Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
March 1, 2011 Agenda
AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL March 1, 2011 After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas will convene in a Work Session on Tuesday, March 1, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: WORK SESSION 1. Citizen Comments on Consent Agenda Items This section of the agenda allows citizens to speak on Consent Agenda Items only. Each speaker will be given a total of three (3) minutes to address any items he/she wishes that are listed on the Consent Agenda. A Request to Speak Card should be completed and returned to the City Secretary before Council considers this item. 2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for March 1, 2011. 3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the FY 2009-10 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and annual audit. 4. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding drafting a new Planned Development (PD) ordinance for inclusion within the Denton Development Code, with associated development standards. The discussion will include a general overview of PD's, a brief history of PD's in Denton, effect of 2002 city-wide rezoning, and rescinding of previous PD districts. (1)CA10-0007) 5. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding general terms and provisions of a Vulnerable Road User ordinance. 6. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the governance of the Airport as recommended in the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan. Following the completion of the Work Session, the City Council will convene in a Closed Meeting 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 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. CLOSED MEETING 1. Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations regarding Real Property - Under Texas Government Code §551.072; Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code Sec. 551.071. 1. Discuss, deliberate, and receive information from Staff and provide Staff with direction pertaining to the acquisition or the condemnation of City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2011 Page 2 permanent utility easement and temporary constriction easement tracts the location of which being generally north and west of the Denton Municipal Airport in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. Consultation with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues associated with the acquisition or condemnation of the tracts referenced above where a public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City's attorneys to the Denton City Council under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Conduct of the State Bar of Texas, or would jeopardize the City's legal position in any administrative proceedings or potential litigation. 2. Discuss, deliberate, and receive information from Staff and provide Staff with direction pertaining to the acquisition or the condemnation of a permanent easement tract for utilities, at the northeast corner of Loop 288 and Stuart Road, the location of which being S. McCracken Survey, Abstract Number 871, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. Consultation with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues associated with the acquisition or condemnation of the tract referenced above where a public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City's attorneys to the Denton City Council under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Conduct of the State Bar of Texas, or would jeopardize the City's legal position in any administrative proceedings or potential litigation. B. Deliberations regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.086; and Consultation with Attorneys -Under Texas Government Code, Sec. 551.071. 1. Receive a presentation and hold a discussion regarding a public power competitive and financial matter regarding offers from power suppliers and other entities for firm energy and services (RFP 4601- Request for Proposals for Firm Energy Supply and Service); and provide Staff with direction. C. Consultation with Attorneys - Under Texas Government Code Sec. 551.071. 1. Receive a briefing from the City's attorneys and provide them with direction pertaining to a vulnerable road users ordinance in the City of Denton where public discussion of these legal matters would conflict with the duty of the City's attorneys to the Denton City Council under the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Conduct of the State Bar of Texas or would jeopardize the City's legal position in any administrative proceedings or potential litigation. 2. Receive a briefing from and a consultation with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues concerning the possible constriction and installation of a combined heat and power (CUP) tri-generation station for the City in the industrial district in the City of Denton, Texas; and discuss, deliberate and provide the City's attorneys with direction and any recommendations regarding such legal matter. A public discussion of this legal matter City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2011 Page 3 would conflict with the duty of the City's Attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar or Texas. 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 §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. GOVT. CODE, §551.001, ET SE Q. (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 §551.071-551.086 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: REGULAR MEETING 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. U. S. Flag B. Texas Flag "Honor the Texas Flag - I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible." 2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamations/Awards I. Social Work Month 2. Presentation of the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association 3. National Surveyor's Week 3. 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, purchase orders, contracts, and other items to be approved under the Consent Agenda (Agenda Items A - L). 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 A - L below will be approved with one motion. If items are pulled for separate discussion, they may be considered as the first items following approval of the Consent Agenda. City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2011 Page 4 A. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Budget and Annual Program of Services of the City of Denton to allow for an adjustment to the Materials Management Fund of three million nine hundred thousand dollars ($3,900,000) to provide for additional funding capacity for costs of goods sold in the Warehouse; declaring a municipal purpose; providing a severability clause; providing an open meetings clause; and providing an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval B. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for the purchase of Water Treatment Chemicals for the City of Denton Water Treatment Plants; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4643-Annual Contract for Water Treatment Chemicals awarded to the lowest responsible bidder for each item in the annual estimated amount of $850,000). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0). C. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network for the partial replacement of the roof at City Hall East by way of an interlocal agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 4671-Partial Replacement of the Roof at City Hall East awarded to Castro Roofing of Texas in the amount of $778,500). D. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for Eagle Drive Drainage Improvements; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4623-awarded to the lowest responsible bidder meeting specification, Humphrey and Morton Constriction Company, Inc., in the amount of $1,478,128.30). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). E. Consider approval of a resolution allowing Tejas Storytelling Association to be the sole participant allowed to distribute/not sell alcoholic beverages at the Texas Storytelling Festival on March 12, 2011, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommends approval (7-0). Staff recommends approval of the Texas Storytelling Festival request. F. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to approve a second amendment to an Airport Lease Agreement approved by Resolution R87- 054 dated September 15, 1987, between the City of Denton, Texas, and First Financial Resources, Inc. at Denton Municipal Airport which will extend the lease term an additional ninety (90) days; and providing an effective date. The Airport Advisory Board recommends approval (4-0). G. Consider approval of the minutes of: February 1, 2011 February 7, 2011 February 8, 2011 City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2011 Page 5 H. Consider adoption of an ordinance finding that a public purpose and necessity exists and finding that public welfare and convenience requires the acquisition through agreement or eminent domain of an approximate 1.989 acre utility easement, and a 3306 acre temporary constriction easement for the relocation and installation of municipal utilities relating to Denton Municipal Electric projects located generally north and west of the Denton Municipal Airport and situated in the F.P. Johnson, C.R. Green, J.F. Myers, and H.F. Brimmett Surveys, Abstract Number 1699, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. L Consider adoption of an ordinance finding that a public purpose and necessity exists and finding that public welfare and convenience requires the acquisition through agreement or eminent domain of an approximate 0.041 acre utility easement for utilities at the north east corner of Loop 288 and Stuart Road, the location of which being S. McCracken Survey, Abstract Number 871, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. J. Consider adoption of an ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 2009-174 and Ordinance No. 20 10-3 12 and amending Section 2-29 of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances relating to Rules of Procedure for the City Council of the City of Denton; and declaring an effective date. K. Consider approval of a resolution allowing Metzler's Food and Beverage to be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at the 35 Conferette March 10-March 13, 2011, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date. Staff recommends approval of Metzler's Food and Beverage request. L. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a full property damage release of all claims by the City of Denton, Texas against Lindsay Palmer and Bobby Palmer, in settlement of a claim arising on or about May 1, 2009; authorizing the City Manager and City Attorney to take actions necessary to finalize settlement of this claim; and declaring an effective date. 4. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION A. Consider adoption of an ordinance directing the publication of Notice of Intention to issue $11,500,000 in principal amount of Certificates of Obligation of the City of Denton for General Government and Solid Waste projects; and providing for an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3- 0). B. Consider adoption of an ordinance directing the publication of Notice of Intention to issue $21,000,000 in principal amount of Certificates of Obligation of the City of Denton for Wastewater and Electric System projects; and providing for an effective date. The Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval (3 - 0). City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2011 Page 6 C. Consider a request for a variance to the Noise Ordinance by the North Texas Rail Group for the purpose of constriction activities of the DCTA A-train passenger rail. The exception is requested for constriction work to begin at 9:00 a.m. instead of 1:00 p.m. on Sundays, from March 2 through June 30, 2011. D. Continue consideration of adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation, with an overlay district, on 6.836 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, within the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (ZIO-0007, 1411 E. University Drive) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with an overlay district (3-2). DUE TO MORE THAN 20% OPPOSITION FROM THE LAND AREA WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE REQUEST, A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE BY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL. E. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2003-258 relating to the Economic Development Partnership Board ("The Board") to add to the membership of the Board and to expand the duties of the Board to include branding and marketing for the Denton Municipal Airport in support of the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan and to further include duties related to Airport economic development incentives; repealing all conflicting ordinances and portions thereof, and providing an effective date. F. Consider approval of a resolution amending Resolution No. R2009-015 to establish a standing committee of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas to be known as the City Council Airport Committee to advise and assist the City Council regarding City of Denton Municipal Airport Matters; alternatively assigning such duties to an existing City Council committee; and providing for an effective date. G. Consider approval of a resolution establishing an Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee to advise and assist the Airport Manager regarding City of Denton Municipal Airport matters; and providing for an effective date. H. Consider nominations/appointments to the following boards and commissions: 1. Community Development Advisory Board 2. Human Services Advisory Committee 3. Public Art Committee 4. Traffic Safety Commission 5. Zoning Board of Adjustment 6. Designate a chairman for the Downtown Denton Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone Board City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2011 Page 7 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) to allow a theater use in a Downtown Commercial General zoning district. The approximately 1.27 acre site is located on the south side of East Hickory Street, approximately 200 feet west of the intersection of East Hickory Street and Bell Avenue. (,SIO-0007, Black Box Theatre) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-0). (Cunningham) B. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, concerning a Specific Use Permit for a new self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower on property located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district classification and use designation. The approximately 14.9 acre property is generally located east of Teasley Lane and south of the Denton County Transportation Authority railroad right-of-way and is more commonly known as lot 6A, Block B of the Shady Oaks Industrial Park Addition; and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of this request (6-1). (,SI0-0010, DCTA A- Train North ('011innal cation Toirer) 6. CONCLUDING ITEMS A. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting AND Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide reports about items of community interest regarding which no action will be taken, to include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; or an announcement involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. B. Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. C. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2011 Page 8 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 2011 at 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. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the FY 2009-10 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and annual audit. BACKGROUND Each year, the City hires an independent accounting firm to conduct an audit of the City's basic financial statements. The purpose of the audit is to express an opinion as to whether the City's financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City. The annual audit report is comprised of four major components: 1) the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), 2) Management Letter (when appropriate), 3) Single Audits, and 4) Auditor's Communication to the Audit Committee. The CAFR represents the entire financial position of the City, specifically for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010. The document includes the independent auditor's opinion of management's representations within the annual report. The auditors have provided the City a clean opinion (unqualified), which means that in the opinion of Weaver, LLP, the City's financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City. A clean or unqualified opinion is the best opinion that may be rendered in an audit of the financial statements. The Weaver audit specifically included the following items: • Audit of the City's CAFR in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. • Performance of a Single Audit, which is an audit of the City's expenditures of State and Federal grant awards. • A review, analysis, and evaluation of the City's financial accounting systems and internal controls. The auditor's examination of internal controls was conducted at a level sufficient to gain an understanding of the internal control stricture to determine the nature, timing, and extent of audit procedures. The auditors did not perform an audit of internal controls, but performed limited tests of internal controls for the purpose stated above. Additionally, the auditors examined, on a test basis, evidence supporting amounts and disclosures in the combined financial statements. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 As separate items, you will find a copy of the City's 2010 CAFR and the Single Audit Report. Since the presentation to the Audit/Finance Committee, the Single Audit Report has been updated to also include state grant award information. The updated report is included in the backup materials for your reference. In addition, the Independent Auditor's Report is included in the CAFR, and the Auditor's Communication to the Audit/Finance Committee is also provided. Representatives from Weaver will be present to provide their opinion and to answer any questions that you may have. In prior years, the auditor has also included a Management Letter in their presentation to the Audit/Finance Committee and the City Council. However, the auditor has not indicated any areas for improvement in FY 2010, and as a result, a Management Letter is unnecessary for this fiscal year. This is a significant achievement for an organization of our size, and accordingly, we are very proud of our staff for all of their hard work and dedication over the past year. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards or Commissions) On February 15, 2011, the Audit/Finance Committee unanimously recommended approval to forward the CAFR and annual audit to the City Council for consideration. EXHIBITS 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) 2) PowerPoint Presentation 3) Single Audit Report 4) Auditor's Communication to the Audit Committee Respectfully Submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010 CITY MANAGER George C. Campbell ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER Jon Fortune Prepared by: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer Antonio Puente Haivev Jaivis Assistant Director of Finance Controller Kevin Aim Mullen, CPA Codv Wood Assistant Controller Assistant Controller David Wilson Diane Chang, CPA Electric Accounting Manager Senior Grants Accountant Kurt Breyfogle Randall Mahaffey, CIA Senior Utilities Accountant Senior Auditor Ed Lane, CPA Marti Billings Accountant III Accountant III Lori Allen Michelle McCallum Accounting Technician Budget and Municipal Court Manager Mike Halsema Caroline Finlev Financial Analyst Treasury- Administrator City of Denton, Texas Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For Year Ended September 30, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTORY SECTION (UNAUDITED): Transmittal Letter i Organizational Chart ..........................................................................................................................................vii Certificate of Achievement viii List of Principal Officials ....................................................................................................................................ii FINANCIAL SECTION: Independent Auditors' Report ..............................................................................................................................1 Management's Discussion and Analysis .............................................................................................................3 Basic Financial Statements: Government-wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets ........................................................................................................................13 Statement of Activities ..........................................................................................................................14 Fund Financial Statements: Governmental Fund Financial Statements: Balance Sheet .................................................................................................................................16 Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets ......17 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances ..........................................18 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities ..............................................................19 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget to Actual General Fund ...............................................................................................................................21 Proprietaiy Fund Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets .................................................................................................................22 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Assets .............................................26 Statement of Cash Flows ................................................................................................................28 FiduciaiN- Fund Financial Statements: Statement of Assets and Liabilities ................................................................................................30 Notes to Basic Financial Statements ...........................................................................................................31 Required Supplementaiy Information: Schedule of TMRS Funding Progress and Contributions - Last Three Fiscal Years 63 Schedule of Denton's Firemen's Relief and Retirement Plan Funding Progress and Contributions - Last Three Valuation Years 63 Schedule of Other Post Employment Benefits Funding Progress and Contributions Last Three Valuation Years ..................................................................................................................64 Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget to Actual: Debt Seiwice Fund ................................................................................................................................65 Combining Balance Sheet - Nonma_jor Governmental Funds .....................................................................68 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Nonmajor Governmental Funds ............................................................................................................70 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget to Actual: Recreation 72 Police Confiscation ........................................................................................................................73 Tourist and Convention ..................................................................................................................74 Gas Well Revenues Fund ...............................................................................................................75 City of Denton, Texas Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For Year Ended September 30, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page FINANCIAL SECTION (continued) : Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules (continued): Combining Statement of Net Assets - Internal Service Funds 78 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Assets - Internal Service Funds ..........................................................................................................................80 Combining Statement of Cash Flows - Internal Service Funds ..................................................................82 Combining Statement of Assets and Liabilities - Agency Funds 84 Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities - Agency Funds 85 Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds: Comparative Schedules by Source ..............................................................................................................87 Schedule by Function and Activitv .............................................................................................................88 Schedule of Changes by Function and Activity 89 STATISTICAL SECTION (TUNA UDITED) : Table 1 Net Assets by Component 92 2 Changes in Net Assets ...............................................................................................................................94 3 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds ....................................................................................................98 4 Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds ................................................................................100 5 Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property .........................................................102 6 Property Tax Rates (Per $100 of Assessed Value) - Direct and Overlapping Governments ..................103 7 Principal Property Taxpayers ..................................................................................................................105 8 Property Tax Levies and Collections ......................................................................................................106 9 Ratio of Outstanding Debt by Type .........................................................................................................108 10 Ratio of General Bonded Debt Outstanding ............................................................................................110 11 Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt ..........................................................................111 12 Pledged Revenue Coverage .....................................................................................................................112 13 Demographic and Economic Statistics ....................................................................................................114 14 Principal Employers ................................................................................................................................115 15 Full-Time Equivalent City- Government Employees by Function/Program ............................................116 16 Operating Indicators by Function/Program .............................................................................................118 17 Capital Asset Statistics by Function/Program .........................................................................................120 OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: Schedule of Expenditures - Budget and Actual - General Fund ...............................................................123 CITY F DENTON i . 1 215 E. MCKINNEY • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 • (940) 349-8200 • FAX (940) 349-7206 February 11, 2011 The Honorable Mavor and Members of the Citv Council Citv of Denton Denton, Texas It is with great pleasure that kve present to you a copy of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of the City of Denton (the City) for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010. The purpose of the report is to provide the City Council, management, citizens, and other interested parties with detailed information concerning the City's financial condition. THE REPORT The Texas Local Government Code 103.001) requires an annual audit for municipalities. In addition, the City Charter (Section 2.13) requires a Certified Public Accountant who, as of the end of the fiscal year, shall make an "independent audit of accounts" and prepare a report to the City Council and the City Manager. This document fulfills the above mentioned requirements, and the independent auditor's opinion is included in the report for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010. The CAFR is presented in three sections: Introductory, Financial, and Statistical. The Introductory Section includes this transmittal letter, the City's organizational chart, and a list of principal officials. The Financial Section includes the Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), Basic Financial Statements, Required Supplementaiv Information, Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Other Supplemental Information, as well as, the independent auditors' report. The Statistical Section includes selected financial and demographic information, generally presented on a multi-year basis. The responsibility for both the accuracy of the presented information and the completeness and fairness of the presentation of the data, including all disclosures, rests with the City. To the best of our knowledge and belief, the enclosed data is accurate in all material respects and is reported in a manner designed to fairly present the results of our operations in each of the various funds reported by the City. All disclosures necessary to enable the reader to gain an understanding of the City's financial activities have been included. The accounting firm of Weaver, LLP has issued an unqualified opinion on the City of Denton's financial statements for the period ended September 30, 2010. Asa recipient of federal and state grant awards, a separate audit is prepared to meet the requirements of the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and related OMB Circular A-133. As a part of the City's single audit, tests are conducted to determine that the City has complied with applicable laws and regulations related to federal awards. Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) immediately follows the independent auditors' report and provides a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements. The MD&A complements this letter of transmittal and should be read in conjunction with it. PROFILE OF THE GOVERNMENT Originally incorporated on September 26, 1866, the City of Denton is now 94.901 square miles and has an estimated population of 121374. The City is a home rule city and operates under the Council-Manager form of government. The elected seven-member council consists of a Mayor and six Council Members. The Mayor and two Council Members are elected at large, while the remaining representatives are elected from single member districts. The City Council enacts local laws, determines policy, and adopts the annual budget, and the City Manager is the chief executive officer for the City. i The City of Denton is located in the northern portion of the Dallas/Fort Worth Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA). The City is a part of the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, and is situated at the apex of a triangle based by Dallas (38 miles to the southeast) and Fort Worth (36 miles to the southwest) providing excellent access to and from all parts of the area. The City provides a full range of general government services to its citizens including: public safety (police and fire protection); public works (construction and maintenance of highways, streets and infrastructure); parks and recreation; libraiv, ; planning and zoning; economic development; and general administrative services. The City's enterprise fund operations consist of a utility system and solid waste operations. The City's utility system provides electric, water and wastewater services. The internal service operations consist of the Materials Management, Fleet Services, Risk Retention, Health Insurance, and Technology Services funds. The Materials Management Fund accounts for the financing of Warehouse and Purchasing services which are provided to other City departments. The Fleet Services Fund accounts for the financing of goods and services provided by the municipal garage to other departments within the City. The Risk Retention Fund accounts for the accumulation of resources for the payment of workers' compensation, general liability claims, and insurance policies. The Health Insurance Fund accounts for administration of the self-insurance program in the City-. The Technology Services Fund provides support for the various information and computer systems within the City. Reprographics, which is part of the Technology Services Fund, provides imaging, print shop, and office services to City departments. The financial statements presented include all government activities, organizations, and functions for which the City is financially accountable as defined by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). LOCAL ECONOMY Due to its proximity to Dallas and Fort Worth, Denton enjoys a low average unemployment rate of 6.6% compared to the state average of 8.2% (as of November 2010). While both of these rates are higher than prior years, they are also significantly lower than the U.S. unemployment rate of 9.8% (as of November 2010). According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' January 2011 Regional Economic Update, "Texas' economy continues to expand at a moderate pace, with some notable acceleration in the final weeks of 2010 and early 2011. Payroll employment continues to grow as indicators increasingly point to an improved labor market in 2011. The energy sector remains strong, and while construction and housing activity are only now beginning to stabilize, hard-hit sectors such as manufacturing are increasing current and planned future production levels. The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' Texas Leading Index suggests further economic growth in the spring." The above news bodes well not only for the state of Texas as a whole, but also, for the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex region which includes the City of Denton. In addition, as depicted in the below chait from the Reserve Bank of Dallas' January 2011 Regional Economic Update, the Texas Leading Index reached a two- year high in November 2010 which further supports the prospect of future economic expansion. T c Lee, ti I i..3 r c1!_'.:'. C I - r 1 I g: h i n Jax 130 125 120 11~ .r 110 -1,00 '9 °9,6 '97 °98 '99 '00 '01 °,0'03 '04 =0,5. '06 '07 '08 '0 °10 O URCE-Federal Roserwa Bank of aIIlas,_ ii The City's tax base continues to grow over the long term, but the pace of the expansion has slowed recently. The Denton Central Appraisal District's fiscal year 2009-10 certified appraisal roll shows an increase of 0.58% over the fiscal year 2008-09 certified value. This is substantially lower than the 11.91% growth realized in FY 2007-08 and the 3.31% growth in FY 2008-09. The appraised values for FY 2010-11 declined by 1.55% compared to FY 2009-10 values, but even with this decline, certified values are 14.5% higher than the FY 2006-07 values. After property tax revenues, the second largest source of revenue in the General Fund is sales tax. Representing approximately 24% of overall revenue in the General Fund, sales tax is a significant revenue source that is heavily dependent upon a variety of economic factors. For FY 2009-10, total sales tax revenues equaled $20,484,954, which is $18,182, or 0.09%, more than the prior year collections of $20,466,772. For FY 2010- 11, sales tax collections are expected to increase by 2.0% over FY 2009-10 receipts. Employment and personal income levels continue to be a major indicator of sales tax growth, and as depicted in the below chart from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' December 2010 Regional Economic Update, the prospect of continued job growth in the state of Texas is strong. J -c~ID C ro1 h L1 el to P1ck 1icih it 1In 201('0 h-101o swfjobs Index 11,0 133 1 25 10.6 10.4 ~ 127 102 115 10.0 9.,6 1 9: 1 05 441 100 VV SCiWRC federal Reserve Bank cfDallas:6-laverAna fics.. FY 2009-10 also was filled with exciting economic development news for the City of Denton. Listed below are just a few of the highlights: • Rayzor Ranch Market Place completed over 360,000 square feet of retail and commercial space. Sam's and Walmart anchor the Market Place with 137,381 and 189,929 square feet respectively. Sam's is estimated at $9.7 million and Walmart at $18.8 million in valuation. In addition, two banks, First State Bank and First United Bank opened in 2010, along with several restaurants and retail tenants. • The mixed-use development, Unicorn Lake, continues to experience growth. Foundation Management completed their 45,000 square foot office/training facility in 2010. The medical services company included 5,000 square feet of meeting space that Nvill be made available to the community for events. The space comes complete with catering kitchen privileges. • U.S. Aviation completed their 28,400 square feet expansion at a $1.2 million valuation. The company officially gained fixed base operator (FBO) status at the Denton Municipal Airport. The expansion provides space for FBO services and flight training room space. U.S. Aviation is the official flight training school for Chinese commercial aircraft pilots. The company provides a complete package of housing, flight training and other services to the students. • Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) began construction of the two rail transit stations in Denton. Service will begin in June 2011. The Downtown transit station is expected to generate other development surrounding the site. The Medpark transit station, located near the Denton Regional Medical Center, will serve as the main park and ride station. DCTA buses will serve both stations, transporting riders to the stations and/or their final Denton locations. iii • Target Corporation, a top Fortune 50 company, announced Denton as their chosen site for a 400,000 square foot frozen and refrigerated food distribution center. The facility Nvill be located on the southeast corner of Airport and Corbin Roads. Target is progressing through the development process and plans to begin construction on their site in the spring of 2011, Nvith a completion date in 2012. This $100 million project received a 65% tax abatement for five years from the City of Denton to help offset costs to improve Airport and Corbin Roads. • Schlumberger, a Fortune 500, French-ovried oilfield service company, purchased a portion of Granite Point Industrial Park for their regional maintenance facility for oilfield equipment. The company purchased a 150,000 square foot building and approximately 35 acres of land. This Nvill be one of three new regional maintenance facilities in the U.S. for Schlumberger. Renovation of the building is estimated at $10 million. No valuation has been provided at this point for the state-of-the-art calibration and maintenance equipment to be housed in the facility. The company plans to be operational from the Denton plant in April 2011. A Chapter 380 grant previously given to Granite Point was transferred to the company as an incentive for the Denton location. LONG-TERM FINANCIAL PLANNING In conjunction with this document, interested parties are encouraged to read the City of Denton's FY 2010-11 Annual Budget document. This document details the City's long-term financial policies, program accomplishments, and other key initiatives. The document also includes the long-term financial forecasts for each of the major funds, and a summary of the assumptions that are included in these plans. In addition, the budget document provides an overview of the adopted Capital Improvement Program and planned future debt issuances. The budget document can be obtained from the City of Denton's Finance Department by calling (940) 349-8531. The Annual Budget can also be accessed through the City's web site at «-«-«-.citvofdenton.com and selecting the Finance Department under the "Departments and Services" link. RELEVANT FINANCIAL POLICIES The City of Denton maintains reserve balances for emergencies. The major proprietaiy funds strive to maintain a working capital reserve equivalent to approximately 60 days of operating expenditures. In the General Fund, the reserve was previously established at a level of 12-15% of budgeted expenditures (approximately 45 to 60 days of operating expenditures) to provide stability and flexibility for the organization. As a result of the recent national economic recession, bond rating agencies have increased their scrutiny on the financial stability of local governments, and accordingly, the rating agencies have indicated that a reserve level below 15% would be considered low compared to similarly rated cities. Therefore, the City updated our target reserve balance level to 15-20% of budgeted expenditures for the General Fund in FY 2010-11, which Nvill be more commensurate with a similarly rated city. This increased reserve requirement Nvill address the rating agency concerns, and more importantly, Nvill provide the City with increased financial flexibility in the future. As described in the accompanying CAFR document, the undesignated and unreserved fund balance is $21.5 million, or 23.6%, of annual budgeted expenditures for the General Fund for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010. The City of Denton has adopted an Investment Policy which guides the investment of all City funds. In accordance with State law, the policy is revieNved annually by the City Council to ensure that public funds are being invested in a conservative and prudent fashion. In addition, the City also annually reviews and approves a Debt Management policy. The purpose of this policy is to provide general guidelines regarding the issuance of City debt and the use and limitation of such debt. The City complied with all aspects of the Investment and Debt Management policies during fiscal year 2010. iv MAJOR INITIATIVES Public safety continues to be a major initiative for the City. The FY 2009-10 adopted budget included additional contributions to the Firemen's Relief and Retirement Fund in connection with the new meet and confer contract that was approved by the City Council in September 2009. Additional funding was also provided for personal protective equipment in the Fire Department to replace bunker gear sets for the City's firefighters. Funding was also provided in the Municipal Court to replace a municipal case management program that was originally purchased in 1998. The City also continues to emphasize community service programs. The FY 2009-10 budget included additional funding for the Code Enforcement Department for moNving, trash and debris removal, as well as funding for a public relations campaign and the second year implementation of the substandard structures program. Funding was also included for a new neighborhood outreach program to connect City planning staff with the City's various neighborhood groups and associations. An additional Health Inspector position was also included in the adopted budget to perform annual inspections at approximately 500 establishments. AWARDS AND ACKOWLEDGEMENTS The Government Finance Officers' Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009, for the twenty-fifth consecutive year. In order to be awarded the Certificate of Achievement in Financial Reporting, the City must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. This report satisfies both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. The Certificate of Achievement is held for a period of one year only. We believe our current Comprehensive Annual Financial Report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. The City also received the GFOA award for Distinguished Budget Presentation for its fiscal year 2009-10 Annual Budget. In order to qualify for the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award, the City's budget document was judged according to its compliance with specific guidelines established by GFOA. These guidelines help ensure that Denton's budget is distinguished as an operations guide, financial plan, policy document, and communications device. The City has submitted its fiscal year 2010-11 Annual Budget to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. We believe it continues to meet the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award criteria. In 2010, the City's Purchasing Department earned the Excellence in Procurement Award from the National Purchasing Institute, Inc. (NPI) for the thirteenth year in a row. This award is achieved by those organizations that demonstrate excellence in procurement by achieving a high score on standardized criteria designed to measure innovation, professionalism, productivity, and leadership. NPI represents purchasing officials employed by national, state, and local governments; educational institutions; and tax-supported and public entities throughout the country-. v We would like to thank the City Council for their strong leadership and support that helped make the presentation of this report possible. We would also like to thank the Finance staff, department directors, division heads and especially the Accounting Division staff for their diligent efforts in the preparation of the annual financial report. I)*I Jon Fortune Bryan Langley Assistant City Manager Chief Financial Officer vi CITYOFDENTON CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL CHART Citizens City Council FBoards, Commissions, & Committees City Attorney I Municipal Judge Internal Audit I City Manager F Administrative Services City Manager's Office City Secretary Reprographics Public Communications Office Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager Economic Development Electric Operations Fire Finance Solid Waste Operations I Library I Water Operations I Parks & Recreation I Accounting/Budget/Treasury I Wastewater Operations I Police Strategic Services Streets I Municipal Court Animal Services Traffic /Street Lighting Materials Management Planning Environmental & Substainability Customer Service Building Inspections Transportation/Ai rp o rt Code Enforcement Facilities/Fleet Social Services 1 Human Resources 111 llevelopnrent Review Risk Management I Gas Well Review Technology Services "11 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Denton Texas For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2009 A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public employee retirement systems whose comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. AIN h President % S 5~y4st'i'•Executive Director i ~I I CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS List of Principal Officials September 30, 2010 ELECTED OFFICIALS Title Name Mayor Marl-, Burroughs Mayor Pro-Tem Pete Kamp Councilmember Jim Engelbrecht Councilmember Dalton Gregor- Councilmember Charlye Heggins Councilmember James King Councilmember Chris Watts CITY OFFICIALS Title Name City Manager George C. Campbell Assistant City Manager HoNvard Martin Assistant City Manager Jon Fortune Assistant City Manager Fred Greene Chief Financial Officer Bryan Langley City Attorney Anita Burgess Municipal Judge Robin Ramsay Citv Secretaiv Jennifer Walters ix CITY F DENTON weaver INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT To The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council City of Denton, Texas We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Denton, Texas (the City) as of and for the year ended September 30, 2010, which collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and the significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Denton, Texas, as of September 30, 2010, and the respective changes in financial position, and, where applicable, cash flows, thereof and the budgetary comparison for the General Fund for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated February 11, 2011, on our consideration of the City of Denton's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. The accompanying Management's Discussion and Analysis (on pages 3 through 12), the schedules of TMRS funding progress and contributions and Denton firemen's relief and retirement plan funding progress and contributions (on page 63), and the schedule of other post employment benefits (on page 64) are not a required part of the basic financial statements but are supplementary information required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. We have applied certain limited procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation of the required supplementary information. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it. AN IINI)EP ~ =NT WEAVER AND TIDWELLLLR DALLAS MEN ~ 3 LLt TILLY CLRTII PUBLI` d JSAN°a C; , . 1115 12 1 :FlEITIT DRVL. SUITE 1400. DALLAS. TX 75251 NTFR,, ur I P 1" '970 F:(972) 702 81,21 City of Denton Page 2 Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements. The introductory section, combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules, capital assets used in the operation of governmental funds schedules, the statistical section, and the other supplementary information as listed in the table of contents are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules, capital assets used in the operation of governmental funds schedules, and the other supplementary information have been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The introductory section and the statistical section have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and accordingly, we express no opinion on them. WEAVER AND TI DWELL, L.L.P. Dallas, Texas February 11, 2011 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 The City of Denton's Management's Discussion and Analysis is designed to (a) assist the reader in focusing on significant financial issues, (b) provide an overview of the City's financial activity, (c) identify changes in the City's financial position (its ability to address the next and subsequent years' challenges), (d) identify any material deviations from the financial plan (the approved budget), and (e) identifi- individual fund issues or concerns. Since the Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) is designed to focus on the current year's activities, resulting changes and currently known facts, please read it in conjunction with the Transmittal Letter (beginning on page i) and the City's financial statements (beginning on page 13). FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS • The assets of the City exceeded its liabilities at the close of the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010 by $593,464,538 (net assets). Of this amount, $177,978,505 (unrestricted net assets) may be used to meet the government's ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. • The City's total net assets increased by $25,484,337. This increase can be attributed to the net revenue of the governmental activities, business-type activities and the contribution of capital assets by developers. • As of September 30, 2010, the City's governmental funds reported combined fund balances of $83,690,310, an increase of $6,706,012 in comparison with the prior fiscal year, due primarily to higher franchise fees, higher fees for service from gas well royalties, higher intergovernmental transfers from the Texas Department of Transportation , lower capital expenditures, and new proceeds from the issuance of long- term debt. Approximately 423% of the $83,690,310, or $35,365,204, is available for spending at the government's discretion (unreserved fund balance). • At the end of the fiscal year, the unreserved and undesignated fund balance for the General Fund was $21,526,779, or 23.6% of budgeted general fund expenditures. • The City's total noncurrent liabilities increased by $94,769,262 during the fiscal year. The primaiv reason for the increase was the issuance of $58.8 million of tax and revenue bonds, $4.1 million of general obligation bonds, $61.1 million of certificates of obligation bonds, along with the normal pay down of general obligation bonds and certificates of obligation bonds of $11.9 million, and the normal pay down of revenue bonds of $15.9 million. OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The Management's Discussion and Analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the City of Denton's basic financial statements. The City's basic financial statements are comprised of three components: (1) government-wide financial statements, (2) fund financial statements and (3) notes to the financial statements. This report also contains other supplementaiv information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves. Government-wide Financial Statements. The government-wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the City's finances in a manner similar to private-sector business. The statement of net assets presents information on all of the City's assets and liabilities, with the difference between the two reported as net assets. Over time, increases or decreases in net assets may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating. The statement of activities presents information showing how the City's net assets changed during the most recent fiscal year. All of the current year's revenues and expenses are taken into account regardless of when cash is received or paid. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that 'kvill only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned but not used vacation leave). Both the statement of net assets and the statement of activities are prepared using the accrual basis of accounting as opposed to the modified accrual basis. 3 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 In its Statement of Net Assets and the Statement of Activities, the City is divided between two kinds of activities: • Governmental activities. Most of the City's basic services are reported here, including police, fire, libraries, development, public services and operations, public works, building inspection, technology services and general administration. Property taxes, sales taxes and franchise fees finance most of these activities. • Business-type activities. The City charges a fee to customers to cover the cost of services it provides. The City's utility systems (electric, water and wastewater) and solid waste activities are reported here. The government-wide financial statements can be found on pages 13 - 15 of the report. Fund Financial Statements. A fund is a grouping of related accounts used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. Fund financial statements provide detailed information about the most significant funds, not the City as a whole. Some funds are required to be established by state law or bond covenants. However, the City Council establishes many other funds to help it control and manage money for particular purposes or to show that it is meeting legal responsibilities for using certain taxes, grants and other monies. The below illustration summaries the major features the City's financial statements. Major Features of City of Denton's Government-wide and Fund Financial Statements Fund Statements Government-wide Statements Governmental Funds Proprietary Funds Scope Enti re City gove rn me nt Activities of the City that are Activities the City operates • proprietary, to private businesses: police, fire and parks electric, water, wastewater utilities and solid waste operations Required financial Statement of net assets Balance Sheet Statement of net assets statements Statement of activities Statement of revenues, Statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in expenses and changes in fund balances fund net assets Statement of cash flows Accounting basis and Accrual accounting and Modified accrual accounting Accrual accounting and measurement • economic resources focus and current financial economic resources focus resources focus Types of asset/liability All assets and liabilities, Only assets expected to be All assets and liabilities, both information both financial and capital, used up and liabilities that financial and capital, short- short-term and long-term come due during the year or term and long-term soon thereafter; no capital assets included Type of inflow/outflow All revenues and expenses Revenues for which cash is All revenues and expenses information during year, regardless of received during or soon after during year, regardless of when cash is received or the end of the year; when cash is received or paid paid expenditures when goods or services have been received and payment is due during the year of soon thereafter 4 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 All of the funds of the City can be divided into three categories: governmental funds, proprietary funds and fiduclaiv funds. • Governmental funds. The majority of the City's basic services are reported in governmental funds, which focus on how money flows into and out of those funds and the balances left at year-end that are available for spending. These funds are reported using an accounting method identified as the modified accrual basis of accounting, which measures cash and all other financial assets that can readily be converted to cash. The governmental fund statements provide a detailed short-term view of the City's general government operations and the basic services it provides. Governmental fund information helps the reader determine whether there are more or fewer financial resources that can be spent in the near future to finance the City's programs. By comparing information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements, readers may better understand the long-term impact of the government's near-term financing decisions. The relationship or differences between governmental activities (reported in the Statement of Net Assets and the Statement of Activities) and governmental funds are detailed in a reconciliation following the fund financial statements. The City of Denton maintains eleven governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the governmental funds balance sheet and in the governmental funds statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances for the general fund, debt service fund and capital projects fund, all of which are considered to be major funds. Data from the other eight governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for seven of these non-major governmental funds along with an aggregate of all other is provided in the form of combining statements elsewhere in this report. • Proprietary funds. The City charges customers for certain services it provides, whether to outside customers or to other units within the City. These services are generally reported in proprietary funds. Proprietary funds are reported in the same manner that all activities are reported in the Statement of Net Assets and the Statement of Activities. In fact, the City's enterprise funds (a component of proprietary funds) are similar to the business-type activities that are reported in the government-kvide statements but provide more detail and additional information, such as cash flows. The internal service funds (the other component of proprietary funds) are utilized to report activities that provide supplies and services for the City's other programs and activities, such as the City's municipal warehouse, the City's self-insurance fund and equipment maintenance function. Because these services benefit both governmental and business-type functions, they have been included in both the governmental and business-type activities in the government-wide financial statements. The City of Denton maintains four enterprise funds. The City uses enterprise funds to account for its electric, water and wastewater systems and solid waste operations. The funds provide the same type of information as the government-Nvide financial statements, only in more detail and include some of the internal service fund-type activity. The City considers all enterprise funds to be major funds. • Fiduciary funds. Fiduciary funds are used to account for resources held for the benefit of parties outside the government. Fiduciary funds are not reflected in the government-wide financial statement because the resources of those funds are not available to support the City's own programs. The accounting used for fiduclaiv funds is much like that used for proprietary funds. Agency funds are a component of fiduciary funds. Agency funds differ from other fiduclaiv funds in that they do not typically involve a formal trust agreement. Agency funds are used to account for situations where the City's role is purely custodial, such as receipt, temporary investment and remittance of flduciaiy resources to individuals, private organizations, or other governments. The City maintains three fiduclaiv funds which include the payroll fund, developers' escrow fund, and other agency funds. The City uses agency funds to account for the collection and payment of the City's payroll and associated liabilities, employee-purchased insurance and other similar relationships. Notes to the financial statements. The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government-wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements can be found on pages 31 - 61 of this report. 5 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS As of September 30, 2010, the City's combined net assets were $593,464,538, of which $154,011,484 can be attributed to governmental activities and $439 453 054 attributed to business-type activities. This analysis focuses on the net assets (Table 1) and changes in net assets (Table 2) of the City's governmental and business- type activities. The largest portion of the City's net assets (64.4%) reflects its investment in capital assets (e.g., land, building, machineiv and equipment), less any related debt used to acquire those assets that is still outstanding. The City uses these capital assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending. Although the City's investment in its capital assets is reported net of related debt, it should be noted that the resources needed to repay this debt must be provided from other sources, since the capital assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities. Table 1 Net Assets (in thousands) Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 Current and other assets S 101393 S 97A00 S 328,805 S 238,660 S 430,198 S 336,060 Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 201,765 198,891 530,975 510,132 732,740 709,023 Total assets 303,158 296,291 859,780 748,792 1,161938 1,045,083 Long-term liabilities outstanding 126.908 129,944 371.122 273317 498.030 403.261 Other liabilities 21239 24,037 49,205 49,805 71A44 73,842 Total liabilities 149,147 153,981 420327 323,122 569,474 477,103 Net assets: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 104,636 101110 277356 281463 381,992 384,573 Restricted 1895 L948 30,599 33380 33A94 35328 Unrestricted 46A80 38,252 131,498 109,827 177,978 148,079 Total net assets S 154,011 S 142310 S 439,453 S 425,670 S 593,464 S 567,980 6 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Governmental activities increased the City's net assets by $11,701,719 and business-type activities increased the City's net assets by $13,782,618. The key elements of these increases are contained in Table 2. Table 2 Changes in Net Assets (in thousands) Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 Revenue: Program Revenue: Charges for services $ 14,781 $ 14,925 $ 187,914 $ 199,308 $ 202,695 $ 214,233 Operating grants and contributions 3,407 2,281 - - 3,407 2,281 Capital grants and contributions 15,206 3,641 5,154 8,100 20,360 11,741 General Revenue: - - Property tax 43,145 43,187 - - 43,145 43,187 Sales tax 20,485 20,467 - - 20,485 20,467 Franchise tax 17,458 15,670 - - 17,458 15,670 Hotel occupancy tax 1,302 1,239 - - 1,302 1,239 Beverage tax 348 339 - - 348 339 Bingo tax 22 23 - - 22 23 Investment Income 685 2,413 1,654 6,075 2,339 8,488 Miscellaneous 5,691 3,328 257 558 5,948 3,886 Totalrevenue 122,530 107,513 194,979 214,041 317,509 321,554 Expenses: General government 29,570 27,482 - - 29,570 27,482 Public safety 47,999 45,368 - - 47,999 45,368 Public works 15,768 15,816 - - 15,768 15,816 Parks and recreation 12,854 12,755 - - 12,854 12,755 Interest on long-term debt 5,121 5,733 - - 5,121 5,733 Electric - - 114,904 124,902 114,904 124,902 Water - - 27,220 28,636 27,220 28,636 Wastewater - - 20,560 19,909 20,560 19,909 Solid waste - - 18,029 18,037 18,029 18,037 Total expenses 111,312 107,154 180,713 191,484 292,025 298,638 Increase in net assets before transfers 11,218 359 14,266 22,557 25,484 22,916 Transfers 483 846 (483) (846) - - Increase in net assets 11,701 1,205 13,783 21,711 25,484 22,916 Net assets at beginning of year 142,310 141,105 425,670 403,959 567,980 545,064 Net assets at end of year $ 154,011 $ 142,310 $ 439,453 $ 425,670 $ 593,464 $ 567,980 Governmental activities. The most significant governmental activities expense Nvas in providing public safety, which incurred expenses of $47,998,906. These expenses Nvere funded by revenues collected from a variety of sources, Nvith the largest being from property taxes, which are $43,144,645 for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010. The most significant portion of public safety is the cost of personnel, which totaled $38,989,681. Other significant governmental activities expense for the City includes general government, which incurred $29,569,535 in expenses, of which $17,588,107 represented personnel charges. Increased expenses for governmental activities includes an increase of $1.1 million for general government due to personnel costs, an increase of $1.2 million in public safety- due to personnel cost, and interest on long-term debt decreased $0.6 million. The $14.7 million increased revenues in governmental activities are mainly due to a increase of $1.1 million in operating grants and contributions due primarily to a CDBG grant, $11.6 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 million in capital grants and contribution due to a funding agreement with Texas Department of Transportation for the distribution of regional toll revenues, $1.8 million in higher franchise tax due to a 1% increase to the rate, and $1.7 million in lower investment income due to the current rate environment. Business-type activities. Business-type activities increased the City's net assets by $13,782,618, accounting for 54.1% of the growth in the entity-wide net assets. A key element of this increase is capital contributions which represent a major revenue source for the Water and Wastewater funds during the current fiscal year, producing $5.2 million in revenue. Contributions of assets arise from new property development within the City. Charges for Electric residential services provided $2.1 higher revenue while Energy Cost Adjustment (ECA) rate revenue decreased by $9.4 million with $10.7 million in lower energy costs, for a net increase of $3.4 million to business type income. Water and Wastewater collected $2.2 million and $1.0 million respectively in Impact fees. Interest income decreased $4.4 million to $1.7 million during FY 2010 for all Business-type funds. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S FUNDS As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. Governmental funds. The focus of the City's governmental funds is to provide information on near-term inflows, outflows, and balances of resources available to spend. Such information is useful in assessing the City's financing requirements. In particular, unreserved fund balance may serve as a useful measure of a government's net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year. As of the end of the current fiscal year, the City's governmental funds reported a combined ending fund balance of $83.7 million, an increase of $6.7 million in comparison with the prior year. Approximately $35.4 million constitutes unreserved, undesignated fund balance, which is available for spending at the government's discretion. The remainder of the fund balance is reserved to indicate that it is not available for new spending because it has already been committed 1) to purchase or construct capital assets ($45.0 million), or 2) to pay debt service ($3.4 million). The General Fund is the chief operating fund of the City. At September 30, 2010, the unreserved and undesignated fund balance of the General Fund was $21.5 million, or 23.6% of budgeted general fund expenditures. The fund balance of the General Fund decreased by $13 million during the current fiscal year. The change in fund balance is primarily due to expenditures, including other financing uses, of $82.9 million and $81.6 million of revenue, including other financing sources. Revenues were higher compared to the previous year due to higher franchise fees of $1.8 million, offset by lower investment revenues of $0.5 million. Expenditures were higher compared to the previous year due to $1.2 million of additional general government personnel costs and $1.2 million of additional public safety personnel costs. Personnel costs for general government were higher due to a one time merit raise, while personnel for public safety continued to receive their step raises. Both general government and public safety personnel cost was higher due to increased benefit costs. The entire balance of the capital projects fund is reserved for capital construction and acquisition. At the end of the fiscal year, the capital projects fund has a fund balance of $45.0 million, an increase of $9.6 million. In 2010, the City received $6.9 million of proceeds from the issuance of debt and $10.7 million of regional toll revenues from the Texas Department of Transportation for street construction while expending $123 million on construction and acquisition. In addition, the capital projects fund received $03 million in interest income, transfers in from the gas well fund of $3.1 million, and other government contributions of $0.5 million. The debt service fund has a total fund balance of $3.4 million, all of which is reserved for the payment of debt service. The overall increase in the debt service fund balance of $0.9 million was due to a $0.2 million decrease in debt issuance cost and a decrease of $0.6 million in principal and interest costs while revenues remained level. 8 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Proprietary funds. The City's proprietary funds provide the same type of information found in the government-wide financial statements, but in more detail. Unrestricted net assets in Electric, Water, and Wastewater at September 30, 2010 are $75.6 million, $31.6 million, and $15.2 million respectively. Solid Waste has unrestricted net assets of $2.2 million. The results reflect an increase of unrestricted net assets in the Electric fund of $0.5 million, an increase in the Water fund of $15.1 million, an increase in the Wastewater fund of $2.9 million, and an increase of less than $0.1 million in Solid Waste. Other factors concerning the finances of these funds have already been addressed in the discussion of the City of Denton's business-type activities. BUDGETARY HIGHLIGHTS During fiscal year 2009-2010, one formal amendment to adjust the City's of Denton Annual Program of Services -,vas approved by Council. The Council increased appropriations in the Airport Gas Well Fund to accommodate a transfer of $1.0 million to the General Fund in order to reimburse airport operation expenditures in prior years. GENERAL FUND HIGHLIGHT For fiscal year 2009-10, General Fund actual expenditures (including transfers) on a budgetary- basis were $87.0 million compared to the budget of $91.2 million. The $4.2 million variance was primarily due to reduced personnel costs of $0.5 million and reduced operations costs of $0.8 million for the general government, $0.9 million due to reduced personnel costs for public safety, reduced costs of $0.2 million in public works, and $0.6 million due to reduced costs for parks and recreation. Actual revenue (including transfers and sale of capital asset) on a budgetaiv basis was $85.8 million compared to the original budget of $873 million. Of the $1.6 million revenue variance, approximately $0.4 million was due to increased ad valorem tax collection, $1.1 million for decreased sales tax collection, $0.6 million for decreased franchise fees due to lower energy costs, $0.2 million for decreased cable franchise fees, and $0.1 million increased for building and electrical permit fees make up most of the revenue variance. The City of Denton's unreserved and undesignated fund balance at September 30, 2010 is $21.5 million, or 23.6% of budgeted expenditures. Below is a listing of the ending unreserved balances for the past two years, as well as fiscal year 2009-10 projected and actual. For those years where the actual ending balance has exceeded the policy level, the following year's budget has included utilization of that amount for one-time expenditures. By using the fund balance primarily for one-time expenditures, the financial impact on future budgets is reduced. Actual Actual Adopted Projected Actual 9/30/08 9/30/09 9/30/10 9/30/10 9/30/10 Unreserved balances $25,377,493 $22,794,955 $17,954,757 $18,907,705 $21,526,779 % of total budgeted expenditures 30.51% 25.52% 19.7% 21.46% 23.59% Policv level 12-15.00% 12-15.00% 12-15.00% 12-15.00% 12-15.00% The largest revenue source of the General Fund's budget was the ad valorem tax. Denton's ad valorem tax rate is comprised of two components. The first is the operations and maintenance component that is used to calculate revenue for the City's General Fund operations. The second component is the debt portion that is used to calculate revenue to pay the City's general debt service obligations. The Denton Central Appraisal District's certified appraisal roll shows an increase of 0.58% over the prior year certified value. The current property tax year included $279 million of new construction that was added to the tax roll. Offsetting those new appraised values, the City's values -,were reduced by $107 million due to a large hospital receiving a property tax exemption. In addition, existing property on the tax rolls decreased by $242 million in 2009 as compared to 2008. The 2009-10 ad valorem tax rate remained the same as the prior year at $0.66652 per $100 of valuation. 9 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 CAPITAL ASSET AND DEBT ADMINISTRATION Capital assets. At the end of fiscal year 2010, the City- had $732,740,219 invested in a broad range of capital assets, including police and fire equipment, buildings, park facilities, roads, bridges and water and sewer lines (see Table 3 below). This amount represents a net increase (including additions and deductions) of $23,717,556, or 3.4% over the prior fiscal year. Table 3 Capital Assets at Year-end (Net of Accumulated Depreciation, in Thousands) Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Totals 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 Land $ 12,923 $ 12,923 $ 10,749 $ 10,407 $ 23,672 $ 23,330 Landfill improvements - - 4,895 849 4,895 849 Buildings and improvements 41,500 41,240 7,811 5,200 49,311 46,440 Plant, machineiv and equipment 18,973 18,503 120,578 115,930 139,551 134,433 Water rights - - 55,010 55,706 55,010 55,706 Infrastructure 87,715 91,736 245,543 235,806 333,258 327,542 Construction in progress 40,654 34,489 86389 86,234 127,043 120,723 Total capital assets $ 201,765 $198,891 $530,975 $510,132 $732,740 $709,023 This year's major additions included: Description Amount Southwest Storage Area and Booster Station $ 5,538,908 Electric Distribution Upgrades 4,937,487 Landfill Cell 3A 3,575,589 Rayzor Ranch North Phase 1 and 2 2,180,633 Highway 380 Water and Wastewater Relocation 1,842,335 Denia Water Main atRoselawn 1,730,483 A1diDistribution Center 1,714,904 Moris Street Drainage 1,504,769 Landfill Scalehouse 1,410,092 Duncan Street Drainage 629,770 Old North Street Drainage 591,732 Equipment and Tire Wash 526,582 Electric Meters and Divices 482,006 Total $ 26,665,290 Additional information on the City's capital assets can be found in note IV. D. on pages 41 - 43 of this report. 10 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Debt. At year-end, the City had $498.7 million in bonds and notes outstanding as compared to $411.4 million at the end of the prior fiscal year, an increase of 21.2%, as shown in Table 4. Table 4 Outstanding Debt at Year-end (in thousands) Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Totals 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 General obligation bonds $ 77,315 $77359 $ 39,600 $ 4366 $ 116,915 $ 81,725 Certificates of obligation 45,728 48,611 126,207 11,244 171,935 59,855 Revenue bonds - - 209,885 266,705 209,885 266,705 Notes - - - 3,141 - 3,141 Total $123,043 $125,970 $375,692 $285,456 $498,735 $411,426 These amounts do not include net unamortized premiums/(discounts) of $16,597,767 or net deferred gain/(loss) on refunding of ($9,531,555). During the current fiscal year, the City issued debt three times. The new debt resulted primarily from the issuance of $58.8 million in combination tax and revenue bonds for Texas Municipal Power Association obligations, $61.1 million in certificates of obligation bonds primarily for utility operations, $4.1 million in general obligation bonds and $39.2 million in general obligation refunding bonds. Normal pay down in general obligation bonds was $5.4 million, in certificates of obligation was $6.5 and in utility revenue bonds was $15.9 million. The note to the Army Corp. was paid off in 2010. No utility revenue bonds were issued in 2010 since management elected to utilize general obligation bonds as a result of lower interest rates. Moody's Investor's Service, Inc. has given the City's General Obligation Bonds and the Certificates of Obligation a rating of "Aa2." Standard and Poor's Corporation has given both the City's General Obligation Bonds and Certificates of Obligation an "AA" rating. The City's Utility Revenue Bonds carry "Aa2" and "AA-" ratings by Moody's and Standard and Poor's, respectively. The City is permitted by Article XI, Section 5 of the State of Texas Constitution to levy- taxes up to $2.50 per $100 of assessed valuation for general governmental services including the payment of principal and interest on general obligation long-term debt. The current ratio of tax-supported debt to certified assessed value of all taxable property is 2.25%. Other long-term liabilities. The City maintains a self-insurance program for general liability, auto liability, public officials' liability, errors and omission liability, police professional liability, and workers' compensation. Private insurance companies cover claims for property loss over $50,000 per occurrence and for workers' compensation and liability over $500,000 per occurrence. The City has a reserve for claims and judgments of $2.6 million outstanding at year-end compared with $3.9 million at the end of the prior fiscal year. Other obligations include accrued vacation pay and sick leave. More detailed information about the City's long-term liabilities is presented in Note IV. G., on pages 46 - 52 of this report. ECONOMIC FACTORS AND NEXT YEAR'S BUDGETS AND RATES While growth for the Denton community is expected to be slow for the short term, demands for city services is expected to remain strong over the long term. As a result, the 2010-11 Budget includes an ad valorem tax rate of $0.68975/$100 valuation, a increase of 2323 cents from the prior year. While sales tax has declined over the past year, revenue is projected to increase 2.0% in FY2010-11. Expenditures were also reduced by approximately $3.0 million in the General Fund in response to declining revenue projections. The 2009-10 budget includes no base rate increases for electric customers. The Water budget includes a 9% rate increase for all residential and commercial rates. No base rates changes are proposed for wastewater retail or wholesale customers. Various rate increases were adopted for Solid Waste residential, commercial and landfill customers. Other minor fee adjustments kvere also approved for the electric, water, and solid waste fee schedules. 11 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the City's finances for all those with an interest in the City's finances. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the City of Denton Finance Department, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas 76201. 12 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit I STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Primary Government Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total ASSETS: Current assets: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 47,872,136 S 121,244,391 $ 169,116,527 Receivables, net of allowances: Taxes 4,520,652 - 4,520,652 Accounts - 11,479,168 11,479,168 Unbilled utility service - 8,211,549 8,211,549 Interest 198,952 492,505 691,457 Other 3,579,124 - 3,579,124 Internal balances (13,296,147) 13,296,147 - Due from other governments 2,104,713 - 2,104,713 Inventory 8,181,198 - 8,181,198 Prepaid items - 60,568,215 60,568,215 Deferred debt issuance costs 148,173 287,127 435,300 Total current assets 53,308,801 215,579,102 268,887,903 Noncurrent assets: Restricted assets: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value 46,786,647 110,861,536 157,648,183 Escrow deposits 241,000 51,184 292,184 Accrued interest 190,067 431,431 621,498 Deferred debt issuance costs 866,571 1,882,112 2,748,683 Capital assets not being depreciated: Land 12,922,784 10,749,322 23,672,106 Construction in progress 40,654,423 86,388,337 127,042,760 Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation: Buildings 41,500,031 7,810,828 49,310,859 Plant, machinery and equipment 18,973,178 120,578,018 139,551,196 Infrastructure 87,714,897 245,542,865 333,257,762 Landfill improvements - 4,895,097 4,895,097 Water rights - 55,010,439 55,010,439 Total noncurrent assets 249,849,598 644,201,169 894,050,767 Total assets 303,158,399 859,780,271 1,162,938,670 LIABILITIES: Current liabilities: Accounts payable 4,128,898 12,427,862 16,556,760 Retainage payable 50,884 90,912 141,796 Deposits - 4,078,470 4,078,470 Accrued interest 725,703 170,150 895,853 Due to other governments 231 - 231 Noncurrent liabilities due within one year 15,989,700 21,907,935 37,897,635 Other liabilities 508,883 - 508,883 Unearned revenue 18,058 2,701,334 2,719,392 Payable from restricted assets: Accounts payable 680,700 2,019,650 2,700,350 Retainage payable 135,649 508,649 644,298 Accrued interest - 5,300,424 5,300,424 Total current liabilities 22,238,706 49,205,386 71,444,092 Noncurrent liabilities: Noncurrent liabilities due in more than one year 126,908,209 371,121,831 498,030,040 Total noncurrent liabilities 126,908,209 371,121,831 498,030,040 Total liabilities 149,146,915 420,327,217 569,474,132 NET ASSETS: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 104,636,239 277,356,195 381,992,434 Restricted: Restricted for debt service 2,894,676 26,426,016 29,320,692 Restricted for capital acquisition - 4,172,907 4,172,907 Unrestricted 46,480,569 131,497,936 177,978,505 Total net assets S 154,011,484 S 439,453,054 S 593,464,538 The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 13 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Program Revenues Operating Capital Charges for Grants and Grants and Functions/Programs Expenses Services Contributions Contributions Primary government: Governmental activities: General government $ 29,569,535 $ 3,551,733 $ 2,727,458 $ 1,365,511 Public safety 47,998,906 6,431,007 800,113 425,501 Public works 15,767,926 1,425,683 (210,172) 12,250,267 Parks and recreation 12,854,336 3,372,579 89,686 1,165,145 Interest expense 5,121,329 - - - Total governmental activities 111,312,032 14,781,002 3,407,085 15,206,424 Business-type activities: Electric system 114,903,831 119,156,314 - - Water system 27,219,944 28,407,954 - 2,077,935 Wastewater system 20,560,600 21,917,651 - 3,075,633 Solid waste 18,028,832 18,432,245 - - Total business-type activities 180,713,207 187,914,164 - 5,153,568 Total primary government S 292,025,239 S 202,695,166 $ 3,407,085 $ 20,359,992 General revenues: Taxes: Property tax Sales tax Franchise fees Hotel occupancy tax Beverage tax Bingo tax Investment income Miscellaneous Transfers Total general revenues and transfers Change in net assets Net assets at beginning of year Net assets at end of year The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 14 Exhibit II Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Assets Priman- Government Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total $ (21,924,833) $ - $ (21,924,833) (40,342,285) - (40,342,285) (2,302,148) - (2,302,148) (8,226,926) - (8,226,926) (5,121,329) - (5,121,329) (77,917,521) - (77,917,521) - 4,252,483 4,252,483 - 3,265,945 3,265,945 - 4,432,684 4,432,684 - 403,413 403,413 - 12,354,525 12,354,525 (77,917,521) 12,354,525 (65,562,996) 43,144,645 - 43,144,645 20,484,954 - 20,484,954 17,457,994 - 17,457,994 1,302,617 - 1,302,617 347,940 - 347,940 22,611 - 22,611 684,709 1,653,515 2,338,224 5,690,969 257,379 5,948,348 482,801 (482,801) - 89,619,240 1,428,093 91,047,333 11,701,719 13,782,618 25,484,337 142,309,765 425,670,436 567,980,201 $ 154,011,484 $ 439,453,054 $ 593,464,538 15 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit III BALANCE SHEET GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Other Total General Capital Governmental Governmental Fund Debt Service Proiects Funds Funds ASSETS: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value S 19,373,330 S 3,359,179 S 45,486,834 S 12,550,951 S 80,770,294 Receivables, net of allowances for uncollectibles: Taxes 4,208,643 312,009 - - 4,520,652 Accrued interest 83,889 13,646 184,786 50,277 332,598 Other 2,622,864 - - 842,412 3,465,276 Interfund receivables 136,235 - - 231,083 367,318 Due from other governments 371,943 - - 1,732,770 2,104,713 Total assets 8 26.796904 8 3.684.834 8 45.671.620 8 15.407.493 8 91.560.8.51 LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES LIABILITIES: Accounts payable 2,932,040 64,455 565,400 436,814 3,998,709 Retainage payable - - 135,649 31,887 167,536 Interfund payables - - - 231,083 231,083 Due to other governments 231 - - - 231 Other liabilities 508,883 - - - 508,883 Deferred revenues 1,828,971 265,844 869,284 2,964,099 Total liabilities 5,270,125 330,299 701,049 1,569,068 7,870,541 FUND BALANCES: Reserved for: Debt service - 3,354,535 - - 3,354,535 Capital projects - - 44,970,571 - 44,970,571 Unreserved, undesignated reported in: General fund 21,526,779 - - - 21,526,779 Special revenue funds - - - 13,838,425 13,838,425 Total fund balances 21,526,779 3,354,535 44,970,571 13,838,425 83,690,310 Total liabilities and fund balances S 26,796,904 S 3,684,834 S 45,671,620 S 15,407,493 S 91,560,851 The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 16 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit IV RECONCILIATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Total fund balances - governmental funds (Exhibit HI) $ 83,690,310 Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net assets are different because: Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources and therefore are not reported as assets in governmental funds. 201,765,313 Certain receivables will be collected next year but are not available soon enough to pay for the current period's expenditures and therefore are reported as deferred revenues in the funds. 2,946,041 An internal charge to business-type activities is not recorded at the fund level. (6,780,128) Several internal service funds are used by the City's management. The assets and liabilities of the internal service funds are included with governmental activities. Total assets of internal service funds $ 30,656,801 Less: Deferred debt issuance costs (21,068) Less: Capital assets reported above (8,154,777) Less: Total liabilities of internal service funds (16,151,449) Liabilities reported below 5,224,856 11,554,363 Long-term liabilities, including bonds payable, are not due and payable in the current period and therefore are not reported as liabilities in the funds. Long-term liabilities at year-end consist of: General obligation bonds payable S (77,314,650) Certificates of obligation payable (45,727,950) Bond (premiums)/discounts (1,798,093) Deferred loss on refunding 922,433 Deferred charges for issuance costs 1,014,744 Accrued interest on the bonds (725,703) Capital leases payable (1,771,952) Municipal pension obligation (2,559,629) Other post employment benefits liability (1,643,810) Compensated absences (9,559,805) (139,164,415) Total net assets of governmental activities (Exhibit 1) S 154,011,484 The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this exhibit. 17 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit V STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Other Total General Capital Governmental Governmental Fund Debt Service Projects Funds Funds REVENUES: Taxes S 50,049,759 S 14,132,173 S - $ 1,302,617 S 65,484,549 Licenses and permits 1,198,552 - - - 1,198,552 Franchise fees 17,457,994 - - - 17,457,994 Fines and forfeitures 4,378,064 - - 450,095 4,828,159 Fees for services 5,989,349 - - 6,254,909 12,244,258 Investment revenue 237,559 46,616 284,856 115,678 684,709 Intergovernmental 770,164 - 10,687,979 5,180,895 16,639,038 Miscellaneous 317,460 - 247,380 437,293 1,002,133 Total revenues 80,398,901 14,178,789 11,220,215 13,741,487 119,539,392 EXPENDITURES: Current: General government 22,037,729 - 16,828 4,854,928 26,909,485 Public safety 43,156,478 - - 1,241,964 44,398,442 Public works 6,516,276 - - 1,441 6,517,717 Parks and recreation 9,837,073 - - 1,234,988 11,072,061 Capital outlay 691,880 - 12,313,423 1,159,359 14,164,662 Debt service: Principal retirement 185,154 9,092,649 - - 9,277,803 Bond issuance costs - 78,919 - - 78,919 Interest and other charges - 5,095,246 - - 5,095,246 Total expenditures 82,424,590 14,266,814 12,330,251 8,492,680 117,514,335 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (2,025,689) (88,025) (1,110,036) 5,248,807 2,025,057 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Refunding bonds issued - 3,460,000 - - 3,460,000 Payment to refunded bond escrow agent - (3,774,764) - - (3,774,764) Issuance of long-term debt - - 6,905,000 - 6,905,000 Premium on debt issuance - 342,473 156,209 - 498,682 Sale of capital assets 160,495 - - - 160,495 Transfers in 1,018,218 1,000,563 3,679,792 117,196 5,815,769 Transfers out (421,200) - - (7,963,027) (8,384,227) Total other financing sources (uses) 757,513 1,028,272 10,741,001 (7,845,831) 4,680,955 Net change in fund balances (1,268,176) 940,247 9,630,965 (2,597,024) 6,706,012 Fund balances at beginning of year 22,794,955 2,414,288 35,339,606 16,435,449 76,984,298 Fund balances at end of year S 21,526,779 5S 3,34,535 S 44,970,571 S 13,838A25 S 83,690,310 The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 18 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit VI RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Net change in fund balances - total governmental funds (Exhibit V) $ 6,706,012 Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because: Governmental funds report capital outlays as expenditures. However, in the statement of activities the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expense. This is the amount by which capital outlay ($14,164,662) exceeded depreciation and retirement of assets ($14,804,865 = $16,539,591 total governmental minus $1,734,726 internal service portion) in the current period. (640,203) Revenues in the statement of activities that do not provide current financial resources are not reported as revenues in the funds. Such amounts are recorded in the funds when considered available. 288,193 The net effect of various miscellaneous transactions involving capital assets (i.e., sales, trade-ins and donations) is to increase net assets. 2,266,513 Bond proceeds provide current financial resources to governmental funds, but issuing debt increases long-term liabilities in the statement of net assets. Repayment of bond principal is an expenditure in the governmental funds, but the repayment reduces long-term liabilities in the statement of net assets. This is the amount by which proceeds exceeded payments. 2,522,804 Fund-level financials report costs related to bonds as expenditures; however, these are deferred and amortized on the government-wide financials. (326,864) Certain expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and therefore are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. (1,912,740) Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as insurance and telecommunications, to individual funds. A portion of the net revenue (expense) of certain internal service funds is reported with governmental activities. The amount reported with business-type activities is $3,152,663. 2,798,004 Change in net assets of governmental activities (Exhibit II) $ 11,701,719 The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 19 CITY F DENTON 20 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit VII STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET TO ACTUAL GENERAL FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Adjustments - Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Actual Budgetary Budgetary Positive Original Final Amounts Basis Basis (Negative) REVENUES: Taxes S 50,661,275 S 50,661,275 S 50,049,759 S - S 50,049,759 S (611,516) Licenses and permits 1,101,015 1,101,015 1,198,552 - 1,198,552 97,537 Franchise fees 18,165,833 18,165,833 17,457,994 - 17,457,994 (707,839) Fines and forfeitures 5,537,770 5,537,770 4,378,064 - 4,378,064 (1,159,706) Fees for services 6,033,748 6,033,748 5,989,349 - 5,989,349 (44,399) Investment revenue 650,000 650,000 237,559 - 237,559 (412,441) Intergovernmental 778,329 778,329 770,164 - 770,164 (8,165) Miscellaneous 217,700 217,700 317,460 - 317,460 99,760 Total revenues 83,145,670 83,145,670 80,398,901 - 80,398,901 (2,746,769) EXPENDITURES: Current: General government 28,169,800 28,225,053 22,037,729 4,181,158 26,218,887 2,006,166 Public safety 44,169,908 44,071,209 43,156,478 - 43,156,478 914,731 Public works 7,130,097 6,768,901 6,516,276 - 6,516,276 252,625 Parks and recreation 10,478,562 10,461,077 9,837,073 - 9,837,073 624,004 Capital outlay 591,799 610,684 691,880 - 691,880 (81,196) Debt service: Principal retirement 168,460 193,202 185,154 - 185,154 8,048 Total expenditures 90,708,626 90,330,126 82,424,590 4,181,158 86,605,748 3,724,378 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over expenditures (7,562,956) (7,184,456) (2,025,689) (4,181,158) (6,206,847) 977,609 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Sale of capital assets - - 160,495 - 160,495 160,495 Transfer in 4,202,340 4,202,340 1,018,218 4,181,158 5,199,376 997,036 Transfers out (531,278) (909,778) (421,200) - (421,200) 488,578 Total other financing sources (uses) 3,671,062 3,292,562 757,513 4,181,158 4,938,671 1,646,109 Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other sources over (under) expenditures and other uses (3,891,894) (3,891,894) (1,268,176) - (1,268,176) 2,623,718 Fund balances at beginning of year 22,794,955 22,794,955 22,794,955 - 22,794,955 - Fund balance at end of year S 18,903,061 S 18,903,061 S 21,526,779 S - S 21,526,779 S 2,623,718 Adjustments - Budgetary Basis are expenditures allocated to and reimbursed by other funds. These expenditures are recorded in the other funds' financials. The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 21 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS PROPRIETARY FUNDS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds Electric Water Wastewater Solid System System System Waste ASSETS: Current assets: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 75,448,849 $ 30,214,289 $ 13,319,440 $ 2,261,813 Receivables, net of allowances: Accounts 7,686,629 1,611,064 1,212,330 969,145 Unbilled utility service 5,581,927 1,083,944 865,296 680,382 Accrued interest 306,503 122,708 54,108 9,186 Other - - - - Interfund receivables 6,154,229 290,142 71,648 - Merchandise inventor- - - - - Prepaid items 60,568,215 - - - Deferred debt issuance costs 103,160 114,276 49,321 20,370 Total current assets 155,849,512 33,436,423 15,572,143 3,940,896 Noncurrent assets: Restricted assets: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value 31,028,495 49,889,461 19,214,973 10,728,607 Escrow deposit - 50,000 1,118 66 Accrued interest 119,438 193,847 74,562 43,584 Total restricted assets 31,147,933 50,133,308 19,290,653 10,772,257 Deferred debt issuance costs 707,211 832,029 240,504 102,368 Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 148,537,460 196,937,157 157,213,047 28,287,242 Total noncurrent assets 180,392,604 247,902,494 176,744,204 39,161,867 Total assets 336,242,116 281,338,917 192,316,347 43,102,763 LIABILITIES: Current liabilities: Accounts payable 10,840,052 757,218 268,849 561,743 Retainage Payable - 55,988 31,878 3,046 Claims payable - - - - Compensated absences payable 602,696 490,119 296,009 309,779 Leases payable - - 95,611 449,436 Deposits 3,785,698 242,750 9,957 40,065 Accrued interest - - - 170,150 Interfund payables - - - - Unearned revenue 2,701,334 - - - Payable from restricted assets: Accounts payable 34,069 1,178,654 657,528 149,399 Retainage payable 74,717 327,380 52,896 53,656 Accrued interest 2,835,118 1,830,823 634,483 - Revenue and certificate and general obligation bonds 7,937,177 5,495,902 3,466,947 2,764,259 Total current liabilities paid from restricted assets 10,881,081 8,832,759 4,811,854 2,967,314 Total current liabilities 28,810,861 10,378,834 5,514,158 4,501,533 22 Exhibit VIII Governmental Activities - Total Internal Enterprise Service Funds Funds S 121,244,391 $ 13,811,335 11,479,168 - 8,211,549 - 492,505 56,107 - 113,848 6,516,019 - - 8,181,198 60,568,215 - 287,127 5,102 208,798,974 22,167,590 110,861,536 77,154 51,184 241,000 431,431 314 111,344,151 318,468 1,882,112 15,966 530,974,906 8,154,777 644,201,169 8,489,211 853,000,143 30,656,801 12,427,862 694,221 90,912 18,997 - 1,399,351 1,698,603 259,669 545,047 325,811 4,078,470 - 170,150 17,419 - 6,652,254 2,701,334 - 2,019,650 116,668 508,649 - 5,300,424 - 19,664,285 607,351 27,493,008 724,019 49,205,386 10,091,741 (continued) 23 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS PROPRIETARY FUNDS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds Electric Water Wastewater Solid System System System Waste Noncurrent liabilities: Leases payable $ - $ - $ 309,654 $ 969,476 Payable from restricted assets: General obligation bonds payable 4,333,126 21,050,184 12,058,576 4,065,767 Certificates of obligation 93,347,495 12,725,610 4,405,567 15,392,160 Revenue bonds payable, net of premium/discount 70,889,557 98,073,334 31,774,179 - Deferred amount on refunding (1,572,105) (3,462,164) (728,480) (134,139) Compensated absences payable 80,276 28,208 40,221 103,469 Claims payable - - - - Municipal pension obligation 505,929 439,926 298,766 321,082 Other post employment benefits 217,624 313,043 163,355 182,511 Landfill closure/postclosure costs - - - 4,929,624 Total noncurrent liabilities 167,801,902 129,168,141 48,321,838 25,829,950 Total liabilities 196,612,763 139,546,975 53,835,996 30,331,483 NET ASSETS: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 55,496,626 94,764,536 116,526,077 10,568,956 Restricted for debt service 8,509,928 12,913,454 5,002,634 - Restricted for capital acquisition - 2,465,582 1,707,325 - Unrestricted 75,622,799 31,648,370 15,244,315 2,202,324 Total net assets S 139,629,353 S 141,791,942 S 138,480,351 S 12,771,280 Adjustment to reflect inclusion of internal service fund activities related to enterprise funds. Net assets of business-type activities (Exhibit I) The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 24 Exhibit VIII Governmental Activities - Total Internal Enterprise Service Funds Funds $ 1,279,130 $ 919,677 41,507,653 1,699,634 125,870,832 983,140 200,737,070 - (5,896,888) (17,552) 252,174 39,692 - 2,045,102 1,565,703 265,330 876,533 124,685 4,929,624 - 371,121,831 6,059,708 420,327,217 16,151,449 277,356,195 3,713,870 26,426,016 - 4,172,907 - 124,717,808 10,791,482 $ 432,672,926 $ 14,505,352 6,780,128 $ 439,453,054 (concluded) 25 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET ASSETS PROPRIETARY FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds Electric Water Wastewater Solid System System System Waste OPERATING REVENUES: Utility services $ 116,828,978 $ 22,722,440 $ 20,044,756 S 17,954,404 Charges for goods and services - - - - Other fees 2,327,336 3,460,748 911,436 477,841 Miscellaneous - - - - Total operating revenues 119,156,314 26,183,188 20,956,192 18,432,245 OPERATING EXPENSES: Operating expenses before depreciation 106,598,618 17,170,088 13,432,696 14,919,456 Depreciation 5,675,112 5,300,220 5,607,403 3,156,613 Total operating expenses 112,273,730 22,470,308 19,040,099 18,076,069 Operating income 6,882,584 3,712,880 1,916,093 356,176 NON-OPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES): Investment revenue 758,956 606,005 228,200 60,354 Interest expense and fiscal charges (4,003,515) (5,433,368) (1,925,146) (643,635) Impact fee revenue - 2,224,766 961,459 - Gain (loss) on disposal of capital assets (43,637) 29,506 (57,579) 85,735 Other non-operating revenues (expenses) (1,743) 243,506 2,191 (600) Total non-operating revenues (expenses) (3,289,939) (2,329,585) (790,875) (498,146) Income before contributions and transfers 3,592,645 1,383,295 1,125,218 (141,970) CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS: Capital contributions - 2,077,935 3,075,633 - Transfers in - 65,100 295,502 148,319 Transfers out (218,264) (123,641) (619,417) (30,400) Total contributions and transfers (218,264) 2,019,394 2,751,718 117,919 Change in net assets 3,374,381 3,402,689 3,876,936 (24,051) Net assets at beginning of year 136,254,972 138,389,253 134,603,415 12,795,331 Total net assets at end of year $ 139,629,353 S 141,791,942 S 138,480,351 S 12,771,280 Change in fund net assets of proprietary funds Adjustment to reflect inclusion of internal service fund activities related to enterprise funds. Change in net assets of business-type activities (Exhibit II) The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 26 Exhibit IX Governmental Activities - Total Internal Enterprise Service Funds Funds S 177,550,578 $ - - 39,456,936 7,177,361 - - 852,561 184,727,939 40,309,497 152,120,858 35,712,314 19,739,348 1,734,726 171,860,206 37,447,040 12,867,733 2,862,457 1,653,515 96,278 (12,005,664) (165,416) 3,186,225 - 14,025 (114,801) 243,354 - (6,908,545) (183,939) 5,959,188 2,678,518 5,153,568 - 508,921 3,535,668 (991,722) (263,519) 4,670,767 3,272,149 10,629,955 5,950,667 422,042,971 8,554,685 S 432,672,926 $ 14,505,352 10,629,955 3,152,663 $ 13,782,618 27 CITY OF DENTON, TE-VAS STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS PROPRIETARY FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds Electric Water Wastewater System System System CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash received from customers $ 120,846,485 S 26,252,232 S 21,023,435 Cash paid to employees for services (7,585,523) (9,485,442) (5,429,695) Cash paid to suppliers (163,410,187) (5,943,899) (7,431,240) Net cash provided (used) by operating activities (50,149,225) 10,822,891 8,162,500 CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfers out (218,264) (123,641) (619,417) Transfers in - 65,100 295,502 Proceeds from issuance of debt 62,944,159 - - Net cash provided (used) by noncapital financing activities: 62,725,895 (58,541) (323,915) CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Principal payments on capital debt (12,965,577) (28,804,537) (16,710,521) Interest and fiscal charges (2,754,958) (5,703,227) (2,129,734) Principal payments under capital lease obligation - - (155,079) Proceeds from issuance of debt 38,838,498 35,469,592 17,021,178 Proceeds from impact fees - 2,224,766 252,684 Proceeds from sale of capital assets 159,625 29,506 - Acquisition and construction of capital assets (18,836,225) (10,418,985) (4,870,581) Net cash provided (used) by capital financing activities 4,441,363 (7,202,885) (6,592,053) CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Proceeds from sale and maturities of investment securities 72,655,560 67,601,873 26,861,893 Purchase of investment securities (89,507,323) (71,152,040) (28,072,223) Interest received on investments 935,153 804,800 309,838 Net cash used by investing activities (15,916,610) (2,745,367) (900,492) Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 1,101,423 816,098 346,040 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 9,101,483 7,822,549 3,137,862 Cash and cash equivalents at end of year 10,202,906 8,638,647 3,483,902 Investments, at fair value (Note W.A.) 96,274,438 71,465,103 29,050,511 Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value S 106,477,344 S 80,103,750 S 32,534,413 RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME TO NET CASH PROVIDED (USED) BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating income S 6,882,584 S 3,712,880 S 1,916,093 Adjustments: Depreciation expense 5,675,112 5,300,220 5,607,403 Decrease (Increase) in receivables 1,705,740 (27,760) 63,521 Decrease (Increase) in interfund receivables (15,569) 96,805 3,723 Increase in inventories - - - Increase in prepaid items (60,566,515) - - Decrease in escrow deposits - - - Increase (Decrease) in accounts payable (4,223,627) 1,372,836 349,596 Increase (Decrease) in compensated absences payable 34,187 2,455 (9,304) Increase in municipal pension obligations 80,762 253,094 172,032 Increase in other post employment benefits 296,353 112,361 59,436 Increase in closure/postclosure liability - - - Decrease in interfund parables (18,252) - - Total adjustments (57,031,809) 7,110,011 6,246,407 Net cash provided (used) by operating activities S (50,149,225) S 10,822,891 S 8,162,500 NONC'ASH CAPITAL, INVESTING AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Decrease in fair value of investments (240,415) (220,778) (89,637) Capital asset contributions - 2,077,935 3,075,633 The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement 28 Exhibit X Governmental Activities Total Internal Solid Enterprise Service Waste Funds Funds $ 18,549,607 $ 186,671,759 $ 40,345,076 (6,612,860) (29,113,520) (5,342,434) (7,896,152) (184,681,478) (31,903,557) 4,040,595 (27,123,239) 3,099,085 (30,400) (991,722) (263,519) 148,319 508,921 3,535,668 - 62,944,159 - 117,919 62,461,358 3,272,149 (2,583,111) (61,063,746) (597,206) (564,141) (11,152,060) (163,760) (1,164,042) (1,319,121) (812,565) 9,118,934 100,448,202 - - 2,477,450 - 189,131 - (4,374,318) (38,500,109) (1,620,538) 433,322 (8,920,253) (3,194,069) 4,515,233 171,634,559 6,694,902 (9,025,612) (197,757,198) (10,010,397) 64,619 2,114,410 112,399 (4,445,760) (24,008,229) (3,203,096) 146,076 2,409,637 (25,931) 899,135 20,961,029 1,142,811 1,045,211 23,370,666 1,116,880 11,945,209 208,735,261 12,771,609 S 12,990,420 S 232,105,927 S 13,888,489 $ 356,176 $ 12,867,733 $ 2,862,457 3,156,613 19,739,348 1,734,726 57,562 1,799,063 35,579 - 84,959 _ - - 492,214 - (60,566,515) 657 52,026 52,026 - (178,693) (2,679,888) (2,159,599) 11,068 38,406 12,377 183,776 689,664 152,144 65,656 533,806 45,787 336,411 336,411 - - (18,252) (77,257) 3,684,419 (39,990,972) 236,628 $ 4,040,595 $ (27,123,239) S 3,099,085 (19,421) (570,251) (27,786) 5,153,568 - 29 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XI STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES AGENCY FUNDS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Total Agency Funds ASSETS: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 1,331,900 Accrued interest 911 Other receivables 44,040 Total assets $ 1,376,851 LIABILITIES: Accounts payable 1,376,851 Total liabilities $ 1,376,851 The notes to the basic financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 30 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 I. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The City of Denton is a municipal corporation governed by an elected seven-member council consisting of a mayor elected at large and six councilpersons, four representing specific geographical districts and two elected at large. The City receives funding from state and federal government sources and must comply with the requirements of these funding source entities. However, the City is not included in any other governmental "reporting entity," as defined in pronouncements by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 14, "The Financial Reporting Entity," since council members are elected by the public and have decision-making authority, the authority to levy taxes, the power to designate management, the ability to significantly influence operations, and primary- accountability for fiscal matters. The GASB issued Statement No. 51, "Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible Assets", which was effective for the City in the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010. This statement addresses questions and establishes guidance concerning accounting and financial reporting requirements for intangible assets used in providing government services including easements, water rights, timber rights, patents, trademarks, and computer software. The statement requires that all intangible assets covered under the provisions of the statement should be considered capital assets. In the process of evaluating the implementation of the statement, the City determined there was no material impact to the financial statements. The GASB issued Statement No. 58, "Accounting and Financial Reporting for Chapter 9 Bankruptcies." This Statement establishes accounting and financial reporting guidance for governments that have petitioned for protection from creditors by filing for bankruptcy under Chapter 9 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. The City has not petitioned for bankruptcy under Chapter 9 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, and thus, is not affected by this statement. The GASB issued Statement No. 53, "Accounting and Financial Reporting for Derivative Instruments." This Statement establishes accounting and financial reporting requirements for derivative instruments entered into by state and local governments. The City has no derivative instruments at September 30, 2010, and thus, is not affected by this statement. The financial statements of the City have been prepared to conform to accounting principles generally accepted (GAAP) in the United States of America as applicable to state and local governments. GASB is the accepted standard-setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles. The following is a summaiy of the more significant policies. A. Reporting entity An elected seven-member council consisting of a mayor and six councilpersons govern the City. As required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, these financial statements present the City (the primaiy government) and its component units, which are entities for which the City is considered to be financially accountable. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are, in substance, part of the City's operations, and so data from these units are combined with data of the primaiy government. A discretely presented component unit, on the other hand, is reported in a separate column in the government- wide financial statements to emphasize it is legally separate from the City. The City had no component units, discretely presented or blended, at September 30, 2010. B. Government-wide and fund financial statements The basic financial statements include both government-wide (based on the City as a whole) and fund financial statements. The reporting focus is either the City as a whole (government-Nvide financial statements) or major individual funds (within the fund financial statements). The government-wide financial statements (i.e., the statement of net assets and the statement of activities) report information on all non-fiduciaiy activities of the primaiy government. For the most part, the effect of inter-fund activity has been removed from these statements. Governmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues, 31 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 are reported separately from business-type activities, which rely to a significant extent on fees and charges for support. The government-wide statement of activities demonstrates the degree to which the direct expenses of a functional category- (public safety, public works, etc.) or segment are offset by program revenues. Direct expenses are those that are clearly identifiable with a specific function or segment. Program revenues include (1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use or directly benefit from goods, services or privileges provided by a given function or segment; (2) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting operational requirements of a particular function or segment; and (3) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the capital requirements of a particular function or segment. Taxes and other items not properly included among program revenues are reported instead as general revenues. The net cost (by function or business-type activity) is normally covered by general revenue (property taxes, sales taxes, franchise fees, interest income, etc.). Separate fund financial statements are provided for governmental funds, proprietaiv funds, and fiduciary funds, even though the latter are excluded from the government-wide financial statements. Major governmental funds and major enterprise funds are reported as separate columns in the fund financial statements. GASB Statement No. 34 sets forth minimum criteria (percentage of assets, liabilities, revenues or expenditures/expenses of either fund categoiv and for the governmental and enterprise funds combined) for the determination of major funds. Non-major funds are combined in a column in the fund financial statements. Internal service funds, which traditionally provide services primarily to other funds of the government, are presented in summary- form as part of the proprietary- fund financial statements. The financial statements of internal service funds are allocated (based on the percentage of goods or services provided) between the governmental and business-type activities when presented at the government-wide level. The City's fiduciary funds are presented in the fund financial statements. Since by definition these assets are being held for the benefit of a third party (other local governments, individuals, etc.) and cannot be used to address activities or obligations of the government, these funds are not incorporated into the government-wide statements. The government-wide focus is more on the sustainability of the City as an entity and the change in aggregate financial position resulting from the activities of the fiscal period. The focus of the fund financial statements is on the major individual funds of the governmental and business-type categories, as well as the fiduciary funds (by categoiv). Each presentation provides valuable information that can be analyzed and compared to enhance the usefulness of the information. C. Measurement focus, basis of accounting and financial statement presentation The government-wide financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting, as are the proprietaiy fund statements. Revenues are recorded when earned, and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Property taxes are recognized as revenues in the year for which they are levied. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. Governmental fund-level financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available. Revenues are considered to be available when thev are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay liabilities of the current period. For this purpose, the government considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 60 days of the end of the current fiscal period. Expenditures generally are recorded when a liability is incurred, as under accrual accounting. However, debt service expenditures, as well as expenditures related to compensated absences and claims and judgments, are recorded only when payment is due. 32 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Property tax, franchise fees, sales tax and other taxes associated with the current fiscal period are all susceptible to accrual and so have been recognized as revenues of the current fiscal period. All of the other revenue items are considered to be measurable and available only when cash is received. The City reports the following major governmental funds: The general fund is the City's primary operating fund. All general tax revenues and other receipts that are not allocated by law or contractual agreement to some other fund are accounted for in this fund. From the fund are paid general operating costs, fixed charges and capital improvement costs that are not paid through other funds. The debt service fund accounts for the payment of principal and interest on general long-term liabilities, paid primarily by taxes levied by the City. The capital projects fund accounts for financial resources used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities being financed from bond proceeds, capital contributions, or transfers from other funds, other than those recorded in the enterprise funds and internal service funds. Other governmental funds is a summarization of all of the non-major governmental funds. The City reports the following major proprietaiv funds: The City utility system is made up of three separate funds as follows: The electric fund accounts for electrical utility services to the residents and commercial establishments of the City. Activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in the fund, including, but not limited to, administration, operations, maintenance, finance and related debt service. The water fund accounts for water utility services to the residents and commercial establishments of the City. Activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in the fund, including, but not limited to, administration, operations, maintenance, finance and related debt service. The wastewater fund accounts for seNver and storm water services to the residents and commercial establishments of the City. Activities necessary- to provide such services are accounted for in the fund, including, but not limited to, administration, operations, maintenance, finance and related debt service. The City provides additional services through the following fund: The solid waste fund accounts for the provision of solid waste services to the residents of the City. Activities necessaiv to provide such services are accounted for in the fund, including, but not limited to, administration, operations, maintenance, finance and related debt service. The City additionally reports the following funds: Internal service funds are used to account for the financing of materials and services provided by one department of the City to other departments of the City on a cost-reimbursement basis. Agency funds are used to account for the payment of payroll, developers' escrow funds, and other similar liabilities. The City holds the assets in an agency capacity- for individuals, private organizations or other governments. The City follows private-sector standards of accounting and financial reporting (as issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board) issued prior to December 1, 1989 in both the government-wide and proprietaiv fund financial statements to the extent that those standards do not conflict with or contradict guidance of the GASB. Governments also have the option of following subsequent private-sector guidance for business-type activities and enterprise funds, subject to this same limitation. Proprietaiv funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from non-operating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a proprietary fund's principal ongoing operations. The principal operating revenues of the City's electric, water, 33 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 wastewater and solid waste funds are charges to customers for services. Operating expenses for the enterprise funds and internal service funds include the cost of sales and services, administrative expenses and depreciation on capital assets. All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as non-operating revenues and expenses. For deferred charges, the City recognizes, as an asset or a liability, the difference between the electric fund's energy cost adjustment (ECA) revenue collected and related costs, in compliance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 71 Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City's policy to use restricted resources first, then unrestricted resources as they are needed. D. Assets, liabilities and net assets or equity 1. Cash, cash equivalents and investments The City's cash and cash equivalents are considered to be cash on hand, demand deposits and short-tern investments with original maturities of three months or less from the date of acquisition. Investments are carried at fair value or cost, if maturities are one year or less. Fair value is determined as the price at which two swilling parties would complete an exchange. The City- uses a pooled cash and investment fund to hold and account for all of the City's investments except the utility debt service reserve amounts. For financial reporting purposes, the investment balances in the pooled fund are allocated back to the individuals funds based on their respective share of the pooled total. Interest earned on investments is also allocated back and recorded directly to the individual funds on a monthly basis. 2. Receivables Outstanding balances between funds are reported as "interfund receivables/payables." Any residual balances between governmental activities and business-type activities are reported in the government-swide statements as "internal balances." Trade and property tax receivables are shown net of an allowance for uncollectibles. The City accrues amounts for utility services provided in September, but not billed at September 30, 2010. 3. Inventories Inventories of supplies are maintained at the City warehouse for use by all City funds and are accounted for by the consumption method. Cost is determined using a moving average method. No inventories exist in the governmental fund types. 4. Restricted Assets Certain proceeds of the City's governmental and proprietaiv fund revenue bonds, general obligation bonds, and certificates of obligation, as well as certain resources set aside for their repayment, are classified as restricted assets on the balance sheet because their use is limited by applicable bond covenants. Assets collected from impact fees are limited by state statute in use and also shown as restricted on the balance sheet of the Water and Wastewater funds. 5. Capital Assets Capital assets, which include property, plant, equipment and infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, bridges, sidewalks and similar items) are reported in applicable governmental or business-type activities columns in the government-swide financial statements and in the proprietaiv fund financial statements. The City defines capital assets as assets with an initial, individual cost of more than $5,000 and an estimated useful life in excess of one year. Such assets are recorded at historical cost or estimated historical cost if purchased or constructed. Donated capital assets are recorded at estimated fair value at the time received. Major outlays for capital assets and improvements are capitalized as projects are constructed. Net interest incurred during the construction phase of capital assets of business-type activities and enterprise funds is included as part of the capitalized value of the assets constructed. For 2010, net interest capitalization of 34 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 $1,399,526 was recorded for electric fund projects, $362,044 was recorded for water fund projects and $259,354 was recorded for wasteNvater fund projects. Capital assets are depreciated using the straight-line method over the folloNving useful lives: Assets Years Buildings 40 Infrastructure 20 - 40 General improvements 10 Machineiv and equipment 10 - 20 Furniture and office equipment 10 Computer equipment/softivare 3- 10 Plant and equipment 5 Underground pipe 40 Water storage rights 50- 100 Water recreation rights 50 Communication equipment 5 Vehicles 3- 10 Renewals and betterments of property and equipment are capitalized, whereas normal repair and maintenance are charged to expense as incurred. 6. Compensated Absences The City allows full-time employees to accumulate unused vacation up to 320 hours (480 for Civil Service Fire employees.) Upon termination, any accumulated vacation time will be paid to an employee. Generally, sick leave is not paid upon termination except for fire fighters and police officers. Firefighters and police officers accumulate unused sick leave up to a maximum of 1080 hours and 720 hours, respectively. All other employees are paid only upon illness while employed by the City. Accumulated vacation and sick leave is accrued when incurred in the government-wide, proprietaiv and fiduciaiv fund financial statements. A liability for these amounts is reported in governmental funds only if they have matured, for example, as a result of employee resignations and retirements but have not been paid this amount at the end of the fiscal vear. The General Fund and Other Governmental Funds are used to record any payout expenditures of the governmental funds' employees and related liability, while proprietaiv fund payouts for their employees are recorded as reductions to the liabilities in those funds. 7. Arbitrage Arbitrage involves the investment of the proceeds from the sale of tax-exempt securities in a taxable money market instrument that yields a higher rate, resulting in interest revenue in excess of interest costs. Federal tax code requires that these excess earnings be rebated to the federal government. The Capital Projects Fund has been used in prior years to liquidate governmental funds' related liability. 8. Lon4-term obli atg ions In the government-wide financial statements and proprietaiv fund types in the fund financial statements, long-term obligations are reported as liabilities. Bond premiums and discounts, as well as issuance costs, are deferred and amortized over the life of the bonds. Bonds payable are reported net of the applicable bond premium or discount. Gains and losses on refunding are amortized over the life of the refunded debt or the life of the nevv issue, whichever is shorter. 35 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 In the fund financial statements, governmental fund types recognize bond premiums and discounts, as well as bond issuance costs, during the current period. The face amount of debt issued is reported as other financing sources. Premiums received on debt issuances are reported as other financing sources while discounts on debt issuances are reported as other financing uses. Issuance costs, whether or not withheld from the actual debt proceeds received, are reported as debt service expenditures. 9. Fund equity In the fund financial statements, governmental funds report reservations of fund balance for accounts that are not available for appropriation or are legally restricted by outside parties for use for a specific purpose. Designations of fund balances represent management plans that are subject to change. E. Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses/expenditures during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. II. RECONCILIATION OF GOVERNMENT-WIDE AND FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Explanation of certain differences between the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances and the government-wide statement of activities Another element of that reconciliation states, "Bond proceeds provide current financial resources to governmental funds, but issuing debt increases long-term liabilities in the statement of net assets. Repayment of bond principal is an expenditure in the governmental funds, but the repayment reduces long-term liabilities in the statement of net assets. This is the amount by which proceeds exceeded payments." The details of this $2,522,803 difference are as follows. Debt issued or incurred: Issuance of general obligation debt $(7,575,000) Issuance of certificates of obligation (2,790,000) Principal repayments: Certificates of obligation principal retirement 4,338,649 General obligation debt principal retirement 4,754,000 Refunded principal 3,610,000 Lease obligations principal retirement 185,154 Net adjustment to decrease net changes in fund balances - total governmental funds to arrive at changes in net assets of governmental activities $ 2.522 803 Another element of that reconciliation states, "The net effect of various miscellaneous transactions involving capital assets (i.e., sales, trade-ins and donations) is to increase net assets." The details of this $2,266,513 difference are as follows: Loss on disposal of capital assets $ (215,962) 36 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Transfers of capital assets from governmental activities decrease net assets in the statement of activities but do not appear in the governmental funds because they are not financial expenditures (220,890) Donations of capital assets increase net assets in the statement of activities but do not appear in the governmental funds because 2,703,365 they are not financial resources Net adjustment to increase net changes in fund balances - total $2,266 513 governmental funds Another element of that reconciliation states, "Certain expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and therefore are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds." The details of the $(1,912,740) difference are as follows: Compensated absences $ (106,178) Municipal pension obligation (1311,592) Other post employment benefits (549,808) Accrued interest 54,838 Net adjustments to decrease net changes in fund balances - total governmental funds to arrive at changes in net assets of governmental activities ' (1912.7401 III. STEWARDSHIP, COMPLIANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY A. Budgetary information The City Council follows these procedures, as prescribed by City Charter, in establishing the budgets reflected in the financial statements: 1. Within the time period required by law, the City Manager submits to the City Council a proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning on the folloNving October 1. The operating budget includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. 2. Public hearings are conducted prior to the adoption of the budget in order to obtain taxpayer comments. 3. The annual budget adopted by the City Council covers the general fund, non-major special revenue funds (Recreation Fund, Police Confiscation Fund, Tourist and Convention Fund, and the Gas Well Revenues Fund), the debt service fund, the enterprise funds, and internal service funds. The budget is legally enacted by the City Council through passage of an ordinance prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. The basic financial statements reflect the legal level of control, (i.e. the level at which expenditures cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount) which is established at the total fund level as approved by City Council. 4. The City Charter provides that the City Manager may transfer any part of the unencumbered appropriation balance or the entire balance thereof between programs or general classifications of expenditures Nvithin an office, department, agency or organizational unit. (The City Council defines an organizational unit as set forth in Article VIII, Section 8.07 of the City Charter, to be a fund that has been appropriated by the City Council.) City Council approval is not required up to the fund level. The Charter also provides that at any time during the year, at the request of the City Manager, City Council may by resolution transfer any part of the unencumbered appropriation balances or the entire balance thereof from one office, department, agency, or organizational unit to another, as Nvell as make any increases in fund appropriations. 37 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Budgets are adopted on a basis for the governmental funds and the budgeted special revenue funds that is generally consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Budgets for enterprise funds are prepared on the full accrual basis, except certain noncash transactions such as depreciation expense and amortization on debt issuance costs where it is not budgeted, and debt service payments where it is budgeted. At the beginning of the subsequent year, management reviews all open encumbrances from the prior year and, as provided in the budget ordinance, appropriations for the encumbrances may be carried foixvard. In the current fiscal year, no appropriations were carried foixvard for the General Fund or Other Governmental Funds. Also, during the budgetaiy process, amounts are included in all fund budgets to recognize administrative transfers between funds for goods or services. These amounts are not included in the reporting of actual activity for the funds. For funds reporting required budget-to-actual comparisons, these administrative transfers are included as adjustments - budgetaiy basis. IV. DETAILED NOTES ON ALL FUNDS A. Deposits and investments In order to facilitate effective cash management practices, the operating cash of all funds is pooled into a common account for the purpose of increasing income through combined investment activities. At year-end, the City had $31,080,242 in cash and cash equivalents, including $26,358,000 invested in TexPool and TexSTAR, a local government investment pool the City considers a cash equivalent. Of the $31,080,242, $1,125,786 is included in the agency funds. In addition, the City had $15,078 in petty cash at year-end. The Public Funds Investment Act (Texas Government Code) authorizes the City to invest in obligations of the U.S. Treasury, U.S. agencies, fully collateralized repurchase agreements, public fund investment pools, SEC- registered no-load money market mutual funds, investment-grade rated municipal securities of any state and fully collateralized or insured certificates of deposit. The City's investment policy may further restrict those investment options. The investments reported on September 30, 2010 were similar to those held during the fiscal year. The City reports all investments in the financial statements at fair value. At September 30, 2010, the City's investments carried a fair value of $297,001,290. As of September 30, 2010, City investments were as follows: Weighted Average Investment Type Fair Value Maturity (Years) U. S. Treasury Securities-Coupon $ 24,351,088 0.56 U. S. Treasury Securities-Discount 9,997,261 0.21 U. S. Agency Securities-Coupon 147,655,781 0.91 U. S. Agency Securities-Step-Up 14,002,342 1.09 U. S. Agency Securities-Discount 20,895,818 0.43 Certificates of Deposit-Insured 80,099,000 0.67 Total fair value of investments $ 297,001,290 Portfolio weighted average maturity 0.77 Interest rate risk. In accordance with its investment policy, the City manages its exposure to declines in fair values due to interest rate fluctuations by limiting the weighted average maturity of its investment portfolio to less than eighteen months. Credit risk. The City's investment policy limits investments to obligations of the United States of America and its agencies, investment quality obligations of the State of Texas with a rating not less than AA, fully insured or collateralized Certificates of Deposits, and commercial paper that has a maturity of 270 days or less and a rating 38 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 of A-1 or P-1. The City's investments in the bonds of U.S. agencies were rated AAA by Standard & Poor's and Fitch Ratings and Aaa by Moody's Investors Service. Custodial credit risk. This is the risk that in the event of a bank or counterpaity failure, the City's deposits may not be returned. The policy states that all bank deposits and bank investments of City funds shall be secured by pledged collateral with a market value equal to no less than 102 percent of the principal plus accrued interest less an amount insured by FDIC, if a deposit. As of September 30, 2010, the bank balance for deposits was $7,958,537 which was insured by FDIC for $250,000 and covered by collateral with a fair value of $10,485,160 held by an independent third paity custodian pledged for the City, but not in the City's name. Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value are reported together on the financial statements. Investments, at fair value, by fund were as follows: Other General Debt Capital Governmental Fund Service Projects Funds Electric Water Unrestricted investments $ 18,965,278 $ 3,085,106 $ 41,775,589 $ 11,366,390 $ 69,293,020 $ 27,741,407 Change in fair value 24,200 3,936 53,304 14,503 88,415 35,397 Restricted investments - - - - 26,860,403 43,634,856 Change in fair value - - - - 32,600 53,443 Total $ 18,989,478 $ 3,089,042 $ 41,828,893 $ 11,380,893 $ 96,274,438 $ 71,465,103 Internal Total Total City and Service City Other Agency Agency Wastewater Solid Waste Funds Investments Funds Investments Unrestricted investments $ 12,232,439 $ 2,076,721 $ 12,684,473 $ 199,220,423 $ 205,851 $ 199,426,274 Change in fair value 15,608 2,650 16,187 254,200 263 254,463 Restricted investments 16,781,935 9,853,266 70,860 97,201,320 - 97,201,320 Change in fair value 20,529 12,572 89 119,233 - 119,233 Total $ 29,050,511 $ 11,945,209 $ 12,771,609 $ 296,795,176 $ 206,114 $ 297,001,290 B. Property tax revenue Property taxes attach as an enforceable lien on property as of Januaiv 1. Taxes are levied on October 1 and are due and payable at that time, therefore, the legally enforceable claim arises on October 1. A receivable is recorded at that time. All unpaid taxes levied October 1 become delinquent February 1 of the following year. Property taxes at the fund level are recorded as receivables and revenue at the time the tax levy- is billed. Current-year revenues recognized are those ad valorem taxes collected within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay current liabilities, which is sixty days after year-end. All other outstanding receivables are adjusted from revenue and recognized as deferred for future collections. Current tax collections for the year ended September 30, 2010, were 98.95% of the tax levy-. An allowance is provided for delinquent taxes not expected to be collected in the future. At September 30, 2010, the City had a tax rate of $0.66652 per $100 valuation. Based upon the maximum ad valorem tax of $2.50 per $100 valuation imposed by Texas Constitutional lase, the City had a tax rate margin of 39 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 $1.83348. Additional revenues up to $116,020,946 could be raised per year based on the current year's assessed value of $6327,909,022 before the limit is reached. C. Receivables Receivables at September 30, 2010, for the City's individual major funds and other funds (non-major funds, internal service funds and fiduciaiv funds), including the applicable alloNvances for uncollectible accounts, are shoN-,n below. Capital General Debt Service Projects Electric Water Receivables: Taxes $ 4,671,732 $ 501,725 $ - $ - $ - Accounts - - - 8,322,713 1,744,377 Accrued interest 83,889 13,646 184,786 425,941 316,555 Unbilled utility service - - - 51581,927 1,083,944 Other 13,252,142 - - - - Gross receivables 18,007,763 515,371 184,786 14,330,581 3,144,876 Less: Allowance for uncollectibles (11,092,367) (189,716) - (636,084) (133,313) Net total receivables $ 6,915,396 $ 325,655 $ 184,786 $ 13,694,497 $ 3,011,563 Other Internal Waste- Solid Governmental service water Waste Funds Funds Total Receivables: Taxes $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5,173,457 Accounts 1,312,648 1,049,341 - - 12,429,079 Accrued interest 128,670 52,770 50,277 56,421 1,312,955 Unbilled utility service 865,296 680,382 - - 8,211,549 Other - - 842,412 113,848 14,208,402 Gross receivables 2,306,614 1,782,493 892,689 170,269 41,335,442 Less: Allowance for uncollectibles (100,318) (80,196) - - (12,231,994) Net total receivables $ 2,206,296 $ 1,702,297 $ 892,689 $ 170,269 $ 29,103,448 40 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 D. Capital assets Capital assets balances and transactions for the year ended September 30, 2010 are summarized below and on the folloNving page. Governmental activities: Balance at Transfers and Balance at October 1, 2009 Increases Decreases September 30, 2010 Capital assets not being depreciated: Land $ 12,922,784 $ - $ - $ 12,922,784 Construction in progress 34,489,005 14,110,001 (7,944,583) 40,654,423 Total capital assets not being depreciated 47,411,789 14,110,001 (7,944,583) 53,577,207 Capital assets being depreciated: Buildings 57,038,518 1,761,558 - 58,800,076 Infrastructure 188,670,984 4,984,300 - 193,655,284 Machinery and equipment and other improvements 54,864,953 6,961,749 (4,692,252) 57,134,450 Total capital assets being depreciated 300,574,455 13,707,607 (4,692,252) 309,589,810 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings 15,798,567 1,489,878 11,600 17,300,045 Infrastructure 96,935,092 9,005,295 - 105,940,387 Machinery and equipment and other improvements 36,361,726 6,044,418 (4,244,872) 38,161,272 Total accumulated depreciation 149,095,385 16,539,591 (4,233,272) 161,401,704 Total capital assets, being depreciated, net 151,479,070 (2,831,984) 45( 8,980) 148,188,106 Govenmental activities capital assets, net $198.890.859 $11.278.017 (8.403.563) $201.765.313 Transfers and decreases in accumulated depreciation for machinery and equipment and other improvements include $248,923 from the transfer of assets to and from business-type activities. 41 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 (Continued) Business-type activities: Balance at Transfers and Balance at October 1, 2009 Increases Decreases September 30, 2010 Capital assets not being depreciated: Land $ 10,406,777 $ 342,545 $ - $ 10,749,322 Construction in progress 86,234,170 36,197,158 (36,042,991) 86,388,337 Total capital assets not being depreciated 96,640,947 36,539,703 (36,042,991) 97,137,659 Capital assets being depreciated: Buildings 8,098,688 2,896,808 (12,000) 10,983,496 Landfill improvements 10,623,240 4,244,896 - 14,868,136 Water rights 69,883,098 - - 69,883,098 Infrastructure 314,188,204 18,907,188 (1,159,380) 331,936,012 Plant, machineiv, equipment and other improvements 226,892,839 15,498,838 (2,751,266) 239,640,411 Total capital assets being depreciated 629,686,069 41,547,730 (3,922,646) 667,311,153 Less accumulated depreciation for: Buildings 2,899,505 284,763 (11,600) 3,172,668 Landfill improvements 9,773,720 199,319 - 9,973,039 Water rights 14,176,671 695,988 - 14,872,659 Infrastructure 78,382,235 8,302,649 (291,737) 86,393,147 Plant, machineiv, equipment and other improvements 110,963,081 10,256,629 (2,157,317) 119,062,393 Total accumulated depreciation 216,195,212 19,739,348 (2,460,654) 233,473,906 Total capital assets, being depreciated, net 413,490,857 21,808,382 (1,461,992) 433,837,247 Business-type activities capital assets, net $510,131,804 $58.348.085 (37.504.983) $530.974.906 Depreciation expense Nvas charged to activities of funds/functions/programs as follows: Governmental activities: General government $ 1,948,795 Public safety 2,398,851 Public works 8,993,513 Parks & recreation 1,463,706 Capital assets held by internal service funds are charged to the various functions based upon usage 1,734,726 Total depreciation expense - governmental activities $ 16,539,591 Business-type activities: Electric $ 5,675,112 Water 5,300,220 Wastewater 5,607,403 Solid waste 3,156,613 Total depreciation expense - business-type activities $ 19,739,348 42 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Construction commitments: The City has several major construction projects planned or in progress as of September 30, 2010. These projects are evidenced by contractual commitments with contractors and include: Remaining Project Spent-to-Date Commitment Roselax-,-n Elevated Water Tank $3,357,431 $2,477,518 Not Water Main Phase 1 4,765,191 2,047,803 Lake LeNvisville Water Treatment Plant Upgrade 1,771,378 1,408,500 Teasley Substation 2,948 1,297,038 Remote Meter Reading Network 315,420 1,260,918 Bonnie Brae Distribution Substation 2,104,382 1,138,771 Pecan Creek Wastewater Interceptor Phase 1 1,152,652 1,101,950 E. Interfund receivables, payables and transfers A summaiv of interfund receivables and payables (in thousands) at September 30, 2010, is as follows: Interfund Receivables: Governmental Major Funds Business-Type Major Funds Non-Major Governmental Interfund Payables: General Fund Funds Electric Water Wastewater Total Non-Major Governmental Funds $ - $ 231 $ - $ - $ - $ 231 Internal Service Funds 136 - 6,154 290 72 6,652 Total $ 136 $ 231 $ 6,154 $ 290 $ 72 $ 6,883 The more significant interfund receivables and payables include the folloNving: Interfund receivables Interfund payables Amount Electric fund Internal service funds-materials management $6,154,229 Water fund Internal service funds-materials management 290,142 General fund Internal service funds-materials management 136,235 Wastewater fund Internal service funds-materials management 71,648 The outstanding balances between the Electric, Water, General Fund and Wastewater Funds and the Materials Management Fund are a result of the cash position in the Materials Management Fund due to inventor- purchases. 43 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Transfers between funds (in thousands) during the year Nvere as follows: Transfers Out: Governmental Government- Major Funds Business-Type Major Funds W ide Non-Major Internal Governmental Service Governmental Transfers In: General Fund Funds Electric Water Wastemater Solid Waste Funds Activities Total Governmental Major Funds: General Fund $ $ 1,018 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,018 Debt Service Fund 217 - 520 264 1,001 Capital Projects Fund 366 3,307 7 - - 3,680 Non-Major Governmental Funds 55 62 - 117 Electric - - - Water 65 - 65 Wastewater 226 2 67 295 Solid Waste 97 - - - 51 148 Internal Service Funds - 2,971 216 117 99 30 - 103 3,536 Total $ 421 $ 7,963 $ 218 $ 124 $ 619 $ 30 $ 264 $ 221 $ 9,860 The more significant transfers include the folloNving: Transfers from fund Transfers to fund Amount Non- Major Gov't - Gas Well Revenues Capital Projects $3,160,900 Non- Major Gov't - Other Special Revenues Internal Service - Health Insurance 2,706,841 Non- Major Gov't - Gas Well Revenues General Fund 973,583 Wastewater Debt Service 520,057 General Fund Capital Projects 365,840 The transfers from the Gas Well Revenues Fund to the Capital Projects Fund were to fund capital projects using gas Nvell revenues. The transfer from Other Special Revenues was to move funding set aside for Other Post Employment Benefits to the Health Insurance Fund. The transfer from the Gas Well Revenues Fund was to repay the General Fund for prior subsidies of Airport operations. Transfers from the Wastewater Fund to the Debt Service Fund were for related debt service payments. Transfers from the General Fund to the Capital Projects Fund were to fund capital projects. 44 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 F. Leases Leases payable represent the remaining principal amounts payable under lease purchase agreements for the acquisition of equipment through the General, Solid Waste, Tech Services, and Wastewater funds. These leases are recorded as capital leases. Remaining requirements, including interest, under these leases are as follows: Year Payments 2011 $1,153,251 2012 1,104,907 2013 758,964 2014 758,964 2015 58,497 2016-2018 120,958 Total minimum lease payments 3,955,541 Less: amount representing interest 359,412 Present value of minimum future lease payments $3.596 129 The following schedule provides an analysis of the City's investments in equipment under capital lease arrangements as of September 30, 2010: Equipment $ 11,781,542 Less: Accumulated Depreciation (7,731,141) Total $ 4,050 401 45 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 G. Long-term debt Long-term liabilities transactions for the year ended September 30, 2010, are summarized as follows below and on the folloNving page: Balance at Balance at October 1, September 30, Due Within 2009 Increases Decreases 2010 One Year Governmental Activities : General obligation bonds $ 77,358,650 $ 7,575,000 $ 7,619,000 $ 77,314,650 $ 5,389,000 Certificates of obligation 48,611,150 2,790,000 5,673,200 45,727,950 4,872,950 Obligations under capital leases 2,769,671 - 997,719 1,771,952 466,233 Compensated absences payable 9,441,250 3,798,044 3,679,489 9,559,805 3,702,109 Claims payable 4,806,833 13,901,674 15,264,054 3,444,453 1,399,351 Municipal pension obligation 1,095,893 6,931,090 5,467,354 2,559,629 - Other post employment benefits 1,048,215 827,266 231,671 1,643,810 - Unamortized premium/(discounts) 1,658,410 498,684 359,001 1,798,093 330,371 Unamortized deferred gain/(loss) (1,017,734) (173,818) (269,119) (922,433) (170,314) Total governmental long-term liabilities $ 145,772,338 $ 36,147,940 $ 39,022,369 $ 142,897,909 $ 15,989,700 Balance at Balance at October 1, September 30, Due Within 2009 Increases Decreases 2010 One Year Business-type Activities: Revenue bonds $ 266,705,000 $ - $ 56,820,000 $ 209,885,000 $ 13,180,000 General obligation bonds 4,366,350 35,705,000 471,000 39,600,350 1,766,000 Certificates of obligation 11,243,850 117,115,000 2,151,800 126,207,050 5,572,050 Obligations under capital leases 3,161,549 - 1,337,372 1,824,177 545,047 Compensated absences payable 1,912,371 1,557,368 1,518,962 1,950,777 1,698,603 Note payable 3,141,222 - 3,141,222 - - Municipal pension obligation 660,448 4,287,478 3,382,223 1,565,703 - Other post employment benefits 558,318 457,303 139,088 876,533 - Landfill closure/post-closure costs 4,593,213 393,198 56,787 4,929,624 - Unamortized premium/(discounts) 5,586,295 11,120,119 1,906,740 14,799,674 1,867,530 Unamortized deferred gain/(loss) (7,638,382) (3,776,610) (2,805,870) (8,609,122) (2,721,295) Total business-type activities 294,290,234 166,858,856 68,119,324 393,029,766 21,907,935 Total long-term liabilities $ 440,062,572 $ 203,006,796 $ 107,141,693 $ 535,927,675 $ 37,897,635 For Internal Service funds, long-term liabilities are included as part of the above totals for governmental activities. Compensated absences payables and municipal pension obligations are based on the assignment of an employee within a fund, with both historically being liquated predominantly by the General Fund. Other post employment benefits are liquidated from the Health Insurance internal service fund, with the retiree subsidy amounts paid predominantly by the General Fund. Claims payable represents an estimate of self- insured claims liability outstanding in the Health Insurance and Risk Retention internal service funds. 46 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 General bonded debt - General bonded debt at September 30, 2010, is comprised of the folloNving: Gross Amount Original Outstanding at Interest Rate Final Amount September 30, Bonded Debt Issue Date Maturit-v of Issue 2010 General obligation 4.5 to 5.5 2001 2021 $ 14,245,000 $ 710,000 General obligation 5.0 to 5.25 2002 2022 12,075,000 1,120,000 General obligation refunding 3.0 to 4.75 2003 2023 7,222,999 3,129,650 General obligation refunding 2.5 to 5.0 2004 2020 7,370,000 5,795,000 General obligation 3.0 to 5.0 2005 2025 5,000,000 4,190,000 General obligation 4.25 to 4.875 2006 2026 3,695,000 3,220,000 General obligation 4.0 to 4.5 2007 2026 15,925,000 14,385,000 General obligation refunding 4.0 to 5.25 2007 2022 26,025,000 25,505,000 General obligation 4.0 to 4.75 2008 2028 7,300,000 6,840,000 General obligation refunding 3.0 to 5.0 2009 2016 6,730,000 4,845,000 General obligation refunding 3.0 to 5.0 2010 2022 3,460,000 3,460,000 General obligation 4.0 to 4.3 2010 2030 4,115,000 4,115,000 Total general obligation bonds 113,162,999 77,314,650 Certificates of obligation 4.25 to 5.25 2001 2021 8,275,000 520,000 Certificates of obligation 4.7 to 5.25 2002 2022 8,045,000 1,010,000 Certificates of obligation 3.0 to 4.75 2003 2023 5,650,000 3,130,000 Certificates of obligation 2.0 to 5.0 2004 2024 12,805,000 10,145,000 Certificates of obligation 3.0 to 4.375 2005 2025 5,575,000 3,360,000 Certificates of obligation 4.0 to 4.75 2006 2026 7,214,950 5,147,950 Certificates of obligation 4.7 to 5.0 2007 2027 8,855,000 6,620,000 Certificates of obligation 4.0 to 5.0 2007A 2028 7,065,000 6,625,000 Certificates of obligation 3.0 to 4.625 2008 2028 7,865,000 6,380,000 Certificates of obligation 2.0 to 4.125 2010 2030 2,790,000 2,790,000 Total certificates of obligation 74,139,950 45,727,950 Total general bonded debt $187,302,949 $123,042,600 [These amounts do not include net unamortized premiums/(discounts) of $1,798,093 nor net deferred gain/(loss) on refunding of ($922,433).] Proceeds of general bonded debt are restricted to the uses for which they were approved in the bond elections. The City Charter expressly prohibits the use of bond proceeds to fund operating expenses. The general obligations are collateralized by the full faith and credit of the City and, primarily, payable from property taxes. In prior years, the City defeased general obligation bonds and certificates of obligation by placing the proceeds of new debt in an irrevocable trust to provide for all future debt service payments on the old bonds. Accordingly, the trust account assets and liabilities for the defeased debt are not included in the City's financial statements. On September 30, 2010, $14,875,000 of general obligation bonds and $8,040,000 of certificates of obligation considered defeased are still outstanding. 47 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 In March 2010, the City issued $58,820,000 in Combination Tax and Revenue Bonds. The debt -,vas issued to refinance a portion of the City's contractual obligations to the Texas Municipal Power Agency (the "TMPA") under a power sales contract. In July 2010, the City issued $61,085,000 ($58,295,000 of which is included as part of business type activities) in certificates of obligation and $4,115,000 of general obligation bonds. The debt -,vas issued to pay the costs of various capital improvements in the Capital Projects Fund ($6,905,000), Electric ($32,945,000), Water ($12,585,000), Wastewater ($4,355,000), and Solid Waste ($8,410,000). In August 2010, the City issued $39,165,000 ($35,705,000 of which is included as part of business-type activities) of general obligation refunding bonds. The reacquisition price exceeded the net carving amount of the old debt by $3,952,881, of which $3,779,061 is reported in business-type activities. This amount is being amortized over the remaining life of the refunded debt, which is shorter than the life of the new debt issued. This advance refunding was undertaken to reduce total debt service payments over the next 20 years by $7,316,456 and resulted in a net present value savings of $2,523,676. Revenue bonds - Revenue bond debt at September 30, 2010, is comprised of the following issues: Principal Net Net Original Outstanding at Unamortized Outstanding at Interest Rate Issue Final Amount September 30, Premium/ September 30, Revenue Bonds Date Maturitti- of Issue 2010 (Discount) 2010 Utilitti- wstem 4.974 to 6.0 2000 2020 54,880,000 $ 2,800,000 $ 1,374 $ 2,801,374 Utilitti- wstem 4.0 to 5.4 2001 2021 59,545,000 13,095,000 80,479 13,175,479 Utilitti- wstem 4.25 to 5.0 2002 2022 56,710,000 7,835,000 33,660 7,868,660 Utility system 5.0 to 6.5 2002 2022 13,985,000 1,860,000 (2,512) 1,857,488 Utilitti- wstem 3.625 to refunding 5.625 2003 2022 50,180,000 29,280,000 727,383 30,007,383 Utilitti- wstem refunding 2.0 to 5.25 2004 2024 24,850,000 23,635,000 792,704 24,427,704 Utilitti- wstem refunding 3.0 to 5.0 2005 2023 53,845,000 53,370,000 2,882,154 56,252,154 Utilitti- wstem refunding 4.5 to 5.0 2006 2026 8,515,000 7,360,000 - 7,360,000 Utilitti- wstem 4.0 to 4.25 2007 2026 16,740,000 15,040,000 3,183 15,043,183 Utilitti- wstem refunding 4.0 to 4.25 2007 2029 41,795,000 41,455,000 79,491 41,534,491 Utilitti- Sti-stem 3.50 to 5.00 2008 2027 15,290,000 14,155,000 66,377 14,221,377 Total revenue Bonds $396,335,000 $209,885,000 $4,664,293 $214,549,293 [These amounts do not include net unamortized gain/(loss) on refunding of ($6,566,419).] The revenue bonds are collateralized by the revenue of the Denton utility system funds (System) and the various special funds established by the bond ordinance. The ordinance provides that the revenue of the System is to be used first to pay operating and maintenance expenses of the System and second to establish and maintain the revenue bond funds. Any remaining revenues may then be used for any lawful purpose. The ordinance also contains provisions, which among other items restrict the issuance of additional revenue bonds unless the special funds noted above contain the required amounts and certain financial ratios are met. Management believes the City is in compliance with all significant requirements. Assets in these accounts 48 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 consist of cash and U.S. government securities. Below is a summaiv of the various net asset balances in the funds required by the bond ordinance to be restricted for debt service. Interest and sinking fund $12,138,684 Reserve fund 14,287,333 Total restricted net assets restricted for debt service $26,426,017 In prior years, the City defeased revenue bonds by placing the proceeds of new bonds in an irrevocable trust to provide for all future debt service payments on the old bonds. Accordingly, the trust account assets and liabilities for the defeased bonds are not included in the City's financial statements. On September 30, 2010, $97,105,000 of revenue bonds considered defeased are still outstanding. Other enterprise obligations - General obligation bonds and certificates of obligation issued for solid waste fund at September 30, 2010, is comprised of the folloNving: Gross Amount Interest Original Outstanding at Rate Issue Final Amount September 30, Other Obligations Date Maturit-v of Issue 2010 General obligation refunding 3.0 to 4.75 2003 2023 $ 857,001 $ 265,350 General obligation refunding 2.5 to 5.0 2004 2015 2,040,000 720,000 General obligation refunding 4.0 to 5.25 2007 2022 2,245,000 2,205,000 General obligation refunding 3.0 to 5.0 2008 2016 795,000 705,000 General obligation refunding 3.0 to 5.0 2010 2022 35,705,000 35,705,000 Total general obligation bonds 41,642,001 39,600,350 Certificates of obligation 4.25 to 5.25 2001 2021 3,845,000 70,000 Certificates of obligation 4.7 to 5.25 2002 2022 4,545,000 280,000 Certificates of obligation 3.0 to 4.75 2003 2023 1,755,000 250,000 Certificates of obligation 2.0 to 5.0 2004 2024 1,195,000 655,000 Certificates of obligation 3.0 to 4.375 2005 2025 1,570,000 675,000 Certificates of obligation 4.0 to 4.75 2006 2026 5,450,050 3,102,050 Certificates of obligation 4.7 to 5.0 2007 2027 2,590,000 1,765,000 Certificates of obligation 3.0 to 4.625 2008 2028 2,820,000 2,295,000 Certificates of obligation 2.0 to 5.0 2010 2030 58,295,000 58,295,000 Certificates of obligation 2.0 to 5.0 2010 2025 58,820,000 58,820,000 Total certificates of obligation 140,885,050 126,207,050 Total other enterprise obligations $182,527,051 $165,807,400 [These amounts do not include net unamortized premiums/(discounts) of $10,135,381 nor net deferred gain/(loss) on refunding of ($2,042,703).] Note payable In 1980, the City and the City of Dallas contracted with the Corps of Engineers for the construction and development of Ray Roberts Reservoir in Denton County. In contracts with the Corp of Engineers, the City will paid for twenty-six (26%) percent of the estimated water storage rights of the reservoir. Water obtained from the reservoir will be pro rata on the basis of each city's proportional share of total construction cost. The 49 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 closing of the dam was completed in 1987 with water being available from the reservoir in 1989. During fiscal year 2010, the final payment to the Corp of Engineers was finalized and paid, thus relieving the note payable. Schedule of long-term debt maturities Aggregate maturities of the long-term debt (principal and interest) for the years subsequent to September 30, 2010, are shoN-,n on the folloNving page: Governmental Activities: Certificates of General Ob ation Ob ation Capital Leases Total Fiscal Year Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest 2011 $ 5,389,000 $ 3,374,036 $ 4,872,950 $ 1,921,028 $ 466,233 $ 75,770 $ 10,728,183 $ 5,370,834 2012 5,685,950 3,105,465 4,170,000 6,307,806 435,810 57,850 10,291,760 9,471,121 2013 5,857,900 2,857,525 3,345,000 5,996,552 345,478 39,496 9,548,378 8,893,573 2014 5,861,800 2,606,662 2,815,000 5,684,280 361,695 23,280 9,038,495 8,314,222 2015 6,020,000 2,358,195 2,940,000 5,341,660 52,199 6,298 9,012,199 7,706,153 2016-2020 27,330,000 7,944,506 12,575,000 4,782,136 110,537 10,421 40,015,537 12,737,063 2021-2025 15,535,000 2,872,034 11,650,000 2,028,155 - - 27,185,000 4,900,189 2026-2030 5,635,000 391,586 3,360,000 213,231 - - 8,995,000 604,817 Total $77,314,650 $25,510,009 $45,727,950 $32,274,848 $1,771,952 $213,115 $124,814,552 $57,997,972 50 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Business-Tape Activities: Certificates of General Obli ag tion Ob ation Revenue FiscalYear Principal Interest Principal Interest Principal Interest 2011 $ 1,766,000 $ 1,784,596 $ 5,572,050 $ 6,448,173 $ 13,180,000 $ 9,440,637 2012 3,024,050 1,742,679 7,180,000 379,362 12,560,000 8,818,306 2013 3,292,100 1,601,883 6,990,000 313,244 13,100,000 8,225,184 2014 3,373,200 1,439,739 6,720,000 256,748 13,760,000 7,609,221 2015 3,465,000 1,273,226 6,955,000 217,008 14,090,000 6,967,777 2016-2020 16,805,000 3,967,456 33,575,000 16,648,725 77,820,000 24,313,697 2021-2025 7,875,000 393,644 40,320,000 8,118,106 47,070,000 8,801,671 2026-2030 - - 18,895,000 1,979,175 18,305,000 1,685,172 2031-2035 - - - - - - Total $ 39,600,350 $ 12,203,223 $ 126,207,050 $ 34,360,541 $ 209,885,000 $ 75,861,665 Capital Leases Total FiscalYear Principal Interest Principal Interest 2011 $ 545,047 $ 66,201 $ 21,063,097 $ 17,739,607 2012 565,721 45,526 23,329,771 10,985,873 2013 349,922 24,068 23,732,022 10,164,379 2014 363,487 10,502 24,216,687 9,316,210 2015 - - 24,510,000 8,458,011 2016-2020 - - 128,200,000 44,929,878 2021-2025 - - 95,265,000 17,313,421 2026-2030 - - 37,200,000 3,664,347 2031-2035 - - - - Total $ 1,824,177 $ 146,297 $ 377,516,577 $ 122,571,726 [These amounts do not include net unamortized premiums/(discounts) of $16,597,767 nor net deferred gain/(loss) on refunding of ($9,531,555).] 51 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Bonds authorized and unissued General obligation bonds authorized but unissued as of September 30, 2010 amounted to $6,219,000. When issued, the proceeds will be allocated to the applicable capital projects. H. Landfill closure and post-closure cost State and federal laws and regulations require the City to place a final cover on its Mayhill Road landfill site upon closure and to perform certain maintenance and monitoring functions at the site for thirty years after closure. Although closure and post-closure care costs will be paid only upon anticipated closure, the City reports a portion of these costs as an operating expense in each period based on landfill capacity used as of each balance sheet date. Based on a model created by a 2009 engineering study, total landfill closure and post- closure cost increased from $14,150,821 at September 30, 2009 to $14,490,440 at September 30, 2010. The $4,929,624 reported as landfill closure and post-closure care liability is a $336,411 increase from the $4,593,213 liability- reported on September 30, 2009. This liability represents the cumulative amount incurred to date based on the use of 34% of the estimated capacity of the entire landfill at September 30, 2010. Based on this estimate, the remaining potential estimated liability for closure and post-closure care of the entire landfill is $9,560,816. The City will recognize the remaining estimated cost of closure and post-closure care as the remaining capacity is filled. These amounts are based on what it kvould cost to perform closure and post- closure care in 2010. Actual cost may fluctuate due to inflation, changes in technology, or changes in regulations. The landfill has a remaining life of 39 years, and the City expects to close the landfill in fiscal year 2049. The solid waste fund has provided for a restriction and designation of cash and investments of $4,940,160 at September 30, 2010, and anticipates increasing the reserve in future periods as the closure and post-closure activities are carried out. V. OTHER INFORMATION A. Pension plans Texas Municipal Retirement Plan Plan description The City provides pension benefits for all of its eligible employees (except fire fighters) through a non- traditional, joint contributonv, hybrid-defined benefit plan in the state-wide Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS), one of 837 administered by TMRS, an agent multiple-employer public employee retirement system. Benefits Upon retirement, benefits depend upon the sum of the employee's contributions to the plan, with interest, and the city-financed monetary credits, with interest. City-financed monetary credits are composed of three sources: prior service credits, current service credits, and updated service credits. At the inception of each city's plan, the city granted monetary credits for service rendered before the plan began (or prior service credits) of a theoretical amount at least equal to two times what would have been contributed by the employee, with interest (3% annual), prior to establishment of the plan. Monetary credits for service since the plan began (or current service credits) are a percent (200%) of the employee's accumulated contributions. In addition, the City can grant, either annually or on an annually repeating basis, another type of monetary credit referred to as an updated service credit. This monetary- credit is determined by hypothetically recomputing the member's account balance by assuming the current member deposit rate of the City (7%) has always been in effect. The computation also assumes the member's salary has always been the member's average salary - using a salary calculation based on the 36-month period ending a year before the effective date of calculation. This hypothetical account balance is increased by 3% each year, and increased by the city match currently in effect (200%). The resulting sum is then compared to the member's actual account balance increased by the actual city match and actual interest credited. If the hypothetical calculation exceeds the actual calculation, the member is granted a monetary credit (or Updated Service Credit) equal to the difference between the 52 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 hypothetical calculation and the actual calculation times the percentage adopted. At retirement, the benefit is calculated as if the sum of the employee's accumulated contributions Nvith interest and the city -financed monetaiv credits with interest were used to purchase an annuity. Members can retire at ages 60 and above Nvith 5 or more years of service or Nvith 20 years of service regardless of age. A member is vested after five years. The plan provisions are adopted by the governing body of the City, Nvithin the options available in the state statutes governing TMRS and Nvithin the actuarial constraints also in the statutes. Contributions The contribution rate for the employees is 7% of gross earnings, and the City matching percentage is currently 200%, both as adopted by the governing body of the City. Under the state laxv governing TMRS, the actuary annually determines the city contribution rate using the Projected Unit Credit actuarial cost method. This rate consists of the normal cost contribution rate and the prior service contribution rate, both of which are calculated to be a level percent of payroll from year to year. The normal cost contribution rate finances the portion of an active member's projected benefit allocated annually. The prior service contribution rate amortizes the unfunded actuarial liability over the remainder of the plan's 25-year amortization period. Both the normal cost and prior service contribution rates include recognition of the projected impact of annually repeating benefits, such as Updated Service Credits and Annuity Increases. Both the employees and the City make contributions monthly. Since the City needs to know its contribution rate in advance for budgetaiv purposes, there is a one-year delay between the actuarial valuation that serves as the basis for the rate and the calendar year when the rate goes into effect. Beginning in 2009, the City of Denton elected to "phase in" higher contributions to TMRS over a period of eight years in order to recognize the change to a Projected Unit Cost Method in the 2007 valuation. By doing so, the City Nvill contribute less than the actuarially determined annual required contribution (ARC), and as such Nvill need to accrue a net pension obligation on its balance sheet. In subsequent years, this net pension obligation Nvill continue to increase until the full actuarially determined ARC is paid. The "phase in" period Nvill last eight years from fiscal year 2009 through fiscal year 2016. The annual pension cost and net pension obligation are as follows: Net Pension Obligation Annual required contribution $ 11,194,086 Interest on prior year net pension obligation 131,726 Adjustment to annual required contribution (107,244) Annual pension cost 11,218,568 Contributions made 8,849,577 Increase in net pension obligation 2,368,991 Net Pension obligation - beginning of year 1,756,341 Net pension obligation - end of year $ 4,125,332 Three-Year Trend Information for TMRS Funding Year ending 9/30/10 9/30/09 9/30/08 Annual required contribution (ARC) $11,194,086 $9,709,279 $7,082,769 Actual contributions $8,849,577 $7,952,938 $7,082,769 Percent contributed 79% 82% 100% Net pension obligation $4,125,332 $1,756,341 - 53 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Actuarial Assumptions 12/31/09 Actuarial cost method Projected unit credit Amortization method Level percent of payroll Remaining amortization period 28 years - closed period Asset valuation method 10-year Smoothed Market Investment rate of return 7.5% Projected salary increases Varies by age and service Includes inflation at 3.0% Cost-of-living adjustments 2.1% As of December 31, 2009, the most recent valuation date, the plan Nvas 62.1% funded. The actuarial accrued liability for benefits Nvas $221,022,906, and the actuarial value of assets Nvas $137,336,828, resulting in an unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) of $83,686,078. The covered payroll (annual payroll of active employees covered by the plan as of the valuation date) Nvas $61,295,163, and the ratio of the UAAL to the covered payroll Nvas 136.5%. The City adopted the Updated Service Credit provision in 1992, on a repeating basis. Additionally, the City adopted annuity increases for its retirees, on a repeating basis in 1992 equal to 70% of the change in consumer price index. The City of Denton is one of 837 municipalities having the benefit plan administered by TMRS. Each of the 837 municipalities has an annual, individual actuarial valuation performed. All assumptions for the December 31, 2009, valuations are contained in the 2009 TMRS Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, a copy of which may be obtained by writing to P.O. Box 149153, Austin, Texas 78714-9153; in addition, the report is available on TMRS' website at www.TMRS.com. Supplemental death benefit fund The City of Denton contributes to a cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit group-term life insurance plan lmovm as the Supplemental Death Benefits Fund (SDBF). This is a separate trust administered by the TMRS Board of Trustees and is a voluntary program in which the City elected, by ordinance, to provide group term life insurance coverage to active and retired members. The City may terminate coverage under and discontinue participation in the SDBF by adopting an ordinance before November 1 of any year to be effective the folloNving January- 1. Contributions are made monthly based on the covered payroll of employee members of the City. The contractually required contribution rate is determined annually, and the rate is based on the mortality and service experience of all employees covered by the SDBF and the demographics specific to the Nvorkforce of the City. There is a one-year delay between the actuarial valuation that serves as the basis for the employer contribution rate and the calendar year when the rate goes into effect. The contributions to the SDBF are pooled for investment purposes Nvith those of the Pension Trust Fund described above. The TMRS Act requires the Pension Trust Fund to allocate investment income to the SDBF on an annual basis. The funding policy of the plan is to assure adequate resources are available to meet all death benefit payments for the upcoming year, the intent is not to prefund retiree term life insurance during employees' entire careers. As such, contributions are utilized to fund active member deaths on a pay-as-you-go basis; any excess contributions and investment income over payments then become net assets available for postemployment benefits other than pension 54 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 benefits (OPEB). The City's contributions to SDBF for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2008, 2009, and 2010, Nvere $128,148, $124,275, and $116,414 respectively, which equaled the required contributions each year. Payments from this fund are similar to group term life insurance benefits, and are paid to the designated beneficiaries upon the receipt of an approved application for payment. The death benefit for active employees provides a lump-sum payment approximately equal to the employee's annual salary. The death benefit for retirees is considered an OPEB and is a fixed amount of $7,500. The obligations of this plan are payable only from the SDBF and are not an obligation of, or claim against, the Pension Trust Fund. Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Plan Plan description The Board of Trustees of the Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Fund is the administrator of a single- employer defined benefit pension plan. The Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Fund covers firefighters in the Denton Fire Department. The table below summarizes the membership of the fund as of December 31, 2009, the most recent biennial actuarial valuation. 12/31/09 1. Retirees and beneficiaries currently receiving benefits and terminated employees entitled to 63 benefits but not yet receiving them 2. Current employees a. Vested 92 b. Nonvested 71 3. Total 226 The Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Fund provides service retirement, death, disability and Nvithdrawal benefits. These benefits vest after 10 years of credited service. Firefighters may retire at age 50 Nvith 20 years of service. As of the December 31, 2009 actuarial valuation date, the Plan effective September 1, 2008 provided a monthly normal service retirement benefit, payable in a joint and two-thirds to spouse form of annuity, equal to 2.59% of highest 36-month average salary for each year of service. There is no provision for automatic postretirement benefit increases. The fund has the authority to provide, and has periodically in the past provided for, ad hoc postretirement benefit increases. The benefit provisions of this plan are authorized by the Texas Local Fire Fighter's Retirement Act (TLFFRA). TLFFRA provides the authority and procedure to amend benefit provisions. Contributions Required and Contributions Made The contribution provisions of this plan are authorized by TLFFRA. The TLFFRA provides the authority and procedure to change the amount of contributions determined as a percentage of pay by each firefighter and a percentage of payroll by the city. While the contribution requirements are not actuarially determined, state law requires that each plan of benefits adopted by the fund must be approved by an eligible actuary. The actuary certifies that the contribution commitment by the firefighters and the city provides an adequate financing arrangement. Using the entiy age actuarial cost method, the plans' normal cost contribution rate is determined as a percentage of payroll. The excess of the total contribution rate over the normal cost contribution rate is used to amortize the plan's 55 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 unfunded actuarial accrued liability-, and the number of years needed to amortize the plan's unfunded actuarial accrued liability is determined using an open, level percentage of payroll method. The costs of administering the plan are financed from the fund. The funding policy of the Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Fund requires contributions equal to 12% of pay by the firefighters and contributions by the City equal to the same percentage of payroll the City contributes to the Texas Municipal Retirement System for other employees. The December 31, 2009 actuarial valuation assumes that the city contribution rate will average 16% of payroll in the future. The City contribution rate for 2010 was 15.41% by the City and 12% by the firefighters and is scheduled to be 17.17% by the City and 12.6% by the firefighters for 2011. Three-Year Trend Information for Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Funding Year ending 9/30/10 9/30/09 9/30/08 Annual required contribution (ARC) $1,976,155 $1,747,908 $1,426,906 Actual contributions $1,976,155 $1,747,908 $1,426,906 Percent contributed 100% 100% 100% Actuarial Assumptions 12/31/09 Actuarial cost method Entiy age Amortization method Level percent of payroll, open Amortization period for ARC 26 years Asset valuation method 5-year adjusted market value Investment rate of return 7.25% Projected salaiy increases 3.75% plus promotion and longevity Includes inflation at 3.50% Cost-of-living adjustments None Pavroll increases 3.75% ARC as percent of payroll Budgeted rates As of December 31, 2009, the most recent valuation date, the plan was 70.2% funded. The actuarial accrued liability for benefits was $65,874,164, and the actuarial value of assets was $46,256,617, resulting in an unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) of $19,617,547. The covered payroll (annual payroll of active employees covered by the plan as of the valuation date) was $12,750,355, and the ratio of the UAAL to the covered payroll was 153.9%. Financial statements are available and can be obtained by contacting the Denton Fire Department at the City of Denton at 332 E. Hickory, Denton, Texas 76201. B. Post-employment benefits other than pensions (OPEB) The cost of post-employment healthcare benefits, from an accrual accounting perspective, similar to the cost of pension benefits, should be associated with the periods in which the cost occurs, rather than in the future year 56 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 when it will be paid. According to the requirements of GASB Statement No. 45 for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010, the City recognizes the cost of post-employment healthcare in the year the employee services are received, reports the accumulated liability from prior years, and provides information useful in assessing potential demands on the City's future cash flows. Recognition of the liability accumulated from prior years Nvill be amortized over 30 years, the first period commencing with the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008. Plan Description The City provides post-employment medical care (OPEB) for retired employees through a single-employer defined benefit medical plan. The plan provides medical benefits for eligible retirees, their spouses and dependents though the City's group health insurance plans, which covers both active and retired members. The benefits, benefit levels, and contribution rates are approved annually by the City management as part of the budget process. Any changes in rate subsidies for retirees are approved by the City Council. Since an irrevocable trust has not been established, the plan is not accounted for as a trust fund. The plan does not issue a separate financial report. Benefits Provided The City provides post-employment medical, dental, and vision care benefits to its retirees. To be eligible for benefits, an employee must qualify for retirement under the Texas Municipal Retirement System or the Denton Firemen's Relief and Retirement Plan. Retirees must make a one-time irrevocable decision to chose benefits at the time of retirement, after that their eligibility for the benefits ceases. All medical care benefits are provided through the City's self-insured health plan. The benefit levels are the same as those afforded to active employees. As of September 30, 2010, membership consisted of Retirees and beneficiaries receiving benefits 123 Terminated employees eligible for benefits, but not yet enrolled - Active employees 1,122 Total 1,245 Funding Policy The plan premium rates are determined annually by City management and approved by the City Council as part of the annual budget. The retiree's contribution is the full amount of the actuarially determined blended premium rate less a subsidy dependent upon years of service at retirement. By providing retirees with access to the City's healthcare plans based on the same rates it charges to active employees, the City is in effect providing a subsidy to retirees. This implied subsidy exists because, on average, retiree health care costs are higher than active employee healthcare costs. By the City not contributing anything toward this plan in advance, the City employs a pay-as-you-go method through paying the higher rate for active employees each year. The subsidies paid by the City for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010 totaled $60,000 and are calculated as follows: Years of service Subsidv < 5 years $20/month 5 - 9 years $40/month 10 - 14 years $60/month 15 - 19 years $80/month 20+ vears $100/month 57 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 The City's GASB Statement No. 45 liability was discussed at length with the Audit/Finance Committee and the City Council. At the conclusion of these discussions, the City Council concurred with the staff recommendation to fund the City's OPEB costs on a pay-as-you-go basis. This basis has been recommended since 1) this provides the lowest cost approach, 2) the ARC is relatively small in comparison to the City's overall budget, and 3) the pay-as-you-go cost is not forecast to exceed the ARC until approximately the year 2031. This approach will be reevaluated ever- two years when new valuations are prepared. Annual OPEB costs and Net OPEB Obligation The City's annual other post-employment benefit (OPEB) cost is calculated based on the annual required contribution of the City (ARC), an amount actuarially determined in accordance with the parameters of GASB Statement 45. The ARC represents a level of funding that, if paid on an ongoing basis, is projected to cover normal cost each year and to amortize any unfunded actuarial liabilities over a period not to exceed thirty years. The City's annual OPEB cost for the current year and the related information are as follows at September 30, 2010: Annual required contribution $ 1314,901 Interest on prior year Net OPEB obligation 64,261 Adjustment to annual required contribution (94,593) Annual OPEB cost 1,284,569 Contributions made 370,759 Increase in net OPEB obligation 913,810 Net OPEB obligation - beginning of year 1,606,533 Net OPEB obligation - end of year $ 2,520,343 Percentage of OPEB costs contributed 28.86% Funded Status and Funding Progress The funded status of the plan as of the actuarial measurement date of October 1, 2009 was as follows: Actuarial accred liabilitv $ 10,944,544 Actuarial value of plan assets - Unfunded actuarial accred liabilitv $ 10,944,544 Funded ratio 0.0% Covered payroll $ 74,045,518 Unfunded actuarial accred liabilitv as a percentage of covered payroll 14.8% The schedule of funding progress, presented as Required Supplementary Information following the notes to the financial statements, presents multi-year trend information about whether the actuarial value of plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liability of benefits. Actuarial valuations involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of events in the future. Amounts determined regarding the status of the plan and the annual required contributions of the employer are subject to continual revision as actual results are compared to past expectations and new estimates are made about the future. 58 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Actuarial Methods and Assumptions Projections of benefits are based on the substantive plan (the plan understood by the employer and plan members) and include the type of benefits in force at the valuation date and the pattern of sharing benefits between the City and the plan members at that point. Actuarial calculations reflect a long-term perspective and employ methods and assumptions that are designed to reduce short-term volatility in actuarial accrued liabilities and the actuarial value of assets. Significant method and assumptions used for this fiscal year valuation were as follows: Actuarial Assumptions 10/1/09 Actuarial cost method Projected Unit credit Amortization method Level dollar, closed Amortization period for ARC 28 years Asset valuation method N/A Investment rate of return 4.0% Includes inflation at 2.75% Healthcare inflation rate 8.2% initial, 4.2% ultimate grade-in period through 2082 Medical Reimbursements The federal government may provide the city subsidies per the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Subsidy Program for providing healthcare for Medicare eligible employees. As the City does not participate in these subsidies, any current and future year subsidies are not recognized as a reduction to the actuarial accrued liabilitv. C. Deferred compensation plan The City offers its employees a deferred compensation plan created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. For the calendar 2010 year, the plan, available to all permanent City employees, permitted them to defer, until future years, up to 25% of annual gross earnings not to exceed $16,500. Employees who are age 50 or older may contribute an amount not to exceed $22,000. Employees who are within three years of retirement eligibility may elect to participate in a catch-up provision allowed by Section 457, which has an annual maximum contribution amount of $33,000. The withdrawal of deferred compensation funds is not available to employees until termination, retirement, death, or unforeseeable emergency. All amounts of compensation deferred under the plan, all property and rights purchased with those amounts, and all income attributable to those amounts, property or rights are, until paid or made available to the employee or other beneficiary, solely the property- and rights of the employees. Accordingly, the assets and associated liability of the plan are not included in the City's financial statements. It is the opinion of the City's legal counsel that the City has no liability for losses under the plan. D. Self-insurance plan The City has established a self-insurance plan for liability and Nvorkers' compensation benefits in the Risk Retention Fund. Accrued claims payable include provisions for claims reported and claims incurred but not reported. The provision for reported claims is determined by estimating the amount which will ultimately be paid each claimant. The provision for claims incurred but not yet reported is estimated based on actuarial studies. 59 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 It is the policy of the City of Denton not to purchase commercial insurance for Nvorkers' compensation claims or general liability. Commercial liability insurance coverage is purchased for public officials, airport operations, emergency medical services, take-home vehicles, and employee theft and dishonest-. Additionally, excess insurance is purchased for general liability and workers' compensation exposure. The City reports liabilities when it is probable that a loss has occurred and the amount of that loss can be reasonably estimated. Liabilities include an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported. Because actual claims liabilities depend on such complex factors as inflation, changes in legal doctrines, and damage awards, the process used in computing claims liability does not necessarily result in an exact amount. In Januaiv 2008, the City started a self-insured group employee health insurance plan. Claims are paid from the Health Insurance Fund, which has an annually negotiated stop loss provision. The City's costs associated with the self-insurance plans are reported as interfund transactions. Accordingly, they are treated as operating revenues of the Internal Service Risk Retention Fund and Health Insurance Fund and operating expenditures (expenses) of the other funds and employee payroll deductions. Claims liabilities are re-evaluated periodically to take into consideration settlement of claims, new claims and other factors. As of September 30, 2010, the estimated value of these liabilities was $3,444,453. Changes in balances of claims liabilities during fiscal years 2010 and 2009 were as follows: Claims Liabilitv Claims and Claims Liabilitv Beginning of Change in Claims End of Fiscal Year Estimates Pavments Fiscal Year Workers' Compensation 2010 $3,478,137 $ (808,247) $ 616,486 $2,053,404 2009 2,935,214 1,012,163 469,240 3,478,137 General Liabilitv 2010 $ 376,518 $ 228,058 $ 40,037 $ 564,539 2009 556,633 256,457 436,572 376,518 Health Insurance 2010 $ 952,178 $14,481,863 $14,607,531 $ 826,510 2009 1,737,525 12,663,228 13,448,575 952,178 On September 30, 2010, the City of Denton held additional amounts in unrestricted net assets of $3,145,970 in the Risk Retention Fund and $4,227,559 in the Health Insurance Fund for payment of claims. There were no significant reductions in insurance coverage from coverage in the prior year, and the amount of settlements did not exceed insurance coverage in the current year or in any of the past three fiscal years. E. Commitments and contingencies Agreement with TMPA In 1976, the City, along with the cities of Bryan, Greenville, and Garland, Texas (the Cities) entered into a Power Sales Contract with the Texas Municipal Power Agency (TMPA). TMPA was created through concurrent ordinances of the Cities and is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of eight members, two appointed by the governing body of each city. Under the terms of the agreement, TMPA agreed to construct or acquire electric generating plants to supply energy and power to the Cities for a period of not less than 35 years. The Cities in turn agreed to purchase all future power and energy requirements in excess of the amounts generated by their systems from TMPA at prices intended to cover operating costs and retirement of debt. In the event that revenues are insufficient to cover all costs and retire the outstanding debt, each of the Cities has guaranteed a portion of the unpaid debt based, generally, upon its pro rata share of the energy delivered to consumers in the prior operating year. As of September 30, 2010, total TMPA long-term debt outstanding was approximately $794,742,000, and the City's percentage was approximately 21.3%. In December 2009, the City and the other Member Cities entered 60 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 into a Global Compromise Settlement Agreement. As part of the settlement, the Member Cities agreed to issue debt to provide for TMPA's scrubber refurbishment project and to refinance TMPA's 2003, 2004, and 2004A Subordinate Lien Bonds. The City Council approved the issuance of $58,820,000 of combination tax and revenue refunding bonds, which represents the City's approximate 21.3% share of the TMPA debt to be refinanced. In the opinion of management, the possibility of a material payment in the near future under this agreement is remote in that TMPA is generating operating profits, and assets exceed liabilities. TMPA operates a 462-megaNvatt, coal-fired generating plant. In 1996, TMPA switched to an external source of coal to reduce costs. Should TMPA be dissolved, each city would be entitled to an undivided interest in the property . Selected financial statement information of TMPA is as follows: September 30 (Unaudited) 2010 2009 (000s) (000s) Operating revenues $ 253,647 $ 224364 Operating expenses 143,998 130,444 Operating income 109,649 93,920 Other non-operating sources (uses) (3) 3 938 Current unrestricted assets 44,080 62353 Total assets 1,190,004 1,183,993 Long-term obligations 794,742 981,921 Total liabilities 1,132,361 1,143,666 Total equity 57,643 40327 Agreement with the City of Dallas During 1985, the City entered into an agreement with the City of Dallas that provides for the purchase of a minimum of 500,000 gallons/day of untreated water from the City of Dallas from Lake Lewisville. This contract Nvill be effective for 30 years. The cost of water purchased under this agreement during fiscal year 2010 was $98,118. F. Litigation Various claims and lawsuits are pending against the City. In accordance with GAAP, those judgments considered "probable" are accrued, while those claims and judgments considered "reasonably possible" are disclosed but not accrued. In the opinion of City management and legal counsel, the maximum amount of all significant claims considered reasonably possible, excluding condemnation proceedings, is approximately $500,000 as of September 30, 2010. Potential losses after insurance coverage on all probable claims and lawsuits will not have a material effect on the City's financial position as of September 30, 2010. G. Subsequent events The City has evaluated all events or transactions that occurred after September 30, 2010 up through February 11, 2011, the date the financial statements were issued. On December 7, 2011, the City Council approved a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Reinvestment Zone for the purpose of dedicating the increase in tax revenues generated within the TIF district for development in the downtown area of the City. The TIF district consists of approximately 226 acres and is expected to generate $24.8 million and exist for thirty years or the date when all project costs are paid and any debt is retired, whichever comes first. 61 CITY F DENTON 62 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Exhibit XII SCHEDULE OF TEXAS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM FUNDING PROGRESS AND CONTRIBUTIONS LAST THREE FISCAL YEARS (Unaudited) Actuarial Unfunded Accrued Actuarial Actuarial Actuarial Liability (AAL) Accrued Fiscal Valuation Value of Unit Credit Liability Funded Year Date Assets Method (UAAL) Percent 2008 12/31/2007 S 113,952,231 $ 181,480,297 $ (67,528,066) 62.8% 2009 12/31/2008 122,458,472 195,038,325 (72,579,853) 62.8 2010 12/31/2009 137,336,828 221,022,906 (83,686,078) 62.1 UAAL as Percent of Annual Fiscal Covered Covered Required Actual Percent Year Payroll Payroll Contributions Contributions Contributed 2008 S 50,347,495 134.1% $ 7,082,769 $ 7,082,769 100.0% 2009 55,905,136 129.8 9,709,279 7,952,938 81.9 2010 61,295,163 136.5 11,194,086 8,849,577 79.1 SCHEDULE OF DENTON FH2EMEN'S RELIEF AND RETIREMENT PLAN FUNDING PROGRESS AND CONTRIBUTIONS LAST THREE VALUATION YEARS (Unaudited) Actuarial Unfunded Accrued Actuarial Actuarial Actuarial Liability (AAL) Accrued Fiscal Valuation Value of Unit Credit Liability Funded Year Date Assets Method (UAAL) Percent 2006 12/31/2005 7 34,677,009 $ 45,341,724 $ (10,664,715) 76.5% 2008 12/31/2007 41,020,648 52,675,541 (11,654,893) 77.9 2010 12/31/2009 46,256,617 65,874,164 (19,617,547) 70.2 UAAL as Percent of Annual Fiscal Covered Covered Required Actual Percent Year Payroll Payroll Contributions Contributions Contributed 2006 S 10,445,026 102.1% $ 942,237 $ 942,237 100.0% 2008 11,320,817 103.0 1,426,906 1,426,906 100.0 2010 12,750,355 153.9 1,976,155 1,976,155 100.0 63 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Exhibit XIH SCHEDULE OF OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FUNDING PROGRESS AND CONTRIBUTIONS LAST TWO VALUATION YEARS (Unaudited)' Actuarial Unfunded Accrued Actuarial Actuarial Actuarial Liability (AAL) Accrued Fiscal Valuation Value of Unit Credit Liability Funded Year Date Assets Method (UAAL) Percent 2008 7/31/2007 - $ 7,926,202 $ (7,926,202) 0.0% 2010 10/1/2009 - 10,944,544 (10,944,544) 0.0 UAAL as Percent of Annual Fiscal Covered Covered Required Actual Percent Year Payroll Payroll Contributions Contributions Contributed 2008 S 61,668,312 12.9% $ 879,280 $ 69,696 7.9% 2010 74,045,518 14.8 1,314,901 370,759 28.2 'Fiscal year 2008 was the first year the City implemented GASB Statement No. 45. Only two actuarial valuation studies have been performed, with the next valuation scheduled for fiscal year 2012. 64 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XIV SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL DEBT SERVICE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Adjustments - Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Actual Budgetary Budgetary Positive Original Final Amounts Basis Basis (Negative) REVENUES: Taxes S 13,849,894 S 13,849,894 S 14,132,173 S - S 14,132,173 S 282,279 Investment revenue - - 46,616 - 46,616 46,616 Total revenues 13,849,894 13,849,894 14,178,789 - 14,178,789 328,895 EXPENDITURES: Debt service: Principal, interest and fiscal charges 17,985,687 17,985,687 14,187,895 3,551,476 17,739,371 246,316 Bond issuance costs - - 78,919 - 78,919 (78,919) Total expenditures 17,985,687 17,985,687 14,266,814 3,551,476 17,818,290 167,397 Deficiency of revenues under expenditures (4,135,793) (4,135,793) (88,025) (3,551,476) (3,639,501) 496,292 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES: Refunding bonds issued - - 3,460,000 - 3,460,000 3,460,000 Payment to refunded bond escrow agent - - (3,774,764) - (3,774,764) (3,774,764) Premium on debt issuance - - 342,473 - 342,473 342,473 Transfers in 4,588,030 4,588,030 1,000,563 3,551,476 4,552,039 (35,991) Total other financing sources 4,588,030 4,588,030 1,028,272 3,551,476 4,579,748 (8,282) Net change in fund balance 452,237 452,237 940,247 - 940,247 488,010 Fund balance at beginning of year 2,414,288 2,414,288 2,414,288 - 2,414,288 - Fund balance at end of year S 2,866,525 S 2,866,525 S 3,354,535 S - S 3,354,535 S 488,010 65 CITY F DENTON 66 NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds are used to account for specific revenues that are legally restricted to expenditures for particular purposes. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - to account for the operations of projects utilizing Community Development Block Grant Funds. Such revenues are restricted to expenditures for specified projects by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Recreation - to account for the revenues and expenditures for the recreation programs that are self-supporting. All expenditures Nvill be reimbursed 100%. Various business operations, such as concessions, fall into this account. Criminal Justice - to account for revenue received from the State of Texas Criminal Justice Division and other grants administered by the police department. Police Confiscation - to account for revenues received from confiscated goods. Expenditures are restricted to enhancing law enforcement. Tourist and Convention - to account for taxes received from hotel and motel occupancy for the purpose of promoting tourism. Gas Well Revenues - to account for the receipt of royalty, pooling, tax, and lease revenue related to gas Nvells. Citizens' Park Trusts - to account for several small trust funds that are for park development. All Other - to account for miscellaneous special revenue sources that are required to finance specific activities. 67 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Special Revenue Funds Communitv Development Criminal Police Block Grant Recreation Justice Confiscation ASSETS Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 813 $ 459,516 $ - $ 232,776 Receivables (net of allowances): Accrued interest - 1,861 - 946 Other - - - - Interfund receivables - 231,083 - - Due from other governments 156,147 - 172,501 - Total assets $ 156,960 $ 692,460 $ 172,501 $ 233,722 LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES LIABILITIES: Accounts payable $ 82,430 $ 59,675 $ - $ - Interfund payables 58,582 - 172,501 - Retainage payable - - - - Deferred revenues - - - - Total liabilities 141,012 59,675 172,501 - FUND BALANCES: Unreserved balance 15,948 632,785 - 233,722 Total fund balance 15,948 632,785 - 233,722 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 156,960 $ 692,460 $ 172,501 $ 233,722 68 Exhibit XV Special Revenue Funds (continued) Total Tourist Citizens' Nonmajor and Gas Well Park All Governmental Convention Revenues Trusts Other Funds $ 172,662 $ 6,467,347 $ 4,611,840 $ 605,997 $ 12,550,951 - 26,273 18,735 2,462 50,277 109,261 695,863 - 37,288 842,412 - - - - 231,083 - - - 1,404,122 1,732,770 $ 281,923 $ 7,189,483 $ 4,630,575 $ 2,049,869 $ 15,407,493 $ 6,848 $ - $ 87,034 $ 200,827 $ 436,814 - - - - 231,083 - - 31,887 31,887 - 201,925 - 667,359 869,284 6,848 201,925 87,034 900,073 1,569,068 275,075 6,987,558 4,543,541 1,149,796 13,838,425 275,075 6,987,558 4,543,541 1,149,796 13,838,425 $ 281,923 $ 7,189,483 $ 4,630,575 $ 2,049,869 $ 15,407,493 69 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Special Revenue Funds Communitv Development Criminal Police Block Grant Recreation Justice Confiscation REVENUES: Fees for services $ - $ 1,238,835 $ - $ - Fines and forfeitures - - - 67,233 Investment revenue - 4,721 - 2,179 Tax revenue - - - - Intergovernmental 2,271,406 - 195,302 - Miscellaneous 79,731 110 - 36,970 Total revenues 2,351,137 1,243,666 195,302 106,382 EXPENDITURES: General government 1,919,548 - - - Public safety - - 142,709 92,904 Public works - - - - Parks and recreation - 1,093,758 - - Capital outlay - 5,495 62,434 - Total expenditures 1,919,548 1,099,253 205,143 92,904 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 431,589 144,413 (9,841) 13,478 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers in - - 12,063 - Transfers out (415,501) - - - Total other financing sources (uses) (415,501) - 12,063 - Net change in fund balances 16,088 144,413 2,222 13,478 Fund balance (deficit) at beginning of year (140) 488,372 (2,222) 220,244 Fund balance at end of year $ 15,948 $ 632,785 $ - $ 233,722 70 Exhibit XVI Special Revenue Funds (continued) Total Tourist Citizens' Nonmajor and Gas Well Park All Governmental Convention Revenues Trusts Other Funds $ - $ 4,562,088 $ 182,927 $ 271,059 $ 6,254,909 - - 382,862 450,095 63,780 39,216 5,782 115,678 1,302,617 - - - 1,302,617 - - - 2,714,187 5,180,895 - 17,362 - 303,120 437,293 1,302,617 4,643,230 222,143 3,677,010 13,741,487 1,125,801 65,607 - 1,743,972 4,854,928 - - - 1,006,351 1,241,964 - - - 1,441 1,441 - - - 141,230 1,234,988 - - 569,889 521,541 1,159,359 1,125,801 65,607 569,889 3,414,535 8,492,680 176,816 4,577,623 (347,746) 262,475 5,248,807 - - - 105,133 117,196 (4,401,306) - (3,146,220) (7,963,027) - (4,401,306) - (3,041,087) (7,845,831) 176,816 176,317 (347,746) (2,778,612) (2,597,024) 98,259 6,811,241 4,891,287 3,928,408 16,435,449 $ 275,075 $ 6,987,558 $ 4,543,541 $ 1,149,796 $ 13,838,425 71 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XVH SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: RECREATION FUND FOR YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Adjustments - Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Actual Budgetary Budgetary Positive Original Final Amounts Basis Basis (Negative) REVENUES: Fees for services $ 1,405,702 $ 1,405,702 $ 1,238,835 $ - $ 1,238,835 $ (166,867) Investment revenue 20,000 20,000 4,721 - 4,721 (15,279) Miscellaneous - - 110 - 110 110 Total revenues 1,425,702 1,425,702 1,243,666 - 1,243,666 (182,036) EXPENDITURES: Parks and recreation 1,175,752 1,175,752 1,093,758 - 1,093,758 81,994 Capital outlay - - 5,495 - 5,495 (5,495) Total expenditures 1,175,752 1,175,752 1,099,253 - 1,099,253 76,499 Excess of revenues over expenditures 249,950 249,950 144,413 - 144,413 (105,537) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers out (154,405) (154,405) - - - 154,405 Total other financing uses (154,405) (154,405) - - - 154,405 Net change in fund balance 95,545 95,545 144,413 - 144,413 48,868 Fund balance at beginning of year 488,372 488,372 488,372 - 488,372 - Fund balance at end of year $ 583,917 $ 583,917 $ 632,785 $ - $ 632,785 $ 48,868 72 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XVHI SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: POLICE CONFISCATION FUND FOR YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Adjustments - Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Actual Budgetary Budgetary Positive Original Final Amounts Basis Basis (Negative) REVENUES: Fines and forfeitures $ 178,875 $ 178,875 S 104,203 S - $ 104,203 S (74,672) Investment Revenue - - 2,179 - 2,179 2,179 Total revenues 178,875 178,875 106,382 - 106,382 (72,493) EXPENDITURES: Public safety 126,000 126,000 92,904 - 92,904 33,096 Capital outlay - - - - - - Total expenditures 126,000 126,000 92,904 - 92,904 33,096 Net change in fund balance 52,875 52,875 13,478 - 13,478 (39,397) Fund balance at beginning of year 220,244 220,244 220,244 - 220,244 - Fund balance at end of year S 273,119 S 273,119 S 233,722 S - $ 233,722 S (39,397) 73 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XIX SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: TOURIST AND CONVENTION FUND FOR YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Adjustments - Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Actual Budgetary Budgetary Positive Original Final Amounts Basis Basis (Negative) REVENUES: Taxes S 1,347,585 S 1,347,585 S 1,302,617 S - S 1,302,617 S (44,968) Total revenues 1,347,585 1,347,585 1,302,617 - 1,302,617 (44,968) EXPENDITURES: General government 1,382,665 1,382,665 1,125,801 - 1,125,801 256,864 Total expenditures 1,382,665 1,382,665 1,125,801 - 1,125,801 256,864 Net change in fund balance (35,080) (35,080) 176,816 - 176,816 211,896 Fund balance at beginning of year 98,259 98,259 98,259 - 98,259 - Fund balance at end of year $ 63,179 $ 63,179 S 275,075 $ - $ 275,075 $ 211,896 74 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XX SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: GAS WELL REVENUES FUND FOR YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Adjustments - Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Actual Budgetary Budgetary Positive Original Final Amounts Basis Basis (Negative) REVENUES: Fees for service S 3,125,072 S 3,125,072 S 4,562,088 S - $ 4,562,088 S 1,437,016 Investment revenue 54,000 54,000 63,780 - 63,780 9,780 Miscellaneous 75,000 75,000 17,362 - 17,362 (57,638) Total revenues 3,254,072 3,254,072 4,643,230 - 4,643,230 1,389,158 EXPENDITURES: General government 365,000 365,000 65,607 - 65,607 299,393 Total expenditures 365,000 365,000 65,607 - 65,607 299,393 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over(under)expenditures 2,889,072 2,889,072 4,577,623 - 4,577,623 1,688,551 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Transfers in 1,758,992 1,758,992 - - - (1,758,992) Transfers out (4,371,880) (5,345,462) (4,401,306) - (4,401,306) 944,156 Total other financing uses (2,612,888) (3,586,470) (4,401,306) - (4,401,306) (814,836) Net change in fund balance 276,184 (697,398) 176,317 - 176,317 873,715 Fund balance at beginning of year 6,811,241 6,811,241 6,811,241 - 6,811,241 - Fund balance at end of year S 7,087,425 S 6,113,843 S 6,987,558 S - $ 6,987,558 S 873,715 75 CITY F DENTON 76 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Internal Service Funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department for another. The Citv has five Internal Service Funds as follows: Materials Management Fund - to account for the financing of goods and services provided by Materials Management to other City departments. Such costs provided by Materials Management are billed to the other departments at standard labor charges and cost of parts plus 0 percent. Actual costs include depreciation on machineiv and equipment used to provide the service. Fleet Services Fund - to account for the financing of goods and services provided by the Municipal Garage and Machine Shop to other City departments. Municipal Garage and Machine Shop billings include labor charges and cost of parts plus 25 percent. Actual costs include depreciation on the building, improvements, machineiv, and equipment used to provide the service. Health Insurance Fund - to account for the accumulation of resources for the self-insurance activities of the Citv for employee medical insurance as well as other employee insurance benefits including long-term disability, short-term disability, dental insurance, and vision insurance. Risk Retention Fund - to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of employee insurance claims and insurance policies. Technology Services Fund - to account for the accumulation of resources to provide computer programming services, systems analysis, imaging, print shop, and office services to City departments. 77 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Materials Fleet Health Risk Management Services Insurance Retention Fund Fund Fund Fund ASSETS: Current assets: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 22,232 $ 1,135,894 $ 4,804,377 $ 5,818,964 Receivables, net of allowances: Accrued interest 90 4,615 19,517 23,639 Other - 113,371 - - Merchandise inventory 8,112,260 68,938 - - Deferred debt issuance costs 391 2,817 - - Total current assets 8,134,973 1,325,635 4,823,894 5,842,603 Noncurrent assets: Restricted assets: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value - - - - Accrued interest - - - - Escrow deposit - - 241,000 - Deferred debt issuance costs 2,594 11,326 - - Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 710,105 3,508,465 - 2,255 Total noncurrent assets 712,699 3,519,791 241,000 2,255 Total assets 8,847,672 4,845,426 5,064,894 5,844,858 LIABILITIES: Current liabilities: Accounts payable 93,410 310,942 10,825 23,312 Retainage payable - 18,997 - - Claims payable - - 826,510 572,841 Compensated absences payable 36,070 78,029 - 14,846 Accrued interest 2,677 10,130 - - Interfund payables 6,652,254 - - - Leases payable - - - - Payable from restricted assets: Accounts payable - 116,668 - - Certificate and general obligation bonds 27,342 194,547 - - Total current liabilities 6,811,753 729,313 837,335 610,999 Noncurrent liabilities: Leases payable - - - - Payable from restricted assets: General obligation bonds payable - 1,552,102 - - Certificates of obligation 435,733 142,863 - - Deferred amount on refunding - (17,530) - - Compensated absences payable 1,182 14,328 - 7,370 Claims payable - - - 2,045,102 Municipal pension obligation 44,270 76,979 - 22,774 Other post employment benefits 25,919 40,541 - 10,388 Total noncurrent liabilities: 507,104 1,809,283 - 2,085,634 Total liabilities 7,318,857 2,538,596 837,335 2,696,633 NET ASSETS: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 247,030 1,636,483 - 2,255 Unrestricted 1,281,785 670,347 4,227,559 3,145,970 Total net assets S 1,528,815 S 2,306,830 S 4,227,559 S 3,148,225 78 Exhibit XXI Total Technolo*- Internal Services Service Fund Funds $ 2,029,868 $ 13,811,335 8,246 56,107 477 113,848 - 8,181,198 1,894 5,102 2,040,485 22,167,590 77,154 77,154 314 314 - 241,000 2,046 15,966 3,933,952 8,154,777 4,013,466 8,489,211 6,053,951 30,656,801 255,732 694,221 - 18,997 - 1,399,351 130,724 259,669 4,612 17,419 - 6,652,254 325,811 325,811 - 116,668 385,462 607,351 1,102,341 10,091,741 919,677 919,677 147,532 1,699,634 404,544 983,140 (22) (17,552) 16,812 39,692 - 2,045,102 121,307 265,330 47,837 124,685 1,657,687 6,059,708 2,760,028 16,151,449 1,828,102 3,713,870 1,465,821 10,791,482 S 3,293,923 S 14,505,352 79 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET ASSETS INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Materials Fleet Health Risk Management Services Insurance Retention Fund Fund Fund Fund OPERATING REVENUES: Charges for goods and services $ 5,865,252 S 7,493,051 S 16,126,650 S 2,642,679 Miscellaneous 37,624 20,571 759,798 33,469 Total operating revenues 5,902,876 7,513,622 16,886,448 2,676,148 OPERATING EXPENSES: Operating expenses before depreciation 5,596,056 7,197,855 17,036,714 849,629 Depreciation 17,629 122,624 - 1,574 Total operating expenses 5,613,685 7,320,479 17,036,714 851,203 Operating income (loss) 289,191 193,143 (150,266) 1,824,945 NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES): Investment revenue 195 8,648 33,458 43,569 Interest expense and fiscal charges (21,767) (88,575) - - Gain (loss) on disposal of capital assets - - - - Total non-operating revenues (expenses) (21,572) (79,927) 33,458 43,569 Income before contributions and transfers 267,619 113,216 (116,808) 1,868,514 Transfers in - 264,020 2,706,841 400 Transfers out - - - - Change in net assets 267,619 377,236 2,590,033 1,868,914 Total net assets at beginning of year 1,261,196 1,929,594 1,637,526 1,279,311 Total net assets at end of year $ 1,528,815 S 2,306,830 S 4,227,559 S 3,148,225 80 Exhibit XXII Total Technolo*- Internal Services Service Fund Funds $ 7,329,304 S 39,456,936 1,099 852,561 7,330,403 40,309,497 5,032,060 35,712,314 1,592,899 1,734,726 6,624,959 37,447,040 705,444 2,862,457 10,408 96,278 (55,074) (165,416) (114,801) (114,801) (159,467) (183,939) 545,977 2,678,518 564,407 3,535,668 (263,519) (263,519) 846,865 5,950,667 2,447,058 8,554,685 $ 3,293,923 S 14,505,352 81 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Materials Fleet Management Services Fund Fund CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash received from customers $ 5,908,602 $ 7,543,714 Cash paid to employees for services (864,908) (1,622,835) Cash paid to suppliers (4,977,855) (5,488,752) Net cash provided (used) by operations 65,839 432,127 CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfers out - - Transfers in - 264,020 Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities - 264,020 CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Principal payments on capital debt (25,890) (190,892) Interest and fiscal charges (21,470) (87,936) Principal payments under capital lease obligation - - Acquisition and construction of capital assets - (457,256) Net cash used by capital financing activities (47,360) (736,084) CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Proceeds from sale and maturities of investment securities (17,210) 1,344,827 Purchase of investment securities - (1,351,030) Interest received on investments 130 11,999 Net cash provided (used) by investing activities (17,080) 5,796 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 1,399 (34,141) Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 389 125,487 Cash and cash equivalents at end of year 1,788 91,346 Investments, at fair value 20,444 1,044,548 Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 22,232 $ 1,135,894 RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) TO NET CASH PROVIDED (USED) BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Operating income (loss) $ 289,191 $ 193,143 Adjustments: Depreciation expense 17,629 122,624 Decrease (Increase) in receivables 5,726 30,092 Decrease (Increase) in inventories 501,440 (9,226) Decrease in prepaid items 657 - Increase (Decrease) in accounts payable (692,496) 29,178 Increase (Decrease) in compensated absences (13,412) 7,675 Decrease in interfund payables (77,257) - Increase in municipal pension obligation 24,399 44,058 Increase in other post employment benefits 9,962 14,583 Total adjustments (223,352) 238,984 Net cash provided (used) by operating activities $ 65,839 $ 432,127 NONCASH CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Increase ( decrease) in fair value of investments 11 (3,507) 82 Exhibit XXHI Total Health Risk Technolo*- Internal Insurance Retention Services Service Fund Fund Fund Funds $ 16,886,448 $ 2,676,148 S 7,330,164 S 40,345,076 - (460,992) (2,393,699) (5,342,434) (17,151,807) (1,797,781) (2,487,362) (31,903,557) (265,359) 417,375 2,449,103 3,099,085 - (263,519) (263,519) 2,706,841 400 564,407 3,535,668 2,706,841 400 300,888 3,272,149 - (380,424) (597,206) (54,354) (163,760) - (812,565) (812,565) (400) (1,162,882) (1,620,538) (400) (2,410,225) (3,194,069) (630,791) 5,048,386 949,690 6,694,902 (1,705,793) (5,630,652) (1,322,922) (10,010,397) 29,908 56,513 13,849 112,399 (2,306,676) (525,753) (359,383) (3,203,096) 134,806 (108,378) (19,617) (25,931) 251,551 576,325 189,059 1,142,811 386,357 467,947 169,442 1,116,880 4,418,020 5,351,017 1,937,580 12,771,609 $ 4,804,377 $ 5,818,964 S 2,107,022 S 13,888,489 S (150,266) S 1,824,945 S 705,444 S 2,862,457 1,574 1,592,899 1,734,726 - (239) 35,579 - 492,214 - 657 (115,093) (1,426,720) 45,532 (2,159,599) 752 17,362 12,377 - - (77,257) 13,103 70,584 152,144 3,721 17,521 45,787 (115,093) (1,407,570) 1,743,659 236,628 S (265,359) S 417,375 S 2,449,103 S 3,099,085 (4,069) (15,401) (4,820) (27,786) 83 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXIV COMBINING STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES AGENCY FUNDS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Agency Funds Other Total Payroll Developers' Agency Agency Fund Escrow Fund Funds Funds ASSETS: Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 935,415 $ 224,138 $ 172,347 $ 1,331,900 Accrued interest - 911 - 911 Other assets - - 44,040 44,040 Total assets S 935,415 S 225,049 S 216,387 $ 1,376,851 LIABILITIES: Accounts payable $ 935,415 $ 225,049 $ 216,387 $ 1,376,851 Total liabilities S 935,415 S 225,049 S 216,387 S 1,376,851 84 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXV COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN ASSETS AND LIABILITIES AGENCY FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Balance Balance October 1, 2009 Additions Deductions September 30, 2010 PAYROLL FUND ASSETS Cash and deposits $ 910,664 $ 38,939,392 $ 38,914,641 $ 935,415 Total assets $ 910,664 $ 38,939,392 $ 38,914,641 $ 935,415 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ 910,664 $ 38,939,392 $ 38,914,641 $ 935,415 Total liabilities $ 910,664 $ 38,939,392 $ 38,914,641 $ 935,415 DEVELOPERS' ESCROW FUND ASSETS Cash and deposits $ 2,774,744 $ 33,209 $ 2,583,815 $ 224,138 Accrued interest 18,991 - 18,080 911 Total assets $ 2,793,735 $ 33,209 $ 2,601,895 $ 225,049 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ 2,793,735 $ 33,209 $ 2,601,895 $ 225,049 Total liabilities $ 2,793,735 $ 33,209 $ 2,601,895 $ 225,049 OTHER AGENCY FUNDS ASSETS Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 195,226 $ 1,611,939 $ 1,634,818 $ 172,347 Other assets 72,953 252,521 281,434 44,040 Total assets $ 268,179 $ 1,864,460 $ 1,916,252 $ 216,387 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ 268,179 $ 1,864,460 $ 1,916,252 $ 216,387 Total liabilities $ 268,179 $ 1,864,460 $ 1,916,252 $ 216,387 TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS ASSETS Cash, cash equivalents and investments, at fair value $ 3,880,634 $ 40,584,540 $ 43,133,274 $ 1,331,900 Accrued interest 18,991 - 18,080 911 Other assets 72,953 252,521 281,434 44,040 Total assets $ 3,972,578 $ 40,837,061 $ 43,432,788 $ 1,376,851 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ 4,262,738 $ 40,837,061 $ 43,432,788 $ 1,376,851 Total liabilities $ 4,262,738 $ 40,837,061 $ 43,432,788 $ 1,376,851 85 CITY F DENTON 86 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXVI CAPITAL ASSETS USED IN THE OPERATION OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS COMPARATIVE SCHEDULES BY SOURCE' SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 AND 2010 2010 2009 Governmental funds capital assets: Land $ 12,124,142 $ 12,124,142 Construction in progress 39,839,064 34,154,206 Buildings 55,664,154 53,914,596 Plant, machinery and equipment 44,987,697 43,465,773 Infrastructure 193,226,264 188,241,964 Total governmental funds capital assets $ 345,841,321 S 331,900,681 Investments in governmental funds capital assets by source: General fund $ 177,165,321 $ 176,469,726 Special revenue funds 5,281,322 4,691,851 Capital projects funds 163,394,678 150,739,104 Total governmental funds capital assets $ 345,841,321 S 331,900,681 'This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in internal service funds are excluded from the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 87 CITY OF DENTON, TEtiAS Exhibit tiYVII CAPITAL ASSETS USED IN THE OPERATION OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS SCHEDULE BY FUNCTION AND ACTIVITY SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Plant, Machinery Construction and in Function and Acthity Land Buildings Equipment Infrastructure Progress Total General government: Finance $ - $ - $ 23,100 $ - $ 473,964 $ 497,064 Legal - - 300,937 - - 300,937 Municipal court/judge/clerks - - 292,252 - 113,286 405,538 Human resources - - 27,703 - - 27,703 City manager/economic development - 808,462 325,528 - 2,650,000 3,783,990 Facilities management 355,470 15,040,178 4,521,609 570,021 860,977 21,348,255 Library - 9,386,386 6,499,653 14,715 2,553,088 18,453,842 Building inspections - - 237,710 - - 237,710 Planning/community development - 494,500 125,800 24,057 486,220 1,130,577 Engineering - - 359,827 769,237 - 1,129,064 Code Enforcement - - 190,629 - - 190,629 Airport 881,252 2,985,523 549,978 4,957,085 1,085,945 10,459,783 Total general government 1,236,722 28,715,049 13,454,726 6,335,115 8,223,480 57,965,092 Public,vyorks: Traffic operations - 14,600 1,405,968 16,170,260 1,727,852 19,318,680 Streets 792,665 5,000 3,646,697 159,663,967 22,956,985 187,065,314 Total public works 792,665 19,600 5,052,665 175,834,227 24,684,837 206,383,994 Parks and recreation 8,070,051 14,420,727 6,418,600 11,056,922 3,820,691 43,786,991 Public safety: Fire administration - - 145,011 - - 145,011 Fire operations 2,024,704 12,109,983 10,431,258 - 1,775,608 26,341,553 Fire prevention - - 343,450 - - 343,450 Emergency medical ser-iices - - 453,555 - 247,183 700,738 Police - 11,993 8,381,245 - - 8,393,238 Animal services - 386,802 307,187 - 1,087,265 1,781,254 Total public safety 2,024,704 12,508,778 20,061,706 - 3,110,056 37,705,244 Total governmental funds capital assets $ 12,124,142 S 55,664,154 S 44,987,697 S 193,226,264 S 39,839,064 S 345,841,321 *This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in internal ser-iice funds are excluded from the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 88 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXVIH CAPITAL ASSETS USED IN THE OPERATION OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS SCHEDULE OF CHANGES BY FUNCTION AND ACTIVITY' FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Governmental Governmental Funds Capital Funds Capital Assets Assets Function and Activity October 1, 2009 Additions Deductions September 30, 2010 General government: Finance $ 23,100 $ - $ - $ 23,100 Legal 285,728 15,209 - 300,937 Municipal court/judge/clerks 7,705 284,547 - 292,252 Human resources 27,703 - - 27,703 City manager/economic development 1,070,173 63,817 - 1,133,990 Facilities management 18,973,543 1,571,249 (57,514) 20,487,278 Library 16,133,296 533,576 (766,118) 15,900,754 Building inspections 218,888 18,822 - 237,710 Planning/community development 663,179 - (18,822) 644,357 Engineering 1,129,064 - - 1,129,064 Code Enforcement 230,065 - (39,436) 190,629 Airport 9,258,421 145,402 (29,985) 9,373,838 Total general government 48,020,865 2,632,622 (911,875) 49,741,612 Public works: Traffic operations 16,559,148 1,046,345 (14,665) 17,590,828 Streets 160,446,161 4,266,665 (604,497) 164,108,329 Total public works 177,005,309 5,313,010 (619,162) 181,699,157 Parks and recreation 38,650,950 1,436,270 (120,920) 39,966,300 Public safety: Fire administration 80,106 64,905 - 145,011 Fire operations 24,223,713 636,129 (293,897) 24,565,945 Fire prevention 270,293 73,157 - 343,450 Emergency medical services 72,187 381,368 - 453,555 Police 8,693,246 436,792 (736,800) 8,393,238 Animal services 729,806 - (35,817) 693,989 Total public safety 34,069,351 1,592,351 (1,066,514) 34,595,188 Construction in progress 34,154,206 12,890,102 (7,205,244) 39,839,064 Total governmental funds capital assets $ 331,900,681 S 23,864,355 S (9,923,715) $ 345,841,321 'This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in internal service funds are excluded from the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of internal service funds are included as governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 89 CITY F DENTON 90 STATISTICAL SECTION This part of the City of Denton's comprehensive annual financial report presents detailed information as a context for understanding what the information in the financial statements, note disclosures, and required supplementary information says about the city's overall financial health. Contents Financial Trends These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the city's financial performance and Nvell-being have changed over time. (Tables 1 - 4) Revenue Capacity These schedules contain information to help the reader assess the city's most significant local revenue source, the property tax. These tables do not include the Electric fund information due to confidentiality of information necessary for competitive rates. (Tables 5 - 8) Debt Capacity These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the city's current level of outstanding debt and the city's ability to issue additional debt in the future. (Tables 9 - 12) Demographic and Economic Information These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the city's financial activities take place. (Tables 13 - 14) Operating Information These schedules contain service and infrastructure data to help the reader understand how the information in the city's financial report relates to the services the city provides and the activities it performs. (Tables 15 - 17) Sources: Unless otherwise noted, the information in these schedules is derived from the comprehensive annual financial reports for the relevant year. The city implemented GASB Statement 34 in 2002; schedules presenting government-wide information include information beginning in that year. 91 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NET ASSETS BY COMPONENT LAST NINE FISCAL YEARS (accrual basis of accounting) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Governmental activities Invested in capital assets, net of related debt $ 88,162,242 S 100,876,627 S 107,754,576 S 107,112,321 $ 107,410,289 Restricted 1,000,906 428,426 296,731 451,046 439,658 Unrestricted 14,091,681 13,185,865 14,615,294 18,519,185 30,352,691 Total governmental activities net assets 103,254,829 114,490,918 122,666,601 126,082,552 138,202,638 Business-type activities Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 131,316,531 163,784,452 172,589,102 193,657,258 213,074,701 Restricted 28,456,447 30,558,417 35,812,117 30,863,580 30,974,925 Unrestricted 94,356,569 78,074,629 78,543,929 76,726,025 90,843,185 Total business-type activities net assets 254,129,547 272,417,498 286,945,148 301,246,863 334,892,811 Primary government Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 219,478,773 264,661,079 280,343,678 300,769,579 320,484,990 Restricted 29,457,353 30,986,843 36,108,848 31,314,626 31,414,583 Unrestricted 108,448,250 91,260,494 93,159,223 95,245,210 121,195,876 Total primary government net assets S 357,384,376 S 386,908,416 S 409,611,749 S 427,329,415 S 473,095,449 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports 92 Table 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ 99,858,383 $ 102,040,021 $ 102,110,134 $ 104,636,239 886,141 1,454,579 1,947,553 2,894,676 30,738,026 37,610,966 38,252,078 46,480,569 131,482,550 141,105,566 142,309,765 154,011,484 242,015,614 263,325,859 282,463,031 277,356,195 31,015,188 33,087,609 33,380,595 30,598,923 107,837,825 107,545,434 109,826,810 131,497,936 380,868,627 403,958,902 425,670,436 439,453,054 341,873,997 365,365,880 384,573,165 381,992,434 31,901,329 34,542,188 35,328,148 33,493,599 138,575,851 145,156,400 148,078,888 177,978,505 $ 512,351,177 $ 545,064,468 $ 567,980,201 $ 593,464,538 93 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CHANGES IN NET ASSETS LAST NINE FISCAL YEARS (accrual basis of accounting) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 EXPENSES Governmental activities: General government $ 16,240,418 $ 22,933,107 $ 26,411,608 $ 26,675,799 $ 22,165,661 Public safety 27,322,153 28,837,158 30,508,765 33,642,445 36,626,635 Public works 13,691,514 10,274,822 11,053,131 11,986,881 12,485,281 Parks and recreation 7,362,939 8,419,508 9,418,580 9,912,996 10,497,241 Interest expense 4,252,970 4,186,051 4,494,851 4,175,466 4,333,428 Total governmental activities expenses 68,869,994 74,650,646 81,886,935 86,393,587 86,108,246 Business-type activities: Electric system 99,831,597 113,674,296 119,650,157 132,829,976 145,368,132 Water system 18,095,107 20,424,805 21,278,791 22,380,589 26,708,095 Wastewater system 15,555,687 16,560,308 18,528,348 18,808,374 19,027,926 Solid waste 11,658,565 12,366,910 11,301,940 13,168,880 13,454,556 Building inspections 1,731,031 - - - - Total business-type activities expenses 146,871,987 163,026,319 170,759,236 187,187,819 204,558,709 Total primary government expenses 215,741,981 237,676,965 252,646,171 273,581,406 290,666,955 PROGRAM REVENUES Governmental activities: Charges for services: General government 1,428,098 3,654,387 3,417,657 3,333,866 3,904,941 Public safety 4,082,859 4,371,407 3,382,791 4,965,056 6,023,100 Public works 1,085,200 1,803,025 1,280,423 1,086,387 802,711 Parks and recreation 1,597,496 347,110 2,143,756 2,613,567 3,234,347 Operating grants and contributions 2,480,309 3,221,264 3,264,777 2,995,978 3,712,817 Capital grants and contributions 6,379,228 14,023,056 14,046,071 7,426,194 5,536,786 Total governmental activities program revenues 17,053,190 27,420,249 27,535,475 22,421,048 23,214,702 Business-type activities: Charges for services: Electric system 91,315,761 105,509,934 111,742,276 129,343,037 149,419,800 Water system 22,352,636 24,552,658 24,331,555 24,890,289 33,436,651 Wastewater system 15,398,218 17,144,312 19,210,529 20,423,424 23,670,458 Solid waste 10,383,296 11,728,024 13,172,556 13,600,512 14,624,132 Building inspections 1,415,998 - - - - Capital grants and contributions 8,504,900 19,022,045 8,415,470 9,808,842 10,022,654 Total business-type activities program revenues 149,370,809 177,956,973 176,872,386 198,066,104 231,173,695 Total primary government program revenues 166,423,999 205,377,222 204,407,861 220,487,152 254,388,397 NET (EXPENSE)/REVENUE Governmental activities (51,816,804) (47,230,397) (54,351,460) (63,972,539) (62,893,544) Business-type activities 2,498,822 14,930,654 6,113,150 10,878,285 26,614,986 Total primary government program net expense S (49,317,982) S (32,299,743) S (48,238,310) S (53,094,254) S (36,278,558) 94 Table 2 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ 22,145,804 $ 26,408,949 $ 27,482,131 $29,569,535 42,161,674 43,426,526 45,368,783 47,998,906 14,008,867 15,448,473 15,816,065 15,767,926 11,564,247 12,927,020 12,755,037 12,854,336 4,658,128 5,372,868 5,733,268 5,121,329 94,538,720 103,583,836 107,155,284 111,312,032 123,926,967 138,791,009 124,901,262 114,903,831 25,839,614 26,226,068 28,636,190 27,219,944 18,785,353 19,413,247 19,909,229 20,560,600 15,451,025 17,065,295 18,036,331 18,028,832 184,002,959 201,495,619 191,483,012 180,713,207 278,541,679 305,079,455 298,638,296 292,025,239 3,694,869 3,310,592 4,792,856 3,551,733 6,160,611 6,461,037 6,554,619 6,431,007 800,378 853,091 586,377 1,425,683 3,220,837 3,292,528 2,990,921 3,372,579 2,991,224 3,306,325 2,281,136 3,407,085 5,399,220 7,308,398 3,641,296 15,206,424 22,267,139 24,531,971 20,847,205 33,394,511 128,973,477 138,467,222 128,511,236 119,156,314 27,830,767 30,843,797 30,067,774 28,407,954 22,634,454 23,184,369 22,342,174 21,917,651 15,967,051 16,660,375 18,386,616 18,432,245 8,440,634 5,742,139 8,099,722 5,153,568 203,846,383 214,897,902 207,407,522 193,067,732 226,113,522 239,429,873 228,254,727 226,462,243 (72,271,581) (79,051,865) (86,308,079) (77,917,521) 19,843,424 13,402,283 15,924,510 12,354,525 $ (52,428,157) $ (65,649,582) $ (70,383,569) $ (65,562,996) (continued) 95 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CHANGES IN NET ASSETS LAST NINE FISCAL YEARS (accrual basis of accounting) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 GENERAL REVENUES AND OTHER CHANGES IN NET ASSETS Governmental activities: Taxes: Property tax $ 19,075,268 $ 20,964,738 $ 23,149,916 $ 26,678,783 $ 30,000,847 Sales tax 15,875,935 16,047,297 17,871,380 18,998,057 20,343,413 Franchise tax 11,930,612 12,571,989 13,215,882 14,250,484 16,499,994 Hotel occupancy tax 938,225 855,879 911,505 988,573 1,132,500 Beverage tax 174,264 192,243 208,855 215,872 257,950 Bingo tax 20,673 28,146 21,127 25,466 24,260 Investment income 3,990,679 1,451,106 1,332,568 1,148,517 1,967,473 Miscellaneous 3,246,851 5,354,783 4,213,163 4,218,245 3,892,087 Transfers 1,073,857 1,000,305 1,410,947 864,493 895,106 Total governmental activities 56,326,364 58,466,486 62,335,343 67,388,490 75,013,630 Business-type activities: Investment income 11,819,512 4,143,039 2,698,551 3,252,342 7,298,870 Miscellaneous 379,357 214,563 914,087 1,035,581 627,198 Transfers (1,073,857) (1,000,305) (1,410,947) (864,493) (895,106) Total business-type activities 11,125,012 3,357,297 2,201,691 3,423,430 7,030,962 Total primary government 67,451,376 61,823,783 64,537,034 70,811,920 82,044,592 CHANGE IN NET ASSETS Governmental activities 4,509,560 11,236,089 7,983,883 3,415,951 12,120,086 Business-type activities 13,623,834 18,287,951 8,314,841 14,301,715 33,645,948 Total primary government $ 18,133,394 S 29,524,040 $ 16,298,724 $ 17,717,666 S 45,766,034 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports 96 Table 2 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ 34,756,356 $ 41,499,791 $ 43,187,433 $43,144,645 20,653,932 21,440,839 20,466,772 20,484,954 15,197,943 16,197,042 15,669,981 17,457,994 1,268,627 1,369,667 1,239,261 1,302,617 294,623 319,541 338,700 347,940 23,708 23,653 22,915 22,611 3,632,744 3,287,282 2,413,339 684,709 3,199,131 4,214,028 3,327,758 5,690,969 (13,475,571) 323,038 846,119 482,801 65,551,493 88,674,881 87,512,278 89,619,240 12,108,632 7,817,671 6,075,453 1,653,515 548,189 195,055 557,690 257,379 13,475,571 (323,038) (846,119) (482,801) 26,132,392 7,689,688 5,787,024 1,428,093 91,683,885 96,364,569 93,299,302 91,047,333 (6,720,088) 9,623,016 1,204,199 11,701,719 45,975,816 21,091,971 21,711,534 13,782,618 $ 39,255,728 $ 30,714,987 $ 22,915,733 $ 25,484,337 97 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS (modified accrual basis of accounting) 2001 2002 2003 2004 General fund Reserved for encumbrances $ 199,135 $ 431,528 $ 137,051 $ 112,292 Unreserved, designated - - - - Unreserved, undesignated 9,571,700 8,033,092 8,442,942 9,504,988 Total general fund 9,770,835 8,464,620 8,579,993 9,617,280 All other governmental funds Reserved for: Debt service 1,594,620 934,406 428,426 296,731 Capital projects 27,293,278 37,584,615 24,389,226 26,548,130 Encumbrances 3,457,022 2,899 14,295 - Unreserved, undesignated reported in: Special revenue funds 509,513 2,390,065 1,678,620 3,607,200 Total all other governmental funds $ 32,854,433 $ 40,911,985 $ 26,510,567 $ 30,452,061 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports 98 Table 3 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ 210,818 $ 242,088 $ - $ 123,696 $ - $ - - 1,550,000 4,360,649 - - - 9,718,368 13,264,027 18,199,161 25,253,797 22,794,955 21,526,779 9,929,186 15,056,115 22,559,810 25,377,493 22,794,955 21,526,779 451,046 439,658 886,141 1,954,955 2,414,288 3,354,535 27,671,252 32,840,640 48,971,610 57,887,531 35,339,606 44,970,571 - - - 5,515 - - 3,614,489 5,534,701 8,896,111 9,534,627 16,435,449 13,838,425 $ 31,736,787 $ 38,814,999 $ 58,753,862 $ 69,382,628 $ 54,189,343 $ 62,163,531 99 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS (modified accrual basis of accounting) 2001 2002 2003 2004 REVENUES: Taxes: Property tax $ 16,579,367 $ 18,894,068 $ 20,964,737 $ 22,986,590 Sales tax 17,489,408 15,875,933 16,047,297 17,684,899 Hotel occupancy tax 910,907 938,225 855,879 911,505 Beverage tax 165,379 174,264 192,243 208,855 Bingo tax 26,856 20,675 28,147 21,127 Licenses and permits 233,219 91,049 1,151,169 1,700,044 Franchise fees 10,709,710 11,930,612 12,571,989 13,215,882 Fines and forfeitures 3,222,517 3,522,895 3,422,952 3,338,979 Fees for services 4,118,361 6,818,363 8,556,002 10,022,001 Investment revenue 1,835,650 2,963,755 1,451,106 1,332,568 Intergovernmental 6,397,702 3,573,399 5,757,543 6,655,240 Miscellaneous 1,039,093 656,186 1,304,367 5,012,607 Total revenues 62,728,169 65,459,424 72,303,431 83,090,297 EXPENDITURES: General government 16,750,445 14,748,842 21,025,986 24,894,438 Public safety 23,957,206 26,155,876 28,406,261 29,689,083 Public works 6,954,265 7,949,472 4,627,292 4,752,409 Parks and recreation 6,336,352 6,962,373 8,094,780 8,404,074 Capital outlay 15,842,919 15,005,659 22,845,204 13,463,619 Debt service: Principal retirement 3,853,087 5,019,164 5,027,222 5,502,897 Advance refunding escrow - - - - Bond issuance costs - - - - Interest and other charges 3,285,426 4,215,673 4,487,778 4,544,502 Total expenditures 76,979,700 80,057,059 94,514,523 91,251,022 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (14,251,531) (14,597,635) (22,211,092) (8,160,725) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES): Refunding bonds issued - - 4,130,000 - Payment to refunded bond escrow agent - - (4,130,000) - Issuance of long-term debt 20,992,749 20,120,000 6,913,483 11,805,000 Premium on debt issuance - - - - Proceeds of capital lease - - - - Sale of capital assets - - - - Transfers in 3,193,675 1,454,541 2,192,680 3,496,765 Transfers (out) (1,253,889) (1,906,600) (1,181,116) (2,162,259) Total other financing sources (uses) 22,932,535 19,667,941 7,925,047 13,139,506 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES $ 8,681,004 $ 5,070,306 $ (14,286,045) $ 41978,781 Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures 11.7% 14.2% 13.3% 12.9% Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports 100 Table 4 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $ 26,640,930 $ 30,019,657 $ 34,662,336 $ 41,436,012 $ 42,980,209 $ 43,326,427 18,998,058 20,343,413 20,653,932 21,440,839 20,466,772 20,484,954 988,573 1,132,500 1,268,627 1,369,667 1,239,261 1,302,617 215,872 257,950 294,623 319,541 338,700 347,940 25,465 24,260 23,708 23,653 22,915 22,611 1,235,337 1,383,169 1,097,323 1,080,580 1,265,733 1,198,552 14,250,484 16,499,994 15,197,943 16,197,042 15,669,981 17,457,994 3,959,476 4,639,922 5,065,049 5,262,189 4,972,905 4,828,159 8,255,342 6,779,904 7,624,265 7,951,665 7,595,440 12,244,258 1,148,517 1,967,473 3,632,744 3,287,282 2,415,817 684,709 5,443,517 5,254,058 3,852,513 8,094,307 4,049,439 16,639,038 1,931,762 3,424,786 3,006,751 3,778,673 3,183,891 1,002,133 83,093,333 91,727,086 96,379,814 110,241,450 104,201,063 119,539,392 22,272,681 20,539,006 20,158,739 24,110,329 25,223,041 26,909,485 33,057,120 35,813,329 37,755,272 40,855,112 42,540,423 44,398,442 5,247,546 5,206,224 5,624,287 6,596,191 6,753,314 6,517,717 9,176,686 9,548,416 10,234,361 11,557,168 11,444,577 11,072,061 11,760,356 9,056,102 17,237,922 23,275,703 21,863,647 14,164,662 5,642,487 5,914,819 6,808,439 8,479,136 9,479,243 9,277,804 216,148 - - - 148,575 - 293,668 70,745 314,286 530,137 105,392 78,919 4,018,765 4,210,628 4,389,307 5,261,346 5,570,770 5,095,245 91,685,457 90,359,269 102,522,613 120,665,122 123,128,982 117,514,335 (8,592,124) 1,367,817 (6,142,799) (10,423,672) (18,927,919) 2,025,057 7,316,688 - 24,780,000 24,595,000 6,120,000 3,460,000 (7,491,938) - - (25,117,336) (6,265,255) (3,774,764) 9,070,000 9,550,000 - 22,230,000 - 6,905,000 404,361 49,644 528,630 937,755 246,012 498,682 - - 1,108,131 69,897 - - - - - 582,087 44,865 160,495 3,341,047 4,095,018 12,323,132 2,406,678 10,286,496 5,815,769 (2,451,402) (2,857,338) (5,154,536) (1,833,960) (9,280,022) (8,384,227) 10,188,756 10,837,324 33,585,357 23,870,121 1,152,096 4,680,955 $ 1,596,632 $ 12,205,141 $ 27,442,558 $ 13,446,449 $ (17,775,82L _L 6,706,012 12.7% 12.5% 13.5% 14.7% 15.1% 14.0% 101 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Table 5 ASSESSED VALUE AND ESTIMATED ACTUAL VALUE OF TAXABLE PROPERTY LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Estimated Market Value Less: Total Taxable Total Direct Fiscal Real Personal Tax-Exempt Assessed Tax Year Property Property Property Value Rate 2001 S 2,959,019,481 S 665,990,501 $ 565,373,249 S 3,059,636,733 0.52815 2002 3,343,400,379 618,020,979 594,129,333 3,367,292,025 0.54815 2003 3,761,322,990 654,159,101 712,069,576 3,703,412,515 0.54815 2004 4,129,344,174 659,848,833 746,990,136 4,042,202,871 0.54815 2005 4,468,428,305 695,572,385 789,056,859 4,374,943,831 0.59815 2006 4,876,565,660 733,405,037 820,593,886 4,789,376,811 0.60815 2007 5,475,770,871 952,273,984 986,815,946 5,441,228,909 0.62652 2008 6,159,567,238 969,219,527 1,039,286,990 6,089,499,775 0.66652 2009 6,443,103,507 938,547,047 1,090,291,442 6,291,359,112 0.66652 2010 6,619,118,472 922,539,801 1,213,749,251 6,327,909,022 0.66652 Source: Denton Central Appraisal District 102 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Table 6 PROPERTY TAX RATES (PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE) DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING' GOVERNMENTS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Overlapping Rates Denton City of Denton Independent Total Direct Fiscal Operating Debt Service Total Denton School & Overlapping Year Rate Rate Direct Rate County District Rates 2001 0.31948 0.20867 0.52815 0.23193 1.84400 2.60408 2002 0.31948 0.22867 0.54815 0.25193 1.85400 2.65408 2003 0.33816 0.20999 0.54815 0.24897 1.86400 2.66112 2004 0.34928 0.19887 0.54815 0.24717 1.86400 2.65932 2005 0.39928 0.19887 0.59815 0.25480 1.86400 2.71695 2006 0.42928 0.17887 0.60815 0.24648 1.86400 2.71863 2007 0.44765 0.17887 0.62652 0.23192 1.76400 2.62244 2008 0.44765 0.21887 0.66652 0.23577 1.49000 2.39229 2009 0.44765 0.21887 0.66652 0.24980 1.49000 2.40632 2010 0.44765 0.21887 0.66652 0.24980 1.49000 2.40632 Source: Denton County Tax Office 'Overlapping rates are those of local and county governments that apple to property owners with the C.1tp of Denton. 