Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 14, 2004 Agenda AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL September 14, 2004 After determining that a quorum is presem, the City Council will convene in a Planning Work Session of the City of DeNon City Council on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, DeNon, Texas at which the following item will be considered: NOTE: A Planning Work Session is used to explore matters of interest to one or more City Council Members or the City Manager for the purpose of giving staff direction imo whether or not such matters should be placed on a future regular or special meeting of the Council for citizen input, City Council deliberation and formal City action. At a Planning Work Session, the City Council generally receives informal and preliminary reports and information from City staff, officials, members of City committees, and the individual or organization proposing council action, if invited by City Council or City Manager to participate in the session. Participation by individuals and members of organizations invited to speak ceases when the Mayor announces the session is being closed to public input. Although Planning Work Sessions are public meetings, and citizens have a legal right to attend, they are not public hearings, so citizens are not allowed to participate in the session unless invited to do so by the Mayor. Any citizen may supply to the City Council, prior to the beginning of the session, a written report regarding the citizen's opinion on the matter being explored. Should the Council direct the matter be placed on a regular meeting agenda, the staff will generally prepare a final report defining the proposed action, which will be made available to all citizens prior to the regular meeting at which citizen input is sought. The purpose of this procedure is to allow citizens attending the regular meeting the opportunity to hear the views of their fellow citizens without having to attend two meetings. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the 2004-2005 Budget and the 2004-2009 Capital Improvement Program. 2. Receive outcome statements and hold a discussion regarding Environment. o Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding Pavemem Management Recommendations. Suggestions for Agenda Committee on future agenda items and/or placement of items for upcoming agendas. CERTIFICATE I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of DeNon, Texas, on the day of ,2004 o'clock (a.m.) (p.m.) CITY SECRETARY NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ROOM IS ACCESSIBLE iN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE iNTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS iN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800-RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE iNTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE. AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET September 14, 2004 Water Utilities Howard Martin, Utilities 349-8232 ~ SUBJECT Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding the pavement management recommendation. BACKGROUND Responsibility for Streets/Traffic operations and maintenance were transferred to the Water Department in 2001. Funding for these two divisions continues to be provided from the general fund. After assessing the resource needs for these two divisions as well as the condition of the streets, it is clearly evident that these divisions are severely under funded and that the condition of the streets in Denton are continuing to deteriorate. In the past, the Streets Department relied on visual inspection of the street system by employees within the street department to determine the condition of Denton's streets. This approach is time consuming, can result in questionable assessments due to the subjective nature of the process, and requires manpower that would otherwise be available for street maintenance. Recognizing the need for a more accurate and efficient approach for Denton's street assessment, staff began researching new automated technologies. Staff selected a Pavement Management System (PMS) implememed by ERES Consultams that used semi-automated video distress survey and ground penetrating radar that simultaneously recorded the surface condition, rutting, and roughness of the pavemem surface. The comprehensive assessmem produced an Overall Condition tndex (act) for all the streets in DeNon in a relatively short period of time. DeNon specific pavement performance models were then developed using the collected data. From the models, staff can determine the most efficient way to appropriate available funding for operations and maintenance and determine the necessary funding resources required to meet certain act target goals. Staff received the final report recommendations from ERES Consultams in July of 2004 (Exhibit 1). Results of the PMS study indicate several areas that need to be addressed to begin to improve the overall street condition in the community. The two most obvious primary needs are: 1) implememation of quality comrol procedures to ensure streets are built to standard, and 2) increased overall funding. Historically, the design criteria standards and quality control procedures for Denton streets have been relatively weak. Weak design criteria and lack of quality comrol provided lower initial construction costs for developers but resulted in lower quality streets, and therefore, long-term maimenance problems which now must be addressed. Over the last few decades the design criteria thickness standards of asphalt and concrete streets have been gradually increased. The most currem revision of the developmem code (February 2002) improved the street design criteria standards by requiring