The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNovember 05, 2002 Agenda AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL November 5, 2002 After determining that a quorum is present, the City Council will convene in a Work Session on Tuesday, November 5, 2002 at 4:30 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: Hold a joint City Council / Planning & Zoning Commission work session to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the draft Downtown Master Plan. Requests for clarification of consent agenda items listed on the consent agenda for today's City Council regular meeting of November 5, 2002. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, November 5, 2002 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: 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE U.S. Flag Texas Flag "Honor the Texas Flag -- I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one and indivisible." 2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamations B. Awa~s 3. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Receive citizen reports from the following: 1. Ross Melton regarding Code Enforcement, Municipal Court, trash ordinance, and the Council. Dessie Goodson regarding the City of Denton's public transportation and the Denton Housing Authority. Bob Clifton regarding residency requirements for City Council members and outrageous salaries over $60,000 and benefits for employees. 4. 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. City of Denton City Council Agenda November 5, 2002 Page 2 Listed below are bids, purchase orders, contracts, and other items to be approved under the Consent Agenda (Agenda items A-R). 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 AR below will be approved with one motion, if items are pulled for separate discussion, they will be considered as the first items following approval of the Consent Agenda. A. Consider approval of the minutes of October 8, 2002. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Pipeline Crossing Agreement with Union Pacific Railroad Company for a pipeline crossing located at Mile Post 723.10, Choctaw Subdivision, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an interlocal Agreement with Texas Woman's University to enable an exchange of easements and services to accommodate utility relocations and easements in conjunction with the widening of US 380; and declaring an effective date. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 18, Article Viii "SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES" Section 18-210 (E.1.) of the Code of Ordinance conceming the removal of the entire portion which concerns the Immaculate Conception Catholic school zone, being both directions of Bolivar Street from its intersection with Second Street to its intersection with Third Street. The Traffic Safety Commission recommends approval of this item (7-0). Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 18, Article VIII "SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES" Section 18-210 (A.9.) of the Code of Ordinance conceming the removal of the entire portion which concerns the Sullivan Keller Elementary school zones, being: Both directions of Wood Street beginning 230 feet south of where Wood Street intersects the center line of Davis Street to 300 feet north of where Wood Street intersects the center line of Davis Street; Both directions of Ruddell Street beginning 230 feet south of where Ruddell Street intersects the center line of Davis Street to 300 feet north of where Ruddell Street intersects the center line of Davis Street; both directions of Davis Street from its intersection with Wood Street to the intersection of Ruddell Street and Davis Street. The Traffic Safety Commission recommends approval of this item (7-0). Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving a real estate contract between the City of Denton and E. J. Dane, relating to the purchase of an approximate 0.2383 acre tract or parcel of land, being part of Lot 4, Block A, Blount Addition, an addition to the City of Denton, for use as a drainage channel; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. City of Denton City Council Agenda November 5, 2002 Page 3 Consider adoption of an ordinance declaring a public necessity exists and finding that public welfare and convenience requires the taking and acquiring of an approximate 0.807 acre tract or parcel of land in fee simple for street purposes such title to be in the name of the City of Denton and a drainage and access easement containing approximately 0.036 acre and three temporary construction, grading, and access easements containing approximately 0.089 acre, 0.959 acre and 0.028 acre, respectively, all of which are located in Stephen A. Venter Survey, Abstract Number 1315 in the City of Denton, Denton County Texas and being part of a tract of land conveyed to Gary Jay Madrigal by Quitclaim Deed recorded in Volume 4155, Page 1044, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to make an offer to purchase the property for its fair market value and if such offer is refused, authorizing the city attorney, or his designee, to institute the necessary proceedings in condemnation in order to acquire the property necessary for the public purpose of constructing street, drainage, utility and related improvements; and declaring an effective date. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the execution of a change order to the contract for annual maintenance of the City of Denton phone system; providing for the addition of a sixth year of service; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2902 - Verizon Southwest in the amount of $40,000.08). Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order with the Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governments (HGAC) for the acquisition of two 40 yard front load refuse truck bodies by way of an inteflocal Agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 2911 - HGAC - Two 40 Yard Front Load Refuse Truck Bodies in the amount of $152,888). Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of parking lot improvements to Evers Park; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (Bid 2900 - Evers Park Parking Lot improvement Project Phase iV awarded to Jones and Jeffery Construction Co., inc. in the amount of $718,529). Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Professional Services Agreement with ETTL Engineering and Consulting, Inc. for hydro geological consulting and ground water monitoring services at the Denton Municipal Landfill as set forth in the contract; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2910 to ETTL Engineering and Consulting, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $40,940.48). Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Camp Dresser & McKee, inc. for professional engineering services related to the design of the Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant project; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (RFP 2897 - Design of Clear City of Denton City Council Agenda November 5, 2002 Page 4 Creek Water Reclamation Plant awarded to Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $499,347). Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Freese and Nichols, Inc. for professional engineering services related to the City of Denton Clear Creek Interceptor and Water Reuse Line project; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (RFP 2898 - Clear Creek WRP Interceptor and Reuse Lines awarded to Freese and Nichols, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $431,120). Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a first amendment to professional services agreement with RJN Group, inc. for professional engineering services respecting the final design services related to infiltration/inflow corrections for the Eastern Pecan Creek and Hickory Creek Basins; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2913 - RJN Group inc. in an amount not to exceed $375,680). Consider adoption of an ordinance awarding a contract for the purchase of software upgrades and services to enhance the existing LaserFiche Document Imaging Application and Enhancement Services currently being used by the City of Denton from VP Imaging as awarded by the State of Texas Building and Procurement Commission (formerly known as the General Services Commission) through the Qualified Information Services Vendor (QISV) Catalogue Program; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2909 - VP Imaging in an amount not to exceed $177,823). Consider adoption of an ordinance awarding a contract for the purchase of fiber optic cable, patch panels and cable assemblies as awarded by the State of Texas Building and Procurement Commission (formerly known as State of Texas General Services Commission); providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (PO 107601 to FMS Technologies, Inc. in the amount of $30,021.15). Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an interlocal Agreement between the City of Denton and the University of North Texas to provide for the purchase and restoration of buses to provide express passenger service for UNT students, staff and faculty; and providing for an effective date. R. Consider approval of tax refunds for the following property taxes: Name Reason Tax Amount Year 2. Texas Title for Terry & Susan Wilson Duplicate Payment 2001 538.78 City of Denton City Council Agenda November 5, 2002 Page 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 80 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zomng district. The five tracts are generally located on Brush Creek Road west of the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Country Club. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-3). (Z02-0036) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 6.8 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The five tracts are generally located on Woodcreek Circle, south of Brush Creek and east of Fort Worth Drive. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-0). (Z02-0037) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 9.6 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zomng district. The two tracts are generally located on Fort Worth Drive, north of Hamilton. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial (5-2). (Z02- 00~$) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 21 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zomng district. The three tracts are generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Hamilton Road and north of Brush Creek. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-1). (Z02-0039) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 43.7 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) to a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district. The nine tracts are generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Brush Creek. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-2). (Z02-0040) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 2.8 acres of land from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zomng districts to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU) zoning district. The property is generally located north of McKinney Avenue, west of Joshua Street. A professional office building is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). (Z02-0034) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 23.2 acres of land from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to City of Denton City Council Agenda November 5, 2002 Page 6 Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district. The property is generally located north of McKinney Avenue, west of Joshua Street. A single-family subdivision is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). (Z02-0035) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 4 acres from a Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR-1) zoning district to a Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district. The property, commonly known as 4405 Pockrus Page Road, is generally located north of Pockrus Page Road approximately 1100 feet east from interstate 35E Service Road and Pockrus Page Road intersection. No development is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). (Z02-0044) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 0.19 acres from a Downtown Residential 1 (DR-l) to a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district. The site is generally located at 1115 Eagle Drive to the east of Avenue A. Multi-family residential is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). (Z02-0041) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 1.2 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district. The site is generally located at the southwest comer of the intersection of Fan-is Road and Silverdome Road. Three single-family lots are proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). (Z02-0046) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance regarding the expansion of a Special Exemption for 1.75 acres, commonly known as the Service Center Expansion. The property is located at the northwest comer of Ruddell and Willis Streets. A material storage yard is proposed. The property is zoned Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12). The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). (Z02-0043) 6. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION Consider approval of a resolution nominating members to the Appraisal Review Board of the Denton Central Appraisal District; and declaring an effective date. New Business This item provides a section for Council Members to agendas or to request information from the City Manager. suggest items for future items from the City Manager 1. Notification of upcoming meetings and/or conferences 2. Clarification of items on the agenda Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. City of Denton City Council Agenda November 5, 2002 Page 7 Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Demon, Texas, on the day of ,2002 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. WS Item #1 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT Hold a joint City Council / Planning & Zoning Commission work session to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the draft Downtown Master Plan. BACKGROUND The Downtown Master Plan was commissioned by City Council on February 20, 2001. Work is nearing completion, and the draft plan will soon be released for formal review and approval. Prior to formal review, a joint City Council - Planning & Zoning Commission work session has been scheduled. John Fregonese of Fregonese-Calthorpe Associates, the fLrm responsible for development of the Downtown Master Plan, will make a presentation and be available to answer questions. Following the presentation, Council Members and Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss the draft plan and share initial comments. OPTIONS The consultant and staff are prepared to respond to comments received during the work session. RECOMMENDATION Once the draft master plan is ready for public review, staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission start the formal review process. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE If directed to do so, staff will schedule the draft plan for formal Planning & Zoning Commission review, public heating(s), and recommendation to City Council. City Council would then complete the review process through its own review, public hearing(s), and adoption process. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW City Council conducted a long-range planning session to discuss the downtown area on April 9, 2002. FISCAL INFORMATION The downtown master plan will address redevelopment and public/private parmerships. the aspects of economic development related to ATTACHMENTS None. Respectfully submitted: David M. Hill Asst. City Manager - Development Services Item #4A CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 8, 2002 After determining that a quorum was present, the City Council convened in a Work Session on Tuesday, October 8, 2002 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street. PRESENT: Mayor Brock; Mayor Pro Tem Burroughs; Council Members Fulton, McNeill, Montgomery, Phillips, and Redmon. ABSENT: None 1. Staff responded to requests for clarification of consent agenda items listed on the consent agenda for the regular meeting of October 8, 2002. Mayor Pro Tem Burroughs requested a modification in the minutes of September 17th regarding the suggestion of looking at an increase in sales tax due to the Fry Street Fair. That suggestion had been made by Council Member McNeill. Following the completion of the Work Session, the Council convened in a Closed Meeting. 1. The following was considered in Closed Meeting: Consultation with Attorney -- Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.071. Considered and discussed possible settlement of a claim against the City of Denton by R.D. Forester. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, October 8, 2002 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. 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. Mayor Brock presented a proclamation for National Fire Prevention Week. B. City Manager Conduff presented recognition of staff accomplishments. 3. CITIZEN REPORTS A. The Council received citizen reports from the following: Nell Yeldell regarding zoning designations of property and problems with deeds. Ms. Yeldell was not present at the meeting. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 8, 2002 Page 2 2. Marvin Franks regarding Code Enforcement notice. Mr. Franks was not present at the meeting. 3. Dessie Goodson regarding before and after Code Enforcement, the Budget, and the City of Denton's Public Transportation. Ms. Goodson stated that she had cleaned up branches from along several sidewalks on Carroll Blvd. so that people could walk on the sidewalks without having to go around the brush in the way. 4. Ross Melton regarding lawsuits, Code Enforcement, and lawyers. Mr. Melton restated that he was having problems with the City's trash and debris ordinance and the Code Enforcement office. Terry Stansberry regarding promises made by the Code Enforcement that have never been taken care of. Mr. Stansberry was not present at the meeting. Gary Madrigal regarding eminent domain proceedings on Hickory Creek Road. Mr. Madrigal stated that he was having a problem with the City's eminent domain policy. He reviewed the details of the case. The city was trying to require him to provide property for an easement to a drainage ditch next to his property. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Burroughs motioned, Montgomery seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and accompanying ordinances and resolutions with the modification in the September 17th minutes as discussed in the Work Session. On roll vote, Burroughs "aye", Fulton "aye", McNeill "aye", Montgomery "aye", Phillips "aye", Redmon "aye", and Mayor Brock "aye". Motion carded unanimously. Approved the minutes of September 3, 2002, September 10, 2002, and September 17, 2002. R2002-047 - A resolution to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the unreserved fund balance of the Recreation Fund with Certificates of Obligation so that a project approved in the 2002-2003 Capital Improvement budget may be commenced; and providing an effective date (Project - $565,000 for Aquatic Center Water Park equipment). R2002-048 - A resolution approving the issuance of bonds by the Colorado Health Facilities Authority on behalf of the Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society; and providing an effective date. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 8, 2002 Page 3 2002-323 - An ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement for a grant with the Texas State Library and Archives Commission to provide library services to preschool children in daycare centers; ratifying the actions of the City Manager, Director of the Library, and other City officials in egard to the grant application; and providing an effective date. 2002-324 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an inteflocal ambulance agreement between the City of Denton and Denton County for ambulance services; and declaring an effective date. 2002-325 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an interlocal Fire protection agreement between the City of Denton and Denton County for fire protection services; and declaring an effective date. 2002-326 - An ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for the purchase of hand tools and miscellaneous hardware; and providing for an effective date (Bid 2886 - Hand Tools and Miscellaneous Hardware awarded to Grainger Industrial Supply in the estimated amount of $30,000). 2002-327 An ordinance accepting competitive bids by way of an Interlocal Agreement with Tarrant County and awarding a contract for the purchase of light bars, pagers and office supplies; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2894 - Inteflocal Agreement for Light Bars, Pagers and Office Supplies with Tarrant County awarded to Emergency Vehicle Equipment (Light Bars) in the estimated amount of $25,000, Verizon Wireless Messaging (Pagers) in the estimated amount of $80,000, and Corporate Express of Texas (Office Supplies) in the estimated amount of $120,000). 2002-328 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas providing fir, authorizing, and approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of Promotional Commercials from Charter Media, Denton, Texas, pertaining to Denton Municipal Electric, which are available from only one source in accordance with the pertinent provisions of Chapter 252 of the Texas Local Government Code exempting such purchases from the requirements of competitive bidding; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2901 - Charter Media in the amount of $36,608). 2002-329 - An ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a Water Main Cost Participation Agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and 1-35 RV Park for the city's participation in the oversizing of water mains and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this ordinance; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 8, 2002 Page 4 2002-330 An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, approving the Second Amendment to that Agreement between the City of Denton and the Denton Affordable Housing Corporation; authorizing the City Manager to execute the Second Amendment; and providing an effective date. L. Approved tax refunds for the following property taxes: Name Reason Tax Amount Year lic fo~dd~ ~nd ~li~P ~ 2001 $ 52603 2. Lereta Corporation for Mark & Nanette Overpayment 2001 551.46 Behning 3 St it~e °~°~i°n ° ~l~s fo ~li ~ P ~ Hig ~me~ ~ Inc 4. Bryan & Angela Everheart Duplicate Payment 2001 729.43 Approved a 2001 tax refund to Popp & Ikard LLP for First Denton Ltd. on behalf of Pace's Crossing in the amount of $6,901.52. Approved a 2001 tax refund to Student Housing Corporation on behalf of Jefferson Commons in the amount of $52,485.73 ($51,123.80 base, plus $1,361.93 interest.) 2002-331 - An ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas amending the Schedule of Electric Rates contained in ordinance No. 2002-267; amending and superseding all prior ordinances which created and dealt with the Denton Municipal Electric EnergySave Program in any manner; adopting a new amended EnergySave Schedule (amended Schedule EP); providing for the expenditure of funds; adopting declarations and findings in the preamble; providing for a repealer; providing for a savings clause; providing for a severability clause; and providing for an effective date. R2002-049 A resolution authorizing the City of Denton to participate in the coalition of cities on police power/preemption issues in matters conceming proceedings before the Public Utility Commission; and providing an effective date. 5. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION A. The Council considered an appeal from Ruby Cole regarding costs imposed for mowing fees in accordance with Section 20-72 of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances. Joannie Housewfight, Captain-Denton Police Department, presented the details of the case. Mowing fees had been assessed Ms. Cole for mowing high weeds and grass. Council deliberated the pros and cons of the mowing ordinance and the provisions of assessing fees per lot. Ms. Cole spoke on the issue. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 8, 2002 Page 5 Burroughs motioned, Perry seconded to table consideration pending staff`review of the charges. After discussion by Council of the motion, the motion and second were withdrawn. Montgomery motioned, Fulton seconded to charge one mowing fee and one administrative fee for a total cost of $120 upon determination by the Legal Department that such a charge would be legal. On roll vote, Burroughs "nay", Fulton "aye", McNeill "aye", Montgomery "aye", Phillips "nay", Redmon "aye", and Mayor Brock "nay". Motion carried with a 4-3 vote. B. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: 1. Mayor Pro Tem t3arroughs requested a review of the provisions of the high weeds and grass ordinance. 2. Council Member Fulton requested information on city notifications of such items as planning notices and notices regarding distribution of trash bags. 3. Council Member McNeill requested staff work with the Chamber to set up a meeting with gas well developers and interested citizens. 4. Mayor Pro Tem Burroughs requested a resolution for Council consideration dealing with the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition and alternatives to DART for surrounding non-Dart cities. 5. Council Member Redmon requested a rate review of utilities dealing with property owners with the possibility of additional services added to rent such as trash collection and recycling instead of a utility charge on a utility bill. 6. Council Member Redmon asked for information on the City's street obligations around the universities. 7. Council Member Phillips requested a work session item to obtain a consensus of Council on the rezoning of the Bynum property on Oak Street. 8. Council Member Montgomery asked for a clarification on the parking situation on Willowwood. C. Items from the City Manager City Manager Conduff` did not have any items for Council. D. There was no continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. City of Denton City Council Minutes October 8, 2002 Page 6 E. There was no official action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. 551.071- EULINE BROCK MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS Item #4B AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Engineering Dave Hill, 349-8314 .,:"~ SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Pipeline Crossing Agreement with Union Pacific Railroad Company for a pipeline crossing located at Mile Post 723.10, Choctaw Subdivision, City of Demon, Denton County, Texas; Authorizing the expenditure of funds, therefore; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND A pipeline installation crossing is proposed U.S. 377 and the Union Pacific Railroad just north of Chipping Campden Road (Hills of Argyle). Staff has an upsize cost sharing agreement with the Vintage Development Corporation to serve the Vintage Subdivision as well the Roark Branch Sewershed. Staff has requested permission to cross an area within the boundaries of an existing Union Pacific Railroad right of way. The Union Pacific Railroad Company has agreed to the encroachment on their right of way with the use of a Pipeline Crossing Agreement. OPTIONS 1. Approve the ordinance, or 2. Denial, or 3. Table for future consideration RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the draft Ordinance. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Summer 2003 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW None FISCAL INFORMATION The cost to the City is a $1,500.® one-time license fee ATTACHMENTS Location Map Draft Ordinance License Agreement Prepared by: Denise M. Perez Technical Assistant Respectfully submitted: Charles Fiedler, Director Engineering Department i Locat on Map Pipeline Crossing At Mile Post 723.10 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE A PIPELINE CROSSING AGREEMENT WITH UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY FOR A SANITARY SEWER PIPELINE LOCATED AT MILE POST 723.10, CHOCTAW SUBDIVISION, CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROViDiNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HERBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute a Pipeline Crossing Agreemem with Union Pacific Railroad Company for a sanitary sewer pipeline located at mile post 723.10, Choctaw Subdivision, City of DeNon, DeNon County, Texas which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein (the "Agreemem"). SECTION 2. The expenditure of funds as provided in the Agreemem is hereby authorized. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2002. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: EULINE BROCK, MAYOR µ0ñ]}ì3hq4^†t#PÎaAO£cïÊç99 £E¯ÒiiÅ¡ã‹–þÔ@‡ð`p2>¶˜Þ•ýW}C×Šª»ûÚÎlA/ÈÇr_A½[UàåYÃ×j¿zï5oK®7s ÊëZž}¸ž9&qTr\S1 r{~,©þ¢lmO^Set™„bÕ#APGÕ†˜«jßæí"Íßö1x3,’ª0E=;} Ô½w0y‹MÂ7cè7)¤œ@h[IVsd›BÕ`áû¨åéìí¨ž‘'°$M)Ãöío$+ek"A©KÔÓï1 Š.èø)A:¦#ïkS}U`5Ð'‚î–:zŽ+ër‘Ë$tÈUaUA˜~iÂIYw¾Æ! SÐ— ÚÎïF×·5¥¨KM,£I¨$wQ…±ïE$:ëþ‹AMPRMPCVKML JGPGKLCDVGÁl]©Ù°ê]~¶æø‡Ð©–ÈÃåJ·âáÂzãÈíÍþÍ(]³ÛfDmi¸Ñ+|dxr¸d¯®0!gx(:¥=(?JÍäOM]íâH# BÐQQâY&ú‡4if|i½èçpV–Šk”»i[CQÖ-'/+6=ING@ä%e+¡~aOöGé<±ÿkv1¨–»Â;¯SGó‚uþ&'¶9( óÙèíe>L"”Ál^“À ¼âakÔ©(Â¶¬ßòQÉÄ¯¥M–RgL¤ÊzlP¨M&SÒY„}Ñ<°0)!ØoZ–Ý6ÏÃÜÆºDa3Þë…E:¼/"õ¿q$P’ÿÉú:í¯eï¥r›¨ØÑ†TŠSlÍè‘ç5»C3d·‰:1`-Œ¯-œ#'A¡O*d&ô=úM:²e.ÀI‡~ú–°+¡äÐ:UKM!ÊøHÁ«‹Hiåçx{=™d.x!Ùm(.ªv>Jçpo3stL–[HM<îyr,^ö¦ä·ô9Qûu~ÞÅýžëoQ>¨4ZËjûKUEM25\[^V—eTÆ ^àÁ‰;– +)‘çb‚Å,$¨¥Y÷‚Çd d d Ü¼Ž*É¯hÁ0Q1ÿ¼VNíLQ_T6vj@ó*ÈÖÑ6é:mÇåT‡âòFàsZZUnÂ<c~8F>?ñ[þ))\ïê*ñ‹¡ |¥IZÑà)\„feyúÊ¨pžç<†rv$y"”/$„xá…‚ëçþéç&07Â-yFòd…Jpm[Ð'ÍÊ2"+\!-ÔŽAÁi%O*L£|-lu*äwhcdîEdˆCr[LQ#a¡ImôLh|æR¤¶ñG>èqu·O89NPOGFVJG;ŒmcçË-¡@r>D“þp3íÊæñö†ñQyrlÕÅ÷6TcH3¼ñQ‚ùDÝø=¨Ä‡BëBØÇ«°&Îh>ÎeY¦[Â¢¡¡7;} !Bã4¢–æTm[ñÃzS‡mmë¥o%('[W%)OPQpñœäHN”ûêÌìBvïÙÔõQBvŸ(àj6@(w¦³~}FMèoDpWmZ'žOã$b|„CŒîÊ%ý@$_ñîR¾AJ#ÑE|ò¨fW£•²õM8d(PT dçH xxæÃcÇ&æ3î– ÿv¿t"2F?eŸLd1¨ãnõ 7…mD‘`kLGŸú.*7ÂCPQ7,¡&IwV9VGÈ§YÂclÅ@3?V8(TNL&ÖL¼sf|S’çÐÜšùi½:Ò n†:„p.hËøš4}»h‘å"o2Ô)z¬ãh¡Í?3ê‚Gç ÏŒN0[9DZ¢.”ä$Íy ÷}e)sôÁãSÄË.èÔ|ƒyçw=^#60µ,yÔ¦PÜØ½ãì3%~G({2dÔàûÝ„ëNáuö/â‰î2tTú“Øúê„$RVëâKºD÷‚ÔHÙa<uWS\|r@=!Kï%l.)GPõ¦Ó&‹ö(|‹‡Ô€t’ûÐ³Î~( årb1h â38dq2ñ$2½HV«1‡a¿Í3EhäU*õz)CL]Éqì8¸ßÌ6aPÆ[ð!Jmêl¡(e(½a/ÏOµ&¿¹|è=:t¬g{ì1é„d‹X0?*AÊíí¶eO1Wíw±çæ`§ZƒJó¿|¨ûC•§UáðG‘;9ª&9ä!)R¹è7:eyt1åâAuˆ†$Â^ŠR>Ègñ†–IŽ…%Ecë'X1F}-ÊEÎ>B?›A½mc|©jIXER¬çZRã°¨~µùHx«¥¦©¬}`³fl«u†HôIm©CÈ‰Œ"2í&(pHÅìü¨Ða3c$Â~þÜ‚kb°*¨ŽLiÂ•âE<B!{ÿóNÇD•óRl’A‚°+&…²½IÉ|içU@lâ5M}Î¢P¶`UëÓgN8cdtN7Ý%í‰W4c®`$5å¡1Åe}ìØ¥IZQ²*a&°Éÿ]Âð!Â-c£14T¹ eè.h=EKLgš¬,@ßd…ªd¼=éPé’FN$0§$tªq>jINù©g\ýÑùB‡0«Dj!Êè&^]ÚKÙCmuÜ˜@Ôa·EogöÅäM|dÌœA‡qGôŽÉ“ø"¡°QXù™äDQŸýùÙëÿ×úo‘3+d 0²eïGljBèeyR¤±A§‡J¡Nº©*aç.N¡÷Ì9¿èNÞy+¥õñ-(Fr{* $2#»G~®k-g‘C™=Mµ4Ã7}AbˆVÓÂŠcçLWKøÍEfj%FNa"I¥ìcOMPQW@Q:þV`mx.iÿE`ìx|J6ÁîƒLJÂàAŠs4`QÂFs*¯ü°5í3Œ.}JK¸-H7Vxu”AyåÂeïf†øÍAv7T–_{xîu contractor to execute the Railroad's for Contractor's Right of Entry Agreement. Licensee acknowledges receipt of a copy of the Contractor's Right of Entry Agreement and understanding of its terms, provisions, and requirements, and will inform its contractor of the need to execute the Agreement. Under no circumstances will Licensee's contractor be allowed onto Licensor's premises without first executing the Contractor's Right of Entry Agreement. Article V. INSURANCE The Licensee, at its expense, shall provide the Licensor a Certificate of Insurance, identifying Folder No. 2103-37, issued by its insurance carrier, confirming the existence of such insurance and that the policy or policies contain the following endorsement: UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY is named as an additional insured with respect to all liabilities arising out of the existence, use or any work performed on or associated with the 'Pipeline' located on Railroad right-of-way at Mile Post 723.10 on the Choctaw Subdivision, at or near Denton, Denton County, Texas. Bo Licensor agrees that all of its Licensee's insurance requirements may be satisfied by self- insurance. All insurance correspondence shall be directed to: Folder No. 2103-37 Union Pacific Railroad Company Real Estate Department 1800 Farnam Street Omaha, NE 68102 Article VI. AMENDMENT OF EXHIBIT B Sections 7(b) and 10 of Exhibit "B", hereto attached are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 7(b) in addition to other indemnity provisions in this agreement, the Licensee shall indemnify and hold harmless the Licensor from and against all costs, liability and expense whatsoever (including, without limitation, attorney's fees, court costs and expenses) arising out of any act or omission of the Licensee, agents and/or employees, that causes or contributes to (1) any damage to or destruction of any telecommunications system on Licensor's property, and (2) any injury to or death of any person employed by or on behalf of any telecommunications company and/or its contractor, agents and/or employees, on Licensor's property. Licensee shall not have or seek recourse against Licensor for any claim or cause of action by alleged loss of profits or revenue or loss of service or other consequential damage to a telecommunication company using Licensor's property or a customer or user of services of the fiber optic cable on Licensor's property. Section 10 INDEMNITY As used in this section, "Licensor" includes other railroad companies using the Licensor's property at or near the location of the Licensee's installation and their officers, agents and employees; "Loss" includes loss, damage, claims, demands, actions, causes of action, penalties, costs, and expenses of whatsoever nature, including court costs and attorney's fees which may result from: (a) injury to or death of persons whomsoever (including the Licensor's officers, agents, and employees, the Licensee's officers, agents, and employees, as well as any other person); and (b) damage to or loss or destruction of property whatsoever (including Licensee's property, damage to the roadbed, tracks, equipment, or other property of the Licensor, or property in its care or custody). As a major inducement and in consideration of the license and permission herein granted, the Licensee agrees, to the extent permitted by law, to indemnify and hold harmless the Licensor from any Loss which is due to or arises from: 1. The prosecution of any work contemplated by this agreement including the installation, construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, reconstruction, relocation, or removal of the Pipeline or any part thereof; or The presence, operation, or use of the Pipeline or contents escaping therefrom, except to the extent that the Loss is caused by the sole and direct negligence of the Licensor. ARTICLE VII. TERM This agreement shall take effect as of the date first herein written and shall continue in full force and effect until terminated as herein provided. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed in duplicate as of the date first herein written. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY By: Contracts Representative CITY OF DENTON By: City Manager Witness: X DIrECTS'ON REL~T)VF~ TO .RO=,.,ING ??~ REV. 5-15-98 WV~ vV.Ltp;'f. COi ENCASED NON FLAMMABLE /',/' J PIPELINE CROSSING ~x. .>/ ..~'~Z%FNO SCALE FILLED IN TO PROCESS THIS APPLICATION. ' ~/ (~scnte[ rfx~ mJECT) (OESC~]~ FI~ . - [ Ar L~AT~ONS ~T ~1~ sEcrI~ OISTA~ ?0 A LEGIL ~Y LI~ IS flE~lflKO)~ r ' . ~ ~~ STEEL CASING ~ ~l~ o~s~ ~ I ~ THICKNESS C~RT ~ (~ .~) , / · r.:c~.tss cAsi~ ~ I .~' I/q' 12' ~ LESS .]125'5/IG' OVER / I lb5 ~T. ' ~ .~TSW ~/e' ovER ,e--zz- / ~?l, (20 Fr.m~) , ,k'~'.?.. · ~ ~l~ .~ i/2' OVER ~ C~I~ ~ ~ ~1~ PI~(~ ~te 4) iJ r,~ur~ ) .625~ 5/8' OVER ~ I / f T ~ I ..... ~lCn PIK X I ~ A~VED BY ~R. CO. PIPES WITH ~INI~ YI[LD ~, ~ ~ FT. ~ ~,OFTL · .- ' ~'~FT. · ~ tFOR'LA TO FIG~ ~SING LEITH CROSSING WITH OTHER ANGLE THAN OF ' ) B I) ~t ~)~ OISTA~ES TO ~ ~ AT RI~T A~ES ~ OF ~ ~ SIN 7%~~ 21 CASI~ TO E~ ~Y~ T~ ~ ~ 1~ AT Rl~ ~E5 T~ ~AT[fl M ~ * ~ FT.~ ~ ~ FT.e - B A) IS PIPELINE CROSSING WITHIN DEDICATED STREET T YES;v .o; EXHIBIT "~".~ B] IF YES, NA~ OF STREET ~/~. / O) O]STR)BUTION LiNE OR TRANSMISSION LINE C) CARRIER PIPE : UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. C~DITY lO BE CONVEYED ~~ ~~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ J WALLOPERATINGTHICKNEssPRESSUR$?~'~ PS] ~n ~ ~,./~ I,' ~.-- -- ~IAMETER ~ ' ~TER] AL, : ~' ~ P ~.I E.s. II~S I + E) CAS]NGwALLPiPE:TH]CKNESS ~/~# ;DIAMETER ;~TERIAL ~E;~ ; NOIE :CASIMG ~ST HAVE 2' CLE~R~HCE BETWEEN GREATEST ~NCASED ~~ ~ROSS]~O C~RR]ER PIPE ~HD INSIDE OF C~SING PIPE. ,K~.cm, ,~., ) F) UETHOD~ )NSTALL]NG CASING P]PE UNDER TRACK(S): C.~ 0¢ ~eJxiDrd DRY BORE AND JACK (lET BORE NOI PErillED) ~ ,~(~ __TUNNEL ; OTHER ~ RR FILE J _ G) WILL C~STRUCTION BE BY AN OUTS]DE CONTRACIO~ ~ YES; ~ N0--~'~DATE~'~I'2~m~ H) DISTANCE F~ CENTER LINE OF TRACK TO NEAR FACE OF BORING AND I A n N I N O JACKING PITS ~EN ~ASURED AT R]GHT AN~ES TO TRACK ]) APPLICANT HAS CONTACTED 1-80~3~-9193t 1~' m~) m~L ~1~ ~ ~. ~P~ ~T Ir ~ IN ~ U. P. CO~N]CATION DEPARTMENT, AND HAS DETERMINED FleER ~ ~ ~ TO KTE~IK [XISTE<E ~ OPTIC CABLE__DOES ; ~ DOES ~T ; EX]ST IN VICINITY OF t~llm M FI~R~}C C~LE. ~RK TO BE PERFORMED . TICKET ~. ~-~l~t~ ~ PL X 980'112 Form Approved, AVP-Law F_~IBIT B Section LIMITATION AND SUBORDINATION OF RIGHTS GRANTED. (a) The foregoing grant of right is subject and subordinate to the prior and continuing right and obligation of the. Licensor to use and maintain its entire property including the right and power of the Licensor to construct, maintain, repair, renew, use, operate, change, modify or relocate railroad tracks, signal, communication, fiber optics, or other wirelines, pipelines and other facilities upon, along or across any or all parts of its property, all or any of which may be freely done at any time or times by the Licensor without liability to the Licensee or to any other party for compensation or damages. (b) The foregoing grant is also subject to all outstanding superior rights (including those in favor of licensees and lessees of the Licensor's property, and others) and the right of the Licensor to renew and extend the same, and is made without covenant of title or for quiet enjoyment. Section 2. CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION. (a) The Pipehne shall be constructed, operated, maintained, repaired, renewed, modified and/or reconstructed by the Licensee in strict conformity with Union Pacific Railroad Co. Common Standard Specification 1029 adopted November 1949, and all amendments thereof and supplements thereto, which by this reference is hereby made a part hereof, except as may be modified and approved by the Licensor's Vice President-Engineering Services. In the event such Specification conflicts in any respect with the requirements of any federal, state or municipal law or regulation, such requirements shall govern on all points of conflict, but in all other respects the Specification shall apply. (b) All work performed on property of the Licensor in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification or reconstruction of the Pipeline shall be done to the satisfaction of the Licensor. (c) Prior to the commencement of any work in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, relocation, reconstruction or removal of the Pipeline where it passes underneath the roadbed and track or tracks of the Licensor, the Licensee shall submit to the Licensor plans setting out the method and manner of handling the work, including the shoring and cribbing, if any, required to protect the Licensor's operations, and shall not proceed with the work until such plans have been approved by the Vice President-Engineering Services of the Licensor and then the work shall be done to the satisfaction of the Vice President-Engineering Services or his authorized representative. The Licensor shall have the right, if it so elects, to provide such support as it may deem necessary for the safety of its track or tracks during the time of construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, relocation, reconstruction or removal of the Pipeline, and, in the event the Licensor provides such support, the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor, within fifteen (15) days after bills shall have been rendered therefor, all expense incurred by the Licensor in connection therewith, which expense shall include all assignable costs. (d) The Licensee shall keep and maintain the soil over the Pipeline thoroughly compacted and the grade even with the adjacent surface of the ground. Section 3, NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT OF WORK If cm emergency should arise requiring immediate attention, the Licensee shall provide as much notice as practicable to Licensor before commencing any work. In all other situations, the Licensee shall notify the Licensor at least ten (10) days (or such other time as the Licensor may allow) in advance of the commencement of any work upon property of the Licensor in connection with the construction, maintenance, repc~r, renewal, modification, reconstruction, relocation or removal of the Pipeline. Ail such work shall be prosecuted diligently to completion. Section 4 LICENSEE TO BEAR ENTIRE EXPENSE. The Licensee shall bear the entire cost and expense incurred in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair and renewal and any and all modification, revision, relocation, removal or reconstruction of the Pipeline, including any and all expense which may be incurred by the Licensor in connection therewith for supervision, inspection, flagging, or otherwise. plx.exb Page I of 4 Exhibit B PL X 980'112 ' Form Approved, AVP-Law Section 5. REINFORCEMENT, RELOCATION OR REMOVAL OF PIPELINE. (a) The license herein granted is subject to the needs and requirements of the L/censor in the operation of its railroad and in the improvement and use of its property, and the Licensee shall, at the sole expense of the Licensee, reinforce the Pipehne, or move all or any portion of the Pipeline to such new location as the L/censor may designate, whenever, in the furtherance of its needs and requirements, the L/censor shall find such action'necessary or desirable. (b) All the terms, conditions and stipdlations herein expressed with reference to'the Pipeline on property of the L/censor in the location hereinbefore described shall, so far as the Pipeline remains on the property, apply to the Pipeline as modified, changed or relocated within the contemplation of this section. Section 6. NO INTERFERENCE WITH LICENSOR'S OPERATION. The Pipeline and all parts thereof within and outside of the limits of the property of the L/censor shall be constructed and, at all times, mc~tained, repaired, renewed and operated in such manner as to cause no interference whatsoever with the constant, continuous and uninterrupted use of the tracks, property and facilities of the Licensor, and nothing shall be done or suffered to be done by the Licensee at any time that would in any manner impair the safety thereof. ~n 7. PROTECTION OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE SYSTEMS. (a) Fiber optic cable systems may be buried on the Licensor's property. Protection of the fiber optic cable systems is of extreme importance since any break could disrupt service to users resulting in business interruption and loss of revenue and profits. Licensee shall telephone the L/censor at 1-800-336-9193 (a 24-hour number) to determine if fiber optic cable is buried anywhere on the Licensor's premises to be used by the Licensee. If it is, Licensee will telephone the telecommunications company(ies) involved, arrange for a cable locator, make arrangements for relocation or other protection of the fiber optic cable, all at Licensee's expense, mud will commence no work on the right of way until all such protection or relocation has been accomplished. Licensee shall indemnify and hold the L/censor hurmless from and against all costs, liability and expense whatsoever (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, court costs and expenses) arising out of or caused in any way by Licensee's failure to comply with the provisions of this paragraph. (b) In 'z_d'~_~tien te ether ~mdc.mni,"; F-rc:".':icn-.: ~m t?!: A~ecment, the T_/~gc.~.-_.co zh,-,~! indem_~y _,'m~_d held the T_~censor h.m~..~=~ from ~d ag~st ~ costs, ~fl~W ~d e~ense whosoever (mclu~g, ~thout l~t~on, ~torneys fees, ~o~~xW::~.s:~:r-~, c~s~ by the neg~gence of the ~cens~, its contractor, agents ~or employ '~[~[-:age to ar destruction of ~y tel~o~c~ions ~stem on ~censo~s pro~, ~or [2~~ ~%, ~r~. employ~ by or on ~h~f of ~y tel~omm~c~ions comfy, ~or ~.~ comr:c:~ m~::~ee:,,~., on ~censor's pro~, except if sUch costs, ~ or e~enses ~e c~sed solely ~ th ~:~e?:?r~ce o.~ ~he ~censor. ~cens~ f~her a~ees th~ it sh~ not h~e or seek r~:~.co~:.~ u~.~:~~'~u:~m or c~se o~ action for ~leged loss of ~rofits or revenue or loss of se~ce or other · '.rz~ ~ ~6, ~: tel~o~umc~ion comply using ~censor's prope~ or ~ ~tomer or ~er of se~ces of the fi~r Section 8. C~S ~D ~NS FOR ~OR ~D ~~; T~S. "~'[ (a) ~e ~censee sh~l fully p~ far all m~eri~s joined or ~fked to ~d l~or ~erformed upon prope~ of the Licensor in colorlon ~th the const~ction, m~ten~ce, re~r, renewS, mo~ic~ion or r~onst~ction of the ~e, ~d sh~ not pe~t or s~fer ~y mech~c's ar m~eri~m~'s lien of ~y ~nd or n~ure to be e~orced ag~nst the properW for ~y work done or m~erials fumish~ ther~n ~ the inst~ce or request or on ~half of the Licensee. The ~censee shall indemni~ and hold h~ess the ~censar agmnst ~d from ~y ~d ~1 liens, clmms, dem~ds, costs ~d e~nses of wh~s~er n~ure in ~y w~ co~ected ~th or ~o~ng out of such work done, labor performS, or m~eri~s furmshed. (b) The Licensee shall promptly pay or discharge all taxes, charges and assessments levied upon, in respect to, or on account of the Pipeline, to prevent the same from becoming a charge or lien upon property of the Licensor, and so that the taxes, charges and assessments levied upon or in respect to such property shall not be increased because of the location, construction or maintenance of the Pipeline or any improvement, appliance or fixture connected therewith placed upon such property, or on account of the Licensee's interest therein. Where such tax, charge or assessment may not be separately made or assessed to the Licensee but shall be included in the assessment of ,the property of the Licensor, then the Licensee shall pay to the L/censar an equitable proportion of such taxes determined by the Value of the Licensee's property upon property of the Licensor as compared Page 2 of 4 '.xhibit B PL X 980! 12 ' Form Approved, AVP-Law with the entire value of such property. Section 9. RESTORATION OF LICENSOR'S PROPERTY. In the event the Licensor authorizes the Licensee to take down any fence of the Licensor or in any manner move or disturb ony of the other property of the Licensor in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, reconstruction, relocation or removal of the Pipeline, then in that event the Licensee shall, as soon as possible and at Licensee's sole expense, restore such fence and other~ property to the same condition as the same were in before such fence was taken down or such other property was moved or disturbed, and the Licensee shall indemnify and hold harmless the Licensor, its officers, agents and employees, against and from any crud all liability, loss, damages, claims, demands, costs and expenses of whatsoever nature, including court costs and attorneys' foes, which may result from injury to or death of persons whomsoever, or damage to or loss or destruction of property whatsoever, when such injury, death, damage, loss or destruction grows out of or arises from the taking down of any fence or the moving or disturbance of any other property of the Licensor. Section 10. INDEMNITY. from: (a) injury to or death of persons whomsoever (including the Licensor's officers, agents, and ,.!,~i~:i~.~ the Licensee's officers, agents, and employees, as well as any other person); ,:~nc~or it:~ :?-~::~rr~,::~qe !o .:.,: l~:~ or ~[~:: ~:., o~ ?:~:~:-?:t'T whatsoever (including Licensee's property, damage to the roadbed, tracks, equi~ 'pment, or other ~::r :::)f ~:~/~+~::.~: ~ ~'.~::,n:~,~::,;.. or property in its care or custody). (b) As a major inducement and in consideration of the l~d pe.rmiss, ion herein granted, the Licensee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Licensor from ~:~: due to or arises from: 1 The prosecution of an~, c ,on.,t.ern..plated by this Agreement including the installation, construction, maintenanc construction, relocation, or removal of the Pipeline or any part thereof; Section 11 REMOVAL OF PIPE LINE UPON TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. Prior to the termination of this Agreement howsoever, the Licensee shall, at Licensee's sole expense, remove the Pipeline from those portions of the property not occupied by the roadbed and track or tracks of the Licensor and shall restore, to the satisfaction of the Licensor, such portions of such property to as good a condition as they were in at the time of the construction of the Pipeline. If the Licensee fails to do the foregoing, the Licensor may do such work of removal and restoration at the cost and expense of the Licensee. The Licensor may, at its option, upon such termination, at the entire cost and expense of the Licensee, remove the portions of the Pipeline located underneath its roadbed and track or tracks and restore such roadbed to as good a condition as it was in at the time of the construction of the Pipeline, or it may permit the Licensee to do such work of removal and restoration to the satisfaction of the Licensor. In the event of the removal by the Licensor of the property of the Licensee and of the restoration of the roadbed and property as herein provided, the Licensor shall in no manner be liable to the Licensee for any damage sustained by the Licensee for or on account thereof, and such removal and restoration shall in no manner prejudice or impair any right of action for damages, or otherwise, that the Licensor may have against the Licensee. Section 12. WAIVER OF BREACH. The waiver by the Licensor of the breach of any condition, covenant or agreement herein contained to be kept, observed and performed by the Licensee shall in no way impair the right of the Licensor to avail itself of any remedy for any subsequent breach thereof. plx.exb Page 3 of 4 Exhibit B PL X 980~ 12 · Form Approved, AVP-Law Section 13. TERMINATION (a) If the Licensee does not use the right herein granted or the Pipeline for one (1) year, or ff the Licensee continues in default in the performance of any covenant or agreement herein contained for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice from the Licensor to the Licensee specifying such default, the Licensor may, at its option, forthwith immediately terminate this Agreement by written notice. (b) In addition to the provisions of subp~agrcrph (a) above, this Agreement may be terminated by written notice given by either party hereto to the other on any date in such notice stated, not less, however, than thirty (30) days subsequent to the date upon which such notice shall be given. (c) Notice of default and notice of termination may be served personally upon the Licensee or by mailing to the last known address of the Licensee. Termination of this Agreement for any reason shall not affect any of the rights or obligations of the parties hereto which may have accrued, or liabilities, accrued or otherwise, which may have arisen prior thereto. Section 14. AGREEMENT NOT TO BE ASSIGNED. The Licensee shall not assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, or any rights herein granted, without the written consent of the L/censor, and it is agreed that any transfer or assignment or attempted transfer or assignment of this Agreement or any of the rights herein granted, whether voluntcn7, by operation of law, or otherwise, without such consent in writing, shall be absolutely void and, at the option of the Licensor, shall terminate this Agreement. Section 15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. Subject to the provisions of Section 14 hereof, this Agreement shall be' binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. plx.¢xb Page 4 of 4 ~xhibit B Item #4C AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Engineering Dave Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute an Interlocal Agreement with Texas Woman's University to enable an exchange of easements and services to accommodate utility relocation and easements in conjunction with the widening of U.S. 380; and declaring an effective date. BACKGROUND Texas Woman's University has requested that the City of Denton abandon a portion of the existing utility easement from which the existing sewer line will be removed and relocated to the newly dedicated exchange easement area. The project scope also includes casing upsizes at 2 bore locations in exchange for the dedication of 3 additional utility easements. These easements are necessary as a part of the U.S. 380 Utility Relocation Project. OPTIONS Approve the Ordinance, or Denial, or Table for future consideration RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the draft Ordinance. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Fall 2002 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW None FISCAL INFORMATION None ATTACHMENTS Location Map Draft Ordinance License Agreement Exhibits A-D Prepared by: Denise M. Perez Technical Assistant Respectfully submitted: Charles Fiedler, Director Engineering Department Location Map, ~ Exhibit "A-2" Exhibit "A-3" Exhibit "A-l" UNIVERSITY Exhibit "A-4" TEXAS WOMAN'S UNIVERSITY ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH TEXAS WOMAN'S UNIVERSITY TO ENABLE AN EXCHANGE OF EASEMENTS AND SERVICES TO ACCOMMODATE UTILITY RELOCATIONS AND EASEMENTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WIDENING OF U.S. 380; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton and Texas Woman's University desire to enter into an Interlocal Agreement for the exchange of land for use as easements, pursuant to §791.028 of the Government Code, §272.001 of the Texas Local Government Code, and §2-127 of the Denton code of ordinances; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS Section 1. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Denton an Interlocal Agreement with Texas Woman's University to enable an exchange of easements and services to accommodate utility relocations and easements in conjunction with the widening of U.S. 380 in substantially the same form as of the Interlocal Agreement attached hereto and mad a part hereof by reference. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2002 EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into effective as of the date set forth below by and between the City of Denton, Texas, a home rule municipal corporation (the "City") and Texas Woman's University ("TWU"). WHEREAS, the City and TWU desire to enter into an Inteflocal Agreement to provide for City of Denton utility facility relocations and easements in conjunction with the widening of U.S. 380 (the "Project") as it affects the TWU golf course, pursuant to {}791.028 of the Texas Government Code; and WHEREAS, TWU has previously granted to the City a utility easement dated August 17, 1967, and recorded in the Deed Records of Denton County under Volume 555, Page 363 (the "Existing Easement"); and WHEREAS, TWU has requested that it exchange a new City of Denton utility easement as more particularly described in Exhibits "A-I" and "B-I" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Replacement Easement") to replace a portion of the Existing Easement as more particularly described in Exhibits "A-5" and "B-5" attached hereto and made a part here of by reference (the "Easement Abandonment") which will lessen the impact the utility facilities will have on the proposed greens for TWU's golf course; and WHEREAS, the Project also necessitates the City's acquisition of additional City of Denton utility easements as more particularly described in Exhibits "A-2", "B-2", "A-3", "B-3", "A-4" and "B-4" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference ("Exchange Easement 2,3 and 4" respectively) attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the Replacement Easement, Exchange Easement 2, Exchange Easement 3, Exchange Easement 4, and Temporary Construction Easement are collectively called the "Exchange Easements"); and WHEREAS, the Project and this agreement will benefit TWU, the City and its citizens and is in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the consideration for the promises contained herein represent fair market value for the property interests being granted or abandoned and fair and reasonable compensation for the services being performed under this agreement; and WHEREAS, all monies expended under this agreement are from current revenues of the paying party; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein the City and TWU hereby agree as follows: On or a TWU shall deliver the fully executed non-exclusive Exchange Easements to the City; and City shall deliver to TWU a certified copy of a City ordinance abandoning a portion of the Existing Easement (the "Abandonment Ordinance") As additional consideration, and as a part of the Project; The City shall provide a casing upsize to accommodate not only the proposed City of Denton utility installation, but also three 4" poly pipe conduits (495 l.f.) and stainless steel spacer upgrade as shown on plan sheet 25 (Exhibit "C"). The conduits shall be reserved for TWU's use at their discretion. The City shall provide a casing upsize to accommodate not only the proposed City of Denton utility installation, but also one 4" poly pipe crossing (135 1.f.) and stainless steel spacer upgrade as shown on plan sheet 9 (Exhibit "D"). The conduit shall be reserved for TWU's use at their discretion. TWU shall erect temporary fencing at such locations as to limit the Project contractor's equipment path and working area (generally 20' wide easement + 20' wide working area) as more particularly described in Exhibit "A-6" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Temporary Construction Easement"), within the TWU Golf Course area. The City shall cause the Project contractor after installation of the sewer and water facilities to leave the earthwork in accordance with City specifications. The City will restore all impacted areas in a workmanlike manner to a condition equal to or better than that existing prior to construction except that area within the Golf Course where TWU will be responsible for restoration of the grass. The City will use its best efforts to minimally interrupt play at the 8th golf green. The'City shall allow TWU the surface use of all easement area excluding the construction, erection or placement of any buildings, signs or other permanent structures, or portions thereof, in, on, or over the permanent easements. TWU shall have the right to make use of the easements for any purpose that does not interfere with the City's rights in the easements for the purposes granted, subject to the restrictions contained herein. TWU's right to use the easement shall specifically include the right to pave the easement areas for vehicular ingress, egress, and parking. 3. The City Council of the City and the Board of Regents of TWU have duly authorized this Agreement and the execution of same by the officers or agents who have signed below on their behalf. C:~Documents and Settings~bfloydXLocal Settings\Temporary Intemet Files\OLK417~TWU Interlocal Agreement-TxDot Wideningl.doc Page 2 the In Witness Whereof, this Agreement has been executed by the parties to be effective this , day of ,2002. CITY OF DENTON By: MICHAEL A. CONDUFF, CITY MANAGER ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM TEXAS WOMAN'S UNIVERSITY BY: DR. BRENDA FLOYD, VICE"PRES IDENI' FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION BY: C:kDocuments and SettingsXbfloyffff~.~al Settings\Temporary Intemet Files\OLK417~TWU Interlocal Agreement-TxDot Wideningl.doc Page 3 EASEMENT STATE OF TEXAS, COUNTY OF DENTON KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT Texas Woman's University (Grantors) of Denton County, Texas, in consideration of the sum of ONE DOLLAR and NO CENTS ($1.°°) and OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION in hand paid by the City of Denton, Texas, (Grantee), receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does by these presents grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the City of Denton, Texas, the free and uninterrupted use, liberty and privilege of the passage in, along, upon and across the following described property, owned by Grantors and situated in Denton County, Texas, in the B.B.B. & C.R.R. Survey, ~stract No~ 185 & the Wm. Crenshaw Survey, Abstract No. 318 & the N~H. Meisenheimer Survey, Abstract Nog 81!. SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS ~A-i","A-2","A-3","A-4",-B-i",~B-2'', & ~B-3", ~B-4" FOR EASEMENT DESCRIPTIONS & ILLUSTRATIONS SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT ~A-6" FOR TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ILLUSTRATION And it is further agreed that the City of Denton, Texas in consideration of the benefits above set out, will remove from the property above described, such fences, buildings and other obstructions as may now be found upon said property. For the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, installing, repairing, and perpetually maintaining city utilities, in, along, upon and across said premises, with the right and privilege at all times of the grantee herein, his or its agents, employees, workmen representatives having ingress, egress, and regress in, along upon and across said premises for the purpose of making additions to, thereof. Upon conclusion of the initial temporary construction easement shall terminate. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto the said City of Denton, Texas as aforesaid for the purposes aforesaid the premises above described. improvements on and repairs to said facilities or any part construction, the Witness my hand, this the Texas Woman's University .day of , 2002 By: Dr. Brenda Floyd Vice President Finance & Administration THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON ACKNOWLEDGMENT This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the , 2002 by Dr. Brenda Floyd. day of Notary Public, in and for the State of Texas My Commission Expires Accepted this the__day of City of Denton, Texas (Resolution No. 91-073). ,2002 for the BY: Paul Williamson EXHIBIT"B-I" lEGAl DESCRIPTION for a 20 foot w/de Utility easement out of Wm. CRENS/CAW SEt~¥EY A.138 and t/~e 8.B. 8. & C. RE S~/RVEY A.IE5 Denton, Denton County, Texas BEING ail that certain tract, parcel or strip of/and out of B.B.B. & C. RE. Survey A. 185 and the Wm. CRENSHAW SURVEY, A.318 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas as described hy deeds recorded in Volume 328, Page 153 and Volume 258, Page 152 Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and more particularly described as fo/lows: BEG/IV/V/NG at a point for corner in the southeast r/EM.of, way//ne of U.S. Highway 380 (East University Drive) that is 350.8 feet, S73° 20' W from a concrete monument found for the point of tangent of the southeast right.of-way//ne and 255.5 feet, N 77047, E from a concrete monument found for the point of curve of the same southeast r/£ht.of, way //ne; THENCE: w/th the said r/gM-of, way curve to the/eft; central angle of 0°35'15'', a radius of 3£02.8! feet and whose center hears N14°05'08'' W; an arc distance of 40.02 feet to a point for corner; from which a found iron rod w/th a Texas Department of Transportatinn (TXDOT] cap bears N!5°!7' W, 0.3 feeC THENCE: w/th the west//ne of a drainage easement, S!5° !8'57" E, 50.!3 feet to an iron rod found for corner w/th a TXDOT cap; THENCE: S74°35'43'' W, 22.5! feet to a point for corner; THENCE: S!0°33'!£'' W, 285. 70 feet to a point for an angle po/nC THENCE: S29°44'10'' W, 47.73 feet to.a point for an angle poinC THENCE: S0! °22'25" E, 241.98 feet to a point for comer in the center of an easement described by deed recorded //7 Volume 555, Page 383, Deed Records, of Denton County, Texas; THENCE: w/th the sam easement, N87° 34' W, 20.04 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE: leaving the sam center//ne, N07°22'25'' W, 246.20 feet to a point for an angle point, THENCE: N29°44'1£"E, 49.92 feet to a point rotan angle point; THENCE: N!0°33'!£"E, 283.48 feet to a point for an angle point; N15°18'57'' W, 4!.05 feet to the P/ace of Beginning and contain/nE 0.30~ ' m~.~, or THENCE: /ess. (See Attached Exhibit A-jn] &OEO 1) "Dedicated to ~.tttt[[t~l Sera)ice" ~u2to. cit~ofitenton.com EXHIBIT 'A-2" The fore~7oln¢ sketch and legal description were prepared from an actual survey made on the grouna. , DENTON EXHIBIT "B-2" tEGA/ DESCRIPTION for a Utility Easement out of the B.B.B. & C. Bit SllBVEYA-I85 Denton, Denton County, Texas BEING a// that certain tract, parce/ or strip of/and out of B.B.B. & C. R.R. Survey A-185 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas according to the tract described by deed recorded in Volume 258, Page152 Deed/Yecords of Denton County, Texas and more particularly described as fo//ows: BEGINNING at an 'X' cut for a comer in the east right-of, way of BELL A VENUE at the intersection of the southeast corner c//p for East University Drive; THENCE: w/th the said right.of, way comer clip, N45°32'07'' E, 37.43 feet to a iron rod w/th an aluminum d/s/~ mar/~ed TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA T/ON; THENCE: continuing w/th the south right-of-way of East University Drive, N$£° 23'D7" E, 8.52 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE:/earing the sa/d r/ght.of, way //ne, S0°30'12'' W, 15.£3 feet to a point for comer; THENCE: S45°32'07" W, 49. 46 feet to a point for comer in the east right.of, way of Be//A venue; THENCE: w/th the sam east right-of, way//ne, N0°30'12'' E, 28.27 feet to the P/ace of Beginning and containing 953 square feet of/and more or/ess. (see attached Exhibit B. jn~L.OOl17) ~Dedicated to Qualitj/ Service wu,u:citj~ofdenton, com 5 FOOT EXHIBIT 'A ,3" PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (THE STATE OF TEXAS TRACT) reACT ~ I~ STATE OF ~XAS s~N ~. KUR VOL. 2742, PG. 379 D.R.D.C.T. - ~'~'~'~'" 0.598 Acres 50 0 SCALE 1 "=50' FIRST '~ACT BLANCHE OINNINGS VOL. 1044, Pg. 295 D.E.D.C.T. FEET 50 PROPOSED 5' PUBLIC Z = UTILITY EASEMENT 0.011 Acres i' [ , . -~ ': NOO'14'O6*E F. 00~% * ~r'3c;'~'8~¥£ 94.50' ' POINT OF ~ POINT JOF~ALU~NU~ ............ -- COMMENCING H~ MON ~ 1~1~ j (CONmO~ J MONUM[NT) ~ ,, ~ ' -~. / Not.: UNIVaRSIT7 DRIVE 1. Basis of Bearings Is the north line of University . right-of-way) Drive (U.S. Hwy 580) according to TXDOT Plans of Proposed Right-of-Way Project No. 0155- 10-041 and as monumented on the ground. 2. Property subject to easements of record. 3. Surve~r did not abstract the property. I:\CADO\SUR'~ry~,ol\2001033-50\2001033-rXHISIT. DW~ TE& TAN DUNAWAY ASSOCIATES, Inc. E~GD~F, RS - PLAN94'ERS - SURVEYORS FORT ~O~H. ~ ?el07 JOHN N. CORDLE R~ISTERED PROFESSIO~L ~ND SURV~OR T~S REGIST~TION NO. 2026 MAY 31, 2001 N,H. EXHIBIT SHOWING A 5 FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT SITUATED IN THE MEISENHEIMER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 811, CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS DAi JOB NO. 2001033-50 EXHIBIT "B ,3" LEGAL DESCRIPTION 5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (The State of Texas Tract) BEING a tract of land situated in the N.H. Meisenheimer Survey, Abstract Number 811, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, and being part of a tract of land described in deed to the State of Texas, recorded in Volume 342, Page 346, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: COMMENCING at a Texas Department of Transportation aluminum highway monument found at the intersection of the north right-of-way line (80' right-of-way) of University Drive (US Hwy. 380) and the west right-of-way line of Bell Avenue (100' right-of-way); THENCE N 89036'48'' W, with said north right-of-way line, a distance of 568.76 feet to a point in the east line of said State of Texas tract for the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N 89°36'48'' W, continuing with said north right-of-way line, a distance of 94.50 feet to a point for comer in the west line of said State of Texas tract; THENCE N 00o14'06'' E, along the west line of said State of Texas tract, a distance of 5.00 feet to a point for corner; THENCE S 89°36'48'' E, departing the west line of said State of Texas tract and being parallel to and 5 feet perpendicular distance from the said north line of University Drive, a distance of 94.50 feet to a point for comer in the east line of said State of Texas tract; THENCE S 00015'05'' W, along the east line of said State of Texas tract, a distance of 5.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 473 square feet or 0.011 acres of land. ,' ,oJ;~,~:~ N. Cordle ~],,'~: 1,% No. 2026 '~"Dunaway Associates, Inc. Job No. 2001033.50 May 31, 2001 NOTE: Basis of Bearings is the north line of University Dr. (U.S. Hwy 380) according to TxDOT Plans of Proposed Right-of-Way Project No. 0135-10-041 and as monumented on the ground. Property is subject to easements of record. Surveyor did not abstract the property A plat of even survey date herewith accompanies this legal description. \~SVFWO l\Cadd~Survey\01~2001033-50\esmt41gl.doc C~'' 14 BLOCK D lO ,/ \ \ \ EXHIBIT "A-4" u.p, t/~,x, p6o Den/on, Den/on COunty, Te,~a~ The foregoing iketch ond legol deIcript~on were prepared from on octuol survey mode on the ground. DENTON EXHIBIT "B-4" / e#al Description for a ~/ti/ity Easement out of the W. CRENSHA W SDRVEY A-318 Denton, Denton County, Texas Being ail that certain tract, parcel, or strip of/and out of the W. CRENSHAW SIIRVEY A.318 in the City of Denton, Texas as described by deed recorded in Volume 328, Page !53, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as fo/lows: COMMENCING at a found !/2" square tube for the southeast corner of Lot £, Block D, BflDWNWOOD ADD/T/ON, as recorded in Cab. A, Slide 208, P/at Records, Denton County, Texas, said corner being in the north right-of-way//ne of Wood/and StreeC THENCE; S 00°05'4£"E, 50. O0 feet to a point in the south right.of-way//ne of sam Wood/and StreeC THENCE; S 6£°54'! !" W, a/mg said south//ne, 520. 70 feet to the POINT 0£ BEGiNNiNG; THENCE; leaving sam north line, S 45°20' W, 74. 75 feet toan angle po/nC THENCE; S 23°5!'43"E, 322.33 feet to a point for corner, said po/nt being in the proposed north right-of, way//ne for U.S. Hwy. 380; THENCE; S 76°04'40'' W a/mg sam north//ne, 20.30 feet to a point for corner; THENCE; leaving sam north//ne, N 23°5! '43" W, 33263 feet to an angle poinC THENCE; N 45°20'E, 68.24 feet to a point for corner, saM po/nt being the south right-of, way line of Wood/and Street, THENCE; N 8£°54'! ! "E along sam south right-of-way//ne, 28.50 feet to the POINT 0/; BEGiNNiNG and CONTAiNiNG O. !832 acres of/and more or less as surveyed by john nail jr. rp/s # !970 during the month of July 2002. See attached Survey Sketch jn~S-££06 'Dedicated to Quality Service www. cityofdenton.com XHBT A 5 R=5,902~6'' N87'"54'W ! 0.45' DENTON EXHIBIT "B 5" lEGAl DESCRIPTION for a lO foot w/de Utility easement abandonment out of Wm. CRENSHA W SURVEY A-138 and the B.B.B. & C. RR SURVEY A. 185 Denton, Denton County, Texas BEING ail that certain tract, parcel or strip of/and out of B. 8. B. & C. ER. Survey A-185 and the Wm. CRENSHAW SURVEY, A-318 in the City of Denton· Denton County· Texas as described by deeds recorded in Volume 328, Page 153 and Volume 256, Page ~ 52 Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and more particularly described as fo/Iowa: BEG/NE/NE at a point for comer in the southeast right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 380 (East University Drive) that is 373.9 feet, S73 °31' W from.a concrete monument found for the point of tangent of the southeast right-of-way line and 232.1 feet, N 78 ~04' E from a concrete monument found for the point of curve of the same southeast right-of-way line; THENCE: leaving the said southeast right-of, way line for U.S. Highway 38L) (East University Drive), S14 "4L)'L)I"E, 63757 feet to a point for corner in the north line of an easement described by deed recorded in Volume 555, Page 363, Deed Records, of Denton County, Texas; THENCE: with the said easement//ne, N87 °34' W, iL). 45 feet to a point for a corner; THENCE: leaving the said easement//ne, El4 °4L)'L)I" W, 634.71 feet to a point found for comer in the southeast right-of, way 0 · ti line of U.S. Highway 380, in a right-of-way curve to the left having a central angle of § L)8 '49, a radius of 3£L)2.61 feet, and whose center bears NI3 °35'42" W; THENCE: with the said right-of-way curve to the left an arc distance of IL).§I feet to the place of beginning and containing L). 146 acres of land mom or less. 'Dedicated to Quality Service" www. cityofdenton.com EXHIBIT 20' WIDE TEMPORARY,, CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT 20' WIDE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT EXHIBIT "C" EXHIBIT "D" Item #4D AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Engineering David Hill, 349 - 8314 --~' SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 18, Article VIII "SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES" Section 18-210 (E. 1.) of the Code of Ordinance concerning the removal of the entire portion which concerns the Immaculate Conception Catholic school zone, being: · Both directions of Bolivar Street from its intersection with Second Street to its intersection with Third Street. The Traffic Safety Commission recommends approval of this item (7-0). BACKGROUND The Immaculate Conception School has now located to its new site at the southwest comer of Bonnie Brae and Windsor. The old school located at the northeast comer of Bolivar and 2"a Streets has been abandoned for school use. As such, the School 20MPH Zone located on Bolivar is no longer warranted. Staff recommends the removal of the school zone associated with the old school. If approved, the associated signing and markings will also be removed. OPTIONS 1. Approve amending the ordinance 2. Deny amending the ordinance RECOMMENDATION Amend Chapter 18 "Motor Vehicles and Traffic" of the Code of Ordinances cf Denton, Texas Article VIII "School Safety Speed Zones", Section 18-210 to remove all off E. That the time periods for the reduced speed for the school zones described below shall be from 7:00 a.m. until 9:00 a.m. and from 2:00 p.m. until 4:00 p.m. on school days. The location of school zones described below shall be as follows, to-wit: Immaculate Conception Catholic School Both directions of Bolivar Street from its intersection with Second Street to its intersection with Third Street. The Traffic Safety Commission voted 7-0 to recommend amending of the Code of Ordinance, on October 7, 2002. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The Traffic Safety Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of amending the Code of Ordinance on October 7, 2002. Page 1 FISCAL INFORMATION Removal costs of the applicable signing Operations signing and markings budget. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site location map 2. TSC minutes 3. Ordinance Prepared By: and markings is a normal cost associated with the Traffic David Salmon, Assistant Director Engineering Respectfully submitted: Charles Fiedler Director, Engineering Page 2 0 Traffic Safety Commission - October 7, 2002 ITEM #4: CONSIDER REMOVAL OF A SCHOOL ZONE ON BOLIVAR STREET FOR THE FORMER IMMACULATE CONCEPTION SCHOOL AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. Vokoun said the old Immaculate Conception School was moved from their old site on Bolivar Street, between Second Street and Third Street, to their new site at Bonnie Brae Street and Windsor Street. There are presently no school children using this school and therefore staff recommends removing the school zone. Staff recommends the TSC make a recommendation to City Council to amend the ordinance removinq the school zone. Cheek made a motion to recommend to City Council to amend Ordinance No. 2002-312, removing the school zone on Bolivar Street for the old Immaculate Conception School Howell seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. DRAFT S:\Our Docmments\Ordinances\02~2002School Zone RemoveSKellerandUatholic.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18-210 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO REMOVE THE SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES FOR SULLIVAN KELLER AND THE FORMER LOCATION OF IMMACULATE CONCEPTION CATHOLIC SCHOOL; PROVIDING A FiNE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROViDiNG A SEVERABiLiTY CLAUSE; PROViDiNG FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 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 deleting Section 18-210.A.9. regulating speed for the former Sullivan Keller Elementary and Section 18-210.E. 1. regulating speed for the former Bolivar Street location of the immaculate Conception Catholic School from Chapter 18 titled "School Safety Speed Zones." SE~ffJD~L2. An individual adjudged guilty of the provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine not to exceed Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00). SECTION 3. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Demon defining school zones and school bus loading zones and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 4. That if in any section, subsection, paragraph, semence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstance 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 Demon, Texas hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Demon 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 ,2002. EULiNE BROCK, MAYOR S:\Our Docmments\Or dinances\02~002 School Zone RemoveSKellerandUatholic.doc ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 of 2 Item #4E AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Engineering David Hill, 349 - 8314 ~-~' SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 18, Article VIII "SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES" Section 18-210 (A.9.) of the Code of Ordinance concerning the removal of the entire portion which concerns the Sullivan Keller Elementary school zones, being: · Both directions of Wood Street beginning 230 feet south of where Wood Street intersects the center line of Davis Street to 300 feet north of where Wood Street intersects the center line of Davis Street. · Both directions of Ruddell Street beginning 230 feet south of where Ruddell Street intersects the center line of Davis Street to 300 feet north of where Ruddell Street intersects the center line of Davis Street. · Both directions of Davis Street from its intersection with Wood Street to the intersection of Ruddell Street and Davis Street. The Traffic Safety Commission recommends approval of this item (7-0). BACKGROUND The Sullivan Keller Elementary School has now located to its new site at the Ann Windle School for Young Children, 901 Audra Ln. The old school located on the southerly part of the block surrounded by Wood Street/Davis Streel/Ruddell Street/Paisley Street has been abandoned for school use. As such, the School 20MPH Zones located on Wood, Ruddell and Davis are no longer warranted. Staff recommends the removal of the school zones associated with the old school. If approved, the associated signing and markings will also be removed. OPTIONS 1. Approve amending the ordinance 2. Deny amending the ordinance RECOMMENDATION Amend Chapter 18 "Motor vehicles and Traffic" of the Code of Ordinances of I~nton, Texas Article VIII "School Safety Speed Zones", Section 18-210 to remove that portion orA. being: Sullivan Keller Elementary Both directions of Wood Street beginning 230 feet south of where Wood Street intersects the center line of Davis Street to 300 feet north of where Wood Street intersects the center line of Davis Street. Both directions of Ruddell Street beginning 230 feet south of where Ruddell Street intersects the center line of Davis Street to 300 feet north of where Ruddell Street intersects the center line of Davis Street. Page 1 Both directions of Davis Street from its intersection with Wood Street to the intersection of Ruddell Street and Davis Street. The Traffic Safety Commission voted 7-0 to recommend amending of the Code of Ordinance, on October 7, 2002. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The Traffic Safety Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of amending the Code of Ordinance on October 7, 2002. FISCAL INFORMATION Removal costs of the applicable signing and markings is a normal cost associated with the Traffic Operations signing and markings budget. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site location map 2. TSC minutes 3. Ordinance Prepared By: David Salmon, Assistant Director Engineering Respectfully submitted: Charles Fiedler Director, Engineering Page 2 '--- [] [] [.nngm~. rumba di ~ ,i $ ~,1, d · nlm mm ..,m r ~]." m,m. ,% "' {m ,,~.,n mm mB [] [] m ,~, · mmn · mB ma]m mm q~mm { mmm · ';,, .,. ! ."."'"' ?". ,, I [] [] I. ,,."l Imm Traffic Safety Commission - October 7, 2002 ITEM #5: CONSIDER REMOVAL OF SCHOOL ZONES ON RUDDELL STREET, DAVIS STREET, AND WOOD STREET SURROUNDING THE FORMER SULLIVAN KELLER SCHOOL, AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. Vokoun said Sullivan Keller Elementary School has moved to its new location at the Ann Windle School for Young Children, 901 Audra Lane. The old school had three school zones on Ruddell Street, Davis Street, and Wood Street. There are presently no school children using this school and therefore staff recommends removing the school zones. Howell made a motion to recommend to City Council to amend Ordinance No. 2002-312, removing the school zones on Ruddell Street, Davis Street, and Wood Street for the old Sullivan Keller School Lesko seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Howell asked staff to check with Denton Independent School District to see why a school zone has not been requested for the Ann Windle School. Vokoun said staff knew the answer. The school is offset from the street and there are no children walking to the school. There is no need for a school zone. DRAFT S:\Our Docmments\Ordinances\02~2002School Zone RemoveSKellerandUatholic.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18-210 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO REMOVE THE SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES FOR SULLIVAN KELLER AND THE FORMER LOCATION OF IMMACULATE CONCEPTION CATHOLIC SCHOOL; PROVIDING A FiNE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROViDiNG A SEVERABiLiTY CLAUSE; PROViDiNG FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 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 deleting Section 18-210.A.9. regulating speed for the former Sullivan Keller Elementary and Section 18-210.E. 1. regulating speed for the former Bolivar Street location of the immaculate Conception Catholic School from Chapter 18 titled "School Safety Speed Zones." SE~ffJD~L2. An individual adjudged guilty of the provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine not to exceed Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00). SECTION 3. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the City of Demon defining school zones and school bus loading zones and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct conflict with the provisions of this ordinance. SECTION 4. That if in any section, subsection, paragraph, semence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstance 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 Demon, Texas hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Demon 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 ,2002. EULiNE BROCK, MAYOR S:\Our Docmments\Or dinances\02~002 School Zone RemoveSKellerandUatholic.doc ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 of 2 Item #4F AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Engineering Dave Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of DeNon, Texas approving a real estate contract between the City of DeNon and E. J. Dane, relating to the purchase of an approximate 0.2383 acre tract or parcel of land being a part of Lot 4, Block A of the Blount Addition, an addition to the City of Denton, for use as a drainage channel; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND Presently, staff is undertaking drainage improvements in phased segments within the Pecan Creek drainage basin. In 1998, a substantial portion of the PEC-4 tributary was improved from Bell Avenue at Robertson Street, eastward to the Woodrow Lane bridge. Acquisition of the subject parcel is necessary to provide connection of the eastern terminus of the pending Eagle Drive Drainage Improvemem project to the existing and recently improved channel at Bell Avenue and Robertson Street. Mr. E. J. Dane, the landowner, and City staff have been in positive negotiations and have reached an equitable agreemem. The Cleveland Street Drainage Improvemem project was completed a few months ago, the project limits being from the detention pond drainage outfall at the south side of Collins Street (Arbors Apartments), east to Cleveland, then along Cleveland and terminating at Eagle Drive. The limits of the pending Eagle Drive Drainage project begin at Cleveland Street at Eagle Drive, then proceed east in Eagle Drive across Carroll Boulevard to Myrtle Street, then north in Myrtle Street to Maple Street, then east in Maple Street, across Elm & Locust Streets to a transition point from underground drainage boxes to an open channel design eastward to existing channel improvements. The subject tract will allow for channel improvements between the transition point at Locust Street and the existing open channel improves east of Bell Avenue. OPTIONS 1. Approve the Real Estate Agreement, or 2. Denial, or 3. Table for future consideration RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Real Estate Agreement. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Closing Date: On or before November 15, 2002 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW None FISCAL INFORMATION $50,000.00 plus closing costs o£ about o£ $1,000 ATTACHMENTS Draft Ordinance Real Estate Agreement Location Map Prepared by: Tod J. Taylor Real Estate Specialist Respectfully submitted: Charles Fiedler, Director Engineering Department ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING A REAL ESTATE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND E. J. DANE, RELATING TO THE PURCHASE OF AN APPROXIMATE 0.2383 ACRE TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PART OF LOT 4, BLOCK A OF THE BLOUNT ADDITION, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF DENTON, FOR USE AS A DRAINAGE CHANNEL; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HERBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to execute a Real Estate Contract between the City and E. J. Dane, in substantially the form of the Real Estate Contract which is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance for all purposes, for the purchase of approximately 0.2383 acre for use as drainage. SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to make the expenditures as set forth in the attached Real Estate Contract. SECTION 3. passage and approval. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2002. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: REAL ESTATE CONTRACT STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON THIS CONTRACT OF SALE is made by E. J. Dane (hereinafter referred to as "Seller") and CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, a home rule municipality, of Denton, Denton County, Texas, (hereinafter referred to as "Purchaser"), upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. PURCHASE AND SALE Seller hereby sells and agrees to convey, and Purchaser hereby purchases and agrees to pay for all that certain tract, lot or parcel of land described in "EXHIBIT A", attached herein, with all rights and appurtenances pertaining to the said property, including any right, title and interest of Seller in and to adjacent streets, alleys or rights-of-way (all of such real property, rights, and appurtenances being hereinafter referred to as the "Property"), together with any improvements, fixtures, and personal property situated on and attached to the Property, for the consideration and upon and subject to the terms, provisions, and conditions hereinafter set forth. PURCHASE PRICE Amount of Purchase Price. The total purchase price for the Property shall be the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($50,000.00) (the "Purchase Price"). Payment of Purchase Price. The full amount of the Purchase Price shall be payable in cash at the closing. PURCHASER'S OBLIGATIONS The obligations of Purchaser hereunder to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby are subject to the satisfaction of each of the following conditions any of which may be waived in whole or in part by Purchaser at or prior to the closing. 1. Preliminary Title Report. Within twenty (20) days after the date hereof, Seller, at Seller's sole cost and expense, shall have caused the Title Company (hereinafter defined) to issue a owner's policy commitment (the "Commitment") accompanied by copies of all recorded documents relating to easements, rights- of-way, etc., affecting the Property. Purchaser shall give Seller written notice on or before the expiration of ten (10) days after Purchaser receives the Commitment that the condition of title as set forth in the Commitment is or is not satisfactory. In the event Purchaser states the condition of title is not satisfactory, Seller shall, at Seller's option, promptly undertake to eliminate or modify all unacceptable matters to the reasonable satisfaction of Purchaser. In the event Seller is unable to do so within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice, this Agreement shall thereupon be null and void for all purposes; otherwise, this condition shall be deemed to be acceptable and any objection thereto shall be deemed to have been waived for all purposes. 2. Survey. Purchaser may, at Purchaser's sole cost and expense, obtain a current survey of the Property, prepared by a duly licensed Texas land surveyor acceptable to Purchaser. The survey shall be staked on the ground, and shall show the location of all improvements, highways, streets, roads, railroads, rivers, creeks, or other water courses, fences, easements, and rights-of- way on or adjacent to the Property, if any, and shall contain the surveyor's certification that there are no encroachments on the Property and shall set forth the number of total acres comprising the Property, together with a metes and bounds description thereof. Purchaser will have ten (10) days after receipt of the survey to review and approve the survey. In the event the survey is unacceptable, then Purchaser shall within the ten (10) day period, give Seller written notice of this fact. Seller shall, at Seller's option, promptly undertake to eliminate or modify the unacceptable portions of the survey to the reasonable satisfaction of Purchaser. In the event Seller is unable to do so within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice, Purchaser, at its option may elect to terminate this Agreement (in which event this Agreement shall be null and void), grant Seller additional time to cure, or proceed to closing. Purchaser's failure to give Seller this written notice shall be deemed to be Purchaser's acceptance of the survey. 3. Seller's Compliance. Seller shall have performed, ob- served, and complied with all of the covenants, agreements, and conditions required by this Agreement to be performed, observed, and complied with by Seller prior to or as of the closing. PAGE 2 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF SELLER Seller hereby represents and warrants to Purchaser as follows, which representations and warranties shall be deemed made by Seller to Purchaser also as of the closing date: 1. There are no parties in possession of any portion of the Property as lessees, tenants at sufferance, trespassers or other parties. 2. Except for the prior actions of Purchaser, there is no pending or threatened condemnation or similar proceeding or assessment or suit, affecting title to the Property, or any part thereof, nor to the best knowledge and belief of Seller is any such proceeding or assessment contemplated by any governmental authority. 3. Seller has complied with all applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, statutes, rules and restrictions relating to the Property, or any part thereof. 4. To the best of the seller's knowledge, there are no toxic or hazardous wastes or materials on or within the Property. Such toxic or hazardous wastes or materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous materials or wastes as same are defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended. CLOSING The closing shall be held at the office of Texas Title Company, 2215 S. Loop 288, Suite 320, Denton, Texas 76205 on or before November 15, 2002, or at such title company, time, date, and place as Seller and Purchaser may mutually agree upon (which date is herein referred to as the "closing date"). CLOSING REQUIREMENTS 1. Seller's Requirements. At the closing Seller shall: A. Deliver to the City of Denton a duly executed and acknowledged General Warranty Deed conveying good and marketable title in fee simple to all of the Property, free and clear of any and all liens, encumbrances, conditions, assessments, and restrictions, except for the PAGE 3 following: 1. General real estate taxes for the year of closing and subsequent years not yet due and payable; 2. Any exceptions approved by Purchaser pursuant to Purchaser's Obliqations here- of; and 3. Any exceptions approved by Purchaser in writing. B. Deliver to Purchaser a Texas Owner's Policy of Title Insurance at Seller's sole expense, issued by Texas Title Company, Denton, Texas, (the "Title Company"), or such title company as Seller and Purchaser may mutually agree upon, in Purchaser's favor in the full amount of the purchase price, insuring fee simple title for the City of Denton to the Property subject only to those title exceptions listed in Closinq Requirements hereof, such other exceptions as may be approved in writing by Purchaser, and the standard printed exceptions contained in the usual form of Texas Owner's Policy of Title Insurance, provided, however: 1. The boundary and survey exceptions shall be deleted if required by Purchaser and if so required, the costs associated with same shall be borne by Purchaser; 2. The exception as to restrictive cove- nants shall be endorsed "None of Record"; 3. The exception for taxes shall be limited to the year of closing and shall be endorsed "Not Yet Due and Payable"; and 4. The exception as to liens encumbering the Property shall be endorsed "None of Record". C. Deliver to Purchaser possession of the Property on the day of closing. 2. Purchaser's Requirements. Purchaser shall pay the consideration as referenced in the "Purchase Price" section of this contract at Closing in immediately available funds. PAGE 4 3. Closinq Costs. Seller shall pay all taxes assessed by any tax collection authority through the date of Closing. All other costs and expenses of closing in consummating the sale and purchase of the Property not specifically allocated herein shall be paid by Purchaser, except for Seller's attorney fees. REAL ESTATE COMMISSION Seller and Purchaser represent and warrant to each other that neither has retained a broker for this transaction and that there are no broker or real estate fees due as a result of the consummation of this contract. BREACH BY SELLER In the event Seller shall fail to fully and timely perform any of its obligations hereunder or shall fail to consummate the sale of the Property except Purchaser's default, Purchaser may either enforce specific performance of this Agreement or terminate this Agreement by written notice delivered to seller. BREACH BY PURCHASER In the event Purchaser should fail to consummate the purchase of the Property, the conditions to Purchaser's obligations set forth in PURCHASER'S OBLIGATIONS having been satisfied and Purchaser being in default Seller may either enforce specific performance of this Agreement, or terminate this Agreement by written notice delivered to purchaser. MISCELLANEOUS 1. Assignment of Agreement. This Agreement may be assigned by Purchaser without the express written consent of Seller. 2. Survival of Covenants. Any of the representations, war- ranties, covenants, and agreements of the parties, as well as any rights and benefits of the parties, pertaining to a period of time following the closing of the transactions contemplated hereby shall survive the closing and shall not be merged therein. 3. Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be delivered hereunder shall be deemed received when sent by United States PAGE 5 mail, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to Seller or Purchaser, as the case may be, at the address set forth beneath the signature of the party. 4. Texas Law to Apply. This Agreement shall be construed under and in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, and all obligations of the parties created hereunder are performable in Denton County, Texas. 5. Parties Bound. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors and assigns where permitted by this Agreement. 6. Legal Construction. In case any one or more of the pro- visions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, said in- validity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if the invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. 7. Prior Aqreements Superseded. This Agreement constitutes the sole and only agreement of the parties and supersedes any prior understandings or written or oral agreements between the parties respecting the within subject matter. 8. Time of Essence. Agreement. Time is of the essence in this 9. Gender. Words of any gender used in this Agreement shall be held and construed to include any other gender, and words in the singular number shall be held to include the plural, and vice versa, unless the context requires otherwise. 10. Memorandum of Contract. Upon request of either party, both parties shall promptly execute a memorandum of this Agreement suitable for filing of record. 11. Compliance. In accordance with the requirements of the Texas Real Estate License Act, Purchaser is hereby advised that it should be furnished with or obtain a policy of title insurance or Purchaser should have the abstract covering the Property examined by an attorney of Purchaser's own selection. 12. Time Limit. In the event a fully executed copy of this Agreement has not been returned to Purchaser within ten (10) days after Purchaser executes this Agreement and delivers same to Sel- ler, Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement PAGE 6 upon written notice to Seller. 13. Effective Date. The term "Effective Date" means the latter of the dates on which this Contract is signed by either Sellers or Purchaser, as indicated by their signature below. If the last party to execute this Contract fails to complete the date of execution below that party's signature, the date the Title Company acknowledges receipt of a copy of this fully executed contract is the Effective Date. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Purchaser have executed this contract as follows: SELLER: BY: E. J. Dane DATE: PURCHASER: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS: BY: DATE: Michael A. Conduff City Manager 215 E. McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 PAGE 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § This instrument is acknowledged before me, on this day of , 2002 by Michael A. Conduff, City Manager, of the City of Denton, a municipal corporation, known to me to be the person and officer whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that the same was the act of the said City of Denton, Texas, a municipal corporation, that he was duly authorized to perform the same by appropriate ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton and that he executed the same as the act of the said City for purposes and consideration therein expressed, and in the capacity therein stated. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § This instrument is acknowledged before me, on this , 2002 by E. J. Dane. day of Notary Public in and for the State of Texas PAGE 8 TITLE COMPANY ACCEPTANCE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The Title Company acknowledges receipt of the fully executed Contract on day of , 2002. TITLE COMPANY: Name: Texas Title Company Address: 2215 S. Loop 288, Suite 320 Denton, Texas 76205 Telephone: 940-382-8251 By: Printed Name: Title: PAGE 9 Exhibit "A" Ail that certain tract of land lying and being situated in the William Loving Survey, Abstract 759, City and County of Denton and being part of Lot 4, Block A, BLOUNT ADDITION, an addition to the city of Denton, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 75, Page 54 Deed Records, Denton County, Texas and being a part of the Third Tract as described in a deed from James Leon McNatt to Phillip Clemente on December 28, 1970, recorded in Volume 625, Page 180, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a steel pin at the Northeast corner of Lot 4, Block A of said addition; Thence S 0° 55' W 74.0 feet to a steel pin; Thence N 89° 39' W 139.71 feet to an "X" cut in a concrete drainage channel on the East boundary line of Wainwright street; Thence N 0° 00' 50" E with the East boundary line of Wainwright Street 74.0 feet to a steel pin at a fence corner; Thence S 89° 39' E with a fence 140.88 feet to the place of beginning, containing in all 10,382.5 square feet or 0.2383 acre of land. PAGE 10 GENERAL WARRANTY DEED Date: , 2002 Grantors: E. J. Dane Grantee: City of Denton Grantee's Mailing Address (including county): City of Denton 601 East Hickory Street Denton, Texas 76205 Denton, County Consideration: FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($50,000.00) and other good and valuable consideration. Property (including any improvements): Being a 0.2383 acre parcel of land situated in the Wm. Loving Survey, Abstract No. 759, Denton County, Texas, being more particularly described in "EXHIBIT A" attached hereto and by this reference being made a part hereof for all purposes. Reservations From and Exceptions to Conveyance and Warranty: Easements, rights-of-way, and prescriptive rights, whether of record or not; all presently recorded instruments, other than liens and conveyances, that affect the property. GRANTOR , for the consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and subject to the reservations from and exceptions to conveyance and warranty, grants, sells and conveys to Grantee the property, together with all and singular the rights and appurtenances thereto in any wise belonging, to have and to hold it to GRANTEE, GRANTEE'S, successors or assigns forever. GRANTOR binds GRANTOR and GRANTOR'S heirs, executors, administrators and successors to warrant and forever defend all and singular the property to GRANTEE and GRANTEE'S, successors and assigns against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim the same or any part thereof, except as to the reservations from and exceptions to conveyance and warranty. When the context requires, singular nouns and pronouns include the plural. GRANTOR: BY: E. J. Dane ACKNOWLEDGMENT THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON This instrument was acknowledged before me on 2002 by E. J. Dane. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas Exhibit "A" Being all that certain tract of land lying and being situated in the William Loving Survey, Abstract 759, City and County of Denton and being part of Lot 4, Block A, BLOUNT ADDITION, an addition to the city of Denton, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 75, Page 54 Deed Records, Denton County, Texas and being a part of the Third Tract as described in a deed from James Leon McNatt to Phillip Clemente on December 28, 1970, recorded in Volume 625, Page 180, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a steel pin at the Northeast corner of Lot 4, Block A of said addition; Thence S 0° 55' W 74.0 feet to a steel pin; Thence N 89° 39' W 139.71 feet to an "X" cut in a concrete drainage channel on the East boundary line of Wainwright street; Thence N 0° 00' 50" E with the East boundary line of Wainwright Street 74.0 feet to a steel pin at a fence corner; Thence S 89° 39' E with a fence 140.88 feet to THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING in all 10,382.5 square feet or 0.2383 acre of land, more or less. o .J '8 '8 '8 @~:~ o ~@~ Item #4G AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: November 5, 2002 Engineering CM/DCM/ACM: David Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance declaring a public necessity exists and finding that public welfare and convenience requires the taking and acquiring of an approximate 0.807 acre tract or parcel of land in fee simple for street purposes such title to be in the name of the City of Denton and a drainage and access easement containing approximately 0.036 acre and three temporary construction, grading, and access easements containing approximately 0.089 acre, 0.959 acre and 0.028 acre, respectively, all of which are located in Stephen A. Venter Survey, Abstract Number 1315 in the City of Denton, Denton County Texas and being part of a tract of land conveyed to Gary Jay Madrigal by quitclaim deed recorded in Volume 4155, Page 1044, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; authorizing the City Manager or his designee to make an offer to purchase the property for its fair market value and if such offer is refused, authorizing the City Attorney, or his designee, to institute the necessary proceedings in condemnation in order to acquire the property necessary for the public purpose of constructing street, drainage, utility and related improvements; and declaring an effective date. BACKGROUND This ordinance is an amendment to Ordinance #2002-185. The amendment is necessary due to an increase in size of one of the temporary construction, grading, and access easements. After initial dialogue with the property owners, we revisited the road embankment design considerations in connection with the Madrigal's existing pond feature, which is very close proximity to the side- slope of the proposed road. The plans were modified to provide for a toe-wall feature at the pond, which accommodates for fence reconstruction and provides a better transition between the road & pond. The pond will need to be dewatered for the duration of this section of the road project so that the contractor will be able to "muck out" the silted portion of the pond and replace it with select fill and the concrete toe-wall, thus providing optimal stability to the proposed road bed. This update to the plans is in the best interest of the property owner as well as the City. The attached plat illustrates the tracts necessary for the widening and improvements to Hickory Creek Road. James Daniels and Associates, Inc., the contracted right-of-way services finn, has been in negotiations for purchase of fight-of-way and easements with the landowner, Mr. Gary J. Madrigal, with the initial offer made February 25, 2002. We continue to have candid dialogue with the owners and they have raised some issues with the design in which we have revisited. We are hopeful that an equitable settlement can be reached but all indications are that we have very different perspectives when it comes to valuing the take area and appraisal methodologies. OPTIONS 1. Approve the ordinance, or 2. Denial, or 3. Table for future consideration RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Hickory Creek Road improvements to be initiated upon possession of necessary parcels, in December, 2002. estimated PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW On June 16, 2002, Ordinance Number 2002-185 was approved for the purchase or condemnation of the subject right-of-way and easements. It has since been determined that additional temporary construction, grading and access easement will be necessary to facilitate improvements to the "silt pond" area of the property. FISCAL INFORMATION An appraisal of this property was performed by Sargent Appraisal Company indicating a value of $19,468.00 inclusive of the right-of-way and easements. This offer has been rejected by the landowner. The appraisal has subsequently been updated to include the increased area of one of the temporary construction, grading and access easements. The updated appraisal indicates a value of $25,731.00. In accordance with Texas Property Code 21.0111, the appraisal will be made available to the landowner at the time the final acquisition offer is made. ATTACHMENTS Location map Draft ordinance Survey Illustration Exhibits Prepared By: Respectfully submitted: Tod J. Taylor Real Estate Specialist Charles Fiedler, Director Engineering Department ion Map HICKORY CREEK ROAD WIDENING IMPROVEMENTS S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\02\3-Hickory Creek Road Condemnation Parcel 3 Ordinance.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE DECLARING A PUBLIC NECESSITY EXISTS AND FiNDiNG THAT PUBLIC WELFARE AND CONVENIENCE REQUIRES THE TAKING AND ACQUIRING OF AN APPROXIMATE 0.807 ACRE TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND IN FEE SIMPLE FOR STREET PURPOSES SUCH TITLE TO BE IN THE NAME OF THE CITY OF DENTON AND A DRAINAGE AND ACCESS EASEMENT CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.036 ACRE AND THREE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION, GRADING, AND ACCESS EASEMENTS CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.089 ACRE, 0.959 ACRE AND 0.028 ACRE, RESPECTIVELY, ALL OF WHICH ARE LOCATED IN STEPHEN A. VENTER SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1315 iN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY TEXAS AND BEING PART OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO GARY JAY MADRIGAL BY QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED iN VOLUME 4155, PAGE 1004, DEED RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO MAKE AN OFFER TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY FOR ITS FAIR MARKET VALUE AND IF SUCH OFFER IS REFUSED, AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO INSTITUTE THE NECESSARY PROCEEDINGS IN CONDEMNATION IN ORDER TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY NECESSARY FOR THE PUBLIC PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING STREET, DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that a public necessity exists and hat public welfare and convenience hereby require the acquisition of fee simple title for street purposes, with such fee simple title vesting in the City of Demon in the hereinafter d~scribed land for the public purpose of constructing street, drainage, utility and related improvements; and WHEREAS, the hereinafter described property is believed to be owned by Gary Jay Madrigal ("Owner"); NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Public necessity exists and public welfare and convenience require the acquisition of the following: fee simple title for street purposes, with such fee simple title vesting in the City of Denton in that certain tract or parcel of land containing approximately 0.807 acre, together with improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and illustrated in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Right-of-Way Property"). a drainage and access easement in the name to the City of Demon, Texas in, over and across that certain tract or parcel of land containing approximately 0.036 acre as more particularly described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Drainage Easement") and as depicted on Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference; reserving unto the owner of said property the right to use the surface for parking and for driveway access to and from the adjacem public street. three temporary construction, grading and access easements in the name of the City of Denton, Texas in, over and across those certain tracts or parcels of land containing approximately 0.089 acre, 0.959 acre and 0.028 acre, respectively, as more particularly described in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Temporary Construction, Grading and Access Easements") and as depicted on Exhibit "D", attached hereto and made a part by reference, to use for access, staging, and placement of materials, equipment and supplies in conjunction with construction activities for the construction and installation of Drainage Utility Easement and the Hickory Creek Road Paving, Drainage, and Utility Improvements (the "Construction Activities"), with said Temporary Construct/on, Grading and Access Easement expiring upon the completion of the Construction Activities or two years from the date the City of Denton takes possession of the Temporary Construction, Grading and Access Easement property, which ever occurs first. The Right-of-Way Property, Drainage Easement and Temporary Construction, Grading and Access Easements are hereinafter collectively called the "Property". SECTION 2. The City Council finds that there is a public necessity and public need to acquire the Property in the size, scope, width, and dimensions of the Property and for the purposes stated in this ordinance. SECTION 3. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized and directed to make an offer for the Property in the amount of the fair market value, including damages to the remainder, if any, as determined by an independent appraisal obtained by the City. SECTION 4. In the event the offer as described in Section 3 is refused by the Owner of the Property, the City Attorney or his designee is hereby authorized and directed to file the necessary condemnation proceedings or suit and take whatever action that may be necessary against the Owner and any other parties having an interest in the Property to acquire fee simple title for street purposes in the Property, with such fee simple title vesting in the City of Denton and to acquire the Drainage Easement and Temporary Construction, Grading and Access Easements. SECTION 5. If it should be subsequently determined that additional parties other thn those named herein have an interest in said property, then in that event, the City Attorney or his designee is authorized and directed to join said parties as Defendants in said condemnation. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. Page 2 S:\Our Documents\Or dJnances\02\3 Hickory Creek Road Condenmarion Parcel 3 Ordinance.doc PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 3 S:\Our Documents\Or dJnances\02\3 Hickory Creek Road Condenmarion Parcel 3 Ordinance.doc EXHIBIT A RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PARCEL 3 BEING a strip of land located in the Stephen A. Venture Survey, Abstract No. 1315, Denton County, Texas and being a portion of a tract of land conveyed to Gary Jay Madrigal by quitclaim deed recorded in Volume 4155, Page 1004, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, said strip of land being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a found P.K. nail at the northeast comer of said Madrigal Tract, also being the northwest comer of a tract of land conveyed to the City of Denton, Texas by affidavit and deed recorded in Volume 4647, Page 3456 of said Deed Records, said point being in Hickory Creek Road; THENCE S 3°10'29'' W, with the common line between said Madrigal Tract and said City of Denton Tract, a distance of 48.08 feet to a 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP) set on the proposed new south fight-of-way line of said Hickory Creek Road; THENCE with said new right-of-way line, with the following courses and distances: S 89°51'30" W, a distance of 279.57 feet to a set 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP); S 81o19'39" W, a distance of 101.12 feet to a set 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP); S 89°51'30" W, a distance of 150.00 feet to a set 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP); N 73026'33" W, a distance of 52.20 feet to a set 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP); S 89°51'30" W, a distance of 67.32 feet to a 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP) set on the west line of said Madrigal Tract, also being the original east line of Hickory Creek Ranch, shown by plat recorded in Cabinet S, Page 241, Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE N 0°51'21" W, with said line, departing from said new right-of-way line, passing a found 1/2 inch iron rod at 11.69 feet, in all a distance of 50.00 feet to the northwest comer of said Madrigal Tract, in Hickory Creek Road; THENCE S 89057'57'' E, a distance of 650.30 feet to the Point of Beginning and containing 0.807 acre of land of which 0.557 acre is included in the existing prescriptive right-of-way, leaving a remainder of 0.250 acre of land more or less. DRAINAGE AND ACCESS EASEMENT BEING a strip of land located in the Stephen A. Venture Survey, Abstract No. 1315, Denton County, Texas and being a portion of a tract of land conveyed to Gary Jay Madrigal by quitclaim deed recorded in Volume 4155, Page 1004, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, said strip of land being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a point at the intersection of the west line of said Madrigal Tract with the proposed new south right-of-way line of Hickory Creek Road, previously described above, said point being S 0°51'21" E, a distance of 50.00 feet from the northwest comer of said Madrigal Tract and also being S 0°51'21" E, 11.69 feet from a found 1/2 iron rod in the west line of said Madrigal Tract; ~ THENCE N 89051'30'' E, with said proposed new south right-of-way line, a distance of 29.95 feet; THENCE S 15008'33'' W, departing said right-of-way line, a distance of 108.65 feet to a point on the west line of said Madrigal Tract; THENCE N 00°51'21" W, with said line, a distance of 104.82 feet to the Point of Beginning and containing 0.036 acre of land. Bearings are based the Texas State Coordinate System, North Central Zone (NAD 83). See Exhibit B for map. Exhibit B ,, MAP SHOH~NG PROPOSED RIGH T- OF- WA Y A COUISI TION AND DRAINAGE AND ACCESS EASEMENT City of Denton, Denton County, Texas i CHAUCER ESTATE; PHASE I CHAUCER ESTATES CAB. O. SLD. 267 PHASE II · .~-~ CAB. S, PG. 274 '-] ..... ~-~. ..... ~ 8 -'~-, 41 5 / ". t.