Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
March 1, 2005 Agenda
AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL March 1, 2005 After determining that a quorum is presem, the City Council of the City of DeNon, Texas will convene in a Special Called Work Session on Tuesday, March 1, 2005 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Work Session Room at City Hall, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction concerning regulating extended stay hotel/motel facilities. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction on: 1) the City's annexation policies, process and plan; 2) release of extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) and certificate of convenience and necessity (CCN) boundary; and 3) extension of utilities in the ETJ. o Requests for clarification of consent agenda items listed on the consent agenda for today's City Council regular meeting of March 1, 2005. Following the completion of the Special Called Work Session, the City Council will convene in a Closed Meeting to consider specific items when these items are listed below under the Closed Meeting section of this agenda. When items for consideration are not listed under the Closed Meeting section of the agenda, the City Council will not conduct a Closed Meeting and will convene at the time listed below for its regular or special called meeting. The City Council reserves the right to adjourn into a Closed Meeting on any item on its Open Meeting agenda consistent with Chapter 551 of the TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, as amended, as set forth below. 1. Closed Meeting: mo Deliberations regarding economic development negotiations - Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.087 and Consultation with the City Attorney - Under TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE Section 551.071. Deliberate and discuss commercial or financial information received from a business prospect and offers of financial or other incentives to the business prospect for the purposes of economic development negotiations with SFT Industrial, LTD ("Granite"), regarding the construction of a business park in the City of DeNon, generally located on the west side of 1-35W, south of Airport Road. Also, receipt of legal advice from the City's attorneys on matters in which their professional responsibility to the City Council requires private legal consultation. Deliberate and discuss commercial or financial information received from a business prospect and offers of financial or other incemives to a business prospect for the purposes of economic development negotiations, including without limitation a public improvement district, relating to the developmem of Robson Ranch being a residemial community located in the City of DeNon, Texas comaining approximately 2,375 acres of land located in the B.B.B & C.R.R. Survey, Abstract No. 197, F. Garcia Survey, Abstract No. 502, C. Manchaca Survey, Abstract No. 789, J. McGowan Survey, Abstract No. 798, F. Oliver Survey, Abstract No. 989, City of DeNon City Council Agenda March 1, 2005 Page 2 M. Spurlock Survey, Abstract No. 1141, T & P RR Co Survey, Abstract No. 1301, W. Dunning Survey, Abstract No. 1568, and the J. Paine Survey, Abstract No. 1617 and being located along and north of Robson Ranch Road, approximately 2.5 miles west of i-35W. Also, receipt of legal advice from the City's attorneys on matters in which their professional responsibility to the City Council requires private legal consultation. 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, ET SEQ. (THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT) ON ANY ITEM ON ITS OPEN MEETING AGENDA OR TO RECONVENE IN A CONTINUATION OF THE CLOSED MEETING ON THE CLOSED MEETING ITEMS NOTED ABOVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION §551.071-551.086 OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. Special Called Regular Meeting of the City of DeNon City Council on Tuesday, March 1, 2005 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 mo Proclamations/Awards Recognition of staff accomplishments 3. CONSENT AGENDA Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and approval thereof will be strictly on the basis of the Staff recommendations. Approval of the Consem 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 Consem Agenda (Agenda items A - K). This listing is provided on the Consem Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss or withdraw an item prior to approval of the Consem Agenda. if no items are pulled, Consem Agenda items A - K 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. City of Demon City Council Agenda March 1, 2005 Page 3 mo Consider adoption of an ordinance awarding a contract for the purchase of fleet vehicles to the second low bidder, Philpott Ford, due to the low bidder refusing to honor a bid for three vehicles awarded as Items 1 and 8 in Ordinance No. 2005- 031, dated January 18, 2005; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. (Bid 3251 - Fleet Vehicles for Items 1 and 8 to Philpott Ford- $48,724). Bo Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Demon authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order with the Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governmems (H-GAC) for the acquisition of a HazMat Command System for the City of Denton Fire Department by way of an Interlocal Agreemem with the City of Demon; and providing an effective date (File 3308 - Interlocal Agreement for HazMat Command System with H-GAC awarded to Smiths Detection in the amoum of $63,589.75). Co Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works contract for the construction of a single family dwelling at 634 E. Prairie Street for the City of Demon Community Developmem Block Gram Division; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 3286 - 634 E. Prairie Street Infill New Construction awarded to Delta One Construction in the amoum of $90,722). Do Consider adoption of an ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of two LIFEPAK 12 defibrillators/monitoring units for the City of Denton Fire Department available from only one source in accordance with the provision for state law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids; and providing an effective date (File 3306 - Defibrillators for Fire Department awarded to Medtronic Emergency Response Systems in the amoum of $38,382). mo Consider adoption of an ordinance awarding a comract under the Texas Multiple Award Schedule (TXMAS) program for the purchase of an ANDROS F6A robot for the City of Denton Fire Department as awarded by the State of Texas Building and Procuremem Commission (Comract TXMAS-5-84030); providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 3307 - Robot for Fire Departmem awarded to Remotec, Inc. in the amoum of $163,026). Fo Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a contract for the long-term rental of heavy equipment for the Solid Waste Department; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (Bid 3296 - Long Term Remal of Heavy Equipmem awarded to the lowest responsible bidder for each item as listed in Exhibit A). The Public Utilities Board recommends approval (6-0). Go Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Demon, Texas, graining the Demon Festival Foundation, pursuam to Section 20-1(d)(3)b.6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, an exception to the limitations imposed by that section with respect to hours of operation of an amplified loudspeaker system; and setting an effective date. This request for noise exception is for the 25 Arts and Jazz Festival to be held April 29, 30 and May 1, 2005 in the Civic Center Park. City of Denton City Council Agenda March 1, 2005 Page 4 Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Demon abandoning and vacating a 1.21 acre Street Right of Way tract dedicated to the City of Denton by Charles D. Adams Recorded in Volume 666, Page 535 of the deed records of Demon County, Texas and a 0.506 acre Street Right of Way tract dedicated to the City of Denton, Texas by the Denton Bible Church Addition, Lot 2, Block B plat, recorded in Cabinet V, Pg. 880 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; and providing an effective date. (Northcrest Street between Mingo and University) Consider approval of tax refunds for the following property taxes: Tax Name Reason Amount Year ~rb~ ~a~ Dupli~at~ Payment 2004 $6i 8 00 2: Cendejas, Hector F & Carina Duplicate Payment 2004 $881.99 4. Cooper, John H Duplicate Payment 2004 $716.70 6. Countrywide Home Duplicate Payment 2004 $647.71 Loans/Thompson, Lisa 8. Cycle Center of Denton Overpayment 2004 $2,626.91 10. Fra~lin Ba~ Duplicate Payment 2004 $955.35 12. Jackson, Harold L Duplicate Payment 2004 $589.35 14. Principal Residential Ove~ayment 2003 $715.11 Mtg/Raviehandran, Thimvadi 16: Rasch, BettyH Ove~ayment 2004 $1,445.99 18. Rogers, Diana L Duplicate Payment 2004 $1,023.84 20: Tettleton, Stephanie Duplicate Payment 2004 $1745.10 22. Wells Fargo/Hill-Haley, Sheila Duplicate Payment 2004 $520.39 Consider an exaction variance of Section 35.19.6 (C)(1) of the Code of Ordinances Subchapter 19 Drainage Standards. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). (V04-0034, Newton Street Drainage Variance) Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids by way of an interlocal agreement with the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network and awarding a contract for the purchase of an Air Cooled Helical Rotary Water Chiller for City Hall East; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (File 3302-Imerlocal Agreemem for Chiller with the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network, contract awarded to Trane in the amount of $68,615). City of Demon City Council Agenda March 1, 2005 Page 5 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS Demon Towne Crossing. The 43.77-acre property is generally located south of Loop 288 and east of Brinker Road. The property is in a Regional Cemer Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning district and a Regional Cemer Commercial Dowmown (RCC-D) zoning district. A regional shopping center is proposed. (Demon Towne Crossing) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 38.5 acres from Regional Cemer Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning district to Regional Cemer Commercial Dowmown (RCC-D) zoning district. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). (Z04-0048, Denton Towne Crossing - Rezoning) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance approving an Alternative Development Plan for an approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping cemer. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with conditions (5-0). (ADP04-O008, Denton Towne Crossing - ADP) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance approving a Special Sign District for an approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping plaza. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). (SD04-0004, Denton Towne Crossing - Sign DistricO Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning approximately 2.63 acres from Neighborhood Residemial (NR-3) zoning district to Neighborhood Residemial Mixed Use (NRMU-12) zoning district with an overlay district. The property is located approximately 150 feet east of Carroll Blvd, to the northwest of Westway St. and Anna St. intersection. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). (Z04-0049, Point Bank) Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance graining approval of a license agreement for the subsurface use of an approximate 0.138 acre portion of the Cross Timbers Park for the purpose of a natural gas pipeline in accordance with chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; providing for the issuance of license, and providing an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommends approval (4-0). 5. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION Consider adoption of an ordinance establishing an Economic Developmem Program under Chapter 380 of the Local Governmem Code for making grams of public money to promote economic development and to stimulate business activity in the City of Demon; approving an Economic Developmem Program Gram Agreemem with SFT Industrial, Ltd. ("Granite") regarding the developmem of an approximate 94 acre parcel of land located west of 1-35W and south of Airport Road in the O.S. Brewster Survey, Abstract No. 56 and the Thomas W. Daugherty Survey, Abstract No. 357, in the City of Demon, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. City of Demon City Council Agenda March 1, 2005 Page 6 Announcement of Councilmember Bob Montgomery's conflict of interest in the Emergency Shelter Gram Program ("ESGP") through his wife's employmem by a subrecipiem of ESGP funds in accordance with the requiremems of 24 CFR 576.57(d) and consider and take action to authorize the City staff to initiate the process for submitting an application to HUD for an exception to the conflict through the Texas Departmem of Housing and Community Affairs. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Demon, Texas, on first reading, graining a cable franchise to the University of North Texas to construct, reconstruct, operate and maintain a cable television system in the City of Denton, Texas and setting forth conditions accompanying the granting of this cable franchise; providing for a penalty of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) for the violation of this ordinance; providing for a savings clause; providing for the effect of this ordinance upon other ordinances and resolutions; and providing an effective date. Consider approval of a resolution urging Congress to reject that portion of the Administration's proposed 2006 Federal Budget that calls for the elimination of the Community Developmem Block Gram (CDBG) program and request that CDBG remain fully funded. E. Consider nominations/appoimments to the City's Boards and Commissions. Citizen Reports 1. Review of procedures for addressing the City Council. 2. Receive citizen reports from the following: A. Willie Hudspeth regarding concerns of Southeast Denton. New Business This item provides a section for Council Members to suggest items for future agendas or to request information from the City Manager. Items from the City Manager 1. Notification of upcoming meetings and/or conferences 2. Clarification of items on the agenda Possible Cominuation of Closed Meeting under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Official Action on Closed Meeting Item(s) under Sections 551.071-551.086 of the Texas Open Meetings Act. City of Demon City Council Agenda March 1, 2005 Page 7 CERTIFICATE I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Demon, Texas, on the day of ,2005 at o'clock (a.m.) (p.m.) CITY SECRETARY NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IS ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 349-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800- RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: March 1, 2005 Planning and Development Department Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: SI05-0003 (Extended Stay Hotel/Motel Facilities) Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction concerning regulating extended stay hotel/motel facilities. BACKGROUND The City Council requested information concerning regulating extended stay hotels/motels. The issues include land use and taxation. The City's Taxation, Police and Legal Departments as well as Kim Phillips from the Convention Bureau assisted in the "thinking "about this paper. The following identifies the current and past regulations in Denton. Development Code: Definitions The Development Code does not differentiate between hotel/motel and extended stay facilities in the use tables in Subchapter 5 even though it provides a definition of"extended stay facility." Subchapter 23 -- "Definitions" of the Denton Development Code provides the following: Hotel: A facility offering transient lodging accommodations to the general public at a daily rate for a period of time not to exceed thirty (30) days, and providing additional services, such as restaurants, meeting rooms, and recreational facilities. Guest quarters are accessible through a main entrance and by hallways. Motel: A structure or group of structures on the same lot containing individual guest units for rental to transients, with separate exterior entrances, and consisting of individual sleeping quarters, detached or in connected rows, with or without cooking facilities. Hotel/Motel, Extended Stay: A facility offering transient lodging rooms and/or suites to the general public, including lodging quarters for corporation and businesses, intended to be used, or which are used, rented, or hired out to be occupied or which are occupied for sleeping purposes for guests, may contain up to two bedrooms, contain kitchen facilities for food preparation including, but not limited to, refrigerators, stoves, and ovens, and which may also include living areas, and which are furnished to the public for periods of one week or more. Development Code: Permitted Uses In Subchapter 5 -- "Zoning Districts and Limitations," hotels and motels are explicitly permitted by right in the following zoning districts: NRMU DC-G CM-G ,/ CM-E ,/ RCC-N ,/ RCC-D EC-C ,/ EC-I IC-E ,/ Although allowed use tables in Subchapter 5 do not list "hotel/motel extended stay" facilities as separate uses from hotels and motels, staff interpretation is that extended stay facilities are permitted. The policy issue is whether the Council wants to treat extended stay facilities differently from other hotels/motels and if not, then the definition "extended stay facility" is not needed in the Development Code. Old Code There are several motels and hotels in Denton offering extended stay services. Many of these facilities do not advertise as extended stay. Many of the older facilities were in place and operating as extended stay facilities prior to the adoption of the Denton Development Code. The zoning ordinance in effect prior to the Development Code did not distinguish between extended stay hotels/motels and regular overnight stay hotels/motels. Under the old code, hotels/motels were defined as follows: Hotel or motel means a building or group of buildings designed and occupied as a temporary abiding place of individuals. To be classified as a hotel or motel, an establishment shall contain a minimum of six (6) individual guestrooms or units and shall furnish customary hotel services such as linen, maid service, telephone, use and upkeep of furniture. Even if certificates of occupancy were issued specifically for a hotel/motel use, there is no evidence indicating that facilities that offered extended stay services were singled out as separate or inappropriate uses, since they would have been covered under the above definition. Hotel or motel uses were permitted in multiple-family 2, office, general retail service, commercial, central business, light industrial and planned development districts. Development Code: Legal Nonconforming Uses and Expansions Pursuant to Subchapter 11.3 "Nonconforming Uses, Special Exceptions", the adoption of the Development Code did not cause any existing, legal use of property to become nonconforming. Under this provision, properties with legal extended stay facilities in place on February 20, 2002, automatically have a Special Exception designation. An existing extended stay hotel/motel can be expanded up to 1,000 square feet or 25% of the existing floor area; whichever is greater according to the expansion applicability table in Subchapter 13 - Site Design Standards. A site plan, traffic impact analysis, landscaping and tree canopy, building design standards, parking lot landscaping and street trees are also required. Any new extended stay hotel/motel must meet the site design standards in Subchapter 13. Survey Data: A brief survey of hotels and motels operating in Denton, Lewisville and Fort Worth indicates that the majority of these facilities offer extended stay services at a discounted or reduced rate. Based on the survey, users of extended stay services could include the following: · Business travelers · Displaced homeowners · Vacationers · Families awaiting new homes · Short-term job assignment employees · Military personnel · Construction companies · Consultants · Health care workers · Sales Representatives Other observations about extended stay facilities users include: agencies marketing to vacationers do not market extended stay facilities, and high end corporate users often opt for other types of short term housing. Crime data are not reported to be higher for hotel/motels than in surrounding neighborhoods in Denton, but national data indicate that extended stay motels may be associated with or be located in neighborhoods with higher crime rates. International Building Code Under the International Building Code (IBC) requirements, there is no real difference between the occupancies for regular overnight stay hotels/motels and extended stay hotels/motels. The only major difference is transience. The IBC may actually be less restrictive in the regulation of extended stay facilities than that of regular overnight stay facilities. The basis for the building code requirements is life safety. Occupants of an extended stay establishment are less transient (the stay usually exceeds more than a few nights) and as such, would be more familiar with their surroundings in the event of an emergency, thus possibly reducing some of the requirements for exiting, fire alarms and other life safety requirements depending upon the classification and size of the structure. DISCUSSION A. If the Council decides to make "extended stay facilities" a distinct use and regulate it, the following steps could be taken to regulate extended stay facilities from a land use perspective: 1. The Development Code could be amended to make a distinction between hotels/motels and extended stay hotels/motels. 2. Regulation of extended stay facilities would also impact bed and breakfast facilities. Bed and breakfast facilities are defined in the Denton Code as a detached dwelling in which rooms are rented and meals may be served to transient guests on an overnight basis. Many of these facilities also allow guests to lodge for periods greater than a week. This could be handled by defining the minimum number of rooms in an extended stay facility. 3. A possible alternative definition: A facility consisting of four (4) or more guest rooms offering transient lodging accommodations, including inns, residence or extended stay hotels, other similar facilities, that offer rental accommodations for periods of generally less than 30 days at a time. Such establishments may provide cooking facilities as well as room service for food and beverages and shall provide maid service and laundering of linens. Additionally, these establishments may contain a restaurant within the building, which may also contain meeting space. Associated uses may include additional services such as meeting rooms, restaurants, health spas, retail shops and beauty shops. 4. A possible amendment to the hotel and motel definitions that addresses the possibility of hotels and motels being converted into permanent apartments: Up to 10 percent of the total number of rooms in an establishment can provide a place for people requiring a longer stay of up to nine consecutive months. 5. Future Extended Stay facilities could be addressed by requiring a specific use permit. Enforcement Issues Tracking and enforcement of extended stay services could be a challenge. Additional building and/or code enforcement officers would be needed to ensure that extended stay and non-extended stay facilities aren't in violation of the regulations. Unless hotel and motel operations were observed directly and on a frequent basis or complaints were registered that non-extended stay facilities were allowing extended stay services, tracking would be a challenge. Arlington includes its extended stay facilities in its multifamily housing inspection program, which is conducted on an annual basis. Were the Council to proceed with a rental housing inspection program, "extended stay facilities" could be included. Taxation Issues The State of Texas taxes hotels. It defines Hotel as "Any building or buildings in which members of the public obtain sleeping accommodations for a consideration. The term includes, in addition to the buildings listed in Tax Code, § 156.001, manufactured homes, skid mounted bunk houses, residency inns, condominiums, cabins, and cottages." The State further defines a permanent resident as a "person who has the right to use or occupy a room or space in a hotel for at least 30 consecutive days without interruption. A person may be an individual, organization, or entity." The state provides for exemptions from the state hotel occupancy tax as follows: "(6) Permanent residents are exempt from payment of hotel occupancy tax. (A) A permanent resident is exempt beginning on: (i) the first day for which the resident has entered into a written agreement with the hotel or has given a written notice to the hotel of the resident's intent to use or occupy a room or space in the hotel for the next 30 or more consecutive days and the resident actually stays for at least the next 30 consecutive days; or (ii) the first day after the 30th consecutive day of the stay, if the resident neither gave written notice of intent to stay, nor entered into any written agreement with the hotel. For example, if a person does not notify the hotel that he intends to stay for at least 30 days, but stays 35 days, then the person is exempt from hotel tax from the 31st day through the 35th day, but tax is due on the first 30 consecutive days of the occupancy. (B) The permanent resident exemption ends when an interruption in the right to use or occupy the room or space occurs. (C) Permanent residents are not required to physically occupy a room or space. (D) Permanent residents may have the right to use or occupy different rooms in the same hotel without loss of the permanent resident exemption. (E) The permanent resident exemption applies to the lowest number of rooms in a written notice, agreement, or contract for a range of rooms plus the number of rooms that qualify for the permanent resident exemption under subparagraph (A)(ii) of this paragraph." Thus, there appears to be the potential for local governments to lose hotel occupancy taxes in cases where residents exceed 30 days in stay. The policy questions are whether the Council is concerned about this potential revenue loss and whether land use regulation is an appropriate tool to address this issue (by limiting stays, for example). OPTIONS 1. Direct the staff the prepare amendments to the development code to specifically regulate extended stay facilities. 2. Direct the staff to prepare amendments addressing the ratio of extended stay rooms to short term rooms. 3. Direct the staff to identify the costs associated with adequate staffing of additional monitoring and enforcement concerning extended stay facilities. 4. Leave the code as it is. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Option 4. ATTACHMENTS 1. American Planning Association, Zoning News Article: "Zoning for Extended-Stay Lodgings" 2. Other Cities' Definitions and Regulations for Extended Stay Facilities (Arlington, Frisco, and Lewisville) Prepared by: Dedra Den6e Ragland, AICP Comprehensive Planning and Research Manager Respectfully submitted: Kelly Carpenter, AICP Director of Planning and Development NOVEMBER 1998 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION Lodgings By Joseph J. Cimer and Richard W. Redniss, AICP Extended-stay facilities are neither hotels nor apartments. Falling curiously in between, they become a unique land use worthy of more understanding. While such lodgings have existed for many years, recent opportunity in the marketplace has increased their appeal. According to the Highland Group, hotel investment advisers, the extended-stay niche market has entered a new phase. This segment of the marko. was a fraction of the overall hotel industry, appealing primarily to upscale guests, but a mid-level and eco~ol:'~'~? product began to emerge in the late 1980s. This nev, product has a broader range of customers and is popularity among corporate clients. Hotel giants Manor Care and Marriot have take~l ~'~o~ According to the Highland Group, Manor Care's e:~!<'~ !~ d-~I.~ brand, Mainstay, is expected to develop 500 proper~ nationally over the next few years, ranging in size fr~'!~ 0II 100 units. Marriot is expected to enter the market v,'id'~ average rate of $50 per night, well below the companys established extended-stay Residence Inn. Although upscale Extended Stay vs. Hotels or Apartments J.C. Bradford and Company Hotel Extended Stay Apartment Rental Tern Daily weekly 6-12 months Fumisked yes yes no Kitchen no yes yes Cable/phone yes yes no Hmmkeepilg daily weekly no GNst Laundry no yes yes Restaurants yes no no Frmtt Desk 24 hrs. 17 hrs. 8 hrs. facilities have dominated the extended-stay market to this point, growth in the niche market will be in the mid- and economy-level segments, and the competition does not appear to be overwhelming. Homestead Village, an extended-stay lodging provider, estimates the present national corporate demand alone to be in excess of 400,000 annual room nights. Smith Travel Research and the Highland Group have found comparable demand fi~ure~ in re~t*ar~h ~:~l.nduct~ d on the number of rooms in extended-stay facilities, representing about three percent of the total hotel market. In total, the extended- stay niche is expected to make up about 12 percent of the rooms in the hotel industry. Among extended-stay rooms, 46 The building entrance to the Stamford, Connecticut, Homestead Village site, with a ~ypical guest room interior and floor layout. percent are upscale facilities appealing largely to the high-end business traveler. The economy and mid-price rooms make up 39 and 11 percent of the market segment and are expected to greatly outnumber upscale rooms more than two to one by 2002. This issue of Zoning News will focus on these segments of the extended-stay market. A Kitchen in Every Room A cooking area (cookware included) in each guest room differentiates an extended-stay facility from a hotel. Each one- room unit also has a desk, telephone, table and chairs, television, full bathroom, and bed. Maid service, reception, and front desk services are limited. Laundry facilities will likely be available within the building. A meeting or gathering room and a workout area are usually found on the premises. Extended-stay facilities usually lack conference facilities, bars, restaurants, and retail/convenience stores. They tend to be purpose built, meaning that conversions from an apartment or other hotel typically will not work. New facilities can more easily attend to the modern business traveler's communication needs. Fax machines, personalized voice mail, and meeting r~)t?lnn.~ are avai!i!t.)le convenience=. Operating costs are comparably lower for extended-stay facilities because of the lack of food preparation, room delivery, a daily maid, and other guest services. Lower client turnover has resulted in higher occupancy rates than traditional hotels. According to J.C. Bradford and Compaq% average occupancy in 1996 was 80 pei:c:e~t extended-stay facilities and 66 perce~t for hotels. It has been found that maintcI~a~ce costs for extended-stay operations te~'~d lower because guests staying longer t~ke care of their rooms. A typical extended-stay facility i:~ or three-story structure with interie~ to the rooms. In the more temperate southern states, buildings with exterior access have been built to help reduce construction costs. However, the recent trend has been to provide interior hallways for the security and convenience of guests. Generous landscaping often buffers against noise and provides a more residential "home away from home" appearance. With Downsizing Comes Opportunity The effect of corporate downsizing and merging of companies can be credited with much of the increased demand for extended-stay lodging. Downsizing has effectively reduced the number of branch offices, driving up corporate travel to yet fewer locations. Where managers once made day trips to several close locations, they are now traveling farther distances for longer periods of time. Business travelers have found the convenience and price of extended-stay facilities more suitable than full-service hotels, apartments, or staying with friends or relatives. Such changes in the business environment have caused the mid- and economy- level extended-stay market to the hotel industry. Downsizing, mergers, and corporate relocations have forced corporations to reduce travel accounts and focus on the bottom line. Technology has placed new demands on workers and team-based job strategies are on the rise. Such changes require corporations to provide training that will optimize productivity. Training can last more than five consecutive days, reports the Highland Group, with banking and telecommunication industries often requiring more than 10 consecutive days of annual training. Furthermore, communications technology is changing quickly, fueling the need for corporate training programs. Coupled with downsizing, companies are finding more economy in centralizing training programs and bringing in out-of-town employees. Providing a more comfortable location with the conveniences of home may increase productivity and reduce the stress of being away. Joseph J. Cimer is a planner and Richard W. Redniss is the president of Redniss & Mead Planners, Engineers, Surveyors, Environmental Consultants, in Stamford, Connecticut. Extended-stay lodging has also become a viable alternative for non-business guests. Census data show that an increasing number of American households are relocating, prompting a need for transitional accommodations. With upscale extended- stay hotels an expensive option, mid- and economy-level segments 9f the niche market have allowed movers a reasonably priced alternative. J.C. Bradford has found that as many as 25 percent of the guests of some extended-stay facilities would otherwise have found temporary accommodations with family or friends. Price-conscious military personnel and government workers also find extended-stay hotels financially attractive, as do contractors placed in new markets by government outsourcing and families requiring location-specific and specialized health care. As the mid-price and economy market segments grow, and as the targeted markets mature, a better understanding of all users will become known. Cheap Land The extended-stay industry tends to locate on land cheaper than that occupied by traditional hotels. The sites may be comparatively small, accommodating as few as 60 units of ~w~¢~:~d~d:,'~il.7 h~.~u:dng. The Higl:d~u~d G!",;!.up h~'~ found that thc typical project is 100 to 150 units in size. Land available to this growing lodging use has traditionally been in the suburbs. As the market segment matures and is more easily identified by the industry, extended-stay property owners may find more suitable urban locations. Extended-stay sites can range from one to three acres in size, making location near a major thoroughfare essential for visibility and convenience. Because the facilities typically do not contain retail amenities, a variety of restaurants or shopping should be within a five-minute drive. The lower-end extended- stay lodging facilities generate most business through drive-by recognition and word-of-mouth, says KPMG, advisers to the real estate hospitality and construction industry. For this segment, visibility becomes a major factor for success. Companies entering the low-end market early also have an upper hand in fi~ture Iocatious within the same market area. Only 18 percent of the guests in that stay in low-end facilities are corporate clients, while up to 48 percent of the clientele are construction employees and movers. With fewer barriers to entering this market, oversupply is predicted. Opportunity Lost: A Connecticut Case Study When Homestead Village wanted to locate in Stamford, from abutting neighbors. Plans for the site included a 123-unit Connecticut, which is home to many corporate headquarters and over 14 million square feet of office space, the extended-stay provider was seeking typical location criteria: a parcel of land two to three acres in size, visibility on a major thoroughfare, a population of 200,000 within a five-mile radius, and proximity to restaurants, sen, ices, and offices. The company had difficulty finding a suitably priced site, but then located a nonconforming warehousing and restaurant site along a busy state route in a residential neighborhood. Initially, it was unlikely that the extended-stay facility would be compatible with the residential area. However, a closer look revealed nearby corporate campus-style offices and many home occupations, nonconforming uses, and even illegal uses situated along the arterial road. The reuse of the warehouse and restaurant site would eliminate truck noise and odor, a common complaint extended-stay lodging facility. Replacing the nonconforming uses with an extended-stay hotel could not be accomplished under existing regulations. Stamford planning consultants Redniss and Mead proposed an amendment to the regulations that would permit a new use within a similar "footprint" as the existing nonconforming buildings. The amendment would also limit the height of the new use to that of existing buildings. As long as the proposed use was determined to be less intensive, the local zoning board had the authority to grant the new use. Although abutting neighbors were in support, surrounding neighborhood associations were opposed to the precedent of a commercial use in their backyard, and downtown businesses objected to a hotel-type use outside of the core area. Enough discomfort was expressed to deny the proposal. Existing Regulation Within many zoning regulations, extended stay would fit better within the definition of a hotel than an apartment. Yet the use falls somewhere between, causing many communities to develop specific definitions. The zoning regulations for the town of Windsor, Connecticut, include a definition and standards for Residence Inns. Windsor's ordinance stipulates that the building be "used for the accommodation of transient lodgers in suites having one or more rooms exclusive of a bathroom, water-closet compartment, laundry, pantry, foyer, communicating corridor, closets, or any dining alcove with less than 70- square-feet of floor space. A kitchen area separate from the living or sleeping areas shall be provided and cooking may be done only in the kitchen area." In 1996, Norcross, Georgia, adopted regulations defining extended-stay motels as "any building containing six or more guest rooms intended or designed to be used, or which are used, rented, or hired out to be occupied, or which are occupied for sleeping purposes for guests and contain kitchen facilities for food preparation including but not limited to such facilities as refrigerators, stoves and ovens." A more liberal approach in DeSoto, Texas, permits any type of lo.d!~i l~ g f~ ~li I)r, in~l ~lditlg ~× ~: ~ld use (permit required) in planned development districts. Some cities, such as Atlanta, have a number of extended-stay lodging facilities, but have not amended local regulations to allow for the use. Extended-stay hotels are built for a specific function, but could be adapted for apartments or senior housing if the hotel use ends. For the industry and many communities, adaptive reuse would minimize the impact risks because apartments and senior housing would be similar to extended-stay facilities. However, communities are often unwilling to consider the potential benefits of adaptive reuse options. To help support extended-stay uses, and limit the potential for other uses, Irving, California, employs specific requirements for extended-stay hotels within its zoning ordinance. Design criteria such as a minimum lobby area, conference and meeting space, and a requirement for restaurants would encourage hotel rather than apartment use m the ~utut~e. Windsor, Connecticut, takes the same approach, allowing for "restaurants, recreation, or other facilities open to the general public, other than lodgers." Communities must consider whether extended-stay lodging will detract business from the existing hotel base. The problem is minimized because the extended-stay market segment appears to fulfill a new demand. The business traveler on site for weeks at a time may be more comfortable at an extended-stay facility. Families that are relocating may find extended-stay lodging more accommodating than staying with friends or relatives. The presence of extended-stay facilities could also help to regulate Extended Stay Hotels Estimates by Smith lrevd hsmach as of Sqdmn~ 30,1997 J.C. Brmfford and Company N,mhr of Hotels Upscab Resichmce Inn 239 Homewood Suites 43 Summerfiold Suites 24 Hawthorn Suites 20 Woodfin 6 Total 332 Extefldecl Stay America 99 Homestead Village 50 Studio tqus 49 Lexington lO Homegate 8 Westar 5 Sierra 3 Candlewood 1 Totd 225 Economy Villager Lodge 50 Suburban Lodges 36 Cressland Economy Studios 3 Totd 89 Total Extruded Stay Hotels 647 the use of apartments for short-term leases and bring an equilibrium to local housing markets. Final Perspective The longer guests stay, the more amenities they desire. In markets where extended-stay facilities are frequented by families, child play areas have been installed or designed into the site. Some jurisdictions even require play areas as a component of site planning. Fut~re desired an'~c~iti¢~ will determine whether the extended-stay market will conform to the look and feel of apartments, traditional hotels, or both. Where guest families may desire a swimming pool or game room, business travelers may require a small lounge for entertaining clients. Indeed, such changes are likely to push extended-stay facilities into the traditional hotel venue. The marketplace for extended-stay facilities will eventually stabilize, alleviating the uncertainties associated ~ith an ~lnelging us~. 'lhc strong market demand is expected to increase as target audiences grow. Business will undoubtedly continue its savvy reach for the bottom line by reducing costs for employee travel, and the country's aging population will proceed southward to warmer climates, finding temporary shelter in extended-stay facilities. This growing lodging alternative is an inevitable part of the landscape. Communities need only determine where it fits best. Cotre,ctio. How Many Sisters Make a Family? It was all a misunderstanding, says Joliet, Illinois, planning. director Don Fisher. In the end, he says, that is what caused most of the 103 people who signed a petition opposing a variation in use for a group of nuns to wish they had not. Of those signers, only four opposed the permit during the meeting at which the city council unanimously approved it on October 6. Variation in use is the term of art in the Joliet zoning ordinance for the special-use permit that now allows the Franciscan Sisters of the Sacred Heart to house up to seven nuns in their home in a single-family residential neighborhood. The zoning board of appeals recommended council approval in a 4-3 vote on September 24. The Joliet ordinance allows up to three unrelated individuals to live in the same home in a single-family district. Three nuns already occupied the house, but they wanted to bring in a fourth sister and also allow up to three visitors at any time. The variation, says Fisher, lasts only while the nuns occupy the 3,000-square-foot house. The attached conditions state that the variation will cease whenever the Franciscan sisters leave the property, and that if the home ceases to function as a "nunnery," another term defined in the ordinance, it would revert to' single-family r~sidcntial u.~. Any other proposed u~e~. Fishe~ ~a~ "mu~ go before the zoning board" and would require approval by the city council. Fisher adds that if, at any time, the use becomes a nuisance, the ordinance specifies that the permit "shall be. recalled for a possible revocation" by the zoning board and city council. Because of these provisions, he says, the planning staff assumed that the variation would not pose a problem. Zoning News is a monthly newsletter published by the American Planning Association. Subscriptions are available for $55 (U.S.) and $75 (foreign). Frank S. So, Executive Director; William R. Klein, Director of Research. Zoning News is produced at APA. Jim Schwab and Mike Davidson, Editors; Shannon Armstrong, Barry Bain, Jerome Cleland, Fay Dolnick, San jay Jeer, Megan Lewis, Maa3m Morris, Becki Retzlaff, Reporters; Cynthia Cheski, Assistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design and Production. Copyright ©1998 by American Planning Association, 122 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 1600, Chicago, IL 60603. The American Planning Association has headquarters o~ces at 1776 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036. All right* re*erved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the American Planning Axsociation. Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber and 10% postconsumer w~te. ~ 4 But, says Fisher, the misinformation that drove the petitions included the impression that the convent would become a boarding house and "did' not exactly reflect what the proposal was." Many people, he says, "didn't know what the actual use was." Jim Schwab, AICP / 0rts The Plan for SoBro Christine Keyling. City Press Publishing, Inc., 209 10th Ave. S., Suite 222, Nashville, TN 37202. 1997. 48 pp. Free by calling 615-244-7989. South of B.roadway (SoBro) has been a neglected "land of promise" in Nashville in the words of this report on a charrette for the area sponsored last year by a local alternative newspaper, the Nashville Scene. Many of the area's problems will sound familiar: issues of surface parking, a potential split resulting from a proposed new highway corridor, and the need to rebuild a sense of urban neighborhood character with the appropriate mixture of uses. Yet SoBro also has the unique opportunities of an area that includes the Tennessee State Capitol and life in the shadows of downtown skyscrapers. The resulting guidelines are both inst}uctive and reasonably creative, including the emphasis on the need for a "boulevard, not a corridor." Siting Criteria for Personal Wireless Service Facilities Prepared by Kreines and Kreines, Inc., in cooperation with the Cape Cod Commission, 3225 Main St., P.O. Box 226, Barnstable, MA 02630. June 1997. 50pp. Free with $5 shipping charge for out-of-state orders. Distilling lessons and ideas from dozens of other communities, the Cape Cod Commission managed to craft trend-setting standards in one ofplanning's evolving new dilemmas, the siting of wireless telecommunications facilities. This document is the result of a project the commission pursued with funding from thc Ma~aghu~:t~ D~'partment of Hot!sing and Community Development. Readers with Internet access can supplement this useful handbook by finding the commission's model bylaws for such facilities on its web site, www.capecodcommission.org. CitySpace: An Open Space Plan for Chicago City of Chicago, Department of Planning and Development, Strategic Planning Division, 121 North LaSalle Street, Room 1003, Chicago, IL 60602. The OtySpace Plan is the result of an intergovernmental initiative created to expand open space in Chicago. The CitySpace Project was initiated by a partnership that induded the City of Chicago~ Chicago P,qrk District~ Forest Pre~er~e'Di.~tri~ of Cook County, and the Chicago Board of Education. The plan sets fOrth development goals, priorities, and implementation strategies, targeting land along inland waterways, vacant lots, and land surrounding public schools. Attachment 2 Other Cities' Definition and Regulations for Extend Stay Hotel/Motel Facilities City of Arlington Definitions Bed and Breakfast Inn. A house, or portion thereof, where short term lodging rooms and meals are provided. The operator of the inn shall live on the premises or in adjacent premises. Hotel, Full Service or Motel or Residence Hotel/Motel Motel - A building or group of buildings whose main function is to provide rooms for temporary lodging which is not classified as a full service hotel or residence hotel/motel. Residence Hotel/O/lotel - Any hotel or motel which offers more than 5% of its rental units for stays extending thirty (30) consecutive days or more. A multi-dwelling unit extended stay lodging facility consisting of efficiency units or suites with a complete kitchen suitable for long- term (thirty days or more) occupancy. Meeting rooms, clubhouse, and recreational facilities intended for the use of residents and their guests are permitted. This definition shall not include other dwelling units as defined by this Ordinance. Full service Hotel - A building or group of buildings whose main function is to provide rooms for temporary lodging where entrance to each room is gained from a completely enclosed area or from an exterior court which is within a secured area; may also contain various personal service shops. (Amend Ord 00-025, 3/14/00) Regulations Section 12-1000 Special Standards for Full Service Hotels, Motels and Residence Hotels/ Motels A. Guidelines for Development: The purpose of the following guidelines is to provide an applicant for SUP or "PD" cases insight into City policy regarding design for full service hotels, motels and residence hotels/motels. 1. Building Scale and Rhythm Proposed buildings should respect the scale of any adjacent buildings and provide orderly transition to the different scale of development. Stair stepping building height, breaking up the mass of the building and shifting building placement should be employed to mitigate the impact of differing building scales and intensities. Building rhythm is established through horizontal and vertical patterns expressed in architectural features such as roof angles, cornices, columns, windows, doors or variations in massing. Several related rhythms should be employed to avoid repetition of a single or limited number of elements throughout the building. Examples of building rhythm include vertical and horizontal banding with different colors or materials, groupings of windows, and regular or repetition of external details. 2. Building FaCade and Elevations. External details in building facades, entries, stairways, retaining walls and other features provide visual interest, enrichment and texture to buildings. New developments should incorporate the use of strong vertical and horizontal reveals, offsets and three-dimensional details between surface planes to create shadow lines and break up flat surface areas. Large flat blank surfaces should be avoided. Rear elevations should be aesthetically enhanced with materials to match the front of the building and should be treated with the same quality of design and materials. Relentless grids of repeated windows should be avoided. The patterns created by the window and door placement can add variety and interest to the design. Buildings and windows should be located to maximize the possibility of occupant surveillance of entryways, recreation and laundry areas. Children's play areas should be sited to allow for unobstructed parental monitoring. B. Minimum Development Standards 1. Full Service Hotels a. Must provide meeting/conference rooms, with a minimum of 1000 square feet of conference space. bo Must provide recreation facilities including a swimming pool, exercise room or comparable recreation facilities. Co Must have an interior restaurant with a full service kitchen offering meals during normal dining hours (breakfast, lunch and dinner) and seating for a minimum of 50 patrons. d. Must have daily maid service. e. Must have management onsite 24 hours a day. Access to each room must be gained from a completely enclosed area or from an exterior court which is within a secured area. 2. Motels a. Must provide housekeeping service or daily maid service. b. Must contain a lobby with a minimum of 150 square feet. c. Must have identifiable management on site 24 hours a day. do Exterior walls must be built of a minimum of 90% concrete, decorative masonry, Portland cement stucco or Exterior Insulation Finish System (EIFS). (This requirement supercedes the minimum requirement in Article XIII and in the BP District.) 3. Residence Hotels/Motels a. Must have identifiable manager when the office is closed. b. Must provide a minimum of 1000 square feet of recreation facilities including a swimming pool or exercise equipment room. c. Must have access through an interior corridor or from an exterior court, which is within a secured area. d. Minimum size of a unit shall be 300 square feet. e. Must provide on site laundry facilities and weekly maid service. f. Exterior walls must be built of 90% concrete, decorative masonry, Portland cement stucco or Exterior Insulation Finish System (EIFS). (This requirement supercedes the minimum requirements in Article XIII and in the BP District.) g. Each room must contain a complete kitchen, including a refrigerator, rangetop, sink, and cabinets. h. Must contain lobby with a minimum area of 150 square feet. i. Each room must contain a telephone. (Amend Ord 00-025, 3/14/00) City of Frisco, Texas Definitions Bed and Breakfast Inn - An owner (or operator) occupied residence with up to five (5) bedrooms available for overnight guests. A Bed and Breakfast Inn may provide for guest stays up to fourteen (14) consecutive days; however, it shall not offer weekly rental rates. Kitchen and dining facilities may be included to provide meals for guests only; however, no food preparation shall be permitted in guest bedrooms. A Bed and Breakfast Inn shall not include restaurants, banquet facilities, or similar services. Hotel - A building or group of buildings used as a temporary dwelling place for individuals in exchange for financial consideration where customary hotel services such as linen, maid service, and telephone are provided. Hotel room units are accessed through doorways into an internal hallway, courtyard, or lobby. Financial consideration for Hotel room units is generally calculated on a nightly basis. Residence Hotel - A building or group of buildings used as a temporary dwelling place for individuals in exchange for financial consideration where customary hotel services such as linen, maid service, and telephone are provided. Residence Hotel room units are designed to be suitable for long term occupancy with financial consideration being calculated on a nightly, weekly, and/or monthly basis. Typical Residence Hotel attributes include, but are not limited to, kitchen facilities, two-story design, and external doorways into room units. Regulations Conditional Development Standards Hotel: Hotel developments shall be subject to the following development standards: a) External balconies and walkways shall be set back two hundred feet (200') from any residential zoning district. b) Shall provide staff on-site 24 hours a day. c) Shall provide at least three amenities from the list below: · Indoor/Outdoor Pool · Spa/Sauna · Weight Room/Fitness Center · Playground · Sports Court · Plaza/Atrium · Game Room · Jogging Trail · Conference Room (1,000 square foot minimum) · Full Service Restaurant (minimum seating capacity of 35) d) All room units must be accessed through an internal hallway, lobby, or courtyard. e) Permitted by Specific Use Permit in an Original Town Commercial District Motel: Motel developments shall be subject to the following development standards: a) External balconies and walkways shall be set back two hundred feet (200') from any residential zoning district. b) Shall provide staff on-site 24 hours a day. c) Shall provide at least three amenities from the list below: · Indoor/Outdoor Pool · Spa/Sauna · Weight Room/Fitness Center · Playground · Sports Court · Plaza/Atrium · Game Room · Jogging Trail · Conference Room (1,000 square foot minimum) · Full Service Restaurant (minimum seating capacity of 35) d) Shall maintain a minimum separation of fifteen hundred feet (1,500') measured linearly from property line to property line from any other Hotel, Motel, or Residence Hotel property. Residence Hotel: Residence Hotel developments shall be subject to the following development standards: a) Not more than 23 room units per acre. b) External balconies and walkways shall be set back two hundred feet (200') from any residential zoning district. c) Shall maintain laundry facilities on-site for guest use. d) Shall provide staff on-site 24 hours a day. e) Shall provide at least three amenities from the list below: · Indoor/Outdoor Pool · Spa/Sauna · Weight Room/Fitness Center · Playground · Sports Court · Plaza/Atrium · Game Room · Jogging Trail · Conference Room (1,000 square foot minimum) · Full Service Restaurant (minimum seating capacity of 35) f) Shall be set back a minimum of one hundred feet (100') from any residential district. g) Shall maintain 15% of the lot area as open space, exclusive of required setbacks and parking areas, but including amenities from the above list except for Conference Room and Full Service Restaurant. h) Shall maintain a minimum separation of fifteen hundred feet (1,500') measured linearly from property line to property line from any other Hotel, Motel, or Residence Hotel property. i) A minimum of 50% of the room units shall contain kitchen facilities. j) Location: 1. Shall be permitted only with frontage along SH 121, Preston Road, the Dallas North Tollway, FM 423, or US 380; or A Residence Hotel may locate at an intersection of two major thoroughfares. If this location option is chosen, it shall count as the multifamily development at that intersection as referenced in the Future Land Use Plan. It shall also be subject to the Multifamily-2 Zoning District development standards as they exist or may be amended. If Multifamily zoning already exists at an intersection of two major thoroughfares, then a Residence Hotel will not be permitted at that intersection. City of Lewisville, Texas Definitions Bed and Breakfast: A "bed and breakfast" is an establishment offering the use of guest rooms to the transient public for compensation. Structures must be owner-occupied and are limited to a maximum of five (5) bedrooms. A minimum of one meal per day shall be served on the premises for the benefit of the guests of the bed and breakfast, but a restaurant is not an allowable accessory use. A bed and breakfast is a non-residential use. Hotel, Motel or Inn: A "hotel, motel or inn" is an establishment offering lodging, the use of guest rooms or sleeping accommodations, to the transient public for compensation. Hotels, motels or inns furnish customary hotel services and may contain a restaurant, club, lounge, banquet hall, meeting rooms and other accessory uses. A hotel, motel or inn is a non-residential use. For purposes of this Ordinance, if more than 20% of the guest rooms of the establishment are occupied by a person who has the right to use or possess a guest room for at least 60 consecutive days without interruption, then the use of such establishment shall be classified as residential. Residential usage shall not be permitted in a non-residential zoned area. Regulations LEWISVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE 1995 51 SECTION 17-22. "GB" GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REGULATIONS service (a) Use Regulations: A building or premise shall be used only for office, retail and uses which are primarily retail in nature including, but not limited to: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (il) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) Any use permitted in District "LC". Auto or mobile home display, sales and repair, but not including auto body shops. Bakeries. Building material sales, including lumber yards. Business or commercial schools. Clinic, medical and dental, and professional offices. Carpentry, painting, plumbing or tinsmithing shop. Cleaning, laundry and dyeing plants. Creamery, ice cream manufacturing and dairy operations. Farm implement display and sales room. Hotels, Motels and Inns. Mortuaries. Office buildings. Pet shops, retail. Printing, engraving and newspaper plants. Radio or television broadcasting station or studio. Monopole towers up to one hundred (100) feet in height and including no more than one monopole platform or communications dish are allowed as an accessory use for such broadcasting use or other uses in General Business. All other towers (except those of 25 feet in height or less) will require Specific Use District Zoning. Retail stores. (18) Veterinarian or animal hospital provided that no such building, kennel or exercise runway shall be closer than fifty (50) feet to any residemial district. (19) Bowling alley and other commercial amusemem uses. (20) Church worship facilities. (21) Uses similar to the above memioned permitted uses, provided activities conducted observe the requiremems of all City Ordinances. (22) Temporary buildings for uses incidemal to construction work on the premises, which buildings shall be removed upon the completion or abandonmem of construction work. (23) Accessory buildings and uses customarily incidem to any of the above uses, provided that such not be objectionable because of odor, smoke, noise, vibration or similar nuisance. Open storage shall be considered an accessory use but no more than ten percem (10%) of the platted lot may be used for outside storage, including access and maneuvering areas for moving the stored items. (24) Dwelling units of 850 square foot minimum size when located over a retail, restaurant or similar use on the first floor. (b) Height Regulations: No building shall exceed in height the width of the street on which it faces plus the depth of the from yard. On a lot adjoining a residemial district, no building shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height, except that this height may be increased up to the maximum of twelve (12) stories or one hundred eighty (180) feet at the rate of two (2) feet of additional height for each one (1) foot of additional setback from required yard lines. In no eveN, however, shall any building exceed two (2) standard stories when located within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any property zoned for residemial purposes. (c) (1) a. bo Co Area Regulations: Size of Yards: Front Yard: There shall be a front yard having a minimum depth of twenty- five (25) feet. No parking, storage or similar use shall be allowed in required from yards in District "GB", except that automobile parking (including automobile dealer display parking) will be permitted in such yards if separated by at least twenty-five (25) feet from any residemial district. Side Yard: A side yard of not less than fifteen (15) feet in width shall be provided on the side of a lot adjoining a side street. A side yard of not less than ten (10) feet in width shall be provided on the side of a lot adjoining a residemial district. The required side yard shall be waived when a screening device is installed in accordance with the City's General Developmem Ordinance. The building itself can serve as a portion of the screening device when that portion of the building exterior is constructed of the same materials as the screening device. No parking, storage or similar use shall be allowed in any required side yard or in any side street yard adjoining a residemial district. Rear Yard: No rear yard is required, except that a rear yard of not less than twenty-five (25) feet in depth shall be provided upon that portion of a lot abutting or across a rear street from a residential district, except that such yard requiremem shall not apply where the property in the residemial district also backs up to the rear street. The required rear yard shall be waived when a screening device is installed in accordance with the City's General Developmem Ordinance. The building itself can serve as a portion of the screening device when that portion of the building exterior is constructed of the same materials as the screening device. (2) Reserved: (d) Outside Storage Regulations: In all zoning districts where outside storage yards are allowed, such storage yards shall be screened from view in accordance with the standards outlined in the City General Development Ordinance. This provision applies to all outside storage, which began after the original date of passage of this provision (April 4, 1994). Any variance request involving the requirements or standards relating to such required screening devices shall be considered by the City Council in accordance with the General Development Ordinance. Areas which are used for infrequent and temporary storage for a period of thirty (30) days or less per year shall not be deemed as "storage yards". SECTION 17-22.6 "OTC" OLD TOWN CENTER BUSINESS DISTRICT REGULATIONS (a) Use Regulations: A building or premise shall be used only for office, retail and service uses which are primarily retail in nature including, but not limited to: (1) Retail establishments including but not limited to: bakeries; book, card, gift and stationary stores; building material sales; clothing; florists; grocery stores; and pet shops or others of a similar nature and subject to the following condition: a. Temporary, portable outside display of merchandise is allowed on a daily basis but is limited to the area directly adjacent to the building occupied by the business and no more than five (5) feet from the building. A clear aisle shall be maintained for pedestrian access. Otherwise, no outside display or storage is permitted. (2) Barber and beauty shops. (3) Buildings and uses owned or operated by public governmental agencies. (4) Business or commercial schools. (5) Church worship facilities. (6) Clinic, medical and dental, and related professional offices. (7) Communication towers, accessory to the primary use, shall be located on a building and may extend a maximum of 15 feet above the building, but must be screened from view. (8) Day nurseries. (9) Dry cleaning and laundry services. (10) Hotels, motels and inns. (11) Professional offices. (12) Restaurants including those with private clubs as an accessory use. (13) Veterinarian or animal clinic provided that no kennel or exercise runway shall be located outside the building. (14) Video rental stores and movie theaters. (15) Accessory buildings and uses customarily incident to any of the above uses, provided that such not be objectionable because of odor, smoke, noise, vibration or similar nuisance. Dwelling units of 850 square foot minimum size shall be allowed as an accessory use to retail businesses. (16) Non-accessory dwelling units of 850 square foot minimum size when located over a retail, restaurant or similar use on the first floor. (17) (18) Temporary buildings for uses incidental to construction work on the premises, which buildings shall be removed upon the completion or abandonmem of construction work. Uses similar to the above mentioned permitted uses; provided activities conducted observe the requiremems of all City Ordinances. (b) Height Regulations: No building shall exceed a maximum height of three (3) stories or forty-five (45) feet excluding parapet walls. Parapet walls shall have a maximum height of eight (8) feet. (c) Area Regulations: (1) Size of Yards: a. Front Yard: The from facades of buildings shall be set at the from property line. However, a portion of the faCade may be set back further in order to create a special entry court or restaurant seating. b. Side Yard: The faCade of a building located on a lot that adjoins a side street shall be located at the property line. SECTION 17-29. "SU" SPECIFIC USE DISTRICT REGULATIONS (a) Use Regulations: This district is for the purpose of the uses specifically listed and other unusual uses which are limited in number and which are clearly not allowed in any other zoning district. Zoning shall not be allowed under this district as a way of circumventing the standard provisions of this or any other Ordinance of the City of Lewisville. Allowable uses shall include: (1) Bed and Breakfast businesses. Structures must be owner-occupied and are limited to a maximum of five (5) bedrooms. (2) Cemeteries and accessory uses. (3) Broadcast or transmission towers in excess of one hundred (100) feet in height or supported by guy wires. (4) Criminal or penal institutions. (5) Landfill operations and accessory uses. (6) Commercial drilling for oil, gas and other minerals. (7) Mining activities and storage, including sand and gravel mining, and stone quarries. (b) All requests for Specific Use zoning shall be accompanied by an Engineering Site Plan as outlined in the City of Lewisville General Developmem Ordinance. Variances from the regulations in the General Development Ordinance may be granted at the discretion of the Lewisville City Council. (c) Any proposed enlargemem, structural modification or other significam change to any site which had been grained Specific Use zoning shall require approval of the Lewisville City Council following a public hearing. Such public hearing shall be conducted after a recommendation is received from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the request for an amendmem after conducting a public hearing in accordance with requiremems necessary for any proposed zone change. (d) The Zoning Board of Adjustmem shall not have jurisdiction to hear, review, reverse, or modify any decision, determination, or ruling with respect to the granting, extension, revocation, modification or any other action taken relating to the granting of any Specific Use zoning. (e) Building setbacks and heights shall be consistent with other structures in the immediate area, as determined by the Lewisville City Council. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: March 1, 2005 Planning and Development Department Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT SI05-0004 (Annexation and ETJ Discussion) Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction on annexation processes in general, and specifically on the potemial extra-territorial jurisdiction (ET J) release to surrounding communities and a potemial certificate of convenience and necessity release to the City of Krum. BACKGROUND The purpose of this session is to review the annexation process in Texas, its application to the City of Denton, and the current Denton annexation policies and plan. Further, staff seeks City Council policy direction on requests from the Towns of Krum and Ponder for the release of Extra Territorial Jurisdiction. Chapter 43 of the Texas Local Government Code regulates annexation by municipalities. In the past ten years, the Texas State Legislature has dramatically restricted city authority to annex land and has increased the steps required to annex land imo the city. Current Denton Annexation Plan The Texas State Legislature has adopted rules concerning municipalities adopting a three- year annexation plan. This is a documem required by Texas Local Governmem Code, Section 43.052, idemifying certain kinds of areas that a city imends to annex. DeNon adopted a resolution for an annexation plan that stated no potential future involuntary annexations would contain more than 100 units pursuant to state requirements. (Refer to Attachmem 1 .) Annexation Process Annexations must rigidly adhere to the City Council public hearing schedule and specific timing mandates established by Texas State Law. (Refer to Attachment 2.) Given the timing requirements, at a minimum, 90 days are required to process an annexation. Prior to initiating the annexation, another 30 days is usually needed in order for staff to complete the service analysis and plan and other preparatory work. If, at any time, there are substantial changes to the annexation, or required meeting is cancelled, the process of annexation is stopped. To proceed, the annexation process must be reinitiated. There are basically two types of annexations: those that are included in the annexation plan and those that are exempt. CiG of Denton Annexation & ETJ Policies (The Denton Plan) The Denton Plan specifically addresses the issues of Extra Territorial Jurisdiction and Annexation in "The Edge" Chapter of the Land Use Element of the plan. (Refer to Attachment 3.) The plan calls for the city to examine the long-term goals of annexation of land to accommodate growth in population, but to temper the amount of land annexed by the ability of the city to provide adequate infrastructure within a reasonable timeframe. To date, the City has not developed a specific annexation strategy to be used as a master annexation plan. Annexation and ETJ Policv (CiG Code of Ordinances) Chapter 34, Sections 35 - 38, of the Code of Ordinances identifies the City's annexation polices, procedures, and fees as well as development standards and requirements in the ETJ. (Refer to Attachments 4 and 5.) With some exceptions, including Sections 35-38, Chapter 34 was included in the new Chapter 35 of the Code, now known as the Denton Development Code. However, the provisions of Chapter 34, Sections 35-38 continue to govern annexation policy, procedures and fees. The City adopted an inter-local cooperation agreement (proposed between the City and Denton County) for regulatory jurisdiction within the ETJ. (Refer to Attachments 6 and 7.) Per the agreement, the City has jurisdiction to regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits in the City's Division I ETJ, and the County has jurisdiction to regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits in the City's Division II ETJ. The County has not yet signed the agreement. ISSUES/DISCUSSION 1. Annexation Policy a. Corbin Road A developer was considering constructing a temporary asphalt batch plant on 51 acres on Corbin Road in Division I ETJ. Planning and Development staff initially pursued annexing the property pursuant to Section 34-35 (b) (2) of the Code: an industrial development over one acre in size. Staff asserted that annexation would allow better regulation of the land use and the provision of city services. The annexation timeline was at least four months, and within this time frame, the developer would have a vested interest. This interest would allow the developer to proceed with the batch plant under the land use and city service provision regulation in place at the time of plat approval. Therefore, annexation of the property would not have afforded the City with any additional regulatory power over the use of the site if the developer proceeded according to his original proposal. In addition, the developer constructed a water line from Airport Road to the southern boundary of the site. City staff had approved the design of the water line, and a three-way development contract was processed. The City Attorney's office subsequently determined that the subdivision was in violation of the subdivision ordinance, and recommended that utility connections be denied umil the plat was in compliance with the subdivision regulations and that the property be annexed. However, staff asserted that since there were no specific policies in place requiring annexation when utility lines are extended, the annexation was not pursued. (Refer to Attachmem 8.) Sanitary sewer service was also provided to the property. Sanitary sewer service was not proposed originally. It was a water line extension to service an unplatted one-lot development. However, when the project was presented as a platted development with interior public streets and subdivided lots, extension of public sanitary sewer lines within the public street right of ways was proposed and approved. b. Gas Wells In 2002, gas well plats in the ETJ increased significamly. Staff had proposed to initiate several involuntary annexations of the gas well sites. During the proposed annexation of the AGF Ranch on November 6, 2001, City Council expressed concerns regarding the involuntary annexation of properties strictly related to gas well development. The Planning and Zoning Commission had expressed similar concerns following several gas well annexations in 2001. Given City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commissioners' concerns, staff did not further pursue annexation of gas well sites in the ETJ. Currently, staff continues to follow that direction and does not pursue involuntary annexation of gas well sites in the ETJ. While the DeNon Plan does not specifically address gas wells, staff recommends annexation of natural gas fields if the property is located within the designated urbanizing area, if the area of the well expected to accommodate urban growth in the next twenty years, and if the gas well location is comiguous to existing city limits, city roads and rights-of-way that may be used for gas transport. Development of gas well properties located in the ETJ is subject to only the City's subdivision regulations and not any zoning regulations. Annexation is the logical step to provide the City of DeNon the authority to regulate land use based upon a zoning classification and to ensure the welfare and safety of all existing and future development. The operation of natural gas wells provides revenue opportunities. The fiscal impact of gas well development to the City of Denton is another factor in considering gas well annexation. 2. CCN Policy a. City of Krum CCN Boundary and ETJ Release Request The City of DeMon's Water and Wastewater Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CNN#10195) was originally established November 1, 1979 (Attachmem 14). A CCN is a utility service area permit authorizing a specified utility to be the retail service provider. Denton's CCN covers both water and wastewater retail service and extends to the southern and eastern side of the City of Krum. Bolivar Water Supply Corporation's (BWSC) Water CCN (CCN #11257) was also established on November 1, 1979. BWSC's CCN covers retail water service and extends to the north of Hwy 380 and to the west ofi-35. Both DeNon and Krum's City Council approved a boundary adjustmem agreemem (DeNon Ordinance #2001-318 passed September 4, 2001 and Krum Ordinance #2001-11 passed November 8, 2001). (Refer to Attachmem 9.) This agreemem established the legal clearance for recent Krum annexations that had encroached into Denton's existing ETJ and also established the existing ETJ boundaries between the Cities of Denton and Krum as the future City limit line for Krum. However, this agreement was silent on the issue of water and wastewater CCNs and this has implications to both the City of DeNon and the City of Krum that should be considered. The City of DeNon recemly comracted directly with the City of Krum to provide it wholesale wastewater service. The City of DeNon has also comracted with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District (UTRWD) to provide wholesale water service on a temporary basis to the City of Krum. In both cases, the City of DeNon financially participated in the wastewater and water line extension to the City of Krum, establishing a potential retail service presence for the northwest side of Denton's CCN and Extra Territorial Jurisdiction. In the case of the wastewater line extension to Krum, the City of Denton's participation in the line ends at the metering point that extends to the north of Hwy 380 and into the southern section of the Krum ET J/future City Limit agreement. In the case of the UTRWD/Denton waterline, the City of Denton's participation ends just south of the intersection of Masch Branch Road and FM 1173 near the eastern edge of the Krum ET J/future City Limit agreemem. The City of Krum asserts it has legal authority to provide retail water and wastewater service within its city limits. However, the Texas law governing retail water and wastewater service allows cities to provide service within their corporate city limits without a CCN provided they are not within the CCN of another retail utility. (Refer to Attachmem 10.) Technically, this would place the City of Krum at risk by actions not only from the City of DeNon, but also from BWSC. The City of Denton could elect to remain silent to the CCN issue within the Krum ET J/Future City Limit agreement. However, this action would not provide protection from protests from BWSC, which have occurred in the past on recent annexations by Krum along FM 1173 east of their community. Krum has informally requested an ETJ boundary adjustmem to eliminate splitting large undeveloped tracts of land. This proposed request would result in a net reduction to Denton's ETJ of 176 acres. (Refer to Attachment 11.) Additionally, a developer of a 67-acre tract of land located on Hopkins Road, north of FM 1173 has requested utility service from the City of Krum. The proposed developmem has a preliminary plat approved by the City of Krum that includes a developer agreement that would require action by the Cities of Denton and Krum. This tract has approximately 59 acres inside Krum's ETJ and approximately 8 acres within DeMon's ETJ. All of the property lies within the dually certified water CCN's held by BWSC and DeNon, and the single certified wastewater CCN held by Denton. The developer's agent, Kirk Wilson, has requested that the City of Denton release the 8-acre area of the proposed development to allow Krum to annex the emire tract, as well as execute a Transfer of Sale Merger (TSM) for Denton's water and wastewater CCN. (Refer to Attachment 12.) On January 24, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) met to consider DeMon's Water and Wastewater CCN and an existing ETJ agreemem between the City of DeNon and the City of Krum. Staff recommended conveying the water/wastewater CCN to Krum and adjusting the ETJ line to avoid splitting the property tracts between two cities. The PUB approved staff's recommendation to take a holistic approach to the boundaries of the Krum ETJ and to consider monetary compensation. (Refer to Attachment 13.) b. Town of Ponder Request for ETJ Release The Town of Ponder has submitted two resolutions to the City of Denton requesting the release of Denton's ETJ. The resolutions are submitted at the request of residents of Old Stony Estates and Holiday Ranchettes subdivisions located north of the Town of Ponder. The release area is more specifically located north of Town of Ponder and west of FM 156 and includes approximately 448 acres. The area contains approximately 36 residences and 8 gas wells. The second area includes a 22-acre tract located immediately north of Ponder, off George Owens Road. The current conditions are as follows: · By Texas Local Government Code, the City of Denton may maintain a 31/2-mile ETJ extending beyond the city limits. · Only the subdivision regulations are enforced in the ETJ. · The Old Stony Road area is located within Division 2 of Denton's ETJ. Therefore, the County, not the City of Denton, regulates subdivision and platting. · Once Denton self-certifies a population of 100,000, the City may extend its ETJ 5 miles beyond the current city limits. Denton may reach this milestone by fourth quarter 2005 or first quarter 2006. · The Denton Plan identifies these areas as Rural Area Land Use. Rural area land uses are properties that the City of Denton may not be able to service with urban-style infrastructure within the 2020 planning horizon set forth in the plan. · These two areas are serviced by Aquasource Water Company and are on septic wastewater systems. · Solid Waste disposal services are contracted. Issues include the following: · The current annexation resolution states that no areas of the City of Denton ETJ are considered for annexation, which would include more than 100 separate tracts of land on which one or more residential dwellings are located on each tract. The areas under consideration in the Ponder case contain 36 housing units. · Additionally, state law provides that any annexation must be contiguous to the current city limits and must be greater than 1000 feet wide. The Old Stony Road area is approximately one mile from the nearest Denton city limit line, which is north at Jim Christal Road and the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe railroad line parallel to FM 156. To the south and east, the northern edge of Robson Properties is approximately 2.3 miles. The southern boundary of the area under study is approximately 0.5 mile from the northern boundary of the Town of Ponder. · The rate of western expansion beyond 1-35W in the past 10 years has increased the size of the city by 5,203 acres (8.1 sq. mi.). Robson Ranch (2,746 acres) and Hunter Ranch (2,226 acres) were the largest of these annexations. · The Denton Plan states that ETJ areas that are isolated or pose accessibility problems should be carefully evaluated to determine if service provision is able to occur on a cost effective basis. Further, "the city will work with adjacent municipalities to determine shared boundaries, and will execute inter-local agreements based upon mutual agreement that will benefit affected property owners. The municipalities along the western edge of the ETJ-Northlake, Ponder, and Sanger - will be approached to determine if jurisdictional boundaries can be determined through the negotiation of inter-local agreements." The areas in question are located west of FM 156 and the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe railroad line. · The ETJ area proposed for release is outside the City of Denton's water and wastewater service area. · Providing services and infrastructure to this area, even within a 20 to 30 year time frame would in all probability exceed the revenues generated from the property taxes gained by annexation. OPTIONS ANNEXATION POLICY AND PLAN (STRATEGY) 1. Update the City's current annexation policies in order to provide more specific guidance for making annexation decisions. This might involve: a) Reviewing, updating and incorporating the annexation policy, procedures and fees in Chapter 34, Sections 35 through 38 of the Code of Ordinances and any amendments in the Denton Development Code. b) Reviewing, updating and incorporating the development standards and requirements in the ETJ in Chapter 34-38 of the Code of Ordinances and any amendments in the Denton Development Code. c) Developing an annexation strategy that provides more specific and objective criteria to the City Council for making annexation decisions. (I.e. gas wells, extension of utility lines, etc.) d) Developing an annexation program that identifies the areas the City wishes to consider for annexation over a set period. 2. Do not amend annexation policies or the Development Code. CCN and ETJ POLICY a. KRUM CCN and ETJ RELEASE 1. City of Denton releases its water and wastewater CCN within the existing or modified ET J/City Limit Boundary agreement. Staff would support this approach since imposing Denton's water and wastewater retail service within a limited portion of Krum's future city limits does not appear to meet the spirit and intent of the recently approved boundary agreement. Simply being silent on the issue also does not give the City of Krum adequate assurances of a legal right to provide retail water or wastewater service in this area. Modify the existing ETJ boundary agreemem to avoid the splitting of large tracts of land between two municipal jurisdictions. Staff in principal believes that this is in the best interests of all parties concerned. However, establishing these specific boundaries may be difficult to achieve a consensus between the two governing bodies and may not result in a net loss of land to one of the parties. Staff recommends options 1 and 2 using the proposed boundary adjustment shown in Attachment 11 as requested by Krum. The developer of the Aspen Park subdivision would like the Cities of DeNon and Krum to expedite the ETJ and CCN transfers for their development. The representatives from Krum would prefer a single more comprehensive decision on a more global scale. Staff believes that a more global approach is superior to making a decision for just one developer. Do not adjust the ETJ agreement and do not release the water and wastewater CCN to Krum. b. PONDER ETJ RELEASE 1. Release the ETJ as requested. Based on an assessment of all City Departments that would be impacted by the release, the request will not have any great effect on to the City of Denton long-range planning for growth: · At the rate of western annexation expansion, it may be an additional 20 to 25 years before city boundaries extend to the FM 156 corridor. · The proximity of the areas to the Town of Ponder make servicing more economically feasible for Ponder. · The Burlington Northern/Sama Fe Railroad line and FM 156 corridor serves as both a political and physical boundary to DeMon's infrastructure expansion. The corridor is the western extem of DeMon's Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) boundary for both water and wastewater provisions. To service this area with water and wastewater utilities, the City of Denton would have to increase the CCN boundary to the west of its current alignment. Water/Wastewater Department commented that Denton's ETJ extends further west of Old Stony Road to George Owens Road. If the ETJ in this area is annexed into Denton's corporate limits, then the release of the proposed ETJ areas to Ponder will leave a gap/enclave within the future wastewater service area of Denton. This may result in inefficient use of resources to provide wastewater service because of geographic incominuity. 