lime or concrete stabilized subgrade and increasing the thickness of asphalt and concrete streets to thicknesses that may result in longer lasting streets. The pavemem design focus group recognized the beneficial economics of increasing pavemem life as a method to reduce annual maintenance. Staff is currently comparing the life cycle differences between asphalt and concrete pavements and will make recommendations as to future design criteria standards upon completion of the study. Streets under the current design criteria will be monitored and evaluated to determine the effect of the improved standards on their life cycle. High standards are necessary in Denton due to the nature of the local geology that burdens development with highly expansive soils. Due to problems associated with local soil types, quality control procedures for street construction, which are currently insufficient, are paramount to ensure high quality, long lasting streets and need to include a system of checks and balances that consist of geotechnical monitoring, coring and/or ground penetrating radar. The lack of a strong quality control program and strict enforcement of street standards negatively impacted the quality of DeMon's streets and have added cost to the City's e&M expenses. In order to evaluate necessary funding requirements, ERES Consultants prepared several comprehensive 5-year work plans using the simulation capabilities of PAVEMENTview Plus, a comprehensive pavement management software package. PAVEMENTview Plus was customized to develop Maimenance, Repair, and Rehabilitation (MRR) decision matricies that reflect the City's current maintenance and rehabilitation practices. The customized software package was used to generate budgeting scenarios for both the entire roadway network and for just the arterials and collectors in the network. ERES used a "best first" policy and the Network Priority Rating (NPR) calculation weighted at 55% on Overall Condition index (ecl) and 45% on Functional Classification (FC). A number of scenarios were modeled including: 1) a work plan using the currem annual e&M budget of $2.1 million with a restriction placed on the total amount that could be spent in each of four MRR activities, 2) a work plan without budget restrictions to determine total street network requirements, and 3) work plans using several differem budget scenarios. At currem funding levels of $2.1 million annually the Network eCl would decrease from 70 to approximately 55 over the next five years. Maintaining the current Network eCl of 70 would require approximately $18 million in annual funding. The results of these simulations are presemed graphically in Appendix D of Exhibit 1. The scenarios generated from the PMS are useful in determining necessary levels of funding as well as the most efficiem allocation of available resources. A number of policy questions exist regarding street funding and allocation. However, the PMS study has clearly illustrated that additional funding is needed to keep our streets from deteriorating to unacceptable levels. As directed by Council, staff is exploring a "street maimenance fee" as an additional source of funding. The City of Austin and the City of Arlington are the only known Cities in Texas to have charged a fee to pay for street maimenance, in December of 2000 the City of Arlington began billing their residems and businesses a street maimenance fee. The fee was legally challenged shortly after, initially the fee was declared illegal by a state district judge; an appellate court later overturned the ruling. Arlington has since transitioned its funding source for its streets from the street maintenance fee to a street maintenance sales tax. The City of Austin implememed a Transportation User Fee in 1992 (Exhibit 2) and is still curremly billing the momhly fee. Austin, with a population of approximately 650,000, generated $19 million from its fee in 2003. Approximately 50 percem of the revenues were generated from the residemial rate class and 50 percent of the revenues were generated from the commercial class. Austin's Residemial fee for a single-family home is $3.67 per momh, which assumes 8 trips per day per household. Multi-family developmems vary in cost depending on the number of units. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF AUTOMATED ROADWAY EVALUATION Final Report Prepared For The City of Denton Engineering Department City Hall East 601 E. Hickory, Suite B Denton, Texas 76205 Prepared By ERES Consultants A Division of Applied Research Associates, Inc. 505 W. University Avenue Champaign, Illinois 61820 (217) 356-4500 July 28, 2004 Exhibit 1 City of Denton P3/IS Implementation Final Report Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ERES Consultants completed a pavement management system (PMS) implementation project for the City of Denton to update the City's existing Cartegraph PAVEMENTview Plus PMS database and develop multi-year work plans. ERES used a seven-task approach to the collection and analysis of engineering data and pavement management system customization that included: Task 1. ERES gathered information about the City's roadway inventory and current traffic information. We also interviewed key City staff members to better understand how the pavement management system database was being used and what the expectations were for the enhancement of this database during the project. Task 2. ERES conducted a semi-automated video distress survey on approximately 1,300 lane-miles of roadway in July 2003 using a vehicle equipped with digital pavement and right-of-way cameras and a set of lasers in the front bumper. This equipment simultaneously recorded the surface condition, rutting, and roughness of the pavement surface. It also recorded