103 CITY F DENTON 104 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Table 7 PRINCIPAL PROPERTY TAXPAYERS CURRENT YEAR AND NINE YEARS AGO 2010 2001 Percentage of Percentage of Taxable Total Taxable Taxable Total Taxable Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Name of Taxpayer Value Values Name of Taxpayer Value Value2 Columbia Medical Columbia Medical Center of Denton Center of Denton (Denton Regional (Denton Regional Hospital) $ 83,900,462 13.26% Hospital) $ 48,088,644 1.57% Inland Western Crossing (Denton PAC'C'AR Inc -Crossing) 53,041,520 8.38% (Peterbilt) 45,223,673 1.48% PAC'C'AR Inc Verizon Southwest (Peterbilt) 52,109,610 8.23% (Telephone Company) 39,974,849 1.31% Verizon Southwest (Telephone Company) 32,549,140 5.14% United Copper 34,137,388 1.12% GEL Timberlinks (The Timbers at Denton) 29,500,000 4.66% Tetra Pak 26,575,056 0.87% Aldi, LLC:' (Grocery Triad Denton Hospital Distributor) 25,554,780 4.04% (Presbyterian Hospital) 20,768,756 0.68% Denton Education Housing Corp (LTniyersity Anderson Courtyard Merchandisers Apartments) 21,693,000 3.43% (Distribution Center) 20,437,452 0.67% SCI Gateway at Denton Fund 25 LLC (Gateway at Denton Apartments) 20,717,990 3.27% Golden Triangle Mall 17,901,804 0.59% C'NL Retirement C'RSI (I\ layhill Hospital) 19,778,423 3.13% Wal-Mart Supercenter 16,232,497 0.53% Value Family Andrevv Corporations Properties (Pecan (Communication Creek Mobile Home Antenna Park) 19,776,368 3.13% Manufacturer) 15,123,695 0.49% Total S 358,621,293 56.67% Total $ 284,463,814 9.31% Source: Denton Central Appraisal District iTotal taxable assessed value for tax year 2009 (fiscal year 2010) is $6,327,909,022. Total taxable assessed value for tax year 2000 (fiscal year 2001) is $3,059,636,733. 105 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS LAST SIX FISCAL YEARS Taxes Levied Adjustments Adjusted Collected Within the Within the to Levy in Taxes Levied Fiscal Year of the Lei-v Collections Fiscal Fiscal Year Subsequent for the Percentage in Subsequent Year of the Lei-v Years Fiscal Year Amount of Lei-v Years 2005 $ 26,457,399 $ 176,831 $ 26,634,230 $ 26,016,239 97.68% $ 538,764 2006 29,545,033 133,501 29,678,534 29,162,978 98.26% 439,105 2007 34,273,862 296,995 34,570,857 33,872,404 97.98% 633,375 2008 40,816,256 33,841 40,850,097 40,354,528 98.79% 295,992 2009 43,086,123 (4,008) 43,082,115 42,423,707 98.47% 400,770 2010 42,898,414 - 42,898,414 42,448,364 98.95% - Source: Denton Central Appraisal District Only six years of data included due to inability to obtain correct data from previous tax software. 106 Table 8 Total Collections to Date Percentage Amount of Le«- $ 26,555,003 99.70% 29,602,083 99.74% 34,505,779 99.81% 40,650,520 99.51% 42,824,477 99.40% 42,448,364 98.95% 107 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS RATIO OF OUTSTANDING DEBT BY TYPE LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Governmental Activities Business-Type Activities General Certificates General Certificates Fiscal Obligation of Other Revenue Obligation of Other Year Bonds Obligation Obligations Bonds Bonds Obligation Obligations 2001 S 49,950,882 S 21,924,825 S 1,022 S 211,035,241 S 1,759,622 S 8,504,895 S 3,148,744 2002 58,663,791 27,628,284 635,442 274,875,129 1,508,017 12,188,878 3,141,222 2003 59,721,870 30,148,929 696,508 304,366,352 2,191,168 11,765,612 3,328,798 2004 55,893,370 40,540,162 1,244,678 293,105,000 2,046,630 11,325,838 3,141,222 2005 58,870,849 41,791,588 2,210,846 281,120,000 3,904,151 9,233,412 3,141,222 2006 58,742,900 46,700,000 3,559,742 277,305,000 3,582,100 11,975,000 3,141,222 2007 70,650,317 51,355,100 2,393,684 281,750,000 3,099,683 13,889,900 7,032,986 2008 80,814,594 55,097,550 1,819,298 282,200,000 4,865,406 12,952,450 5,713,041 2009 77,358,650 48,611,150 2,769,671 266,705,000 4,366,350 11,243,850 3,161,549 2010 77,314,650 45,727,950 1,771,952 209,885,000 39,600,350 126,207,050 1,824,177 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports Note: Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the financial statements. 'See Table 13 for personal income and population data. 108 Table 9 Total Percentage Primary of Personal Per Government Income' Capital $ 296,325,231 0.01879% 3,471.19 378,640,763 0.02248% 4,190.59 412,219,237 0.02006% 4,399.49 407,296,900 0.01889% 4,143.91 400,272,068 0.01764% 3,877.85 405,005,964 0.01680% 3,736.87 430,171,670 0.01661% 3,780.07 443,462,339 0.01729% 3,839.30 414,216,220 0.01532% 3,483.62 502,331,129 0.01901% 4,138.70 109 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Table 10 RATIO OF GENERAL BONDED DEBT OUTSTANDING LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS General Bonded Debt Outstanding Percentage of General Certificates Less: Amounts Actual Taxable Fiscal Obligation of Available in Debt Value of Per Year Bonds Obligation Service Fund Total Property' Capita 2001 $ 51,569,223 $ 30,571,000 $ 1,594,620 $ 80,545,603 2.63% $ 891.43 2002 60,185,495 39,806,000 934,406 99,057,089 2.94% 1,057.21 2003 61,913,038 41,978,000 428,426 103,462,612 2.79% 1,052.65 2004 57,940,000 51,866,000 296,731 109,509,269 2.71% 1,060.93 2005 62,775,000 51,025,000 451,046 113,348,954 2.59% 1,045.84 2006 62,325,000 58,675,000 439,658 120,560,342 2.52% 1,059.41 2007 73,750,000 65,245,000 886,141 138,108,859 2.54% 1,195.69 2008 80,814,594 55,097,550 1,954,955 133,957,189 2.20% 1,126.60 2009 77,358,650 48,611,150 2,414,288 123,555,512 1.96% 1,039.12 2010 77,314,650 45,727,950 3,354,535 119,688,065 1.89% 986.11 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports Note: Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the financial statements. 'See Table 5 for property value data. 2See Table 13 for population data. 110 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Table 11 DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES DEBT AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Estimated Estimated Share of Debt Percentage Overlapping Governmental Unit Outstanding Applicablei Debt Debt repaid with property taxes: Denton Independent School District $ 610,963,527 64.37% $ 393,277,222 Denton County 496,900,000 11.86% 58,932,340 Aubrey Independent School District 53,442,142 0.03% 16,033 Krum Independent School District 47,550,303 2.69% 1,279,103 Arg}-le Independent School District 55,188,117 7.90% 4,359,861 Sanger Independent School District 28,442,339 1.07% 304,333 Ponder Independent School District 30,505,000 2.15% 655,858 Pilot Point Independent School District 18,735,324 0.06% 11,241 Subtotal, overlapping debt 458,835,991 City of Denton, direct debt 100.00% 123,042,600 Total direct and overlappping debt $ 581,878,591 Source: Compiled from data from the "Texas Municipal Report" prepared for the Municipal Advisor, Council. Note: Overlapping governments are those that coincide, at least in part, with the geographic boundaries of the city. This schedule estimates the portion of the outstanding debt of those overlapping governments that is borne by the residents and businesses of the City of Denton. This process recognizes that, when considering the City of Denton's ability to issue and repay long-term debt, the entire debt burden borne by the residents and businesses should be taken into account. However, this does not imply that every taxpayer is a resident, and therefore responsible for repaying the debt, of each overlapping government. The percentage of overlapping debt applicable is estimated using taxable assessed proper-h, values. Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of the overlapping government's taxable assessed value that is within the City of Denton's boundaries and dividing it by the overlapping government's total taxable assessed value. 111 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PLEDGED REVENUE COVERAGE LAST NINE FISCAL YEARS Utility Systems Revenue Bonds Less: Fair Market Less: Value Operating Adjustment Expenses Fiscal Operating Investment to Investment Impact Fee Before Year Revenue Revenue Revenue2 Revenue Depreciation 2002 $ 124,769,615 $ 8,406,425 $ 2,515,297 $ 4,294,000 $ 113,557,718 2003 140,450,819 4,320,188 (2,599,123) 5,150,000 125,351,837 2004 148,512,689 2,618,296 (1,523,523) 6,771,671 134,885,329 2005 170,450,120 3,114,254 (2,027,258) 4,206,630 150,549,007 2006 200,970,560 7,061,556 721,058 5,556,349 166,537,867 2007 173,879,713 11,390,142 2,710,742 5,558,985 142,890,603 2008 185,874,450 7,458,605 69,292 6,620,938 158,245,885 2009 176,464,357 5,817,918 930,936 4,456,827 147,392,056 2010 166,295,694 1,593,161 (550,830) 3,186,225 135,112,901 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports 1The Utility System includes the Electric, Water, and Wastewater funds. 2For the coverage calculation, the fair market adjustment to the value of investments is excluded. 3For the coverage calculation, franchise fees and return on investment payments to the General Fund are excluded from operating expenses. 'Revenue bond covenants require a times coverage of 1.25 or greater. 112 Table 12 Add: Franchise Fees and Return Debt Service on Investment Net Paid to Available Times General Fund3 Revenue Principal Interest Coverage's $ 8,487,570 $ 29,884,595 $ 7,345,000 $ 12,130,021 1.53 9,207,505 36,375,798 9,965,000 14,324,178 1.50 9,596,617 34,137,467 11,255,000 15,979,950 1.25 10,922,442 40,171,697 12,545,000 14,429,925 1.49 12,839,184 59,168,724 12,330,000 13,798,811 2.26 11,283,647 56,511,142 13,325,000 12,265,461 2.21 11,862,151 53,500,967 14,840,000 13,088,928 1.92 11,325,647 49,741,757 15,670,000 13,073,992 1.73 12,828,293 49,341,302 15,935,000 12,267,799 1.75 113 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Table 13 DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC STATISTICS LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Estimated Personal Per Capita Median Grade School University Unemployment 2 2 Year Population' Income Income Age Enrollment3 Enrollment's Rates 2001 85,367 1,577,069,958 18,474 26.8 14,408 34,026 4.7% 2002 90,355 1,684,488,265 18,643 26.8 13,600 36,985 7.4% 2003 93,697 2,054,962,604 21,932 26.9 15,128 38,612 7.4% 2004 98,288 2,155,652,416 21,932 27.1 16,932 39,618 5.8% 2005 103,220 2,269,291,700 21,985 27.1 18,395 41,204 3.3% 2006 108,381 2,410,068,297 22,237 27.1 19,701 42,408 3.5% 2007 113,800 2,590,088,000 22,760 27.1 20,880 43,133 3.4% 2008 115,506 2,564,348,706 22,201 27.9 22,221 43,770 4.4% 2009 118,904 2,703,758,056 22,739 28.8 22,761 45,658 6.5% 2010 121,374 2,641,826,484 21,766 28.9 24,047 47,236 6.3% Sources: 'City of Denton Planning and Development Department estimate United States Census and Denton Chamber of Commerce 3Denton Independent School District tniversity of North Texas' and Texas Woman's University's Denton campus enrollment 5Texas Workforce Commission estimate 114 CITY OF DENTON, TETAS Table 14 PRINCIPAL EMPLOYERS CURRENT YEAR AND NINE YEARS AGO 2010 2001 Percentage Percentage of Total Citv of Total City Name of Employer Employees Employment Name of Employer Employees Employment University of North Texas 7,949 13.16% University of North Texas 5,900 12.80% Denton Independent School 2,600 4.30% Denton Independent 2,000 4.34% District School District Texas R'oman's University 1,620 2.68% Boeing Electronics 1,733 3.76% Denton State School 1,533 2.54% Denton State School 1,353 2.94% Peterbilt Alotors- 1,4_50 2.40% Peterbilt Motors 1,325 2.88% Headquarters & Plant Denton County Denton County (in Denton) 1,441 2.39% (in Denton) 1,227 2.66% City of Denton 1,319 2.18% City of Denton 1,191 2.58% Denton Regional Medical 850 1.41% Texas R'oman's 1,131 2.45% Center University Presbyterian Hospital of 800 1.32% Denton Regional Medical 865 1.88% Denton Center Sally Beauty Company 750 1 24% Federal Emergency 750 1.63% Headquarters Management Agency Total 20,312 33.62% Total 17,475 37.92% Source: Office of Economic Development & Denton Chamber of Commerce 115 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT CITY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES BY FUNCTION/PROGRAM LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Full-time Equivalent Employees for Fiscal Year Function / Program 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 General government 200.53 203.75 202.75 202.75 211.75 Public safety Police 176.62 178.14 180.14 183.73 198.23 Fire 151.25 151.25 152.25 152.25 160.25 Animal services 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 Public works 61.00 83.00 84.00 84.00 77.00 Parks and recreation 115.15 117.17 136.37 152.34 149.62 Electric system 136.75 107.50 108.50 109.50 110.50 Water system 110.21 112.71 113.71 120.00 130.00 Wastewater system 81.00 76.00 79.12 80.12 83.22 Solid waste 88.50 88.50 88.50 88.50 82.50 Materials management 13.00 13.00 15.00 15.00 14.00 Fleet services 18.50 18.50 20.00 19.00 16.00 Technology services 29.75 34.75 33.75 33.75 29.75 Risk Retention - - - - - Total 1,190.26 11192.27 1,222.09 1,248.94 1,270.82 Source: City of Denton Budget Office 116 Table 15 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 19250 192.38 197.38 208.38 212.13 206.23 212.23 217.23 217.23 217.23 162.25 162.25 162.25 163.25 163.25 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 37.00 38.00 39.00 39.00 39.00 141.85 142.07 144.15 144.15 143.08 110.50 112.00 120.50 125.00 129.50 161.75 164.50 165.00 160.50 158.00 83.12 82.87 83.37 84.87 86.37 85.00 87.00 88.00 9350 9350 12.50 12.50 12.50 13.50 13.50 17.00 18.00 19.00 21.00 21.00 26.00 24.50 25.00 25.00 25.00 - 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 1,243.70 1,261.30 11286.38 1,308.38 1,314.56 117 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS OPERATING INDICATORS BY FUNCTION/PROGRAM LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Year Function / Program 2001 2002 2003 2004 Public Safety Police Calls for service 57,704 68,869 68,727 69,312 Traffic citations issued 38,628 39,138 38,181 34,804 Fire Fire calls for service 2,200 2,800 2,894 2,917 EMS calls for service 7,200 7,200 8,808 7,012 Inspections (Businesses) 2,794 2,802 3,114 3,000 Animal Services Animals sheltered 5,234 5,098 4,769 5,166 Animals adopted, transferred, or returned 2,269 3,015 1,487 1,777 Public Works Street repaving (square yards) 50,000 107,956 211,113 32.41 i Pot holes repaired 5,000 8,304 5,162 4,004 Cutouts base failures (square feet) 150,000 165,335 94,876 79,010 Crack seal maintenance (linear feet) NA NA NA NA Parks and Recreation Attendance Leisure Services 869,960 893,710 1,026,309 981,883 Water Park NA NA 102,637 107,198 Total Acres Maintained 1,916 2,084 2,107 2,190 Water System Number of customers 21,419 23,098 24,089 25,303 Annual finished water production (in thousand gallons) 4,966,603 5,070,200 5,636,768 5,369,957 Wastewater System Number of customers 19,825 21,455 22,561 23,550 Annual wastewater discharge (in thousand gallons) 5,190,410 4,687,960 4,689,450 4,967,440 Solid Waste Number of customers (residential and commercial) 23,265 23,783 24,254 25,154 MSW Landfilled (tons) 110,172 107,901 107,061 122,113 Recycling collections (tons) 14,060 11,965 15,322 16,353 Source: Various city departments Note: Fire calls for 1997-2002 were rounded to the nearest hundred by department. 1 lane miles of repaving and reconstruction curbside residential recycling program introduced 118 Table 16 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 73,154 73,346 74,397 80,117 83,557 83,746 36,757 39,483 31,131 31,610 36,598 33,990 3,013 3,495 3,539 3,703 3,391 3,199 6,527 6,840 6,544 6,862 7,017 7,255 3,727 3,882 3,144 3,591 3,622 4,739 4,320 4,443 5,427 4,967 4,341 5,042 2,091 2,167 2,297 2,119 2,193 3,264 19.44 16.41 23.38 41.28 17.43 10.27 5,479 3,971 8,153 6,841 11,593 20,988 124,442 171,543 44,566 75,877 126,691 169,396 40,338 79,314 42,624 40,288 55,894 53,712 952,866 985,778 1,048,500 1,010,351 1,031,530 1,153,632 141,495 162,039 163,000 169,000 179,386 193,361 2,208 2,262 2,293 2,633 2,633 2,633 26,715 27,884 28,898 29,679 30,288 30,889 5,901,750 7,097,403 5,671,124 6,582,151 6,210,472 6,209,966 24,894 26,079 27,185 28,019 28,647 29,105 5,039,240 4,428,700 5,174,100 5,263,780 4,733,839 5,617,490 26,062 27,805 28,954 30,680 31,173 32,044 122,477 114,060 128,644 136,024 160,378 140,284 16,195 17,762 21,179 24,248 44,540 50,246 119 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CAPITAL ASSET STATISTICS BY FUNCTION/PROGRAM LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS Fiscal Year Function / Program 2001 2002 2003 2004 2004 Public safety Police Police stations 1 1 1 1 1 Police patrol units 104 138 141 143 148 Fire Fire stations 6 6 6 6 6 Emergency vehicles 20 20 21 22 21 Animal services Animals shelters 1 1 1 1 1 Public works Lane miles added per year 36.30 32.15 34.95 14.79 24.56 Streetlights 5,426 5,713 6,086 6,931 7,104 Parks and recreation Parks 27 28 33 34 34 Park acreage 813 981 1,177 1,240 1,205 Recreation centers 10 10 11 12 13 Water system Water mains (miles) 433 458 478 497 511 Raw water (in thousand gallons) 5,185,568 5,472,708 6,168,039 6,046,070 6,234,076 Wastewater system Wastewater mains (miles) 396 414 426 442 452 Maximum daily capacity (in million gallons) 15 15 15 21 21 Solid waste Landfills 1 1 1 1 1 Source: Various city departments 120 Table 17 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1 1 1 1 1 149 149 147 149 149 6 7 7 7 7 22 24 24 26 30 1 1 1 1 1 25.34 22.66 10.10 14.79 41.77 7,118 7,008 7,011 7,015 7,016 37 30 37 37 37 1,272 1,210 1,444 1,449 1,449 13 13 13 13 13 520 530 533 550 558 7,322,361 5,801,994 6,694,734 6,471,258 6,416,086 459 470 481 488 495 21 21 21 25 25 1 1 1 1 1 121 CITY F DENTON 122 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXIX SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL GENERAL FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Budgetary Positive Original Final Basis (Negative) EXPENDITURES: Personal Service $ 1,822,386 $ 1,812,386 $ 1,808,181 $ 4,205 Materials and Supplies 40,832 40,812 21,810 19,002 Maintenance and Repairs 4,428 4,428 1,728 2,700 Insurance 137,358 137,358 137,358 - Miscellaneous 59,820 56,870 30,865 26,005 Operations, Services 117,861 87,773 69,328 18,445 Transfers - Interfund 124,095 124,695 124,695 - City Manager's Office 2,306,780 2,264,322 2,193,965 70,357 Personal Service 134,372 134,372 147,376 (13,004) Materials and Supplies 1,450 1,450 175 1,275 Maintenance and Repairs 1,500 1,500 295 1,205 Insurance 1,485 1,485 1,485 - Miscellaneous 500 500 - 500 Operations, Services 17,134 13,834 5,514 8,320 Transfers - Interfund 12,850 12,850 12,850 - Cable Television 169,291 165,991 167,695 (1,704) Personal Service 294,877 229,990 219,796 10,194 Materials and Supplies 3,700 602 703 (101) Maintenance and Repairs 400 - - - Insurance 1,367 1,367 1,367 - Operations, Services 57,776 74,985 65,085 9,900 Transfers - Interfund 9,821 9,821 9,821 - Internal Audit 367,941 316,765 296,772 19,993 Personal Service 273,488 273,488 275,463 (1,975) Materials and Supplies 13,820 13,820 7,527 6,293 Maintenance and Repairs - 289 289 - Insurance 2,059 2,059 2,059 - Operations, Services 111,239 106,750 64,947 41,803 Transfers - Interfund 18,834 18,834 18,834 - Public Communications 419,440 415,240 369,119 46,121 Personal Service 1,183,204 1,183,204 1,155,187 28,017 Materials and Supplies 32,500 31,418 19,419 11,999 Maintenance and Repairs 500 500 278 222 Insurance 8,601 8,601 8,601 - Miscellaneous 47,023 47,023 29,168 17,855 Operations, Services 183,585 181,659 122,969 58,690 Transfers - Interfund 105,833 105,833 105,833 - Human Resources $ 1,561,246 $ 1,558,238 $ 1,441,455 $ 116,783 (continued) 123 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXIX SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL GENERAL FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Budgetary Positive Original Final Basis (Negative) EXPENDITURES: Personal Service $ 1,388,584 $ 1,388,584 $ 1,384,656 $ 3,928 Materials and Supplies 13,956 25,956 25,764 192 Maintenance and Repairs 1,410 - 1,950 (1,950) Insurance 6,488 6,488 6,488 - Miscellaneous 500 - - - Operations, Services 201,840 304,383 150,606 153,777 Transfers - Interfund 36,075 36,075 36,075 - Fixed Assets 21,620 11,530 15,209 (3,679) Legal Administration 1,670,473 1,773,016 1,620,748 152,268 Personal Service 350,616 350,616 297,733 52,883 Materials and Supplies 4,945 4,945 2,207 2,738 Insurance 3,041 3,041 3,041 - Operations, Services 5,870 3,850 4,463 (613) Transfers - Interfund 38,184 38,184 38,184 - Municipal Judge 402,656 400,636 345,628 55,008 Personal Service 1,920,244 1,920,244 1,696,717 223,527 Materials and Supplies 50,802 50,042 48,191 1,851 Insurance 35,029 35,029 35,029 - Miscellaneous 12,360 20,320 18,967 1,353 Operations, Services 299,863 351,780 272,234 79,546 Transfers - Interfund 186,141 186,141 186,141 - Planning 2,504,439 2,563,556 2,257,279 306,277 Personal Service 1,515,058 1,515,058 1,452,735 62,323 Materials and Supplies 52,600 52,600 37,368 15,232 Maintenance and Repairs 10,200 10,200 4,167 6,033 Insurance 17,554 17,554 16,554 1,000 Operations, Services 86,031 73,158 56,861 16,297 Transfers - Interfund 131,223 131,223 131,223 - Building Inspections 1,812,666 1,799,793 1,698,908 100,885 Personal Service 958,538 958,538 935,690 22,848 Materials and Supplies 35,420 37,420 42,866 (5,446) Insurance 10,763 10,763 10,763 - Operations, Services 194,782 188,732 123,719 65,013 Transfers - Interfund 71,718 71,718 71,718 - Code Enforcement 1,271,221 1,267,171 1,184,756 82,415 Personal Service 951,026 899,526 893,697 5,829 Materials and Supplies 62,291 62,291 40,553 21,738 Miscellaneous 10,927 10,927 10,927 - Operations, Services 96,065 146,132 99,904 46,228 Transfers - Interfund 149,548 149,548 87,548 62,000 Municipal Court $ 1,269,857 $ 1,268,424 $ 1,132,629 $ 135,795 (continued) 124 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXIX SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL GENERAL FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Budgetary Positive Original Final Basis (Negative) EXPENDITURES: Personal Service $ 2,136,169 $ 2,202,206 $ 2,174,613 $ 27,593 Materials and Supplies 80,650 75,150 86,910 (11,760) Maintenance and Repairs 675 675 675 - Insurance 16,271 16,271 16,271 - Miscellaneous 1,350 1,350 1,415 (65) Operations, Services 846,050 828,003 770,084 57,919 Transfers - Interfund 154,620 154,620 156,960 (2,340) Finance 3,235,785 3,278,275 3,206,928 71,347 Personal Service 501,254 501,254 486,413 14,841 Materials and Supplies 45,855 45,855 26,527 19,328 Insurance 3,552 3,552 3,552 - Miscellaneous 16,500 16,500 10,539 5,961 Operations, Services 77,749 41,069 26,774 14,295 Transfers - Interfund 25,341 53,276 53,276 - Economic Development 670,251 661,506 607,081 54,425 Personal Service 6,572,925 6,572,925 6,155,095 417,830 Materials and Supplies 678,714 651,714 655,314 (3,600) Maintenance and Repairs 736,205 757,605 720,317 37,288 Insurance 156,935 156,935 156,942 (7) Miscellaneous 100 100 93 7 Operations, Services 2,024,866 2,012,981 1,824,426 188,555 Transfers - Interfund 389,832 389,832 397,544 (7,712) Fred Assets - 21,600 69,251 (47,651) Parks & Recreation 10,559,577 10,563,692 9,978,982 584,710 Personal Service 1,026,560 1,026,560 1,022,955 3,605 Materials and Supplies 62,517 62,517 35,235 27,282 Maintenance and Repairs 546,328 523,039 507,341 15,698 Insurance 17,940 17,940 17,940 - Miscellaneous 1,503 1,503 - 1,503 Operations, Services 1,216,032 1,213,511 1,081,924 131,587 Transfers - Interfund 76,366 88,455 88,455 - Fixed Assets - 11,200 11,169 31 Facilities Management 2,947,246 2,944,725 2,765,019 179,706 Personal Service 3,245,273 3,245,273 3,133,615 111,658 Materials and Supplies 153,398 235,163 240,926 (5,763) Maintenance and Repairs 107,199 62,215 75,081 (12,866) Insurance 54,527 54,527 54,527 - Operations, Services 370,276 357,981 301,114 56,867 Transfers - Interfund 683,506 689,506 689,506 - Fixed Assets 570,179 504,789 528,741 (23,952) Library $ 5,184,358 $ 5,149,454 $ 5,023,510 $ 125,944 (continued) 125 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXIX SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL GENERAL FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Budgetary Positive Original Final Basis (Negative) EXPENDITURES: Personal Service $ 145,713 $ 145,713 $ 155,583 $ (9,870) Materials and Supplies 5,332 5,062 1,920 3,142 Insurance 608 608 607 1 Miscellaneous 2,000 2,250 2,127 123 Operations, Services 186,865 184,322 162,891 21,431 Transfers - Interfund 15,057 15,057 15,057 - Transportation Operations 355,575 353,012 338,185 14,827 Personal Service 904,563 904,563 856,274 48,289 Materials and Supplies 23,800 23,800 16,210 7,590 Maintenance and Repairs 400,412 352,812 340,691 12,121 Insurance 15,883 15,883 15,883 - Miscellaneous 2,633 2,633 1,244 1,389 Operations, Services 152,262 130,762 132,556 (1,794) Transfers - Interfund 75,610 95,610 95,610 - Fixed Assets - 47,600 47,561 39 Traffic Operations 1,575,163 1,573,663 1,506,029 67,634 Personal Service 1,807,864 1,807,864 1,858,756 (50,892) Materials and Supplies 66,000 58,520 59,356 (836) Maintenance and Repairs 2,059,465 1,808,224 1,680,249 127,975 Insurance 45,413 45,413 45,413 - Miscellaneous 4,550 4,550 2,122 2,428 Operations, Services 412,133 381,321 419,433 (38,112) Transfers - Interfund 80,067 355,067 352,067 3,000 Fred Assets - 13,965 14,023 (58) Streets 4,475,492 4,474,924 4,431,419 43,505 Operations, Services 783,032 783,032 637,402 145,630 Street Lighting 783,032 783,032 637,402 145,630 Personal Service 300,785 300,785 296,048 4,737 Materials and Supplies 8,300 8,300 5,333 2,967 Maintenance and Repairs 53,863 53,863 33,886 19,977 Insurance 18,065 18,065 18,065 - Miscellaneous 1,200 1,200 1,853 (653) Operations, Services 98,744 95,263 81,884 13,379 Transfers - Interfund 31,287 31,287 31,287 - Airport 512,244 508,763 468,356 40,407 Personal Service 20,531,543 20,444,443 19,911,514 532,929 Materials and Supplies 297,760 297,760 271,758 26,002 Maintenance and Repairs 189,680 189,680 191,774 (2,094) Insurance 248,938 248,938 248,937 1 Miscellaneous 5,000 5,000 4,467 533 Operations, Services 1,113,861 1,150,301 1,156,903 (6,602) Transfers - Interfund 1,090,089 1,090,089 1,090,089 - Police $ 23,476,871 $ 23,426,211 $ 22,875,442 $ 550,769 (continued) 126 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Exhibit XXIX SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL GENERAL FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Variance with Actual on a Final Budget - Budgeted Amounts Budgetary Positive Original Final Basis (Negative) EXPENDITURES: Personal Service $ 18,213,396 $ 18,213,396 $ 17,886,738 $ 326,658 Materials and Supplies 437,363 437,363 370,476 66,887 Maintenance and Repairs 184,756 184,756 166,890 17,866 Insurance 214,460 214,460 214,460 - Miscellaneous 46,550 48,000 40,958 7,042 Operations, Services 1,138,768 1,089,279 1,179,451 (90,172) Transfers - Interfund 517,302 517,302 517,302 - Fire 20,752,595 20,704,556 20,376,275 328,281 Personal Service 122,027 122,027 121,635 392 Insurance 1,051 1,051 1,051 - Miscellaneous 147,296 147,296 163,952 (16,656) Operations, Services 2,333 2,333 2,333 - Transfers - Interfund 25,501 25,501 25,501 - Agency Contributions 298,208 298,208 314,472 (16,264) Personal Service 50,000 50,000 85,600 (35,600) Materials and Supplies - - 40 (40) Miscellaneous 553,126 318,323 217,289 101,034 Operations, Services 1,031,512 1,304,073 945,315 358,758 Transfers - Interfund 1,022,859 1,054,335 534,724 519,611 Fred Assets - - 5,926 (5,926) Miscellaneous/Finance 2,657,497 2,726,731 1,788,894 937,837 Personal Service 66,350,465 66,203,015 64,412,070 1,790,945 Materials and Supplies 2,172,005 2,222,560 2,016,588 205,972 Maintenance and Repairs 4,297,021 3,949,786 3,725,611 224,175 Insurance 1,028,315 1,028,315 1,027,320 995 Miscellaneous 902,011 673,418 525,059 148,359 Operations, Services 10,826,529 11,107,267 9,758,120 1,349,147 Transfers - Interfund 5,071,759 5,444,859 4,870,300 574,559 Fred Assets 591,799 610,684 691,880 (81,196) TOTAL GENERAL FUND $ 91,239,904 $ 91,239,904 $ 87,026,948 $ 4,212,956 127 CITY F DENTON 128 r ® ol M II ~ 4-4 ~ jig? T bk O o a~ ~ • O • O ~ PT~ U cj) U C~ U C~ ~ o ~ a ct p N ct U PT~ • cct .4-D O ~ t Ct U bio o p c ct ct C424) ct b-C p -~-D I ~ = o ct P-4 a) 9) 9) C ~ Q ct a O W ° U) c~ ~i C4-4 c~ o ct co a ° co o c~ ° ° -5 ° o c~ a ~ O o o O O c C4 ~-4 ct co C42-4 A-D r-I C4 ct ;~-4 PLI ~-4 b-C Y) U) U) A-D ~ U v •r o • ' Gil • b-C 4) O bJD LCD Q ~A ~ Gon O o ~ V J v ~ O V ~O w . LO `0 ° 4D bow c~ bk o N a--+ 0 U O Q CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS SINGLE AUDIT REPORTS YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 CONTENTS Page Independent Auditor's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Audit Standards 1 Independent Auditor's Report on Compliance with Requirements that Could Have a Direct and Material Effect on Each Major Program and on Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 3 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 5 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 7 Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 9 weaver REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Denton, Texas We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the City of Denton, Texas (the City), as of and for the year ended September 30, 2010 and have issued our report thereon dated February 11, 2011. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over financial reporting. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the City's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City's financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. AN IIDOEP ~ =NT WEAVER AND TIDWELLLLR DALLAS MEN ~ 3 LLt TILLY CLRTII PUBLI` d JSAN°a C; , . 1115 12 1 :FlEITIT DRVL. SUITE 1400. DALLAS. TX 75251 NTFR,,,,liur I P 1" 'D72 F:(072)7028321 City of Denton, Texas Page 2 This report is intended solely for the information and use of the audit committee, management, City Council, and federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. WEAVER AND TI DWELL, L.L.P. Dallas, Texas February 11, 2011 2 weaver REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS THAT COULD HAVE A DIRECT AND MATERIAL EFFECT ON EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OMB CIRCULAR A-133 AND ON THE SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Denton, Texas Compliance We have audited the compliance of the City of Denton (the City), with the types of compliance requirements described in the U. S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement that could have a direct and material effect on each of its major federal programs for the year ended September 30, 2010. The City's major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor's results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to each of its major federal programs is the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the City's compliance based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations. Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the City's compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination on the City's compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, the City, complied, in all material respects, with the requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on each of its major federal programs for the year ended September 30, 2010. Internal Control Over Compliance The management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the City's internal control over compliance with requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over compliance. EPEi'dULNT WEAVER AND TIDWELL LLP 3 DALLAS I KKR TILLY CE, J J' If NI TS AND C~1 SULTANTS 12221 MERIT DRIVE SUI U Tr, ~ TA 152"d 1 _1 I'.CLI_ P (972) U <C 1970 C I7?.-, 7: City of Denton, Texas Page 2 A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over compliance that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards We have audited the basic financial statements of the City of Denton as of and for the year ended September 30, 2010 and have issued our report dated February 11, 2011. Our audit was performed for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by OMB A-133 and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management, and federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. WEAVER AND TI DWELL, L.L. P Dallas, Texas February 11, 2011 4 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 1. Summary of the Auditor's Results: Financial Statements a. An unqualified opinion was issued on the financial statements. b. Internal control over financial reporting: • Material weakness(es) identified? Yes X No • Significant deficiency(ies) identified that are not considered a material weakness? Yes X No c. Noncompliance material to financial statements noted Yes X No Major Programs d. Internal control over major programs: • Material weakness(es) identified? Yes X No • Significant deficiency(ies) identified that are not considered a material weakness? Yes X No e. An unqualified opinion was issued on compliance for major programs. f. Any audit findings disclosed that were required to be reported under Section 510(a) or OMB Circular A-133. Yes X No g. Identification of major programs: 14.218 Community Development Block Grant 14.253 Community Development Block Grant- Recovery Act 14.257 Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program 16.804 Byrne Justice Assistance Grant- Recovery Act 20.507 Federal Transportation Grant 81.128 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Grant 81.086 Conservation Research and Development Grant- Recovery Act 97.008 UASI State Homeland Security Program h. The dollar threshold used to distinguish between type A and type B programs. $300,000 i. Auditee qualified as a low-risk auditee. X Yes No 5 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 II. Findings Relating to the Financial Statements Which Are Required To Be Reported in Accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards. None III. Findings and Questioned Costs for Federal Awards None IV. Summary of Prior year Findings. None 6 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Federal Grantor/ Federal Passed Pass-Through Grantor/ Grant CFDA Through to Program Title I.D. Number Number Expenditures Subrecipients FEDERAL AWARDS U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Community Development Block Grant' B-03-MC-48-0036 14.218 $ 23,939 $ Community Development Block Grant' B-04-MC-48-0036 14.218 54,771 Community Development Block Grant' B-05-MC-48-0036 14.218 81,573 Community Development Block Grant' B-06-MC-48-0036 14.218 129,836 Community Development Block Grant' B-07-MC-48-0036 14.218 61,535 Community Development Block Grant' B-08-MC-48-0036 14.218 45,242 2,097 Community Development Block Grant' B-09-MC-48-0036 14.218 533,122 171,654 Community Development Block Grant' B-10-MC-48-0036 14.218 47,498 - Home Investment Partnership M-04-MC-48-0223 14.239 27,619 Home Investment Partnership M-05-MC-48-0223 14.239 23,321 Home Investment Partnership M-06-MC-48-0223 14.239 34,761 Home Investment Partnership M-07-MC-48-0223 14.239 145,509 Home Investment Partnership M-08-MC-48-0223 14.239 293,087 - Home Investment Partnership M-09-MC-48-0223 14.239 193,904 112,025 Home Investment Partnership M-10-MC-48-0223 14.239 16,195 - Community Development Block Grant - Recovery Grant' B-09-MY-48-0036 14.253 128,502 22,000 Total Direct Funding U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 1,840,414 307,776 Passed Through Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs Emergency Shelters Grant 42090000577 14.231 171,240 164,982 Homelessness Prevention and Re-Housing Program 12090000692 14.257 298,876 287,727 Total U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 2,310,530 760,485 FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Denton Brownfields Cleanup Transit Park BF - 96693601-0 66.818 17,596 - Passed through Texas Commission of Environmental Quality Nonpoint Source Water Quality Management Planning Implementation Grant 582-10-90463 66.460 39,772 Total Federal Environmental Protection Agency 57,368 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy Efficiency and Conservation Grant DE-S00002683 81.128 156,127 Conservation Research and Development Grant ARRA-DOE-03 81.086 360,882 Total Department of Energy 517,009 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Passed through State Department of Public Safety Governor's Division of Emergency Management Emergency Management Performance Grant 10TX-EMPG-0122 97.042 80,993 2007 UASI State Homeland Security Program 2007-GE-T7-0024 97.008 131,645 2008 SHSP State Homeland Security Program 2008-GE-T8-0034 97.073 6,952 2008 SHSP-LEAP State Homeland Security Program 2008-GE-T8-0034 97.073 77,774 2008 UASI State Homeland Security Program 2008-GE-T8-0034 97.008 149,891 2008 UASI-LEAP State Homeland Security Program 2008-GE-T8-0034 97.008 202,681 Total U.S. Department of Homeland Security 649,936 * CDBG Entitlement Grants Cluster (Continued) 7 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 Federal Grantor/ Federal Passed Pass-Through Grantor/ Grant CFDA Through to Program Title I.D. Number Number Expenditures Subrecipients U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Byrne Justice Assistance Grant 2009-SB-B9-2435 16.804 $ 172,501 $ COPS 2006 Technology Grant 2006-CK-WK-0140 16.710 8,516 Total U. S. Department of Justice 181,017 U. S. DEPARTMENT of AGRICULTURE Passed through Texas Department of Health and Human Services Summer Food Services Grant 061-1002 10.559 128,634 Total U.S. Department of Agriculture 128,634 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transportation Grant TX-03-0293-00 20.507 839,569 Passed Through State Department of Transportation STEP - Comprehensive 2010-DentonPD-S-SYG-0019 20.600 75,881 STEP - Click It Or Ticket Mobilization 2010-DentonPD-CIOT-00039 20.600 9,969 STEP- Impaired Driving Mobilization 2010-DentonPD-STEP-IDM-00015 20.600 12,768 Installing of Traffic Signal Equipments 2250-01-021 20.205 19,254 Total U.S. Department of Transportation 957,441 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES National Endowment for the Humanities Grant PG - 50568-09 45.149 2,069 Total National Endowment for the Humanities 2,069 TOTAL EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS $ 4,804,004 $ 760,485 STATE AWARDS TEXAS STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES COMMISSION Loan Star Library Grant 442-09136 N/A $ 56,240 $ Total library 56,240 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Airport Maintenance Grant M018DNTON N/A 49,836 Installing of Traffic Signal Equipments 2250-01-021 N/A 4,814 Total Texas Department of Transportation 54,650 TEXAS COMMISSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Trinity River Basin Environ. Restoration Initiative Grant 587-2-77062 N/A 4,231 Total Texas Commission of Environmental Quality 4,231 TOTAL EXPENDITURES OF STATE AWARDS $ 115,121 $ - TOTAL FEDERAL AND STATE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE EXPENDED $ 4,919,125 $ 760,485 (Concluded) 8 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS NOTES TO SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 1. GENERAL The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards presents the activity of all applicable federal and state awards of the City of Denton, Texas (the City). The City's reporting entity is defined in Note 1 to the City's basic financial statements. Federal and state awards received directly from federal and state agencies as well as federal and state awards passed through other government agencies are included in the respective schedule. 2. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented using modified accrual basis of accounting, which is described in Note 1 to the City's basic financial statements. 3. RELATIONSHIP TO FEDERAL FINANCIAL REPORTS Grant expenditures reports as of September 30, 2010, which have been submitted to grantor agencies will, in some cases, differ slightly from amounts disclosed herein. The reports prepared for grantor agencies are typically prepared at a later date and often reflect refined estimates of year-end accruals. The reports will agree at termination of the grant as the discrepancies noted are timing differences. 4. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS The schedule of findings and questioned costs, including the summary of auditor's results for federal awards, is included beginning on page 5. 9 weaver February 15, 2011 To the Audit Committee City of Denton 215 E. McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Denton as of and for the year ended September 30, 2010. Professional standards require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing standards (and Government Auditing,Standards and OMB Circular A-133), as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit. We have communicated such information in our letter to you dated July 7, 2010. Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit. Significant Audit Findings Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City of Denton are described in Note I to the financial statements. No new accounting policies were adopted and the application of existing policies was not changed during the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010. During 2010, the City provided the Texas Municipal Power Agency with prepayments of their contractual obligations totaling $62,655,015 to pay debt in advance of its scheduled maturity. Although there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus for this transaction, we have evaluated management's rationale for recording the prepayment as prepaid purchase power and amortizing it on a straight-line basis over the life of the debt, and feel that it is reasonable. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period. Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were: Management's estimates relating to the allowance for uncollectible receivables for property taxes and utility services. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the allowances in determining that it is reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. AN IINI)EP ~ =NT WEAVER AND TIDWELL LLP DALLAS MEN 3 LLt TILLY CLRTII PUBLI` d JSAN°a C; , . 111 T 12 1 :AIRIT DRVL. SUITE 1400. DALLAS. IX 75251 NTEf `4 0 iU'r I P i ' 9 70 F:((972) 702 8321 City of Denton February 15, 2011 Page 2 Management's estimates of useful lives in calculating depreciation on capital assets. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estimate in determining that it is reasonable. Management's estimates relating to the recognition of claims liability for the City's self-insurance plans were made based on actuarial calculations. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the claims liability in determining that it is reasonable in relation to the internal service fund-type financial statements taken as a whole. Management's estimates relating to the recognition of a liability for the City's Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) were made based on actuarial calculations. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estimate in determining that it is reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. D1fficldtles Encountered in Pe, fornfing the Andlt We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit. Corrected crud Uncorrected Misstatements Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit's financial statements taken as a whole. Disagreements with Management For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor's report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. City of Denton February 15, 2011 Page 3 Management Representations We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated February 11, 2011. Management Consultations frith Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the governmental unit's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor's opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. Other Audit Findings or Issues We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the governmental unit's auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. This information is intended solely for the use of the audit committee and management of the City of Denton and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Yours truly, WEAVER AND TIDWELL, L.L.P. This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Planning & Development ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT (DCA10-0007) Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding drafting a new Planned Development (PD) ordinance for inclusion within the Denton Development Code, with associated development standards. The discussion will include a general overview of PDs, a brief history of PDs in Denton, effect of 2002 city-wide rezoning and rescinding of previous PD districts. BACKGROUND The City's first Planned Development (PD) regulations were approved between the adoption of the 1966 and 1969 Zoning Ordinances. Within Article IV of the 1969 Zoning Ordinance (Exhibit 1), PD Districts were authorized if certain minimum standards such as minimum acreages for proposed uses and site plan standards were met. Additionally, each adopted PD district became an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance itself via appendices and was designated with a specific number within the Ordinance and on the official City of Denton Zoning Map. In 1969 there were five (5) PD districts listed with in the City's Zoning Ordinance and identified on the official zoning map. In 2002 the City adopted the Denton Development Code (DDC) and initiated a city-wide rezoning which eliminated the option to create new PD districts. Several reasons for discontinuance of the PD district and process at the time of the DDC adoption include: 1. Below par guidelines within the PD district and the disparity in guidelines from PD to PD which caused difficulty with interpretation and enforcement at the time of development; 2. Many PDs did not have timelines for development and over time, uses proposed within the district were no longer compatible with adjacent districts, infrastructure serving the proposed uses and future land uses at the actual time of the development were below par but vested; 3. The original purpose of PDs was to achieve higher standards of development than what was typical of conventional standards, but this was not necessarily achieved; 4. PDs became a means to circumvent conventional development code requirements; 5. Many PDs were not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the Denton Plan; and, 6. There was great difficultly tracking and administering all paper work and amendments, minor and major, as PDs were approved. At the time of the adoption of the DDC in 2002, there were two hundred (200) PDs within the city limits; however, only fifteen (15) PD districts were retained and vested in the DDC as part of Section 35.1.5.13 (Exhibit 2). To provide for some make-up for the elimination of PD opportunities, the DDC allows mixed-use zoning districts with the intent to allow some flexibility which PDs had typically provided within the former Zoning Ordinance. Granted, these mixed-use zoning districts still have limitations to the size of the proposed uses, location and site design parameters found in the Subdivision Regulations. In 2007, the City adopted the Master Plan Community (MPC) District, codified in Section 35.7.12 of the DDC. A MPC is a PD in application. In fact, per 35.7.21.1 of the DDC: "The :NIP(-- District is intended to accommodate large-scale, unified, comprehensively planned development that conforms with and enhances the goals and policies contained within the Denton Plan. This district is intended to provide an alternative zoning district and development process to accommodate substantial development for residential, commercial, professional, recreational, industrial or other activities, including combinations of uses appropriately requiring flexibility under controlled conditions, not otherwise attainable under conventional zoning districts." To date, four (4) MPCs have been approved: Hills of Denton; Hills of Denton, North; Inspiration (AKA Hunter Ranch); and Cole Ranch. Within the City of Denton, PDs and MPCs currently account for 25.21% (15,010 acres) and of the City's incorporated area - 59,53334 acres. Per the American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report Number 545, PDs (including MPCs) now make up the largest share of new development in many suburban areas nationwide. This report will discuss PDs as a zoning concept, and a checklist for drafting PD district regulations. Staff consulted several texts in researching this very important development topic due its potential impact on the communities in proximate where they are located, and their potential impact on City, County, and Denton Independent School District (DISD) resources and services. The major source of information contained herein came from the American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report Number 545, Planned Unit Developments, and Texas Municipal Zoning Law, 3`1 Edition by John Mixon, James Dougherty, and Brenda McDonald. Staff also researched several relevant zoning court cases. While this report is somewhat lengthy, it is staff's determination that the information herein should be presented in its entirety so as to capture the full scope of the subject matter. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AS A ZONING CONCEPT Planned Development History The following excerpt from the 2002, Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook (pages 10-7 to 10- 8) describes the emergence of discretionary zoning approaches: "Early zoning codes, based on the ordinance in Euclid z,. A111bler Realty, the 1926 Supreme Court decision that established the constitutionality of zoning, contained a few zones- residential, commercial, and industrial. Such ordinances typically listed a large number of permitted and prohibited uses. According to one analysis, "[a] few uses such as funeral parlors or airports were so unique they were not permitted in any zone but were allowed under an ad hoc determination as a special exception. This began to change in the 1960s and 1970s. As-of-right development permitting was supplanted by discretionary approaches, including - to name a few - conditional uses (also known as special exceptions), overlay zones, planned unit development [AKA PD], and cluster development, a variant of planned unit development where residential units are grouped together on a site. The intention was to allow staging of development and to encourage innovative site design, the retention of open space, the protection of environmentally sensitive areas, and, through clustering, a reduction in infrastructure costs. These new techniques recognized that development had changed from a lot-by lot approach to one at a much larger scale. Major, multiphase subdivisions, regional shopping centers, industrial parks, planned communities, and mixed use development became the rule rather than the exception in the suburbs." Simply put, a PD is a development project that is processed and reviewed comprehensively, usually in the zoning process employed to approve a development plan. A PD proposal usually contains a map (or series of maps and/or plans such a zoning/land use map, concept plan, detail plan, final site development plan and/or site plan) and the associated regulations that will govern the development, operation and maintenance of the PD via a PD ordinance. The more site- specific regulations within the associated PD ordinance are usually in addition to the more general PD development regulations and design standards that are outlined in the municipal's zoning or land development code. Most conventional municipal zoning codes do not allow single- fa~nily, multi-family, and non- + residential uses in the same zoning district and are commonly referred to as Euclidean zoning. The term Wi Euclidean Zoning is derived from Euclid (Ohio) v. Ambler Realty ' Co. the 1926 U.S. Supreme Court L decision to affirm the validity of comprehensive zoning. They also contain site development standards for setbacks, site coverage, and the a like that produce what many look upon as dull projects because they apply uniformly throughout each Cookie-czrttc ho sing velop i t district. Developers who had to comply with these zoning and subdivision regulations typically built residential projects with a sameness that led to the nickname "cookie-cutter" development, unless there were regulations in place to prevent them from doing so. The PD concept was a response to the inflexibility in conventional residential development. It was implemented by a new set of regulations in the zoning ordinance that applied primarily to residential development and required a discretionary project review followed by the approval of a development plan that displaced zoning regulations in residential zones. In its early stages, a PD was intended to provide a comprehensive development review that could overcome the shortcomings of traditional zoning and subdivision regulations, improve project design, and provide common open space in return for "cluster housing" development elsewhere in the project at increased densities; however, total project density was not increased. Open space was either privately held and available only to the residents of the PD or dedicated to the local government. National zoning literature such as Future ofLand Development by Reid Ewing, began to describe the virtues of PDs in the 1960s. Ten years earlier, Texas courts accepted the basic PD concept by upholding the City of Dallas's specific-use permitting (SUP) procedure. The Dallas procedure, described in the 1950 case of Prince v. Cothrum used zoning amendments to grant specific approval for development pursuant to approved site plans. What PD is Today A PD is both a physical plan and a legal concept that can be defined as: A comprehensive development plan intended to provide flexibility in design and building placement, promote attractive and efficient environments that incorporate a variety of uses, densities and dwelling types, provide for economv of shared services and facilities, and preserve natural resources. This definition does not expressly state that the design of a PD must be better than what might be obtained through traditional zoning, but it is implied. PDs can range in size from infill housing development on a few acres in a downtown area to a large-scale mixed-use development such as an MPC of several square miles. This variety suggests that different kinds of regulation may be required for different types of development and that no single approach to PD regulation can fit all alternatives. Downtown sites, for example, may not have natural resources to preserve. As such, the previously stated definition can be generalized to better emphasize both the process in which PDs are approved and the type of development contemplated by the regulations by stating: A PD is a development that has been approved via a process that requires the comprehensive reviely of project design and that can include a variety of project types, including infill developments, residential developments, and mixed-use developments. The Changing Market and Policy Environment for PDs and MPCs Changes in marketplace demand, development practices, the scale of development, and community expectations have substantially altered the market and policy environment for PD regulation. Housing demand, for instance, has called for major changes in the housing products that PDs and MPCs can offer. One observer commented several years ago that a mass market in housing no longer exists; rather, it is breaking into niche markets with different housing needs. This change has occurred because the homebuyer profile has changed, and the stereotypical nuclear family of the past no longer drives the housing market. The nuclear family is now a minority, and the number of children on average in each family has decreased by one-third. Employment has shifted from production to service, and time is a growing amenity as many families need dual incomes, and work demands put pressures on family life. Working at home through telecommuting has increased and may require a different kind of housing that contains a work environment. New Urbanism, Smart Growth and other Design Issues A. The popularity of new urbanist development continues to rise, given its advantages over development produced by conventional zoning. One of its important concepts is a development model of self-contained, self-sufficient communities in which reliance on the automobile is substantially reduced. New urbanists support regional planning for open space, context-appropriate architecture and planning, and the balanced development of jobs and housing. They believe their strategies can reduce traffic congestion, increase the supply of affordable housing, and rein in urban sprawl. This objective is achieved by providing internal employment opportunities, improving pedestrian access and requiring street connectivity to the adjacent grid, and by eliminating the isolated cul-de-sac that reduces mobility. B. Also on the rise is the implementation of smart growth principles. Spurring the smart growth movement are demographic shifts, a strong environmental ethic, increased fiscal concerns, and more nuanced views of growth. In communities across the nation, there is a growing concern that current development patterns - dominated by "sprawl" - are no longer in the long-term interest of our cities, existing suburbs, small towns, rural communities, or wilderness areas. Though supportive of growth, communities are questioning the economic costs of abandoning existing infrastructure in the city, only to rebuild it further out, thus creating costly leap-frog developments. } { L ,ate: ~ w ws Il V S,; rtGroirthDei lope it The features that distinguish smart growth in a community vary from place to place. Nevertheless, in general, smart growth invests time, attention, and resources in restoring community and vitality to center cities and older suburbs. New smart growth is more centered around the urban core, is mass-transit and pedestrian oriented, and has a greater mix of housing, commercial and retail uses. It also preserves open space and many other environmental amenities. Smart growth encourages communities to craft a vision and set standards for development and constriction which respond to community values of architectural beauty and distinctiveness, as well as expanded choices in housing and transportation. It seeks to create interesting, unique communities which reflect the values and cultures of the people who reside there, and foster the types of physical environments which support a more cohesive community fabric. Smart growth promotes development which uses natural and man-made boundaries and landmarks to create a sense of defined neighborhoods, towns, and regions. It encourages the constriction and preservation of buildings which prove to be assets to a community over time, not only because of the services provided within, but because of the unique contribution they make on the outside to the look and feel of a city. The creation of high-quality communities with architectural and natural elements that reflect the interests of all residents have resulted in a greater likelihood that buildings (and therefore entire neighborhoods) will retain their economic vitality and value over time. In so doing, the infrastructure and natural resources used to create these areas will provide residents with a distinctive and beautiful sense of place that they can call "home" for generations to come. C. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, or CPTED (pronounced sep-ted), is a crime prevention philosophy based on the theory that proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime, as well as an improvement in the quality of life. The best time to apply this philosophy is in the development design phase, before a building or neighborhood is built. It may also be successfully applied later, but retrofitting an existing environment can sometimes be costly. The use of CPTED principles has proven to reduce crime and fear by decreasing criminal opportunity and fostering positive social interaction among legitimate users of space. A legitimate user means one who is using a space for its intended purpose. The emphasis is on prevention rather than apprehension and punishment. There are three (3) basic and overlapping principles in the CPTED concept. To get a better understanding of the concept, let us consider these: 1. Natural Surveillance - Is achieved by creating environments where there is plenty of opportunity for people engaged in their normal behavior to observe the space around them. By designing the placement of physical features, activities and people in such a way to maximize visibility, natural surveillance occurs. 2. Natural Access Control - Most criminal intruders will try to find a way into an area where they will not be easily observed. Limiting access and increasing natural surveillance keeps them out altogether or marks them as an intruder. By selectively placing entrances and exits, fencing, lighting and landscape to control the flow of or limit access, natural access control occurs. 3. Natural Territorial Reinforcement - An environment designed to clearly delineate private space does two things. First, it creates a sense of ownership. Owners have vested interest and are more likely to challenge intruders or report them to the police. Second, the sense of owned space creates an environment where "strangers" or "intruders" stand out and are more easily identified. By using buildings, fences, pavement, signs, lighting and landscape to express ownership and define public, semi-public and private space, natural territorial reinforcement occurs. All the above development forms - new urbanist, smart growth and CPTED - as well as other locally desired design features can be achieved by including their associated standards as requirements for the approval of a PD. It is also possible to adopt standards allowing hybrid developments that include any combination of these three (3) design standards in conjunction with traditional designs (Ewing 2000). Fitting PD into the Surrounding Community: Depending on their size, density and intensity, PDs have the potential to generate substantial additional traffic, make substantial demands on public facilities such as schools, and affect the jobs/housing balance. The problem could potentially be even more serious when PDs are located in undeveloped outlying areas. PD ordinances, development regulations and design standards can include requirements to proactively take these problems into account and provide for possible solutions. For example, one may be a jobs/housing balance prerequisite that requires an adequate balance of jobs and housing to reduce effects on the community outside the project. Another may be a requirement that a PD must provide an adequate amount of work-force housing so that housing will be available for persons who cannot afford market-rate housing (Weitz 2003). Ordinances can also address the traffic problem by requiring a development to capture internally the traffic it generates via an adequate mixture of non-residential uses and other amenities. PD ordinances should have adequate public facilities requirement to ensure the development will not occur unless adequate public facilities are available. Adequate public facilities may also include facilities requirement such as the provision of public school sites within the development, when necessary. Role of the Comprehensive Plan As previously stated, PDs may impact the community at large via their effect on growth and development and the adequacy of public facilities. Therefore, all PDs should conform with and enhance the goals and policies contained within the Comprehensive Plan (Denton Plan). Therefore, PD regulations should be composed with this outcome in mind. Furthermore, per section 211.004 of the Texas Local Government Code (Tx.LGC): zoning regulations must be adopted in accordance with a comprehensive plan and must be designed to: 1. Lessen congestion in the streets; 2. Secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; 3. Promote health and the general welfare; 4. Provide adequate light and air; 5. Prevent the overcrowding of land; 6. Avoid undue concentration of population; or 7. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewers, schools, parks, and other public requirements. When appropriately structured and implemented, PDs do not depart from comprehensive planning because the comprehensive plan itself anticipates orderly amendments to authorize developments and condition permits to ensure conformity with the Plan. When properly regulated and implemented, PDs promote the general welfare because their procedures, criteria, and protective conditions minimize adverse impacts and protect nearby landowners and the public interest by allowing diversity and variety in desirable new development. PDs Prevent Spot Zoning The fact that a PD district can be applied to a single lot to accommodate in-fill redevelopment has raised concern of spot zoning is some arenas. Per Mixon, the Supreme Court's 1981 attempt to define the spot-zoning doctrine in City of Pharr v. Tippitt should protect most PDs from spot- zoning characterization. In City of Pharr, the Texas Supreme Court observed that the term "spot zoning" is used in Texas "to connote an unacceptable amendatory ordinance that singles out a small tract for treatment that differs from that accorded similar surrounding land lvithont proof of changes in conditions." Spot zoning is regarded as a preferential treatment which defeats a pre-established comprehensive plan. It is piecemeal zoning, the antithesis of planned zoning. The Court noted certain criteria against which zoning ordinances should be reviewed. Tippitt listed five (5) considerations for determining whether rezoning is spot zoning. Mixon further represents that all of these tests work in favor of PDs, and are as follow: 1. PD approval procedures should be spelled out in the basic ordinance. If the municipality follows its procedures for PD approval, provides adequate notice, and gives all interested parties an opportunity to develop their case fully, then PDs should pass the procedural test. As a substantive matter, municipalities that have strong statements explaining their PD goals are better equipped to defend particular PD approvals than municipalities that do not. Specific approvals should expressly connect the stated goals of comprehensive plan and the particular amendment. 2. Tippitt notes that substantial inconsistency with surrounding areas is likely to be called spot zoning. PDs do not often place gigantic commercial projects in residential neighborhoods. Instead, residential PDs or mixed uses are likely to be placed in residential and mixed neighborhoods where they are appropriate, and commercial PDs are likely to be placed in commercial districts. Moreover, PDs are ordinarily conditioned with buffers and other protections to reduce adverse "spot-zoning" impacts on nearby neighborhoods. 3. Tippitt states that suitability of the tract for uses as presently zoned is a factor, considering size, shape, and location. PD applicants are usually motivated by tract suitability for higher-intensity use than that allowed by the general regulations. This does not necessarily negate profitable use under general regulations, but it indicates that the sought after PD is economically more efficient. Functionally, PD uses specified in the associated PD ordinance usually predetermined to be desirable land uses in the districts in which they may be placed. The PD provision thus stands as a general legislative pronouncement that all designated receptor districts are suitable for properly planned and buffered PDs. 4. Tippitt states that the amendment must bear a substantial relationship to the general police-power goals. PDs allow development under strictly controlled conditions to ensure that the public interest health, safety, and welfare are both considered and protected. The public interest is also served by renewing urban land that has become valuable for high-investment development, thereby providing services, employment opportunities, and increased tax base for the community. 5. Tippitt notes that spot zoning singles out small tracts for special treatment. If a PD ordinance or the municipality's zoning regulation specifies a minimum-sized tract that must be dedicated to the project as a condition of approval, the acreage reflects the community's considered determination of the appropriate size for regulated and conditioned rezoning for that type of development. The municipality's own determination should not be overturned unless clearly unreasonable. Per Mixon, PD procedures can help avoid the technical and substantive defects of spot zoning and contract zoning. The supposed evil of spot zoning is that a particular tract is singled out and is zoned it in a favorable or unfavorable way that departs from the municipality's Comprehensive Plan and does not further the community's general welfare. Municipalities using PD procedures ought to be explicit in their zoning ordinance (and preferably in their Comprehensive Plan as well) that certain types of PDs are desirable and anticipated. The more planning statements a community can furnish to justify approval of specific PDs, the better chance specific amendments have when tested for spot zoning. PDs are based on a theoretical assumption that comprehensive planning is a "process," and not a once-and-for-all-time statement written in the first zoning ordinance. PDs orderly and rational approval process allows the municipality to pass judgment on significant land uses when they are presented as live development proposals instead of having to anticipate them in a purely abstract (speculative) setting. Most important, the process carries planning forward as a continuing exercise and allows the City and developers to plan together to solve common problems and reap the benefits of the marketplace. Imposition of Protective Conditions PD regulations must be written in such a manner that it distinguishes between permissible conditional zoning and impermissible contract zoning. Conditional zoning unilaterally imposes protective conditions on the property owner without the municipality's committing to rezone. Due to the fact that the municipality makes no binding promise when it imposes conditions, there is no abrogation of its legislative function. Contract zoning, on the other hand, refers to a bilateral agreement whereby the municipality promises to rezone in consideration of the owner's promise to use or not use the land in a certain way. That is, in form, the municipality binds itself to pass the rezoning/ordinance if the deal is struck. The two (2) objections to contract zoning are: (1) that zoning ordinances are legislative enactments, and a governmental body cannot legally contract away its police power; and (2) a municipality cannot surrender its power to make future changes. When applied, the conditions for PD approval ought to be stated objectively in the associated PD ordinance so that applicants and the community at large can know what site specific qualifications must be met, in addition to the general PD development regulations and design standards that are required by the municipal's development code. The municipality can lawfully condition rezoning on the developer's satisfying the negotiated requirements and thereby accomplish the desired specific control to ensure that community interests are protected. Planned Developments and their associate PD ordinances operate as zoning amendments for approved projects, and permitting officials cannot impose additional unauthorized conditions on constriction. In Rhodes v. ,Shopiro, after the legislative body had amended its ordinance to approve a PD, the Planning Commission informed the permit officer to condition the constriction permit on the project's not being financed under a federal subsidy program. On appeal, the court held that the Planning Commission had no authority to impose the requirement, and that mandamus to require the officer to issue the permit was proper. A CHECKLIST FOR DRAFTING PD AND MPC REGULATIONS Different Type of PD Regulations Any community considering a local zoning code to regulate PDs needs to determine what kind of code should be adopted. The following provides a checklist of issues that should be considered when deciding whether to include provisions for PDs (including MPCs) in land-use regulations. A. Planned Developments Designated as "Floating Zones" Most zoning ordinances do not identify PD districts on the zoning map. Instead, there is the potential that qualifying tracts can be rezoned upon request to allow specifically approved PDs. A PD is therefore an available district designation that is placed on the map only after: 1. The developer applies for approval for a qualifying project on a specific site; 2. The P&Z holds a public hearing or hearings and makes a recommendation concerning the proposal; and 3. The governing body (the City Council) follows statutory formalities and adopts an amendment that identifies the PD district and requires the development to conform to the established standards and approved site plan. B. Planned Development by-Right Notwithstanding the aforementioned, permitting PDs by-right has become a popular alternative in many communities. Remember that a PD is both a physical plan and a process. If PD ordinances are intended to produce "better" development and if a community knows what kind of development it prefers, it is quite possible to draft ordinances that require the "preferred" development and allow that development by-right without the need to go through a discretionary approval process. If it is possible to identify and agree on the elements of a PD in the zoning ordinance, approval should follow without difficulty, if regulation standards are met. PD by-right should be limited, however, to smaller sites, such as in-fill sites in the downtown, or sites within proximity to transit station. These PDs should have predetermined design requirements established in the land-use regulations, and should not generate substantial additional traffic, should not make new substantial demands on public facilities, such as schools, and should not notably affect the jobs/housing balance. Modest density increases and the introduction of limited non- Transit ot°xenteaDeveloprrrent residential uses may not have a significant effect on traffic congestion, the adequacy of public facilities, or the character of the surrounding area. An example of a PD by-right is the designation of land adjacent a transit station as a Transit Oriented Design (TOD) PD. PD by-right may not be possible in an environment in which different kinds of development are anticipated at different locations. Nor is it workable when the community wants to retain some form of discretionary review. Providing a fixed development format in the ordinance may avoid negotiation and bargaining over project approvals, but it also prevents flexibility in fitting project design to each development environment. It may also lead to unintended design outcomes, or may turn out not to be marketable in a changing environment. An alternative is a mixture, as some communities have done, in which the ordinance contains both discretionary and by-right forms of PD. Some communities have also adopted hybrid ordinances in which development standards are spelled out clearly, but administrative review is still required. This is a useful alternative if the standards adopted do not bind too tightly. As previously stated, adoption of a single development option for all types of PDs may not be possible. One set of code requirements might allow residential cluster housing adjacent an ESA, while another might allow vertical mixed-use development adjacent to a mass- transit station or a MPC within a designated growth area. Huffines Communities breaks ground on big mixed-use project in Lewisville By STEVE BROWN/The Dallas Morning News Developers broke ground Thursday afternoon on a mixed-use development that will take advantage of Denton County's first commuter rail line. The 90-acre Hebron 121 Station project is being built in Lewisville by Huffines Communities. The $300 million development will have more than 1,700 apartments and 250,000 square feet of retail and office space. The project is near Vista Ridge Mall and Interstate 35E and is next to Denton County Transit Authority's new rail station. The rail line, which will link Denton with downtown Dallas, is set to open next year. The first phase of the Huffines project is 234 apartments on Lakeway Circle that will open next spring. The Caribbean resort-style buildings were designed by architect Humphreys and Partners. "We are not aware of any existing residential transit-oriented developments in Texas that are of the size and scope of Hebron 121 Station," said Phillip Huffines, one of the owners of Huffines Communities. "At completion, the project will offer residents world-class retail and restaurant choices and resort-style amenities." Huffines Communities projects that the entire project will be finished in six to eight years. TYPES OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS When regulating PDs, some communities adopt a short form regulation with minimal standards that require a substantial exercise of discretion in their application. Other regulations are substantially longer and more detailed. Which alternative to choose is a matter of preference. A key element in the regulation of PDs is the tension between providing detail and authorizing discretion. In other words, should the regulations confine the decision maker by providing detailed guidance, or should it provide general directions that allow the exercise of a considerable amount of administrative discretion? Design standards, for example, can be highly detailed and prescriptive, or they can simply provide a general directive. An intermediate approach goes beyond generalized regulations but does not enact a detailed development format. An intermediate regulation would contain a directive standard that can be applied in different ways. It might contain a connectivity standard, for example, specifying the number of access points the project might have, but it would not specify how they should be provided. An intermediate regulation could also deal with traffic problems by including the requirement of internal capture of traffic, but not specify how this is to be accomplished. A jobs/housing balance requirement could establish a jobs/housing ratio but not detail how that ratio should be achieved. Generalized design guidelines can be provided without specifying design elements in detail, such as a requirement for a gridiron development pattern of lots and blocks. When PDs are not entitled as a matter of right, the municipality has a strong bargaining position. However, if the municipality is too demanding, it can lose a desirable development. Developers can, of course, if denied a PD permits, build any project allowed by the zoning district's general regulations. PDs are therefore effective regulatory mechanisms only if the developer wants to use the land for some purpose that is not ordinarily allowed by general zoning district regulations. New influences on what is expected in project development have encouraged communities to adopt regulations more concerned with project design and character. General Requirements for Planned Development Districts While there are varying types of PD regulations, certain minimum general requirements should be in place to realize the desired development outcome. These requirements should be specific, measurable, realistic, and when possible, have an applied time factor. Experience has demonstrated that subject requirements seldom deliver the development that is envisioned by the community. It is simply not good practice just to require the PD to have a "better" design than what would be possible by complying with the municipal zoning regulation, or simply that the PD must have "good" or "innovative" project design. These standards leave considerable room for interpretation and can make the review process an open ended battle that oftentimes lead to mediocre developments. Keep in mind that this type of end result was one of the very reasons for discontinuing the City's former PD process. Planned development districts should be established in appropriate locations, with respect to intended function; where they will not set a precedent for the introduction of an inappropriate use into an area; and so as not to encourage non-residential strip development along streets. Ideally, the municipal's zoning regulations should indicate the basic criteria for reviewing and approving PDs. The following general review criteria should be considered in evaluating requests and establishing conditions for PD districts: 1. Appropriateness. Designated minimum size, and the development should be planned and maintained as an integrated unit; 2. Physical Characteristics of the Site; Relation to Surrounding Property. The site should be suitable, in that it must be free from the probability of erosion, subsidence, slipping of the soil, flood hazard, destruction of ESAs, or other dangers. Conditions of soil, ground water level, drainage and topography should be appropriate to both type and pattern of use intended. 3. Relation to Public Utilities, Facilities and Services. PD districts should be located in relation to available transportation systems, sanitary sewers, emergency services, schools, public safety, water lines, storm and surface drainage systems and other utilities systems. If these systems are not existing at the time of the PD application/approval, the developer should be required to provide all required services prior to the issuance of any building permits associated with any development that are dependent on the services. 4. Relation to Major Transportation Facilities. PD districts, where appropriate because of the size or intensity of the proposed district, should be located within proximity to expressways, arterial and collector streets or mass transit facilities, and should be so designed as to provide access to and from the PD without creating excessive traffic along minor streets in residential neighborhoods outside the PD. 5. Compatibility. PD districts should be located and designed so as to minimize the negative effects of external impacts resulting from factors such as traffic, noise, or lights. Project control should be accomplished through such techniques as buffering, architectural design, site design, height limitations, and density or intensity limitations. 6. Transitions. PD districts should be responsive to the character of the area. When located in an area where land use types and/or intensities or densities vary, PD districts should be designed in such a manner as to provide for gradual changes in intensity and/or density. 7. Relationship to Adjacent Property. The PD should include adequate screening, buffering, transitional uses or other design features as necessary to adequately protect existing or probable uses of surrounding property; and should provide functional and logical linkages to activity centers and circulation facilities on such adjacent property. 8. Access. Principal vehicular access points should be designed to encourage smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movements and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Merging and turnout lanes or traffic dividers and extra width of the approach street should be required where existing or anticipated traffic flows indicate need. a. Vehicular access to streets or portions of streets from off-street parking and service areas should be so combined, limited, located, designed and controlled as to channel traffic from and to such areas conveniently, safely, and in a manner which minimizes traffic friction, and excessive interruptions. b. Pedestrian access should, where practical, be separated from vehicular access points to reduce congestion, friction and hazards, except where signalization is used in such a manner as to control pedestrian and vehicular movement safety. 9. Streets, Drives, Parking and Service Areas. Streets, drives, parking and service areas should provide safe and convenient access to all buildings and general facilities. Commercial and office uses should be grouped in relation to parking areas so after visitors arrive by automobile, establishments can be visited with a minimum of internal automotive movements. Facilities and access routes for deliveries, servicing and maintenance should be located and arranged to prevent interference with pedestrian traffic. Loading zones where customers' pick-up goods should be located and arranged as to prevent interference with pedestrian movement, fire lanes, and other vehicular travel ways. All rights-of-way and streets in PDs should adequately address the following minimum design considerations: a. Safe vehicular travel; b. The manner in which pedestrians, including those with physical disabilities, can traverse in the PD; c. Structural stability of all constriction materials; d. Utility distribution, power, sewer, cable, potable water and fire protection routing, location, and sizing; e. Horizontal and vertical sight distances; f Traffic safety requirements; g. Emergency vehicle maneuverability and access; h. Logical future extension of inter-neighborhood ties. 10. Pedestrian Systems. All PD districts should provide internal or external walkways where pedestrian circulation requires them. Site planning should provide for safe, efficient, convenient and harmonious groupings of strictures, uses, facilities and open spaces in a manner facilitating pedestrian movement between major origins and destinations, within and adjacent, to the district, with a minimum of conflicts with vehicular traffic. Pedestrian systems through buildings should be related to a network of exterior open spaces reserved for pedestrian use and enjoyment, consistent with the American with Disability Act (ADA) standards. Interior and exterior pedestrian ways should be scaled for anticipated traffic and form a convenient pattern connecting major concentrations of uses within the district, and shall connect to principal access points within and outside the district. Access for pedestrians and cyclists entering or leaving the district should by safe and convenient routes. Where there are crossings of pedestrian ways and vehicular routes at edges of PDs, such crossings should be safely located, marked and controlled, and where such ways are exposed to substantial vehicular traffic, safeguards should be required, except at designated points. Bicycle or pedestrian paths, if provided, should be so related to the vehicular system that street crossings are combined. 11. Density/Intensity. Density and/or intensity should not exceed maximums projected in the Comprehensive Plan. PD district densities/intensities should be established after consideration of the Comprehensive Plan criteria and limits, neighborhood compatibility, transitions, site design, and the existing transportation, water, wastewater and drainage system capacities. 12. Height. Height in a specific Planned Development district should be determined after review of the nature of surrounding land uses to ensure that the proposed development will not create any external impacts that would adversely affect surrounding development, existing or proposed. 13. Buffer and Screening. Fences or vegetative screening or buffering at periphery of PD district should be provided to protect occupants from undesirable views, lighting, noise or other off-site influence, or to protect occupants of adjoining districts from similar adverse influences. When adjacent development is of either similar use or intensity, such buffering may be reduced at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Development. 14. Yards and Setbacks. Yard and setback should be adequate to promote general health, safety, welfare, design excellence and neighborhood compatibility. All setbacks within the Planned Development Districts should be measured from property lines, not zoning district lines. All proposed setbacks should be shown on the appropriate plans in both graphic and tabular form. 15. Solid Waste and Utility Screens. All mechanical equipment (AC units, junction boxes, etc), central refuse and solid waste collection containers should be screened from sight or located in such a manner so as not to be visible from any public area within or adjacent to the PD district. 16. Signs. Signs in the PD district should be in accordance with the local zoning code or a special sign district should be created. The provisions of the PD approvals may be more restrictive, but not less restrictive. 17. Landscaping. Landscaping should be equal to or exceed the standards stipulated in the local zoning code. 18. Entranceways. Critical gateways should be identified and additional scrutiny should be given to the potential visual impacts of the proposed projects. 19. Utility Standards. All utility improvements should adhere to the requirements of the City's Criteria Manual and no utility system should be accepted for operation or maintenance by the City until all aspects adhere to the Criteria Manual. Specific deviations from the Criteria Manual, due to an existing site constraint or dimensional conflict, may individually be approved in writing by the City Engineer or the appropriate City agency having authority to do so. 20. Mormwater Management. Stormwater Management facilities should adhere to the requirements of the zoning code. 21. Minimum Open Space Requirements. Minimum open space requirements should be as required by each specific PD. However, the minimum requirement should not be less than the requirement of the local zoning code. 22. Natural and Historic Features. Conservation r and Preservation Areas. PD districts should be designed to preserve the natural features of the land and historic resources, such as - existing trees, natural topography, and archaeological and historic sites, as much as possible. However, archaeological and historic sites should not -become impediments to development. y - fixed-Used Plcurired Developrrreirt adjaceirt histot°ic site PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW As there are varying types of PD regulations, so are there varying types of PD application reviews. For example, a municipality may employ a three-step process leading off with a Concept Plan followed by a Detail Plan, and then a Final Development Plan; or a two-step process with a Concept Plan and then a Detail Plan is approved. In either process, the Detail Plan will only be approved after a determination that it is in compliance with the approved Concept Plan. If a PD is to be built in phases, a separate Detailed Plan should be required for each phase. A Phasing Plan should also be adopted to dictate the phasing sequence to ensure development is not done in a manner to avoid or put-off the constriction of infrastructure or other required amenities that are vital to the success of, or necessary to support the project. Entitlements and the Timing of Plan Approval. Important decisions about the content, timing, and specificity of development plans and their approval must be given due consideration when drafting PD regulations within the local development/zoning code. The first issue is to decide what plans the developer must submit and when. The following are the types of plans that are usually associated with a PD. A. PD Concept Plan Many communities suggest the preparation and approval of a PD Concept Plan as the first (1st) step in the review process. A PD Concept Plan is usually a generalized plan indicating the boundaries of the area to be developed. This plan should at the very least contain identified areas of the project where densities and intensities (development types) are proposed, but only in a general fashion. The Concept Plan should also establish general guidelines for the PD district. PD Concept Plans maybe adjoined by a PD Zoning Ordinance that is development specific (including a Zoning Map). The PD Concept Plan and the development specific PD Zoning Ordinance may be approved together or separately, depending on the size of the PD. The following information is typically provided on a Concept Plan: 1. Total acreage of the project. 2. Survey boundaries of the project. 3. Proposed general land uses and the acreage of each use, including open space. 4. Proposed major street layout. 5. 100-year floodplain, floodway, major drainage ways and ESAs. 6. City limits and Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) boundaries. 7. Adjoining zoning districts and land uses. 8. Existing transportation, water, wastewater, and storm sewer facilities. 9. Master transportation, water, wastewater, and drainage studies of such detail that identify the major public infrastructure facilities needed by each phase, the connection of these facilities to the existing public infrastructure, and any off-site improvements required. B. PD Development Specific Zoning Ordinance PD Zoning may be defined as the police power measure in which the PD is divided into districts or zones within which permitted and special uses are established as are regulations governing density, building heights, etc. The PD Zoning Ordinance is not just another add-on, but a major development specific regulatory program requiring careful analysis and study before being adopted as the adoption of the PD Zoning Ordinance displaces the existing conventional district zoning for the subject property and becomes its own independent zoning district. A notation is then made on the municipal's zoning map, and the PD district is given a designation, such as PD-1. Additional districts are numbered sequentially as they are approved. This was the historical practice in Denton. For instance, the Robson Ranch PD is designated as PD 173. Many developers prefer getting both their PD Concept Plan and development specific PD Zoning Ordinance approval in the very early stages of the process because it gives them a legislative endorsement of the essential elements of the proposed development while allowing them the flexibility to plan the details later. Especially with large-scale projects that may take many years to complete, developers can avoid the cost of expensive detailed plan preparation at the time of initial application that may produce a plan that becomes dated and unusable as markets change. C. PD Development Phasing Plan When a PD is to be developed over multiple phases, a Development Phasing Plan should accompany the PD Concept Plan at the time of adoption. The PD Development Phasing Plan may be combined with the PD Concept Plan, or submitted as a separate document. At the very least, the PD Development Phasing Plan should be adopted prior to the adoption of first PD Detail Plan. The PD Development Phasing Plan illustrates in graphic form the sequence in which the PD will be developed. Critical infrastructure improvements may be tied to certain phases of a PD. As such, special attention should be given to ensure that mandates are in place to enforce the development sequencing so as to prevent any avoidance or delay of constriction of vital infrastructure, amenities, adequate public or private facilities. The following information is typically provided on PD Development Phasing Plan: 1. Total acreage of the project. 2. Survey boundaries of the project. 3. Proposed general land uses and the acreage of each use including open space. 4. Proposed street layout (arterial and collector level). 5. Phasing lines with associated numbering sequence. a. Sub-phase lines, if necessary. b. Year ranges for anticipated development by phase or sub-phase. 6. Table with phasing number, phasing order, year ranges, uses and proposed density and intensity of uses. 7. Existing transportation, water, wastewater, and storm sewer facilities. 8. Master transportation, water, wastewater, and drainage studies of such detail that identify the major public infrastructure facilities needed by each phase, the connection of these facilities to the existing public infrastructure, and any off-site improvements required. D. PD Detail Plan The PD Detail Plan is often the second (2"d) major step in the PD review process and is intended to contain all of the information of the adopted PD Concept Plan but provides additional detailed information as to specific land uses and their boundaries. The PD Detail Plan follows the adoption of the PD Concept Plan, the associated development specific PD Zoning Ordinance, and the Development Phasing Plan, if necessary. The PD Detail Plan must be consistent with the adopted PD Concept Plan and associated Zoning Ordinance. Depending on the size and complexity of PD being proposed, the PD Detail Plan may be submitted with the PD Concept Plan, but should be submitted as a separate document. An example is a PD associated with an in-fill project on a limited scale where the planning and design objectives are clear, and the time frame for development reasonably short. Large-scale developments with a longer build-out time and more uncertainties and risk, like the Robson Ranch PD, and Inspiration MPC, cannot do advance detail planning with any certainty. A proposed PD Detail Plan application that passes the initial staff completeness review should then be reviewed for compliance with the criteria established by the local development/zoning regulations in addition to the associated adopted PD Concept Plan and the development specific PD Zoning Ordinance. At this point, a great deal of negotiation may occur, depending on the type of PD that is proposed. For example, the DRC may require widening of access streets and increased landscaping as a condition of approval. It may require that the developer design a stormwater management facility is such a way that it can be used for active outdoor recreation when the facility is dry, or to expedite the constriction of off-site street improvements to solve traffic problems that are anticipated from the development. The P&Z and/or the City Council may impose whatever conditions they deem appropriate to ensure desired development outcome, and/or to protect the general welfare of the community. The following information is typically provided on a PD Detail Plan: 1. Total acreage of the project. 2. Survey boundaries of the project. 3. Proposed specific land uses in tabular format and the surveyed boundary acreage of each use including open space. 4. Proposed street layout (arterial and collector). 5. Development standards: a. Maximum height of buildings b. Maximum building coverage c. Maximum floor to area ratio. 6. 100 year floodplain, ESAs, floodway and major drainage ways. 7. Existing transportation, water, wastewater, and storm sewer facilities. 8. Preliminary size and location of any detention facilities required. 9. City limits and Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) boundaries. 10. Adjoining zoning districts and land uses. E. Final Development Plan Commonly referred to as a Site Plan, the PD Final Development Plan is often the third (3rd) step in the PD review process and must be consistent with all prior approved associated plans, ordinances and conditions. The PD Final Development Plan increases the level of detail of the approved PD Concept Plan by illustrating in graphic form internal and external streets, thoroughfares, other means of access, open spaces, natural resources, uses, densities, intensities, height, boundaries in a metes and bounds description, drainage facilities location, minimum setbacks, maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of buildings; number, location and dimension of all lots, number of dwelling units and density. The following information is typically provided on a Final Development Plan: 1. Acreage in project shown by survey and certified by a registered surveyor. 2. Permitted land uses and acreage of each land use. 3. Land uses and zoning of adjacent properties. 4. Other existing or proposed off-site improvements as specified by the department. 5. Location and size of all streets, alleys, parking lots and spaces, loading areas or other areas to be used for vehicular traffic. 6. Proposed access and connection to existing or proposed streets and traffic generated by the proposed uses conforming to the master transportation plan approved with the Concept Plan. 7. Non-residential: location, maximum height (in feet), minimum setbacks, and maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of buildings. 8. Residential: number, location and dimension of all lots, minimum setbacks, number of dwelling units and density. 9. Location of all creeks, ponds, lakes, floodplains, ESA, and/or other water detention/retention or major drainage facilities and improvements conforming to the master drainage study approved with the Concept Plan. 10. Location size and route of all major water, wastewater, electrical lines and other facilities necessary to serve the project conforming to the master water and wastewater plan approved with the Concept Plan. 11. Location of all protected trees and a detailed landscape plan. 12. Location, type and size of all fences, berms, or screening features. 13. Sidewalks and other pedestrian or bicycle access. The following table provides a side-by-side comparison of the information that may be required on each plan. By no means is this intended to be an all-inclusive list, nor does it limit the level of specificity that may be required of each plan, particularly, the Final Development Plan. Detail Concept Plan Plan Final Development Plan 1. Total acreage of the project. 1. Total acreage of the project. 1. Acreage in project shown by 2. Smvey boundaries of the 2. Smvey boundaries of the project. smvey and certified by a registered surveyor. project. 3. Proposed specific land uses in reb 3. Proposed general land uses tabular format and the surveyed 2. Permitted land uses and and the acreage of each use boundary acreage of each use acreage of each land use. including open space. including open space. 3. Land uses and zoning of 4. Proposed arterial street 4. Proposed arterial, collector and adjacent properties. layout. local street layout 4. Other existing or proposed off- s. 100 year floodplain, 5. Development standards: site improvements as specified. floodway and major drainage a. Maximum height of buildings 5. Location and size of all streets, ways. alleys, parking lots and spaces, b. Maximum building coverage 6. City limits and Extra loading areas or other areas to Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) c. Maximum floor to area ratio. be used for vehicular traffic. boundaries. 6. 100 year floodplain, floodway 6. Proposed access and 7. Adjoining zoning districts and major drainage ways. connection to existing or and land uses. Existing transportation, water, proposed streets and traffic 8. Existing transportation, wastewater, and storm sewer generated by the proposed water, wastewater, and storm facilities. uses. sewer facilities. 7. Preliminan- size and location of 7. Non-residential: location, any detention facilities required. maximum height (in feet), 9. Master transportation, water, minimum setbacks, and wastewater, and drainage 8. City limits and (ET) boundaries. maximum floor area ratio studies of such detail that 9. Zoning districts and land uses on (FAR) of buildings. identify the major public ro ect and ad acent lands. infrastructure facilities p J _l 8. Residential: number, location by each phase, the and dimension of all lots, needed minimum of these facilities inimum setbacks, number of dwelling units and density. to the existing public infrastructure, and anti- off- 9. Location of all creeks, ponds, site improvements required. lakes, floodplain, and/or other water detention/retention or major drainage facilities and improvements. 10. Location size and route of all major water, wastewater, electrical lines and other facilities necessan- to seine the project. 11. Location of all protected trees and a detailed landscape plan according to rules set forth in the Landscape Ordinance. 12. Locations, type and size of all fences, berms, or screening features. 13. Sidewalks and other pedestrian or bici-cle access. PD Categories The next question is what type of PD provisions should be allowed. The key to answering this question is to develop a list of categories of expected PDs and to note that each category may require a different type of regulation and review process. One preliminary issue is that PDs are not necessarily built only on greenfield sites in suburban or non-urban areas. The redevelopment of inner-city areas was one of the reasons why PD regulation was originally considered, and PDs on in-fill sites in downtowns and other areas are quite common. Another initial point is that differentiation may not be necessary if adopted regulations provide for an open and flexible set of standards that apply to a wide variety of development types. Some possibilities are as follow: A. In.fill development/redevelopment on a vacant site or a developed site to be redeveloped in an established community. Transit oriented development located adjacent a transit station or redevelopment in the downtown or adjacent historic overlay zones are examples of this type of PD - B. New development on a greenfield or redevelopment of existing land in suburban or non- urban area to accommodate mixed or single-use development - fifteen I C. Master-Planned Community. A MPC is a PD, usually on substantial acreage that combines employment, office, retail, and entertainment centers with associated self-contained neighborhoods. It can include diverse housing types as well as its own retail, entertainment, and office centers - CONCLUSION: There is no all-purpose model for regulating PD districts. Communities will need to make choices about which review process to use and which substantive standards should apply. PDs have clearly changed from a modest attempt to provide flexibility, better design, and open space in residential development to a major land-use program that can create developments for both small-scale in-fill spaces and large MPCs. Its content has also changed to place new emphasis on design, natural resource preservation, social objectives, and the implementation of land development policies included in comprehensive plans. RECOMMENDATION: Give staff direction to draft new PD regulations for inclusion in the DDC. Staff recommends an intermediate approach to the regulations that at the very minimum embraces the twenty two (22) general review criteria presented in this report; emphasis being placed on project design and character - development product outcome. Staff also recommends exploring different types of PD application review processes that are tailored to specific development types such as new development, smaller in-fill/redevelopment, and mega MPC. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW No prior Action. OPTIONS 1. Direct staff to proceed with the development of PD regulations that will also govern MPCs. 2. Direct staff to take another direction. EXHIBITS 1. Zoning Ordinance 35-128; 2. DDC Section 35-1-5, Application of This Chapter; 3. List of References; 4. Associated Court Cases; and 5. PD/MPC Map Prepared by: Erica Marohnic, AICP Senior Planner Respectfully Submitted: Mark Cunningham, AICP, CPM Director of Planning and Development EXHIBIT 1 ZONING § 35-138 ARTICLE IV. PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 35-136. Purpose. The purpose of this article is to provide for the creation of planned development zoning districts. These districts 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. 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 a 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, strictures, features or places. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-137. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Commission shall mean the planning and zoning commission. Department shall mean the department of planning and community development. PD or district shall mean a planned development zoning district. Plan shall mean a general concept plan, development plan or detailed plan. (Ord. No. 91- 016, § 1, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-138. Application to existing undeveloped districts. The provisions of this article requiring the submission and approval of a detailed plan prior to development of the district shall apply to any district for which development has not begun and for which no detailed plan has been approved which substantially complies with the requirements of this article. Editor's note - Ord. No. 91-016, § 1, adopted Feb. 5, 1991, amended the provisions of former Art. IV, relative to planned development districts, in their entirety to read as set out herein. Former Art. IV derived from Ord. No. 69-1, § 1 (App. B, Art. ll(AUE), adopted Jan. 14, 1969 and Ord. No. 88-64, § 1, enacted May 6, 1986). Sec. 35-139. Notice, hearing and written protests. The provisions of Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code relating to notices, public hearings, and written protests for changes in zoning districts or regulations shall apply to requests for approval or amendment of general concept plans, development plans and detailed. plans, except detailed plans over which the commission has final approval authority. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-140 - 35-150. Reserved. DIVISION 2. APPROVAL PROCEDURES Sec. 35-151. District plans. There are three types of plans that may be used in the planned development process. The general purpose and use of each plan is described as follows: (1) General concept plan. This plan is intended to be used as the first step in the planned development process for larger or long term developments. It establishes the most general guidelines for the district by identifying the land use types, approximate thoroughfare locations and project boundaries and illustrates the integration of these elements into a master plan for the whole district. (2) Development plan. This plan is intended to be used most often as the second step of the PD process. The development plan contains all the information of a general concept (3) Detailed plan. The detailed plan is the final step of the planned development process. It contains the details of development for the property. 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 step in the planned development process. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-152. Approval of district. The city council may, after receiving the report of the commission, approve by ordinance the creation of a district based upon a general concept, development. or detailed plan. The approved plan shall be made part of the ordinance establishing the district. Any amendments to a general concept plan or development plan must be in harmony with the plan for the entire district and must be approved by the city council by ordinance. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-153. Approval of development plan. If a district is approved based upon a general concept plan, the council may thereafter approve by ordinance a development plan by ordinance for all or part of the district, a copy of which shall be attached to the ordinance creating the district. If the applicant requests approval of a detailed plan for property for which no development plan has been approved, the detailed plan must be approved by the city council. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-154. Commission approval of detailed plans. The commission is delegated the authority to approve a detailed plan or the amendment of a detailed plan for property for which a development plan has been approved by the city council, unless no detailed plan has been approved for the property within ten (10) years of the date of approval of a development plan, in which case the detailed plan must be approved by the city council, after notice and hearing. The approved detailed plan shall be attached to the ordinance establishing the district. The commission shall approve the detailed plan if it finds that: (1) The plan complies with the general concept plan or development plan approved for that property; (2) The plan provides for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses and would not adversely affect adjoining neighborhoods or properties outside the plan; (3) The plan provides for the adequate and safe circulation of vehicular traffic; and (4) The plan is in substantial compliance with the landscape, sign, subdivision and other regulations of the city, or, if not, the plan offers corresponding benefits that merit deviation from those regulations. (Ord. No. 91.016, § I, 2.5.91) Sec. 35-154-1. Deviation from general sign regulations. (a) Deviations from the general sign standards may be considered if the continuous street frontage in the planned development district is less than that required for consideration of a special sign district. (b) Deviations from the ground sign standards may be approved as long as the deviations equally meet the objectives of the sign regulations and such deviations are necessitated by the design of the development within the planned development district, and if such deviations are found to meet the same criteria as that for creation of a special sign district. (c) Approval of deviations from general sign standards shall be supported by written findings approved by the city council or the planning and zoning commission. (Ord. No. 93-030, § I, 3-2-93) Sec. 35-155. Conditions imposed. The commission or the city council may impose conditions concerning the location, use, arrangement, constriction 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) Sec. 35-156. Expiration of detailed plan. Any detailed plan approved after February 15, 1991, shall be valid for twenty-four (24) months from the date of its approval. Once constriction begins pursuant to a building permit issued for the property within the twenty-four (24) months, the detailed plan shall automatically expire and no longer be valid. The commission may, prior to expiration of the detailed plan, for good cause shown, extend for up to three hundred sixty (360) days the time for which the detailed plan is valid. (Ord. No. 91-016, § 1, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-157. Appeals from commission action. If the commission disapproves a detailed plan over which it has final approval authority, or imposes conditions, or refuses to grant an extension of time for which a detailed plan is valid, the applicant may appeal the decision to the city council by filing a written request with the department within ten (10) days of the decision. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-158. Minor amendments to a detailed plan. Upon request of the applicant, the executive director of planning and development, or his designee, may authorize minor amendments to a detailed plan so long as such minor amendments do not change the land use or substantially change the character, development stan- dards or design of the development as shown on the approved detailed plan. For purposes of this provision, a "substantial change" shall mean a change which will increase the number of proposed dwelling units; increase the floor to-area ratio, size of stricture, height, lot coverage or number of stories or buildings; reduce lot, yard, or space size; decrease the amount of required off-street parking spaces; change types of buildings, setbacks, street access points, or lots; or increase density, change traffic patterns or alter the basic relationship of the proposed development to adjacent properties. The executive director of planning and development, or his designee, shall make such authorization only in writing and such document shall be placed in the ordinance file governing the specific plan. (Ord. No. 93-126, § I, 7-20-93) Sec. 35-159 - 35-170. Reserved. DIVISION 3. APPLICATIONS AND SUBMISSIONS Sec. 35-171. Application, fee and plan required. Any person requesting rezoning to a planned development district or the amendment of a district plan shall submit an application, the fee and the required plan and information to the department. All plans, studies, maps, and other information which the petitioner wishes to be considered by the commission or council must be submitted to the department at least two (2) weeks prior to the public hearing on the request. Should the petitioner submit additional information after that time, the commission or council may defer consideration to allow the department time to review the additional information. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) To properly process applications and administer this article. the department is authorized to specify the form and manner in which all required information and plans are to be sub- Sec. 35-172. Form and manner. To properly process applications and administer this article. the department is authorized to specify the form and manner in which all required information and plans are to be sub mitted. Requests for amendments to part of a district must take into account the approved plan for the whole district. The applicant may be required to show the remainder of a district not included in the petition in order to determine whether the amendment would be in harmony with the plan for the entire district. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-173. Additional information required or waived. The department, commission. or council may require the submission of additional plans, statements, or other information not specified in this article if necessary to properly evaluate the petition. The department may also waive any required information it finds it unnecessary for proper consideration of the petition. (Ord. No. 91-016. § L 2-5-91). Sec. 35-174. General concept plan information. A general concept plan shall contain the following information: (1) Relation to the master plan. A general statement setting forth how the proposed district will relate to the city's comprehensive plan and the degree to which it is or is not consistent with that plan. (2) Acreage. The total acreage within the proposed district. (3) Snrvev. An accurate survey of the boundaries of the district. (4) Land uses. Proposed general land uses and the acreage for each use, including open space. For residential development, the total number of units and the number of units per acre. (5) General thoroughfare layout. Proposed streets, as a minimum to arterial street level. (Showing collector and local streets is optional.) (6) Development standards. Development standard for each proposed land use, as follows: Minimum lot area. Minimum lot width and depth. Minimum front, side, and rear yard areas. Maximum height of buildings. Maximum building coverage. Maximum floor to area ratios for nonresidential uses. Minimum parking standards for each general land use. (7) Existing conditions. On a scaled map as specified by the department, the following shall be shown for the area within and adjacent to the proposed district: Topographic contours of ten (10) feet or less. Existing streets. Existing 100-year floodplain, floodway and major drainage ways. City limits and E.T.J. boundaries. Zoning districts. Land use. Utilities, including water, wastewater, and electric lines. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-175. Development plan information. The development plan shall contain all the information required for a general concept plan, plus the following: (1) Permitted uses. A table listing the specific permitted uses proposed for the property to the detail specified by the department. (2) Boundaries. A map showing the boundaries of the different land uses and the boundary dimensions. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) 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 offsite improvements, as specified by the department, sufficient to demonstrate the relationship and compatibility of the dis- trict 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 uses. (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 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 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 landscape plan as (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) Sec. 35-177-35-180. Reserved. DIVISION 4. DEVELOPMENT OF DISTRICT Sec. 35-181. Compliance with approved plan. No development shall begin and no building permit shall be issued for any land within a district until a detailed plan has been approved for that land. All districts shall be developed, used and maintained in compliance with the approved detailed plan for the district. All other plans, maps, drawings, pictures, written statements or other representations on which the city council or commission relies in approving a detailed plan shall be considered part of the approved detailed plan and shall be incorporated in the ordinance and be binding upon the property. (Ord. No. 91- 016, § 1, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-182. Permitted uses. The permitted uses for a district shall be specified in the approved detailed plan. No person shall have the right to make use of any property within a district for any permitted use except upon approval of the detailed plan showing the location and layout of the permitted use. (Ord. No. 91- 016, § 1, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-183. Corrections of errors, omissions on detailed plan. Upon the request of an applicant, the chairperson of the development review committee may authorize minor technical changes or adjustments in the approved detailed plan to correct errors or omissions, so long as such changes do not substantially change the use, character, or design of the development. (Ord. No. 91-016, § I, 2-5-91) Sec. 35-184. Regulations applied; omissions. All conditions, regulations, and development standards for the district shall be contained in the ordinance or approved detailed plan for the district. If any regulation or restriction applied in other zoning districts by this chapter is omitted in the approved ordinance or detailed plan, the regulation applicable in the most comparable zoning district, as determined by the department, shall apply to the property. Any person aggrieved by the department's decision may appeal the determination to the city council after recommendation by the commission. (Ord. No. 91-016, § 1,2-5-91) Sec. 35-185 - 35-210. Reserved. EXHIBIT 2 DDC Section 35-1-5 35-1-5 Application of this Chapter. A. Permits or approvals authorizing a particular use of land or stricture shall transfer with the ownership of the land or strictures. So long as land or strictures, or any portion thereof, continue to be used for the purpose and in the manner authorized by a permit or approval, no person, including a successor or assign of the person who obtained the permit or approval, may use the land or stricture except in accordance with all the terms, conditions, and requirements of the permit or approval. B. All Planned Development Zoning Districts approved prior to the effective date of this Chapter, and which have not submitted a complete application for either a preliminary plat or a general development plan, are obsolete and are hereby repealed on the effective date of this Chapter. The following previously approved Planned Development Zoning Districts shall continue as a special exception in the zoning district and shall continue as a legal conforming use: 1. PD 12, I-35 at State School 2. PD 111, Oakbrook 3. PD 115, Smith Tract / Kings Ridge 4. PD 120, North Pointe 5. PD 132, The Preserve 6. PD 138, Hunter Ranch Business and Industrial Park 7. PD 139, The Vintage 8. PD 142, Hilcrest Center / Outlet Mall 9. PD 170, Wheeler Ridge 10. PD 172, Wheeler Ridge 11. PD 173, Robson Ranch 12. PD 174, Country Lakes 13. PD 176, Wheeler Ridge 14. PD 187, The Preserve, Section A-3 15. PD 191, Prominence Square EXHIBIT 3 List of References 1. Krasnowiecki, Planned Unit Development: A Challenge to Established Theory and Practice ofLand Use Control, 2. Mandelker, Daniel R. 2003. "Model Legislation for Land Use Decisions." The Urban Lairver 35, No. 4:635 3. Mixon, John. Dougherty, James. and McDonald, Brenda, Texas Municipal Zoning Lair, 3rd Edition 4. Weitz, Jerry. 2003. Jobs-Housing Balance, Planning Advisory Report No. 516. American Planning Association. EXHIBIT 4 Court Case Citations 1. 227 S.W.2d 863 (Tex. Civ. App. Dallas 1950, no writ). 2. 507 S.W.2d 876 (Tex. Civ. App. Dallas 1974, writ refused n.r.e.). 3. City of Pharr v. Tippitt, 616 S.W.2d 173 (Tex. 1981). Accord, Weatherford v. City of San Marcos, 157 S.W.3d 473 (Tex. App. -Au stin2004, pet. denied. (citing Mixon, Texas Municipal Zoning Law) 4. Calhoun v. St. Bernard Parish, 937 F.2d 172 (5th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1060 (1992). 5. Op. Tex. Att'y Gen. 7M-493 (May 19, 1986) advised that zoning commissions were not authorized to issue specific use permits, which some Texas zoning ordinances provide for planned development district approval. 6. See Reno, Non-Euclidian Zoning: The Uses of the Floating Zone, 23 Mn. L.Rev.105 (1963). 7. Dallas Development Code § 51-4.219 (1981) requires from applicants for SUP a site plan that includes the dimensions, bearings, and street frontage of the property; the location of buildings, strictures, and uses; the method of ingress and egress; off-street parking and loading arrangements; screening, lighting, and landscaping, if appropriate; and other information deemed necessary for complete review. Corpus Christi Zoning Ordinance No. 6106 § 28-4 (1984) requires for residential PUD-1 a minimum of five acres, density according to a specified land-use intensity scale, screening of adjacent properties, open space, vehicular access and parking and pedestrian access as appropriate, and an effective management system for common areas. Amarillo Zoning Ordinance § 26-12 (1980) imposes minimum tract sizes, site plans showing building location, parking and traffic access, and open space requirements. 8. Bernard v. City of Bedford, 593 S.W.2d 809 (Tex. Civ. App. Fort Worth 1980, writ refused n.r.e.). 9. 616 S.W.2d 173 (Tex. 1981). 10. See, for example, Moore v. City of Carrollton, 517 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. Civ. App. Dallas 1974, no writ), in which the court indicated that a claimed "trade-out" involving a promise to pave streets in exchange for a zoning amendment was a corrupt legislative act that could invalidate the ordinance. But see McWhorter v. City of Winnsboro, 525 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App. Tyler 1975, writ refused n.r.e.), in which the PD "required" the landowner to meet conditions of drainage, surface materials, and fencing and to bear a fair share of the cost of maintaining a designated street. 11. Id. Super Wash, Inc. v. City of White Settlement, 131 S.W.3d 249, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 1933 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2004, pet. filed) riled that a zoning amendment was not illegal contract zoning. The ordinance imposed a requirement that a landowner build a screening fence, as a condition of changing the zoning. The court riled that there was not "a bilateral agreement." See, also, discussion and cases cited in 11.901 through 11.903 of Texas Municipal Zoning Law, 3rd Edition, Mixon, Dougherty, and McDonald. 12. 494 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. Civ. App. Waco 1973, no writ). See also Bartlett v. Cinemark USA, Inc., 908 S.W.2d 229 (Tex. App. Dallas 1995, no writ), subjecting the city council to potential personal liability for refusing a ministerial duty to approval constriction. EXHIBIT-5 - PD/MPC Map MPICs and PDs City of Denton ' I r IJ-'~N -ILL- F GE ` IJOF'-H - F_ HILLS 0= DENTC'l - J tl - I11 V~ Iq~ 147. L LL~C~ 9'111 9 - 115 IJ { _ CGLE RdVCH ~F - - 737 FIT 1Z FUP.TEP. F:A:C1 - .71'1, - - - 474 City of Denton \l'~ Planning and Development Legend Q: 221 N. Elm Street n Denton, Texas 76201 1'0 N (94D) 349-8350 F ~ _ W".cltyofdenton.com am~o Daa~~ AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Transportation Operations All YT_ ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding general terms and provisions of a Vulnerable Road User ordinance. BACKGROUND At the October 12, 2010 Mobility Committee Meeting, the Committee received a briefing regarding a proposed Vulnerable Road User ordinance based off of Senate Bill 488. The purpose of such an ordinance would be to protect vulnerable road users which are typically defined as a pedestrian or cyclist. Senate Bill 488, attached as Exhibit 1, was passed by both the House and Senate during the 81st Legislative Session, but was subsequently vetoed by Governor Perry. While supportive of enhancing safer roads in the State of Texas, the Governor stated in his veto comments, attached as Exhibit 2, that "...this bill contradicts much of the current statute and places the liability and responsibility on the operator of a motor vehicle when encountering one of these vulnerable road users." Sixteen other states have passed vulnerable road user laws to provide additional protection to non-motorist using public roadways. Additionally, the cities of San Antonio, Austin, El Paso and Helotes have passed local vulnerable road user ordinances which, as I understand, have been embraced by cycling organizations. General provisions that may be addressed by a vulnerable road user include: • Establishing pedestrians, runners, disabled persons, children, skaters, constriction/maintenance workers, cyclist, horseback riders, motorcycles, tow trick operators and others as vulnerable road users. • Establishing a standard safe passing distance of three feet for cars and light vehicles and six feet for commercial vehicles. • Prohibiting turning dangerously in front of a vulnerable road user. • Failing (vehicle) to yield when making a left hand turn at an intersection. The establishment of a vulnerable road user ordinance is clearly a policy decision to be considered by Council and may be one that Council would monitor and/or advocate as part of the legislative agenda for the 82nd Legislature. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION N/A FISCAL INFORMATION No information has been generated at this time on the costs to enforce a proposed vulnerable road user ordinance. EXHIBITS 1. Senate Bill 488 2. Governor Perry's SB 488 Veto Statement Respectfully submitted, Mark Nelson Transportation Director 81(R) SB 488 - Enrolled version - Bill Text EXHIBIT 1 page 1 of 2 S.B. No. 488 AN ACT relating to the operation of a motor vehicle in the vicinity of a vulnerable road user; providing penalties. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTION 1. Subchapter I, Chapter 545, Transportation Code, is amended by adding Section 545.428 to read as follows: Sec. 545.428. VULNERABLE ROAD USERS. (a) In this section, "vulnerable road user" means: (1) a pedestrian, including a runner, physically disabled person, child, skater, highway construction and maintenance worker, tow truck operator, utility worker, other worker with legitimate business in or near the'road or right-of-way, or stranded motorist or passenger; (2) a person on horseback; (3) a person operating equipment other than a motor vehicle, including a bicycle, handcycle, horse-driven conveyance, or unprotected farm equipment; or (4) a person operating a motorcycle, moped, motor-driven cycle, or motor-assisted scooter. (b) An operator of a motor vehicle passing a vulnerable road user operating on a highway or street shall: (1) vacate the lane in which the vulnerable road user is located if the highway has two or more marked lanes running in the same direction; or (2) pass the vulnerable road user at a safe distance (c) For the purposes of Subsection (b)(2), when road conditions allow, safe distance is at least: (1) three feet if the operator's vehicle is a passenger car or light truck; or (2) six feet if the operator's vehicle is a truck other than a light truck or a. commercial motor vehicle as defined by Section 522.003. (d) An operator of a motor vehicle that is making a left turn at an intersection, including an intersection with an alley or private road or driveway, shall yield the right-of-way to a vulnerable road user who is approaching from the opposite direction and is in the intersection or in such proximity to the intersection as to be an immediate hazard. (e) An operator of a motor vehicle may not overtake a vulnerable road user traveling in the same direction and subsequently make a right-hand turn in front of the vulnerable road user unless the operator is safely clear of the vulnerable road user, taking into account the speed at which the vulnerable road user is traveling and the braking requirements of the vehicle making the right-hand turn. (f) An operator of a motor vehicle may not maneuver the vehicle in a manner that: (1) is intended to cause intimidation or harassment to a vulnerable road user; or (2) threatens a vulnerable road user. _(g) An operator of a motor vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with an vulnerable road user on a roadway or in an intersection of roadways. (h) A violation of this section is punishable under Section 542.401 except that: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/dodoes/81 R/billtext/html/SB00488F.htm 81(R) SB 488 - Enrolled version - Bill Text Page 2 of 2 (1) if the violation results in property damage, the violation is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not to exceed $500; or (2) if the violation results in bodily injury, the violation is a Class B misdemeanor. (i) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that at the time of the offense the vulnerable road user was actin in violation of the law. (j) If conduct constituting an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under another section of this code or the Penal Code, the actor may be prosecuted under either section or both sections. SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2009. President of the Senate Speaker of the House I hereby certify that S.B. No. 488 passed the Senate on April 21, 2009, by the following vote: Yeas 25, Nays 5; May 23, 2009, Senate refused to concur in House amendments and requested appointment of Conference Committee; May 29, 2009, House granted request of the Senate; May 31, 2009, Senate adopted Conference Committee Report by the following vote: Yeas 26, Nays 5 Secretary of the Senate I hereby certify that S.B. No. 488 passed the House, with amendments, on May 19, 2009, by the following vote: Yeas 140, Nays 5, one present not voting; May 29, 2009, House granted request of the Senate for appointment of Conference Committee; May 30, 2009, House adopted Conference Committee Report by the following vote: Yeas 142, Nays 0, two present not voting. Chief Clerk of the House Approved: Date Governor http://www.Iegis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/8lR/billtext/htrnl/SB00488F.htm Office of the Governor Rick Perry - Veto Statements Gov. Perry Vetoes SB 488 Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT 2 You are here: ills Gov. Perry Vetoes SB 488 June 19, 2009 TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME: Pursuant to Article IV, Section 14 of the Texas Constitution, I, Rick Perry, Governor of Texas, do hereby disapprove of and veto Senate Bill No. 488 of the 81 st Texas Legislature, Regular Session, due to the following objections: Senate Bill No. 488 would create a new class of users of roadways, called "vulnerable road users," which would require specific actions by operators of motor vehicles. These vulnerable road users would include pedestrians; highway construction and maintenance workers; tow truck operators; stranded motorists or passengers; people on horseback; bicyclists; motorcyclists; moped riders; and other similar road users. Many road users placed into the category of vulnerable road users already have operation regulations and restrictions in statute. For example, a person operating a vehicle being drawn by an animal is subject to the same duties as a motor vehicle, and a pedestrian is required to yield the right of way to a motor vehicle, unless he or she is at an intersection or crosswalk. While I am in favor of measures that make our roads safer for everyone, this bill contradicts much of the current statute and places the liability and responsibility on the operator of a motor vehicle when encountering one of these vulnerable road users. In addition, an operator of a motor vehicle is already subject to penalties when he or she is at fault for causing a collision or operating recklessly, whether it is against a "vulnerable user" or not. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have signed my name officially and caused the Seal of the State to be affixed hereto at Austin, this the 19th day of June, 2009. RICK PERRY Governor of Texas ATTESTED BY: COBY SHORTER, III Deputy Secretary of State For a detailed view of this bill, visit http://www. leg i s.state.tx. us/ iII Looku ist ry.aspx?Leg ss= 1 ill= 488. http://www.govemor.state.tx.us/news/veto/12636 3/5/2010 c: documents and settings jerichar,local settings temporary internet filescontent.outlook 95yned3n vulnerable road users (2).doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ADDING SECTION 18- OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO VULNERABLE ROAD USERS; BY CREATING SECTION 18- TO DEFINE VULNERABLE ROAD USERS AND RE- AFFIRM THE OBLIGATION OF ALL OPERATORS OF MOTOR VEHICLES TO EXERCISE DUE CARE IN THE OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES; PROVIDING A REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $200 FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, bicyclists and pedestrians are allowed to use the roadway by law in Texas, but these users do not have the same physical protection as motorists and are at greater risk of injury or death; and WHEREAS, approximately 50 cyclists and 400 pedestrians are killed every year in Texas; and WHEREAS, a safe passing ordinance provides the foundation for an education campaign of tolerance and acceptance for "active" forms of alternative transportation, which furthers the City's goals of promoting Denton as a bicycle friendly community, as well as for the enhancement of walkable streets and neighborhoods. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 18 "Motor Vehicles and Traffic" of the Code of Ordinances of Denton, Texas is hereby amended by adding Section 18- regarding vulnerable road users. Section 18- shall read as follows: Sec. 18- VULNERABLE ROAD USERS. (a) In this section, a Vulnerable Road User means: (1) a pedestrian, a runner, a physically disabled person utilizing the roadway for travel, a highway constriction or maintenance worker, tow trick operator, a utility worker, or any other worker with legitimate business in or near the road or right-of-way, or a stranded motorist or passenger, or one assisting or providing aid to a stranded or injured motorist; or (2) a person on horseback; or (3) a person operating manual equipment other than a motor vehicle as defined by the Texas Transportation Code, including, but not limited to, a bicycle, hand-cycle, horse-driven conveyance, a skateboarder, rollerblader, roller-skater, or a person operating a manual scooter. (4) a person operating an electric personal assistance mobility device in compliance with the following requirements: c: documents and settings jerichar,local settings temporary internet filescontent.outlook 95yned3n vulnerable road users (2).doc (A) A person may operate an electric personal assistive mobility device on a residential street, roadway or public highway with a speed limit of 30 miles per hour or less only: 1. while making a direct crossing of a highway in a marked or unmarked crosswalk; 2. where no sidewalk is available; or 3. when so directed by a traffic control device or by a law enforcement officer. (B) A person may operate an electric personal assistive mobility device on a path set aside for the exclusive operation of bicycles. (C) Any person operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a residential street, roadway, or public highway shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand edge. (D) Except as otherwise provided by this section, provisions of this section applicable to the operation of bicycles apply to the operation of electric personal assistive mobility devices. (b) Vulnerable road users utilizing the roadway as defined by subsections (a)(2), and (a)(3) above shall comply with the requirements for bicycles set forth as follows: (1) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, unless: (A) the person is passing another vehicle moving in the same direction; (B) the person is preparing to turn left at an intersection or onto a private road or driveway; (C) a condition on or of the roadway, including a fixed or moving object, parked or moving vehicle, pedestrian, animal, or surface hazard prevents the person from safely riding next to the right curb or edge of the roadway; or (D) the person is operating a bicycle in an outside lane that is: 1. less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that lane; or 2. too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side. Page 2 c: documents and settings jerichar,local settings temporary internet filescontent.outlook 95yned3n vulnerable road users (2).doc (2) A person operating a bicycle on a one-way roadway with two or more marked traffic lanes may ride as near as practicable to the left curb or edge of the roadway. (3) Persons operating bicycles on a roadway may ride two abreast. Persons riding two abreast on a laned roadway shall ride in a single lane. Persons riding two abreast may not impede the normal and reasonable flow of traffic on the roadway. Persons may not ride more than two abreast unless they are riding on a part of the roadway set aside for the exclusive operation of bicycles. (c) Vulnerable road users utilizing the roadway as defined by subsections (a)(1) and (a)(4) above shall walk on a sidewalk when provided or, if none, shall walk against traffic as close as practicable to the edge of the roadway. (d) An operator of a motor vehicle passing a vulnerable road user operating on a highway or street shall: (1) move to the left lane if the highway has two or more marked lanes running in the same direction; or (2) pass the vulnerable road user at a safe distance (e) An operator of a motor vehicle that is making a left turn or a u-turn at an intersection, including an intersection with an alley or private road or driveway, shall yield the right- of-way to a vulnerable road user in all circumstances in which the operator would be required to yield right-of-way pursuant to the traffic law. (f) An operator of a motor vehicle may not overtake a vulnerable road user traveling in the same direction and subsequently make a right-hand turn in front of the vulnerable road user unless the operator is safely clear of the vulnerable road user. (g) An operator of a motor vehicle may not maneuver the vehicle in a manner that: (1) is intended to cause intimidation or harassment to a vulnerable road use; or with imminent. (2) threatens a vulnerable road user with imminent bodily injury. (h) An operator of a motor vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any vulnerable road user on a roadway including public rights of way. (i) A vulnerable road user on a roadway or public right-of-way shall exercise due care and comply with all applicable city ordinances and state statutes. It is a defense to prosecution under this section that at the time of the offense, the vulnerable road user was acting in violation of the law, acting in a reckless manner or not exercising due care. Page 3 c: documents and settings jerichar,local settings temporary internet filescontent.outlook 95N-ned3n vulnerable road users (2).doc SECTION 2. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any invalidity. SECTION 3. Save and except as amended hereby, all the provisions, sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, and phrases of the Code of Ordinances shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. Any person found guilty of violating this Ordinance by a court of competent jurisdiction shall be fined a sum not to exceed two hundred dollars ($200). SECTION 5. This Ordinance providing for a penalty 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, the 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 12011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 4 This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Airport ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the governance of the Airport as recommended in the Denton Airport 2010 Business plan. BACKGROUND On November 16, 2010, the City Council approved the Denton Airport Business Plan. The approved Airport Business Plan stresses financial self sufficiency for the Airport and specifically states that "The City of Denton should also consider modifying its airport governance stricture to assist with vetting financial proposals for the Airport as well as provide policy input related to targeted marketing initiatives and development." During discussions of this document, the City Council requested that staff provide a recommendation on airport governance options. With these issues in mind, staff proposed the following on December 14, 2010: ➢ Expand the role of the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB) to review, consider, and make recommendations to the City Council regarding airport branding, marketing, and development incentive policies. ➢ Increase EDPB membership by two members from seven (7) to nine (9). One of the new members will be required to have knowledge or experience in general aviation related matters and must reside or work within the city. The other new member will be a citizen of the city who in the discretion of the City Council has specific knowledge, skills, and abilities that can assist with any or all of the functions related to the EDPB. ➢ Create a City Council Airport Committee to oversee Airport operations. ➢ Hold regularly scheduled meetings with interested stakeholders and Airport tenants to share information and solicit ideas, comments, or concerns, relative to the Airport operations or development. The intent of these meetings will be to increase access and public input into matters that involve airport operations. ➢ Continue to have the Airport Manager administer the day-to-day operations of the Denton Airport. Subsequent to the December 14, 2010, recommendation, Council Member Engelbrecht suggested that staff consider formalizing the existing Airport Safety Committee. The Safety Committee is currently administered by staff, but the membership of the committee is not formally defined and the meetings occur on an irregular basis. In addition, the charge of this committee is not officially defined in a written format. As such, Council Member Engelbrecht proposed that the committee membership, charge, and meeting schedules be formalized if the Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 proposed governance stricture is changed. Staff agreed with this approach and incorporated the concept into the February 15th recommendation. The staff proposal is more completely described in the attached Agenda Information Sheet, Exhibits and PowerPoint Presentation that was discussed with the City Council on February 15, 2010 (See Exhibit 1). In essence, staff recommended the creation of a new Council Airport Committee, an expanded role for the EDPB, and the formal creation of a staff level Safety Committee and Tenant/Stakeholder Relations Group. As part of this approach, the ordinance establishing the Airport Advisory Board would also be rescinded. The key elements of the staff February 15th recommendation are summarized in the graphic below: Recommended k f ~ Policy Governance Airport Mgmt. Structure Structure On February 15, 2011, the City Council tabled the proposal until a specific recommendation could be presented regarding the safety, tenant, and stakeholder groups mentioned. As such, the purpose of this item is to review the above described proposal and provide a specific recommendation on how the Safety and Tenant/Stakeholder groups will be organized. In considering this issue, staff has reviewed the City Council and Airport Advisory Board (AAB) comments that were mentioned over the past few weeks. The City Council and AAB have agreed and emphasized that: ➢ Tenants and other stakeholders at the Airport should have ample input on Airport related issues. ➢ Historical and general aviation knowledge at the Airport should be preserved. ➢ Economic Development at the Airport should be enhanced. ➢ Citizens should have increased access to the City Council on Airport matters. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 3 ➢ Various aspects of the proposed governance stricture should be more completely defined. In the view of staff, the following recommendation addresses each of the above issues: ➢ Formally establish an Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee. ➢ Intent of the committee will be to explore a wide range of safety and operational issues including Flight and Ground Operations. o Focus will be on tenant/stakeholder outreach. ➢ The Airport Manager will conduct the meetings. ➢ May meet monthly (or more frequently based on need), but not less than 4 times per year. ➢ In order to be responsive to any issue that may be raised, the meetings will conducted by management and will include an opportunity to discuss any issue. ➢ At a minimum, invitees to the meetings will include Fixed Base Operator (FBO) representatives, Air Traffic Control management, and the Airport Operations Coordinator. o Any member of the public will be encouraged to participate in the discussion. ➢ FAA representatives and contractors at the Airport may also occasionally be invited to attend to discuss a wide range of issues that may be relevant. ➢ The Chairman of the newly formed Airport Committee will also be formally invited to attend each meeting. ➢ A summary of the Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee's discussions will be forwarded for review to the Airport Committee and City Council. The remaining key aspects of the proposed governance stricture are detailed below: Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB) • Expand EDPB by two members (from 7 to 9). • Review, consider, and make recommendations to the City Council regarding Airport branding and marketing efforts. • Outline development incentive policies for the Airport. • Leverage common goals and create synergy between development of Airport and the development of the community. Airport Committee: • Three member City Council Committee. • City Manager (or designee) also on Committee. • Review and make recommendations regarding leases at the Airport. • Review grant funding opportunities. (e.g. master plan, infrastructure improvements, etc.) • Monitor budget and assist with development of long term financial plans for the Airport. • Provide a forum for tenants and other interested parties to interface directly with the City Council on Airport related issues. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 4 PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) On November 16, 2010, the City Council approved the Denton Airport Business Plan. At this time, the City Council also asked staff to prepare a recommendation on airport governance options. On December 6, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Airport Advisory Board (AAB). The AAB expressed some concerns regarding the options presented, but they did not provide a formal recommendation to the City Council. On December 7, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The EDPB was very supportive of the staff recommendation, and has recommended that the City Council approve the proposed revisions to the membership and role of the EDPB. On December 13, 2010, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss their potential response and recommendation to the City Council concerning the governance options that were presented by staff. As a result of this discussion, the AAB developed a letter that was forwarded to the City Council on December 14, 2010. In this communication, the AAB recommended that the City Council either 1) table the item until more discussion could take place or 2) increase the size of the Airport Advisory Board from seven (7) to nine (9) members with one additional member coming from the Economic Development Partnership Board and one member coming from the Chamber of Commerce. On December 14, 2010, staff made a presentation to the City Council on the airport governance options that were identified. The City Council elected to table the Airport governance discussion until the February 1, 2011, meeting since only four Council members were in attendance. On January 5, 2011, the AAB held a meeting to discuss the Airport governance options that were presented by staff. On January 19, 2011, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss the Airport governance options. The focus of this meeting was to receive input and consider the views of the Airport tenants and stakeholders. On January 24, 2011, a three member committee of the AAB met to consider drafting a response to the City Council on governance options. On February 1, 2011, the City Council was scheduled to discuss the Airport governance issue, but the item was tabled due to inclement weather. On February 9, 2011, the Airport Advisory Board met to discuss the Airport governance options that would be presented to the City Council. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 5 On February 15, 2011, the City Council discussed the Airport governance recommendations, but the issue was ultimately tabled in order for a specific recommendation to be developed concerning safety and tenant stakeholder relations. On February 21, 2011, the Airport Advisory Board met to discuss the Airport governance options that would be presented to the City Council. As a result of this meeting, the AAB developed the recommendation that is attached as Exhibit 3. EXHIBITS 1. February 15, 2011, Agenda Information Sheet, Exhibits and PowerPoint Presentation regarding Airport governance options. 2. PowerPoint Presentation 3. Airport Advisory Board February 21st Recommendation Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: FebruaiN- 15, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Airport ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Receive a report and public input, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding the governance of the Airport as recommended in the Denton Airport 2010 Business plan. BACKGROUND On November 16, 2010, the City Council approved the Denton Airport Business Plan. The approved Airport Business Plan stresses financial self sufficiency for the Airport and specifically states that "The City of Denton should also consider modifying its airport governance structure to assist with vetting financial proposals for the Airport as well as provide policy input related to targeted marketing initiatives and development." During discussions of this document, the City Council requested that staff provide a recommendation on airport governance options. With these issues in mind, staff proposed the following on December 14, 2010: Staff Recommendation: The purpose of the staff proposal is to further enhance the value of the Airport as an economic engine for the community and heighten the City's commitment to the Airport. This objective will be accomplished by: ➢ Expanding the role of the Economic Development Partnership Board to review, consider, and make recommendations to the City Council regarding airport branding, marketing, and development incentive policies. ➢ Increasing EDPB membership by two members from seven (7) to nine (9). One of the new members will be required to have knowledge or experience in general aviation related matters and must reside or work within the city. The other new member will be a citizen of the city who in the discretion of the City Council has specific knowledge, skills, and abilities that can assist with any or all of the functions related to the EDPB. ➢ Transitioning from an Airport Advisory Board, as currently exists, to a City Council Airport Committee. The recommended course of action will effectively eliminate the current Airport Advisory Board stricture. ➢ Holding regularly scheduled meetings with interested stakeholders and Airport tenants to share information and solicit ideas, comments, or concerns, relative to the Airport operations or development. The intent of these meetings will be to increase access and public input into matters that involve airport operations. MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 Agenda Information Sheet February 15, 2011 Page 2 ➢ Continuing to have the Airport Manager administer the day-to-day operations of the Denton Airport. The staff proposal is more completely described in the attached Agenda Information Sheet and PowerPoint Presentation that was discussed with the City Council on December 14, 2010 (See Exhibit 1). Since December 14th, the Airport Advisory Board (AAB) has met on January 5th and January 19th to discuss the governance options in more detail. In addition, on January 24th, a three member committee of the AAB met and drafted a letter to the City Council which provided additional options for consideration. The committee's letter is attached for review as Exhibit 2. In addition, Council Member Engelbrecht has suggested that staff consider formalizing the existing Airport Safety Committee. The Safety Committee is currently administered by staff, but the membership of the committee is not formally defined and the meetings occur on an irregular basis. While the purpose of the meetings is to discuss current operational and safety issues at the Airport, the charge of this committee is not officially defined in a written format. Typically, participants at the Safety Committee meetings include FBO representatives, Air Traffic Control management, the Airport Operations Coordinator, and pilots who are active at the Airport. In addition, FAA representatives and contractors at the Airport occasionally attend to discuss a wide range of issues that may be relevant. To provide assurance that Airport staff properly addresses safety concerns, Council Member Engelbrecht proposes that the committee membership, charge, and meeting schedules be formalized if the proposed governance stricture is changed. Staff is in agreement with this recommendation and will draft a proposal for the City Council to consider if directed to do so. 2 MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 Agenda Information Sheet February 15, 2011 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the current duties of the Airport Advisory Board be reassigned to a new Council Airport Committee and the EDPB. As part of this approach, the ordinance establishing the Airport Advisory Board will also be rescinded. The recommended approach is graphically described below: Recommended Pc)liey Gc)vertianee Airpc)rt Mgmt. Current Structure Structtti,e Structure PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) On November 16, 2010, the City Council approved the Denton Airport Business Plan. At this time, the City Council also asked staff to prepare a recommendation on airport governance options. On December 6, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Airport Advisory Board (AAB). The AAB expressed some concerns regarding the options presented, but they did not provide a formal recommendation to the City Council. On December 7, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The EDPB was very supportive of the staff recommendation, and has recommended that the City Council approve the proposed revisions to the membership and role of the EDPB. On December 13, 2010, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss their potential response and recommendation to the City Council concerning the governance options that were presented by staff. As a result of this discussion, the AAB developed a letter that was forwarded to the City Council on December 14, 2010. In this communication, the AAB recommended that the 3 MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 Agenda Information Sheet February 15, 2011 Page 4 City Council either 1) table the item until more discussion could take place or 2) increase the size of the Airport Advisory Board from seven (7) to nine (9) members with one additional member coming from the Economic Development Partnership Board and one member coming from the Chamber of Commerce. On December 14, 2010, staff made a presentation to the City Council on the airport governance options that were identified. The City Council elected to table the Airport governance discussion until the February 1, 2011, meeting since only four Council members were in attendance. On January 5, 2011, the AAB held a meeting to discuss the Airport governance options that were presented by staff. On January 19, 2011, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss the Airport governance options. The focus of this meeting was to receive input and consider the views of the Airport tenants and stakeholders. On January 24, 2011, a three member committee of the AAB met to consider drafting a response to the City Council on governance options. EXHIBITS 1. December 14, 2010, Agenda Information Sheet and PowerPoint Presentation regarding Airport governance options. 2. January 26, 2011, Letter from Airport Advisory Board Committee regarding governance options. 3. PowerPoint Presentation Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 EXHIBIT ONE MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: December 14, 2010 DEPARTMENT: Finance Ael ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the Airport governance stricture as recommended in the adopted Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan. BACKGROUND In 2003, the City Council approved an Airport Master Plan that established a clear vision for the Airport. This plan became the basis for airport development and the creation of a business plan. The Master Plan included an outcome statement that defined the Airport as follows: ➢ First class aviation center that serves as the home for corporate aircraft from the North Texas region, as well as locally owned general aviation aircraft. ➢ Financially self-reliant. ➢ Major mid-continent refueling center. ➢ Land in vicinity of Airport is locally owned or controlled. ➢ Fully served by municipal infrastructure and utilities. ➢ Make the airport a major economic development benefit to the community. ➢ Established partnerships to include a nationally recognized aviation education institute. ➢ Public understands the value of the Airport to the Denton economy and future. As stated above, the 2003 Master Plan recommended that the Denton Airport become financially self-reliant and become a major economic development benefit to the community. With this goal in mind, the Council approved a Business Plan on November 16, 2010 to help the Airport achieve these objectives. The approved Airport Business Plan specifically states that "The City of Denton should also consider modifying its airport governance stricture to assist with vetting financial proposals for the Airport as well as provide policy input related to targeted marketing initiatives and development." Accordingly, the purpose of this work session item is to explore the governance stricture of the Airport and provide the City Council with a recommendation on which stricture provides the best foundation to achieve the above mentioned goals. The current Airport Advisory Board (AAB) is comprised of seven (7) board members that have been appointed by the City Council. The primary purpose of the board is to provide the City Council and City Manager with advice regarding lease agreements, development policy, and grant projects. Like other advisory boards in the City of Denton, the AAB is only advisory in nature, and as such, final decision making authority on any issue rests with the City Council. In MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 Agenda Information Sheet December 14, 2010 Page 2 addition, since the AAB only provides advice regarding the issues described above, the Airport Manager is charged with managing all day-to-day operations at the Airport. In evaluating potential Airport governance options, the following central question should be addressed: ➢ Does the current AAB governance stricture best fit the goal of establishing the Airport as an economic engine for the community? If it is determined that the current stricture does not provide the best fit, what options are available to better meet the City's needs? With this question in mind, the following Airport governance options have been identified by staff for consideration. Option A: Redefine role and membership requirements of the AAB to clarify expectations. Under this scenario, the membership of the AAB could be altered or modified to increase the membership and diversity of the board. In addition, the mission of the board could be reevaluated to provide more focus on Council priorities. Option B: Transfer airport governance to another existing board or Council Committee. Under this scenario, the duties of the AAB could be reassigned to another existing board or committee. Option C: Status quo. Under this scenario, no changes to the AAB stricture would be implemented. Option D: Transfer branding, marketing, and development incentive activities to the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB) and create a new Council Committee to oversee all other activities for the Airport. This option is recommended by management, and is more fully explained below. Under the Option D scenario, the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB) would be tasked with the following: ➢ Review, consider, and make recommendations to the City Council concerning Airport branding and marketing efforts. ➢ Outline Airport development incentive policies and make recommendations to the City Council concerning any development incentives as assigned by the City Council or requested by the City Manager. ➢ Leverage common community goals and create a synergy between the development of the Airport and the development of the overall community. To accomplish the above tasks, the EDPB membership would be expanded by two members (from 7 to 9). One of the new members will be required to have knowledge or experience in general aviation related matters and must reside or work within the city. The other new member MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 Agenda Information Sheet November 2, 2010 Page 3 will be a citizen of the city who in the discretion of the City Council has specific knowledge, skills, and abilities that can assist with any or all of the functions related to the EDPB. In addition, under Option D, a new City Council standing committee called the Airport Committee would be created. The purpose of the committee would be to review, consider, and make recommendations to the City Council regarding Airport operations as assigned by the City Council or requested by staff. The day-to-day operations would continue to be managed by the Airport Manager under this governance stricture. Finally, under Option D and as recommended in the 2010 Airport Business Plan, staff would create a standing meeting (at least quarterly) with existing stakeholders, clients, and tenants to discuss: ➢ Safety and security issues. ➢ Airport operations. ➢ Development activities. ➢ Special events. ➢ Any questions or other issues as appropriate. In summary, staff is recommending Option D, which proposes that the current AAB duties be reassigned to the EDPB and a new Council Airport Committee. In our view, this new governance stricture will enhance development opportunities in the community and at the Airport. The benefits of this new approach include: ➢ Expanded marketing efforts and enhanced collaboration with community development initiatives. ➢ Effective implementation of 2010 Business Plan. ➢ Enhanced stricture to provide the City Council with more direct contact on Airport Issues. While a number of options are presented above for consideration, staff would like to point out that we can successfully work with any of the governance models presented. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Option D as defined above be implemented by the City Council. Under this scenario, the current duties of the Airport Advisory Board will be reassigned to the EDPB and a new Council Airport Committee. As part of this approach, the ordinance establishing the Airport Advisory Committee will also be rescinded. PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) On December 6, 2010, City Management discussed potential governance options with the Airport Advisory Board (AAB). The AAB expressed some concerns regarding the options MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 Agenda Information Sheet December 14, 2010 Page 4 presented, but they did not provide a formal recommendation to the City Council. The AAB called a special meeting on December 13, 2010, to discuss their potential response and recommendation to the City Council. On December 7, 2010, City Management discussed potential governance options with the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The EDPB was very supportive of the staff recommendation, and has recommended that the City Council approve the proposed revisions to the membership and role of the EDPB. EXHIBITS PowerPoint Presentation Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer m X w C) N S U Q bio y 4-J d 4-j 4-J 4-J C1~ c7j O CJ Cld 4-1 O v~ Cld U C) bjo Ct cld ~ o +1 Cld 4-j r--4 4-j r-4 0 4-j ~ O • 4-1 +1 Cld a~ 4-1 m O N 4 r~ h/^~ ^ 4 4-J -4 C) 0 V~ cn r-4 ''c~ U C~ • cn 0-4 p • v~ N aj 4-j P-1 ;-4 Cld U • 4-+ 4 U a-1 Cli 4-j 4-j r-4 U cld • U O CO O O A4 O bjo N O Q~ O r--1 FTi rzi or-.4 O O 4-j O p4 c~ c~ i 4-j 4-j 4-j i 4-j O X N U V • O v O ~ O Cld bio cld wo C~ 4-J 4--J O O c~ 4-j bjo 4-j ~34 0~~ O c~ F Ti cn cp rlc~ O O O • 41 W v i 4-J ~ v c~ ~ O 4-1 4-J 4-1 4-J el) * • r--1 X o U O U~ 4-J C) 4-1 N b~0 • 4-1 CFJ p + o ~ c~ ~ w O ; ; ; ; ; ; •r~l ; •r~l ; U ; ; Q O O cCi ; ; c~ cCi 4~ ; bJ0 W ~ ; A4 Q ; ; m ~ v~ 0 bJ0' 0 0 C.) ; ; ; ; ; ; ; O as Q ; ; ; 0 O O~Q ~t4~ ; ; ; ; • • Q~ 4-j cd P-4 rJa rK4 4-J 0 4-j C) Cld pq Cd WO 4-j m ~ o cld ° ® w a~ o 4-j~ w r-4 Cld N U . o Q a~ ; Cld c~ ; v~ +-j 0 4-j . cld A bio ;-4 ^4 a~ r-4 _4 0 o Q o 0 ; w ; W 4 4-1 ~ o o p 4~ ~ ~ ago U 4-1 4-1 O ~ C~ U 4-1 w r C) o 4-1 N 4-1 ~ +J O C~ a~ o 4-1 O ~ O o a~ to tLo a~ 4-1 4-1 c~ ~ o 4-1 - 4-1 O ~ • ^ ct +-j r-4 ct N_ cn v e 4~ 4~ ^ i 4-J O +-j +J 4-1 4-J c~ +-1 O O w a~ E~ F Ti WSJ cn O ' cn • . O 4-1 i 4-1 4-j ' 4-1 CFJ 4-1 4-1 4-1 • 4-1 ;~-4 w 4-1 v C) ct V) 4-J F-4 a X 4-J LU V) CD W O C\j • O P-4 4-j F. U i 'J 4-1 E 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-1 P-.4 I-+ W A4 bJ0 V a m i u _ u X W u u _ u ~ u O N ° u u u = u u ry Q W! . 1~1 1~1 V1 W 1~1 V MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 EXHIBIT TWO EXHIBIT TWO MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 MEMORANDUM TO: DENTON CITY COUNCIL FROM: AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD SUBJECT: FUTURE OF AIRPORT AND GOVERNANCE OF THE BOARD - PART 2 DATE: 1/28/2011 CC: CITY MANAGEMENT, AIRPORT STAKEHOLDERS CURRENT STATUS The City Manager recently proposed a change in "governance" relating to the airport. The Staff proposal comes following the approval of the Business Plan and is meant to provide an opportunity to pursue the objectives outlined in the Business Plan. The Staff recommendation provided for dissolution of the existing Airport Advisory Board and merger of its functions to the Economic Development Partnership Board and to a new three-member sub-committee of the Council. The Council tabled action on the governance item until their February work session. Since the time of the original presentation, the AAB has held a public meeting and a committee meeting of the AAB, and hereby presents these recommendations to the City Council. Based on the public meetings and citizen input (Nebrig letter attached) the AAB has determined that the following are the most important considerations in governance of the airport: • AIRPORT KNOWLEDGE There was consensus from all parties on the need for specific airport knowledge and experience on any governance structure implemented. The airport, much like the utility is "special creature" and needs specific attention in aviation related areas. • ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT There was consensus from all parties on the need for "more aggressive" economic development, branding and marketing. • BOARD MEMBERS MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 There was input that restricting board membership to only "people in city limits of Denton" limited our choices and has in fact in the past deprived the board of valuable citizen involvement. • TENANT RETENTION There was input that economic development be thought of for existing tenants as well as attracting new folks. • ENTERPRISE BOARD There was input and discussion that this was an excellent opportunity to create a real Enterprise Board charged with maintaining the airport's self sufficiency into the future. Accordingly, the AAB recommends that the city take even more time to study this matter due to its importance and the significance that any change could have on the airport and the city. While the AAB believes we have now considered all voices, it could be that there are other ideas that might be important to consider before enacting so sweeping a change (like research into how other airports manage themselves, regional cooperation opportunities or to get input on what the Council or Chamber is thinking.) In the alternative, if a decision were to be made today, based on all available information the AAB believes the following "governance option" is best suited for the Denton Airport and the city of Denton: CREATION OF NEWDENTON AIPORT ENTERPISE BOARD The Council could create and transition to a new Denton Airport Enterprise Board (the "DAEB"). This new board would still be an advisory board but would function much like the Public Utility Board (PUB.) All airport business would go through the DAEB and it would always seek financial self-sufficiency. There should still be some discussion as to how much authority to give this board but we are recommending a format similar to the PUB. As a new board all its members would have to be appointed. Existing members of the AAB would be eligible for appointment, but that would be up to the Council. All term limits would begin upon appointment to the new DAEB. SIZE OF BOARD: Board size could be increased from 7 to 9 with an additional member each from the Economic Development Partnership Board and the Chamber of Commerce. As an Enterprise Board it may also make sense to have a Council member "ex officio" to improve the lines of communication. BOARD MEMBERS: Board members would be nominated by the council under the same terms as the existing AAB (Terms similar in length to the PUB, one appointment per Council member) but we recommend a variance the appropriate city ordinance to allow no 2 MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 more than 2 of the seven qualified members from outside the city limits. (Initial appointments should be staggered so as to avoid all member terms ending at the same time. For example 2, two rear, 2 three rear and 3 four rear terms.) If the decision is to have 9 members their initial appointments should be staggered also. The two additional members would be chosen by the Chamber and EDPB, approved by Council. MISSION: Board will be directed to continue the existing advisory functions of the prior AAB and additionally seek to further the airports mission as stated in the Business Plan which "is to serve as an engine for economic development in the Denton area, providing operation safety-; outstanding service; and absolute security for private pilots and the aviation industry". Board would also be directed to further the self-sufficiency of the airport so as never again to require general funds. The new DAEB could form subcommittees to provide ideas to the City on such areas as economic development, marketing and branding, capital improvements, security, pollution control (air, noise, refuse), airport operations, tenant retention and relations, the Airshow, regional involvement and other important issues. It is ow- assumption that the City's economic development efforts, ill their current role, should already be actively involved ill the Airport, the proposed airport board would work in conjunction with them or ativ other department or advisory board of the city, as ()pportunities arise. SU:N INLARY The AAB believes the Staff recommendation to give all these airport related responsibilities to staff only significantly underestimates the character and nature of the airport and the amount of time necessary to govern such an important part of our city infrastructure. Further, after providing for public discussion and comments, the AAB does not believe the Staff recommendation will fully achieve all the goals of the airport as outlined by the citizens, your advisory board, and the Business Plan. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Council not adopt the Staff recommendation. The AAB also respectfully requests that you either (i) form a special committee to study the matter further or (ii) adopt a Denton Airport Enterprise Board similar in theory to that discussed above. PROS - Builds on existing 40 year AAB history and knowledge - Builds on aviator backgrounds and knowledge of several board members - AAB support (past & present) - Provides a way to enhance economic development and marketing - Shows actual city support for Airport and does not combine with other Boards/Priorities - Support of majority of airport tenants - Helps insure FAA "revenue compliance" (Tide 49 U.S. Code 47107(b), 47133) - Helps insure "Enterprise operation" GASB 34 compliance - Addition of community board members helps further branding and economic development - New board would pursue ways for economic self sufficiency for 10-20 year window - Would not place addition burdens and responsibilities on EDP Board or Council - Expanding board membership will allow for more o ortunities MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 MISSION AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF CURRENT STRUCTURE Chapt. 3, article I, section 2c. The board shall serve in an advisory capacity and shall advise the city council on all matters concerning or pertaining to the Denton Municipal Airport, and shall submit a budget recommendation to the city manager for the airport for his consideration in preparing the total city budget. (Code 1966, j 1-21(b); Ord. No. 97 299, j I, 10- 7-97) The AAB, acting under the ordinance quoted above, rejoices in pointing out that in the last 40 years we have helped guide development and provide the following benefits to the City of Denton via the airport. We hope that with an Enterprise Board and additional assistance from the Economic Development Partnership Board we can do even better. 1. The board as now constructed, working closelv with city staff and council, has done nothing less than a spectacular job of developing the airport from a small airport with a 4000 foot runway and 6 buildings to one of 60 buildings plus tower and terminal building with a 7000 foot runway and an added parallel taxiway plus a tower and radar. We made creative use of resources and some economic incentives to do this Nvith no subsidies, no tax abatements, and no give-aways. 2. We've gone from a total dependence on the City's General Fund to collecting more money in fiscal 2009 from ground leases and fuel taxes than the city's expenditure. 3. We are in the process, within 3 nears, of adding a second (parallel) runway 3000 ft. long, on the Nvest side of the main runway. 4. We Nvere designated Reliever Airport of the Year in Texas for 2009 by the Aviation Department of TXDOT. 5. We have added miles of paved taxiNvays. 6. More than quadrupled the paved ramp space. 7. Added perimeter fencing to increase security, not just from human intruders, but also from coyotes, stray dogs, deer, and other wild creatures in the area. 8. Attracted substantial business to DTO, the top three of which do more than 100 million dollars worth of business per year to the airport, with off-airport businesses that add millions more to the economic benefit of Denton. 9. Grown from selling a few thousand gallons of fuel per year to more than a million gallons a year. 10. Increased the work force on DTO from fewer than 10 to more than 400, with a total payroll of more than $14 million per year. 4 MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 It. Increased the direct economic benefit to Denton from a few thousand dollars per year to more than 100 million dollars per year. If you consider the multiplier effect of business in Denton, the numbers get significantly larger. 12. Attracted businesses that located here because we have a good airport. Sally Beauty, United Copper, and Hulcher Emergency Services, Inc. are examples. 13. Attracted service businesses to DTO that do aircraft repair, major jet inspections, airframe repair, aircraft interiors and painting, avionics installation and repair, and other goods and services that make DTO a desirable place to own and base an airplane. We hare: 2 helicopter flight schools, 1 fixed N ing flight school 4 or 5 maintenance shops Verb- high-end paint shop Operations of 13-14,000 per month; more than 160,000/year. 2 avionics shops One maintenance and avionics shop that is open 18 hours/day and on weekends. Thank you for your time and for the opportunity to provide this advice. MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 January 24, 2011 T : Denton City Council Members Airport Advisory Board Members Nebrig Quentin Hix Associates, Inc. Mark Nelson "801 joh : Mike Nebrig SUBJECT: Denton Airport Advisory Board I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed changes to the Denton Airport Advisory Board. I attended a presentation by City Staff on Wednesday, January 1961, 2011, and while I agree with some points of the proposal, I remain unconvinced as to the necessity of others. I do agree that the Airport needs to be marketed and branded to its maximum potential, and if partnering with the Economic Development Partnership Board does this, then I support a change. I am less convinced as to the necessity to change from an Airport Advisory Board to a City Council Airport Committee for governance. The presentation by City staff on January 19th simply did not prove a compelling reason for a change. Nebrig & Associates has a vested interest in seeing continued success at our Airport. Since relocating to the Airport in 1997, we have constructed, and currently own and manage over 80,000 square feet of hangar and office area, comprised of thirty-six (36) individual t-hangars, and six (6) individual corporate hangars. In addition, we own and manage one of the three fuel farm facilities located on the Airport. In closing, I would encourage all parties involved in this decision to step back and allow additional review and discussion to take place, as it certainly appears that the change in governance structure is simply "change for change's sake" with no appreciable benefit to the Airport and its tenants. Mike Nebrig President NT-r-. P_ n MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 1 EXHIBIT THREE m_ w 0 N U ry Q PTO t Ct ~ Fli C V U $:i O Ct ; p p p 4-j Ct U C) +-J ; ' 4-J Ici Ct 4--J `t 4-j . r-4 ct a--' s... • 4~ ; rzi ; ; a~ O ° ct p X a v) N N ~ h ~ v C) P-4 C) ~ ; p Q O a-j ` P, 4-J r-4 C) r- C) 4-j O ct r--+ rf) 4-J r-4 4--J Cn CFJ 4-j ; p +j 4-j cn ; cr, Ct U 4-J 4-J o 0 4-j ; ; 5~- 4 ' C) VCj t4-4 4-j ) U -5 o bJ0 0) el) 4-J O ; U Q ' ; ; ; ; ; ; v~ U ; 4-J C) ; e ; O ; ; ; ; CFJ W i ^J F i 4-J rl . r--1 1 . CFJ ; ; c~ w 4-1 U ^ O ^ O U~ - ; O ; ; ' N ; ; V) rg~ ; 4-J 4-1 CFJ O O ; ; 4 o 4-1 o ; ; Q Q ; o~ L o a~ ; U 4-1 74 p c~ • U q ! C ~ O c c~ +-1 O t4-4 0 U° C~ ` 4 4-j ~q X w CFJ N P 4-1 [ I J _ V1 _ 4-1 p ^ l C) ct 1.4 ;L-4 ry ON a) b~0 F. - p ►►---j s p O _ 4-J 4-j O _ N N ^ co v +-1 ric~ +-1 - O P--4 i "Ej 4-j ct U U Q 4-' Q a~ O O O ago 41 _ 4-j F7F O O c~ 4-1 4-1 4-1 bhp Q 4-1 0 4-' O r w O c~ 4-1 X 4-J Cl) w V Cl) 4-J 0 C'4 p! 4-1 Q 0) C) P-4 C) 0 0 O N O b0 N N U 4-04 91% 4-1 V) O 4-J C\l O O t424 - 4-J W 4-j 4-1 i 4 w.8 i ~ ~ gg i 4 4-1 i t+-4 U c 4-1 4-1 4-j 4-1 r L~ Q rp .2 +-1 a i f e ~ ~ v a~ O 9 t4~ X rn LU 4- v1 U y C) 4-J 4-J Q W • 1--1 N ; cn 4-J O 4-1 J { ~ ~ ON O t4~ c ' N • 4-j cl~ ~n v O c~ 64 -,4 ct E. o O O O ct O r--1 ~ I • I V 4-j C) r~ ct NO 4-j o ct NO Ct ct 4-j O ,5 v O ct NO p O m w O p ~ • ~ `4 ct . ;..4 +-j N ry 41 a O O b~0 4-J Ct t4-4 a~ 4-j 4-j o~~~ ~ ago Ct W rc~ ct NO O O NO O -4-j 4-j 4-j ct ct 4~ O 4-J 4~ O , O p ;-1 4--J cn --4 v c~ V ^ O ct O W I~ C U mc~ , , O ~ , P , d d e a e ~ d i ~ a d e d i , , , , i i w O v N S Q , O a , ~ 6 d e d i 6 d i 6 tl ~ e d ; ed , eA BI i ° i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i N H m 2 X W 0 0 N 2 U Q U Ct U Ct U r---4 V Fli Cl) ;~-4 cn U $:i O ct bA p p p 4-j Ct U C) +-J ' 4-J Ici ct 4--J `t 4-j . r-4 ct a--' s... • 4~ ct $=i a o U O N m ° ct p w ct rc~ 0 CFJ ° a C\l N V a C) ct bjo 4-J 1 V e P-4 C) ct r bA O i--~ O 4-j ` +J ct • r- C) 4-j a p ct rf) 4-j r-4 4--J CFJ 4-j p L, b ° +j cr, o +-j r-4 Cj t4-4 4-j -5 C) p ) U• 5 a O . U Q ;--4 O ;--4 4-j C) O r~ ct i O ct ~ rc~ --j O ~ O Cld ct ;--4 O U cn ct O -4 Q) C) 4-J 'C6 C) ct O O 4-j 4-j ~ ' " ;--4 C) +J a) . c) _ U tj a--+ bJ0 0 r-4 C) j 4-+ N O p O Ici • ~ ct a) ~ 10 a) a) 4-j Cld U 4-j • r--i • a--+ lci a--j ct 41 O m 4-4 cn 4-j Q 0 4-j 4-J Ct C) V) J V) bio .p Ct ~ ct W 0 ~i 0'~ O WSJ •r~l 4-1 4 • r--1 ~ I Cd 4- ~V\J l i i i +-j ~ as 4 N O I 4-J "F CD Ct CD N • rl C) , C) 4-1 U a O v 5 ;2)4 P" Q +-1 O 4-J Ct 4-J Ct O 4-1 ct 4 4-1 4--l Cn P 4-J 64 4~ 4~ O y ` J 4.01 I N H Piz m ~ Piz w ~ C) C) N U Q V C~ 0 V ~ y 4.01 V 0 a Q) a~ O ~ O v O O v N C.) ~C LU 4-j O C) C) Ct C) 4-j 4-j 4~ v v~ - O 4-j bJ0 . bio ; ; ; ; ; ; Ct ~4 ; lid N i ~ • • r--1 4-j ; ; ; O a X ! w CD NO CD F<1 C}~ N p O 4-j 4-j O V fy ct e y--1 Ct F-4 a ; rci # 4-J 4-j ~a,% o 1) 0 C) U F ; 4-J 0 4~ 4-j ct O ct ; cl~l ; E 4-J Ct Ct V r--r O Q) p C ^ cn C ct c bJ0 Q ;--1 . C) C) O v~ p bA ' ct C) ~ 4-J ct v) ct ~ a) N O +J C~ C) 4-J a) bio x ct C) r-4 w ct O v V) 0 4-j bjo r; a--+ • O O O j _v p ~ Q W 4-J 4-j O'er ~ O U •V) ct ~ O •r-4 ~ r ;--4 O ct rja ct 0O O V) 4-J O' 4-4 c ~ ~ O C) g1l ;-4 ~ ct bA • r-4 C) r. 4-J 4-J 4-J O ° a~ ct r~ O c, ct 4-j C) O 4 4-j 4-J ;--1 • r--, ' cl~ 4 p C) 4-J PA C) bio O O O ~ O cl~ ct , ct t4Z4 C) V) +-j C) O' a) r1o t4-4 4-J ct a) N cn P-4 ct 'U w O O C) c rc~ N C) O ct o 4-1 a) 0 ct ~ 4-j ct O O ct 4-j +_j ct 4-j cn 4-j 4-j cn 4-5 c ~o ~ ~ • o ~ . ct `t o a~ o J C, ct V) o Ct 4-J C) 4-j P-4 O ~-L, 0 a-J H ct U r--i O ~ U ct ct bio 7~ Fli C) C) O 4-; ;~-'4 ;•-1 U U 4-j O U U ct +-j 4-j ct U o a~ ct O 4-J 4-j ct +j • 4-j O t bA 4-j ct 4-j w c~ ~ 4-j C) 4-j *+j ct O s-~ O ct 4-j C) 4-J r-4 4-J W -1 4-j a~ s~ U ct 4 . ct U ct Ct 4-j 4-j Cn C', cto O bAO O U • v aA ct ct Ct ;-4 o ' er C) .4 s-i bA O U O 'x 4-J O ct Q ct C U W c~ bio O ct, r-4 4-j ct P4 4-J P-1 Fli i i i i i i i i i i N i H i m i 2 X w 0 0 N i U i r ' Q i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 4-1 ct ~ o V +-1 O O a j O 4~ 4-1 4-1 U 4-1 P-4 o w ~ 4-J K 4-1 4-1 ry v 4~ ~ ~ ~ O 4~ CV Ct W 4-1 rci O r-ci a~ 4-1 4-1 ' O c~ MARCH 1, 2011 EXHIBIT 3 Page 1 of I Economic Development Partnership Board Add to the membership of the Economic Development Partnership Board and expand the duties of that board to include branding and marketing for the Denton Municipal Airport in support of the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan and to further include duties related to economic development incentives. Denton Airport Enterprise Board Restructure and rename the current Denton Airport Advisory Board to the Denton Airport Enterprise Board. The board along with the City Airport Manager is to advise and assist the City Council regarding City of Denton Airport matters, implementation of the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan, Airport Safety, Tenant/Stakeholder relations and additional matters as assigned by the City Council. Denton Airport Enterprise Board Structure • 7 members each nominated by a city council member, up to 2 members could be appointed from outside Denton city limits. • Staggered initial term length • Term limits to be the same as the Denton Public Utilities Board. • Past or current Airport Advisory Board members are eligible, but past service shall be included to determine term limit eligibility. • Conflict of interest guidelines to be consistent with City of Denton guidelines for other boards. Airport Board Option This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending the Fiscal Year 2010- 11 Budget and Annual Program of Services of the City of Denton to allow for an adjustment to the Materials Management Fund of three million nine hundred thousand dollars ($3,900,000) to provide for additional funding capacity for costs of goods sold in the warehouse; declaring a municipal purpose; providing a severability clause; providing an open meetings clause, and providing an effective date. (Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval 3-0) BACKGROUND On April 27, 2010, the City Manager executed an agreement with Celerity Consulting, LLC, to conduct a comprehensive study of the City's warehouse operations. The intent of the study was to review current processes and provide recommendations to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and customer service of the City's warehouse operations. One aspect of this review was a staff recommendation to record the purchase of electric transformers as a capital asset instead of as an inventory item. By recording transformers in this manner, the Electric Fund will be able to better track all transformers since these assets are already being stored in the Electric Department's pole yard. In addition, the transformers will also now be included on the Electric Fund's balance sheet as a capital item which can be depreciated. To accomplish this, the transformers in the warehouse were "sold" to the Electric Fund on October 1, 2010. This action removed the items from the Materials Management Fund inventory and capitalized the items in the Electric Fund. The value of the above mentioned "sale" from the Materials Management Fund to the Electric Fund was approximately $3.9 million. This sale is reflected as a "Cost of Goods Sold" expense in the Materials Management Fund, and it is offset with Warehouse Sales revenue from the Electric Fund. The FY 2010-11 Adopted Budget for the Materials Management Fund included $4,802,440 for Cost of Goods Sold, but this amount did not contemplate the sale of $3.9 million in transformers. As a result, a budget amendment is needed to accommodate this sale and the sales activity that is expected to occur over the remainder of the fiscal year. It is important to note that this change does not impact the ending fund balance for the Materials Management Fund. Since $3.9 million in revenue will also be received, the $3.9 million expenditure budget amendment will not affect the ending fund balance level in any way. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) On February 15, 2011, the Audit/Finance Committee unanimously recommended approval to forward the Materials Management Fund's budget amendment to the City Council for consideration. FISCAL INFORMATION This budget amendment will allow an additional $3,900,000 from the Materials Management Fund to be expended as a "cost of goods sold" expense for inventory items. Since a corresponding increase in revenues will also be received, there is no impact on the ending fund balance level for the Materials Management Fund. The Electric Fund can accommodate this expense in their existing FY 2010-11 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget that was approved by the City Council. Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer sAlegal\our documents\ordinances\11\budget amendment-materials mgmt.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 BUDGET AND ANNUAL PROGRAM OF SERVICES OF THE CITY OF DENTON TO ALLOW FOR AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE MATERIALS MANAGEMENT FUND OF THREE MILLION NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($3,900,000) TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING CAPACITY FOR COSTS OF GOODS SOLD IN THE WAREHOUSE; DECLARING A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVING AN OPEN MEETINGS CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2010-214, the City Council of Denton, Texas, approved the Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Budget and Annual Program for Services (the "Budget"); and WHEREAS, the Materials Management Fund did not provide $3,900,000 for the purchase of transformers which Denton Municipal Electric purchased at the beginning of the Budget; and WHEREAS, it serves a municipal purpose that the Budget be amended to allow for an adjustment of $3,900,000 to the Materials Management Fund to provide for additional funding capacity for costs of goods sold in the warehouse; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Budget Amendment also serve an important municipal purpose already contemplated as eligible items for expenditure in the current Budget, consistent with Section 102.010 of the Texas Local Government Code and other applicable laws; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings set forth in the above preamble to this Ordinance are true and correct and are hereby adopted. SECTION 2. The Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Budget and Annual Program for Services is hereby amended by the City Council to allow for an adjustment to and increase in the Material Management Fund budget of Three Million Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars ($3,900,000) to provide for additional funding capacity for costs of goods sold in the warehouse. SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall be filed with the City Secretary, who is directed to attach a copy of this Ordinance to the Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Budget and Annual Program for Services and cause this Amendment to be published once in the Denton Record-Chronicle, and to file a copy of this Ordinance with the County Clerk of Denton County and the State Comptroller of Public Accounts in Austin. SECTION 4. This Ordinance was approved by at least five members of the City Council as required by Section 8.08 of the City Charter. s:\legal\our documents\ordinances\l 1\budget amendment-materials mgmt.doc SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word in this Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or under any circumstances is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, and the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. SECTION 6. It is officially found and determined that the meeting at which this Ordinance was passed was open to the public as required by law, and the public notice of the time, place and purpose of this meeting was given as required by law. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY r' BY: Page 2 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Jim Coulter 349-7194 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for the purchase of Water Treatment Chemicals for the City of Denton Water Treatment Plants; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 46431- Annual Contract for Water Treatment Chemicals awarded to the lowest responsible bidder for each item in the annual estimated amount of $850,000). (The Public Utilities Board approved this item by a vote of 6-0). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the annual contract to supply water treatment chemicals for the water production and wastewater treatment process. The chemicals are delivered in bulls quantities to on-site storage facilities. The estimated award amount is based on the prior year's usage. RECOMMENDATION Award to the lowest responsible bidder meeting specification for each item as listed below: Item Description Price Vendor I LIQUID CHLORINE, NSF 60 CERTIFIED $03035/lb PC INDUSTRIES (ONE TON) INC. 2 LIQUID CHLORINE, NSF 60 CERTIFIED $0.3170/lb PC INDUSTRIES (BULK) INC. 3 SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE $0.054/lb PC INDUSTRIES INC. 4 FLUROSILICIC ACID, $03375/lb ARCROS NSF 60 CERTIFIED CHEMICALS, INC. 5 LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA $0.2315/lb STI, INC. NSF 60 CERTIFIED 6 POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE $3.24/lb NIVAR USA 7 ANHYDROUS AMMONIA, $0.5975/lb TANNER NSF 60 CERTIFIED INDUSTRIES, INC. 8 CATIONIC POLYMER, NSF 60 CERTIFIED $0.69/lb BASF CORPORATION 9 LIQUID FERRIC SULFATE 60% $0.089/lb MIRA WATER SOLUTIONS, INC. 10 LIQUID OXYGEN $.0326/1b AIR LIQUIDE INDUSTRIAL U.S. LP Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION (CONTINUED) The apparent low bidders on Line Items 2, 5, and 6 did not meet specification. Line Item 8 had two identical bid prices; therefore staff based its recommendation on the cost associated with having to change out the existing chemical storage. An explanation of each item is listed below. • Line Item 2, Liquid Chlorine (Bulk), Brentag is the low bid at $0.29/lb but pricing is only firm for 30 days so they did not meet specification. Therefore, DPC Industries Inc. is the low bidder meeting specification. • Line Item 5, Liquid Caustic Soda, the Harcros price per pound is based on wet weight versus the specified dry weight. FSTI is the low bidder based on price per dry ton. • Line Item 6, Potassium Permanganate, Chemrite Inc., Marubeni Specialty Chemicals, and BioSafe Systems bid products that did not meet approved specifications. Therefore, Univar USA is the low bidder. • On Line Item 8, Cationic Polymer, BASF Corporation and Polydyne Inc. had identical bid prices at $0.69/lb. Since both bidders had the exact same price per pound, staff decided to remain with the BASF Corporation to avoid having to drain the existing product from the bulk storage tanks prior to introducing a slightly different product to the tanks from Polydyne Inc. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) At its February 14, 2011 meeting, the Public Utilities Board recommended approval to forward this item to the City Council for consideration (Exhibit 2). PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS DPC Industries Inc. Univar USA Harcros Chemicals, Inc. Cleburne, TX Dallas, TX Dallas, TX FSTI, Inc. DPC Industries Tanner Industries, Inc. Austin, TX Cleburne, TX Southampton, PA BASF Corporation Kemira Water Solutions, Inc. Air Liquide Industrial U.S. LP Suffolk, VA Lawrence, KS Grand Prairie, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This is an annual contract with the option to renew for additional one-year periods contingent upon all prices, terms, and conditions remaining the same. Delivery of individual chemicals varies from two days to 2 weeks and will be ordered as needed. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 3 FISCAL INFORMATION Funding for these water treatment chemicals will come from account 630100.6334. Individual purchase orders will be issued as needed. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Bid Tabulation Exhibit 2: Public Utilities Board Draft Minutes Respectfully submitted: Antonio Puente, Jr., 349-7283 Assistant Director of Finance 1-.CIS-Bid 4643 H O ~ a~ ~ o w M w o w~ rn w ~ ~ w z o z as as ~ w as M w as as ~ 0 N 0 ~ w ~ z z z ° z z N W W W N W W W a o U Qo~ as as as M as " v A M -Cli cn Cd ° Cd m M O O O Q y G~ Z own O o O ao o ° Cj ~ V ~ `n ~ ~ U U p ~ ~ ~ 'x O b~A y ~ ~ O cn O cn ~ cn O cn ~ ~ cn ~ cn M cn y ~ U a~ O a~ pa a~ v-, a~ ~ O a~ v-, a~ p a~ °O o~ c ~ la~l ~ ~ N ~ c^/] N c^/] N CJ N ~ M N a ~ N ~ N U U U U U O U a U U UCd U x cd CD 0 C) 0 C) C) C) vD z z w z a s z a z z ~ ~ a a a 3a Qa a a O O O o °O G N U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 M O ~ ~ U o Q Q Q -ct ~ U w H z z z ,Sw U ° 00 H Q Q Q 00 COO 0 0 N w ~ z z z w w A z z z ° LLI ~ ~ Z e~C C y O c a~ o • ~°o c, H x u ~Cll an a.. p. U w v O U 4° A U z a z a z 70 O p da C) ° ° o C) C) N V vii o 0 0' O W O' m o o) u ~CUz k cw ~ ~ v1 ~ W o~ 0 w 00 4 U ~ v~ a W ~ ~ p"' O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ o z z z z z z ~W U ~ Q Q Q ~ Q Q 4.1 a U is U tr) ct as as as w as as as t x ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ as ~ ~ as as U x o y c7 Q 4.1 U ~ m -Cli c Cd ° X an O G~ M O LLI O O v O. y z bA z v' z ~ z Q z ~ z ~ z C) O s. O a -Cli U U p O cn O cn ~ cn O cn ~ ~ cn ~ cn M cn y ~ U a~ O a~ pa a~ v-, a~ ~ O a~ v-, a~ O a~ o C,j o U U U U U o U C~ a U U UCd U Cd U S o -0 Z wU wU w w 9 w y~ w w W vD O:z o ° z d z O A a z a z CA z w z a a~ z a~ V cli cli cli cli cli O ~-4 ~4 ~4 Q CD CD M N E~ °o °o 0O oO ° °o °o O 0 0 ~p w pr o 0 0 M O ~ ~ U ~ ~.y O inn S. ~ ~ S. CC py ~ ~ O O O N ~ o z z z COO U U Q Q Q it ~ ~ ~ ~ z z z N ~ 4.1 U is U i. Q Q Q 4.1 x U ° ~ ~ w as as w 4.1 0 m r..~ o Ca„ ~ x cd ~i O O"N N N ^ Gw U n U w U O U 70 C da C )CD 0 00 o N V vii F ° C rn C) ~o w pr o cd v z w k cw s. W a -a 00 d A~ o v~ ~ ~ ~ O O O O O O ~o z z z z z z o a ~ ~ ~ ~ ¢ as as as as as as as 0 COO N W N W Vj °z A ~ ° ° O O O O O O O ~ a~ ~ z z z z z z z 4.1 O ct ~ a3 ~ F" W W W W W ~ ~ O x U °z °z °z °z °z z ca W 0 v' ~ H -Cli c Cd 2 C, O O M w o o v Q o~ G~ Z oln 0O n - U U p O cn O cn ~ cn O cn ~ ~ cn ~ cn M cn y U a~ O a~ pa a~ v-, a~ O a~ tr) a~ O a~ o ~ o ° O Q ) y O O a m ~ a C~ a U U U U Cd C) 0 C) C) cn U U U U U o U U o Z W Cr O UD ::5 UD o ° z d z O A a z a z z w z a a~ z a~ V c ~ O Q ~ ~4 CD CD C) C) oO oO oO ° 0O oO M N E~ 0O ~p w pr o 0 0 00 M 't t M O 00 0 bA z z z a tr) o o 0 ~COO W W W M W A i. ~ a M 'C ~ct ch N ° y O O o •0 ~ ~ ~ ~ as as as ca W 0 m ~ N x v o 's: o Ca„ ~ ~Cll U w v O U ~ U y ° o ° c 4° A U z z z 70 ~ C da' o0 00 0 ~ ~ o N V vii F ° C ~o w pr o v z rn C) 00 O 50, S. C.' U Q Q Q Q Q Q Q t. e~C 5 V1 x °z °z °z °z °z °z °z COO ° o o as as as as as as as ~ ~ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z a ~ ~ as as as as as as as z w . c as as as as as w as P. 4.1 -Cli U o yi n M bA Cd pa N N O O M o Q o~ m y Z own Z Z y Z Z Z Z -Cli O cn O cn ~ cn O cn ~ ~ cn ~ cn M cn y ~ U a~ O a~ pa a~ v-, a~ ~ O a~ v-, a~ O a~ o Cj Cj o C~ a U U U U Cd U U U U U o U C) C) U o w U w U w w w y w w 40 M N E~ ° °O °O °O °O O 0 0 C) C) CD CD ~p w pr o 0 0 00 M O ~ ~ U COO N z COO a a z ci M W O O O rq 0 ~ o 0 4~ - C~ • v, ~o cw x cd ~i O O N Cj N N ^ cw n U w v O U 4° A U z z z 70 O C da o0 00 0 o rn C) N V vii F o o ~''O C) C~ ~o w pr o cd v z w k cw s. W a -a 00 o ~ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 0 ~ ~ ~ x as as as as as as as ~ ~ o 0 COO Ct • i as as as as w as as c7 ~ Z Z Z Z ° Z Z a o ~ s9 ai w _a. Q Q Q a, Q Q Q o ~ >C ~ ~ ~ M ~ O O O U w ~ ~ ~ °z °z °z z z z Q v ~ M -Cli o -0 rq = v O O M X O yy - O~ W O O U _ y y _ z o z v' z z U z U z z O O O aO V 7~ U U p O bA y O '~'O cn O cn ~ cn O cn ~ ~ cn ~ cn M cn y ~ U a~ O a~ pa a~ v-, a~ ~ O a~ v-, a~ p a~ o o A. °o to y o ; o 00 o~ ~ ~ la~l N c^/] N c^/] N U N M N a N N a U U UCd U xcd U U U U U O U N C) 0 C) 0 C) C) CD w ,a v~ z z w z a s z a z z ~ ~ a a a 3a Qa a a O O O o °O G N U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~p w pr o 0 0 o 0 M O 00 ~ : ~ as as ~ ~ N z ~ ~ x ? w as as ~ o ~ a, ° ° ~ O O U z COO ti cd z 4.1 cn ~ N U w w w a. Q Q Q a o a ~ ~ - o 0 0 'z -Ct z z z ° m x v o 's~. oo v' \ ° v a~ o ;.m ~Cll 00 00 p~ U U O U cn C) C) C) 4° A z a z a z 70 O p da oo ° o o o 0 0' O W z a C) v z W o'~ O o 00 Exhibit 2 1 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM # 2 3 DRAFT MINUTES 4 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 5 February 14, 2011 6 7 After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas is 8 present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board will thereafter convene into an open meeting on 9 Monday, February 14, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 10 Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton. 11 12 Present: Chair Dick Smith, Vice Chair Bill Cheek (departed at 11:24), Bill Grubbs, Phil 13 Gallivan, John Baines (departed at 10:47) and Randy Robinson 14 15 Ex Officio Member: 16 George Campbell, City Manager 17 Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 18 19 Absent: Barbara Russell, excused 20 21 OPEN MEETING: 22 23 CONSENT AGENDA: 24 25 1) Consider recommending approval of competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for 26 the purchase of water treatment chemicals (Bid 4643-Water Treatment Chemicals awarded 27 to the lowest responsible bidder in the total estimated amount of $850,000). 28 29 Board Member Cheek moved to approve item 1 with a second from Board Member 30 Grubbs. The motion was approved by a 6-0 vote. 31 32 Adjournment was at 11:40 a.m. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING AN ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF WATER TREATMENT CHEMICALS FOR THE CITY OF DENTON WATER TREATMENT PLANTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 4643-ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR WATER TREATMENT CHEMICALS AWARDED TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR EACH ITEM IN THE ANNUAL ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $850,000). 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 therefor; 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 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 4643 1-3 DPC Industries, Inc. Exhibit A 4643 4 Harcros Chemicals, Inc. Exhibit A 4643 5 FSTI, Inc. Exhibit A 4643 6 Univar USA Exhibit A 4643 7 Tanner Industries, Inc. Exhibit A 4643 8 BASF Corporation Exhibit A 4643 9 Kemira Water Solutions, Inc. Exhibit A 4643 10 Air Liquide Industrial U.S. LP Exhibit A 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, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid Proposals, and related documents. SECTION 3. Should the City and the winning bidder(s) 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 a written contract in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in the Bid Proposal and related documents and to extend that contract as determined to be advantageous to the City of Denton. SECTION 4. By the acceptance and approval of the above enumerated bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 12011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY h BY: a-oxn-4643 0 COO ~ N W A U ~ O ~ V ~ ~ M V1 ~ V1 ~ V1 a~ s, O W r., W O W U H ~ ~ N C O C eC Qo~ U A Cd M F." ~ G~ N m C~ N X ~ O O U Q LLl y _ z bA z v' z z Ucn z U z z O O O aO O Cj ~ O n O n n O n n ~ n M n y ~ U a~ O a~ pa a~ v-, v-, a~ p a~ o o tr) IL) 0O Z -z:s p o U O y o o 00 o~ ~ ~ la0 N c^/] N c^/] N U N M N a N N U U U U U O U a U U UCd U x Cd CD 0 C) 0 C) C) C) C) CD z w z a s z a z z ~ ~ a a a 3a Qa a a O O O O °O N U C) C) O O o C) C) 0 oO oO o ~p w pr o 0 C) 0 0 tr) ,M~ N M t M O ~ ~ 0 COO Q U ~ L ~ ~ O y ~ O. i y eOC p" N O, O U O N COO w O O v Qo~ x U A O Q m C~ o s. X orA ~ Z oo a~ o • goo c, H x u N z o an a.. p. U w v O U 4° A z a z a z 70 O p da C )C) o ° o o 0 0' O W z a r CD v z 00 o ~ COO so, o ~ U COO COO C .a Con M bA Cd N N O O M- O ~ O O U Q ~ y z bA s. _p aO Q O O Cj ~ O ~ ~ U U O LLl O cn O cn cn O n n n i n y U a~ O a~ pa a~ v-, a~ O a~ tr) a~ O a~ A. rq o o 0O Z -Z:s o~ ~ ~ ~ la~l ~ ~ N ~ c^n N c^n N CJ N ~ M N a cn N ~ N U U U U U O U a U U UCd U x cd C) 0 C) 0 C) C) cn CD C) w ,a v~ z z w z a s z a z z ~ ~ a a a 3a Qa a a O O O o °O N U 0O C) CD o 0O o 0 0 ~p w pr o 0 0 o 0 tr) tr) ,M~ N M t M O ~ ~ o ~ o ~ COO 50. W J/1 ~ d o 0 o U z COO U 00 COO a O O s, a N Vl V1 O Gw a V1 s, s, O N O ~ ~ SO, bl4 w 0 cw v o 0 Z Q r oo m o cw y w UD a. G~ o c O u C~ a,.. H x u N z o an a.. p. U w v O U 4° A U z a z a z 70 O p da C )C) o ° o o 0 0' O W z a r C) cd v z k cw C) -0 w ~ v1 ~ W o~ ~ 0 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to David Saltsman 349-7247 ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network for the Partial Replacement of the Roof at City Hall East by way of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 4671-Partial Replacement of the Roof at City Hall East awarded to Castro Roofing of Texas in the amount of $778,500). FILE INFORMATION This contract is for the partial replacement of the roof at City Hall East. Specific sections of the roof at City Hall East were scheduled to be replaced in 2009 but the Facilities Management Preventative Maintenance Program made it possible to extend the life of the roof two years longer than expected. The roof is now out of warranty and is showing signs of failure. The Facilities Management Department and Armko Industries, our roofing consultant, recommend the replacement of sections Al, A2, C, D1, D2, and E of the roof by utilizing the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network Contract4 244-06. Armko recommended and requested proposals from three roofing contractors through the Buy Board that could handle a job of this size. This process included obtaining a quote from a vendor whose business is located within the Denton city limits. The contractors that provided proposals were Castro Roofing of Texas in the amount of $778,500; Benco Commercial Roofing in the amount of $872,615; and CBS Roofing Services, a local vendor, in the amount of $1,086,785 (Exhibit 2). The proposal submitted by Castro Roofing of Texas includes the cost of payment and performance bonds for the project (Exhibit 1); the proposals submitted by the other two vendors do not include this cost. Therefore, Facilities Management and Armko recommend awarding the contract to Castro Roofing of Texas. Furthermore, this proposed roof replacement will provide the City with a 20 year warranty. PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) A Reimbursement Ordinance for the funding for this project was approved by City Council on February 15, 2011. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends award to Castro Roofing of Texas in the amount of $778,500. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Castro Roofing of Texas Dallas, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This project is estimated to be completed by May 2011. FISCAL INFORMATION This project will be funded from account number 100160462.1365.40100. Requisition# 101986 has been entered in the Purchasing software system. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Castro Roofing of Texas Proposal Exhibit 2: Proposal Comparison Exhibit 3: Map of City Hall East Roof Respectfully submitted: _f Cik- Antonio Puente, Jr., 349-7283 Assistant Director of Finance 1-AIS-File 4671 Exhibit 1 ROOFING PROPOSAL FOR CITY HALL EAST FOR THE CITY O DENTON PROJECT NUMBER: 20110120-30 PROPOSAL DUE: TUESDAY, FEBRUARY ,x011 - ~Z~NW"`"a4C~i aty4«.. i ,f aSm+~ GFa e t a9n -✓wnx is w ~'arxuc v pwu w i n u p w y4 1~ 1~ IV N rc~ 5},' ~ - IIWP'',4~.nr. e ufiyu t n urn ~fV'' } i The contents of this Proposal are considered to b private Afroko ortdus¢rs n, ync, data of the City of Denton; therefore, the contents herein Tem., Registered nginaermg Siam. may riot be used or reproduced without the specific written a f-U¢lasfFas ¢ permission of the City of Denton. dom. 114TR eCEOR 'IMF 'A L t.. DB i9 CITY OF DENTON ~ CITY HALL EAST, DENTON, X } PROJECT NO,, 20110920-30 r ~ ~,4Wn S6S F~ i R `The purpose of this prcopo l is for the City of Benton to complete the replacement of the ~ . , i roof system at City Hall East, utilizing the Buy Board, a Cooperative Purchasing Network, as per Texas Local Government Code 252,26,2/Texas Education Cade 44.013, Inter-local Cooperative Purchasing Act, as a pror urr inert option for Governmental agencies. The proposal by the contractor shall be submitted to Mr. David Saltsrnan, 869 S. Woodrow, Deanton, 'i'X 762.0 5, by Tuesday, Februaty 8, 20' at 2:00 P.M. Questions regarding ft specifications should be directed to Mr. Tim Green, Te saisa erre Erigh Inc. tas Ft Rragist5rcd id Er,~iraaprprtG Flrna 2 '214.802.1207. The contract for the project will be be%vaen the City of Denton and this Roofing waw ...~a Contracting Company. Ci' NTRACT' DOCU LENT'S, Having examined the Proposal, Corftact, General Instructions, Materials, Execution, and 13rawirigs for F-Imled No. 2011012C0 0 and conditions for said roofing replacement work, and having examined the premises and circurnstari ms affecting the work, ft undersigned offer. OFFER: To €umisli all taLvr, material, tools, equipment, transportation, bonds, insurance certificates, all applicable taxes, in 4dentals, and outer facilities, and to pe orin all work' fbr the said roofing replacement for the following area.:: BASE PROPOSAL u',lork shall include: I . At Areas Al, A2, C and E9, tear off to deck and install a fully tapered oric-eighth 'snots (1,16) per toot polyisot yanurate Insulation with a minimurn of one ins la (1") roof system as specified. 2. At Area DI, tear-off to deck and install roof system as specifled. 3 Blase your Proposal on Contractor Proposal Form, dated 1-26-2499. 4, Existing ballast is to be retrioaved and disposed of. :i. Provide new pipe roller stands at all gas r. echank*1 fir ies. 6. All mechanics) work is the responsibility of the Contractor. 7. Derno all misting pacers. 8. Install standing learn rental coping as detailed. g. Replace all tsxirltirtg drain bimis and accessories with cast iron, dike size. at Areas Al, C and El. 10. Replace existing gulteris and dt wnrspotsts at Area. D1. 11. At Area D2. dente existing structure to substiate. 2.. At Area C and 09, demo, I•-Beare equipment support structure. I& Erect a Rush paned metal wall in front of is ingi glass blrxk walls as detailed (color to be sc leOed by Owner), 94. Establish ;M n ingency, of Twa nty-Five'Thousand and 001100 Dollars ($25,000.00). 15. X-Ray and cut hok s necessary to in Malt sixteen (98) ove3aflaw, adrairis and drain lines and all accessories where designated. 71 x,000.00 AuERNA't"i!w' PROPOSAL 1 Wbik shall include: 1. Install metel cagy on existing chimney location at Area D1. 2. Install two (2) roof drains and accessories on Area G2. 3. Repair existing scupper located on Area G2. 4. At Areas F. C,9 and 02, remove all existing counterf]ashing where specified, and install new termination tsar, wall flashing, cleat and prsfinished cciping. 6. Rework expansion joint located at Areas 0 t and HI to rerntain as lour profile expansion joint with l:t Aows,. 6. At Areas 01, G2, H9 and H2, repair all field membrane, bass flashings and reapply aluminum coating can all base flashings. 7. At Area 8, insult new overflow scuppers where. designated on drawing. 8. At Area E2, reinstall brfden looks on ribs of standing se-arn roof. $41,500.00 CITY OF DENTON CITY HA&„d.. FAST, DENT ON, .l'X PROJECT NO. 2.0110120.30 CONTRACTOR PROPOSAL. FORM PAGE 2 OF 2 ALTERNATE PROPOSAL. 2 Work shall include: Demo existing chimney down to deck and All with inetal as spectried. ,000 Unit Price Proposal. I. Remove aria replace damaged metal necking: pei• square, foot. 2. Remove and replace, damaged concrete decking., s -1 8.00 Per square, foot. 3. Remove and replace deteriorated naiilers: $ per board foot. 4. Install four inch (4") roof drain: $ _ each. 6. fnatehi tour inch (W") PVC drain line complete with all e*nnections, elbows, atc.: $ per linear feat.. 6. -Additional cost over and above t~ contract amount for weekend or overtime rerliae-ded by the City: _ cost Per Ivaco pet, liour. Tdaa above Pr+.'~61'owik quoted by Qontractor: Contractor 711 above proposal accepted by Owner: acknowledges receipt of "1 nrutun;: tale following addends. Signature: NamePnted: 7-aZRC3l ENlJlaBil#1: Nan~.ePsirt :a: Title: 7F rkis: r~nE~~:salaUM AI: conapa+iy: 1:11 S Client: _ _(initial) re#~: W_W _ _ .,.M....... wWw_W._ CATRe ROOFING Of TEXAS Thursday, February 17, 2011 Julia A. Klinck Procurement Coordinator City of Denton Purchasing Department Phone (940) 349-7100 Fax (940) 349-7302 Email i lia.kli ck@a.cityo e to .ca RE: Denton City Hall East Payment and Performance Bond Ms. Klinck, The cost of the Payment and Performance Bond for the Denton City Hall East project is: $19,000.00 Should you need further information please don't hesitate to call our office. Sincerely, Chris Hight - Operations Manager 4854 Olson Dr Dallas TX 75227 0 214.381.8108 Fox 214.381.8109 800.759.1879 .www.CastroRoofing.com Exhibit 2 City Hall East Roof Replacement Proposal Tabulation Castro Roofing of Benco Commercial CBS Roofing Texas* Roofing** Services** Place of Business Dallas, TX Fort Worth, TX Denton, TX Base Proposal $715,000.00 $820,710.00 $974,285.00 Alternate Proposal 1 $41,500.00 $43,055.00 $74,500.00 Alternate Proposal 2 $3,000.00 $8,850.00 $38,000.00 Payment and Performance Bond $191000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Proposal Total $778,500.00 $872,615.00 $1,086,785.00 *Total amount Includes Payment and Performance Bonds Total amount does not include Payment and Performance Bonds a B Q o~ o u p r O ~ 0 .m. M M p 1 4 ® u W Z a ~ Q LL a _ • u " O N o c w w a tp 0 r a r ® o s . N ' ® Mu ED M 0 ID 0 It m1~ CD $ a GPPPPOP4 © n❑❑ • Mx a a 4 b.0 Cc n o3w m N u a a Z O N N 0. O w 4 7 7 Z > O Z 0 Z 7 Z Z w <w m X y' O ¢ u J F uQ - N O w wE 2 .1E 2 a a (7 w E N wa wa u M a a a w a U m z r 7 z u Z N w j O r O 4 N U) Ow O 04 w w LL O w ®-))a w 2w ®0 w D ■a t: 0 N7 ® ®x ®aN _JO> > [91 `a " IF Iff- K Iff-, 19' OF lg- W-- f f EL W ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE ORDER THROUGH THE BUY BOARD COOPERATIVE PURCHASING NETWORK FOR THE PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF THE ROOF AT CITY HALL EAST BY WAY OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF DENTON; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 4671-PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF THE ROOF AT CITY HALL EAST AWARDED TO CASTRO ROOFING OF TEXAS IN THE AMOUNT OF $778,500). WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 2005-034, the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network 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 on behalf of the City of Denton; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described materials, equipment, supplies, or services can be purchased by the City through the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network programs at less cost than the City would expend if bidding these items individually; 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 items shown in the "File Number" referenced herein and on file in office of the Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: FILE NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 4671 Castro Roofing of Texas $778,500 SECTION 2. By the acceptance and approval of the items set forth in the referenced file number, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies, or services in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the bid documents and related documents filed with the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network and the purchase orders issued by the City. SECTION 3. Should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items set forth in the referenced file number wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the City's ratification of bids awarded by the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network, 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 and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the Buy Board Cooperative Purchasing Network, and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. By the acceptance and approval of the items set forth in the referenced file number, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approval purchase orders or pursuant 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 12011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 5-ORD-File 4671 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed DEPARTMENT: Materials Management to Frank Payne at 349-8946 A~T ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for Eagle Drive Drainage Improvements; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4623-awarded to the lowest responsible bidder meeting specification, Humphrey and Morton Constriction Company, Inc., in the amount of $1,478,128.30). (The Public Utilities Board approved this item by a vote of 5-0). BID INFORMATION This bid consists primarily of installing 872 linear feet (If) of 18'x 7' cast-in-place reinforced concrete (CIP RC) Box Culvert to replace the existing rock lined channel, as well as other drainage bid items including 45 if of 9'x 5' CIP RC Box Culvert, 30 if of 16'x7' CIP RC Box Culvert, ten (10) inlets, and other miscellaneous items required to install a new storm drain system. This project also includes the asbestos removal and demolition of the buildings located at 702 South Locust and 107 Maple. The limits of this project will extend from the east side of Elm Street to east of Locust Street running primarily along the existing route of the rock lined channel (maximum extents of project based on available funding). Bids for the constriction phase of this project were received on January 20, 2011. There were 12 bidders, with bids ranging from a low bid of $1,401,000 to a high bid of $2,159,710. The Engineer's estimate for the project was $1,500,000. The bid summary is enclosed as Exhibit 1. The apparent low bidder for this project was Davis Excavation Inc; however, this bidder did not meet the minimum qualifications of the contractor as listed in the Special Instructions to Bidders. The next lowest bidder, Humphrey & Morton Constriction Company, Inc. did meet the qualifications as listed in the Special Instructions to Bidders. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) At its February 14, 2011 meeting, the Public Utilities Board recommended approval to forward this item to the City Council for consideration (Exhibit 2). RECOMMENDATION Award to the lowest responsible bidder meeting specification, Humphrey and Morton Constriction Company, Inc., in the amount of $1,478,128.30. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Humphrey and Morton Constriction Company, Inc. Fort Worth, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The estimated completion date is 160 working days from notice to proceed. FISCAL INFORMATION This project will be funded from the following accounts: 650020560.1365.40100-$139,021.58, 650020561.1365.40100-$474,000, and 650020562.1365.40100-$865,106.72. Requisition 101967 has been entered in the Purchasing software system. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Bid Tabulation Exhibit 2: Public Utilities Board Draft Minutes Respectfully submitted: 1 Antonio Puente, Jr., 349-7283 Assistant Director of Finance I-.CIS-File 4623 U x ~ pi o O O CG r- O C~j v 609, Q U U ~C M Cr~ ~C ° A A C~j z C~j z a N Cj w 0 609, C~j 609, U ti ap a x o a o H o 00 U 609, 609, Q U O ~ O C~j O N O v1 v1 O 00 v1 v1 C~j a) u C~j 00 w z C~ja ti 00 C~j 0 609, 0 609, ~ U U w ° yC 00 G~ 0 b9 w 609, ~ U a H C) H C) O ° v~ v~ O o ° ~ Z Z z o a~ w ~ ~ w as ~ M 609, Q 6~9 (m W L A z z A N ~ a m a m A ~ m a~i .5 m a~i C c ~ a H m Q a H m Q Exhibit 2 1 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA ITEM # 2 3 DRAFT MINUTES 4 PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD 5 February 14, 2011 6 7 After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas is 8 present, the Chair of the Public Utilities Board will thereafter convene into an open meeting on 9 Monday, February 14, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton 10 Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton. 11 12 Present: Chair Dick Smith, Vice Chair Bill Cheek (departed at 11:24), Bill Grubbs, Phil 13 Gallivan, John Baines (departed at 10:47) and Randy Robinson 14 15 Ex Officio Member: 16 George Campbell, City Manager 17 Howard Martin, ACM Utilities 18 19 Absent: Barbara Russell, excused 20 21 OPEN MEETING: 22 23 ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION: 24 25 4) Consider approval of Bid No. 4623 to Humphrey & Morton Constriction Company, Inc. for 26 the constriction of the Phase 1 Eagle Drive Drainage Improvements Project, in an amount 27 not to exceed $1,478,128.30. 