to its original condition. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Construction on this development is projected to begin in early 2000 with a nine-month completion schedule. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW: The Parks and Recreation Board considered this item at their January 27, 2000 meeting. The board voted to concur with staff's recommendation provided that the tunnel connection can be implemented and proper signage be placed directing trail users of safe crossing options and warning of high water flow in the creek.. FISCAL INFORMATION: Compensation related to this use is still under discussion with the City of Denton and the developer on the culvert connection. It is reasonable to expect that improvements directly related to programs and/or facilities on the Denton Branch Rail/Trail will be provided. BID INFORMATION: Not applicable -2- EXHIBITS: Ordinance Attached exhibits A-D(Maps) Minutes of the Park Board meeting, January 27, 2000 Respectfully submitted: Ed Hodney, DirectS' Parks and RecreaiSon Department Prepared by: Robert K. Tickner, Superintendent Parks and Recreation Department -3- Denton Branch Rail Trail iosed Lakeview Crossing Proposed Lakeview Blvd 1 Denton Branch Rail Trail © 1997 DeLormc. Strut Atlas USA Denton Branch Rail Trail Exhibit A - ak ew - ~ / / I I \ ¥ '\ \ '\ \ :!~,. ,,~. /:,',~ ~. ' ;I · ~. '"-<' "" ; . · : , ,._ ..... ,, ,.:~ .~;i.~..~. :%.. ! "x,..-->" .--"~' */' i '\ .~.'"" '¥" * /:':,\ / " .,,,,.., ,,';.% '.\ '\.,/. o '~\ ",, ~. ..,';,"~. i <,,~;." -6- Exhibit C ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SURFACE USE OF A PORTION OF THE DENTON BRANCH RAIL/TRAIL APPROXIMATELY 2000 FEET NORTH OF SHADY SHORES ROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC STREET IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 26 OF THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE CODE; PROVIDiNG FOR A STREET DEDICATION EASEMENT; AND PROVIDiNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Section 26.001 of the Texas Parks of Wildlife Code provides that public land designated and used as a park may be used for a non-park purpose if the City Council finds after notice and hearing that there is not feasible and prudent.alternative to the use of such land for the proposed project and the proposed project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the park resulting from such use; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to improve public transportation to the City of Denton by constructing a four lane divided roadway 100 linear feet across the trail for a public street; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to construct the public, street across the Denton Branch Rail/Trait since alternative options would not be feasible and prudent; and WHEREAS, the City provided notice in the Denton Record Chronicle on January 23, January 30, and February 6, 2000 of a Public Hearing to be held on February 15, 2000 in the Council Chambers to consider the alternatives to the use of City Park for the subject street project; and WHEREAS, the City Council on February 15, 2000, received testimony at a public heating on the issues of no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of the property for the proposed project and that the project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the Denton Branch Rail/Trail resulting from the public street crossing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the project does not fall within the purview of Section 253.001 of the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is no feasible and prudent altemative to the use of the park land and that the subject public street project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the park as a result of the project; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The public street crossing for Lakeview Boulevard proposed by the City of Denton (the "Project") shall be constructed and maintained above the surface of the park property described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes, and that the surface of the park after installation of the public street be constructed in a manner -8- so that the park land may still be used by its patrons after completion of the Project in the same manner it was used prior to the Project. SECTION 2. A public street dedication easement which is revocable as required by law (National Trails System Act, 16 U.S.C. 1247(d)) shall be composed by the City Manager or his designee and approved by the City Attorney allowing the use of the park property for the Project as referenced above with appropriate provision to insure the improvements are constructed in accordance with City Subdivision Rules and Regulations; protects the patrons using the park from injury and damage both during and after construction of the Project; compensates for the reasonable market value of the use herein granted and generally protect the health, safety and general welfare of the City. SECTION 3. During construction of the Project, temporary use of such additional park land necessary to stage the construction of the improvements may be approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation Department. However, at the completion of the construction activities for the Project such additional park land shall be restored to the condition to which it existed prior to the beginning of such construction activities. SECTION 4. The rights and benefits set forth in this ordinance may not be assigned without the express written consent of the City. SECTION 5. The findings contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated into the body of this ordinance. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2000. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY JACK MILLER, MAYOR By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: Sy: ~~ Page 2 of 2 -9- EXHIBIT "A" I~ING A 0.2~ A~ ~ACT ~ A ~ACT ~ ~, ~ ~ACT ~ L~ ~ O~ BY ~ ~ ~ 0.2~ A~ ~ACT ~O ~ P~Y ~O AS ~ AT ~ ~C~ ~ ~ ~ST ~T-~-WAY ~ ~ ~ PA~ R~ ~Y (A I~ ~ m~T-~-WAY) ~ ~ ~ST ~T-~-WAY ~ ~ ~W ~VA~, (A 1~ F~T ~ ~T-~-WA~: ~: ~ 13 ~ ~ ~ 57 ~C~S ~ST, A ~T~ ~ 102.78 ~ET TO A ~T P~ C~, ~ ~T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~AST ~T-~-WAY ~ ~ ~ PA~ R~, ~ ~ ~ A ~ TO ~ ~T~ ~N~ ~ ~ ~E~ ~ ~ 02 ~C~S ~ST, A ~ST~ ~ 1~2.93 ~ET ~ ~ ~T: ~: ~ ~ ~AST ~T-~-WAY ~ ~ ~ PA~ R~ ~ ~ ~ ~ TO ~E ~T, ~ ~ ~T~ ~ ~24.~ ~ET ~ A ~N~ ~ ~ ~ ~E~ 37 ~S, 10 ~C~ TO A ~T F~ C~R, ~ ~T ~ ~ ~ ~E ~ST ~T-~-WAY ~ ~ ~, ~ ~T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ST ~T-~-WAY ~ ~ ~ PA~ R~, ~: ~ ~ ~ST ~T-~-WAY ~ ~ ~ P~ R~ ~ ~ ~ ~ TO ~E ~FT, ~ ~ ~T~ ~ 1~.~ ~ET ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~S. 57 59 ~S TO ~ ~T~ ~ C~TM~ 12.473 ~ ~ET ~ 0.~ A~S ~ ~ ~ 0.286 ACRE TRACT ,,.. . . _ . . _.__ . . . LOCATED IN THE ClIY OF I)~n'o~ IDC~ I ,14 .... __ . ~mmo~o~( EXHIBIT "A" THE PRESERVE et PECAN CREEK Ernest A. TJnneretlo Vol. ,~.x~3, Pg. 0925 D.R.D.C.T. 0 80 100 3OO 3OO GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET THE PRESERVE at PECAN CREEK ,~1- 04'37ho' R = 154.2,93' T=62.23' L=124,40' 73S0'286 ACRES O. FT.) .,John L. T~nnereflo Vol. 5.T~3, Pg. og2g D.R.D.C.T. NOTE: 8EARING SYSTEM BASED ON THE PLAT OF THE BILL UTTER FORD ADDITION, AN ADDIT1ON TO THE CITY OF' CORINTH, TEXAS RECORDED IN CABINET P, PACE 357 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF ~ I ~gr · I~lfl ............... ,~_mm_~our~ __ _ I -- ' ""~L_-'_-' I ~ ~ su~w, ~ .o. ,~o -11- Parks and Recreation Board Meeting Sanuary 27, 2000 Denia Recreation Center Members present: Don Edwards, Dalton Gregory, Dale Yeatts, Brandon Barnes, Brenda Phillips, and Gwendolyn Carter. Staffpresent: Ed Hodney, Bob Tickner, Janet Simpson, Kathy Mosby, and Janie McLeod. Amy Docteur with PARD's Therapeutic Recreation. Chairman Don Edwards called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. A motion made by Dalton Gregory and seconded by Gwendolyn Carter approved the minutes from the November 10, 1999. Amy Docteur, with PARD Therapeutic Recreation, invited the Board to participate in the Sweetheart Ball being held on February 11 at the Civic Center. Amy explained that the dance is for individuals with physical and development disabilities. ACTION ITEMS Consider a Request from the City of Denton Engineering Department to Construct a New Street Across the Denton Branch Rail Trail. Bob discussed the Lakeview crossing on the Rail Trial. He stated that the trail would be redirected through 10'xl0' culverts north of the road crossing and would be ADA accessible. The Board inquired about the flooding possibilities. Bob explained that the land would be raised four inches with slots along the side to drain the water. Signage would be ~r~q~ ~... Bob said that there would be a public meeting at the City Council Febn~_a_ry 15 meeting and invited the Board to attend. Dalton moved to approve the Lakeview crossing with appropriate signage for high water. Brandon Barnes seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Reconsider the November IOta Action of the Park Board on the City of Denton Engineering Department's Request to Construct a New Street Across the Denton Branch Rail Trail at Brink, er Road Ed requested that the Board revisit the item from the November meeting. He said that maps were included in the packet and more information was available to share with the Board. Bob Tickner pointed out the current 15 crossings at-grade on the Rail Trail. He commented that the total Brinker Road crossing, as presently designed, would cost the City $900,000. The cost of a pedestrian bridge crossing is estimated at $350,000. He reminded the board that the Mayhill Road crossing will be upgraded and that Brinker Road along with Loop 288 and Mayhill Road will help relieve traffic congestion. Bob asked the Board to reconsider if the pedestrian overhead bridge the most feasible option. Brandon Barnes commented that the crossing was not as close as he thought and that a mile between crossings wasn't unreasonable. Dale Yeatts asked why Parks and Recreation would support a crossing the trail. Dale said he wanted to protect the parkland. Ed said that, this was not a requirement of state law, but that the needs of the community were taken into consideration. Brenda asked if State law required the land be put back to its original condition? Ed explained that the road would be paved and that the area around the crossing would be restored to its original condition if damages were incurred. Dalton Gregory said that it appears that proper funding was not designated for the project, but understands that the road needs to be built. The Board wanted the City Council to understand their hesitation to approve the request. Dalton said it sounds like the message being sent to the public is aati-business when the City doesn't follow the same standards that the developers are required to follow. Dale Yeatts moved that the Board reluctantly reject the recommendation. The reasons the Board stated were: better planning and funding might have provided for the grade separation; the City should follow the same requirements that the developers are asked to £ollow; crossing doesn't enhance the park land; safety concerns; and the negative impact on the land. Dalton Gregory seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. -13- AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: February 15, 2000 Parks and Re~artment Dave Hill SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consider a Ordinance granting approval of a surface use of a portion of the Denton Branch Rail/Trail approximately 2500 feet south of Loop 288 for the installation of a public street in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; providing for the issuance of an easement and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND: The City of Denton, Engineering and Transportation Depmh.ent has requested the use of park land for the purpose stated, in order to provide a new Collector thoroughfare, Brinker Road (see exhibits A-B), which is part of the city's Mobility Plan. This four lane, divided roadway will extend the existing section of Brinker Rd eastward from Colorado Boulevard to Loop 288 at the Walmart complex. TXDOT is relying on this connection to provide a Loop 288 by-pass during reconstruction of Loop 288 when the bridge over the old railroad/rail trail is removed. The city has committed $900,000 and Denton County $600,000 for completion of the project. State law as defined in Chapter 26. Protection of Public Parks and Recreational Lands of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code requires that a "(a) municipality of this state may not approve any program or project that requires the use or taking of any public land designated and used prior to the arrangement of the program or project as a park.unless the municipality, acting through its duly authorized governing body or officer, detei-iiiines that: (1) there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use or taking of such land; and (2) the program or project includes all reasonable planning to minimize ha,u to the land, as a park, resulting from the use or taking. (b) A fmding may be made only after notice and a hearing as required by this chapter." If the proposed public street easement is allowed, a value must be placed on the 100 linear foot section and charged to the City of Denton. In addition, land disturbed in the park will be returned to its original condition. Parks and Recreation Depm~taent and the City of Denton Engineering staff have reviewed all other possible alternatives. These alternatives included: · Select another route through the city that would pass across the trail at the Mayhill road crossing. This would require many easements be obtained from adjacent property owners at great expense. · Terminate the new Brinker Road at the rail trail corridor location. This option will not conform to the Denton Thoroughfare Master Plan for the city. -1- · Construct a pedestrian bridge for the trail up and over the proposed new roadway. Estimates for a pedestrian bridge will be in the $350,000 range. Providing a signalized crosswalk for trail users appears to be a more cost-effective alternative. · Construct a highway bridge over the rail trail at this location. Estimates for a highway bridge are $1.6 million at this location. Therefore, there are no feasible or prudent alternatives to the placement of the new Brinker Road roadway at this location. OPTIONS: Because other solutions to this issue have proven to be infeasible, the option remains to approve the use as presented or require the City of Denton to begin obtaining easements through and to other city streets and adjacent property owners. RECOMMENDATION: After reviewing all other alternatives, staff recommends approval of this use of the Denton Branch Rail/Trail. The City of Denton, Engineering and Transportation Department is proposing to place a signalized crosswalk at the roadway to accommodate trail users. There would be no major impact on current park operations or programs. The Parks and Recreation Department have indicated that the City of Denton has investigated all other alternatives and has used reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land. The City of Denton is fully aware of the Federal railbanking law that in the event a railroad or rail transit agency wishes to reclaim the right of way for rail service, the City of Denton may be responsible for removing crosswalk signals and converting to railroad crossing signals and restoring the right of way to its original condition. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Construction on this development is projected to begin in early 2000 with a nine month completion schedule. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW: The Parks and Recreation Board considered this item at their November 10, 1999 and January 27, 2000 meeting. The Board voted to not support staff's recommendation for the crossing, citing it's responsibility to protect the recreational value of the trail as well as safety. The board has concern for the proliferation of new grade crossings on top of the existing 15 public at grade street crossings. The Board feels the new crossings will detract fi.om the safety and enjoyment of the trail by pedestrians and cyclists. As an alternative, the Board suggests consideration of a pedestrian/bicycle overhead bridge over the new roadway. FISCAL INFORMATION: Compensation related to this use is still under discussion with the City of Denton. It is reasonable to expect that improvements directly related to programs and/or facilities on the Denton Branch Rail/Trail will be provided. BID INFORMATION: Not applicable -2- EXHIBITS: Ordinance Exhibits A-B(Maps) Minutes of the Park Board November 10,1999; January 27,2000 Respectfully submitted: Ed Hodney, Director / Parks and Recreation Department Prepared by: Parks and Recreation Department -3- Creel~ ? 76208 Wa!mart Proposed Brinker Road Crossing of Rail Trail Denton Regional Medical Center Exhibit A -4- \, ~,) Exhibit B ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SURFACE USE OF A PORTION OF THE DENTON BRANCH RAIL/TRAIL APPROXIMATELY 2500 FEET SOUTH OF STATE LOOP 288 HIGHWAY FOR THE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC STREET 1N ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 26 OF THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE CODE; PROVIDING FOR A STREET DEDICATION EASEMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Section 26.001 of the Texas Parks of Wildlife Code provides that public land designated and used as a park may be used for a non-park purpose if the City Council finds after notice and hearing that there is not feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land for the proposed project and the proposed project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the park resulting fi.om such use; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to improve public transportation to the City of Denton by constructing a four lane divided roadway 100 linear feet across the trail for a public street; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to construct the public street across the Denton Branch Rail/Trail since alternative options would not be feasible and prudent; and WHEREAS, the City provided notice in the Denton Record Chronicle on January 23, January 30, and February 6, 2000 of a Public Hearing to be held on February 15, 2000 in the Council Chambers to consider the alternatives to the use of City Park for the subject street project; and WHEREAS, the City Council on February 15, 2000, received testimony at a public hearing on the issues of no feasible and prudent altemative to the use of the property for the proposed project and that the project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the Denton Branch Rail/Trail resulting fi.om the public street crossing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the project does not fall within the purview of Section 253.001 of the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of the park land and that the subject public street project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the park as a result of the project; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The public street crossing for Brinker Road proposed by the City of Denton (the "Project") shall be cofistructed and maintained above the surface of the park property described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes, and that the surface of the park after installation of the public street be constructed in a manner so that the -6- park land may still be used by its patrons after completion of the Project in the same manner it was used prior to the Project. SECTION 2. A public street dedication easement which is revocable as required by law (National Trails System Act, 16 U.s.C. 1247(d)) shall be composed by the City Manager or his designee and approved by the City Attorney allowing the use of the park property for the Project as referenced above with appropriate provision to insure the improvements are constructed in accordance with City Subdivision Rules and Regulations; protects the patrons using the park from injury and damage both during and after construction of the Project; compensates for the reasonable market value of the use herein granted and generally protect the health, safety and general welfare of the City. SECTION 3. During construction of the Project, temporary use of such additional park land necessary to stage the construction of the improvements may be approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation Department. However, at the completion of the construction activities for the Project such additional park land shall be restored to the condition to which it existed prior to the beginning of such construction activities. SECTION 4. The rights and benefits set forth in this ordinance may not be assigned without the express written consent of the City. SECTION 5. The findings contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated into the body of this ordinance. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. ' PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ., 2000. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY JACK MILLER, MAYOR By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: Page 2 of 2 -7- · EXHIBIT 'A' · LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING 8,740 square feet of land located in the JOHN WHITE SURVEY, Abstract No. 1433, City of DentOn, Denton County, Texas, being a portion of the Old M. K. & T. Railroad right-of-way and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 1/2" iron rod set in the North right-of-waY line of said Old M. K. & T. Railroad, being the South boundary line of a 57.087 acre tract of land described in dccd to Epic Development, Inc. tract, recorded in Volume 3245, Page 699 of the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas, and the proposed West right-of-way line of Bdnker Road (a proposed 80 foot wide right-of-way), lying N 89°11'16"E, 269.38 feet, S 00°34'55"E, 575.50 feet, S 12°14'08"W, 505.81 fcct and N 41°26'39"W, 87.87 feet from a 1/2" iron rod found at an intedor corner of said Epic .tract, being the Southwest comer of a tract of land described in deed to John Karvouniads, recorded in Volume 3405, Page 50 of the Real Property Records of Denton County~ Texas; THENCE S 41°26°39"E along the North right-of-way of said Old M. K. & T. Railroad and the South boundary line 'of said 57.087 acre tract, 87.87 feet to a 1/2" iron rod set in the proposed East right-of-way line of Brinker Road; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY along the proposed East right-of-way line of Brinker Road (a proposed 80 foot wide right-of-way), 108.65 feet along a Curve to the Right, having a radius of 1140.00 feet, a central angle of 05°27'39" and a chord bearing S 27°47'01'W, 108.61 feet to a 1/2" iron rod set in the South right-of-way line of said Old M. K. & T. Railroad, being the No[ih boundary line of a 243.185 acre tract of land described in deed to Epic Development, Inc., recorded in Volume 3245, Page .699 of .the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE N 41°26'39"W along the South right-of-way of said Old M. K. & T. Railroad and the North boundary line of said 243.185 acre tract, 84.48 feet to a 1/2" iron rod set in the proposed West right-of-way line of Bdnker Road; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY along the proposed West right-of-way line of Brinker Road (a proposed 80 foot wide right-of-way), 109.91 feet along a Curve to the Left, having a radius of 1060.00 feet, a central angle of 05°56'27" and a chord beadng N 26°07'45"E, 109.86 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING, containing 8,740 square feet of land. 'Page 1 of I W.A. No. 99004 February 1, 2000 -8- L. / / -9- Denton Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Meeting November 10, 1999 Denia Recreation Center DRAFT Members present: Don Edwards, Dale YeaRs, Dalton Gregory, Brandon Barns, Gwendolyn Carter, and Brenda Phillips. Members absent: Corina Romas Staffpresent: Ed Hodney, Janet Simpson, Kathy Mosby, Bob Tickner and Janie McLeod. Others attending: Judy Atkinson, Sterling Smith and Linda Manaco to speak on the Rail Trails item. Chahtnan Don Edwards called the meeting to order at 4:35 p.m. AWARDS AND RECOGNIZATION. Ed discussed the two awards presented to PARD at the Texas Recreation and Parks Society (T.R.A.P.S.) Region 2 & 3 luncheon. Amy Docteur was awarded the Lone Star program for her therapeutic recreation program "Shine in 99". Also, the Nette Shultz Neighborhood won a community involvement award for their contribution to the walkway and bridge in Nette Shultz park. Brenda asked that the staff be congratulated for their award winning efforts. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 9 AND OCTOBER 22, 1999. Brandon Barnes moved to approve the September 9, 1999, minutes as distributed. Dale Yeatts seconded the motion and it was passed unanimous. Dale Yeatts moved to approve the October 22, 1999, minutes as distributed. Brandon Barnes seconded the motion and it was passed unanimous. ACTION ITEMS. Request from City of Denton Engineering Regarding the Denton Branch Rad Trail. Bob Tickner asked for Board's consideration and approval for an easement across the Brinker Road crossing to the Denton Branch Rail Trail for a new roadway south of loop 288. The new road is Brinker Road. Bob said other options had been considered and there had not been any other feasible or prudent alternative to the placement of the new Brinker roadway. Bob said that to construct a highway bridge over the rail trail would be at an estimated cost of $1.6 million. The crossing will open up access to other properties in the area of Denton Regional Hospital and WalMart. Bob added that there would be a total of 18 crossing when the trail is completed. Dalton asked about the crossing bridge at Loop 288. Bob said TXDOT plans to build a pedestrian bridge over the new Loop 288 during reconstruction of 288. Bob said Mayhill Road will be upgraded and Loop 288 bypass will not be happening as originally planned. Dalton asked if the railroad could request the return of the rail track. Bob said yes they could and if within the first 10 years they would have to reimburse the City for its capital expenditures up to $150,000. Brenda Phillips asked about the safety of pedestrians crossing the new Brinker Road. Bob said there would be a signal light like at traffic lights to stop traffic for pedestrians to cross with a median between lanes. -10- DRAFT Citizen, Linda Monaco said that it was sad that nothing had been completed on the Rail Trail after 6-7 years of discussions. She commented that the trail with all the street crossings was not a place to be riding bikes and that it was too congested area and will only get worse. Citizen, Sterling Smith expressed his thoughts on the importance of the trails to the community and recommended that the City and County communicate with each other on linking the trails to the Trinity River, Green Belt and other cities. Mr. Smith was concerned that if requests for a trail crossing are granted that soon there won't be much of a trail because of all the crossings. He asked that the City come to the rescue and work with developers for alternate routes. Smith also commented on his concerns that the crossing light system wouldn't be safe enough measures for children crossing the trail. Mr. Smith's concern was to protect the trail and not have several crossings on the trails. Brandon Barnes said that if there are nine crossing to Brinker Road, then there could be several miles of uninterrupted trails between the crossings. Ed stated that the crossings are being driven by thoroughfare planning. He said that a Rail Trail Crossing policy is being developed and should help with future decisions. ACTION: Brandon made a motion to deny staff's recommendation to approve the Brinker Road Crossing as presented to be at grad~ crossing. An alternative to build a pedestrian bridge over the new road is recommended at this location. Dalton Gregory seconded the motion and it passed unanimous. Gwendolyn asked about the lighting and curfews for the trails. Ed said the trail would be the same as the parks - operating hours are fi.om 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. He added that the more urban the area, the more likely there will be more lights. Dalton suggested that the trails might need to be redesigned or request for more grant money for lights. Request from City of Corinth Regarding the Denton Branch Rail Trail. Bob said that thia item differs fi.om the first item because the City of Corinth was asking to construct a tunnel for Trail users with a new road to loop to the east side of Corinth. He added that due to the 1-35E exit t/460 configuration, it would require the new road to be raised to meet the elevation of the intersection. The City of Corinth plans to have a 10 x 10 concrete box tunnel that is 95 ft. long under the new road. The tunnel will be lighted. Ed said there would be a grade separation and continuous route for Trail users. ACTION: Brandon made a motion to approve the request because of no feasible or prudent alternative to the placement of the new Corinth Loop roadway..Dale seconded the motion and it was passed unanimous. Amendment: In addition there are no feasible or prudent alternative to the placement of the new Corinth Loop roadway at this location and that all reasonable planning had been done. The Board will ask the City Council to ensure that any future work within the right of way continue grade separation if this is granted. Brandon moved to approve the motion as amended and Dale seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimous. -Il- DRAFT Brenda asked about the safety of the tunnel regarding flooding. Bob said the tunnel flares Out at each end and the floor will be one foot lower than the existing railroad bed, but above any drainage area. He added that the drainage crowns in the middle and flows out and will drain properly. Bob said there would be consideration of skylights so if the electric lights fail there will be some kind of lighting for safety. Bob said there will be a public hearing at the Council meeting on December 7th at 6:00 p.m. and citizens' comments can be heard. DISCUSSION ITEMS - No items were listed on the agenda. Bond Election. Don said that City Council had approved the Capital Improvement Projects and the bond election has been set for January 15, 2000. Meeting Dates. Ed was asked to e-mail the Board requesting input on a more convenient meeting date and time. Park Master Plan. Ed distributed a list of rankings for the Park Master Plan consults and asked the Board to return the ranking by the next day. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Project Status Report- Ed said he would response to any questions the Board may have regarding the distributed report. Brenda asked for more information as to what each project involves. Janet told the Board that there would be a neighborhood meeting to discuss the South Lakes and Joe Skiles parks improvements to get citizen input on November 22 at 6:00 p.m. location to be announced. (Motel 8 on 1-35). Also, Ed said that a Park Master Plan meeting has been scheduled for November 18th at 6:30 p.m. at the MLK Recreation Center. OTHER ITEMS Leisure Services Briefing - Postponed to December meeting. ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING ~' Brenda asked if the Park Board should be doing a vision and goals as the KDB Board has done at their planning retreat. ~' Rail Trail Briefing and tour. ~' Leisure Service Briefing. Brenda asked the Board to encourage citizens to fill out a survey for the "Raise the Bar" campaign. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m. -12- Parks and Recreation Board Meeting January 27, 2000 Den. ia Recreation Center UKAi' i Members present: Don Edwards, Dalton Gregory, Dale Yeatts, Brandon Barnes, Brenda Phillips, and Gwendolyn Carter. Staff present: Ed Hodney, Bob Tickner, Janet Simpson, Kathy Mosby, and Janie McLeod. Amy Docteur with PARD's Therapeutic Recreation. Chairman Don Edwards called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. A motion made by Dalton Gregory and seconded by Gwendolyn Carter approved the minutes from the November 10, 1999. Amy Docteur, with PARD Therapeutic Recreation, invited the Board to participate in the Sweetheart Ball being held on Febma_ry 11 at the Civic Center. Amy explained that the da_nee is for individuals with physical and development disabilities. ACTION ITEMS Consider a Request from the City of Denton Engineering Department to Construct a New Street Across the Denton Branch Rail Trail. Bob discussed the Lakeview crossing on the Rail Trial. He stated that the trail would be redirected through 10'xl0' culverts north of the road crossing and would be ADA accessible. The Board inquired about the flooding possibilities. Bob explained that the land would be raised four inches with slots along the side to drain the water. Signage would be required. Bob said that there would be a public meeting at the City Council February 15th meeting and invited the Board to attend. Dalton moved to approve the Lakeview crossing with appropriate signage for high water. Brandon Barnes seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Reconsider the November IOta Action of the Park Board on the City of Denton Engineering Department's Request to Construct a New Street Across the Denton Branch Rail Trail at Brink, er Road. Ed requested that the Board revisit the item from the November meeting. He said that maps were included in the packet and more information was available to share with the Board. Bob Tickner pointed out the current 15 crossings at-grade on the Rail Trail. He commented that the total Brinker Road crossing, as presently designed, would cost the City $900,000. The cost of a pedestrian bridge crossing is estimated at $350,000. He reminded the board that the Mayhill Road crossing will be upgraded and that Brinker Road along with Loop 288 and Mayhill Road will help relieve traffic congestion. Bob asked the Board to reconsider if the pedestrian overhead bridge the most feasible option. Brandon Barnes commented that the crossing was not as close as he thought and that a mile between crossings wasn't unreasonable. Dale Yeatts asked why Parks and Recreation would support a crossing the trail. Dale said he wanted to protect the parkland. Ed said that, this was not a requirement of state law, but that the needs of the community were taken into consideration. Brenda asked if State law required the land be put back to its original condition? Ed explained that the road would be paved and that the area around the crossing would be restored to its original condition if damages were incurred. Dalton Gregory said that it appears that proper funding was not designated for the project, but understands that the mad needs to be built. The Board wanted the City Council to understand their hesitation to approve the request. Dalton said it sounds like the message being sent to the public is anti-business when the City doesn't follow the same standards that the developers are required to follow. Dale Yeatts moved that the Board reluctantly reject the recommendation. The reasons the Board stated were: better planning and funding might have provided for the grade separation; the City should follow the same requirements that the developers are asked to follow; crossing doesn't enhance the park land; safety concerns; and the negative impact on the land. Dalton Gregory seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. -14- AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Planning Department David Hill, 349-8314 Agenda No. t~-- ~'~q ....... ~_" Agenda Item ;~ Date ...___._~§. O0 ..... SUBJECT - Z-99-071: (2446 Lillian Miller Parkway) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance amending Section 1, conditions 5, 8 and 13 of Ordinance No. 96-187. Amendment of condition 5 (maintaining trees larger than 2" in diameter within 10' of the southern property line), condition 8 (removal of a 15 foot bufferyard along the southern property line) and condition 13 (erecting an 8' solid fence along the southern property line) is requested. The 0.456 acre property is located at 2446 Lillian Miller Parkway. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-1) with conditions. BACKGROUND The applicant has requested to amend three conditions of Ordinance No. 96-187 to expand parking on the property. The subject property is located in an Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district created by Ordinance No. 96-187 on September 3, 1996. (see Attachment 1, enclosure 4). Ten (10) property owners were notified of the request by certified mail and Forty-one (41) courtesy notices were mailed to properties within 500 feet. Three (3) letters of opposition representing approximately 21.8 % have been received. Mrs. Graner (owner of two of the properties) will rescind her opposition if conditions 1, 2 and 3 recommended by P&Z and identified in the draft ordinance are incorporated in an approval. This would lower the opposition to approximately 8.2 %. (see Attachment 3) PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ-99-071: Application Date - August 31, 1999. P&Z Dates - October 13, December 1 & 15, 1999 and January 12, 2000. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE If approved, a parking lot site plan will be required prior to expansion of the existing parking lot. FISCAL INFORMATION Development of this property will require no short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city. As a form of infill development, no extension of public infrastructure is necessary to service this site. 1. P&Z SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-1) of this zoning request with the following conditions: 1. Condition number 5 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches (2") in diameter which are located within ten feet (10') of any property line abutting residentially zoned property, unless such trees would interfere with any fence requirements." 2. Condition number 8 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A "bufferyard" measuring fifteen feet (15) wide, and comprising four (4) canopy and eight (8) understory trees per each one hundred linear feet (100') shall be installed along all property lines abutting residentially zoned property." 3. Condition number 13 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A minimum eight-foot (8') tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained along the boarders of all residentially zoned property." 4. The southern most driveway at the Timber Oaks Office Park, adjacent to Southridge Oaks, be removed on or before March 1, 2000. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions. 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Report, January 12, 2000, Z-99-071 (includes minutes and reports from previous P&Z meetings). 2. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes from January 12, 2000. 3. Opposition Calculations 4. Draft Ordinance. Respectfully submitted: Douglas S. l~ov~ell, AICP Director of Planning and Development Prepared by: Development Review Manager ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda No. ~ Agenda Item Subject: 2446 Lillian Miller Parkway Staff: Larry Reichhart, Development Review Manager Case Number: z-gg-071 Agenda Date: December15,1999, January 12,2000,& January 26,2000 Continue a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council to amend Section 1(5, 8 and 13) of Ordinance No. 96-187. The applicant has requested an amendment to condition 5 (maintaining trees larger than 2" in diameter within 10' of the southern property line), condition 8 (removal of a 15 foot bufferyard along the southern property line) and condition 13 (erecting an 8' solid fence along the southern property line). Location: Size: LOCATION MAP 2446 Lillian Miller Parkway. 0.456acres Applicant: Landmark Surveyors Owner: 4238 1-35 North Denton, TX 76205 Scott Lipscomb D.D.S. 2446 Lillian Miller Pkwy Denton, Tx 76205 On September 3, 1996, the subject property, known as Lot 10R in Block 1, of the J.W. Erwin Subdivision was part of a rezone from SF-16 to Office Conditioned (O(C)). At that time, the property had not been platted and was part of a larger tract that was legally described as 2.6662 acres in the John McGowen Survey, which has since been platted as well as replatted. At the time of the rezoning the property to the south remained as a single family residential district. This set forth, the conditions for the buffer yard, saving the existing trees and erecting the fence as conditions of approval. Subsequent to the rezoning, the adjacent property to the south has since been rezoned from single-family to office use, which in turn, makes the two abutting properties, zoned for office use. This could then allow the conditions relating to the requirement between the two properties to be removed. September 3, 1996 - The subject property was part of a 2.662 acre tract out of the John McGowen Survey that was rezoned from SF-16 to Office conditioned (O(c)).through Ordinance 96-187. December 10, 1997 - The subject property was part of the J.W. Erwin plat that was platted and approved. February 11, 1998 - The subject property was part of a replat and became what it is currently described as, Lot 10R in Block 1, of the J.W. EnNin Subdivision. Notice of the zoning request was published in the Denton Record-Chronicle on Sunday, December 5, 1999. Ten (10) property owners were notified of the request by certified mail and Forty-one (41) courtesy notices were mailed to properties within 500 feet.. As of this writing, there have been two letters of opposition which does not represent more than twenty percent of property within the two hundred foot notice area. Public hearings were held on October 13th , December 1st and 15th and January 12, 2000. The original intent of the three conditions was to buffer the adjacent residential properties from commercial development. As the property to the south is now commercially zoned the request to modify the conditions is appropriate with further stipulations. The request should not effect any of the adjacent residential property and should only apply to the portion of the property that abuts commercially zoned property. Modification of the three conditions will still require the property to comply with the Landscape Code, which requires fifteen (15) trees per acre and twenty (20) percent of all surfaces to remain pervious (plantable area). Finally the modification of the conditions will facilitate the expansion of parking on the property and should only be approved on the condition that the northern most driveway at the Timber Oaks Office Park, adjacent to Southridge Oaks Office Park is to be removed (See Enclosure 6) Staff recommends approval of Z-99-07 with the following conditions: Condition number 5 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches (2") in diameter which are located within ten feet (10') of any property line abutting residentially zoned property, unless such trees would interfere with any fence requirements." Condition number 8 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A "bufferyard" measuring fifteen feet (15) wide, and comprising four (4) canopy and eight (8) understory trees per each one hundred linear feet (100') shall be installed along all property lines abutting residentially zoned property." Condition number 13 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A minimum eight-foot (8') tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained along the boarders of all residentially zoned property." The southern most driveway at the Timber Oaks Office Park, adjacent to Southridge Oaks, be removed on or before March 1,2000. I move to recommend approval Z-99-071 with the following conditions: Condition number 5 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches (2") in diameter which are located within ten feet (10') of any property line abutting residentially zoned property, unless such trees would interfere with any fence requirements." Condition number 8 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A "bufferyard" measuring fifteen feet (15) wide, and comprising four (4) canopy and eight (8) understory trees per each one hundred linear feet (100') shall be installed along all property lines abutting residentially zoned property." Condition number 13 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A minimum eight-foot (8') tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained along the boarders of all residentially zoned property." The southern most driveway at the Timber Oaks Office Park, adjacent to Southridge Oaks be removed on or before March 1, 2000. 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. 1. Vicinity Map. 2. Zoning Map. 3. 200-500' Notification Map. 4. Ordinance No. 96-187 5. Draft Ordinance 6. Driveway Letters Z-99-071 ENCLOSURE 1 (2446 Lillian Miller Parkway) NORTH 'VICINITY MAP Agenda Date: October 13, 1999 Scale: None o Z-99-071 ENCLOSURE 2 (2446 Lillian Miller Parkway) NORTH ZONING MAP Agenda Date: October 13, 1999 Scale: None Z-99-071 ENCLOSURE 3 (2446 LILLIAN MILLER PKVVY) NORTH 200-500 FOOT NOTICE MAP Agenda Date: October 13, 1999 Scale: None 10. zg;oo?c.o~o ENCLOSURE 4' O IN CE NO. qG- 9 ANORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FORA CHANGE FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY 16 (SF-16) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO THE OFFICE CONDITIONED (O[C]) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 2.6662 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LILLIAN MILLER PARKWAY APPROXI- MATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF 1-35E; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Mr. Rob Rayner, on behalf of First State Bank of Denton, initiated a change in zoning for 2.6662 acres of land from the Single Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district classification and use designation to the Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a change from the Single Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district and use classification to the Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district and use classification; and WHEREAS, on June 18, 1996, the Council of the City of Denton, Texas considered the rezoning application and voted 4-3 in favor of the rezoning, believing at the time that a majority vote was sufficient; and WHEREAS, it was subsequently discovered that a supermajority vote was necessary to effectuate the rezoning, by virtue of the fact that the owners of at least 20% of the land within 200 feet of. the subject property were opposed; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 1996, a majority of the Planning & Zoning Commissioners in attendance gave informal direction to City staff to waive any subsequent zoning application fee on the subject property; and WHEREAS, On JUly 11, 1996, Mr. Robert Rayner submitted a new petition tO rezone the subject property, requesting rezoning to a conditioned zoning district which was more restrictive than the petition considered on June 18, 1996; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 1996, notice was sent pursuant to State law for a second rezoning case on the subject property, similar to the first; and WHEREAS, on July 24, 1996, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Denton, Texas'voted to allow the City's application of this second rezoning on the property in the public interest, and without fee, pursuant to §35-7(a) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, so that the original applicant would not be called upon to pay a second application fee in this matter, and so 11. that the ~ezoning effort would not be barred by §35-7(b) (6) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, which prohibits reconsideration of a denied zoning application within twelve months of the denial, absent a finding of changed circumstances in the neighborhood, or a finding that the reconsideration was for a more restrictive zoning classification; and WHEREAS, on July 24, 1996, the Planning.and Zoning.Commission recommended approval of a change requested'in the subsequent peti- tion, from the Single Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district and use classification to the Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district and use classification; and WHEREAS, the owner of the property and a designated represen- tative of the neighborhood settled upon a set of conditions agreeable to the owner and the surrounding neighbors, and have indicated their concurrence with the rezoning herein proposed; and WHEREAS, a new set of proposed conditions reviewed by the owner and the neighborhood representative was reviewed by the Planning staff, and found to be in compliance with the Denton Development Plan; and WHEREAS, the newly proposed conditions included at least one condition which was deemed to be less restrictive than those which were previously noticed for public hearing and considered by the Denton Planning & Zoning Commission on July 24, 1996; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 1996, the Planning & Zoning Commission indicated its ongoing approval of City's sponsorship of a third rezoning proposal, in the public interest and without fee, pursuant to §35-7(a) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas; and WHEREAS, on August 16, 1996, notice of an August 28, 1996 public hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commission was sent to all owners of real property within 200' of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission reconsidered zoning under the newly, proposed conditions on August 28, 1996, and voted to recommend approval of same to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council now finds that it would have postponed the June 18, 1996 vote on the rezoning to allow time to clear up the uncertainty surrounding the majority requirements prior to voting; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that the withdrawal of the zoning protest of Mitchell Vexler on three lots within 200 feet PAGE 2 12. of the subject property, as well as the apparent resolution of conflicts between the owner and the surrounding neighborhood, constitutes a substantial change in theconditions surrounding the area to be rezoned, that would have warranted reconsideration of the original rezoning request; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that due to the confu- sion surrounding the initial vote concerning the percentage.of land owners protesting the rezoning, and the fact that the City Council anticipates that the chapter of the Code of Ordinances applicable to zoning will be shortly amended to allow zoning'reapplications similar to this without the necessity of a waiting period, that a variance from the waiting period should be granted; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed Office Conditioned zoning would provide a smoother transition between adjacent properties zoned for residential and commercial uses. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning will be in compliance with the Denton Development Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the Zoning district classification and use' designation of the 2.6662 acres of land described in Exhibit 1, is changed from the Single-Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district classifi- cation and use designation to the Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, subject to the following conditions: That the uses described in the list attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit 2, shall be prohibited within this district, in addition, to those ordinarily prohibited by the Office classification, or any other condition listed herein. That the total floor area for all buildings constructed on the 2.6662 acres shall not exceed 30,000 square feet. 3. That no loading docks shall be permitted. That the exterior walls of all buildings shall be constructed of brick or brick veneer. The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches (2") in diameter which are located within ten feet (10') of any property line, other than a property line fronting Lillian Miller Parkway, unless such trees would interfere with any required fence. PAGE 3 13. No "off-premise" signs (as defined.by Section 33-2 of the -Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, or its succes, sor) Shall be permitted. 7. No direct off-site lighting shall be permitted. A "bufferyard" measuring fifteen feet (15') wide, and comprising four (4) canopy and eight (8) understory trees per each one hundred linear feet (100'), shall be in- stalled along the western and southern property lines of the acreage described in Exhibit 1. There shall be no second story windows allowed on any western-facing facades of any building, nor any second story windows on any southern-facing facade within 150' of the southern property line, on the acreage described in Exhibit 1. 10. Maximum building height shall not exceed two (2) stories; however, no more than ten thousand square feet (10,000 ft.2), in the aggregate, may be located on the second stories of all the two-story buildings. 11. No individual bUilding may exceed 7,500 square feet in floor area. ~ 12. Ail buildings must have pitched roofs, and no roof surface may have a slope of less than 30%. 13. A minimum eight-foot (8') tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained on the western and southern borders of the property described in Exhibit 1. SECTION II. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION III That the provisions of §35-7(6) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, to the extent that they would impede any reconsideration of a rezoning on the subject property within 12 months of the initial consideration, are hereby varied and superseded for the limited purposes of this rezoning. SECTION IV. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00.' Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become e££ectiv¢ ~our- teen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be PAGE 4' 14. published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published-in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the ~___~day of~ 1996. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY PAGE 5 15. DESCRIPTION OF 2.6662 ACRES XN THE JOHN McGOWEN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER-797, CXTY AND COUNTY OF DENTON, TEXAS. ALL THAT CERTAIN'TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING SlTUATZD IN THE JOHN McGOWEN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 797, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENTON, TEXAS, BEING ALL OF LOTS 6, 7 AND 8, BLOCK 1, J. W. ERWIN SUBDIVISION, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 337, PAGE 530, DEED RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND BEING.MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 WHICH IS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 3R, BLOCK 1, J. W. ERWIN SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN CABINET E, PAGE 96, PLAT RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND IN THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY OF LILLIAN MILLER PAI~AY; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 05 MINUTES 14 SECONDS EAST ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY OF LILLIAN MILLER PARKWAY A DISTANCE OF 449.32 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8, BLOCK 1, AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF A CALLED 5.1649 ACRE TRACT, TRACT 1, AS DESCRIBED IN A DEED FROM, TERI TAYLOR COMPANIES, INC., TO MAVEX 9, INC., ON THE 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER 1992, AND RECORDED IN VOLUME 3417, PAGE 0001, REAL PROPERTY RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 08 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT 8 AND THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID MAVEX 9, INC. TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 258.44 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CONWAY STREET IN THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 11, BLOCK A, THE RIDGE OF SOUTHRIDGE, AN ADDITION TO THE. CITY OF DENTON, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED CABINET D, PAGE 330, PLAT RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; THENCE NO~TH 00 DEGREES 05 MINUTES 42 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY OF CONWAY STREET A DISTANCE OF 449.39 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 09 SECONDS EAST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT 3R A DISTanCE OF 258.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINI~IG 2.6662 ACRES OF LAND. EXHIBIT 2 LIST OF PROHIBn'ED USES Z-96-007C One Family Dwelling Restricted Community Unit Development Dormitory, Boarding or Rooming House Hotel or Motel Church or Rectory Community Center (public) Day Nursery or Kindergarten School Group Homes Halfway House Hospital (General Acute Care) Hospital (Chronic Care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthropic Nature Monastery or Convent Nursing Home or Residence Home for Aged Occasional Sales Park, Playground or Public Community Center School, Private Primary or Secondary School, Public or Denominational Accessory Building Community Center (private) Electrical Substation Electrical Transmission Une Temporary Field or Constmcticn Office (subject to approval and control by Building Inspector) Fire Station or Similar Public Safety Building Gas Transmission Une and Metering Station Home Occupation Off Street Remote Parking Sewage Pumping Station Private Swimming Pool Telephone Une & Exchange Switching or Relay Station Water Reservoir, Water Pumping Station or Well Country Club (private) with Golf Course Public Golf Course Public Park or Playground Public Play Field or Stadium Swim or Tennis Club Railroad Track or Right-of-Way Animal Clinic or Hospital (no. outside runs or pens) Farm or Ranch Cemetery or Mausoleum Fraternity, Sorority, Lodge or Civic Club Home for Care of Alcoholic, Narcotic or Psychiatric Patients Public Building, Shop, Yard of Local, State of Federal Government Radio and/or Talevision Microwave Tower Water Treatment Plant Airport Landing Field or Heliport Commercial Parking Lot or Structure Cafeteria Mortuary or Funeral Parlor Restaurant ENCLOSURE 5 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF ORDINANCE 96-187 WHICH ESTABLISHED AN OFFICE (O[C]) CONDITIONED ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 0.456 ACRES OF LAND BEING LOT 10R IN BLOCK 1, OF THE J.W. ERWlN SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LILLIAN MILLER PARKWAY APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF 1-35E; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-071) WHEREAS, Landmark Surveyors, Inc, on behalf of Dr. Scott Lipscomb D.D.S., has applied for an amendment to the conditions of Ordinance 96-187, which established a Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district classification and use designation for 0.456 acres of land; and WHEREAS, on November 2, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in conditions of Ordinance 96~ 128; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in conditions of Ordinance 96-128 will be in compliance with the 1988 Denton Development Plan, the 1998 Denton Plan Policies, and the 1999 Growth Management Strategies and Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the conditions of Ordinance 96-187 (Exhibit A), which established an Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district classification and use designation for the subject 0.456 acre property, described in the site plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Lot 10R in Block 1, of the J.W. Erwin Subdivision 1 are amended under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, as follows: Condition No. 5 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read, "The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches (2") in diameter which ,are located within ten feet (10') of any property line abutting residentially zoned property, unless such trees would interfere with any fence requirements." Condition No. 8 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read, "A "bufferyard" measuring fifteen feet (15) wide, and comprising four (4) canopy and eight (8) understory trees per each one hundred linear feet (100') shall be installed along all property lines abutting residentially zoned property." Condition No. 13 of 0rdinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A minimum eight-foot (8') tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained along the borders of all residentially zoned property." SECTION V. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION VI. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,1999. ATTEST: JENNIFERWALTERS, CITY SECRETARY JACK MILLER, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 20. ENCLOSURE6 December 6, 1999 Dr. Scott Lipscomb 2446 Lillian Miller Parkway Denton, TX 76205 Dear Dr. Lipscomb: As per comments made in Development Review Committee on September 24t~, 1998 and October 8~', 1998, the northern most driveway at the Timber Oaks Office Park, adjacent to Southridge Oaks Office Park is to be removed. Copies of the comments are enclosed as well as a copy of a portion of the approved detailed plan for Southridge Oaks. You will note on the enclosed detailed plan, the subject driveway at Timber Oaks was shown to be removed. Please work with Dale Irwin the adjacent property owner to remove the subject driveway no later than March 1st, 2000. If the driveway is not removed by that date, The City of Denton will remove the driveway approach and bill the affected property owners for the work. Please respond in writing with your intentions concerning removal of the subject driveway. Sincerely, David Salmon PE Engineering Administrator City of Denton 21. December 6, 1999 Mr. Dale Irwin Irwin Realty Group 525 South Carroll Blvd. Denton, TX 76201 Dear Mr. Irwin: As per comments made in Development Review Committee on September 24~, 1998 and October 8~, 1998, you are required to remove the northern most driveway at the Timber Oaks Office Park, adjacent to Southridge Oaks. Copies of the comments are enclosed as well as a copy of a portion of the approved detailed plan for Southridge Oaks. You will note on the enclosed detailed plan, the subject driveway at Timber Oaks was shown to be removed. Please work with Dr, Lipscomb the adjacent property owner to remove the subject driveway no later than March 1st, 2000. If the driveway is not removed by that date, The City of Denton will remove the driveway approach and bill the affected property owners for the work. Please respond in writing with your intentions concerning removal of the subject driveway. Sincerely, David Salmon PE Engineering Administrator City of Denton 22. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ATTACHMENT 2 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Ail right. this particular time, at least, we'll go ahead. right. then. So at Ail ~ Very good. We'll move ahead with Item No. 6 ~ Item 6 was to continue a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council to amend Section 1, Subsection 5, 8, and 13 of ordinance No. 96-187. The applicant has requested an amendment to the ordinance to allow the removal of a 15-foot bufferyard, relief from maintaining trees greater than two inches in caliper, and erecting an eight-foot tall fence along the southern property line that abuts the office Conditioned zoning district. The bufferyard, tree, and screening requirements abutting the residential zoning district will not be removed. And since this is a continuance, at this time it would appear that we have a different staff member that's going to give us a report tonight. Mr. Donaldson, if you would, sir. MR. DONALDSON: Thank you, Mr. chair, Commission. Larry has been unexpectedly delayed at the doctor's office, may not be able to appear for awhile, so I'll try to jump in and manage through this. This particular case has been continued a number of times and it may, in fact, have to be continued yet again. Really, it's boiled down to the issue of two existing driveway PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 23. JANUARY 26, 2000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cuts and trying to decide which one ought to be the appropriate one. In your backup, we had recommended a condition that the southern-most driveway at the Timber Oaks office Park, which is partially on this property, on this flagpole portion be removed on or before March 1st, 2000. We've been trying to clarify the chronology of events between the platting of this subdivision and the platting and zoning approvals of Southridge Oaks office Park immediately to the south. There was language during our discussions with regard to Southridge Oaks about allowing one or the other of those driveways but not both. We have yet to get that resolved and the only way that we could recommend approval of the amendments to the conditions, which really aren't related to the driveway, is if we were a condition such that either of the southern-most driveway of Timber Oaks or the northern-most driveway of Southridge Oaks be closed on or before March 1st. And that in the event that the existing driveway in Timber Oaks, which is the northern-most office park, that no additional parking be allowed along that driveway due to its problems with regard to distance back from the right-of-way. If you're uncomfortable with that condition, we understand, and I don't know that time'is of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 26, 2000 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 essence. It's always important to move as quickly as we can but I think getting it right is probably more important so take that into consideration. As we reviewed our notes, it was pretty clear to us, as Southrid~e was developing, that we would allow one or the other but not both, and today we have both. And we believe we have the municipal authority to close down one of them and we need to work it out with the respective owners as to which one is the better one. Any questions? MR. ENGELBRECHT: Ms. Gourdie. MS. GOURDIE: Thank you. I do have quite a few questions. First question that I have is I guess the median cut that's now there at the top of the hill with the blind side there goes into the Southridge Oaks subdivision. So if that one's closed, then what we'll have is what we're having now of people making u-turns and kind of going up the wrong way road to get to that intersection to cut through or they were going up to the Alberton's and u-turning around. So I guess I'm perplexed as to how the option could even be to close the northern-most of the Southridge Oaks side office complex. MR. DONALDSON: In the event that that driveway were shut down, that median opening would also be closed which would take all of the traffic up to the northern end of Timber Oaks where there is access into the PLANNING AND ZONING COMNISSION 25. JANUARY 26, 2000 11 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 office park through that driveway that's between Red Lobster and, I guess, the Keller -- MS. GOURDIE: Well, the Apple Orthodontics and the Keller Williams office complex which heads off into two different directions. There is a light going in there. I see signal work going is; is that correct? MR. DONALDSON: I believe so. MS. GOURDIE: Okay. Secondly, I guess I'm perplexed as to how those can even be in question. I reviewed the videotape of the city Council meeting for the Southridge Oaks office complex and it stated very clearly that there would be a drive-through between the two office complexes and that one driveway would be closed, very clearly when I watched it three or four times, because there was a lot of questions I had. So I'm curious as to why there's even any confusion as to what's really happening here. MR. DONALDSON: The confusion comes with the chronology of ownership primarily and when the lot in question was actually purchased by the current owner with respect to the timing of the Southridge Oaks zoning and platting. MS. GOURDIE: I guess then what I don't understand is how does the owner of this one building, the doctor's office, how does his purchase of a property PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 26. JANUARY 26, 2000 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 affect the legality of two driveways, one of being in, let's say, an illegal conforming or illegal -- I don't know what the word is but they're too close together. And that this one whole office complex was approved based on these conditions. So I don't know how this even comes into play. I'm confused and maybe you could help me understand, but I don't see how one man buying a building, building 'a building has control over the whole way the ordinance was written and so I don't understand. MR. DONALDSON: Well, it's because he has ownership of part of the driveway and he wasn't a party to the Southridge Oaks development. So, therefore, not a part of that agreement. Now, we've always felt that only one driveway was allowed there and early in the negotiations in the Southridge Oaks development, we gave them the choice of going with either the Timber Oaks driveway or the Southridge Oaks driveway. That moved towards closing down the Timber Oaks driveway because we weren't aware that the properties had actually changed hands and that the owners of the Southridge Oaks actually still had ownership to that driveway. So the issue of ownership becomes part of the discussion. MS. GOURDIE: Okay. What I would like, if we PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 27. JANUARY 26, 2000 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 continue this on, I would like a picture of what's being proposed because it's very difficult to imagine if the northern-most of Southridge Oaks is closed down, which leaves the southern-most of Timber Oaks open, there's no longer parking. The situation is that Dr. Lipscomb wants parking so he won't get parking. So either way, there's a bad situation happening here and I would just like to see a visual of the two options that would be -- one of them has to happen. Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. McNeill. MR. MCNEILL: Yeah. I think you've answered part of my questions. But if the cut that would be between the south park and the north business park, that's up to the owners to decide where that would go. We're not trying to dictate where that cut would occur. MR. DONALDSON: Within -- yeah, within reason. MR. MCNEILL: Right, yeah. MR. DONALDSON: There is some flexibility. MR. MCNEILL: I understand there is certain -- yeah, right. And so Dr. Lipscomb is not willing, if I understand what you're saying, at this point to close that entrance on to Lillian Miller even though he's going to have an access to the south park. Did he give any reason for that? MR. DONALDSON: Not that I'm aware of. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 28. JANUARY 26, 2000 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MCNEILL: Because it looks to me like he's getting the best of both worlds. He's getting, gaining his parking. He still has access to an entrance on to Lillian Miller. So I guess I'm confused as to why he doesn't approve that or why he's resisting that. If I'm understanding correctly, he's resisting this closure of that right-of-way, that cutaway into Lillian Miller. MR. DONALDSON: Yes, sir. MR. MCNEILL: Okay. Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Rishel. MR. RISHEL: I guess I'd like to hear from Dr. Lipscomb is he's here on what that precipitates. It looks to me like there's several other things with regard to conditions that he's looking at trying to deal with, circumvent. I don't know what the best word is. No. 5, No. 8, and No. 13 of Ordinances No. 19-187, would you explain to me how 5, 8, and 13 are variances from what we would typically have as ordinances? MR. DONALDSON: Well, these are conditions that were placed in the zoning that allowed the offices to be developed. In this particular case, they all relate to a required landscape bufferyard around the property that was at that time adjacent to residentially zoned land. That included what we now call Southridge Oaks. At that time, that was zoned for residential use. That has since PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 29. JANUARY 26, 2000 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 been rezoned for office use. And in an effort to increase parking, the applicant wanted to encroach into that bufferyard where it was adjacent to the office uses. Well, these three conditions dictated that the bufferyard be so many feet, have a fence, and maintain the landscaping and trees that existed. So in order to encroach into that required bufferyard, he had to amend those three conditions. Those are addressed in our recommended conditions 1 through 3. And in doing so, the issue of the driveways came into play. MR. RISHEL: Okay. So what you're saying is that there is no change on those No. 5, No. 8, and No. 13 from what our ordinance reads other than the fact that how it affects residential. MR. DONALDSON: We keep the bufferyard in tact as it was originally conditioned adjacent to residential, the current residential uses. MR. RISHEL: Right. And it would not be necessary under our ordinance if it was abutting commercial property? MR. DONALDSON: Correct. MR. RISHEL: Okay. Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. I think my question'~ kind of been answered, but I haven't heard it the way I PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 30. JANUARY 26, 2000 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 can understand it. What's the hardship here? MR. DONALDSON: The hardship is the existing condition that was put in place to buffer office uses from residential uses. Some of those residential uses have gone away and the applicant questions why do I have to have this bufferyard between two office parks. MR. WILLIAMS: I'm talking about, but why is it a hardship? MR. DONALDSON: I don't think it's a question of a hardship. This isn't a variance. It's an amendment to a condition of the zoning. MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. But my understanding when we start easing rules to me, in my mind, it has to be some type of hardship upon the property owner, in my mind. MR. DONALDSON: Well, it prevents him from utilizing land that would be in that bufferyard for other purposes such as parking when the conditions have changed that required the bufferyard. MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. MR. ENGELBRECHT: A question. If the driveway is removed, I'm assuming that as part of that, although it's unstated, would be that it be brought back to the condition that it would have had to have been at with no driveway there. In other words, they'd have to landscape and et cetera. In essence, this is not a situation where PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 31. JANUARY 26, 2000 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you can just put a cement block out there and call it closed? MR. DONALDSON: Right. We may, in fact, do the removal, the City may, in fact, do that themselves, ourselves. MR. ENGELBRECHT: All right. As I understand it, as you said, the issue of the driveways came up when the request came in for the other with regard to the other issues and that's a benefit to the city, as I see it. MR. DONALDSON: Correct. MR. ENGELBRECHT: From the standpoint that we don't have so many driveway cuts, the traffic flows smoother, et cetera, because I know we've been trying to close up those along University and a number of other places where we used to have them every three feet, almost, or in some places continuous. Okay. All right. Is the petitioner or petitioner's representative present? If you care to make any remarks, please do so. Name and business address, please. MR. IRWIN: My name is Dale Irwin. My office is at 525 South Carroll. I am not the petitioner nor am I his representative so I'm not authorized to speak in his case. But I am involved in this development because we developed the northern part that you're talking about where Dr. Lipscomb's office is. And Dr. Lipscomb bought 18 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 26, 2000 32. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that office, and I don't have the dates in front of me because I didn't come prepared to even speak about this, with the understanding that he had an entrance going out to Lillian Miller Parkway, which he did. We own half of that entrance and that's probably something that's a little bit hard to visualize. But the City, if you can believe this, has an ordinance, or we do have an ordinance, that requires that any lot that has to have at least 30 foot of frontage on the main street or to the street that it's closest to. So a lot was created for Dr. Lipscomb and 30 foot -- it's not an easement because it's actually his ownership that goes out to the street. The driveway that's in place there and was put in place when he bought his property is 24-feet wide which is regulations. He owns approximately half the driveway. We own half of it. And then it's a legitimate or a platted easement for the use of all. About six months later, and I might hasten to say that this, I think, is an important thing, Southridge Addition which came into being, you know, within a year after that, was not a dream in anybody's eye when this first development took place because it was residential zoned and that was the case. But we went into a zoning application. Purchased it ~ubj~et to getting it zoned and we were fortunate enough to get it zoned and are in the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 33. JANUARY 26, 2000 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 process of developing it. Part of the plan, hopefully, was to make an easement across Dr. Lipscomb's office and go, you know, where you could have ingress and egress from one development to the other. Obviously, that's controlled by Dr. Lipscomb because he owns the property. I think his -- and also the plan originally at that time, which hasn't been brought up tonight, was that the red light which you-all know -- which has been discussed in Denton for probably three years, the red light was going to be at the top of the hill there in front of the northern-most Southridge exit and that's where the red light was planned to be. And it was being worked, the proposal was with Morning Star and you know the resulting mess there that lasted over a year. So the City staff told us and was in memo, I think a couple of PD, the meetings that you had Thursday morning, Development Review, that the plan was to have the red light up at the top of the hill. And if that red light did, in fact, come in, then they would want to come in and close the curb cut in front of Dr. Lipscomb's office and put a median cut in existence there. Sometime later, about six months later, we had a meeting with the Engineering Department and they said we'd still like %o put the median cut in the Southridge deal but the red light is not going to go in. It's going PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 34. JANUARY 26, 2000 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to go in down at the bottom of the hill. We said great. We might be interested in doing it and the Engineering Department said we'd be happy to pay half of it if you do it. We want it that bad. We said that's great but we don't have the authority to close the curb cut because we own half of it and Dr. Lipscomb owns the other half of it. We would like to have the ingress going across the property, both of them because it probably would help everybody involved including Dr. Lipscomb, we feel. And, again, I'm not speaking for him at all. And we honestly don't care whether the second curb cut, you know, in front of his office, even though we own half of it, is closed. Whether it's important to close it, you know, I question that, but I don't know. I'm not a traffic engineer, by any means, or, you know, have that much experience. But Dr. Lipscomb needs more parking and he owns the land to put it on. And the buffer that was, you know, in existence because of that housing development to the south of it is no longer needed. So he has a justifiable reason to expand his parking lot. He has the land to do it in. I think he's agreed to the ingress/egress deal, but I don't think he wants to close the curb cut and that's his prerogative. I'll be happy to answer anything I can, you PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 35. JANUARY 26, 2000 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 know, and, again, I'm not speaking for him. I'm hoping he'll get here in time and I didn't even realize this was on the Agenda, so I didn't come to talk about it. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Ms. Gourdie. MS. GOURDIE: Thank you. Mr. Irwin, I have a question for you. It's quite interesting you had said that -- did you ever bring up during the city Council or the Planning and zoning Commission meetings that Dr. Lipscomb owned half of that? I mean, I don't recall hearing anything of that information. MR. IRWIN: I don't know that we did. He owned it, you know, from the very beginning and when that northern part was platted, his name was on the plat. So, you know, I don't know that we specifically said who owned that lot or who owned Apple Orthodontics. Apple Orthodontics was sold, also. MS. GOURDIE: I guess what I'm curious about is the driveway. Being that you had come before us and talked about Southridge Oaks, you never even mentioned that either. I'm perplexed as to why you left this out so we could not make the proper decision without this information and now we are in a catch-22. MR. IRWIN: I don't guess I understand what you're talking about leaving out. MS. GOURDIE: I'm just saying that you said to PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 36. JANUARY 26, 2000 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 us that six months he owned -- that he owned half the driveway. You've known about that before you even -- you sold it to him. MR. IRWIN: MS. GOURDIE: Exactly. And you knew about it. But I don't remember hearing on the city Council tapes, I don't remember reading it in the Planning and zoning Commission meetings. MR. IRWIN: I probably didn't tell you that Apple Orthodontics owned their lot either and I don't think I'm responsible for telling you who owns property up and down Carroll Boulevard or Lillian Miller. MS. GOURDIE: I'm curious as to -- we cannot make appropriate decisions without information. This is what bothers me is that the whole Southridge Oaks -- MR. IRWIN: Well, what is your -- how are you mixed up? I don't understand it. But the issue is closing the curb cut down at the bottom of the hill. MS. GOURDIE: That is correct. MR. IRWIN: Okay. MS. GOURDIE: And the issue is tha~ we made a decision to approve Southridge Oaks based on certain information that was given to the City. We were sold on a certain bill and we didn't get all the information and so we sold it. We bought it from you and, now, all of 23 PLANNING AND ZONING ~m~TSSION JANUARY 26, 2000 37. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 sudden, we're back here where we are with this problem. And I'm just saying I don't understand how this information got left behind. MR. IRWIN: Well, I don't think it got left I'm sorry you're mixed up, but I don't know that behind. it was -- MS. GOURDIE: No, sir, I'm not mixed up. MR. IRWIN: I don't think I am either. MS. GOURDIE: I'm very smart on this and I'm on to you so I just want to let you know. MR. IRWIN: Okay. Okay. MS. GOURDIE: I just want all the information next time. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Are there any other questions? Thank you, Mr. Irwin. MR. IRWIN: Yes, sir. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Is there anyone else present who would like to address this issue? Is there anyone else present who would like to speak in favor of this petition? Anyone present to speak in favor of this petition? In that case, is there anyone present to speak in opposition to the petition? Anyone present to speak in opposi%ion %o %he petition. S~ing no opposition, rebuttal is waived. The public hearing is closed. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 38. JANUARY 26, 2000 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Mr. Donaldson, you had indicated some staff concern about possibly continuing this. Is there any particular reason why we shouldn't just act on this and move forward from the staff perspective and the city's perspective? MR. DONALDSON: No. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Any other staff remarks with regard to this case? Mr. Salmon. MR. SALMON: Maybe -- I just wanted to go through a couple of facts with you and maybe help you put some of this in perspective. I have been working on the chronological or the chronology of events on how all this came about, the driveways, with Mark Donaldson's help. And I thought it might be appropriate to give you a few dates. I wish I would have brought the timeline with me but I don't have it, but I can try to tell you some specific dates that I recall off the top of my head. To the best that we've been able to determine, Dr. Lipscomb closed on his lot in mid-April of 1998. About two weeks later, we had a predesign conference with Dale Irwin concerning Southridge Oaks. And at that time, we told them that the driveway that they were proposing wasn't going to work because it was too close to the driveway on th~ Timber Oaks O~fice Park. At that time, we didn't know that Dr. Lipscomb had already PLANNING AND ZONING COM~ISSION 39. JANUARY 26, 2000 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 purchased his lot. In fact, I think we thought that Dale Irwin or the Irwin Realty Group still owned it. So within two weeks of Dr. Lipscomb buying the lot, we did have a predesign conference at DRC and indicated that they would not be able to have their northern-most driveway. About two weeks later, about mid-May, we had another DRC meeting where we reviewed the detailed plan for Southridge Oaks. At that point in time, discussion had begun, well, you know, maybe we can have this northern-most driveway. But if we do, then we have to close the southern-most driveway on the other property. And then at the end of May, I think it was around the 27th, there was a public hearing for the detailed plan here at Planning and zoning Commission. And at that time, I believe the applicant of Southridge Oaks, being the Irwin Realty Group, indicated that, you know, closing this driveway at Timber Oaks was an option and something that was being pursued. So, you know, obviously, there was very little, if any, time. I mean, there was a very short period of time there from the time that Dr. Lipscomb bought his lot to the time that we were into the zoning for Southridge Oaks. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. There are some questions here. Mr. Rishel. MR. RISHEL: Yes. I was going to ask Mr. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 40. JANUARY 26, 2000 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Salmon to come forward and speak anyway. You have spoken to all the parties involved here; is that correct? MR. SALMON: I've never personally spoken with Dr. Lipscomb. MR. RISHEL: Have you talked with his representative? MR. SALMON: No. The only person I've ever spoken with concerning this issue representing property owners would have been the Irwin Realty Group folks. I've never spoken directly with Dr. Lipscomb or his real estate agent. I have spoken with his surveyor on a couple of occasions about the issue. MR. RISHEL: And can you kind of summarize his general feelings of the necessity for the driveway access? Obviously, we can't prohibit someone from making access but we can limit the amount of cuts any one property can have. MR. SALMON: Well, let me back up a little bit further and I don't -- I'm sorry I don't remember particular dates and years, but the Irwin Realty Group developed Timber Oaks office Park a couple of years prior to any of this happening and went through the zoning and replatting. At that time, they were told they couldn't have what's now the Dr. Lips¢omb driveway and they pursued a variance from the Traffic Safety Commission to have that PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 41. JANUARY 26, 2000 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 driveway. The driveway was granted by the Traffic Safety Commission partially on the premise that the adjacent property at that time was residential and they didn't feel that it would be appropriate for a residential property and a commercial property to share a driveway. And so they went ahead and granted a variance to allow this southern-most driveway at Timber Oaks. So the driveway was there partially because the adjacent property was residential. Of course, now it's not. So I don't know, I don't know if that might partially tell you where -- MR. RISHEL: I don't think we're going to have any problem in trying to determine that we only need one cut for that. It's just a matter of which -- it sounds to me like the question is which cut needs to be appropriate. What we don't want to create, I think, is a situation what we have a Calloway's and Pep Boys where we have a real awkward situation for both owners to work with and make access and egress to. MR. SALMON: Well, and from what we can tell by going through all of our records, it appears that Dr. Lipscomb purchased his lot thinking that he had a good driveway. We're still working on some -- we're still trying to find additional comments and notes and memos that might show otherwise but, so far from what we've determined, we think that he thought he did have a good PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 42. JANUARY 26, 2000 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 driveway there when he purchased the property. So, you know, I guess like any property owner, if you buy a piece of property thinking that you have a driveway, I mean, I guess he's probably set in his mind that, you know, that's his driveway. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Ms. Gourdie. MS. GOURDIE: I just would like to know what the legal distance is between driveways. MR. SALMON: Our ordinance requires 300 feet between driveways on an arterial such as Lillian Miller. MS. GOURDIE: And is that within -- are those within 300 feet or are they further than 300 feet? MR. SALMON: I don't recall the exact distance. I think the distance is somewhere around 100 to 150 feet. MS. GOURDIE: Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. McNeill. MR. MCNEILL: Has the City paid for its half of the cut on Lillian Miller? MR. SALMON: Yes, we have paid for our half of the median opening. MR. MCNEILL: Because the Irwin Group paid for that and then you were to reimburse them for half of it. MR. SALMON: That's correct. MR. MCNEILL: So you have paid that? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 43. JANUARY 26, 2000 Z9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. SALMON: And that has occurred. MR. MCNEiLL: So when you paid for half of that, did that not legitimatize that cut that was there? MR. SALMON: We believe that the best location for a driveway is at the Southridge Oaks Office Park. Number one is at the crest of the hill and that's where median openings ought to be. The problem with the location of the Timber Oaks driveway is it's just far enough over the crest of the hill that if you had a median opening there, people turning left wouldn't be able to see traffic coming from the south. So, I mean, the staff -- MR. MCNEILL: But the cut you paid for was the one that was at Southridge? MR. SALMON: Yeah, the Southridge Oaks. MR. MCNEILL: Not at Timber Oaks. MR. SALMON: Right. So, I mean, if staff had its druthers, we would prefer to have the driveway at Southridge Oaks because there you can have a median opening and it's safe to make left turns. And so that's why when Mr. Donaldson went through his conditions, he indicated that if it turns out that we end of closing the Southridge Oaks driveway, then the median opening really needs to go, as well. And there would be no median opening at Timber Oaks because it's not a safe place for a median opening. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 44. JANUARY 26, 2000 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. RISHEL: MR. SALMON: already there. MR. ENGELBRECHT: But it's already there. The Southridge Oaks one is Mr. Moreno. MR. MORENO: Mr. Salmon, in our backup you have copies of two letters, one to Dr. Lipscomb and one to Mr. Irwin regarding the removal of the driveway at Timber Oaks. Have they responded to this letter? I think Salty asked this sort of. MR. SALMON: Yes. Mr. Irwin responded. And as he said while he was up here earlier, they don't -- they personally don't oppose closing the driveway. They own half of the Timber Oaks driveway and they personally don't oppose the closure of it. But Dr. Lipscomb, I don't think that Dr. Lipscomb has ever responded to that letter. MR. MORENO: He has not. Okay. You refer to a detailed plan and in that detailed plan it says that the subject driveway at Timber Oaks was shown to be removed. I'm not understanding. Was it there and now it's going to be removed or was it not there in the first place? MR. SALMON: Okay. If you look at the -- I don't know if we have that with us this evening but if you look at the approved detailed plan on Southridge Oaks, the existing driveway on Timber Oaks is shown to be gone. It just isn't there. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 45. JANUARY 26, 2000 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MORENO: Okay. MR. SALMON: Now, of course, the detailed plan is only applicable for the property that was being zoned but it's a little bit -- I guess we fell it's a little bit misleading that the driveway was shown not there. Even though it's not a part of MR. MORENO: that detailed plan. MR. SALMON: Right. MR. MORENO: Okay. Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. McNeill. MR. MCNEILL: Well, what else was not shown on that plan? You say the driveway was not shown. Was everything else shown except the driveway? MR. SALMON: Right. What was shown on the adjacent property was the parking lot going down to the right-of-way and then just ending and then no driveway. MR. MCNEILL: But I guess were there other details that were on that drawing that would -- in other words, is the only thing that was left out was the driveway? MR. SALMON: As far as I know the only thing that wasn't on the drawing was the driveway. MR. MCNEILL: Thank you. MR. ENCELBRECHT~ Let ma just interject, it was not on the detailed plan because you had asked that it PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 46. JANUARY 26, 2000 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not be on the -- that it be taken off. MR. SALMON: That was probably the case. I don't know. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Yeah. You can't remember for sure. But it turned out, in fact, the point that the applicant on that particular case did not own at that time that property. It had already been sold. MR. SALMON: Right. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Let me ask you another question. Is it not possible that if this goes through as staff has recommended, that Dr. Lipscomb could go to the Traffic Safety Commission and request some sort of variance, for example, for an in-only drive or a number of other options? I've seen some of those around town. MR. SALMON: Well, if we determine that Dr. Lipscomb's driveway is going to be closed, he could apply for a variance and request some other type of driveway arrangement. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Right. So there are some other options. But in the event this goes through, what you would want to do immediately is close that curb cut in front of the driveway. Is that my understanding? MR. SALMON: Correct. Again, based on what we're finding out in our records, we're trying to determine whether we're going to have the municipal PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 47. JANUARY 26, 2000 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 authority to close that because what we've actually said was that the City is going to physically come out and do the work if we have to within a certain time period. And we feel we have the municipal authority to do so but we haven't worked out all the details and, obviously, we're going to be consulting our Legal Department before we do that, as well. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Now what I'm hearing is we're not sure we can close that curb cut. MR. SALMON: Well, we're pretty sure but, obviously, as important and hot an issue as this has been and as mixed up as it's been, we want to be 100 percent sure before we go out and start removing a driveway, that we have the authority to do so. MR. ENGELBRECHT: I understand. I understand. MR. SALMON: And so that's why I throw that caveat in. Standing here today, I think we can do that but we're going to continue to make sure that that is the case before we do it. MR. ENGELBRECHT: It just seems to me that the most critical element in terms of safety is getting that curb cut closed so that there can't be left turns and you're putting people at risk from folks coming over the hill. MR. SALMON: Well, and I guess what -- they PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 48. JANUARY 26, 2000 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 can't make left turns out of there now because there's not a median opening at that location. But it's so close to the other median opening, it's very likely that people could pull out of that driveway and try to immediately get into the turn lane and it's very awkward. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Yeah, I understand. Right. Okay. Well, it looks like now we have a whole other series of questions. Mr. McNeill. MR. MCNEILL: I guess I'm a little concerned here when you talk about municipal authority and we're going to run out and close something. There's due process that has to occur here, isn't there? There has to be a notification and the owner has a chance to respond to that. I mean, you can't just run out there with your bulldozer and shut down that curb cut. MR. SALMON: Well, I think what we've tried to do -- I mean, obviously, this zoning case has been, I guess, continued several times. You've got the letters in your backup that were sent out to both property owners, you know, sometime ago. MR. MCNEILL: But that letter does not constitute a legal notice. There's no receipt of -- we don't know whether that was delivered or not. I mean, obviously, it was. MR. SALMON: And that was, I guess, part of my PLA/~NING AND ZONING COM~4ISSION 49. JANUARY 26, 2000 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 reasoning for telling Mr. Engelbrecht what I did was that, you know, obviously, there's probably going to be some additional I's that need to be dotted and T's crossed before we can physically do that. MR. MCNEILL: Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Ms. Gourdie. MS. GOURDIE: And I don't know if you can answer this for me, Mr. Salmon, or if we need Mr. Donaldson to do it. On the top part, it says special information and analysis, it says, finally the modification, the conditions will facilitate the expansion of parking on the property and should only be approved on the condition of the northern-most driveway at Timber Oaks is closed. I guess what I'm curious about is if we go forward with this recommendation and put it forward as such, then that means that Dr. Lipscomb has to have that closed. He's not able to have anything else. Is that what I'm reading here or is it just strictly just to remove the buffer? See, my problem is it's twofold. If he removes the buffer and he doesn't have to do all this, he could put that in there anyways because it doesn't say anything about -- I mean, it says that he has to keep all the buffers near the residential property but it doesn't say that he has to keep the one that is existing, which PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 50. JANUARY 26, 2000 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the whole purpose of this was to remove the existing buffer to put in parking. MR. DONALDSON: I'm not sure I understand the question. MS. GOURDIE: Okay. The conditions are, as they were written for Timber Oaks, that there will be a buffer of trees and a fence line. And the way this is written, it's asking that Dr. Lipscomb only has to maintain the trees and everything that's at the current residential property which is actually Southridge East, which is to the, I guess you'd call it the northwest, who knows, directly behind Dr. Lipscomb's and a little bit to the south of his property. So my question is that there is a bufferyard that exists now that was planted with crepe myrtles and other trees and has a grass tree lined area that divides Southridge Oaks from Timber Oaks. That's the buffer he wants to remove. MR. DONALDSON: Yes. MS. GOURDIE: Okay. And what this says, the way I'm reading this and correct me if I'm wrong, this says that he no longer has to maintain that buffer between Southridge Oaks and Timber Oaks. Is that correct? MR. DONALDSON: From this point to this point. MS. GOURDIE: Correct. And the whole purpose, the reason why he doesn't want to do this is to put in PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 51. JANUARY 26, 2000 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 parking. MR. DONALDSON: Correct. MS. GOURDIE: So if we go forward with this, he could take those trees out because he no longer has to maintain them, which is just going to further the argument, I can put parking in now. And so I guess what I don't understand is this is so open-ended and so subjective, just as what we're going through now, everything that was said in all the meetings before obviously wasn't -- they were very subjective. They were just however someone interpreted the way it was done, and now we're reaping the problems of not knowing all the information when we go and do ordinances and we do rezonings. And I'm just saying this is very open-ended. So he could easily take out the buffer and put pavement in and say, hey, there's my parking. MR. DONALDSON: As long as he maintains 20 percent planted area. And we feel with the driveway, there's only a limited number of parking spaces that could be gained. MS. GOURDIE: I understand that but the driveway is still there. He could still -- he'll have people backing in or parallel parking and we're going to have ingress/egre~ with people trying to park right there. I guess if you don't drive it every day and you PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 52. JANUARY 26, 2000 38 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 don't see what's going on there, those median cuts weren't done correctly so you've got people blocking traffic to make u-turns all the time. It's a hellacious place to drive now, even worse than before. And I don't see how this, us doing this is going to help the situation so I'm just kind of curious as to what is really going on here, because the way I'm reading it is totally different than the way y'all are saying it. MR. DONALDSON: I guess we can't answer that. MR. ENGELBRECHT: I want to go back to that in a moment. Mr. Rishel. MR. RISHEL: Mr. Salmon, what is the best engineering recommendation safety-wise that we can put forth here? MR. SALMON: If you look strictly at technical merit, the best thing to do is to close the Timber Oaks driveway. MR. RISHEL: Which is the north end? MR. SALMON: Which is the southern-most driveway of Timber Oaks which -- MR. MCNEILL: MR. SALMON: MR. RISHEL: Is the north business park. Yeah, the northern business park. And does that still leave Dr. Lipscomb wi%h an egress and an ingress? MR. SALMON: Well, of course, he has access to PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 53. JANUARY 26, 2000 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the large driveway down near Apple Orthodontics and we're really hoping that he's going to work out access between his property and the Southridge Oaks, which is the property directly adjacent to him on the south to the existing driveway where the brand new median opening is. MR. RISHEL: Okay. Thank you. MR. MORENO: What are you drawing, Mr. Donaldson? MR. DONALDSON: A rough approximation of the access to this particular lot. There is access from a point to the north here to the lot in this direction and then if the northern-most drive of the Southridge Oaks is maintained and there is cross access granted here, they would also have access here and there would be a median opening at this point as opposed to coming out here. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Mr. McNeill, you had a question. MR. MCNEILL: Yeah. I guess, if I understand the recommendations from staff, there are four conditions that staff is recommending that would allow us to approve this and they're pretty specific. Three of them deal with the buffer and the trees and the fourth one says that the driveway would be closed. So I don't see that Dr. Lipscomb is going to be able to, if that's what we, indeed, pass, then that would eliminate his access right PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 54. JANUARY 26, 2000 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 there at that southern-most curb cut of Timber Oaks. that correct? Rishel. Is MR. DONALDSON: Yes. MR. MCNEILL: Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Other questions? Mr. MR. RISHEL: Just a comment. This has been on our Agenda three or four times and we have looked at this on three or four different occasions and I'd like to kind of get it moved along myself so I don't hesitate at all of trying to make a recommendation that we proceed with something that gives us a plan to work from. And if Dr. Lipscomb wants to come back later and appeal that or modify that in some way, shape, or form, at least he has something to work from. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Do you want to put that in the form of a motion? MR. RISHEL: Are you ready for that? MR. ENGELBRECHT: We have completed staff -- questions of staff. If there are any other comments, Commissioners, anybody have any other comments? MR. MCNEILL: I'm ready for a motion. MR. ENGELBRECHT: A motion would be appropriate. MR. RISHEL: I'd like to move the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 55. JANUARY 26, 2000 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 recommendation of approval of Z-99-071 with the following conditions: Condition No. 5 of the Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read, The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches in diameter, which are located within ten foot of any property line abutting residential zoned property unless such trees would interfere with any fence requirements. And Condition No. 8 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read, a bufferyard measuring 15-foot wide and comprising four canopy trees and eight understory trees per 100 linear foot shall be installed along all property lines abutting residential zoned property. And Condition No. 13 of Ordinance No. 96-98 shall be amended to read, a minimum of eight-foot tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained along the borders of all residential zoned property. And number four, the southern-most driveway at the Timber Oaks office Park adjacent to Southridge Oaks be removed on or before March 1, 2000. MR. MCNEILL: Second. MR. ENGELBRECHT: It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval with conditions as outlined by staff. Is there any discussion on the motion? Ms. Gourdie. MS. GOURDIE: I just hav~ a legal question. If we approve this and Dr. Lipscomb is not pleased because PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 56. JANUARY 26, 2000 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 he owns half this driveway and, obviously, there's someone -- there's a claim that he owns this property and we can't do that, legally, how are we going to safeguard the people that drive this road if he's able to maintain an open entryway? MR. SNYDER: First off, the City has the authority to close that curb cut. As I understand it, it's within City right-of-way, street right-of-way. Is that correct? And the Doctor doesn't have an absolute property interest as far as that curb cut goes even though he has a driveway there. If the city feels that from a traffic safety standpoint it needs to be closed, the City can do that. Now, if we -- if let's say -- having said that, if he files some kind of lawsuit and gets some kind of restraining order against the city so that it can't be done in the short haul, your question is what's to prohibit the developer from going forward doing the other things that are outlined in this item. I suppose they could. But, ultimately, it's my opinion that the City would prevail on that point, as far as closing that driveway. The City can do that. The City can do that even without this case here tonight. If the city feels that it's a traffic hazard to have an opening on the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 57. JANUARY 26, 2000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 street, it can make that determination. MS. GOURDIE: So the ruling of the City would override any rulings from any boards -- variances, boards, commissions that are able to approve like a traffic adjustment or whatever. If he took this to a board for a variance, would the city be able to say the board made an incorrect decision and it will be -- MR. SNYDER: No. I think if one of our own boards ruled that it was not a traffic hazard, then that decision would override.the decision of the transportation engineer on that point. So in that case, the curb cut would remain. MS. GOURDIE: And so we, the citizens, have to live at the mercy of bad choices. Is that how it works? MR. SNYDER: Well, it depends on how you characterize it. For example, Boards of Adjustment sometimes grant variances under other circumstances that vary from what was approved in the zoning and that's just the process that we go through. MS. GOURDIE: I understand that. I do. But it just -- there's a problem and I know many of these people know the loop holes and that's where the problem lies. Thank you. MR. ENCELBRECHT: Mr. Rish~l. MR. RISHEL: No. I'd just like to make the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 58. JANUARY 26, 2000 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 9.4 25 comment, I think there's an appeals process here. I'm a little disappointed that we don't have all parties present to work with and I think that we could make a better decision if that Was the case. But I would like to give them an opportunity to have something they can look at and know that they can work from and is still a workable plan. If they'd like to change it from there, I think they have something they can go with. So I think it's the best thing for our City and our Agenda both. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Any other discussion? In that case, the motion -- I think I've read the motion. We'll do it one more time. It's to approve with the four conditiOns outlined by staff. Vote, please. Motion carries six to one. (Commissioner Gourdie voting no.) MR. ENGELBRECHT: We'll move on to Agenda Item No. 7 which is to continue a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to city Council regarding a detailed plan for approximately ten acres located between Mulkey and.Audra streets north of Paisley. The property is located in Planned Development 9. A Denton Independent School District education facility is proposed. Remember, Commissioners, this is a continuance. At this time, we'll a~k Mr. Gray to provide us once again with the staff report. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 59. JANUARY 26, 2000 45 ATTACHMENT 3 AREA CALCULATIONS FOR Z-99-071 (2446 Lillian Miller Parkway) Calculated By: LCR A. TOTAL AREA (Site and 200' Notice Area): B. AREA OF SITE ONLY C. AREA WITHIN 200' NOTICE AREA (A - B) 1. PROPERTIES IN OPPOSITION Date Calculated: 2/11/00 293197.0 SF 19,451.6 SF 273,745.4 SF Location / Address Area* 2434 Lillian Miller 22,325 SF 16,636 SF 2400 Stonegate Cir 2324 Hollyhill Lane Total Area in Opposition Area of property within 200' of subject property 20,616 SF 59,577 SF 2. PERCENT OF NOTICE AREA IN OPPOSITION (1/C) 21.8 % If the opposition from 2400 Stonegate Cir & 2324 Hollyhill Lane is rescinded, the opposition is at 8.2%. 60. Z-99-071 (2446 Lillian Miller Parkway) NORTH 200'-500' NOTICE MAP 200' Legal Notices sent via Certified Mail: 1_.0 500' Courtesy Notices sent via 1st Class Mail: 41 Scale: None ATTACHMENT 4 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF ORDINANCE 96-187 WHICH ESTABLISHED AN OFFICE (O[C]) CONDITIONED ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 0.456 ACRES OF LAND BEING LOT 10R IN BLOCK 1, OF THE J.W. ERWIN SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LILLIAN MILLER PARKWAY APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF 1-35E; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-07 l) WHEREAS, Landmark Surveyors, Inc, on behalf of Dr. Scott Lipscomb D.D.S., has applied for an amendment to the conditions of Ordinance 96-187, which established a Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district classification and use designation for 0.456 acres of land; and WHEREAS, on November 2, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in conditions of Ordinance 96-128; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in conditions of Ordinance 96-128 will be in compliance with the 1988 Denton Development Plan, the 1998 Denton Plan Policies, and the 1999 Growth Management Strategies and Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the conditions of Ordinance 96-187 (Exhibit A), which established an Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district classification and use designation for the subject 0.456 acre property, described in the site plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Lot 10R in Block 1, of the J.W. Erwin Subdivision 1 are amended under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, as follows: Condition No. 5 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read, "The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches (2") in diameter which are located within ten feet (10') of any property line abutting residentially zoned property, unless such trees would interfere with any fence requirements." Condition No. 8 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read, "A "bufferyard" measuring fifteen feet (15) wide, and comprising four (4) canopy and eight (8) understory trees per each one hundred linear feet (100') shall be installed along all property lines abutting residentially zoned property." Condition No. 13 of Ordinance No. 96-187 shall be amended to read "A minimum eight-foot (8') tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained along the boarders of all residentially zoned property." 62. The southern most driveway at the Timber Oaks Office Park, adjacent to Southridge Oaks, be removed on or before March 1, 2000. Referenced in paragraph 8 of Section I of Ordinance 96-187, to remove the existing bufferyard and setback line along the south property line. SECTION 2. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. That the provisions of this ordinance shall govern and control over any conflicting provisions of Ordinance 96-128, but all provisions of Ordinance 96-128 as they apply to the remaining portion of the zoning district land use regulations not herein amended, shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 4. That a copy of this ordinance shall be attached to Ordinance 96-128 showing the amendments herein approved. SECTION 5. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 6. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of .,2000. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY JACK MILLER, MAYOR By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT~UTY, CI. TY ATTORNEY By: ,/~/ 63. Page 2 of 2 .- Z9600?C.OP.D AN 'ORDINANCE OF. THE CITY -OF DENTON, TEXAS,. PROVIDING FORA CHANGE FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY 16 '(SF-16)' ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO THE OFFICE CONDITIONED (O Ici) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 2.6662 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LILLIAN MILLER PARKWAY APPROXI- MATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF 1-35E; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Mr. Rob Rayner, on behalf of First State Bank of Denton, initiated a change in zoning for 2.6662 acres of land from the Single Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district'classification and use designation to the Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHERR~S, on April 24, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a change from the Single Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district and use classification to the Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district and use classification; and WHEREAS, on June.18., 1996, the Council of the'City of Denton, Texas considered the rezoning application and Voted 4-3 in favor of the rezoning, believing at the time that a majority vote was sufficient; and WHEREAS, it was subsequently discovered that a supermajority vote was necessary to effectuate the rezoning, by virtue of the fact that the owners of at least 20% of the land within 200 feet of. the subject property were opposed; and WHEREAS,.on July 10, 1'996, a majority of the Planning & Zoning Commissioners in attendance gave informal direction to City staff to waive any subsequent zoning application fee on the subject' property; and 'WHERE~S, On July 11, 1996, Mr. Robert. Rayner submitted a new petition'to rezone the subject property, requesting rezoning to a conditioned zoning district which was more restrictive than the petition considered on June 18, 1996; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 1996, notice was sent pursuant to State law for a second rezoning case on the subject property, similar to the first; and WHEREAS, on July.24, 1996, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Denton, Texas'votedto allow the City's application of this second rezoning on the property in the public interest, and without fee, pursuant to §35-7(a) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, so that the original applicant would not. be called upon to pay a second application fee in this matter, and so that the rezoning effort would not be barred by §35-7(b) (6) of the Code of O~dinances.of the City of Denton, Texas,. which prohibits reconsideration of a denied zoning application within twelve months of.the denial, absent a finding'of'changed Circumstances in the neighborhood, or a finding that the reconsideration was for a more restrictive zoning classification; and WHERm~S, on July 24, 1996, the Planning.and ZoningCommission recommended approval of a change requested'in'the subsequent peti- tion, from the Single Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district and use classification to the Office Conditioned (O[c]) zoning district and use classification; and WHEREAS, the owner of the property and a designated represen- tative of the neighborhood settled upon a set of conditions agreeable to the owner and the surrounding neighbors, and have indicated their concurrence with the rezoning herein proposed; and WHERRAS, a new set of proposed conditions reviewed by the owner and the neighborhood representative 'was reviewed by the Planning staff, and found to be in compliance with the Denton Development Plan; and WHEREAS, the newly proposed conditions included at least one condition which was deemed to be less restrictive than those which were previously noticed for public hearing and considered by the Denton Planning & Zoning Commission on July 24, 1996; and' WHEREAS, on August 14, 1996, the Planning & Zoning Commission indicated its ongoing approval of City's sponsorship of a third rezoning proposal, in the public interest and without fee, pursuant to §35-7(a) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas; and WHEREAS, on August 16, 1996, notice of an August 28, 1996 public hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commission was sent to all owners of real proper~y within 200' of' the subject property; and ... . · WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission reconsidered zoning under the newly, proposed conditions on August 28, 1996, and voted to recommend approval of same to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council now finds that it would have postponed the June 18, 1996 vote on the rezoning to allow time to clear up the uncertainty surrounding the majority requirements prior to voting; and WHEREAS, the City Councll further finds that the withdrawal of the zoning protest of Mitchell Vexler on three lots within 200 feet 65. of the su~_ject property, as well as the apparent resolution of conflicts between the owner and the surrounding neighborhood, .constitUtes a substantial.change in the.conditions surroundinH t.he area to be rezoned, that would have' warranted reconsiderat'ion of the original rezoning reqUest; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that due to the confu- sion surrounding the initial vote concerning the percentage.of land owners protesting the rezoning, and the fact that the City Council anticipates that the chapter of the Code of Ordinances applicable to zoning will be shortly amended to allow zoning'reapplications similar to this without the necessity of a waiting period, that a variance from the waiting period should be granted; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed Office Conditioned zoning would provide a smoother transition between adjacent properties zoned for residential and commercial uses. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that'~ change in zoning will be in compliance with the Denton Development Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: ~ECTION I. That the Zoning'district classification 'and use' designation of the 2.6662 acres of land described in Exhibit 1, is changed from the Single-Family 16 (SF-16) zoning district classifi- cation and use designation to the Office Conditioned (O[c])' zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, subject to the following conditions: .2. That the uses described in the list attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit 2, shall be prohibited within this district, in addition to those ordinarily prohibited by the Office classification, or any other condition listed herein. That 'the'total.floor area for all buildings constructed on the 2.6662 acres shall not'exceed 30,000 sqUare feet. That no loading docks shall be permitted. That the exterior walls of all buildings shall be constructed of brick or brick veneer. The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two inches (2") in diameter which are located within ten feet (10') of any property line, other than a property line fronting Lillian Miller Parkway, unless such trees would interfere with any required fence. 66. 10. 11. No "off,premise" signs (as defined.by Section 33-2 of the -Code of Ordinances of the City of.Denton, or its succes- 'sot) Shall.be permitted. .." No direct off-site lighting'shall be permitted. A "bufferyard" measuring fifteen feet (15') wide, and comprising four (4) canopy and eight (8) understorytrees per each one hundred linear feet (100"), shall be in- stalled along the western and southern property lines of the acreage described in Exhibit 1. There shall be no second story windows allowed on any western-facing facades of any building, nor any second story windows on any southern-facing facade within 150' of the southern property line, on the acreage described in Exhibit 1. Maximum building height, shall n6~"~xceed two (2) stories; however, no more than ten thousand square feet (10,000 ft.2), in the aggregate, may be located on the second stories of all the two-story buildings. No individual building mayexceed 7,500 square feet in floor area. 12. Ail buildings must have pitched roofs, and no roof surface may have a slope of less than 30%. 13. A minimum eight-foot (8') tall solid fence shall be erected and maintained on the western and southern borders of the property described in Exhibit 1. SECTION'~I. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification.' SEC___~TION III_=. That the provisions of.~35-7(6) of the Code of Ordinances of .the' City of Denton, .to the 9xtent that they would impede any reconsideration of a rezoning on ithe Subject property' within 12 months of the initial consideration, are hereby varied and superseded for the limited purposes of this rezoning. SECTION IV. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00.' Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitdte a separate and distinct offense. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective four- teen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published ~n the City.of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the · date of its passage·.'· ' .... . . - PASSED AND APPROVED this the ~A~/day of~,, 1996. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY:~__ AP.P HERBERT~TTORIqEy..~ ! 68. DESCRIPTION OF 2.6662 ACRES IN THE JOHN McGOWEN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER ~97, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENTOn, TEXAS. .ALL. THAT CERTAIN' TRACT OR PARCEL oF LAND LYING AND BEING sITuATED IN THE JOHN McGOWEN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NU~BmR 797, CITy'AND COUNTY OF DENTON, TEXAS, BEING ALL OF LOTS 6, 7 AND 8, BLOCK l, J. W. ERWIN SUBDIVISION, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OS DENTON, TEXAS ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED XN VOLUME 337, PAGE 5~0, DEED RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND BEING.MORE.PARTICULARLY. DESCRXBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 WHICH IS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 3R, BLOCK 1, J. W. ERWXN SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN CABXNET E, PAGE 96, PLAT RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND IN THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY OF LILLXAN MXLLER PARKWAY; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 05 MINUTES 14 SECONDS EAST ALONG THE.WEST RIGHT OF WAY OF LILLIAN HX'LLER, pARKWAY' ~"DISTANCE OF 449.32 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAXD LOT 8, BLOCK X, AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF A CALLED 5.1649 ACRE TRACT, TRACT 1, AS DESCRIBED IN A DEED FROM, TERX TAYLOR COMPANIES, XNC., TO MAVEX 9, XNC.,. ON THE 28TH DAy OF DECEMBER 1992, AND RECORDED. IN VOLUME 3417,'PAGE 000X,"REAL'PROPERTY RECORDS OF DENTON'COUNTY~ TEXAS~ THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 24 MXNUTES 08 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LXNE OF SAID LOT 8 AND THE NORTH BOUNDAR~ LINE OF SAID MAVEX 9, INC.' TRACT, A DXSTANCE OF 258.44 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CONWAY STREET IN THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 11, BLOCK A, THE RXDGE OF SOUTHRIDGE, AN ADDITION TO THE. CXTY OF DENTON, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED X~ CABINET D, PAGE 330, PLAT RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS~ THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 05 MXNUTES 42 SECONDS WEST ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY OF CONWAY STREET A DISTANCE OF 449.39 FEET TO THE NORTfFREST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT THENCE SouTH'89 DEGREES 23"MXNuTEs 09 sECoNDS EAST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT ~R A DISTanCE os 25s.~o SEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAXNX~G 2.6662 ACRES OF LAND. 69. EXHIBIT 2 LIST OF PROHIBITED USES Z-g6-O07C One F~mily Dwalling'Restrlcted Community Unit Dev. elopman{ Dormitory, Boarding or Rooming House ' Hotel or Motel Church or Rectory Community Center (public) Day Nursery or Kindergarten School Group Homes Halfway House Hospital (General Acute Care) Hospital (Chronic Care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthropic Nature Monastery or Convent Nursing Home or Residence Home for Aged Occasional Sales Park, Playground or Public Community Center School, P~ate Primary or Secondary School, Public or Denominational Accessory Building Community Center (pr'n/ate) Electrical Substation Electrical Transmission Une Temporary Field or COnstruction Office (subject to approval and c0ntrol.by Building 'Inspector) Fire Station or Similar Public Safety Building Gas Transmission Une and Metering Station Home Occupation Off Street Remote Parking Sewage Pumping Station P~ate Swimming Pool Telephone Une & Exchange Switching or Relay Station Water Reservoir, Water Pumping Station or Well Country Club (private) with Golf Course Public Golf Course Pul~lic Park or Playgrourjd Public Play Field or Stadium Swim or Tennis Club Railroad Track or Right-of-Way Animal Clinic or Hospital (no. outside runs or pens) Farm or Ranch · · Cemetery or Mausoleum .' Fraternity, Sorority, Lodge or Civic .Club Home for Care of Alcoholic, Narcotic or Psychiatric Patients Public Building, Shop, Yard ef Local, State ef Federal Government Radio and/or Television MiCrowave Tower Water Treatment Plant Airport Landing Field or Heliport Commercial Parking Lot or StnJcture Cafeteria Mortuary or Funeral Parlor Restaurant 70. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda No. Agenda Item Date AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: February 15, 2000 Planning Department Dave Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT - Z-99-088 (PD-9 Detailed Plan) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Detailed Plan for approximately 10 acres located between Mulkey and Audra Streets north of Paisley in east central Denton. The property is located in the Planned Development 9 (PD-9) zoning district. A D.I.S.D. education facility is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) with conditions. BACKGROUND Denton Independent School District has requested approval of a Detailed Plan for PD-9 so as to allow development of an early childhood development center. The facility as proposed is intended to serve 250 students, but could be expanded to serve a maximum of 300 students if necessary. The subject property is located in the Planned Development 9 (PD-9) zoning district, created in 1970 under Ordinance 70-52. An amended Concept Plan, which allows the development of a school facility on the site, was approved by City Council on January 18, 2000. This Detailed Plan is consistent with the approved Concept Plan. The site falls within an "Existing Neighborhoods/Infill Compatibility" area of the 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan. Seventy-three (73) property owners were notified of the zoning request. At total of thirty- one (31) responses have been received; ten (10) are in favor, seventeen (t 7) are opposed and four (3) are neutral to the request (see Attachment 3). The responses in opposition to the request constitute 3.9% of the land area within 200 feet of the site. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ-99-088 commonly known as PD-9 Detailed Plan: Application Date - DRC Date(s) - P&Z Date - October 26, 1999 November 4, 1999 January 12, 2000 & January 26, 2000 ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE A final plat for the property has been submitted. It will need to be approved before development of the property can begin. 1. FISCAL INFORMATION Development of this property will increase the assessed value of the city, county, and school district. It will require no short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city. As a form ofinfili development, no extension of public infrastructure is necessary to service this site. P&Z RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) of this zoning request with the following condition: Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine onor otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions. 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Report, January 26, 2000, Z-99-088. 2. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes from January 12, 2000. 3. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes from January 26, 2000. 4. Draft Ordinance. Prepared by: Thomas B. Gray Planner I Respectfully submitted: Dougta~s S. owl el~l, AI[[p Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Afie~ A§enda Date Subiect: PD-9 Detailed Plan Staff: Thomas B. Gray Case Number: Z-99-088 Agenda Date: January 26, 2000 Continue :a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Detailed Plan for approximately 10 acres in a Planned Development (PD-9) zoned district located between Mulkey and Audra Lanes north of Paisley. A Denton Independent School District education facility is proposed. Because the Moratqrium on nonresidential property prevented city staff from taking any action on this case, public notice forthis agenda item was completed by the Denton Independent School District. However, the Denton Independent School District inadvertently neglected to publish a public hearing notice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, as is required under City Code. Staff requested a continuance of this agenda item from the January 12, 2000 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission so that this item could be properly noticed. On January 14, 2000, new legal notices were sent to seventy (70) property owners within two hundred feet of the subject property and new courtesy notices were sent to two hundred thirty eight (238) residents within five hundred feet of the subject property. Notice of the zoning request was published in the Denton Record-Chronicle on January 16, 2000. Additionally, an amended Concept Plan for this proposed facility (case Z-99-087) was approved by City Council on January 18, 2000. Because this zoning request has now been properly noticed, staff feels that the Planning and Zoning Commission can now take action this agenda item. The proposed Detailed Plan is consistent with the approved amended Concept Plan for PD-9 which was approved by Council on January 18, 2000. Staff recommends approval of Z-99-088 with the following condition: 1. Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. PD-9 Detai~ed I move to recommend approval of Z-99-088 with the following condition: 1. Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with additional conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item, A. January 12, 2000 P&Z Staff Report for Z-99-088 B. Draft Ordinance PD9 Detailed · ~ ENCLOSURE A ,' ..... .'~ ~,~ 0~- ~ ~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ~:~m ~ II STAFF r~pOrT subject: PD-9 Detailed Plan Staff: Thomas B. Gray Case Number: Z-99-088 Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Detailed Plan for approximately 10 acres located between Mulkey and Audra Lanes north of Paisley. A Denton Independent School District education facility is proposed. COIl rthou se onthe Squere Location: Size: LOCATION MAP Between Mulkey and Audra Lanes north of Paisley in east central Denton Approximately 10 acres PD-9 Detailed ! Applicant: Burke Engineering 504 Academy Drive Austin, TX 78704 Owner: Denton Independent School District 230 N. Mayhill Road Denton, Texas 76208 Planned development zoning districts (PD) are intended to provide forthe development of land as an integral unit for single or mixed use in accordance with a plan that may vary from the established regulations of other zoning districts for similar land uses. They are also meant to encourage flexible and creative planning to ensure the compatibility of land uses, to allow for the adjustment of changing demands to meet the current needs of the community, and to provide for a development that is superior to what could be accomplished in other zoning districts by meeting one or more of the following purposes: (1) Provides for the design of lots or building; increased recreation, common or open space for private or public use; berms, greenbelts, trees, shrubs or other landscaping features; parking areas, street design or access; or other development plans, amenities or features that would be of special benefit to the property users or community; (2) Protects or preserves topographical features, such as trees, creeks, ponds, floodplains, slopes or hills; or (3) Protects or preserves existing historical buildings, structures, features or places. There are three (3) types of plans that may be used in the planned development process; concept plan, development plan and detailed plan. CONCEPT PLAN - This plan is intended to be the first step in the PD process for larger or long term developments. It establishes the most general guidelines, identifying the land use types, approximate thoroughfare locations within the boundaries of the district. DEVELOPMENT PLAN - This plan is intended to be used most often as a second step in the PD process. It includes the same information that is provided on the concept plan, plus details as to the specific land uses and their boundaries. alan All detailed plans should be in substantial compliance with landscape, sign, subdivision and other regulations of the Code of Ordinances. When concessions from these regulations are requested by a developer, there needs to be corresponding benefits that merit deviation from those regulations. PD-9 Detailed The developer is requesting approval of a Detailed Plan for PD-9 that will allow the construction of an early childhood development center for D.I.S.D. This facility as proposed will serve 250 students. If necessary, the facility could be expanded to serve a maximum of 300 students. The existing Concept Plan for PD-9 sets the subject property aside for multifamily, neighborhood service and duplex uses. The applicant is requesting a change in the Concept Plan under a separate petition (Z-99-087). The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the Concept Plan on December 15, 1999. City Council will consider approving the Concept Plan at its January 18, 2000 meeting. The subject property is located in a predominantly residential area and is surrounded by single family homes and duplexes. Transportation A. Trip generation Although this facility is not technically an elementary school, it is a facility for small children and staff expects it to have the same traffic impact as an elementary school of similar size. According to data provided in the Institute of Traffic Engineers' 1991 Trip Generation manual, an elementary school generates an average of 1.09 trips per student. The proposed development would generate approximately 273 trips per day if built out for 250 students and approximately 327 trips per day if built out for 300 students. B. Access Access to the school will be provided to Mulkey and Audra Lanes. C. Road Capacity Mulkey Lane is identified as a local street by the 1998 Denton Mobility Plan. This street is designed to be a two (2) lane undivided street without parking, providing two (2) lanes of through traffic. As such, its designed traffic capacity allows for a tolerable traffic flow of up to 9,100 trips per day. Mulkey is currently constructed with four (4) lanes with parking. There are no traffic counts available for this section of Mulkey Lane. Audra Lane is identified as a secondary major arterial road by the 1998 Denton Mobility Plan. This road is designed to be a four (4) lane undivided street without parking, providing four (4) lanes of through traffic. As such, its designed traffic capacity allows for a tolerable traffic flow of up to 14,900 trips per day. Audra is currently constructed with two (2) lanes with parking. The most recent traffic counts for Audra indicate that there is adequate capacity to handle the calculated tdps that could be generated by the proposed development. A traffic count on Audra just north of McKinney indicated a traffic volume of 4954 trips per day. A traffic count on Audra north of Lattimore indicated a traffic volume of 3024 trips per day. There is enough excess capacity to handle the number of new trips expected to be generated by this educational facility. PDt9 Detailed D. Pedestrian Linkages Sidewalks along all public streets are required. Sidewalks to building entrances on the interior of the property are required by Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS). Utilities This site has access to existing water and sanitary sewer lines. New fire hydrants will be installed in and around this property at the time of development. (see Enclosure 3) Drainage and Topography A detention pond is proposed to be placed on the area zoned 2F directly to the south of this PD. As a result, a long-standing drainage problem in the neighborhood will be alleviated. The design of the pond is subject to staff review and approval. 4. Signs As per the sign ordinance. 5. Off-Street Parking New development must provide parking according to the regulations of Chapter 35 (35-301) of the Code of Ordinances. 6. Landscaping This property will have to comply with the new Landscape Code, which requires fifteen (15) trees per acre and twenty (20) percent of all surfaces to remain pervious (plantable area). 7. Open Space and Recreational Areas Nonresidential development is not required to participate in park dedication requirements. A playground will be provided on-site for the use of the students. aa Lighting Lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. This restriction will need to be written in as a condition of the Ordinance approving the Detailed Plan. 9. Environmental Quality impacts None anticipated. PDt9 Detailed 8o r January 14, 1969 - The subject property was placed in thee One-Family Dwelling (SF-7) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 69-01 which adopted the first zoning ordinance and map for the City of Denton. December 8, 1970 - A Concept Plan for the subject property was approved by Ordinance 70-52. This created the PD-9 zoning district. (see Enclosure 5) December 15, 1999 -An amended Concept Plan for PD-9 was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission under separate petition that will allow for the development of a school facility. (see Z-99-087) A preliminary plat for the subject property was approved on December 1, 1999. A final plat will need to be submitted and approved before development of the property can begin. Public notice was completed by Denton Independent School District because the Moratorium on nonresidential property prevented city staff from taking any action on this case. Notice of the zoning request was not published in the Denton Record-Chronicle. Seventy (70) property owners within two hundred feet were mailed legal notices and Two hundred thirty-eight (238) residents within five hundred feet were sent courtesy notices informing them of the request (see Enclosure 4). As of this writing, there have been seven (8) responses in favor of the zoning request and four (4) responses in opposition to the zoning request. A neighborhood meeting was held on the evening of Thursday, December 9 at Lee Elementary. Residents expressed concern with the effect of this development on existing traffic and drainage problems within the neighborhood. Because notice was not published in the Denton Record-Chronicle, staff recommends continuing this item to the January 26, 2000 meeting so that city staff can property notice the proposed zoning amendment. I move to continue Z-99-088 to the January 26, 2000 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. 1. Detailed Plan 2. Zoning Map 3. Utility Map 4. 200'-500' Notification Map 5. Existing Concept Plan for PD-9 6. Proposed Amended Concept Plan for PD-9 PD-9 Detailed lO. , ENCLOSURE 1 11. ENCLOSURE 2 Z-99-088 (PD-9 Detailed Plan) NORTH ZONING MAP Agenda Date: December 15, 1999 Scale: None 12. ENCLOSURE 3 Z-99-088 (PD-9 Detailed Plan) NORTH UTILITIES MAP · Hydrants .... Water Line (W. L.) .... Sewer Line (S. L.) Agenda Date: December 15, 1999 Scale: None 13. ENCLOSURE 4 Z-99-088 (PD-9 Detailed Plan) NORTH 200'-500' NOTICE MAP 200' Legal Notices sent via Certified Mail: 70 500' Courtesy Notices sent via Ist Class Mail: 238 Total number of responses to notices: Within 200': Opposed: 11 In Favor: 6 Neutral: 3 Within 500': Opposed: 7 In Favor: 4 Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 3.9% Council Agenda Date: February 15, 2000 Scale: None 14.¸ ENCLOSURE 5 ENCLOSURE 6 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 70- 52 TO PROVIDE FOR A DETAILED PLAN FOR 10.06 ACRES LOCATED WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 9 (PD-9) ZONING DISTRICT; THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEING LOCATED BETWEEN MULKEY AND AUDRA STREETS NORTH OF PAISLEY STREET; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Z-99-088). WHEREAS, on December 8, 1970, by Ordinance 70-52, the City Council approved a change in zoning for 13.8 acres of land to Planned Development 9 (PD-9) Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2000, by Ordinance 2000-025, the City Council approved an amended Concept Plan for 13.64 acres of land located within PD-9 with the intent to develop a new public school facility; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 1999 Burke Engineering, on behalf of Denton Independent School District, submitted a Detailed Plan for 10.06 acres of land located within PD-9 with the intent to develop a new public school facility; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a Detailed Plan for such 10.06 acres; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Detailed Plan is consistent with the approved amended Concept Plan for PD-9; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 70-52 providing for the approval of a Planned Development Zoning District Classification and Use Designation for the property described as PD-9 is amended by approving the Detailed Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit B for 10.06 acres located within PD-9, more particularly described by the legal description attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. SECTION 2. That the provisions of this ordinance as they apply to the 10.06 acres shown in the detailed plan herein approved, shall govern and control over any conflicting provisions of Ordinance No. 70-52, but all the provisions of Ordinance No. 70-52 as they apply to that remaining portion of the district not herein amended, shall continue in force and effect and shall apply to the remainder of said district. SECTION 3. That a copy of this ordinance shall be attached to Ordinance No. 70-52 showing the amendment herein approved. 17. SECTION 4. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record Chronicle, official newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ., 2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 18. EXHIBIT A 10.06 ACRES (DISD PORTION OF PD 9) FIELD NOTES to all that a certain tract of land situated in the J. Brock Survey Abstract Number 55, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and being part of the called 15.755 acre tract described in the deed from Realty Alliance of Texas, Ltd., to James Coleson recorded under C.F.N. 93-R0027172 of the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; the subject tract being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING for a reentrant comer of the said 15.755 acre tract being South 00 Degrees 10 Minutes 35 Seconds West a distance of 641.70 feet and East a distance of 349.0 feet from the intersection of the South right-of-way line of Lattimore Street and the East right- of-way line of Mulkey Lane; THENCE South 89 Degrees 23 Minutes 32 Seconds East a distance of 532.76 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE South 21 Degrees 09 Minutes 35 Seconds West along the West right-of-way line of Audra Lane a distance of 703.68 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE South 89 Degrees 52 Minutes 50 Seconds West a distance of 148.66 feet to a point for a comer; . THENCE North a distance of 149.20 feet to the beginning of the curve to the left; THENCE Westerly along said curve (having a radius of 396.06 feet), an arc length of 9.83 feet (chord bearing North 89 Degrees 17 Minutes 20 Seconds West a distance of 9.83 feet) to a point or comer; THENCE West along the North right-of-way line of Meadow Oak Drive a distance of 270.00 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE South 89 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds West a distance of 273.00 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE North 15 Degrees 27 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 431.00 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE North 12 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 170.00 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE South 76 Degrees 46 Minutes 19 Seconds East a distance of 279.99 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and enclosing 10.06 acres of land. 19. SF- 7 EXHIBIT B ?TTTq-!-?-T','F'!-! I I 20. ATTACHMENT 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 ? 