images of roadside items such as sidewalks, curb/gutter, signs, guardrail and fencing, while traveling at prevailing traffic speeds. Task 3. A ground penetrating radar survey of the 1,300 lane-mile road network was conducted by GEOVision in July 2003, under a subcontract to ERES, using a 1.0 GHz, air-coupled radar antenna system that pulsed the pavement at 2-fi.intervals while traveling at prevailing roadway speeds Task 4. ERES uploaded the results of the analysis of the semi-automated pavement distress survey into the PAVEMENTview database. This data included the distress types, severities, and extents picked off the video imaging, as well as the average TRT, rutting, and faulting values for each roadway segment in the database. Task $. ERES developed Denton-specific pavement performance models based on the pavement condition data collected in Task 2 and the layer thickness data collected in Task 3. These models were then stored in the PAVEMENTview Plus database for use in predicting the future performance of the network and triggering specific rehabilitation recommendations at the proper timing. ERES also developed the Maintenance, Repair and Rehabilitation (MRR) decision matrices and established the trigger levels to reflect the City's current maintenance and rehabilitation practices. Task 6. ERES prepared several comprehensive 5-year work plans for the entire roadway network and for just the arterials and collectors in the network. We used a "best first" policy and developed work plans using the current annual O&M budget of $2.1 million. Finally, we generated work plans using several budget levels to determine what budget level would keep the network OCT at its present level of 69 and what budget level would raise the network OCT to 75. Task 7. ERES delivered digital video images from the downward-looking line scanning camera and the forward-looking and right-of-way cameras to the City and linked them as a separate layer to the City's ESRT GTS database. We also delivered the RoadDoctor viewing software along with the GPR data files and MPEG video files that were cross referenced to the PMS database route segments. ERES developed a comprehensive user's guide for PAVEMENTview Plus and provided several copies to the City staff during a 3-day training workshop. Finally, ERES delivered the Cartegraph PAVEMENTview and PAVEMENTview Plus databases that contained the final route segment inventory, deterioration models, MRR decision matrices, and budget scenarios. ERES recommends the City aggressively maintain their new PMS database through semi-annual revisions of the activity unit costs, monthly input of new route segments and weekly updates of work performed throughout the network. We also recommend the City explore the use of routine and preventative maintenance activities that can economically extend pavement life. Finally, we recommend the City retain ERES Consultants during the next 1 to 2 years to assess how well the PMS is meeting the City's needs and to make adjustments, if necessary, to the decision matrices, trigger levels, and OCT and NPR calculations. 1. Background City of Denton P3/IS Implementation Final Report Page $ ERES Consukants, a division of Applied Research Associates, has completed a pavement management system (PMS) implementation project for the locally maintained roads within the City of Denton, Texas. The purpose of this project was to 1) update the City's existing Cartegraph PAVEMENTview Plus PMS database with current pavement condition and inventory information and 2) develop multi-year work plans using current and projected funding levels. This report summarizes ERES' work on each project task and presents the results of several 5-year pavement management (PM) plans. 2. Project Scope ERES used a seven-task approach to the collection and analysis of engineering data and pavement management system customization for the City of Denton. These tasks are briefly described below. Task 1. Site Visit and Preliminary Pavement Management Tasks Prior to the start of data collection in July 2003, ERES conducted a kickoff meeting in June 2003 to familiarize the staff with the scope of work and data collection procedures and to gain an understanding of the City's previous distress inspections, the current PAVEMENTview Plus and GIS databases, and the problems encountered with this data. In addition, we gathered information about the new roads that have been accepted into the City's inventory since the last inspection and the most current traffic information available for each route in the network. Finally, we interviewed key City staff members to better understand how the pavement management system database was being used and what the expectations were for the enhancement of this database during the project. Task 2. Semi-Automated Video Distress Survey and Analysis ERES conducted a semi-automated video distress survey on approximately 1,300 lane-miles of roadway in July 2003 using a vehicle equipped with digital pavement and fight-of-way cameras and a set of lasers in the front bumper. This equipment simultaneously recorded the surface condition, rutting, and roughness of the pavement surface. It also recorded images of roadside items such as sidewalks, curb/gutter, signs, guardrail and fencing, while traveling at prevailing traffic speeds, so no additional traffic control was required. The van-mounted camera and profiler system was manufactured by International Cybernetics Corporation (ICC) and offered the highest quality downward-looking pavement images available on the market, including: · 2048 x 2000 resolution downward-facing digital pavement images · 1300 x 1028 resolution foreword- and side-facing panoramic images · 5-laser profiler for roughness, rutting, and faulting measurements · Distance referencing and GPS coordinates · Lighting system to eliminate hard shadows and shading The ERES survey vehicle, shown in Figure 1, stored pavement and panoramic images on its onboard computers in real time using the JPEG format. The images were stored on removable hard drives, one per camera, which were sent to our office in Mechanicsburg, PA for post-processing on an ICC-developed workstation. This workstation consisted of a tower computer with multiple monitors for viewing pavement and panoramic images simultaneously. The ICC software was used to access, view, and step forward and backward through the collected images to precisely locate and categorize the manholes, catch basins, and valve covers on each route segment. Following completion of data processing, the digital images were backed up on DVD disks and archived for future viewing. Figure 2 shows the ICC workstation used for data processing. City of Denton P3/IS Implementation Final Report Page 4 Figure 1. Digital Survey Vehicle Figure 2. Image Processing Workstation There were several benefits to using video surveys, including the consistency that could be achieved in the data collection and analysis, the gathering of ride quality information that truly represented the public's perception of the road network's quality, and the collection of spatially accurate GPS coordinates of all pavement segments and roadside assets. A video survey of the entire network was accomplished in just a few days because the analysis of the data was accomplished at special workstations at ERES' offices. City of Denton P3/IS Implementation Final Report Page 5 Task 3. Ground Penetrating Radar Survey and Analysis A ground penetrating radar survey of the 1,300 lane-mile road network was conducted by GEOVision in July 2003, under a subcontract to ERES, using a 1.0 GHz, air-coupled radar antenna system manufactured by Geophysical Survey Systems, Inc. This system pulsed the pavement at 2-ft.intervals while traveling at prevailing roadway speeds, so no traffic control was required. Ground penetrating radar has been proven to be effective in defining the subsurface profile of a road network. The radar unit, shown in Figure 3, took continuous images of the subsurface while traveling at posted speeds. The GPR data was analyzed by GEOVision using the RoadDoctor analysis software shown in Figure 4. The results of this analysis were provided to ERES in three forms: a spreadsheet of layer thicknesses for each segment of the network, RoadDoctor files for each segment of the network, and MPEG video files for each segment of the network. Figure 3. GPR Survey Vehicle. ~';";'""~B~,;;;--~'/~m.~ ~*m~*,~ ~ .,~ !*~ ~,~ !~, ..... ~- Figure 4. RoadDoctor Viewing Software. City of Denton P3/IS Implementation Final Report Page 6 Task 4. PMS Database Update ERES uploaded the results of the analysis of the semi-automated pavement distress survey into the PAVEMENTview database. This data included the distress types, severities, and extents picked off the video imaging, as well as the average IRI, rutting, and faulting values for each roadway segment in the database. Appendix A contains several charts describing the results of the condition survey. Task 5. PMS Software Customization and Training ERES developed pavement performance models based on the pavement condition data collected in Task 2 and the layer thickness data collected in Task 3. This performance modeling used the pavement "family class" approach, where a "family class" is defined as a group of pavements with similar composition and use. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of every segment in the network was plotted against its "date of last resurfacing" to develop a Denton-specific deterioration model for each family class. These models were then stored in the PAVEMENTview Plus database for use in predicting the future performance of the network and triggering specific rehabilitation recommendations at the proper timing. Appendix B contains graphs of each of these models. With significant input from the City staff during the software customization meeting in November 2003, ERES developed the Maintenance, Repair and Rehabilitation (MRR) decision matrices and established the trigger levels that could be applied to the various pavement family classes based on the amount and type of distress present in the pavement segments. These MRR matrices and trigger levels were designed to reflect the City's current maintenance and rehabilitation practices. Appendix C graphically illustrates the MRR matrices and their trigger levels for asphalt and jointed concrete surfaces on urban arterial routes. In February 2004, ERES conducted a 3-day workshop to present the results of the pavement condition and GPR surveys and to familiarize the City staff with the PMS and RoadDoctor software. A comprehensive PAVEMENTview Plus Training Document was developed for this workshop and distributed to its attendees that can be used by the staff as a technical reference for adding and editing records and fields in the database, running budget simulations, and generating reports. Task 6. I~ork Plans ERES prepared several comprehensive 5-year work plans using the simulation capabilities of PAVEMENTview Plus. This software package allowed us to generate budgeting scenarios for the entire roadway network and for just the arterials and collectors in the network. We used a "best first" policy and the Network Priority Rating (NPR) calculation weighted at 55% on Overall Condition Index (OCI) and 45% on Functional Classification (FC). We developed work plans using the current annual O&M budget of $2.1 million and placed restrictions on the total amount that could be spent in each of four MRR activities. We also ran these same work