2. Do not release the ETJ. ATTACHMENTS 1. Annexation Plan Resolution 99-063 2. Annexation Process and Timeline 3. Annexation and ETJ Policies and Strategies (DeNon Plan) 4. Annexation Policy (Code of Ordinances) 5. Developmem Standards and Requiremems in the ETJ (Code of Ordinances) 6. liner-local Agreemem between City and County for the Regulation of Subdivisions in the ETJ 7. Division i and ii ETJ Map 8. E-mail concerning Corbin industrial Park 9. Existing Boundary Agreement between Denton and Krum 10. Denton Water and Wastewater CCN Areas inside Krum's City Limits and ETJ 11. ETJ Boundary Adjustmem informally Requested by Krum 12. Developer Agreement between Aspen Park and Krum and requested TSM 13. Public Utilities Board Minutes, 01-24-05 14. City of Denton Water and Wastewater CNN Map. Prepared by: Dedra Den6e Ragland, AiCP Planning Manager Respectfully submitted: Kelly Carpemer, AiCP Director of Planning and Developmem Attachment 1 Annexation Plan Resolution 99-063 Rt~SOLUTION NO A ~SOL~ION OF T~ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ADOPTI/qG T~ C~Y OF DENTON TH-~YEAR A.NN~TIOI'.I PLAN ~ i~.EQI~D BY TS TO SECTIONS 42 ~'D 43 OF ~E TEXAS LOCAL GOt./ CODE A~ SPEC~!ED BY SENAf~ B~L 89, ~PT~ BY T~ 76TM ~XAS LEGISLATIVE ON MAY 25, i~9, ~FECTIVE ON S ~ i, i.~9, gf~ THE ~OPTION OF A T~E-~. AI~qEXATION PLAN WITH A~N EFFECTI¥~ DATE OF DECF~X,~ER 31, 1999, Al.ID PROV~ING AN EFFE~VE DATE g,.'llER~, the 76th Tex~ ~slattu-o adopted Sena!e Bff! 89 on Ma>, 25, 1999, w~ch was eff~ve on September 1, 19~, and , S~__ate Bffi 89 nm-de sigmfic~t amendments to ~e mumcipal annexatmn ~uh"mllertt8 ootltalr~eazl m S~tlOm 42 and 43 of the Texas ~al Cmvemm.eni Code, ~ , S~e Bill 89 am~dmg Sectmn 43 052(e) of the Texas Doom ~vermm~nt Code st~ifi~ that "A mumc~pal~ty ahall prepare an annexation plan thru specifically ~dent~qe~ ann~ttona that ~' occur beg~nning on the third amversa~ of the date the annexation plan ts adopted % md W~REAS, S~tmn 17(b) of Senate B~I1 89 spemfies ~at "F;ach mumctpaht-y shall adopt an ann~atton plan a~ m~red by Section 43 052, Local Government Code, as ~ended by th~$ .~lct, on or b~ore December $1, J999, that ~com~ cffectrve ~Deeernber $1, 199~ ', and , Senate Bill 89 ¢onlmns scverM new mquh. ments mt~ded to proteei l>opulated m m mlrmo~orat~ ~a~ from umvm'~te~ mummpal annexanon, and ~,~AS, Se~ Bill 89 amemtod ~lion 43 052¢) of the T~ ~al Gov~ent Code to provide s~eral exem~om ~m the rev'is~ annex~on reqm~ents m¢lu&_~ ~ exemptmn for areas pmpo~ for ~exatmn ff" the area contains fewer than 1 O0 s~arate tract~ of land on which one or ~nore ~m'ent~l dwellings are located", and ~~AS, the C~ty of D~nton has m unincorporated popuiat~d areas conu~m to tis mumc~pal bounces con~.ammg mom than 100 ~arale tracts of land on wh~¢h one or mom remdonttal ~elltngs ~ locate, ~ ~ det~m~ that any ant~c:pated annexatm~ in the foreseeable fut*~ wdl be exemp~ from the am~exatmn ptmn and oth~ pmmmorm of S~mte Ball 89 pursum~ m ~a8 ex~mpt[on and o,Am' exemptions as set forth m S~tmn 43 052(h), ~ AS, Senate Bill 89 mend~ Secuon 43 0520)(1) of the Tex~ Lo~ Government Code, intimating that "Ifa mumc~pahty has an Internet webs~m the ~mtc~hty aha!! post and rr, amtam the po~wmg of tis annexatton plan on ~ts Internet websne ", md , the City of Denton CtB, Council ~nduct~ a pubhc hcmng on November 16~ i~ ~ he~r clt~7~ ~mments reg~mg ~ City of ~mn Thxee-Ye~ 3~qex~on PI~ ~d ~t m ~o ~ of ~e C~W Comcfl to Mopt the T~Ye~ ~atmn Plm, NOW, THE~FO~, CITY COU~4C~ OF ~E CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOL~,~S ~ The C~W of Denton Thxe~Yeg Armexataon Plan, ~ ~mred by S~on 43 052 of the T,x~ Lo~ Govem~mt Code, whmh ~d,cmt~fies no land m be included ~ part of a ~ee~ye~ ~ex~on seh~ule, ~s ~opted by w~ue of approval ofth~s ~olut~on SEC~ON 2 The Clvy Counefl of the C~ty of Dmton hereby mc~ the webmasmr of ~e c~'s ~tmet webs~te to post md ~ntm the posting a copy of ta~ r~olutmn md ~exatmn plan on the c~ty's ~ webs~te SEmi_ 0~3~ ~e C~ty of ~ton may c~ntmue to consider armexatmn of area,~ whmh exempt ~m melusmn m the C~W of Denton ~e~Year ~amexat~on Plan ~s resoluaoa, ~all t~e effect Decm~r 31, 1 ~9 PASSED ~ APPROVED ~s the __ ~y of I999 ,, MAYOR A~ST JEl:~g~ W~TE~, CITY SECRETARY By ~PROVED AS TO LEG~ FOP. aM HE~ERT L ~.OUTY, CITY A~O~Y By Page 2 10 Attachment 2 Annexation Process for Areas Exempt From Annexation Plan A typical annexation process includes: 1. 30 Day Advance Notification to all property owners of an involumary annexation 2. City Council conducts first public hearing. · Public notice must be no less than 10 days and no more than 20 days before public hearing. · Annexation Study prepared and available for public review. · Service Plan prepared and available for public review. 3. City Council conducts second public hearing. · Public notice must be no less than 10 days and no more than 20 days before public hearing. 4. Planning and Zoning Commission public hearings - make a recommendation to City Council regarding the proposed annexation and the proposed zoning. 5. City Council by a four-fifths vote institutes annexation proceedings. · First reading of annexation ordinance. · Action must be more than 20 days after the second public hearing but less than 40 days from the first public hearing. 6. Publication of annexation ordinance in Demon Record-Chronicle. 7. City Council by a four-fifths vote takes final action. · Second reading and adoption of the annexation ordinance. City Council considers approval of zoning request. · Council must take action more than 30 days after publication of ordinance and less than 90 days after council institutes annexation proceedings. When the City Council is on a normal bi-momhly regular meeting schedule, this timeline is easy to abide by. If a regular meeting is moved to an off-week, or a fifth week in a momh occurs, or a regular meeting is skipped due to holiday or vacation leave, a special called meeting of the City Council is necessary. Time Period Needed for Public Hearing Process For Annexations (Does Not Include Staff Time for Service Plan Authorin 30 Days for Involuntary Regularly scheduled Regularly Scheduled > 20 days after > 30 days after Annexation City Council Meeting City Council Meeting second public first reading, hearing, but < 40 but < 90 days days after second after first public hearing, reading Involuntary 30 Days 30 Days 44 Days 64 Days to 84 Days 94 Days to Annexation 174 Days Voluntary 0 Days 0 Days 14 Days 34 Days to 54 Days 64 Days to Annexation 144 Days 11 Attachment 3 Denton Plan Annexation and ETJ Policies and Strategies (Excerpt from Denton Plan, 1999-2020, pgs. 28 through 30) DeMon's ability to grow and expand should be idemified in the city's annexation strategy. City limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction (ET J) boundaries should be clearly established, and relationships with other jurisdictions should be determined through interlocal agreements. The annexation strategy should also reflect the costs of service provision and external environmental impacts associated with land located in the ETJ. Adopting an aggressive annexation policy in order to manage the density and quality of growth within current ETJ land, and to maintain the existing certificate of convenience and necessity (CCN). Denton should endeavor to set finite boundaries that make sense, rather than allowing annexations to set arbitrary ETJ edges. ETJ edge areas that are isolated or pose accessibility problems should be carefully evaluated to determine if service provision can occur on a cost effective basis. Political subdivisions adjacem to DeNon, such as Argyle and Corimh, are obvious hard edges to DeMon's jurisdiction. Geographic boundaries can also be used advamageously. DeNon will endeavor to protect the imegrity of neighboring communities where development in Denton occurs adjacent to those communities. The city will work with adjacem municipalities to determine shared boundaries, and will execute interlocal agreements based upon mutual agreement that will benefit affected property owners. The municipalities along the western edge of the ETJ (Northlake, Ponder, and Sanger) will be approached to determine if jurisdictional boundaries can be determined through the negotiation of interlocal agreements. The city will prepare an annexation plan, in accordance with state legislation and with a minimum three-year time horizon, to coordinate the availability of municipal services with areas likely to experience developmem pressure at urban densities. The city annexation plan will be considered a master plan that requires coordination with other master plans that address water, wastewater, drainage, transportation, parks, libraries, capital improvement programs and other improvements. The city will not encourage development at the edges of its ET J, in recognition of the higher costs of "leapfrog" developmem and haphazard urban sprawl. An estimated sixty percem of the land area within the city remains undeveloped, and services are for the most part reasonably available to vacant land inside Denton. Incentives encouraging infill developmem will be implememed, particularly within existing city limits. The extem of westward ETJ expansion will be analyzed in the city annexation plan. Consideration will be given to the environmemal managemem objectives being formulated for the Hickory Creek watershed, and the feasibility of extending ETJ jurisdiction imo other watersheds. Additional research will be devoted to the policy choices involved in extending ETJ boundaries to the west side of Krum, Justin, Northlake, and Fort Worth, where access to ETJ areas will prove difficult. 12 Attachment 4 Annexation Policy (Excerpt from City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 34, Section 34-35 through 34-37) Sec. 34-35. Annexation policy. (a) It is the general policy of the City of Denton to assess on a case-by-case basis the annexation of areas in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ET J) when significant developments are proposed, occurring, or likely to occur in the near future. (b) The following are guidelines for determining when annexation study should be considered: (1) (2) (3) (4) Single-family developments over five (5) lots; or Multi-family, industrial or commercial developments over one (1) acre; or Any area where the density exceeds five hundred (500) units per square mile; or Any development or area that might have a significant impact upon the city, including but not limited to service costs, increased traffic, drainage impact, utility needs or utilization, safety or health hazards. When any or all of the above conditions exist, city staff shall review the proposed development for the purpose of considering annexation. The review shall also include consideration of the annexation of logical planning areas around the area of initial concern. (c) Guidelines for scope of study. In studying the questions of whether or not an area should be annexed, the following criteria shall be considered at a minimum: (1) The ability of the city to furnish normal city services equal to other comparable areas inside the city limits. Water and sewer system capabilities are considered, but lines for individual areas are normally not the city's financial responsibility. (2) The reliability, capacity, and future public cost, if any, of current and planned provisions for community facilities such as roads, drainage, utilities, etc. Private facilities will be considered. (3) The need and quality of land use and building controls. Private controls will be considered. (4) Impact on the city, both current and long range, including at a minimum: a. Fiscal cost and benefits; b. Traffic; c. Infrastructure of roads, utilities and other community facilities; d. Safety or health; e. Building or development quality; f. Aesthetic quality; and g. Community character. (5) Conformance with or need to ensure conformance with the officially adopted master plans of the city. (Ord. No. 94-150, § I, 8-16-94) 13 Sec. 34-36. Annexation procedures. (a) If, after preliminary study, the criteria described in section 34-35 indicate annexation is appropriate in order to promote or protect the public interest, the city will initiate formal annexation proceedings to consider the annexation question in detail. (b) If a tract of land in the extraterritorial jurisdiction is contiguous to the city limits and the owner of said property desires that it be annexed in order to be qualified to receive city services when available and to be afforded zoning protection, the owner may petition the city for annexation. (c) Study and annexation procedure. (1) Based upon guidelines for initiating study, the staff shall initiate a preliminary assessment of the area for possible annexation and present the results to the city council. The city council will review the study results and other information and make a determination whether or not formal study and public hearings and annexation proceedings should be initiated. (2) If formal public hearings are initiated, the planning and zoning commission shall review the annexation study and make a recommendation to the city council. (3) The city council will then consider all recommendations and public comment during the prescribed public hearings phase, and make a determination whether or not to initiate formal annexation proceedings. (4)Formal annexation proceedings are executed, if applicable. (d) Public hearing notification procedures: (1) Notice ofpublic hearing. Notice of the public hearings shall be given not less than ten (10) days before the date set for the first annexation public hearing using each of the following methods: a. Published notice. Notice of the scheduled public hearings shall be published in the official newspaper of the city stating the time and place of such public hearings and a description of the proposed annexation. b. Courtesy notice. Written notice of the scheduled public hearings, properly addressed and postage-paid via first class mail shall be provided to all residents of property located within five hundred (500) feet of the subject property by posting such notice to each parcel address as recorded on the city's geographic information system (GIS) data base. Failure on the part of property owners to receive the courtesy notice shall not invalidate the scheduled public hearing process. c. Posted notice. A sign shall be posted on the subject property according to rules established and published by the planning and development department, a copy of which will be available at the city secretary's office and the planning and development department offices. (2) Access to property. The applicant/petitioner/landowner shall allow the director of planning and development or his/her designee to enter onto the premises for which an annexation public hearing is scheduled for the purposes of installing, maintaining, and removing signs required by this section. (e) Remedy for removal of sign. It shall be unlawful for any person, other than the director of planning and development or his/her designee, to knowingly remove, deface, or injure in any manner a sign or part thereof required by the provisions of this section. 14 (Ord. No. 94-150, § I, 8-16-94; Ord. No. 99-030, § I, 2-2-99) Sec. 34-37. Annexation fees. Any person, firm or corporation who shall petition the city for annexation shall pay to the department of planning and community development a fee in an amount determined, and as from time to time amended, by ordinance of the city council. The fee shall be based upon the administrative expenses of the city in reviewing such petitions. A true and correct copy of the current ordinance establishing the fees shall be maintained in the department of planning and community development. (Ord. No. 94-150, § I, 8-16-94) 15 § 1,02 CODE l~ec, 1.0~. Ex~e~ision of city limits, ~e city ~mc~, by a vo~ of~ ~ ~ fO'~.~ {~)6fi~ a~h,~J~p, shall haw ~ahitaata of thc ~:rrite'~ a.ane~ed. U~a a,¢ ia~;~a;;~an ef any such o~inance ~o ~e City l~s ~ fo~:.f~ (%) of the mamba:mhip of the Cky CeaseS! and pi~blica.6~ ahMi na ~ha~ be ~naliy ac~ upon until at least thi~, (30), da~ a~ th~ ~qd a~a ~he final ~s~e of a~- such o~m~ or any ;~ea~nen~ b~.nd~ ~ ~ the City a~ ~e~ ~ ~ ~e.d ~eby. When. ~y ~didanal baa ~sa ~ ~.~exed ~e sha~ ~ a p~ ~ the CiW of ~n~, ~M ~ p~,' aitnat~ ~e ~abit~ ~ ~ ~ entit~ ~ ~ sh~l ~$ al~ ~a ~gh~ a~d pnvi!¢g~s ~ the S,e~. i.~, Form of g~e~ment. The m~¢iF~ ~ernme_at provided hy fhi~ Ch~r s~ ba ~own ~ ~ ~c~mci i n ~vernm~t." '~uant to i'~ p~,iaions ~d sui~jea 0a'ly ~ the liaff, atioas im~ by t~ s~te Constitution and by this chair, ¢I p~e~ of ~he City shal~ ~ ~a.ted ia aa elective administer th~ ~varnma~t cfi t~ city. Mt l)~w~ of ~e city shall ~ exereis~ ~ ~he m~er Sec. 1.0~. Powe~ of ~e city. The City of E~n't~n ah~l have and may aaa~ ail t~ ~we;~. gran¢~ t~. citi~ by t~ Con~i'gu6on ~ laws ~ Te~ indadi~'~ $~tfieally t[~e t~,'e~ m~e available m~ t~n fi~ ~o~d (5,0~) k,~bicma.ta by wb~ is known ~ the ~o~e Rule ~ ~.e Censti~aaan ~¢ T~as (~icle Xi,. ~a;ioa ~ ~d ~e H~e R~e Enab~g ~ Texas C~ ~a~, ~as ~al O~wera~eat CMa ~t;oa 5,~, Chapter 9, Ckmp~r 26, and Su~hapter E of Chap~r 51L ~ the~ laws n~w read a' may ~a~r ~ amended. ~ty may ~u~ t~n~y with:ia or ~thsat i~ co~om~ h~m for ~y m~eip~ pn~me; snMi;6si~ ~ a~mplish say law~fi p;,~ ~r the adv~cement ~ the he~ $~ei.~; eonveniem~, v,r welfare vf tar ci~.y or i~ ~abi¢~a.; ~y ~ le~, mo~gag'e, hold,,. 16 Attachment 5 Development Standards and Requirements in the ETJ (Excerpt from City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 34, Section 34-38) Sec. 34-38. Development standards and requirements in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. (a) The extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of DeNon is classified imo two (2) divisions as indicated on the map on file in the departmem which is made a part hereof for all purposes. Division 1 is that area located within the regulatory line reflected on the map referenced above. Division 2 is that area on the map located outside the regulatory line surrounding Division 1. (1) All of the provisions of this chapter governing subdivision and developmem standards for subdivisions within the city shall apply to all subdivisions and developmems within Division 1. (2) The subdivision and developmem standards of the County of DeNon, as such standards exist today or as they may hereafter be amended, shall apply to all subdivisions and developmems within Division 2. The approval of plats by the city for subdivisions and developmems in the extraterritorial jurisdiction comprising Division 2 is not required and such subdivisions and developmems must comply only with development or plat requirements of Denton County and state law. (b) The departmem is directed to consider amendmems to the regulatory line map whenever the certificate of public convenience and necessity for water and wastewater services is amended by the state, the Greater Denton Planning Area as defined in the Denton Developmem Plan as revised, or when directed by the planning and zoning commission and city council. Any amendmems shall not be effective umil the revised regulatory line map is approved by the city council. (Ord. No. 94-150, § I, 8-16-94) 17 Attachment 6 Interlocal Agreement between City and County for the Regulation of Subdivisions in the ETJ ORDe ANCE NO. £egg - b:b' ORDRqANCE OF ~ CITY' OF DENTON, TE~S AP?ROVING AN INTERLOCAL C~PEI~&TION AG~EMENT BiETWEEN THE CITY OF ~'D FOR THE ~£GU-LATION OF SU~DP¢SIONS IN ~ OR~.L ~dSDICTION OF ~ CITY OF D[NWON; A~ PROVinG J'~ EFFECTIYE DA~. ~,~R~_&S, prior to r~ent amendmen~ to Tex~ txw.,al Govemmem Code §242,001, the City a~d the C%unty could excise concurrent ju~sdiction over the platt~g process ~uired upon the su~vision of l~d within the City's Extraterritorial Suri~iction C~TF') lo.ted ,~thin the Comty; mud , prior to recent am~ents to Texas ~al Government Code §242,001, the City adopted Ordin~ce No. 93-033, w~ch was amend~ by ~rmce No, 94-039 & 94~t22, where,, the City adopted ~d amended ik~ regmlatopy 1Lac map reflecting Division I a~d Divi. sion, ~ of the City's ET J; ~d W}~AS, &ese receipt mendmems to Texas ~cal Government C~e §24Z001 allow the City and County to enter into an tnterlocal .,~eement s~ forth the City and the County's mgalatow j~sdictions with/n the ETJ; ~ WHE~AS, both City and ~ty desire that City contin~ to excise exclusive jurisdiction m regulate subdivision pl~ and approve re.ted permits, in City's Division I ETJ under Subc~ter A of Chapter 212 of the Tex~ l~eal Gov~_men,t C~ ~d other statutes applicable to m~i¢ipalifies, and the County be granted such exclusive jurisdiction to regulme subdivision plats aad ~prove related permits ~ City's Division II ETJ u~der Subctmpter A of Chapter 232 of the Texas [~eaI Govetnamenl Code ~ other smites applicable to ee~fies, all of which is provided for ~ the Interloc~ Cooperation Act and ~cat Gmvemment (~de §242.~1. ~&~E~AS, the City Council hereby finds that the ~tedecal A~mt is in the pubti¢ interest; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF ~E C~Y OF DENTON, TE~2&S HEI~Y ORDAINS: S~'TION 1. The findings ~d r~itations contained in the pre-,~ble of this ordinem~ ~ ineo~oratM here~ by re.once. SECTION 2. The City M~ger is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Denton the ~t~local C~peration Agreement wi~ D~aon County in sub~fi~ fo~, which is a~acheri hereto. SECTION 3. This ordinan~ s.hali ~come effecdve ~ately upon im pas~ge ~d ~mvaL 18 PASSED AW ~PROVED this the ~,,'~a~., ATTF~ST: JENN~,R WALTEr, CITY SECReTlY 2003. EULINE BR~K. ~*~YOR A~vPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L~ PROUTY, CITY ATTORNE ~Y BY: Page 2 19 Attachment 7 Division 1 and 2 ETJ Map City of Denton Regulatory Map August 2004 ~,, ,a,7,.,.;% , ,~¥~, 20 Attachment 8 Corbin Industrial Park E-mail Peele I J From: Kevin Roberts To: Brant Heath; Charles Fled!er; David Salmon: Don Mcbughiin; Donna Batemen; Dorothy Paiumbo; Edwin Snyder; l{eily Carpenter; Michael Copeland; Tim Fisher Date: 4/29/04 3:37PM Subject: Corbin lndustriai Park Corbin Industrial Park is a 5!-acre parcel of land on Corbin Road, jus[ outside the City Limits, but within the Celtificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) and the Division One ET J. 'The City has platting authorib over' the parco!, Recentiy, the Industrial Park has become a difficult issue, initial!y, the developer, 2, R. Marriot. informed the City that the site would oniy be used for a temporary bate plant. The project had long history from a previous p/an ~o bs~all a baI:ch plant on ~viasch branch Road. The City Attorney's office was of the opinion based upon information provided to the City; that the parcel (!id not require platting, Subsequent!y, rise developer presented a 16 lot cornmercial subdivision Preliminary Plat to Denton Municipal Electric, requesting electric service for each of the lots, The Preliminary Rat has !sot been officially submitted to the Cily and r',o appiic~ntion has been received. It does not conforr'n to the information previously provided to the City, The developer is proceeding with the construction of a 12" water line from Airport: Road to the Southern boundary of ~he si~e, Cib Staff approved the design of the water line and three-way development contracts i~ave been processed. Ti~e pre-construction conference has been held, and appropriate fees have been paid. The City entered in~o the d:eve~opmen~ agreemen~ with the understanding ~ha~ subdivision would not occur. The City Attorney's office has informed me that the subdivision is in violation of rise City Subdivision Ordinance, and Utility connections can and should be denied un¢ the property pfats to come into compiiance with the subdivision regu!ations The City's Attorney's office is aisc of the opinion that the Cib' should annex the property. ! wi!! provide a letter to the developer for review by Planning and ~he City Attorney informing the developer of the City's requirement ~o pia~ arid refuse! of utility connection until the conditions of the plat are satisfied. Please give me any feedback you may have. Kevin Roberts, Senior Engineer -. Development Review City of Denton Gity Halt West 221 N. Elm Denton, TX 76201 (940) 349-8538 (940) 349-8148 FAX 21 Attachment 9 Existing Boundary Agreement between Denton and Krum ~"~VED OE', o 4 ?003 OiRD]~AN O~ ~O, 2001-I 1 DENq'OH COUN~ CLERt' CY['~Y H iA M iTOHE~' ~40RDJ'NA~C[ A2~OV~O ~E'TWESN THB C~'TY OF ~l~t.~M AND 'TFIE:CiTY OF O~N3. ON WH.~CH P~LEASES EXT~CFEKR.ITOKiAL: 3~ISDiC!'I'ON PROPERTY AND ESTABLISHES A FUTL~E BOU~'D~RX B~TWEEN THE TWO CITTFtES; AND PROVID~G ~N F, FFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCF= OF THE CITY ~..~,C~: Thc May'or, or. bis dcsigr~ce, is hereby authorized to execute Bou,,4dao' .A. djustmcn~ Agr¢ement beg,,,een the Cib' of lQ'urn ~.d the City of D¢nton ~bstantiat!y IM fomx of the Agreeme. n~ wNch i's a~tached to m~d made a pa~ ofthis ordium~ce for gl] proposes. The Cil7 Council her¢t~y finds that the Agreement is in public interest. o ': - ~ ~. , S~T~, ~, This ordinance shall become effcctiv¢ immediately ttpo]l its passage and approval. PASSED AN~ >¢PROVED fl~s the ~ day of November, 2001. D AV]]) P O LLE-Y, 7~¢LAY OR CiTY SECRETARY APPROVED'AS '?O LEGAL FORM P ~,'TP, J ~ IGHT, CiTY %:g"OM,~.~ON\CLiENYS'~,~ITY OF KRUM\ORD.'-NANCF. NO 200! -o'., 1 I.doc EXHIBIT 1 AN OR'DiNANC. E APPKOVING A BOUNDARY ADJUSTMBNT AGREE'MENT BETWEEN THE CIT'£ OF DENTON AND THE CI~TY OF KRUM .Wi:I'I. CH 'RELEASES EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION I'N CERTAI.N REAL PROPERTY AN[) ESTABLISHES A FUTURE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE TWO CITIES;. AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTt. VE DATE. '~ ' ' I I:,X. AS HE'REB~ ORDAINS: THE COL,NCTL O'F THE CITY OF DENTOn," SECI'ION 1. TI.~ Mayor, or her designee, ks hereby m~thodzed to execute a Boundaq, Adjusm~ent AgTeement belween the City of Denton and lhe City of Krtm~ in substantially the Ibrm of tile Agreement which is attached to and made. a. pm't of this ordinance for all purposes. The City Council hereby finds thai the Agreement is in the public interesL ' ~_I}_(~TLOH..2. TI:ia old inm~ce shal[ becom'e effective immediately uport its passage and al) proval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ~/~.c~ ,~..' ,2001. EULtN B BROCK, MAYOR . A"FTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CFFT SECRETARY . I,/ /.- AP'?~OVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PRO'UTY, CITY ATTORNEY .... 2.~,:-~x_._., ,-" ~-f..'~"~ - .... B'5': "~'_/// ..................... _/_ ......... ~.~,_ · THIS AGREEMENT is made a~'~d catered imo by anti beiwCen tim crrY OF DENTON, 1 EXAm, hereinager reterred to as "Denton", and ~ CITY OF KRUM, T. EXAS, hcrcinaI'tcr t'el~rmd to as "K~m~". .. WHE~AS, Krum has heretotbre annexed or int~ds tc~ annex ee~ain real property into its city Jim.iLs kl~itt is wii.l~Jn pcmon's cxt,'atcn'itorial .iuris~liction ("ET]"), which propm'ty is particularly described i~ Exhibit "A" attached hereto ami made a part hereof by refere~ce and depicted in Exhibit "B" attachcd hereto ami made a part her~f by reference '(call~'l the "PropertY"); and WItEREAS, Denton desires 1.o release to Krum alt of'its fights in and to its ETJ in the Prooertv and Io consenl to Krum's annexation of thc Propc~%'; and WHERE~, Denton and Kmm desh'e to establish a fi~ture mutual city limit botmda}'y belwee~ the ~wo cities as n]ore particularly dcscribed in 'Exhibil' "('." attached hereto and made a pa~. hereof by rel~rence [.ilqt~ d~Jc~ed in Exhibit "D" :.~tt,~chcd hereto and made a pm~ hereof by reference (ca)led the "Future.Mutual Boundau"); at~d . WHEREAS, the governing bodies 'of Denton and K]~m~ 5nd that such Future Mu~ml Boundaw ~s in the public int~cst. NOW, THEREFORE, ~br and in ~onsit.erafic..~ oF the mutual c.oventmts, c~nditi0ns, and prbmises expressed herein, Denton and Krum agree ms ik, l lows: SEC'FION I. [.')eaton hereby releases ang rcliuquishes all ol~ iks ETJ rights in ~d to the Property to 1Cram and conscm[8 Io 14rum's anncxalion of" the Prol:>erty. whet'her (n' nol 8nch anncxation has occurred prio r lo the dale. of Ih is agreement, consents l.o Krum's ;mnexal.~on o f thc Propm'ly. It expressly a~'o~d Q:at tLis Waiver and release shall only operate in favor Kmm, and shall ~ot ~nstitule a waiver or rcl~se of any right, including ETJ rights, which Denton may be able &s~e~ against an.other mm~icipality..In ad(titling, ii'Kmm does not comp~eLa the mmexation ofl:he Properly within one year of the date of this. Agreement this wa'iver and release shall be null an void a~cl of no fi~rther Force and effect. De,~;ton and 'K.rum hereby agree d'~at their Future Mut'ual. Boundary shall be as described in Exhibit C and depicted in Exhibit D. In ibis regard each waives, releases and r{Enquishes ETJ rights to the ether w i lb respect to fl~e side of the Future Mumal Bmmdm'y that is located in the other c~ty ~ 'tk~ture territory' as described and depicted on Exhibit C: and D. It is expressly a~eed that tiffs waivm' and release shall only operate in fi~,,,Or of Denton and Kmm, and shall not' constilute a. waiver Ol; release of m~Y right, i,~ch~dirtg ETJ right:s, which Denton or Ki'[Li~I may be able to assert'against ami.her mimicipality. SEC'F1ON Should any provision of ~,h'is Agreement be declared ,,,oid by .a court of compe, tenl .}m'isdic1'ibu, the remaining provisions or" this Agreement sha[l, remain in full lbrce and effect.' SECTION VII. A_.EI~ v a! b_y.' C, o¥ e rn ing._B od.i~a Denton and Kl~am rcprescnl lo each other, Ihat their respective go¥crning bodies have approved this Agreemerq by ordinance or t'csoluttm~ as set ~b~h below. SIGNED (his .......... day of ...... L ......... ~ .........2001. CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS EULtNE BROCK, MAYO'R A'Iq'EST: JENNIFER WA1.TER.S, CITY SECRETARY APPROV'ED AS TO FORM: APPROVED'B~ON O!~)!NANCE NO. ATTBST: /"9 CITY SECRETARY MAYOR O,j~T.Y .ATTO R.N-EY/ '/ A~P?~OVE'D B~' K2~.LTMi O,~D4/~CE NO. A. CK'.N O~¥I.~ED GI¥IENT$ STA.'.I'~. OF TEXAS § '. COI~NTY oF DENTO.r'4 . § This inslrumem w'as acknowledged be!br~ me tl~Js .__ day of . -200t, by EULINE BROCK, Mayor of the CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, a home-rule mmx[¢ipat corpo~mion, on behMf of said muuicip,] co~oration. · N~{ary Public in and for the State of Texas STATE OF T'EXA S § COUNTY OF DENTON § mun~cipali~, op~ehalf of said mun/cipM~tv. State h~i>Tc'x as ~ . Page 5 ~ Tr~tt BEGINNING for the Northwest Comer of the tract being des.cribed herein at the Northwest Comer Of the second mentioned Ver~teeg tract (most northerly tract) in the West line of said. Survey in the middle of Hopkins Road in the East line of the existing Krum City Limits tine, from which the most Easterly Northeast City Limits Comer bears North a distance of 528 feet more or less;' THENCE South 89 Degrees 16 Minutes 4'7 Seconds Bast with the North Line of said Versteeg tract a distance of 889.69 feet to a capped iron rod found for the Northeast. comer of said Versteeg tract and the Northwest Comer of said Bstes tra6t; THENCE SoUth 89 Degrees 18 Minutes 28 Secc~nds East wi~ the North Line thereof, generally along a fence a distance of 869.39 feet to a capped iron rod- found for the Northeast Comer of said Bstes tract and the Noz!hwest Comer of said Fowler tract; THENCE South 89 Degrees 10 Minutes O0 Seconds East with'the North line thereof along a fence a distance of 1225.79 feet to the Northeast Comer of said Fowler tract in' Masch Branch Road; THENCE South with the West line of said Fowler tract in said Road and passing the Southeast Comer of said Fowl.er tract being in the North line of Farm to Market Highway' 1173 and continuing along said course across said highway a total distance of 2596.31... feet to a comer on the South line of smd Highway for the Southeast comer of the herein described trjact; . . THENCE North 89 Degrees 45 Minuies 07 Seconds West along said Highway a distance . of 14I I.'43 feet to the most Southerly Southwest Comer of the herein described tract; THENCE North.01 Degrees 56 Minutes 51 Seconds East re'crossing said Highway at 90 ' feet passing a ½" iron rod found for the most Southerly 'Southwest Comer of said Estes tract on the North line of said Highway and continuing along 'said course', in all, a.total distance of 370.02 feet to a fence comer post at an angle point in the now Westerly line of said Estes tract; ·. THENCE in a Northerly then Westerly direction with the most Southwesterly line of said Estes tract generally ·along a fence, the following 6 courses and distances; 1. North 00 Degrees 56 Minutes ~-5 Seconds West a distance of 56.6~ feet to a ~/z" iron rod found; 2. North 15 Degrees 59 Minutes '17 Seconds West a'distance of 52.39 feet to a ¼" iron rod found; 3. North t7 Degrees 25 Minutes 26 Seconds West a distance of 75.21 feet to a found pipe; 4. South 76 Degrees 43 Minutes 00 Slconds West a distance of 2t2.02'feet to a found nail; :g:~.RO W S ?.~c clX? r c~j c ~lsX. An nc.'i~li0n\KR UM _F N~ B_Og_$O_O I \Krum_Enctoacl~rncm_tr acts. I~XHIBIT_A.dcx: ' ~-,'5 IIql BXHIB]~T A 5. North 83 Degrees 08 Minutes 00 Seconds-West a distance., of 86.07 feet to a ½" iron rod found; . · ~' ' 6. North 88 Degrees 58 Minutes 53 Seconds West a distance of 366.97 l~eet to a. ½" iron rod found' for he most Westerly Southwest comer of said Estes tract; THENCE North with the West line there0f generally along a fence a distance of 702.93 feet to a ~/2" iron. rod found for the Southeast Comer of said Freeman tract; THENCE North. 89 Degrees 16 Minutes 23 Seconds West with the South line thereof a distance of 88.20 feet to the Southwest Comer o£ said Freeman tract in the middle of'said. Hopkins Road in the West line of said survey; THENCE North 00 Degrees 02 Minutes 33 S~conds West in said Road ~ith the We~t tine of said S',Jrvey a distance of 1398.86 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING.and enclosing 145.8 acres of land more or less.. Tract 2 FIELD NOTES-to all that certain tract of land situated in the J. Haney Survey, Abstract Number 515, Denton County, Texas'and being a survey of a called 150 acre tract described in the deed recorded under Clerk's File Number 94-R0089285, Real Property ':Records of said county; the subject tract being more particulai'ly described as follows: BEGhNNING at a Metal Fence Comer Posf in the South right-of-way ofF.M: 1173, same being the Northeast comer of t 17.92 acre tract described i.n the deed to Henry Beckman recorded in Volume 4293, Page 1577; .. THENCE North 01 Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of'90.0t feet.to a called iron rod set for the Northwest comer of the herein described trac{ in the North right-of-way of said highway; THENCE South 89 De,ecs 40 Minutes 20 Segonds East a. distance of 2424 feet to a ½" capped iron rod set for the Northeast comer of the herein described tract in the North right-of-way of said highway; ..THENCE South 00 Degrees 25 Minutes 1~ Seconds West a al{stance ofg0.00 feet to a point in the middle of Maser Branch Road for the Southeast comer .of tract described herein; THENCE SouTh 00 Degrees 25 Minutes 19 Second~ West with the middle of Masch Branch Road a distance of 2687.53 feet.to a point in the center of said road for the Southeast comer of herein described tract and the Northeast comer of a catled' 10.00 acre tract described in the deed to Leslie R. Peterson recorded in Volume 936, Page .204, Deed Records, Denton County, TeXas; $:'~ROW S},~ rcC~,p ~o,lcc ~$',,A n n c',r o[lor~'~K.R U M _ FM 1~,_011_$0_0 I~,Krum_Enc'ro~chmcnl~racls_£,'~HI Bl¥.A.doc EX2~BIT A THENCE North 89 Degrees 16 Minutes 56 Seconds West with the North llne of said 10.00 acre tract and the South line 0fsaid 150 acre tract ~bassing at 25.39 feet at'a Wood Fence Comer Post and continuing along said. c6urse along or near a fence a iotaI distance -of2452.58 feet to a Wood Pence Comer Post for the Southwest comer of the tract described herein and the Southeast comer 'of a traci described in the deed to Warren Edward Strate recorded under Clerk's'File Number 98-R0033529 of.said Real Property Records; THENCE North 0I Degrees 00 Minutes 00 Seconds East With the East line thereof .passing at-594.21 feet a ½" capped iron rod found for the Southeast comer of said 1 t7;92 acre tract and continuing on along said course along or near a fence a total.distance of 2671.0t feet to the. PLACE OF BEGrNrNING and enclosing-155.03 acres of land more or less.~ Tract 3 FIELD NOTES to all that certain tract of land being a part of Tract 27 of Little Brook Estates Unit No. 2 an addition in Denton County, Texas, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 3, Page 5 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas as recognized and occupied on the ground; the subject tract being more particularly described as follows; BEGINNING far the Nbrthwest Comer o.f the tract being described herein at a concrete monument found for the Northwest Comer of said Tract 27 in.the South tight-of-way of F.M. Highway 1173 and the Hast. line of Masch Branch Road; ' ~ THENCE North 89 Degrees 44 Minutes 51 Seconds East with the North line of Said Tract 27 and the.South line 6f said highway, generally along a fence a distance of416.47 feet to a V2" iroh rod found for the Northeast Comer of said Tract 27, same being the Northwest Comer of said Tract 28, from which the remains Of an old concrete monument was found lying nearby; · - THENCE South 00 Degrees 09. Minutes.01 Secofids East with the East line of said Lot 27' a di.stanc~' of 745.53 feet to a concrete monument found for the Northeast Comer of that certain tract out of said Tract 27, described in the de&d to Denton Baptis~t Asso&, recorded in Volume 2660, Page 583 of Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE North 89 Degrees 47 minutes 08 Seconds West with'the North line of said Baptist tract, severing said Tract 27 a distance 6f417.74 feet to a ½" iron rod found for 'the Northwest Comer of said Baptist tract in the West line of said Tract 27 and th'e East line of said Masch Branch Road; THENCE North 00 Degrees 03 Minutes 10 Seconds West with said East li~e and the West line of said Tract 27, generally along a fence occupying the East line of saidroad a Sh~eoXP~ojcc~s~,Ann~xatu>n'sK.RUk,I FMB 08 ~t0 0 ~,Klmrn n r a m distance of 742.13 feet to the PLAC. E OF BEG~G and, en¢Iosing 7.122 acres of land.. ..:. .~ !...;,. -. ..'. " Tract 4. FIELD NOTES' to kll that certain tract ofland situated in the J. Haney Survey, Abstract Number 515, Denton County, Texas, and being~the Southerly 5 acres of Tract 27, Little Brook EstateS, Unit.21 as shown in the'pl~t there0f~e¢orded in Volume 3, page 5 of the Plat Records and described in the bleed fi.om Conni~'Puilen et.al to'Trinity Baptist Church of Denton recorded in Volume 1955, Page 613 of the Real Property Records of Denton. · County, Texas; the. subject tract being more particularly described as follows:' ' ' BEGrNNrNG -for the Southwest comer of the tract being described h~rein at a con~reie · monument found at.the Southwest comer of Tract 27 and th'e Northwest comer of Tract 36 in the East tine of Masch Branch Road as raonum~nted; TICENCE North 00 Degrees 10 Minutes 3'6 Seconds West with the West line of Tract 27 . and the East ~line of Masch Branch Road as monUmented a distance of 520,65 feet to an iron rod set for the Northwest comer of the Thnity Baptist Church Tract t.2 feet West of a concrete monument. THENCE South 89 D~grees 54 Minutes 46 Seconds East severing Tract ')-'7 with the North line of the Trinity Baptist Church Tract a distance 417.65.feet to .a concrete. monument found at the Northeast comer thereof in the East.lin~ of Tract 27;' THENCE South 00 Degrees I6 Minutes 13 Seconds East with the East line of Tract 27, a distance of 520,80 feet to a concrete monument found a~ the Southeast comer thereof in the North line of~ract 36; THENCE North 89 Degrees 53 Minutes 33 Secc~nds West Wi~h the South line of Tract 27 a distance of418.50 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING and enclosing 4.998 acres of land .... Fi'dP- 08 3.1) Ol\~.rum Ee.¢roacbmcnt ~r~cts I[XHIBrT ^.6ce 1./~ I101 EXHI. BIT B EXISTING CiTY OF DENTON 3.5 MI LE ETJ EXISTING' KRUM 1/2 MILE ETJ CITY OF KRUM ANNEXATION ORDINANCE 97-1'0 145,8 ACRES · .'i CITY OF KRUM ..... ~':I CITY OF KRUM .PROPOSED :,,..~ ~:~.: .... ANNEXATION ANNEXATION ' ?':" '. ORDINANCE 00-08 AREA. 4.988 - . · : 155.03 ACRES ACRE & 7.'~22 ENCROACHMENT AREA 4000 0 4000 Feet J~ILI~I I.L_t GtS ENGINEERING DEPT. CITY OF DENTON,TX, EXIZtIBIT C BEGINNING at a point lying on the City of Krum V2 mile extraterritorial jurisdiction line, as established of legal record, said point lying 292 feet west of the northeast comer ora 145;8 acre tract annexed by the City of Krum by Ordinance. Number 9%10, said point being the BEGINNING of a Fufure. Mutua! Boundary line (FMB) bebveen the City of Denton and the City of Krum; THENCE South 89 degrees 10 minutes 00 seconds East along the north line of said 145.8 acre annexation tract and along the said FMB line a distance of 292 feet to a point for comer, said point lying in Masch Branch Road; THENCE South alon~ the smd FMB i/ne and the most eastern tine of said 145.8 acre annexation tract a distance of 2,506.31 feet to'a point for corner, said point lying on the north fight-of-way line of F.M. Highway 1 I73, said point also lying on the north lin~ of a 155.03 acre tract annexed by the City orR.rum by Ordinance Number 00-08; THENCE South 89 degrees 40 minutes 20 seconds East along the north right-of-way line of said F.M. Highway 1173 and along said FMB line, same being the north line of said 155.03 acre annexation tract distance of 780 feet to a point for comet', said point being the northeast comer of said 155.03 acre annexation tract; - THENCE South 00 degrees 25 minutes 19 seconds West aI~ng the east tine of said· 155.03 acre annexation tract and the FMB line a distance of 90 feet to a point 'for comer, said point lying in the middle of Masch Branch Road and being a point on the south. right-of-way 6f F.M. Highway 1173; THENCE North 89 degrees 44 minutes 51 seconds East along the south righi-of-way Of F.M. Highway 1173 and along the said ]FMB line a distance of 441.47 feet to a point for comer; said point being the northeast corner of Tract 27 of Little Brook Estates Unit No. 2, an addition in Denton Cou.nty, Texas according to the pla! thereof recorded in Volume 3, Page 5 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; '"' THENCES0uth 00 degrees 09 minutes 01 second~ East along the east line of said.'Lot 27 and the said FMB line a distance of 745.53 feet to a point for corner, said poin~ being the northeast comer of that certain tract out of said Tract 27, described in the deed to Denton Baptist Association, recorded in Volum. e 2660, Page 583 of the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas; : THENCE South 00 degrees 16 minutes· I3 Seconds East along the east line or,aid Lot 2'2 and the said FMB tine a distance of. 520.80 feet to a point for corner; THENCE North 89 degrees 53 seconds 33 seconds West with the soutl~ line of said Tract 27 most' of the way and the said ~'MB line a distance of 443..50 feet to a point for comer, said point lying in the middle of Masch Branch Road, said point also lying on the east line of said 155.03 acre tract annexed by the City orR.rum by Ordinance Number 00-08; S:\ROW ' ' _ _ . . ~(rum_FMB_dcsodpli0. 6oc 8/11101 Sharc~Pmj¢ccs~.nncxa.on[KRIJM FMB 0~ 30 Ol~ EX~IBIT'C THENCE 'South 00,degrees 25 minutes 19 seconds West with the middle ofMasch Branch Road, along the east line of.said 155.03 acre.annexation tract and the said FMB line a d/stance bf 1,396 feet to a point for comer, ~.aid point being the southeast comer of said 155.03 acre annexation tract; TI-PENCE North 01 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds Wist aior~g the south line of said 155.03 acre annexatio, n tract most of the way and the said FM-B line a distance of 2,532 feet to the ENDINGof the said FMB; said point lying on the City ofKram ½ mile "extraterr/toriaI juri~llc.~ibfl' Iine,::a'ff~sfablished of legal re,hr '. ,. THENCE initially progress!ng southwesterly along said City of Kin ¼' mile " "~xfratenStOfial jurisdiction line, as ~st'ablighed of legal 'iecord, and ~ontinuing in a circumambient manner along said City ofK_mm ~.mile ~xtraterritorial jur/sdi~tion line, as established of legal record, to the POINT OF BEGINNING.' S~"~OW $~'c~,°rc :c~s~,nneaa[ion'~K-gklM_FMB_O~_2'0_Ol~.Krum_FMB_clg~¢riplivn.'~o~ EXISTING CITY OF DENTON 3.5 MILE ETJ ~ :..", ,. .:: . :'..-: ....' _::: , '".'. !' -~-:. i :': :' :'." '.:¢'. ,,:.t' '.' . '.7. EXIS'I'.t NG KRUM 1/2 MILE ETJ FMB BEGINNING FUTURE MUTUAL' BOUNDARY 4000 0 4000 Feet FUTURE MUTUAL BOUNDARY' -- (FMB) ' GIS ENGINEERING DEPT. CiTY OF DENTON Attachment 10 Denton Water and Wastewater CCN Areas inside Krum's City Limits and ETJ DENTON CCN BOUNDARY Krum ETJ within Denton CCN 925 ACRES BRANCH City Limits Denton CCN DENTON CCN Existing - 1400 acres total Attachment 11 ETJ Boundary Adjustment Informally Requested by Krum DENTON CCN BOUNDARY KRUM ETJ LOSES 6 ACRES 20 ACRES ER DENTON LOSES 66 ACRES NEW ETJ BOUNDARY PROPOSED BY KRUM BRANCH ISEWER METERL ~.JDENTON LOSES 30 ACRES DENTON GAINS ,5 ACRES] DENTON LOSES 20 ACRES DENTON GAINS 10 ACRES DENTON LOSES 90 ACRESI BENTON CON net loss of 176 acres Attachment 12 Developer Agreement between Aspen Park and Krum and Requested TSM Wilson Associates 600 North Pearl Street, Suite 900 Dallas, Texas 75201 .voice. 469.867.4168 .facsimile. 940.387.7957 email: twilson464@aol.com December 2, 2004 Tim Fisher, Asst. Director Water Utilities DMUA City of Denton 907 A Texas Street Denton, Texas 76209 RE: Aspen Park, Krum ETJ Project Dear Mr. Fisher: Pursuant to our phone conversation on December 1 st, this letter is sent to you. As you know, Aspen Park is a proposed subdivision that consists of approximately 194 preliminary platted lots in the ETJ of Krum, Texas on Hopkins Road. An additional 8 acres lie within Denton ETJ. The total property is approximately 67 acres in total land area. All of the 67 acres are contained in the certificated area for water and wastewater service for the City of Denton and Dual certification for water to Bolivar Water Supply Corporation. A "Development Agreement" has been executed by the City of Krum and Aspen Park Limted. Both parties have agreed to the following: The City of Krum would provide Water and Wastewater Retail Service to Aspen Park. Aspen Park would be annexed into the City Boundaries of Krum, Texas after all relevant tasks have been accomplished. The Aspen Park Plat would be approved as negotiated. Aspen Park would request an ETJ release of its 8 acres on the east from the City of Denton to the City of Krum so as to make Aspen Park a wholly contained subdivision within the Krum area. I write you this letter to clarify our request from the City of Denton at this time. EXHIBIT 3 Aspen Park requests: The City of Denton grant relief of the petition submitted by the City of Krum on behalf of Aspen Park Limited that requests the release of ETJ of its approximately 8 acres on the East edge of the tract as described in the petition filed in November, 2004 with the City of Denton. The City of Denton agree to execute a "Transfer of Sale and Merger" (TSM) of its water and wastewater CCN's to the City of Krum, Texas. Since the area is dually certified for water with Bolivar and solely certified for wastewater to Denton, the TSM is the simplest and quickest way for us to obtain rights for the City of Krum to serve Aspen Park. This is a simple process that requires both parties to execute and then file it with TCEQ. TCEQ usually processes TSM's within 60 to 90 days. We request that your Utility Board authorize whichever authorized party to execute a TSM to transfer the metes and bounds- legal description area of Aspen Park to the City of Krum. We will have the City of Krum execute it and it will be filed by Krum with the TCEQ. We will provide the document if you need us to provide. We would request that our TSM process start as soon as possible so as to allow the timer at TCEQ to run efficiently for our development. As you know, the City planning department has recommended approval of both of our requests as of November 25'h, 2004. You may consult Larry Reichart for that consent authorization. Thank you for your time on this matter and please advise me as to timing on the TSM execution issue as soon as possible. Sincerely,/~ ~ Kirk Wilson Agreement This Agreement (this "Agreement") is entered into among the City of Krum, Texas ("Krum"), and Aspen Park, Ltd. ("Develot/_e__r") (individually a "Party_ '~'and collectively the "Parties") t_o be effective (the "Effective Date") the 20th day of September, 2004. WHEREAS, Krum is a Texas general law municipality; and WHEREAS, Developer is a Texas limited partnership; andWHEREAS, Developer is the owner of appro.ximately 52.979 acres of land located in Denton County, Texas and described on the attached Exhibit A and commonly known as AsPen Park Phase One (the "Krum ETJ Prop..e...n3r._ "); and WHEREAS, the Krum ETJ Property is located wholly within the extraterritorial jurisdiction ("ET J") of Krum; and WHEREAS, Developer is the owner o f approximately 7.011 acres of land locatedin Denton County,~ Texas, and described on the attached Exhibit B and commonly known as Aspen Park Phase Two (the "Denton ET$ Prop.e .r!y.") and collectively, with the Krum ETJ Property, the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Denton ETJ Property is located wholly within the ETJ of Denton; and WHEREAS, the Property is within a dual certification area covered by'a City of Denton ("Denton") water certificate of c6nvenience and necessity ("CCN") and a Bolivar Water Supply corPoration water CCN; and WHEREAS, the ProperS/is covered by a Denton sewer CCN; and WHEREAS, the Kmm ETJ Property is covered by that certain preliminary plat prepared by Greg Edwards Engineering Services, Inc. ("GEES") that was filed with Kmm on May 6, 2004 and that was approved by.the Ci.ty Council of Krum on May 17, 2004 (the "Approved Phase One Preliminary_ Plat") and WHEREAS, GEES, on behalf of Develop~r, filed with Krum a new preliminary plat on the Krum ETJ Property on August 13, 2004 (the "New Phase One Preliminary_ Plat"); and WHEREAS, upon City approval of the New Preliminary Plat, Developer shall withdraw the Approved Phase One Preliminary Plat; and WHEREAS, Developer plans to file a preliminary plat application on the Denton ETJ Property (the "Phase Two Preliminary Plat.") with Krum upon Denton's release and Kmm's aeceptance of such property; AGREEMENT, PAGE I H:kDOCShMargcXKna-nW..rum_A~eement 1.WPD [September 21, 2004] WHEREAS, Krum would like to provide retail water and sewer service to the Property; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to settle their disputes with respect to the rights of Knma to regulate the Property and provide water and sewer service for the development of the Property; and WHEREAS, the Parties further desire, as part of such settlement, to agree upon the standards by which the Property wilt be developed and the process by which the Property will be annexed into the corporate limits of Kmm. NOW.THEREFORE, in consideration for the mutual promises of the Parties set forth in this Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and adequacy of which are acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Water and Sewer Service. Krum agrees to pursue a Transfer of Sale and Merger agreement (a "TSM Agreement") with Denton for both water and sewer service on the Property within 14 days of approval of this Agreement; Developer agrees to support the TSM Agreement by petition to the City of Denton. 2. ~Applicable Regulations. The Property shall be developed in accordance with the following regulations (collectively, the "Applicable Regulations"): (a) the New Phase One Preliminary Plat and the proposed Phase Two Preliminary Plat; Co) the following international codes adopted by ordinance of the City Council and uniformly applied throughout the corporate limits of Krum: 2000 International Building Code; 2000 International Plumbing Code; 2000 International Mechanical Code; 2000 International Fuel Gas Code; 2000 International Energy Conservation Code; 2000 International Residential Code; 2000 International Code Council, 2000 International Zoning Code, International Code Council Electric al Code, International Property Maintenance Code, 2000 International Fire Code; and (c) Krum Subdivision Ordinance No. 95-02, as amended and as in effect on May 6, 2004, approved by the City Council May 8, 1995; and (d) except as otherwise provided by this Agreement, SF-4 residential zoning reguiations of Krum Zoning Ordinance No.3185 approved by the City Council on February. 24, 1997, as amended and as in effect on May 6, 2004, (the "Zoning Ordinance") shall apply to development of the Property. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the foregoing SF-4 residential zoning regulations and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control; AGREEMENT, PAGE 2 tf:V)OCSkMargekKmm~Lmm_Ag~eementl.WPD [September21, 2004] (e) tap fees are excluded from this agreement; tap fees will be subject to thc fees at the time that each building permit is issued. (f) notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the above-referenced sections, the following regulations shall apply to the development of the Property: (1) the minimum tot area shall be 6,500 square feet; (2) the minimum lot width (measured. at the building line) shall be 60 feet; (3) the minimum front yard setback shall be 25 feet; (4) the minimum side yard setback shall be six feet; (5)_the minimum rear yard setback shall be ten feet; (6) the minimum house size shall be 1,500 square feet, except i 0 percent of ail homes.may be between 1,200 and 1,500 square feet and 20 percent of all homes must be 1,600 square feet or more; (7) the maximum building coverage shall be 50% plus an additional 15% coverage for accessory buildings such as garages, carports, and storage buildings; (8) masonry construction (which shall include only brick, stucco and stone), shall be required on 75% ofth~ first level of each home; (9)_the maximum road width shall be 31 feet face to curb to face to curb; (10) the maximum right-of-way width for all intemal roads shall be 50 feet; and (t 1) the maximum right-of-way width for the entrance and the roadway over the flood plain or/and drainage area shall be 60 feet. (g) Developer agrees and stipulates that the Developer shall obtain ail necessary approvals of the roadway crossing over the flood plain from the C0rp of Engineers prior to any approval of the Final Plat for the property. Said approval is a condition precedent for the approval of the Final Plat. 3. ETJ Transfer. Developer agrees to petition Denton to release from Denton's ETJ the Denton ETJ Property to Krum's ETJ. Krmn agrees to support Developer's petition with a resolution confirming that if Denton releases the Denton ETJ Property from Denton's ETJ that Krum will include the Denton ETJ property in Kmm's ETJ. Developer must petition the City of Denton within 45 days of approval of this agreement. 4. Notices. Any notice required or contemplated to be given under this Agreement shall be given in writing and may be given either by depositing the notice in the United States mail postage prepaid, registered or certified mail, with return receipt requested; by delivering the notice using a private delivery service that provides evidence of delivery (such as FedEx or UPS). Notice deposited by mail in the foregoing manner shall be effective three says after the day on which it is deposited. Notice given by private delivery service shall be effective when delivered. For purposes of notice, the addresses of the parties shall be as follows: AGREEMENT, PAGE 3 Hhl)OCSLh~argekKn2an'dC, xan_Agqeement I.WPD [September 21~ 2004} If to Knmq: City of Kmm Arm: Mayor Jan Farris P. O. Box 217 Krum, Texas 76249 If to Developer: Aspen Park, LP Attn: Alan Michlin, President P.O. Box 1075 Little Elm, Texas 75068 5. Reservation of Rights. All rights, powers, privileges and authorities of the Parties not restricted or affected by the express terms and provisions of this Agreement are reserved by the Parties 6. Merger. This Agreement embodies the entire agreement and understanding among the Parties with regard to the subj eot matter of this Agreement. -7. ~ent. DeVeloper has the right,.from time to time, to Sell, transfer, convey, donate, assign, pledge, mortgage, or encumber all or any part of Developer's rights and obligations under this Agreement to any person or entity ("Assignee") approved by Krum (which approval'shall not be un_reasonably withheld or delayed) provided the Assignee agrees in writing to be bound by this Agreement (whereupon Developer shall b e released from further performance under this Agreement to the extent .such performance is assumed by the Assignee). Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer may also, from time to time, sell, transfer, convey, donate, assign, pledge, mortgage, or encumber all or any part of Developer's rights and obligations under this Agreement without the consent of Krum provided (a) Assignee is a. successor owner or developer of land within the Property, (b) Assignee agrees in writing to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement (whereupon Develop er shall be released from further performance under this Agreement to the extent AGREEMENT, PAGE 4 tt:'d0OCSTMargekKmmkIG'xtm_Agrehmcntl.WPD [September 21, ¢004] such performange is assumed by Assignee), and (c) a copy of the written agreement between Developer and Assignee is given to Kmm. 8. Binding Obligation. This Agreement is a "development agreement" between Developer and Kmm pursuant to the authority of Section 212. t71 et. seq. of the Texas Local Government Code; and as such, shall continue for a maximum term of 15 years (subject to renewal by mutual agreement of Krum and Developer) and shall be recorded in the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas. This Agreement, when recorded, shall constitute a covenant running with the Property and shall be binding upon Developer and the Assignees permitted .by this Agreement. This Agreement is not, however, binding on, and does not create any encumbrance to title as to, any end-buyer ora fully develoi~ed tot within the. Property (except for the Applicable Regulations that shall continue to apply to such lots). 9. Default. No Party shall be ia default under this Agreement until written notice of such party's alleged failure to perform has been given to ail Parties (including a detailed description of the alleged failure) and until such Party has had a reasonable opportunity to cUre the alleged failure (taking into consideration the nature and extent of the alleged failure, but in no event less than 30 days after the notice is given). Ifa Party is in default under this Agreement, the exclusive remedies of the non-defaulting Parties shall be injunctive relief, mandamus, or specific performance. 10. Petition for Annexation. This Agreement, when fully executed by the Parties, shah constitute a petition by Developer requesting annexation of the Krum ETJ Property into the corporate limits of Krum. Within 14 days after Denton's release of the Denton ETJ Property from Denton's ETJ and Krum's acceptance of the DentOn ETJ Property into Krum's ET/t, Developer shall file a petition with Krum requesting annexation of the Denton ETJ Property. Each such petition is upon the condition that, and with the agreement of Kmm that, (a) Krum will follow all of the requirements of Chapter. 43 of the Texas Local Government Code that are applicable to annexations including, but not limited to, the requirements for public hearings and the requirement for the adoption o fa service plan for the annexed area that incorporates, by reference, this Agreement, and Co) from and after the effective date of the annexation, development of the Property shall continue to. be controlled by this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between this Agreement and any other ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations, standards, policies, guidelines, or other requirements of any kind adopted, enacted, or otherwise sought to be enforced by Krum after annexation,' then this Agreement shall control. 1t. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is ju~ticially declared invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed severed from this Agreement, and the remaining portions of this Agreement shall remain in effect. 12. Authority to Act. The parties (the City and Developer) each represent and warrant that the signatories on this Agreement are authorized to execute this Agreement and bind his/her principals AGREEMENT, PAGE 5 H:XDOCS~iarge~K.mmLlrxum_Agrekmcnt 1.VfPD [Sq~ernbcr 21, 2004] to the terms .and provisions hereof. Each party warrants that any action requked to be taken in order for this Agreement to be binding on it has been duly and properly taken prior to the execution of this Agreement. The City of Kmrn, Texas Title: Mayor Date: q,-&q-0d Aspen Park, LP, a Texas limited partnership By: Alan Michtin Title: President Date: September 21, 2004 STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF § This instrument.4~as acknowledged before me on this ~[(~day of September, 2004, by C2~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ of The City of Krum, Texas. k ' Notary Public in and for the State of Texas STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF § This instrument was acknowledged before.me on this 21 ~t day o f September, 2004, by Alan Michlin, President of Aspen Park, LP, a Texas limited partnership, on behalf of said partnership. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF T~S My Comm. ~. I0-2~2005 Notary Publi] ~ ~1 for thgStat~ of Texas AGREEMglNT) PAGE 6 H:~OCS',,Marge'~rum"~.nan_Agrcementl.W'PD [September 21, 2004] Exhibit A Legal Description of the IQ;um ETJ Propert3~ AGREEMENi, PAGE 7 H:~DOCSLMarge~nzmLKrum_Agteement 1.WPD [September 2 !, 2004] 52.979 ACRE TRACT IN THE ETJ OF THE CITY OF IcaX. UM FIELD NOTES to alt that certain tract of land situated in the JOHN W. GIBBONS SURVEY, Abstract No. 446 in Denton County, >re×as and being a part of a called 120 acre tract of land described in the deed from Rosa Hopkins, et al to Fred F, Hopkins as recorded in Volume 654, Page 636 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas~ the subject tract being more particularly described as follows: BEGIJNNING at a 60d nail-found for the Northwest corner of said tract at the Southwest corner of a called 70.154 acre tract described in the deed to Lena L. Erickson as recorded iri Vcilume 654, Page 645 of said Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE South 88 degrees 45 minutes 44 seconds East with the South line thereof and the North line of said 120 acre tract a distance of 2633.99 feet to the Northeast corner of the herein described tract, in a line separating the current Extra-Territorial Jurisdictions of the City of Krum and the City of Denton; THENCE South 00 degrees 27 minutes 50 seconds West with said ETJ line a distance of 875.88' to the Southeast corner of the herein described tract; THENCE North 88 degrees 45 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 2636.09 feet to a 60d nail found in the West. line of said 120 acre tract; THENCE North 00 degrees 36 minutes'04 seconds East with the West line thereof a distance of 875.85 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING and enclosing 52.979 acres of land, more or less. Page 2 of 3 N:\# 1 Jobsk2004\040041\040041-ETJ. doc 7.0ll ACRE TRACT IN TIlE ETJ OF THE CITY OF.DENTON FIELD NOTES to all .that certain tract of land situated in the JOHN W.'GIBBONS SURVEY, Abstract No. 446 in Denton County, Texas and being a part ora called 120 acre tract of land described in the deed from Rosa Hopkins, et al to Fred F. Hopkins as recorded in Volume 654, Page 636 of the Deed Recoi-ds of Denton County, Texas; the subject tract being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a wood fence post found for the Northeast corner of said tract at the Northwest comer of a calIed 50.00 acre tract of land described in the deed to Donal Green as recorded in Volume 4665, Page 744 of the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas, in the South tine of a called 70.154 acre tract of land described in the deed to Lena L. Erickson as recorded in Volume 654, Page 645 of said Deed Records; THENCE South 00 degrees 58 minutes 10 seconds West with the East line of said 120 acre tract and the West line of said 50.00 acre tract, along or near a fence a distance of 875.8I feet to a ½" capped iron rod found for corner; THENCE North 88 degrees 45 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 344.86 feet to the Southwest comer of the herein described tract, in a line separating the current Extra- Territorial Jurisdictions of the City of Kmm and the City of Denton; THENCE North 00 degrees 27 minutes 50 seconds East with said ETJ tine a distance of 875.88 feet to the Northwest corner of the herein described tract in the North line of said 120 acre tract, in the South line of a said 70. t54 acre tract; THENCE South 88 degrees 45 minutes 44 seconds East with the South line thereof and the North line of said 120 acre tract a distance of 352.58 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING and enclosing 7.01 t acres of land, more or less. These Field Notes were prepared from an on-the-ground survey performed under my direction and supervision on 9-3-4. "-~~-~ ~x*~ ~ .____ J. E. Thompson II R.PTL.S. No. 4857 Date Page 3 of 3 N:\# 1 Jobs\2004\040041 \040041 -ETJ.doc (r~a nnm~) ~ ,BB'gLB ],,Og,L~'.O0 N i. Z Z WITHOUT EMBOSSED SEA~ Exhibit B Legal Description of the Denton ETJ Property_ ~GREEB4ENT~ I~AGE 9 H:~. OCSqMarge~d'um~Xram_kgxeemcntLWl'D [September 20, 2004] PETITION AN~ REQUEST FOR THE RELEASE OF LAND FROM THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON Whereas, the undersigned is the owner of that certain tract of land in Denton County, Texas, more particularly described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Property_"); Whereas, the Property. is currently within the extraterritorial jurisdiction ("ETJ") of the City of Denton, Texas (''Denton''); Whereas, Denton's ETJ may not be reduced unless Denton*s govemlng body gives its written consent by ordinance or resolution; and Whereas, the undersigned petitions and requests the Property be released from Denton's ETJ and included within the ETJ of the City of Kmm, Texas ("Kngn. "); NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned: I. Requests the City Council of Denton to adopt such ordinance or resolution, required by Texas Local Govemmentt Code § 42,023, to release the Property fi:om Denton's ETJ, effective as of the earliest date deemed legally permissible. 2. Agrees that copies of this Petition and Request may be filed of record in the Real Property Records of Denton CoUnty, Texas, in the office of the Co .unty Judge of Denton County, Texas, and the city ot~ices 0i~-I)enton; ~k_m any true and correct copy of thl.q Petition and Request shall be effective as an original; and that the original or any legible copy of this Petition and Request shall be notice to and binding upon all persons or entities now or hereafter having any interest in the Property. Executed to be effective on the "7~4. day of October, 2004. ASPEN I'ARK, LTD., a Texas limited partnership Title: 014815.00010:867129.02 STATE OF TEXAS. COUNTY OF qt~ This inspect was acknowledged before me oM October 4'~., 2004, by t_~- _~X] ~.~C_~]]~ ~ of Aspen Park, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, on behalf Of said partnership. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas 014815.00010:867129,02 EXHIBIT A 014815.00010:867129.02 Legal Description of the Den.ton ETJ Property 0148 I5.00010:867129.02 7.0l t ACRE TRACT IN THE tiTJ OF THE CITY OF DENTON FIELD NOTES to all .that certain tract of laad situated in the JOHN W.' GIBBONS SURVEY, Abstract No. 446 in Denton County, Texas and being a part ora called 120 acre tract of land described in the deed from Rosa Hopkins, et al to Fred F. Hopkins as recorded in Volume 654, Page 636 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; the subject tract being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a wood fence post found for the Northeast corner of said tract at the Norti~west corner of a called 50.00 acre tract of land desctqbed in the deed to Donal Green as recorded in Volume 4665, Page 744 of the Real Property Records of Deaton County, Texas, in the South line of a called 70.154 acre tract of land described in the deed to Lena L. Erickson as recorded in Volume 654, Page 645 of said Deed Records; TH~_,NCE South 00 degrees 58 minutes 10 seconds West with the East line of said 120 acre tract and the West tine of said 50.00 acre tract, along or near a fence a distance of IZ~ 875.81 feet to a ~_, capped iron rod found for corner; THENCE North 88 degrees 45 minutes 44 secoads West a distance of 344.86 feet to the Southwest corner of the herein described tract, in a line separating the current Extra- Territorial Jurisdictions of the City of. Krum and the City of Denton; THENCE North 00 degrees 27 minutes 50 seconds East with said ETJ tine a distance of 875.88 feet to the Northwest corner of the herein described tract in the North line of said 120 acre 'tract, in the South line of'a said 70 t54 acre tract; THENCE South 88 degrges 45 minutes 44 seconds East with the South line thereof and the North line of said 120 acre tract a distance of 352.58 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING :hnd enclosing 7.011 acres of land, more or less. These Field Notes were prepared from an 0n-tl~e-ground survey performed under my direction and supervision on 9-3-4. J. E_ Thompson Ii R..~(~.S. No. 4857 Date Page 3 of 3 N:\#I Jobs\2004\040041\040041 -ETJ. doc Eh: Aspen Park-Projected Ideal Timeline GE/nas ATTACHMENT 13 Excerpt from City of Denton Public Utilities Board Minutes January 24, 2005 11) Receive a report, hold a discussion and give Staff direction concerning DeMon's Water and Wastewater CCN and an existing ETJ agreement between the City of Denton and the City of Krum. Tim Fisher, Assistam Director of Water Utilities, presented this item. The City of DeMon's Water and Wastewater Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) was originally established on November 1, 1979. Bolivar Water Supply Corporation's (BWSC) Water CNN was also originally established on this same date. Denton's CCN covers both water and wastewater retail service and extends to the southern and eastern side of the City of Krum. BWSC's (Bolivar Water Supply Corporation) CNN only covers retail water service and extends to the north of Highway 380 and to the west of 1-35. When the CCN's were first established, neither DeNon nor BWSC had existing facilities to provide water and wastewater service in the immediate area surrounding the City of Krum. As properties developed adjacem to the City of Krum, property owners requested utility service and Krum would require them to be annexed imo their City limits as a condition of obtaining water and wastewater service. The expansion of the Krum lSD facilities along FM 1173 on their eastern boundary spurred additional developments and annexations that began to encroach into Denton's ETJ as well as DeMon's CCN. Discussions regarding ETJ and future city limit boundaries resulted in a boundary adjustmem agreemem approved by each City. However, the agreemem did not address the issue of water and wastewater CCN's. DeNon has recently comracted with the City of Krum to provide wholesale wastewater service. The City of DeNon has also comracted with the Upper Trinity Regional Water District (UTRWD) to provide wholesale water service on a temporary basis to the City of Krum. The facilities are currently under construction and wholesale water service should begin within the next few months. In discussion with representatives from the City of Krum, it was apparem that Krum thought it had the legal right to provide retail water and wastewater service as long as they were in compliance with their currem city ordinance requiremems of being within their city limits. Currem Texas law governing retail water and wastewater service allows cities to provide service within their corporate city limits without a CCN, provided they are not within the CCN of another retail utility such as the BWSC. The City of Krum would be at risk of protest by BWSC, similar to protests that occurred in the past during annexations along FM 1173 The best solution would be for the City of Denton to consider transferring its existing water and wastewater CCN within the Krum ET J/Future City Limit agreement area to the City of Krum. Another option would be to reconsider the existing boundary agreement between the Cities of Denton and Krum. Although the agreement established an ET J/Future Krum City Limit boundary, it divided several large tracts of undeveloped land, thereby creating situations that could potentially cause conflicts associated with two sets of development regulations required by two Page 1 of 3 utility providers. An alternative boundary agreement between the Cities of Krum and Denton may need to be considered. A developer has an application pending for annexation of a tract of land to the City of Krum. This tract is within the ETJ of the City of Krum and within the City of Demon's s ETJ and CCN. The developer asked the City of Denton to release the CCN and ETJ for the entire tract. The representatives from Krum would prefer a single, more comprehensive agreement that would take imo consideration ownership of land so as to avoid conflicts between Ownership and the CCN and ETJ in order to facilitate the ease of administration by altering the current CCN and ETJ agreement. Fisher presented slides depicting existing conditions with acreage for Denton's CCN within Krum's city limits and within Krum's ETJ. Included was Krum's first proposal for DeMon's consideration for ETJ adjustment with a net loss to Denton of 376 acres. Fisher presented five alternatives offered to Krum reducing the net loss in increments down to 17 acres. Krum has informally asked that the City consider a net loss of 176 acres and additional loss of CCN. Board Member Charldean Newell asked if Krum would actually obligate the City of DeNon to provide water and wastewater services within the limited timeframe. Board Member George Hopkins asked if it was economically feasible to extend service to the area. Fisher explained that the City would not extend service at the city's expense but would require the developer to extend service through the normal extension policy. Hopkins explained that he is more concerned with the final boundaries than with the CCN. He stated that the issue should be resolved now so that the City does not have to deal with it in the future. Smith asked what role Bolivar plays in this process. Fisher explained that Bolivar is certified for water north of Hwy 380 and west ofi-35. Bolivar has no facilities in this general area. Krum would provide service on some boundaries and the City would provide it on the other side. The City has not approached Bolivar in these discussions. Fisher explained that Krum could approach Bolivar to sell them their CCN for water, but that does not address the wastewater issues. Krum wans to provide utility service at a retail level within their ETJ boundaries and Bolivar has protested. Ed Snyder, Deputy City Attorney, informed the Board that Bolivar is proposing that the City transfer the CCN to them. Smith asked for an explanation of the disadvamages of transferring the City's CCN to Krum. Fisher responded by explaining that as long as the City of Demon owns the CCN it would remain actively involved in the developmem process. Mike Conduff, City Manager, informed the Board that anything dealing with City limit adjustmems with a neighboring city is a public policy issue in the eyes of the City Council. From a Board's perspective, it is more of a customer responsibility. Conduff stated that the CCN clearly has an economic value regarding future impact fees and monthly bills that would offset capital investments. He suggested that the Board approach the issue from a customer perspective by analyzing system impact. He also recommended that the Board consider the effect of the surrender of several hundred acres suitable for potential development, which would result in lost impact fees and customer revenues. In conclusion, he asked that the Board make some type of recommendation to City Council regarding ownership issues. Page 2 of 3 Smith confirmed his understanding of the CCN's value and asked if Krum was willing to provide financial compensation. Martin responded by stating that if water and wastewater service issues could be worked out with our neighbors now, there would be less chance of the fresh water supply district or another entity providing service within the City's or Krum's service area in the future. Fisher recommended relinquishing the City's CCN to Krum either by the established boundary agreement or a modified boundary. Hopkins stated he was increasingly concerned about the direction this discussion was taking. He said he did not own property in this area, but members of his family did and he was concerned he might have a conflict of interest as that term is defined in State Law and asked to be excused from the discussion at this time. Hopkins removed himself from the Board Room. Conduff and Snyder excused themselves from the meeting at 11:15 a.m. Smith commented that Conduff's previous statements led him to believe that consideration of financial compensation might be appropriate even though staff suggests that setting the boundary line would be compensation enough. The Board was in agreement with the boundary of the ETJ as presented. They also confirmed their interest in considering monetary compensation in negotiations with the City of Krum. Smith stated his interest in resolving compensation and boundary issues simultaneously. Newell asked for a motion recommending a holistic approach to the boundaries of the Krum ETJ and consideration of monetary compensation from the City of Krum. Bland moved to approve the recommendation to take a holistic approach to the boundaries of the Krum ETJ and to consider monetary compensation, with a second from Smith. The motion passed by a vote of 3-0. Page 3 of 3 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET March 1, 2005 Materials Management Kathy DuBose g% Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7133 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance awarding a contract for the purchase of fleet vehicles to the second low bidder, Philpott Ford, due to the low bidder refusing to honor a bid for three vehicles awarded as items 1 and 8 in Ordinance No. 2005-031, dated January 18, 2005; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date. (Bid 3251-Fleet Vehicles for items 1 and 8 to Philpott Ford- $48,724). BID INFORMATION On January 18, 2005, Council awarded a contract to Graft Chevrolet for the purchase of three vehicles in the amount of $48,118. During the order entry process, Graft Chevrolet realized they had priced 6-cylinder engines in place of the V-8 engines required for the two vehicles on item 1. On item 8, Graft priced a gasoline engine in place of the diesel engine required in the bid specifications. Graft is unable to honor their bid and has withdrawn. The second low bidder, Philpott Ford, meets all requirements with their bid in the amount of $48,724. As a result, the total bid award will increase by $606. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) Council approved award of Bid 3251 at its January 18, 2005 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Rescind the award of Graft Chevrolet and award Items 1 and 8 to Philpott Ford in the amount of $48,724. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Philpott Ford Inc. Port Neches, TX ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Delivery is estimated to be 60-90 days from receipt of an order. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2005 Page 2 FISCAL INFORMATION This change order has a total impact of $606. 810001.8535. The funding is available from motor pool account Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1-AlS-Bid 3251 Change Order I./'3 0 0 0 0 i.r3 0 0 0 0 ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AWARDING A CON I'RACT FOR THE PUR.CI{ASE OF FLEET VEH'F.?LES TO THE SEC eND LO W BiDDER, PHII.?OTT FORD, D L/E TO THE LOW BIDDER REF USING TO HONOR A BiD FOR THREE VEHICLES AWARDED AS ITEMS 1 AND g tN ORDINANCE NO. 2005-©31, DATED JANt:ARY 18, 2005; PROV'[DING FOR '!NE EXPENT)iTURE OF FLi~rDS FliqEREFORE; AND PROViD'FNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE. {BID 32.5i~,,FLEE"f VEHICLES FOR ITEMS ! AND 8 TO PHII..POTT FORD-S48,724) WHEREAS, !>ursuant to ()~dinancg No. 2005-031, daled .lanuary 18, 2005 (the "Approval Ordinance"}, t]~.e City having solicited, received and Iabu[ated competitive bids tior thc pL~rchase of certain l~eet vehicles a bid was awarded to Grafl'Clsew-ole~ in accord, ante with the procedures of Szste taw a.nd Cit:y ordinances lbr a:t~c purchase of fica vehicles idcnlilicd as [~,ems I and 8, consis!ing of ihre. e vd?~icles~, a~ a [ota~ price of S48,1 !8 as the lowest responsible bidder; and WHEREAS, sub sequen~ t:o the App ~oval etd. in ance Ora.flT!hevrolet infol"m edl the Cii:y th at ii; bad made a mislake in ~!':eir' bid price and refused 1o ho:r~or 'ti~c' bid price; and WHEREAS, the Ch?s Purchasing Agen~ recommends I. hat the contrael be awarded the second low bidder, Ph.ilpott Fm,d in ihe amom'U o£548,,724, as beh]g d::c lowest responsible bidder; and Wt IEREAS, the City Cot~n cf! h as pro'vid cd in the City Bud get: ff~-,r the a. pprolWiation of funds to be used fbr I. be pm-ci~ase of'flS'!e vehicles approvedi and accepted herein', NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIl. OF I'[:IE CHTY OF .DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. 'The £mdi:[~gs and reci..ta[ions contained in t:!'~e preamble of [his ordhmnce are incoq~orated herein by rcl~crencc~ SECTION 2, The bid of Philpott Ford tbr the nm:nbered i'terns i~::~ the following numbered bids fix' the su/k] eot vehicles_ shown in Ibc "Bid Proposals" on file 'in 8-~e office of'the City Purchasing Agent., is hereby accepted and approved as being ll~e lowest responsible bids tbr such items: BiD JMB ER ITEM VENDOR AMOUNT 3251 1,8 Pb:ilpott S 48,7242X) SECTt'ON 3. By the acceptance and approval of'ti:'~c above numbered items o£t. he submitted bids. the City accepts ~.71~e r,>~.le~'~"= - of I.h.e persons .... st~bmitthm, the bids :l~:)r such items and am'ecs to pt[F- chase the :materials, equipment, supplies or sen, ices J:~'~ accordance '~¢~ i:th th:e temps, specifications, slandnrds, quantifies and for thc specified sums cmnai~md in the Bkt ].nvi~a/ic:ms, Bid Proposals, and re~a~ed docu:menls. SECTION 4, Should Ibc Ci[y and persons submitting approved and ancepted items and: of the submii;tcd bids wish lo enter into a (Ore, al wri!ten aBrcemeni: as a l:'cSkd[ of the acceptance, approval arm awm-din8 oJthc bids, the (fY ~ t ~' Manager or his designated reprcscn[afi ye is 1-~erebv authorizcd ~o exc:cu~e i:he wrJ[ten contract, provided t]~a[ ibc written contrac~ is n, accordm.~ce ~,"vid~ the tor'ms~ SECIION 5, Sy thc accepm:!:}c¢ and approval of the above :numbered items of the am/~mi~ted bids, tl~e Cky Cou.rlcJ ] hereby a u d~od zes l:he cxpclldil.~!i:e O:f irUi'Ids ~herei:br in d~e al'nou]~[ and i n accordance wiih t:he approved bids or audmdzed herein, SECT;ION d, Th, is ordu~ance si~al, I became ef:~;eci:ive immediately upon ii~ passaB¢ and approvai, PASSEE~ AND APPRO\?ED il;dc day o f' 2 ()05. BROCK, MAYOR JENNIFER WAI, TERS, CITY SECRETARY AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET March 1, 2005 Materials Management Kathy DuBose g'>~ Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Ross Chadwick 349-8830 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Demon authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute a purchase order with the Houston-Galveston Area Council of Governments (H-GAC) for the acquisition of a HazMat Command System for the City of Demon Fire Department by way of an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Denton; and providing an effective date (File 3308-Imerlocal Agreemem for HazMat Command System with H-GAC awarded to Smiths Detection in the amoum of $63,589.75). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the purchase of a HazMat Command System (Hazardous Materials Idemification Equipmem). This piece of equipmem will enable the Demon Fire Departmem Hazardous Material Team, Denton Fire Department Bomb Squad, and Denton Police Department Investigations Unit, to idemify unknown substances such as toxic chemicals, explosive compounds and illegal drugs. The equipmem is part of a regional project approved by the Urban Area Working Group as part of the State Homeland Security Gram Program. This project is 100% funded by this gram program. RECOMMENDATION Award a contract to Smiths Detection for the purchase of one HazMat Command System in the amount of $63,589.75, utilizing the Houston-Galveston Area Interlocal Agreement. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Smiths Detection Danbury, CT ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Delivery of this item can be made 60-90 days after receipt of an order. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2005 Page 2 FISCAL INFORMATION This equipment will be funded entirely from the 2003 Urban Area Security Initiative, which is part of the State Homeland Security Grant Program- account 342002.6332. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Quote from Smiths Detection 1-AlS-File 3308 srn hs Smiths Detection Quotation for: City of Denton 332 E Hickory Denton, TX Attachment 1 DATE: QUOTATION NO.: PAGE NO.: TERMS: DELIVERY: VALID UNTIL: WARRANTY: F.O,B,: Federal ID#: 1/31/2005 OTZ2QA00012J Page 1 of 3 Net30 See Terms & Conditions Summary Page 4/2/2005 One year parts and labor Destination 22-355-2823 Item Qty Part No. Description Base Price Net Price 1 1 023-I001 HazMatID System $ 50,650.00 $ 50,650.00 Sample interface is a single (1) reflection diamond requiring a single drop of liquid or grain of powder for analysis Smith Detection's customized HazMat data coltection software includes QuallD software for advanced data manipulation, HazMatlD software for control of the HazMatlD system, and an embedded computer system that features a touch screen interface. All screens have been customized for use by the first responder. Power: 12VDC or 115/240 VAC 50/60 HZ HazMatlD package features: 1. Pelican hardened shipping case. 2. Sealed data compartment - including USB port, Ethemet port, Keyboard/Mouse port, and Power port. 3L Two batteries. Chargeable in the system or separately with external battery charger. 4. External Battery Charger. 5. USB storage device -16 MB storage capacity 6. USB CD*ROM for software and library upgrade or installation. 