------ N 00751'21' W H/CqOt~Y CREEK I ! PHASE II I CAEn. S,I PG. 241, P.R.T.~T. I ~t 27 I ~ 26 ' NOTES: t. Bearings ore based on the Texas State Coordinate System. North Central Zone (Nod 83). 2.Integral parts of this survey: o. Mop b, Field notes 3.The new right-of-way llne will be monumented with §/8" iron rods copped "T.N.P,' EXHIBIT B PARCEL 3 L: ~PROJ- R 14\D£NO0271 \ROW~PARC _3. DWG GEORGE T. CONNELL, JR. VOL. 3135, PG. 436, D.R.D.C.T. HICKORY CREEK ROAD (VARIABLE HID TH s e~'5;; E ~50,.~o' 2 CONNELL ADDITION CAB. P, PG. 75 L II ~'G': ~,.~.11 MLM FAMILY TRUST; CC ~ 96-0059630 R.P.R.D.C.T. IV 279,57 ~J ~V]J~ w 8.~1'~o' E :~.95' PARCEL J ROw I ~'~' ~ m~.~5' o.~o~ ~CR~ rOr~ I 0.557 ACRE IN [XIS~NC ROW I ~50 ACRE REMAINDER DRAtNA~ AND ACCESS EA~MENT j CARY JA Y MADRIGAL ~...... L~% VOL' 4155, Pa 1004, (OUITCLAIM) ~ ~ ~. 429, PG. 46Z (RE~ DEED) ~ 4%%~ALWN E. MEREDI~ ET U~ -~ mL. 829, PG. 474 I CITY OF DENTON VOL. 4647, PG. J456 , 0 200 4O0 6O0 Dote: TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS I f O0 Macon $1reet Fort Worth, Texa~ 76102 (817) 336-5773 235 Weet Hickory Street Suite tO0 Denton, Texoe 7620! (ge0) 3e3- 4 ~ 77 EXHIBIT C TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS PARCEL 3 BE1NG three strips of land located in the Stephen A. Venture Survey, Abstract No. 1315, Denton County, Texas and being a portion of a tract of land conveyed to Gary Jay Madrigal by quitclaim deed recorded in Volume 4155, Page 1004, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, said strips of land being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT NO. 1 BEGiNNiNG at a point on the west line of said Madrigal Tract, said point being S 00°51'21" E, 154.82 feet from the northwest comer of said Madrigal Tract; THENCE N 15008'33" E, with the easterly line of a proposed Drainage and Access Easement, a distance of 108.65 feet to a point on the proposed new south right-of-way line Hickory Creek Road; THENCE N 89°51 '30" E, with said line, a distance of 25.92 feet; THENCE S 15008'33" W, a distance of 202.68 feet to a point on the west line of said Madrigal Tract; THENCE N 00°51'21" W, a distance of 90.71 feet to the Point of Beginning and containing 0.089 acre of land more or less; TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT NO.2 BEGiNNiNG at a point on the proposed new south right-of-way line Hickory Creek Road, said point being S 03010'29" W, 48.08 feet, S 89051'30" W, 279.57 feet and S 81019'39" W, 10.00 feet from a found P.K. nail at the northeast comer of said Madrigal Tract; THENCE S 00008'30" E, a distance of 185.00 feet; THENCE S 89051'30" W, a distance of240.11 feet; THENCE N 00008'30" W, a distance of 171.48 feet to a set 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP) on said proposed new south right-of-way line of Hickory Creek Road; THENCE with said right-of-way, with the following courses and distances: N 89°51'30" E, a distance of 150.00 feet to a set 5/8 inch capped iron rod (TNP); N 81019'39" E, a distance of 91.12 feet to the Point of Beginning and containing 0.959 acre of land more or less; TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT NO.3 BEGiNNiNG at a point on the proposed new south right-of-way line Hickory Creek Road, said point being S 03010'29" W, 48.08 feet and S 89051'30" W, 150.00 feet from a found P.K. nail at the northeast comer of said Madrigal Tract; THENCE S 00°08'30'' E, a distance of 30.00 feet; THENCE S 89°51'30'' W, a distance of 40.00 feet; THENCE N 00°08'30'' W, a distance of 30.00 feet to a point on said proposed new south right-of- way line of Hickory Creek Road; THENCE N 89°51'30" E, a distance of 40.00 feet to the Point of Beginning and containing 0.028 acre of land more or less; Bearings are based the Texas State Coordinate System, North Central Zone (NAD 83 ). 1/2" IRt~ 32 II ~0 251 24 EXHIBIT D MAP SHOiffNG. PROPOSED TEMPORARY CONSTRUC110N EASEMENTS City of Denton, Denton Count.v, Texas HICKORY CREEK ROAD (VARIABLE I~IDTH ROW) N 00~'21' W 5o, oo'(ror,) / 73T$'33' W 52,20' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCllON EASEMENT NO. 2 (0.959 ACRE) PARCEL $ \P.O~B. N 89~1'30' E 40.00' P.O.B. · S 895F30' W ~50.00' '"' S 00~38'30~ £ 30.00' ~ S 89~t'30' w 40.00' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENt NO. J (o.o~* ACRE) S 89~I'$0" Fl 24011' DRAINAGE ~ ACCESS EASEMENT TEMPORARY CONSTRUCllON EASEMENT NO. I (o, o89 ACRE) GARY JAY MADRIGAL VOL. 4155, PG. 1004, (QUITCLAIM) VOL. 429, PG. 467, (R-CF. DEED) / CiTY OF DENTON VOL. 4647, PG. 3456 NOTES: 1. BeaHngs ore based on the Texas State Coordinate System, North Central Zone (Nod 85). 2. Intecjrol parts of this survey. a. Mop b. Field notes 3. The new AcJht-of-woy line will be monumented with 3/8' icon rods copped 'T.N.P." PARCEL L: \PROJ- R t 4\D£NO0271 \ROW~?C£_.).D~ 100 200 500 "15repaFed Date: TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS 1100 Macon Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102 (817) 336-5773 235 West Hickory Street Suite 100 Denton, Texas 76201 (940) 383-4177 Item #4H AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Materials Management Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Alex Pettit 349-8595 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance authorizing the execution of a change order to the contract for annual maimenance of the City of DeNon phone system; providing for the addition of a sixth year of service; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2902-Verizon Southwest in the amoum of $40,000.08). BID INFORMATION This change order one extends the time period of the maintenance contract for an additional one- year period with no other changes to the terms and conditions. This annual agreement is for the maimenance of the City of DeNon phone system including 24 hr/day, 7-days/week support on all equipmem. This includes both desk phones and/or phone switches located in City facilities covered by the maintenance contract schedule. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that change order one to the annual maintenance agreement to Verizon Southwest be approved in the amoum of $40,000.08. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Verizon Southwest Dallas, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This maimenance agreemem will be in effect from July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003. FISCAL INFORMATION Funding for this agreemem will come from Technology Services accoum 830200.6504. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 Attachment 1: Quotation 1-AlS-File 2902 Verizon Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1 ve ri7_9 Irwng, ~X /5062 .qeptcmbcr 12, 2002 John Dumell C, ily of Denton 601 £. D~:~ton, Texas 76205 Dc,Jr JOhl~: ilel~ is thc breakdown of thc n,aintcnanc¢ contract tbr the term 2002 to 2003. PLtM's 2-2666 City Hall(6 2-2036 Service CenTer(91) 2-1031 City HallEast{128) 2-21)35 Waste Water(86) 2'2665 Spencer(04) Sub-Total $2.75/por~ + $0.35/port(24x? VgP)-S22,?66 40 $2.75/port., $0.35/pon(24x7 VSP)-$3,385.20 S2.75/pot't v $0.351port(24x7 VSP)~$4,761.60 $2.75/port + $0 35/por~(24x7 VSP)=$3,1~9.20 $2.75/I~-,O.* $0.35/pott(24x? V~P)-$2,380.BO $36,493.20 Office Hours: 2-2663 [)eaton Parks and Ree 2-0978 Conmaunily dcvclopmcnl 2-09007 Dc, ia 2-90006 MLK 2-9002 Norrhlake 2-2664 I)entnn Municipal Albert 2-9001 Animal Control Sub-To~al 5382.92 S382.92 $382.92 $324.00 $38292 $421.68 $418.56 $2.695 92 24x7 coverage 2-1304 Denton Fire#5 2-0542 Denton Fife#6 2-9003 Denton Fire ~ 2-9004 DcntonYire #3 2-9003 Denton Fixe #2 Sub-Total $517.08 $508.68 $478.68 $478.68 $478.68 $2,461.80 Suh-Tolal: OJscol]t~! S41,650.92 $1,651.00 Grand Total $40,000.08 Sincerely, Corporate Accomtt Manager ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CHANGE ORDER TO THE CONTRACT FOR ANNUAL MAINTENANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON PHONE SYSTEM; PROVIDING FOR THE ADDITION OF A SIXTH YEAR OF SERVICE; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 2902-VERIZON SOUTHWEST CHANGE ORDER ONE iN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000.08). WHEREAS, on August 15, 1995 (Ordinance 95-152), the City awarded an annual maintenance agreement to GTE Southwest, Inc., in the amount of $221,775.12 for maintenance of the City of Denton phone system; and WHEREAS, the City Manager having recommended to the Council that a change order be authorized to amend such contract agreement with respects to the scope of work, materials, labor and an increase in the payment amount, and said change order being in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 252 of the Local Government Code; Now, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the change order increasing the amount of the agreement between the Verizon Southwest (formerly known as GTE Southwest, inc.) on file in the office of the Purchasing Agent, in the amount of Forty Thousand and 08/100 Dollars ($40,000.08), is hereby approved and the expenditure of funds therefor is hereby authorized. The master contract amount is amended to read $261,502.18. SECTION 2. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __day of ,2002. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULiNE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Item #41 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Materials Management Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Vance Kemler 349-8444 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Demon authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order with the Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governments (HGAC) for the acquisition of two 40 yard from load refuse truck bodies by way of an Imerlocal Agreemem with the City of Demon; and providing an effective date (File 2911-HGAC-Two 40 Yard From Load Refuse Truck Bodies in the amoum of $152,888). BID INFORMATION The acquisition of two 40 yard front load refuse truck bodies is necessary to replace two Commercial Division front load bodies that must be replaced to return to service. The first truck, EMIS#0191, was hit by a Kansas City Southern Lines train on April 30,2002. The truck chassis is being repaired, but extensive damage to the refuse body necessitates its replacemem. A second truck, EMIS# 9445, incurred a catastrophic lifting assembly failure. This vehicle is a 1994 model and the maintenance cost on this unit has been substantially higher than similar units. The Solid Waste Division has chosen to retire this unit from service and convert a low- mileage roll-off truck to from load service by replacing the refuse body. The field operations staff recognized that they could reduce the fleet by one truck through the coordination of schedules between the Commercial Division and Recycling Division. This would allow them to convert a roll-off truck to a front load truck and still provide the same level of services. This would be more cost effective than purchasing a new replacement truck. The existing truck chassis, EMIS #0194, will be mourned with a new refuse body for about half the cost of a new truck. The removed roll-off hoist will be stored and mourned on a new chassis when the next roll-off truck is replaced. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) This item was considered and approved at the October 7, 2002 Public Utility Board meeting. RECOMMENDATION We recommend approval of File 2911-HGAC-Two 40 Yard From Load Bodies in the amount of $152,888. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governments Houston, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The installation of the new truck bodies is estimated to be completed by early December. FISCAL INFORMATION Funding for the two 40 yard from load refuse bodies will provided from Solid Waste accoum 660200.8535. Respectfully submitted: Attachmem 1: Quote from HGAC 1-AlS-File 2911 Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1 P~EPARED ~F O R,: Vanoe Kemler 50 gal ~a~----------------~2 ~lLrm r*ium hydmcOc 8ac~ u~ I~mps - mrmssed in Io~r (ailgate TOTAL 212 t;2% ~,E,T, Exem~! 52 150 t,I39 212 2;33 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE ORDER WITH THE HOUSTON- GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT (HGAC) FOR THE ACQUiSiTiON OF TWO 40 YARD FRONT LOAD REFUSE TRUCK BODIES BY WAY OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF DENTON; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 2911-HGAC- TWO 40 YARD FRONT LOAD REFUSE TRUCK BODIES iN THE AMOUNT OF $152,888). WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 95-107, the Houston-Galveston Council Area of Governmem (H-GAC) has solicited, received, and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipmem, supplies, or services in accordance with the procedures of state law on behalf of the City of DeNon; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described materials, equipmem, supplies, or services can be purchased by the City through the Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governmem (H-GAC) 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, equipmem, supplies, or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the numbered items in the following numbered file for materials, equipmem, supplies, or services, shown in the "Purchase Orders" 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 2911 H-GAC $152,888 SECTION 2. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the referenced purchase orders, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the H-GAC 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 comained in the bid documems and related documems filed with the H-GAC, and the purchase orders issued by the City. SECTION 3. That should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items set forth in the referenced purchase orders wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the City's ratification of bids awarded by the H-GAC, 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 H-GAC, quantities and specified sums contained in the City's purchase orders, and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the referenced purchase orders, 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. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: File 2911 -HGAC INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASING ORDINANCE Item #4J AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: November 5, 2002 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Ed Hodney 349-8271 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of parking lot improvements to Evers Park; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (Bid 2900-Evers Park Parking Lot Improvement Project Phase IV awarded to Jones and Jeffery Construction Co., Inc, in the amount of $718,529). BID INFORMATION Phase IV of the parking lot improvement project at Evers Park includes earthwork, concrete flatwork, concrete parking lots, erosion control, landscaping and irrigation to convert approximately 258 unpaved parking spaces to paved spaces and to add an additional 130 spaces. The spaces will meet new City of Denton requirements for parking lot construction. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that Bid 2900 Evers Park Parking Lot Improvement Project Phase IV be awarded to Jones and Jeffery Construction Co., Inc. in the base bid amount of $451,553 plus the alternates listed below for a total amount of $718,529. Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3 Alternate 4 Alternate 5 Alternate 6 Alternate 8 Alternate 10 Alternate 11 Add West Spaces On North Lot $ 27,553 Add South Spaces On North Lot $ 5,753 Special Entry Paving $ 4,915 Playground Sidewalks $ 7,416 Additional Spaces on Central Lot $125,315 Landscaping North Lot $ 18,534 Landscaping Central Lots, T-Ball $ 41,754 Lots, Field 10-11 Lots, Landscaping For Alternate 5 Parking Lot Irrigation North Lot $ Irrigation Central Lots $ 14,758 20,978 Agenda information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Jones and Jeffery Construction Co., Inc. Denton, Texas STAFF COST Staff's cost estimate for this project was $691,600. This excludes some of the alternates that were recommended in the award. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This project is scheduled to begin on approximately December 9, 2002 with the first phase completed by March 15, 2003. The second phase is scheduled to start July 2003 with an estimated completion date of November 2003. FISCAL INFORMATION Funding for this project will be provided from Parks account 40001900.1365.40100. Respectfully submitted: Attachment 1: Bid Tabulation 1-AlS-Bid 2900 Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS TO EVERS PARK; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2900-EVERS PARK PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT- PHASE IV AWARDED TO JONES AND JEFFERY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $718,529). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the construction of public works or improvements in accordance with the procedures of STATE law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has received and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the construction 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. That the following competitive bids for the construction 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 Jones and Jeffery Construction Co., Inc. 2900 $718,529 SECTION 2. That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive bids shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for construction of such public works or improvements herein accepted and approved, until such person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and furnishing of performance and payment bonds, and insurance certificate after notification of the award of the bid. SECTION 3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and Bid Proposals, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION 4. That 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. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of .,2002 EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD- BID 2900 - CONTRACTUAL ORDINANCE Item #4K AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: November 5, 2002 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Vance Kemler 349-8444 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a Professional Services Agreement with ETTL Engineering and Consulting, Inc. for hydro geological consulting and ground water monitoring services at the Denton Municipal Landfill as set forth in the contract; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2910 to ETTL Engineering and Consulting, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $40,940.48). BID INFORMATION The Denton Municipal Landfill was required to furnish quarterly groundwater monitoring data for background purposes to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for the first two years of its operation. The quarterly groundwater requirement was fulfilled as of September 2000 but the Landfill is now required to perform and submit ground water monitoring reports on the twenty existing monitor wells and two leachate sumps on a semi-annual basis. ETTL Engineering and Consulting, Inc. drilled the monitor wells and provided monitoring and reporting information to the TCEQ and the Solid Waste Department for the three previous years. They are familiar with Denton's geological site conditions located in the woodbine formation, and possess staff capable of monitoring and accurately interpreting Denton's groundwater data within this formation. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) This item is scheduled to be considered by the Public Utility Board at its November 4, 2002 meeting. RECOMMENDATION We recommend approval of the professional services agreement for hydro geological consulting and ground water monitoring services with ETTL Engineering and Consulting, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $40,940.48. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ETTL Engineering and Consulting, Inc. Tyler, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The first semi-annual landfill monitoring will occur in March 2003 with the final monitoring to be performed in September 2003. FISCAL INFORMATION This agreement will be funded from Solid Waste account 660300.7855. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AlS-File 2910 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ETTL ENGINEER AND CONSULTING, INC. FOR HYDRO GEOLOGICAL CONSULTING AND GROUND WATER MONITORING SERVICES AT THE DENTON MUNICIPAL LANDFILL AS SET FORTH IN THE CONTRACT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 2910-ETTL ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING, iNC. iN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $40,940.48). THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: WHEREAS, The professional services provider (the "Provider) mentioned in this ordinance is being selected as the most highly qualified on the basis of its demonstrated competence and qualifications to perform the proposed professional services; and WHEREAS, The fees under the proposed contract are fair and reasonable and are consistent with and not higher than the recommended practices and fees published by the professional associations applicable to the Provider's profession and such fees do not exceed the maximum provided by law; NOW, THEREFORE, SECTION 1. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a professional service contract with ETTL Engineering and Consulting, inc. to provide hydro geological consulting and ground water monitoring services at the Denton Municipal Landfill; a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 2. The City Manager is authorized to expend funds as required by the attached contract. SECTION 3. The findings in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ., 2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 2-ORD -File 2910 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENq- FOR. FIYDROGEOLOGICAL CONSULTLNG .~NT) .KN?d_"iTICAL SERVICES PERTALNING TO TI-[E CITY OF DENTON L.&\'DF'[LL 1'1415 AGREEMENT is made. emered imo, and effective as of the 1~ day of October. 2002. by and between the City. of Denton,. Texas, a Texas Mtmicipal Corporation. ~Mth ks principal offices at 215 East McKim~' Street. Denton. Texas 76201 (hereinafter "O~NER"): and ETFL E ~n..~tneers & Commkams. [nc.. a Corporation. v/th ks corporate office at 1717 East Em-in Street. Tyler. Texas 75702-6398. ~ "CONSULTANT'); the parties acting herein by and thro%gh their respecrive duly-authorized representatb'es and officers. VGTNESSETH. that in consideration of the covenams and ~agreements herein contained, the parties hereto da m~mmllv AGREE as follows: ARTICI,F 1 EMPLOYMENT OF CONSUI_TA_N-I- The OV~.'NTR hereby contracts v, Sth CONSULTANT. as an independent contractor, and the CONSU_T.kNT here~' agrees to perform the services hereto in connection w/th the Project as stated in the .ad'tides to follow. ,a/th diligence and in accordance ,a/th the professional standards custornariN obtained for such serMces in the State of Texas. The professional sen-ices set forth herein are in connection with the following descnlxxl project (.the "Project"): Pro~'ading professional ~'dmgeological consulting and anabfical serxices pertaining to the Cit.' of Denton Lan4fill (MSW Permit No. 1590A) for the period beg4nntng on October 1. 2002 and ending on September 30. 2003. ETTL shall serve as the OV~%TR's professional selMces commkant relative to all landfill ~ound-water monitoring, data re~iev< reporting t including, without limitation, t~-o semi- annual detection ~m'ound-water monitoring events), and general geolo~cal and hydrogeolo~cal consulting services, where needed on the Project. ARTICI F lq' SCOPE OF SERXqCES The CONSULT.&NT shall perform the follo,Mng Basic Sen-ices in a professional manner.: To pertbrm all those serMccs as arc set forth in the CONSULT.~NT's "Proposal" to the Citx o£ Denton_ Texas corrmined in that certain three (3) page letter fi.om Leslie .~ Jeske. Operations ManagerHydrogeologist of CONSL-LT.&N7 to Da~4d Dugger. Landfill Superintendent o~' OV~%TtL dated September 9. 2002. ,ahich letter is attached hereto as E'OSbk "A" and is incorporated herevdth by reference. ff there is am' conflict that arises between the terms of this :&gr~ eement and the Probable Co~ Estimate (September 9. 2002). ExNbit "B" attached to this. ~a~eement. then the terms and conditions of Exhfbit "13" shall control over the terms and conditions oft. he. ~a4reement. ARTICI F III .-kDDITION.&L SERVICES Any Additional Services to be performed by CONSULT.&\T. ffatrdno~ b' OV~2',-ER_ which are not included a~ Basic Services in thc al~vc-descn'bed Scope of Set-vices. set forth in .Article H above, shall be later ~agreed-upon 1:5.' OWNER and CONSL'LTANT. who shall determine, in ,zriting. the scope of such .additional Services. the amoum of compensation for such additional sel~ices, and other essential terms pertaining to the provision of such Additional Serdces by CONSULT.42qT A partial listing of possible Additional Services and the rates therefor, are set forth on page two (2) of the "Probable Cost Estimme" which is anached hereto as Extn'bit "B" and incorporated by reference herew/th. AR]ICI F Iv' PERIOD OF SERVICE The parties hereby agree that in any event, this .M:reermmt shall be effect~'e as of October 1. 2002. Work shall co,,,,ence upon the is~tance of a notice to proceed to CONSULTANT by the OVa%TR. Tim Agreermmt shall remain in force for the period which may reasonabb' be required for the completion of the Project. including Additional Services. if an5'. and am' required e~ensions approved by the OV,?4E1L or until September 30. 2003. whichever event shall first occur. This Agr~ eement may be sooner terminaled in accordance with the provisions hereof. I-LME IS OF THE ESSENCE IN' THE PERFORMANCE .&ND COMPLETION OF THIS AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT shall make all reasonable efforts to complete the serMces set forth herein as extx4itiousb' as pOSsl'ble and to meet the schedute~s) reasonablx? estab~ by the OV~1E1L acting d~rougt~ ~ it~ Director o£SoIid Waste or his designee. ARTICI V V COMP~SAHON COMPENSATION TERMS: "Direct Non-Labor Expense" is defined as that expense [other than "per diem" e.~]. based upon actual cost plus fifteen (15%) percent, for an)' om-of-pocket exTx'nse reasonabb' incurred by the CONSLrLTANT related to its perlbrmance of this _ ~X=_~menL for long distance telephone charges, telecopy charges, messenger ser~4ces, priming and reproduction expenses, om-of-pocket expenses for purchased computer rime. prudentb incurred navel expenses related to the work on the Project. and similar incidental exT~enses incurred in connection ~4th the Project. B. BILLING .ANT) PAYMENT: For and in consideration of the professional services to be performed by CONSULTANT herein. OV~_'NER a.~ ees to pa) CONSL-LT.&NT. based upon the satisfactor~ completion of the Basic Services tasks set forth in the Scope of Sel-~/ces as shown in )d-ticle H above: as tbllows: 1. CONSULTANT shall perform its work on this Project on an hourly the basis, plus reimhursemenI for all reasonab.ly incurred om-of-pocket exlxmses, billed monthl?-, or for longer periods of time. CONSULTANT shall bill from time sheets, in minimum ~1 hour increments of time. at tine rates and subject to the terms set forth in CONSLT_TA_\-I"s "Probable Cost Estimate" which is contained in Ex. hi'bit "B" heretofore referred to in .Article 111. OV,%TR shall pa?- to CONSULTANT for ks professional services performed, and for its om-of pocket extxmses incurred in the Project. a total amount not to exceed 540.940.48. 2. Partial payments to the CONSULTANT v411 be made momhtv based on the percent of actual completion of the Basic Services, rendered to and approved ~ the OgLNTR thro _ough ks Director of Solid Waste or his designee. However, under no circumstames shall any monthb- stmemem for services exceed the value of the work performed at the time a statement is rendered. The OWNER may vdtht~ld the final ten (1~/0) percent of the above not-to-exceed amoum umil satisfacxoD- completion of the Project by CONSULTANT. 3. Nothing contained in this Article shall require the OWNER to pa.',' for any work that Lg not submitted in compliance wSth the terms of this. ~a4reemem. O'¢,2¢ER shall not be required to make an).- pa.xxnents to CONSULTANT at any time v~hen CONSLrLT)dNT is in default under thi~ ~, ~m'eerrk--m 4. It is SlX~~, understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT shall not be authorized to undertake any work pursuant to th/s Agreerr~mt v, hich would require additional pa?rncnts b~ the OV,_NER for any charge, expense or reimbursement above the not-to-exceed amount as stated hereinabove, v, Sthout first ha'~ng obtaimxl the prior v, ritten atnhorization of the O~_x,TtL CONSULTANT shall not proceed to perform any services to be later provided for under .M'tick III. "Additional SenSces" v,5thout first obtaining prior ,aritten authorization fi.om the O~.NER. .M)DITIONAL SERVICES: For .additional Serxdces authorized in whting by the OV~%TR in .Article III. hereinabove, CONSULT,&NT shall be paid based on a to-be- ~agreed-upon Schedule of Charges. Payments tbr Additional Sm'ices shall be due and pa?able upon subrnSssion by the CONSLIT.&NT. and shall be in accordance xaith Exl'n'bit "B" attached hereto. and .au--title V.B. hereinabove. StatermmB for Basic Services and any Additional Sm-ices shall be submitted to OW%rER no more fi-equenll?- than once monthb. PAXx~IENT: If the OW%TR fails to make pa.xmems due the CONSL-LT.~\T ~br services and expenses wStNn forts'-frye t45') days after receipt of the CONSLT_-[.~\Ts undisputed statemem thereof, the amotmts due the CONSULT.AN7 v,~ be increased by the rate of one percent (1%) per month from and after the said forty-fifth t45th) day. and in addition, thereat~er. the CONSLrLT.~N7 may. after gbing ten (10) days v, rirten notice to the OV,2NT1L ~ services under this. ~agreemem until the CONSULT.&NT has been paid in full for all arnoums then due and owing, and not disputed bv OWNER. for scpdces, cxt.~n..ses '4ml c 'barges. Provided. however, nothing herein shall require the OW2NTR to pay the late charge of one percent (1%) per morrth as set forth herein, ff the OW%rER reasonabb' determines that the CONSL-LT.&\T's work is not submitted in accordance ~ith the terms of this. ~4~xm'ient. in accordance v/th .au-tick V.B. of this ~ and OW%TR has promptb notified CONSLT_TANT of that fact in v~rking. ARTICI F 'vi OBSERVATION AND REVIEW OF THE WORK The CONSULTA_NT will exercise reasonable care and due diligence in discovering and promptb' reporting to the OW?CER am detects or deficiencies in the work of CONSL-LT.&N-[. ARTICT F OWNERSI-t~ OF DOCL~IENTS .~ll documents prepared or fiankshed by the CONSULTANT pursuant to this, ~'eement are insm.tmems of ser~dce and shall become the property of the OV~%TR upon the termir~ion of this Agreement. The CONSULTANT is entitled to retain copies of all such documenm. The documents prepared and furnished by the CONSULTANT are intended onb.' to be appl/cable to this project and OW2NTR's use of these documems in ot~ projects shall be at O~%TR's sole risk and expense. In the event the OWNTR uses the A_~~ in another project or for other purposes than specified herein any of the informazion or materials developed pursuant to this. ~Agreemem. CONSbZT*\T ks released fi:om any and all liabili~.- relating to their use in that project. ARTICI F ~ INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONSL~T.~NT shall provide services to OV~%TER as an independent coraractor, not as an employee of the OWNER_ CONSULTANT shall not have or claim an.',- '~right arising t~om emplo)ee stall. IS. ~RTICT 'g I~,- LNDEND4Ti%' AGREEMENT The CONSUI_T.A_NT shall indemnig' and saxe and hold harmless the O~%TR and ks officials. officers. ~ems. attome~-s and employees from and ~ainst any and all liabilM-, claims, demands. damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to court costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred N; the OV~LNER_ and including without limitation damages for bod~- and personal injur7,_-. death, or property damage, resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of the CONSULT.~\'T or ks officers, shareholders. ~ems. attorneys and employees in the execution, operation, or pertbrmance of Nothing in this .%_m'eemem shall be construed to create a liabiliw to any person vdno is not a part?- to thi~ A~m-eernem and nothing herein sl'mll waix,e arlv of the part?s defenses, both at law or equit?, to any claim_ cause of action or litigation filed by anyone not a p~.-to this, ~Agreemenk including the defense of govemmemal h,l,,lklrli~.-, v, hich defenses are hereby expressly reserved. ART1-CI F X [NS Llq_&NCE During the performance of the Services trader this..zk?xm~e~ CONSLTLT.~',,-f shall maintain the follovdng insurance with an insurance cornt:mny licensed to do business in the State of Texas by the State Insurance Board or am successor agency, that has a rating ~ith A. N£ Best Rare Careers of at least an "A-" or abo~e: Comprehensive General Liability. Insurance ,a/th b~d~.' injtay limits of not less than $1.000.000 for each occmrence and not less than $1,1300,000 in the aggregate, and vcith property damage 1/mits of not less than $100.000 for each occurrence and not less than $100.000 rathe ag_m-egate. Bo Automolyane LJaN]ity Insurance with bod~. injm?-lim3t6 of not less than $1.000.000 for each person and not less titan $1,000.000 for each accident and ~aith properD.- ctan~e lirnks for not less than $100.000 for each accident. Worker's Comtxmsation Insmance in accordance with smnno~- requirements, and Employer's Liability. Insurance w/th limits of not less than $100.000 for each accident. Do Professional Liahlit3.' me or atypropriate Errors & Omissions lnstwance with limits of not less than SI.000.000 annual aggregate. go CONSULTANT shall fumi~ me certificates or instmance policies at the OW%TR's request to evidence such coverages. The insurance policies shall name the OV~_NER as an additional insured on all such policies to the e,,:tem that is legally pos,s%le, and shall contain a pro,Asion that such insurance shall not be cancelled or modified without thim' (30) days prior written notice to OWNER and CONSULTANT. In such event, the CONSLrLTANT shall prior to the effectb,-e dnte Of the cha~gc or cancellation of coverage, deE-,,er copies o£ am such substitute policies, furnishing at least the same policy limits and coverage, to OV, ZNTR. ARTICI F XI ARBITRATION ANT) ALTERNATE DISPLTI-E RESOLUTION The parties wtll make efforts to settle an?-disputes arising under th/s .%greemem by submiv, ing the dispute to m-Numion or other means of alternate dispute resolution such as mediation. However. no arbitration or other form of attemate dispute resolution arising out of. or relating to this Agreement im;otving one partys disagmerm~ may include the other pan5.-to the disagreement w/thom the other's approx~ ARTICI F XII TERMENATION OF AGREEMEN-I- Notvdthsland?ng am' other prm/sion of this _~ either part3.- may terminate this .-M~ ~ ID.- pro~fding thirty (30) days advance v, ritten notice to the other part?.-. This Agreemem ma?' akermO,'eb,.' be terminated in v, hole or in part in the event of either part)- mbstamialb' fmqing to fulfill its obligations trader this. ~Agreernem. No such termination ~ be effected unless the other part?.- is gi~-¢n (1) v~Titten notice {delNered by cevr2fied mail return receipt requested') of intenI to termk~e and setting forth the reasons sp¢c~.Sng the nonperformance or other rea~n~st, and not less than thirty (30) calendar d&vs to cure the fi~lm'e: · and (2) an oppommity for consultation ~Ath the terminafi~ part?- prior to termination the. ~'eemem is terminated prior to completion of the sewices to he provided hereunder. CONSUI_TANT shall in~-xtimelv cease all services upon receipt of the written notice of termirmion from Ol3,q'qTR. and shall render a final bill for services to the OWNER ~2hin t~-entv (20) days after the date oftcrn~inalfion. The OWNER shall pay CONSL~TA_NT for all services proper,ly rendered and satisfactoru~r performeck and for reimbursable expenses prior to notice of termination being receNed by CONSULTANT. in accordance u/th .~licle V. of this Agr, ~. Should the OWNER subsequenlly contract v/th a new consultant for the conlinuation of services on the Project CONSLrLT.&NT shall cooperate in pro,Ming information to the OWNER and to the ne,,- commItant. If applicable, O~,%'ER shall alloxa' CONSULTANT a reasonable time to transition and to turn over the ProJect to a new' consultant. CONSULTANT shall turn over all d~ prepared or furnished by CONSULT.&NT pursuam to this Agleemem to the OWNER on or before the date of tennk~'on, but may maintain copies of such docmmms for its files. ARTICI .F RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAINLS ,&ND LLqBILI'I~S .Kr~proval of the work by the OWNER shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsihlit? and lhhlky, of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, or agents, for the accuracy and competency of tbek work perforrr~ pursuam to this ~Agreement; nor shaI1 such appmx'a_l bx the OlXrN-ER be deemed az an assmnption of such responm'N]ity ~' the OWNER for any defect in the work prepared ~- the CONSULIANT, ks principals, officers, employees, and agents. ARTICI .[ XFV NOTICES .,Mi notices, co~ns, and reports required or permkted under this. ~,~mement shall be person,~.~ delivered to; or telecopied to; or mailed to the respective parties bF.- depositing same in the United States rmil at the addresses shovm belov< postage prepaid, certified mail. return receipt To CONSL~T.&NT: To OWNER: ETTL E ~ngineers & Consultants. Inc. Cit-?.' of Denton. Texas Leslie A_ Jeske. ~Mgr~. of Hydrogeological Services Miclm~l .& Condu~ C~- Mm~er 1717 East Er~4n Street 215 East McKinnev Street Tyler. Texas 75702 Denton. Texas 76201 Fax: (903) 595-6113 Fax: {940) 349-8596 All notices trader this AgreermmI shall be effectb'e upon trek actual receipt bx- the parr3.-to whom such notice is giverk or three (3) days after re,ruling of the notice, v, hichcvcr cvcnt shall first OCC1Zr. -~RTICI F X¥ ENTIRE AGREEMENT This . _&greemem consistir~ of ten (10) pages and two 12) E.xl:u'bits thereto, said Exl-nq:dts consisting of three {3) and ~-o (2) p~es respectNeb-, constitutes the complete and 15hal e:q~ression of the Agreement of the parties and is imended as a complete and exclusNe statemem of the terms of their agreemems, and ~ all prior comemporam~us offers, promises, representations, negotiations. discussions, com,ntmicalions, understanding, and _a=_m-eemems wNch may ha'~-e been made in connection with the subject matter of this Agreement. AR'FICq' F XVI SEVERABIJ_ITY If any provision of this. ~greement is fotmd or deemed by a court of competenx.kmsdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, it shall be considered severable fi-om the remainder of this .;~:ermmt. and shall not cause the remainder to be in,,xlid or um'nforceable. In such evem. the parties shall retbrm this . _kgreernerm to the extent reasonabb' possible, to replace such stricken pro, Non vdth a valid and enforceable provision which comes as close as possl'ble to expresqing the o '_nginal imemions of the parties respecting any such stricken provision. AR'IICI F X~TI' COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS CONSULT.~IT shall compb' with all federal state, local laws. roles, re~mdafions, and ordinances applicable to the work performed by CONSULTAN'T hereunder, as they mav now read or ARTICI F X/X/lTl DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED In performing the senices required hereunder. CONSULTANT shall not discriminme ~ainst any person on the basis of race. color, reli~'on, sex. national origin or ancestm ~e. or p~sical handmp. ART]CI F XTX PERSON2NEL CONSULTAN'T represents that it has or w~l secure at its own exTense all personnel required to perform all ~ services required m~der thLs Agreemem. Such personnel shall not be employees or officers of. nor have any contractual relations w/th the O'¢,.'NTR. CONSULT.~\'T shall h-mnediatek- inform the OWNER in writing of any conflict of imerest or potemial conflict of interest that CONSULTANT may discover, or which may arise dm'lng the term of this &greemem. Bo O~%TR requires ~ CONSLrLTANT carefulb~ safe~m, mrd all doctammts, data. and irfforn~ion provided by O~.XlE-R to CONSULTANT incident to this engagemerrt. CONgLT_TAN-1- reco.mfives thai such documents; data: and information'_ involve sensitive, corrrpetitive ~mes: m some cases, confidemfial informafioru and in some cases proprietary informatioru and the dLsctosurc of such information ~- CONSULIANT to am- third part3.-. ,Mthom the express v, rit-ten consent of Og'.'NEIL is expressb- proh~ited by OXx,'2NTtL and ,xodd l~eN- cause economic loss and detriment to OWNER..amy such ummhofized disclosure of information by CONSLTTANT shall constitute an act of default respecting this .~mx-nt. CONSULT.&\-f represents to OW%TR that it w~ safeguard OW%IER's information and ~all. upon O~.-NTR'S reasonable request, provide OXI,'NER xaSth CONSULT_&NT'S policies regarding ks procedures for identifs.~ conflicts of imerest, and ks procedures and safe_retards which are in place xahich v'odd appb' to CONSULT.&NT'S treatment and Mndling of OV~2N-ER'S documems, clam and information during this engagement. ,&Il services required hereunder w~l be pcrtbrmed by CONSL~T_~_\-I- or under ks direct supervision_ )all personnel eng~ed in performing the work provided for in this .~L shall be qualified, and shall be au~rized and l:m-mkted under applicable state and local hws to ARTICI F XX ASSIGNABIIITY The CONSULTANT shall not ass/gn an,v imerest in this _Agreement and shall not transfer any interest in this Agreement (whether by, ashgnmem, novation or othem~) w/thom the prior written conse~ of the OV~NER. CONSULI.&NT shall promptb' notify Okk2NT__R of any change of ks name as well as of any material change in its corporate structure, ks location, an&'or in its operations. ARTICI.F xxq MODEFICATION No v~aiver or modification of this AgreemenI or of an3.' covenanu condition, limitation herein contained shall be '~xlid tmless in vmting and dub,, executed ~- the party to be charged there,~/th. No evidence of any ~aiver or modification shall be offered or received in e-ddence in any procceding arising between the parties hereto om of or affecting this ~a-eermmt. or the '~nghts or obligations of the parties hereunder, tmless such wak'er or raxtifica~n is in writing, duly executed_ The parties further a~e that the provisions of this .article v,~l not be ~aived unless as herein set forth, ARTICI ,F XXII MISCELLANEOUS CONSULT.&NT ~agrees that OV~2',FER shall tmfil the expiration of three (3) ?'ears alier the final pasmem made by O~NER under this Agreement. have access to and the 'gnght to examine any dkectb' pertinem books, documents, papers and records of the CONSLZTAY,T invoMn~ tramactions relating to this Agreerre~ CONSULT_&NT ~agrees that O~.'NTR shall Mve access during normal working hours to all necessary CONSULT,&NT facilities and shall be provided adequate and appropriate v~orkJxn2d~ space in order to conduct examinations or anclks in compliance ~4th this .Article. OWNER shall give CONSULT.~NT reasonable advance notice of all intended examinmions or audits. Venue of arw smi~ or cause of action under this ~Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton Count3.'. Iexas. This .~-eetr~ shall be governed ~. and construed in accordance w/th the law~ of the State of Texas. For purposes of this _ ~,kgreeim~ the parties ~agree that Leslie A. Jeske ("Jeske"} shall serve as the Project Manager of CONSU-LT.&NT respecting this eng~ement. This. ~-Xgreen-em has been entered into with the understanding that Jeske shall serve as the CONSULT.-Z\'T's PrQect .Manager and will be the k~' person se~4ng the OWNT~R on th/s Project. Am-proposed changes requested bv CONSU~T.~Nq'. respecting Jeske serving as the Project Mm2qSer on the Project. shall be subject to the appro~ of the O~,%~ER. ~hich approval the O~NER shall not unreasonably withhold. Nothing herein shall lirntt CONSULT.~Nq- from ~ other qualified and competent members of im firm to perform the other services required herein, under its supervision or controL Do CONSULTANT shall conm-~nce, carry on. and complete ~ work on the Project v,2th applicable dispatch, and in a sound, economical_ efficient manner, and in accordance ~4th the provisions hereof. In accomplish~ the Project. CONSULT,~NT shall take such steps as are appropriate to ensure that the work involved is properb.' coordinmed with related work being carried on by the OV~NE1L The OWNER shall assist and fully cooperate with CONSULTANT by placing at the CONSULTANTs disposal ail a~le infonm~n pertinent to the Project. including pre~ous reports, any other dina relative to the Project and arranging for the access to. and make all provisions for the CONSULT~Nq' to emer in or upon. public and prNate propen3' as required for the CONSULTANT to perform professional services under this Agreement. O~%T~R ~ CONSU-LTANT agree that CONSULTANT is entitled to reb' upon back4ground information fimfis~ to it by OWNER w4thout the need for timber inquiry or investigation imo such information. The captions of this AgreetmmI are for informational pm-po~ onN and shall not in any way affect the substantive terms or conditiom of this ~. IN' ~TTNESS WHEREOF. the City of Demon. Texas has executed this ~Agreemem in tbur ofigir~al counterparts, by and through its dub'-authofized C~- Mamger: and CONSULT:~\T has day of .2002, but to be effective onthe 1~ day of October. 2002. "CI I'Y" CITY OF DENTON. TEXAS A Municipal Corporation Michael .~ ConduiE Cit3- Manager ATTEST: JENNWER WALTERS. CITY SECRETARY APPROV-ED AS TO LEGAL FOR54: HERBERT L. PROUTY. CITY ATTO1LNEY BX': "CONSULT.&\T' ETTL ENGLNEERLNG & CONSL,-LT.4~Nff'S, LN-C. A Corporation ATTEST: By: Secretary Item #4L AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Materials Management Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Jim Coulter 349-7194 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the City of DeNon authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreemem with Camp Dresser & McKee, inc. for professional engineering services related to the design of the Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant project; authorizing the expenditure of funds therfor; and providing an effective date (RFP 2897-Design of Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant awarded to Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $499,347). PROJECT INFORMATION The Clear Creek and Milam Creek Basins constitute the majority of the northern portion of the wastewater service area north of Loop 288 from west of IH 35 to the proximity of Elm Fork of the Trinity River. Culp Branch drains the northeast portion of the service area and discharges into Elm Fork upstream of Clear Creek. The total service area constitutes 28,750 acres, of which Milam Creek and Clear Creeks accoum for 21,150 acres and the Culp Branch accoums for 7,600 acres. On August 19, 2002 staff presented to the PUB the options for providing wastewater service in the Clear Creek/Milam Creek Basins to the major developmems proposed in this basin. These options were presemed to the City Council on September 3, 2002. Staff received direction from the PUB and the Council to proceed with the design of the sewer line and a conventional wastewater treatment plant. Pursuant to the direction from the PUB and the Council, staff invited six engineering firms on September 6, 2002 to submit proposals for the design of the wastewater treatment plant per the requiremems of Request For Proposal 2897. The six firms are listed alphabetically as below: CDM Chiang Patel & Yerby. Inc. CH2M-Hill Freese & Nichols, inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. Montgomery Watson Agenda Information sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 PROJECT INFORMATION (CONTINUED) Proposals were due on September 20, 2002. CH2M-Hill and HDR Engineering, Inc. did not submit proposals. The Selection Committee reviewed the four proposals and ranked the firms based on the criteria established in the RFP. The Selection Committee ranked CDM as Number 1 followed by Freese & Nichols, Chiang Patel & Yerby and Montgomery Watson respectively. Staff then moved to negotiate a scope of work and cost proposal from CDM. The important aspects of the scope of work are listed below: · Evaluate alternatives for a plant size from 0.5 to 0.95 million gallons per day (mgd) capacity. Recommend the best value alternate for initial and future loading conditions. · Include process features to accommodate future regulatory criteria. · Allow easy expansion of plant by integrating initial process units in future expansion. · Integrate automation to allow remote monitoring and operation from the Pecan Creek WRP during the early years of plant operation. · Produce effluent water quality to allow Type I Reuse Water application for irrigation. · Produce plans and specifications for bidding. · Meet with regulatory agencies to obtain all necessary permits for plant construction and operation. Staff has negotiated the Scope of Work and the Cost Proposal. The design cost of whether the city elects to construct a 0.5 mgd or 1 mgd plant is same. It would take the consultant the same effort in either case. Approximately 100 to 105 sheets will be produced for the project. The range of per plan sheet cost for plant design work is generally $3500-$4000. CDM has estimated the design phase cost which includes plan and specification preparation (Phase II) at $383,899. This averages $3,839 per sheet and is within the range of industry norm. The Phase I cost of $91,939 includes the study phase, survey and geotechnical services. The study phase is a critical phase where CDM will make recommendations about process selection, future expansion of the plant capacity, and make provisions to accommodate future regulatory criteria. Staff has evaluated these costs and finds them acceptable. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) The Public Utility Board approved the staff recommendation to design a conventional plant in the Clear Creek Basin on August 19,2002. The City Council approved the staff recommendation to design a conventional plant in the Clear Creek Basin on September 3, 2002. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 3 PRIOR ACTION (CONTINUED) The Public Utility Board approved the staff recommendation for a professional services agreement with Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. for professional services related to the design of the City of Denton Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant on October 21, 2002. RECOMMENDATION We recommend approval of the amendment to the professional engineering services agreement with Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $499,347. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. Dallas, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The wastewater collection and treatment systems based on the projected needs of the proposed developments need to be operational by the middle of the year 2004. FISCAL INFORMATION The engineering fees will be funded from the March 2002 bond sale and the interest earned from the bonds Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AlS-RFP 2897 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE DESIGN OF THE CLEAR CREEK WATER RECLAMATION PLANT PROJECT; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council deems that it is in the public interest to engage Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc., a Corporation, of Dallas, Texas ("CD&M"), to provide professional engineering services pertaining to the design of the City of Denton Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant Project; and WHEREAS, the City staff has reported to the City Council that there is a substantial need for the above-referenced professional engineering services, and that limited City staff cannot adequately perform the specialized services and tasks with its own personnel; and WHEREAS, Chapter 2254 of the Texas Government Code, known as the "Professional Services Procurement Act," generally provides that a City may not select a provider of professional services on the basis of competitive bids, but must select the provider on the basis of demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications, and for a fair and reasonable price; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1: That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Camp, Dresser & MeKee, Inc., a Corporation, of Dallas, Texas, for professional engineering services pertaining to the design of the City of Denton Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant, in an amount not to exceed $499,347; in substantially the form of the Professional Services Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herewith by reference. SECTION 2: That the award of this Agreement by the City is on the basis of the demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications of CD&M and the demonstrated ability of CD&M to perform the services needed by the City for a fair and reasonable price. SECTION3: That the expenditure of funds as provided in the attached Professional Services Agreement is hereby authorized. SECTION 4: That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the ~ day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY By: S:\Our Documents\Ordmances\02\Camp Dresser & McKee, lnc,-Clear Creek Water Reclam Plant Oral.doc STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the ~ ~day of ~~ ,2002, by and between the City of Denton, Texas, a Texas municipal corporation, with its principal office at 215 East McKirmey Street, Denton, Denton County, Texas 76201, hereinafter called "Owner" and Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., with its regional office at One Glen Lakes, 8140 Walnut Hill Lane, Suite 1000, Dallas, Texas 75231 and its corporate office at One Cambridge Place, 50 Hampshire Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 hereinafter called "Design Professional," acting herein, by and through their duly authorized representatives. In consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows: SECTION 1 EMPLOYMENT OF DESIGN PROFESSIONAL The Owner hereby contracts with the Design Professional, a licensed Texas engineering finn, as an independent contractor. The Design Professional hereby agrees to perform the services as described herein and in the Scope of Work, the General Conditions, and other attachments to this Agreement that are referenced in Section 3, in connection with the Project. The Project shall include, without limitation, the design of the Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant (CCWRP). The Clear Creek Basin is located north of Loop 288, extends west of IH 35, and discharges into the Elm Fork of the Trinity R/ver. Within the Wastewater Service Area of the City of Denton, the Clear Creek Basin along with Culp Branch encompasses 28,750 acres. The proposed treatment facility will eventually serve this entire basin within the Service Area of the City of Denton, Texas and may provide wholesale wastewater treatment service to other entities beyond the Service Area of the City of Denton. Time is of the essence in completing the design of the facility. The plant is needed on line, providing treatment service in June 2004. The effort of the Design Professional will include the following: Prepare an engineering report evaluating various treatment alternatives and recommend a cost effective and practical solution. In the evaluation process account for future expansion of the treatment facility in terms of ease of expansion, future regulatory requirements, and cost of construction. Perform design and produce contract documents suitable for competitive bidding under municipal laws. Page 1 Provide assistance during bidding of the Project. SECTION 2 COMPENSATION The Owner shall compensate the Design Professional as follows: 2.1 BASIC SERVICES 2.1.1 For Basic Services the total compensation shall be $499,347.00. 2.1.2 Progress payments for Basic Services shall be billed by the Design Professional from time sheets, on a once-monthly basis, in minimum ½ hour or smaller time increments, at the hourly Billing Rates not to exceed those shown in the Engineering Fee Summary attached. For and in consideration of the professional services to be performed by the Design Professional herein, the Owner agrees to pay, at the listed hourly Billing Rates, a total fee, including reimbursement for direct non-labor expenses and for its sub-consultant expense, an amount not to exceed that listed for each task as shown below, all of which shall not exceed the total as listed under Item 2.1.1. J Phase I - Study $91,939 Phase II - Design 30% Plans and Specifications 80% Plans and Specifications 100% Plans and Specifications $72,569 $165,822 $145A98 Bidding Phase $23,519 2.2 ~ ADDITIONAL SERVICES 2.2.1 For Additional Services authorized in writing by the Owner, the Design Professional shall be paid based on a to-be-agreed-upon Schedule of Charges. Payments for additional services shall be due and payable upon submission by the Design Professional, and shall be in accordance with Item 2.1.2 hereinabove. Statements for Basic Services and any Additional Services shall be submitted to the Owner no more frequently than once monthly. 2.2.2 Compensation for Additional Services of consultants, including additional structural, mechanical and electrical engineering services shall be based on a multiple of 1.10 times the mounts billed to the Design Professional for such additional services. Page 2 2.3 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES Reimbursable Expenses shall be a multiple of 1.I times the expenses incurred by the Design Professional, the Design Professional's em- ployees and consultants in the interest of the Project as defined in the General Conditions, but not to exceed the totals as shown in the Engineering Fee Surranary, without the prior written approval of the Owner. SECTION 3 ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement includes this executed agreement and the following documents all of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference as if fully set forth herein: 1. City of Denton General Conditions to Agreement for Architectural or Engineering Services. 2. The Design Professional's Scope of Work and Engineering Fee Summary. This Agreement is signed by the parties hereto effective as of the date first above written. "OWNER" CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: MICHAEL A. CONDUFF CITY MANAGER By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY By: Page 3 "DESIGN PROFESSIONAL" CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE INC. - . .,DEE bVice President ATTEST: S:\Our Documents\Contracts\02\Camp Dresser McKee-Design PSA WW 2002.doc Page 4 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS GENERAL CONDITIONS TO AGREEMENT FOR ARCHITECTURAL OR ENGINEERING SERVICES ARTICLE 1. ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 1.1 The Architect or Engineer's services consist of those services for the Project (as defined in the agreement (the "Agreement") and proposal (the "Proposal") to which these General Conditions are attached) performed by the Architect or Engineer (hereinafter called the "Design Professional") or Design Professional's employees and consultants as enumerated in Articles 2 and 3 &these General Conditions as modified by the Agreement and Proposal (the "Services"). 1.2 The Design Professional will perform all Services as an independent contractor to the prevailing professional standards consistent with the level of cam and skill ordinarily exemised by members of the same profession cunantly practicing in the same locality under similar conditions, including reasonable, informed judgments and prompt timely actions (the "Degree of Care"). The Services shall be performed as expeditiously as is consistent with the Degree of Care necessary for the orderly progress of the Project. Upon request of the Owner, the Design Professional shall submit for the Owner's approval a sehedute for the performance of the Services which may be adjusted as the Project proceeds, and shall include allowances for:periods of time requi~ed for the Owner's review and for approval of submissions by authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. Time limits established by this schedule and approved by the Owner shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Design Professional or Owner, and any adjustments to this schedule shall be mutually acceptable to both parties. ARTICLE 2 SCOPE OF BASIC SERVICES 2.t BASIC SERVICES DEFINED The Design Professional's Basic Services consist of those described in Sections 2.2 through 2.6 of these General Conditions and include without limitation normal structural, civil, mechanical and electrical engineering services and any other engineering serv/ees necessary to produce a complete and accurate set of Construction Documents, as described by and required in Section 2.4. The Basic Services may be modified by the Agreement. 2.2 SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE 2.2.1 The Design Professional, in consultation with the Owner, shall develop a written program for the Project to ascertain Owner's needs and to establish the requkements for the Project. 2.2.2 The Design Professional shall provide a preliminary evaluation of the Owner's program, construction schedule and construction budget requirements, each in terms of the other, subject to the limitations set forth in Subsection 5.2.1. 2.2.3 The Design Professional shall review with the Owner alternative approaches to design and construction of the Project. 2.2.4 Based on the mutually agreed-upon program, schedule and construction budget requirements, the Design Professional shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Schematic Design Documents consisting of drawings and other docUments illustrating the scale and relationship of Project components. The Schematic Design shall contemplate compliance with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2.2.5 The Design Professional shall submit to the Owner a preliminary detailed estimate of Construction Cost based on current area, volume or other unit costs and which indicates the cost of each category of work involved in constructing the Project and establishes an elapsed time factor for the period of time fi'om the commencement to the completion of construction. 2.3 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE 2.3.1 Based on the approved Schematic Design DocUments and any adjustments authorized by thc Owner in the prognu-n, schedute or construction budget, the Design Professional shall prepare for approval by the Owner, Design Development Documents consisting of drawings and other docUments to fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical systems, materials and such other dements as may be appropriate, which shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, cedes and regulations. Notwithstanding Owner's approval of the documents, Design Professional represents that the Documents and specifications WilI be sufficient and adequate to fulfill thc purposes of the Project. 2.3.2 The Design Professional shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to the preliminary estimate of Construction Cost in a further Detailed Statement as described in Section 2.2.5. 2.4 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PHASE 2.4.1 Based on the approved Design Development Documents and any further adjustments in the scope or quality of the Project or in the construction budget authorized by the Owner, the Design Professional shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Construction Documents consisting of Drawings and Specifications setting forth in detail requirements for the construction of the Project, which shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. Page I, of 9 2.4.2 The Design Professional shall assist the Owner in the preparation of the necessary bidding or procurement information, bidding or procurement forms, thc Conditions of the contract, and the form of Agreement between the Owner and contractor. 2.4.3 The Design Professional shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to previous preliminary estimates of Construction: Cost indicated by changes in requirements or general market conditions. 2.4.4 The Design Professional shall assist the Owner in connection with the Owner's responsibility for filing documents requited for the approval of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 2.5 CONSTUCTION CONTRACT PROCLrREMENT 2..q.1 The Design Professional, following the Owner's appmvaI of the Construction Documents and of the latest preliminary detailed estimate of Construction Cost, shall assist the Owner in procuring a construction contract for the Project through any procurement method that is legally applicable to the Project including without limitation, the competitive sealed bidding process. Although the Owner will consider the advice of the Design Professional, the award of the construction contract is in the sole discretion of the Owner. 2.5.2 If the construction contract mount for the Project exceeds the total construction cost of the Project as set forth in the approved Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs of the Project submitted by the Design Professional, then the Design Professional, at its sole cost and expense, will revise the Construction Documents as may be required by the Owner to reduce or modify the quantity or quality of the work so that the total construction cost of the Project will not exceed the total construction cost set forth in the approved Detailed Statement of Probable Construe.ion Costs. 2.6 CONSTRUCTION PItASE - ADMINISTRATION OF TIlE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 2.6.1 The Design Professional's responsibility to provide Basic Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with the award of the Contract for ConsU-uction and terminates at the issuance to the Own,r of the final Certificate for Payment, unless extended under the terms of Subsection 8.3.2. 2.t5.2 The Design ProfessionaI shall provide detailed administration of the ConUact for Construction as set forth below. For design profassionalss the administration shall also be in accordance with AIA document A201, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction. current as of tho date of the Agreement as may be amended by the City of Denton special conditions, unless otherwise provided in tho Agreement. For engineers the administration shall also be in accordance with the Staedard Specifications for Public Works Construction by the North Central Texas Council of Govertunents, current as of the date of the Agreement, unless otherwise provided in the Agreement. 2.6..3 Construction Phase duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the Design Professional shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement of the Owner and Design Professional. 2.6.4 The Design Professional shall be a representative of and shall advise and consult with the Owner (1) during construction, and (2) at the Owner's direction from time to time during the correction, or warranty period described in the Contract for Construction. The Design Professional shall have authority to act on behalf of the Owner only to the extent provided in the Agreement and these General Conditions, unless otherwise modified by written instrument 2.6.5 The Design Professional shall observe the construction site at least one time a week, while construction is in progress, and as reasonably necessmy while construction is not in progress, to become familiar with the progress and quality of the work completed and to determine if the work is being performed in a manner indicating that the work when completed will be in accordance with the ConWact Documents. Design Professional shall provide Owner a written repo~t subsequem to each on-site visit. On the basis of on-site observations the Design Professional shall keep the Owner informed of the progress and quality of the work, and shall exercise the Degree of Care and diligence in discovering and promptly reporting to the Owner any observable defects or deficiencies in the work of Contractor or any subcontractors. The'Design Professional represents that he will follow Degree of Care in performing all Services under the Agreement. The Design Professional shall promptly correct any defective designs or specifications furnished by the Design Professional at no cost to the Owner. The Owneds approval, acceptance, use of or payment for all or any part of the Design Professional's Services hereunder or of the Project itself shall in no way alter the Design Professional's obligations or the Owner's rights hereunder. 2.6.6 The Design Professional shall not have control over or charge of and shall not be responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the work. The Design Professional shall not be responsible for the Contractor's schedules or failure to carry out the work in accordance with the Contract Documents except insofar as such failure may result from Design Professional's negligent acts or omissions. The Design Professional shall not have control over or charge of acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or of any other persons performing portions of the work. 2.6.7 The Design Professional shall at all times have access to the work wherever it is in preparation or progress. 2,6.8 Except as may otherwise be provided in the Contract Documents or when direct communications have been specially authorized, the Owner and Contractor shall communicate through the Design Professional. Communications by and with the Design Professional's consultants shall be through the Design Professional. 2.6.9 Based on the Design Professional's observations at the site of the work and evaluations of the Contractor's Applications for Payment, the Design Professional shall review and certify the amounts due the Contractor. Page 2 of 9 2.6.10 The Design Professional's certification for payment shall constitute a rapresentation m the Owner, based on the Design Professional's obser- vations at the site as provided in Subsection 2.6.5 and on thc data comprising thc Contractor's Application for Payment, that the work has p~ogressed to tho point indicated and that thc quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents. The foregoing representations am subject to minor dcviations from tho Contract Doc,aments correctable prior to completion and to specific qualifications expressed by the Design Professional. Thc issuance of a Certificate for Payment shall further constitute a representation that the Contractor is entitled to payment in the mount cextiffed. However, the issuance of a Certificate for Payment shall not be a representation that the Design Professional has (1) reviewed construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or (2) ascemined how or for what propose the Contractor has used money previously paid on account of the Contract Sum. 2.6.11 The Design Professional shall have the responsibility and authority to reject work which does not conform to thc Contract Documents. Whenever thc Design Professional considers it necessary or advisable for implementation of thc intent of the Contract Documents, the Design Professional will have authority to require additional inspection or testing of the work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not such Work is fabricated, installed or completed. However, neither this authority of thc Design Professional nor a decision made in good faith either to exemise or not exercise such authority shall give rise to a duty or responsibilit~ of the Design Professional to the Contractor, Subcontractors, material and equipment suppliers, their agents or employees or other persons performing portions of the work. 2.6.12 The Design Professional shall review and approve or take other appropriate action upon Contractor's submittals such as Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples for the purpose of (1) determining compliance with applicable laws, statutes, ordinances and codes; and (2) determining whether or not tho work, when completed, will be in compliance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Design Professional shall act with such reasonable promptness to came no delay in the work or in the construction of the Owner or of separate contractors, while allowing sufficient time in the Design Professional's professional judgment to permit adequate review. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other details such as directions and quantifies or for substantiating instructions for installation or performance of equipment or systems designed by the Cent-actor, ail of which remain the responsibility of thc Contractor to thc extent required by .the Con~ract Documents. Thc Design Professional's review shall not constitute approval of safety precautions or, unless otherwise specifically stated by the Design Professional, of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. Thc Design Professionars approval of a specific item shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which thc item is a component. When professional certification of performance characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required by the Contract Documents, the Design Professional shall be entitled to rely upon such certification to establish that the materials, systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria required by thc ' Contract Documents. 2.6.13 The Design Professional shall prepare Change Orders and Construction Change Directives, with supporting documentation and data if. deemed necessary by the Design Professional as provided in Subsections 3.1.1 and 3.3.3, for thc Owner's approval and execution in accordance with the Contract Documents, and may authorize minor changes in the work not involving an adjustment in the Con,act Sum or an extension of the Con,act Time which are not inconsistent with the intent of the Contract Documents. 2.6.14 On behalf of thc Owner, the Design Professional shall conduct inspections to determine the dates of Substantial Completion and Final Completion, and if requesteA by the Owner shall issue Certificates of Substantial and Final Completion. Thc Design Professional will receive and review written guarantees and related documents required by the Contract for Construction to be assembled by the Contractor and shall issue a final certificate for Payment upon compliance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 2.6.15 The Design Professional shall intea-pret and provide recommendations on matters concerning performance of the Owner and Conaaetor under the requirements of the Contract Documents on written request of either the Owner or Con~a-acter. The Design Professional's response to such requests shall be made with reasonable promptness and within any time limits agreed upon. 2.6.16 Interpretations and decisions of the Design Professional shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from tho Contract Documents and shall be in v~iting or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial decisions, the Design Professional shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by both Owner attd Contractor, and shall not be liable for results or interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith in accordance with alt the provisions of this Agreement and in the absence of negligence. 2.6.17 The Design Professional shall render wnitten decisions within a reasonable time on all claims, dispums or other matters in question between the Owner and Contractor relating to the execution or progress of thc work as provided in the Contract Documents. 2.6.18 The Design Professional (1) shall render services under the Agreement in accordance with the Degree of Care; (2) will reimburse tho Owner for all damages caused by the defective designs the Design Professional prepares; and (3) by acknowledging payment by the Owner of.any fees due, shall not be released from any fights the Owner may have under the Agreement or diminish any of the Design Professional's obligations thereunder, 2.6.19 The Design Professional shall provide the Owner with four sets of reproducible prints showing all significant changes to the Construction Documents during the Construction Phase, based upon information provided by the construction contractor. ARTICLE 3 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 3.1 GENERAL Page 3 of 9 3.1.1 The services described in this Article 3 are not ~ncluded in Basic Services unless so identified in the Agreemen! or Proposal, and they shall be paid for by the Owner as provided in the Agreement, in addition to the compensation for Basic Services. The services described under Sections 3.2 and 3.4 shall only be provided if authorized or confirmed in writing by the Owner. If services described under Contingent Additional Services in. Section 3.3 are required due to circumstances beyond the Design Professional's control, the Design Professional shall notify the Ownar in writing and shall not commence such additional services until it receives written approval from the Owner to proceed. If the Owner indicates in writing that all or part of such Contingent Additional Services are not required, the Design Professional shall have no obligation to provide those services. Owner will be responsible for compensating the Design Professional for Contingent Additional Services only if they are not required due to the negligence or fault of Design Professional. 3,2 PROJECT REPRESENTATION BEYOND BASIC SERVICES 3.2.1 If more extensive representation at the site than is described in Subsection 2.6.5 is required, the Design Professional shall provide one or more Project Representatives to assist in carrying out such additional on-site responsibilities. 3.2.2 Project Representatives shall be selected, employed and directed by the Design Professional, and the Design Professional shall be com- pensated therefor as agreed by the Owner and Design Professional. 3.3 CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICES 3.3.t Making material revisions in Drawings, Specifications or other documents when such revisions are: 1. inconsistent with approvals or instructions previously giv~ by the Owner, including revisions made necessary by adjustments in the Owner's program or Project budget; 2. required by the enactment or revision of codes, laws or regnlafions subsequent to the preparation of such documents, °r 3. due to changes required as a result of the Owner's failure.to render decision in a timely manner. 33.2 Providing'services required because of significant changes in the Project including, but not limited to, size, quality, complexity, or the Owner's schedule, except for services required under Subsection 2.5.2. 3.33 Preparing Drawings, Specifications and other documentation and supporting data, and providing other services in connection with Change Orders and Construction Change Dkectives. 33.4 Providing consultation concerning replacement of work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, and furnishing services requi~ed in connection with the replacement of such work. 3.3.5 Providing services made necessary by the default of the Contractor, by major defects or deficiencies in the work of the Contractor, or by failure of performance of either the Owner or Contractor under the Contract for Construction. 33.6 Providing services in evaluating an extensive number of claims submitted by the Con~ractor or others in connection with the work. 33.7 Providing services in connection with a public hearing, arbitration proceeding or legal proceeding except where the Design Professional is party thereto. 3.3.8 Providing services in addition to those required by Article 2 for preparing documents for alternate, separate or sequential bids or providing services in connection with bidding or consauction prior to the completion of the Construction Documents Phase. 3.3.9 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Agreement, Proposal or these General Conditions to the contrary, alt services described in this Article 3 that are caused or necessitated in whole or in part due to the negligent act or omission of the Design Professional shall be perfon'ned by the Design Professional as apart of the Basic Services under the Agreement with no additional compensation above and beyond the compensation due the Design Professional for thc Basic Services. The intervening or concurrent negligence of the Owner shall not hmit the Design Professional's obligations under this Subsection 3.3.9. 3.4 OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES 3.4.1 Providing financial feasibility or other special studies. 3.4.2 Providing planning surveys, site evaluations or comparative studies of prospective sites. 3.4.3 Providing special surveys, environmental studies and submissions required for approvals of governmental authorities or others having jurisdiction over the Project. 3.4.4 Providing services relative to future facilities, systems mhd equipment. 3.4.5 Providing services to investigate existing conditions or facilities or to make measured drawings thereof. Page 4 of 9 3.4.6 Providing services to verify the accuracy of drawings or other information furnished by the Owner. 3.4.7 Providing coordination of construction performed by separate contractors or by the Owner's own forces and coordination of services required in connection with construction performed and equipment supplied by the Owner. 3.4.8 Providing detailed quantity surveys or inventories of material, equipment and labor. 3,4.9 Providing analyses of operating and m~intonance costs. 3,4.10 Making investigations, inventories of materials or equipment, or valuations and detailed appraisals of existing facilities. 3.4.12 Providing assistance in the utilization of equipment or systems such as testing, adjusting and balancing, preparation of operation and maintenance manuals, training personnel for operation and maintenance and consultation during operation. 3.4.13 Providing interior design and similar services ~equired for or in connection with the selection, procurement or installation of fin'niture, furnishings and related equipment. 3.4.t4 Providing services other than as provided in Section 2.6.4, after issuance to the Owner of the final Certificate for Payment and expiration of the Warranty period of the Contract for Construction. 3.4.15 Providing services of consultants for other than architectural, civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering portions of the Project provided as a part of Basic Services. 3.4.16 Providing any other services not otherwise included in ~s Agreement or not customarily furnished in accordance with generally accepted architectural practice. 3.4.17 Preparing a set of reproducl'bfe record drawings in addition to those required by Subsection 2.6.19, showing significant changes in the work made during construction based on marked-up prints, drawings and other data furnished by the Contractor to the Design Professional. 3.4.18 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Agreement, Proposal or these General Conditions ~o the contrary, all services described in this A_edcle 3 that are caused or necessitated in whole or in part due to the negligent act or omission of the Design Professional shall be performed by the Design Professional as a part oft_he Basic Services under the Agreement with no additional compensation above and beyond the compensation due the Design Professional for the Basic Services. The intervening or concurrent negligence of the Owner shall not limit the Design Professional's obligations under this Subsection 3.4. t 8. ARTICLE 4 OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 4.1 The Owner shall consult with the Design Professional regarding req~firements for the Project, including (1) the Owner's objectives, (2) schedule and design constraints and criteria, including space requirements and relationships, flexibility, expendability, special equipment, systems and site requirements, as more specifically described in Subsection 2.2.1. 4.2 The Owner shall establish and update an overall budget for the Project, including the Construction Cost, the Owner's other costs and reasonable contingencies related to all of these costs. 4.3 If requested by the Design Professional, the Owner shall furnish evidence that financial arrangements have been made to fulfill the Owner's obligations under this Agreement. 4.4 The Owner shall designate a representative authorized to act on the Owner's behalf with respect to the Project. The Owner or such authorized representative shall render decisions kaa timely manner pertaining to documents submitted by the Design Professional in order to avoid unreasonable delay in the orderly and sequential progress of the Design Professional's services. 4.5 Where applicable, the Owner shall furnish surveys describing physical characteristics, legal limitations and utility locations for the site of the Project, and a written legal description of the site. The surveys and legal information shall include, as applicable, grades and lines of streets, alleys, pavements and adjoining property and structures; adjacent drainage; rights-of-way, restrictions, easements, encroacltments, zoning, deed restrictions, boundaries and contours of the site; locations, dimensions and necessary data pertaining to existing buildings, other improvements and trees; and information concerning available utility services and lines, both public and private, above and below grade, including inverts and depths. All the information on the survey shall be referenced to a project benchmark. 4.6 Where applicable, the Owner shall famish the services of geotechnical engineers when such services are requested by the Design Professional. Such services ~nay include but are not limited to test borings, test pits, determinations of soil bearing values, percolation tests, evaluations of hazardous materials, ground corrosion and resistivity tests, including necessary operations for anticipating sub-soil conditions, with reports and appropriate professional recommendations. 4.6.1 The Owner shall furnish the services of other consultants when such services are reasonably required by thc scope of the Project and are requested by the Design Professional and axe not retained by the Design Professional as part of its Basic Services or Additional Services. Page 5 of 9 4.7 When not a part of the Additional Services, the Owner shall furnish structural, mechanical, chemical, air and water pollution tests, tests of hazardous materials, and other laboratory and environmental tests, inspections and reports required by law or the Contract Documents. 4,8 The Owner shall furnish all legal, accounting and insurance counseling services as may be necessary at any time for the Project, including auditing services the Owner may require to verify the Contractor's Applicafons for Payment or to ascertain how or for what purposes the Contractor has used the money paid by or on behalf of the Owner. 4,9 The services, information, surveys and reports required by Owner under Sections 4.5 through 4.8 shall be furnished at the Owner's expense, and the Design Professional shall be entitled to rely upon tho accuracy and completeness thereof in the absence of any negligence on the part of the Design Professional. 4.10 The Owner shall give prompt xwitten notice to the Design Professional if the Owner becomes aware of any fault or defect in tho Project or nonconformance with the Contract Docamants. 4.11 Design Professional shall propose language for certificates or certifications to be requested of the Design Professional or Design Professional's consultants and shall submit such to the Owner for review and approval at least fourteen (14) days prior to execution. The Owner agrees not to request certifications that would require knowledge or services beyond the scope of the Agreement. ARTICLE 5 CONSTRUCTION COST 5.1 CONSTRUCTION COST DEFINED 5,1.1 The Construction Cost shall be the total cost or estimated cost to the Owner of all elements of the Project designed or specified by tho Design Professional. 5.1.2 The COnstruction Cost shall include the cost at current market rates of labor and materials furnished by the Owner and equipment designed, specified, selected or specially provided for by the Design Professional; plus a reasonable allowance for the Contractors overhead and profit In addition, a reasonable allowance for contingencies shall be included for market conditions at the time of bidding and for changes in the work during construction. 5.1.3 Coma'action Cost docs not include the compensation of the Design Professional and Design Professional's consultants, the costs of the land, rights-of-way, financing or other costs w~ch are thc responsibility of the Owner as provided in Article 4. 5.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION COST 5.2.1 Evaluations of the Owners Project budget, preliminary estimates of Construction Cost and detailed estimates of Construction Cost prepared by the Design Professional represent the Design Professional's best judgment as a design professional familiar with the construction indust~j. It is recognized, however, that neither the Design Professional nor the Owner has control over the cost of labor, matedaIs or equipment, over the Con- tractor's methods of determining hid prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions. Accordingly, the Design Professional cannot and does not warrant or represent that bids or cost proposals will not vary fi'om the Owner's Project budget or from any estimate of Construction Cost or evaluation prepared or agreed to by the Design Professional. 5.2.2 No fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be established as a condition of the Agreement by the furnishing, proposal or establishment of a Project budget, unless such fixed lim/t has been agreed upon in writing and signed by the parties thereto. If such a fixed limit has been established, the Design Professional shall be permitted to include contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation, to determine what materials, equip- ment, component systems and types of construction are to be included in the Contract Documents, to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include in the Contract Documents alternate bids to adjust the Construction Cost to the fixed limit. Fixed limits, if any, shall be increased in the amount of an increase in the Contract Sum occurring attcr execution of the Contract for Construction. 5.2.3 If the Procurement Phase has not commenced within 90 days after the Design Professional submits the Construction Documents to the Owner, any Project budget or fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be adjusted to reflect changes in the general level of prices in the construction industry between the date of submission of the Construction Documents to the Owner and the date on which proposals are sought. ARTICLE 6 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF DOCUMENTS 6.1 The Drawings, Specifications and other docmnents prepared by the Design.Professional for this Project are instruments of the Design Professional's service and shall become fl~e property of the Owner upon termination or completion of the Agreement. The Design Professional is entitled to retain copies of all such documents. Such documents are intended only be applicable to this Project, and Owner's use of such documents in other projects shall be at Owner's sole risk and expense. In the event the Owner uses any of the information or materials developed pursuant to the Agreement in another project or for other purposes than are specified in the Agreeme~t, the Design Professional is released from any and all liability relating to their use in that project 6.2 Submission or distribution of documents to meet official regulatory requirements or for similar purposes in connechon with the Project is not to be construed as publication in derogation of the Design Professional's reserved rights. Page 6 of 9 ARTICLE 7 TERMINATION, SUSPENSION OR ABANDONMENT 7A The Design Professional may terminate the Agreement upon not less than thirty days written notice should the Owner fail substantially to pexform in accordance with the terms of the Agreement through no fault of tho Design Professional. Owner may terminate the Agreement or any phase thereof with or without cause upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to thc Design Professional. All work and labor being performed under the Agreement shall cease immediately upon Design Professional's receipt of such notice. Before the end of the thirty (30) day period, Design Professional shall invoice the Owner for all work it satisfactodty performed prior to the receipt of such notice. No amount shall be duo for lost or anticipated profits. All plans, field surveys, and other data related to the Project shall become property of the Owner upon termination of thc Agreement and shall be promptly delivered to the Owner in a reasonably organized form. Should Owner subsequently contract with a new Design Professional for continuation of services on the Project, Design Professional shall coopera~e in providing information. 7,2 If the Project is suspended by the Owner for more than 30 consecutive days, the Design Professional shall be compensated for services satisfactorily performed prior to notice of such suspension. When the Project is resumed, the Design Professional's compensation shall be equitably adjusted to provide for expenses incuncd in the interruption and resumption of the Design Professional's services. 7.3 Thc Agreement may be terminated by the Owner upon not less than seven days written notice to tho Design Professional in thc event that the Project is permanently abandoned. If the Project is abandoned by the Ownar for men: than 90 consecutive days, thc Design Professional or the Owner may terminate the Agreement by giving written notice. 7.4 Failure of the Owner to make payments to the Design Professional for work satisfactorily completed in accordance with thc Agreement shall be considered substantial nonperformance and cause for termination. 7.5 If thc Owner fails to make payment to Design Professional within thirty 00) days of receipt of a statement for services properly and satisfactorily performed, the Design Professional may, upon seven days written notice to the Owner, suspend performance of services under the Agreement 7.6 In thc event of termination not thc fault of the Design Professional, thc Design Professional shall be compensated for services properly and satisfactorily performed prior to marion. ARTICLE 8 PAYMENTS TO THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL 8.1 DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSE 8.1.1 Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the direct salaries of the Design Professional's personnel engaged on the Project and the portion of the cost of their mandatory and customary contributions and benefits related thereto, such as employment taxes and other statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pensions and similar contributions and benefits, 8.2 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 8.2.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to compensation for Basic and Additional Services and include expenses incurred by the Design Professional and Design Professional's employees and consultants in the interest of the Project, as identified in the fotIowing Clauses. 8.2.1.1 Expense oftransporlatiun in connection with thc Project; expenses in connection with authorized out-of-town travel; long-distance communications; and fees paid for securing approval &authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 8;2.1.2 Expense ofreproductions (except the reproduction of thc sets of docurnents referenced in Subsection 2.6.19), postage and handling of Drawings, Specifications and other documents. 8.2.13 If authorized in advance b7 the Owner, expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates. 8.2.1.4 Expense of renderings, models and mock-ups requested by the Owner. 8.2,1.5 Expense of computer-aided design and drafting equipment time when used in connection with the Project. 8.2.1.6 Other expenses that are approved in advance in writing by the Owner. 8.3 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF BASIC SERVICES 8.3.1 Payments for Basic Services shall be made monthly and, where applicable, shall be in proportion to services performed within each phase of service, on the basis set forth in Section 2 of the Agreement and the schedule of work. 8.3.2 If and to the extent that the time initially established in the Agreement is exceeded or extended through no fault of the Design Professional, compensa6on for any services rendered during ~he additional period of time shall be computed in the manner set forth in Section 2 of the Agreement. 8.3.3 When compensation is based on a percentage of Conslmction Cost and any portions of the Project are deleted or otherwise not constructed, compensation for those portions of the Project shall be payable to the extent services are performed on those portions, in accordance with the Page 7 of 9 schedule set forth in Section 2 of the Agreement based on (1) thc lowest bona fi& bid or (2) if no such bid or proposal is received, the most recent preliminary estlmatc of Construction Cost or detailed estimate of Construction Cost for such portions of the Project. 8.4 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITIONAL SERVICES 8.4.1 Payments on account of the Design Professional's Additional Services and for Reimbursable Expenses shall be made monthly within 30 days aRer the presentation to the Owner of the Design Professional's statement of services ~adcred or expenses incurred. 8.5 PAYMENTS WITHHELD No deductions shall be made from the Design Professional's compensation on account of penalty, liquidated damages or other sums withheld from payments to contractors, or on account of the cost of changes in the work other than those for which the Design Professional is responsible. 8.6 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS Design Professional shall make available to Owner or Owne?s authorized representative records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses per~ining to Additional Services and services performed on the basis ora multiple of Direct PersonneI Expense for inspection and copying during regular business hours for three years at,er the date of the final Cextificate of Payment, or until any litigation related to thc Project is final, wlficheves date is later. ARTICLE 9 INDEMNITY 9.1 The Design Professional shall indemnify and save and hold harmless the Owner and its officers, agents, and employees from and against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, losses, and expenses, including, but not limited to court costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the Owner, and including, without limitation, damages for bodily and personal injury, death and property damage, resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of the Design Professional or its officers, shareholders, agents, or employees in the performance of the Agreement. 9.2 Nothing herein shall be construed to create a liability to any person who is not a party to the 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 the Agreement, including the defense of governmental immunity, which defenses are hereby expressly reserved. ARTICLE 10 INSURANCE During the performance of thc Services under thc Agreement, Design Professional shall maintain the following insurance with an insurance company licensed or authorized to do business in the State of Texas by thc State Insurance Commission or any successor agency that has a rating with Best Rate Carriers of at least an A- or above: 10.1 Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence and not less than $2,000,000 in the aggregate, and with property damage limits of not less than $100,000 for each occurrence and not less than $250,000 in the aggregate. 10.:I Automobile Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $500,000 for each person and not less than $500,000 for each accident, and with property damage limits of not less than $100,000 for each accident. 10.3 Worker's Compensation Insurance in accordance with statutory requirements, and Employers' Liability Insurance with limits of not less than $100,000 for each accident including occupational disease. 10.4 Professional Liability Insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 annual aggregate. 10.5 The Design Professional shall furnish insurance certificates or insurance policies to the Owner evidencing insurance in compliance with this Axtiele 10 at the time of the execution of the Agreement. The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall name the Owner as an additional insured, the Workers' Compensation policy shalt contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the Owner, and each policy shall contain a provision that such insurance shall not be canceled or restricted in limits or scope of coverage, without thirty (30) days' prior written notice to Owner and Design Professional. In such event, the Design Professional shall, prior to the effective date of the change or cancellation, l~rnish Owner with substitute certificates of insurance meeting the requirements of this Article 10. ARTICLE I1 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 11.1 The Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue of any suit or cause of action under the Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton County, Texas. 11.2 The Owner and Design Professional, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement. The Design Professions! shall not assign its interests in the Agreement without the written consent of the Owner. 11.3 The term Agreement as used herein includes the executed Agreement, the Proposal, these General Conditions and other attachments referenced in Section 3 of the Agreement which together represent the enti,e and integrated agreement between the Owner and Design Professional and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. The Agreement may be amended only by written instrmnent signed by both Owner and Design Professional When interpreting the Agreement the executed Agreement, Proposal, these General Conditions and the other attachments Page 8 of 9 referenced in Section 3 of the Agreement shall to the extent that is reasonably possible be read so as to harmonize the provisions. However, should the provisions of these documents be in conflict so that they can not be reasonably harmonized, such documents shall be given priority in the following order: 1. The executed Agreement 2. Attaehrnents referenced in Section 3 of the Agreement other than the Proposal 3. These General Provisions 4. The Proposal 11.4 Nothing contained in the Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party against either the Owner or Design Professional. ILS Upon receipt of prior written approval of Owner, the Design Professional shall have the fight to include representations of the design of the Project, inciuding photographs of the exterior and interior, among the Design Professional's promotional and professional materials. The Design Professional's materials shall not include the Owners confidential or proprietary information if the Owner has previously advised the Design Professional in writing, of the specific information considered by the Owner to bo confidential or proprietary. The Owner shall provide professional credit for the Design Professional on the construction sign and in the promotional materials for the Project. 11.6 Approval by the Owner shall not constitute, nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the Design Professional, its employees, associates, agents, subcontractors, and sub-consultants for the accuracy and competency of their designs or other work; nor shall such approval be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility by the Owner for any defect in the design or other work prepared by the Design Professional, its employees, subcontractors, agents, and consultants. 11.7 All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under the Agreement shall be personally delivered or mailed to the respective parties by depositing same in the United States mail to the address shown below signature block on the Agreement, certified mail, return receipt requested, unless otherwisi~ specified herein. All notices shall be deemed effective upon receipt by the party to whom such notice is given, or within three (3) days alter mailing. 11,8 If any provision of the Agreement is found or deemed by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenfomeable, it shall be considered severable from the remainder of the 'Agreement and shall not cause the remainder to be invalid or unenforceable. In such event, the parties shall reform the 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. 11.9 The Design Professional shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances applicable to the work covered hereunder as they may now read or hereinafter be amended during the term of thi~ Agreement. 11.10 In performing the Services required hereunder, the Design Professional shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age, or physical handicap. 11.11 The captions of the Agreement are for informational purposes only, and shall not in any way affect the substantive terms or conditions oftbe Agreement. S:\Our Documents\Contracts\02\Oeneral Conditions PSA - CD&M - 9 pr.doc Page 9 of 9 Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas Background The Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant (CCWRP) is a new treatment facility that will be used to serve the northern and northeastern parts of the City. The facility will be initially designed to handle an average daffy flow (ADF) of about 0.5 to 0.95 MGD with anticipated discharge limits as foliows: Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD): Total Suspended Solids (TSS): Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N): Dissolved Oxygen (D.O.): pH Fecal Coliform 5 to 10 mg/L 10 to 15 mg/L 2to 3mg/L 5to 6mg/L 6to 9mg/L 25/75 CFU/100mL The associated maximum monthly, maximum daily and peak hourly flows are 120%, 250% and 400% of the average daily flow, respectively. Description of Possible Improvements The study phase of the project will evaluate various process alternatives and recommend the most economical and practical solutions. A design report will be prepared to outline the recommended improvements. To budget engineering effort for design, construction and post-construction phases, it is anticipated that the following major process components will be engaged: A. Raw Wastewater Pump Station with Screening The new pump station will be designed to handle peak plant flows with provisions to expand for future design conditions. Mechanical Bar Screen (fine or coarse) will be provided to protect pumps from clogging. B. Influent Metering A flow meter will be installed in the force main from this pump station to the grit chambers. C. Grit Removal Grit removal system will be considered to protect equipment downstream. Both aerated and vortex type of grit chambers will be evaluated. Consideration will be given to install the grit removal system before the raw wastewater pump station to further reduce pump maintenance. C:~ec~n'~lew ~peo fWo~k_St udy.D esi,~n 8~d10~22.02 ~oc Scope of Work C/ear Creek Water Rec/arnation P/ant City of Denton, Texas D. Anoxic Biological Selector This will be considered to improve the settle-ability of biological solids. The selector will consist of three cells operating in series. One train is considered with additional trains in future. Consider constructing the bioselector as an integral part of the aeration basins if practical. E. Activated Sludge System A number of alternatives will be evaluated to select one that is reliable, flexible, and easily expandable for future needs. These units will be sized such that the same units will be suitable for and can be easily incorporated into future treatment scheme. The secondary clarifiers will be sized to meet the current needs. Provisions will be made to possibly convert these clarifiers to gravity thickeners, if they are no longer suitable serving as secondary clarifiers. Both multiple and single stage air blowers will be compared for efficiency, reliability and maintenance requirement to facilitate an unmanned operation. Consideration will be given to combine Return Activated Sludge (R_AS) and Waste Activated Sludge (WAS) into one system. No separate pumps are required for WAS system to ~e the number of pumps. F. Disinfection Consider a UV irradiation system for disLrffection. The UV system would normally require less operator attention than a chemical feed system for the same purpose. Due to wide variation in UV system design, it is prudent to pre-select an UV manufacturer using an evaluated bid approach. The selection would be based on life cycle cost, which consists of capital cost as welt as operation and maintenance cost on present- worth basis. G. OutfaI1 Consider an ouffall that is adequateIy sized for future flow. 2 C:'~D eat~ nb'~lew WW'TI~S co p~otW o rk~S.tudy. D e~.iO rt.'Bid 10. 22,02.d oc Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas H. Non-potable and Potable Water Systems Evaluate the economics of two separate systems versus one potable water system that would satisfy also non-potable water needs. I. Sludge Handling Sludge produced at this facility wilt be transported to the Pecan Creek WRP for further processing. J. Reuse of Reclaimed Water Consider various applications for reuse of reclaimed water, including irrigation of crops, pasture land, golf courses, etc. If there are sufficient demands, CCWRP may be able to achieve zero discharge.. K. SCADA System Evaluate alternatives to monitor and control the operations of the CCWRP from a remote location, i.e., Pecan Creek WRP. L. Power Sources Evaluate electric power supply sources. Redundant power source may be required. Options include a second power supply from a different substation or on-site emergency generator. M. Yard Piping and Miscellaneous Facilities Evaluate piping size for all process units to accommodate current and future design flows. The raw wastewater sewer will be terminated at the property line and be cormected to the interceptor sewer that will be constructed under a separate contract to deliver raw wastewater to the treatment plant. The reuse water line will also be terminated at the property line to cormect to the extension of the reuse force main to be provided under a separate contract. Consider a security surveillance system that provides monitoring capability of this facility from a remote site. The security system may be incorporated as a part of the plant SCADA system. Scope of Services The project will consist of three project phases and the major tasks under each phase are as follows: Phase I - Evaluation of Alternatives · Establish/Confirm Project Goals and Objectives · Formulate improvement alternatives and conduct review of these alternatives with the City C:~De ~n~l ~,~ WWTP'~ copeo fv~o rk_St ud¥.Desig n ~id 10. 22.(r2,d0 C Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas · Alternatives evaluation and recommendations · Develop recommended plan and conduct review workshop · Prepare and finalize Design Report · Coordinate with City's Engineering Department and Corps of Engineers (COE) to address flood protection issues, ff applicable ,,' Coordinate with TCEQ · Perform topographic survey and subsurface investigations Phase II - Design · Prepare preliminary design and produce 30% complete Plans and Specifications and conduct preliminary design review workshop · · Prepare 80% complete Plans and Specifications and conduct 80% design review workshop · Finalize design documents (100% complete) · Coordinate with COE, and TCEQ for approval · Refine and finalize construction cost estimate at 100% complete · Conduct progress review meetings at 30% and 80% design completion stages · Perform in-house QA/QC reviews Phase III - Bidding · Provide services during Bidding The scope of services and tasks for construction, resident project representative and post-construction services will be prepared at a later date. A narrative description of major tasks and subtasks is provided in the subsequent paragraphs. Phase I - Evaluation of Alternatives A. Task 1.1 - Establish/Confirm Project Goals and Objectives Task Objectives: To ascertain City stakeholders' expectations of project success. C:~ltoff~ew ~pe~lWo~_b-~dy (~esig n.B~ 10.22.02.d0c Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas Subtasks: 1. Upon receipt of notice-to-proceed, the CDM Team will plan, schedule and convene a project kick-off meeting/workshop. The purpose of the worksho its planning is to: Establish project stakeholder list Establish communication protocol and · Discuss QA/QC procedures · Establish project critical success factors in the minds of all stakeholders · Establish stakeholder expectation as to what the project is about (contracted scope or otherwise) · Establish design flows and loading · Coordinate hydraulic gradient for incoming sewer to the raw wastewater pump station and reuse force main termination and routing with pipeline consultant to be selected by the City · Develop action plans to meet established expectations. 2. Prior to the Workshop, the CDM project management team will confer with the City to plan the agenda of the Workshop and develop the initial list of project stakeholders that should probably attend the Workshop. 3. CDM will prepare minutes of the Workshop and distribute such to ail participants. 4. The CDM Team will document the above work in a Technical Memorandum (TM) entitled, Project Goals and Objectives. First ckaft of this TM will be produced under this task. Task 1.1 - Deliverables · Workshop Minutes containing City stakeholder expectations of project success and action plans that will assist the team in meeting these expectations. · Technical Memorandum - Project Goals and Objectives (5 copies) · Work Plan (5 copies) B. Task 1.2 - Formulate Alternatives and Conduct Review of Viable Alternatives Task Objectives: To develop viable alternatives to provide reliable and dependable treatment. C:~Ok~'fa~lew '~ O~P~O~,~O d(_~tudy. Oe-sign-BEI f O,~.ff'd 6k2,~ Scope of Work C/ear Creek Water Reclamation P/ant City of Denton, Texas S#btasks: 1. The CDM Team will perform the necessary engineering calculations and investigations to identify and develop viable alternatives using information from project goals and objectives established under Task 1.1. The initial feasible alternatives will be developed for the following at a minimum: Site development · Screening Raw wastewater pumping Grit removaI system Biological treatment systems · Aeration blowers Disinfection including, UV irradiation, chlorination/dechlorination, etc. Effluent piping/outfall Potable and non-potable water systems Evaluation of SCADA systems · Power sources Yard piping, reuse piping, security system, etc. Other issues may be added during the course of the Improvement Project as they develop. The project team will conduct with City staff, a workshop to review the initial improvement alternatives and to perform screening of these alternatives. It is intended to provide the forum in which ali stakeholders can participate and comment on alternative development. It will focus on consensus building among the attendees on the critical elements such as process selection, equipment reliability, system flexibility, operations and maintenance concerns, cost impact, etc. Through creative thinking and evaluation process, a list of the most viable alternatives will be developed for further development. Upon completion of the above subtasks, the project team will document the work of tlxis task as a TM entitled, Feasible Alternative Identification and Screening. First draft of this TM will be produced under this task. C:'~Denton~'~ew WW'I'p',,S (:~ pe3 IWo~_g~'uC/.Des~g r~.l~:ll 0.22.02.doc ,Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas Task 1.2 - Deliverables · Workshop minutes containing comments from project stakeholders and advisors · Technical Memorandum - Feasible Alternative Identification and Screening (5 copies) C. Task 1.3 Alternatives Evaluation and Recommendations Task Objectives: To determine "best" value alternative for the City based on established goals and objectives and performance criteria. Subtasks: 1. The improvement alternatives developed under Task 1.2 will be further refined. Refinement efforts will take into account: · Reliability and flexibility enhancements · Ease of operations and maintenance · Cost to benefit ratio Project goal and objective compliance Project Team's confidence level that a particular improvement is capable of unmanned operation, buildable, operable, implementable and expandable within the constraints for which the project is subject. · Ability to be upgraded to meet anticipated future regulatory requirements o A decision matrix will be produced that addresses the non-economic and economic factors associated with making decisions as to which alternative best fits the City-defined needs. The advantages and disadvantages of each alternative will be discussed and the recommended improvement alternative(s) will be selected based on technical merits and cost considerations. The project team will document the above work as a TM entitled, Alternatives Evaluation and Recommendations. First draft of this TM will be produced under this task. Task 1.3 Deliverable = Technical Memorandum - AltemaQves Evaluation and Recommendations (5 copies) D. Task 1.4 Develop Recommended Plan and Conduct Review Workshop Task Objectives: To prepare preliminary design documents to show schematic design of the recommended improvements; refine the estimate of probable construction costs; and develop an implementation plan based on the prelLminary design. C:k~,e~t o n'r~lew ~ copeolWe tk_Stu~y. Desig n.B~ 10.;Z? Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas Subtasks: 1. The project team will prepare preliminary design documents to include: Design criteria Process unit sizing Description of major equipment, electrical loads, control scheme, etc. · Process diagrams The project team wilt prepare a refined budgetary construction cost using the preliminary design documents. The estimate will be based on in-house data, rough material take-off and vendor input. 3. 'An implementation schedule will also be developed based on the proPosed improvements and City's time constraints. 4. The project team will document the above work in a TM entitled, Recommended Plan. First draft of this TM will be produced under this task. The project team will conduct with City staff, a workshop to review the recommended plan and solicit comments to finalize the improvement recommendations. Task 1.4 - Deliverables · Revised Budgetary Construction Costs · Implementation Schedule · Technical Memorandum - Recommended Plan (5 copies) E. 