28 29 Noreen Housewright, Engineer, presented this item. Housewright knows most of the 30 information regarding this project is in the backup but would like the opportunity to summarize 31 staff's request. Housewright stated that she is here to ask the PUB to accept staff's 32 recommendation to approve Bid No. 4623 to Humphrey & Morton Constriction Company for 33 the constriction of the Phase 1 Eagle Drive Drainage Improvements Project. Bids were received 34 on January 20, 2011. Humphrey & Morton was the second lowest bid for this project. The low 35 bidder was Davis Excavation Inc. The difference between the two bidders was $77,12830. 36 This project was previously bid on August 26, 2010. The apparent low bidder was Davis 37 Excavation Inc. Since staff had not worked with Davis Excavation previously and were not 38 familiar with their company and the type of work they performed, staff decided to meet with Mr. 39 Davis and discuss the project and their previous experience. Gary Vickery, from Teague Nall 40 and Perkins, and Housewright met with Mr. Davis on September 2, 2010. At that meeting, Mr. 41 Davis produced a limited amount of drainage experience. He stated that he usually did 42 development / apartment work and since the market has slowed is trying to get into municipal 43 work. Frank Payne, City Engineer, and Housewright met with Gary Vickery on September 8, 44 2010 to discuss the previous meeting with Mr. Davis and decided that due to the scope of this 45 project that we wanted a contractor that was already experienced in this type of work. Since we 46 did not have language in the Specification book outlining the type of experience required for the 47 contractor, staff could not dismiss the apparent low bidder and accept the next lowest bidder. On Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board Meeting February 14, 2011 Page 2 of 3 1 October 19, 2010 Council approved rejection of all bids based on the recommendation from the 2 Purchasing Department. Staff rebid this project on January 20, 2011 with a list of Contractor 3 Qualifications added to the Specifications. Once again Davis Excavation was the apparent low 4 bidder. Staff asked Davis Excavation to supply their experience based on the list of Contractor 5 Qualifications in the project specifications book. At first review, they did not meet the 6 qualifications. On 1/26/11 staff provided an additional opportunity for them to supply 7 information. They provided more information regarding their experience, but staff does not 8 believe they met three out of the six contractor qualifications as defined in the project 9 specification book. The three qualifications are as follows: 10 11 1. Firm experience of at least 3 years in the constriction of public drainage projects: 12 • The experience provided was development experience with some drainage work in the 13 public ROW. 14 2. Firm experience in the constriction of at least 3 separate large cast-in-place concrete box 15 projects successfully completed. Large projects are considered to be a minimum box span of 16 10 feet and a minimum length of 100 ft. 17 • In the documentation provided, there is only one project meeting the qualification. 18 Addison Circle 1997, 10' x 10' Box Culvert, 834 ft. but there is no mention of whether it 19 was a Pre-Cast or Cast-in-place box. 20 3. Firm experience in the constriction of at least 3 separate drainage projects each with a 21 contract value of at least $1,000,000. 22 • In the documentation provided, Davis Excavation provided only two development 23 projects with a contract value of at least $1,000,000. 24 25 Humphrey & Morton supplied an unsolicited experience report. Their experience was reviewed 26 in the same manner as Davis Excavation and found to meet the qualifications. Staff would like 27 for the PUB to approve staff s recommendation to award of the contract to Humphrey & Morton 28 Constriction Company, Inc. Baines asked what the start date is, Housewright stated that we 29 have not awarded the contract as of yet but should be in a couple of months. Baines further 30 asked if it was planned to start about that time and Housewright agreed. Grubbs asked if we 31 normally have bidder qualifying riles for contracts. Housewright stated that this is the second 32 time staff has added it to the specifications. Grubbs asked stated isn't that a standard operating 33 procedure (SOP)? Frank Payne, City Engineer, responded that it hasn't been that necessary until 34 the last few bids. We have had problems with bidders that are primarily first in development 35 work and they have gotten hungry and have moved over to the public works side. It is SOP now 36 and we put it in every bid package. George Campbell, City Manager, stated that was the obstacle 37 was in denying the bid in the first place. We didn't have the criteria specific enough in the bids. 38 So Council wanted that in there for the re-bid. Payne stated that was correct. Cheek recused 39 himself as requested by Council and left the room. Chair Smith asked Payne if he is satisfied 40 that there will not be any challenges on this issue. Payne stated that he is satisfied he will still 41 need to touch base with legal but the language that was added in was at the request of purchasing 42 and legal. Purchasing has looked at it and agrees with staff that Davis does not meet the 43 qualifications. Payne can't imagine that there will be a problem with the award staff asked for 44 the additional information after the first submittal at Payne's request because he wanted to make 45 sure there was no problem. Staff them gave them an additional chance to produce information. 46 It didn't happen, there is no way to look at that data and tell staff that they meet the Draft Minutes of the Public Utilities Board Meeting February 14, 2011 Page 3 of 3 1 qualifications. Payne stated that there may be a protest from them. If the data would have been 2 given before the project was re-bid staff may have moved forward with them. Chair Smith asked 3 Mike Copeland, Utility Attorney, if he was comfortable with moving forward and accepting the 4 second lowest bidder and Copeland stated that he was. 5 6 Board Member Grubbs moved to approve items 4 with a second from Board Member 7 Baines. The motion was approved by a 5-0 vote. Cheek was excused from the vote. 8 9 Adjournment was at 11:40 a.m. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR EAGLE DRIVE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 4623-AWARDED TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER MEETING SPECIFICATION, HUMPHREY AND MORTON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,478,128.30). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the constriction 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 responsible bids for the constriction of the public works or improvements described in the bid invitation, bid proposals and plans and specifications therein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The following competitive bids for the constriction of public works or improvements, as described in the "Bid Invitations", "Bid Proposals" 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 4623 Humphrey and Morton Constriction Company, Inc. $1,478,128.30 SECTION 2. The acceptance and approval of the above competitive bids shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for constriction 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 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the constriction 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 Bid Proposals, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION 4. Upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive 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 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 12011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-Bid 4623 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation ACM: Fred Greene f SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution allowing Tejas Storytelling Association to be the sole participant allowed to distribute/not sell alcoholic beverages at the Texas Storytelling Festival on March 12, 2011, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date. Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommended approval with a vote of 7-0. Staff recommends approval of the Texas Storytelling Festival request. BACKGROUND The Storytelling Festival holds a Talespinner's Dinner on Saturday night in the Civic Center. There will be beer and wine served during the dinner hours: 5:00 p.m. until 6:30 p.m. The Civic Center is the only facility in Quakertown Park where, with City Council's approval, alcohol is permitted. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the resolution and agreement as submitted, which is consistent with agreements for other events serving alcoholic beverages. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) An ordinance was adopted on October 6, 2009, requiring approval by City Council for an event that is open to the public to have alcohol in the Civic Center building. This request was presented to the Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board on February 7, 2011 and passed with a vote of 7-0. FISCAL INFORMATION None. EXHIBITS 1. Resolution 2. Civic Center Agreement 3. Letter of Request 4. Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board Minutes of February 7, 2011 Respectfully submitted: tk . 0. Emerson Vorel Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator llcodadldepartmcntsllegallour documentslresolutionsll IVexas storytelling festival alcohol distribution.doc RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ALLOWING TEJAS STORYTELLING ASSOCIATION TO BE THE SOLE PARTICIPANT ALLOWED TO DISTRIBUTE/NOT SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT THE TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL ON MARCH 12, 2011, UPON CERTAIN CONDITIONS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT IN CONFORMITY WITH THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton ("City") is the owner of the Civic Center; and WHEREAS, the consumption of alcoholic beverages is allowed in the Civic Center pursuant to City of Denton Code, §22-32 (b); and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the public interest to select only one vendor of alcoholic beverages at the Texas Storytelling Festival; and WHEREAS, Elizabeth Ellis, President of Tejas Storytelling Association (called "Association"), has requested that they be the sole participant allowed to distribute/not sell alcoholic beverages at this year's Texas Storytelling Festival on March 12, 2011; and WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation, and Beautification Board has recommended that the Association be the sole participant allowed to distribute/not sell alcoholic beverages at the Texas Storytelling Festival; and WHEREAS, the City agrees with the recommendation of the Parks, Recreation, and Beautification Board; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION 1. Association shall be the sole participant allowed to distribute/not sell alcoholic beverages at the Texas Storytelling Festival on March 12, 2011 at the Civic Center upon the following conditions: 1. They shall provide the security necessary for the distribution or sale of alcoholic beverages; 2. They shall provide general comprehensive liability insurance from a responsible carrier, with the City as an additional insured, in the amount of $500,000.00. 3.. They agree to indemnify the City of Denton against any liability incident to the distributing or selling of alcoholic beverages at the Texas Storytelling Festival. SECTION 2. The City Manager or his designee is authorized to execute an agreement in conformity with this Resolution, which shall be substantially in the form of the agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference. llcodadldepartrrentsllegallouf documentslresolutions1111texas storytelling festival alcohol dstribution.doc SECTION 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY By. Page 2 of 2 cAdocuments and settingslboard presidenAlocal settingsVemporary intemet fcleslcontent. ie51a1 bh20I ltexas°/a20storytelling°/a20festival%20alcohol%20contract[ 1 doc CIVIC CENTER AGREEMENT FOR THE TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § This Agreement, made this day of , 2011, by and between the City of Denton, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY" and Eliabeth Ellis doing business as TE.IAS STORYTELLING ASSOCIATION, hereinafter referred to as "ASSOCIATION". WITNESSETH, that in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows: ARTICLE I GENERAL The City grants to ASSOCIATION the exclusive privilege to distribute/not sell alcoholic beverages, subject to the exceptions and conditions hereinafter set forth, for the TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL on March 12, 2011 to be held at the Civic Center. This privilege does not extend beyond the date of the TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL for the year 2011. ARTICLE 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES ASSOCIATION in order to exercise the privilege to distribute/not sell alcoholic beverages must perform the following: A. ASSOCIATION shall be solely responsible for the rental and payment for any booth space necessary for the distribution/not sale of alcoholic beverages at the TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL. B. ASSOCIATION shall be solely responsible to obtain any temporary license and permit necessary for the distribution/not sale of alcoholic beverages at the TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL. C. ASSOCIATION shall be solely responsible for the obtaining and paying for any security necessary for their distribution/not sale of alcoholic beverages at the TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL. ASSOCIATION'S failure to do any of the above and to show proper proof of compliance shall waive their right to exercise the privilege of distributing/not selling alcoholic beverages at the TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL. ARTICLE 3 LOCAL RULES AND REGULATION ASSOCIATION agrees to abide by all municipal, county, state and federal laws, ordinances, rules and regulations and specifically, without limitation, the Denton Civic Center Rules and Regulations, to obtain all necessary and proper licenses, permits and authorizations, and to comply with the requirements of any duly authorized person acting in connection therewith. ASSOCIATION shall pay all taxes, if any, of every nature and description arising out of or in any manner connected with the sale of alcoholic beverages. ASSOCIATION will exercise reasonable care and due diligence in their distribution/not sale of alcoholic beverages at the TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL. ARTICLE 4 INDEMNITY AGREEMENT ASSOCIATION shall indemnify and save and hold harmless the CITY and its officers, agents, and employees from and against any and all liability, claims, demands, losses, and expenses, including but not limited to, court costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the CITY, and including, without limitation, damages for bodily and personal injury, death and property damage, resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of ASSOCIATION or its officers, shareholders, agents, or 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 parties' 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 immunity, which defenses are hereby expressly reserved. ARTICLE 5 INSURANCE During the performance of the Agreement, ASSOCIATION shall maintain the following insurance with an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Texas by the State Insurance Commission or any successor agency that has a rating with Best Rate Carriers of at least an A- or above: A. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $500,000 for each occurrence and not less than $500,000 in the aggregate, and with property damage limits of not less that $100,000 for each occurrence and not less than $100,000 in the aggregate. B. Liquor/Dram Shop Liability in the amount of $250,000 per occurrence for any event occurring on City-owned property where alcohol will be provided or served. TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL - Page 2 C. ASSOCIATION shall furnish insurance certificates or insurance policies at the CITY'S request to evidence such coverages. The insurance policies shall name the CITY as an additional insured on all such policies, and shall contain a provision that such insurance shall not be canceled or modified without written notice to the CITY and ASSOCIATION. In such event, ASSOCIATION shall, prior to the effective date of the change or cancellation, serve substitute policies furnishing the same coverage. ARTICLE 6 NOTICES All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under this Agreement shall be personally delivered or mailed to the respective parties by depositing same in the United States mail to the address shown below, certified mail, return receipt requested, unless otherwise specified herein. Mailed notices shall be deemed communicated as of three (3) days' mailing: To ASSOCIATION: To CITY: TE.IAS STORYTELLING ASSOICATION CITY OF DENTON: Elizabeth Ellis, President City Manager P.O. Box 2806 215 E. McKinney Denton, TX 76202 Denton, Texas 76201 All notices shall be deemed effective upon receipt by the party to whom such notice is given, or within three (3) days' mailing. ARTICLE 7 ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement, consisting of five (5) pages and no exhibits, 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, and agreements which may have been made in connection with the subject matter hereof. ARTICLE 8 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 from the remainder of this Agreement and shall not cause the remainder to be invalid or unenforceable. In such event, the parties shall reform this Agreement to replace such stricken provision with a valid and enforceable provision which comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL - Page 3 ARTICLE 9 DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED In performing the services required hereunder, ASSOCIATION shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age, or physical handicap. i ARTICLE 10 PERSONNEL ASSOCIATION 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, or have any contractual relations with the CITY. ARTICLE 11 ASSIGNABILITY ASSOCIATION 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 CITY. ARTICLE 12 MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, or limitation herein contained shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged therewith, and 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, and unless such waiver or modification is in writing and duly executed; and the parties further agree that the provisions of this section will not be waived unless as set forth herein. ARTICLE 13 MISCELLANEOUS A. Venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton County, Texas. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. B. 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. TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL - Page 4 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the City of Denton, Texas has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized City Manager, and ASSOCIATION has executed this Agreement through its duly authorized undersigned officer on this the day of , 2011. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS GEORGE C. CAMPBELL, CITY MANAGER ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY r BY: TEJAS STORYTELLING ASSOCIATION o y VA;) BY: EL ZAB ELL AS, SIDENT WITNESS: BY: TEXAS STORYTELLING FESTIVAL - Page 5 Jan. 10, 2011 Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator City of Denton 601 East Hickory, Suite B Denton, TX 76205 Dear Janie: The Tejas Storytelling Association is requesting permission to include wine and beer at our fundraiser, The Talespinner Dinner, which will be held on Saturday, March 12, 2011 from 5 to 6:30 p.m. during the Texas Storytelling Festival. We will be offering wine and beer only to those who purchase a ticket for this fundraiser, and not to the general audience of the festival. Although El Guapo will be catering the dinner, the wine and beer will be purchased and distributed by the Tej as Storytelling Association. If further information is needed, please contact me at 214-282-7701. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Elizabeth Ellis President, Tej as Storytelling Association DRAFT Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board Minutes February 7, 2011 Civic Center Community Room Members present: Carol Brantley, Vicki Byrd, Alex Lieban, Derrick Murray Janet Shelton, Dave RoNvley, Jennifer Wages Members absent: None. Staff present: Emerson Vorel, Bob Tickner, Mary Aukerman, Janie McLeod REGULAR MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER - Murray, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF January 10, 2011 MEETING: Shelton made a motion to approve the minutes as presented, Wages seconded and the motion carried Nvith a vote of 7-0. 3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS: None. 4. ACTION ITEMS: A. Request From Tejas Storytelling Association to Serve Alcoholic Beverages at Texas Storytelling Festival - McLeod told the Board that the Tej as Storytelling Association has requested to be the sole participant allowed to provide beer and wine at their annual Texas Storytelling Festival fundraiser, the Talespinner Dinner, on Saturday, March 12, 2011, in the Civic Center. Per Ordinance, the Board has to make recommendation to City Council for approval of all requests for allowing alcoholic beverages in the Civic Center for events that are open to the public. Staff recommends approval of the request, which is consistent with agreements for other events with alcohol held in the Civic Center. MOTION: Shelton made the motion to recommend approving the request from Tej as Storytelling Association to serve alcoholic beverages at the Texas Storytelling Festival fundraiser in the Civic Center on March 12, 2011. Rowley seconded the motion and it carried with a vote of 7-0. B. 2011 Public Art Project - Vorel presented the proposed Public Art Project for the 2011 fiscal year. The Public Art Committee requested Ms. Karla K. Morton, 2010 Texas Poet Laureate, to create poems depicting the history of Denton. Of the poems she submitted, the Committee chose 25 poems for the project at a cost of $2,500, which will be paid from the 2011 Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT) Funds. The poems are being submitted to the Park Board for their recommendation to City Council for approval. Pending approval of the project by City Council, artists will submit their portfolios and the Public Art Committee will select and pair an artist to a poem for them to illustrate. Each artist will be paid $500 for their illustration. When completed, the poems with their illustrations will be temporarily displayed at the Center for Visual Arts before being moved to various city facilities. It is the goal of the Public Art Committee to assemble all the poems and illustrations into a book that will be available to the public. HOT Funds are used to draw people to the Denton area and a portion is allocated for Public Art projects each fiscal year. It is uncertain if HOT Funds can be used to produce the book. If not, private funding will be sought for the book concept. It has been proposed that any remaining HOT Funds be used to create a mural on the east wall of the Center for Visual Arts that faces the new train station on Hickory Street. MOTION: Murray asked for a motion to move ahead with the vote by the Board. Shelton made a motion to accept the recommendation by the Public Art Committee and to make the Boards' recommendation to City Council to approve the 2011 Public Art Project as submitted; Lieban seconded the motion and it carried with a vote of 6-1. 5. DISCUSSION ITEMS: A. Future Plans for Expansion Including the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) - Vorel wanted to inform the Board of the various funding sources for projects undertaken by the Parks and Recreation Department (PARD). Funding comes from CIP funds, bonds, grants, Park Dedication and Development fees, Certificates of Obligation, gas well revenues, CDBG Block Grants and the City's general fund. How and what is funded by each source was explained in detail. Wages asked what the biggest need in Parks is. Vorel answered that our 2009 Parks Master Plan identified trails as the number one request from citizens. Vorel sees a future need for a new senior center as the baby boomer population continues to age, more gym space, an indoor soccer facility, renovation to the Civic Center pool, and the need to keep the Water Works Park updated with new attractions to compete Nvith other facilities in the area. The next CIP Bond election that will include PARD projects is tentatively scheduled for the 2015-16 fiscal year. There are many projects that are in various stages of completion. Each month an update is given of current projects. It was pointed out that each new roadway in Denton is now required to have at least sidewalks. Note: Byrd left the meeting at 6:55 p.m. 6. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Parks Department Projects Status Report This report was included in the Discussion Item. B. Public Art Committee Meeting Minutes Draft - The minutes of the Januaiy 13, 2011 Public Art Committee Meeting are included in the packet. 7. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: A. Crowley asked that a brief budget presentation be presented at the next Park Board Meeting. With no further items on the agenda, Murray asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Brantley made the motion to adjourn, Wages seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Airport YT_ ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to approve a Second Amendment to an Airport Lease Agreement approved by Resolution R87-054 dated September 15, 1987, between the City of Denton, Texas, and First Financial Resources, Inc. at Denton Municipal Airport which will extend the Lease term an additional ninety (90) days; and providing an effective date. (Airport Advisory Board Recommends Approval 4-0) BACKGROUND First Financial Resources, Inc. owns a 6,000 square-foot hangar constricted on an Airport ground lease first approved in September 1987. Hangar enlargement and renovations were constricted by First Financial Resources early in 2010. The lease has a primary term of twenty- three (23) years with three (3) consecutive options to renew for a five (5) year period each. The primary term of twenty-three (23) years expired on September 15, 2010. Section VII, B, 2 and 3 of the lease state the following: 2. Assumption All buildings and improvements of whatever nature remaining upon the leased premises at the end of the primary term, or any extension thereof, of this lease shall automatically become the property of Lessor absolutely in fee without cost to Lessor. 3. Building Life. It is agreed that the life of the building to be constructed by Lessee on the property herein leased is twenty-three (23) years. Section III, Term, contains the following requirement related to each 5-year renewal: The rental and terms to be negotiated shall be reasonable and consistent with the then value, rentals and terms of similar property on the Airport. " This is the first enforcement of the assumption clause at Denton Airport of which management is aware. The Airport Advisory Board and City staff have been reviewing the terms for assumption of property improvements under similar provisions in almost all of the current Airport property leases. In order to hold the option open to provide First Financial Resources, Inc. the same terms and conditions for assumption as other tenants on the Airport, Airport staff negotiated a six (6) month extension of the primary term for the current lease which was approved by the City Council on September 7, 2010. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 The lease extension approved by Ordinance 2010-207 expires on March 15, 2011. Due to changes in Airport management organization and ongoing deliberations regarding Airport governance, staff has requested an additional 90 day extension of the original lease. The new lease expiration date, if approved by City Council, will be June 15, 2011. RECOMMENDATION Airport Staff recommends approval of the additional 90 days after the extension for six (6) months expires from the primary term for the First Financial Resources, Inc. lease. The Airport Board recommends the extension with the request that staff complete proposed revisions of the reversion clause and negotiate a full-term lease renewal for First Financial Resources, Inc. without further delay. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW 1. Original Lease approved for twenty-three (23) year initial term by Resolution R87-054 dated September 15, 1987, between the City of Denton, Texas, and First Financial Resources, Inc. 2. City Council approved a first amendment to extend the primary term by six (6) months on September 15, 2010. 3. Airport Advisory Board reviewed second amendment to extend primary lease term an additional ninety (90) days on February 21, 2011 and recommended approval (4-0). EXHIBITS 1. Ordinance to approve the First Financial Resources, Inc. Lease extension for 90 days 2. Lease Agreement 3. Excerpt from Airport Board Minutes February 21, 2011 Respectfully submitted: Quentin Hix Airport Manager llcodadldepartmentsVegallour documentslordinances1111airport first financial lease 2nd amendment. doc EXHIBIT 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO AN AIRPORT LEASE DATED SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND FIRST FINANCIAL RESOURCES, INC. AT THE DENTON MUNCIPAL AIRPORT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, certain real property upon the Denton Municipal Airport was leased to First Financial Services, Inc. in an Airport Lease Agreement, and WHEREAS, the City of Denton and Lessee desire to amend the lease agreement, and WHEREAS, the Airport Board recommends approval of the Amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it in the public interest to approve this Assignment of the Lease; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute a Second Amendment to an Airport Lease Agreement between the City of Denton and First Financial Services, Inc. at the Denton Municipal Airport which is attached to and made a part of this ordinance for all purposes and to exercise all rights and duties of the City of Denton under the Airport Lease Agreement. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR 1 UodaMepaztmentsAegahour documentslordinancesA I\airport first financial lease 2nd amendment.doc ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 2 SECOND AMENDMENT TO COMMERCIAL OPERATOR LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF DENTON AND FIRST FINANCIAL RESOURCES, INC. THE STATE OF TEXAS § § KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS COUNTY OF DENTON § This Second Amendment to that certain Commercial Operator Lease which was first made and executed on September 15, 1987 at Denton, Texas, by and between the City of Denton, Texas, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor," and First Financial Resources, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Lessee". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Lessor and the Lessee have requested an amendment of the Lease term and the City Manager and the Airport Advisory Board support the amendment of the Lease; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and the mutual covenants contained in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: SECTION III. - TERM OF THE LEASE IS HEREBY AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of twenty-three (23) years, commencing on the 15th day of September, 1987 and as amended to continue through the 14`h day of March 2011, except as amended hereby to extend for ninety (90) days through the 15Th day of June, 2011, unless earlier terminated under the provisions of the Agreement. Lessee shall have the first right of refusal to renegotiate this lease for three (3) additional five year periods at rentals and terms mutually agreed upon by the Lessor and Lessee without regard for or considering the then cost of living index. Lessee's election to renegotiate this lease shall be in writing addressed to the City Manager at least one hundred eighty (180) days before the expiration of the primary term of twenty- three (23) years as amended hereby to extend for ninety (90) days and at least 180 days before the expiration of each additional renegotiated period. The rental and terms to be negotiated shall be reasonable and consistent with the then value, rentals and terms of similar property on the Airport, Lessee's first right of refusal to renegotiate this lease shall expire upon the end of the last day of the primary term of twenty-three (23 ) years as amended hereby to extend for ninety (90) days and the last day of each additional renegotiation period. 1 SECTION IV. PAYMENTS RENTALS AND FEES IS HEREBY AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: Land rental shall be the sum of Two Hundred Twenty Eight Dollars and Eighty One Cents ($228.81) per month effective March 15, 2011 through June 15, 2011, payable in six (6) equal monthly installments in the sum of Two Hundred Twenty Eight Dollars and Eighty One Cents ($228.81) in advance, on or before the first day of each and every month during the term of this agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the lease rental is reduced by the product of $0.11481 per square foot times the number of square feet compromising all easements established in accordance with Article II (c). SECTION XI. - INSURANCE OF THE LEASE IS HEREBY AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: C. Indemnity. Lessee must indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Lessor, its officers, agents and employees, from and against liability for any and all claims, liens, suits, demands and/or actions for damages, injuries to persons (including death), property damage, (including loss of use), and expenses, including court costs, attorneys' fees and other reasonable costs, occasioned by or incidental to the Lessee's occupancy or use of the Leased Premises or the Airport and/or activities conducted in connection with or incidental to this Lease Agreement, including all such causes of action based on common, constitutional or statutory law, or based in whole or in part upon the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of Lessee, its officers, agents employees, invitees or other persons. Lessee must at all times exercise reasonable precautions on behalf of, and be solely responsible for, the safety of its officers, employees, agents, customers, visitors, invitees, licensees and other persons, as well as their property, while in, on, or involved in any way with the use of the Leased Premises. The Lessor is not liable or responsible for the negligence or intentional acts or omissions of the Lessee, its officers, agents, employees, agents, customers, visitors and other persons. The Lessor shall assume no responsibility or liability for harm, injury, or any damaging events which are directly or indirectly attributable to premise defects, whether real or alleged, which may now exist or which may hereafter arise upon the Leased Premises, responsibility for all such defects being expressly assumed by the Lessee. The Lessee agrees that this indemnity provision applies to all claims, suits, demands, and actions arising from all premise defects or conditions. 2 THE LESSOR AND THE LESSEE EXPRESSLY INTEND THIS INDEMNITY PROVISION TO REQUIRE LESSEE TO INDEMNIFY AND PROTECT THE LESSOR FROM THE CONSE UENCES OF THE LESSOR'S OWN NEGLIGENCE WHILE LESSOR IS PARTICIPATING IN THIS LEASE AGREEMENT WHERE THAT NEGLIGENCE IS A CONCURRING CAUSE OF THE INJURY DEATH OR DAMAGE. NOTWITHSTANDING THE TERMS OF THE PRECEDING SENTENCES, THIS INDEMNITY PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY TO ANY CLAIM LOSS DAMAGE CAUSE OF ACTION SUIT AND LIABILITY WHERE THE INJURY DEATH OR DAMAGE RESULTS FROM THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THE LESSOR OR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES CONTRACTORS OR AGENTS, UNMIXED WITH THE FAULT_ OF ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY. ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day March 2011. BY LESSOR: GEORGE C. CAMPBELL CITY MANAGER ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: 3 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: FIRST FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. LESSEE: %-X46:z~' BY: Byron art STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON This instrument was acknowledged before me on the ~L day of F r , 24 f by Byron Hart. [ JUNE AN MUWNS Not y Public, State of Texas My ConWssW Eft My Commission Expires May 27, 2013 (or Notary Stamp) STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON , This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of 24 , by George Campbell, City Manager on behalf the City of Denton, Texas, a municipal corporation. [SEAL] Notary Public, State of Texas My Commission Expires (or Notary Stamp) 4 EXHIBIT 3 DRAFT MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD FEBRUARY 21, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the Airport Advisory Board of the City of Denton, Texas convened in a Special Called Meeting on Monday February 21, 2011 at 5:30 p.m. in the Airport Terminal Building, Meeting Room at 5000 Airport Road, Denton, Texas, at which the following items were considered: BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Dr. Don Smith, Mr. Bob Pugh, Mr. Jim Clark and Mr. Jeremy Fykes. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Bill Schofield excused absent. STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Quentin Hix, Airport Manager, Julie Mullins, Administrative Assistant, Andrea Sumner, Operations Coordinator. PUBLIC PRESENT: Jeff Soules, US Aviation Group; John Selvidge, Tenant ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION III. Receive a report, hold a discussion and make a recommendation regarding an Ordinance authorizing the City Manager to approve a second amendment to an Airport Lease Agreement approved by Resolution R87-054 dated September 15, 1987, between the City of Denton, Texas and First Financial Resources, Inc. at Denton Municipal Airport. Mr. Hix commented on talking with Mr. Hart on the extension for 90 days, he has signed the lease extension and this should be resolved within the 90 days. Mr. Fykes made a motion to approve the extension. Mr. Pugh seconded motion. Motion carried 4-0 This page left blank intentionally . CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 1, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Tuesday, February 1, 2011 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. Note: Due to the poor weather conditions, the Work Session was not held. 1. Citizen Comments on Consent Agenda Items This item was not considered. 2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda for February 1, 2011. This item was not considered. 3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the governance of the Airport as recommended in the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan. This item was not considered. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. PRESENT: Council Member King, Council Member Watts, Council Member Gregory, Council Member Engelbrecht, and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp. ABSENT: Council Member Heggins and Mayor Burroughs. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the U. S. and Texas flags. 2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamations/Awards 1. Presentation by Carter Blood Care of Four Seasons Award. 2. Presentation of Empowering Excellence Award. 3. Denton Family Unity Week Proclamation. Due to the weather conditions, the presentations and proclamations were postponed to a future meeting. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 2 3. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. 1. Stephanie Johnson regarding red light cameras in Denton. Ms. Johnson was not present at the meeting. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member Watts seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances and resolutions with the exception of Items B and C. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Approved the exception to the Noise Ordinance as listed below. A. Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance for the purpose of performing live music during House Concerts hosted by Cassandra Fuhrmann. The House Concerts will be located at 616 Woodland Street, beginning at 5:00 p.m. and concluding at 8:00 p.m., on the following Sundays: March 27, April 17, May 22, August 28, September 25, and October 23, 2011. This request is for an increase in decibels from 65 to 69 and for amplified sound on Sundays. Staff recommends approving the noise exception request. This item was not considered. B. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2003-258 relating to the Economic Development Partnership Board ("The Board") to add to the membership of the Board and to expand the duties of the Board to include branding and marketing for the Denton Municipal Airport in support of the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan and to further include duties related to Airport economic development incentives; repealing all conflicting ordinances and portions thereof, and providing an effective date. This item was not considered. C. Consider approval of a resolution amending Resolution No. R2009-015 to establish a standing committee of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas to be known as the City Council Airport Committee to advise and assist the City Council regarding City of Denton Municipal Airport Matters; alternatively assigning such duties to an existing City Council committee; and providing for an effective date. Ordinance No. 2011-011 D. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for Front Load Refuse Containers and Replacement Lids for the City of Denton Solid Waste Department; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 4598-Annual Contract for Front Load Refuse Containers awarded to the lowest responsible bidder meeting specification, Roll-Offs USA, Inc., in the annual estimated amount of $140,000). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 3 Ordinance No. 2011-012 E. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids by way of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Fort Worth and awarding a contract for the Commercial Credit Card Services; repealing Ordinance 2003-247; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to make expenditures as set forth in the Participation Agreement; and providing an effective date (File 4649-Interlocal Agreement for Commercial Credit Card Services with the City of Fort Worth, contract awarded to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.). Ordinance No. 2011-013 F. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order through the Buy Board for the acquisition of thirteen (13) vehicles for the City of Denton General Fund Departments by way of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 4650- Interlocal Agreement for the purchase of General Fund Vehicles awarded to Caldwell Chevrolet in the amount of $248,230 and Philpott Ford in the amount of $111,752 for a total award of $359,982). Ordinance No. 2011-014 G. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving an agreement between the City of Denton and the North Texas Umpire Association; determining a sole source and approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Certified Softball Officiating Services available from only one source in accordance with the provisions of the state law exempting such purchases from the requirements of competitive bids; and providing an effective date (File 4641-Agreement with North Texas Umpire Association in the amount per game as specified in the agreement for an estimated award of $68,500). Ordinance No. 2011-015 H. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Annual Maintenance for continued vendor support of the Open Systems International, Inc., Monarch SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) System from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 4645-Purchase of Annual Maintenance Services for Monarch Software Package awarded to Open Systems International, Inc. in the amount of $96,760). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). Ordinance No. 2011-016 L Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the refurbishment of a Quint Aerial Fire Trick for the City of Denton Fire Department available from only one source in accordance with the provision for State Law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 4652-Purchase of Services and Materials for Refurbishment of Aerial Fire Trick awarded to E-One in the amount of $352,330). City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 4 Ordinance No. 2011-017 J. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, repealing Ordinance No. 2005-112, and thereby revoking an alternative development plan previously approved therein, for approximately 3.2 acres of land generally located at the southwest corner of Windriver Lane and I-35E, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; and providing for an effective date. (ADP04-0009, Unicorn Lake) Ordinance No. 2011-018 K. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Burns & McDonnell for environmental permitting services and studies incident to the development of the 10 MW CUP facility in Denton, Texas; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (in an amount not to exceed $146,806; and in the aggregate amount of not-to exceed $188,681). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (5-0). Resolution No. R2011-001 L. Consider approval of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, suspending the effective date for ninety days in connection with the rate increase filing of Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC on January 7, 2011; finding that the meeting complies with the Open Meetings Act; making other findings and provisions related to the subject; and declaring an effective date. Approved the minutes listed below. M. Consider approval of the minutes of. December 7, 2010 December 14, 2010 January 4, 2011 January 11, 2011 5. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION A. Continue consideration of adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation, with an overlay district, on 6.836 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, within the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (Z 10-0007, 1411 E. University Drive) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with an overlay district (3-2). Council Member Gregory motioned, Council Member Watts seconded to continue the item to the next Council meeting. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye". Motion carried unanimously. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 5 B. Consider nominations/appointments to the following boards and commissions: 1. Community Development Advisory Board 2. Health and Building Standards Commission 3. Historic Landmark Commission 4. Human Services Advisory Committee 5. Public Art Committee 6. Traffic Safety Commission 7. Zoning Board of Adjustment 8. Downtown Denton Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone Board Council Member Watts nominated James McDade to the Human Services Advisory Committee and Eric Piledo to the Historic Landmark Commission. Council Member Gregory nominated Sara Bagheri to the Human Services Advisory Committee, Pat Cheek to the Traffic Safety Commission and Cecile Carson to the Health and Building Standards Commission. Council Member Heggins requested to nominate Michael Green to the Traffic Safety Commission. Council Member Engelbrecht nominated Howard Draper to the Traffic Safety Commission. Council Member Watts motioned, Council Member King seconded approve the nominations. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Hold the first of two public hearings to consider the involuntary annexation of approximately 1,595 acres of land located within the City of Denton's Extraterritorial (ETJ) Jurisdiction, Division 1, in accordance with Texas Local Government Code. The proposed annexation consists of three (3) distinct areas under multiple ownerships and are identified and generally located as follows: 1. DH-7: 143 acres, located east and north of Teasley Lane, south of Teasley Harbor Subdivision and west of Southlake Drive; City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 6 2. DH-9: 298 acres, located north of Pockris Page Road, north, south and northeast of Edwards Road; and 3. DH-12: 1,154 acres, located south of E. University Drive, east of N. Mayhill Road, north and south of Blagg Road, north and south of Mills Road, east and west of S. Trinity Road. Mark Cunningham, Director of Planning and Development, stated that this was an involuntary annexation and service plan for three areas with multiple parcels in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction. Overview/Background - In 2009, 18 potential annexation areas were identified. Of the 18 areas, all but three were exempted from the 3-year annexation plan requirements. The 15 areas that were exempted from the requirement of the 3-year annexation plan were annexed on May 4, 2010 except for properties that qualified for non-annexation agreements. The areas to be included in the proposed annexation in terms of acres and parcels were reviewed. Annexation plan process included (1) the adoption of a 3 year annexation plan, (2) providing written notice of intent to annex, (3) conducting an inventory of services and facilities, (4) preparing a service plan for extension of full municipal services, (5) holding two public hearings, (6) negotiating for the provision of services and (7) holding two readings of the annexation ordinance. A Service Plan must be prepared that provided for full municipal services to the annexed areas. The City may provide the services by any of the methods by which it extended services to other areas of the City. The City was not required to extend services to a newly annexed area prior to the extension of services to existing similar areas. The City was not required to provide a uniform level of full municipal services to each area annexed if different characteristics of topography, land use and population density constituted a sufficient basis for providing different levels of service. Staff was recommending the same Service Plan for the three-year annexation areas that was prepared and adopted for the other 15 recently annexed exempted areas. Elements of the Service Plan - (1) Fire - would be provided at a level consistent with current methods and procedures consistent with those services provided to other areas of the city including fire suppression, pre-hospital medical services, hazardous materials response, emergency prevention, technical rescue response and constriction plan review. (2) EMS - included emergency medical dispatch, pre-hospital emergency advanced life support and medical rescue services. (3) Solid Waste - solid waste and recycling services would be made available immediately upon the effective date of annexation with private collection services continuing up to two years after the annexation. (4) Parks and Recreation - the annexed areas would be able to utilize all existing park and recreation facilities on the effective date of the annexation. (5) Streets - emergency street maintenance would be provided on the effective date of the annexation, routine maintenance would be provided consistent with current policies of the City, and roadway signage would be provided in priority of importance starting with emergencies. (6) Water - connection to existing city water in accordance with existing city policies would be available at the established rates. As new development occurred in the annexed areas, the extension of water would be extended consistent with city policies. Water service capacity would be provided consistent with the same fashion in the current city limits. Existing developments, businesses or homes on individual water systems would be allowed to remain as City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 7 such until a request was made for service. (7) Wastewater - sanitary sewer mains would be extended in accordance with the provisions of the City's codes, ordinances and regulations. (8) Operation and Maintenance - the City would assume the operation and maintenance of wastewater facilities; roads and streets; and any other publicly owned facility, building or service following the effective date of the annexation. After holding the public hearings, the City and property owners must negotiate with area representatives for the provision of services to the area after annexation. The Denton County Commissioners Court would select the representatives to negotiate with the City for the provision of services. The City would not be able to annex those areas appraised for agriculture, wildlife management or timberland uses unless offered a non- annexation agreement and the property owner declined to make the agreement. Annexation schedule - the second public hearing was scheduled for February 15th with negotiations for services determined after that. The first reading of the annexation ordinance was scheduled for January 2012 with the 2" d reading to be held sometime before May 2013. The Mayor Pro Tem opened the public hearing. The following individuals spoke during the public hearing: Will Strict, 4008 Hickory Lane, Denton, 76208 - had questions regarding the process Leo Miller, 3091 Swisher, Denton, 76208 - concerned about the services as presented The Mayor Pro Tem closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that because of the weather there was a concern that many citizens were not able to attend this meeting. A third public hearing would be scheduled as a courtesy to those individuals. The hearing would be either February 17th or 18th. Cunningham noted in response to Mr. Miller's concerns that the Service Plan must provide the area with a level of service comparable to or superior to the level of services available in other parts of the City with land uses and population densities similar to those projected in the area. The timing of the services would be issues included in the negotiation phase. Different areas might get different levels of service consistent with similar areas in the city. Council Member Gregory asked if there would be separate negotiation teams for each area of annexation or one team for the entire process. Cunningham stated that it was anticipated that there would be several separate negotiations from each area. No action was required by Council on this item at this time. B. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation, on approximately 0.26 acres of land located on the east side of Bonnie Brae Street and City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 8 approximately 200 feet south of Emery Street; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (Z10-0012, Janke Addition) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-0). Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that Council could open the public hearing and continue it to the February 15th agenda. The Mayor Pro Tem opened the public hearing. No one spoke during the public hearing. Council Member King motioned, Council Member Watts seconded to continue the public hearing to the February 15, 2011 council meeting. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 2011-019 C. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance granting approval of a sub-surface use of a portion of Quakertown Park for the purpose of a sewer line easement in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; providing for the issuance of a sewer easement; and providing an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommends approval (6-0). Bob Tickner, Parks Superintendent, stated that Denton Municipal Utilities had requested the use of parkland to relocate a sewer line across Quakertown Park. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Code required a public hearing to determine that there were no feasible alternatives to the use or taking of the land. Several other options were explored but the proposed use was the most prudent and cost effective way to provide the sewer line in this area. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommended approval. Council Member Gregory asked how the line would be developed. Jim Wilder, Senior Engineer, stated that an open cut would be made to cross the creek with a replacement of the concrete embankment. The Mayor Pro Tem opened the public hearing. No one spoke during the public hearing. The Mayor Pro Tem closed the public hearing. Council Member Watts motioned, Council Member King seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll call vote, Council Member King "aye", Council Member Watts "aye", Council Member Gregory "aye", Council Member Engelbrecht "aye", and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp "aye". Motion carried unanimously. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 9 7. CONCLUDING ITEMS A. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting AND Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide reports about items of community interest regarding which no action will be taken, to include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; or an announcement involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. Council Member Watts asked for an informal staff report regarding the constriction of student family homes in single family subdivisions. Council Member Engelbrecht thanked the staff who had been outdoors the last 24 hours doing service for citizens. B. Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp announced that Council would go into Closed Meeting following the completion of the regular meeting. C. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting items. Following the completion of the regular session, the Council convened into Closed Session to discuss the following: 1. Closed Meeting: A. Deliberations regarding Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters Under Texas Government Code Sec. 551.086 and Consultation with Attornevs - Under Texas Government Code Sec. 551.071. 1. Receive a status report and further presentation from staff regarding public power competitive and financial matters regarding the possible construction and installation of a state-of-the-art combined heat and power (CHP) tri-generation station for the City to be located in the industrial district in the City of Denton, Texas; discuss deliberate, consider and provide staff with direction regarding same. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 1, 2011 Page 10 Further, receive a briefing from and a consultation with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues concerning the possible construction and installation of a combined heat and power (CHP) tri-generation station for the City- in the industrial district in the City- of Denton, Texas; and discuss, deliberate and provide the City's attorneys with direction and any recommendations regarding such legal matter. A public discussion of this legal matter would conflict with the duty- of the City's Attorneys to the City Council under the Texas Disciplinaiv Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. B. Consultation with Attornev - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071; Deliberations regarding Real Property - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.072. 1. Receive a report and hold a discussion with the City's attorneys regarding legal issues associated with real property interests located in the Hiram Sisco Survey, Abstract No. 1184, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas (the "Property") and actions of the City of Denton related to the value and sale of the Property. The duty of the City's attorneys to the City of Denton under the Texas Disciplinaiv Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code in this matter. Also hold a discussion to deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease or value of the Property-. A discussion of these matters in an open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of the City of Denton in negotiations with the third party. C. Consultation with Attornev - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.071; Deliberations regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Under Texas Government Code Section 551.087. 1. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding legal issues related to economic development incentives in which the duty- of the attorney to the City of Denton under the Texas Disciplinaiv Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas clearly conflicts with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. Also hold a discussion regarding economic development incentives and the discussion shall include commercial information the Citv Council has received from the candidate which the Citv Council seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory- of the City, and with which the City Council is conducting economic development negotiations and to deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to such candidate. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. MARK A. BURROUGHS JENNIFER WALTERS MAYOR CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 7, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Monday, February 7, 2011 at 11:30 a.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall. PRESENT: Council Member King, Council Member Gregory, Council Member Engelbrecht, Mayor Burroughs, Council Member Watts, and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp. ABSENT: Council Member Heggins. 1. Receive a report, hold a discussion and provide staff direction on street pavement conditions and recommended maintenance funding requirements. Stephen Smith, IMS Infrastructure Services, presented an update on the state of the roadways in Denton. He stated that the network average was acceptable but the backlog of repair was going to need work. There was a steady decline in street conditions since 2003. He reviewed where the money was spent with the most of it going to the surfacing of the roadways. Concept of pavement management - the concept of pavement management was a balanced approach among (1) City objectives, policies and budgets; (2) understanding of the condition of the roadways; and (3) priorities, analysis techniques and reporting. Why do pavement management - the main reason was to obtain the best roadway at the lowest cost. Investment in preventative maintenance was more cost effective than reconstruction. After several rehabilitation cycles, streets still needed to be reconstructed. It was critical to not let streets deteriorate past their overlay rehabilitation limit as that caused large jumps in costs and inconvenience. When pavements started to show cracks, rehabilitation was already past due. Pavement Condition Score - the score was on a 0-100 basis with 100 being really good and 0 being really bad. It was important to intercept roads at the very good to good stage. The condition rating focused on cracking and rutting; distortions, weathering and flushing; patching and potholes; and roughness. Denton's network average was 64 and a typical roadway network was 60-65. Denton did not have a typical distribution of conditions with a big backlog of roads to work on. Smith continued with a review of the results by pavement type. Concrete roads were in the excellent category but most of the asphalt roadways were in the very poor condition. In terms of Functional Class, the collectors were in the worst condition and comprised 19% of the network. Residential streets had the highest rating. They also formed the greatest percentage of reconstructs. Arterials were the most costly. In terms of arterial strength of the roadway network, many streets came out under strength which meant they could not handle the load that was required of them. Reasons for that included the street had not been built strong enough to begin with, there was too thin an overlay or the core was not sufficient. Looking forward on how to solve the problem there were several factors to consider (1) Funding was not $0 nor was it unlimited; (2) Denton placed a value on its roadway network; (3) Identify an annual budget to maintain the current OCI; (4) Examine the effects of the current funding levels; and (5) Prevent ongoing deterioration in pavement quality. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 7, 2011 Page 2 Steps to be considered in the process included (1) Step 1 - identify the magnitude of the current deficit. Considering the overall condition of the network and if there were unlimited funding, $158 million dollars would be needed. The bulk of those funds would be spent on asphalt road reconstruction in terms of overlays, surface treatments, and routine maintenance. (2) Step 2 - estimate annual steady state costs. An estimated annual cost would be $10.6 million. (3) Step 3 - set priorities and operating parameters. Develop predictable models on how the streets would deteriorate. Put an emphasis on arterials and more emphasis on asphalt over concrete with urban roads over rural roads. Tailor what each street needed. (4) Step 4 - complete a 5-year budget analysis. $10 million was needed to stay the way the roads were today, $15 million to get back to the target score of 69. (5) Step 5 - examine results. Doing nothing was not an option. If funding was done at the current level, the City would still be behind. $3.9 million did not take care of any of the backlog but the goals would be met at $10 million per year. It was important to keep in mind that the figures did not include inflation or network growth. Recommendations included (1) Target the OCI to be between 65-70 with a backlog under 20%. This equated to a $13 to $16 million annual budget. (2) maintain an OCI at 63 and a backlog under 20% equated to a $10 million annual budget. A budget of $3.2 million was inadequate and resulted in an OCI of 55 with 26% snowballing backlog. (3) Additional long-term funding needed to be secured. Borrowing/bonding would not provide a full solution due to growth and inflation. (4) Maintenance only deferred eventual reconstruction. (5) The following business processes should be reviewed - pavement mix design and specifications, structural cross-section, constriction inspection and testing, and GIS data management. Keith Gabbard, Street and Drainage Superintendent, stated that the numbers in the budget did not include the OCI or work such as sanding, etc. Council Member Watts asked about the difference between concrete and asphalt. Smith stated that concrete was about three times as much with the life of concrete 2-1 over asphalt. Mayor Burroughs stated that funding was always the issue. Smith was suggesting a large increase in the General Fund budget. Smith replied that funding needed to be a process to look at alternatives, select one and proceed. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp stated that Utilities paid a franchise fee to drive on the roads and asked how much of that went to repairing or rebuilding roads. Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager, stated that the current annual expenditure was $13 million with $5 million for streets. At the upcoming Planning Session, staff would be discussing with Council financing and sources of funding. Mayor Burroughs asked if the priorities of the roadways included the amount of traffic on the roads. Smith stated that was included in OCI figures. He stated that a five-year horizon was to stop the deterioration and maybe willowing away at the backlog. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 7, 2011 Page 3 Council Member Watts asked about quality testing on roads. Tim Fisher, Division Manager-Water Administration, stated that the contractor hired someone to inspect the roadway as it was being built. Council discussed the pros and cons of quality testing of the streets and who would be best to do so. With no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 12:55 MARK A. BURROUGHS MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ANNUAL PLANNING SESSION AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL February 8, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in an Annual Planning Session on Tuesday, February 8, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. in the Facilities Management Department Training Room at 869 S. Woodrow Lane. PRESENT: Council Member Gregory, Council Member Engelbrecht, Mayor Burroughs, and Council Member Watts. ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Council Member Heggins and Council Member King. 1. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and gave staff direction regarding the development of a draft city-wide strategic plan including, but not limited to, the following: a. The Pavement Management System Report and its impact on the strategic plan b. Council's objective of developing community leadership through boards and commissions City Manager Campbell stated that the strategic plan was a project staff had been working on with Council and the Leadership Team for over two years. He hoped the information presented was consistent with the objectives formulated by Council in 2009. Bryan Langley, Chief Financial Officer, presented the Strategic Plan Update. Overview and Purpose - Discuss the goal of the strategic planning process; review the history of the city of Denton's strategic planning process; discuss vision, mission and value statements; provide an overview of the key focus areas, goals and objectives; and review next steps. What was a Strategic Plan and Why Now? A strategic plan was an action-oriented roadmap to achieve a vision. It defined who the City was, where the City wanted to go, and how to plan to get there. A strategic plan was needed to sharpen the focus of the City and enhance the resource allocation process. It was long-term in nature, should be a fundamental tool to prepare and monitor budgets with some goals and objectives that later might need to be re-evaluated. Council Member King joined the meeting. Goal of the Strategic Plan - Provide a "high level" overview of key policy goals with more specific detail for objectives developed in departmental plans. It ensured policy and administrative decision-making based on a proactive approach. It created stability for the community and organization. A strategic plan incorporated citizen feedback and communicated a desired service level to citizens and employees alike. It linked organizational direction to the City's established vision, mission, and values. Langley reviewed the Strategic Plan timeline which included the citizen survey, a Leadership Team retreat, City Council Planning Session and Leadership Team strategic planning meetings. He reviewed the vision statement, mission statement and values statement. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 8, 2011 Page 2 Council discussed the time frame for citizen surveys which were done every couple of years. Langley stated that one was due in the next year or so. He reviewed the Leadership Team draft Strategic Plan that included areas of community of choice, sustainability, community governance and management principles. Where are we now? - The Strategic Planning Steering Committee created a draft strategic plan, utilizing Council reports and the Leadership Team's planning document. The draft strategic plan introduced key focus areas, goals, and objectives to assist in the prioritization of resource allocation. Key Focus Areas - included organizational excellence; public infrastructure; sustainable economic development and environmental stewardship; safe, livable and family friendly community; and partnerships and regional leadership. Langley reviewed and Council discussed the Key Focus Areas and the goals for each of the areas. Mayor Burroughs stated that the goals of the key focus areas were how to implement the key focus areas and determine if the process was working. Getting feedback and the quality of feedback would be important to determine if the process was working. Langley replied that the key was to have good performance measures and good performance management based on the information. Council Member Gregory stated that it would be important to pay attention to perceptions of the citizens. Council discussed the various key focus areas, goals and objectives and made suggestions for wording changes and additions. Individual tasks would be included under each objective as the process progressed. Mayor Pro Tem Kamp arrived at the meeting. Next steps for the process included incorporating the Council feedback and distribute a final plan to city staff, utilizing the strategic plan in the FY 2011-12 budget process; and developing performance measures and a scorecard for the next fiscal year. a. The Pavement Management System Report and its impact on the strategic plan Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager, presented details on Key Focus Area 2: Public Infrastructure and objectives associated with that key area. An objective to the goal of improving the quality of city roadways was to manage city street funding based on the overall condition index. Council discussed the wording for the various key focus areas, goals and objectives and made suggestions for wording changes and additions. City of Denton City Council Minutes February 8, 2011 Page 3 Martin reviewed the pavement condition score in terms of cost per square foot. He indicated the lower the score for the pavement, the more cost that was involved. A five-year transition to the proposed $10 million funding for street maintenance was discussed. Council discussed funding issues associated with street maintenance and any upcoming CIP bond issues and elections. Suggestions from city staff and boards and commissions on the needs for CIP bond projects would be helpful in formulating any future bond programs. b. Council's objective of developing community leadership through boards and commissions This item was not discussed. Item 44 was discussed. 4. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding a ten year review of The Denton Plan/Mobility Plan. Fred Greene, Assistant City Manager, presented an update on the Denton Plan. He stated that the Mobility Plan, the Denton Development Code, and the Criteria Manual came out of the Denton Comprehensive Plan. It involved both the engineering side and planning side for the Development Review Committee. The Comprehensive Plan was over 10 years old and if any changes were made to it, there would be changes in all of the above mentioned plans. It would change the way the City did business. The Denton Plan was adopted in 1999 and had multiple elements that included land use, infrastructure, urban design, parks and open space, historic preservation, environmental management, community development and an implementation section. The land use element guided land-use decision making by public officials, residents, and existing and potential property owners. The Denton Plan had not been reviewed or updated in excess of 10 years. It was estimated that the cost to update the Denton Plan would be $600,000-$800,000 and would take up to 12 months to complete. The Denton Mobility Plan defined street type, width and right-of-way requirements for all streets in Denton. It was applied along with the Criteria Manual, to all development and used to define street exactions and right-of-way for applicable development. The Mobility Plan should reflect the land use, urban design and infrastructure recommendations defined in the Denton Plan. Both plans should work together to reflect the direction the city chooses to undertake for future development. It was recommended that the Mobility Plan also be updated along with the Denton Plan to more completely provide a solid direction for the city. It was recommended that a Request for Proposal for the new Denton Plan be published within the next two months in order to allow for review and recommendations to the Council for award before the end of the third quarter 2010-2011. The new Denton Plan should be undertaken before the Mobility Plan was updated. This allowed for the recommendations from the new Denton Plan to provide input for a new Mobility Plan. The Mobility Plan study should City of Denton City Council Minutes February 8, 2011 Page 4 commence when the Denton Plan was at least 3/4 completed. At this time, the cost of the Mobility Plan update was estimated to be $150,000. Council discussed the scope of the Requests for Proposal. Greene stated that a new Denton Plan would have changes to all of the other components such as the Mobility Plan and the Criteria Manual. Langley indicated that last year part of the cost was included in the non-airport gas well funds but was pulled out in terms of the budget. The funding was still there and could be used with a budget amendment. It would be his suggestion to use the funds from the non-airport gas well funds. City Manager Campbell stated that staff needed direction on whether or not to start the process. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the RFP process and return with an action item for consideration. Item 43 was considered. 3. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding City sponsorship of special events. Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager, stated that the City had no policy or guidelines addressing requests for co-sponsorship of special events. Requests for support had included the use of city facilities and equipment at no charge or at a reduced rate, assistance from City staff such as Police, Fire and Parks for setting up or working during an event without charge to the organizer. In November staff had discussed with Council co-sponsorship of special events with the general consensus of Council to formulate a policy or guidelines to determine the City's co-sponsorship of special events and at what level. Based on those conversations, staff was recommending an established application period each year when event organizers could request support. It was recommended that the application period coincide with the Hotel Occupancy Tax Recipient application process to be considered and reviewed by the Hotel Occupancy Tax Committee. The application would be evaluated by staff to determine the costs of co-sponsorship and if resources were available. With that information the Committee would review the applications and present their recommendation to Council for approval in advance of the event. Organizations seeking first-time support outside of the annual process would complete an application to be reviewed by staff and be considered by Council on a case by case basis. Subsequent applications must be made during the normal annual process. Key considerations for the guidelines, process and application materials included (1) determine that co-sponsorship was based on available resources, (2) define eligibility of the organizations, (3) determine that co-sponsorship would be made prior to the event, (4) determine the level of co-sponsorship, (5) include Parks and Recreation Director flexibility, (6) determine whether to City of Denton City Council Minutes February 8, 2011 Page 5 allow service to the City in return for co-sponsorship, (7) enforce applicable city ordinances, (8) determine how to deal with the eligibility of organizations with outstanding balances and (9) determine the number of consecutive events the City would co-sponsor. Council discussed consideration of what the event was doing for the city of Denton and for-profit events versus non-profit organizations. Council Member Gregory and Mayor Pro Tem Kamp left the meeting. Mayor Burroughs asked about the waiving of fees. Fortune stated that in return for the exclusive rental of a facility, an organization would provide the City some level of service in return. Mayor Burroughs questioned co-sponsorship as a means to help new events get established. He was not in favor of denying an old event sponsorship in favor of sponsoring a new event as the new event might not work out. He suggested considering a sustaining a co-sponsorship at a lower level than the original funding. Fortune stated that there could be several levels of seed money for ongoing events as opposed to new organizations. Mayor Burroughs stated that the sustaining level could be tied into the amount given back into the community. Council Member Watts questioned how the financial impact on the community would be verified. A determination needed to be made on how to allocate the resources based on the impact. In-kind contributions should also be included in the process. Council Member Engelbrecht stated that co-sponsorship implied participating in the cost of the event. A consideration might be made to changing the term to sponsorship. Fortune stated that these were not city events but rather outside events that were asking for city funds to help with the cost of the event. He questioned the eligibility of organizations with outstanding balances and how the Council would like to proceed with issue. It was the staff s recommendation that an event would not be eligible until any outstanding balance was taken care of. Consensus of the Council was to have everything spelled out cost wise and the event would not get more funding if a prior bill was not paid. Fortune stated that co-sponsorship did not deal with health inspections and vendor fees and those would not be waived. Council Member King suggested considering adding outstanding balances to the next year funding as some organizations might not have funds until next event occurred. Item 42 was considered City of Denton City Council Minutes February 8, 2011 Page 6 2. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding various development improvement activities. Fred Greene, Assistant City Manager, provided an update on the Development Process Improvements. Those improvements included (1) a Builder and Developer's luncheon, (2) formation of a Developers Committee, (3) creation of the Development Review Committee Administrator and reorganization of the DRC process, (4) the relocation of Development Review Committee meetings, (5) taking minutes at DRC meetings, (6) requiring the applicant to be in attendance at the DRC meetings, (7) pre-application meetings, (8) revised submission deadlines, (9) a reduction in a project intake processing time, (10) a published timeline for DRC projects, (11) staffing internal DRC engineering reviewers, (12) proportionality assessment procedures established, (13) adoption of performance measures, (14) the purchase and implementation of ProjectDox plan Review software, (15) Laserfiche Project implementation, (16) development of a process flow chart, (17) neighborhood planning, (18) revising the Park Exaction Formula Application, and (10) Denton Development Code amendments. The development process improvements also resulted in the adoption of the Planning Department's first strategic plan which provided clear direction and focus; established the mission, a shared vision, defined critical issues, set goals and prioritized strategies for achieving the goals; and provided performance measures to determine the department's success. 5. Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the City Council or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting AND Under Section 551.0415 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, provide reports about items of community interest regarding which no action will be taken, to include: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; or an announcement involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda. There were no items suggested by Council. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. MARK A. BURROUGHS JENNIFER WALTERS MAYOR CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Denton Municipal Electric ACM: Howard Martin, Utilities 349-8232 hV- SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance finding that a public purpose and necessity exists and finding that public welfare and convenience requires the acquisition through agreement or eminent domain of an approximate 1.989 acre utility easement, and a 3306 acre temporary constriction easement for the relocation and installation of municipal utilities relating to Denton Municipal Electric projects located generally north and west of the Denton Municipal Airport and situated in the F.P. Johnson, C.R. Green, J.F. Myers, and H.F. Brummett Surveys, Abstract Number 1699, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board will consider this item on February 28, 2011 BACKGROUND Denton Municipal Electric has a utility project that necessitates easement acquisitions along Jim Christal road north of the Denton Municipal Airport. A professional appraisal of the subject easement tracts is underway. Staff will prepare a formal offer to purchase the property for the appraised value, and enter into negotiations with the property owner for the acquisition. If that offer is not accepted, or settlement negotiations reach an impasse, then the City will pursue acquisition of the easements via eminent domain. OPTIONS 1. Recommend approval of the Ordinance. 2. Not recommend approval of the Ordinance. 3. Table for future consideration. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) City Council Closed Session Briefing on the utility project September 14, 2010 City Council Closed Session Briefing on the utility project January 1, 2011 Public Utility Board Meeting February 28, 2011 FISCAL INFORMATION Offer to purchase the easements to be determined by the commissioned appraisal. BID INFORMATION N/A EXHIBITS 1. Ordinance 2. Location map Respectfully submitted, Phil Williams General Manager Denton Municipal Electric Prepared by, Pamela G. England Real Estate Specialist sAlegah ur documem\ordu►ances\1 Aporta draft ordmance.doc ORDINANCE NO. 2011- AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND NECESSITY EXISTS AND FINDING THAT PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE REQUIRES THE ACQUISITION THROUGH AGREEMENT OR EMINENT DOMAIN OF AN APPROXIMATE 1.989 ACRE UTILITY EASEMENT, AND A 3.306 ACRE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FOR THE RELOCATION AND INSTALLATION OF MUNICIPAL UTILITIES RELATING TO DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC PROJECTS LOCATED GENERALLY NORTH AND WEST OF THE DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND SITUATED IN THE F.P. JOHNSON, C.R. GREEN, J.F. MYERS, AND H.F. BRUMMETT SURVEYS, ABSTRACT NUMBER 1699, CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, after due consideration of the public interest and the use and benefit to accrue to the City of Denton, Texas; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION L The Council finds that a public purpose and necessity exists, and that the public welfare and convenience require, and the City of Denton, Texas. does hereby exercise its home-rule and statutory authority to acquire by agreement or through eminent domain, approximate 30-foot wide permanent and perpetual utility easement; and approximate 50-foot wide temporary construction easement, in, on, along, over, under, and across the subject tracts described in Exhibit "A' attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (hereafter the. "Easements" The City Council hereby finds and determines that the acquisition' of the Easements through agreement or eminent domain is for a public purpose to provide utilities, to serve the public and the citizens of the City of Denton, Texas. SECTION 2. The City Attorney, or her designee, shall have the authority to do all things necessary and appropriate to acquire the Easements through agreement or eminent domain. The City Council delegates to the City Attorney, or her designee, the details of accomplishing this objective including, but not limited to, obtaining final surveys, title insurance, engineering matters, title search, formulating and presenting offers, proper documentation, and filing and prosecuting eminent domain proceedings. SECTION 3. If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, phrase, clause or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any persons or circumstances, is held invalid . or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; the City Council declares that it would have ordained such remaining portion despite such invalidity, and such remaining portion shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTESTED: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY By: wqing. Co.: I. . ~ ~ rid • PA Bo:i-54 M LMsviilc, Tcias 75067 OM06: (972) 221-94 9 Fax; (972}`221-4¢75 EXHIDIT A ,EASEhEMT"& RIWr-OF: WAY CITY-OF W TON DEENTi O COUNTY BMNG-aff didt certain lot, tract or.parcel of Land sitttaftd is tfie'F P oltxtsob, C Green, ,Y: F Myers;- and Hs; F. Bru nmett 4UMV, Abstract No. 1699, located in the City of Denton, Benton Count!, Texas, and being pot of a called 691.64 acre had of landdescribod in deed. to Eagle Farms„ 1w., and John Porter: Arno .sates, Iris., recorded in County Clerk ° l3ooument Na. 93-. R0077959, Real Property Records of Dentm County, Texas, and tie' more descxiliaf as follows: m8 particularly COMMENCING at a %'incb ken rod found: at_the- northeast comer of that wtm.t tit of land described in deed to the City of DantM recorded in Volume `1 i:SS Paip 999 of the Deed Redot ds -&Deu~= C ty, Tom; :1'SEN South 19 degrees 2 minutes 36 seconds Brest, with the M& line of said Denton tract, a distance of 33.91 feet to `a po6 for earner; :THENCE wiM, through and across said orte .tract the following seven (7) ls: North $9 degrees45 dInutes 19. OF, - BxIl1tNlNG;o a distance of 294'6 1feet to this POI North degrees' 45 nibutes 19 seconds East, a distance of 658.60 feet to':a.paint for ;corner;, South 15 degrees :10 minutes 37 seconds East, s-distance of 250.53: feet to :a point. for ;corner;.: 'South? . ; . degrees ; 3 minutes 29 seconds Fast, a.dish of 150 69 feet to:a..patnt for ;comet; ; FI. South 87 degrees 53 minutes Of? seconds East, a distance. of 3005.53 feet to;a poitct:for ;corner; South 86- dew 27 n inutea 37 seconds East, a distance of:367.73 feet to .pow fttr corner,- South 87 degrees 23 minutes 13 seconds last; a_distance of 01.67 feet #a a point in the west line of that certain tract of land descrt'bed in deed to the city of Denton, recorded under I0strtment Number 2010A442 of the Real Property Records of Denton Texas; County, ; 12~it1°°d1280869 -lion ask dnI~ dOCBU 08127 a Porterdoo a 4. W. y Co Tthur s urveymg Inc. JPnvf+ ssio rl l~axid Sb rveyozs. P.O. Box 54 - Lewisville, Texas 75057 Offop: (972),,221-9439 Pam- ('972) 221-4675 '#'TCIE: 36uth 08. degrees 12 miAUtes 59 seconds East; wish the. West; line of said City of Deyitoa'trac; a di§taace of 30:54 i tapo o i6tforcoin ; , THENCE over, through and across said Porter tract thee following seven (7) cads North 97 degre6s 23 minutes 13 seconds West, deparfmg the west line ofi' said 4.4 Dam tract, a distance of 457:63 feet to a poiaat foAr.cer; North; 96'degraes 27:minutes 37 suds West,.a distance of 367A fleet to it point f®r corner, North; 87 depim 53 minutes 00 secpnEds West, a distance of 1019.44 fed to a point. for comer, North 37' degrees 53 itinvt= 29 seconds West, `a distance . of 154 55 feet ta+ a point: for calmer, North-75 degcew 10 39 seeds Woo% a distance of 236.44 feat tci a peittt for corner, South ;89" d ,45 inninutesl0secxo►ds West; a distance of bS4.71. feet Born f a pouxtAbIr North 00 degrees}O5 nihmAbs 25,a=u&: West;-a•&t&6ce of`30:00 f6t-t ihe:P0 4}F U>GDINIhiG and containing 1.989 set' of mod, more. or less..O vF w ' MU t.lr iii M{LO amp dmdd dma 00912' . amt pot6~doC . y: .tom,,, 1 r 'y,r 2004- MMM~ 0 200 Feet CAtUED ~.ertng sye em tin.ee `on me qty of tknton OIS aetw►k 1.33 "AC12 ES X89.23'58" W.. THE: C OFZg~Z.85' t1NE TABf:E i . DENTOnr; TEW l VO 1185 . PG, 999 R.P.iD.C.T. is st 'w - 43 a 2l8F ~a$d t") . Tsxae 1lufiiri .t,t~a, Qy. t is; Imp A0 10, M~ cis I ..1 v a l7 tp ;ut . , # t7 A Called 7.938 Acre WRY.- 14 _ I City or.; Krum tD D fMt..No 2003-8063238 9 ( x g cJt~ l ~ G• 5.~ ~ Q 4 N 1.889 ACRE IL ! EASEIWENT ~t75"!0'37"W IGHT OF-4*,Y 236:44' :carted 1.956 Acre df 20° lrtility 1 f Easement ^ G'ty of :Kam (Alf. 'E Doe. No. 2003-80032369 ~~~i Q• Easement cYr f clgrl wvf WaY N37'S~'29"W ~ ..e 1.089 Arras in the' 154-55' F. P..Tobnstln,. -C.: R. Greece, J F. myera do MM*1A&tt ' S~irvep, Abst. No: 1699 0~ ® SUR F City Qf Denton i. Denton County, Tezas •r~'L - 2010 - ! - f C1Y;~ r" I CALLED 24.265 AC t6 ~1r: x.1 I I J VML C. LYSSERT AND WIFt Y -inc g Inc t w!Nwmff J. LYBBERT .Pr0f+e~0[WA.Rud',Sutveyers DOC. NO. 94-R60ib 33.' I txzai-asrs R P:R.D:C.T: 2x4 Ari~ &Mk&IW ra s;z,s4 ` r46= 75067 / MATCHLlNE vain 200 0 -200 feet El ogho 4stim bawd an urs City of Omtm p$ netrajir 4044, -01 co CAUED ' 2.95 ACRES G Q~` O JHR CON57RiiCTION CO.. INC.' C.C. DOCK NO. 99-801 f 0735 > - .R.O.C.T. G. PA MUAM 4V n." 4• sERN R.ce w X40. PG. 364 a ' , ! P.R.D.C.T. ' 3.014 ACRES CA= YM 1323. KIM I I R.P:R:O.C.T. J ! - Lq ~ - Oj t + G1dJE BEARNJG . v 1 969' ACRL tt y o EASEMENT d.2 . f - Li )GHF- OF-WA TernPorarY.(.OmtrM4 6kii LOW Acres in. the .!E P. P. Johnson, V. R. Green, F: ':Myer r"1 ! & H. F. BrUMMett Survey, Abst. No..1699 ! City of Benton ea►rad 1.9W acre Denton County, Texts. ..:20' Utility Eosimtnt V City, of Krum j -2+110 - Dot. No. Y003-80032369 , N ~ f rth1l►r r 1 $Urveymg.Co.i.inc,. { 1 1 972-227-9°839 Pka 97z223rG7~ : City of Denton. (j 2W Mm s&"W. SWI&2QD P.O Box 54 Inst.. No. 2010--9442 Z--As-tK T=m 7-V67 ~is "~k° r if c. tthui S u vey g IDIOM o r lac surveyors P.O. Box 54 - Lewisville, Texas 75067: . office.:. (972) 221.9439 -r Fax: '(972) 2214675 - . , . ~ ~ ERHIBIT A 50''1MWORABY CONSTRUCTIO T:EASL1l ENT 3.306 ACRES CITY OF DENTON, ]DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS BEING AU'dW certain lot, had or parcel of land sitintad in the. F. P. Johnson, C. R Green, 7 F Myers, and H. >i. Brummett Survey,: Abswact No. 1,699, located in the City of Denton, :Menton Texas, and being pmt of a called 591.64 acre: tract of laid descrnbed in iced to Ie County Farms Inc., laid John $orb Auto. galas, 1Icrecondod in. County Clem Dom :93 Y, 'Tee, anc ° being rno rtteWarly R0077959, Real Party Records' of ' DeatoW &scrgxd:as follows: COMI iCIiN at a'h i iron rod found at the-northeast corner of that certaa~r tract o€'uw described in deed to the City of Denton; recorded. in Yom 1185, Page 999 of the Deed Rec+jrcls ; of Demon Comity, Texas; THENCE South 19 dew 27 minutes 36 seconds West; whiz a east lizie 'dlDenton ti~at~t, a distance of 3.91 feet to a point forcer, THENCE over, through and-across said Porter tract the foll owing eight. (8) calls,:. North 89 degrees 45 minutes 19 seeonds last, a distance of 294.61 feet to the POINT OF *GINNING; 00 finet.Iri apoint Nartft Wdegrees 05 minutes 25 seconds West, a.dist ce of 56, North 89 degrees 45 minutes 19 seconds last, a distance : of 665.48 feet to' a: point for corner; South 75 degrees 10 minutes 37 seconds East, a distance: of 274AI feet 'to: a pouat for corner. South 37 degrees 53 minutes 29 seconds East; a distance, of 14425 feet to a point for corner; Sough 87 degrees 53 minutes 00 seconds Fast, a distance of 983.14 feet. a point for corn, . South 86 degrees 27 minutes 37 sbcQnds East, a distance, of 367.94 feet to .a point for corner a:120WooM0W -Jim dklad dme;cwmw6 acs OOR27 00pmWUmip doe rthur ing :Co. In', Surve P.O. Box 54 - LewisvUle,'Texas 75067 Office: (972) 221.9439 Fm (972) 221-4675 :the ift ' South;87 degrees 23 3m*utes:13 scconds Eat, a distance of 441.70 feet to a point ' west line. of that certain bad, of land described in -deed to the City of I . ontax►, IVWT!,d under lnst<ument Number 2010-9442 of the Real Property Rids of Denton.: COW% Texas; TSE34CE South 08 degrees' 12 minutes 59 seconds East, with ttm west dine of said City of Denton tact, a distance of 50.91 feet to a point for corner; TMNCE over, th rough'and across said Porter Uact *e following six (6) cans. North 87 degrees 23 : mimitm 13 secan~ds West ,or the west line of said City of Demon tract; a ice of:451:b7 fed to a point for corner. - . North 86 degrees 27: minutes 37 seconds West, a' distance of. 367.73 feat ti). a pout far corner; ' North 87 degrees 53 minutes 00 seconds West, a- distance -of 1005:83. feet to a point fbr - comer;; ..North 37 degrees 53. minutes 29 seconds West; a diMng6bf.150.69,feet to 0,0* for corner; North 75 degrees 10 minute's 37 seconds Vilest, a distance of 250.53 feet to u point for com r; South 89 degrees 45 minutm 19.-9econds West; it dis6n= of'658.60 feet to .the f'Opff, OF $MUeJING, and mining 3306 acres of land, morn or less TH ivl:IJIRLEY Ill v. 0200$Icoda$9859 -pm dui~rd dme co memAdoollOO$127_eamt potter tep.doc . 1 z7(RW 200 0 200_ Feet ` CALLED 1.33 ACRES S$9"23 58 W • sy.t ro based be to atj of oenun 0S nato.d& THE ° COY OF MOM TE' AS `1NE L ! 1$5 U E TABLE 0-0 LINE = R Pf .C:T. L1 L3 MM U-91, _gA t3 ?ezee Mi+nFwl Poq~ n~ 1 1IRF VOL t:l a,% p9 'tiles OD: CAA.: I I weed 1:455` Aerb> . KsVrn y+t \ 20' [Itllito .r.{rm City of.- K -R0032369 A3 x ;p R ~ ~ M1 .14 Doc. No 20 :3 6 l~i t CU l TriPar'et'y n trt;~ty CWW:. 1.956, ACM City of. . Easerr,ent _ ; Caciox Krum O=. No. 2003-RU032369 E+gmettt N75-10'3'7"1N f . 250.53' N37'53'29"W 0' '~'errip nary Construction : 150.89' IJ S75"J0'37"E ti N.MRn M • /iR ! 27401.' WT ~f44RLuYil1 HAD MM,/gM. i q M Easement ' . :9.306 Acres in 'the l i r F: P. Joh4son. C..R. Green-, L F.: Myers ' & H. F. BrOmmett Survey. Abet. No. 1699 1 $37"53'29"E , City of Denton Dentoa4 County. Texas I I 144: 5 2014 r j ! ! ! C,4LLD 24 285 ACRD C6 VERL C. LVBBERT.-AND ~w'tF` , hr Surveying Irc, I : MARGARET . LY Eff DOC. NO.... s4-ROQBQ,t 3. . 1 C.C. Prnfessfurlsl T.and Seuveyors R.P.R.D.C.T. 97~2219d39 ~-I+8tr97~2l1-4675 _ 2Z0M=:5 200 ^ P.R Bar 54 I :x.psv O6Team7sosy t AAATCHLlNE -AMC= =1 fim~mlw .200 0 200 Feet ; 71: soaring .yst«n ba.w.' on th. aty of oetm ds eetwolii Iltt MATCHUN V f Vi t : G '~Qt~e~ CALLED 2.95 ACRES Q f W ; JHR CONSTRWCTION CO., INC. ( . O ( O : C.C. DOC. NO. 99-RO1':9O735 Gr' ( d &P.R.D.C.T. o ((ppipp WILLU~I PATTERSON f~ IV cs AND WIFE' BERNIECE PATTER5ON: r► z. v x W . VIAL 74D, :PQ 364 . a ' :f R.P.R.O.C.T. ~m \t o cn CALLED 3.0'14 ACRES ~ h p LARRY MANNM VOL: 4329.: PG. 230 c3 rgq~ CI R.P.R.D.C.T. i 4~ Fa - ~1 i:T~1/'{ )4 y,~'~'T,'LE Y W. f LINES TMILE.. O,H -BEARINGVLF 41 w f lo+ 3.30[ Acres 7 Tam 13 P: ar~ v Iio w ' Coanstructfon $asem~t ! 50' Temporary Cbnstruet do v f . N Ease~rnent f J~'• 3.306 Acres is the w (~Iw F. P, Johnson, C. R. Green, J. F.. pers g f .m & FL F. B nlmrnett Survey. Abat'. No: 1 f City cif Denton Denton County,: Texas Cgited 1.956 A" 2Q'' %!I Easement ~ f - 260 City. of Krum O= ;No. 2003-It00323tD9 t] rthur Surveyli lg co'.., In Pits Onal Laud SMrlx'VaC1 . ! f 97Z=.Z-0439 - Faz 972-=1- b"75 City: of Daitton t 22oBrm Sm~ swim 2W - poaox 54 I LewisvMe,: Tears 7MO7 ;Inst: No. 2090--9442 NORTH Denton Airport NTS SITE MAP This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Water Department ACM: Howard Martin, Utilities 349-8232 hV- SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance finding that a public purpose and necessity exists and finding that public welfare and convenience requires the acquisition through agreement or eminent domain of an approximate 0.041 acre utility easement for utilities at the north east corner of Loop 288 and Stuart Road, the location of which being S. McCracken Survey, Abstract Number 871, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. The Public Utilities Board will consider this item on February 28, 2011. BACKGROUND In 2002, the City of Denton constricted a water transmission line along the north side frontage of State Highway Loop 288. The limits of that water transmission line installation being a connection at Sherman Drive (54-inch Lake Ray Roberts line), traversing northeasterly and westerly along the Loop 288 frontage, approximately 12,000 lineal feet, terminating at the Nicosia Street projection. At that time, "stub-tee" flange connection points were included in the water transmission line constriction. These flanges were placed at strategic locations to provide for water distribution line connections, as necessitated by the onset of future development endeavors or as water system service level needs warrant. Presently, staff has determined that it is necessary to provide for the connection of an existing distribution water line, situated within Stuart Road, to the existing 42-inch transmission water line stub-tee, situated at the northeast corner of Loop 288 and Stuart Road. The confines of the existing water transmission line easement being too narrow to accommodate the proposed distribution line connection. A professional appraisal of the subject easement tract has been completed. Staff will prepare a formal offer to purchase the easement property for the appraised value. Staff is poised to enter into negotiations with the property owner for the acquisition of the easement property. If that offer is not accepted, or settlement negotiations reach an impasse, then the City will pursue acquisition of the easement property via eminent domain proceedings. OPTIONS 1. Recommend approval of the Ordinance. 2. Not recommend approval of the Ordinance. 3. Table for future consideration. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) Public Utility Board February 28, 2011 FISCAL INFORMATION The appraisal indicates a value of $4,657.00 for the easement. BID INFORMATION N/A EXHIBITS 1. Ordinance 2. Location map Respectfully submitted, Jimmy D. Coulter Director, Water Utilities Prepared by, Pamela G. England Real Estate Specialist i s:Ue0\our doo=entslordinancesll nwolsk 4hw t dm ft ordhmce.doc ORDINANCE NO.2011- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS FINDING THAT A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND NECESSITY EXISTS AND FINDING THAT PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE REQUIRES THE ACQUISITION THROUGH AGREEMENT OR EMINENT DOMAIN OF AN APPROXIMATE 0.041 ACRE UTILITY EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES AT THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF LOOP 288 AND STUART ROAD, THE LOCATION OF WHICH BEING IN THE S. MCCRACKEN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 871, CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, after due consideration of the public interest and the use and benefit to accrue to the City of Denton, Texas; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The Council finds that a public purpose and necessity exists, and that the public welfare and convenience require, and the City of Denton, Texas does hereby exercise its home-rule and statutory authority to acquire by agreement or through eminent domain, approximate 15-foot wide permanent and perpetual utility easement in, on, over, under, and across the subject tract described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (hereafter the "Easements'). The projects are referred to as the "Beaver Creek Phase I Water Line Project". The City Council hereby finds and determines that the acquisition of the Easement through agreement or eminent domain is for a public purpose to provide public utilities, to serve the public and the citizens of the City of Denton, Texas. SECTION 2. The City Attorney, or her designee, shall have the authority to do all things necessary and appropriate to acquire the Easements through agreement or eminent domain. The City Council delegates to the City Attorney, or her designee, the details of accomplishing this objective including, but not limited to, obtaining final surveys, title insurance, engineering matters, title search, formulating and presenting offers, proper documentation, and filing and prosecuting eminent domain proceedings. SECTION 3. If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, phrase, clause or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any persons or circumstances, is held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; the City Council declares that it would have ordained such remaining portion despite such invalidity, and such remaining portion shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTESTED: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY r By: F -44 n Co., Inc. rt ur surveyi • Pxotessiox~a,I .~a.~d Suz~reyaxs P.O. Sox 54 -y Lewisville; Texas 75067. r Office: (972) 221-944 Fa.Y (972) 221-m675.: EXHIBIT "A" 15 Foot Public Utility Easement 0.041 Acre City of Denton, Denton County, Texas BEING'all that certain lot, tract or parcel of land situated in the S. McCracken Survey, Abstract No. 817, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, and being a part of that certain tract of land described by deed to. Edward F. Wols4 recorded under Instrument Number 2005-66783, Official Public Records of Denton i follows- County, Texas.- aad being more particularlydescribed as follows: BEGINNING at 'a point for coiner in the west line of said Wolsks tract, same point being the northwest corner of a 25 foot Public Utility Easement recorded under Iiissttument Number 2402-107450, Official Public Records, Denton.County, Texas, same point being in Stuart Road; THENCE North 01 degrees 05 minutes 23 seconds East, with the west line of said Wolski tract, for a distance of 21.09 feet to a point for corner; THENCE South 44 degrees 15 minutes 14 seconds East, over, across and through said Wolski tract for a distance of 132.89 feet to a point for corner on a north line of said 25 foot Public Utility Easement; THENCE North 89 degrees 29 minutes 33 seconds West, with the north line of said 25 foot Public Utility Easement, for a distance of 21.13 feet.to a point for comer; THENCE North 44 degrees 15 minutes 14 seconds West, with the northerly line of said 25 foot Public Utility Easement, for a distance of 103.19 feet to the POINT of BEGINNING and containing 0.041 acre of land, more or less. L. ART) - En. Zvi w . f • i I aW 20 0 10 20 40 of Saris of BeAlin$ !&based oe the N ♦ do Omen= as nmtwts& 0 Edward F. Wolski a. jam. Lstr. No. 2t}05-68783 1 ♦ s. 4 j ♦ ♦ J 4 6: t Lb ~ AJ 1. ~ r ' tcS' r 1% ♦♦v.3a' +:ta~.'sTalr n M .wp, cN. rK~ 7 y~4. EEEEE 1~ r~~~~ _ / _ Found Jp~ ` ♦w~f.~^f ~ 58979'03"t \ `9•'~♦ ~Srj U 12.91' sn~♦ ♦ 01 a 89'29'33"W- 21.13' 1♦ cry S8912 33"F 9 879.61" Concrete Broken Monument, Concrete ; Monument. LOOP 288 (c.M.) 15' Public Utility Easement S. McCracken Survey, rthur Surveying Co., Inc. Abstract No. 817 mesas rom City of Denton, P.O.Bos 54 - Lewiaoiile, Texas 75067 Deacon County, Texas office: (972) 221-9439 Fax: (972) 221-4675 Eatatiiahed 1994 - 2010 - Proposed 15' Public Utility Easement y Ex. 25" Public Utility Easement Q - Cr) LOOP 288 ® Scale: 1"=40' 15' Proposed Public Utility Easement SITE MAP ® By: Mark A. Laird Date: 07/06/10 Edward Wolski Tract NEC Loop 288 & Stuart Rd. NORTH y N City of Denton, Denton County, Texas This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office CM/ACM: George C. Campbell, City Manager SUBJECT: Consider adoption of an ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 2009-174 and Ordinance No. 2010- 312 and amending Section 2-29 of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances relating to Rules of Procedure for the City Council of the City of Denton; and declaring an effective date. BACKGROUND: The City Council expressed a desire to streamline the City Council meetings while facilitating citizen's access to make comments to their local governing body. Staff prepared revisions to the City Council's Rules of Procedure to reflect the intent of the Council to conduct the meetings of the Denton City Council in the most efficient and time effective manner possible. These riles revisions were implemented as a pilot test project only to allow the Council to work with the interim riles to insure their purpose and intent proved effective in practice at the Council meetings. These interim riles have been in effect since October 2010. Staff has received numerous comments from citizens that the new riles are more logical and create additional time efficiencies. Should the Council desire to change the Rules of Procedure to reflect the changes used during the test period, the attached ordinance will do so. Should the Council not desire to make the changes and return to the previous Rules of Procedure, the pilot test expires on March 31, 2011 with no further action required on the part of the Council. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance to amend the Rules of Procedures for the City Council. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW: City Council suspended certain portions of Section 2-29 of the City Code relating to Rules of Procedure and substituted interim riles in October 2010. The Council continued the pilot project for an additional test period in December 2010. The interim test will terminate on March 31, 2011. Respectfully submitted, George C. Campbell City Manager C Dcnmenh an Settur,TERICILAR Local Settnvn Temlxuan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED3N CC Rules of I ocechue,. doh,- - - _ _ _ Deleted: S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rtiles of Procedtues.doe ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2009-174 AND ORDINANCE NO. 2010- 12 AND AMENDING SECTION 2-29 OF THE CITY OF DENTON CODE OF ORDINANCES JRELATING TO RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL O_F_ T_HE_ C_ITY_ 0F_ , _ - Deleted: SuSPENDnvG cERT.-kIN PORTIONS DENTO AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. of SECTION-29 of THE CITY cODE Deleted: TEXAS UNTIL APRIL 1. -1011 AND SUBSTITUTIN(; ALTERNATIVE PROVISIONS WHEREAS, the Cih- Council of the Cih- of Denton desires to conduct the Cih- Council THROUGH MARCH 31, 2011 FOR THE meetings of the Cih- of Denton in the most efficient and tune effective manner', and PURPOSE OF TESTIN(; INTERIM RULES OF PROCEDURE HEREIN ESTABLISHED WHEREAS, the Cih- Council also desires to allow open dialogue by citizens of the colminunity regarding the business of cite governinent, and WHEREAS, recent meetings of the City Council have run into the late evening hours and even the early morning hours, thereby inconveniencing citizens waiting to make comments to the Citt• Council and fatiguing the Council, staff and citizens, and WHEREAS the Cite- Council has conducted_a plot )r(i test foI several months of some Deleted: desires to test alternative processes and procedures to streamline the City Council meetings, lilnit their duration, and facilitate citizen's access to make colminents to their local governing bode; and WHEREAS the City Council is of the opinion that such alternative processes and procedures have effected the desired goals and the Cih Council is desirous of codifying these changes in the Rules of Procedure, OW, THEREFORE, Deleted: de ices to suspend certaai pi ovisions of its Rides of Procedtue m order to test the alternatrve processes uid procedtues; THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That,Section 2-29 of the City Code, luiown as the Denton City Council Rules , - Deleted: certari portion, of Of Procedure 1s hereby' amended to read as, folD~ys' _ , - Deleted: are hereby suspended mitil April 1, 2011 and alternative procedtues are substituted to test them efficiencytluoughMarch3l, -~Oll, as follows. 1. (2-29(a)) AUTHORITY 1.1(1) Charter: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.07 of the Charter of the Cih- of Denton, Texas, the City Council hereby enacts these rules of procedure for all meetings of the Cih- Council of the Cih- of Denton, Texas. During any meeting, a reasonable opportunity' shall be given for citizens to be heard under these rules. These Rules of Procedure are enacted as guidelines to be followed by all persons in the Council Chamber including the city administrative staff, news media, and visitors. 2.(2-29(b)) GENERAL RULES 2.1 (1) Meetings to be Public: All official meetings of the Council and Council committees and subcortunittees, except closed meetings permitted by the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter >j 1, TEX. GOVT. CODE ANN. (Vennons Annotated Texas Civil Statutes (Velnons 2009), as amended, shall be open to the public. C Dcnmenh and Settur'TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temrauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe 2.2 (2) Quoin : Four members of the Council shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. (Charter, Section 2.06) 23 (3) Compelling Attendance: No member shall be excused from attendance at a Council meeting except for good and valid reasons. It will be the duty of the Council member to notify the Cite- Secretar'v prior to the meeting at which he or she is going to be absent. The Cite- Secretary will record each Council member as being present or absent as a part of the minutes prepared for each Council meeting. 2.4 (4) Misconduct The Council may punish its own members for iisconduct consistent with any Ethics Policy adopted by the Council. 2.5 (5) Minutes of Meetings: An account of all proceedings of the Council shall be kept by the Cih- Secretary and shall be entered in a book constituting the official record of the Council. A certified agenda shall be prepared and shall be approved by the Mayor for all closed meetings for which a certified agenda is required to be kept in accordance with Chapter 551, TEX. GOVT. CODE ANN. (Vernons 2009), as amended. 2.6 (6) Questions to Contain One Subject All questions submitted for a vote shall contain one subject, except the Cite- Council may approve all items which are on the consent agenda in one motion, regardless of how many subjects are contained in the consent agenda, so long as all items have been properly posted in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act and have not been removed from the consent agenda by a Council member. If two or more points are involved, any member may require a division, if the question reasonably admits of a division. 2.7 (7) Right of Floor: Any member desiring to speak shall be recognized by the Chairperson, and shall confine his or her remarks to the subject under consideration or to be considered. No member shall be allowed to speak more than once on any one subject until every member wishing to speak shall have spoken. 2.8 (8) City Manager: The Citt• Manager, or Acting City Manager, shall attend all meetings of the Council unless excused. He or she may make recommendations to the Council and shall have the right to take part in all discussions of the Council, but shall have no vote. (Charter, Section 5.03 (d)). 2.9 (9) Citv Attorney: The Citv Attorney, or Acting Cih- Attorney, shall be available upon request for all meetings of the Council unless excused and shall, upon request, give an opinion, either written or oral, on questions of law. The City Attorney shall act as the Council's parliamentarian. 2.10 (10) Citt• Secretarv: The Citt• Secretary, or Acting City Secretary, shall attend all meetings of the Council unless excused, and shall keep the official minutes and perform such other duties as may be requested by the Council. 2.11 (11) Officers and Employees: Any officer or employee of the City, when requested by PAGE 2 C Docnmenh and Settur,TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temrauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe the Cih- Manager, shall attend any meeting of the Council. If requested to do so by the City Manager, such employee may present information relating to matters before the Council. 2.12 (12) Rules of Order: These rules govern the proceedings of the Council in all cases, except that where these rules are silent, the most recent Edition of Robert's Rules of Order revised shall govern. 2.13 (13) Suspension of Rules: Any provision of these rules not governed by the City Charter or other City Code provisions may be temporarily suspended by the affirmative vote of four members of the Council. The vote on any such suspension shall be taken by yeas or nays and entered into the minutes of the Council. 