7. Keyboard and Mouse m be used with HazMatlD system, 8. I year Standard Warranty - See Parmership Program below for details. 9. 1 year Web access for sharing data with other first responders 10.24/7 reachbaek capability - a~cess to chemists Partnership Program: -Free software upgrades. -All parts and labor to repair system in ~e event of' a malfunction. *Free loaner (Delivered by Overnight Carrier) if system malfunctions. -HazMatlD refresher course for I person per yr. at a 1 day regional training course. Limited to the length of Partnership Program. -Access to proprietary web site, www.lmzmatld.com. -Web access for sharing data with other first responders. -24/7 ReachBack access to Ph.D. chemists, engineers, and application scientists for spectral interpretation assistance and/or technical support, Included Libraries: 000-0012 Nerve and Blister agents 000-0013 Toxic Industrial Chemicals 000-0002 Common Chernieals 000-0015 Explosives 000-0016 Forensic Drags 000-0017 Common white powders 000-0018 Drug Precursors 3 seats to a one day regional training class. 023-1006 Uoerade to HazMatlD Command System $ 12,000.00 $12,000,00 Complete upgrade from HazMatlD to HazMatlD Command System. Includes: 1~ Laptop Operating system with Linksys Wireless PC Card to enable remote operation of HazMatlD system. 2. USB CD-ROM for software and library upgrade or installation. 3. One additional license of QuallD provided for use on remote laptop. Smiths Detection 14 Commerce Drive Danbury, CT. 06810 Main (203) 207-9700 Fax (203) 207-9780 www. smithsdetection.com srntths Smiths Detection Ouotation for: City of Denton 332 E Hickory Denton, TX DATE: QUOTATION NO.: PAGE NO.: TERMS: DELIVERY: VALID UNTIL: WARRANTY: F.O.B.: Federal ID#: 1/31/2005 OTZ2QA00012J Page 2 of 3 Net 30 See Terms & Conditions Summary Page 4/2/2005 One year parts and labor Destination 22-365-2823 Item Qty Part No. Description Base Price Net Price 4.3 Year Partnership Program: includes standard manafaeturing warranty, web access for sharing data with other £n-st-responders, 24/7 ReachBack and replacement loaner program. 5. On-Site Training - One day HazMat integration lraining held on-site at the customers facility for up to 16 people. *Best efforts wilt be made to arrange and complete training w/thin 45 days after receipt of unit. *A training day must be booked within one year after receipt of unit or training will be forfeit. 3 1 HGAC-FEE HGAC-FEE $939.75 $ 939.75 HGAC Processing Fee TOTAL: $ 63,589.75 Smiths Detection 14 Commerce Drive Danbury, CT. 06810 Main (203) 207-9700 Fax (203) 207-9780 www. smithsdetection, com srn hs Smiths Detection Ouotation for: City of Denton 332 E Hickory Denton, TX DATE: QUOTATION NO.: PAGE NO.: TERMS: DELIVERY: VALID UNTIL: WARRANTY: F.O.B.: Federal ID#: 1/31/2005 OTZ2QA00012J Page 3 of 3 Net 30 See Terms & Conditions Summary Page 4/2/2005 One year parts and labor Destination 22-355-2823 Item Qty Part No. Description Base Price Net Price Should you have any questions regarding this quotation, please contact Mike Ackermann at (972) 274-1176 or via email at mike. ackermann~smithsdetection.com. Terms and Conditions Summary ALL Smiths Detection standard Terms & Conditions apply to ALL quotations unless specifically amended in said quotation. Smiths Detection's Terms & Conditions will be supplied at the time of order acknowledgement or upon customer request. Delivery for the TravellR product line is 60 to 90 Days after receipt of Order. Delivery for the IlluminatlR product line is 60 to 90 Days after receipt of Order. Delivery for the HazMatID product line is 60 to 90 Days after receipt of Order. Delivery for the GasID product line is 60 to 90 Days after receipt of Order. Delivery for the ChemlD product line is 60 to 90 Days after receipt of Order. Delivery for all other Products and Accessories is 45 Days after receipt of Order, unless indicated otherwise. Full payment is due within 30 days of product invoice date. To place your order and expedite shipment, please fax your Purchase Order request with all associated terms and conditions, atong with a tax exemption certificate if applicable, to Fax #(203) 207-9780, Attention: Order Administration. All Purchase Orders must show Smiths Detection, 14 Commerce Drive, Danbury, CT. 06810 as the vendor name and address. Please reference our quotation number on your purchase order and on any correspondence regarding the quotation. Include a copy &this quotation with your Purchase Order. Prices, warranty, installation and services on the items quoted herein are available only in the United States, and may not be otherwise assigned. Buyer shall pay any applicable federal, state and local taxes in addition to the price stated on this quotation unless buyer submits a signed exemption certificate or direct pay permit. Your purchase order should indicate the sales tax status of your order. Buyer shal[ not export or re-export technical data or products supplied by Smiths Detection in violation of applicable export regulations. Buyer who exports from the U.S. products purchased hereunder assumes all responsibility for obtaining any required export authorization and payment of applicable fees. Smiths Detection 14 Commerce Drive Danbury, CT. 06810 Main (203) 207-9700 Fax (203) 207-9780 www. smithsdetection.com ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE ORDER WITH THE HOUSTON-GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (H-GAC) FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A HAZMAT COMMAND SYSTEM FOR THE CITY OF DENTON FIRE DEPARTMENT BY WAY OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF DENTON; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 3308 - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR HAZMAT COMMAND SYSTEM WITH H-GAC AWARDED TO SMITHS DETECTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $63,589.75). WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 95-107, the Houston-Galveston Council Area of Government (H-GAC) has solicited, received, and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies, or services in accordance with the procedures of state law on behalf of the City of Denton; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described materials, equipment, supplies, or services can be purchased by the City through the Houston-Galveston Area Council of Government (H- GAC) programs at less cost than the City would expend if bidding these items individually; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipment, supplies, or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The numbered items in the following numbered purchase order for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "File Number" referenced herein and on file in office of the Purchasing Agent, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: FILE NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 3308 Smiths Detection $63,589.75 SECTION 2. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the referenced File Number, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the H-GAC for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies, or services in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums contained in the bid documents and related documents filed with the H-GAC, and the purchase order issued by the City. SECTION 3. Should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items set forth in the referenced File Number wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the City's ratification of bids awarded by the H-GAC, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the H-GAC, quantities and specified sums contained in the City's File Number 3308, and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the referenced File Number, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids or pursuant to a written contract made pursuant thereto as authorized herein SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of .,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-File 3308 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET March 1, 2005 Materials Management Kathy DuBose ~'~ Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Barbara Ross 349-7235 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a public works comract for the construction of a single family dwelling at 634 E. Prairie Street for the City of Demon Community Developmem Block Gram Division; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (Bid 3286-634 E. Prairie Street Infill New Construction awarded to Delta One Construction in the amoum of $90,722). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the construction of a single family housing unit at 634 E. Prairie. The property was recently struck off to the City of Denton after failing to sell at a tax foreclosure sale. The City's Community Development staff worked with the City's tax attorneys to acquire the property at a reduced cost. The completed unit will be approximately 1,350 square feet, with three bedrooms, two and one-half baths, and a one car garage. After completion, the house will be sold to a family that is eligible under HOME program guidelines. The family will be required to obtain a mortgage loan and will be assisted with the down paymem and closing costs through the HOME program. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) During the 2003 Community Developmem application process, the Community Development Advisory Committee recommended approximately $200,000 in funding for the Infill New Construction Program. The program was approved by City Council in the 2003 Action Plan for Housing And Community Developmem. RECOMMENDATION Award this bid to Delta One Construction in the amoum of $90,722. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Delta One Construction Demon, TX Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2005 Page 2 STAFF ESTIMATE The construction estimate for this project was $85,000 not including bonding or insurance. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This project is scheduled to begin late March or early April with an estimated completion date of July 2005. The unit will be advertised for sale by the Community Developmem staff when the construction is substantially completed. FISCAL INFORMATION This project will be funded from Community Developmem Block Gram accoum 912003007.1360.10100. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1-AlS-Bid 3286 Bid # 3286 Attachment 1 Date: 1/27/05 634 E. Prairie Street :[nfill New Construction Delta One Construction Principle Place of Business: Denton, TX I Total Base Bid $90,722.00 2 Bid Bond YES ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AT 634 E. PRAIRIE STREET FOR THE CITY OF DENTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT DiViSiON; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROViDiNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 3286-634 E. PRAIRIE STREET iNFiLL NEW CONSTRUCTION AWARDED TO DELTA ONE CONSTRUCTION iN THE AMOUNT OF $90,722). WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the construction of public works or improvements in accordance with the procedures of State law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has received and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the construction of the public works or improvements described in the bid invitation, bid proposals and plans and specifications therein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the following competitive bids for the construction of public works or improvements, as described in the "Bid invitations", "Bid Proposals" or plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City's Purchasing Agent filed according to the bid number assigned hereto, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids: BiD NUMBER CONTRACTOR AMOUNT Delta One Construction 3286 $90,722 SECTION 2. That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive bids shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for construction of such public works or improvements herein accepted and approved, until such person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and furnishing of performance and payment bonds, and insurance certificate after notification of the award of the bid. SECTION 3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and Bid Proposals, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, conditions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained therein. SECTION 4. That upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive bids and the execution of contracts for the public works and improvements as authorized herein, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds in the manner and in the amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized contracts executed pursuant thereto. SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of .,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-Bid 3286 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET March 1, 2005 Materials Management Kathy DuBose ~G Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Ross Chadwick 349-8830 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance approving the expenditure of funds for the purchase of two LIFEPAK 12 defibrillators/monitoring units for the City of Denton Fire Department available from only one source in accordance with the provision for state law exempting such purchases from requiremems of competitive bids; and providing an effective date (File 3306-Defibrillators for Fire Department awarded to Medtronic Emergency Response Systems in the amount of $38,382). BID INFORMATION This ordinance is for the purchase of two LIFEPAK 12 defibrillator/monitor units for use by the Emergency Medical Services Division of the Fire Departmem. These units will be placed on the two new MICU ambulances approved by Council in November 2004. These units are the latest models, fully compatible with our existing units and with the communications to and from the local hospitals. Defibrillators are used to treat and monitor patients suffering from cardiac arrest. LIFEPAK 12 defibrillators are available from only one source and protected by patents and copyright. Texas Local Governmem Code Chapter 252 exempts sole source acquisitions from competitive bidding. The City of DeNon Fire Departmem has standardized the Medtronic LIFEPAK line of defibrillator/monitor since the beginning of the EMS service. Medtronic is the only source of equipment, maintenance, and service compatible with our existing defibrillators/monitors. Cominued use of the Medtronic LIFEPAK 12 units allows for compatibility and interchangeability of batteries, chargers, LEDs, maintenance agreements and other supplies from one response vehicle to another. Most importantly is the consistency of the training of the user and the accuracy of communications with the local hospitals that also utilize the Medtronic equipmem. RECOMMENDATION Award to the sole source provider, Medtronic Emergency Response System, two LIFEPAK 12 defibrillators in the total amoum of $38,382. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Medtronic Emergency Response System Redmond, WA Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2005 Page 2 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Shipping can be accomplished within 30-45 days after receipt of an order. FISCAL INFORMATION This acquisition will be funded from motor pool funds associated with the ambulance purchase and approved by Council as a budget package using account 810002706.1355.30100. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Medtronic Quote #1-BYA7P Attachment 2: Sole Source Letter 1-AlS-File 3306 · ttaela~eat I Battalion Chief Colt Higgins EMS Coon:linator Denton Fire Depa[Iment 332 East Hickory DENTON, TX 762O1 Phone: (940) 349-8834 Fax: (940) 349-8835 corL higgins@cityofdenton.com Contract: None JAN 4 2005 Medtronic Emergency Response Systems 11811 W~llows Road NE P.O. Box 97023 Redmond, WA 98073-9723 U.S.A www. medtronic-ers.com www. medtronic.com tel 800.442.1142 fax 800.732.0956 Quote#: Rev~. Quote Date: Sales Consultant; FOB: ShioDin~: Terms: 1 -BYA7P 2 12120/2004 Todd Shire · 800-4.42-1142 x 2205 Redmond, WA 30-45 Days Net 30, all quotes subject to credit approval and the following terms & conditions Exp Date: 0211812005 99400-002505 - LP12 DEFIB/MON, ADAPTIV Biphaslc, AED, EL Screen, Pacing, $pO2, 12Lead, Fax, NiBP, EtCO2, Trending, 100mm The biphasic L1FEPAK 12 is an ADAPTIV fully escalating (to 360 joules) biphasic mutii-parameter defibrillator/monitor unit. Ship kit included. Hard paddles, batteries and carrying case not included. 41310-002432 - MFEPAK 12 SHIPKIT USA, 2 ENGESH, BIPHASIC, C02, 12 LEAD, SHORT $24,995.00 $6,000,00 $0.00 $18,995.00 $37,990.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 11141-000026 - LIFEPAK NlCd battery, 2.4 8 amp hour capacity Rechargeable nickel-cadmium with fuel gage. Must be used with an AC or DC Power Adaptor that is compatible with 2.4 amp hour batteries. Same size and weight as 1.7 amp hour battery. 1t 150-000006 - Internal Modem (PC card 2 modem) For analog cellular and landline transmission. Requires modem door assembly. 11150-000009 - Modem Door Assembly 2 i 1171-000007 - Masimo SET SpO2 Sensor Adult Reusable 1117%000006 - Masimo SET SpO2 Patient 2 Cable - 4ft For use with lhe LIFEPAK 20. 11996-000023 - Small Adult Cuff, t 2x30cm 2 Reusable $268.00 $268.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 $275,00 $79,00 $0,00 $196,00 $392,00 $147.00 $147.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25.00 $25.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $52.00 $52.00 $0,00 $0.00 $0,00 $320.00 $320.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Quote Products (continued} Quote~: J-BYA7P Rev~: 2 Quote Date: t2/20/2004 9 11996,000024 - Adult Cuff, 14x37.Scm 2 Reusable $26,00 $26,00 $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 10 11996-000025 - Large Adult Cuff, 16x42cm Reusable 2 $29.00 $29.00 $0.00 $0,00 $0,00 11 11260.000012 - LIFEPAK 12 Basic Carrying Case Includes shoulder strap, dght pouch, and front cover. 12 11220-000028 - Top Pouch Storage for sensors and electrodes. Insert in place of standard paddles. 13 11220-000072 - Back Pouch - large 2 Requires basic carrying case. 14 11220,000027 - Left Pouch 2 Storage for ECG and other monitoring cables. Requires basic carrying case. 15 1'1998-000063 - Removable Acrylic Screen 2 Shield Hard acrylic shield for disptay protection. Cannot be used with front cover. 16 11996,000126 - Smart CapnoLine with 02 1 delivery Adult (for patients above 120 lbs) 02 delivery and CO2 sampling via mouth or nose (12 hours typical length of use). 17 11996-000081 - FIIterline Set Adult/Pediatric - 1 Includes airway adapter Box of 25, Includes airway adapter, FitterLine for short- term intubated patients {24 hours typical). 2 $147.00 $147,00 $0.00 $0,00 $0,00 2 $46.00 $46,00 $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 $46.00 $46.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $33.00 $33.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $42,00 $42,00 $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 $295,00 $295.00 $0.00 $0,00 $0,00 $215,00 $215,00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 GRAND TOTAL Pricing Summary Totals List Price: Cash Discounts: GRAND TOTAL FOR THIS QUOTE $38,382.00 $55,020.00 - $16,638.00 $38.382.00 TO PLACE AN ORDER, PLEASE FAX A COPY OF THE QUOTE/PURCHASE ORDER TO FAX # 800-732. 0956, A TTN: SALES SUPPORT. MEDTRONE; REQUIRES v~RrCFEN ~,JFtCATE~N OF THE OR~E~ OR A PURCHASE ORDER. R_F_AS~ CHECK ONE: _ PURCHASER HAS A PURCHASE ORDER SYS'[EM. _ PURCHASER DOES NOT HAVE A PURCHASE ORDER SYSTEM AND THE UNDERSIC~ED iS A~7'~r3 TO ACCEPT CUSTOMER APPROVAL (SIGNATURE) NAME TITLE DATE Attachment 2 11811 Wilbwi Road NE P-O. B~ Redmond, WA 98073~9706 w ww. medtr~i(;-o~,CO~l February 14, 2005 Dear Customer, In response to your meat request. I am writing to verify that Medtronic Em, rgency Response Systems, Inc. is the o,ly source from which to obtain the LIFEPAK defibrillator/monitor family of prodacts, its upgrades, parts and accessories in your marketplace. Mecltronic does not utflLze the sexvic~s of any dealen or distributors in the sale of our products in your marketplace. If you have any quesficrns, please feel free to contact me at 800442-1142 ext. 4551. Sincerely, L. Murray Lomnee Sr. Pricing and Contracting Manager MEDTRONIC FAVlERGENC~ RESPONSE SYSTEMS,' INC. When Life Dej_~er~ds on. Medical Tecbllolot,~ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO LIFEPAK 12 DEFIBRILLATORS/MONITORING UNITS FOR THE CITY OF DENTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION FOR STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 3306-DEFIBRILLATORS FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT AWARDED TO MEDTRONIC EMERGENCY RESPONSE SYSTEMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $38,382). WHEREAS, Section 252.022 of the Local Government Code provides that procurement of items that are only available from one source, including; items that are only available from one source because of patents, copyrights, secret processes or natural monopolies; films, manuscripts or books; electricity, gas, water and other utility purchases; captive replacement parts or components for equipment; and library materials for a public library that are available only from the persons holding exclusive distribution rights to the materials; need not be submitted to competitive bids; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to procure one or more of the items mentioned in the above paragraph; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the following purchase of materials, equipment or supplies, as described in the "File Number" listed hereon, and on file in the office of the Purchasing Agent, and the license terms attached hereto are hereby approved: FILE NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT Medtronic Emergency Response Systems 3306 $38,382 SECTION 2. That the acceptance and approval of the above items shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the quotation for such items until such person shall comply with all requirements specified by the Purchasing Department. SECTION 3. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any contracts relating to the items specified in Section I and the expenditure of funds pursuant to said contracts is hereby authorized. SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY 3-ORD- FILE 3306 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET March 1, 2005 Materials Management Kathy DuBose ~G Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Ross Chadwick 349-8830 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance awarding a comract under the Texas Multiple Award Schedule (TXMAS) program for the purchase of an ANDROS F6A robot for the City of Demon Fire Department as awarded by the State of Texas Building and Procurement Commission (Comract TXMAS-5-84030); providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 3307-Robot for Fire Department awarded to Remotec, Inc. in the amount of $163,026). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the purchase of an ANDROS F6A robot for the City of Denton Fire Department. This piece of equipment will enable the Denton Fire Department Bomb Squad, Denton Fire Department Hazardous Material Team, and Denton Police Department Tactical Unit, to provide remote operations at hazardous events. The robot will allow for operations from a safe location at evems such as explosive device incidems, hazardous materials incidems, and hostage incidems. This acquisition is part of a regional project approved by the Urban Area Working Group as part of the State Homeland Security Gram Program. This project is funded 100% by the gram program. RECOMMENDATION Award a contract with Remotec, Inc. for the purchase of one ANDROS F6A robot in the amount of $163,026 utilizing the TXMAS program pricing. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Remotec, Inc. Climon, TN ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Delivery of this item will be determined after placemem of the order. The Fire Departmem amicipates delivery by July 2005. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2005 Page 2 FISCAL INFORMATION This equipment will be funded entirely through the 2003 Urban Area Security Initiative, which is part of the State Homeland Security Grant Program-account 342002.6372. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Remotec, Inc. Quote 1-AlS-File 3307 Attachment I Print Date: 31-Jan-05 Remotec GSA Schedule # GS-OTF-OS38M TEXMAS REV: 'REMOTEC, I~lC. BUDGETARy ESTIMATE. GSA REMOTEC Reference No. 4227 FROM: REMOTEC, Inc. Date: 353 JD Yarnell Industrial Parkway Clinton, TN 37716 Terms: Net 30 Days Attn: Don Wilson / Jim Daniels Phone: (865) 483-0228 Ext 201 / 165 Prices are F.O.B. Clinton, TN 37716 Fax: (865) 483-1426 TO: Chad Weldon Delivery: To be Determined City of Denton After Acceptance of Order 212 W. Sycamore (For Multi-Vehicle Orders Denton, TX 72601 Check With Sales Dept.) E-mail: chad.wetdon@city of denton.corn 940-391-9942 This pricing is valid for 90 days. PAGE 1 OF 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION PART NO. QTY. UNIT PRICE "TOTAL PRICE 1 ANDROS FCA Vehicle Assembly: E2455-0100' 1 $ 85,857 $ 85,857.00 -Double-Articulated, Tracked Chassis -Manipulator Arm with Shoulder and Elbow Pivot -Manipulator Shoulder Rotate (+90°) Assembly -Wrist Pitch with 8 in. Grip Extend and Dual Accessory Interface -8 in. Gripper with Continuous Wrist Rotate -Color Arm Camera with Auto Iris/Focus, Wide-Angle Lens and Light -Surveillance Color Camera with Light, 216:1 Zoom Lens and Pan/Tilt (Continuous Pan) -Vertical Surveillance Camera Extend Assembly (24 in.) -Black/White Drive Camera Assembly -Picture-in-Picture -Two Low-Light Lenses -24 Volt Battery Pack -24 VDC Battery Charger ~-1/4 Turn Connectors -Seven Firing Circuits -Tool Kit -Pneumatic Wheel Kit -One Operation/Maintenance Manual (CD-ROM) -2 1/2 Days Operator/Maintenance Training at REMOTEC (maximum class size is 6 people) See Note (2) lA 24 VDC Battery Charger Assembly,,(included in ~tem 1 ) B2450-0150-X 1 CONTROL SYSTEM OPTIONS (The Tabletop Controller and One of Either ltems 4, .7, or 8 must be chosen to make the ANDROS FCA functional) 2 ANDROS Tabletop ControtlerAss'~mbly: E2455-8450 1 $ 9;726 $ 9','726.00 -Dimensions: 18 in. Deep X 22 in. Wide X ~0 in. High -Powder Coated, Weather Resistant Enclosure -Detachable Switchbox -t5 in. Self-Compensating, Daylight Readable LCD Monitor WP60/Marketing/Proposal/ andros4228.xls ANDROS F6A Page 1 Print Date: 31-Jan-05 Rerrlotec GSA Schedule # GS-O7F-O5381~! TEXMAS REV: N 1-12 VDC Battery and Charger One Battery Charger and Power Cord Are Included in Item 2 - Select Power Requireme,n,t ' 2A 240 VAC Power Cor. d. Assembly B3850-8136-X $ 2B 240VAC Battery_ChargerAssembly 83850-0155-X $ - 2C 120 VAC Battery Ch.arger (For Tabletop Control)' . CHGR-019 2D 120 ~AC Power Cord Assembly B3850-8132 DATA LINK OPTIONS 3 ANDROS Hand Co.n'irollerAssembly D7055-8490 $ .:1,047 $ - Fiber Optic Cable Reel Assembly (1200 ff.) (Includes 4 CASE-004) C7055-8330' 1 $ 14,863 $ 14,863.00 5 Foot Switch Assembly (FiberTake-Up) B2450L8337 t $ 454 $" 454.00 6 Spare ,Spool of Fiber Optic Cable D7050-8323 1 $ 1,0.12 $ 1,012.00 7 Cable ReelAssembly (330 ft.) E7055-8600 $ 3,641 $ Radio Control Assembly (5 Watt System) (Includes" 8 CASE_004) C2455-844o-xxx $ 23,605 $ 9 Radio Jumper ASsembly (~0 ff.) "' B7055_8920. $ 690 $ 10 Radio Jumper Box Assembly (requires Cable "Reel - Item 7) E7055-8280 $ 1,397 $ ' 120 VAC Cehicle Power Sul~ply Assembly (requires 11 Cable Reel - ~tem 7) D2450-1850-1 $ .2,095 $ 12 240 VAC Vehicle Power Supply Assembly (requires Cable Reel- Item 7) D2450-1850-2 $ 2,095 $ 13 RADIO, VEHICLE/CONSO. LE, NLR c2455-8441-001 1 $ 18,681 $ 18,681.00 AUDIONIDEO OPTIONS 14 !camera PanFl'ilt Assembly (Can Be Used On Arm) C2450-5030' :1 $ 4,444 $ ~,444.00 15 (~'amera Sighting KitAs. sembty ' C7055-5140 I $ 813 $ 81':3.00 16 Camera MountAssemb..!y C2400-1265 "$ 579' $ 17 .Laser Assembly .... C7055-5170 t $ 598 $ 598.00 18 Laser Filter,Assembly C7055-3830 $ 542 $ - 19 High Intensity Light Assembly' ... D7055-6015 1 $ 1,147 $ 1,!..47.00 20 Headset Assy... B3850-8496 $ 2.:.095 $ - SENSORS 21 AP...D20001MUL~'IRAE Detector Mou. ntin9 Kit B70,~-6080 1 $ 1,496 $ 1,496..00 22 X-Ray Assembly (fits Golden X-Ray SystemsI E7050-5800 1 $ 2,14~ .$ 2,145.00 23 Real-Time X-Ray Assembly (fits FoxRay VCU 10 only) D2450-5900 $ 3,596 $ 2,.,4 Contamination SmearAssem.bly '" C7045L7600 $ "' 1,397 $ TOOLS 25 Pan Disrupter Mount Assembly '"D2450-5360 $ 1,347 $ - 26 Dual Pan. Disrupter Mouq.t Assembly D2450-5350 1 $ 1,546 $ 1,546.00 27 Dual Disrupter Mount Assembly (for Royal Arms or Neutrex 29mm/20mm - Please Specie) D2450-5250 $ 2,190 $ 28 Shock Tube Initiator, One Channel 'iNiT_lCH_S $ 820 $ 29 Shock Tube Initiator, TWo Channel INIT*2CH-S $ 1,466 $ 30 Shock Tube in(.tiator, Four Channel INIT-4CH-S 1 $ 2,664 $ 2,664.00 31 Shock Tube Initi.ator, Six Channel INIT-6CH-S $ 3,305 $ 32 Ch?ge Dropper Assembly (330 ft.~ C7055-5550 $ 748 $ - 33 Gas Dispenser Mo.u. nt Assembly E7055-6030 $ 993 $ - 34 SL6 Mount Assembly (will also hold SL8) E7055-6000 1 $ 2,610 $ 2,610.00 35 Striker Mount Assembly E7055-6010 I $ 2,584 $ 2,584.00 WP60/Marketing/Proposalt andros4228.xls ANDROS F6A Page 2 ' NORTHROP Re i-~-~ otec Print Date: 31-Jan-05 GSA Schedule # GS-07F-05381~I TEXMAS -' F~r-v · 36 Striker 12 Shotgun STRIKER1'2 1 $ 1,(~47 $ 1,047.00 37 Window BreakerAs~mbly B7045-5850 $ ~299 $ ' - 38 Claw Assembly C7045-2720 1 $ 848 $ 848.00 39 Cable Cutter Asser~bly C7040-7030 1 $ 416 $ 416.00 40 Boot Banger Assembly C7040-7050 $ 285 $'" 41 .. Cordless Circular Saw Ass(imbly D7040-7070 1 $ 1,687 $ 1,687.00 42 :Reciprocati.ng SawAssembl¥ D7040-7080 I $ 1,535 $ 1,5351'00 43 Cordless DrillAssembly D7040-7040 1 $ 764 $ 764.00 44 J-Rod MountAssembty (6) E7055-7000 $ 5,225 $ - .... MAINTENANCE 45 Sp.a. re Vehicle BatterYAssembl. y D2450-1600 1 $ 603 $ 6'03.00 46 Spare Controller BatterY 'BATTERY.009 $ 154 $ 47 Emergency Spare Parts Kit B2455_01'64, $ 8.,757 $ 48 F6A Chassis Service Kit B2450.0153 $ 486 $ 49 F6A OVerhaul Ki't C2450-0158 $ 8,464 $ 50 One-Year Extended serVice Contract MAINTENANCE-0~)I 1 $ 5,486 $ 5,486.00 MISCELLANEOUS 51 IPackagin¢ in Reusa'ble Shippincj Crate CRATE-002 $ ' 698 $ 52 Additional Operations & Maintenance Manual OM-F6A-001 $ 150 $ - 53 Painted Machine.. PAINT $ '2,943 $ _ Subtotal (from Misc Items) (See attachment if greater than 0) Shipping & Handling Charges TOTAL COST Customer Pick Up '-';' Yes ,?' No $ 163,026.00 $ $ 163,026.00 * Assemblies Will be Painted if Paint Option is Selected (1) Prices listed are for sales in U.S.A. only. Export prices are available upon request. (2) Additional pricing available upon request for off-site training at customer's facility. (3) Please see REMOTEC's terms and conditions for details on our 1 year limited warranty. Extended Service contracts are available. (4) Prices are based upon acceptance of REMOTEC's Terms and Conditions (attached). Any deviation from these conditions may resutt in a price increase. (5) The pdces contained herein are budgetary, are submitted for planning purposes only and are not to be construed as a firm quotation. Any resultant contract shall be contingent upon negotiation of mutuaIly acceptable terms and conditions. (6) For Military Use Only NOTE: "Acceptance of order may be delayed while negotiating terms and conditions, acquiring customer order details, acquiring radio frequencies, and resolving any other unforeseen issues which may require resolution prior to scheduling the production of items ordered. If radio frequencies are not supplied by customer at time of order, REMOTEC is expressly authorized to ship and invoice order less the Radio Control Assembly. The Radio Control Assembly will be shipped and invoiced upon completion." WP60/Marketing/Proposar/ andros4228.xls ANDROS F6A Page 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AWARDING A CONTRACT UNDER THE TEXAS MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (TXMAS) PROGRAM FOR THE PURCHASE OF AN ANDROS F6A ROBOT FOR THE CITY OF DENTON FIRE DEPARTMENT AS AWARDED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS BUILDING AND PROCUREMENT COMMiSSiON (CONTRACT TXMAS-5-84030); PROViDiNG FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROViDiNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 3307-ROBOT FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT AWARDED TO REMOTEC, iNC. iN THE AMOUNT OF $163,026). WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 92-019, the State Purchasing Building and Procurement Commission 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 bythe City through the Building and Procuremem programs at less cost than the City would expend if bidding these items individually; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the materials, equipmem, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The numbered items in the following numbered purchase order for materials, equipmem, supplies, or services, shown in the "File Number" listed hereon, and on file in the office of the Purchasing Agem, are hereby approved: FILE NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 3307 Remotec, Inc. $163,026 SECTION 2. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in File 3307, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the Building and Procuremem Commission for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipmem, supplies or services in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sums comained in the bid documems and related documems filed with the Building and Procuremem Commission, and the purchase orders issued by the City. SECTION 3. Should the City and persons submitting approved and accepted items set forth in File 3307 wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the City's ratification of bids awarded by the Building and Procurement Commission, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the Building and Procurement Commission, quantities and specified sums contained in the City's purchase orders, and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION 4. By the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in the attached purchase orders, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved purchase orders or pursuant to a written contract made pursuant thereto as authorized herein. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of ,2005. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-File 3307 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: March 1, 2005 Materials Management Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Tom Shaw 349-7100 ACM: Kathy DuBose SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a contract for the long-term rental of heavy equipment for the Solid Waste Department; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (Bid 3296-Rental of Heavy Equipment awarded to the lowest responsible bidder for each item as listed in Exhibit A). BID INFORMATION This bid is for the annual contract for long-term rental of heavy equipment for the City's Solid Waste Department. The Solid Waste Department rents heavy equipment from time-to-time in order to perform landfill operations and cell excavation. Rental allows the Department to utilize the equipment only during the time period when it's needed, i.e. cell construction and excavation. The Landfill Division will be excavating Phase 3A over the remaining portion of the 2005 fiscal year. Approximately 800,000 yards of soil will require relocation to on-site cover stockpiles. Similar excavation operations were performed during FY 2000 by the City's landfill staff in preparation of Phase 2. At that time, approximately 800,000 cubic yards of soil were excavated and relocated by the City's landfill division personnel. There is no guarantee of any minimal usage as part of this agreement and each rental will have an individual purchase order. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS) The Public Utility Board approved this item at its February 14, 2005 meeting. RECOMMENDATION We recommend award of this contract to the lowest responsible bidder for each item as listed below. Vendor Item Number TKO Equipment Company United Equipment Rentals 1-3 4 Underwood Equipment Company, the apparent low bidder on Items 1 and 2, did not meet bid specifications regarding delivery of equipment within five days. Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2005 Page 2 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS TKO Equipment Co. Irving, Texas United Equipment Rentals Fort Worth, Texas ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT This price agreement will be in effect for a period of one year from the date of award and may be extended for additional one-year periods if agreed to by both parties with all pricing, terms and conditions remaining the same. FISCAL INFORMATION These items will be charged to the Landfill operating budget account 660300.7802. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Tabulation Sheet 1-AlS-Bid 3296 Bid' 3296 Attachment 1 Date' 2/1/2005 Annual Contract For Long-Term Rental of Heavy Equipment ~end~i Vend~i ~nd~i ~end~i Company ~ Company Company Principle Place of Business: [rving, TX Fort Worth, TX Fort Worth, TX Dallas, TX I~ _~_ ~ove. r, .Cat. $12,650.00 $13,000.00 $12,250.00 No Bid , ,on ns o _ I Rental rate after IlA R~r initial7 month $~2,650.00 $~2,000.00 $~2,250.00 No Bid rental, up to 1 year ~ 2 __7 Earthmover, Cat No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid - on, s _ I Rental rate after I2A R~r init.iai 7 month No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid rental, up to 1 year I~ ,.~_ ~ov~, ~a~ $~o,sso.oo No Bid No Bid No Bid _ I Rental rate after I3A R~r initial7 month $1o,55o.oo No Bid No Bid No Bid rental, up to 1 year _ I _ Tr~k Type ~actor, I4 H~ths D8 or.~qui~lent ' $11,950.00 $11,600.00 $12,250.00 $15,000.00 _ I Rental rate after 14~ ~ initial7 month ,~,gso.oo ,~,200.00 $12,250.00 $14,000.00 renta/,_uo to 1 year I Shipment NA 2 Days NA NA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE LONG-TERM RENTAL OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT FOR THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (BID 3296-LONG TERM RENTAL OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT AWARDED TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR EACH ITEM AS LISTED IN EXHIBIT A). 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 NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 3296 1-3 TKO Equipment Co. Exhibit A 3296 4 United Equipment Rentals 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; 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 ,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: 3-ORD-Bid 3296 Bid' 3296 Exhibit A Date' 2/1/2005 Annual Contract For Long-Term Rental of Heaw ent T-K-O Equipment . Un.ted Rentals Company Principle Place of Business: Irving, TX Fort Worth, TX 7 Earthmover, Cat I $12,650.00 Months 623 or equivalent Make/Model Bid' 623G Rental rate after Rate per lA month initial 7 month $12,650.00 rental, up to 1 year 7 Earthmover, Cat 2 No Bid Months 627 or equivalent Make/Model Bid' NA Rental rate after 2A Rate per initial 7 month No Bid month rental, up to 1 year 7 Earthmover, Cat 3 $10,550.00 Months 621 or equivalent Make/Model Bid' 621F Rental rate after Rate per 3A month initial 7 month $10,550.00 rental, up to I year Track Type Tractor, 7 4 Months D8 or equivalent $11,600.00 with ripper Make/Model Bid' D8R Rental rate after Rate per 4A month initial 7 month $11,2oo.oo rental, up to I year 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 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 CITY OF DENTON PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MINUTES February 14, 2005 DRAFT 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, February 14, 2005, at 9:00 a.m. in the Service Cemer Training Room, City of Demon Service Cemer, 901-A Texas Street, Denton, Texas. PRESENT: John Baines, Bob Bland, Bill Cheek, George Hopkins, Charldean Newell, Dick Smith EXCUSED: EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Howard Martin, ACM/Utilities Phil Gallivan The Public Utilities Board convened its Open Session at 9:00 a.m. The Chair, Charldean Newell, stated to the Board that there were two Closed Meeting agenda items set forth in the Closed Meeting agenda and requested a motion to consider the agenda item under §551.086 of the Texas Government Code. A motion was then made and seconded respecting the consideration of the items by the Board. The Board then voted 5-0 (Baines arrived shortly thereafter) to move imo Closed Session to consider the items, and thereafter convened its Closed Session at 9:04 a.m. 1) 2) 3) 4) The Public Utilities Board reconvened in an Open Session at 9:24 a.m. The meeting was called to order to consider the following business: CONSENT AGENDA: Consider approval of Bid No. 3252 awarding a contract for purchase of heavy trucks for various utility departments, in an amount not to exceed $304,364. Consider approval of Bid No. 3281 awarding a contract for purchase of two rear-load chassis only and one roll-off refuse truck for the City of Denton Solid Waste Department; in an amount not to exceed $315,524. Consider approval of an amendment to the three-year agreement for purchase of substation power transformers from Waukesha Electric Systems, Inc., in an estimated maximum amount of $54,000 per transformer. Consider approval of Bid No. 3285 awarding a three-year contract for the purchase of overhead conventional pole-mounted distribution transformers for Denton Municipal Electric, in an amount not to exceed $169,895. 5) Consider approval of Bid No. 3289 awarding a three-year contract for the purchase of pad- Page 1 of 2 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 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 mounted underground distribution transformers for Denton Municipal Electric, in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000. 6) Consider approval of Bid No. 3291 awarding an annual contract for the purchase of water treatment chemicals, in an amount not to exceed $500,000. 7) Consider approval of Bid No. 3296 for the long-term rental of heavy equipment to the City of Denton as follows: 623 Scrapers - TKO Equipment Company and D8R Dozers - United Rentals. Consent Agenda Item #5 was pulled for further discussion. Board Member Dick Smith moved to approve Consent Agenda Items #1, #2, #3, #4, #6 and #7, with a second from Board Member John Baines. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0 ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION: 5) Consider approval of Bid No. 3289 awarding a three-year contract for the purchase of pad- mounted underground distribution transformers for Denton Municipal Electric, in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000. Brent Heath, Senior Engineer, explained to the Board that the bid tabulation of $3.5M is the total evaluated cost, the actual cost is $1.69M. The actual cost is what the City pays the vendor for the transformer. Over the 30-year life of a unit, if the transformer manufacturer uses aluminum instead of copper or a higher impedance conductor, it costs the City more to operate that transformer. Heath explained that staff factors the load loss factors and no-load loss factors to establish the evaluated cost. The initial up-front cost is minimal, but over the 30-year life of the electricity cost value on that transformer there is a significant difference. Board Member George Hopkins moved to approve Bid #3289, in the amount of $1.69M with a second from Board Member Bill Cheek. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0. Page 2 of 2 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: March 1, 2005 Parks and Recreation Howard Martin, 349-8232 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, granting the Denton Festival Foundation, pursuam to Section 20-1 (d)(3)b.6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas, an exception to the limitations imposed by that section with respect to hours of operation of an amplified loudspeaker system; as setting an effective date. This request for noise exception is for the 25th Arts and Jazz Festival to be held April 29, 30 and May 1, 2005 in the Civic Center Park. BACKGROUND The Denton Festival Foundation is requesting a renewal of the three-year exception to the noise ordinance for the Denton Arts & Jazz Festival, an annual outdoor music festival scheduled at the City of Demon Civic Cemer Park, on the last Friday and Saturday in April umil 12:00 midnight, and the first Sunday in May from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The event normally is held the last Friday, Saturday and Sunday in April but in 2005, the Sunday date would be May 1 st. The Denton Festival Foundation would not have to request a noise exception for the purpose of the Denton Arts and Jazz Festival until 2008 if the exception is granted. The proposed ordinance graining the three-year exception is attached (Exhibit 1). The noise ordinance, amended by ordinance Number 2001-265, declares loudspeakers, amplifiers, and musical instrumems above 65 dba a noise nuisance, particularly after 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and anytime on Sunday (Exhibit 2). The ordinance does, however, provide that the City Council may make exceptions for sound levels or hours of operation when the public interest is served. The organizers have been informed that should Council approve this request, responsible use of amplified sound is still required by Section 20-1 of the City of DeNon Code of Ordinances. In particular, Section 20-1 §4(a) states: It shall be unlawful for any person to make or cause any unreasonably loud, disturbing, unnecessary noise, which causes or may cause material distress, discomfort or injury to persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) Ordinance No. 2002-042 granted a three-year exception that expired at the end of 2005. FISCAL INFORMATION None. EXHIBITS 1. Proposed Ordinance 2. Letter of Request from Denton Festival Foundation Janet Simpson Director of Parks and Recreation Prepared By: Janie McLeod Community Events Coordinator S:\Our Documen~\OrdManccs\05~Arts Festival exemption from noise ordinance.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, GRANTING THE DENTON FESTIVAL FOUNDATION, PURSUANT TO SECTION 20-1(d)(3)b.6 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AN EXCEPTION TO TIlE LIMITATIONS IMPOSED BY THAT SECTION WITH RESPECT TO HOURS OF OPERATION OF AN AMPLIFIED LOUDSPEAKER SYSTEM; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to §20-1(d)(3)b.6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, the Denton Festival Foundation has made application to the City Council for an exception to the provision of that same section restricting the operation of amplified loudspeakers from Monday through Saturday after 10:00 p.m. and at anytime on Sunday, in connection with the Denton Arts & Jazz Festival annual event held at the Civic Center Park, and in connection with said request, has requested the exception to be granted on an ongoing basis for said annual event at said location the last Friday and Saturday in April, 2005 until 12:00 midnight, and the first Sunday in May 2005 from 11:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m. and the last Friday and Saturday in April 2006 and 2007 until 12:00 midnight, and the last Sunday in April, 2006 and 2007 from 11:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m.; and WHEREAS, upon prior application and approval by the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, the Denton Festival Foundation has consistently demonstrated over the past ten years an ability to responsibly operate amplified loudspeakers in connection with the Denton Arts & Jazz Festival annual event held at Civic Center Park, at times past the hours defined in §20-1(d)(3)b.6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, within the public interest and without materially disturbing persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof; and WHEREAS, based upon this past history, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas finds that granting an exception for this annual event on an ongoing basis, subject to the restrictions contained herein, would serve the public interest; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That, pursuant to §20-1(d)O)b.6 of the Code of Ordinances, the Denton Festival Foundation is hereby granted an exception from said section's 10:00 p.m limitation from Monday through Saturday and prohibition on Sunday, upon the operation of amplified loudspeakers, subject to the conditions listed below: 1. This exception is granted only in connection with the operation of the Denton Arts & Jazz Festival annual event at the Civic Center Park, on the last Friday and Saturday in April until 12:00 midnight and the first Sunday in May from 11:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m. and the last Friday !and Saturday in April 2006 and 2007 until 12:00 midnight, and the last Sunday in April, 2006 and 2007 from 11:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m. 2. The Denton Festival Foundation agrees to take full responsibility for ensuring that the conditions of this exception are met, and to take all reasonable measures EXHIBIT 1 S:\Our Docurnents\Ordinances\05~ts Festival exemption from noise ordinance.doe necessary to avoid disturbing persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity of the event. The Denton Festival Foundation agrees to cease using amplified loudspeakers at 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday and 10:00 p.m. on Sunday. Under no circumstances shall the annual event employ the use of amplified loudspeakers past 12:00 midnight on Friday or Saturday or before 11:00 a.m. or past 10:00 p.m. on Sunday. Under no circumstances shall the annual event employ the use of amplified loudspeakers that exceed 70 dba when measured from the perimeter of the source as measured by an approved measuring instmment. This ordinance confers no personal or property fights, and may be mended, modified, superseded or revoked in whole or in part at the will of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, without any advance warning, hearing or compensation, for any reason at all, or for no reason. This ordinance shall be strictly construed as an exception granted pursuant to §20- l(d)(3)b.6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas. The City of Denton, Texas expressly reserves unto itself and all other persons any and all legal remedies, civil or criminal, relating to excessive noise in connection with this annual event, and hereby disclaims any promissory or equitable estoppel which might in any way impede the pursuit of such remedies by any person. SECTION 7. That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval, and expire three years hence, unless sooner repealed, modified or rescinded. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ., 2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: Page 2 of 3 S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\05~Arts Festival exemption from noise ordinance.doc APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 3 of 3 D E N T~.O N F E S T I, V A L February 4, 2005 Mayor Euline Brock City Council Members 215 E. McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 Dear Mayor Brock and City Council, The Denton Arts & Jazz Festival is requesting a 3-year exception to the Noise Ordinance. The dates 'for the festival are Friday, April 29, Saturday, April 30 and Sunday, May 1, 2005. The exception would cover 2005, 2006 and 2007. We are requesting the exception extend until 12:00 midnight on Friday and Saturday nights and on Sunday from 11:00 am until 10:00 pm. Thank you tbr your consideration. Your support 'for the annual Denton Arts & Jazz Festival is greatly appreciated. " ! S~ncere y, Carol Short, Director (940) 383-4418 Box 210t~ . l)enton~'[k~xas 7f~2{)2 ' (~'}40) 5t~>5-0931 EXHIBIT 2 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2005 DEPARTMENT: ACM: Utilities Howard Martin, 349-8232 SUBJECT An ordinance of the City of Denton abandoning and vacating a 1.21 acre Street Right of Way tract dedicated to the City of Demon by Charles D. Adams Recorded in Volume 666, Page 535 of the deed records of Denton County, Texas and a 0.506 acre Street Right of Way tract dedicated to the City of Denton, Texas by the Denton Bible Church Addition, Lot 2, Block B plat, recorded in Cabinet V, Pg. 880 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND The DeNon Bible Church (DBC) has requested that the City of DeNon abandon its street right-of-way interests in order to facilitate the current development of their property. In January 1973, Charles D. Adams executed a street right-of-way and utility easement document to the City of Demon and it was filed of record shortly thereafter. In our records, we have found a proposed street & utility plan schematic for "Northcrest Street", dated January 1973, referencing Mr. Adams as being the owner/developer of the street project. None of the proposed improvemems shown on the 1973 plan (water line, sewer line, and street paving) were actually constructed and/or accepted by the City. Nor have we found any evidence that the City formally accepted the street and utility dedication instrumem from Mr. Adams in 1973. When DBC came to develop the property last year, it became evident in the Development Review process that DBC desired to incorporate the area affected by the aborted street plan into their site lay- out for their parking lot. The DRC consensus endorsed the DBC plan, with the caveat that the abandonment of the street easement would be predicated on the conveyance by DBC of any easements necessary to accommodate the existing or proposed utilities and to convey a public access & fire lane easement, to manage the U.S. 380 driveway access at the DBC's northeast property corner. There was a timing mismatch last Summer (2004) between the DBC re-platting timetable & a separate abandonment action for the Northcrest Street easement. In order to maintain their construction project schedule, it was agreed to allow DBC to move forward with their project, with the condition that DBC final plat that portion of their property involving immediate developmem, and have them design and construct a short street section to City standards at their northeast comer. The DBC plat was filed and their building permit released for vertical construction. The understanding was that the new easements & right-of-way tract abandonments would be brought forward for consideration prior to the completion of the new DBC facility & related improvemems, which is the present circumstance. Staff performs an analysis on requests for right-of-way and easemem abandonmem as follows: · Is the property tract requested for abandonmem considered "excess right-of-way"? · Does the property tract requested for abandonmem have a cominued public use? · Is it in the best interest of the general public to abandon the government's rights in the subject abandonment tract? · Would the granting of this request establish a precedent for right-of-way abandonment for future requests? Staff findings on this analysis are as follows: 1. The right-of-way tracts requested fit the criteria of excess right-of-way. Excess right-of-way is defined as: Property acquired or used by the City for right-of-way and subsequemly declared excess (not needed for the Project, road or streetscape). There is some doubt to the legitimacy of the conveyance by Mr. Adams in 1973, since his proposed street and utility project never materialized. 2. There are proposed and existing public facilities in the proposed abandonmem tracts, and DeNon Bible Church has conveyed and delivered the necessary easemems to ensure the City preserves the legal rights necessary to operate and maintain the utility infrastructure. 3. Abandonmem is in the public imerest because the areas for subject abandonmem are not needed by the public; there are no near or long-term plans for a public street connection capital project at this location. Connectivity in the area has been established by DeNon Bible Church's right-of-way donation for the Audra-Nottingham Connection Project of years past, through their property to the west, connecting Mingo to U.S. 380. 4. This abandonment would not set a precedent because the above three standards have been met. OPTIONS 1. Approve the ordinance, or 2. Denial, or 3. Table for future consideration RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Spring 2005 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Development Review Staff FISCAL INFORMATION Application fee of $150.00 EXHIBITS 1. Location map 2. Site map of easements conveyed to City 3. Draft ordinance 4. Correspondence from applicant Prepared by: Paul Williamson Real Estate & Capital Support Manager Respectfully submitted: Jim Coulter, Director Utilities Department VICINITY MAP LOCATION O AUDRA N.T.S. NORTH EXHIBIT 1 MAP OF EASEMENTS CONVEYED PROP, PHASE: tl PARKINI PROP, PHASE 11 PARKING PER T~DOT C(A4MENTS PER I"XOOT COHI~:NT5 DIMENSIONAL CONTROL PLAN DENTON BIBLE CHURCH EAST UNIVERSITY DR NORTH CREST ST SURVEY, ~iTY OFW)~NTON,, T~-J6AS S:\Our Documents\Ordinanccs\05LNorthcrest Abandonment Ordinance. DOC ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON ABANDONING AND VACATING AN APPROXIMATE 9,453 SQUARE FOOT STREET RIGHT OF WAY TRACT DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF DENTON BY CHARLES D. ADAMS IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN VOLUME 666, PAGE 535 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS AND AN APPROXIMATE 0.545 ACRE STREET RIGHT OF WAY TRACT DEDICATED AS NORTHCREST DRIVE BY THE PLAT OF DENTON BIBLE CHURCH ADDITION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN CABINET V, PG. 880 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton has received a request from the underlying fee simple owner, Denton Bible Church (the "Owner"), for the abandonment of an approximate 9,453 square foot street right-of-way tract more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference, and for the abandonment of a 0.545 acre street right of way tract more particularly described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (collectively called the "Abandonment Area"); and WHEREAS, the Abandonment Area was dedicated as street easements, was never used by the City for street purposes, and was never formerly accepted by the City;, and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the above, in order to remove any doubt as to the existence of the street right-of-way the Owner has requested that the City formally abandon the Abandonment Area; WHEREAS, the Owner has granted to the City an approximate 0.162 acre sanitary sewer easement attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference as Exhibit "C", an approximate 0.172 acre water easement attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference as Exhibit "D" and an approximate 0.061 acre public access and fire lane easement attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "E" (collectively called the" City Easements"); and WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the requested abandonment of the Abandoned Area and has recommended approval, subject to the City Easements; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas has determined that it is in the public interest to abandon the Abandonment Area and the City's interests therein, subject to the City Easements; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The recitations and findings contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. The Abandonment Area is hereby permanently abandoned with all of the City's right, title and interests being quit claimed to the Owner; SAVE & EXCEPT the City Easements, which all shall remain in full force and effect. A certified copy of EXHIBIT 3 this ordinance may be recorded in the Real Property Records of Denton County, Texas to evidence this abandonment and quit claim. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __day of ,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: Page 2 EXHIBIT A All that certain tract or parcel of land situated in the W. Lloyd Survey, Abstract No. 773, Denton County, Texas, and being part of a certain 19.839 acre tract conveyed by William J. Miller to Charles D. Adams on October 13, 1972 as recorded in Volume 651, Page 509 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a steel pin at the Southwest comer of a 0.55 acre tract of land conveyed by Charles D. Adams to Don Johnson Oil Co. on January 2, 1973 as recorded in Volume 662, Page 687 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE South 78° 44' East, 181.8 feet with the South boundary line of said Don Johnson tract to a point for comer, the same being also the Southeast comer of the Johnson tract; THENCE South 1 ° 35' West, 240.0 feet, with the most Easterly East boundary line of said C. D. Adams tract to a point for comer; THENCE South 61° 15' West, 169.1 feet, with the most Northerly South boundary line to a point for comer, the same being an interior comer of said Adams tract; THENCE North 12° 27' West, 16.02 feet, with the East fight-of-way line of proposed Northcrest Street to a point for comer; THENCE North 61° t5' West, 152.73 feet, 16.0 feet North of and parallel to the most Northerly South boundary line, to a point for an inside comer; THENCE North 1 ° 35' East, 216.45 feet, 16.0 feet West of and parallel to the most Easterly East boundary line of the Adams tract, to a point for an inside comer; THENCE North 78° 44' West, 165.74 feet, 16.0 feet South of a parallel to the South boundary line of said D. Johnson tract, to a point for comer, said point also being in the East right-of-way line of proposed Northcrest Street; THENCE North 10° 48' East, 16.01 feet, with the East fight-of-way line of proposed Northcrest Street, to the place of beginning and containing therein approximately 9,453 square feet of land. EXHIBIT "B" NORTHCREST DRIVE 23,720 SQUARE FEET William Lloyd Survey, Abstract No. 773 'City of Denton, Denton County, Texas. DESCRIPTION, of a 23,720 square foot (0.545 acre) tract of land situated in the.William Lloyd Survey, Abstract No. 773, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; said tract being alt' of a 73-foot wide fight-of-way known es Northcrest Drive dedicated by the plat of Denton Bible Church Addition, an addition to the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas according to the plat thereof recorde(~ in. Cal~inet V, Page 880 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; said 23,720 square foot {0.545 acre) tract being more pa~culady described as follows (the Bearing system for this description .is based on a beadng of South 88 degrees, 53 minutes, 59 seconds East for the SOuth right-of-way line of East University Drive according to the above referenced plat of Denton Bible Church Addition); BEGINNING, at a 1/2-inch iron rod. found at the intersection of the south right-of-way tine of 'East UnNersity Drive (U.S. HIGHWAY 380) (a variable width fight-of-way) with the east right-of;way line of Northcrest Ddve; said point being the northwest corner of a tract of land described in a deed to SM7. inc., D.B.A. High~and Food Store recorded in .Volume 4311, Page 2828 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE, South 10 degrees, 12 minutes, 38 seconds West, along the east right-of, way line of Northcrest Drive, a distance of 140.11 feat to a 1/2-inch iron rod found.for corner, said point being the southwest corner of said SM7~ Inc. tract; said point, also being the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; THENCE, in a southwesterly direction along said curve to the left and with said east right-of-way line of Northcrest Drive,. having a central angle of 15 degrees, 02 minu~s, 18 seconds, a radius of 682.5g feet, a chord bearing and distance of South.O2 degrees, 41 minutes, 29 seconds West, 178',65 feet, an arc distance of 179.1~ feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod with "Pacheco Koch" cap found for the end of said c[~rve at t~e southeast comer of the southerly terminus of said Northcrest Drive; THENCE, North 89 degrees, 24 minu~es, 28 seconds West, along said southerly terminus, a distance of 73.30 feet to a l/2-.thch iron'rod with "Pacheco Koch" cap found for comer at the southwest comerof said southerly terminus of Northcrest Drive; said point being the most easterly southeast comer of Lot 2, Btoc~ B of said Denton Bible Church Addition; said point also being the beginning ora non-tangent curve fo the dght; THENCE, in a northea.wbedy direction along said curve to the right-and with the west right-of-way line of Northcrest Drive, having a centrat angle of 14 degrees, 30 minutes, 48 seconds,.a radius of 755.59 feet, a chord bearing and distance of North 02 degrees, 57 minutes, 14 seconds East, 190.89 feet, an arc distance of ~191.40 feet to a point for the end of said curve; THENCE, North 10 degrees, 12 minutes, 38 seconds Eest,.with said'west right-of-way line; .a distance of 138.98 feet to a point for comer at the intersection.of said west right-of-way line of Northcrest Ddve with the south right-of-way line of said East-University Drive; said point being the beginning of a non-tangent curve fo'the right; THENCE, in a southeasterly direction along said curve to the dght and with the south line of said .East University Drive, having a central angle of 01 degrees, 06 minutes, 56 seconds, a radius of 3749.72 feet; a chord bearing and distance of South 80 degrees, 40' minu~es, 32 seconds East, 73.01 feet, an arc distance of 73.01 feet to the'POINT OF SEGINNING; CONTAINING, 23,720 square feet. or 0.545. acres of'ten(t, mom or less. (A survey plat of even survey date' herewith accompanies this description.) The undersigned, Registered. Professional Land Surveyor, hereby certifies that the foregoing description accuratety sate out the metes and bounds of the tract described. Jam[,s~. Koch, ~lr. ' ..... Date Registered Prof~ional Land Surveyor No. 4688 Pachedg Koch Cibnsulting Engineers, Inc. 8350.N.~;entrai ~wy., #1000, Dallas TX 75206 '(972) 23~t R.O,W, ABANDONMENT.doc 2305.02.246 SRD SHEET f OF 2 15' SIDEWALK EASEMENT OF-WAy) (CAB. V, PC TXOOT C~. 20' u~u~ N 10~ 2'38' (C~. V, PG ~0) 158.98' R.O.W. AB~M~T~ 0.5~ A~ 25,720 SF LOT .2, BLOCK B D~TON BIB~ CHURCH ADDISON (cA . v. PS. ssa) R-37~9,72' L--75.01' ('U.S. HIGHWAY 380) cass 80'40'52' E~ (VARIABLE W1DTH RIGHT- CD-73.01' POINT OF IRON ROD FOUND (C.M.) 10'12'..',',',',',',',',~' W ' SM7, INC. ~.--D.B.A. HIGHLAND FOOD STORE (VOL, 4311, PO. 2828) I/2.-INC, ~RON I RO0 FOUND _~S 79~16'10" [: ',....,...,,~ ' ~81.90' DENTON BIBLE CHURCH R~=16~~,~51; ~ (VOL. 5388, PG. 2575) ~--I/2-1NCH IRON ~=14'30'48" ROD F~ND R=755.59' ~s' ~ ~ Lei 91.40' WA~R E~T~ CB=N 02~7 14 ~= = n~.x,,~. ~ 60. ~. 17~ 28= t I EAST ~e~i~" w ~ I I APAR~EN~, LP. 4 BIBLE CHURCH ~ [(CC~ 97-068469) I N 89=4'28" ~ (VOL. 5588, PG. 2573) I I%. , '. , ~ 5~-IN~ IR~ ~ ~S 01~1 14. W 50' S~EET EASEM~T (C.M.) COkffROLUNG MONUMENT IRF 1/2-1NClt IRON RO0 W/'PACH£CO KOCH" CAP FOUND The under.gnarl, Registered Profeaslonal Land ~, h~y o~lfles ~at this pl~ of mt~y ~ ~t ~e metes ~d ~m~t tr~ de~ib~. tlr, 4688 1'~100' FE~ 200~ 23O8-O2.246 0 50 100 200 F ' "1 I I GRAPHIC SCALE 'IN FEET NOTES: 1, A legal desarlptl~n of even ~rvey date herewith acoompanl~ this e~ibit, 2.. 1he 8ee~g system for thls axlE)it is I:me~l o~ o bearing of South 88 degrees, 53 minutes, 59 s~c~ds East for the s~uth right-of-~vay line of E~st UntverMty Dflve eccard~g to the plot of Oent~ Bible Church Addltkm, an ~dd['d~ to the City of Oe~to~, De~tm~ caunt~ Te~e, re~ in Cabinet V, Pegs 880 of the Plat Records of Dento~ County, Texas NORTHCREST DRIVE 23,720. SQUARE. FEET LOCA'F.D IN THE CilY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND tAEING OUT OF THE ?ILI. IAM LLOYD SURVEY, ABSTR~'r NO. 773 AND D~rroN COUH1% TEXAS SHEEr 2 OF 2 Exhibit C · SANITARY SEWER EAS~ ~ . KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT, Den2on Bible C~ureh, of Denton Count~, TeXas, whose mail/~xg address 'is 1910 East Univezsit~ Drive, Denton, TX 76209, in c0~sideration o£ the sum of One Dollsr and No Cents ($1.00) and o~her good and valuable consideration in hand paid lr~ the C~ty of Denton, Texas, receipt of whic~ is hereby acknowledged, does by these presents grant, Bargain, .sol1 and ccnlvey unto the City o~ Denton, TeXas, ~he ~oe end uninterrupted use, l~Berty and privile~e o£: the passage· in, along, upon and across the following des~r/he~ p~ope=ty, owne~ By him and situated An Dentcsl County, Texas, in the Willt~ Lloyd Survey, Abstrant NO. TT$. SANITARY SEWE~ F~SE~ENT DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT AND ILLUSTRATED IN EXHIBIT ~B' Aud' it is ~urther agreed that the City. oo~sideration of the benefits above set out, will r---~m~- e fr~a the pro~rC~ ~ve descried, su~ ~ces, buil~gs as. ~y n~ be ~0~ u~ aai~ property. For ~e ~ose o~ c~str~ct~g, rec~st~ot~, · ~sta11~G, r~ir~g, ~d p~et~ly ~Ca~g s~ita~ se~r aI~, u~ ~d across said pr~..ses, wi~ ~e ~1 ~s o~ ~ ~tee herein, his or its ~d repres~tatives hav~ ~ess, e~ress, ~d r~ss ~, al~ u~ ~d across said pr~ses ~o= ~e pu~ose o~ ~g a~s to, ~~.ts ~ ~ re~=s to said s~ta~ TO ~ ~ TO HO~ ~to ~e said City o~ D~t~, T~s as ~a~d ~o= ~ pu~ses a~oresa~ ~ pr--~ses ~ve descried. . C~:~/~,.'.o~.,~tOn.,. Texas (:~esOZ~ii~/~n .~0!*' .9:Z~073")'~:* .lt,~~., · . '.. :':'";t:". 'i/. . ,,:i::': i R~a'u~N TO: 20' SEWER EASEMENT 7,055 SQUARE FEET Wiltiam :Lloyd Survey, Abstract No. 773 City of Denton, Denton County, Texas DESCRIPTrON, of a 7,055 square foot (0.162 acre) tract of land situated 'in the William' Uoyd Survey, Abslract No. 773, Denton County, Texas; said.tract being part of a tract of land described in a deed to Denton Bible Church recorded in Volume 5388, Page 2573 of-the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; said 7',055 square foot. (0.152 a~e) tract being more particularly described as follows (Ihe beadng system 'is based on a beadng of South 88 degrees, 53 minutes,. 59 seconds East for the south right-of-way line of East UniVersity Drive according to the plat. of De~ton Bible Church Addition, an addition to the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas according . to the plat thereof recorded in Cabinet V, Page 880 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas); BEGINNING, at a 1/2-inch iron rod found on the east fight-of-way line of Northcrest Drive (a 73- foot wide right-of-way); said point being the southwest comer of a tract of land described in a deed to SMT, Inc. D.B.A. Highland Food Store recoil_ ed in Volume 4311, Page 2828 of said Deed Records; THENCE, South 79 degrees, 16 minUtes,- 10 seconds East, with the.south line of said SMT, Inc. .tract, a distance Of 20.00 feet to a point for come.r; said point being.lhe beginning of a.non- tangent curve to ~e left; THENCE, in a southeasterly direction along said curve to left, departing said' south line, traversing said Denton Bible Church tract, having a central angle of 22 degrees, 51 minutes~ 40 seconds, a radius of 662.59 feet, a chord bearing and distance of South 01 degrees, !4 minutes, 08 seconds East, 262.63 feet, an arc dislance of 264.38 feet to a point f0~ the end. of said curve; THENCE, South 12 degrees, 39 minutes, 58 seconds East, a distance of 81'.37. feet to a point.for cox, nar on a norlh line of a tract of land described in a deed to Denton V~llage East Apar~nents, LP. recorded in Clerk's File No. 97-068469 of said Deed Records; THENCE, South 61 degrees, 10 minutes, 06 seconds West, with said north line, a distance of 20.82 feet to a 5/8-Inch iron rod found for comer; said point being a re-entrant comer of said Denton Bible Church tract and being an angle point in the west tine of said Denton Village East ,~q)artmenls, .L.P. lract; THENCE, North t2 degrees, 39 minUtes, 58 seconds West, traversing said Denton Bible Church tract, a distance of 87.17 feet to a point for corner;, said point being the beginning of a tangent' curve to the right; THENCE, in a northwesterly direction along said curve to the right, at an arc distance of 93;38 feet passing the southeast, comer of the southerly terminus of said Norlhcrest Drive, continuing with said curve and along the east line of said Northcrest Drive, having a central angle of 22 degrees, 52 minutes, 36 seconds, a radius of 682.59 feet, a chord bearing and distance of North 01 degrees, 13 minutes, 40 seconds West, 270.74 feet~ atotai arc distance of 1272.54 feel to the POINT OF BEGiNNiNG; CONTAtNING, 7,055 square feet or 0.162 acres of land, more Or lass. (A survey plat of even Survey date herewilh aCCOmpanies this description.) The undersigned, Registered Professional Land Surveyor, hereby certifies that the foregoing. description accurately sets out the metes and bounds of the easement tract.described. James ~. Koch,-Jr.I Revised 02/14/2005 Ragiste~:l Professilonal Land Surveyor No. 4688 Pacheco\Koch Co~sulting Engineers, Inc. 6350 N. O~enl~ai E.j~owy., #1000, Dallas TX 75206 (972) 235~// 20'SEWERESMT.doc 2~08-02.246 SED SHEET 1 OF 2 (CAB. %.PG 8~) . · · ~ .~ , ~D.B.A. HIGHLAND FOOD STORE, ' LOT 2, BLOCK B /~ ~' ~ (VOL 4311; PG. 2828) DENTON BIBLE CHURCH /~ ~ ~ ~ ~.eu · (VOL 5388, PG. 2573) /~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 20' WA~ ~T ~ ] .......... ~ ~ I VOL 666, PG. ...... ~ 174~28' : IRF IRF~ ~ ~ J I EAST 3 'lRr N 8~8"~~ 'z~ I I APAR~ENYS, LP. ~%~2~w~ ~: ~j ' ~ L'(c0#97-o68~9) ] ~ 0.162 A~ES t ~ ~' / / % R~ FOUND . (7,055 SF) ~ ~L- ~s mo'o~,' w · LINE TABLE ' , ' [ ~s '~2'39'~' ~ . L1 S 7916'10' E 20.~ L3 S 61~0'~~ W 20.82 L~ ~N 12'39'58" W 87.17 cU w TAeL ~ 22~1'~' 662.59 I 264.38 133.97 ~ ~ ~4'0~" [ (C.M.) ~N~NG MONUMENT IRF 1/2-1N~ IR~ ROD NO~S: 1. 'A legal ~tl~ of e~ ~ dote h~th ~e und~, R~t~ed Professional Lond [ ~e B~r~g s~em f~ ~ exh~it la bes~ a~ ~u~ ~n~ .r~.~.~ ~ ~--~ East for ~e ~u~ ~ht-of--way line of EaSt Unimlty am~[ trac~ aes~oeo. ~.A~f.~ ~I~ acc~ing to the plot of Oent~ B~e Chur~ oos 7,0S5 SQUARE FEET THE STATE OF TF, XAS, COUNTY OF DENTON Exhibit D WATEt~ EASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE P~ESENTS: THAT, Den~°n BiBle Church, o~ Dentoa County, Texas, whose mailing address is 1910 East t~nlversity DriVe, Denton, TX 7..6209, in consideration o£ the sum O£ One Dollar and NO Cents ($1.00) ~ other good and valuable considerat~on An hand paid by the Cit~ o£ Dant~n, Texas, receipt of which is .hereby acknowledged, does by these presents ~rant, bargain, sell and.o0~vey unto the C~ty o£ De'Itch, Texas, 'the f~ee and uninterrapted use, liberty and privile~e of the passage in, alon~, · upo~ and aoross the £ollowing described property, owned by him and situated in Denton County, T~_as, in the. Williams Lloyd Survey, Abstract WATEZ' FAB~ DESCribeD IN EXHIBIT ~A" AND ILL~JSTRATED IN EXHIBIT ~B" And it is further a~reed ~hat the City co~eider&tion of the benefits property ~ve ~scr~, su~ as ~y n~ be ~o~d u~ said properS. For t~ pu~se o~ Const~ct~n~, rec~s~ct~, ~Stallin~, repairS, ~d pe~e=ually ~tain~ ~ter u~ilities ~, ~g, up~ ~d ac~ss sa~d pr~{ ses, w[~ ~e right ~a pr~v~l~e at all t~s o~ ~e .~tee here~n, his or its ag~ts, ~l~es, repres~tati~s hav~ ~ess, across said pr~ses ~or ~he ~r~s ~ ~d repairs 2o 'said ~ter Ea~l~ties or ~y part TO ~ ~ TO HO~ ~to the s~d City o~ D~ton, T~s as a~oresaid ~or ~e ~ses a~oresa~ Denton' :BibIe"ch~r'dh-, D~t~o~ Cogency, :Texas C~ty ,oZ.'Denton¥ Texas IResolUtion ,NOel WATER EASEMENT 7,480 SQUARE FEET William Lloyd Survey, Abstract .No. 773 City of'Denton, Denton County, Texas DESCRIPTION; of a 7,480 square foot (0;172 acre) tract of land situated in the William Lloyd Survey, Abstract No. 773, City of Denton; Denton County, Texas; said tract being part of .a 73-foot wide right-of- way know~ as Northcrest Drive dedicated by the plat of Denton Bible Chumh Addition, an addition to the City of. Denton, Denton County, Texas according to the plat thereof- recorded in Gabinet V, Page: 880 of the Deed :Records of Denton County, Texas; said 7;480 square foot (0.172 acre) tract being more parlicularly described as follows (the bearing system is based on a bearing of South 88 degrees, ~3 minutes, 59 seconds East for the south right-of-way line of East University Drive according to the above referenced plat of Denton Bible Church Addition); BEGINNING, at a ~l/2-inch iron rod fOund at the intersection of the south right-of-way line of East University Drive (U.S. HIGHWAY 380) (a vadable width right-of-way) with the east right-of-way line of Northcrest Drive; said point being the northwest comer of a tract of [and described in a. deed to SM7,' Inc., D.B.A. Highland Food. Store recorded in Volume 431!, Page' 2828 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE, South 10 degrees, '12 minutes, 38 seconds West along the east dght.-of~way line of Northcrest Drive, a distance of 140.11 feet to a' 1/2-inch iron rod found for corner,, said point being the southwest comer of said SM7, Inc. tract;, said point also being the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; THENCE, in a .southwesterly direction along said curve .to the left and with said east fight-of-way line of Northcrest Drive, having a central, angle of 15.degrees, 02 minutes, 18 seconds, a radius of 682.59 feet, a chord beating and distance, of South 02' degrees, 41 minutes; 29 seconds West, 178.65 feet, an am distance of 179.16 feet'to a 1/2-inch iron rod with "Pacheco Koch" cap found for the end Of said curve at the southeast corner of the southerly terminus of said Northcrest Drive; . THENCE, North 89 degrees, 24 minutes, 28 seconds West, along said southerly termint~s, a distance of 73.30 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod with ."Pacheco Koch" cap found for comer at the southwest comer of said southerly terminus of Northcmst Drive; said point being the most easterly southeast comer of Lot 2, Block B of said Denton Bible Church Addition; said point also being the beginning of a non-tangent curve to tbe right; THENCE, in a northwesterly directi°n along said~cu~ve to the right and with the west right-of-way line of said Northcrest Drive, having a central.angle of 01 degrees, 31 minutes, 14 seconds, a rediiJa.of. 755.59 feet, a chord bearing and distance of North 03 degrees, 32 minutes, 33 seconds West, 20.05 feet, an arc distance of 20.05 feet to e point for the end of said curve; THENCE, South 89 degrees, 24 minutes, 28 seconds East, departing said weSt right-of-way line end traversing said Northcrest 'Drive,- a distance of 53.I0 feet to a point for comer;, said point being the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the right; THENCE, in a northeasterly direction along said curve to the right, having:a central.angle of 13 degrees, 14 minutes, 52 seconds, a radius of 702.59 feet. a chord bearing and distance of North 03 degrees, 35 minutes, 12 seconds East, 162.09 feet, an arc distance of 162.45 feet to a point for the end of said. curve; THENCE, North lO degrees, 12 minutes, 38 seconds East. a distance of 139.94 feet ~o a point for corner on the south right-of-way line of said East University Drive; said point'being the beginning of'a non- tangent curve to the right; THENCE, in a southeasterly direction elong said'curve to the right and with said south right-of-way line, having' a centre! angle of 00 degrees, 18' minutes, 20 seconds, a radius of 3749.72 feet, a chord bearing and distance of South 80 degrees, 16 minutes, 14 seconds East, 20.00 feet, 'an arc distance of 20.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING, 7,480 square feet or 0.172 acres of land, more or less. (A survey plat of even survey date herewith accompanies this description.) The undersigned, Registered Professional Land Surveyor, hereby certifies that'the foregoing description accurately sets out the metes and bounds of the easement tract described. James.A. I~chl J Revised 02/14/2005 Registered~Profe,, =hal Land Surveyor No. 4688 Pacheco Id(x:h Cc suiting Engineers, Inc. 8351:) N. Cei~tml E )wy., #1000, Datlas TX 75206 (972) 235--30~ 6978~F WATER EASEMENT.doc 2308-02.246 SRD SHEET 1 OF 2 'A s r . flRII/g r-NORTHCREST DENTON BIBLE CHURCH ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~l/2-1Nm IRON I~1 b~ 1~' EASEMENT TO~ I 2o.o'J iLL1. DENTON" BIBLE IRF N 89~4'28" W CHURC~,. ~.~DENTON ~LLAGE LINE TABLE LINE BEARING L$ N 89'24'28' W L2 , ,S ,i~g"'24'25' E ~ · N 10"'12'38' E I LENGTH 7.~.~0 55,10 139;94- (C,M,) CONTROLUNG MONUMENT IRE 1/2-INCH IRON ROD 0 ,50 t00 .20( W/'PACHECO. KOCH' c~ rou. D I I [. · I GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET CURVE TABLE ..... CURVE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT · CHORD BEARING ~HORD ' Ct 15'02'18' 682,5~ 179.16 90,10 S 02'4-I'29" W -178,65 C2 . ,,Q!'51'14" 755,59 20,05 10,03 N 03'32'33" w 20,05 C3 1314'52" 702.59 162,45 ' 81,59 N 03.35'12"'E 162,09 C4 00'18'20" 3749,72 20,00 10,00 S 80'16'14" E '2.0,00. The undersigned, Registered Profe~ional Land Surveyor, hereby cerflfie~ that this'plat of survey accurately sets out the metes anti easemen't tract described. 1',,100' FEB. 2005 2...'~S-.02.246 NOTES: 1. A legal deac~lpflan of'e~n survey date herewith accompaniee this exh~it. 2. ~e Bearing s~t~ f~ ~is ~it ~ bo~d ~ a ~adng of Sou~ 88 d~r~ 5~ m~utee, 59 s~ds Ea~ for ~e eou~ ~t-of~way I~e of Ea~ Uni~lty Drl~ a~ord~g to ~e ~at of Oent~ Bble ~ur~ AddlUon, an: addition to ~e Clty of Denton, D~t~ Cowry, Texas, re--ed In ~blnet V, Page· 8~ of the Pi~ Rec~ds of Oen~ C~nty,- Te~a 7,480 SQUARE FOOT WATER .EASEMENT LOCATED IN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND BE]NG OUT OF THE WILLIAM LLOYD ~LIRVEY, ABSTRACT NO, 773 OE~rON COUNTY, TEXAS SHEET 2 OF 2 Exhibit E · PUBLIC ACCESS ~ F'rRE LM~ F~.SE~E~T TRE ST~..TE OF TF, Y,.~S ~: THAT Denton B~ble Church (Grantor), o£ Dent~n County, Texas, whose mailing address is 1910 East University Drive, Denton, TX 76209, in consideration o~ the sum o£ ONE DOLLA~ and NO C~TS ($1.'00} a~d other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by the City of Denton, Texas, (Grantee} , receipt o£ wb/eh is hereby acknowleclged, does ~y .these presents grant, .bargain, sell and convey unto the Cl~y of Denton, Texas, the £ree and uninterrupted use, liberty and privilege of the passage in,. along, upon and across the following de.s~ribed property, owned by ~rantor and sit~ated in Dent~ ~3unty, Texas, in the Willlam Lloyd Survey, Abstract No. ??3. PU~tIC ACCESS AHD FIRE LANE EAS~ DESC~X~ED IN EXHIBIT ~A# AND ILLUSTRATED IN EXHIBIT And it is ~urthe= agreed that the Grantor, in ~onsid~__~ation of the benefits above set out, will remove fron the p~operty above described, such fences, builfl4~s and other obstruct/cas as Bay uow be found upon said property. For the purpose of access .in along and across said prea~ses. The ~tblic access and fire lane easement shall be open to the public, £ire and police units and e~ergency services. The maintenance of paving on the ~ublic access and fire lane easement described herein shall be the responsibility of the proper~y Owner. No buildings, fences, trees, shrubs, or o~her /~prove~e~ts or. growths, other than paving, shall be constructed, reconstructed or placed upon, over or across, the easement granted herein. That ~ undersigned does bereft 'covenant and agree that it shall ~mstruct upon the access and fire lane tract, as described and illustrated herein, a hard surface that it shall maintain the same in a' state o[ good repair at all times and keep the same free and clear of any D~tO=' .Bib~e'.'~urch,. "D~ntOn'...Cou~ty~ .Texas ~ay. ,M~arlane ~:' STATE. O~ :~EXAS ~ OF DENTON T~s -inS.~l:. was .. a~/~n~wt~'dge~li ibe,EC~=e=~ ::me '-on' by Ha~...-,KcFar~ane., g]~d~u:. City o£ De. ton, Te.~as (Resolut&on No.. 91-073). .BY: ~ Real EsCate and AEte~ ££1~ng, please zeturn to~ Ctt¥o~ Denhon 601 E. H~ckoL~ Street, Suite B Denton, TZ 76205 PUBLIC ACCESS & FIRELANE EASEMENT 2,674 SQUARE FEET Wi;liam Uoyd Survey, Abstract No. 773 City of Denton, Denton .County, Texas DESCRIPTION, of a 2,674 square foot (0.061 acre) tract of land situated in Ih~;William Lloyd Survey, Abstract'No. 773, City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; .said tract being a portion-of a 73~foot wide right- of-way imown as Northcrest Drive dedicated by the plat of Denton Bible Church.Addition. an addition to the City of Denton, Denton Cotmty, Texas acCOrding to the plat thereof recorded in Cabinet V, Page 880 of the'Prat Records of Denton County, Texas; said 2.674 square foot tract being mom.particularly described as follows (the bearing system is based on a bearing of South 88 degrees, 53 minutes,'59 seconds East for the south right-of-way line of East Un versity Drive according to the above referenced plat of Denton Bible Church Addition); COMMENCING, at a 1/2-inch iron rod found at the intersection Of the soulh right-of-way line of East Univere[ty .Drive (U.S. HIGHWAY 380) (a variable width fight-of-way) with .the east fight-of-way line of Northcrest Drive; said point being the no~hwast corner of a I~act of land described in a deed to SM7, inc., D.B.A. Highland Food Store recorded in Volume 4311, Page 2828 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE, S°uth 10 degrees, 12 minutes,.38 seconds West, along the east right-of-way line of Norlhcrest Ddve, a distance of 31.63 feet to the .POINT OF BEGINNING;. THENCE, South 10 degrees, 12.minutes, 38 seconds West, along said. east right-of-way line, a'distance of 25.00 feet to a point for come~, THENCE, departing said easl right-of-way line, traversing said Northcrest Drive. the following four (4) calls: North 79 degrees, 47 minutes, 22 secon~ls West, a distance .of 19.50 feet to a point for comer; s.a d po nt being the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; In a soulhWasterty direction along said curve to the left, having a central angle of 92 degrees, 10 minutes, 51 seconds, a radius of 12.3,0 feel, a chord bearing and distance of South 54 degrees, 07 minutes, 13 seconds West. 17.72 feet, an arc distance of 19.78 feet. to a point for the end of .said curve; North 81 degrees, 58 minutes, 1.3 seconds West, a distance of 26.73 feet to a point for comer;, North 10 degrees, 12 minutes 38 seconds East, a distance of 69.62 feet to a point for comer on the south right-of-way line of said East University Drive; said point being the beginning of a. non- tangent curve to the right; THENCE, in a Southeasterly direction along said curve to the right and the south line of .East' University Drive, having a central angle of 00 degrees, 22 minutes, 55 seconds, a radius of 37a,9.72 feet, a chord bearing and distance of South 80 degrees, 49 minutes, 14 seconds East, 25.00 feet. an arc. distance of 25.00 feet to a point for.the end of said curve; THENCE, South 10.degrees,. 12 '.minutes, 38 seconds West, departing said south ~gttt-of-way line, t~aversing said Northcrest Drive, a. distance, of t6.40 feet to a. point .for 'comer;, said paint being the ' beginning of a tangent curve to the left; THENCE, in a southsasteffy direction along said curve to the left, having a central angle of 90 degrees.' 00 minutes, 00 seconds, a radius-of 14.89 feet, a chord bearing and distance, of South 34 degrees, 47 minutes, 22' seconds East, 21.06 feet, an arc distance of 23..39 feet to' a point for the end of said curve; THENCE, South 79 degrees, 47 minutas~ 22 seconds East, a distance of 18.61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING, 2.674 square feet or 0.061. acres of land, more.or less. (A survey plat of evan survey date herewith accompanies this description.) The undersigned. Registered 'Professional Land Surveyor, hereby certifies that the foregoing description accurately sets out the metes and bounds of the easement tract described. Pacheco I~och ( 8350 N. C~trat 2308-02.246 SRD Revised 02/14/2005 ional Land Surveyor No. 4688 tsulting Engineers~ thC. :pwy., #1000, Dallas TX 75206 ~EMENT.doc SHEET 1 OF 2 ·(c~8. v, PG 8BO) R [u,$. FIl(; ~ . I I. . __ ~v.~ ,~e~ v~ ~w~.~ ~e'o~ POINT OF · t h , ' ~' ~S 10~2'~" W . 138.98 ~ ~ - · ' 3 ' ~ ' . m~[A~T ~ ~ ~~POINT OF I LOT 2, BLOCK'S. /. ~ ~ BEGINNING . DENTON BIB~ /.~ Cl · CHURCH ADDITION .~. (CAB. V, PG. 880) I' DENTON BIBLE CHURCH / (VOL 5388, PG. 2573) ~14'30'48" R=7§5'59' E "' ~'~ L=191.40' ~'. CB=N 02~7'14" CD=190.89' LINE TABLE LINE I BEARING I LENGTH L1 I ~; 101~'38,".,.W '1 25,00 L2 ,,.I N 79'47'22" W 19.50 L~ I N 81'58'15P W ] 26.7~ L',- I . lO~2':~8: c t 69.,,2 1_5 ..S 10'12'~8" W16.40 L6 $ 79'47'22' E I 18~61 ~ SM7, INC. 1 D.B.A. HIGHLAND FOOD STORE (VOL. 4311, PG. 2828) - JS 79'16~1.0," E / / lm;~o . t~/-1/2-1NCH IRON /r?6' EASL~MI~NT TO - DENTON-BIBLE CHURCH (VOL. 5388, P~. 