8 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 thJ. s area is a vote to develop with the railroad track as appreciate and applaud the efforts to try area with some different lot sizes. to see that more. But have in f. too fast. And will be voting plat that was approved, I now, I feel like is neighborhood. been, I guess, time, 1 it ought to be ~ deny it. 2 3 4 articular 5 to 6 7 Chairman, I too 9 The preliminary 10 less than three years ago vith the rest of the a short period of a deal. 1997, year2000 sc be votingto Any I was a -- I, frankly, am tired of seeing these , with these tiny half-acre, quarter-acre stuck over in a comer somewhere. a functionality to a neighborhood and I don't think we have to write that completely into our regulations. I think a developer should come in here. witt mind. And I didn't see that in this case and ] ~ against it. Any other discussion? I want to Can I'd like to reset Itl I made the invertly. MR. WILLIAMS: ?Ote. because ! thinking All right. MR. WILLIAMS: MR. ~ staff to reset the -- all right, e motion a motion and second to uest. MR. Thank MR. Motion ~ to zero. Apple not present this ~ from the audience.) !NGELBRECHT: Ladies and gentlemen, asked you not to do that in our roles. And out and I appreciate you keepinl comments short. I noticed most of them about roles, sir. MR. on to the next issue. roles. MR. earlier. But I would ask that we ~ Thank you. .PEAKER: ~t's Sir, l'm moving ; need to know the Agenda 11 -- we we don't have 14 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Item No. 11 is to hold a 15 public hearing and consider recommending approval to the 16 City Council an amended detailed plan for approximately 17 ten acres located between Mulkey and Audra streets north 18 of Paisley. The property is legally described as 12.159 19 acres in the J. Brock Survey, Abstract #55 in the City of 20 Denton. It's located in a Planned Development-9 zoning 21 district. The proposal is to construct a Denton 22 Independent School District education facility. At this 23 time, I'll open the public hearing and ask Mr. Gray from 24 the Planning Department to provide us with staff report. MR. GRAY: Thank you. As you might recall, Page 176 1 this item had originally been scheduled for the, I 2 believe, December 15th meeting when we discussed the 3 concept plan for this same site. However, because of the 4 moratorium that was in effect at the time, we could only 5 discuss the concept plan so we had to postpone the 6 detailed plan to this meeting. This site, if I could get 7 the overhead to work, this site is located between Mulkey 8 and Audra streets north of Paisley. It is proposed to be 9 a Denton Independent School District Early Childhood 10 Center serving 250 students. It could be expanded to 300 11 students if need be. The actual site encompassed by the 12 detailed plan is ten acres. This is the school that sits 13 in the middle of the slte with perking loops coming off of 14 Audra, as well as Mulkey. Parents would be coming through 15 this loop and staff and busses would be coming through 16 this loop. 17 One thing that needs to be noted, because of 18 the moratorium, the City could take no action on this case 19 so the Denton Independent School District decided to 20 renotice tho case themselves in the hope that the Zl moratorium would bo lift~l in tim~ for this meetln/5. It 22 was. However, as was later learned, Denton Independent 23 School District, when they did the notice, they neglected 24 to publish the notice in th~ Denton Record-Chronicle as is required under our Zoning Code, the public notice PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 21. Page 173 - Page 176 Cond~ns~ItTM Page 177 I provisions of our Zoning Code. Therefore, and because of 2 that, Denton Independent School District asked to continue 3 the meeting. Our recommendation is to open the public 4 hearing to allow the citizen input from citizens that are 5 here tonight and then continue this public hearing to the 6 January 26th Planning and Zoning Agenda so that City staff 7 can go back and properly renotice this public heating 8 under the confines of the law. 9 MR. ENGELBRECHT: commissioners, any questions 10 of Mr. Gray? Thankyou. So, Mr. G-ray, the Dmo does not 11 plan to make any presentation this evening. 12 MR. GRAY: I do not believe that they plan to 13 make any presentation. 14 MR. ENGELBRECHT: IS there a representative 15 from ~)ISD present? Okay. Allfight. Thankyou. Is 16 there anyone present who would like to speak in favor of 17 this proposal? Anyone present to speak in favor of the 18 proposal? In that case, is there anyone present to speak 19 in opposition? Yes, ma'am, if you would give us your nam~ 20 and address, please. 21 MS. FRONTWELL: Good evening. I applaud you 22 for staying at your meeting this many hours after my 11:15 23 lunch at school. I'm Katherine Nell Frontwell. I live at 24 1700 Meadow Oak. I teach for Birdville Iso and I live 25 five houses from the 200 limit so you're not truly very Page 178 I interested in my input. Most of my neighbors rent but 2 rent for five, seven, ten, 12 years. You're not 3 interested in their input. There are three dead-end 4 streets into Mulkey. I live on the only one with an extra 5 access not on Muikey, on Autumn Oak. 6 So, really, I'm not as stuck as them, but they 7 don't have a voice because they're not within 200 feet. 8 There's some problems. There's some serious problems 9 because these are people whose lives are going to be 10 terribly, horrendously affected. 11 I used to live on Emerson right by Woodrow 12 Wilson, by the school, and it wasn't an hnpaet in my life 13 because we had wide streets with good drainage with ample 14 parking. Nobody on Emerson Street has a single-car 15 garage. Nobody on Emerson Street truly requires street 16 parking unless they have teenagers. Everybody on my 17 street requires their parking. Everybody on my street has 18 the small houses these last people were talking about. 19 But, see, we get along and we do well and we pay our taxes 20 and we take care of our children. And four blocks from 21 this, there's a school, a large public school. We'll have 22 bussing for two significant school populations within 23 four-and-a-half blocks of each other. Is that happening 24 in your neighborhood? Probably not. Not on a street with 25 three dead-end hon~ing streets right there. Page 179 1 I get up for work at 5:00 and I leave my house 2 by 6:15. My life isn't going to be bothered by the buses 3 on Mulkey. Have you driven Mulkey recently?. But these 4 three dead-end streets will and lots of them will be 5 trying to get to work about 7:30 or get to the Denton City 6 County Daycare Nursery, which is a significant place, 7 that's two blocks over. Think about what's already there 8 in that little neighborhood of small homes, ff peOple 9 bought a house next to Robert E. Lee, Robert E. Lee was 10 built there first. It has different streets. It has 11 different supports. We were not a high-rent neighborhood 12 when it was built or this single mother couldn't have 13 bought that house. But our roads are narrow. Oar lives 14 will be horrendously impacted. 15 We have City services that are horribly 16 overloaded. My house has been flooded by City sewer water 17 four times and I still love Denton and I still live hero. 18 I've had to replace my flooring, not just carpets, because 19 my house was a health risk for my family. Do you know 20 what the City attorney apologized to me and said four 21 years ago when that happened? He said, I'm so sorry. If 22 it were ten families, we'd be responsible but it's just 23 one. That was what the City of Denton telling my 24 children, my grandchildren don't mauer because there 25 aren't enough affected. But I love my house. I love my Page 180 1 neighborhood. I installed a new sewer line to the main. 2 It's not my line that ever had a problem. But if I had a 3 new one with three outlets, I could call the City instead 4 of me calling $85.00 plumber and the plumber calling the 5 City. Because after a while, the plumber just charged me 6 $60.00 because all he'd do is call the City. Our sewer 7 line is horrendously upset. 8 MR. ENGELBRECHT: could we stay on the issue 9 of the school? 10 MS. FRONTWELL: I apologize. Yes. Well, I 11 apologize. I'm just saying long-term, we've had serious 12 sewer problems on that area that maybe you-all weren't 13 told about. This will impact them. This has to. We have 14 horrendous long-term problems in the area. This will not 15 be a neighborhood school. This will be a schcol for 16 children with needs who come from all over. It could be 17 anywhere. It wouldn't need to be there to serve our 18 children. I apologize for using so much of your time. 19 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Thank you. Is there anyone 20 present who would like to speak in opposition? Yes, 22 MR. RISHEL: I'd just like to comment that we 23 are concerned about all citizens and want to here from 24 whatever citizens want to address us. So I want to make 25 sure that's clear. Our Commission is very open to citizen PLANNING AND ZONING COI~MISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 Page 177 - Page 180 22. CondcnscltTM Page 181 1 input and I want to make sure that everyone understands 2 that. 3 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Yes, ma'am. 4 MS. PEDRICK: YeS. My name is Lynn Pedrick. 5 I own the duplex at 1800 and 1802 Meadow Oak Lane. 6 been before you before. We addressed the drainage' 7 retention pond. Since then, a neighbor of mine has gotten 8 pictures of the drainage retention pond located at Ryan 9 High School. I believe there's a Food Lion there. I 10 believe it's -- I don't know if it's Paisley or -- I don't 11 know where it is. Anyway. But I've seen the pictures and 12 this was only yesterday, I'm not sure of the loeatien. I 13 was satisfied with what I saw there. I don't think the 14 drainage retention pond will be a major problem as long as 15 they stick to those pictures. So I feel confident about 16 that. I do have other concerns still. The traffic, the 17 parking. We do need to park on the street when we have 18 people visiting us. I'd like the City to hear the 19 response, if we can, because of the speed of the traffic 20 through there. And I just have those major concerns. As 21 far as the City is concerned I think those things need to 22 be addressed right now. The rest of my questions would be 23 to DISD and I'll wait until they are here at the next 24 meeting. The funds that they're using educate these 25 children, I'd like to know where they're coming from. Is · Page 182 I it Headstart which will be defunct in a few years. And 2 then what do they do, they start putting the older 3 children in them that I have to worry about running 4 around, climbing over the fences, destroying my property, 5 making my neighborhood dangerous. I want to -- I'd like 6 to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. Yes, it 7 is, it's not a high-income neighborhood. But we arc good 8 neighbors. We love the City. We take care of our homes. 9 We work hard. And I'd like to maintain them that way. 10 As I said, I have other questions for tho DISD 11 and I also, I have three other of my neighbors who have 12 signed against this. I also realize that -- which my 13 husband and I were informed today even, if we do get 20 14 percent people to sign to not approve this or against it, 15 that th~ school district can do it anyway, can build the 16 sehoolanyway. Yes, we could b~ a lot worse. Ialsojust 17 found out that this land was Po-9 which is not your 18 problem. Our title company informed us when we purchased 19 our house four years ago that it was MF-1. our tax office 20 here told us it was MF-1 in 1996 when we bought the house. 21 I found out today it was PD-9 then. 8o I have issue, but 22 my attorney and I will talk about that, wlxa~ I stand. 23 That's not your problem. 24 MR. ENGELBRECHT: okay. Commissioners, any 25 questions? Thanlt you. Thank you. Is ~ anyone else Page 183 1 present who would like to speak in opposition to this 2 petition? Yes, ma'am. 3 MS. DAVIS: Hello. I'm Denise Davis and I own 4 the home at 1704 Meadow Oaks and I have three concerns. I 5 am in thc 500 foot limit. I am concerned about the 6 traffic. There's so much traffic out in thc area now with 7 the loop out there and McKinney as much built up as we 8 have already had out there. I;m very concerned about the 9 traffic, the noise level. And One concern I have doesn't 10 need to be addressed here because I'm concerned that the 11 land that they have there isn't going to be sufficient to 12 do all the improvements and provide thc buildings and the 13 services that they're going to try to do for that school 14 project. Thank you. 15 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Thank you. This there 16 anyone else present who would like to speak in opposition? 17 Anyone else present to speak in opposition? Given the 18 history tonight, is there anyone present who would just 19 like to address the issue, not positive or negative? 20 Okay. With that, Commissioners, do you have any questions 21 of staff? There has been a request to continue this to 22 our meeting. We would need a motion with regard to that. 23 Before that, is there any questions you would like to ask 24 of staff? Mr. Williams. 25 MI~. WmLInMS: Yes. I would like to ask staff page 184 I to, since I drive down Audra Lane, what I see here in the 2 backup, Audra Lane is not two lanes. It's where two cars 3 can pass each other and that's different between two 4 lanes. I drive Audra Lane. And especially in that 5 dangerous curve there and I would like to know would the 6 school district be willing to do some improvement to Audra 7 Lane because it's unrealistic to think that people are 8 going to put their four-year-olds and six-year-olds on a 9 bus. They're going to drive them. So we're going to have 10 200 cars. 11 MR. ENGELBRECHT: He wants to talk about the 12 development of Audra Lane. Thank you, Mr. Salmon. 13 MR. SALMON: ! gue_~s, first of all~ of course, 14 we've worked quite extenSiVely with the school district on 15 this particular site design and it's been purposely 16 designed so that parent drop-off and student drop-off 17 would be on Audra Lane. We are actually in the process of 18 widening Audra Lane from just south of this site and 19 extending it all the way up to Mingo Road as a four-lane 20 road. 21 And, in faot~ construction has already started 22 on the north end. Excuse me. We've been delayed a little 23 bit because we've had some issues with the railroad and a 24 gas pipeline, but we're getting closer to getting those 25 issues resolved and we'll be back under construction here PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 Page 181 - Page 184 23. CondcnseltTM Page 185 1 in, hopefully, a few weeks. 2 Ma. ENOELBRECHT: xhat will be four-lane? 3 MIL SALMON: Right. It's a four-lane 4 undivided all the way up to Mingo Road. The other side 5 toward Mulkey is being designed specifically for school 6 bus and faculty access, which, of course, is going to be 7 the lesser of the two types of access. I don't know 8 specifically this evening what the bus routes are. i 9 would doubt that they are planning to run school buses on 10 Autumn Oak, not Autumn Oak but Meadow Oak. I'm assuming 11 that they're going to bring school buses in on Mulkey Lane 12 either from the north or the south. But we can certainly 13 verify that information with the school district. 14 MR. WILLIAMS: And when will this be completed 15 because what I'm thinking here is the improvements are 16 fine but the school is going to be them and we're going 17 to be stuck with -- in other words, sometimes if you don't 18 have anything to do, turn left, come from downtown, turn 19 left on Audra Lane and just weave around there and, 20 hopefully, you know, run into a teenager who's driving too 21 fast because you're going to have to get over in the 22 ditch. I know because I drive that road two, three, four 23 times a week. 24 MR. SALMON: well, it would be my hopes that 25 we're going to be back out there with construction again Page 1 within the next few weeks. It's probably a six-month, sit 2 to eight-month construction process. So I would hope that 3 before the end of this year, that road will be complete. 4 MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you. 5 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Rishel. Thank you, Mr. 5 6 Salmon. 6 7 MR. RISHEL: Mr. Salmon, would you pass on as 7 8 you work with the school district that if they could get 8 9 us some sort of a visual or even a plan that has less 9 10 detail on it that will kind of outline the buildings and 10 11 the driveways and whatever else a'little bit better 11 12 without so much overlay to it. When we go to illustrate 12 13 this the next meeting on the 26th, I think it will make it 13 14 a little bit easier for us to at least show the audience 14 15 and the citizens what we're trying to work with here. So 15 16 I'd like to get another drawing that has a little bit less 16 17 definition to it. And I'd like to make a motion. 17 18 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. If we could just, 18 19 before we have the motion, I want to make a comment. Can 19 20 we do that? Okay. Any other questions or comments, 20 21 Commissioners? I just wanted to make a comment to the 21 22 residents that are here that live on Meadow Oak. I would 23 agree totally with Mr. Salmon, I don't think we're going 24 to see any buses on that particular road. If you haven't 25 seen the current facility and how it operates over between 'Page 187 1 Ruddell and Wood Street, please take a look. They have no 2 room at all and they have managed to make that work. Now, 3 granted, we're talking 200. Now, the question is at 300, 4 and when DISD gets here in two weeks, we'll have an 5 opportunity to talk to them about some of those issues. 6 And I do want to thank you for coming and we will keep 7 those things in mind and we'll ask staff to provide us 8 with a transcript of your comments this evening at our 9 next public hearing in the event that you cannot make it. 10 Okay. Mr. Rishel. 11 }em. ruSHY. L: I'd like to make a motion that we 12 continue Z-99-088 until our next scheduled P&Z meeting on 13 January the 26th, the year 2000. 14 MS. GOURDIE: second. 15 MR. ENOELBRECHT: We have a motion and second 16 to continue to January 26. Any discussion? Vote, please. 17 Motion carries unanimously. a public hearing and Council 21 two acres Thc 22 property is legally : acres in the F. 23 ' of Denton, Texas. It's located a .000 feet east of the intersection of West University Drive and 1-35. The proposal is At this time, I'll c ask Mr. Gray to provide us with the MR. GRAY: Thank you. This zoned not a lot. not a lot. And here zoned Agricultural. We here because the 1999 recently approved by zoning of this lot in that the front acres of here, the front acres are But the: two acres are And I should , call it tracts, t technically is ~ showing the six-acre which is actually , an interesting dilemma Dian that was south and a of the lot, the ,f this rezoning t centers areas. Now, commercial, large scale · gas station is generally not what s it e center to the north. So, 3f the proposed a neighborhood centers concept. However, the issue becomes is this line between the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 Page 185 - Page 188 24. ATTACHMENT 3 1 omment, I think there's an appeals process here. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 .0 .1 2 3 4 le disappointed that we don't have all parties I'm a to decision them an op~ know that they can If they'd like to change something they can go with. thing for our city and MR. ENGi that case, the We'll do i ith and I think that we could make a be~ was the case. But I would to have something from and it to give can look at and .ill a workable plan. , I think they have I think it's the best Agenda th. :CHT: Any .on -- I think I've more time. It's to approve outlined by staff. Vote, please. six to one. discussion? In motion. the four 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ENGELBRECHT: We'll move on to Agenda Item No. 7 which is to continue a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a detailed plan for approximately ten acres located between Mulkey and Audra streets north of Paisley. The property is located in Planned Development 9. A Denton Independent School District education facility is proposed. Remember, Commissioners, this is a continuance. At this time, we'll ask Mr. Gray to provide us once again with the staff report. PLANNING AND ZONING COM~ISSION 25. JANUARY 26, 2000 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. GRAY: Okay. This is, as you know today, a continuance from last week. This site should look familiar to you not only because it was on the Agenda two weeks ago, but also because there is also a concept plan for this same site concerning the school district's early childhood education facility. The concept plan for this property was approved by city Council last week. I did note that in your backup. The reason we had to continue it, of course, is because this detailed plan was caught up in the moratorium and it was renoticed by Denton Independent School District but in that renoticing, it didn't -- notice didn't make it to the newspaper. So staff felt that it would be wise if we renoticed this which we did so a couple of weeks ago and now we're prepared to move on. Just to refresh your memories, this is an early childhood education facility probably for, and I'll let the representative of the school district explain it a little better than I could, for young children, 250 students, could be expanded to 300. It's located between Audra and Mulkey streets. It's a ten-acre site and the school is on the -- in the middle of the site. There are access loops coming off of Audra, as well as Mulkey. The Audra loop is going to be primarily for parents. Whereas, the Mulkey loop is going to be for buses and staff. And, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 26. JANUARY 26, 2000 46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 of course, there's going to be the requisite landscaping. There's a detention pond down here in the corner that is being built to catch rainwater runoff. You may remember the discussions we had concerning that, the concept plan phase. applicant speak. MR. I'll be happy to answer any questions or let the ENGELBRECHT: Commissioners, are there any -- yes, there appears to be at least one. Ms. Apple. MS. APPLE: I just have one question and also a concern. In the backup, it mentions that Audra Lane is designed to be a four-lane undivided street without parking and we know currently that it is a two-lane street with parking. And in the recent past, we've had quite a few of these where we are told what the road is designed to be and what the traffic flow could be in the future. And this Commissioner would be very happy if we could have information on what current information is -- MR. GRAY: What current information is. MS. APPLE: -- because I think that's wonderful to know that at such time as it's four-lane undivided without parking, it can handle 14,900. It would be very helpful to me to know what it can handle since it is currently two-lane with parking. And, unfortunately, I don't have that information in front of me. MR. GRAY: Staff will take that into PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 27. JANUARY 26, 2000 47 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 consideration as we write purpose reports. MS. APPLE: I'm sure -- at least I would appreciate that. Thanks. MR. GRAY: I will let -- I believe, Mr. Salmon has a piece of information that he would like to share, first of all. MS. APPLE: MR. SALMON: Thanks. Well, I think fortunately in this case, it's going to be a four-lane undivided street in the very near future. In fact, I don't know if you've driven out there lately but our Street Department is already in the process of construction on the northern end between where Audra Lane bends and Mingo Road. And the whole Audra Lane from where, I think, from some number of feet north of Paisley Street all the way up to Mingo Road is being reconstructed as a four-lane undivided road. There's been some delay in the construction due to a conflict with a gas line and waiting for the railroad to allow us to install the crossing at the railroad there next to Mingo Road. But I think you'll see, at least in this case, that that really is going to be a four-lane undivided road probably before this school is -- well, almost certainly before this school is completed. MS. APPLE: Okay. So that traffic capacity PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 28. JANUARY 26, 2000 48 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 would be accurate in the very near future. MR. SALMON: Yeah, in this particular case it will be accurate in the very near future. MS. APPLE: Okay. And I would still like my comment to stand for those others cases, you know, that we've had recently. Thank you, David. MR. GRAY: report template. MR. ENGELBRECHT: questions at this time? Thank you. petitioner's representative present? your name and address for the record. I'll make a change to the staff Commissioners, any other Is the petitioner or If you would give us MR. MARTIN: Yeah, Mr. chair, Commissioners, my name is Curtis Martin. I'm with the Denton Independent School District. I reside at 320 North Mayhill Road. And I'd like to add to the comment. I want to talk a little bit about traffic concerns and the detention pond that we had in our previous meeting here. And not only is the road being expanded to the four lanes, we've also been working with city staff to put a left turn lane here on Audra Lane. We have met with the neighborhoods. They have concerns. We're in a joint venture with the city, when they construct this, that they will build our approaches and the turn lane as they do the work. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 29. JANUARY 26, 2000 49 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 We anticipate about a 157 parents to drop their students off. This will be one-way through the parent dropoff. And we've, at this facility since most of the students are four and five years old, we feel like that most parents are going to want to stop, take their kids, their children into the school. And we've tried to made adequate parking to -- for that, for the parents to drop and park and plenty of stacking, and this being one-way back out to Audra Lane. On the back side, we've had some concerns about our traffic on Mulkey Lane. We've designed this to be, once it gets to our property, to be a one-way bus dropoff out to Oak Drive and also our staff parking. We have approximately 47 staff members that will be arriving at the school between 7:00 and 7:30 in the morning. There are nine buses that will be arriving to unload the mostly special-ed kids, students at 7:30. They will be exiting on Oaktree and leaving by 8:00 o'clock. The buses, there's about five or six daycare buses that will be picking up kindergarten students in the middle of the day and some in the afternoon, also. But most of the five or six daycare buses will be gone by the 2:25 let out of the school. The nine buses from the district and -- one's from Gainesville and one's from Lewisville, at 2:25 they will line up at the bus dropoff and they will exit the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 30. JANUARY 26, 2000 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 property at around 3:00 o'clock. The staff, the 47 staff members will be exiting the parking lot at about 3:40 to 4:00 o'clock so there will be plenty of time between our neighbors going to work and our traffic coming on-board. One of the other concerns that we had at our neighborhood meeting is where my place goes around and passes in front of Lee Elementary School. We've got some congestion there and we're in the predesign concept there and we're anticipating taking a single-lane bus dropoff over in that area and making a two-lane stackable student dropoff to alleviate some of the parking or traffic problems that we have at Mack Place at Lee. MR. RISHEL: that and tell me -- MR. MARTIN: Would you backup again for me on One of our concerns that we had in our neighborhood meetings was the fact that some of the people getting out of these neighborhoods, they go out Mack Place which goes right in front of Lee Elementary School. MR. RISHEL: MR. MARTIN: Right. And as we're in the addition and renovation of that school, we anticipate making a larger parent dropoff to get the traffic off the street there. MR. RISHEL: So would you show me on your little map where that would be? PLANNING AND ZONINC COMMISSION 31. JANUARY 26, 2000 51 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MARTIN: That's completely off this site. It's about two blocks away. It's down Paisley. When you're coming back down Audra, you come to the four-way stop, take a left on Paisley, go about a block, and you run back into Mack Place. MR. RISHEL: I'm sorry. Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Any other questions, Commissioners? MR. MARTIN: The other issue we had was our detention pond and whether we fence it or leave it open and a little concern about safety of the detention pond. So I got with the neighbors. I took some photographs of the detention pond that's at the Food Lion store out by the Strickland Middle School. This detention pond was fenced. I did talk with the principal that was active getting this fence placed around this detention pond. She was just like everybody else. You know, you mention the word pond and safety around a school campus. But since she's seen what was constructed and not having any problems with her students and the way this thing has been maintained, she doesn't have a great deal of concern. MR. RISHEL: She doesn't have a great deal of concern with the fencing? MR. MARTIN: Well, with the safety of the students. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 32. JANUARY 26, 2000 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. RISHEL: Yeah. So what we're proposing here though is not fencing this area; is that correct? MR. MARTIN: MR. RISHEL: MR. MARTIN: MR. RISHEL: MR. MARTIN: That's correct. More like at Ryan High. Uh-huh. Okay. This is a little more -- some other photographs of that showing how the water exits the pond. It goes underground. The one we have at Ryan, this one is about a six-foot deep pond. This is the exit. The pond, the way it's metered out. As you can tell by looking at this one, we were able to leave quite a few of the trees naturally inside the detention pond itself. I've talked to the principal and to our maintenance people at our bus barn. This pond has never had over about eight or ten inches of water retained in it at one time and they told me that it was gone in about 45 minutes. So we feel like that leaving this thing natural on our site, we're closer in our design at this point with the neighbors' concern about it being close to the property. We managed to only have to take out two trees that are protected tree size. In fact, the whole site that we're developing here, I think there were 82 tr~es that would be protected and I think we're only going to PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 33. JANUARY 26, 2000 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 lose 13 of those trees. And then, of course, we'll meet the landscaping ordinances. I did have Mr. Burke do me a survey of approximately what the depths would be when it did rain because these things are designed from two years to 100-year flood. And I won't bore you a whole lot unless you have additional questions, but you can tell a two-year storm with 32 minutes of rain, the first pond will be about 18 inches deep. It will take approximately two hours to drain. The second smaller detention pond, same amount of time would be between nine inches deep and also around a two-hour emptying period. As you go on up to maybe a ten-year storm, your depth goes up and you start getting a little more water over here where we have a berm that's going to protect these homeowners here and the inlets of the existing storm system. But the drainage, drain down time is about the same. And the last one I'd just like to give you is 100-year calculations and you can see that the water depth hasn't increased that much but the drainage time has only gone up by about nine minutes. And these things will be totally drained. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. We do appear to have some questions. Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. I can visualize the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 34. JANUARY 26, 2000 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 four-lane street. I still can visualize horrendous traffic there. I listened to you discuss who all you talked to. Have you talked to the Juvenile Detention Center and the Sheriff's Department and the people at the courthouse about what time people come to work? Because all this is in that area. MR. MARTIN: We haven't addressed any of those concerns. We've addressed the City staff's concerns and the neighborhood concerns. I live in that area myself and I understand that there's traffic. But as staff was relating to early, the road in front of this property now is just two lanes unimproved and we feel like that when the improvements are made in the near future with the added turn lane, the traffic flow will be better in that area. But we feel like that the school district's staff, you know, that's the City's or if you asked us to go get with these people, we can do that, too. MR. WILLIAMS: Well, I'm just looking at the close -- you have two schools, a County jail, a courthouse, and a detention center in less than a half-mile of each other and it concerns me about the traffic there. It really does. MR. MARTIN: We've had a traffic study and it reflects that about 61 percent of these people, the parent dropoff will be coming South Audra Lane with about 28 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 35. JANUARY 26, 2000 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 percent of our 156 there would be coming North Audra Lane or Nottingham. And then we've got about 11 percent of this traffic that we're putting on Audra that will be coming off of Paisley. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Williams? Any other comment, Mr. MR. WILLIAMS: No. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Ms. Apple. MS. APPLE: I, too, have traffic concerns based on what the neighbors had presented to us and I just want to make sure, and forgive me if I'm having you repeat yourself, I just want to make sure that I got everything right. You're anticipating, I presume, maybe 250 students at the beginning but possibly up to 300? MR. MARTIN: That's correct. MS. APPLE: And you mentioned that there would probably be about 157 people bringing children to school, five to six daycare buses, two trips a day. And then did you say nine district buses in addition to that? MR. MARTIN: MS. APPLE: staff members, also. That's correct. And then you mentioned the 47 You said the daycare buses would pick up those children around 2:25 and then the district buses would be there around 3:00? MR. MARTIN: No, the district buses would be PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 36. JANUARY 26, 2000 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 there at 2:25 and they will be off campus by 3:00. MS. APPLE: Okay. And what time -- and I appreciate the information you gave us about what time the staff would be leaving because that would be a little bit earlier than the 5:00 o'clock rush so that would be helpful. But what time will they start? What time will the staff, the 47 staff get there, and what time will the 157 parents and the five to six daycare and the nine district buses be getting there in the morning? MR. MARTIN: Okay. The 47 staff members will be arriving between 7:00 and 7:30. I talked to Transportation this afternoon and they're not allowed to start unloading those students until 7:30, the traffic that will be coming off of Mulkey. I presume that the parents will by dropping their students off on Audra Lane between 7:30 and 8:00, the 157, because I presume school starts at 8:00, just a little after 8:00. MS. APPLE: Okay. MR. ENGELBRECHT: MR. RISHEL: lying under oath here. Thanks. Mr. Rishel. Mr. Martin, I don't want you When you introduced yourself, you said that you resided at Mayhill Road and I know that was not your intent. Would you go ahead and restate what that Mayhill Road connection is? MR. MARTIN: I work at 320 North Mayhill Road. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 37. JANUARY 26, 2000 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I reside at 3000 Yorkshire. MR. RISHEL: Okay. I appreciate it. I heard you say you lived in the area so I knew that the first -- MR. MARTIN: Sometimes I feel like it. MR. RISHEL: I know you put in a lot of hours there. Just a couple of comments and I appreciate the work that we've done in trying to work with the local neighbors, particularly about the drainage and the traffic situation. My wife is a teacher and I can assure you she's capable of leaving between 3:40 and 4:00 but she never gets out of there before 4:30 or 5:00. So I know some of those people aren't just rushing out the door at 3:40 and it's a big traffic bottleneck right there. That's probably not the case when it comes to staff. This is a project that came out of vision 2000 and we're pleased to finally see this get off the ground as a long-term part of that. I'm really pleased that this center is going in and we're going to have something we're going to be proud of in our community. Mr. Williams, and I want to get clarification, it sounds like you're concerned about the proximity of the jail and the probation center and the other things in that area. And I appreciate your understanding of those particular needs and assets of our community. You make it ~ound lik~ w~'re going to have people that are getting out of jail and then PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 38. JANUARY 26, 2000 58 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 kind of hanging around in that area. MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. Let me clear this up. I'm talking about the people who are going t° work. That's my concern. We have jailers that will be going to work. We have clerks that work at the courthouse that will be going to work. We have juvenile probation officers who will be going to work. We have juvenile detention officers who will be going to work. And I'm concerned about traffic. It has nothing to do with safety and jail because if I had my druthers, I would put every school in front of a jail because they're a whole lot safer from criminals than they are any place else. MR. RISHEL: Okay. That's part of my question. The people that live in that area of the school that work at the jails are part of that traffic count that we already have. So we know, we have a pretty good idea of what the traffic count is. And I think that typically you're probably not going to be -- the traffic count kind of speaks for itself because those businesses or those operations or institutions are already in place so I think the school district has been prudent in our City working with them to try to get the best traffic count we possibly can. I think we know what that is and the improvements that we're doing to the road certainly speaks for itself. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 39. JANUARY 26, 2000 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Do you still see any concerns or questions that have been brought forth from the neighbors as you have further flushed out your plan and showed them what has happened? I know that the drainage and the parking and the potential traffic on that is always an important issue for us. MR. MARTIN: The photographs, I sent those with one of the neighbors home for a weekend and she passed them around. I haven't been able to speak with her. She's been on vacation. But it seemed to come back very positive about the drainage. I think mostly, too, on the traffic concerns that they have is on Mulkey Lane and it's more the speeders and the people that are driving fast down that area than it is the additional traffic load. I'm sure that's a big concern. But I live out that way myself and they really, when the Audra Lane up to Nottingham is completed, it will take a lot of traffic off of where I live. But, you know, they drive real fast out there and I think that's more their concern than the load of traffic. MR. RISHEL: And we have some traffic quieting methodology that we'll be implementing, I'm sure, that Mr. Salmon will work with the school system and our Traffic Engineering Department. That's all I have. Thank you. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 40. JANUARY 26, 2000 6O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a minute. question? MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. Thank you. Oh, wait I'm sorry. Mr. Williams, do you have a MR. WILLIAMS: No, I have a comment. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. MR. WILLIAMS: Since I drive this street probably four times a week and also I know that statistically parents tend to guard their children from kindergarten to third grade very, very carefully. And there are very few preschoolers on school buses. So even though special-ed may have buses prepared for these parents, I really think that the projection for these preschoolers is a little bit low because I can't see these kids being on buses because I work around schools and I don't see toddlers and four-year-olds and toddlers getting off of buses. They're usually getting out of parents' cars. And that's my concern when you've got all these people trying to get to work and you've got parents moving in and then you've got parents who are -- and that's my concern about the traffic because I know what's in that neighborhood. Like I said, I drive that at least four times a week. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Thank you. Mr. McNeill. MR. MCNEILL: I have a question for counsel. Is this really -- this is really a good neighbor request PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 41. JANUARY 26, 2000 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 because they don't really need our permission to do this. They're an independent body. They could go right ahead with this plan; is that correct? MR. SNYDER: Yes, the school district doesn't have to comply. MR. MCNEILL: So this is really a good neighbor request, in effect, saying we want to be good neighbors living here in the city. MR. SNYDER: That's correct and that's not unusual, though. MR. MCNEILL: Yeah, I understand. Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Rishel. MR. RISHEL: Perhaps Mr. Parton could help us with -- I'm trying to clarify for Mr. Williams. This is not a neighborhood school and so the demographics with which you draw from across the City is a little bit different makeup than we would have with strictly a school situation. Is that correct? MR. PARTON: That's correct. MR. RISHEL: Okay. As you see, and I appreciate the fact that -- MR. WILLIAMS: is. you. MR. RISHEL: Okay. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 42. I know what kind of school it I appreciate it. Thank JANUARY 26, 2000 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Thank you. Is there anyone present who would like to speak in favor of this petition? Anyone present to speak in favor of the petition? In that case, is there anyone present who would like to speak in opposition to the petition? Anyone present to speak in opposition to the petition? Seeing no opposition, the rebuttal period is waived and the public hearing is closed. Mr. Gray, any final staff remarks? MR. GRAY: Yes. There's one final remark and I'm passing around right now the responses from neighbors we have received. Since we sent out courtesy and legal notices on three separate occasions, we got quite a bit of feedback in return. some neighbors actually sent back their legal notices all three times. So the final tally or the current tally, just so you're aware, we've had 11 responses in opposition, ten responses in favor, four are neutral, but only three of those in opposition are actually within 200 feet of the detailed plan. So that accounts to roughly 1.65 percent. Staff is concerned with the -- we are aware of the concerns of the neighbors just from the written comments we've received and also from comments from the neighborhood meeting that we had last December. And we do recognize that there is concern about traffic along Mulkey, especially the speed of traffic. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 43. JANUARY 26, 2000 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 And the staff will work with the school district in looking at ways to reduce traffic or, at least, reduce the speed of traffic along Mulkey. MR. ENGELBRECHT: In regard to the ten that you're showing in favor, can you tell me what number was within 200 feet? MR. GRAY: I really couldn't because I only -- MR. ENGELBRECHT: You only did it because of the opposition. Now, when you say 11 and ten, is that from the most recent mailing or is that cumulative over the three mailings? MR. GRAY: This is cumulative. In fact, the people that sent in duplicate mailings, I paperclipped them together so that -- and counted them as one. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. So that we have 11 individual oppositions over the three mailings and three of those are within 200 feet is what you're telling me? MR. GRAY: Correct. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. All right. Commissioners, any other questions for Mr. Gray? If there are no other questions, are there any comments or a motion? MR. RISHEL: I'd like to make a motion. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Rishel. MR. RISHEL: I'd like to move to recommend the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 44. JANUARY 26, 2000 64 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 approval of Z-99-088 with the following conditions: Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or shine and project upward to prevent diffusion into the night sky. MR. MCNEILL: Second. MR. ENGELBRECHT: It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval with the conditions outlined by staff. Any discussion? Ms. Apple. MS. APPLE: I'll be voting for the motion because, as Commissioner McNeill pointed out, basically, regardless of what we do, the school district takes precedence. But I just would like to register my concerns about putting two school facilities so close together and some possibly inherent traffic problems that will be caused. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. I want to piggyback what Ms. Apple said. Since the school district is a political subdivision, they can pretty well do what they want to do. However, since I drive this neighborhood, I would like to see our school board do better planning when they pick school sites. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Any other comment? I would just like to say I will be voting in favor of the motion. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 45. JANUARY 26, 2000 65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 First off, I recognize that this a courtesy application, if you will. I do want to commend the school district for working with the City, working with the residents, and with our -- to take into account all the concerns. Traffic being one of the major ones. I do believe we're going to see a considerable change there as Audra is turned into four-lane and linked up to Nottingham, basically, is what it's going to be. It will go up to Mingo Road and come across as four lanes. And I think that will disburse that. I really believe the school district has done a good job, or whoever designed this, in terms of managing the bus traffic and staff traffic and the parent traffic by keeping them on two sides, will minimum the impact on the neighborhood, I believe. And I think that -- I know there were some concerns about the retention ponds. I believe if there is a problem with those, that I have no doubt the district will move quickly to ensure that safety prevails. Mr. Rishel, did you want to make a comment? MR. RISHEL: I just wanted to echo your comment. I think we've seen an ongoing relationship with DISD and the City and the neighbors of making sure that we have a dynamic plan. And if there's things that need to be addressed, that we'll make sure we try to do that in an expeditious manner. And I think that's the history that PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 46. JANUARY 26, 2000 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we've seen with DISD and I'm proud to put this forth as a motion. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Motion carries seven to zero. Ail right. Vote, please. And at this time, as I'd indicated earlier, we will be taking a 30-minute break. (Break taken.) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 47. JANUARY 26, 2000 67 ATTACHMENT 4 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 70- 52 TO PROVIDE FOR A DETAILED PLAN FOR 10.06 ACRES LOCATED WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 9 (PD-9) ZONING DISTRICT; THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEING LOCATED BETWEEN MULKEY AND AUDRA STREETS NORTH OF PAISLEY STREET; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Z-99~088). WHEREAS, on December 8, 1970, by Ordinance 70-52, the City Council approved a change in zoning for 13.8 acres of land to Planned Development 9 (PD-9) Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2000, by Ordinance 2000-025, the City Council approved an amended Concept Plan for 13.64 acres of land located within PD-9 with the intent to develop a new public school facility; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 1999 Burke Engineering, on behalf of Denton Independent School District, submitted a Detailed Plan for 10.06 acres of land located within PD-9 with the intent to develop a new public school facility; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a Detailed Plan for such 10.06 acres; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Detailed Plan is consistent with the approved amended Concept Plan for PD-9; NOW, THEREFORE, ' THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 70-52 providing for the approval of a Planned Development Zoning District Classification and Use Designation for the property described as PD-9 is amended by approving the Detailed Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit B for 10.06 acres located within PD-9, more particularly described by the legal description attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the following condition: Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. SECTION 2. That .the provisions of this ordinance as they apply to the 10.06 acres shown in the detailed plan herein approved, shall govern and control over any conflicting provisions of Ordinance No. 70-52, but all the provisions of Ordinance No. 70-52 as they apply to that remaining portion of the district not herein amended, shall continue in force and effect and shall apply to the remainder of said district. 48. SECTION 3. That a copy of this ordinance shall' be attached to Ordinance No. 70-52 showing the amendment herein approved. SECTION 4. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record Chronicle, official newspaper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: :-'~~" ~ PAGE 2 49. EXHIBIT A 10.06 ACRES (DISD PORTION OF PD 9) FIELD NOTES to all that a certain tract of land situated in the J. Brock Survey Abstract Number 55, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and being part of the called 15.755 acre tract described in the deed from Realty Alliance of Texas, Ltd., to James Coleson recorded under C.F.N. 93-R0027172 of the Real Property Records 0fDent0n County, Texas; the subject tract being more particularly described as follo6ts: BEGINNING for a reentrant corner of the said 15.755 acre tract being South 00 Degrees 10 Minutes 35 Seconds West a distance of 641.70 feet and East a distance of 349.0 feet from the intersection of the South right-of-way line of Lattimore Street and the East right- of-way line of Mulkey Lane; THENCE South 89 Degrees 23 Minutes 32 Seconds East a distance of 532.76 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE South 21 Degrees 09 Minutes 35 Seconds West along the West right-of-way line of Audra Lane a distance of 703.68 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE South 89 Degrees 52 Minutes 50 Seconds West a distance of 148.66 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE Noah a distance of 149.20 feet to the beginning of the curve to the left; THENCE Westerly along said curve (having a radius of 396.06 feet), an arc length of 9.83 feet (chord bearing North 89 Degrees 17 Minutes 20 Seconds West a distance of 9.83 feet) to a point or corner; THENCE West along the North right-of-way line of Meadow Oak Drive a distance of 270.00 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE South 89 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds West a distance of 273.00 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE Noah 15 Degrees 27 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 431.00 feet to a point for'a corner; THENCE North 12 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 170.00 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE South 76 Degrees 46 Minutes 19 Seconds East a distance of 279.99 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and enclosing 10.06 acres of land. 50. EXHIBIT B V'I-] 51. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda No. ~ A§enda Item Date ~ AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: February 15, 2000 Planning Department Dave Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT - Z-99-094 (Racetrac) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately two acres of land from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial (C) zoning district. The property is located approximately 550 feet north and 1000 feet east of the intersection of West University Drive (US 380) and 1-35. Development of a gas station and mini-warehouses has been proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) with conditions. BACKGROUND The developer is requesting a Commercial (C) zoning district classification for this 2.05 acre property, which is actually part of a six acre tract of land (see Attachment 3). The southern four acres of the tract is already zoned Commercial (C). The applicant would like to change the zoning of the northern two acres of the property from Agricultural (A) to Commercial (C) in order to consolidate the zoning of the entire tract. The applicant is proposing to build a gasoline service station and a mini-warehouse facility. The subject property is located in a Agricultural (A) zoning district created in 1969 with the City of Denton's first zoning ordinance. The property is bounded to the west by property zoned General Retail (GR), and to the east and north by property zoned Agricultural (A) (see Attachment 3). Five (5) property owners were notified of the zoning request. One (1) response has been received in favor of the zoning request and one (1) response has been received in opposition. The one response in opposition constitutes 66.8% of the land area within 200 feet of the subject property, thus triggering the 20% rule (see Attachment 3). PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ-99-094, commonly known as Ractrac: Application Date- November 17, 1999 P&Z Date - January 13, 2000 ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property has not been platted and will need to be platted prior to any development. FISCAL INFORMATION Development of this property will increase the assessed value of the city, county, and school district. It will require no short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city. P&Z RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0) of this zoning request with the following conditions: 1. Permitted uses are limited to those listed in Attachment 3, Exhibit B. 2. Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. 3. All buildings shall have a brick, stucco or stone exterior. 4. Site plan approval by City Council is required prior to development. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions. 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Report, January 12, 2000, Z-99-094. 2. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes from January 12, 2000. 3. Draft Ordinance. Prepared by: Planner I ~ Respectfully submitted: Douglas S. ~ox~ell, AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Date Subject: Racetrac Staff: Thomas B. Gray, Planner I Case Number: Z-99-094 Aqenda Date: January 12, 2000 Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council concerning the rezoning of approximately two acres of land from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial (C) zoning district. Cit~Y H.ll Location: Size: LOCATION MAP Approximately 550 feet north and 1000 feet east of the intersection of West University Drive (US 380) and 1-35. 2.05 acres Z-99-094 P&Z St:afl Report Applicant: Bonnie Sylvester Owner: Hickman Consulting Engineers, Inc. 1315 E. 19t" Street, Suite A Piano, TX 75074 Racetrac Petroleum, Inc. 300 Technology Court Smyrna, GA 30082 The developer is requesting a Commercial (C) zoning district classification for this 2.05 acre property. This property is actually part of a larger six acre tract of land (see Enclosure 1). The southern four acres of the larger property are already zoned Commercial (C). The applicant would like to change the zoning of the northern two acres of the property from Agricultural (A) to Commercial (C) in order to consolidate the zoning of the entire tract. The applicant is proposing to build a gasoline service station on a portion of the six acre tract. No development plans currently exist for the remainder of the tract, which includes the two acres that are the subject of this zoning request. The property that is the subject of this zoning request is bounded to the west by property zoned General Retail (GR), and to the east and north by property zoned Agricultural (A) (see Enclosure 3). 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan Analysis The 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan places this property within a Neighborhood Centers Area (see Enclosure 4). These areas are intended to be developed as inward-oriented, center-focused neighborhoods. While the Neighborhood Centers are intended to be primarily residential in nature, neighborhood-oriented retail and service uses are also permitted. Staff feels that the requested rezoning to Commercial (C) is incompatible with the type of development proposed for Neighborhood Centers. However, staff feels that there are circumstances which temper this analysis somewhat. When the 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan was developed, the boundary between the Community Mixed Use Center along University Drive and the Neighborhood Centers Area north of University Drive was drawn to follow the existing zoning boundary, which was Agricultural (A) to the north and Commercial (C) to the south. No consideration was given to the actual property boundary, and as a result the larger tract is split both in regards to zoning and the Denton Comprehensive Plan. It should also be pointed out that Section 219.005 of Texas Local Government Code states that "a comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries." Therefore, zoning that is not necessarily consistent with the comprehensive plan can be approved, especially when other issues are present. See "Staff Analysis" section below. Z-99-094 P&Z Staff Repod: 1. Transportation A. Trip generation The proposed development would generate approximately nine hundred and eleven (911) trips per day if built out with either commercial or retail (see Table 1 ). Table 1. Proposed Trip Generation Land Use Average Trip Average Density Acres Estimated Lots Total Trip Generation* or Sq. Ft. Generation General Retail 41 trips/1,000 sq. ft. 10,834 sq. ft./ac 2.05 22,209.7 sq. ft. 911 Commercial 60 trips/1,000 sq. ft. 10,834 sq. ft./ac 2.05 22,209.7 sq. ft. 911 Calculations provided b,, the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1991. B. Access The two acre subject property is part of a larger six-acre property that has access to University Drive. C. Road Capacity University Drive is identified as a primary major arterial road by the 1998 Denton Mobility Plan. This road is designed to be a six (6) lane divided street without parking, providing six (6) lanes of through traffic. As such, its designed traffic capacity allows for a tolerable traffic flow of up to 27,900 trips per day. University is currently constructed with four (4) lanes without parking. The most recent traffic counts for University indicate that there is adequate capacity to handle the calculated trips that could be generated by the proposed development. A traffic count at University and 1-35 west of the site indicated a volume of 14,286 vehicles per day. A traffic count at University and Bonnie Brae east of the site indicated a volume of 17,415 vehicles per day. D. Pedestrian Linkages E. Sidewalks along all public streets are required. Pedestrian connections from sidewalks to entrances of new buildings are required by Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS). 2, Utilities This site has access to existing water and sanitary sewer lines (see Enclosure 5). Drainage and Topography New development will be required to design and construct a drainage system to city standards. A preliminary drainage study will be required with the submission of a preliminary plat. The study must include calculations of the 100-year storm for all drainage areas on this property and any area that drains towards this property. The developer must indicate the method by which the run- off will be carried across the property or stored on the property. 4. Signs Z-99-Ogq P&Z Staff Report As per the sign ordinance. 5. Off-Street Parking New development must provide parking according to the regulations of Chapter 35 (35-301) of the Code of Ordinances. 6. Landscaping This property will have to comply with the new Landscape Code, which requires fifteen (15) trees per acre and twenty (20) percent of all surfaces to remain pervious (plantable area). 7. Open Space and Recreational Areas Nonresidential development is not required to participate in the development of public recreational areas. Lighting Lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. This restriction will need to be written in as a condition of the Ordinance approving the rezoning. Environmental Quality impacts No impacts are anticipated. January 14, 1969 - The subject property was placed in the Agricultural (A) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 69-01 which adopted the first zoning ordinance and map for the City of Denton (see Enclosure 3). The subject property is not platted and would need to be platted prior to any development. Notice of the zoning request was published in the Denton Record-Chronicle on Sunday, January 2, 2000. Five (5) property owners within two hundred feet were mailed legal notices and ten (10) residents within five hundred feet were sent courtesy notices informing them of the request (see Enclosure 6). As of this writing, there has been one (1) response in favor of the rezoning request and one (1) response in opposition to the zoning request (see Enclosure 7). The one response in opposition to the request constitutes 66.8% of the land area within 200 feet of the subject property, thus triggering the 20% rule. No neighborhood meetings were held. Z..99-Ogq P&Z Staff Repo~ As was noted previously, the two acres that are the subject of this rezoning request are part of a larger six acre tract, the majority of which is zoned commercial. As also explained above, the tract is split both in regards to zoning and the Denton Comprehensive Plan. Staff believes that the split zoning of the entire six acre tract creates a hardship for the owner, because it severely limits development of the property. The tract could not be platted as a single lot given the current zoning configuration because Section 34-125 (f) of the City's Subdivision and Land Development Regulations prohibit individual lots from 'containing two or more incompatible zoning districts; residential zoning such as Agricultural is deemed to be incompatible with non-residential zoning such as Commercial. Furthermore, it would be difficult to subdivide the portion of the tract zoned Agricultural from the portion of the tract zoned Commercial because Section 34-125 (b) of the City's Subdivision and Land Development Regulations require that every lot be provided with adequate access to an existing or proposed public street. The remote location of the subject property makes compliance with this requirement problematic. Nevertheless, staff feels that some attempt should be made to observe the suggested land use districts of the 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan. As was noted above, large commercial development is not compatible within the residential Neighborhood Centers area and could be detrimental to future development within the area. As a resolution to this dilemma, staff makes the recommendation that this property be rezoned General Retail (GR) instead of Commercial (C). Staff feels that the more limited scope of uses allowed in a General Retail zoning district would be more appropriate for this property, since it abuts land that the Comprehensive Plan anticipates to be residential in the future (see Enclosure 8 listing allowed uses in Commercial districts and Enclosure 9 listing allowed uses in General Retail districts.) The General Retail zoning classification would not preclude the applicant from developing a gas station or any other retail or service-oriented business on the subject property, but would limit more intense commercial development that might be incompatible with adjacent residential districts. The Planning and Zoning Commission could, at its discretion, even further limit the uses allowed in this district by striking them from the list of allowed uses for General Retail zoning. Staff sees an opportunity for the subject property to be developed with retail and service type uses that will serve future residential development within the Neighborhood Centers area. Staff recommends approval of Z-99-094 with the following conditions: 1. Zoning of the subject tract shall be General Retail (GR). 2. Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise Z-99-094 P&Z §t~ff Report disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. I move to recommend approval of Z-99-094 with the following conditions: 1. Zoning of the subject tract shall be General Retail (GR). 2. Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. 1. Survey of Subject Property 2. Vicinity Map 3. Zoning Map 4. 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan Map 5. Utility Map 6. 200'-500' Notification Map 7. Property Owner Responses (2) 8. Permitted Uses and Restrictions in Commercial (C) Zoning Districts 9. Permitted Uses and Restrictions in General Retail (GR) Zoning Districts 10. Draft Ordinance Z-99-094 P&Z S~zf~ Report ENCLOSURE 1 (D.R.D,C.T.) LINE DATA L1 N 00"18'20" E 139.72' L2 S 87°24'58'' E 646,71' ..... ~;-§'"5'i °',~'F' ~"~"-~- L4 N 87°31'29" W 642,91' LEGEND ,3/4" J* NEWTON RAYZOR SECOND TRACT ~- ~ (crc) (VOLUME 505, PAGE 701) ~ w/CAP (ZONE "A" AGRICULTURAL) REMAINDER 18,269 ACRES BRENT W. ANBRUS VAUGHN A. ANDRUS (C.C. FlEE No. 97-R0057940) ZONE "GR" GENERAL RETAIL) (ZONE "C" COMMERCIAL) '~ P.O.B. 408.46' PORTER/ ANDRU$ AOGITION (CABINET O, PAGE 48) (CABINET N, PAGE 218) L2 PROPOSED REZONING (ZONE #C" COMMERCIAL) 89,628 SQUARE FEET 2.0576 ACRES L4 254,54' I sk P.O.C. (ZONE "C" COMMERCIAL) J.E. ALLEN ENTERPRISES INC. 420.00' DEED = EAST ~ 210.00' ~'-~0'-- 122.65 / '~'~ I~ ,~l~ I ~ ~ z0 J.E. ALLEN 236) ~ I I ~ I ~(c,c. 0oo' mo.w.) (VOLU~E 258, PAGE 109) J, NEWTON RAY OR FIRST TRAC~~ (VOLUME 505, PAGE 701) (ZONE "A" AGRICULTURAL) (ZONE "C" COMMERCIAL) HOLIDAY PARTNERS, LTC. (C.C, FILE NO. 96-R0079078) TRACT 2 FJLE No. 96-R0079078) ZONING EXHIBIT CITY OF DENTON % Hi,kman Co,,.,,lti~g F.~ers, Inc. DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS ENCLOSURE 2 Z-99-094 (Racetrac) NORTH VICINITY MAP Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None 10. ENCLOSURE 3 Z-99-094 (Racetrac) NORTH LI A ZONING MAP Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None 11. ENCLOSURE 4 Z-99-094 (Racetrac) NORTH Neig Centers Area Community Mixed Use Center eighborhood Centers Area 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None 12. ENCLOSURE 5 Z-99-094 (Racetrac) NORTH UTILITIES MAP Hydrants Water Line (W. L.) Sewer Line (S. L.) Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None 13. ENCLOSURE 6 Z-99-094 (Racetrac) NORTH Limit of 20~' Notification Limi[ of 500' Notification 200'-500' NOTICE MAP 200' Legal Notices sent via Certified Mail: 5 500' Courtesy Notices sent via 1st Class Mail: 10 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · Opposed: 1 · In Favor: 1 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 66.8% Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None NOTICE ENCLOSURE 7 OF PUBLIC HEARING Z-99-094 - - .. The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, January 12, 2000, to consider recommending approval to City Council the rezoning of approximately two acres of land from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial (C) zoning district. The property is legally described as a 2.05 acre tract in the F? Batson Survey, Abstract No. 43, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. It is located approximately 550 feet north and 1000 feet east of the intersection of West University Drive (US 380) and 1-35. The proposal is to develop a gas station. The public hearing will start at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no way prohibits you from attending and participating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Thomas B. Gray, Planner I The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. ~of req ,ues-~ Comments: Please circle one: Neutral to request Opposed to request Signature: Pnnted Name: Mailing Address: ~ ;~:; ~:,:' ;~, ~~, Ci~, State Zip: ~., Telephone Number: Physi~l Address of Prope~ within 200 feet: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS C~TY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 200' Notice, doc 15. NOTICE OF PUB?.IC Z-99-094 - -, HEARING The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, January 12, 2000, to consider recommending approval to City Council the rezoning of approximately two acres of land from an Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial (C) zoning district. The property is legally described as a 2.05 acre tract in the F. Batson Survey, Abstract No. 43, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. It is located approximately 550 feet north and 1000 feet east of the intersection of West University Drive (US 380) and 1-35. The proposal is to develop a gas station. The public hearing will start at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no way prohibits you from attending and participating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: ' - -Planfiing and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 ./ Attn: Thomas B. Gray, Planner I The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second~ the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. In favor of request Comments: Please circle one: Neutral to request Signature: :~ ~ ~ Mailing Address' 1204 WeVst University Drive, Ste. 400 City. State Zip: Denton, Texas 76201 Telephone Number: 940.-387-8711 Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: 2400 West University Drive, and 2700 West University Drive CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS 200' Notice. doc CITY HALL WEST . DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 ° (F) 940.349.7707 16 USES: ENCLOSURE 8 ' ' Primary Residential Uses One.' Family Dwelli'ng Restricted " . " Community Unit Devel.opment " ' Educational: InstltutiOn~l & Special. Uses . Art Gallery or Museum Cemetery.or Mausoleum ".. Church or Rectory College or University or Private School Community Center (Public) Day Camp Day Nursery or. KindergaMten School Group Homes Halfway House Home for'Care of"Alcoholic, Narcotic or Psychiatric'Patient~ Hospital (General Acute Care) Hospital (Chronic care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthropic Nature Public Library ' Monastery or Convent . . .Nursing ~ome..or.Resid~nCe acme .~o~.Aged ...'.''-. --" .. '" :' ' Occasional Sal~.s · .'1-.. .' '('- "-"i'. Park, PlaygrOund or PubliO'communityCenter' School, Private Primary or Secondary School, Public or Denominational School, Business or Trade · Utility/ Accessory and Incidental Uses. Accessory Building .. Community Center (Private) Electrical Substation Electrical Transmission Line Temporary Field or Construction offic~ (su~jeo~ to'Approval and Control-by Building. , . Inspector).'. . . . .,. . -.}j.j'............. ... ..: .. F~re Station.orSimilarPubl~c S~fety.B?~d%Dg ..... Gas Transmissi6~ Line a~MeterSng. S%~tl0n · 3: :'.'' : ·. ''-:' '. .. HomeOcoupation · · Off Street-~rking Incidental to Main Use' Off Street Remote Parking Public Building,.Shop, Yard of Local, state or Federal Government Radio and/or Televi~ion Microwave Tower Sew~gePu'~ping Statlo~. Private Swimming Pool Telephone, Business office .-. . Telephone Line and Exchange Swxtchi~g or Relay station Water Reservoir, Water Pumping statxoh or.Well · Water ~reatment Plant Il(Ill ~o~me~o~al D~at (eoa~{~uedl Amusem. ent, Comm~ (Outdsor) · Amusement, Commercial.(Indoor). CouBtryC1%~ (P~ivate) with Golf C~u~se Dance Hal~ or Night.Club. · . . , .-. . . commeroia!"'Gol . oUr e" · Public Park or PlaygroUnd Public Play field or Stadium 'Rodeo Grounds Roller or Ice. Skating Rink .. Sexually Oriented Business Stable, Private Club Stable, Commercial Rental · Stable, Boarding Swim or Tennis club Theater, Drive-in Theater, Other than Drive-in Type Transportation Related Uses Airport Landing Field or Heliport Bus Station or Terminal Hauling or Storage Company Motor Freigh~ Terminal Railroad'F~eight Terminal. .':' '.:. '.... : '. Railroad'*passenger station *.:'.... · Railroad Track .or Right-of-Way Railroad Team Track Truck Parking Lot Commercial .P~rking Lot or Structure Automobile Service Use~ Auto Laundry Auto Painting and Body Repair Auto Sales and Repair (In Building) Gasoline Service Station New Auto Parts Sales Stores- New or Used Car Sales Lot (In Open)- Seat Cover and MUffler Installation. Shop.. .. Used':AUto· Part~'Sales" (In 'Bu~ld~hg)* ;-~ :: · .. · . Retail and Service Type'Uses Antique Shbp Bakery or C6nfectionery Shop (R~%ail) Cafeteria Cleaning and Pressing Small Shop and PickUp Custom Personal. Service Shop Drapery, Needlework or Weaving Shbp Florist or Garden Shop' /~ Greenhouse or Plant'Nur~ry'~,,~taXi) Handic~aft Shop Household Appliance Service and-Repair Laundry or.Cl~aning Sel~ Service Retail and Service' T~ne ~'ses {_'continued) Mimeograph, Stationery or Letter Shop Mortuary or Funeral Parlor Offides, Professional and Administrative Off' Premise Sale. of Beer and/or On Premise Bale of Bee~ and/or Wine · RestaUrant " .-' '"'''' .~' Retail Stores and Shops - 4,000 square feet or less Retail Stores and Shops - Over 4,000 square f6et Studio for Photographer, Musician, Artist or Health Secondhand Store, Used Furniture or Rummage Sale .' Tool or Trailer Rental Agricultural Type Uses Animal clinic or HosPital (no outside runs o~ pens) Animal clinic, Hospital or Kennel (with outside runs .or pens) Farm or Rahch ' Greenhouse or Plant Nursery Hatchery, Poultry ~ommercial Type Uses Bakery (Wholesale) .. " Building Material .Sale. s.' '? '~ ' -'i. - ' ...." '" ' Ca~inet. and. Upholstery .Shop . · · ' .' '. - Cleaning and 'Dyeing plant (Commercial): ' Cleaning Plant, Bags 'or Carpets (Special Equipment.) . Clothing Manufacture or. Light compound, lng or Fabr~catlon Contractors Shop and Storage Yard Engine and Motor Repairing Feed Store Heavy Machinery Sales and Storage Job Printing or Newspaper Printing Laundry Plant (Commercial) Milk Depot, Dai .ry,.or Ice C. ream Pla~t · paint ..Shop Pl~:~bing Shop -_ · scienti-fi¢ or Research Laboratories- St6rage And .Sales' .of Furniture.or.~Kppl..i~h~e.s' (Outsid~ a"Buil~ing) storage' or ~sale~' Warehbuse..-" '. : ~.... ' ' . .' ~. · · Trailer Rental. or Sales Transfer,-.~orage and Baggage Te~(~inal ' Wholesale office and Sample. Room ~ERMITTED USES ~ITH ~PPR~VED SpEOIFIO USE pERMIT: primary Residential Uses Trailer camp or Mobile Home Park Educationglr Institutiona~ & Special Uses ' '' Fraternity, Sorority~ Lodge o~ Civic 19. , Utility. Accessory hnd Incid-en~al Uses · Electrical Generating Plant Private Utility Shop or Storage Yard -- ._ Sewage .Trea.tment Plant Recreational and ~n~rt~inment Uses ._ Drag strip or Commercial Racing . ~, '. ' 'GO ..cart .Track -:-" ~.' · '-.'...',' '"~ i .'" · ..'.'... :'"' .' i..... '. :-~]-., -... ':'; <:.:~" .'.-:'"' i" , '~"']':' .:. '-~"" ~. · :"-'-" ' ."' ' "~" ".'.' '.~ .';: ': .'-"..'"'. '- ~::"' ~" .? '. ':'. ~" ". · ~' .. ' "'.-'-- '.' .- -':'t :' ~' .' ";: ' ~, '.. ~.'~" :-.-..' .... ' '. '.-:.;' -"."- -'.' .... . .'i'. i'Aa~i~u'~'tfi{a{ 'TV~'e -Uses.. "" ' ' '" '" ' Animal Pound (Public or Private) 'commercial'TvDe Uses Flea Market Natural Resource Storage and Extraction. Extraction and Storage of Sand, Calec~e, Stone, Clay or Gravel Special Industrial'Processes Temporary Asphalt or.Concrete Batching Plant Mixing and Sale of Concrete 2:1 Maximum ~%REA REQUIREMENTS: · Floor/Area Ratio Min.imu~ ~25 ~ee%'. ' :. "--~ " No Side'Yard is specified for non-residential use except ·where a non-residential use abuts upon a · district boundary line diViding such districts from a residential' district or when the sSde yard .is adjacent .to the street, in which event a ten (10') foot side yard shall be provided. YARD REOUIREMENTS: ''~ro~t Yar~:'.' side Yard: Rear Yard: No rear year is specified for non-residential use except where retail, commercial or industrial' uses b~ckupon a common district line, whether separated' by an alley or not, dividing the district from any of the residential distric~ listed,-a:mini~um.~f ten (1~) feet shall'be'prov~edJ...".'"".' ~' '..."."'~.'.' '.' .. :... :. : '..... '.. '? ../ ..: ; . ':: ~' . ..' ,<...'.'."' .. ""' i~. ,' ...~ ' setback. 'RZeU ONS'.' ' ' 'Twe. nty ' (20) stories, except as ~o~'ed. in special required for all structures over three- (3) stories'; SUPPLEMENTAL REGbL~TION~ See Article 34-115.)' 1. Parking (Based on use. 2. Signs 3. Lighting. 4. L~.ndsoaping 5. Screening.& Fencing' PEI~TTED USES~ !'GR" General Retail Distr~c~ ENCLOSURE 9 ~rimar_v Residential Uses One Family Dwelling Restricted Community Unit Development Dormitory, Boarding or Rooming House Hotel or.Motel i.' ('~ ': !"J" ' ~ i ' .'" '" ' '." "'" ' EdUCational[ .In~'itutiOn~'! '& special use~ .' Art Gallery or Museum Church or Rectory College or University or Private School Community Center (Public) Day Nursery or Kindergarten School Group Homes Halfway House Home for' Care of Alcoholic, Narcotic or Psychiatric Patients Hospital (General Acute Care) Hospital (Chronic Care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthropic Nature Public Library Monastery or Convent Nursing Home or Residence Home for Aged Occasional Sales Park, Playground or Public Community Center School, Private Primary or Secondary ' School, Public.or Denominational iSchool, BUsiness or Trade . utiiity~ Accessory and Incldental Uses Accessory Building Community Center (Private) Electrical Substation Electrical Transmission Line Temporary Field or Construction office Control by Building Inspector) Fire Station or similar Public Safety Building Gas Transmission Line and Metering Station Home Occupation Off Street Parking Incidental to Main Use Off Street Remote Parking Radio and/or Television Microwave Tower 'Sewage pumping Station ' ~ " ' :. ' .... Private swimming 'Pool Telephone, Business office Telephone Line and Exchange switching or Relay Station Water Reservoir, Water Pumping Station or Well Recreational and Entertainment Uses Amusement, Commercial (Indoor) Country Club (Private) with Golf Course (Subject to Approval and Dance Hall or Night Club Publlc Golf Course Public Park or Playground Public Play field or Stadium Sexually Oriented Business Swim or Tennis Club Theater, Other than Drive-in Type 21. Transportation Related Us~s Railroad Passenger Station Railroad Track or Right-of-Way Commercial Parking Lot or Structure ~ ...-..~.. .: AutomobileService Uses ... Auto Laundry Auto Sales and Repair (In Building) Gasoline Service Station New Auto Parts Sales Stores Retail and Service Type Uses Antique Shop Bakery or Confectionery Shop (Retail) Cafeteria Cleaning and Pressing Small Shop and Pickup Custom Personal Service Shop Drapery, Needlework or Weaving Shop Florist or Garden Shop Greenhouse or Plant Nursery (Retail) Handicraft Shop Household Appliance Service and Repair Laundry or Cleaning Self Service Mimeograph, Stationery.or Letter Shop Mortuary or Funeral. Parlor Offices, Professional and Administrative Off Premise Sale of Beer and/or Wine On Premise Sale of Beer and/or Wine Licensed Private Club Restaurant Retail Stores and Shops - 4,000 square feet or less Retail Stores and Shops - Over 4,000 square feet Studio for Photographer, Musician, Artist or Health Aqricultural Type Uses Animal Clinic or Hospital (no outside runs or pens) Farm or Ranch Greenhouse or Plant Nursery.~ . PERMITTED USES WITH'~PP~OVED SPECIFIC USE pERMIT:.. Educational~ Institutional & Special Uses Cemetery or Mausoleum Fraternity, Sorority, Lodge or civic Club Recreational & Entertainment U~es Fairground or Exhibition Area Utility~ Accessory and Incidental Uses Private Utility Shop or Storage Yard P~blic Building, Shop, yard of Local, State or Federal Government Sewage Treatment Plant Water Treatment Plant 22. !~R" ~eneral Retail District ~c0~t~nue~ Recreational and Entertainment Uses Stable, Private Club Theater, Drive-in "i' " .'~ i//."' ' ' " .... ' '" ~ 'Transportati°n R~lated Uzes. Airport Landing Field or Heliport YARD REOUIREMENTS: Front Yard: Side Yard: Rear Yard: Minimum 25 feet Ho side yard is specified for non-residential use except where a non-residential use abuts upon a district boundary line dividing such districts from a residential district or when the side yard is adjacent to the street, in which event a ten (10) foot side yard shall be provided. No rear year is specified for non-residential use except where retail, commercial or industrial uses back upon a common district line, whether separated by an alley or not, dividing the district'from any of. the.residential.districts listed, a'minimum of ten (10) feet shall'be provided. HEIGHT RE~UL~TIONS: Three (3) stories, except as follows: In the districts where the height of buildings is restricted to two (2) or th_tee (3) stories, cooling towers, roof gables, chimneys and vent stacks may extend for additional height not to exceed forty- five (45) feet above the average grade line of the building. Water stand pipes and tanks, church steeples, domes and spires, and school buildings and institutional buildings may be erected to exceed three (3) stories in height in residential areas restricted to two (2) or.three (3) stories inlheight, provided that one '.additional foot shall be added to the'width'and depth of.side.and rear yards'for each foot'that such structures exceed three (3) stories in height. SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS: 1. Parking (Based on use. 2. Signs 3. Lighting 4. Land~caplng 5. Screening & Fencing See Article 34-115.,) ENCLOSURE 10 ORDINANCE-NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO GENERAL RETAIL CONDITIONED (GR[C]) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO ACRES OF LAND LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 550 FEET NORTH AND 1000 FEET EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST UNIVERSITY DRIVE (US 380) AND INTERSTATE 35; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-094) WHEREAS, Hickman Consulting Engineers, Inc., on behalf of Racetrac Petroleum, Inc., has applied for a change in zoning for approximately two acres of land from Agricultural (A) zoning district classification and use designation to Commercial (C) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning will be in compliance with the 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the zoning district classification and use designation of the approximately two acre property described in the legal description attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A is changed from Agricultural (A) zoning district classification and use designation to Commercial (C) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, subject to the following conditions: Permitted uses are limited to those listed in Exhibit B. Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. All buildings shall have a brick, stucco or stone exterior. Site plan approval by City Council is required prior to development. SECTION II. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION III. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION IV. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be 24. published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of .,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 25. EXHIBIT A LE ~- D EX3 CI'{I pT][O~T~ BEING, a tract of land situated in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, out of the Francis Batson Survey, Abstract No. 43, and being a potlion of the land conveyed to J.E. Allen Enterprises, according to the deed filed for record in Volume 535, Page 532, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, said tract being that portion of said J.E. Allen Enterprises tract which lies in Zoning Classification "A" (Agricultural) and being more particularly described by metes and bonnds as follows. BEGINNING, at a 5/8" iron rod tbund with cap stamped "R.P.L.S. 5199", said iron rod lies in the north line of U.S. 380 (University Drive 100' R.O.W.), and being the con,non southwest coruer of a tract of land conveyed to J.E. Allen Enterprises, Inc., according to the deed filed for record in Volume 535, Page 532, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, and the southeast corner of Lot 1, Block A. Porter/Andrus Addition, according to the plat filed for reco,'d in Cabinet O, Page 48, Plat Records, Denton County, Texas; THENCE, departing said north line, along the common west line of said J.E. Allen Tract and being tile east line of said Lot i, North 00 degrees, 18 minules, 20 secouds East, passing at 392· 16 feet a 1/2" iron rod fbund with cap~ being the southeast corner of a tract of land conveyed to Brent W. Andrus and Vanghn A. Andpas, according to the deed filed for record in, C.C. File No. 97-R0057940. Deed Records. Denton Connty, Texas, continuing a total distance in all of 550.39 fi~ct to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, North 00 degrees, 18 minutes, 20 seconds East, a distance of 139·72 feet, to a 5/8" irou rod found with cap stamped "R.P.L.S. 5199", said iron rod being the northwest corner of said J.E. Allen Enterprises htc. tract and bcmg the southwest comer of a 23·402 acre tract of laird conveyed to J. Newton Razor, according to Vohune 505, Page 70t, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, fi'om which a 1/2" iron rod found bear% North 00 degrees, 18 minutes, 20 seconds East, a distance of 646.33 feet, being the nmlheast corner of said Andros tract; TI IENCE, along tile common north line of said J.E. Allen Enterprises Inc. tract and being the south line of said J. Newton Razor tract, South 87 degrees, 24 minutes, 58 seconds East, a distance of 646.7l feet to a 5/8" iron rod found, being tile northeast comer of said J.E. Allen Entmp~ises h:c. tract, from which a l/2" iron rod fonnd bears, North 01 degree, 51 nfinutes, 31 seconds East, a distance of 355 18 feet, being the common comer of said 23.402 acre ri'act and a 6.641 acre tract of land conveyed to J. Newton Razor, according to thc deed filed for ~ccord in Volume 505, Page 701, Deed Records, Denton Connty, Texas; THENCE, along the common east line of said J.E. Allen Enterprises Inc. t~act and said J. Newton Razor ri'act, South 0I degree, 51 minutes, 31 seconds West, a distance of 138.40 feet to a point for cot net from which a 5/8" iron rod £ound with cap stamped "R.P.L.S. 5199" bears, South 01 degree, 51 ~mnutes, 31 seconds West, a distance of 130.52 feet, being the common comer of said J.E Allen tract and a tract of land conveyed to Holiday Partners, Ltd., Tract 2, according 1o the deed filed for record itt, C.C. File No. 96-R0079078, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas; THENCE, North 87 degrees, 31 minutes, 29 seconds West, a distance of 642.9,1 feet to tile POINT OF BEGINNING and coirtaining, 89,628 square feet or 2.0576 acres of land more or less. 1, Kurtis R. Webb: a Registered Professional Land Surveyor, rio hereby certify, that tile foregoing description was compiled fi'mn a smwey made o-ff~ ground and office computations under my supervision. Registered Professional Land Smweyor No. 4125 Kurtis R. bb ~ SHEET 2 OF 2 E:\90 i 9-46\SI\LEGAL\legal.doc 26. One[ F~ily ~elli~g Restricted " .. .. Art Gallery or Museum Church ~r Rectory Colleg? or University ?r Private School Communxty Center (PuBlic) Day NurSery or. Kinde~ga~ten School croup Homes Hospital (General Acute Care) '' Hospital (Chronic Care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthr6pio Nature Public Library Monastery or Convent · .Nursing ~ome.or.ResldAnoe acme .~og..Age~ ...'.''- occasional ~al~s '.. . ~ '"' · .". Pa~k, Playgroun~ or Publio'commu~tty dent~. School, Private Primary or Secondary School, Public or Denominational School, Business or Trade · Utility[ Accessory and Incidental Uses. Accessory Building Commun%ty Center (Private) Electrical Substatibn E16ctrical Transmission Line Temporary Field or Construction Offic9 contro}T~¥ Building Inspector).- . · ..- · Fire Station.or-Slmila~ ........ ' '~ .1~/bllc S~fety.Bul~dlDg.:~.... 'Gas Transmissi6~ Line and Metering.Stat~on '.'~. ~.'' ~ .'-~om~ Occupation~ '- (su~.je~' to'A~Prov~l and Off Stree~ ~Arklng Incidental to Main Use' Off Street Remote Parking Radio anu~or TexevlsXon Micro~ave To'er Sew~gePu~ping Statio~. Private Swimming Pool Telephone, ~usiness Office · TeleDhone L~ne and Exchange S~ttchi~gor Relay Station Water Reservoir, Water Pumping Statioh or Well Rea-reattonal. hnd ~nte~tatnmen~ Couhtry Club (P~ivate) with Golf C6u~se . · · .... ' · ' .. ~'~.' ~.' ' t'.'... 'i:; ' · ...' . ~.~l'i~.:'.~o~:,fO~e ~..~:-:. ~., '/'": '"" ~'''''' ..... ",~,........,. ..... ............,.... . . . ~:',. :< :: .:~.-~:: . .: :;..'.:':..'":" :.>-.-....'. . Publio Par~ or ~layground P~blio Play field or Stadium swim- o~ Tennis club Theater, Ot~er ~nun Drive-in Type Transportation Related Uses Ra~lroad'.Passenger-~at~ Railroad Track .or Right-of-wa~ C°mmerctal.P~rking Lot or StrUcture Automobile Service Use~ Auto Laundry Auto Sales a&d Repair-(In-Building) Gasoline Service Station New Auto Parts Saies Stores. ' ' 'Retall and SerVice TVDe'Uses Antigue Shbp Bakery or C6nfeotionery Shop (R~ail) Cafeteria Cleaning and Pressing Small Shop an~ Piok~p Custom Personal Servioe Shop Drapery, Needlework or Weaving Shbp Florist or Garden S~op' .-.-' Han~io~aft Shop gousehold Applianoe Servloe and.Repair Laundry or.Cl~aning Sel~ Servioe Reta41'and S~'rviOe ~'ype '~ses (O°nt~nued) ' M~eograph, Statio~ery or ~tter shop .:~-~. ~' ~'~. ~o~ua~ or ~neral Parlor off ides, Professional. an~ Aam~nistrativ~ Off' Premise Sale. of Beer and/or Wi~e' On Premise Sale of Bee~ and/or Wine . . Retail StOres arid Shops - 4,000 S~are feet or less Retail stores and Shops - Over 4,000 s~are f~et Stu4io for Photo~raDher, Musician, Artist or ~e~lth Agricultural Type Uses Animal Clinic or HosDital eno outsid~runs o~ pens) Farm or Reflch Greenhouse or Plant Nursery ~ommerclal Type Uses ~E.RMITTED USES WITH ~PPR~VED SPEOIFIO USE PERMIT= ~rimar_vRes~dent~al Uses Educatlongl~ instttutiona~ & Sp&o{al Uses · "Frate~nity, Sorority, Lodge o~ Civic ClUb' o~ ~ 29. , ' ' !~" ' u'ommeroi~l Dts~fot ¢oonti~uhal '' ' Private Utility Shop-0r stOrage ~ard ;:;a~...~ '' Sewage Treatment Plant ..... Recreational and Entertainment Uses .Drag strip or commercial Racing . '.' Go.~art..Traok .:...'h..'-.,,.'.'':~:~.' %. · "".~'.'?..'.i".~-~ ': .'..".'~:'"'.""'..i"'~' :.'..'?.~':' <~'~'~,.~.->.-,.'." "" ' ;" "'~'/ '"?' '~"' '"i'~ J'~ ~'~i~u~{ ~-us%" 'commercial'Type Uses Natural Resougce Storage add Extraction.. S~ecial Industrial Processes AREA REQUIREMENTS~ .Floor/Area Ratio 2:1 Maximum Side Yard: XARD REQUIREMENTS~ . ". .. ... . ~.."~ .. · ~. .. ...'~ · Minimd~ ~25 '~ee~'. , : .... "-.~ ' · " No Side'Yard is specified for nOn-residential use except 'where a non-residential use abuts upon a · district boundary line dividing such dlstriots from a residential' district or when the sSde yard-is adjacent 'to the street, in which event a ten (10) foot side yard shall be provided. Rear Yard: No rear year is specif~ed for non-residential use except where retail, commercial or industria~ uses i b%ck upon a common district line, whether separated' by an alley or not, dividing the district from any --,,- of the residential districts listed, .a~mini~..9~ .: '5 ten (10) feet. shall'be'provi~ed~.-.;'.'"". ' ~'..!~... ?.' · ~ ~'~.~..'~ :.. '.' .., ...-' ..- .. · . .-?..,.:......?...-..".- .. . . : ..-" .'. ~.'-..~ ..1.: .';: - . . . ~E~ea~'RZe0~oNs%' : ..' · Twenty '(20) stories, eXcept as ~o~'ed in specia1 required for all structures over three. (3) stories'; setback. SUPPLRMENTAL RE~L~TION~ 1. Parking (Based on use. 2. Signs 3. Lightihg. 4. L~.ndscaping S. Screening .& Fencing' See Article 34-115.)' 30. ' ATTACHMENT 2 MIL ENOELBRECI-IT: ?h.a,t will be fo~-lan¢? ~ 2 ~ tat aB snd ~ have mana~ ~ m~o ~at ~ Now, SALMON: ~t, It sa fo~-lano ~ 3 ~, ~WO'm ~ng 200. Now, ~o quotient 300, · e way up ~ ~ngo Road. ~ o~side 4 ~ W~D gg~ h~ in ~o w~ks. w~a7 ~n is b~ng d~ign~ s~ificaHy~sch~l 5 og ,~i~ m ~ about sera.ese issue. s, w~ch, of co~se, ~ng ~ ~ 6 ~ I do want ~ you for co. and we win k~ ~ of acc~s, l~t ~ow . 7 *{ go ~ngs ~ wo'R ~f ~ provide us 8 s~if~Hy ~ ev~ what *o b~ ~. I ' 8 g' h a ~s~ of yo~ ~s evening at o~ 9 wo~d doubt ~t ~lann~ ma sch~l bus~ on 9 ., t pub~ h~~*~ot make it: l0 rm .. / 11 *at ~'~ goi~ ~ bn~g~bus~ in o~ Mno 11 ~ ~SHE~d ~ko ~ ma~moti~ *at we 12 ~ from *e no~ ~sou~ut we c~ c~i~y 12 c~ tinuo Z~ o~t sch~P~ m~ting on 16 r~at~o~g~and%=going 16 , ~~scus~on7 Vo~,p~. 17 m~sm~i~~or~,~~oudon't 17 ~ y. 18 have.nm ~o, ~ 1~ com~ from do~, ~ 18 W~ ~n mow on m~n m Agenda I~ No. 12 19 le~Au~a ~n~ and just w~w ~ou~ ~ a~ 19 w~ch is bold a public ~fing and consld~ ma~ng 20 ~y~m a ~n~ who's ~vi~ 20 ~o~ng ~ CiV Council ~ ~ning of approx~ly 22 pro~ is l~a~y d~c~ as 2.05 ac~ in ~c F. 23 Ba~on S~ey, Abs~act No. 43 in ~ Ci~ of ~nmn, 25 ~ ~i~ ~ ~ b~~ ~cti~ a~ ~ 25 no~ and 1.000 f~t ~st of ~ in~s~tion of W~t ~~~l~m~na ~ i UniversiW D~ve and 1-35. ~e proposal is to develop a 2 ~~n pm~s~ ~ Iwould he.at 2 g~ station. At as t~e, I'll open the public h~ng 3 ~ ~¢ ¢~~ aa~oaq ~11 ~ ¢omp~ 3 and ~k ~. Gray to provide us with ao staff ~pon. 4 ~g. ~LL~a Okay. ~k ~o~ ./.. 4 Ma. G~Y: Thank you. ~is prope,y, 2.5 S ~~~ ~. ~1. ~a~ou, ~. S acres is actually p~ of a l~ger six-acm lot ~em is 6 Sa~on. ~ ~ 6 a peouli~ of ~s lot in that ~e front fo~ acres of 7 MR~~on, would~ pass on as 7 t~s L-shaped lot fi~t here, the front fo~ acres 8 ~ dis~c~a~oy ~uld get 8 ak~y ~ned Co~ercial. But the ~ two acres 9 us ~ ~ of a v~l or even a~ ~a~.h~ less _ 9 mn~ A~cult~. And I should ac~ally call it ~c~, ~~~o buil~ngs and l0 not a lot. It h~ not ~ plaid so it t~hni~ly is II ~e ~veways and wM~~o bit ~r 11 not a lot. And here is a tuning map ~owing ~e six-acre 12 ~out so much overlay ~ ~ w~go t? illu~ 12 ~act and ~en tho ~o-acm po~ion w~ch is ac~lly 13 ~~~ ~ it~ll m~e it 13 mn~ A~cul~. We get into an in~msting ~ 14 ~~~ ~at l~ow ~e au~ 14 here b~u~ thc 1999 ~ton ~mpmh~sive Plan ~at w~ ~s ~~~~ng~ wi~ hem. So ~S r~fly approved by Ci~ Council followed ~e efifling ~'d l~~~at h~ li~le bit less 16 ~ning line be~n Co~emial ~d A~cul~ral wh~ it 17 ~d Fie to m~e ~tion. 17 ~vid~ ~e ~a into a co~uni~ ~xed-u~ ~r 18 MR~T~y. I~o.~ld just, 18 sou~ and a nei~borh~d ~tcrs ~ to the no~. So, 19 ~av~e ~, Iwant t~ m~e ~t. C~ 19 ~i~lly, ~e pogion of ~e lot, the po~ion of 20 ~~her queens or ~, 20 ~act ~at is ~e subj~t of ~s intoning request is 21 ~~~o ~ ~ ~c 21 acm~ly in a nci~borhood ~n~rs ~s. ~ ~%%?~!~~q~23 ~agass~fionisgmer~lynotwhats~ffhadin~d 24 whm ~ey propo~ a nei~borhood ~rs ~n~pt. ~5 However, ~ issue ~mes is ~s line ~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 Page 185 - Page 188 31. CondcnscltTM Page 189 I neighborhood center and the community mixed-use center, is 2 that a definite or can that line be fuzzy, should that 3 line have been mended to follow the existing property 4 boundaries. A hardship is currently created in that this 5 lot is not currently plat and the split zoning of this 6 tract will prevent -- it create a major hardship in that 7 this tract cannot be platted as a single lot given the 8 current zoning configuration. The City'S Subdivision and 9 Land Development Regulations prohibit individual lots from 10 containing two or more incompatible zoning districts. And 11 more residential zoning such as Agricultural is considered 12 to be incompatible with non-residential zoning such as 13 Commercial. So the lot or the tract as currently zoned, 14 they could not plat it as one lot. Therefore, they could 15 not develop it. 16 What they could try to do is subdivide the 17 tract to create the four-acre lot in front, which is zoned 18 Commercial, and then the two-acre lot in back, which is 19 zoned Agricultural, they could subdivide it as two lots. 20 However, our Subdivision Regulations state that they need 21 to provide street frontage and seeing that this portion of 22 the tract is way back here, it doesn't have any -- it's 23 very remote. It doesn't have any street frontage fight 24 now. They would have to build a street up from 25 University, basically. Page 190 1 So although staff recognizes hardship here, we 2 also feel that some attempt should be made to at least 3 observe the suggested land use district to the 1999 Denton 4 Comprehensive Plan and, in fact, we see that this area 5 back here could probably become an ideal space or an ideal 6 location for smaller-scale retail or neighborhood 7 service-type uses once this neighborhood centers area is 8 developed, whenever that might occur. 9 So staff makes the recommendation that this 10 property be rezoned to General Retail instead of 11 Commercial. That's our -- one step down from Commercial 12 is General Retail in terms of intensity. The scope of 13 uses allowed in General Retail is somewhat more limited. 14 There might be some additional land uses currently allowed 15 in General Retail that the Commission might also consider 16 striking, aswell. But staff is looking, trying to find 17 the best of both worlds here which is to observe the 1999 18 Denton Comprehensive Plan and the area within the Denton 19 Comprehensive Plan, but at the same time, free the 20 developer from this hardship as we see currently exists. 21 Thc only other thing I need to point out is 22 that a couple of weeks ago -- well, I think Rayzor 23 Investments owns these two tracts fight here. I received 24 a letter of opposition from thom a couple of weeks ago and 25 since they are on three sides of this property, they are Page 191 1 well above 20 percent opposition. The applicant has 2 indicated to me that he has spoken to the person from 3 Rayzor and perhaps a person from Rayzor will rescind their 4 opposition. When I spoke to the representative from 5 Rayzor, he said that his voting in opposition was more of 6 a default than anything else because he did not know what 7 was happening to the property. 8 I think the applicants, and when they come up 9 they can probably explain just as Well, they might have 10 some concerns about the zoning to General Retail as it 11 applies to certain types of land uses. But I will let 12 them make their case when they come up. In the mean time, 13 I would like to answer any questions the Commission might 14 have. 15 MR. ENGELBRECHT: commissioners? Mr. Rishel. 16 MR. RISHEL: AS you look at General Retail and 17 you look at the Commercial that was requested, does a 18 service station, filling station fit into either one of 19 those categories? 20 MR. GRAY: It fits into both categories. 21 MR. RISHEL: Both categories. 22 MR. ENGELBRECHT: MI'. Moreno. 23 MR. MORENO: Ye, all. I t]qlnk it's in our backup 24 but would you define what is comprised in or what kind of 25 development is allowed in a Neighborhood Centers area? Page 192 I mg. ORA¥: ^S defined by our 1999 2 Comprehensive Plan, Neighborhood Centers are intended to 3 be developed as inward-oriented center-focused 4 neighborhoods, primarily residential in nature, but also 5 permitting some neighborhood-oriented as in lower-level 6 retail and service uses. I'm trying to think of a good 7 example but -- 8 MR. MOP, ENO: SO we think it's going to be 9 primarily residential. 10 MR. ORAY: This ama back here, yes. 11 MR. MORENO: The area back them. And then 12 tho gas station that's going to be built, basically, a 13 good ways away from University, what would the immediate 14 access be? Would it bo from University Drive? 15 MR. GRAY: I believe so. As currently 16 proposed, I believe the gas station is not taking the 17 entire six-acre sit~. In fact, I'm not sum that any 18 portion of tho gas station will actually bo on tho site 19 that is the subject property for the rezouing. I believe 20 the gas station will have access down hem directly to 21 University and I will lot tho applicants ©xplain that. 22 MR. MORENO: okay. 23 MR. ORAY: This is more of a situation where 24 they cannot develop the property, they cannot plat tho 25 propea'ty right now because of tho zoning situation. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 32. Page 189 - Page 192 CondcnseltTM Page 193 1 MR. MORENO: SO thc line between neighborhood 2 centers and community mixed-use center, is that carved in 3 stone, so to speak? 4 MR. DONALDSON: I'll take a shot at that. 5 MIL MOP, ENO: Call that line be shifted a little 6 bit or what do we do? 7 MR. DONALDSON: well, the Comprehensive Plan 8 and the Land Use Plan are certainly meant to be guidelines 9 in nature and don't constitute a zoning map. So they're 10 to provide you kind of a framework for decision-making. 11 We wrestle with this all the time. There are always going 12 to be edges between districts. When we did draw the map, 13 we tried to acknowledge parcel lines. We obviously missed 14 this one because we did it on a zoning district line here. 15 But there are other areas on the Land Use Plan where we 16 did try to put the lines on property lines. So you have 17 -- I don't know, you've got -- the Council has some 18 discretion. We'd certainly like to acknowledge that we 19 are deviating somewhat from the Land Use Plan but I think 20 we still meet the intent of it if you were to recommend 21 approval. 