2.14 (14) Amendment of Rules: These rules may be amended, or new rules adopted by the affirmative vote of four members of the Council, provided that the proposed amendments or new rules shall have been introduced before the Cih- Council at a prior Council meeting. 3. (2-29(c)) CODE OF CONDUCT 3.1 (1) Council members: a. During Council meetings, Council members shall preserve order and decorum and shall neither by conversation or otherwise delay or interrupt the proceedings nor refuse to observe the rules of the Council. b. A Council member, once recognized, shall not be interrupted while spealung unless called to order by the Mayor or presiding officer, unless a point of order is raised by another member or the parliamentarian, or unless the speaker chooses to yield to questions from another member. If a Council member is called to order while he or she is speaking, he or she shall cease spealung i nrnediately until the question of order is determined. If ruled to be in order, he or she shall be permitted to proceed. If ruled not to be in order he or she shall remain silent or shall alter his or her remarks so as to comply Nvith rules of the Council. 3.2 (2) Administrative Staff: a. Members of the Administrative staff and employees of the Cih- shall observe the same rules of procedure and decorum applicable to members of the Council, and shall have no voice unless and until recognized by the Chair. b. While the presiding officer shall have the authority to preserve decorum in meetings as far as staff members and Cite employees are concerned, the City- Manager also shall be responsible for the orderly conduct and decorum of all City employees under his or her direction and control. c. The Cite Manager shall take such disciplinar'v action as may be necessary to insure that such decorum is preserved at all tunes by Citt• employees in Council meetings. d. All remarks and questions addressed to the Council shall be addressed to the Council as a PAGE 3 C Denmenh and Settur'TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temlauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe whole and not to any individual member thereof e. No staff member, other than a staff member haying the floor, shall enter into any discussion either directly or indirectly without permission of the presiding officer. 3.3 (3) Citizens: a. Citizens and other visitors are welcome to attend all public meetings of the City Council, and will be admitted to the Cih- Council Chamber or other room in which the City Council is meeting, up to the fire safety- capacity of the room. b. All meeting attendees shall conduct themselves with propriety- and decorum. Conversations between or among audience members should be conducted outside the meeting room. Attendees will refrain from excessively loud private conversations while the Council is in session. c. Unauthorized remarks from the audience, stamping of the feet, applauding, whistles, yells, and similar demonstrations shall not be permitted. d. Placards, banners, or signs will not be permitted in the City Council Chamber or in any other room in which the City Council is meeting. Exhibits, displays, and visual aids used in connection with presentations to the City Council, however, are permitted. e. Audience members may not place their feet on any chairs in the City Council Chamber or other room in which the City Council is meeting. f. Only City Council members and City staff may step onto the dais. g. All people wishing to address the City Council shall first be recognized by the presiding officer and shall limit their remarks to the matter under discussion. h. All remarks and questions addressed to the City Council shall be addressed to the Cih- Council as a whole and not to any individual members. i. Any person addressing the City Council in the City Council Chamber shall do so from the lectern unless physically unable to do so. People addressing the City Council shall not be permitted to approach the dais. If they wish to hand out papers or other materials to the Cih- Council, they should express that desire to the presiding officer, and the City Manager shall direct a staff member to hand out the materials. J. When the time has expired for a presentation to the City Council, the presiding officer shall direct the person speaking to cease. A second request from the presiding officer to cease speaking shall be cause of the removal of the speaker if that person continues to speak. k. Equipment, apparatus, or paraphernalia such as camera tripods, easels, or wheelchairs shall not obstruct, block, or otherwise be located in the doorway, entranceway, or walkways of PAGE 4 C Dcnmenh and Settur,TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temlauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N CC Rules ofI ocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe the Cih- Council Chambers or of any other room in which the Cih- Council may choose to meet. Representatives of the electronic media may set up cameras and other equipment only in the back of the room. It is permissible for television camera operators to film for short periods of time (several minutes) from the entrancewav to the Cite- Council Chambers using hand-held cameras only. Any radio station, which broadcasts the regular City Council meetings lire may hook their equipment up at the front of the room as long as it remains out of sight and out of the way. 1. There will be a uniformed Cih- of Denton police officer present at all regular meetings of the City Council. This police officer shall act in the capacity of a security officer/sergeant-at- arms, and shall enforce the meeting rules and act upon the direction of the presiding officer. m. Any person making personal, impertinent, profane, or slanderous remarks, or who becomes boisterous while addressing the City Council or who otherwise violates any of the above-mentioned rules while attending a City Council meeting shall be removed from the room at the direction of the presiding officer, and the person shall be barred from further audience before the Citv Council during that session of the City Council. If the presiding officer fails to act, anv member of the Cih- Council may move to require the offending person's removal, and the affirmative vote of a maioritc- of the City Council shall require the presiding officer to act. The sergeant-at-arms, if so directed by the presiding officer or an affirmative vote of the majority of the City Council, shall remove the offending person from the meeting. 3.4 (4) Enforcement: The City Manager, in the absence of a designated law enforcement officer, shall act as Sergeant-at-Arms for the Council, and shall furnish whatever assistance is needed to enforce the rules of decorum herein established. 3.5 (5) Seating Arrangement: The City Secretar , Cih- Manager and Cite Attorney shall occupy the respective seats in the Council Chamber assigned to them by the Mayor, but any two or more members of the Council may exchange seats. 4.(2-29(d)) TYPES OF MEETINGS 4.1 (1) Regular Meetings: The Council shall meet on the first and third Tuesday of each month, at such time as may be set by the Cih- Council, unless the meeting is postponed or cancelled for valid reasons. All regular meetings of the Council will be held in City Hall at 215 East McKinney Street, Denton, Texas or at such other location as the Cih- Council may, by motion, resolution or ordinance from time to time designate. 4.2 (2) Special Meetuigs: Special meetings may be called by the Mayor, the Citt• Manager, or by any three members of the Council. The call for a special meeting shall be filed with the Cih- Secretarv in written form, and he or she shall post notice thereof as provided by the Texas Open Meetings Act, TEX. GOVT. CODE ANN. § 551.001, et seq. (Vemons 2009, as amended). The Mayor, City Manager, or three of the council members may designate a location for the special meeting other than Cih- Hall as long as the location is open to the public. 4.3 (3) Workshop Meetings: Workshop meetings or work sessions may be held on the first PAGE 5 C Denntenh and Settnr'TERICHAR Local Settm, Tenrpouanti Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iyTTED',N CC Rules of I ocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou Loci uentsOnclutantcesI I CC Rtiles of Procedtues.doe and third Tuesday of each month at such time as may be set by the City' Council, or on such other day as the City Council may designate and at such time as may be set by the City Council to discuss near to inid or long range issues and to answer City Council questions concerning all agenda items. Workshops or Work Sessions may be called using the same procedure required for special meetings as provided for in Section 4.2(2) above. The purpose of the workshop meeting is to discuss or explore matters of interest to the City, to meet Nvith Cite' boards, conimissions, or committee members, City staff or officers of civic organizations, governing bodies or individuals specifically invited to the session by the Mayor, Council or Cite' Manager. These meetings are informational and normally no final action shall be taken unless the posted agenda indicates otherwise. Citi_ze_iis , - Deleted: Citizen, or other ntterested person, or other interested perso s atteildnlg the workshop sleeting will be alloyed to make citizen attenduigthe Nvoil session Nillnot be allowed to participate nt the session tuiless ntaited to do so bar conlnlent regarding consent agenda items to be considered in the regular council nleetnlg. This will the flm or. Citizen, sltotild be aclh iced of the nattue be the only opportunity for citizens to speak to consent agenda items llllleSS the item is removed of the Nvork e ,ion wid that them ntput iuap be necen ed and considered at a regtilarh seltedtiled from the consent agenda by a member of the Council to be considered as all individual Itelll durnlg comell nteetntg where the agenda prm ides for fatal . the regular llleetlllg. Speakers will be allowed three lllliluteS per speaker and may eollllllellt (Hl any actiontobetakenonthematter Theptuposeofthis procedtue is to allow the citizen, attending the Or all consent ageilda items so long as any speaker's time does not exceed. a total of three minutes. regiilar nteetntg the opporttunn* of ltearntg the arewi I of tlteir felloNNv citizens in a store formal settutg. Any All speakers must comply with 2-29(f)(4)b. with regard. to completing a -`request to speak' card. citizen itim supph the ('1k Cotutcilawritten prior to the council's consideration of the clarification of the consent ageilda Itelll,. As it concerns statement or report regarding the citizen's opnnon on a matter beint2 ch. caused m t ~iorlc se-..lion. If the all other items hosted. oil the workshop ageilda_. citizens or other interested. persons may not f 1m or ntaites citizen, to participate nt a Nvork participate in the session unless invited to do so by the Mayor. Citizens Should be advised of the session, them participation Nvill cease at the point the f Im or close the session to public input to allow the nature of the work session and that they slay make eollllllellt oil the consent agenda Itelll, as herein Comell to ga e C'1h staff direction as to needed specified. but that their input oil other Itelll, oil the agenda may be received and considered at a information for the possible fitttue meeting without re, ilarly scheduled council meeting where the agenda provides for final action to be taken oil the hsttacting conuuent front the audience. matter. The purpose of this procedure is to alloy the citizens attending the re, filar sleeting the opportunity of hearing the views of their fellow citizens in a more formal setting. Airy citizen may supply the City Council a written statement or report regarding the citizen's opinion on a matter being discussed in a work session. If the Mayor invites citizens to participate in a work session other than citizen continent on consent items. their participation will cease at the point the Mayor closes the session to public input to allow the Council to give City staff direction as to needed information for the possible tirfire meeting without distracting, continent from the audience. 4.4 (4) Emergency Meetings: In case of emergency or urgent public necessity , which shall be expressed in the notice of the meeting, an emergency meeting may be called by the Mayor, the Cite' Manager or by three members of the Council, and it shall be sufficient if the notice is posted two hours before the meeting is convened. 4.5 (5) Closed Meetings: The Council may meet in a closed meeting pursuant to the requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter >j 1, TEX. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vernons 2009), as amended. 4.6 (6) Recessed Meetings: Any meeting of the Council may be recessed to a later time, provided that no recess shall be for a longer period than until the next regular meeting. 4.7 (7) Notice of Meetings: The agenda for all meetings, including Council Committee or Subcommittee meetings, shall be posted by the City Secretarv on the Cih-'s official bulletin board and notice of all meetings shall be given bv the Cite' Secretary' pursuant to the requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter >j 1, TEX. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vemons 2009, as amended.) PAGE 6 C Denmenh and Settur,TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temrauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe 5. (2-29(e)) PRESIDING OFFICER AND DUTIES 5.1 (1) Presiding Officer: The Mavor, or in the absence of the Mavor, the Mavor Pro-Tem, shall preside as chairman, or presiding officer at all meetings of the Council. In the absence of the Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, the Council shall elect a temporary presiding officer. (Charter, Section 2.03) 5.2 (2) Call to Order: The meetings of the Council shall be called to order by the Mayor, or in his or her absence, by the Mayor Pro-Tem. In the absence of both the Mayor and the Mayor Pro- Tem, the meeting shall be called to order by the City Secretar and a temporary presiding officer shall be elected as provided above. 53 (3) Preservation of Order: The presiding officer shall preserve order and decorum, and confine members in debate to the question under discussion. The presiding officer shall call upon the Sergeant-at-Arms as necessary to enforce compliance with the rules contained herein. 5.4 (4) Points of Order: The presiding officer shall determine all points of order, subject to the right of any member to appeal to the Council. If any appeal is taken, the question shall be, "Shall the decision of the presiding officer be sustained?". If a majorih- of the members present vote "No", the ruling of the chair is overruled, otherwise, it is sustained. 5.5 (5) Questions to be Stated: The presiding officer shall state all questions submitted for a vote and announce the result. A roll call vote shall be taken upon the request of any member, and upon the passage of all ordinances and resolutions. 5.6 (6) Substitution for Presiding Officer: The presiding officer may call any other member to take his or her place in the chair, such substitution not to continue beyond adjournment. 5.7 (7) Call for Recess: The presiding officer may call for a recess of up to fifteen (15) minutes at regular intervals of approximately one hour at appropriate points in the meeting agenda, or if requested by any two members. 6. 2-29 (1)(4)(5) ORDER OF BUSINESS 6.1 (1) Agenda: The order of business of each meeting shall be as contained in the agenda prepared by the City Manager, which shall be reviewed and approved by an Agenda Committee composed of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tem, and the City Manager. When items are removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda by members of the Council, the removed items shall be taken up in the order of removal right after the consent agenda. Placement of items on the agenda shall be governed by this Section and Section 6.3; provided that if a Council member has an "emergency" item that the Council member believes should be placed on the next regular or special meeting agenda, the placement must be approved by two members of the Agenda Conurlittee or at the direction of a majorih- of the Council. Conduct of business at special meetings and Council Committees and subcornrnittees will likewise be governed by an agenda and these Rules of Procedure. PAGE 7 C Denmenh and Settnr,TERICHAR Local Settnk Temlxuan Intemet File, Content Outlook 951TTED3N CC Rule, of I ocechue,. do r„_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou Loci umentsOr clnaaracesI I CC Ri des of Procedues.doc 6.2 (2) Pledge of Allegiance: Each agenda shall provide an item for the recital of the "Pledge of Allegiance" at the regularly scheduled city council meetings. This item shall begin with the recital of the pledge of allegiance for the United States flag and shall follow with a recital of the pledge of allegiance for the Texas state flag in accordance with Section 3100.101 of the Tex. Gov't Code. 63 (3) Presentations by Members of Council or Cih- Manager: The agenda shall provide a time when the Mayor or any Council member may bring before the Council any business that he or she feels should be deliberated upon by the Council at a future Council meeting. These matters need not be specifically listed on the agenda, but discussion and formal action on such matters shall be deferred until a subsequent Council meeting. Any member may suggest an item for discussion at a future work session. The Cih- Manager or City staff shall only respond preliminarily on this item at the work session. If the City- Council believes the item requires a more detailed review, the Council will give the City Manager or City Staff direction to place the item on a future regular meeting agenda and advise staff as to the background materials to be desired at such meeting. The Cih- Council may receive from the City Manager or Cih- staff or a member of the City Council Formatted: Don't keep lines together reports about items of con inunity interest including expressions of thanks, congratulations, or - i Deleted: Arajpersointiho Nti ishes to place a subject condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a on the Corincrl agenda at regrilar cite Coruacil public official, public employee, or other citizen, except that a discussion regarding a change in the rmeeta g ,hall ad i,e the r rhr Manager', orrice of if that fact and the specified subject matter Nvlncla he or status of a person's public office or public employment is not an honorarY or salutary recognition If she desires to place on the agencla no later than 500 III p m . wechae day acil meetir for purposes of this subdivision-, a renninder about an upconning event organized or sponsored by the I~I i prior to the Coru at p ~vlncli lie or he N ishes the designated subject to be governing body: information regarding a social, ceremonial, or comnnunih- event organized or 11 cor>,idered , time for such reports shall be r sponsored by an entity other than the governing bode that was attended or is scheduled to be I~ determnaed ba the Agencla Committee giv aag due - - q cor>,ideration to the length of the Agenda, the attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality-: and com ernerace of the public, and the orderlN flow of If pi rblic busine , 6rav speaker xovichl a report announcements ini'ohTing an imnninent threat to the public health and safety- of people in the if i g 11 ,hill speak for no longer than form (4) mmliutes on all municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda so long as authorized by the Texas Open „ iterms that he or she lim bring before the Coruacil at Meetings Act, Chapter 551, TEX. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vernons Annotated Texas Civil Statutes f", each meetamg runless the mayor or the majorih of the Coruacil ga mats ua extenmon of time. No person 2009) (Velnons 2009). irm fill out a "request to peak" form na order to q speak or comment on another person's report, Nvlncla fl is given at the same Coruacil meeting. Ara 6.4 (4) Presentations from Members of the Public: of arnaoruacermerat hall be rmade, prior to the tame for reports from members of the public on the agenda, U smmmarimW the main portior>, of the Ri des and a. Reports from Members of the Public: o section 3 de of Conduct as their rmaN apply to membc i : of the public speaknag to the Coruacil.¶ Ane person who wishes to place a subject on the Council agenda at re, filar Cit<- Council meetings q b Soeadng on Regiilu and Cor>,ent Agenda shall advise the City Managers office of that fact and the specified subject matter winch lie or she Items. Anj* person who N; ishes to adchess the desires to place oil the agenda no later than 5:00 p.m. 'Wednesday prior to the Council nleetnlg at (oruacil regardnag a non-public hearnag item that is yylllch lie or she wishes the designlated. subject to be considered. 5lleh reports Shall be heard. either at on the Corincil's agenda for a regular or special meetnag shall complete a request to peak" form the beUn lima of the regular nleetina of the City Council. or later oil the council's a<3enlda at a place asking to speak regarcling the item and shall rettun it determined be the Agetlda COnnilnttee in hght of the length of the ageilda and the anticipation of to the City Secretary before the Coruaml cor>,iders the item. The nlaj or Nvill call upon the person to time needed. for the agenda items under considerations. Placement of citizens reports at the beginning speak for no longer than tlnee (3) minute: as that of the agen (ki sliall be determined. be a rule of rotation as follows: Every member of the public will particidar agencla item is cor>,ideredbs the City oruacil except that applicants and then agents on be given and Opporttltllt<' for placement of their report at the begnlln[lg of the regular city council public hearnag items shall be allowed to -.peals for no nleetRlg once every six (6) months, should. a citizen desire to present reports more freclu.enltle than longer than five (5) minute or as inchcated na Pal-graph 6.4 d (5) "Tame Lnuits." The pro, isror>, once every 6 lllonths_. such reports will be heard. bl' the council at the time determined. bl' the of this paragraph do not apply- to workshop meetings, Avenida Conlllllttee after the cahnlT of an avenlda hens posted for such purpose; and speakers will be and a Person right t ;1-h mad provide aaput at these meetings shat I be I . 1 and controlled bar subsection a3(2-_ 1 , worl. hopffeetnags PAGE 8 C Document,, and Settnr,TERICHAR Local Settnk Tempouan Intemet File, Content Outlook )5YLTED'N tC Rules of P ocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted: S Legal Ou Loci intents OrcluiuicesI I CC Rides of Procedtues.doc assigned to the first part Of the meeting off a first come. first served basis with a llllllt of three (3) speakers assigned to this early forum. It is the intent of the rule of rotation to better manage the time of the City Council members. the city staff. and to fashion some more available and convenient time for all members of the public to address the City Council on a non-discririnlatory and rotating basis. Any speaker providing a report shall speak for no longer than four (4) minutes on all items that lie or she may bring before the Council at each meeting. wiless the Mayor or the majority of the Council Unarms an extension of time. No person may fill out a "request to speak" form is order to speak or continent on another person's report. which is given at the same Council meeting. An announcement may be made, prior to the time for reports from members of the public on the agenda. sununarizing the main portions of the Rules and subsection (c), "Code of Conduct' as they may apple to members of the public speaking to the Council. b. Speaking on Re«irlar and Consent Agenda Items: Arly)erson who wishes to address the Council regarding a non-public hearing item that is on the Council's agennda_ shall complete a "recluest to speak" form asking to speak regarding the item and shall return it to the City Secretary before the Council considers the item. This procedure applies to speakers desiring to speak to items for individual consideration on the agenda during the regalar meeting of the City Council. as well as to speakers desiring to speak to consent agenda items during a workshop session. During the re~ilar session. the Mayor will call upon the person to speak for no longer than three (3) minutes as that particular agenda item is considered by the Cite Council. except that applicants and their agents off public hearing items shall be allowed to speak for no longer than five (5) minutes or as indicated is subsection (f)(5). The provisions of 2-29(4)(3) 'Workshop Meetings- shall control with regard to time limitations for speakers on consent agenda items. c. Public Hearings: Any person who wishes to address the Council at a public hearing is encouraged to complete a "request to speak" form and return it to the City Secretary before the applicable hearing. The Mayor will call upon the person to speak for no longer than three (3) minutes or five (5) minutes for applicants and their agents in accordance with paragraph 6.5(5) "Time Limits." d. Any group or organization comprised of ten or more members present in the Cit.- Council Chambers who wishes to address the Council at a public hearing or on a non-public hearing agenda item shall designate a representative to address the Cit.- Council and shall limit their remarks to ten (10) minutes or less. The group or organization shall turn in a written designation to the City Secretary prior to the coirimencement of the meeting identifi-ing the representative who will address the Citv Council on behalf of the group or organization. + Deleted: Speakers before the Cotuicil shall limit 6.5 (5) Time L1InltS: ~5pe ikeLS before the Council Shall limit there remarks to no more than them remarks to no more than tlaee (1) mnnites for three (3) Lllinlu.tes for public hearing items provided. that lpplicailts for laird. rise or other public public hearnig items provided that applicants for hearing items and their agents shall lmirt their remarks to five (5) minutes or less per speaker and laid rue or other public hewing items and them a¢ent-. -.hall Inuit them rentals to five (5) nanutes or shall have a maximum of fifteens (15) illlilutes to speak to the item Reports from members of the le„ per speaker and shall hake a maanurua of fifteen public shall be hunted. to four (4) illlilutes or less. Groups, or organizations comprised. of tens or (15) mnnites to ~peake to the item. Reports from members of the public shall be Inuited to fora (a) more members shall lint their remarks in accordance with the parameters established. in p uagraph mnnites or less Croups or orgauizatroiu comprised 2-29(f)(4). Speakers before the Council on Corlsellt agenda items during the workshop sessions of ten or more members shall Inuit their remarks in accordance N ith the parameters established in shall llllllt their remarks oil all consent items to no more than three (3) illlilutes per section 2-29(d.). paragraph 6.4d (2-29(f)(4) At the chscretion of the At the discretion of the presidnlg officer or a majority of the City Council. ally Speaker lllay be presiding officer or a majority of the City Coruicit, anj speaker lam be granted an esters ion of tulle to speak PAGE 9 C Dcnmenh and Settur'TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temlauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe granted an extension of time to speak. 6.6 (6) Presentation of Proclamations: The agenda may provide a time for the presentation of proclamations. The Mayor or presiding officer may deliver and present proclamations upon the request of citizens. Proclamations may encompass any activ ih- or theme except that proclamations Nyith a theme religious or partisan in nature shall not be presented. Moreover, proclamations shall not be used for any comrnercial or advertising purpose. 7. (2-29(g))CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS 7.1 (1) Printed or TypeNNTitten Form: All ordinances and resolutions shall be presented to the Council in printed, h-pewritten or electronic form. The Council may, by proper motion, amend any ordinance or resolution presented to it at the meeting at which it is presented or directs that the amended ordinance be placed on the next or any future Council Agenda for adoption. 7.2 (2) Cite Attorney to Approve: All ordinances, resolutions, and contracts and amendments thereto, shall be approved as to form and legality- by the City Attorney, or he or she shall file a written opinion on the legality of such ordinance, resolution or contract prior to submission to the Council. (Charter, Section 6.02). 73 (3) Distribution of Ordinances and Resolutions: The City Manager shall prepare copies of all proposed ordinances and resolutions for distribution to all members of the Council at the meeting at which the ordinance or resolution is introduced, or at such earlier time as is expedient. 7.4 (4) Recording of Votes: The yeas and nays shall be taken upon the passage of all ordinances and resolutions and the vote of each member shall be recorded in the minutes. (Charter, Section 2.06 (b)). 7.5 (5) Majority- Vote Required: An affirmative vote of four (4) members is necessary to repeal any ordinance or take any official action in the name of the City- except as otherwise provided in the Charter, by the laws of the State of Texas, or these Rules. (Charter, Section 2.06). 7.5.1(a) Tie-Vote: Matters voted on by the Cih- Council which end in a tie-vote shall automatically be placed on each subsequent Council meeting agenda until a full Council is present. 7.6 (6) Demand for Roll Call: Upon demand of any member, the roll shall be called for yeas and nays upon any question before the Council, with the exception of those circumstances set forth in Section 7.12, The Previous Question. It shall not be in order for members to explain their vote during the roll call. 7.7 (7) Personal Privilege: The right of a member to address the Council on a question of personal privilege shall be limited to cases in which his or her integrity-, character, or motives are assailed, questioned, or impugned. 7.8 (8) Dissents and Protests: Any member shall have the right to express dissent from or protest against any ordinance or resolution of the Council and have the reason therefore entered PAGE 10 C Denmenh and Settur,TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temlxuan Intemet File, Content Outlook )iYLTED'N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe upon the minutes. Such dissent or protest may be filed in writing, and presented to the Council not later than the next regular meeting following the date of passage of the ordinance or resolution objected to. 7.9 (9) Voting Required: No member shall be excused from voting except for lack of information and except on matters involving the consideration of his or her own official conduct, or where his or her personal interests are involved in accordance with Chapter 171, TEX. LOC. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vernon 2009), and in these instances he or she shall abstain. Any member prohibited from voting by personal interest shall announce this at the commencement of consideration of the matter and shall not enter into discussion or debate on any such matter and shall leave the meeting room. The member having briefly stated the reason for his or her request, the excuse from voting shall be made without debate. 7.10 (10) Order of Precedence of Motions: a. The following motions shall have priority in the order indicated: 1. Adjourn (when unqualified) and is not debatable and may not be amended; 2. Take a recess (when privileged), 3. Raise a question of privilege, 4. Lay on the table: 5. Previous question (2/3 vote required); 6. Limit or extend limits of debate (23 vote required); 7. Postpone to a certain time, 8. Cournit or refer: 9. Amend: 10. Postpone indefinitely: 11. Main Motion. b. The first two motions are not always privileged. To adjourn shall lose its privilege character and be a main motion if in any way qualified. To take a recess shall be privileged only when other business is pending. c. A motion to adjoum is not in order: 1. When repeated without intervening business or discussion; PAGE 11 C Dcnmenh and Settur,TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temrauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe 2. When made as an interruption of a member while speaking, 3. While a vote is being taken. d. Only certain motions may be amended as provided in the most current edition of Robert's Rules of Order, remised. A motion to amend shall be undebatable when the question to be amended is undebatable. 7.11 (11) Reconsideration: A motion to reconsider any action of the Council can be made not later than the next succeeding official meeting of the Council. Such a motion can only be made by a member who voted with the prevailing side. It can be seconded by any member. In order to comply with the Texas Open Meetings Act, any Council member who wishes to make such a motion at a meeting succeeding the meeting where the action was taken shall notify the Cih- Manager to place the item for reconsideration on the Council agenda. No question shall be twice reconsidered, except by unanimous consent of the Council, except that action related to any contract may be reconsidered at any time before the final execution thereof. A matter which was not timely reconsidered in the manner provided by this section or was reconsidered but the action originallv taken was not changed by the Council cannot be reintroduced to the Council or placed on a Council meeting agenda for a period of six (6) months unless this rule is suspended as provided for in these Rules of Procedure. 7.12 (12) The Previous Question: When the previous question is moved and seconded, it shall be put as follows: "Shall the main question be now put?". There shall then be no further amendment or debate; except that nothing herein shall allow the previous question to be called prior to a least one opportunitc- for each member of the Council to speak on the question before the Council. Any pending amendments shall be put in their order before the main question. If the motion for the previous question is lost, the main question remains before the Council. An affirmative vote of 23 of the Council shall be required to move the previous question. To demand the previous question is equivalent in effect to moving "That debate now cease, and the Council shall immediately proceed to vote on the pending motion". In practice, this is done with the phrase "Call for the question", or simple saying "Question". 7.13 (13) Withdrawal of Motions: A motion may be withdrawn, or modified, bv its moyant without asking permission until the motion has been stated by the Presiding Officer. If the moyant modifies his or her motion, the seconding council member may withdraw his or her second. After the question has been stated, the moyant shall neither withdraw it nor modify it without the consent of the Council. The subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment. A motion to amend an amendment shall be in order, but one to amend an amendment to an amendment shall not be in order. 7.14 (14) Appropriations of Monev: Before formal approval by the Council of motions providing for appropriation of money, information must be presented to the Council showing purpose of the appropriation. In addition, before finally acting on such an appropriation, the Council shall obtain a report from the Cite Manager as to the availability- of funds and his or her recommendations as to the destrabilih- of the appropriation. PAGE 12 C Dcnmenh and Settur'TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temrauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe 7.15 (15) Transfer of Appropriations: At the request of the Cih- Manager, at any time during the fiscal year, the Council may by resolution transfer an unencumbered balance of an appropriation made for the use of one department, division, or purpose; but no transfer shall be made of revenues or earnings of any non-tax supported public utilit< to any other purpose. 8. (2-29(h)) CREATION OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 8.1 (1) Council Committees: The Council may, by resolution and as the need arises, authorize the appointment of Council committees. Any committee so created shall cease to exist when abolished by resolution of the Council. 8.2 (2) Citizen Boards, Commissions, and Committees: The Council may create other Committees, Boards and Commissions to assist in the conduct of the operation of the City government with such duties as the Council may specify not inconsistent with the City Charter or Code. Creation of such Committees, Boards and Commissions and memberships and selection of members shall be by Council resolution if not otherwise specified by the Cih- Charter or Code. Any Committee, Board, or Commission so created shall cease to exist when abolished by a resolution approved by the Council. No Committee so appointed shall have powers other than advisor Y to the Council or to the City- Manager, except as otherwise specified by the Charter or Code. 83 (3) Appointments: a. Individual City Council members malting nominations for members to citizen boards and commissions will consider interested persons on a cih-wide basis. b. The Cih- Council will make an effort to be inclusive of all segments of the con inunih- in the board and commission appointment process. Cih- Council members will consider ethnicity-, gender, socio-economic levels, and other factors to ensure a diverse representation of Denton citizens. c. The City Council will take into consideration an individual's qualifications, willingness to serve, and application information in selecting nominations for membership to each board and commission. d. In an effort to ensure maximum citizen participation, Cih- Council members will continue the general practice of nominating new citizens to replace board members who have served three consecutive terms on the same board per the provisions of Denton Code of Ordinances, Sec. 2- 65. e. Each City Council member will be responsible for malting nominations for board and commission places assigned to him or her, which shall correspond to the Cih- Council member's place. Individual Cih- Council members will make nominations to the full City- Council for the governing body's approval or disapproval. 8.4 (4) Rules of Procedure: Board, Commission and Committee members shall comply PAGE 13 C Dcnmenh and Settur'TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temlxuan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N CC Rules ofI ocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe Nvith the provisions of Article III of Chapter 2 of the Code of Ordinances. Each Board, Commission and Committee member shall be provided a cope of these rules of procedure and a cope of the Cih- of Denton Handbook for Boards, Commissions and Committees, which shall govern operational procedures of such Boards, Commissions and Committees. 9. (2-29 (i)) VOTES REQUIRED Questions on which the voting requirement is varied by the Charter, State Statutes and these rules are listed below: 9.1 (1) Charter and State Statutory Requirements: a. Charter Amendment - Five Votes: Ordinances submitting proposed Charter amendments must be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the Council. (Article XI, Section 3, Texas Constitution and Chapter 9, Texas Local Government Code (Vemons 2009.) For a semen member Council, this means five members must vote affirmatively. b. Le-v wing Taxes - Five Votes: Ordinances providing for the assessment and collection of certain taxes require the approval of two-thirds of the members of the Council (Section 302.101 Texas Tax Code) (Vernons, 2009). c. Changing Paying Assessment Plans - Five Votes: Changes in plans for paying assessment require a two-thirds vote of the Council (Section 313.053(e) Transportation Code, Vemons 2009). d. Changes in Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Classifications: In cases of a written protest of a change in a zoning regulation or zoning classification by the owners of twenty (20%) percent or more either of the area of the lots included in such proposed change, or of the lots uninediately adjoining the same and extending two hundred feet (200') therefrom, such amendment shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all members of the Cih- Council; six (6) votes of the City Council is required to override the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission that a zoning change be denied (Section 211.066 Tex. Loc. Gov't Code and Section 35.3.4.C.(4) Denton Cih- Code (Development Code). e. Amendment of Tax Abatement Policy: The guidelines and criteria adopted as the Citc-'s Tax Abatement Policy may be amended or repealed by a vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all members of the Citt• Council (Section 312.002(c)) Texas Tax Code (Vernon 2009). 10. (2-29(j)) SEVERABILITY CLAUSE That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the v alidih- of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the Cih- Council of the Cih- of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite an such inyaliditt•. PAGE 14 C Dcnmenh and Settur'TERICH.~R Local Settnvn Temlauan Intemet File, Content Outlook 9iYTTED',N tC Rules ofhocechue,. do_ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted' S Legal Ou DoccuuentsOrcluiancesI I CC Rciles of Procedtues.doe SECTION 2. That Ordinance Nos. 2009-174 and 2010-312 are hereby repealed. SECTION 3. That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 15 SALegal\Our Documents\0rdinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2009-174 AND ORDINANCE NO. 2010- 312 AND AMENDING SECTION 2-29 OF THE CITY OF DENTON CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton desires to conduct the City Council meetings of the City of Denton in the most efficient and time effective manner; and WHEREAS, the City Council also desires to allow open dialogue by citizens of the community regarding the business of city government; and WHEREAS, recent meetings of the City Council have run into the late evening hours and even the early morning hours, thereby inconveniencing citizens waiting to make comments to the City Council and fatiguing the Council, staff and citizens; and WHEREAS the City Council has conducted a pilot project test for several months of some alternative processes and procedures to streamline the City Council meetings, limit their duration, and facilitate citizen's access to make comments to their local governing body; and WHEREAS the City Council is of the opinion that such alternative processes and procedures have effected the desired goals and the City Council is desirous of codifying these changes in the Rules of Procedure; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Section 2-29 of the City Code, known as the Denton City Council Rules of Procedure, is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. (2-29(a)) AUTHORITY 1.1(1) Charter: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.07 of the Charter of the City of Denton, Texas, the City Council hereby enacts these rules of procedure for all meetings of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas. During any meeting, a reasonable opportunity shall be given for citizens to be heard under these rules. These Rules of Procedure are enacted as guidelines to be followed by all persons in the Council Chamber including the city administrative staff, news media, and visitors. 2.(2-29(b)) GENERAL RULES 2.1 (1) Meetings to be Public: All official meetings of the Council and Council committees and subcommittees, except closed meetings permitted by the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, TEX. GOV'T. CODE ANN. (Vernons Annotated Texas Civil Statutes (Vernons 2009), as amended, shall be open to the public. S:\Legal\Our Documents\0rdinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures.doc 2.2 (2) uorum: Four members of the Council shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. (Charter, Section 2.06) 2.3 (3) Compelling Attendance: No member shall be excused from attendance at a Council meeting except for good and valid reasons. It will be the duty of the Council member to notify the City Secretary prior to the meeting at which he or she is going to be absent. The City Secretary will record each Council member as being present or absent as a part of the minutes prepared for each Council meeting. 2.4 (4) Misconduct: The Council may punish its own members for misconduct consistent with any Ethics Policy adopted by the Council. 2.5 (5) Minutes of Meetings: An account of all proceedings of the Council shall be kept by the City Secretary and shall be entered in a book constituting the official record of the Council. A certified agenda shall be prepared and shall be approved by the Mayor for all closed meetings for which a certified agenda is required to be kept in accordance with Chapter 551, TEX. GOV'T. CODE ANN. (Vemons 2009), as amended. 2.6 (6) Questions to Contain One Subject: All questions submitted for a vote shall contain one subject, except the City Council may approve all items which are on the consent agenda in one motion, regardless of how many subjects are contained in the consent agenda, so long as all items have been properly posted in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act and have not been removed from the consent agenda by a Council member. If two or more points are involved, any member may require a division, if the question reasonably admits of a division. 2.7 (7) Right of Floor: Any member desiring to speak shall be recognized by the Chairperson, and shall confine his or her remarks to the subject under consideration or to be considered. No member shall be allowed to speak more than once on any one subject until every member wishing to speak shall have spoken. 2.8 (8) City Manager: The City Manager, or Acting City Manager, shall attend all meetings of the Council unless excused. He or she may make recommendations to the Council and shall have the right to take part in all discussions of the Council, but shall have no vote. (Charter, Section 5.03 (d))• 2.9 (9) City Attorney: The City Attorney, or Acting City Attorney, shall be available upon request for all meetings of the Council unless excused and shall, upon request, give an opinion, either written or oral, on questions of law. The City Attorney shall act as the Council's parliamentarian. 2.10 (10) City Secretary: The City Secretary, or Acting City Secretary, shall attend all meetings of the Council unless excused, and shall keep the official minutes and perform such other duties as may be requested by the Council. 2.11 (11) Officers and Employees: Any officer or employee of the City, when requested by PAGE 2 S:\Legal\Our Documents\0rdinances\1 MCC Rules of Procedures.doc the City Manager, shall attend any meeting of the Council. If requested to do so by the City Manager, such employee may present information relating to matters before the Council. 2.12 (12) Rules of Order: These rules govern the proceedings of the Council in all cases, except that where these rules are silent, the most recent Edition of Robert's Rules of Order revised shall govern. 2.13 (13) Suspension of Rules: Any provision of these rules not governed by the City Charter or other City Code provisions may be temporarily suspended by the affirmative vote of four members of the Council. The vote on any such suspension shall be taken by yeas or nays and entered into the minutes of the Council. 2.14 (14) Amendment of Rules: These rules may be amended, or new rules adopted by the affirmative vote of four members of the Council, provided that the proposed amendments or new rules shall have been introduced before the City Council at a prior Council meeting. 3. (2-29(c)) CODE OF CONDUCT 3.1 (1) Council members: a. During Council meetings, Council members shall preserve order and decorum and shall neither by conversation or otherwise delay or interrupt the proceedings nor refuse to observe the rules of the Council. b. A Council member, once recognized, shall not be interrupted while speaking unless called to order by the Mayor or presiding officer, unless a point of order is raised by another member or the parliamentarian, or unless the speaker chooses to yield to questions from another member. If a Council member is called to order while he or she is speaking, he or she shall cease speaking immediately until the question of order is determined. If ruled to be in order, he or she shall be permitted to proceed. If ruled not to be in order he or she shall remain silent or shall alter his or her remarks so as to comply with rules of the Council. 3.2 (2) Administrative Staff: a. Members of the Administrative staff and employees of the City shall observe the same rules of procedure and decorum applicable to members of the Council, and shall have no voice unless and until recognized by the Chair. b. While the presiding officer shall have the authority to preserve decorum in meetings as far as staff members and City employees are concerned, the City Manager also shall be responsible for the orderly conduct and decorum of all City employees under his or her direction and control. c. The City Manager shall take such disciplinary action as may be necessary to insure that such decorum is preserved at all times by City employees in Council meetings. d. All remarks and questions addressed to the Council shall be addressed to the Council as a PAGE 3 S:\Legal\Our Documents\Ordinances\11\CC Rules ofProcedures.doc whole and not to any individual member thereof. e. No staff member, other than a staff member having the floor, shall enter into any discussion either directly or indirectly without permission of the presiding officer. 3.3 (3) Citizens: a. Citizens and other visitors are welcome to attend all public meetings of the City Council, and will be admitted to the City Council Chamber or other room in which the City Council is meeting, up to the fire safety capacity of the room. b. All meeting attendees shall conduct themselves with propriety and decorum. Conversations between or among audience members should be conducted outside the meeting room. Attendees will refrain from excessively loud private conversations while the Council is in session. c. Unauthorized remarks from the audience, stamping of the feet, applauding, whistles, yells, and similar demonstrations shall not be permitted. d. Placards, banners, or signs will not be permitted in the City Council Chamber or in any other room in which the City Council is meeting. Exhibits, displays, and visual aids used in connection with presentations to the City Council, however, are permitted. e. Audience members may not place their feet on any chairs in the City Council Chamber or other room in which the City Council is meeting. f. Only City Council members and City staff may step onto the dais. g. All people wishing to address the City Council shall first be recognized by the presiding officer and shall limit their remarks to the matter under discussion. h. All remarks and questions addressed to the City Council shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole and not to any individual members. i. Any person addressing the City Council in the City Council Chamber shall do so from the lectern unless physically unable to do so. People addressing the City Council shall not be permitted to approach the dais. If they wish to hand out papers or other materials to the City Council, they should express that desire to the presiding officer, and the City Manager shall direct a staff member to hand out the materials. j. When the time has expired for a presentation to the City Council, the presiding officer shall direct the person speaking to cease. A second request from the presiding officer to cease speaking shall be cause of the removal of the speaker if that person continues to speak. k. Equipment, apparatus, or paraphernalia such as camera tripods, easels, or wheelchairs shall not obstruct, block, or otherwise be located in the doorway, entranceway, or walkways of PAGE 4 SALegal\Our Documents\Ordinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures. doc the City Council Chambers or of any other room in which the City Council may choose to meet. Representatives of the electronic media may set up cameras and other equipment only in the back of the room. It is permissible for television camera operators to film for short periods of time (several minutes) from the entranceway to the City Council Chambers using hand-held cameras only. Any radio station, which broadcasts the regular City Council meetings live may hook their equipment up at the front of the room as long as it remains out of sight and out of the way. 1. There will be a uniformed City of Denton police officer present at all regular meetings of the City Council. This police officer shall act in the capacity of a security officer/sergeant-at- arms, and shall enforce the meeting rules and act upon the direction of the presiding officer. in. Any person making personal, impertinent, profane, or slanderous remarks, or who becomes boisterous while addressing the City Council or who otherwise violates any of the above-mentioned rules while attending a City Council meeting shall be removed from the room at the direction of the presiding officer, and the person shall be barred from further audience before the City Council during that session of the City Council. If the presiding officer fails to act, any member of the City Council may move to require the offending person's removal, and the affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council shall require the presiding officer to act. The sergeant-at-arms, if so directed by the presiding officer or an affirmative vote of the majority of the City Council, shall remove the offending person from the meeting. 3.4 (4) Enforcement: The City Manager, in the absence of a designated law enforcement officer, shall act as Sergeant-at-Arms for the Council, and shall furnish whatever assistance is needed to enforce the rules of decorum herein established. 3.5 (5) Seating Arraneg ment: The City Secretary, City Manager and City Attorney shall occupy the respective seats in the Council Chamber assigned to them by the Mayor, but any two or more members of the Council may exchange seats. 4. (2-29(d)) TYPES OF MEETINGS 4.1 (1) Regular Meetings: The Council shall meet on the first and third Tuesday of each month, at such time as may be set by the City Council, unless the meeting is postponed or cancelled for valid reasons. All regular meetings of the Council will be held in City Hall at 215 East McKinney Street, Denton, Texas or at such other location as the City Council may, by motion, resolution or ordinance from time to time designate. 4.2 (2) Special Meetings: Special meetings may be called by the Mayor, the City Manager, or by any three members of the Council. The call for a special meeting shall be filed with the City Secretary in written form, and he or she shall post notice thereof as provided by the Texas Open Meetings Act, TEX. GOV'T. CODE ANN. § 551.001, et seq. (Vernons 2009, as amended). The Mayor, City Manager, or three of the council members may designate a location for the special meeting other than City Hall as long as the location is open to the public. 4.3 (3) Workshop Meetings: Workshop meetings or work sessions may be held on the first PAGE 5 S:\Legal\Our Documents\0rdinances\1 MCC Rules of Procedures.doc and third Tuesday of each month at such time as may be set by the City Council, or on such other day as the City Council may designate and at such time as may be set by the City Council to discuss near to mid or long range issues and to answer City Council questions concerning all agenda items. Workshops or Work Sessions may be called using the same procedure required for special meetings as provided for in Section 4.2(2) above. The purpose of the workshop meeting is to discuss or explore matters of interest to the City, to meet with City boards, commissions, or committee members, City staff or officers of civic organizations, governing bodies or individuals specifically invited to the session by the Mayor, Council or City Manager. These meetings are informational and normally no final action shall be taken unless the posted agenda indicates otherwise. Citizens or other interested persons attending the workshop meeting will be allowed to make citizen comment regarding consent agenda items to be considered in the regular council meeting. This will be the only opportunity for citizens to speak to consent agenda items unless the item is removed from the consent agenda by a member of the Council to be considered as an individual item during the regular meeting. Speakers will be allowed three minutes per speaker and may comment on any or all consent agenda items so long as any speaker's time does not exceed a total of three minutes. All speakers must comply with 2-29(0(4)b. with regard to completing a "request to speak" card prior to the council's consideration of the clarification of the consent agenda items. As it concerns all other items posted on the workshop agenda, citizens or other interested persons may not participate in the session unless invited to do so by the Mayor. Citizens should be advised of the nature of the work session and that they may make comment on the consent agenda items as herein specified, but that their input on other items on the agenda may be received and considered at a regularly scheduled council meeting where the agenda provides for final action to be taken on the matter. The purpose of this procedure is to allow the citizens attending the regular meeting the opportunity of hearing the views of their fellow citizens in a more formal setting. Any citizen may supply the City Council a written statement or report regarding the citizen's opinion on a matter being discussed in a work session. If the Mayor invites citizens to participate in a work session other than citizen comment on consent items, their participation will cease at the point the Mayor closes the session to public input to allow the Council to give City staff direction as to needed information for the possible future meeting without distracting comment from the audience. 4.4 (4) Emergency Meetings: In case of emergency or urgent public necessity, which shall be expressed in the notice of the meeting, an emergency meeting may be called by the Mayor, the City Manager or by three members of the Council, and it shall be sufficient if the notice is posted two hours before the meeting is convened. 4.5 (5) Closed Meetings: The Council may meet in a closed meeting pursuant to the requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, TEX. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vernons 2009), as amended. 4.6 (6) Recessed Meetings: Any meeting of the Council may be recessed to a later time, provided that no recess shall be for a longer period than until the next regular meeting. 4.7 (7) Notice of Meetings: The agenda for all meetings, including Council Committee or Subcommittee meetings, shall be posted by the City Secretary on the City's official bulletin board and notice of all meetings shall be given by the City Secretary pursuant to the requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, TEX. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vernons 2009, as amended.) PAGE 6 S:\Legal\Our Documents\0rdinances\1 l\CC Rules of Procedures.doc 5. (2-29(e)) PRESIDING OFFICER AND DUTIES 5.1 (1) Presiding Officer: The Mayor, or in the absence of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro-Tem, shall preside as chairman, or presiding officer at all meetings of the Council. In the absence of the Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, the Council shall elect a temporary presiding officer. (Charter, Section 2.03) 5.2 (2) Call to Order: The meetings of the Council shall be called to order by the Mayor, or in his or her absence, by the Mayor Pro-Tem. In the absence of both the Mayor and the Mayor Pro- Tem, the meeting shall be called to order by the City Secretary, and a temporary presiding officer shall be elected as provided above. 5.3 (3) Preservation of Order: The presiding officer shall preserve order and decorum, and confine members in debate to the question under discussion. The presiding officer shall call upon the Sergeant-at-Arms as necessary to enforce compliance with the rules contained herein. 5.4 (4) Points of Order: The presiding officer shall determine all points of order, subject to the right of any member to appeal to the Council. If any appeal is taken, the question shall be, "Shall the decision of the presiding officer be sustained?". If a majority of the members present vote "No", the ruling of the chair is overruled; otherwise, it is sustained. 5.5 (5) Questions to be Stated: The presiding officer shall state all questions submitted for a vote and announce the result. A roll call vote shall be taken upon the request of any member, and upon the passage of all ordinances and resolutions. 5.6 (6) Substitution for Presiding Officer: The presiding officer may call any other member to take his or her place in the chair, such substitution not to continue beyond adjournment. 5.7 (7) Call for Recess: The presiding officer may call for a recess of up to fifteen (15) minutes at regular intervals of approximately one hour at appropriate points in the meeting agenda, or if requested by any two members. 6. 2-29 (f)(4)(5) ORDER OF BUSINESS 6.1 (1) Agenda: The order of business of each meeting shall be as contained in the agenda prepared by the City Manager, which shall be reviewed and approved by an Agenda Committee composed of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tem, and the City Manager. When items are removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda by members of the Council, the removed items shall be taken up in the order of removal right after the consent agenda. Placement of items on the agenda shall be governed by this Section and Section 6.3; provided that if a Council member has an "emergency" item that the Council member believes should be placed on the next regular or special meeting agenda, the placement must be approved by two members of the Agenda Committee or at the direction of a majority of the Council. Conduct of business at special meetings and Council Committees and subcommittees will likewise be governed by an agenda and these Rules of Procedure. PAGE 7 S:\Legal\Our Documents\Ordinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures.doc 6.2 (2) Pledge of Allegiance: Each agenda shall provide an item for the recital of the "Pledge of Allegiance" at the regularly scheduled city council meetings. This item shall begin with the recital of the pledge of allegiance for the United States flag and shall follow with a recital of the pledge of allegiance for the Texas state flag in accordance with Section 3100.101 of the Tex. Gov't Code. 6.3 (3) Presentations by Members of Council or City Manager: The agenda shall provide a time when the Mayor or any Council member may bring before the Council any business that he or she feels should be deliberated upon by the Council at a future Council meeting. These matters need not be specifically listed on the agenda, but discussion and formal action on such matters shall be deferred until a subsequent Council meeting. Any member may suggest an item for discussion at a future work session. The City Manager or City staff shall only respond preliminarily on this item at the work session. If the City Council believes the item requires a more detailed review, the Council will give the City Manager or City Staff direction to place the item on a future regular meeting agenda and advise staff as to the background materials to be desired at such meeting. The City Council may receive from the City Manager or City staff or a member of the City Council reports about items of community interest including expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition of a public official, public employee, or other citizen, except that a discussion regarding a change in the status of a person's public office or public employment is not an honorary or salutary recognition for purposes of this subdivision; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the governing body; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event organized or sponsored by an entity other than the governing body that was attended or is scheduled to be attended by a member of the governing body or an official or employee of the municipality; and announcements involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety of people in the municipality that has arisen after the posting of the agenda so long as authorized by the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, TEX. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vernons Annotated Texas Civil Statutes 2009) (Vemons 2009). 6.4 (4) Presentations from Members of the Public: a. Reports from Members of the Public: Any person who wishes to place a subject on the Council agenda at regular City Council meetings shall advise the City Manager's office of that fact and the specified subject matter which he or she desires to place on the agenda no later than 5:00 p.m. Wednesday prior to the Council meeting at which he or she wishes the designated subject to be considered. Such reports shall be heard either at the beginning of the regular meeting of the City Council, or later on the council's agenda at a place determined by the Agenda Committee in light of the length of the agenda and the anticipation of time needed for the agenda items under consideration. Placement of citizen reports at the beginning of the agenda shall be determined by a rule of rotation as follows: Every member of the public will be given an opportunity for placement of their report at the beginning of the regular city council meeting once every six (6) months; should a citizen desire to present reports more frequently than once every 6 months, such reports will be heard by the council at the time determined by the Agenda Committee after the calling of an agenda item posted for such purpose; and speakers will be PAGE 8 S:\Legal\Our Documents\Ordinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures.doc assigned to the first part of the meeting on a first come, first served basis with a limit of three (3) speakers assigned to this early forum. It is the intent of the rule of rotation to better manage the time of the City Council members, the city staff, and to fashion some more available and convenient time for all members of the public to address the City Council on a non-discriminatory and rotating basis. Any speaker providing a report shall speak for no longer than four (4) minutes on all items that he or she may bring before the Council at each meeting, unless the Mayor or the majority of the Council grants an extension of time. No person may fill out a "request to speak" form in order to speak or comment on another person's report, which is given at the same Council meeting. An announcement may be made, prior to the time for reports from members of the public on the agenda, summarizing the main portions of the Rules and subsection (c), "Code of Conduct" as they may apply to members of the public speaking to the Council. b. Speaking on Regular and Consent Agenda Items: Any person who wishes to address the Council regarding a non-public hearing item that is on the Council's agenda, shall complete a "request to speak" form asking to speak regarding the item and shall return it to the City Secretary before the Council considers the item. This procedure applies to speakers desiring to speak to items for individual consideration on the agenda during the regular meeting of the City Council, as well as to speakers desiring to speak to consent agenda items during a workshop session. During the regular session, the Mayor will call upon the person to speak for no longer than three (3) minutes as that particular agenda item is considered by the City Council, except that applicants and their agents on public hearing items shall be allowed to speak for no longer than five (5) minutes or as indicated in subsection (f)(5). The provisions of 2-29(d)(3) "Workshop Meetings" shall control with regard to time limitations for speakers on consent agenda items. c. Public Hearings: Any person who wishes to address the Council at a public hearing is encouraged to complete a "request to speak" form and return it to the City Secretary before the applicable hearing. The Mayor will call upon the person to speak for no longer than three (3) minutes or five (5) minutes for applicants and their agents in accordance with paragraph 6.5(5) "Time Limits." d. Any group or organization comprised of ten or more members present in the City Council Chambers who wishes to address the Council at a public hearing or on a non-public hearing agenda item shall designate a representative to address the City Council and shall limit their remarks to ten (10) minutes or less. The group or organization shall turn in a written designation to the City Secretary prior to the commencement of the meeting identifying the representative who will address the City Council on behalf of the group or organization. 6.5 (5) Time Limits: Speakers before the Council shall limit their remarks to no more than three (3) minutes for public hearing items provided that applicants for land use or other public hearing items and their agents shall limit their remarks to five (5) minutes or less per speaker and shall have a maximum of fifteen (15) minutes to speak to the item. Reports from members of the public shall be limited to four (4) minutes or less. Groups or organizations comprised of ten or more members shall limit their remarks in accordance with the parameters established in paragraph 2-29(f)(4). Speakers before the Council on consent agenda items during the workshop sessions shall limit their remarks on all consent items to no more than three (3) minutes per section 2-29(d). At the discretion of the presiding officer or a majority of the City Council, any speaker may be PAGE 9 S:\Legal\Our Documents\Ordinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures.doc granted an extension of time to speak. 6.6 (6) Presentation of Proclamations: The agenda may provide a time for the presentation of proclamations. The Mayor or presiding officer may deliver and present proclamations upon the request of citizens. Proclamations may encompass any activity or theme except that proclamations with a theme religious or partisan in nature shall not be presented. Moreover, proclamations shall not be used for any commercial or advertising purpose. 7. (2-29(g))CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS 7.1 (1) Printed or Typewritten Form: All ordinances and resolutions shall be presented to the Council in printed, typewritten or electronic form. The Council may, by proper motion, amend any ordinance or resolution presented to it at the meeting at which it is presented or directs that the amended ordinance be placed on the next or any future Council Agenda for adoption. 7.2 (2) City Attorney to Approve: All ordinances, resolutions, and contracts and amendments thereto, shall be approved as to form and legality by the City Attorney, or he or she shall file a written opinion on the legality of such ordinance, resolution or contract prior to submission to the Council. (Charter, Section 6.02). 7.3 (3) Distribution of Ordinances and Resolutions: The City Manager shall prepare copies of all proposed ordinances and resolutions for distribution to all members of the Council at the meeting at which the ordinance or resolution is introduced, or at such earlier time as is expedient. 7.4 (4) Recording of Votes: The yeas and nays shall be taken upon the passage of all ordinances and resolutions and the vote of each member shall be recorded in the minutes. (Charter, Section 2.06 (b)). 7.5 (5) Majority Vote Required: An affirmative vote of four (4) members is necessary to repeal any ordinance or take any official action in the name of the City except as otherwise provided in the Charter, by the laws of the State of Texas, or these Rules. (Charter, Section 2.06). 7.5.1(a) Tie-Vote: Matters voted on by the City Council which end in a tie-vote shall automatically be placed on each subsequent Council meeting agenda until a full Council is present. 7.6 (6) Demand for Roll Call: Upon demand of any member, the roll shall be called for yeas and nays upon any question before the Council, with the exception of those circumstances set forth in Section 7.12, The Previous Question. It shall not be in order for members to explain their vote during the roll call. 7.7 (7) Personal PrivjkM: The right of a member to address the Council on a question of personal privilege shall be limited to cases in which his or her integrity, character, or motives are assailed, questioned, or impugned. 7.8 (8) Dissents and Protests: Any member shall have the right to express dissent from or protest against any ordinance or resolution of the Council and have the reason therefore entered PAGE 10 S:\Legal\Our Documents\0rdinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures.doc upon the minutes. Such dissent or protest may be filed in writing, and presented to the Council not later than the next regular meeting following the date of passage of the ordinance or resolution objected to. 7.9 (9) Voting Required: No member shall be excused from voting except for lack of information and except on matters involving the consideration of his or her own official conduct, or where his or her personal interests are involved in accordance with Chapter 171, TEX. LOC. GOVT CODE ANN. (Vernon 2009), and in these instances he or she shall abstain. Any member prohibited from voting by personal interest shall announce this at the commencement of consideration of the matter and shall not enter into discussion or debate on any such matter and shall leave the meeting room. The member having briefly stated the reason for his or her request, the excuse from voting shall be made without debate. 7.10 (10) Order of Precedence of Motions: a. The following motions shall have priority in the order indicated: 1. Adjourn (when unqualified) and is not debatable and may not be amended; 2. Take a recess (when privileged); 3. Raise a question of privilege; 4. Lay on the table; 5. Previous question (2/3 vote required); 6. Limit or extend limits of debate (2/3 vote required); 7. Postpone to a certain time; 8. Commit or refer; 9. Amend; 10. Postpone indefinitely; 11. Main Motion. b. The first two motions are not always privileged. To adjourn shall lose its privilege character and be a main motion if in any way qualified. To take a recess shall be privileged only when other business is pending. c. A motion to adjourn is not in order: 1. When repeated without intervening business or discussion; PAGE 11 SALegal\Our Documents\0rdinances\11\CC Rules of Procedures.doc 2. When made as an interruption of a member while speaking; 3. While a vote is being taken. d. Only certain motions may be amended as provided in the most current edition of Robert's Rules of Order, revised. A motion to amend shall be undebatable when the question to be amended is undebatable. 7.11 (11) Reconsideration: A motion to reconsider any action of the Council can be made not later than the next succeeding official meeting of the Council. Such a motion can only be made by a member who voted with the prevailing side. It can be seconded by any member. In order to comply with the Texas Open Meetings Act, any Council member who wishes to make such a motion at a meeting succeeding the meeting where the action was taken shall notify the City Manager to place the item for reconsideration on the Council agenda. No question shall be twice reconsidered, except by unanimous consent of the Council, except that action related to any contract may be reconsidered at any time before the final execution thereof. A matter which was not timely reconsidered in the manner provided by this section or was reconsidered but the action originally taken was not changed by the Council cannot be reintroduced to the Council or placed on a Council meeting agenda for a period of six (6) months unless this rule is suspended as provided for in these Rules of Procedure. 7.12 (12) The Previous Question: When the previous question is moved and seconded, it shall be put as follows: "Shall the main question be now put?". There shall then be no further amendment or debate; except that nothing herein shall allow the previous question to be called prior to a least one opportunity for each member of the Council to speak on the question before the Council. Any pending amendments shall be put in their order before the main question. If the motion for the previous question is lost, the main question remains before the Council. An affirmative vote of 2/3 of the Council shall be required to move the previous question. To demand the previous question is equivalent in effect to moving "That debate now cease, and the Council shall immediately proceed to vote on the pending motion". In practice, this is done with the phrase "Call for the question", or simply saying "Question". 7.13 (13) Withdrawal of Motions: A motion may be withdrawn, or modified, by its movant without asking permission until the motion has been stated by the Presiding Officer. If the movant modifies his or her motion, the seconding council member may withdraw his or her second. After the question has been stated, the movant shall neither withdraw it nor modify it without the consent of the Council. The subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment. A motion to amend an amendment shall be in order, but one to amend an amendment to an amendment shall not be in order. 7.14 (14) Appropriations of Money: Before formal approval by the Council of motions providing for appropriation of money, information must be presented to the Council showing purpose of the appropriation. In addition, before finally acting on such an appropriation, the Council shall obtain a report from the City Manager as to the availability of funds and his or her recommendations as to the desirability of the appropriation. PAGE 12 SALegal\Our Documents\0rdinances\1 MCC Rules of Procedures.doc 7.15 (15) Transfer of Appropriations: At the request of the City Manager, at any time during the fiscal year, the Council may by resolution transfer an unencumbered balance of an appropriation made for the use of one department, division, or purpose; but no transfer shall be made of revenues or earnings of any non-tax supported public utility to any other purpose. 8. (2-29(h)) CREATION OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 8.1 (1) Council Committees: The Council may, by resolution and as the need arises, authorize the appointment of Council committees. Any committee so created shall cease to exist when abolished by resolution of the Council. 8.2 (2) Citizen Boards, Commissions, and Committees: The Council may create other Committees, Boards and Commissions to assist in the conduct of the operation of the City government with such duties as the Council may specify not inconsistent with the City Charter or Code. Creation of such Committees, Boards and Commissions and memberships and selection of members shall be by Council resolution if not otherwise specified by the City Charter or Code. Any Committee, Board, or Commission so created shall cease to exist when abolished by a resolution approved by the Council. No Committee so appointed shall have powers other than advisory to the Council or to the City Manager, except as otherwise specified by the Charter or Code. 8.3 (3) Appointments: a. Individual City Council members making nominations for members to citizen boards and commissions will consider interested persons on a citywide basis. b. The City Council will make an effort to be inclusive of all segments of the community in the board and commission appointment process. City Council members will consider ethnicity, gender, socio-economic levels, and other factors to ensure a diverse representation of Denton citizens. c. The City Council will take into consideration an individual's qualifications, willingness to serve, and application information in selecting nominations for membership to each board and commission. d. In an effort to ensure maximum citizen participation, City Council members will continue the general practice of nominating new citizens to replace board members who have served three consecutive terms on the same board per the provisions of Denton Code of Ordinances, Sec. 2- 65. e. Each City Council member will be responsible for making nominations for board and commission places assigned to him or her, which shall correspond to the City Council member's place. Individual City Council members will make nominations to the full City Council for the governing body's approval or disapproval. 8.4 (4) Rules of Procedure: Board, Commission and Committee members shall comply PAGE 13 S:\Legal\Our Documents\0rdinances\1 I\CC Rules of Procedures.doc with the provisions of Article III of Chapter 2 of the Code of Ordinances. Each Board, Commission and Committee member shall be provided a copy of these rules of procedure and a copy of the City of Denton Handbook for Boards, Commissions and Committees, which shall govern operational procedures of such Boards, Commissions and Committees. 9. (2-29 (i)) VOTES REQUIRED Questions on which the voting requirement is varied by the Charter, State Statutes and these rules are listed below: 9.1 (1) Charter and State Statutory Requirements: a. Charter Amendment - Five Votes: Ordinances submitting proposed Charter amendments must be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the Council. (Article XI, Section 3, Texas Constitution and Chapter 9, Texas Local Government Code (Vernons 2009.) For a seven member Council, this means five members must vote affirmatively. b. Levying Taxes - Five Votes: Ordinances providing for the assessment and collection of certain taxes require the approval of two-thirds of the members of the Council (Section 302.101 Texas Tax Code) (Vernons, 2009). c. Changing Paving Assessment Plans - Five Votes: Changes in plans for paving assessment require a two-thirds vote of the Council (Section 313.053(e) Transportation Code, Vernons 2009). d. Changes in Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Classifications: In cases of a written protest of a change in a zoning regulation or zoning classification by the owners of twenty (20%) percent or more either of the area of the lots included in such proposed change, or of the lots immediately adjoining the same and extending two hundred feet (200') therefrom, such amendment shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all members of the City Council; six (6) votes of the City Council is required to override the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission that a zoning change be denied (Section 211.066 Tex. Loc. Gov't Code and Section 35.3.4.C.(4) Denton City Code (Development Code). e. Amendment of Tax Abatement Policy: The guidelines and criteria adopted as the City's Tax Abatement Policy may be amended or repealed by a vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all members of the City Council (Section 312.002(c)) Texas Tax Code (Vernons 2009). 10. (2-290)) SEVERABILITY CLAUSE That if any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. PAGE 14 S:\Legal\Our Documents\Ordinances\l MCC Rules of Procedures.doc SECTION 2. That Ordinance Nos. 2009-174 and 2010-312 are hereby repealed. SECTION 3. That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: es PAGE 15 This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation ACM: Fred Greene ` SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution allowing Metzler's Food and Beverage to be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at the 35 Conferette March 10 - March 13, 2011, upon certain conditions; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an agreement in conformity with this resolution; and providing for an effective date. Staff recommends approval of Metzler's Food and Beverage request. BACKGROUND The 35 Conferette outdoor concerts will be held on Hickory Street and the Williams Trade Square. Metzler's Food and Beverage has requested to be able to sell alcoholic beverages on City property during the four-day festival. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the resolution and agreement as submitted, which is consistent with agreements for other events serving alcoholic beverages. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) The request to allow the sale and consumption of alcohol on City property for this event was approved at the February 15, 2011, City Council meeting. FISCAL INFORMATION None EXHIBITS 1. Resolution 2. City of Denton Agreement with Metzler's Food and Beverage Respectfully submitted: ~M-0 Emerson Vorel Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator codad global aQendas`nei~Jl iborhood sv cs`.2011 agenda items march 2011 march 1 - 2011 .40 - pard 35 conferette sale of alcohol - metzler's`.2 - res - 35 conferette alcohol sell.doc RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ALLOWING METZLER' S FOOD & BEVERAGE TO BE THE SOLE PARTICIPANT ALLOWED TO SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT THE 35 CONFERETTE MARCH 10-13, 2011, UPON CERTAIN CONDITIONS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT IN CONFORMITY WITH THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton ("City") is the owner of the Williams Trade Square; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the public interest to select only one vendor of alcoholic beverages at the 35 Conferette; and WHEREAS, Metzler's Food & Beverage (called "Metzler's") has requested that they be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages at this year's 35 Conferette March 10-13, 2011; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION 1. Metzler's shall be the sole participant allowed to sell alcoholic beverages on City property at the 35 Conferette March 10-13, 2011, at Williams Trade Square located on Hickory Street upon the following conditions: 1. They shall be responsible to obtain the temporary license and permit for selling alcoholic beverages approved by appropriate state agency; 2. They shall provide the security necessary for the sale of alcoholic beverages; 3. They shall provide general comprehensive liability insurance from a responsible carrier, with the City as an additional insured, in the amount of $500,000.00; 4. They shall provide Liquor/Dram Shop Liability in the amount of $250,000 per occurrence; 5. They agree to indemnify the City of Denton against any liability incident to the selling of alcoholic beverages at the 35 Conferette. SECTION 2. The City Manager or his designee is authorized to execute an agreement in conformity with this Resolution, which shall be substantially in the form of the agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. codad global aQendas`nei~Jl iborhood sv cs`.2011 agenda items march 2011 march 1 - 2011 .40 - pard 35 conferette sale of alcohol - metzler's`.2 - res - 35 conferette alcohol sell.doc PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 12011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 of 2 cAdocuments and settings\]08214\Iocal settings\temporary internet files\content.outlook\8geyydI3\35 conferette alcohol contract.doc CITY OF DENTON AGREEMENT WITH METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § This Agreement, made this day of 2011, by and between the City of Denton, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY" and METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE. WITNESSETH, that in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 GENERAL The City grants to METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE the exclusive privilege to sell alcoholic beverages, subject to the exceptions and conditions hereinafter set forth, for the 35 CONFERETTE on MARCH 10 - MARCH 13, 2011 to be held on city property located at Williams Trade Square on Hickory Street. This privilege does not extend beyond the date of the 35 CONFERETTE set for the year 2011. ARTICLE 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE in order to exercise the privilege to sell alcoholic beverages must perform the following: A. METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall be solely responsible for the rental and payment for any booth space necessary for the sale of alcoholic beverages at the 35 CONFERETTE. B. METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall be solely responsible to obtain any temporary license and permit necessary for the selling of alcoholic beverages at the 35 CONFERETTE. C. METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall be solely responsible for the obtaining and paying for any security necessary for their sale of alcoholic beverages at the 35 CONFERETTE. METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE'S failure to do any of the above and to show proper proof of compliance shall waive their right to exercise the privilege of selling alcoholic beverages at the 35 CONFERETTE. ARTICLE 3 LOCAL RULES AND REGULATION METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE agrees to abide by all municipal, county, state and federal laws, ordinances, rules and regulations and specifically, without limitation, to obtain all necessary and proper licenses, permits and authorizations, and to comply with the requirements of any duly authorized person acting in connection therewith. METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall pay all taxes, if any, of every nature and description arising out of or in any manner connected with the sale of alcoholic beverages. METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE will exercise reasonable care and due diligence in their sale of alcoholic beverages at the 35 CONFERETTE. ARTICLE 4 INDEMNITY AGREEMENT METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall indemnify and save and hold harmless the CITY and its officers, agents, and employees from and against any and all liability, claims, demands, losses, and expenses, including but not limited to, court costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the CITY, and including, without limitation, damages for bodily and personal injury, death and property damage, resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE or its officers, shareholders, agents, or 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 parties' 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 immunity, which defenses are hereby expressly reserved. ARTICLE 5 INSURANCE During the performance of the Agreement, METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall maintain the following insurance with an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Texas by the State Insurance Commission or any successor agency that has a rating with Best Rate Carriers of at least an A- or above: A. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $500,000 for each occurrence and not less than $500,000 in the aggregate, and with property damage limits of not less that $100,000 for each occurrence and not less than $100,000 in the aggregate. B. Liquor/Dram Shop Liability in the amount of $250,000 per occurrence for any event occurring on City-owned property where alcohol will be provided or served. 35 CONFERETTE Agreement - Page 2 C. METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall furnish insurance certificates or insurance policies at the CITY'S request to evidence such coverages. The insurance policies shall name the CITY as an additional insured on all such policies, and shall contain a provision that such insurance shall not be canceled or modified without written notice to the CITY and METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE. In such event, METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall, prior to the effective date of the change or cancellation, serve substitute policies furnishing the same coverage. ARTICLE 6 NOTICES All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under this Agreement shall be personally delivered or mailed to the respective parties by depositing same in the United States mail to the address shown below, certified mail, return receipt requested, unless otherwise specified herein. Mailed notices shall be deemed communicated as of three (3) days' mailing: METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE CITY OF DENTON: Roy Metzler, Owner City Manager 628 Londonderry Lane 215 E. McKinney Denton, Texas 76205 Denton, Texas 76201 All notices shall be deemed effective upon receipt by the party to whom such notice is given, or within three (3) days' mailing. ARTICLE 7 ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement, consisting of five (5) pages and exhibits, 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, and agreements which may have been made in connection with the subject matter hereof. ARTICLE 8 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 from the remainder of this Agreement and shall not cause the remainder to be invalid or unenforceable. In such event, the parties shall reform this Agreement to replace such stricken provision with a valid and enforceable provision which comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. 35 CONFERETTE Agreement - Page 3 ARTICLE 9 DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED In performing the services required hereunder, METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age, or physical handicap. ARTICLE 10 PERSONNEL METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE 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, or have any contractual relations with the CITY. ARTICLE 11 ASSIGNABILITY METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE 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 CITY. ARTICLE 12 MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, or limitation herein contained shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged therewith, and 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, and unless such waiver or modification is in writing and duly executed; and the parties further agree that the provisions of this section will not be waived unless as set forth herein. ARTICLE 13 MISCELLANEOUS A. Venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton County, Texas. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. B. 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. 35 CONFERETTE Agreement -Page 4 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the City of Denton, Texas has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized City Manager, and METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE has executed this Agreement through its duly authorized undersigned officer on this the day of 12011. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS GEORGE C. CAMPBELL, CITY MANAGER ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: METZLER'S FOOD & BEVERAGE BY: OY MET R, OWNER GJ.! WITNESS: BY: 35 CONFERETTE Agreement - Page 5 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 Questions regarding this report may be directed to DEPARTMENT: Human Resources/Risk Management Scott Payne at 349-7836 AI-L ACM: Jon Fortune SYT- SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a full property damage release of all claims between the City of Denton, Texas against Lindsey Palmer and Bobby Palmer, in settlement of a claim arising on or about May 1, 2009; authorizing the City Manager and City Attorney to take actions necessary to finalize settlement of this claim; and declaring an effective date. BACKGROUND On May 2, 2009, a vehicle operated by Lindsay Palmer disregarded a stop sign at the intersection of Hartlee Field Road and FM 428 (E. Sherman). Ms. Palmer then crossed FM 428, left the roadway, and continued down the embankment and crashed through the fence surrounding the Water Works Park. The vehicle came to a stop after striking and causing significant damage to the yellow "speed slide" inside the Park. At the time the police report was completed, charges against Ms. Palmer were still pending. We were later advised by the District Attorney's Office that Ms. Palmer was charged with Driving While Intoxicated - Second Offense. Ms. Palmer was sentenced to jail time, probation, and community service, but no restitution was ordered by the Court. The damage to City property included the following: Slide Repair $45,496.00 Fence Repair $ 4,275.00 Engineer Inspection $ 1,500.00 Total $51,271.00 Ms. Palmer has automobile insurance coverage through Progressive Insurance with policy limits of $25,007 for property damage. Progressive Insurance has agreed to pay the full policy limit in exchange for a full release. RECOMMENDATION Progressive Insurance will not issue a check without the executed release. While the release would preclude us from pursuing further collections actions against Ms. Palmer, it appears that Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 she has no additional assets so the City would be hard pressed to even recover the $25,007 being offered by Progressive. It is staff's recommendation that we execute the property damage release and accept the policy limits of $25,007 as settlement of this claim. FISCAL INFORMATION As part of the fence repair and constriction of the new slide at the Water Works Park, approximately $30,775 was expended from the Risk Retention Fund (860002.6551). Proceeds from the settlement will be deposited back into the Risk Retention Fund. EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 - Police Report Exhibit 2 - Accident Photos (3) Exhibit 3 - City Demand Letter Exhibit 4 - Progressive Insurance Letter & Release Exhibit 5 - Palmer Insurance Declarations Page Exhibit 6 - Ordinance Respectfully submitted: Scott Payne Risk Manager Respectfully submitted: Carla Romine-Haggmark, 349-8344 Director of Human Resources - - MAY 0 7 ?009 Law ErrDrcermY. and TxDO, Use C-NLY ❑ FATAL ❑ CMV INVOLVED ❑ SCHOOL BUS RELATED ❑ RAILROAD RELATED ❑ UEDICAL ADVISORY BOARD ❑ HR AND RUN ❑ AMENDMENTISUPREMENT J Texas Peace Officer's Cr Report tam eqi (GSO-EPC) ~y Submission of Crash Records: This report may be submitted via the CRIS Web Portal, electronically submitted via Page 1 of 2 XML, or by mailing to the Texas Department of Transportation, Crash Records, PC Box 149349. Austin, TX 78714. Questions? Call: 51 214 86-5 7 80 CRAASH OCCUD LocI 09005820 COUN^Y DENTON CTTYORTown DENTON ORII IF CRASH WAS OUTSIDE CITY Lm TS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ OF TxDOT n INDICATE FROM NEAREST TOWN MILES N S E W ROADONHVHICHCRASH 2400 HARTLEE FILED CONSTRUCTION ZONE OYES SNO SPEED 30 OCCURRED BLOCK NUMBER STREET OR ROAD NAME ROUTE NUMBER OR STRUT CODE WORKERS PRESENT OYES S NO LIMIT wTERsEc wGSREET 4400 E- SHERMAN FM 428 CONSTRUCTION ZONE OYES [D NO SPEED 55 OR RR XING NUMaEA BLOCK NUMBER STREET OR ROAD NAME ROUTE NUMBER OR STREET CODE WORKERS PRESENT ❑ YES S NO UMn OFT. ❑ ❑ O ❑ OF LATITUDE NOTATINTERSECTION ❑Ml. N S E W swn raeroroz wenas: mrrrrs=cwo mree eo wo v:rowe a~or LONGffWE EMEfT NTCR]ECTWO STIa[T A IItlClID1`! ~Cm DATE OF MAY 2 2009 DAY OF SATURDAY HOUR 3:36 SAM • • WEEX o•T re.a OPM .oau:c •-MOTOR VEHICLE 4-P OESTRIAN 7.NON.CONTACT WVWEK73C46P023022 ALTERED OYES 2-TRAIN SMOTORIZED CONVEYANCE S-OTHER VINi VEHICLEtCIGHT ®NO 3-PEDALCYLSST STOWED YEAR 2006 COLOR6 GRAY VW MODEL PASSAT BCov 4 DR SED. LICENSE 10 TX PVJ500 MODEL. MAKE NAME STYLE PLATE .,`.x sere w- DRNERs PALMER LINDSAY A 2610 LAKEHILL LN 8C, CARROLLTON, TX 75006 NAME wT Tar. .u •oorsaa C-T. an. cT•TL aol rwa r<nnern 1-VALID LCANCELLEDDENIED DRIVERS TX 06353853 C 05103!79 n~'~ 1 32 APENDEDrHEVOKED 64JN OWN ucEnSE - c*•r[ a.vacn awsvmc ri.oan[Trnra urcrnsrlaa wre Drama, - N R5 1.WHTE 4-AStAN DRIVERS MALE DRIVER'S ETHNICITY 1 3D SoTOTT+ER SEX FEMALE OCCUPATION POLICE FIREFIGHTER. EMS. ON EMERGENCY ❑nc«ecxea ruueeauwww.wurne _ BLACK TYPE OF ALCOHOL SPECIMEN i AKEN 4 TEST TYPE OF ORUG SPECIMEN TAKEN 3 TEST DRUG 1. ,-BREATX 2ELOOD 3MNE 4-NONE S-REFUSED -RESULTS _ 1-BLOOD 2-URINE 3-NONE aREFUSED _ RESULTS CATEGORY 2 ❑LESSE-` SAME S DINNER a.+21•ur•n novt4aaL s lE 1FD, or~nw t£ aMO~'~ w'hERI •maEaa RTtaei. cr. ar•TE sl ~CE OONO PROGRESSIVE 40573611-6 VEHICLE DAMAGE RATING 12-FD-4 OEV F---" IF] ,-MOTOR VEHICLE. 4-PEDESTRIAN 7-NON-CONTACT ALTERED OYES 2-TRAIN 5-MOTORIZED CONVEYANCE 3OTHER VIN 9 VEHCLE HEIGHT ❑ NO 3PEDALCYLIST STOWED YEAR COLORS MODEL BODY LICENSE MODEL MAKE NAME STYLE PLATE .uue ar•re .warn ORWER'S NAME wr rwsr u •nv+aas LroeeT-SV, ar•:LLeI PMOHE wYaEn I-VALID 44MCELLEMENIND ORIVER'S LICENSE 2-NOT VALID 54EXPIRED LICENSE STATUS _ }SUSPENOEDIREVOKED r.UNKNOWN .AM url[n ~ •.••mc oso.aeTm+a •csracrww wre w eanl DRIVER'S 1-1VHRE 4-ASIAN DRIVER'S ❑MALE OFU\.V'S ETHNICITY _ 2-HISPANIC SOTHER SEX - OFEMALE OCCUPAT.ON POLICE. FIREFIGHTER EMS. ON EMERGENCY ❑voa<ec;~. vtF.ceew•wwwwa.T 3-BLACK TYPE OF ALCOHOL SPECIMEN TAKEN TEST TYPE OF•ORUG SPECIMEN TAKEN TEST DRUG 148REA7H 2-8L000 3-URINE 4-NCNE 5-REFUSED _ RESULTS _ 143LOM 2-URINE 3NON-c 4A-FUSED _ RESULTS CATEGORY 2. ❑ LESSt ❑°WNER•~w•naFa+trasvTC•ao.ct¢aocaNa,owaw, •alaT~,.~..ar.TE>9, LIABILITY OYES INSURANCE ONO VEHICLE DAMAGE RATING ❑EXP nuwxna.~. wwrn DAMAGE TOPROPERTYOTHER THAN vEmlaEs FENCE, LANDSCAPE, STONE AND CONCRETE, FIBERGLASS SLIDE, CLEAN UP SEE ABOVE CITY OF DENTON, 215 E. MCKINNEY, DENTON, TX 16D $ 450,000 OBIECT NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER FEET FROM CURB DAMAGE ESTMATEE IN YOUR OPINION. DID THIS CRASH RESULT IN AT LEAST $7.000.00 DAMAGE TO ANY ONE PERSONS PROPERTY? S YES ❑ NO CHARGES FILED NAME PENDING CHARGE CnanON0 NAME CHARGE CITATION:; OF ° 05/02109 3:48 AM Hrnv DISPATCHED ATMSN 05!02/09 4:04 AM RD PEOROTF 05/03109 WE nas wre TYPED OR PRINTED REPORT S YES NAMEOFWVESTIGATOR MARK KING IDL 120 AGENCY DENTON PD DISTNAREA 866 COMPLETE 0 NO Form CR-3 2 03109) 2 of 2 SEAT POSIT101 SOUCITATION EJECTED RESTRAINT USED A[RHAG MELYE'USE INJIfRY SEVERTY r.iRON: ten 7-T1m10 IT iR OJIGT[OA PEttlON10F3DE SO AEOFAE CONTACT FRDU FW 1aIa,ADER fTAP Oar t-SxclE0. rF".T 1#'OT APPtr.°r SNTTW,DAUAOED K+OiED i-rRpJi CEKTFA 4TNFID IT 1.1. PFRL0r6 LEEJOUp PROEESadJK EYPIOTUE)lT AfJroR lYEi }-0.p{ApER 6L':OKtT L~.C }E TNO: DEP.OTED 2NCrW,Nai DN4GED M L.IwnT.MOO:AIRT 1ERONT RrOT F.N_IOEI.,_ M1/.:TOAiET•. CNOEOPRAGTOA PNTi'nAK, ADIOibA 1rEf. RART4L 1(A>pai ml 4pS1Gli iDFJIOYEO. rAD.T iNgRN.rMK, yty,r~ LNd MGVIU.]'T•TIYG NIIfRY OEi TtfR rlfiiROO AAEI. PRVA:E OIt£inYTVL 09 •NT O:MER pE0.M WoI APgK;AFTE .-Oa~lEl.:. f.dOfGiMtYip tWIXMONN aOEpLpTED, 110E WOS WOM CIOLtOIE NJURY SfECOTD IfEAT LFJrTEK ISWifaE `FM"~E ITEOIT.ERFD CAU3NliDOTANELL:u CArrE SIINKKQKK S-nILO TEAT. rrGKO ve iLEPLOYO.OIIEP S{IIDTNQNI rFWCR. MKC aAAFJ ~fSEGOKO fFAT RANI r}aa.trdw' RE,^.3A:0RT AOErPT (Trfnln:, rt~fOt6T1 s.oaJ SEA:. tmxNOKN WNIWONN "ter TDwmAWG 15AEarGTO DAVAGEOOYEOYES OES VEHICLE eLGYOVEDTO 519 S. ELM, DENTON, TX 8Y MIKES TOWING O COrRETE ALL prig d Au occiK•AN-a IaAJ1E5. POlTroNS.laaTRAINSS OSE~. ET. rlEU • i4T hOKRK0. n 4 KOT RECyYRT 10 ftgrc UDrSbtEf lfr e.a NLLD OR 0}AMED. i:l EJECTED KESTRIDiT AKO4O 10NET AGE tEY OIAIrtT wparrd ..ur OA-Si.rRi:.ID) AWRESi IRED CODE 1 PALMER, LINDSAY 2610 LAKEHILL 8C, CARROLLTON, TX 75006 N 1 1 3 4 29 F A S f r DUE TO OYES dSABLWGDAMAGE ONO VEHICLE REMOVED TO BY REN. .m Twl ~N.N T~¢~nAr. rwrr N~r_s s.R.~roµwwr ~~wnEas m~iED On w~uD.,~E ~Ate!! in. EvfcTEO .ww NESrEr •aE !EZ I cox f r i f a PEO-rED.t_KOT, ~ww~iEOSCiovuTiEi •oialmoA VpnnE ucoNa cmJO etAmv 60L lPCLOQII RE61AT OPECYEN RE]RRT IELNEi AOf iUt OOIF CONYET. ETG CACJLLTY KATE V3T. FauT. Yl A sec.. TAISK TutFJ. GSPGOrTTd OF Nl•en CA INATRED F lrOID.eNDF/ R[u Ff LQN TD M TOE NOTriFD TOTE ARRNED Ai AEpUTANCE r Or ATTENDU.T! r Of PERlO t SCE.E dR F O pOYE31 TRAKlPORTED FOR TKFA:rIFJIT 1 METHODIST DALLAS CAREFLITE 3:47 AM 4:02 AM C4 2 1 COMPLETE THIS SECTION IF PERSON KILLED (7 f of v u ommATd die! llarml JOdays d Pa assn DlDaaf omplNf Eis area ar1E n al the supplmeM ID ft Crash RemTds BDTearr) TIT • DATE apfiiN TOE Os CE•TN ITEM• WiE OF DEATH IwE OF OEI.:N I:F.11• mrmorD - -corn - ITEUi MT!Of OFATN TWE OF DEAN aVET. TMINARRATIVEOPl•!ON Wwr1AT NAPPfl FD Or.ON .rmrTb4E StLETO F KECFZE .I -,WAY. Nor UNIT 1 WAS W/B HARTLEE FILED ROAD. UNIT 1 RAN THROUGH 1 i r6WAY•WroEO UIPKOIf 7ED rEpNN O ~iE T,omofo. woiECIFD OART{P THE STOP SIGN LOCATED AT HARTLEE FIELD ROAD AND !G"`"°D CROSSED FM 428. UNIT 1 LEFT THE ROADWAY AND STRUCK A FENCE. UNIT 1 DROVE THROUGH A FENCE AND STRUCK A WATER SLIDE. ( T'1' FACTORS AND CONDITIONS LISTED ARE THE INVESTIGATOR'S OPINION ~+rn..-vaaernos a 16 61 A67 - - - r - Iam.to. roso-aarsTa li AuArnuoaAnEV 'n.ao:cwT.DEVnao~ EV4,1C444Vlee- 114EL-0R,1 leE fpK~KATIOJI WETr Oiil NYE1EnE nnMT A, .cw.®IUEw.Ea.uc.vF owEe.pa EV+m+crarF r.on¢R r.nDRi m:Edug TRAFFIC COMOL ROADWAY. RSATICN 1 snf>=sesaE OErECn ..Iaia.Kp monosa~ rrSS16HIN IRIF}ILIMd ISNApb®I potl1G NDE r-M51nIO T9lMIgR aMG1FATIaI 4WF0111KiY noslECUm fTVAlomsm.u sar•rarnEn Drapr~jO,wKWIAIrT~j l•IOPBNTIK sstvaor .aaAn mrE >drfsowwAi nOSRFCwROfID.901 eAlsic ULLIW.WNKPASM7 VEHIG.E DEFECTS 4YELDSOI nalosfwA D iDOSD9l vAC1¢riJm RraKUrii.TwTSaicTAV oosArao saoTrnEV.N.AUVnp soEfmlEUNC IC~AKrs Jn•ow rs..nmA STY aarculE ~ AK2wN A nollcarAO wu csral.i mlfTR;KTIY oflNirDlswafglFlAL">/Jnrrol sGETTGrnEa NOSTntArs sfal.utort s®IrTn srra ,,w.¢Yn naTSEaI 1 uaiTr•cTaKNSesnE. sasouNm sDVm tcErsa*Ea.o it lArFS isuaeuc!muort .or.cun:aE acwE*crnEIIGDI swo©oowarorunclwE soE•E:JnEaNC nrtKSTC 1AIFs nGlosE riTlAUtxWJar. aaE>arEiE,ctrntow .aFECriEUwm.uiERNCi PART OFROAOMiY ROADWAY AIIGNAENT UGHT CON07IDN arnIDrom.Tan sxm sNJSeriAGUnrASS wtFROEK1 aEARNCE nGErra{aNOwra!mw5 DrN1IDmDINENfl4EVIE WUOS A1DEAip iD STi OfIAEi rIGErET{RrOS:E'AIC.IZOI wwlAr4 riTRKOTi.tFtEl tdrNEll FiAriIW fp1EA NsAi®mQ.4 MAV 61prnii `XNUFLNTWFC r aJEFF.:T{T/1CCt rIi.! SAFRICFKND 101M0(:. CAYrE r1)FI4w1 SCMIKOiDai® riM.VOMr aJYLIDmN®YfYLOGAII }HMlELM11GRIlDl3 ppEs~r{DYl(tI NTa lifrlARCE KNa SfIRFnn.RLQ6i SfJ1o.Lr+IrEp F-i41PJ mFKS i0r61 Lf91 VMiiESw Ip F44W^IIOE aEpI RNF ~ IGIRTEtFlQ ~ AWN.WEK)7~ rs.aramKwmwnisEi. sr~ssao aIS7naauA socr.elw samcrnlu SGR.J a.Ain TO C+EraIr oANSOC rov YJpfpµsui.msrTTllorr TDVplne SoElua saF.x NUOrtiY snv wAim maivATnacfniJZ ~ SNJEflbrl }m. ear YiAtED WSro.rd stNin Nl! NiPEEDFCasEAllOi nf~rosivral raga a:ullcsFUwnp.¢u.N KAHNTrf} asATm rornoltpn•ErEACLCYKIe>tF a^,aaExruNrsECT.an mlDaaoTITSr TYPE OF ROAD 3RFA:E WEkTHM SLRFAC_ CONDfiION nrAr~roTEADfd.aEK w:,7srrcmn ..rwFyluoanT.ro4lr«r v~oFiT soar rcEKIInDInr ratERECApssw•a T00'. rcao.iKa. oKr WAtlD mT[1D ROw.rIN.301•JrE 62.OOmIb1101EA:T-NfOGTA`E iaAKilV SOTIP i•NK sonFn sKET sa:rFJr asAtm roTETn cAr.irvsa avaEOwld vasr- Sala N•IOiavK saFETwa s+•Iaw. aaTlro.AwTTls sssw sJ.i~EnrorcAraw.TUpd.m o,m s.rglotna lTrD✓SFADK .aaava a im.+a swmlla. NCF aFAT®roTE:pmw-Tec}p, maroresn+ror rASCr, MAY 0 7 2009 .4+ ~«ft1~i i r 1 ~ ~rti f Td rr/1 N ~ c .~`~r fr}~k. ~ , F } •s ,.tr~rr r . /y N 7 ~ r r~ JI ` 7 , 116 j y~ d 1 ~ ~ 4 .61 T try`':;.: ' .F +d': ^':i`t4 d'i, d .a,,-h~, a3.p; r4:.'gs. 't v'+s^'~Y~ •a AGE. 5 ~y}. 'i•'` :9 a' . :;q l~~•r''^ } S.• . .:s 4 K. ' > ,x:~r'r ;'t>ni..z :d.< ..„yea.-. +~vtii ..Y `c°" g " y .ia~[.~'`~i '.r '\k i'tx+'~..,k+.:~• .``V..: ~w r, .a.::~~p xr1, i~-~,.~; .~:Y,a.1i'... ~•~.k.),,w!kN4.r.~ y~ br: •d 8:v lj''~a„q,~..7 d'~•`: t: M J I. ln, qk- -Al : aA grrt" ~ i { d ~ .s^.~ ,.x, ~ ;~Y~' . 1n r x„t Y . , rpax "~f. : ~ k.p 51'Np:. _.ia i•!. a • +r a. $'~"c h try, ^',yA -NN S,PY +Y~ ',uA,,~ A. a v a~,. ,;.94.x...- "lS'' ~'~'.-~t~~.+' • ,4 ~`a"',eT3 rv. 'Lt/,,,,',~f' a, q.?xr a^ Y ~i~. n1'. _ rZti wo~_.tw•,~.:.~~~ ..•}xs~;:~'`~I=~'~,s yy d s t `4 % . t ji.1 ~j:G, 3' rtk • 4~ ' Y sr r3~ c ~ & 4gr of '4~ it ~Yr.^~ .lY7~p'•ar(yj,;. r ) '~':fi'•a..x. 4 ~v 1. 1 a Y'. ,N err. A~,g~:'xa•. r ,a'~. "i.~ e • r n ,f . Y r A F. ASV vv~~ ~ +ev 1t1. w~dY W s P' . A All All, 0- sap 41-3 - ISAK r +i5yt 1 r {f Jj~t! ~ ~ rf~J%r` "i ~ ~ • j •ii r: I /04 Mill A 1 f • i• v^"a ':.W ir, yr, t \i'`~j'It'`k~+l~r~'~'~'~''~~/~,y+~, " `t'Wsty+~ "yy ~..c~~w'°au .m rrx r. 31~FA.. i~ ~b~l~' ~j4~~ ~x ~a^ •rw:'.F#V,m6i~'A. A / + ~1~1 tfa'm+~~ P 611 '1 < .o....k' 'n i '""4 'a m.;rr:; »^Yn Y~y ®.(•'~1 A y{61t f f y9r ~ ,y„,m kp ,f1~ y ~ y (L l■ j~ PPP S S f~$Fcw~"i y+"'. i } ,'t.,a `cV' P a , .as ° t' l p a v bS h ALA. 41, AV 0 6, A kx 3 t of } 601 E. Hickory, Suite A Denton, TX 76201 Telephone 940 349-7807 ` FAX 940 349-7803 Risk Management Tom Keel/ Safety/Claims Administrator August 4, 2009 Progressive Insurance Obiaj Okwufulueze 1350 N Glenville Road, Ste 100 Richardson, TX 75081 Re: Our Claim 20090501 DOL: 05/02/09 Your Claim 091616242 To Obiaj Okwufulueze, Please see the attached subrogation demand of $51,271.00 for your insured; Owner/Operator: Mrs. Linday Palmer Drivers License 06353853 Address- 2610 Lakehill Lane #8C Carrollton, TX 75006 Policy 40573611-6 Your insured was involved in an accident on May 2, 2009 in Denton, Texas, in which damages occurred to the City of Denton's property. The police report indicates your insured was responsible for this accident. Slide Repair $45,496.00 Fence Repair $4,275.00 Engineer Inspection $1,500.00 Total $51,271.00 My understanding is that your insured has coverage limits of $25,000.00. If this is the case, please forward a copy of your insured's declaration page and accept this as a demand for policy limits. If you have any questions, please call our office at (940) 349-7807. Sincerely, Tom Keel Safety and Claims Administrator 08/25/2009 16:42 FAX IaOO2/005 PROGRESSIVE CLAIMS 1350 N GLENVILLE DRIVE SUIT w w SUITE 100 RICHARDSON, TX 75081 /~+►8X Underwrhun By: - _ = - - - Progressive County Mutual Insurance Company Claim Number. 09.1616242 CITY OF DENTON Loss Date: May 1, 2009 Document Dace: August 25, 2009 601 E HICKORY Page 1 of 1 DEMON, TX 76205 clal ms.prog resslve.com Track the status and details of your claim, e-mail your representative or report a new daim. Claim Information Mr. Keel: Enclosed you will find our Property Damage release and a copy of our dierrt's Declaration's page as requested. Outlined in the release, we agreeto issue payment to the City of Denton for our policy limits of $25,007.00. Once we receive the original release back in our office we will issue the payment. We appreciate your cooperation and understanding with this claim. OBIAIULU OKWUFULUEZE Claims Department 1-972-699-4468 1-800-PROGRESSIVE (1-800-776-4737) Fax: 1.972.680-3720 Farm 2587 u (01/09) - rx 08/25/2009 1 G A2 FAX [a003/005 FULL PROPERTY DAMAGE RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS WITH INDEMNITY Claim N: 09-1616242 KNOW ALL BE THESE PRESENTS, that I (we), Tom Keel on behalf of the City of Denton TX for and in consideration of the sum of Twenty five thousand seven dollars ($25,007-00). the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does/do hereby for my heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns and any and all other persons, firms, employers, corporations, associations, or partnerships release, acquit and forever discharge Lindsay Palmer and Bobbv Palmer of and from any and all property damage claims resulting from an automobile accident which occurred on or about May 1, 2009, at or near 2400 Hartlee Field and East Sherman, Denton TX. It is understood and agreed that this settlement is in full compromise of a doubtful and disputed claim as to the nature and extent of the property damages, and that neither this release, nor the payment pursuant thereto shall be construed as an admission of liability, such being denied. It is further understood and agreed that the undersigned relies wholly upon the undersigned's judgment, belied and knowledge of the nature, extent, effect, and duration of said property damages and is made without reliance upon any statement or representation of the parry or parties hereby released or their representatives. In consideration of the payment of the sum, the undersigned further agrees to indemnify Lindsay Palmer and ao. Palmer and save them harmless from any and all further property damage claims arising because of any property damages, and, if necessary in order to save them so harmless, to satisfy on their behalf and judgment against them arising in any way out of the aforesaid accident. Any person who knowingly and with intent to defraud any insurance company or other person files a statement of claim containing any materially false information, or conceals, for the purpose of misleading, information concerning any fact material thereto, commits a fraudulent insurance act, which is a crime. THE UNDERSIGNED HAS READ THE FOREGOING RELEASE AND FULLY UNDERSTANDS IT. Signed Dote Witness Daze Signed Daze Witness Dare 08/25/2009 16:42 FAX IaOO4/005 PROGRESSIVE M09RE RYE" P.O. BOX 31260 DIRECT TAMPA, FL 33631 Policy number. 40573611-7 UnderWten by Progressive County mutual ins Co IJO PALMER lone 19, 2009 LINDSAY PALMER Policy Period: lul 15, 2009 - Jan 15, 2010 Page 1 of 2 progressive.com Online Service Make payments, check bllling activity. update pollcy Information or check status of a claim. Auto Insurance BOO-PROGRESSIVE (800.776'4737) Coverage Summary 24rhours aday,r7days aweek.sernGe' This is your Renewal Declarations Page The coverages, limits and policy period shown apply only if you pay for this policy to renew. Your coverage begins on July 15, 2009 at 12:01 a.m. This policy expires on January 15, 2010 at 12:01 a.m. Your insurance policy and any policy endorsements contain a full explanation of your coverage. The policy limits shown for a vehicle may not be combined with the limits for the same coverage on another vehicle. The policy contract is form 961 OD TX (05/06). The contract is modified by forms Z357 (06/06), Z445 TX (05/08) and Z538 (10/08). Automobile Theft Prevention Authority Fee Notice: A fee of $1.50 is payable in addition to the premium due under this policy. This fee reimburses the insurer, as permitted by 28 TAC Sec. 5.205, for the $1.00 fee per motor vehicle per year required to be paid to the Automobile Theft Prevention Fund under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 4413(37), Sec. 10, which became effective on June 6, 1991. Drivers and household residents Addlrkhnal ftr utbn PALMER Named insured LINDSAY PALMER Named insured outline of coverage 2006 Mitsubishi Galant LS Medium 4D VIN 4A3AB36S76EO31053 Umhs DeductUe Prertwm Liability to Others $464 Bodily Injury Liability $50,007 each person/$100,007 each accident Property Damage Liability $25,007 each accident Personal Injury Protection $5,003 each person/each accident 96 Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Bodily Injury Rejected - Uninsured/Underirrsured Property Damage Rejeced - Comprehensive Actual Cash Value $999 8 2 Collision Actual Cash Value $499 393 Total premium for 2006 Mitsubishi 51,035 Form 6489 TX (h tA3) Conynuod 08/25/2009 16:42 FAX 16005/005 Policy number 40573611.7 BOBBY PALMER UNDSAY PALMER Page 2 of 2 2002 Volkswagen Goff GIs VIN 9BWGB61JS24011743 limin DeduEWe Premium Liability to Others $265 Bodily Injury Liability $50,007 each Persor4100,007 each accident Property Damage liability $25,007 each accident Personal Injury Protection $5,003 each person/each accident 62 Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Bodily Injury Rejected . . Uninsured/Underinsured Property Damage Rejected ° Comprehensive.. Actual Cash Value $499 47 Collision Actual Cash Value $499 221 Total premium for 2002 Volkswagen 5595 2006 M■rutry Milan 40 VIN 3MEFM07Z96R638693 Umhs Deductible Premium Liabilit y to Others $309 Bodily Injury Liability $50,007 each rsorU$100,007 each accident Property Damage Liability $25,007 each accident Personal Injury Protection $5,003 each person/each accident 7 Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Bodily Injury Rejected - lJninsured%Undeir insured Property Da mage Rejec ted - Comprehensive Actual Cash Value $999 65 Collision Actual Cash Value $499 388 Tot for.....2006 60-15".Me.....rc.ury.......................................................................................................-----........,..,.......840 alpremiu...... ..m Subtotal policy premium $2,470.00 Automobiie Theft..Prevention.. Authority.. ..fee 1.50 Yotal 6 month policy premium $2,471.50 Premium discounts P~. 40573611-7 Online Quote and multi-car Vehide . 