plans without restrictions to see how the software would select candidate projects. Finally, we generated work plans using several budget levels to determine what budget level would keep the network OCI at its present level of 69 and what budget level would raise the network OCI to 75. The results of these simulations are presented graphically in Appendix D. Task 7. Data Delivery ERES delivered the digital video images from the downward-looking line scanning camera, as well as the images from the forward-looking and fight-of-way cameras, to the City on two external 200 GB hard drives in February 2004. These images were linked as a separate layer to the City's ESRI GIS database using the Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates tied to each image. ERES also delivered the RoadDoctor viewing software and license to the City in February 2004, along with the GPR data files and MPEG video files that were cross referenced to the PMS database route segments. In addition, ERES developed a comprehensive user's guide for PAVEMENTview Plus and provided several copies to the City of Denton PMS Implementation Final Report Page 7 City staff during a 3-day training workshop in February 2004. Finally, ERES delivered the Cartegraph PAVEMENTview and PAVEMENTview Plus databases to the City in July 2004 that contained the final route segment inventory, deterioration models, MRR decision matrices, and budget scenarios. 3. Recommendations ERES recommends the City aggressively maintain their new PMS database through semi-annual revisions of the activity unit costs, monthly input of new route segments and weekly updates of work performed throughout the network. The updates for work performed on each segment should be accomplished through "desktop" re-inspections of the segment that revise the extent and severity levels of distress types affected by the work. We also recommend the City explore the use of routine and preventative maintenance activities that can economically extend pavement life. For example, pavement preservation techniques such as the application of gilsonite-based seal coats immediately after construction of an asphalt overlay and then a reapplication every 3-4 years thereafter can potentially extend the life of an asphalt surface well beyond 15 years. Finally, we recommend the City retain ERES Consultants during the next 1 to 2 years, after the City has had an opportunity to work with the system and generate budget scenarios and reports, to assess how well the PMS is meeting the City's needs and to make adjustments, if necessary, to the decision matrices, trigger levels, and OCI and NPR calculations. s~,ue[u§es jo Jeq[unN s~,ue[u§es jo Jeq[unN sluetuBes j.o JeqtunN E s~,ue[u§es jo Jeq[unN 0 IDd IDd 0 0 0 0 I~)d 0 0 0 0 I~)d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '~. L 0 0 L 0 I00 ~lJo~,eN 0 0 IC)O ~lJo~]eN Page i of 9 Austin City Cod~e TITLE i4, use OF ST~ETS AND PUBLIC PROPERTY. CHAPTER 14-1.0, TRANSPORTATION USER FEE. CHAPTER 14-1{}. FEE. 14-t0~1 14-10-2 14-10-4 14-~.o-5 14-10-7 !~:1.9-__8_ 14-10-11 14-10-12 I4-10-!3 14d0-14 14-10-15 TRANSPORTATi ON Definitions Findings Trip Factors Developed Acreage Fee Established Transportation Fund Method of Collection Allocation Adjustments Reduced Fee Deposit Not Required Recovery of Unpaid Fees; Enforcement Rules Exeznptions Liability § 14-I0-I DEI~'JI~TIONS. (A) In this chapter: (1) BEN-EFITTED PROPERTY means: (a) a residence; (b) a business; or USER ht~://w~vw~arn~ega~c~m/austin~nxt/gateway.d~Texas/Austin/tit~e~1~4.htm/cha7~ter~11... 8/17/2004 EXHIBIT 2 Page 2 of 9 (c) a lot or parcel on which improvements have been constructed and that generates motor vehicle trips. (2) D~CTOR means the director of the Public Works Department. (3) MOTOR VEHICLE TRIP means each departure from and each arrival to a property by a motor vehicle. (4) TRAJ~SPORTATION USER FEE means '[he fee established by this chapter. (5) TtL4NSPORTATION SYSTEM means: (a) the structures~ traffic controls, streets, rights-of-way, bridges, alleys, and other facilities that are dedicated to the use o£vehicular traffic, and accessory pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks; and (b) the acquisition, constraction, operation, administration, repair~ maintenance, improvemen.t, and extension of those facilities. (6) TRIP FACTOR means the number of trips per acre per day assmx~ed for a developed use divided by 40 and rounded up to the nearest temh. (7) USER means the person who is responsible for the payment of charges on a City utility meter for a benefitted propeI%q (B) In this chapter: (1) Uses of property have the same meanings they have in Ar~jgle J_ (Zoning Uses). of Subchapter ~ (Zoning Uses, Districts, and Yt~a?s) of Chapter 25~2 (Zonin.g Uses, District& a~zd Maps)~ except that the description of a use does not exclude a use included in a more specific category. (2) A residential use includes any use described in Section 25-2-3 (Residential Uses Described). (3) A non-residential use includes any usc described in Article 1 (Zor~it~g U~'es) of Subchapter A (Zoning Uses, District~, a~d Maps) of Chapter 25-2 (Zoning O~'es, Districts, a~d Mat)s), other than the uses described in Section 25-2~3 (Residential Uses Dexcribect)~ Source: 1992 Code Section 15-6-I; Ordl 031204-12; O'rdl 031211-1I, § 14-10-2 FIIh~DINGS. (A) The council finds: (1) It is appropriate that a user of a benefitted prope~%, pay the prorated atmual cost of the transportation system that can reasonably be at~ibuted to the benefitted property. (2) The number of motor vehicle trips generated by a benefitted property may reasonably be used to estimate the prorated cost of the tTansportation system attributable to a benefi.tted property. http ://w,~v. amlegal.com/austin_nxt/gateway.dll/Texas/Austin/title00104.htm/chapter00t 