22 MR. MORENO: SO staff is suggesting General 23 Retail instead of Commercial primarily because of the way 24 the line is dram. Is that what I'm hearing? 25 MR. DONALDSON: well, non-residential zoning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 194 districts are cumulative in nature. They increase in intensity as you move from Neighborhood Services to the Industrial zoning districts. There are uses within the Commercial zoning district that could be viewed to be relatively obnoxious if it would next to a neighborhood, whereas, that pallet of uses is much smaller in the General Retail zone district. MR. MORENO: okay. Thank you. MR. ENGELBRECHT: MI'. MeNeill. MIL MCNEILL: The light square that's down here, is that the Cracker Barrel? IS that where the Cracker Barrel is, restaurant? Is that the Cracker Barrel Page 195 1 MR. MCNEILL: of the Cracker Barrel? 2 MR. DONALDSON: Right. 3 MR. MCNEILL: okay. So what he's proposing to 4 put in here is -- and there's already one gas station down 5 here on the comer. 6 MR. DONALDSON: Right on the comer. 7 MR. MCNEILL: SO another gas station there is 8 not incompatible with the kind of stuff that's there. 9 Okay. Thank y0u} l0 MR. ENGELBRECHT: other questions? To sort of 11 go back to Mr. Moreno's question, can someone tell me how 12 large that neighborhood centers area is in terms of acres? 13 Approximately, do you remember? Did we look at that? 14 MR. DONALDSON: I'm trying to find a project 15 to -- it's probably on the 100 to 150-acre range. 16 MR. ENGELBRECHT: SO we're talking about two 17 over 150 in terms of change so one-half percent or 18 something, not a great deal of -- okay. 19 MR. DONALDSON: Probably closer to 100. 20 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Ally other questions for 21 staff?. All'right. 22 Mil.. GRAY: .lust as a reference, I have the 2:5 Comprehensive Plan map right here and I can just show you 24 this area right here -- and it's hard to see on the 25 overhead but there's a shaded area that's yellow down here Page 196 1 and that's the Neighborhood Centers area. And the 2 community nfixed-use center is just right here so we're 3 talking about a little sliver of land just right there, 4 fight above my fingertip. 5 M~. £NOEt. Bm~UX: all right. Thank you. Any · 6 other questions for staff?. 7 MP~ DONALDSON: If you zoom out far enough, 8 you'd never notice it. 9 MR. ENOELBRECHT: It would just disappear 10 altogether. In that case, is petitioner or petitioner's 11 representative present? Please give us your name and 12 business address for then:cord. right there? MR. DONALDSON: Yes. MR. MCNEILL: Now, just north of that, aren't there some proposed -- hasn't something been platted in there? MR. DONALDSON: Yes, si;, There's a hotel under construction. MR. MCNEILL: Yeah. Where's that hotel going to be? MR. ENGELBRECHT: we'd all like to know that. MR. DONALDSON: R'S just to the north and west of the Cracker Barrel. Well, almost due -- not west, east, almost due east. 13 MR. NoFrsoEP,: c, ood evening, Chairman, members 14 of the Commission. My name is Mitchell Noftsger 15 representing Racetrac Petroleum. And I wanted to tell you 16 we have went over ~ staff's report and we are in general 17 agreement with the position and the recommendation. 18 We've, with regards to tbe gasoline station that we're 19 talking about building, that would be, as mentioned, 20 probably would be along University Drive. We would not be 21 setting it back on tl~ two acres that am currently being 22 discussed. But we want to develop out the remainder of 23 that tract. We've been looking at possible uses for that 24 acreage that is set back off of University and, as you 25 mentioned, at this time them is no real access to it. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 33. Page 193 - Page 196 CondenseltTM Page 197 1 What we want~A to recommend is a revised 2 Commercial zoning. One of the possible uses we thought 3 that that tract back thew would serve would possibly be 4 mini-storage and that would be also in keeping with your 5 neighborhood centers and your General Retail or 6 Commercial. However, General Retail does not allow that, 7 Commercial does. My review and understanding of our 8 zoning, General Retail appears to be a subset of your 9 Commercial zoning. And we would be in favor of 10 restricting the Commercial zoning to that General Retail 11 subset with the addition of the, I think, it is storage 12 warehouses for mini-storage, if that would be -- if you 13 could consider that. That's really about all I had extra 14 to add to it. 15 MR. ENGELBRECHT: All right. 16 MR. NOFTSGER: And if you have any other 17 questions for me. 18 MR. ENGELBRECHT: com1~ssion~s, any 19 questions? Ms. Gourdie. 20 MS. GOURDIE: Thank you. I'm curious, okay, 21 this is six acres of land that fall are looking to 22 rezone; is that correct? 23 MR. NOFrSGER: Actually, just two. 24 MS. GOURDIE: Just two? 25 · MR. NOFTSGER: Correct. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 198 MS. GOURDIE: okay. I guess I'm confused then because it's an L-shaped site and that's two acres total, the L-shape. I guess I don't understand what's going on here. MR. GRAY: The L-shape is six acres total and this portion, the front four acres is already zoned Commercial. The rear two acres is zoned Agricultural. And so the zoning request is for the rear two acres. MS. GOURDIE: okay. So, in actuality, they already have the zoning they want in place for the front part of the lot? MR. RISHEL: For the front, correct. MS. GOURDIE: SO I guess the whole reason why Page 199 1 stations look like. How much property does that 2 development usually take that gas station? 3 MR. NOFTSGER: Typically, about 1.4 acres. 4 MS. GOURDIE: 1.4 acres and y'all usually are 5 on a long -- you take the long way. So how would that 6 property behind you be accessed if you take most of the ' 7 frontage up to put your development on there? I need the 8 visual if you could show me, please. 9 MR. NOFTSGER: I hope I can help you here~ 10 MS. GOURDIE: okay. Thank you. 11 MR. NOFTSGER: There, that's a pretty good 12 layout. What-- 13 MS. GOURDIE: Actually, could you do me a 14 favor? Could you pull your bottom paper out from 15 underneath there? 16 MR. NOFTSGER: Oh, I'm sorry. 17 MS. GOURDIE: It'S causing a shadow. Thank 18 you. 19 MR. NOFTSGER: There. This is the initial 20 concept of what we're intending to develop as far as 21 locating the service station. And we're looking at 22 combining the L-shaped lot with the lot right here and 23 giving access into this back area and to try and develop 24 this into two additional uses. 25 MS. GOURDIE: YOU really want self-storage, Page 200 1 don't you? 2 MR. NOFTSGER: I didn't put that part of the 3 package together, but there arc some people that feel like 4 that would be a good use for it. We 'also considered as 5 possible uses grocery stores, maybe a shopping center, or 6 even a small motel because of the location and the amount they're here is because the back two acres has to be rezoned in order to make it compatible with the Denton Comprehensive Plan? MR. GRAY: The back two acres -- well, right now, they would have difficulty platting the property because they can't plat this tract as one lot because it contains Agricultural and Commercial. And they can't subdivide the lot because this back lot does. not have direct access to a street as is required by our Subdivision Regulations. MS. GOURDIE: So, okay, then let me ask you this question, Mr. Noftsger. I know what Racetrac's 7 of land back there. 8 MS. GOURDIE: Thank you. I appreciate you 9 showing me that. 10 MR. NOFTSGER: Sure. 11 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Rishel. 12 MR. RISHEL: AS we look at the development of 13 our community and we have laid out some specific 14 entryways, as we call them, and corridors within our 15 community, we have had a real struggle with trying to 16 improve the esthetics of what we consider our main 17 thoroughfares in our community and 380, obviously, is one 18 of those things that we consider a gateway and a main 19 route as people come to and from Denton. And so we'd like 20 you to strongly consider the esthetics of mini-storage 21 warehouses and what that means to us. Wc have som~ areas 22 that we have seen that happen in some of our corridors 23 because it's undevelopable for other things because they 24 don't have services that are provided by our community and 25 so it lends itself to that type of thing. PLANNING AND ZOlqIlqG COMMISSION JAIqUARY 12, 2000 Page 197 - Page 200 34. 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 Condcn~ ~ItTM Page 201 But I would highly cncourag~ you to think about something that might be more esthetically acceptable to the neighborhood. Ma. ~OFrSOER: oh, certainly. I personally have no problem. I'm not married to the idea. ~ mmv. L: vm just sharing that with you. My personal view only, i can assure you. IvlR. NOFTSOER: s1Lr~. MR. RIS~HEL: Thank you. MR. ENOELBRECHT: Mr. Williams. MR. WILLIAMS: My COlleague is a lot more tactful than I am. I'm feeling the end mn here. How can you satisfy me that this is not some kind of end mn that 18 months down the road we may be coming back with a plat for, and I'm just going way out here as an example, as an adult-oriented business? In other words, something that - because I'm kind of concerned about -- I have problems approving addresses. I also have problems just -- we've got this small little piece of property we're going to develop today, but we're going to approve all this for something, you know. And then later on, we may have a zoning case that we may -- a plat that we may not like. So I'm kind of concerned. How can you ease my fears that this may be an end mn here7 MR, NOFTSOER: YOU have an understandable Page 203 I night sky or not. You know, the canopy lights, the glow 2 in the night service stations. 3 MR. DONALDSON: I don't believe that we have 4 rezoned any of the property west of here. 5 MR. ENGELBRECHT: NO, what I'm -- we have a 6 condition here about not shining into the night sky. 7 MR. DONALDSON: Right. 8 MR. ENGELBRECHT: But will that preclude this 9 Racetrac with their overhead to put in those kind of 10 lights that basically project out for about five miles in 11 the night and they're simply used as a means of 12 recognition. And I want to know whether our condition 13 will stop that. 14 MR. DONALDSON: The condition that we use has Page 202 I concern. We've tailed about this internally, too, before 2 we even came to present this. That was, after looking at 3 your General Retail and Commercial, adult-oriented 4 businesses is one of those items that we saw that was an 5 allowable use. We also realize that if that would be an 6 additional use that you would prefer to strike the list is 7 fine with us. We agree that -- we try to be good 8 neighbors, try to be good businessmen. The businesses and 9 property surrounding us, we're looking at the entire 10 development. For us to have a bad development around us 11 is not going to help our property values either. It's in 12 our best interest also to try to develop it in the best 13 way that we see possible or to get it to somebody that can 14 be developed in a manner that is conducive to your 15 Comprehensive Plan. And so if, for instance, that use or 16 there are other uses that you would like to restrict, we'd 17 bo more than willing to entertain those. Does that answer 18 your question? 19 MR. WILLIAMS: It answers my question. It 20 doesn't alleviate my fear but it answers my question. 21 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Other questions, 22 Commissioners? While you're there, Mr. Noftsger, I have a 23 question for staff. I want a definitive explanation of 24 whether these canopies with the lights right next door to 25 this proposed location are defined as projecting into the 15 the statement that it shall not disturb surrounding 16 residential property. The residential could be stricken 17 in which case, they would then have to shield all lights 18 so that there is no projection onto other property, as 19 well as into the night sky. 20 MR. ENGELBRECHT: okay. Mr. Noftsger, I'm 21 just going to ask you, will you recess all your lights up 22 into your canopy so that there is no projection of the 23 bulb, the canopy, the cover or anything else down; will 24 you agree to that restriction? 25 MR. NOFTSGER: Would shielding be an option as Page 204 1 opposed -- 2 MR. ENGELBRECHT: The canopy right here, the 3 bulbs recessed, that's what I'm proposing. 4 MR. NOFTSGER: I understand. And I'm really 5 not trying to being argttmentative here. 6 MR. ENGELBRECHT: NO, I understand. I am. 7 MR. NOFTSGER: The reason we have been trying 8 to go away from recessed lights has nothing to do with the 9 lighting effect. I understand your position on that. 10 Recessed lights, however, create holes in the canopy for 11 leakage. What we try to do is we'd lile to go with the 12 fixtures that set below the canopy, but are shielded so 13 you do not have light thrown out at more than a 90 degree 14 angle which is what you're talking about. What we do - 15 there are a couple of ways of doing that. One is, that 16 same fixture that you've seen that you don't like with a 17 tape, it's an opaque film that's being put on the inside 18 on the vertical face, that removes that glare or that 19 throw to 90 degrees. 20 MR. ENGELBRECHT: what concerns me is the word 21 opaque, it' you would have said something other than 22 opaque, it suggests that it can shine through. 23 MS. GOURDIE: NO. 24 MS. APPLE: No. 25 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Okay. I'm sorry. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 35. Page 201 - Page 204 CondenseltTM Page 205 I MR. NOFTSGER: Nontransparent. 2 MR. ENGELBRECHT: I have no problem with that. 3 Now, my second question is -- has to do with the area in 4 the rear. All right. We're going to have primary 5 residential back there. We have that visible from the 6 major entryway to the front. Explain to mc how that's 7 going to be compatible with both of those? In other 8 words, all sides of that rear facility impacts somebody in 9 ' an esthetic way, the neighborhoods, all the folks coming Page 207 1 had this. We spent two hours going through this list and 2 I really don't want to do this again. And the problem is 3 that when you are up, what is probably going to be homes, 4 there are a lot of fowl things in Commercial. You don't 5 want a paint and body shop up against your house. You 6 don't want an automotive place. You don't want tire 7 retread. You don't want all these things in your 8 backyard. So my question to you is how can we do this in 9 a fair and efficient way without keeping you here until 10 in and out of town, what are y'all going to do to assure I1 me that it's not going to be a series of orange tin 12 buildings? 13 MR. NOFTSGER: I'm not real sure how to answer 14 that how to assure you. I would love to assure you that 15 -- we're not real sure how it's going -- 16 MR. ENGELBRECHT: All you'd have to say is 17 that you're going to make it masonry and that pretty well 18 takes care of it. 19 MR. NOF~Sa~.R: Oh, it will be masonry. All of 20 our buildings are all masonry. 21 MR. ENGELBRECHT: of a natural color. Not 22 pink, et cetera. Let's not dance around. You know, will 23 it look like brick, red. I'd be willing to vote for this 24 so long as it's a masonry, brick or stone. Okay. You're 25 agreeable to that? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 206 MR. NOFTSGER: Yes. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. McNeill. MR. MCNEILL: I am concerned about when we get to thc point where wc arc telling these guys when they come in here and they're going to put a building, that it's got to be shape number 26 of red brick. I'm opposed to that. I know where you're coming from in terms of esthetics, but I don't think we are -- ought to be in a position of picking out the color of the brick that a developer is going to put on his building. I think that's wrong, and I want the record to show that. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Moreno. Mm MOP,~'NO: somewhere I got lost here. Are 10 the next day? 11 MR. NOFTSGER: well, I understand and I've 12 already went through that list, too. What we prefer to 13 do, if it was possible, was to add the additional use 14 we've been talking to to General Retail, but I understand 15 that is not something we can do, but we can subtract 16 everything else. And if we make a -- I guess my 17 suggestion was as far as expediency goes, if the motion 18 read to restrict the commercial uses to those of General 19 Retail plus storage warehouses that would do it without 20 having to go through the list and strike everything. 21 MS. GOURDIE: okay. I guess my problem is I 22 don't know what's in General Retail. My list shows 23 Comanercial so maybe Mr. Gray could help me in that 24 department. What, what, what? 25 MR. REICHHART: Page 19 of your backup. Page 208. I MS. GOIJRDIE: They're so good. Page 19, okay. 2 All right. I'll let everyone else and I'll read. Thank 3 you. Well, is everyone reading this? Is anyone looking 4 at the General Retail? I know that Mr. Williams had asked 5 that the sexually-oriented business, and it was agreed 6 upon, that that be tossed out. 7 MR. NOFTSGER: That will be fine. 8 MS. GOURDIE: And I don't have enough time 9 here but on-sale means a nightclub situation and off-sale 10 means you can take it out. I mean, it's really intense 11 here. Okay. I really don't know if up agalnst a house, 12 you know, a home care for alcoholic, narcotic, and 13 psychotic, psychiatric patients is preferable to have up we talking about a brick mini-warehouse? MR. ENGELBRECHT: YOU got it. MR. MORENO: Mr. Donaldson, is a brick mini-warehouse compatible with a neighborhood center? MR. DONALDSON: It could be. MR. ENGELBRECHT: MS. Gourdie. MS. GOURDIE: I am horrible feelings here because we are talking about a property that you would like to be zoned from agricultural to commercial which will be up against what is going to be considered a neighborhood center, which would be residential. And there's a property on the south side of town that kind of 14 against someone's house. 15 MR. GRAY: well, what I've done here, I've 16 taken out of your backup the allowed uses in a Commercial 17 zoning district and stricken from them anything that is 18 not allowed in General Retail. And that way, we can allow 19 General Retail uses plus a storage warehouse, which is 20 what the applicant is suggesting. We can't add to General 21 Retail but we can subtract from Commercial. 22 MS. GOURDIE: Right. I'm just trying to be as 23 efficient as possible. Right. I have problems with 24 General Retail because you've got home for care of 25 alcoholic, narcotic, and psychiatric patients. I don't PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 36. Page 205 - Page 208 Cond~nseltTM 1 2 3 $ ? 9 ~0 Il 12 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 Page 209 know if most of us really want that in our backyard. Ms. Apple has some things she'd like to put in there. MS. APPLE: The only things that really stick out to me are the halfway house and the home for care of Page 211 I MR. NOFTSGER: Right. 2 MR. ENGELBRECItT: Okay. The question becomes 3 how do we make this list within reason for both parties? 4 Yes, Mr. MeNeill. alcoholic, narcotic, or psychiatric patients, the dance hall or nightclub, the sexually-oriented businesses, as Mr. Williams already .said, and licensed private club. MR. ENGELBRECHT: could I just throw in a point that if you turn 'to the back page, it says retail and service-type uses. Isn't that what the sort of thing they'd be interesting in using there under retail and all that other stuff doesn't make really much sense to work 5 MR. MCNEILL: Can't we instruct staff -- I 6 mean, do we need to really micro-manage this. Can we 7 instruct staff to do -- they've got the tenor of what 8 we're saying here. Can't we instruct staff to strike the 9 appropriate things as everyone has described here? 10 MR. ENGELBRECHT: And take it to Council. 11 MR. SNYDER: May I make a suggestion? Under 12 the Commercial beginning on page 16 and onto page 17, through anyway. Antique shop, bakery, cafeteria, custom personal shop, drapery, florist, greenhouse, et cetera; if you just include that and mini-warehouses. MR. GRAY: And mini-warehouses would be under storage or sales warehouse in commemial-type uses. MR. ENGELBRECHT: Right, and the one right above that, automobile service uses. We're certainly never going to have a railroad passenger station there, I don't think. MR. MCNEILL: Never say never. MR. ENGELBRECHT: well, I don't know. You know, DART could pop in here in the next -- MR. RISHEL: 20 years. Page 210 1 MR. ENGELBRECItT: Right. 2 MS. APPLE: certainly, the automobile services 3 uses might be compatible if you did go with the warehouses 4 with the service station. 5 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Right. It would be 6 consistent with what you're putting in there and then you 7 have all of these retail uses that are standard retail 8 uses. 9 MR. NOFTSGER: I wanted to point out -- 10 MR. ENGELBRECHT: well, we simply use these 11 and then the mini-warehouse. 12 Ma. NoFrsGER: The property just adjoining us 13 to the, I guess, the northeast is General Retail, too, 14 abutting the neighborhood centers. 15 MS. GOURDIE: Let's go beat them up, too. 16 MS. APPLE: SO you'd like to include the 17 primarily residential uses. The hotel/motel, 18 dormitory/boarding and rooming house, keep those uses, 19 also? 20 MR. NOFTSGER: We would, within reason, we 21 would like to keep our options open for how we will be 22 able to develop it out and not limit it down to we can 23 only find one or two that meet the criteria. 24 MS. APPLE: Okay. Just not sexually-oriented 25 hotels or motels? 13 there's a list of automobile service uses and retail and 14 service-type uses. And that also includes the 15 mini-storage. 16 MS. APPLE: But the commercial, retail, and 17 service-type uses go on to include the licensed -- well, 18 that's on the General Retail, too. 19 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Rishel, it appears that 20 you have a comment. 21 MR. RISHEL: I hate to think that my 22 mini-storage warehouse comment is going on deaf ears. 23 I'll just throw that out. 24 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. McNeill, did you have 25 another comment? Page 212 1 MR. MCNEILL: NO. 2 MR. ENGELBRECHT: okay. 3 MR. MCNEILL: l just suggested -- 4 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Then I simply, I'I1 throw 5 out the fact that, you know, we keep -- they're saying 6 over here we have to use the Commercial structure. Fine. 7 We'll say that it's Commercial and what you can list is 8 those uses that are on page 20 under automobile services, 9 retail-type services. Stick those in there out of the 10 retail one and, in addition to that, the mini-warehouses 11 and we're done. 12 MS. APPLE: And automobile and services. 13 MR. ENGELBKECHT: Yeah, that's What I said. 14 Automobile and services from the General Retail, retail 15 and service-type uses from General Retail, and then the 16 mini-warehouses. Now, if you want to classify that under 17 under Commercial, fine, whatever. Call it whatever you 18 wish. 19 MS. AP?I.E: And he also wanted to include the 20 primary residential so the motel would be an option. 21 MR. ENOELBRECHT: okay. 22 MR. GRAY: I would also add in the, just 23 thinking ahead here, I might also suggest the utility 24 accessory and incidental uses be added in, as well because 25 that includes stuff like an electrical substation or a gas PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 Page 209 - Page 212 37. CondcnscltTM Page 213 1 transmission line, utility-type uses that might be a necessary at a later time on the site. 3 MS. GOUP, Dm: SO can we just say that the 4 Commercial zoning district will be reflected as the 5 General Retail district to include warehouses and to 6 exclude halfway house, home for care, alcoholic and 7 sexually-oriented businesses, and dance nightclub? Would 8 that not be an appropriate way of you guys doing the work? 9 MR. GRAY: Yes. That would be fine. 10 MS. GOURDIE: we have a vote of approval over 11 here. Okay. Does that make sense? Just say Commercial 12 will be reflected as General Retail with the inclusion of 13 the beautiful, brick mini-store warehouses and to exclude 14 halfway house, home care for alcoholic, dance hall, 15 nightclub, sexual-oriented businesses. 16 MR. NOFTSGER: That's acceptable to us. 17 MS. GOURDIE: Thank you. 18 MR. ENGELBRECHT: All right. Mr. Williams, 19 you still have a question? 20 MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. 21 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Or by this time, it may have 22 gotten lost. I understand. 23 MR. WILLIAMS: NO. 24 MR. ENGELBRECHT: okay. 25 MR. WILLIAMS: I kind of agree with Ms. Page 214 1 Gourdie says but I need to know the definition of what an 2 amusement -- on page 19, under recreation and 3 entertainment uses, what does amusement and commercial 4 indoor mean? 5 MR. DONALDSON: Dave and Buster's midway. 6 MR. GRAY: Like a video arcade or a pool hall, 7 something of that nature. 8 MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. Because what I was going 9 to recommend that we just put in just -- probably just put 10 in excluding recreation and entertainment uses with the 11 exception of amusement commercial indoor and swim and 12 tennis club and theater other than drive-in type, and 13 probably we would pretty well have it. 14 MS. GOUm~m: Yeah. Part of it, also, is that 15 there's not enough land would also limit it down a little 16 bit. 17 MR. NOFTSGER: Yeah. We won't be able to get 18 a golf course on there. 19 MS. GOURDIE: Ail right. I know -- it's 20 perfect sense. 22 MR. NOFTSOER: understood. 23 MR. ENGELBRECHT: All right. There seem to be 24 no other questions? Any other questions for the 25 petitioner? Those conditions, I have one and that is that Page 215 1 it has been suggested that a way to ensure that these 2 things are met at the later date is to make a condition 3 that there be site plan approval by City Council prior to 4 development. All right. Okay. Any other questions? 5 Thank you, sir. 6 MR. NOFTSGER: Thank you. 7 MR. ENGELBRECHT: IS there anyone present who 8 .would like to speak in favor of this petition?. 9 MR. GRAHAM: Bill Graham, 1022 Egan Street. 10 I'm here representing the agent Les Kelly for Right Place 11 Management Storage which is on the east side of this 12 property and Baron Investments out of Fort Worth. We're 13 in favor of this move. We hope that the Council will take 14 a good look at this and maybe see where some more of this 15 commercial property development can bring some more 16 activity to this area right now. I've been in Denton ten 17 years. Pouting concrete six of those and didn't have any 18 trouble until all these tract builders came up from south 19 and tried to starve me out. I've had all the practice I 20 need. 21 If we can't make a profit, why are we doing 22 it? So I hope that y'all would consider this deal, as 23 well as the rest of the commercial things that you've got 24 on hold right now because there's a lot of people sitting 25. at home doing nothing. Page 216 1 MR. ENGELBRECHT: I have a question. You were 2 indicating the fa'ms you represent. 3 MR. GaAHAM: Right Place Management out of 4 Colorado. 5 MR. ENGELBRECHT: DOeS either one of those, 6 are they either one involved with the development of the 7 motel that's to the west? 8 MR. GRAHAM: NO. 9 MR. ENGELBRECHT: okay. 10 MR. GRAHAM: But I would like to know what 11 happened to the motel. 12 MR. ElqGELBRECHT: well, that's what we're 13 trying to find out. 14 MR. GRAHAM: Oh, really? 15 MR. ENGELBRECHT: I thought maybe you could 16 clue us in. Okay. All right. Thank you. 17 MR. ORAHAM: NO. I saw the floorboard set and 18 nobody has every showed up. 19 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Ail right. Thank you. 20 MR. GRAHAM: If I find out, I'1 let you know. 21 MR. EVIGELBRECHT: Is there anyone el~e pre~-nt 22 who would like to speak in favor of the petition? Anyone 23 else present to speak in favor of the petition? In that 24 case, is there anyone present to speak in opposition to 25 the petition? Anyone present to speak in opposition to PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 Page 213 - Page 216 38. CondcnseltTM Page 217 1 the petition? Seeing no opposition, ~e public -- the 2 rebuttal period is waived and the public hearing is 3 closed. Mr. Gray, do you have any final staff remarks? 4 MR. GRAY: other than staff would recommend 5 recommendation of approval of rezoning Commercial with 6 these uses stricken. 7 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Commissioners, any questions 8 for staff, comments, or a motion? Mr. Rishcl. 9 MR. RISHEL: Mr~ Brown had his hand up. I ~0 don't know if he has a point of information. I know we ll closed the hearing. 12 MR. ENGELBRECHT: I didn't see that. 13 MR. RISHEL: I know we closed the heating but 14 fight as you were saying that, he was raising his hand and 15 I didn't know whether he had something as a point of 16 information he wanted to bring before us, being he's been 17 here all night. 18 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Did you want to speak on an 19 informational basis? We've had several -- 20 MR. BROWN: Informational only. 21 MR: ENGELBRECHT: I'm sorry. I forgot. 22 MR. BROWN: It won't take but about a minute. 23 I told you earlier I wasn't going to speak. At the time, 24 being I do represent the owners of the property. Racetrac 25 is not the owner. Page 218 1 MR. ENGELBRECHT: If you would, by the way, 2 give us your name and address for the record. 3 MR. BROWN: Jinu'ny Brown. That's fine. 4 Racetrac is not the owner of the property. They do have 5 it under contract. I would say that I would probably 6 agree with everything with the exception of the brick 7 storage building. I know that if Racetrac doesn't buy it 8 that I have several prospects that I can go back with and 9 we'll divide it. In fact, I had in mind dividing it and I 10 had two motels lined up plus several other businesses at 11 one time to buy the property, to buy parts of it. Let me 12 say it that way. 13 I had a telephone company that wanted to buy 14 an acre-and-a-quarter just about two months ago on the 15 rear part of the two acres that needs to be zoned 16 Commercial, which would be a good clean business and so 17 forth. So I am concerned about this for the owners and I 18 do recommend that you zone it Commercial just for that 19 reason. So if you want to connect the -- there's a total 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Page 219 thc owners should Racetrac decide not to buy it. Thank yOU. MR. £~O~.LagF~CRX: ~hank you. Okay. Commissioners, any comments or a motion7 Anyone want to delve into a motion on this onc? MR. RISHEL: AS amended. Ma. MCa, mmv: would you accept a friendly amendment already? MS. ENGELBRECHT: Mr. Will Jams. MR. WILLIAMS: NO, I hit the wrong thing. MS. c, otmnm: All right. I have a question. Mr. Brown brought up this, being that the property is under contract and I am so with you on this brick and stone thing. I'm there with you. I don't want to see any more metal buildings anywhere. I think they should be outlawed. And I'm sorry to the people who produce them but they're just wrong. But -- and, gosh, I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I really -- I understand what he's saying is that it could be self storage buildings, they could be done right or they could be done wrong. In Denton, we've had the habit of them being done wrong. So I'm tom. Do we put this in with brick and stone, as you say, or do we permit the developer to do the right thing, which -- MR. MCNEILL: But we're not approving that at · Page 220 this point. MS. GOURDIE: well, yes we are because if Mr. Brown does not sell this property to Racetrac, it goes with these conditions to the next person. MR. MCNEILL: But don't they have to come back for a plat? MS. GOURDIE: NO, the conditions -- this is zoning. It's exactly as we say they have to do. They cannot add any uses to it. They cannot take any uses from it unless they come in and file the system over again. And so we're zoning the land and we're conditioning the land. And so -- well, then, I'll just -- MR. ENGELBRECHT: Lot me interject that we can put a condition on here, which the petitioner had said he would be agree to, that would require site plan approval by City Council prior to development. MR. DONALDSON: Keep in mind that we're only rezoning the back two acres so that these conditions would apply only to that part of the parcel. of nine acres there and you would be making the whole nine aCres thc ~amc type of zoning, I flo not want any adult sites on it. I don't believe in them. I've never dealt with those type of businesses and I don't think Racetrac will either. But I understand the City's concern on those but I am concerned about the zoning of the property for 2o 22 23 24 25 acres. MS. GOURDIE: I'm sorry, what? MR. ENGI~LBRI~CHT: Wc~r© onl~* rczonin~ two MS. GOURDIE: The back two, right. Okay. MR. BROWN: NOW, if Stucco could be added to that, I would agree to that. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 2000 Page 217 - Page 220 39. Condcns~ItTM Page 221 Page 223! 1 MR. ENGELBRECHT: I don't know. Did somebody I should all do wrong. We need to have an example set and I 2 hear something about stucco? The public hearing is closed 2 do believe, wh~ther it be tbe City or th~ d~velopers or 3 but it seems to be -- 3 anyone, wc have to start setting a standard for this town. 4 MS. GOURDIE: Mr. Williams, did you want to 4 We just can't keep saying someone's not doing right so, 5 make the motion? 5 therefore, we won't continue to do it right. Oar town 6 MR. WILLIAMS: NO, I just have a comment. I 6 will b~ pathetic if we continue in that line of thinking, 7 agree with Mr. McNeill. As long as I see those pipes, as 7 as as personally believe. And so I believe that we have 8 long as I see those ugly City trucks, I will not vote for 8 to set a standard and if.we can,t get our City trucks to 9 any type of esthetics because the City of Denton tells me 9 do it and oar City to do, then at least the Planning and 10 because that property belongs to the City, they're not 10 Zoning Commission or the City Council or someone can start 11 really interested in esthetics because you're setting an 11 stepping up and raising the bar is what the new City 12 example by what you do. And those City tmaks and all 12 promotion is. 13 that pipe abutting those people's homes over off of Wood 13 And I think that it starts hero and starts now 14 Street and those streets over there, I have no empathy for 14 and it starts having the courage to say do unto others as 15 any types of esthetics until the City of Denton starts to 15 you would have done unto you. And if we want a nice 16 treat their neighbors the same way that we expect for the 16 neighborhood and nice looking city where we have 17 developers to treat their neighbors. 17 high-paying jobs and businesses that stay here and people 18 MR. ENGELBRECHT: MS. Oourdie. 18 that work here, we have to start doing the right thing for 19 MS. GOURDIE: I'll make a motion. 19 the City. And so I appreciate you saying that because it 20 MR. ENGELBRECHT: Yes. 20 just cemented it down. I know it went the wrong way but I 21 MS. GOURDIE: I move to recommend approval of 21 just wanted to say thank you for helping me to understand 22 Z-99-094 with the following conditions: the zoning of the 22 what I was thinking. 23 subject tract shall be Generai Retail -- no, shall be 23 MR. ENO£LBRECHT: Any other discussion? I 24 Commercial with the Commercial conditioned as General 24 just want to say that ! am very familiar with the area on 25 Retail to include mini-warehouses from the Commercial 25 Paisley that you're addressing and I have talked to Page 222 Page 224 1 section; to exclude halfway house, home care for i members of the staff in the past about better screening 2 alcoholic, narcotic, psychiatric patients, dance hall, 2 along that area and I'm still watching it and we're going 3 club or nightclub, amusement commercial indoor, sexual- 3 to get that one of these days soon, I do believe. Yeah, 4 oriented businesses. Was there anything else that I 4 that is not anywhere what it onght to be. Okay. Any 5 missed, y'ail? 5 others? Vote, please. Motion carries unanimously. 6 MS. APPLE: Licensed private club. e ave 7 MS. GOURDm: A licensed private club? Too, ~k got to find my Agenda. Commissioners, do you want to 8 that the lighting on the property shail be designed and ~ve minutes? Yeah, there's going to be some commeny 9 maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb ~kand 14 am going to be a little more brief than 10 surrounding property or to shine and project upward to 1 ml~ think. 14 and 15, I'm sorry. But we doh~ some 11 prevent the diffusion into the night sky. Number four, I folk~t do what to speak to them and soysay we 12 require -- excuse me, number three, require site plan takea ~unum of five minutes. /' . _ 13 approval prior to development by the City Council. Is fl~PLE: A minimum? O~'ll be back in . 14 that how you worded that, Mr. Engelbrecht? Okay. And ~ 45. na_,~ J 15 number four, that brick or stone or stucco be used for 5 ~ WlL]~S: we~/n going home and come 16 building purposes. 6 back next -- you sa[-Vmam of fiw. 17 MR. ENGELBRECHT: On the exterior. 7 (Break tnk~k _ .. 18 MS. GOURDIE: On the exterior. Thank you. 8 MR. EN~CH~[~'ll convene to Item No. 19 MR. RISHEL: second. 9 14 ~s-~aYs conslder m.~ng a' 20 MR. ENGELBRECHT: We have a motion and second. C) ~l~ding an ordlnanc~ of 21 The motion is to approve with conditions. Is there ~_~[ty ~ estabh'stu'~l~texim standards 22 discussion on the motion? Ms. Gourdie. : ,~~e adopted Con~i?nsive Plan to 23 MS. GOIJRDIE: I need say, Mr. Williams, you · ' ed ' 24 kind of locked it down for me why I put that in there. I · of 25 don't believe just because someone else is doing wrong, we th~idin~ for admin~ion_ ~x axn~x~ a~u-r~ ~_t3XlllqG ~t3MMIRRION JANE ~tt¥ 12. 2000 Page 221 - rag~224 40. ATTACHMENT 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF TI~ CITY'OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO GENERAL RETAIL CONDITIONED (GR[C]) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO ACRES OF LAND LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 550 FEET NORTH AND 1000 FEET EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST UNIVERSITY DRIVE (US 380) AND INTERSTATE 35; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-094) WHEREAS, Hickman Consulting Engineers, Inc., on behalf of Racetrac Petroleum, Inc., has applied for a change in zoning for approximately two acres of land from Agricultural (A) zoning district classification and use designation to Commercial (C) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning will be in compliance with the 1999 Denton Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the zoning district classification and use designation of the approximately two acre property described in the legal description attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A is changed from Agricultural (A) zoning district classification and use designation to Commercial (C) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, subject to the following conditions: o Permitted uses are limited to those listed in Exhibit B. Lighting on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. All buildings shall have a brick, stucco or stone exterior. Site plan approval by City Council is required prior to development. SECTION 2. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. 41. SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of .,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY By: 42. PAGE 2 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING, a tract of land situated in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, out of the Francis Batson Survey, Abstract Nol 43, and being a portion of the land conveyed to J.E. Allen Enterprises, according to tile deed filed for record in Volume 535, Page 532, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, said tract being that portion of said J.E. Allen Enterprises tract wlficb lies in Zoning Classification "A" (Agricultural) and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows. BEGINNING, at a 5/8" iron rod found with cap stamped "R.P.L.S. 5199", said iron rod lies in the north line of U.S. 380 (University Drive 10ft R.O.W.), and being the conm',on southwest corner of a tract of land conveyed to J.E. Allen Enterprises, Inc., accordin_o the deed filed for record in Volume 535, Page 532, Deed Records, Denion County, Texas, and the southeast comer of Lot I, Bl0ct~ Porter/Andros Addition, according to the plat filed for reco,'d in Cabinet O, Page 48, Plat Records, Denton County, Texas; THENCE, departing said north line, along the common west line of said J.E. Alien Tract andbeing tile east line of said Lot 1, North 00 degrees, 18 minutes, 20 seconds East, passiug at 392.16 feet a 1/2" iron rod [bnnd with cap, being the southeast corner of a tract o1' land conveyed to Brent W. A~dms and Vaughn A. Andrus, according to the deed filed for record in, C.C. File No. 97-R0057940. Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, continuing a total distance in all of 550.39 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, North 00 degrees, 18 n~i,mtes, 20 seconds East, a distance of 139.72 feet, to a 5/8" iron rod found with cap stamped "R.P.L.S. 5199", said iron rod being the northwest comer of said J.E. Allen Enterprises Inc. tract and being the southwest comer of a 23.402 acre tract of land conveyed to J. Newton Razor, according to Volume 505, Page 701. Deed Records.. Denton County, Texas. fi'om which a 1/2" iron rod found bears, North 00 degrees, 18 minntes, 20 seconds East, a distance of 646.33 feet, being the northeast corner of said Andrus tract: ~ THENCE, along the common north line of said J.E. Allen Enterprises Inc. tract and being the south line of said J. Newton Razor tract. South 87 degrees, 24 minutes, 58 seconds East, a distance of 646.71 feet to a 5/8" iron rod found, being the northeast comer of said .I.E. Allen Enterprises Inc. tract, from which a l/2" iron rod found bears, North 01 degree, 51 nfinutes. 31 seconds East, a distance of 355 18 feet, being the common come,' of said 23.402 acre tract and a 6.641 acre tract of land conveyed to J. Newton P, azor, according to the deed filed for record in Volume 505, Page 701, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas; THENCE, along the common east line of said J.E. Allen Enterprises Inc. tract and said J. Nex~qon Razor tract, South 01 dearee, 51 minutes, 31 seconds West, a distance of 138.40 feet to a point for corner from ~vhich a 5/8" iron rod found with cap stamped "~,.P.L.S. 5199" bears, South 01 degree, 51 minutes, 31 seconds \Vest, a d/stance of 130.52 feet, being the common comer of said J.E Allen traci and a lract of land conveyed to Hol,day Parmers, Ltd., Tract 2, according to the deed filed for record in. C.C. File No. 96-R007907S. Deed Records, Denton County, Texasi THENCE, North 87 degrees, 31 minutes, 29 seconds West, a distance of 642.91 feet to tim POINT OF BEGINNING and containing. 89,628 square feet or 2.0576 acres of land more or less. I, Kurtis R. Webb, a Registered Professional Land Surveyor, do hereby certify that survey made o-n-"qJde ground and office computations under my supervision. Kurtis R. Registered Professional Land Surveyor No. 4125 \l the foregoing description was compiled from a SHEET 2 OF 2 E:\9019-46~l\LEGAL\legal.doc l~ri~arv Re's_~dentlal Uses One' Family Dwellihg Restricted " Co~unity Unit Devel.opme~t " . . . · '- po~o~, ,B~ar~ng. or. R~om~ng:~.House.~ -..- ,-...: .:..."- · ..... Hotel~'or.~o~l . ~.;..1: . t.. '..t-..~-...: .:-..:~.. · .~ -. ~..'.." '.~ ": .. . ~ .... . -' :..[...- ...: .-': .... ;..;~ .;: ........ f.: . .: :..'~-~ . . ...... '.... - . .. : ~ . Educational~ institutiOn~l & Specia~ Uses.' ., Art Gallery or ~useum church ~r Rectory College or Unfversity o~ Private School Community Center Day NurSery or. Kindergarten School Group Homes Hospital (General Acute Care) '' Hospital (Chronic Care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthrdpic Nature Public Library Monastery or Convent · .Nugsing ~ome.or.ResidAn6e ~o~e.~o~..Age~ ...'.''-. Occasional ~alAs '. . ' '-'-~ '.". Pa~k, Playgrou~ or PubiiC'commu~ity dent~ School, Private Primary or Secondary School, Pnblic or Denominational School, Business or Trade · Utility; Accessory and Incidental Uses. Accessory Building " .. Community Center (~rivate) Electrical Substatl~n E16ctrioal Transmission Line Temporary Field or Construction offic9 control?by BRilding Inspector).- Fire st&rich .?r..Simtla~.Public (suhje~'t' to'Ap]prov.al and · ...'Home occupation- off Streeb ~Arking incidental to Main off street Remote Parking Radio an~o~ Television Micropave To'er SewAge Ikt~plng Stat~o~. Private Swimming Pool Telephone, ~usiness Office .- . Telephone L~n? and Exchange.switching or Relay Station Water Reservozr, Watgr pumping Statioh or.Well · ~eo-reattonal. [nd Ente~tainment -country Club (P~ivate)'with Golf e6u~s t'-, '' . , · '~ ~ .'.'' .. ~ ~.'" :'"' '~' ' l~,~..!~:'.~i~:,6o~ ~..~'.'~.' ' ' .... ""' ' ' ~'" "~"' ~ ' ""i:"' i :;j: '"' :"':'" ', -, · .'. ' '.-.' ' , .,": · " ':., :-.. :-'-"f: .' ii · ' '.' · · .~ .%_ ~ _..._. .:. ~.. k .... ~ . . .' ' " ' L'.''"' "."' "'"':'"' ' Public Par~ or Playground Public Play field or Stadium Swim'-~ Tennis C1%;_~_ Theater, Other ~aun Drive-in Type TransPortation Related Uses RailrOad ~rack .or Right-Of-Wa~ Commercial.P~rking Lot or Structure Auto Laundry Automobile Service Use~ Auto Sales a~d Repair-(In-Building) Gasoline serVice Station Ne~ Auto Parts Saies Stores· 'Retail and SerVice Type'Uses Antique Shbp . Bakery or C6nfectzonery Shop (R~ail) Cafeteria Cleaning And Pressing Small Shop and PickUp Custom Personal. SerVioe Shop Drapery, Needlework or Weavin~ Shbp Florist or Garden Shop' .. Greenhouse or Plant Nursery"(Retaii) ~andiogaft Shop Household Appliance Service and.Repair' Laundry or.Cleaning SeLf Service Of fides, Professional- and A~m[nistrative off' Premise Sale. of Beer and/Or WiRe' On Premise Sale of Beer an.G/or Wine Retail StOres &~d ShOPs - 4,000 s~are feet or less' Retail Stores and Sho~s - Over 4,000 Stuaio for ~hotograDher. Musician. Artist or ~e~lth Agricultural Type Uses Animal Clinic or HosPital (no outsid~runs o~ p~ns) Fazm or Ranch' ' ' -- ~ ...... Greenhouse or Plant Nursery Commercial T~vpe Uses Store 'or, e~". a s . ..: ~ERMITTED USES ~ITH ]%PPR~VED SPEOIFIO ~SE PERMIT: prfmar~ Res[dentfal Uses "~rate~nity, Sorority,, Lo~g~ o~ Civic ClUb' 'Com~erctal'Type Uses ~atural Resou~ce_St~r~ge. and_~xtraction.. 'S6eaial'In~strial'Prooesses .Floor/Area Ratio 2:1 ~aximum Side Yard: Rear Yard: i ee - · = - ..".-~" .- No'~ideyard is specified fOr non-residential use e~cept 'whdre a non-residential use ~but? uDon a · district boundary line dividing such distracts from a ~esidential' district' ~r when the side yard .is ad3acent-to the street, zn which even~ a ten (10') foot side yard shall be provided. No rear year is specified, for non-residential use except where retail, oommeroial or industrial' uses b%¢k upon a common district line, whether ~eparated' by an alley or not, dividing the district from ~ny · Twenty ' (20) stories, 'except as "~o~'ed in specia1 required for all structures over three· ~3) stories'; --, ,- of the residential districts listed, .a.mini~um 9f .: . · '." ten (1 feet· si{all 'be'provi~ed:../'. '"". "%.'-i .' : · ': ",.....': ':...'!..' ... :': ....- ':, '~ '.,.-.' ~-- .~.,~,'..:~ ;.L:::' .,.'; .:-'..' ..'."' ."' .""' · .'.' .' ' · ..' setback. 1, parking (Based on use. 2.. Signs 3. Lighting. 4. Ig. ndscaping 5. Screening.& Fencing' See Article 34-115.)' 47. AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 Materials Management AoendaNo. Agenda Item_., ....... Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7100 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT: An Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a contract for the purchase of Medium & Heavy Trucks; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 2456 - Medium & Heavy Trucks awarded to Peterbilt Motor Co., in the amount of $139,802). BID INFORMATION: This bid is for the purchase of two trucks approved for replacement in the 1999/2000-budget process. The 12-yd. dump truck will replace a similar unit purchase in 1990. The water track will replace a similar unit purchased in 1981. The Older units are no longer economical to maintain and will be sold at Auction. Metro Sterling has offered a purchase price on Item I that is $360 lower that the recommended supplier, Peterbilt Motor Co. Legislation recently passed, Texas Local Government Code 271.905 also kno~wn as "Local Preference Law", allows Council the opportunity to award a bid to a supplier that has their principal place of business within the City if their bid is no more than 3% higher than a numerically low bid of a non local bidder. The bid offered by Peterbilt Motor Co. is well within this amount. If the Council determines that it is their desire to utilize this legislation and award this bid as recommended, an ordinance has been written and is attached to comply with the new legislation. The legislation requires the "governing body of the local government to determine, in writing, that the local bidder offers the local government the best combination of contract price and additional economic development opportunities for the local government created by the contract award, including the employment of residents of the local government and increased tax revenues to the local government." This section does not prohibit .a local governmental body from awarding to the lowest bidder or rejecting all bids. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded as indicated: Bid Item Description Supplier Price 12 Yd. Dump Truck Peterbilt Motor Co. $ 62,636 Options Total $ 1,840 Total $ 64,476 4000 Oal/Water Truck Peterbilt Motor Co. $ 74,311 Options Total $ 1,015 Total $ 75,326 Total Bid Award $139,802 Agenda Information Sheet February 15, 2000 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION (CONTINUED): The Council must decide if the 3% Local Preference allowed by State Law is to be applied in this instance. If not Metro Sterling of Dallas would be awarded Bid Item 1 at a $360 lower price. Both ordinances are attached for consideration. PRINICPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: Peterbilt Motor Co. Metro Sterling 1700 Woodbrook Street 4000 Irving Blvd. Denton, TX 76205 Dallas, TX 75247 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: The two listed trucks are scheduled for delivery in 150 days from receipt of purchase order or approximately July 15, 2000. FISCAL INFORMATION: Funding for these, two vehicles will come from the following sources: * Item 1 - Motor Pool Replacement (720-025-0584-9104) Wastewater Field Services (625-082-0471-9104) Total · Item 2 - Motor Pool Replacement (720-025-0584-9104) $55,000 $ 9,476 $64,476 $75,326 Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet Attachment 2: Local Preference Letter- Peterbilt Motor Co. 1335.AGENDA BID 2456 MEDIUM & HEAVY TRUCKS ATTACHMENT #1 TABULATION SHEET Date: 1/20/00 No I DESCRIPTION VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR ii S°uthwestern Bruckner Barrett Peterbilt Metro Lone Star Mahaney Motor Co. Sterling Mack White GMC ........ ( .....!1 ~ O International 12 CUBIC YARD TANDEM $62,636.00 $61,995.00 $66,408.96 $65,730.00 $76,199.00 $75,035.00 1 DIESEL DUMP TRICK 120-180 DELIVERY 150 Days 90-180 Days 150 Days 90-180 Days 90-120 Days Da,~s BED VIBRATOR $675.00 $675.00 $650.00 $600.00 $650.00 '$700.00 STROBE LIGHT $150.00 $150.00 $175.00 $150.00 $175.00 $200.00 AIR RIDE DRIVER SEAT $290.00 Incl Incl $523.00 Incl $300.00 AIR CONDITIONING $560.00 $833.00 $663.00 $801.00 Incl $500.00 AM/FM RADIO $165.00 $463.00 $200.00 $272.00 Incl $200.00 TOTAL WITH OPTIONS $64,476.00 $64,116.00 $68,096.96 $68,076.00 $77,024.00 $76,935.00 52,000 GVW CAB/CHASSI WITH $74,311.00 $79,988.00 $76,822.00 $80,800.00 No Bid No Bid 2 4,000 GALLON WATER TANK DELIVERY 150 Days 90-180 Days 150 Days 90-180 Days No Bid No Bid AIR RIDE DRIVER SEAT $290.00 Incl Incl $523.00 No Bid No Bid AIR CONDITIONING $560.00 $833.00 $663.00 $801.00 No Bid No Bid AM/FM RADIO $165.00 $463.00 $200.00 $272.00 No Bid No Bid TOTAL WITH OPTIONS $75,326.00 $81,284.00 $77,685.00 $82,396.00 No Bid No Bid A~ACHMENT 2 February 1, 2000 Mr. Tom Shaw City of Denton 901B Texas St. Denton, TX 76201 This.letter is to inform you that on your bid number 2456 for two (2) Peterbilt Model 330's, Peterbilt Motors Company, 1700 Woodbrook St., Denton, TX. Will invoice the City of Denton directly for these vehicles. Sincerely, Medium Duty Sales Manager Cc' Randy Bradley - Dallas Peterbilt Mel Luigs JPZ:rfr PETERBILT MOTORS COMPANY , ; ..~,O,-,.~[ OOK S'7;:{EE'E DENTON, '!EX,-\S ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MEDIUM & HEAVY TRUCKS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2456 - MEDIUM AND HEAVY TRUCKS AWARDED TO PETERBILT MOTOR CO., IN THE AMOUNT OF $139,802). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of STATE law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, Section 271.905 of the Local Government Code allows the City to award a contract to a bidder having its principal place of business in the City if its bid is within three per cent of the lowest bid price received from a nonresident bidder if the governing body determines in. writing, that the local bidder offers the City the best combination of price and additional economic development oppommities for the City created by the contract award, including the employment of residents of the City and increased tax revenues to the City; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed the herein described bids for the materials, equipment, supplies or services as shown in the "Bid Proposals" submitted therefore and represents to the City Council that the herein described local bidder's bid is within three per cent of lowest bid price received from a nonresident bidder; and WHEREAS, the City. Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby determines that the vendor set forth below has its principal place of business in the City of Denton, Texas, its bid is within three per cent of the lowest bid price received from a nonresident bidder and such local bidder offers the City the best combination of price and additional economic development opportunities for the City created by this contract award. The numbered items in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, supplies, or services from the below described local bidder and as shown in the "Bid Proposals" on file in the office of the City Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved: BID ITEM NUMBER NO LOCAL BIDDER AMOUNT 2456 1 Peterbilt Motor Co. $64,476 2456 2 Peterbilt Motor Co. $75,326 SECTION 2. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to pur- chase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the. terms, specifications, standards, quar~tities and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid PropOsals, and related documents. SECTION 3. Should the City and persons submitting app~'oved and accepted items and of the submitted bids wish to enter into a fomtal written agreement as a result of the acceptance, approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract which shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in the Bid Proposal and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids or pursuan! to a written contract made pursuant thereto as authorized herein. ' SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY JACK MILLER, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: BID 2456-MEDIUM & HEAVY TRUCKS - LOCAL PREFERENCE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. ~ AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MEDIUM & HEAVY TRUCKS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2456 - MEDIUM AND HEAVY TRUCKS AWARDED AS LISTED BELOW, IN THE AMOUNT OF $139,442). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated cOmpetitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of STATE law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the materials, equipment, supplies or services as shown in the "Bid Proposals" submitted therefore; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the numbered items in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "Bid Proposals" on file in the office of the City Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: BID ITEM NUMBER NO VENDOR AMOUNT 2456 1 Metro Sterling $ 64,116 2456 2 Peterbilt Motor Co. $ 75,326 SECTION II. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the terms, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid Proposals, and related documents. SECTION III. That should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items and of the submitted bids wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance, approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract which shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in the Bid Proposal and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION IV. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accOrdance with the apprOved bids or Pursnaqt to a ~tten Contract made pursuant thereto as' authorized herein. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this __ day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 2446 SUPPLY. ORDINANCE 2000 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: February 15 2000 Legal Department Herbert L. Prouty, City Attomey SUBJECT: An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending Ordinance No. 99-474 as amended by Ordinance No. 2000-017 to extend the term of the moratorium that was established pending the adoption of interim standards for applying policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan to certain specified nonresidential development applications prior to adoption of a revised Land Development Code; providing for a savings clause; providing for a severability clause; and providing for an effective date. BACKGROUND: The City Council previously adopted Ordinance No. 99-474 (the non- residential moratorium ordinance) which was later amended by Ordinance No. 200-017. It placed a moratorium on the acceptance and processing of certain nonresidential development applications. The moratorium is to expire on February 16, 2000. The nonresidential interim regulations will not be approved by February 16, 2000. The expiration date in this extension ordinance is March 8, 2000, one day after the scheduled March 7, 200 Council meeting. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW: Adoption of Ordinance Nos. 99-474 and 200-017. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: Your options are to approve this ordinance, approve the ordinance with revisions, or not approve the ordinance. Respectfully submitted, BY:He;crt L. Pr~y City Attorney C:\WlNDOWS\TEMP\commercial moratorium extension.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 99-474 AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2000-017 TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE MORATORIUM THAT WAS ESTABLISHED PENDING THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM STANDARDS FOR APPLYING POLICIES OF THE ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO CERTAIN SPECIFIED NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF A REVISED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton has enacted by Ordinance No. 99-474 as amended by Ordinance No. 2000-017, a moratorium pending the adoption of interim standards for applying policies of the adopted comprehensive plant to certain specified nonresidential development; and WHEREAS, the ordinances established that the moratorium was to expire on February 16, 2000; and WHEREAS, the City Council has not adopted such interim regulations by February 16, 2000; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the moratorium should be extended until March 8, 2000 in order to provide for more citizen input and input from interested parties into the standards to be adopted by the interim regulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the public interest to amend such ordinances to extend the moratorium; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 99-474, SECTION 4, is hereby amended to read as follows: Moratorium Period. The moratorium established by Ordinance No. 474, as amended by Ordinance No. 2000-017 shall commence on the effective date of Ordinance No. 474 and expire on March 8, 2000. SECTION 2. Saving. That the provisions of this ordinance shall govern and control over any conflicting provisions of Ordinance No. 99-474 as amended by Ordinance No. 2000-017, but all the provisions of Ordinance No. 99-474 as amended by Ordinance No. 2000-017 not in conflict with this ordinance shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\commercial moratorium extension.doc SECTION 4. Attachment. That a copy of this ordinance shall be attached to Ordinance No. 99-474 showing the amendment herein approved. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon the date of its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY JACK MILLER, MAYOR By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: February 15, 2000 Parks and Recre~Department Dave Hill-~ ~ SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNATE TO TERMINATE TWO COMMERCIAL LEASES FOR SIGNBOARDS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF LOOP 288 AND THE DENTON RAII,-TRAIL (FORMERLY THE DENTON SUBDIVISION OF THE MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD); AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BACKGROUND: The City of Denton in July of 1993 acquired legal title to eight miles of the old MKT railroad right of way from Hickory Street to Lake Dallas. This property was obtained through the Railbanking process under the National Trails Act, allowing the city to keep the railroad right of way intact for future use and a walking/biking trail in the interim. The city obtained the right of way from the Missouri Pacific Railroad, which had absorbed the MKT railroad previously. In the agreement, the city was assigned all rights and property except rights to fiber optics lines and coal slurry pipelines. The railroad in 1991 had entered into two commercial leases for land located within the right of way near Loop 288 for the placement of two commercial billboard type signs. The city now wishes to tea~finate these leases simply as a prerogative of land ownership, not as an exercise of police power, legislative authority or regulato~ authority. This resolution will authorize the City Manager or his designee the authority to execute any documents necessary or advisable to terminate the commercial leases, which currently authorize the signboards. OPTIONS: Options for this resolution include: · Terminating the Billboard leases and direct the media companies to remove the signs from the property. This is staff's recommendation · Renegotiate with the media companies a new lease term with a phaseout period with removal of the signs to follow. · Renegotiate a new lease and allow the signs to remain without a phaseout period. RECOMMENDATION: After reviewing all options, staff recommends that the leases be terminated and the signs be removed. With the pending construction of the trail -1- anticipated to begin summer, 2000 and widening of Loop 288 in the near future, it would be good timing to remove the signs. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Not applicable PRIORACTION/REVIEW: Not applicable FISCAL INFORMATION: Current leases for the signs are $3,000 for Impact Outdoor, Inc. and $1000 per year for Eller Media, Inc. BID INFORMATION: Not applicable MAP: Attached Respectfi~lly submitted: d odney, Direct~ Parks and Recreation Department Prepared by: Robert K. Tickner, Superintendent Parks and Recreation Department F:\USERS~RKTICKNEIRailtrail Utility crc~sing~Bfinker Road Railtrail c~ossing asenda item.doc -2- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNATE TO TERMINATE TWO COMMERCIAL LEASES FOR SIGN'BOARDS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF LOOP 288 AND THE DENTON RAII.-TRAIL (FORMERLY THE DENTON SUBDIVISION OF THE MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD); AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in early 1991, the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, as Lessor, entered into two commercial leases for land located within the right-of-way of their Denton Subdivision, near its intersection with Loop 288, authorizing the lessees to place signboards in those locations; and WHEREAS, in 1993, the City of Denton, Texas acquired legal title to the right-of-way which is now burdened by these leases, and was assigned all operating agreements relating to the right-of-way, including all rights formerly held by the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, as Lessor; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas now elects to temfinate these leases simply as a prerogative of land ownership, and not as an exercise of police power, legislative authority or regulatory authority; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION I: That the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby · authorized to act on behalf of the City of Denton, Texas in executing any document necessary or advisable to terminate the commercial leases which currently authorize the signboards located near the intersection of Loop 288 and the Denton Rail-Trail, without the necessity of further action by the City Council. SECTION II: That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY JACK MILLER, MAYOR BY: -3- APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: .HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY C:\WlNDOWS\DesktopLRail Billboard Terminaiton.doc Page 2 of 2 -4- Denton Branch Rail Trail Billboard Impact Outdoors,Inc. Billboard Eller Merlin,Inc. Denton -5- AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: SUBJECT February 15, 2000 Engineering & Transporta~ Dave Hill, 349-8314 Agenda No._ ~-~ .... Agenda Item , Date / A resolution approving a right-of-way use agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and Lakeview Ranch, L.P., a Texas Limited Partnership; and declaring an effective date. BACKGROUND The developers of Lakeview Ranch have requested formal permission to install signs, landscaping and irrigation within the right-of-way of Lakeview Boulevard, within the northern limits of their development. RECOMMENDATION Staff endorses the approval of the resolution. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) None FISCAL INFORMATION Lakevicw Ranch Home Owner's Association shall maintain a $7,000 reserve specifically for removal of improvements within the right-of-way should removal be deemed necessary. MAP Attached Prepared by: Paul Williamson Right-of-Way Agent Respectfully submitted: J~rector~~ En'g/fieering 8/Transportation -1- SITE BLAGG ROAD Bullcrd 60 Acres 0 )- -2- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A RIGHT-OF-WAY USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND LAKEVIEW RANCH, L.P., A TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION 1. That the City COuncil of the City of Denton hereby approves a Right-of- Way Use Agreement between the City of Denton and Lakeview Ranch, L.P., a Texas limited partnership, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City. SECTION 2. That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERB ERT/~U~, CITY ATTORNEY By:~~ -3- RIGHT-OF-WAy USE AGREEMENT THE STATE OF TEXAS )( COUNTY OF DENTON )( · KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT the City of Denton, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" does consent and agree to permit Lakeview Ranch, L.P., a Texas limited partnership, hereafter referred as "APPLICANT", to use a right-of-way dedicated to the City, Lakeview Boulevard, M. Forrest Survey, Abstract Number 417, such right-of-way being described in Exhibits Al-A6, attached hereto, for the purposes of landscaping, irrigation, a Iow masonry wail sign at U.S. Highway 380 entry, 3-rail horse fencing and secondary entry monuments with overarching sign framework, upon the following conditions: That APPLICANT, his successors or assigns shail maintain and keep in sightly condition all of the above described improvements situated in the right-of-way area and the CITY shail not become responsible for such maintenance at any time in the future. Upon removai of such improvements and the payment of ail costs in connection therewith, APPLICANT'S duties hereunder shail terminate. The CITY agrees that its obligations to maintain Lakeview Boulevard as a dedicated right-of-way within the CITY shail not be diminished in any way as a result of this Agreement, except for the maintenance of the improvements provided.for in this Agreement. That APPLICANT shail and does hereby agree toindemnify and hold hamfless CITY from any and ail damages, loss or liability of any kind whatsoever by reason of injury to property or third person occasioned by its use of the right-of-way or act of omission, neglect or wrongdoing of APPLICANT, his officers, agents, employees, invitees or other persons, with regard to the improvements and maintenance of such improvements; and the APPLICANT shall, at his own cost and expense, defend and protect the CITY against any and ail such claims and demands. That APPLICANT shall purchase and maintain Commercial General Liability Insurance naming the CITY as an "additional insured" for damages arising from the construction, maintenance and removal of the improvements authorized above with a limit of not less than $250,000.00 for each person and $500,000.00 for each single occurrence for bodily injury or death and $100,000.00 for each single occurrence for injury to or destruction of property. -4- That APPLICANT, shall have the right to remove the improvements on the right-of-way area at any time. Further, APPLICANT shall arrange for all activities and improvements in the right-of- way to be discontinued and/or removed, at the direction of the CITY, within thirty (30) days of notification by CITY, that the City Council has directed the use of the right-of-way by the APPLICANT be discontinued; and the costs associated with the discontinuing of such activities, and the removal of such improvements shall be borne by the APPLICANT. That, APPLICANT, its successors or assigns shall not seek compensation from CITY for loss of the value of the improvements made hereunder when such improvements are required to be removed by APPLICANT. That APPLICANT shall place upon the face of each overarching sign support column, on a reasonably conspicuous area, a permanent sign plat of 3 inches in height and 5 inches in width that displays the text illustrated in "Exhibit B" attached herewith. The sign plate shall be of such plastic or metal material to withstand the effects of the elements over time and shall be attached with fasteners of industry standard. Specific sign plate features shall be at the discretion of the APPLICANT. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the APPLICANT and the CITY, and their successors and assigns, including the Lakeview Ranch Homeowners' Association, Inc. hereinafter, the "AS SOCIATION", a non-profit corporation which has been organized under the laws of the State of Texas. Upon assignment of this Agreement by APPLICANT to the ASSOCIATION, and the assumption of APPLICANT'S duties and obligations by the ASSOCIATION, APPLICANT shall be released from all further liability hereunder. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions For Lakeview Ranch, Phase I (the "Declaration") shall contain a provision providing that the ASSOCIATION shall be responsible for the performance of all obligations of the APPLICANT under this AGREEMENT and shall provide for adequate maintenance of the improvements provided for in this Agreement, including establishing a reserve to cover the cost of removal of the improvements, such reserve to be in the amount reasonably required to pay all costs incurred in removing said improvements, but in no event less than $7,000.00. The Declaration shall provide for assessment procedures made applicable to all lot owners within Lakeview Ranch, Phase I which assessments shall be sufficient to support the · proper maintenance of the improvements and the above referenced reserve for removal of said improvements. The Declaration shall contain a clause in bold type stating THAT THIS RESERVE FOR REMOVAL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL -5- NOT BE RELEASED OR REDUCED wITHouT THE pRIoR EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE CITY OF DENTON; provided, however, the CITY agrees to grant such approval promptly upon the removal of the subject improvements from the right-of-way and presentation to the CITY of reasonable documentation showing the payment of all costs and expenses incurred in connection therewith. Prior to entering upon the Hght-of-way area the APPLICANT shall submit to the City Attorney a copy of the Declaration for review and approval. IN TESTIMONY~WHEREOF, APPLICANT executes onthis/~ ~ dayof (,?~O~~- ,2000. this Right-of-Way Use Agreement LAKEVIEW RANCH, L.P., A Texas Limited Partnership By: Lakeview Ranch, G.P., Inc., CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS A Texas Corporation, General Partner By:. Michael W. Jez City Manager Nicholas Raimondo President (APPLICANT) STATE OF TEXAS )( )( COUNTY OF DENTON )( Before me, a notary public, on the. day of ,2000, personally appeared Michael W. Jez, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing document and, being by me first duly sworn, declared that the statements therein contained are tree and correct. Notary Public, State of Texas -6- STATE OF TEXAS )( )( COUNTY O~ )( Before me, a notary public, on the/~l/~-day of .~7-~l~~, 2000, personally appeared Nicholas Raimondo, known to me to be the person whose n~ne is subscribed to the foregoing document and, being by me first duly sworn, declared that the statements therein contained are true and correct. ~.~.~'.,'"'# State of Texas ~ ~¥; Corn, £xp. 11-19-2000 ~ ",'~,, &_,~-- .. Not~r~ Public, Stat~ oi' Tefe/a~ -7- l'RUIt= I,)l'l'llUH U[TV ~TTDRHE¥ FR~ HO.= 94e3827923 -8- i \ - -9- FROM~ DENTON C[TV RTTORHE¥ FRX NO.: -10- FROH; DEHTOI'I i:[T'~ ;ll'TORltE'l FII~ HO.: t ; I I -11- -12- :Il ~ 113- ROH: DEHTOH CITY RTTORHE¥ FR~ NO.: 948~82792~ 81-87-$B 18:B4R P.it "EXHIBIT B" PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY NO ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS WITHOUT PRIOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF DENTON -14- AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Agenda Item Date Z.'l~.oo AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: February 15, 2000 Planning & Developmenl~ Dave Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT Consider the following request for relief from the provisions of Ordinace99-474, establishing moratoria to apply to certain specified development applications: a. 1504 - 08 N. Elm Street, Detailed Plan with office uses. b. 1513 N. Locust Street, Detailed Plan with office uses. c. 2225 E. McKinney Street, Detailed Plan with office use. d. 215 First Street, Zoning Case Z-99-090. BACKGROUND Ordinance 99-474 (Exhibit A) was adopted by City Council on December 14t~, 1999. This ordinance specifies certain types of general retail, and commercial development applications that are subject to moratoria intended to temporarily postpone application review and processing until interim standards are adopted. Ordinances 99-474 (Section 3) also contains provisions that allow applicants to request moratorium relief, and contains the following evaluation criteria to be used by Council: (a) whether granting relief from the moratorium jeopardizes the City's best interests in implementing residential density limitations or other development standards contained in the proposed interim development regulations; (b) the suitability of the proposed residential uses in light of land uses allowed in the zoning districts on property adjacent to the proposed site; (c) the impact of the proposed residential use on the transportation and other public facilities systems affected by the development; (d) the measures proposed to be taken by the applicant to prevent negative impacts of the proposed use on the neighborhood; (e) the likelihood that sufficient relief will be provided to the applicant following adoption of the interim regulations; (f) the total expenditures made in connection with the proposed residential development in reliance on prior regulations, including the costs of installing infrastructure to serve the project; (g) any fees reasonably paid in connection with the proposed use; (h) any representations made by the City concerning the project and reasonably relied upon to the detriment of the applicant. OPTIONS Council may either: 1. Deny the request for relief, or 2. Grant the request for relief, or 3. Grant the request of relief, subject to conditions consistent with the evaluation criteria set forth in the moratorium ordinances (and referenced above). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the decision of whether or not to grant the request for relief should be based on the merits of each individual application. A separate Council vote should be made for each petition. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE If moratorium relief is granted for a petitioner, processing of the development application will resume as per established procedures and legal requirements. If moratorium relief is not granted, processing of the application will be delayed until the moratoria are lifted. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Four petitions were reviewed on February 1, 2000. The petitions requesting moratoria relief heard by Council included: a. Ryan Road, west of Teasley - not heard due to adoption of the Interim Residential Regulations b. Ace Business Park - not heard due to there being no motion to reconsider c. Payne Storage Lockers - approved d. Aston Dallas Residential - not heard due to adoption of the Interim Residential Regulations Six petitions were reviewed on January 4th, 2000. The petitions requesting moratoria relief heard by Council included: Kwik Industries - approved Children's Lighthouse Learning Center- approved Denton Independent School District projects - exempt under Ord. # 2000-071 (1, 2, & 3) Denton Cancer Center - approved Shadow Brook Place - approved Meztler's Addition - approved Five petitions were reviewed on January 11th, 2000. The petitions requesting moratoria relief heard by Council included: ao Business Park on Teasley - approved Lakeview Ranch - approved Center Place - not approved Silver Dome and Cooper Creek - not approved Aec Business Park - not approved Four petitions were reviewed on January 18th, 2000. The petitions requesting moratoria relief heard by Council included: ao Ryan Road, west of Teasley - continued PD-1 - not approved Rudy's Bar-B-Q - approved Robson Ranch - approved FISCAL INFORMATION The petitions are being processed and brought to City Council using existing staff resources. Several petitions claim financial ham~, an issue that may be evaluated by City Council. ATTACHMENTS 2. 3. 4. 1504 - 08 N. Elm Street Staff Report (City initiated). 1513 N. Locust Street Staff Report (City initiated). 2225 E. McKinney Street Staff Report. 215 First Street Staff Report. Respectfully submitted: Dot~glas SI. Pb~vell, AICP Director of Planning & Development WAIVER REQUEST STAFF REPORT Subject: 1504-08 N. Elm Street Staff: Larry Reichhart Case Number: Z-99-083 BACKGROUND: Request for Relief to: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Platting: Comp Plan Consistency: Additional Information: Continue to process a Detailed Plan application. 1504-08 N. Elm Street. (see Enclosure 1) Commercial (see Enclosure 2) 0.24 acres The property is platted. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this property to be within the "Downtown University Core District. This area is intended to have a mix of educational, residential, retail, office, service, government, cultural and entertainment development. The applicant is proposing to allow both office and residential uses on the site. (see Enclosure 3). Staff finds the use consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval on January 26, 2000 POTENTIAL AFFECT OF INTERIM REGULATIONS: As currently drafted, this application would be required to submit a Zoning Plan and a Project Plan. This provision may be revised prior to ordinance adoption. CONCLUSION: If the moratorium relief request is granted the applicant will be able to continue the review process by returning to City Council for approval. If the moratorium relief request is not granted the application will not be processed until the moratorium is rescinded or expires. ENCLOSURES: 1. P & Z Staff Report PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Sub|ect: 1504 - 1508 N. Elm Staff: Larry Reichhart, DeveloPment Review Manager Case Number: Z-99-083 Agenda Date: January 26, 2000 Hold a public hearing to consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding the rezoning of approximately 0.24 acres, commonly known as 1504, 1506 and 1508 N. Elm, from a Office (O) zoning district to a Planned Development (PD) zoning district. The proposal is to allow office and residential uses on the property. Location: Size: LOCATION MAP 1504-1508 N. Elm Approximately 0.24 acres Filename Applicant: City of Denton 215 E. Mckinney Denton, TX 76201 Owner: John Hoeffier Planned development zoning districts (PD) are intended to provide forthe development of land as an integral unit for single or mixed use in accordance with a plan that may vary from the established regulations of other zoning districts for similar land uses. They are also meant to encourage flexible and creative planning to ensure the compatibility of land uses, to allow for the adjustment of changing demands to meet the current needs of the community, and to provide for a development that is superior to what could be accomplished in other zoning districts by meeting one or more of the following purposes: (1) Provides for the design of lots or building; increased recreation, common or open space for private or public use; berms, greenbelts, trees, shrubs or other landscaping features; parking areas, street design or access; or other development plans, amenities or features that would be of special benefit to the property users or community; (2) Protects or preserves topographical features, such as trees, creeks, ponds, floodplains, slopes or hills; or (3) Protects or preserves existing historical build!ngs, structures, features or places. There are three (3) types of Plans that may be used in the planned development process; concept plan, development plan and detailed plan. CONCEPT PLAN - This plan is intended to be the first step in the PD process for larger or long term developments. It establishes the most general guidelines, identifying the land use types, approximate thoroughfare locations within the boundaries of the district. DEVELOPMENT PLAN - This plan is intended to be used most often as a second step in the PD process. It includes the same information that is provided on the concept plan, plus details as to the specific land Uses and their boundaries. DETAILED PLAN - This plan is the final step in the process and is required prior to any development. For smaller tracts or where final development plans are otherwise known prior to rezoning, the detailed plan may be used to establish the district and be the only required plan in the planned development process. It will contain information specific to the site. All detailed plans should be in substantial compliance with landscape, sign, subdivision and other regulations of the Code of Ordinances. When concessions from these regulations are requested by a developer, there needs to be corresponding benefits that merit deviation from those regulations. Filename The subject property was placed in Office (O) zoning district and land use classification in 1969 by Ordinance 69-01 (see Enclosure 3). Prior to that time, the three structures on the site were used as single-family houses. Recently, the renter of the eastern most unit asked the owners of the property if she could use the unit for her office. Not knowing that the existing non-conforming use (the residential use) would no longer be allowed after the unit was utilized as an office for more than six months, the owners of the property agreed. The owners of the property would like the ability to utilize the site for both residential and office use. The surrounding neighborhood is a mixture of single-family residential, offices, single-family houses that have been converted to offices and multi-family residential. A Planned Development (PD) is the only zoning classification that will allow for both office and residential uses on the same property. 1999-2020 Comprehensive Plan Analysis The Comprehensive Plan identifies this property to be within the "Downtown University Core District. (see Enclosure 2). This area is intended to have a mix of educational, residential, retail, office, service, government, cultural and entertainment development. It is a place where residents can live, work, learn and play in the same neighborhood. Staff finds the request to be consistent With the Comprehensive Plan. 1. Transportation A. Trip generation The property is currently zoned Office (O). Assuming 40% lot coverage the potential total trips generated would be approximately 63 trips per day. Utilizing the three structures as offices (assQming 1,000 sf per structure) would generate up to 45 trips per day. As single-family the three units would generate approximately 29 trips per day. Table 1. Proposed Land Use Trip Generation Land Use Average Trip Maximum Buildout Total Daily Trip Generation Generation Single-Family 9.55 trips/day/unit x 3 homes 28.7 (Detached) Office 45 Note: Proposed Average Trip Generations provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1991. B. Access Existing access is on N. Elm. Filename 2. Utilities This site has access to existing water and sanitary sewer lines (see Enclosure 4): 3. Drainage and Topography No new development is proposed at this time. New development will be required to design and construct a drainage system to city standards. A preliminary drainage study will be required with the submission of a preliminary plat. The study must include calculations of the 100-year storm for all drainage areas on this property and any area that drains towards this property. The developer must indicate the method by which the run-off will be carried across the property or stored on the property. 4. Signs As per the sign ordinance. Sm Off-Street Parking New development must provide parking according to the regulations of Chapter 35 (35-301) of the Code of Ordinances. Landscaping New development will have to comply with the new Landscape Code, which requires fifteen (15)' trees per acre and twenty (20) percent of all surfaces to remain pervious (plantable area). 7. Open Space and Recreational Areas New residential development will be required to participate in the development of public recreational areas. Through the Park Dedication Ordinance (98-039), this development will contribute to park land dedication and park development fees. Dedication requirements are required during the platting process. Park development fees are required prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. Lighting Any new non-residential lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb, surrounding residential property or to shine and project uPWard to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. 9. Environmental Quality impacts No negative environmental impacts have been identified. Filename January 14, 1969 - The subject property was placed in the Office (O) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 69-01. The subject property is platted. Notice of the zoning request was published in the Denton Record-Chronicle on Sunday January 16, 2000. Thirteen (13) property owners within two hundred feet were mailed legal notices and eighty-two (82) residents within five hundred feet were sent courtesy notices informing them of the request (see Enclosure 5). As of this writing, there have been no responses. The use of the existing structures for both office and residential uses is consistent with the 1999 - 2020 Comprehensive Plan and with the existing surrounding land uses. As only the uses of the existing structures are changing and no new construction is proposed at this time, the existing site conditions as identified in Enclosure 1 shall constitute the Detailed Plan. As with any Planned Development, any future alterations to the site or structures would require a new detailed plan and a new series of public hearings, therefore: Staff recommends approval of Z-99-083 with the following conditions: 1. The documentation of the existing development on the property shall constitute a Detailed Plan. 2. Uses shall be limited to those of the Office (O) zoning district plus Multi-family dwelling -1 (MF- 1) zoning district. 3. Any new non-residential lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb, surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. I move to recommend approval of Z-99-083 with the following conditions: 1. The documentation of the existing development on the property shall constitute a Detailed Plan. 2, Uses shall be limited to those of the Office (O) zoning district plus Multi-family dwelling -1 (MF-1) zoning district. 3, Any new non-residential lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb, surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. Filename e 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. 1. Land Use Map 2. Existing Site Conditions (Photos) 3. Zoning Map 4. Utility Map 5. Notification Map 6. Draft Ordinance Filename 10. Enclosure I Z-99-083 (1504- 1508 N. Elm) NORTH LAND USE MAP Scale: None Agenda Date: January 26 2000 ENCLOSURE 2 Z-99-083 ('1508 North Elm) PHOTOS Photo 1. A view of the subject properly from the northwest. Photo 2. The property as seen from the southwest. Photo 3. The property as seen from the southeast. Photo 4. The property as seen from the northeast. Photo 5. The property as seen from North Elm Street. Photo 6. The property as seen from the rear. Z-99-083 l:'hotos 12. ENCLOSURE 3 Z-99-083 (1504 - 1508 N. Elm) NORTH ZONING MAP Agenda Date: January 26, 2000 Scale: None 13. ENCLOSURE 4 Z-99-083 (1504- 1508 N. Elm) NORTH UTILITY MAP Hydrants Water Line (W. L.) Sewer Line (S. L.) Agenda Date: January 26, 2000 Scale: None ENCLOURE5 Z-99-083 (1504- 1508 N. Elm) NORTH Notification Limit of 500' Notification 200'-500' NOTICE MAP Agenda Date: January 26, 2000 Scale: None ORDINANCE NO. ENCLOSURE 6 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM OFFICE (O) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 0.24 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1508 N. ELM; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-083) WHEREAS, the City of Denton, on behalf of John Hoeffler, has applied for a change in zoning for 0.24 acres of land fi.om Office (O) zoning district classification and use designation to Planned Development (PD) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WI-IEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning will be in compliance with the 1999 -2020 Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the zoning district classification and use designation of the 0.24 acre property described in the legal descriPtion attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A is changed fi.om Office (O) zoning district classification and use designation to Planned Development (PD) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, subject to the following conditions: That permitted land uses be restricted to those described in the list attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit B, and allow land uses peiniitted with a Specific Use Penn'lt in an Office (O) zoning district. That for the purposes of this ordinance Exhibit C shall constitute the Detailed Plan. SECTION II. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. : SECTION IlL That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION IV. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. 16.' PASSED AND APPROVED this the ~ day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: WAIVER REQUEST STAFF REPORT Subject: 1513 N Locust Staff: Larry Reichhart Case Number: Z-99-084 BACKGROUND: Request for Relief to: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Platting: Comp Plan Consistency: Additional Information: Continue to process a Detailed Plan application. 1513 N. Locust. (see Enclosure 1) Commercial (see Enclosure 2) 0.19 acres The property is platted. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this property to be within the "Downtown University Core District. This area is intended to have a mix of educational, residential, retail, office, service, government, cultural and entertainment development. The applicant is proposing to allow both office and residential uses on the site. Staff finds the use consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. This application was scheduled for the Planning and Zoning on February 9, 2000 POTENTIAL AFFECT OF INTERIM REGULATIONS: As currently drafted, this application would be required to submit a Zoning Plan and a Project Plan. This provision may be revised prior to ordinance adoption. CONCLUSION: If the moratorium relief request is granted the applicant will be able to continue the review process by returning to City Council for approval. If the moratorium relief request is not granted the application will not be processed until the moratorium is rescinded or expires. ENCLOSURES: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map Z-99-084 (1513 Locust Street) NORTH COLLEGE TWU LOCATION MAP Scale: None 19. Z-99-084 (1513 Locust Street) NORTH GR TWU MF-2 ZONING MAP Scale: None 20. WAIVER REQUEST STAFF REPORT Subject: 2225 E. McKinney Street Staff: Larry Reichhart Case Number: N/A BACKGROUND: Request for Relief to: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Platting: Comp Plan Consistency: Apply and proceed with an Office zoning and subsequent platting application. 2225 E. McKinney. (see Enclosure 1) SF-7 (see Enclosure 2) 4.5_+ acres The property is not platted. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this property to be within the "Existing Neighborhood / Infill Compatible" District. New development should respond to existing development with compatible land uses, patterns and design standards. The applicant is proposing to "re-use" an existing structure with minor alterations. Staff finds the use consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. POTENTIAL AFFECT OF INTERIM REGULATIONS: As currently drafted, this application would be required to submit a Zoning Plan and a Project Plan. This provision may be revised prior to ordinance adoption. CONCLUSION: If the moratorium relief request is granted the applicant will be able to submit a zoning and eventually a platting application, and the review process will commence. If the moratorium relief request is not granted the application will not be processed until the moratorium is rescinded or expires. ENCLOSURES: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Waiver Request ENCLOSURE I 2225 E. McKinney Street NORTH LOCATION MAP Scale: None 22. 2225 E. McKinney Street NORTH ZONING MAP Scale: None 23. 02/09/00 ~D 15:33 F,~ 9403497707 . C!~Y .OF DNNTON PLANNING ANN E. KELSEY 206 ~dgecr~t Clrclo Denton, Teoms 76205 94048~.9~70 f~ ~87-9553 ~maO ~kelsev~i~lobal.n~ FebruAry 9, 2000 The Honorable Mayor Jack Miller 215 E. McKinncy Denton, TX 76201 City Council of Denton, Texas 215 E. McK~nncy Denton, TX 76201 Re: 2225 E. McKinney Strett, Denton, Text~ 76201, 3.8 acres Dear Gentlemen: We respectfully request that me Honorable Mayor and Council waive the moratorium on non:residential (Planned Development-office) zoning on the above tract. Attached is a copy of the sttrvey plat. The plan is to'leave the colonial, house end front yard (sight llne) and all trees in place. We will use the house for offices without We intend to produce a Planned Development-office footprint for Mgh-quality compatible offices generally located on the east and north boundary lines (with 20 foot set back). Our planner is working On a plan. Our purchase agreement is contingent upon office zonlnE, We will lose the contract if we cannot get the zon~,~g. We ask your waiver of the momtori-m so this application may be processed with all deliberate speed. Please contact me if you have any questions. AK;lkg Very truly yours, WAIVER REQUEST STAFF REPORT Subiect: 215 First Street Staff: Larry Reichhart Case Number: Z-99-090 BACKGROUND: Request for Relief to: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Platting: Comp Plan Consistency: Additional Information: Continue to process a Neighborhood Services (NS) zoning request. 215 First Street (see Enclosure 1) Two-family dwelling (2-F) (see Enclosure 2) 0.425 acres The property is not platted. The subject site is located in the Downtown University Core district. The general intent is to allow a mix of uses and densities. Staff finds the use consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The current structure has been used as a business for a number of years without any known problems. Neighborhood Service (NS) zoning classification is the most restrictive retail/commercial zoning classification within the city and promotes uses that are typically not detrimental to a neighborhood. The Planing and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-1) with conditions. POTENTIAL AFFECT OF INTERIM REGULATIONS: As currently drafted, this application would be affected by the non-residential interim regulations. The applicant would be required to submit a Zoning Plan and a Project Plan. This provision may be revised prior to ordinance adoption. CONCLUSION: If the moratorium relief request is granted the applicant will be able to continue the review process by proceeding to City Council. If the moratorium relief request is not granted the application will not be processed until the moratorium is rescinded or expires. ENGLOGUREG; 1. P&Z Staff Report 2. Waiver Request 25. Agenda No. · ~ O ,. ~'~ ! PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSlONAgendaltem, 'F' ~ ' STAFF REPORT Dste /-/..~ -- ~ O Sub|ect: 215 First Street Staff: Larry Reichhart, Development Review Manager Case Number: Z-99-090 Agenda Date: December 15, 1999 Continue a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council concerning the rezoning of approximately 0.25 acres from Two-family dwelling (2-F) zoning district to a Neighborhood Service (NS) zoning district. The change of zoning will allow the utilization of the existing non- residential structure on the eastern portion of the site for non-residential use. A neighborhood meeting was held on January 3, 2000. The neighbors and the applicant agreed to limit the potential uses on the site (See attachment 1) and impose additional restriction to future uses (See conditions of approval). After the meeting, three (3) adjacent property owners rescinded their original opposition, which reduces the total opposition to approximately 7.3% (See attachment 2) The current structure has been used as a business for a number of years without any known problems. Neighborhood Service (NS) zoning classification is the most restrictive retail/commercial zoning classification within the city and promotes uses that are typically not detrimental to a neighborhood. The relatively small size of the existing structure and the limited amount of space available for parking will also limit the intensity and use of the site. Staff recommends approval of Z-9-090 with the following conditions: 1. The uses shall be limited to those identified in Exhibit B of the Draft Ordinance. 2. No tattoo parlors, abortion clinics shall be permitted. 3. No food and/or beverage Sales are permitted. 4. No customers shall, be allowed on the property from 7PM to 7AM. 5. All on-site parking shall be south of the existing structure. 6. Any new non-residential lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb, surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. No flashing or strobe lighting is allowed. 7. The size and/or square footage existing structure shall not be increased. 8. Existing trees larger than 3 inches in caliper shall be saved. 9. The property is subdivided to correspond with the proposed zoning. Filename 26. 