2573) CURVE, I DEL TA Ct "'1 9210'51" · c2 o'27'~',. C3 90"00'00~' c4 I 0'3o'43" . RADIUS 12;30 3749,72 14.89 3749.72 CURVE TABLE ' LENGTH I TANGEN'r l CHORD BEARING I CHORD 19.78 . J ....... 12.77 s 54'07'13? w 17.72- 25.00' 12.50 S 80'49'14" E J 25.00 23.39 I 14.89 I S ~'47'22' E ] 21.06 33.50 I 16.75 I $ 80'22"25" E 33.50 (C.M.) CONTROLLING MONUMENT IRF 1/2-INCH IRON ROD W/'PACH£CO KOCH" CAP FOUND The undersigned, Registered Profesei~qal Land Surveyor, hereby certifies that this pi,M: of survey accurately sets out the metes and. the easerneflt tract described. ,6360 N ~ F. J4~WY St. ITIE ~lGO0 DN,.I.~'TGXAS 1S2~ GTZ2~L3Q31 . 1'-50' FEB. 2005 2308-02.246 0 25 50 100 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET NOTES: 1. A la§el description of even surly dote herewith aaem'npanle~ th~ 'exhWIL 2. l~e Bearing s~stem for this exhibit is basad on a beefing of $~th 88 degree~, 5~ m~ute=, 59 eeq=~nda' East for the south right-of-way line of East Univemity OHve occordihg to the plat of Dentil .91bie Church Addition, an edditinn to the. City of Deflt~, Denton County, Texas, recorded in CQbinet V, Page 880 of the Plat Records of Denton. County, Texas 2,674. SQUARE FOOT PUBLIC ACCESS & FIRE ··LANE EASEMENT LOCATED LN THE CRY OF DE]iT'ON.- AND BE]HQ OUT OF THE MUJNd LLOYD SURVEY, .ABSTRACT NO, 773 DENTON COUN'rY, TEXAS SHEET 2 OF 2 D E NTON BIBLE CHURCH Elders Spunky Adams Dick C)wven M/l/ct Da v/doee Manny Desai Dan IlefzTey Jack Manes Ray ~cFartane Tom Ne/son Warren Nystrom Jim Robe.s Gene ~Sibotn JanuaD¢ 28, 2005 Mr. Paul Williamson Ri~t-of-Way A~nt Engineering & Capital PrQects DMsion CiB, of Demon 60 t E. Hickow Denton, TX 76205 Dear N~ Williamson: RE: Abandonment of Northcrest Street Attached is a formal request for abandonmen1 of the unimproved right-of-way named Northcre~t StreeL This right-of-way was dedicated to the Cib' of Denton by Charles D~ Adams on January 23,1973 and is described in a document recorded in Volume 666, 'Page 535 of the Real Property Records of Denton Coumy. The right-of-way has never been improved. The Church now owns the property and prefers to utilize k for landscaping, p~king and a driveway. The Ch~ch has committed to provide permanent access from US 380 to the EZ Chek property at 2400 East University Drive. A copy of this letter of commitment is also attached. Please contact me at (940)365-9668 if there are any questions concerning this abandomnent process. S~n,~e dy, Enclosures 1910 E. UNIVERSITY ',' DENTON * TX · 7(5209 940/383-3(564 940/565-9380 ,FAX EXHIBIT 4 DENTON BIBLE CHURCH Elders Spu~ Adams Dick (.'raven Idnller Da~Jdse lvlanny D~ He~ey Jack Man~ ~y McF~t~e 7bm Nel~n Warren ~I~m Jim Ro~s J~nuary 28 2005 Claud P. Elsom I!I, P.E. :&e~ Engineer Tex~s ~ of Trans~n 2624 W. Prairie Demon; TX 76201-5 t t 7 De~r _Mr. Etsom: RE; US 380 Median ~ at Northcrest S/reel This letter sepees as a formal cormmitmem on the part o£Denton Bible Church to provide pe~nm~t access from our prope~- to the EZ Chek Grocery at 2400 Ems~ UniversiW I~ve in Denton. The access from US 380 across our property to the EZ Chek property tLqe w4ll be constructed b), .Denton Bible Church to meet. the Ci~j of Denton stardards. My tmderst~ing is ihat witl~ the provision of ~ acc-ess by Denton Bible Church m the ~ Chek property; the median openiv~ on US 380 will be constructed as designed an<t w4ll not be moved. Cc: .}on Fomam .robin Pols~er UNIVERSITY .' DENTON ,. TX - 76209 940/303-3664 940/565-93~B0 ,,FA AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET March 1, 2005 Tax Kathy DuBose ~ SUBJECT Consider approval of tax refunds for the following property taxes: Tax Name Reason Year Amount 2. Cendejas, Hector F & Carina Duplicate Payment 2004 $881.99 i iiiiiii~ii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~i ~ iiiiiiE~iar ~iiiiii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~iup~i~iat ~iiiiii~ ~ntiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~i~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii$iii~iiii i0i~iiiiiiiii i~0iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 4, Cooper, John H Duplicate Payment 2004 $7!6,70 6. Countrywide Home Loans/Thompson, Lisa Duplicate Payment 2004 $647.71 ~r~ M i~heii~ ~upii~ ~ ~ $8 5 8. Cycle Center of Denton Overpayment 2004 $2,626.91 10: Fm~!inBa~ DUp!icae Paymem 2004 $~3~ Aut S PP! ~ ~00 ~ 12. Jackson, Harold L Duplicate Payment 2004 $589.35 14. Principal Residential Mtg/Raviehandran, Thiruvadi Ove~ayment 2003 $715.11 16. Rasch, BetW H Ove~ayment 2004 $1,445.99 !8: Rogers, Diana L Duplicate Payment 2004 $!,023:84 20. Tettleton, Stephanie Duplicate Payment 2004 $1,745.10 22. Wells Fargo/Hill-Haley, Sheila Duplicate Payment 2004 $520.39 BACKGROUND Chapter 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the governing body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $500.00. FISCAL INFORMATION The tax overpayment revenue fund would be reduced by $61,782.47. Respectfully submitted: Diana G. Ortiz Director of Fiscal Operations AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2005 DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: Planning and Development Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: V04-0034 (Newton Street Addition Drainage Variance) Consider an exaction variance of Section 35.19.6 (C)(1) of the Code of Ordinances Subchapter 19 Drainage Standards. The 1.008-acre parcel is located on the north side of the Northern end of Newton Street, between the street and the Pecan Creek drainage channel. The developer plans to subdivide this parcel into four single-family residential lots. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). BACKGROUND: Allen Bussell, Greg Edwards Engineering Services, Inc. (representing property owner and developer Ladwanee B. and Lyma Allen), has applied for an exaction variance of requirements described in Section 35.19.6(C)(1) of the Code of Ordinances. The Code requires construction of a 1 O-foot curb inlet at the end of Newton Street, and an 18-inch diameter closed storm drain pipe and outlet headwall on the developer's property to convey a 100-year storm flow based on developed upstream conditions. The applicant is proposing to construct a 6-foot wide concrete flume from the street through their property to convey the developed 100-year storm flow instead of the inlet and pipe system required by Code. The applicant is requesting this variance to provide relief from the costs associated with constructing the required curb inlet and closed storm drain improvement in proportion to the size and type of development contemplated. The developer is also proposing to dedicate a 16-foot wide drainage easement for the drainage flume by plat. This easement complies with the requirements of the Code of Ordinances for an enclosed pipe system. A copy of the applicant's letter is attached. The City Council uses the following criteria from the Code in this decision on a development exaction variance: The imposition of any development exaction pursuant to these regulations exceeds any reasonable benefit to the property owner or is so excessive as to constitute confiscation of the tract to be platted, such exactions may be waived by the City Council. The price the applicant(s) paid for the parcel, or the cost of the proposed building improvements is not a factor in determining reasonable costs. The question is are the costs associated with the public improvement reasonable and consistent with the type of development proposed and the demand for services created by the development. The drainage flume crosses a single property, is at the end of a street that is not planned for extension. The engineer's analysis demonstrates that the flume would provide capacity for the developed 100-year storm flow and the developer is willing to dedicate a drainage easement that meets the Code requirements. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commissions) Feb. 9, 2005 - Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. FISCAL INFORMATION The applicant's Engineer has approximated the cost of providing the inlet and closed storm sewer at $15,300, and the cost for constructing the requested concrete drainage flume is $3,872. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). ATTACHMENTS 1. Site location map 2. Plat 3. Applicant's letter 4. Feb. 9, 2005 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Prepared by: RLA, AICP Assistant Director of Planning and Development Chairman, DRC Review Committee Respectfully submitted: Kelly Carpenter, AICP Director of Planning and Development 2 ATTACHMENT 1 SITE LOCATION MAP I I / / f I I / / £ ~, 162'.8'8!,. "~' N W ~ 1,B2.§B' \ / : .~,/ / : /' / / / I / / 1 ThursdaY, December 23, 2004 Kay Liang City of Denton City Hall West 221 N. Elm Street Denton, TX 76201 Ph: 940-349-8357 RE: Newton Street Addition- PP04-0040, Variance Request Dear Kay: when Newton Street was constrUcted, a curb inlet at the low point in the Cul D'Sac should have been constructed with a pipe system provided to convey stormwater from the street to an appropriate outfatL Since this was not provided, Mr. Allen's options appear to be 1) initiate a law suit to correct the problem, 2) correct the problem by constructing the required pipe system, or 3) request a variance. The need for this drainage system was not identified in the Pre-Design Conference. Since the direct mn-off to this area came from a drainage basin with an area significantly less than 3 acres, we proposed a surface swale to convey :the flow between the lots. To support a variance for this surface flow the staff indicated that the 100-year flow should be contained within a concrete flume with a minimum width of 6' and that the flume should be in a dedicated drainage easement all in one lot. The attached inlet calculations indicate approximately 16.6 cfs will bypass the upstream inlets and fl°w to the end of the Newton Street Cul D'Sac. The attached HGL computation indicates that the existing pipe system should have capacity to convey all flows intercepted by the inlets. The crossections on the proposed site plan show that the fire lane and concrete flume have capacity to convey this flow from the street to a point beyond the proposed homes. The flow is then spread out so that it can flow into the channel behind Mr. Allen's property in a non-erosive manner. If the variance is approved, the proposed alternate surface drainage design reduces the cost of the required drainage facility for Newton Street Addition by approximately 70%. Surface flow in the fire lane should be less than 3" deep in storms up to 10-year frequency and less than 4" for storms of 100-year frequency and above. The surface system will also provide a Z:LSENT REOORDS\lO00.1099\I045\I045 - LT05 Y~y Liang variance request, doc Kay Liang Viera City of Denton December 23, 2004 Page 2 much higher level of service for storms greater than 100-years and reduce the probability that these homes could be damaged by an extreme mn-off event. tt is our hope that the City of Denton will be able to support this Variance request, and that Mr. Alien will be able to proceed with his infill project that will provide needed single family housing near the Rivera Elementary School. Please call if you have any questi°ns, Sincerely, GEES, Inc. GE/nas Z:~SENT RECORDS\I000-1099\I045\1045 - LT05 Kay Liang variance request, doc NEWTON STREET ADDITION CIVIL CONSTRI,,~'~'ION CO;ET E'$'TrMATE (0~43~'400e) cost DI~eFE~ENC~ ~IEt'WEEN FLUME AND PIPE SYSYEM PIP E SYSTEM PART 'D' - DRAINAOE FACliJTIES lO-FOOT Clt.~RB INLET I EA O~J'I~.DT ~TRUCTURES I EA ROCK RiP RAP 20 SY TOTAL PART ~' - DI~INAGEFACILiTIE$ · ~UBTOTAL P~.RT *D' CONTINGENCY TOTAL ESTiMATlaDCONSTRUCTION - APPROXIMATELY EASEMENT ACQU]SlTtON ???? $16,30fl'.§0 $16,300',00 $5.009,00 FI. UME PAET 'D' - DRAINAGE FACILITIES iTEM QUNdTJl'Y SUBTOTAL PART CONTINGENCY TOTAL ESTLMATED CONSTRUCTION - APPROXIMATELY EASEMENT ACQUI$1TtON UNIT $1 $$,8?2.00 S4,GSO.O0 SO,OO CondCnseltTM 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 15 16 17' 18 19 20 21 you PROCEEDINGS COMMISSIONER STRANGE: ThgI'~ is'a quorum and I would call the February 9th, 2005 and Zoning Commission to ordex, r( Gin us in the Pledge to the flag, (Thereupon, the Pled~s of Allegit Agenda is 2005 meeting.' ~USSIONER STRANGE: of the minutes ~' 26th, approval. second. have a motion by We'll vote. Vote Mr. Roy and a second passes 5-0. Next i is our The Planning and i Commission ~ opportunity to meet at our 5sion with staff to discu,' items on the Cons Any questions that id have been and I would ask for a motion on )nsent COMMISSIONER HOLT: SO moved. COMMISSIONER ROY; second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Motion by Ms. Holt secoud by Mr. Roy. Please vote. Vote passed 5-0. 12 13 14 15 6 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the chart, can you? COMMISSIONER HOLT; Mr. Roy. t will approve Item Is there a second? second. favor. to Four in (COMMISSIONERS STRANGE AND WATK~IN A'rrEN~^NCE.) ~ COMM[SS[ONE,R STRANGE: Next itenl on the Agenda is the Newton Street Addition, It's a 1.008 parcel of land located On the north side of the northern end of Newton Street between the street and the Pecan Creek Drainage Channel. Mr. Reichhan. MR. REIGHHART: Thank you. Normally, this item would have been on the Consent Agenda. Staff is recommending approval of the variance, but we also have a preliminary plat associated with this. And tile one -- that's your next item. And staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat. This is an exaction variance for the drainage improvement so it will go on to City Council. Were recommending approval of thv i~rellminary plat. And it would be conditional that the variance is granted. But 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Pa Tile next item ave individual considerations, and on Item No. 4A, I'm going to abstai~ :on this issue, and I'm going to ask olt to handle the this COMMISSIONER HOLT: we'lI be con Item No. shadow Brook approval of 1 through 9, Block A Shadow'Brook oood Commissioners, and all present here. Thoppil from the Planning The plat conforms to the Denton Development :and staff recommends approval. 13 This is not a pubhc 14 hearing, but if wants to s~k:~k, if they would fill 15 out the yellow ct and pass them i~wn. Does the I6 applicant wis~ i1{ ink? '~. ~, 17 /Y )N: My name is Gera ,~Yenson, 18 LanchnajkrSm v{ h 4238 1-35 North. I'm"~gt going to 19 mess~tht' success. I'm here to answer questio/~f'~ you 20 t~rth~m. ~at's an. ~ 21 f COMMISSIONER HOLT: xhank you. Are thel~ ' 22 any questions of file applicant? AnYone from the publiN 23 wishing to speak? Do I hear a motion? '~ 24 COMMISSIONER ROY: YOU caWt read the ~ 25 consider final plat of i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 Page 4 I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have on either item. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: what did you say about conditional approval? I misunderstood that. MR. REtCHHART: well, a copy of the preliminary plat is in your backup and it does show the drainage channel, the open drainage channel which is the variance that's being sought, So the approval of the preliminary plat is conditional to that. The variance is finally granted at P & Z -- or at City Council. COMMISSIONER ROY: xhank yOU. I understand that. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Anyone else have a question? Do we have a motion? COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me. I thought the applicant was going to talk, so -- MR. REICHHART: They're here basically to answer any questions that you have. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Is the applicant here and do they wish to speak? No. Okay. And based on the advice of counsel we should consider this item in two ~eparate motions. So we will have B, little i, which is the making a recommendation to Council regarding the exaction variance. And the second one would be the AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 1 - Page 4 CondenseltTM Page 5 I approval of ~e preliminary plat. So we'll need two 2 motions. Mrs. Holt, 3 COMMISSIONER HOt,T: I move approYal of the 4 exaction yariagc¢. 5 COMMISSIONER STRANOE: Mr. Roy. 6 COMMISSIONER ROY: I was going to ask a 7 question. I-- § COMMISSIONER sTRANGE: [ thought yOll were 9 going to second it'? Are you going to second it? We need 10 a second. 1 COMMISSIONER THIBODEA!JX: second. 2 COMMISSIONER STRANGE: second, Dr. 13 Thibodeaux. We have a motion by Ms. Holt, a second by Dr. 14 Thibodeaux. Now, Mr. Roy. 15 COMMISSIONER R°y: Yes. I'm sorry I didn't i 6 ask the question earlier.- I thought that I'd have aa 17 opportunity to ask the applicant. I'm a little bit 18 confused about the terminology and such. It looks like 19 fltis backs up to Pecan Creek, this propmay. 20 MR, REICHHART: COrrl~t, 21 COMMISSIONER ROY: "AIId SO just the back 22 part of the property will drain into the creek, is that 23 what fl~ey're -- we're allowing. 24 MR. REICHHART: I can show you what's going 25 on. Page 6 23 24 25 1 2 6 7. 8 9 10 11 12 13 t4 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 1 COMMISSIONER ROY: Please, yes. 1 2 MR. REICHHART: ^pparently what's happening 2 3 is that water is coming down the street and flowing across 3 4 the property. So what they're doing is channel[zing it 4 5 throagh the driveway and it's open flume basically to get 5 6 it into the creek. Our Code requires that they collect 6 ? that water and put it under ground, but the cost of, you 7 8 know, building those structures and the piping for the 8 9 four lots being proposed is, you know, quite high per lot 9 10 in your backup '- I don't have the exact figures again, 10 I but it was substantially higher to do the underground than 11 2 it is to do the open flume. Getting the water into Pecan 12 13 Creek is what we would require, it's how you do it. 13 14 COMMISSIONER ROY: SO there's no impact on 14 15 property to the east and west? 15 16 MR. REICHHART: None at all. 16 17 COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. That's what I 17 18 wanted to hear. Thank you. 18 19 COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Anyone else have a 19 20 question? Discussion? Okay. We have a motion and a 20 21 second. Please, vote. Let's see. Dr. Thibodeaux, you 21 22 did not end up voting. 22 COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: I attempted to. 23 COMMISSIONER STRANGE: YOU attempted to? 24 25 Okay. Page 7 COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: vii try again. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: I think we probably all need to vote again just to be safe. Okay~ Motion passes 5-0. -- We also now need a motion for the approval of the preliminary plat and conditioned on the variance, drainage variance. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I move approval. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: second? COMMISSIONER ROY: SCCOlld. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: 1 have a motion by Mrs. Holt and a second by Mr. Roy. Any discussion? If not, please vote. Motion passes 5-0. Page 8 Page 5 - Page 8 ?LANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: March 1, 2005 Materials Management Kathy DuBose Questions concerning this acquisition may be directed to Bruce Henington 349-8134 SUBJECT Consider adoption of an Ordinance accepting competitive bids by way of an interlocal agreement with the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) and awarding a comract for the purchase of an Air Cooled Helical Rotary Water Chiller for City Hall East; providing for the expenditure of funds therefore; and providing an effective date (File 3302-Imerlocal Agreemem for Chiller with the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network, contract awarded to Trane in the amoum of $68,615). FILE INFORMATION This item is for the acquisition of a new 185-ton nominal air-cooled rotary water chiller (air conditioner). This unit will enhance a similar approximately 13-year-old 170-ton unit curremly installed in the Police Departmem area of City Hall East. Sam Toub and Associates engineered and made a recommendation as to the 185-ton additional unit. The Trane model RTAC185 is available directly from Trane by utilizing the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) interlocal agreement. Council approved the interlocal agreement with TCPN on February 2, 2005. By utilizing this agreement, all State of Texas bidding requirements have been met. Installation was bid separately and awarded by staff in the amoum of $23,980. PRIOR ACTION/VIEW (COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISIONS) An imerlocal agreemem for cooperative purchasing was approved on February 2, 2005 (Ord. 2005-033) with the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) allowing the City of DeNon to participate in the TCPN contracts for the supply of goods and services. RECOMMENDATION Award a comract to Trane in the amoum of $68,615, utilizing the TCPN imerlocal agreemem and engineering recommendation. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Trane Dallas, TX Agenda Information Sheet March 1, 2005 Page 2 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Delivery of the unit is estimated to be eight weeks from receipt of an order. Installation is estimated to be approximately three weeks after the unit arrives. Project completion is scheduled for June 2005. FISCAL INFORMATION Funding for the HVAC unit is available from account 100092437.1365.40100. Respectfully submitted: Tom Shaw, C.P.M., 349-7100 Purchasing Agent Attachment 1: Quote from Trane 1-AIS-File 3302 ~t tachment 1 Proposal Prepared For: Customer Name: City of Denton, TX TCPN Customer Number: 02-10539 Date: January 31, 2005 TCPN Proposal Number: 02-10539-04-001 Job Name: Engineer: City of Denton N/A City Hall East Chiller Delivery Terms: Freight Allowed and Prepaid Payment Terms: Net 30 Days: 1% discount if paid w/in 10 days Trane is pleased to provide the enclosed proposal for your review and approval, Pre-Arranged Pricing Levels through The Cooperative Purchasing Network Tag Data - Air-Cooled Helical Rotary Water Chillers (Qty: 1) Item Tac, l(S} Oty D'~scri,,ption ;Model Numbe"r TCPN Multiplier A1 CH-1 1 Air-Cooled Series R(TM) ( RTAC ) i RTAC170 ProdUct Code: %154 Multiplier of a .3104 A! CH-1 1 Air-Cooled Series R(TM) ( RTAC ) ~ RTAC185 Product Code: T-154 Multiplier of a .3104 Product Data - Air-Cooled Helical Rotary Water Chillers Item: A1 & A2 Qty: 1 Tag(s): CH-1 Air Cooted Series R(TM) Model RTAC 170 Nominal Tons 460 V/60 Hz/3 Ph Std 40-60F leaving, with evaporator heaters Standard Pass Arrangement, insulated Low Ambient Capability Aluminum Fins ODP Condenser Fans Across the line starter Single point power connection Non-Fused Disconnect Switch Dyna-View operator interface LonTalk Communications Interface 150 psi NEMA-1 flow switch (Field Installed) With suction service valves Neoprene isolators (Field Installed) 1st Year Labor Warranty Startup 170 Ton Total Net Price (Excluding Sales Tax) ......................... $ 58,186.00 185 Ton $ 62,418.00 Total Net Add: Architectural Louvered Panels ............ $ 1,935.00 $ 2,456.00 Total Net Add: 2-5 Year Compressor Warranty ........ $ Total Net ADD: Sound Attenuation $ 1,657.00 1,885.00 $1,856.00 $1,885.00 NOTE: PLEASE SEND ALL PURCHASE ORDERS TO: FAX: 713~67-5719 E-MAIL: ~¥mko~.trane.com & to Joe Lucash Fax 972-243-1398 Trane appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the City of Denton. if there are any questions concerning this or any other matters, please call. Sincerely, Joe Lucash - Trane National Account Executive 1400 Valwood Parkway, Suite 100 Carro[[ton, TX 75006 Phone: (972) 406-3650 Fax: {972) 243-1398 Rev. 1/91 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS BY WAY OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE TEXAS COOPERATIVE PURCHASING NETWORK (TCPN) AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF AN AIR COOLED HELICAL ROTARY WATER CHILLER FOR CITY HALL EAST; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (FILE 3302-INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR CHILLER WITH THE TEXAS COOPERATIVE PURCHASING NETWORK, CONTRACT AWARDED TO TRANE IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,615. WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 2005-033, the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network has solicited, received and tabulated competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedure 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 Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network program 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 "File Number" listed hereon, and on file in the office of the Purchasing Agem are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: FILE NUMBER VENDOR AMOUNT 3302 Trane $68,615 SECTION 2. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items set forth in File 3302, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids to the City of Carrollton for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipmem, 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 Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network 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 file number wish to enter into a formal written agreement as a result of the City's ratification of bids awarded by the Texas Cooperative Purchasing Network, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, specifications and standards contained in the Proposal submitted to the City of Carrollton, 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 file numbers shown, 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 ,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY 3-ORD- FILE 3302 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: March 1, 2005 Planning and Development Department Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Z04-0048 (Denton Towne Crossing, Zoning) Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance rezoning approximately 38.5 acres from a Regional Cemer Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning district to a Regional Cemer Commercial Dowmown (RCC-D) zoning district. The property is generally located south of Loop 288 and east of Brinker Road. A retail developmem is proposed. The planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: Gerald Luecke (Hodges & Associates) as agem for DeNon Towne Crossing L.P. Dallas, Texas The applicant owns approximately 43.77 acres, which they propose to develop as a regional shopping plaza including two big box anchor tenams each over 120,000 square feet in size. Approximately 5.27 acres is zoned RCC-D and the majority of the site (38.5+ acres) is zoned RCC-N. RCC-N zoning limits gross floor area to 55,000 square feet per lot. The proposed RCC-D zoning district has no limitations on the size of retail. Eight legal notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the property. Staff has received no written responses to the notice. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Deny. 3. Postpone consideration. 4. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. Preliminary and Final Plats and building permits are required prior to commencement of construction. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Jan. 26, 2005: Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Feb 9, 2005: Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Location/Zoning & Land Use Maps 3. Notification Map & Information 4. Letters from Applicant 5. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes (Jan 26, 2005 & Feb. 9, 2005) 6. Draft Ordinance ~ Reic ~ rt, AS~A, AIC~~'~' Assistant I~irector of Planning and Development Respectfully submitted: Kelly Carpenter, AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Request The applicant is requesting approval of the rezoning request to Regional Center Commercial Dowmown (RCC-D) to facilitate the developmem of a regional shopping plaza. The proposed developmem includes two large (big box) anchor tenams that are both over 120,000 sr. The existing Regional Cemer Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning limits the size of retail development on any one lot to 55,000sr. Existing Condition of Property Adjacem zoning: North: RCC-D (Gas Station & DeNon Crossing) South: RCC-N (Rails to Trails & Undeveloped) West: RCC-D & RCC-N (Wal-Mart Plaza) East: RCC-D & RCC-N (Target Plaza & Auto related Strip Cemer) The subject property is undeveloped. Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located within the "Regional Mixed-Use Activity Center" future land use area. These areas contain the shopping, services, recreation, employment, and institutional facilities supported by and servicing an emire region. A regional activity cemer could include a regional shopping mall, a number of major employers, restauram and emertainmem facilities, a large high school or community college, and high-density housing. A regional activity cemer is considerably larger and more divers in its land uses than any other activity cemer. It also includes vertically imegrated uses where differem uses may occur on each floor of the building. The proposed zoning change is in compliance with the approved Concept Plan. Development Code/Zoning Analysis Transportation A Traffic Impact Analysis has been submitted and has idemified required improvemems necessary to mitigate the traffic impacts associated with the development. Public Infrastructure Adequate utilities are available to service the developmem. (See Attachmem 4) Development Code/Zoning Analysis The proposed zoning change will facilitate the developmem of two large (big box) anchor tenants that are both over 120,000 square feet in size. The amount or size of retail development in the currem RCC-N zoning district is limited (L 13 - see below) to 55,000 square feet. The following tables idemify the differences between the existing RCC-N zoning district and the proposed RCC-D zoning district: Bed and Breakfast L(9) P Retail Sales and Service L(13) P Professional Services and Offices L(14) P Vehicle Repair N P Auto and RV Sales N P Administrative or Research Facilities L(14) P Bakeries L(21 ) P Light Manufacturing N L(23) Veterinary Clinics L(14) P Business / Trade School L(14) P Kindergarten, Elementary School P N The following define the limitations to zoning uses when the zoning matrix identify a use as permitted, but limited L(8) - Travelers' accommodations, are permitted, provided that: 1. The business-owner or manager shall be required to reside on the property occupied by the accommodation, or adjacent property. 2. That each accommodation unit shall have 1 off-street parking space, and the owners shall have 2 parking spaces. All spaces shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Off-Street Parking section of this Chapter. 3. That only one ground or wall sign, constructed of a non-plastic material, non-interior illuminated of 4 sq. ft. maximum size be allowed. Any exterior illumination of signage shall be installed such that it does not directly illuminate any residential structures adjacent or nearby the travelers' accommodation. 4. That the number of accommodation units allowed shall be proportional to the permitted density of the zone. Each traveler's accommodation unit shall be counted as 0.6 units for the purpose of calculating the permitted number of traveler's accommodations. 5. All traveler's accommodations shall be within 200 feet of a collector or arterial. Street designations shall be as determined by the City Comprehensive Plan. Distances shall be measured via public street or alley access to the site from the arterial. 6. Excluding the business-owner's unit and the area of the structure it will occupy, there must be at least 400 sq. ft. of gross interior floor space remaining per unit. 7. Traveler's accommodations are limited to no more than 8 guest units. L(9) - All restrictions of L(8), but limited to no more than 15 guest units. L(13) - Uses are limited to no more than 55,000 square feet of gross floor area per lot. L(14) - Uses are limited to no more than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area. L(21) - Bakery and bottling areas not to exceed 2,500 square feet. Sales on premises of products produced required in this zone. The following table identifies the general regulations for the RCC-N and RCC-D zoning districts: Minimum lot area (square feet) None None Minimum lot width 20 feet None Minimum lot depth 50 feet None Minimum front yard setback 10 feet None Minimum side yard 6 feet None Minimum side yard adjacent to a street 6 feet None Minimum rear yard None None 30 feet 30 feet plus 1 plus 1 foot for foot for each each Minimum yard abutting a single family foot of foot of use or district building building height height above above 30 feet 30 feet Minimum residential unit size 500 SF 500 SF Maximum FAR 1.5 3.0 Maximum Density, dwelling units per 80 100 acre Maximum Lot Coverage 85% 90% Minimum Landscaped Area 15% 10% Maximum building height 65 feet 100 feet In addition to the general regulations, the proposed development is subject to all the requirements of the Development Code, including §35.13.13.6 (Large Scale Development Regulations). Staff Findings · The proposed zoning is consistent with the Denton Plan. · The proposed zoning is consistent with surrounding zoning and land uses. Staff Recommendation Based on above findings staff recommends approval. ATTACHMENT 2 Location/Zoning Map NORTH Land Use Map ATTACHMENT 3 Notification Map NORTH 200 FOOT BUFFER 500 FOOT BUFFER Scale: None Eight 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 0 · Neutral: 0 *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 November29,2004 P.L.L.C. www. hodgesusa.com Mr. Larry..Reichart · City of Denton Planning & Development Department 221 N. Elm Denton, Texas 76201 RE: Denton Towne Crossing S.W.Q.S.H. 288 and Brinker Road Denton, Texas · Hodges Project No. 00167 Dear Mr. Reichart: Enclosed is a legal description for the parcel of land referenced above. The existing zoning on the property is a combination of RCCD and RCCN Zoning. We are requesting that the zoning be modified to provide an RCCD Zoning for the entire property. This will allow us to provide national retail anchor stores at their prototype size, including an expansion of the one of the anchor stores. It wilt also provide one continuous zoning for the entire piece of property. It is our opinion that the zoning meets the intention of the development on this property. Please contact us if you require further information. Best regards, HODGES & ASSOCIA'~ES, P.L.L.C. Gerald E. Luecke 13642 Omega Dallas, TX 75244 . .~72) 387-1000 Enclosure XC: Christina Anderson Charles Hodges Gary DeVleer Trey Swindle F (972) cJ60-1129 Lt J:~'000~9011~Cc~rrespondence~etters~00167 Ltr 1 t2904 Cily.~c L C A Lawrence A. Cates & Associates, LLP t'dcpiitmc: {972~ 385-2272 Fax: (972~ 080.-i 62? WWw. J~twt'gllOeaCale:LCOl~ · I)alh~< Lawren,~ ^ (.,ws. lie Bryan M. B,.'y,:r, I' I~ November 24, 2004 'Mr.. Larry Reichart City'ofDenton Planning & Development Department 221 N. Elm Denton, TX 76201 Re: Denton Towne Crossing S.W.Q.S.H. 288 & Brinker Road Denton, Texas LCA No. 21099 Dear Mr. Reichart, Please accept this letter as our assessment of the existing public utilities currently in place to service the above referenced project. The site is currently serviced by existing 12" and 8" water lines, an i8" sanitary sewer line and a proposed 7' x 5' reinforced concrete box culvert which will be installed by the Texas Department of Transportation as part of the State Highway 288 expansion. TXDOT will also be providing an expanded road' section for State Highway 288 which will provide adequate traffic capacity to the site. Brinker Road is currently built out and will also provide adequate traffic capacity. Please contact our office if you require any additional information. Sincerely, CondcnscltTM 5 6 7 8 ll 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 i13 14 15 16 17 t9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 9 COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Nfl'At iteul on the agenda is going to be a continued public hearing. It's a continued public hearing, consider making a reconm~endation to City Council on the following items, Denton Town Crossing. The prop~y is located on the south side of Loop 288 and the east side of Brinker Road. The first item is the rezoning of approximately 38.5 acres from regional center commercial neighborhood, RI~¢-~ zoning digtrict to regional center co~rmxercial downtown, RCC Zoning District. The second item is an alternative development plan for approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping plaza. And the third item is a special sign district for approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping plaza. Mr. Reichhart. MR. R~IC~aA~?: Ihank you. On the overhead is thc subject property. Prior to the meeting I handed out so,ne infommtion regarding some updates to the parking and the open space requirements. The subject property is outlined ia black. It is across the street on Loop 288, from Denton Crossing, the new shopping plaza. And Wal-Mart is located across Brinker to give you an idea of where it is. This development and the proposals tonight are very similar to what we've done for -- or what the process that we used for Denton Crossing, a rezoning, an Page 10 Alternative Development Plan and then a Special Sign District. As you recall, with the bigger projects like this, our Code is really oriented toward -- not towards these huge projects. I mean, there's -- these are so complex that there's some nuances in our Code that we've seen the bigger projects come forward with the ADP and this is very similar. As I said, the subject property is outlined in black, and what we're doing is just taking the entire site to the Rccr~ zoning district. Staff is recommending approval of that. And with each three of these, we'll need separate motions on each three of the cases. So Staff is reco~mnending approval of the zoning. And I'm going to do a very brief overview of the proposals. Tonight the applicant has a more in depth Powerpoint presentation, so I don't want to be redundant. The site plan in on the overhead. And I really need to point out one thing as we go througk If you're familiar with the site, there's a grove of existing Post Oaks in this area. The applicant is proposing up to a 30-foot retaining wall along this edge of that Post Oak Grove in order to preserve over an acre of the existing trees. With that and some of the other trees they're doing and some of the little bit of mitigation of additional trees, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 tl 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 11 they would meet the requirements of the tree preservation regulations even though this project had started well before those regulations went into place, the applicant has met those requirements. Additionally, there's two basically big box develop~nents, a Home Depot, and a Target being developed and along Loop 288 and Brinker will be some out pamels. The applicant is proposing, as you see in my backup, quite a bit of open space and landscaping mitigation for thc proposed impervious material, the extra parking spaces if you will. And if you notice the nmnber in file backup was 402 additional parking spaces. We're looking at 475 parking spaces now. Tho site plan, it's typical with these type of developments, are constantly changing as you're working with thc corporate headquarters of the different entities. The amount of open space is ahnost double. It's 85 percent more than what is required per Code. They've done that obviously by preserving the trees. But they've addext additional landscaping in the parking areas with additional tree coverage. And, again, that handout that I prepared for tonight identifies how much more additional tree canopy coverage. They more than double what is required in the parking areas. And a 62 percent increase or 27 percent of Page 12 the site would be corelli with tree canopy coverage. And then on the alternative or the sign district, excuse me, in the backup again, identifies the location and the number of signs that could be proposed along Loop 288 and they were all 30 foot high pylon signs and tbe applicant is proposing to use more monument signs along Loop 288 and Brinker. The nmnbers, how we calculate signs, we include file whole base if it's a monument sign. You know, the effective alvin of the sign. It's now decorative -- and you're looking at -- it's drawing your attention to that sign, so what the applicant considers a sign, quite honestly, fl~e actual sign sitting on top of the monument or surrounded by the brick, we count the brick and everything. I wanted to point that out in your backup, also. We are reconunending approval of the ^m~ and the Speciai Sign District as proposed tonight. I can answer any questions you want, but it might be better to wait and let the applicant go through their presentation and then we can resolve all of those issues at once. But I'd be happy to answer any questions you would have at this point. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Any questions? Okay. If not, we will open the public hearing. And I think for the purposes of this item we will have one PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 9 - Page 12 CondenscltTM 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 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 13 public hearing for all time i~ns. So is the applicant he~'e and do they wish to speak? If you will, when you come down, please give us your name and your address, please. Mt~. wnm3na: Yes, sir. Good evening. My name is John Webber. I'm president of Webber and Company, 16,000 Dallas Parkway, Suite 300, Dallas Texas 75248. Webber and Company is a shopping center developer and primarily we develop for Target Stems and Home Depot stores throughout fl~e North Texas market. I will keep it relatively brief tonight, too. And we have our entire staff here of consultants, civil engineers, arctfitects, traffic consultants. And they've enjoyed working with members of your staff here in Denton. And it's a pretty complex and detailed work effort that's been put forth. And really I'm here to help answer questions. And I think you've seen all of the site plans. And Mr. Gerald Luecke with Hedges and Associates, our architect will do you a brief slide show here of a little bit in depth. But I've asked them to be brief so we can save plenty of time for any detailed questions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Thank you. MR. LUECKE: Good evening. I'm Gerald Luccke with Hedges and Associates Arclfitccts at 13642 Page 14 Omega in Dallas. And I appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight to present the Denton Town Crossing to you. We're excited about this development and are anxious to present it to you and to be able to proceed on what we feel like is a lan&hark development in the City. Let me see if I can get the presentation going here. First, is just an overview of a site plan on an aerial and I think Mr. Reichhart covered it well as far as the orientation of the site in relationship to the roadways. This is a couple of oblique aerials of the site as it sits today and its relationship to Brinker Road and 288 from a couple of different angles. The site is outlined in yellow, of course. This is the zoning plan presentation. And as Mr. Reichhart said our request is to zone the entire project as an RCCD to allow this Regional Mixed Use Center Development. The Alternative Development Plan is the next site plan. And we've incorporated several features into the Alternative Development Plan. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Could you please lift that mike up a little bit9 The people in the back are having a hard time hearing you. MR. LUECKE: Sure. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Thank you. MR. LUECKE: Incorporated several features 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 MINUTES FEBRUARY Page 15 into the Alternative Development Plan. Specifically, the preservation of trees, existing trees. Again, in this area of the site, in tile southern area of the site, and with a retaining wall that proceeds from Brinker Road and continues on around all the way bordering tile existing tree area so that those trees can be saved and preserved for the development. In addition to that, we've created a wide 30 foot landscape strip through the parking area that provides a pedestrian pathway that would into'connect the pad site buildings out along Brinker as well as a small shop retail building that sits in this location of the site would connect those to the anchor stores toward the back of the site. Also, we've incorporated some plaza areas with this curvilinear sidewalk, plaza area here that is adjacent again to the small shop retail buildings. And the front of the anchor store here will incorporate planting areas, benches and seating areas for customers for that anchor store. Our parking is set based upon the anchor requirements and what they perceive as the required parking for the area and the pad sites are also parked in relationship to their uses as restaurants or retail buildings along the pad sites. Page 16 1 Colored site plan which indicates again, 2 the landscaped areas, the existing tree preservation that 3 we created. This anchor store has a future expansion area 4 that will be toward 288, but that area, that green space, 5 which will be existing today in the initial part of the 6 development is not counted as part of our green space 7 calculations that we were using in the landscape calcs. 8 The next one is just an enlargement of our 9 plaza area as I was speaking about the area in front of 10 the anchor store with planters, which will be used to 11 screen some car storage that they have there, but also the 12 incorporation of some seating areas with benches and a 13 paving area out front. The long linear plaza is the 14 pedestrian connector between the anchor store buildings 15 and the pad sites out front and the small shop retail 16 building out front. And then this pedestrian plaza is the .17 one that's adjacent to the small shop retail building out 18 front. So we've again incorporated sidewalk areas and 19 areas to pause, have seating areas in these plaza areas 20 along with additional highlighted landscaping. 21 The next one is the facade plan and wc 22 brought that forward just to show you the quality of the 23 development that we will have. We're working with staff 24 in meeting your requirmnents for the large anchor store 25 requirement from a design standpoint, and we've also 9, 2005 Page 13 - Page 16 CondcnscItTM 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 to 11 :12 13 14 15 16 17 18 I9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page i upgraded these buildings with a majority of masonry on the buildings and we have a sample panel hew that -- and we can show the actual materials as well. It will have a base, tan colored brick, and then we'll also have some accent colors. Okay. That's super. Thank you. We'll have accent brick colors. We'll have some texture coating on concrete panels up above the main columns. Pilasters would be a brick with tile brick bases. And then we also have what we call a burnish granite faced block that will be part of the accent medallions that will be mounted on the building. So we feel that the design is a special design for file area and also incorporates the main features of the anchors, but brings the entire development together with a consistent design and material pallet. The next one is just a site section showing the positioning of the home improvement building and the garden center as it relates to Brinker Road. This area is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 Page 19 Brinker Road and 288. And those am shown in the blue and in the green. And then finally is the sign design showing the same brick to be used on thc base of the signage. And then the same colors to be used on the legs of the signs as they project and frame the sign all of the way up to the top. We would also use detailing at the top side of the signs that would match the top of the buildings, the coping of the buildings would be a projected detail at the top along with the shopping center name. All right. So that's all I have and we am here to answer questions. As Mr. Webber said, we have our landscape architect, our civil engineer, traffic enginem', and myself, the architect, so we'd be happy to answer questions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We do have some questions. Dr. Noble. COMMISSIONER NOBLE: Thank you. I think the Brinker Road paving. And then as Mr. Reichhart said, there's a large retaining wall that creates the plateau up top for file saving of the existing trees. So the home improvcanent store is actually inset into the side of the hill, if you will. And the garden center is in this location. So as you view across these trees, it has this inset, and therefore is very well screened from the Page 18 surrounding Brinker Road. The next one is our sign calculation sheet, and as Mr. Reichhart said it var[es from his in that we had calculated the actual sign area of the signs in lieu of the entire sign structure and our request is that, you know, we not be penalized for creating the signage that uses materials to match the building and provides a consistent sign design. And our proposal is that the allowable signage, we're less in number of signs and also in overall square footage. If you do calculate just the sign area we are less than the allowable sign area as well. And it's a -- as I say, it's well coordinated with the building materials and the overall design of the center. This one shows the allowable sign plan and just the positions of the signage that could be allowed on the project. And then the next one is our proposed sign plan. And it is color-coded so you can sec that our main shopping center sign is out along 288 at the main entry. We have a secondary shopping center sign that is at the main entry off of Brinker Road. We have one multi-tenant monument sign that will also be along 288 in this position that would allow signage for the small shop retail building. And then we have individual monument signs that would occur along the pad sites along both 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 that's a beautiful design actually. But my question is and I guess it may be obvious, are those anchor stems -- are those anchor stores proposed to be the Target and a Home Depot; is that correct? MR. LUECKE: Yes, they ar~. COMMISSIONER NOBLE: Tell me if I'm wrong. But isn't -- I thought there was a Target that is pretty Page 20 close to that vicinity right off of 288; isn't that correct? MR. LUECKE: Yes, that's correct. MR. WEBBER: YeS, sir, that's right. I think your question will become what are they planning to do with that store, is that -- COMMISSIONER NOBLE: IS there any plans MR. WEBBER: what they have done over the years with Target corporation is their stores, this stem was built several years ago. And, obviously, it's size, it's become functionally obsolete. It's location is, as you know, excellent, in fact, superb. And it will be a sold or leased to i'm sure another national retailer. They haven't done that yet but that is usually what goes on with the Target stores. And I've heard this -- I'm not Target myself, but I've heard that most all of these stores I've seen over the years, they go very, ve~3~ quickly. This one will because of its proximity to thc vibrant retail area that's there. The second question goes for the Home Depot. They, too, have a store that's relatively new, but it, too, this retailing business is changing so quick. But it -- they, too, are looking for a larger more modern store and it's obvious that 288, Loop 288 has become the PLANNING AND ZON1NG MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 17 - Page 20 CondenseltTM 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 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 21 main retail corridor for this region of the city. And so that's their desire too, to move. So they will also be selling that building or leasing it. So that's tile best I can tell you. COMMISSmNER NOBLE: okay. And the second question that I was reading that there was some -- what is the issue with the TxDOT, is that the -- part of that is the proposed expansion on 288, was that part of fl~e issue that the applicant had or -- MR. REICHHART: If yOU recall, we continued this from the previous meeting because of the TXDOT issues with tile proposed traffic light and the Loop Road. Excuse me. There was a proposed traffic light at this location on Loop 288 at their entry and what the applicant was working with TXDOT tO try to design this, what's typically referred to a Ring Road to have more of a direct access on to Brinker. Typically, these roads come through and would loop directly around and there would be another T intersection at this. But the idea is trying to get this more to work as -- I don't want to say cut-through, but more -- more like a road and have that direct access to Brinker. And that's -- the applicant was working with TXDOT on that design up until -- they're probably still working with them. But this is the closest we've gotten now to where 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 t8 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 23 it over the months and everyone is on board that this is a good plan. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: Every citizen in Denton will tell you this is the biggest problem area we have is that Loop 288. And I tlfink we have an understanding of when Loop 288 is going to be improved. And what I'm trying to understand is when are you going to do this? Can you tell us when you expect -- is this going to be something you am going to do right away and just exacerbate the problem or are you going to wait unti[ 288 is fixed, or what is your plan? MR. WEBBER: Tho plan is for the retailer, Target and Home Depot to open October 2006. The entire, as you know, 288 will not yet be completed and I will say that we did buy this property four years ago knowing what the situation was on 288. And as you do know, ail of tile retail that has evolved around us has occurred -- a good part of it has occurred in the last four years since we purchased the property. And this is thc last key piece in this congested intersection. And evv~'yone has watched it carefully and we've done ntm~erous traffic impact analysis and studies and as you might expect a national retailer does not wish to open into a congested area in an nonsolved area, and they've studied this, tile Target Page 22 we thit~k TxOoT and the applicant and the tenants would work out. But that was the -- what we were working on before, is the design of that inteTnal mad system and that's why we had file continuance from Wee weeks ago. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: And we have also an additional cormnent. Ms. Carpenter. MS. CARPENTER: I'd like to also say that on the traffic studies that were p~rformed by a variety of traffic engineers that were on the -- that looked at the project, there is no decrease in the functionality on 288 with tile traffic signal. And part of the reason for that functionality not having a decrease is because the road does have an exit right on to Brinker and doesn't function as the traditional ring road that Larry described. And it does have the outlet on to Brinker Road. So it's taken many months and study from city traffic engineers and our consultants and their consultants and working with Mr. Elsom at TxDOT tO come to a position whca,~ everyone is in agr~ment that the level of service will not be diminished on 288 in its improved condition. Okay. Once it's at full capacity, once it's finished with its new expansion. MR. LUECKE; I agree. That's very w~[1 explained. It was the staff reconunendafion in the beginning and all of the national retailers have studied 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 24 corporation and Home Depot and said, they do wish to go. COMMISSIONER ROY: HaVe those people visited this area? MR. WEBBER: Yes, sir. The senior officers of both of these corporations. COMMISSIONER ROY: Because 288, tile contract won't even be let for that construction by the time you open, that's going to be a real mess out there. MR. WEBBER: We do all understand that schedule when it's been quite detailed by TXDOT and to all parties, and as you know Wal-Mart and Lewes and ~'oger and all of the others have opened. And it was worse even in a position then even candidly and they've measured it and said this is what we'd like to do. COMMISSIONER ROY: well, I hope you know something I don't because I don~t know how people are going to get to your store but that's a business decision. Let me ask another question. On the west side of your propox3,, there's a green area which has not bexm discussed. Do you see that along 288 on the west side? MR. WEB8ER: on the west side behind the two anchor stores? COMM£SSIONERROY: Right there. What is that? MR. WEBBER: oh, that is a detention pond PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 21 - Page 24 Condcns¢ItTM 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 t8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 25 that is -- that has been designed and will be holding water for a short period of time after a heavy, heavy rainstorm, and it's landscaped to meet all of the ordinance and design standards on the landscape. COMMISSIONER ROY: rll continue unless the -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: You're on the floor. Continue on. COMMISSIONER ROY: The property -- or the trees down to the right there, to the west side -- east side. MR. WEBBER: YeS, sir. COMMISSIONER ROY: I am very pleased about your plan to maintain those trees. And I was looking at the site tree canopy coverage that you have. You've proposed 27 percent or 618,000 square feet of site tree canopy coverage. Does that five acres or roughly five acres, is that included in the calculation to -- for you to get up to your 27 percent? MR. LUECKE: YeS, it is. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO basically what you're going to have and, again, I'm very pleased to see that stand protected, but your site tree canopy coverage is largely going to be, it looks like covered in the one section of it. And I'm trying to visualize then what the Page 26 rest of the site is going to look like. I accept that on the whole site you're meeting the -- slightly exceeding the canopy coverage, but, I guess, I worry a little bit that the rest of the site is not going to look, say, as nice as across the street. MR. LUECKE: I think that that concern is met by the amount of landscaping we have along the perimeter, We have wide buffer areas along the perimeter And we also have again, these areas that border the parking area that split the parking into smaller fields of parking with our wide landscaped pedestrian walkway through the center between the two anchor buildings as well as around the perimeter of this -- the Loop road area. We also have individual islands within the parking area that break up the rows of parking in the individual islands. So it's kind of a three-tiered effect, if you will. We have an exterior buffer area along the outside. We have these wide areas that split the parking area into smaller fields. And then we have the individual landscaped islands within thc parking itself. So we will have substantial number of trees outside of the exlsting tree canopy that's there at ~e southwest portion -- or southeast portion of the site. Pardon me, the tree canopy coverage calculation then does not include the existing trees, I'm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 2t 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 lg 19 ~20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 27 sorry. That was incorrect. COMMISSIONER ROY: Please clarify that further. The five-acm lot -- the five acres of old Oak Trees is not included in your canopy calculation. Is that what you're saying? MR. LUECKE: Yes, that's correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: IS that upland habitat land there? MR, REICHHART: It has the characteristics of upland habitat, but it's not 10 acres in size, so it's not classified as an ma area. And they are ending up preserving about one acre of the trees out there. thought. acl~. COMMISSIONER ROY: one acm.9 MR. RE[CHHART: YeS. COMMISSIONER ROY: I read SOlllewhgat3 five, I MR. REICHHART: [ believe it's about one COMMISSIONER ROY: olle acre, Thank you. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mrs. Holt. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Yes, [ have some questions about the design. Target and Home Depot are two of my very favorite places. But I don't like big boxes, so I've got a problem. And having looked at big boxes for a long tiine here in Denton, we seem to get the worst of Page 28 the worst, How are fl~ese going to be better than the big boxes we already have.9 Are we going to see fertilizer? Are we going to see soil? Are we going to see carts? Are we going to see junk on file outside? MR. LUECKE: FrOlll an operational standpoint? COMMISSIONER HOLT: From a drive-by customer standpoint, MR, WEBBER: If yOU saw thc material board, it's quite a bit upgrade. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I SaW the material board and it looks nice. But, for instance, Southlake Home Depot is gorgeous. Denton Home Depot is not. Where do we fall in between with tiffs new one? Do we get a Southlake or do we kccp Denton? M~. [UUCKE: I think you'll find that the building design itself is at least as attractive as Southlake, if not mom and the reason for that is we have a substantial amount of masonry, which I believe on Southlake is mostly stucco with some tile roof and some ofl~er accent areas, but the majority of the building, I think is~ if I'm not nfistaken is mainly a stucco-type surface, In our case, we are going to have a substantial mnount of masonry on the surface. That is an alternating material with a textm-e coating so that we'll have -- it PLANNING AND ZONING MINIYrES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 25 - Page 28 CondcnscltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 tO ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 29 will be -- the ams of the wall will be broken up into smaller areas, it won't look like a big box, if you will. It will be broken up into smaller areas. And we have a -- this whole panel, for instance, is all brick venire, and then we have these accent bands to go through that. We also have sloped roofs. COMMISSIONER HOLT: okay. What is all of this down here? I know that's the garden center. But what's that on the end, the very end? MR. LUECKE: *hat's a screening for the garden center. COMMISSIONER HOLT: IS that a wall on the end? MR, LUECKE: uh-huh. This is a colmnn, a masonry colunm that's on tile end. And then this is wh~re the site section if we want to go back to that, but this is where the wall comes up and the existing trees are located -- that's tucked into the side of the hill. COMMISSIONER HOLT: That's good. MR. LUECK£: ^nd I think that provides a very attractive area for that to bo located in relationship to tile view angles as you're driving along Brinkcr Road. COMM[SStONeR HOLX; will this look sort of like the one across the street, across 288? I mean, is it Page 30 the same type of thing? MR. LUECKE: I don't think so. It certainly is a Home Depot, but the look -- this is a projected canopy, so it's not flat against thc wall, It's projected out like this. So it also has relief not only in vertical articulation but also in the horizontal articulation, it has some low areas that were dipped out from building, and other areas that are higher, up above, that form a backdrop. COMMISSIONER HOLT: BUt why does it all have a flat roof, flat line? MR. LUECKE: I'm sorry. Could you ask that question again? COMMISSIONER HOLT: why docs it all have a flat line across the top? I mean, I see it has awnings and projections and it all has a flat line across the top. MR. LUECKE: Yeah. Our goal is to not make it flat. In oti~er words, it -- the wall steps. I mean, obviously, the top of the wall is flat, but the wall steps such that it does not appear as one, you know, single flat line, It has these articulated areas that move up and down in relationship to, you know, thc base wall of the building, And as you see those projected out with the front canopies, then, again, it doesn't look just like a plain flat faced box. PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 31 COMMISSIONER HOLT: NOW, what is tile relationship or what is the unifying factor in these big boxes and the out parcels that are against 288 or will there be any? MR. LUECKE: There will be. We will have materials. We typically will do an overall design guideline for the shopping center, and we will have materials that arc specified for our buildings, and then they will be used on the pad buildings as well around. The pad buildings will have their own unique character. In other words, if it's a Chili's or something like that, they would have their unique character, but they would also be able to use our materials so that the whole design would coordinate. COMMISSIONER HOLT: what is this second -- this second drawing? What is that of?. Is that -- MR. LUECKE: This one. COMMISSIONER HOLT: uh-huh. MR. LUECKE: That is the small shop retail building, the one that is out -- oh, I can't point on this, but the one that's behind the pad buildings along 288 and that will be a building that's split up into smaller boutique-type tenants that would occupy that building, more of a local tenant or it may be a national tenant, but someone that's a smaller retailer. Page 32 COMMISSIONER HOLT: And what is this third -- the third one down? MR. LUECKE: And then the bottom two are the Target building, one is the fi'ertl and one is the side facing 288 of the Target building, And the same thing occurs on the Target building. This is a new prototype for them, where, again, we've created some elements that are masonry elements that project out and project up from the backdrop of the main building. And it also has some overhang canopies on it as well. MR. WEBBER: As metroplex standards go, these are very both upgraded buildings by these two national tenants. They're very upgraded. And Gerald is right also in that on the out lots, as the developer, and Target and ttome Depot, the three parties reserve through the operating easement agreements all of the rules and regulations of the center and the materials. While they're national credit restaurants and national anchored-type restaurants, they will adhere to our approval standards of these -- using these materials and yet maintaining their unique architectural designs for their buildings which often are more or less their I.D. signs or I,D. buildings that people know who they are. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Then on the landscaping along 288 it looked like a narrow -- FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 29 - Page 32 CondcnscltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 :13 '14 '15 16 17 lg 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 22 23 24 25 Page 33 MR. LUECKE: Along this area? COMMISSIONER HOLT: Right. Is that -- since there will be parl6ng up there against that 288, will there be any bushes or trees or anything along that area, or is that too narrow? MR. LUECKE: There will be trees, and there will be shrubs, but there is not parking along that area. We have adhered to the City standards where we've sat back and just had the parking on the sides of the building or on the back. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I thought there was parking on this~ This looks like little parking spaces. Is that not parking along there? MR. WEBBER: NO, ma'am. That's just a driveway. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Oh, okay. There are hedges there. And will that be the backs of those buildings? MR. LUECKE: NO, no. That will either be a side -- it will more than likely be a side because again, forcing the parking away from that side, then typically they would not have their front door facing the area that docs not have parking. So usually the front door would face probably to the side that has the parking. And then that would be a side of the building. Page 34 COMMISSIONER HOLT: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER STRANGE'. Legal has a question they'd like to ask. MR. SNYDER: Just a clarification. If you turn to your ADP, iS that the second to last page where you show the elevations? You got it up there on the -- the bottom one here says right elevation side. I notice you didn't label like you did the other elevations. You didn't label the -- where the brick is. MR. LUECKE: Yes. The materials -- the colors indicate the same material that's shown on the front of the building so it w[[[ be consistent there on that side. Yes, it will be. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Anyone else have a question? Okay. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I'd like to switch over to the sign district if -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We[[, could I have a couple of questions on the site plan while it's there first. COMMISSIONER ROY: sure, COMMISSIONER STRANGE: I just have a couple of questions I'd like to ask you. Did I understand Mr. Reich_hart earlier to say that you're building a 30-foot tall retaining wall. 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 Page 35 MR. LUECKE: It varies again in this -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: could you kind of start up there -- back up a little bit. What's the height of the wail right in there? MR. LUECKE: in this area it's zero. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. MR. LUECKE: ^nd then it slowly increases as you go here. By the time you get to this point, it's approximately 10 to 12 feet. Brian, you correct me if I'm wrong. And then as you come around, the wall gets to the highest right about in this area, and it does go to almost 30 feet. I think it's maybe 28 feet in that area and then it begins to go down again as you come around the corner and then goes down m zero again as you go around the corner. COMMISSIONER STRANCoE: okay. I think I've got a couple of questions there. One, at the highest point of that retaining wall, what kind of a barricade system do you have there? I mean, we're talking about Brinker with apartments and other things down there, people walking along, somebody cuts across tlu'ough that grove, what's the barricade at the top of that? MR. LUECKE: YeS. We'll have a rail at this point on the wall, a pedestrian-type rail here there is and I don't recall the exact number, but I believe it's Page 36 about 20 feet of landscaping between the roadway and the wall at that point. And in this area, wcql look at it specifically. We may or may not have a railing in this area again just because it's a dense wooded area that is not likely to have pedestrians in that area. And then again, as you come down here, then we'll probably add rail again in this area that's accessible. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: NOW, I don't have the advantage of any topographical data here, so help me out when we come around that corner from that 30-foot high wall, what kind of slopes do we have on that exit street going out to Brinker, is that -- is there any consideration there where people are going to be coming around trying to go up a hill to get out there? MR, LUECKE: we've tried to hold it to five percent on all of our driveways. So as we're coming in from Brinker here, and then as we're comit~g along this area -- this area stays down low, obviously, and then slowly slightly rises as it comes up to meet Brinker in this area as well. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: [ was just curious if that was going to have a severe slope. MR. WEBBER: Five percent slopes are generally what are accepted by the National Tenants on the entrance drives. Anything greater than that, no, they'd PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRIJARY 9, 2005 Page 33 - Page 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 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 CondenseltTM Page 37 rather not. But five is very common, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Okay. What are you going to have on the tops of these buildings? Is that where your mechanicals and all are going to be? MR. LUECKE: YeS, it iS. And we have a parapet wall surrounding that to -- to screen those units. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Because I see you've taken a lot of care in your rendering preparation here in your presentation materials to show a lot of enhancements to the building. But, you know, if Brinker is 20 to 30 feet above ground level, I'm wondering from the Brinker side, how much of that effect you're going to get or are you going to be looking at roof top? What is the site line there? Are you going to see anything of the buildings or are you just going to see the roof?. MR. LUECKE: We will see some of the building. Again, your view angles are blocked by these trees as you're coming along Brinker from this direction. So until you get to about here then your view angles are pretty well blocked. And here we have some additional trees along Brinker in this area. But we will be above the finished floor of Home Depot with Brinker Road here and it's just a matter of creating the parapet wall such that the units are screened. And it -- we'll just have to do some site line studies there, but it will have to be a 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 38 conthination of the trees and the wall, and I don't know that it will be fully screened at this point, but it wilt be a scenario that as you're on the site, the units will be screened. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: I agree with you on the trees for probably eight months of the year, but this time of the year, with no leaves on those Oak Trees, there's not much screening. So, again, I would have some concerns about how those roof units are handled so that you're not looking at a mass of air-conditioners and built-up roofing up there, with, again, alt of the considerations that you've given to thc rest of it. So -- MR. LUECKE: it iS certainly -- you know, from certain angles and heights above the building, there's really no way to screen thcan just because of the view angle that you have. So we will do something that is reasonable as far as the parapet wails and try to get those screened from anything on site and hopefully for most of the view off Brinker. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: YOU might -- 11neon, it's not nay suggestion to make, but, you know, you were talking about barricades, perhaps some slu'ubbery screen, something along that retaining wall would help block that well, and incorporate shrubs in with what railing you're going to build, it would kind of help again to get that 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 39 line of site higher. That would be a consideration. And then if you don't mind, Mr. Roy, I have cue question on the signs, then we can have your question. I noticed when you were going througb your presentation you showed that you were under the allowable signage over on the Loop, but you kind of skipped over tile fact that you were over the signage on Briaker Road. And I was just curious back there, you've got -- I was having a hard time when you had that exhibit up them on your signs, because those little spots are pretty small where the signs are and which ones are which. I see that you've got -- MR. LUECKE: This yellow sign is what we call our main shopping center sign and that's located hca~ at the entry off of 288. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: SO that's going to be over on -- that's going to be your one monument at 40 feet? MR, LUECKE: That's correct. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. And then you've got one momm~ent at 30 feet? MR. LUECKE: uh-huh. And that one is located here at the main entrance off of Bfinker. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay, MR. LUECKE: And then our next sign is a 24 25 ~LANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 40 multi-tenant monuurent sign wbich would be located here along 288 -' MR. WEBBER: onIy one. ~R. [UEC~U: yeah. That will just be one location of that. And, again, that's for mainly these tenants in this small shop building. COMMISSIONERSTRANOE; That's your 30 footer? MR. LUECKE: NO. That's only 17 feet, I believe. That's this sign fight here, the M-1. And then in the blue are the monmuents for file individual pad sites which will be, again, along 288, and also one here along Brinker and a future one right on this -- this lot along Brinker. And those are 10 foot 10 inches. MR. WEBBER: Fl'Om groklBd to top. MR. LUECKE: Then the last one is tile one that is green coated, which is just an entry sign off of the driveway on Brinker. That will bc for the two anchor stores. And it is seven feet, 10 inches tall. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Yeah. Somehow those -- whatever wc have as a backup doesn'~ have thc same heights, but I get your point. MR. WEBBER: A pretty modest amount of signs. COMMISSIONER STRAN(SE: YOtlI~, I wasn't Page 37 - Page 40 1 2 4 5 6 ? 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 t3 14 15 16 [7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CondenseltTM Page 41 concerned about 288 as much as I was that other graph you had where we were over -- MR. WEBBER: AS WaS pointed out, we are significantly below on 288. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: On 288, yeah, I saw that, but then we kind of picked it back up over on the Brinker Road side of it. MR. WEEBER: we kind of helped you out there, and then we asked for just a little bit mom on the Brinker side, but in smaller heights. COMMISSIONER ROY: Mr. Chairman, you have to go to this package, not this. This is a comparative one. The one that is in the backup packet is the right. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. MR. WEBBER: YOU might have a previous one. COMMISSIONER STRANOE: I got tho One that was handed out tonight. COMMISSIONER ROY: That's the one across the sU'eet. That's Denton Crossing, not Denton Town Crossing. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: oh, oh~ excuse me. I thought this was the stone one. Well, some of the numbers match, in fact, most of them match. Mr. Roy, you had some questions on the sign district? 6 7 8 9 10 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 43 the legs on that sign. So in other words, as you're viewing it from the ground level, it will not block your view other than just the legs of the sign. MR. WEBBER: And there are presently two-acre signs target Home Depot. And what's the width and height of the inset panels? MR. LUECKE: The width is 12 feet and the height is 12 feet. MR. WEBBER: 12 and 12, 144 square feet. COMMISSIONER ROY: Btlt the big one is the -- the 40 foot one, this 640 square foot. So it's 40 foot tall, 640 square foot size. That's the way I road this chart. And that is huge in terms of just driving down the road and seeing this groat monstrosity sitting over there. Am I missing something? COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Maybe staff can shed light on this. MR. WEBBER: The Target and the Home Depot sign as they are 12 by 12. It's 144. So -- times two, that's 288. And I can toll you from -- and you probably want to know how does that compare with other cities. COMMISSIONER ROY: NO. I want to know how it compares to Denton. And across the street, that's twice -- across the street we approved 410 square foot as an exceedence to our -- Page 42 COMMISSIONER ROY: Yeah, because on mine, they don't match. I guess I'm looking hem on Loop 288, and the maximum sign permitted by our ordinance is 200 square feet. And in our backup on page 5, you were asking for one of those signs at 250, okay. But one of them you wanted 640 square feet. I mean, that -- to my knowledge, we have never considered and approved a sign that much exceeding our ordinance and I'm struggling with that because that is huge. m~. kUF. CKE: ff I might, again, I think a lot of it comes into just the way it is calculated. On our calculation of that sign, if you calculate the sign area onIy -- COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me~ but we're uot interested in the sign area. We're intereslext in the physical being. MR. LUECKE: I understand. COMMISSIONER ROY: This thing is standing out there and it's the sign area, it's the base, it's everything. And it's just the -- the visual impact of this huge thing that's out there of 640 square feet, which i'm assmning is correct. MR. LUECKE: One other possible help to you on that is this particular sign does not have anything in the base between the legs, so there is visibility through 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 44 MR. REICHHART: NO. If yOU look at the top, there was one at 547 square feet. And that is the one -- COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. You're right. MR, REICHHART: --just about right across the street from this. And iVs similar in height, but if you recall, it goes from the ground all of the way up~ where we're looking at -- as the applicant was saying, I can look at -- show here. This face here in the sign is open. There's no sign tlm-e. Across the street, it gees from the top all of the way to the bottom with panels with signs on it. So it is -- by our calculations because we calculate that open space as part of the sign. We just square this whole sign off and that is the sign. You know, I haven't calculated this open space in there to sec if the physical face is similar. But across thc street, it was 547 square feet total from top to bottom. And if you look at those signs, they're a little bit busier because it has multiple tenants on here. This big sign, it will have the big Target, big Home Depot and then two tenants, where across the street there's probably eight different signs on that So it won't be -- in my opinion, it won't be as much in your face as it is across the street. It is similar to what we've done rigbt across the street, PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 41 - Page 44 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 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 CondcnseltTM Page 45 And as quickly calculated and I'll relate, the area within the sign, excluding that open space, it's around 400 square feet if we calculate the open space. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Well, convince me about Brlnker. You -- Brinker Road you've got a 490 square foot monument sign, and across the street we've allowed is 100 square feet, which I'm trying to understand why you have to be so nmch bigger than the other retailers in the area. MR. REICHHART: And, again, if you look at tile overall sign package across the street, on Loop 288, they had the one at 547 and another one at 410, so they had two very big signs on Loop 288. Tl~ey had more linear frontage on Loop 288 and I tlfink they had less quite honestly on Brinker and on Spencer. If you ~mall, Sprucer is basically their back door. All of the buildings back up to Spencer, so they don't have a lot of signage on there, just basically at the couple of entries and at the intersection. So they chose to upgrade or play up Loop 288 because it is the back of their store on Spencer and Brinker is the sides. And again, I'm not -- what we did across thc street, I mean, they increased the number of signs on Loop 288 by four. Spence they decreased by thn~. And on Brinker it went up by one. So they increased the nmnber of signs across the street, but Page 46 it's that unified package and the look and the signs is what that sign district does, similar to this site. And basically if I -- this site has two fronts, if you will where across the street it really had a front and a back. And thafs why they didn't play up Spencer as much and Brinker was just cutting right through their plaza, and creating two smaller ones if you would. And, I mcan, that's how we looked at it when we were reviewing, doing the analysis of what has been approved in the area, what are the similarities, and what am the differences. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: DOCS anyone else have any questions? Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else here who wishes to speak on this matter? If not, I'll declare the public hearing closed and would ask for a motion and -- we would need to vote on all three items, each as a separate item. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval of Item 5A. COMMISSIONER HOLT: s~cond, COMMISSIONER STRANGE: well, we need a separate motion -- 5A one, little one, little i. COMMISSIONER ROY: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize they were so designated. 5A with a single i. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We have a motion. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 47 Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER HOLT: Second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: second by Mrs. Holt. We have a motion by Mr. Roy, a second by Mrs. Holt. Do we have any discussion? If not, please vote. Mrs. Holt, you still haven't registered. Now, you have. And the rezoning issue passes 5-0. DO we have a motion now on SA, two, which would be the alternative development plan? Mt-. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval of SA, two. 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 COMMISSIONER STRANOE: DO We have a second? COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE.. We have a second by Dr. Thibodeaux. We have a motion by Mn'. Roy, a second by Dr. Thibodeaux. Any discussion? I would like to make oae suggestion to see if you would include this in your motion and ill your second, that we do give special consideration to the view plans or the view lines off Brinker on this so that we do have some adequate assurance that we do not see the tops of these buildings. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO this is alternative -- COMMISSIONER STRANCJE: Development plata. COMMISSIONER ROY: -- development plan, SO Page 48 we can make those conditions; is that correct? MR. SNYDER: ':'es. But I think we probably need to be a little more specific on that condition because I think -- the testimony I heard was it would be impossible to screen the entire view of the top of the buildings. So I think we need to maybe -- I think 1 heard you say earlier you asked them to put shrubbery along there? COMMISSIONER STRANGE: well, that was a suggestion, yes. MR. SNYDER: Or something along those lines. I just think that the way you worded that condition, it might be such to be impossible to meet. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: oh, well, I wouldn't want that to be the case. But it would need to be possible to meet, but I would want to make sure that adequate effort was -- was put forth to preserve that. And, primarily, again, in consideration of the fact that we do have trees with no leaves for four or five months, I think there needs to be some vegetation across the top of that knoll where the visibility from Brinker is screened and it could be -- you know, and again, without topography, I don't know if it needs to be four feet tall or six feet tail. And that's why I was saying adequate to cover a majority of it. Again, you can't cover it all, PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 45 - Page 48 Cond~nscItTM 1 2 3 5 6 ? 8 9 lO 11 12 13 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 117 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 49 but I was hoping to see some effort there to provide a scr~ell. MR. SNYDER: I gUeSS my suggestion is make that a part of the motion. In between now and when it goes to council, maybe staff can come up with the applicant some type of alternative to put on the plan that meets that intent. Is that possible? COMMISSIONER ROY: SO the addendum would be along the lines that approve it with the condition that staff work with tile developer to come to an agreement as to what type of additional screening beyond wlmt has been presented to us tonight could be reasonably provided. COMMISSIONF_.R STRANGE: Correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO I accept that addendum to my motion. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Dr. Thibodcaux, do you accept? COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Okay. Anyone else have any discussion? Okay. Would we please vote. And the Rcm with tile with condition has passed 5-0. Now, do we have a motion on SA, three, which would be the sign district. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I'm going to make a motion to approve this but I am not totally convinced this Page 50 is going to look as good as we would really tike it. But I -- well, I don't know how to articulate it any further. But I'm a little skeptical, but I'm going to trust the developer to give us something that they will be proud of and that will be nice for our City. So I'm going to rccmmnend approval of Itmn SA, three with no conditions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: DO we have a second? COMMISSIONER HOLT: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: we have a motion by Mr. Roy a second by Mrs. Holt. Do we have any discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Item passes 5-0. MR. WEBUER: ?hank you very much and I will appreciate and respect your trust. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: -thank you for your presentations. 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 MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 51 Page 52 Page 49 - Page 52 S :\Our Do~uments\Ordinances\05'~X)4-0048.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FOR APROXIMATELY 38.5 ACRES FROM REGIONAL CENTER COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (RCC-N) ZONING DISTRICT TO REGIONAL CENTER COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN (RCC-D) ZONING DISTRICT SUCH PROPERTY BEING GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF LOOP 288 AND EAST OF BRINKER ROAD, COMMONLY KNOWN AS DENTON TOWNE CROSSING; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Z04-0048) WHEREAS, Gerald Luecke O-lodges & Associates) as agent for Denton Towne Crossing L.P. has applied for a change in zoning for approximately 38.5 acres as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A" (the "Property") from Regional Center Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning district to Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district classification and use designation; and WHEREAS, on February 9, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested zoning change; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds the change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein. SECTION 2. Thc zoning district classification and use designation of the Propertyis hereby changed from Regional Center Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning district to Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning district classification and use. SECTION 3. The City's official zoning map is mended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 4. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circtunstance 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 servable. SECTION 5. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the ~ day of' ,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 DAVID PETREE REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR 11015 Midway Road Dallas, Texas 75229 Phone: (214) 358-4500 Fax: (214) 358-4600 Metes and Bounds Description 38.4099 Acres of Land Joseph White Survey, A-1433 J.S. Taft Survey, A-1256 City of Denton Denton County, Texas BEING all that certain tot, tract or parcel of land located in the Joseph White Survey, Abstract No. 1433 and the J. S. Taft Survey, Abstract No. 1256, Cityof Denton, Denton County, Texas, and being a portion of that certain cailed 57.087 acre tract of land conveyed to Epic Development, Inc., described as Tract II in the Special Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale filed for a record in Volume 3245, Page 699 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, now conveyed to Denton Towne Crossing, L. P., recorded in Volume 4915, Page 506 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as folfows; BEGINNING at a p.k. nail in a retaining wall found on the Southeast right-of-way line of Loop 288, (a 150 foot wide right-of-way at this point) and being the most Northerly Northeast comer of said 57.087 acre tract and the Northwest corner of said tract of land conveyed to Clarence L. Carter, according to the deed recorded in Volume 708, Page 938, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, now conveyed to Denton Towne Crossing by deed recorded in County Clerks File Number 2002- 00104301 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE South 0° 38' 03" East along the West line of said Carter Tract, same being common to the line of said Denton Towne Crossing tract recorded in Volume 4915 at Page 506 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas for a distance of 306.71 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found for the Southwest comer of said Carter tract; THENCE North 89° 49' 45" East along the South line of said Carter tract and passing the Southeast corner of same at a distance of 128.20 feet, said point of passing also being the Southwest corner of a tract of land conveyed from Terry L. Mayville to Denton Towne Crossing by deed recorded in Volume 4915 at Page 500 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and all following along the fine of said Denton Towne Crossing tract recorded in Volume 4915 at Page 506 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas for a total distance of 328.45 feet to a 3/4 inch iron rod found for the Southeast corner of said Denton Towne Crossing tract recorded in Volume4915 at Page 500 of the Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, said point also being in the West line of a tract of land conveyed to John Karvouniaris by deed recorded in Volume 3405 at Page 50 of the Deed Records of Denton County;, THENCE South 00° 35' 32" East and continuing along the West boundary tine of said Karvouniaris tract for a distance of 1019.12 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found for the Southwest comer of said Karvouniads tract; PAGE 3 THENCE South 89° 32' 27" East along the South line of said Karvouniads tract for a distance of 189.08 feet to a 5/8 inch iron rod found on the West right-of-way line of Bdnker Road (a 80 foot,vide right-of-way); THENCE South 00° 33' 01" East along the West right-of-way line of said Bdnker Road for a distance of 571.22 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found with a cap for the beginning of a tangent curve to the right having a radius of 1060.00 feet; THENCE along said curve to the right and along the West right-of-way line of said Bdnker Road, said curve having a central angle of 23° 43' 49", an arc length of 439.02 feet and having a long chord which bears South 11 ° 18' 27" West at 435.89 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found with a cap at the intersection of the Westerly right-of-way of said Brinker Road and the Northeasterly right-of-way of the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way recorded in Volume O, Page 67, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas; THENCE North 41 o 24' 15" West along the Northeasterly right-of-way line of the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way, a distance of 2067.06 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found at the intersection of said railroad right-of-way and a West line of the aforementioned 57.087 acres tract, from which a 1/2 inch iron rod bears South 01° 21' 16" East at 4.27 feet; THENCE North 01 ° 09' 08" West along a West line of said 57.087 acre tract for a distance of 184.40 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found with a cap on the Southeasterly right-of-way line of the aforementioned Loop 288, from which a 1/2 inch iron rod found beam South 01 ° 09' 08" East at 7.56 feet; THENCE along the Southeasterly right-of-way line of said Loop 288 as follows; North 60° 11' 20" East for a distance of 147.28 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found with a cap; North 54° 57' 05" East for a distance of 602.50 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod found with a cap; North 60° 11' 20" East at a distance of 149.88 feet passing a wood highway monument found, and continuing on in all for a distance of 343.78 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and CONTAINING 38.4099 ACRES OF LAND, more or less. Metes and Bounds Description Prepared February 15, 2005 From Surveys. By: David Petree, RPLS Registered Professional Land Surveyor No. '1890 PAGE 4 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: March 1, 2005 Planning and Development Department Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: ADP04-0008 (Denton Towne Crossing, Alternative Development Plan) Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance for an Alternative Developmem Plan for DeNon Towne Crossing. The approximately 43.77 acre property is in a Regional Cemer Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) zoning district and a Regional Cemer Commercial Dowmown (RCC-D) zoning district and is generally located south of Loop 288 and east of Brinker Road. A retail development is proposed. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval with conditions (5-0) BACKGROUND Applicam: Gerald Luecke (Hodges & Associates) agem for DeNon Towne Crossing L.P. Dallas, Texas The purpose of an alternative development plan is to provide an option for developments that do not meet the site design standards as outlined in the Development Code; but meet or exceed the objectives of the DeNon Plan and Developmem Code. A regional shopping plaza including two big box anchor tenams each over 120,000 square feet in size, as well as other retail uses, is proposed. The applicant is proposing a to vary from the City's site design standards concerning sidewalk display and cart storage, permanem and seasonal outdoor display, screening of rear storage areas, parking lot design and pervious parking requirements. This request is in conjunction with a Zoning request (Z04-0048) and a Special Sign District (SD04-0004). Eight legal notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the property. Staff has received no written responses to the notice. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0) with the following condition: 1. Add more landscaping in the area of the proposed retaining wall to provide screening of roof mounted HVAC equipment from Brinker Road. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. Preliminary and Final Plats and building permits are required prior to commencement of construction. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Jan. 26, 2005: Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Feb 9, 2005: Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis 2. Location/Zoning & Land Use Maps 3. Notification Map & Information 4. ADP Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Elevations 5. Summary of Open Space and Landscaping for Demon Crossing ADP 6. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes (Jan 26, 2005 & Feb. 9, 2005) 7. Draft Ordinance Prepared by: ~, · ~ Reic ,~ rt, AS~A, AIC~ ~ssistant I3~rector of Planning and Development Respectfully submitted: Kelly Carpenter, AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary of Alternative Developmem Plan Request Parking lot Design: § 35.13.10.B.l.c states: Parking lots with 100 spaces or more shall be divided into separate areas and divided by lan&caped areas or walkways at least 10 feet in width, or by a building or group of building(s). The applicam is proposing to develop a 30' wide landscape buffer between the two large parking areas in from of the two "big box" anchors. The proposed landscape buffer is 20' larger than the minimum 10' width, comains landscaping and a meandering sidewalk intended to connect the proposed plaza area to the two anchor tenants. The proposed design also adds 19,685 sf of open space (approximately a 40% increase) and 163.733 sf of canopy coverage (an increase of approximately 150%) throughout all parking areas. Permeable paving: § 35.13.10.B. 1 .c states: Permeable paving is required for those parking spaces that exceed the number of parking spaces required. The applicant is proposing to exceed the required parking by 475 spaces, which relates to 65.124 sf of permeable paving. Instead of the permeable paving, the applicant is proposing to increase open space and tree canopy coverage throughout all parking areas and for the emire developmem. The table below idemifies the required and proposed open space and tree canopy required and proposed: Required Proposed Difference 7% 9.7% 40% + increase Parking lot open space (49,610 sq. ft.) (69,295 sq. ft.) (19,685 sq. ft.) 10% 18.5% 85% + increase Site open space (190,662 sq. ft.) (353,150 sq. ft.) (162,400 sq. ft.) Parking lot tree canopy 15% 38% 154% + increase coverage (106,307 sq. ft.) (270,040 sq. ft.) (163,733 sq. ft.) Site tree canopy 20% 27% 62% + increase coverage (381,324 sq. ft.) (618,577 sq. ft.) (237,253 sq. ft.) Additionally, the applicant has met the recently approved tree preservation regulations by designing a retaining wall to preserve approximately one acre of existing trees. For comparison purposes, a summary of the open space and landscaping associated with the Denton Crossing ADP is included in Attachment 5 Sidewalk display and cart storage: § 35.13.13.6.A.2 states: "Sidewalk" display is a term commonly used in the retail industry to describe display areas along the front of a building. Nothing herein permits storage, display or sale of any item on property that has been dedicated for public use. Sidewalk display and cart storage in the sidewalk display area are prohibited: a. Areas for customer loading of merchandise shall be clearly delineated and shall not be located in front of any customer entrances or exit door(s) or within 15 feet on either side of the door(s). b. This section does not prohibit storage of carts in the parking lot, but merely regulates storage of carts in the sidewalk display area The applicant is proposing cart storage adjacent to Target. To mitigate the cart storage, landscaping or low walls will be utilized to screen the carts, and 5' wide sidewalk area will be kept free of carts for pedestrian circulation. Permanem outdoor display, sales and storage: § 35.13.13.6.A.3 states: Merchandise may be stored or displayed for sale to customers on the front or side of the building in accordance with this paragraph. a. The total square footage of all permanent outdoor storage, display and sales areas shall be limited to 10% of the footprint of the building, but in no event shall exceed 15, 000 square feet. b. Permanent outdoor storage, display and sales shall be contiguous to the building and shall not be permitted within l OO feet of residential property. c. The permanent storage, display and sales area shall be enclosed by a minimum eight- foot wall of like appearance to the building topped by wrought iron or tubular steel fencing. No merchandise other than trees shall be visible above the wall or fence. Permanent outdoor display, sales and storage are proposed in front of Home Depot, in the parking lot in from of Home Depot (adjacem to Brinker Road, and in the Garden Cemer. Excluding the Garden Cemer, the amoum of outdoor display will be limited to 11,00 sq. ft. and will not be enclosed or screened with fencing. The area adjacem to Brinker will be partially screened by a retaining wall and existing trees. Although the Garden Cemer exceeds the maximum square footage allowed, it will be screened by enclosed by a vinyl covered chain link fencing and screened by a grade change including a 30+ feet tall retaining wall and an existing grove of trees. Seasonal outdoor display and sales: § 35.13.13.6.A.4 states: Christmas trees may be displayed for sale from November 15 to December 31. In addition, bedding plants, trees, shrubs, potting soil and bagged yard products including without limitation bark, mulch, peat moss and play sand may be displayed fi'om March 15 to June 15. Fertilizer or other chemical products shall not be stored or displayed outdoors. The seasonal outdoor sales area shall be limited to 5% of the footprint of the building but in no event shall exceed 6,000 square feet. No merchandise may exceed five feet in height, except Christmas trees. The dates of the outdoor storage (idemified above) is proposed to be year round. Existing Condition of Property Adjacem zoning: North: RCC-D (Gas Station & DeNon Crossing) South: RCC-N (Rails to Trails & Undeveloped) West: RCC-D & RCC-N (Wal-Mart Plaza) East: RCC-D & RCC-N (Target Plaza & Auto related Strip Cemer) The subject property is undeveloped. Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located within a "Regional Mixed Use Center" future land use area. Regional Mixed Use Centers are intended to contain the shopping, services, recreation, employment and institutional facilities supported by and serving an entire region. A regional activity cemer could comain developmems such as a regional shopping mall, big box retail, superstores, restaurant and entertainment facilities, a high school or community college, and high-density housing. "The quality of development, particularly commercial development along the city's corridors, is a significant factor in the quality of neighborhoods, the urban environment, and the sustainability of structures. Adequate public facilities shall be a criterion by which zoning is granted." (p. 42) "l/isual quality objectives and a healthy business climate should not be considered mutually exclusive. Urban design concepts should be incorporated into private development plans early into the review process." (p. 61) "OffZstreet parking requirements should reflect respect for environmental quality considerations. Parking location and associated landscaping should be carefully regulated to avoid unacceptable expanses of pavement. Large parking lots should be broken into smaller sub-lots. Parking standards should be carefully set to avoid unnecessary pavement. Shared use parking facilities should be encouraged." (p. 66) The Denton Plan clearly identifies the visual quality of commercial developmems as an integral component of the site design process that could have a major impact on the urban environment. Special attention is given to parking lots in the Denton Plan. Developers should design parking areas with pedestrian pathways, minimized large paved surfaces, and the use of landscape areas. The applicant has provided alternative approaches to meet the intent of The Denton Plan. (See Developmem Code/Zoning Analysis section) Development Code/Zoning Analysis The proposed plan varies from the standards established by the Development Code in 3 general categories: parking, permeable paving, and outdoor display. Section 35.13.5.A. (listed below) identifies the criteria for approval of an Alternative Development Plan. A. Criteria for Approval. The goals and objectives which must be met, and by which the proposal will be judged are: 1. Preserve Existing Neighborhoods. 2. Assure quality development that fits in with the character of Denton. 3. Focus new development to activity centers to curb strip development and urban sprawl. 4. Ensure that infrastructure is capable of accommodating development prior to the development occurring. Staff Findings: 1. The proposed development is not adjacent to any existing neighborhoods. 2. The proposed development is similar to recent developments in Denton. 3. The proposed development is located in a Regional Activity Center. 4. Existing infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the development. 5. The proposed variations from the Development Code are similar to other recent large-scale developments. 6. The proposed mitigation, especially the additional open space, landscaping and the preservation of existing trees, envisions a quality development that meets the intent of the regulations of the Development Code. Staff Recommendation: Based on above findings staff recommends approval. ATTACHMENT 2 Location/Zoning Map NORTH Land Use Map ATTACHMENT 3 Notification Map NORTH 200 FOOT BUFFER 500 FOOT BUFFER Scale: None Eight 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 0 · Neutral: 0 *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ,I Attachment 5 DENTON CROSSING OPEN SPACE SUMMARY: 50.4 Acres Approx. 2,195,816 sf of building Required parking = 1,719, Proposed 2,505 spaces, (798 additional spaces = 129,276 sf of permeable paving required). ADP proposed additional open space, tree canopy coverage and water quality pond as alternative. Required Proposed Difference 7% 8.5% 22% + increase Parking lot open space (85,435 sq. ft.) (104,695sq. ft.) (19,260 sq. ft.) 19.1% 10% 110% + increase Site open space (219,581sq. ft.) (463,292 sq. ft.*) (243,711 sq. ft.) * Includes ROW O.S. Parking lot tree canopy 15% 17% 15% + increase coverage (182,959 sq. ft.) (210,333 sq. ft.) (27,374 sq. ft.) Site tree canopy 20% 21% 6% + increase coverage (439,163 sq. ft.) (464,970 sq. ft.) (25,885 sq. ft.) CondcnscltTM 5 6 7 8 ll 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 i13 14 15 16 17 t9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 9 COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Nfl'At iteul on the agenda is going to be a continued public hearing. It's a continued public hearing, consider making a reconm~endation to City Council on the following items, Denton Town Crossing. The prop~y is located on the south side of Loop 288 and the east side of Brinker Road. The first item is the rezoning of approximately 38.5 acres from regional center commercial neighborhood, RI~¢-~ zoning digtrict to regional center co~rmxercial downtown, RCC Zoning District. The second item is an alternative development plan for approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping plaza. And the third item is a special sign district for approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping plaza. Mr. Reichhart. MR. R~IC~aA~?: Ihank you. On the overhead is thc subject property. Prior to the meeting I handed out so,ne infommtion regarding some updates to the parking and the open space requirements. The subject property is outlined ia black. It is across the street on Loop 288, from Denton Crossing, the new shopping plaza. And Wal-Mart is located across Brinker to give you an idea of where it is. This development and the proposals tonight are very similar to what we've done for -- or what the process that we used for Denton Crossing, a rezoning, an Page 10 Alternative Development Plan and then a Special Sign District. As you recall, with the bigger projects like this, our Code is really oriented toward -- not towards these huge projects. I mean, there's -- these are so complex that there's some nuances in our Code that we've seen the bigger projects come forward with the ADP and this is very similar. As I said, the subject property is outlined in black, and what we're doing is just taking the entire site to the Rccr~ zoning district. Staff is recommending approval of that. And with each three of these, we'll need separate motions on each three of the cases. So Staff is reco~mnending approval of the zoning. And I'm going to do a very brief overview of the proposals. Tonight the applicant has a more in depth Powerpoint presentation, so I don't want to be redundant. The site plan in on the overhead. And I really need to point out one thing as we go througk If you're familiar with the site, there's a grove of existing Post Oaks in this area. The applicant is proposing up to a 30-foot retaining wall along this edge of that Post Oak Grove in order to preserve over an acre of the existing trees. With that and some of the other trees they're doing and some of the little bit of mitigation of additional trees, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 tl 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 11 they would meet the requirements of the tree preservation regulations even though this project had started well before those regulations went into place, the applicant has met those requirements. Additionally, there's two basically big box develop~nents, a Home Depot, and a Target being developed and along Loop 288 and Brinker will be some out pamels. The applicant is proposing, as you see in my backup, quite a bit of open space and landscaping mitigation for thc proposed impervious material, the extra parking spaces if you will. And if you notice the nmnber in file backup was 402 additional parking spaces. We're looking at 475 parking spaces now. Tho site plan, it's typical with these type of developments, are constantly changing as you're working with thc corporate headquarters of the different entities. The amount of open space is ahnost double. It's 85 percent more than what is required per Code. They've done that obviously by preserving the trees. But they've addext additional landscaping in the parking areas with additional tree coverage. And, again, that handout that I prepared for tonight identifies how much more additional tree canopy coverage. They more than double what is required in the parking areas. And a 62 percent increase or 27 percent of Page 12 the site would be corelli with tree canopy coverage. And then on the alternative or the sign district, excuse me, in the backup again, identifies the location and the number of signs that could be proposed along Loop 288 and they were all 30 foot high pylon signs and tbe applicant is proposing to use more monument signs along Loop 288 and Brinker. The nmnbers, how we calculate signs, we include file whole base if it's a monument sign. You know, the effective alvin of the sign. It's now decorative -- and you're looking at -- it's drawing your attention to that sign, so what the applicant considers a sign, quite honestly, fl~e actual sign sitting on top of the monument or surrounded by the brick, we count the brick and everything. I wanted to point that out in your backup, also. We are reconunending approval of the ^m~ and the Speciai Sign District as proposed tonight. I can answer any questions you want, but it might be better to wait and let the applicant go through their presentation and then we can resolve all of those issues at once. But I'd be happy to answer any questions you would have at this point. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Any questions? Okay. If not, we will open the public hearing. And I think for the purposes of this item we will have one PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 9 - Page 12 CondenscltTM 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 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 13 public hearing for all time i~ns. So is the applicant he~'e and do they wish to speak? If you will, when you come down, please give us your name and your address, please. Mt~. wnm3na: Yes, sir. Good evening. My name is John Webber. I'm president of Webber and Company, 16,000 Dallas Parkway, Suite 300, Dallas Texas 75248. Webber and Company is a shopping center developer and primarily we develop for Target Stems and Home Depot stores throughout fl~e North Texas market. I will keep it relatively brief tonight, too. And we have our entire staff here of consultants, civil engineers, arctfitects, traffic consultants. And they've enjoyed working with members of your staff here in Denton. And it's a pretty complex and detailed work effort that's been put forth. And really I'm here to help answer questions. And I think you've seen all of the site plans. And Mr. Gerald Luecke with Hedges and Associates, our architect will do you a brief slide show here of a little bit in depth. But I've asked them to be brief so we can save plenty of time for any detailed questions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Thank you. MR. LUECKE: Good evening. I'm Gerald Luccke with Hedges and Associates Arclfitccts at 13642 Page 14 Omega in Dallas. And I appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight to present the Denton Town Crossing to you. We're excited about this development and are anxious to present it to you and to be able to proceed on what we feel like is a lan&hark development in the City. Let me see if I can get the presentation going here. First, is just an overview of a site plan on an aerial and I think Mr. Reichhart covered it well as far as the orientation of the site in relationship to the roadways. This is a couple of oblique aerials of the site as it sits today and its relationship to Brinker Road and 288 from a couple of different angles. The site is outlined in yellow, of course. This is the zoning plan presentation. And as Mr. Reichhart said our request is to zone the entire project as an RCCD to allow this Regional Mixed Use Center Development. The Alternative Development Plan is the next site plan. And we've incorporated several features into the Alternative Development Plan. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Could you please lift that mike up a little bit9 The people in the back are having a hard time hearing you. MR. LUECKE: Sure. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Thank you. MR. LUECKE: Incorporated several features 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 MINUTES FEBRUARY Page 15 into the Alternative Development Plan. Specifically, the preservation of trees, existing trees. Again, in this area of the site, in tile southern area of the site, and with a retaining wall that proceeds from Brinker Road and continues on around all the way bordering tile existing tree area so that those trees can be saved and preserved for the development. In addition to that, we've created a wide 30 foot landscape strip through the parking area that provides a pedestrian pathway that would into'connect the pad site buildings out along Brinker as well as a small shop retail building that sits in this location of the site would connect those to the anchor stores toward the back of the site. Also, we've incorporated some plaza areas with this curvilinear sidewalk, plaza area here that is adjacent again to the small shop retail buildings. And the front of the anchor store here will incorporate planting areas, benches and seating areas for customers for that anchor store. Our parking is set based upon the anchor requirements and what they perceive as the required parking for the area and the pad sites are also parked in relationship to their uses as restaurants or retail buildings along the pad sites. Page 16 1 Colored site plan which indicates again, 2 the landscaped areas, the existing tree preservation that 3 we created. This anchor store has a future expansion area 4 that will be toward 288, but that area, that green space, 5 which will be existing today in the initial part of the 6 development is not counted as part of our green space 7 calculations that we were using in the landscape calcs. 8 The next one is just an enlargement of our 9 plaza area as I was speaking about the area in front of 10 the anchor store with planters, which will be used to 11 screen some car storage that they have there, but also the 12 incorporation of some seating areas with benches and a 13 paving area out front. The long linear plaza is the 14 pedestrian connector between the anchor store buildings 15 and the pad sites out front and the small shop retail 16 building out front. And then this pedestrian plaza is the .17 one that's adjacent to the small shop retail building out 18 front. So we've again incorporated sidewalk areas and 19 areas to pause, have seating areas in these plaza areas 20 along with additional highlighted landscaping. 21 The next one is the facade plan and wc 22 brought that forward just to show you the quality of the 23 development that we will have. We're working with staff 24 in meeting your requirmnents for the large anchor store 25 requirement from a design standpoint, and we've also 9, 2005 Page 13 - Page 16 CondcnscItTM 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 to 11 :12 13 14 15 16 17 18 I9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page i upgraded these buildings with a majority of masonry on the buildings and we have a sample panel hew that -- and we can show the actual materials as well. It will have a base, tan colored brick, and then we'll also have some accent colors. Okay. That's super. Thank you. We'll have accent brick colors. We'll have some texture coating on concrete panels up above the main columns. Pilasters would be a brick with tile brick bases. And then we also have what we call a burnish granite faced block that will be part of the accent medallions that will be mounted on the building. So we feel that the design is a special design for file area and also incorporates the main features of the anchors, but brings the entire development together with a consistent design and material pallet. The next one is just a site section showing the positioning of the home improvement building and the garden center as it relates to Brinker Road. This area is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 Page 19 Brinker Road and 288. And those am shown in the blue and in the green. And then finally is the sign design showing the same brick to be used on thc base of the signage. And then the same colors to be used on the legs of the signs as they project and frame the sign all of the way up to the top. We would also use detailing at the top side of the signs that would match the top of the buildings, the coping of the buildings would be a projected detail at the top along with the shopping center name. All right. So that's all I have and we am here to answer questions. As Mr. Webber said, we have our landscape architect, our civil engineer, traffic enginem', and myself, the architect, so we'd be happy to answer questions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We do have some questions. Dr. Noble. COMMISSIONER NOBLE: Thank you. I think the Brinker Road paving. And then as Mr. Reichhart said, there's a large retaining wall that creates the plateau up top for file saving of the existing trees. So the home improvcanent store is actually inset into the side of the hill, if you will. And the garden center is in this location. So as you view across these trees, it has this inset, and therefore is very well screened from the Page 18 surrounding Brinker Road. The next one is our sign calculation sheet, and as Mr. Reichhart said it var[es from his in that we had calculated the actual sign area of the signs in lieu of the entire sign structure and our request is that, you know, we not be penalized for creating the signage that uses materials to match the building and provides a consistent sign design. And our proposal is that the allowable signage, we're less in number of signs and also in overall square footage. If you do calculate just the sign area we are less than the allowable sign area as well. And it's a -- as I say, it's well coordinated with the building materials and the overall design of the center. This one shows the allowable sign plan and just the positions of the signage that could be allowed on the project. And then the next one is our proposed sign plan. And it is color-coded so you can sec that our main shopping center sign is out along 288 at the main entry. We have a secondary shopping center sign that is at the main entry off of Brinker Road. We have one multi-tenant monument sign that will also be along 288 in this position that would allow signage for the small shop retail building. And then we have individual monument signs that would occur along the pad sites along both 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 that's a beautiful design actually. But my question is and I guess it may be obvious, are those anchor stems -- are those anchor stores proposed to be the Target and a Home Depot; is that correct? MR. LUECKE: Yes, they ar~. COMMISSIONER NOBLE: Tell me if I'm wrong. But isn't -- I thought there was a Target that is pretty Page 20 close to that vicinity right off of 288; isn't that correct? MR. LUECKE: Yes, that's correct. MR. WEBBER: YeS, sir, that's right. I think your question will become what are they planning to do with that store, is that -- COMMISSIONER NOBLE: IS there any plans MR. WEBBER: what they have done over the years with Target corporation is their stores, this stem was built several years ago. And, obviously, it's size, it's become functionally obsolete. It's location is, as you know, excellent, in fact, superb. And it will be a sold or leased to i'm sure another national retailer. They haven't done that yet but that is usually what goes on with the Target stores. And I've heard this -- I'm not Target myself, but I've heard that most all of these stores I've seen over the years, they go very, ve~3~ quickly. This one will because of its proximity to thc vibrant retail area that's there. The second question goes for the Home Depot. They, too, have a store that's relatively new, but it, too, this retailing business is changing so quick. But it -- they, too, are looking for a larger more modern store and it's obvious that 288, Loop 288 has become the PLANNING AND ZON1NG MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 17 - Page 20 CondenseltTM 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 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 21 main retail corridor for this region of the city. And so that's their desire too, to move. So they will also be selling that building or leasing it. So that's tile best I can tell you. COMMISSmNER NOBLE: okay. And the second question that I was reading that there was some -- what is the issue with the TxDOT, is that the -- part of that is the proposed expansion on 288, was that part of fl~e issue that the applicant had or -- MR. REICHHART: If yOU recall, we continued this from the previous meeting because of the TXDOT issues with tile proposed traffic light and the Loop Road. Excuse me. There was a proposed traffic light at this location on Loop 288 at their entry and what the applicant was working with TXDOT tO try to design this, what's typically referred to a Ring Road to have more of a direct access on to Brinker. Typically, these roads come through and would loop directly around and there would be another T intersection at this. But the idea is trying to get this more to work as -- I don't want to say cut-through, but more -- more like a road and have that direct access to Brinker. And that's -- the applicant was working with TXDOT on that design up until -- they're probably still working with them. But this is the closest we've gotten now to where 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 t8 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 23 it over the months and everyone is on board that this is a good plan. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: Every citizen in Denton will tell you this is the biggest problem area we have is that Loop 288. And I tlfink we have an understanding of when Loop 288 is going to be improved. And what I'm trying to understand is when are you going to do this? Can you tell us when you expect -- is this going to be something you am going to do right away and just exacerbate the problem or are you going to wait unti[ 288 is fixed, or what is your plan? MR. WEBBER: Tho plan is for the retailer, Target and Home Depot to open October 2006. The entire, as you know, 288 will not yet be completed and I will say that we did buy this property four years ago knowing what the situation was on 288. And as you do know, ail of tile retail that has evolved around us has occurred -- a good part of it has occurred in the last four years since we purchased the property. And this is thc last key piece in this congested intersection. And evv~'yone has watched it carefully and we've done ntm~erous traffic impact analysis and studies and as you might expect a national retailer does not wish to open into a congested area in an nonsolved area, and they've studied this, tile Target Page 22 we thit~k TxOoT and the applicant and the tenants would work out. But that was the -- what we were working on before, is the design of that inteTnal mad system and that's why we had file continuance from Wee weeks ago. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: And we have also an additional cormnent. Ms. Carpenter. MS. CARPENTER: I'd like to also say that on the traffic studies that were p~rformed by a variety of traffic engineers that were on the -- that looked at the project, there is no decrease in the functionality on 288 with tile traffic signal. And part of the reason for that functionality not having a decrease is because the road does have an exit right on to Brinker and doesn't function as the traditional ring road that Larry described. And it does have the outlet on to Brinker Road. So it's taken many months and study from city traffic engineers and our consultants and their consultants and working with Mr. Elsom at TxDOT tO come to a position whca,~ everyone is in agr~ment that the level of service will not be diminished on 288 in its improved condition. Okay. Once it's at full capacity, once it's finished with its new expansion. MR. LUECKE; I agree. That's very w~[1 explained. It was the staff reconunendafion in the beginning and all of the national retailers have studied 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 24 corporation and Home Depot and said, they do wish to go. COMMISSIONER ROY: HaVe those people visited this area? MR. WEBBER: Yes, sir. The senior officers of both of these corporations. COMMISSIONER ROY: Because 288, tile contract won't even be let for that construction by the time you open, that's going to be a real mess out there. MR. WEBBER: We do all understand that schedule when it's been quite detailed by TXDOT and to all parties, and as you know Wal-Mart and Lewes and ~'oger and all of the others have opened. And it was worse even in a position then even candidly and they've measured it and said this is what we'd like to do. COMMISSIONER ROY: well, I hope you know something I don't because I don~t know how people are going to get to your store but that's a business decision. Let me ask another question. On the west side of your propox3,, there's a green area which has not bexm discussed. Do you see that along 288 on the west side? MR. WEB8ER: on the west side behind the two anchor stores? COMM£SSIONERROY: Right there. What is that? MR. WEBBER: oh, that is a detention pond PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 21 - Page 24 Condcns¢ItTM 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 t8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 25 that is -- that has been designed and will be holding water for a short period of time after a heavy, heavy rainstorm, and it's landscaped to meet all of the ordinance and design standards on the landscape. COMMISSIONER ROY: rll continue unless the -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: You're on the floor. Continue on. COMMISSIONER ROY: The property -- or the trees down to the right there, to the west side -- east side. MR. WEBBER: YeS, sir. COMMISSIONER ROY: I am very pleased about your plan to maintain those trees. And I was looking at the site tree canopy coverage that you have. You've proposed 27 percent or 618,000 square feet of site tree canopy coverage. Does that five acres or roughly five acres, is that included in the calculation to -- for you to get up to your 27 percent? MR. LUECKE: YeS, it is. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO basically what you're going to have and, again, I'm very pleased to see that stand protected, but your site tree canopy coverage is largely going to be, it looks like covered in the one section of it. And I'm trying to visualize then what the Page 26 rest of the site is going to look like. I accept that on the whole site you're meeting the -- slightly exceeding the canopy coverage, but, I guess, I worry a little bit that the rest of the site is not going to look, say, as nice as across the street. MR. LUECKE: I think that that concern is met by the amount of landscaping we have along the perimeter, We have wide buffer areas along the perimeter And we also have again, these areas that border the parking area that split the parking into smaller fields of parking with our wide landscaped pedestrian walkway through the center between the two anchor buildings as well as around the perimeter of this -- the Loop road area. We also have individual islands within the parking area that break up the rows of parking in the individual islands. So it's kind of a three-tiered effect, if you will. We have an exterior buffer area along the outside. We have these wide areas that split the parking area into smaller fields. And then we have the individual landscaped islands within thc parking itself. So we will have substantial number of trees outside of the exlsting tree canopy that's there at ~e southwest portion -- or southeast portion of the site. Pardon me, the tree canopy coverage calculation then does not include the existing trees, I'm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 2t 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 lg 19 ~20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 27 sorry. That was incorrect. COMMISSIONER ROY: Please clarify that further. The five-acm lot -- the five acres of old Oak Trees is not included in your canopy calculation. Is that what you're saying? MR. LUECKE: Yes, that's correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: IS that upland habitat land there? MR, REICHHART: It has the characteristics of upland habitat, but it's not 10 acres in size, so it's not classified as an ma area. And they are ending up preserving about one acre of the trees out there. thought. acl~. COMMISSIONER ROY: one acm.9 MR. RE[CHHART: YeS. COMMISSIONER ROY: I read SOlllewhgat3 five, I MR. REICHHART: [ believe it's about one COMMISSIONER ROY: olle acre, Thank you. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mrs. Holt. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Yes, [ have some questions about the design. Target and Home Depot are two of my very favorite places. But I don't like big boxes, so I've got a problem. And having looked at big boxes for a long tiine here in Denton, we seem to get the worst of Page 28 the worst, How are fl~ese going to be better than the big boxes we already have.9 Are we going to see fertilizer? Are we going to see soil? Are we going to see carts? Are we going to see junk on file outside? MR. LUECKE: FrOlll an operational standpoint? COMMISSIONER HOLT: From a drive-by customer standpoint, MR, WEBBER: If yOU saw thc material board, it's quite a bit upgrade. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I SaW the material board and it looks nice. But, for instance, Southlake Home Depot is gorgeous. Denton Home Depot is not. Where do we fall in between with tiffs new one? Do we get a Southlake or do we kccp Denton? M~. [UUCKE: I think you'll find that the building design itself is at least as attractive as Southlake, if not mom and the reason for that is we have a substantial amount of masonry, which I believe on Southlake is mostly stucco with some tile roof and some ofl~er accent areas, but the majority of the building, I think is~ if I'm not nfistaken is mainly a stucco-type surface, In our case, we are going to have a substantial mnount of masonry on the surface. That is an alternating material with a textm-e coating so that we'll have -- it PLANNING AND ZONING MINIYrES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 25 - Page 28 CondcnscltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 tO ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 29 will be -- the ams of the wall will be broken up into smaller areas, it won't look like a big box, if you will. It will be broken up into smaller areas. And we have a -- this whole panel, for instance, is all brick venire, and then we have these accent bands to go through that. We also have sloped roofs. COMMISSIONER HOLT: okay. What is all of this down here? I know that's the garden center. But what's that on the end, the very end? MR. LUECKE: *hat's a screening for the garden center. COMMISSIONER HOLT: IS that a wall on the end? MR, LUECKE: uh-huh. This is a colmnn, a masonry colunm that's on tile end. And then this is wh~re the site section if we want to go back to that, but this is where the wall comes up and the existing trees are located -- that's tucked into the side of the hill. COMMISSIONER HOLT: That's good. MR. LUECK£: ^nd I think that provides a very attractive area for that to bo located in relationship to tile view angles as you're driving along Brinkcr Road. COMM[SStONeR HOLX; will this look sort of like the one across the street, across 288? I mean, is it Page 30 the same type of thing? MR. LUECKE: I don't think so. It certainly is a Home Depot, but the look -- this is a projected canopy, so it's not flat against thc wall, It's projected out like this. So it also has relief not only in vertical articulation but also in the horizontal articulation, it has some low areas that were dipped out from building, and other areas that are higher, up above, that form a backdrop. COMMISSIONER HOLT: BUt why does it all have a flat roof, flat line? MR. LUECKE: I'm sorry. Could you ask that question again? COMMISSIONER HOLT: why docs it all have a flat line across the top? I mean, I see it has awnings and projections and it all has a flat line across the top. MR. LUECKE: Yeah. Our goal is to not make it flat. In oti~er words, it -- the wall steps. I mean, obviously, the top of the wall is flat, but the wall steps such that it does not appear as one, you know, single flat line, It has these articulated areas that move up and down in relationship to, you know, thc base wall of the building, And as you see those projected out with the front canopies, then, again, it doesn't look just like a plain flat faced box. PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 31 COMMISSIONER HOLT: NOW, what is tile relationship or what is the unifying factor in these big boxes and the out parcels that are against 288 or will there be any? MR. LUECKE: There will be. We will have materials. We typically will do an overall design guideline for the shopping center, and we will have materials that arc specified for our buildings, and then they will be used on the pad buildings as well around. The pad buildings will have their own unique character. In other words, if it's a Chili's or something like that, they would have their unique character, but they would also be able to use our materials so that the whole design would coordinate. COMMISSIONER HOLT: what is this second -- this second drawing? What is that of?. Is that -- MR. LUECKE: This one. COMMISSIONER HOLT: uh-huh. MR. LUECKE: That is the small shop retail building, the one that is out -- oh, I can't point on this, but the one that's behind the pad buildings along 288 and that will be a building that's split up into smaller boutique-type tenants that would occupy that building, more of a local tenant or it may be a national tenant, but someone that's a smaller retailer. Page 32 COMMISSIONER HOLT: And what is this third -- the third one down? MR. LUECKE: And then the bottom two are the Target building, one is the fi'ertl and one is the side facing 288 of the Target building, And the same thing occurs on the Target building. This is a new prototype for them, where, again, we've created some elements that are masonry elements that project out and project up from the backdrop of the main building. And it also has some overhang canopies on it as well. MR. WEBBER: As metroplex standards go, these are very both upgraded buildings by these two national tenants. They're very upgraded. And Gerald is right also in that on the out lots, as the developer, and Target and ttome Depot, the three parties reserve through the operating easement agreements all of the rules and regulations of the center and the materials. While they're national credit restaurants and national anchored-type restaurants, they will adhere to our approval standards of these -- using these materials and yet maintaining their unique architectural designs for their buildings which often are more or less their I.D. signs or I,D. buildings that people know who they are. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Then on the landscaping along 288 it looked like a narrow -- FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 29 - Page 32 CondcnscltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 :13 '14 '15 16 17 lg 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 22 23 24 25 Page 33 MR. LUECKE: Along this area? COMMISSIONER HOLT: Right. Is that -- since there will be parl6ng up there against that 288, will there be any bushes or trees or anything along that area, or is that too narrow? MR. LUECKE: There will be trees, and there will be shrubs, but there is not parking along that area. We have adhered to the City standards where we've sat back and just had the parking on the sides of the building or on the back. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I thought there was parking on this~ This looks like little parking spaces. Is that not parking along there? MR. WEBBER: NO, ma'am. That's just a driveway. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Oh, okay. There are hedges there. And will that be the backs of those buildings? MR. LUECKE: NO, no. That will either be a side -- it will more than likely be a side because again, forcing the parking away from that side, then typically they would not have their front door facing the area that docs not have parking. So usually the front door would face probably to the side that has the parking. And then that would be a side of the building. Page 34 COMMISSIONER HOLT: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER STRANGE'. Legal has a question they'd like to ask. MR. SNYDER: Just a clarification. If you turn to your ADP, iS that the second to last page where you show the elevations? You got it up there on the -- the bottom one here says right elevation side. I notice you didn't label like you did the other elevations. You didn't label the -- where the brick is. MR. LUECKE: Yes. The materials -- the colors indicate the same material that's shown on the front of the building so it w[[[ be consistent there on that side. Yes, it will be. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Anyone else have a question? Okay. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I'd like to switch over to the sign district if -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We[[, could I have a couple of questions on the site plan while it's there first. COMMISSIONER ROY: sure, COMMISSIONER STRANGE: I just have a couple of questions I'd like to ask you. Did I understand Mr. Reich_hart earlier to say that you're building a 30-foot tall retaining wall. 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 Page 35 MR. LUECKE: It varies again in this -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: could you kind of start up there -- back up a little bit. What's the height of the wail right in there? MR. LUECKE: in this area it's zero. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. MR. LUECKE: ^nd then it slowly increases as you go here. By the time you get to this point, it's approximately 10 to 12 feet. Brian, you correct me if I'm wrong. And then as you come around, the wall gets to the highest right about in this area, and it does go to almost 30 feet. I think it's maybe 28 feet in that area and then it begins to go down again as you come around the corner and then goes down m zero again as you go around the corner. COMMISSIONER STRANCoE: okay. I think I've got a couple of questions there. One, at the highest point of that retaining wall, what kind of a barricade system do you have there? I mean, we're talking about Brinker with apartments and other things down there, people walking along, somebody cuts across tlu'ough that grove, what's the barricade at the top of that? MR. LUECKE: YeS. We'll have a rail at this point on the wall, a pedestrian-type rail here there is and I don't recall the exact number, but I believe it's Page 36 about 20 feet of landscaping between the roadway and the wall at that point. And in this area, wcql look at it specifically. We may or may not have a railing in this area again just because it's a dense wooded area that is not likely to have pedestrians in that area. And then again, as you come down here, then we'll probably add rail again in this area that's accessible. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: NOW, I don't have the advantage of any topographical data here, so help me out when we come around that corner from that 30-foot high wall, what kind of slopes do we have on that exit street going out to Brinker, is that -- is there any consideration there where people are going to be coming around trying to go up a hill to get out there? MR, LUECKE: we've tried to hold it to five percent on all of our driveways. So as we're coming in from Brinker here, and then as we're comit~g along this area -- this area stays down low, obviously, and then slowly slightly rises as it comes up to meet Brinker in this area as well. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: [ was just curious if that was going to have a severe slope. MR. WEBBER: Five percent slopes are generally what are accepted by the National Tenants on the entrance drives. Anything greater than that, no, they'd PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRIJARY 9, 2005 Page 33 - Page 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 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 CondenseltTM Page 37 rather not. But five is very common, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Okay. What are you going to have on the tops of these buildings? Is that where your mechanicals and all are going to be? MR. LUECKE: YeS, it iS. And we have a parapet wall surrounding that to -- to screen those units. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Because I see you've taken a lot of care in your rendering preparation here in your presentation materials to show a lot of enhancements to the building. But, you know, if Brinker is 20 to 30 feet above ground level, I'm wondering from the Brinker side, how much of that effect you're going to get or are you going to be looking at roof top? What is the site line there? Are you going to see anything of the buildings or are you just going to see the roof?. MR. LUECKE: We will see some of the building. Again, your view angles are blocked by these trees as you're coming along Brinker from this direction. So until you get to about here then your view angles are pretty well blocked. And here we have some additional trees along Brinker in this area. But we will be above the finished floor of Home Depot with Brinker Road here and it's just a matter of creating the parapet wall such that the units are screened. And it -- we'll just have to do some site line studies there, but it will have to be a 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 38 conthination of the trees and the wall, and I don't know that it will be fully screened at this point, but it wilt be a scenario that as you're on the site, the units will be screened. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: I agree with you on the trees for probably eight months of the year, but this time of the year, with no leaves on those Oak Trees, there's not much screening. So, again, I would have some concerns about how those roof units are handled so that you're not looking at a mass of air-conditioners and built-up roofing up there, with, again, alt of the considerations that you've given to thc rest of it. So -- MR. LUECKE: it iS certainly -- you know, from certain angles and heights above the building, there's really no way to screen thcan just because of the view angle that you have. So we will do something that is reasonable as far as the parapet wails and try to get those screened from anything on site and hopefully for most of the view off Brinker. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: YOU might -- 11neon, it's not nay suggestion to make, but, you know, you were talking about barricades, perhaps some slu'ubbery screen, something along that retaining wall would help block that well, and incorporate shrubs in with what railing you're going to build, it would kind of help again to get that 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 39 line of site higher. That would be a consideration. And then if you don't mind, Mr. Roy, I have cue question on the signs, then we can have your question. I noticed when you were going througb your presentation you showed that you were under the allowable signage over on the Loop, but you kind of skipped over tile fact that you were over the signage on Briaker Road. And I was just curious back there, you've got -- I was having a hard time when you had that exhibit up them on your signs, because those little spots are pretty small where the signs are and which ones are which. I see that you've got -- MR. LUECKE: This yellow sign is what we call our main shopping center sign and that's located hca~ at the entry off of 288. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: SO that's going to be over on -- that's going to be your one monument at 40 feet? MR, LUECKE: That's correct. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. And then you've got one momm~ent at 30 feet? MR. LUECKE: uh-huh. And that one is located here at the main entrance off of Bfinker. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay, MR. LUECKE: And then our next sign is a 24 25 ~LANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 40 multi-tenant monuurent sign wbich would be located here along 288 -' MR. WEBBER: onIy one. ~R. [UEC~U: yeah. That will just be one location of that. And, again, that's for mainly these tenants in this small shop building. COMMISSIONERSTRANOE; That's your 30 footer? MR. LUECKE: NO. That's only 17 feet, I believe. That's this sign fight here, the M-1. And then in the blue are the monmuents for file individual pad sites which will be, again, along 288, and also one here along Brinker and a future one right on this -- this lot along Brinker. And those are 10 foot 10 inches. MR. WEBBER: Fl'Om groklBd to top. MR. LUECKE: Then the last one is tile one that is green coated, which is just an entry sign off of the driveway on Brinker. That will bc for the two anchor stores. And it is seven feet, 10 inches tall. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Yeah. Somehow those -- whatever wc have as a backup doesn'~ have thc same heights, but I get your point. MR. WEBBER: A pretty modest amount of signs. COMMISSIONER STRAN(SE: YOtlI~, I wasn't Page 37 - Page 40 1 2 4 5 6 ? 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 t3 14 15 16 [7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CondenseltTM Page 41 concerned about 288 as much as I was that other graph you had where we were over -- MR. WEBBER: AS WaS pointed out, we are significantly below on 288. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: On 288, yeah, I saw that, but then we kind of picked it back up over on the Brinker Road side of it. MR. WEEBER: we kind of helped you out there, and then we asked for just a little bit mom on the Brinker side, but in smaller heights. COMMISSIONER ROY: Mr. Chairman, you have to go to this package, not this. This is a comparative one. The one that is in the backup packet is the right. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. MR. WEBBER: YOU might have a previous one. COMMISSIONER STRANOE: I got tho One that was handed out tonight. COMMISSIONER ROY: That's the one across the sU'eet. That's Denton Crossing, not Denton Town Crossing. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: oh, oh~ excuse me. I thought this was the stone one. Well, some of the numbers match, in fact, most of them match. Mr. Roy, you had some questions on the sign district? 6 7 8 9 10 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 43 the legs on that sign. So in other words, as you're viewing it from the ground level, it will not block your view other than just the legs of the sign. MR. WEBBER: And there are presently two-acre signs target Home Depot. And what's the width and height of the inset panels? MR. LUECKE: The width is 12 feet and the height is 12 feet. MR. WEBBER: 12 and 12, 144 square feet. COMMISSIONER ROY: Btlt the big one is the -- the 40 foot one, this 640 square foot. So it's 40 foot tall, 640 square foot size. That's the way I road this chart. And that is huge in terms of just driving down the road and seeing this groat monstrosity sitting over there. Am I missing something? COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Maybe staff can shed light on this. MR. WEBBER: The Target and the Home Depot sign as they are 12 by 12. It's 144. So -- times two, that's 288. And I can toll you from -- and you probably want to know how does that compare with other cities. COMMISSIONER ROY: NO. I want to know how it compares to Denton. And across the street, that's twice -- across the street we approved 410 square foot as an exceedence to our -- Page 42 COMMISSIONER ROY: Yeah, because on mine, they don't match. I guess I'm looking hem on Loop 288, and the maximum sign permitted by our ordinance is 200 square feet. And in our backup on page 5, you were asking for one of those signs at 250, okay. But one of them you wanted 640 square feet. I mean, that -- to my knowledge, we have never considered and approved a sign that much exceeding our ordinance and I'm struggling with that because that is huge. m~. kUF. CKE: ff I might, again, I think a lot of it comes into just the way it is calculated. On our calculation of that sign, if you calculate the sign area onIy -- COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me~ but we're uot interested in the sign area. We're intereslext in the physical being. MR. LUECKE: I understand. COMMISSIONER ROY: This thing is standing out there and it's the sign area, it's the base, it's everything. And it's just the -- the visual impact of this huge thing that's out there of 640 square feet, which i'm assmning is correct. MR. LUECKE: One other possible help to you on that is this particular sign does not have anything in the base between the legs, so there is visibility through 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 44 MR. REICHHART: NO. If yOU look at the top, there was one at 547 square feet. And that is the one -- COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. You're right. MR, REICHHART: --just about right across the street from this. And iVs similar in height, but if you recall, it goes from the ground all of the way up~ where we're looking at -- as the applicant was saying, I can look at -- show here. This face here in the sign is open. There's no sign tlm-e. Across the street, it gees from the top all of the way to the bottom with panels with signs on it. So it is -- by our calculations because we calculate that open space as part of the sign. We just square this whole sign off and that is the sign. You know, I haven't calculated this open space in there to sec if the physical face is similar. But across thc street, it was 547 square feet total from top to bottom. And if you look at those signs, they're a little bit busier because it has multiple tenants on here. This big sign, it will have the big Target, big Home Depot and then two tenants, where across the street there's probably eight different signs on that So it won't be -- in my opinion, it won't be as much in your face as it is across the street. It is similar to what we've done rigbt across the street, PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 41 - Page 44 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 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 CondcnseltTM Page 45 And as quickly calculated and I'll relate, the area within the sign, excluding that open space, it's around 400 square feet if we calculate the open space. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Well, convince me about Brlnker. You -- Brinker Road you've got a 490 square foot monument sign, and across the street we've allowed is 100 square feet, which I'm trying to understand why you have to be so nmch bigger than the other retailers in the area. MR. REICHHART: And, again, if you look at tile overall sign package across the street, on Loop 288, they had the one at 547 and another one at 410, so they had two very big signs on Loop 288. Tl~ey had more linear frontage on Loop 288 and I tlfink they had less quite honestly on Brinker and on Spencer. If you ~mall, Sprucer is basically their back door. All of the buildings back up to Spencer, so they don't have a lot of signage on there, just basically at the couple of entries and at the intersection. So they chose to upgrade or play up Loop 288 because it is the back of their store on Spencer and Brinker is the sides. And again, I'm not -- what we did across thc street, I mean, they increased the number of signs on Loop 288 by four. Spence they decreased by thn~. And on Brinker it went up by one. So they increased the nmnber of signs across the street, but Page 46 it's that unified package and the look and the signs is what that sign district does, similar to this site. And basically if I -- this site has two fronts, if you will where across the street it really had a front and a back. And thafs why they didn't play up Spencer as much and Brinker was just cutting right through their plaza, and creating two smaller ones if you would. And, I mcan, that's how we looked at it when we were reviewing, doing the analysis of what has been approved in the area, what are the similarities, and what am the differences. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: DOCS anyone else have any questions? Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else here who wishes to speak on this matter? If not, I'll declare the public hearing closed and would ask for a motion and -- we would need to vote on all three items, each as a separate item. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval of Item 5A. COMMISSIONER HOLT: s~cond, COMMISSIONER STRANGE: well, we need a separate motion -- 5A one, little one, little i. COMMISSIONER ROY: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize they were so designated. 5A with a single i. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We have a motion. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 47 Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER HOLT: Second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: second by Mrs. Holt. We have a motion by Mr. Roy, a second by Mrs. Holt. Do we have any discussion? If not, please vote. Mrs. Holt, you still haven't registered. Now, you have. And the rezoning issue passes 5-0. DO we have a motion now on SA, two, which would be the alternative development plan? Mt-. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval of SA, two. 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 COMMISSIONER STRANOE: DO We have a second? COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE.. We have a second by Dr. Thibodeaux. We have a motion by Mn'. Roy, a second by Dr. Thibodeaux. Any discussion? I would like to make oae suggestion to see if you would include this in your motion and ill your second, that we do give special consideration to the view plans or the view lines off Brinker on this so that we do have some adequate assurance that we do not see the tops of these buildings. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO this is alternative -- COMMISSIONER STRANCJE: Development plata. COMMISSIONER ROY: -- development plan, SO Page 48 we can make those conditions; is that correct? MR. SNYDER: ':'es. But I think we probably need to be a little more specific on that condition because I think -- the testimony I heard was it would be impossible to screen the entire view of the top of the buildings. So I think we need to maybe -- I think 1 heard you say earlier you asked them to put shrubbery along there? COMMISSIONER STRANGE: well, that was a suggestion, yes. MR. SNYDER: Or something along those lines. I just think that the way you worded that condition, it might be such to be impossible to meet. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: oh, well, I wouldn't want that to be the case. But it would need to be possible to meet, but I would want to make sure that adequate effort was -- was put forth to preserve that. And, primarily, again, in consideration of the fact that we do have trees with no leaves for four or five months, I think there needs to be some vegetation across the top of that knoll where the visibility from Brinker is screened and it could be -- you know, and again, without topography, I don't know if it needs to be four feet tall or six feet tail. And that's why I was saying adequate to cover a majority of it. Again, you can't cover it all, PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 45 - Page 48 Cond~nscItTM 1 2 3 5 6 ? 8 9 lO 11 12 13 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 117 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 49 but I was hoping to see some effort there to provide a scr~ell. MR. SNYDER: I gUeSS my suggestion is make that a part of the motion. In between now and when it goes to council, maybe staff can come up with the applicant some type of alternative to put on the plan that meets that intent. Is that possible? COMMISSIONER ROY: SO the addendum would be along the lines that approve it with the condition that staff work with tile developer to come to an agreement as to what type of additional screening beyond wlmt has been presented to us tonight could be reasonably provided. COMMISSIONF_.R STRANGE: Correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO I accept that addendum to my motion. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Dr. Thibodcaux, do you accept? COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Okay. Anyone else have any discussion? Okay. Would we please vote. And the Rcm with tile with condition has passed 5-0. Now, do we have a motion on SA, three, which would be the sign district. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I'm going to make a motion to approve this but I am not totally convinced this Page 50 is going to look as good as we would really tike it. But I -- well, I don't know how to articulate it any further. But I'm a little skeptical, but I'm going to trust the developer to give us something that they will be proud of and that will be nice for our City. So I'm going to rccmmnend approval of Itmn SA, three with no conditions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: DO we have a second? COMMISSIONER HOLT: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: we have a motion by Mr. Roy a second by Mrs. Holt. Do we have any discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Item passes 5-0. MR. WEBUER: ?hank you very much and I will appreciate and respect your trust. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: -thank you for your presentations. 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 MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 51 Page 52 Page 49 - Page 52 S:\Our Docume~s\Ordinances\05kADP04-0008 Ordnance.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING AN ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON APROXIMATELY 43.77 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF LOOP 288 AND EAST OF BRINKER ROAD, COMMONLY KNOWN AS DENTON TOWNE CROSSING, WITHIN A REGIONAL CENTER COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (RCC-N) AND A REGIONAL CENTER COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN (RCC-D) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING SITE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (ADP04-0008) WHEREAS, Gerald Luecke (Hodges & Associates) as agent for Denton Towne Crossing L.P. has apphed for an alternative development plan which is on file in the City's Planning Department, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A" (the Alternative Development Plan), on approximately 43.77 acres of land located in a Regional Center Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) and a Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning districts; and Wtt~REAS, on February 9, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a Alternative Development Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Alternative Development Plan is consistent with The Denton Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY .OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein. SECTION 2. The Alternative Development Plan is hereby approved. 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 servable. SECTION 4. Anyperson 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 Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2005. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR BY: BY: ~ ~ PAGE 2 EXHIBIT A See following pages for an enlargement of notes and table. ./ Blake Rood 1 Denton Towne Crossing Alternate Compliance items Section 12 Large Scale Devetopment A., 2. Sidewalk Display and Cart Storage Sidewalk display will be provided in the sidewalk adjacent to the building. Cart storage will be provided in the sidewalk adjacent to the building but will be screened with landscaping or Iow walls. A minimum of 5' wide will be reserved for pedestrian circulation. A., 3., a., & c. Permanent Outdoor Display, Sales, and Storage Outdoor display, sales, and storage area in the garden center will be as shown on the site plan, approximately 34,650 sq. lt. Outdoor display garden center will be screened with a fence (vinyl covered chain link) and also screened by lhe grade difference of up to 30' tall wall and exis~ng trees left in place. Other outdoor display will be provided in the parking lot. (See A., 4. below) A., 4. Seasonal Outdoor Display and Sales Seasonal outdoor display will be provided. Size would be limited to 11,000 sq. ft. maximum, located within the areas shown on the site plan. Dates for outdoor display would be year round. The seasonal outdoor display in the parking area will be screened by the large retaining wall and grove of existing trees on the east side of the site. Products on display near the building would include gdlls, pavers, landscaping materials, etc. Products on display in the parking area will be landscape materials, st. orege buildings, pavers, etc. Fertilizer and chemicals will not be displayed in parking lot or next to the building. A., 5. Rear Storage Rear storage will be screened with a wood privacy fence or a retaining wall, plus the wide landscape area along the rails. Public open space or plaza is provided as shown on the landscape plans, and exceeds the required amount. Subchaptsr 14, F. Additional parking above City code is provided due to the requirements of the Anchor store tenants. Genera/Comments: Landscaping has been provided on site which exceeds the basic requirements from the City. Approximately 20,000 sq. ft. of additional landscaping is provided. Nso, the Exisling Tree Ordinance has been met with almost no mitigation. Refer to landscape calculations. All standards and requirements of the Development Code will be adhered to other than the alternate compliance items listed above. PAGE 4 SITE TABUI_ATIONS I EST. BUILDING LOT PARKING PARKING LAND AREA COVERAGE REOUiRED PROVIDED [Si=) (X) AREA ( ACRES ) MAJOR ANCHOR1 14.61 173,800 27% (l:300sf) 580 769 MAJOR ANCHOR 2 14.07 149,348 2'4% (l:3Oosf) 498 595 RETNL TRACT A 2.56 19,600 18% (1:3oo sf) 66 103 PAD SITE 1 0.93 2,960 7.3% (t:lOOsf) 30 40 PAD SITE 2 1.02 4,000 9.0% (1:100 sf) 4~'~) 52 PAD SITE 3 1.01 3,800 8.6% (1:1oo sf) 38 47 Detention Area 0.75 R.O.W. Ded. 0.08 PAD SITE 5 1.15 4,700 9.4% (t:3oosf) 16 32 P,~D SITE 6 0.70 "4,200 '14% (1:300s0 14 39 PAD SITE 7 1.07 3,585 7.7% (l:lOOsf) 36 42 PAD SITE 8 1.90 6,999 8.5% (l:100sf) 70 135 PAD SITE 9 1.10 8,288 17% (l:300sf) 28 37 (NET) TOTALS 40.95 381,280 21.4% 1416 1891 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 2.82 (GROSS) TOTAL 43.77 PAGE 5 See following page for enlargement of Landscape Tabulations. PAGE 6 LANDSCAPE TABULATIONS LANDGCAPE AND TREE CANOPY' REQUIREMENTS Total Site: 43,77 acres (1,g0S,621.2 ~.f.) Reclulmmenta: t0 % of tow lot area ~ be landscape with 20 % of required landscape to be free Requlm~i Provided tg0,662.12 s.f. (10 %) lmndscapa Area 304,656 si (19.1%) 3BI,324,2 e~f. (20 %)Tree C, anopy Naa 618,5'/7 =.f. (27%) STREET TREES Requirements: (t] Cna tree per evary 30 Lf. of street frontage Requlred Provided (32) 3" caliper Trees; exJsOng trees US 288 Prodded N/A R.O.W. SCREENING ProVided 8hmb Hedge 5 gallon, 2fi' hL, 24' o,~. at tna~lallon PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING (708,714 Requirements: 7 % of tolal pa~kir~g t5% of required pa~ng lo I~ c~i by line can~rE Required 4g,809.~ s.f. (7 %) 10S,30r ~.f. (t5%) Provided ~9,2~5 270,040 LARGE RETAIL PUBUC SPACES (288,44D a,f.; Includes Ta~jet F..xpan~len and N.I.¢. Garden Ctr) Requlremenls: one square foot public sp~ce or plaza requital for every t0 s.f. of gross ground ~oor. Publl= space or Plaza shall have 3 of 5 elarnen~, s~tt[ng area~, ~aded ama, ~ @ (I} per 600 s.[, water festuna or pubic ad, outdoor eaffng area Required Provided 28,844 a.f. 3t.000 ALL STANDARDS OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE WILL BE ADHERED TO (O'rHER THAN THOSE USTED ON THE EXHIBIT FOR WHICH THE ADP IS SOUGHT) PAGE 7 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: March 1, 2005 Planning and Development Department Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: SD04-0004 (Denton Towne Crossing Special Sign DistricO Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance for the creation of a Special Sign District for the Denton Towne Crossing development. The approximately 43.7 acre property is in a Regional Cemer Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) and a Regional Center Commercial Dowmown (RCC-D) zoning district. The property is generally located south of Loop 288 and east of Brinker Road. The purpose of the Special Sign District is to allow signage for a development to deviate from the requirements of Subchapter 15 of the Development Code. The planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: Gerald Luecke (Hodges & Associates) as agem for DeNon Towne Crossing L.P. Dallas, Texas The applicant is proposing the creation of a Special Sign District for the proposed Denton Towne Crossing retail development. Subchapter 15 of the Development Code, authorizes the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council if it finds that the five criteria (Attachmem 1) are met and that the proposal is "clearly superior" to what would be permitted without the plan. The applicam has also submitted a Zoning request (Z04-0048) and an Alternative Developmem Plan (ADP04-0008) for the proposed project. Eight Legal notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the property. Staff has received no written responses to the notice. OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission Recommends approval (5-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is not platted. Preliminary and Final Plats and building permits are required prior to commencement of construction. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW Jan. 26, 2005: Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Feb 9, 2005: Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Location/Zoning & Land Use Maps 3. Notification Map & Information 4. Letters from Applicant 5. Sign District Plan 6. Sign Details 7. Summary of Denton Crossing Sign District 8. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes (Jan 26, 2005 & Feb. 9, 2005) 9. Draft Ordinance ~ Reic ~rt, ASI~A, AIC~~'~- ~J~_ssistant Director of Planning and Development Respectfully submitted: Kelly Carpenter, AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary_ of Request The applicant is proposing the creation of a Special Sign District. Subchapter 15 of the Development Code, authorizes the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council if it finds the five criteria are met and that the proposal is "clearly superior" to what would be permitted without the plan. The ordinance states: The council may approve the creation of a sign district for any property which has more than three hundred (300) feet of continuous street frontage on one (1) public street if it finds the district: (1) Provides a comprehensive plan for signs that would be clearly superior to what would be allowed without the plan; (2) FFould be compatible with surrounding properties. In considering whether a district and sign plan is "compatible" and "clearly superior", the commission and council shall consider, but are not limited to considering the following: 1. Scale. The relationship between and compatibility of sign scale, site scale and the scale of nearby buildings. 2. Color. The relationship between and compatibility of sign color to the color of nearby buildings and landscaping: The degree to which sign colors are complimentary to its surroundings. 3. Material The materials of the signs and how they relate to their surroundings. 4. Shape. The shape and design of the signs and how they relate to their surroundings. 5. Landscaping. The relationship of signs to landscaped features in and outside the district. 6. Traffic Safe.tv and Traffic Circulation. The impact of the signs on driver's view, the degree to which view obstructions are created or improved, avoidance of confusion with or obstruction of traffic control signs and devices, and the time it takes a motorist to read the sign. 7. Illumination. The impact and compatibility of sign illumination within the district and in relation to neighboring properties. The avoidance of glare and light pollution. 8. Integration. How the signs in the district are integrated into a unified development concept with the topography, building design, other signs, landscaping, traffic circulation and other development features on the district and nearby property. (3) Is not being used merely to avoid or gain a variance of the sign regulations; (4) Does not violate the spirit or intent of the sign regulations; and (5) Complies with the requirements of this for a special sign district. Existing Condition of Property Adjacem zoning: North: RCC-D (Gas Station & DeNon Crossing) South: RCC-N (Rails to Trails & Undeveloped) West: RCC-D & RCC-N (Wal-Mart Plaza) East: RCC-D & RCC-N (Target Plaza & Auto related Strip Cemer) The subject property is undeveloped. Sign District Plan Analysis The subject site is located within a "Regional Mixed Use Center" future land use area. Regional Mixed Use Centers are intended to contain the shopping, services, recreation, employment and institutional facilities supported by and serving an entire region. A regional activity cemer could comain developmems such as a regional shopping mall, big box retail, superstores, restaurant and entertainment facilities, a high school or community college, and high-density housing. Staff's analysis for the Special Sign District requires the review of the criteria stated in the ordinance and reiterated in the summary above. The requiremem or criteria is underlined, and then followed by a Staff finding: The council may approve the creation of a sign district for any property which has more than three hundred (300) feet of cominuous street fromage on one (1) public street if it finds the district. Staff finding: The subject property has more than 2,400 feet of street fromage along Loop 288 and over 1,500 feet of street frontage along Brinker Road. Provides a comprehensive plan for signs that would be clearly superior to what would be allowed without the plan; · A site plan and sign details have been prepared by the applicam (Attachmems 5 and 6). · A comparison of what is proposed to what is permitted by the sign ordinance is shown in the following table: Permitted Permitted Permitted by ~ro~tag~ by R~sted by Ordinance per R~st~ ~ s!g~ Ordinance Ordinance Sign ft ~ 10 Signs ~ ~ta! 30 feet ! ~i ~ ~ft 200 sq. ft. i ~i~ ft (2,000 sq. ft. total) ft ~ B~i~b~ R~ 5 Signs 6 Feet (300 sq. ft. total) P~i~ Staff Finding: The applicam's proposal would decrease the number of proposed signs along Loop 288. One sign on Loop 288 would be higher than allowed, but the other 8 would be shorter. All the signs along Brinker would be higher than allowed (Brinker is classified as a collector which only allows for 6' high signs). Additionally, the total square footage of signs increases with the applicant's proposal. This is in part due to the way monument signs are measured. The total area of the sign, including any brick ornamentation, is included in the area calculation. For comparison purposes, a summary of Denton Crossings sign district (SD02-0002, approved 8/6/02) is provided in Attachment 7. 