1 8/17/2004 Page 3 of 9 (3) The size and use of a proper~y may reasonably be used to estimate the n~mber of motor veh/cle trips generated by the property. (4) Based on the best available data, the method of assessing the fee set forth in this chapter reasonably prorates the cost of the transportation syste~n among users. (5) A maximum trip factor avoids a dispropo~ionate burden on a user. (B) The council finds that: (1) if available, appraisal district property tax records may be relied on to determine the size of a non-residential property; and (2) it is equit£bleto assume: (a) five single family residences per acre; (b) seven mobile homes per acre; (c) 10 duplex, two-family residential, towr~house residential, or condo~niurn units per acre; (d) 12 multi family units per acre in developments of three or four units; and (e) 25 multifamily units per acre in developments of five or more units. (C) The council finds that it is reasonable and equitable to assmne that each utility meter in the service area serves a user of a benefitted property. (D) The council fir}ds that, except as provided in this subsection, residential use generates approximately 40 motor vehicle ~_ps per acre per day. (1) Condominium residential use and townhouse residential use generate approximately 60 motor vehicle trips per acre per day, (2) Mobile home residential use generales approximaely 35 motor vehicle trips per acre per (3) Duplex use, two-family residential Use, and multifainily residential use with fewer than five units generate approximately 70 motor vehicle trips per acre per day. (4) Multifamily residential use with five or more units generates approximately 150 motor vehicle trips per acre per day; (5) Group residential use, retirement housing use, and bed and breakfast residential use generate approximately 200 motor vehicle ~-ips per acre per day. (E) The council fn}ds that, except as provided in. tiffs subsection non-residential use generates 200 or more motor vehicle trips per acre per day. (1) The ±bllowh~g uses generate approximately 1 $0 motor vehicle trips per acre per day: hi~p~//ww~`¥~am~ega~`c~m/austin-mxt/ga~eway~d~/Texas/Austin/dt~e~4~htr~/chapter~ 1... $/17/2004 Page 4 of 9 (2) (c) (3) per day. (4) (a) administraive and business offices; (b) financial services; (c) medical offices; (d) professional office; (e) sofbx~are development; administrative services; (g) counseling services; (h) guidance services; and (i) communication services. The following uses generate approximately 80 motor vehicle trips per acre per day: (a) aviation facilities; railroad facilities; and transportation tem~fl~al. Research warehousing services uses generate approximately 56 motor vehicle trips per acre (a) ®) (c) (e) (a) Tide following uses generate approximately 40 motor vehicle trips per acre per day: private prima~ educational facilities; private secondar7 educational facilities;; business or trade school; college and university facilities; convep2ence storage; and limited warehousing and dist~bution, The following uses generate approximately 20 motor vetficle trips per acre per day: relig~ous assembly; and h~p://ww~v,arnlegal.com/sustin m~t/gateway,dll/Texas/Ausfin/tifle00104.htm/chapter00It_. 8/17/2004 Page 5 of 9 (6) The following uses generate approximately 16 motor vehicle trips per acre per day: (a) electronic prototype assembly; (b) research assembly services; (c) research services; (d) basic industry; (e) light manufacturing; and (f) resource extraction. So~rce: 1992 Code Section 15-6~2; Ord. 031204~]2; Ord. 031211-11. § ~4-~0-~ Trap ~.~c~:o~s. (A) The director shall assignat to each benefitted property a trip factor according to the prope~?s use. The director shall assume Gr each benefitted properl¢' the number of trips per acre per day set forth in Section 14-10-2 (Findings). The director shall assrm~e no more than 200 trips per acre per day for any properS. (B) For purposes of th~s section, a property's use does not depend on the property's zoning. If a propertT fits more than one category of use, the director shall assigm a trip factor that most accurately reflects the number of motor vehicle trips generated by the property. So~rce: 1992 Code Sectio~ 15-6-3; Ord. 031204-12; Ord. 031211-11. (A) Except as provided by Subsection (C), the d~rector' shall detemaine the number of' developed acres of' a non-residenlial benefitted property by subtracting ~om the total number oF acres of` the propertT shown N appraisal district records: (1) the number o£ acres of any portion o£ the property that is in its natural state; arid (2) 90 percetkt of`the number of' acres of' any portion o£ the property not in its nat'ural s;a~e ~hat (a) part of a contiguous area that is .2 acre: or greater in size; mad (b) not under impe~wious cover. (B) If appraisal district records are m~available, the director may dete~ine the size of a non- residential benefitted propert:y from the best available infon~.ation, (C) If a non-residential benefitted property includes a building of eight stories or more, the developed acreage is Ge square footage of the building expressed in acres, minus m~y space devoted to a partdng garage. Page 6 of 9 Souvce: ]992 Code Section ]5-6-4; Oval. 031204-]2; Oral. § 14-I0-5 FEE ESTABLIS~D. (A) A transpo~ation user fee is assessed against each user. The ~ount of the monthly tr~spo~atio~ user fee per acre s5all be set by ordinance. (C) Each ~onth each ~ser of a beneStted residential prope~f shall pay an amount equal to the ~onthly fee per acre multiplied by the trip factor assigned to the prope~~ m~ltiplied by: (1) .2 for each single-family residence; (2) .143 for each mobile home; (3) .1 for each duplex, two-Pamily residential, mwnhouse residential, or condomNium unit; (4) .0833 