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2. Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5, Table item. 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet 3. Opposition letters 4. December 15, 1999 P&Z Staff Report Filename 2?. ENCLOSURE 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM TWO-FAMILY DWELLING (2-F) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORI-IOOD SERVICES (NS) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 0.25 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 215 FIRST STREET; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF;AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z-99-090) WHEREAS, Dudley Doyle has applied for a change in zoning for 0.25 acres of land from Two-family dwelling (2-F) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Service (NS) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2000 the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning will be in compliance with the 1999-2020 Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the zoning district classification and use designation of the 0.25 acre property described in the legal description attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A is changed from Two-family dwelling (2-F) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Service (NS) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, subject to the following conditions: 1. That permitted land uses be restricted to those described in the list attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit B, and allow land uses permitted with a Specific Use Permit in an Neighborhood Service (NS) zoning district. 2. No tattoo parlors, abortion clinics shall be permitted. 3. No food and/or beverage sales are permitted. 4. No customers shall be allowed on the property from 7PM to 7AM. 5. All on-site parking shall be south of the existing structure. 6. Any new non-residential lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb, surrounding residential property Or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. No flashing or strobe lighting is allowed. 7. The size and/or square footage existing structure shall not be increased. 8. Existing trees larger than 3 inches in caliper shall be saved. 9. The property is subdivided to correspond with the proposed zoning. PAGE 28. SECTION II. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION III. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fmed a stun not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION IV, That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of .,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 9 · EXHIBIT A ?. .. 0.25 ACRES BEING all that certain tract of land si.tuated in the B.B.B. & C. R. R. Company Survey, Abstract Number 185, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas'and being a part of,a tract of lan. d described in the Deed from Fred Ha?Per et ux to E. C.'Doyle et ux recorded in'Volume 283. Page 400 of the Deed. Records of Denton Cou~nty, :Texas and being more.particularly desc~'ibed as follOWs:' ' ' : ' ' ' '... BEGINNING at a PK nail set for the Northeast corner of the herein described tract in or near the middle of First Street and at the Northeast corner of said Doyle tract; THENCE Sou[h 00 degrees 14 minutes 56 seconds West with the East line thereof passing at a distance 19.21 feet a ½' capped iron rod found for the Northwest corner of a called 0.211 acre tract of land described in the Deed from JHR Construction Co., Inc. to Darrell G. Reid, Sr. recorded under County Clerk's File Number 97-R0086665 of the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas and continuing on said course passing at a distance of 79.26 feet a ½' capped iron rod found for the Southwest comer t~{ereof and the Northerly Northwest corner of a tract of land described in the Deed from E. Wayne Stephens et ux Custom Designs, Inc. recorded in Volume 3231, Page 750 of the Real Property Records of Denton Cdunty, Texas and continuing a total distance of 108.26 feet to a ½' capped iron rod set for the Southwest corner of the herein described tract; THENCE South 89 degrees 24 minutes 17 seconds West a distain ,~,_ of 100.00 feet to a ½' capped iron rod set for the Southwest corner of the herein described tract in the North line of a called 0.281 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Kimberly Ann Petty to Benny R. Russell et ux recorded in Volume 4309, Page 1574 of the Real Property Records of Denton County. Texas; · THENCE NOrth 00 degrees '~4 minutes 35 seconds East a distance of 1;I 1.45 feet a POint in or near the middle of said First Street; · i THENCE South 89 degrees 45 minutes 18 seconds East with said First Street a distance of 100.00 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING and enc. losing 0,25 acres of land. more or less. '. J. E. Thompson II R.P~ Date 30. ~ wee mmNSmm -- o -EXHIBIT 'B One Family Dwelling Restricted,' i_ Ii ~_ii I__ le '..' .~ '-.~ . . ' .. i~ ~U~a~ o~ ~. . - :~ ~e~ o~ ~f' .~ IL ~ti~itv, .A~oessor~v a.d ~InO:idental u~ea' I Off Street Parking to Main Use . . .. .. ...., .::..': Recreatlonaland Entertainment Uses I- 'Il I - " .... 'c)o~' '"' c~es D' t ot · c~o ' Right-of-Way R~tail and S~rvice ~Type Uses '1 ~akery or'Confeotionery Shop Retail) 'Drape'~y, 'N~ea!e¢0rk or Weaving Shop.: Florist or Garden Shop Handioraft Shop -Office~, Professio~al and AdminiStrative ~etail Stores and Shops - 41000 square fe&t or less Studio for Photographer, Musician, Artist or Health . Agricultural' Type Uses ~ERMITTED USES ~;ITH ]%~PROVED SPEOIFIO USE ~E~I~ · :UtiXity,. AoceSS~y ~n~': i~c{dental: .Us'es" :"" '" '". "."' Transportation Related Uses Retail and Service Type Uses ! Agricultural _Type Uses Greenhouse or ~lant Nursery Front Yar~ Minim~ 25 feet.~' '~,.. Si~e yar~: No side yard is specified for non-residenti~l use except where'd non-residential use abuts upon district bo~aa~ li~ dividing such districts ' ....-... .... .a 'residential distrlot..qr' wh~. ~he...siue..yar~. 1s.' .. ' ; adjacent ~to th~ street%~.'~n a~.~en'. (10) .'~ "' 'foot' ~iae '~ard ~shal}'be prog~e~,' · 3.' Rear Yard: No rear yea~ is specified for non-resi~ential'use' except where retail, c6~ercial or industrial uses back upon 'a co~mon district line, whether separate4 by an alley or ~ot, .dividing the district from any of the residential districts listed, a minim~ of ten (10) feet shall be provided. Two.(2) stories, except that cooling towers, chimneys, HvAC structures may extend to a maximum of 45 feet.. Floor area ratio, building coverage, lot size, No Standards '- SUPPLEMENTAL RE~UL~T~ONS~ '"" Parking (Based on use. See Article 34-115.) 2. signs 3. Lighting 4. Landscaping . 5. screening and Fencing lot dimensions: 33. ..... 09~07/00 IION 08:57 FAX 9403497707 CIT~ OF DENTON PLANNING ~1003 Fcb~mry 2, 2000i City of Denton ' 215 E McKinney: Denton, TX 76201 Dear City Cotmeil Members: I am requesting ~ waiver of the non-residential moratorium so I can proceed with my zoning case (Z-99-090) for 215 First Street. Thi~ property hn.~ b~en in my family since 1940. The exisfi.i!g block building was constructed in 1959. Due to an illness in the family the block l~uilding lost its non-confo~'a~ing status and now can oRly be utilized as a storage structure. The proposed Neighborhood Service (NS) zoning district will allow the building to be utilized for non-residential uses while affording the neighborhood safeguards. We had a neighborhood meeting on January 3, 2000 and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval on January 12,2000. We have been working on this rezoning for a munber of months and would appreciate yollr grating thi$::reqne~. Sincerely, :! Dudley Doyle 34. AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15th, 2000 Planning & Developme~rtment Dave Itill, 349-8314 Agenda No. ~ Agenda Item ~2 ' Oat~ ~. 15.00 SUBJECT Consider and take action on a request for relief from the Residential Interim Regulations, Ordinance No. 2000-046, filed by Golden Triangle Joint Venture for Zoning Case No. Z-99-096, PD-93 located at the southwest comer of Ryan Road and Teasley Lane. BACKGROUND Golden Triangle Joint Venture has applied in writing for relief from the Residential Interim Regulations (see Attachment 1). Background information regarding the current status of this case is provided in Attachment 2. This property was the subject of a request to the Planning and Zoning Commission on January 12 and January 26, 2000 for Detail Plan. The Commission continued the request to allow the applicant to meet with adjoining property owners to address design issues. Ordinance 2000-046, known as the Residential Interim Regulations, was adopted by City Council on February 1st, 2000. This ordinance contains standards with which residential development projects must comply until the Code Rewrite project is completed and permanent standards are adopted. Ordinances 2000-046 also contains a separate section that allows applicants to request relief from the interim regulations, including evaluation criteria to be used by Council: Section F. Relief Procedures 1. The applicant may petition the City Council for relief from these interim development regulations by requesting such relief in writing. 2. The City Council shall not relieve the applicant from the requirements of this ordinance, unless the applicant first presents credible evidence from which the City Council can reasonably conclude that the imposition of the residential density limitations or other development standards deprives the applicant of a vested property right or deprives the applicant of the economically viable use of his land. 3. In deciding whether to grant relief to the applicant, the City Council shall take into consideration the following: (a) whether granting relief from the residential density limitations or other development standards contained in these interim development regulations, in the absence of permanent revisions to the City's Land Development Code that implement the provisions of the comprehensive plan jeopardizes the City's best interests in preventing such effects; (b) the suitability of the proposed residential uses in light of land uses allowed in the zoning districts on property adjacent to the proposed site; (c) the impact of the proposed residential use on the transportation and other public facilities systems affected by the development; (d) (e)' (0 (g) (h) the measures proposed to be taken by the applicant to prevent negative impacts of the proposed use on the neighborhood; the likelihood 'that sufficient relief will be provided to the applicant following adoption of the City's Development Code; the total expenditures made in connection with the proposed residential development in reliance on prior regulations, including the costs of installing infrastructure to serve the project; any fees reasonably paid in connection with the proposed use; any representations made by the City concerning the project and reasonably relied upon to the detriment of the applicant The City Council may take the following actions: (a) deny the relief request; (b) grant the relief request; or (c) grant the relief request subject to conditions consistent with the criteria set forth in this section. Any relief granted by the City Council shall be the minimum deviation from ordinance requirements necessary to prevent deprivation of a vested property fight. OPTIONS Council may either: 1. Deny the request for relief, or 2. Grant the request for relief, or 3. Grant the request for relief, subject to conditions consistent with the evaluation criteria set forth in the ordinance (and referenced above). RECOMlVlENDATION Staff recommends that the decision of whether or not to grant the requests for relief should be based on the merits of each individual application. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE If the relief is granted the applicant will proceed with the existing Detailed Plan Application. If the relief is not granted the applicant will be required to submit a Design Plan as identified in Ordinance No. 2000-046. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Council has not reviewed any requests for relief from Ordinance 2000-046 prior to February 15th, 2000. FISCAL INFORMATION The petitions are being processed and brought to Council using existing staff resources. Several of the petitions claim financial harm, an issue that may be evaluated by Council. ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from petitioner 2. Background information Respectfully submitted: DoUglas SI P~well, AICP Director of Planning & Development 03:49p. From-WINSTEAD ~ECHREST ATTACHMENT ,0 1 T-OI6 P.002/003 F-641 %XZlNSTEAD SECHREST 8t MINICK FebrUary 8, 2000 Pa:m~nce Tower ' 120113m Dallas. Texas 75270 bx 214/745.539o VIA FAX 940/382-7923 Herbert L. Prouty, Esq. Denton C~ty Anomey Ci~ of Denton 215 Has~ McKinney Denton, TX 76201 Re: Golden Triangle 3oint Vem~e/Ryan Road ~ Teaslcy Lm2e, S.W. Coruer Z-99-096 Dear Herb: · Our firm repre~en~ Golden Triangle Joinx Venture, thc owner office undeveloped land in PD 93. We strongly dispute the validity of Ordinance No. 2000-046 and ,:seave all legal rights to challenge same. If this Ord,.'~s_nce is being applied to our client~ the land owner requests relief from thc interim development regulations in accordance with Section F of the Ordinance at the next City Council meeting. Application of the in!~rim regulations and/or a delay in approving the pending derailed plan application will result in the terminatioa dour sales contract and significant injury to our dienc The Planning and Zoning Commission will need to approve our application at i~s February 23rd meeting, or we will have no alternative but to file suit agaim;x th~ City arid r~sponsible individuals to protect our client's righis. !fyou have any questions or need additional infmmali0n, please let me know. Arthu~ J. Anderson AJ plg Cc.' Alyson Archer (Via FAX 972-599-999g) David Hill (Via FAX 940-3494596) DALLAS HO%ISTON AUSTIN Feb-06-2000, 03:46pm From-WIFISTEAD $£CHREST & MINICK-3 Herbert L. P~Ty, Esq. J~ 24, 2000 Page 2 214-746-5390 P.003/003 F-641 Hd Snyder (Via FAX 940-382-7~23) Jennifer Wahers (Via FAX 940-349-8236 X8596) 0DMA~CDOES~DALLAS._I ~32 e$333 ~2 3283: WAIVER REQUEST STAFF REPORT ATTACHMENT 2 Subiect: Ryan Rd / Teasley Lane (PD-93) Staff: Larry Reichhart Case Number: Z-99-096 BACKGROUND: Request for Relief to: Location: Zoning: Acreage: Platting: Comp Plan Consistency: Additional Information: Relief from the Residential Interim Regulations, Ordinance No. 2000-046.. west corner of Ryan Road and Teasley Lane. (see Enclosure 1 ) PD-93 (see Enclosure 1) 10 _+ acres multifamily and 4_+ acres commercial The property is not platted. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this property to be within a "Neighborhood Center" area (See Enclosure 1). The adopted Growth Management Strategy states that these areas are to be developed in an inwardly oriented manner with a focus upon the centers of the neighborhoods. The center would contain uses necessary to support the surrounding neighborhood including retail uses such as convenience grocery, barbers, or small professional offices, higher density residential uses such as townhomes, park uses including central neighborhood "greens" and institutional uses such as fire stations, schools, libraries and transit nodes. The proposed land use is somewhat consistent with the intent of "Neighborhood Center" with townhouse style units around the perimeter of the multi-family portion of the site and the proposed commercial area within walking distance to the residential areas. It is not, however, inwardly oriented and the site design and density is potentially inconsistent with the plan. This application has been heard at the January 12 and 26, 2000 P&Z meeting and was continued to the February 23, 2000 meeting. o POTENTIAL AFFECT OF INTERIM REGULATIONS: As currently drafted, this application would be required to submit a Design Plan. CONCLUSION: If the relief request is granted the applicant will be able to proceed with the Detailed Plan application. If the relief request is not granted the application will be required to submit a design plan as identified in Ordinance No. 2000-046. At that time the review and public hearing processes will start. ENCLOSURES: 1. January 26, 2000 P&Z Staff Report ENCLOSURE 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ,aa" STAFF REPORT Sub|ect: Ryan Rd / Teasley Case Number: Z-99-096 Staff: Larry Reichhart, Dev. Review Manager Agenda Date: January 26, 2000 Continue a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council concerning the detailed plan for a Planned Development (PD-93) encompassing approximately 13.7 acres. The detailed plan proposal is for a 159 unit multi-family residential development and 4.3 acres of commercial development. Due to the commercial moratorium, the applicant has removed the 4.3 acres of commercial development from this proposal. Location: Size: LOCATION MAP The property is located at the southwest corner of Teasley and Ryan Road. 9.5+ acres e Applicant: Dale and Craig Irwin 525 S. Carroll Blvd. Denton, TX 76201 Owner: Golden Triangle Joint Venture 2112 W. Spring Creek, #200 Piano, TX 75023 Planned development zoning districts (PD) are intended to provide for the development of land as an integral unit for single or mixed use in accordance with a plan that may vary from the established regulations of other zoning districts for similar land uses. They are also meant to encou rage flexible and creative planning to ensure the compatibility of land uses, to allow for the adjustment of changing demands to meet the current needs of the community, and to provide for a development that is superior to what could be accomplished in other zoning districts by meeting one or more of the following purposes: (1) Provides for the design of lots or building; increased recreation, common or open space for private or public use; berms, greenbelts, trees, shrubs or other landscaping features; parking areas, street design or access; or other development plans, amenities or features that would be of special benefit to the property users or community; (2) Protects or preserves topographical features, such as trees, creeks, ponds, floodplains, .slopes or hills; or · · (3) Protects or preserves 'existing historical buildings, structures, features or places. There are three (3) types of plans that may be used in the planned development process; concept plan, development plan and detailed plan. CONCEPT PLAN - This plan is intended to be the first step in the PD process for larger or long term developments. It establishes the most general guidelines, identifying the land use types, approximate thoroughfare locations within the boundaries of the district. DEVELOPMENT PLAN - This plan is intended to be used most often as a second step in the PD process. It includes the same information that is provided on the concept plan, plus details as to the specific land uses and their boundaries. DETAILED PLAN - This plan is the final step in the process and is required prior to any development. For smaller tracts or where final development plans are otherwise known prior to rezoning, the detailed plan may be used to establish the district and be the only required plan in the planned development process. It will contain information specific to the site. All detailed plans should be in substantial compliance with landscape, sign, subdivision and other regulations of the Code of Ordinances. When concessions from these regulations are requested by a developer, there needs to be corresponding benefits that merit deviation from those regulations. 9. The developer is requesting approval of a detailed plan for this 13.7+ acre site (See enclosure1). This site is a portion of an original 31+ acre site that was approved as PD-93 on April 2, 1985, which included 17 acres of single-family development, 10 acres of multi-family development and 4 acres of general retail. (See enclosure 2) This proposal is for 159 multi-family units (with a total of 250-350 bedrooms) on 9.4+ acres equaling 17 units per acre and 6 commercial pad sites on 4.4+ acres. The Concept Plan aPproval allowed for 17 units per acre accounting for 159 units on the proposed 9.4 acres. Other restrictions of the Concept Plan (Ordinances No. 85-68) that effect this proposal include; 1. Multi-family housing which abuts single-family housing should not exceed two-story construction height. (the applicant has limited the multi-family units adjacent to the single-family housing to 1% stories (max. 35') with no 2"d story windows facing the single-family properties.) 2. Parking lot lights should be positioned away from residential buildings. (a note to this effect and/or lighting details should be included on the plans) 3. Screening shall be provided to protect multi-family hOusing from commercial retail activities and also buffer single family housing from multi-family developments. (The proposed screening should be indicated on the General Landscape Plan) Sec. 35-176. Detailed plan information The detailed plan shall contain the following information: (1) Acreage. The acreage in the plan as shown by a survey, certified by a registered surveyor. · . (2) Land uses. Permitted 'uses, specified in detail as determined by the department, and the acreage for each use. (3) Off-site information. Adjacent or surrounding land uses, zoning, streets, drainage facilities and other existing or proposed off-site improvements, as specified by the department, sufficient to demonstrate the relationship and compatibility of the district to the surrounding properties, uses, and facilities. (4) Traffic and transportation. The location and size of all streets, alleys, parking lots and parking spaces, loading areas or other areas to be used for vehicular traffic; the proposed access and connection to existing or proposed streets adjacent to the district; and the traffic generated by the proposed use. (5) Buildings. The location, maximum height, and minimum setbacks for all buildings, and if nonresidential~ the maximum total floor area. (6) Residential development. The number, location, and dimensions of all the lots, the minimum setbacksf the number of dwelling unitsf and number of units per acre (density) (7) Water and drainage. The location of all creeks, ponds, lakes, floodplains or other water retention or major drainage facilities and improvements. (8) Utilities. The location and route of all major sewer, water, or electrical lines and facilities necessary to serve the district. (9) Trees and landscaping. The location of all protected trees and a landscaping plan as required by the city's landscape ordinance. ~ 10. (10) Open space. The approximate location and size of greenbelt, open, common, or recreation areas, the proposed use of such areas~ and whether they are to be used for public or private use. (11) Screening. The location, type, and size of all fences, berms, or screening features proposed between different land uses or adjacent properties. (12) Signs. Location, type~ and size of all signs regulated bY the city's sign ordinance (13) SideWalks and bike paths. Sidewalks or other improved Ways for pedestrian or bicycle use. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Section 35-155 of the city code contains the following provision: "The commission or the city council may impose conditions concerning the location, use, arrangement, construction or development of the district in order to ensure the appropriate use of the district and to protect surrounding properties. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91)." Staff interprets this section to apply to a PD Concept Plan, Development Plan, or Detailed Plan as appropriate, and in correlation to required information related to the corresponding plan. As such, Concept Plan conditions would be related to information contained in Section 35-174, and Detailed Plan conditions would be related to Section 35-176 information. Since this project is a proposed PD Detailed Plan, staff has provided an evaluation based on minimum information required as per Section 35-176, and has also checked for consistency with the previously approved Concept Plan. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this property to be within a "Neighborhood Center" area (See enclosure 5). The adopted Growth Management Strategy states that these areas are to be developed in an inwardly oriented manner with a focus upon the centers of the neighborhoods. The center would contain uses necessary to support the surrounding neighborhood including retail uses such as convenience grocery, barbers, or small professional offices, higher density residential uses such as townhomes, park uses including central neighborhood "greens" and institutional uses such as fire stations, schools, libraries and transit nodes. The proposed land use is somewhat consistent with the intent of "Neighborhood Center" with townhouse style units around the perimeter of the multi-family portion of the site and the proposed commercial area within walking distance to the residential areas, It is not, however, inwardly oriented and the site design and density is potentially inconsistent with the plan, 11. m Transportation A. Trip generation A traffic impact analysis (TIA) identifying impacts and required mitigation will be required prior to platting. B. Access Access will be from both Ryan Road and Teasly Lane and will be shared between the multi- family and commercial developments. C. Pedestrian Linkages Sidewalks along all public streets are required. Utilities This site has access to existing water and sanitary sewer lines (see Enclosure 6): 3. Drainage and Topography New development will be required to design and construct a drainage system to city standards. A preliminary drainage study will be required with the submission of a preliminary plat. The study must include calculations of the 100-year storm for all drainage areas on this property and any area that drains towards this property. The developer must indicate the method by which the run-off will be carried across the property or stored on the property. 4, Signs As per the sign ordinance. The location of the proposed monument signage is indicated on both sides of both entries. Sm m Off-Street Parking Parking will be provided per code requirements. Landscaping This property will have to comply with the new Landscape Code, which requires fifteen (15) trees per acre and twenty (20) percent of all surfaces to remain pervious (plantable area). Open Space This residential development will be required to participate in the development of public recreational areas. Through the Park Dedication Ordinance (98-039) this development will contribute to park dedication and park development fees. Park Land Dedication or fees in lieu is required at the time of platting and Park Development Fees will be required at the time building permits are issued. Lighting Lighting on the property should be designed and maintained so as not to shine on or otherwise disturb, surrounding residential property or to shine and project upward to prevent the diffusion into the night sky. 9. Environmental Quality impacts No negative environmental impacts have been identified. April 4, 1985 -A Planned Development (PD-93) Concept Plan, for the subject property, was approved by Ordinance No. 85-68 allowing for single-family, multi-family and commercial development. The site plan for the single-family portion of the development was also approved by Ordinance No. 85-68. September 19, 1996 - An Amended Detailed Plan for the single-family development is approved by the Director of Planning and Development. The subject property is not platted and would need to be platted prior to any development. Notice of the zoning request was published in the Denton Record-Chronicle on Sunday May 2, 1999. Forty-four (44) property owners were notified and ninety-nine (99) courtesy notices were mailed. As of this writing, there has been Forty-one (41) responses, thirty-nine opposed (equalling over 20% opposition)and two (2) neutral to the request. (See enclosure 8) Neighborhood meetings were held on January 10th and January 19th. Issues raised at the meetings included: · Property Values decreasing due to the presence of Multi-family · Security · Increased traffic · Dumpster location · Privacy (windows looking into adjacent back yards) · Closeness of the buildings to the property line · What constitutes adequate buffering (brick wall, evergreen hedges, wood fences) The applicant responses included: · Moving the buildings from 10 foot to 15 foot from the property line. · Limit the adjacent buildings to 1 ¼ stories (35' max.) adjacent to the single-family houses with no 2nd story windows facing the single family properties. · Proposed a evergreen hedge · Willing to relocate dumpsters · Willing to rearrange open space. 13. The applicant has stated his willingness to revise the Detailed Plan but has not received a clear indication from the neighbors as to what revisions should be undertaken. No consensus was arrived at regarding issues such as, the minimum distance the buildings should be from the property line, what type of fencing and landscaping should be utilized as a buffer, the maximum height of the buildings, what type of building materials should be on the back of the buildings. Although the minimum requirements of a Detailed Plan are present, a number of outstanding issues still exist. Staff recommends that the commission takes input from the applicant and the neighbors and then gives the applicant direction as to what revisions should be pursued. Staff recommends continuing Z-99-096 to February 9, 2000 to allow the applicant time to address the issues related to the Detailed Plan. I move to continue Z-99-096 to February 9, 2000. 1. Recommend approval as submitted. 2, Recommend approval with conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. 1. Detailed Plans. 2. PD-86 Concept Plan and Ordinance. 3. Vicinity Map. 4. Zoning Map. 5. Land Use Map 6. Utility Map. 7. Denton Modility Plan Map 8. 200' Property Owner Notification Map and responses. ENCLOSURE 15. 8. ENCLOSURE 2 AN ORDINANCE 'AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DENTON,. TEXAS, AS SAME WAS ADOPTED AS AN'APPENDIX TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, BY ORDINANCE NO. 69-1, AND AS SAID MAP APPLIES TO APPROXIMATELY 30.3595 ACRES OF LAND SITUATED IN THE ELI PICKETT SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1018, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS AND SITUATED· AT THE SOU%~tWESTERN CORNER OF RYAN ROAD AND TEASLEY LANE INTERSECTION; TO PROVIDE FOR' A PLANNED ·DEVELOPMENT "PD" DISTRICT ZONING CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR SAID PROPERTY; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That a Planned Development "PD" District Zoning Classification and Use designation is hereby established for all of the property described below under the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas: · All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the Eli. PiCkett Survey, Abstract No. 1018, Denton County, Texas, being part of a (called) 117.5 acre tract in a deed from Gover C. Stuart to J. T. Stuart on the 21st day of January, 1930, as recorded in VolUme 225, Page 528, Deed Records of said County, and being all of a (called) 31.027 acre tract described in a Deed from B. Thomas McElroy to Mrs. Marsha Stuart Savage and Robert Mark Stewart on the 24th day of December, 1975, recorded in VolUme 769, Page 557, Deed Records of said County, and being more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a steel pin on the north line of said 117.5 acre tract and of said Pickett Survey about the middle of Ryan Road at the north- east corner of a 26.171 acre tract out of said 117.5 acre tract at a point 1035.84 feet east of the northwest corner of said tract and of said Survey; THENC~ north 89°42'49'' east with the north line of said 117.$ acre tract and said Survey in Ryan Road a distance of 1013.11 feet to a corner on the west right of way of Farm to Market Road 2181; THENCE south 33°49'45'' east with said right of way a distance of 85.28 feet to the beginning of a curve; THENCE southerly with said right of way around a curve to the right, having a central angle of 32°24' and 00", a chord of south east, a distance of 774.09 feet, a radius of 1387.3 feet and an arc length of 784.50 feet to a right of way post at the end of said curve; THENCE south 01°25'45'' east with said right of way 294.5 feet-to a steel pin at the northeast corner of a 58.103 acre tract off the south end of said 117.5 acre tract; THENCE south 89053' 'west, a distance of 1299.88 feet to a steel pin at the southeast corner of said 28.171 acre tract; THENCE north 00°07'44'' west, 1100.57 feet to. the place of begihning and containing in all 31.0154 acres of land, there being 0.6559 acre within Ryan Road, leaving a net of 30.3595 acres of land. SECTION II. That in approving.this planned development district ordinance, the City Council hereby approves the final site plan, attached herato, for the area designed for'SF-6 use. Prior to the development of the areas designated as multifamily (MF) district and general retail (GR)'on the site plan attached hereto, a final comprehensive site plan shall be required to be submitted and approved' as part of this ordinance in accordance with Article 11, Appendix B-Zoning, of the Code' of' Ordinances. 16. Z-170Z/PAGE 12. SECTION That the development of the property shall be in substantial compliance with all comprehensive site plans approved herein or hereafter, and attached hereto and made a part herein for all purposes. SECTION IV. That prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the use of any building within the planned development district, the following conditions shall be met: 1. Multi-family hOUSing which abuts single family housing should not exceed two-story construction height. 2. Parking lot lights should be positioned away from residential buildings. Screening shall be provided to protect multi-family housing from commercial retail activities and also to buffer single family housing from multi-family developments. 4. The platting and building requirements of Appendix A and B of the Code of Ordinances for single family housing (SF-7),. including front, side and rear setbacks, and maximum lot coverage, shall be applicable to the proposed single family development (SF-6). 5. All other engineering, planning, and building requirements not controlled by these conditions must conform to the Zoning and Land Development Regulations and other plans and ordinances of the City of Denton. SECTION V. That the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby finds that such zoning is in accordance with a comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting the general.welfare of the City of Denton, Texas~ and with reasonable consideration, among other things for the character of the district and for its peculiar suitability or particular uses, and with a view to conserving the value of the buildings, protecting human lives, and encouraging the most appropriate uses of land for the maximum benefit to the City of Denton, Texas, and its citizens. SECTION VI. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect {mmedtately after its passage and approval, the required public hearings having heretofore been held by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, after giving due notice PASSED AND APPROVED this the y of , 1985. ,~RI~HARD-O~ STF. WAXT, MAYOR y · CITY OF D~NTON, TEXAS ATTEST: CHARLOTTE ALLEN~ CITY-SECRETA~cf CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APV~OVED AS TO LEGAL FOF~; DEBRAADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS & Z-1702/PAG Z-1702/PAGE 18. ENCLOSURE 3 Z-99-096 (Ryan Rd. / Teasley Ln., PD-93) NORTH ROBINSON VICINITY MAP Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None 19. ENCLOSURE 4 Z-99-096 (Ryan Rd. / Teasley Ln., PD-93) NORTH A A ZONING MAP Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None ENCLOSURE 5 Z-99-096 (Ryan Rd. I Teasley Ln., PD-93) NORTH LAND USE MAP Texa~ Lo~ol Government Gode "A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries" Adopted Ord No 99-439 December 7, 1999 Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None ENCLOSURE 6 Z-99-096 (Ryan Rd. / Teasley Ln., PD-93) NORTH ROBINSON UTILITY MAP Hydrants Water Line (W. L.) Sewer Line (S. L.) Elec. Lines Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None 22. ENCLOSURE 7 Z-99-096 (Ryan Rd. / Teasley Ln., PD-93) NORTH DENTON MOBILITY PLAN MAP FreeWays Primary Major Arterials ," ',,,,' Secondary Major Arterials /""........." Collectors Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 Scale: None 23. ENCLOSURE 8 Z-99-096 (Ryan Rd. @ Teasley) NORTH $00' Notification Limits ROBINSON 200'-500' NOTICE MAP Agenda Date: January 12, 2000 24. Scale: None Z-9 6 Ryan Rd./Teasley) - Opp .JItEon Number Street Name Comment 3009 Overlake Dr. Glenn believe that our neighborhood will lose property value due to apartments being built. The apartments will seem 3904 Overlake Dr. Huff overbearing on our homes. do not feel the zoning in this area is consistent. We have upscale single-family housing, mobile home lots and now you would like to bring in multi-family units. Property values will decrease and the value of our neighborhood will ~ 3908 overlake Dr. Patrick decrease. 3909 Overlake Dr. Glenn 3912 Overlake Dr. Bergman 3913 Overlake Dr. Haddlock 3917 Overlake Dr. Harper I am very opposed! This will make my property value 3920 Overlake Dr. Williams lower. 3925 Overlake Dr. Domes 3932 Overlake Dr. Oldham 3936 Overlake Dr. Muller 3937 Overlake Dr. Carter 3941 Overlake Dr. Noto 3945 Overlake Dr. Boso I was led to believe that the area would be Doctors Offices. 3952 Overlake Dr. Young This I feel will hurt property values and quality of life. 3953 Overlake Dr. Deramo 3956 Overlake Dr. Goggin 3957 Overlake Dr. DuBois 3961 Overlake Dr. Clark 2220 Wildwood Lane LeBrun I will be at every meeting to fight this 2305 Wildwood Lane Tandif 2308 Wildwood Lane Richter Neither I nor my wife have any interest of having a multi- family dwelling in our backyard. We moved to a residential location to get away from all aspects of apartment life. We also moved to a Residential location as an investment in our future, and this proposed plan will severely devalue the 2309 Wildwood Lane George land and housing in the immediate area. Teasley Lane is already too crowded - many accidents at Ryan, Windowed and Robinson. Property value would go 2312 Wildwood Lane Steward down. 2313 Wildwood Lane Wright Having multi-family housing on this property will lower the 2316 Wildwood Lane Moore ~roperty value on the homes in this neighborhood. 2317 Wildwood Lane Cartwright We already are adjacent to two Mobil home parks which have a high density population. We do not want the additional density or additional traffic flow. Additional traffic flow to an existing heavy flow will cause problems for our neighborhood children. We want a quite and safe home for 2321 Wildwood Lane Garner our kids. 2325 Wildwood Lane Tinsman Opposed, no apt. only houses. 2400 Wildwood Lane Watson 2401 Wildwood Lane Johnson Z-99-,,96 Ryan Rd./Teasley) -Opp . ition do not want t-o see apartments on this property, I think this would be detrimental to my property value, and would create an even more dangerous traffic situation than 2404 Wildwood Lane Thomas already exists. 2405 Wildwood Lane Grisson Multi-family (apts) will depreciate property value, increase traffic in an already congested area. We also have safety concerns if apts. Should be built - over population in small 2408 Wildwood Lane Deeb area. 2409 Wildwood Lane Brown 2417 ' Wildwood Lane Franklin · 2420 Wildwood Lane Smith 2421 Wildwood Lane Brown/Raper We request rezoning of the property to single family. NEUTRAL Although neutral in opinion, would prefer the property for 3928 Overlake Dr. Mandviwalla single-family residential. I am willing to keep an open mind until I see the plans. A 2300 Wildwood Lane Ressler big complex or highrise will get a definite no though. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Allendaltem, .~,,..~ AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: February 15th, 2000 Planning & Development~ Dave Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, authorizing a special called joint public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council to be held on Thursday, March 2, 2000, pursuant to Texas Local Government code §211.007 (b), at the City Council Chambers, at 6 o'clock p.m., to consider recommendation and action upon an ordinance creating nonresidential interim regulations for the implementation of the new comprehensive plan of the City of Denton; prescribing notice of the joint hearing pursuant to Texas Local Government Code §211.007 (d); providing for a recommendation by the planning and zoning commission; superceding the provisions of all ordinances on the same subject matter to the extent of a conflict; and providing for an effective date. BACKGROUND On February 15th, Council will consider a special called.joint public hearing of the City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission on Thursday, March2fa' 2000, to consider the interim nonresidential ordinance. The public hearing date is the first possible date that allow compliance with state notification requirements if the joint hearing is authorized on February 15 . The only item to be listed nd on the March 2 agenda would be the interim nonresidential ordinance. After the public hearing is closed, P&Z would be scheduled to make a recommendation to Council, and Council would then be enabled to consider adoption of the ordinance. The Commercial and General Retail moratorium ordinance will be rescinded upon adoption of the interim nonresidential ordinance, as currently drafted. At the February 8th City Council / Planning & Zoning Commission joint public hearing, the draft interim nonresidential ordinance was referred back to staff for further review. Fourteen speakers voiced opposition to the ordinance, and about the same number of attendees submitted written cards in opposition. Staff was asked to contact the Chamber of Commerce to coordinate a series of meetings designed to discuss the ordinance in detail, and to determine if revisions could be made to make the ordinance acceptable. An estimated project schedule is provided in this report that outlines several steps intended to facilitate Chamber / City Staff discussion, but to move quickly to adopt the interim ordinance and rescind the Commercial and General Retail moratorium that remains in effect. Council is scheduled to consider a moratorium extension in a separate action on February 15th. OPTIONS 1. Approve the ordinance as drafted. 2. Change the date of the joint public hearing to Tuesday, March 7th. 3. Postpone action on the interim nonresidential ordinance until the February 22na work session. RECOMMENDATION The estimated project schedule is aggressive and requires several meetings within a short period of time. Should Council wish to pursue a different approach, staff will contact the Chamber of Commerce to revise the ordinance review process. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Monday, February 14th Tuesday, February 15th Tuesday, February 15th Wednesday, February 16th Wednesday, February 16th Friday, February 18th Tuesday, February 22nd Wednesday, February 23ra February 24th - March 1st Thursday, March 2na Chamber Committee / City Staff Mtg. (6:00 am) Chamber Committee / City Staff Mtg. Council considers ordinance to conduct joint public hearing on March 2nd Open Meeting: proposed revisions / options First notice of March 2nd public hearing in newspaper Staff report delivered to City Council and P&Z City Council work session P&Z work session Continued opportunities for further Chamber / City Staff discussion Joint Council / P&Z public hearing; P&Z makes recommendation; Council adopts ordinance; moratorium is lifted; PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW December 14th, 1999 December 14th, 1999 January 4th, 2000 January 11th, 2000 January 25th, 2000 January 26th, 2000 February 8th, 2000 City Council work session review GR & C moratorium ordinance adopted (Ordinance No. 99-474) GR & C moratorium ordinance amended (Ordinance No. 2000-017) City Council work session review City Council work session P&Z work session Joint City Council / P&Z public hearing FISCAL INFORMATION None. ATTACHMENTS Draft Ordinance ? ~'D~-''Respectfully submi.~v - Assistant City Manager, Development Services ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING A SPECIAL CALLED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2000 PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE §211.007 (b) AT THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 6 O'CLOCK P.M. TO CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION AND ACTION UPON AN ORDINANCE CREATING NONRESIDENTIAL INTERIM REGULATIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF DENTON; PRESCRIBING NOTICE OF THE JOINT MEETING PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE §211.007 (d); PROVIDING FOR A RECOMMENDATION BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION; SUPERCEDING THE PROVISIONS OF ALL ORDINANCES ON THE SAME SUBJECT MATTER TO THE EXTENT OF A CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Denton City Council pursuant to its home rule powers and Section 219 of the Texas Local Government Code, has adopted a new Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has previously appointed a City of Denton Code Committee to undergo the process of recommending new development regulations that are consistent with the policies set forth in the new Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, in order to implement some of the policies pertaining to nonresidential uses contained within the new Comprehensive Plan, on an interim basis pending the adoption of new development regulations, the City Council deems it prudent to consider the adoption of interim regulations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Texas Local Government Code §211.007, the City Council desires to have a joint public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 2, 2000 at the City Council Chambers at 6 o'clock p.m, regarding the interim regulations.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Texas Local Government Code §211.007 (d), the City Council wishes to prescribe notice of the time and place of the joint public hearing in a manner that is efficient and economical; and WHEREAS, by a two-thirds vote of the City Council, as required by Texas Local Government Code §211.007 (d) the prescribed notice of the joint public hearing shall be as · hereinafter set forth within this ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE; THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the Denton City Council and the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission shall conduct a special called joint public hearing pursuant to Texas Local Government Code §2!1.007 (b) on Thursday, March 2, 2000 at the City Council Chambers located in City Hall at 215 East McKinney Street in Dent6n, Texas, at 6 o'clock p.m. to receive public input, consider, make recommendation, and/or take appropriate action concerning a proposed ordinance adopting nonresidential interim regulations implementing policies contained within the new Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 2. That the notice of the time and place for the joint public hearing on March 2, 2000 shall be given on two separate occasions as follows: Before the 15th day before the public hearing, a notice of the date, time and place of the public hearing shall be published in the Denton Record-Chronicle in two separate places; the legal notice section and.another location in the newspaper separate from the legal notice section; and Before the 7th day before the public hearing, a notice of the date, time and place of the public hearing shall be published in the Denton Record-Chronicle in two separate places; the legal notice section and another location in the newspaper separate from the legal notice section. SECTION 3. The notice provided for herein is authorized by Subsection 211.007(d) of the Local Government Code. This ordinance and the notice requirements contained within this ordinance supercede any other notice requirements set forth in state law and other City of Denton ordinances including without limitation the notice requirements set forth in Subsections 211.006(a) and 211.007(b) and (c) of the Local Government Code and Section 35-7 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton. SECTION 4. The Planing and Zoning Commission may make its recommendation to the City Council concerning the proposed nonresidential interim regulations at the same joint public hearing meeting or may defer its recommendation to a later Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. If the recommendation is deferred to a later Planning and Zoning Commission meeting such recommendation may be referred to the City Council at any special or regular City Council meeting regardless of the time between such Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and City Council meeting. SECTION 5. This ordinance supercedes the provisions of any other ordinance on the same subject matter to the extent of a conflict. SECTION 6. The findings contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein as if fully set forth within the body of this ordinance. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. ' PAGE 2 PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2000. JACK MILLER, MAYOR' ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: PAGE 3 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET February 15, 2000 City Manager's Office Mike Jez, City Manager SUBJECT Consider nominations and appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions. BACKGROUND The following is a list of current Board/Commission vacancies/nominations: Kevin Kasparek has resigned from the Keep Denton Beautiful Board. This is a nomination for Council Member Kristoferson. Lynn Ebersole has resigned from the Human Services Advisory Committee. This is a nomination for Council Member Kristoferson. Nicholas Eassa has resigned from the Construction Advisory and Appeals Board. This is a nomination for Council Member Cochran. Joe Bendzick has resigned from the Zoning Board of Adjustment. This is a nomination for Mayor Miller. If you require any further information, please let me know.