'Task 1.5 - Prepare and Finalize Design Report Task Objective: To document the above Work and to obtain the consensus of project team members as to the project's overall direction and expected outcome. Subtasks: 1. The project team will compile the Work performed under Tasks 1.1, 1.2,1.3, and 1.4 into a Preliminary Design Report. Ten copies of the Preliminary Design Report will be submitted to the City's project team for review and comment. Simultaneous to the City submission, the project team will distribute copies of the Preliminary Design Report to its technical review team for quality assurance/quality control purposes. 8 Scope of Work C/ear Creek Water Reclamation P/ant City of Denton, Texas 3. The review comments from both Cit}/s project team members and CDM's technical review committee members will be shared and discussed, and appropriate revisions to the report that were agreed to with the City. 4. The project team will submit the Preliminary Design Report to COE and TCEQ for review and comment. The project team will also assist in presenting rationale to these agencies and revising the document as required and agreed to by the City to obtain their consensus of action. 5. The results of all review comments will then be incorporated into a Final Design Report. Ten copies of this Final Design Report will then be submitted to the City's project team for approval. Task 1.5 - Deliverables ,, Preliminary Design Report (10 copies) · Design Report review comments in a Comment, Response, and Action format · Materials for presentation to governmental agendes · Minutes of all meetings with regulatory authorities · Documents to address review comments by governmental agencies · Final Design Report (10 copies) F. Task 1.6 - Coordinate with Governmental Agencies Task Objectives: To obtain approval from COE and TCEQ regarding the proposed improvement alternative(s). Subtasks: 1. The project team will submit to COE and TCEQ the final design report for their approval. 2. Coordinate with the City to arrange meetings as necessary with these regulatory agendes. Task 1.6 Deliverables · Final Design Report (3 copies) G. Task 1.7Perform Topographic Survey and Subsurface Investigation Task Objectives: To obtain information and data necessary for design of the improvements. 1. The project team will perform topographic surveys in the areas that will be used for the proposed improvements to provide information required. The areas to be 9 Scope of Work C/ear Creek Water Reclamation P/ant City of Denton, Texas used for the proposed improvements will be outlined on the site drawings provided by the City. Clearing of trees and brushes in these areas will be performed by the City prior to topographical surveys. 2. The project team will also perform a boundary surveys to establish City's property lines. 3. The project team will conduct subsurface exploration work to gather information to aid in foundation design for the improvements. Task 1.7 Deliverables · Survey Drawings to show property boundaries and topography of the areas for improvements (1 se0 = Geotechnical Investigation Reports (2 copies) 'Phase II - Design The design phase will develop the conceptual design into bidding documents suitable for public sector, competitive, low bid general construction delivery. This development will occur in three steps, 30%, 80% and 100% compiete documents to assure forward design progress, timely incorporation of value-added comments, and update of probable construction cost during the design of proposed improvements. A. Task 2,1 - Prepare 30% Complete Plans and Specifications: Task Objective: To develop conceptual design into preliminary design documents to set the framework for further development into bidding documents. Subtasks: 1. Efforts will be concentrated during this step, on establishing general requirements and developing preliminary and final layout for process, mechanical, civil and site work. In reaching this milestone, the project team will: · Mock-up and submit for approval samples of proposed drawing formats Identify alt permits and licenses required to execute the work of the completed contract documents and begin the pursuit of obtaining such permits and licenses · Determine remaining design criteria necessary to complete the detailed design effort · All design plans will be prepared on AutoCAD 2000 2. The project team will prepare 30% complete plans as a part of this task which will generally include: 10 C:~eo~n~lew Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas ·Cover/title sheet with location plan · Civil/Site legend and abbreviation sheets · Site plan sheets · General details of civil/site construction sheets · Process/mechanical legend and abbreviation sheets · Hydraulic profile sheet · Process & inslxumentation diagram sheets · Process/mechanical plan sheets · Process/mechanical sectional sheets a General details of process/mechanical construction 3. The project team will prepare 30% complete specifications as a part of this task which will generally include: · Draft general terms and conditions of contract. Coordinate with City Purchasing Department to incorporate legal/purchasing requirements. · Draft general requirements of contract (Division 1) · Draft applicable specification sections in Divisions 9, 11 and 15 4. Upon compIeting the above subtasks, the project team will pian, schedule, and convene a workshop to review and discuss the 30% complete design effort. Design review packages will be distributed approximately one week ahead of the scheduled workshop to the City. Concerns and issues raised by all reviewing parties will be discussed and resolved during the workshop and the minutes of the workshop will be documented in "comment," "response," and "action" format. Appropriate comments and concerns will be incorporated into design efforts leading to the 80% complete design milestone. Task 2.1 Deliverables · 30% Complete Design Review Package (5 copies) · Workshop Minutes · Permit needs list 11 Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation P/ant City of Denton, Texas B. Task 2.2 Prepare 80% Complete Plans and Specifications Task Objective: To develop the previously prepared 30% complete design effort into 80% complete design milestone. To assure forward design progress and timely incorporation of value-added comments during the design development phase of the project. Subtasks: 1. Incorporate the recommended modifications that have been approved by City staffto produce a final draft of front-end documents. 2. Modify the design as appropriate to reflect the changes resulting from agreed review comments of 30% complete documents. 3. Expand the previously prepared 30% complete documents to include: · Cover/title sheet with location plan · Revised plan index sheet · Civil/Site legend and'abbreviation sheets · Revised site plan sheets · Revised yard piping plan sheets · General details of civil/site construction sheets · Structural legend and abbreviation sheets · Ail structural plan sheets for major process traits · Ail structural sectional sheets for major process units · General details of structural construction sheets · Architectural treatment sheets (ff required) · Process/mechanical legend and abbreviation sheets =, Hydraulic profile sheet · Process diagram sheets · All process/mechanical plan sheets · All process/mechanical sectional sheets · General details of process/mechanical construction 12 Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas Electrical/instrumentation legend and abbreviation sheets Electrical one-line diagram sheets Control schematics Instrumentation control system architecture sheets Electrical plan sheets Electrical sectional sheets General details of electrical/instrumentation construction sheets Control loop diagrams The project team will also prepare additional specifications as a part of this task, which will generally include; Revised table of contents Revised general terms and conditions of contract with City input Final draft general requirements of contract (Division 1) Final specifications of critical components such as concrete mix, major equipment, painting/coating, piping, etc. in Divisions 3, 9,11,13, 14, 15 and 16 technical specifications Final draft of all other specification sections in Division 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,10,11, 12, 13, 14,15 and 16 technical specifications A workshop will be convened upon completing the above subtasks. The 80% design review package will be distributed to the City and to designated project quality assurance/quality control individuals approximately one week ahead of the scheduled workshop. An overview of design progress to date will be prepared at the workshop by discipline and concerns and issues will be solicited from both City and CDM reviewers. Minutes of the workshop will be taken in "Comment," "Response," and "Action" format. Task 2.2 Deliverables · 80% Complete Design Documents (Plans & Specifications) (5 copies) along with City's markups on the 30% complete documents. · Workshop Minutes 13 C;'~Denton'&l ew VpNTp~ cope~3 fWork~t~ly.Desi~ ~,.Elkl 10.22.02.doc Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant City of Denton, Texas C. Task 2.3 - Prepare 100% Complete Plans and Specifications Task Objective: To develop the previously prepared 80% complete design effort into 100% construction plans and specifications for bidding purpose. To assure forward design progress and timely incorporation of value-added comments during the design development phase of the project. Subtasks: 1. Prepare 100% Complete Plans. Produce a draft final design plans that will generally consist of adding specific details of construction sheets for all design disciplines, adding instrumentation control loop diagram sheets, and adding elementary wiring diagram sheets to the electrical discipline design package. Additionally, comments received, as a result of previous Document Review Workshop will be incorporated into the plan sheets as appropriate. 2. Prepare 100% Specifications. Final draft design specifications and general terms and conditions of contract will also be produced under this task. Perform Inter- and Cross-Discipline checking of both plans and specifications will take place under this task. The purpose is to capture omissions in and conflicts between various design disciplines. Additionally, perform constructability, operability and maintainability review. 4. Incorporate changes resulting from review of 80% complete documents and intra- and cross-discipline checking. 5. Finalize design specifications and general terms and conditions of contract. Remaining work to be completed includes: ·TaiIoring Division 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12,13, 14 and 16 technical specifications · Tailoring the general terms and conditions of contract for the specific requirements of the project. Perform cost estimate refinement based on the 100% complete documents. Abrupt deviations from previous estimates will be rationalized and discussed for validity. With City's approval, the project team will schedule and convene a meeting with the TCEQ as well as COE to overview the planned improvements and solicit comments as to concerns and issues using the 100% design documents. The TCEQ comments and the revision actions agreed to during the workshop will be incorporated into the 100% complete plans and specifications to finalize documents. The final documents will be delivered to the City, COE and TCEQ for approval. 14 Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation P/ont City of Denton, Te×as o 10. Adjustments to the cost estimate will be made based on the revisions incorporated and the final cost estimate will be transmitted to the City prior to project advertisement. Our technical review committee will perform quality control and assurance review following the established QA/QC procedures. This review will include constructability, operability and maintainability of the designed improvements. Their comments will be shared with City staff for additional input at the document review workshop and be incorporated into the design documents as appropriate. 11. Prepare reproducible plans and final specification for production of bid documents. Task 2.3 Deliverables · 100% complete design documents along with City's 80% review set with markups (5 copies) · TCEQ and COE Review Comments 100% complete plan in reproducible mylar and CD-Rom (1 set) · 100% complete specifications in Word format (1 set) D. Task 2.4 Prepare "Request for Proposals" to pre-select or pre-purchase UV Disinfection System: Task Objective: To select the most cost effective UV system for the plant and to tailor the design for the pre-selected UV manufacturer. Subtasks: 1. Prepare a "Request for Proposals" document and assist City's Purchasing Department in soliciting proposals from qualified and reputable UV system manufacturers. 2. Respond to proposers' request for information, answer questions, and issue clarifications. Evaluate proposals to detem4ne the most cost effective system using life cycle costs. The life cycle cost consists of capital expense, and operating and maintenance cost on present worth basis associated with power consumption, lamps, ballasts and quartz sleeves replacement, maintenance labor, chemical, etc. 4. Recommend to the City the most desirable system for implementation. 15 Scope of Work Clear Creek Water Reclamation P/ant City of Denton, Texas Task 2.4 Deliverables · Request for proposals (10 copies) · Recommendation for selection of UV system Phase III - Bidding The services during bidding consist of the following tasks: Produce 50 sets of bidding documents of which 10 set would be with full size drawings (22'x34') and 40 sets with half size drawings (ll'x17"). Distribute bidding documents and maintain a record of prospective bidders to whom Bidding Documents have been issued. Receive and process fees for bidding documents. 2. Assist the City in advertising for and obtaining bids for construction, materials, equipment and services and conduct pre-bid conference. 3. Respond to all inquiries concerning this bid and issue addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify or expand the Bidding Documents. Attend bid opening, prepare bid tabulation sheets and assist the City in evaluating bids or proposals, recommend contract award, and assemble contract documents for execution. Consult with and advise the City as to the acceptability of subcontractors, suppliers and other persons and organizations proposed by the Contractor for those portions of the work to which such acceptability is required by the Bidding Documents. Consult with the City concerning and determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor when substitution prior to the award of contract is allowed by the Bidding Documents. 7. Provide five (5) sets of Contract Documents (with full size drawings, 22'x34') for the Contractor's use during construction. 8. Provide two (2) set of full size Documents for the City and one (1) set for the resident project representative's use at project site. Bidding Phase Deliverablest · Contract addenda (57 copies) · Pre-bid Meeting Minutes · Bid tabulation 15 Scope of Work C/ear Creak Water Rec/amation Plant City of Denton, Texas · Contract award recommendation letter (END OF SECTION) 17 C:~)eraon~New WWTPt?a~paofWork_S~udy.O~sig n. E~ 10.22.02.d oc Item #4M AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Materials Management Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Jim Coulter 349-7194 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the City of DeNon authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreemem with Freese and Nichols, inc. for professional engineering services related to the City of Denton Clear Creek Interceptor and Water Reuse Line project; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (RFP 2898 - Clear Creek WRP imerceptor and Reuse Lines awarded to Freese and Nichols, inc. in an amoum not to exceed $431,120). AGREEMENT INFORMATION The Clear Creek and Milam Creek Basins constitute the majority of the northern portion of the wastewater service area north of Loop 288 from west of IH 35 to the proximity of Elm Fork of the Trinity River. Culp Branch drains the northeast portion of the service area and discharges into Elm Fork upstream of Clear Creek. The total service area constitutes 28,750 acres, of which Milam Creek and Clear Creeks accoum for 21,150 acres and the Culp Branch accoums for 7,600 acres. On August 19, 2002 staff presented to the PUB the options for providing wastewater service in the Clear Creek/Milam Creek Basins to the major developmems proposed in this basin. These options were presemed to the City Council on September 3, 2002. Staff received direction from the PUB and the Council to proceed with the design of the sewer line and a conventional wastewater treatment plant. Pursuant to the direction from the PUB and the Council, staff invited six engineering firms on September 13, 2002 to submit proposals for the design of the Clear Creek Interceptor sewer per the requiremems of RFP 2898. The six firms are listed alphabetically as below: Freese & Nichols, Inc. Halff Associates Inc. Huitt Zollars Kimley-Horn Turner Collie & Braden Teague Nall& Perkins Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 AGREEMENT INFORMATION (CONTINUED) Proposals were due on September 27, 2002. Kimley-Horn did not submit a proposal. The Selection Committee reviewed the five proposals and ranked the firms based on the criteria established in the RFP. The Selection Committee ranked Freese & Nichols as Number 1. Staff then moved to negotiate a scope of work and cost proposal from Freese & Nichols. The important aspects of the scope of work are listed below: · Evaluate alternative sewer alignments and recommend the best overall sewer alignment. · Determine wastewater flows based on Land Use Criteria and determine size of the sewer lines. · Design 33,000 feet of Sewer Line and 14,000 feet of Reuse Line. · Provide survey, easement document preparation and geotechnical services. · Conduct an environmental evaluation of the sewer alignment to determine permit requirements and prepare permit documents. · Produce plans and specifications for bidding. Staff has negotiated the Scope of Work and the Cost Proposal (see Exhibit II - Freese & Nichols Scope of Work & Cost Proposal). The Sewer Line and Reuse Line costs are estimated at $4,400,000 and 600,000 respectively. The basic services fee of $233,500 for the design of the sewer and reuse lines amount to 4.67 percent. The Special Services fees of $197,620 amount to 3.95 percent. The total engineering fees are thus estimated at 8.62 percent of the project cost. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) The Public Utility Board approved the staff recommendation to design a conventional plant and sewer system in the Clear Creek Basin on August 19, 2002. The City Council approved the staff recommendation to design a conventional plant and sewer system in the Clear Creek basin on September 3, 2002. The Public Utility Board approved this RFP on October 21, 2002. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the professional services agreement with Freese & Nichols in an amount not to exceed $431,120. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 3 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Freese and Nichols, Inc. Fort Worth, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The wastewater collection and treatment systems based on the projected needs of the proposed developments need to be operational by the middle of the year 2004. FISCAL INFORMATION The engineering services fees will be funded from the March 2002 bond sale and the interest earned from the bonds. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AlS-RFP 2898 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH FREESE & NICHOLS, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE CITY OF DENTON CLEAR CREEK INTERCEPTOR AND WATER REUSE LINE PROJECT; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council deems that it is in the public interest to engage Freese & Nichols, Inc. a Corporation, of Fort Worth, Texas ("F&N"), to provide professional engineering services pertaining to the City of Denton Clear Creek Interceptor and Water Reuse Line Project; and WHEREAS, the City staff has reported to the City Council that there is a substantial need for the above-referenced professional engineering services, and that limited City staff cannot adequately perform the specialized services and tasks with its own personnel; and WHEREAS, Chapter 2254 of the Texas Government Code, known as the "Professional Services Procurement Act," generally provides that a City may not select a provider of professional services on the basis of competitive bids, but must select the provider on the basis of demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications, and for a fair and reasonable price; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1: That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Freese & Nichols, Inc., a Corporation, of Fort Worth, Texas, for professional engineering services pertaining to the City of Denton Clear Creek Interceptor and Water Reuse Line, in an mount not to exceed $431,120; in substantially the form of the Professional Services Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herewith by reference. SECTION 2: That the award of this Agreement by the City is on the basis of the demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications of F&N and the demonstrated ability of F&N to perform the services needed by the City for a fair and reasonable price. SECTION3: That the expenditure of funds as provided in the attached Professional Services Agreement is hereby authorized. SECTION 4: That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its pa~age and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the ~ day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\02kFreese & Nichols, Inc.-Clear Creek Interceptor Sewer PSA.doc STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the __ day of ,2002, by and between the City of Denton, Texas, a Texas municipal corporation, with its principal office at 215 East McKinney Street, Denton, Denton County, Texas 76201, hereinafter called "Owner" and Freese and Nichols, Inc., with its corporate office at 4055 International Plaza, Suite 200, Fort Worth, Texas 76109-4895 hereinafter called "Design Professional," acting herein, by and through their duly authorized representatives. In consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows: SECTION 1 EMPLOYMENT OF DESIGN PROFESSIONAL The Owner hereby contracts with the Design Professional, a licensed Texas engineering finn, as an independent contractor. The Design Professional hereby agrees to perform the services as described herein and in the Proposal, the General Conditions, and other attachments to this Agreement that are referenced in Section 3, in connection with the Project. The Project shall include the design of the Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant. Interceptor and Reuse Lines. The Clear Creek Basin is located north of Loop 288, extends west of 1I-1-35, and discharges into the Elm Fork of the Trinity River. The proposed gravity interceptor will collect flows within the Clear Creek Basin and route them to the proposed Clear Creek Water Reclamation Plant ("WRP") to be designed by others. The proposed reuse line will ronte treated water from the WRP west, parallel to the new interceptor, to reuse customers along F.M. 428. Within the Wastewater Service Area of the City of Denton, Texas the Clear Creek Basin along with Culp Branch encompasses 28,750 acres. Time is of the essence in completing the design of these lines, with final completion by May 2004. The effort of the Design Professional will include the following: Prepare an engineering report sizing the interceptor and reuse line, evaluating various alignment alternatives and recommending a cost-effective and practical route. Produce survey for selected route, establishing all necessary control for design purposes (as shown in the detailed Scope of Work, Attachment CO), and produce instruments for easement acquisitions. Page 1 · Perform design and produce contract documents suitable for competitive bidding under municipal laws. * Provide assistance during bidding of the Project. e Provide aSsistance during construction of the Project. SECTION 2 COMPENSATION The Owner shall compensate the Design Professional as follows: 2.1 BASIC SERVICES 2.1.1 For Basic Services the total compensation shall be $431,120. 2.1.2 Progress payments for Basic ServiCes shall be billed by the Design Professional on a once-monthly basis. For Lump Sum tasks, Design Professional shall submit invoices based on the actual percentage of work completed. For other tasks, the Design Professional shall bill from time sheets, in minimum ½ hour or smaller time increments, at the hourly Billing Rates, not to exceed those shown in the Fee Proposal Summary attached. For and in consideration of the professional services to be performed by the Design Professional herein, the Owner agrees to pay, at the listed hourly Billing Rates, a total fee, including reimbursement for direct non-labor expenses and for its sub-consultant expense, an amount not to exceed that listed for each task as shown below, all of which shall not exceed the total as listed under Item 2.1.1. Basic Scawices - Preliminary Design Basic Services - Design Phase Basic Services - Construction Phase Special Services - Design Survey- Special Services - Easement Preparation (up to 12 temporary and 12 permanent) Special Services - Geotech and Driller Special Services - Environmental Review $50,000 Lump Sum $160,000 Lump Sum $23,500 Lump Sum $137,500 Cost Plus Not to Exceed $21,120 Cost Plus Not to Exceed $25,000 Cost Plus Not Exceed $14,000 Cost Plus Not Exceed to to Page 2 2.2 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 2.2.1 For Additional Services authorized in writing by the Owner, the Design Professional shall be paid based on a to-be-agreed-upon Schedule of Charges. Payments for additional services shall be due and payable upon submission by the Design Professional, and shall be in accordance with Item 2.1.2 hereinabove. Statements for Basic Services and any Additional Services shall be submitted to the Owner no more frequently than once monthly. 2.2.2 Compensation for Additional Services of outside consultants, including additional structural, mechanical and electrical engineering services shall be based on a multiple of 1.1 times the amounts billed to the Design Professional for such additional services. 2.3 REIMBURSABLE EXI~ENSES Reimbursable Expenses shall be a multiple of 1. t times the expenses incurred by the Design Professional, the Design Professiona?s employees and consultants in the interest of the Project as defined in the General Conditions, but not to exceed the totals as shown in the Fee Proposal Summary without the prior written approval of the Owner. SECTION 3 ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement includes this executed agreement and the following documents all of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference as if fully set forth herein: City of Denton General Conditions to Agreement for Architectural or Engineering Services. 2. The Design Professional's Proposal and Fee Proposal Summary. This Agreement is signed by the parties hereto effective as of the date first above written. Page 3 "OWNER" CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY Michaet A. Conduff City Manager By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY By: "DESIGN PROFESSIONAL" FREESE AND NICHOLS, 1NC. ATTEST: S:\Our Doeuments\Contmcts\02~Freese & Nichols Irc- Design Professional Agreement-- WW 2002..doc Page 4 CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS GENERAL CONDITIONS TO AGREEMENT FOR ARCItlTECTURAL OR ENGINEERING SERVICES ARTICLE L ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 1.1 The Architect or Engineers services consist of those services for the Project (as defined in the agreement (the "Agreement") and proposal (the "Proposal") to which these General Conditions are attached) performed by the Architect or Engineer (hereinafter called the "Design Pmfessioual") or Design Professional's employees and consultants as enumerated in Articles 2 and 3 of these General Conditions as modified by the Agreement and Pmposai (the "Sexvices')~ 1.2 The Design Professional will perform all Services as an independent contractor to thc prevailing professional standards consistent wiffr the level of care and skill ordinarily exemised by members of the same profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions, including reasonable, informed judgments and prompt timely actions (the "Degree of Care"). The Services shall be performed as expeditiously as is consistent with the Degree of Care necessary for the orderly progress of the Project Upon request of the Owner, the Design Professional shall submit for the Owner's approval a schedule for the performance of the Services which may be adjusted as the Project proceeds, and shall include allowances for periods of time required for the Owner's review and for approval of submissions by authorities having jurisdiction over the Project Time limits established by this schedule and approved by the Owner shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Design Professional or Owner, and any adjustments to this sched/.fle shall be mutually acceptable to both parties ARTICLE 2 SCOPE OF BASIC SERVICES 2.1 BASIC SERVICES DEFINED The Design Professional's Basic Services consist of those descrBed in Sections 2.2 through 2.6 of these General Conditions and include normal structural, civil, mechanical and electrical engineering services and any other engineering services necessary to produce a complete and accurate set of Construction Documents, as described by and required in Section 2A The Basic Services may be modified by the Agreement 2.2 SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE 2.2.1 The Design Professional, ia consultation with the Owner, shall develop a written program for the Project to ascertain Owner's needs and to establish the requirements for the Project 2.2.2 The Design Professional shall provide a prelirninary evaluation of the Owners program, construction schedule and construction budget requirements, each in terms of the other, subject to the limitations set forth in Subsection 5.2.1 2.2.3 The Design Professional shall review with the Owner alternative approaches to design and construction of the Pr6ject 2.2.4 Based on the mutually agreed-upon program, schedule and construction budget requirements, the Design Professional shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Schematic Design Documents consisting of drawings and other documents illustrating the scale and relationship of Project components. The Schematic Design shall contemplate compliance with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes andregulations.. 2.2.5 The Design Professional shall submit to the Owner a pmllmiuary detailed estimate of Construction Cost based on curt'cut area, volume or other unit costs and which indicates the cost of each category of work involved in constructing the Project and establishes an elapsed time factor for the period of time from the coramencement to the completion of construction. 23 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE 2.3.1 Based on the approved Schematic Design Documents and any adjustments authorized by the Owner ia the program, schedule or conslmcfion budget, the Design Professional shall prepare for approval by the Owner, Design Development Documents consisting of drawings and other documents to fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, stmcturA, mechanical and electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate, which shall comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. Notwithstanding Owners approval of the documents, Design Professional represents that the Documents and specifications will be sufficient and adequate to fulfill the purposes of the Project 2.3.2 The Design Professional shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to the preliminary estimate of Construction Cost in a further Detailed Statement as described ia Section 2.2..5 2.4 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PItASE 2.4.1 Based on the approved Design Development Documents and any further adjustments in the scope or quality of the Project or in the construction budget authorized by the Owner, the Design Professional shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Construction Documents consisting of Drawings and Specifications setting forth in detail requirements for the construction of the Project, which shall comply with ail applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations, Page ] of 9 S:kEngrs\EmpkFGPayne\pdf fileskFnBGeneral Conditions PSA .- F&N - 9 pt, doc Revised 5-30-02 2.42, The Design Professional shall assist the Owner in the preparation of the necessary bidding or procurement information, bidding or procurement forms, the Conditions of the contract, and the form of Agreement between the Owner and contractor 2.4.3 The Design Professional shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to previous preliminary estimates of Construction Cost indicated by changes in requirements or general market conditions. 2.4.4 The Design Professional shall assist the Owner in connection with thc Owner's responsibility for ffling documents required for the approval ofgovemmenlal authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 2.$ CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROCUREMENT 2.5.1 The Design Professional, following the Owners approval of the Conslmction Documents and of the latest preliminary detailed estimate of Construction Cost, shall assist the Owner in procuring a construction contract for the Project through any procmement method that is legally applicable to the Project including the competitive sealed bidding process. Although the Owner will consider the advice of the Design Professional, the award of the construction contract is in the sole discretion of the Owner 2.5.2 If the construction contract amount for the Project exceeds the total construction cost of thc Project as set forth in the approved Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs of the Project submitted by the Design Professional, then the Design Professional, at its sole cost and expense, will revise the Construction Docmants as may be required by the Owner to reduce or modify the quantity or quality of the work so that the total construction cost of the Project will not exceed the total construction cost set forth in the approved Detailed Statement of Probable Construction Costs, 2.6 CONSTRUCTION PHASE - ADMhNISTRAT1OI~ OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 2.6.1 The Design Professional's responsibility to provide Basic Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with the award of the Contract for Construction and termimtes at the issuance to the Owner of the final Certificate for Payment, unless extended under the terms of Subsection 8.3 2. 2.62, The Design Professional shall provide construction phase services as described in Attachment CO 2.6.3 Construction Phase duties, responsibilities and lhnitafions of anthority of the Design Professional shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement of the Owner and Design Professional. 2,6.4 The Design Professional shall advise and consult with the Owner (1) during constmefon, and (2) at the Owner's direction from time to time during the correction, or warranty period descn'bed in the Contract for Construction_ The Design Professional shall have authority to act on behalf of the Owner only to the extent provided in the Agreement and these General Conditions, un/ess otherwise modified by written instmmcut. 2.6.5 The Design Pmfessioual shall observe the construction site as described in Attachment CO wtdle construction is in progress to become fm'niliar with the progress and quality of the work completed and to determine if thc work is being performed in a manner indicating that the work when completed wilt be in accordance with the Contract Documents~ Design Professional shall provide Owner a written report subsequent to each on-site visit. The Design Professional represents that he will follow Degree of Care in performing all Services under the Ag~eemenl. The Design Professional shall promptly correct any defective designs or specifications fiunished by the Design Professional at no cost to the Owner. The Owner's approval, acceptance, use of or payment for all or any part of the Design Professional's Services hereunder or of the Project itself shall in no way alter the Design Professional's obligations or the Owner's rights hereunder 2.6.6 The Design Professional shall not have control over or charge of and shall not be responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the work The Design Professional shall not be responsthle for the Contractor's schedules or failure to carry out the work in accordance with the Contract Documents except insofar as such failure may result from Design Professional's negligent acts or omissions. The Design Professional shall not have controt over or charge of acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or of any other persons performing poffions of the work. 2.6.7 The Design Professional shall at all times have access to the work wherever it is in preparation or progress. 2.6.8 The Design Professional shall review and approve or take other appropriate action upon Contractor's submittals such as Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples for the purpose of(i) deteimimn~ g compliance with applieable laws, statutes, ordhaances and codes; and (2) determining wliether or not the work, when completed, will be in compliance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Design Professional shall act with such reasonable prompmess to cause no delay in the work or in the cons~tcfion of the Owner or of separate contractors, while allowing sufficient time in the Design Professional's professional judg~nent to penuit adequate review. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of deterraining, the accuracy and completeness of other details such as dimensions and quantities or for substantiating' inslzuetions for installation or performance of equipment or systems designed by the Contractor, all of which remain the responsibility of the Contractor to the extent required by the Contract Documents~ The Design Professional's review shall not constitute approval of safety precautions or, unless otherwise specifically stated by the Design Professional, of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The Design Professional's approval of a specific item shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item is a component, When professional certification of performance characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required by the Contract Documents, the Design Professional shall be entitled to rely upon such cefdfication to establish that the materials, systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria required by the Contract Documents, Page 2 of 9 S:\Engrs\Emp~GPayne\pdf fileskFnl~Genexal Conditions PSA - F&N - 9 pt.doe Revised 5-30-02 2,6~9 The Design Professional shall assist the Owner in the preparation of Change Orders and Constmcfiun Change Directives, with supporting documentation and data if deemed necessary by the Design Professional as provided in Subsections 3.i.1 and 3..33, for the Owner's approval and execution in accordance wfth the Contract Documents, and shall assist the Owner in the authorization of rninor changes in the work not involving an adjustment in thc Contract Sum or an extension of the Contract Time which are not inconsistent with the intent of the Contract Documents. 2.6.10 The Design Professional shall interpret and provide recommendations on matters concerning performance of the Owner and Conlractor under the requirements of the Contract Documents on writtk, n request of either the Owner or Contractor The Design Professional's response to such requests shall be made with reasonable promptness andwithJn any time limits agreed npon. 2.6.11 Interpretations and decisions of the Design Professional shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Docmnents and shall be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial decisions, the Design Professional shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by both Owner and Contractor, and shall not be liable for results or interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith in accordance with all the provisions of this Agreement and in the absence of negligence. 2.6.12 The Design Professional shall render written decisions within a reasonable time on all claims, disputes or other matters in question between the Owner and Contractor relating to the execution or progress of the work as provided in the Contract Documents. 2.6.13 The Design Professional (I) shall render senrices under the Agreement in accordance with the Degree of Care; (2) will reimburse the Owner for all damages directly caused by the Design Professional not meeting the Degree of Care, but not costs that would have been borne by the Owner if the error or omission had not been made; and (3) by acknowledging payment by the Owner of any fees due, shall not be released from any fights the Owner may have under the Agreement or diminish any of the Design Professional's obligations thereunder. ARTICLE 3 ADDITIONAL sERVICES 3.1 GENERAL 3.1.I The services described in this Article 3 are not included in Basic Services unless so identified in the Agreement or Proposal, and they shall be paid for by the Owner as provided in the Agreement, in addition to the compensation for Basic Services. The services descn'bed under Sections 3.2 and 3.4 shall only be provided Lf authorLzed or confumed in writing by the Owner. if services described under Contingent Additional Services in Section 3.3 are required due to circumstances beyond the Design Professional's control, the Design Professional shall notify the Owner in writing and shall not commence such additional services until it receives written approval from the Owner to proceed. If the Owner indicates in writing that all or part of such Contingent Additional Sea-vices axe not required, the Design Professional shall have no obligation to provide those services. Owner will be responsible for compensating the Design Professional for Contingent Additional Sendces only if they are not required due to the negligence or fault of Design Professional. 3.2 PROJECT REPRESENTATION BEYOND BASIC SERVICES 3.2,1 I1' more extensive representation at the site than is described in Subsection 2.6.5 is mqnked, the Design Professional shall provide one or more Project Representatives to assist in carrying out such additional on-site responsibilities. 3.2.2 Project Representatives shall be selected, employed and directed by the Design Professional, and the Design Professional shall be com- pensated therefor as agreed by the Owner and Design Professional. 3.3 CONTiNGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICES 33.1 MakingmateriaI revisions in Drawings, Specifications or other documents when such revisions are~ 1 inconsistent with approvals or instructions previously given by the Owner, including revisions made necessary by adjustments in the Owner's program or Project budget; 2~ requked by the enactment or revision o£ codes, laws or regulations subsequent to the preparation of such documents, or 3 due to changes required as a result of the Owner's failure to render decision in a timely manner 3.3.2 Providing services required because of significant changes in the Project including, but not limited to, size, quality, complexity, or the Owner's schedule, except for services required under Subsection 2..5.2.. 3.3.3 P~eparing Drawings, Specifications and other documentation and supporting data, and providing other services in connection with Change Orders and Construction Change Directives. 3.3.4 Providing consultation concerning replacement of work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, and funfishing services required in connection with the replacement of such work_ 3.3.5 Providing services made necessary by the default of the Contractor, by major defects or deficiencies in the work of the Contractor, or by failure of performance of either the Owner or Contractor under the Contract for Construction. Page 3 of 79 S:\Engrs\EmpkFGPayne\Fd:[ files~FnBGeneral Conditions PSA - F&lq - 9 pr,dec Revised 5-30-02 3.3.6 ProvidLng sendces in evaluating an extensive number of claims subrdtted by the Contractor or others in connection with the work_ 3.3.7 Providing services in connection with a public hearing, arbitration proceeding or legal proceeding except where the Design Professional is party thereto. 3.3.8 Providing services in addition Io those required by Article 2 for preparing documents for alternate, separate or sequential bids or providing services in connection with bidding or construction prior to the completion of the Construction Documents Phase. 3.3.9 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Agreement, Proposal or these General Conditions to the conlrary, all services described in this Article 3 that are caused or necessitated in whole or in part due to the negligent act or omission oftha Design Professional shall be performed by the Design Professional as a part of the Basic Services under the Agreement with no additional compensation above and beyond the compensation due the Design Professional for the Basic Services. The intervening or concurrent negligence of the Owner shall not limit the Design Professional's obligations under this Subsection 3.3 9. 3.4 OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES 3.4.1 Providing financial feas~ility or other special studies. 3.4.2 Providing planning surveys, site evaluations or comparative studies of prospective sites. 3.4.3 Providing special surveys, environmental studies and submissions required for appmvals of governmental authorities or others having juris~ction over the Project. 3.4.4 Providing services relative to future facilities, systems and equipment. 3.4.5 Providing services to investigate existing conditions or facilities or to make mcasmed drawings thereof. 3.4.6 Providing services to verify the accuracy of diawings or other information furnished by the Owner 3.4.7 Providing coordination of construction performed by separate contractors or by the Owners own fomes and coordination of services required in connection with construction performed and equipment supplied by the Owner 3.4.8 Providing dehailed quantity surveys or inventories of material, equipment and labor. 3.4.9 Providing analyses of operating and maintenance costs. 3.4.10 Making investigations, inventories of materials or equipment, or valuations and detailed appraisals of existing facilities. 3.4.12 Providing assistance in the utilization of equipment or systems such as testing, adjusting and balancing, preparation of operation and mainteaanee manuals, training personnel for operation and maintenance and consultation during operation. 3.4.13 Providing interior design and similar services required for or in connection with the selection, procurement or installation of furniture, furnishings and related equipment. 3.4.14 Providing services other than as provided in Section Z6r4, after issuance to the Owner of the final Certificate for Payment and expireti°n of the Warranty period of the Contract for Construction. 3.4.15 Providing services of consultants for other than architeelural, civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering portions of the Project provided as a part of Basic Services. 3.4.16 Providing any other services not otherwise included in this Agreement or not customarily furnished in accordance with generally accepted architectural practice 3.4.17 Preparing a set of reproducible record drawings showing significant changes in the work made during construction based on marked-up prints, drawings and other data furnished by the Contractor to the Design Professional.. 3.4.18 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Agreement, Proposal or these General Conditions to the contrary, all services described in this Article 3 that are caused or necessitated in whole or in part due to the negligent act or omission of the Design Professional shall be performed by the Design Professional as a part of the Basic Services under the Agreement with no additional compensafiun above and beyond the compensation due the Design Professional for the Basic Services~ The intervening or concurrent negligence of the Owner shall not limit the Design Professional's obligations under this Subsection 3..3 9 Page 4 of 9 S:~Engrs\EmpWGPayne\pdf filpsWnl~General Cond/tions PSA - F&N - 9 pt~doe Revised 5-30-02 ARTICLE 4 OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 4.1 Thc Owner shall consult with tlae Design Professional regarding requirements for the Project, including (t) the Owneds objectives, (2) schedule and design constraints and criteria, including space requirements and relationships, flexibility, expendability, special equipment, systems and site requirements, as more specifically described in Subsection 2.2..I 4.2 The Owner shall establish and update an overall budget for the Project, inchiding the Conslraction Cost, the Owner's other costs and reasonable contingencies related to all of these costs, 4.3 If requested by the Design Professional, thc Owner shall famish evidence that fmanciat arrangements have been made to fhlfi11 the Owner's obligations under this Agreement. 4.4 The Owner shall designate a representative authorLzed to act on the Owner's behalf with respect to the Project.. The Owner or such authorized representative shall render decisions in a timely manner periaining to documents submitted by the Design Professional in order to avoid unreasonable delay/n the orderly and sequential pro~ess of the Design Professional's services 4.5 Where applicable, the Owner shall furnish surveys describing physical characteristics, legal limitations and utility locations for the site of the Project, and a written legal description of the site.. The surveys and legal information shall ineinde, as applicable, grades and lines of streets, alleys, pavements and adjoining property and stmctmes; adjacent drainage; rights-of-way, restrictions, easements, encroachments, zoning, deed restrictions, boundaries and contours of the site; locations, dimensions and necessary data pertaining to existing buildings, other improvements and trees; and information concerning available utility services and lines, both public and private, above and below grade, including inverts and depths. All the information on the survey shall be referenced to a project benchmark. 4.6 Where applicable, the Owner shall famish the services of geotechnical engineers when such services are requested by the Design Professional. Such services may include but are not limited to test borings, test pits, determinations of soil bearing values, percolation tests, evaluations of hazardous materials, g~ound corrosion and resistivity tests, including necessary operations for anticipating sub-soil conditions, with reports and appropriate professional recommendations 4.6.1 The Owner shall famish the services of other consultants when such services are reasonably mquked by the scope of the Project and are requested by the Design Professional and are not retained by the Design Professional as part of its Basic Services or Additional Services 4.7 When not a part of the Additional Services, the Owner shall furnish stmctmml, mechanical, chemical, air and water pollution tests, tests of hazardous materials, and other lab0mtory and environmental tests, inspections and reports required by law or the Conlmct Documents. 4.8 The Owner shall fumish all legal, accounting and insurance counseling services as may be necessary at any time for the Project, including auditing services the Owner may require to verify the Contractor's Applications for Payment or to ascertain how or for what purposes the Contractor has used the money paid by or on behalf of the Owner. 4.9 The services, information, surveys and reports required by Owner under Sections 4,5 through 48 shall be furnished at the Owners expense, and the Design Professional shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness thereof in the absence of any negligence on the part of the Design Professional. 4.10 The Owner shall give prompt whtten notice to the Design Professional if the Owner becomes aware of any fault or defect in the Project or nonconformance with the Contract Docmnents. 4.11 Design Professional shall propose language for certificates or certifications to be requested of the Design Professional or Design Pmfessiona?s consultants and shall submit such to the Owner for review and approval at least fourteen (i4) days prior to executio~ The Owner agrees not to request certifications that would require knowledge or services beyond the scope of the Agreement. ARTICLE $ CONSTRUCTION COST 5.1 CONSTRUCTION COST DEFINED 5.1.1 The Construction Cost shall be the total cost or estimated cost to the Owner of all elements of the Project designed or specified by the Design ProfessionaL. $.1.2 The Construction Cost shall include thc cost at current market rotes of labor and mateafais furnished by thc Owner and equipment designed, specified, selected or specially provided for by the Design Professional, plus a reasonable allowance for the Contractors overhead and profiL In addition, a reasonable allowance for contingencies shall be included for market conditions at the time of bidding and for changes in the work during construction. 5.1.3 Construction Cost does not include the compensation of thc Design Professional and Design Professional's consultants, the costs of thc land, rights-of-way, fmancing or other costs which are the responsibility of the Owner as provided in Article 4, Page 5 of 9 S~\Engrs~,mpXFGPayne\pdf iilesWnlSGeneral Conditions PSA - F&N - 9 pt~do¢ Revised 5-30-02 5-2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION COST 5.2.1 Evaluations of the Ownees Project budget, preliminary estimates of Conslmction Cost ~nd detailed estimates of Construction Cost prepared bY the Design Professional represent the Design Professional's best judgment as a design professional familiar with the construction indush3~ ltis recognized, however, that neither the Design Professional nor the Owner has control over the cost of labor, materials or equipment, over the Con- tractors methods of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions. Accordingly, the Design Professional cannot and does not warrant or represent that bids or cost proposals will not vary fi.om the Owner's Project budget or from any estimate of Construction Cost or evaluation prepared or agreed to by the Design Professional. 5.2-2 No fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be established as a condition of the Agreement by the furnishing, proposal or establishment of a Project budget, unless such fixed limit has been agreed upon in writing and signed by the parties thereto. If such a fixed limit has been established, the Design Professional shall be permitted to include contingencies for design, bidding and price escalation, to determine what materials, equip- ment, component systems and types ofcenstmction are to be included in the Contract Documents, to make reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include in the ConWact Documents alternate bids to adjust the Construction Cost to the fixed limit. Fixed limits, if any, shall be increased in the mount of an increase in the Contract Sum occun-ing after execution of the Conlract for Construction. 5.2.3 If the Procurement Phase has not commenced within 90 days after the Design Professional submits the Construction DoCtUnents to the Owner, any Project budget or fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be adjusted to reflect changes in the general level of prices in the consm~cfion industry between the date of submission of the Construction Documents to the Owner and the date on which proposals are sought_ ARTICLE 6 OWNERSIIIP A_ND USE OF DOCUMENTS 6.1[ The Dmwlngs, Specifications and other documents prepared by the Design Professional for this Project are instnmaents of the Design Professional's service and shall become the property of the Owner upon termination or completion of the Agreement. The Design Professional is entitled to retain copies of alt such doemuents Such documents are intended only be applicable to this Project, and Owner's use of such documents in other projects shall be at Owner's sole risk and expense. In the event the Owner uses any of the information or materials developed pursaant to the Agreement in another project or for other purposes than are specified in the Agreement, the Design Professional is released from any and all liability relating to their use in that project 6.2 Submission or dislribufion of documents to meet official regulatory requirements or for similar purposes in connection with the Project is not to be conslraed as publication in derogation of the Design Professional's reserved rights. ARTICLE 7 TERMINATION, SUSPENSION OR ABANDONMENT 7.1 The Design Professional may tesminate the Agreement upon not less than thirty days written notice should the Owner fail substantially to perform in accordance withthe terms ofthe Agreement throughno fault of the Design Professional~ Owner may terminate theAgrecment orany phase thereofwith or without cause upon thirty 00) days prior wfi~n notice to the Design Professional. All work and labor being performed under hhe Agreement shall cease immediately upon Design Professional's receipt of suer notice. Before the end of the thirty 00) day period, Design Professional shall invoice the Owner for all work it satisfactorily performed prior to the receipt of such notice. No amount shall be due for lost or anticipated profits. All plans, field surveys, and other data related to the Project shall become property of the Owner upon termination of the Agreement mad shah be promptly delivered to the Owner in a reasonably organized form. Should Owner subsequently contract with a new Design Professional for contmnation of services on the Pmjec4 Design Professional shall cooperate in providing information.. 7.2 ffthe Project is suspended by the Owner for more than 30 consecutive days, the Design Professional shall be compensated for services satisfactorily performed prior to notice of such suspension. When the Project is resumed, the Design Professional's compensation shall be equitably adjusted to .provide for expenses incurred in the interruption and resumption of the Design Professional's services~ 7.3 The Agreement may be terminated by thc Owner upon not less than seven days written notice to the Design Professional in the event that the Project is perro~nently abandonecL If the Project is abandoned by the Owner far more than 90 consecutive days, the Design Professional or the Owner may terrainate the Agreement by giving written notice.. 7.4 Failure of the Owner to make payments to the Design Professional for work satisfactorily completed in accordance with the Agreetnent shall be considered substantial nonperformance end cause for termination. 7.5 If the Owner fails to make payment to Design Professional within thirty (30) days of receipt of a statement for services properly and satisfactorily performed, the Design Professional may, upon seven days written notice to the Owner, suspend performance of services under the Agreement. 7.6 In the event of .termination not the fault of the Design Professional, the Design Professional shall be compensated for services properly and satisfactorily performed prior to termination. Page 6 of 9 Sr\Ertgrs\Emp~VGPayne\pdf fileskFnr~Gmeeral Conditions PSA - F&N- 9 pt~doe Revised 5-30-02 ARTICLE 8 PAYMENTS TO THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL 8.1 DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSE 8.1.1 Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the direct salaries of the Design Professional's personnel engaged on the Project and the portion of the cost of their mandatory and customary conm'ont/ons and benefits related thereto, tach as employment taxes and other statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pensions and similar contributions and benefits. 8.2 REIMBURSABLE EXPEaNSES 8.2.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition lo compensation for Basic and Additional Services and include expenses incurred by the Design Professional and Design Professional's employees and consultants in the interest of the Project, as identified in the following Clausesl 8.2.1.1 Expense of transportation in connection with the Project; expenses in connection with authorized out-of~town travel; long-distance communications; and fees pakt for securing approval ofanthorifies having jurisdiction over the Project. 8.2.1.2 Expense of reproductions (except the reproduction of the sets of documents referenced ha Subsection 2.6,19), postage and handling of Drawings, Specifications and other documents. 8.2.1.3 If authorized in advance by the Owner, expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates~ 8.2.1.4 Expense ofrenderings, models and mock-ups requested by the Owner 8.2.1.5 Expense of computer-aided design and drafting equipment time when used in connection with the Project.. 8,2.1.6 Other expenses that are approved in advance in writing by the Owner. 8.3 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF BASIC SERVICES 8.3.1 Payments for Basic Services shall be made monthly and, where applicable, shall be in proportion to services performed within each phase of service, on the basis set forth in Section 2 of the Agreement and the schedule of work. 8.3.2 If and to the extent that the time initially established in the Agreement is exceeded or extended through no fault of the Design Professional, compensation for any services rendered during the additional period of time shall be computed in the manner set forth in Section 2 of the Agreement 8.3.3 When compensation is based on a percentage of Construction Cost and any portions of the Project are deleted or otherwise not constructed, compensation for those portions of the Project shall be payable to the extent services are performed on those portions, in accordance with the schedule set forth in Section 2 of the Agreement based on (1) the lowest bona fide bid or (2) if no such bid or proposal is received, the most recent preliminary estimate of Construction Cost or detailed estimate of Construction Cost for such portions of the Project. 8,4 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITIONAL SERVICES 8`4.1 Payments on account of the Design Professional's Additional Services and for Reimbursable Expenses shall be made monthly within 30 days after the presentation to the Owner of the Design Professional's statement of services rendered or expenses incurred. 8.5 PAYMENTS WITHHELD No dechactions shall be made from the Design Professional's compensation on aeconnt of penalty, liquidated damages or other sums withheld fi.om payments to contractors, or on account of the cost of changes in the work other than those for which the Design Professional is responsible. 8.6 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS Design Professional shall make available to Owner or Owners authorized representative records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses pertaining to Additional Services and services performed on the basis of a multiple of Direct Personnel Expense for inspection and copying during regular business hours for three years ager the date of the final Certificate of Payment, or until any litigation related to the Project is final, whichever date is latex ARTICLE 9 INDEMNITY 9.1 The Design Professional shall indemnify and save and hold harmiess the Owner and ils officers, agents, and employees from and against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, losses, and expenses, including, but not limited to court COsts and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the Owner, and including, without limitation, damages for bodily and personal injury, death and property damage, resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of the Design Professional or its officers, shareholders, agents, or employees in the performance of the Agreement. Page 7 of 9 S:\Engrs\EmpWGPayne\pdf files~Fnl~Genexal Conditions PSA - F&N - 9 pr.doc Revised 5-30-02 9.2 Nothing herein shall be construed to create a liability to any person who is not a party to thc 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 thc Agreement, including the defense of governmental immunity, which defenses are hereby expressly reserved. ARTICLE 10 INSURANCE During the performance of the Services under the Agreement, Design Professional shall maintain the following insurance with an insurance company licensed or authorized 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: 10.1 Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence and not less than $2,000,000 in the aggregate, and with property damage Iimits of not less than $100,000 for each occurrence and not less than $250,000 in the aggregate. 10.2 Automobile Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $500,000 for each person and not less than $500,000 for each accident, and with property damage limits of not less than $100,000 for each accident 10.3 Worker's Compensation Insurance in accordance with statutory reqnirements, and Employers' Liability Insurance with limits of not less than $100,000 for each accident including occupational disease 10.4 Professional L/ability Insurance with limits of not less than $i,000,000 annual aggregate. 10.$ The Design Professional shall furnish insurance certificates or insurance policies to the Owner evidencing insurance in compliance with this Article 10 at the time of the execution of the Agreement The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall name the Owner as an additional insured, the Workers~ Compensation policy shah contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the Owner, and each policy shall contain a provision that such insurance shall not be canceled or modified without thirty (30) days' prior written notice to Owner and Design Professional. In such event, the Design Professional shall, prior to the effective date of the change or cancellation, furnish Owner with substitute certificates of insurance meeting the requirements of this Article 10 ARTICLE 11 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 11.1 The Agreement shah be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue of any suit or cause of action under the Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton County, Texas~ 11.2 The Owner and Design Professional, respectively, bind themselves, their parmers, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreemont~ The Design Professional shall not assign its interests in thc Agreement without the written consent of the Owner 11.3 The term Agreement as used herein includes the executed Agreement, the Proposal. these General Conditions and other attaclnnents referenced in Section 3 of the Agreement which together represent the entire and integrated agreement between the Owner and Design Professional and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreement s, either written or oral. The Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both Owner and Design Professional. When interpreting the Agreement the executed Agreement, Proposal, these General Conditions and the other attachments referenced in Section 3 of the Agreement shall to the extent that is reasonably possble be read so as to harmonize the provisions. However, should the provisions of these documents be in conflict so that they can not be reasonably harmonized, such documents shall be given priority in the following order' I The executed Agreement 2. The Proposal, including Scope of Services 3 Attachments referenced in Section 3 of the Agreement other than the Proposal 4. These General Provisions 11.4 Nothing contained in the Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action In favor of a third party against either the Owner or Design Professional. 11.5 Upon receipt of prior written approval of Owner, the Design Professional shall have the fight to include representations of the design of the Project, including photographs of the exterior and interior, mnong the Design Professional's promotional and professional materials. The Design Professional's materials shall not include the Owner's confidential or proprietary information ffthe Owner has previously advised the Design Professional in writing of the specific infomtion considered by the Owner to be confidential or proprietary. The Owner shall provide professional credit for the Design Professional on the construction sign and in the pmmotionaI materials for the Project 11.6 Approval by the Owner shall not constitUte, nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the Design Professional, its employees, associates, agents, subcontractors, and sub-consultants for the accuracy and competency of their designs or other work; nor shall such approval be Page 8 of 9 S:kEngrs\Emp~FGPayne\pdf files~nlkGoneral Conditions PSA - F&N - 9 pt.doc Revised 5-30-02 deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility by the Owner for any defect in the design or other work prepared by the Design Professional, its employees, subcontractors, agenls, and consultants. 11.7 All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under the Agreement shall be personally delivered or mailed to the respective parties by depositing same in the United States mail to the address shown below signature block on the Agreement, certified mail, return receipt requested, unless otherwise specified herein All notices shall be deemed'effective upon receipt by the party to whom such notice is given, or within three (3) days after mailing. 11.8 If any provision of the 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 the Agreement and shall not cause the remainder to be invalid or unenforceable, Irt snch event, the parties shall reform the 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 11.9 The Design Professional shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances applicable to the work covered hereunder as they may now read or hereinafter be amended during the term of this Agreement. 11.10 tn performing the Services required hereunder, the Design Professional shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age, or physical handicap. 11.11 The captions of the Agreeznent are for informational purposes only, and shall not in any way affect the substantive terms or conditions of thc Agreement. Page 9 of 9 S:\Engxs\EmpkFGPayncydf fileskFn~General Conditions PgA - F&N - 9 pr.doc Revised 5-30-02 ATTACHMENT CO EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNER CLEAR CREEK INTERCEPTOR AND WATER REUSE LINE FOR THE CITY OF DENTON OCTOBER 15, 2002 GENERAL: The City of Denton Clear Creek Interceptor and Water Reuse Line Project (the Project) will include the following facilities: · Approximately 15,000 linear feet of 30 to 36-inch Gravity Sewer Interceptor · Approximately 14,000 linear feet of 30 to 33-Inch Gravity Sewer Interceptor Approximately 4~000 linear feet of 18 to 21-Inch Gravity Sewer Interceptor · Approximately i4,000 linear feet of 12-Inch Water Reuse Line The Project will be designed and constructed as one construction contract. If a portion of the project is split into a separate construction project, then additional compensation will be allowed at a fee to be determined. ARTICLE I BASIC SERVICES: FNI shall render the following professional services in connection with the development &the Project: A. PRELIMINARY PHASE Upon execution of this AGREEMENT, FNI shall: 1. Consult with OWNER: (1) to review the scope of services, (2) to verify OWNER's requirements for the Project, and (3) to review available data. 2. Advise OWNER as to the necessity of OWNER's providing or obtaining data or services from others, and assist OWNER in connection with any such services. 3 FNI will provide preliminary route selection maps with up to two altemate routes. The mapping shall include properties and topographic information. Review up to three (3) different flow rate projections for both alignments and size the interceptor for each flow rate, FNI will prepare flow rates, however the City will furnish projected population densities After approval of the route and line size, FNI will proceed with the preliminary phase. FNI wilt proceed with the field route selection for the Clear Creek Interceptor and the Water Reuse Line. Based on the final route selection, FNI will revise the pipe profile and tine sizing as required. FNI will study the hydraulics o£the water reuse line and make recommendations regarding its size and pressure class. FNI will prepare opinions of probable construction cost and recommendations for the alternatives studied. FNI will meet with the OWNER to review and walk the route~ Estimates of the cost of land and rights-of-way, compensation for or damages to properties and interest and financing charges will be provided by OWNER or others so designated by OWNER. In arriving at its opinion of probable construction cost for the Project, FNI will include the estimates furnished by OWNER and will have no responsibility to determine the accuracy or validity of these estimates 5. Prepare preliminary design documents consisting of fmal design criteria, preliminary drawings and conceptual design information T'~Denton\Clear Creek\S¢ope-4.do¢ CO-1 FNI OWNER 6 ATTACHMENT CO Based on the information contained in the preliminary design documents, submit a revised opinion of probable Project Costs 7 Funfish five (5) copies of the above preliminary design documents and present and review them with OWNER. DESIGN PHASE: Upon approval of the preliminary design documents, FNI shall provide professional services in this phase as follows: Prepare drawings, specifications, Construction Contract Documents, designs, and layouts of improvements to be constructed. Attend four meetings with the OWNER to review the project .. If specifically authorized in writing by the OWNER, FNI ~vill provide special services, including environmental services, surveying services, geotechnical services, and miscellaneous special services as described hereafter. FNI will advise OWNER of any other special services and the retention of special consukants. The cost of other special services shall be paid by OWNER and are not included in the services performed by FNI. Furnish OWNER, when requested, the engineering data necessary for applications for routine permits required by local, state and federal anthorities. Preparation of applications and supporting documents for government grants or for planning advances is an Additional Service Submit drawings, specifications, and Construction Contract Documents to the applicable federal and state agency(s) for approval, where required, including permit applications for road crossings. Furnish such information necessary to utility companies whose facilities may be affected or services may be required for the Project. 6 Prepare revised opinion of probable construction cost. 7. Prepare bidder's proposal forms (project quantities) of the improvements to be constructed. 8 Furnish OWNER five (5) sets of copies of drawings, specifications, and bid proposals marked "Preliminary" for approval by OWNER. Upon fmal approval by OWNER, FNI will provide OWNER three (3) sets of copies of"Final" drawings and one set of reproducible drawings. FNI will furnish an electronic copy of the final bid drawings so that the OWNER may prepare record drawings after the construction phase. BID PHASE. Upon completion of the design services and approval of"Final" drawings and specifications by OWNER, FNI will proceed with the performance of services in this phase as follows: Assist OWNER in securing bids. Issue a Notice to Bidders to prospective contractors and vendors listedin FNI's database of prospective bidders, and to selected plan rooms~ Provide a copy of thc notice to bidders for OWNER to use in notiffing construction news publications and publishing appropriate legal notice. The cost for publications shall be paid by OWNER. 2. Send one (1) copy of Bid Documents to TCEQ, if required.. Assist Owner by responding to questions and interpreting bid documents. Prepare addenda to the bid documents to forward to OWNER for distribution, if necessary FNI T'kDenton\Clear Creek\S¢ope-4.doe CO-2 OWNER ATTACHMENT CO CONSTRUCTION PHASE: Upon completion of the bid phase services, FNI will proceed with the performance of construction phase services as described below. FNI will endeavor to protect OWNER in providing these services however, it is understood that FNI does not guarantee the Contractor's performance, nor is FNI responsible for supervision of the Contractor's operation and employees, FNI shall not be responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by the Contractor, or any safety precautions and programs relating in any way to the condition of the premises, the work of the Contractor or any Subcontractor. FNI shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any person (except its own employees or agents) at the Project site or othenvise performing any of the work of the Project. These services are based on the use of EJCDC standard General Conditions for construction projects The OWNER agrees to include provisions in the construction contract documents that will require the construction contractor to incIud¢ FNI and their subconsultants on this project to be listed as an additional insured on contractor's insurance policies 1 Attend a pre-construction conference. The Owner wilt conduct the meeting and prepare minutes. 2 Establish communication procedures with the OWNER and contractor All commtmications between FNI and the Contractor will be through the OWNER. 3. Review contractor's submittals, including, requests for information and shop drawings in accordance with the requirements of the construction contract documents for the projects FNI will attend the pre-construction meeting and one final inspection visit. In addition, FNI will make two (2) visits to the site (as distinguished from the continuous services of a Resident Project Representative) to observe the progress and the quality of work and to attempt to determine in general if the work is proceeding in accordance with the Construction Contract Documents In this effort FNI will endeavor to protect the OWNER against defects and deficiencies in the work of Contractors and wilt report any observed deficiencies to OWNER. Visits to the site in excess of the specified number are an additional service. Provide general recommendations to the OWNER for the work of testing laboratories and inspection bureaus required for the testing or inspection of materials, witnessed tests, factory testing, etc. for quality control of the Project. The cost of such quality control shall be paid by OWNER andis not includedin the services to be performed by 6 Interpret the drawings and specifications for OWNER and Contractor(s). Investigations, analyses, and studies requested by the Contractor(s) and approved by OWNER, for substitutions of equipment and/or materials or deviations from the drawings and specifications is an additional sen, ice. 7 Investigations, analyses, studies or design for substitutions of equipment or materials, corrections of defective or deficient work of the contractor or other deviations from the construction contract documents requested by the contractor and approved by the Owner are an additional service,. Substitutions of materials or equipment or design modifications requested by the OWNER are an additional service. Conduct, in company with OWNER's representative, one final review of thc Project for conformance with the design concept of the Project and general compliance with the Construction Contract Documents. Visiting the site to review completed work in excess of one trip is an additional service. T'~Denton\Clear Creek\Scope-4.do¢ CO-3 FNI OWNER ATTACHMENT CO ARTICLE II SPECIAL SERVICES: SURVEYING: FNI will retain and monitor the efforts of a surveying firm (Gorrondona and Associates) to provide the following services: * Provide deed research for the preparation of easement documents. (This task does not include title research) Provide survey control along the pipeline route irt a coordinate system approved by the Owner, and compatible with other pipeline projects. · Prepare metes and bounds easement descriptions for each private ixact. A separate description will be prepared for both permanent and temporary easements. For budgeting purposes, a maximum of twelve tracts are estimated (24 Easement Documents). Payment for parcel descriptions shall be on a per parcel basis If more than twelve parcels are required (24 Easement Documents), then additional compensation will be required, for not only the cost for easement preparation on a per each basis but also for the cost of additional field work. · Provide topographic survey for a 100-foot width along the pipeline routes for up to 33,000 linear feet.. Topographic survey will not include individual tree surveys. · Provide survey ties to major utility lines, as located by the utility owners. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING: FNI will provide a sub-consultant to perform drilling and laboratory testing. The scope and fee will be negotiated at. a later time. ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING: FNI'will provide office research and a field review ofthe pipeline route, to determine if any environmental permits are required. Based on this field review, FNI will prepare a memorandum to the OWNER, indicating the conclusions of the analysis and noting if any additional actions are required.. It is anticipated that no enviroumental permit notifications will be needed for the project and the Project may be covered by Nationwide Permit No. 12. If environmental permit applications, in-depth environmental studies or archeological studies are required, then these activities would be an additional service. ARTICLE III ADDITIONAL SERVICES: Additional Services to be performed by FNI, ff specifically authorized in writing by OWNER, which are not included in the above-'described basic services, are described as follows: A GIS mapping services or assistance with these services. Making revisions to drawings, specifications or other documents when such drawings are 1) consistent with approvals or instructions previously given by OWNER or 2) due to other causes not solely within the control of FNI. C Providing consultation concerning the replacement of any Work damaged by frre or other cause during the construction, and providing services as may be required in connection with the replacement of such Work. T'kDent°n\Clear Creek\S¢opo-4,do¢ CO-4 FNI OWNER Do ATTACHMENT CO Investigations involving consideration of operation, maintenance and overhead expenses, and the preparation of rate schedules, earnings and expense statements, feasibility studies, appraisals, evaluations, assessment schedules, and material audits or inventories required for certification of force account construction performed by OWNER_ Providing shop, mill, field or laboratory inspection of materials and equipment. Observe factory tests of equipment at any site remote to the project or observing tests required as a result of equipment failing the initial test. Preparing Operation and Maintenance Manuals or conducting operator training~ Fumistfing the services of a Resident Project Representative to act as OWNER's on-site representative during the Construction Phase. Performing investigations, studies and analyses of substitutions of equipment and/or materials or deviations from the drawings and specifications. Except as indicated in Article II, Paragraph C, providing environmental support services including the design and implementation of ecological baseline studies; environmental monitoring; impact assessment and analyses; permitting assistance; preparation of a 404 permit application, including pre-construction notification for a Nationwide Permit, request for authorization under regional general permit or letter of permission procedure, or preparation of an individual permit application form, such as USACE ENG FORM 4345; preparation of applications for other permits that are identified by the study; detailed wetland delineation in accordance with the USACE's 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual; archeological and historical properties investigations; consultation in ~xifing, by telephone, or in person with the USACE or other regulatory agencies; surveying of water bodies by a Registered Public Land Surveyor; or preparation of a compensatory mitigation plan. Performing investigations, studies, and analysis of work proposed by construction contractors to correct defective work. Design, contract modifications, studies or analysis required to comply with local, State, Federal or other regulatory agencies that become effective after the date of this agreement. Services required to resolve bid protests or to rebid the projects for any reason. Visits to the site in excess of the number of trips included in Article I for periodic site visits, coordination meetings, or contract completion activities Any services required as a result of default of the contractor(s) or the failure, for any reason, of the contractor(s) to complete the work within the contract time. Providing services after the completion of the construction phase not specifically listed in Article I. Providing basic or additional services on an accelerated time schedule. The scope of this service include cost for overtime wages of employees and consultants, inefficiencies in work sequence and plotting or reproduction costs directly attributable to an accelerated time schedule directed by the OWNER_ Providing services made necessary because of unforeseen, concealed, or differing site conditions or due to the presence of hazardous substances in any form. T'~Denton\Clear Creek\Scope-4.do¢ CO-5 FNI OWNER S ATTACHMENT CO Providing services to review or evaluate construction contractor(s) claim(s), provided said claims are supported by causes not. within the control of FNI. Providing value engineering studies or reviews of cost savings proposed by construction contractors after bids have been submitted. Provide follow-up professional services during Contractor's warranty period. Provide a surge model for the water re-use pipeline. ARTICLE IV TIME OF COMPLETION: FNI is authorized to commence work on the Project upon execution of this AGREEMENT and agrees to complete the services in accordance with the following schedule' Complete Preliminary Design Report and Route Selection by December 20, 2002. Complete surveying and easement documents by May 19, 2003 Complete design plans and specifications by July 21, 2003. The above schedule i~s based on a notice to proceed not later than November 6, 2002. If the notice to proceed is delayed, the schedule, will be adjusted If FNI's services are delayed through no fault of FNI, FNI shall be entitled to adjust contract schedule consistent with the number of days of delay. These delays may include but are not limited to delays in OWNER or regulatory reviews, delays on the flow of information to be provided to FNI, governmental approvals, etc, If these delays are excessive, then FNI reserves the right to negotiate additional compensation for additional services related to the delay ARTICLE V RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNER: OWNER shall perform the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the services of FNI' Designate in whting a person to act as OWNER's representative with respect to the services to be rendered under this AGREEMENT. Such person shall have contract authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define OWNER's policies and decisions with respect to FNI's services for the Project Provide all criteria and full information as to OWNER's requirements for the Project, including design objectives and constraints, space, capacity and performance requirements, flexibility and expandability, and any budgetary limitations; and furnish copies of all design and construction standards which OWNER will require to be included in the drawings and specifications C Assist FNI by placing at FNI's disposal all available information pe~inent to the Project including previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the Project Arrange for access to and make all provisions for FNI to enter upon public and private property as required for FNI to perform services under this AGREEMENT, including preparing and obtaining Right-of-Entries for engineering, surveying and geotechnical activities. Identify Landowners and provide contacts for coordination of field work.. If conditions are muddy, the driller will delay drilling until conditions improve. Provide or pay for any towing required due to soft grotmd conditions impassable to four-wheel-drive and tracked equipment and any FNI T'kDenton\Clear CreekkScope-4.doc CO-6 OWNER ATTACHMENT CO clearing or grading necessary for access Repair or compensate property owners for any damage, including but not limited to crop damage, ruts, and cracked slabs, caused by normal access and operation of exploration equipment. Examine all studies, reports, sketches, drawings, specifications, proposals and other documents presented by FNI, obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor and other consultants as OWNER deems appropriate for such examination and render in writing decisions pertaining thereto with_in a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of FNI. F Furnish approvals and permits from ali governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project and such apprevals and consents from others as may be necessary for completion of the Project. G. Provide title investigations and title insurance, if deemed necessary by the OWNER. Provide such accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance counseling services as may be required for the Project, such legal services as OWNER may require or FNI may reasonably request with regard to legal issues pertaining to the Project including any that may be raised by Contractor(s), such auditing service as OWNERmay require to ascertain how or for what purpose any Contractor has used the moneys paid under the construction contract, and such inspection services as OWNER may require to ascertain that Contractor(s) are complying with any law, nde, regulation, ordinance, code or order applicable to their furnishing and performing the work. Attend the pre-bid conference, bid opening, preconstruction conferences, construction progress and other job related meetings and substantial completion inspections and £mal payment inspections. Give prompt written notice to FNI ~vhenever OWNER observes or otherwise becomes aware of any development that affects the scope or timing of FNI's services, or any defect or nonconformance of the work of any Contractor. The OWNER shall give 48 hour written notice to the Design Professional if the OWNER becomes aware of any errors or omissions in the design work Furnish, or direct FNI to provide, Additional Services as stipulated in Attachment SC, Article III of this AGREEMENT or other services as required. L Provide easement acquisition services M. Bear all costs incident to compliance with the requirements of this Article V N Provide land use and population projections to allow master planning of the gravity interceptor. Provide flow criteria for the water re-use pipeline. The OWNER, or his consultant for the wastewater treatment plant, will provide design of surge control devices at the water re-use pump station. The Owner will reproduce the bid documents, distribute to bidders, supphers, and plan rooms, distribute addenda, and maintain a log of planholders The Owner will open, tabulate, analyze bids and recommend award of contracts The Owner will prepare the construction contract for execution by the Contractor and Owner and will furnish copies of the contract documents to FNI, Owner, and Contractor P The OWNER will provide an OWNER's representative during the construction phase. The representative will be the first point of contact with the Contractor. The representative will receive and distribute all submittals and maintain a submittal log. The Owner's representative will review and approve payment requests. The Owner's representative will prepare change orders and field orders. The Owner's representative will review all claims by the Contractor. The Owner's representative will prepare all punch- lists and follow-up inspections. The OWNER will prepare record drawings based on information funfished by the construction contractor~ FNI T'X,Denton\Clear Creek\Scope-4.doc CO-7 OWNER FEE PROPOSAL SUMMARY DENTON CLEAR CREEK INTERCEPTOR AND WATER REUSE LINE BASIC SERVICES - PRELIMINARY DESIGN BASIC SERVICES - DESIGN PHASE BASIC SERVICES - CONSTRUCTION PHASE TOTAL BASIC SERVICES SPECIAL SERVICES DESIGN SURVEY SPECIAL SERVICES EASEMENT PREPARATION $880 PER DOCUMENT (12 PERMANENT AND 12 TEMPORARY) SPECIAL SERVICES GEOTECH & DRILLER SPECIAL SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW = TOTAL BASIC AND SPECIAL SERVICES $50,000 $160,000 $23,5oo $233,5oo $137,500 $21,120 $25,000 $14,000 $4:~1,120 Lump Sum Lump Sum Lump Sum Lump Sum Cost Plus Not to Exceed Cost Plus Not to Exceed (Budget Amount -Scope and Fee to be determined alter mute selection) Cost Plus Not to Exceed Item #4N AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: November 5, 2002 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Jim Coulter 349-7194 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the City of DeNon, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a first amendment to professional services agreement with RJN Group, Inc. for professional engineering services respecting the final design services related to infiltration/inflow corrections for the Eastern Pecan Creek and Hickory Creek Basins; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2913-RJN Group Inc., in an amoum not to exceed $375,680). AGREEMENT INFORMATION The City of DeNon is under an Administrative Order (AO) from the EPA to complete the Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) corrections in all of the sewer basins by September 2005. I/I is the emry of the ground water and rainwater into the wastewater collection system resulting in reduced capacity in the collection system and under severe conditions overflow from the collection system. The City has worked diligently to stay on the EPA mandated schedule for I/I corrections. Construction for I/I corrections in the Western Pecan and Cooper Creek Basins is complete. Design for the Middle Pecan Creek Basin was completed in house and the project has been advertised for bids. City crews are already working on the lining of the manholes and doing poim repairs in the Middle Pecan Creek Basin. The Sewer System Evaluation Survey of the Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Basins is complete. The Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Basins design and construction has been scheduled to comply with the EPA mandate. RJN Group Inc. (RJN) was retained by the City in May 2002 for the Phase I Services for the Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Basins. The Phase I services included Closed Circuit TV inspection of approximately 100,000 linear feet of sewer lines included in both of the sewer basins, review of the video tapes, analysis of defects in the sewer lines based on the tape review, and recommendations for corrections of each defect idemified. RJN through the CCTV inspection and analysis has determined that about 39,000 feet of the 100,000 feet of the sewer line needs replacemem. Determination of how these sewer lines will be replaced and production of plans and specifications for this sewer line replacement is part of the Phase II Services. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 AGREEMENT INFORMATION(CONTINUED) Staff has negotiated the Phase II of the engineering services Scope of Work and Cost Proposal with RJN based on the findings in the Phase I. The construction cost for sewer line replacement for both basins is estimated at $4.5 million. The Basic Engineering Services fee is estimated at $290,103 amounting to 6.44 percent of the construction cost. The Special Services fee including survey, easement document preparation, geo-technical, and direct costs related to computer, mileage and printing is estimated at $135,577. This amounts to 3.01 percent of the construction cost. The total engineering services fee amounts to 9.45 percent of the construction cost. There is $50,000 remaining from the Phase I Services that will be applied towards survey cost for the Phase II. The total funds needed for Phase II after the credit from Phase I amount to $375,680. Staff has reviewed the Scope of Services and the Cost Proposal and finds it acceptable. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) The Public Utility Board approved this item at its October 21, 2002 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with RJN Group, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $375,680. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS RJN Group, Inc. Dallas, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Eastern Pecan Basin design will be completed first. This is scheduled to be complete by April 2003. Hickory Creek Basin design will begin in January 2003 and will be completed in July 2003. FISCAL INFORMATION $400,000 is included in the FY 2003 budget for the Hickory Creek Basin I/I correction design. These funds will be used to fund the final design services for Phase II. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 3 1-AIS-File 2913 Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent ORDINANCE NO. 2002- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RJN GROUP, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES RESPECTING THE FINAL DESIGN SERVICES RELATED TO INFILTRATION/INFLOW CORRECTIONS FOR THE EASTERN PECAN CREEK AND HICKORY CREEK BASINS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVD1NG AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council deems that it is in the public interest to continue to engage RJN Group, Inc., a Corporation, of Dallas, Texas ("RJN'), to provide professional engineering services pertaining final design services related to infiltration/inflow corrections for the Eastern Pecan Creek and Hickory Creek Basins, known as Phase II of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, heretofore, in May 2002, the City entered into an Agreement with RJN for Phase I services, which Agreement was approved by the City Council, which included, without limitation closed circuit television inspection of approximately 100,000 linear feet of sewer lines included in both the Eastern Pecan Creek and the Hickory Creek Basins. This examination determined that approximately 39,000 linear feet of the sewer lines examined would need replacement. Determination of how these sewer lines will be replaced, and the production of plans and specifications for this sewer line replacement is a part of the Phase II services; and WHEREAS, the City staff has reported to the City Council that there is a substantial need for the above-referenced professional engineering services, and that limited City staff cannot adequately perform the specialized services and tasks with its own personnel; and WHEREAS, Chapter 2254 of the Texas Govemment Code, known as the "Professional Services Procurement Act," generally provides that a City may not select a provider of professional services on the basis of competitive bids, but must select the provider on the basis of demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications, and for a fair and reasonable price; NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1: That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement ("First Amendment") with RJN Group, Inc., a Corporation, of Dallas, Texas, for professional engineering services pertaining to the final design services related to infiltration/inflow corrections for the Eastern Pecan Creek and the Hickory Creek Basins, in a further amount not to exceed $375,680; in substantially the form of the First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herewith by reference. SECTION 2: That the award of this First Amendment by the City is on the basis of the demonstrated competence, knowledge, and qualifications of RJN and the demonstrated ability of RJN to perform the services needed by the City for a fair and reasonable price. SECTION 3: That the expenditure of funds as provided in the attached First Amendment is hereby authorized. SECTION 4: That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __day of .,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY By: S \Our Documents\Ordinances\02hXlN Group First Amendment to PSA-I-I-Corrections Oral.doc STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT RESPECTING THE FINAL DESIGN SERVICES RELATED TO INFILTRATION/INFLOW CORRECTIONS FOR THE EASTERN PECAN CREEK AND HICKORY CREEK BASINS THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the ~, day of ,2002, by and between the City of Denton, Texas, a Texas Municipal Corporation, with its principal offices at 215 East McKinney Street, Denton, Texas 76201 (hereafter "OWNER") and the RJN Group, Inc., an Illinois corporation, with its offices at 12160 Abrams Road, Suite 200, Dallas, Texas 75243 (hereafter "CONSULTANT"); the parties acting herein, by and through their duly- authorized representatives and officers. WlTNESSETH, that in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, agreements herein, and in consideration of the premises, the parties hereto do mutually AGREE as follows: ARTICLE I EMPLOYMENT OF CONSULTANT HERETOFORE, on the 14th day of May, 2002, OWNER and CONSULTANT made and entered into a "Professional Services Agreement for the Infiltration/Inflow Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins" (hereafter the "Agreement"). This Agreement provided for Phase I services, was for an amount not to exceed $407,282, and was duly approved by Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas. The OWNER hereby contracts with CONSULTANT, as an independent contractor, and the CONSULTANT hereby agrees to perform the Phase ii services heroin described in connection with the Project as stated in the Articles to follow, with diligence and in accordance with the professional standards customarily obtained for such services in the State of Texas. The professional services set forth herein are in connection with the following described project (the "Project"): Professional engineering services pertaining to the final design services related to the Infiltration/Inflow Study corrections for the Eastern Pecan Creek and the Hickory Creek Drainage Basins (Phase II). ARTICLE II SCOPE OF SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall perform the following Basic Services in a professional manner. A. To perform those professional services as set forth in the Scope of Service: Ill Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins Project for the City of Denton, Texas prepared on October 17, 2002 by CONSULTANT for OWNER; which document is a ten (10) page document that is attached hereto as Exhibit "Amendment No. 1," and is incorporated herein by reference; which document is also comprised of and includes the "Schedule of Costs" and "Estimated Level of Effort." B. If there is any conflict, or if any conflict arises between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit "Amendment No. 1" attached to this Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control over the terms and conditions of said Exhibit. ARTICLE III ADDITIONAL SERVICES Any additional services to be performed by the CONSULTANT, if authorized by the OWNER, which are not included as Basic Services in the above-described Scope of Services, set forth as provided by Article II above, shall be later agreed-upon by OWNER and CONSULTANT, who shall determine, in writing, the scope of such additional services, the amount of compensation for such additional services, and other essential terms pertaining to the provision of such additional services by the CONSULTANT. ARTICLE IV PERIOD OF SERVICE This Agreement shall become effective upon its execution by the OWNER and the CONSULTANT, and upon the issuance of a notice to proceed by the OWNER, and shall remain in force and effect for the period that may reasonably be required for the completion of the Project, including Additional Services, if any, and any required extensions approved by the OWNER. This Agreement may be sooner terminated in accordance with the provisions hereof. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall make all reasonable efforts to complete the services set forth herein as expeditiously as possible and to meet the schedule reasonably established by the OWNER, acting through its City Manager or his designee. ARTICLE V COMPENSATION A. COMPENSATION TERMS: "Subcontract Expense" is defined as those expenses, if any, incurred by CONSULTANT in the employment of others in outside firms, for services in the area of professional engineering, or related services. Any subcontractor or sub-consultant billing reasonably incurred by the CONSULTANT in connection with the Project, shall be invoiced to OWNER at the actual cost plus ten percent. 2 "Direct Non-Labor Expense" is defined as that expense, based upon actual cost, for any out- of-pocket expense reasonably incurred by the CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement for long distance telephone charges, telecopy charges, messenger services, printing and reproduction expenses, out-of-pocket expenses for purchased computer time, prudently incurred travel expenses related to the work on the Project, and similar incidental expenses incurred in connection with the Project. B. BILLING AND PAYMENT: For and in consideration of the professional services to be performed by the CONSULTANT herein, the OWNER agrees to pay CONSULTANT, based upon the satisfactory completion of the Basic Services tasks set forth in the Scope of Services as shown in Article II above; as follows: 1. CONSULTANT shall perform its work on this Project in accordance with the provisions of those tasks that are described and as set forth in Exhibit "Amendment No. 1" attached hereto and incorporated herewith by reference. CONSULTANT shall bill from time sheets, on a once-monthly basis, in minimum 1/4 hour or smaller time increments, at the hourly Billing Rates or as otherwise provided. For and in consideration of the professional services to be performed by the CONSULTANT herein, the OWNER agrees to pay a fiuther fee, at an hourly rate shown in Exhibit "Amendment No. 1" which is incorporated herewith by reference, a total additional fee, including reimbursement for direct non-labor expenses and for its subcontractor expense, an amount not to exceed $375,680. 2. Partial payments to the CONSULTANT will be made monthly in accordance with the statements reflecting the actual completion of the Basic Services, rendered to and approved by the OWNER through its City Manager or his designee. However, under no circumstances shall any monthly statement for services exceed the value of the work performed at the time a statement is rendered. The OWNER may withhold the final ten (10%) percent of the above not-to-exceed amount until satisfactory completion of the Project by the CONSULTANT. 3. Nothing contained in this Article shall require the OWNER to pay for any work which is unsatisfactory as reasonably determined by the City Manager or his designee, or which is not submitted by CONSULTANT to the OWNER in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. The OWNER shall not be required to make any payments to the CONSULTANT at any time when the CONSULTANT is in default under this Agreement. 4. It is specifically understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT shall not be authorized to undertake any work pursuant to this Agreement which would require additional payments by the OWNER for any charge, expense or reimbursement above the not-to-exceed amount as stated hereinabove, without first having obtained the prior written authorization from the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall not proceed to perform any services to be later provided for under Article III "Additional Services" without first obtaining prior written authorization from the OWNER. C. ADDITIONAL SERVICES: For additional services authorized in writing by the OWNER in Article III hereinabove, CONSULTANT shall be paid based on a to-be-agreed- upon Schedule of Charges. Payments for additional services shall be due and payable upon submission by the CONSULTANT, and shall be in accordance with Article V.B. hereinabove. Statements for Basic Services and any Additional Services shall be submitted to OWNER no more frequently than once monthly. D. PAYMENT: If the OWNER fails to make payments due the CONSULTANT for services and expenses within forty-five (45) days after receipt of the CONSULTANT'S undisputed statement thereof, the amounts due the CONSULTANT will be increased by the rate of one percent (1%) per month from and after the said forty-fifth (45th) day, and in addition, thereafter, the CONSULTANT may, after giving ten (10) days written notice to the OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement until the CONSULTANT has been paid in full for all monies then due and owing, and not disputed by OWNER, for services, expenses and charges. Provided, however, nothing herein shall require the OWNER to pay the late charge of one percent (1%) per month as set forth herein, if the OWNER reasonably determines that the CONSULTANT's work is unsatisfactory, in accordance with Article V.B. of this Agreement, and OWNER has notified CONSULTANT of that fact in writing. ARTICLE VI OBSERVATION AND REVIEW OF THE WORK The CONSULTANT will exercise reasonable care and due diligence in discovering and promptly reporting to the OWNER any defects or deficiencies in the work of the CONSULTANT or any of its subcontractors or sub-consultants. ARTICLE VII OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS All documents prepared or furnished by the CONSULTANT (and CONSULTANT's subcontractors or sub-consultants) pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of service and shall become the property of the OWNER upon the termination of this Agreement. The CONSULTANT is entitled to retain copies of all such documents. The documents prepared and furnished by the CONSULTANT are intended only to be applicable to this Project and OWNER'S use of these documents in other projects shall be at OWNER'S sole risk and expense. In the event the OWNER uses the Agreement in another project or for other purposes than specified herein any of the information or materials developed pursuant to this Agreement, CONSULTANT is released from any and all liability relating to their use in that project. ARTICLE VIii INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT shall provide services to OWNER as an independent contractor, not as an employee of the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall not have or claim any right arising 4 from employee status. ARTICLE IX INDEMNITY AGREEMENT The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and save and hold harmless the OWNER and its officials, officers, agents, attorneys and employees ~om and against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to court costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the OWNER, and including without limitation damages for bodily and personal injury, death, or property damage, resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of the CONSULTANT or its officers, shareholders, agents, subcontractors, sub-consultants, attorneys, and/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 thc party's defenses, both at law or equity, to any claim, cause of action or litigation filed by anyone not a party to this Agreement, including the defense of governmental immunity, which defenses are hereby expressly reserved. ARTICLE X INSURANCE During the performance of the Services under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall maintain the following insurance with an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Texas by the State Insurance Board or any successor agency, that has a rating with A. M. Best Rate Carders of at least an "A-" or above: A. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence and not less than $1,000,000 in the aggregate; and with property-damage limits of not less than $100,000 for each occurrence, and not less than $100,000 in the aggregate. B. Automobile Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than '$500,000 for each person and not less than $500,000 for each accident; and with property damage Iimits for not less than $100,000 for each accident. C. Worker's Compensation Insurance in accordance with statutory requirements and Employer's Liability Insurance with limits of not less than $100,000 for each accident. D. Professional Liability Insurance with limits of not Iess than $1,000,000 annual aggregate. E. CONSULTANT shall furnish insurance certificates or insurance policies to the OWNER to evidence such insurance coverage. The insurance policies shall name the OWNER as an additional insured on all such policies to the extent that is legally possible, 5 and shall contain a provision that such insurance shall not be cancelled or modified without at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to OWNER and CONSULTANT. In such event, the CONSULTANT shall, prior to the effective date of the change or cancellation of coverage, deliver copies of any such substitute policies, furnishing at least the same policy limits and coverage, to OWNER. ARTICLE XI ARBITRATION AND ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties may agree to settle any disputes under this Agreement by submitting the dispute to arbitration or other means of alternate dispute resolution such as mediation. No arbitration or alternate dispute resolution arising out of or relating'to, this Agreement involving one party's disagreement, may include the other party to the disagreement without the other's approval. ARTICLE XII TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, either party may terminate this Agreement by providing thirty (30) days advance written notice to the other party. B. This Agreement may alternatively be terminated in whole or in part in the event of either party substantially failing to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. No such termination will be effected unless the other party is given (1) written notice (delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested) of intent to terminate and setting forth the reasons specifying the nonperformance or other reason(s), and not less than thirty (30) calendar days to cure the failure; and (2) an opportunity for consultation with the terminating party prior to termination. C. If this Agreement is terminated prior to completion of the services to be provided hereunder, CONSULTANT shall immediately cease all services upon receipt of the written notice of termination from OWNER, and shall render a final bill for services to the OWNER within twenty (20) days after the date of termination. The OWNER shall pay CONSULTANT for all services properly rendered and satisfactorily performed, and for reimbursable expenses prior to notice of termination being received by CONSULTANT, in accordance with Article V. of this Agreement. Should the OWNER subsequently contract with a new consultant for the continuation of services on thc Project, CONSULTANT shall cooperate in providing information to the OWNER and to the new consultant. If applicable, OWNER shall allow CONSULTANT a reasonable time to transition and to turn over the Project to a new consultant. CONSULTANT shall turn over all documents prepared or furnished by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement to the OWNER on or before the date of termination, but may maintain copies of such documents for its files. ARTICLE XIII RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES Approval of the work by the OWNER shall not constitute, nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, and sub-consultants for the accuracy and competency of their designs or other work performed pursuant to this Agreement; nor shall such approval by the OWNER be deemed as an assumption of such responsibility by the OWNER for any defect in the design or other work prepared by the CONSULTANT, its principals, officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, and sub-consultants. ARTICLE XIV NOTICES All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under this Agreement shall be personally delivered to; or telecopied to; or mailed to the respective parties by depositing same in the United States mail at the addresses shown below, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, unless otherwise specified herein: To CONSULTANT: RJN Group, Inc. At-tn: Jeff Plymale 12160 Abrams Road, Suite 200 Dallas, Texas 75243 Fax: (972) 437-2707 To OWNER: City of Denton, Texas City Manager 215 E. McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 Fax: (940) 349-8596 All notices given under this Agreement shall be effective upon their actual receipt by the party to whom such notice is given. ARTICLE XV ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement consisting of eleven (11) pages and one (1) Exhibit constitutes the complete and final expression of the agreement of the parties and is intended as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of their agreements, and supersedes all prior contemporaneous offers, promises, representations, negotiations, discussions, communications, understandings, 7 and agreements which may have been made in connection with the subject matter of this Agreement. ARTICLE XVI SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Agreement is found or deemed by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, it shall be considered severable 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 the extent reasonably possible, to replace such stricken provision with a valid and enforceable provision which comes as close as possible to expressing the original intentions of the parties respecting any such stricken provision. ARTICLE XVII COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The CONSULTANT shall comply with all federal, state, local laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances applicable to the work performed by CONSULTANT hereunder, as they may now read or as they may hereafter be amended. ARTICLE XVItI DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED In performing the services required hereunder, the CONSULTANT shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age, or physical handicap. ARTICLE XIX PERSONNEL A. CONSULTANT represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required to perform all the services required under this Agreement. Such personnel shall not be employees or officers of, nor have any contractual relations with the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall immediately inform the OWNER in writing of any conflict of interest or potential conflict of' interest that CONSULTANT may discover, or which may arise during the term of this Agreement. B. All services required hereunder will be performed by CONSULTANT or under its direct supervision. All personnel engaged in performing the work provided for in this Agreement, shall be qualified, and shall be authorized and permitted under state and local laws to perform such services. ARTICLE XX ASSIGNABILITY The CONSULTANT shall not assign any interest in this Agreement and shall not transfer any interest in this Agreement (whether by assignment, novation or otherwise) without the prior written consent of the OWNER. CONSULTANT shall further promptly notify OWNER in writing of any change of its name as well as of any significant change in its corporate structure, its business address, its operations, or regarding its solvency. ARTICLE XXI MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, limitation herein contained shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged therewith. No evidence of any waiver or modification shall be offered or received in evidence in any proceeding arising between the parties hereto arising out of, or affecting this Agreement, or the rights or obligations of the parties hereunder, unless such waiver or modification is in writing, duly executed. The parties further agree that the provisions of this Article wilt not be waived unless as herein set forth. ARTICLE XXII MISCELLANEOUS A. The following Exhibit is attached to, incorporated herewith by reference, and is made a part of this Agreement for ail purposes pertinent: Exhibit "Amendment No. 1" - Scope of Services/Schedule of Costs/Estimated Level of Effort. B. CONSULTANT agrees that OWNER shall, until the expiration of four (4) years after the final payment made by OWNER under this Agreement, have access to and the fight to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of the CONSULTANT involving transactions relating to this Agreement. CONSULTANT agrees that OWNER shall have access during normal working hours to all necessary CONSULTANT facilities and shall be provided · adequate and appropriate working space in order to conduct examinations or audits in compliance with this Article. OWNER shall give CONSULTANT reasonable advance notice of all intended examinations or audits. C. Venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton County, Texas. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. D. For purposes of this Agreement, the parties agree that the Project Principal: shall be Hugh Kelso, Principal, and the key persons who will perform most of thc work as the Project Team, include the Project Manager, Tom Harris, P.E., under, and in accordance with this Agreement, shall be as specifically identified and set forth in the organizational chart included in the March 9 28, 2002 proposal submitted in response to Request for Proposal No. 2830. This Agreement has been entered into with the understanding, expectation, and the OWNER's reliance, that the above-stated employees of CONSULTANT shall perform all or a significant portion of the work on the Project. Any proposed changes regarding the change of the Project Manager or other key personnel, requested by CONSULTANT, respecting one or more of the above-stated employees, shall be subject to the approval of the OWNER, which approval the OWNER shag not unreasonably withhold. Nothing rein shall limit CONSULTANY from using other qualified and competent members of its firm to perform the other incidental services required herein, under its supervision or control. E. CONSULTANT shall commence, carry on, and complete its work on the Project with all applicable dispatch, and in a sound, economical, efficient manner, and in accordance with the provisions hereof in accomplishing the Project, CONSULTANT shall take such steps as are appropriate to ensure that the work involved is properly coordinated with any related work being carried on by the OWNER. F. The OWNER shall assist the CONSULTANT by placing at the CONSULTANT's disposal all available information pertinent to the Project, including previous reports, any other data relative to the Project and arranging for the access to, and make all provisions for the CONSULTANT to enter in or upon, public and private property as required for the CONSULTANT to perform professional services under this Agreement. OWNER and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT is entitled to rely upon information furnished to it by OWNER without the need for further inquiry or investigation into such information. G. The captions of this Agreement are for informational purposes only and shall not in any way affect the substantive terms or conditions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the OWNER, the City of Denton, Texas has executed this Agreement in four (4) original counterparts, by and through its duly authorized City Manager, and CONSULTANT has executed this Agreement by and through its duly authorized undersigned officer on this the ~ day of ,2002. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS A Texas Municipal Corporation By: ATTEST: JENN1FER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY Michael A. Conduff City Manager By: 10 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY "CONSULTANT" ILIN Group, Inc. An Illinois Corporation By: ~b~ 7~ /k.f~ Hugh ~elso, Principal ATTEST: S:\Our Documents\Contmets\02kRevlsed P-JN First Amendment to PSA-WW3-2002.doe 11 AMMENDMENT NO. 1 I/I Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins PROJECT DESCRIPTION The scope of services under this Amendment includes the provision of engineering design and related construction administrative services as described herein. The total footage of design services is based on 3'8,719 feet of sewer piping that has been identified and recommended for rehabilitation and improvement. 1) Project Administration Project administration includes the supervision and management of all aspects of the .design contract including the CONSULTANT'S staff and subcontractors as described herein. The CONSULTANT shall maintain project cost controls, project scheduling and provide regular status reports. A meeting will be held to initiate the design phase and to discuss the planning and design criteria, work program and schedule, procedures of communication, basis of compensation, additional survey requirements, assigmnents of personnel, and any other matters that may have direct or indirect effects upon the completion and results of this project. Monthly progress status meetings shall be conducted throughout the project at regular intervals. The CONSULTANT'S scope of services is based on attending 12 status meetings. 2) Basic Services - Design The engineering design services to follow shall be performed by basin; Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek shall be performed as two separate projects (two sets of construction plans and specifications) and include the following tasks for each: A. Preliminary Design 1) Obtain from the CITY, electronic or hardcopy files containing all available pertinent survey data including easements, street right-of-way widths, existing pavement, utilities and drainage systems, benchmark elevations, and other data that may be useful in considering the alignment, location, final design, and construction - of the proposed improvement. Generation of necessary data required for design that is not readily available from the CITY is the sole responsibility of the CONSULTANT. 2) 3) CONSULTANT shall provide a list of as-built drawings needed for use in the performance of design to which the CITY will provide the documents. Determine from a field reconnaissance of the project area the construction method for each replacement line. 10/24/2002 A (1) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 I/I Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins 4) Evaluate and recommend any alignment adjustments that could be affected by such conditions as relocation, pipe upsizing, conflicting utilities, or easement requirements. 5) The replacement utilities will generally be in the sanae location as the existing utilities and shall include consideration of the following: (a) Access for fire, police, and other emergency vehicles (b) Maintenance for service during construction (c) Access for property owners to their respective driveways (d) Minimum inconvenience to adjacent property owners 6) Present brief conceptual design report, which shall include cost projections and recommendations to the CITY. This report shall address location ofutilities within the right-of-way and additional right-of-way/easement requirements. The report shall be submitted at the thirty percent (30%) completion stage in a meeting with the CITY. 7) Upon the approval of the conceptual design, proceed with preparing the plan sheets for design (CAD), at the direction of the CITY. Plan and profile sheets shall be done in 1"-40' scale unless otherwise agreed to for congested areas. 8) Obtain survey data required based on the preferred alignment determined in the conceptual design phase. 9) Prepare layouts of proposed piping improvements and other related appurtenances. 10) Investigate and resolve conflicts with existing utility (water, sewer, drainage, gas, telephone, and electric) locations, depths, etc. 11) Prepare preliminary "Opinion of Probable Construction Costs." 12) Prepare preliminary work on: (a) Standard specifications (b) Special conditions (c) Proposal, bid schedule, and contract documents Specifications may be based on CONSULTANT's or CITY's specifications to be determined and agreed upon by CITY representative. 13) Field verify preliminary drawings and specifications. 14) Submit a minimum of five (5) copies of the preliminary plans and three (3) copies of the preliminary specifications to the CITY for review. This submittal shall be at the ninety percent (90%) completion stage and shall include all pertinent sheets. 10/24/2002 A (2) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 FI Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins 15) Meet with the CITY to discuss review comments on preliminary design before proceeding with final design. 16) Based on review comments from the CITY, submit plans that will be forwarded by the CONSULTANT to the utility companies for review and comment. 17) Identify the extent of any temporary or permanent easements or right-of-way required. Provide information for the preparation of documents required for right- of-way acquisition, as necessary. Final Design 1) Prepare construction plans.to address comments of the CITY, the utility companies, and other agencies from the preliminary design reviews. Finalize the design of the sewer lines and other pertinent items. Complete plan set shall include: (a) Cover Sheet (b) Control Sheet (c) Index and Location Map (d) General Notes, Legends, Symbols & Abbreviations (e) Plan and Profile Sheets (0 Required Details 2) Develop any necessary additional design details. 3) Prepare final quantity of materials. 4) Prepare final "Opinion of Probable Construction Costs." 5) Submit five (5) copies of the pre*final plans and specifications to the CITY for final review, discussions, and comment. 6) Provide updated plans for the utility companies, if necessary. 7) CONSULTANT shall identify in the construction documents that traffic control plans are to be provided by the CONTRACTOR. 8) Meet with the CITY to discuss final review comments prior to preparing bid package. 9) Revise finals plans to address review comments from the CITY and other agencies affected by the project. 10) Prepare final bid schedule, special conditions, technical specifications, proposal, and contract documents. 11) Revise final "Opinion of Probable Construction Costs," if necessary. 10/24/2002 A (3) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 III Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins 12) Present ten (10) sets of the final documents for the bidding phase to the CITY for approval. This submittal shall be at the 100% completion stage and must include a full size (22"x34") reproducible set of plans as well as the complete bid documents. Summary of Design Deliverables Final deliverables will include the following: Conceptual design report Preliminary design drawings and documents Final design plans, profile sheets and documents Project layout control showing pertinent survey data on the plan/profile sheets and all pertinent construction notes. Local control shall be used per project area. · Final horizontal and vertical utility locations on the plan/profile sheets Final special design considerations and locations of appurtenances · Finalize conduit plan/profile -- Identify locations of all conflicts - Adjust horizontal and vertical alignment to optimize hydraulics, eliminate conflicts and, maximize utility clearance · Final plan/profile for the wastewater rehabilitation, other utility relocations and adjustments, and identify special considerations and methods Pipe material specification based on design criteria, soil types and embedment requirements · Coordination plans to maintain continuous service for all utility and service lines · Construction plans (blue line and reproducible black mylars) and corresponding bid specifications as directed by the CITY. Provide original copies of approved easements, field notes, and all pertinent documentations. CONSULTANT shall also furnish an electronic copy of the final engineering plans in AutoCAD format. · Provide ten (10) sets of final plans, specifications, and bid item take-offs for the preliminary contract bid package development. 10/24/2002 A (4) RJN GR(~UP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 Ill Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins 3) Basic Services - Construction Assistance Construction services to follow shall be performed by basin; Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek shall be bid and performed as two separate projects and include the following tasks for each: Advertising and Receiving Bids 1) The CITY shall advertise for the bids based upon a legal notice provided by the CONSULTANT. 2) 3) All plans, specifications, and bidding documents shall be distributed from the CITY's Purchasing office from requests received by the bidders and suppliers. Address any questions raised by the bidders and issue addenda though the CITY's Purchasing department, as necessary. Pre-Bid Meetings Meet with the CITY, the Contractors, and other interested parties to discuss the contract documents and clarify any concems within the bidding documents. This scope of services anticipates two bid openings. Construction Inspection Services CONSULTANT shall provide limited construction inspection services throughout the project. Eight (8) site visits are to be performed under this contract; 2 for pre- construction, two (2) for final inspection, and four (4) during the course of the construction phase. Change Order Review Review and prepare any necessary change orders during construction within th. hours identified in the Estimated Level of Effort. Summary of Construction Assistance Deliverables · Attendance at two (2) pre-bid meetings · Six (6) construction site visits · Review change order requests 4) Special Services Geotechnical Services In the event that both the CITY and CONSULTANT determine it is necessary to provide geological analysis, CONSULTANT shall be compensated per the unit rates 10/24/2002 A (5) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 I/I Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins identified as an allowance in the Schedule of Costs. The allowance may not be exceeded without prior written approval of the OWNER. Vertical and Horizontal Survey The following survey data shall bc obtained and applied in the development of construction drawings. 1) All survey shall be based on elevations and coordinates using City benchmarks if feasible. If not, the surveyor shall establish local control for each project area. Control between non-sequential line segments is not necessary. 2) Existing above-ground utility appurtenances, structures, trees, curbs, pavements, fences, property comers, block comers, points of curvature (PCs), points of tangents (PTs), and points of intersection (Pis), etc. as necessary for the design of the project. 3) Top of operating nuts and flags set by utility companies shall be tied to control. Existing manhole invert and rim elevations. Where there is only one (1) gravity flow structure within the limits of the survey, the next adjacent structure upstream and downstream shall be surveyed, and the flow line elevations shall be provided. 5) Existing pavement type. 6) Provide location and elevation of underground utilities or structures as marked by utility companies and as shown on record drawings. Coordinate with f~anchise utility companies to have subsurface lines marked for field location. 7) All curb lines, driveways, building comers, fences, ditches, sidewalks, and other above ground features shall be located as necessary for the design of the project. 8) Natural ground elevations and top of curb elevations every fifty feet along the proposed centerline and a minimum of 25 feet to each side of the centerline or R.O.W to R.O.W., and all grade breaks shall be surveyed. 9) Spot elevations as required to facilitate the generation of one foot contours shall be collected. C. Easements The CONSULTANT shall request easement research from the CITY where easements may exist and are needed to support the improvements. In the event that easements must be created, the CONSULTANT shall provide the legal description to the CITY. Easements may include any fight of access easements, temporary and permanent easements. CITY shall secure fight of entry with assistance from CONSULTANT as necessary. CONSULTANT shall perform property research for cases where the CITY 10/24/2002 A (6) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 I/I Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins is unable to provide the necessary information. The CONSULTANT'S scope of services shall be limited to 10 easements under this Agreement. The number of easements assumed within this scope is identified in the Schedule of Costs. Permits The CONSULTANT shall identify permits needed to facilitate the rehabilitation and construction improvements. Permits include those needed from state and local transportation authorities, railroad authorities, and 404 permits. The number of permits assumed within this scope is identified in the Schedule of Costs. Any additional permits beyond this amount shall require prior written approval from the CITY. 5) ~i~_ Responsibilities 1) Designate a person to act as CITY'S representative with respect to the services to be rendered under this AGREEMENT. Such person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define CITY'S policies and decisions with respect to CONSULTANT'S services for the PROJECT. 2) Provide all criteria and full information as to CITY'S requirements for the PROJECT, including design objectives and.constraints, space, capacity and performance requirements, flexibility and expandability, and any budgetary limitations; and fitmish copies of all design and construction standards and specifications, which CITY will require to be included in the PROJECT. 3) Provide as-built drawings based on requests provided by the CONSULTANT. 4) Place at CONSULTANT'S disposal all available pertinent information including previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the PROJECT. 5) Make available to CONSULTANT, as required for performance of CONSULTANT'S Basic Services, the following: (a) Data prepared by or services of others, including without limitations previous sewer system reports and wastewater flow records and other special data or consultations not covered in CONSULTANT'S services; all of which CONSULTANT may rely upon in performing his services. 6) In the event CONSULTANT is unable to secure access, the CITY shall arrange for access to and make all provisions for CONSULTANT to enter upon public and private property as required for CONSULTANT to perform services under this AGREEMENT. 7) Examine all studies, reports, sketches, Drawings, Specifications, proposals, and other documents presented by CONSULTANT, obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor and other consultants as CITY deems appropriate for such t 0/24/2002 A (7) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 Ill Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins examination and render in writing decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of CONSULTANT. 8) Fumish approvals and permits for all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the PROJECT and such approvals and consents from others as may be necessary for completion of the PROJECT. 9) Provide such accounting, independent cost estimating, and insurance counseling services as may be required for the PROJECT, such legal services as CITY may require or CONSULTANT may reasonably request with regard to legal issues pertaining to the PROJECT. 10) Give prompt written notice to CONSULTANT whenever CITY observes or . otherwise becomes aware of any development that affects the scope or timing of CONSULTANT'S services, or any defect or nonconformance in the work of any Contractor. 11) Provide design flows for lines where capacity evaluation should be considered in the design. Perform manhole and point repairs. CONSULTANT's scope does not include efforts to produce design documents or specifications for the manhole and point repair activities beyond detailed maps of locations, tables and a database of observed defects, priority rankings, rehabilitation recommendations, etc. t 3) Obtain easements based upon the legal descriptions provided by the CONSULTANT. 14) Perform bid advertisement based on legal notice provided by CONSULTANT. 15) Provide all costs associated with the Additional City Responsibilities described herein. 16) Provide a GIS map in digital format suitable for CONSULTANT to link defect data and rehabilitation recommendations to produce thematic maps. 10/24/2002 A (8) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 I/I Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins SCHEDULE OF COSTS Project Administration Total Project Administration $24,744 $24,744 Basic Services - Design t. Preliminary Design 2. Final Design Total Design Services $168,783 $86,396 $255,179 C. Basic Services - Bidding/Construction Assistance Total Bidding/Construction Services $101,~_0_80 $10,180 D. Special Services I. Computer Usage/Printing/Plotting 2. Geotechnical Survey (8 ~ $1,200 ea.) 3. Vertical/Horizontal Survey (20,719 1.f. ~ $2.75/1.f.) 4. Easements (10 @ $1,200 ea) Total Special Services $10,000 $ 9,6O0 $56,977 $ 9 000 $85,577 Total Contract Fee $375,680 10/24/2002 A (9) RJN GROUP, Inc. AMMENDMENT NO. 1 I/I Study and Rehabilitation for Eastern Pecan and Hickory Creek Drainage Basins RJN Group, Inc. Estimated Level of Effort [. .] [. * Class Codes* .] Total Total Task N( Task Des~p§on PD PM PE FM DP/CT FS OTICL Hours Cost [, .] [. Hours .... ! [~ ] PROJECT ADMINISTRATION 1001 Administration 8 44 24 24 8 0 24 132 $12,264 1002 Status Meetings 8 56 40 0 0 0 16 120 $12,480 ................ ~;'~;'¥;;i;i ................................................................................ i'~ .......... '~'~'~; ............ ~' ........... '~;~ .............. '~ ....... . ....... ~ ............ ';;~ .......... ~' .................. PRELIMINARY PLANS/PROFILE SHEETS 2001 Utility Coordination 0 4 8 0 0 0 , 0 12 St,240 2002 As-Built Review 0 2 16 0 0 0 0 18 $1,760 2003 Allign Study 4 24 80 0 160 0 10 278 $22,441 2004 Right-of-Way Research 0 8 44 0 24 0 8 84 $7,172 2005 Survey Data Reduction 0 0 0 4 74 0 0 78 $5,332 2006 Preliminary Plan and Profile Sheets (2 sets) 8 80 378 0 1056 0 24 1546 $119,678 2007 Preliminary SubmEtals to City (2 sets) 4 8 28 0 50 0 8 98 $8,000 2008 Review Meetin.~s with Ci~ (2 sets) 4 12 12 0 0 0 0 28 $3,160 ................ ~'~'~;'~;~,'i .............................................................................. ~ .......... '~'~'~ .......... ~' .............. ;~ ........ ~'~ .............. ~' ........... '~ ........ ~;~'~' ............... '~¥~'Y~" FINAL PLANS, SPECS, ESTIMATES 3001 Final/Plan/Plan and Profile Sheets (2 sets) 8 48 128 0 296 0 32 512 $40,808 3002 Specitications-Line Repair/Replacement (2 sets) 8 52 192 0 16 0 76 344' $30,528 3003 Quantity Take-off/Engineers Estimate (2 sets) 8 i6 64 0 0 0 16 104 $9,960 3004 Subm ttal and Review with C ~ (2 sets} 0 16 16 0 20 0 6 58 $5,100 ................ ~'~i;'¥;~'i ............................................................................... ~;~, .......... '~'i~ ...... ;~ ......... ~ .......... ~'~ ......... ~" "~'~ ........ :i~'~'~ .................. ~';~" BASIC SERVICES - BIDDING ASSISTANCE 4001 Pre-Bid Meetings (2 sets) 0 12 24 0 0 0 8 44 $4,120 4005 Site Visits (8 visits) 0 5 36 0 0 0 0 41 $4,020 4006 Change Order Rev ew 0 4 8 0 0 0 16 28 $2,040 ................ ~;'¥;'t;'i .................................................................................. ~ ............ ~'i ............. ~' .............. ~ .............. '~' .............. ~ ............ '~: .......... :i'~' .................. ~:i~'3'~" Other Direct Costs 9901 Computer Usage $4,500 9902 MileagetMisce~laneous $1,000 9903 Pdnting $4,500 9904 Soil Borings 8 each @ $1,200 $9,600 9905 Vertical and Horizontal Survey 20,719 feet @ $2.75 $56,977 9906 Easements 10 each @ $900 $9,000 ........ ~-u-~ T.l:(;~a~ =(~ ;; -~ ~r ~ -~; s t s $85.577 Grand Total 60 39t 1098 28 1704 0 244 3525 $375,680 Item #40 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: November 5, 2002 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Alex Pettit 349-8595 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance awarding a comract for the purchase of software upgrades and services to enhance the existing LaserFiche Documem imaging Application and Enhancemem Services currently being used by the City of DeNon from VP imaging as awarded by the State of Texas Building and Procuremem Commission (formerly known as the General Services Commission) through the Qualified information Services Vendor (QiSV) Catalogue Program; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2909-VP imaging in an amoum not to exceed $177,823). FILE INFORMATION Phase i of the City of DeNon imaging project included the trial and selection of VP Imaging (QiSV#1752738222400/73532) to implemem the LaserFiche Documem imaging Application by providing software licenses for the City Secretary's Office and the Legal Departmem. Phase ii of the documem imaging project included the upgrade of software licenses from two to ten and the initial deployment of hardware and software by VP Imaging in Human Resources, Municipal Court, Tax, Engineering, Utilities Administration at City Hall, and Utility Administration at the Service Center. This request is for system software upgrades/enhancements and implementation services for Phase iii of the Laser Fiche Document Imaging Application solution that is currently being used by the City of Denton. This request will upgrade the existing software licensing to LaserFiche 6.0 SQL Server, LaserFiche E-mail Site License; purchase additional enhancemem software, Snapshot Add-on, DocuNav3 Tool Bar, and DocuNav Auto File. This will save time when indexing and converting information. The system point upgrades for existing LaserFiche Enterprise Weblink, LaserFiche intergrator Toolkit, and LaserFiche Plus Publisher are also part of the software request. The services for back scanning information into the imaging system for Human Resources, Police Department, Fire Department and the City Secretary's Office, system integration, and setup of enhanced features are also included in the request. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) Phase 1-On April 20, 2000, Purchase Order 04969 was issued for the trial and selection process of using the LaserFiche Documem imaging Application for the City of DeNon. Phase Il-On January 8, 2002, the City Council approved Purchase Order 102246 to VP Imaging for initial deployment of LaserFiche document imaging to Human Resources, Municipal Court, Engineering, Tax, and Utilities. Phase Ill-For direction in planning enhancements and expansion to the existing LaserFiche Documem imaging Application, an imaging Committee (made of represematives from the Human Resources, Fire, Police, Legal, Engineering, Municipal Court, City Manager's Office, City Secretary's Office, Utilities, and Materials Managemem departmems) was established to present the current imaging needs and to set the priority for implementation of the project within the Technology Services Tech Plan budget. This request represents the recommendations of the Imaging Committee. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that implementation of Phase iii of the LaserFiche Document Imaging Application software and system enhancemems be awarded to VP imaging in the amoum of $177,823. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS VP Imaging Lubbock, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Implementation of the software and system enhancements for Phase iii is estimated to be completed ninety (90) days from the date that the purchase order is received by VP imaging. Completion of the back scanning of documents will be contingent upon coordination with the Human Resources, Police and Fire Departmems and City Secretary's Office. FISCAL INFORMATION This project will be funded from Technology Services Tech Fund accoum 83001300. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 3 Attachment 1: Quotation 1-AlS-File 2909 Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1 P O Box 94011 Lubbock, Tsxas 79493 806-784-0055 FAX 806-771-0925 VID# 1752738222400 QUOTE Quote# 33582 Date: 09/06/02 Icity of Denton Municipal Courts 215 E. McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 VPI Contact: Cody Bettis Customer ID: Denton Note: This quote expires 120 days from above date. Please call your VPI contact for any changes. ll0 DNBaW 1 DNAto within LaserFiche. Includes VP Imaging Technical Support for one year. I I 4 VPIYR VP Imaging On-Site Training and Services, one year, ~$60.00 $ 240.00 (Note: Additional hours maybe nurchased as needed) 1 VPIIN VP Imaging Installation and Configuration Services. One-time charge 1,000.00 Please review this quote. Let us know if you have any questions or need additional ~ information. We look forward to working with you! Thank you, Nadine. J Attachment 1 P O Box 94011 Lubbock, Texas 79493 806-784-0055 FAX 806-771-0925 VID~ f 752738222400 City of Denton 215 E. McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 QUOTE Quote~ 33602 Date: 09/25102 VPI Contact: Cody Bettls Customer ID: Denton Note: This quote expires 120 days from above date. Please call your VPI contact for any changes. VP Imaging Unlimited Technical Support, for one year, via phone, fax, email, M-F. 8am-Soo.CST. Call Toll-free I SAS VPI Snapshot Add-on, Site License. This allows you to select the folder and I $ 2,500.001 $ 2,500.00 template when using the LF Snapshot feature. I I 1 VPIC VP Imaging Services On-site: Services for Conversion of all existing LF DB I $ 4,880.00 I $ 4,880.00 and installation of New LaserFiche SQL license. System operation checks forI I performance. This includes CMO conversion. Additional I g hours to review with Computer Services, cnnfiguraticm and implementation I arocess, recommended procedures before conversion. ( i.e. Volmes, DataRnse~ Connect Cnnfim~rntion~ I $ $ $ ATTENTION: I $ 75,388.00 Please review this quote. Please Note: With out QISV discount Item 1 is: $71,828.00 Item 2 is: $3,50000. Let Lis know if you have any question.q er need additional information. We look forward to working with you! I ~ $ - Thank you, Nadine. I ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF SOFTWARE UPGRADES AND SERVICES TO ENHANCE THE EXISTING LASERFICHE DOCUMENT IMAGING AND ENHANCEMENT SERVICES CURRENTLY BEING USED BY THE CITY OF DENTON FROM VP IMAGING AS AWARDED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS BUILDING AND PROCUREMENT COMMISSION (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE GENERAL SERVICES COMMISSION) THROUGH THE QUALIFIED INFORMATION SERVICE VENDOR (QISV) CATALOGUE PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 2909-VP IMAGING IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $177,823). WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton has heretofore adopted Resolution 92- 019 pursuant to Section 2157.067 of the Texas Government Code and Sections 271.082 and 271.083 of the Texas Local Government Code which authorizes the City to participate in the State Purchasing building and Procurement Commission's Qualified Information Service Vendor Catalogue Purchase Method provided for in Subchapter B of Chapter 2157 of the Texas Government Code (the "QISV Catalogue"); and WHEREAS, the herein described vendor is a qualified vendor in the QISV Catalogue and the contract authorized by this ordinance is in the best interests of the City and complies with the requirements of Subchapter B of Chapter 2157 of the Texas Government Code as a QISV Catalogue purchase; 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 file for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "File Number" listed hereon, and on file in the office of the Purchasing Agent, are hereby approved: FILE NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 2909 VP Imaging $177,823 SECTION 2. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in File 2909, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the General Services Commission 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 General Services Commission, and the purchase orders issued by the City. SECTION 3. Should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items set forth in File 2909 wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the City's ratification of bids awarded by the State of Texas Building and Procurement Commission, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the State of Texas Building and Procurement Commission, quantities and specified sums contained in the City's purchase orders, and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the subject file, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved 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 .,2002. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-File 29 Item #4P AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: November 5, 2002 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Sharon Mays 349-8487 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance awarding a comract for the purchase of fiber optic cable, patch panels and cable assemblies as awarded by the State of Texas Building and Procuremem Commission (formerly known as State of Texas General Services Commission); providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (Purchase Order 107601 to FMS Technologies, inc. in the amoum of $30,021.15). BID INFORMATION This purchase order is for the acquisition of 16405 feet of 36 pair fiber optic cable. The cable will be utilized in the expansion of the City of DeNon fiber optic network. The price is taken from the State of Texas Building and Procurement Commission Contract 1-75-210-7290-400 awarded to FMS Technologies, inc. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that Purchase Order 107601 to FMS Technologies, Inc. be awarded in the amoum of $30,021.15. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS FMS Technologies, Inc. Addison, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The 36 pair fiber optic cable is available for shipmem in 3 weeks from receipt of a purchase order. FISCAL INFORMATION Funding for this purchase order will be from Electric Communications accoum 60006700.1350.3970. Agenda Information Sheet November 5, 2002 Page 2 Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Quote from FMS Technologies, Inc. 1-AlS-File 2912 Technologies City. at 18 e.~ PCR-700-SP, 72 F{i~m' Rack / ~ I pa~ ~~7~ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE, PATCH PANELS AND CABLE ASSEMBLIES AS AWARDED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS BUILDING AND PROCUREMENT COMMiSSiON (FORMERLY KNOWN AS GENERAL SERVICES COMMISSION); PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (PURCHASE ORDER 107601 TO FMS TECHNOLOGIES, iNC. iN THE AMOUNT OF $30,021.15). WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 92-019, the State Purchasing General Services Commission 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 DeNon; 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 General Services Commission 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. That the numbered items in the following numbered purchase order for materials, equipmem, supplies, or services, shown in the "Purchase Orders" listed hereon, and on file in the office of the Purchasing Agem, are hereby approved: PURCHASE ORDER VENDOR AMOUNT 107061 FMS Technologies, Inc. $30.021.15 SECTION 2. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the attached purchase orders, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the General Services Commission 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 comained in the bid documems and related documems filed with the General Services Commission, and the purchase orders issued by the City. SECTION 3. That should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items set forth in the attached purchase orders wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the City's ratification of bids awarded by the General Services Commission, 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, speci- fications and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the General Services Commission, quantities and specified sums contained in the City's purchase orders, and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the attached purchase orders, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved purchase orders or pursuant to a written contract made pursuant thereto as authorized herein. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PO 107601 Item #40 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: November 5, 2002 Airport and Transit Operations Jon Fortune, Public Safety and Transportation Operations SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an Interlocal Agreemem between the City of Demon and the University of North Texas ("UNT") to provide for the purchase and restoration of buses to provide express passenger service for UNT studems, staff and faculty from the Jefferson Commons and Pace's Crossing housing complexes; and providing for an effective date. BACKGROUND UNT is facing significam demand on parking services for those studems who live off campus. The University recently approved a transportation fee as part of the standard fees and tuition for each studem and will begin collecting said fee in the Spring 2003 semester. To alleviate the demand on university area parking, UNT officials are researching options to reduce the number of vehicle trips to campus and will have the aforememioned resources to fund proposals directed at reducing parking and traffic congestion on campus. With this understanding, UNT Parking and Transit officials approached staff in September 2002 to determine the feasibility of establishing a partnership to provide an express shuttle service to UNT from various apartment complexes that demonstrate a high ratio of university studems residing on the property. Because the studem transportation fee will be administered in the spring of 2003 and the demand for parking is critical, UNT is anxious to begin providing limited services, at a minimum, as soon as possible. In working with McDonald Transit, the current LINK System operator, it was determined that the City of Denton could enter into an Interlocal agreement with UNT and amend the current contract with McDonald to provide the proposed shuttle service. UNT would be responsible for providing operating expenses to the City for the proposed service and would also provide the local match for federal funding to acquire transit vehicles. This would allow UNT the opportunity to leverage funding via gram mechanisms available through the LINK Public Transportation System. McDonald also identified vehicles recently retired from the Fort Worth Transportation Authority, The T, which could be acquired at a low cost. The acquisition of these used vehicles would allow LINK the opportunity to provide UNT the proposed service much sooner and at reduced cost. Once the proposed service is operational, UNT officials and staff would then begin researching additional grant opportunities through the Federal Transit Authority, Texas Department of Transportation, and North Central Texas Council of Governments to provide funding for a long-term agreement. It is important to note that the vehicles are more than 15 years old and many of the vehicles have more than 300,000 miles. To ensure a minimum of four vehicles remain on route and operational for the efficient operation of the shuttle service, it will be necessary to add an additional mechanic (FTE) to the Fleet Maintenance division. This position would be funded through the Interlocal Agreement with UNT and would be dedicated to the maintenance of the LINK transit vehicles. OPTIONS Approve the proposed Interlocal Agreement for UNT express service in its current form. II. Provide staff direction with other alternatives to the proposed Interlocal agreement in its current form. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of the proposed express service. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Interlocal Agreement would become effective November 6, 2002 to begin equipment acquisition process. Shuttle service would begin January 13, 2002 and continue through August 31, 2005. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The City Attorney's Office reviewed and prepared the proposed agreement. FISCAL INFORMATION The Agreement requires UNT to provide the City $13,800 to be used for the acquisition of a minimum of six (6) transit buses from the Fort Worth Transit Authority. A sum not to exceed $15,000 is also included in the Agreement for the interior restoration and miscellaneous exterior markings for the proposed vehicles. Furthermore, the Agreement will require UNT to remit a monthly payment to the City for the operating expenses for the proposed shuttle service. The cost per hour to operate the proposed service is $37.56, which includes funding of an FTE for preventative maintenance of the vehicles. EXHIBITS Ordinance Agreement Respectfully submitted: Mark Nelson Director of Airport and Transit Operations S :/legalJoutdocuments/02/ordinance/UNTexpresspassengerinterlocal.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN iNTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS ("UNT") TO PROVIDE FOR THE PURCHASE AND RESTORATION OF BUSES TO PROVIDE EXPRESS PASSENGER SERVICE FOR UNT STUDENTS, STAFF AND FACULTY; ANDPROViD1NG FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the University of North Texas ("UNT") has requested that the City provide for an express passenger shuttle service for students, staff and faculty; and WHEREAS, the University of North Texas ("UNT") will provide the funds to purchase and restore a minimum of six used buses to start this express passenger service, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that such service is in the public interest; NOW, THEREFORE; THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The Mayor, or in her absence the Mayor ProTem, is hereby authorized to execute an interlocal Agreement between the City of Denton and UNT to provide for the purchase and restoration of buses to provide express passenger shuttle services for UNT students, staff, and faculty, in substantially the form of the copy of the agreement which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2002. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULiNE BROCK, MAYOR BY: S :/legalJoutdocuments/02/ordinancefUNTexpresspassengerinterlocal.doc APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Tills AGREEMENT is made and. ente~v, zt into to be effective the __ day of ~, 2002, by and between the CITY O_~ DENTON, a Texas municipal corporation, hereinaker referred to as Ci'TY and UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS, a Texas State University, herinafter mt'e~red to as UNT. W ~HEREAS, the CITY contracts t:o~ the provision of mass ktansportarion passenger m~>tor career .service within the city limits of the CITY under ;he name '~LINK"; and WHEREAS, LINT has determined that a express passenger bus system is needed to provide needed transportation for certain mtdent~ living near the university; and WHEREAS, ail payments for services under this agreement are made from current revenues of the paying party and fairly compensate the performing party for the services provided for herein; and WHEREAS, Ihis l/nlerlcc',d Agreement is in the public interest; NOW, TD-F.REFORE, CITY and UNT, in c;msiderat/oa of the mutual covenanB hereinafter expressed, agree as follows: ARTICLE ONE UNT shall provide flmds lo the CITY for the purchase and restoration of six used buses to start the express passenger shuttle ~ervice from leff, rson Commtmst'Pac¢'z Crossing. U-N-F shall t'~ro~de up to S13,800.00 I'or the pumhase of six used buses and a sum not m exceed $15,0(10 to restore these buses for express passenger services. The restoration shall pertain to interior impm'~,emems m~d miscellaneous interior and exterior markings, lINT shall provide for painting of the exterior of the buses. The buses shall be purchased from the Fort Worth q'ransportation Author[ty and are 1987 F~xibte Metro 35' by 96" buses. 'Ihe service is contingent upon their purchase and restoration and Lhia agn:~men~-shall terminate if t~te purchase and restoration otbuses is not accomplished. I.~.NT shall be invoiced for the purchase and restoration and shall pa5, the billing wi~in 30 days of receipt and approval of invoice. In exchange, thc CITY shall provide an e×pmss passenger shuttle bus ser'dce for all 1ONT students, staff, facaky aatl other passengers :as outlined in IExhibat "A", which ig attached and ineo:t-porated by reference, on an unlimited bas[s~ The .service shall provi, d, the routes shov, m on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a parc hereof by reference. The CITY and UNT designate and authorize [h~ A.S~IslLi;L-IL City Manager fro- Public SafeLy and q-ransportation Operations and the UNT Director of Police, Parking &. Transportation Services to make change, to the routes and times of operations, tLS long aS any increase in ser~'iees does not exceed 20% of the gross mwnues due 1.t 1.2 1.3 2-1 3.0 and payable For e~h service period as indicated in clauge 1.1 below, Any changes mu~t be in wdting and agreed to by both representatives. The term for the express passenger agreement shall commence on Janua~ 1, '20tl3 and end on August 31, 2005. L'NT shall pay fccs t'~r January 1, 2003 through August 31, 2003 Based upon a 79-day semester with 40 reYenue hour~ of ~ervice per any at a charge of $3-/.56 for each revenue hour of service. For the period of September J., 2003 ~rough Augt~st 31, 2004, UNT shall pay foes based upon two 7%day semesters (Fall and Slmng) with 40 reYenue hours of ser¥[ce per day at a charge of 537.56 tbr each revenue hour of service, l:or t~e period September 1, 2004 th,,ough August 31, 2005 UNT shall pay tees ba~ed upcm [we 79-day semesters (Fall and Spring) with 40 reYeaue hours of sec'vice pea' day ar a cha~ge ol" $38.83 (S37.56 plus a 3.37% escalation) for each revenue hour of ~erv-ice. The fees shall be paid to the City of Denton Public 'transportation Office based upon a monthly billing. UNT ah'all pay ~ai;t_ fees wiOn 30 days of receipt and upping'al ol~ the billing. At ~11 reasonab£e times UNT shall be entitled to audit the records or' the City to determine that the fees m-e correct. However, in m~ event shall this provision permit UN'[' to withhold payment of the fees- if it is found that k:kNT was overcharged UNT sltall be entitled to receive the amount of overcharge with interest. CITY shall l:n*ovide that as to t_he services pmvicled by this Agreement that UNT be named as an additional insured upon the inmtranc¢ policy of the contracted carrier and operator of the bus services. UNT shall be entitled to a copy of the Certificate of Insurance upon request. ARTfCLE T~VO This agreement and UNT's Purchase Order represents the entire and integrated agreement belween CITY and 'UNT and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations and/or ago:emerita, either written or oral. This agreement may be amended only by w~itten instrument signed Dy troth pa_riles. It is unde~tood and agreed by the parties that if any part, term, or provision of this contract is hold by the court~ to be illegal or in conflict with any taw of the state where made, the validity of the remaining portions o~ provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of [he par[les shall be construed and enforced as if the contract did not conta/n the particular part, term, or provis/on held ro Be inva]i0l. ARTICLE TI-~EE This Not-withstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, any pr~y to this agreement may terminate this agreemen[ with or without cause by giving the other pa_tti¢~ written notice of such tenmn~ion at l~s1:30 days prior {o the expiration of ~y f~o p~riod ltstect in paragraph 1,1 ~bove, which termina~is~ ~hall becoms ¢ff~¢dv¢ at the end of s~¢h fee 3,1 This atgreement is in add/tion to the transit agreement betwc,¢n ~c CITY and UNT allowing studenm, staff, and faculty, to nde LLNK buses. 3.2 Chapter 2260 of the Texas Government Code establishes a dispute resolution process for contracts in'miring goods, sca'vices and c¢~tain types of project~. If Chapter 2260 applies to this Agreement, the pan.les must use the statutery dispute resolution proces~ ~o attempt to te.,oN'e dispute~ arising under this A~eement. Signed this day of ., 2002. UN-iVERS1TY OF NORTH TEXAS CITY OF DENTON Vice President for Achninistaation By: Euline Brock Mayor ATrEST: ATTEST: A4rmnistrative As sistant Lrnivetsi ty of North Te;~as City Secretary, City of Denton APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Ely: ~Counsel APPROVED AS FORM By: (~~ TO LEGAL Herbert L. Prouty City Attorney Exhibit '~A" UNT OlrCamp~s Express .Passenger Shmtle Service Oay.~ of Service ~ha.ll normally bt Monday th_rough rrid=y excluding holidays, sohool offdayg and summer semesters. Time of service shall be appro~aatcly from 7 a.rm to 7p.m. Approximalely 40 revenue huurs of service per day. Appro×imarely 79 da}.' semester is anticip=terl. Fixed mute to and from Jcl-Foot, on Commons ba,_qed on 20 minute seawice. Fixed route to anti ~rom Pace's Crossings b~ed on 15 rmaute ~uttle Revenue hours ,q_re ho~g velucie travels in revcnuc ~er-vi~e, V*,~icle reveaue houapa/miles inolucles layover/re¢<~vm'y but cxoludea travel to arul from ~torage faoilitics, training opm-ators prior to revenue gm'vice, mad test and deadhead travel. Revenue Sm'vice o¢~ur.~ only whm the ¥¢1~1e is available m pa~sengem and thee is a rcastm'able expectntion of canting p~emge~m that eith.~ directly pay £ares, are subsidized by public pol/cy, or provide p~ymca~_~: th,rough ¢ontractn~t arrangement. Tibia docs not imply/hat a cash £am m~t ]be paid, Vehicle~ operated in free fare services aro considererlSn revenue service. E×HrBIT .-i~ ~,- "2, .~. ill :,J ..' ~r.~a~le.~, b_-n,~ .... .r.¢a~?~.~n~ ...... lI[1' [ ill '.'... l ..... I :..' ..~ .-~ [ 1 . .%:[. Jl '[ ? i-l: , "' i, .... ';( ~ . . i ~ ' · il'' ' i'''~ "~ 'i''l; --l"''''' ~ L ' :'' '! ..... ' *- :d .' JJ '~* .:il i:::'; ~'''' ' .... ~.'.. i.-':F':' i.' .;~ :., ,. , ~ , .-Amadl[o..,8-[-- .'f il I ~-..~.,-':ii',..i ,! : :: '1 ·-: . ¢ -~ .!] , [iSbi'b,St"' ".'~:~,;-?" ;... ;:: ~j :.~..:-'~l~'¢li~,~t ~,-":.'i. Item #4R AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Tax Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider approval of tax refunds for the following property taxes: Tax Name Reason Amount Year F go ~o gag fo ~Pl~at Pay~g~ ~ 5 B. Texas Title for Terry & Susan Duplicate Payment 2001 538.78 Wilson ~ ati~~ ~ P~nt 200~ BACKGROUND Chapter 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the governing body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $500.00. FISCAL INFORMATION The tax overpayment revenue fund would be reduced by $13,055.21. Respectfully submitted: Diana G. Ortiz Director of Fiscal Operations Item #5A AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 ~ !~';~¥>' SUBJECT - Z02-036 (Brush Creek Road) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning of approximately 80 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The five tracts are generally located on Brush Creek Road west of the intersection of Brush Creek Road and Country Club. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-3). BACKGROUND Applicant: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton, Texas The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have five parcels of land, totaling approximately 80 acres, rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The zoning of this area was initially raised as an issue when the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Future Zoning map, specifically the southwest quadrant of the city. The Commission began to question the appropriateness of the zoning in the area based on the old zoning and the current land uses. Also, this issue was raised during the First Quarterly Review of the Development Code. The zoning of this area was one of the issues City Council instructed the Planning and Zoning Commission to review. The Commission reviewed this issue during several worksessions and voted unanimously to rezone the property on June 26, 2002. In worksessions, the Commission spent a great deal of time in discussing the issue of land use and zoning of this area and how the existing zoning came into place. At the time verbatim minutes of worksessions were not kept and therefore are not available for inclusion in the back up. However, a summary of the meeting discussion was provided in a separate memo. The public hearings before the Commission were supposed to be held on August 28, 2002 but had to be postponed due to rotification errors. This delay resulted in the cases not being heard until September 25, 2002, at which time the make-up of the Commission had changed. The staff reports to the Commission were brief and did not contain the detail and history of this area. The elapsed time (3 months) between the worksessions and the public heating, and the minimum backup in the staff reports contributed to the confusion reflected in the public hearing minutes. This request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis is provided for in the Staff`Analysis (Attachment 1). Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing, staff has received one opposing response from property owners of the subject site; therefore a supermajority vote (6-1) by City Council will be required to approve this rezoning. As of this writing, staff has received no subject site. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission opposed). responses from property owners within 200 feet of the recommends approval, 4-3 (Johnson, Roy, and Powell ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject properties are not platted. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0036, commonly known as Brush Creek Road Circle: Application Date - July 15, 2002 DRC Date - August 1, 2002 Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - September 25, 2002 No Neighborhood meeting was held FISCAL INFORMATION No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A Prepared by: / Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: S. AICP Director of Planning and Development for ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Sunamry of Zoning Request The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have five parcels of land, totaling approximately 80 acres, rezoned from its currem Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residemial 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The request was initiated in an effort to maintain the rural setting of surrounding areas. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Agricultural (A). The subject property currently contains single-family homes and vacant land. Adjacent zoning: North: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)- single-family homes South: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)- agricultural uses East: Neighborhood Residemial 1 (NR- 1) zoning district - agricultural uses West: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) - single-family homes Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in an "Existing Neighborhoods/Infill Compatibility" future land use area. New developmem in this district 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. The DeNon Plan identifies the following Primary Residential Land Use Principles: Preserve Neighborhoods: achieved by demanding and evenly applied. (page 35) The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be establishing design and construction standards that are fair and Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in Denton by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density development where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning would serve to preserve the rural setting in this area and maintain the existing neighborhood as called for by the Denton Plan under "Existing neighborhoods/infill development" classification. Sprawl is characterized by low residential density housing, which the proposed zoning would create. This is not desirable according to the Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. The proposed zoning change would allow a maximum of 1 single-family dwelling unit per acre, limiting the trip generation to approximately 764 trips per day. A traffic impact analysis is not required. Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Brush Creek. Brush Creek is identified as a primary major arterial not to standard by the Denton Mobility Plan. The future surrounding road system may not be compatible with this type of development. Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zoning Analysis Current NR-2 zoning allows for single-family homes with a maximum of two (2) units per acre. The proposed Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning would allow only one (1) dwelling unit per acre. Staff Findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan in regards to compatibility and preservation of surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed zoning change would provide for a diversity of housing stock. 3. The proposed zoning change may not be compatible with the mobility plan for this area. 4. The proposed zoning change would facilitate sprawl, which is not desired by the Denton Plan. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map ETJ ETJ LOCATION MAP Scale: None Mobility Map NORTH .,' MOBILITY MAP Scale: None .;",. ,,' Mobilit~collector ~ Freeway ~ Prim ar~ Major Alternate ~\~ Prima~ Major Arterial ??~i;~? Secondary Major Alternate ~'~ ~? ge¢onda~ Major Arterial FUTURE ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map iED 200' LNl~if cation Scale: None Public Notification Date: August 15 & September 12, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 14 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 1 (Owner) · In Favor: 0 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0 % Percent of owner opposition: 45% *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ! Property Owner Responses Michael Pettibon, MD 1300 Brush Creek Road Opposed See Attached Letter David Yoder Favor See Attached Letter 940 Brush Creek Road Argyle, Texas 76226 Henry and Lona Wolfe Favor See Attached Letter 4801 Argyle Lane Argyle, Texas 76226 Richard and Gina Favor See Attached Letter Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 Dennis and Sharon Cox Favor See Attached Letter 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 September 24, 2002 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Members Mayor and City Council Members Re: Public Hearings on Brush Creek Road and Highway 377 area rezonings ~ am unable to attend the meeting~ but would like my comments on record in support of the zoning changes that are proposed. My wife and ! have lived at 940 Brush Creek Road since 1985. We moved from the City of Denton to this area to get away from the high-density houses and to a less busy, less stressful way of life. We have continued to watch the development of new homes In our area and were comfortable with the quality and density of these homes because they have all maintained the space and openness of the community. We were appalled to see that the new zoning map has changed the zoning along Brush Creek Road to NR 2, which ! understand is 2 homes to an acre of land. That is very scary to those of us who have lived here, are raising families and animals and enjoying our 'country" way of life. ! presume that this zoning would allow my neighbor, if he so chose, to subdivide his 10 acres and put 20 houses next to mine. Please support the change to NR 1 zoning. There are no undeveloped lots along this road and lot sizes range from 2 acres up to 80 acres. The other area that has us very concerned is the NR 4 zoning along the frontage of 377, south of Brush Creek Road, :just around the corner from our home. Who, in all common sense, could envision 4 homes to the acre out here? ! specifically remember Assistant City Manager, Dave Hill, telling us when this new plan was in the beginning stages that properties closer in to town would be denser and as you moved away from town you would have less density, with the least density being in the areas that bordered the ET3, or other towns. We are as far from ~own as you can get. We border Argyle and they, as a town, Just reaffirmed their commitment to keeping a rural, open feel with their new plan. ! just don't see how NR 4 fits. Directly across the highway, land with a railroad track running through it is even zoned less dense - NR 2. We ask that you support the rezoning change to NR 2 for this strip. Please, please take a good look at these and make them compatible for this area. There should not be more than one home, at the most, to an acre in this area. We feel we have already been greatly compromised by the NR 2 designation on the approximately 150 acre tract that is being developed as Country Club Village. We do not want to be downgraded any further. We keep hearin~qv~er,~nd over how the new plan is concerned with preserving and protecting ~l~i~l~~hoeds. Well, ~ preserve and protect us. '! can only hope understand the impact your decision will have on those and so long to build the very unique community we now I~( and~llerish. Thank you for Your time and kind consideration. /~- 940 Brush Creek Read Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton City Council and Mayor Re: Support for rezoning requests to less density re Brush Creek Road, Highway 377 and Hills of Argyle area We would 1/kc to respectfully request that a zoning change be seriously considered to correct what must surely be an error in the zoning map. In section L6, in an area where every existing home within a 1.5 mile radius is located on at least an acre, with most homes being on lots of 2 to up to I00 acres, there is a large section of land along Highway 377 designated to be NR-4. That would seem totally incompatible with the promise to "preserve and protect exisisting neighborhoods". The rural atmosphere and the large estate size lots, ARE the existing neighborhood and it is unfathomable that NR- 4 would be seen as a reasonable designation to be "plopped" down in the midst of this. There are other concerns as well, as there is an environmentally sensitive area along one side of this area as well as continuous flooding problems. We request that this area be rezoned to NR-2 to at least accommodate some of our concerns. There is undeveloped land adjoining this area that has been designated as NR-2, and that would seem more appropriate. Also, the land directly behind our home in the Hills of Argyle, along Brush Creek Road, has been designated on the new map as NR-2, which is also totally inconsistent with the surrounding area. To our knowledge, all of the lots on Brush Creek Road from Highway 377 to Highway 1830 are all developed, complete with homes, barns, animals, etc. All of these developed lots are large - about 2 acres up to about 80 acres. Why would you then "overzone" this area as NR-2? Makes no sense to us Please correct these mistakes by approving the rezoning for less density for this area. Sincerely, -, Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Hills of Argyle Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: Denton Plaunln~ and Zoning Commission Re: September 25, 2002, meeting - agenda items 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 We Just recently purchased our dream home at 8001 Woodcreek Circle. We moved here from Piano expressly to get away from the crowded subdivisions and hurried lifestyle. Though we commute to work now, the drive is more than worth the peace and tranq~lity we find when we return home. We researched many area towns and looked at many homes trying to find an area that had estate-size lots and some semblance of nature. A realtor in Dallas actually suggested this area to us aft~, hea~ing our desi~'es and otu' f~ustration in locating what we were looking for. Every surrounding town has subdivision miter subdivision on small Iota or in some cases, on no lot at all !! This arem of Denton is unique in that you can offer large lots, in the midst of natural beauty, and yet be close to town. This area is somethln~ very special. Its uniqueness needs to be preserved. There a~e Hterally hundreds of crowded subdivisions to choose fron~ but extremely few that offer what we have. Please vote in support of the rezonlugs for this area that will help to maintain the wonderful quality of our new life here in your fair city. We will be so disappointed ff this area becomes what we searched for so long to escape from. d and Olna Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 September 24, 2002 Dear Mayor Brock, City Council Members, and Planning and Zoning Commission Members, Please take another look at our neighborhood. We live in a cul-de-sac that was annexed into Denton in the tate 1970's. Our cul-de-sac contains 5 lots, with 4 homes that have been in existence for many years and one unbuilt lot. The 5 lots range in size from 1.022 acres up to 2.003 acres. On the new zoning map, apparently they have now zoned our area to NR 2, or 2 homes to the acre. This puts us in avery precarious position with regard to our wel{-established neighborhood. With this new zoning, the owner of the vacant lot could completely change the character of what we have worked so hard to create - a spacious, rural feel. Another seemingly incongruous zoning is the NR 4 zoning along 377 from Brush Creek Road south, which is located behind our cul-de-sac. This would appear to be better served by an NR 1 or NR 2 zoning and more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood - to one side of the area now zoned NR 4 is a large (50 + acres) cattle farm and to the other side is a large horse farm. Another important consideration is that this area is adjacent to an already threatened environmentaJ[y sensitive area and an area that has had significant flooding problems, which would be exacerbated by higher density. We have also noted that across the street from us (in the as-yet-unannexed area along Brush Creek Road) you have now zoned that area to be NR 2 also, yet those homes are on even Jar§er lots, some 20 to 40 acres and more. Ptease correct these apparent oversights and consider something more approprfate, such as NR f. The future of our neighborhood is at stake. We would appreciate your vote in support of the rezoning for the lower densities which, in turn, is a vote for the integrity of our long-standing neighborhood. Most sincerely, Dennis and Sharon Cox 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 940-243-1122 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs Page 111 2 will take public hearings Nc go through and figure out 3 presentation since they are in the same area and so 3 who got to go to who. There are letters -- letters that ! 4 similar in nature, and then we will vote on them 4 passed out. Four of them are for Woodcreck Circle, four 5 individually. And Ms. Speer with the City planning office 5 of them are letters from the same owners concerning the 6 will present and I'll open the public hearing. 6 whole area. Some of them would apply to other cases as 7 MS. SPEER: Good evening, Comauissioners. 7 far as being in the 200-foot notice. 8 I'm going to do these together as one unit but I'm going 8 COMMISSIONER AVPtn: ~ecause some of them 9 to do each individual one separately, seeing as we have 9 actually address these Agenda items, not the other ones. 10 different forms of opposition. 10 Ms. SeEER: Right. Right. 11 Item Agenda No. 28 is again a Planning 11 COMMISSIONER ~eCE: SO I just want to make 12 and Zoning initiated zoning request. There's five parcels 12 the Commissioners aware to read the letters in the packet 13 of land, approximately 80 acres. The Planning and Zoning 13 because they're stuck behind the wrong Agenda item. Thank 14 Commission has requested they go from a Neighborhood 14 you. Commissioner Johnson has a question. 15 Residential 2 to a Neighborhood Residential 1. As I said, 15 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: AS we go along, 16 there's no opposition on this land. Most of the land is 16 could you indicate because it says in all cases the 17 vacant. There are several small home sites kind of hidden 17 applicant is the City of Denton. Could you tell me if the 18 back in there. 18 owner agrees with the requesteat zoning? 19 This property does have some opposing 19 Ms. senna: i can, That's one reason t 20 issues. In one sense thc idea of maintaining the 20 want to do them separately. In this particular case, I 21 integrity of the rural atmosphere by downzoning this 21 have not received any notification from the owner that 22 property is its -- the goal was achieved. However, the 22 they oppose. This particular 80-acre site, there are five 23 goal of the Denton Plan also is to prevent sprawl. So you 23 separate owners and they were all notified, twice 24 have kind of a catch 22. You have this downzoning which, 24 actually, and I haven't received any opposition from 25 by its nature, the definition of sprawl could facilitate 25 owners on this one.... Page 110 Page 112 1 that. However, it does preserve the neighborhood and 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: And just for 2 maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. 2 clarification purposes, as she announced earlier, the 3 Also another case in question is the 3 Planning and Zoning Commission is actually who initiated 4 Mobihty Plan. On this map I've showed you Country Club 4 this. 5 and Brush Creek, they are on the Mobility Plan. Brush 5 MS. SPEER: correct. 6 Creek is not to standard. It's a secondary -- itrs a 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: That's why it says the 7 primary major arterial. Right now we know that that's not 7 City. But it was actually this body that initiated. 8 what it looks like. So I just -- staff wants to make sure 8 Commissioner Mu[roy. 9 that we're aware of the conflicting items here. We have 9 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS. Thank you. Ms. 10 that the area of the downzoning does preserve the 10 Speer, were you in our work section? I think we had two 11 neighborhood, does provide compatible uses. However, the 11 work sessions dealing with these properties. 12 Mobility Plan and the issue of it could facilitate sprawl 12 MS. SPEER: I don't believe I was here at 13 is something to be considered on all of these cases. This 13 the time, sir, no. 14 one, however, does not have any opposition so it does not 14 COMMISSIONER MLJLROY: okay. So I want to ,15 require super-majority at this point for City Council. 15 take a small liberty to refresh our collective memories 16 The next ease I'll talk about, unless you 16 and perhaps impart some of the background to you. Your 17 want to have questions about this specific one. 17 comments which are repeated in each Agenda item that this 18 COMMISSIONER APPLE: t just want to 18 is kind of counter to the anti-sprawl portions of the Comp 19 interrupt you because I noticed that you stapled all of 19 Plan, that was fully recognized in our work shop. And we 20 these together go they appear that they're for Item 29 20 had -- the consideration was given first to reflecting the 21 when actually they cover all of them. 21 existing neighborhood, there was long-e~tablished homes m 22 MS. srE~: vdght. 22 that really one-acre and larger tradition. 23 COMMISSIOSmt ~PLE: SO I just was 23 Number two, also the Comp Plan wants 24 wondering if you made the Commission aware that these 24 diversified housing. We have many areas of the City that 25 probably shouldn't be stapled together. 25 we're looking at the new urbanization and upping the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 109 - Page 112 CondcnseltTM Page 113 1 density and pedestrian-oriented, et cetera, et cetera. 2 This is one already established area of the City that is 3 more of the larger estate-type lots and so in order to be 4 diversified, we need to have that offering. 5 Number three, on an economic development 6 standpoint, we are losing some potential housings of this 7 type to Argyle because they have an abundance of the 8 larger acreage and we don't. So for this body, in our 9 deliberations and examining in the total context, not just 10 a narrow focus but of all the things you mentioned, 11 evolved the decision that this would be the part of town 12 that we would like to keep this way. So I really want to 13 address -- reflect to your comments that have been 14 repeated here. Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, i 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 MS. SPEER: Are there any further questions 18 on this particular site? I'll continue. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 20 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Did I understand you 21 to say that there were five comers? 22 MS. SPEER: NO, sir. There are five 23 separate tracts of land in this 80-acre parcel. It's 24 totaling 80 acres that's zoned right now, the NR-2, but 25 there's five different tracts. Page 114 1 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: okay. And we're not 2 allowed to know who the owners were or, I mean, it was 3 initiated by the Planning and Zoning, but I see a fellow 4 in the audience that owned a good bit of that property at 5 one time. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, I guess normally 7 we don't take who owns the property into deliberation, so 8 to speak. It's the property that we're looking at, not so 9 much who owns it. I0 COMMISSIONER WATK£NS: SUre. Sur~. 11 COMMISSIONER AP?CE: But if she has that 12 information available, I'm sure she'd he happy to sham it 13 with you. But I thought I understood her to say she did 14 not have that information. 15 MS. SPEER: on this particular site, this 16 was my easy one. Everybody else I could tell you who owns 17 what because they all -- there's opposition and favorable. 18 But this one I didn't receive anything except -- 19 COMM~ssIoNEa WATmNS: vll withdraws[ my 20 question. 21 MS. SPEER: I did want to address 22 Conmfissioner Mulroy, if I could. I wasn't aware of the 23 previous work session meetings. I do want to say that 24 that was part of my issue in writing the staff report is 25 that there is a catch 22 issue, you know, your diversify PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 115 1 housing. So you have this area of town however sprawl, 2 however compatibility with neighborhood. So that's why in 3 my staff report, the recommendations, I have kind of 4 opposing findings and I just want to make those clear. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, bless your 6 heart. It's unfortunate that the hours of commentary on 7 this during work sessions were not provided to you since 8 you have all five of these cases. I am perplexed as to 9 why that was not done. 10 MS. SPEER: Right. I am, as well. l l COMMISSIONE.R APPLE: commissioner Roy, 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: We're going to go 13 through several cases and I'm afraid that I'm going to 14 forget each ease as we go through it. I wonder would it 15 be mom appropriate to -- and we've talked about this t 6 particularl tract of land, to see if there's any comments 17 from tho audience about that tract of land, resolve it, 18 and then go to the next one. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: ! was just wondering 20 the same thing, if it might not be more prudent at this 21 point to separate them out for purposes of presentation. 22 It seems to be getting rather muddled. Without objection 23 -- and vote on each one as we go. All fight. That seems 24 to be the consensus. If you want to start back with 28. 25 MS. SPEEa: okay. I just wanted to -- Page 116 1 basically, I'm completed with 28, if you have any 2 questions. 3 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. So were there 4 any questions on 28? Okay. So we're okay. We're on to 5 30. Oh, gosh, stop me. We need to vote. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yeah, we also need 7 to go for public comment. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: We n{~l to do the 9 public hearing. Gosh, somebody stop me. Commissioner 10 Johnson has his -- 11 COMMISSIONER JOUNSON: Yeah. I still want 12 to make sure that I understand this. This property has 13 owners. We have tried to contact them. We know who they 14 are. I don't need to know but you have tried to contact 15 them and they have not responded to you; is that right? 16 MS. SPEER: rm required to contact them 17 via mail and we contact them certified mail. We actually 18 have sent out thre~ notifications for these cases because 19 of postal errors. So I have received several calls on thc 20 site. I don't have their names right now with me because 21 I received most of the calls back in August. This was 22 initially planned to go a month ago. But I haven't 23 received any written comments whatsoever on this 24 particular 80 acres. 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. This is a SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 113 - Page 116 CondenscItTM Page 117 1 public hearing and I do have several cards who wish to 2 address this issue. Tom McMurray, 3 MR, MCMURILAY: chairperson, Tom McMurray, 4 1800 Wickwood. Is this the shee~ that shows up here? I 5 live right there. Okay. This whole neighborhood here is 6 Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Hills of Argyle. It is 7 completely now sold and Phase 3 up here is now starting to 8 be developed. This site with Brush Creek, the way it's 9 designed with the right-of-way, would be more appropriate 10 to be 11 One reason is is we are in the City of 12 Denton, one of the rare properties like this thaCs 13 like this, but we are also in the school district of 14 Argyle ~SD. ~md one of the issues that I'm sure this 15 Commission is aware of is that Argyle just deannexed 8,000 16 acres to send a message to the City Council of Denton 17 because they force fed another deal. 18 And as a citizen of both Denton and the ISV 19 of Argyle, taxpayers of both, we would like to see not 20 only the conformity, but it's the natural conformity. 21 It's like, you know, all the terrain, if you've driven it, 22 it's got some hills, rolling to it. It's a natural 23 terrain for larger estate homes. It's the type of thing 24 that not only helps your tax base, it helps bring a 25 positive image to that area of town. Page 118 1 Although 377, you-all are working hard on 2 it, we're not offended by any of that. We understand 3 that. We drive in every day. And our position on that 4 is hhat we would like to see you do NR-1. The reason 5 being is that until Brush Creek is really redone, it's not 6 compatible at this point. I know on the plans it's got 7 the right-of-way. 8 Mr. Johnson, I don't know if you've driven 9 it, but I know that's part of your questions. But I drive 10 it every day and you don't drive too fast, it will tear 11 your car up. But assume all that is redone, across the 12 street here is actually ETJ, I believe, but fight now it's 13 just being produced as oil and gas royalty fight now. 14 That's the King area. And we would ask that y'all just 15 allow it to look a lot like this. Because if you do that, 16 it's going to be natural, it's going to be in conformity, 17 it's going to look good. It's got a lot of trees in that 18 area. We know Denton likes to save trees. So that's the 19 deal. I'd ask that you vote for NR-i. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE; Thank you, I have a 21 card from a Larry McGehee. MeGehee, is that correct? 22 MR. MCGEHEE: Yes ma'am, My name is Larry 23 McGehee. I live at 2001 C1Mstina Court also one of those 24 little dots on the map in the Hills of Argyle. 25 When the Denton Plan was passed, our Page 119 I neighborhood was zoned ~R-2 and ~a-4, although it had been 2 platted and approved as one-acre lots and larger. And 3 when we spoke to Council about this, they basically said 4 we understand this is an oversight. This subdivision is 5 already here. They were overlaying a subdivision that had 6 been approved and plat for one and two-acre lots. So it 7 was a mistake and so that's where Na-X came from. I don't 8 know how staff could have rezoned this whole city and not 9 missed a few little things, and that one was one that was 10 missed. And so out of cou_nesy or respect or what~ver, 11 No-1 was created to take care of that subdivision. 12 I believe that all of these are the same 13 issue, that this land is rural. I've lived there for 14 almost a year and a half. I've never seen a Denton police 15 officer even in the subdivision. We had people steal some 16 signs from us and when we called them to come out, they 17 said, well, you're in Argyle. You don't even live in the 18 City of Denton. So we're not getting serviced to death 19 out there. We have to tell them where it is before they 20 can come out. You have to go through a large floodplain 21 area to even get to this area. And a big portion of this 22 tract in question is in a floodplain and probably will 23 never be developed in. I don't know what the actual 24 usable acreage is but I don't think that we're talking 25 about very many usable acres to begin with. Page I20 1 The road of Brush Creek Road is not a 2 two-lane black top. It's a one-lane death trap and you 3 can get killed there on any day because you've got two 4 blind hills. So I think it was an oversight. I think all 5 of this stuff is an oversight. And we request that you 6 keep it rural. Keep it Na-lr There will be nice big 7 homes built there. They'll pay a lot of taxes, The 8 developer is not going to get hurt on these deals. 9 They're going to sell them and make a lot of money. It's 10 just a question of how much. Thank you. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I have a 12 card from Bill Lewis. All right. You don't wish to 13 speak? 14 MR. LEWIS: Not on this issue, 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. I have a card 16 from Chris Mellberg, 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He wanted you to 18 read the back. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Traffic issues are 20 scary both -- that's not what this says. Traffic issues 21 are really bad both on Brush Creek and 377. And we wan 22 to preserve the feel of the neighborhood. 23 Is there anyone else who wants to speak in 24 support? Okay. I have two cards -- no, I have one card 25 on this particular item. Michael Pettibon. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 117 - Page 120 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1i 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 12I MR. PETTIBON: Hi. I'm Mike Pettibon and I own 40 acres that abuts the Hills of Argyle. And I'm not really sure if I understand the zoning change all that well and maybe you can change my mind about opposing this. Page 123 NR-I? MS. SPEER: Just to clarify, the only difference in uses for NR-I and NR-2 is under NR-2 if yOU have an suP, you can put in manufactured homes. There are But I think the reason that I'm opposed, I want it to stay rural and I can tell you that 75 percent of the land that I own is floodplain and you couldn't build a house on it if you wanted to. And I have no plans to build anything else and I don't want anything else built on it. But I think that I have a problem with zoning it so that it's more prohibitive of what I could or couldn't do on my property. And I don't know if that is truIy the ease or not as far as animals or livestock or what I want to do with it. And I feel like the people in Hills of Argyle are looking at my property and trying to make sure that I conform to their standards. And while I guarantee you that, you know, I don't want to spend a million dollars on a piece of property and have it look terrible, I also moved out to the country sort of so that I was no longer in the gated neighborhood I used to be in with people telling me that I couldn't paint my front door this color or have a dog over this size or park my vehicle. That's why I'm opposed. I think that I am opposed to further regulation of land. And maybe that's not truly 5 no other residential differences. Just density and 6 manufactured housing. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Does that 8 help you, sir? 9 M~. PETTIBON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: IS therO anyone else 11 who wishes to address Item -- 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: I had a question. 13 COMM[SSIONERAPPLE: okay. Commissioner 14 Roy. 15 COMMISSIONF~ ROY: t had a question of the 16 person who just spoke. Sir, are you a property owner in 17 that lot that we're looking at right now? You own 18 property in that yellow area? 19 MR. PETTIBON: I own -- that's my this half 20 of the rectangle. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 of the 80. 23 COMMISSlmmm APPLE: commissioner Johnson, 24 if you have a question. 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 O[' thc 80 acres Page 122 the spirit of it but that's how I interpret it. COMMISSIONER APPLE: would you like us to explain to you what we're doing, what is proposed so you would understand? MR. PETTIBON: If you could. COMMISSIONER APPLE: what is being proposed, and I'll let probably Mr. Reichhart, if Mr. Reichhart would come up and explain what this -- what is happening here so that then he would maybe feel more comfortable. MR. REICHHART: very briefly, the difference between NO-1 and NR-2 is basically density. NR-1, you have a density of one unit per acre. NR-2 has a density of two units per acre. Regarding keeping animals or livestock, there are different ordinances that address that. You have to have so much acreage per type of animal you have or horses or cows, tkings like that. And the zoning, regardless if it's Ne-1 or NR-2, wouldn't matter. So the real difference is when or if the property were ever going to be subdivided in the future, it would be a density issue. COMMISSIONER APPLE: And could you also explain to him some uses such as the manufactured homes that could be allowed in NR-2 that cannot be allowed in i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 124 is yours, sir? MR. PETrlBON: Right. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: IS it the east half or the west half?. MR. PETTIBON: The west. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The west? Have you decided yet if you're in favor of this or against it? MR. PETTIBON: You kllow, I guess that ! am still opposed. And it probably isn't my place to say it but, once again, it is just because I don't want added -~ someone telling me what I can do and can't do. Once again, I have no intention of decreasing the property values. And also I don't think if you tried as hard as you possibly could that you could put more than two more houses on that whole 40 acres. But I still stand opposed. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I don't see any more questions. Is them anyone else who'd like to address Agenda Item No. 28? Seeing no one, does staff have any additional marks? MS. SPEER: My only additional remark would be with his opposition we'd be at about 50 percent opposition, it would require super-majority at City Council. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Powell. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 121 - Page 124 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 125 COMMISSIONER POWELL: IS is safe to assume that we haven't heard from the owners, owner or owners of the other 40 acres? MS. SPEER: Corro.,ct. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Comtnis siGners. Commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Ye...8, Madam Chair. I'm going to make a motion for approval. I understand the verbally stated opposition but the reality is the motion and the downzoning will be less restrictive is what the Page 127 1 hearing. 2 MS. SPEER: Good evening once again. I am 3 basically going to go through these cases and talk to you 4 about the opposition and the site location. Staff has the 5 same findings in all of the cases. This site is 6 approximately a roughly ten-acre site. Same exact 7 situation, going from Neighborhood Residential 2 to 8 Neighborhood Residential 1 zoning district. This case 9 will have to go forward to City Council for 10 super-majority. Both owners of the two tracts do oppose. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. For commentary was directed towards. So I make a motion for approval as presented. Thank you. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion by Commissioner Mulroy and a second by Commissioner Watkins. For discussion, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I am greatly influenced by the landowner of half of this property that doesn't want to make a change and I don't see why we would do something he doesn't want to do. So I will be voting against approval of this. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: ~ We going to register this as an opposing view that is going to drive Page 126 1 the City Council to a super-majority? 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Director Powell would 3 like to weigh in. 4 MR. POWELL: we really need, to make it 5 official, we do need the opposition in writing. Bm I'm 6 sure that we can get that in between now and the month it 7 takes from P&Z to City Council. $ COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. And just for 9 the record, I'm going to agree with Cormnissioner Roy 10 because I'm going to give great deference to the 11 landowner' s stated preference on this. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 13 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Discussion of Mr. 14 Mulroy's point. I would look at it as being more 15 restrictive because with an NR-2, he does have some 16 options that disappear when it goes to NR-1. I just want 17 to point -- I'm just looking at this a little differently 18 than you are, sir. I wanted to make that point. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Any 20 further discussion? Vote, please. Motion carries 4-3. 21 (Commissioners Johnson, Roy, Powcll voted 22 in opposition.) 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Next we'll address 24 . Agenda Item No. 30 which is a public hearing. Again, 25 Ms. Speer, if you'll present and I'll open the public 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Agenda Item No. 30 -- COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me. Can I ask clarification? COMMISSIONER APPLE: oh, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: You said two tracts? MS. SPEER: correct, theret$ two tracts of land, two different parcels. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. All right. We're looking at it as one site. MS, SPEER: Correct. The line is right here. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. Both owners are in opposition, had written opposition to this change? MS. SPEER: correct. Page 128 1 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Regarding this Agenda 3 item, we have severa[ people who would like to address 4 this, also. Again, Mr. McMurray. 5 MR. MCMURRAY: I have a question for the 6 staff to help with my -- is there a sewer down Fort Worth 7 Drive? No? Is there a sewer because if it's NR-2, 8 residential, you've got a problem with your septic. 9 Because we're all septic out here. There is sewer running l0 up Fort Worth Drive up here to the new part of Phase 3. 11 So I could see where it wouldn't be that, you know, it 12 wouldn't be that expensive to get it there. That is an 13 issue because NR-i iS the minimum for a septic 14 requirements of spacing for your aerobic system. So one 15 of the -- I understand the landowner may want opposition. 16 It's going to have to be an issue addressed at some point 17 whether or not there's going to be sewer. So we would 18 vote NR-1 because it really conforms with the land use as 19 in the neighborhood. 20 All of this is NR-! but I can understand 21 the landowner saying he doesn't want NR-2, but there's not 22 going to be a special use permit for mobile homes. Not 23 next to alt this. You talk about everybody coming down 24 here, y'all would have a good time. So that ain't going 25 to happen. So at this point, I would say that you ought PLANIqlNG AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 125 - Page 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 § 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Conden scltTM Page 129 to go with NR-1 for the purpose that he can't -- if the 1 landowner can't use it for anything other than NR-i anyway 2 because of the fact that you have to have a septic spacing 3 unless the City's deciding to put sewer there. Thank you. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. McGehee. 5 MR. MCGEHEE: I would have dressed up if 6 I'd known I was going to have to speak in front of this ? camera. Do I need to introduce myself each time? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: please. 9 MR, MCGEHEE: Larry McGehee, 2001 Christina 10 Court, Denton, Texas. I believe and I need to ask staff 11 this but arc you allowed to build a house on a half an 12 acre without a sewer line? You're not o/lowed to do that. 3 Isn't this, in effect, an oversight in thc Denton zoning? .4 Why would this be zoned NR-2 when you can't use it as15 NR-2? This is an oversight. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Could someone from 17 staff address that question? 18 MR. POWELL: I'd be happy to address it. 19 If you remember back to the previous cases, there's a20 differentiation between zoning and platting and providing, 21 as part of platting, you provide utilities. The zoning of 22 the property, could it be developed today at the higher 23 density because there's no utilities? No. But that's a 24 platting issue. It's not really a zoning issue. Though 25 Page 130 they're somewhat intertwined. So you really do need to 1 try to separate those two. The question may be can 2 someone develop that at a higher density? Yes. Would 3 they have to provide the utilities? Yes. But it is 4 possible. It might not be feasible. It might not be cost -- might be cost prohibitive right now. But that really 6 is a platting issue rather than a zoning issue. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Did that 8 answer your question? 9 MR. MCGEHEE: Yeah, I guess. I still think 10 that this was an oversight. I don't believe it was 11 intentionally zoned NR~2 because there is no sewer line 12 there. It's also a 65 mile an hour State highway. The 13 traffic in there is horrible, I don't know if any of you 14 have tried to go from Argyle to Denton on Fort Worth 15 Drive. You can't get there very quickly, You're blocked 16 by that trestle down there. 17 Again, I don't think that even if it's 18 zoned NR-1 that it will -- somebody is going to come in 19 here and someday ask you for commercial zoning on this. 20 NP,-I, it may make sense because there's a railroad track 21 across there and it's a State highway, and anybody that 22 would develop that would want it to be at least one-acre 23 lots, which puts the house away from the road and the 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION train. It just doesn't make sense. It really needs to be SEPTEMBER 25TIt, 2002 Page 131 NR-I. And look at all the other stuff out there, We're all one-acre and bigger because there's no sewer line and that's why it's all like it is. Somebody is benefiting from a mistake. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Bill Lewis. All right. You just want to show support. MR, LEWIS: show me in favor of this one. COMMISSIONER APPLE:. chris Mellberg does not wish to speak but wants to express support. Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wishes to offer support. Carol Haesle was not able to attend but she does want to offer support. She says all of these items include areas in rural neighborhoods with land, trees, and nature. Please allow the existing developments to maintain their environment and feel. Also, traffic on these rural roads is very bad. Please don't make it worse. And M.D. Williamson wishes not to speak but he offers support, Then I have a card from Paul Berry. He's one of the owners. Is he present? Would you like to speak? MR. BERRY: My name is Paul Berry and I am the owner of the south portion there. My address is P.O. Page 132 Box 101, Mena, Arkansas. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. MR. BERRY: I did live on this property for 20 years, but, like I say, I am now living out of state. Y'all seem to be spending some time talking about mobile homes. This property and all the property in that 30 acre group and back behind there is deed restricted from mobile homes. You couldn't put a mobile home in there if you wanted to. And -- but I do wish to express my opposition. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Question for staff for my education. Doesn't zoning supersede deed restrictions? MR. POWELL: No. The way it works is whichever is more restrictive. So in the case of a deed restriction that didn't allow mobile home parks but was allowed in zoning, you still couldn't do it. We wouldn't enforce that deed restriction but if it was valid, you could enforce it by private means. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Berry. COMMISSIONER MULROY: I have a question. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy has a question for you, sir. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes, sir. Thank you Page 129- Page 132 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 CondonscltTM Page 133 for coming down. My question is prior to the adoption of 1 the Development Code, what was the zoning on this 2 property? 3 MR. BERRY: Oh, that was something else 4 that I meant to address. Until I got this notice, I was 5 still under the assumption that all that was unzoned. I 6 was never notified when the zoning was changed previously. 7 So if I ever g~ any acceptance for these two notices on 8 this issue, if I ever get any notice on hearings regarding 9 this property, it has always been after the meeting and 10 after the decision has been made. And I didn't know at 11 all when it was changed to NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER MULROY: But previous to that, 13 to your knowledge, it was zoned Agricultural then? 14 MR. BERRY: Agricultural or unzoned or 15 something. 16 Page 135 and let's say'you had an old sF-7 and we're trying to take you to ~,m-l,well, shame on us. But that's really not the case. It's always been Ag. The policy was to assign it some zoning and we're just making that adjustment. So we're really not trying to take away something that you've had. MR. BERRY: But yOU are. But you are. COMMISSIONER MIJLROY: well, see, my comment COMMISSIONER MULROY: And how long have you owned it? MR. BeP, aY: Probably about 25, 26 years. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. In all those times, you never had any intention or made any attempt to upzone it to two or three or four houses an acre? Mit. BERRY: NO. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. So, see, what's transpired, we've gone -- where unzoned land was to you would be then these 20 years, did you ever come forward to try to upzone it? MR. BERRY: NO, but still you're taking something away. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, but it's something you didn't have. MR. BERRY; NO) because I still had the land, I still have the land. Page 134 carded as Ag, we've assigned it the low end possibility as NR-I, NR-2. And really you never had NR-2, yOU had Ag. And we're trying to sustain the 'rural flavor of that area. We want to redesignate it as NP,-1 which is less dense and more rural. MR. BERRY: I never, I never -- well, I own it -- entertain this idea but yet I don't want to tie my hands behind my back. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I understand. I want to refresh our collective memory. One, it was originally Ag. It was assigned NR-2 during the Code 12 adoption. And in reflection -- 13 MR. BERRY: BUt I didn't know that. 14 COMMISSIONER MULROY: -- that NRq would 15 have been mom appropriate. So it's not that someone is 16 taking something away that you've had for 20 years. It is 17 attempting by this body to correct an oversight. When the 18 Code was adopted, rather than having the least dense, NR-2 19 was assigned rather than NR-1. In viewing the 20 neighborhood, we viewed it as very rural and the previous 21 makeup of tiffs body initiated the changes to go to Na-1 22 which would be our lowest designation or least dense. 23 So I just want to make it clear that these 24 deliberations have already been undertaken and it's not 25 that you had -- if you had made any effort over 20 years 17 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONE~ APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Berry. 19 Is them anyone else who wishes to address the Commission 20 in regards to this Agenda item? 21 MR. REICHHART: I was just asked a question 22 in the audience and as a point of clarification I just 23 want to point out to remind everybody that Agricultural 24 zoning has a one-acm limit development similar to the 25 NR4. someone asked me that, regarding that question. Page 13 6 2 3 4 5 6 situation 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Watkins. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Just as a matter of information, and you possibly can't answer this question, but this didn't change actually or did it change the tax on the property when we went from Ag to this? MR. REICHHART: NOs sir. ?LANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 8 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: I mean, they may 9 have seen an increase but that was because alt of Denton 10 County, I suppose, went up. 11 MR. REICHHART: That's correct. 12 COMMISSIONER WATK~NS: BUt it would be the 13 same. Okay. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Is there anyone else 1 $ who wants to address this Agenda item? Seeing no one 16 coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing. 17 Commissioner Mulroy. 18 COMMISSIONER MULROY: That was the que, 19 right? No. I think I've already given my mini lecture 20 but in view that we had undertaken the deliberations as 21 I've stated, I'm going to remain consistent and make the 22 motion to approve as presented. Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a 24 motion on the table. The motion dies for lack of a 25 second. Commissioner Roy. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 133 - Page 136 Cond_~n solt TM 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 137 COMMISSIONER ROY: we did have a lot of discussion about this area but I think I was under the assumption, I wont along with the discussion under the assumption that the property owners would be happy to have this changed. So it's obvious that in this particular case the property owners are not happy to have this changed so I move denial of this. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: We have a motion and a second to deny. Any discussion? I have one polut of discussion only because I was just tolally not present at that moment. I was thinking of something else. And I would have seconded Commissioner Mulroy's motion. And for Page 139 1 property. However, we do live in a City. And sometimes 2 ii' you want to 'be -- if you would like to own a piece of 3 property that nobody can tell you what to do, perhaps you 4 ought to buy that piece of property that is further away 5 from file City than these parcels are. These parcels are 6 in the City. So, anyway, I do support this mainly 7 because that was already there. Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Lewis. 9 Tom McMurray. 10 MR. MCMURR~Y: Tom McMurray, 1800 Wickwood, 11 City of Denton. This piece of property is not unhke the 12 other piece o? property that y'all just discussed which 13 was the other parcel, there was two parcels in the one that, I apologize. I will be voting against the motion. Any discussion? Vote, please. Motion passes 5-2. (Commissioners Mulroy and Apple voted in Opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: NeXt iS Agenda Item 31, a public hearing considering rezonlng 21 acres on Fort Worth Drive, south of Hamilton and north of Brush Creek. Ms. Speer will present and I'll open the public hearing. MS. SPEER: oood evening once again. Agenda Item No. 31, as Commissioner Apple had stated, is approximately 21 acres. The same situation down to the 14 tract. However, this one is a lot longer. And it is -- 15 being a Denton resident now for a long time, this is 16 exactly what gives us a bad name in the neighborhood is 17 that it's agricultural which is one-acre lot minimums and 18 then we come in and make a mistake as a City and now we 19 can't stand up and say we made a mistake and do the right 20 thing. Okay. We're telling you wc would tike to see it 21 done r~ght so it's in conformity with the whole area. 22 Just because of the Hills of Argyle was 23 done right} because that was an oversight and we had to 24 come down and tel1 y'all how to do that. Now we're not 25 going to get this done right. You need to vote for this Page 138 1 zoning of Residential Neighborhood 2 to Neighborhood 2 Residential 1. This particular case, I do have one owner 3 opposition and I have one owner in favor. However, the 4 opposition is right at 20 percent so the super-majority 5 rule will be required at City Council. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 7 Commissioner Powell. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Is it safe to assume 9 the white area is the third owner that has not spoken? 10 MS. SPEER: Correct. 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I have several cards 13 for this Agenda item, also. Mr. Williamson does not wish 14 to speak but he wishes to express support. Carol Haesle 15 is not available to speak but she does express support. 16 Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wants to t7 express support. Chris Mellherg is not available to speak 18 but does wish to express support. Bill Lewis, ii' you'll 19 give your name and address, please. 20 MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek 21 Road. I support this zoning change. To me, it just makes 22 sense because it matches what's already them. That's the 23 main reason that I support it. I appreciate people not 24 being want -- not liking to be told how to run their .25 business, especially when it comes to using their own Page 140 1 to be NR4. There's still no sewer there. It's still the 2 same arguments. You're going to have to have development. 3 I understand there's a difference in zoning and platting. 4 The difference is that it needs to he in conformity with 5 the rural area. And I can't emphasize it enough, I like 6 the landowners. I'm a landowner. Got lots of land other 7 than this land. But this land right hem needs to be in 8 conformity with the area and the other citizens in it. 9 You have all those people that you mentioned awhile ago 10 that were for it. They all live out there. So it's like 11 the whole people are saying we need you to back up what 12 the City of Denton says. I understand the landowners may 13 or may not be for it. Here we've got one that's for it. 14 But you need to do what's right for the area, please. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Mr. Larry 16 MeGehee. 17 MR. MCGEHEE: My name is Larry McGehee. I 18 live at 200 t Cl~ristina Court, Denton, Texas. I'm almost 19 breathless after this last vote. You know, it's like a 20 guy gees in a bank to make a deposit for $100.00 and he 21 finds some money in a bag and somehow that money becomes 22 his. This land has hccn zoned AgricultUral forever, one 23 acre. These people have never been down here before you 24 asking for it to be two houses per acre. There's no sewer 25 llne. And there's some kind of thought that people should PLANNING AND ZON1NG COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 137 - Page 140 CondenscItTM Page 141 1 profit from mistakes and this was a mistake. But nobody 2 wants to take away the right for someone to capitalize on 3 a mistake that the City has made. Now, I'm a property 4 owner. Iown 17 houses in this City. I've lived here 31 5 years. And to stand here and see people vote to allow 6 mistakes, I can't believe it. I'm sorry. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 8 there anyone else who wishes to speak to this item? 9 Seeing no one coming forward, I'll close the public t0 hearing. Commissioner Roy. 11 COMMISSIONER ROY: I wanted to ask a 12 question of staff. Is the landowner who is in opposition, 13 is that landowner here? 14 MS. SPEER: That is Bill and Joyce Keenis 15 and I don't believe we have a card from them. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question of staff before you get away. Excuse me, Madam Chairman. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 143 1 body or the City to do it unless there is a tremendous 2 greater good. And I don't see a tremendous greater good 3 to make this particular change. I agree that it's not a 4 major issue. It's not a major change. But we discussed 5 it on the basis that this is something that the landowners 6 wanted to do, and that has not been the case. 7 Now, in this particular piece of property 8 there is I would say a significant piece of this one that 9 percentage-wise it's kind of overwhelnfing either in favor 10 or no comment. So I don't particularly feel strongly 11 about this one as opposed to the last one in which 100 12 percent of the property owners did not want to make the 13 change. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS, With all 16 respect to my fellow Commissioners, my recollection was in 17 our discussions that perhaps because of time constraints, 18 due consideration wasn't given to this section of this next? Thank you. How big is the red property? MS. SPEER: The red property, I believe they have -- COMMISSIONER POWELL: I mean, approximately. Is it two acres? MS~ SPEER: About 15 acres, I think. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Got yOU. Thank you. Page 142 t 9 quadrant, this lower quadrant section of town. And we 20 reviewed it and we had that discussion of the Ag and 21 ~m-2, that ~4R-t was most appropriate generally for this 22 whole area. That it would, in fact, protect the majority 23 of the landowners. 24 I don't think, with all respect, I can't 25 recall that it was ever put forward that a specific Page 144 1 Ms. SPEER: I'm sorry. That's wrong. It's 2 about five acres. 3 COMMISSIONF31 POWELL: SO the gll~B property 4 would be 15 or more acres. Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mukoy. 6 COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I'm going to 7 stay consistent. I'm ready to move approval. And I 8 remind you that, again, part of our discussion was that we 9 were looking at blanket taking it back to ~4R-t. And 10 people that wanted to do sometlfing, desired to do 11 something more dense could come and make the case with 12 their specifics in mind and we would be open to that. 13 Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: second. Discussion? 15 Ihavejust a comment. I'm still Igness sorter 16 perplexed and fascinated by the fact that this body t7 brought these rezonings forward. And rm not sure if 18 there are lapses in the work sessions that we had and the 19 issues that were discussed or what, but I'm confused and 20 amazed. Cormnissloner Roy. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: I am not confused and 22 amazed because at the work session it was made clear to mo 23 that this was sucfioned from the landowners and people who 24 lived in the area. And if the landowner does not want to 25 make this change, I don't feel it's appropriate for this 1 landowner of a specific plot was advocating this. No, 2 tiffs was initiated from P&Z solely and that we were 3 recognizing, a mistake may be too hash of a word, but 4 let's say not enough time in judgment in assigning tho 5 zonings when the Code was adop~d. And we hashed it over 6 and it was our consensus that t~a-~ would have been more 7 appropriate for this area and that's why we initiated it. 8 So in that sense, Mr. McG~hee is fight, the 9 net result was - is correcting the mistake. And I'll 10 reiterate and I was the one that spoke up and said, well, ~ 11 if someone comes, because I know there's some lqR-4 that 12 we're taking down, and that if they como back and say this 13 is what I want to do. Here's my amenities. Here's my 14 entranceways, et cetera, et cetera, that we'd give it the 15 fullest consideration when we had specifics. But in thc 16 meantime, in the interim, to go back to closest to Ag that 17 we can. I mean, that's my best recollection of the 18 discussion. That's why we've initiated it. Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 20 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Help me out her~. 21 How did we decide th~ configuration of this piece of 22 property to be rezoned? I saw a map earlier that showed 23 all these pieces. How do you figure this one as opposed 24 to another one or why weren't they all together7 Help me 25 out here. Why did you make the split right here? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 141 - Page 144 CondcnseltTM Page 145 1 MS. SPEER: AS far as I know, the split is 2 made simply by proximity. This is already NR-I. Then you 3 had the two parcels of NR-2, you had this NRMU section 4 that was rezoned a couple of years ago independently. 5 Then you have Brush Creek which divides these two 6 properties. This one is NR-2. And it didn't make sense 7 to have these two together because this one is NR-4. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That. answered my 9 question. Thank you very much. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Just to kind of weigh 11 in on that, that may be true that that was the logic for 12 it. But in our discussions my memory is the same as 13 Commissioner Muh-oy's, that we actually brought these up :14 because there were actually some oversights in this map. il 5 And I have no recollection of it being any landowners. It 16 was just a discussion amongst us at a work session and it 17 was -- the NR-4 which you're basing the NR-2 on seemed to 18 be a mistake, also. 19 And I will use the word mistake because I 20 actually was told that, that it was a mistake. 21 Especially when just across the street with a railroad 22 running through it is zoned NR-2. So if the NR-2 Was 23 based on the fact that it was between an NR-4, which was a 24 mistake, and an NRMU which had a very specific reason for 25 being an NRMU, that was a long going case and a very Page 146 1 particular parcel of land, you really can't use that 2 rationale for determining that that makes sense there. 3 MS. SPEER: I think we're addressing two 4 different questions. I think he just wondered why they 5 were stuck together the way they were, thc different 6 tracts. Why, you know, this owner is in favor but this 7 one opposes. Why are those three together as one case? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. I thought 9 he was asking you how they ended up with the des[gnat[om 10 that they ended up with. 11 MS, SPEER: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Either way I'm 13 satisfied with the answer. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Thanks. 15 Commissioner Johnson. 16 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: This is an 17 interesting chart. Is that NR-6 on there correct? 18 MS. SPEER: Yes, sir. 19 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: well, why are we not 20 talking about that NR-6 then? 21 MS. SPEER: It'S a railroad and a 22 right-of-way. See, everything around here, I mean, 23 everything is eTJ. ~ll of thc white is ETJ. Only the 24 yellow is what's zoned and we are actually -- 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: what about south of PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION the NR-4 that's shown here? there. Page 147 1 2 3 4 5 6 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: But the way it's 7 drawn, it would look like it's NR-6. 8 MS. SPEER: It'S not. The color is hard, 9 the yellow is hard to discern from the green. 10 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. And one more 11 question. The ETJ there that is just between what is now 12 NR-2 and what is now NR-1 -- 13 MS. SPEER: Right here? 14 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yeah. Has not been 15 annexed by the City yet, right? 16 MS. SPEER: Correct. 17 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: SO what is the 18 requirements on who can build what in there? 