3. Would be compatible with surrounding properties. Staff Finding: Within the surrounding area, there is a variety of building and sign styles and materials. The applicant is proposing a consistent use of material, color, and architecture features for all proposed signs, similar to the Special Sign District approved for Denton Crossing. Additionally, the proposed Sign District is similar to the recently created Sign District for Demon Crossing (Attachmem 7). In considering whether a district and sign plan is "compatible" and "clearly superior", the commission and council shall consider, but are not limited to considering the following: 4. Scale. The relationship between and compatibility of sign scale, site scale and the scale of nearby buildings. Staff Finding: The subject site is a 43.77 acre tract of land where approximately 350,000 square feet of retail and restaurant uses are proposed. The proposed development provides a mixture of small retail shops and "big box" retailers. Four developments, Denton Crossing, Wal-mart Super Center, Oak Tree Plaza, and Racetrac Gas Station/Convenience Store, are located along Loop 288. Denton Crossing and Oak Tree Plaza use monument signs. The other two developments use typical pylon signs to advertise their tenants. The Wal-mart Super Center could be classified as a "big box" retailer, Oak Tree Plaza is a retail strip mall and Denton Crossing is a combination. The proposed development and sign package are similar in scale, to the surrounding developments. Color. The relationship between and compatibility of sign color to the color of nearby buildings and landscaping: The degree to which sign colors are complimentary to its surroundings. Staff Finding: The design of the signage is consistent sign to sign and uses the same colors, materials and architectural detail of the buildings. The proposed monument signs will compliment the proposed buildings meeting this requirement. 6. Material. The materials of the signs and how they relate to their surroundings. Staff Finding: All monuments signs are proposed to be made of brick masonry and the larger shopping center signs will use the same brick masonry with textured coated columns. The size of each individual tenant sign will vary according to the size of the monument signs and the number of tenants displayed. 7. Shape. The shape and design of the signs and how they relate to their surroundings. Staff Finding: Signs proposed would be of standard geometric shapes that are comparable to other signs throughout Denton. Landscaping. The relationship of signs to landscaped features in and outside the district. Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing to locate the monument signs in landscaped beds. Traffic Safety and Traffic Circulation. The impact of the signs on driver's view, the degree to which view obstructions are created or improved, avoidance of confusion with or obstruction of traffic control signs and devices, and the time it takes a motorist to read the sign. Staff Finding: The locations of all proposed monuments requirements. signs are according to the sign location 10. Illumination. The impact and compatibility of sign illumination within the district and in relation to neighboring properties. The avoidance of glare and light pollution. Staff Finding: Signs are internally illuminated, similar to other signs in the area and throughout Denton. 11. Integration. How the signs in the district are integrated into a unified development concept with the topography, building design, other signs, landscaping, traffic circulation and other development features on the district and nearby property. Staff Finding: The applicant has integrated the architecture features of the proposed buildings into the design of the monument signs. 12. Is not being used merely to avoid or gain a variance of the sign regulations; Staff Finding: Eleven sign variances would be necessary for the approval of the signs as proposed by the applicant. 13. Does not violate the spirit or intent of the sign regulations; and Staff Finding: The spirit and intent of the sign regulations is to regulate signs according to type, number, size, setback, classification and height. The "spirit" of the ordinance, as noted on the ordinance at the time of adoption stated "WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton finds that the use of signs and other outdoor advertising devices and structures, if unregulated, can, because of their number, placement, and characteristics, adversely affect property values; aesthetically damage the overall environment; create an unfavorable business climate which hampers attempts to attract and retain desirable commercial and business emerprises; and foster conditions that lessen the enjoymem and desirability of the City of Demon as a place in which to visit, live and work." The proposed special sign district will regulate signs according to number, size, and height and meets the spirit and intent of the sign regulations. 14. Complies with the requiremems of the ordinance for a special sign district. Staff Finding: All submittal requirements of the Special Sign District have been met. This section of the ordinance allows the Planning and Zoning Commission to recommend and the City Council to impose appropriate conditions concerning the placement, design or use of signs in the district in order to protect surrounding properties, the community, and comply with the intent of the sign ordinance. Staff Recommendation Based on above findings staff recommends approval. 7 ATTACHMENT 2 Location/Zoning Map NORTH Land Use Map ATTACHMENT 3 Notification Map NORTH 200 FOOT BUFFER 500 FOOT BUFFER Scale: None Eight 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice · In Opposition: 0 · In Favor: 1 · Neutral: 0 *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 P, LLC. www. l~odgesus~.com 13642 OmeCja January 10,2005 Mr, Larry. Reichart · City of Denton Planning & Development Department 221 N, Elm Denton, Texas 76201 Fax: 940-349,-7707 RE: Denton Towns Crossing S.H. 288 and Bfinker Road Denton, Texas Hedges Project No. 00167 Dear Larry: This is wrttten in concert with the submission for a Special Sign District at · Denton Towne Crossing, Th& Developer wishes to present a coordinated Sign Design program for the entire center, which includes shared S hopping Cente~ signs for the Anchor stores and major tenants, as well as smaller individual signs for the pad sites and a multi-tenant sign for the small shop retail building, in order to achieve this, we have prepared the Special Sign District that includes specific locations for signs as well as a comprehensive aesthetio design for the signs. This design incorporates the same materials used on the buildings, as well as the copings and masonry coursing features. The Special Sign District request also limits the signage to less than what would be allowed under standard sign criteda (refer to chart on Special Sign District Plan). This includes fewer signs as well as a substantially smaller square footage requested than that which would be allowed. Off-site signage is included for the Anchor stores, so that their Shopping Center signs are visible from Hwy. 288 and Brinker Road. We appreciate your help in this matter.. Of course contact us with any questions. We look fona/ard to continuing through this process for approval with the City. Best regards, HODGE8 & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C. Dallas, TX 75244 P (972) 387-1000 F (972) g60-1129 00167 OUt Mark Davis Larry Catss //' ~ q PAGE 3 ./ II , Attachment 7 Summar~ of Denton Crossings Sign District (SD02-0002) Based on Street Frontage S~re~ Permitted l'4~ber Max. Height Ma imu~ H~i~~ Maximum Size Permitted Permitted by by Re~O~teO by Ordinance Ordinance per Sign Ordinance 6 Signs i~ 30 feet ~ Mo umen at ~ ftc Monument = 200 sq. f~ Mo~umen~ ~M~nu ~ ~at~ft a. ~onumen~ ~ft ach 2 I9I f~ 5 Signs ~ Mo~men~ 6 Feet ~ Mo~umen~ ~ ~ ft Monument = 60 sq. ~onumen ~ ~ ~ g ~ach Biiake~ Rd iMo at i~ ft Monument = 60 sq. 4Signs ~Mo ~en 6Feet e~uestea man ~eemittea: area Deemi~ea CondcnscltTM 5 6 7 8 ll 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 i13 14 15 16 17 t9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 9 COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Nfl'At iteul on the agenda is going to be a continued public hearing. It's a continued public hearing, consider making a reconm~endation to City Council on the following items, Denton Town Crossing. The prop~y is located on the south side of Loop 288 and the east side of Brinker Road. The first item is the rezoning of approximately 38.5 acres from regional center commercial neighborhood, RI~¢-~ zoning digtrict to regional center co~rmxercial downtown, RCC Zoning District. The second item is an alternative development plan for approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping plaza. And the third item is a special sign district for approximately 43.77 acre regional shopping plaza. Mr. Reichhart. MR. R~IC~aA~?: Ihank you. On the overhead is thc subject property. Prior to the meeting I handed out so,ne infommtion regarding some updates to the parking and the open space requirements. The subject property is outlined ia black. It is across the street on Loop 288, from Denton Crossing, the new shopping plaza. And Wal-Mart is located across Brinker to give you an idea of where it is. This development and the proposals tonight are very similar to what we've done for -- or what the process that we used for Denton Crossing, a rezoning, an Page 10 Alternative Development Plan and then a Special Sign District. As you recall, with the bigger projects like this, our Code is really oriented toward -- not towards these huge projects. I mean, there's -- these are so complex that there's some nuances in our Code that we've seen the bigger projects come forward with the ADP and this is very similar. As I said, the subject property is outlined in black, and what we're doing is just taking the entire site to the Rccr~ zoning district. Staff is recommending approval of that. And with each three of these, we'll need separate motions on each three of the cases. So Staff is reco~mnending approval of the zoning. And I'm going to do a very brief overview of the proposals. Tonight the applicant has a more in depth Powerpoint presentation, so I don't want to be redundant. The site plan in on the overhead. And I really need to point out one thing as we go througk If you're familiar with the site, there's a grove of existing Post Oaks in this area. The applicant is proposing up to a 30-foot retaining wall along this edge of that Post Oak Grove in order to preserve over an acre of the existing trees. With that and some of the other trees they're doing and some of the little bit of mitigation of additional trees, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 tl 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 11 they would meet the requirements of the tree preservation regulations even though this project had started well before those regulations went into place, the applicant has met those requirements. Additionally, there's two basically big box develop~nents, a Home Depot, and a Target being developed and along Loop 288 and Brinker will be some out pamels. The applicant is proposing, as you see in my backup, quite a bit of open space and landscaping mitigation for thc proposed impervious material, the extra parking spaces if you will. And if you notice the nmnber in file backup was 402 additional parking spaces. We're looking at 475 parking spaces now. Tho site plan, it's typical with these type of developments, are constantly changing as you're working with thc corporate headquarters of the different entities. The amount of open space is ahnost double. It's 85 percent more than what is required per Code. They've done that obviously by preserving the trees. But they've addext additional landscaping in the parking areas with additional tree coverage. And, again, that handout that I prepared for tonight identifies how much more additional tree canopy coverage. They more than double what is required in the parking areas. And a 62 percent increase or 27 percent of Page 12 the site would be corelli with tree canopy coverage. And then on the alternative or the sign district, excuse me, in the backup again, identifies the location and the number of signs that could be proposed along Loop 288 and they were all 30 foot high pylon signs and tbe applicant is proposing to use more monument signs along Loop 288 and Brinker. The nmnbers, how we calculate signs, we include file whole base if it's a monument sign. You know, the effective alvin of the sign. It's now decorative -- and you're looking at -- it's drawing your attention to that sign, so what the applicant considers a sign, quite honestly, fl~e actual sign sitting on top of the monument or surrounded by the brick, we count the brick and everything. I wanted to point that out in your backup, also. We are reconunending approval of the ^m~ and the Speciai Sign District as proposed tonight. I can answer any questions you want, but it might be better to wait and let the applicant go through their presentation and then we can resolve all of those issues at once. But I'd be happy to answer any questions you would have at this point. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Any questions? Okay. If not, we will open the public hearing. And I think for the purposes of this item we will have one PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 9 - Page 12 CondenscltTM 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 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 13 public hearing for all time i~ns. So is the applicant he~'e and do they wish to speak? If you will, when you come down, please give us your name and your address, please. Mt~. wnm3na: Yes, sir. Good evening. My name is John Webber. I'm president of Webber and Company, 16,000 Dallas Parkway, Suite 300, Dallas Texas 75248. Webber and Company is a shopping center developer and primarily we develop for Target Stems and Home Depot stores throughout fl~e North Texas market. I will keep it relatively brief tonight, too. And we have our entire staff here of consultants, civil engineers, arctfitects, traffic consultants. And they've enjoyed working with members of your staff here in Denton. And it's a pretty complex and detailed work effort that's been put forth. And really I'm here to help answer questions. And I think you've seen all of the site plans. And Mr. Gerald Luecke with Hedges and Associates, our architect will do you a brief slide show here of a little bit in depth. But I've asked them to be brief so we can save plenty of time for any detailed questions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Thank you. MR. LUECKE: Good evening. I'm Gerald Luccke with Hedges and Associates Arclfitccts at 13642 Page 14 Omega in Dallas. And I appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight to present the Denton Town Crossing to you. We're excited about this development and are anxious to present it to you and to be able to proceed on what we feel like is a lan&hark development in the City. Let me see if I can get the presentation going here. First, is just an overview of a site plan on an aerial and I think Mr. Reichhart covered it well as far as the orientation of the site in relationship to the roadways. This is a couple of oblique aerials of the site as it sits today and its relationship to Brinker Road and 288 from a couple of different angles. The site is outlined in yellow, of course. This is the zoning plan presentation. And as Mr. Reichhart said our request is to zone the entire project as an RCCD to allow this Regional Mixed Use Center Development. The Alternative Development Plan is the next site plan. And we've incorporated several features into the Alternative Development Plan. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Could you please lift that mike up a little bit9 The people in the back are having a hard time hearing you. MR. LUECKE: Sure. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Thank you. MR. LUECKE: Incorporated several features 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 MINUTES FEBRUARY Page 15 into the Alternative Development Plan. Specifically, the preservation of trees, existing trees. Again, in this area of the site, in tile southern area of the site, and with a retaining wall that proceeds from Brinker Road and continues on around all the way bordering tile existing tree area so that those trees can be saved and preserved for the development. In addition to that, we've created a wide 30 foot landscape strip through the parking area that provides a pedestrian pathway that would into'connect the pad site buildings out along Brinker as well as a small shop retail building that sits in this location of the site would connect those to the anchor stores toward the back of the site. Also, we've incorporated some plaza areas with this curvilinear sidewalk, plaza area here that is adjacent again to the small shop retail buildings. And the front of the anchor store here will incorporate planting areas, benches and seating areas for customers for that anchor store. Our parking is set based upon the anchor requirements and what they perceive as the required parking for the area and the pad sites are also parked in relationship to their uses as restaurants or retail buildings along the pad sites. Page 16 1 Colored site plan which indicates again, 2 the landscaped areas, the existing tree preservation that 3 we created. This anchor store has a future expansion area 4 that will be toward 288, but that area, that green space, 5 which will be existing today in the initial part of the 6 development is not counted as part of our green space 7 calculations that we were using in the landscape calcs. 8 The next one is just an enlargement of our 9 plaza area as I was speaking about the area in front of 10 the anchor store with planters, which will be used to 11 screen some car storage that they have there, but also the 12 incorporation of some seating areas with benches and a 13 paving area out front. The long linear plaza is the 14 pedestrian connector between the anchor store buildings 15 and the pad sites out front and the small shop retail 16 building out front. And then this pedestrian plaza is the .17 one that's adjacent to the small shop retail building out 18 front. So we've again incorporated sidewalk areas and 19 areas to pause, have seating areas in these plaza areas 20 along with additional highlighted landscaping. 21 The next one is the facade plan and wc 22 brought that forward just to show you the quality of the 23 development that we will have. We're working with staff 24 in meeting your requirmnents for the large anchor store 25 requirement from a design standpoint, and we've also 9, 2005 Page 13 - Page 16 CondcnscItTM 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 to 11 :12 13 14 15 16 17 18 I9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page i upgraded these buildings with a majority of masonry on the buildings and we have a sample panel hew that -- and we can show the actual materials as well. It will have a base, tan colored brick, and then we'll also have some accent colors. Okay. That's super. Thank you. We'll have accent brick colors. We'll have some texture coating on concrete panels up above the main columns. Pilasters would be a brick with tile brick bases. And then we also have what we call a burnish granite faced block that will be part of the accent medallions that will be mounted on the building. So we feel that the design is a special design for file area and also incorporates the main features of the anchors, but brings the entire development together with a consistent design and material pallet. The next one is just a site section showing the positioning of the home improvement building and the garden center as it relates to Brinker Road. This area is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 Page 19 Brinker Road and 288. And those am shown in the blue and in the green. And then finally is the sign design showing the same brick to be used on thc base of the signage. And then the same colors to be used on the legs of the signs as they project and frame the sign all of the way up to the top. We would also use detailing at the top side of the signs that would match the top of the buildings, the coping of the buildings would be a projected detail at the top along with the shopping center name. All right. So that's all I have and we am here to answer questions. As Mr. Webber said, we have our landscape architect, our civil engineer, traffic enginem', and myself, the architect, so we'd be happy to answer questions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We do have some questions. Dr. Noble. COMMISSIONER NOBLE: Thank you. I think the Brinker Road paving. And then as Mr. Reichhart said, there's a large retaining wall that creates the plateau up top for file saving of the existing trees. So the home improvcanent store is actually inset into the side of the hill, if you will. And the garden center is in this location. So as you view across these trees, it has this inset, and therefore is very well screened from the Page 18 surrounding Brinker Road. The next one is our sign calculation sheet, and as Mr. Reichhart said it var[es from his in that we had calculated the actual sign area of the signs in lieu of the entire sign structure and our request is that, you know, we not be penalized for creating the signage that uses materials to match the building and provides a consistent sign design. And our proposal is that the allowable signage, we're less in number of signs and also in overall square footage. If you do calculate just the sign area we are less than the allowable sign area as well. And it's a -- as I say, it's well coordinated with the building materials and the overall design of the center. This one shows the allowable sign plan and just the positions of the signage that could be allowed on the project. And then the next one is our proposed sign plan. And it is color-coded so you can sec that our main shopping center sign is out along 288 at the main entry. We have a secondary shopping center sign that is at the main entry off of Brinker Road. We have one multi-tenant monument sign that will also be along 288 in this position that would allow signage for the small shop retail building. And then we have individual monument signs that would occur along the pad sites along both 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 that's a beautiful design actually. But my question is and I guess it may be obvious, are those anchor stems -- are those anchor stores proposed to be the Target and a Home Depot; is that correct? MR. LUECKE: Yes, they ar~. COMMISSIONER NOBLE: Tell me if I'm wrong. But isn't -- I thought there was a Target that is pretty Page 20 close to that vicinity right off of 288; isn't that correct? MR. LUECKE: Yes, that's correct. MR. WEBBER: YeS, sir, that's right. I think your question will become what are they planning to do with that store, is that -- COMMISSIONER NOBLE: IS there any plans MR. WEBBER: what they have done over the years with Target corporation is their stores, this stem was built several years ago. And, obviously, it's size, it's become functionally obsolete. It's location is, as you know, excellent, in fact, superb. And it will be a sold or leased to i'm sure another national retailer. They haven't done that yet but that is usually what goes on with the Target stores. And I've heard this -- I'm not Target myself, but I've heard that most all of these stores I've seen over the years, they go very, ve~3~ quickly. This one will because of its proximity to thc vibrant retail area that's there. The second question goes for the Home Depot. They, too, have a store that's relatively new, but it, too, this retailing business is changing so quick. But it -- they, too, are looking for a larger more modern store and it's obvious that 288, Loop 288 has become the PLANNING AND ZON1NG MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 17 - Page 20 CondenseltTM 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 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 21 main retail corridor for this region of the city. And so that's their desire too, to move. So they will also be selling that building or leasing it. So that's tile best I can tell you. COMMISSmNER NOBLE: okay. And the second question that I was reading that there was some -- what is the issue with the TxDOT, is that the -- part of that is the proposed expansion on 288, was that part of fl~e issue that the applicant had or -- MR. REICHHART: If yOU recall, we continued this from the previous meeting because of the TXDOT issues with tile proposed traffic light and the Loop Road. Excuse me. There was a proposed traffic light at this location on Loop 288 at their entry and what the applicant was working with TXDOT tO try to design this, what's typically referred to a Ring Road to have more of a direct access on to Brinker. Typically, these roads come through and would loop directly around and there would be another T intersection at this. But the idea is trying to get this more to work as -- I don't want to say cut-through, but more -- more like a road and have that direct access to Brinker. And that's -- the applicant was working with TXDOT on that design up until -- they're probably still working with them. But this is the closest we've gotten now to where 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 t8 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 23 it over the months and everyone is on board that this is a good plan. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: Every citizen in Denton will tell you this is the biggest problem area we have is that Loop 288. And I tlfink we have an understanding of when Loop 288 is going to be improved. And what I'm trying to understand is when are you going to do this? Can you tell us when you expect -- is this going to be something you am going to do right away and just exacerbate the problem or are you going to wait unti[ 288 is fixed, or what is your plan? MR. WEBBER: Tho plan is for the retailer, Target and Home Depot to open October 2006. The entire, as you know, 288 will not yet be completed and I will say that we did buy this property four years ago knowing what the situation was on 288. And as you do know, ail of tile retail that has evolved around us has occurred -- a good part of it has occurred in the last four years since we purchased the property. And this is thc last key piece in this congested intersection. And evv~'yone has watched it carefully and we've done ntm~erous traffic impact analysis and studies and as you might expect a national retailer does not wish to open into a congested area in an nonsolved area, and they've studied this, tile Target Page 22 we thit~k TxOoT and the applicant and the tenants would work out. But that was the -- what we were working on before, is the design of that inteTnal mad system and that's why we had file continuance from Wee weeks ago. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: And we have also an additional cormnent. Ms. Carpenter. MS. CARPENTER: I'd like to also say that on the traffic studies that were p~rformed by a variety of traffic engineers that were on the -- that looked at the project, there is no decrease in the functionality on 288 with tile traffic signal. And part of the reason for that functionality not having a decrease is because the road does have an exit right on to Brinker and doesn't function as the traditional ring road that Larry described. And it does have the outlet on to Brinker Road. So it's taken many months and study from city traffic engineers and our consultants and their consultants and working with Mr. Elsom at TxDOT tO come to a position whca,~ everyone is in agr~ment that the level of service will not be diminished on 288 in its improved condition. Okay. Once it's at full capacity, once it's finished with its new expansion. MR. LUECKE; I agree. That's very w~[1 explained. It was the staff reconunendafion in the beginning and all of the national retailers have studied 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 24 corporation and Home Depot and said, they do wish to go. COMMISSIONER ROY: HaVe those people visited this area? MR. WEBBER: Yes, sir. The senior officers of both of these corporations. COMMISSIONER ROY: Because 288, tile contract won't even be let for that construction by the time you open, that's going to be a real mess out there. MR. WEBBER: We do all understand that schedule when it's been quite detailed by TXDOT and to all parties, and as you know Wal-Mart and Lewes and ~'oger and all of the others have opened. And it was worse even in a position then even candidly and they've measured it and said this is what we'd like to do. COMMISSIONER ROY: well, I hope you know something I don't because I don~t know how people are going to get to your store but that's a business decision. Let me ask another question. On the west side of your propox3,, there's a green area which has not bexm discussed. Do you see that along 288 on the west side? MR. WEB8ER: on the west side behind the two anchor stores? COMM£SSIONERROY: Right there. What is that? MR. WEBBER: oh, that is a detention pond PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 21 - Page 24 Condcns¢ItTM 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 t8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 25 that is -- that has been designed and will be holding water for a short period of time after a heavy, heavy rainstorm, and it's landscaped to meet all of the ordinance and design standards on the landscape. COMMISSIONER ROY: rll continue unless the -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: You're on the floor. Continue on. COMMISSIONER ROY: The property -- or the trees down to the right there, to the west side -- east side. MR. WEBBER: YeS, sir. COMMISSIONER ROY: I am very pleased about your plan to maintain those trees. And I was looking at the site tree canopy coverage that you have. You've proposed 27 percent or 618,000 square feet of site tree canopy coverage. Does that five acres or roughly five acres, is that included in the calculation to -- for you to get up to your 27 percent? MR. LUECKE: YeS, it is. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO basically what you're going to have and, again, I'm very pleased to see that stand protected, but your site tree canopy coverage is largely going to be, it looks like covered in the one section of it. And I'm trying to visualize then what the Page 26 rest of the site is going to look like. I accept that on the whole site you're meeting the -- slightly exceeding the canopy coverage, but, I guess, I worry a little bit that the rest of the site is not going to look, say, as nice as across the street. MR. LUECKE: I think that that concern is met by the amount of landscaping we have along the perimeter, We have wide buffer areas along the perimeter And we also have again, these areas that border the parking area that split the parking into smaller fields of parking with our wide landscaped pedestrian walkway through the center between the two anchor buildings as well as around the perimeter of this -- the Loop road area. We also have individual islands within the parking area that break up the rows of parking in the individual islands. So it's kind of a three-tiered effect, if you will. We have an exterior buffer area along the outside. We have these wide areas that split the parking area into smaller fields. And then we have the individual landscaped islands within thc parking itself. So we will have substantial number of trees outside of the exlsting tree canopy that's there at ~e southwest portion -- or southeast portion of the site. Pardon me, the tree canopy coverage calculation then does not include the existing trees, I'm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 2t 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 lg 19 ~20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 27 sorry. That was incorrect. COMMISSIONER ROY: Please clarify that further. The five-acm lot -- the five acres of old Oak Trees is not included in your canopy calculation. Is that what you're saying? MR. LUECKE: Yes, that's correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: IS that upland habitat land there? MR, REICHHART: It has the characteristics of upland habitat, but it's not 10 acres in size, so it's not classified as an ma area. And they are ending up preserving about one acre of the trees out there. thought. acl~. COMMISSIONER ROY: one acm.9 MR. RE[CHHART: YeS. COMMISSIONER ROY: I read SOlllewhgat3 five, I MR. REICHHART: [ believe it's about one COMMISSIONER ROY: olle acre, Thank you. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mrs. Holt. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Yes, [ have some questions about the design. Target and Home Depot are two of my very favorite places. But I don't like big boxes, so I've got a problem. And having looked at big boxes for a long tiine here in Denton, we seem to get the worst of Page 28 the worst, How are fl~ese going to be better than the big boxes we already have.9 Are we going to see fertilizer? Are we going to see soil? Are we going to see carts? Are we going to see junk on file outside? MR. LUECKE: FrOlll an operational standpoint? COMMISSIONER HOLT: From a drive-by customer standpoint, MR, WEBBER: If yOU saw thc material board, it's quite a bit upgrade. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I SaW the material board and it looks nice. But, for instance, Southlake Home Depot is gorgeous. Denton Home Depot is not. Where do we fall in between with tiffs new one? Do we get a Southlake or do we kccp Denton? M~. [UUCKE: I think you'll find that the building design itself is at least as attractive as Southlake, if not mom and the reason for that is we have a substantial amount of masonry, which I believe on Southlake is mostly stucco with some tile roof and some ofl~er accent areas, but the majority of the building, I think is~ if I'm not nfistaken is mainly a stucco-type surface, In our case, we are going to have a substantial mnount of masonry on the surface. That is an alternating material with a textm-e coating so that we'll have -- it PLANNING AND ZONING MINIYrES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 25 - Page 28 CondcnscltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 tO ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Page 29 will be -- the ams of the wall will be broken up into smaller areas, it won't look like a big box, if you will. It will be broken up into smaller areas. And we have a -- this whole panel, for instance, is all brick venire, and then we have these accent bands to go through that. We also have sloped roofs. COMMISSIONER HOLT: okay. What is all of this down here? I know that's the garden center. But what's that on the end, the very end? MR. LUECKE: *hat's a screening for the garden center. COMMISSIONER HOLT: IS that a wall on the end? MR, LUECKE: uh-huh. This is a colmnn, a masonry colunm that's on tile end. And then this is wh~re the site section if we want to go back to that, but this is where the wall comes up and the existing trees are located -- that's tucked into the side of the hill. COMMISSIONER HOLT: That's good. MR. LUECK£: ^nd I think that provides a very attractive area for that to bo located in relationship to tile view angles as you're driving along Brinkcr Road. COMM[SStONeR HOLX; will this look sort of like the one across the street, across 288? I mean, is it Page 30 the same type of thing? MR. LUECKE: I don't think so. It certainly is a Home Depot, but the look -- this is a projected canopy, so it's not flat against thc wall, It's projected out like this. So it also has relief not only in vertical articulation but also in the horizontal articulation, it has some low areas that were dipped out from building, and other areas that are higher, up above, that form a backdrop. COMMISSIONER HOLT: BUt why does it all have a flat roof, flat line? MR. LUECKE: I'm sorry. Could you ask that question again? COMMISSIONER HOLT: why docs it all have a flat line across the top? I mean, I see it has awnings and projections and it all has a flat line across the top. MR. LUECKE: Yeah. Our goal is to not make it flat. In oti~er words, it -- the wall steps. I mean, obviously, the top of the wall is flat, but the wall steps such that it does not appear as one, you know, single flat line, It has these articulated areas that move up and down in relationship to, you know, thc base wall of the building, And as you see those projected out with the front canopies, then, again, it doesn't look just like a plain flat faced box. PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 31 COMMISSIONER HOLT: NOW, what is tile relationship or what is the unifying factor in these big boxes and the out parcels that are against 288 or will there be any? MR. LUECKE: There will be. We will have materials. We typically will do an overall design guideline for the shopping center, and we will have materials that arc specified for our buildings, and then they will be used on the pad buildings as well around. The pad buildings will have their own unique character. In other words, if it's a Chili's or something like that, they would have their unique character, but they would also be able to use our materials so that the whole design would coordinate. COMMISSIONER HOLT: what is this second -- this second drawing? What is that of?. Is that -- MR. LUECKE: This one. COMMISSIONER HOLT: uh-huh. MR. LUECKE: That is the small shop retail building, the one that is out -- oh, I can't point on this, but the one that's behind the pad buildings along 288 and that will be a building that's split up into smaller boutique-type tenants that would occupy that building, more of a local tenant or it may be a national tenant, but someone that's a smaller retailer. Page 32 COMMISSIONER HOLT: And what is this third -- the third one down? MR. LUECKE: And then the bottom two are the Target building, one is the fi'ertl and one is the side facing 288 of the Target building, And the same thing occurs on the Target building. This is a new prototype for them, where, again, we've created some elements that are masonry elements that project out and project up from the backdrop of the main building. And it also has some overhang canopies on it as well. MR. WEBBER: As metroplex standards go, these are very both upgraded buildings by these two national tenants. They're very upgraded. And Gerald is right also in that on the out lots, as the developer, and Target and ttome Depot, the three parties reserve through the operating easement agreements all of the rules and regulations of the center and the materials. While they're national credit restaurants and national anchored-type restaurants, they will adhere to our approval standards of these -- using these materials and yet maintaining their unique architectural designs for their buildings which often are more or less their I.D. signs or I,D. buildings that people know who they are. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Then on the landscaping along 288 it looked like a narrow -- FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 29 - Page 32 CondcnscltTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 :13 '14 '15 16 17 lg 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 22 23 24 25 Page 33 MR. LUECKE: Along this area? COMMISSIONER HOLT: Right. Is that -- since there will be parl6ng up there against that 288, will there be any bushes or trees or anything along that area, or is that too narrow? MR. LUECKE: There will be trees, and there will be shrubs, but there is not parking along that area. We have adhered to the City standards where we've sat back and just had the parking on the sides of the building or on the back. COMMISSIONER HOLT: I thought there was parking on this~ This looks like little parking spaces. Is that not parking along there? MR. WEBBER: NO, ma'am. That's just a driveway. COMMISSIONER HOLT: Oh, okay. There are hedges there. And will that be the backs of those buildings? MR. LUECKE: NO, no. That will either be a side -- it will more than likely be a side because again, forcing the parking away from that side, then typically they would not have their front door facing the area that docs not have parking. So usually the front door would face probably to the side that has the parking. And then that would be a side of the building. Page 34 COMMISSIONER HOLT: okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER STRANGE'. Legal has a question they'd like to ask. MR. SNYDER: Just a clarification. If you turn to your ADP, iS that the second to last page where you show the elevations? You got it up there on the -- the bottom one here says right elevation side. I notice you didn't label like you did the other elevations. You didn't label the -- where the brick is. MR. LUECKE: Yes. The materials -- the colors indicate the same material that's shown on the front of the building so it w[[[ be consistent there on that side. Yes, it will be. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Anyone else have a question? Okay. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I'd like to switch over to the sign district if -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We[[, could I have a couple of questions on the site plan while it's there first. COMMISSIONER ROY: sure, COMMISSIONER STRANGE: I just have a couple of questions I'd like to ask you. Did I understand Mr. Reich_hart earlier to say that you're building a 30-foot tall retaining wall. 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 Page 35 MR. LUECKE: It varies again in this -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: could you kind of start up there -- back up a little bit. What's the height of the wail right in there? MR. LUECKE: in this area it's zero. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. MR. LUECKE: ^nd then it slowly increases as you go here. By the time you get to this point, it's approximately 10 to 12 feet. Brian, you correct me if I'm wrong. And then as you come around, the wall gets to the highest right about in this area, and it does go to almost 30 feet. I think it's maybe 28 feet in that area and then it begins to go down again as you come around the corner and then goes down m zero again as you go around the corner. COMMISSIONER STRANCoE: okay. I think I've got a couple of questions there. One, at the highest point of that retaining wall, what kind of a barricade system do you have there? I mean, we're talking about Brinker with apartments and other things down there, people walking along, somebody cuts across tlu'ough that grove, what's the barricade at the top of that? MR. LUECKE: YeS. We'll have a rail at this point on the wall, a pedestrian-type rail here there is and I don't recall the exact number, but I believe it's Page 36 about 20 feet of landscaping between the roadway and the wall at that point. And in this area, wcql look at it specifically. We may or may not have a railing in this area again just because it's a dense wooded area that is not likely to have pedestrians in that area. And then again, as you come down here, then we'll probably add rail again in this area that's accessible. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: NOW, I don't have the advantage of any topographical data here, so help me out when we come around that corner from that 30-foot high wall, what kind of slopes do we have on that exit street going out to Brinker, is that -- is there any consideration there where people are going to be coming around trying to go up a hill to get out there? MR, LUECKE: we've tried to hold it to five percent on all of our driveways. So as we're coming in from Brinker here, and then as we're comit~g along this area -- this area stays down low, obviously, and then slowly slightly rises as it comes up to meet Brinker in this area as well. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: [ was just curious if that was going to have a severe slope. MR. WEBBER: Five percent slopes are generally what are accepted by the National Tenants on the entrance drives. Anything greater than that, no, they'd PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRIJARY 9, 2005 Page 33 - Page 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 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 CondenseltTM Page 37 rather not. But five is very common, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Okay. What are you going to have on the tops of these buildings? Is that where your mechanicals and all are going to be? MR. LUECKE: YeS, it iS. And we have a parapet wall surrounding that to -- to screen those units. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Because I see you've taken a lot of care in your rendering preparation here in your presentation materials to show a lot of enhancements to the building. But, you know, if Brinker is 20 to 30 feet above ground level, I'm wondering from the Brinker side, how much of that effect you're going to get or are you going to be looking at roof top? What is the site line there? Are you going to see anything of the buildings or are you just going to see the roof?. MR. LUECKE: We will see some of the building. Again, your view angles are blocked by these trees as you're coming along Brinker from this direction. So until you get to about here then your view angles are pretty well blocked. And here we have some additional trees along Brinker in this area. But we will be above the finished floor of Home Depot with Brinker Road here and it's just a matter of creating the parapet wall such that the units are screened. And it -- we'll just have to do some site line studies there, but it will have to be a 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 38 conthination of the trees and the wall, and I don't know that it will be fully screened at this point, but it wilt be a scenario that as you're on the site, the units will be screened. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: I agree with you on the trees for probably eight months of the year, but this time of the year, with no leaves on those Oak Trees, there's not much screening. So, again, I would have some concerns about how those roof units are handled so that you're not looking at a mass of air-conditioners and built-up roofing up there, with, again, alt of the considerations that you've given to thc rest of it. So -- MR. LUECKE: it iS certainly -- you know, from certain angles and heights above the building, there's really no way to screen thcan just because of the view angle that you have. So we will do something that is reasonable as far as the parapet wails and try to get those screened from anything on site and hopefully for most of the view off Brinker. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: YOU might -- 11neon, it's not nay suggestion to make, but, you know, you were talking about barricades, perhaps some slu'ubbery screen, something along that retaining wall would help block that well, and incorporate shrubs in with what railing you're going to build, it would kind of help again to get that 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 39 line of site higher. That would be a consideration. And then if you don't mind, Mr. Roy, I have cue question on the signs, then we can have your question. I noticed when you were going througb your presentation you showed that you were under the allowable signage over on the Loop, but you kind of skipped over tile fact that you were over the signage on Briaker Road. And I was just curious back there, you've got -- I was having a hard time when you had that exhibit up them on your signs, because those little spots are pretty small where the signs are and which ones are which. I see that you've got -- MR. LUECKE: This yellow sign is what we call our main shopping center sign and that's located hca~ at the entry off of 288. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: SO that's going to be over on -- that's going to be your one monument at 40 feet? MR, LUECKE: That's correct. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. And then you've got one momm~ent at 30 feet? MR. LUECKE: uh-huh. And that one is located here at the main entrance off of Bfinker. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay, MR. LUECKE: And then our next sign is a 24 25 ~LANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 40 multi-tenant monuurent sign wbich would be located here along 288 -' MR. WEBBER: onIy one. ~R. [UEC~U: yeah. That will just be one location of that. And, again, that's for mainly these tenants in this small shop building. COMMISSIONERSTRANOE; That's your 30 footer? MR. LUECKE: NO. That's only 17 feet, I believe. That's this sign fight here, the M-1. And then in the blue are the monmuents for file individual pad sites which will be, again, along 288, and also one here along Brinker and a future one right on this -- this lot along Brinker. And those are 10 foot 10 inches. MR. WEBBER: Fl'Om groklBd to top. MR. LUECKE: Then the last one is tile one that is green coated, which is just an entry sign off of the driveway on Brinker. That will bc for the two anchor stores. And it is seven feet, 10 inches tall. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Yeah. Somehow those -- whatever wc have as a backup doesn'~ have thc same heights, but I get your point. MR. WEBBER: A pretty modest amount of signs. COMMISSIONER STRAN(SE: YOtlI~, I wasn't Page 37 - Page 40 1 2 4 5 6 ? 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 11 12 t3 14 15 16 [7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CondenseltTM Page 41 concerned about 288 as much as I was that other graph you had where we were over -- MR. WEBBER: AS WaS pointed out, we are significantly below on 288. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: On 288, yeah, I saw that, but then we kind of picked it back up over on the Brinker Road side of it. MR. WEEBER: we kind of helped you out there, and then we asked for just a little bit mom on the Brinker side, but in smaller heights. COMMISSIONER ROY: Mr. Chairman, you have to go to this package, not this. This is a comparative one. The one that is in the backup packet is the right. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. MR. WEBBER: YOU might have a previous one. COMMISSIONER STRANOE: I got tho One that was handed out tonight. COMMISSIONER ROY: That's the one across the sU'eet. That's Denton Crossing, not Denton Town Crossing. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: oh, oh~ excuse me. I thought this was the stone one. Well, some of the numbers match, in fact, most of them match. Mr. Roy, you had some questions on the sign district? 6 7 8 9 10 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 43 the legs on that sign. So in other words, as you're viewing it from the ground level, it will not block your view other than just the legs of the sign. MR. WEBBER: And there are presently two-acre signs target Home Depot. And what's the width and height of the inset panels? MR. LUECKE: The width is 12 feet and the height is 12 feet. MR. WEBBER: 12 and 12, 144 square feet. COMMISSIONER ROY: Btlt the big one is the -- the 40 foot one, this 640 square foot. So it's 40 foot tall, 640 square foot size. That's the way I road this chart. And that is huge in terms of just driving down the road and seeing this groat monstrosity sitting over there. Am I missing something? COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Maybe staff can shed light on this. MR. WEBBER: The Target and the Home Depot sign as they are 12 by 12. It's 144. So -- times two, that's 288. And I can toll you from -- and you probably want to know how does that compare with other cities. COMMISSIONER ROY: NO. I want to know how it compares to Denton. And across the street, that's twice -- across the street we approved 410 square foot as an exceedence to our -- Page 42 COMMISSIONER ROY: Yeah, because on mine, they don't match. I guess I'm looking hem on Loop 288, and the maximum sign permitted by our ordinance is 200 square feet. And in our backup on page 5, you were asking for one of those signs at 250, okay. But one of them you wanted 640 square feet. I mean, that -- to my knowledge, we have never considered and approved a sign that much exceeding our ordinance and I'm struggling with that because that is huge. m~. kUF. CKE: ff I might, again, I think a lot of it comes into just the way it is calculated. On our calculation of that sign, if you calculate the sign area onIy -- COMMISSIONER ROY: EXCUSe me~ but we're uot interested in the sign area. We're intereslext in the physical being. MR. LUECKE: I understand. COMMISSIONER ROY: This thing is standing out there and it's the sign area, it's the base, it's everything. And it's just the -- the visual impact of this huge thing that's out there of 640 square feet, which i'm assmning is correct. MR. LUECKE: One other possible help to you on that is this particular sign does not have anything in the base between the legs, so there is visibility through 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 44 MR. REICHHART: NO. If yOU look at the top, there was one at 547 square feet. And that is the one -- COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. You're right. MR, REICHHART: --just about right across the street from this. And iVs similar in height, but if you recall, it goes from the ground all of the way up~ where we're looking at -- as the applicant was saying, I can look at -- show here. This face here in the sign is open. There's no sign tlm-e. Across the street, it gees from the top all of the way to the bottom with panels with signs on it. So it is -- by our calculations because we calculate that open space as part of the sign. We just square this whole sign off and that is the sign. You know, I haven't calculated this open space in there to sec if the physical face is similar. But across thc street, it was 547 square feet total from top to bottom. And if you look at those signs, they're a little bit busier because it has multiple tenants on here. This big sign, it will have the big Target, big Home Depot and then two tenants, where across the street there's probably eight different signs on that So it won't be -- in my opinion, it won't be as much in your face as it is across the street. It is similar to what we've done rigbt across the street, PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 41 - Page 44 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 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 CondcnseltTM Page 45 And as quickly calculated and I'll relate, the area within the sign, excluding that open space, it's around 400 square feet if we calculate the open space. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. Well, convince me about Brlnker. You -- Brinker Road you've got a 490 square foot monument sign, and across the street we've allowed is 100 square feet, which I'm trying to understand why you have to be so nmch bigger than the other retailers in the area. MR. REICHHART: And, again, if you look at tile overall sign package across the street, on Loop 288, they had the one at 547 and another one at 410, so they had two very big signs on Loop 288. Tl~ey had more linear frontage on Loop 288 and I tlfink they had less quite honestly on Brinker and on Spencer. If you ~mall, Sprucer is basically their back door. All of the buildings back up to Spencer, so they don't have a lot of signage on there, just basically at the couple of entries and at the intersection. So they chose to upgrade or play up Loop 288 because it is the back of their store on Spencer and Brinker is the sides. And again, I'm not -- what we did across thc street, I mean, they increased the number of signs on Loop 288 by four. Spence they decreased by thn~. And on Brinker it went up by one. So they increased the nmnber of signs across the street, but Page 46 it's that unified package and the look and the signs is what that sign district does, similar to this site. And basically if I -- this site has two fronts, if you will where across the street it really had a front and a back. And thafs why they didn't play up Spencer as much and Brinker was just cutting right through their plaza, and creating two smaller ones if you would. And, I mcan, that's how we looked at it when we were reviewing, doing the analysis of what has been approved in the area, what are the similarities, and what am the differences. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: DOCS anyone else have any questions? Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else here who wishes to speak on this matter? If not, I'll declare the public hearing closed and would ask for a motion and -- we would need to vote on all three items, each as a separate item. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval of Item 5A. COMMISSIONER HOLT: s~cond, COMMISSIONER STRANGE: well, we need a separate motion -- 5A one, little one, little i. COMMISSIONER ROY: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize they were so designated. 5A with a single i. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: We have a motion. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 47 Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER HOLT: Second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: second by Mrs. Holt. We have a motion by Mr. Roy, a second by Mrs. Holt. Do we have any discussion? If not, please vote. Mrs. Holt, you still haven't registered. Now, you have. And the rezoning issue passes 5-0. DO we have a motion now on SA, two, which would be the alternative development plan? Mt-. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I move approval of SA, two. 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 COMMISSIONER STRANOE: DO We have a second? COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE.. We have a second by Dr. Thibodeaux. We have a motion by Mn'. Roy, a second by Dr. Thibodeaux. Any discussion? I would like to make oae suggestion to see if you would include this in your motion and ill your second, that we do give special consideration to the view plans or the view lines off Brinker on this so that we do have some adequate assurance that we do not see the tops of these buildings. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO this is alternative -- COMMISSIONER STRANCJE: Development plata. COMMISSIONER ROY: -- development plan, SO Page 48 we can make those conditions; is that correct? MR. SNYDER: ':'es. But I think we probably need to be a little more specific on that condition because I think -- the testimony I heard was it would be impossible to screen the entire view of the top of the buildings. So I think we need to maybe -- I think 1 heard you say earlier you asked them to put shrubbery along there? COMMISSIONER STRANGE: well, that was a suggestion, yes. MR. SNYDER: Or something along those lines. I just think that the way you worded that condition, it might be such to be impossible to meet. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: oh, well, I wouldn't want that to be the case. But it would need to be possible to meet, but I would want to make sure that adequate effort was -- was put forth to preserve that. And, primarily, again, in consideration of the fact that we do have trees with no leaves for four or five months, I think there needs to be some vegetation across the top of that knoll where the visibility from Brinker is screened and it could be -- you know, and again, without topography, I don't know if it needs to be four feet tall or six feet tail. And that's why I was saying adequate to cover a majority of it. Again, you can't cover it all, PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 45 - Page 48 Cond~nscItTM 1 2 3 5 6 ? 8 9 lO 11 12 13 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 117 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 49 but I was hoping to see some effort there to provide a scr~ell. MR. SNYDER: I gUeSS my suggestion is make that a part of the motion. In between now and when it goes to council, maybe staff can come up with the applicant some type of alternative to put on the plan that meets that intent. Is that possible? COMMISSIONER ROY: SO the addendum would be along the lines that approve it with the condition that staff work with tile developer to come to an agreement as to what type of additional screening beyond wlmt has been presented to us tonight could be reasonably provided. COMMISSIONF_.R STRANGE: Correct. COMMISSIONER ROY: SO I accept that addendum to my motion. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Dr. Thibodcaux, do you accept? COMMISSIONER THIBODEAUX: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Okay. Anyone else have any discussion? Okay. Would we please vote. And the Rcm with tile with condition has passed 5-0. Now, do we have a motion on SA, three, which would be the sign district. Mr. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: I'm going to make a motion to approve this but I am not totally convinced this Page 50 is going to look as good as we would really tike it. But I -- well, I don't know how to articulate it any further. But I'm a little skeptical, but I'm going to trust the developer to give us something that they will be proud of and that will be nice for our City. So I'm going to rccmmnend approval of Itmn SA, three with no conditions. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: DO we have a second? COMMISSIONER HOLT: second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: we have a motion by Mr. Roy a second by Mrs. Holt. Do we have any discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Item passes 5-0. MR. WEBUER: ?hank you very much and I will appreciate and respect your trust. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: -thank you for your presentations. 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 MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 51 Page 52 Page 49 - Page 52 C:xDOCUME~ I k:adickq. DCALS~l\Temp\SD04-0004 Dmt~ Ordinance,doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, CREATING AN OVERLAY DISTRICT AND APPROVING A SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT PLAN ON APROXIMATELY 43.77 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF LOOP 288 AND EAST OF BRINKER ROAD, COMMONLY KNOWN AS DENTON TOWNE CROSSING, WITHIN A REGIONAL CENTER COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (RCC-N) AND A REGIONAL CENTER COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN (RCC-D) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (SD04-0004) WHEREAS, Gerald Luecke (Hodges & Associates) as agent for Denton Towne Crossing L.P. has applied for a Special Sign District which is on file in the City's Planning Department, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A" (the "Special Sign District"), on approximately 43.77 acres of located in a Regional Center Commercial Neighborhood (RCC-N) and a Regional Center Commercial Downtown (RCC-D) zoning districts, which is more particularly described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, on February 9, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the Special Sign District; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Special Sign District is in compliance with Subchapter 15 of the Development Code of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, and is consistent with The Denton Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein. SECTION 2. The Special Sign District is hereby approved on the Property. All signs permitted by the Special Sign District shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the Special Sign District. No other ground signs are permitted within the Property. However, additional wall signs, private traffic control signs and roof signs are permitted and regulated by Subchapter 15 of the Development Code. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall supercede all requirements of the Sign Ordinance affecting the Property that are in conflict with or addressed by the Special Sign District plan and the Special Sign District Regulations established by this ordinance. All other provisions of the Sign Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect against the Property. 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 o£its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the __ day of ,2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 //' ~ q PAGE 3 ./ II , . :... ,~:.:.~. :..::, ~ ~ ~" :'~',' :¢I · ..~.' . . '.~'~~~i"'i ........ ~ ~ "' ~ , ....... II PAGE 4 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: March 1, 2005 Planning and Development Department Jon Fortune, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT - Z04-0049 (Point Bank, Lot 4, 5, 6, & 7, T. N. Skiles Subdivision) Hold a public hearing and consider rezoning of approximately 2.63 acres from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with an overlay district. The site is located approximately 150 feet east of Carroll Blvd and northwest of the intersection of Westway St. and Anna St. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). BACKGROUND Applicant: Pilot Point Bancorp, Inc. Pilot Point, TX The applicant is requesting to rezone lots 4, 5, 6, & 7 of the T. N Skiles Subdivision from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with an overlay district. The applicant wishes to develop lot 4 as a parking lot to serve an existing bank. The houses on lots 5, 6, & 7 will be renovated and used for banking services. Public notification and property owner responses are provided in Attachment 3. As of this writing, staff received one written response in opposition from a property owner within 200 feet of the subject site. The opposition is currently at 0.19% OPTIONS 1. Approve as submitted. 2. Approve with conditions. 3. Deny. 4. Postpone consideration. 5. Table item. 6 RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5-0). ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The subject property is platted. The applicant wishes to develop Lot 4 as a parking lot for the existing bank. A commercial parking lot is not a permitted use in NRMU-12 zoning district. Hence, the applicant is required to replat Lot 4 into the existing bank property. A final replat will be required prior to the issuance of the building permit. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff'Analysis 2. Maps 3. Public Notification (Property Owner Notification Map) 4. Site Photo 5. Aerial Photo 6. Letter of Intent 7. Letter of Opposition 8. February 9, 2005 P&Z Meeting Minutes 9. Ordinance Prepared by: Supriya Chewle Planner I Respectfully submitted: Kelly c~rPenter, AICP Director of Planning and Development ATTACHMENT 1 Staff Analysis Summary_ of Zoning Request The applicant requests to rezone approximately 2.63 acres of land from a Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district with an overlay district. Existing Condition of Property The subject property is currently used for single-family dwellings and commercial uses. Prior to the adoption of the Development Code, Lot 5 was zoned Neighborhood Service District, Conditional (NS(c)) and the remainder of the property was zoned One Family Dwelling District (SF-7). Adjacent Zoning North: South: East: West: Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU-12), Single-Family and Commercial Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3), Single-Family Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3), Single-Family and Church Community Mixed Use General (CM-G), Commercial Comprehensive Plan Analysis The subject site is located in the "Existing Neighborhood/Infill Compatibility" future land use area of the Denton Plan. According to the Denton Plan, "within established residential areas, new development should respond to existing development with compatible 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." In addition, the Plan states that "within the undeveloped urban and urbanizing areas of the city, new neighborhoods may develop in traditional patterns. Mixed-use and mixed housing types will be allowed to develop in a pattern of 'neighborhood centers'. Residential uses may occur at higher density..." Existing developments in the vicinity of the subject property are of mixed densities, ranging from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3), Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) to Commercial Mixed Use General (CM-G). The proposed zoning request is compatible with the existing neighborhood. Therefore, the request to rezone the subject property to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use is compatible with the Future Land Use Plan (Existing Neighborhood). Development Review Analysis Access Access to the subject site is from Anna and Westway Street, which are classified as local streets. Public Infrastructure Public utilities are available to serve the site. Development Code / Zoning Analysis The comparison between uses permitted in NR-3 and NRMU-12 zoning districts are provided in the following charts. Professional services and offices is an allowed use in NRMU-12 with certain limitations (L4). The Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district permits some commercial uses, but mostly with limitations. The chart below illustrates the difference between the two zoning districts. Limitations for each use are explained following the last chart. SUP Accessory Dwelling Units L(1 ) L(1 ) Attached Single Family Dwellings SUP P Dwellings Above Businesses N P Live/Work Units N P Duplexes N P Group Homes N SUP Multi-Family Dwellings N P P-- Permitted, N--not permitted, SUP-- Specific Use Permit Required, L(X) -- Limited as defined in Section 35.5.8 Home Occupation P P Bed and Breakfast N L(10) Retail Sales and Service N L(15) Professional Services and Offices N L(14) Laundry Facilities N P Outdoor Recreation P SUP P-- Permitted, N--not permitted, SUP-- Specific Use Permit Required, L(X) -- Limited as defined in Section 35.5.8 Community Service N P Semi-public, Halls, Clubs, and Lodges SUP L(15) Adult or Child Day Care SUP P Kindergarten, Elementary School SUP P Middle School N P Elderly Housing N L(13) P-- Permitted, N--not permitted, SUP-- Specific Use Permit Required, L(X) -- Limited as defined in Section 35.5.8 Limitations: L(1): Accessory dwelling units are permitted, subject to the following additional criteria: 1. The proposal must conform with the overall maximum lot coverage requirements of the underlying zone. and setback 2. The maximum number of accessory dwelling units shall not exceed 1 per lot. 3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1000 sq. ft. GHFA unless the lot meets the requirements of L(1).5. 4. One additional parking space shall be provided that conforms to the off-street parking provisions of this Chapter. 5. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, where the lot size is equal to or greater than ten acres in size. An SUP is not required for such an accessory residential structure where the lot size is equal to or greater than ten acres. L(10): All restrictions of L(8), but limited to no more than 5 guest units. L(13): Uses are limited to no more than 55,000 square feet of gross floor area per lot. L(14): Uses are limited to no more than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area. L(15) = Uses are limited to no more than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area per lot. An SUP is required for additional square footage Gr Semi-Public Halls, Clubs and Lodges. General regulations of the Residential Neighborhood land use zone are contained in the table below: The following limits apply to subdivision of 2 acres or less: Minimum lot area (square feet) 10,000 3,500 Minimum lot width 60 feet 30 feet Minimum lot depth 80 feet 80 feet Minimum front yard setback 15 feet 10 feet 1(2) Minimum side yard 6 feet 6 feet Minimum side yard adjacent to a street 10 feet 10 feet Minimum rear yard 10 feet 10 feet The following limits apply to subdivision of more than 2 acres in lieu of minimum lot size and dimension requirements: Maximum density, dwelling units per acre 3.5 12 Minimum side yard for non-attached buildings 6 feet 10 feet The followin limits to all Maximum lot coverage 50% 60% Minimum landscaped area 55% 40% Maximum building height 40 feet 40 feet 10 feet plus 1 foot for each 15 feet plus 1 foot for each Minimum yard when abutting a single- foot of building height foot of building height [amil¥ use or district above 20 feet above 20 feet Staff Findings The proposed zoning change is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and is in compliance with the intent of the Denton Plan. Staff Recommendation Based on the above findings, staff recommends approval of the requested zoning change with and overlay district. ATTACHMENT 2 Location/Zoning Map NORTH Land Use Map ATTACHMENT 3 Notification Map Scale: None Public Notification Date: January 28, 2004 200' Legal Notices* sent via Certified Mail: 26 Number of responses to 200' Legal Notice: · In Opposition: 1 · In Favor: 2 · Neutral: 0 *A copy of the notification list can be picked up at City Hall West, 221 N. Elm Denton TX 76201 ATTACHMENT 4 Site Photo Photo l& 2: View of subject property from Westway Street. Site Photo Photo 3 & 4: View of the subject property from Anna Street 10 ATTACHMENT 5 Aerial Photo 11 ATTACHMENT 6 December 16, 2004 Lam3' Reighhart, ASLA, AICP Assistant Director - Planning and Development Plavming and Development / Building Inspections City Hall West 221 N Elm Denton Texas 76201 Dear Larry: Pilot Point Bancorp, Inc, would like to re-zone lots 4, 5, 6, & 7 of T. N. Skiles Subdi,dsion also known as 400 & 404 Westway and 1701 & 1705 Anna Streets'from the existing zoning of NR-3 to NRMU-12. The proposed NP~-dU-12 zoning '4411 allow for the propertie~ to be u~ed as a Neighborhood Services Center to enhance the services of the adjoining PointBank facility~ Thc site is surrounded by existi~qg single family residences as well asthe bank and re-zoning is required for the future intended use of the Site, Attached to this letter of intent is the application, appropriate fees, legal descriptions ar.d location maps. If additional information is necessary for >'our consideration, please contact David Fuller at (940) 686-7021 or dfutler(&l~ointbanLcom for the necessary details. Thank you for your consideration of our request. J. Pmymond David, Sr. President/CEO 12 02/09/2005 09'15 ~:AX [ATTACHMENT 7] ~]001/001 NOT'ICE OF PUBL:]::¢ HEAR]:N6 Z04,.0049 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton will hold a public heating on Wednesday, Februa~ 9. 2004, tO consider making a recommendation to City Council concerning the rezoning of Lots 4, 5, 6. & 7 of T. N. Skiles Subdivision from Neighborhood Residential (NR-3) to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use (NRMU-12). The property is located approximately 100 ft east of Carrotl Bird, on the north side of Westway Street and to the west side of Anna Street. The public hearing wilt start at 6;30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 21,~ E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas. Because you own property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, the Planning and Zoning Commission would like to hear how you feel about this request and invites you to attend ~he public l~earing. Please, in order for your opinion to be taken into account, return this form with your comments prior to the date of the public heating. (This in no way prohibits you from attending and participating in the public hearing.) You may fax it to the number located at the bottom or mail it to the address below or drop it off in- Planning and Development Department 22t N, Elm ST Denton, Texas '16201 Attn: Suprlya Chewle, Planner I These forms are used to calculate the percentage of landowners that support and oppose the meluest. The Commission is informed of the percent of responses in support and in Please circle one: In favor of request Neutral to request Reason for Opposition: ~ ~ - ~.-- ~'~ ~-- . Signature: ~ Printed Name: Te[ephoneNumb-~;: "-¢~-,~';~ .... Physi~l Address of Pmpe~ within 200 feet: 200' P&Z No~ce IATTACHMENT 8 Condcns¢ItTM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il [2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 I9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 69 COMMISSIONER STRANGE: The next itean is Item No, 7, which is also the public hearing. Item 7A is mzoning of approximately 2.63 acres from Neighborhood Residential NR-3 zoning District to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use Zoning District. The property is located approximately 150 feet cast of Carroll Boulevard and northwest of the intersection of Wcstway and Anna. Staff?. MS. CHEWLE: The applicant is requesting tO rezone Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the T.N. Skiles Subdivision froln a Neighborhood Residential 3 to a Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 Zoning District. Existing development in this vicinity of the subject property is of mixed densities ranging from 5 6 7 8 9 .0 tl i2 13 14 Page 71 I may need your help here. But I believe this house right here is intended to be -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: The one on the left? MR. DAVID: The one on the right is not part of this. That's the one that's not -- that is Ms. Pitner's house. Okay. 5} 6 and 7 -- 4, we plan to make a parking lot out of it for the bank. We'd like to demolish that house and make a parking lot. 5 is currently used as a commercial piece of property from -- it has a water filter company in it that sells, I think, all over the United States through thc internet. And we plan to keep that and, perhaps, one of these days come back to you or come back to tile City and make a real nice conuuercial building out of it, not demolishing it. In fact, we want Neighborhood Residential 3, Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use 12 to Couunercial Mixed Use General. The proposed change of zone would allow the applicant to use the subjcct property for professional services and offices. The site is located about 150 feet east of Carrolll Boulevard and northwest of the intersection of Westway and Anna Street. The future land use designation is existing neighborhood and infill compatibility. Twenty-six public notices were sent out to property owners within 200 feet radius. At this time staff has received one response in Page 70 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to put a brick on it like we have the bank and make it match so that it would match the area of what we have at the bank. Six and seven, we just bought them for future use. I mean, at this point in time, they're going to be rent houses. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: could you please give us your name and address, Mr. David. MR. DAVID: oh, I'm sorry. I'm Raymond David, 8834 Highway 377 in Pilot Point, Texas 76258. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Thank you very much. Page 72 favor and one in opposition. Opposition is currently at 0.19 percent. Staff received no opposition from the residents within 500 feet limit. Tile subject site is located within -- within an existing neighborhood, according to the Denton Plan with established residential, as new development should respond to existing development MR. DAVID: Thank you. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: £8 there anyone who has any other questions of the applicant? Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? Seeing no other discussion, I'll close the public hearing. Ma'. Roy. COMMISSIONER ROY: Yes. I guess I expected someone to speak on this. I do have a question of the with compatible uses, patten, and design standard. Staff finds flaat the proposed zoning change is compatible with the surrounding use and is in compliance with the Denton Plan~ therefore, staff recmmnends approval. If you have any questions, I can take them now. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Any questions Of staff?. Okay. Thank you. We'll open the public hearing. Is the applicant here and do they wish to speak? MR. FULLER: Good evening. I'm David Fuller, 815 East Northside Drive, Pilot Point, Texas 76258 representing PolntBank. The property is currently utilized by PointBank. It's owned by Pilot Point Bancorp, Inc. our holding company. I'm here to answer any questions if y'all would have any. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mrs. Holt. COMMISSIONER HOLT: YeS. AI'o those houses going to be used by the Bank for office space? MR, FULLER: one of the houses -- Raymond, 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 applicant, if I may. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. We can get thean back down. COMMISSIONER ROY: If you don't mind, thank you. We are faced with a dilenuna every time we move fi'mn a residential use zoning to a NRMU or NRMU-12 because there are so many other options that you could do with that property once we give you the zoning that you've asked for. One of the options for that property is multi-fmnily, if wc give it taRMU-I 2. MR. DAVID: We have absolutely no intentions. It will be cotmnercial property once it comes out of rental property. COMMISSIONER ROY: would you bc willing to accept an overlay or some conuniunent to that, that it would not be used for -- overlay, can we -- it's not -- I'm not talking about conditional zoning, but I'm talking about an overlay; is that possible, Mr. Snyder? PLANNING AND ZONING MINIJTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 69 - Page 72 CondenseItTM 5 6 7 8 9 10 ii f2 13 14 15 i16 18 i9 2O 21 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 I3 i4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 73 MR. S~VDER: well, I know we've done it once before because I member I was doing it before, i think you can do it. The general rule on noticing zoning cases, as long as you restrict the zoning to where it's less than what was noticed, you can do so. So I -- my legat opinion would he that you could put an overlay restricting it against multi-family use. And then when it goes to the City Council, I guess we could put that in the notice. But in my opinion, you can do that if that's the pleasure of the Commission. But we're being mom restrictive than what was noticed in the zoning notice, so any member of the public would have an opportunity to COlUe and voice their concerns. COMMISSIONER ROY: I think I see how you're planning that site, and it makes a lot of sense what you've described, but I think we do have to protect the neighborhood and think ahead about this. The second item is the home that's in opposition, is that right above seven there? Is that the home that's in opposition? MR. DAVID: MS. Pitner told me -- she owns that property and we spoke with a lot of the neighbors around there. And she personally told me she had no problem with this. In fact, she would support it. MS. CUEWC~: This one right here, that is Page 74 in opposition. There's an arrow showing. It's in red. COMMISSIONER ROY: welt, what is the property r/ght above the site and that is a home right now? MR. DAVID: It's a rental property. Mrs. Pitner owns that and that's a rental property. She wanted to keep it or we would have acquired it and brought it to you as well so that we would have had the whole block, but she -- at this point in time, she was not interested in selling it. COMMISSIONER ROY: when you do develop there, il' she wants to keep that as a rental property or a residence, maybe staff could help me in terms of what is our requirement for a buffer between NRMU-12 and a residence in NR-3. MR. REICHHART: It'S a wall and ten foot landscape area. COMMISSIONER ROY: okay. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Mr. David, while you're near the podimn, I don~t know that I heard you say. Are you in agreement to the overlay to restrict this from multi-family? MR. DAVID: I don't tlfink we have a problem with that because that's not our intent to have a multi-use fanfily. I mean, it's not for apartments or 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 Page 75 anything. It strictly would be -- COMMISSIONER STRANGE: strictly for commercial. MR. DAWD: strictly for conunercial, perhaps maybe an office building or something like that one of these days or whatever, you know, just exactly what the site could be used for. But since we had an opportunity and we owned all of that around us, we just thought it was a good business sense for us to acquire that, COMMISSIONER STRANGE: Right, Okay. Thank you very much. Any other discussion or any other questions? Mrs. Holt, ate you ready to make a motion? COMMISSIONER HOLT: Move for approval. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. Are you making -- moving approval with the restriction? COMMISSIONER HOLT: YeS. With the overlay restriction. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: okay. I have a motion. Do wc have a second? COMMISSIONER ROY: [ second. COMMISSIONER STRANGE: second by Mr. Roy. So we have a motion by Mrs. Holt, a second by Mr. Roy. We'll be voting for this with the restriction that it has an overlay prohibiting nmlti-family usage of the property. Page 76 Any other discussion? If not, please vote. And the item passes 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Page 73 - Page 76 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL 3 (NR-3) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE-12 (NRMU-12) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION, WITH AN OVERLAY DISTRICT RESTRICTING THE USES TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND OFFICES, FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 4, 5, 6 AND 7 OF THE T.N. SKILES SUBDIVISION, AN ADDITION TO CItY OF DENTON, TEXAS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN CABINET 613, PAGE 210 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF 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. (Z04-0049) WHEREAS, Pilot Point Bancorp, Inc. has applied for a change in zoning for approximately 2.63 acres described as tots 4, 5, 6, & 7 of the T. N Skiles Subdivision, an addition to the City of Denton, Texas, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 15, page 10, of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas (the "Property"), from Neighborhood Residential 3 (NR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use - 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation with an overlay district; and WHEREAS, on February 9, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning with an overlay district; and WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings: The change in zoning, including the overlay district, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and The overlay district will protect and enhance the Property and surrounding area which are distinct from lands and structures outside of the overlay district and the immediate neighborhood; and The regulations imposed in the overlay district serve important and substantial public interests by preserving the integrity of the neighborhood surrounding the overlay district while offering a different type of residential home to the public and the neighborhood; NOW, THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. The zoning district classification and use designation of the Property is hereby changed from Neighborhood Residential 3 CNR-3) zoning district classification and use designation to Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use - 12 (NRMU-12) zoning district classification and use designation with an overlay district (the "Overlay District") containing the following regulation: The permitted uses are limited to professional services and offices only. The above regulation shall control within the Overlay District over any contlicting regulations for the NRMU-12 zoning district contained in the Denton Development Code. SECTION 3. The City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 4. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. SECTION 5. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ., 2005. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY EULINEBROCK, MAYOR BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY BY: PAGE 2 AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: March 1, 2005 Parks and Recreation Department Howard Martin., Utilities 349-8232 SUBJECT Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance granting approval of a license agreement for the subsurface use of an approximate 0.138 acre portion of the Cross Timbers Park for the purpose of a natural gas pipeline in accordance with Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code; providing for the issuance of license, and providing an effective date. The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommended approval with a vote of 4-0. BACKGROUND Cross Tex Pipeline Company has requested the use of parkland in order to locate a natural gas transmission line across the frontage of Cross Timbers Park on south side of Hickory Creek Road. The request is for a License Agreement on a 20 foot wide, 328 foot long section of park property. The company states they will bore the crossing to not disturb any trees or vegetation growth. State law as defined in Chapter 26, Protection of Public Parks and Recreational Lands, of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code requires that: a) a municipality of this state may not approve any program or project that requires the use or taking of any public land designated and used prior to the arrangement of the program or project as a park unless the municipality, acting through its duly authorized governing body or officer, determines that: 1.) there is no feasible andprudent alternative to the use or taking of such lan& and 2.) the program or project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land, as a park, resulting from the use or taking. b) a finding may be made only after notice and a hearing as required by this chapter." If the proposed natural gas line license agreement is allowed, a value must be placed on the 328 linear foot section and charged to the Cross Tex Pipeline Company. In addition, land disturbed in the park will be returned to its original condition. Parks and Recreation Department and the City of Denton staff have reviewed all other possible alternatives. These alternatives included: · Select a route through the city that would by-pass the park area. A routing study was conducted using Ryan Road. It determined many circuitous directions and multiple property ownership that make the proposed routes to be unreasonable.. · Select a route that would use other areas of Cross Timber and Lake Forest Park to get to Ryan Road. This routing would cause negative impacts to the parks and trees in the area of tree loss and environmental impacts. · Permit the proposed Hickory Creek Road routing of a natural gas line across the park frontage area to connect to existing natural gas wells. Require the installer to bore underground under the creek and across park property to avoid any removal of trees. After 1 review of this option, it appears to be the most prudent and cost effective way transport natural gas from this part of the city. OPTIONS City Council may approve or deny the recommendation to allow a natural gas pipeline in Cross Timbers Park, select the other option outlined above, or request staff'to submit an alternative not listed. RECOMMENDATION After reviewing all alternatives, staff recommends approval of the use of the Cross Timbers Park for a natural gas pipeline license. The site must be bored to protect trees and vegetation. There would be no major impact on current park operations or programs. The Parks and Recreation Department confirms that the City of Denton has investigated all other alternatives and has used reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF PROJECT Construction is projected to begin in spring 2005. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW The Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board recommended approval of this natural gas pipeline license and License agreement at a meeting on February 21, 2005. FISCAL INFORMATION Compensation related to this use is still under discussion with Cross Tex Pipeline Company. It is reasonable to expect that improvements directly related to programs and/or facilities in the Cross Timbers Park will be provided. BID INFORMATION Not applicable EXHIBITS: 1. Ordinance 2. Map 3. Minutes Respectfully Submitted: Janet Simpson, Director Parks and Recreation Department Prepared by: Bob Tickner, Superintendent Parks and Recreation Department -2- ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING APPROVAL OF A LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR THE SUBSURFACE USE OF AN APPROXIMATE 0.138 ACRE PORTION OF THE CROSS TIIvlBERS PARK FOR THE PURPOSE OF A NATURAL GAS PiPELINE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 26 OF THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE CODE; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A LICENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks of Wildlife Code (the "Code") provides that public land designated, and used as a park may be used for a non-park purpose only if the City Council finds after notice and heating that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land for the proposed project and the proposed project includes all reasonable planning to minimize the harm to the park resulting from such use; and WHEREAS, the Cross Tex Pipeline Company (the "Licensee") desires to construct a natural gas pipeline across Cross Timbers Park because alternative options are not feasible and prudent; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of the Code the City provided notice in the Denton Record Chronicle on February 7, February 14, and February 21 of a Public Hearing to be held on March 1, 2005 in the Council Chambers to consider the alternatives to the use of City Park and Recreational land for the subject natural gas pipeline project (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City Council on March 1, 2005, conducted a public hearing as required by the Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that Section 253.001 of thc Texas Local Govcmmcnt Code is not applicable because this does not involve the sale of park land; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of the park land for the Project and when constructed in accordance with the provisions of the license as described below the Project includes all reasonable planning to minimize the harm to the park resulting from such use; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The findings and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby authorizes the issuance of a license to Licensee, below the surface of an approximate 20-foot wide park property described in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit "B" both of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference (the "License Area"), for the installation of a natural gas pipeline. The license which is revocable as required by law will be composed by the City Manager or his designee and approved by the City Attorney allowing the subsurface use of the License Area with appropriate provision to S:\Our Doc~'nv~\Conm~ts\05~Cro s s Titulars Park Gas Line-Tea Pipeline.doc EXHIBIT I insure the improvements are constructed in accordance with City Subdivision Rules and Regulations; protects the patrons using the park from injury and damage both during and after constmction of the Project; compensates the City for the reasonable market value of the use herein granted and generally protects the health, safety and general welfare of the City. The natural gas pipeline will be installed by boring. SECTION 3. During construction of the natural gas pipeline Licensee may have temporary use of an approximate 25 foot wide area adjacent to the License Area as depicted in Exhibit "B" to stage the construction of the natural gas pipeline (the "Temporary Construction Area"). The License shall contain provisions to ensure that the use of the Temporary Construction Area will not interfere with the use of the park. At the completion of the construction activities for the natural gas pipeline the License Area and Temporary Construction area shall be restored to the condition they were in prior to the beginning of such construction activities. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the 2005. __ day of EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY By: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FOIl: HERBERT L. RNEY By: Coleman & Assoc. Land Surveying P.O. Box 686 Denton, Texas 76202 Phone (940)565-8215 Fax {940)56~5-9800 Exhibit "A" 20 foot Gas License Area · River Oaks Addition FIELD NOTES to all that certain tract of land situated in the J. Rogers Survey Abstract Number 1084 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and also being part of Lot 1, Block V of the River Oaks Addition as shown by the plat recorded in Cabinet Q, Page 67 of the Plat Records of Denton County, Texas; the subject tract being more particularly described as follows; BEGINNING at the Northwest comer of the tract being described herein on the West line of Lot 1 at a ½ inch iron rod with a cap stamped TNP found (herein after referred to as TNP IR_F) at the Southwest comer of the called 0. t 99 of an acre tract designated as Parcel 2 in the right-of-way acquisition for the Hickory Creek Road expansion and called to be 37.1 feet South of the Northwest comer of Lot 1, also being in the East line of the tract of land described in the deed to Walter Edward Leatherwood and Jack Robertson recorded in Volume 496, Page 421 of the deed Records of Denton County, Texas; THENCE Easterly with South line of Parcel 2 and with the South right-of-way of Hickory Creek Road the following 3 calls as defined by Parcel 2: 1. North 89 Degrees 54 Minutes 17 Seconds East a distance of 93.8 feet more or less to a called TNP IRF at an angle point; 2. North 82 Degrees 18 Minutes 43 Seconds East a distance of 113.5 feet more or less to a called TNP IRF a angle point; 3. North 89 Degrees 54 Minutes 17 Seconds East a distance of 94.0 feet to the East line of Lot 1, and the West line of Lot 1, Block A of the Hickory Creek Road Elementary Addition as shown by the plat thereof recorded in Cabinet F, Page 36 of the said Plat Records, from which the Northwest comer thereof bears North 01 Degrees 02 Minutes 31 Seconds East a distance of 20.7 feet; THENCE South 01 Degrees 02 Minutes 31 Seconds West with the East line of Lot 1, Block V of the River Oaks Addition a distance of 20.0 feet; THENCE Westerly, 20 feet South of and parallel with the said South right-of-way of Hickory Creek Road, the following 3 calls: 1. South 89 Degrees 54 Minutes 17 Seconds West a distance of 92.3 feet more or less to a angle point; 2. South 82 Degrees 18 Minutes 43 Seconds West a distance of 113.5 feet more or less to a angle point; 3. South 89 Degrees 54 Minutes 17 Seconds West a distance of 122.6 feet more or less to a angle point; THENCE North 01 Degrees 02 Minutes 31 Seconds East a distance of 20.0 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING enclosing 0.138 acres of land. Together with a 25 foot temporary Construction Area South of and adjacent to the above described area as shown by Exhibit "B" attached hereto. LOT 23, BLOCK E RYAN RANCH PHASE 1 CAB. S, P. 21 (REMAINDER) 114.77 AC.: C.F.N. 99-R0066749 OAKS OF MONTECITO PHASE I CAB. N, P. 54 HICKORY CREEK ROAD ooi~ ~u~m~ ~ 1~.855 Ao. Ir. ~$.410 Ao. lr~ LOT t, BLOCK V, LOT 1, BLOCK A, RIVER OAKS ADDITION HICKO~ CREEK ROAD CAB. Q, P. 256 E~MENT~ ADDITION ~B. F, P. 2~6 EXHIBIT "B" LICENSE AREA RIVER OAKS ADDITION CITY OF DENTON DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS DRAWN: CF JOB ~-' CHECKED: WMC DATE: REVISED: N/A SCALE: t 0O5 2-14-05 1" = 100' Coleman & Associates Land Surveying P. O. BOX 666 DENTON, TEXAS 76202 PH(940)565-8215,FAX (940)565-9S00, WWW. COI IrMANSU RVEYING.COM (~) 200~ COLEMAN & ASSOC. SUEVEYINO 0 25 100 Cross Timbers Park Natural Gas Pipeline Exhibit 2 DEL MAR BELMONT PARK N HICKORY CREEK EXHIBIT 2 Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board Minutes February 21, 2005 Members present: Teresa Andress, Patrice Lyke, Reginald Heard, and Geri Aschenbrenner. Staff present: Janet Simpson, Emerson Vorel, Bob Tickner and Lorraine McGregor. Chairman Teresa Andress called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m. Approval of Minutes - Minutes from the January 3, 2005 meeting was accepted and stand as printed. ACTION ITEMS Gas Line Easement, Cross Timbers Park - Bob introduced a Chapter 26 public hearing requests for a natural gas line through Cross Timbers Park. The request will be for a License agreement. 300 linear feet along Hickory Creek Road in Cross Timbers Park will be used for the pipeline. The plan is to bore under the creek so as not to affect trees, except for where it turns to cross the street. Mr. Bill Coleman, a surveyor working with Cross Tex Pipeline Company, stated that the purpose of the gas line is to (1) provide a route to get the natural gas from the gas wells to market and (2) provide a choice of sales points for the producing companies. The producers will have ability to flow gas to various trunk pipelines and provide gas year around, not seasonally. He stated the pipeline will have to cross Fletcher Branch Creek at some point. It has been determined to cross the creek adjacent to new bridge improvements that the City is planning on Hickory Creek road. They will bore under the creek so there is minimum damage to the surrounding vegetation. Patrice Lyke asked if there would be tree mitigation for any loss of trees. Mr. Coleman responded that they are working with City Planning on how the tree ordinance applies to gas lines and that they would look for spots to take out as few trees as possible, taking more scrub oak trees than other indigenous trees like large Post Oaks. Teresa Andress commented she was concerned after seeing lots of trees taken off of the nearby Woodson property in a gas pipeline project. Mr. Coleman stated they would bore very deep under the Fletcher Branch Creek, which is 45 feet lower than the Hickory Creek roadway surface. Because they can only bend the steel pipe so much they will place bore pits in open areas on either side of the project area. Janet Simpson asked if the staging area would be on park property. Mr. Coleman stated that the bore on the east side of park property will be beyond the tree line at the creek in a more open area. After crossing Cross Timbers Park, the line will be bored under Hickory Creek Road in a northeasterly direction. EXHIBIT 3 Emerson Vorel asked about the Pipeline Company replacing any sidewalks damaged by the heavy equipment. Mr. Coleman noted that all damage would be replaced to the city's satisfaction. ACTION: Reginald Heard made a motion to allow natural gas pipeline License at Cross Timbers Park. Patrice Lyke seconded and the motion was approved 4-0. DISCUSSION ITEMS Proposed Gas Line Easement on the Denton Branch Rail Trail - Bob Tickner presented information that NGG Pipeline Company had made a preliminary request to place a natural gas pipline on the Denton Branch Rail Trail between Brinker Road and Woodrow Lane. Mr. Coleman, representing NGG Pipeline, stated their objective is to try to get a pipeline from the wells to market, from a point at Unicorn Lake development near the new Cinemark Theater across the 1-35E to the Rail Trail to just south of Brinker Road to the gas wells near Tom Fouts Realty land at Woodrow Lane and Shady Oaks. From there, the pipeline will head east to a point near Trinity road and East McKinney Streets. The proposal would use an area on the rail trail right of way that may remove a 45 feet wide area of trees on one side of the trail right of way. Railroad standards require gas pipelines to be 35 feet from the centerline of the nearest rail track. This placement will require the line to be placed into the outer 5 feet of right of way. In order to accomplish placement of the line with out removing large amounts of trees, many bore pits will be required. A second impact for consideration of this proposal is the future reactivation of the railroad for a rail commuter line by Denton County Transit Authority. At this time, the location of pipeline might affect future locations for stations and placement of the rail track. Chapter 26 requires that all alternate routes have to be studied and they are still studying all alternates at this time. Teresa Andress stated that the removal of so many trees would be devastating to the trail and wildlife on the trail and she could not support it. That trail users need the trees for shade. Geri Aschenbrenner stated that the trail is an oasis in a highly developed area. She also stated that the concerns of nearby residents should be considered, that the trail and trees are more than aesthetics, it is a quality of life issue. She asked how this would affect the area if a commuter rail returns? Bob Tickner stated that the future track would be put back where it was at one time in the middle of the right of way. If a second track were to be added, the pipeline and a new trail would still be far enough away from the railroad so both could exist with the commuter rail. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Public Improvement Districts - Janet reviewed the creation and implementation of Public Improvement Districts as it relates to Parks. Currently, no PID's exist in the city, but some developers have expressed an interest. Geri Ashenbrenner stated that it would be important to educate the citizens so that they didn't think the city was providing a high standard of service level in certain neighborhoods and not in others. Patrice Lyke stated that it could appear that the city was being inequitable in service delivery. Janet stated that other cities report it is critical to communicate with citizens on these issues. The meeting adjourned at 7:09 p.m. AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: ACM: February 22, 2005 Economic Development Mike Conduff, City Manager SUBJECT Consider adoption of an ordinance establishing an Economic Developmem Program under Chapter 380 of the Local Governmem Code for making grams of public money to promote economic development and to stimulate business activity in the City of Demon; approving an Economic Development Program Grant Agreement with SFT Industrial, Ltd. ("Granite") regarding the developmem of an approximate 94 acre parcel of land located west of I-35W and south of Airport Road in the O.S. Brewster Survey, Abstract No. 56 and the Thomas W. Daugherty Survey, Abstract No. 357, in the City of Demon, Texas; authorizing the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND Staff will brief City Council regarding the proposed Section 380 Agreemem in the February 22, 2005 Execmive Session. The proposed agreemem will be provided to City Council in the Attorney/Client Status report. Respectfully submitted: Linda Ratliff, Director Economic Development Department AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: March 1, 2005 DEPARTMENT: Legal CM/DCM/ACM: Herbert L. Prouty, City Attorney SUBJECT: Announcement of Councilmember Bob Montgomery's conflict of interest in the Emergency Shelter Grant Program ("ESGP") through his wife's employment by a subrecipient of ESGP fimds in accordance with the requirements of 24 CFR 576.57(d) and consider and take action to authorize the City staff to initiate the process for submitting an application to HUD for an exception to the conflict through the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. BACKGROUND: The City receives ESG,'P fimds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD'") as a subrecipient from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs ("TDHCA"), the recipient of these funds. The Denton Community Development Division has made inquiries of HUD as to whether or not this constitutes a conflict of interest. Long after Councilmember Montgomery was elected to the City Council, his wife became the Development Director of Denton County Friends of the Family who operates domestic violence shelters. Denton County Friends of the Family ("DCFOF") has and may receive future ESGP funds through a service contract with the City. We have received a preliminary determination from HUD's Office of Counsel that, even though the Councilmember Montgomery does not take part in any votes regarding ESGP's funding or other activities, he is still in a position to gain information with regard to ESGP activities and his wife is employed by DCFOF. Therefore, he has a conflict of interest under 24 CFR 576.57(d). Although Councilmember Montgomery may resolve any conflict which is presented either by the City Charter, City ordinances, the Local Government Official Conflict of Interest Act (Section 171 of the Loc. Gov't Code), or by your recent adopted Code of Ethics for Denton Elected and Appointed Officials by abstaining fi.om voting or deliberating on an ESGP item, a conflict may · still exist under the federal regulations. Ken McDonald, with the HUD Office of Counsel for the HUD Fort Worth region, has made a preliminary detemfination that there is a conflict under ESGP regulations. He has advised that in 9rder to resolve the conflict we must obtain an exception from HUD through the TDHCA to avoid any problem in future funding of the ESGP. In order to apply for the exception, Counci~lmember Montgomery must meet two threshold requirements. The first threshold requirement is that TDHCA - as the recipient of funds - must submit an opinion from its attorney that conflict of interest would not violate state or local law. A copy of the opinion we would request TDHCA to adopt is included in this week's status report. The opinion would be submitted to HUD as a part of our application for the exception. The second threshold requirement mandate~, that the conflict of interest must be publicly disclosed. This threshold requirement will be satisfied by Councilmember Montgomery reading into the record the attached statement which describes this conflict of interest and which has been approved by HUD's Office of Counsel. Agenda Information Sheet March I, 2005 Page 2 OPTIONS: Authorize the City staff to begin the process for submission of an application for an exception from a potential conflict of interest under the ESGP to HUD. Do not authorize the initiation of the process for application for aa exception. RECOMMENDATION: In order to resolve the potential conflict and to avoid any future impairment to the ESGP, we would recommend that Councilmember Montgomery read the attached statement into the record, and that Jermifer Walters incorporate the statement as part of the minutes and certify this portion of the minutes. With your approval we will submit the certified minutes with the exception application that addresses seven other factors which HUD will consider in whether or not to grant the exception. PRIOR REVIEW: The conflict of interest statement which will be read into record has been reviewed and approved both by our office and by Ken McDonald, HUD attorney, Office of Counsel. FISCAL IMPACT: There will be no fiscal impact as a result of this action, however, if this action is not taken, the conflict exception would not be granted. This could possible impair the City's ability to obtain future ESGP funds. Respectfully submitted: Herbert L. Prouty ~/ City Attomey Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Public Disclosure Statement. Exhibit 1 Public Disclosure Statement Agenda Item ~ Announcement of Councilmember Bob Montgomery's conflict of interest in the Emergency Shelter Grant Program ("ESGP") through his wife's employment by a subrecipient of ESGP funds in accordance with the requirements of 24 CFR 576.57(d) and consider and take action to authorize the City staff to initiate the process for submitting an application to HUD for an exception to .the conflict through the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. Statement to be read into the records by Councilmember Montgomery: "The City of Denton is in the process of applying for Emergency Shelter Grant Program ("ESGP") funds fi:om the Texas Department of Housing and'Community Affairs, which administers HUD's state ESGP funds in TeXas. I, Bob Montgomery, want to make it known that since becoming a City Councilmember, my wife has recently accepted a position as a Development Director for Denton County Friends of the Family, who isa contractor for ESGP funds administered by the City of Denton. HUD has made a preliminary determination that this creates a conflict of interest under 24 CFR 576.57(d). Although I will abstain from any participation in any vote concerning the grant of ESGP funds, HUD has determined that I am still in a position to gain information with regard to ESGP activities and that the City should seek an exception from tiffs conflict. One of the special requirements for an exception to this conflict is that the conflict be publicly disclosed in accordance with 24 CFR 570.611(d)(1). In order to meet this public disclosure requirement, I, Bob Montgomery, am hereby making this public disclosure as part of the City's request for an exception from these conflict of interest provisions. I request that the City Secretary record this statement in the minutes of this meeting." Agenda hem.~c AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM/DCM/ACM: March 1, 2005 General Government Betty Williams, Director of Managemem & Public Information Michael A. Conduff, City Manager SUBJECT: Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of DeNon, Texas, on first reading, granting a cable franchise to the University of North Texas to construct, reconstruct, operate and maintain a cable television system in the City of Denton, Texas and setting forth conditions accompanying the graining of this cable franchise; providing for a penalty of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) for the violation of this ordinance; providing for a savings clause; providing for the effect of this ordinance upon other ordinances and resolutions; and providing an effective date. BACKGROUND: In June of 2004, Charter Communications notified the City that the University of North Texas (UNT) had a bid out for a fiber optic network and satellite television service. After investigation of the facts and legal research, staff concluded that if the fiber optics system was used for satellite television service and any part of the system was in city right-of-ways, UNT would have to apply for a cable television ordinance. UNT representatives did confirm that the fiber optics system would be used for satellite television service to dormitories and other university buildings. UNT also provided us with a map showing that the fiber optic system would be located in city right-of-ways. The DeNon Cable Television Ordinance requires that all multi-channel video providers shall obtain a franchise from the City prior to providing service to any residem, business or person within the City, and shall have a franchise prior to the installation of lines, fibers or facilities that are in or cross any streets or public right-of-ways or other public property within the city. A multi-channel video service means multiple channels of video programming where some or all of the video programming is generally considered comparable to programming provided by a television broadcast station or by a direct to home satellite service. The UNT satellite television service would fall within the definitions of a multi-channel video system. Cable television service has historically been provided to dormitories and other UNT buildings by Charter Communications. UNT and Charter negotiate a bulk rate for this service as part of an annual contract. Charter pays the City a 5% franchise fee from these revenues. The bulk rate contract was due to expire in September 2004, but UNT did extend the contract with Charter for one more year. ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com (TDD 800-735-2989) March 1, 2005 UNT Cable Television Franchise Agreement Page 2 of 3 On November 22, 2004, UNT comacted the City to begin the cable television franchise application process. The application is attached. The Denton Cable Television Ordinance requires a public hearing within ninety (90) days from the filing of a cable television application, to hear all commems from the public on the application. No later than ninety (90) days after the public hearing, the city council shall make a determination to gram or deny the franchise based upon an evaluation of the application, the public hearing, and any other information deem relevant. Staff will conduct an audit of the fiber optics system and begin negotiations with UNT on the terms of a cable television franchise agreement. On December 7, 2004, the Demon City Council held a public hearing to afford the public appropriate notice and provide an opportunity to comment on the cable television franchise application filed by the University of North Texas with the City of Demon. The VP and General Manager for Charter Communications, Sharan Wilson, was the only person that made commems at the public hearing. OPTIONS: 1) Approve the ordinance graining a Cable Television Franchise Agreemem to the University of North Texas to construct, reconstruct, operate and maintain a cable television system in the City of Demon. 2) Deny the ordinance and direct staff to continue working on the terms of the Cable Television Franchise Agreemem with the University of North Texas. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends option # 1 PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Council, Boards, Commission): 1. Legal Status Report on September 3, 2004 2. City Council Closed Session on September 7, 2004 3. Legal Status Report on October 15, 2004 4. Legal Status Report on December 3, 2004 5. Public Hearing on December 7, 2004 FISCAL INFORMATION: In order to ensure that this Franchise is competitive neutral and not discriminatory as to other cable operators in the City, the City requires, and the gramee agrees, the gramee shall pay a franchise fee equal to $0.455 per momh per each End Poim Connection during the term of this Franchise. The gramee shall pay to the City the franchise fee as calculated in accordance with this section in quarterly installmems within forty-five (45) days after March 30, June 30, September 30 and December 31 of each year the franchise fee attributable to the preceding quarter. Included with such payment will be a report on the number of End Point Connections providing service on a momhly basis by street address and room number. Such franchise fee is a 5% fee based upon a presem estimated retail value of the cable services of $9.10 per End Poim Connection when provided in bulk. The $0.455 charge is 5% of the retail bulk value of the cable services provided by the gramee. This franchise fee is comparable to the franchise fee that Charter was paying to the City for Charter's bulk rate cable television service to UNT. ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com (TDD 800-735-2989) March 1, 2005 UNT Cable Television Franchise Agreement Page 3 of 3 Further the City may adjust the franchise fee no more than once every two years to reflect any increases in the charges for such services by the other cable providers in the City providing similar services with 30 days' notice to grantee. In the event the grantee provides additional services, the City reserves the right to reasonably estimate the retail market value of those services based upon the rates of the other cable providers in the City of similar services and adjust this franchise fee to be 5% of the value of those services accordingly with 30 days' notice to Grantee. Examples of such services includes, but is not limited to the following: (a) Revenue from all charges for services provided to Users of entertainment and nonentertainment services, including leased access fees; (b) Revenue from all charges for the insertion of commercial advertisements, including but not limited to launch fees, upon the cable system; and (c) Revenue from all charges for the installation, connection and reinstatement of equipment necessary for the utilization of the cable system and the provision of User and other services. Prepared by: John Cabrales Jr. Public Information Officer Respectfully submitted: Betty Williams Director of Management and Public Information Attachments 1. Ordinance 2. UNT Cable Television Franchise Agreement ADA/EOE/ADEA www.cityofdenton.com (TDD 800-735-2989) S:\Our Documents\Ordinances\05XUNT.doc ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS GRANTING A CABLE FRANCHISE TO THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS TO CONSTRUCT, RECONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND SETTING FORTH CONDITIONS ACCOMPANYING THE GRANTING OF THIS CABLE FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS, ($500), FOR THE VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR A SAViNGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECT OF THIS ORDINANCE UPON OTHER ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, all cable operators providing cable service within the City of Denton ("City") are required to obtain a cable franchise; and WHEREAS, Marcus Cable Operating Company, L.L.C., doing business a Charter Communications ("Charter"), currently provides cable service in the City under three sets of agreements generally described as an "Initial Grant," the "1995 Amendments" and the "1999 Amendments" (collectively "Charter Franchise") corresponding to Parts I, II and iii hereof; and WHEREAS, the University of North Texas, has agreed to enter into a Cable Franchise generally based on the Charter Franchise so that it has legal authority to provide cable service in the City on terms generally comparable to those of Charter; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the City to grant University of North Texas a Cable Franchise effective through April 21, 2009 based on the documents incorporated, herein. NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON TEXAS HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Incorporation of Preamble. The above and foregoing preamble is · incorporated into the body of this Ordinance as if copied, herein, in its entirety. SECTION 2. mutually agree to be this ordinance. Cable Franchise. The City and University of North Texas hereby bound by the terms of this Cable Franchise in ATTACHMENT A to SECTION 3. By its signature below, the University of North Texas, Grantee, hereby agrees that consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has been provided for by the changes made herein, and agrees to be bound by and comply with such changes. The University of North Texas farther represems and agrees that the person signing below on behalf of the University of North Texas is the properly authorized official of that corporation and has the necessary authority to execute this document and further certifies to the City that any necessary resolution or other act extending such authority has been duty passed and is now in full force and effect. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other Ordinances and shall not repeal any of the provisions of such Ordinances except for those instances where there are direct conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance. Ordinances or parts thereof in force at the time this Ordinance shall take effect and that are inconsistent with this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent that they are inconsistent with this Ordinance. SECTION 5. If any section, article, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word in this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed such remaining portions of this Ordinance despite such invalidity, which remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 6. The City Secretary of the City of Denton is hereby directed to engross and enroll this Ordinance by copying the exact caption and effective date in the minutes of the City Council and by filing, this Ordinance in the ordinance records of the City. SECTION7. In accordance with Section 13.02 of the City Charter, this ordinance shall become effective twenty-one days after final approval. The full text of this ordinance shall be published once each week for two consecutive weeks in the official newspaper of the City, the entire expense of which shall be borne by the University of North Texas. The City Secretary is hereby directed to publish the full text of this ordinance in such official newspaper of the City once each week for two consecutive weeks immediately following the passage of this ordinance on second reading. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,2005. ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY EULINE BROCK, MAYOR The City of Denton, Texas, acting herein by its duly constituted authorities, hereby declares the foregoing Ordinance passed on first reading on the __ day of ,2005; and passed on second reading on the __ day of ., 2005; and being finally effective as of the ~ day of ,2005. /si /si Euline Brock, Mayor /s/ Pete Kamp, Council Member /s/ Bob Montgomery, Council Member /s/ Jack Thomson, Council Member Joe Mulroy, Council Member /s/ Perry McNeill, Council Member /s/ Raymond Redmon, Council Member The above and foregoing ordinance read, adopted on first reading and passed to second reading by the following votes, this the ~ day of ,2005, at a regular sessiOn of the City Council. Euline Brock, Mayor, voting ~ Joe Mulroy, CounciI Member, voting ~ Pete Kamp, Council Member, voting __ Perry McNeill, Council Member, voting .__ Bob Montgomery, Council Member voting __ Raymond Redmon, Council Member, voting __ Jack Thomson, Council Member, voting __ The above and foregoing ordinance read, adopted on the second reading and passed by the following votes, this the __ day of ,2005, at a regular session of the City Council. Euline Brock, Mayor, voting ~ Joe Mulroy, Council Member, voting __ pete Kamp, Council Member, voting ~ Perry McNeill, Council Member, voting __ Bob Montgomery, Council Member voting __ Raymond Redmon, Council Member, voting __ Jack Thomson, Council Member, voting_ of ACCEPTANCE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, did on the__ ,2005 enact an Ordinance entitled: ORDiNANCE NO. day AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS GRANTING A CABLE FRANCHISE TO THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS TO CONSTRUCT, RECONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND SETTING FORTH CONDITIONS ACCOMPANYING THE GRANTING OF THIS CABLE FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECT OF THIS ORDINANCE UPON OTHER ORDiNANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, said Ordinance was on the __ day of ., 2005 duly approved and subscribed by the Mayor of said City, and the seal of said City was thereto affixed and attested to by the City Secretary; NOW, THEREFORE, the University of North Texas, hereby in all respects ACCEPTS, APPROVES AND AGREES TO said Ordinance, and the same shall constitute and be a binding contractual obligation of the University of North Texas, and of the City, without waiver of any other remedy by the University of North Texas, does hereby file this, its written acceptance, with the City Secretary of the City of Denton, Texas, in her office. DATED this the day of ., 2005. The University of North Texas By: Title: ATTEST: By: Title: ATTACHMENT A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AND THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS (UNT) March 1, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE, PART I .............................................................. 5 SECTION I. TITLE ............................................................................................................ 5 SECTION II. PREAMBLE ................................................................................................. 5 SECTION III. DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................ 5 SECTION IV. CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ......................... 6 SECTION V. POLICE POWER ......................................................................................... 6 SECTION VI. SYSTEM TIMETABLE ............................................................................. 7 SECTION VII. IDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE ................................................ 9 SECTION VIII. COMPLAINT PROCEDURE .................................................................. 9 SECTION IX. SECTION X. SECTION XI. SECTION XII. SECTION XIII. SECTION XIV. SECTION XV. SECTION XVI. SECTION XVII. SECTION XVIII. SECTION XIX. SECTION XX. SECTION XXI. SECTION XXII. CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................ 10 CONSTRUCTION AND EXTENSION .................................................... 11 CONSTRUCTION BOND REQUIRED .................................................. 11 GOVERNING LAW ............................................................................... 12 CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT TERM ............. 12 RENEWAL PROCEDURE ................................................................... 12 PERFORMANCE REVIEW ................................................................... 12 SECURITY FUND/FULL FAITH and CREDIT of the STATE .......... 12 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ................................................................. 13 FORFEITURE ..................................................................................... 14 TRANSFERS ......................................................................................... 15 FRANCHISE FEE ................................................................................... 15 RATES ................................................................................................... 16 ACCESS TO SERVICES AND FACILITIES ..................................... 16 SECTION XXIII. SECTION XXIV. SECTION XXV. SECTION XXVI. SECTION XXVII. SECTION XXVIII. SECTION XXIX. SECTION XXX. SECTION XXXI. SECTION XXXII. EMERGENCY OVERRIDE ............................................................... 18 PROGRAMMING MIX ..................................................................... 18 FORCE MAJEURE .............................................................................. 19 NOTICES ............................................................................................ 19 SAVINGS CLAUSE ......................................................................... 20 CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ............... 20 FEES AND COSTS ............................................................................ 20 PAYMENT OF TAXES ....................................................................... 21 NON-LIABILITY ............................................................................... 21 WAIVERS ......................................................................................... 21 SECTION XXXIII. COMPLIANCE REQUIRMENTS ...................................................21 SECTION XXXIV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS ........................................................ 22 PART I. EXHIBIT A. UNT CHANNELS RECOMMENDED LINEUP ........................ 23 CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, PART II ............................... 24 SECTION I ........................................................................................................................ 24 SECTION II ....................................................................................................................... 24 SECTION III. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS .......................................................... 24 SECTION IV. CONFLICT ................................................................................................ 24 PART II. Exhibit A .......................................................................................................... 25 CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, PART III ............................. 31 2. 3. 4. 5. Covenants Binding ................................................................................................. 31 Customer Service ................................................................................................... 31 Validity of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement ......................................... 31 The Cable Television Franchise Agreement for Cable Only ................................. 31 Access to Records .................................................................................................. 31 ii o 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. PART iii. EXHIBIT A. Cable Modem, High-Speed Data and Internet Services ........................................ 31 Notification of Rate Increases ................................................................................ 32 Other Matters ......................................................................................................... 32 Institutional Network ............................................................................................. 33 HDTV .................................................................................................................... 36 Leased Access and PEG Channels ......................................................................... 37 Transfer .................................................................................................................. 37 Definitions .............................................................................................................. 38 Compliance Requirements ..................................................................................... 39 Fees and Costs ........................................................................................................ 40 Approval and Acceptance ...................................................................................... 40 Customer Service and Consumer Protection ...................... 41 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Customer Service Standards .................................................................................. 41 Pay Per View .......................................................................................................... 41 Notification ............................................................................................................ 41 Notice of Changes .................................................................................................. 41 Complaint Procedures ............................................................................................ 42 General ................................................................................................................... 42 Telephone Service Standards ................................................................................. 43 Office ..................................................................................................................... 44 Installation Standards ............................................................................................. 44 Installations/Service Calls: ..................................................................................... 44 Service Call Charges .............................................................................................. 45 Service Interruptions: ............................................................................................. 45 Log of Complaints ................................................................................................. 45 iii 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. Bills ........................................................................................................................ 46 Refunds and Credits ............................................................................................... 46 Late Payment for Cable Service ............................................................................ 47 Disconnection ........................................................................................................ 47 Truth In Advertising .............................................................................................. 48 Reports: .................................................................................................................. 48 FCC Technical Standards ...................................................................................... 49 Liquidated Damages - Customer, Service Calls .................................................... 50 Liquidated Damages - Other .................................................................................. 51 Procedure for Assessment of Liquidated Damages ............................................... 51 Payment of Liquidated Damages ........................................................................... 52 Ombudsman ........................................................................................................... 52 City Liaison: ........................................................................................................... 52 Definitions: ............................................................................................................ 52 iv CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT PART I. SECTION T. TITLE. This ordinance shall be known and may be cited as "Cable Television Franchise Agreement." SECTION TT. PREAMBLE. This ordinance was passed after a full, open and public hearing upon prior notice and opportunity of all imerested parties to be heard and upon consideration of the University of North Texas' qualifications, including its legal, financial and technical qualifications. SECTION TTT. DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of Parts T, TT and TTT of this ordinance, and when not inconsistem with comext, words used herein in the present tense include the future, the word "shall" is always mandatory. The captions supplied herein for each section are for convenience only. Said captions have no force of law, are not part of the section, and are not to be used in construing the language of the section. The following terms and phrases, as used herein, shall be given the meanings set forth below: "Cable Ordinance" shall mean Chapter 8 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas. (2) "City" is the CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Texas. (3) "City Council" is the City Council of the CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, or its designated representatives. (4) "Gramee," "University" or "UNT" means the University of North Texas existing under the laws of the State of Texas, duly qualified and authorized to do business in the State of Texas, and it is the grantee of rights under this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. (5) "Campus" shall mean the land and property of the University of North Texas, located within the City of DeNon. (6) "UNT Facilities" shall mean housing units and other buildings owned by the University of North Texas. (7) "End Poim Connection" shall mean a cable wall outlet used to provide cable services under this agreement. (8) "User" means a person (or in some instances, a location) who receives programming from the cable system, similar to a subscriber to a for profit cable system. As used in this document, a word shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 8 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas (hereinafter, the "Cable Ordinance") at Section 8-2, unless it is apparent from the context that it has a different meaning, or unless such word is specifically defined herein. The term "Gramee" shall refer to the University of North Texas and its successors hereunder. SECTION IV. CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. There is hereby grained by the City to gramee a Cable Television Franchise Agreemem with the right and privilege to construct, reconstruct, erect, operate and maintain, in, upon, along, across, above, over or under the streets, alleys, easemems, public ways and public places now laid out or dedicated and all extensions thereof and additions thereto in the City, all poles, wires, cables, underground conduits, manholes and other conductors and fixtures necessary for the maintenance and operation in the City of a cable television system for the transmission of television signals and other signals, either separately or upon or in conjunctions with any public utility maimaining the same in the City, with all of the necessary and desirable appliances and appurtenances pertaining thereto. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem shall and does hereby include the right in, over, under, and upon streets, sidewalks, alleys, easemems, and public grounds and places in the City to install, erect, operate or in any way acquire the use of, as by leasing or licensing, all lines and equipmem necessary to the grantee's cable system and the right to make connections to UNT Facilities and the right to repair, replace, enlarge and extend said lines, equipment and connections. SECTION V. POLICE POWER. Grantee shall, at all times during the term of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, be subject to all lawful exercise of the police power of the City. The right is hereby reserved to the City to adopt, in addition to the provisions herein comained and any other existing applicable ordinances, such additional applicable ordinances as it shall find necessary in the exercise of its police power; provided that such additional ordinances shall be reasonable, shall not substantially or materially conflict with or alter in any manner the rights granted herein, and shall not conflict with the laws of the State of Texas, the laws of the United States of America, or the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. All terms, conditions, and provisions of the Cable Ordinance shall be deemed to be embodied in this Agreemem and gramee does hereby agree to comply with the terms of said Ordinance while this Cable Television Franchise Agreement is in effect. SECTION VI. SYSTEM TIMETABLE. (a) Within the time period specified in (b) of this section, the grantee shall have completely constructed a Cable System which has the capability of delivering at least sixty (60) video channels over at least 860 MHZ Cable bandwidth (the "Cable System") and the grantee shall use its best efforts to maximize usage of such capacity with non-duplicated video channels. (b) The grantee shall exercise its best good faith efforts to expedite construction of the Cable System as required in subsection above in a sound and economical manner. Subject to the provisions of Section XXV (Force Majeure) hereof, grantee shall meet the following schedule: Submission of all applications for authorizations necessary for construction of the Cable System on or before February 22, 2006. (2) Securing all authorizations necessary to begin initial construction of the Cable System on or before February 22, 2006. (3) The Cable System shall have the capability to transmit video in one direction. (4) Grantee shall have completed the installation of alternative (standby) power sources at the headend on or before February 4, 2006. Thereafter, grantee shall maintain such power sources so that all Cable System and work lines and sub-stations may be maintained at full power for at least two (2) hours beyond the time when normal power sources serving the Cable System have ceased. (5) Grantee shall provide the capability for insertion of video programming and other video, voice and data messages into the Cable System from the following points in the City or other locations mutually agreed upon by the City and the grantee: Municipal Building, 215 E. McKinney; Central Fire Station, 332 E. Hickory; Service Center, 901 Texas Street; Police Station, 601 E. Hickory; Library, 502 Oakland; Library 3020 N. Locust; Library, 3228 Teasley Lane and Civic Center, 321 E. McKinney. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (6) In addition to the above-designated point for insertion of video programming and other video, voice and data messages into the Cable System described above, grantee shall provide a central insertion point for the Cable System within the City, which shall be one of the points described above and which shall include signal switching and processing equipment as is reasonably required to allow those utilizing the insertion points listed above to transmit to the other insertion points of the Cable System, or to transmit to all Users, at the City's option. Prior to designating the central insertion point for the Cable System within the City, grantee shall obtain the prior written consent of the City Manager to such designation. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requiremems) are met. (7) Gramee shall provide and maimain five access channels as follows: (a) A local govemmem channel to be administered by the City or its designee. (b) An education channel to be administered by the DeNon Independent School District or its designee (c) A higher education channel to be administered by Texas Woman's University or its designee. (d) A higher education channel to be administered by the University of North Texas or its designee. (e) A public access channel. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requiremems) are met. (8) Grantee shall provide and maintain at its expense all lines, facilities and equipmem (such as modulators and coders/decoders) necessary for it to receive access programming at each of the studios for the five access channels described above and simultaneously distribute such programming on the cable system. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requiremems) are met. (9) Unless otherwise agreed by City in writing, the local govemmem channel shall be on channel 26; the education channel shall be on channel 24; the higher education channel for Texas Woman's University shall be on channel 23; the higher education channel for the University of North Texas shall be on channel 22; and the public access channel shall be on channel 25. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requiremems) are met. (c) The gramee has submitted its drawings and specifications for the Cable System to the City. The City assumes no liability or responsibility whatsoever for the design or construction of the Cable System by virtue of its receipt of such drawings and specifications, it being understood that the City's approval of such drawings and specifications shall not be required. The gramee has also submitted a detailed plan of action for the accomplishmem of the Cable System, including, without limitation, a timeline which will permit the City to monitor the grantee's progress toward completing the Cable System in a timely fashion. SECTION VII. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. UNT shall possess and use the right of way for cable services at UNT's sole risk. Neither UNT, nor Denton, shall have any obligation to indemnify the other party hereto in the case of any loss or liability arising from the use of the right of way for cable services. SECTION VIII. COMPLAINT PROCEDURE. 1. GraNee shall provide several local offices open 24 hours per day as follows: A. UNT will take User service complaints at either the front desk of a residence hall or at a centralized location in Crumley Hall ("CeNralized Location"). Either the residence hall front desk or the Centralized Location, which shall act as general User service centers, shall be staffed twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. B. Users needing service will report such need to either the front desk or the Centralized Location. The staff member working the desk or the CeNralized Location will log such request in the work order log book and will also send the work order electronically to UNT Housing MaiNenance DepartmeN (940-565-4711) where the order will be priNed out. Orders shall be generally worked within 24 hours with the exception of weekends when the order would be worked the following Monday. UNT Housing MaiNenance will check first for issues with the coaxial cable, the connectors, or the User's TV set. C. Users may pick up and drop off any converters, remotes or other Grantee supplied equipment at either the front desks or the Centralized Location twenty-four hours per day, 7 days per week. 2. Complain procedure A. Users who believe they have not received timely or adequate service can return to either the front desk or the Centralized Location and report such whereupon the staff shall contact the Administrative Services Officer. Users can also contact this staff member directly or UNT's Director of Housing. Users will be advised of the complain procedure at least once per year in writing and will be informed as to whether the front desk of their residence hall or the Centralized Location should be used. B. If the operator of the satellite system providing signals to the Cable System does not provide a clear signal, complains in that regard shall be referred to such operator who shall immediately correct same. 3. General mo UNT employees who eNer User rooms for work requests will wear ideNifying badges and will leave a notice of eNry slip to record their time, date, and purpose of entry. Users do not have to be in their rooms for the workers to enter. B. UNT Housing will give advance notice to Users as a courtesy any time the system is taken down for emergency maintenance or repairs to the entire system. It is anticipated that routine maintenance will be done during summers and holidays so Users' service generally will not be interrupted. C. UNT Housing will train desk staff regularly on expected service standards. D. Grantee shall, not less than once a year, provide information to Users on the Cable System with a complete list of service offerings, options, prices (if applicable), credit policies and procedures for Users to address service complaints associated with the Cable System. 4. Telephone service. A. Grantee shall establish and maintain sufficient telephone lines and personnel so as to not delay unreasonably the answering of all telephone calls. The City, upon receipt of documented complaints from more than ten Users during a single business day between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. regarding their inability to reach a live, personal representative of grantee during non-emergency, non-system outage periods, may seek liquidated damages as provided in Section 8-128 of the Cable Ordinance. SECTION IX. CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE. (a) All structures, lines and equipment erected by grantee within the City shall be so located as to cause minimum interference with the proper use of streets, alleys, easements, and other public ways and places and to cause minimum interference with the rights or reasonable convenience of property owners, and grantee shall comply with all reasonable, proper and lawful ordinances of the City now or hereafter in force. Existing poles, posts, conduits, and other such structures of any electric power system, telephone company, or other public utility located in the City shall, when possible, be made available to grantee for leasing or licensing upon reasonable terms and rates and shall be used to the extent practicable in order to minimize interference with travel and avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities. Poles owned by City shall be made available to grantee for its use under the terms, conditions and provisions of a separate Pole Rental Agreement to be negotiated between the parties. (b) Grantee shall not open or disturb the surface of any street, sidewalk, driveway or public place that is not owned by grantee for any purpose without first having obtained a permit to do so in accordance with the applicable ordinances, including, but not limited to, Chapter 21 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, except that grantee shall not be required to post a bond prior to commencing such disturbance. Grantee specifically agrees to pay any fees in connection herewith required by applicable City Ordinances. In case of any disturbance by the grantee of City-owned pavements, sidewalk, driveway, or other surfacing, grantee shall, at its own cost and expense and in a manner approved by the City, replace and restore all paving, sidewalk, driveway or surface so disturbed in as good condition as before said work was commenced. 10 (c) In the event that at any time during the period of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement the City shall elect to alter or change any City-owned street, alley, easement, or other public way requiring the relocation of grantee's facilities, then in such event, grantee, upon reasonable notice from the City, shall remove, relay, and relocate the same at its own expense. (d) Grantee shall, on the request of any person holding a building moving permit issued by the City, temporarily raise or lower its lines to permit the moving of the building. The expense of such temporary removal shall be paid by the person requesting the same, and grantee shall have the authority to require such payment in advance. (e) All poles, lines, structure or other facilities owned by grantee in, on, over and under the streets, sidewalks, alleys and easements and public grounds or places of the City shall be kept by grantee at all times in a safe and substantial condition. SECTION X. CONSTRUCTION AND EXTENSION. (a) Grantee has submitted a construction plan that includes system design details, equipment, specifications and design performance criteria. The plan also includes a map of the entire authorized areas of service and the mandated areas of service, and the dates by which service will be provided to each area. The areas within the authorized area where the cable system is currently available, including a schedule of construction for each year that construction or reconstruction is proposed. (b) In regards to the mandated areas of service, grantee does not intend to provide cable services outside of the UNT Campus. If grantee desires to provide cable service outside of the UNT Campus, within the City of Denton, grantee shall be required to receive permission from the City of Denton prior to providing any cable service outside of the UNT Campus, and this agreement shall be amended to reflect the terms and conditions of the provision of cable service by grantee. (c) Nothing in this section shall prevent the grantee from constructing or reconstructing the system earlier than planned. However, any delay in the system construction beyond the times specified in the plan report timetable must be submitted to and approved by the City Council. (d) Grantee shall construct, install, operate and maintain its system in a manner consistent with any construction standards submitted by grantee as a part of its application. Consistent with State law, grantee agrees to comply with applicable codes, and any supplements or amendments thereto, including any codes referenced in its application. SECTION XI. CONSTRUCTION BOND REQUIRED. Construction Bond shall not be required. The City recognizes the full faith and credit of the State of Texas as sufficient for the construction bond required. 11 SECTION XII. GOVERNING LAW. To the extent applicable to grantee, this Cable Television Franchise Agreement is governed by and subject to all applicable provisions of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended through 1996; regulations promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant thereto prior to acceptance by grantee of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement as provided in Part III, Section 26; as well as the laws of the State of Texas, not inconsistent therewith. SECTION XIII. CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT TERM. This Cable Television Franchise Agreemem shall take effect and be in full force from and after acceptance by grantee as provided in Part III, Section 26, and the same shall continue in full force and effect umil four (4) years from the effective date. Notwithstanding the foregoing, gramee reserves the right to terminate this Agreemem without penalty with sixty (60) days written notice to the City if grantee ceases to provide cable services under this Agreement, or in accordance with applicable laws. SECTION XIV. RENEWAL PROCEDURE. This Cable Television Franchise Agreemem shall be subject to renewal in accordance with the terms and conditions of Section 626 of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, 47 U.S.C. 546, as amended through 1996. SECTION XV. PERFORMANCE REVIEW. The parties agree that the City shall have the right to conduct a performance evaluation with the grantee and the Users relating to this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. The grantee agrees to incur the costs of the evaluation and the City's ascertainment of the current cable-related needs and interests of the Users; provided, however, that the total payment by the gramee shall not exceed Twenty-Five Thousand ($25,000.00) Dollars. This sum shall be adjusted on the basis of the proportion that the then all Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) for the Dallas/Fort Worth Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area bears. The City shall provide grantee with the names of three nationally recognized independent cable television consulting firms and the grantee, together with the City, shall select one of the three consultants to perform the evaluation. Grantee agrees that such costs are in addition to and not to be deducted from the franchise fees due the City. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requiremems) are met. SECTION XVI. SECURITY FUND/FULL FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE STATE. (a) UNT shall not be required to pay to DeNon a security deposit. The City recognizes the full faith and credit of the State of Texas as security under this agreemem. (b) To the extem allowed by applicable law, the City Manager may make demand upon the State of Texas in the event of any of the occurrences set forth in this Section and in 12 Section 8-128 (Liquidated Damages), of Chapter 8, Cable Television, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Demon, Texas. Within ten (10) days after notice to it that any amoum has been withdrawn or paid out, as is appropriate, from the security fund deposited pursuam to subdivision (a) of this section in accordance with Section 8-128 (Liquidated Damages). (c) Examples of a basis for drawing upon the security fund include, but are not limited to the following: (1) failure of the grantee to pay to the City any taxes after a written notice of delinquency in accordance with the prompt payment act. (2) failure of the grantee to pay to the City after a written notice on any amoums due and owing the City by reason of the indemnity provision in accordance with the prompt payment act. (3) failure by the gramee to pay to the City, any liquidated damages due and owing to the City pursuant to Section 8-128 of Chapter 8, Cable Television, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas; (4) failure by the grantee to pay to the City any amounts due pursuant to Section 8-57(g) of the Chapter 8, Cable Television, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas; (5) failure by the grantee to pay, after a written notice, any amounts owing as franchise fees pursuam to this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, in accordance with the prompt payment act. (d) The rights reserved to the City with respect to making demand upon the State are in addition to all other rights of the City whether reserved by this comract or authorized by law, and no action, proceeding or exercise of a right with respect to such security fund shall affect any other right the City may have. SECTION XVII. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. To the extem allowed by law, the parties agree to the liquidated damages specified in Section 8-128, Liquidated Damages of Chapter 8, Cable Television, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas, as adopted on the 1st day of November, 1988, but without prejudice to any other remedies available to the parties hereto to the extent permitted by law. The parties agree that the liquidated damages set forth in the ordinance may be greater or less than the City's actual damages and such damages represent the best estimate by the parties hereto as the likely extent of such damages. The liquidated damages are not intended to constitute a penalty, but rather, are designed to save the parties from having to engage in costly litigation with regard to the extent of such damages. In addition to the amounts set forth in the Cable Ordinance, the following liquidated damages shall apply: 13 (a) per day. For breach of any service standards adopted pursuant to Section VIII, hereof $200 (b) If the City Manager determines that the grantee is liable for liquidated damages, he shall issue to the grantee by certified mail a notice of intention to assess liquidated damages. The notice shall set forth the basis for the assessment, and shall inform the grantee that liquidated damages will be assessed from the date of the notice unless the assessment notice is appealed for hearing before the City Council. If the grantee desires a hearing before the City Council, it shall send a written notice of appeal by certified mail to the City Manager within ten (10) days of the date on which the City sent the notice of intention to assess liquidated damages. In the event the City Manager receives such a notice from the grantee, the hearing on the grantee's appeal shall be held within thirty (30) days of the date on which the City sent the notice of intention to assess liquidated damages unless mutually extended by the City and the grantee. After such hearing, and based on the facts before it, if the City Council finds (a) that an extension of time or other relief should be granted, or (b) that there was never a violation, then it shall waive the City Manager's assessment of liquidated damages. If the City finds that the facts warrant the assessment of liquidated damages, or any portion thereof, the City may at any time thereafter draw the amount of liquid damages from the security fund established pursuant to Section 8-128 of the Cable Ordinance up to the full amount of accrued liquidated damages to such date. In considering whether or not to waive all or a portion of any liquidated damages assessable against the grantee hereunder, the City shall consider, without limitation, the number, frequency and magnitude of any prior breaches of this Agreement by the grantee and the speed with which the grantee cured breach or breaches. SECTION XVIII. FORFEITURE. If grantee should violate any of the terms, conditions or provisions of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement or if grantee should fail to comply with any reasonable provisions of any ordinance of the City regulating the use by grantee of the streets, alleys, easement or public ways of the City, and should grantee further continue to violate or fail to comply with the same for a period of thirty (30) days after grantee shall have been notified in writing by the City to cease and desist from any such violation or failure to comply so specified, then grantee may be deemed to have forfeited and annulled and shall thereby forfeit and annul all the rights and privileges granted by this Cable Television Franchise Agreement; provided, that such forfeiture shall be declared only by written decision of the City Council after following the procedures set forth in Section 8-59 of the Cable Ordinance and an appropriate public proceeding before the City Council affording grantee due process and full opportunity to be heard and to respond to any such notice of violation or failure to comply; and provided further that the City Council may, in its discretion and upon a finding of violation or failure to comply, impose a lesser penalty than forfeiture of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement or excuse the violation or failure to comply upon a showing by grantee of mitigating circumstances. Grantee shall have the right to appeal any finding of violation or failure to comply and any resultant penalty to or seek relief in any court of competent jurisdiction. In the event of any determination by the City to revoke this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, such a determination shall be stayed during the pendancy of any judicial review thereof. 14 SECTION XIX. TRANSFERS. All of the rights and privileges and all of the obligations, duties, and liabilities created by this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem shall pass to and be binding upon the successors of the City and the successors and assigns of gramee; and the same shall not be assigned or transferred without the prior written approval of the City Council, which approval shall be sought and obtained in accordance with Section 8-62 of Chapter 8, Cable Television, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas. While this Cable Franchise Agreemem is in effect, gramee specifically agrees to comply with the provisions of said Section 8-62 of Chapter 8, Cable Television, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas. SECTION XX. FRANCHISE FEE. In consideration of the terms of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, effective twenty-one days after final approval, and when the cable system is activated, grantee agrees to pay to the City a sum of money as a franchises fee as described herein. In order to ensure that this Franchise is competitive neutral and not discriminatory as to other cable operators in the City, the City requires, and the gramee agrees, the gramee shall pay a franchise fee equal to $0.455 per momh per each End Poim Connection providing service during the term of this Franchise. The gramee shall pay to the City the franchise fee as calculated in accordance with this section in quarterly installmems within forty-five (45) days after March 30, June 30, September 30 and December 31 of each year the franchise fee attributable to the preceding quarter. Included with such payment will be a report on the number of End Point Connections providing service on a momhly basis by street address and room number. Such franchise fee is a 5% fee based upon a presem estimated retail value of the cable services of $9.10 per End Poim Connection when provided in bulk. The $0.455 charge is 5% of the retail bulk value of the cable services provided by the gramee. Further the City may adjust the franchise fee no more than once every two years to reflect any increases in the charges for such services by the other cable providers in the City providing similar services with 30 days' notice to grantee. In the event the grantee provides additional services, the City reserves the right to reasonably estimate the retail market value of those services based upon the rates of the gramee and other cable providers in the City of similar services and adjust this franchise fee to be 5% of the value of those services accordingly with 30 days' notice to Grantee. Examples of such services includes, but is not limited to the following: (a) Revenue from all charges for services provided to Users of emertainmem and nonentertainment services, including leased access fees; (b) Revenue from all charges for the insertion of commercial advertisemems, including but not limited to launch fees, upon the cable system; and (c) Revenue from all charges for the installation, connection and reinstatement of equipment necessary for the utilization of the cable system and the provision of User and other services. 15 SECTION XXI. RATES. The grantee shall not charge a fee for cable services to the Users of the cable system separate from the fees it charges for housing. If applicable and to the extent permitted by federal and state law, the City may regulate the following rates, fees and charges: (a) (b) (c) Rates for the provision of basic cable service to Users whether residential or commercial, including multiple tiers of basic cable service. Rates for the initial installation or the rental of one set of the minimum equipment, which is necessary for the Users' receipt of basic cable service. Any other rates for any type of services delivered by the grantee that may become subject to local regulation. SECTION XXII. ACCESS TO SERVICES AND FACILITIES. Grantee shall provide the minimum range of services required from time to time by the FCC as its regulations presently exist or may hereafter be amended including, without limiting the foregoing, public, educational and governmental use channels in accordance with the following conditions: (a) Grantee shall provide and maintain five channels for public programming, educational programming and governmental programming as set forth in Sections VI (b)(7) and VI (b)(8) above. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (b) The public access channel described in Section VI (b)(7)(e) above shall be made available for non-commercial use to qualifying applicants without charge when requested all in accordance with the rules hereinafter mentioned. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (c) Rules shall be established by the cooperative effort of City and the grantee regarding access programming, priority of use for the access channel, prohibition of lottery information, obscene or indecent matter, and permitting public inspection of the complete record of names and addresses of all persons or groups requesting access time. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (d) Should a dispute arise between the user of an access channel and the grantee relative to the quality of the audio or visual signal, at the request of either, the dispute will be submitted to an independent engineer to be jointly selected by City and grantee. The party requesting that such testing be performed shall be required to pay for the cost of testing and analysis performed by the engineer, unless the engineer shall find that there is a distortion of signal quality. If a distortion is found, the party responsible for causing the distortion shall pay the cost of testing. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. 16 (e) Subject to Section 8-101 of the Cable Ordinance, the grantee agrees to provide reasonable equipment to be used by access cable casters with the aid of a technical and production staff to be provided by the cable operator. Equipment that can store programs for later showing shall be provided. In addition, grantee shall make available a centrally located studio to all access users on a first-come, first-serve basis. Grantee shall provide, at a minimum, the production equipment and facilities designated in "Part I, Exhibit B." All equipment shall be maintained in good working order by grantee and shall be replaced as needed, consistent with good operating practice. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (f) Grantee agrees to maintain a local programming studio and shall provide adequate staffing and equipment for the local programming studio, and for training of the public in the use of production equipment. Grantee shall keep a log of inquiries by citizens requesting such training and shall conduct free training sessions in use of cablecasting equipment cablecasting techniques not less than once each three months during the term hereof. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (g) Grantee also agrees to provide an instructor and the facilities to train, without charge, once per year, potential access users through sessions offered through the Denton Independent School District. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (h) Grantee shall establish rules and rates if necessary, to ensure that the studio is available in an equitable manner provided that grantee shall not, charge for use of the public and educational access channels unless City has approved the charging of the proposed. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (i) As required by applicable law, the parties hereby incorporate by reference the provisions of 47 U.S.C. 532. Applicable provisions are incorporated herein to assure that the widest possible diversity of information sources are made available to User from the Cable System in a manner consistent with the growth and development of the Cable System. User may add additional cable channels to the Cable System in order to comply with the requirements of 47 U.S.C. 532 (j) Grantee shall undertake any and all construction installation necessary to keep current with the latest technological and economically feasible developments in the state-of-the- art for cable television, whether with respect to increasing channel capacity, developing new services, and instituting two-way service or any other state-of-the-art technology. Further, grantee specifically agrees to comply with Section 8-163 of the Cable Ordinance. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. 17 SECTION XXIII. EMERGENCY OVERRIDE. Grantee shall provide and maintain the equipment necessary for the City to maintain an emergency alert system to override, by any telephonic means, the audio and/or video signal to transmit a message regarding a bona fide emergency over all cable video channels simultaneously. At City's option such message shall be transmitted either by a text crawl across the bottom of the screen or by audio override and video blanking on all channels. For telephonic activation of the emergency alert system, grantee shall provide City with the ability to activate the system from any telephone but with an appropriate security code and procedures. Grantee shall provide appropriate training to City personnel as may be necessary to operate the systems, equipment and facilities described in this Section. Grantee shall designate a channel, which will be used for emergency broadcasts. Grantee shall provide a remote data terminal, telephone lines, modems, cables and any other items needed to adequately supply this service. Such equipment shall be maintained at a location designated by City. SECTION XXIV. PROGRAMMING MIX. (a) Grantee agrees to provide programming that at least substantially maintains the mix of distinct and separate channels listed in Exhibit A. In accordance with the Cable Act, the grantee shall, for the term of this Agreement, substantially maintain at least the mix, quality and level of programming set forth in Exhibit A. (b) In addition to the programming mix indicated above, grantee will use the upgraded system to provide a wide range and assortment of optional programming services. Grantee shall provide, at a minimum, the following additional services: provision of an additional full channel space for films and cultural entertainment programming; (2) provision of an additional full channel space for children's entertainment programming; (3) addition of a full channel space for documentary, public broadcasting programming; (4) addition of a full channel space devoted to weather information service; (5) addition of a Pay-Per-View Channel. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requirements) are met. (c) Grantee agrees to produce a minimum of 400 hours of local origination programming annually including but not limited to NTTV productions. 