for each uNt in a multiPamily developmem with {t~-ee or four (5) ,04 for each m~t in a multifamily development wkh five or more u~ts;, or (6) the developed acreage as calculated under Section 14~10r~ (De~)eJo~edAcreage). (D) Each month each user of a benehtted non- residential prope~y shall pay an amoum equal the monthly fee per acre multiplied by the thp factor assi~ed to the properV multiplied by the developed acreage as calculated nnder Section 14-!0~_[ (Developed Acreage). Source: ]992 Code Secrio~ ]5~6~5; Ord, ~3J204-]2; Ord. ~ 14-10-6 TRanSPORTATION (A) The transportation user fee shall be used only for the ~anspo~:ation system. (B) A transpo~arion fund is crea~ed to identi~ revenues and expenses a~ibutable to the t~'~spm~ation system~ (C) Transpo~¢ation user fees shall be deposited in the transpo~afion ~%nd. (D) Money ~om sources otb.er than the transpo~a~ion user fee that is available for construction and main'tenmxce of the transpo~afion system may be deposked 5n the kamspo~lafion frond. (E) ~ expenditure ~om the transpo~ation fund need no~ sp~c~5~call) relale to the prope~y of a pa~icu.lm: user from whom ~he transportation user fee was collected. (F) The director shall provide ~ ~nual report on the transportation ~nd and the transpo~ation user fee to ~he council. So~rce: i992 Code Sec~io~ ]5-6-6; Ord. 03J204-~2; O~'d. http://wwhqv amlegal.com/austin_ro:t/gateway.dI1/Texas/AustJ~titleOO!O4.htm/chapterO011... 8/17/2004 Page 7 of 9 (A) The transportation user fee shall be billed each month on the utility bill for each benefitted property. (B) Payment is due when the user receives the bill. Source: ]992 Code Section 15-6~7; Ord. 03]204-]2; Ord. 0312IJ-]L § 14-t0-8 ALLOCATION. If one benefitted property is served by multiple meters or where one meter serves multiple benefitted properties, the director may determine the allocation of' the fee among the users by any reason£ble method that takes into account the relative contribution of each to traffic generation, In the absence of better information, the director may allocate the fee equally among the users. Source: ]992 Code Sectior~ 15-6-8; Ord. 031204-]2; Oral 0312]]-]L § 14-1 ¢-9 AD~STh@2NTS. (A) A user may apply to the director for an adjustment in the user's monthly transportation user fee if: (1) the user disputes the category of land use used in calculating the fee for the ow~,er's benefitted property; or (2) the user believes the fee has been assessed in error. (B) A user must apply for an adjustment under this section. (C) The director may adjust the transportation user fee for a user who has applied for an adjustment under this section, according to the director's best professional jud~ent. (D) A user who disagrees with a determ~ation of the dkector under this section may apply for a hearing. The director shall desi~.ate a heating officer with authority to hold the hearing. The user requesting the hearing shall have the burden of proof. On completion of the hearing, the heating officer shall reco~Tm~end a disposition of the mailer to the director who may revise or reinstate the original detemfination. (E) If, after a hearing, a user disagrees with a determination of the director under this section,, the user may appeal to the council. Am appeal under this subsection must be filed with the cii7 clerk no later than the 15th day after the date of the director's determination. If the council does not take action on the appeal by the 45tt~ day after the dale the appeal is filed[, the director's dete~nation is final. (F) A user may not receive a refmtd resulting from an adjustment under this section except for a fee paid dmfng the two years immediately preceding the date the user applied for the adjustment. TMs subsection does not apply to an adjustment applied for on or before May 22, 2000. Soz~rce: 1992 Code, Section 15-6-9; Oral 031204-]2; Ord, § 144040 RE!0UCED FEE, (A) If a user believes that the trip factor assigned to the user's bc~efiited property does not fairly httP://~am~ega~c~n~/austin-nxt/gateway.d~/Texas/Aust~/tit~e~ ~ ~4.h~m/chapter~ ~ ~ 8/17/2004 Page ~ of 9 reflect the motor vehicle trips generated by the user's benebtted prope~y, the user may apply for a reduced fee under this section. (B) A user may receive a reduced fee if the user shows that, based on an actual courit of motor vehicle u-ips, the trip £actor assigned to the user's prope~y should be reduced. The user is responsible for the cost of counting motor vehicle ~ips. (C) If the &rector dete~nes that a user no longer qualifies for a reduced fee under t~s section, ~e director may reinstate the full fee. (D) Anser e~'~titled to a reduced fee u~der this section must apply for the reduclio=. (E) A reduced. I~e m~der this section is prospective only. A user may not receive a re,ad resulting fi-om a reduction urrder rNs section. (F) The director shall adopt pales for the a~xi~bstration of this sectio=, including acceptable n~ethods of core, ting motor vehicle irips. (G) A user who disa~'ees with a det. e~fi~afion of the d~rector under Ibis section may apply for a hearing in the ma~er provided by Subsection 14-10-9(D) (Xdji~3'tme~ts) and, a~er a hearing, appeal the ma~er provided by Subsection 14-1.9:~(E) Source: 1992 Cocle Sectio~ 15-6-10; Ord. 031204-12; Ord. } 14-10-11 DEPOSIT NOT REQL~ED. The Ci~ may not require a user to pay a deposit ~o:r the trmxspo~adon user ~ee. Sogrce: 1992 Code Sectio~. 