19 MS. SPEER: AS far as I understand in the 20 ETJ -- larry's going to come talk. 21 MR. REICHHART: Any development in our 22 Division 1 ETJ that's approximately tttree and a half miles 23 from the City of which that area falls into, land use -- 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. We have a 25 point of order because we are actually getting off on MS. SPEER: That's also NR-2. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It's NR-2? MS. SPEER: uh-hllh, along the right-of-way Page 148 1 another issue rather than we have a motion and a second on 2 the table and Legal has advised me that we are addressing 3 an issue that's not germane. 4 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I don't remember a 5 motion and a second. Am I wrong? 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mu[roy 7 made the motion and I made the second, 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I'm sorry. Thank 9 you. 10 COMMISSIONF_,R APPLE: we have a motion and a 11 second. Any mom discussion on the motion and the second? 12 Vote, please. 13 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Can you restate the 14 motion just so we're sure what we're voting on? 1 $ COMMISSIONER APPLE: Certainly. 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 COMMISSIONER M[JLROY: ! move approval as 18 submitled. 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That was move to approve? 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: HO moved approval as submitted and I seconded. Vote, please. Motion carries 6-1. (Commissioner Johnson voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: Moving onto our final SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 145 -Page t48 Cond~nscltTM t item, public hearing No. 32. Again, I'll open the 2 public hearing and Ms. Spear will present. 3 MS. SPE~: oood evening once again. This 4 particular item is a little bit different from our 5 previous four areas. This area is currently a 43.7 acm 6 site. It's the strip along 377 south of Brush Creek. 7 This strip is currently zoned Neighborhood Residential 4. 8 It's being requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission 9 to go to Neighborhood Residential 2. I have 15 acres of 10 opposition here, 15 acres of opposition, 20, 15 acres 11 here, and one home here and one neutral home. So I have 12 about 85, 90 percent opposition on this particular case. 13 Super-majority vote will be required at City Council. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question. 16 COMMissIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 17 COMMISSIONER POWELL: when was this zoned 18 ~m.47 was this in the major rezoning or was this some 19 other time? And if it was in the major rezoning, why did 20 they plunk an t~R-4 there? Does anybody know? Can anybody 21 help me? 22 COMMISSIONF.~ APPLE: Mr. Powell. 23 ~. POWELL: If i may. This one is the one 24 that comes closest to the mistake word or oversight. The 25 majority of that property was in a Po and the eD had Page 150 i several variations and then it was finally hard zoned, the 2 back portion of thc property but not the front part. And 3 so if I believe the old PD had 16,000 square foot lots 4 really didn't match up with NR-4. SO it doesn't match 5 what was there prior to February 20th or February this 6 year. Now it's been upzoned since that time. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I~t me add onto that 8 question then for Mr. Powell. If it doesn't match the 9 NR-4 that it was given, what did it match to? What would 10 have been a match? 11 MR. POWELL: I believe the NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 14 COMMISSIONER WATKn~S: Thank you. I assume 15 if it's NR-4 that there's no utilities there and so there 16 will be nothing built there; is that correct? Doesn't it 17 take a one-acre site for a septic? 18 MR. PowELL: Yes. If I may, there is a 19 sewer that does run down through this area, kind of 20 bisecting it. So there is sewer. There is water. So 21 unlike the properties to the north, this one it doesn't 22 have sewer there but it's close. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Again, we 24 have -- did you have a question? 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I have another Page 149 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 .22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ,20 21 22 23 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION question. Powell. Page 151 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Commissioner COMMISSIONER POWELL: would that be a City of Argyle sewer? It's not a City of Denton sewer, is it? MR. POWELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yes, sir, what.'? MR. POWELL: City Of' Dellton sewer. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thatlk you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a number of cards again who wish to speak in support of this. Mr. Williamson doesn't want to speak but wishes support. Carol Haesle in support. Sandra Lewis checked I wish to speak on this item. No? Okay. Hard to tell once both of them are checked. But she is in support. Chris Mellberg is in support. Bill Lewis. MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek Road. We do support this issue. That is what is already there. The other issues here are that this is an environmentally sensitive area. You've heard a lot from us already on this property and i'm here to reiterate. Thank you for what you've done in the past to help protect that area. Making it NR-2 will help protect it some more, also. Page 152 There has also been some discussion, maybe it's differences of opinion about where the floodplain is out there. However, there is some floodplain out there. I think we can agree on that. As far as more general zoning issues go, I think that the possible strategy that some cities try to use is that the closer you are to the core of tho City, that's where higher densities occur. As you get further out away from the City, that's where the lower densities are. This is about as far away as you can get from Denton and still bc in Denton. And I think that pretty well summarizes my thoughts on this issue. I'll take any questions. COMMISSIONER APPLE: ?hank you. Tom McMurray. MR. MCMURRAY: Just in support. You've heard my arguments. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Larry McOehcc, MR. MCGEItEE: My name is Larry McGeh~e. I live at 2001 Ckfistina Court in Denton, Texas. My faith has been restored. We had one person found the money and got out of here but the rest of the money has been returned to the citizens. Thank you. This one is the biggest mistake that we're looking at tonight. NR-4 makes no sense. In fact, it ought to be ~m-t. t don't know how SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 149- Page 152 CondensoltTM Page 153 Page 155 1 we're going to NR-2 but that is what we're trying to do 1 2 here, right? NR-4toNR-2? well, I'min favor of that. 2 3 Thank you for your last vote. 3 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 4 5 anyone else who wishes to address this item? Seeing no 5 6 one coming forward, I'll close the public hearing. 6 7 Commissioner Mulroy. 7 8 COMMISSIONER MULROY: I'm going to move 8 9 approval. 9 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Second. 10 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: A question of staff. 11 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy is 12 13 13 prior to you. 14 COMMISSIONER ROY: I just wish that 14 15 somebody had explained this in more detail to the 5 16 landowners. Here we have another case of 85 percent .6 17 roughly opposition. You can argue about how we got here I7 18 but the fact is we are here at NR-4 and the landowners who 18 19 own this property don't want to change it, 85 percent of 19 20 them don't want to change it. And I'm just really 20 21 struggling with this, this whole concept, 21 22 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 22 23 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you, ma'am. 23 24 That was not to get attention. That was getting over a 24 25 cold. Staff, a question. The owners who are in 25 Page 154 i opposition, did they make any attempt to get here? 2 There's nobody in opposition here and that bothers me. 3 MS. SPEER: If I can be blunt, they're 4 coming to City Council. The owners, the opposition on 5 this site has plans for this site and owns this land, they 6 will be at City Council. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own what land? 8 MS. SPEER: They own this property. 9 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own the NR-2, as 10 well as the NR-4. 1 MS. SPEER: correct. This part. 2 COMMISSIONER POWELL: okay. But they own 13 all of the NR-2 beh/nd it, to the east of it? 14 MS. SPEER: 1 believe they do own all of 15 it. They even own the vacant lot up here. 16 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy. 18 COMMISSIONER ROY: One question. That 19 vacant lot on the NR-i up there, they were not in 20 opposition to. that? 21 MS. SPEER: correct. They sent in a letter 22 for favor of that. 23 COMMISSIONER ROY; Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion and a 25 second to approve. Any more discussion? Vote, please. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Motion can'[es 5-2. (Commissioners Roy and Powell voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: That ends our Agenda items. And if there's no further business, we are adjourned. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 153 - Page 155 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 2 (NR-2) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 1 (DR-1) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1300, 1360, AND TRACT 5 BRUSH CREEK ROAD LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS TRACTS 33, 34, 35, 36, 36A, 36B IN ABSTRACT 1343A IN THE J.W. WITHERS SURVEY, iN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0036) WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a change in zoning for approximately 80 acres of land being tracts 33, 34, 35, 36, 36A, 36B in abstract 1343A in the J.W. Withers survey the City of Demon, DeNon County, Texas, commonly known 1300, 1360, and tract 5 Brush Creek Road, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property") from Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residemial 1 (NR-1) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval to change the zoning to Neighborhood Residemial 1 (NR-1); and WHEREAS, the City has received written protests pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Section 211.006, which requires a three quarter vote by the City Council to change the zoning district classification and use designation. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change is consistem with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby changed from Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residemial 1 (NR- 1) zoning district classification and use and such zoning change has been passed by a three quarter vote of the City Council. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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 SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. 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 Demon 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 ,2002. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Exhibit A Z02-0036 (Brush Creek Road) NORTH LOCATION MAP Item #5B AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 ~ !~';~¥>' SUBJECT - Z02-037 (Woodcreek Circle) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 6.8 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The five tracts are generally located on Woodcreek Circle, south of Brush Creek and east of Fort Worth Drive. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton, Texas The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have five parcels of land, totaling approximately 6.8 acres, rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The zoning of this area was initially raised as an issue when the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Future Zoning map, specifically the southwest quadrant of the city. The Commission began to question the appropriateness of the zoning in the area based on the old zoning and the current land uses. Also, this issue was raised during the first Quarterly Review of the Development Code. The zoning of this area was one of the issues City Council instructed the Planning and Zoning Commission to review. The Commission reviewed this issue during several worksessions and voted unanimously to rezone the property on June 26, 2002. In worksessions, the Commission spent a great deal of time in discussing the issue of land use and zoning of this area and how the existing zoning came into place. At the time verbatim minutes of worksessions were not kept and therefore are not available for inclusion in the back up. However, a summary of the meeting discussion was provided in a separate memo. The public hearings before the Commission were supposed to be held on August 28, 2002 but had to be postponed due to notification erors. This delay resulted in the cases not being heard until September 25, 2002, at which time the make-up of the Commission had changed. The staff reports to the Commission were brief and did not contain the detail and history of this area. The elapsed time (3 months) between the worksessions and the public heating, and the minimum backup in the staff reports contributed to the confusion reflected in the public heating minutes. This request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis is provided for in the Staff`Analysis (Attachment 1). Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing, staff has received five favorable responses from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-0). Commissioner Apple had a legal conflict of interest and could not vote or participate in the deliberations. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject properties are platted. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0037, commonly known as Woodcreek Circle: Application Date - DRC Date - Planning and Zoning Public Heating - July 23, 2002 August 1, 2002 September 25, 2002 No Neighborhood meeting was held FISCAL INFORMATION No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A Prepared by: Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: Do~tglas S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development for ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have five parcels of land, totaling approximately 6.8 acres, rezoned from its current Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The request was initiated in an effort to maintain the rural setting of surrounding areas. Four of the five subject properties are developed and all five of the parcels are greater than one acre in size. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Agricultural (A) Four of the five sites currently contains single-family homes. Adjacent zoning: North: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ET J) zoning district- single-family homes South: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district - open space/single family East: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) zoning district - golf course West: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district - single-family homes Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located within a "Neighborhood Centers" future land use area. These areas may develop in conventional patterns or may be developed in a pattern of 'neighborhood centers'. Neighborhood centers are oriented inwardly, focusing on the center of the neighborhood and containing facilities vital to the day-to-day activity of the neighborhood. A neighborhood center might contain a convenience store, small restaurant, personal service shops, church or synagogue, daycare, individual office space, a small park and perhaps an elementary school. The Denton Plan identifies the following Primary Residential Land Use Principles: Preserve Neighborhoods: achieved by demanding and evenly applied. (page 35) The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be establishing design and construction standards that are fair and Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in Denton by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density development where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning would serve to preserve the rural setting in this area and maintain the existing neighborhood as called for by the Denton Plan under "Neighborhood Centers" classification. Sprawl is characterized by low residential density housing, which the proposed zoning would create. This is not desirable according to the Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. A traffic impact analysis is not required. Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Brush Creek. Brush Creek primary major arterial not to standard by the Denton Mobility Plan. is identified as a Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zoning Analysis Current NR-2 zoning allows for single-family homes with a maximum of two (2) units per acre. The proposed Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning would allow one (1) dwelling unit per acre. Staff Findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan in regards to compatibility and preservation of surrounding land uses. 2. The properties are platted and conform to the density and requirements of the proposed Neighborhood Residential i(NR- 1) zoning district. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map ETJ ETJ ETJ LOCATION MAP Scale: None Mobility Map NORTH MOBILITY MAP .;",. ,,' Mobilit~collector ~ Freeway ~ Prim ar~ Major Alternate ~\~/~ Primar-f Major Arterial ?~i?'~ Secondar~ Major Alternate ~ ~'~ ~? ge¢ondaw Major Arterial FUTURE dot Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Limits o' 500' .imits of Notificatio 00' Scale: None Public Notification Date: August 15 & September 12, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 12 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 5 (Owners) · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0 % *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Property Owner Responses Carmen Investments Favor See Attached Letter 500 Denton Tap Road (Owner) Ste 106 Coppell, Texas 75019 Sharon Cox Favor No Comments 8008 Woodcreek Circle (Owner) Argyle, Texas 76226 Larry and Susan Apple Favor "Why would "new" map change the zoning on 5 800 Woodcreek Circle (Owner) lot cul de sac in existence since 1978777 Argyle, Texas 76226 Ciro Lopez Favor "Wanted to live near nature on a big piece of land" 8011 Woodcreek Circle (Owner) Argyle, Texas 76226 Gina and Richard Favor "Moved here for rural feel from Piano- only 6 Shanhouse (Owner) months ago and would like to preserve the 8001 Woodcreek Circle lifestyle" Argyle, Texas 76226 David Yoder 940 Brush Creek Road Argyle, Texas 76226 Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Argyle, Texas 76226 Richard and Gina Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 Favor Favor Favor See Attached Letter See Attached Letter See Attached Letter Dennis and Sharon Cox Favor See Attached Letter 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Sop 20 02 02:3:3p FRO~ ; C T.House / Blue Pup FAX NO, : 972-dG2-7891 817-490-9096 ~ep. 2.8 2~ 12:58PM P1 September plamiing and Developmem Department City of Denton, Texa~ AtI~. Autumn Speer Vi~t F~ ~O. 34~97fl7 l~; Zo. le8 Ca,e Z02-~03~ Dear Ms. Spec~ C#r~en lnvestment9, l~c. is ~c o~er of e~ of t~ I~a i~uded ~ ~is p~p~ ~m~, It h my uude~l~ ~at ~ ~sral ~la~s (L~, minlmm lot width, ~backs, ~c.) a~ t~ same for ~.l, lmmi~g ~s undc~t~d[~ is c~ it .ap~n~ tb~ ~C p~d ~n~ug iff no way ~a~da~a that would ~ im~s~ ~ the NR*~ ~n~ ~at I am eot aw~ ~, P~ ad~ m~ 500 DENTON TAP ROAD - SUITE 106 · COPPELL, TEXAS 7501{) · 462-1723 NOT CE OF PUBL3;C HEARZNe Z02.0037 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City o$ Denton will hold a public hearing 0¢t Wed; September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning five tracts of land Iotaling approximately 6,8 acres gE located on Woodcreek Circle, souLh of Brush Creek and east of For[ Worth Drive, from a Nei Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district (see backside). The property is legatly described as Lots 1-5, Block t of the Woodcreek Addition in of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. The public headng wilt start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at McKinney Street, Denton. Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feel subject property, the Planning ancl Zoning Commf$~lon would like to hoar how you feel ~b~ zoning chenge request end invites you to attend the public headng. Please. in order for your op be taken into account, re[urn this form with your comments prior to the date of lhe public hearin in no way prohibits you from attending and participating id th~ public hearing,) You may fax number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in. person: Planning and Development Department 22t N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 7620'1 Affn: Autumn Spoor, Planne~'l The zoning process includes (we public hearings designed to provide opporlunlfles for involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred {200) the subject property are notiFied of thc zoning request by way of this notice. The first public he held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the responses in support and in opposition, Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City COL final action providing the Commi,s$ion recommends approval. Should the Commission reco~ denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200} feet of the site submil wr[tlen opposition, out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve thc zoning change. These used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition, Reasons forOpposltion; Please circTe one: Neutral tO request Tolephgne Number: ~/0-~_ Physical Address of Proped~ within 200 feet: CiTY OF DENTON, TEXAS S£p 2 CITY HALL WEST , DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · g40.34g.83~rD . (F} NOTICE OF PUBLTC HEAR:I:N6 Z02-0037 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton Will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning five tracts of land totaling approximately 6.8 acres generally located on Woodcreek Circle, south of Brush Creek and east of Fort Wodh Drive, from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning distdct (see map on backside). The property is legally described as Lots 1~5, Block 1 of the Woodcreek Addition in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. The public hearing will start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no WaY prohibits you ~ro..m.. attending, and participating in. the public hea#ng.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Autumn Speer, Planner I The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public headng is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition, Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. 'Reasons for Opposition: Signature: Please circle one: Neutral to request Opposed to request Printed Name: Mailing Address: c ty, state z p: Telephone Number: ... ' ~,~ 7-,.~'~,~' g Physic[ Address of Properly ~thin 200 feet: ~ ~¢¢~r~ ~~ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS cITY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 Z02.0037 200' Nofi~e NOTICE OF PUBLIC.' HEARING Z02-0037 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning five tracts of land totaling approximately 6.8 acres generally ~ocated on Woodcreek 'Circle, south of Brush Creek and east of Fort Worth Drive, from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district (see map on backside). The property is legalty described as Lots 1-5, Block 1 of the Woodcreek Addition in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. The public hearing witl start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission woUld like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with.your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no w. ay pr~ohib_i.t~_y_ou from ..attending and.part!cipating in the public h_earing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off imperson: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Autumn Speer, Planner I The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition, Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. Please circle one: __nnfa ~ _ vor of request......)' Neutral to request Opposed to request - ~' Reasons for OppOsition:; -. -~..~- .-~ ~ - Mailing Address: (:~) ~ / ~O ~ ~,~ ff ~ . City, State Zip:~~ ~', %~ 7 ~ ~~. T ephone 7 ¢ ~hysical Address of ~rope~y w~th[n 200 feet: ~// ~~~ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CiTY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 Z02-0037 200' Notice NOT'J:¢E OF PUBL]:¢ HEAR N6 Z02-0037 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning five tracts of land totaling approximately 6.8 acres generally located on Woodcreek Circle, south of Brush Creek and east of Fort Worth Drive, from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district (see map on backside). The property is legally described as Lots 1-5, Block 1 of the Woodcreek Addition in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. The pubfic hearing wilt start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within ~/o hundred (200) feet of fhe subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no .Way prohibits ypu f.._/;o_m.._ attending a. nd participating in.the public hearing.) You. may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Autumn Speer, Planner l The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit wdtten opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. Please circle one: Neutral to request Opposed to request ~Rea ' Signature: ~~. dY'~. ,~~~/~:~ MaifingAddress: ~ ~o¢~cr~ek Ci~, State Zip: Q~ . T~ Telephone Number: G~, '~S{ , Physi~l Address of Properly within 200 feet: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS C~TY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349,7707 Z02~0037 200' Nofice September 24, 2002 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Members Mayor and City Council Members Re: Public Hearings on Brush Creek Road and Highway 377 area rezonings ~ am unable to attend the meeting~ but would like my comments on record in support of the zoning changes that are proposed. My wife and ! have lived at 940 Brush Creek Road since 1985. We moved from the City of Denton to this area to get away from the high-density houses and to a less busy, less stressful way of life. We have continued to watch the development of new homes In our area and were comfortable with the quality and density of these homes because they have all maintained the space and openness of the community. We were appalled to see that the new zoning map has changed the zoning along Brush Creek Road to NR 2, which ! understand is 2 homes to an acre of land. That is very scary to those of us who have lived here, are raising families and animals and enjoying our 'country" way of life. ! presume that this zoning would allow my neighbor, if he so chose, to subdivide his 10 acres and put 20 houses next to mine. Please support the change to NR 1 zoning. There are no undeveloped lots along this road and lot sizes range from 2 acres up to 80 acres. The other area that has us very concerned is the NR 4 zoning along the frontage of 377, south of Brush Creek Road, :just around the corner from our home. Who, in all common sense, could envision 4 homes to the acre out here? ! specifically remember Assistant City Manager, Dave Hill, telling us when this new plan was in the beginning stages that properties closer in to town would be denser and as you moved away from town you would have less density, with the least density being in the areas that bordered the ET3, or other towns. We are as far from ~own as you can get. We border Argyle and they, as a town, Just reaffirmed their commitment to keeping a rural, open feel with their new plan. ! just don't see how NR 4 fits. Directly across the highway, land with a railroad track running through it is even zoned less dense - NR 2. We ask that you support the rezoning change to NR 2 for this strip. Please, please take a good look at these and make them compatible for this area. There should not be more than one home, at the most, to an acre in this area. We feel we have already been greatly compromised by the NR 2 designation on the approximately 150 acre tract that is being developed as Country Club Village. We do not want to be downgraded any further. We keep hearin~qv~er,~nd over how the new plan is concerned with preserving and protecting ~l~i~l~~hoeds. Well, ~ preserve and protect us. '! can only hope understand the impact your decision will have on those and so long to build the very unique community we now I~( and~llerish. Thank you for Your time and kind consideration. /~- 940 Brush Creek Read Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton City Council and Mayor Re: Support for rezoning requests to less density re Brush Creek Road, Highway 377 and Hills of Argyle area We would 1/kc to respectfully request that a zoning change be seriously considered to correct what must surely be an error in the zoning map. In section L6, in an area where every existing home within a 1.5 mile radius is located on at least an acre, with most homes being on lots of 2 to up to I00 acres, there is a large section of land along Highway 377 designated to be NR-4. That would seem totally incompatible with the promise to "preserve and protect exisisting neighborhoods". The rural atmosphere and the large estate size lots, ARE the existing neighborhood and it is unfathomable that NR- 4 would be seen as a reasonable designation to be "plopped" down in the midst of this. There are other concerns as well, as there is an environmentally sensitive area along one side of this area as well as continuous flooding problems. We request that this area be rezoned to NR-2 to at least accommodate some of our concerns. There is undeveloped land adjoining this area that has been designated as NR-2, and that would seem more appropriate. Also, the land directly behind our home in the Hills of Argyle, along Brush Creek Road, has been designated on the new map as NR-2, which is also totally inconsistent with the surrounding area. To our knowledge, all of the lots on Brush Creek Road from Highway 377 to Highway 1830 are all developed, complete with homes, barns, animals, etc. All of these developed lots are large - about 2 acres up to about 80 acres. Why would you then "overzone" this area as NR-2? Makes no sense to us Please correct these mistakes by approving the rezoning for less density for this area. Sincerely, -, Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Hills of Argyle Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: Denton Plaunln~ and Zoning Commission Re: September 25, 2002, meeting - agenda items 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 We Just recently purchased our dream home at 8001 Woodcreek Circle. We moved here from Piano expressly to get away from the crowded subdivisions and hurried lifestyle. Though we commute to work now, the drive is more than worth the peace and tranq~lity we find when we return home. We researched many area towns and looked at many homes trying to find an area that had estate-size lots and some semblance of nature. A realtor in Dallas actually suggested this area to us aft~, hea~ing our desi~'es and otu' f~ustration in locating what we were looking for. Every surrounding town has subdivision miter subdivision on small Iota or in some cases, on no lot at all !! This arem of Denton is unique in that you can offer large lots, in the midst of natural beauty, and yet be close to town. This area is somethln~ very special. Its uniqueness needs to be preserved. There a~e Hterally hundreds of crowded subdivisions to choose fron~ but extremely few that offer what we have. Please vote in support of the rezonlugs for this area that will help to maintain the wonderful quality of our new life here in your fair city. We will be so disappointed ff this area becomes what we searched for so long to escape from. d and Olna Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 September 24, 2002 Dear Mayor Brock, City Council Members, and Planning and Zoning Commission Members, Please take another look at our neighborhood. We live in a cul-de-sac that was annexed into Denton in the tate 1970's. Our cul-de-sac contains 5 lots, with 4 homes that have been in existence for many years and one unbuilt lot. The 5 lots range in size from 1.022 acres up to 2.003 acres. On the new zoning map, apparently they have now zoned our area to NR 2, or 2 homes to the acre. This puts us in avery precarious position with regard to our wel{-established neighborhood. With this new zoning, the owner of the vacant lot could completely change the character of what we have worked so hard to create - a spacious, rural feel. Another seemingly incongruous zoning is the NR 4 zoning along 377 from Brush Creek Road south, which is located behind our cul-de-sac. This would appear to be better served by an NR 1 or NR 2 zoning and more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood - to one side of the area now zoned NR 4 is a large (50 + acres) cattle farm and to the other side is a large horse farm. Another important consideration is that this area is adjacent to an already threatened environmentaJ[y sensitive area and an area that has had significant flooding problems, which would be exacerbated by higher density. We have also noted that across the street from us (in the as-yet-unannexed area along Brush Creek Road) you have now zoned that area to be NR 2 also, yet those homes are on even Jar§er lots, some 20 to 40 acres and more. Ptease correct these apparent oversights and consider something more approprfate, such as NR f. The future of our neighborhood is at stake. We would appreciate your vote in support of the rezoning for the lower densities which, in turn, is a vote for the integrity of our long-standing neighborhood. Most sincerely, Dennis and Sharon Cox 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 940-243-1122 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs 1 COMMISSIONER th~ all as a group. 2 Agenda are public hearings ann racy are numbers 28 2 COMMISSrONER POWELL: NO. We would be 3 through 32, and they are basically in the same geographic 3 exert that she has prop~y in 29. 4 area and very similar in nature. And I would have 4 ¢OMMISSrOr~ER IOHNSON; okay, So on 29 all 5 proposed to take all five at one time for the 5 the owners ar~ in agreement? 6 presentation. However, I own property in Item No. 29 so 6 MS. SPEP: correct. 7 I need to excuse myself, Vice-Chair Powell will kindly 7 COMMISSEONE~ JOSr~SON; okay, 8 take over the meeting and then I will return for -- and I 8 COMM~SSrO~ER POWELL: R looks like Nfl:. 9 will return after that item and then we will proceed with 9 Powelt wanted to say something. Okay. I don't see any 10 Items 28, 30, 3 I, and 32 without objection. 10' other questions. I wouldn't know if tho light was lit or 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: At this time I'll 11 not so you'll have to raise your hand. Thank you. I'll 12 open the public hearing on Item No. 29 and ask for a 12 ask if there's anybody here that would like to speak on 13 staff report. 13 Item No. 29 for or against. If anybody would like to. 14 MS. SPEER: Good evening again, 14 Please. Please come down and give us your name and your 15 Commissioners. Agenda No. 29 is a Planning and Zoning 15 address. 16 initiated request. It is five parcels. Pve put up a map 16 m. MCOenee: my name is Larry McGchee. I 17 of the entire area so we can use the same map throughout. 17 live at 2001 Christina Court in the City of Denton. Was 18 But this is the Woodcreek Circle. Five parcels are in 18 that all I needed? 19 question. Currently the area is zoned Neighborhood 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL; Tel1 US whether 20 Residential 2. Four of the five lots do have homes on 20 you're in favor or against and why. 21 them. The one vacant lot is to the comer. What you've 21 MR. MCaEHEE: Vm in favor. It's obviously 22 received are five favorable opposite notifications that 22 -- I think there's only one lot really in question there 23 were received today and Monday. This property is located 23 and everything else is built out so I'm definitely in 24 within a Neighborhood Centers future land use area. The 24 favor of that. 25 main purpose of this downzoning of this property is to 25 COmmissioNER eOWgLL: Thank you, sir. Mr. Page 106 Page 108 1 maintain the rural integrity of this area. And these five I McMurray raised his hand a minute ago. Do you wish to 2 lots, being that they are already developed, they're 2 speak? I have your card in favor. 3 already over one-acre lots, staff finds that the zoning is 3 Ma. MCMURRAY: Tom McMurray, 1800 Wickwood, 4 compatible with the existing land use. I'll take any 4 City of Denton property. That parcel number 29, I would 5 questions. 5 vote in favor of that one. All of the other lots are 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL; Thank you. Are there 6 already conforming to the NR-1 and there's only one lot 7 any questions from the Commissioners? I don't have a clue 7 left. It's right at the end of the cul-de-sac. And it 8 how to work these lights so we'll go with hands. 8 would almost be harder to split that anyway to try to make 9 COMMrSSIONER JOHNSON: I didn't see on 9 two lots anyway. So I don't think this is a very I0 these that it indicated who the owners are of the 10 difficult discussion. 11 properties. 11 COMM~SmOr~e~ cOWerS: Thank you, sir. I 12 MS. SPEER: The notifications that you 12 also show a Mr. Fred Moell~r is in favor of Item 29. A 13 received today, the four, those are the owners, the four 13 Mr. Williamson, is he here to speak? A Mr. Bill Lewis. 14 that we just passed out. The last letter is the vacant i4 You didn't mention this one, did you? All right. That's 15 lot. 15 all I show in favor. None against. Anyone else who would 16 coMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. So all of the 16 like to speak on this issue? Close the public hearing and 17 Agenda itcans, the owners are in agrccraent with the zoning? 17 ask for whatever the Comrnissioncrs would enjoy hem. 18 MS. SPEER: Corll~t. Addenda No. 29, this 18 COMMISglONER MULROV: Vii move approval. 19 particular item, Woodcreek Circle, they're all in favor. : 19 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: second. 20 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. What about 28 20 COMMISSIONER POWELL: we have a motion to 21 and30-- 21 approve and we have a second. I'll ask you to vote. And ,22 ms. S~EER: we're not to those yet. 22 I'll have to go down them to vote so my vote doesn't show 23 COMM~SSrONER eOWE[~: we're only doing 29 23 as Susan's vote. And if Mr. Powell will read the score. !24 at this time. 24 MR. ?OWE[~: MOtion carries 6-0 with one 125 COMMISS;IONERJOHNSON: okay. I'm sorry. I 25 abstention. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 105 - Page t 08 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 2 (NR-2) ZON1NG DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESDIENTIAL 1 (DR-1) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 6.8 ACRES OF LAND GERERALLY LOCATED AT WOODCREEK CIRCLE, SOUTH OF BRUSH CREEK ROAD AND EAST OF FORT WORTH DRIVE LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1 - 5, BLOCK 1 OF THE WOODCREEK ADDITION, IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0037) WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a change in zoning for approximately 6.8 acres of land being Lots 1-5, Block 1, of the Woodcreek Addition in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property") from Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residemial 1 (NR-1) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change is consistem with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby changed from Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residemial 1 (NR-1) zoning district classification and use. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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 SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. 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 DeNon 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 ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 Exhibit A Z02-0037 (Woodcreek Circle) NORTH LOCATION MAP Item #5C AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 = !~'~¢' SUBJECT - Z02-038 (Fort Worth Drive N of Brush Creek) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 9.6 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The two tracts are generally located on Fort Worth Drive, north of Hamilton. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial (5-2). BACKGROUND Applicant: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton, Texas The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have two parcels of land, totaling approximately 9.6 acres, rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The zoning of this area was initially raised as an issue when the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Future Zoning map, specifically the southwest quadrant of the city. The Commission began to question the appropriateness of the zoning in the area based on the old zoning and the current land uses. Also, this issue was raised during the fa'st Quarterly Review of the Development Code. The zoning of this area was one of the issues City Council instructed the Planning and Zoning Commission to review. The Commission reviewed this issue during several worksessions and voted unanimously to rezone the property on June 26, 2002. In worksessions, the Commission spent a great deal of time in discussing the issue of land use and zoning of this area and how the existing zoning came into place. At the time verbatim minutes of worksessions were not kept and therefore are not available for inclusion in the back up. However, a summary of the meeting discussion was provided in a separate memo. The public hearings before the Commission were supposed to be held on August 28, 2002 but had to be postponed due to notification errors. This delay ~esulted in the cases not being heard until September 25, 2002, at which time the make-up of the Commission had changed. The staff reports to the Commission were brief and did not contain the detail and history of this area. The elapsed time (3 months) between the worksessions and the public heating, and the minimum backup in the staff reports contributed to the confusion reflected in the public heating minutes. This request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis is provided for in the Staff`Analysis (Attachment 1). Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. The property owners have opposed the rezoning, therefore a supermajority vote (6-1) by City Council will be required to approve this rezoning. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial, 5-2 (Apple and Mulroy opposed). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject properties are not platted. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0038, commonly known as Fort Worth Drive N of Brush Creek: Application Date - DRC Date - Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - July 23, 2002 August 1, 2002 September 25, 2002 No Neighborhood meeting was held FISCAL INFORMATION No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff`Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A Prepared by: Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development for ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have two parcels of land, totaling approximately 9.6 acres, rezoned from its current Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The request was initiated in an effort to maintain the rural setting of surrounding areas. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Agricultural (A) The subject property currently contains single-family homes and agricultural uses. Adjacent zoning: North: Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1)zoning district-single-family/agricultural South: Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU) zoning district -single- family/agricultural East: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) zoning district- single-family/agricultural West: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) zoning district-single-family/agricultural Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located within a "Neighborhood Centers" future land use area. These areas may develop in conventional patterns or may be developed in a pattern of 'neighborhood centers'. Neighborhood centers are oriented inwardly, focusing on the center of the neighborhood and containing facilities vital to the day-to-day activity of the neighborhood. A neighborhood center might contain a convenience store, small restaurant, personal service shops, church or synagogue, daycare, individual office space, a small park and perhaps an elementary school. The Denton Plan identifies the following Primary Residential Land Use Principles: Preserve Neighborhoods: The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be achieved by demanding and establishing design and construction standards that are fair and evenly applied. (page 35) Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in Denton by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density development where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning would serve to preserve the rural setting in this area and maintain the existing neighborhood as called for by the Denton Plan under "Neighborhood Centers" classification. Sprawl is characterized by low residential density housing, which the proposed zoning would create. This is not desirable according to the Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. A traffic impact analysis is not required. Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Fort Worth Drive. Fort Worth Drive is identified as a primary major arterial by the Denton Mobility Plan. The future surrounding road system may not be compatible with this type of development Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zonin~ Analysis Current NR-2 zoning allows for single-family homes with a maximum of two (2) units per acre. The proposed Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning would allow one (1) dwelling unit per acre. Staff Findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan in regards to compatibility and preservation of surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed zoning change would provide for a diversity of housing stock. 3. The proposed zoning change may not be compatible with the mobility plan for this area. 4. The proposed zoning change would facilitate sprawl, which is not desired by the Denton Plan. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map ETJ ETJ LOCATION MAP Scale: None Mobility Map NORTH MOBILITY MAP .:",. ,,' MobiliWcollector ~ Freeway ~* Prim ar'f Major Alternate ~\~/~ Primar'f Major A~erial ,?~?~? Seconda~ Major Alternate ~ ~? geconda~ Major A~erial FUTURE dot Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Limits of 500' Notification Limits of 200' Notification Scale: None Public Notification Date: August 15 & September 12, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 4 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 2 (Owners) · In Favor: 0 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: greater than 20% Owner Opposition: 100% *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Property Owner Responses Paul Berry PO Box 101 Board Camp, AR Ed Ruibal 608 S Pearl Dallas, TX 76201 Opposed (Owner) Opposed (Owner) David Yoder 940 Brush Creek Road Argyle, Texas 76226 Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Argyle, Texas 76226 Richard and Gina Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 Favor Favor Favor See Attached Letter See Attached Letter See Attached Letter Dennis and Sharon Cox Favor See Attached Letter 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 NOTICE OF PUBL]:¢ HEARZN,G . Z02-0038 - The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning two tracts of land totaling approximately 9.6 acres generally located on Fort Worth Drive, north of Hamilton, from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district (see map on backside). The property is legally described as Tracts 7 and 9, in Abstract 1164A, Old DCAD TR 1H and 1 F, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. The public hearing will start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 2'15 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no w_ay_p£ohibits_.you..£rorn attendin__~Land part~cipat_i~g_i_n th_e public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or dro Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Autumn Speer, Planner I ,PLANNING & D.E.+V,E.IT,,,0.P rE,,I T The zoning process includes two public hearings designed ,~, prcv=,,,c ;~p;,,'.:::.: ..... Iizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. In favor of request . Reasons for Opposition: Please circle one: Neutral to request t~Opposed to request Signature: Printed Name; Mailing Address: Ci~, State Zip: ..... Physical Address of Prope~y within 200 feet: OlTY O~ DENTON, TEXAS c~ HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 7620~ · 940.S4~.SS50 · (F) 940.349.7707 Z02-0038 200' Notice FROM : PHOTOS RESTORED NO. : 50~394~8~ Aug. 23 2~2 O~:iTPM Pi NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAR:I:N6 Z02-0038 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of' Denton will hold a public headng on Wednesday, August 28, 2002, to consider rezoning two tracts of land totaling approximately 9.6 acres generally located on Fort Worth Drive, north of Hamilton, from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential I (NR-I) zoning district (see map on backside), The property is legally described as Tracts 7 and 9, in Abstract '~ 164A, Old DCAD TR 1H and IF, In the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, No development is proposecl at this time. The public hearing will start at 7:00 p,m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Dot'ton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the ,~ubject. property, the Planning end Zoning Cornmi~eion would like to hear how you feel about lhis zoning change request and fnvftes you to attend the public heating, Please, in order for your opinion to ........ be .ta.k.e..n.l.n.!.o...ap_..cg..u...n...t., ..r. eturn t.hi~ form witl~ ~L~_ur comments pdor to the date of the public headn~ (This number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 7620'1 Attm Autumn Spear, Planner I The" zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first pubtic hearing is held before the' Planning and Zoning Commission, The Commission is informed of the percent responses in support and in opposition, Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Coundl for flna] action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend deniat, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. if owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the tend area within two h~lndred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change, These forms are used to calculate the percentage 'of landowner opposition, Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request . Reasons for opposition: Z02.0038 2gO'Notice September 24, 2002 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Members Mayor and City Council Members Re: Public Hearings on Brush Creek Road and Highway 377 area rezonings ~ am unable to attend the meeting~ but would like my comments on record in support of the zoning changes that are proposed. My wife and ! have lived at 940 Brush Creek Road since 1985. We moved from the City of Denton to this area to get away from the high-density houses and to a less busy, less stressful way of life. We have continued to watch the development of new homes In our area and were comfortable with the quality and density of these homes because they have all maintained the space and openness of the community. We were appalled to see that the new zoning map has changed the zoning along Brush Creek Road to NR 2, which ! understand is 2 homes to an acre of land. That is very scary to those of us who have lived here, are raising families and animals and enjoying our 'country" way of life. ! presume that this zoning would allow my neighbor, if he so chose, to subdivide his 10 acres and put 20 houses next to mine. Please support the change to NR 1 zoning. There are no undeveloped lots along this road and lot sizes range from 2 acres up to 80 acres. The other area that has us very concerned is the NR 4 zoning along the frontage of 377, south of Brush Creek Road, :just around the corner from our home. Who, in all common sense, could envision 4 homes to the acre out here? ! specifically remember Assistant City Manager, Dave Hill, telling us when this new plan was in the beginning stages that properties closer in to town would be denser and as you moved away from town you would have less density, with the least density being in the areas that bordered the ET3, or other towns. We are as far from ~own as you can get. We border Argyle and they, as a town, Just reaffirmed their commitment to keeping a rural, open feel with their new plan. ! just don't see how NR 4 fits. Directly across the highway, land with a railroad track running through it is even zoned less dense - NR 2. We ask that you support the rezoning change to NR 2 for this strip. Please, please take a good look at these and make them compatible for this area. There should not be more than one home, at the most, to an acre in this area. We feel we have already been greatly compromised by the NR 2 designation on the approximately 150 acre tract that is being developed as Country Club Village. We do not want to be downgraded any further. We keep hearin~qv~er,~nd over how the new plan is concerned with preserving and protecting ~l~i~l~~hoeds. Well, ~ preserve and protect us. '! can only hope understand the impact your decision will have on those and so long to build the very unique community we now I~( and~llerish. Thank you for Your time and kind consideration. /~- 940 Brush Creek Read Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton City Council and Mayor Re: Support for rezoning requests to less density re Brush Creek Road, Highway 377 and Hills of Argyle area We would 1/kc to respectfully request that a zoning change be seriously considered to correct what must surely be an error in the zoning map. In section L6, in an area where every existing home within a 1.5 mile radius is located on at least an acre, with most homes being on lots of 2 to up to I00 acres, there is a large section of land along Highway 377 designated to be NR-4. That would seem totally incompatible with the promise to "preserve and protect exisisting neighborhoods". The rural atmosphere and the large estate size lots, ARE the existing neighborhood and it is unfathomable that NR- 4 would be seen as a reasonable designation to be "plopped" down in the midst of this. There are other concerns as well, as there is an environmentally sensitive area along one side of this area as well as continuous flooding problems. We request that this area be rezoned to NR-2 to at least accommodate some of our concerns. There is undeveloped land adjoining this area that has been designated as NR-2, and that would seem more appropriate. Also, the land directly behind our home in the Hills of Argyle, along Brush Creek Road, has been designated on the new map as NR-2, which is also totally inconsistent with the surrounding area. To our knowledge, all of the lots on Brush Creek Road from Highway 377 to Highway 1830 are all developed, complete with homes, barns, animals, etc. All of these developed lots are large - about 2 acres up to about 80 acres. Why would you then "overzone" this area as NR-2? Makes no sense to us Please correct these mistakes by approving the rezoning for less density for this area. Sincerely, -, Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Hills of Argyle Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: Denton Plaunln~ and Zoning Commission Re: September 25, 2002, meeting - agenda items 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 We Just recently purchased our dream home at 8001 Woodcreek Circle. We moved here from Piano expressly to get away from the crowded subdivisions and hurried lifestyle. Though we commute to work now, the drive is more than worth the peace and tranq~lity we find when we return home. We researched many area towns and looked at many homes trying to find an area that had estate-size lots and some semblance of nature. A realtor in Dallas actually suggested this area to us aft~, hea~ing our desi~'es and otu' f~ustration in locating what we were looking for. Every surrounding town has subdivision miter subdivision on small Iota or in some cases, on no lot at all !! This arem of Denton is unique in that you can offer large lots, in the midst of natural beauty, and yet be close to town. This area is somethln~ very special. Its uniqueness needs to be preserved. There a~e Hterally hundreds of crowded subdivisions to choose fron~ but extremely few that offer what we have. Please vote in support of the rezonlugs for this area that will help to maintain the wonderful quality of our new life here in your fair city. We will be so disappointed ff this area becomes what we searched for so long to escape from. d and Olna Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 September 24, 2002 Dear Mayor Brock, City Council Members, and Planning and Zoning Commission Members, Please take another look at our neighborhood. We live in a cul-de-sac that was annexed into Denton in the tate 1970's. Our cul-de-sac contains 5 lots, with 4 homes that have been in existence for many years and one unbuilt lot. The 5 lots range in size from 1.022 acres up to 2.003 acres. On the new zoning map, apparently they have now zoned our area to NR 2, or 2 homes to the acre. This puts us in avery precarious position with regard to our wel{-established neighborhood. With this new zoning, the owner of the vacant lot could completely change the character of what we have worked so hard to create - a spacious, rural feel. Another seemingly incongruous zoning is the NR 4 zoning along 377 from Brush Creek Road south, which is located behind our cul-de-sac. This would appear to be better served by an NR 1 or NR 2 zoning and more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood - to one side of the area now zoned NR 4 is a large (50 + acres) cattle farm and to the other side is a large horse farm. Another important consideration is that this area is adjacent to an already threatened environmentaJ[y sensitive area and an area that has had significant flooding problems, which would be exacerbated by higher density. We have also noted that across the street from us (in the as-yet-unannexed area along Brush Creek Road) you have now zoned that area to be NR 2 also, yet those homes are on even Jar§er lots, some 20 to 40 acres and more. Ptease correct these apparent oversights and consider something more approprfate, such as NR f. The future of our neighborhood is at stake. We would appreciate your vote in support of the rezoning for the lower densities which, in turn, is a vote for the integrity of our long-standing neighborhood. Most sincerely, Dennis and Sharon Cox 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 940-243-1122 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs Page 111 2 will take public hearings Nc go through and figure out 3 presentation since they are in the same area and so 3 who got to go to who. There are letters -- letters that ! 4 similar in nature, and then we will vote on them 4 passed out. Four of them are for Woodcreck Circle, four 5 individually. And Ms. Speer with the City planning office 5 of them are letters from the same owners concerning the 6 will present and I'll open the public hearing. 6 whole area. Some of them would apply to other cases as 7 MS. SPEER: Good evening, Comauissioners. 7 far as being in the 200-foot notice. 8 I'm going to do these together as one unit but I'm going 8 COMMISSIONER AVPtn: ~ecause some of them 9 to do each individual one separately, seeing as we have 9 actually address these Agenda items, not the other ones. 10 different forms of opposition. 10 Ms. SeEER: Right. Right. 11 Item Agenda No. 28 is again a Planning 11 COMMISSIONER ~eCE: SO I just want to make 12 and Zoning initiated zoning request. There's five parcels 12 the Commissioners aware to read the letters in the packet 13 of land, approximately 80 acres. The Planning and Zoning 13 because they're stuck behind the wrong Agenda item. Thank 14 Commission has requested they go from a Neighborhood 14 you. Commissioner Johnson has a question. 15 Residential 2 to a Neighborhood Residential 1. As I said, 15 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: AS we go along, 16 there's no opposition on this land. Most of the land is 16 could you indicate because it says in all cases the 17 vacant. There are several small home sites kind of hidden 17 applicant is the City of Denton. Could you tell me if the 18 back in there. 18 owner agrees with the requesteat zoning? 19 This property does have some opposing 19 Ms. senna: i can, That's one reason t 20 issues. In one sense thc idea of maintaining the 20 want to do them separately. In this particular case, I 21 integrity of the rural atmosphere by downzoning this 21 have not received any notification from the owner that 22 property is its -- the goal was achieved. However, the 22 they oppose. This particular 80-acre site, there are five 23 goal of the Denton Plan also is to prevent sprawl. So you 23 separate owners and they were all notified, twice 24 have kind of a catch 22. You have this downzoning which, 24 actually, and I haven't received any opposition from 25 by its nature, the definition of sprawl could facilitate 25 owners on this one.... Page 110 Page 112 1 that. However, it does preserve the neighborhood and 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: And just for 2 maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. 2 clarification purposes, as she announced earlier, the 3 Also another case in question is the 3 Planning and Zoning Commission is actually who initiated 4 Mobihty Plan. On this map I've showed you Country Club 4 this. 5 and Brush Creek, they are on the Mobility Plan. Brush 5 MS. SPEER: correct. 6 Creek is not to standard. It's a secondary -- itrs a 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: That's why it says the 7 primary major arterial. Right now we know that that's not 7 City. But it was actually this body that initiated. 8 what it looks like. So I just -- staff wants to make sure 8 Commissioner Mu[roy. 9 that we're aware of the conflicting items here. We have 9 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS. Thank you. Ms. 10 that the area of the downzoning does preserve the 10 Speer, were you in our work section? I think we had two 11 neighborhood, does provide compatible uses. However, the 11 work sessions dealing with these properties. 12 Mobility Plan and the issue of it could facilitate sprawl 12 MS. SPEER: I don't believe I was here at 13 is something to be considered on all of these cases. This 13 the time, sir, no. 14 one, however, does not have any opposition so it does not 14 COMMISSIONER MLJLROY: okay. So I want to ,15 require super-majority at this point for City Council. 15 take a small liberty to refresh our collective memories 16 The next ease I'll talk about, unless you 16 and perhaps impart some of the background to you. Your 17 want to have questions about this specific one. 17 comments which are repeated in each Agenda item that this 18 COMMISSIONER APPLE: t just want to 18 is kind of counter to the anti-sprawl portions of the Comp 19 interrupt you because I noticed that you stapled all of 19 Plan, that was fully recognized in our work shop. And we 20 these together go they appear that they're for Item 29 20 had -- the consideration was given first to reflecting the 21 when actually they cover all of them. 21 existing neighborhood, there was long-e~tablished homes m 22 MS. srE~: vdght. 22 that really one-acre and larger tradition. 23 COMMISSIOSmt ~PLE: SO I just was 23 Number two, also the Comp Plan wants 24 wondering if you made the Commission aware that these 24 diversified housing. We have many areas of the City that 25 probably shouldn't be stapled together. 25 we're looking at the new urbanization and upping the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 109 - Page 112 CondcnseltTM Page 113 1 density and pedestrian-oriented, et cetera, et cetera. 2 This is one already established area of the City that is 3 more of the larger estate-type lots and so in order to be 4 diversified, we need to have that offering. 5 Number three, on an economic development 6 standpoint, we are losing some potential housings of this 7 type to Argyle because they have an abundance of the 8 larger acreage and we don't. So for this body, in our 9 deliberations and examining in the total context, not just 10 a narrow focus but of all the things you mentioned, 11 evolved the decision that this would be the part of town 12 that we would like to keep this way. So I really want to 13 address -- reflect to your comments that have been 14 repeated here. Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, i 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 MS. SPEER: Are there any further questions 18 on this particular site? I'll continue. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 20 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Did I understand you 21 to say that there were five comers? 22 MS. SPEER: NO, sir. There are five 23 separate tracts of land in this 80-acre parcel. It's 24 totaling 80 acres that's zoned right now, the NR-2, but 25 there's five different tracts. Page 114 1 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: okay. And we're not 2 allowed to know who the owners were or, I mean, it was 3 initiated by the Planning and Zoning, but I see a fellow 4 in the audience that owned a good bit of that property at 5 one time. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, I guess normally 7 we don't take who owns the property into deliberation, so 8 to speak. It's the property that we're looking at, not so 9 much who owns it. I0 COMMISSIONER WATK£NS: SUre. Sur~. 11 COMMISSIONER AP?CE: But if she has that 12 information available, I'm sure she'd he happy to sham it 13 with you. But I thought I understood her to say she did 14 not have that information. 15 MS. SPEER: on this particular site, this 16 was my easy one. Everybody else I could tell you who owns 17 what because they all -- there's opposition and favorable. 18 But this one I didn't receive anything except -- 19 COMM~ssIoNEa WATmNS: vll withdraws[ my 20 question. 21 MS. SPEER: I did want to address 22 Conmfissioner Mulroy, if I could. I wasn't aware of the 23 previous work session meetings. I do want to say that 24 that was part of my issue in writing the staff report is 25 that there is a catch 22 issue, you know, your diversify PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 115 1 housing. So you have this area of town however sprawl, 2 however compatibility with neighborhood. So that's why in 3 my staff report, the recommendations, I have kind of 4 opposing findings and I just want to make those clear. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, bless your 6 heart. It's unfortunate that the hours of commentary on 7 this during work sessions were not provided to you since 8 you have all five of these cases. I am perplexed as to 9 why that was not done. 10 MS. SPEER: Right. I am, as well. l l COMMISSIONE.R APPLE: commissioner Roy, 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: We're going to go 13 through several cases and I'm afraid that I'm going to 14 forget each ease as we go through it. I wonder would it 15 be mom appropriate to -- and we've talked about this t 6 particularl tract of land, to see if there's any comments 17 from tho audience about that tract of land, resolve it, 18 and then go to the next one. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: ! was just wondering 20 the same thing, if it might not be more prudent at this 21 point to separate them out for purposes of presentation. 22 It seems to be getting rather muddled. Without objection 23 -- and vote on each one as we go. All fight. That seems 24 to be the consensus. If you want to start back with 28. 25 MS. SPEEa: okay. I just wanted to -- Page 116 1 basically, I'm completed with 28, if you have any 2 questions. 3 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. So were there 4 any questions on 28? Okay. So we're okay. We're on to 5 30. Oh, gosh, stop me. We need to vote. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yeah, we also need 7 to go for public comment. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: We n{~l to do the 9 public hearing. Gosh, somebody stop me. Commissioner 10 Johnson has his -- 11 COMMISSIONER JOUNSON: Yeah. I still want 12 to make sure that I understand this. This property has 13 owners. We have tried to contact them. We know who they 14 are. I don't need to know but you have tried to contact 15 them and they have not responded to you; is that right? 16 MS. SPEER: rm required to contact them 17 via mail and we contact them certified mail. We actually 18 have sent out thre~ notifications for these cases because 19 of postal errors. So I have received several calls on thc 20 site. I don't have their names right now with me because 21 I received most of the calls back in August. This was 22 initially planned to go a month ago. But I haven't 23 received any written comments whatsoever on this 24 particular 80 acres. 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. This is a SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 113 - Page 116 CondenscItTM Page 117 1 public hearing and I do have several cards who wish to 2 address this issue. Tom McMurray, 3 MR, MCMURILAY: chairperson, Tom McMurray, 4 1800 Wickwood. Is this the shee~ that shows up here? I 5 live right there. Okay. This whole neighborhood here is 6 Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Hills of Argyle. It is 7 completely now sold and Phase 3 up here is now starting to 8 be developed. This site with Brush Creek, the way it's 9 designed with the right-of-way, would be more appropriate 10 to be 11 One reason is is we are in the City of 12 Denton, one of the rare properties like this thaCs 13 like this, but we are also in the school district of 14 Argyle ~SD. ~md one of the issues that I'm sure this 15 Commission is aware of is that Argyle just deannexed 8,000 16 acres to send a message to the City Council of Denton 17 because they force fed another deal. 18 And as a citizen of both Denton and the ISV 19 of Argyle, taxpayers of both, we would like to see not 20 only the conformity, but it's the natural conformity. 21 It's like, you know, all the terrain, if you've driven it, 22 it's got some hills, rolling to it. It's a natural 23 terrain for larger estate homes. It's the type of thing 24 that not only helps your tax base, it helps bring a 25 positive image to that area of town. Page 118 1 Although 377, you-all are working hard on 2 it, we're not offended by any of that. We understand 3 that. We drive in every day. And our position on that 4 is hhat we would like to see you do NR-1. The reason 5 being is that until Brush Creek is really redone, it's not 6 compatible at this point. I know on the plans it's got 7 the right-of-way. 8 Mr. Johnson, I don't know if you've driven 9 it, but I know that's part of your questions. But I drive 10 it every day and you don't drive too fast, it will tear 11 your car up. But assume all that is redone, across the 12 street here is actually ETJ, I believe, but fight now it's 13 just being produced as oil and gas royalty fight now. 14 That's the King area. And we would ask that y'all just 15 allow it to look a lot like this. Because if you do that, 16 it's going to be natural, it's going to be in conformity, 17 it's going to look good. It's got a lot of trees in that 18 area. We know Denton likes to save trees. So that's the 19 deal. I'd ask that you vote for NR-i. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE; Thank you, I have a 21 card from a Larry McGehee. MeGehee, is that correct? 22 MR. MCGEHEE: Yes ma'am, My name is Larry 23 McGehee. I live at 2001 C1Mstina Court also one of those 24 little dots on the map in the Hills of Argyle. 25 When the Denton Plan was passed, our Page 119 I neighborhood was zoned ~R-2 and ~a-4, although it had been 2 platted and approved as one-acre lots and larger. And 3 when we spoke to Council about this, they basically said 4 we understand this is an oversight. This subdivision is 5 already here. They were overlaying a subdivision that had 6 been approved and plat for one and two-acre lots. So it 7 was a mistake and so that's where Na-X came from. I don't 8 know how staff could have rezoned this whole city and not 9 missed a few little things, and that one was one that was 10 missed. And so out of cou_nesy or respect or what~ver, 11 No-1 was created to take care of that subdivision. 12 I believe that all of these are the same 13 issue, that this land is rural. I've lived there for 14 almost a year and a half. I've never seen a Denton police 15 officer even in the subdivision. We had people steal some 16 signs from us and when we called them to come out, they 17 said, well, you're in Argyle. You don't even live in the 18 City of Denton. So we're not getting serviced to death 19 out there. We have to tell them where it is before they 20 can come out. You have to go through a large floodplain 21 area to even get to this area. And a big portion of this 22 tract in question is in a floodplain and probably will 23 never be developed in. I don't know what the actual 24 usable acreage is but I don't think that we're talking 25 about very many usable acres to begin with. Page I20 1 The road of Brush Creek Road is not a 2 two-lane black top. It's a one-lane death trap and you 3 can get killed there on any day because you've got two 4 blind hills. So I think it was an oversight. I think all 5 of this stuff is an oversight. And we request that you 6 keep it rural. Keep it Na-lr There will be nice big 7 homes built there. They'll pay a lot of taxes, The 8 developer is not going to get hurt on these deals. 9 They're going to sell them and make a lot of money. It's 10 just a question of how much. Thank you. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I have a 12 card from Bill Lewis. All right. You don't wish to 13 speak? 14 MR. LEWIS: Not on this issue, 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. I have a card 16 from Chris Mellberg, 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He wanted you to 18 read the back. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Traffic issues are 20 scary both -- that's not what this says. Traffic issues 21 are really bad both on Brush Creek and 377. And we wan 22 to preserve the feel of the neighborhood. 23 Is there anyone else who wants to speak in 24 support? Okay. I have two cards -- no, I have one card 25 on this particular item. Michael Pettibon. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 117 - Page 120 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1i 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 12I MR. PETTIBON: Hi. I'm Mike Pettibon and I own 40 acres that abuts the Hills of Argyle. And I'm not really sure if I understand the zoning change all that well and maybe you can change my mind about opposing this. Page 123 NR-I? MS. SPEER: Just to clarify, the only difference in uses for NR-I and NR-2 is under NR-2 if yOU have an suP, you can put in manufactured homes. There are But I think the reason that I'm opposed, I want it to stay rural and I can tell you that 75 percent of the land that I own is floodplain and you couldn't build a house on it if you wanted to. And I have no plans to build anything else and I don't want anything else built on it. But I think that I have a problem with zoning it so that it's more prohibitive of what I could or couldn't do on my property. And I don't know if that is truIy the ease or not as far as animals or livestock or what I want to do with it. And I feel like the people in Hills of Argyle are looking at my property and trying to make sure that I conform to their standards. And while I guarantee you that, you know, I don't want to spend a million dollars on a piece of property and have it look terrible, I also moved out to the country sort of so that I was no longer in the gated neighborhood I used to be in with people telling me that I couldn't paint my front door this color or have a dog over this size or park my vehicle. That's why I'm opposed. I think that I am opposed to further regulation of land. And maybe that's not truly 5 no other residential differences. Just density and 6 manufactured housing. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Does that 8 help you, sir? 9 M~. PETTIBON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: IS therO anyone else 11 who wishes to address Item -- 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: I had a question. 13 COMM[SSIONERAPPLE: okay. Commissioner 14 Roy. 15 COMMISSIONF~ ROY: t had a question of the 16 person who just spoke. Sir, are you a property owner in 17 that lot that we're looking at right now? You own 18 property in that yellow area? 19 MR. PETTIBON: I own -- that's my this half 20 of the rectangle. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 of the 80. 23 COMMISSlmmm APPLE: commissioner Johnson, 24 if you have a question. 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 O[' thc 80 acres Page 122 the spirit of it but that's how I interpret it. COMMISSIONER APPLE: would you like us to explain to you what we're doing, what is proposed so you would understand? MR. PETTIBON: If you could. COMMISSIONER APPLE: what is being proposed, and I'll let probably Mr. Reichhart, if Mr. Reichhart would come up and explain what this -- what is happening here so that then he would maybe feel more comfortable. MR. REICHHART: very briefly, the difference between NO-1 and NR-2 is basically density. NR-1, you have a density of one unit per acre. NR-2 has a density of two units per acre. Regarding keeping animals or livestock, there are different ordinances that address that. You have to have so much acreage per type of animal you have or horses or cows, tkings like that. And the zoning, regardless if it's Ne-1 or NR-2, wouldn't matter. So the real difference is when or if the property were ever going to be subdivided in the future, it would be a density issue. COMMISSIONER APPLE: And could you also explain to him some uses such as the manufactured homes that could be allowed in NR-2 that cannot be allowed in i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 124 is yours, sir? MR. PETrlBON: Right. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: IS it the east half or the west half?. MR. PETTIBON: The west. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The west? Have you decided yet if you're in favor of this or against it? MR. PETTIBON: You kllow, I guess that ! am still opposed. And it probably isn't my place to say it but, once again, it is just because I don't want added -~ someone telling me what I can do and can't do. Once again, I have no intention of decreasing the property values. And also I don't think if you tried as hard as you possibly could that you could put more than two more houses on that whole 40 acres. But I still stand opposed. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I don't see any more questions. Is them anyone else who'd like to address Agenda Item No. 28? Seeing no one, does staff have any additional marks? MS. SPEER: My only additional remark would be with his opposition we'd be at about 50 percent opposition, it would require super-majority at City Council. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Powell. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 121 - Page 124 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 125 COMMISSIONER POWELL: IS is safe to assume that we haven't heard from the owners, owner or owners of the other 40 acres? MS. SPEER: Corro.,ct. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Comtnis siGners. Commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Ye...8, Madam Chair. I'm going to make a motion for approval. I understand the verbally stated opposition but the reality is the motion and the downzoning will be less restrictive is what the Page 127 1 hearing. 2 MS. SPEER: Good evening once again. I am 3 basically going to go through these cases and talk to you 4 about the opposition and the site location. Staff has the 5 same findings in all of the cases. This site is 6 approximately a roughly ten-acre site. Same exact 7 situation, going from Neighborhood Residential 2 to 8 Neighborhood Residential 1 zoning district. This case 9 will have to go forward to City Council for 10 super-majority. Both owners of the two tracts do oppose. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. For commentary was directed towards. So I make a motion for approval as presented. Thank you. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion by Commissioner Mulroy and a second by Commissioner Watkins. For discussion, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I am greatly influenced by the landowner of half of this property that doesn't want to make a change and I don't see why we would do something he doesn't want to do. So I will be voting against approval of this. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: ~ We going to register this as an opposing view that is going to drive Page 126 1 the City Council to a super-majority? 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Director Powell would 3 like to weigh in. 4 MR. POWELL: we really need, to make it 5 official, we do need the opposition in writing. Bm I'm 6 sure that we can get that in between now and the month it 7 takes from P&Z to City Council. $ COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. And just for 9 the record, I'm going to agree with Cormnissioner Roy 10 because I'm going to give great deference to the 11 landowner' s stated preference on this. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 13 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Discussion of Mr. 14 Mulroy's point. I would look at it as being more 15 restrictive because with an NR-2, he does have some 16 options that disappear when it goes to NR-1. I just want 17 to point -- I'm just looking at this a little differently 18 than you are, sir. I wanted to make that point. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Any 20 further discussion? Vote, please. Motion carries 4-3. 21 (Commissioners Johnson, Roy, Powcll voted 22 in opposition.) 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Next we'll address 24 . Agenda Item No. 30 which is a public hearing. Again, 25 Ms. Speer, if you'll present and I'll open the public 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Agenda Item No. 30 -- COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me. Can I ask clarification? COMMISSIONER APPLE: oh, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: You said two tracts? MS. SPEER: correct, theret$ two tracts of land, two different parcels. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. All right. We're looking at it as one site. MS, SPEER: Correct. The line is right here. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. Both owners are in opposition, had written opposition to this change? MS. SPEER: correct. Page 128 1 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Regarding this Agenda 3 item, we have severa[ people who would like to address 4 this, also. Again, Mr. McMurray. 5 MR. MCMURRAY: I have a question for the 6 staff to help with my -- is there a sewer down Fort Worth 7 Drive? No? Is there a sewer because if it's NR-2, 8 residential, you've got a problem with your septic. 9 Because we're all septic out here. There is sewer running l0 up Fort Worth Drive up here to the new part of Phase 3. 11 So I could see where it wouldn't be that, you know, it 12 wouldn't be that expensive to get it there. That is an 13 issue because NR-i iS the minimum for a septic 14 requirements of spacing for your aerobic system. So one 15 of the -- I understand the landowner may want opposition. 16 It's going to have to be an issue addressed at some point 17 whether or not there's going to be sewer. So we would 18 vote NR-1 because it really conforms with the land use as 19 in the neighborhood. 20 All of this is NR-! but I can understand 21 the landowner saying he doesn't want NR-2, but there's not 22 going to be a special use permit for mobile homes. Not 23 next to alt this. You talk about everybody coming down 24 here, y'all would have a good time. So that ain't going 25 to happen. So at this point, I would say that you ought PLANIqlNG AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 125 - Page 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 § 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Conden scltTM Page 129 to go with NR-1 for the purpose that he can't -- if the 1 landowner can't use it for anything other than NR-i anyway 2 because of the fact that you have to have a septic spacing 3 unless the City's deciding to put sewer there. Thank you. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. McGehee. 5 MR. MCGEHEE: I would have dressed up if 6 I'd known I was going to have to speak in front of this ? camera. Do I need to introduce myself each time? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: please. 9 MR, MCGEHEE: Larry McGehee, 2001 Christina 10 Court, Denton, Texas. I believe and I need to ask staff 11 this but arc you allowed to build a house on a half an 12 acre without a sewer line? You're not o/lowed to do that. 3 Isn't this, in effect, an oversight in thc Denton zoning? .4 Why would this be zoned NR-2 when you can't use it as15 NR-2? This is an oversight. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Could someone from 17 staff address that question? 18 MR. POWELL: I'd be happy to address it. 19 If you remember back to the previous cases, there's a20 differentiation between zoning and platting and providing, 21 as part of platting, you provide utilities. The zoning of 22 the property, could it be developed today at the higher 23 density because there's no utilities? No. But that's a 24 platting issue. It's not really a zoning issue. Though 25 Page 130 they're somewhat intertwined. So you really do need to 1 try to separate those two. The question may be can 2 someone develop that at a higher density? Yes. Would 3 they have to provide the utilities? Yes. But it is 4 possible. It might not be feasible. It might not be cost -- might be cost prohibitive right now. But that really 6 is a platting issue rather than a zoning issue. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Did that 8 answer your question? 9 MR. MCGEHEE: Yeah, I guess. I still think 10 that this was an oversight. I don't believe it was 11 intentionally zoned NR~2 because there is no sewer line 12 there. It's also a 65 mile an hour State highway. The 13 traffic in there is horrible, I don't know if any of you 14 have tried to go from Argyle to Denton on Fort Worth 15 Drive. You can't get there very quickly, You're blocked 16 by that trestle down there. 17 Again, I don't think that even if it's 18 zoned NR-1 that it will -- somebody is going to come in 19 here and someday ask you for commercial zoning on this. 20 NP,-I, it may make sense because there's a railroad track 21 across there and it's a State highway, and anybody that 22 would develop that would want it to be at least one-acre 23 lots, which puts the house away from the road and the 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION train. It just doesn't make sense. It really needs to be SEPTEMBER 25TIt, 2002 Page 131 NR-I. And look at all the other stuff out there, We're all one-acre and bigger because there's no sewer line and that's why it's all like it is. Somebody is benefiting from a mistake. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Bill Lewis. All right. You just want to show support. MR, LEWIS: show me in favor of this one. COMMISSIONER APPLE:. chris Mellberg does not wish to speak but wants to express support. Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wishes to offer support. Carol Haesle was not able to attend but she does want to offer support. She says all of these items include areas in rural neighborhoods with land, trees, and nature. Please allow the existing developments to maintain their environment and feel. Also, traffic on these rural roads is very bad. Please don't make it worse. And M.D. Williamson wishes not to speak but he offers support, Then I have a card from Paul Berry. He's one of the owners. Is he present? Would you like to speak? MR. BERRY: My name is Paul Berry and I am the owner of the south portion there. My address is P.O. Page 132 Box 101, Mena, Arkansas. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. MR. BERRY: I did live on this property for 20 years, but, like I say, I am now living out of state. Y'all seem to be spending some time talking about mobile homes. This property and all the property in that 30 acre group and back behind there is deed restricted from mobile homes. You couldn't put a mobile home in there if you wanted to. And -- but I do wish to express my opposition. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Question for staff for my education. Doesn't zoning supersede deed restrictions? MR. POWELL: No. The way it works is whichever is more restrictive. So in the case of a deed restriction that didn't allow mobile home parks but was allowed in zoning, you still couldn't do it. We wouldn't enforce that deed restriction but if it was valid, you could enforce it by private means. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Berry. COMMISSIONER MULROY: I have a question. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy has a question for you, sir. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes, sir. Thank you Page 129- Page 132 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 CondonscltTM Page 133 for coming down. My question is prior to the adoption of 1 the Development Code, what was the zoning on this 2 property? 3 MR. BERRY: Oh, that was something else 4 that I meant to address. Until I got this notice, I was 5 still under the assumption that all that was unzoned. I 6 was never notified when the zoning was changed previously. 7 So if I ever g~ any acceptance for these two notices on 8 this issue, if I ever get any notice on hearings regarding 9 this property, it has always been after the meeting and 10 after the decision has been made. And I didn't know at 11 all when it was changed to NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER MULROY: But previous to that, 13 to your knowledge, it was zoned Agricultural then? 14 MR. BERRY: Agricultural or unzoned or 15 something. 16 Page 135 and let's say'you had an old sF-7 and we're trying to take you to ~,m-l,well, shame on us. But that's really not the case. It's always been Ag. The policy was to assign it some zoning and we're just making that adjustment. So we're really not trying to take away something that you've had. MR. BERRY: But yOU are. But you are. COMMISSIONER MIJLROY: well, see, my comment COMMISSIONER MULROY: And how long have you owned it? MR. BeP, aY: Probably about 25, 26 years. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. In all those times, you never had any intention or made any attempt to upzone it to two or three or four houses an acre? Mit. BERRY: NO. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. So, see, what's transpired, we've gone -- where unzoned land was to you would be then these 20 years, did you ever come forward to try to upzone it? MR. BERRY: NO, but still you're taking something away. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, but it's something you didn't have. MR. BERRY; NO) because I still had the land, I still have the land. Page 134 carded as Ag, we've assigned it the low end possibility as NR-I, NR-2. And really you never had NR-2, yOU had Ag. And we're trying to sustain the 'rural flavor of that area. We want to redesignate it as NP,-1 which is less dense and more rural. MR. BERRY: I never, I never -- well, I own it -- entertain this idea but yet I don't want to tie my hands behind my back. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I understand. I want to refresh our collective memory. One, it was originally Ag. It was assigned NR-2 during the Code 12 adoption. And in reflection -- 13 MR. BERRY: BUt I didn't know that. 14 COMMISSIONER MULROY: -- that NRq would 15 have been mom appropriate. So it's not that someone is 16 taking something away that you've had for 20 years. It is 17 attempting by this body to correct an oversight. When the 18 Code was adopted, rather than having the least dense, NR-2 19 was assigned rather than NR-1. In viewing the 20 neighborhood, we viewed it as very rural and the previous 21 makeup of tiffs body initiated the changes to go to Na-1 22 which would be our lowest designation or least dense. 23 So I just want to make it clear that these 24 deliberations have already been undertaken and it's not 25 that you had -- if you had made any effort over 20 years 17 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONE~ APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Berry. 19 Is them anyone else who wishes to address the Commission 20 in regards to this Agenda item? 21 MR. REICHHART: I was just asked a question 22 in the audience and as a point of clarification I just 23 want to point out to remind everybody that Agricultural 24 zoning has a one-acm limit development similar to the 25 NR4. someone asked me that, regarding that question. Page 13 6 2 3 4 5 6 situation 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Watkins. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Just as a matter of information, and you possibly can't answer this question, but this didn't change actually or did it change the tax on the property when we went from Ag to this? MR. REICHHART: NOs sir. ?LANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 8 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: I mean, they may 9 have seen an increase but that was because alt of Denton 10 County, I suppose, went up. 11 MR. REICHHART: That's correct. 12 COMMISSIONER WATK~NS: BUt it would be the 13 same. Okay. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Is there anyone else 1 $ who wants to address this Agenda item? Seeing no one 16 coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing. 17 Commissioner Mulroy. 18 COMMISSIONER MULROY: That was the que, 19 right? No. I think I've already given my mini lecture 20 but in view that we had undertaken the deliberations as 21 I've stated, I'm going to remain consistent and make the 22 motion to approve as presented. Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a 24 motion on the table. The motion dies for lack of a 25 second. Commissioner Roy. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 133 - Page 136 Cond_~n solt TM 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 137 COMMISSIONER ROY: we did have a lot of discussion about this area but I think I was under the assumption, I wont along with the discussion under the assumption that the property owners would be happy to have this changed. So it's obvious that in this particular case the property owners are not happy to have this changed so I move denial of this. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: We have a motion and a second to deny. Any discussion? I have one polut of discussion only because I was just tolally not present at that moment. I was thinking of something else. And I would have seconded Commissioner Mulroy's motion. And for Page 139 1 property. However, we do live in a City. And sometimes 2 ii' you want to 'be -- if you would like to own a piece of 3 property that nobody can tell you what to do, perhaps you 4 ought to buy that piece of property that is further away 5 from file City than these parcels are. These parcels are 6 in the City. So, anyway, I do support this mainly 7 because that was already there. Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Lewis. 9 Tom McMurray. 10 MR. MCMURR~Y: Tom McMurray, 1800 Wickwood, 11 City of Denton. This piece of property is not unhke the 12 other piece o? property that y'all just discussed which 13 was the other parcel, there was two parcels in the one that, I apologize. I will be voting against the motion. Any discussion? Vote, please. Motion passes 5-2. (Commissioners Mulroy and Apple voted in Opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: NeXt iS Agenda Item 31, a public hearing considering rezonlng 21 acres on Fort Worth Drive, south of Hamilton and north of Brush Creek. Ms. Speer will present and I'll open the public hearing. MS. SPEER: oood evening once again. Agenda Item No. 31, as Commissioner Apple had stated, is approximately 21 acres. The same situation down to the 14 tract. However, this one is a lot longer. And it is -- 15 being a Denton resident now for a long time, this is 16 exactly what gives us a bad name in the neighborhood is 17 that it's agricultural which is one-acre lot minimums and 18 then we come in and make a mistake as a City and now we 19 can't stand up and say we made a mistake and do the right 20 thing. Okay. We're telling you wc would tike to see it 21 done r~ght so it's in conformity with the whole area. 22 Just because of the Hills of Argyle was 23 done right} because that was an oversight and we had to 24 come down and tel1 y'all how to do that. Now we're not 25 going to get this done right. You need to vote for this Page 138 1 zoning of Residential Neighborhood 2 to Neighborhood 2 Residential 1. This particular case, I do have one owner 3 opposition and I have one owner in favor. However, the 4 opposition is right at 20 percent so the super-majority 5 rule will be required at City Council. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 7 Commissioner Powell. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Is it safe to assume 9 the white area is the third owner that has not spoken? 10 MS. SPEER: Correct. 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I have several cards 13 for this Agenda item, also. Mr. Williamson does not wish 14 to speak but he wishes to express support. Carol Haesle 15 is not available to speak but she does express support. 16 Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wants to t7 express support. Chris Mellherg is not available to speak 18 but does wish to express support. Bill Lewis, ii' you'll 19 give your name and address, please. 20 MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek 21 Road. I support this zoning change. To me, it just makes 22 sense because it matches what's already them. That's the 23 main reason that I support it. I appreciate people not 24 being want -- not liking to be told how to run their .25 business, especially when it comes to using their own Page 140 1 to be NR4. There's still no sewer there. It's still the 2 same arguments. You're going to have to have development. 3 I understand there's a difference in zoning and platting. 4 The difference is that it needs to he in conformity with 5 the rural area. And I can't emphasize it enough, I like 6 the landowners. I'm a landowner. Got lots of land other 7 than this land. But this land right hem needs to be in 8 conformity with the area and the other citizens in it. 9 You have all those people that you mentioned awhile ago 10 that were for it. They all live out there. So it's like 11 the whole people are saying we need you to back up what 12 the City of Denton says. I understand the landowners may 13 or may not be for it. Here we've got one that's for it. 14 But you need to do what's right for the area, please. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Mr. Larry 16 MeGehee. 17 MR. MCGEHEE: My name is Larry McGehee. I 18 live at 200 t Cl~ristina Court, Denton, Texas. I'm almost 19 breathless after this last vote. You know, it's like a 20 guy gees in a bank to make a deposit for $100.00 and he 21 finds some money in a bag and somehow that money becomes 22 his. This land has hccn zoned AgricultUral forever, one 23 acre. These people have never been down here before you 24 asking for it to be two houses per acre. There's no sewer 25 llne. And there's some kind of thought that people should PLANNING AND ZON1NG COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 137 - Page 140 CondenscItTM Page 141 1 profit from mistakes and this was a mistake. But nobody 2 wants to take away the right for someone to capitalize on 3 a mistake that the City has made. Now, I'm a property 4 owner. Iown 17 houses in this City. I've lived here 31 5 years. And to stand here and see people vote to allow 6 mistakes, I can't believe it. I'm sorry. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 8 there anyone else who wishes to speak to this item? 9 Seeing no one coming forward, I'll close the public t0 hearing. Commissioner Roy. 11 COMMISSIONER ROY: I wanted to ask a 12 question of staff. Is the landowner who is in opposition, 13 is that landowner here? 14 MS. SPEER: That is Bill and Joyce Keenis 15 and I don't believe we have a card from them. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question of staff before you get away. Excuse me, Madam Chairman. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 143 1 body or the City to do it unless there is a tremendous 2 greater good. And I don't see a tremendous greater good 3 to make this particular change. I agree that it's not a 4 major issue. It's not a major change. But we discussed 5 it on the basis that this is something that the landowners 6 wanted to do, and that has not been the case. 7 Now, in this particular piece of property 8 there is I would say a significant piece of this one that 9 percentage-wise it's kind of overwhelnfing either in favor 10 or no comment. So I don't particularly feel strongly 11 about this one as opposed to the last one in which 100 12 percent of the property owners did not want to make the 13 change. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS, With all 16 respect to my fellow Commissioners, my recollection was in 17 our discussions that perhaps because of time constraints, 18 due consideration wasn't given to this section of this next? Thank you. How big is the red property? MS. SPEER: The red property, I believe they have -- COMMISSIONER POWELL: I mean, approximately. Is it two acres? MS~ SPEER: About 15 acres, I think. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Got yOU. Thank you. Page 142 t 9 quadrant, this lower quadrant section of town. And we 20 reviewed it and we had that discussion of the Ag and 21 ~m-2, that ~4R-t was most appropriate generally for this 22 whole area. That it would, in fact, protect the majority 23 of the landowners. 24 I don't think, with all respect, I can't 25 recall that it was ever put forward that a specific Page 144 1 Ms. SPEER: I'm sorry. That's wrong. It's 2 about five acres. 3 COMMISSIONF31 POWELL: SO the gll~B property 4 would be 15 or more acres. Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mukoy. 6 COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I'm going to 7 stay consistent. I'm ready to move approval. And I 8 remind you that, again, part of our discussion was that we 9 were looking at blanket taking it back to ~4R-t. And 10 people that wanted to do sometlfing, desired to do 11 something more dense could come and make the case with 12 their specifics in mind and we would be open to that. 13 Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: second. Discussion? 15 Ihavejust a comment. I'm still Igness sorter 16 perplexed and fascinated by the fact that this body t7 brought these rezonings forward. And rm not sure if 18 there are lapses in the work sessions that we had and the 19 issues that were discussed or what, but I'm confused and 20 amazed. Cormnissloner Roy. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: I am not confused and 22 amazed because at the work session it was made clear to mo 23 that this was sucfioned from the landowners and people who 24 lived in the area. And if the landowner does not want to 25 make this change, I don't feel it's appropriate for this 1 landowner of a specific plot was advocating this. No, 2 tiffs was initiated from P&Z solely and that we were 3 recognizing, a mistake may be too hash of a word, but 4 let's say not enough time in judgment in assigning tho 5 zonings when the Code was adop~d. And we hashed it over 6 and it was our consensus that t~a-~ would have been more 7 appropriate for this area and that's why we initiated it. 8 So in that sense, Mr. McG~hee is fight, the 9 net result was - is correcting the mistake. And I'll 10 reiterate and I was the one that spoke up and said, well, ~ 11 if someone comes, because I know there's some lqR-4 that 12 we're taking down, and that if they como back and say this 13 is what I want to do. Here's my amenities. Here's my 14 entranceways, et cetera, et cetera, that we'd give it the 15 fullest consideration when we had specifics. But in thc 16 meantime, in the interim, to go back to closest to Ag that 17 we can. I mean, that's my best recollection of the 18 discussion. That's why we've initiated it. Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 20 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Help me out her~. 21 How did we decide th~ configuration of this piece of 22 property to be rezoned? I saw a map earlier that showed 23 all these pieces. How do you figure this one as opposed 24 to another one or why weren't they all together7 Help me 25 out here. Why did you make the split right here? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 141 - Page 144 CondcnseltTM Page 145 1 MS. SPEER: AS far as I know, the split is 2 made simply by proximity. This is already NR-I. Then you 3 had the two parcels of NR-2, you had this NRMU section 4 that was rezoned a couple of years ago independently. 5 Then you have Brush Creek which divides these two 6 properties. This one is NR-2. And it didn't make sense 7 to have these two together because this one is NR-4. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That. answered my 9 question. Thank you very much. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Just to kind of weigh 11 in on that, that may be true that that was the logic for 12 it. But in our discussions my memory is the same as 13 Commissioner Muh-oy's, that we actually brought these up :14 because there were actually some oversights in this map. il 5 And I have no recollection of it being any landowners. It 16 was just a discussion amongst us at a work session and it 17 was -- the NR-4 which you're basing the NR-2 on seemed to 18 be a mistake, also. 19 And I will use the word mistake because I 20 actually was told that, that it was a mistake. 21 Especially when just across the street with a railroad 22 running through it is zoned NR-2. So if the NR-2 Was 23 based on the fact that it was between an NR-4, which was a 24 mistake, and an NRMU which had a very specific reason for 25 being an NRMU, that was a long going case and a very Page 146 1 particular parcel of land, you really can't use that 2 rationale for determining that that makes sense there. 3 MS. SPEER: I think we're addressing two 4 different questions. I think he just wondered why they 5 were stuck together the way they were, thc different 6 tracts. Why, you know, this owner is in favor but this 7 one opposes. Why are those three together as one case? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. I thought 9 he was asking you how they ended up with the des[gnat[om 10 that they ended up with. 11 MS, SPEER: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Either way I'm 13 satisfied with the answer. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Thanks. 15 Commissioner Johnson. 16 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: This is an 17 interesting chart. Is that NR-6 on there correct? 18 MS. SPEER: Yes, sir. 19 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: well, why are we not 20 talking about that NR-6 then? 21 MS. SPEER: It'S a railroad and a 22 right-of-way. See, everything around here, I mean, 23 everything is eTJ. ~ll of thc white is ETJ. Only the 24 yellow is what's zoned and we are actually -- 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: what about south of PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION the NR-4 that's shown here? there. Page 147 1 2 3 4 5 6 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: But the way it's 7 drawn, it would look like it's NR-6. 8 MS. SPEER: It'S not. The color is hard, 9 the yellow is hard to discern from the green. 10 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. And one more 11 question. The ETJ there that is just between what is now 12 NR-2 and what is now NR-1 -- 13 MS. SPEER: Right here? 14 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yeah. Has not been 15 annexed by the City yet, right? 16 MS. SPEER: Correct. 17 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: SO what is the 18 requirements on who can build what in there? 19 MS. SPEER: AS far as I understand in the 20 ETJ -- larry's going to come talk. 21 MR. REICHHART: Any development in our 22 Division 1 ETJ that's approximately tttree and a half miles 23 from the City of which that area falls into, land use -- 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. We have a 25 point of order because we are actually getting off on MS. SPEER: That's also NR-2. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It's NR-2? MS. SPEER: uh-hllh, along the right-of-way Page 148 1 another issue rather than we have a motion and a second on 2 the table and Legal has advised me that we are addressing 3 an issue that's not germane. 4 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I don't remember a 5 motion and a second. Am I wrong? 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mu[roy 7 made the motion and I made the second, 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I'm sorry. Thank 9 you. 10 COMMISSIONF_,R APPLE: we have a motion and a 11 second. Any mom discussion on the motion and the second? 12 Vote, please. 13 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Can you restate the 14 motion just so we're sure what we're voting on? 1 $ COMMISSIONER APPLE: Certainly. 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 COMMISSIONER M[JLROY: ! move approval as 18 submitled. 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That was move to approve? 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: HO moved approval as submitted and I seconded. Vote, please. Motion carries 6-1. (Commissioner Johnson voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: Moving onto our final SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 145 -Page t48 Cond~nscltTM t item, public hearing No. 32. Again, I'll open the 2 public hearing and Ms. Spear will present. 3 MS. SPE~: oood evening once again. This 4 particular item is a little bit different from our 5 previous four areas. This area is currently a 43.7 acm 6 site. It's the strip along 377 south of Brush Creek. 7 This strip is currently zoned Neighborhood Residential 4. 8 It's being requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission 9 to go to Neighborhood Residential 2. I have 15 acres of 10 opposition here, 15 acres of opposition, 20, 15 acres 11 here, and one home here and one neutral home. So I have 12 about 85, 90 percent opposition on this particular case. 13 Super-majority vote will be required at City Council. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question. 16 COMMissIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 17 COMMISSIONER POWELL: when was this zoned 18 ~m.47 was this in the major rezoning or was this some 19 other time? And if it was in the major rezoning, why did 20 they plunk an t~R-4 there? Does anybody know? Can anybody 21 help me? 22 COMMISSIONF.~ APPLE: Mr. Powell. 23 ~. POWELL: If i may. This one is the one 24 that comes closest to the mistake word or oversight. The 25 majority of that property was in a Po and the eD had Page 150 i several variations and then it was finally hard zoned, the 2 back portion of thc property but not the front part. And 3 so if I believe the old PD had 16,000 square foot lots 4 really didn't match up with NR-4. SO it doesn't match 5 what was there prior to February 20th or February this 6 year. Now it's been upzoned since that time. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I~t me add onto that 8 question then for Mr. Powell. If it doesn't match the 9 NR-4 that it was given, what did it match to? What would 10 have been a match? 11 MR. POWELL: I believe the NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 14 COMMISSIONER WATKn~S: Thank you. I assume 15 if it's NR-4 that there's no utilities there and so there 16 will be nothing built there; is that correct? Doesn't it 17 take a one-acre site for a septic? 18 MR. PowELL: Yes. If I may, there is a 19 sewer that does run down through this area, kind of 20 bisecting it. So there is sewer. There is water. So 21 unlike the properties to the north, this one it doesn't 22 have sewer there but it's close. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Again, we 24 have -- did you have a question? 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I have another Page 149 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 .22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ,20 21 22 23 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION question. Powell. Page 151 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Commissioner COMMISSIONER POWELL: would that be a City of Argyle sewer? It's not a City of Denton sewer, is it? MR. POWELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yes, sir, what.'? MR. POWELL: City Of' Dellton sewer. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thatlk you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a number of cards again who wish to speak in support of this. Mr. Williamson doesn't want to speak but wishes support. Carol Haesle in support. Sandra Lewis checked I wish to speak on this item. No? Okay. Hard to tell once both of them are checked. But she is in support. Chris Mellberg is in support. Bill Lewis. MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek Road. We do support this issue. That is what is already there. The other issues here are that this is an environmentally sensitive area. You've heard a lot from us already on this property and i'm here to reiterate. Thank you for what you've done in the past to help protect that area. Making it NR-2 will help protect it some more, also. Page 152 There has also been some discussion, maybe it's differences of opinion about where the floodplain is out there. However, there is some floodplain out there. I think we can agree on that. As far as more general zoning issues go, I think that the possible strategy that some cities try to use is that the closer you are to the core of tho City, that's where higher densities occur. As you get further out away from the City, that's where the lower densities are. This is about as far away as you can get from Denton and still bc in Denton. And I think that pretty well summarizes my thoughts on this issue. I'll take any questions. COMMISSIONER APPLE: ?hank you. Tom McMurray. MR. MCMURRAY: Just in support. You've heard my arguments. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Larry McOehcc, MR. MCGEItEE: My name is Larry McGeh~e. I live at 2001 Ckfistina Court in Denton, Texas. My faith has been restored. We had one person found the money and got out of here but the rest of the money has been returned to the citizens. Thank you. This one is the biggest mistake that we're looking at tonight. NR-4 makes no sense. In fact, it ought to be ~m-t. t don't know how SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 149- Page 152 CondensoltTM Page 153 Page 155 1 we're going to NR-2 but that is what we're trying to do 1 2 here, right? NR-4toNR-2? well, I'min favor of that. 2 3 Thank you for your last vote. 3 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 4 5 anyone else who wishes to address this item? Seeing no 5 6 one coming forward, I'll close the public hearing. 6 7 Commissioner Mulroy. 7 8 COMMISSIONER MULROY: I'm going to move 8 9 approval. 9 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Second. 10 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: A question of staff. 11 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy is 12 13 13 prior to you. 14 COMMISSIONER ROY: I just wish that 14 15 somebody had explained this in more detail to the 5 16 landowners. Here we have another case of 85 percent .6 17 roughly opposition. You can argue about how we got here I7 18 but the fact is we are here at NR-4 and the landowners who 18 19 own this property don't want to change it, 85 percent of 19 20 them don't want to change it. And I'm just really 20 21 struggling with this, this whole concept, 21 22 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 22 23 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you, ma'am. 23 24 That was not to get attention. That was getting over a 24 25 cold. Staff, a question. The owners who are in 25 Page 154 i opposition, did they make any attempt to get here? 2 There's nobody in opposition here and that bothers me. 3 MS. SPEER: If I can be blunt, they're 4 coming to City Council. The owners, the opposition on 5 this site has plans for this site and owns this land, they 6 will be at City Council. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own what land? 8 MS. SPEER: They own this property. 9 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own the NR-2, as 10 well as the NR-4. 1 MS. SPEER: correct. This part. 2 COMMISSIONER POWELL: okay. But they own 13 all of the NR-2 beh/nd it, to the east of it? 14 MS. SPEER: 1 believe they do own all of 15 it. They even own the vacant lot up here. 16 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy. 18 COMMISSIONER ROY: One question. That 19 vacant lot on the NR-i up there, they were not in 20 opposition to. that? 21 MS. SPEER: correct. They sent in a letter 22 for favor of that. 23 COMMISSIONER ROY; Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion and a 25 second to approve. Any more discussion? Vote, please. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Motion can'[es 5-2. (Commissioners Roy and Powell voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: That ends our Agenda items. And if there's no further business, we are adjourned. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 153 - Page 155 S 5Our Documents~Ordina~ces~02~Z02-0038.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 2 (NR-2) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESDIENTIAL 1 (DR- 1) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 8.65 ACRES OF LAND, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING A PORTION OF A TRACT IN ABSTRACT 1164 IN THE J.SEVERE SURVEY, IN THE DEED TO PAUL S. BERRY RECORDED IN VOLUME 4616, PAGE 1936 AND BEING A PORTION OF A TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO RUIBAL PROP INC. RECORDED IN VOLUME 4958, PAGE 691 OF THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0038) WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a change in zoning for approximately 8.65 acres of land described as being a portion of a tract in abstract 1164 in the J.Severe survey, in the deed to Paul S. Berry recorded in volume 4616, page 1936 and being a portion ora tract of land described in deed to Ruibal Prop Inc. recorded in volume 4958, page 691 of the real property records City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property") from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial to change the zoning to Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR- 1); and WHEREAS, the City has received written protests pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Section 211.006, which requires a three quarter vote by the City Council to change the zoning district classification and use designation. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby changed from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR- 1 ) zoning district classificat ion and use and such zoning change has been passed by a three quarter vote of the City Council. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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 S 5Our Documents~Ordina2~ces~02~Z02-0038.doc SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. 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 Demon Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Demon, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 8.65 Acres of Land All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in the County of Denton, State of Texas, and being part of the J. Severe Survey, Abstract Number 1164, and being a portion of a certain called tract of land described in the deed to Paul S. Berry recorded in Volume 4616, Page 1936 of the Real Property Records Demon County, Texas and being a portion of a certain called tract of land described in the deed to Ruibal Prop inc. recorded in Volume 4958, Page 691 of the Real Property Records Demon County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows: BEING only the area of those certain called tracts of land located within the present City limits line established by Ordinance 69-40 iii, City of Denton, Demon County, Texas: BEGINNING at a point in the existing U.S. 377 East Right-of-way line and being 12.44 feet more or less West of a Northwest property comer of said Ruibal Prop Inc. tract; THENCE East along the North boundary line of said Ruibal Prop Inc. tract a distance of 493 feet more or less to a point on the East boundary of the current City limits line established by said Ordinance; THENCE Southwest along the East boundary line of the currem City limits line established by said ordinance and passing the South boundary line of said Ruibal Prop Inc. tract also being the North boundary line of said Paul S. Berry tract a distance of 857.45 feet more or less to a point on the South boundary line of said Paul S. Berry tract. THENCE North 89 Degrees 59 Minutes 21 Seconds West along the South boundary of said Paul S. Berry tract a distance of 494.91 feet to a point for a comer and being the Southwest comer of said Paul S. Berry tract lying on the East Right-of-way line of said U.S. 377; THENCE Northeast along the existing U.S. 377 Right-of-way line and passing the Northwest comer of said Paul S. Berry tract also being the Southwest comer of said Ruibal Prop Inc. tract a distance of 859.08 feet more or less to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing in all 8.65 acres of land more or less. Exhibit A Z02-0038 (Fort Drive/North Brush Creek) NORTH LOCATION MAP Item #5D AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 %/~ SUBJECT - Z02-039 (NE 377 & Brush Creek) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 21 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The three tracts are generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Hamilton Road and north of Brush Creek. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (6-1). BACKGROUND Applicant: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton, Texas The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have three parcels of land, totaling approximately 21 acres, rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The zoning of this area was initially raised as an issue when the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Future Zoning map, specifically the southwest quadrant of the city. The Commission began to question the appropriateness of the zoning in the area based on the old zoning and the current land uses. Also, this issue was raised during the fa'st Quarterly Review of the Development Code. The zoning of this area was one of the issues City Council instructed the Planning and Zoning Commission to review. The Commission reviewed this issue during several worksessions and voted unanimously to rezone the property on June 26, 2002. In worksessions, the Commission spent a great deal of time in discussing the issue of land use and zoning of this area and how the existing zoning came into place. At the time verbatim minutes of worksessions were not kept and therefore are not available for inclusion in the back up. However, a summary of the meeting discussion was provided in a separate memo. The public hearings before the Commission were supposed to be held on August 28, 2002 but had to be postponed due to notification errors. This delay resulted in the cases not being heard until September 25, 2002, at which time the make-up of the Commission had changed. The staff reports to the Commission were brief and did not contain the detail and history of this area. The elapsed time (3 months) between the worksessions and the public heating, and the minimum backup in the staff reports contributed to the confusion reflected in the public heating minutes. This request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis is provided for in the Staff`Analysis (Attachment 1). Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing, staff has received one favorable and one opposing response from property owners of the subject site, therefore a supermajority vote (6-1) by City Council will be required to approve this rezoning. As of this writing, staff has received no responses from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval, 6-1 (Johnson opposed). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject properties are not platted. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0039, commonly known as NE 377 & Brush Creek: Application Date - DRC Date - Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - No Neighborhood meeting was held July 23, 2002 August 1, 2002 September 25, 2002 FISCAL INFORMATION No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff`Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A Prepared by: Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: Douglas S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development for ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zoning Request The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have three parcels of land, totaling approximately 21 acres, rezoned from its current Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district. The request was initiated in an effort to maintain the rural setting of surrounding areas. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Agricultural (A) The subject property currently contains single-family homes and agricultural uses. Adjacent zoning: North: Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU) - single- family homes South: Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district-single-family/agricultural East: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) -single- family homes/agricultural West: Neighborhood Residential 6 (NR-6) zoning district -single-family homes Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located within a "Neighborhood Centers" future land use area. These areas may develop in conventional patterns or may be developed in a pattern of 'neighborhood centers'. Neighborhood centers are oriented inwardly, focusing on the center of the neighborhood and containing facilities vital to the day-to-day activity of the neighborhood. A neighborhood center might contain a convenience store, small restaurant, personal service shops, church or synagogue, daycare, individual office space, a small park and perhaps an elementary school. The Denton Plan identifies the following Primary Residential Land Use Principles: Preserve Neighborhoods: The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be achieved by demanding and establishing design and construction standards that are fair and evenly applied. (page 35) Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in Denton by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density development where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning would serve to preserve the rural setting in this area and maintain the existing neighborhood as called for by the Denton Plan under "Neighborhood Centers" classification. Sprawl is characterized by low residential density housing, which the proposed zoning would create. This is not desirable according to the Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation A traffic impact analysis is not required. Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Fort Worth Drive. Fort Worth Drive is identified as a primary major arterial by the Denton Mobility Plan. The future surrounding road system may not be compatible with this type of development. Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zonin~ Analysis Current NR-2 zoning allows for single-family homes with a maximum of two (2) units per acre. The proposed Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning would allow only one (1) dwelling unit per acre. Staff Findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan in regards to compatibility and preservation of surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed zoning change would provide for a diversity of housing stock. 3. The proposed zoning change may not be compatible with the mobility plan for this area. 4. The proposed zoning change would facilitate sprawl, which is not desired by the Denton Plan. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map ETJ ETJ LOCATION MAP Scale: None Mobility Map NORTH MOBILITY MAP ,:', ,,' Mobili~collector ~ ~-~ Freew ay ~ ~'Primary Major Alternate / ~'f Primary Major Arterial ~i ~Seconda~ MajorAIternate FUTU RE dot Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Li~ of 50 Notification Limits of 200' Notification Favor Scale: None Public Notification Date: August 15 & September 12, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 6 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 1 (Owner) · In Favor: 1 (Owner) · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0 % Owner Opposition: 20% *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Property Owner Responses Oran Monroe 7655 Ft Worth Drive Argyle, Texas 76226 Billy and Joyce Kenas 2126 Hamilton Drive Argyle, Texas 76226 In Favor (Owner) Opposed (Owner) None See Attached Letter Ed Ruibal 608 South Pearl Dallas, Texas 75201 David Yoder 940 Brush Creek Road Argyle, Texas 76226 Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Argyle, Texas 76226 Richard and Gina Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 Dennis and Sharon Cox 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 Opposed Favor Favor Favor Favor Property is in ETJ See Attached Letter See Attached Letter See Attached Letter See Attached Letter *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z02-0039 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton Will hold a pubtic hearing on Wednesday, August 28, 2002, to consider rezoning three tracts of land totaling approximately 21 acres (inside the city limits) generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Hamilton Road and north of Brush Creek, from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district (see map on back). The property is legally described as Tracts 16, 22, and 31 in Old DCAD TR #1D, #lB, and #1-C in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. . Note: Only those properties located inside the city limits of Denton will receive this notice. The public hearing will start at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. BecaUse you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the pubfic hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to - be taken i-nto a~cJ3unt, 'mtur~n-~[h~form With"yC~Ur (~6mment~--PTib-r-to the date-bf th~e-~ublichearing: ('This it] no way prohibits you from attending and participating in fhe public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas .76201 Attn: Autumn Speer, Planner I The zoning process includes two pubfic hearings .designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public hearing is held before the PIanning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal-the request to the City Council, If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. Please circle one: Mailing Address', Ci~, State Zip: Telephone Number: Physical Address of Properly within 200 feet: ~~ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 z02-0o39 200' Notice 08/14/2002 05:I5 019403823031 KENAS PAGE Aug. 26, 2002 To whom it may concern: Billy and Joyce Kenas feel that it will be in our best interest for the zoning on our property to stay as it is now. We feel that it is unfair to give a party a commercial rating with the majority of the zoning board agreeing that the proper zoning should be commercial and then decide within a five-year period to change it. This did not happen to us but it did to the property owners just north of us. If we were to try for a commercial ruling how long would it be before the zoning department decided to change it again? We ask your department to be more consistent and less political. AUG ~.,8 2002 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Yours truly~ Joyce Kenas NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN6 Z02-0039 : Lccj The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a~pub c. hearing on.Wednesday, September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning three tracts of land totaling approximately 21 acres (inside the city limits) generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Hamilton Road and north of Brush Creek, from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district (see map on back). The property is legally described as Tracts 16, 22, and 31 in Old DCAD TR #lB, #lB, and #1-C in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. Note: Only those properties located inside the city limits of Denton will recei~)e this notice. The public hearing will start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the pubfic hearing. (This in no way prohibits you from attending and participating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it of Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Autumn Speer, Planner I The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first pub[ic hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Reasons forO~p.,~,posi~on: \ \ Printed Name: ,z~. % k~,,,.~_,,, ,'-~_~. ~. Mailing Address: /O0~ .~ Telephone Number: ~/L/ ~ -~f¢4:~ ' / ~ ] ~ Physical Address of Property within 200 feet: ..~, ]~;? ~/-jd x~/27~-,~ ..¢ -g;F-z~, ~E j'¢/,~ ,j~y3j~ J/¢~/ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 , 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 Z02.0039 200' No~ice September 24, 2002 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Members Mayor and City Council Members Re: Public Hearings on Brush Creek Road and Highway 377 area rezonings ~ am unable to attend the meeting~ but would like my comments on record in support of the zoning changes that are proposed. My wife and ! have lived at 940 Brush Creek Road since 1985. We moved from the City of Denton to this area to get away from the high-density houses and to a less busy, less stressful way of life. We have continued to watch the development of new homes In our area and were comfortable with the quality and density of these homes because they have all maintained the space and openness of the community. We were appalled to see that the new zoning map has changed the zoning along Brush Creek Road to NR 2, which ! understand is 2 homes to an acre of land. That is very scary to those of us who have lived here, are raising families and animals and enjoying our 'country" way of life. ! presume that this zoning would allow my neighbor, if he so chose, to subdivide his 10 acres and put 20 houses next to mine. Please support the change to NR 1 zoning. There are no undeveloped lots along this road and lot sizes range from 2 acres up to 80 acres. The other area that has us very concerned is the NR 4 zoning along the frontage of 377, south of Brush Creek Road, :just around the corner from our home. Who, in all common sense, could envision 4 homes to the acre out here? ! specifically remember Assistant City Manager, Dave Hill, telling us when this new plan was in the beginning stages that properties closer in to town would be denser and as you moved away from town you would have less density, with the least density being in the areas that bordered the ET3, or other towns. We are as far from ~own as you can get. We border Argyle and they, as a town, Just reaffirmed their commitment to keeping a rural, open feel with their new plan. ! just don't see how NR 4 fits. Directly across the highway, land with a railroad track running through it is even zoned less dense - NR 2. We ask that you support the rezoning change to NR 2 for this strip. Please, please take a good look at these and make them compatible for this area. There should not be more than one home, at the most, to an acre in this area. We feel we have already been greatly compromised by the NR 2 designation on the approximately 150 acre tract that is being developed as Country Club Village. We do not want to be downgraded any further. We keep hearin~qv~er,~nd over how the new plan is concerned with preserving and protecting ~l~i~l~~hoeds. Well, ~ preserve and protect us. '! can only hope understand the impact your decision will have on those and so long to build the very unique community we now I~( and~llerish. Thank you for Your time and kind consideration. /~- 940 Brush Creek Read Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton City Council and Mayor Re: Support for rezoning requests to less density re Brush Creek Road, Highway 377 and Hills of Argyle area We would 1/kc to respectfully request that a zoning change be seriously considered to correct what must surely be an error in the zoning map. In section L6, in an area where every existing home within a 1.5 mile radius is located on at least an acre, with most homes being on lots of 2 to up to I00 acres, there is a large section of land along Highway 377 designated to be NR-4. That would seem totally incompatible with the promise to "preserve and protect exisisting neighborhoods". The rural atmosphere and the large estate size lots, ARE the existing neighborhood and it is unfathomable that NR- 4 would be seen as a reasonable designation to be "plopped" down in the midst of this. There are other concerns as well, as there is an environmentally sensitive area along one side of this area as well as continuous flooding problems. We request that this area be rezoned to NR-2 to at least accommodate some of our concerns. There is undeveloped land adjoining this area that has been designated as NR-2, and that would seem more appropriate. Also, the land directly behind our home in the Hills of Argyle, along Brush Creek Road, has been designated on the new map as NR-2, which is also totally inconsistent with the surrounding area. To our knowledge, all of the lots on Brush Creek Road from Highway 377 to Highway 1830 are all developed, complete with homes, barns, animals, etc. All of these developed lots are large - about 2 acres up to about 80 acres. Why would you then "overzone" this area as NR-2? Makes no sense to us Please correct these mistakes by approving the rezoning for less density for this area. Sincerely, -, Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Hills of Argyle Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: Denton Plaunln~ and Zoning Commission Re: September 25, 2002, meeting - agenda items 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 We Just recently purchased our dream home at 8001 Woodcreek Circle. We moved here from Piano expressly to get away from the crowded subdivisions and hurried lifestyle. Though we commute to work now, the drive is more than worth the peace and tranq~lity we find when we return home. We researched many area towns and looked at many homes trying to find an area that had estate-size lots and some semblance of nature. A realtor in Dallas actually suggested this area to us aft~, hea~ing our desi~'es and otu' f~ustration in locating what we were looking for. Every surrounding town has subdivision miter subdivision on small Iota or in some cases, on no lot at all !! This arem of Denton is unique in that you can offer large lots, in the midst of natural beauty, and yet be close to town. This area is somethln~ very special. Its uniqueness needs to be preserved. There a~e Hterally hundreds of crowded subdivisions to choose fron~ but extremely few that offer what we have. Please vote in support of the rezonlugs for this area that will help to maintain the wonderful quality of our new life here in your fair city. We will be so disappointed ff this area becomes what we searched for so long to escape from. d and Olna Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 September 24, 2002 Dear Mayor Brock, City Council Members, and Planning and Zoning Commission Members, Please take another look at our neighborhood. We live in a cul-de-sac that was annexed into Denton in the tate 1970's. Our cul-de-sac contains 5 lots, with 4 homes that have been in existence for many years and one unbuilt lot. The 5 lots range in size from 1.022 acres up to 2.003 acres. On the new zoning map, apparently they have now zoned our area to NR 2, or 2 homes to the acre. This puts us in avery precarious position with regard to our wel{-established neighborhood. With this new zoning, the owner of the vacant lot could completely change the character of what we have worked so hard to create - a spacious, rural feel. Another seemingly incongruous zoning is the NR 4 zoning along 377 from Brush Creek Road south, which is located behind our cul-de-sac. This would appear to be better served by an NR 1 or NR 2 zoning and more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood - to one side of the area now zoned NR 4 is a large (50 + acres) cattle farm and to the other side is a large horse farm. Another important consideration is that this area is adjacent to an already threatened environmentaJ[y sensitive area and an area that has had significant flooding problems, which would be exacerbated by higher density. We have also noted that across the street from us (in the as-yet-unannexed area along Brush Creek Road) you have now zoned that area to be NR 2 also, yet those homes are on even Jar§er lots, some 20 to 40 acres and more. Ptease correct these apparent oversights and consider something more approprfate, such as NR f. The future of our neighborhood is at stake. We would appreciate your vote in support of the rezoning for the lower densities which, in turn, is a vote for the integrity of our long-standing neighborhood. Most sincerely, Dennis and Sharon Cox 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 940-243-1122 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs Page 111 2 will take public hearings Nc go through and figure out 3 presentation since they are in the same area and so 3 who got to go to who. There are letters -- letters that ! 4 similar in nature, and then we will vote on them 4 passed out. Four of them are for Woodcreck Circle, four 5 individually. And Ms. Speer with the City planning office 5 of them are letters from the same owners concerning the 6 will present and I'll open the public hearing. 6 whole area. Some of them would apply to other cases as 7 MS. SPEER: Good evening, Comauissioners. 7 far as being in the 200-foot notice. 8 I'm going to do these together as one unit but I'm going 8 COMMISSIONER AVPtn: ~ecause some of them 9 to do each individual one separately, seeing as we have 9 actually address these Agenda items, not the other ones. 10 different forms of opposition. 10 Ms. SeEER: Right. Right. 11 Item Agenda No. 28 is again a Planning 11 COMMISSIONER ~eCE: SO I just want to make 12 and Zoning initiated zoning request. There's five parcels 12 the Commissioners aware to read the letters in the packet 13 of land, approximately 80 acres. The Planning and Zoning 13 because they're stuck behind the wrong Agenda item. Thank 14 Commission has requested they go from a Neighborhood 14 you. Commissioner Johnson has a question. 15 Residential 2 to a Neighborhood Residential 1. As I said, 15 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: AS we go along, 16 there's no opposition on this land. Most of the land is 16 could you indicate because it says in all cases the 17 vacant. There are several small home sites kind of hidden 17 applicant is the City of Denton. Could you tell me if the 18 back in there. 18 owner agrees with the requesteat zoning? 19 This property does have some opposing 19 Ms. senna: i can, That's one reason t 20 issues. In one sense thc idea of maintaining the 20 want to do them separately. In this particular case, I 21 integrity of the rural atmosphere by downzoning this 21 have not received any notification from the owner that 22 property is its -- the goal was achieved. However, the 22 they oppose. This particular 80-acre site, there are five 23 goal of the Denton Plan also is to prevent sprawl. So you 23 separate owners and they were all notified, twice 24 have kind of a catch 22. You have this downzoning which, 24 actually, and I haven't received any opposition from 25 by its nature, the definition of sprawl could facilitate 25 owners on this one.... Page 110 Page 112 1 that. However, it does preserve the neighborhood and 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: And just for 2 maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. 2 clarification purposes, as she announced earlier, the 3 Also another case in question is the 3 Planning and Zoning Commission is actually who initiated 4 Mobihty Plan. On this map I've showed you Country Club 4 this. 5 and Brush Creek, they are on the Mobility Plan. Brush 5 MS. SPEER: correct. 6 Creek is not to standard. It's a secondary -- itrs a 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: That's why it says the 7 primary major arterial. Right now we know that that's not 7 City. But it was actually this body that initiated. 8 what it looks like. So I just -- staff wants to make sure 8 Commissioner Mu[roy. 9 that we're aware of the conflicting items here. We have 9 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS. Thank you. Ms. 10 that the area of the downzoning does preserve the 10 Speer, were you in our work section? I think we had two 11 neighborhood, does provide compatible uses. However, the 11 work sessions dealing with these properties. 12 Mobility Plan and the issue of it could facilitate sprawl 12 MS. SPEER: I don't believe I was here at 13 is something to be considered on all of these cases. This 13 the time, sir, no. 14 one, however, does not have any opposition so it does not 14 COMMISSIONER MLJLROY: okay. So I want to ,15 require super-majority at this point for City Council. 15 take a small liberty to refresh our collective memories 16 The next ease I'll talk about, unless you 16 and perhaps impart some of the background to you. Your 17 want to have questions about this specific one. 17 comments which are repeated in each Agenda item that this 18 COMMISSIONER APPLE: t just want to 18 is kind of counter to the anti-sprawl portions of the Comp 19 interrupt you because I noticed that you stapled all of 19 Plan, that was fully recognized in our work shop. And we 20 these together go they appear that they're for Item 29 20 had -- the consideration was given first to reflecting the 21 when actually they cover all of them. 21 existing neighborhood, there was long-e~tablished homes m 22 MS. srE~: vdght. 22 that really one-acre and larger tradition. 23 COMMISSIOSmt ~PLE: SO I just was 23 Number two, also the Comp Plan wants 24 wondering if you made the Commission aware that these 24 diversified housing. We have many areas of the City that 25 probably shouldn't be stapled together. 25 we're looking at the new urbanization and upping the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 109 - Page 112 CondcnseltTM Page 113 1 density and pedestrian-oriented, et cetera, et cetera. 2 This is one already established area of the City that is 3 more of the larger estate-type lots and so in order to be 4 diversified, we need to have that offering. 5 Number three, on an economic development 6 standpoint, we are losing some potential housings of this 7 type to Argyle because they have an abundance of the 8 larger acreage and we don't. So for this body, in our 9 deliberations and examining in the total context, not just 10 a narrow focus but of all the things you mentioned, 11 evolved the decision that this would be the part of town 12 that we would like to keep this way. So I really want to 13 address -- reflect to your comments that have been 14 repeated here. Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, i 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 MS. SPEER: Are there any further questions 18 on this particular site? I'll continue. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 20 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Did I understand you 21 to say that there were five comers? 22 MS. SPEER: NO, sir. There are five 23 separate tracts of land in this 80-acre parcel. It's 24 totaling 80 acres that's zoned right now, the NR-2, but 25 there's five different tracts. Page 114 1 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: okay. And we're not 2 allowed to know who the owners were or, I mean, it was 3 initiated by the Planning and Zoning, but I see a fellow 4 in the audience that owned a good bit of that property at 5 one time. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, I guess normally 7 we don't take who owns the property into deliberation, so 8 to speak. It's the property that we're looking at, not so 9 much who owns it. I0 COMMISSIONER WATK£NS: SUre. Sur~. 11 COMMISSIONER AP?CE: But if she has that 12 information available, I'm sure she'd he happy to sham it 13 with you. But I thought I understood her to say she did 14 not have that information. 15 MS. SPEER: on this particular site, this 16 was my easy one. Everybody else I could tell you who owns 17 what because they all -- there's opposition and favorable. 18 But this one I didn't receive anything except -- 19 COMM~ssIoNEa WATmNS: vll withdraws[ my 20 question. 21 MS. SPEER: I did want to address 22 Conmfissioner Mulroy, if I could. I wasn't aware of the 23 previous work session meetings. I do want to say that 24 that was part of my issue in writing the staff report is 25 that there is a catch 22 issue, you know, your diversify PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 115 1 housing. So you have this area of town however sprawl, 2 however compatibility with neighborhood. So that's why in 3 my staff report, the recommendations, I have kind of 4 opposing findings and I just want to make those clear. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, bless your 6 heart. It's unfortunate that the hours of commentary on 7 this during work sessions were not provided to you since 8 you have all five of these cases. I am perplexed as to 9 why that was not done. 10 MS. SPEER: Right. I am, as well. l l COMMISSIONE.R APPLE: commissioner Roy, 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: We're going to go 13 through several cases and I'm afraid that I'm going to 14 forget each ease as we go through it. I wonder would it 15 be mom appropriate to -- and we've talked about this t 6 particularl tract of land, to see if there's any comments 17 from tho audience about that tract of land, resolve it, 18 and then go to the next one. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: ! was just wondering 20 the same thing, if it might not be more prudent at this 21 point to separate them out for purposes of presentation. 22 It seems to be getting rather muddled. Without objection 23 -- and vote on each one as we go. All fight. That seems 24 to be the consensus. If you want to start back with 28. 25 MS. SPEEa: okay. I just wanted to -- Page 116 1 basically, I'm completed with 28, if you have any 2 questions. 3 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. So were there 4 any questions on 28? Okay. So we're okay. We're on to 5 30. Oh, gosh, stop me. We need to vote. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yeah, we also need 7 to go for public comment. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: We n{~l to do the 9 public hearing. Gosh, somebody stop me. Commissioner 10 Johnson has his -- 11 COMMISSIONER JOUNSON: Yeah. I still want 12 to make sure that I understand this. This property has 13 owners. We have tried to contact them. We know who they 14 are. I don't need to know but you have tried to contact 15 them and they have not responded to you; is that right? 16 MS. SPEER: rm required to contact them 17 via mail and we contact them certified mail. We actually 18 have sent out thre~ notifications for these cases because 19 of postal errors. So I have received several calls on thc 20 site. I don't have their names right now with me because 21 I received most of the calls back in August. This was 22 initially planned to go a month ago. But I haven't 23 received any written comments whatsoever on this 24 particular 80 acres. 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. This is a SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 113 - Page 116 CondenscItTM Page 117 1 public hearing and I do have several cards who wish to 2 address this issue. Tom McMurray, 3 MR, MCMURILAY: chairperson, Tom McMurray, 4 1800 Wickwood. Is this the shee~ that shows up here? I 5 live right there. Okay. This whole neighborhood here is 6 Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Hills of Argyle. It is 7 completely now sold and Phase 3 up here is now starting to 8 be developed. This site with Brush Creek, the way it's 9 designed with the right-of-way, would be more appropriate 10 to be 11 One reason is is we are in the City of 12 Denton, one of the rare properties like this thaCs 13 like this, but we are also in the school district of 14 Argyle ~SD. ~md one of the issues that I'm sure this 15 Commission is aware of is that Argyle just deannexed 8,000 16 acres to send a message to the City Council of Denton 17 because they force fed another deal. 18 And as a citizen of both Denton and the ISV 19 of Argyle, taxpayers of both, we would like to see not 20 only the conformity, but it's the natural conformity. 21 It's like, you know, all the terrain, if you've driven it, 22 it's got some hills, rolling to it. It's a natural 23 terrain for larger estate homes. It's the type of thing 24 that not only helps your tax base, it helps bring a 25 positive image to that area of town. Page 118 1 Although 377, you-all are working hard on 2 it, we're not offended by any of that. We understand 3 that. We drive in every day. And our position on that 4 is hhat we would like to see you do NR-1. The reason 5 being is that until Brush Creek is really redone, it's not 6 compatible at this point. I know on the plans it's got 7 the right-of-way. 8 Mr. Johnson, I don't know if you've driven 9 it, but I know that's part of your questions. But I drive 10 it every day and you don't drive too fast, it will tear 11 your car up. But assume all that is redone, across the 12 street here is actually ETJ, I believe, but fight now it's 13 just being produced as oil and gas royalty fight now. 14 That's the King area. And we would ask that y'all just 15 allow it to look a lot like this. Because if you do that, 16 it's going to be natural, it's going to be in conformity, 17 it's going to look good. It's got a lot of trees in that 18 area. We know Denton likes to save trees. So that's the 19 deal. I'd ask that you vote for NR-i. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE; Thank you, I have a 21 card from a Larry McGehee. MeGehee, is that correct? 22 MR. MCGEHEE: Yes ma'am, My name is Larry 23 McGehee. I live at 2001 C1Mstina Court also one of those 24 little dots on the map in the Hills of Argyle. 25 When the Denton Plan was passed, our Page 119 I neighborhood was zoned ~R-2 and ~a-4, although it had been 2 platted and approved as one-acre lots and larger. And 3 when we spoke to Council about this, they basically said 4 we understand this is an oversight. This subdivision is 5 already here. They were overlaying a subdivision that had 6 been approved and plat for one and two-acre lots. So it 7 was a mistake and so that's where Na-X came from. I don't 8 know how staff could have rezoned this whole city and not 9 missed a few little things, and that one was one that was 10 missed. And so out of cou_nesy or respect or what~ver, 11 No-1 was created to take care of that subdivision. 12 I believe that all of these are the same 13 issue, that this land is rural. I've lived there for 14 almost a year and a half. I've never seen a Denton police 15 officer even in the subdivision. We had people steal some 16 signs from us and when we called them to come out, they 17 said, well, you're in Argyle. You don't even live in the 18 City of Denton. So we're not getting serviced to death 19 out there. We have to tell them where it is before they 20 can come out. You have to go through a large floodplain 21 area to even get to this area. And a big portion of this 22 tract in question is in a floodplain and probably will 23 never be developed in. I don't know what the actual 24 usable acreage is but I don't think that we're talking 25 about very many usable acres to begin with. Page I20 1 The road of Brush Creek Road is not a 2 two-lane black top. It's a one-lane death trap and you 3 can get killed there on any day because you've got two 4 blind hills. So I think it was an oversight. I think all 5 of this stuff is an oversight. And we request that you 6 keep it rural. Keep it Na-lr There will be nice big 7 homes built there. They'll pay a lot of taxes, The 8 developer is not going to get hurt on these deals. 9 They're going to sell them and make a lot of money. It's 10 just a question of how much. Thank you. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I have a 12 card from Bill Lewis. All right. You don't wish to 13 speak? 14 MR. LEWIS: Not on this issue, 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. I have a card 16 from Chris Mellberg, 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He wanted you to 18 read the back. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Traffic issues are 20 scary both -- that's not what this says. Traffic issues 21 are really bad both on Brush Creek and 377. And we wan 22 to preserve the feel of the neighborhood. 23 Is there anyone else who wants to speak in 24 support? Okay. I have two cards -- no, I have one card 25 on this particular item. Michael Pettibon. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 117 - Page 120 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1i 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 12I MR. PETTIBON: Hi. I'm Mike Pettibon and I own 40 acres that abuts the Hills of Argyle. And I'm not really sure if I understand the zoning change all that well and maybe you can change my mind about opposing this. Page 123 NR-I? MS. SPEER: Just to clarify, the only difference in uses for NR-I and NR-2 is under NR-2 if yOU have an suP, you can put in manufactured homes. There are But I think the reason that I'm opposed, I want it to stay rural and I can tell you that 75 percent of the land that I own is floodplain and you couldn't build a house on it if you wanted to. And I have no plans to build anything else and I don't want anything else built on it. But I think that I have a problem with zoning it so that it's more prohibitive of what I could or couldn't do on my property. And I don't know if that is truIy the ease or not as far as animals or livestock or what I want to do with it. And I feel like the people in Hills of Argyle are looking at my property and trying to make sure that I conform to their standards. And while I guarantee you that, you know, I don't want to spend a million dollars on a piece of property and have it look terrible, I also moved out to the country sort of so that I was no longer in the gated neighborhood I used to be in with people telling me that I couldn't paint my front door this color or have a dog over this size or park my vehicle. That's why I'm opposed. I think that I am opposed to further regulation of land. And maybe that's not truly 5 no other residential differences. Just density and 6 manufactured housing. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Does that 8 help you, sir? 9 M~. PETTIBON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: IS therO anyone else 11 who wishes to address Item -- 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: I had a question. 13 COMM[SSIONERAPPLE: okay. Commissioner 14 Roy. 15 COMMISSIONF~ ROY: t had a question of the 16 person who just spoke. Sir, are you a property owner in 17 that lot that we're looking at right now? You own 18 property in that yellow area? 19 MR. PETTIBON: I own -- that's my this half 20 of the rectangle. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 of the 80. 23 COMMISSlmmm APPLE: commissioner Johnson, 24 if you have a question. 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 O[' thc 80 acres Page 122 the spirit of it but that's how I interpret it. COMMISSIONER APPLE: would you like us to explain to you what we're doing, what is proposed so you would understand? MR. PETTIBON: If you could. COMMISSIONER APPLE: what is being proposed, and I'll let probably Mr. Reichhart, if Mr. Reichhart would come up and explain what this -- what is happening here so that then he would maybe feel more comfortable. MR. REICHHART: very briefly, the difference between NO-1 and NR-2 is basically density. NR-1, you have a density of one unit per acre. NR-2 has a density of two units per acre. Regarding keeping animals or livestock, there are different ordinances that address that. You have to have so much acreage per type of animal you have or horses or cows, tkings like that. And the zoning, regardless if it's Ne-1 or NR-2, wouldn't matter. So the real difference is when or if the property were ever going to be subdivided in the future, it would be a density issue. COMMISSIONER APPLE: And could you also explain to him some uses such as the manufactured homes that could be allowed in NR-2 that cannot be allowed in i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 124 is yours, sir? MR. PETrlBON: Right. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: IS it the east half or the west half?. MR. PETTIBON: The west. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The west? Have you decided yet if you're in favor of this or against it? MR. PETTIBON: You kllow, I guess that ! am still opposed. And it probably isn't my place to say it but, once again, it is just because I don't want added -~ someone telling me what I can do and can't do. Once again, I have no intention of decreasing the property values. And also I don't think if you tried as hard as you possibly could that you could put more than two more houses on that whole 40 acres. But I still stand opposed. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I don't see any more questions. Is them anyone else who'd like to address Agenda Item No. 28? Seeing no one, does staff have any additional marks? MS. SPEER: My only additional remark would be with his opposition we'd be at about 50 percent opposition, it would require super-majority at City Council. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Powell. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 121 - Page 124 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 125 COMMISSIONER POWELL: IS is safe to assume that we haven't heard from the owners, owner or owners of the other 40 acres? MS. SPEER: Corro.,ct. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Comtnis siGners. Commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Ye...8, Madam Chair. I'm going to make a motion for approval. I understand the verbally stated opposition but the reality is the motion and the downzoning will be less restrictive is what the Page 127 1 hearing. 2 MS. SPEER: Good evening once again. I am 3 basically going to go through these cases and talk to you 4 about the opposition and the site location. Staff has the 5 same findings in all of the cases. This site is 6 approximately a roughly ten-acre site. Same exact 7 situation, going from Neighborhood Residential 2 to 8 Neighborhood Residential 1 zoning district. This case 9 will have to go forward to City Council for 10 super-majority. Both owners of the two tracts do oppose. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. For commentary was directed towards. So I make a motion for approval as presented. Thank you. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion by Commissioner Mulroy and a second by Commissioner Watkins. For discussion, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I am greatly influenced by the landowner of half of this property that doesn't want to make a change and I don't see why we would do something he doesn't want to do. So I will be voting against approval of this. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: ~ We going to register this as an opposing view that is going to drive Page 126 1 the City Council to a super-majority? 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Director Powell would 3 like to weigh in. 4 MR. POWELL: we really need, to make it 5 official, we do need the opposition in writing. Bm I'm 6 sure that we can get that in between now and the month it 7 takes from P&Z to City Council. $ COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. And just for 9 the record, I'm going to agree with Cormnissioner Roy 10 because I'm going to give great deference to the 11 landowner' s stated preference on this. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 13 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Discussion of Mr. 14 Mulroy's point. I would look at it as being more 15 restrictive because with an NR-2, he does have some 16 options that disappear when it goes to NR-1. I just want 17 to point -- I'm just looking at this a little differently 18 than you are, sir. I wanted to make that point. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Any 20 further discussion? Vote, please. Motion carries 4-3. 21 (Commissioners Johnson, Roy, Powcll voted 22 in opposition.) 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Next we'll address 24 . Agenda Item No. 30 which is a public hearing. Again, 25 Ms. Speer, if you'll present and I'll open the public 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Agenda Item No. 30 -- COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me. Can I ask clarification? COMMISSIONER APPLE: oh, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: You said two tracts? MS. SPEER: correct, theret$ two tracts of land, two different parcels. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. All right. We're looking at it as one site. MS, SPEER: Correct. The line is right here. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. Both owners are in opposition, had written opposition to this change? MS. SPEER: correct. Page 128 1 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Regarding this Agenda 3 item, we have severa[ people who would like to address 4 this, also. Again, Mr. McMurray. 5 MR. MCMURRAY: I have a question for the 6 staff to help with my -- is there a sewer down Fort Worth 7 Drive? No? Is there a sewer because if it's NR-2, 8 residential, you've got a problem with your septic. 9 Because we're all septic out here. There is sewer running l0 up Fort Worth Drive up here to the new part of Phase 3. 11 So I could see where it wouldn't be that, you know, it 12 wouldn't be that expensive to get it there. That is an 13 issue because NR-i iS the minimum for a septic 14 requirements of spacing for your aerobic system. So one 15 of the -- I understand the landowner may want opposition. 16 It's going to have to be an issue addressed at some point 17 whether or not there's going to be sewer. So we would 18 vote NR-1 because it really conforms with the land use as 19 in the neighborhood. 20 All of this is NR-! but I can understand 21 the landowner saying he doesn't want NR-2, but there's not 22 going to be a special use permit for mobile homes. Not 23 next to alt this. You talk about everybody coming down 24 here, y'all would have a good time. So that ain't going 25 to happen. So at this point, I would say that you ought PLANIqlNG AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 125 - Page 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 § 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Conden scltTM Page 129 to go with NR-1 for the purpose that he can't -- if the 1 landowner can't use it for anything other than NR-i anyway 2 because of the fact that you have to have a septic spacing 3 unless the City's deciding to put sewer there. Thank you. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. McGehee. 5 MR. MCGEHEE: I would have dressed up if 6 I'd known I was going to have to speak in front of this ? camera. Do I need to introduce myself each time? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: please. 9 MR, MCGEHEE: Larry McGehee, 2001 Christina 10 Court, Denton, Texas. I believe and I need to ask staff 11 this but arc you allowed to build a house on a half an 12 acre without a sewer line? You're not o/lowed to do that. 3 Isn't this, in effect, an oversight in thc Denton zoning? .4 Why would this be zoned NR-2 when you can't use it as15 NR-2? This is an oversight. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Could someone from 17 staff address that question? 18 MR. POWELL: I'd be happy to address it. 19 If you remember back to the previous cases, there's a20 differentiation between zoning and platting and providing, 21 as part of platting, you provide utilities. The zoning of 22 the property, could it be developed today at the higher 23 density because there's no utilities? No. But that's a 24 platting issue. It's not really a zoning issue. Though 25 Page 130 they're somewhat intertwined. So you really do need to 1 try to separate those two. The question may be can 2 someone develop that at a higher density? Yes. Would 3 they have to provide the utilities? Yes. But it is 4 possible. It might not be feasible. It might not be cost -- might be cost prohibitive right now. But that really 6 is a platting issue rather than a zoning issue. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Did that 8 answer your question? 9 MR. MCGEHEE: Yeah, I guess. I still think 10 that this was an oversight. I don't believe it was 11 intentionally zoned NR~2 because there is no sewer line 12 there. It's also a 65 mile an hour State highway. The 13 traffic in there is horrible, I don't know if any of you 14 have tried to go from Argyle to Denton on Fort Worth 15 Drive. You can't get there very quickly, You're blocked 16 by that trestle down there. 17 Again, I don't think that even if it's 18 zoned NR-1 that it will -- somebody is going to come in 19 here and someday ask you for commercial zoning on this. 20 NP,-I, it may make sense because there's a railroad track 21 across there and it's a State highway, and anybody that 22 would develop that would want it to be at least one-acre 23 lots, which puts the house away from the road and the 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION train. It just doesn't make sense. It really needs to be SEPTEMBER 25TIt, 2002 Page 131 NR-I. And look at all the other stuff out there, We're all one-acre and bigger because there's no sewer line and that's why it's all like it is. Somebody is benefiting from a mistake. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Bill Lewis. All right. You just want to show support. MR, LEWIS: show me in favor of this one. COMMISSIONER APPLE:. chris Mellberg does not wish to speak but wants to express support. Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wishes to offer support. Carol Haesle was not able to attend but she does want to offer support. She says all of these items include areas in rural neighborhoods with land, trees, and nature. Please allow the existing developments to maintain their environment and feel. Also, traffic on these rural roads is very bad. Please don't make it worse. And M.D. Williamson wishes not to speak but he offers support, Then I have a card from Paul Berry. He's one of the owners. Is he present? Would you like to speak? MR. BERRY: My name is Paul Berry and I am the owner of the south portion there. My address is P.O. Page 132 Box 101, Mena, Arkansas. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. MR. BERRY: I did live on this property for 20 years, but, like I say, I am now living out of state. Y'all seem to be spending some time talking about mobile homes. This property and all the property in that 30 acre group and back behind there is deed restricted from mobile homes. You couldn't put a mobile home in there if you wanted to. And -- but I do wish to express my opposition. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Question for staff for my education. Doesn't zoning supersede deed restrictions? MR. POWELL: No. The way it works is whichever is more restrictive. So in the case of a deed restriction that didn't allow mobile home parks but was allowed in zoning, you still couldn't do it. We wouldn't enforce that deed restriction but if it was valid, you could enforce it by private means. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Berry. COMMISSIONER MULROY: I have a question. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy has a question for you, sir. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes, sir. Thank you Page 129- Page 132 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 CondonscltTM Page 133 for coming down. My question is prior to the adoption of 1 the Development Code, what was the zoning on this 2 property? 3 MR. BERRY: Oh, that was something else 4 that I meant to address. Until I got this notice, I was 5 still under the assumption that all that was unzoned. I 6 was never notified when the zoning was changed previously. 7 So if I ever g~ any acceptance for these two notices on 8 this issue, if I ever get any notice on hearings regarding 9 this property, it has always been after the meeting and 10 after the decision has been made. And I didn't know at 11 all when it was changed to NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER MULROY: But previous to that, 13 to your knowledge, it was zoned Agricultural then? 14 MR. BERRY: Agricultural or unzoned or 15 something. 16 Page 135 and let's say'you had an old sF-7 and we're trying to take you to ~,m-l,well, shame on us. But that's really not the case. It's always been Ag. The policy was to assign it some zoning and we're just making that adjustment. So we're really not trying to take away something that you've had. MR. BERRY: But yOU are. But you are. COMMISSIONER MIJLROY: well, see, my comment COMMISSIONER MULROY: And how long have you owned it? MR. BeP, aY: Probably about 25, 26 years. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. In all those times, you never had any intention or made any attempt to upzone it to two or three or four houses an acre? Mit. BERRY: NO. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. So, see, what's transpired, we've gone -- where unzoned land was to you would be then these 20 years, did you ever come forward to try to upzone it? MR. BERRY: NO, but still you're taking something away. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, but it's something you didn't have. MR. BERRY; NO) because I still had the land, I still have the land. Page 134 carded as Ag, we've assigned it the low end possibility as NR-I, NR-2. And really you never had NR-2, yOU had Ag. And we're trying to sustain the 'rural flavor of that area. We want to redesignate it as NP,-1 which is less dense and more rural. MR. BERRY: I never, I never -- well, I own it -- entertain this idea but yet I don't want to tie my hands behind my back. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I understand. I want to refresh our collective memory. One, it was originally Ag. It was assigned NR-2 during the Code 12 adoption. And in reflection -- 13 MR. BERRY: BUt I didn't know that. 14 COMMISSIONER MULROY: -- that NRq would 15 have been mom appropriate. So it's not that someone is 16 taking something away that you've had for 20 years. It is 17 attempting by this body to correct an oversight. When the 18 Code was adopted, rather than having the least dense, NR-2 19 was assigned rather than NR-1. In viewing the 20 neighborhood, we viewed it as very rural and the previous 21 makeup of tiffs body initiated the changes to go to Na-1 22 which would be our lowest designation or least dense. 23 So I just want to make it clear that these 24 deliberations have already been undertaken and it's not 25 that you had -- if you had made any effort over 20 years 17 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONE~ APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Berry. 19 Is them anyone else who wishes to address the Commission 20 in regards to this Agenda item? 21 MR. REICHHART: I was just asked a question 22 in the audience and as a point of clarification I just 23 want to point out to remind everybody that Agricultural 24 zoning has a one-acm limit development similar to the 25 NR4. someone asked me that, regarding that question. Page 13 6 2 3 4 5 6 situation 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Watkins. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Just as a matter of information, and you possibly can't answer this question, but this didn't change actually or did it change the tax on the property when we went from Ag to this? MR. REICHHART: NOs sir. ?LANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 8 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: I mean, they may 9 have seen an increase but that was because alt of Denton 10 County, I suppose, went up. 11 MR. REICHHART: That's correct. 12 COMMISSIONER WATK~NS: BUt it would be the 13 same. Okay. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Is there anyone else 1 $ who wants to address this Agenda item? Seeing no one 16 coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing. 17 Commissioner Mulroy. 18 COMMISSIONER MULROY: That was the que, 19 right? No. I think I've already given my mini lecture 20 but in view that we had undertaken the deliberations as 21 I've stated, I'm going to remain consistent and make the 22 motion to approve as presented. Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a 24 motion on the table. The motion dies for lack of a 25 second. Commissioner Roy. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 133 - Page 136 Cond_~n solt TM 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 137 COMMISSIONER ROY: we did have a lot of discussion about this area but I think I was under the assumption, I wont along with the discussion under the assumption that the property owners would be happy to have this changed. So it's obvious that in this particular case the property owners are not happy to have this changed so I move denial of this. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: We have a motion and a second to deny. Any discussion? I have one polut of discussion only because I was just tolally not present at that moment. I was thinking of something else. And I would have seconded Commissioner Mulroy's motion. And for Page 139 1 property. However, we do live in a City. And sometimes 2 ii' you want to 'be -- if you would like to own a piece of 3 property that nobody can tell you what to do, perhaps you 4 ought to buy that piece of property that is further away 5 from file City than these parcels are. These parcels are 6 in the City. So, anyway, I do support this mainly 7 because that was already there. Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Lewis. 9 Tom McMurray. 10 MR. MCMURR~Y: Tom McMurray, 1800 Wickwood, 11 City of Denton. This piece of property is not unhke the 12 other piece o? property that y'all just discussed which 13 was the other parcel, there was two parcels in the one that, I apologize. I will be voting against the motion. Any discussion? Vote, please. Motion passes 5-2. (Commissioners Mulroy and Apple voted in Opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: NeXt iS Agenda Item 31, a public hearing considering rezonlng 21 acres on Fort Worth Drive, south of Hamilton and north of Brush Creek. Ms. Speer will present and I'll open the public hearing. MS. SPEER: oood evening once again. Agenda Item No. 31, as Commissioner Apple had stated, is approximately 21 acres. The same situation down to the 14 tract. However, this one is a lot longer. And it is -- 15 being a Denton resident now for a long time, this is 16 exactly what gives us a bad name in the neighborhood is 17 that it's agricultural which is one-acre lot minimums and 18 then we come in and make a mistake as a City and now we 19 can't stand up and say we made a mistake and do the right 20 thing. Okay. We're telling you wc would tike to see it 21 done r~ght so it's in conformity with the whole area. 22 Just because of the Hills of Argyle was 23 done right} because that was an oversight and we had to 24 come down and tel1 y'all how to do that. Now we're not 25 going to get this done right. You need to vote for this Page 138 1 zoning of Residential Neighborhood 2 to Neighborhood 2 Residential 1. This particular case, I do have one owner 3 opposition and I have one owner in favor. However, the 4 opposition is right at 20 percent so the super-majority 5 rule will be required at City Council. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 7 Commissioner Powell. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Is it safe to assume 9 the white area is the third owner that has not spoken? 10 MS. SPEER: Correct. 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I have several cards 13 for this Agenda item, also. Mr. Williamson does not wish 14 to speak but he wishes to express support. Carol Haesle 15 is not available to speak but she does express support. 16 Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wants to t7 express support. Chris Mellherg is not available to speak 18 but does wish to express support. Bill Lewis, ii' you'll 19 give your name and address, please. 20 MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek 21 Road. I support this zoning change. To me, it just makes 22 sense because it matches what's already them. That's the 23 main reason that I support it. I appreciate people not 24 being want -- not liking to be told how to run their .25 business, especially when it comes to using their own Page 140 1 to be NR4. There's still no sewer there. It's still the 2 same arguments. You're going to have to have development. 3 I understand there's a difference in zoning and platting. 4 The difference is that it needs to he in conformity with 5 the rural area. And I can't emphasize it enough, I like 6 the landowners. I'm a landowner. Got lots of land other 7 than this land. But this land right hem needs to be in 8 conformity with the area and the other citizens in it. 9 You have all those people that you mentioned awhile ago 10 that were for it. They all live out there. So it's like 11 the whole people are saying we need you to back up what 12 the City of Denton says. I understand the landowners may 13 or may not be for it. Here we've got one that's for it. 14 But you need to do what's right for the area, please. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Mr. Larry 16 MeGehee. 17 MR. MCGEHEE: My name is Larry McGehee. I 18 live at 200 t Cl~ristina Court, Denton, Texas. I'm almost 19 breathless after this last vote. You know, it's like a 20 guy gees in a bank to make a deposit for $100.00 and he 21 finds some money in a bag and somehow that money becomes 22 his. This land has hccn zoned AgricultUral forever, one 23 acre. These people have never been down here before you 24 asking for it to be two houses per acre. There's no sewer 25 llne. And there's some kind of thought that people should PLANNING AND ZON1NG COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 137 - Page 140 CondenscItTM Page 141 1 profit from mistakes and this was a mistake. But nobody 2 wants to take away the right for someone to capitalize on 3 a mistake that the City has made. Now, I'm a property 4 owner. Iown 17 houses in this City. I've lived here 31 5 years. And to stand here and see people vote to allow 6 mistakes, I can't believe it. I'm sorry. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 8 there anyone else who wishes to speak to this item? 9 Seeing no one coming forward, I'll close the public t0 hearing. Commissioner Roy. 11 COMMISSIONER ROY: I wanted to ask a 12 question of staff. Is the landowner who is in opposition, 13 is that landowner here? 14 MS. SPEER: That is Bill and Joyce Keenis 15 and I don't believe we have a card from them. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question of staff before you get away. Excuse me, Madam Chairman. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 143 1 body or the City to do it unless there is a tremendous 2 greater good. And I don't see a tremendous greater good 3 to make this particular change. I agree that it's not a 4 major issue. It's not a major change. But we discussed 5 it on the basis that this is something that the landowners 6 wanted to do, and that has not been the case. 7 Now, in this particular piece of property 8 there is I would say a significant piece of this one that 9 percentage-wise it's kind of overwhelnfing either in favor 10 or no comment. So I don't particularly feel strongly 11 about this one as opposed to the last one in which 100 12 percent of the property owners did not want to make the 13 change. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS, With all 16 respect to my fellow Commissioners, my recollection was in 17 our discussions that perhaps because of time constraints, 18 due consideration wasn't given to this section of this next? Thank you. How big is the red property? MS. SPEER: The red property, I believe they have -- COMMISSIONER POWELL: I mean, approximately. Is it two acres? MS~ SPEER: About 15 acres, I think. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Got yOU. Thank you. Page 142 t 9 quadrant, this lower quadrant section of town. And we 20 reviewed it and we had that discussion of the Ag and 21 ~m-2, that ~4R-t was most appropriate generally for this 22 whole area. That it would, in fact, protect the majority 23 of the landowners. 24 I don't think, with all respect, I can't 25 recall that it was ever put forward that a specific Page 144 1 Ms. SPEER: I'm sorry. That's wrong. It's 2 about five acres. 3 COMMISSIONF31 POWELL: SO the gll~B property 4 would be 15 or more acres. Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mukoy. 6 COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I'm going to 7 stay consistent. I'm ready to move approval. And I 8 remind you that, again, part of our discussion was that we 9 were looking at blanket taking it back to ~4R-t. And 10 people that wanted to do sometlfing, desired to do 11 something more dense could come and make the case with 12 their specifics in mind and we would be open to that. 13 Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: second. Discussion? 15 Ihavejust a comment. I'm still Igness sorter 16 perplexed and fascinated by the fact that this body t7 brought these rezonings forward. And rm not sure if 18 there are lapses in the work sessions that we had and the 19 issues that were discussed or what, but I'm confused and 20 amazed. Cormnissloner Roy. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: I am not confused and 22 amazed because at the work session it was made clear to mo 23 that this was sucfioned from the landowners and people who 24 lived in the area. And if the landowner does not want to 25 make this change, I don't feel it's appropriate for this 1 landowner of a specific plot was advocating this. No, 2 tiffs was initiated from P&Z solely and that we were 3 recognizing, a mistake may be too hash of a word, but 4 let's say not enough time in judgment in assigning tho 5 zonings when the Code was adop~d. And we hashed it over 6 and it was our consensus that t~a-~ would have been more 7 appropriate for this area and that's why we initiated it. 8 So in that sense, Mr. McG~hee is fight, the 9 net result was - is correcting the mistake. And I'll 10 reiterate and I was the one that spoke up and said, well, ~ 11 if someone comes, because I know there's some lqR-4 that 12 we're taking down, and that if they como back and say this 13 is what I want to do. Here's my amenities. Here's my 14 entranceways, et cetera, et cetera, that we'd give it the 15 fullest consideration when we had specifics. But in thc 16 meantime, in the interim, to go back to closest to Ag that 17 we can. I mean, that's my best recollection of the 18 discussion. That's why we've initiated it. Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 20 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Help me out her~. 21 How did we decide th~ configuration of this piece of 22 property to be rezoned? I saw a map earlier that showed 23 all these pieces. How do you figure this one as opposed 24 to another one or why weren't they all together7 Help me 25 out here. Why did you make the split right here? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 141 - Page 144 CondcnseltTM Page 145 1 MS. SPEER: AS far as I know, the split is 2 made simply by proximity. This is already NR-I. Then you 3 had the two parcels of NR-2, you had this NRMU section 4 that was rezoned a couple of years ago independently. 5 Then you have Brush Creek which divides these two 6 properties. This one is NR-2. And it didn't make sense 7 to have these two together because this one is NR-4. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That. answered my 9 question. Thank you very much. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Just to kind of weigh 11 in on that, that may be true that that was the logic for 12 it. But in our discussions my memory is the same as 13 Commissioner Muh-oy's, that we actually brought these up :14 because there were actually some oversights in this map. il 5 And I have no recollection of it being any landowners. It 16 was just a discussion amongst us at a work session and it 17 was -- the NR-4 which you're basing the NR-2 on seemed to 18 be a mistake, also. 19 And I will use the word mistake because I 20 actually was told that, that it was a mistake. 21 Especially when just across the street with a railroad 22 running through it is zoned NR-2. So if the NR-2 Was 23 based on the fact that it was between an NR-4, which was a 24 mistake, and an NRMU which had a very specific reason for 25 being an NRMU, that was a long going case and a very Page 146 1 particular parcel of land, you really can't use that 2 rationale for determining that that makes sense there. 3 MS. SPEER: I think we're addressing two 4 different questions. I think he just wondered why they 5 were stuck together the way they were, thc different 6 tracts. Why, you know, this owner is in favor but this 7 one opposes. Why are those three together as one case? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. I thought 9 he was asking you how they ended up with the des[gnat[om 10 that they ended up with. 11 MS, SPEER: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Either way I'm 13 satisfied with the answer. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Thanks. 15 Commissioner Johnson. 16 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: This is an 17 interesting chart. Is that NR-6 on there correct? 18 MS. SPEER: Yes, sir. 19 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: well, why are we not 20 talking about that NR-6 then? 21 MS. SPEER: It'S a railroad and a 22 right-of-way. See, everything around here, I mean, 23 everything is eTJ. ~ll of thc white is ETJ. Only the 24 yellow is what's zoned and we are actually -- 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: what about south of PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION the NR-4 that's shown here? there. Page 147 1 2 3 4 5 6 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: But the way it's 7 drawn, it would look like it's NR-6. 8 MS. SPEER: It'S not. The color is hard, 9 the yellow is hard to discern from the green. 10 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. And one more 11 question. The ETJ there that is just between what is now 12 NR-2 and what is now NR-1 -- 13 MS. SPEER: Right here? 14 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yeah. Has not been 15 annexed by the City yet, right? 16 MS. SPEER: Correct. 17 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: SO what is the 18 requirements on who can build what in there? 19 MS. SPEER: AS far as I understand in the 20 ETJ -- larry's going to come talk. 21 MR. REICHHART: Any development in our 22 Division 1 ETJ that's approximately tttree and a half miles 23 from the City of which that area falls into, land use -- 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. We have a 25 point of order because we are actually getting off on MS. SPEER: That's also NR-2. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It's NR-2? MS. SPEER: uh-hllh, along the right-of-way Page 148 1 another issue rather than we have a motion and a second on 2 the table and Legal has advised me that we are addressing 3 an issue that's not germane. 4 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I don't remember a 5 motion and a second. Am I wrong? 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mu[roy 7 made the motion and I made the second, 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I'm sorry. Thank 9 you. 10 COMMISSIONF_,R APPLE: we have a motion and a 11 second. Any mom discussion on the motion and the second? 12 Vote, please. 13 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Can you restate the 14 motion just so we're sure what we're voting on? 1 $ COMMISSIONER APPLE: Certainly. 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 COMMISSIONER M[JLROY: ! move approval as 18 submitled. 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That was move to approve? 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: HO moved approval as submitted and I seconded. Vote, please. Motion carries 6-1. (Commissioner Johnson voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: Moving onto our final SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 145 -Page t48 Cond~nscltTM t item, public hearing No. 32. Again, I'll open the 2 public hearing and Ms. Spear will present. 3 MS. SPE~: oood evening once again. This 4 particular item is a little bit different from our 5 previous four areas. This area is currently a 43.7 acm 6 site. It's the strip along 377 south of Brush Creek. 7 This strip is currently zoned Neighborhood Residential 4. 8 It's being requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission 9 to go to Neighborhood Residential 2. I have 15 acres of 10 opposition here, 15 acres of opposition, 20, 15 acres 11 here, and one home here and one neutral home. So I have 12 about 85, 90 percent opposition on this particular case. 13 Super-majority vote will be required at City Council. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question. 16 COMMissIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 17 COMMISSIONER POWELL: when was this zoned 18 ~m.47 was this in the major rezoning or was this some 19 other time? And if it was in the major rezoning, why did 20 they plunk an t~R-4 there? Does anybody know? Can anybody 21 help me? 22 COMMISSIONF.~ APPLE: Mr. Powell. 23 ~. POWELL: If i may. This one is the one 24 that comes closest to the mistake word or oversight. The 25 majority of that property was in a Po and the eD had Page 150 i several variations and then it was finally hard zoned, the 2 back portion of thc property but not the front part. And 3 so if I believe the old PD had 16,000 square foot lots 4 really didn't match up with NR-4. SO it doesn't match 5 what was there prior to February 20th or February this 6 year. Now it's been upzoned since that time. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I~t me add onto that 8 question then for Mr. Powell. If it doesn't match the 9 NR-4 that it was given, what did it match to? What would 10 have been a match? 11 MR. POWELL: I believe the NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 14 COMMISSIONER WATKn~S: Thank you. I assume 15 if it's NR-4 that there's no utilities there and so there 16 will be nothing built there; is that correct? Doesn't it 17 take a one-acre site for a septic? 18 MR. PowELL: Yes. If I may, there is a 19 sewer that does run down through this area, kind of 20 bisecting it. So there is sewer. There is water. So 21 unlike the properties to the north, this one it doesn't 22 have sewer there but it's close. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Again, we 24 have -- did you have a question? 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I have another Page 149 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 .22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ,20 21 22 23 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION question. Powell. Page 151 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Commissioner COMMISSIONER POWELL: would that be a City of Argyle sewer? It's not a City of Denton sewer, is it? MR. POWELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yes, sir, what.'? MR. POWELL: City Of' Dellton sewer. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thatlk you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a number of cards again who wish to speak in support of this. Mr. Williamson doesn't want to speak but wishes support. Carol Haesle in support. Sandra Lewis checked I wish to speak on this item. No? Okay. Hard to tell once both of them are checked. But she is in support. Chris Mellberg is in support. Bill Lewis. MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek Road. We do support this issue. That is what is already there. The other issues here are that this is an environmentally sensitive area. You've heard a lot from us already on this property and i'm here to reiterate. Thank you for what you've done in the past to help protect that area. Making it NR-2 will help protect it some more, also. Page 152 There has also been some discussion, maybe it's differences of opinion about where the floodplain is out there. However, there is some floodplain out there. I think we can agree on that. As far as more general zoning issues go, I think that the possible strategy that some cities try to use is that the closer you are to the core of tho City, that's where higher densities occur. As you get further out away from the City, that's where the lower densities are. This is about as far away as you can get from Denton and still bc in Denton. And I think that pretty well summarizes my thoughts on this issue. I'll take any questions. COMMISSIONER APPLE: ?hank you. Tom McMurray. MR. MCMURRAY: Just in support. You've heard my arguments. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Larry McOehcc, MR. MCGEItEE: My name is Larry McGeh~e. I live at 2001 Ckfistina Court in Denton, Texas. My faith has been restored. We had one person found the money and got out of here but the rest of the money has been returned to the citizens. Thank you. This one is the biggest mistake that we're looking at tonight. NR-4 makes no sense. In fact, it ought to be ~m-t. t don't know how SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 149- Page 152 CondensoltTM Page 153 Page 155 1 we're going to NR-2 but that is what we're trying to do 1 2 here, right? NR-4toNR-2? well, I'min favor of that. 2 3 Thank you for your last vote. 3 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 4 5 anyone else who wishes to address this item? Seeing no 5 6 one coming forward, I'll close the public hearing. 6 7 Commissioner Mulroy. 7 8 COMMISSIONER MULROY: I'm going to move 8 9 approval. 9 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Second. 10 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: A question of staff. 11 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy is 12 13 13 prior to you. 14 COMMISSIONER ROY: I just wish that 14 15 somebody had explained this in more detail to the 5 16 landowners. Here we have another case of 85 percent .6 17 roughly opposition. You can argue about how we got here I7 18 but the fact is we are here at NR-4 and the landowners who 18 19 own this property don't want to change it, 85 percent of 19 20 them don't want to change it. And I'm just really 20 21 struggling with this, this whole concept, 21 22 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 22 23 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you, ma'am. 23 24 That was not to get attention. That was getting over a 24 25 cold. Staff, a question. The owners who are in 25 Page 154 i opposition, did they make any attempt to get here? 2 There's nobody in opposition here and that bothers me. 3 MS. SPEER: If I can be blunt, they're 4 coming to City Council. The owners, the opposition on 5 this site has plans for this site and owns this land, they 6 will be at City Council. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own what land? 8 MS. SPEER: They own this property. 9 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own the NR-2, as 10 well as the NR-4. 1 MS. SPEER: correct. This part. 2 COMMISSIONER POWELL: okay. But they own 13 all of the NR-2 beh/nd it, to the east of it? 14 MS. SPEER: 1 believe they do own all of 15 it. They even own the vacant lot up here. 16 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy. 18 COMMISSIONER ROY: One question. That 19 vacant lot on the NR-i up there, they were not in 20 opposition to. that? 21 MS. SPEER: correct. They sent in a letter 22 for favor of that. 23 COMMISSIONER ROY; Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion and a 25 second to approve. Any more discussion? Vote, please. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Motion can'[es 5-2. (Commissioners Roy and Powell voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: That ends our Agenda items. And if there's no further business, we are adjourned. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 153 - Page 155 S 5Our Documents~Ordinances~02~Z02-0039.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 2 (NR-2) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 1 (NR- 1) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 19.69 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED AT FORT WORTH DRIVE NORTH OF BRUSH CREEK ROAD LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING A PORTION OF A TRACT IN ABSTRACT 1164 IN THE J. SEVERE SURVEY, AND ABSTRACT 160 IN THE B.B.B. & C.R.R. SURVEY IN THE DEED TO ORAN E. MONROE RECORDED IN VOLUME 429, PAGE 247 DEED RECORDS AND BEING A PORTION OF A TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO WILLIAM L. FRYE & MARILYN J. FRYE RECORDED BY COUNTY CLERK NUMBER 94-R00082319, REAL PROPERTY RECORDS AND BEING A PORTION OF A TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO BILLY ROYCE KENAS RECORDED IN VOLUME 981, PAGE 737, DEED RECORDS IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0039) WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a change in zoning for approximately 19.69 acres of land being legally described as being a portion of a tract in abstract 1164 in the J. Severe survey, and Abstract 160 in the B.B.B. & C.R.R. Survey in the deed to Oran E. Monroe recorded in volume 429, page 247 deed records and being a portion of a tract of land described in deed to William L. Frye & Marilyn J. Frye recorded by county clerk number 94 - r00082319, real property re cords and being a portion of a tract of land described in deed to Billy Royce Kenas recorded in volume 981, page 737, deed records, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made part hereof by reference (the "Property") from Neigh borhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR-1) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval to change the zoning to Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR- 1); and WHEREAS, the City has received written protests pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Section 211.006, which requires a three quarter vote by the City Council to change the zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby changed from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 1 (NR- 1) zoning district classification and use and such zoning change has been passed by a three quarter vote of the City Council. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning S :~Our Documents~Ordinm~ces~02~Z02-0039.doc district classification. SECTION 3. 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 SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. 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 Demon Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Demon, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 19.69 Acres of Land All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in the County of Denton, State of Texas, and being part of the J. Severe Survey, Abstract Number 1164, and being part of the B.B.B. & C.R.R. Survey, Abstract Number 160, and being a portion of a certain called tract of land described in the deed to Oran E. Monroe recorded in Volume 429, Page 247 Deed Records, DeNon County, Texas and being a portion of a certain called tract of land described in the deed to William L. Frye & Marilyn J. Frye ~ecorded by County Clerk file number 94-R00082319, Real Property Records, DeNon County, Texas and being a portion of a certain called tract of land described in the deed to Billy Royce Kenas recorded in Volume 981, Page 437 Deed Records, Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows: BEING only the area of those certain called tracts of land located within the present City limits line established by Ordinance 69-40 iii, City of Denton, DeNon County, Texas: BEGiNNiNG at a poim in the existing U.S. 377 East Right-of-way line and being the Northwest property comer of said Billy Royce Kenas tract; THENCE East along the North boundary line of said Billy Royce Kenas tract a distance of 509 feet more or less to a poim on the East boundary of the current City limits line established by said Ordinance; THENCE Southwest along the East boundary line of the currem City limits line established by said ordinance and passing the South boundary line of said Billy Royce Kenas tract also being the North boundary line of said William L. Frye & Marilyn J. Frye tract then passing the South boundary line of said William L. Frye & Marilyn J. Frye tract also being the North boundary line of said Oran E. Monroe tract a distance of 1,985 feet more or less to a point on the South boundary line of said Oran E. Monroe tract. THENCE West along the South boundary of said Oran E. Monroe tract a distance of 344 feet more or less to a point for a for a comer; THENCE Northwest along a South boundary line of said Oran E. Monroe tract a distance of 109 feet more or less to a poim for a comer on the East Right-of-way line of said U.S. 377; THENCE Northeast along the West boundary line of said Oran E. Monroe tract a distance of 1065 feet more or less to a poim for a comer and being the Southwest comer of said William L. Frye & Marilyn J. Frye tract; THENCE North 28 Degrees 14 Minutes 33 Seconds East, along the East Right-of-way of said U.S. 377 and passing the Northwest comer of said William L. Frye & Marilyn J. Frye tract also being the Southwest comer of said Billy Royce Kenas tract a distance of 813.53 feet to the POINT OF BEGiNNiNG and containing in all 19.69 acres of land more or less. Exhibit A Z02-0039 (Northeast 377 and Brush Creek Road) NORTH LOCATION MAP Item #5E AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349- 8314 SUBJECT - Z02-040 (SE 377 & Brush Creek) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 43.7 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) to a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district. The nine tracts are generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Brush Creek. No development is proposed at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-2). BACKGROUND Applicant: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton, Texas The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have nine tracts of land, totaling approximately 43.7 acres, rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) to a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district. The zoning of this area was initially raised as an issue when the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Future Zoning map, specifically the southwest quadrant of the city. The Commission began to question the appropriateness of the zoning in the area based on the old zoning and the current land uses. Also, this issue was raised during the first Quarterly Review of the Development Code. The zoning of this area was one of the issues City Council instructed the Planning and Zoning Commission to review. The Commission reviewed this issue during several worksessions and voted unanimously to rezone the property on June 26, 2002. In worksessions, the Commission spent a great deal of time in discussing the issue of land use and zoning of this area and how the existing zoning came into place. At the time verbatim minutes of worksessions were not kept and therefore are not available for inclusion in the back up. However, a summary of the meeting discussion was provided in a separate memo. The public hearings before the Commission were supposed to be held on August 28, 2002 but had to be postponed due to notification errors. This delay resulted in the cases not being heard until September 25, 2002, at which time the make-up of the Commission had changed. The staff reports to the Commission were brief and did not contain the detail and history of this area. The elapsed time (3 months) between the worksessions and the public heating, and the minimum backup in the staff reports contributed to the confusion reflected in the public heating minutes. This request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, an analysis is provided for in the Staff Analysis (Attachment 1). Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing, staff has received three opposing responses from property owners of the subject site, therefore a supermajority vote (6-1) by City Council will be required to approve this rezoning. Staff has also received one favorable response from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval, 5-2 (Powell and Roy opposed). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject properties are not platted. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology of Z02-0040, commonly known as SE 377 and Brush Creek: Application Date - DRC Date - Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - No Neighborhood meeting was held July 23, 2002 August 1, 2002 September 25, 2002 FISCAL INFORMATION No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A Prepared by: Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: AICP Director of Planning and Development for ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a request to have nine tracts of land totaling approximately 43.7 acres be rezoned from its current Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) to a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district. The request was initiated in an effort to maintain the rural setting of surrounding areas. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Planned Development 118 (PD-118) The subject property currently contains single-family homes and agricultural uses. Adjacent zoning: North: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district-single-family homes/agricultural South: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district -single-family home/agricultural East: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district -single-family homes /agricultural West: Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) -single- family homes Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located within a "Neighborhood Centers" future land use area. These areas may develop in conventional patterns or may be developed in a pattern of 'neighborhood centers'. Neighborhood centers are oriented inwardly, focusing on the center of the neighborhood and containing facilities vital to the day-to-day activity of the neighborhood. A neighborhood center might contain a convenience store, small restaurant, personal service shops, church or synagogue, daycare, individual office space, a small park and perhaps an elementary school. The Denton Plan identifies the following Primary Residential Land Use Principles: Preserve Neighborhoods: achieved by demanding and evenly applied. (page 35) The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be establishing design and construction standards that are fair and Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in Denton by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density development where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning would serve to preserve the rural setting in this area and maintain the existing neighborhood as called for by the Denton Plan under "Neighborhood Centers" classification. Sprawl is characterized by low residential density housing, which the proposed zoning would create. TNs is not desirable according to the Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation A traffic impact analysis is not required. Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Fort Worth Drive. Fort Worth Drive is identified as a primary major arterial by the Denton Mobility Plan. The future surrounding road system may not be compatible with this type of development. Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zonin~ Analysis Current NR-4 zoning allows for single-family homes with a maximum of four (4) units per acre. The proposed Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning would allow two (2) dwelling unit per acre. Staff Findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan in regards to compatibility and preservation of surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed zoning change would provide for a diversity of housing stock. 3. The proposed zoning change may not be compatible with the mobility plan for this area. 4. The proposed zoning change would facilitate sprawl, which is not desired by the Denton Plan. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map ETJ ETJ ETJ LOCATION MAP Scale: None Mobility Map NORTH r~ I p,I I RFI'3 MOBILITY MAP .;",. ,,' Mobili~collector ~ Freeway ~'~ Prim ar~ Major Alternate ~\~/~,~ Primar-f Major Arterial ,?~i;4;~ Secondar~ Major Alternate ~*'~?' ge¢onda~ Major Arterial FUTURE dot Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map 500' Notifi Scale: None Public Notification Date: August 15 & September 12, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 7 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 3 (3 owners) · In Favor: 1 · Neutral: 1 (owner) Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0 % Owner Opposition: Greater than 20% *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ! Property Owner Responses John David Monroe Favor 7655 Fort Worth Drive Argyle, Texas 76226 Dr. Hugh Pruett Opposed 4024 Pruett Lane (Owner) Argyle, Texas 76226 Morelle Miller Opposed "1 believe my property is included in the "site". 1811 Bolivar (Owner) There are four houses in a row- mine is the last Denton, Texas 76201 one (yellow). If it is in the site it would violate NR- 2. I suppose the grandfather clause would except it, but I would rather be in compliance." Carmen Investments Opposed See attached letter 500 Denton Tap Road, (Owner) Coppell, Texas 75019 Linda McGalliard Neutral "My husband, Thomas McGalliard, and I do have PO Box 994 (Owner) some concerns about how the land around us Argyle, Texas 76226 may be developed. This zone change as we understand it will change the number of houses allowed per acre. I called and asked questions and Autumn Speer very kindly answered them. At this time we do not have any major objection to the rezoning." David Yoder Favor See Attached Letter 940 Brush Creek Road Argyle, Texas 76226 Henry and Lona Wolfe Favor See Attached Letter 4801 Argyle Lane Argyle, Texas 76226 Richard and Gina Favor See Attached Letter Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 Dennis and Sharon Cox Favor See Attached Letter 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, Texas 76226 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 NOT]:¢E OF PUBL.i:¢ HEAR]:NG Z02-0040 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning nine tracts of land totaling approximately 43.7 acres generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Brush Creek, from a Neighborhood Residential 4 zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district (see map on back). The property is legally described as Tracts 1, 2, 3, 3A, 4, 4A, 5, 5A, and 5B in Abstract 0586A, W,M. Hudson Survey, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. Note: Only responses from those properties located inside the dty limits of Denton will be included for opposition. The public hearing will start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Coun¢it Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas, Because you own property within Nlo hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear I~ow you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Pk order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior the hearing. (Thi~ in no way prohibits you from attending and participating in the tp°ubii-~L~~~ number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attm Autumn Spear, Planner l The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities involvement and comment, Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public, heating is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is fom/arded to the City Council for final act[on providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request tO the City Council. If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. Please circle one: in favor of request Neutral to request Reasons forOppositio . ~. ~ ~ ~ Printed Name: C~ ~~/~. ~, /~,//r~ Mailing Address: / ~G'// ~ Telephone Number: f_.//~¢ '"'..-¢,¢'~7'~/~¢~''''/ ¢/ Physic_,al Address of Property within 200 feet: I~ ~)._~ ~' CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS iz, CITY HALL WEST ' DENTON, TEXAS 7620~ · ¢4D.349.8350 · (F) 948.34g.7707 Z02.0040 200'No,ce 26 02 05:56p HUGH & SPINDRR PRUETT 940-4SS-2~27 00/27/2082 17:01 9~046~3745 R£~d. £ST~TE STATION No'r CE OF PUBLIC' HEAR]:N The Planning and Zoning Commission o! the City of Denton ~ilJ hold a public headng on W~n~y, A~usl 28, Z~2, to c~siOer razzing ~ine ~ac~ of land totaling approximately 43.7 a~es generally lo.ted on Foal Woffh Drive sou~h of 8r~h Creek. from a Neighbo~ Residential 4 (NR~) zoni~ disldct to a Ne~hbor~d Res~en~l 2 (NR-2) zoning district (see map on back). The pmpe~ legal~ ~3cribed as Tracl$1,2, 3, 3A, 4, 4A, 5, SA, and 5B in Abst~ct 0585A, W.M. Huason 5u~ey, the C~ty of Denton. Denton ~unly, Texas. No development is ~ropos~ at this time. Note: Only those pmpe~es ~t~ inside the city limits ef Denton will receive th~s The public hearing will s~ at 7:00 p.m. tn the City Coun~l Cham~m o~ City Halt I~ted at 215 E. McK~ney St[~t, Denton, Te~. Because y~ own pro~dy w~in ~0 hundred (200) feet of subject p~e~y, the Planning and Zoning Commiss~n would like to hear how ~u feel about this zoning change ~guest and invite~ you to attend ~e public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion be ~ken into a~unt, mlum ~ fo~ with your c~enls pd~ to ~e da~e of the pubtic hear~g. (Th~s in no way p~hfblt~ you f~ affending a~d padicipating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to number I~le~ at ~e ~om, mail it to t~ address ~low, or drop it off in-~rson: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas T6Z01 Attn: Autumn Spear, Planner I p.! PAG~ 8cJ/14 The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provicle opportunities lot citizen invo(vement and ¢omment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners wilhin lwo hundred (200) feet of the subject propc:~y are notified of the zoning request by way of lhis notice. The f~rst public hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of Ihe percent of re-'.pon¢es in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council t~or final action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the requesl to the City Council. Jf owners of more than twenty (:20) percent of the land area within Iwe hundred (200) feet of the site Submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve ~he zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition, . - Please circle one: ~ In favor of request Neutral to request ~ Opposed to request PrintedName:---"'~'~;~/'Z "-/c//./~-~,,V' .Z"'~. ~)/~/~'~:~Z-~'~' L_. .... ------- Telephone Number: _ . ~~CLUPM/: Physicol Address of Prope~y~ithin 200 feet: ~)~"7'~~._~"~ 0~: ~ ~--~'~F~'/~'~----"''- ........... ' g40 349 835 · (F) 940.34a,??0-~ CiTY OFDENTON. TEXAS C~TY HALL WEST - DEN'TON, YEXA~[ 76201 · . _ .... ,, ,, ~ .... · "".'"' · -.~-~. ~ '"' __ _.~ ~ ...... Sep ~0 02 02:34p FI201~I : C T.House / Blue Pup FRX NO. : 972-q62-78~1 B1 ?-490-9096 September 20, ~002 PianniM: amd Development Departmeut City of Denton, Texas Attn. Autumn Speer 1~.* Zon[]q~ Cn~ Z02~0~40 Dear M& Spc~c Cameo bJvestmeots, ]f~ h abe owner of ~m~ of the pr~y I~lud~ in thia p~d ~onl~ ~m ~ to ~K-2. Weoppo~ thk pmp~cd Thank you for your notification aad conddcrat~ou. 500 0ENTON TAP ROAD · SUITE 106 · COPPELL, TEXAS?$0'I9 · 4S2-1723 Sep ~0 02 02:33p T.House / Blue Pup 817-490-~096 p.! SiTE LC(~ATiCN ~1~ Z02-0040 BUFFER BUFFEI CITY OI~DENTON, TEXAS Ct'FY HALLWEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 - (F") 940.349.7707 Z02-0040 200' No~ice S~p 2~ 02 03:16p SOUTH~ST ~OULDI~G ~0~79209~ p.! NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z02-0040 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 25, 2002, to consider rezoning nine tracts of land totaling approximately 43.7 acres generally located on Fed Worth Ddve south of Brush Creek, from a Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district (see map on back). The property is legally described as Tracts I, 2, 3, 3A, 4, 4A, 5, 5A, and 5B in Abstract 0586A, W.M. Hudson Survey, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. Note: Only responses from those properties located inside the city limits of Denton will be included for opposition. The public headng will start at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hail located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request end invites you to attend the public heating, Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return.this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no way prohibits you from attending and participating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 Attn: Autumn Speer, Planner l The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opporj ~ies for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two h~ ~..~~ ~~ the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is inforrg~j~ responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwardedj~i .~ City final action providing the Commission recommends approval Should the C9/~f~J ;sion,.,eCq~rrkmend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council. If owng/~ ~ more tho"' (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit wrLtl~..~ ~en s[~U~ out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning chahlgeT~~r~e~emrms, are · used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. Please circle one: [n favor of request (~eutral to reques~ Opposed to request ?easons for~ oppo~sitioni,(Y~ t:tqs~ i':'T~u~$ .~---:~11,' .'~..) q~-[._T'do J~u'~ ~*o,'~e_ Printed Name: ~.~v,,~4.~ /.., 11I) L.~<AIt~-A.~ Iq.,.~c,,'~Ar~ -~-cdr' ~'~/ City, State Zip: ~t-c4Vl~ j j /~ .,--/~,~,~L, . kJe..~..~ .~ j~:l.[/a_ ~,vLy' PhysicaiAddress of Prope~within 206feet: ~O~! ~ ~l~ ;~. ~~~ ~ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CiTY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 * 940.349.8350 · (Fl 940.349.7707 Z02-O0,~O 200'Notice NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAI IN Z02-0040 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, August 28, 2002, to consider rezoning nine tracts of land totaling approximatefy 43.7 acres generally located on Fort Worth Drive south of Brush Creek, from a Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district (see map on back). The property is legally described as Tracts 1, 2, 3, 3A, 4, 4A, 5, SA, and 5B in Abstract 0586A, W.M. Hudson Survey, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. No development is proposed at this time. Note: Only those properties located inside the city limits of Denton wili receive this notice. The public hearing will start at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this zoning change request and invites you to attend the public hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to. be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no way prohibits_you_from.attendingand participating in the public hearing.) -You-may fax it to the - 'number.located at the bottom, mail it to.the address below~ or-drop it off in-person: ..... Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 At-tn: Autumn Speer, Planner I The zoning process includes two public hearings designed to provide opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. Prior to the public hearings, landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are notified of the zoning request by way of this notice. The first public hearing is held before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in opposition. Second, the zoning petition is forwarded to the City Council for finat action providing the Commission recommends approval. Should the Commission recommend denial, the petitioner may then appeal the request to the City Council If owners of more than twenty (20) percent of the land area within two hundred (200) feet of the site submit written opposition, then six out of seven votes of the City Council are required to approve the zoning change. These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowner opposition. Please circle one: Neutral to request Opposed to request ............... ReasOnSsignature:fOr Opposition: _ Mailing Address: City, State Zip: Property within 200 feet: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CITY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 Z02-0040 200' Notice September 24, 2002 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Members Mayor and City Council Members Re: Public Hearings on Brush Creek Road and Highway 377 area rezonings ~ am unable to attend the meeting~ but would like my comments on record in support of the zoning changes that are proposed. My wife and ! have lived at 940 Brush Creek Road since 1985. We moved from the City of Denton to this area to get away from the high-density houses and to a less busy, less stressful way of life. We have continued to watch the development of new homes In our area and were comfortable with the quality and density of these homes because they have all maintained the space and openness of the community. We were appalled to see that the new zoning map has changed the zoning along Brush Creek Road to NR 2, which ! understand is 2 homes to an acre of land. That is very scary to those of us who have lived here, are raising families and animals and enjoying our 'country" way of life. ! presume that this zoning would allow my neighbor, if he so chose, to subdivide his 10 acres and put 20 houses next to mine. Please support the change to NR 1 zoning. There are no undeveloped lots along this road and lot sizes range from 2 acres up to 80 acres. The other area that has us very concerned is the NR 4 zoning along the frontage of 377, south of Brush Creek Road, :just around the corner from our home. Who, in all common sense, could envision 4 homes to the acre out here? ! specifically remember Assistant City Manager, Dave Hill, telling us when this new plan was in the beginning stages that properties closer in to town would be denser and as you moved away from town you would have less density, with the least density being in the areas that bordered the ET3, or other towns. We are as far from ~own as you can get. We border Argyle and they, as a town, Just reaffirmed their commitment to keeping a rural, open feel with their new plan. ! just don't see how NR 4 fits. Directly across the highway, land with a railroad track running through it is even zoned less dense - NR 2. We ask that you support the rezoning change to NR 2 for this strip. Please, please take a good look at these and make them compatible for this area. There should not be more than one home, at the most, to an acre in this area. We feel we have already been greatly compromised by the NR 2 designation on the approximately 150 acre tract that is being developed as Country Club Village. We do not want to be downgraded any further. We keep hearin~qv~er,~nd over how the new plan is concerned with preserving and protecting ~l~i~l~~hoeds. Well, ~ preserve and protect us. '! can only hope understand the impact your decision will have on those and so long to build the very unique community we now I~( and~llerish. Thank you for Your time and kind consideration. /~- 940 Brush Creek Read Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Denton City Council and Mayor Re: Support for rezoning requests to less density re Brush Creek Road, Highway 377 and Hills of Argyle area We would 1/kc to respectfully request that a zoning change be seriously considered to correct what must surely be an error in the zoning map. In section L6, in an area where every existing home within a 1.5 mile radius is located on at least an acre, with most homes being on lots of 2 to up to I00 acres, there is a large section of land along Highway 377 designated to be NR-4. That would seem totally incompatible with the promise to "preserve and protect exisisting neighborhoods". The rural atmosphere and the large estate size lots, ARE the existing neighborhood and it is unfathomable that NR- 4 would be seen as a reasonable designation to be "plopped" down in the midst of this. There are other concerns as well, as there is an environmentally sensitive area along one side of this area as well as continuous flooding problems. We request that this area be rezoned to NR-2 to at least accommodate some of our concerns. There is undeveloped land adjoining this area that has been designated as NR-2, and that would seem more appropriate. Also, the land directly behind our home in the Hills of Argyle, along Brush Creek Road, has been designated on the new map as NR-2, which is also totally inconsistent with the surrounding area. To our knowledge, all of the lots on Brush Creek Road from Highway 377 to Highway 1830 are all developed, complete with homes, barns, animals, etc. All of these developed lots are large - about 2 acres up to about 80 acres. Why would you then "overzone" this area as NR-2? Makes no sense to us Please correct these mistakes by approving the rezoning for less density for this area. Sincerely, -, Henry and Lona Wolfe 4801 Argyle Lane Hills of Argyle Argyle, TX 76226 September 25, 2002 To: Denton Plaunln~ and Zoning Commission Re: September 25, 2002, meeting - agenda items 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 We Just recently purchased our dream home at 8001 Woodcreek Circle. We moved here from Piano expressly to get away from the crowded subdivisions and hurried lifestyle. Though we commute to work now, the drive is more than worth the peace and tranq~lity we find when we return home. We researched many area towns and looked at many homes trying to find an area that had estate-size lots and some semblance of nature. A realtor in Dallas actually suggested this area to us aft~, hea~ing our desi~'es and otu' f~ustration in locating what we were looking for. Every surrounding town has subdivision miter subdivision on small Iota or in some cases, on no lot at all !! This arem of Denton is unique in that you can offer large lots, in the midst of natural beauty, and yet be close to town. This area is somethln~ very special. Its uniqueness needs to be preserved. There a~e Hterally hundreds of crowded subdivisions to choose fron~ but extremely few that offer what we have. Please vote in support of the rezonlugs for this area that will help to maintain the wonderful quality of our new life here in your fair city. We will be so disappointed ff this area becomes what we searched for so long to escape from. d and Olna Shanhouse 8001 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 September 24, 2002 Dear Mayor Brock, City Council Members, and Planning and Zoning Commission Members, Please take another look at our neighborhood. We live in a cul-de-sac that was annexed into Denton in the tate 1970's. Our cul-de-sac contains 5 lots, with 4 homes that have been in existence for many years and one unbuilt lot. The 5 lots range in size from 1.022 acres up to 2.003 acres. On the new zoning map, apparently they have now zoned our area to NR 2, or 2 homes to the acre. This puts us in avery precarious position with regard to our wel{-established neighborhood. With this new zoning, the owner of the vacant lot could completely change the character of what we have worked so hard to create - a spacious, rural feel. Another seemingly incongruous zoning is the NR 4 zoning along 377 from Brush Creek Road south, which is located behind our cul-de-sac. This would appear to be better served by an NR 1 or NR 2 zoning and more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood - to one side of the area now zoned NR 4 is a large (50 + acres) cattle farm and to the other side is a large horse farm. Another important consideration is that this area is adjacent to an already threatened environmentaJ[y sensitive area and an area that has had significant flooding problems, which would be exacerbated by higher density. We have also noted that across the street from us (in the as-yet-unannexed area along Brush Creek Road) you have now zoned that area to be NR 2 also, yet those homes are on even Jar§er lots, some 20 to 40 acres and more. Ptease correct these apparent oversights and consider something more approprfate, such as NR f. The future of our neighborhood is at stake. We would appreciate your vote in support of the rezoning for the lower densities which, in turn, is a vote for the integrity of our long-standing neighborhood. Most sincerely, Dennis and Sharon Cox 8008 Woodcreek Circle Argyle, TX 76226 940-243-1122 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs Page 111 2 will take public hearings Nc go through and figure out 3 presentation since they are in the same area and so 3 who got to go to who. There are letters -- letters that ! 4 similar in nature, and then we will vote on them 4 passed out. Four of them are for Woodcreck Circle, four 5 individually. And Ms. Speer with the City planning office 5 of them are letters from the same owners concerning the 6 will present and I'll open the public hearing. 6 whole area. Some of them would apply to other cases as 7 MS. SPEER: Good evening, Comauissioners. 7 far as being in the 200-foot notice. 8 I'm going to do these together as one unit but I'm going 8 COMMISSIONER AVPtn: ~ecause some of them 9 to do each individual one separately, seeing as we have 9 actually address these Agenda items, not the other ones. 10 different forms of opposition. 10 Ms. SeEER: Right. Right. 11 Item Agenda No. 28 is again a Planning 11 COMMISSIONER ~eCE: SO I just want to make 12 and Zoning initiated zoning request. There's five parcels 12 the Commissioners aware to read the letters in the packet 13 of land, approximately 80 acres. The Planning and Zoning 13 because they're stuck behind the wrong Agenda item. Thank 14 Commission has requested they go from a Neighborhood 14 you. Commissioner Johnson has a question. 15 Residential 2 to a Neighborhood Residential 1. As I said, 15 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: AS we go along, 16 there's no opposition on this land. Most of the land is 16 could you indicate because it says in all cases the 17 vacant. There are several small home sites kind of hidden 17 applicant is the City of Denton. Could you tell me if the 18 back in there. 18 owner agrees with the requesteat zoning? 19 This property does have some opposing 19 Ms. senna: i can, That's one reason t 20 issues. In one sense thc idea of maintaining the 20 want to do them separately. In this particular case, I 21 integrity of the rural atmosphere by downzoning this 21 have not received any notification from the owner that 22 property is its -- the goal was achieved. However, the 22 they oppose. This particular 80-acre site, there are five 23 goal of the Denton Plan also is to prevent sprawl. So you 23 separate owners and they were all notified, twice 24 have kind of a catch 22. You have this downzoning which, 24 actually, and I haven't received any opposition from 25 by its nature, the definition of sprawl could facilitate 25 owners on this one.... Page 110 Page 112 1 that. However, it does preserve the neighborhood and 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: And just for 2 maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. 