18 SECTION XXV. FORCE MAJEURE. In the event the grantee's diligent performance of any of the terms, conditions, obligations or requirements of this agreement is prevented or impaired due to any cause beyond its reasonable comrol which was not reasonably foreseeable to the parties hereto, such inability to perform shall be deemed to be excused for the period of such impairmem, and no penalties or sanctions shall be imposed. Before invoking this section, the grantee must have exercised good faith in attempting to perform such terms, conditions, obligations or requirements. Causes beyond the grantee's reasonable control and not reasonably foreseeable to the parties hereto shall include, without limitation, labor unrest and strikes. Upon its best good faith efforts to obtain all authorizations on an expedited basis, the gramee shall also be excused for time delays in construction requirements in Section VI which are caused by unreasonable delays on the part of utility companies or the City in issuing licenses, permits or authorizations for poles and conduits or other authorizations necessary to continue construction. Where the grantee cannot obtain access to any individual's property, after due diligence and a good faith effort by the gramee to obtain access to such property, compliance with the terms of this agreemem shall be excused by the City as to that individual and the consequemial effects thereof only, and only for such period as the property is inaccessible. Where the cause beyond the gramee's comrol is either an act of God or civil emergency, an inability to perform during such period shall not be an independem ground for termination of this agreement. SECTION XXVI. NOTICES. All notices, statements, demands, requests, consents, approvals, authorizations, offers, agreemems, appoimmems or designations hereunder by any party to another shall be in writing and shall be sufficiemly given and served upon the other party, immediately if delivered personally or by telex or telecopy (provided with respect to telex and telecopy that such transmissions are received on a business day during normal business hours), on the second business day after dispatch if sent by first class mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: The City: City Manager City of DeNon, Texas 215 E. McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 Public Information Officer City of DeNon, Texas 215 E. McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 City Attorney City of DeNon, Texas 215 E. McKinney Street Denton, Texas 76201 19 The Grantee: University of North Texas Office of the Vice Presidem of Finance and Business Affairs P.O. Box 310500 Demon, TX 76203 SECTION XXVII. SAVINGS CLAUSE. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a federal or state court or administrative or governmemal agency of competem jurisdiction, specifically including the Federal Communications Commission, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independem provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. SECTION XXVIII. CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. In the event of any conflict between the terms of Parts I, II, and III this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem, Part II of this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem (including exhibits thereto) shall prevail over Part I, and Part III of this Cable Televison Franchise Agreement (including exhibits thereto) shall prevail over Parts I and II. In the evem of any conflict between the terms of this Cable Televison Franchise Agreemem and any City Ordinance, that provision which provides the greatest benefit to the City, in the opinion of the City Council, shall prevail, subject to the Reservation of Rights in Part I, Section XXXIV. SECTION XXIX. FEES AND COSTS. (a) The gramee shall provide to the City a lump sum gram of $4,000 for capital facilities for the PEG Channels on the dates and in the amoums set forth below. City shall allocate such grants among the entities administering the PEG Channels as it determines is in the public imerest. The gram will be paid upon acceptance of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement by the grantee. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part I, Section XXXIII (Compliance Requiremems) are met. (b) The gramee will reimburse the City all its costs, which exceed the initial $5,000, in association with the preparation and award of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, including publication costs and costs of consultants and attorneys, not to exceed $1,500. In addition, the grantee will reimburse the City all its costs in association with the preparation and award of a Cable Television Franchise Agreemem Renewal, including publication costs and costs of consultants and attorneys. The preceding reimbursement requirement applies whether a Cable Television Franchise Agreemem is executed. (c) The gramee will remit its check for such costs within thirty (30) days of the City invoicing the grantee for same. Reimbursement of costs under this provision shall not be considered a paymem of franchise fees, shall not reduce the franchise fee otherwise payable and shall not be passed through to Users. Grantee specifically waives any claim to the contrary. 20 SECTION XXX. PAYMENT OF TAXES. If required by law, the grantee covenants and agrees that it will pay and discharge, or cause to be paid and discharged, in timely fashion all payments in lieu of taxes, service charges, assessments, utility fees, user fees and other governmental charges which may lawfully be imposed upon the grantee with respect to the grantee or the cable system or any portion thereof or relating thereto, or upon the revenues and income therefrom and will pay all lawful claims for labor, material and supplies which, if unpaid, might become a lien or charge upon any of said properties, revenues or income or which might impair the security interest granted by this agreement or the value of the cable system or the grantee; provided that nothing in this section shall require the grantee to make any such payment so long as the grantee in good faith shall contest the validity thereof. SECTION XXXI. NON-LIABILITY. The City shall not be liable to the grantee or any other person or entity for death or personal injury or for loss, damage or destruction of property in, on or about the cable system or any part thereof by or from any cause whatsoever other than the City's own negligence or willful misconduct, nor shall the City be liable in any way or regard to the grantee or to any of grantee's affiliates, officers, directors, members, agents or employees if any claim is asserted against the grantee by any taxing authority or other entity as the result of any election or decision which the grantee may make or may have made with respect to the cable system for purposes of filing federal or state income or franchise tax returns or making any other type of filing whatsoever. SECTION XXXII. WAIVERS. No waiver by either Party hereto of any breach, default or violation of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by grantee shall be construed to be or act as a waiver of any subsequent default of any of such terms, covenants and conditions. SECTION XXXIII. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS When grantee's cable End Point Connections exceed Five Thousand (5,000) within the City of Denton, the grantee will be required to comply with the below listed sections, or parts of sections, upon request from the City. Section VI, SYSTEM TIMETABLE, (b), (5), (6), (7) (8) and (9). Section XV, PERFORMANCE REVIEW. Section XXII, ACCESS TO SERVICES AND FACILITIES, (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (j). Section XXIV, PROGRAMMING MIX, (b). Section XXIX, FEES AND COSTS, (a). 21 SECTION XXXIV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS (a) Submission of an application for a cable franchise and acceptance of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement by the grantee, does not waive any rights, privileges and immunities grantee has, in law or in equity, as a public university authorized to operate under Chapter 105 of the Texas Education Code and operating as an arm of the State of Texas. Further, in submitting the application for a franchise, accepting the award of a franchise from the City, and entering into this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, grantee is neither expressly nor implicitly consenting to the jurisdiction of the City or to its ordinances notwithstanding any contrary term or clause included in this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. In the event of a contradiction between this contractual provision and any other contractual provision included herein, this provision shall take precedence. (b) Grantee reserves the right to contest the applicability of the City's Charter and any or all of its ordinances in the future and also specifically reserves the right to contest the premise that it is required to obtain a franchise from the City. In submitting an application for a cable franchise and entering into this Cable Television Franchise Agreement under protest, grantee is not in any way conceding or establishing a precedent that would make City Ordinances applicable to grantee as a public university authorized to operate under Chapter 105 of the Texas Education Code and operating as an arm of the State of Texas and this application should not be construed in such a manner by any party. Such interpretation is expressly denied by grantee and the University of North Texas System. (c) Although Grantee may contest the applicability of the City Charter or the premise that it is required to obtain a franchise from the City, Grantee shall comply with this Cable Television Franchise Agreement unless and until relieved of the obligation to do so by order of a court of competent jurisdiction, FCC regulation, rule or order, state or federal law, regulation or rule, Texas Attorney General's opinion. Grantee shall notify the City in writing if Grantee is relieved by order of a court of competent jurisdiction, FCC regulation, rule or order, state or federal law, regulation or rule, Texas Attorney General's opinion. The City may elect to pursue its remedies under applicable law. 22 Exhibit A UNT channels Recommended lineup 1. IND- KDTN 2. PBS - KERA 3. CBS - KTVT 4. ABC - WFAA 5. NBC - KXAS 6. WB - WKAF 7. U PN - KTXA 8. FOX- KDFW 9. UNI - KUVN 10.TMO - KXTX 11 .TFT - KSTR 12.ND - KFWD 13.1ND - KDFI 14.A& E 15.Bloomberg 16.BET 17.Boomerang 18.Cartoon Network 19.CNN 20.CNN Headline News 21 .Comedy Central 22.CSPAN 23.E!Entertainment 24Fox News 25.FX 26.History 27.Learning Channel 28.Lifetime 29.MTV 30.MTV2 31 .Nickelodeon 32.Sci-Fi 33 .TBS 34 .TNT 35.TV Land 36.USA 37.VH1 38.Weather Channel 39.ESPN 40.ESPN2 41 .ESPN News 42.ESPN Classic 43.Fox Sports Net 44.Fox Sports World 45.Jade East 46.Jade World Super Channel 47.Chinese Movie Channel 48.CCTV-4 49.BBC America 50.News World International 51 .Trio 52.1FC 53.Bravo 54 .WE 55.Hallmark 56.Lifetime Movie Network Replacement Channel Options: College Sports Television Spike 23 Cable Television Franchise Agreement PART II. SECTION I. This Part II relates to the Cable Television Franchise Agreement granted by the City of Demon ("City") in Part i of this agreemem, as amended and supplememed by Part ii and Part iii of this agreement. The foregoing Part i, this Part ii and the following Part iii are hereinafter referred to collectively as the "Cable Television Franchise Agreemem." A) To the extent allowed by law, execution by grantee of the acceptance referred to in Part iii, Section 26 of this Ordinance, which includes accepting the agreement attached as Exhibit A to this Part ii, including, without limitation, grantee's agreement to pay liquidated damages not less than $4,000 for failure to comply with customer service standards in accordance with Section D1 of the agreement that is attached as Exhibit A to this Part ii, including, without limitation, the following conditions: Gramee will provide the capability for insertion of video programming and other video, voice, and data messages into the cable system at the poims in the City in accordance with the terms required under Section Vi (b) (6) of Part i of the Cable Television Franchise Agreemem, and will comply completely with the above section of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part ii, Section iii (Compliance Requiremems) are met. SECTION II. Grantee may, at any time and from time to time, assign or grant or otherwise convey one or more liens or security interests in its assets, including its rights, obligations and benefits in and to the cable television system and Cable Television Franchise Agreement, to any lender providing financing to grantee. Any assignment or transfer by a lender or as a result of a foreclosure will require the City's consem as provided in the Cable Television Franchise Agreement. SECTION III. (COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS) When gramee's End Poim Connections exceed Five Thousand (5000) within the City of DeNon, the gramee will be required to comply with the below listed sections, or parts of sections, upon request from the City. Part ii, Section i, (A), (1). Part ii, Exhibit A, Section E, Service Equipment for Public Facilities. Part ii, Exhibit A, Section J, Other Provisions, (1). SECTION IV. (CONFLICT) In the event of any conflict between the terms of Parts I, II, and iii this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, Part ii of this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem (including exhibits thereto) shall prevail over Part i, and Part iii of this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem (including exhibits thereto) shall prevail over Parts i and ii. in the event of any conflict between the terms of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement and any City Ordinance, that provision which provides the greatest benefit to the City, in the opinion of the City Council, shall prevail, subject to the Reservation of Rights in Part i, Section XXXiV. 24 PART II EXHIBIT A A. The promises, covenants, and conditions contained herein inure to the benefit of the City and are binding on grantee. Bo Customer Service. 1. As required by applicable law, Grantee will comply with the customer service rules of the FCC as presently in effect, 47 CFR § 76.309. Grantee's compliance shall be measured and enforced as follows: ao For the purpose of such rules "normal business hours" therein are deemed to be 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. bo Transfer to or answering by a voice mail system (or other automated response system) does not constitute answering "by a trained customer representative" under § 76.309(c)(ii) or analogous provisions of such rules. Co Within 20 business days of the close of each calendar quarter (or monthly, if the City requests same), grantee will provide the City with a report in such form as the City and grantee may reasonably agree, setting forth on a consistent basis, fairly applied, grantee's performance as compared to such standards, including in particular as compared to the standards for telephone answer time, busy signals, standard installations, service interruptions, appointment windows, refunds and credits. do Such reports shall show service telephone calls, installations, service interruptions, and appointment windows. eo Such reports shall show grantee's performance including and excluding any periods of abnormal operating conditions, and if grantee contends that any such abnormal conditions occurred during the reporting period in question, they shall also describe the nature and extent of such conditions. UNT will take User service complaints at either the front desk of a residence hall or at the Centralized Location. Either the residence hall front desk or the Centralized Location, which shall act as general User service centers, shall be staffed 24/7. o Users needing service will report such need to either the front desk or the Centralized Location. The staff member will log such request in the work order log book and will also send the work order electronically to UNT Housing Maintenance Department (940-565-4711) where the order will be 25 printed out. Orders are generally worked within 24 hours with the exception of weekends when the order would be worked the following Monday. UNT Housing Maintenance will check first for issues with the co-axle cable, the connectors, or the User's TV set. Users who believe they have not received timely or adequate service can return to either the front desk or the Centralized Location and report such whereupon the staff will contact the Administrative Services Officer. Users can also contact this staff member directly. Beyond this person, UNT's Director of Housing can be reached should a complain not be rectified. Users will be advised of the complain t procedure at least once a year in writing and will be informed as to whether the from desk for their residence hall or the Centralized Location should be used. o Issues beyond connectivity which UNT Housing Maimenance will investigate and repair will be referred to (use title instead) who operates the satellite system and is responsible for a clear signal reaching all connections. o UNT employees who enter User rooms for work requests will wear idemifying badges and will leave a notice of emry slip to record their time, date, and purpose of entry. Users do not have to be in their rooms for the workers to enter. o UNT Housing will give advance notice to Users as a courtesy anytime the system is taken down for emergency maintenance or repairs to the entire system. It is anticipated that routine maintenance will be done during summers and holidays so Users' service generally will not be imerrupted. 8. UNT Housing will train staff regularly on expected service standards. Grantee shall, not less than once a year, provide information to Users on the Cable System with a complete list of service offerings, options, prices, and credit policies associated with the Cable System, if applicable. 10. Gramee shall establish and maimain sufficiem telephone lines and personnel so as to not delay unreasonably the answering of all telephone calls. The City, upon receipt of documented complaints from more than ten Users during a single business day between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. regarding their inability to reach a live, personal represemative of gramee during non- emergency, non-system outage periods, may seek liquidated damages as provided in Section 8-128 of the Cable Ordinance. 11. Grantee acknowledges that noncompliance with customer service standards will harm Users and the City and that the extem of harm will be difficult or impossible to measure. The City may therefore assess liquidated damages against grantee for non-compliance with the preceding customer service 26 standards as follows: The FCC Rules curreNly state as to § 76.309(c)(1)(ii) and (iv); and § 76.309(c)(2)(I), (ii), (iii) and (iv) (collectively "quarterly customer service standards") that the standards set forth therein "shall be met no less than ninety (90) perceN of the time under normal operating conditions measured on a quarterly basis." 12. Liquidated damages may be assessed if graNee does not meet the ninety (90) perceN standard for a given subsection (for example, §76.309(c)(2)(ii)) of the quarterly customer service standards in a given calendar quarter as follows. First Second Third and subsequeN Noncompliance Noncompliance Noncompliance $1,000 $2,000 $4,000 13. In the even ora change in 47 C.F.R § 76.309 that makes any of the Federal customer service standards therein less stringent than those in effect in July 1995, the City may adopt customer service regulations as to the subject matter of the portion of the rule that is changed. City agrees to meet with grantee on any proposed changes prior to taking action on them, and to provide grantee with at least 60 days notice of such action. Grantee agrees to comply with any such provisions that are no more stringent than those contained in 47 C.F.R § 76.309 as in effect in July, 1995 as applicable to graNee and to such exteN agrees that it is not entitled to recover the costs of such compliance through external cost treatment or otherwise. 14. GraNee acknowledges that under applicable law the City may unilaterally establish and enforce reasonable customer service regulations that exceed or are not addressed by the standards established by the FCC or the standards curreNly established by the Cable Television Franchise AgreemeN. 15. GraNee will provide at minimum the quality of service required by the Cable Television Franchise AgreemeN, Chapter 8 "Cable Television" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, and any other applicable City ordinances and applicable FCC regulations. As evidence of and to assist in compliance with such commitmeN, the City and graNee agree as follows: ao On an annual basis graNee will provide the City with historical expenditure information and staffing levels on customer service related matters; the customer service standards currently used; its materials, if any, on same as used by its customer service representatives; and its procedures and forms used to measure compliance with applicable customer service standards. bo GraNee will provide such other information as the City reasonably requests relating to customer service matters. 27 C. Signal Quality. The following shall apply to graNee's implemeNation of and compliance with the rules and regulations relating to cable television technical standards for signal quality adopted by the FCC in MM Dockets 91-169 and 85-38 on February 13, 1992 and subsequent amendments thereto: All testing for compliance with the FCC technical standards shall be done by a person with the necessary expertise and substantial experience in cable television matters. Upon request, grantee shall provide the City with the written report of such testing. GraNee shall follow the procedures listed above in sections 4 and 5 for resolving complains from Users about the quality of the television signal delivered to them: All matters not resolved shall at grantee's or the User's option be referred to City for attempted resolution. All matters not resolved at that step shall be referred to the FCC for it to resolve. 4. GraNee shall annually notify its Users of the preceding. Upon request by the City, grantee at its expense will test the system in areas specified by City where there are appareN problems and provide City with the written report of such testing. If the test shows a non- compliance with such standards, grantee will bring the system into compliance with such standards within 180 days. D. Validity of the Cable Television Franchise AgreemeN. Subject to the Reservation of Rights in Part I, Section XXXIV, grantee agrees to the following: to be bound by the terms and conditions of the City Charter, Chapter 8 "Cable Television" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas, the Cable Television Franchise AgreemeN and all other ordinances applicable to its operation. Grantee does not contend that any provision of the Cable Television Franchise AgreemeN is unlawful or unenforceable, nor is it aware of any other ordinance or any provision in the City Charter which it coNends is unlawful or unenforceable. The City acknowledges that the Cable Television Franchise AgreemeN is in full force and effect. E. Service and EquipmeN for Public Facilities. GraNee will provide the "basic service" and "cable programming services" tiers of cable Service, including installation and service and converter boxes, without charge to public facilities as required by the Cable Television Franchise AgreemeN, Chapter 8 "Cable Television" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas, or any other applicable city ordinance, except that such service is limited to (a) City, school, county, state and Federal buildings located within 5,000 feet of graNee's cable system; (b) PlO office, Municipal Building, 215 E. McKinney; (c) DeNon Police Department, 601 E. Hickory; (d) Denton Fire Department, Central Fire Station, 332 East Hickory; and (e) Utility Service CeNer, 901 Texas Street. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part II, Section III (Compliance Requirements) are met. 28 F. EEO Matters. Grantee agrees to faithfully adhere to all applicable federal, state and city laws, rules and regulations relating to non-discrimination, equal employmem and affirmative action. G. Access to Records. The records and reports of the grantee which are to be submitted to the City or otherwise made available for the City (such as for inspection by the City) pursuam to the Cable Television Franchise Agreemem or other ordinance or charter provision of the City shall include records maintained by grantee and its affiliates to the extent necessary for the City to discharge its responsibilities under the Cable Television Franchise Agreemem, Chapter 8 "Cable Television" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas, FCC rules or state or local law, or to insure compliance with the Cable Television Franchise Agreement. H. Cable Television Franchise Agreemem Requiremem. Gramee will give the City sixty (60) days notice in writing prior to allowing any telecommunications entity other than grantee to use or lease its facilities (other than towers) in the City or capacity thereon or to amending any agreement with such an entity. No such arrangements or uses are presently in existence except as have been disclosed. "Telecommunications emity" means any emity subject to the jurisdiction of or regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (such as under the Communications Act of 1934 as amended) or the Texas Public Utility Commission or their successors, including telephone, alternative access and cable companies. Gramee will provide the City with such documents relating to the foregoing as the City may reasonably request, including copies of the agreemems. Gramee will give the City sixty (60) days notice in writing prior to providing telecommunications services within the City or making its facilities (other than towers) available to others for that purpose. "Telecommunications services" means conventional telephone services, such as alternative access service that connect User locations and connect Users to long distance companies. Nothing herein shall expand or modify any restrictions or limitations under the Cable Television Franchise Agreemem or applicable law on use for telecommunication purposes of the facilities being acquired by grantee. I. Other Matters. Subject to the Reservation of Rights in Part I, Section XXXIV, grantee agrees to the following: In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, Chapter 8 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of DeNon, Texas, the City Charter, or any City Ordinance, that provision which 29 provides the greatest benefit to the City, in the opinion of the City Council, shall prevail. To the extent allowed by law, grantee will join the City in obtaining from the FCC any waivers from time to time necessary to effectuate the provisions of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. The term "affiliate" means any individual, partnership, association, joint stock company, trust, corporation, or other person or entity who owns or controls, or is owned or controlled by, or is under common ownership or control with the entity in question. J. Other Provisions. Grantee will promptly, but no later than twelve (12) months from the effective date of the ordinance approving the Cable Television Franchise Agreement, provide the capability for insertion of video programming and other video, voice and data messages into the cable system at the points in the City required under Section VI (b)(6) of Part I of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement and will comply in all respects with that section of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part II, Section III (Compliance Requirements) are met. The City will not be required to provide any financial support for any Public, Education or Government (PEG) access programming on the grantee's cable system. The City will not collect a PEG fee or require the grantee to provide any financial support for any PEG programming that is not on the grantee's system. 30 Cable Television Franchise Agreement PART iii. SECTION I. This Part III relates to the Cable Television Franchise Agreement granted by the City of Denton ("City") in Part i of this agreement, as amended and supplemented by Part ii and Part iii of this agreement. The foregoing Part i, and Part ii and this Part iii are hereinafter referred to collectively as the "Cable Television Franchise Agreement." Covenants Binding: The promises, covenants, and conditions contained herein inure to the benefit of the City and are binding on grantee. Customer Service. Grantee will comply with the customer service and consumer protection provisions set forth in "Part iii, Exhibit A." o Validity of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement. Subject to the Reservation of Rights in Part i, Section XXXiV, grantee agrees to the following: to be bound by the terms and conditions of the City Charter, the Cable Television Franchise Agreement and all ordinances applicable to grantee's operations. Grantee does not contend that any provision of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement is unlawful or unenforceable, nor are they aware of any ordinance or any provision in the City Charter which they contend is unlawful or unenforceable. The City acknowledges that the Cable Television Franchise Agreement is in full force and effect. The Cable Television Franchise Agreement for Cable Only. Grantee acknowledges that the Cable Television Franchise Agreement is granted solely for the provision of cable service. o Access to Records: The records and reports of the grantee which are to be submitted to the City or otherwise made available for the City (such as for inspection by the City) pursuant to the Cable Television Franchise Agreement or other ordinance or charter provisions of the City shall include records maintained by grantee and its affiliates to the extent necessary for the City to discharge its responsibilities under the Cable Television Franchise Agreement, FCC rules or state or local law, or to insure compliance with this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. o Cable Modem, High-Speed Data and intemet Services. The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 modified the definition of"cable services" in the Federal Cable Act (Title Vi of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 USC Section 115 and following). The change addresses cable companies' ability to provide Enhanced, Advanced Cable Services over a cable system as a cable service (and not as a telephone service, with accompanying telephone regulation), if grantee intends to provide Enhanced, Advanced Cable Services. 31 6.1 To remove any uncertainty on grantee's authority to provide Enhanced, Advanced Cable Services the parties agree that grantee has the authority to provide Enhanced, Advanced Cable Services under the Cable Television Franchise Agreement and that the revenues therefrom shall be included in gross revenues for the purpose of computing and paying cable franchise fees. 6.2 If gramee provides any Enhanced, Advanced Cable Services to residential Users in the areas the grantee serves, then without any initial or ongoing charge it shall provide the City cable modems and associated access to the internet with a speed of up to 250 kbs. Such modems and service shall be provided to each City library and to three (3) additional locations specified by the City in City buildings in areas the grantee serves. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section XXiii (Compliance Requiremems) are met. Notification of Rate Increases. The grantee shall not charge a separate fee to the Users of the cable system. If applicable and to the extent permitted by federal and state law, the grantee shall notify the City of any rate increase to its rates for basic cable service, equipmem, or service calls regulated by the City. 8. Other Matters. 8.1 Conflict: In the event of any conflict between the terms of Parts I, II, and iii this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, Part ii of this agreement (including exhibits thereto) shall prevail over Part i, and Part iii of this agreemem (including exhibits thereto) shall prevail over Parts i and ii. in the event of any conflict between the terms of this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem and any City Ordinance, that provision which provides the greatest benefit to the City, in the opinion of the City Council, shall prevail, subject to the Reservation of Rights in Part i, Section XXXiV. 8.2 Waivers: To the extem allowed by law, the gramee will join the City in obtaining from the FCC any waivers or other relief from time to time necessary to effectuate the provisions of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. 8.3 Venue and Choice of Law: Venue of any suit under or arising out of this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem shall be exclusively in DeNon County, Texas or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. This Cable Television Franchise Agreemem shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. 32 8.4 Treatment of Liquidated Damages: Grantee acknowledges and agrees that liquidated damages under this Cable Television Franchise Agreement (including its exhibits) do not constitute franchise fees, do not reduce the amounts otherwise payable as franchise fees, and will not be passed through to Users. 8.5 Rate Orders: The grantee shall not charge a separate fee to the Users of the cable system. If applicable and to the extent permitted by federal and state law, the grantee agrees to the following: unless a final order of the FCC (affirmed on appeal if an appeal is taken) determines that franchise authority rate orders are automatically stayed by the filing of an appeal to the FCC, grantee will implement each rate order adopted by the City unless and until grantee obtains an order of the FCC or a court of competent jurisdiction staying the effectiveness of the rate order. Grantee will reimburse all attorneys fees and other expenses incurred by the City as a result of a violation of this section. 8.6 Franchise Fee Calculation: Grantee will comply with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in City of Dallas v FCC, 118 F3d 393 (1997). Grantee will pay the additional franchise fees due under the Fifth Circuit decision with interest and without pass-through to Users for the time period from September 1997 forward as related to gross revenues, if any, and Part i, Section XX. 9. Institutional Network: Grantee shall provide, construct, operate and maintain an institutional Network (excluding coders/decoders, interface and other terminal equipment which will be supplied by Users) that will provide the City and other i- NET Users with Institutional Network Services. The I-NET shall be as set forth below. Unless the City agrees otherwise in writing, the I-NET, including the individual fiber optic fibers constituting all or a portion of it, shall be owned and maintained by grantee but provided for the exclusive use of the City and other i- NET Users and shall be provided without any charge to the City or I-NET Users. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requirements) are met. 9.1 Grantee shall install and terminate additional fiber optic pairs ("incremental I-NET Fiber") in grantee's future new and replacement fiber optic installations for use as an I-NET as follows. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requirements) are met. 9.1.1 City will inform grantee in writing from time to time of the additional facilities it would like to have served by an I-NET. Grantee will use such information in its plans for future fiber installations, where (for example) one routing will pass a facility 33 City would like to have served and another (of comparable cost) would not. 9.1.2 By January 31 of each year grantee will provide City with its conceptual plans for new and replacement fiber optic construction for that calendar year. 9.1.3 Grantee will also provide City from time to time during the year with written notice of conceptual plans for any additional fiber optic construction during that year (or January of the following year). Such notice shall be provided as soon as is feasible. 9.1.4 Upon written request by City, grantee will provide City with a conceptual cost estimate (and other information City may reasonably require) of installing incremental I-Net Fiber along all or a portion of the routes that are a part of such conceptual plans. Such estimates shall be provided as soon as possible after request by City in order that City may have time to obtain approval (such as from its legislative body) to install such incremental I-Net Fiber. 9.1.5 As to any route where City has requested a conceptual cost estimate, grantee shall provide City with the final cost of installing incremental I-Net Fiber (and such other information as City may reasonably request) as soon as grantee's design of the fiber for such route is reasonably complete. City will have 60 days after receipt of the final cost figure to notify grantee to install Incremental I-NET Fiber. 9.1.6 The cost of installing Incremental I-NET Fiber shall be computed on an incremental basis, meaning the difference in cost to grantee of constructing and installing fiber on a given route (a) with, and (b) without, the incremental I-NET Fiber. 9.1.7 Grantee shall be reimbursed by City for the cost of installing i- NET fibers under this Section 17.2 computed as set forth in Section 17.2.6. 9.2 I-NET Maintenance. Grantee shall provide I-NET users with a reliable level of service, repair and maintenance that at a minimum, meets the following performance standards. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requirements) are met. 9.2.1 Grantee shall maintain a minimum of 99.5 percent service availability to I-NET Users measured over a period of one year. 34 9.3 9.2.2 Grantee shall respond to repair requests from an I-NET User for circuits identified as critical within 2 (two) hours of the request. Grantee shall respond to other repair requests within four (4) hours of the request. 9.2.3 Grantee shall provide ongoing maintenance at its discretion, as it deems necessary. Grantee shall provide at least one-week advance notice to any affected I-NET User of any maintenance requiring temporary interruption of services, except in emergency situations. 9.2.4 Grantee and the City shall develop a mutually agreeable priority listing of critical circuits and their terminal locations. When notifying grantee of service complaints, an I-NET User shall identify critical circuits requiring priority repair. Grantee shall escalate repair of critical circuits to the extent reasonable under the circumstances. Definitions. 9.3.1 Institutional Network or 1-NET means the fiber optic communications network described in Section 17 and Schedule 17 to be constructed and operated by grantee for the provision to i- NET users (but not cable service Users) of institutional Network Services. 9.3.2 Institutional Network Services means the provision of usable bandwidth capacity to I-NET users through fiber optic lines for applications including but not limited to two-way dedicated voice, data, video and telephony channels connecting and interconnecting facilities owned, leased or used by the City, schools, counties, road commissions or other units of state or local government. Other applications include but are not limited to computerized traffic control systems for coordinated traffic control on an area-wide basis; Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems for municipally owned water, sewer, gas and electric systems (including street lighting systems); interconnection of facilities serving police, fire and other public safety systems, video arraignment facilities for local courts; interconnection of government buildings for the two or one-way interchange of video signals; and local area networks or wide-area networks connecting governmental buildings, such as for GiS (Geographical informational Systems) purposes. 9.3.3 I-NET User means and is limited to the City and any school or unit of state or local government designated by the City to receive Institutional Network Services. 35 10. HDTV: Broadcast and cable channels are likely to convert in whole or in part to an HDTV (high definition television) format within the next few years, with channels likely being delivered in both HDTV and convemional analog formats during a transition period. The following provisions address the ability of the City to acquire additional PEG Channels such that one or more PEG entities may have their signals simultaneously delivered by the cable system in both an HDTV and conventional analog 6 MHz NTSC format for the transition period, and provide funds for PEG entities to convert to an HDTV format. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requiremems) are met. 10.1 Reports: Gramee shall provide annual reports to City on its plans and progress for HDTV conversion, including the number of channels to be converted, date, equipment changes, formats to be used and other information reasonably necessary for the City to be able to plan an appropriate and potentially concurrent conversion of PEG Channels and facilities to HDTV format. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requiremems) are met. 10.2 Cable Televisions Franchise: After the date when grantee provides at least fifty (50) channels in one or more of several high definition television (or successor) formats, as such formats may from time to time be adopted or in effect ("HDTV Format"), then upon request from City, gramee shall provide a capital facilities grant to City sufficient for PEG entities to convert all their facilities and equipmem (including but not limited to studios, vans, video, audio, lighting, comrol, storage and editing equipment) to the HDTV Format selected by City but with the amount of such grant not to exceed 30¢ per User per month when amortized over grantee's Users as of the end of the calendar quarter preceding the date when the grant is made, using straight line amortization without interest for the lesser of five (5) years or the remaining term of the Cable Television Franchise Agreemem. City shall allocate the gram among PEG emities for such purpose as City deems is in the public imerest. Gramee shall modify the cable system whereby gramee receives PEG signals from each PEG Emity (for redistribution on its Cable System) so as to be capable of receiving and accepting the PEG Emity's signals. City shall co-ordinate with grantee to ensure that the HDTV Format selected by City is compatible with the format employed by grantee. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requiremems) are met. 10.3 Temporary_ Additional PEG Channels: After the date when gramee provides at least fifty (50) channels in HDTV Format, City may from time to time request, and grantee shall provide, one additional PEG Channel so 36 11. 12. as to allow, to the extent deemed appropriate by City, PEG Channel simulcasting in both 6 MHz analog NTSC format and in an HDTV Format. Gramee need no longer provide the additional PEG Channel described in the preceding semence when gramee no longer provides any channel of programming on the cable system in 6 MHz NTSC analog format. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requiremems) are met. 10.4 Allocation of PEG Channels: As of the effective date of this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem, City may allocate and reallocate PEG Channels as follows: City may at any time on six (6) momhs notice to grantee allocate or reallocate the usage of the PEG Channels among and between differem uses and users. This expressly may include City removing a PEG Emity or PEG Channel, replacing a PEG Emity or PEG Channel, requiring several differem persons to share or joimly use a given PEG Channel or conversely allowing one or more persons curremly sharing such a channel to have a channel on which they are the sole PEG user. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requiremems) are met. Leased Access and PEG Channels: The need for a PEG Channel can be removed by gramee providing the PEG Emity designated by City of such currem or prospective PEG Channel with an otherwise idemical leased access channel, so long as the leased access rate for such user is one dollar ($1.00) per year. in the event the preceding sentence is exercised it shall be applied first to educational channels and then to public channels, if applied to such channels the channel number on which they are carried shall not be changed and such channels shall be included in the basic tier of service and shall be listed in gramee's program guide or comparable listing with an appropriate description, such as "City of DeNon Channel" or "University of North Texas Channel." The need for a PEG Channel is removed only so long as the PEG Emity in question in fact is provided with such leased access channel. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requiremems) are met. Transfer. City consem in advance shall be required for a transfer of comrol of gramee, which shall include, but is not limited to, any of the following: 12.1 Any change in limited partnership imerests, non-managing limited liability company interests, or non voting stock representing thirty percent or more of the equity interests in the entity in question. 12.2 Any option, right of conversion or similar right to acquire interests constituting control without substantial additional consideration (such as compared to consideration previously provided). 37 12.3 Any change in the effective control of grantee including that described in 47 C.F.R. § 76.501 and following (including the notes thereto but excluding footnote 2f) as in effect on the date of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. 13. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply for the purpose of this Part iii. and it's Exhibits. 13.1 Affiliate means any individual, partnership, association, joint stock company, limited liability company, trust, corporation, or other person or entity who owns or controls, or is owned or controlled by, or is under common ownership or control with the entity in question. 13.2 Capital Facilities means PEG Channel and I-NET related facilities and equipment including fiber lines, studios, production facilities, vans and cameras or other property having a useful life of more than one year, as well as any expenditures which increase or add to the value of the facilities or equipment, adapt the facilities or equipment to new or different uses, or maintain, restore, extend or prolong the useful life of such facilities or equipment. 13.3 Cable Service means 13.3.1 The one-way transmission to all UNT Facilities of (i) Video Programming, or (ii) other programming service, and 13.3.2 User interaction, if any, including but not limited to that which is required for the selection or use of such Video Programming or other programming service, selecting from various on-screen options, use of Enhanced, Advanced Cable Services, game channels, interactive services, downloading programs or data access, or ordering merchandise, and 13.3.3 Institutional Network Services. 13.4 Cable System or System means a facility consisting of a set of closed transmission paths and associated signal generation, reception, and control equipment that is designed to provide cable services but such term does not include (i) a facility that serves only to re-transmit the television signals of one or more television broadcast stations; (ii) a facility that serves subscribers without using any public right of way; (iii) a facility of a common carrier which is subject, in whole or in part, to the provisions of Title ii of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, except that such a facility shall be considered a cable system (other than for purposes of Section 621 (c) of such Act) to the extent such facility is used in the transmission of video programming directly to subscribers, unless the 38 14. extent of such use is solely to provide interactive on-demand services; (iv) an open video system that complies with Section 653 of Title VI of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended; or (v) any facilities of any electric utility used solely for operating its electric utility system. 13.5 Enhanced, Advanced Cable Services means enhanced services, information services, Internet protocol (IP) telephony, high speed data service, Internet access and Internet service (such as that of an Internet service provider). 13.6 FCC means the Federal Communications Commission. 13.7 I-NET User has the meaning set forth in Section 9.3.3. 13.8 Institutional Network or I-NET has the meaning set forth in Section 9.3.1. 13.9 Institutional Network Services has the meaning set forth in Section 9.3.2. 13.10 PEG Channels means the public channels, educational channels and government channels provided by grantee on the cable system under this Cable Television Franchise Agreement, or applicable ordinance, and shall include leased access channels provided pursuant to Section 19 herein. 13.11 PEG Entity means a person authorized to operate or use a PEG Channel (or a leased access channel provided in lieu of a PEG Channel under Section 11) or the X-NET, and shall include City. If several persons share the operation of a PEG Channel each person shall be a separate PEG Entity. 13.12 User shall have the same meaning as in Part I, Section III of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. 13.13 Video Programming means programming provided by, or generally considered comparable to programming provided by, a television broadcast station. Compliance Requirements: When grantee's cable End Point Connections exceed Five Thousand (5000) within the City of Denton, the grantee will be required to comply with the below listed sections, or parts of sections, upon request from the City. Part III, Section 9, Institutional Network, 9.1 and 9.2. Part III, Section 10, HDTV, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4. Part III, Section 11, Leased Access and PEG Channels. Part III, Exhibit A, (4). 39 15. Fees and Costs. The gramee will reimburse the City all its costs, which exceed the initial $5,000, in association with the preparation and award of this Cable Television Franchise Agreemem, including publication costs and costs of consultants and attorneys, not to exceed $1,500. In addition, the grantee will reimburse the City all its costs in association with the preparation and award of a Cable Television Franchise Agreemem Renewal, including publication costs and costs of consultants and attorneys. The preceding reimbursement requirement applies whether a Cable Television Franchise Agreemem is executed. 16. Approval and Acceptance. In accordance with Section 13.02 of the City Charter of the City of DeNon, this ordinance shall become effective twenty-one (21) days after final approval, before that date, grantee shall give its written acceptance of this ordinance by signing as provided below; and provided that, after final approval and before the expiration of twenty-one (21) days, the full text of this ordinance shall be published once each week for two (2) consecutive weeks in the official newspaper of the City, the expense of which shall be borne by gramee. Gramee, for itself, its successors and assigns hereby accepts this ordinance and agrees to be bound by all of its terms and provisions. 40 PART III EXHIBIT A. CUSTOMER SERVICE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION Customer Service Standards: Grantee shall at all times comply with the more stringent of the customer service and consumer protection provisions of this Part iii, Exhibit A, the Cable Television Franchise Agreement and the FCC. Grantee may provide its Customer Bill of Rights (if any) to its Users in the City. Pay Per View: Users shall be given the options of (a) not having pay per view or per program service available at all or (b) only having such service provided upon the User providing a security number. The terms of this section will be activated when the terms in Part iii, Section 14 (Compliance Requirements) are met. Notification: Grantee shall provide written information on at least each of the following matters (a) at the time of installation or reinstallation of service, (b) annually to all Users, and (c) at any time upon request of a User or the City. The information shall be dated with the printing, revision, or effective date. 3.1 Products and services offered. 3.2 Installation and service maintenance policies. 3.4 Instructions on how to use Cable Services 3.5 Channel positions of programming carried on the cable system, including a listing specific to the City showing the channel names and numbers actually available to Users. 3.6 Complaint procedures with a notice for the User to initially contact grantee with complaints and questions. 3.7 Applicable privacy requirements as set forth in the Cable Television Franchise Agreement or provided for by law. 3.8 The procedure for resolving signal quality problems Notice of Changes: Users and the City shall be notified of any changes in rates, Cable Services or channel positions as soon as possible through announcements on the cable system or in writing. Grantee will notify City in advance of notifying Users and will make every effort to notify City forth-five (45) days in advance of a change. Unless a longer time period is required by applicable law or regulation, notice must be given to Users a minimum of thirty (30) days in advance of such 41 o o changes if the change is within the comrol of gramee and as soon as possible if not within the control of grantee. In addition, grantee shall notify Users and the City thirty (30) days in advance of any significam changes in the matters covered by the preceding Section 3. Notifications provided pursuant to this Section shall be dated with the printing, revision or effective date. Complaim procedure: 5.1 UNT will take User service complaints at either the front desk of a residence hall or at the Centralized Location. Either the residence hall front desk or the Centralized location, which shall act as general User service cemers, shall be staffed twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. 5.2 Users needing service will report such need to either the from desk or the Cemralized Location. The staff member will log such request in the work order log book and will also send the work order electronically to UNT Housing Maimenance Departmem (940-565-4711) where the order will be primed out. Orders shall be generally worked within 24 hours with the exception of weekends when the order would be worked the following Monday. UNT Housing Maintenance will check first for issues with the coaxial cable, the connectors, or the User's TV set. 5.3 Users may pick up and drop off any converters, remotes or other Grantee supplied equipment at the front desks or the Centralized Location twenty- four hours per day, 7 days per week. 5.4 Users who believe they have not received timely or adequate service can return to either the front desk or the Centralized Location and report such whereupon the staff shall contact the Administrative Services Officer. Users can also contact this staff member directly or UNT's Director of Housing Users will be advised of the complaint procedure at least once per year in writing and will be informed as to whether the from desk for their residence hall or the Cemralized Location should be used. 5.5 If the operator of the satellite system providing signals to the Cable System does not provide a clear signal, complaints in that regard shall be referred to such operator who shall immediately correct same. General: 6.1 UNT employees who enter User rooms for work requests will wear idemifying badges and will leave a notice of emry slip to record their time, date, and purpose of entry. Users do not have to be in their rooms for the workers to enter. 42 6.2 UNT Housing will give advance notice to Users as a courtesy any time the system is taken down for emergency maintenance or repairs to the entire system. It is anticipated that routine maintenance will be done during summers and holidays so Users' service generally will not be interrupted. 6.3 UNT Housing will train desk staff regularly on expected service standards. 6.4 Grantee shall, not less than once a year, provide information to Users on the Cable System with a complete list of service offerings, options, prices (if applicable), credit policies and procedures for Users to address service complaints associated with the Cable System. 7. Telephone service: 7.1 Grantee shall have a local or toll-free telephone number available for use by Users. The local or toll-free numbers shall be listed, with appropriate explanations, in any significant directories published by the grantee. 7.2 Grantee shall establish and maintain sufficient telephone lines and personnel so as to not delay unreasonably the answering of all telephone calls. The City, upon receipt of documented complaints from more than ten Users during a single business day between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. regarding their inability to reach a live, personal representative of grantee during non-emergency, non-system outage periods, may seek liquidated damages as provided in Section 8-128 of the Cable Ordinance. 7.3 Trained Representatives shall be available to respond to User telephone inquiries. 7.3.1 As to video service matters, the term "Trained Representatives" shall mean employees of grantee, or contractor, who have the authority and capability while speaking with a User to, among other things, schedule service and installation calls. 7.4 Under Normal Operating Conditions, telephone answer time by a Trained Representative, including wait time, shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds from when the connection is made. If the call needs to be transferred, the time to complete the transfer time shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds. These standards shall be met no less than ninety percent (90%) of the time under Normal Operating Conditions, measured on a quarterly basis. 7.5 Under Normal Operating Conditions, the User shall receive a busy signal less than three percent (3%) of the time, measured on a quarterly basis. 43 10. Office: Grantee shall do all the following: (i) maintain a business office that shall include a place where Users may receive information on grantee's cable services. Installation Standards: Under Normal Operating Conditions, installations shall be performed within seven (7) business days after an order has been placed no less than ninety-five percent (95%) of the time, measured on a quarterly basis. Installations/Service Calls: The following shall apply to Users (current or new) requesting installations or service: 10.1 Installations calls shall be available at a minimum from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday, and service calls shall be available at a minimum from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Saturday. 10.2 Grantee shall not cancel an appointment with a User after 5 PM on the business day prior to the scheduled appointment. 10.3 If grantee's technician is running late for an appointment with a User and will not be able to keep the appointment as scheduled, the User shall promptly be contacted. The appointment shall be rescheduled, as necessary, at a time, which is convenient for the User. 10.4 In the event access to the User's premises is not made available to grantee's technician when the technician arrives during the established appointment window, the technician shall leave written notification stating the time of arrival and requesting that grantee be contacted again to establish a new appointment window. 10.5 Notwithstanding the foregoing, if grantee's technician or service representative telephones the User during or prior to the appointment window and is advised that the technician will not be given access to the User's premises during the appointment window, then the technician shall not be obliged to travel to the User's premises or to leave the written notification referred to above, and the burden shall again be upon the User to contact grantee to arrange for a new appointment. 10.6 Except as otherwise provided above, grantee shall be deemed to have responded to a service or installation request under the provisions of this section when a technician arrives at the service location or is advised by telephone no access will be given. 10.7 Grantee's service technician or service representative shall take adequate time on each service call to address or correct the problem in question. 44 10.8 Under Normal Operating Conditions, grantee shall meet the standards of Section 10.1 through 10.3 no less than ninety-five perceN (95%) of the time, measured on a quarterly basis. 11. Service Call Charges: No charge shall be made to the User for any service call relating to grantee owned and grantee maintained equipment after the initial installation of Cable Service unless the problem giving rise to the service request can be demonstrated by grantee to have been: 11.1 Caused by negligence or malicious destruction of cable equipmeN by the User, or 11.2 A problem established as having been non-cable in origin. 12. Service Interruptions: 12.1 Under Normal Operating Conditions, grantee shall meet the standards of Sections 12.2 and 12.4 no less than ninety-five perceN (95%) of the time measured on a quarterly basis. 12.2 Under Normal Operating Conditions, graNee shall begin working on a Service INerruption promptly and in no even later than twenty-four (24) hours after the interruption becomes known to grantee. 12.3 "Service Interruption" means the loss of picture or sound on one or more cable channels, affecting one or more Users. 12.4 Under Normal Operating Conditions, graNee shall begin working on User complains involving impairmeN or degradation of signal quality (other than a Service Interruption) promptly and in no event later than the next business day after the problem becomes known to graNee. 12.5 GraNee shall be deemed to have begun work under the provisions of this section when a technician arrives at the service location. 13. Log of Complaints: Grantee shall maintain a written log, or an equivalent stored in computer memory and capable of access and reproduction in priNed form, of a random sampling of all cable-related User complains within the City that are referred to graNee. Such log shall be in form and substance acceptable to the City and at minimum list the date and time of each such complaint, identify the User to the extent allowed by law, and describe the nature of the complaint and when and what actions were taken by grantee in response thereto. The log shall be kept at graNee's office for a period of at least two (2) years and shall be available for inspection during regular business hours by the City upon request. 45 14. 15. Bills: The grantee shall not charge a separate fee to the Users of the cable system. If applicable, the gramee shall comply with the following on Cable Service billing: 14.1 Bills shall be issued momhly to each User with a balance due or change of service. 14.2 Bills shall be clear, concise and understandable. Bills shall be fully itemized, with itemizations including, but not limited to, basic service, cable programming service, premium service charges and equipmem charges. Bills shall also clearly delineate all activity during the billing period, including optional charges, rebates, credits, and late charges. 14.3 Each bill shall prominemly display gramee's local or toll-free telephone numbers available for use by Users. If a bill has more than one portion (for example, one portion that is kept by the User and one portion that is sen to gramee) the numbers shall prominemly appear on the from side of the portion of the bill retained by the User. 14.4 Grantee shall respond in writing to all written complaints from Users regarding billing matters within thirty (30) days. 14.5 Grantee shall not disconnect a User for failure to pay legitimately comested charges during a billing dispute. However, during a billing dispute grantee may disconnect a User for failure to pay charges that are not contested. 14.6 The City shall be given thirty (30) days advance notice of any change in the format of bills. Refunds and Credits: The grantee shall not charge a separate fee to the Users of the cable system. If applicable, the gramee issue refund checks for Cable Service promptly, but no later than either: 15.1 The User's next billing cycle following resolution of the request or thirty (30) days, whichever is earlier, or 15.2 If service is terminated, 30 days after return of equipmem owned by grantee or at the time of the next billing cycle, whichever is earlier. 15.3 Credits for Cable Service shall be issued no later than the User's next billing cycle following a determination that a credit is warranted. 46 16. Late Payment for Cable Service: The grantee shall not charge a separate fee to the Users of the cable system. If applicable, the grantee agree to the following: 16.1 Each bill shall specify on its face in a fashion emphasizing same (such as bold face type, underlined type or a larger font): "For payments received 16 days after due date, a $4.95 processing fee for late payment may be charged." 16.2 No processing fees for late payment, however denominated, shall be added to a User's bill less than sixteen (16) calendar days after the mailing of the bill to the User. 16.3 No processing fees for late payment, however denominated, shall be added to a User's bill by reason of delay in payment other than those described in this Section 16. All such charges shall be separately stated on the User's bill and include the word "late" in the description of them. 16.4 There have been negotiations in connection with this Exhibit regarding the appropriate amount of fees that may be charged for late payment. The parties have agreed to withdraw this issue from consideration without prejudice to any claims and defenses. 17. Disconnection: The grantee shall not charge a separate fee to the Users of the cable system. If applicable, the grantee agree to the following: 17.1 Grantee shall not disconnect a User for failure to pay until at least twenty- six (26) days have elapsed after the due date for payment of the User's bill and grantee has provided at least ten (10) days written notice separate from the monthly bill to the User prior to disconnection, specifying the effective date after which Cable Services are subject to disconnection. 17.2 Grantee may disconnect a User at any time if grantee in good faith believes that the User has tampered with or abused grantee's equipment, that there is a signal leakage problem (or other non-compliance with FCC rules or other standards which poses a risk to lives or property) on the User's premises, or that the User is or may be engaged in the theft of Cable Services. 17.3 Grantee shall promptly disconnect any User who so requests disconnection. No period of notice prior to requested termination of service shall be required of User by grantee. No charge shall be imposed upon the User for or related to disconnection or for any Cable Service delivered after the effective date of the disconnect request (unless there is a delay in returning grantee equipment). If the User fails to specify an effective date for disconnection, the effective date shall be deemed to be 47 the day following the date the disconnect request is received by grantee provided that grantee equipment has been returned. 17.4 The term "disconnect" shall include Users who elect to cease receiving Cable Service from grantee. 18. Truth In Advertising: The grantee shall not charge a separate fee to the Users of the cable system. If applicable, the grantee's bills, advertising and communications to its current or potential Users shall be truthful, shall not contain any false or misleading statement and shall comply with the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act, TEX.BUS. & COM.CODE ANN. §§ 17.41-17.63. (Vernon 1987). For the purposes of the preceding, a statement is false or misleading if it contains an untrue statement of any material fact or omits to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. 19. Reports: Grantee shall provide reports to the City monthly (by the 15th business day of the following month) and quarterly (by the 15th business day of the following quarter) as follows: 19.1 The reports shall include the following forms currently used by grantee or otherwise in form and substance acceptable to the City, showing on a consistent basis, fairly applied, grantee's compliance with customer service standards. 19.1.1 Monthly Report of Service Calls by Reason, which shall include an explanation of the categories of reported reasons. 19.1.2 Monthly Outage Summary. 19.1.3 Monthly Service Call Availability Analysis and Installation Call Availability Analysis. 19.1.4 Monthly Customer Call Sample Report, showing the results of a random sampling of customer complaints referred to grantee. 19.1.5 Monthly Call Center Performance Report, (excluding the 2% "assumed" adjustment). 19.2 Such reports shall show grantee's performance excluding periods that were not Normal Operating Conditions ("Abnormal Operating Conditions") and if grantee contends any such conditions occurred during the period in question, it shall also describe the nature and extent of Abnormal Operating Conditions and show grantee's performance both 48 including and excluding the time periods grantee contends such conditions were in effect. 19.3 At the City's request grantee will provide additional information and existing reports reasonably related to the measurement and evaluation of grantee's compliance with the customer service requirements of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement, and this Exhibit A. 19.4 Reports of installations/service calls and service interruptions shall report matters occurring within the City. 19.5 The City reserves the right to audit grantee to verify the accuracy of the reports required under this Section 19. All records (including those of contractors) reasonably necessary to conduct the audit shall be made available at a convenient location in Denton, TX. If the audit discloses performance that is three (3) percentage points worse than any of the standards of the referenced sections (such as compliance 92% of the time versus 95% of the time), grantee shall pay the City's costs in connection with the audit within thirty (30) days of submission of an invoice. 20. FCC Technical Standards As applicable and required by law, the following shall apply to grantee's implementation of and compliance with the rules and regulations relating to cable television technical standards for signal quality, currently set forth at 47 C.F.R. § 76.601 and following, and subsequent amendments thereto: 20.1 Grantee shall notify the City in advance of testing for compliance with FCC standards. The City may have a representative present to observe such tests and may designate one location to be tested. Grantee shall provide the City with a report of testing for compliance with such standards upon written request (but not more than twice a year). Such report to City shall state, in pertinent part, that the person doing the testing has reviewed the applicable rules and regulations of the FCC, the industry standards and other materials referenced therein, and that such testing was done fairly and either shows full compliance with such rules and regulations or sets forth with specificity and in detail all areas of non- compliance, their actual or likely scope and causes, and grantee's professional recommendation of the best corrective measures to immediately and permanently correct the non-compliance. 20.2 Grantee shall establish the following procedure for resolving complaints from Users about the quality of the television signal delivered to them: All complaints shall go initially to grantee. All matters not resolved by grantee shall at grantee's or the User's option be referred to the City for it to resolve. All matters not resolved by the City may be referred to the FCC for it to resolve. 49 21. 20.3 The City at its expense (no more than twice per year, barring unusual circumstances) upon thirty (30) days written notice to grantee may test the cable system for compliance with the FCC technical standards. Grantee shall cooperate in such tests and provide access to the cable system. Grantee shall reimburse the City for the full expense of any test, which shows a material non-compliance with such standards. Liquidated Damages - Customer Service Calls: Grantee acknowledges that non- compliance with the customer service standards identified above will harm User and the City and the amounts of actual damages will be difficult or impossible to ascertain. The City may therefore assess the following liquidated damages against grantee for non-compliance with the customer service standards set forth in Sections 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 9, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.10, 12.1, 12.2 and 12.4 (measured on a quarterly basis). Grantee acknowledges that the liquidated damages set forth below are a reasonable approximation of actual damages and that this Section 21 is intended to provide compensation and is not a penalty. 21.1 Telephone Standards. The damages for non-compliance with one or more of the standards in Sections 7.3, 7.4 and 7.5 during a calendar quarter are: 21.1.1 First non-compliance: $1.00 per End Point Connection. 21.1.2 Second non-compliance within three (3) consecutive calendar quarters: $2.00 per End Point Connection. 21.1.3 Third non-compliance within six (6) consecutive calendar quarters and (subject to Section 21.4) each subsequent non-compliance: $3.00 per End Point Connection. 21.2 Service and Installation Standards. The damages for non-compliance with one or more of the standards in Sections 9, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.10, 12.1, 12.2 and 12.4 during a calendar quarter are: 21.2.1 First non-compliance: $1.00 per End Point Connection. 21.2.2 Second non-compliance within three (3) consecutive calendar quarters: $2.00 per End Point Connection. 21.2.3 Third non-compliance within six (6) consecutive calendar quarters and (subject to Section 21.4) each subsequent non-compliance: $3.00 per End Point Connection. 21.3 Minimums. The liquidated damages for the first and each subsequent non- compliance under Section 21.1 or Section 21.2 shall be no less than $5,000, unless modified as provided in Section 21.4. 50 22. 23. 21.4 Effect of Extended Periods of Compliance. If grantee complies with all of the standards identified in Sections 21.1 and 21.2 for eight consecutive calendar quarters, the damages for the first subsequent non-compliance with any of those standards will be the greater of 25¢ per End Point Connection or $3,000. 21.4.1 Following such a non-compliance the damages provided in Sections 21.1 and 21.2 will again be applicable so that the next non-compliance within four (4) consecutive calendar quarters will be subject to Sections 21.1.2 and/or 21.2.2. 21.5 An event of non-compliance will be taken into account in determining whether a later event of non-compliance is a second, third or subsequent event without regard to whether City has assessed liquidated damages or taken any other action with respect to the non-compliance. 21.6 Grantee shall report the number of End Point Connection within the City on the last day of the quarter by the 15th business day of the following quarter. Liquidated Damages - Other: 22.1 Liquidated damages in the amount set forth in Section 21.1.1 (but not less than the amount set forth in Section 21.3) may be assessed for failure to timely submit the quarterly reports required by Section 19. 22.2 Liquidated damages may be assessed for violation of the provision of Section 26.4 for submission of reports within five (5) business days in the amount of $1,000 per day. Procedure for Assessment of Liquidated Damages: The procedure for consideration and assessment of liquidated damages is as follows: 23.1 Liquidated damages shall be assessed by the City Manager or his or her designee. 23.2 Grantee may obtain a review of the assessment by the City Council by making a written request within ten (10) business days after receipt of notice in writing of the assessment and its basis. 23.3 Grantee shall have an opportunity to be heard at a meeting of the City Council or by a person designated by the Council as a hearing officer prior to action being taken by the Council. 51 23.4 The City Council may adopt additional procedures, including appoimmem of a City official or other person to act as a hearing officer. The Council's decision may be based upon the record of proceedings conducted by the hearing officer or a proposal for decision submitted by the hearing officer. 24. Paymem of Liquidated Damages: Liquidated damages shall be paid in accordance with the prompt payment act following assessment or, if grantee requests review by the City Council, on or before the temh (10th) business day following issuance of the Council's decision. 25. Ombudsman: Gramee will provide a senior employee (at the Vice Presidem or Director level) as ombudsman. The ombudsman or his designee will have responsibility for working with the City to address problems that may arise under the Cable Television Franchise Agreemem. 26. City Liaison: Gramee shall provide problem solving liaison services for the City. The purpose of this service is to provide the City with direct access to supervisory level personnel who can obtain prompt action on customer service problems referred by the City to gramee. This service shall include at least the following: 26.1 The personnel providing the service shall be located in DeNon County. 26.2 The personnel providing the service shall have sufficiem authority and access to grantee's facilities and personnel in order to investigate and take appropriate remedial action without delay. 26.3 The City shall be given a special direct phone number to use which will generally during normal business hours be answered by a live person and will provide immediate access to a person having the authority specified in the preceding section. 26.4 Grantee shall investigate (including an attempt to contact the User) and respond to the City on each call, fax or written complaint or request by the end of the next business day and shall provide a written report within five (5) business days. 26.5 Grantee shall give the City notice in writing of changes in the key contact personnel or material changes in procedures involved in providing this service. 27. Definitions: For the purposes of this Exhibit A, the following definitions shall apply: 27.1 Cable Administrator means the person designated by City as having principle responsibility for cable matters. 52 27.2 27.3 27.4 Complaint means a telephone call or written communication from a User notifying grantee of a problem relating to grantee's billing or billing practices, grantee's equipment, picture quality, failure to receive one or more channels, a change in grantee's practice or policy, grantee's advertising or other business practice, the conduct of a grantee employee or contractor, or the failure of grantee or a service representative to comply with customer service regulations. Normal Operating Conditions means those service conditions that are within the control of grantee. Those conditions which are not within the control of grantee include, but are not limited to, natural disasters, civil disturbances, power outages, telephone network outages, and severe or unusual weather conditions. Those conditions which are within the control of grantee include, but are not limited to, special promotions, pay- per-view events, rate increases, regular or seasonal demand periods, changes in the billing cycle, changes in the form of bills and other billing matters, changes in channel lineups or services that are within grantee's control, and repairs, rebuilds, maintenance and upgrade of the cable system including computer software and hardware. Labor Disputes. Employee strikes, slowdowns and walkouts of less than 30 days duration are not within the control of grantee. 53 AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM: AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET March 1, 2005 Economic Development Mike Conduff SUBJECT Consider approval of a resolution urging Congress to reject that portion of the Administration's proposed 2006 Federal Budget that calls for the elimination of the Community Developmem Block Gram (CDBG) program and request that CDBG remain fully funded. BACKGROUND The Administration's FY06 budget proposes the elimination of the Community Development Block Gram (CDBG) program. In lieu of the long-standing and very successful CDBG program, the new proposal is for the creation of a smaller program within the Department of Commerce that will focus mainly on economic development. This will not replace the programs we have developed using CDBG funds that curremly assist families and individuals in Demon's low- income community. CDBG has served low and moderate-income residents in the City of Denton for twenty years. Some of our neighboring communities have participated since the program's inception in 1974. The creation of this program was the fulfillment of a promise from the Federal government to establish a strong partnership with local governments without dictating to local officials what specific activities they should be carrying out in their communities. CDBG has given flexibility to local governments to determine their needs and expend funds according to those needs. In Denton, these funds are very important. We have consistently used them to improve the extensive stock of older housing units within our city. Census figures indicate that approximately 40% of the housing units in Denton were built before 1970. These units have a high incidence of substandard features. A significant percentage of these units are located in the low-income areas of Demon. They house working families and senior citizens who have worked all of their lives, yet, these households cannot afford to buy food and clothing, pay utility and other housing costs and have funds available to make home repairs and improvemems when they are needed. We rely on CDBG funds to assist these households. In conjunction with programs designed to meet these critical home improvemem needs, the City of Denton also allocates the maximum percentage of CDBG funds to various social service agencies in our community. CDBG funds supplemem the general fund dollars that Demon provides to these services. CDBG funds help to provide after-school care, day care and educational programs to low-income households. They also provide shelter and food for the homeless and transitional housing for single-parem families who are about to become homeless. CDBG is an important part of the safety net here in the North Texas area! It is important to note that CDBG programs use local contractors and businesses to provide services. The elimination of the program will mean less support for local businesses, resulting in an overall economic loss to our community. ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE The budget proposal submitted to Congress would end the Community Development Block Grant program after the 2005-'06 program year. The program year in Denton is from August 1 through July 31. PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW (Councils, Boards, Commissions) The Community Development Advisory Committee and the Human Services Advisory Committee have both adopted resolutions supporting the Community Development Block Grant program that have been sent to Denton's congressional delegation. FISCAL INFORMATION The elimination of the CDBG program will require that the City's current home improvement loan program, minor repair program, demolition of substandard housing program and microenterprise loan program be discontinued or funded from other sources. Also, support for social services and public improvements in low and moderate-income neighborhoods would end. This may create gaps in services if the City was not able to increase spending in these areas. EXHIBITS 1. Resolution Respectfully submitted: Linda Ratliff Director of Economic Development Prepared by: Barbara Ross Community Development Administrator RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS URGING CONGRESS TO REJECT THAT PORTION OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSED 2006 FEDERAL BUDGET THAT CALLS FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM AND REQUEST THAT CDBG REMAIN FULLY FUNDED, WHEREAS, since its creation by President Richard Nixon more than 30 years ago, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program has been the signature partnership between the federal government and local government to create jobs, increase economic development opportunities, expand home ownership, and maintain neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, in previous years, CDBG provided the City of Denton with approximately $1.2 million per year that was used to benefit homeowners through the reconstruction or the repair of existing homes, assist new homebuyers with down payment and closing costs, provide loans to local small businesses owned by low-income persons, benefit thousands of residents by improving streets, sidewalks and parks in their neighborhoods and provide social services to thousands of families and individuals in need, through assistance to local agencies; and WHEREAS, for every dollar invested through CDBG programs, approximately $4.43 in private or other grant dollars is leveraged for housing, social services and economic development; and WHEREAS, the 2006 Federal Budget as released February 8, 2005, proposes to transfer the CDBG program and 17 other programs from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the Department of Commerce along with a reduced level of funding, thereby eliminating the CDBG program in the future; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the National Community Development Association and the National Association of Counties have joined with a coalition of business leaders to denounce the elimination of CDBG in the 2006 Federal Budget; and WHEREAS, the coalition to stop the elimination of CDBG has bi-partisan support, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Denton: SECTION 1. That Council hereby strongly urges the Congress to reject that portion of the Administration's proposed 2006 Federal budget that calls for the elimination of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, and to require that CDBG remain fully funded at the $4.7 billion level and continue to be administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. SECTION 2. That this resolution is hereby declared to be an emergency measure necessary for the immediate preservation of public peace, safety and welfare and for the reason that the Community Development Block Grant program is a vital component of the partnership between the federal and local governments to create jobs, increase economic development opportunities and expand home ownership. SECTION 3. That the City Council authorizes the City Manager or his designee to send a copy of this resolution to U.S. Senators John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison and Representative Michael Burgess. SECTION 4. That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of .. ., 2005. EULINE BROCK, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: HERBERT L. PROUTY, CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET AGENDA DATE: DEPARTMENT: CM: March 1, 2005 City Manager's Office Mike Conduff, City Manager SUBJECT Consider nominations/appointments to the City's Boards and Commissions. BACKGROUND The following is a list of current board/commission vacancies: Council Member Redmon has nominated Emma Guzman-Ramon to the Planning and Zoning Commission. If you require any further information, please let me know. Respectfully submitted: Jennifer Walters City Secretary S:kAgenda Items\Board-Commission vacancies.doc