15~6-11; Ord. 031204-]2; Ord. 0312ll-l], } 14-I0-17 RECOX'ZRY OF I~'P~ FEES; ENFORCEMZNT, (A) The City may recover a ~ansportation user fbe that is not paid when due in an action at law. (B) The CiD' may discontinue utility se~hces to a user who fails to pay the tr~spo~ation user fee when due. Source: ]Q92 Code Section ]5-6-]2; Ord. 03]204-]2; Ord. } 14-10-13 RULES. The dh'ecror shall adop17re.les necessaW for the adr~stration of this chapter. Source: ]992 Code SecEon ]5-6-]3; Ord. 03J204-]2; Ord. (A) This chapter does not apply to the state, a cowry, or an Ndepen. dent school dist~ct. (B) T2is chapter does not apply to a property' (hat is vacant. The director may adopt any reasonable method to detemhne whether a property is vacant. h~t~://~axa~am~ega~.c~m/aus~m-rLxt/gateway.d~L/Texas~`Aust1n/t}t~e~4~hu~/chapter~l 1... 8,/17/2004 Page 9 of 9 (C) This chapter does not apply to a property thai is used only for off-street parldng, (D) A user of a residential property may apply for and receive an exemption from this chapter if: (l) the user does not own or regularly use a private motor vehicle for transportation; or (2) the user is 65 years of age or older. (E) A user entitled to an exemption under this sect/on must notify the director of the applicable exemption. A fee paid before the d/rector is notified of an exemption may not be refunded. Source: 1992 Code Sectim~ 15-6-14; Ord. 031204-12; Ord. 03121l-ll. § I4-1{]-I5 LIABILITY. This chapter does not imply that a benefitted property will be free from poorly maintained roads, and does not create additional duties on the part of the City. This chapter does not waive the City's immunity under any law. Source: ]992 Code Sectio~,, 15-6-15; Ord. 031204-12; Ord. 0312jl-jj. Disclaimer: The Technical Criteria Manuals and/or any other documents that appear an this site may not reflect the most current leais~ation adopted by the City of Austin, Texas. American Legal Pubbishing Corporation provides these manuals for informational purposes on!y. These manuals shau!d not be relied upon as the definitive authority for !ocal legislation. Additionally, the formatting and paginatio~ of the posted docurneh~¢ varies from the forma~ing end paginatio~ of the official copy. The ofSci~l prir~ted copy of the Technics! Criteria Manuals should be consulted prior to any ~ction being taken. For fur[her information regardin9 the official versions of the Technical Criteria Manuals or other documents posted on this site, please contact the of Austin, Texas directly or contact American LeBel Publishing toll-free at 800-445-5588. © 2002 American Leaaf Publishing Corporation t e c h s~E p~9~ @ mi e_q.a I .cam 1.800.445.5588. hiIp //~n~xv~am~ega~m/austin~r~xt/gateway.d~/Texas/Austin/~it~e~4.htm/chapter~ ] .... 8/'17/2004 STREET MAINTENANCE FEE RATE DESIGN CALCULATION WORKSHEET Total Revenue Requirement Residential Customer Base @ number of trips per day per house/unit Austin Residential Rate Austin Total Vehicle Trips Austin Vehicle Trips per Day Austin Vehicle Trips per Person Denton Total Vehicle Trips per Day ($3.67 / 30) / 8 ($19,000,000 / .0153) (1,242,596,812 / 365) (3,404,128 / 656,000) (5.2 X 95,000) Denton ;Revenue Requirement per Day (Revenue Req / 365) Denton, Cost per Vehicle Trip ($8,219 /492,976) Denton Residential Trips Per Day Daily Revenue Generated from Residential Trips per Day Monthly Revenue Generated from Residential Trips per Day Annual Revenue Generated from Residential Trips per Day Residential Monthly Bill Multi-family Monthly Bill per Unit Denton Commercial Trips Per Day (492,976 ~ Res Trips) Dally Revenue Generated from Commercial Trips per Day Monthly Revenue Generated from Commercial Trips per Day Annual Revenue Generated from Commercial Trips per Day Total Revenue Generated Residential + Commercial Percent Generated from Residential Customers Percent Generated from Commercial Customers Calculation for $3,000,000 Revenue Requirement below Walma~t (23.6 Acres X 200 Trips per Day X $.0167 X 30) Outback (1.44 Acres X 200 Trips per Day X $.0167 X 30) Professional Office (0.5 X 180 Trips per Day X $.0167 X 30) Wellspring (1.1 Acres X 40 Trips per Day X $.0167 X 30) $3,000,000 21,000 @ 8 trips 15,000 @ 6 trips $0,0153 1,242,506,812 3,404,128 5.2 492,9?6 $8,219 $0.0167 258,000 $4,302 $t29,046 $ t ,548,549 $4,00 $3.00 234,976 $3,918 $117,53O $1,410,355 $2,958,904 52% 48% Denton rate generating $3 million Denton Austin $2,365 $2,166 $t44 $132 $45 $43 $22 $2O CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #W HANDOUT TO COUNCIl DRAFT CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MEETING MINUTES September 15, 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, September 15, 2003, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Center Training Room, City of Denton Service Center, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. PRESENT: George Hopkins, Bill Cheek, Charldean Newell, Dick Smith, Don White and Yolanda Guzman EXCUSED: EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Michael Conduff, City Manager Howard Martin, ACM/Utilities John Baines 4) Consider the approval of the Denton Municipal Electric contract with Comcast Advertising for educational commercial airtime in an mount not to exceed $41,028. Glenn Fisher, Assistant Director of Planning and External Affairs, presented this item. Fisher reported to the board that this agreement would provide commercial airtime fxom Comcast Advertising. The advertising would be geared to educate Denton residents on energy conservation, the P-L-U-S One Program and other various services DME provides to assist customers with their energy bills. Board Member Charldean Newell asked staff if airing the promotion of certain programs like the P-L-U-S One Program around Christmas or tax season would have any effect on contributions. Jessica James, Marketing Specialist, responded that during the holiday season contributions usually decrease. James reported that airing the commemials year round has elicited a more consistent response. Hopkins moved to approve the contract, with a second from Board Member Dick Smith. The motion was approved unanimously. Page 1 of 1