2 clarification purposes, as she announced earlier, the 3 Also another case in question is the 3 Planning and Zoning Commission is actually who initiated 4 Mobihty Plan. On this map I've showed you Country Club 4 this. 5 and Brush Creek, they are on the Mobility Plan. Brush 5 MS. SPEER: correct. 6 Creek is not to standard. It's a secondary -- itrs a 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: That's why it says the 7 primary major arterial. Right now we know that that's not 7 City. But it was actually this body that initiated. 8 what it looks like. So I just -- staff wants to make sure 8 Commissioner Mu[roy. 9 that we're aware of the conflicting items here. We have 9 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS. Thank you. Ms. 10 that the area of the downzoning does preserve the 10 Speer, were you in our work section? I think we had two 11 neighborhood, does provide compatible uses. However, the 11 work sessions dealing with these properties. 12 Mobility Plan and the issue of it could facilitate sprawl 12 MS. SPEER: I don't believe I was here at 13 is something to be considered on all of these cases. This 13 the time, sir, no. 14 one, however, does not have any opposition so it does not 14 COMMISSIONER MLJLROY: okay. So I want to ,15 require super-majority at this point for City Council. 15 take a small liberty to refresh our collective memories 16 The next ease I'll talk about, unless you 16 and perhaps impart some of the background to you. Your 17 want to have questions about this specific one. 17 comments which are repeated in each Agenda item that this 18 COMMISSIONER APPLE: t just want to 18 is kind of counter to the anti-sprawl portions of the Comp 19 interrupt you because I noticed that you stapled all of 19 Plan, that was fully recognized in our work shop. And we 20 these together go they appear that they're for Item 29 20 had -- the consideration was given first to reflecting the 21 when actually they cover all of them. 21 existing neighborhood, there was long-e~tablished homes m 22 MS. srE~: vdght. 22 that really one-acre and larger tradition. 23 COMMISSIOSmt ~PLE: SO I just was 23 Number two, also the Comp Plan wants 24 wondering if you made the Commission aware that these 24 diversified housing. We have many areas of the City that 25 probably shouldn't be stapled together. 25 we're looking at the new urbanization and upping the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 109 - Page 112 CondcnseltTM Page 113 1 density and pedestrian-oriented, et cetera, et cetera. 2 This is one already established area of the City that is 3 more of the larger estate-type lots and so in order to be 4 diversified, we need to have that offering. 5 Number three, on an economic development 6 standpoint, we are losing some potential housings of this 7 type to Argyle because they have an abundance of the 8 larger acreage and we don't. So for this body, in our 9 deliberations and examining in the total context, not just 10 a narrow focus but of all the things you mentioned, 11 evolved the decision that this would be the part of town 12 that we would like to keep this way. So I really want to 13 address -- reflect to your comments that have been 14 repeated here. Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, i 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 MS. SPEER: Are there any further questions 18 on this particular site? I'll continue. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 20 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Did I understand you 21 to say that there were five comers? 22 MS. SPEER: NO, sir. There are five 23 separate tracts of land in this 80-acre parcel. It's 24 totaling 80 acres that's zoned right now, the NR-2, but 25 there's five different tracts. Page 114 1 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: okay. And we're not 2 allowed to know who the owners were or, I mean, it was 3 initiated by the Planning and Zoning, but I see a fellow 4 in the audience that owned a good bit of that property at 5 one time. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, I guess normally 7 we don't take who owns the property into deliberation, so 8 to speak. It's the property that we're looking at, not so 9 much who owns it. I0 COMMISSIONER WATK£NS: SUre. Sur~. 11 COMMISSIONER AP?CE: But if she has that 12 information available, I'm sure she'd he happy to sham it 13 with you. But I thought I understood her to say she did 14 not have that information. 15 MS. SPEER: on this particular site, this 16 was my easy one. Everybody else I could tell you who owns 17 what because they all -- there's opposition and favorable. 18 But this one I didn't receive anything except -- 19 COMM~ssIoNEa WATmNS: vll withdraws[ my 20 question. 21 MS. SPEER: I did want to address 22 Conmfissioner Mulroy, if I could. I wasn't aware of the 23 previous work session meetings. I do want to say that 24 that was part of my issue in writing the staff report is 25 that there is a catch 22 issue, you know, your diversify PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 115 1 housing. So you have this area of town however sprawl, 2 however compatibility with neighborhood. So that's why in 3 my staff report, the recommendations, I have kind of 4 opposing findings and I just want to make those clear. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: well, bless your 6 heart. It's unfortunate that the hours of commentary on 7 this during work sessions were not provided to you since 8 you have all five of these cases. I am perplexed as to 9 why that was not done. 10 MS. SPEER: Right. I am, as well. l l COMMISSIONE.R APPLE: commissioner Roy, 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: We're going to go 13 through several cases and I'm afraid that I'm going to 14 forget each ease as we go through it. I wonder would it 15 be mom appropriate to -- and we've talked about this t 6 particularl tract of land, to see if there's any comments 17 from tho audience about that tract of land, resolve it, 18 and then go to the next one. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: ! was just wondering 20 the same thing, if it might not be more prudent at this 21 point to separate them out for purposes of presentation. 22 It seems to be getting rather muddled. Without objection 23 -- and vote on each one as we go. All fight. That seems 24 to be the consensus. If you want to start back with 28. 25 MS. SPEEa: okay. I just wanted to -- Page 116 1 basically, I'm completed with 28, if you have any 2 questions. 3 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. So were there 4 any questions on 28? Okay. So we're okay. We're on to 5 30. Oh, gosh, stop me. We need to vote. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yeah, we also need 7 to go for public comment. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: We n{~l to do the 9 public hearing. Gosh, somebody stop me. Commissioner 10 Johnson has his -- 11 COMMISSIONER JOUNSON: Yeah. I still want 12 to make sure that I understand this. This property has 13 owners. We have tried to contact them. We know who they 14 are. I don't need to know but you have tried to contact 15 them and they have not responded to you; is that right? 16 MS. SPEER: rm required to contact them 17 via mail and we contact them certified mail. We actually 18 have sent out thre~ notifications for these cases because 19 of postal errors. So I have received several calls on thc 20 site. I don't have their names right now with me because 21 I received most of the calls back in August. This was 22 initially planned to go a month ago. But I haven't 23 received any written comments whatsoever on this 24 particular 80 acres. 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. This is a SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 113 - Page 116 CondenscItTM Page 117 1 public hearing and I do have several cards who wish to 2 address this issue. Tom McMurray, 3 MR, MCMURILAY: chairperson, Tom McMurray, 4 1800 Wickwood. Is this the shee~ that shows up here? I 5 live right there. Okay. This whole neighborhood here is 6 Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Hills of Argyle. It is 7 completely now sold and Phase 3 up here is now starting to 8 be developed. This site with Brush Creek, the way it's 9 designed with the right-of-way, would be more appropriate 10 to be 11 One reason is is we are in the City of 12 Denton, one of the rare properties like this thaCs 13 like this, but we are also in the school district of 14 Argyle ~SD. ~md one of the issues that I'm sure this 15 Commission is aware of is that Argyle just deannexed 8,000 16 acres to send a message to the City Council of Denton 17 because they force fed another deal. 18 And as a citizen of both Denton and the ISV 19 of Argyle, taxpayers of both, we would like to see not 20 only the conformity, but it's the natural conformity. 21 It's like, you know, all the terrain, if you've driven it, 22 it's got some hills, rolling to it. It's a natural 23 terrain for larger estate homes. It's the type of thing 24 that not only helps your tax base, it helps bring a 25 positive image to that area of town. Page 118 1 Although 377, you-all are working hard on 2 it, we're not offended by any of that. We understand 3 that. We drive in every day. And our position on that 4 is hhat we would like to see you do NR-1. The reason 5 being is that until Brush Creek is really redone, it's not 6 compatible at this point. I know on the plans it's got 7 the right-of-way. 8 Mr. Johnson, I don't know if you've driven 9 it, but I know that's part of your questions. But I drive 10 it every day and you don't drive too fast, it will tear 11 your car up. But assume all that is redone, across the 12 street here is actually ETJ, I believe, but fight now it's 13 just being produced as oil and gas royalty fight now. 14 That's the King area. And we would ask that y'all just 15 allow it to look a lot like this. Because if you do that, 16 it's going to be natural, it's going to be in conformity, 17 it's going to look good. It's got a lot of trees in that 18 area. We know Denton likes to save trees. So that's the 19 deal. I'd ask that you vote for NR-i. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE; Thank you, I have a 21 card from a Larry McGehee. MeGehee, is that correct? 22 MR. MCGEHEE: Yes ma'am, My name is Larry 23 McGehee. I live at 2001 C1Mstina Court also one of those 24 little dots on the map in the Hills of Argyle. 25 When the Denton Plan was passed, our Page 119 I neighborhood was zoned ~R-2 and ~a-4, although it had been 2 platted and approved as one-acre lots and larger. And 3 when we spoke to Council about this, they basically said 4 we understand this is an oversight. This subdivision is 5 already here. They were overlaying a subdivision that had 6 been approved and plat for one and two-acre lots. So it 7 was a mistake and so that's where Na-X came from. I don't 8 know how staff could have rezoned this whole city and not 9 missed a few little things, and that one was one that was 10 missed. And so out of cou_nesy or respect or what~ver, 11 No-1 was created to take care of that subdivision. 12 I believe that all of these are the same 13 issue, that this land is rural. I've lived there for 14 almost a year and a half. I've never seen a Denton police 15 officer even in the subdivision. We had people steal some 16 signs from us and when we called them to come out, they 17 said, well, you're in Argyle. You don't even live in the 18 City of Denton. So we're not getting serviced to death 19 out there. We have to tell them where it is before they 20 can come out. You have to go through a large floodplain 21 area to even get to this area. And a big portion of this 22 tract in question is in a floodplain and probably will 23 never be developed in. I don't know what the actual 24 usable acreage is but I don't think that we're talking 25 about very many usable acres to begin with. Page I20 1 The road of Brush Creek Road is not a 2 two-lane black top. It's a one-lane death trap and you 3 can get killed there on any day because you've got two 4 blind hills. So I think it was an oversight. I think all 5 of this stuff is an oversight. And we request that you 6 keep it rural. Keep it Na-lr There will be nice big 7 homes built there. They'll pay a lot of taxes, The 8 developer is not going to get hurt on these deals. 9 They're going to sell them and make a lot of money. It's 10 just a question of how much. Thank you. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I have a 12 card from Bill Lewis. All right. You don't wish to 13 speak? 14 MR. LEWIS: Not on this issue, 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. I have a card 16 from Chris Mellberg, 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He wanted you to 18 read the back. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Traffic issues are 20 scary both -- that's not what this says. Traffic issues 21 are really bad both on Brush Creek and 377. And we wan 22 to preserve the feel of the neighborhood. 23 Is there anyone else who wants to speak in 24 support? Okay. I have two cards -- no, I have one card 25 on this particular item. Michael Pettibon. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 117 - Page 120 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1i 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 12I MR. PETTIBON: Hi. I'm Mike Pettibon and I own 40 acres that abuts the Hills of Argyle. And I'm not really sure if I understand the zoning change all that well and maybe you can change my mind about opposing this. Page 123 NR-I? MS. SPEER: Just to clarify, the only difference in uses for NR-I and NR-2 is under NR-2 if yOU have an suP, you can put in manufactured homes. There are But I think the reason that I'm opposed, I want it to stay rural and I can tell you that 75 percent of the land that I own is floodplain and you couldn't build a house on it if you wanted to. And I have no plans to build anything else and I don't want anything else built on it. But I think that I have a problem with zoning it so that it's more prohibitive of what I could or couldn't do on my property. And I don't know if that is truIy the ease or not as far as animals or livestock or what I want to do with it. And I feel like the people in Hills of Argyle are looking at my property and trying to make sure that I conform to their standards. And while I guarantee you that, you know, I don't want to spend a million dollars on a piece of property and have it look terrible, I also moved out to the country sort of so that I was no longer in the gated neighborhood I used to be in with people telling me that I couldn't paint my front door this color or have a dog over this size or park my vehicle. That's why I'm opposed. I think that I am opposed to further regulation of land. And maybe that's not truly 5 no other residential differences. Just density and 6 manufactured housing. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Does that 8 help you, sir? 9 M~. PETTIBON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: IS therO anyone else 11 who wishes to address Item -- 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: I had a question. 13 COMM[SSIONERAPPLE: okay. Commissioner 14 Roy. 15 COMMISSIONF~ ROY: t had a question of the 16 person who just spoke. Sir, are you a property owner in 17 that lot that we're looking at right now? You own 18 property in that yellow area? 19 MR. PETTIBON: I own -- that's my this half 20 of the rectangle. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 of the 80. 23 COMMISSlmmm APPLE: commissioner Johnson, 24 if you have a question. 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: 40 O[' thc 80 acres Page 122 the spirit of it but that's how I interpret it. COMMISSIONER APPLE: would you like us to explain to you what we're doing, what is proposed so you would understand? MR. PETTIBON: If you could. COMMISSIONER APPLE: what is being proposed, and I'll let probably Mr. Reichhart, if Mr. Reichhart would come up and explain what this -- what is happening here so that then he would maybe feel more comfortable. MR. REICHHART: very briefly, the difference between NO-1 and NR-2 is basically density. NR-1, you have a density of one unit per acre. NR-2 has a density of two units per acre. Regarding keeping animals or livestock, there are different ordinances that address that. You have to have so much acreage per type of animal you have or horses or cows, tkings like that. And the zoning, regardless if it's Ne-1 or NR-2, wouldn't matter. So the real difference is when or if the property were ever going to be subdivided in the future, it would be a density issue. COMMISSIONER APPLE: And could you also explain to him some uses such as the manufactured homes that could be allowed in NR-2 that cannot be allowed in i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 124 is yours, sir? MR. PETrlBON: Right. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: IS it the east half or the west half?. MR. PETTIBON: The west. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The west? Have you decided yet if you're in favor of this or against it? MR. PETTIBON: You kllow, I guess that ! am still opposed. And it probably isn't my place to say it but, once again, it is just because I don't want added -~ someone telling me what I can do and can't do. Once again, I have no intention of decreasing the property values. And also I don't think if you tried as hard as you possibly could that you could put more than two more houses on that whole 40 acres. But I still stand opposed. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I don't see any more questions. Is them anyone else who'd like to address Agenda Item No. 28? Seeing no one, does staff have any additional marks? MS. SPEER: My only additional remark would be with his opposition we'd be at about 50 percent opposition, it would require super-majority at City Council. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Powell. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 121 - Page 124 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 125 COMMISSIONER POWELL: IS is safe to assume that we haven't heard from the owners, owner or owners of the other 40 acres? MS. SPEER: Corro.,ct. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Comtnis siGners. Commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Ye...8, Madam Chair. I'm going to make a motion for approval. I understand the verbally stated opposition but the reality is the motion and the downzoning will be less restrictive is what the Page 127 1 hearing. 2 MS. SPEER: Good evening once again. I am 3 basically going to go through these cases and talk to you 4 about the opposition and the site location. Staff has the 5 same findings in all of the cases. This site is 6 approximately a roughly ten-acre site. Same exact 7 situation, going from Neighborhood Residential 2 to 8 Neighborhood Residential 1 zoning district. This case 9 will have to go forward to City Council for 10 super-majority. Both owners of the two tracts do oppose. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. For commentary was directed towards. So I make a motion for approval as presented. Thank you. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion by Commissioner Mulroy and a second by Commissioner Watkins. For discussion, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I am greatly influenced by the landowner of half of this property that doesn't want to make a change and I don't see why we would do something he doesn't want to do. So I will be voting against approval of this. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: ~ We going to register this as an opposing view that is going to drive Page 126 1 the City Council to a super-majority? 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Director Powell would 3 like to weigh in. 4 MR. POWELL: we really need, to make it 5 official, we do need the opposition in writing. Bm I'm 6 sure that we can get that in between now and the month it 7 takes from P&Z to City Council. $ COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. And just for 9 the record, I'm going to agree with Cormnissioner Roy 10 because I'm going to give great deference to the 11 landowner' s stated preference on this. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 13 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Discussion of Mr. 14 Mulroy's point. I would look at it as being more 15 restrictive because with an NR-2, he does have some 16 options that disappear when it goes to NR-1. I just want 17 to point -- I'm just looking at this a little differently 18 than you are, sir. I wanted to make that point. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Any 20 further discussion? Vote, please. Motion carries 4-3. 21 (Commissioners Johnson, Roy, Powcll voted 22 in opposition.) 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Next we'll address 24 . Agenda Item No. 30 which is a public hearing. Again, 25 Ms. Speer, if you'll present and I'll open the public 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Agenda Item No. 30 -- COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me. Can I ask clarification? COMMISSIONER APPLE: oh, Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: You said two tracts? MS. SPEER: correct, theret$ two tracts of land, two different parcels. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. All right. We're looking at it as one site. MS, SPEER: Correct. The line is right here. COMMISSIONER ROY: Okay. Both owners are in opposition, had written opposition to this change? MS. SPEER: correct. Page 128 1 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Regarding this Agenda 3 item, we have severa[ people who would like to address 4 this, also. Again, Mr. McMurray. 5 MR. MCMURRAY: I have a question for the 6 staff to help with my -- is there a sewer down Fort Worth 7 Drive? No? Is there a sewer because if it's NR-2, 8 residential, you've got a problem with your septic. 9 Because we're all septic out here. There is sewer running l0 up Fort Worth Drive up here to the new part of Phase 3. 11 So I could see where it wouldn't be that, you know, it 12 wouldn't be that expensive to get it there. That is an 13 issue because NR-i iS the minimum for a septic 14 requirements of spacing for your aerobic system. So one 15 of the -- I understand the landowner may want opposition. 16 It's going to have to be an issue addressed at some point 17 whether or not there's going to be sewer. So we would 18 vote NR-1 because it really conforms with the land use as 19 in the neighborhood. 20 All of this is NR-! but I can understand 21 the landowner saying he doesn't want NR-2, but there's not 22 going to be a special use permit for mobile homes. Not 23 next to alt this. You talk about everybody coming down 24 here, y'all would have a good time. So that ain't going 25 to happen. So at this point, I would say that you ought PLANIqlNG AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 125 - Page 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 § 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Conden scltTM Page 129 to go with NR-1 for the purpose that he can't -- if the 1 landowner can't use it for anything other than NR-i anyway 2 because of the fact that you have to have a septic spacing 3 unless the City's deciding to put sewer there. Thank you. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. McGehee. 5 MR. MCGEHEE: I would have dressed up if 6 I'd known I was going to have to speak in front of this ? camera. Do I need to introduce myself each time? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: please. 9 MR, MCGEHEE: Larry McGehee, 2001 Christina 10 Court, Denton, Texas. I believe and I need to ask staff 11 this but arc you allowed to build a house on a half an 12 acre without a sewer line? You're not o/lowed to do that. 3 Isn't this, in effect, an oversight in thc Denton zoning? .4 Why would this be zoned NR-2 when you can't use it as15 NR-2? This is an oversight. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Could someone from 17 staff address that question? 18 MR. POWELL: I'd be happy to address it. 19 If you remember back to the previous cases, there's a20 differentiation between zoning and platting and providing, 21 as part of platting, you provide utilities. The zoning of 22 the property, could it be developed today at the higher 23 density because there's no utilities? No. But that's a 24 platting issue. It's not really a zoning issue. Though 25 Page 130 they're somewhat intertwined. So you really do need to 1 try to separate those two. The question may be can 2 someone develop that at a higher density? Yes. Would 3 they have to provide the utilities? Yes. But it is 4 possible. It might not be feasible. It might not be cost -- might be cost prohibitive right now. But that really 6 is a platting issue rather than a zoning issue. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Did that 8 answer your question? 9 MR. MCGEHEE: Yeah, I guess. I still think 10 that this was an oversight. I don't believe it was 11 intentionally zoned NR~2 because there is no sewer line 12 there. It's also a 65 mile an hour State highway. The 13 traffic in there is horrible, I don't know if any of you 14 have tried to go from Argyle to Denton on Fort Worth 15 Drive. You can't get there very quickly, You're blocked 16 by that trestle down there. 17 Again, I don't think that even if it's 18 zoned NR-1 that it will -- somebody is going to come in 19 here and someday ask you for commercial zoning on this. 20 NP,-I, it may make sense because there's a railroad track 21 across there and it's a State highway, and anybody that 22 would develop that would want it to be at least one-acre 23 lots, which puts the house away from the road and the 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION train. It just doesn't make sense. It really needs to be SEPTEMBER 25TIt, 2002 Page 131 NR-I. And look at all the other stuff out there, We're all one-acre and bigger because there's no sewer line and that's why it's all like it is. Somebody is benefiting from a mistake. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Bill Lewis. All right. You just want to show support. MR, LEWIS: show me in favor of this one. COMMISSIONER APPLE:. chris Mellberg does not wish to speak but wants to express support. Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wishes to offer support. Carol Haesle was not able to attend but she does want to offer support. She says all of these items include areas in rural neighborhoods with land, trees, and nature. Please allow the existing developments to maintain their environment and feel. Also, traffic on these rural roads is very bad. Please don't make it worse. And M.D. Williamson wishes not to speak but he offers support, Then I have a card from Paul Berry. He's one of the owners. Is he present? Would you like to speak? MR. BERRY: My name is Paul Berry and I am the owner of the south portion there. My address is P.O. Page 132 Box 101, Mena, Arkansas. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. MR. BERRY: I did live on this property for 20 years, but, like I say, I am now living out of state. Y'all seem to be spending some time talking about mobile homes. This property and all the property in that 30 acre group and back behind there is deed restricted from mobile homes. You couldn't put a mobile home in there if you wanted to. And -- but I do wish to express my opposition. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Question for staff for my education. Doesn't zoning supersede deed restrictions? MR. POWELL: No. The way it works is whichever is more restrictive. So in the case of a deed restriction that didn't allow mobile home parks but was allowed in zoning, you still couldn't do it. We wouldn't enforce that deed restriction but if it was valid, you could enforce it by private means. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Berry. COMMISSIONER MULROY: I have a question. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy has a question for you, sir. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes, sir. Thank you Page 129- Page 132 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 CondonscltTM Page 133 for coming down. My question is prior to the adoption of 1 the Development Code, what was the zoning on this 2 property? 3 MR. BERRY: Oh, that was something else 4 that I meant to address. Until I got this notice, I was 5 still under the assumption that all that was unzoned. I 6 was never notified when the zoning was changed previously. 7 So if I ever g~ any acceptance for these two notices on 8 this issue, if I ever get any notice on hearings regarding 9 this property, it has always been after the meeting and 10 after the decision has been made. And I didn't know at 11 all when it was changed to NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER MULROY: But previous to that, 13 to your knowledge, it was zoned Agricultural then? 14 MR. BERRY: Agricultural or unzoned or 15 something. 16 Page 135 and let's say'you had an old sF-7 and we're trying to take you to ~,m-l,well, shame on us. But that's really not the case. It's always been Ag. The policy was to assign it some zoning and we're just making that adjustment. So we're really not trying to take away something that you've had. MR. BERRY: But yOU are. But you are. COMMISSIONER MIJLROY: well, see, my comment COMMISSIONER MULROY: And how long have you owned it? MR. BeP, aY: Probably about 25, 26 years. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. In all those times, you never had any intention or made any attempt to upzone it to two or three or four houses an acre? Mit. BERRY: NO. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. So, see, what's transpired, we've gone -- where unzoned land was to you would be then these 20 years, did you ever come forward to try to upzone it? MR. BERRY: NO, but still you're taking something away. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, but it's something you didn't have. MR. BERRY; NO) because I still had the land, I still have the land. Page 134 carded as Ag, we've assigned it the low end possibility as NR-I, NR-2. And really you never had NR-2, yOU had Ag. And we're trying to sustain the 'rural flavor of that area. We want to redesignate it as NP,-1 which is less dense and more rural. MR. BERRY: I never, I never -- well, I own it -- entertain this idea but yet I don't want to tie my hands behind my back. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I understand. I want to refresh our collective memory. One, it was originally Ag. It was assigned NR-2 during the Code 12 adoption. And in reflection -- 13 MR. BERRY: BUt I didn't know that. 14 COMMISSIONER MULROY: -- that NRq would 15 have been mom appropriate. So it's not that someone is 16 taking something away that you've had for 20 years. It is 17 attempting by this body to correct an oversight. When the 18 Code was adopted, rather than having the least dense, NR-2 19 was assigned rather than NR-1. In viewing the 20 neighborhood, we viewed it as very rural and the previous 21 makeup of tiffs body initiated the changes to go to Na-1 22 which would be our lowest designation or least dense. 23 So I just want to make it clear that these 24 deliberations have already been undertaken and it's not 25 that you had -- if you had made any effort over 20 years 17 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONE~ APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Berry. 19 Is them anyone else who wishes to address the Commission 20 in regards to this Agenda item? 21 MR. REICHHART: I was just asked a question 22 in the audience and as a point of clarification I just 23 want to point out to remind everybody that Agricultural 24 zoning has a one-acm limit development similar to the 25 NR4. someone asked me that, regarding that question. Page 13 6 2 3 4 5 6 situation 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Watkins. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Just as a matter of information, and you possibly can't answer this question, but this didn't change actually or did it change the tax on the property when we went from Ag to this? MR. REICHHART: NOs sir. ?LANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 8 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: I mean, they may 9 have seen an increase but that was because alt of Denton 10 County, I suppose, went up. 11 MR. REICHHART: That's correct. 12 COMMISSIONER WATK~NS: BUt it would be the 13 same. Okay. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Is there anyone else 1 $ who wants to address this Agenda item? Seeing no one 16 coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing. 17 Commissioner Mulroy. 18 COMMISSIONER MULROY: That was the que, 19 right? No. I think I've already given my mini lecture 20 but in view that we had undertaken the deliberations as 21 I've stated, I'm going to remain consistent and make the 22 motion to approve as presented. Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a 24 motion on the table. The motion dies for lack of a 25 second. Commissioner Roy. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 133 - Page 136 Cond_~n solt TM 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 137 COMMISSIONER ROY: we did have a lot of discussion about this area but I think I was under the assumption, I wont along with the discussion under the assumption that the property owners would be happy to have this changed. So it's obvious that in this particular case the property owners are not happy to have this changed so I move denial of this. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: We have a motion and a second to deny. Any discussion? I have one polut of discussion only because I was just tolally not present at that moment. I was thinking of something else. And I would have seconded Commissioner Mulroy's motion. And for Page 139 1 property. However, we do live in a City. And sometimes 2 ii' you want to 'be -- if you would like to own a piece of 3 property that nobody can tell you what to do, perhaps you 4 ought to buy that piece of property that is further away 5 from file City than these parcels are. These parcels are 6 in the City. So, anyway, I do support this mainly 7 because that was already there. Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Lewis. 9 Tom McMurray. 10 MR. MCMURR~Y: Tom McMurray, 1800 Wickwood, 11 City of Denton. This piece of property is not unhke the 12 other piece o? property that y'all just discussed which 13 was the other parcel, there was two parcels in the one that, I apologize. I will be voting against the motion. Any discussion? Vote, please. Motion passes 5-2. (Commissioners Mulroy and Apple voted in Opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: NeXt iS Agenda Item 31, a public hearing considering rezonlng 21 acres on Fort Worth Drive, south of Hamilton and north of Brush Creek. Ms. Speer will present and I'll open the public hearing. MS. SPEER: oood evening once again. Agenda Item No. 31, as Commissioner Apple had stated, is approximately 21 acres. The same situation down to the 14 tract. However, this one is a lot longer. And it is -- 15 being a Denton resident now for a long time, this is 16 exactly what gives us a bad name in the neighborhood is 17 that it's agricultural which is one-acre lot minimums and 18 then we come in and make a mistake as a City and now we 19 can't stand up and say we made a mistake and do the right 20 thing. Okay. We're telling you wc would tike to see it 21 done r~ght so it's in conformity with the whole area. 22 Just because of the Hills of Argyle was 23 done right} because that was an oversight and we had to 24 come down and tel1 y'all how to do that. Now we're not 25 going to get this done right. You need to vote for this Page 138 1 zoning of Residential Neighborhood 2 to Neighborhood 2 Residential 1. This particular case, I do have one owner 3 opposition and I have one owner in favor. However, the 4 opposition is right at 20 percent so the super-majority 5 rule will be required at City Council. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 7 Commissioner Powell. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Is it safe to assume 9 the white area is the third owner that has not spoken? 10 MS. SPEER: Correct. 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I have several cards 13 for this Agenda item, also. Mr. Williamson does not wish 14 to speak but he wishes to express support. Carol Haesle 15 is not available to speak but she does express support. 16 Sandra Lewis does not wish to speak but she wants to t7 express support. Chris Mellherg is not available to speak 18 but does wish to express support. Bill Lewis, ii' you'll 19 give your name and address, please. 20 MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek 21 Road. I support this zoning change. To me, it just makes 22 sense because it matches what's already them. That's the 23 main reason that I support it. I appreciate people not 24 being want -- not liking to be told how to run their .25 business, especially when it comes to using their own Page 140 1 to be NR4. There's still no sewer there. It's still the 2 same arguments. You're going to have to have development. 3 I understand there's a difference in zoning and platting. 4 The difference is that it needs to he in conformity with 5 the rural area. And I can't emphasize it enough, I like 6 the landowners. I'm a landowner. Got lots of land other 7 than this land. But this land right hem needs to be in 8 conformity with the area and the other citizens in it. 9 You have all those people that you mentioned awhile ago 10 that were for it. They all live out there. So it's like 11 the whole people are saying we need you to back up what 12 the City of Denton says. I understand the landowners may 13 or may not be for it. Here we've got one that's for it. 14 But you need to do what's right for the area, please. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Mr. Larry 16 MeGehee. 17 MR. MCGEHEE: My name is Larry McGehee. I 18 live at 200 t Cl~ristina Court, Denton, Texas. I'm almost 19 breathless after this last vote. You know, it's like a 20 guy gees in a bank to make a deposit for $100.00 and he 21 finds some money in a bag and somehow that money becomes 22 his. This land has hccn zoned AgricultUral forever, one 23 acre. These people have never been down here before you 24 asking for it to be two houses per acre. There's no sewer 25 llne. And there's some kind of thought that people should PLANNING AND ZON1NG COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 137 - Page 140 CondenscItTM Page 141 1 profit from mistakes and this was a mistake. But nobody 2 wants to take away the right for someone to capitalize on 3 a mistake that the City has made. Now, I'm a property 4 owner. Iown 17 houses in this City. I've lived here 31 5 years. And to stand here and see people vote to allow 6 mistakes, I can't believe it. I'm sorry. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 8 there anyone else who wishes to speak to this item? 9 Seeing no one coming forward, I'll close the public t0 hearing. Commissioner Roy. 11 COMMISSIONER ROY: I wanted to ask a 12 question of staff. Is the landowner who is in opposition, 13 is that landowner here? 14 MS. SPEER: That is Bill and Joyce Keenis 15 and I don't believe we have a card from them. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question of staff before you get away. Excuse me, Madam Chairman. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 143 1 body or the City to do it unless there is a tremendous 2 greater good. And I don't see a tremendous greater good 3 to make this particular change. I agree that it's not a 4 major issue. It's not a major change. But we discussed 5 it on the basis that this is something that the landowners 6 wanted to do, and that has not been the case. 7 Now, in this particular piece of property 8 there is I would say a significant piece of this one that 9 percentage-wise it's kind of overwhelnfing either in favor 10 or no comment. So I don't particularly feel strongly 11 about this one as opposed to the last one in which 100 12 percent of the property owners did not want to make the 13 change. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS, With all 16 respect to my fellow Commissioners, my recollection was in 17 our discussions that perhaps because of time constraints, 18 due consideration wasn't given to this section of this next? Thank you. How big is the red property? MS. SPEER: The red property, I believe they have -- COMMISSIONER POWELL: I mean, approximately. Is it two acres? MS~ SPEER: About 15 acres, I think. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Got yOU. Thank you. Page 142 t 9 quadrant, this lower quadrant section of town. And we 20 reviewed it and we had that discussion of the Ag and 21 ~m-2, that ~4R-t was most appropriate generally for this 22 whole area. That it would, in fact, protect the majority 23 of the landowners. 24 I don't think, with all respect, I can't 25 recall that it was ever put forward that a specific Page 144 1 Ms. SPEER: I'm sorry. That's wrong. It's 2 about five acres. 3 COMMISSIONF31 POWELL: SO the gll~B property 4 would be 15 or more acres. Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mukoy. 6 COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I'm going to 7 stay consistent. I'm ready to move approval. And I 8 remind you that, again, part of our discussion was that we 9 were looking at blanket taking it back to ~4R-t. And 10 people that wanted to do sometlfing, desired to do 11 something more dense could come and make the case with 12 their specifics in mind and we would be open to that. 13 Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: second. Discussion? 15 Ihavejust a comment. I'm still Igness sorter 16 perplexed and fascinated by the fact that this body t7 brought these rezonings forward. And rm not sure if 18 there are lapses in the work sessions that we had and the 19 issues that were discussed or what, but I'm confused and 20 amazed. Cormnissloner Roy. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: I am not confused and 22 amazed because at the work session it was made clear to mo 23 that this was sucfioned from the landowners and people who 24 lived in the area. And if the landowner does not want to 25 make this change, I don't feel it's appropriate for this 1 landowner of a specific plot was advocating this. No, 2 tiffs was initiated from P&Z solely and that we were 3 recognizing, a mistake may be too hash of a word, but 4 let's say not enough time in judgment in assigning tho 5 zonings when the Code was adop~d. And we hashed it over 6 and it was our consensus that t~a-~ would have been more 7 appropriate for this area and that's why we initiated it. 8 So in that sense, Mr. McG~hee is fight, the 9 net result was - is correcting the mistake. And I'll 10 reiterate and I was the one that spoke up and said, well, ~ 11 if someone comes, because I know there's some lqR-4 that 12 we're taking down, and that if they como back and say this 13 is what I want to do. Here's my amenities. Here's my 14 entranceways, et cetera, et cetera, that we'd give it the 15 fullest consideration when we had specifics. But in thc 16 meantime, in the interim, to go back to closest to Ag that 17 we can. I mean, that's my best recollection of the 18 discussion. That's why we've initiated it. Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 20 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Help me out her~. 21 How did we decide th~ configuration of this piece of 22 property to be rezoned? I saw a map earlier that showed 23 all these pieces. How do you figure this one as opposed 24 to another one or why weren't they all together7 Help me 25 out here. Why did you make the split right here? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 141 - Page 144 CondcnseltTM Page 145 1 MS. SPEER: AS far as I know, the split is 2 made simply by proximity. This is already NR-I. Then you 3 had the two parcels of NR-2, you had this NRMU section 4 that was rezoned a couple of years ago independently. 5 Then you have Brush Creek which divides these two 6 properties. This one is NR-2. And it didn't make sense 7 to have these two together because this one is NR-4. 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That. answered my 9 question. Thank you very much. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Just to kind of weigh 11 in on that, that may be true that that was the logic for 12 it. But in our discussions my memory is the same as 13 Commissioner Muh-oy's, that we actually brought these up :14 because there were actually some oversights in this map. il 5 And I have no recollection of it being any landowners. It 16 was just a discussion amongst us at a work session and it 17 was -- the NR-4 which you're basing the NR-2 on seemed to 18 be a mistake, also. 19 And I will use the word mistake because I 20 actually was told that, that it was a mistake. 21 Especially when just across the street with a railroad 22 running through it is zoned NR-2. So if the NR-2 Was 23 based on the fact that it was between an NR-4, which was a 24 mistake, and an NRMU which had a very specific reason for 25 being an NRMU, that was a long going case and a very Page 146 1 particular parcel of land, you really can't use that 2 rationale for determining that that makes sense there. 3 MS. SPEER: I think we're addressing two 4 different questions. I think he just wondered why they 5 were stuck together the way they were, thc different 6 tracts. Why, you know, this owner is in favor but this 7 one opposes. Why are those three together as one case? 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. I thought 9 he was asking you how they ended up with the des[gnat[om 10 that they ended up with. 11 MS, SPEER: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Either way I'm 13 satisfied with the answer. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Thanks. 15 Commissioner Johnson. 16 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: This is an 17 interesting chart. Is that NR-6 on there correct? 18 MS. SPEER: Yes, sir. 19 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: well, why are we not 20 talking about that NR-6 then? 21 MS. SPEER: It'S a railroad and a 22 right-of-way. See, everything around here, I mean, 23 everything is eTJ. ~ll of thc white is ETJ. Only the 24 yellow is what's zoned and we are actually -- 25 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: what about south of PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION the NR-4 that's shown here? there. Page 147 1 2 3 4 5 6 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: But the way it's 7 drawn, it would look like it's NR-6. 8 MS. SPEER: It'S not. The color is hard, 9 the yellow is hard to discern from the green. 10 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. And one more 11 question. The ETJ there that is just between what is now 12 NR-2 and what is now NR-1 -- 13 MS. SPEER: Right here? 14 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yeah. Has not been 15 annexed by the City yet, right? 16 MS. SPEER: Correct. 17 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: SO what is the 18 requirements on who can build what in there? 19 MS. SPEER: AS far as I understand in the 20 ETJ -- larry's going to come talk. 21 MR. REICHHART: Any development in our 22 Division 1 ETJ that's approximately tttree and a half miles 23 from the City of which that area falls into, land use -- 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. We have a 25 point of order because we are actually getting off on MS. SPEER: That's also NR-2. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It's NR-2? MS. SPEER: uh-hllh, along the right-of-way Page 148 1 another issue rather than we have a motion and a second on 2 the table and Legal has advised me that we are addressing 3 an issue that's not germane. 4 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I don't remember a 5 motion and a second. Am I wrong? 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mu[roy 7 made the motion and I made the second, 8 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I'm sorry. Thank 9 you. 10 COMMISSIONF_,R APPLE: we have a motion and a 11 second. Any mom discussion on the motion and the second? 12 Vote, please. 13 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Can you restate the 14 motion just so we're sure what we're voting on? 1 $ COMMISSIONER APPLE: Certainly. 16 Commissioner Mulroy. 17 COMMISSIONER M[JLROY: ! move approval as 18 submitled. 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That was move to approve? 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: HO moved approval as submitted and I seconded. Vote, please. Motion carries 6-1. (Commissioner Johnson voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: Moving onto our final SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 145 -Page t48 Cond~nscltTM t item, public hearing No. 32. Again, I'll open the 2 public hearing and Ms. Spear will present. 3 MS. SPE~: oood evening once again. This 4 particular item is a little bit different from our 5 previous four areas. This area is currently a 43.7 acm 6 site. It's the strip along 377 south of Brush Creek. 7 This strip is currently zoned Neighborhood Residential 4. 8 It's being requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission 9 to go to Neighborhood Residential 2. I have 15 acres of 10 opposition here, 15 acres of opposition, 20, 15 acres 11 here, and one home here and one neutral home. So I have 12 about 85, 90 percent opposition on this particular case. 13 Super-majority vote will be required at City Council. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Question. 16 COMMissIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 17 COMMISSIONER POWELL: when was this zoned 18 ~m.47 was this in the major rezoning or was this some 19 other time? And if it was in the major rezoning, why did 20 they plunk an t~R-4 there? Does anybody know? Can anybody 21 help me? 22 COMMISSIONF.~ APPLE: Mr. Powell. 23 ~. POWELL: If i may. This one is the one 24 that comes closest to the mistake word or oversight. The 25 majority of that property was in a Po and the eD had Page 150 i several variations and then it was finally hard zoned, the 2 back portion of thc property but not the front part. And 3 so if I believe the old PD had 16,000 square foot lots 4 really didn't match up with NR-4. SO it doesn't match 5 what was there prior to February 20th or February this 6 year. Now it's been upzoned since that time. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I~t me add onto that 8 question then for Mr. Powell. If it doesn't match the 9 NR-4 that it was given, what did it match to? What would 10 have been a match? 11 MR. POWELL: I believe the NR-2. 12 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Watkins. 14 COMMISSIONER WATKn~S: Thank you. I assume 15 if it's NR-4 that there's no utilities there and so there 16 will be nothing built there; is that correct? Doesn't it 17 take a one-acre site for a septic? 18 MR. PowELL: Yes. If I may, there is a 19 sewer that does run down through this area, kind of 20 bisecting it. So there is sewer. There is water. So 21 unlike the properties to the north, this one it doesn't 22 have sewer there but it's close. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Again, we 24 have -- did you have a question? 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I have another Page 149 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 .22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ,20 21 22 23 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION question. Powell. Page 151 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Commissioner COMMISSIONER POWELL: would that be a City of Argyle sewer? It's not a City of Denton sewer, is it? MR. POWELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yes, sir, what.'? MR. POWELL: City Of' Dellton sewer. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thatlk you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have a number of cards again who wish to speak in support of this. Mr. Williamson doesn't want to speak but wishes support. Carol Haesle in support. Sandra Lewis checked I wish to speak on this item. No? Okay. Hard to tell once both of them are checked. But she is in support. Chris Mellberg is in support. Bill Lewis. MR. LEWIS: Bill Lewis, 900 Brush Creek Road. We do support this issue. That is what is already there. The other issues here are that this is an environmentally sensitive area. You've heard a lot from us already on this property and i'm here to reiterate. Thank you for what you've done in the past to help protect that area. Making it NR-2 will help protect it some more, also. Page 152 There has also been some discussion, maybe it's differences of opinion about where the floodplain is out there. However, there is some floodplain out there. I think we can agree on that. As far as more general zoning issues go, I think that the possible strategy that some cities try to use is that the closer you are to the core of tho City, that's where higher densities occur. As you get further out away from the City, that's where the lower densities are. This is about as far away as you can get from Denton and still bc in Denton. And I think that pretty well summarizes my thoughts on this issue. I'll take any questions. COMMISSIONER APPLE: ?hank you. Tom McMurray. MR. MCMURRAY: Just in support. You've heard my arguments. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Larry McOehcc, MR. MCGEItEE: My name is Larry McGeh~e. I live at 2001 Ckfistina Court in Denton, Texas. My faith has been restored. We had one person found the money and got out of here but the rest of the money has been returned to the citizens. Thank you. This one is the biggest mistake that we're looking at tonight. NR-4 makes no sense. In fact, it ought to be ~m-t. t don't know how SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 149- Page 152 CondensoltTM Page 153 Page 155 1 we're going to NR-2 but that is what we're trying to do 1 2 here, right? NR-4toNR-2? well, I'min favor of that. 2 3 Thank you for your last vote. 3 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 4 5 anyone else who wishes to address this item? Seeing no 5 6 one coming forward, I'll close the public hearing. 6 7 Commissioner Mulroy. 7 8 COMMISSIONER MULROY: I'm going to move 8 9 approval. 9 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Second. 10 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: A question of staff. 11 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy is 12 13 13 prior to you. 14 COMMISSIONER ROY: I just wish that 14 15 somebody had explained this in more detail to the 5 16 landowners. Here we have another case of 85 percent .6 17 roughly opposition. You can argue about how we got here I7 18 but the fact is we are here at NR-4 and the landowners who 18 19 own this property don't want to change it, 85 percent of 19 20 them don't want to change it. And I'm just really 20 21 struggling with this, this whole concept, 21 22 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 22 23 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you, ma'am. 23 24 That was not to get attention. That was getting over a 24 25 cold. Staff, a question. The owners who are in 25 Page 154 i opposition, did they make any attempt to get here? 2 There's nobody in opposition here and that bothers me. 3 MS. SPEER: If I can be blunt, they're 4 coming to City Council. The owners, the opposition on 5 this site has plans for this site and owns this land, they 6 will be at City Council. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own what land? 8 MS. SPEER: They own this property. 9 COMMISSIONER POWELL: They own the NR-2, as 10 well as the NR-4. 1 MS. SPEER: correct. This part. 2 COMMISSIONER POWELL: okay. But they own 13 all of the NR-2 beh/nd it, to the east of it? 14 MS. SPEER: 1 believe they do own all of 15 it. They even own the vacant lot up here. 16 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy. 18 COMMISSIONER ROY: One question. That 19 vacant lot on the NR-i up there, they were not in 20 opposition to. that? 21 MS. SPEER: correct. They sent in a letter 22 for favor of that. 23 COMMISSIONER ROY; Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion and a 25 second to approve. Any more discussion? Vote, please. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Motion can'[es 5-2. (Commissioners Roy and Powell voted in opposition.) COMMISSIONER APPLE: That ends our Agenda items. And if there's no further business, we are adjourned. SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 153 - Page 155 S 5Our Documents~Ordina~ces~02~Z02-0040.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 4 (NR-4) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESDIENTIAL 2 (NR-2) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 34.16 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED AT FORT WORTH DRIVE SOUTH OF BRUSH CREEK ROAD LAND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING A PORTION OF A TRACT IN ABSTRACT 517 IN THE H. HAGGOOD SURVEY AND A PORTION OF A TRACT IN ABSTRACT 568 IN THE W. HUDSON SURVEY AND A PORTION OF A TRACT IN ABSTRACT 351 IN THE GEORGE W. DAUGHERTY SURVEY AND BEING ALL OF A TRACT SHOWN BY DEED TO JOE W. RHOADES RECORDED IN VOLUME 639, PAGE 486, DEED RECORDS AND BEING ALL OF A CERTAIN TRACT SHOWN BY DEED TO HERBERT E. WYSS RECORDED IN VOLUME 1042, PAGE 834, DEED RECORDS AND BEING ALL OF A TRACT OF LAND SHOWN BY DEED TO EWELL BURKALTER, ET AL, RECORDED IN VOLUME 886, PAGE 602, DEED RECORDS IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS;PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0040) WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission initiated a change in zoning for approximately 34.16 acres of land being legally described as being a portion of a tract in abstract 517 in the H. Haggood Survey and a portion of a tract in abstract 568 in the W. Hudson Survey and a portion ora tract in abstract 351 in the George W. Daugherty Survey and being all ora tract shown by deed to Joe W. Rhoades recorded in volume 639, page 486, Deed Records and being all of a certain tract shown by deed to Herbert E. Wyss recorded in volume 1042, page 834, Deed Records and being all of a tract of land shown by deed to Ewell Burkalter, Et Al, recorded in volume 886, page 602, Deed Records in the city of Denton, Denton County, Texas, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made part hereof by reference (the "Property") from Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval to change the zoning to Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR -2); and WHEREAS, the City has received written protests pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Section 211.006, which requires a three quarter vote by the City Council to change the zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby S 5Our Documents~Ordina2~ces~02~Z02-0040.doc changed from Neighborhood Re sidential 4 (NR-4) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use and such zoning change has been passed by a three quarter vote of the City Council. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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 SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. 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 Demon Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Demon, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Exhibit A Z02-0040 (Southeast 377 and Brush Creek Road) NORTH Il LOCATION MAP 34.16 Acres of Land All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situated in the H. Haggood Survey, Abstract Number 517; The W. Hudson Survey, Abstract Number 568; and the George W. Daugherty Survey, Abstract Number 351, Denton County, Texas, and being all of a tract shown by deed to Joe W. Rhoades, recorded in Volume 639, Page 486, Deed Records, and being all of a certain tract shown by deed to Herbert E. Wyss, recorded in Volume 1042, Page 834, Deed Records, and being all of a tract of land shown by deed to Ewell Burkhalter, Et Al, recorded in Volume 886, Page 602, Deed Records of said county and being more fully described as follows; BEGINNING at the intersection of the East right-of-way line of U.S. Highway 377 and the South right-of-way line of Brush Creek Road, said point being 371.33 feet more or less West of the Southwest comer of the present city limits as established by Ordinance No. 69-40, also being the Northwest comer of the current city limits line established by Ordinance No. 86-21; THENCE North 89 Degrees 41 Minutes 42 Seconds East, along the South right-of-way line of said Brush Creek Road a distance of 299.99 feet more or less to a point for a comer; THENCE South 00 Degrees 18 Minutes 20 Seconds East, a distance of 261.15 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE South 22 Degrees 13 Minutes 00 Seconds West, a distance of 1,123.24 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE North 89 Degrees 47 Minutes 00 Seconds West, a distance of 17.00 feet to a point for a comer and being the beginning of curve to the fight having a radius of 363.06; THENCE along said curve to the right having a arc length of 172.67 feet and a chord bearing of North 76 degrees 09 minutes 30 seconds West, a distance of 171.05 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE North 62 Degrees 32 Minutes 00 Seconds West, a distance of 90.00 feet to a point for a comer, said point lying 390 feet East of and perpendicular to the centerline of U.S. Highway 377; THENCE South 27 Degrees 28 Minutes 00 Seconds West, parallel with and 390 feet East of the centefline of U.S. Highway 377 a distance of 2,468.99 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE North 50 Degrees 07 Minutes 44 Seconds West, a distance of 337.88 feet to a point for a comer lying on the East fight-of-way line of said U.S. 377; THENCE North 27 Degrees 28 Minutes 00 Seconds East, along the East right-of-way line of said U.S. 377 a distance of 2,926.42 feet to a point for a comer; 34.16 Acres of Land THENCE North 33 Degrees 09 Minutes 14 Seconds East, along the East right-of-way line of said U.S. 377 a distance of 301.15 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE North 27 Degrees 37 Minutes 11 Seconds East, along the East right-of-way line of said U.S. 377 a distance of 294.39 feet to a point for a comer; THENCE North 58 Degrees 35 Minutes 38 Seconds East, a distance of 156.33 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing in all 34.16 acres of land more or less. Item #5F AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning and Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 ~' SUBJECT - Z02-034 (Maple Leaf- Professional Office) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 2.8 acres of land from a Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning districts a Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use (NRMU) zoning district. The property is generally located north of McKinney Avenue, west of Joshua Street. A professional office building is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). BACKGROUND Applicam: Isbell Engineering Group, Inc. DeNon, Texas The applicant is requesting two parcel of land totaling approximately 2.8 acres be rezoned from the currem Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning districts to a Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use (NRMU) zoning district. Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing staff has received one response from property owner within 200' foot area of the subject site neutral to the request. As there is no opposition, a simple majority vote (4-3) by City Council will be required to approve this request. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0 ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. Platting is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology of Z02-0034, commonly known as Maple Leaf Professional Office. Application Date - Date: DRC Date- Date: Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - Date: September 3, 2002 July 25, 2002 September 25, 2002 A neighborhood meeting was held on August 26, 2002. (see Attachment 4) FISCAL INFORMATION Future development of this property will increase the assessed value of the city. No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis. 2. Maps. 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses). 4. Neighborhood Meeting minutes. 5. The Applicant's correspondence. 6. Photographs. 7. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 8. Draft Ordinance. Prepared by: Tiffanie Willis Planner I Respectfully submitted: for Dc glas S. AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary_ of Zoning Request The applicant is requesting two parcel of land approximately totaling 2.83 acres of land to be rezoned from its currem Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning districts to a Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use (NRMU) zoning district. The requested zoning change allows the applicam to pursue construction of professional office buildings. The applicant has submitted two zoning cases, Z02-0034 and Z02-0035. Although two separate zoning cases Z02-0034 reflects the developers desire to establish retail and professional office uses and zoning case Z02-0035 details plans for a residemial subdivision. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning districts and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Developmem Code, the property was zoned Agricultural (A) and Single Family-7 (SF-7) zoning classification. The subject 1.66 acre property is curremly vacam and is divided imo two zoning districts. One zone is 0.54 acres of NR-3 and the other zone is 1.12 acres of NR-4. Adjacem zoning: North: South: East: West: Neighborhood Residemial 3 & 4 (NR-3 & 4) zoning district - vacant/ further existing homes Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning district - vacam home and single family Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) zoning district -single family homes Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) zoning district - single-family homes/ (Foumains of DeNon) Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in the "Existing Neighborhood / Infill Compatibility" future land use area. New development in this district 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. Preserve Neighborhoods: The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be achieved by demanding and establishing design and construction standards that are fair and evenly applied. (page 35) Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential componeN of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in DeNon by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density developmeN where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning does promote a diversity of retail business and the increased zoning would allow for the ability to construct quality professional office, or retail sales & services as this area is ideNified by infill land use compatibility. The proposed new developmeN will be compatible with the existing uses and zoning of the surrounding properties at this time. The general area surrounding the site includes a variety of Neighborhood ResideNial 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood ResideNial 4 (NR-4) zoning district uses. The majority of the properties located within five hundred feet of this site are renal units with multi-family type dwellings. Several sites in this area are vacant or small professional offices/retail establishments. This proposed zoning designation NRMU allows several more commercial and resideNial uses than the existing NR-3 and NR-4 zoning district. The NR-3 zoning designation does not allow any of the proposed commercial uses as meNioned by the applicaN.(see AttachmeN 5) New developmeN in this area would improve the viability of surrounding properties. DevelopmeN Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. The proposed approximately ninety-three (93) one bedroom single-family dwelling units would generate approximately fifty-six (56) trips per day. The number of trips is doubled that of the maximum allowed under the proposed curreN zoning designation. A traffic impact analysis is required for any proposed site developmeN that can be reasonably expected to generate more than 1,000 vehicle trip ends during a single day and or more than one hundred (100) vehicle trip ends during a single hour. Access and Connectivity CurreNly the access to the property is from McKinney. McKinney is ideNified as a primary arterial and TXDOT coNrolled by the DeNon Mobility Plan. This street requires one hundred thirty five (135) feet of right-of-way. McKinney meets the standards for the existing primary arterial by the DeNon Mobility Plan. It is aNicipated the surrounding road system will be sufficieN to handle increased traffic generated from this proposal. Public Infrastructure CurreNly the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed developmeN. downstream structures in McKinney Avenue will need to be evaluated. The Environmental Quality Impacts No negative environmeNal impacts have been ideNified. Development Code/Zoning Analysis Current NR-3 and NR-4 zonings basically allow for a single family. The proposed Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU) zoning would allow multi-family development up to thirty (30) dwelling units per acre with the approval of an SUP. Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU) also allows office and retail uses by right with limitations. Staff Findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan 2. The proposed zoning would provide additional neighborhood services and or business in the area but may facilitate additional infill development. 3. .The proposed zoning is compatible with zoning and uses in the general area along McKinney, but higher in intensity with adjacent zoning and uses. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps Location/Zoning Map NORTH i NR-2 I I NR. NR.~ N R;4 Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Maps Public Notification Map NORTH Scale: None Public Notification Date ...... 200' Legal Notices * sent via Certified Mail: 500" Courtesy Notices* sent via 1st Class Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 0 · Neutral: 1 September 14, 2002 5 38 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0% Z02-0034 200 Foot and 500 Foot Property Owner Responses Property Owner within In Favor Comments 200' Name and Address /Opposed* Donald Schmidt 1228 Denison Dorant, Ok 74701 Not provided No comment provided Netural. *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ATTACHMENT 4 Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Maple Leaf Homes (office) August 26, 2002 Z02-0034 (Maple Leaf) Neighborhood Meeting - Monday August 26, 2002 Developer has amended proposal to build single family homes along with professional office commercial off the frontage of McKinney Drive. Staff attendees Tiffanie Willis, of lEG, Lee Allison, Vicki Oppenheim. Twenty citizens attended the scheduled meeting, lEG presented a power point presentation on both proposed office professional and single-family development. Additionally existing developments constructed by the land owner were viewed. Neighborhood Comments: · How much is the single-family is being reduced? (2.83 acres) · McKinney is noisy at night; the development will crate a buffer that reduces noise to the existing neighborhood, plus it will be convenient to have professional office and services nearby. · What will house sizes be? (actual size Unknown at this stage; but the development code does contain a minimum house size, the developer speculated 1,600 to 1,700) · If the residential area is designed well, small-lot homes won't be an issue; however, we don't want Choice or Pulte developments. · Will you develop this yourself or will you sell this property once it's been rezoned? If so, what's to keep you from selling off to Choice or Pulte? · Can we discuss the allowed uses in each district as seen on the City handout? (Yes) · Applicant's plan is reducing the amount of residential and adding commercial/office currently being proposed. If the applicant decides not to go through with this rezoning, we'll be stuck with the retail/commercial zoning area near McKinney. · Does the platting process require a public hearing? (No) · Would the applicant consider reducing some of the NRMU to NR-6? · What is the timeframe for this development? · We appreciate the reduction in single-family density. · The Development code has aesthetic standards that will address house design. · Applicant is trying to preserve some of the existing trees, which I appreciate. · Why not entirely connect Joshua into Paisley? · I don't want traffic from this development to inundate internal residential roads. · Joshua should connect with proposed roadway system that will eliminate the separation between the residential community and the school site. · Something's going to happen to this land whether we like it or not. And the drainage MUST be improved. · Our neighborhood needs to remain vigilant; this development is too unpredictable. · I wish the applicant had larger lot sizes for single-family tracts, but will the applicant work with us regarding the design of this project? · What the applicant is proposing is better than what could go here otherwise. · The plus is that the applicant is a local developer; he's not an out-of-towner. · The applicant needs to be able to make a profit; I'd like to see larger single family lots but I'm glad he reduced the frontage to professional office. · I'm concerned about traffic. · I'm thrilled that the applicant has adjusted the alignment of Joshua. · I'm glad the residential area is being reduced. · The applicant has tried to accommodate us; we can live with this development and the drainage must be repaired before development. · The drainage impact will be to great for existing land owners to the south of McKinney. · The consistent flooding over 6 inches in my garage is long over due and the City has promised for 13 years to not allow another developer clearance until this infrastructure is improved, will this happen with this project? · The construction of the Fountains of Denton compiled the drainage problems in this area. · IEG committed to working with the residents by contact the City about the drainage problems and a report discussing the drainage options will be forth coming. · Maybe our neighborhood should form committees to meet with the city regarding some of these issues. 10 ATTACHMENT 5 Applicant Correspondence ISBELL ENGI~ERING GROUP, INC. Fm~ -', Vic~ Opera. tm 11 C 2,31, 1.] ? N~ 12 ISBELL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 2002 13 D E 14 ISBELL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. CO~gUI. TA,¥]',~' t,¥ .~N('~I57~;'ER~ AND 1%4h%'~VG 1~f~ 15~ 2002 A~ Mert~,~r~ C~ty of D~ton City ~11 Were 221 N, lsd!! ~j~r~ng (imt~'p, Inc~ on beh~.if ~f Maple Le~t Home.~ submit: t~ ~ll~w~g NR-4 ~mi~ on MeKm > Ave~ to NRMU. We ~t]e~i p'ab~ h~ing~: ~fom ihe City Fo r !:w~y-fiye ye,~ e'~ M a.~y Sba w o f M ap ~, L ~f '~'Io~s ~. buitt ~th ~:~idc~t ~al ~ ~'~crcbl dcwet~p:mc~.s b CanMa a~ ~a ii'~. Dal~$ Fo.~ Wo'~h M~plex. Ou~ of t~ scm. m! thousaM Maple !,ear ~s ~ t.~ Datla~ Fan-Womb N,leeopkm, <~'~ 200 ta>'mas ar~ b~ ~o~; 15 T'~ m;bj~ ~ ~66~ property ~}m~ McK~nney A~nue ~t of~k~ke. T~ ~peny' ihe ot~r ~'~ ~s 0,54 ~ cfNR~3, '~ pe~y i~l~ely ~o t~ ~,h ~, va.eaat ~d fun.her McKiP~y Avenue, afMeKinne)' A~nu:e, ~qm flood[~ Ms promp~ the City to plan for d~jmgm a~ag McKbney A~nue, !'l~ po~e:t~ial ain't,ge ~obk'm wiE be: ~e~ected !brough:an a~ndmm applkatim~ ~ De~tment of T~gtion al~ pla~ m Mdm McK~n~,ey Ave~ w~hia t:~ mx't ~ral year~, T[~ '~g M[i ptanmte t~ a~e~m~ve,neas f~x re~hl a~d, eo~rebl d~ebp~m. 16 imm~d~cly ~ t~c '~5 ~d ea~:, :~v~ ~n:g immediately surrou.~&~g t~ peo.p~a~ to t~ west~ Om~HalfMi.k ~flko~aea NRMU map), 17 C~mpa,~so,~ ~ Exl,t~g Z~aing: te Pro,pos~ p~of~donal o!g~cs, Thus. 1~ i~a~sity of u,~ writ ~ ~0~;~e'nt wil~ Off~s alreaay ~b>' a~ng McKL~my C~mmuni~' B~n~it~. T~ p~>l~sed p~fc~io~[ oit]~¢:a: ~o,~g McK~aa,ey A~a~ wH1 18 Tr~e: lEG ~,lg~!~t~ th~ ~oily ~s, generated ~ ~he ~z~ NR~3 ~ NR~ ~.oning m '~ ~rty, T~ City will ~af~m. ~he aymm ca~c ~y duo,ag the p~t6ag p~css ~d t~ 'Dainag~ ~ dra,inagc of ~ si:to is ~ ~ah ~o ~'h. *'i]l~ antici~t~ ~ge s~m ~r t~ ~t~ will ~ availabk m ~[~ve i~ ~mkmge ~obLems ~o ~,~' a~u~l~ ~ ~:s the flow ~om Scn~,r t.ee Alli~n, Ma~ of Civil EttgJ:n. ecrb~ Divisio~ 19 ATTACHMENT 6 Site Photographs 2O CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 t7 18 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 73 COMMISSIONER APPLE: All right. We're going to convene our meeting and we'll begin with Items 25 and 26 which are public hearings, Commissioners. And we're going to take those together, I believe; is that correct? MS. WILLIS: Yes, ma'am, COMMISSIONER APPLE: We will need two motions, one for 25 and one for 26, but the presentations will be made together. Ms. Willis with the City planning staff will present and I'I1 open the public hearing, MS. WILLIS: Thank you, Chairwoman Ms. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Page 75 addition to case number 35, City staff and vice -- Assistant Director Larry Reichhart did provide for you at the commence of the public hearing a visual of two parcels. There's a property here that may have become in conflict with some of the residents who are within the 200-foot area. MR. POWELL: I believe that the Commissioner's question was not the number but have we calculated the percentage in opposition? MS. WILLIS: oh, yes. It was less than three percent. Apple. Before you this evening are zoning cases 34 and 35. The applicant is proposing on zoning case 34 to rezone the existing Neighborhood Residential 3 and 4 areas to the NRMU zoning designation. Thank you. Zoning case 35 featured, the applicant is proposing to rezone the area existing NR-3 to the zoning classification of NR-4. The applicant has taken the liberty to empower the neighborhood and assist them with 12 14 15 16 I7 18 19 them? COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. MR. POWELL: For which one or for both of MS, WILLIS: For 35. MR. POWELL: 35? ' MS. WILLIS: Yes, sir. MR. POWELL: Okay. MS. WILLIS: And then 34 was not calculated knowledge as to exactly what they plan to develop on both sites. Zoning case 34 is encouraging office, professional office there on the frontage, and then to the rear portions, residential development. The number of homes have not been decided as yet. However, the applicant is a known developer in the City of Denton and has established Page 74 some projects noteworthy of comment here tonight. A neighborhood.meeting was held, Twenty citizens did come out and attend and make their voice known at the meeting. Several concerns were made, In your backup, there is a follow-up sheet there about the neighborhood meetings. Some of the strong concerns for the citizens were the drainage issues that will come with the impact of new development. And the applicant has, I understand, followed up with the citizens in that regard, as well as City staff to learn what additional requirements will be made of them at the time of platting of both of the properties presented before you. The staff report gives you some good information about this site and how it compares with the Comp Plan, and staff would entertain questions at this t/mc. COMMISSIONER APPLE: I don't see anyone in the que so I have one. Ms. Willis, do you know what the opposition percentage ended up being? MS. WILLIS: The opposition for case 34, we received one opposition letter. The packet that Ms. Speer passed out to you, there -- 34 was one. In case 35, we received six petitions in favor of the case and then we received in record seven, I believe, in opposition. In 20 but we only received one, 21 COMMISSIONER APPLE: It was significant. 22 Thank you. 23 MS. WILLIS: And I also have a map of the 24 responses within a 200-foot area. 221 Joshua lying within 25 200, and then 308 Joshua there in the front area, and then Page 76 I 409 Pace and 2800 Paisley, ail responding in opposition, 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is the 3 applicant here and do they wish to present? 4 MS. WILLIS: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Before you head out, 6 Commissioner Powell has a question. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: would you put that 8 last map back up there? 9 MS. WILLIS: Yes, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Tell me the 11 significance of the yellow. Why is it colored yellow? 12 MS. WILLIS: Okay. In the notification 13 process, we are to select areas that should be notified 14 that are classified within the red ring. Actually, you're 15 seeing here this would be the percentage that would push a 16 20-percent presentation on to the City Council level. So 17 this is the mapping. 18 MR. POWELL: Tiffanie, if I may, the red 19 line and the blue line shows the active areas. The yellow 20 just looks Iike we picked up some parcels and those are 21 colored in yellow, They really don't represent anything, 22 COMMISSIONER POWELL: SO it's no major 23 significance. 24 MS. WILLIS: No, sir. 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Nothing to worry PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 73 - Page 76 Condcns¢ItTM Page 77 1 about tonight? 2 MS, WILLIS: NO, not for tonight. 3 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you very much. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is the 5 applicant present? If you'll give us your name and 6 address, please. 7 MS. OPPENHEIM: 'rhank you, Commissioners. 8 My name is Vicki Oppenheim. I work with Isbell 9 Engineering Group, 1405 West Chapman Drive in Sangcr. 10 Thank you ve~ much for providing this opportunity for us 11 to present the proposed Maple Leaf Homes development. 12 Tonight we are here to request proposed 13 zoning amendment changes for residential and commercial 14 development. We're requesting a zoning amendment to NR-4, 15 as well as a zoning amendment to SRMU to allow 16 professional offices along McKinney Avenue. Massey Shaw 17 is the owner of Maple Leaf Homes. He has been developing 18 buildings within the Dallas/Fort Worth area for about 25 19 years. He's built over 200 homes in Denton and several 20 thousand in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex. 21 There's some examples of the quality homes 22 that he's built in Denton already. He's built several in 23 Chateau Court off of Bell Avenue in north Denton, as well 24 as Oaks of Montecito in south Denton off of Hickory Creek. 25 Here are more examples of some homes he's built in Oaks of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 79 And, as I said, four offices would buffer the homes from McKinney Avenue. It would be a master plan development and try to maintain a residential quality to the commercial development. I wanted to give you a little history of this project. He initiated purchasing the property in early July. And we've met with the Summer Oaks Addition representatives who are proposing some development to the north. They arc in the platting process at this point. We also met with the neighbors on August 26th and we also met with the City of Denton's Jim Colter about drainage issues, as well as the property owner to the south about drainage issues. We are very interested in coordinating drainage improvements with ail the developers, as well as the City, as well. The concept, again, is 93 to 96 homes, four professional offices. The Wade Owen existing residence, and connectivity to existing streets. This is a summary of the zoning districts. A and E would be NRMU. C and D would be ~R-4. And B would remain m-4 because it's already NR-4 at this point. Total acreage to be rezoned is 26, approximately 26 acres. Masscy Shaw wanted me to take pictures of professional offices on Lillian Miller. They're examples of offices he envisions for h/s professional offices that Page 78 1 Montecito and some other moderately priced homes on 2 Chateau Court off Bell Avenue. Here are yet some more. 3 I want to talk about the existing 4 conditions of the propm'ty. At this point it's 5 predominantly vacant with the exception of one existing 6 home, the Wade Owen house which will remain if the project 7 proceeds. At this point, the surrounding zoning is sa.4 8 and NRMU-12. We are: NR-3 and htR-4, under the current 9 zoning, approximately 84 homes may be built at 3.5 units 10 per acre. Under the proposed slz4 zoning, we would get 11 approximately 96 homes. 12 I want to discuss with you the existing 13 commercial uses along McKinney Avenue. At this point t4 there's a Piggly Wiggly which is pointed out on the map. 15 Th~ro am some offices. There are some apartments to the 16 west~ The Fountains of Denton. There's a car wash 17 facility. And there are also some existing professional 18 offices, actually law offices to the west of the proposed 19 development. 20 So as I've mentioned, there will be 21 approximately between 93 and 96 homes built if this zoning 22 goes forward. He's proposing moderately priced homes. He 23 wants to keep them in about $120,000.00 range. And 24 approximately four one-story professional offices. In the 25 concept plan, we would have between 93 and 96 homes here. Page 80 1 he would build. Some more examples, landscaping, a 2 residential feel to the buildings. And some more 3 examples. I want to thank you for your time. If you have 4 any questions, I'm here to answer any questions. And Lee 5 Allison is also in the audience who is an engineer with 6 our firm. Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I don't 8 sec any questions. I do have one card from someone who 9 would like to address this item, John Tysseland. If you'd 10 come down and speak into the mike and give us your name 11 and address. 12 MR. TYSSELAND: My name is John Tysseland. 13' I live at 3009 Brookshire, Plane. I own the property i4 right in front of the development so I'm concerned about 15 drainage. I know that the City of Piano (sic) was 16 surveying that and signed some waivers six months ago to a 17 year, had not heard anything on what the outcome of that 18 was. So my concern is drainage, like everybody else. 19 Thank you. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE: lhank you. Is there 21 anyone else who would like to address this issue? Seeing 22 no one coming forward, would you like to respond to his 23 drainage concerns? 24 MR, ^[nrsoN: oood evening. My name is Lee 25 Allison. I'm with Isbell Engineering, the Manager of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 77 - Page 80 CondenseltTM P~g¢ 81 1 Civil Division. Drainage is -- everywhere, I guess, is a 2 big issue and we've had several meetings. Obviously, 3 we've met with the developer to the north. They are not 4 required to provide for detention. But with us they are 5 intcxested in, of course, being able to convey their 6 drainage through our site. And even once it gets past our 7 site, their interest is the impact going downstream 8 conditions. On our site, we are planning on having 9 detention. We expect to do that. We know it's required 10 and we do not anticipate downstream improvements to be 11 able to accommadate the full runoff from our site. 12 We have visited with both Jim Colter and 13 David Salmon in a couple of different ways. With Jim 14 Colter we're looking at ways to coordinate detention with 15 watex quality improvements. Instead of spending money on 16 downstream improvements, they may -~ the City may want to 17 use a part of our land to increase the detention; il 8 therefore, minimize needs downstream. We're very open to 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 83 1 they have, they're moving a little more forward with the 2 negotiations at this time. But, again, we're doing 3 detention. Not expecting to have any downstream impacts, 4 but at the same time, we're trying to help be a 5 facilitator in all of this goings on between property 6 owners, north, south, east, and west regarding the 7 drainage. Probably that was a whole lot more than you 8 asked for. But be glad to respond to any other questions 9 you may have. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. 11 Allison. Commissioners, do you have any questions? 12 Commissioner Roy. 13 COMMISSIONER ROY: On the site that you t4 want to make NRMU, are you committing to build 15 professional office buildings? 16 MR. ALLISON: Yoll need to ask Mr. Massey 17 Shaw that question. That's what he's indicated to me and 18 I'll ask him. He's nodding his head yes. that. Of course, we need to work to try and keep our property in balance. He may lose a few home sites but if in losing those home sites, he doesn't lose his expectations off the land itself, that's not a significant issue as long as we can have a quality development. We're looking at ways to build these 19 20 21 22 much. 23 24 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. MR. ALLISON: Sllre. Anything else? COMMISSIONER APPLE: NO. Thank you very MR. ALLISON: All fight. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: I$ there anyone else detention facilities in so that they can be used kind of Page 82 like a park. If you can imagine a cul-de-sac with a one-way strut around it and houses on one side, and in front of all these homes right across the street, you've got a detention area that in dry periods is good for volleyball and tennis, picnics and green space. Going to have some landscaping and trees. We're working with them 25 present who'd like to address this item? If you'll turn Page 84 your card in. Thank you. If you'll go to the microphone and give us your name and address, Mr. Walker. MR. WALKER: I'm Ken Walker. I live at 223 Belin[re. It's within the 500-foot circle of this. My wife and I didn't get to attend the neighborhood meeting but I heard a mention but I didn't hear what streets this on ways to accomplish that. Downstream according to Mr. Salmon, it's my understanding that the improvements are already designed. They're trying to acquire the easements of the land so they can construct thc improvements on the south side of McKinney Street. That is being held up with some rnisund~standings in the negotiations with property owners. The Mitchells seem to have full 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 would connect to. My concern if the feed street is to be Bellaire, my concern would be the amount of increased traffic on Bellaire. There's no light on that street and it already is very heavily congested in the early morning and late afternoon. COMMISSIONER APPLE: All right. I'll have staff address that question. MR. WALKER: And I'd like to aIso make a comment that at current the end of Joshua where it comes understanding and are ready to work with the City and move forward with it. We've nm with the representative, Ms. Copehagin. And I think at first they didn't understand what a green space credit meant to them. It's just green space. And we talked about that in terms of what it means in dollars of development. That if they waited and actually made the improvements downstream, you know, developed the land, then they would be responsible for drainage improvements that the City is planning on making. So I think understanding the benefits that 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 up to join into Bellaire, when it rains now it does flood in that area. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Could Ms. Willis or Mr. Powell address the gentleman's question? Thank you, Ms. Willis. MS. WILLIS: what was your question? COMMISSIONER APPLE: The gentleman proposed one. Did you -- MS. WILLIS: I was assisting a citizen. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Did you miss it? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 81 - Page 84 Condens¢ItTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 !14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 85 MS. WILLIS: Yes. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Sir, could you address your question again? MR. WALKER: My question was the connectivity to existing streets. What existing streets will this 93 to 96 homes connect to? How will he get into that development off of McKinney? Page 87 want to make sure I heard that correctly. MR. REICHHART: We requil'e the connectivity between all properties unless a variance is sought. COMMISSIONER APPLE: co~mnissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: I'll put Mr. Reichhart further on the spot. The gist of these two cases is really raising the density slightly in the COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank yell. MS. WILLIS: AS yOU look at the map, before you to the north of this site is Paisley. We can use this map here. To the north of the site is Paisley and the applicant has displayed their internal road structure to connect here to the north, as well as you have frontage on McKinney. Them is existing Joshua that I understand will be-- MR. POWELL: If we could go back to the Power Point presentation, it does show the connectivity. That shows the connection points. There's one sitting on the-- COMMISSIONER APPLE: Could you speak into the microphone, please? MS. WILLIS: Joshua will connect in here. Pardon me. And then you also have to the north of the property Paisley running here and this is McKinney where I don't see an entrance for the residential but, of course, Page 86 I McKinney will have to provide entrance for the office 2 professionals, the ingress/egress them. Does that answer 3 your question, sir? 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Reichhart, are you 5 going to weigh in? 15 MR. REICHHART: Yes. Just for a point of 7 clarification, this is a schematic sketch that we really 8 have not reviewed yet. The applicant will be required to 9 connect all the existing streets that are stubbed into 10 this subdivision, as well as provide a connection to 11 McKinney through the office complex that they're 12 proposing.' So there will be a number of connections. To 13 the west of this is property owned by The Fountains of 14 Benton, I believe, which is atready developed. So there 15 would not be a connection that way but there would be at 16 least two connections to the east and one to McKinney. 17 COMMISSIONER APPLE: corm~ssioner Powell 18 has a question. 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Mr. Reichhart, I'm 20 going to put you on the spot and get you to repeat that 21 the residential portion of this zoning change would 22 connect to East McKinney Street. 23 MR. REICHHART: Yes, through the NRMU 24 development there would be a connection. 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. I just 8 residential section because it's already zoned 9 residential. 10 MR. REICHHART: correct. 11 COMMISSIONER MULROY: And then allowing the 12 office buffer on McKinney and that's why they want the 13 NRMU which actually will have a little less traffic to the 14 neighborhood. But that's the gist of the two cases. 15 MR. REICHHART: That's correct. Thc NRMU 16 would also allow some retail neighborhood residential, but 17 not multi-family. 18 COMMISSIONER MULROY: SO traffic and 19 drainage are really platting issues. They already have 20 residential zoning. We're talking about upping the 21 density slightly. 22 MR. REICHHART: Point five units per acre. 23 COMMISSIONER MULROY: Right. And then the 24 change on McKinney, it's pretty self evident that that's 25 commercial retail frontage. So these other issues, we Page 88 I already have residential zoning on this piece of property 2 so these other issues really should be directed towards 3 platting would be my understanding of the process. 4 MR. REICHHART: Mine too, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I have no 6 more cards of people wishing to speak. I do. There is no 7 Agenda item on here though. Is tiffs for this item? All 8 right, Mr. Whitson. 9 MR. WHITSON: My name is Dennis Whitson, 10 3502 Kingfisher here in Denton. ] 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: xhank you. 12 MR, WHrrSON: I had no intention to 13 speaking until the gentleman over here made a statement 14 that all they intended to do was put detentions and not 15 make any improvmneats downstream. I know that it's not a 16 part of your purview here, but I've got a house here on 17 McKinuey where there's standing water in front of the 18 house right now. Them will probably be standing water 19 there all year long. And with this much improvement to go 20 on upstream and nothing to be done downstream is just 21 ridiculous. 22 I will say that I've seen the work that Mr. 23 Massey has done in other parts of the town. He docs 24 excellent work. I've got nothing against what he wants to 25 do. I just think that we need to do something to take PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 85 - Page 88 CondonsoitTM Pag~ 89 1 care of this water situation. Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 3 there anyone else who wishes to address this item? Would 4 you like rebuttal since there's been further public 5 comment? 6 MR. ALLISON'. NOt so much rebuttal hilt more 7 a minor additional explanation, particularly regarding the 8 traffic and the connectivity. Again, this is a concept 9 plan. But what we're trying to do with this traffic 10 pattern 'here is to make it so that our access primarily is 11 either to the north through Paisley. And as soon as I get 12 my draftsmen to remove those bushes there to the south of 13 McKinney Street, we had a drafting error, but we are 14 trying to not encourage shortcutting through here back 15 into this neighborhood by any means. We'd rather make t6 this a true neighborhood-type activity that goes directly 17 to its primary access. 18 And then regarding the drainage, we do 19 realize the downstream concerns and issues. Again, 20 through our detention we have no reason to impact that 21 whatsoever. In the design of the detention, we always 22 oversize it some so there will be some minor, but I'm 23 quick to say probably negligible or insignificant positive 24 impact downstream as the result of our detention. But, 25 hopefully, with our working with this developer and the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 90 landowners here and with the City regarding improvements. hopefully we can help bring those improvements about quicker than is going otherwise. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes. For some of the audience clarification, Mr. Allison, in fact, you are required and you have little choice but to handle the additional drainage created by development through on-site detention and not through downstream or off-site improvements. Is that not how the Code reads? MR. ALLISON: That's absolutely correct. COMMISSIONER MULROY: SO everything you said is exactly what we required you to do, and going downstream is not one of your options on the first go round under our existing ordinances? MR. ALLISON: That's correct. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. MR. ALLISON: Appreciate it. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Reichhart is dying to speak again. MR. RE1CHHART: Yeah. I'm sorry. I just need to clarify, that is incorrect for the Development ' Code. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 91 I but they would have to build it to the ultimare 2 development. There's two options they have. If we don't 3 choose one or the other, they can analyze both and 4 determine which is better suited for their development. 5 But it isn't -- you have to detain first and then go 6 downstream and they can analyze both. 7 COMMISSIONE~ MULROY: well, I did say that 8 thc first go around is directed toward on-sire detention. 9 MR. REICHHART: That isn't always the case. 10 That's all I wanted to point out. A lot of people choose 11 to improve downstream. 12 COMMISSIOn, mR Mtn. ROY: well, I hope you go 13 on record with that, Larry. I think expa'iencc might bc 14 different than what's being reflecw..d. But, anyway. 15 Thank you. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. 17 Reich_hart. Thank you. l 8 MR, ALLISON: May I add one thing? 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: one thing. 20 MR, ALLISON: We can do improvements 21 downstream, but those would only be required to the extent 22 it accommodates the flow from our development. Our 23 downstream improvements would not help anybody upstream. 24 And the flows that are already coming above and beyond 25 what the system can handle would still be above and They do have the option of improving downstream, 25 SEPTEMBER 25111, 2002 Page 92 I beyond. So if wc did do anything downstream, our 2 requirements would not relieve the problems as they exist 3 today. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you for 5 'clarifying that, If there's no one else who wishes to 6 address this item, I'm going to close thc public heating. 7 Commissioners, do you have any comments? And we will 8 to make separate motions on Item 25 and 26. 9 Commissioner Powell. 10 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you, Madam 11 Chairperson. I move to approve Item 25 as submitted. 12 I'm sorry, Item 24, isn't it? 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: N0~ 25, You were 14 right, 25. 15 COMMISSIONER POWELL: 25, CXClISO me. 16 COMMISSIONER MULROY: second. 17 COMMISSIONE~ APPLE: We have a motion and a 18 second to approve Item 25. Is there any discussion? 19 Vote, please. Passes 7-0. 20 Item 26, Commissioner Powell. 2I COMMISSIONER POWELL: I move to approve 22 Item 26 as submitted. 23 COMMISSION'ER MULROY: second. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: There's a motion and a second. Discussion? Vote, please. Motion carries %0. Page 89 - Page 92 ATTACHMENT 8 Draft Ordinance ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE OF TIlE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.82 ACRES OF LAND IN THE CITY OF DENTON FROM NEIGttt~)RHOOD RESIDENTIAL 3 (NR- 3) AND NEIGttBORtt~D RESIDENTLAL 4 (NR-4) ZONING DISTRICTS TO NEKT}HBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE (NRMU): SAID REAL PROPERTY BEING GENERALLY LOCATED ALO:NG THE WEST OF BELLAIRE ON MCKIN~EY ,AVENUE, EAST OF MACK~ WEST OF JOSHUA DRiWE; PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE W~H A MAXIMUM FINE OF $2000.00 PER DAY FOR A VIOLATION OF TtIIS ORDINANCE; A SEVERABILtTY CLAUSE; AND AN EFFI:£CTIVE DATE. (Z024×)34). WHEREAS, the owner has initiat~ a change in zoning t;0r approximately 2.82 acres of land as wore r~micularly described in Ext~ibit "A" att~mhed hereto and ~r~de a part hereof by rc/brence (the ~'Propcrty") t¥om a Ncighbofll<md Residential 3 (NR,3} m~d Neigh~r[w,¢.4 Residential 4 (NR,4) zoning districB classification a~ use &signation to NcighborNi, od Residential Mix~ Use (NRMU) zeal ng district; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002~ tim Planning ami Zoning Commission rccommendc~J approval of thc requested zmfing; m~d WHEREAS, the City Cotmcil finds tN~t the zoning is consis:tent with the Comprehensive Plml, NOW, TttEREFORE TIlE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I, The Pm~rty is Mreby cNmg~ from NcighN)rh~:vod Residential 3 (NR, 3)zoning district classification a~ u.s,e &sigmation to NeighN)r[m~ Residential Mix~ U,m (NRMU) zoning distric~ m~er thc comprehensive ×oning ordimim,'c of thc Ci(v of Dcnton~ Si:?.CTION 2. Thc City's ofl~icitfl zoning map is amended to s[~:.~w thc change in zoning district classiticati SI/~CTION 3. Any person violating any provision of tiffs ordinanc~ s~ll, upon conviction, ~ fhmd a sum m:,t excmding $2~)0~00. I:~tmh day that a provision oftNs ordinance is violatc, d shall constitute a separate m~d distinct offcnm. SECTION 4. If any stmtion, sttbsection~ paragraph, sentence, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application there of to any person or circumstm~cc is held invalid 105, any cm[rt of competent juri.~iction, such N:~lding s[~tall not at'Ii:ct the validity of the rewmning portions of this ordim~m:e, Cib: Council of the Cib: of Denton, Tex[kq lmreby ~clares it would have mmct~ suci~ renmining l~×~rtimts ~spi:tc m~y suc[~ invalidity. SECTION 5. This ordinance sh~dl ~cmne cfli:ctivc fburmcn :(14) days from the dac of its pasmge, and tim City Secretary is hereby dircx~ted to ~mse the captim~ of this ordinance to be publish~ twice in the Dca~ton Recor&Chroaicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of M thh~ ten ( ! 0 ): ~ys o f the ~ te o f i ts passa ge? PA SS ED AN D ~&P PRO¥ ED ~[~i:s ~h¢. ...................... day of:' 2002, EU~NE BROC~ MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS,~ CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: ttERBERT L. PROUTY, CWY A~ORNEY BY: E×hibit ;~A" 2,82 ACRES FIELD NOTES to all tN~t certain tract of land situat~ in the M. YOACItUM SURVEY, Abstract No. 1442, m the City of Denton, Denture County, Texas and being a part cfa rolled 2X) 74 ~rc ~rac~ of l~md &scrib~ in the Dc~t from Stcila Marie Court,my Di Mt=lo, et al to Donald C, Schmidt as recorded Volmr~ 2739, Page P~3 oft~m Real Property Rtmords of mid Dent{m Cotmty, Tcxas~ a part cfa ~llcd 3. ! 89 acre trot of land des~ibed in t~e Dc~ Imm William Troy Walker, et al to Nejat Destmii tm r~ord~ in Volume 4768, Page ! 768 of said Real Property Records, and a ~rt of Lot l~ Block I of the Maim Addition an a~ition in t~ City of Denton, Demon County, Texas according to tim Plat tkmmof reeord~ in Cabinet E, Page 59 of the Plat Records of said Denton Coumy, Texas; BEGE'gNING tit a ??' caped iron rod 'fbkt[~ 'fbr th~ ~utherly most Southms:t corner of mid ~stani Tnmt at thc ~uthwcst comer cfa tract of land described in thc Deed fi'om William T. Walker to Robert John as record~ taide r Cotal~y Clerk's File Nmn~ r 97-R{X) 54124 of said Real Property Records of ~nton County, Texas, same being in the North right-of'-way li~m of FM Road 426 (East Mc~nncy Stroct); TttENCE North 73. degrees 19 minutes 42 socor~s West with said right-of~way trod the South linc of said ~s:tani Tract a distance of416.72, IL'et to a 3/8" iron r{:~ tk:m~ tbr the Southwest comer of said 2.074 acre ~hmidt Tr;mt, mine being the ~uthcast corner cfa called 5 acre tract of land described in tim Dmd lmm Billy Joe Martin mid Nell ic E. Martin to JOhn Tysselmld as recorded in Volmnc 666. Page 726 of the Deed Records of Demo n Cotmkv, Texas; THENCE North 00 &grees 44 minutes 23 seconds East wsth the East line thereofaral the West line of said 2,074 acrc S,chmidt Tract a distance of 250,00 tket to the Northwest conmr of the herein described tract; THENCE ~uth 89 degrees 15 minutes 3 7 s¢~s~s F. asta distance of 398.32 ii:ct to the N'orthmst otm~cr of tim [mmin described tract; TttENCE ~uth 00 degrees 21 minutes 5{) secor~s West l~mssin,g tit a dista~ce cfi I7.I5 fket a capp~ iron r<:'~ lbtmd at t~ ~lient con~r of ~id 3. [ 89 acre Destani Tract a~ t~ Northwest of'said John TraO, a~ coatiaui ag with t~ West lira ther~)f and the East lira of said 3, ! 89 acre ~stani Tract a tot~fl dis~ame of3~.40 t~ct to thc PLACE OF BEGINNING lind c~iosing 2.82 acres of Item #5G AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: November 5, 2002 Planning and Development CM/DCM/ACM: Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 SUBJECT - Z02-035 (Maple Leaf-Residential) Hold a public hearing and consider an adoption of ordinance rezoning of approximately 23.2 acres of land from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district. The property is generally located north of McKinney Avenue, west of Joshua Street. A single-family subdivision is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: Isbell Engineering Group, Inc. Denton, Texas The applicant is requesting of land totaling approximately 23.2 acres be rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district. The applicant also has a second zoning case adjacent to this property. See Z02-0034 Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 3. As of this writing staff has received 7 letters of support and 4 letters of opposition from the adjacent landowners. The opposition represents less than 5 %. As opposition is less than 20% a simple majority vote (4-3) by City Council will be required to approve this request. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval 7-0. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. Platting is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0035, commonly known as Maple Leaf Residential: Application Date - Date: DRC Date- Date: Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - Date: September 3, 2002 July 25, 2002 September 25, 2002 A neighborhood meeting was held on August 26, 2002. (see Attachment 4) FISCAL INFORMATION Future development of this property will increase the assessed value of the city. No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis 2. Maps. 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses). 4. Neighborhood Meeting minutes. 5. Applicants Correspondence. 6. Photographs. 7. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting. 8. Draft Ordinance. Prepared by: Tiffanie Willis Planner Respectfully submitted: for )uglas S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary_ of Zoning Request The applicant is requesting one parcel of land totaling 23.2 acres of land to be rezoned from its current Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district. The requested zoning change allows the applicant to pursue construction of approximately ninety-two (92) single-family residential subdivision homes. The applicant has submitted two zoning cases, Z02-0034 and Z02-0035. Although two separate zoning cases Z02-0034 reflects the developers desire to establish retail and professional office uses and zoning case Z02-0035 details plans for a residential subdivision. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Agricultural (A) zoning classification. The subject 23.2 acre property is currently predominantly vacant. One tract of land is 2.3 acres and zoned NR-3 and the other tract of land is 20.21 acres and zoned NR-3. Adjacent zoning: North: Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district - vacant & further existing homes South: Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district - vacant East: Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district -single family homes West: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district-Vacant & (Fountains of Denton) & single- family homes Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in the "Existing Neighborhood / Infill Compatibility" future land use area. New development in this district 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. No new development is proposed at this time, however increased density allowed from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) should be considered. Currently NR-3 allows a maximum of 3.5 units per acre, up to approximately eighty (80) single-family units. The proposed NR-4 zoning would allow up to 4 dwelling units per acre, up to ninety two (92) single family units. Preserve Neighborhoods: The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be achieved by demanding and establishing design and construction standards that are fair and evenly applied. (page 35) Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in DeNon by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density developmeN where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning does promote a diversity of housing stock and the increased density.. The proposed new developmeN will be compatible with the existing uses and zoning of the surrounding properties at this time. The general area surrounding the site includes a variety of Neighborhood ResideNial 3 (NR-3) and Neighborhood ResideNial 4 (NR-4) zoning district uses. The majority of the properties located within five hundred (500) feet of this site are renal units with multi- family type dwellings. Several sites in this area are vacaN or small professional offices/ retail establishmeNs. This proposed zoning designation, NR-4, allows the construction of duplex units (with limitation) as in comparison with the existing NR-3 zoning district. New development in this area would improve the viability of surrounding sites. DevelopmeN Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. The proposed NR-3 zoning classification with 20.2 acres would generate approximately 599 trips per day, for approximately sixty (60) units. In the NR-4 zoning designation, the number of trips will increase to 921 trips per day for approximately ninty two (92) units according to that of the maximum allowed under the proposed current zoning designation. The increase of traffic based on this zoning change would be minimal. Access and Connectivity CurreNly the access to the property is from Paisley. Paisley is ideNified as a proposed collector and is a resideNial avenue by the DeNon Mobility Plan. This street has a minimum right-of-way of sixty-five (65) feet. Paisley meets the standards for the proposed collector street and the Denton Mobility Plan permits no driveway access to single-family and two-family dwelling units. It is aNicipated the surrounding road system will be sufficieN to handle increased traffic generated from this proposal. And the City prefers that common access to ensure coordination with surrounding streets to protect the various property owners will be accomplished by the developer. Public Infrastructure CurreNly the infrastructure in this area is aNicipated to be adequate to serve the proposed developmeN. The downstream structures in Paisley and McKinney Avenue will need to be evaluated. Environmental Quality Impacts No negative environmeNal impacts have been ideNified. Developmem Code/Zoning Analysis Currem NR-4 zonings allow for a single family homes and duplexes (with limitation) with a maximum of four (4) units per acre. The proposed Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning would allow up to ninety two (92) dwelling units per acre. However due to the size of this site only four (4) maximum units per acre could be built, not accounting for lot improvements. See comparison chart below: Zoning District NR-3 Density (Max) per Acre 3.5 NR-4 4 93 Maximum Units Maximum Lot Allowed per Site Coverage 80 50 % 60% Staff Findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The DeNon Plan and surrounding land uses. 2. Existing infrastructure needs to be more efficient as development is proposed along McKinney Avenue. 3. The proposed Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning is consistem with the existing adjacem properties. ATTACHMENT 2 Location/Zoning Map NORTH NR-2 I: NR-2 ii NR-4 HR.4 NR;4 Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification Map Public Notification Date ...... 200' Legal Notices * sent via Certified Mail: 500" Courtesy Notices* sent via 1st Class Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 4 · In Favor: 7 · Neutral: 0 September 14, 2002 178 238 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: less than 3% Scale: None Z02-0035 200 Foot Property Owner Responses Property Owner within In Favor Comments 200' Name and /Opposed* Address NeJat Destani 6399 Willow Springs Rd Favor No comment provided, Lagrange, IL 60525 We encourage the City to make the north-south Sursh Shridhamd, Pres. Favor street in the northern panhandle to become stubbed 2404 Texas dr. #103 out all the way to the north property line and be Irving, Texas 75062 connected to Paisley. David Mosig No comment provided. Physical address within 200' RT 9 Box 4612 Favor 201 Joshua. Lufkin, Texas 75901 Kathleen Couch 209 Bellaire Drive Favor No comment provide. Denton, Texas 76209 Wade B Owen 7533 Somerset Favor No comment provided. Physical address within 200' Aubrey, TX 76227 limitation 2701 E. McKinney St. Marie M Fuller 1707 Mill Springs Drive Favor No comment provided. Physical Address 101 Austin, TX 78746 Bellaire Paul Dworak 316 Joshua Favor No comment provided. Denton, Texas 76209 Stacie Hayes Fowler 409 Pace Drive Opposed No comment provided. Denton, TX 76209 Barbra Ashcraft 308 Joshua St Opposed See note attached. Denton, TX 76209 John Janson 2410 Greenbriar Ct. Opposed No comment provided. 2801 Paisley not found Grand Prairie, TX 75050 Pamela Magee 221 Joshua Opposed No comment provided. Denton, Texas 76209 ADDITIONAL PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSE Eric Kartchner 2018 Longmeadow Ct. Opposed No comment provided. Denton, TX 76209 Thelma Jackson 2019 Longmeadow Ct. Opposed No comment provided. Denton, Texas 76209 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ATTACHMENT 4 Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Maple Leaf Homes (single-family) August 26, 2002 Z02-0034 (Maple Leaf) Neighborhood Meeting - Monday August 26, 2002 Developer has amended proposal to build single family homes along with professional office commercial off the frontage of McKinney Drive. Staff attendees Tiffanie Willis, of lEG, Lee Allison, Vicki Oppenheim. Twenty citizens attended the scheduled meeting, lEG presented a power point presentation on both proposed office professional and single-family development. Additionally existing developments constructed by the land owner were viewed. Neighborhood Comments: · How much is the single-family is being reduced? (2.83 acres) · McKinney is noisy at night; the development will crate a buffer that reduces noise to the existing neighborhood, plus it will be convenient to have professional office and services nearby. · What will house sizes be? (actual size Unknown at this stage; but the development code does contain a minimum house size, the developer speculated 1,600 to 1,700) · If the residential area is designed well, small-lot homes won't be an issue; however, we don't want Choice or Pulte developments. · Will you develop this yourself or will you sell this property once it's been rezoned? If so, what's to keep you from selling off to Choice or Pulte? · Can we discuss the allowed uses in each district as seen on the City handout? (Yes) · Applicant's plan is reducing the amount of residential and adding commercial/office currently being proposed. If the applicant decides not to go through with this rezoning, we'll be stuck with the retail/commercial zoning area near McKinney. · Does the platting process require a public hearing? (No) · Would the applicant consider reducing some of the NRMU to NR-6? · What is the timeframe for this development? · We appreciate the reduction in single-family density. · The Development code has aesthetic standards that will address house design. · Applicant is trying to preserve some of the existing trees, which I appreciate. · Why not entirely connect Joshua into Paisley? · I don't want traffic from this development to inundate internal residential roads. · Joshua should connect with proposed roadway system that will eliminate the separation between the residential community and the school site. · Will any development be coordinated with other proposed residential projects in the immediate area? · Something's going to happen to this land whether we like it or not. And the drainage MUST be improved. · Our neighborhood needs to remain vigilant; this development is too unpredictable. · I wish the applicant had larger lot sizes for single-family tracts, but will the applicant work with us regarding the design of this project? · What the applicant is proposing is better than what could go here otherwise. · The plus is that the applicant is a local developer; he's not an out-of-towner. · The applicant needs to be able to make a profit; I'd like to see larger single family lots but I'm glad he reduced the frontage to professional office. · I'm concerned about traffic. · I'm thrilled that the applicant has adjusted the alignment of Joshua. · I'm glad the residential area is being reduced. 