Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 21, 2003 Agenda AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL January 21, 2003 After determining that a quorum is presem, the City Council will convene in a Work Session on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, DeNon, Texas at which the following items will be considered: Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the DeNon Developmem Code's NRMU and NRMU-12 zoning classifications. Requests for clarification of consent agenda items listed on the consent agenda for today's City Council regular meeting of January 21, 2003. Following the completion of the Work Session, the Council will convene in a Closed Meeting to consider specific items when these items are listed below under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. When items for consideration are not listed under the Closed Meeting section of the agenda, the City Council will not conduct a Closed Meeting and will convene at the time listed below for its regular or special called meeting. The City Council reserves the right to adjourn into a Closed Meeting on any item on its Open Meeting agenda consistent with Chapter 551 of the Texas Governmem Code, as amended, as set forth below. 1. Closed Meeting: mo Consultation with Attorney - Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.071. Consider and discuss status of litigation styled Robinson v. City of Denton, et al., Cause No. A167804, currently pending in the 58th District Court, Jefferson County, Texas. Deliberations regarding real property---Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.072 and Consultation with Attorney---Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.071. Deliberate the value and purchase of real property imerests of certain real property owned by Vodie Fulton, et al., being six tracts of land totaling approximately 19 acres in J. Brock Survey, Abstract 55, the J. Lilly Survey, Abstract 762, the W. Crenshaw Survey, Abstract 318, and in the B.B.B & C.R.R. Survey, Abstract 185, situated along the 1100 block of North Ruddell Street, south of the Union Pacific Railroad corridor; and receipt of legal advice from the City Attorney on a matter in which his professional responsibility to the City Council requires private legal consultation. Co Deliberations Regarding Certain Public Power Utilities Competitive Matters - Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.086.** Consultation with Attorney -Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.071. Receive competitive electric public power and market information regarding the issue ofconsem, by the City Council of the City of DeNon, Texas, to approval of the sale and transfer by the PG&E-related entities to City of DeNon City Council Agenda January 21, 2003 Page 2 the City of Garland, Texas respecting the Spencer Station Generation Plan and the Lake Lewisville Hydroelectric Facility, both located in DeNon County, Texas. Discuss, deliberate, consider, provide Staff with direction, and take final action regarding the proposed sale and transfer regarding the above matters. Further, discuss and consider the legal ramifications and legal position of the City by conducting a consultation with the City's attorneys in order to obtain the advice and recommendations of the City's attorneys concerning this issue; where to discuss such issue and matter in a public meeting would conflict with the attorneys' duties and professional responsibilities to their clieN, the DeNon City Council, under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. ANY FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE ON A MATTER DELIBERATED IN A CLOSED MEETING WILL ONLY BE TAKEN IN AN OPEN MEETING THAT IS HELD IN COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT SUCH FINAL ACTION, DECISION, OR VOTE IS TAKEN IN THE CLOSED MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF §551.086 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE (THE "PUBLIC POWER EXCEPTION"). THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO A CLOSED MEETING OR EXECUTIVE SESSION AS AUTHORIZED BY TEX. GOV'T. CODE, §§551.001, E.~_T SEQ. (THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT) ON ANY ITEM ON ITS OPEN MEETING AGENDA OR TO RECONVENE IN A CONTINUATION OF THE CLOSED MEETING ON THE CLOSED MEETING ITEMS NOTED ABOVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION §§551.071-551.086 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 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 mo U.S. Flag Texas Flag "Honor the Texas Flag -- I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one and indivisible." 2. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamations/Awards B. January Yard-of-the-MoNh Awards C. Recognition of staff accomplishments 3. CITIZEN REPORTS A. Receive citizen reports from the following: City of Denton City Council Agenda January 21, 2003 Page 3 Tillman Uland: salary for the Mayor and City Council, retired city employees and the budget, and neighborhood City Council meetings. 2. Dalton Allen: City's Solid Waste ordinance. 3. Willie Hudspeth: concerns about Southeast Denton. 4. Larry Jambor: garbage cans in Wind River Estates. Petemia Washington: issues at the MLK Center and City of Denton hiring practices. Walter Jackson: reconsideration of the hiring decision for the MLK Center director. Lilly Moturi: reconsideration of the hiring decision for the MLK Center director. 8. Marcella Brown: job affairs in Denton. 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. Listed below are bids, purchase orders, contracts, and other items to be approved under the Consent Agenda (Agenda items A-Q). This listing is provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss or withdraw an item prior to approval of the Consent Agenda. if no items are pulled, Consent Agenda items A-Q 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. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for the purchase of polymer concrete pull boxes and providing an effective date (Bid 2929 - Polymer Concrete Pull Boxes awarded to Hughes Supply in the estimated amount of $37,950). Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for the purchase of decorative streetlight fixtures and providing an effective date (Bid 2933 - Decorative Streetlight Fixtures awarded to Genlyte Dallas/Hadco in the estimated amount of $212,250). Consider adoption of an ordinance to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Unreserved Retained Earnings of the Materials Management Fund with Certificates of Obligation for the purchase of land; declaring an emergency and amending the 2002-2003 Capital improvement Budget; and providing an effective date. (Project: $585,000 land purchase and misc. related costs not to exceed $25,000). City of Denton City Council Agenda January 21, 2003 Page 4 Do Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving a real estate contract betweenthe City of Denton and Vodie Fulton, Edwin Owen Fulton and Joe L. Fulton for the purchase of six tracts of land totaling approximately 19.06 acres and generally located adjacent to and east of the City of Denton Service Center in the J. Brock Survey, the J. Lilly Survey, the W. Crenshaw Survey, and the B.B.B. & C.R.R. Survey, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. mo Consider adoption of an ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds for the emergency purchase of fuel for the Fleet Services Department in accordance with provisions of state law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bidding; and providing an effective date (Purchase Order 109185 to Kelsoe Oil Co. in the amount of $53,637). Fo Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids by way of an Interlocal Agreement with Denton County and awarding a contract for the purchase of office furniture; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2948 - Furniture for the New Central Fire Station and for the New Solid Waste Operations/Administration Building awarded to Texas Furniture Source, Inc. in the amount of $192,227.79). Go Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to accept an Interlocal Agreement with U.S. Communities to authorize participation in various U.S. Communities contracts for the purchase of various goods and services; and declaring an effective date (File 2930 - Interlocal Agreement with U.S. Communities). Ho Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with R. J. Covington Consulting, LLC for consulting services relating to the Denton Municipal Electric Utility; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. Consider adoption of an ordinance partially abandoning an easement assigned to the City of Denton as recorded in Volume 538, Page 666, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, from an easement previously granted to Texas Power & Light Company by Deed as Recorded in Volume 231, Page 179, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas; and providing an effective date. Jo Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an amended budget for hotel tax fund expenditures by Denton County, Texas, for the operation of the Courthouse on the Square Museum during calendar year 2002 (CY2002), to be effective as of the date of passage and approval of this ordinance. Ko Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton approving a License Agreement between the Texas Municipal Power Agency ("TMPA"), and the City of Denton relating to the encroachment of a sanitary sewer line and a double box culvert across an existing TMPA Easement as part of the Southern Hills Medical City of Denton City Council Agenda January 21, 2003 Page 5 Plaza improvements 8-Inch Sanitary Sewer line and 7' by 4' double box culvert, located within the tract of land situated in the Joseph White Survey Abstract Number 1433, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and being a portion of a called 243.185 acre tract of land described in the deed being recorded in Volume 3245 page 699 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. Lo Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement of resignation with Doug Powell; and providing for an effective date. Mo Consider approval of a resolution leasing parking spaces located on the Williams Trade Square; and providing an effective date. No Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract for professional legal services between the City of Denton and Orgain, Bell & Tucker, LLP for legal services in litigation styled Robinson v. City of Denton, et al., currently pending in the 58th District Court of Jefferson County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. Oo Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance for the purpose of construction on the Denton Crossing Project by Rogers-O'Brien Construction beginning immediately through May 2003 during the hours of 6:00 a.m. through 8:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 7:00 a.m. through 8:30 p.m. on Saturday. Specifically the request is for an exception to the hours of operation beginning an hour early, at 6:00 a.m., on Monday through Friday and an exception to the hours beginning one hour early, at 7:00 a.m., on Saturday effective immediately through May of 2003. No request for an exception to the hours of operation has been made for Sunday. P. Consider the appointment of a Deputy City Secretary. Qo Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving an amendment to an economic development program grant agreement dated November 27, 2001 between the City of Denton and Denton Crossing Partners LTD., which was duly assigned to ORIX Hunt Denton Venture; and providing an effective date. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS mo Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning three parcels totaling approximately 0.8 acres, from a Multiple Family Dwelling District 1 (MF-1) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district. The property commonly known as 1822, 1828 and 1902 West Oak Street is generally located on the north side of West Oak Street approximately 310 feet east of Bradley. The property is being rezoned to bring it in conformance with the Denton Development Code. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (7-0). (Z02-0053, 1822, 1828 & 1902 West Oak StreeO City of Denton City Council Agenda January 21, 2003 Page 6 Bo Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 18.5 acres of land from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU 12) zoning district. The property is generally, located east of Audra, south of Paisley and is commonly referred to as 700 and 702 Audra Lane. Multi-family use is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial (7-0). (Z02-0047, Saddle Creek Apartments) Co Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 0.4 acres from a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) to a Downtown Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) zoning district. The site is generally located at 309 Fry Street north of Oak Street. Mixed-use multi-family and a restaurant are proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-3). (ZO2-OOS& 309 Fry StreeO 6. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION mo New Business This item provides a section for Council Members to suggest items 6r future agendas or to request information from the City Manager. Bo Items from the City Manager 1. Notification of upcoming meetings and/or conferences 2. Clarification of items on the agenda Co Possible Continuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Do 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 Denton, Texas, on the day of ., 2003 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. 01/21/03 WS #1 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 Planning & Development Department Dave Hill, 349- 8314 .~.,~' SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the Denton Development Code's NRMU and NRMU- 12 zoning classifications. BACKGROUND During the First quarterly review of the Development Code, City Council referred several issues related to the Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use zoning classifications (NRMU and NRMU-12) to the Planning & Zoning Commission for analysis and revision recommendations. On October 15, 2002, City Council adopted five amendments affecting the NRMU and NRMU-12 zoning regulations. A sixth amendment recommended by a split vote (4-3) of the Planning & Zoning Commission, which would require the approval of a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for NRMU-12 multi-family development located within 200 feet of an existing single family dwelling, was tabled by the Council for further study. The NRMU-12 Specific Use Permit issue was continued to December 17, 2002, at which time Council closed the public heating and directed staff to schedule a work session to allow further Council discussion and analysis. NRMU-12 AND NRMU ISSUES The NRMU zoning districts intentionally allow a mix of uses, from single family and multi-family dwellings to limited restaurant, sales, service and office uses. Traditional zoning districts tend to allow only homogenous uses, making it easier to envision the exact nature of the type of use that will eventually be built on a site. To date, no NRMU-zoned properties have been developed in the city that would help to demonstrate how the code regulates mixed-use projects. Major concerns regarding the NRMU districts include: Uncertainty regarding the specific characteristics of a development project in an NRMU district raises compatibility concerns, since permitted uses may be varied. Since the NRMU is unlike other districts traditionally used in Denton, unfamiliarity with a mixed-use zoning district raises concerns regarding the potential form a project may take. The primary concern raised regarding NRMU districts is the development of multi-family dwellings. The primary issue is the extent to which existing development code requirements impose sufficient density limitations and site design standards to allow multi- family development as a permitted use versus requiting a specific use permit. Current NRMU multi-family restrictions include: NRMU Multi-Family Dwellings o Maximum 30 units per acre. o Permitted as part of a mixed use development of 10 acres or more and only in conjunction with office, retail, or other permitted commercial or institutional uses [Limitation L(4)]. o Must meet site design standards. -1- · NRMU-12 Multi-Family Dwellings o Maximum 12 units per acre. o Currently listed as a "Permitted" use. o Must comply with site design standards. Citizen Concerns Since the adoption of the Development Code in February 2002, an actual NRMU or NRMU-12 project has not yet been constructed. No examples of how the new code impacts mixed use or multi-family development is available to assess the adequacy of the new regulations. Without the benefit of seeing such examples, residents of existing neighborhoods have expressed concern that potential negative impacts will not be mitigated unless public heating input and Council site plan review allow a case-by-case evaluation of each proposed project. Proponents of the SUP requirement have stated that Council should review and approve site plans for NRMU-12 multi-family projects to protect neighborhoods from an as yet unproven zoning category, and that developers with compatible, high quality proposals should have nothing to fear from a increased level of public scrutiny. Another concern is that the 200-feet distance requirement could be used to avoid public notice and super-majority approval requirements if 20% or more of the neighboring properties within 200 feet express opposition to the SUP application. Developer Concerns Proponents of the current NRMU regulations accurately state that the imposition of SUP approval for multi-family development would require two-tiered zoning approval (initially for the NRMU zoning, and then for SUP approval), which has been eliminated when possible in the new code. A specific goal of the new code was to limit legislative review of zoning changes early in the project planning stages, and to rely on measurable standards for compliance as the level of project investment increases. The principle of eliminating discretionary review late in the project development process has been a cornerstone of the formation of the new code. The objections to the SUP requirement are (1) multi-family projects could be denied approval despite obtaining the underlying zoning, and (2) SUP site plan approval could require significant changes to projects that had already been designed and engineered. ASSESSMENT OF NRMU-12 IMPACTS The operation of NRMU-12 zoning and development can take one of several forms. Staff has prepared four potential scenarios to facilitate Council's discussion and evaluation of the variety of impacts associated with an SUP requirement. The scenarios have been devised with the knowledge that a Specific Use Permit (SUP) is a type of zoning change that must be processed according to state law, with specific evaluation criteria identified in the code. Exhibit 1 contains SUP code requirements. Scenario 1: Integrated NRMU-12 Context: A portion of a large-tract, mixed use development is master planned to contain NRMU- 12 zoning intended to accommodate multi-family dwellings. Staff Comments: The restriction of a SUP on multi-family within 200 feet of single- family development could cause master-planned developments that contain single- family dwellings to trigger a serf-imposed regulation. -2- Scenario 2: Pre-SUP NRMU-12 zoning districts Context: Properties were classified as NRMU-12 during or subsequent to the Development Code adoption, with the understanding that multi-family dwellings were allowed as a permitted use. Staff Comments: If the NRMU-12 SUP amendment is adopted by Council, these properties will be required to go through a second zoning change for development. Opposition from affected property owners is anticipated, based on "changing the rules" after NRMU- 12 zoning approval had already been obtained. Scenario 3: Infill NRMU-12 Context: A property currently zoned NRMU-12 is intended to be developed for multi- family dwellings only, as a stand-alone infill project (not part ora master planned tract). Staff Comments: This scenario is likely to be of primary concern to homeowners located near the project. Maximum NRMU-12 residential density is 12 units per acre, and compliance with staff-administered site design standards is required. This is the primary issue addressed by the Planning & Zoning Commission that led to the SUP requirement recommendation for MF within 200 feet of single family homes. The real question appears to be one of "regulatory comfort." Do existing code requirements articulate standards that meet land use compatibility expectations, or should Council exercise its legislative authority to review each project because the code is not adequate to afford the desired level of protection for neighboring properties? Scenario 4: Proposed (Future) NRMU-12 Zoning Changes Context: A zoning application proposing the reclassification of property to NRMU-12 is received and reviewed, as required by state law, by the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council. Staff Comments: Regardless of whether or not NRMU-12 zoning requires an SUP for the development of multi-family dwellings, City Council is legislatively empowered to approve or deny a zoning change. Is it better to determine the appropriateness of a proposed NRMU-12 zoning district initially, or should multi-family compatibility be determined during a second stage SUP review process? NRMU-12: GEOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS As of January 2003, there were 522 separate parcels of land zoned NRMU-12 within the City of Denton. Of these, staff has identified 83 parcels that are currently vacant or "underdeveloped" (properties which may have structures, but could redevelop at higher densities). Many of these parcels are located adjacent to each other and may be under common ownership in several cases. Of the 83 identified underdeveloped parcels, there are 63 parcels zoned NRMU-12 throughout the city where the perimeter of NRMU-12 property is located within 200 feet of existing, platted -3- single-family lots. A total of 557 single family lots are located within 200 feet of these 63 NRMU- 12 parcels. Exhibit 2 provides aerial photographs of the 63 NRMU-12 parcels identified by staff. Summarv of NRMU-12 Zoning in Denton · A total of 522 parcels are zoned NRMU- 12. · A total of 83 NRMU- 12 parcels (485 acres) are considered vacant or "underdeveloped". · A total of 63 vacant or "underdeveloped" NRMU-12 parcels (444 acres) are located within 200 feet of existing single family platted lots, located generally within 16 distinct areas of the city. · A total of 557 single-family lots are located within 200 feet of the 63 identified vacant or "underdeveloped" NRMU- 12 parcels. Zoning Cases since Code Adoption Since the adoption of the Development Code in February 2002, there have been 15 zoning cases in which the applicant has requested either the NRMU-12 or the NRMU zoning classification. Of those cases, 9 were approved. Two of the largest rezonings occurred within the Windsor Oaks Development on Loop 288 near Windsor Drive and the Clear Creek Ranch Development north of Loop 288 and east of North Locust (FM 2164). · :o NRMU: PURPOSE & SITE DESIGN STANDARDS Purpose of the NRMU-12 and NRMU Zoning Classifications The Neighborhood Residential Mixed-Use districts were developed to provide zoning requirements that would allow the creation of "activity" nodes within existing and proposed new neighborhoods. A variety of residential densities within existing and new neighborhoods would be allowed. A gradient of density would increase from surrounding single-family subdivisions (1 to 4 units per acre) to townhomes and garden apartments (6 to 12 units per acre) to urban style apartments (up to 30 units per acre) located adjacent to or above retail and office spaces creating the neighborhood center. This Density Gradient in Neighborhood gradient of densities allows a variety of housing types, styles and prices within a single neighborhood, meeting one of the residential goals stated in the Denton Plan. (Denton Plan, page 38.) Mixed land uses are also intended to provide services convenient to residents and reduce travel demand on major city thoroughfares. The center of the neighborhood would allow both residential and commercial land uses, in conjunction with civic and institutional uses such as schools, parks, libraries, and fh'e stations. All development within existing and new neighborhoods would be subject to the new site design standards contained in the code. These activity centers would be a focal point for pedestrian travel, transit stops, and resident interaction. The NRMU-12 and NRMU districts may also be located as a residential/commercial buffer between boundaries of contrasting character areas, such as Regional Mixed Use Centers and Neighborhood Centers. Zoning for mixed use districts is intended to allow commercial development major arterials, but imposes design constraints to discourage traditional strip center development. -4- History of the NRMU-12 and NRMU Zoning Classifications The Land Use Map within the Denton Comprehensive Plan outlines two distinct areas of primarily residential development, the "Existing Residential / In~ill Compatibility" and the "Nei,ghborhood Centers" classifications. Both of these areas are intended to provide a mix of housing types and densities, and to provide the opportunity to create compatible mixed-use developments. Specific focus on the compatibility of infill development within the Existing Residential / Infill Compatibility is a goal stated in the Denton Plan. New standards were devised and adopted in response to this objective. To implement the plan, separate zoning categories were developed for each of the land use classifications. Both zoning categories (neighborhood centers and neighborhood residential) included a 12 unit per acre mixed use district (NCMU-12 and NRMU-12) and a total mixed use district (NCMU and NRMU). As the process to adopt the Development Code progressed, it was recommended by the public, city staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission to consolidate the Neighborhood Centers and Neighborhood Residential zoning categories into one. The resulting category contains elements of both. Consolidation of Existing Neighborhood and Neighborhood Center Zoning Districts NR-2 Neighborhood Residential - 2 1.5 NR-3 Neighborhood Residential - 3 3.5 NR-4 Neighborhood Residential -4 4.0 NRMU-12 Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use -12 12.0 NRMU Nei hborhood Residential Mixed Use 25 NCR-2 Neighborhood Center Residential -2 2 NCR-4 Neighborhood Center Residential -4 4 NCR-6 Neighborhood Center Residential -6 6 NCMU-12 Neighborhood Center Mixed Use -12 12 NCMU Nei ~hborhood Center Mixed Use 30 NR- 1 Neighborhood Residential -1 1 NR-2 Neighborhood Residential - 2 2 NR-3 Neighborhood Residential - 3 3.5 NR-4 Neighborhood Residential-4 4 NR-6 Neighborhood Residential-6 6 NRIVlU-12 Neighborhood Residential IVlixed Use-12 12 NRIVlU Neighborhood Residential Nixed Use 30 Intent of the Site Design Standards for Multi-Family Development The original intent of allowing various housing types and styles within neighborhoods was to create the required densities needed to help sustain the pedestrian-oriented neighborhood centers, in addition to providing a variety of housing choices within a single neighborhood. A wider variety of housing diversity allows a greater diversity of population the opportunity to live within their preferred area of the city. Additionally, the Denton County 100% Access Committee in charge of prioritizing geriatric issues has recently identified housing diversity as an opportunity for seniors to "age-in-place", or provide the opportunity to move to housing within their neighborhood that fits their immediate need. Otherwise, as needs change many individuals have to move across town or even to another city to find appropriate housing. -5- The diversity of housing styles was not proposed in the Denton Plan without the checks and balances provided in the form of site design standards, which require new development to comply with Subchapter 13 of the Denton Development Code: Orientation Requirements Any residential buildings designed for multiple units, either for rental or condominium ownership and their lots shall comply with the following standards: 1. Orientation requirements for all multi unit buildings, except in designated pedestrian zones: a. At least 50% of the front yard frontage shall have buildings within 30 feet of the front property line. b. Buildings that are located within 30 feet of property line adjacent to a front yard shall have at least 25% of the wall facing the street in window or door areas. c. Parking areas shall not be located between buildings and the street. Parking lots may be located on the sides and behind the buildings. 2. A project greater than 3 acres must contain a public or private street system that creates blocks of three acres or less. Private Streets shall be required to include sidewalks of at least 5 feet, and include street trees according to the standards of this section, but public street setbacks shall not apply. 3. Special Standards for Large Scale Multi-Family Developments (greater than 30 units and/or more than 3 buildings). The same exterior design may not be used for greater than 30 units and/or more than 3 buildings in a project. A variety of compatible exterior mterials' use and type, building styles, massing, composition, and prominent architectural features, such as door and window openings, porches, rooflines, shall be used. This section illustrates two types of multi-family housing, infill style development and large-scale apartment complexes. The image on the left illustrates high density (40-50 du/ac) apartment complexes that have been the staple of multi-family housing the past several decades. While nicely landscaped, the development is isolated from surrounding uses, provides little pedestrian connections, is constructed of the same repetitive architecture, allows drive-through parking lots instead of street style parking, and feeds all of its traffic onto a major arterial at one prime entrance. Denton's Development Code discourages the development of monolithic multi-family projects. Even where high densities are allowed by fight in Regional Mixed Use Centers, the developments must conform to design standards that create multi-family urban villages rather than isolated enclaves. New large developments must have buildings oriented to either a public street or an internal street network, and may not create just a series of parking lots. Along public streets, parking lots are not allowed in the front of buildings, and may be placed only on the side or in the rear of the development. Compliance with streetscape standards requires the provision of sidewalks and street trees. Architecturally, buildings within a multi-family development must exhibit a variety of design elements. They must also incorporate variations in style, color or faqade. The image to the left shows a three-unit structure out of a development of 200 units in Fort Worth. The structure is similar in scale and bulk to a large home and provides an open neighborhood feel. Parking is to the rear of the structure, accessed by a common alley. Open spaces and amenities are located throughout the development. This example would meet City of Denton design standards. -6- Moderate density housing (12 du/ac) may be built with the feel oftownhomes or garden apartments. The image on the left contains 8 units (4 units in each structure) as inffll development in a single- family neighborhood in Palo Alto, Califomia. The density of the Palo Alto example is approximately 10 units per acre. The image to the right is of street-facing owner-occupied townhomes located on the north side of Evers Park in Denton. The Denton example meets the new code site design standards and is owner-occupied (each with its own platted lot), at a density of approximately 16 units per acre. If correctly placed within the community, infill multi-family development can emulate the look, feel and style of surrounding single-family development without compromising neighborhood integrity. The above two images illustrate infill multi-family development built within a single-family neighborhood in Austin, Texas. The structures are designed to look like large homes and "fit" compatibly with surrounding homes. Each of the units has a backyard and open space. There are 8 units in the structure on the left placed on nothing larger than half an acre parcel (16 du/ac). Illustrating how a multi-family development may be sited with orientation to the street with sidewalks and street trees, this plan was developed as an example for the Palo Alto, Califomia site design standards. The City of Denton's site design regulations incorporate virtually the same standards. -7- OPTIONS Several options are available to the City Council to be discussed during the work session. If Council instructs staff to initiate a Development Code amendment, a new formal process will have to be scheduled. Staff suggests that the following points be considered: Development projects built in compliance with NRMU or NRMU-12 zoning standards are not yet available for inspection and evaluation. Current site design standards require that multi-family projects be constructed differently than in the past. The imposition of an SUP requirement should be used rarely, in cases where the potential variability of a certain type of land use is so great that development characteristics are unpredictable, or potential negative impacts pose extremely serious threats. Staff suggests that the site design standards for multi-family development be revised if they don't meet expectations of development quality, rather than requiting Council review on a case-by- case basis. The impact of the imposition of an SUP for NRMU-12 multi-family development will increase project planning, design, and processing costs significantly. In addition, the potential for site plan revisions required as a condition of SUP approval will heighten the level of uncertainty for applicants, since discretionary review of site plans would take place near the end of the review process. A similar two-stage process for Planned Development approval (Concept Plans and Detailed Plans) was eliminated recently, when the Development Code was adopted. 4. If a property zoned NRMU or NRMU-12 is clearly inappropriate for the area within which it is located, the zoning should be changed rather than imposing the SUP requirement. Of the approximate 40,000 acres of land within the City of Denton, 444 acres (1.1% of the city's land area) are zoned NRMU-12 and located within 200 feet of platted single family lots. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the proposed NRMU-12 SUP amendment not be pursued at this time. If changes are warranted, the site design standards or specific NRMU-12 zoning district locations should be reexamined. Staff continues to research the impact of rental properties that currently exist, an issue that will require separate Council discussion. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Staff will prepare a project schedule pending Council's instructions. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The effective date of the Denton Development Code was February 20, 2002. -8- City Council adopted five amendments to the NRMU and NRMU-12 zoning regulations on October 15, 2002: NRMU 1. Quick Vehicle Servicing and Drive Through Facilities: changed from "Not Permitted" to "Specific Use Permit Required". 2. Restaurant or Private Club: limitation of "no take out service" deleted from condition L(11). 3. Attached Single Family Dwellings: revised from "Specific Use Permit Required" to L(40), which limits the use to a maximum density of 12 units per acre. NRMU-12 1. Retail Sales & Service: changed from L(14) to L(15); reduction from maximum 10,000 SF (square feet) to maximum 5,000 SF. 2. Professional Services and Office: changed from L(15) to L(14); increase from maximum 5,000 SF to maximuml0,000 SF. FISCAL INFORMATION If text amendments to the Development Code or city-initiated zoning resources that are currently budgeted will be used to implement the changes. ATTACHMENTS 1. Specific Use Permit (SUP) Regulations 2. Areas of NRMU- 12 Zoning which Affect Existing Single-Family Development changes are pursued, staff Respectfully submitted: Dave Hill Assistant City Manager, Development Services -9- Exhibit 1 SPECIFIC USE PERMIT (SUP) REGULATIONS (from Denton Development Code, Subchapter 6) Certain uses are permitted in each zoning district only by Specific Use Permit. This Subchapter provides standards by which applications for a Specific Use Permit are to be evaluated. No Specific Permitted Use may be established, enlarged or altered unless the City Council first issues a Specific Use Permit under the Zoning Amendment Procedure detailed in Subchapter 3. A. A plan is required to be submitted for all Specific Use Permit applications in accordance with the Application Criteria IVlanual. B. An application for a Specific Use Permit may, but need not be, made concurrently with any required application for site design review under Subchapter 13. A Specific Use Permit may be granted if the City Council finds that the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria. C. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with The Denton Plan and federal, state, or local law. D. A specific permit shall be issued only if all of the following conditions have been found. 1. That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity. 2. That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided; 4. The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or adjacent developments; 5. That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration; 6. That directional lighting will be provided so as not to disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; and 7. That there is sufficient landscaping and screening to ensure harmony and compatibility with adjacent property. E. That adequate capacity of infrastructure can and will be provided to and through the subject property. F. That the Special Use is compatible with and will not have an adverse impact cn the surrounding area. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the surrounding area, the following factors shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. - 10- 2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. :Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. 3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. 4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. 5. Generation of noise, light, and glare. 6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in The Denton Plan. 7. Other factors found to be relevant to satisfy the requirements of this Chapter. The conditions which the approval authority may impose include, but are not limited to the following. conditions are in addition to the standards required in this Chapter. These A. Regulation and limitation of uses. B. Regulation of setbacks and spacing. C. Regulation of fences and walls. D. Requirement to submit a Development Plat, to insure the proper dedications and public improvements are made. E. Regulation limiting the magnitude of traffic generated. F. Regulation of points of vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress. G. Regulation of signs. H. Regulation of building materials, textures, colors and architectural features. :[. Regulation of landscaping, including screening and buffering where necessary to increase compatibility with adjoining uses. ~1. Regulation of noise, vibration, dust, odors or similar nuisances. I~ Regulation of hours of operation and the conduct of certain activities. L. Regulation of the period of time within which the proposed use shall be developed. IV1.Regulation of the duration of use. N. Regulation of any Environmentally Sensitive Areas as allowed under Subchapter 17. O. Regulation of any site development condition permitted by Subchapter 13. P. Such other conditions as will make possible the development of the City in an orderly and efficient manner and in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter that are reasonable. A. A Specific Use Permit shall be deemed revoked if the proposed use or phase does not possess an approved building permit within eighteen months from date of approval, unless a longer period is approved by City Council. :If the permit requires Site Design Review approval under Subchapter 13, the permit shall be deemed revoked if the use or phase is not developed within one year of the date of Site Design Review being approved. B. A Specific Use Permit may be revoked or modified, after notice to the property owner and a hearing before the City Council, for either of the following reasons: 1. The Specific Use Permit was obtained or extended by fraud or deception; or 2. That one or more of the conditions imposed by the permit has not been met or has been violated. 01/21/03 #4A AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: January 21, 2003 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7100 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual comract for the purchase of polymer concrete pull boxes; and providing an effective date (Bid 2929- Polymer Concrete Pull Boxes awarded to Hughes Supply in the estimated amoum of $37,950). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the annual comract to supply polymer concrete pull boxes. These items are utilized by DeNon Municipal Electric and are carried in the warehouse for easy access. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that this bid be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, Hughes Supply, in the estimated amoum of $37,950. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Hughes Supply Corimh, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This is an annual comract, which will begin January 21, 2003 and run through January 21, 2004 with the option to renew for an additional year, contingent upon pricing remaining the same. FISCAL INFORMATION The items in this bid will be funded out of the Warehouse Working Capital accoum and charged back to the using department. Agenda Information Sheet January 21, 2003 Page 2 Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1-AlS-Bid 2929 Polymer Concrete Pull Boxes Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent X 0 J J Q_ uJ uJ Z 0 uJ )- J 0 Q_ ii 0 uJ 'l- (J Q_ uJ '1- 0 .C (U ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING AN ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF POLYMER CONCRETE PULL BOXES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2929-POLYMER CONCRETE PULL BOXES AWARDED TO HUGHES SUPPLY iN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $37,950). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of State law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the materials, equipment, supplies or services as shown in the "Bid Proposals" submitted therefore; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the numbered items in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "Bid Proposals" on file in the office of the City Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: BID ITEM NUMBER NO VENDOR AMOUNT 2929 1,2 Hughes Supply Exhibit A SECTION 2. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the terms, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid Proposals, and related documents. SECTION 3. That should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items and of the submitted bids wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance, approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract which shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in the Bid Proposal and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids or 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 ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-BID 2929 r~ U Z 0 U r~ iii >- 0 1.1_ 0 iii "I- U iii ,-i- mr~<m 01/21/03 #4B AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: January 21, 2003 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7100 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding an annual contract for the purchase of decorative streetlight fixtures; and providing an effective date (Bid 2933- Decorative Streetlight Fixtures awarded to Genlyte Dallas/Hadco in the estimated amount of $212,250). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the annual contract to supply decorative streetlight fixtures. These items are utilized by Denton Municipal Electric for street lighting in developments and subdivisions and are carried in the warehouse for easy access. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that this bid be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, Genlyte Dallas/Hadco in the estimated amount of $212,250. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Genlyte Dallas/Hadco Dallas, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This is an annual contract, which will begin January 21, 2003 and run through January 21, 2004 with the option to renew for an additional year, contingent upon pricing remaining the same. FISCAL INFORMATION The items in this bid will be funded out of the Warehouse Working Capital account and charged back to the using department. Agenda Information Sheet January 21, 2003 Page 2 Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1-AlS-Bid 2993 Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent c~ 0 iii 0 iii '1- iii '1- 0 iii iii iii U ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING AN ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF DECORATIVE STREETLIGHT FIXTURES AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 2933-DECORATIVE STREETLIGHT FIXTURES AWARDED TO GENLYTE DALLAS/HADCO IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $212,250). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of State law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the materials, equipment, supplies or services as shown in the "Bid Proposals" submitted therefore; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the numbered items in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "Bid Proposals" on file in the office of the City Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: BID ITEM NUMBER NO VENDOR AMOUNT 2933 1,2 Genlyte Dallas/Hadco Exhibit A SECTION 2. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the terms, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid Proposals, and related documents. SECTION 3. That should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items and of the submitted bids wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance, approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract which shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in the Bid Proposal and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids or 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 ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-BID 2933 c~ 0 iii 0 ILl 'F © I.l- ILl ILl ILl ILl 01/21/03 #4C AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: January 21, 2003 DEPARTMENT: Management and Budget ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance to declare the intent to reimburse expenditures from the Unreserved Retained Earnings of the Materials Management Fund with Certificates of Obligation for the purchase of land; declaring an emergency and amending the 2002-2003 Capital Improvemem Budget; and providing an effective date. (Project: $585,000 land purchase; and Misc. related costs Not-to-Exceed $25,000). BACKGROUND This reimbursemem ordinance is for the acquisition of approximately 19.06 acres of land adjacem to and east of the City of DeNon Service Cemer. There is a critical need for additional space to accommodate inventory needed to support the significant growth in projects related to utilities and streets infrastructure and maintenance. Although the City of Denton has in the past engaged in discussion with the property owners regarding the possible acquisition of the property, there has been a very recem change in family circumstances surrounding the heirs to the property and the land has now become available. The proximity to the existing warehouse and utility operations makes this an excellent acquisition. Because of the development occurring in the area, if this ordinance is not approved and we are not able to proceed with the purchase, it is highly unlikely that the land will still be available for purchase by the time of 2003-04 budget approval. The funds for the purchase will be provided by the Materials Managemem Fund unreserved retained earnings and will be reimbursed with Certificates of Obligation to be issued in the second quarter of fiscal year 2002-2003. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) None. FISCAL INFORMATION This resolution will allow $585,000 for the acquisition of land and an amount not-to exceed $25,000 for other costs related to the purchase of the land from the Materials Management Fund unreserved retained earnings. These funds will be expended and subsequently reimbursed with Certificates of Obligation. The debt service will be paid from the revenues of the Materials Management Fund. Respectfully submitted: Anna Mosqueda Director of Management and Budget ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO DECLARE THE INTENT TO REIMBURSE EXPENDITURES FROM THE UNRESERVED RETAINED EARNINGS OF THE MATERIALS MANAGEMENT FUND WITH CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAND AND RELATED COSTS; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND AMENDING THE 2002-2003 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PROJECT- $585,000 FOR LAND PURCHASE; RELATED COSTS $25,000) WHEREAS, the City of DeNon (the "Issuer") is a municipal corporation/political subdivision of the State of Texas; and WHEREAS, the issuer expects to pay expenditures in connection with the purchase of land for Attachmem "A" (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the Issuer finds, considers, and declares that the reimbursemem of the Issuer for the payment of such expenditures will be appropriate and consistent with the lawful objectives of the issuer and, as such, chooses to declare its imemion, in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 Treasury Regulations, to reimburse itself for such payments at such time as it issues the obligations to finance the Projects; and WHEREAS, Sec. 8.08 of the DeNon City Charter provides that in case of grave public necessity, emergency expenditures to meet unusual and unforeseen conditions, which could not by diligem thought and attemion have been included in the original budget, may be authorized by the affirmative vote of at least five (5) of the members of the council as an amendmem to the original budget; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that a grave public necessity and unforeseen emergency exists which requires amendmem of the 2002-2003 City of DeNon Capital Improvement Budget, to wit: The City is in grave need to expand its warehouse facilities and it was not reasonably foreseeable that the subject land would be available at the time the 2002-2003 Capital Improvement Budget was adopted. NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1: The findings and recitations in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2: The Issuer reasonably expects to incur debt, as one or more series of obligations, with an aggregate maximum principal amount equal to $585,000 for the purpose of paying the costs of the land purchase and an amount not-to-exceed $25,000 for other related costs as set forth in the attached Attachment "A" which is made a part of this ordinance for all purposes. SECTION 3: All costs to be reimbursed will be for land purchase and other related expenditures. No tax-exempt obligations will be issued by the Issuer in furtherance of this ordinance after a date which is later than 18 months after the later of (1) the date the expenditures are paid, or (2) the date on which the property, with respect to which such expenditures are made, is placed in service. All amounts expended from the Unreserved Retained Earnings for the Projects to pay any costs of the Projects shall be reimbursed from Certificate of Obligation proceeds within the 2002-2003 fiscal year. SECTION 4: The foregoing notwithstanding, no tax-exempt obligation will be issued pursuant to this ordinance more than three years after the date any expenditure which is to be reimbursed is paid SECTION 5: The 2002-2003 Capital Improvemem Budget of issuer is amended up to $610,000 to provide for adjustmems to budgeted appropriations in the Materials Management Fund. SECTION 6: The City Secretary is directed to attach a copy of this ordinance to the original budget and cause this amendmem to be published once in the Demon Record- Chronicle. SECTION 7: This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: ATTACHMENT "A" City of Denton, Texas Annual Program of Services Proposed 2002-07 Capital Improvement Program Materials Management Fund Year Div/Dept Project Name Other* Total Required City Funding Aid In Const. Total Project Costs 2002-03 Mat. Mgmt. Warehouse-Land Acq. Misc. Costs $585,000 $585,000 25,000 25,000 $610,000 $610,000 $585,000 25,000 $610,000 *Includes certificates of obligation, fund balance, and General Fund Resources 01/21/03 #4D AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: January 21, 2003 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7100 ACM: Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving a real estate contract between the City of DeNon and Vodie Fulton, Edwin Owen Fulton and Joe L. Fulton for the purchase of six tracts of land totaling approximately 19.06 acres and generally located adjacem to and east of the City of Denton Service Center in the J. Brock Survey, the J. Lilly Survey, the W. Crenshaw Survey, and B.B.B. & C.R.R. Survey, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Approximately 19.06 acres of land located adjacem to and east of the City of DeNon Service Cemer recemly became available for purchase. The land referred to as the Fulton property became available due to changes in circumstances involving the owners and apparent heirs to the property, in January 2002, the land was idemified in the City of DeNon Facilities Master Plan completed by Hellmuth, Obata, and Kassabaum, inc. (HOK), for Service Cemer related projects and the possible realignmem of Ruddell Street. Staff has been actively involved in negotiations with the owners and their representatives for the past sixty days. The Real Estate Agreement that is attached to the ordinance for this item is the result of these negotiations. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Real Estate Agreement be approved in the amount of $585,000. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The closing date will be on or before February 28, 2003. Agenda Information sheet January 21, 2003 Page 2 FISCAL INFORMATION The purchase price of $585,000 including the cost of closing will be funded as outlined in the Reimbursement Resolution listed as a separate item on this Agenda. Respectfully submitted: Paul Williamson Real Estate and Capital Support Manager Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-ALS File 2951 ATTACHI~ENT 1 FULTON PROPERTIES C i~ c,f Den:o: Service RE S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\03\Fulton Real Estate Ordinance.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING A REAL ESTATE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND VODiE FULTON, EDWIN OWEN FULTON AND JOE L. FULTON FOR THE PURCHASE OF SIX TRACTS OF LAND TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 19.06 ACRES AND GENERALLY LOCATED ADJACENT TO AND EAST OF THE CITY OF DENTON SERVICE CENTER IN THE J. BROCK SURVEY, THE J. LILLY SURVEY, THE W. CRENSHAW SURVEY, AND THE B.B.B. & C.R.R. SURVEY, CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; 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 Vodie Fulton, Edwin Owen Fulton and Joe L. Fulton, in substantially the form of the Real Estate Contract which is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance for all purposes. 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. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2003. 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 OFDENTON THIS CONTRACT OF SALE is made by Vodie Fulton, widow of R.O. Fulton, Edwin Owen Fulton, and Joe L. Fulton (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 those certain tracts, lots or parcels of land described as follows: Tract 1 - A 5.90 acre tract described as the First Tract in the warranty deed recorded in Volume 313, Page 220 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. Tract 2 - A 0.60 acre tract described in the warranty deed recorded in Volume 604, Page 45 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. Tract 3 - A 4.07 acre tract described in the warranty deed recorded in Volume 489, Page 18 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. Tract 4 - A 4.3 acre tract described as the Third Tract in the warranty deed recorded in Volume 313, Page 220 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. Tract 5 - A 2.00 acre tract described as the Second Tract in the warranty deed recorded in Volume 313, Page 220 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. Tract 6 - A 2.19 acre tract described in the warranty deed recorded in Volume 203, Page 525 of the D.R.D.C.T. & Affidavit of Adverse Possession recorded in Volume 416, Page 211 of the D.R.D.C.T. With all fights and appurtenances pertaining to the said property, including any fight, 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. The Seller specifically reserves ownership of the two steel pipe gates that Seller created and installed in association with the road closure of Lattimore Street. Seller shall remove said steel pipe gates within a period of 120 days after the closing date, otherwise the gates shall become the property of the Purchaser. The Seller further specifically reserves Seller's undivided interest to all the remaining oil, Page 1 gas, and other minerals that are in and under the property and that may be produced from it, without the right of access to the surface of the property, unless Purchaser gives its prior written approval. PURCHASE PRICE Amount of Purchase Price. The total purchase price for the Property shall be the sum of Five Hundred Eighty Five Thousand Dollars and no/t 00 ($585,000), regardless of the actual area disclosed by the formal survey contemplated by this agreement. 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. 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 an 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 often (t0) 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 (t0) 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. 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. Page 2 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. Seller's Compliance. Seller shall have performed, observed, 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. 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: There are no parties in possession of any portion of the Property as lessees, tenants at sufferance, trespassers or other parties, with the exception of the month to month lease of the residential structure situated on the 0.60 acre tract (Tract 2), occupied by Frank Nunez. If Frank Nunez continues to lease the residence situated upon Tract 2 beyond the date of closing, then the Purchaser shall notify Mr. Nunez, in writing, giving a minimum of 60 days notice after the closing date, prior to formal lease termination by the Purchaser. It is expressly understood and the Purchaser agrees that Seller shall not be obligated or liable regarding the month to month lease by the Tenant of Tract 2 after the date of Closing. It shall be Purchaser's sole responsibility to enforce Purchaser's right of possession and/or to suffer any loss or injury associated with said lease after the Closing date. 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. Seller has complied with all applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, statutes, rules and restrictions relating to the Property or any part thereof. Page 3 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 Environmemal Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended. CLOSING The closing shall be held at the office of Alamo Title Company, 1100 Dallas Drive, Suite 100, Denton, Texas 76205 on or before February 28, 2003, 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 Seller's Requiremems. At the closing Seller shall: Deliver to the City of Demon 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 following: General real estate taxes for the year of closing and subsequent years not yet due and payable; and Any exceptions approved by Purchaser pursuant to Purchaser's Obligations hereof; and 3. Any exceptions approved by Purchaser in writing. Deliver to Purchaser a Texas owner's Policy of Title Insurance at Seller's sole expense, issued by Alamo Title Company, Demon, 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 Purchaser's fee simple title to the Property subject only to those title exceptions listed in Closing Requiremems hereof, such other exceptions as may be approved in writing by Purchaser, and the standard primed exceptions comained in the usual form of Texas Owner's Policy of Title insurance, provided, however: Page 4 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; The exception as to restrictive covenants shall be endorsed "None of Record"; The exception for taxes shall be limited to the year of closing and shall be endorsed "Not Yet Due and Payable"; and The exception as to liens encumbering the Property shall be endorsed "None of Record". Deliver to Purchaser possession of the Property on the day of closing. Purchaser's Requirements. Purchaser shall pay the consideration as referenced in the "Purchase Price" section of this contract at Closing in immediately available funds. Closing Costs. Seller shall pay all taxes assessed by any tax collection authority through the date of the 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. Seller and Purchaser expressly agree that if any change in the use of the property before closing results in the assessment of additional taxes, penalties, or interest for periods before closing, the assessments will be the sole obligation of Seller. If a change of use by Purchaser after closing results in an assessment, Seller shall not be responsible for such assessment. The parties agree that this provision will survive closing. REAL ESTATE COMMISSION Seller represents and warrants that it is responsible for all real estate commissions resulting from this sale including the 4% commission to Randy Smith Realtors. Seller indemnifies Purchaser from and against any such real estate commissions. Page 5 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 PROVISIONS Assignment of Agreement. This Agreement may be assigned by Purchaser without the express written consent of Seller. Survival of Covenants. Any of the representations, warranties, 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. Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be delivered hereunder shall be deemed received when sent by United States 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. 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. 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. Legal Construction. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, said invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be Page 6 t0. tt. 12. 13. 14. construed as if the invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. Prior Agreements 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. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 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. Memorandum of Contract. Upon request of either party, both parties shall promptly execute a memorandum of this Agreement suitable for filing of record. 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. Time Limit. In the event a fully executed copy of this Agreement has not been returned to Purchaser within ten (t0) days after Purchaser executes this Agreement and delivers same to Seller, Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Seller. 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 signatures 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. The Seller specifically reserves under a temporary residential lease that portion of TRACT 6 which is currently fenced in only (referred to as the "homestead") for purposes of the removal of personal items, equipment and other similar property. The temporary residential lease shall be for a period of four (4) months from the date of closing with the right to extend for another four (4) month term. Seller shall retain a right of possession only for purposes of the removal of Seller's personal property, no rental shall be paid to Purchaser, and Purchaser shall not be obligated or liable regarding Seller's personal property or any loss or injury which Seller may Page 7 incur, and Seller shall release and indemnify Purchaser from any such claims or liability. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Purchaser have executed this contract as follows: SELLER: PURCHASER: By: By: Date: SELLER: Vodie Fulton Michael A. Conduff City Manager 215 E. McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 By: Edwin Owen Fulton Date: SELLER: By: Joe L. Fulton Date: SELLER'S AGENT & ADDRESS: PURCHASER' S ADDRESS: City Attorney's Office Attention: Ed Snyder 215 East McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 Page 8 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON This instrumem is acknowledged before me, on this __ day of ,2003 by Michael A. Conduff, City Manager, of the City of DeNon, a municipal corporation, known to me to be the person and officer whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrumem and acknowledged to me that the same was the act of the said City of DeNon, Texas, a municipal corporation, that he was duly authorized to perform the same by appropriate ordinance of the City Council of the City of DeNon 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. STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON Notary Public in and for the State of Texas ACKNOWLEDGMENT This instrumem is acknowledged before me, on this __ Vodie Fulton. day of ,2003 by STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON Notary Public in and for the State of Texas ACKNOWLEDGMENT This instrumem is acknowledged before me, on this __ Edwin Owen Fulton. day of ,2003 by Notary Public in and for the State of Texas Page 9 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON This instrument is acknowledged before me, on this __ Joe L. Fulton day of ,2003 by Notary Public in and for the State of Texas TITLE COMPANY ACCEPTANCE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT The Title Company acknowledges receipt of the fully executed Contract on __ ,2003. day of TITLE COMPANY: Alamo Title Company 1100 Dallas Drive, Suite 100 Denton, Texas 76205 (940) 382-4357 By: Printed Name: Title: Page 10 01/21/03 #4E AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 Materials Management Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Cary Tower 349-8424 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds for the emergency purchase of fuel for the Fleet Services Department in accordance with provisions of State law exempting such purchases from the requirements of competitive bidding; and providing an effective date (Purchase Order 109185 to Kelsoe Oil Co. in the amount of $53,637). PURCHASE ORDER INFORMATION This purchase order is for the emergency purchase of diesel and unleaded fuel for the City of Denton's fleet. This purchase was made to ensure 24-hour operation of the City's fleet during a six week time period when the Fleet Services pumps were inoperable. This downtime was due to the requirement for relocating the electrical power source and fuel monitoring system from the old Fleet Services building to the new Fleet Services facility. Due to the cost of the relocation process, it was not included in the construction cost of the new facility. Our current fuel island was closed for a 6-week period due to excavation required to install the new electric line and monitoring system. We originally anticipated that the fuel island would only be closed for two days. Thus the amount of the purchase would have been well below the $25,000 threshold for competitive bidding. Due to unforeseen inclement weather the electrical work was delayed after the fuel island was out of commission. We had no choice but to continue the purchase of the fuel from the outside source. Kelsoe Oil was chosen as an alternate source of fuel due to their close proximity to the service center, 24 hour access to fuel and they currently share a portion of our annual fuel supply contract. RECOMMENDATION We recommend that Purchase Order 109185 to Kelsoe Oil Co. be approved in the amount of $53,637. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Kelsoe Oil Co. Denton, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT The installation of new wiring and conduit to the fuel pumps was completed in six weeks. Agenda Information Sheet January 21, 2003 Page 2 FISCAL INFORMATION The purchase of fuel is charged to the using department. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Declaration of Emergency Memo 1-AlS-File 2950 Attachment 1 MEMORANDUM DATE: January 21, 2003 TO: Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent FROM: Cary Tower, Fleet Services SUBJECT: Emergency Purchase of Fuel The requiremem for emergency purchase of fuel for the City of Demon fleet is the result of our fuel facilities being closed for renovations. Trench openings and electrical improvemems made it impossible to safely operate our facility. The renovations, which required six weeks to complete, consisted of relocating and upgrading the electric power source and fuel maintenance system from the old Fleet Services Building to the New Fleet Services Facility. Availability of parts and the adverse weather conditions delayed the project completion beyond our original estimates. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE EMERGENCY PURCHASE OF FUEL FOR THE FLEET SERVICES DEPARTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (PURCHASE ORDER 109185 TO KELSOE OIL CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $53,637). WHEREAS, state law requires that certain contracts requiring an expenditure or payment by the City in an amount exceeding $25,000 be by competitive bids, except for certain exempt purchases as set forth in Section 252.022 of the Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has recommended to the City Council that it is necessary in order to preserve and protect the public health and safety of the City's residents to purchase goods or services because of unforeseen damage to public machinery, equipment, or other property as more fully outlined in the file of the office of the City's Purchasing Agent, which is incorporated herein by reference and is in compliance with the requirements of Subsection 252.022 (a)(3) of the Local Government Code; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby determines that this procurement is necessary in order to preserve and protect the public health and safety of the City's residents and because of unforeseen damage to property, and the following emergency purchases of materials, equipment, supplies or services, as described in the "Purchase Orders" referenced herein and on file the office of the Purchasing Agent, are hereby approved: PURCHASE ORDER VENDOR AMOUNT 109185 Kelsoe Oil Co. $53,637 SECTION 2. Because of such emergency, the City Manager or designated employee is hereby authorized to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies or services as described in the attached Purchase Orders and to make payment therefore in the amounts therein stated, such emergency purchases being in accordance with the provisions of state law exempting such purchases by the City from the requirements of competitive bids. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-AIS-File 2590 01/21/03 #4F AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 Materials Management Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7100 SUBJECT: Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids by way of an imerlocal Agreement with Denton County and awarding a contract for the purchase of Office Furniture; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 2948 - Furniture For the New Central Fire Station, and for the New Solid Waste Operations/Administration Building awarded to Texas Furniture Source, Inc., in the total amount of $192,227.79). INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT INFORMATION: An imerlocal Agreemem for cooperative purchasing of materials and supplies between the City of DeNon and DeNon County was approved by Council on October 20, 1998-(Ordinance 98- 344). Among those comracts available to the City of DeNon from DeNon County is Bid 06-01- 1432-Office Furniture. This bid was awarded by Denton County to Texas Furniture Source, Inc. at an agreed price of 55.2% off of manufacture's (HON) latest published price list. Due to the wide variety of furniture required to fit into the configuration at the New Central Fire Station as well as the New Solid Waste Operations/Administration Building and the desire to maintain a level of consistency in color and style throughout the City of DeNon, a percemage from list price works much better than a bid for individual items. This cooperative agreemem allows for a volume discount that is advantageous to both the citizens of the City and County. The furniture included in this acquisition is for the administrative offices, and firefighter living quarters in the New Central Fire Station as well as the employee work stations, furniture for public areas, conference/meeting rooms, break areas, and storage areas at the New Solid Waste Operations/Administration Building. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend Purchase Order 109184 to Texas Furniture Source, Inc., in the amount of $115,208.20 and Purchase Order 109278 to Texas Furniture Source, inc., in the amoum of $77,019.59, be approved. The proposals from Texas Furniture Source, inc. are available for viewing in the office of the Purchasing Agent. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS: Texas Furniture Source, Inc. Carrollton, TX Agenda Information Sheet January 21, 2003 Page 2 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT: Delivery of the listed furniture is approximately 6 weeks after receipt of an order. FISCAL INFORMATION: Funding for the Fire Department furniture is available from account 10001500.1365.40100. Funding for the Solid Waste furniture is available from account 6002500.1355.30100. Attachment 1: Attachment 2: Purchase Order 109184 Purchase Order 109278 Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AlS-File 2948 ~g E ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS BY WAY OF AN iNTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH DENTON COUNTY AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF OFFICE FURNITURE; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 2948 -FURNITURE FOR THE NEW CENTRAL FIRE STATION, AND FOR THE NEW SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS/ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AWARDED TO TEXAS FURNITURE SOURCE, iNC., iN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $192,227.79). WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 98-344, the County of Denton 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 interlocal Agreement with Denton County 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 purchase order for materials, equipmem, supplies, or services, shown in the "Purchase Orders" referenced herein and on file in office of the Purchasing Agem, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: PURCHASE ORDER VENDOR AMOUNT 109184 Texas Furniture Source, Inc. $115,208.20 109278 Texas Furniture Source, inc. $ 77,019.59 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 Denton County for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies, or services in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quamities and for the specified sums comained in the bid documems and related documems filed with the DeNon County, 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 DeNon County, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract referenced herein; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the Denton County, 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 ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY 3-ORD-Filc .... 01/21/03 #4G AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: January 21, 2003 Materials Management Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7100 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance authorizing the City Manager to accept an Imerlocal Agreement with U.S Communities to authorize participation in various U.S. Communities comracts for the purchase of various good and services; and declaring an effective date (File 2930-Imerlocal Agreemem with U.S. Communities) BACKGROUND The Imerlocal Cooperative Act, V.T.C.A. Government Code Chapter 791, authorizes respective participating governments to enter into joint contracts and agreements for the purchase of necessary materials, supplies and services. Over the past several years, the City of Denton and other entities have entered into cooperative purchasing agreements that have been highly beneficial to the taxpayers through anticipated savings. The attached Agreement is an authorization to participate in contracts awarded by U.S. Communities for various goods and services. Any acquisition exceeding $25,000 will be presemed to Council for approval, prior to issuing a purchase order. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This Agreemem is effective upon approval by the City of DeNon City Council and will remain in effect umil terminated by either party. RECOMMENDATION We recommend this Imerlocal Agreement be approved. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS U.S. Communities Walnut Creek, California Agenda Information Sheet January 21, 2003 Page 2 FISCAL INFORMATION Each acquisition, based on this Agreemem, will follow the City of DeNon fiscal verification policy and be charged to the appropriate budget account. AGREEMENT INFORMATION This Interlocal Agreement will allow the City of Denton to utilize contracts for supplies and services competitively bid by U.S. Communities. In the past, we have purchased such items as police sedans, tires, corrugated metal pipe, lubricants, oils, road materials and other supplies from similar agreemems. The bid process followed by U.S. Communities including the County of Los Angeles, CA and County of Fairfax, VA as "Lead Public Agencies", meets all State bidding requiremems and bid opportunities are extended to all manufacturers and suppliers nation wide. Designed in cooperation with an Advisory Board of local govemmem purchasing officials, U.S. Communities pools the purchasing power of public agencies, achieves bulk volume discoums on behalf of public agencies, competitively solicits quality products through a lead public agency and provides a purchasing forum for public agencies nationwide. U.S. Communities is co-sponsored by National League of Cities, National Institute of Governmental purchases, United States Conference of Mayors, The Association of School Business Officials International and The National Purchasing Institute. Over 285 governmental entities in the State of Texas are currently participating in Interlocal Agreements with U.S. Communities. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent 1-AlS-Bid 2930 lnterlocal Agree~nent with US Co,ran. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH U.S. COMMUNITIES TO AUTHORIZE PARTICIPATION IN VARIOUS U.S. COMMUNITIES CONTRACTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF VARIOUS GOODS AND SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (FILE # 2930-INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH U.S. COMMUNITIES). WHEREAS, U.S. Communities is a nonprofit corporation duly created and operating to perform one or more governmental functions and services including the purchase of goods and services for local governments and other governmental entities throughout the United States; and WHEREAS, Section 791.025 of the Texas Govemmem Code (the "Act") authorizes cities to enter into interlocal agreements with such nonprofit corporations which satisfies competitive bidding requirements; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas finds that the Master Intergovernmental Cooperative Purchasing Agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Imerlocal Agreemem") is in the public imerest and satisfies the requirements of the Act; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to execute the Interlocal Agreement on behalf of the City of Denton. SECTION 2. The duly appoimed Purchasing Agem for the City of DeNon is designated by the City Manager to have the authorization to expend funds pursuant to this Imerlocal Agreemem for the purchase of various good and services in compliance with the Act. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-Ord-File 2930 Page 2 MASTER INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT This agreement is made between certain government agencies that execute a Lead Public Agency Certificate ("Lead Public Agencies") to be appended and made a part hereof and other government agencies ("Participating Public Agencies") that agree to terms and conditions hereof through U.S. Communities registration to be appended and made a part hereof. RECITALS WHEREAS, after a competitive bidding and selection process by Lead Public Agencies, a number of Vendors have entered into Master Agreements to provide a variety of goods, products and services based on national volumes (herein "Products"); WHEREAS, Master Agreements are made available by Lead Public Agencies through U.S. Communities and provide that Participating Public Agencies may purchase Products on the same terms, conditions and pricing as the Lead Public Agency, subject to any applicable local purchasing ordinances and the laws of the State of purchase; WHEREAS, the parties desire to comply with the requirements and formalities of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act as may be applicable to the laws of the State of purchase; WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to conserve resources and reduce procurement cost; WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the procurement of necessary Products; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained in this agreement, and of the mutual benefits to result, the parties agree as follows: 1. That each party will facilitate the cooperative procurement of Products. 2. That the procurement of Products subject to this agreement shall be conducted in accordance with and subject to the relevant statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations that govern each party's procurement practices. 3. That the cooperative use of bids obtained by a party to this agreement shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the bid, except as modification of those terms and conditions is otherwise allowed or required by applicable law. 4. That the Lead Public Agencies will make available, upon reasonable request and subject to convenience, information which may assist in improving the effectiveness, efficiency and economy of Participating Public Agencies procurement of Products. 5. That a procuring party will make timely payments to the Vendor for Products received in accordance with the terms and conditions of the procurement. Payment for Products and inspections and acceptance of Products ordered by the procuring party shall be the exclusive obligation of such procuring party. Disputes between procuring party and Vendor are to be resolved in accord with the law and venue rules of the State of purchase. 6. The procuring party shall not use this agreement as a method for obtaining additional concessions or reduced prices for similar products or services. 7. The procuring party shall be responsible for the ordering of Products under this agreement. A non-procuring party shall not be liable in any fashion for any violation by a procuring party, and the procuring party shall hold non-procuring party harmless from any liability that may arise from action or inaction of the procuring party. 8. The exercise of any rights or remedies by the procuring party shall be the exclusive obligation of such procuring party. 9. This agreement shall remain in effect until termination by a party giving 30 days written notice to U.S. Communities at 2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 550, Walnut Creek, CA 94596. 10. This agreement shall take effect after execution of the Lead Public Agency Certificate or Participating Public Agency Registration, as applicable. 04/14/02 http://www'usc°mmunities'°rg/iga'htm (1 of 3) [09/09/2002 3:53:35 PM] ~D PL~LIC AGENt' ATE I hsreby ~wl~it¢', on ~lf of ~ Cowry o£ L;×~ A~ge[es~,, CA (~c "Lead F~Hc Age~y') thaL I have ~ad and agree to ~e general te~:~ and c~nd~ons sci f:~ in Produ¢~ that fi-om time to time a~e ~de a~qai~ble by Lead ~ Agency X~ Pa~:mi,pa~g ~bh,¢ Age~e¢ Pa¢i¢ipatk~ Pabhc Ag~ies. I ~t,and that the purctm~ of ~a:e or mere l%~m ~e~ ~e provDmn,~ of~¢ ~CPA ~a at the aole md coa'~p,l~e cl/~r~n of ~ Parc~pa~k~g Public Ag~y, Joe Sandovai, DMsion Manager ?umha~ng and Contma 8er~,icea County of Los An.cjeles and T/fie of Signer http://www.uscommunities.org/iga.htm (2 of 3) [09/09/2002 3:53:35 PM] ~,~ PUB~L!C AGEN~ CERTIFICATE md ~omplem ~cz~m~ of t~e ?~~,g P~JLi~ Age~. http://www'usc°mmunities'°rg/iga'htm (3 of 3) [09/09/2002 3:53:35 PM] C. OM M I.;'N {'i'l {,% PARTICIPATING PUBLIC AGENCY PARTICIPATION CERTIFICATE I hefeby acknov..tedge, on behalf o~ the p~lBlic agency i~entified (lhe "Partic4palin9 Public Agency") lhaL I have r~d and ~ree to ~e general terms and c~dltions set ~th in the e~l~ Mest~ Interg~v~nm~nlal C~ral~e Pur~asing Agreem~ {MICPA, "Att~hmenl A') regulatmg the use ot the van~s ~as~er Agr~ments e~ purchase at Pr~uc~s m~c Agencies through U.S. Communities. Be~e pur~as,ng any ore ~ m~ Pa~c~palmg Pubhc Agency sh~ld revi~ end ensure ~he t~ms and ~gvisions o~ the appl~a~le Mast~ Agreement are ~c~gta~le I u~de~/~nd that the purchase of one or more Pr~uct~ under th~ provi~i~s olthe MICPA [s at the s~ a.d c~lete dls~Jio~ of the Pa~lcipati. g Public Agency. -~gnat ufo: PUBLIC AGENCY: [IMPORTANT!} Emplayer 9-Oig~t Tax ID #. (TIN): ./3-60g0~ [~. _ _ Please mark lhe appropriate box: LJ Courtly ~ City, Town or Village ~1 City Special D~stnct CONTACT PERSON: Name. Tom D_ ~haw, C.P,N., A.P.P. Title: Put ch,tslng Ager~ t Maihng Address. 90 I Cil~: Bonbon Telephone. 94U-349-7 Slate: TX Zip. 762g9 E-Mai~: ~ d-shawl, dc it¥ol:d ent-o n. corn ~UP'I-'LII::I~ IN I Office Supplies · Office Depnt Electrical & Corem/Data Of-ri 6c I-urniturc 0 Hawortb · Herman Mille~ · Knoll Industrial Supplies · Grainger Computers * Coma~k o Co~.pUSA · Gateway All Vendors Master Aqreerr er't No Las AngP. l~ Cc.mb/f:r,r.~',~c.r ~.: 1 .:2' l.os Angeles Count,.,. C~-.~-:r~.c.[ ¢57128 and =f4 ~ 4.'_.:'_' Fairfax C.2. L f',?y' CL~r d.-~.::,' P. QOl-.~113! :!lEG Fairf.---x C¢~r.t'¢ Cont'nc~ R©014113'31~6 [-','=1 rl:~.x (.~CI. IF,'¥ C,gr::ra,gt ~Q014.113-31-~E Lcs Ar.c;eles Ccur~'_¢ Couha.::[ #~,7'14~ Fai."f. ax Counb) Coqb'act RQOC:-413G216 ~.A B. 1SM [] Micron L-9 Seftware Spectrum 0 Please Fax to U.S. Communities at (925) 933-8457 FOF ques[IonS OF ;~dCll:lon8l Info,'ma£1on, please c~3n[ac~: U.~. L;omnlUnltleS at i~fo~uscommuni[ies.orq or toll Iree a[ 866.,I,72.7467 Date and Fime Received: By: 12.6,2 01/21/03 #4H AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: January 21, 2003 Electric Utility Howard Martin, 349-8232 SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH R. J. COVINGTON CONSULTING, LLC FOR CONSULTING SERVICES RELATING TO THE DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC UTILITY; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BACKGROUND: Task Order 03-A For the past seven years, it has been the practice of Denton Municipal Electric (DME) to maintain a daily services contract with R. J. Covington, initially as an employee of Resource Management International followed by contracting with his independent consulting firm. Mr. Covington and his finn have provided a variety of analytical and strategic planning support to DME over this period in areas such as: · Development of strategic options · Gas price forecasts · Assistance in financial and technical model development · Drafting of contracts and agreements · RFP development · Technical support for state legislative efforts · Review and analysis of TMPA Financial records · DME load analysis · Support for DME Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) Filings · Representation of DME at ERCOT committee and stakeholder meetings The existing DME staff has strengthened its ability to forecast natural gas prices and develop models. However it remains unable to perform all of these types of tasks largely because of workload. In addition, Mr. Covington's location in Austin provides a cost effective way to access data located in Austin, such as PUCT records and filings by other electric utilities, provides him access to information sources not available to staff isolated in Denton, and makes it possible for DME to be represented in strategy sessions with other municipal utilities that are held in Austin. Since the passing of SB 7, Mr. Covington's firm, working in coordination with DME and Garland staff members, has been critical in providing coverage of the large number of Austin based Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) and PUCT committees, workshops and projects that have determined the initial the operational structure of the new retail deregulated marketplace and continue to modify that structure. It is clear that failure of DME to participate effectively in these activities will result in development of a market model halmfi~l to the interest of smaller players such as DME, and may result in changes to the wholesale supply system that reduce reliability of the ERCOT system. The PUC staff and other stakeholders, including other municipal utilities, continue to try to force changes in the established ERCOT protocols. Many of these proposed changes could have a negative effect on DME's ability to operate effectively in the new market. DME needs all the resources possible to maintain the positions it has negotiated so far. Some of the major issues under discussion include: · Retention by the TMPA cities of cost effective transmission rights sufficient to move Gibbons Creek energy to the northern cities. · Fees that should be paid by opt out utilities including ERCOT operation fees and BENA charges. · Pricing and allocation of available transmission service. · Reserve margin/generation adequacy requirements and cost allocation of those requirements · Wholesale market design changes · Ancillary services requirements and pricing of those requirements · Pricing and availability of Reliability Must Run generation service In addition to the issues described above, R. J. Covington Consulting will work with both DME technical staff and the City accounting staff to improve the FERC accounting procedures in order to increase revenue recovery for transmission expenses. Task Order 03-B When DME entered into a five year Transition Power Agreement (TPA) to provide all power needs above what is supplied by Gibbons Creek, the expectation was that five years would give the wholesale power market in Texas time to mature and DME would have sound options to consider when the time came to look for a new power supply. The events of the past year have had an unprecedented negative effect on the electric industry throughout the US. As a result, financing options for the construction of new generation have dried up. Also, the oversupply of new generating plants in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) has depressed prices to a level at which parties are presently not interested in building new generation, even if they have the funding available. TNs situation is not expected to change until the present excess generation capacity has been used up and prices rise. Given these market conditions, the prudent thing for DME to do is to be proactive today regarding researching options for filling its power needs when the existing TPA ends. Taken alone, DME's load requirements, above what is supplied by Gibbons Creek, are too small to support a significant investment in a generating unit. DME's debt requirements to cover needed internal system improvements, DME's TMPA debt burden, and overall utility debt coverage issues preclude raising sufficient funds for a major capitol investment in generation. Due to the market uncertainty discussed above, long term power purchase contracts being offered today for small load requirements tend to increase in cost in the timeframe when the existing TPA ends. One option for DME is to join with other small entities in ERCOT to combine purchasing power in order to gain bargaining leverage. R. J. Covington Consulting is proposing to study the feasibility of just such a partnership. The potential of combining the largely night street lighting load of 120 municipalities in ERCOT with more traditional load shapes of municipals such as Denton in order to develop a larger, attractive customer for power suppliers appears to have merit. DME believes it is worth the proposed investment in the first phase of the study. OPTIONS: Task Order 03-A 1. Continue to use RJC's services. 2. Reduce DME participation in the development of the Texas electric market design. Task Order 03-B 1. Participate in the Phase I study. Do not participate in the Phase I study. RECOMMENDATIONS: Task Order 03-A DME recommends the continuing use of Mr. Covington's firm for the tasks outlined in Task Order 03-A. Task Order 03-B DME recommends participation in the Phase I study. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commission): The Public Utilities Board voted to approve Task Order 03-A and Task Order 03-B at the January 6, 2003 meeting by a vote of 5 to 0 with 2 members absent. FISCAL INFORMATION: Task Order 03-A not to exceed $100,000. Task Order 03-B not to exceed $25,000. Respectfully submitted: Sharon Mays Director of Electric Utilities ORDINANCE NO. 2003- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH R. J. COVINGTON CONSULTING, LLC FOR CONSULTING SERVICES RELATING TO THE DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC UTILITY; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council deems it in the public interest to engage the firm of R. J. Covington Consulting, LLC of Austin, Texas ("Covington"), to provide consulting services to the City relating to the Denton Municipal Electric utility ("DME"), including, without limitation, regulatory services and an investigation into the formation of a joint public power agency; and WHEREAS, the City staff has reported to the City Council that there is a substantial need for the above-described specialized professional services, and that limited City staff cannot adequately perform the 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; and WHEREAS, Covington has represented DME continuously over the past seven years, and has proven to be a valuable, affordable, competent, dependable professional resource who has expertise in and is well acquainted with the electric regulatory framework in Texas. Covington and his staff are particularly familiar with the characteristics and operations of DME; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of fimds to be used for the purchase of the professional services, as set forth in the Professional Services Agreement; 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 R. J. Covington Consulting, LLC of Austin, Texas, for professional consulting services relating to the Denton Municipal Electric Utility, 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 Covington and the ability of Covington to perform the professional services needed by the City for a fair and reasonable price. SECTION 3: 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 ., 2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY:/~Q~ ~? S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\03x,P- J Covington Consulting LLC PSA-DME Ord 2003,do0 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DENTON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES PERTAINING TO DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the __ day of ., 2003, by and between the City of Denton, a Texas Municipal Corporation, with its principal office at 215 East McKinney Street, Denton, Texas 76201 ("CITY"); and R. J. COVINGTON CONSULTING, LLC, A Texas Limited Liability Corporation, with its principal office at t 3276 Research Blvd., Suite 201, Austin, Texas 78750, hereafter "COVINGTON"; acting herein by and through their duly authorized representatives. WiTNESSETH, that in consideration of the covenants, promises and agreements herein contained, the CITY and COVINGTON do hereby AGREE as follows: ARTICI .F. I EMPLOYMENT OF CONSULTANT The CITY hereby contracts with COVINGTON, as an independent contractor, and COVINGTON hereby agrees to perform the services herein in connection with the Scope of Services as stated in the Articles to follow, with diligence and in accordance with the highest professional standards customarily obtained for such services in the State of Texas. A RTICI .F. II SCOPE OF SERVICES A. COVINGTON shall provide to the CITY professional consulting services pertaining to the assistance of City Staff in areas associated with operating in the competitive restructured electric industry in Texas. COVINGTON agrees to perform the services and tasks more particularly described in Task Order No. 03-A attached hereto and incorporated herewith by reference. B. COVINGTON shall provide to the CITY professional consulting services pertaining to the assistance of City Staff in areas associated with the investigation and evaluation into the formation of a joint public power agency. COVINGTON agrees to perform the services and tasks more particularly described in Task Order 03-B attached hereto, and incorporated herewith by reference. C. To consult with the City Manager, Assistant City Manager/Utilities, the Director of Electric Utilities, the Utility Attorney, and any other designated administrative personnel regarding any and all aspects of the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement. ARTICI.E III PERIOD OF SERVICE This Agreement shall become effective upon execution by both the CITY and COVINGTON, and shall remain in fome for the period which may reasonably be required for the completion of the work described in Article II herein, or at such time that the total fee provided for herein shall be expended, whichever event shall first occur. This Agreement may be sooner terminated in accordance with the provisions hereof. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. COVINGTON shall make all reasonable efforts to complete the services set forth herein as expeditiously as possible and to meet the schedule established by the CITY, acting through its Director of Electric Utilities. P, RTICI .F. IV COMPENSATION COMPENSATION TERMS: "Direct Non-Labor Expense" is defined as that expense for any assignment incurred hereunder by COViNGTON for supplies, long-distance telephone, telecopier, reproduction expense, overnight courier, photocopy expense, transportation, travel, communications, subsistence and lodging away from home and similar incidental expenses reasonably incurred in connection with that assignment. BILLING AND PAYMENT: 1. For and in consideration of the professional services to be performed by COViNGTON herein, the CITY agrees to pay COViNGTON, a total fee, including reimbursement for direct non-labor expense, not to exceed $100,000 for the services in Task Order No. 03-A and not to exceed $25,000 for the services in Task Order No. 03-B; totaling a not to exceed amount of $125,000. 2. The fee for the services described in this Agreement to be performed by COVINGTON are to be billed the rates as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herewith by reference, Billing shall be reported in minimum one-quarter (1/4) hour increments. 3. Payments to COVINGTON wilt be made by the CITY on the basis of detailed monthly statements rendered to the CITY through its Director of Electric Utilities. The fees hills as submitted shall be allowed by the Director of Electric Utilities; and they shall be examined and approved by the Utility Attorney. However, under no circumstances shall any monthly statement for services exceed the value of the work performed at the time a statement is rendered. 4. Nothing contained in this Article shall require the CITY to pay for any work which is unsatisfactory as reasonably determined by the City Manager or the Director of Electric Utilities, or which is not submitted in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. The City shall not be required to make any payments to COVINGTON when COVINGTON is in default under this Agreement. 5. It is specifically understood and agreed that COVINGTON shall not be authorized to undertake any work pursuant to this Agreement which would require additional payments by the CITY for any charge, expense or reimbursement above the maximum not-to-exceed fee as Page 2 stated, without first having obtained written authorization from the CITY. C. PAYMENT If the CITY fails to make payments due COVINGTON for services and expenses within forty (40) days after receipt of COVINGTON'S undisputed statement thereof, the amounts due COVINGTON will be increased by the rate of one percent (1%) per month from the said forty (40th) day, and in addition, COVINGTON may, after giving ten (10) days' written notice to the CITY, suspend services under this Agreement until COVINGTON has been paid in full all amounts due for services, expenses and charges provided. However, nothing herein shall require the CiTY to pay the late charge of one percent (1%) set forth herein if the CITY reasonably determines that the work of COVINGTON is unsatisfactory, in accordance with this Article IV, Compensation, and the CITY notifies COVINGTON in writing of any such defect. ARTtCLF. V OBSERVATION AND REVIEW OF THE WORK COVINGTON will exercise reasonable care and due diligence in discovering and promptly reporting to the CITY any defects or deficiencies in his work or the work of any subconsultants performed hereunder. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS All documents, analyses and other data prepared by COVINGTON under this Agreement ("Work Products") are instruments of service and are and shall remain the property of CITY. COVINGTON shall have the fight to make and retain copies and use all Work Products; provided, however, the use shall be limited to the intended use for which the services and Work Products are provided under this Agreement. COVINGTON may use and may copyright certain non-sensitive Work Products as property of COVINGTON; provided that prior written approval is obtained from CITY, whose approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, and providing that copywfiting will not restrict CITY'S right to retain or make copies of the Work Products for its information, reference and use on the Project or services under the Agreement. The Work Products shall not be changed or used for purposes other than those set forth in this Agreement without the prior written approval of COVINGTON. If CiTY releases the Work Products to a third party without COVINGTON'S prior written consent, or changes or uses the Work Products other than as intended hereunder, CiTY does so at its sole risk and discretion and COVINGTON shall not be Liable for any claims or damages resulting from or connected with the release or any third party's use of the Work Products. Page 3 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR COVINGTON shall provide services to the CITY as an independent contractor, not as an employee of the CITY. COVINGTON shall not have or claim any right arising from employee status. INDEMNITY AGREEMENT COVINGTON shall indemnify and save and hold harmless the CiTY 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's fees incurred by the CITY, and including without limitation, damages for bodily and personal injury, death and property damage, and damage for professional malpractice resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of COVINGTON or any subconsultants, in performance of this Agreement. COVINGTON'S liability under this Article VIII is expressly limited to the limit of COVINGTON'S insurance as set forth in Article IX. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create a liability to any person who is not a party to this Agreement and nothing herein shall waive any of the party's defenses, both at law or equity, to any claim, cause of action or litigation filed by anyone not a party to this Agreement, including the defense of govemmental immunity, which defenses are hereby expressly reserved. INSURANCE During the performance of the Services under this Agreement, COVINGTON shall maintain the following insurance with an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Texas by the State Insurance Commission or any successor agency that has a rating with Best Rate Carriers of at least an "A-" or above: Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $500,000 for each occurrence and not less than $500,000 in the aggregate, and with property damage limits of not less than $100,000 for each occurrence, and not less than $100,000 in the aggregate. Automobile Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of not less than $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. Professional Liability Insurance with policy limits of not less than $1,000,000 annual aggregate. COVINGTON shall furnish insurance certificates or insurance policies at the CITY's request to evidence such coverages. The insurance policies shall name the CITY as an additional insured on all such policies to the extent legally possible, and shall contain a provision that Page 4 such insurance shall not be canceled or modified without thirty (30) days prior written notice to CITY and COVINGTON. in such event, COVINGTON shall, prior to the effective date of the change or cancellation, deliver substitute policies furnishing the same coverage to the CITY. ARBITRATION AND ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties 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 Agreemem involving one party's disagreement may include the other party to the disagreement without the other's approval. ARTtC. I JE XI LIMITATION OF LIABILITY To the extent permitted by law, the total liability of COVINGTON to CiTY for any and all claims arising out of this Agreement, whether caused by negligence, errors, omissions, strict liability, breach of contract or contribution, or indemnity claims based on third-party claims, shall not exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000). ARTICLF. XII CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES In no event and under no circumstances shall COVINGTON be liable to CITY for any interest, loss of anticipated revenues, earnings, profits, or increased expense of operations, or for any consequential, indirect or special damages. ,ARTICIJE XrlI PROFE~qglONAL STANDARDS COVINGTON will perform services under this Agreement with the degree of skill and diligence normally practiced by professional engineers or consultants performing the same degree of similar services. No other warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, is made with respect to the services furnished under this Agreement and all implied warranties are disclaimed. ARTICLE XIV TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, either party may terminate this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days advance written notice of termination to the other party. This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part in the event of either party substantially failing to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. No such tem~ination wilt 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, Page 5 and not tess than ten (10) business days in which to cure the failure; and (2) an opportunity for consultation with the terminating party prior to termination. If this Agreement is terminated prior to completion of the services to be provided hereunder, COVINGTON shall immediately cease all services and shall render a final bill for services to the CITY within 30 days after the date of termination. The CITY shall pay COVINGTON for alt services properly rendered and satisfactorily performed and for reimbursable expenses to termination incurred prior to the date of termination in accordance with Article IV, Compensation. Should the CITY subsequently contract with a new consultant for the continuation of services on the Project, COVINGTON shall cooperate in providing information. COVINGTON shall mm over all documents prepared or furnished by COViNGTON pursuant to this Agreement to the CiTY on or before the date of termination, but may maintain copies of such documents for its use. ARTICLE XV RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES Approval by the CiTY shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of COVINGTON, or any sub-consultants of COVINGTON, for the accuracy and competency of their designs or other work product. ARTICLE XVI NOTICES All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under this Agreement shall be personally delivered or mailed to the respective parties by depositing same in the United States mail at the address shown below, certified mail, return receipt requested unless otherwise specified herein. Mailed notices shall be sent to the parties at the following addresses: To COVINGTON: To CITY: R.J. Covington Consulting, LLC Attn: Richard J. Covington 13276 Research Blvd., Suite 201 Austin, Texas 78750 City of Denton, Texas Attn: Michael A. Conduff, City Manager 215 East McKinneyStreet Denton, Texas 76201 All notices shall be deemed effective upon receipt by the party to whom such notice is given or within three days after the date of mailing. ARTICI.E XVII ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement consisting of nine (9) pages, and eight (8) additional pages consisting of Task Order No. 03-A and 03-B, 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, Page 6 communications and agreements which may have been made in connection with the subject matter hereof. ARTICIJE XVIII 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 party shall reform this Agreement to replace such stricken provision with a valid and enforceable provision which comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. ARTICLF. XIX COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS COVINGTON shall comply with all federal, state, local laws, roles, regulations, and ordinances applicable to the work covered hereunder as they may now read or hereinafter be amended. ARTICI.E XX DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED In performing the services required hereunder, COVINGTON shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age, or physical handicap. ARTICLE XXI PERSONNEL COVINGTON represents that he has secured, or will secure at his own expense any additional personnel required to perform all the services required under this Agreement. Such personnel shall be subconsuttants of COVINGTON, and shall not be employees or officers of, nor have any contractual relations with the CITY. COVINGTON shall inform the CITY of any conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest that may arise during the term of this Agreement. All services required hereunder will be performed by COVINGTON or under his supervision. All personnel engaged in work shall be qualified and shall be authorized and permitted under state and local laws to perform such services. ARTICI.E XXII ASSIGNABILITY COVINGTON 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 wTitten consent of the CITY. Page ARTICJ.E XXIII MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, limitation herein contained shall be valid unless in writing and duty executed by the party 1}o be charged therewith and no evidence of any waiver or modification shall be offered or received in evidence in any proceeding arising between the parties hereto out of or affecting this Agreement, or the rights or obligations of the parties hereunder, and unless such waiver or modification is in writing, duly executed; and, the parties further agree that the provisions of this section will not be waived unless as herein set forth. MISCELLANEOUS COVINGTON agrees that CITY shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after the final payment under this Agreement, have access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of COVINGTON involving transactions relating to this Agreement. COVINGTON agrees that the CITY shall have access during normal working hours to all necessary COVINGTON facilities and shall be provided adequate and appropriate working space in order to conduct audits in compliance with this section. The CITY shall give COVINGTON reasonable advance notice of any intended audits. Venue of any suit or cause of action under this Agreement shall lie exclusively in Denton County, Texas. This Agreement shall be governed by, and consmaed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. COVINGTON shall commence, carry on, and complete the work required by this engagement with all applicable dispatch, in a sound, economical, efficient manner and in accordance with the provisions hereof, tn accomplishing the work, COVINGTON shall take such steps as are appropriate to ensure that the work involved is properly coordinated with related work being carded on by the CITY. The CITY shall assist COVINGTON by placing at COVINGTON's disposal all available information pertinent to the work required by this engagement, including previous repons, any other data relative to the project and arranging for the access to, and make alt provisions for COVINGTON to enter in or upon, public and private property as required for COVINGTON to perform services under this Agreement. The captions of this Agreement are for informational purposes only and shall not in any way affect the substantive terms or conditions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Denton, Texas has caused this Agreement to be executed in four original counterparts, by its duly authorized City Manager; and COVINGTON has executed this Agreement by its duty authorized officer on this the __ day of January, 2003. Page "CITY" CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS A Municipal Corporation By: Michael A. Conduff, City Manager ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY "COVINGTON" R.J. COVINGTON CONSULTING, LLC A Texas Limited Liability Corporation By: Richard J. Coving~n, Presic~6~ ATTEST: By: $:\Our Documents\Conttacts\03~'J CovingtOn Consulting LLC PSA 2003-DME doc Page 9 EXHIBIT A FEES FOR SERVICES Professional and support services, except for testimony, shall be billed at the following rates: Title Hourly Rate Executive Consultant Sr. Management Consultant Management Consultant Sr. Consultant Consultant Assistant Consultant Technical Assistant Research Assistant Data Specialist Administrative Assistant $195.00 $190.00 $170.00 $155.00 $140.00 $125.00 $100.00 $ 80.00 $ 70.00 $ 55.00 The above rates shall be adjusted each year, commencing January 1, 2004, to reflect the change in rates officially established by R. J. Covington Consulting. Testimony shall be billed at not less than eight hours per day. Reproduction, printing, communications, computer services, and other miscellaneous support services shall be billed at rates for such services as determined from time to time and officially established by R. J. Covington Consulting. All travel, food, lodging, and other work-related expenses, except automobile mileage, associated with the provision of services hereunder shall be billed at cost. Automobile mileage shall be billed at the mileage rate as published by the Internal Revenue Service from time to time. Client shall pay to R. J. Covington Consulting any applicable sales tax, if in fact there is any sales tax lawfully owing, which arises from, and becomes due and owing regarding services performed by R. J. Covington Consulting. ATTACHMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT DATED JANUARY 21, 2003 BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND R.J. COVINGTON CONSULTING, LLC TASK ORDER NO. 03-A Regulatory Services Tasks provided for in this Attachment are directed at assisting the City staff (Staff) in areas associated with operating in the competitive restructured electric industry in Texas. The regulatory and operating environment continues to change. As issues are addressed at the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUQ and at the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), RJC will report on these activities and will participate in representing the City on those issues that may affect the City. RJC will also assist Staff by providing technical analysis and assistance in addressing competitive issues requiring attention. Following is an overview of each of the primary areas of services to be provided under this Task Order. Regulatory Support at PUC and ERCOT The scope of services in Tasks A and B includes continuing participation at the PUC and at ERCOT on issues affecting the City. During 2003, issues that require attention include: 1) evaluation of direct assignment of intrazonal congestion, including study of tocational marginal pricing for transmission; 2) investigation into generation adequacy in ERCOT and how the cost of reserves will be spread begin market participants; 3) investigation into reliability must run units (RMR) in ERCOT and how the cost of RMR will be determined; 4) PUC review of the wholesale market design and possible changes that would affect costs and service to the City; 5) other continuing changes in the ERCOT Protocols and the PUC Substantive Rules. As on-going changes and modifications are made to the operating protocols, issues will continue to arise that can substantially affect the City's cost of doing business. RJC effectively works with Staff and the City's attorneys to provide notification, evaluation and intervention as needed to protect the City's interest. These and other regulatory related activities will directly and indirectly affect the Task Order 03-A Regulatory Services City's municipal electric system and its ability to contribute to the funding of City operations. Monitoring Activities and Technical Support Tasks C and D allow RJC to augment Staff's efforts to process the wide range of information that is needed to keep up with activities at the PUC and ERCOT and to support staff in addressing the many issues that arise as the market changes. In addition to reporting on on-going activities at the PUC and ERCOT, RJC will provide technical assistance to analyze and evaluate the impact on the City of various competitive issues. This support includes addressing customer rate issues, competitive pricing questions, service area and business practices issues, issues related to TMPA, issues related to the City's wholesale power supply agreement, and other activities to assist Staff in responding to issues raised by customers, the Utility Board, and by City Council. One activity of particular importance for 2003 will be to work closely with City staff to help identify and coordinate the FERC accounting systems and processes needed for regulatory filings. By improving the 'accounting and reporting process, the transmission related costs can be better identified, leading to lower costs to Denton's retail ratepayers. Following is a detail list of services to be provided under this Task Order. Scope of Services Task A PUC Regulatory_ Support Task A-1 Attending Workshops And Hearings At PUC 1. RJC will stay informed on activities at the PUC and wilt attend workshops and hearings as needed. 2. When appropriate, RJC wilt participate in workshops and hearings to represent interests of City based on directions of Staff. 3. RJC will work with Staff in developing positions which should be taken and strategies for working with parties involved. Task A-2 Analyze Proposed Rules and Policies 1. Proposed new rules and rule changes from the PUC will be analyzed. 2. RJC will discuss proposed new rules, and changes to existing rules with Staff and legal counsel, helping to identify areas of concern and preparing posit/ohs that represent the interests of the City. 2 of 5 Task Order 03-A Regulatory Services 3. RJC will meet with PUC staff and other parties as appropriate to discuss proposed rules, and present the City's concerns regarding such proposals. Task A-3 Preparation of Comments 1. RJC will prepare or assist in preparing comments to be filed with the PUC representing City's position on issues brought up in proposed roles, projects and dockets. 2. These comments will be coordinated through Staff and the City's legal team. 3. RJC will assist the City's legal team as necessary in the preparation and filing of comments and testimony in dockets that have been identified by Staff as requiring intervention to protect the City's interest. Task B Assistance With ERCOT Task B-1 1. RJC Attending Committee and Working Group Meetings At ERCOT will stay informed on activities at the ERCOT Independent System Operator (ISO) and will attend meetings as directed. RJC will participate in discussions in meetings to represent interests of City based on directions of Staff. RJC will work with Staff in developing positions which should be taken and strategies for working wi~h other ERCOT stakeholders. Task B-2 Analyze Proposed Policies and Protocols 1. Proposed new policies and protocols from the ISO will be analyzed. 2. RJC will review proposed protocols with Staff, to identify areas of concern and prepare responses that represent the position of the City on the issues before the committees. 4. RJC wilt meet with ERCOT staff and other stakeholders to discuss proposed protocols, and negotiate reconciliation of concerns. Task B-3 1. Preparation of Comments RJC will prepare or assist in preparing whitepapers and comments to be submitted to the committees and be prepared to present such papers to represent the City's position on issues. These papers and comments will be coordinated through Staff and when necessary, the City's legal team. 3 of 5 Task Order 03-A Regulatory Services Task C Provide Staff With Technical Assistance On Competitive Issues Task C-1 Technical Assistance 1. RJC will work with Staff as requested to review DME models and assist in making changes to models to reflect changing market and operating conditions. 2. RJC will discuss with and be available to Staff to assist in special projects to evaluate impacts of changes in customers rates, the effect of competition on customer related issues, and special analyses related to business practices that may affect DME's competitive position. 3. RJC will provide, as directed, technical support to help quantify impact of issues affecting DME. Examples of such issues may include: 1) issues associated with TMPA; 2) issues associated with the Transition Power Agreement; 3) analysis of opt-in versus opt-out issues; 4) toad management and energy efficiency measures; 5) retail rate issues; 6) load forecasting. Task C-2 Industry Monitoring and Evaluation 1. RJC will have continuing communication with Staff and the City's legal team in order to monitor proposed industry changes and address those issues affecting municipalities. 2. An on-going dialog will be maintained with Staff and the legal team in order to evaluate changing operating and market requirements and conditions, and evaluate potential effects on City operations. 3. Information necessary to supplement and support the decision making process will be provided as requested. 4. A summary of activities at the PUC and ERCOT will be provided weekly. Task D Special Projects Task D-1 Coordination of FERC Accounting Systems and Transmission Cost of Service t. RJC will coordinate with Staff the development of FERC accounting systems and reporting needed for regulatory filings at the PUC. 2. RJC will work with engineering staff in the identification and separation of transmission costs from distribution costs in substations and in the overall electric system. 3. RJC wilt work with Staff to improve recovery of Transmission Costs of Service as the electric system continues its growth in transmission facilities to serve Denton and the surrounding area. 40f5 Task Order 03-A Regulatory Services Budget RJC recommends a not to exceed budget of $100,000 for labor and expenses. This budget will not be exceeded without prior approval of the City. RJC will bill monthly with supporting documentation of activities performed. The work being performed will be under the supervision of the Director of Electric Utilities and may be modified at any time upon appropriate notice to RJC. EXECUTED this__ day of January, 2003. AUTHORIZED BY: ACCEPTED BY: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS A Texas Municipal Corporation R.J. COVINGTON CONSULTING, LLC By' Dated: January 21, 2003 Dated: January 21, 2003 ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY By: Dated: January 21, 2003 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY CITY ATTORNEY Dated' Janu ~-)21, 2003 S:\Our Documents\Contract~\03~d~ J Covington TO No 03-A DME-PSA,doe 5of5 ATTACHMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT DATED JANUARY 21, 2003 BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND R.J. COVINGTON CONSULTING, LLC TASK ORDER NO. 03-B Investigation Into Formation of Joint Public Power Agency Tasks provided for in this Attachment are directed at Phase i of the formation of a Joint Public Power Agency (JPPA). Phase I includes the investigation and evaluation of the City's potential participation in the JPPA. The JPPA would jointly secure power supply resources to serve municipal load in over 120 municipalities in ERCOT, as well as the load for participating municipal utility systems such as Denton Municipal Electric (DME). The goal of the JPPA is to combine the purchasing power of a number of loads in ERCOT to gain bargaining leverage and to increase control over fuel and power costs to serve customers. The advantage to DME of participating in the JPPA is that much of the municipal load served is street lighting. The relative high percentage of street lighting to total load provides a better load profile for power suppliers looking to serve that load. Another benefit of participation in the JPPA is to gain more control over power supply costs, as compared to going to the market which is heavily influenced by market events which can have no bearing on actual cost to serve. Overall the goals of DME wilt be to lower costs while having more control over the factors affecting those costs. Following is a detail list of services to be provided under this Task Order. Scope of Services Task 1 Evaluate Economics of Public Power Agency 1. RJC will develop and evaluate the City's load profile along with that of other participants. 2. Based on the load profiles, RJC will construct a draft proposed generation supply portfolio to serve the load. This will include considerations of unit and fuel diversity, loss of generation contingencies, transmission congestion issues and QSE services. Task Order 03-B Investigation Into Formation of JPPA 3. RJC will work with interested power supply entitles to explore options for supplying the power, including equity participation in new units, purchase of older units, entering into long term power supply contracts or tolling arrangements, and other options as appropriate. 4. Fuel market risks and opportunities to control fuel purchases and avoid fuel market volatility will be investigated and summarized. 5. Once a draft plan is developed, RJC will estimate a preliminary power supply cost to the JPPA participants. Task 2 Work With JPPA Participates on Organizational Issues 1. Working with representatives of the various groups, RJC will deveIop a proposed organizational plan. 2. The organizational plan would address possible responsibilities of entities, list legal considerations among entities, propose a voting structure, and suggest administrative and operating approaches. Task 3 Develop Preliminary Assessment Report 1. Based on discussions with parties and potential suppliers, and the preliminary economic assessment, RJC will develop a report for JPPA participate members. The report will address the preliminary evaluation of costs/benefits and risks associated with the JPPA. 2. The report will make a recommendation with respect to whether or not to proceed to Phase 2 of the development of the JPPA. Budget RJC recommends a not to exceed budget for Phase I of $25,000 for labor and expenses. This budget will not be exceeded without prior approval of the City. City will be billed for activities based on its relative load ratio share of alt participates. RJC will bill monthly with supporting documentation of activities performed. It is anticipated that the initial costs for Phase I and Phase II for development of the JPPA may be partially or fully recovered through membership fees to new entities wanting to join the JPPA in the future. EXECUTED this __ day of January, 2003. 2of3 DRAFT PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MEETING MINUTES January 6, 2003 9:00 A.M. After determining that a quorum of the Public Utilities Board of the City of Denton, Texas was present, the Public Utilities Board convened into an Open Meeting on Monday, January 6, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. PRESENT: Chaff&an Newell, George Hopkins, Don White, Dick Norton and Dick Smith EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Mike Conduff, City Manager Howard Martin, Assistant City Manager EXCUSED: Bill Cheek UNEXCUSED: Jim Wilson ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION: 6) Consider approval of the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Denton and R.J. Covington Consulting, LLC., Austin, Texas (Task Orders 03-A and 03-B). Sharon Mays, Electric Utility Director, presented this item. Mays reported that it has been the practice of Denton Municipal Utilities, over the last seven years, to maintain a service contract with R. J. Covington for analytical and strategic planning support. Mays reported to the Board that Task Order 3B would support a feasibility study conducted by Covington Consulting examining the possibility of joining with other small entities in ERCOT to combine purchasing power in an effort to gain bargaining leverage. Board Member George Hopkins moved to approve the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Denton and R.J. Covington, LLC., Austin, Texas (Task Orders 03A and 03-B, with a second from Nortolt The motion wa s approved by a vote of 5-0. 01/21/03 #41 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 Engineering Dave Hill, 349-8314 =.,5~¢~ SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance partially abandoning an easement assigned to the City of Denton as recorded in Volume 538, Page 666, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, from an easement previously granted to Texas Power & Light Company by deed as recorded in Volume 231, Page 179, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND The current property owner, (Southwest Affordable Housing) "Bluffview Villas Apartments", has requested that the City abandon the above referenced easement. All City of Denton facilities were removed from the easement area and the property owner constructed a building on the site a year ago. In a recent attempt to expand by the property owner, it was discovered that the easement portion encumbering this tract had not been formally abandoned. RECOMMENDATION Staff endorses the approval of the abandonment. owner's use of the tract. The existence of the easement encumbers the property PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW None FISCAL INFORMATION None ATTACHMENTS Location Map Ordinance Prepared by: Denise M. Perez Technical Assistant Respectfully submitted: Charles Fiedler, Director Engineering Department Location Map BLUFFVlEW VILLAS ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PARTIALLY ABANDONING AN EASEMENT ASSIGNED TO THE CITY OF DENTON AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 538, PAGE 666, DEED RECORDS, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM AN EASEMENT PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TO TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY BY DEED AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 231, PAGE 179, DEED RECORDS, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of DeNon has received a request for the partial abandonmem of certain utility easemem recorded in volume 538, page 666 of the Deed Records of DeNon County, Texas (the "Utility Easemem") from the underlying and abutting fee simple owner; and WHEREAS, the portion of the Utility Easemem to be abandoned is described in Exhibit "A" and illustrated in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Abandoned Area"); and WHEREAS, the City of DeNon Engineering Departmem has reviewed the Property and determined that this easemem area is not needed for future utility purposes; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds and determines that the Property is not needed for utility easemem purposes and it is in the public imerest to abandon the Property and the City's imerests therein to the currem underlying and abutting landowner ("Currem Owner"); NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The Abandoned Area is vacated and permanemly abandoned as a utility easemem. All other portions of the Utility Easemem not abandoned herein or previously abandoned will remain in full force and effect. SECTION 2. The imerests of the City of DeNon in the Abandoned Area are hereby released and will revert to the owners as provided by law. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __day of ,2003 EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING the centerllne of an easement to Texas Power &Llght Company according to the deed filed for record in Volume 231, Page 179, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas and belng reassigned to the City of Denton according to the deed filed for record in Volume 538, Page 666, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas and being situated in the Clty of Denton, Denton County, Texas out of the J,D, Lilly Survey, Abstract No, 762 and being part of Lot 2, Block A, Bluffvlew Villas according to the plat thereof recorded in Cabinet U, Page 516, Map Records, Denton County, Texas, also being part of a 29,137 acre described tract of land conveyed to TX Bluffview Housing, L,P, according to the deed filed for record in Volume 4829, Page 04011, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas and being more particulary described as follows: COMMENCING at a 1/2" iron rod found with plastic cap stamped "SENT CORP RPLS 4001" in the north right of way line of alngo Road (variable-width right of way) and being the southwest corner of said Lot 2; THENCE, aiong said north right of way line, North 52 degrees, 20 minutes, 42 seconds, East, a distance of 563.71 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, departing said north right of way line, North O0 degrees, 57 minutes, O0 seconds, West, a distance of 570.95 feet to a point; THENCE, South 89 degrees, 56 minutes, O0 seconds, West, a distance of 429.00 feet to a point in the west line of said Lot 2, from which a 1/2" iron rod found bears North O0 degrees, 29 minutes, 24 seconds, East, a distance of 165.98 feet. Pouglas/~, Loomis ~ Registered Professional Land Surveyor No, 5199 EASEMENT EXHIBI'F'A" LOT 2, BLOCK A BLUFFVIEW VILLAS (CABINET U, PAGE 516, M.R.D.C.T.) J.D. LILLY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 762 Date: 11/07~2002 Scale: 1"=200' Pro~ect No, 0210024 811 E. Piano Parkway Suite 117 Piano, Texas 75074 (972) 424-7002 Voice (972) 633-1702 Fax W~VW.SurveyConsultantslnc.Com 1/2:' ~ TEXAS POWER ~ L}G;HT COMPANY EASE.BENT i ('v'OLU.~E 2:31, PAGE ~, - REASSIGNED TO CITY OF BENTON- ~ (VOLUME 558. PAOE 686) ~ : ~;LUFFV[V~ ~oC~ :l0 SCALE;:~ ! LOT 2, BLOCK l ....... *l m Sll E. Pl~oP=~ay BLUFFVIEW VIL~S ~ _]j~ suite Pl~o, T~x~ 7~074 ~CA...~T u, PA~ S16, M.R.D.C.T.~~r~~~ m4,-,oo~ ~o,~ J.D. LILLY SURVEY, ABST~CT NO. 762 (972) 633-17o2 F~ ~ate: 11/07~2002 Scol.: 1'=200' Pro,.ct No. 0210024 ~W.Su~cyConsul~Inc. Com 01/21/03 #4J AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: January 21, 2003 Tax Kathy DuBose, Fiscal and Municipal Services SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an amended budget for hotel tax fund expenditures by Denton County, Texas, for the operation of the Courthouse on the Square Museum during calendar year (CY2002), to be effective as of the date of passage and approval of this ordinance. BACKGROUND Funding for the Denton County Courthouse on the Square Museum was originally approved for a term of January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2002. The monies were encumbered from fiscal year 2001-2002 Hotel Occupancy Tax funds. Expenditure reports for this contract period will be submitted on January 31, 2003. In pursuit of this report, the Denton County Courthouse on the Square Museum requested a budget amendment on January 2, 2003, in the amount of $72. The request to revise their budget would reduce the Historical category "Archival Preservation Reference Books" and provide an Administrative category for "Office Supplies" in the amount of $72. This new line item is for an expenditure to Terrill Wheeler for sign-in sheets for the Museum's guest register book. FISCAL INFORMATION These funds have been encumbered and budgeted from FY 2001-2002 HOT fund revenues. Respectfully submitted: Diana G. Ortiz Director of Fiscal Operations ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDED BUDGET FOR HOTEL TAX FUND EXPENDITURES BY DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, FOR THE OPERATION OF THE COURTHOUSE ON THE SQUARE MUSEUM DURING CALENDAR YEAR 2002 (CY2002), TO BE EFFECTIVE AS OF THE DATE OF PASSAGE AND APPROVAL OF THIS ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, the City of Demon has previously approved by ordinance a contract with Denton County, Texas for the expenditure of hotel tax funds during CY2002; and WHEREAS, pursuant to §3.01 of the above-referenced contract, the Council had previously approved a budget for such expenditures; and WHEREAS, Denton County, Texas has submitted a request to amend the CY2002 budget for expenditure of hotel tax funds, which the Council deems to be both necessary and appropriate to the services contemplated by the contract and State law; and WHEREAS, such amendment shall have no effect upon the amount of money appropriated for these services or upon the annual budget of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the attached amended budget for the CY2002 agreement between the City of Denton and Denton County, Texas for the payment and use of hotel tax revenue in support of the Courthouse on the Square Museum is hereby approved as of the date of passage and approval of this ordinance. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2003. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBEP~ '-~p ......... X~ .......... BY: 01/21/03 #4K AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 Engineering Dave Hill, 349- 8314 - ::;~ SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City cf Denton approving a License Agreement between the Texas Municipal Power Agency ("TMPA"), and the City of Denton relating to the encroachment of a sanitary sewer line and a double box culvert across an existing TMPA Easement as part of the Southern Hills Medical Plaza improvements 8-Inch Sanitary Sewer line and 7' by 4' double box culvert, located within the tract of land situated in the Joseph White Survey Abstract Number 1433, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and being a portion of a called 243.185 acre tract of land described in the deed being recorded in Volume 3245 page 699 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. BACKGROUND Staff has approved the construction plans for Southern Hills Medical Plaza and has facilitated the Public Utility and Drainage easements for the 8-inch Sanitary Sewer line and 7-feet by 4-feet double box culvert installation. The City of Denton has requested permission to cross an area within the boundaries of an existing TMPA electric easement. TMPA has agreed to the encroachment on the easement with the use of their standard License Agreement. OPTIONS 1. Approve the License Agreement 2. Denial, or 3. Table for future consideration RECOMMENDATION Staff endorses the approval of the License Agreement ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Spring2003 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Not Applicable. FISCAL INFORMATION N/A ATTACHMENTS Location Map Draft Ordinance License Agreement Prepared by: Mark A. Laird Technical Assistant Respectfully submitted: Charles Fiedler, Director Engineering Department WATER TREATMENT SPENCER RO,aO GOLDEN TRIANGLE MALL ect Site DENTON REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER 'USTON ; EM ~ Drawn by: Mark A. Laird LOCATION MAP Not to Scale ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON APPROVING A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY ("TMPA"), AND THE CITY OF DENTON RELATING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A SANITARY SEWER LINE AND A DOUBLE BOX CULVERT ACROSS AN EXISTING TMPA EASEMENT AS PART OF THE SOUTHERN HILLS MEDICAL PLAZA IMPROVEMENTS 8-INCH SANITARY SEWER LINE AND 7' BY 4' DOUBLE BOX CULVERT, LOCATED WITHIN THE TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE JOSEPH WHITE SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 1433, CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING A PORTION OF A CALLED 243.185 ACRE TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED BEING RECORDED IN VOLUME 3245 PAGE 699 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1. The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to execute a License Agreement Related to Encroachment on Easement between the City of Denton and the Texas Municipal Power Agency ("TMPA") in substantially the form of the Agreement which is attached to and made a part of this ordinance for all purposes, for the purpose of locating a City water pipeline within a TMPA Electric utility easement as described therein. Section 2. The City Manager is authorized to make the expenditures as set forth in the attached Agreement. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2003. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: LICENSE AGREEMENT RELATING TO ENCROACHMENT ON EASEMENT Date: December 6, 2002 File Code: T-08, D-12 Re: Denton Steam-Corinth 138 kV Transmission Line Dear Sir: The City of Denton (hereinafter referred to as User) has requested permission to use the area within the boundaries of Texas Municipal Power Agency's (TMPA) Denton Steam -Corinth 138 kV Power Line Easement, located in Denton County, Texas for an 8" Sanitary Sewer Line crossing near Colorado Blvd. at tower 3/2 and a 7'x4' double box culvert extension into the easement approximately 55' N. of Brinker Rd. TMPA is agreeable to the construction of the 8" Sewer Line and Box Culvert hereinafter referred to as the "encroaching facility", if the encroaching facility is located and described as shown on the attached drawing, marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein, and subject to the following terms and conditions: It is understood and agreed that TMPA holds easement rights on or owns the property involved; therefore, User will be required to obtain whatever rights and permission, other than TMPA's, that are necessary. This letter agreement shall extend to and be binding upon User and its heirs, successors, and assigns, and is not to be interpreted as a waiver of any rights held by TMPA under its easement. To the extent permitted by law, user shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless TMPA, its employees and agents from and against any and all claims, expenses, (including attorney fees), damages, losses and judgments whether for bodily injury or damage to property whether or not arising from the sole or concurrent negligence or fault of TMPA or its employees, arising out of or incident to the presence, construction, operation and maintenance of the encroaching facility. Use of dragline or other boom-type equipment in connection with any work to be performed on the TMPA easement by User, its employees, agents, representatives or contractors must comply with Chapter 752, Texas Health and Safety Code, the National Electrical Safety Code and any other applicable safety or clearance requirements. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, in no event shall any equipment be within fifteen feet of the TMPA power line situated on the aforesaid property. User must notify the Supervisor of Transmission, Tom Chambers, at (936) 873-1125 or (936) 873-2013, 48 hours prior to the use of any boom-type equipment on the TMPA easement. If in the future the encroaching facility, in the sole judgment of TMPA, does 2 interfere with the use or enjoyment of its easement rights, TMPA shall have the right to remove said encroaching facility. TMPA shall notify User in writing that, within 90 days, the encroaching facility must be removed at User's sole cost. If at the end of the 90 day period the encroaching facility has not been removed, TMPA shall remove it at User's expense. TMPA will not be responsible nor will compensation be paid for damages incurred by such removal. However, in an emergency, TMPA shall have the right to immediately remove the encroaching facility. If the encroaching facility is removed, TMPA will not unreasonably withhold consent for User to relocate the encroaching facility within the easement. It is expressly understood and agreed that if the property has transmission or distribution facilities located thereon, User shall not place upon the premises, any improvements including but not limited to, building, light standards, fences, shrubs, trees or signs unless approved in writing by TMPA. It is agreed that no trash dumpsters, toxic substances or flammable material will be allowed on the easement. TMPA will not be responsible for any costs of construction, operation and maintenance of User's encroaching facility. It is further agreed that TMPA shall not be liable for any damage to the encroaching facility herein agreed to as a result of TMPA's use pursuant to its easement. Any TMPA property damaged or destroyed by User or its agents shall be repaired or replaced by TMPA at User's expense and payment is due upon User's receipt of an invoice from TMPA. 8. Blasting is not permitted on the TMPA right of way Grading shall be done in order to leave the right of way in as near as possible to present condition. Spoil dirt and all trash shall be removed from the right of way. Slopes shall be graded so that TMPA vehicles may transit the right of way when required to maintain TMPA's facilities. Shoring shall be required where approved excavation is within 10 feet of a structure and shall extend 20 feet each side of the centerline of the structure. Shoring shall be sufficient to withstand the added Icad of the structure and its footing. Ditches shall not be left open for extended periods of time. Except when pipe or underground facilities are installed, shoring shall be removed and ditches properly backfilled as soon as practical. Backfill shall be thoroughly tamped. Water tamping shall not be permitted within this area. 11 The TMPA right of way shall be protected from washing and erosion by a method approved by TMPA. Construction equipment and materials shall not be stored on the right of way during construction. 3 13. It is understood and agreed that, in case of default by User or its agents in any of the terms and conditions herein stated and such default continues for a period of ten (10) days after TMPA notifies User of such default, TMPA may at its election forthwith terminate this agreement and upon such termination all of User's rights hereunder shall cease and come to an end. This agreement shall also terminate upon the abandonment of the encroaching facility. If the foregoing terms and conditions are acceptable to The City of Denton, please have the original and a copy of this letter agreement signed and returned to me at Texas Municipal Power Agency, P.O. Box 7000, Bryan, Texas 77805 within 30 days for final approval by TMPA. This letter agreement shall be effective only after final approval by TMPA. Yours very truly, - Hubert Nelson Land Supervisor ACCEPTED: City of Denton APPROVED: Texas Municipal Power Agency By: Title: Date: By: Title: General Manager Date: Encroachment: Denton Steam - Corinth i \ PROJECT EXHIBIT EXHIBIT SHOWING ENCROACHMENT OF TMPA EASEMENT SOUTHERN HILLS MEDICAL PLAZA ENGINEERS SURVEYORS LAND PLANNERS 4300 BELI~A¥ FUCE SUITE 1~0 ~UN(;TON, TEXAS 76018 METRO 1817)467-7700 8721 5th STREET FRISCO; TF3~S 7S034 METRO (214)~7-8000 A -,,....c. WA# 02019 VICINITY :MAP E X H I B ! T I I l I = 60' EXHIBIT SHOWING OF TMPA EASEMENT SOUTHERN HILLS WA~ 01/21/03 #4L AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 CMO/Legal Department Eddie Martin, Assistant City Attorney SUBJECT: TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT OF RESIGNATION WITH DOUG POWELL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BACKGROUND: There is a proposed negotiated agreement between Doug Powell and the City as to the terms of his resignation. The agreement allows for a mutual and amicable separation from employment that gives bolh parties the ability to pursue their separate needs at this time. The parties believe that this agreement is fair and equitable. OPTIONS: To authorize the agreement. RECOMMENDATION: The recommendation is to authorized the agreement. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions): None. FISCAL INFORMATION: Not to exceed $50,000.00. Respectfully submitted, Eddie Martin Assistant City Attorney S:\Our DocmmentshMiscellaneous\03\agenda infbrmarion sheer Powell.doc S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\03\Powell Resignation alternate.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT OF RESIGNATION WITH DOUG POWELL; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute an Agreement of Resignation with Doug Powell. SECTION 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to expend the funds necessary to carry out any agreement in an amount not to exceed $50,000. SECTION 3. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __day of ,2003. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 01/21/03 #4M AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: January 21, 2003 DEPARTMENT: Public Safety & Transportation Operations ACM: Jon Fortune, Public Safety & Transportation Operations SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution leasing parking spaces located on the Williams Trade Square; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND Demon County has leased fifteen parking spaces on the Williams Trade Square from the City for the past eight years. The Lease Agreement recently expired and this resolution provides that the County will lease the same fifteen parking spaces at a rate of $14 per space per month for one year. The Agreement provides the option to extend the lease up to eight successive years. In addition, the Agreemem provides five "anytime" Square parking permits to the Commissioner's Court. At the request of the County, this Agreement also includes one "anytime" Square parking permit, good for one year only, for the County's Director of Facilities to be used during the Courthouse renovation project. The Agreement also includes twenty-one Square parking passes for various County staff members during Commissioner Court meetings. These passes are good only on Tuesday mornings umil noon and will be distinguished from the other "anytime" passes. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The former Agreement with the County to lease parking spaces on Williams Trade Square was adopted in November 1994. FISCAL INFORMATION This Agreemem is expected to generate $2,520 annually in General Fund revenue. Respectfully submitted: Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager Public Safety & Transportation Operations S:\Our Docmments~esolurions\03~ParkingonSquareCommissioner sCoar t.doc RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION LEASING PARKING SPACES LOCATED ON THE WILLIAMS TRADE SQUARE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Demon has improved and maimained the area known as the "Williams Trade Square"; and WHEREAS, such improvements include paved parking spaces; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to continue to lease parking spaces in order to recover the costs of the maintenance and improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION 1. The City Manager of the City of Demon, Texas, is hereby authorized to execute an agreemem between the City of Demon and the County of Demon to lease parking spaces at the "Williams Trade Square," a copy of which agreemmt is attached hereto and incor- porated by reference herein. SECTION 2. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE COUNTY DENTON LEASE AGREEMENT This AgreemeN is made and eNered iNo by and between the City of DeNon, Texas, hereinafter referred to as Lessor, and Denton County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as Lessee. WITNESSETH: 1. Lessor leases to Lessee and Lessee leases from Lessor fifteen (15) parking spaces at the Williams Trade Square for a period of twelve (12) months commencing on the 1st day of October, 2002 and ending on September 30, 2003, at a monthly rate of seveNeen dollars and fifty ceNs ($17.50) each to be occupied as a parking lot only. 2. Lessee will pay the rent monthly on the 1 st day of month. 3. Lessee agrees to allow Lessor to have free access to the premises; to leave the premises, on termination of the lease, in good repair; not to assign nor sublet the premises or any part thereof; and to hold Lessor harmless and indemnify Lessor from any claim, damages or loss resulting from the use of the parking lot as to any use of said premises by Lessee to the extent permitted by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas. 4. Lessor will provide the five (5) members of the Commissioners Court with a sticker permit authorizing parking in the Courthouse Square area without time limit, to be in effect during the term of this Agreement. 5. Lessor will provide the Facilities Director of Denton County with a sticker permit authorizing parking in the Courthouse Square area without time limit, to be in effect for one (1) year from the commencement of this Agreement. 6. Lessor will provide twenty-one Tuesday-only sticker permits authorizing parking in the Courthouse Square area on Tuesday mornings (8:00a.m. -12:00p.m.) without any two-hour time limits. These permits shall be in effect during the term of this agreement. 7. Lessee shall have the option to extend this Lease for eight (8) successive terms of twelve (12) months each at such renal that the City Manager shall establish. To exercise the option to extend, Lessee shall give Lessor sixty (60) days written notice of its iNeN to renew the Lease. Upon receipt of such notice, the City Manager shall give Lessee written notice of the increase, if any, in renal. Increases in renal shall be based upon economic conditions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement to be effective the __ day of ,2003. LESSEE LESSOR Denton County Texas 1110 West Hickory Denton, Texas 76201 City of Demon 215 E. McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 HONORABLE MARY HORN COUNTY JUDGE HONORABLE EULINE BROCK MAYOR ATTEST: CYNTHIA MITCHELL AND EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF DENTON COUNTY ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM HERBERT PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: BY: S :\Ow Docaments \Contracts\03\Williams Trade Square Lease2.doc 01/21/03 #4N AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: January 21, 2003 DEPARTMENT: Legal Department CM/DCM/ACM: Herb Prouty, City Attomey SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND ORGAIN, BELL & TUCKER, LLP FOR LEGAL SERVICES IN LITIGATION STYLED ROBINSON V. CITY OF DENTON, ET AL., CURRENTLY PENDING IN THE 58m DISTRICT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BACKGROUND: On April 30, 2002, one of the City of Denton's solid waste drivers was hit as he drove his track across the path of an oncoming train. This pending litigation involves the injury claim of the driver of the train. The Plaintiff filed this case in Beaumont, Texas. We need to hire local counsel to represent the City in Beaumont. OPTIONS: You can approve the contract with Orgain, Bell & Tucker, LLP to provide local counsel to represent the City in Beaumont in this litigation, or the City Attorney's office can continue traveling to Beaumont for each heating. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend you approve the contract with Orgain, Bell & Tucker, LLP. FISCAL INFORMATION: The fees are not to exceed $35,000. ::t'e~v E. Drake, zc''~ Sen~or As~ City Attorney Litigatio~n Chief S:\Our Documcnts~Vlisc¢llaneous\03~agenda information shect-orgain.doc SSOur Docume~ts~dh~n~e~03~ofg~n bell coxttva~t.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND ORGAIN, BELL & TUCKER, LLP FOR LEGAL SERVICES IN LITIGATION STYLED ROBINSON V. CITY OF DENTON, ETAL., CURRENTLY PENDING IN THE 58TM DISTRICT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a Contract for Professional Legal Services between the City of Denton and Orgain, Bell & Tucker, LLP for legal services in litigation styled Robinson v. City of Denton, et al., currently pending in the 58th District Court of Jefferson County, Texas, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 2. That the expenditure of funds as authorized in the attached contract is hereby authorized. SECTION 3. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2003. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINEBROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF DENTON § This AGREEMENT, made and entered into this the __ day of , 2003, by and between Orgain, Bell & Tucker, L.L.P., 470 Orleans Street, Beaumont, Texas 77704, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant", and the City of Denton, a Texas municipal corporation, 215 East McKinney, Denton, Texas 76201, hereinafter referred to as "City". WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the City finds it necessary to employ outside legal counsel to perform professional legal services regarding litigation styled Robinson v. City of Denton, et al., Cause No. A167804, filed in the 58th District Court of Jefferson County, Texas; and WHEREAS, the Consultant is willing to perform such services in a professional manner as an independent contractor; and WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the Consultant to render the professional services in connection therewith, and the Consultant is willing to provide such services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual obligations herein, the parties hereto do hereby mutually AGREE as follows: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Consultant shall perform the following services in a professional manner working as an independent contractor not under the direct supervision and control of the City: Services to be provided: 1 The Consultant shall evaluate the relevant facts and circumstances and shall advise the City, by written opinion, with respect to its options and the legality of such options, regarding researching and responding to requests for legal services. 2. Consultant shall also consult, as requested, with the City Manager, the City Attorney, and any other designated City staff respecting any and all aspects of the services to be performed under this Agreement. 3. The Consultant shall perform all the professional services required in a timely fashion, and shall complete same in compliance with schedules established by the City through its City Attorney, through discussions with the Consultant, as appropriate to carry out the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2. TERM This Agreement shall be for a term of 20 months, beginning effective January 1, 2003 and ending on September 30, 2004. This Agreement may be sooner terminated in accordance with the provisions hereof. Time is of the essence of this Agreement, and the Consultant shall make all reasonable efforts to complete the services set forth herein as expeditiously as possible during the term of this Agreement, and to meet the schedules established by the City, through its City Attorney, or as the progress of this matter may require. 3. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT A. The Consultant shall charge the following fees for its professional services hereunder, based on the following fees for its professional services hereunder, based on the following hourly billing rates for the attorneys and support staff involved in this matter: Michael Truncale Martha Campbell and Scott Doyen Donna Polidoro $175/hour $140/hour $135/hour Attorney time will be billed at one tenth (. 1) hour minimum billing increments. Bo The Consultant will try to reduce costs whenever feasible by utilizing qualified principals, associates, paralegals, and law clerks. The Consultant shall bill the City through the submission of itemized invoices, statements, and other documentation, together with supporting data indicating the progress of the work and the services performed on the basis of monthly statements showing hourly rates indicating who performed the work, what type of work was done, and descriptions and/or details of all services rendered, along with specific description and supporting documentation, if available, respecting any reasonable and necessary out-of-pocket expenses incurred. C. Consultant estimates and the City agree that all charges for the legal services hereunder, including reasonable out-of-pocket expenses, shall not exceed thirty-five thousand dollars ($35,000), and Consultant agrees to notify the City and seek a modification of the agreement should the total fees exceed such amount. D. The City shall either pay directly or reimburse the Consultant, as the case may be, for reasonable and necessary actual out-of-pocket expenses, including but not limited to, long- distance telephone, telecopier, reproduction, overnight courier, on-line research, and travel. All copies will be charged at the rate of ten cents ($0.10) per copy for copies made within Consultant's offices, with as much photocopying as possible being done by outside vendors at bulk rates or by the city to reduce costs if bulk copying is necessary. The parties agree that there will be no charges for outgoing telecopies or incoming telecopies. Whenever feasible, City encourages cost savings by the use of computer files in Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat formats, attached to e-mail transmissions. Contract For Professional Legal Services - Page 2 go The parties anticipate invoices or statements for services will be generated on a monthly basis and that said invoices or statements will be sent on or about the ~ day of each month. The City shall make payment to the Consultant within 30 days of the satisfactory completion of services and receipt of an itemized invoice or statement. All reimbursable expenses, including, but not necessarily limited to travel, lodging, and meals shall be paid at the actual cost, pursuant to the terms, conditions, and limitations hereinabove set forth. All invoices and bills shall be approved for payment by the City Attorney. F. It is understood that the Consultant shall work with the coordination and general supervision of the City Attorney or the Senior Assistant City Attorney/Litigation Chief. G. All notices, billing statements and invoices shall be made in writing and may be given by personal delivery or by mail. Notices and invoices sent by mail shall be addressed to: Jerry E. Drake, Jr., Senior Assistant City Attorney/Litigation Chief, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas 76201. When so addressed, the notice, invoice, and/or payment shall be deemed given upon deposit in the United States Mail, postage prepaid. In all other instances, notices, invoices, and/or payments shall be deemed given at the time of actual delivery. Changes may be made in the names and addresses of the responsible person or office to whom notices, invoices, and/or payments are to be sent, provided reasonable written notice is given. 4. PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCY A. The Consultant agrees that in the performance of these professional services, Consultant shall be responsible for the level of competency and shall use the same degree of skill and care presently maintained by other practicing professionals performing the same or similar types of work. For the purpose of this Agreement, the key persons who will be performing most of the work hereunder shall be Michael Truncale. However, nothing herein shall limit Consultant from using other qualified and competent members of its firm to perform the services required herein. B. All legal opinions and other legal documents prepared or obtained under the terms of this Agreement are instruments of service and the City shall retain ownership and a property interest therein. If this Agreement is terminated at any time for any reason prior to payment to the Consultant for work under this Agreement, all such documents prepared or obtained under the terms of the Agreement shall upon termination be delivered to and become the property of the City upon request and without restriction on their use or further compensation to the Consultant. 5. ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS Full and accurate records shall be maintained by the Consultant at its place of business with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. Such records shall be maintained for a period of at least three years after receipt of final payment under this Agreement. Contract For Professional Legal Services - Page 3 6. AUDITS AND INSPECTION At any time during normal business hours and upon reasonable notice to the Consultant, there shall be made available to the City all of the Consultant's records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. The Consultant shall permit the City to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of contracts, invoices, materials, and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. 7. ACCOMPLISHMENT OF PROJECT The Consultant shall commence, carry on, and complete any and all projects with all practicable dispatch, in a sound, economical and efficient manner, and, in accordance with the provisions hereof and all applicable laws. In accomplishing the projects, the Consultant shall take such steps as are appropriate to ensure that the work involved is properly coordinated with related work being carried on by the City. 8. INDEMNITY AND INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR RELATIONSHIP The Consultant shall perform all services as an independent contractor not under the direct supervision and control of the City. Nothing herein shall be construed as creating a relationship of employer and employee between the parties. The City and Consultant agree to cooperate in the defense of any claims, action, suit, or proceeding of any kind brought by a third party which may result from or directly or indirectly arise from any negligence and/or errors or omissions on the part of the Consultant or from any breach of the Consultant's obligations under this Agreement. Nothing herein constitutes a waiver of any rights or remedies the City may have to pursue under either law or equity, including, without limitation, a cause of action for specific performance or for damages, a loss to the City, resulting from Consultant's negligent errors or omissions, or breach of contract, and all such rights and remedies are expressly reserved. 9. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. In connection with the work outlined in this Agreement, it is agreed and fully understood by the Consultant that the City may cancel or indefinitely suspend further work hereunder or terminate this Agreement at any time upon written notice to Consultant, Consultant shall cease all work and labor being performed under this Agreement. Consultant may terminate this Agreement by giving the City 30 days written notice that Consultant is no longer in a position to continue representing the City. Consultant shall invoice the City for all work satisfactorily completed and shall be compensated in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. All reports and other documents, or data, or work related to the project shall become the property of the City upon termination of this Agreement. B. This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part, in writing, by either party in the event of substantial failure by the other party to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement through no fault of the terminating party. Provided, however, that no such termination may be effected, unless the other party is given [ 1 ] written notice (delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested) of intent to terminate, and not less than 30 calendar days to cure the Contract For Professional Legal Services - Page 4 failure; and [2] an opportunity for consultation with the terminating party prior to termination. Co Nothing contained herein or elsewhere in this Agreement shall require the City to pay for any work which is unsatisfactory or which is not submitted in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. 10. ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The Consultant agrees that, if necessary, it will use its best efforts to resolve any disputes regarding the Agreement through the use of mediation or other forms of alternate dispute resolution set forth in Chapter 154 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code (V.A.T.C.S.). 11 ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement represents the entire agreement and understanding between the parties, and any negotiations, proposals, or oral agreements are intended to be integrated herein and to be superseded by this written Agreement. Any supplement or amendment to this Agreement to be effective shall be in writing and signed by the City and the Consultant. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The Consultant 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 hereafter be amended, including but not limited to the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. 13. GOVERNING LAW For the purpose of determining place of agreement and law governing same, this Agreement is entered into in the City and County of Denton, State of Texas, and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. Venue and jurisdiction of any suit or cause of action arising under or in connection with this Agreement shall be exclusively in a court of competent jurisdiction sitting in Denton County. 4. 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. 15. PERSONNEL Ao The 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 have any contractual relations with the City. Consultant shall inform the City of any conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest that may arise during the term of Contract For Professional Legal Services - Page 5 this Agreement, in accordance with Consultant's responsibilities under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. B. All services required hereunder will be performed by the Consultant or under its direct supervision. All personnel engaged in work shall be qualified and shall be authorized or permitted under state and local laws to perform such services. 16. 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 City thereto. 17. SEVERABILITY All agreements and covenants contained herein are severable, and in the event any of them, with the exception of those contained in sections headed "Scope of Services", "Independent Contractor Relationship," and "Compensation and Method of Payment" hereof, shall be held to be invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, this Agreement shall be interpreted as though such invalid agreements or covenants were not contained herein. 18. RESPONSIBILITIES FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITY Approval by the City shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the Consultant for the accuracy and competency of its work; nor shall such approval be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility of the City for any defect in any report or other documents prepared by the Consultant, its employees, officers, agents and consultants. 19. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT No waiver or modifcation of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, or limitation herein contained shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged therewith, and no evidence of any waiver or modification shall be offered or received in evidence in any proceeding arising between the parties hereto out of or affecting this Agreement, or the rights or obligations of the parties hereunder, unless such waiver or modification is in writing, duly executed as aforesaid; and, the parties further agree that the provisions of this section will not be waived as herein set forth. 20. CAPTIONS 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. Conlxact For Professional Legal Services - Page 6 21. BINDING EFFECT This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors, and assigns where permitted by this Agreement. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the City of Denton, Texas, has caused this Agreement to be executed in duplicate originals by its duly authorized City Manager, and Consultant has executed this Agreement through its duly authorized undersigned partner, dated this the __ day of ,2003. CITY OF DENTON BY: MICHAEL A. CONDUFF, CITY MANAGER ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUT¥;'C~TY -ATTORNEY ORGAIN, BELL & TUCKER, LLP BY: S:\Our DocumentskLitigation~Robinson\truncale contract.doc Contract For Professional Legal Services - Page 7 01/21/03 #40 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 City Manager's Office Michael Conduff, City Manager SUBJECT Consider a request for an exception to the Noise Ordinance for the purpose of construction on the Demon Crossing Project by Rogers-O'Brien Construction beginning immediately through May 2003 during the hours of 6:00 a.m. through 8:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 7:00 a.m. through 8:30 p.m. on Saturday. Specifically the request is for an exception to the hours of operation beginning an hour early, at 6:00 a.m., on Monday through Friday and an exception to the hours beginning one hour early, at 7:00 a.m., on Saturday effective immediately through May of 2003. No request for an exception to the hour of operation has been made for Sunday. BACKGROUND Cody Taylor, Quality Manager for Rodgers-O'Brien Construction is requesting a noise exception for work on the Demon Crossing Project, to allow for early morning concrete pours effectively immediately through May of 2003. No request has been made for an exception to work on Sunday. Both the ability to pour concrete in the early morning and the earlier travel time for concrete to be delivered at the construction location will greatly enhance the ability to complete the Denton Crossing Project in time for individual tenants to begin their interior construction as early as mid-May. The delivery of concrete at these earlier hours will also assist other travelers as it will remove trucks from early morning traffic congestion. The need to work longer hours at this poim, to reach timely project completion, has been made necessary by the above average rainfall that the area has experienced. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards or Commissions) None FISCAL INFORMATION None Betty Williams Director of Management and Public Information Prepared By: Pamela Rambo-Estill, Management Assistant Attachmems: Letter from Cody Taylor January 8, 2003 Pam Rambo-Estill City of Denton 215 East McKinney Denton, TX 76201 Reference: Denton Crossing Work Hours Dear Ms. Rambo-Estill, We would like to outline to you the work schedule we anticipate using on the Demon Crossing Project. We have agreed to a very aggressive schedule that we expect will have the individual tenants beginning their interior construction as early as mid-May. In order to meet these goals we find it necessary to start making our concrete pours starting at 6:00 am Monday through Friday and 7:00 am. Saturday for the next 4 months. This early start time accomplishes several things for us. The concrete plant is located in Lewisville and that supplier uses 1-35E to access the project. With the heavy traffic on this road later in the morning, our trucks would be contributing to the traffic and would be losing valuable time on the track life of the concrete. Our schedule dictates that we form and pour the concrete tilt panels quickly and try to pour concrete almost every other day. With the above average rainfall that the area has experienced and that is expected, we have no choice bm to work longer hours and start earlier in the morning to meet our schedule. On most Saturdays we will have a few crews working in order to prepare for pours the following week. Rogers-O'Brien Construction wants to be a good neighbor to those you live in the area and we look forward to addressing any comments/concems you may have with these schedules. Regards, Cody Taylor Quality Manager 01/21/03 #4P AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM: January 21, 2003 City Manager's Office Mike Conduff, City Manager SUBJECT Consider the appointment of a Deputy City Secretary. BACKGROUND Section 2.12 of the City Charter authorizes the City Manager to appoint a City Secretary and deputies subject to the approval of the City Council. It is requested that the Council approve the appointment of Charleta Thompson as Deputy City Secretary to assist in signing documents and the posting of agendas in the absence of the City Secretary and Assistant City Secretary. Linda Holley was recently appointed a Deputy City Secretary but with her move to City Hall West she is no longer available. Respectfully submitted: Jennifer Walters City Secretary 01/21/03 #4Q AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET January 21, 2003 Economic Development David Hill, 349-8314 ? :~¢~' SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas approving an amendment to an economic development program grant agreement dated November 27, 2001 between the City of Denton and Denton Crossing Partners LTD. which was duly assigned to ORIX Hunt Denton Venture; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND The City of Denton entered into a Section 380 agreement with Demon Crossing Partners LTD in November 2001 in support of a 50-acre retail development. The project requires certain public improvements to be made. In return, the City will rebate a portion of the sales tax generated by the project to the developer as reimbursement for those costs. The City of Denton will also be improving Spencer Road from Woodrow to Loop 288. Both parties felt it was important to coordinate the construction of Spencer Road with the improvements to Spencer Road that Denton Crossing would be required to construct. The agreement provided the City the ability to bid out road and utility construction and to bill Denton Crossing for their portion of the work performed. The estimated amount for that work was $701,500. The developers are at a point in their construction that requires they complete the utility work on Spencer Road prior to the City's construction schedule. The attached amendment simply allows Denton Crossing to perform the utility work now and to make payment to the City for the balance of improvements when contracted. The agreement also allows Denton Crossing Parmers LTD to assign all or part of its rights and/or obligations. You will note that the caption of the ordinance references ORIX Hunt Denton Venture, the new parmership responsible for the development. FISCAL INFORMATION This amendment does not change the financial obligation for either of the parties. The amendment simply allows Denton Crossing to perform the utility construction work that would have been performed by the City as part of the Spencer Road project. EXHIBITS Ordinance Amendment Respectfully submitted: Linda Ratliff, Director of Economic Development S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\03\Denton Crossing 380 Amendment.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 27, 2001 BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON CROSSING PARTNERS LTD. WHICH WAS DULY ASSIGNED TO ORIX HUNT DENTON VENTURE; 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 an Amendment to Economic Development Program Grant Agreement (the "Amendment"), in substantially the form of the Amendment which is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance for all purposes. SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to exercise the City of Denton's rights and duties as set forth in the Amendment. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2003. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: THE STATE OF TEXAS} 1 f COUNTY OF DENTON} AMENDMENT TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT This Amendment to Economic Development Grant Agreement ("Amendment") is made as of the __ day of January, 2003 between the City of Denton, a Texas municipal corporation ("City") and ORIX Hunt Denton Venture, an Illinois general partnership ("OHDV"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the City and Grantee's predecessor, Denton Crossing Partners Ltd., a Texas limited partnership ("DCP") entered into a certain Economic Development Program Agreement dated as of November 27, 2001 and filed of record with County Clerk of Denton, Texas on December 21, 2001 at Volume 4989, Page 00274 (the "Agreement"), which Agreement relates to the Property legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto, and WHEREAS, DCP assigned all of its right, title and interest in, to and under the Agreement as the "Grantee" therein to OHDV by that certain Assignment of Economic Development Grant Agreement dated as of September 11, 2002 and filed of record on September 13, 2002 at Volume 5170, Page 84 (the "Assignment"); WHEREAS, as required by the Agreement, DCP provided written notice of the Assignment to the City; and WHEREAS, by virtue of the Assignment, OHDV has succeeded to all of the rights of DCP under the Agreement as the "Grantee" therein (OHDV hereinafter accordingly referred to as the "Grantee"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, it was contemplated that the Grantee would advance to the City the cost of the Spencer Road Improvements (as determined pursuant to the Agreement terms) (the "Spencer Road Improvement Contribution") which are contemplated by the Agreement to be constructed by the City as a part of the Public Works Project; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Project has not commenced as of this date, and City and Grantee have determined that further delay in construction of that part of the Spencer Road Improvements consisting of the water main, sanitary sewer and storm sewer improvements (the "Utility Component") could result in delays in construction of the balance of the Public Participation Items and other Improvements to be constructed by Grantee at the Property; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of both Grantee and City that the construction of the Public Participation Items and other Improvements be completed in an expeditious manner; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9 of the Agreement, the Grantee and City agreed to do all things necessary and appropriate to carry out the terms of the Agreement and to assist each other in carrying out those terms; and WHEREAS, the City and Grantee have determined that the construction of the Utility Component at this time (so as to coincide with similar construction activities of Grantee at the Property) is a necessary and economical action to be taken; and WHEREAS, Grantee has agreed to pay the cost of the Utility Component, and City has agreed that the amount so paid by Grantee (the "Spencer Road Utility Component Amount") shall for all purposes under the Agreement constitute an Actual Cost of a Public Improvement Item eligible for reimbursement in the calculation of the Program Grant, and that accordingly the payment of the Spencer Road Utility Component Amount by Grantee shall be deemed to constitute a part of the Spencer Road Improvement Contribution required to be made by Grantee under the Agreement, and WHEREAS, Grantor and City desire to formally document the agreements outlined in the above recitals. NOW THEREFOR, in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, Grantor and City hereby agree as follows: 1. Recitals/Defined Terms. That (a) the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference, and (b) that any capitalized terms utilized in this Amendment and not herein defined shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Agreement. 2. Agreement to Construct Utility Component. Grantee and City agree that, notwithstanding the terms of the Agreement, Grantee shall cause the construction of the Utility Component of the Spencer Road Improvements to be constructed at Grantee's expense and the Utility Component shall no longer be a part of the Public Works Project to be constructed by City. Such construction shall be performed pursuant to a construction contract (the "Contract") with L.H. Lacy Co. ("Contractor") to be executed among Grantee, City and Contractor, in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to City. The amount to be paid by Grantee Contractor under the Contract has been determined to be $209,700, which is hereby declared to be Spencer Road Utility Component Amount. City acknowledges and agrees that upon payment by Grantee of the Spencer Road Utility Component Amount, the same shall for all purposes under the Agreement constitute an Actual Cost of a Public Improvement Item eligible for reimbursement in the calculation of the Program Grant. 3. Agreement Related to Spencer Road Improvement Contribution. In consideration of Grantee's payment for construction of the Utility Component in the amount of the Spencer Road Utility Component Amount, City acknowledges its continuing obligation to construct that portion of the Spencer Road improvements other than the Utility Component as a part of the Public Works Project on the terms otherwise provided in the Agreement. City further acknowledges that, as a result of the agreements herein contained (and provided Grantee constructs and pays for the Utility Component as herein contemplated), Grantee's obligation to contribute to the cost of the Public Works Project shall consists solely of the obligation to advance to the City the cost of construction of those portions of the Spencer Road improvements other than the Utility Component when required under the Agreement terms. 4. Full Force and effect; Authority to Execute. Grantee and City acknowledge and agree that the Agreement, as amended hereby, is and remains in full force and effect between them. Grantee and City, respectively, further represent and warrant to each other that this Amendment has been approved by all necessary corporate or municipal authorities, as the case may be, and that the person(s) executing the agreement their behalf have full power and authority to bind them to the terms and provisions hereof. 5. Counterparts/Recording. This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterpart by the parties, each of which shall be deemed an original and which, when taken together shall constitute a single instrument. This Amendment may be filed for record with the Clerk of Denton County Texas by either party hereto. {Balance of this page intentionally blank; Signature Page follow} Attest: By: Its: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment to Economic Development Grant Agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS By: Its: GRANTEE: ORIX HUNT DENTON VENTURE, an Illinois general partnership By: ORIX Denton Limited Partnership, an Illinois limited partnership, a general partner By: ORIX Power Center Denton, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company its general partner By: ORIX Real Estate Equities, Inc., a Delaware corporation, its sole member By: Name: Title: By: Denton Crossing Partners, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, a general partner By: Denton Crossing GP, LLC, a Texas limited liability company, its general partner By: Hunt Properties, Inc., a Texas corporation, its Manager By: Name: A1 Allred Title: President CITY: Acknowledgements State of Texas ) County of Denton ) This instrument was the , the acknowledged before me on the day of ., 2002 by of the City of Denton, Texas, and attested to by of such City, on behalf of such City. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission expires: Grantee: State of Texas ) County of Denton ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the __ day of ., 2002 by A1 Allred as President of Hunt Properties, Inc., a Texas corporation, as manager of Denton Crossing GP, LLC, a Texas limited liability company, as general partner of Denton Crossing Partners, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, as a general partner of ORIX Hunt Denton Venture, an Illinois general partnership, on behalf of such partnership. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission expires: State of__ ) County of ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of ., 2002 by as of ORIX Real Estate Equities, Inc., a Delaware corporation, as sole member of ORIX Power Center Denton, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company, as general partner of ORIX Denton Limited Partnership, an Illinois limited partnership, as a general partner of ORIX Hunt Denton Venture, an Illinois general partnership, on behalf of such partnership. Notary Public in and for the State of My Commission expires: EXHIBIT A Property Description BEING all that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the Mary L. Austin Survey, Abstract No. 4, the John W. Cheek Survey, Abstract No. 324, and the J.S. Taft Survey, Abstract No. 1256,of Denton County, Texas, being all of Lot 1, Block A, Lone Star Par 3 Addition, an addition to the City of Denton filed of record in Cabinet I, Slide 277, Plat Records of said County, and being all of that tract of land conveyed to Pacific Asset Managemen~ INc., Volume 5128, Page 538; Mark A. Kuhn ,Volume 4163, Page 680; Roy Dean & Patsy Smith, Volume 489, Page 92; D. Schiflet & W. Schweitzer, Volume 1129, Page 61; J. Hudspeth Jr. & W. Schweitzer, County Clerk's File Number 95R0080326; J. Hudspeth, Jr. &D. Shiflet Hudspeth, Volume 1708, Page 661; Shiflet Financial Corp., W. Schweitzer, J. Hudspeth, Jr., & D. Hudspeth, Volume 1493, Page 129; The Baptist Foundation of Texas, Volume 4163, Page 674, filed for record in the Public Records of Denton County, Texas, said tract being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 5/8" iron rod set in the North line of State Highway Loop 288, from which a 5/8" iron rod with an aluminum TXDoT cap bears South 65 degrees 39 minutes 28 semnds West, 21.88 feet, and from which a 1/2" iron rod found, the Southwest comer of Lone Star Par 3 Addition, according to the plat filed of record in Cabinet I, Page 277, Plat Records of Denton County, Texas, bears North 00 degrees 13 minutes 40 seconds West, a distance of 1.60 feet for the Southwest comer of this tract; THENCE North 00 degrees 13 minutes 40 seconds West, at 1.60 feet pass the said 1/2" iron rod found, the Southwest comer of said Lone Star Par 3 Addition, in all a distance of 1681.35feet to a 1/2" iron rod found in the approximately South line of Spencer Road, for the Northeast comer of that certain tract of land conveyed to Charles E. Bailey according to the deed filed of record in Volume 4083, Page 1299, Deed Records of Demon Courty, Texas, and the Northwest comer of said Lone Star Par 3 Addition, for the Northwest comer of this tract; THENCE South 88 degrees 03 minutes 04 seconds East, along the approximate South line of said Road, and along the North line of said addition, adistance of 1125.52 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found at the Northwest comer of that certain tract of land described in a lease to Lone Star Gas Company according to the lease documem filed of record in Volume 410, Page 455, and being the remainder of that certain tract of land conveyed to M.M. Smith according to the deed filed of record in Volume 305, Page 258, Public Records of Denton County, Texas, said iron rod also being a comer of this tract; THENCE South 02 degrees 10 minutes 48 seconds West, alongthe West line of said Lone Star Gas Lease tract, a distance of 144.97 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Southwest comer of said tract, and being the most southerly Northwest comer of that certain tract of land conveyed to Roy Dean and Patsy Smith according to the deed filed of record in Volume 489, Page 92, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, for a comer of this tract; Exhibit A -- Property Description THENCE South 88 degrees 02 minutes 05 seconds East, along the South line of said lease tract and the most westerly North line of said Smith tract, a distance of 50.39 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Southeast comer of said lease tract, and being an inside ell comer of said Roy Dean and Patsy Smith tract for an inside ell comer of this tract; THENCE North 02 degrees 02 minutes 52 seconds East, along the East line of said lease tract and the most northerly West line of said Smith tract, a distance of 145.50 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found in the approximately South line of said Road, for the Northeast comer of said lease tra:t and the most northerly Northwest comer of said Smith tract, for a comer of this tract; THENCE South 88 degrees 35 minutes 31 seconds East, along the approximate South line of said road and the North line of said Roy Dean & Patsy Smith tract, a distance of 259.72 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found for the Northeast comer of said tract and being in the West line of said D. Schiflet & W. Schweitzer tract, for a comer of this tract; THENCE North 00 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds West, crossing said road, adistance of 51.63 feet to a 1/2" iron rod found in the approximate North line of said road for the Northwest comer of that certain tract of land conveyed to D. Schiflet & W. Schweitzer according to the deed filed of record in Volume 1129, Page 61, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, for a comer of this tract; THENCE along the approximate North line of Spencer Road the following courses and distances; South 88 degrees 33 minutes 38 seconds East, along the North line of said Schiflet & Schweitzer tract, a distance of 139.74 feet to a 3/8" iron rod found at the Northeast comer thereof; South 88 degrees 01 minutes 39 seconds East, along the North line of that certain tract of land conveyed to J. Hudspeth, Jr. & Schweitzer according to the deed filed ofrecord under County Clerk's File Number 95R0080326, Public Records of Denton County, Texas, a distance of 104.69 feet to a 5/8" iron rod set at the Northwest comer of that certain tract of land conveyed to J. Hudspeth, Jr. and D. Shiflet-Hudspeth according to the deed filed of record in Volume 1708, Page 661, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; South 88 degrees 11 minutes 27 seconds East, along the North line of said tract, a distance of 129.05 feet to a 3/4" iron rod found at the Northeast comer thereof; South 86 degrees 53 minutes 08 seconds East, along the North line of that certain 2.5 acre tract of land conveyed to Shiflet Financial Corporation, W. Schweitzer, J. Hudspeth, Jr. & D. Hudspeth, according to the deed filed of record in Volume 1492, Page 129, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, a distance of 240.21 feet to a 3/4" iron rod found, an angle point in the North line thereof; South 74 degrees 36 minutes 30 seconds East, along said North line, a distance of 245.25 feet to a 5/8" iron rod set in the West line of State Highway Loop 288, from which a 1/2" iron rod bears South 74 degrees 36 minutes 30 seconds East, a distance of 1.94 feet for the Northeast comer of said 2.5 acre tract and the Northeast comer of this tract; Exhibit A 7 THENCE South 26 degrees 15 minutes 21 seconds West, crossing said Spencer Road and along the West line of said Highway, and along the East line of said Shiflet Financial Corporation, Schweitzer, Hudspeth & Hudspeth tract, a distance of 61.34 feet to a 5/8" iron rod set bang an angle poim in the West line of said Highway and said East line, for a comer of this tract; THENCE South 19 degrees 12 minutes 47 seconds East, along the West line of said Highway and the East line of said tract, a distance of 53.48 feet to a 5/8' iron rod set for a comer of this tract, said point being the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the right; THENCE along said Highway and the South line of said Shiflet Financial Corporation, Schweitzer, Hudspeth & Hudspeth tract and along the Southeast line of that certain tract of land, a 3/4% interest which was conveyed to The Baptist Foundation of Texas according to the deed filed of record in Volume 4163, Pages 674,677, Deed Records of DeNon County, Texas, and of which the remaining 1/4% imerest was conveyed to Mark Kuhn according to the deed filed of record in Volume 4163, Page 660, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and along said curve to the right, having a radius of 2804.79 feet, and a central angle of 15 degrees 48 minutes 46 seconds, a chord bearing and distance of South 44 degrees 07 minutes 45 seconds West, 771.62 feet, an arc length of 774.08 feet to a 5/8" iron rod set for a comer of this tract at an angle point in the Northwest line of said Highway; THENCE South 58 degrees 25 minutes 34 seconds West, along said Highway and the South line of said Baptist Foundation Tract, a distance of 195.82 feet to a 5/8" iron rod set for the beginning of a curve to the right and for a comer of this tract; THENCE along said curve to the right and said Highway line, same being the South line of said Baptist Foundation tract and said Mark A. Kuhn tract, said curve having a radius of 2789.79 feet, and a central angle of 04 degrees 23 minutes 05 seconds, a chord bearing and distance of South 58 degrees 13 minutes 41 seconds West, 213.45 feet, an arc length of 213.50 feet to a 5/8" iron rod with TXDoT aluminum cap found for a comer of this tract at an angle point in the Northwest line of said Highway; THENCE South 60 degrees 25 minutes 13 seconds West, along said Highway and the South line of said Baptist Foundation and Kuhn tract, and along that certain tract of land conveyed to Pacific Asset Managemem, Inc. according to the deed filed of record in Volume 5128, Page 538, Deed Records of DeNon County, Texas, and along the South line of said Lone Star Par 3 Addition, a distance of 980.80 feet to an aluminum TXDoT cap found in concrete for an angle point in the Northwest line of said Highway for a comer of this tract; THENCE South 65 degrees 39 minutes 28 seconds West, along said Highway and the South line of said Addition, a distance of 580.63 feet to the Place of Beginning, and comaining 54.16 acres of land. Exhibit A 8 01/21/03 #5A AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: January 21, 2003 Planning Department CM/DCM/ACM: David Hill, 349-8314 SUBJECT - Z02-0053: (1822, 1828 and 1902 West Oak StreeO Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance rezoning three parcels totaling approximately 0.8 acres, from a Multiple Family Dwelling District -1 (MF-1) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district. The property commonly known as 1822, 1828 and 1902 West Oak Street is generally located on the north side of West Oak Street approximately 310 feet east of Bradley. The property is being rezoned to bring it in conformance with the Denton Development Code. BACKGROUND Applicant: City of Denton On November 19, 2002, City Council initiated a new zoning case for the subject property. A previous request (Z02-0016) to rezone the property from MF-1 to NR-3 was heard by the City Council on May 14, 2002. Although City Council voted 5-2 (Mr. Redmond and Mrs. Fulton opposed) to approve the zone change, the property owner opposed the zone change, resulting in the need for a supermajority vote. As a supermajority vote was not obtained, the request was not approved. In the intervening time, the Fire damaged structure at 1902 W. Oak was demolished in August. The Construction Advisory and Appeals Board had declared the building dangerous in June of 2001. This application relates to three parcels which now has one existing structure. The property owner applied for a preliminary plat on March 12, 2001, which is still being processed. In addition to the subject properties, only one other property is currently zoned MF-1. The MF-1 zoning designation was retained when the Development Code was adopted in February of this year. Section 35.1.5 states: D. Properties located at 722 Oak Street, 1822 Oak Street, 1828 Oak Street, and 1902 Oak Street are zoned MF-1, Multiple-Family Dwelling District-l, under Ordinance No. 69-1, as amended and shall remain MF-1, Multiple-Family Dwelling District-l, until a zoning procedure is initiated under this Chapter. The basis for the application is contained in the StaffAnalysis, Attachment 1. As the property owner is opposed to the zoning change, a super majority vote 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 applicant submitted a preliminary and final plat application on March 12, 2001. The plat applications were submitted under Chapter 34, Subdivision and Land Development Regulations and Chapter 35, Zoning for MF-1. To date, no revisions have been submitted which would allow for the applications to move forward. A final plat is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0053, commonly known as 1822, 1828, and 1902 West Oak Street: City Cotmcil initiates zoning request: - P&Z Public Heating - November 19, 2002 December 4, 2002 No neighborhood meeting was held. FISCAL INFORMATION Development of this property will increase the assessed value of the city. development, no extension ofpnblic infrastructure is necessary to service this site. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Notification Map & Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from December 4, 2002 Planning and Zoning Meeting 6. Draft Ordinance As a form of infill Respectfully submitted: Larry Reichhart, ASLA, AICP Assistant Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT I Staff Analysis Summary of Zonin~ Request The request is to rezone the subject site from Multiple Family Dwelling District 1 (MF-1) to a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to bring the properties into compliance with the Development Code. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was retained in the Multiple Family Dwelling District 1 (MF-1) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. The Multiple Family Dwelling District 1 (MF-1) has been in place on the subject property since 1969. The land use designation of the subject property and surrounding area known as the "Houston Place Neighborhood" was changed from Downtown University Core to Existing Neighborhood/Infill Compatibility on January 8, 2002. Adjacent zoning and land use (ATTACHMENT 2): North: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) - UNT Housing South: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) - Single Family Residences East: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) - Single Family Residences West: Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) - Single Family Residences Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in an "Existing Neighborhoodsflnfill 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 prime purpose of the Existing Neighborhoods/Infill Compatibility land use designation is to protect and preserve existing neighborhoods. The subject property is located on a secondary arterial, in the middle of the block, surrounded by single-family residential development with the exception of the UNT housing to the north. The Comprehensive Plan contains several sections, which could be applied to this application; two excerpts that underscore the need to protect neighborhoods versus the need to provide a variety of housing types are as follows: "Future residential development within established residential areas would be developed in a manner that responds to the existing residential development with compatible land uses and development patterns. Existing neighborhoods within the city will be protected and preserved. " (p. 24) "Accommodate multifamily residential development in a variety of Jbrms. Many of the deteriorating apartments adjacent to the universities could be renovated or redeveloped as new student housing in order to better support the needs of UNT and TWU. Additionally, other types of attached residential development such as townhomes should be considered. It is recommended that multifamily development be located in areas that provide transitions between lower and higher intensity uses, and in a manner that will not negatively impact surrounding uses. Additionally, multifamily uses should be located in small groupings around the city in a manner that provides a mix of uses and densities, rather than concentrating all multifamily uses in one area which can have negative impact upon the city." (p. 24) Based on the surrounding zoning of Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) and the existing single- family residential land uses, the proposed NR-3 zoning is compatible with the Denton Plan. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) will allow the development of approximately two lots which will generate approximately 19 trips per day. If the property were to remain zoned MF-1 it would generate approximately 130 additional trips per day. A Traffic Impact Analysis will not be required. Access. The development will have access from West Oak Street. Road Capacity The Denton Mobility Plan identifies West Oak Street as a Secondary Major Arterial street. Preliminary analysis indicates West Oak Street has adequate capacity for NR-3 development. Minimum requirements for pedestrian linkages, utilities, drainage, and topography will be addressed at the time of platting. Development Code/Zonin~ Analysis If the zone change request is approved, any proposed uses on the subject site will be required to be in compliance with the regulations of Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3). STAFF FINDINGS 1. The proposed Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning designation will encourage and preserve contiguous single-family residential development. 2. Single-family residential development is compatible with the predominately existing residential land uses and development patterns in this neighborhood. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps Location/Zoning Map NORTH Scale: None NORTH Land Use Map Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Pro perties Opposed OAK Properties In Favor, (typ.) Public Notification Date: November 21,2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 16 500' Courtesy Notices* sent via 1st Class Mail: 77 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 1 (Owner of subject property & 215 Marietta St.) · In Favor: 12 (9 via letter 3 via petition) · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 2.9 % Scale: None *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Note: Properties with addresses were sent a Courtesy Notice; properties shaded were sent a Legal Notice Property Owner Responses Updated 12-23-02 Property Owner Name In favor Comments and Address /opposed* Dixie Stevenson The NR-3 zoning is the only zoning that fits the In Favor Neighborhood and all other MF-1 zonings have been 1920 W. Oak rezoned to NR-3. Margaret Wilson In Favor None 1914 W. Oak I, Hossw Ghadiri owner 1910 Oak very upset of Hosse Chadiri building apt. next to my property to lose peace & 1910 W. Oak In Favor value of my property. My biggest fear is drainage problem by building apt. I will have flood in my property. This family neighborhood provides stability in the Caroline Polliard 1800 W. Oak In Favor part of Denton that has Fry Street, the Ousley addition, and Bonnie Brae problem We need to bring these properties into the same Karen DeVinney In Favor zoning as the rest of the neighborhood. Pleas note I 1820 W. Oak live right next door. I would like to register my strong support for the Taylor Scalf In Favor proposed NR-3 zoning for our neighborhood, case # 1819 W. Oak Z02-0053 at 1822 - 1828 - 1902 W. Oak Street. Scott and Laura Short In Favor We strongly support rezoning 1822, 1828 and 1902 1907 W. Oak West Oak from MF1 to NR3. Please! Please! Vote in favor of NR-3. We would like Darlene G. Stewart In Favor to keep our residential neighborhood of family 2003 W. Oak Street homes just that. Many of the homes have been family homes for years. AS residents of this neighborhood for over 35 years Leslie & Joyce Palmer (31 yrs. 9 mos. At 1905 W. Oak, across from the 1905 W. Oak In Favor properties at issue), we very strongly support the request for NR-3 zoning for 1822, 1828, and 1902 W. Oak. Curtis & Kathy Elder In Favor Via petition 1823 W. Oak Ben & Mary Gibbions In Favor Via petition 1815 W. Oak John Enlow In Favor Via petition 1801 W. Oak David Bynum Subject Properties & Opposed None 215 Marietta St. A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs 1902 West Oak Street 1822 West Oak Street 1822 West Oak Street · November,' _200.2...~.. ' .-. ' ~-~.,~, r~at~ Area Neighborhood Support NR-3 We' the U'ndersigne.d C.~L~en.s ? ~'~'~,~'~ 904 West Oak Street Zoning of Properties at. 1822, 1828 ,,., ...... ' NAME ADDRESS ~We, the U.nde~.sign~d Citizens of the West·Oak Area Neighborhood SupportNR-3 ' Zoning of Properties at 1822, '1'828. and:lg02/1904 West Oak Street. ...... :.'November, 2002 We, the Undersigned'CitiZens of the .West Oak Area Neighborhood' Support NR-3 Zoning of Properties at 1822, 1828 and 1902/1904 West Oak Street. " NAME· ' '' ADDRESS '"'- ~ y~,,.,_.f~.' · _-. '-_._ =!- ~,,~.,. ~,.,.-,~. p~..:...' '.'. . O~x~~.. ..... - ~ '~- .l . .. ....... · -~/~~~ .,, ....,.".' ~8 d.~xx .... : . .. ,~ '_~~,~~ . ~ ~.. ~ -. . ~'~. ~:~~. .../ 7.~ ~ ~, o~'L . ..,. · ~6 ~'~.~,,¥~~. ' · . · .~', ~.,'~ ~k ' ' - ~9 ~~'~_~ ._ . ....: xq.~ ~,~~......: ...._.._:...~ ~o. ~ :~ ......... ~-n ~~~/. :,..:' :, ....__._.. · November, 2002 We, the Undersigned Citizens of the West Oak Area Neighborhood Support N'R.3 Zoning of Properties at 1822, 1828 and 1902/1904 West Oak Street. NAME ADDRESS · ~ ~-~- /~/w ~ ...... _~ F~e~_~~.'' ' ." ..... · ...... z~% t~~ ez~ 21 · 22 23 24 November, 2002 We, the Undersigned Citizens of the West Oak Area Neighborhood Support the City's Proposed NR-3 Zoning of the Properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak Street. NAME ADDRESS WEST OAK AREA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION November 26, 2002 Dear Planning and Zoning Commissione~. West Oak Area Homeowners Association members have prepared information that we think is peainent to the proposed NR-3 zoning of properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak for you to review before the public heating on December 4th. Enclosed you will find a statement of our position on this matter, and a short history of proposed zoning for this neighborhood. Our neighborhood strongly supports the City Council's action that brings this zoning case forward again and the City of Denton's position that this property should be zoned NR-3. Sincerely, Elise Ridenour for the West Oak Area Homeowners Association WEST OAK AREA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Position on NR-3 Zoning for Properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak The West Oak Area Homeowners Association strongly supports the proposed zoning o£NR-3 by the City of Denton for the properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak for the following reasons: NR-3 is a zoning that will be consistent with the zoning of every other piece of property in the neighborhood area of West Oak Street between Avenue C and Thomas Street, the south side of Scripture Street between Jagoe and Thomas Street, the west side of Jagoe Street between West Oak and Scripture, Marietta Street, Bradley Street, and Houston Place. Under the old code there were 19 properties in this area that were zoned MF-1, O, or 2-F. 1822 and 1902 West Oak were the only two of these 19 properties that were not zoned NR-3 when the new code was adopted. See attached History of Proposed Zoning and Maps. NR-3 is a zoning that will be in compliance with the Denton Development Plan's stated goals. Chapter Three, Land Use of The Denton Plan in the Existing Residential/Infill Compatibility states, "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." Any zoning other than NR-3 for these properties would constitute spot zoning and would also indicate that this property is receiving special consideration from the city that other property owners in Denton do not have access to. There were three neighborhood properties in the entire city of Denton that remained MF-i when the code was passed on February 5, 2002, two of them are the adjacent 1822 and 1902 West Oak properties. Why should three residential properties owned by two individuals be given a consideration that no one else in Denton has been given? The owner of the two properties requested an NRMU zoning in January 2002. This zoning designation would not allow single family homes, duplexes, or multi-family dwellings. It does allow Hotels, Retail Sales of up to 25,000 square feet, Theaters having up to 1,000 seats, Restaurants or Private Clubs that seat up to 100 people, Laundromats, and many other inappropriate land uses in a single family neighborhood. This zoning designation is clearly not now, nor ever has been, appropriate for this neighborhood. The West Oak Area Neighborhood is one of Denton's oldest in-tact neighborhoods. A substantial percentage of the houses were built by Denton's early civic leaders, and by University of North Texas faculty and administrators in the first half of the 1900s. Two of them were designed by well known Texas architect O'Neill Ford. In preserving Denton's history it is important to make every effort possible to keep the few remaining neighborhoods like this intact. The NR-3 zoning will contribute to this effort. As well as being a neighborhood that has historic significance for the city, it is a contemporary, viable neighborhood of and for families with children, who have personal investments in seeing it thrive as a single family neighborhood. A consistent neighborhood zoning will demonstrate the kind of support and commitment needed to continue to attract families to this neighborhood. · History of Zoning and Proposed Zoning In The West Oak Street Area Neighborhood Time line of zoning and proposed zoning for properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak before adoption of the new code in February 2002. MF-1 Since 1969 under old code Downtown University Core/NCR-4 Fall 2000, proposed in the new Denton Plan at neighborhood . meetings. NR-3 February 2, 200t, City Council directed zoning to be changed with rest of neighborhood. NRMu January 9, 2002, City Council agreed by consensus in a work session. MF-1 January 29, 2002, City Coucil voted in a work session. Besides the two properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak there were 17 other properties with zonings other than single family. They were: 1 parking lot zoned O 1 single family house used as a business zoned O 1 day care zoned MF-1 3 apartment complexes zoned MF-1 i 4 acre piece of land with 53 student housing units zoned MF- 1 1 duplex zoned 2-F 9 single family homes zoned MF-1. All of these properties were proposed as Downtown University Core District in the fall of 2000 and subsequently changed to NR-3 with the rest of the neighborhood in 2001. They became NR-3 with the rest of the neighborhood on February 20, 2002 when the new code took effect. The properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak are the only two properties in the entire Oak Street Area Neighborhood that were not zoned NR-3 in the new Denton code. Time line of proposed zoning and variance for properties at 1822 and 1902 West Oak after adoption of the new code in February 2002. NR-3 NR-3 NR-3 MF-1 Variance NR-3 March 2002 City of Denton initiates zoning change. April 10, 2002 Planning and Zoning Commission recommends NR-3 zoning change in a 4 to 2 vote. May 14, 2002 City Council defeats the NR-3 recommendation in a vote of 5 in favor of NR-3 and 2 opposed to NR-3. Because a super majority was required, the recommendation was defeated. May 20, 2002 Zoning Board of Adjustment defeats a zoning variance request made by property owner in a 7 to 0 vote. The requested variance was for a change in the set back in an attempt to over-build the limitations of MF-1 zoning. · November 19, 2002. City Council directs city staff to bring NR-3 zoning forward again. The property owner has had a plat application on file with the City of Denton since March 12, 2001 and has done nothing to move it forward since March 2002. Other than a lien y~'being placed on the property for demolition by the City of Denton there has been no activity Ance the variance request was denied on May 20, 2002. CondenscltTM Page 57 I COMMISSIONER APPLE: MOVirlg now to Item 2 No. 11 which is a public hearing. Larry Reichhart w~th 3 City staff will present and I'll open the public hearing. 4 MR. REICHHART: Thank you. On November 5 19th, the City Council initiated a zoning on the subject 6 property which ~s currently zoned MF-I and the zoning 7 request is for Nr~-3. In your backup, you do have two 8 letters of support for the petition. In addition, that 9 was given to you earlier today, there were seven new 10 letters of support and one letter of opposition. The 11 letter of opposition is from the property owner which will 12 trigger a super-majority vote as this case moves forward 13 to City Council. 14 The subject property, as I said, is zoned 15 MV-I. it was a remnant piece from the old Code that was 16 maintained the MF-1 zoning. As we said, the request is to 17 go to NR-3. This represents the opposition prior to the 18 new opposition that we got in tonight and the ones in 19 favor. Here is the subject site. There was a building on 20 this property that was demolished. I have one current 21 building on the property. That ends my presentation. Is 22 there any questions? 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: NO. Thank you. is 24 the applicant present? 25 MR. REICHHART: Wc are the applicant. Page 58 COMMISSIONER ^PPLE: oh, that's right. The City. Okay. What we will do now is hear from people who Page 59 I how that would affect my family and my children, And I do 2 ask you to vote in favor of the N~-3 zoning for this 3 neighborhood. Thank you very much. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Dorothy 5 Damico. 6 MS. DAM[CO: Good evening, members of the 7 Co~mnission. My name is Dorothy Damico. I live at 1801 8 Panhandle. I also do not live on West Oak Street. But 9 the reason I'm interested in this is because we chose to 10 come to Denton many years ago. We chose a neighborhood 11 and then we decided once we got here we would be good 12 citizens and we believe in -- because we are willing to 13 pay taxes, abide by ordinances, volunteer for things, and 14 be good citizens of the cormnunity, that our City 15 government has a contract with us that they will provide 16 us with City services and maintain this City to be the 17 good City that we know that is it. 18 That contract expresses itself, I think, in 19 the zoning ordinances. The zoning is what protects our 20 neighborhoods, keeps the neighborhoods, the neighborhood 21 that we chose. And I think that for all areas of the 22 City, the neighborhood is what people have chosen when 23 they came to Denton and what we believe City govermnent 24 has a contract with us to keep it the way it is. 25 And so to have zoning in the middle of a Page 60 residential area with the fine, old homes that would be apartment building and new construction and totally out of 1 2 3 are in support, and I have a number of cards. Robyn 4 Mullendore. If you would give your name and address for 5 the record, please? 6 Ms. MULLENDORE: Yes. My name is Robyn 7 Mullendore. I live at 1139 Oakhurst Street here in 8 Denton, Texas. Good evening, Madam Chair, lady and 9 gentlemen of the Conmfission. 10 I'm here to speak in favor of the NR-~ 11 zoning on Oak Street. I do not live anywhere near this 12 area but I am a Denton resident ever since 1968 and I've 13 seen a lot of changes in Denton. Oak Street is one of the 14 places that I remember driving down with my parents and 15 really admiring all of the old houses that are there. And 16 I think that this is one of those streets tbat we do have 17 that is very beautiful, very historic in Denton, and I 18 would like to see it preserved this way. 19 I know my daughter that's six now loves 20 seeing these old houses that are there and we'd like to 21 see the neighborhood be preserved. I was thinking earlier 22 today what if it landed in my neighborhood, how would I 23 feel, you know, having a wonderful home and homes next to 24 me and across from me and then look to my right or my left 25 and sec a huge apamnent complex. I just could not fathom 3 -- in a totally different style than the rest of them 4 would be damaging to the neighborhood. And if it can 5 happen to that neighborhood, it can happen to mine or to 6 yours or to anyone else's. 7 And so I would like to see you zone this so 8 it will be consistent with the rest of the neighborhood so 9 that area can stay the way it is. And in a sense, you 10 will be also assuring me that my neighborhood will stay 11 the way mine is. And so I urge you to vote for it. Thank 12 you. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Joe 14 Potthoff. 15 MR. POTTHOFF: I'd like to defer in the 16 interest of time and speak only toward the end if 17 necessary. I think it's more important to hear from the 18 neighborhood. Is that okay? 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Really, if you don't 20 mind, just come on and speak because then I'll have to 21 shuffle you again. 22 MR. POTI'HOFF: That's all right. I'll just 23 defer to the neighborhood. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: okay. Dixie 25 Stevenson. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 57 - Page 60 CondenseltTM Page 61 1 MR. STEVENSON: Good evening. My name is 2 Dixie Stevenson. I live at 1920 West Oak. And my 3 assistants here am going to show you exactly what the 4 neighborhood looks like, in case you haven't had a chance 5 to see it for yourself. I'm here to give you a brief 6 history of this neighborhood. 7 My wife and I moved in here 25 years ago. 8 And at that point in time, we were the youngest in the 9 neighborhood by 20 years. We're in the house on the end l0 down there. That's at the corner of Bradley Street and t 1 Oak Street. Bradley Street is named Bradley Street 12 because that was the path to the Bradley house, up the 13 hill from us. 14 The street, short street between Oak Street 1 $ and Hickory Street across from my house is called Miller 16 Street. It's called Miller Street because that was the 17 path to my house, the Miller house. We don't live in our 18 own homes out hem with the exception of these two. All 19 the others have a very long history. Were built by 20 professors, almost all of them were built by professors at 21 North Texas, and lived in for the first 30 years of the 22 home's life by that professor. 23 In the past several years, many new people 24 have been moving into the neighborhood as the old owners 25 have died off. We now have many children living in the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 t0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 62 neighborhood which is boundaried. This is the whole neighborhood. Yeah, thet~ we are. And, actually, the zoning that's been proposed by the City is the only zoning that fits this neighborhood. It is a single-family neighborhood. It has always been a single-fmnily neighborhood with very few exceptions. And even those exceptions have now been zoned NR-3. I know I'm stealing some of your thunder here but I've got to make that point. We have been in the past and we will in the future be called a special interest group. We am not a special interest group. There are many people behind me in support of this and I wish they would stand while giving you this petition to snpport NR-3 for the neighborhood. I see some eyebrows raised when ahnost all of the audience stands up. COMMISS~O~Ea ^pet. e: ~f y'all would please be seated now. MR. STEVENSON: I think it's impressive when you can get that many people on a Wednesday night, and it's getting late now for some of us, to come down here to show their support to maintain an old neighborhood in Denton that we all live in and all love so dearly that we just want to only -- our only goal is to maintain the integrity of that neighborhood. Thafs all I've got to Page 63 I say. Thank you very much. 2 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. David 3 H-O-L -- I apologize. 4 Ma. ~O[D~MA~: xhat's okay. My handwriting 5 is probably not the best. My name is David Holdcnnan and I 6 live at 1820 West Oak Street which is the property just to 7 the east of tbe site that we're talking about. My wife, 8 Karen Divini and I own the home there and we live in it 9 with our two children, including Stun here who's learning 10 about government tonight a little bit. 11 And right now, as Dixie just said, the 12 neighborhood is composed of single-family homes. And we 13 think that it's one of the nicest parts of Denton. The 14 homes, like ours, tend to be older, have Solne character. 15 They have large trees and big yards. And a lot of the 16 people in the neighborhood like us are raising children 17 there. A lot of people have lived there for years and 18 years. And we think that having a large apartment 19 building right in thc middle of this area is going to 20 detract from it in some fairly obvious ways. It will look 21 bad. It will create more traffic and mom noise and more 22 trash. And we're opposed to that. Therefore, we'd like 23 to see the zoning that would protect the single-family 24 residential character of the neighborhood. Thank you. 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Elise Page 64 1 Ridenour. 2 MS. RtDENOUR: My nmne is Elise Ridenour. 3 I live at 2205 West Oak. I'm hem tonight to speak in 4 favor of the proposed zoning. Fm going to talk about the 5 boundaries and zoning history of the West Oak area 6 neighborhood tonight. 7 In the new Code passed in February, the 8 City clearly defined the boundaries between the 9 sing[e-fmnily neighborhoods west of jagoc and north of 10 Hickory. So here's Jagoe on the map that's in your folder 11 and hem's Hickory, and so our neighborhood is this area 12 here. On this map, it shows it in the bigger context of 13 the City and this is the neighborhood with the university 14 and other mixed use down hem and single-family 15 neighborhood extended to Bonnie Brae and to University 16 over hem. These boundaries am evident in the maps 17 provided tonight on pages 5, 6, and 7 in your backup 18 material, i believe this is page 6. This is from the t9 Code that i got a copy of off the intemet. 20 What the maps show is that we are bordered 21 on two sides by mixed use. Oak and Jagoe Streets are the 22 proverbial lines in the sand that separate this older and 23 historic in nature single-fmnily neighborhood from the .24 mixed use areas adjaccmt to it. Because we live on this 25 boundary does not mean that the mixed use side of thc ?LANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 61 - Page 64 CondenseltTM Page 65 1 boundary should be fluid or expanding. It means exactly 2 the opposite, that the City and citizens need to be extra 3 vigilant to successfully protect this neighborhood because 4 our proximity to the boundary makes us vulnerable. 5 We don't have to go far to see what has 6 lmppened to many single-family neighborhoods that allowed 7 property by property zoning between 1969 when file old Code 8 came in and 2002, this year when the new Code was passed. 9 Mulberry, Hickory, and Fry Streets are just some of the 10 well known examples in our area of town of what's happened 11 to neighborhoods that have been allowed to be zoned like 12 this. Older and historic single-family neigbborhoods arc 13 rapidly becoming extinct in Denton because of this zoning 14 approach. 15 I'm going to take these maps off now and 16 show the old zoning and the new zoning. When the new Code 17 was being developed, the City of Denton and its citizens 18 felt strongly enough about safeguarding the integrity of 19 this part of town that it took an active step of 20 preservation. The City zoned 17 properties that had been 21 MFq, office or Two-Family to NR-3. And this is the old 22 zoning, all of the properties that did not have 23 single-family zoning. This includes three apartment 24 buildings, two here, one over here: a couple of 25 businesses, one hero, one here; and a ta,~T property that Page 66 I has 53 small studio units for graduate students on it, and 2 that's this piece of property that abuts, It's a piece of 3 university property. 4 This speaks to the City's mission to 5 provide future zoning protection for neighborhoods. This 6 City made the decision to protect this neighborhood as a 7 neighborhood with the exception of this one piece of 8 property. And logic tells us that the only logical zoning 9 for this in NR-3. Thank you. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: 'thank you. Steven 11 Friedson. Cmmnissioner Roy. 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: Yes. I'd like to ask a 13 question of the last person. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Certainly. Ms. 15 Ridenour. 16 COMMISSIONER ROY: If yOU don't mind, 17 you're the one first one who has addressed the history of 18 the area and it was very interesting. Our backup material 19 says that this zoning of MF-1 has been in place since 20 1969. So this is nothing new. 21 MS. RIDENOUR: Exactly. No. 22 COMMISSIONER ROY: And so I'm trying to 23 understand. What is your understanding of why it was 24 there and it's been that way since 1969. 25 MS. RIDENOUR: And why we're asking for the Page 67 I change? I think that all of these, if you look at this 2 map, all of these properties were zoned mFq in 1969. 3 COMMISSIONER ROY: Could you -- tile one on 4 the right I believe is the one you wanted us to look at 5 and I can't tell what's what on that map. 6 MS. RIDENOUR: okay. Do you want me to 7 define the streets? 8 COMMI'SSIONER ROY: Yeah, just a couple of 9 them so I can see it. l0 MS. RIDENOUR: HOW about if I turn it this 11 way so you can see it? Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: That's Oak Street, 13 MS. RIDENOUR: This is Jagoe Street and I4 this is Oak Street right here. And in 1969 in the old 1 $ Code, all of these properties were MF-1 with the exception 16 of this which was Two-Family and these two down here were 17 office buildings, Everything else in this neighborhood 18 was single-family. And I can't tell you why they zoned it 19 like that in 1969. These were not -- and many of these 20 properties were not developed as MF-t. 21 When the new Denton Development Plan came 22 through, there was a COlmnitment by the City and our 23 neighborhood to preserve neighborhoods. They're not just 24 our neighborhood but neighborhoods were asking please 25 offer us some zoning preservation. It's a pretty conunon Page 68 1 occurrence once stone of these MF-I. properties start 2 getting developed as apartment complexes and other uses, 3 that the neighborhoods deteriorate and go downhill. And 4 that's exactly what's happened on Hickory Street. That's 5 exactly what's happened on Fry Street, on Mulberry Street. 6 So there are just really very few older historic in nature 7 intact neighborhoods left in Denton. And what Denton is 8 doing to itself is eliminating its own physical history. 9 COMMISSIONER ROY: May I ask you what is 10 your understanding of why this property is still zoned 11 12 MS. V,~Dn~4OUP,: oh, dear. All right. My 13 understanding is -- well, I know that in January before 14 the Code was passed, City Council person Phillips asked 15 that this property be witl~held for reasons tlmt I don't 16 know why. The City Council on a consent in a work session 17 said that, yes, they'd agree to do that. Actually, it 18 wasn't uv-~, They were going to zone it NRMLI, ^nd it 19 showed up on January 10th on the City maps, and I have 20 that map in my folder if anybody wants to sec it, as 21 The following week people were tlu'eatening to sue the City 22 over this issue as spot zoning and the City withdrew NRMU 23 and said let's leave it MF-I until we can agree on a 24 zoning. 25 So you people have heard this case before PLANN1NG AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 65 - Page 68 CondenscItTM Page 69 earlier this year. The City promptly in March, after 2 passing the Code in February, brought it forward as N[~-3. 3 It passed here. It passed at City Council 5-2 but it 4 required a super-majority. In October, Council person 5 Phillips, who was the one who originally asked that it be 6 pulled out, asked that it be put back on to be considered 7 as NR-3. 8 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. You've answered 9 my question. Thank you. 10 MS. RIDENOUR: Okay, 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Ned Webster. Oh, I'm 12 sorry. 13 MR. FRIEDSON: Thank you. My name is 14 Steven Fricdson. I live at 2205 West Oak. I'm here to 15 speak in favor of the zoning. 16 To follow-up a little bit on your question, 17 the new Code gives a high priority to existing 18 neighborhoods to preserve the City. This is written over 19 and over again both in the planning sessions, the 20 discussions that were held. The reason we're here tonight 21 has to do with Section 35.1.5, Section D in the new Code 22 which states that this property will be MF-1, and I think 23 the telling phrase is, until a zoning procedure is 24 initiated under this chapter. In other words, to bring 25 this into compliance with the new Code. Page 70 1 There's only one issue before you. This is 2 not a building issue or a project issue. This is not an 3 issue of whether this should be brought back before a 4 year's time has elapsed. The City Council has ah~ady 5 addressed that issue and agreed that it is appropriate to 6 bring this forward at this time. This is strictly what is 7 file appropriate zoning in an existing, what the City 8 itself has labeled existing neighborhood infill. The only 9 possible zoning that could work here is NR-3. 10 What you have to ask yourself is the 11 question you asked, wily was this property pulled out. 12 What is special about this property that gives it special 13 consideration that no other property in the City of Denton 14 had? Every single property in our area that was MV-1, no 15 other owner got a chance to ask for a super-majority when 16 their property was changed to NR-3. It was only the 17 person on this property that had that option given to him. 18 There is nothing specla[ about this property. 19 There are existing laws in both the State 20 Code and fl~e City that address issues about development on 21 this property. What we're asking for is the con, ct 22 zoning for fut~tre protection. It's the only zoning that 23 fits into the future land use policy of the City of 24 Denton. k's the right thing to do. We ask you to 25 support this NR-3 zoning. Thank you. Page 71 i COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Ned 2 Webster. 3 MR. WEBSTER: YeS, ma'am. Chairwoman 4 Apple, I really like what Mr. Potthoff had requested 5 earlier but I'm going -- 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: I'm sorry. We have 7 too many speakers to adjust when y'all speak. 8 MR. WEBSTER: I understand. I understand. 9 COMMISSIONER APPLE: If you would just come I0 forward. There's not that many more people to speak. If 11 you'd just please come take yom' time. 12 MR. WE~S?ER: welt, I'm just here in case 13 certain issues came up and they haven't yet. And just for 14 the sake of expediency, I'd like to sit back down. 15 COMMISSIONE~ ^P~LE: okay. All right. But 16 you do support this? 17 MR. WEBSTER: YeS, ma'am. 18 COMMISSIONER APPLE: James Dickens. 19 MR. DICKENS: Thank you, Madam Chairman and ' 20 distinguished guests and panel. I'm resident James L. 21 Dickens at 2717 Crater Lake Lane in Wind River. As you 22 can tell, I don't live on West Oak but I think it's a 23 condition that's dear to ali of our hearts in terms of the 24 things that are happening around the City, the planning 25 and zoning Codes and the changes that we're going through. Page 72 I And I think it's imperative that we preserve single-family 2 dwellings in the communities such as Oak Street. 3 I don't ,see a benefit for the City nor do I 4 see a benefit for the cmm~unity that it's going to 5 potentially adversely affect. And we have a play on these 6 nomenclatures that we're using here and this thing clearly 7 defines this as a multi-family dwelling district. And 8 from what I've seen in the previous presentations, that's 9 not the case. And so you guys would be totally 10 inconsistent with what's already there, in my opinion, if 11 you did make this a multi-fm~ily dwelling district. So I 12 come to you as a private citizen, not as the HOA president 13 of Wind River but as a private citizen to say I do support 14 the NR-~ zoning for this particular, those particular 15 properties that are in question. And that's it. Thank 16 you. 17 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Sherry 18 Darby. 19 MS. DARBY: sherry Darby, 1920 Cornell Lane 20 here in Denton. And I just want to offer some brief 2t cmmnents. I don't live in the neighborhood but I'm also 22 big supporter of the neighborhood groups here in town and 23 I'm here to offer support to this group. 24 But I have some handouts and I did have a 25 helper. I had a helper here to help me give these out so PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 69 - Page 72 CondenscltTM Page 73 1 we'd save a little bit of time. But I have a couple of 2 comments I want to make about this. One of my pet peeves, 3 perhaps, is concerning the City of Denton, the City of 4 Denton is nmnber one in the State of Texas regarding 5 percentage of renter occupied units versus owner occupied 6 units. 58.1 percent of the housing units in Denton are 7 renter occupied while only 41.0 percent of the housing 8 units in Denton are owner occupied. This information 9 comes frown the U.S. Census for the year 2000 and the 10 Denton Comprchcnsive Plan and Development Code recognizes 11 and has stated a goal of reversing these munbers, 12 So when we discuss multi-family housing and 13 in this particular case, also we really need to pay 14 attention to these numbers. We have stated goals in 15 regards to this. And this is a big concern of home owners 16 all across thc City of Denton. 17 The second thing I want to bring out -- 18 sorry. But we also attended a meeting, the City Council 19 meeting, and this was in February of 200 f, and I have 20 handouts from this and it was concerning Agenda Itmn No. 21 43 and it was concerning the rezoning of .22 acres at 1723 22 Scripture. And this is at the corner of Scripture and 23 Jagoe and on the other side of this neighborhood. My 24 husband spoke at this meeting. And what this is is on the 25 back side of this neighborhood, the intersection three of Page 74 1 Jagoe and Scripture, that the same scenario was in place. 2 You had a property owner who owns, and I guess still docs, 3 there is a garage apartment there that he's renting out 4 and he had plans to change this small lot, .22 acres into 5 a four -- no, sorry, a six-unit aparUnent complex. 6 And we were there opposing this and the 7 City Council also was opposed to this. So there's a 8 precedent for this similar scenario that we have been 9 opposed to this in the past. There is a history of this 10 neighborhood opposing these multi-family complexes. 11 And what else can I say? One mom thing I t2 want to mention, though, I did some research today quickly 13 on this issue. And what I was looking for in particular 14 were the lot sizes. Like I said, I've got this previous 15 case at the corner of Scriptm, c and Jagoe and comparing i 16 the lots sizes there to lot sizes on this West Oak 17 property. So I went to the Denton County Tax Appraisal 18 District to go back to the website there and look ['or the 19 lot sizes to compare them to thc West Oak properties to 20 the Jagee -- sorry, Scripture property. 21 But while I was there, I pulled up 22 information, and I know this is public information and I 23 don't really want to -- you know. But what I found out 24 though is 1822 West Oak is listed with the Denton County 25 Appraiser's office as a residential single-family Page 75 1 property. And also according to Denton County Tax 2 Assessor-Collector's office, 1902 West Oak is also listed 3 as a residential single-family property. 4 So whatever the label is with the City of 5 Denton is not what they have with the County. So I don't 6 know if that's for tax purposes or whatever. But if 7 there's a history with the City of Denton, the zoning that 8 this property is multi-family, well, there's a history 9 with the County that this property has been labeled as 10 residential single-family. 11 COMMISSIONER APPLg: Thank you, Ms. Darby. 12 Anthony Dmnico. 13 MR. D^MECO: oood evening, Madam Chainuan 14 and Cormnissioa members. My wife and I came here about 36 15 years ago and we moved in on Panhandle Street. And within 16 a short time, there was a large, big lot that runs along 17 Broadway. And people, the owners there tried to sell it 18 for many years for multiple housing and the neighborhood 19 fought it, especially under the -- I suppose thc coaching 20 of Bruce Davis, many of you may r~member. And during that 21 time we heard all kinds of things, that we were 22 anti-business and alt that kind of business and that all 23 kinds of bad things would happen if we didn't let that go 24 over. And we didn't and it ultimately turned into a very 25 nice plot of private homes, very good looking, very modern Page 76 1 holnes. And no tumbleweeds in the town square or anything 2 like that. 3 We often hear stories about, you know, how 4 we're anti-business but for most people at our level, our 5 home is thc biggest investment we make. And I don't mean 6 just in money and in property but in what it gets to mean 7 to us. And this particular neighborhood is between our 8 house and the university. And whenever I would have -- 9 Frank, seriously. Whenever I would have a bad day at the 10 plant, I would take an extra long trip back and drive 11 through that neighborhood just because of the way it 12 settled my nerves. And I think that we need to have those 13 kinds of places preserved. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I have no 15 other cards to speak. Is there anyone in the audience who 16 wishes to speak who did not fill out a card? 17 MR. COCHRAN: Madam Chainnan, thank you. I : 18 didn't fill out a card but if I may just make a couple of 19 co~mnents and respond to something. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE: certainly. 21 MR. COCHRAN: My name is Mike Cochran. [ 22 live at 610 West Oak Street. I live on Oak Street but not 23 in the same neighborhood that the folks, that this 24 property is but I do have an interest in it. 25 Mr. Roy asked a question about how this PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 73 - Page 76 CondenseltTM Page 77 I property became multi-family in 1969 and I wanted to give 2 you just a little brief history lesson here. At that stone 3 time, all of Oak Street down where I live in the historic 4 district was zoned multi-fmrdly at the same time. And the 5 answer to the question of how it got zoned multi-family is 6 poor choices on the part of the Planning and Zoning 7 Commission, if I may say, and the City Council. 8 And luckily the market forces were not 9 there to allow all the homes to be tom down and have 10 multi-family built there. But, in fact, we have a case 11 up here where the similar anomaly came in where you had 12 probably it was a duplex at that time and they just zoned 13 it to be a multi-family structure. But, in fact, it never 14 functioned as a classic multi-family. It was always part 15 of the neighborhood. It was an evolved single-family 16 house that becmne a duplex. 17 · In any event, the issue before you today is 18 just very, very simple. Why have this piece of property 19 or these two pieces of property exist under a completely 20 separate zoning ordinance than the entire rest of the 21 City? Th[s zoning ordinance that is currently in effect 22 for this piece of property was established in 1969 and we 23 have come a long way since then in our understanding of 24 the community and what the community expects from the 25 City, et cetera. So we have a new set of standards that Page 78 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 still has rights to do some development on his land. But the question is not what the development is. It's not the house. It's the zoning at this point. That's a separate issue, a separate legal issue. But under the vesting roles of thc State of Texas, he's still got rights. This doesn't say bo can't build anything there. It just puts the zoning in conformity with the rest of the community. The problem with why it's not an ~MU is because if it were in the new zoning ordinance in a way that would allow by right apa~nents, it would also allow 27 or 28 other uses that would be ridiculous as far as, you know, office and retail, ct cetera. So that's a separate issue. This does not take his right to develop that property, the right that is moro intense than a single-family house, according to my understanding of what the City has said. COMMISSIONER ROY: ?hank you. MR. COCHRAN: Sllre, COMMISSIONER APPLE: IS there anyone else wishing to speak in support that did not fill out a card? If you'll come forward, sir, and give your name and address for the record. MS. OA_mL~: My name is Rocky Oarilli. I live next to this property, 1910. But actually I don't live there. We have a plan with my wife later on because Page 80 1 exist for everyone else in town exc~t for this property 2 here and one other in my neighborhood, but that's not on 3 the Agenda tonight. But, nevertheless, that is not 4 exactly -- there is no decent zoni~ig reason for that to 5 exist, for there to be two sets of standards in the City. 6 And to single into one in a single-family neighborhood 7 like this is not justified in my opinion. Anyway. Thank 8 you very much. 9 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Roy has a 10 question. t 1 COMMISSIONER ROY: Yes, sir. You seem to 12 know the background of this. What we've heard tonight is 13 a lot of arguments about why this should be changed from 14 the current zoning. And what I haven't heard is any 15 understanding or explanation of the homeowner's rights, 16 the landowner's rights. How would you characterize that? 17 What would be your opinion of that? 18 MR. COCHRAN: well, my opinion is really 19 something that I've gotten from the Planning Deparunent of 20 the City of Denton, and that is that file homeowner has 21 certain rights to develop his property, that it go with 22 the land separate from the zoning. And, in fact, my 23 understanding, and this is not a legal opinion that I've 24 developed or anything, but from nay understanding from 25 Planning Department and maybe from Ed here too is that he 1 I'm working for the university. I like that neighborhood 2 very much. But after I heard they want to change this in 3 my next property into multiple family, actually, I don't 4 believe that's multiple family. Actually, It's like a 5 hotel for a student. You do not see any kids there even 6 though probably family, just single student. Anyway. I 7 want to -- frankly, I'll tell you, if you give right to 8 that guy to make those apartments, I will be thc next one 9 to come here and ask to change my property into multiple 10 family because I cannot live there. 11 I love that house very umch. It was built 12 in 1948. And because it was a type of h[sturic houses, I 13 love to buy that house in order to move there. I bought 14 it tlwee years ago but never had the chance because we 15 live on Thomas Street. And wc thought we'd come back to 16 that neighborhood because I love it very much. 17 And also I have another problem with that 18 because I know North Texas University has owned Bradley 19 Apartments and one time they tried to sell it to another 20 developer, but tile City was opposed to making a new 21 apartment there. Therefore, the City believes that 22 neighborhood is a slngle-family. And that guy changed his 23 mind and North Texas }lousing Department couldn't sell that 24 property to that guy probably to build that. 25 And also I think this affects my propezty PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 77 - Page 80 CondenseItTM Page 81 1 and my property too much because if they built that 2 apa~nent next to my apartment, next to my property, all 3 that water and flood, my property flooded with the whole 4 probably land to buy build~ng. The concrete and driveway 5 and probably 90 percent of that covered by -- I can have a 6 drainage problean, too. That is my concept. And I ask the 7 City to take that into consideration when you make a 8 decision about that. I love that neighborhood very much. 9 I love my property and my investment. 10 But if that happens, I will come here and 11 ask to change because I have another house. I probably 12 think, oh, that's a good business next to North Texas. 13 That's a gold mine. I can build another 20 apartments 14 there and make money. And I can do that but I don't want 15 it. Thank you very much. 16 COMMISS~ONEa ^PPL£: xhank you, sir. Is 17 there anyone else who wishes to speak in support that did 18 not fill out a card? If you'll wait till you get to the 19 microphone. 20 MR. e~qLOW: i've lived there about 17 21 years. John Enlow, 1801 West Oak. It's about -- it's 22 just across the street. I just wanted to say how fragile 23 that neighborhood is. When wc moved in, one of my chores 24 on Saturday morning was to pick up beer cans, you know, in 25 front of the house because there had been parties and Page 82 1 things like that. Especially over the past few years, 2 there's been a lot of families that have moved in, taken 3 the place of the older people, the professors and the 4 other people that had moved in. My house is the Jagoe 5 house. And I really feel that you'll -- if you do this, 6 it will really destroy that neighborhood. And I've seen 7 it over a long period of time and that's -- and I really 8 do believe that you will make a difference. And, so I 9 hope you will vote to keep it -- to approve it. 10 Sorry I didn't prepare my mnarks but ~ did 11 want to let you know that I live across the street and it 12 would make a tot of difference how you vote tonight. 13 Thank you. 14 COMMiSSiONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 15 there anyone else in the audience who did not fill out a i6 card that wishes to speak in support? Seeing no one t 7 coming forward, I have quite a few cards from people who 18 do not wish to speak but wish to register support. And 19 for the record, I'm just going to quickly read their names 20 and addresses. 21 Pete Gunter, 225 Jagoe. Mary Brewer, 3205 22 Meredith. Bob Mullendore, 1139 Oak_hurst. Diana Hatch, 23 2117 North Locust. Eugene Hargrove, 2025 Houston Place. 24 Ed Soph, 1620 Victoria. Carol Soph, 1620 Victoria. Sara 25 Harvey, 312 Marietta. Edie Lenaburg, 308 Marietta. Joyce Page 83 1 Pahlaer, 1905 West Oak. William Darby, 1920 Comell. 2 $oAnn Nunnelly, 22t5 Houston Place. Leona LangfotM~19 3 Houston. Crawford and Dora Sloan, 2211 Houston Place. 4 Elizabeth Gunter, 225 Jagoe. Helen Ikerd, 1722 West Oak. 5 Henry Gibbons, 2015 Houston Place. Jennifer Collins,312 6 Marietta. And Patrick Lenaburg at 308 Marietta. 7 I'll now ask for those people who wish to 8 speak in opposition. The first card is from Larry -- it's 9 either Jambor or Tambor. ts he present? Okay. He did 10 not want to speak. He just wanted to register his 11 opposition. 12 Then the only card I have is David Bynum. 13 Is he present? 14 ~na. ~Yi, mU: night here. Good evening. My 15 name is David Bynmn. I live at 215 Marietta. I'm the 16 property owner of the property in question. 17 I'd like to address several issues. Nmnber 18 one, the property has been zoned multi-family since 1969. 19 That's why I bought it. I bought it in June of 2000. The 20 Denton Plan was adopted on April 7th, 1998. The 21 Comprehensive Plan was published in May of 2000 right 22 before I bought thc property. I've gone tln:ough here and 23 highlighted a few items that are vm"y pertinent to this 24 situation and I'd like to explain than to you. 25 The purpose of the Comp Plan, I think will Page 84 1 be the first one. We'll start at the beginning and work 2 my way back. The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to 3 translate a vision statement and planning policies into 4 meaningful actions that benefit the entire colmnunity. 5 Potential investors, developers, business persons, and 6 residents should use this docmnent to learn more about the 7 con~nunlty that they may decide to join. The Land Use [~lan 8 is intended as a guide to land use decision making by 9 public officials, residents, and existing and potential 10 property owners. This is what you should use as a 11 guideliue before you invest in Denton. That's what it 12 says fight here. 13 Let me move on. I think the most important 14 thing is preserving neighborhoods. I'd really like to 15 find out who came up with the idea that you preserve 16 neighborhoods by taking existing zoning away from someone. 17 This property has had multi-family zoning since 1969, 33 18 years. All of these people who own property have a 19 responsibility. It's called due diligence. 20 They have to go out and find out what's 21 around them. If they don't want to do fl~at and they sign 22 on the dotted line to buy their house, that's their 23 decision. They accept it as is, where it is, with the 24 conditions around it. The conditions around it would be the zoning around it. There's a zoning map stapled up in PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 81 - Page 84 CondenseItTM Page 85 1 the development office. Anyone can go in there and look 2 at it at any time, find out what thc zoning is around 3 their property. 4 Preserving neighborhoods, page 35, and this 5 is und~rllned, the preservation of existing and future 6 neighborhoods can be achieved by demanding high quality 7 development and establishing design and construction 8 standards that are fair and evenly applied. It doesn't 9 say you preserve neighborhoods by taking someone's zoning 10 away from them that's been in that neighborhood for 33 11 years. Who came up with that idea? No one is going to 12 achuit to it. That's fine. 13 Let me move on. Land Use Plan map 14 designates this property as the Downtown University Corn 15 District. And that means you can do a lot of things with 16 it. 17 I've got probably too many things hcrc to 18 talk about. Compatibility, people have talked about 19 compatibility. There's a definition of compatibility in 20 the back. The characteristics of different uses or 21 activities or design which allow them to be located near 22 or adjacent to each other in harmony. Compatibility docs 23 not mean the same as. Right? Rather, compatibility 24 refers to the sensitivity of development proposals in 25 maintaining the character of existing development. Page 86 I That goes right back to preserving :2 neighborhoods. The preservation of existing and future 3 neighborhoods can be achieved by demanding high quality 4 development and establishing design and construction 5 standards that are fair and evenly applied. Not trying to 6 -- not taking something away from someone. 7 I bought this property because of its 8 zoning, because of its location. It's in a good 9 neighborhood. It's within 500 feet of the North Texas 10 campus. The Denton Plan says under existing residential 11 infill compatibility, within established residential 12 areas, new development should respond to existing 13 development with compatible land uses, patterns, and 14 d~sign standards. The Plan reemmuends that existing 15 neighborhoods within the City be vigorously protected and 16 preserved. Not taken away from people. Housing that is 17 compatible with existing density, neighborhood services, 18 commercial land uses is allowed. 19 This is a political issue. And any of you 20 who know this realize that this is politics. This is ~1 someone high up in the chain of cm~and trying to 22 something for what I'm going to call their friends. 23 That's corrupt. You don't change thc law or the rules to 24 serve your purpose. 2~ COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Bynum, your time Page 87 1 has expired. Do you have more you'd like to -- 2 MR. BY'SUM: l'lease. 3 COMMISSIONER APPLE: i'll ask the 4 Commissioners if they'll allow Mr. Bynum an additional 5 minute since he is the property owner. Yes, sir. 6 MR. nYNUM: Thank you. Infill near UST and 7 Twu, growth management strategies, the following growth 8 management strategy and plan is preferred alternative for 9 future growth of Denton. The Plan combines many of the 10 concepts from the alternative development scenarios that 11 received favorable responses at the community meetings, 12 including the development of neighborhood centers, urban 13 centers, and strong industrial districts within the City 14 while encouraging the restoration, redevelopment, and 15 infill of parcels in the dovmtown area and adjacent to the 16 University of North Texas and Texas Women's University. 17 The reason you utilize the structure and 18 infrastructure you've already built is not -- so you don't 19 waste tax dollars. There's adequate traffic. There's 20 adequate streets, adequate water, adequate sewer, and you 21 need to utilize that for the City of Denton. You can't 22 take someone's rights away from them for a small group of 23 neighbors and take it away from the rest of the City. 24 What these people are asking you to do is forgot the rest 25 of the City, just concentrate on them. They all had an Page 88 1 opportunity to look. It's called due diligence. 2 Instead of going over these issues over and 3 over again, I'd like to just answer any questions anyone 4 might have. Okay. Y'all do what you decide is best. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: EXCUSe rne. 6 Colmnissioner Mukoy. 7 COMMISSIONER MULROY: Yes, if I may. I 8 have a question or two. Mr. Bynum, when thc mapping was 9 done for the Code and the Code was adopted and the bulk of 10 the neighborhood was zoned ~4R~3, why was your property 11 held back? 12 M~. UYNUM: TO my understanding, the 13 property was held back because the City was threatened 14 with lawsuits because of the public notification process. 15 They said that since the City Council came to a consensus 16 on January 9th to take this to NRMU, that somehow that was 17 done belfind or without the public view. That was done in 18 secret is what they implied. 19 COMMISSIONER MULROY: BUt why -- whether it 20 was held back as NRMU or MVq, why was this pulled off the 21 table when the rest of the neighborhood was blanketly 22 zoned ~R-3, rezoned NR-3? 23 MR. BYNUM: well 24 COMMISSIONER MULROY: or assigned a new 25 zoning category of PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 85 - Page 88 Condons¢ItTM Page 89 MR. BYNUM: I'm not sm how I could answer your question better except to say that I never got the zoning -- my legal notification that everyone got that says ~cryone's property in Denton will be rezoned in accordance with the Denton Development Plan to a comparable zoning classification. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I never received a comparable zoning 8 classification until January 9th under consensus of the 9 City Council, to take it to NRMU. And the only reason 10 NRMU is because it is the most compatible. It's a lateral 11 change. It's as close to MF-I as you could get. I2 COMMISSIONER MULROY: BUt what brought this 13 to City Council's attention, this one piece of property? 14 Ma. BYN'UM: The threat of lawsuit. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY: From whom? 16 MR. BYNUM: I believe it was Mike Cochran. 17 COMMISSIONER MULROY: Excuse ~ne. Mike 18 Cocln:an, I'm understanding you're relaying to me that Mike 19 Cochmn threatened the City with litigation if he didn't, 20 if we didn't obtain the equivalent of multi-family zoning 21 for your property? 22 MR. BYNUM: NO. No. If the City went 23 ahead with what they thought was a consensus of January 24 9th to take it to NRMU, they were threatened with a 25 lawsuit. So it was held back. Page 90 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Reichhart would 2 like to weigh in on this. 3 MR. REICHHART: I believe, correct me it' 4 I'm wrong, that you identified that as an issue that the 5 proposed zoning wasn't comparable. 6 MR. BYNUM: correct. 7 MR. REICHHART: ^nd identified that during 8 a public hearing process and requested the NRMU zoning on 9 the property. 10 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. 11 MR. REICHHART: At a work session, City 12 Council reviewed that request and them was a consensus 13 reached to rezone it to NRMU. But issues were raised 14 because that was not done during a public hearing process 15 and the neighborhood would not have the ability to give '16 input on that. City Council then reverted it. 17 And due to the timing and the Code being 18 scheduled to be adopted in early February, there wasn't 19 enough time to have additional public hearings. So at 20 that time, it was determined that leave it as MF and we'll 21 come back and revisit it. 22 COMMISSIONER MULROY: SO I'm understanding, 23 Mr. Reichhart, basically at that time City Council froze 24 any action, held it underneath the old Code, and 25 ascertained that they would initiate zoning action post Page 91 1 adoption of the new Code. 2 MR. REICHHART: COITCCt. 3 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. And that's the 4 process that we've been going through the last time before 5 and tonight. So I have one question, a second question, 6 Mr. Bynum. Since there's provision for, in simple terms, 7 for a grandfather of usc of property, what exactly rights 8 will you lose if the N~-3 zoning is adopted tonight? 9 MR. BYNKJM: well, aren't you aware with the 10 fact that I would have a time limit? It's not an open 11 ended grandfather clause. I must apply for a permit under 12 the local peri, it procedure within six months of the change 13 in zoning. And in doing that, I must demonstrate that I 14 have spent time and money in the expectation of use of my 15 multi-family zoning. And then if I can demonstrate that, 16 I have one year from thc time it was changed to begin 17 constrnction. 18 And I've been trying to plat this property 19 since April of 2001 and I continually get issues brought 20 up by the staff. And I don't want to say they're dragging 21 their feet but they're not being efficient. And I've had 22 erroneous information. 23 The major problem is the City told me on my 24 plat docmucnts that my setback was supposed to be 25 feet. 25 I spent a lot of money designing my complex based on my Page 92 I front yard setback being 25 feet based on the ordinances 2 and based on the City's development staff telling me this. 3 Now, there was this homeowner's association 4 hired an attorney. Their attorney found the clause or 5 applied 'the clause in that same paragraph that says if 6 other houses are set back farther, then you have to 7 average thc setback. But we can't make you set it back 8 more than 50 feet. Okay. The development staff said, 9 well, we know we told you 25 feet. We know you spent a 10 lot of money developing it by going forward on your 11 development with a 25-foot setback. 12 COMMISSION'ER MULROY: IS that 25-foot 13 setback under the ne;v Code or the old Code? 14 Ma. t~YNUM: That was the old Code. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY; okay. 16 MR. BYNUM: It was MF-t at that point. I'm t7 still ~F-l. ^nd you have to design by some criteria. If 18 you want me to design it by the new Code, fine, let's do 19 that. But this is really hbout this group of people 20 trying to keep me from utilizing what I purchased. And I 21 purchased it in good faith. 22 COMMISSIONER Mr. JLROY: This is whet'~ I 23 really am asking questions to get 1o the heart of the 24 matter. From my limited knowledge of the Code and how it 25 has protected the existing rights and the existing PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 89 - Page 92 CondenseItTM Page 93 I operations of properties, you really would not be deprived 2 of the opportunity to pursue your multi-family interest if 3 we adopt NR-3 tonight. But if you do not go through with 4 it or if something changes in the future, our signal would 5 be that we recognize that's generally a single-fm~ily 6 neighborhood. 7 MR. BYNU'M: well, I can only point to the 8 past year and a half of me trying to get a plat passed 9 through the development -- well, this is very important -- 10 getting it passed through the development staff. If I've 11 already spent a year and a half and you change it to ~- 12 you know, in a couple of weeks the City Council changes 13 it, then I have a year from there to get it developed. I 14 can anticipate problems and there are no guarantees. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY: I understand that but 16 it's not a year that you have to have it built and ready 17 for occupancy. You have to have meaningful activity in 18 the beginning of development. 19 MR. BYN'UM: NO, I have to have a building 20 pennit. And in order to get a building permit, the land 21 has to be platted. I have to address all the issues. 22 COMMISSIONER MULROY: such as anyone has 23 to. 24 MR. BYNLIM: correct. Correct. 25 COMMISSIONER MULROY: It' s not an onerous Page 94 1 singular burden to you. It's anybody in Denton. And that 2 would be the meaningful activity and that would be your 3 connection to the grandfather provision that you're 4 carrying on. If it goes vacant or whatever, and you know 5 I think we're looking at the overall and in the future 6 what signal are we to send. So, yeah, there's a certain 7 activity that you have to demonstrate or accomplish, but, 8 in effect, that's not abnonnal. If I were to ask any 9 developer do you plan on taking a whole year to get your 10 plat, their answer would be heck no. I need to get it, 1 get my money working for me and get going. So I don't 2 think that's particularly onerous. 13 And so I want to go back to my main 14 question. What, without some obfuscation of different 15 issues, what really rights would be taken, would you be 16 deprived of if we assigned the NR-3 as zoning? 17 MR. BYNUM: My only concern is that through 18 actions other than my own, I would not be able to make th 19 one-year deadline. 20 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. If there's 21 some arbitrary and capricious actions by other parties, 22 then that would be for litigation and you could respond as 23 such. Othenvise, under normal circumstances, you're 24 really not deprived of any rights. 25 MR. BYNLrM: I have the expectation of use Page 95 I of solnething that I p~rchased in good faith. And what is 2 the reasoning that you should take my zoning away from me? 3 It's not -- you can't keep saying it's to protect 4 neighborhoods because the Denton Plan says how you protect 5 neighborhoods and it deesn't say you do it by taking 6 someone's zoning away from them. It says you design it 7 properly and I have intentions to do that. And thatrs 8 what you should be backing up is the Denton Plan. 9 COMMISSIONER MULROY: My question is again, 10 and without getting the issue confused, is in the normal 11 course of business, what rights would you be deprived of 12 if we go ahead wifla the ~a-3 zoning? 13 Ma. Ua,rOM: ~ anticipate problems based on 14 my past experience with the City. 15 COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay, but in the 16 normal course of business -- 17 MR. BYNIJM: well, I don't know if you could 18 call any business normal. 19 COMMISStONEa MU[aO¥: well, I understand 20 that and there's always things to work out -- 21 MR. BYNUM: well, there were several cases 22 before me wh~e a developer has expectations. 23 COMMISSIONER MULROY: t understand. But 24 the way the ordinance is structured, it d~es allow 25 coverage and for people such as yourself to continue on Page 96 1 with what they had in mind. But you have some burden to 2 do it in an expeditious manner and to solve some of the 3 problems. 4 MR. BYNUM: correct. 5 COMMISSIONER MULROY: So I still -- I'm 6 hard to understand what rights you're deprived of. 7 MR. BYNUM: 1 alll not a wealthy developer. 8 I m~ a relatively poor carpenter who has dumped alt of his 9 lifetime savings into this purchase of the property and 10 the development to this stage. I don't have an endless 11 bank account. I can't just run out tomorrow and get this 12 thing developed. I have to go out and work to pay for the 13 lawyers and all the development that I've already -- [ 14 have to throw it in the trash. I still have to pay for 15 that stuff. Now, I've got a year to pay for that and then 16 pay for additional things. To answer your question, I'm a 17 poor guy. 18 COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, I don't want to 19 belabor this. We need to move on. But I'm not asking 20 about -- I'm asking about rights. Are any real rights or 21 opportunity being taken away? 22 MR. BYNUM: well, the Assistant City 23 Manager on January 9th pointed out to the City Council 24 that if you downzone someone, according to the State 25 statutes, that's a taking of land. And when you do that, PLANNING AND ZONING COMldlSSION 12/4/2002 Page 93 - Page 96 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 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 97 the City becomes liable for the loss in value and they also become liable for any money spent in the expectations of use of that zoning. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, the whole City was rezoned, assigned new zoning. MR. Bv2q-c~: Right, and the whole City was rezoned with a comparable zoning. Where is my comparable Page 99 MR. REICHHART: The NR-3 zoning is limited, it's on the east side of Jagoe and on the lots adjacent to Oak on the south side of Oak and then it goes to the west. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: IS the day care center on Oak NR-37 MR. REICHHART: I do not believe it is. It is? Okay. zoning? This is about taking my zoning away from me. It's not about -- where's my comparable zoning? COMMISSIONER MULROY: I know but you've yet to explain to me what rights under the way the ordinance was written that you're really deprived of. Okay. Anyway. We need to move on. I thank you for your time. MR. BYNIJM: Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to express opposition to this Agenda Itmn? Seeing no one coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing and ask if Mr. Reichhart has any final remarks. MR. REICHHART: NO. COMMISSIONER APPLE: xhank you. Con~nissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER $OItNSON: Yeah. I have a question. I have a question for staff, if I may please. COMMISSIONER APPLE: YeS, sir. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Yeah. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: And the U-NT property is alt NR-3? MR. REICHHART: Yes. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: which means that they can continue with their present use but if they ever change hands, the zoning reverts back to NR-3. In other words, you can't tear that day care center down and build anything other than an NR-3 compliant building, right? MR. REICHHART: That's correct. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: what happens along Hickory? MR. REICHHART: Hickory is -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Excuse me. MR. REICHHART: The special exception category, thank you, would allow that use to continue. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That use could continue? Page 98 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. Could you describe the character of Oak Street between, say, Jagoe and Welch? MR. REICHHART: t would think the character is basically single-family. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Between Jagoe and Welch? MR. REICHHART: I'd have to look at a map. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Or Fry. MR. REICHHART: There is more of a mix of uses in that area. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Are there any single-family houses in that block, in that area? MR. REICHHART: I couldn't say if there is or isn't. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON; okay. How about going west from, say, Avenue E west on Oak Street? Is the character of that basically single-family? MR. REICHHART: I couldn't answer that right now. I am not that familiar to be able to say between which blocks are single-family. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: On the south side of Oak, and I think it's down several houses from the ones we're talking about, is a church and it looks like a piece of church property. Is that zoned NR-3 now? 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 100 MR. REICHHART: If it were tom down, it would have to be built to the new standards of the Code. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: HOW about if [t bums down accidentally? MR. REICHHART: Then they could rebuild it as is. okay. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: AS the stone use? MR. REICHHART: Yes. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: If it changes hands? MR. REICHHART: It doesn't matter. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It doesn't matter, MR. REICHHART: AS long as the same use is continued. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. 'W'hat happens if LrST decides that they want some of the property along Oak? I mean, they take it and they can convert it to whatever use they want, right? MR. REICHHART: Correct. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. And Hickory is completely, pretty much completely non-residential, isn't it? MR. REICHHART: I don't think I'd say that. I mean, there is a nmnber of residential structures on Hickory. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 97 - Page 100 CondenseltTM Page 101 I COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: single-family 2 residential7 3 MR. REICHHART'. 1 don't know if they're 4 single-fmnily, They're singlc-fmnily structures. I don't 5 know if they've been subdivided or used for rental but 6 they're single-family structures. 7 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: cormnissioner Powell. 9 COMMISSIONER POWELL: A couple of questions 10 of staff, it wasn't made clear to me that I understand 11 yet why we're talking about this tonight if we talked 12 about it in April and voted on it and the City Council 13 voted on it April of this year. How did we get back here 14 this soon? 15 MR. REICHHART: city Council directed staff 16 to initiate the zoning. 17 COMMISSIONER POWELL: EVell after they heard 18 it in May or whatever? 19 MR. REICHHART: Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 21 COMMISSIONER APPLE: cormnissioner Watkins. 22 COMMISSIONER POWELL: sorry. I had a 23 couple of questions. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: That's okay. You just 25 continue right ahead. Page 102 1 COMMISSIONER POWELL: what could be built 2 on this property or properties, this land in question 3 under NR-3 zoning? What would be the maximum tlmt could 4 be built on it.9 Just Generally. 5 MR. REICHItART: c~nerally, it's 6 single-family. 7 COMMISSIONER POWELL: HOW many 8 single-family's? Maybe I'm questioning that? 9 MR. REICHHART: NOW you're going tO make mc 10 do math. Two units. 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: TWO units, okay. And 12 I have a third question that just came up, if I may, Madam 13 Chairman. 14 COMMISSIONER APIECE: werll indulge you. ]5 COMMISSIONER rOWELL: okay. Thank you. If 16 it stays the way it is, it can be, he could build 17 aparuuents, correct? 18 MR. REtC~U~a~T: with the multi-family 19 zoning, correct. 20 COMMISSIONER rOWELL: eight. And if he -- 21 if we change the zoning, he can still build apartments on 22 it but there's time limits and there's other things that 23 become involved, if I understand that correctly? 24 MR. REICHHART: That's correct. 25 COMMISSIONER POWELL: And the question came Page 103 I up of what was the normal course of events, and Mr. Mukoy 2 was getting at that, and the homeowner, excuse me, the 3 property Swner pointed out that maybe the normal course of 4 events in Denton takes longer than it would take in 5 Corinth or somewhere. I don't know. He appeared to be 6 assuming that. I've noticed that. 7 If he initiates platting and building 8 pemfits and whatever right away and it takes him two years 9 to get it through the Denton system, is he stuck or can he 10 keep right on going? If he has already initiated the 11 action, is that what is necessary for him to maintain his 12 rights? 13 MR. REICHHART: DO yea want to take on 14 that? 15 MR. st,rvO~.R: It's really a complicated 16 issue because if it's that intensive under the Development 17 Code, the propc~y owner has an opportunity to ask for 18 what is called a local permit within six months of the 19 zoning change. That would be a decision that would be 20 made at the staff level. 21 I don't have my Code here right in front of 22 me but that would be a process he would have to go 23 tkrough. That determination would be made and the 24 determination would bc based on a number of factors that 25 are in the Code. So lie would have a situation where there Page 104 1 might be some risk that the permit would not be granted. 2 And then he also would have -- he also might have the risk 3 that even if it were granted, die granting of permit would 4 be challenged and it would be overturned. 5 So it's - when he said earlier, when he 6 was asked those questions about the local permit by 7 Conunissioncr Mukoy and he said that -- he was asked why 8 he wouldn't want the zone -- why the local permit 9 procedure wouldn't be adequate, it would be adequate 10 assuming the permit is granted and assmning that he makes 11 the application within that timeframe. There's no 12 guaranlees on that anymore than there's any guarantees 13 that somebody would get property rezoned. But I don't 14 know if that answers your question or not. 15 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Let me ask the 16 question another way. Maybe you can help me here. If he 17 makes the application within the six-month period, is that 18 the trigger that allows it to go, as long as he continues t9 with the application process, as long as necessary, 20 assuming he gets the permit and gets his plat and all 21 that? But is there a time limit that it has to be 22 accomplished in if he doesn't, you know -- does this give 23 him the grandfather as long as he does it within the six 24 months and ko:ps applying in good faith to get the job 25 done? PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 101 - Page 104 CondenscltTM Page 105 1 MR. SNYDER: Yeah. The provision does say 2 that he must begin construction unless construction is 3 actually co~mnenced within one year of the date the 4 determination is made. So there is a one-year timeframe 5 he has to begin construction. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: That date o? 7 termination, of dcrtiminatino -- what detennination? 8 MR. SNYDER: The director determines 9 whether or not the local permit should be granted, 10 planning director. Once he makes the detennination, then 11 the property owner has to begin construction within one 12 year. 13 COMMISSIONER POWELL: okay. But that's 14 after a permit is issued. 15 MR. SNYDER: Right. So it's a year and six 16 months potentially. 17 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Yeah, but suppose it 18 takes a year to get the permit? That wouldn't be unusual. 19 You know, alt I'm saying is if he applies in six months 20 and he does his due diligence and he works at it 21 diligently to get through the process of platting and 22 permitting and whatever other hassles involved and it 23 takes longer than expected, where is he? 24 MR. SI,D/DER: well, the Code is silent on 25 what happens there. We would just have to make a Page 106 1 determination at that time whether that one year is a hard 2 and fast rule or whether it could be nfitigated by 3 circumstances beyond the property owner's control. But 4 the Code itself does not allow for an extension of that 5 one-year period as written. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER APPLE: conunissloner Watkins. 8 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Thank you, Madam 9 Chair. It's working. Just a light moment to step back to 10 what one of the speakers said earlier, I was raised within 11 two blocks of this neighborhood. Avenue C didn't go 12 through t/il after we had a City Manager. Tile block 13 extended from Miller all the way to Avenue B, the West 14 Side Fire Stat[on. Dr. Harold Brinholtz lived oa 15 Marietta, sold property to J.C. Matthews and Jce Barks. 16 As to the MP-t, it's hard to believe, but 17 for several years North Texas had no dormitories. If you 18 were a female in 1936, they built Markmus Hall and Terrell 19 Hall. 20 But if you were a male and attending the 21 North Texas State Teacher's College, you lived in a 22 private home. And that may well be wbere MF-1 crone from 23 because there wasn't any zoning laws at that time. 24 In 1959 we adopted a City Manager form of 25 government and found out all the tilings that we hadn't Page 107 1 been doing correctly. So that's probably -- before that, 2 you went before the City Council and if you wanted to 3 build an apartment house on thc back or a garage apa~nent 4 or whatnot, you just built it. And so that may well be 5 where the MF-I'$ Call'tO from all over town. 6 Also in World War II, tile Air Force, Marine 7 Corps, Army fellows came down to date the girls at TWtJ or 8 CIA, and they stayed in individual homes. Prior to tile 9 present zoning Code, I believe, you could build a duplex 10 in a residential neighborhood. There was one on Ector 11 Street and they're all over town. And so it seems like 12 this has just come about but it's been developing for some 13 length of time. Thank you for indulging me for my little 14 bit of history. 1 ~ COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, 16 Commissioner Watkins. Commissioner Johnson. 17 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: oak Street, and I'm 18 going back to the character, back to the character of the 19 neighborhood, Oak Street and Hickory, east of about Welch, 20 are designated a historical district? Has there been any 21 action toward trying to designate any part of Oak Street 22 in this area as a historical district? 23 MR. REICHHART: I believe there has been. 24 COMMISSIONER JOItNSON: There has been? 25 MR. RE[CHHART: Yes. Page 108 1 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: But iS it nOW? 2 MR. REICHHART: It is not -- 3 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER IN THE AUDIENCE: It'S 4 in progress. 5 COMMISSIONER JOI{NSON: It'S in progress. 6 MR~ REICHHART: But it is not now. 7 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: okay. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Co~ranissioners, what's 9 your pleasure? Cmrunissioner Powell. 10 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I don't have a 11 pleasure yet, me'tort, but I do want to mention something. 12 I sit here between a rock and a hard place and I've been 13 here before and that's what I get paid for, folks, so, you 14 know, i expect it. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Don't encourage that 16 perception. 17 COMMISSIONER POWELL: The night we voted 18 for this new zoning ordinance, I voted no. And I said the 19 reason I would vote no is because it was a barrel of 20 snakes, and I used that terminology. And, boy, here's one 21 jumping rigl~t out at us. This is one of those snakes that 22 I was worried about at the time. 23 We've got a man who I assume he's telling 24 the truth, in good faith bought the property under one 25 zoning. We've got neighbors in good faith who don't like PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 105 - Page I08 Condens¢ItTM Page 109 1 that zoning, and for good reason. And everybody is in 2 good faith. I'm assuming that to be the fact. I don't 3 think anybody is lying to us tonight. I'm sorry, ma'am, 4 i'm discussing this with the rest of the Commission. 5 Everybody is here tonight, I'm assuming, in 6 good faith. And I voted against the neighborhood the 7 last time. Two of us did. And I don't know yet what I'm 8 going to do tonight. I'll do something though because I'm 9 getting paid to do something. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Please don't encourage 11 that perception. Please take that back. Somebody might 12 take you seriously. 13 COMMISSIONER POWELL: okay. I volunteered 14 to be here to do something. Okay? And I'm not going to 15 back off. I will do something. But t really see this as 16 the City having caused this problem. The City of Denton 17 caused this. And the City of Denton had good faith when 18 they did it. By golly, this is a terrible thing to have 19 to be in. It's a terrible situation. 20 I'm inclined to vote this time with the 21 neighborhood because I think the property owner has the 22 ability to do what he needs to do. Maybe I didn't 23 understand that last time. I'm not sure. And I'm really 24 not happy that it's back to us this soon, to bc honest 25 with you. If the Council couldn't get it straight, then 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Page 1 10 let them handle it as far as I'm concerned. Why throw it back on us? But whatever, it's here and I'll wait for a motion. And I'm sorry, I'm just thinking out loud. Thank you for your time. Thank you for allowing me to think out loud. COMMISSIONER APPLE: COlmnissioncr Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I'm very uncomfortable with this thing, as we all were, I think are. I think the property owner has rights. I believe he bought this property in good faith and I'm very uncomfortable about it. But I also feel there is a greater good to be achieved here. And it should never have been singled out as a small area of MF-1 in the first place, in my opinion. It should have gone NR-3 along with the rest of the property in the area. So I'm ready to make a motion if there's no further discussion. COMMISSIONER APPLE: 1 do have two Cormnissioners on the que if you wish to defer. COMMISSIONER ROY: YeS, I'll defer. COMMISSIONER APPLE: All right. Cmmnissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yeah. My feeling on the thing is I tend to not like it when you change the rules of the gmue after the game has started. I also am Page 1 11 [25 in favor generally of individual rights and property 2 However, in this case from what I'm 3 understanding here the way the discussion is going 4 tonight, thc owner of this property will be able to do 5 what he wants to do providing there am no artificial 6 roadblocks put in his way by the City. So I think that 7 I'm going to probably vote the way most of the people in 8 this audience want it to go which is in favor of the Na-3. 9 COMMISSIONER APPLE: conunissioner Mukoy. 10 COMMISSIONER MULROY: YeS. To follow-up on 11 the comments, I'm pro property rights but I also 12 understand in rezoning a total City it may not be a 13 perfect situation. And in that, as that Code evolved, 14 that's why these provisions, the special exceptions 15 provisions or the grandfathering and some of these time 16 brackets were put in there, that if someone is in process 17 or serious about carrying on, the means and method would 18 be there for them to proceed. So, you know, there is a 19 consideration for the property rights. 20 And at the same token, when we took at 21 zoning, you may not always consider zoning as absolute and 22 forever. As the nature of a neighborhood changes, and if 23 you go to West Oak you can see that new money has been put 24 over there in the last ten years as people have bought 25 these homes and rchabbed them and upgraded them and made Page 112 1 them their homes, so the nature has changed. And I think 2 that's part of our duty is to recognize that and recognize 3 where people have invested their money in what way and 4 protect that. 5 So I'm going to vote for the zoning 6 assignment of NR-3, as it should have been when the Code 7 was changed because these same rights would have been 8 there with the same timefrmnes. So the gentleman would 9 not have been deprived of anything. Thank you. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Co~mnissioner Roy, I'll 11 go back to you for your motion. 12 COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval as 13 proposed. 14 COMMISSIONER MULROY: second. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: it'S been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion9 Vote, please. Motion carries 7-0. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 109 - Page 112 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROViDiNG FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT 1 (MF-1) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSiFiCATiON AND USE DESiGNATiON TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESiDENTiAL 3 (NR-3) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 0.79 ACRE OF LAND COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1822, 1828, AND 1902 WEST OAK STRREET GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST OAK STREET, APPROXIMATELY 195 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARIETTA AND WEST OAK STREET LOCATED IN THE E. PUBCHALSKi SURVEY, ABSTRACT 996; PROViDiNG FOR A PENALTY iN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING A SEVERABiLiTY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0053) WHEREAS, the City of Denton initiated a change in zoning for approximately 0.79 acres of land from Multiple Family Dwelling 1 (MF-1) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation for single family uses; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission concluded a public hearing as required by law, and recommended approval of the requested change in zoning to Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning 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 approximately 0.79 acre property described in the legal description attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A is changed from Multiple Family Dwelling 1 (MF-1) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation. 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 Page 1 of 2 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 ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 of 2 Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTION WHEREAS David Bynum is the owner of al! that certain lot, tract or parce~ of land situat~ in the Eugene Pulchalski Su~ey, Abstract Number 996, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, and being all of First Tract and Second Tract of Exhibit D-4 and all that certain tract of land described in Exhibit D-9 as described in deed to Peggy J. Morris recorded in Clerk's File Number 93-R0082575 and being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a 5/8 inch iron rod found on the north line of West Oak Street, a pubtic roadway, being the southeast corner of said Second Tract and the southwest corner of that certain tract of land described in deed to The State of Texas recorded in Volume 114, Page 443 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE S 88°35'57" W. atong the north tine of West Oak Street passing at a distance of 84.75 feet a 112 inch iron rod found at the southwest corner of said Second Tract and continuing on a total distance of 169.21 feet to a capped iron rod found at the southeast corner of that certain tract of Jand described in deed to G, Tommy Bastian recorded in Volume 4276, Page 647 of the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE N 01 °17'07" W, along the east line of said Bastain tract a distance of 208.17 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found being the northeast corner thereof, same being the southeast corner of that certain tract of land described in deed to State of Texas recorded in Volume 489, Page 284 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and the southwest comer of that certain tract of land described in de~d to State of Texas recorded in VoJume 490, Page 269 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE S 89°20'10" E, along the south line of said State of Texas tract passing the southeast corner thereof and the southwest corner of that certain tract of [and recorded in deed to State of Texas recorded in Volume 490, Page 452 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and continuing on a totaJ distance of 167.77 feet to a 518 inch iron rod found at the southeast corner of said State of Texas tract same being the northeast corner of said First Tract: THENCE S 0t °43'09" E, aJong the east line of said First Tract a distance 20212 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing approximately 0.79 acres of land more or less. 01/21/03 #5B AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: January 21, 2003 Planning and Development Dave Hill, 349-8314 =~¥~ SUBJECT - Z02-0047 (700 and 702 Audra Lane) Hold a public heating to consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 18.5 acres of land from a Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU 12) zoning district. The property is generally, located east of Audra, south of Paisley and is commonly referred to as 700 and 702 Audra Lane. Multi-family use is proposed. BACKGROUND Applicant: Placet Services, Robert Russell Dallas, Texas The applicant is requesting the rezoning of land totaling 18.5 acres be rezoned from Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) zoning district to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district. The current land use in the area includes single-family, multi-family development, and park land. Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this writing, staff has received sixty two (62) written notice from property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property. Currently approximately 52% of he landowners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property are in opposition to the request. As opposition is greater than 20 % and because the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends denial, a super majority vote 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 denial (7-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. The subject property will need to be platted and building permits issued prior to development. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0047, generally known as 700 and 702 Audra Lane: DRC Date - Application Date - Neighborhood meeting- Planning and Zoning Public Hearing- City Council Public Heating- June 13, 2002 August 26, 2002 September 9, 2002 December 4, 2002 January 21, 2003 FISCAL INFORMATION Future development of this property under the new NRMU - 12 zoning will increase the assessed value of the property. 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. Applicant correspondence. 6. Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes December 4, 2002. 7. Photos. 8. Draft Ordinance Prepared by: Tiffanie Willis Planner Respectfully submitted: ASLA, AICP Assistant Director of Planning and Development Staff Analysis ATTACHMENT I Summary of Zoning Request The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 18.5 acres of land from a Neighborhood Residential-2 (NR-2) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use-12 (NRMU-12)zoning district. The existing NR-2 zoning is typically a single-family zoning district with a maximum density of two dwelling units per acre. The subject 18.5 acre property is currently predominantly vacant. The requested zoning change allows the applicant to pursue construction of a maximum of two hundred twenty two (222) units. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the 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 Agriculture (A) zoning classification. The subject property currently maintains some single-family residences on the adjacent private drive and near the frontage of the property. The 18.5 acre tract is predominantly vacant. New development may be considered compatible with the existing uses and zoning of the surrounding properties at this time. The general area surrounding the property includes Neighborhood Residential 2 (NR-2) and Neighborhood Residential 4 (NR-4) zoning district uses along with the Community Mixed Use (CM- G) zoning classification. To the north and east of the site are three standard housing single-family subdivisions with ranges from 2.5 acres to 5 acres in size. February 20, 2002 - The subject property maintained the Planned Development 191 (PD-191)zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was designated Agricultural (A) zoning district. Adjacent zoning: North: Neighborhood Residential-4 (NR-4) zoning district -single-family residential South: Neighborhood Residential-2 (NR-2) zoning district - Mack Park and single- family residential East: Neighborhood Residential-4 (NR - 4) zoning district - single-family residential West: Community Mixed Use General (CM-G) zoning district - multi-family attached The property is currently undeveloped. Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in an "Existing Neighborhoodsflnfill 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. Multi-Family units that are compatible with the existing density, neighborhood service, and commercial land uses is allowed. The Comprehensive Plan does contain several sections which could be applied to this application: three excerpts that underscore the need to protect neighborhoods vs. the need to provide a variety of housing types and limit sprawl is as follows: 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 residential unit 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. However the proposed multi-family development could have a negative effect on the character of the adjacent single-family neighborhoods. Development Review Analysis Transportation Trip Generation. Assuming a maximum of two hundred twenty two (222) single family detached dwelling units would generate approximately 2,166 trips per day. The number of trips allowed under the NR-2 contains a maximum allowed three hundred sixty one (361) trips per day under the current zoning. A Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) study will be required, should the property be rezone& prior to Final plat approval. Access and Connectivity The Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) study will identify any required road improvements needed to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development. The site will have one point of access to Audra lane. Public Infrastructure Water and sanitary sewer mains will need to be extended to serve this site. Development Code/Zoning Analysis Currently NR-2 allows a maximum of 2 units per acre, for a maximum density of thirty seven 07) units on the subject property. The proposed NRMU-12 zoning allows a maximum of twelve (12) dwelling units per acre, for a maximum density of two hundred twenty two (222) units. Although the applicant is proposing two hundred fifty six (256) units, the development, if rezoned, would be limited to the maximum number of units allowed in the requested zoning designation. The development, if rezoned, will be required to be in compliance with the regulations of Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU- 12) and all applicable sub-chapters of the Denton Code. Current NRMU-12 zoning regulations allows multi-family uses by right. As you may recall, at the last quarterly review of the Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended changes to the MRMU-12 district that would require a Specific Use Permit for multi-family development proposed within 200 feet of existing single-family developments. The City Council will be discussing that specific recommendation at there December 10, 2002 hearing. The following chart shows a comparison of the density differences that are allowed with NR-2 and the NRMU-12 zoning district classifications. Maximum Lot Zoning District Density (Max) per Acre Coverage NR-2 2 30% NRMU-12 12 60% Staff Findings 1. The proposed NRMU-12 zoning change could negatively impact the adjacent single-family neighborhoods. 2. The proposed NRMU-12 is compatible with the adjacent multi-family development and would be in conformance with the Denton Plan as it relates to housing diversity and limiting sprawl. ATTACHMENT 2 Public Notification NORTH Scale: None Public Notification Date: November 23, 2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 62 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice 175 · In Opposition: 67 · In Favor: 1 · Neutral: 0 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: more than 52% *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Opposition Map ,erttee Scale: None Zoning Map NORTH Existing Zoning Scale: None Proposed Zoning Future Land Use Map MC Scale: None ATTACH MENT 4 200 foot Property Owner Responses ADDRESS OWNER NAME COMMENTS I don't want apartments because of the 609 AUDRA LN. OROZCO, BLANCA M & accidents and noise. 704 AUDRA LN. MILLER, MORELLE M 715 AUDRA LN. ROSALES, GERONIMO Do not want more apartments - too congested as is- would be worse. Traffic congestion, concerned: school kids, noise pollution 800 AUDRA LN. EDWARDS, EARL No Comment 2000 LONGMEADOW CT. ELLIS, SHAWN P I just purchased my home in April 2002 with the understanding that the land adjacent to my home was for single- family homes, the decreased value of my home the proposed apartments will make will be like a kick in the face to me. 2006 LONGMEADOW CT. ATKINSON, ALAN No Comment 2014 LONGMEADOW ST. MOORS, STEPHEN J & MARISSA L Strongly oppose 2018 LONGMEADOW ST. KARTCHNER, NANCY Strongly opposed 2022 LONGMEADOW CT. HADDEN, DAVIS C No Comment 2023 LONGMEADOW CT. ROWLAND, KEVIN M No Comment Please help defend our rights as one of 414 MACK DR. CRYDER, KENNETH R & VICKI the biggest tax base payers (Home Owners). We bought into a single family area. Apt. 502 MACK DR. LINKE, GAYLE L density is too high in surrounding area already. 505 MACK DR. ROCKWELL, DAVID Strongly opposed.., why rezoning so soon? 506 MACK DR. STANSEL, JERRY W Please don't do this to us again!! 509 MACK DR. OWENS, DORIS M 510 MACK DR. HERNANDEZ, VICTOR No Comment We are terrified that the value of our new 513 MACK DR. QUINN, JUSTIN home will drop drastically. We invested all that we have in our home. 517 MACK DR. BATOn, ELIZABETH M I am opposed to the proposed construction of apartments in my backyard. I am concerned about my privacy, safety of children & property values. The appraised value of of just the 50 605 MACK DR. WILKERSON, WELTON G closest homes is well over 4.5 million. COWLING, DENZIL R 609 MACK DR. More traffic congestion, loss of backyard privacy, drainage issues, value property decrease. Devaluation of property value, crime increase, traffic congestion, drainage issues. Security, Drainage, traffic, privacy, 613 MACK DR; SLAVIN, GERTRUDE A overload local school, vandalism, etc. are our concerns. We are extremely concerned about traffic, more light pollution, trash, 705 MACK DR. STEINEL, MICHAEL L drainage; all which would impact property value. Concerned about privacy, noise, property 709 MACK DR. MOORE, ETHEL L values etc. 713 MACK DR. RIDDLE, CAROL S Traffic, eyesore, crowding, property value 807 MACK DR. BELL, JAMES M & Strongly opposed, concerned about CONNIE P drainage and traffic problems. (See e- mail) Will hurt property value, to much traffic as 811 MACK DR. GRANT, JERRY W is. 715 AUDRA LN. ROSALES, GERONIMO & MARGARITA 1900 PAISLEY ST. STOUT, SARA E Due to devaluation of my property, increased traffic, water supply and the safety of school children walking to and from school, this is not in the best interest of the area. Do not want these apartments behind my 1912 PAISLEY ST. SALAZAR, FRANCISCO house. 1916 PAISLEY ST. LERMA, ARMANDO No Comment Two to three stow apartments would 1920 PAISLEY ST. HARTLINE, BRYAN invade our privacy even over our privacy fence. HOOTMAN, KATHY C VASSEY, LEIGH A 2000 PAISLEY ST. 2004 PAISLEY ST. 2012 PAISLEY ST. Concerned with traffic, property values, noise & light pollution, smell from dumpster by my back fence. I am against the rezoning case Cf Z02- 0047. I am very opposed to the rezoning of this property. This change would be detrimental to the whole community. Additional Responses Kiso Famora Opposed Lived in area 14 years. Crowding of Lee Elementary. Property 2009 Paisley St value going down. And transient population. Child safety. Please Denton, TX 76209 DENY. Cliff Cain Opposed Crowding of Lee Elementary. Property value going down. And 1901 Paisley St transient population. Child safety. Please DENY Denton, TX 76209 Marcella Ochoa Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 1909 Paisley St. Denton, TX 76209 Jackie Williams Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 1913 Paisley St. Denton, TX 76209 Ignacio Palomino Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 2001 Paisley St. Denton, TX 76209 Rudy Ramirez Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 2005 Paisley St Denton, TX 76209 Karen Lopez Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 2017 Paisley St. Denton, TX 76209 Nelson Esparza Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 2101 Paisley St. Denton, TX 76209 *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Additional Responses Lester Neusome 2105 Paisley St Denton, TX 76209 Tom Silva 2201 Longmeadow St Denton, TX 76209 Opposed Opposed Lived in area 14 years. Crowding of Lee Elementary. Property value going down. And transient population. Child safety. Please DENY Issues with adding to thoroughfares, NR-2 ~llows 40 new SF homes, we do not need Apts. We need major investments not overcrowding. The holiday rezoning request is out of order. Please deny. *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Lee Elementary School Parents Sandy Woods 2912 Penniman Kellie Vaughan 1516 Man~n Blvd Linda Frank 3347 Ashley Cir Dawn Cristwell 2609 Timber Trl. Marina Silva 1405 Noble St. Opposed Opposed Opposed Opposed Opposed Parents strongly oppose the rezoning and construction of 300 units. SAME AS ABOVE SAME AS ABOVE SAME AS ABOVE SAME AS ABOVE Lina Dunlap Opposed 424 N. Ruddell Parents strongly oppose the rezoning and construction of 300 units. Henry Lopez 2916 Pennimard Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Maria Guerioro 909 North Wood Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Madely Alcantar 1708 Wayne St. Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Rudy Ramrez 2005 Paisley st. Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Mantia Ramirz 2004 Paisley St. Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Arcelia Godinez 809 Pinckney Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Lelia Howell 712 Jannie St. Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Wendy Mayfield 3321 King Fisher lane Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Gina DeRossett 820 Royal Meadow Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Ilene Lawrence 101 Bluebird Circle Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Kim Weber 704 Allise Circle Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Susie Flemings Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 417 King Fisher Jim Cristwell Opposed 2609 Timber trail SAME AS ABOVE Opposed Lisa Ball SAME AS ABOVE 508 Hettie st. Opposed Parents strongly oppose the rezoning and construction of 300 Tammy Bryant units. 1005 Bayfield Dr. Opposed Carie Castongway SAME AS ABOVE 705 Oak TreeDr. Opposed Angela Losque SAME AS ABOVE 224 Joshua Sonia Coronado SAME AS ABOVE 191 Duches Apt. 928 Opposed Beth Kirby SAME AS ABOVE 3037 Brandywine st. Opposed No Name SAME AS ABOVE 3037 Brandywine Opposed April Boykin SAME AS ABOVE 709 Hettlest Opposed Diane Finney SAME AS ABOVE 617 W. Windsor Opposed Rita Solis SAME AS ABOVE 815 pace drive Opposed Ginger Hinshaw SAME AS ABOVE 1129 KingsRow Opposed No Name SAME AS ABOVE 2013 Paisley St Opposed Susanno Guatemanlo SAME AS ABOVE 2013 Paisley St. Opposed Aide Urquidez SAME AS ABOVE 1202 Audra Opposed SueO'Neil SAME AS ABOVE 701 Diane Circle Additional Responses Erin Michael Greig Opposed Denton plan designates this area as single family. Protection ol 2116 Longmeadow Dr. home value. Three story units abutting single family back yards. MF will decrease property value, increase night time lighting, create noise and trash accumulation. Roman Stempook Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 2120 Longmeadow Dr. John Violte Dickson Opposed SAME AS ABOVE 2200 Longmeadow Dr. Theo Sandy Watts 2204 Longmeadow Dr. Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Jason Peggy Gutierez 2208 Longmeadow Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Gany Vickery 2212 Longmeadow Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Randy Chapoy 2216 Longmeadow Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Julian Ramon 2220 Longmeadow Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Jeff Davis 2300 Eagle Nest Court Opposed SAME AS ABOVE Rick Davison 2304 Eagle Nest Court Opposed SAME AS ABOVE George Terry 2309 Eagle Nest Court Opposed SAME AS ABOVE *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 NO~¢E OF PUBLT.¢ HEAR~NE~ Z02-0047 D~mber ~, ~00~ ~ ¢;~!~e~ ~ a~p~n ~ ~b~ ~r~m~ly ~ ~ ~ ~ I~T~ f~ ~ (~) pe~n~ of: ~ ~nd ar-~ ~[hin ~> hu~r~ (~m~) te~ ~ ~e ~ subm~ '~l[~n ~,i~n, ~en f~n fa~r ~ :mque~[ N~al ~ NO~CE OF PUBIC HEARiN~ Z02-0~7 Oacam:~ ~ 2002, '~ co~aid~t ~fl ap~li~on ~Or ~o~n:g aopmxima~a[~ 18.5 acr~ ~ ~nd ~m~ a Nei~hb:~ha~ ~e~iden~l 2 (NR~2)~ Neighb~ood ~9~n~aI M~ ~se ~2 (N~,~U-~2) dis~dcL The ~ ~ g~erall~., ~oc~ ea~ o~ ~dr~. ~ ~ P~i~ey a~ ~mm~n~y ~efermd T0g A~ra Lane.. Mulu4amiS, use ls proposed. (~ map ~'). T[~ pu~lic ~esfing v~l sla~, a~ 7:03 d~ned ~ pra~e oppoMun~as f~ d~izen, i~o~.n~ and ~m~n~. Ir~ order for y~ opini~ ~ be ~ake~, In-~ accaur~, for Lh~:~ r=e~t, ~ase re~um ~he e~d.~ ~0m~ wiLh your commen~s ,pd0r ~ ~he ~ ~f ~ public b~dr~..~s. ~ n~ w~y p~l?s y~ h~ a~end~ a~ ~fc~a~;n~ ~n the Z2~ ~, ~mST ~¥d~,eme~.t a~d ~manl. Prior ~ ~he gub~:c: h~ri~s, la~o~mers ~l~in ~/~ hundred ~200} fecal the ~ubi~: p~p~? ~'~ ~tir~ a~ ~ ~nirg req~ue~t ~, ,~ay ar this nolice. Th~ 6t~t ~blie ~t~i~ ~n~ act~n g~i~ ~e O~m~i0n mc~mmen~ app~¥-a], Shoul~ ~e ~mmis~n ~ f~tOf ~/ Neu~fa! to ~eS~ .... OFPCSe~: ~e ~ques~ ~~TCW, 'FE3tA~C'ITY H~LW~T ~ DENTON, TEXA~' 7~2~11 ~ ~0 3~.~BB * (FI 9~O. 3z~.77g7 ~: N, Elm ~ ~:~ ~a~Wi~s, Ca~ ~n~ I .] ,,~4 ~02k;) 3 ;20 NO~¢E OF PUBLT.¢ HEA~N~ . ,,~er ~, ~uu~, ~ ~I~.~ ~m appl~r~n for ~g ~m~ely la.~ a~ ¢ i~d ~m ~ Be~ T~ (~:) Deem ~ ~ ~n~ ~a ~4~m ~ h~dr~ (~] feet ~ 1he s~ submit NO~¢E OF PUBIC HEA~N6 Z02"0047 ~, ~,. ~0 ~n~er ~n ~plica~n ~or m~ng ~pp~jm~ly 18.5 city Cou~d{: Oham~rs ¢ Oily Hall 3o~l~d ~o~ni and ,~mme~t. Prior to the ~ubtic pe~e~¢l or the land a~a wtlb~n t~ hundred (2~) fee~ ~ ~he s ~e s,ubm~'[ ~t~.e,~ se~en, '~e5, ¢ ~ CI~F C~n¢lt am required to Deatoa Independent School District Depart:meat of Tra]~sportation & Planaing D~e~abee 3,, 2f£~2 ATTACHMENT 4 Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Saddle Creek September 9, 2002 Z02-0047 (Saddle Creek) Neighborhood Meeting - Monday September 9, 2002 The Planning and Department always encourage any rezoning request to allow for additional dialogue between the applicant and land owners within the Saddle Creek vicinity. The citizen attendees included more than eighty (80) neighborhood citizens Tiffanie Willis planning staff presented a brief summary and Robert Russell concluded with the presentation and answered some questions about the proposed development. Neighborhood Comments: · Neighborhood does not desire the construction of multi-family apartment dwelling units. · Is fencing a requirement? Yes, according to the Development Code. · Privacy and security are the main issues and the cases should be withdrawn. · The applicant shared that Saddle Creek would be responsible for maintaining the fence. Neighborhood citizens were concerned about the noise quality behind the home. · I don't want traffic from this development to inundate the established moderate income neighborhood. · Will the proposed information provided by the applicant comply with the standards of the Denton Code? yes screening required between residential and single-family uses. · What will apartment sizes be? (actual size unknown at this stage; but the development code does contain a minimum of less than 250 units) · This development will generate add ional traffic and increase the transient population. · The safety of the children will be compromised. What measures are being taken to address the existing Lee Elementary Schools needs? · We appreciate the good faith you have shown here today however we do not want additional MF units in this area. CondcnscltTM Page 12t 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: We~l~ going to 2 reconvcne our meeting, We're going to reconvene our 3 meeting and begin with I~m No. 13 which is a public 4 hearing. Ms. Willis with the Planning staff will present 5 and I'll open the public hearing. 6 MS. WILLIS: Good evening, Co~mnissioncrs. 7 Tiffanie Willis, Case Managt:r here before you representing 8 Item No. 13 on your Agenda, Saddle Creek, address at 700 9 and 702 Audra Lane. The straight zoning case request 10 before you, we have -- 11 COMMISSIONER APPLE: EXCUSe: mo, sir. If 12 you could take your phone call outside the chambers. 13 MS. WILLIS: i'll begin again. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER ^PeLE: Thank you, Ms. Willis. 15 MS. WILLIS: The case before you this 16 evening is 700 and 702 Audra Lane. 700 and 702 Audra Lane 17 is before you tonight. The straight zoning change 18 request, the applicant is Robert Russell with PLACEr 19 Corporation, is proposing a straight zoning change from 20 NR~2 zoning classification to NRMU-12. 21 On your screen, please view the site. 22 Notice that adjacent to the north, south, and cast are 23 existing single-family standard established dwelling 24 units, and there to the west cotmnunity mixed usc is the 25 Mack Park multi-family attached apartment units. Again, Page 123 1 notices were provided via the mailing. Those notices were 2 for 200 and 500 foot. 3 The slide before you shows the future land 4 use, the existing land uses, existing neighborhoods, 5 infiI! compatibility. The plan recommends that the 6 existing neighborhoods within the City vigorously protect 7 and preserve neighborhoods. Multi-family units that are 8 compatible with the existing densities, neighborhood 9 service, cmmnercial, and other land uses are allowed. The 10 Comprehensive Plan encourages diversity of housing stock 11 and increased density would definitely limit the sprawl. 12 Before you the applicant is requesting to 13 go from NR-2 residential zoning to the NRMU-12 residential 14 zoning classification. Excuse me. As you can see, 15 NRMU-12 is immediately to the south of this particular 16 site. I would like to return to our notification map and 17 indicate at this time we have received 12 additional 18 responses in opposition to this zoning change to date 19 since the response or the written, typewritten information 20 provided in your backup. We also have received one letter 21 in favor of this zoning change request, person addressed 22 at 708 Audra Lane. Currently, the opposition for this 23 property is at or above 52 percent of the residents that 24 responded to the 200-foot notification. 25 In conclusion, a zoning change would allow Page 122 1 multi-family development is proposed at this property. 2 Currently, the property is mostly vacant. 3 The specific sugges~cl land use analysis 4 provided by the applicant at the time of application 5 suggests that they will build 256 multi-family dwelling 6 units. As you SCL on your backup, page 7, the site 7 proposes compact, possibly increasing the transient 8 population; thus, setting a criteria for performance 9 standards them on Audra Lane. 10 The requested zoning change allows for 222 11 units based on the proposed zoning for ~R~U-12 according 12 to the Development Code. 222 units are allowed according 13 to the Development Code based on the proposed NRMU-12 14 zoning classification. 15 Before you on the screen, photos looking 16 down Audra Lane toward the McKinney Avenue. We see 17 anchoring McKinney are conuncreial uses coming back toward 18 Audra Lane. This is itranediately as you approach the site 19 here below is pretty much vacant. To the west, south is 20 the co~mnunity mixed use general which houses tl:e Mack Park 21 Apamnents. Other than that, this site is bordered by 22 established single-family homes. 23 As identified in the map and your backup, 24 the notification was provided to adchcsses identified on 25 the Denton tax role. A total of 237 or more public Page 124 I new construction and extend the mulfi-fmnily use into 2 existing single-family neighborhoods. This concludes my 3 presentation. 4 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. I believe 5 we have a couple of questions. Co~mnissioner Powell. 6 COMMISSIONER POWELL: The map that's up 7 there now, please if you could describe to me, define for 8 me the colors. 9 MS. WILLIS: Before you, Co~mnissioner 10 Powell, the gold is definitely our site and then the 11 adjacent areas in red would be the areas of properties 12 that arc in opposition. The grayed out areas, excluding 13 701, we did receive an opposition position on that case 14 today short of 4:00 o'clock today, they are in opposition ,15 and counted in the 20 percentile area according to the 16 Code. And this would definitely, the 52 percent, this 17 amount of opposition will definitely trigger a 18 super-majority vote subject time this case goes to City 19 Council. 20 MR. SALMON: what do the gray properties 2 t represent? 22 MS. WILLIS: The gray properties. 23 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Blue, whatever that 24 is there. 25 MS. WILLIS: They are just shadowing, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 121 - Page 124 Condcns¢ItTM Page 125 I showing that they're within the 200-foot area. However, 2 at the time that we created our map had not provided a 3 decision. 4 COMMISSIONER POWELL: SO there was no 5 response from those at that time. 6 MS. WILLIS: That's correct except for -~ 7 MR. REICHHART: ~rhey're just shaded to show 8 that they were within the 200-foot but we have not 9 received a response. 10 MS. WILLIS: Except for the 701. 11 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I understand. 12 MS. WILLIS: Except for the 701 property. 13 Again, we did share with you that we did receive 14 additional responses within the 200-foot but they're after 15 the typewritten was provided in your backup. 16 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you very much. 17 MS. WILLIS: Yes, sir. 18 MR. REICHHART: And there are a couple of 19 properties that we received opposition from that aren't 20 identified on here. So, i mean, this isn't an up-to-date, 21 but there's over 50 percent opposition right now. 22 COMMISSIONER POWELL: It's as up-to-date as 23 you could do it. I understand. Thank you. 24 MR. REICHHART: There are a couple of 25 misses. Page 126 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 2 Colm~issioner Watkins. 3 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Thank you, Madam 4 Chair. Ms. Willis, on page 3 of our backup, I read on the 5 middle paragraph the majority of the properties located 6 within 500 t'eet of this property are rental, multi-family 7 type dwelling units. Is that not an error judging by the 8 map that's on the screen? 9 MR. REICHHART: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Just simply to make 11 clear. Thank you very much. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Cmmnissioner Roy. 13 COMMISSIONER ROY: YeLl stated that the 14 maximum units that could be built on this property is 222 15 under the NRMU designation. The applicatat, as I read in 16 my backup, has a significantly higher number than that. 17 So tonight we are not considering that issue. We are only 18 considering the NRMU; iS that correct? 19 MS. WILLIS: That is correct. Tonight 20 before you is a straight zoning change, NR-2 residemial, 21 proposed NRMU-12 zoning change request. Yes, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER ROY: Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: There are no more 24 questions. Thank you. 25 MS. WILLIS: Thank you. Page 127 I COMMISSIONER APPLE: IS the applicant 2 present? 3 MR. RUSSELL: Yes, ma'am. My name is 4 Robert Russell. I'm at 6231 Berry Hill in Dallas, Texas. 5 We have applied for a zoning change on this 6 property. It's approximately 18 and a half acres. And as 7 Tiffanie has just told you, it's bordered by single-family 8 and multi-family to the west and south, as well as Mack 9 Park which is there below us to the south. The property 10 is heavily wooded. And in the plan that we have proposed 11 with the City, we have kept approximately 75 percent of 12 the trees that arc there. We feel like that that's an 13 important part of the prop~n~y and we've att~npted to keep 14 as many of those trees as possibly. A lot of them are ':15 over 50 years old and those are all tagged and marked on a 16 survey for us. 17 This property is very close to the 18 m~ployment government center that you see down Audra Lane 19 and on the south side of McKinney Avenue where the new 20 government centers are located. As well as on McKinney 21 Avenue, there's also the Food Lion at the comer that's 22 being turned into government offices, as well. This area 23 is going to continue to need additional housing. It's an 24 area that has, we believe, high use for housing for the 25 government center that's coming and is akeady in place. Page 128 I They also have the occupancies of the properties there 2 located nearby remain rather high and we feel that there 3 is a nod for additional housing in that area. 4 This housing is not subsidized. We feel 5 that multi-family is the best use for the property because 6 of its relatively small size and because there's only one 7 entry into the property and that is off of Audra Lane. 8 There is not a flow-through street. 9 The propc-rty was zoned Agricultural until 10 the Plan was taken in earlier this year. It's my 11 understanding that it was, along with several other 12 properties, defaulted at ~-2. ^nd we believe that the 13 best, as I said, we believe that the best use of the 14 property is multi-family. We also agree with Ms. Willis' 15 calculation of 222 units and that would be the maximmn we 16 would ask for. 17 We've had a neighborhood meeting in 18 September. We had excellent turnout and we had excellent 19 suggestions from the neighborhood and we have attempted to 20 respond to those comments and complaints and suggestions 21 in the following manner. We'r~ down to 222 units which we 22 believe is correct. We have changed the plan to have only ,23 two-story buildings. We do not have any three-story 24 buildings. 25 One of the biggest complaints that we heard PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 125 - Page 128 CondonseltTM Page 129 1 was that we were too close to the single-fmnily homes at 2 the back of the property along Paisley and Mack, as well 3 as Longmeadow, and we have proposed to increase the buffer 4 zone from ten feet ~o 25 feet along those three sides. In 5 addition to that, we would provide an eight-foot fence. 6 The eight-foot fence would be moved eight feet, at least 7 eight feet on to our property and our residents and their 8 pets could not get in that eight-foot buffer zone between 9 the fence and the neighborhood. That would cut down on 10 noise, trash, having pets at your backyard, and having 11 people in the back. 12 One of the other things that was suggested 13 was that the trash pickup was a problem on properties like 14 this because they're commercial and sometimes their trash 15 is emptied in the middle of the night. And we have 16 suggested and would go to a compactor systean where we 17 would pick up our own trash with a maintenance man and 18 bring it to fl~e front of the property so it would be the 19 ftmhest point away from thc residents. Thank you. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is thc~re 21 anyone in the audience who would tike to speak in support 22 of this Agenda item? 23 MR. SMIIH: r would. I live at 706 -- 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: YOUr name, sir? 25 MR. SMIXU: David Staith. Page 130 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Yes, sir. 2 MR. SMITH: And like he says, we've got 3 nice apartments already. They don't bother us and I've 4 owned the property ever since 1981 there and it's been in 5 my wife's family, all the property since early '50~s or 6 the late '40's. My wife's, like I said, fm~ily owned the 7 property. Like he says, I've got no gripes about the 8 apartments and I'm the only house that's facing the 9 apartments. So all the rest of them is the back of the 10 apartments, their house. But like I said, my house does 11 face right in the very center of it. Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Is 13 there anyone else who wishes to speak in support? I have 14 a number of cards that wish to speak in opposition. Erie 15 Janssen. 16 MR. JANSSEN: Thank you, Madam Chairwoman 17 and Commissioners. I appreciate being here tonight. Eric 18 Janssen, I live at 413 Fox Creek Court, within 500 feet. 19 Tl~ere's a couple of pertinent facts that I 20 placed on the letter before you. And I know that there 21 are several different groups here this evening, all very 22 interested, and most have been able to stay this late, who 23 also are opposed to rezoning this property NRMU-12. If I .24 could ask all those opposed to please stand, I'd 25 appreciate it. 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 131 COMMISSIONER APPLE: If you'd please address the Commission. MR. SANSSEN: Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. MR. JANSSEN: There are homeowners who back up to The Fountains Aparmtents which were already zoned NRMr. J-t2 and these apartments were built directly behind these homes. There's a speaker here for that group. There are speakers here who abut tlfis site on ali sides who would like to speak. There's a representative of the ~ Elementary PTA who would like to speak, a teacher from the PTA. ~ don't know if the DISD is hc:re tonight. And then there arc a few more other holneowners in thc area. Each one has a unique perspective on the issue and they would each appreciate time minutes, while at the same thne trying to make the meeting go as quickly as possible. If I may point out a couple of things regarding the staff report. As the developer did mention, there were 85 people who showed up on just a couple of days notice at the site. Most were opposed before the meeting. By the end of the meeting, I think the staff will report to you that they were all opposed. I'd like to point out that the Mack Place Apamnents, I think it's already been mentioned, have also taken a position of opposition. Page 132 1 I'd like to point out that the diversity of 2 housing in the City certainly is necessary and it's 3 appropriate, and the Planning Development Code has 4 stipulated that. I believe in the planning process. I 5 was told by Mr. Robert Reinard today that in the 6 development process, multi-family was cited along McKinney 7 Street. It was anticipated for that growth, mostly on the 8 side intentionally for that reason. On the north side 9 from McKinney all the way up to almost to Mingo and to the 10 raikoad tracks is all scheduled for single-family 11 neighborhood infill. That's what we would like to see it 12 stay. 13 The percentage of 52 percent, in actuality, 14 I believe the nmnber is actually higher. On the original, 15 on the computer screen a moment ago a moment ago it showed 16 all the respondees on Long-meadow Court as being in a gray 17 coding. In fact, almost every single one of those have 18 submitW_xt their reports and they are all opposed. I have 19 copies of those. So I think that was probably just an 20 oversight. 21 On my letter I'd like to just read into the 22 record the points that I made on that letter, and that is 23 the bus[ness about the zoning along McKinney is 24 appropriate but zoning a lot of multi-family into the 25 housing area north of McKinney is not appropriate. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 129 - Page 132 CondenscltTM Page 133 1 NRMU-12 zoning, straight zoning tonight without platting 2 means that the developer, while they state inteotions ~'or 3 one purpose at this meeting, could change that to some 4 other purpose, and there are a lot of other uses for 5 NRMU-12. The site has 52 single-family homes within 200 6 feet. The value of those homes is 54.8 million. The 7 elementary school is within 200 feet and there's not 8 currently an elementary school in this City that has 9 hundreds of apartments wiflfin 200 feet. 10 I will respect the three-minute bell and I 11 will entertain any questions or let the other speakers 12 proceed. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 14 MR. JANSSEN: Thank you very nmch. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: ~:en Cryder. 16 MR. CRYDER: My name is Ken Cryder. I live 17 at 414 Mack Drive. We've lived there for about f 2 years 18 since this neighborhood has built. It has been a nice 19 peaceful neighborhood, a quiet neighborhood, and now we've 20 got apa~nents moving in all around us. Well, you know, 21 like you say, this is our most important value is our 22 home. We put everything we've got into our home. When 23 these places move in like this, it devaluates our home. 24 So what are we supposed to do with that extra money we've 25 lost? Just suck it up and go on about it? You know, the Page 135 1 windows and so I have to keep my blinds closed all the 2 time. So my life basically changed having now the 3 apartment complex built next to my property. So that's 4 basically just my feelings. 5 And then there is some collected 6 information from the rest of the people neighboring thc 7 apartment complex. And, for example, Dickson's, 8 three-story looks into their yard; Watts, lost all 9 privacy, reported people using binoculars looking in their 10 windows; Guttierez, she reported people hollering at her 11 children in her own backyard; Ramon, attempted to sell 12 home, couldn't and refused to give it away; Davis, dog put 13 to sleep over a problem with apartment dweller; Davison, 14 owner could not sell; Roate, could not sell. So those are 15 just some notes from the rest of the people neighboring, 16 you know, the apartment which was built two years ago. 17 That's all. 18 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. 19 MR. STEMPROK: Okay. Thanks. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mike Steinel. 21 MR. STEINEL: My name is Mike Steinel. I 22 live at 705 Mack Drive which is one of the properties 23 right there that will abut this new development if it goes :24 in. 25 Rather than speak to all these issues that Page 134 1 family people are what pays most of the taxes, the family 2 homeowner. 3 And I just don't think it's right for the 4 apartments to come in here and degrade our homes and take 5 our values down when they shouldn't go down. Thank you. 6 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Roman 7 Stemprok. 8 Ma. STEM?~O~C: Hello, everybody. My name 9 is Roman Stemprok and I live at 2121 Longmcadow Street. 10 And I'm the neighbor of The Fountains Apartments which 11 akeady were built a couple of years ago, and I bought my 12 house five years ago and basically so I can compare before 13 and after. Before I used my property, my backyard and I 14 had a basketball court and I just played basketball once 15 in awhile there. It was very nice. Then The Fountain t 6 apartment complex was built and when I go to my backyard, 17 then I pick up trash, beer cans, coke cans, and garbage 18 bags once in awhile, cigarette packs. So that's an issue, 19 and I don't usc my backyard, my property as much as 20 before. 21 Then also there is noise. It's not a 22 social noise, just real noise Thursdays, Fridays, 23 Saturdays, parties. So that's also what wakes me up. 24 Then there's basically a large building just maybe 15, 20 25 feet across the fence. And, again, it has a lot of Page 136 1 everybody's concerned about which is privacy, noise, 2 light, pollution, trash, traffic problems which wi[[ be 3 severe because of the limited access. One of the nice 4 things about this little neighborhood is that there's only 5 a couple of ways in so it's pretty quiet. 6 But rather than speak to that, I'd like to 7 speak of the over-arching issue which to me is if this 8 zoning is changed, it will basically benefit one person or 9 one group of people and that's the developer, and will 10 adversely affect the 50-some homeowners right on the 11 perimeter and, I don't know, a couple of other hundred 12 people in that neighborhood which is primarily owner t 3 occupied. 14 My wife and I bought the house four years 15 ago and we enjoy the neighborhood. This rezoning is not 16 compatible with the neighborhood. It isn't compatible 17 with what happens on the north or the east, to most of the 18 area on the south and to much of the area on the west. 19 And I don't think that it's in the spirit of the zoning 20 plan which says, which was stated a minute ago, which 21 vigorously protects existing neighborhoods. 22 Just one thing to clarify, thc builder who 23 said he responded to suggestions, one of the suggestions 24 and one of the requests was that the fences that were 25 destroyed on this area when the land was cteared I think PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 133 - Page 136 CondenseltTM Page 137 1 18 months ago, awhile back, would be fixed. And he agreed 2 to do that in September. I checked with the landowners 3 right there and they're still not fixed. I appreciate 4 your time. 5 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. Dave 6 Rockwell. 7 MR. ROCKWELL: Thank you. My name is Dave 8 Rockwell. I live at 505 Mack Drive and I abut right next 9 to the property myself. I've lived in my house for ten 10 years and it's the only investment I have. Six years ago, 11 I lost my leg and I damn near lost my house. And I 12 managed to keep it and I struggled though, and everything 13 I got is in my house, and I don't want my house to devalue 14 because they're putting apamnents in there. 15 I had a red oak tree planted in my backyard 16 about a foot from behind my fence and not only did they 17 take the red oak out, they pulled my fence down. They 18 hauled it off. It's down there at thc City dump right 19 now. When you go talk to somebody about it, they're doing 20 this, everybody is pointing fingers but it doesn't resolve 21 the issues of the fence. My backyard now is 18.5 acres 22 and I kind of like having that 18.5 acres as a backyard 23 and I appreciate it but, you know, I'd like to have my 24 fence back and my text oak. It didn't belong to them. I[ 25 was mine. I guess that's all I've got to say. Thank you. Page 138 1 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Judy 2 Cowling. 3 MS. COWLINO: Thank you. Judy Cowling, 609 4 Mack Drive. And my husband and I both, I mcan, we abut 5 the property in discussion tonight. My husband and I have 6 lived there for ten years at 609 Mack Drive and we 7 consider our home our major investment, as all others have 8 said. I hate to bore y'all. I'll make this quick. 9 We've enjoyed our environment. We're not 10 opposed to growth but we feel that by building a t I multi-family dwelling directly behind our home would 12 greatly bring about the devaluation of our property. I'm 13 sum y'all could all arrest to that. Not to mention our 14 backyard privacy, how it would be invaded. We do not 15 believe that anyone would like to have a two or 16 three-story building peering over their fence at them. 17 Over the last few years, it has become 18 extremely difficult, not to mention almost impossible to 19 pull out from our home on to Mack Drive and on to McKinney 20 with the existing traffic. If a multi-family facility is 21 allowed to be built on that property in question, it would 22 again increase the traffic tremendously in that area. 23 We also have a concern over added noise and 24 security in that area. By saying this, I can only hope 25 that the reasons for being in opposition to the rezoning Page 139 1 would be fully understood and acknowledged. I can only 2 appeal to your better judgment and put yourself in our 3 place, how you would feel. I know this may go on deaf 4 ears. Y'all have heard this. You're tired. It's very 5 important to us and we can only appeal to you that you 6 would understand our position tonight. Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER AePL~: Thank you. April 8 Boykia. 9 MS. BOYKIN: Good evening, Madam Chair and 10 menthers of the Commission. My name is April Boykin. I 11 reside at 709 Hcttie Street here in Denton. I come to you 12 tonight as a member and representative of tile Lee 13 Elementary PTA Board with the intent of proposing a 14 rcsolntion to the mzoning of land in our neighborhood, 15 and I have provided you-all with a copy of that 16 resolution. I ask that this be entered as an official 17 document into tonight's minutes and transcripts. 18 WHERE^S. the Lee Elementary Parent/Teacher 19 Association represents 556 students, 80 teachers and 20 staff, and hunchexts of parents and residents of the Lee 21 neighborhood; and 22 WnERUnS, a developer is attempting to 23 change the zoning of neighborhood single-family lands at 24 700 Audra Lane into multi-family zoning for purpose of 25 building up to 300 apartments; and Page 140 I WHEREAS, thc land of the at~npted rezoning 2 sits across the street and within 250 feet of the front 3 doors of Lee Elementary School; and 4 WHEREAS, hundreds of new apartments would 5 do nothing to benefit Lee students, may actually cause 6 significant additional safety hazards for students walking 7 to Lee Elementary, and may create significant additional 8 demands on ~he educational efforts of the school. 9 BE IT RESOLVED, tile Lee PTA strongly 10 supports the preservation of the cun, ent single-family 11 zoning of the land at 700 Audra Lane. 12 AND BE [T FURTHER RESOLVED~ Ole ~ PTA 13 strongly opposes any attmnpts to rezone land at 700 Audra 14 Lane for the purpose of constructing hundreds of 15 multi-family apartments. 16 AND BE IT FURTHER RF~OLVED, the Le~ PTA 17 strongly urges the Mayor and City Council members, 18 Planning and Zoning Corranissioners, and all City staff to 19 deny any attcnnpts at rezoning changes that would allow 20 apartments or other high density, high traffic uses of the 21 land near our school. 22 The motion to accept this resolution was 23 voted on and unanimously passed at our general meeting 24 held September 10th. In addition, we have collected three 25 pages of signatures from family mmnbers in the surrounding PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 137 - Page 140 CondcnscltTM Page 141 1 Le~ neighborhoods who oppose the rezoning. 2 I would like to add that the intersection 3 located at Paisley and Audra Lane, just west of thc school 4 campus, will suffer dramatically increased traffic with an 5 addition of some 250 plus vehicles. Because I, along with 6 many other families live west of Audra Lane, my child, as 7 a walker, has to cross that intersection two times a day. 8 I would like to publicly thank our crossing 9 guard, Mr. Blagg, who is in his 80's and has done a l0 tremendous job over the years in keeping our children safe 11 when crossing at that intersection, because I have 12 personally seen a vehicle pass right through there without 13 stopping at the stop signs. 14 However, with an addition of 250 plus 15 vehicles, I don't know that even Mr. Blagg would be able 16 to handle the traffic while helping our children cross the 17 street. In fact, I suspect a traffic light will have to 18 be installed to ensure adequate regulation of the traffic 19 flow. 20 Therefore, Cmm~issioners, I beg all of you 21 to hear us loud and clear. We do not want this 22 development to take place in our cmmuunity. I thank 23 you-all for inviting mc to speak this evening on behalf of 24 everyone from the Lee Elementary School and cmmnunity. 25 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Joy Page 142 1 Robinson. 2 MS. ROBINSON: Madmn Chair person, I'm Joy 3 Robinson. I reside at 409 Fox Creek Court which is within 4 the 500 area. I also mn a teacher at Lee Elementary. I'm 5 also a parent of students at Lee Elementary. 6 I have been a resident in Denton for almost 7 40 years. I have been a resident in my home for ten of 8 those years. And as such, I would like to implore on you 9 to keep our neighborhood a neighborhood. In the ten years 10 that I've lived there, three apartment complexes have come 11 in. It has devaluated our homes. It has caused 12 increased problems at the school with the mobility of the 13 children moving in and edt. We already have a socially -- 14 a low socio-economic population at our school and putting 15 more apartments in that area would only further that 16 problem. And so we implore that you please listen to us. 17 Hear Ms. Boykin. 18 I was going to speak on traffic myself. 19 It's awful and we do not need more people coming in with 20 their traffic and their noise messing up our 21 neighborhoods. Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, ma'am. 23 Kiso Zamora. 24 MR. ZAMORA: Hello. My name is Kiso Zamora 25 and I live at 2009 Paisley Street within 300 feet from the Page 143 1 proposed zoning change. 2 I bought my home in 1988 because I was 3 starting a family and I wanted my son to attend the · 4 ethnically diverse Robert E. Lee Elementary School. I 5 chose a small, quiet neighborhood where everyone knew 6 everyone, where kids were playing in the empty lots behind 7 the house we were looking at. When we were looking at the 8 house, a neighbor stopped by and said we'd be happy there. 9 He welcomed us to the neighborhood. That alone helped us 10 to decide. I loved and still love this neighborhood. We 11 bought this house and the only worries we had were an 12 occasional speeding car or an occasional overrun stop 13 sign. Sadly, this is no longer the case. 14 I've seen two apartlnent complexes built 15 nearby. I've seen the Ann Windle School built. And while 16 they widened Audra Lane for a small stretch, it does 17 little to alleviate the increased traffic. Audra Lane has 18 even more traffic now that it connects to Mingo Road. 19 This increased traffic spills on to our street and our 20 streets, our neighborhoods are not as safe as they used to 21 be. I understand growth and increased traffic, but an 22 apartment complex this close will increase traffic 23 exponentially. 24 I worry what another apartment complex will 25 do to us. We have over 12 children under the age of 14 on Page 144 I Paisley Street. Not only will we have to contend with 2 increased traffic but we will be faced with a transient 3 population right in our backyards. I don't want that. I 4 mentioned living here while two apartment complexes were 5 built nearby. I'm talking about apartments off of 6 McKinncy Street, not in the middle of a residential 7 neighborhood, not apartments where second-story tenants 8 can look into my neighbor's backyards. 9 This developer bought this land and knew of 10 its zoning beforehand and knew of the surrounding homes 11 that he wishes to disrupt. I'm asking you to please deny 12 this developer's attempt to change the zoning on the 13 neighboring land. Please deny his attempt to overcrowd t4 our streets. Please deny his attempt to build a fifth 15 apartment complex in the short distance to our houses. 16 Please help our little cmmnunlty of lower to middle income 17 families keep from becoming another multi-family ceqnent 18 city. Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: thank you, sir. Jason 20 Pitzer. 21 MR. PITZER: Hi. My name is Jason Pitzer. 22 I live at 2009 Longmeadow Court which is right abutmd to 23 the property that they're wanting to develop. 24 Everybody has pretty much stated everything 25 that can be said about this so I'll just be really quick. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 141 - Page 144 CondcnscltTM Page 145 1 I bought this house like a year and a half ago. This is 2 my first home. I'm starting a family here. We moved here 3 because Lee Elementary is fight there. It's a good 4 school. 5 And now a developer wants to come in and 6 lower my property values, add more traffic, make it 7 impossible for me, if this docs happen, to sell my house 8 and get what I've got into it now. I've got 30 years left 9 to pay off this thing. You know, I'd like to keep it 10 where I can, you know, enjoy my neighborhood. That's why 11 we moved in. It's quiet. It's close to a good school. I 12 want to start a family and I'm not going to be able to do 13 that if they put apartments, two-story apartments 20 feet 14 from my backyard, in addition to their wrecking of the 15 fences and everything else that they've talked about. So 16 thank you. 17 COMM[SSlONERAPPLE: Thank you. Connie 18 Bell. 19 MS, BELt.: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The 20 one thing that was not addressed, that Mr. Russell did not 21 address was drainage. I don't know if you are familiar 22 with the drainage in that area but I live at the end of 23 thc hill, I live at 807 Mack Drive. I live at the end of 24 the hill. I've got drainage now all the time. Water 25 comes into my garage every time it rains. I'm worried Page 146 I about the drainage in the area. What is his plan on that? 2 Does anybody have his plan on that, on the drainage? 3 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Mr. Reichhart. 4 MR. REICHHART: NO plan has been submitted 5 at that time to address the drainage issues. 6 MS. BELL: when do you address that, at the 7 preliminary plat? 8 MR. REICHHART: Yes, mn'mn. 9 MS. BELL: Okay. Another thing, we have 10 been, we have heard that the 1 &foot easement that goes, 11 we're right at the comer of the property, that that might 12 possibly be used as a walk-through to Lee Elementary. Is 13 there any truth in that7 14 MR. REICHHART: That hasn't been 15 investigated. But what type of easement is it? 16 MS. BELL: It'S a utility easement. It's a 17 utility and drainage. It doesn't drain anything but it's 18 supposedly -- I mean, it drains into my garage. 19 MR. REICHHART: On face value, unless the 20 easement was identified as a public access easement, it 21 wouldn't normally be used for sidewalks or -- 22 MS. BELL: Or a walkway. Okay. 23 MR. REICHHART: It doesn't prevent people 24 from walking in it. 25 MS. BELL: Another thing, we're right Page 147 1 across from the Lee Elementary driveway. I Icave about 2 7:30 in the morning. Sometimes at the end of Mack Drive, 3 I wait for five or ten minutes to get out on the road on 4 to McKinney, to turn right. The ones that turn left wait 5 longer than I do. And I'm just concerned with the traffic 6 because they're going to be driving around to drop their 7 children off at school. 8 Those are my concerns and I would like for 9 somebody to get back with me on the drainage issue because 10 I believe that's going to be an issue. Thank you. 11 COMMISSIONER ^~P[~: Thank you, Ms. Bell. 12 Cathy Huffer. 13 MS. HUFFER: My name is Cathy Huller. I 14 live at 2000 Longmeadow Court. I appreciate the ability 15 to come and speak to y'alL 16 I was a little bit confused when Tiffanie 17 WiIlis came up on the map she gave. I have a fax showing 18 that I sent mine in on November 1 lth and that it did get 19 through showing that I was opposed. And so some of ~e 20 gray areas, I know you were addressing that, one of the 21 major ones is my property in there. Ms. Willis, can you 22 put this on for me up there? I can work nay fax. I just 23 can't work that. 24 MR. REICHHART: If you'll allow me a second 25 to address that. I revised that map personally and I did Page 148 1 miss some properties on Longrneadow. There are a nmnbcr of 2 properties on Longmeadow that all should have been red. 3 We were trying to update it. The original map had it. We 4 we-re trying to update it before the meeting to get it into 5 the PowerPoint presenlatiom And if you click on one 6 property and inadvertently click on it again, it 7 disappears. So that was my error. 8 MS. HUFFER: okay. So 2000, as you can see 9 right down there, is a big amount of property and I did, I 10 am supposed to that. I want that known in there. 11 I chose that property a total of eight 12 months ago. I guess this is going to have a big effect on 13 the value of my property. I chose it because it was in a 14 cul-de-sac. I chose it because of the neighborhood. I 15 chose it because it was quiet. And all the masons I 16 chose it for are going to be eliminated. A lot of people 17 here have lived there ten years and have built up some 18 value in their home. I haven't even had time to do that 19 before someone is going to take that away. So I'd like 20 you to consider that and also please be aware of all the 21 other areas that we're opposed that aren't on the map 22 them. Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Tom Silva. 24 MR. SILV^: I'm Tom Silva. I live at 2201 25 Longmeadow Street and have lived there for about 15 years. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 145 - Page 148 CondenseltTM Page 149 1 And I wanted to just state my opposition in unison with 2 everybody that's here. 3 We've, in the 15 years we've been fl~ere, 4 we've seen a lot of things happen in our neighborhood. 5 We've seen thc expansion of the jail. We've seen the 6 addition of a garage, not a garage but a service station 7 on the corner, a lot of office sites, a new courthouse. 8 And not that we're opposed to change but we don't need 9 anything else to add to the confusion and the congestion 10 in the neighborhood. 11 One of the things that I'm definitely 12 opposed to is the fact that it takes me five to ten 13 minutes to get out of my neighborhood in the meriting when 14 I need to go to work. And you're asking us to just go 15 ahead and stick in another 175 to 200 cars added to that 16 mess that it ahvmdy takes to get out of the neighborhood. 17 And I realize that there's been all kinds of surveys and 18 stuff. I was listening awhile ago as you guys were 19 talking about all the surveys on Carroll and stuff. Those 20 people that live in our neighborhood, those people that 21 drop their kids off at Robert E. Lee know what a mess it 22 is to get in and out of this neighborhood, and it's going 23 to be worse if you go ahead and allow this property to be 124 built. 25 With that 41 percent of the property owners Page 150 1 that they talked about awhile ago, you know, we've been 2 here for awhile. I love Denton. This is my home. And I 3 want to do what I can to go ahead and stay here as long as 4 I can. But with my property values going down and the 5 addition of this facility going in, I don't really think 6 we need it so Fm just asking you to search your 7 conscience and vote against this. And, you know, that's 8 about all I've got to say. Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, Mr. Silva. 10 Joel Diaz. 11 MR. Di,XZ: rm not a good speaker but my 12 name is Joel Diaz and I just bought the house at 2004 13 Paisley. And if I would have known they were going to 14 build some apa~nents behind my house, I would not buy it. 15 That's all I have to say. Tlmnk you. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. 17 Justin Quinn. 18 MN. qtJIl'~: Madam Chair, I'd like to defer. 19 A lot of the issues have been talked about. 20 COMMISSIONER APPLE: thank you. We'll just 21 weigh in that you are opposed. 22 MR. QUI~: thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER AePLE: Elizabeth B-A-T -- 24 MS. m^TOR: O-R. elizabeth Bator, 517 Mack 25 Drive. I moved to Denton in the fall of 1983 by myself. Page 151 1 I'm a single woman. And my house is 517 which is -- does 2 abut the property. And so when I look out my bedroom 3 window, I see my fence and on the other side is 4 property and I'm not real crazy about the idea of having 5 apartments on the other side. 6 When we had this neighborhood meeting, some 7 man was talking about the apartments, Thc Fountains 8 Apartments and people with binoculars looking in. And, 9 you know, that doesn't make me feel very secure. I feel 10 very safe in Denton. I feel very safe in my neighborhood. 11 I walk around the neighborhood. See kids playing. And 12 it's very important and I just would like to preserve 13 that. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Calvin 15 Manuel. He wishes to register his opposition. Timothy 16 Henderson. Okay. We'll wgister him as opposext. 17 Those are all the cards I have that wish to 18 speak. Is there anyone who did not fill out a card that 19 would like to speak? If you'll come down and give your 20 name and address, please. 21 MR. WRIGHT: thank you. My name is David 22 Wright. I live at 307 Jagoe which is not near there. I 23 just waned to -- actually, I was here for the West Oak 24 meeting but my wife teaches at Lee. 25 I just want to make a couple of cormnents. Page 152 1 I'm opposed to this site for several reasons~ One, as was 2 cited earlier with the West. Oak homes, Denton is 60 3 percent rental property and 40 percent residential, 4 roughly. And they mentioned that this is the worst ratio 5 in the State and that the City planned on rectifying that 6 to improve that. And if that is a goal of the City, I 7 think approving this complex would be a very terrible way 8 to get started on that. 9 Also, I do have, similarly to the West Oak 10 issue, I applaud you-all in your decision to go with 11 keeping the consistency of the neighborhood. And I think 12 that's what should be done here. This is all residential 13 neighborhoods and the current zoning is residential. I 14 don't think that anybody needs to change that, you know, 15 on the behalf of one builder. So as you were consistent 16 in the West Oak area, I think we need to be consistent 17 with the area around Mack Park and Lee Elementary. 18 Another point I had is thc concerns about 19 the existing infrastructure, the ability of the existing 20 streets to handle the traffic. I'm sure you-all know how 21 McKinney is. You know, it's just two lanes, non-divided 22 there's no turn lanes either way, very, very congested. 23 Mack Street which is where Lee Elementary is on the east 24 side is just a two-lane street. And adding 250 units and, 25 you know, assuming they're married or whatever, I mean, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 149- Page 152 CondcnscltTM Page 153 1 potentially 500 vehicles is a lot of traffic to be adding 2 to that small ama with such a small and constricted 3 entrance point. All the traffic coming to and out of that 4 could be -- I mean, if you had a problem with the Carroll 5 lmm into that bank, I mean, you could -- them could be 6 thousands of cars coming in and out of that complex daily 7 and they would have to go around the sim and come down 8 Mack, which is just a two-lane street, or go down Audra 9 and then get on to McKinney which, as we know, I mean, if 10 you want to try to drive to Wal-Mart from the west side of 11 town, it's pretty bad. 12 So, anyway, I just would encourage you-all 13 to take those into consideration, the consistency of tile 14 neighborhood and your conunitment to preserving Denton 15 neighborhoods, as well as the safety of the children at 16 Lee Elementary with the increased traffic and what that 17 burden would do to the school district. Thank you-all for 18 your time. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 20 anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak that did 21 not fill out a card? 22 MS. REESE: My name is Kelley Reese. I 23 live at 2008 Paisley. And in the spirit of what was just 24 said, this property is akeady zoned for single-family 25 residents. And to maintain the integrity of that and the Page 154 I integrity of our City, I would like to see democracy 2 actually work. You have the citizens of your City here 3 asking you what we would like to have happen, for you to 4 simply stay with the planning that you have in place. We 5 have someone from the outside whose come in and asked us 6 to change that and I'd like to see the voice of the people 7 actually have a say. That's all. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there 9 anyone else who did not fill out a card that wishes to 10 speak to this item? All right. I have a nmnbcr of cards 1 t that did not wish to speak but do wish to register 12 opposition. And just so that they'll be in the record, 13 I'll quickly mad thmn. Kathy Hootman, 2000 Paisley. 14 J.S. Adams, 1719 Oak Tree Drive. Micki Wyatt, 80 t Mack 15 Drive. Carol Soph, 1620 Victoria. Kevin and Corinia 16 Maxson, 1904 Paisley. William Calfee, 701 Mack Drive. 17 James Renfro, 2104 Double Oak Street. Robyn Mullcndore, 18 1139 Oak. Burst. Beverly Hoer, 705 Mack Drive. Bryan 19 Hartline, 1920 Paisley. Amanda Hartline at that same 20 address. Eric Kartchncr, 2018 Longmeadow. Kevin Rowland, 21 2023 Longmeadow. Darhyl Ramsey, 514 Mack. Bryan 22 Robinson, 409 Fox Creek Court. Elise Ridenour, 2205 West 23 Oak. Lilliana Wright, 307 Jagoe. Steven Friedson, 2205 24 West Oak. And Stephen Moore, 2014 Longrneadow Court. 25 Would the applicant like some time for PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Page 155 rebuttal? 2 MR. RUSSELL: commissioners, Madam Chair 3 person, only a couple of small points aud I'll get out of 4 your way. We have tried and would like to continue to try 5 and address any issues that the homeowners have. And we 6 would like to be a good neighbor. 7 We would like to be there and make changes 8 that am appropriate and that we can live with and that 9 they need. We understand the complaints about the noise, 10 the trash, the buffer between the single-family and the 11 multi-family and we want to work hard to make that work. 12 We think because we're in the back and we face away that 13 we can make it work for them without people looking in 14 their backyards and without the trash and the noise. 15 The only othcn' point I'd like to make is 16 I've relied upon the City staff for traffic questions on 17 Audra Lane. Audra Lane is designated a major north/south 18 thoroughfare and we had no comments in the -- that doesn't 19 mean we won't have any evidentially, but we've had no 20 comments from traffic as far as the number of cars coming 21 in and out and the traffic that Audra Lane can hold. 22 Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. 24 Coxmnission~rs, do you have any questions? Commissioner 25 Roy. Page 156 1 COMMISSIONER ROY: would you share with us, 2 sir, are you the property owner? 3 MR. RUSSELL: There's a par[nm'ship and I'm 4 thc general partner, yes, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER ROY: And would you tell us 6 also when you bought tile property? 7 MR. RUSSELL: Approximately in January of 8 2002. 9 COMMISSIONER ROY: Thank you. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you, sir. I 11 will close the public hearing at this time and ask for 12 colmnents from Colmnissioners. Co~mnissioner Powcll. 13 COMMISSIONER POWELL: Move to deny. 14 COMMISSIONER HOLT: second. 15 COMMISSIONER APPLE: we have a motion to 16 deny and a second. Any discussion? Vole, please. Motion 17 carries 7-0. 18 Please refrain from -- I know it's hard. 19 20 21 22 ,23 24 25 12/4/2002 Page 153 - Page 156 ATTACHMENT 7 Photo ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, REZONING A TRACT OF LAND, COMPRISING APPROXIMATELY 18.56 ACRES IN THE CITY OF DENTON FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 2 (NR-2) TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENDITAL MIXED USE 12 (NRMU-12) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION; SAID TRACT BE1NG GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF AUDRA LANE, SOUTH OF PAISLEY AND COMMONLY KNOWN AS 700 AUDRA LANE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0047). WHEREAS, the City of DeNon has initiated a change in zoning for an approximate 18.56 acre tract of land more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property") from a Neighborhood Residemial - 2 (NR-2) to Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use - 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on December, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested zoning change; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the zoning 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 a Neighborhood Residemial - 2 (NR-2) to Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use - 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation 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 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 DeNon, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2003. 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" Exhibit A- 18.556 acres FIELD NOTES to all that certain tract of land situated in the T. M. Downing Survey, Abstract Number 346, Denton County, Texas and being all of a called 2.068 acre tract of land described in the Deed to Lawrence L. Miller et ux recorded in Volume 750, Page 927 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and all of a called 3.871 acres of land described in the deed to James Richard Griffith, et ux, recorded in Volume 614, Page 201 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and all of a called 4.993 acres of land described in the deed to T. E. Sanders and Marcia Sanders, recorded in Volume 885, Page 839 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and all of a called 6.991 acres of land described in the deed to Shirley Ann Griffith, Trustee of the Jimmy Ray Sharp Trust, recorded in Volume 3219, Page 503 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and being all of the called 0.322 acre tract described in the deed to Lavon Smith recorded in Volume 1108 Page 261said Deed Records and being all of the called 0.320 acre tract described in the Deed to Armando Pena et.ux. recorded under Clerk's File Number 95-R0055927 Real Property Records Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a 'X' found for the most Northerly Northwest corner of said 3.871 acre tract, same being the Southwest corner of a tract of land described in the deed to Morelle M. Miller, recorded in Volume 1245, Page 992 of the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE North 88 Degrees 57 Minutes 03 Seconds East a distance of 283.13 feet to a capped iron rod set for the Southwest corner of said Smith tract; THENCE North 00 Degrees 57 Minutes 06 Seconds West with the West line thereof a distance of 163.35 feet to a ~" pipe found for the Northwest corner of said Smith tract; THENCE North 88 Degrees 00 Minutes 41 Seconds East with the North line thereof a distance of 84.96 feet to a ½" iron rod found for the Northeast corner of said Smith tract and the Northwest corner of said 2.068 acre tract; THENCE North 89 Degrees 05 Minutes 01 Seconds East with the North line thereof a distance of 549.68 feet to a ½" iron rod found for the Northeast corner of said 2.068 acre tract; THECNE South 00 Degrees 28 Minutes 19 Seconds West with the East line thereof a distance of 163.53 feet to a ~" iron pipe found for the Northeast corner of said Griffith tract; THENCE South 01 Degrees 00 Minutes 52 Seconds East a distance of 730.53 feet to a ½" capped iron rod set for the Southeast corner of the tract being described herein at the Southeast corner of said 6.991 tract; THENCE North 87 Degrees 51 Minutes 37 Seconds West a distance of 424.29 feet to a 1" iron pipe found for the Southwest corner of said 6.991 acre tract, same being the Southeast corner of said 4.993 acre tract; THENCE North 87 Degrees 15 Minutes 02 Seconds West a distance of 312.26 feet to a ½" iron found for corner at the Southwest corner of said 4.993 acre tract; THENCE North 87 Degrees 42 Minutes 28 Seconds West a distance of 283.66 feet to a ½" iron rod found for the Southwest corner of the tract being described herein at the Southwest corner of said 3.871 acre tract, same being the Northwest corner of a tract of land dedicated to the City of Denton by Pauline Berry Mack on 5-6-71 recorded in the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, in the East line of Mack Park, an Addition to Denton County, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Cabinet E, Page 85 of the Plat Records of said county; THENCE North 00 Degrees 31 Minutes 28 Seconds East with the East line of said Addition a distance of 433.90 feet to a metal fence corner post found for corner at the Southwest corner of said Pena tract; THENCE North 00 Degrees 58 Minutes 33 Seconds West with the West line thereof a distance of 155.60 feet to the Northwest corner of said Pena tract on the Southerly side of Audra Lane; THENCE North 48 Degrees 18 Minutes 42 Seconds East with the North line of said Pena tract in said Lane a distance of 96.20 feet to a chiseled X found for the Northeast corner of said Pena tract; THENCE North 47 Degrees 27 Minutes 56 Seconds East, continuing along said Lane a distance of 26.73 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING enclosing 18.556 acres of land more or less. Page 3 of 3 01/21/03 #5C AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: January 21, 2003 Planning and Development Department Dave Hill, Assistant City Manager 349-8314 ~"¥ SUBJECT - Z02-0058 (309 Fry StreeO Hold a public heating and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 0.4 acres from a Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) to a Downtown Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) zoning district. The site is generally located at 309 Fry Street north of Oak Street. Mixed-use multi-family and a restaurant are proposed. BACKGROUND Applicant: Patrick Will Denton, Texas The applicant has submitted an application to allow for a mixed-use development for the existing structure on the site. They are currently allowed to develop dwellings above a retail type business, but not a restaurant in the DR-2 zoning district. The proposed DC-N zoning would allow them to develop both dwellings above a business and a small restaurant. Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 4. As of this date staff has received two opposing responses from property owners within 200 feet of the subject site. Current opposition is at 36.5%; therefore, a super majority vote will be required for City Council to approve the zoning change requested. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (4-3, Apple, Johnson & Roy opposed). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. The property nay require platting depending on necessary improvements. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The following is a chronology ofZ02-0033, commonly known as 918 Avenue A: Application Date - DRC Date - Planning and Zoning Public Hearing - Date: October 25, 2002 Date: November 7, 2002 Date: December 4, 2002 No Neighborhood meeting was held FISCAL INFORMATION Future development of this property under the new DC-N 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, Property Owner Responses) 4. Photographs 5. Minutes from December 4 Planning and Zoning Meeting 6. Draft Ordinance and Exhibit A 7. Owner Application Prepared by: Autumn Speer Planner I Respectfully submitted: Larry Reichhart, ASLA, AICP Assistant Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT I Staff Analysis SmmnmS, of Zonin~ Request The applicant is requesting one parcel of land totaling approximately 0.4 acres be rezoned from its current Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) to a Downtown Residential Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) zoning district. The requested zoning change allows the applicant to use the existing residence for multi family apartments and restaurant use on the lower floor. Existing Condition of Property Property History. February 20, 2002 - The subject property was placed in the Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district and land use classification by Ordinance 2002-040. The property is also located within the Fry Street Impact Area, however is lies outside of the overlay district. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, the property was zoned Single Family-7 (SF-7) The subject property currently contains one single-family home that is being used for rental units. Adjacent zoning: North: Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district - multi-family apartments South: Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district - multi-family and attached single family East: Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) - multi-family apartments West: Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) - multi-family and attached single family 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: 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, l~e 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) 3 The proposed zoning does promote a diversity of housing stock and 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. The general area surrounding the site includes a variety of Downtown University Core Zoning, including Downtown Residential 1 and 2 (DR-1 and DR-2) and Downtown Commercial General (DC-G). The majority of the properties located within two hundred feet of this site are rental units with both single and multi-family type dwellings. The density of the existing multi-family dwellings in the area appears to be greater than that allowed by DR-2 zoning. The proposed zoning would also allow higher density student housing near the University of North Texas which is desired by the future land use plan. The proposed restaurant use would be compatible for the area as well. Just south of the site is the Fry Street retail and restaurant area utilized primarily by UNT students. The restaurant would be within walking distance of several multi-family dwelling and the university. Development Review Analysis Access and Connectivity Currently the access to the property is from Fry Street. Fry Street 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. Public Infrastructure Currently the infrastructure in this area is adequate to serve the proposed development. Development Code/Zonin~ Analysis Current DR-2 zoning allows for dwellings above businesses, but does not allow a restaurant. The proposed DC-N zoning district allows both dwellings above businesses and restaurants as long as they are limited to sit down only and no drive up service is permitted. Additionally restaurants are also limited to no more than 100 seats and no more than 4,000 square feet of restaurant area. The primary difference between the DR-2 zoning district and the DC-N zoning district are that DC-N does not allow single-family housing and the density allowed for housing is more than doubled from 30 to 72. Other differences are summarized below: Single Family P N Accessory Dwelling Units P N Bed & Breakfast L (9) P Theatres Less than 1000 N P Restaurant or Private Club N L (11) Professional Services and Offices L (15) L (17) Commercial Parking Lots N L (28) Administrative Facilities SUP L (14) Production Studio SUP P Bakeries N L (21) Veterinary Clinics SUP L (26) DC-N 2500 72 29 500 80% DR-2 4000 30 12 500 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 provide infill development and higher density residential uses that are compatible with the Future Land Use Plan. ATTACHMENT 2 Maps NORTH Location/Zoning Map LOCATION MAP Scale: None ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notification NORTH Notification Map Scale: None Public Notification Date: November 21,2002 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 2 · In Favor: 0 · Neutral: 0 13 Percent of land within 200' in opposition: 36.5 % *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 Property Owner Responses Soraya Fletcher 600 Partridge Argyle, Texas 76226 Donald Moore PO Box 50904 Denton, Texas 76201 Opposed "There is a existing park space problems around the campus. Commercial zoning can further this problems and infringe on my property and create hardship for my tenants" Opposed 315 Fry Street "No Parking for restaurant" 305 Fry, 223/301 Fry, 302~306 Fry, 405 and 408 Fry Contract 228 Bryan *A copy of the original notice can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Z02-0058 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, December 4, 2002, to consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding the rezoning of one tract of land totaling approximately 0.4 acres commonly known as 309 Fry Street, from Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district to a Downtown Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) zoning district. (See map on back). The public hearing will start at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Half 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 puNic'hearing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public hearing. (This in no way prohibits you from attending and participating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom, mail it to the address below, or drop it off in-person: Planning and Development Department 221 N. Elm ST Denton, Texas 76201 11-26-02P]2:07 RCVD 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. In favor of request Reasons for Opposition: Neutral to request t~ ([,.._...~posed to request Printed Name: ~O~ym ~-'~/~¢~-~ Mailing Address: Ci~, State Zip: Telephone Number: Physical Address of Properly within 200 feet: CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS C~TY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 Z02-0058 200' Notice NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN6 Z02-0058 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, December 4, 2002, to consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding the rezoning of one tract of land totaling, approximately 0.4 acres commonly known as 309 Fry Street, from Downtown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning' district to a Downtown Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) zoning district. (See map on back). 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 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 I 11-27-02A10:25 RCVD 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. I~f&v;rof rcqu;;t Reasons for Opposition: Please circle one: Printed Name: ~ Mailing Address: City, State Zip: ~',~'o,¢.. Telephone Number: q4f~ ~"i~-'¢~¢&',¢ M~ Physical Address of Property within,200 feet:, CiTY OF DENTON, ·TEXAS CITY HALL WEST · DENTON, TEXAS 76201 · 940.349.8350 · (F) 940.349.7707 Z02-0055 200' Notice ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs ATTACHMENT 4 Photographs Con& msolt m 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page I61 COMMISSIONER APPLE:That move8 us ID Item No. 15 which is also a public hinting. And, again, Ms. Speer will present and I'll open the public hearing. MS. SPEER: Good evening once again, Commissioners. Agenda Item No. 15 concerns a request to rezone approximately .4 acres from a Downtown Residential 2 zoning district to a Downtown Commercial Neighborhood zoning district. The applicant -- the site is generally localed at 309 Fry Street just north of Oak Street. The applicant is requesting the zoning change ID allow for multi-use of the structure. It's an existing single-family structure that has been converted into aparm~ents. This is a picture of the site. Wlmt they would like to do is they're proposing a restaurant use on the lower floor and keep the existing apartment units on the upper floor. The existing Downtown Residential 2 zoning district does allow them ID do the mixed use but only a retail on the first floor and the residential units on the second floor. They arc at an opposition of 36.5 percent. Two landowners in the area have opposed. This is file site notification area. The red shows the arms that arc opposed. They're opposed pr/marily for parking reasons, as you can sec in your backup. The adjacent zoning, the proposed zoning is Page 163 COMMISSIONER ROY: [ understood what you said about considering the shape of the land and everything, but the backup indicates that if we change from DR-2 to DCN, that the person who owns the property could in fact put in 29 bedrooms on that site. Is that correct? Page 162 1 compatible with this area. Primarily all of the sites 2 within the area are rental units. Most of them all have 3 been homes that have been converted into apartments. 4 These are some -- this is across the street, across Fry 5 Street, the site itself. This is the current zoning. As 6 you can see, it's all Downtown Residential 2 and then the 7 proposed zoning, the DCN. 8 The primary difference between the zoning 9 districts is the Downtown Residential 2 allows a [0 single-family use, the DeN docs not. There are some other 11 differences as far as what type of retail, what type of 12 cmmnercial uses you can do. The density does increase 13 with the DeN. It doubles, a little over doubles from 30 14 units per acre to 72 units per acre. However, it is -- 15 you need to consider the fact of the site restraints 16 depending on parking requirements and things of that 17 nature as to what they can actually do with the site. 18 Staff finds that the proposed zoning change 19 is compatible with the Denton Plan and the surrounding 20 uses and the proposed zoning change would provide infill 21 development and higher density residential uses that are 22 compatible with the future land use ptan. That conctudes 23 my presentation. 24 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. We have 25 some questions. Cormuissioner Roy. 7 MS. SPEER: lhat's tile maxiumm bedrooms 8 allowed, correct. 9 COMMISSIONER ROY; okay, Thank you. 10 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Holt. I I COMMISSIONER HOLT: would you put back up 12 tile slide that showed the opposition7 Ali of those in 13 orange are in opposition? 14 MS. SPEER: It's two landowners. The 3f5 15 and thc 316 arc one landowner and 305, 223,302, all those 16 are another landowner. They both own aparUnent complexes 17 in the area. ]8 COMMISSIONER HOLT: SO it's the landowners. 19 MS. SPEE[~: It's the property owners, 20 correct. Yes. All of the residents came back. None of 21 those addresses seemed to work. 22 COMMISSIONER tlOLT: okay. So that pushes 23 it up to, what, 32 percent? 24 MS, SPEER: 36.5, 25 COMMISSIONER HOLT: 36,5. 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 12/4/2002 Page 164 MS. SPEER: Correct. COMMISSIONER HOLT: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Pow¢ll. COMMISSIONER POWELL: YOU said that the developer, owner, whatever was expecting to put a restaurant there. And then Mr. Roy brought up 26 bedrooms or something. Is that assm~ing that this will be torn down and new aparmaents would be built there? MS. SPEER: NO. The applicant is proposing to actually use the existing house. The 22 shows the maximmn that you could do for the site if you started from scmteh. Of course, if you're going to have restaurant use and the residential use, you can't do that with the space and tile parking rcquireanents that are required. But that shows you the worst case scenario. COMM[SSIONER POWELL: Alt right. And second question, I have to assmne that if you put a restaurant there, that thcrc will be parking requimnents for that restaurant. MS. SPEER: Correct, COMMISSIONER POWELL: And they'll have to be met before the permit is issued for the restaurant and that thefre off-street parking requirements; is that correct? MS. SPEER: I would assmne that they would Page 161 -Page 164 CondenseltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 t6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 165 be both on-street and on-site parking requirements because it is in the Fry Street area. COMMISSIONER POWELL: I'm peaking over to Mr. Reichhart here. MR. REICHHART: They would be able to utilize some on-street parking, whatever is in front of the property, but it would be, due to the narrowness of the lot, the majority would have to be on-site. But they could use some on the street. COMMISSIONER POWELL: SO they'd either have i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Page 167 anyone to tear it down. Unless they needed parking back COMMISSIONER APPLE: cOUUlliS$[oneT gulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: If the zoning is granted and we start with the restaurant, would the zoning classification allow for a beer and wine license or a liquor license? MS. SPEER: I believe since they're in a wet area of town, it would. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. So this has tO rent space on another property or get space on this existing property in some fashion or other to make it work? MR. REICHHART: Right. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Commissioner Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: JklSt tO make sure we're 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 the potential to evolve into a wet situation, let's put it that way. MS. SPEER: COlTect. COMMISSIONER MULROY: okay. Thank you, COMMISSIONER APPLE: colmnissioner Watkins. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: Thank you, Madmn Chair. Looking at this picture and I drive by today, I on the same page, I understand that the property owner has indicated a proposal for a restaurant. MS. SPEER: correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: which is fine and we can always use a good restaurant in town. But, in fact, if it is changed to this new zoning, this person, if they sold the property or changed their mind tomorrow, if you will, they could in fact demolish that property and build 29 Page 166 bedrooms on that property; is that correct? MS. SPEER: If they could meet alt the parking requirements, landscaping requirements, all the site design requirements, correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: oh, sure. Right. I assume because that's what you said here in this document that the property is big enough to do that. Not that this particular individual plans that but I think we have to keep that in mind if we make a zoning change. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: what's the small 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 don't see any place for parking for a restaurant. I mean -- MS. SPEER: I don't either. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: I'm for development but with thls house that Conmfissioner Johnson was talking about, they have a driveway and I believe that Fry Street is no parking on either side of the street. And we know Scripture is loaded up with cars. Page 168 MS. SPEER: If t'm not mistaken, the applicant believes that they' Il get a lot of foot traffic. I know that Fry Street has lower parking requirements for that area. However, they are going to have some issues depending on how many seats they have. COMMISSIONER WATKINS: well, that's a nice trim house. MR. REICHHART: The parking requirements for a restaurant are one parking space per four seats, one space per 100 square foot of gross leasable floor area, whichever is less. And a minimmn of three parking spaces building behind that house? MS. SPEER: I believe it's used for a residential rental unit. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. But that wouldn't be possible under a DCN, right? MS, SPEER: NO. 12 13 14 15 16 17 is required. So it depends on how much of the building would be converted. I would hnagine they coutd get some parking spaces in thc rear of the property if they tore down the existing structure, depending on how they arranged it on-site. So, you know, it might be a balancing act between how much parking can I get; COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It would have to be tom down or something, right? MS. SPEER: I betieve it would be grandfathered in as an existing use. Would it not, Larry? MR. REICHHART: correct, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It would be grandfathered in? MS. SPEER: Right. We wouldn't require 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 therefore, that's how much restaurant. It might be working backwards this time. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Xhank you. Is the applicant present? MR. LUSTER: They couldn't make it but I have some information to present for them, if t may. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Certainly. If you'll come down and give your nm2e and address. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 165 - Page 168 CondenseltTM Page 169 I MR. LUSTER: ltello. Good evening. My name 2 is Paul Luster and I live at 1007 Boliver here in town. 3 The applicant actually desires to build what I consider to 4 be a cafe style restaurant. Their intention is to be open 5 only in the morning and to cater primarily to walk-in 6 traffic, cooking things such as crepes and Belgun waffles, 7 drink coffee and tea. I believe, it's my understanding 8 they currently have ten parking spaces on the property. 9 And, once again to reiterate, they do plan to have 10 primarily walk-in, walk-out business. They sort of 11 envision kind of like the drive-through donut shack but 12 not quite -- the stone sort of business model but in a less 13 drive-through sort of scenario. Walk through, if you 14 will, restaurant. 15 They do plan to retain the upper floors, the t 6 top two floors as rental properties. They have owned this 17 house for more than ten years and have had renters in 18 there for those ten plus years. And, once again, like you 19 said, their intention is a half a day scenario, more than 20 likely weekdays and Saturdays onIy, and no intention to 21 sell beer or wine at this point and I don't think in the 22 future either. That's all I have. Thank you very much. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: could you indicate 24 where the ten parking spaces that currently exist are? 25 MR. LUSTER: Yes, ma'am. I believe they're 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 t9 2o 21 22 23 24 25 Page 170 in the rear of the property, yes. COMMISSIONER APPLE: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to address this item? Seeing no one coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing, Staff, do you have any additional co~mnents? Commissioner 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 171 if you do that, you'll see that we have an entire area zoned oP,-2 and then there will be this one tiny little spot with a different zoning. And while the owner has stated good intentions and it makes a lot of logic to what he wants to do, once the zoning has changed, we have lost any kind of control over changing his mind or selling the property and it ending up with a site which now he could have 12 bedrooms. If he decided to build them, he could build 29. And I don't think it's wise to take an area, and I do realize what the ama is like now, but I don't think it's wise to take an area and carve out a small area like this in the middle of it and change the zoning. So I will be voting against the motion. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Johnson. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yeah. I agree with that. The zoning wil£ survive the current owner and we'll be right back in here one day trying to figure out how come this is zoned differently. So I'll be voting against it, also. COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Mulroy. COMMISSIONER MULROY: well, Pit address those cmmnents and speak in support of the motion in that if you'll look at the zoning map in the backup and go from your persona[ history and knowledge of the Oak Street area, realize that even though it's zoned DR-2, the vast Page 172 majority of those properties between Oak Street and Scripture are multi-family, either converted older structures or new apamnents. So you're really looking at a higher density multi-family including the Campus Apa~nents there Powdl. COMMISSIONER POWELL: A question of staff. I'm assmning that some of those ten would have to be retained for the rental units. MI'{. RE[CHHART: That's CO1TeCt, COMMISSIONF~ POWELL: SO the restaurant would have to be -- restaurant parking would have to be in addition to what's required for the rental units. MR. REICHHART: That is correct. COMMISSIONER POWELL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLE: co~mnissioner Holt. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER MULROY: secoIld. COMMISSIONER APPLE: We have a motion to approve and a second. Commissioner Roy, COMMISSIONER ROY: while I applaud the idea of going into business here, Ym reluctant to interfere with anyone's business plan. I have to look at the zoning map that's attached to the last page of our handout. And 6 and not strictly DR-2. and then if you look at and count 7 the lots, you're five lots from the coimnercial district, 8 the Dc-o there on Oak Street where all those little 9 cstablislnucnts are. And then you have some establislnnents 10 to the north and nolahwest, again if you count the lots, 11 five or six Iots away. 12 I don't see this as a radical departure from il 3 the university climate and what's really going on thca~ 14 and I would suggest you put that DR-2 designation out of 15 your mind and visualize what that neighborhood really is 16 and what fl~e student activities are there. And I think 17 this would be complimentary rather than adverse to it. 18 Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER APPLE: seeing no other -- 20 Commissioner Roy. 2t COMMISSIONER ROY: yeah. Thank you. I mn 22 cognizant of the area. I suggest if you were to look at 23 the site and go north along Fry Street, that I believe at 24 least three of those homes arc single-fanfily homes fi'om 25 Scripture down to that. It appeared to me in looking at PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/4/2002 Page 169 - Page 172 CondcnscltTM Page 173 2 And I don't know how many across the street 3 are single-fm~ily. It's not obvious. And I accept that 4 there's a wide variety of uses in there, but again I come 5 back to just looking at the whole zoning and it just 6 doesntt seem smart to just take a hole out of it and 7 change it. I think we saw thc result of that in earlier 8 discussions tonight what that can lead to. 9 I do accept that this is quite a different l0 area than the residential area on Oak but I feel we're 11 looking for trouble and I'm, again, I'm reluctant to 12 interfere with the current owner's business plan. 13 COMMISSIONER APPLE: commissioner Powell. 14 COMMISSIONER POWELL: I'd like to point out 15 to my fellow Commissioners that under the old zoning 16 ordinance, I would have probably been voting against this. 17 And I'm not even in favor of the new zoning ordinances 18 I've discussed in the past but it's here and the people in 19 the Denton wanted it apparently and everybody of 20 importance, with the exception of me, voted for it. And 21 it was for diversity and diversity is what we're getting 22 here so I'll be voting for it. 23 COMMISSIONER APPLE: Since there are no 24 other Commissioners waiting to speak, I would like to say 25 that I will be voting against the motion. My concern is 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 174 not with the intentions of the current owner and what they want to do. Pm sure they have the best intentions and envision something that would be wonderful. People walking in and, you know, having breakfast and, you know, maybe kind of an Austin-like kind of flavor to it. But what my fear is is, as it wa~ brought up, thc beer and wine license and being that every property surrounding this property is opposed to it and they are the ones who are going to live with the consequences of our action most directly, I cannot vote for it. Any further discussion? Vote, please. The motion carries 4-3. (COMMISSIONERS APPLE, ROY AND JOHNSON VOTED IN OPPOSITION.) 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 12/4/2002 Page 175 Page 176 Page 173 -Page 176 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROViDiNG FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM DOWNTOWN RESiDENTiAL 2 (DR-2) ZONING DiSTRiCT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (DC-N) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSiFiCATiON AND USE DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 0.4 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 309 FRY STREET iN THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; PROViDiNG FOR A PENALTY iN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF, A SEVERABiLiTY CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z02-0058) WHEREAS, Patrick Will has applied for a change in zoning for approximately 0.4 acres of land commonly known as 309 Fry Street and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A" (the "Property") from Dowmown Residential 2 (DR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Downtown Residential Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 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 approximately is hereby changed from Dowmown Residemial 2 (DR-2) zoning district classification and use designation to Dowmown Commercial Neighborhood (DC-N) 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 ,2003. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 12/30/2002 16:05 9403497707 COD PLANNING DEPT 1:/~0/0~ 11:19 ~dJ, g4o::l~4 DFWM~ EXHIBIT I A: I that t:arkmln lo~, ~re~ or parcel o~ Xand Ii,Paled, lying and p, rt o~ w l0 mere ~raa~ conve~ by 8. A. 8ut~hi~n ~o D. ~. Fry b~.l~ ~rt o~ n ~ o~lX-a~ vt~e, ~o u. M. ~ogtey, by .~ dated February 15, 1899, [~ ~o~ O, Ilu~XeXn, e~ al, ~ j. W. Pe~ere ~m~ Jmu~ry 29, I~:~, abm of re, rd C~Y, ~Wnn, and BOF~ Bi.131W1{l#g K0 ~eet ~ortl, oF ~.he 9oothenst ~urher ma said Ao~ emceed b;' the s~nu buJ~ n ~%;,~ in ~lue ~=t ~dnry lane oE Fry S~ree~ ~1 u ~r~huem~ morner TI OI ~l bat ~rkiXei with ~he ~rth Bou~ery Alee 'of geld ~t, 171 m~ to the ~g OF I ! PAGE t 02 Patrick & Dawnree Will 209 E. University Dr. Denton, TX 76209 City of Denton Planning & Zoning Denton, TX RE: Zoning change 309 Fry St. From DR2 To DCN Friday, October 25, 2002 To whom it may concern: My wife and I are planning to open a restaurant on of the first floor of 309 Fry. Our plans include renting the other units at this property as residential dwellings. This arrangement is very common in other upscale urban cities. We plan to offer breakfast foods, and cater to mostly neighborhood pedestrian traffic. With the other historical houses now gone, and apartments surrounding this property, we feel the restaurant would be a benefit t~he neighborhood and the city. With kind regards, I am, sincerely, P~rrick M. Will ~an-27-03 09:16A CZTY OF DENTON HANDOUT TO COUNCIL Jan-27-O3 O9=17A CITY OF DENTON 01/24/03 16:28 FAX 940381792,,1 DFRDI~ec~ Patrick & Dawnme Will 209 E. U~iv~ity Dr. Dm~to~ TX 76209 '~ty of I~amn :,~.E: Zonin~ chanse 309 Fry St. Z02-0058 Friday,: mua~y 18, 2003 ~u~v; · ~u ~au~y m~ remaining opposmo, to the 2or~ng ~quest mice ~ returns to tim ,:ou~y. With Idnd x~gm'ds, 1 9m~ sincerely, * / P.O2 01/22/2003 10:05 9403497707 COD PLANNING DEPT PAGE 01 -- P,B1 FILE COPY TOTAL P.01 Jan-21-03 10...65A CITY OF DENTON P.02 01/~1/~0B3 ~1:2~ 21482123Gl PLAC~T PAGE 01/81 Laurel Oak Ltd. $612 Hudson Dallas, Texas 7~206 214-821-2142 21~-821-2361 (fax) .l'~muary21.2003 Tiffa~ o Willis PIatufing and Devdopmont City of D~ton ~2i ~orth ]~lm Street Denton, Texas 76201 .Re.: Zonlng .4ppl~catlon 700 Attdra.gaarte, D,,ntoa Dear Ms. Willi~: A~ .w.e d!scusscd earlier, we .Wou. ld mspocfftflly r~u~st a continuance for a ~oning .a~pl,ma~on..~or~ tonight's City. Co?cji meet/,ng. After the ooll~leg/s at the glamling and ~omng ?,etm&.,,w~,? ~;onside~LO~ our optiom and wish to complete this ~vork prior to a presen~cauon warn mo City Council .... ! Tha~: you for your assistance, Please let me know if th~'o is some resistam~i: to this i~L~C~T Donto~ Ltd., FROMi~-John Peul Eddy 1320 Heather Lane Denton, Texas ~76209 January 7, 2002 Denton %.i~City Hall .The City of ChampiOns: Denton~ Texa.s A suggestion is made for a sign entitled, "Central City of Cham-. pions'" mot "City of Championships or "City of Champions" should be put on watert~'e.~i$:~ior.'spe~ial signs in.Denton: Texas~ celebrating champions ~. .,ln~ all,-, ar~ea's fSuck~a s: .......... , ~ "' ,~i~J~,t~i~J~i~nshi~-~ilthe~Unive~it'y ~f'North Te~s ~Texas -~ ' ,~ '~ ~, .,_( M~a~.~i~s~t~';, ~o~H~ Oentr'aI~T~xas: ~oliege',--~an H~g~ School ,,~,1'- ~ ~'~D~tOh~ ~i~ ~cHb~o~.L~$~t~' O~ris~i~n High School and o~hers. · ~. "L '~, .'.~cad~mi& ;::CHamPaigns ';'~'~ent on~;~iv~si'ties, ' CJlI:~'ges, ' SCHools a~ ....music,. drSm~:~debste~ cheerlesding~ and Other/ activities of the champions in Denton'~iversitles~ 'colleges~ .schools and other organ . izstions.. ,':. ~.~.~ Cities surround Denton such as Lewisville, Pilot Point. and K rum ~have signs~of their/state athletic championships'On watertowmrs Sn~?or, other signs; Denton' can do better by not.~only honoring sports chsmpionships but honoring persons in all activitieS'of Our'champion citizens; WeneedLto encourage persons who have succeeded and persons to succeed in some aspect of life.that is good. The time has come to make Denton better'known to the world. No: longer should we be sllent, without: signs, concerning ~the many' champions of Denton, Texas. Already, persons, have offered to. help pay for this recognition sG let's roll no~, Thank you for your' allowing this brief presentation and Happy New Year to you~.ell. Let's"mske the year 2003 one to recognize our"City of Chempio~" in Denton~ Texas.