2006 Mitsubi5hi Galant L5 Medium 4D coverage package 2002 Volkswagen Golf GIs coverage package 2006 Mercury Milan 4D coverage package Lienholder information lienholder. CITI FINANCIAL PO BOX 3449 COPPELL, TX 75019 2006 Mitsubishi Galant LS Medium 4D lienholder. CAPITAL ONE AUTO FIN PO BOX 390907 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55439 2006 Mercury Milan 40 Form 6489 TX (11)03) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A FULL PROPERTY DAMAGE RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS BY THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AGAINST LINDSAY PALMER AND BOBBY PALMER, IN SETTLEMENT OF A CLAIM ARISING ON OR ABOUT MAY 1, 2009; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ACTIONS NECESSARY TO FINALIZE SETTLEMENT OF THIS CLAIM; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approves the Full Property Damage Release of All Claims by the City of Denton, Texas against Lindsay Palmer and Bobby Palmer, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee, and the City's Attorneys are hereby authorized to act on the City's behalf in approving and executing any and all documents necessary or appropriate to effectuate the terms of the settlement, and to take other actions necessary to finalize the settlement. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS; CITY ATTO Y r - _ B~: ZAOur 6awnenlc Ordinmmc l Iluatcrworks release ordin-doc 08/25/2009 16:42 FAX la 003/005 FULL. PROPERTY DAMAGE RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS WITH INDEMNITY Claim 0: 09-1616242 KNOW ALL BE THESE PRESENTS, that I (we), Tom Keel an behalf of the OW of Dentm TX for and in cousideration of the sum of Twenty five Mumd w3vo dollars ($25,007-00) the receipt whemeof is hereby acknowledged, does/do hereby for my hebs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns and auy and all other persons, firms, employers, corporations, associations, or partnerships release, acquit and forever discharge Lindsay, Palmer and BabbV Palmer of and Srom any and all property damage claims resulting from an automobile accident which occurred on or about May 1.2009, at or near 2400 Hartlee Neld and _East Sherman. Denton. TX. It is understood and agreed that this settlement is in full compromise of a doubtful and disputed claim as to the naaa a and extent of the property damages, and that neither this release, nor the payment pursuant thereto shall be construed as an admission of liability, such being denied It is further understood and agreed that the undersigned relies wholly upon d* undersigned's judgment, belief, and knowledge of the natn-e, extent, effect, and duration of said property damages and is made without reliance upon any statement or representation of the party or parties hereby released or their representatives. In consideration of the payment of the stun, the undersigned further agrees to indemnify Lindsay Palmer and bb&Ewer and save them harmless from any and all further property damage claims arising because of any property damages, and, if necessary in order to save them so harmless, to satisfy on their behalf anti judgment against them arising in any way out of the 4bresaid accident. Any pemn who knowinttly and with latent to defraud any insurance company or outer person Mes a statement of claim containing any materially false Information, or conceals, for the purpose of misleading, information concerning any tact material thereto, commits a fraudulent insurance act, which is a erhae. THE UNDERSIGNED HAS READ THE FOREGOING RELEASE AND FULLY UNDISTANDS rr. s;geed Date witam r>Q=. S*ed Date Wimess Date AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance All- ACM: Jon Fortune p SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance directing the publication of Notice of Intention to issue $11,500,000 in principal amount of Certificates of Obligation of the City of Denton for General Government and Solid Waste projects; and providing for an effective date. (Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval 3-0) BACKGROUND This ordinance provides the Notice of Intention to issue $11,500,000 in principal amount of Certificates of Obligation (COs) for General Government and Solid Waste projects, as required by state law. The notice will be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in the Denton Record Chronicle, with the date of the first publication to be at least thirty-one (31) days before the date tentatively set for the passage of the ordinance authorizing the issuance of the bonds. These bonds will provide funding of $3,439,550 for General Government and $7,850,330 for Solid Waste project costs. The additional $210,120 is for the cost of issuance and to allow flexibility in marketing and pricing the bond sale. Staff recommends the sale of $3,439,550 in COs for General Government, which is less than originally intended in the FY 2010-11 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). The decrease is due to the elimination of the Airport Western Development project, the postponement of the Public Safety Training Facility, and lower than anticipated vehicle replacements. Below is a listing of recommended CO funded projects for General Government's FY 2010-11 CIP: 1. Vehicle Replacements - $1,939,550* 2. Facility Maintenance Program - $1,500,000* Total - $3,439,550 *Previously authorized through a Reimbursement Ordinance. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 Staff recommends the sale of $7,850,330 in COs for Solid Waste projects. Below is a listing of recommended CO funded projects for Solid Waste's FY 2010-11 CIP: 1. Articulated Thick - $ 550,000* 2. Auto Side Load Thick - $ 262,865* 3. Auto Side Load Thick - $ 262,865* 4. Auto Side Load Thick - $ 262,865* 5. Commercial Container Equipment/Maintenance - $ 250,000 6. Container Thick - $ 75,000* 7. Flatbed Conversion - $ 25,000* 8. Forldift/Mofitt - $ 60,000* 9. Front Load Thick - $ 257,275* 10. Front Load Thick - $ 267,275* 11. Home Chemical Building - $ 25,000 12. Hybrid Box Thick - $ 66,800* 13. Integrated Waste Management System - $ 50,000 14. Landfill Software - $ 175,000 15. Mechanical Processing Equipment - $ 300,000* 16. Rear Load Thick - $ 212,530* 17. Recycling Carts - $ 100,000 18. Recycling Commercial Containers - $ 105,000 19. Recycling Facility Upgrades - $ 16,000 20. Residential Container Equipment/Assembly - $ 150,000 21. Roll-Off Thick - $ 182,050* 22. Side Load Thick - $ 257,275* 23. Solid Waste Equipment - $ 100,000 24. Solid Waste Management Planning - $ 50,000 25. Super Cab Thick - $ 50,000 26. Waste to Energy Pilot - $ 100,000 27. Leachate Recirculation - $ 50,000 28. Landfill Security Fence - $ 50,000 29. Landfill Improvements - $ 100,000 30. Ground Water Wells - $ 25,000 31. Parking Lot Expansion - $ 250,000 32. Parking Lot Expansion - $ 200,000 33. Landfill Expansion - $ 200,000 34. Landfill Property - $2,000,000 35. Landfill Capital Project Cost - $ 515,530 36. ELR Scada - $ 300,000 Total - $7,850,330 *Previously authorized through a Reimbursement Ordinance. Approximately $6.4 million in General Government and Solid Waste projects of the $11.5 million CO issuance has been previously authorized through Reimbursement Ordinances. 2 Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 3 The City sells bonds in accordance with the useful life of the asset that is being acquired. For example, vehicles are typically sold with bonds that will be paid within five years. For the FY 2010-11 proposed debt issuance for General Government and Solid Waste, $6,099,350 will be 5 year debt, $1,244,000 will be 10 year debt, and $3,946,530 will be 20 year debt. In addition, the 20 year debt issues will also have a 10 year call feature. Concurrently with the sale of the COs for General Government and Solid Waste projects, the City anticipates the sale of approximately $21,000,000 of COs for Wastewater and Electric projects and approximately $11,221,200 in General Obligation Refunding and Improvement Bonds to fund projects approved by voters in 2005 and refund existing utility system debt. The refunding is contingent upon market conditions and it must meet the City's debt policy requirements. If approved by the City Council, staff will proceed with the publication of the Notice of Intention and will schedule the Bond Ordinance for consideration and adoption on April 5, 2011. The closing and delivery of funds will be planned for May 10, 2011. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards or Commissions) On February 15, 2011, the Audit/Finance Committee unanimously recommended approval to forward the upcoming bond issuance to the City Council for consideration. FISCAL INFORMATION The ordinance is for the authorization to publish the Notice of Intention to sell $11,500,000 of Certificates of Obligation for General Government and Solid Waste projects. A notice is only required for the Certificates of Obligation. The General Obligation Refunding and Improvement Bonds were approved by the voters in the 2005 CIP election and there is no statutory requirement to post such notice for the refunding of existing Utility System debt. EXHIBITS 1. Preliminary Debt Schedule - Certificates of Obligation for General Government & Solid Waste 2. Ordinance Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer Preliminary $11,355,000 City- of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Issue Summary- Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 04/01/2011 1 Delivered 04/01/2011 General Solid 3eneral Govt 3eneral Govt Govt - 20 Solid Waste - Waste -10 Solid Waste - Issue - 5 Year - 10 Year Year 5 Year Year 20 Year Summary Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $1,950,000.00 $1,025,000.00 $485,000.00 $4,185,000.00 $225,000.00 $3,485,000.00 $11,355,000.00 Total Sources $1,950,000.00 $1,025,000.00 $485,000.00 $4,185,000.00 $225,000.00 $3,485,000.00 $11,355,000.00 Uses Of Funds Coats of Issuance 9,227.90 4,850.56 2,295.14 19,804.48 1,064.76 16,491.90 53,734.74 Deposit to Project Construction Fluid 1,940,000.00 1,019,000.00 481,000.00 4,165,000.00 225,000.00 3,470,000.00 11,300,000.00 Rounding AAnount 772.10 1,149.44 1,704.86 195.52 (1,064.76) (1,491.90) 1,265.26 Total Uses $1,950,000.00 $1,025,000.00 $485,000.00 $4,185,000.00 $225,000.00 $3,485,000.00 $11,355,000.00 2/17/2011 1 10:15AM First Southwest Company Public Finance Department Page Preliminary $11,355,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Issue Summary Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.'2012 1,160,000.00 4.7500o 712,575.22 1,872,575.22 09.'30.'2013 1,430,000.00 4.7500o 450,300.00 1,880,300.00 09.'30.'2014 1,490,000.00 4.7500o 380,950.00 1,870,950.00 09.'30.'2015 1,565,000.00 4.7500o 308,393.75 1,873,393.75 09.'30.'2016 1,640,000.00 4.7500o 232,275.00 1,872,275.00 09.'30.'2017 290,000.00 4.7500o 186,437.50 476,437.50 09.'30.'2018 300,000.00 4.7500o 172,425.00 472,425.00 09.'30 2019 310,000.00 4.7500o 157,937.50 467,937.50 "Q 1, 2020 330,000.00 4.7500o 142,737.50 472,737.50 w ?,1 2,121 350,000.00 4.7500o 126,587.50 476,587.50 093,1 2022 200,000.00 4.7500o 113,525.00 313,525.00 09.'30 2023 210,000.00 4.7500o 103,787.50 313,787.50 093,1 2024 215,000.00 4.7500o 93,693.75 308,693.75 01) 3n 2n25 230,000.00 4.7500o 83,125.00 313,125.00 093,1 2026 240,000.00 4.7500o 71,962.50 311,962.50 093,1 2027 250,000.00 4.7500o 60,325.00 310,325.00 09.'30.'2028 270,000.00 4.7500o 47,975.00 317,975.00 09.'3, 3,1 2029 280,000.00 4.7500o 34,912.50 314,912.50 0Q'3n 2030 290,000.00 4.7500o 21,375.00 311,375.00 w 2031 305,000.00 4.7500o 7,243.75 312,243.75 Total $11,3_5_5,000.00 $3,_508,_543.97 $14,863,_543.97 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $73,864.08 average Life 6.505 Years average Coupon 4.75000000o Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.75000000o Tice Interest Cost (TIC) 4.743085600 Bond Yield for arbitrage Purposes 4.743085600 All Inclusive Cost (aIC) 4.836728900 IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.750000000 Weighted average Maturity 6.505 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:15 AM First • Company _r- Finance Public Department Preliminary $1,950,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 General Govt - 5 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.30.'2012 32,000.00 4.7500o 119,38333 444,38333 09.'30.'2013 380,000.00 4.7500o 68,162.0 448,162.0 09.'30.'2014 395,000+00 4.7500o 49,76+25 444,76+25 09.'30.'201 415,000+00 4.7500o 30,518+75 445,518+75 09.'30.'2016 43,000.00 4.7500o 10,331.2 445,331.25 Total $1,950,000.00 $278,152.08 $2,228,152.08 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $5 q55 83 AceraQe Life ~ ~ l"stns Average Coupon 4.74999990o Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.74999990o True Interest Cost (Tl('i 4.7371787°, BondYieldfoi \rhiti:r-2 Purposes 4 A11Inclusiv- C<,sti A( 1 4.91U(,>,1? IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.74999990o weighted Average T\IaturitN 3.003 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:15 AM First • Company Finance Public Department Preliminary $1,025,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 General Govt - 10 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.30.'2012 65,000.00 4.7500o 65,26632 130,26632 09.'30.'2013 90,000.00 4.7500o 43,462.50 133,462.50 09.'30.'2014 90,000.00 4.7500o 39,187+50 129,187+50 09.'30.'2015 95,000.00 4.7500o 34,793.75 129,793.75 09.'30.'2016 100,000.00 4.7500o 30,162.50 130,162.50 09.'30.'2017 105,000.00 4.7500o 25,293.75 130,293.75 09.'30.'2018 110,000.00 4.7500o 20,187+50 130,187+50 09.'3(1 2019 115,000.00 4.7500o 14,843.75 129,843.75 .Q3n 2.00 125,000.00 4.7500a 9,143.75 134,143.75 w 2021 130,000.00 4.7500o 3,087+50 133,087.50 Total $1,025,000.00 $285,428.82 $1,310,428.82 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $6,009.03 ~eeraQe Life 5.862 Years Average Coupon 4.75000000o Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4+7500..0,o True Interest Cost (TIC) 4J428~C'10~ BondYieldfor lrhitra-aPm-poses 4 '4 'OX" All Inclusive Cost (AA( 1 4.8391?Wo IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.75000000o Weighted Average Maturity 5.862 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:15 AM First • Company Finance Public Department Preliminary $485,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 General Govt - 20 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.2012 5,000.00 4.7500o 31,493.82 36,493.82 09302013 15.000.00 47500o 22,443.75 37,443+75 09.'30.'2014 15,000.00 4.7500o 21,73125 36,73125 09302015 20-1-1,1 4.7500o 20 900,1,1 1, 91111 nn 09.'30.'2016 20,000.00 4.7500o 19,950.00 39,950.00 09302017 20,,-,1+,1,1 4.7500o 19,000+,", 39,-1,1+00 09.'30.'2018 20,000.00 4.75000 18,050.00 38,050.00 09.'3(1 2019 20,000.00 4.75000 17,100.00 37,100.00 "Q 1,1 'i 00 10 ,1,1,1 , I, I 4.75000 1( 1 5' i , 1, 1 36,150.00 w ?,1 2,121 2> , -0.00 4.7500o 15,08125 40,08125 09.'3,1 2022 25,,-,1+,1,1 4.75000 13,893.75 38,893.75 09.'3,1 2023 25,666+66 4.75000 12,70625 37,70625 09.'3,1 2024 25,,-,1+,1,1 4.75000 11,518.75 36,518.75 -01) 3, 2, 30 ,1,1,1 ,1,1 4.7500o 10,212.50 40,212.50 093,1 2026 30,000.00 4.7500o 8,787+50 38,787.50 09.'3,1 2027 30,,-,1+,1,1 4.75000 7,362.50 37,362.50 09.'30.'2028 35,000.00 4.75000 5,818.75 40,818.75 09.'3,1 2029 35,,-,1+,1,1 4.75000 4,15625 39,15625 nQ/3, 2030 3~ I'lo I' 4.7500o 2,493.75 37,493.75 w 2031 35,000.00 4.7500o 83125 35,83125 Total $485,000.00 $279,681.32 $764,681.32 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $5,888.03 average Life 12.140 Years average Coupon 4.750000000 Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.750000000 Tice Interest Cost (TIC) 4.745990800 Bond Yield for arbitrage Purposes 4.743085600 All Inclusive Cost (aIC) 4.800237100 IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.750000000 Weighted average Maturity 12.140 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:15 AM First • Company _r- Finance Public Department Preliminary $4,185,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Solid Waste - 5 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.'2012 700,000.00 4.7500o 256,155+63 956,155+63 09.'30.'2013 810,000.00 4.7500o 146,300.00 956,300.00 09.'30.'2014 850,000+00 4.7500o 106,875+00 956,875+00 09302015 890,000.00 4.7500o 65 54-1- 955 09.'30.'2016 935,000+00 4.7500o 22,206+25 97,206+25 Total $4,185,000.00 $597,086.88 $4,782,086.88 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $1, 570 '5 AceraQe Life 1, 14 l"~ tns Average Coupon 4.74 (n 1, 1, 1! O o Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.75000000o True Interest Cost (Tl('i 4.737181 BondYield foi \rhiti:i-2 Purposes 4 ^4 A11 Inclusiv- C <,st i A( i 4.9106"I' l IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.75000000o weighted Average T\laturitN 3.004 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:15 AM First • Company Finance Public Department Preliminary $225,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Solid Waste - 10 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.2012 15,000.00 4.7500o 14,309.38 29,309.38 09.'30.'2013 20,000.00 4.7500o 9,500.00 29,500.00 09.'30.'2014 20,000.00 4.7500o 8,550.00 28,550.00 09 30.2015 10 000 n' i 4.7500o 7 n~ i0 nn 27,r,-nn 09.'30.'2016 20,owoo 4.7500o 6,650.00 26,650.00 09.'30.'2017 25,000+-1 4.7500o 5,58125 30,58125 09.'30.'2018 25,000.00 4.7500o 4,393.75 29,393.75 09.'30 2019 25,000.00 4.7500o 3,20625 28,20625 0Q'3n 2020 25 000 00 4.7500o 2,018.75 27,018.75 w 2021 30,000.00 4.7500o 712.50 30,712.50 Total $225,000.00 $62,521.88 $287,521.88 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $1,31625 ~eeraQe Life 5.850 Years Average Coupon 4.75000040o Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.75000040o True Interest Cost (TIC) 4.742870700 Bond Y ield for lrhitra-a Pm-poses 4.743085600 All Inclusive Cost (Ah i 4+83933510o IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.750000400 Weighted Average Maturity 5.850 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:15 AM First • Company Finance Public Department Preliminary $3,485,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Solid Waste - 20 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.'2012 50,000.00 4.750°0 225,966.74 275,966.74 0930 013 115,000.00 4.75000 160,431.25 275,431.25 093/ 2014 120,000.00 4.75000 154,850.00 274,850.00 1 3, 1 -'015 125,000.00 4.75000 149,031.25 274,031.25 09 2016 130,000.00 4.75000 142,975.00 272,975.00 09 2017 140,000.00 4.75000 136,562.50 276,562.50 09.'30.'2018 145,000.00 4.75000 129,793.75 274,793.75 0936 2019 150,000.00 4.75000 122,787+50 272,787.50 no ;ii 020 1r;0.000.00 4.7500a 115.425"" 275,425.00 09 1 -',121 165,000.00 4.75000 107,706.25 272,706.25 09 2022 175,00+00 4.75000 99,631.25 274,631.25 09 2023 185600+00 4.75000 91,081.25 276,081.25 09 1 2024 190"100+00 4.75000 82,175.00 272,175.00 00 ;n 'n'5 1,n1nPi0.00 4.75000 72,912.50 272,912.50 09 2026 210,000.00 4.75000 63,175.00 273,175.00 09 2027 22-00.00 4.75000 52,962.50 272,962.50 09.'30.'2028 235,000.00 4.75000 42,156.25 277,156.25 092029 245,000.00 4.75000 30,756.25 275,756.25 00 1030 255,000.00 4.75000 18,881.25 273,881.25 09 2031 270,000.00 4.75000 6,412.50 276,412.50 Total $3,485,000.00 $2,005,672.99 $5,490,672.99 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $42,224.69 average Life 12.116 Years average Coupon 4.7500000°0 Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.750000000 Tice Interest Cost (TIC) 4.745980000 Bond Yield for arbitrage Purposes 4.743085600 All Inclusive Cost (aIC) 4.800373100 IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.750000000 Weighted average Maturity 12.116 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:15 AM First • Company _r- Finance Public Department sllegal\our documents\ordinances\11\notice of intent ordinance (general solid waste)2.docx ORDINANCE NO. 2011- AN ORDINANCE DIRECTING THE PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE $11,500,000 IN PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND SOLID WASTE PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, it is deemed necessary and advisable that Notice of Intention to Issue Certificates of Obligation be given as hereinafter provided; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That attached hereto is a form of "NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON", the form and substance of which are hereby adopted and approved, and made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes. SECTION 2. That the City Secretary shall cause said NOTICE, in substantially the form attached hereto, to be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, with the date of the first publication to be at least thirty-one (31) days before the date tentatively set for the passage of the Ordinance authorizing the issuance of such Certificates of Obligation. SECTION 3. That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY sAlegal\our documents\ordinances\l l\notice of intent ordinance (general solid waste)2.docx THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § CITY OF DENTON § NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON (GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND SOLID WASTE PROJECTS) THE CITY OF DENTON, in Denton County, Texas, hereby gives notice of its intention to issue CITY OF DENTON CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, in accordance with the Certificate of Obligation Act of 1971, as amended and codified, and other applicable laws, in the maximum principal amount of $11,500,000 for the purpose of paying all or a portion of the City's contractual obligations incurred pursuant to contracts for the purchase, construction and acquisition of certain real and personal property, to wit: (a) acquisition of vehicles and equipment for, and acquiring, constructing, installing and equipping additions, extensions, renovations and improvements to, the City's solid waste disposal system; (b) renovations to, and equipping of, existing municipal buildings, including City Hall East; and (c) acquisition of vehicles and equipment for the City's motor pool; and also for the purpose of paying all or a portion of the City's contractual obligations for professional services, including engineers, architects, attorneys, map makers, auditors, and financial advisors, in connection with said projects and said Certificates of Obligation. The City proposes to provide for the payment of such Certificates of Obligation from the levy and collection of ad valorem taxes in the City as provided by law, and from certain surplus revenues (not to exceed $1,000 in aggregate amount) derived by the City from the ownership and operation of the City's Utility System (consisting of the City's combined waterworks and sewer system and electric light and power system). The City Council of the City tentatively proposes to authorize the issuance of such Certificates of Obligation at a meeting commencing at 6:30 p.m. on the 5th day of April, 2011, in the City Council room at the Municipal Building (City Hall), 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS By: Jennifer K. Walters, City Secretary This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance All ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance directing the publication of Notice of Intention to issue $21,000,000 in principal amount of Certificates of Obligation of the City of Denton for Wastewater and Electric System projects; and providing for an effective date. (Audit/Finance Committee recommends approval 3-0) BACKGROUND This ordinance provides the Notice of Intention to issue $21,000,000 in principal amount of Certificates of Obligation (COs) for Wastewater and Electric projects, as required by state law. The notice will be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in the Denton Record Chronicle, with the date of the first publication to be at least thirty-one (31) days before the date tentatively set for the passage of the ordinance authorizing the issuance of the bonds. These bonds will provide funding of $500,000 for Wastewater and $20,157,000 for Electric project costs. The additional $343,000 is for the cost of issuance and to allow flexibility in marketing and pricing the bond sale. Staff recommends the sale of $500,000 in COs for Wastewater projects. Below is a listing of recommended CO funded projects for Wastewater's FY 2010-11 CIP: 1. TROMMEL Power Screen - $ 500,000* Total - $ 500,000 *Previously authorized through a Reimbursement Ordinance. Staff recommends the sale of $20,157,000 in COs for Electric projects. Below is a listing of recommended CO funded projects for Electric's FY 2010-11 CIP: 1. Automated Meter Reading - $ 156,000* 2. Automated Meter Reading - $ 428,389* 3. Building Constriction - $ 1,000,000 4. Building Constriction - $ 3,689,361* 5. Communication Equipment - $ 117,819* 6. Distribution Transformers - $ 677,000 7. Distribution Transformers - $ 250,000* 8. Feeder Extension & Improvements - $ 1,314,000 9. Feeder Extension & Improvements - $ 3,233,719* 10. New Res./Comm. Transmission Lines - $ 825,000 11. New Res./Comm. Transmission Lines - $ 1,819,702* 12. Distribution Substation - $ 1,602,000 13. Distribution Substation - $ 364,725 Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 14. Transmission Lines - $ 1,172,000 15. Transmission Lines - $ 689,511* 16. Transmission Substations - $ 1,581,000 17. Transmission Substations - $ 588,137* 18. Meters - $ 148,226* 19. Office Furniture & Equipment - $ 77,777* 20. ERCOT/NERC Compliance - $ 84,768* 21. Storm Outages - $ 44,811* 22. Street Lights - $ 78,000 23. Street Lights - $ 215,055* Total - $20,157,000 *Previously authorized through a Reimbursement Ordinance. Approximately $12.2 million in Wastewater and Electric projects of the $20,657,000 CO issuance has been previously authorized through Reimbursement Ordinances. The City sells bonds in accordance with the useful life of the asset that is being acquired. For example, vehicles are typically sold with bonds that will be paid within five years. For the FY 2010-11 proposed debt issuance for Wastewater and Electric, $500,000 will be 5 year debt and $20,157,000 will be 20 year debt. In addition, the 20 year debt issues will also have a 10 year call feature. Concurrently with the sale of the COs for Wastewater and Electric projects, the City anticipates the sale of approximately $11,500,000 of COs for General Government and Solid Waste projects and approximately $11,221,200 in General Obligation Refunding and Improvement Bonds to fund projects approved by voters in 2005 and refund existing utility system debt. The refunding is contingent upon market conditions and it must meet the City's debt policy requirements. If approved by the City Council, staff will proceed with the publication of the Notice of Intention and will schedule the Bond Ordinance for consideration and adoption on April 5, 2011. The closing and delivery of funds will be planned for May 10, 2011. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards or Commissions) On February 15, 2011, the Audit/Finance Committee unanimously recommended approval to forward the upcoming bond issuance to the City Council for consideration. FISCAL INFORMATION The ordinance is for the authorization to publish the Notice of Intention to sell $21,000,000 of Certificates of Obligation for Wastewater and Electric projects. A notice is only required for the Certificates of Obligation. The General Obligation Refunding and Improvement Bonds were approved by the voters in the 2005 CIP election and there is no statutory requirement to post such notice for the refunding of existing Utility System debt. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 3 EXHIBITS 1. Preliminary Debt Schedule - Certificates of Obligation for Wastewater and Electric 2. Ordinance Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer Preliminary $20,765,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Issue Summary Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 04/01/20111 Delivered 04/01/2011 Wastewate Electric - 20 Issue r - 5 Year Year Summary Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $~n~ inn.nn $20,260,000.00 $20.76 , On Total Sources $505Moo.00 $20,260,000.00 $20,765,00 .00 Uses Of Funds Costs of Issuance 389.79 95,875.47 98,26> 26 Deposit to Project Construction Fund ~n~ n in,n0 20,165,000.00 20. rr5, 1, 1, 1 nn Rounding Amount ~I,~ 21 (87 .47) 1 -?4 74 Total Uses $505,000.00 $20,260,000.00 $20,765,000.00 2/17/2011 1 10:16 AM First • Company Finance Public Department Preliminary $20,765,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Issue Summary Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.2012 365,000.00 4.750°0 1,344,805.49 1,709,805.49 093"2013 765,000.00 4.7~""'0 950,83125 1,715,83125 093/ 2014 795,000.00 4.750"0 913,78125 1,708,78125 n o 3 2"15 W , 1, 1 ( 1, 1 ( 1 4+74, „ 875,068.75 1,710,068+75 09 2016 880,000.00 4.750"o 834,337+50 1,714,337.50 09 2017 800,0nn.n0 4+74,Wo 794,437+50 1,594,437.50 09.'30.'2018 840,000.00 4.75000 755,487+50 1,595,487+50 0936 2019 880,000.00 4.75000 714,637+50 1,594,637.50 no ;i 1 1(2" 925 "00 00 4.7500a 671,768.75 1,596,768.75 09 1 2,121 970,0-1-) 4.7500a 626,762.50 1,596,762.50 09 1 2022 1,015,0-1+-) 4.75000 579,618.75 1,594,618.75 09 ?1 2023 1,065,066+60 4.75""0 530,218.75 1,595,218.75 09 1 2024 1,120,0-1+-) 4.75, W o 478,325.00 1,598,325.00 00 3 1 20'5 1,177 , 1, 1, 1 ( 1, 1 4+74, 423,818.75 1,598,818.75 09 1 2026 1,230,000.00 4.750"o 366,700.00 1,596,700.00 09 1 2027 1,290,0-1+-) 4.75, W o 306,850.00 1,596,850.00 09.'30.'2028 1,350,000.00 4.75000 244,150.00 1,594,150+00 09 ?,1 2029 1,420,0-1+-) 4.75000 178,362.50 1,598,362.50 00 ',,1 103" 1,485 ",I, 1, ~0 4.75000 109,368.75 1,594,368.75 09 2031 1,560,000.00 4.7500a 37,050.00 1,597,050.00 Total $20,765,000.00 $11,736,380.49 $32,501,380.49 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $247,081.69 average Life 11.899 Years average Coupon 4.7500000oo Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.750000000 Tice Interest Cost (TIC) 4.7459138°0 Bond Yield for arbitrage Purposes 4.7459138°0 All Inclusive Cost (aIC) 4.801205300 IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.750000000 Weighted average Maturity 11.899 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:16 AM First • Company _r- Finance Public Department Preliminary $505,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Wastewater - 5 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.'2012 8,000.00 4.7500o 30,897.43 11,897.43 09.'30.'2013 100,000.00 4.7500o 17,575+00 117,575+00 09.'30.'2014 100,000.00 4.7500o 12,82.00 112,82.00 09.'30.'201 Iff nnn i n 4.7500o 7,95625 112,95625 09.'30.'2016 115,000+00 4.7500o 2,7312 117,7312 Total $505,000.00 $71,984.93 $576,984.93 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $1,515 47 AceraQe Life ~ ~ ~ I l"~ a rs Average Coupon 4.74 (n 1, 1, 1! O o Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.75000000o True Interest Cost (Tl('i 4.737168200 BondY"ieldfoi \rhiti:r-2 Purposes 4+74591380 0 AllInclusiv- C<,sti fit( 1 4+91078350 0 IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.75000000o weighted Average YlaturitN 3.001 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:16 AM First • Company Finance Public Department Preliminary $20,260,000 City of Denton, Texas Combination Tax & Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2011 Electric - 20 Year Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 09.'30.'2011 09.'30.2012 280,000.00 4.750°0 1,313,908.06 1,593,908.06 093"^_013 665,000+00 4.75""0 933,25625 1,598,25625 093/ 2014 695,000.00 4.750''o 900,95625 1,595,95625 "0 ,"15 73, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 4.74,"„ 867,112.50 1,597,112.50 09 2016 765,000.00 4.750"o 831,60625 1,596,60625 09 2017 80,1 , 1, 1, 1., 10 4+74, W o 794,437.50 1,594,437.50 09.'30.'2018 840,000.00 4.75000 755,487.50 1,595,487.50 0936 2019 880,000.00 4.75000 714,637+50 1,594,637.50 no ;i i'"2" 925 4.75000 671,768.75 1,596,768.75 09 1 2,121 970,0-1-) 4.7500a 626,762.50 1,596,762.50 09 1 2022 1,015,0-1+-) 4.75000 579,618.75 1,594,618.75 091 2023 1,065,066+60 4.75""0 530,218.75 1,595,218.75 09 1 2024 1,120,0-1+-) 4.74, W o 478,325.00 1,598,325.00 no 3i '1'5 1,177,1,1,1(1,1 4.74,";, 423,818.75 1,598,818.75 09 1 2026 1,230,000.00 4.750"o 366,700.00 1,596,700.00 09 1 2027 1,290,0-1+-) 4.74, W o 306,850.00 1,596,850.00 09.'30.'2028 1,350,000.00 4.75000 244,150.00 1,594,150+00 09 ?,1 2029 1,420,0-1+-) 4.75000 178,362.50 1,598,362.50 00 ;i i'"3" 1,485 ",I, 1, ~0 4.75000 109,368.75 1,594,368.75 09 2031 1,560,000.00 4.7500a 37,050.00 1,597,050.00 Total $20,260,000.00 $11,664,395.56 $31,924,395.56 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $245,56622 aceraQe Life 12.121 Years average Coupon 4.7500000oo Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.750000000 Tice Interest Cost (TIC) 4.745982000 Bond Yield for arbitrage Purposes 4.7459138°0 All Inclusive Cost (.SIC) 4.8003481°0 IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.750000000 Weighted average Maturity 12.121 Years 2/17/2011 1 10:16 AM First • Company _r- Finance Public Department s:\Iegal\our documents\ordinances\11\notice of intent ordinance (wastewater electric)2.docx ORDINANCE NO. 2011- AN ORDINANCE DIRECTING THE PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE $21,000,000 IN PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON FOR WASTEWATER AND ELECTRIC SYSTEM PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTWE DATE. WHEREAS, it is deemed necessary and advisable that Notice of Intention to Issue Certificates of Obligation be given as hereinafter provided; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That attached hereto is a form of "NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON", the form and substance of which are hereby adopted and approved, and made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes. SECTION 2. That the City Secretary shall cause said NOTICE, in substantially the form attached hereto, to be published once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, with the date of the first publication to be at least thirty-one (31) days before the date tentatively set for the passage of the Ordinance authorizing the issuance of such Certificates of Obligation. SECTION 3. That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 12011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: s:\legal\our documents\ordinances\11\notice of intent ordinance (wastewater electric)2.docx THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § CITY OF DENTON § NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION OF THE CITY OF DENTON (WASTEWATER AND ELECTRIC SYSTEM PROJECTS) THE CITY OF DENTON, in Denton County, Texas, hereby gives notice of its intention to issue CITY OF DENTON CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, in accordance with the Certificate of Obligation Act of 1971, as amended and codified, and other applicable laws, in the maximum principal amount of $21,000,000 for the purpose of paying all or a portion of the City's contractual obligations incurred pursuant to contracts for the purchase, construction and acquisition of certain real and personal property, to wit: (a) acquisition of equipment for, and acquiring, constructing, installing and equipping additions, extensions, renovations and improvements to, the City's waterworks and sewer system; (b) acquisition of equipment for, and acquiring, constructing, installing and equipping additions, extensions, renovations and improvements to, the City's electric light and power system; and also for the purpose of paying all or a portion of the City's contractual obligations for professional services, including engineers, architects, attorneys, map makers, auditors, and financial advisors, in connection with said projects and said Certificates of Obligation. The City proposes to provide for the payment of such Certificates of Obligation from the levy and collection of ad valorem taxes in the City as provided by law, and from certain surplus revenues (not to exceed $1,000 in aggregate amount) derived by the City from the ownership and operation of the City's Utility System (consisting of the City's combined waterworks and sewer system and electric light and power system). The City Council of the City tentatively proposes to authorize the issuance of such Certificates of Obligation at a meeting commencing at 6:30 p.m. on the 5th day of April, 2011, in the City Council room at the Municipal Building (City Hall), 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS By: Jennifer K. Walters, City Secretary This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Parks & Recreation ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT Consider a request for a variance to the Noise Ordinance by the North Texas Rail Group for the purpose of constriction activities of the DCTA A-train passenger rail. The exception is requested for constriction work to begin at 9:00 a.m. instead of 1:00 p.m. on Sundays, from March 2 through June 30, 2011. The North Texas Rail Group respectfully asks for a variance to the City's noise ordinance as it pertains to the constriction activities along the entire DCTA A-train passenger rail corridor so constriction time can be made up due to inclement weather. BACKGROUND The constriction of the tracks within the city of Denton begins at Shady Shores and ends at Hickory Street. The constriction activities would include placement of railroad ties and rails, and the placement of ballast (rock and gravel). Installation of the signals and wiring could be included during the work on Sundays. The rail service target date is Monday, June 20, 2011, and the signals, crossing gates and track alignments will need to be tested prior to service. The exception is requested in accordance to Ordinance No. 2009-062, Section 17-20 3 F General Noise Violations: "The erection, excavation, demolition, alteration, or repair work on any building at anytime other than between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 8:30 p.m. Monday through Friday from June 1 to September 30; between 7:00 a.m. and 8:30 p.m. Monday through Friday from October 1 to May 31; between 8:00 a.m. and 8:30 p.m. on Saturday; and between 1:00 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. on Sunday; provided, however, that the city council may issue special permits for such work at other hours in case of urgent necessity and in the interest of public safety and convenience." RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the request for the exception to the noise ordinance for work on Sunday before 1:00 p.m. with the following stipulations: • That work from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. take place outside of residential areas that would be impacted by noise, and • That North Texas Rail Group demonstrate efforts to communicate scheduling changes with the affected neighborhoods. Agenda Information Sheet DCTA Constriction Exception to the Noise Ordinance March 1, 2011 Page 2 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) On November 17, 2009 City Council approved a request by Hodges and Associates, P.L.L.C. to pour concrete paving for the Rayzor Ranch Market Place constriction on US 380. The contractors, Mario Sinacola and Sons, need to operate between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Sundays for the duration of the Hwy 380 widening project. The North Texas Rail Group meets with SEDNA on Monday, February 28. They will provide maps to the Council at the March 1 City Council Meeting. FISCAL INFORMATION None EXHIBITS 1. Letter of Request from North Texas Rail Group 2. Letter of Request from DCTA Respectfully submitted: m- . Emerson Vorel, Director Parks and Recreation Department Prepared by: M 114 Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator City Council Mernbezs: The North Texw Rail Group respectfully asks for a variance to the city's noise ordinance so we can mare up for lost time dire to inclement weather as it peilains to our construction activities of the DC:TA A•train passenger rail, We are asking the council to perinit us to begin world at 8 a.m. on Sundays froin now until the end of Ruie. This Nvork would include constivotion along the entire rail coiridor. TIIWr,s for your considem ion, Sincerely, limberly unian Public Infonnation Manager North Texas Rail Group Monday, February 14, 2011 DC TA-COD 0121 arupbell T ; ~1 FTC: A-tralrr I ,rc' I,!, iil Gros ~,VTRG) Sunday No (1 1 )rar, l C i. As the city is aware the i ~ver F- rte (RSI ; lnclrr _iIr I it service into - - in an(' currer reds e 1 ' i d D. L ~ I t t r ( I RCir rr r r a rdiildr r.urr. n€ -i, I reSrllted i. ran the J C s llarl a I 'E' i In lltal 9'' 'I th e ''t Y iYI _ _ Vk, k~"~ j MYI !1416 S^ ability to _.I_ . r- t days r i rn ,lly requests the City of i and _)y NT . DCTA wouL ll. in the ie ; in ,ioului you hov, any gUestions and/or concerns please feel free to contact rrne at (972) 221 4600. Sin I ! _~~~au Ida 1 17 lopment/C: r„ Denton ;aunty t. U M DCT' LCC: J. D, (JCCA), 1, FortUne (COM, K I -I-,nn (COD), €'S Arnra h` n (C0D) a, e (COD), B VokOUn (C01)), T Schmidt (0"T'110), S. Sm R. Btastvrman ( N. 1 -2010), E 1 Avis (OT2010), S Perry (NFRG), R. L J FRG), R. Lan son (Nl RG), C Sonells (N If. Durnan (NTRG) AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Development r ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT -1411 E. University Drive (ZIO-0007) Continue consideration of adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing for a zoning change from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation, with an overlay district, on 6.836 acres of land located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, within the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. (ZIO-0007) The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with an overlay district (3-2). Dice to more than 20% opposition from the land area within 200 feet of the request, a supermajority vote (3/4) is required by the City Council to approve this item. PROPOSAL The applicant (Spring Brook Planning Group) desires to rezone the property- to allow for the uses permitted within the Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with the addition of a restrictive overlay. The applicant proposes to allow all permitted uses within the NRMU-12 district except for Laundry- Facilities. The restrictive overlay addresses buffering along the site's northern property boundaiy and architectural standards. These restrictions -,were added by the applicant to attend to concerns of the surrounding neighborhood discussed at four neighborhood meetings regarding transition and compatibility of adjacent single-family uses. A summaiy of the neighborhood meetings is provided in Exhibit 7. BACKGROUND This item was continued from the February 1, 2011 City Council meeting. The continuation was due to bad weather. The subject site is developed with one single-family home and is currently unplatted. This rezoning proposal was considered by City Council on December 7, 2010 via a public hearing. During the public hearing, many of the overlay restrictions proposed by the applicant were discussed, during which some amendments were proffered. After closing the public hearing, the City Council continued the case to a date certain of February 1, 2011. One of the purposes of continuing the case was to allow for the revision of the overlay restrictions that were agreed to by the applicant at the public hearing. These restrictions included identifying specific architectural standards for the buildings and fencing the backyard of the property. The continuation was also to enable the applicant to further discuss the overlay restrictions with the community and possibly arrive at a consensus. Thirty-one (31) public notices were sent to residents within two hundred feet (200) of the site (Exhibit 8). As of this writing, staff has received 18 responses to the Notice of Public Hearing from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. Eleven (11) respondents are in opposition to the request accounting for 4.34 acres or 27.93% of the land area within 200 feet. If 20% or more of the land area within 200 feet of a rezone request is in opposition to the request at the time of the City Council public hearing, a supermajority vote (3/4) is required by the City Council to approve the request. City Council Staff Report Page 1 of 45 „-'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW 1. City Council February 1, 2011 2. City Council December 7, 2010 3. Planning and Zoning Commission October 20, 2010 OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve subject to conditions. 3. Recommend denial. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends APPROVAL of this rezoning request, subject to the overlay district (3-2). The Development Review Committee recommends APPROVAL of this rezoning request, with the restrictive overlay conditions offered by the applicant. EXHIBITS 1. Site Location/Aerial Map 2. Existing Zoning Map 3. Proposed Zoning Map 4. Future Land Use Map 5. Site/Subdivision/Development Plan 6. Letter from the Applicant 7. Neighborhood meeting summaries 8. Notice of Public Hearing Responses 9. Site Photos 10. October 20, 2010 P&Z Meeting Minutes 11. Ordinance Prepared by: Nana Appiah, AICP Senior Planner Respectfully submitted: ij~XEA Marls Cunningham, AICP, CPM Planning and Development Director City Council Staff Report Page 2 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: ZIO-0007 CITY OF DENTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT P&Z Date: October 20, 2010 TYPE: Rezoning CC Date: February 15, 2011 PROJECT Z10-0007 February 1, 2011 December 7, 2010 Project Number: Z10-0007 Request: Rezoning from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres. Applicant: Spring Brook Planning Group 2405 Mustang Drive Grapevine, TX 76051 Property Owner: John Porter 1111 Emerson Lane Denton, TX 76209 Location: The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380). Size: 6.836 acres Zoning Designation: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) Future Land Use: Existing Land Use Case Planner: Erica Marohnic, AICP P&Z Recommendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends APPROVAL of this rezoning request, subject to a restrictive overlay district DRC Recommendation: The Development Review Committee recommends APPROVAL of this rezoning request, subject to a restrictive overlay district. Summary of Analysis: The subject site is developed with one single-family home on approximately 6.836 acres. The site is unplatted and has a zoning district of Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3), which it received in February 2002 during the city-wide rezoning and adoption of the Denton Development Code (DDC). Prior to NR-3, the zoning district was One-family dwelling district 10 (SF-10). Permitted uses within the SF-10 district were limited to single-family homes, some civic uses and religious institutions. City Council Staff Report Page 3 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 The overlay restrictions proposed by the applicant include a solid fence between any proposed use on site and the existing Crescent Heights subdivision to the north. Per the DDC, a type "C" buffer, 15 feet wide with combination of trees and shrubs, would be required between a commercial use and the existing residential. The applicant is proposing a 15-foot buffer regardless of the ultimate use. The buffer will include a 6-foot tall solid fence with evergreen and deciduous trees; however, there will be no shrubs present. The applicant also proposes to further restrict uses within 150 feet of the northern property line to only single-family, professional service and office uses. The architectural standards proposed by the applicant exceed current standards for commercial and multi-family strictures required in Subchapter 13 of the DDC. Specific types of windows, roof pitch and shingle types are stated. Additionally, height is proposed to be limited to one- story, well below the maximum allowed in the NRMU-12 zoning district. Given the location of the subject property along a major arterial and the configuration of the site, it is staff's opinion that the future development potential of the property being consistent with the neighboring single-family residences is unlikely. The rezoning request to allow for a more intense zoning district at the intersection of an arterial and collector roadway is indicative of the trend towards mixed use and commercial development that can be supported by the surrounding area. Existing commercial uses are found east and west of the site along University Drive. Findings of Fact 1. The request is for a rezoning on approximately 6836 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRM(J-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlav. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Glemrood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380). 2. The subject site is developed with one single family home and is rrnplatted The former Zoirlirg district 11'aS One far??ilv cArelling district 10 (V-10) prior to the, City-iride rezoning in 2002. 3. The sitNect site is frith n the Existing Land U.se f itnre land rise Category ichich inchides existing residential rises and nail' infill compatibility. Nell' develops??ent should respond to existing development with compatible land uses patterns and design standards. The plan recommends that existing neighborhoods irithin the city be vigorously protected and preserved Housing that is compatible with the existing density, neighborhood service and commercial land rises is alloired 4. The NR-3 and NRMU-12 zoning districts are irithin the Neighborhood Residential group of zoning districts whose intent is to preserve and protect existing neighborhoods to ensure that anv nely development is compatible with the existing land uses, patterns and design standards. This district has seven zoning districts irithin its land nse category. These include Neighborhood Residential I (NR-1), Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2), Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3), Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4), Neighborhood Residential 6 (NR-6), Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRM(J-12) and Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRM(J. City Council Staff Report Page 4 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 5. Adjacent zoning districts include Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to the north, Downtoirn Commercial General (DC-G) to the hest, Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU--12) to the south and Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to the east. 6 There are no planned public improvements for potable hater, sanitary server, drainage or transportation facilities serving the subject site in relation to this request. 7. Glemvood Lane is classified as a Residential Avenue Collector requiring 65 feet of right- of-way per the City of Denton's Mobility Plan. Glcmvood Lane is constructed of asphalt and is considered unimproved per the Transportation Criteria Manual. 8. University Drive is classified as a Primary Major Arterial requiring 135 feet of right-of- way per the City of Denton's Mobility Plan. 9. Water is available firoium a 6-inch amain along Glenirood Lane. 10. S'ell'er is available by installing a 6-inch amain eastirard from the property to the existing 8-inch main on Rechrood. Development Review Committee Based upon the information provided by the applicant and a recent site visit, the Development Review Committee finds that with the recommended conditions the request IS CONSISTENT with the surrounding land uses and general character of the area, IS CONSISTENT with the Denton Plan, and IS CONSISTENT with the Denton Development Code. The Development Review Committee recommends APPROVAL of this rezoning request, subject to the following restrictive overlay conditions. The most recent changes since the December 7, 2010 City Council public hearing, and changes to the P&Z recommendation are shown as either or in underlined font: 1. All uses permitted within the NRMU-12 zoning district are permitted on the subject site as described in Exhibit A of the ordinance, except for Laundry Facilities. a. The only strictures allowed within 150 feet of the northern property line shall be professional service and office uses. Parking is permitted within 20 feet of the northern property line. 2. An eight-foot ~eat~ high solid screen fence (good side out) shall be installed per the requirements of the Denton Development Code, constricted with steel posts and decorative caps, in the locations specified within Exhibit B of the ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and is subject to further restrictions as follows: a. The fence shall be constricted in accordance with Section 35.13.9 of the Denton Development Code. b. The fence shall be constricted in the required buffer yard adjacent to the property line in lieu of the required buffer shrubs. c. All required buffer trees shall be planted in accordance with the requirements of the Denton Development Code. d. If the fence is constricted of wood, the wood shall be cedar. 3. In the event that single family detached, single-family attached or duplex strictures are City Council Staff Report Page 5 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 not developed adjacent to Glenwood, a 6-foot high wrought iron style fence shall be installed per the requirements of the Denton Development Code in the locations specified within Exhibit B of the ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and is subject to further restrictions as follows: a. The fence shall be constricted of tubular steel. b. A "Type C" buffer shall be planted adjacent to the fencing in accordance with Section '15. 13.8 of the Denton Development Code. c. Perimeter fences are not required where they interfere with access roads and driveways. 4. The following architectural standards shall be incorporated into proposed buildings: a. Architectural elements such as prominent entries, offsets or recesses along all sides, decorative wall and roof vents and gable features shall be incorporated into the design of buildings; b. All windows shall be Double Insulated windows with thermal break and no mirrored glass; c. The minimum roof pitch shall be 4:12 and the maximum roof pitch shall be 10:12; d. New buildings shall incorporate alternating roof plate heights; e. Shingles (if used) shall be a minimum 30 year architectural style composition shingle; f The exterior of all new strictures shall be constricted of . w* one hundred percent (100%) masonry (excluding doors windows, dormers and trim). For the purposes of this ordinance masonry includes brick, stone and stucco; and g. Building height shall be limited to one story and shall not exceed thirty-two (32) feet. 5. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine onto adjacent properties. 6. All trees planted in the buffer yards shall be a minimum of four inches (4") to six inches (6") dbh and a minimum of twenty feet (20') high. GENERAL NOTES A-OTE: Approval of this request shall not constitute a ivaiver or variance from any applicable development requirement unless specifically noted in the conditions of approval and consistent with the Denton Development Code. A-OTE: All written comments made in the application and subsequent submissions of information made during the application review process, which are on file with the Cio) ofDenton, shall be considered to be binding upon the applicant, provided such comments are not at variance with the Denton Plan, Denton Development Code or other development regulations in effect at the time of development. City Council Staff Report Page 6 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Surrounding Zoning Designations and Current Land Use Activity: Northwest: North: Northeast: Neighborhood Residential 3 Neighborhood Residential 3 Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3); Single family (NR-3); Single family (NR-3); Single family residential residential residential West: East: Doirntown Commercial / • • / / ' / / Neighborhood Residential 3 General Single- / (NR-3); Single family family residential residential commercial development Southwest: South: Southeast: Doirntown Commercial Neighborhood Residential Neighborhood Residential General Multifamily Mixed Use 12 (NRM(J--12); Mixed Use 12 (NRM(J--12) & residential & commercial ✓ Multifamily residential & Neighborhood Residential 3 development undeveloped property (NR-3); Single farm ly residential Source: City of'Denton Geographical 11#6nnatior System and site visit by City staff' Comprehensive Plan: A. Consistency with Goals, Objectives and Strategies The subject site is located in the "Existing Land Use" future land use designation. These areas are typically established residential areas, which new development should respond to existing development with compatible land uses, patterns and design standards. The plan recommends that existing neighborhoods within the city be vigorously protected and preserved. Housing that is compatible with the existing density, neighborhood service and commercial land uses is allowed. New residential, neighborhood services and commercial uses would be consistent with the future land use designation and therefore the Denton Plan. B. Land use analysis There is currently 1,170.61 acres designated NRM[_7-12 in the City. Of these, 1,170.61 acres designated NRMU-12 in the City; 1,069.87 acres are shown to be developed (91%), according to the City of Denton GIS. The differences between the NR-3 and NRMU-12 districts primarily relate to the allowance of some commercial uses with size restrictions within the NRM[_7-12 district which are not currently allowed within the NR-3 district. City Council Staff Report Page 7 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: ZIO-0007 The following tables illustrate the differences between the NRMU-12 and NR-3 districts: Categories Residential Land Use 12 Agriculture P P Livestock L(7) L(7) Single Family Dwellings P P Accessory Dwelling Units L(1) SUP L(1) Attached Single Family Dwellings P SUP Dwellings Above Businesses P N Live/Work Units P N Duplexes P N Community Homes For the Disabled P P Group Homes SUP N Multi-Family Dwellings L(4) N Manufactured Housing Developments N N L(4) = Multi-family is permitted only: 1. With a Specific Use Permit; or 2. As part of a Mixed-Use Development; or 3. As part of a Master Plan Development, Existing; or 4. If the development received zoning approval allowing multi-family use within one year prior to the effective date of Ordinance No. 2005-224; or 5. If allowed by a City Council approved neighborhood (small area) plan. City Council Staff Report Page 8 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Commercial Land Use Categories 12 Home Occupation P P Sale of Products Grown on Site N N Hotels N N Motels N N Bed and Breakfast L(10) N Retail Sales and Service L(15) N Movie Theaters N N Restaurant or Private Club N N Drive-through Facility N N Professional Services and Offices L(14) N Quick Vehicle Servicing N N Vehicle Repair N N Auto and RV Sales N N ***Laundry Facilities N N Equestrian Facilities N N Outdoor Recreation SUP P Indoor Recreation N N Major Event Entertainment N N Commercial Parking Lots N N Administrative or Research Facilities N N Broadcasting of Production Studio N N Sexually Oriented Business N N Temporary Uses L(38) L(38) ***The applicant proposes to eliminate Laundry Facilities as a permitted use within the restrictive overlay district. L(10) = All restrictions of L(8), but limited to no more than 5 guest units. L(13) = Uses are limited to no more than 55,000 square feet of gross floor area per lot. L(14) = Uses are limited to no more than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area. L(15) = Uses are limited to no more than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area per lot. An SUP is required for additional square footage for Semi-Public Halls, Clubs and Lodges. City Council Staff Report Page 9 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Industrial Land Use Categories 12 Printing / Publishing N N Bakeries N N Manufacture of Non-odoriferous Foods N N Feed Lots N N Food Processing N N Light Manufacturing N N Heavy Manufacturing N N Wholesale Sales N N Wholesale Nurseries N N Distribution Center N N Wholesale Storage and Distribution N N Self-service Storage N N Construction Materials Sales N N Junk Yards and Auto Wrecking N N Kennels N N Veterinary Clinics N N Sanitary Landfills, Commercial N N Incinerators, Transfer Stations Gas Wells SUP SUP L(27) L(27) City Council Staff Report Page 10 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Institutional Land Use Categories 12 Basic Utilities L(25) L(25) Community Service P N Parks and Open Space P P Churches P P Semi-public, Halls, Clubs, and Lodges L(15) SUP Business / Trade School N N Adult or Child Day Care P SUP Kindergarten, Elementary School P SUP Middle School P N High School N N Colleges N N Hospital N N Elderly Housing L(13) N Medical Centers N N Cemeteries N N Mortuaries N N City Council Staff Report Page 11 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 35.5.2.3 General Regulations. General regulatiorns of the Residential Neighborhood Land use zone are coatained Ili the table beloNv: The folloNving limits ipply to subditi-isioa of 2 acres or less: General Regulations NRA NR-2 NR-3 N RA NR-6 NRMLl- NRMU 12 Minimum lot area (square feet) 32,000 16,000 10,000 7,000 6,000 3,500 2,500 Minimum lot width 80 feet 80 feet 60 feet 50 feet 50 feet 30 feet 20 feet Minimum lot depth 1!00 feet 100 feet 80 feet 80 feet 50 feet 80 feet 50 feet Minimum front yard setback 20 feet 20 feet 15 feet 20 feet 10 feet 10 feet None L(2) L(2) Minimum side yard 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Minimum side yard adjacent to a street 10 feet 10 feet 16 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet None Minimum rear yard 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet None The follo~, ing limits gppli to subdivision of inore than 2 acres in lieu of uairaianaaa lot size aad di neasion recluirearleats: General Regulations NRA NR-2 NR-3 N RA NR-6 NRMU- NRMU 12 Maximum density, dwelling units per acre 1 2 3.5 4 6 12 30 Minimum side yard for non-attached 20 feet 10 feet 6 feet 5 feet 4 feet 10 feet 12 feet buildings The folio-WAig Lmits apply to all buildings: General Regulations NRA NR-2 NR-3 N R-4 NR-6 NRMU- NRMU 12 Maximum lot coverage 30%p 30% 50% 60% 60%p 60%0 80%0 Minimum landscaped area 70%fl 70%© 55% 40%Q 40% 40% 20% Maximum building height 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 65 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 15 feet 20 feet plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 footfor foot for foot for footfor foot for foot for foot for each each each each each each each Minimum yard when abutting a single- foot of foot of foot of foot of foot of foot of foot of family use or district building building building building building building building height height height height height height height above above above above above above above 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet C. Current Zoning District Allocation Subject Property Zoning allocation 6.836 f acres Current Allocation in the Cite Developed Allocation in Change Based Upon the Cite Request Neighborhood Residential Mixed 1,170.61 1,069.87 (91%) +6.836 Use 12 (NRMU-12) Source: City ofDelrtor City Council Staff Report Page 12 of 45 „ 2011 10 'a_,2 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Nearest Elementary, Middle, and High School Name of School Approximate Distance Project's Estimated Annual Student From Subject Property Generation Wilson Elementan- School 2.6 mif Unable to determine, no unit count proposed. Strickland Middle School 2.4 mi f Unable to determine, no unit count proposed. Billy Ryan High School 7 mi f Unable to determine, no unit count proposed. The applicant has not identified a unit type or total and therefore a student generation total cannot be determined for the proposed rezoning. Nearest Fire, and EMS Station Name of Station Approximate Distance From Subject Property Fire/EMS Fire Station #4, 2110 E. Sherman Drive 3.2 mi f Source: Cite ofDerrtorr GIS; Fire Department, a1id E-AIS Water and Wastewater Demand and Capacity: A. Estimated Demand and Service Provider: Estimated Impact Analysis fProposed Demand (6.836 f Acres) Adequate to Serve (Yes or No) Permitted Densit-v 12 units per acre See below Potable Water Consumption (GPD) 77 Marginal Wastewater Generation (GPD)9 yes B. Available Capacity: Water service is available from an existing 6-inch main along Glenwood Lane. This existing main is inadequate to satisfy fire flow demands for development associated with the requested rezoning; offsite improvements would be necessary to resolve this issue. Sewer service is available by installing a 6-inch main eastward from the property to the existing 8-inch main on Redwood Place. The applicant will have to acquire a public utility easement (PUE) corresponding to the off-site property that this main would cross. C. CIP Planned Improvements: There are currently no planned water or sewer CIP projects for this area. City Council Staff Report Page 13 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: ZIO-0007 Roadways/Transportation Network: A. Estimated Demand: Estimated Impact Analysis Proposed Demand (6.836 f acres) Adequate to Serve (Yes or No) Permitted Density 12 units per acre Yes Average Annual 700 Yes Daily Trips (AADT) PM Peak Hour Trips 70 Yes Per Section 35.20.4.13 of the DDC, access to University Drive is not permitted unless no other reasonable means of providing safe access to the property are available. The applicant will be required to provide trip generation calculations to determine if driveway access onto University Drive may be permitted per Section 34-115(3) of the COD Code of Ordinances at platting or seek a variance. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) may be required depending on the trip generation data in accordance with the DDC, Section 35.20.2.M.2. Constriction of a 5-foot wide sidewalk is required along University Drive frontage at the time of development. Any constriction along University Drive right-of-way will require a TXDOT Permit. A large portion of the site's frontage of Glenwood Lane is classified as unimproved per DDC, Section 35.20.2.1-3.a. Therefore, at the time of development, constriction of a 25-feet wide concrete/asphalt pavement, 8-foot wide sidewalk, curb and gutter, and required drainage improvements will be required along Glenwood Lane frontage (DDC, Section 35.20.2.L.2). B. Available Capacity: There is adequate capacity in the roadway infrastructure serving the site. C. Roadway Conditions: Glenwood Lane is unimproved along the site's frontage. At the time of development, the applicant will be responsible for improving Glenwood Lane frontage to City Standards. University Drive (U.S. 380) is in good condition. D. CIP Planned Improvements: There are currently no planned transportation CIP projects for this area. Environmental Conditions: A. Surface Water: There is no surface water present on site. B. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: There are no environmentally sensitive areas present on site. City Council Staff Report Page 14 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: ZIO-0007 Wells (Public/Private): The City water system will be required to be utilized to meet potable water and fire flow requirements. Airports: The subject site is not within the ACLUD boundaries. Electric: Denton Municipal Electric (DME) has sufficient capacity to support this project. Park Facilities: A. Name of park facilities currently serving this area: a. Sequoia Park, 220 feet to the south. b. Nette Shultz Park, 1,500 feet to the northeast. c. Texas Woman's University Golf Course, 670 feet to the southwest B. Type of services within the area: Parks listed are neighborhood parks within '/2 mile radius which include playgrounds, playfields, play courts, walking trails, open space, and picnic facilities. Comments from other Departments: Not applicable. City Council Staff Report Page 15 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 1 Site Location/Aerial Map 41 its , i St11), ect Site , , h j - Al~ a t 1 -0007; Legend 1411 East University Drive 0 115 23 C FeeCity Council Staff Report Page 16 of 45 „-'oi1iii'4_,zAM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 2 Existing Zoning Map r~ - + REEhI'VoClC ~I~ ( R-3 Subject Site - -G - `REEI DC-G NRPv1U-2 R-3__ - 1 7-1 I DR-2 N Z10-0007; Legend 1411 East University Drive 0 116 230 460 690 920 Centerline FeE 0 parcels City Council Staff Report Page 17 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 3 Proposed Zoning Map R-3 7- I~ Subject Site - r, 7 I I,YEr; : KT- - -G i'FEEk, DC-G i NRMU~12 / . NIF .3 J,, r TA~,' DR-2 E Elrr;13E Z10-0007; Legend 1411 E University Avenue Centerline 400 200 0 400 Feet parcels City Council Staff Report Page 18 of 45 11 -1011 10 14 _52AM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 4 Future Land Use Map i L u1 i Subject Site _ isting Land Use _ F,, -I -T DovUntown University Cor I N Z10-0007; Legend 1411 East University Drive 0 115 230 460 690 920 Centerline Feet parcels City Council Staff Report Page 19 of 45 „'011 10 '4_,2 AM Case#: Z10-0007 'a e a 0 A aAV /,1i';JDAiun 1-,03 MIT m' L~00-DI7 ~ I r~ L Q u W III O 11 + N G f.. ,1 { k ~ IT, 4-1 (IOO JtN3-l!), i zi~ 1 s: r C 0 a a U T U a Exhibit 6 Letter from the Applicant Ijrri-_ March 3, 2010 Mr. k1ark Cunninnharr. AICP Director of k lane in a r -1 E evelopment City (J Eerti>n 22'1 '1 E! i r Denton, TX 6201 Dear ~lr 1 rirrir i aria, Re: 2 nit i '"di iii-Iment application for 6-8± acres generally located u, the northeast corner of E- Ur and commonly referred to as `1411 E r .er Er-, in the City of Denton, T-,as. (14"x'1 E i'i i ~rsity Dr. - PAC'10-0018) Clear Pw9r. Cuinninnharr Mr. J,e'ir Pe>rt~r i,- c- )r Erng rHzonir_i the sult[- t pr-l1=rty ;E,: ii :it I) from INR-3 (Neilihl_, r1 _::~_ill P 11-ii it to CdR1,11-1-12 (NIll find F~.iYeti:I 1,'11:,.ed-Use - '12)_ Althorn-ih ii i i.-) en ford line ' Mr- Port-.['- ii tent r- tr: 1MI Ze the hard corner for c_mrrer_i ] a-=, rld F>e15sibiy construct single-family "cln tei lrc,rnes nrid!or townhomes) on tile r [r_riri_1'i of th l rp~rty- PROJECT NARRITIVE: Existing Site C-7r °iticr,7 • The t roE>~rty is t3 r; -roes and is currently zoned NR-3 tExl-ibt • The property is nit i-l.attrd- • There is one single jig i!•.' strrrrbire t--:n the property- • Based on the C l; of E-~ t irar ing; o Tl -re is no E ,,r: -i t ii- pi I rt, TI -r- is over _1 30 li-,,,t n on the property (Exhibit 2) • ,ter i- iilal1 e frorla e: tiVq ;f I I -nrl Glenwood • wariitar• = ? fr-rn 11 air on Redwood • .Acre tc 1-1 r-~r-l -ity i- from Ilend. -,l)d o A iib -ut n Jr, t e,i-Js Surrounding zoning & uses: North: NR-3-Single-fan 1, E. t col South: NRI' l -Senior Li: n,: Undeveloped East: NR-3-Single-family R?-- ill-i ti-r! West: NR-3- Single-family Rest i li~ri & DC-C - Commercial 2405 Mustang Drive / Grapevine, Texas 76051 1 469-955-9580 817-329-4453 (Fax) City Council Staff Report Page 21 of 45 „'011 10 '4_,2 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Proposed Site Cony' tI n~-- • Tc fc lI 11 . 11 I- rohahly need to be modified (the arnOUnt is unknown at this tune). • TI, t i i~ 11 rlti-ll structure will be removed I demolished Traffic lrnpalrt: • Alt'r_ li:;°l f°-lera are I &velloped, traffic would I I - _o if the property was rez,~ ,d ;rind rede,el+:t1e1_i- It is anticipated that t nirer_.ity Drive can easily a=ccommodate any incre ! tr-ltf c:- • Benton (Bevel pll -r't C de Analvsis: _t It is antiuipafe d that the proposed development will meet or exceed the requirements of the DDC- • Denton PI=1 n This ,-k;prl -nf meets or exceeds many of the stated goals and policies found in the Dentc:n Pl,_Ir irclu!_i ncg- • The prcpert; 4~Jt;III, th- Exlrting Residential Irfll Cornpatibility land use designatl._;r1. The P-r't_,ri Plar, t_fes- Lf'iCf], 7E th c, + 3twce. and a land uses is allowed. The I p --.ed zoning is respording to the e;=istng devel I In1 nt pattern in the surrcul ling area- Commercial (nc.l1-r rti iii i i ,rr 111 -,rlf adjacent to University and single `°imily residential rr t1-at. • The proposal suppal1 t I- t 'I swing Growth fla rci- meat P i - Page 119 _ 21 j • TI -H growth niail , -rl_ i t sfir tom I - to JI ! ,!J[rporf tl_ 11-ridi atlon of publ c 11 se~y with trr; It _ ci_ , 1-1Irr~l F P it-rn~IIt l th>Itll l_lF: tpl" IrI-1 a etll el-at use of I ill In PI ,I_- aril-l Iltl i_tlI_ICa!VI I-i lili;m'I_1tE" The tribe impact .-1` p n atI ~i 'r'Ic!I,Irr_nt I1p-ji_J11i I - &,-CU1 it_I., d rlti-l~ij and asseS~eR~ II pJrrlp ulrtlr'.rl t ~iUI-III- i t-. 7I1 ~ f?i✓'h~t;t-;. • Land u'_ b- I__II_I1_ 1_i to Ir1_,int_ir q_I 1Lt;' of If , ,_1 dl -r-- Pc-r1_rny and _I -1 I-I1_I,-Itl-ir1_d t k,-I__. T'I~ city pro%, 1 open _;rtui iUI-_- for tl e dam= I-Jt~lll-lit c~t a tul aii ~A 1-ind U e3 within the city. + snIII, 1 ~ i1I11 -1' ! -I' I Ii -ir 1'i nfe i=d, V" ad-11--, trr?1? it lit' It I It I, I t'1P,P11 1-, 1`1 it 7,-rlII--] 1 Ul l I-E !J t-1-: I I- 't If p-, Ifilrrrr-1nI t -n ''f11-11_I t I I a t 1111- I -+I`I 1 1_~ II- ' I _flr" 11 ti f- I 1 lair _Ibilt; t1-: J!llt _13t f1cJt;-I1t al Il' _i ~tl'1r' Iir ai,t5 cl' ne:l:_'1bC'rll i I I:-I-rltl A r- :-~rnir tl ir' 11 the use of zrinll it -v-- a planning tool should he t-D f _,_,rrlnl_Inityvalue -#ully- (P:ic- 23) Based upon the v'_liti-:ll it r-i lI:-r iA d_ lelopment and the exI-.tiiIg land Use mix, the city will i-III-e-i to acesmr :date approximately 3,000 Page 2 of 4 City Council Staff Report Page 22 of 45 „''oi 1 10 '4_,z AM Case#: Z10-0007 nacres of ~l e jelopment, 3200 acres of commercial development, and 2,700 o_{cr- -tit--t tl itl _ raI development • rr rrlc:~l_rte fl_itln _ _,:lrrn -i~ -j' i-at I:~ry nodes t1 ro~~r:;'7:?ut fide city. It is r - rrl~ilar~'~I th + ~s-.err ff c11 1j f -I+-It be I !crit d c.: lilt r,i-jously along ccin dorslr a "'-Jiir'r~I ~nneC- r~i aI Criteria fc r apt- „ (§35-3-4-8 DDC) analysis_ `I- A complete op[ II ;_,ti n ,nd fee shall be SUbrnitted- Response: A complete application & fee was submitted. 2- Appi°c-,ti:,rr~ rr~, h~,I I r3,rei yen the folllo~t n:;;af~rl .-ire met: a- Till- I lp,i rec. inin - 11Ifi--,rM^S to the Future ILE iii I IJS,~ Ipmi-nt of Thl . Pprt,)n PIE] 11. Response: The proposed NRMU-12 is consistent with the existing land use designation (Existing Residential I Infill Compatibility). b- The proposed Specific Use Permit meets the criteria set forth in Subchapter 13, and conforms to the Purpose and intent of The Denton Plan. Response: NIA for zoning armendment.. c. The i rezoning or Specific Use Pen it i rl ~ _v:!~ I l late provision of fm r-;[ ort_,tic.n, water, sewers, schools, parks, of -r I i'_I e-11_i Dements and p€Iblic cor,erierll:e. Response: Adequate provisions for public utilities and conveniences exist (see analysis above and PAC09-0023 engineering comrments).. See Exhibit 4 for Property Description See Exhibit 5 f: )r P l-it[ l :,rizc ti :gin (Page 3 of 4 City Council Staff Report Page 23 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 In summary, we k: el vo that the proposed zc>i rig meets the goals of the Denton Plan and is compatible to the i it a-,-nt and surroundii l r _ ind land uses- Th aril. you for your consideration on thi= ri attar r t if you have any questions please do not _ t;ta to contact me. Sincerely- Sprr~- O.Dok P,,rrr r r;rwn i R t, A-'-LA, AIICP Cc: John Porter Attachments Exhibit '1 Location & Zoning reap Exhibit 2: Tor r.1=-,p Exhibit J_ NR- - I']R1.1L!-` 2 rr i- .n in Exhibit A Letter c k M r zation City Council Staff Report Page 24 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 7 Neighborhood Meeting Summaries 1. The first of four neighborhood meetings was held Monday, April 12, 2010 at 6:45 PM at the North Lakes Recreation Center. Thirty-four (34) people were in attendance, not including the applicant's consultant, applicant, Katia Boykin and Erica Marohnic. Larry Reichhart discussed the proposed rezone, possibility of tailoring an overlay district, indicating commercial at the hard corner of Glenwood Lane and University Drive (U.S. 380) with clustered housing or townhomes adjacent to the Crescent Heights subdivision along the site's northern property boundary. Neighbors had concerns regarding height, type of housing proposed, type of commercial uses proposed, preservation of trees, possibility of a wall separating the residential from the existing neighborhood, size of office and professional uses (less than 5,000 or 10,000 sq. ft.), drainage from site south to University Drive (U.S. 380) into adjacent single-family neighborhood, speculative zoning, forethought to limiting uses with an overlay, aggressiveness of proposal, traffic into the neighborhood, lighting concerns, 24-hour type businesses, hours of operation and difficulty getting onto Glenwood from Palmwood. Neighbors suggested tailoring the rezone request with an overlay including appearance of office uses as single-family buildings, limiting office sizes, prohibiting 24-hour type businesses, lighting, driveway approaches on Glenwood and University Drive (U.S. 380), rezoning only a portion north of the University Drive (U.S. 380) right-of-way up to Palmwood Place and then leaving the remainder as NR-3 and consideration of single-family homes along northern property line. Three neighbors in attendance did state, "no matter what you put here, we are not going to be happy." Katia Boykin and Erica Marohnic spoke with both Mr. Porters after the meeting concluded and suggested they regroup with their consultant and reconsider their proposal. After doing so, they should hold another meeting prior to proceeding to P&Z and Council. 2. The second neighborhood meeting held Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 6:45 PM at the North Lakes Recreation Center. Nineteen (19) people were in attendance, not including the applicant's consultant, applicant and Erica Marohnic. Larry Reichhart discussed the proposed rezone, and provided attendees with an exhibit showing a 15-foot wide buffer along the site's northern property line and several restrictions regarding architecture. There was an additional condition regarding primary means of access on the exhibit. A second exhibit page provided pictures of a nearby office park built by Mr. Porter and the type of architectural treatments contemplated for the property. Comments from the neighbors included the statement that the restrictive overlay was, "just window dressing," quality of potential multifamily uses if allowed through SUP approval, fencing type and location, 15-foot buffer and residential proximity slope (RPS), access, City Council Staff Report Page 25 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 compatibility of proposed uses and transition from the surrounding Crescent Heights subdivision, requests to limit the uses to office or low-density residential, requests to limit commercial potential, limit retail to a specific distance to existing residential, questions of ownership in the future, questions of who will develop the property, questions regarding development time frame and questions regarding the site's topography and cutting into the hill. 3. The third neighborhood meeting held Tuesday, October 12, 2010 at 6:45 PM at the North Lakes Recreation Center. Approximately ten (10) people were in attendance, not including the applicant's consultant, applicant and Erica Marohnic. Larry Reichhart discussed the proposed rezone, and provided attendees with an exhibit showing a 15-foot wide buffer along the site's northern property line, 100-foot wide restricted use area where only single-family, professional service and offices may be constricted and several revised restrictions regarding architecture, maximum height and facade treatment. A second exhibit page provided a comparison of uses permitted within the NR-3 district and those permitted in the NRMU-12 district. Comments from the neighbors included the request to not allow Laundry Facilities within the overlay district, clarification of the term "Single-family" (e.g. single-family attached, detached and duplex), new masonry requirements for non-residential strictures, limiting building height for all uses to one story, access to Glenwood, continuing the 100-foot wide restricted use area where only single-family, professional service and offices may be constricted along Glenwood, questions on grading of the site and the need for a retaining wall along the northern property line, questions regarding the square footage of potential homes, questions posed to Mr. Porter regarding his intent to develop the property personally, consideration of retail only at the hard- corner of Glenwood and University, access variance questions on procedure and the reclassification of Glenwood as a Residential Avenue Collector. 4. The fourth neighborhood meeting held Thursday, January 6, 2011 at 6:45 PM. This meeting was held at Mr. Potter's office located at 1801 Hinkle Drive, Denton Texas. Eight residents attended the meeting, as well as the applicant's consultant (Mr. Reichhart), and staff (Nana Appiah). Mr. Reichhart opened the meeting and explained to those present that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the applicant's proposed overlay restrictions and solicit new ideas from the community. Mr. Reichhart also inform those at the meeting that the main purpose of the meeting is to adhere to the recommendation by City Council for the applicant to work with the community to find a consensus on how the subject property can be developed while protecting the adjacent residential homes. The applicant (Mr. Potter), and Mr. Reichhart discussed all the new changes with the community. They also received recommendations of new changes from the community. Those community members at the meeting were satisfied with the changes agreed upon and as was stated by one of the participants' "these new changes are a compromise. We have to meet each other halfway and we believe Mr. Potter has done so". City Council Staff Report Page 26 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 8 Responses to Notification - ~ __~FIA hElp Z!TF 1 ~Ell 500 Ft. Jus L T R a r '00 Ft, ff Tadius- L ( 200 Ft. T a~l .l/ sus ~TT - Subject Site - - - Lagend Z10-0007; [=aite ~NSU'r.' 1411 E University Avenue )pp.- 200 F: Notice Boundary Favor 500 F Notice Boundary 400 200 0 400 Feet Centerline Public Notification Date: 8/27/10 200' Legal Notices sent: 31 500' Courtesy Notices sent: 99 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice: In Opposition: 11 In Favor: 3 Neutral: 4 Opposition is 4.34 acres or 27.93% City Council Staff Report Page 27 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOVICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ZI0-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on September 8, 2010 and consider raking a recommendation to City Council, regarding a rezoning from a Nel()N-orhood Re idarttial 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (lJPMU-12) zvritul cistrict with a restrictive overlay on apprcxirttately 6.836 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the ,3.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas, The public hearing will start at 6:30 p.rn. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 216 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Bocc?wso you own property 4 ithin Ave hundred (200) feat of the subject property, the Planr?ir r -nd 7uning Commission would fik.; to hoor haw you feel about this request and invites you t" atlc,tu ll;e hearing. Please, it order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this fort" with yau, cortinients prior to the date of the public hearing, (This in no way prohibits you from ottondit!_g and pt~rtic pat;l;~ in the pvbl,c hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom or mail it to the add ess below or drop it off in-person; Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 221 N. Elm ST Menton, Texas 76241 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commiss:cr, is informed of tha percent of response, in su~pwt Lind in opposition. Please circle one, In favor of request Neutral to request (:Qosed to request reasons for Opposition: Signature: Printed Name: - 1 r MailirgAddress: ft-f 0MVVI*-i:, e(V Yt 1102o9 City, State Zip: Tefeplic,ne Number; Wt l) --5Zt) is 0 3 `a .7', Physical Address of property within 2010 feet: '-y L)t.,,r? zi ! k',041 (1)" 11 76eo CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST - DENTON, TEXAS 761201 - 940.349.3541 + (F) n47'34),7707 e~sz kra~~~ City Council Staff Report Page 28 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: ZIO-0007 September 6, 2010 Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton RE: Z10-0007, Rezoning of 1411 E. University Avenue TO WHOM IT MAYCONCERN: Our home is located at 1410 Greenwood Drive within 200 feet of the proposed property zoning change. We are o:jposed to the rezoning of the property at 1411 E. University Avenue. We have lived at this property for 2'l: years and are raising our 7 year old daughter. We do not want the property dovolt-ped for business for the following reasons' 1. The beauty of the nelghborhood will be diminished with 1-2 story business buildings constructed. The green space driving up University AvPnuP is needed to attract homebuyers to the neighborhood. One of the main reasons we purchased our home is the beauty of being able to see green, natural space surrounding the property. Being able to live in the city and experience trees and green space around our home and throughout our neighborhood provides a positive influence on our growing slaughter. Too many ckalldrerti a e deprived of nature in our busy lives and having easy access to seeing and enjoying nature is essential for their growing minds and bodies. We have no doubt constructing fence lines and buildings within 15 feet of our back yard will replace this view with something comparable to the rear end of a shopping center. 2. We were su rpr ised to 'earn that the current property owner raised his children in this neighborhood and wis able to enjoy all of the green space and trees throughout their time living here. Howevei, he is now willing to dirninish the opportunity we have and future families have to experience the same privacy, safety and heauty. 3. The owner- has often referred us to some office buildings he has built on Hinkle Road as an example of what wl III be plac--d here on this property. Admittedly, these are attractive office buildings whi rh dLu not clash with the neighboring areas, However, he has given us no guarantee that he will retain the property once it is rezo ed. He could sell 't plecer:ieal, a Id the subsequent owners would be under no corn arils"on to follow the style of his office buildings. 4. If the property is rezoned, then the h it will be taken out and graded. Presumably there will be a ten to fifteen foot retaining wall built, which will have huge pressures placed on it by the weight of all the dirt and rock in our neighborhood's soil. This could destah[117P the houses next to any proposed development. We also have a pool, which could easily crack and leak water if this were to happen, 5. Property values. Denton property values have begun to fall, which threatens to bring on the "underwater" phenomenon, vhern the owner owes more on the house than it is worth nn the market. Putting a series of businesses on that property, next door to our neighborhood, can only worsen this situation. 1 City Council Staff Report Page 29 of 45 - ^_011 10 24 53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 6i The noise -The increased traffic into what could became a business area will raise the already considerable ro€se level and become a nuisance. c arLage trucks and other utilityvehlcie', will come and go a- nrfd hours of the day and night €nterriipt€ng orrr p.r✓ace., and our sleep. 7. The smell - us nesses most often place their garbage bins behind their hriildings, which would then be very close to our homes. The smell of garbage would ruin orrr enjoyment of our h ickyards, and discourage us from opening our windows during pleasant weather, & The lncrcasec heat - paving this large expanse of land car only increase the heat it would retain daring hat weather, which would make our back yards ever hatter during the summer. We respectfully request the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton deny the request to rezone the property at 1411 E. University Avenue. Respectfully submitted, 1 The Verges Family, 3 Roy Verges, Beth Bates-Verges and Sofia .0111 1410 Greenwood Drive Denton, Texas 76209 2 City Council Staff Report Page 30 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOTICE OF V BLI HEARING 210.0007 The P'ar7fng and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will held a public hearing on September 8, 20'0 and ronsider making a recommendation to City Council, regarding a rezoning from a h eichborhood Residertial 3 (\IR zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 'Axed isci 12 (NkiVIU-12) zoning distr,-_t with 'a restfttive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres. The property is located at the northeas' corner cf Glenv. od Cane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situ~jted within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abs*ract No. 7 .62, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will dart at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own PraFerty within two hundred 2 ?Jj fcot of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Canamissiuri w.o)ty f Bice to hear how you foul OboUf this request and invites you 0 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 aftr ,;dinj and parth:ip4ing in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica h1arohnic, Project Manager 221 N, Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request i" Reasons for Opposition:` C "i ~ra .t a Signature: Printed Name - t Mailing Addies_ City, :state Zip:.,l Tc ep:lone Number: Physicai Address of Property within 200 feet: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY FALL WEST - DENTON, TEXAS 76201 940349,8541 (F) 940.349.7707 200, F, PCVD City Council Staff Report Page 31 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z9 0-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on September 8, 2010 and consider making a re,:ar m, _ndation to City Council, regarding a re--c.ni-p from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR" zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixac: Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres, The property is located at the not( a,j, A corner of Glenwood Lane and East d ,iv :rsJy Uride ('J,S, 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas, Tho public hearing will start at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Nall located at 215 E, %icKin,ey Street, Denton, Texas, Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject pwi rry, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feet about this request and Ovites ycu to attend the ptifalic hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form Leith your con-ii rats prior to the date of tt-e public hearing_ (This in no way prohibits you fro)r7 oVer,diog and padfcipafi„;j fn the public I.,-antig•I You may fax it to the number located at the botto-r or mall it to the address Wow or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager i 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percen- Jresponses in support and in o:)positior. Please circle one: _ In favor of request Neutral to request 2p2sed to request Reasons for Opposition: '~rL .~....rtt Sri C/s~~z-~,~ - /~,12~~~a.a.~r€_f •i- 2~'~ ~..._.r Signature: Pri ted Narr,e: , r? 2;:~.~ ?C, k Iv h t'~ i--- Mailinn Address: I j i %a •ti, 17 v C ty, State Zip: Teleplhor.e Number. Phy:~L:u: Add€ .:s~ of P:upc€ty within 200 feat: ve CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY NAIL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 940:349,8541 {F} 9403 349,7707 City Council Staff Report Page 32 of 45 '011 10 4 52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Sep 06 10 09:29p Jet= McCormiok 9411-~-G, i 90.353 p. t NOTICE O PUBLIC HEARING Z10-0007 The Fannlnc and Zpning Commission of the City of Denton will bald a pabfic nn_n rig on Sopt?mber 8, 2010 and consider making recxmrnendaticn to City Council, regarding a rezo,, rg from a Nefghho: horr Reslde tiaf 3 (MR-9) 7nnic3 district to a Neighborhood Reside 3tiu: h7 xc.J Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on appro)dmatniy 6.536 axes. The property Is to sated at the nnftheast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Dove (U.S. 380J, situated within the J.Q. Lilly Sarvey, Abstract Na. 762, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will start at 6:30 p.rr. In the City Council Chambers of City ball located at 215 E. YcKin-my Street. Denton, Texas. Because you own praoper4l w4hin two hundred (200) feet of the suhlPCt property, the plarrnrrrp and Zoning Commission would tike io hear how you fbol about this regoest and invites you to attend tho pubf1c hearing. Please, fn order for your opinion to be takers into aCCClarlt, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public gearing. (This in no way prohibits you from attending and panic{eating fn the oubf.'c heating.) You may fax it to the number ideated at the bottom or retail it to the address Below or dro;: 't off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Mtarrohnic, Project Manager 2210!, Elm ST Renton, Texas 76201 These farms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the r!erc2nt of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request C?pposed to request Reasons for Oppositiontt ` f tax it t9i~ M ~ ~m k l~ t~I Y1t 1tl p ~ Yl~. , cast -A h Drh y' , LA-b Signature: Printed iNarrnc' G .prrr, i A+failing address: t-C Vl 0' city, State Zip: T 1t 2 TelephomA Mi-W)er: 940- - 14 Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: V+~ S CITY OF DENTQN, TEXAS crrv HALL WEST • DENT€)N, TEXAS 76201 • 90.349.8541 • (F) 940.349.7717 City Council Staff Report Page 33 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 f , NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING Z10-0007 The Planning and Zoning Comm'cs€nn of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on September 8, 2010 and consider making a ret;ornrnendation to City Council, regarding a rezurling from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Nelght orhood Residential tvl xcd Use 12 (NRMU-12) : on€:,r; cifstrlct with a restMlive overlay on approximately G.836 acres. Tile pir )perty is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), s t.jated within the J.Q. Lilly Surrey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will start at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Charribuis o° City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Boca!rso you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zcnin Commission would like to hear how you feel about this request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinlon 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, nGrnbor located at the bottom or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person:. Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 221 N. Elm T Denton, Texas 78201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: --6~~ In favor of request Neutral to request apposed to request as ns for Opposition: r r z5r z5r Printed Nam Mailing Address: City, State ;Zip: _rx Telephone Number: r' Physical Address of °rcperty with€r 200 feet: C17'Y'O DEAfTON, TEXAS CITY ItALLwEST . DENTON TEXAS 76201 99UQ 8641 (F)94U49.7707 tip g.i 1(i 13; `f% k"CVD 200 P&Z Notfae City Council Staff Report Page 34 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ,ZIO-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City (,f Centon will hold a tmjhllc; hearing on Se..pte,rnher 8, 2010 a:id consider rna in7 a recommendation to City Council, regard;~ip a rezonira 'torn a Neighbc- h,_-)ad Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NR%1 -1?) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approxlmately 6.833 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas. The nubile hearing will start at 6:30 p.m, n the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 216 E, W,'. ncv Street, Dento7, Toves, 5ecac,se you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the su%;,;; nr perty, the Plnonini; and 7ot?in)g Commission would like to hear how you feei:about this regi,os! and invites you to Woad the pub!+c hearing. Please, in carder for your opinion t;;, be taken into accowil, return this form with your comments prior to the date Qf the public hearing. (This in no way prohL'.,ks you from aftond r;g anct perticr'pat.rny in the pubiic hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom or mail it to the address below or drop it c-ff in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 229 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is infc- wed of the percent of responses it supp )rt and in apposition. Please circle one. In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Rea-;nns for opposition: - - - t, fie,, c Z- all ca: r V.+ r% ;igrat ire: y i , r ~ Marling Address: t k t ~ City, State Zip: Telephone Number: Physical Address of Property within 2M feet: CITY OF DEI1tTQN, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTJN, TEXAS 76201 • 940349.8541 (F) 040.34'9,7707 09-C7-10 13; l eCVD ?00' P3°7 Nolior City Council Staff Report Page 35 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z'I 0-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will held a public hearing on Septcll~~"r P. n10 and consider making a --commendation to City Council, regarding a rezoning from a Neicihborhood Residential 3 (f €R- l zoning district to a t`:=i ,hborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NIRMU-12) zoning district %v the a restrictive overlay on apprc x mafcly 5.836 acres, The pio nerty is Icc-ated at the northeast corner of C enwood !-ane and Eat Jnivc-rsltJ Chive (U.S. 380), situator within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 732, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will start at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKirney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the sc,f ,ie,~! Fropertyr the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feet about this roques' avid invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to betaken into account, return this form with your coiir- en-s prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no way probibits you from attending and participating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are trsect to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of respc: yes in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to reouest (0:1 Se est Reasons for Opposition: ` } ~1 dl~ Im. ((1.QZXeGna~~ C•v~N-,'Akce_ s6, 'n~5erh t{ y e VYterG d'M1 JS J4.A_', uJarcl~ ~ c. GecuDA,, itsn~y Q e tS ir\1A tt~ 5tls + W`, ~~e_ t3rCec,NU''S 4Locil A~a,la~~~~ 1~ [S t~,-t~ *te, ia'h•.lel~~'}5~ 'F~~. Gilt-2c~ for Aur-L tit or ok~tu_ 51q'l:lture: tits v,-inte' Name: Mailinc. Address: [ 4D a Ity, State Zip: Talephone Number: 4- o - oo I Physical Andress of Property within 200 feet: C1T'Y CAF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL uvl=sT ; of TON TEXAS 76201 • 940 349th .41 (F)940.3493707 09-07-10 ti'; 1{cv; City Council Staff Report Page 36 of 45 ""011 10'4 >3 AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z10-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on September 8, 2010 and consider making a recommendation to City Council, regarding a rezoning from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 tike to hear how you feel about this 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 or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: del ~ ~C C' l c` ~cSG ti's - O ' Signature: A&lea Ze'1_111 Printed Name: e C' ~~t ~e f .1, Z ~JdG~~1 c>C Mailing Address: 13-w City, State Zip: 1v--2D~ Telephone Number: 9 7 Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: 13a o <wr_-/ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 • 940.349.8541 • (F) 940.349.7707 Q1-Z3-t1 1221 !Na„gd i City Council Staff Report Page 37 of 45 „2011 10 '4_,2 AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z10-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on September 8, 2010 and consider making a recommendation to City Council, regarding a rezoning from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 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 or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: (~~Ct?2N i"T I n 4 (Ly !L 11 D u i -r0 I r v n r P tJ /7 4 C u 2 13 Cu r U ` Cy L. L W A N t~ ll 5 T 1 ~ 2 L= (A3 1 L L- P~ ~r 7r~ W fo rt Jt 5 ~r r~ i 2- a G^ 7"% Signature: / Printed Name: SON ADD W R Fr- Mailing Address: ~u 2 z- r~ e_ N ate City, State Zip: -1) t!7= N ~+J 7~ 7 G2u el Telephone Number: e?c._ 8? - 86A- Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: Lozs-- G 4,6=:WJe d a Liu ATE 1) )-7 CITY OE DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 940.349.8541 (F) 940.349.7707 (31-24-i1 "l `1 21 i~ City Council Staff Report Page 38 of 45 ^_011 10 a AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z'I0-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on September 8, 2010 and consider making a recommendation to City Council, regarding a rezoning from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 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 or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: _ In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: Signature: Printed Name: ' Mailing Address: City, State Zip: c~ Telephone Number: C' 1 67C,) Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: 1 (~2Oct CITY OF DENTON, TE=XAS CITY HALL WEST DENTON, TEXAS 76201 940.349.8541 (F)940.349.7707 City Council Staff Report Page 39 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ZI0-0007 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on September 8, 2010 and consider making a recommendation to City Council, regarding a rezoning from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and East University Drive (U.S. 380), situated within the J.Q. Lilly Survey, Abstract No. 762, Denton, Texas. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 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 or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department Attn: Erica Marohnic, Project Manager 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: v-!'asp PSf~v4 {X;s~ Signature: Printed Name: eat Mailing Address: -Vec,_, e. City, State Zip: eo a N ,fix 7! 2 o-q Telephone Number: J516- Zo 6 ~7 0 77 Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: &~V ~rerH ,.w~G'i s i CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST - DENTON, TEXAS 76209 940.349.8541 • (F) 940.349.7707 0'i-°28-11 '12:21 !N~ City Council Staff Report Page 40 of 45 „2011 10 '4_,2 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 9 Site Photos ~Ai F 1 V t P~ AV } City Council Staff Report Page 41 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52AM Case#: Z10-0007 i s c 5 t City Council Staff Report Page 42 of 45 „'011 10 '4_52 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Exhibit 10 October 20, 2010 P&Z Meeting Minutes A. Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding a rezoning from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with a restrictive overlay on approximately 6.836 acres. The property is located at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and U.S. Highway 380 (East University Drive). (Z10-0007, 1411 East University Drive, Erica Marohnic) On October 6, 2010, this item was continued to a date certain of October 20, 2010. Marohnic presented this item. The request is to rezone approximately 6.836 acres at the northeast corner of Glenwood Lane and U.S. Highway 380 from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) with a restrictive overlay. Surrounding uses include residential and commercial. The restrictive overlay is proposing all allowable uses with the exception of laundry facilities, a 6 foot tall wrought iron fence, a 15 foot buffer with only trees and a 150 foot limited build zone. The limited build zone would be restricted to only professional and office uses, the buffer would be limited to Type C buffer from the Criteria Manual and the fencing and buffer could be interrupted for ingress/egress. Additional architectural restrictions and limitations were defined in the backup material. The property is currently developed with one single-family house. There were 31 certified notices mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. There were 16 responses received in opposition, 3 of those were outside of the 200 foot radius, but within the 500 foot radius and there was one duplicate. There is a 31.33% area of opposition so a supermajority vote of City Council would be required to rezone this area. The Development Review Committee recommends approval of this request. Lyke questioned the total acreage of the limited build area. The applicant, John Porter, responded from the audience, that it would be approximately 3 acres with the restriction area. Bentley stated that the buffer is limited to professional offices, but requested clarification if retail was completely out and if community services would be allowed. Marohnic responded that retail is completely out and if those community services are allowed in the NRMU 12 zoning district those would be allowed as well. Bentley requested further clarification if bars and clubs would be prohibited. Marohnic confirmed this. The applicant was present to speak. John Porter 1111 Emerson Lane Porter stated that he purchased the property as an investment opportunity. Porter presented photographs to the Commission of another development of professional offices that he completed behind the Chase Bank Building on U.S. Highway 380 and noted the architectural features, roof pitch and the residential neighborhood that is located to the north of it. Bentley questioned the applicant why he was pursing re-zoning the entire property and not something less intense. Porter responded that the NRMU-12 would allow the most flexibility. Bentley also questioned the ratio of businesses to residences, site design and if any tenants were already planned. Porter responded that several neighborhood meetings have taken place, but a ratio, site design and tenants have not been determined at this time. Porter stated that he has City Council Staff Report Page 43 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 spoken with a dentist and pediatrician, however, without having the zoning approved to allow for those uses it is difficult to begin that stage of the project. Ryan questioned if the applicant would be okay with a Specific Use Permit (SUP) requirement for certain uses. Larry Reichhart, Springbrook Planning Group, developer for the applicant, stated that an SUP is already required. Porter stated that the overlay limits the development to one-story to keep it harmonious with the neighborhood. Lyke questioned where the road would be located. Reichhart stated that the Denton Development Code (DDC) does not allow for access off of Highway 380 without a variance. Reichhart continued that there is a current median break on Highway 380 and it is the intention of the applicant to pursue a curb cut off of Highway 380 as the variance was too difficult to tie to the zoning. For the current application purpose access will be derived from Gleenwood. Lyke questioned the location of an internal road. Reichhart stated it would loop through the property. Reichhart noted that there have been several concerns from the adjoining neighborhood including buffering, transition of uses, quality, architecture, lighting, building height and access. Reichhart stated that he and the applicant feel that the overlay district addresses the majority of those concerns. Lyke questioned the topography and if there were plans to grade the hill on the subject site. Reichhart stated the intention is to work within the existing topography. Bentley requested clarification on the limit to one-story and questioned what would prevent a tall commercial box, like CVS. Reichhart stated that the square footage is limited to 5,000 square feet, a lot smaller than a CVS and that he and his applicant are not opposed to a height limit should one be included as a restriction. Reichhart continued that the architectural requirements would not allow a split face retail box. Cunningham questioned if it is the applicants intent to put in for the record the elevations of the applicants other project to demonstrate aesthetics and roof pitch. Reichhart stated that the photographs are an accurate representation of style and roof pitch, however, the proposed aesthetic detail and layout will be different. Thomas opened the public hearing. Spoke in opposition of the request: Tim Fisher, 1603 Greenwood Drive Roy Verges, 1410 Greenwood Drive Louise C. Brooks, 1510 Greenwood Drive Provided cards in opposition, but did not wish to speak: Beth Bates-Verges, 1410 Greenwood Drive Doris Roush, 1518 Greenwood Drive Kay Copeland, 1709 Laurelwood Drive Patsy James, 1511 Greenwood Drive One card was provided by Larry Reichhart, 2405 Mustang Drive, in favor of the request. Reichhart provided his comments during the presentation of this request. City Council Staff Report Page 44 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 Reichhart responded in rebuttal for the applicant. Reichhart addressed the concerns noted by the speaking opposition stating that one complaint was that this was speculative zoning. Reichhart stated that until the property is zoned no one is going to put money forward to invest in creating a site plan. The issue that single-family townhomes may not be compatible Reichhart disagrees with stating they would provide a good transition from commercial to residential uses citing an example on Poinsettia and Sherman Drive. Reichhart stated that this (NRMU-12) is the latest zoning category added by the City. There is some retail and some office uses and this proposed development would blend with other businesses along Highway 380. Other issues addressed including the garbage issue and no restaurants are allowed with this overlay, so the smell from garbage should not be an issue and the lack of green space within the development. There were additional discussions and clarifications with the Commission. One more person came forward to speak in opposition: Kay Copeland, 1709 Laurelwood Drive. Thomas closed the public hearing. Commissioner Ryan motioned, Commissioner Reece seconded to recommend approval of this zoning request. On roll call vote: On roll call vote: Commissioner Ryan "aye", Commissioner Thomas "aye", Chairman Reece "aye", Commissioner Bentley "nay", and Commissioner Lyke "nay". Motion carried. (3-2). City Council Staff Report Page 45 of 45 ^_011 10:24:53 AM Case#: Z10-0007 sAlegaRour documenulordinances1111z10-0007 ordinance.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 3 (NR-3) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO A NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE 12 (NRMU-12) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNTION, WITH AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, ON 6.836 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GLENWOOD LANE AND EAST UNIVERSITY DRIVE (U.S. 380), SITUATED WITHIN THE J.Q. LILLY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 762, WITHIN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z10-0007) WHEREAS, Spring Brook Planning Group, has applied for a change in zoning for approximately 6.836 acres of land described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter, the "Property"), from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation, . with an overlay district; and WHEREAS, on October 20, 2010, the Planning and Zoning. Commission concluded a public hearing as required by law, and recommended approval of the change in zoning, with a restrictive overlay limiting uses and imposing the following additional restrictions (the "Overlay): 1. All uses permitted within the NRMU-12 zoning district are permitted on the subject site as described in Exhibit A of the ordinance, except for Laundry Facilities. a. The only structures allowed within 150 feet of the northern property line shall be professional service and office uses. Parking is permitted within 20 feet of the northern property line. 2. An eight-foot high solid screen fence (good side out) shall be installed per the requirements of the Denton Development Code, constructed with steel posts and decorative caps, in the locations specified within Exhibit B of the ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and is subject to further restrictions as follows: a. The fence shall be constructed in accordance with Section 35.13.9 of the Denton Development Code. b. The fence shall be constructed in the required buffer yard adjacent to the property line in lieu of the required buffer shrubs. c. All required buffer trees shall be planted in accordance with the requirements of the Denton Development Code. d. If the fence is constructed of wood, the wood shall be cedar. saleganour documcntslordinances1111z10-0007 ordinance.doc 3. In the event that single family detached, single-family attached or duplex structures are not developed adjacent to Glenwood, a 6-foot high wrought iron style fence shall be installed per the requirements of the Denton Development Code in the locations specified within Exhibit B of the ordinance, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and is subject to further restrictions as follows: a. The fence shall be constructed of tubular steel. b. A "Type C" buffer shall be planted adjacent to the fencing in accordance with Section 35.13.8 of the Denton Development Code. c. Perimeter fences are not required where they interfere with access roads and driveways. 4. The following architectural standards shall he incorporated into proposed buildings: a. Architectural elements such as prominent entries, offsets or recesses along all sides, decorative wall and roof vents and gable features shall be incorporated into the design of buildings; b. All windows shall be Double Insulated windows with thermal break and no mirrored glass; c. The minimum roof pitch shall be 4:12 and the maximum roof pitch shall be 10:12; d. New buildings shall incorporate alternating roof plate heights; e. Shingles (if used) shall be a minimum 30 year architectural style composition shingle; f The exterior of all new structures shall be constructed of one hundred percent (100%) masonry (excluding doors windows, dormers and trim). For the purposes of this ordinance masonry includes brick, stone and stucco; and g. Building height shall be limited to one story and shall not exceed thirty-two (32) feet. 5. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine onto adjacent properties. 6. All trees planted in the buffer yards shall be a minimum of four inches (4") to six inches (6") dbh and a minimum of twenty feet (20') high. WHEREAS, the City Council fords that the change is consistent with the Denton Plan and the Development Code; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference as true. &1egaRour documentslordinancesl111z10-0007 ordinance.doc SECTION 2. The zoning district classification and use designation for the Property is hereby changed from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation, as further restricted by the above-recommended Overlay district requirements, as specified above in the Recitals. Notwithstanding the attached real property description, the Property being amended includes all property to the centerline of all adjacent street rights-of-way. . SECTION 3. The City's official land use map is amended to show the change in land use designation. SECTION 4. 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 provision of this ordinance are severable. SECTION 5. 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. 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 , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURG~Y. TTORNEY sAegaRour documentslordinances1111z10-0007 ordinance.doe EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Porter Property Description 1411 E. UNIVERSITY DRIVE FIELD NOTES TO ALL THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE J.Q. LILLY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 762, AND BEING PART OF A TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO DONALD L HUTCHERSON AND WIFE, FRANCES R_ HUTCHERSON, AS RECORDED IN COUNTY CLERK'S FILE. NUMBER 2003-201235 OF THE REAL PROPERTY R E C O R D S OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT AT A 112" CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER IN THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 11, BLOCK '0', OF CR.ESTWOOD HEIGHTS, EXTENSION #2, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF DENTONI, TEXAS, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 2, PAGE 13, OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, OF THE NOLES ADDTION TO THE CITY OF DENTON, AS RECORDED.IN CABINET F, SLIDE 359, OF SAID PLAT RECORDS AND AT THE NORTHEST CORNER OF SAID HUTCHERSON TRACT; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 58 SECONDS EAST WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID NOLES ADDITION AND THE EAST LINE OF SAID HUTCHERSON TRACT A DISTANCE OF 87.70 FEET TO A CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER IN THE NORTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NOLES ADDITION; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FOUR CALLS WITH SAID NORTH FLIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE: 1. SOUTH 70 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 40 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 848,85 FEET TO A'/2' CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER; 2-SOUTH 64 DEGREES 30 MINUTES 01 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 100.50 FEET TO A!/ CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER; 3. SOUTH 70 DEGREES 12 MINUTES 40 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 106.21 FEET TO AT' CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER; 4. NORTH 74 DEGREES 40 MINUTES 25 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE O F 86.46 FEET TO A7 CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER IN THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF GLENWOOD LANE; THENCE NORTH 01 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 28 SECONDS EAST WITH THE EAST RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF GLENWOOD LANE A DISTANCE OF 8325 FEET TO A CAPPED IRON ROD SET CORNER IN THE NORTH LINE OF SAID HUTCHERSON TRACT AND IN THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID CRESTWOOD HEIGHTS EXTENSION #2; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 34 MINUTES 25 SECONDS EAST A DISTANCE OF 1.90 FEET TO A CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER IN THE EAST LINE OF GLENWOOD LANE; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 25 MINUTES 35 SECONDS WEST WITH THE EAST LINE OF GLENWOOD LANE AND A WEST LINE OF SAID HUTCHERSON TRACT A DISTANCE OF 343.88 FEET TO A'lz" CAPPED IRON ROD SET FOR CORNER; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 59 SECONDS EAST ALONG OR NEAR A FENCE A DISTANCE OF 1070.75 TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING AND ENCLOSING 6.836 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS. sAlegallour documentslordinancesllllz10-0007 ordinanec.doe The follo`VMg tables illustrate the diffces bdwc= the I MU-12 and NR-3 districts: 12 AcgOwlture P P Li stotl L(7) LF) Single FIp DwefijrKjs P P Accessory [3wellir1g Um Ls L(1 SUP 1t7 Attached Single Family D-,veiPings P, SLIP Dwellings Atone B tresses P N LiveMork Units P N [Ames P N Community Hare For the DMWed P P iouprnes sup Mifl i-Farrtity LxeRii 7_. Lt43 N ua`acturM Housing Develop ents N N L(4) = Multi=wily is permitted only: I . With a Specific Use Permit; or 2. As part of a Mixed-Use Development, or 3. As part of a. Master Play Development, Existing; or 4. the development received zoning approval allowing multi-family use within one year prior to the effective [late of Ordinance. No. _2005-'224; or 5. If allowed by a City Council approved neighborhood. (small area) plan. sategallour documentslordinanccs1111z10-0007 ordinance.doc 12 Horne Occupation P P She of Prodwb Gros on Site N N Hotels N N Motels N N Sep and Elva ,kt:rst L[t49 ReEaw sab:s ana SersIce Lil5i N Movie Theaters N N Restaum t or Private C uh N N O ive-through Facifrty N N Fmtc+ssmaI "rvices actu nt%eee L04) ! Quick VehicJe Serftrg N N Vehicle Repair N N Arta ar-d RV Sales N N -L"ndfy FacNit N N Equeswon F itites N N Ouldaar Recreation °J= P. lrtdu Reueatilrr N N M2W Event Enterwriment N N. Commercial Perking Lots N N AdrrdniSttetiue or Research Facilities N N Broart=Ortg of Production Studio N N Sexnay Oriented Maness N N Temporary Wes L( w) I-M) `The applicant prOposes to eliminate Laundry Facilities as a permitted use Within the restrictive overlay district. L(10) = All restrictions of L(8), but limited to no more than 5 guest units.. L(13) = Uses are limited to no more than 55.000 square feet of gross floor area per Jot. L(14) = uses are limited to no more than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area. L(I5) = Uses are limited to no more than 5,000 square feet of gross flour area per lot. An SUP is required for additional square footage for Semi-Public Halls, Clubs and Lodges- sAlegallour documentslordinances1111z10-0007 ordinance.doc 1 12 Printing / PuNishing N N Bakeries N N Manufacture of Non-odoriferous Few N N Feed Lots N N Fared Processing N N L nufa#r fg N N Heavy Manufading N N Who ale Sales N N Whdesale Nurseries N N UstrrixMon Center N N WhaleSafe Storage and Distrgwf n N N Self-service Strage N N Construchon Malerlafs Sales N N Junk Y rds and Auto Wrecking N N Kieft N N Veterinary Clnics N N Sanitary lsCom N N Incnerafors, Transfer Sfa#ionS CQS wells SUP SUP Lam} L(27) salegallour documentslordinances1111z10-0007 ordinance.doc Basic utilities L(25j 1(2~) ~OmmunityService P Parks and Caen Space P P ,huirhes P See-punt. HaILS, andl-Wges L(1ts SU° Business I Trade Schaal a N Adult or Cd as are S r F KY, Wergarten, Elementary School P SUP MtJdle Schonl P N High School N N Colleges N N Fjerl,FHousing x[131 14 Medical Centers N N pries N N lama s N N s:llegallour documentstordin n"sll IVIO-0007 orsl nance.doe EXHIBIT B LOCATION MAP Imo'- -f- r: k.,` 1J hI I F `~I 1.0 ! W (J •~I NOW y L _ `t{ ~;S i ,1 ~ z Ri ~iyl 1 { _J 11 1.i 1 ~I O ! FF , .t' 1 10 1 1 _G CU na This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance amending ordinance No. 2003-258 relating to the Economic Development Partnership Board ("The Board") to add to the membership of the Board and to expand the duties of the Board to include branding and marketing for the Denton Municipal Airport in support of the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan and to further include duties related to Airport economic development incentives; repealing all conflicting ordinances and portions thereof, and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND This item is closely related to an accompanying work session item that is also included on the February 1, 2011, City Council agenda. As detailed in the work session item, staff is proposing that the current duties of the Airport Advisory Board be reassigned to a new City Council Airport Committee and the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The purpose of this item is to provide the necessary ordinance to revise the membership and role of the EDPB and to rescind the ordinance that established the Airport Advisory Board. As described in the attached ordinance, the membership of the EDPB is proposed to increase by two members (from 7 to 9). One of the new members will be required to have knowledge or experience in general aviation related matters and must reside or work within the city. The other new member will be a citizen of the city who in the discretion of the City Council has specific knowledge, skills, and abilities that can assist with any or all of the functions related to the EDPB. In addition, the EDPB will be tasked with the following: ➢ Review, consider, and make recommendations to the City Council concerning Airport branding and marketing efforts. ➢ Outline Airport development incentive policies and make recommendations to the City Council concerning any development incentives as assigned by the City Council or requested by the City Manager. ➢ Leverage common community goals and create a synergy between the development of the Airport and the development of the overall community. PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) On December 6, 2010, City Management discussed potential governance options with the Airport Advisory Board (AAB). The AAB expressed some concerns regarding the options presented, but they did not provide a formal recommendation to the City Council. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 On December 7, 2010, City Management discussed potential governance options with the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The EDPB was very supportive of the staff recommendation, and has recommended that the City Council approve the proposed revisions to the membership and role of the EDPB. On December 13, 2010, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss their potential response and recommendation to the City Council concerning the governance options that were presented by staff. As a result of this discussion, the AAB developed a letter that was forwarded to the City Council on December 14, 2010. In this communication, the AAB recommended that the City Council either: (1) table the item until more discussion could take place or (2) increase the size of the Airport Advisory Board from seven to nine members with one additional member coming from the Economic Development Partnership Board and one member coming from the Chamber of Commerce. On December 14, 2010, staff made a presentation to the City Council on the Airport governance options that were identified. The City Council elected to table the Airport governance discussion until the February 1, 2011 meeting since only four Council members were in attendance. On January 5, 2011, the AAB held a meeting to discuss the Airport governance options that were presented by staff. On January 19, 2011, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss the Airport governance options. The focus of this meeting was to receive input and consider the views of the Airport tenants and shareholders. On January 24, 2011, a three member committee of the AAB met to consider drafting a response to the City Council on governance issues. Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer sAlegal\our documents\ordinances\10\edp amended ord.doex ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2003-258 RELATING TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP BOARD ("THE BOARD") TO ADD TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE BOARD AND TO EXPAND THE DUTIES OF THE BOARD TO INCLUDE BRANDING AND MARKETING FOR THE DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT IN SUPPORT OF THE DENTON AIRPORT 2010 BUSINESS PLAN AND TO FURTHER INCLUDE DUTIES RELATED TO AIRPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES; REPEALING ALL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND PORTIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas has determined that it is in the public interest to modify the Economic Development Partnership Board to encompass certain responsibilities concerning the City of Denton Municipal Airport; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton commissioned an Airport Business Plan study which was approved by the Denton City Council on November 16, 2010, which Plan recommended the modification of the Denton Airport governance structure to assist with vetting financial proposals for the Airport, as well as providing policy input related to targeted marketing initiatives and development; and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Partnership Board has a proven track record of effectiveness in the City of Denton with regard to reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council concerning economic development within the community; and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Partnership Board has proven particularly adept in the recruitment of business and development in the community; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Article IX. Sec. 2-251 of Ordinance No. 2003-258 is hereby amended as follows: ARTICLE IX. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP BOARD Sec. 2-251. Creation, Members, Qualifications, and Tenure. A. There is hereby created a City of Denton board entitled the Denton Economic Development Partnership Board (the "Board"). The Board shall consist of nine members. The seven board members currently serving shall serve as originally appointed. The member, as described in Sec. 2-251 C.(5) below, shall be appointed to serve until the City Council shall make its 2012 board appointments. The member, as described in Sec. 2-251 C.(6) below, shall be appointed to serve until the City Council shall make its 2011 board appointments. Thereafter, five members shall be appointed for a two-year term in the even numbered years and four members shall be appointed for a two-year term in the odd numbered years. No member shall sAlegal\our documents\ordinances\10\edp amended ord.docx serve more than three consecutive terms except for the President of the University of North Texas ("UNT"), or his designee, who may serve unlimited terms. B. The Board members shall be appointed by the City Council and shall serve at the City Council's pleasure. To aid the City Council in making appointments to the Board, the City Council will appoint two City Council members and one Chamber of Commerce ("Chamber") member to act as a nominating committee (the "Committee"). The Committee members are qualified for appointment to the Board. The City Manager and President of the Chamber will serve as ad hoc non-voting members of the Committee. The Committee will solicit nominations, contact nominees to relate duties and responsibilities and to confirm willingness to serve. The Board will solicit recommendations from the Chamber Board of Directors and the President of UNT. After evaluating the recommended nominees the Committee will present to the City Council a slate of Board nominees for City Council approval. C. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary the membership make- up of the Board shall consist of the following 1. Two members of the Board shall be City Council members at the time of their appointment to their original term. They may serve out all three terms, even if they are no longer members of the City Council after the original appointment as long as they continuously serve throughout the three terms. They must be residents of the City of Denton. 2. Two members of the Board shall be members of the Chamber Board of Directors ("Chamber Board") at the time of their appointment to their original term. They may serve out all three terms, even if they are no longer members of the Chamber Board after the original appointment as long as they continuously serve throughout the three terms. They must reside or work in the City of Denton. The Chamber Board will recommend the two nominees for consideration by the Committee and approval by the City Council. 3. Two members will be, or be employed by, a top twenty City of Denton ad valorem or sales tax payer. Such members must reside or work in the City of Denton. 4. One member will be the President of UNT or a UNT faculty or staff member designated by the President. Such member need not reside in the City of Denton and is not restricted to the three term limits. However, such member must be appointed by the City Council for each term. 5. One member will have knowledge or experience in general aviation- related matters and shall have no financial interest in matters at the Denton Municipal Airport. This member must reside or work in the City of Denton. Page 2 sAlegal\our documents\ordinances\10\edp amended ord.docx 6. One member will be a citizen of the City of Denton who, in the discretion of the City Council, has specific knowledge skills and abilities to assist in all or any one of the functions and responsibilities of the Economic Development Partnership Board. SECTION 2. Sec. 2-254 is amended to add a section F. as follows: Sec. 2-254. Duties and Responsibilities of the Board. F. The Board will review, consider and make recommendations to the Denton City Council regarding Airport Branding and Marketing to support the implementation of the Denton Airport 2010 Business Plan. The Board will review, consider and make recommendations to the Denton City Council regarding Denton Municipal Airport incentive polices, as assigned by the City Council or requested by the City Manager, and will act as a recommending body to the City Council for specific airport economic development incentives, as assigned by the City Council or requested by the City Manager and permitted by City and State law. SECTION 3. This Ordinance amends Ordinance No. 2003-258 and supercedes and repeals any provision of that ordinance, or any other, in conflict herewith; further this ordinance repeals Ordinance No. 97-299 and Ch. 3, Section 3-2 of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY 5 BY Page 3 This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution amending Resolution No. R2009-015 to establish a standing committee of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas to be known as the City Council Airport Committee to advise and assist the City Council regarding City of Denton Municipal Airport Matters; alternatively assigning such duties to an existing City Council committee; and providing for an effective date. BACKGROUND This item is closely related to an accompanying work session item that is also included on the February 1, 2011, City Council agenda. As detailed in the work session item, staff is proposing that the current duties of the Airport Advisory Board be reassigned to a new City Council Airport committee and the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The purpose of this item is to provide the necessary resolution to create the Airport committee that is recommended. As described in the attached resolution, a new City Council standing committee called the Airport Committee is proposed. The committee is proposed to consist of three (3) City Council members that will be appointed by the Mayor and City Council. The purpose of the committee will be to provide recommendations to the City Council on matters affecting Airport operations as assigned by the City Council or requested by staff. The day-to-day operations will continue to be managed by the Airport Manager under this governance stricture. If the City Council elects to assign the above described duties to an existing Council committee in lieu of creating a new Airport committee, the agenda item caption will allow this change to be considered. The attached ordinance, however, has been written to establish the Airport committee as discussed above. PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) On December 6, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Airport Advisory Board (AAB). The AAB expressed some concerns regarding the options presented, but they did not provide a formal recommendation to the City Council. On December 7, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The EDPB was very supportive of the staff Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 recommendation, and has recommended that the City Council approve the proposed revisions to the membership and role of the EDPB. On December 13, 2010, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss their potential response and recommendation to the City Council concerning the governance options that were presented by staff. As a result of this discussion, the AAB developed a letter that was forwarded to the City Council on December 14, 2010. In this communication, the AAB recommended that the City Council either: (1) table the item until more discussion could take place or (2) increase the size of the Airport Advisory Board from seven to nine members with one additional member coming from the Economic Development Partnership Board and one member coming from the Chamber of Commerce. On December 14, 2010, staff made a presentation to the City Council on the Airport governance options that were identified. The City Council elected to table the Airport governance discussion until the February 1, 2011 meeting since only four Council members were in attendance. On January 5, 2011, the AAB held a meeting to discuss the Airport governance options that were presented by staff. On January 19, 2011, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss the Airport governance options. The focus of this meeting was to receive input and consider the views of the Airport tenants and shareholders. On January 24, 2011, a three member committee of the AAB met to consider drafting a response to the City Council on governance issues. Respectfully submitted: Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer sAlegal\our documents\resolutions\11\committees reso 02151 Ldoc RESOLUTION NO. R2011- A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. R2009-015 TO ESTABLISH A STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS TO BE KNOWN AS THE CITY COUNCIL AIRPORT COMMITTEE TO ADVISE AND ASSIST THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING CITY OF DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MATTERS; ALTERNATIVELY, ASSIGNING SUCH DUTIES TO AN EXISTING CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton deems it to be in the best interest of the City to create a standing committee of the Denton City Council on matters affecting the City of Denton Municipal Airport; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION 1. That Resolution No. R2009-015 is hereby amended to add Title VIII, as follows: TITLE VIII. THE CITY COUNCIL AIRPORT COMMITTEE A. The City Council hereby establishes a standing committee to be called the City Council Airport Committee. The Committee shall be composed of three (3) members of the City Council to be appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. The City Manager, or his or her designee, will provide guidance and assistance to the Committee and be responsible for insuring that records are maintained in accordance with the requirements of the City Secretary's Office. B. The Committee members shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council until successors are duly appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Denton City Council. The presiding officer of the Committee shall be chosen annually by the Committee. Members of the Committee must be current elected City Council members of the City of Denton, Texas. C. The duties and purpose of the Committee shall be to review, consider and make recommendations to the City Council on matters affecting airport operations as assigned by the City Council or requested by the City Manager, or his or her designee. SECTION 2. Title VIII. of Resolution No. R2009-015 is renumbered to Title IX. SECTION 3. All provisions of Resolution No. R2009-015 in conflict herewith are superceded and repealed. sAlegal\our documents\resolutions\l l\committees reso 02151 Ldoc SECTION 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Finance Ael ACM: Jon Fortune SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution establishing an Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee to advise and assist the Airport Manager regarding City of Denton Municipal Airport Matters; and providing for an effective date. BACKGROUND This item is closely related to an accompanying work session item that is also included on the March 1, 2011, City Council agenda. As detailed in the work session item, staff is proposing the creation of a new City Council Airport Committee, an expanded role for the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB), and the formal creation of an Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee. The purpose of this item is to provide the necessary resolution to create the Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee that is recommended. As described in the attached resolution, a new Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee is proposed. The intent of the Committee is to explore a wide range of safety and operational issues with appropriate stakeholders at the Airport. The Committee may meet on a monthly basis, or more frequently based upon need, but the Committee will be required to meet at least four (4) times per year. In addition, in order to be responsive to any issue that may be raised, the meetings will conducted by management and will include an opportunity to discuss any issue. At a minimum, invitees to the meetings will include Fixed Base Operator (FBO) representatives, Air Traffic Control management, and the Airport Operations Coordinator. FAA representatives and contractors at the Airport may also occasionally be invited to attend to discuss a wide range of issues that may be relevant. The Chairman of the newly formed Airport Committee will also be formally invited to attend each meeting. Finally, the resolution indicates that a summary of the Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee's discussions will be forwarded for review to the Airport Committee and City Council. PRIOR ACTIONNIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) On December 6, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Airport Advisory Board (AAB). The AAB expressed some concerns regarding the options presented, but they did not provide a formal recommendation to the City Council. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 2 On December 7, 2010, City management discussed potential governance options with the Economic Development Partnership Board (EDPB). The EDPB was very supportive of the staff recommendation, and has recommended that the City Council approve the proposed revisions to the membership and role of the EDPB. On December 13, 2010, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss their potential response and recommendation to the City Council concerning the governance options that were presented by staff. As a result of this discussion, the AAB developed a letter that was forwarded to the City Council on December 14, 2010. In this communication, the AAB recommended that the City Council either: (1) table the item until more discussion could take place or (2) increase the size of the Airport Advisory Board from seven to nine members with one additional member coming from the Economic Development Partnership Board and one member coming from the Chamber of Commerce. On December 14, 2010, staff made a presentation to the City Council on the Airport governance options that were identified. The City Council elected to table the Airport governance discussion until the February 1, 2011 meeting since only four Council members were in attendance. On January 5, 2011, the AAB held a meeting to discuss the Airport governance options that were presented by staff. On January 19, 2011, the AAB held a special called meeting to discuss the Airport governance options. The focus of this meeting was to receive input and consider the views of the Airport tenants and shareholders. On January 24, 2011, a three member committee of the AAB met to consider drafting a response to the City Council on governance issues. On February 1, 2011, the City Council was scheduled to discuss the Airport governance issue, but the item was tabled due to inclement weather. On February 9, 2011, the Airport Advisory Board met to discuss the Airport governance options that would be presented to the City Council. On February 15, 2011, the City Council discussed the Airport governance recommendations, but the issue was ultimately tabled in order for a specific recommendation to be developed concerning safety and tenant stakeholder relations. On February 21, 2011, the Airport Advisory Board met to discuss the Airport governance options that would be presented to the City Council. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2011 Page 3 Respectfully submitted: G~ Bryan Langley Chief Financial Officer sAlegal\our documents\resolutions\11\airport manager safety and stakeholder committee.docx RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN AIRPORT MANAGER SAFETY AND STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE TO ADVISE AND ASSIST THE AIRPORT MANAGER REGARDING CITY OF DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MATTERS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council approved an Airport Business Plan on November 16, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Airport Business Plan stressed financial self-sufficiency for the Airport and indicated the governance structure of the Denton Municipal Airport should be reviewed; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Airport Advisory Board have discussed possible Airport governance options at length over the past several weeks; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Airport Advisory Board have both stated that tenants and other stakeholders at the Airport should have ample input on Airport related issues; historical and general aviation knowledge at the Airport should be preserved; economic development at the Airport should be enhanced; and citizens should have increased access to the City Council on Airport matters; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton deems it in the best interest of the City to create an Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee to assist and advise the Airport Manager regarding the Denton Municipal Airport; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION 1. An Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee shall be appointed to assist and advise the Airport Manager and to explore a wide range of safety and operational issues including Flight and Ground Operations with a focus on tenant/stakeholder outreach. SECTION 2. The Airport Manager shall conduct the meetings, which may meet monthly (or more frequently based on need), but not less than four times per year. SECTION 3. Invitees to the meetings will include Fixed Base Operator (FBO) representatives, Air Traffic Control management, the Airport Operations Coordinator, the Chairman of the newly formed City Council Airport Committee, and any member of the public will be encouraged to participate in the discussion. FAA representatives and contractors at the Airport may occasionally be invited to discuss a wide range of issues that may be relevant. SECTION 4. A summary of the Airport Manager Safety and Stakeholder Committee's discussions will be forwarded for review to the Airport Committee and the City Council. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. s:\legal\our documents\resolutions\11\airport manager safety and stakeholder committee.docx PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY BY~~' L~ - Page 2 This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office CM: George Campbell, City Manager SUBJECT Consider nominations/appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions. BACKGROUND Below is the list of Boards and Commissions which require a nomination and the Council Member responsible for the nomination: Community Development Advisory Committee - Council Member Watts Human Services Advisory Committee - Council Member Heggins and one "All" position. Public Art Committee - Council Member King Zoning Board of Adjustment - One Alternate position for "All". Traffic Safety Commission - Four positions with nominations from Mayor Burroughs, Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Council Member King and Council Member Watts. Downtown Denton Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone Board - Ordinance No. 2010- 316, which established the Board, indicates that the Council shall designate a member of the Board to serve as chairman. At the February 15th meeting, Council appointed the following members: Mayor Pro Tem Kamp, Council Member King, Bob Moses, Virgil Strange, Marty Rivers, Hank Dickenson, and Harold Strong. If you require any further information, please let me know. Respectfully submitted: Jennifer Walters City Secretary This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Development ACM: Fred Greene SUBJECT - Black Box Theatre (MO-0007) Hold a public hearing and consider adopting an ordinance regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) to allow a theater use in a Downtown Commercial General zoning district. The approximately 1.27 acre site is located on the south side of East Hickory Street, approximately 200 feet west of the intersection of East Hickory Street and Bell Avenue. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of this request (4-0). PROPOSAL The Applicant (Denton Community Theatre) is requesting a Specific Use Permit to use a portion of the existing building on the subject property for live theater performances. The proposed use of a live theater is not specifically defined in the Denton Development Code (DDC); however, staff has determined that Movie Theaters are the most closely related use specified in the DDC. This determination was made after consulting with the North American Industry Classification System (NAILS). Movie Theaters in the Downtown Commercial General (DC-G) zoning district require a Specific Use Permit (SUP). BACKGROUND The subject property is within the Denton Record-Chronicle building located on East Hickory Street. The East Hickory Corridor is currently being targeted by the Downtown Implementation Plan (DTIP) to become a transit-oriented development (TOD). This is due primarily to the fact that the Corridor location (including the subject site) is between the proposed Denton County transit station and the downtown square. The East Hickory Corridor is anticipated to develop as a Commercial area with an Arts Focus. It is staff s determination that the proposed use of a theater is appropriate for this pattern of development (See Exhibit 6). The Applicant has already converted a portion of an existing building to accommodate theater- related activities including rehearsal, workshop, office and meeting space as well as storage for props and costumes. The space is currently occupied and being used for all purposes except theater performances. The work was done in anticipation of the SUP being approved for full theater performances. 1 OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions. 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends APPROVAL of this Specific Use Permit request, with the condition that the use not exceed 4,000 square feet of the site (4-0). The Development Review Committee recommends APPROVAL of this Specific Use Permit request, with the condition that the use not exceed 4,000 square feet of the site. EXHIBITS 1. Site Location/Aerial Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Letter from the Applicant 4. Site Plan 5. Notification Map 6. Responses to Public Notification 7. Maps from the Downtown Implementation Plan 8. Site Photographs 9. Excerpt of the Minutes from the January 5, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 10. Ordinance Prepared by: Jane Gurney, AICP Senior Planner Respectfully submitted: Mark Cunningham, AICP, CPM Planning and Development Director 2 CITY OF DENTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT P&Z Date: January 5, 2011 TYPE: Specific Use Permit (SUP) CC Date: March 1, 2011 PROJECT SIO-0007 Project Number: 510-0007 Request: Specific Use Permit for a theater use in a Downtown Commercial General (DC-G) zoning district. Applicant: Denton Community Theatre 214 West Hickory Street Denton, TX 76201 Property Owner: Denton Publishing Company Denton Record-Chronicle 314 East Hickory Street Denton, TX 76201 Location: The subject site is located within the existing Denton Record- Chronicle building, located on the south side of East Hickory Street, approximately 200 feet west of the intersection of East Hickory Street and Bell Avenue. Size: The proposed theater lease space occupies approximately 3,800 square feet within an existing 30,000 square foot building. The subject lot contains approximately 1.27 acres. Zoning Designation: Downtown Commercial General (DC-G) Future Land Use: Downtown University Core Case Planner: Jane Gurney DRC Recommendation: The Development Review Committee recommends APPROVAL of this SUP, as conditioned: 1. The size of the theater use is not to exceed 4,000 square feet within the Denton Publish Company property located at 314 East Hickory Street. Summary of Analysis: The property is located within a Downtown University Core future land use district as defined by the Denton Plan. The Downtown University Core District is defined as: "Specified commercial areas of the downtown university core district should be places of great vitality, with a mix of education, residential, retail, office, service, government, cultural, and entertainment development. The health and vitality of the area can contribute in a major way to the city, its local and regional image, and quality of life. It is a place where residents can live, work, learn, and play in the same neighborhood. It includes different uses which may occur on each floor of the building." The Downtown University Core District includes four different zoning categories, with the Downtown Commercial General (DC-G) being the zoning district of the subject property, and the zoning district which permits the most intense uses. In addition to being subject to the DC-G zoning regulations, the site is also within the Central Business District and within the target study area for the Downtown Implementation Plan (DTIP), and as such, it is subject to additional regulations within these overlay districts. The subject site is within the area covered by the DTIP, in a corridor that has been identified as a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) district, with at-grade retail being the main or preferred use along the East Hickory Street area, and as a Commercial area with an Arts Focus (Exhibit 6). The proposed live theater use is appropriate for the area, as identified in the DTIP, and the scale of the theater (4,000 square feet) is such that it can be accommodated in the area without creating excessive impacts to public infrastructure. Findings of Fact 1. The request is for a Specific Use Permit (YUP) for a theater use to be located within a Doirntoirn ('onn ercial General (D(l-(i) zoning district. 2. The subject property is developed with a newspaper publishing compai v, and the property is platted 3. The subject site is within the Downtown University Core Future Land Use area. 4. The Doirntoirn University (lore District is meant to encourage mixed use development lvithin specified cOnnvercial areas of the district. This district is a pedestrian f "iendly district and hasfour zoning districts irithin its land use categoiy. These include Doirntoirn Residential I (DR-1), Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2), Downtown Commercial Neighborhood (D('N) and Doirntoirn Connvercial General (DC-(;). 5. Adjacent zoning districts are all DC-G. 4 6 The surrounding area is composed of developed properties, occupied and vacant, as hell as undeveloped properties. 7. The subject site is located irithin the Central Business District, and is irithin the area addressed by the Doi rntoirn Implementation Plan. 8. There are no planned public improvements related to the proposed use of this site. 9. The subject site fronts East Hickorv Street, a street with a modified (one-lvav) collector classification. Development Review Committee Based upon the information provided by the applicant and a recent site visit, the Development Review Committee finds that with the recommended conditions the request IS CONSISTENT with the surrounding land uses and general character of the area, IS CONSISTENT with the Denton Plan, and IS CONSISTENT with the Denton Development Code. The Development Review Committee recommends APPROVAL of this specific use permit request, as conditioned: 1. The size of the theater use is not to exceed 4,000 square feet within the Denton Publish Company property located at 314 East Hickory Street. GENERAL NOTES A-OTE: Approval of this request shall not constitute a ivaiver or variance from any applicable development requirement unless specifically noted in the conditions of approval and consistent with the Denton Development Code. A-OTE: All written comments made in the application and subsequent submissions of information made during the application review process, which are on file with the Cio) ofDenton, shall be considered to be binding upon the applicant, provided such comments are not at variance with the Denton Plan, Denton Development Code or other development regulations in effect at the time of development. 5 Section 35.6.4, Approval Criteria: A Specific Use Permit (SUP) may be granted if the City Council finds that the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria. An SUP shall be issued only if all of the following conditions have been met: 1. That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity; The proposed use of a relatively small theater in the downtown area is appropriate for the area based on use and size, and it will contribute to the "Arts Corridor" envisioned by the DTIP. The use is an extension of the existing Denton Counnunity Theatre operations housed on West Hickory Street. 2. That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; The proposed use will not impede any subsequent development in the area The building was existing, and no additional changes are being proposed to the building or inn mediate area that would impact development of surrounding properties. 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided; Adequate facilities exist to serve the theater use; the required building renovations have been completed 4. The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or adjacent developments; The site is within an existing building with no drives or points of egress or ingress directly into this area Pedestrian walkwavs along the building frontage have been umodifled to allow wheelchair access to the building, but this will not impede pedestrian traffic in fi°ont of the building. 5. That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration; No nuisance issues are anticipated with this use; the site will be subject to city noise ordinances. 6 6. That directional lighting will be provided so as not to disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; and The lighting has been installed on the rant of the building in col??pliance, irith the, DIC. 7. That there is sufficient landscaping and screening to ensure harmony and compatibility with adjacent property. The lease space does not provide any areas outside of the building footprint that irould alloir for any landscaping. The location of this site, irithin an existing building in the doirntoirn area, precludes any landscaping or screening opportunities. Surrounding Zoning Designations and Current Land Use Activity: Northwest: North: Northeast: DC-G; Commercial DC-G; Vacant property, Private DC-G; Commercial (Retail) Parkin Lot West: East: DC-G; Restaurants and Private 1 1 DC-G; Fire Station Clubs, Commercial Southwest: South: Southeast: DC-G; Commercial DC-G; Vacant property, Private DC-G; Vacant property, Private Parking Lot Parking Lot Source: City of'Denton Geographical 11#6nnation System and site visit by City staff' Comprehensive Plan: A. Consistency with Goals, Objectives and Strategies The subject site is within a Downtown University Core future land use district. The Downtown University Core district should encourage mixed use development within specified commercial areas of the district, and is recognized as a pedestrian friendly district. The proposed use is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, and will offer a development that provides cultural, entertainment, office, and educational services in the Downtown University Core area. B. Land Use Analysis Nearest Fire and EMS Station Name of Station Approximate Distance From Subject Property Fire/EMS Central Fire Station (Fire Station Number 1) <100 feet Source: Cite ofDeritori GIs, Fire Dej?artmerit, alid EIAP; 7 Water and Wastewater Demand and Capacity: A. Estimated Demand and Service Provider: Subject Property Estimated Im pact Analysis Proposed Demand Adequate to Serve (Yes or No) Potable Water N/A Yes Consumption (GPD) Wastewater N/A Yes Generation (GPD) B. Available Capacity: N/A C. CIP Planned Improvements: N/A Roadways/Transportation Network: A. Estimated Demand: Subject Property Estimated Im pact Analysis 0.09± acres Proposed Demand Adequate to Serve (Yes or No) Average Annual Varies Yes Daily Trips (AADT) B. Available Capacity: N/A C. Roadway Conditions: A microseal covering was recently laid on the roadway in the immediate vicinity, and parking was reconfigured along Hickory Street. D. CIP Planned Improvements: Improvements to Hickory Street are anticipated in accordance with the DTIP. Environmental Conditions: There are no Environmentally Sensitive Areas on site. Wells (Public/Private): There are no known public or private potable water wells on site. Airports: The site is located outside of the Denton Municipal Airport's ACCLUD zones. 8 Electric: There are no other comments regarding this SUP. Comments from other Departments: There are no other comments regarding this SUP. 9 Exhibit 1 Site Location/Aerial Map JZ Sr i} T < log .lift ~ ! S err Cali" w~ r~ .w _ Hk-K: )R 'f w t 2 „ Approximate Limit! . „a n of Lease Space w man a" ra 1 SLli ICct Sits , lot roULBERRY w4w•" Y rl"a t, L. 10 Exhibit 2 Zoning Map 0 Z a J Y a' O HICKORY J Approximate Limit.,, w of Lease Space J J ui m DC-G SL11--ject Site MULBERRY J Q C Q z 0 11 Exhibit 3 Letter From Applicant City of Denton Planning 221 N. Elm Denton, Texas 76201 Re: Black Box Theater Arts Center The following is the project narrative for Denton Community Theatre's request for a SUP for the Black Box Theater Arts Center that will be built in what is now being called the "Entertainment District" or "Arts Corridor" on East Hickory Street. The address of the project is 316 E. Hickory and is 3788.8 square feet of the existing Denton Record Chronicle Building. The proposed' uses for this project are as follow and in the order of their portion of overall use: 1.) Rehearsal space for Denton Community Theatre 35% 2.) Class and meeting space for Denton Community Theatre's Theatre School 35% 3.) Storage for Denton Community Theatre Costumes and staff office space approximately 1/5 of the building space 4.) Meeting space for local businesses and individuals 15% 5.) Small venue (less than 100 audience members) live theatre performances 15% The use will be totally compatible with the businesses in the immediate area, and in fact, should do much to contribute to their customer base. When people attend an event at the center, they will inevitably go to numerous restaurants in and around the area either before or after. The use and it's proximity to the coming rail station will bring in out of town visitors therefore improving the area and the adjacent properties. In short, the establishment of this use will feed the adjacent areas, not impede them. The Black Box Theater Arts Center is in an existing building so no infrastructure will be added for it. The electrical, sewer and water connections are already there so there are only new taps and no new lines to be added. 12 Public parking spaces, permission that we have to use Denton Record Chronicle parking, and existing on street parking is more than ample for the use. Per existing codes no vehicular or pedestrian traffic will be affected. There will be no issues to odor, fumes, dust, noise or vibration. The decibel level and the location of the theater portion in the interior of the building will prohibit any noise problems. The only lighting will be pedestrian lighting pointed down, and lighting that will wash the front of the exterior sign. The building is what could be called an urban building, as it is directly on the street. Because of this there will be no screening simply because there is nowhere to provide plants. In summary, the use requested will have a positive impact on the surrounding area, it will be compatible with the current businesses in the area, it will generate no new noise, problematic lighting, parking or environmental issues. The use will attract traffic to the area that will be desirable for other businesses, and it is very much in line with the Denton Plan and especially with the Downtown Implementation Plan. Thank you. Mike Barrow Managing Director Denton Community Theatre 13 Exhibit 4 Site Plan i w 8 -4 0 ry n > nm , . Lf) r tll m M. 14 it 17 O 4, 1 t O 37 B , ~ i m A O a a.I ~ r 3f ~ m ~ is 'J rr r D 6 y ~,L ~~lIH~BY ` ~ ~ ' NEW DRAWINGS FOR THE. BLACK BOX THEATER 405 E HICKORY STREET DENTON TEAS HICKORY STREET 14 Exhibit 5 Notification Map MCKINNEY z dr -J, td7 pp 6 500 Foot Notification Limit OAK m m s4 i Q $a 200 Foot Notification LirnitPPJ', HICKORY J U? Subject Site `i MULBERRY SYCAMORE ca. z Legend 0 In Favor Neutral Public Notification Date: 12/26/10 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 12 500' Courtesy Notices sent via Regular Mail: 55 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice ■ In Opposition: 0 ■ In Favor: 2 ■ Neutral: 1 15 Exhibit 6 Responses to Public Notification NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z09-0013 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, January 5, 2011, and consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit to allow a theater within a Downtown Commercial General (DC-G) zoning district. The theater wilt be located at 314 East Hickory Street. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 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 or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning Division 221 N. Elm Street Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Jane Gurney, Project Manager These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. tease circ one; In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition:\ Signature: Printed N e. Q Q Mailing Address' 1E J Woo City, State Zip: en -~C7 , t E (0,2, 0-21 Telephone Number: Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 • 940.349.8541 (F) 940.349.7707 200' P&Z Notice 16 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. P t one: In favo-_ r of rf es N_ Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: Signature: Printed Name.: My Mailing Address: PC) I } l~ City, State zip: t,y'(1+w 1n Telephone Number q1~() , _ _!,C~ Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: 7')}-, CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • CENTON, TEXAS 76201 • 940.349.5541 (F) 940.349.7707 7G(1'PSZ Alnlire These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Com&ssi n is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please cir le one: t In favor of request t Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: Signature: Printed Name:11~htl~~Yl~,(1'/YI1~iCY-f Mailing Address: City, State Zip: 1 f)" Telephone Number: q r-Ic~ e ~Q~` a ! ~b00 Physical Address of Property within 209 feet: I II , I'llf~ tYl . I~' ~~t -I(Vio I CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 • 940.349,8541 (F) 940.349.7707 _'U0 PU AVICa 17 These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Cemmisslon Is informed of the percent of responses to support and in opposltion, Please circle one: favor of reque Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition; Signatura:.. Printod Nomo; _e !_d o4^V -6"Y~ aatr+ Mailing Address: ~_3uS K/"aY City, State Zip; L~arru s C X^ ~~~p l Telephone Number: ( Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: r'3 iy ; IV,,6II ,,o9'y CITY OF DEAIT0JV, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 75201 • 949349 11541 IF) 940.349.7707 :00' 082 NOL'ce 18 Exhibit 7 Maps from the Downtown Implementation Plan - Approximate location of theater Mixed Use -3 Residential Nleight:,)orhooci Mixed Use pir: Cdr, TO Area i ( 99 Mixed Use Framework r-an 19 CF. p"LL EAS, , 4 n . TR!1NI1 Tl~f'.CN 71i Nfn ECAN CREEK lJ 4YT: 111i[F.It:I f.lR l, CK STREE` 4•.1 WALK. 4R F1=T, ADAPTIVE REUSE- 1_4 DCTp PLATFCPPA 'A USE LI rA i ICI . ul 5,;: t'~l~ t ~Q •1':I'.. .r .au r n.r.aLTn.u - FE7AIl v~ 4 t W11 1 1`1 All F' ✓ } i:FFiC . ' TOD Districts Exhibit 4.8 M-11INNF! PEC,)N CRFFK w _ ©I:, '.I 14K ST W Illt KCj,~ ' L ~rT F T, I'V . F I r i I l LEGEND FUTURE LAND USE NE'N S7:1EE7 GRID' 'i 3 f. _ _ t C.IVI!-_ ( .1 REML )MMFRCI.AL-A.R -'CJS a 1 W_ nf1 ~.',W[RCIAL EVENTS TCCUE m - -jl r M!%ED I E: RESIDE! ! AKWGOD JTIAL~REL1, IL JCEMEi@kY IIRDAN RE.,ICEPJTIAL lA I PEN H.hE: 'ARK i _ SPA', ` PA AIRIE SI. UP u 1- p HI$'OKIC SITES 1 TOD Future Land Use Concept Exhibit 4.9 20 Exhibit 8 Site Photographs m ' 1 5 a U Irv y4y f 1 C fk { ~i L fiu1,L,<<<41 Front of the building, looking south on East Hickory Street 21 Exhibit 9 Excerpt of the Minutes from the Jan. 5, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES January 5, 2011 After determining that a quorum is present, the Planning and Zoning Commission convened in a Work Session on Wednesday, January 5, 2011 in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. PRESENT: Chairman Walter Eagleton, Commissioners: Jay Thomas, Brian Bentley, and Patrice Lyke. ABSENT: Commissioners: Thom Reece, Jean Schaake, and John Ryan. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: B. Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a theater use in a Downtown Commercial General zoning district. The approximately 1.27 acre site is located on the south side of Hickory Street, approximately 200 feet west of the intersection of East Hickory Street and Bell Avenue. (S 10-0007, Black Box Theatre, Jane Gurney) Jane Gurney presented this item to allow a Specific Use Permit (SUP) in the Downtown Commercial General Zoning District. The applicant is requesting to use a portion of the existing building on the subject property for live theater performances. The proposed use of a live theater is not specifically defined in the Denton Development Code. This subject property is located within the Denton Record Chronicle Building. The applicant has already converted a portion of the existing building to accommodate theater-related activities. Notifications were sent out. Twelve (12) 200 feet (Legal Notices) Fifty-Five (55) 500 feet (Courtesy Notices) Received two (2) responses in favor. Received zero (0) responses in opposition. Received one (1) neutral response. The Development Review Committee recommends approval of this request with the following condition: The theater use does not exceed 4,000 square feet of the site. The applicant, Mike Barrow, Manager of the Denton Community Theater, spoke in favor of the request. 22 The public hearing was opened at 7:06 p.m. Various citizens spoke in favor. The public hearing was closed at 7:07 p.m. Mover: Commissioner Brian Bentley motioned to approve the SUP. Seconder: Commissioner Patrice Lyke On roll call vote: Commissioner Jay Thomas "aye", Chairman Walter Eagleton "aye", Commissioner Brian Bentley "aye", and Commissioner Patrice Lyke "aye". Passed: 4/0 6. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Under Section 551.042 of the Texas Open Meetings Act, respond to inquiries from the Planning and Zoning Commission or the public with specific factual information or recitation of policy, or accept a proposal to place the matter on the agenda for an upcoming meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT: Chairmen Eagleton adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. 23 Exhibit 10 Ordinance sAegaiNour documentslordinances1111s10-0007.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A THEATER TO BE LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 1.27 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN A DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL GENERAL (DC-G) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF EAST HICKORY STREET, APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET WEST OF BELL STREET, WITHIN THE ORIGINAL TOWN OF DENTON ADDITION, IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (S10-0007) WHEREAS, the Denton Community Theatre, has applied for a Specific Use Permit to allow a theater use on approximately 1.27 acres of land within a Downtown Commercial General (DC-G) zoning classification and use designation, legally described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter, the "Property"); and WHEREAS, on January 5, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission concluded a public hearing as required by law, and recommended approval of the requested Specific Use Permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the request is consistent with the Denton Plan and the Development Code, specifically finding that the requirements of §35.6.4 are satisfied by the proposal; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference as true. SECTION 2. A Specific Use Permit to allow a theater on the Property is hereby approved, subject to the following condition: 1. The size of the theater shall not exceed 4,000 square feet within the subject site. SECTION 3. The Specific Use Permit location map attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B", is hereby approved for the property described in the caption of this ordinance. SECTION 4. 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 provision of this ordinance are severable. 24 salegallour documentslordinances1111s10-0007.doc SECTION 5. 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. 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 , 2011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY A- EY BY: 25 &Alegallour documents\ordinances11I1sI0-0007.doc EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Original Town, Block 21, Lots 1, 2, 5 and 6. 26 s:llegallour documentslordinances1111si0-0007.doe EXHIBIT B 0 z a HICKORY - , i ua m ~ _ Su61ed'Site ~ mULB ARY t j E t J 27 This page left blank intentionally . AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2011 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Development ACM: Fred Greene [ SUBJECT - S010-0010 (DCTA A-Train North Communication Tower) Hold a public hearing and consider adopting an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, concerning a Specific Use Permit for a new self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower on property located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district classification and use designation. The approximately 14.9 acre property is generally located east of Teasley Lane and south of the Denton County Transportation Authority railroad right-of-way and is more commonly known as lot 6A, Block B of the Shady Oaks Industrial Park Addition; and providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof, severability and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of this request (6- 1). PROPOSAL The applicant, Jim Hanlon with HAX Technologies, is requesting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) to constrict a 180-foot tall self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower in an EC-1 zoning district. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8.7 of the Denton Development Code (DDC), self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower located in an EC-1 zoning district in excess of 50-feet is permitted only by an SUP. The subject property is proposed to be developed in two (2) phases. The first phase is located in the southwest corner of the subject property and encompasses approximately 800 square feet. It will consist of the proposed telecommunications tower and a prefabricated 80 square foot enclosure, see Exhibit 6. The enclosure will house all the radio and fiber optic equipment necessary for the train dispatcher to operate the train system. The tower and enclosure will be surrounded by a chain link fence, similar to the one shown in Exhibit 7. The second phase will consist of a DCTA Bus Maintenance Facility, which will encompass the remaining property. The DCTA Bus Maintenance Facility is scheduled to commence constriction in 2015. BACKGROUND The subject property is currently being utilized by DCTA as a staging area for the constriction of the rail line. DCTA began utilizing the property as a staging area in July of 2009. Once the constriction of the rail line is complete, the property will be restored in preparation for the future DCTA Bus Maintenance Facility. The subject property is in close proximity the Southeast Denton Neighborhood to the north. The applicant presented the proposed telecommunications tower at a regularly scheduled Southeast Denton Neighborhood Association (SEDNA) meeting held on Monday, December 27, 2010. There were approximately 13 people in attendance. The main concerns expressed by the attendees were regarding potential radiation and interference with personal electronic devices from the tower. According to the applicant, the proposed tower will not emit radiation and it will not cause any interference with personal electronic devices. Notes from the meeting are provided in Exhibit 8. Public notices were sent to residents and property owners within 200 feet of the subject property, see Exhibit 11. As of this writing, staff has received six responses to the Notice of Public Hearing. Two property owners are in favor, three are in opposition, and one is neutral to the proposed project. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW 1. February 23, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted 2. Approve subject to conditions 3. Deny 4. Postpone consideration 5. Table item RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of this request (6-1). The Development Review Committee recommends approval of this request based on the criteria for a Specific Use Permit and the criteria for Specific Use Permits related to telecommunications facilities, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscaping screening between the subject property and the neighborhood north of Kerley Street. EXHIBITS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Location Map 3. Existing Zoning Map 4. Future Land Use Map 5. Narrative and Letter From Applicant 6. Proposed Elevations 7. Photo of a Similar Telecommunication Tower and Enclosure 8. Meeting Notes from SEDNA Meeting 9. Proposed Site Plan From Applicant 2 10. Site Photographs 11. Notification Information 12. February 23, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes 13. Responses to Public Notification 14. Draft Ordinance Prepared by: K~$ - Ron Menguita, AICP Development Review Liaison Respectfully submitted: Mark Cunningham, AICP, CPM Planning and Development Division Director EXHIBIT 1 STAFF ANALYSIS P&Z Date: February 23, 2011 TYPE: Specific Use Permit CC Date: March 1, 2011 PROJECT 510-0010 Project Number: 510-0010 Request: Consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property currently located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. Applicant: Jim Hanlon with Hax Technologies Property Owner: Denton County Transportation Authority Location: 1101 Teasley Lane Size: 14.9 acres Zoning Designation: Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) Future Land Use: Employment Center Case Planner: Ron Menguita DRC Recommendation: The Development Review Committee recommends approval of this request based on the criteria for a Specific Use Permit and the criteria for Specific Use Permits related to telecommunications facilities, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscaping screening between the subject property and the neighborhood north of Kerley Street. Denton Development Code Analysis: The applicant is requesting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for the constriction of a 180-feet tall self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower in an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8.3.A of the DDC, all applications for rezoning or a SUP for a telecommunications tower, antenna, or other facility to provide a telecommunications service shall include a completed supplemental inforMation form provided by the City regarding said 4 facilities. In addition to any information required for applications for a SUP pursuant to this chapter, applicants for a SUP for a telecommunications tower or antenna or other such facility shall submit the following information: 1. A detailed master antenna plan, clearly indicating the location of the proposed tower, on-site land uses and zoning, adjacent land uses and zoning, and other information deemed necessarv by the Director. 2. A legal description of the property and leased Jayua' if applicable. 3. The setback distance bet►veen the proposed tower and the nearest residential unit, platted residentially zoned properties, and un platted residentially zoned properties. 4. The separation distance from other towers shown on an updated site plan or map. 5. A landscape plan showing specific landscape materials. 6 Method of fencing and finished color and, if applicable, the method of camouflage and illumination. The required information was provided as part of the SUP application submitted by the applicant in the form of a site plan, project narrative or described in the applicant's response letter. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8.4.D of the DDC, security fencing shall be installed by a wrought iron or steel chain link fence with evergreen hedge, or a masonry wall, each not less than 6 ,feet in height The exterior of equipment buildings and or metal equipment cabinets visible rom residential areas or public rights-of-wav must have a neutral aggregate finish or be painted to reflect the color" and character of adjoining structures or blend icith adjacent landscaping and other surroundings. The applicant is proposing to provide security fencing in the form of a steel chain link fence similar to the one utilized in a similar project found in the City of Lewisville, see Exhibit 7. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8. t.E all telecommunication towers as well as gitvs and gity anchors shall be located ij,ithin the buildable area of the lot and not ij,ithin the front, rear, or side vard building setbacks. Telecommunication towers in excess of l00 feet) in height shall be set back a minimum of 2, 600 feet from the right-of--wav of all controlled access federal and state roadways designated as frec~vavs to provide unobstructed flight paths for helicopters. The proposed self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower located within the buildable area of the lot. In addition, the proposed telecommunications tower does not exceed 400 feet. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8.4.G, except as otherwise permitted in this ordinance, no signals, lights, or illumination of anv kind shall be permitted on or directed toward any toicer unless required by the FCC, the FAA, or other appropriate public authority. 5 According to the applicant, all signals, lights, or illumination requirements by the FCC, the FAA, or other appropriate public authority will be met. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8.5.B, except as provided in Section 35.12.8.7, telecommunications toll'ers are [lot permitted in any residential zoning district and must be a mininnim of a 3 to 1 distance to height ratio f om a single fal?lily residential use and 1 to 1 distance to height ratio firom a nndtifamily use. The closest single-family residential use is over 600 feet away from the proposed telecommunications tower. There is no multi-family use within proximity of the proposed telecommunications tower. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8.5.E. anv nely telecommunications tower in excess of 180 feet in height must be located a minimum of I mile from any existing tower in excess of 180 feet in height. The proposed telecommunications tower does not exceed 180 feet. Pursuant to Section 35.6 4, a ~pecl f c (Ae permit may be granted 1 f the Ciro Council finds that the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria. A. That the use lvoluld be in conformance lvlth all standards icithln the zoning district in lvhlch the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with the Denton Plan and federal, state, or local lain. The proposed telecommunications tower is permitted within the EC-I zoning district with an SUP. If the SUP is granted, the proposed telecommunications tower would be in conformance with the Development Code. The proposed telecommunications tower is in conformance with the Denton Plan. The following are goals listed in the Denton Plan: ■ Provide a range of viable transportation alternatives, including transit, bicycling, and walking. ■ Reduce use of the single-occupied vehicles over time or maximize occupants per vehicle. Invest in transit planning and transit systems. The proposed telecommunications tower and enclosure will house all the radio and fiber optic equipment necessary for the train dispatcher to operate the future DCTA A- Train system. B. A specific permit shall be issued only if all of the following conditions have been met: 1. That the specific use icill be compatible icith and not igjurlous to the use and eqj( vment of other property nor slgnlficantly diminish or impair property values icithln the immediate vicinity; 6 The proposed telecommunications tower will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other properties. The properties immediately to the west, east and south are zoned EC-I. Existing land uses and proposed land uses permitted in this zoning district is consistent with the proposed telecommunications tower. 2. That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; The proposed telecommunications tower is within the planned DCTA Bus Maintenance and Operations Facility. The telecommunications tower is phase one of a two-phase project. Granting of the SUP will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property. 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided, The DRC has reviewed the proposed project and determined that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities will be provided. 4. The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or adjacent developments; The design, location and arrangement of all driveways will not adversely affect the general public or adjacent developments. 5. That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fames, dust, noise and vibration; The proposed telecommunications tower will not emit odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration. 6 That directional lighting will be provided so as not to disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; and The only exterior lighting will be a fixture over the door to the prefabricated 80 square feet enclosure. The telecommunications tower does not require lighting to meet FAA requirements. 7. That there 1S Siff,fficient landS'caping and screening to ensure harmony and compatibility with adjacent property. Provided with the SUP application submittal is a rendering/exhibit that illustrates how the proposed telecommunications tower will be screened to the neighborhood to 7 the north with existing landscaping in the form of trees and shrubs. The existing landscaping will remain until the construction phase two of the planned DCTA Bus Maintenance and Operations Facility. At the time of construction of this facility other landscaping and screening as required by the Development Code will be installed. C. That adequate capacity of iif°astrnctnre can and will be provided to and through the subject property. The DRC has reviewed the proposed project and determined that adequate capacity of infrastructure can and will be provided to and through the subject property. D. That the Special Use is compatible with and hill not have an adverse impact on the surrounding area. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the surrounding area, the following factors shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. The scale, bulk, and coverage of the prefabricated 80 square feet enclosure are similar to the surrounding structures. 2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicvcle, and mass transit use are considered benef cial regardless of capacity of facilities. The proposed telecommunications tower will result in minimal traffic demand. 3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. The architecture of the prefabricated 80 square feet enclosure is similar to the surrounding structures. 4. Air quality, inchiding the generation of deist, odors, or other environmental pollutants. The proposed telecommunications tower will not emit odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration. 5. Generation of noise, light, and glare. No additional noise, light, and glare will be generated by the radio tower. 6 The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in The Denton Plan. The proposed telecommunications tower is in conformance with the Denton Plan. 8 7. Other factors found to be relevant to satisfy the requirements of this Chapter. The lattice work - segmented design of this tower includes safety features. The tower is segmented into twenty (20) sections. During potential high winds the segmented design will keep large sections from toppling. Additionally the tower is designed to collapse onto itself, thus eliminating the potential of falling onto another property. Findings of Fact 1. The request is for an ,SUP for a telecommunications tower an property currently located within an Entployinent Center Industrial (EC I) Zoning district. The approximately 14.9- acre property is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the DCTA railroad right-of- wav. 2. A Pre-application Conference (PACIO-0120 for the subject project was submitted an November 8, 2010. 3. The subject property is located within an area designated "Employment Centers" by the Denton Plan. 4. The criteria for approval of a Specific (Ae Permit per Section 35.6 4 and the additional criteria required far telecommunication tolvers per Section 35.12.8 have been met. 5. No other plan is subject to the proposed project. 6 The subject property is currently undeveloped The property is currently being utilized as a DCTA staging area. 7. Adjacent uses consist of industrial to the south, west and east. Residential uses are located to the north across the DCTA railroad right-of--wav. 8. Adjacent zoning to the south, west and east is Employment Center Industrial (EC I). Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-=1) is located to the north across the DCTA railroad right-qf--wav. 9. There are no presences of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (E,SAs) or FEMA foodplain within the subjectproperty. 10. The subject project will consist of a 180 foot tall self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower and a prefabricated 80 square feet enclosure. The proposed telecommunications tower and enclosure are located in the southwest corner of the subject property and encompasses approximately 800 square feet. The subject project will be accessed of of Teaslev Lane. Electric power for the telecommunications tower and enclosure will be provided through an underground service to the site. The DRC has 9 reviewed and determined that all other utilities exist to support the proposed telecommunications toirer. 11. No infrastructure or utility demand is anticipated for the first phase. The second phase will demand water, wastewater, storm water, transportation, police, ire and EM,S services. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE Based upon the information provided by the applicant and a recent site visit, the Development Review Committee finds that with the recommended conditions the request IS CONSISTENT with the surrounding land uses and general character of the area, IS CONSISTENT with the Denton Plan, and IS CONSISTENT with the Denton Development Code. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Based upon the findings-of-fact, the Development Review Committee recommends approval of this request based on the criteria for a Specific Use Permit and the criteria for Specific Use Permits related to telecommunications facilities, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscaping screening between the subject property and the neighborhood north of Kerley Street. GENERAL NOTES XOTE: Approval of this request shall not constitute a ii-aiver or variance from any applicable development requirement unless specifically noted in the conditions of approval and consistent with the Denton Development Code. XOTE: All written comments made in the application and subsequent submissions of information made during the application review process, wbicb are on file with the Cio) of Denton, shall be considered to be binding upon the applicant, provided such comments are not at variance with the Denton Plan, Denton Development Code or other development regulations in effect at the time of development. Surrounding Zoning Designations and Current Land Use Activity: Northwest: North: Northeast: NR-4 NR-4 NR-4 Residential Neighborhood Residential Neighborhood Residential Neighborhood West: East: EC-1 EC-1 Industrial Use Industrial Use Southwest: South: Southeast: EC-1 EC-1 EC-1 Industrial Use Industrial Use Industrial Use Source: City of'Denton Geographical11#6nnation System and site visit by City staff 10 Comprehensive Plan: A. Consistency with Goals, Objectives and Strategies: The subject property is located within an area designated "Employment Center" by the Denton Plan. Staff finds that the proposed telecommunications tower is consistent with the Denton Plan. According to the Denton Plan, "Employment centers are intended to provide locations for a variety of workplaces, including limited light manufacturing uses, research and development activities, corporate facilities, offices, and institutions. Employment centers are also intended to accommodate secondary uses that complement or support the primary workplace uses, such as hotels, restaurants, convenience shopping, and child-care. Adequate public facilities shall be a criterion by which zoning is granted." Additionally, employment centers are intended to: ■ Encourage the development of office and business workplaces in close proximity to housing, civic, and recreational uses; ■ Promote excellence in the design and constriction of buildings, outdoor spaces, transportation facilities, and streetscapes; ■ Direct the development of workplaces consistent with the availability of public facilities and services; and, ■ Continue the vitality and quality of life in adjacent neighborhoods. B. Land Use Analysis: The proposed tower is compatible with the surrounding land use. No impact is anticipated. Nearest Fire and EMS Station Name of Station Approximate Distance From Subject Property Central Fire Station - Station Fire Station 41 serves that area and is approximately 1.74 41 (332 E. Hickory Street) miles from the proposed telecommunications tower. Source: Cite ofDeritoi GIS, Fire Department, alid E_AIS This proposed telecommunications tower has been reviewed for compliance with the 2006 International Fire Code and City Ordinance 2009-098, Section 29-2 Amendments to the Fire Code. The applicant is responsible for compliance with all applicable portions of the Fire Code and City Ordinances even in the absence of review comments. Further review comments will be provided upon receipt of more detailed constriction plans submitted as part of a building permit. A building permit is required for constriction of the proposed telecommunications tower. 11 Water and Wastewater Demand and Capacity: A. Estimated Demand and Service Provider: There are currently no water or wastewater demands associated with the proposed telecommunications tower. Further review of water or wastewater demands will be conducted upon receipt of more detailed constriction plans submitted as part of the second phase. The DCTA Bus Maintenance Facility is scheduled to commence constriction in 2015. B. Available Capacity: In the event that there are future demands, there is adequate capacity in the City's water distribution and wastewater collection systems. C. CIP Planned Improvements: There are no planned public improvements for the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the subject site. Roadways/Transportation Network: A. Estimated Demand: The proposed telecommunications tower will result in minimal traffic demand upon project completion. B. Available Capacity: Teasley Lane has the capacity to accommodate this development. C. Roadway Conditions: Teasley Lane is an improved surface roadway. D. CIP Planned Improvements: There are no planned public improvements for the roadways/transportation network serving the subject site. Environmental Conditions: According to the Water Administration Department, an existing ESA designation was removed as part of ESA09-0009. Wells (Public/Private): No public or private portable water wells are proposed for the site. 12 Airports: The subject site is not within the boundaries of the Denton Municipal Airport Overlay District. Electric: Existing DME facilities are adequate for the proposed telecommunications tower. Park Facilities: The proposed telecommunications tower will not result in any increase in park demands. 13 EXHIBIT 2 LOCATION MAP VI ARSE z" a .m G. SU CAS[ w kr-k~F c p~~~` l i w .1I TH Q. \ PROPOSED SUBJECT SITE TOWER I z ~ z i SHADY OAKS pR\~ .y II ~ _4'J I..L D 4NII GLI?NL`S q<<qs DELR TRAIL z n m i HUHKINS 'FOX HC,I i Feet 0 150 300 600 14 EXHIBIT 3 EXISTING ZONING MAP NR-4 MORSE NR-4 c' MCOONALD a m ca SCOj~ w w NR-4 kE'R[ r y ~~~r~ r SMITH ¢ =O~ PROPOSED N SUBJECT SITE TOWER z a z a EC-1 SHADY OAKS nor NR-4 SANTA FE Y o a NR-2 A 9<< NRMU-12 p DC-G 0 qS 4 O a O 4Sz DEFR TRAIL w Y EC-C HOPKINS NR-3 FOX HOLLOW. Feet 0 350 300 600 15 EXHIBIT 4 FUTURE LAND USE MAP MORSE Existing Land Use Z 0 MCDONALD Q M 0 SGOTT w w ~ d kFfr(C r ~P~~. z I a a Exisi Employment Center PROPOSED ° SUBJECT SITE TOWER (Employment Center Employment Center SHADY OAKS p0~~St SANTA FL A WILDERNESS O v A ~ ? m o Downtown University Core ° o Existing Land Use DEER rRA L o z ACC Y 9S HOPKINS O~ FOX HOLLOW (,95, Feet 0 150 300 600 16 EXHIBIT 5 NARRATIVE AND LETTER FROM APPLICANT Project Narrative Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) A-train Passenger Rail Radio Communication Tower, City of Denton, Texas City of Denton Project No. S10-0010 DDTA a Coordinated County Transportation Authority created organized, under Chapter 460, Texas Transportation Code is constructing a 21 mile commuter rail project linking the Cities of Denton, Highland Village and Lewisville with Dallas Area Rapid Transit's (DART) Green line in Carrollton providing citizens of Denton County with alternative transportation choice to downtown Dallas. Paramount to the completion and subsequent services is the installation and testing of DCTA's northern radio tower. The tower is required to provide reliable radio communications between passenger trains and dispatch, for regular communications and emergency communications. This tower is the second of two towers to provide the required coverage and redundancy for passenger rail communications. The planned location of this tower is within the property platted as Lot 6B of the Shady Oaks Industrial Park, 1102 Teasly Road, Cabinet Y, Page 656, and is currently owned by DCTA and is the future location of DCTA's Bus Operations and Maintenance Facility which is scheduled for construction in 2016. At that time the property will be repl'atted all appropriate dedications, landscaping and irrigation will be installed. At this time DCTA wishes to erect its radio tower within this tract. This tract was selected as any location along the rail corridor with sufficient access and space is within or in close proximity to residential zoning. This narrative is provided to aid in the approval of the requested Special Use Permit (SUP). A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with the Denton Plan and federal, state, or local law. The subject property is within an Employment Center - industrial (EC-1) zoning district. A tower of this type is allowed within this zoning per 38.12.8 of The City of Denton Development Code. The property immediately surrounding this tract is also zoned EC-1 across Teasley to the north, immediately to the west and south. To the east the property abuts the DCTA rail Right-of-Way which is a 400-FT. ROW. Parallel to the easterly ROW line of the DCTA rail is Kerley Street which is part of a residential subdivision zoned R-4. The proposed location on the subject tract meets the 3:1 distance to height separation requirement of 35.12,8.5.8. Structural drawings were prepared and sealed by an Engineer registered in the State of Texas, as required by State Law. This radio tower is in conformance with the Denton Plan, addressing transportation goals including transit. As well as land use, it appears this area is within the land use chapter 3 in which the Denton Plan discusses, the North Texas Research Park Employment Center; it appears based on the boundary this Lot is within this strategic employment center area. As part of the DCTA overall plan for this it will provide an employment center for transit uses. B. A specific use permit shall be issued only if all the of the following conditions have been met. Project No. 510-0010 1 17 Project Narrative Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) A-train Passenger Rail Radio Communication Tower, City of Denton, Texas City of Denton Project No. S10-0010 1. That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity. The lattice tower and communications bungalow is compatible with the surrounding properties. The property immediately west of the tower site is zoned EC-1 and the existing structure is consist of a parking lot with an 8,000 SF office/commercial/manufacturing building improvement. Across Teasly to the north the property is also zoned EC-1 and consists of a series of buildings housing the Texas Work Force Commission. Just east of the TWFC is t drainage easement then a property used for construction material and finally Peerless Manufacturing. All these properties and uses are compatible with the radio tower installation and will not be damaged by such an installation. 2. That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; As described this radio tower installation is within the DCTA planned Sus Maintenance and Operations Facility. The tower location has been coordinated with the development of this site to assure that all required access and infrastructure required for the development is not impacted by the tower. As described above the surrounding properties are developed for Employment, commercial and industrial uses. 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided, The installation of the tower will not require any additional access roads or other supporting facilities except for power, which will be coordinated with Denton Municipal Electric. 4. The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or adjacent developments; The location of drives and other infrastructure will be deferred until 2015 when OCTA expects to construct the bus faciflty. 5. That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration; The radio tower will emit no odors, fumes or other environmental concerns. 6. That directional lighting will be provided so as to not disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; and Project No. S10-0410 2 18 Project Narrative Denton County Transportation Authority (CCTA) A-train Passenger Rail Radio Communication Tower, City of Denton, Texas City of Denton Project No. S10-0010 The only exterior lighting will be a fixture over the door to the communications bungalow. The tower is not of sufficient height to require strobes or other lighting on the tower to meet FAA requirements. 7. That there is sufficient landscaping and screening to ensure harmony and compatibility with adjacent property. The installation of the tower will not affect existing landscaping. As shown the surrounding properties are all commercial uses and consist of concrete, asphalt or gravel parkinglyards with commercial type structures, consisting of metal, wood or CMU wall construction. Attached to this resubmital is a photo of the property taken from Kerley Street within the residential property to the east of the subject tract. This photo has both the proposed bus maintenance facility and the tower superimposed into the photo. From Kerley and the neighborhood the tower compound is screened with existing vegetation and trees. At the time of the construction of the bus facility other screening and landscaping as required by ordinance will be installed. C. That adequate capacity of infrastructure can and will be provided to and through the subject property. The existing infrastructure, street, water, sewer and electrical is sufficient for the tower installation. D. That the Special Use is compatible with and will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding area. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the surrounding area, the fallowing actors shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1. Similarity in scale, bulk and coverage. The lattice tower and communications bungalow encompasses a small portion of the tract. The bungalow is a typical prefabricated railroad bungalow. The tower is a lattice type tower, triangular at the base and narrowing as it rises. The scale, bulk and coverage are similar to the surrounding structures. 2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. No new or additional traffic will be generated by the installation of the radio communications tower. The existing facilities, Teasly has the capacity to handle regular maintenance vehicles that would access the tower compound. 3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. As discussed earlier the surrounding architecture is that of a combination of metal, wood and masonry warehouse, manufacturing and industrial facilities. The metal bungalow generally fits into the surrounding architecture. Project No. Slo-0010 3 19 Project Narrative Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA) A-train Passenger Rail Radio Communication Tower, City of Denton, Texas City of Denton Project No. S10-0010 4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. The radio tower and bungalow will generate no noise, dust, odors or other environmental pollutants. 5. Generation of noise, light and glare. No additional noise or light glare will be generated by the radio tower. 6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Denton Plan. Meets the goals of the Denton Plan including Chapter 3, Land Use and Chapter 7, Transportation. This tower is important to the A-train project, which is a key alternative transportation mode for the City of Denton and Denton County. Additionally this property is intended to be developed into DCTA Bus Operations and Maintenance Facility. This will provide a new location for bus operations and maintenance. As DCTA and the service area changes and grows, this facility is expandable and meets employment center goals. 7. Other factors found to be relevant to satisfy the requirements of this Chapter. Other key information includes: J The lattice work, segmented design of this tower includes certain safety features, including the segmented design. The tower for both ease of erection, but also for safety is segmented into twenty (2€7)-FT sections. During potential high winds the segmental design will keep large sections from toppling. Additionally the design for structural failure is for the tower to collapse onto itself, toppling is limited. Should a cross member fail the tower will collapse onto itself, thus eliminating the possibility of falling onto another property. ✓ The tower is below FFA height requirements for strobes or flashing lights ✓ The only lighting will be a fixture over the bungalow doorway. There will be no pole lighting for this phase, limiting the potential for light glare of spill over. • As discussed earlier in this narrative landscaping and camouflage for this compound will be initially by the existing trees. We have attached a photo of the site from the residential neighborhood and superimposed the tower as well as the future bus facility to provide an idea of the view from the residential neighborhood. ✓ The compound itself will be screened from TeasBey when the bus facility is constructed and irrigation system installed to assure landscaping survives. Project No. 510-0010 4 20 January 24, 2011 City of Denton Planning and Development Department 211 N. Elm Street Denton, TX 76201 Attn: Ran Mengu to Subject: DCTAA-train North Communication Tower Special Use Permit (SUP) RE: Project No. S10-0010 Dear Mr Menguita' Pursuant to tare re-sulrinittai of Project S10-0010, please find attached documentation that should satisfy the committee's questions and concerns. As discussed In Our meeting an Friday, January 21, 2011, we would like to make the February g, 2011 Planning and Zoning meeting. Any and all efforts in support of making this date would be greatly appreciated. Attached you will find: 1. Re-submittal Checklist 2. Updated project Narrative addressing all requirements of 35 13.5 and 35.6.4 1 Updated Overall Site Plan 4. Updated Site Plan 5. Responses to all staff comments Dated 1-6-11 6. Photo of site from Kerley Street with rendering of tower and future bus facility to show existing screening of tower site from residential neighborhood. Some key items from the narrative are as follows: 1. The tower is designed to collapse onto itself should structural damage occur, therefore minimizing the potential far collapse Onto surrounding properties. 2. The bus maintenance facility "Phase 11" is currently schedule for 20'15, at this time additional landscaping, including irrigation will be installed. Also as part of "Phase 11" bus drives, pas icing, fire lane striping and other work shown on the site plan will occur. At this time only the tower, communication bungalow and security fencing for' the tower will be installed. 3. The tower allowed by code as this property is currently zoned "rC-I" as well as all surrounding property. The closest residential is across the DCTA rail right-of-way over 700 feet fr'orn the tower's location. 4. Base on our understanding of the Denton Plan, the tower and proposed bus maintenance facility fit into the vision of the Denton Plan. We trust that the above and the information attached with this transmittal will expedite your review of this request. We are available to assist you to ensure making the next P & 2 meeting should you require. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Tim Schmidt (214-215-0176). Regard's- 8216 Northertst Parkti,n} Suite 100 Nartli Richland Hills, 'I'exas 76191 f': 817-514-0755 i : 917-51 1-079=1 21 EXHIBIT 6 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS w e s n ~ ~ }0 RAI x~ C K nJ~ 82 ~g tt" f Z F kr S ~Sa ~ a~ v~ ~ eP Kra O~ t I E I r ~ ~ Kn o~~ ILI_ ra ~ O ~ 1 d r ~ , .s a n -c Y£ II#L a v 'E1 4 y g_ it i E~ g'1 ~3 4 r ~ I C7 ..J F m a } w-scu . wry - ~ .vvirp n~ 22 122 SHIPPING WIDTFf S4 - e":eaB sa vao 112 SHIPPING HEIGHT xa a $&aa 6 L3 Iti gu-g 81.500 2 E +S € 6) - 26.875 22 D 1 E12 T Inc. OEPI T~'AU YAafUGnnPn'ti. A35RMPLT` THIS DRAWING IS 593.E MEER" o' RTMn "D 35 p" iGCil:d UNDER ALL APPLELABLE -1 THCFIT LAWS. THIS UESiGN IS PROPEL_ iU PTN.Vi AN9 IS RR(3YIDEU PN A CORFIBCRTIAL VIEW / 11'~1- V WALL BASES FOR USE RELATED TP ITNYA'S F3U51NE53. THIS OUAWING MAY N Qt BE 1CCF 6UCE4 AND EXTERIOR HC OCSIGH FEAx NdT 8C buP4fLAiE6 WITHOUT C WBETTEN P€RMSSSEUN 9F' PTMi w B ESERVE ERE RU Ha TH -,Y THIS BESV,P. THIS BRAM1Y4HL IS CC AH€d SUBJECT iP RC'IUHI+' OH BCMhRP, 10 X 14 ALUMINUM HOUSE 9100906'2 A SHEET 4 OF 13 23 12 FF- r; Fx- -z- HWn J J z w .J 4 Lij C7 W x W C7' . E:4 24 S6 u 86.5001 86.500 l 1 + Ex. r r S2 7 S6 B2 B2 r9CCE53 3i.t30 - --38.000 PTM-W In e. QDncxEerAI.RADwenTTGNa AssP.AmLs THIS URAWANC IS SDLE PROPERTY a PTbAW AMP TS PROTECTED UNO{R A[L APPLICABLE WPYRICHT LAWS. IRIS DESIGN IS PR0Pft1ETARY TO PTW ANP IS PRw3DEO ON A C0NE.LNTIM BASS FOR USE RELATED TO PSMW BUSINESS, TNIS ER-Ha VIEW O F B WALL DUF NOT BE REPRODUCED AND THE R15N 6 NOT . WC EXTERIOR BVlLIC4TLp WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PE RM3.tIS5L0R OF PiMW € THE ..7 T TER" THIS BESIGl1. a.Nre DRAWING IS LiaaNEDEB 5UBSECT CT TO R CTURk ON OE3,IAND. 10 X 1$ ALUMINUM HOUSE 91000062 A SHEEP 6 C)F 13 25 w s ~ 4~am~QO~ o o o~ r a ~ ~~x x ~ Q _ s~>w J J C.G L!_J x Li! ~El 0 26 EXHIBIT 7 PHOTO OF A SIMILAR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER AND ENCLOSURE r } T+'F rG ~ R ;niY Yom. Photo of a similar telecommunication tower and enclosure located in the City of Lewisville. 27 EXHIBIT 8 MEETING NOTES FROM SEDNA MEETING DCTA Southeast Denton Neighborhood Association Meeting Notes December 27, 2010 DCTA presented information about the radio tower that is to be erected at the new bus maintenance facility location at the southern end of the Southeast Denton neighborhood. There were 13 people in attendance at the regularly scheduled SEDNA meeting. Tim Schmidt presented the information and distributed handouts showing the location of the tower and a photo image of what the tower will look like once installed. Tim noted the tower would be used for rail communications on the A-train, and another similar tower would be located at the southern end of the rail line in Lewisville. The following questions related to the radio tower were asked along with the responses provided: Q: How tall is the tower? R: 180 feet Q: There will be two towers? R: Yes, one in Denton and one in Lewisville. Q: What kind of a permit is being sought from the City of Denton? R: A special use permit. Q: When will the matter go before the Planning and Zoning Commission? R: January 19, 2011 Q: Sometimes there are overlapping frequencies with radio. Who would be the overlapping frequency for this radio tower? A: This would be a very narrow band frequency that is reserved for use by railroad agencies. There would be no overlapping frequencies with other radio operations. Q: Will the radio waves cause satellite television interference? R: No Q: Do you know where there are other towers located in Denton and have those towers caused any disruption to residents? R: The location and type of towers in Denton are unknown. Q: Was there a reason DCTA chose to erect a stand-alone tower for its use rather than share an existing tower somewhere else in Denton? R: The tower must be located near the rail line, and there are no other known towers in a location that could serve the A-train. Q: Are there any health hazards from radio radiation? 28 R: No. This is a simple whip antenna and does not radiate any strong signals such as those transmitted from a microwave or other system. Q: Who is the contact person if there are more questions about the tower? R: Tim Schmidt can be contacted. Tim provided his business card to Ms. Carolyn Phillips, SEDNA president. Questions related to A-train or buses and responses were as follows: Q: When will trains start running? R: Revenue service is scheduled to begin in June 2011. Q: Is DCTA still planning to build the bus maintenance facility down on Kerley? R: Yes, however, moving forward on the facility has been delayed because of funding issues. The plan currently is to build the facility in 2012. Q: How does DCTA determine where the bus stops on the UNT routes it runs? R: The answer to this was unknown. However, the gentleman was advised that if he provides his contact information, a response will be provided to him. He provided his email address and the question was forwarded on to DCTA staff. Q: When the train starts to run, will people be able to get to DART trains? R: Yes. Passengers will be able to transfer to the DART light rail system at the Trinity Mills station. Q: Where can a person buy a ticket for the DART train? R: Passengers will be able to purchase one ticket before getting on the A-train that will allow then to ride on both the A-train and DART light rail. DCTA Southeast Denton Neighborhood Association Meeting Notes December 27, 2010 Page 2 29 EXHIBIT 9 PROPOSED SITE PLAN NVld 31IS a Q % .M I t f I ~ / I 1= I it !I i ~I ~I i I I u I I I ,I f~ I III l , I L I I I II NVI - ismvare rsw '0"73 .m51 - 4-Nt?Z 1o I 4 I 9 X p, x 10 Ll I. ! u i I- w~/ 1..L U Z O ~i 0 D Z H U) X G W L I 1- ( r I I t I ~ I N I I'S I,, 1 sa 31 EXHIBIT 10 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS VieN'~ of proposed location looking southeast. Vie)v from proposed location looking northeast. Vie)v toiv acds proposed location looking southiv est. View tmv aids proposed location looking southeast. i VieN-,- of neighborhood north of subject property-. Vie- of neighborhood north of subject property-. 32 EXHIBIT II NOTIFICATION INFORMATION MORSE 500 FOOT NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY a z_ MCDONALD a M o... 'COQ w w kekt r u O~ SMITH _ w SUBJECT SITE J z Q 7 SI-,,DY OAKS l 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY PTV 4 SANTA FE WILDERNESS d d? M RrC ~ D RS 1? O p R<<RS Z DEER TRAIL w Y HOPKINS FOX HOLLOW Public Notification Date: Januaiy- 27, 2011 200 ft. Legal Notices sent via certified mail: 30 500 ft. Certified Notices sent via regular mail: 74 Feet 0 150 300 600 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice • In Opposition: 3 • In Favor: 2 • Neutral: 1 33 EXHIBIT 12 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT DRAFT PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES February 23, 2011 After determining that a quorum was present, the Planning and Zoning Commission convened in a Work Session on Wednesday, January 5, 2011 in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. PRESENT: Chairman Walter Eagleton, Commissioners: Jay Thomas, Brian Bentley, Thom Reece, Jean Schaake, John Ryan and Patrice Lyke. ABSENT: None. STAFF: Fred Greene, Mark Cunningham, Jerry Drake, Chuck Russell, Jennifer Coles, Cindy Jackson, Ron Menguita, P.S. Arora, and Johnna Matthews. WORK SESSION Chairman Eagleton convened the Work Session at 5:10 p.m. 1. Clarification of agenda items listed in the Regular Session agenda for this meeting, and discussion of issues not briefed in the written backup materials. Bentley questioned Menguita on the item for the communication tower. The staff report indicates that the location of the nearest residence is 600 ft from the tower; however, there are letters in opposition received from property owners within the 200 ft notice boundary. Menguita stated the location of the actual tower is over 600 ft from a residence, the property notifications are sent from 200 ft from the property line. REGULAR MEETING After completing the Work Session, the Planning and Zoning Commission will convened a Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton, Texas which was be held on Wednesday, February 23, 2011 and began at 6:35 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney at which time the following items will be considered: Chairman Eagleton convened the regular meeting at 6:35 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. The approximately 14.9-acre property is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the DCTA railroad right-of-way. (S 10-0010, DCTA A-Train North Communication Tower, Ron Menguita) 34 Menguita presented this item. The request is to consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit for a telecommunications tower. The applicant is requesting a Specific Use Permit to construct a 180-foot tall self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower. Pursuant to Section 35.12.8.7 of the Denton Development Code (DDC), self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower located in an EC-1 zoning district in excess of 50-feet is permitted only by an SUP. The subject site is within the Employment Center future land use designation. Menguita provided site photos and elevations of the proposed tower. A photo of a similar tower to the proposed that has already been constructed in Lewisville was also provided. This site will be completed in two phases. The first phase is the tower; the second phase will be a bus maintenance facility for DCTA estimated to be constructed sometime in 2015. There were 30 notices sent via certified mail for this item. Three responses were received in opposition, two responses were received in favor and one response was neutral to the request. The applicant met with the South East Denton Neighborhood Association (SEDNA) at their regular December meeting and comments and responses received from that meeting are included in the backup for this item. The Development Review Committee recommends approval of this request based on the criteria for a Specific Use Permit and the criteria for Specific Use Permits related to telecommunications facilities, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscaping screening between the subject property and the neighborhood north of Kerley Street. Bentley questioned if there was a guarantee that the location of the tower would not move within the site. Menguita stated that the location is a part of the ordinance that will be taken forward to City Council, that will lock in the location of the tower. The applicant was present to speak. Tim Schmidt, Consultant/Representative for DCTA Schmidt stated that the north tower is an integral part of the testing and operations of the A- Train. This will be a sister tower to the one located in Lewisville that will provide redundant coverage in case of operational issues. The following spoke in opposition: Willie Sellers, 930 Scott Drive Lilli Clark, 1009 Kerley Street William Clark, 1109 Kerley Street Samuel Marshall, 1319 Kerley Street No one spoke in favor of the request. In response to the opposition Menguita stated that notification was sent in accordance with the Texas Local Government Code. The notifications were post marked by the deadline set forth by 35 that Code and the delay of delivery could have been due to the weather conditions. Menguita stated in regard to the hazard issues mentioned in the opposition, the Denton Development Code ( DDC) identifies hazards as noise and vibration and the proposed tower does not exceed those maximum's outlined in the DDC. Drake stated for clarification that radiation or emissions from radio broadcasts are regulated by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). The FCC preempts the City and staff must trust that the FCC is regulating the health and safety concerns. Schaake questioned if the SEDNA meeting was well publicized. Menguita stated it was a regular meeting of SEDNA, but he was unaware of how it was publicized. Schaake stated that in the information provided from the meeting with SEDNA it was noted that this is a whip antenna and it does not transmit waves like radio. Schaake questioned if DCTA has looked at other sites. Schmidt returned for questions. Schmidt stated that yes, other locations were reviewed, DCTA would have preferred to have the tower closer to the rail right-of-way. The location was chosen because of the set back requirements set out by the DDC for a 3 to 1 height and distance ratio. Schaake questioned the distance to a residence. Schmidt stated it was over 600 ft. Schaake questioned the distance from a residence for the Lewisville tower. Schmidt stated that the Lewisville tower is in an industrial area. There were additional discussions about why other locations would not work. Bentley thanked the concerned citizens who came forward to speak. Eagleton questioned the notification area mentioned in the Work Session. Thomas made a motion to make a recommendation to City Council to approve this Specific Use Permit, with a second by Ryan. On roll call vote: Chairman Walter Eagleton "aye", Commissioner Brian Bentley "aye", Commissioner Jay Thomas "aye", Commissioner Patrice Lyke "aye", Commissioner Thom Reece "aye", and Commissioner John Ryan "aye". Commissioner Jean Schaake "nay". Motion approved (6-1). 36 EXHIBIT 13 RESPONSES TO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING S10-0010 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, February 9, 2011 and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property currently located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. The approximately 14.9-acre property is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the DCTA railroad right-of-way. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 request and invites you to attend the public hearing. 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 or mail i#_toAh-e -address below or drnp it off in7person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Ron Menguita, Project Manager These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for pposition: Signature: % ti'A,~o r. rs. Printed Name: 57/1 rq Z 04 Mailing Address: z9D33 A City, State Zip: ~~~fi~ ~L ? Z v Telephone Number: 9,i{o Sg~ OZ 91 Physical Address of Property within 200 feet. ! 3 ~Qa n CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 940.349.8541 (F) 940.349.7707 37 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING S10-0010 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, February 9, 2011 and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property currently located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. The approximately 14.9-acre property is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the DCTA railroad right-of-way. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 request and invites you to attend the public hearing. 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 bottc-m cr mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Ron Menguita, Project Manager These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one. In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposit" Signature: e/li) Printed Name: Mailing Address: City, State Zip: Telephone Number: Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 940.349.8541 (F) 940.349.7707 200' P&Z Vavce, ~ - ~ - - - ~ - _ 38 2011.02-0818:43 as 9403497707 P 1(i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HARING S10-0010 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold public hearing on Wednesday. February 9, 2011 and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property currentl located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. The approximately 14.9-acre pfoperty is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the DCTA railroad right-of-way. The public hearing will start at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambeis of City Hall located 81 215 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 feet about this request and invites you to attend the public hearing. 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 or mail it to the address below or drop it off in-person- Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm 5T Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Ron Menguita, Project Manager These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request- Reasons for Opposition: Signature: ,t • - Printed Name: Mailing Address: rt8'1 .,wtt crl City, State Zip: ii~ta. . I -1 "7u a a u-- Telephone Number- '~`t0- `15 S J tAFk: Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: _11 c a%_r5 n*.Ivt4 Dh•}«t i CITY OF DMTON, TEUS CrTY HAIL WEST - DENTON. TEXAS 7620111 94o-349-8541 • (F) 94p-349.7707 39 FEE-68-2011 04:04 PM 946 627 9629 P.61 NOTICE OF Pu6LIC HEARING 310.0010 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, February 9, 2011 and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property currently located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. The approximately 14.9-acre property is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the OCTA railroad right-of-way. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 tike to hear how you feet about this request and invites you to attend the public hearing. 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 pubfic hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the ttottatnsrr.maitAio_the. WdW$ below pr drop_It off in-person; Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas: 76201 Attn: Ron Mengulta, Project Manager These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one., In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: v ~ as -r- = lvy tic _ Signature: wm~Nnted Name: nz~ Mailing Address: Mb. City. State Zip: ~Z Telephone Number: q4* e- S b 6- te a 1le, Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: M7%12% L I-A CITY OF DENTONV, TEXAS GF Y HAU WEST • DENTON. TEXAS 76201 • NO-349.s541 (F) 840.349.7707 zfl0- ^,Y7_ NdFtte i 40 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING S10-0010 - -i 1 P~~:3~ „CVU The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, February 9, 2011 and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property currently located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning district. The approximately 14.9-acre property is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the DCTA railroad right-of-way. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 request and invites you to attend the public hearing. 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 -ormaiLit to thie-address below_or-dropit-off. -in-Wson-_ Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Ron Menguita, Project Manager These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: Signature: , Printed Name: y✓ //.a m i I sv ~~L r• Mailing Address: Ir~O ,2 DDS' City, State Zip: ~ - TX 7Z, Telephone Number: 97-,le _ 3 F.,1_ - a S / Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: S 41M e CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 940.349.8541 (F) 940.349.7707 200' P&Z Nance 'i 41 ® Z ' -44, 24 42 43 FROM :NT DIST INC FAX NO. :94094e9456 Feb. 0e 2011 01:46PM P1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING S1~0.04't0 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, February 9, 2011 and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a telecommunications tower on property currently located within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning.district. The approximately 14.9-acre property is located east of Teasley Lane and south of the DCTA railroad right-of-way. The public hearing will start at 6:30 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 request and invites you to attend the public hearing. In order for your opinion to betaken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no way prohibits you frem'attending and participating in the public heating.) You may fax it to the number located at the ~..~ttorn.or rr~?il it to h .address below or drop it S2{f~=Pelson: ~ - w _ Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Ron Menguita, Project Manager These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the request. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. - Please circle one. In favor of request Neutral to reque Opposed to request Reasons for Opposition: 7 'Signature: Printed Name: W FL pin n/ 4. fib i Li L. Mailing Address: J i 6 g Fta ikil CV City, State Zip: &97Y 2' 76 Telephone Number: 2 titr7 Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: ii:L1 SH a,czy gdngr V. e71z CfTY OF DENTON, TE"S CITY HALL WEST • DENTON, TEW 76201 • 940.,349.8541 (F) 940.349.7707 200-P&Z Notice 44 EXHIBIT 14 DRAFT ORDINANCE s:VegaNur documents\ordinances111\s10-0010 ordinance,doc I ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A NEW SELF-SUPPORTING LATTICE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER LOCATED WITHIN AN EMPLOYMENT CENTER INDUSTRIAL (EC-I) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION ON 14.9 ACRES OF LAND, GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF TEASLEY LANE AND SOUTH OF THE DCTA RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS LOT 6A, BLOCK B, OF THE SHADY OAKS INDUSTRIAL PARK ADDITION; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (S10-0010) WHEREAS, HAX Technologies, has applied for a Specific Use Permit for the construction of a 180-feet tall self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower on approximately 14.9 acres of land within an Employment Center Industrial (EC-1) zoning classification and use designation legally described as Lot 6A, Block B of the Shady Oaks Industrial Park Addition and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter, the "Property"); and WHEREAS, on February 23, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission concluded a public hearing as required by law, and recommended approval of the requested Specific Use Permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the request is consistent with the Denton Plan and the Denton Development Code, specifically finding that the requirements of Subsections 35.6.4 and 35.12.8 of the Denton Development Code are satisfied by the proposal when conditioned by the Site Plan depicted on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference as true. SECTION 2. A Specific Use Permit to allow the construction of a 180 foot tall self- supporting lattice telecommunications tower on the Property is hereby approved, subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscaping screening between the subject property and the neighborhood north of Kerley Street. i SECTION 3. The Specific Use Permit Site Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "A", is hereby approved, as an additional condition of the permit. SECTION 4. 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. 45 s:Uegaf\our documenrs\ordinances\l 11s10-0010 ordinance.doc SECTION 5. 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. 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 12011. MARK A. BURROUGHS, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ANITA BURGESS, CITY ATTORNEY, BY: Jam-- 46 s:llegal\our documents\ordinancesll I\s10-0010 ordinance.doc EXHIBIT A l 20NE EC-3 \ \ lE^-LANE l I i f z z I i r. L ! SITE Para L IL Page - I 47