10 · The applicant has tried to accommodate us; we can live with this development and the drainage must be repaired before development. · The drainage impact will be to great for existing land owners to the south of McKinney. · The consistent flooding over 6 inches in my garage is long over due and the City has promised for 13 years to not allow another developer clearance until this infrastructure is improved, will this happen with this project? · The construction of the Fountains of Denton compiled the drainage problems in this area. · IEG committed to working with the residents by contact the City about the drainage problems and a report discussing the drainage options will be forth coming. · Maybe our neighborhood should form committees to meet with the city regarding some of these issues. 11 ATTACHMENT 5 Applicants Correspondence ISBELL E.NGINEERING GROUP, INC. 12 13 ISBELL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. CONSULTA)iT~ ~ ~'~GINEERING ~¥D PL4N?41NG July 15~ 200'2 Mr. Salty Rkq~hel, Ch~kman And Membem of ~h~ Plannir~g and ~nir~g Cowa~ssion City of Denton C~y Hail Wes~ Ptanrfing and De~ebpncvmt Department 221 N~Elm Demon,. TX 76201 Commission: Isbell Engine~g Group, Inchon ~tmlfof Maple Leaf Home-s ~ts the fvllowir~g :zoning ~c ju~i~at~n ~ett~ to ~o~any t~ ~g ~Mwent app~eation for ~ple. Le~~ ltow~s. We ~uest public ~gs ~fom ~e City of~nton Pla~g ~d Zo~g Cx)~sion ~ ff~ Ci~ Counc~ to mm~er the approv~ ofo~ request. we ~411 ~: condacting a mi~r~od ~ing to ~ m~du~d ~or to the P~g aM Z°r~ng Core, ion hmfing:~ Maple Leaf l~k,m~ has Ix. era buildBg homes for approximately 25 years M lt~e Dal~- Forth Worth Metrop[ex. ~ oft~ severn! thousa~ Maple: Leaf homes h~ tl~e Da~s Fort- Worth Metroplex, over 200 I-manes ate in Denton. The Denton twines ~I~&. l:hom on Cl~ateau Court and those ~ the Oaks ot' Montecito m~bd~'ision on tt~ko~ Creek. 14 A Mapt~ Leaf Home at Chateau Court in Dent<m Chateau Cou~t tn Denttn Ma.ple: Le~}]omes~ purlx~ ~ to devebp sing~e~farr~ly homes ~ accordance with the Denton ~velopment C~ ~ to n~ke t~ n~cs,mry ~I. iustments to meet t~ particular she cond.ifiom~ ~ple Leaf Homes mq~sts a zx-mk~g cl~nge for 20.2 ! acres to irm~e~sc, t~ number of single tkmily homes possible, from 70 ~o 80 homes, The ~eque:st is to change existing zon~ on thc subject propert-y from NR~3 to NR4, whk:h coincides with tire ~rrounding ;,x~mk~g oft~ exist~ re~det~tb~ development on the west and east as ~,e.~ as proposed Summer O~8 Addition resklemhl tleve[o~nt to fl~, no~h. Tl'~ere is eu~ existk~g z~aing dLstrict of NR-4, 3,19 acres, immed~ately m the somh fronliag McKinney 15 Arcane. Thc ~rmiaed ~ in thc NR-4 ~nkag district would remain ~Ity thc same as in 3, with the exce~Dn of duptex¢~ permitted in NR-4, Description of Site The 20,2 I-acre siie., north of McKim'~y Avenue and west of Belh[m mhd south m~s of ~edo~o~nt~ v~an! land, ~t:h t~ exception of one single-.f~ ~sideace. The ~op~ ~s entkely ~med NR-3. The single ~iJy residence in the ~d~ oftJ~ pro~gy x;{~ m~. T~ pro~d ~s will ~ a continuation oft~ ho~s ~o the e~ with stma cona~Ji'vity~ T~, pro~y gcnemi¢ slo~s 'kom i'~ r~nh m muth m~ l~ a ~to~' of drudge problems. T~: C~y of Demon inked lEG a~ut the ~u~'eat fb~hag ofho~es t~ tk~ ~uth of McKin~y Argue. 'l~ flooding ~s pmmptc~ the C[~ to p~ for drairage akmg MOK~m~ A~ae. '~: ~tential drah~e probi~n will ~ o;~ted throu~ ~ ~proved draimge ~mem. d~¢bptt~nl ~ng Mc~y Av~mue, ~.u~sed M ~e ~te N~2 mr~g appKmtiom T~ ~~ ofT~as~tion ~o p~$ to wMea McKimmy Am~ within the ~t sev~i ~a~. T~ ~Sde:nMg wi~i prorate t~ an~tiven~ for ~idential a~ The immediate sm-rounding ~ u~s~e s~e ~urdly residential argi ~me~* h~. Fugk~r to h~ w~ ~ng MeKinaW A~ ~ ~ e~a~g m~ii~iiy de'~op~t, ~ Fo~m~s of Denton. Across Mc~ Avenue [s aa e~ting ch~ch, Fu~her ~st ~ ~t ~ c~c~ All sn~ouM~ ~sideathl zon.~ is ~n-d~tly NR-4,: with so~ HR-3: on the u~x~b~d: ~ ~om~ McKinney Avm~ md hn~te¢ a4~ent to tM sub~ct pro~y m tM west. Comparison of Existing Zoning to Proposed ~niug The property ~ currently NR~3. T~ mnhng d~ignatkm allows for 3.5 un[Is per acre any prop~rty over 2 acres. The proposed ~nh~g ofNR-4 allo~ for 4 units per acse for any property: over 2 ~res., The ;kugle difference ~weea ~-3 aM NR-4 uses is duplexes tha~ are allowed in NR-4 ;~rtir~g districts with Description of Aatieipa:ted Impacts U~a Ct~* ami Area Corn m uaiLv Ben.ts: Maple Leaf f tomes wi~ develop qualm' homc~ that ~1.~ appeal to current Demon resideras and ~tent~I vesklems seek~g affordable homing. Given ~ amicipmed 16 increase ~ De, on pop~flatio~ over t'he ~ sevemt years, t~s development will provide needed housing as well as iner~aae tt~ residential t~Lx base. Traffi¢~ lEO cakmlat~ the ~t~g NR~3 zoning ~= 20.21 acres would generate 678 trips per day for 70[mits. Ifl~ zo~ng is changed to NR-4. ~ ~r[p~ Mil increase to 773 trips ~ day for 80 units. ~ exiting 2.07 acres ofNR-4 t~t mn'nains uncl~atkged would ge. nerme ~ ~ditional 76 trips per day i~br :g tmi:ts in eittmr cz~se. Thus the to'tM trips generated ibr NR-3 ami NR4 are as fo Exi~i~g NR*3 plus 2.07 acres NR4 ~ Zoning Cha~ge ~o NR-4 pitts 2~07 acres NR~4 = 8.49 12~ ~rea~ in traffic g~eral~ ~r ~e zoning c~ge ~ mln~n~l, x~Sth ov~y m~ im:rease of 95 ~ips r~r F~t~mom, McK~ Averme will ~ w~md by TXDOT yeam.~ ~hools: ~ ~n~oa I~~t 8ck~ol d~s~jet pro~ t~ fo~g esthmle the eff~t of msidenllal &~lop~nt u~n t~ ~1 d~t~t: ti~;Iementary School: 0.40 X nmmber of:skngb family homes Mk4dle S¢imoI: 0. tTX nmmber of~gle .hmily homes Iligh School: 0,1g X number ofsBgk hmily lwmes 11m~ for the Maple Leaf Homes singk 'family develop~nt, ~ number of students get, crated from 88 ~-s wffi ~ 35 e~n~~ mhool students, 15 medle vz~ol au&mrs, ~ i6 high ~c~aol s~uden~. T~ s~dcm esfi~s ~e ~en eo~ w~ the cu~n~ deter~ t~ im~ u~ the ~hool s~te~ This ~am ~ml~ will Deaton lndepeMm't S~:oo! District. lYtilitie~: Bam~g any coatr~ictory analyses from the City, the calculations for ~ter ard se~'~er needs ~icatcxl 'llmt ~tm currmt ~m gh~21d b~ able to handle tl~: ~d/tiom[ t]o~v generated ~ t~ proposed development. There ~ c:x~sling 8-b_ch water ~s and t0~eh w, as~cm~ter lines to the soufl~ ~ng McK.ianey Avenue. Given Ihe downward slope oftlhe lam 1o M~Kinney, them lknes sb, ould ~ accessible. There are also water and w~tewat~ ~i~ms to thc east ~ ~ ofth~ proper*.y. The Gty w~II eo~ the sysfem cap~ity during the platt:Jng proce~ an~ *~ appropr~te: hrnpro~,.,emenls ',~4~ k:: rmde. ~be site will be available to relieYe the drayage prr)ble.m~ to the south and add.mss the flow ~m the ~rth onto the prolp~ty, IEG also ~gan coord~at~n with the eng~,rk~g finn Pefitt and A~soeiate~ [ne tl~at are de~g~g t~ drainage, system for the proposed Smnme~ Oaks Addition to the mmh oftl~ sub3e~t ~p~rty. 17 Requesxs hvo~le Considernfion A~et reviewi~ ibc above letter eonI~m and ~mp~nyi~ doc anm'aat~ you w~l ~ w{th our p~n~fio~ We ~ the Ci~y of Denton's favorable com~ion of our ~on~ cl~e We ~lie~ the pm[~s~ ~hp~ ~af tto~s wia ~ a ~fit Ia the m~h~rhood ~d t~ C~y of [~n~ as a w~)~, we Bok forwmd m working w{th Home~ ~d t~ C~y oi' ~on ~o ~ng fl~ pro~t to a ~c~l complain. We ap~iate ~ t~e ~ ~er~fion wi~ th~$ Respect~ay ~bm~tled, Isbell Engineering Group, V~ki Oppen~ Lee ~ison, P.E. Mare.gev of Civil Ertgineer~g Division Attachmems: l~,~luses W[~ One-HairfMiie ofPro~sed NRMU, Maple ~af}to~s Masse>' SI~w ?roperty Tracts 18 ATTACHMENT 6 Site Photographs CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 t7 18 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 73 COMMISSIONER APPLE: All right. We're going to convene our meeting and we'll begin with Items 25 and 26 which are public hearings, Commissioners. And we're going to take those together, I believe; is that correct? MS. WILLIS: Yes, ma'am, COMMISSIONER APPLE: We will need two motions, one for 25 and one for 26, but the presentations will be made together. Ms. Willis with the City planning staff will present and I'I1 open the public hearing, MS. WILLIS: Thank you, Chairwoman Ms. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Page 75 addition to case number 35, City staff and vice -- Assistant Director Larry Reichhart did provide for you at the commence of the public hearing a visual of two parcels. There's a property here that may have become in conflict with some of the residents who are within the 200-foot area. MR. POWELL: I believe that the Commissioner's question was not the number but have we calculated the percentage in opposition? MS. WILLIS: oh, yes. It was less than three percent. Apple. Before you this evening are zoning cases 34 and 35. The applicant is proposing on zoning case 34 to rezone the existing Neighborhood Residential 3 and 4 areas to the NRMU zoning designation. Thank you. Zoning case 35 featured, the applicant is proposing to rezone the area existing NR-3 to the zoning classification of NR-4. The applicant has taken the liberty to empower the neighborhood and assist them with 12 14 15 16 I7 18 19 them? COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. MR. POWELL: For which one or for both of MS, WILLIS: For 35. MR. POWELL: 35? ' MS. WILLIS: Yes, sir. MR. POWELL: Okay. MS. WILLIS: And then 34 was not calculated knowledge as to exactly what they plan to develop on both sites. Zoning case 34 is encouraging office, professional office there on the frontage, and then to the rear portions, residential development. The number of homes have not been decided as yet. However, the applicant is a known developer in the City of Denton and has established Page 74 some projects noteworthy of comment here tonight. A neighborhood.meeting was held, Twenty citizens did come out and attend and make their voice known at the meeting. Several concerns were made, In your backup, there is a follow-up sheet there about the neighborhood meetings. Some of the strong concerns for the citizens were the drainage issues that will come with the impact of new development. And the applicant has, I understand, followed up with the citizens in that regard, as well as City staff to learn what additional requirements will be made of them at the time of platting of both of the properties presented before you. The staff report gives you some good information about this site and how it compares with the Comp Plan, and staff would entertain questions at this t/mc. COMMISSIONER APPLE: I don't see anyone in the que so I have one. Ms. Willis, do you know what the opposition percentage ended up being? MS. WILLIS: The opposition for case 34, we received one opposition letter. The packet that Ms. Speer passed out to you, there -- 34 was one. In case 35, we received six petitions in favor of the case and then we received in record seven, I believe, in opposition. In 20 but we only received one, 21 COMMISSIONER APPLE: It was significant. 22 Thank you. 23 MS. WILLIS: And I also have a map of the 24 responses within a 200-foot area. 221 Joshua lying within 25 200, and then 308 Joshua there in the front area, and then Page 76 I 409 Pace and 2800 Paisley, ail responding in opposition, 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is the 3 applicant here and do they wish to present? 4 MS. WILLIS: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Before you head out, 6 Commissioner Powell has a question. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: would you put that 8 last map back up there? 9 MS. WILLIS: Yes, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Tell me the 11 significance of the yellow. Why is it colored yellow? 12 MS. WILLIS: Okay. In the notification 13 process, we are to select areas that should be notified 14 that are classified within the red ring. Actually, you're 15 seeing here this would be the percentage that would push a 16 20-percent presentation on to the City Council level. So 17 this is the mapping. 18 MR. POWELL: Tiffanie, if I may, the red 19 line and the blue line shows the active areas. The yellow 20 just looks Iike we picked up some parcels and those are 21 colored in yellow, They really don't represent anything, 22 COMMISSIONER POWELL: SO it's no major 23 significance. 24 MS. WILLIS: No, sir. 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Nothing to worry PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 73 - Page 76 Condcns¢ItTM Page 77 1 about tonight? 2 MS, WILLIS: NO, not for tonight. 3 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you very much. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is the 5 applicant present? If you'll give us your name and 6 address, please. 7 MS. OPPENHEIM: 'rhank you, Commissioners. 8 My name is Vicki Oppenheim. I work with Isbell 9 Engineering Group, 1405 West Chapman Drive in Sangcr. 10 Thank you ve~ much for providing this opportunity for us 11 to present the proposed Maple Leaf Homes development. 12 Tonight we are here to request proposed 13 zoning amendment changes for residential and commercial 14 development. We're requesting a zoning amendment to NR-4, 15 as well as a zoning amendment to SRMU to allow 16 professional offices along McKinney Avenue. Massey Shaw 17 is the owner of Maple Leaf Homes. He has been developing 18 buildings within the Dallas/Fort Worth area for about 25 19 years. He's built over 200 homes in Denton and several 20 thousand in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex. 21 There's some examples of the quality homes 22 that he's built in Denton already. He's built several in 23 Chateau Court off of Bell Avenue in north Denton, as well 24 as Oaks of Montecito in south Denton off of Hickory Creek. 25 Here are more examples of some homes he's built in Oaks of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 79 And, as I said, four offices would buffer the homes from McKinney Avenue. It would be a master plan development and try to maintain a residential quality to the commercial development. I wanted to give you a little history of this project. He initiated purchasing the property in early July. And we've met with the Summer Oaks Addition representatives who are proposing some development to the north. They arc in the platting process at this point. We also met with the neighbors on August 26th and we also met with the City of Denton's Jim Colter about drainage issues, as well as the property owner to the south about drainage issues. We are very interested in coordinating drainage improvements with ail the developers, as well as the City, as well. The concept, again, is 93 to 96 homes, four professional offices. The Wade Owen existing residence, and connectivity to existing streets. This is a summary of the zoning districts. A and E would be NRMU. C and D would be ~R-4. And B would remain m-4 because it's already NR-4 at this point. Total acreage to be rezoned is 26, approximately 26 acres. Masscy Shaw wanted me to take pictures of professional offices on Lillian Miller. They're examples of offices he envisions for h/s professional offices that Page 78 1 Montecito and some other moderately priced homes on 2 Chateau Court off Bell Avenue. Here are yet some more. 3 I want to talk about the existing 4 conditions of the propm'ty. At this point it's 5 predominantly vacant with the exception of one existing 6 home, the Wade Owen house which will remain if the project 7 proceeds. At this point, the surrounding zoning is sa.4 8 and NRMU-12. We are: NR-3 and htR-4, under the current 9 zoning, approximately 84 homes may be built at 3.5 units 10 per acre. Under the proposed slz4 zoning, we would get 11 approximately 96 homes. 12 I want to discuss with you the existing 13 commercial uses along McKinney Avenue. At this point t4 there's a Piggly Wiggly which is pointed out on the map. 15 Th~ro am some offices. There are some apartments to the 16 west~ The Fountains of Denton. There's a car wash 17 facility. And there are also some existing professional 18 offices, actually law offices to the west of the proposed 19 development. 20 So as I've mentioned, there will be 21 approximately between 93 and 96 homes built if this zoning 22 goes forward. He's proposing moderately priced homes. He 23 wants to keep them in about $120,000.00 range. And 24 approximately four one-story professional offices. In the 25 concept plan, we would have between 93 and 96 homes here. Page 80 1 he would build. Some more examples, landscaping, a 2 residential feel to the buildings. And some more 3 examples. I want to thank you for your time. If you have 4 any questions, I'm here to answer any questions. And Lee 5 Allison is also in the audience who is an engineer with 6 our firm. Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I don't 8 sec any questions. I do have one card from someone who 9 would like to address this item, John Tysseland. If you'd 10 come down and speak into the mike and give us your name 11 and address. 12 MR. TYSSELAND: My name is John Tysseland. 13' I live at 3009 Brookshire, Plane. I own the property i4 right in front of the development so I'm concerned about 15 drainage. I know that the City of Piano (sic) was 16 surveying that and signed some waivers six months ago to a 17 year, had not heard anything on what the outcome of that 18 was. So my concern is drainage, like everybody else. 19 Thank you. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE: lhank you. Is there 21 anyone else who would like to address this issue? Seeing 22 no one coming forward, would you like to respond to his 23 drainage concerns? 24 MR, ^[nrsoN: oood evening. My name is Lee 25 Allison. I'm with Isbell Engineering, the Manager of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 77 - Page 80 CondenseltTM P~g¢ 81 1 Civil Division. Drainage is -- everywhere, I guess, is a 2 big issue and we've had several meetings. Obviously, 3 we've met with the developer to the north. They are not 4 required to provide for detention. But with us they are 5 intcxested in, of course, being able to convey their 6 drainage through our site. And even once it gets past our 7 site, their interest is the impact going downstream 8 conditions. On our site, we are planning on having 9 detention. We expect to do that. We know it's required 10 and we do not anticipate downstream improvements to be 11 able to accommadate the full runoff from our site. 12 We have visited with both Jim Colter and 13 David Salmon in a couple of different ways. With Jim 14 Colter we're looking at ways to coordinate detention with 15 watex quality improvements. Instead of spending money on 16 downstream improvements, they may -~ the City may want to 17 use a part of our land to increase the detention; il 8 therefore, minimize needs downstream. We're very open to 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 83 1 they have, they're moving a little more forward with the 2 negotiations at this time. But, again, we're doing 3 detention. Not expecting to have any downstream impacts, 4 but at the same time, we're trying to help be a 5 facilitator in all of this goings on between property 6 owners, north, south, east, and west regarding the 7 drainage. Probably that was a whole lot more than you 8 asked for. But be glad to respond to any other questions 9 you may have. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. 11 Allison. Commissioners, do you have any questions? 12 Commissioner Roy. 13 COMMISSIONER ROY: On the site that you t4 want to make NRMU, are you committing to build 15 professional office buildings? 16 MR. ALLISON: Yoll need to ask Mr. Massey 17 Shaw that question. That's what he's indicated to me and 18 I'll ask him. He's nodding his head yes. that. Of course, we need to work to try and keep our property in balance. He may lose a few home sites but if in losing those home sites, he doesn't lose his expectations off the land itself, that's not a significant issue as long as we can have a quality development. We're looking at ways to build these 19 20 21 22 much. 23 24 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Thank you. MR. ALLISON: Sllre. Anything else? COMMISSIONER APPLE: NO. Thank you very MR. ALLISON: All fight. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: I$ there anyone else detention facilities in so that they can be used kind of Page 82 like a park. If you can imagine a cul-de-sac with a one-way strut around it and houses on one side, and in front of all these homes right across the street, you've got a detention area that in dry periods is good for volleyball and tennis, picnics and green space. Going to have some landscaping and trees. We're working with them 25 present who'd like to address this item? If you'll turn Page 84 your card in. Thank you. If you'll go to the microphone and give us your name and address, Mr. Walker. MR. WALKER: I'm Ken Walker. I live at 223 Belin[re. It's within the 500-foot circle of this. My wife and I didn't get to attend the neighborhood meeting but I heard a mention but I didn't hear what streets this on ways to accomplish that. Downstream according to Mr. Salmon, it's my understanding that the improvements are already designed. They're trying to acquire the easements of the land so they can construct thc improvements on the south side of McKinney Street. That is being held up with some rnisund~standings in the negotiations with property owners. The Mitchells seem to have full 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 would connect to. My concern if the feed street is to be Bellaire, my concern would be the amount of increased traffic on Bellaire. There's no light on that street and it already is very heavily congested in the early morning and late afternoon. COMMISSIONER APPLE: All right. I'll have staff address that question. MR. WALKER: And I'd like to aIso make a comment that at current the end of Joshua where it comes understanding and are ready to work with the City and move forward with it. We've nm with the representative, Ms. Copehagin. And I think at first they didn't understand what a green space credit meant to them. It's just green space. And we talked about that in terms of what it means in dollars of development. That if they waited and actually made the improvements downstream, you know, developed the land, then they would be responsible for drainage improvements that the City is planning on making. So I think understanding the benefits that 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 up to join into Bellaire, when it rains now it does flood in that area. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Could Ms. Willis or Mr. Powell address the gentleman's question? Thank you, Ms. Willis. MS. WILLIS: what was your question? COMMISSIONER APPLE: The gentleman proposed one. Did you -- MS. WILLIS: I was assisting a citizen. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Did you miss it? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 81 - Page 84 Condens¢ItTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 !14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 85 MS. WILLIS: Yes. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Sir, could you address your question again? MR. WALKER: My question was the connectivity to existing streets. What existing streets will this 93 to 96 homes connect to? How will he get into that development off of McKinney? Page 87 want to make sure I heard that correctly. MR. REICHHART: We requil'e the connectivity between all properties unless a variance is sought. COMMISSIONER APPLE: co~mnissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: I'll put Mr. Reichhart further on the spot. The gist of these two cases is really raising the density slightly in the COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank yell. MS. WILLIS: AS yOU look at the map, before you to the north of this site is Paisley. We can use this map here. To the north of the site is Paisley and the applicant has displayed their internal road structure to connect here to the north, as well as you have frontage on McKinney. Them is existing Joshua that I understand will be-- MR. POWELL: If we could go back to the Power Point presentation, it does show the connectivity. That shows the connection points. There's one sitting on the-- COMMISSIONER APPLE: Could you speak into the microphone, please? MS. WILLIS: Joshua will connect in here. Pardon me. And then you also have to the north of the property Paisley running here and this is McKinney where I don't see an entrance for the residential but, of course, Page 86 I McKinney will have to provide entrance for the office 2 professionals, the ingress/egress them. Does that answer 3 your question, sir? 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Reichhart, are you 5 going to weigh in? 15 MR. REICHHART: Yes. Just for a point of 7 clarification, this is a schematic sketch that we really 8 have not reviewed yet. The applicant will be required to 9 connect all the existing streets that are stubbed into 10 this subdivision, as well as provide a connection to 11 McKinney through the office complex that they're 12 proposing.' So there will be a number of connections. To 13 the west of this is property owned by The Fountains of 14 Benton, I believe, which is atready developed. So there 15 would not be a connection that way but there would be at 16 least two connections to the east and one to McKinney. 17 COMMISSIONER APPLE: corm~ssioner Powell 18 has a question. 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Mr. Reichhart, I'm 20 going to put you on the spot and get you to repeat that 21 the residential portion of this zoning change would 22 connect to East McKinney Street. 23 MR. REICHHART: Yes, through the NRMU 24 development there would be a connection. 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. I just 8 residential section because it's already zoned 9 residential. 10 MR. REICHHART: correct. 11 COMMISSIONER MULROY: And then allowing the 12 office buffer on McKinney and that's why they want the 13 NRMU which actually will have a little less traffic to the 14 neighborhood. But that's the gist of the two cases. 15 MR. REICHHART: That's correct. Thc NRMU 16 would also allow some retail neighborhood residential, but 17 not multi-family. 18 COMMISSIONER MULROY: SO traffic and 19 drainage are really platting issues. They already have 20 residential zoning. We're talking about upping the 21 density slightly. 22 MR. REICHHART: Point five units per acre. 23 COMMISSIONER MULROY: Right. And then the 24 change on McKinney, it's pretty self evident that that's 25 commercial retail frontage. So these other issues, we Page 88 I already have residential zoning on this piece of property 2 so these other issues really should be directed towards 3 platting would be my understanding of the process. 4 MR. REICHHART: Mine too, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I have no 6 more cards of people wishing to speak. I do. There is no 7 Agenda item on here though. Is tiffs for this item? All 8 right, Mr. Whitson. 9 MR. WHITSON: My name is Dennis Whitson, 10 3502 Kingfisher here in Denton. ] 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: xhank you. 12 MR, WHrrSON: I had no intention to 13 speaking until the gentleman over here made a statement 14 that all they intended to do was put detentions and not 15 make any improvmneats downstream. I know that it's not a 16 part of your purview here, but I've got a house here on 17 McKinuey where there's standing water in front of the 18 house right now. Them will probably be standing water 19 there all year long. And with this much improvement to go 20 on upstream and nothing to be done downstream is just 21 ridiculous. 22 I will say that I've seen the work that Mr. 23 Massey has done in other parts of the town. He docs 24 excellent work. I've got nothing against what he wants to 25 do. I just think that we need to do something to take PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 85 - Page 88 CondonsoitTM Pag~ 89 1 care of this water situation. Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 3 there anyone else who wishes to address this item? Would 4 you like rebuttal since there's been further public 5 comment? 6 MR. ALLISON'. NOt so much rebuttal hilt more 7 a minor additional explanation, particularly regarding the 8 traffic and the connectivity. Again, this is a concept 9 plan. But what we're trying to do with this traffic 10 pattern 'here is to make it so that our access primarily is 11 either to the north through Paisley. And as soon as I get 12 my draftsmen to remove those bushes there to the south of 13 McKinney Street, we had a drafting error, but we are 14 trying to not encourage shortcutting through here back 15 into this neighborhood by any means. We'd rather make t6 this a true neighborhood-type activity that goes directly 17 to its primary access. 18 And then regarding the drainage, we do 19 realize the downstream concerns and issues. Again, 20 through our detention we have no reason to impact that 21 whatsoever. In the design of the detention, we always 22 oversize it some so there will be some minor, but I'm 23 quick to say probably negligible or insignificant positive 24 impact downstream as the result of our detention. But, 25 hopefully, with our working with this developer and the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 90 landowners here and with the City regarding improvements. hopefully we can help bring those improvements about quicker than is going otherwise. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes. For some of the audience clarification, Mr. Allison, in fact, you are required and you have little choice but to handle the additional drainage created by development through on-site detention and not through downstream or off-site improvements. Is that not how the Code reads? MR. ALLISON: That's absolutely correct. COMMISSIONER MULROY: SO everything you said is exactly what we required you to do, and going downstream is not one of your options on the first go round under our existing ordinances? MR. ALLISON: That's correct. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. MR. ALLISON: Appreciate it. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Reichhart is dying to speak again. MR. RE1CHHART: Yeah. I'm sorry. I just need to clarify, that is incorrect for the Development ' Code. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 91 I but they would have to build it to the ultimare 2 development. There's two options they have. If we don't 3 choose one or the other, they can analyze both and 4 determine which is better suited for their development. 5 But it isn't -- you have to detain first and then go 6 downstream and they can analyze both. 7 COMMISSIONE~ MULROY: well, I did say that 8 thc first go around is directed toward on-sire detention. 9 MR. REICHHART: That isn't always the case. 10 That's all I wanted to point out. A lot of people choose 11 to improve downstream. 12 COMMISSIOn, mR Mtn. ROY: well, I hope you go 13 on record with that, Larry. I think expa'iencc might bc 14 different than what's being reflecw..d. But, anyway. 15 Thank you. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. 17 Reich_hart. Thank you. l 8 MR, ALLISON: May I add one thing? 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: one thing. 20 MR, ALLISON: We can do improvements 21 downstream, but those would only be required to the extent 22 it accommodates the flow from our development. Our 23 downstream improvements would not help anybody upstream. 24 And the flows that are already coming above and beyond 25 what the system can handle would still be above and They do have the option of improving downstream, 25 SEPTEMBER 25111, 2002 Page 92 I beyond. So if wc did do anything downstream, our 2 requirements would not relieve the problems as they exist 3 today. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you for 5 'clarifying that, If there's no one else who wishes to 6 address this item, I'm going to close thc public heating. 7 Commissioners, do you have any comments? And we will 8 to make separate motions on Item 25 and 26. 9 Commissioner Powell. 10 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you, Madam 11 Chairperson. I move to approve Item 25 as submitted. 12 I'm sorry, Item 24, isn't it? 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: N0~ 25, You were 14 right, 25. 15 COMMISSIONER POWELL: 25, CXClISO me. 16 COMMISSIONER MULROY: second. 17 COMMISSIONE~ APPLE: We have a motion and a 18 second to approve Item 25. Is there any discussion? 19 Vote, please. Passes 7-0. 20 Item 26, Commissioner Powell. 2I COMMISSIONER POWELL: I move to approve 22 Item 26 as submitted. 23 COMMISSION'ER MULROY: second. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: There's a motion and a second. Discussion? Vote, please. Motion carries %0. Page 89 - Page 92 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, REZONiNG APPROXIMATELY 22.55 ACRES OF LAND IN THE CITY OF DENTON FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 3 (NR- 3) TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESiDENTiAL 4 (NR-4) ZONING DiSTRiCT; SAiD REAL PROPERTY BEING GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST OF BELLAiRE ON MCKiNNEY AVENUE, EAST OF MACK, WEST OF JOSHUA DRIVE; PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE WITH A MAXIMUM FiNE OF $2000.00 PER DAY FOR A VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; A SEVERABiLiTY CLAUSE; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0035). WHEREAS, the owner has initiated a change in zoning for approximately 22.55 acres of land as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property") from a Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) to Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the zoning is consistem with the Comprehensive Plan, NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The Property is hereby changed from Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residemial 4 (NR-4) zoning district under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of DeNon, Texas. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classifications. SECTION 3. 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 4. If any section, subsection, paragraph, semence, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application there of to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and City Council of the City of DeNon, Texas hereby declares it would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. SECTION 5. 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 DeNon Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of DeNon, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 of 5 Exhibit "A" 22.55 ACRES FIELD NOTES to all that certain tract of land situated in the M. YOACHUM SURVEY, Abstract No. 1442, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and being all of a called 11.403 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Raymond O. Bennett, et ux to Wade B. Owen, et ux as recorded in Volume 768, Page 490 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, all of the tract described in the Deed from International Properties, Inc. to The House of Mosig as recorded in Volume 4130, Page 541 of the Real Property Records of said Denton County, Texas, all of the remaining portion of a tract of land described in the Deed from Glenda Lavem Owen Maxwell to Wade B. Owen as recorded in Volume 3053, Page 155 of said Real Property Records, all of a called 0.31 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Rosemary Walker, et al to Michael R. Mower as recorded in Volume 4472, Page 1897 of said Real Property Records, a part of a called 3.189 acre tract of land described in the Deed from William Troy Walker, et al to Nejat Destani as recorded in Volume 4768, Page 1768 of said Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas and a part of Lot 1, Block 1 of the Mason Addition an addition in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas according to the Plat thereof recorded in Cabinet E, Page 59 of the Plat Records of said Denton County, Texas; BEGiNNiNG at a stone found at a fence comer post at the Northeast comer of the M.E.P.&P. R.R. COMPANY SURVEY, Abstract No 1475 and being the Southerly most Southeast comer of the M.E.P.&P. R.R. COMPANY SURVEY, Abstract No 1473; said stone being the Northeast comer ora tract of land described in the Deed from Bobby Gene Smith, et ux, to William E. Fullbright, Jr. as recorded in Volume 4260, Page 1207 of said Real Property Records of Demon County, Texas and being a saliem comer ora called 26.672 acre tract of land described in the Deed from First State Bank of Texas to Harlan Properties, inc. as recorded in Volume 4411, Page 1603 of said Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE North 01 degree 32 minutes 53 seconds East with the East line thereof and the West line of said 11.403 acre Owen Tract a distance of 94.67 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Northwest comer of said 11.403 acre Owen Tract and of said M. YOACHUM SURVEY, same being a re-entrant comer of said 26.672 acre Harlan Properties Tract; THENCE North 88 degrees 40 minutes 29 seconds East with the South line thereof and the North line of said M. YOACHUM SURVEY and said 11.403 acre Owen Tract a distance of 178.21 feet to a 60D nail found in a fence comer post at the Easterly most Southeast comer of said 26.672 acre Harlan Properties Tract, same being the Southwest comer of a called 6.96 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Grace Temple Baptist Church to John E. Janson and Patricia C. Janson as recorded under County Clerk's File Number 96-R0042973 of said Real Property Records of Demon County, Texas; THENCE North 88 degrees 46 minutes 52 seconds East with the South line thereof and the North line of said M. YOACHUM SURVEY and said 11.403 acre Owen Tract a distance of 127.52 feet to a 3/8" iron rod found for the Northeast comer thereof, same being the Northwest comer of Bellaire Heights, Phase Two, an addition in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas according to the Plat thereof recorded in Cabinet C, Page 389 of said Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; Page 3 of 5 THENCE South 00 degrees 00 minutes 07 seconds West with the West line thereof and the East line of said 11.403 acre Owen tract a distance of 561.79 feet to a ½" iron rod found for the Southwest comer of Phase One, Bellaire Heights, an addition in the City of Demon according to the Plat thereof recorded in Cabinet C, Page 211 of said Plat Records of Demon County, Texas, same being the Northerly most Northwest comer of said House of Mosig Tract; THENCE North 89 degrees 44 minutes 11 seconds East with the North line thereof and the South line of said Phase One Bellaire Heights a distance of 262.80 feet to a ½" iron rod found for the Northerly most Northeast comer of said House of Mosig Tract, same being the Northwest comer of Bentwood, Phase I, an addition in the City of Demon, Demon County Texas according to the Plat thereof recorded in Cabinet D, Page 33 of said Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 28 minutes 03 seconds West with the West line thereof and the East line of said House of Mosig Tract a distance of 1005.24 feet to a ½" iron rod found for re-entrant comer thereof at the Westerly most Southwest comer of said Bentwood, Phase I; THENCE South 89 degrees 29 minutes 23 seconds East with the South line thereof a distance of 105.36 feet to a ½" iron rod found in the West right-of-way line of Joshua a 50 foot right-of-way; THENCE South 00 degrees 28 minutes 26 seconds West with said right-of-way a distance of 117.94 feet to the Southwest comer of the intersection of Joshua and Montclair Place; THENCE South 88 degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds East with the South right-of-way line of said Montclair Place a distance of 105.36 feet to an angle point; THENCE South 87 degrees 58 minutes 47 seconds East again with said South fight-of-way line of Montclair Place a distance of 50.07 feet to a ½" iron rod found for the Easterly most Northeast comer of said House of Mosig Tract, same being the Northwest comer of Block A, Eastridge Addition, an addition in the City of Demon, Demon County, Texas according to the Plat thereof recorded in Cabinet 5, Page 7 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE South 00 degrees 24 minutes 36 seconds West with the West line thereof a distance of 494.07 feet to a ½" capped iron rod found for the Easterly most Southeast comer of said 3.189 acre Walker Tract same being the Northeast comer of a tract of land described in the Deed from William T. Walker to Robert John as recorded under County Clerk's File Number 97-R0054124 of said Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE North 74 degrees 19 minutes 32 seconds West with the North line thereof and the South line of said 3.189 acre Walker Tract a distance of 150.10 feet to a ½" capped iron rod found for the saliem comer thereof and the Northwest comer of said John Tract; THENCE North 00 degrees 21 minutes 50 seconds East a distance of 117.04 feet to a re-entrant comer of the herein described tract; THENCE North 89 degrees 15 minutes 37 seconds West a distance of 221.15 feet to a salient comer of the herein described tract in the East line of a called 2.074 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Stella Marie Courtney Di Muzio, et al to Donald C. Schmidt as recorded in Volume 2739, Page 541 of Page 4 of 5 said Real Property Records of Demon County, Texas and in the West line of said Lot 1, Block 1, Mason Addition; THENCE North 00 degrees 44 minutes 02 seconds East with the West line thereof and the East line of said 2.074 acre Schmidt Tract a distance of 234.97 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Northeast comer thereof at the Southerly most Southeast comer of said House of Mosig Tract; THENCE North 89 degree 04 minutes 23 seconds West with the South line thereof and the North line of said Schmidt Tract a distance of 177.15 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Northwest comer thereof and the Southerly most Southwest comer of said House of Mosig Tract, same being in the East line of a called 5 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Billy Joe Martin and Nellie E Martin to John Tysseland as recorded in Volume 666, Page 726 of said Deed Records of Demon County, Texas; THENCE North 01 degree 03 minutes 59 seconds East with the East line thereof and the West line of said House of Mosig Tract a distance of 157.57 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Southeast comer of said 11.403 acre Owen Tract at the Northeast comer of said 5 acre Tysseland Tract; THENCE South 89 degrees 15 minutes 52 seconds West with the North line thereof and the South line of said 11.403 acre Owen Tract a distance of 303.59 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Southwest comer thereof and the Northwest comer of said 5 acre Tysseland Tract in the West line of said M. YOACHUM SURVEY and the East line of said Fullbright Tract; THENCE North 00 degrees 46 minutes 19 seconds East with the East line thereof and the West line of said 11.403 acre Owen Tract and the M. YOACHUM SURVEY a distance of 1529.79 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING and enclosing 22.55 acres of land. Page 5 of 5 Item #5H AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning and Development Department Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 ~ !~'~¥>' SUBJECT - Z02-0044:(4405 Pockrus Page Road) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 4 acres from a Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR-1) zoning district to a Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district. The property, commonly known as 4405 Pockrus Page Road, is generally located north of Pockrus Page Road approximately 1100 feet east from Interstate 35E Service Road and Pockrus Page Road intersection. No development is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: Kenneth and Nancy Owen The applicant requests the rezoning of 4405 Pockrus Page Road from a Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR-1) zoning district to a Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district. Industrial (Andrew Corporation), Rails and Trails Reserve, and residential uses adjoin the subject property. Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 3. As of this writing, staff has received one (1) response in favor from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. As there is no opposition, a simple majority vote (4-3) by City Council is required to approve this request. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. A final plat is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0044, commonly known as 4405 Pockrus Page Road: Application Date - DRC Date - P&Z Date Neighborhood Meeting August 19, 2002 August 29, 2002 September 25, 2002 None FISCAL INFORMATION Development of this property will increase the assessed value short-term pnblic improvements that are the responsibility of the city. of the city. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photos 5. Applicant's Letter 6. September 25, 2002 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes 7. Ordinance Prepared by: will require no Deborah Viera, AICP Planner II Respectfully submitted: Douglas S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development for ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The applicant is requesting the rezoning of the property, commonly known as 4405 Pockrus Page Road and legally described as Tract 161 of the G. Walker Survey, from a RCR-1 zoning district to a RCC-D zoning district (see Attachment 5). The subject property is generally located north of Pockrus Page Road approximately 1100 feet east from Interstate 35E Service Road and Pockrus Page Road intersection. No development is proposed at this time. Adjacent zoning: North: South: East: West: Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR-1) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002- 040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, this property was zoned Agricultural (A). Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR-1) across Pockrus Page Rd. Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR- 1) Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) The Andrew Corporation is located adjacent to the north. The Rails and Trail Reserve bounds the subject property to the west and residential uses are located to the east. A manufactured home park is located across Pockrus Page Road. Comprehensive Plan Analysis The Denton Plan shows this site to be within a Regional Mixed Use Activity Center Area (see Attachment 2). For a regional activity center, the focus area contains the shopping, services, recreation, employment, and institutional facilities supported by and serving an entire region. A regional activity center could include a regional shopping mall, a number of major employers, restaurants and entertainment facilities, a large high school or community college, and a high- density housing. A regional activity center is considerably larger and more diverse in its land uses than any other activity center. Staff funds the proposed zoning to be consistent with The Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation A TIA may be required prior to any funal platting of any portion of this property to demonstrate that there is adequate traffic related infrastructure to support the proposed development uses. Right-of-way dedication for Pockrus Page Road will be required prior to development. Access. The proposed development will be required to take access from Pockrus Page Road. The subject property has limited street frontage (less than 50 feet) along Pockrus Page Road. Road Capacity Pockrus Page Road is identified as a collector street by the Denton Mobility Plan. This street is designed to be a four (4) lane undivided street without parking, providing four (4) lanes of through traffic. As such, its designed traffic capacity allows for a tolerable traffic flow of up to 14,900 trips per day. Pockrus Page Road is currently constructed with two (2) lanes without parking. No traffic counts are available for this road. Development Code/Zonin~ Analysis This property has limited street frontage (less than 50 feet) along Pockrus Page Road; which might, limiting the development of this parcel unless additional land with street frontage is acquired. Additionally, the subject site is surrounded on the north and west sides by industrial (Andrew Corporation) and civic (Rails and Trails Reserve) land uses that are not likely to be redeveloped for residential uses. The proposed RCC-D zoning districts allows a variety of non residential uses, any proposed development on this site is required to be in compliance with the site design standards of the Development Code, including buffering and screening between the future proposed uses and the adjacent single-family uses to the east. An approved site plan for the proposed development will be required prior to the issuance of any building permit. Staff Findings 1. Limited frontage along Pockrus Page Road limits the development potential subject site. 2. Adjacent non-residential uses are not likely to be redeveloped for residential purposes. on the ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map Scale: None NORTH Land Use Map Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Newspaper Notification Date: 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 500' Courtesy Notices* sent via 1st Class Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 1 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0% September 14, 2002 6 7 Scale: None *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Property Owner Responses Property Owner Name and In favor/neutral/ Comments Address /opposed* Richard Cooper Favor No comments (on behalf of Andrew Corp.) 2701 Mayhill Rd. & 3781 Pockrus Page Rd. A-I-FACH M E NT 4 Photos 10 Ç,; èÍ¶$æ°ÀOlFp¿sÎâ™VãQhÛ»† ½L u9dá{÷mlƒ.uT[æŒX`PB<áÞHÁE9ãwa|cge…ª(„¬ž†í ÊlSèâé´y(ð5x)hj$…“ž"-¡ûÀlœÿÐZÝ\ÆÅZÅC¥Di]Jâ±˜ê^*«„2ÙÕènnáwVšê‰æk2Z2!0fQP¯Lv\º³i|sW&bDƒ}sÈÜ}}²ÏŠjëB´-Ï>÷V{wÎœùññØéˆb×JüWY#Pý²iqï3_-0ÎYïš¤UØ~ùHs"qG/m´»[,&÷ïšãø†ë Ô¶žÆ˜»Pò5öh‚>¢Wd÷ÂA(SI*.7!õ'Kií$.à¤kxmöMî½[k/kv[H$W.½|mC.ôñ$w±E?#¦/àù$÷R5ë=Î0/Mpô(æ=¶ ä°uî#yêT½QZÆ{!ó (sè.Ês$YT?k¢xqE=´÷HæD%çÉØdÜM'õ`ÑrEXj¶S,!M1%æKaÿ%$™™.sÀn‚5[)êŸêGÈ<ëhHˆ¨é nMz²L>Pi“aãáŒá/ökç zoned and had not considered its best use. Subsequently, we were approached by an individual who e~expressed interest in the property, but not as it is currently zoned. This caused us to consider how it is currently zonexled, and how we think that it would be better zoned. We fe~l that there is greater opportunity for development and b, better tax base, if we can be rezoned to the same zoning (RCC-D) as Andrew Corporation's property which adjoins ts our property. We would like to set out some considerations for you and ~ hope that you will agree with us. a. We are bounded on two sides by Andrew eorpcporation. They have previously indicated their opposition to residential development in their area. b. To the west of our property is an electric powevcr station, e, To the south is a mobile hom~ park and a prop~pane storage station, d. There are two properties immediately to the ea~ast of us that are currently zoned RCR-1 which provide a buffer between our property and the resldentia:ial properties further east on Poch'us Page Road. e. Our property has an odd shape with a relativel:~ly narrow access to Pockrus Page Road frontage. f. We do not feel that our property (3.98 acres) is is desirable as a single family dwelling due to the proximity to Andrew Corporation, the mobile home park'k and other surroundings. g. The property is about i/8 mile from 1-35 h. City water is available. i. Sewer, electricity and gas are connected to thahe property. cc with attachments: Planning Department Sincerely, CondenseltTM 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: l~tl No. 20 is a 2 public hearing and Ms. Viera will present. I'll open the 3 public hearing. 4 MS. vmn~: commission, Mr, Owen, the 5 property owner for 4405 Pockrus Page is requesting a 6 zoning change from RCR-1 tO RCC-D. This property is 7 located south of the Andrew Corporation, east of the Rails 8 and Trails Reserve, and north of the mobile home located 9 along Pockms Page. This site has a distinct 10 configuration. They have a very limited access along 11 Pockrus Page. The proposed zoning, RCC-t), would be in 12 compliance with the Denton Plan. Staff is available tO 13 answer any questions that you may have. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 15 anyone who wishes to speak regarding Agenda Item No. 20? 16 Seeing no one, I'll close tho public hearing. 17 Comnfissioners, what's your pleasure? Commissioner 18 Johnson. 19 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: RCCOmanend approval 20 of I~:rn No. 20. 21 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Wig have a motion. 22 COMMISSIONER HOLT: second. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE; We have a motion and a 24 second tO approve. Any discussion? Vote, please. Motion 25 passes 7-0. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 19 Page 20 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 17 - Page 20 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROViDiNG FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM REGIONAL CENTER RESiDENTiAL i(RCR-1)) ZONING DiSTRiCT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO REGIONAL CENTER COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN (RCC-D) ZON1NG DISTRICT CLASSiFiCATiON AND USE DESiGNATiON FOR APPROXIMATELY 4 ACRES OF LAND COMMONLY KNOWN AS 4405 POCKRUS PAGE ROAD AND GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF POCKRUS PAGE 1100 FEET EAST FROM iNTERSTATE 35 EAST SERVICE ROAD AND POCKRUS PAGE ROAD iNTERSECTiON AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS TRACT 161 OF THE G. WALKER SURVEY; PROViDiNG FOR A PENALTY iN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROViDiNG A SEVERABiLiTY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0044) WHEREAS, Kenneth and Nancy Owen initiated a change in zoning for approximately 4 acres of land from Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR-1) zoning district classification and use designation to Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission concluded a public hearing as required by law, and recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the approximately 4 acres described as Tract 161 of the G. Walker Survey, and more particularly depicted in "Exhibit A", is changed from Regional Center Residential 1 (RCR-1) zoning district classification and use designation to Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district classification and use designation. Notwithstanding the above real property description, the property being rezoned includes all property to the centerline of all adjacent street rights-of-way. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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. SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be Page 1 of 3 fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Demon 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 ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT A Page 3 of 3 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET Item #51 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349- 8314 SUBJECT - Z02-041 (1115 Eagle Drive) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 0.19 acres from a Downtown Residential 1 (DR-l) to a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district. The site is generally located at 1115 Eagle Drive to the east of Avenue A. Multi-family residential is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: Craig Irwin Denton, Texas The applicant is requesting one parcel of land totaling approximately 0.19 acres, rezoned from Downtown Residential 1 (DR- 1) to a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district. Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing, staff has received one favorable response from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. As there is no opposition a simple majority vote (4-3) by City Council will be required to approve this request. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. Preliminary and final platting may be required prior to development. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology of Z02-0041, commonly known as 918 Avenue A: Application Date - DRC Date - Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - Date: July 23, 2002 Date: August 8, 2002 Date: September 25, 2002 No Neighborhood meeting was held FISCAL INFORMATION Future development of this property under the new DR-2 zoning will increase the assessed value of the city. No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A Prepared by: Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: AICP Director of Planning and Development for A-I-I-ACHM ENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The applicant is requesting one parcel of land totaling approximately 0.19 acres be rezoned from its current Downtown Residential 1 (DR-l) to a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2)zoning district. The requested zoning change allows the applicant to pursue construction of multi-family residential units. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Downtown Residential 1 (DR-l) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Multi - Family 1 (MF- 1) The subject property is vacant. Adjacent zoning: North: Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district - apartments complexes South: Downtown Residential 1 (DR- 1) zoning district -single-family homes East: Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district - apartment complexes West: Downtown Residential 1 (DR- 1) zoning district - single-family homes Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in the "Downtown University Core District" future land use area. This area is intended to have a mix of educational, residential, retail, office, service, government, cultural and entertainment development. It is a place where residents can live, work, learn, and play in the same neighborhood. The Denton Plan identifies the following Primary Residential Land Use Principles: Preserve Neighborhoods: achieved by demanding and evenly applied. (page 35) The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be establishing design and construction standards that are fair and Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in Denton by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density development where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning does promote a diversity of housing stock and the increased density would limit sprawl as this area is identified by inffll land use compatibility. New development will be compatible with the existing uses and zoning of the surrounding properties at this time. The general area surrounding the site includes a variety of Downtown University Core Zoning, including Downtown Residential 1 (DR-l) and 2 (DR-2), Downtown Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) and Downtown Commercial General (DC-G). The majority of the properties located within two hundred feet of this site a'e rental units with both single and multi-family type dwellings. Several sites in this area are vacant or condemned structures. New development in this area would improve the viability of surrounding sites. The proposed zoning would also allow student housing near the University of North Texas, which is desired by the Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. The proposed zoning change would allow a maximum of 5 one bedroom multi-family dwelling units which would generate approximately 33 trips per day. The number of trips is tripled that of the maximum allowed under the current zoning. A traffic impact analysis is not required. Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Avenue A or Eagle Drive. Eagle Drive is identified as a second major arterial by the Denton Mobility Plan. Avenue A is identified as a local street by the Denton Mobility Plan. It is anticipated the surrounding road system will be sufficient to handle increased traffic generated from this proposal. Future development will be required to develop access from Avenue A. Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zoning Analysis Current DR-1 zoning allows for a single family homes and duplexes with a maximum of eight (8) units per acre. The proposed Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning would allow up to thirty (30) dwelling units per acre. However, due to the size of this site a maximum of five (5) units could be built, not accounting for lot improvements. See comparison chart below: Maximum Minimum Maximum Zoning Minimum Lot Size Density Units Residential Lot Coverage District for this Property (Max) per Allowed Unit Size (sq. ft.) Acre per Site (sq. ft.) DR 1 4000 8 1 (1.5) 700 60% DR-2 4000 30 5 (5.7) 500 75% Staff Findings Provide findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan and surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed zoning change would improve the housing stock this area and provide infill development. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map LOCATION MAP Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Scale: None Public Notification Date: August 15 & September 12, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 10 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 1 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0 % *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Property Owner Responses Property Owner Name In favor Comments and Address /opposed* George Reeves Favor 429 Magnolia Denton, Texas 76201 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs Northwest View From Site 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .12 13 14 5 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Item No. 22 which is a public i the City Planning staff will present. I'll open thc public hearing. MS, SPEER: GOOd evening, Comtrfissioners. Agenda I~n No. 22 is a request to rezone an approximately .020 acre site from current Downtown Residential 1 to a Downtown Residential 2. The applicant is seeking to build multi-fattfily homes in the area. The area is located in the downtown university corn district. And as you can tell, it's dose to the university. Staff finds that the proposed zoning change is compatible with the Denton Plan and surrounding land uses. It also would improve this area a great deal, as we saw a zoning case not too long ago right in this same area. You probably member. Any questions? COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is the applicant here? If you'd give us your name and address, please. Ms. MITCHELL: Madam Chair, members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, my name is Karen Mitchell with Mitchell Planning Oroup, 7823 Nine Mile Bridge Road in Fort Worth. Thank you so much for allowing me to come before you lids evening. As you recall, I've been before you a few Page 26 1 times on some properties in this same area requesting the 2 same zoning. The applicant on this is asking for the same 3 zoning on this particular piece of property due to the 4 proximately of UN'r in this area. They feel that this 5 area is really a great area for redevelopment and it's 6 very ripe for redevelopment. 7 What I'd like to show you-all is, if 8 you-all recall, we had a zoning case at the comer of 9 Avenue A and Fannin. And then after that we had a zoning 10 case just on the other side of that. I would like to show 1 you a sample of what the developer of this property would 2 like to have this area redeveloped as. Something that 13 docs give us 100 percent masonry on this particular one. 14 Very small complexes is what we're looking at doing in 15 this particular area to integrate with the residences thru 16 are existing. 17 We're not looking at combining a lot of t8 properties to put a large complex on there. The developer 19 is wanting to keep it very small, what I refer to as pods 20 of small residential in order to integrate into the 21 community. 22 And I realize that this is not this case 23 but I'm really giving you-all a sample or an example of 24 what it is that they want to do in this particular area. 25 This is the design that we're doing for the Avenue A where 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION I3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 27 u~t two very small complexes with 5, and this is what we're hoping to do on this piece of property, as well, where we can actually get a lot of green~ and park in between the buildings to make it very pedestrian-friendly. And these, like I said, are samples of what it is that we want to do in this particular area. With that, we'll keep this very short and we'll answer any questions that you-all may have at this time. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank yoU.. IS th~ anyone in the audience who would like to address this item? Seeing no one coming forward, I will close the public hearing. Commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes. I move approval as submitted. COMMISSIONER ROY: second. COMMISSIONFJl APPLE: we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Vote, please. Mr. Powell and Ms. Holt your votes did not take, and Mr. Mukoy. The motion carries 7-0. Page 28 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1! 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 25 - Page 28 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL 1 (DR-l) ZON1NG DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL 2 (DR-2) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 0.19 ACRE OF LAND LOCATED AT 1115 EAGLE DRIVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 3, BLOCK 2, OF THE WATTAM ADDITION IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0041). WHEREAS, Craig Irwin has applied for a change in zoning for approximately 0.19 acre of land being a portion of Lot 3, Block 2, of the Wattam Addition in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, commonly known as 1115 Eagle Drive, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property") from Dowmown Residemial 1 (DR- 1) zoning district classification and use designation to Dowmown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change is consistem with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby changed from Dowmown Residemial 1 (DR-1) zoning district classification and use designation to Dowmown Residemial 2 (DR-2) zoning district classification and use. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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 SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. 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 DeNon 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 ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 0CT-08-2002 10:21 ...... .... IRWIN REALTY/PLACE TO BE 940 5659990 P.02/0~ b61nR ,Ll:uate4 in the'i',tt)'"and o~ 'rexna, au~ o~ the ~. Puehal~kL 'Survey, A-g96, ~nd be/hZ p~rc of ~at Re, .~ree' the IJATTA~ ADDITION-to th~'City,~o~. Denton4 Texas, and . . - .: . .': ,,'.g,.., ,~,..vi~.-~ ,.,:./,.V4~,~ ,, .' .' ~loak 21 .' . ' '"... "'~'?'I'i"'~,'?"~~ ~"!'~: ' ~o. 3, 1'3~.0 ~eet to e seake,:Ear.'eotnetl..~ . . , . ~ . . .,:,.,.~ .... ..:: ,;,~. , 7* ' ,~ , '~ ' . · liB~C~ Heat 66,0 {ae, · % ~ ' ~ - .I TItE~C~ North 138,0'. Boun~ac7 ~ine oE HIl~ T~g~C~' Baet ~i~h o~id stree~ 66,O . ~[ne oE sa~d ~ 3, ..: : .?:j .... .,,....,.%:I~.~:.,,.. , ~eslnntn~," . . . .. . ,...,,.. COMPANY DOES NOT iNSURE THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAOE AND/OR ACREAGR AMOUNT SHOWN ARE ACCURATE AND CORRECT. TOTAL P. 02 Item #5J AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning & Development Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 %/~ SUBJECT - Z02-046 (Farris Trio) Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 1.2 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district. The site is generally located at the southwest comer of the intersection of Farris Road and Silverdome Road. Three single-family lots are proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: Rick Baria Denton, Texas The applicant is requesting one parcel of land totaling approximately 1.2 acres, rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district. Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing, staff has received one favorable response from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. As there is no opposition a simple majority vote (4-3) by City Council will be required to approve this request. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is preliminary platted as one lot. A revised preliminary plat and final plat will be required prior to issue of any permits. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0046, commonly known as Fan-is Trio: Application Date - DRC Date - Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - Date: August 26, 2002 Date: September 5, 2002 Date: September 25, 2002 No Neighborhood meeting was held FISCAL INFORMATION Future development of this property under the new NR-3 zoning will increase the assessed value of the city. No short-term public improvements that are the responsibility of the city will be necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map and Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from September 25, 2002 Planning and Zoning meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A 7. Owner Request and Site Proposal Prepared by: Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: Douglas S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The applicant is requesting one parcel of land totaling approximately 1.2 acres be rezoned from its current Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district. The requested zoning change allows the applicant to pursue construction of three single- family homes. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Zoning Classification Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Agricultural (A) The subject property is vacant. Adjacent zoning: North: Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district - Hodge Elementary South: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district -single-family homes East: Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district - vacant (single-family proposed) West: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district - single-family homes Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in an "Existing Neighborhoods/Infill Compatibility" future land use area. New development in this district 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. The Denton Plan identifies the following Primary Residential Land Use Principles: Preserve Neighborhoods: achieved by demanding and evenly applied. (page 35) The preservation of existing and future neighborhoods can be establishing design and construction standards that are fair and Promote a Diverse Housing Stock: The residential component of the Land Use Plan allows all types of people to live in Denton by allowing a variety of housing types, sizes and prices. The housing stock should reflect the demographics and economic structure of the community. (page 35) Limit Sprawl: The residential component of the Land Use Plan should guide development patterns that limit sprawl, accommodates projected housing demand, and allows quality high density development where it is close to jobs, shopping, schools and transit. (page 35) The proposed zoning does promote a diversity of housing stock as a major feature of the applicants proposal includes the preservation of several large trees on the site and the home 3 design planned in regards to the individual sites. The increased density would limit sprawl as this area is identified by infill land use compatibility. New development will be compatible with the existing uses and zoning of the surrounding properties at this time. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. The proposed zoning change would allow a maximum of 3 single-family homes. A traffic impact analysis is not required. Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Farris Road. Farris Road is identified as a residential street by the Denton Mobility Plan. Fan-is Road appears to meet the standards for a collector street. No driveway access to single family or two family dwelling units is permitted, unless single family and two family lots were created prior to adoption of this code by legal subdivision procedures and/or with exclusive frontage on a collector street which may be developed with a circular drive. It should also be noted that the code requires 75fl driveway spacing on a collector. This may not be practical because of the width of the lots. The spacing shall be maximized to come as close to this minimum requirement as possible if each lot is to have its own driveway. Windsor Oaks is planned to connect Fan-is road and existing Windsor Oaks. It is anticipated the surrounding road system will be sufficient to handle increased traffic generated from this proposal. Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zoning Analysis Current NR-2 zoning allows for single-family homes with a maximum of two (2) units per acre. The proposed Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning would allow up to three and one half (3.5) dwelling units per acre. However, due to the size of this site minimum lot dimensions will be required. A maximum of three (3) units could be built if rezoned to Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3). See comparison chart below: Minimum Lot Minimum Minimum Minimum Zoning Size for this Minimum Minimum Front yard Side Rear District Property (sq. Lot Width Lot Depth Setback Yard Yard ft.) NR-2 t6,000 80' tOO' 20' 6' t0' NR-3 t0,000 60' 80' 15' 6' t0' Staff Findings Provide findings 1. The proposed zoning change is compatible with The Denton Plan and surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed zoning change would provide infill development to this area. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map NR-3 LOCATION MAP Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Scale: None Public Notification Date: September 12, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 1 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 0 % 14 *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Property Owner Responses Property Owner Name and In favor Comments Address /opposed* Larry and Jonie Ragland Favor NA 3586 Farris Road Denton, Texas 76208 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs Site ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs CondonseltTM Page 29 1 COMMIS$1ONERAPPLE: Item No. 23 is also 2 a public hearing and again Ms. Speer will present. I'll 3 open t. he public hearing. 4 MS. SPEER: aood evening again, 5 Commissioners. I'm having Ms. Willis pass out a neighbor 6 response that came into today favorable. This is the only 7 response that's come in for the case. 8 Agenda Item No. 23 is a request to rezone 9 one parcel of land, approximately 1.2 acres in size, from 10 Neighborhood Residential 2 to a Neighborhood Residential 3 11 zoning district. Thc apphcant would like to pursue thc 12 construction of a maximum of three single-family homes on 13 the site. 14 Staff finds thc proposed zoning change is 15 compatible with the surrounding areas and the Denton Plan. 16 AS you can sec, this subdivision over h~ is all 17 Neighborhood Residential 3 and Neighborhood Residential 4, 18 and then the school site, Hodge Elementary, is actually t9 Neighborhood Residential 2. So it's only this small 20 portion that remains the m-2 as it is. Any questions? 21 I would iikc to say thc applicant expressed 22 a desire to be here tonight but I think we thought we 23 would be taldng a little longer, so I haven't scm him 24 yet. 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to address this Agenda item? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Holt. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Yes. I do have a question. A_re all of these going to -- I couldn't tell by these drawings. Are they going to have the driveways coming out on Farris Road? MS. SPEER: That is the initial proposal. But when we went through development review, he can't do that, basically, so we'll discover alternative means in the platting. So it may be that we can only do two homes on that site with the driveway standards because Farris Road is a collector. COMMISSIONER HOLT; SO for sure they will not be coming -- because that school there and that's kind of a bad comer. MS. SPEER: Right. Because they have ~o have, I believe, at least 150 feet between the driveways on that collector. And it can't happen with that size site. So there will have to be some sort of alternative, a cul-de-sac type street or some alternative to that. COMMISSIONER HOLT; okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Johnson, you had your -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That was it. COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Commissioners, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 31 any more questions, comments, or a motion? Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval. COMMISSIONER MULROY: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: We have a motion and a second. Any diseusaion? Vote, please. The motion carries 7-0. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 32 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 29 - Page 32 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 2 (NR-2) ZON1NG DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESDIENTIAL 3 (NR-3) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 1.4 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF FARRIS ROAD AND SILVERDOME, BEING DESCRIBED AS TRACT 12 IN THE JAMES P. COLTART SURVEY, ABSTRACT 288, IN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0046) WHEREAS, Rick Baria has applied for a change in zoning for approximately 1.4 acres of land being Tract 12 in the James P. Coltart Survey as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property") from Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change is consistem with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby changed from Neighborhood Residemial 2 (NR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residemial 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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 SECTION 4. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 5. 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 DeNon 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 ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 5120 Exhibit A A certain tract of land, more particularly described in a deed from Jo Lynn Laney, Individually and as Independent Executrix and Trustee of the Estate of IRENE BELEW WILSON, Deceased, to Alice H. Derbyshire d/b/a Chickashaw Properties, Inc. dated September 10, 1999 and recorded in Volume 4423, Page 1695 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, said 1.66 acre tract being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: Being all of that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the Daniel P. Culp Survey, Abstract 287, and the James P. Coltart Survey, Abstract 288, Denton County, Texas, and being a part of a certain 16.6, more or less, acre Second Tract described in a deed from Mrs. Maude May to Dora Lee Reese on November 23, 1964, recorded in Vol. 516, Page 281, Deed Records, and part of a 25-acre Second Tract described in a deed from Maude May to Dora Lee Reese on the 23rd day of November 1964, recorded in Vol. 516, Page 279, Deed Records of said County, and being more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at an iron pin on the East boundary line of said 25-acre tract and of the Coltart Survey in the Farris Road, said beginning point being 755.89 ft. South of the S.E. corner of a certain 2-acre tract described in deed from Dora Lee Reese to Fumiko Nagata Rudd, Trustee, and recorded in Vol. 1117, Page 850 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE North 89 degrees 0 minutes 56 distance of 280.56 ft. to an iron pin; seconds West a THENCE South pass the South boundary line of the Coltart Survey and the North boundary line of the Culp Survey 258.39 ft. to an iron pin; THENCE South 89 degrees 0 minutes 59 seconds East at 28.63 ft. pass the Southwest corner of a 1.33-acre tract described in deed from Dora Lee Reese to Irene Belew Wilson, recorded in Vol. 1209, Page 608, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and continuing a distance of 280.56 ft. to an iron pin on the East boundary line of said 16.6- acre tract and of the Culp Survey in Kings Row; THENCE North with the East boundary line of the Culp Survey 5120 02243 pass the Northeast corner of the Culp Survey, which is also the Southeast corner of the Coltart Survey, a distance of 258.39 ft. to the place of beginning and containing 1.66 acres of land, more or less. Also referred to as Lot 11, Block A, on the unrecorded Preliminary Plat for Lots 8R and 11, Block A, DEERWOOD ADDITION, Phase 3A, a proposed subdivision in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. · P.O. Box 2820 · Denton, Texas 76202-2820 - U.S.A,* 212 South Elm ~tr~et · Denton, Texas 76201 - U.S.A. Telephone: (940) 382-2594 ~ Telefax~ (940) 387-2294 F-Mall: exlxx'ts@l~ofix, com Web Site: biofix.eom 23"~ of Aug 2002 To: The Honorable City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, And City Staff RE: Petition for Zoning Change from NR-2 to NR-3. No street address at present; contiguous to the southeast comer of the Hodge Elementary playground, and east of the intersection of Fards and Sitverdome Roads. Biofix Holding Inc., of Denton, plans to develop this small "infill' parcel into city lots to facilitate the construction of three new residences. After dedication of Rights of Way to the City, the net acreage for all three lots is 0.96 acres, or about 14,000 square feet each.. The drawings supplied indicate the location and clearly show our intentions. The outstanding natural assets on the site are the grand old Post Oaks. The preservation of these monarchs of the original forest is of paramount concern to us. We have paid particular attention to placement of sidewalk and driveways so as to spare the tree roots. Utilities are more than adequate to accommodate three additional homes. The roadway would be improved as there are curbs on adjacent property but. none onsite. A six inch water line runs through the front of the property well off the existing "county" road. We had planned to run sewer line through a contiguous easement on the north side of the property. This easement runs through the Hodge playground; in fact a set of playground equipment on a bed of gravel completely covers it. I have discussed with Curtis Martin, Director of Construction for DISD, on how best to soften the impact on the children's use of the playground. We are exploring alternative routes at this time. The primary benefits to the City are three taxpaying residences on an existing infrastucture. The street is upgraded as well. You can find satisfaction that we are doing the right thing with regard to the neighbors and our stewardship over our native resources. We hope to begin soon in the cooler months as this further protects the trees. Therefore we pray your prompt approval on our endeavor. Thank you, Rick Baria Biofix Holding Inc. Edge oF I-I C) / · autlmaq.-uaO '/WD'~I '[ ) pasodo~d n- O g_ (0 0 n 0 0 0 ?F 0 Z Existing Curb 0 g_ 5120 022 2 Exhibit A A certain tract of land, more particularly described in a deed from Jo Lynn Laney, Individually and as Independent Executrix and Trustee of the Estate of IRENE BELEW WILSON, Deceased, to Alice H. Derbyshire d/b/a Chickashaw Properties, Inc. dated September 10, 1999 and recorded in Volume 4423, Page 1695 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, said 1.66 acre tract being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: Being all of that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the Daniel P. Culp Survey, Abstract 287, and the James P. Coltart Survey, Abstract 288, Denton County, Texas, and being a part of a certain 16.6, more or less, acre Second Tract described in a deed from Mrs. Maude May to Dora Lee Reese on November 23, 1964, recorded in Vol. 516, Page 281, Deed Records, and part of a 25-acre Second Tract described in a deed from Maude May to Dora Lee Reese on the 23rd day of November 1964, recorded in Vol. 516, Page 279, Deed Records of said County, and being more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at an iron pin on the East boundary line of said 25-acre tract and of the Coltart Survey in the Farris Road, said beginning point being 755.89 ft. South of the S.E. corner of a certain 2-acre tract described in deed from Dora Lee Reese to Fumiko Nagata Rudd, Trustee, and recorded in Vol. 1117, Page 850 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE North 89 degrees 0 miilutes distance of 280.56 ft. to an iron pin; 56 seconds West a THENCE South pass the South boundary line of the Coltart Survey and the North boundary line of the Culp Survey 258.39 ft. to an iron pin; THENCE South 89 degrees 0 minutes 59 seconds East at 28.63 ft. pass the Southwest corner of a 1.33-acre tract described in deed £rom Dora Lee Reese to Irene Belew Wilson, recorded in Vol. 1209, Page 608, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and continuing a distance of 280.56 ft. to an iron pin on the East boundary line of said 16.6- acre tract and of the Culp Survey in Kings Row; THENCE North with the East boundary line of the Culp Survey 120 pass the Northeast corner of the Culp Survey, which is also the Southeast corner of the Coltart Survey, a distance of 258.39 ft. to the place of beginning and containing 1.66 acres of land, more or less. Also referred to as Lot 11, Block A, on the unrecorded Preliminary Plat for Lots 8R and 1t, Block A, DEERWOOD ADDITION, Phase 3A, a proposed subdivision in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. Item #5K AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: November 5, 2002 Planning Department Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349- 8314 SUBJECT - Z02-0043 (Service Center Special Exception) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance regarding the expansion of a Special Exemption for 1.75 acres, commonly known as the Service Center Expansion. The property is located at the northwest comer of Ruddell and Willis Streets. A material storage yard is proposed. The property is zoned Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12). The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: City of Denton, Denton TX The applicant is proposing to expand the existing City Service Center Yard onto the subject site (Attachment 5). Subsection 35.11.3.A of the Development Code, provides that a Special Exception may expand onto an adjoining lot upon the approval of City Council. (Attachment 1). There is currently 33.7 opposition (see Attachment 3) to the request. As opposition is greater than 20%, a super majority vote (6-1) will be required to approve the request. 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 (7-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is platted. A building permit is required prior to the commencement of construction. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0043, commonly known as the Service Center Special Exception: Application Date - August 12, 2002 DRC Date - August 22, 2002 P&Z Public Heating - September 25, 2002 No neighborhood meeting was held. FISCAL INFORMATION Development of this property will not increase the a~sessed value of the city. development, no extension of public infrastructure is necessary to service this site. As a form of infill ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification 4. Site Plan 5. Utility Department Memo 6. Photographic Simulations of Proposed Facility 7. Draft Ordinance Prepared by: L~/y Reic~lt~rt, ASLA, AI~ fl/ssistant Director of Planning and Development Respectfully submitted: Douglas S. Powell, AICP Director of Planning and Development for ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The City of Denton is proposing to expand the Service Center by utilizing the subject property for the storage of construction material such as stone, gravel, soil and mulch. The adoption of the Development Code created a Special Exception designation for any use of property, building, structure or site which was lawful before the adoption of the Code, but which would be prohibited, regulated, or restricted under the terms of the Code. The Service Center was a lawful use prior to the adoption of the Code, but is now restricted, therefore it has been designated as a Special Exception. Subsection 35.11.3.of the Code provides for the expansion of a Special Exception by right on the original lot and by City Council approval on an adjacent lot. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - Ordinance 2002-040 placed the subject property in the Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU- 12) zoning district and land use classification. Previous to the adoption of the Denton Development Code, this property was zoned One-Family Dwelling (SF-7). The subject property is currently vacant. Adjacent Zoning and Land Uses: North & West: Downtown Commercial General (DC-G), TWU Golf Course South: Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4), Vacant & City of Denton Service Center East: Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4), Vacant Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in the "Existing Land Use Infill Compatibility" future land use area. New development should respond to existing development with compatible land uses, patterns and design standards. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. The proposed expansion and use will not generate any additional trips. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) will not be required. A Access. The development will have access to Ruddell Street. The Master plan for the Service Center will facilitate the closure of Willis Street in the future. Findings 1. The Service Center use is designated as a Special Exception. 2. The proposed service yard use is compatible with surrounding uses. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps Location & Zoning Map NORTH DC-G TWU GOLF COURSE Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map TWU GOLF COURSE Public Notification Date: September 14, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 5 500' Courtesy Notices* sent via 1st Class Mail: 21 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 1 (representing 3 properties) · In Favor: 0 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 33.7 % Scale: None *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Opposition Map TWU Golf Course SITE 1022 Ruddell p~ owner opposed to ,uest Scale: None 200' Property Owner Responses In favor Property Owner Name and Address /opposed Comments Reasons for Opposition: 1. No description of what kind of storage or type of building. 2. No plan disclosed to shield the storage with a fence. Vodie Fulton 3. No remarks if residential development would be impacted. (1417Mingo, 1124 Opposed 4. No remarks pro or con on restrictions on development of Ruddell & 901 Texas) residential site next door or the impact on value of said property. 5. No traffic flow patterns on increase traffic and noise and or dust due to storage. *A copy of the original letter of opposition can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Attachment 5 New Field Services Storage Yard 1213 1414 1414 .% 1214 CONCRETE PA VE^/tENT FOR STORAGE BINS FILTER STORA GE BUILDING 1124 65" ENTRANCE GATE ClT~' OF DENTON SERVICE CENTER CITY OF DENTON WA TER U T fL fTY 1020 55 110 i i I I I 220 Fe, I EXHIBIT I Memorandum To: Larry Reichhart, Assistant Director of Planning From: Katherine Barnett, Utility Special Projects Coordinator Date: October 23, 2002 Re: Service Center Storage Yard The City of Denton Service Center houses all Water, Wastewater and Drainage Field Services functions as well as Purchasing/Warehouse, Parks Maintenance, Vehicle Maintenance, Streets, Traffic, Police impound and LiNK operations. Space within the complex is at capacity. Currently storage for field service departments is limited to minimal space within the service center including numerous portable buildings located along the northeast portion of the drainage channel that flows through the complex. Gravel, sand and soil are all stored along the southwest side of the drainage channel. To improve storage conditions, improve appearance of the service center and to meet the requirements of EPA Stormwater Phase ii regulations that will go into effect in March 2003, it has become necessary to relocate the current storage area. The proposed storage yard, located along the railroad tracks, directly across Willis street will allow Water, Wastewater, and Drainage to eliminate all temporary storage buildings and store other items that have previously been exposed to the elements, in a protected environment. Sand, soil and gravel will be contained in concrete storage bins. Runoff from the storage bins will drain through a filter prior to entering the drainage channel along Mingo Road meeting EPA Stormwater Phase ii criteria. i have attached photos of the portable buildings that will be removed and photos of the landscaping we have installed along the Paisley perimeter of the Service Center, which is similar to what were proposing along Ruddell. We have also prepared two photographic simulations of the proposed storage facility. Both simulations are views of the Service Center from Mingo. Photographs Photographs Landscape Photographs Cond~ns~ItTM Page 93 I Next on the Agenda is Item No. 27 which 2 is also a public hearing, and Mr. Relchhart will present. 3 I'll open the public hearing. 4 MR. RErCH,~qT: thank you. Tonight we have 5 -- first under the new Development Code, it is the 6 expansion of a special exception and it is related to the 7 City of Denton service center which is south of Mingo. We 8 have Paisley, Texas, and Ruddeil. The site is this little 9 triangular site across from the Tw~ golf course. The 10 Development Code identifies that certain properties were 11 granted special exceptions. If they were legal uses prior 12 to the adoption of the Code, they would maintain that 13 legal use no matter what the zoning classification was put 14 on thern. The service center is one of those special 15 exceptions. 16 In order to expand their property or expand 17 the use of that, they could expand on-site by right and 18 they could expand to adjacent properties with the approval 19 of City Council using the zoning process. What was handed 20 out to you is the one letter of opposition that we 2I received. It came in after the report was published. 22 Although it is one property owner, it does represent 23 approximately 25 percent of the property, surrounding 24 property. Therefore, when this case gets to City Council, 25 a super-majority vote will be required to approve it. Page 95 1 missed. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as 2 existing neighborhoods. And within that land use 3 designation, no matter what zoning classification you 4 have, it would not allow for a construction yard, 5 basically. This -- the service center has been there for 6 a number of years. The neighborhood developed arOUnd it. 7 Therefore, to enable this to expand, it would take, under 8 the old Code, an sue to expand, and under this Code, it's 9 the special exception, special exception expansion. 10 COMMISSION .ER POWELL: I don't often argue 11 with staff, but I'm going to start a little bit, I guess. 12 The houses surrounding this are older than your plant 13 there. The neighborhood was there before the City built. 14 Now, I don't know how long the City has owned the property 15 but, obviously, those are pretty old houses. And I'm 16 famillar because I go by there twice a day to and from 17 work so I understand that's an old neighborhood, not very 18 far developed but an old neigt~borhood. 19 MR. REICHHART: YeS, sir, it is. 20 COMMISSIONER POWELL: And that's been there 2I awhile. I was just curious because I would have figured 22 you would have -- not you personally but the City in 23 general, maybe you personally, would have realized when it 24 was -- all that zoning work was done that you were going 25 to want to use this property and nothing was done with it Page 94 1 As t stated that the Utility Department 2 wishes to expand their use on the property. It's a 3 material storage yard. There is a representative from the 4 Utility Department here to answer any questions that you 5 may have and I'm available for any questions. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: ?hank you. 7 COMMISSIONER MULROY: I have one question. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy. 9 COMMISSIONER MULROY: Mr. Reichhart, would 10 you repeat the percentage that the one individual 11 represents? 12 MR. REICHHART: [ believe it's over 25. I I3 believe it was 26.7 percent. 14 COMMISSIONER MULROY: And you laughed when 15 I said neighborhood meeting? 16 MR. REICHHART: NO, sir. Well, 17 unfortunately, the representative is out of state, I8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell, 19 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Larry, I'vegot to 20 ask a question here. 21 MR. REICHItART: YeS, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER POWELL: when we rezoned the 23 whole City, how did we miss this? Or what's going on here 24 that it was taken care of then? 25 MR. REICHHART: well. it wasn't that it was Page 96 1 then. 2 MR. REICHHART: NO. And prior to the 3 adoption of the Code, the Utility Department did plat this 4 property for the purpose of expanding on the property and 5 it is one that it would have requinxt a Comprehensive Plan 6 change and a totally different zoning classification in 7 the middle of this neighborhood to do that. It would have 8 allowed the same public input in order to do that that 9 we're receiving now to see what the concerns of the 10 neighborhood are, 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Powell would like I2 to add something. 13 MR. POWELL: And I don't know if this is 14 going to enlighten anybody but they did have the option, 15 remember when we adopted the Development Code, there was 16 the option for individuals or developers, whatever, who 17 were in the process, to continue under the old Code. So 18 they could have came in with an suP. what we were faced 19 with is it an sup or a special exception expansion, Both 20 require a public hearing at P&Z and a vote of City 21 Council. So it really is the same process, public 22 notification. They're kind of the same rules. 23 So we said, well, let's do it under the new 24 Code, And in ms of did we know at the time, yes, but 25 it was an existing use at that point in time. But, again, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 93 - Page 96 CondenseltTM Page 97 1 it was kind of covered by this continuation in the local 2 permit procedure clause. And so we did have that 3 discussion. We felt that since it was a new Code and 4 we've never tried one of these things out before, why not 5 make this a good example. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That's a good answer. 7 I bet you reached for that one. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: cormnissioner Holt. 9 COMMISSIONER HOLT: Yes. Have you gone I0 over this letter that -- this opposition that came in 11 about no description of what kind of storage or type of 12 building, no plan disclosed to shield the storage with a 13 fence, no remarks of residential development would be 14 impacted? Have these things been answered? I mean, it 15 could be that if we answered these things, this Mr. Fulton I6 from Arvada, Colorado will not oppose it. 17 MR. REICHHART: Katherine Barnett from the 18 Utility Department is here and perhaps she can answer that 19 question. I believe they are trying to contact the local 20 Fultons to discuss these options prior to just contacting 21 the out of state representative of the family. 22 MS. BARNETT: That's correct. Katherine 23 Barnett. We have initiated trying to contact Mr. Fulton 24 to discuss this. 25 COMMISSIONER HOLT: Thank you. Page 98 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 2 Commissioner Watkins. 3 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Yeah. For staff, 4 once again, the physical plant was built in 1965. I'm 5 well aware of that. And I want to say right off the top 6 that I am for this rezoning of this triangular portion. 7 However, I wish I hadn't gone to look at it. There's a 8 fire hydrant right in the middle of it. Not close to the 9 road but right in the middle of it. There's several 10 thousand pounds of concrete steel as it' you were going to 11 construct something on it. I2 Reading this letter from Mr. Fulton, as 13 well as looking through this, indicates stone, gravel, 14 soil, and mulch. Generally those are stock piles. 15 There's no screening. We talk about trees and we talk 16 about shrubbery. So I guess there isn't an answer to my 17 question what's going to be built there. 18 MS. BARNETT: This is a diagram of the 19 service yard. These are concrete bins for the storage for 20 sand, gravel, and soil. 21 COMMISSIONER APPLE: If you could speak 22 into the microphone, please. Thank you. 23 MS. BARNETt: Poured concrete for the 24 storage, we do have. We can -- we are building it so that 25 we can add a roof at a later date to address storm water Page 99 I runoff concerns. The storage building will be similar to 2 a mini warehouse type facility. It will back up to the 3 railroad tracks. Our landscaping requirements wili meet 4 the City of Denton Landscaping Ordinance. 5 We have agreed to use that along the new 6 Ruddell connector, Willis. That's what our variances were 7 for that were approved previously was for sidewalk and 8 perimeter paving for Willis as the Willis crossing has 9 been offered up to be closed at some point in the future. I0 So all of our screening wilt be on thc Ruddell side. 11 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Thank you. I'm glad 12 I asked. It's going to be nice. Thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 14 Commissioner Roy. 15 COMMISSIONER ROY: Actually, there are no 16 residences adjacent to this or even close to this site; is 17 that correct? I don't remember seeing any homes or 18 anything. 19 MR. REICHHART: The closest houses are down 20 on Ruddell, south of the site. 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: BUt contiguous to the 22 site, there are none. 23 MR. REICHHART: But not adjacent to it. 24 There are no houses adjacent to the site. 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: NOt unless Willis Page 100 1 goes away and then there will be because there's one right 2 on the south side of Willis. Right behind the City's 3 property, there's a residential site. 4 MR. REICHHART: That one. 5 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yes. That house is 6 there but the whole site is residential, I suppose. It 7 goes all the way to Willis. 8 MR. REICHHART: The property is zoned 9 residential. 10 COMMISSIONER POWELL: YeRh, eO~t. So 11 something could be built there. And if Willis goes away, 12 then it would be contiguous. I think that was the word 13 Mr. Roy used. And, Madam Chairman, I didn't even ask if I 14 could jump in here. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: That's okay. You're 16 next on the que. If Commissioner Roy has had his question 17 answered, you're up. 18 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I would like to find 19 a way to got this to the City Council without this 27 20 percent hlckey or whatever it is. Would this be -- I'tn 21 sorry. Sometimes my law enforcement language comes out. 22 Would it bo the thing to do to put this off until the 23rd 23 of October so that these problems could be worked out with 24 the owner? And that wouldn't happen or is that not the 25 City*s wishes at this time? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 97 - Page 100 CondcnscltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 101 I MR. POWELL: If I could, I believe that 2 since the super-majority only kicks in at City Council, I 3 think that the Utilities Department is going to make every 4 effort to try to resolve these issues between now and the 5 time it gets to City Council which would probably be a 6 month, which I think is -- if you can work something out, 7 that will give us enough time. Holding it here, I really 8 don't know if that's going to help. It will cost a time 9 delay. 10 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That answered my 11 question. It's not going to do much good then to hold it i2 here. That's not going to help the situation then. Thank 13 you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Commissioner Mulroy. 15 COMMISSIONERMULROY: Yeah. Commissioner ~16 Powell covered some of the bases I was wanting to talk 17 about with the time constraints. And then I want to back 18 up one step and recognize that the City is putting itself 19 through its own paces that it's asked of all developers 20 and everybody else and they're to be commended for that. 21 In view of the late information, I kind of agree with the 22 answer that I'd be ready to make a motion in a minute to 23 move this forward. Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 25 anyone present who wishes to address this item? Seeing no Page 102 one coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing. Conunissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes. I move approval. COMMISSIONER ROY: second. COMMISSIONER APPLE: We have a motion and a second for approval. Motion carries 7-0. Any discussion? Vote, please. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 103 Page 104 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2002 Page 101 - Page 104 S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\02~Z02-0043 ORDINANCE.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING AN EXPANSION OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR A MATERIAL STORAGE YARD COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE SERVICE CENTER EXPANSION, ON APPROXIMATELY 1.75 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RUDDELL STREET AND WiLLiS STREET, WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD RESiDENTiAL MIXED USE 12 (NRMU- 12) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0043) WHEREAS, the City of Demon, has applied for an expansion of a Special Exception for a material storage yard, commonly known as the Service Center Expansion, on approximately 1.75 acres of land, generally located at the northwest corner of Ruddell Street and Willis Street, within a Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use 12 (MRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the expansion of a Special Exception for a material storage yard, commonly known as the Service Center Expansion; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the expansion of a Special Exception is consistent with the Denton Plan Policies and the Denton Development Code; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. An expansion ora Special Exception is hereby approved for a material storage yard, commonly known as the Service Center Expansion on approximately 1.75 acres of land described as Lot 1, Block A of the Service Center Addition and generally located at the northwest corner of Ruddell Street and Willis Street, within a Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use 12 (MRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation, subject to the following conditions: 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A. SECTION 2. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 3. 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 4. This ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its PAGE 1 S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\02~Z02-0043 ORDINANCE.doc passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Demon Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Demon, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __day of ,2002. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 EXHIBIT A New Field Services Storage Yard 1213 1414 1414 1214 CONCRETE PA VENtENT FOR STORAGE BINS FILTER STORA GE BUILDING 1124 65" ENTRANCE GATE 901 CITY OF DENTON SERVICE CENTER CITY QF DENTQN ?VA TER U T fL/TV 1020 55 110 i i I I I 220 Fe, I EXHIBIT I Item #6A AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET November 5, 2002 Fiscal Operations Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution nominating members to the Appraisal Review Board of the Denton Central Appraisal District; and declaring an effective date. BACKGROUND The Appraisal Review Board hears all appeals that are presemed to the DeNon Cemral Appraisal District (DCAD) during the momhs of May through July and throughout the rest of the year as appeals are requested. Since this is a very time consuming process during May through July, the individual who serves on the board should be available full time during these momhs. Members of the Appraisal Review Board serve two-year terms. Though the Appraisal Review Board members are nominated by taxing jurisdictions they are appoimed by the DCAD Board of Directors. Nominations are due to the DCAD by November 8, 2002. The Board of Directors is scheduled to make their selection during their December meeting. I have attached information from the DCAD concerning the qualifications, appointment and compensation of members of the Appraisal Review Board. Also attached is a list of currem Appraisal Review Board members and their terms. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW None FISCAL INFORMATION None EXHIBITS Appraisal Review Board Information 2001 Appraisal Review Board Members List Resolution Respectfully submitted: Diana G. Ortiz Director of Fiscal Operations APPR. A~SAL ~VIEW BOAPd) Q_ualificafion~Aopoin~ent and Compensation Who Can Serve? To serve on the ARB, you must have lived in the appraisal district for at least two years before taking office. You don't need any special qualifications, but you may be ineligible, to serve on the appraisal review board if the person is a member of'the board of directors, an officer, or employee of the appraisal district, ~ employee of the comptroller, or a member of the governing body, officer, or employee of a taxing unit. In county of more than 100,000, a person is ineligible if the person: 1. Has served all or part of three previous ten~s. 2. Is a foyer member of the board of directors, officer, or employee of the appraisal district. 3. If the person served as a member of the governing body or officer of a taxing unit for which the appraisal district appraises property, until the 4* anniversary of the date the person ceased to be a member or officer 4. Has ever appeared before the ARB for compensation. You also ma3, not serve as an ARB member if you are closely related to a person who operates for compensation as a tax agent or is in the business of appraising property for property tax purposes in the appraisal, district. Relatives barred are those within the second degree of consanguinity or affiniW. If you knowingly violate this provision, you co--it a class B misdemeanor. This provision took effect September 1, 1989, and applies only to ARB members serving terms that began aRer that date. The law also bars from ~ service members who contract with the appraisal district or with a taxing unit in the appraisal distrct. The bar applies if the member or a business entity in which the member has a substantial interest contracts with the appraisal district or a taxing unit that participates in the appraisal district. Likewise, the same taxing units and the appraisal district are each prohibited from contracting with an ~ member or a business entity in which an APd~ member has a substantial interest. Substantial interest is defined as either: 1. Combined ownership by the member or the member's spouse of at least 10 percent of the voting stock or shares of the business. 2. Service by the member or the member's spouse as a partner, limited partner or officer in the business entity. You may also not serve if you hold some other paid public office. The Texas Constitution does not allow a person to hold more than one paid public office. S. B. I 017 requires the Comptroller to approve curricula, provide materials and supervise a course for mining )dLB members. The Comptroller shall issue certificates indicating course completion. All ARB members must complete the course or may not participate in ARB. hearings. Terms and Size Members serve two-year staggered terms; approximately half the member's terms expire each year. Terms begin Janu~ 1. The appraisal district directors appoint APB members by a majority vote and record their decision in a resolution. ARB Compensation The ARB receives a $50.00 minimum fora half day md a maximum pay of $150.00 per day. ~ Meeting~ ARB regular meetings are the third Wednesday of each month at 9:00 A.M. These monthly meetings ~e approximately six to eight hours long. ARB reappraisal hearings will start on a daily basis, as needed, from late May until the appraisal roll is approved usually in late July. Meetings will normally be ~om 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. In October reappraisal hearings will sta~ on the third Wednesday md usually continue for about a week from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Effective January 1, 1998, ARB's must provide heating times in the evening and on a Saturday or Sunday. Currently the Board meets two nights a week during the surcaner months ~til 8:00 P.M. The Board of Directors of the Denton Central Appraisal District is considering you as a possible member of the Appraisal Review Board. The Board of Directors will choose me,ers for a two-year term. The selection will be made at the next Board meeting. Would you please answer the following questions and return to the District as soon as possible. Name Address Address Phone Jurisdiction Would you be willing to serve? If so you would need to be available from mid May until the end of July. The Board meets from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. until the roll is certified. There will also be meetings periodically throughout the year. Have you ever been an officer or employee of the appraisal district. Have you ever served on the appraisal districts board of directors? Have you ever been a member of the governing body or an officer of a taxing unit for which the appraisal district appraises property? If so, has it been the 4~h anniversary of the date you ceased to be a me,er or officer? 5. Have you ever appeared before the ARB for compensation? How long have you resided in Denton County? Occupation D'o you have any prior experiences serving on an appraisal review board or any board that has to do with property value? Could you make a decision based on evidence rather than feelings for the taxpayer? The property tax code requires that all property be valued at 100% of market value. Could you keep this in mind throughout the proceedings? Would you be willing to work nights and weekends if necessary? The Board of Directors will notify you of their decision. Board of Directors Denton Central Appraisal District Denton Central Appraisal District 3911 Morse Street, P O Box 2816 Denton, Texas 76202-2816 (940) 566-0904 2002 DCAD APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD Original Term - June 2000 CHARLES OSBURN 10842 Osburn Rd. Pilot Point, TX 76258 940-365-2235 Term Expires 12/31/2002 Original Term - January 2001 JOHN SOLBERG 2244 Stonegate Denton, TX 76205 940-387-3089 Term Expires 12/31/2002 Original Term - January 1998 LARRY T. WILSON 205 Old Alton Dr. Denton, TX 76205 940-243-5642 Term Expires 12/31/2003 Original Term - January 2000 PEARL FORD P. O. BOX 381 Roanoke, TX 76262 817-430-3100 Term Expires 12/31/2003 Original Term - January 1999 W. GARLAND THORNTON, JR. 625 Mimosa Drive Denton, TX 76201 940-382-7804 940-458-7404 Term Expires 12/31/2002 Original Term - April 1999 NEAL SCHEITEL 4478 Wildcat Rd. Aubrey, TX 76227 940-440-9570 Term Expires 12/31/2002 Original Term - August 2000 ROBBIE J. GOBER 734 Wilson Street Denton, TX 76205 940-384-1002 Term Expires 12/31/2002 Original Term - June 1999 JOHN HAY 15193 AA Bumgarner Road Justin, TX 76247 940-648-3427 Original Term - January 2002 PATRICIA H.MURO 2000 Southridge Denton, TX 76205 940-382-0949 Original Term - April 2001 JAMES M. DEAR 5122-FM 2931 Aubrey, TX 76227 940-365-9596 Original Term - January 2002 SANDRA FAUST 912 Ellison Park Circle Denton, TX 76205 940-384-9999 Original Term - January 2002 LOUIS N. HALL 717 E. Roewe Pilot Point, TX 76258 940-686-0062 Original Term - January 2002 BILL JAMES 3601 Derby Run Corinth, TX 76210 940-321-1117 Original Term - January 2002 JACK WEIR 1212 Vista Verde Denton, TX 76210 940-484-8302 Original Term - February 2002 DAVID HEROLD P. O. Box 1206 Pilot Point, TX 76258 940-686-8007 Term Expires 12/31/2002 Term Expires 12/31/2003 Term Expires 12/31/2002 Term Expires 12/31/2003 Term Expires 12/31/2003 Term Expires 12/31/2003 Term Expires 12/31/2003 Term Expires 12/31/2003 S:\Our Docmments~esolurions\02~Appr aisal Review Board.doc RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION NOMiNATiNG MEMBERS TO THE APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD OF THE DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the term of office for various Appraisal Review Board members of the Denton Central Appraisal District will expire on December 31, 2002; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas wishes to nominate members to said Board; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HEREBY RESOLVES: and SECTION 1. Appraisal District. That the City of Denton, Texas, hereby nominates as members to the Appraisal Review Board of the Denton Central SECTION 2. That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2002. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULiNE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: