HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-13-1994
Ap*NQ
SCIENCELAND 0110
IfFv
DENTON'S DISCOVERY MUSEUM
PROPOSAL
i
acit
i
to the Denton City Cou
anted
Pres {
OBJECTIVE. • 1. a. 2)* INCREASE ATTENDANCE FROM
I
OUTSIDE THE CITY OF DENTON
SOURCE OF FUNDS: LALOR FUNDS (Hotel and Motel tax revenue)
AMOUNT REQUESTED: $1050.00 per month for 7 months ($7350.00)
QUALIFICATION AREAS: Increased Tourism and Historical Content
USE OF FUNDS:
Increased Tourism
Hire a marketing consultant to develop a marketing plan to reach potential
customers outsida the City of Denton. The plan will include programs to increase
planned attendance at the discovery museum, increase workshop participation by
children outside Denton, develop a field trip program for neighboring school
districts, and cooperate with Golden Triangle Mall to increase mall traffic from
f outside the city. The consultant with the best background for this task is Ms.
Karen Courtman. Ms. Courtman served as the Project Director when the city of
Shreveport, LA wasted to develop a discovery museum. She was the leading force in developing and organizing this years opening of Sci•Port Discovery
Center*
bLdget: marketing consultant $2000.00
printing, postage,
and advertising $,600.00
4 tots! tourism development expenditure $S600.00
E
;
y *sec the 1994 objectives adopted by the museum board
j
W 1~
i
I~ t.VVM
~QendtaNo
a0~►d3ll
Creation of Historical Exhibits AreaDatO
Devote 300 square feet (10% of total exhibit space) to exhibits that are
historical in naturo. This area will consist of two exhibits (each needing 10 ft, by
15 ft, of floor space). The exhibits will be developed by members of the museum
board with the assistance of experts from UNT and TWU. While exhibits may be
rotated from time to time this space will always be devoted to exhibits with
historical significano, and content.
budget: Exhibit development board and community donations
General operAft support 51750 00*
total budget for historical exhibits area $17S0.00
Total budget
Tourism development $5600.00
Historical exhibits $1750.00
. . +r~n.wtiyLaftlaMmti ObQlYlibl H-wrn.y
Total $73S0.00
1
* Lalor fund statutes allow the funding of general operating expenses for the area
of the discovery museum devoted to historical er' )its. The total exhibit space is
j 3000 square feet so the 300 square feet of historical exhibits are 10% of total
exhibit space. The museum budget runs just over $2500 on a monthly basis. Ten
C percent of the budget is $250 and over a period of 7 months this would result in
a total expenditure of $1750.00.
i
i
_r
i
AW491
Data
to P~-~a
t
1994
2 ~a
J 1<< .
r _
MUSEUM
OBJECTS
J ` ' .~1 .Y4 /s. el. ~•t'N~'dY'^"Yr.. ..c. . ~r~. Y.r.,.- ~ ~ I i
aJVwMmw-~r+•
..Y 1. r e..11+1.Y
'fir' • ~1'
~ ~e t
1t ;l
5
I IT:
i
1
14 `
t I
I, 1.^
r ~ytYllyi#1'la,u:Ar.~Hd r+.. .,T ~ Ii:~
r.~1
a :'r
r.W
i
Aov*No O
AgeAQalt
S'MCELAND
DENTON'S DISCOVERY MUSEUM
1994 OBJECTIVES
1. Increase Attendance
A museum of our size should reach an average level of
attendance in the range of 10,000 visitors
per 1000 square
feet of exhibit space. For ScienceLand, this translates into
A.. 'o 30,000 visitors annually (an average of 9500 visitors per
month).
a. Develop a program to increase planned attendance focusing
on two demographic.groupst.. .
1) Denton residents
? 2) Visitors from outside the city of Denton.
b. Develop new workshops and increase attendance in workshops f
currently offered. j
f
o. Use free "Family Nights" to draw now visitors that may
become repeat customers or members.
r
2. Increase Memberships
ae Develop new membership material and distribute them to
visitors
b. Include membership information in newsletters
3. Increase Retail Sales
a. Redesign the floorplan to increase retail sales area in the
front of the museum.
be Increase and diversify inventory.
4. Establish an Outreach Program for Local Children
a. Develop a Summer visitation program for economically
challanged areas.
b. Develop a school-year program to reach economically
challenged children in area schools.
c. Encourage local teachers, to visit the museum and set up
field trips for their classes.
i
1.
I
i
E Nod
Y.M.
AND ~
Appal
d ~b
SCIMCELAND
DEHTON'S DISCOVERY MUSEUM
E
1994 OBJECTIVF..4 (cont.)
5. Develop New Exhibits
a. Work with the Don Harrington Discovery center to secure the
Structures exhibit for the Summer of 1994.
b. Develop a series of exhibits to tie into the Magic School
Sus series on PBS in the Pall 1994.
.r
o. Develop .a sexies of Sound exhibits for January 19950
;r
6. Serve as an Indirect Economic Resource to the Community by malcing the
Conference Room available for meetings.,
• ~y '
•
r^
r. rm'.t • v"a.r.•+,ua. r..rr r.wrv, .
• I
.
I
I
a 9
X
.
a
r>r.n v
Y
I.
I
~ ~4QendaNa
~Qe~al
ate
9 ~d
I
LONG ;
4 Y ~•11~ ~ ICY 1~
' RANGE ,
1
l i N'MN"~TS^~M~'V4}.tii1X~Y>1 YID. i.JMa.W.~,Vr.M.•n... • ~ - I '
{ 1 .
OBJTCTI'VES
1 Y ` 1
1.1 1~ ~ I 1 ~A'.i
1
I~ 1
1
r ' y
1 1. i. f Y 1.
t4
DIY`*.r! r•: i'1
M'.* bql
A" No
91a
SCffivCELANn
DENTON'S DISCOVERY MUSEUM
LUNG RANGE GOALS
1. Move into a permanent, stand-alone fac flit' in the Cultural District.
a. Capital Campaign in 1997
b. Facility available in 2002
2, Provide opportunities to explore Natural Science in context through outdoor
` education workshops using local resources.
3. Generate revenue necessary to expand and develop permanent staff and
777
~t r
'j
kI ,
+q t
.
~endafVa~
Apendal
/l Qf Opt,
I .
AUGUST
r rr
r
i
k BOARD
` ~ ; ~ , Mr~.w. ~....~.~....w......,. , . ACTIONS .
y
f
i
4f ~
J
1 ~
r,
e
. ,.may ~{.Jy,I'n `+.n _
n.. F
~Y WA~
r►'Y~M 1~
I
I
MEMORANDUM
/.Z~Gf2a
DATE: August 18, 1994 U
I
TO: The Honorable Robert Castleberry, Mayor, City of Denton
FROM: ScienceLand Board of Directors I
I ~
RE: Board actions at August 4, 1994
` In response to your question at the August 16, 1994 City Council meeting,
we wanted to provide a summary of actions taken to improve the museum's
financial condition.
One of the primary focuses of the August meeting was the financial condition of
the museum. The board reviewed the budget developed at the December board
meeting and found that attemdance growth was close to the targets but the budget
waa still very tight. The coming months would call for some special measures
because of the unplanned increase in the rental rate for the mall space. A variety
of proposals were made and reviewed.
PROPOSAL: Increase the price of admission
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: While the prices of $1 for children and $2 for
adults seems very reasonable,' the substantial difference between attendance on
regular nights and family night attendance demonstrates that our customer base is
very price sensitive. Increases In admission that lead to decreases In attendance
would have a disastrous impact on the museum.
ACTION TAKEN: The board decided to keep the price of admission constant
for the nerr future. After we enhance our reputation with a few more successful
exhibits, the Issue of admission prices will be reexamined.
PROPOSAL: Develop new exhibits
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: The 'Structures' exhibit demonstrated that the
( best way to bring in new customers and encourage repeat visits by existing
I customers is to provide a steady stream of new and 'interesting exhibits. The
I introduction of the h1agig Sch1 Bus Bus series on PBS in the Fall provides an
excellent chance to tie in with a popular series of books, a new show, and the
` f
.T
1 '
1
gp9R08ko 'a
Ap9nOa1
Date
Fall's programs at the public library. While the museum is not in a financial
condition to rent exhibits, a set of instructions can be obtained so that the board
members can build the exhibits. The train exhibits in December have been very
popular and should be re-booked.
ACTION TAKEN: The board decided to obtain the instructions necessary to
build exhibits tied to the M$gic Schools for September. This series of exhibits
will run through December. The trains will be scheduled for December and
January will bring the introduction of a series of exhibits involving "Sound." 1
PROPOSAL: Bring in new products for the retail section. !
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: The new floorplan has placed a new emphasis '
on our retail section and sales have been increasing. We have seen that goods tied
to popular exhibits are often the best sellers. Our current strengths are snake items
due to vector's popularity. We need to have retail items that will de to the Mgic
I mug and the Trains. {
ACTION TAKEN: New items that were on display at the Association of Science
and Technology Centers (ASTC) meetings will be considered along with additional
reasonably priced items. Conductor's hats will be added to the display for the
Train exhibit. We need to be sure that people remember ScienceLand as a place
j to shop for Christmas gifts.
PROPOSAL: Increase attendance and traffic in the museum
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: In addition to brochures, signs and other
advertising, word of mouth is still one of our best sources of attendance. Class
trips and other school related activities can be s good way to introduce children
to the museum. After the initial experience, they are likely to bring their family
back to the museum. We need to have special programs for teachers and
administrators to increase their awareness of our programs. Free child admission
with paid adult coupons in the G}oldea Triangle Mall newsletter is another means
to increase traffic. Increased traffic also increases retail sales,
ACTION TAKEN: Diana will contact Denton After-school Action, Selwyn, and
other private schools in the area to schedule visits. We will also have some open
house nights for teachers to introduce them to the programs. Our coupon will
appear in the next mail newsletter.
low
ACMNo 9y_
1 ~
BUDGET
k a, INFORMATION
2.1
i.•
I
1 ti~
,
r ' 1
M
No ~
Dete
i
i
i
1
r ;
SUPPORT
MATERIAL
i
it
1
Ile
j 1
J.
Date
Denton's Discovery Museum
1994 Budet
(revised 84-94)
INCOME
! category year to date ( 6.30-94) FY 1994 FY 1993
Fees Attendance 5,901.00 12,000 11,310
Wofthops 304.00 700 1,887
i
Birthday p,,,"" 1,020.00 21000 1,240
Memberships 2,600.en 5,000 4,880
Store • Merchandise safes 3,033.92 7,000 2,427.78
a s Sales tax 305.18 610 176.90
Donations 2,581.18 3,150 2,838.12 y
s reimbursement TWU 688.36' 1.100. 0.00
W0* study
' I Grants 1,too.00 1,100 000
,
,
CRY support 0.00 OAO
Fund W *V 0.00 1,500 0.00
xx ~
° r Fun& carded forward 684.83 86481 1,649.81
k
In-KW Donations Materials / Sef*" 7,618 10,400 13,400
TOTAL INCOME 28,814.76 49,444.83 39,891.81
{ .
4
,
l
! ♦r
d
1
PIN
o6t5 5k Vav
Denton's Discovery Museum Budget page
EXPENSES
category year to date (6-30.94) FY 1994 FY 1983 i
100 Operatkx>s
101 Willies 1 rent 7.200.00 14,400 14,400
102 Facilities Maintenance 154.87 500 925.49
k 103 Telephone 256.09 600 638.10
104 OHks Supplied 66.16 150 111.73
105 Printing 346.74 760 94858
106 Postage 107.90 220 839.17
107 Memberships 426.00 425 OAO
108 inwrance 238.02 681 304.98 1}
109 Store lmrentory, 3,139.47 5,000 2,211.73
110 $8168 Tax 304.17 810 66.75
111 Advertising (h c" 130.68 200 4896
112 ' Adv. (beyoW Oily) 0.00 0,00
t 113 General supplies 110.39 226 415.81 ~
114' Property Tax* 176.26 176.28 10921
100 TOTAL OPERATIONS 129653.27 23,837.26 20,707.48
200 PMWM
~J. 201 Exhibits 1,848.65 3,766 2,618.49
202 workshop aWfles I&% 50 3669
203 Blrthday supplies 188b7 250 41.33
204 Outreach program oosw 0.00 1,100 0.00
1
200 TOTAL PROGRAM 1,865.71 5,168 2,828.51
' • This was a charge for 1993 proFerty taxes that will no longer be incurred because we have now
{
completed the necessary paper work to redeye tai exempt status as a SOt - C (3) oorporatkM
f
E
r
r J
is t,+'v 3
oat ~als
Denton's Discovery Museum Budget page 3
category year to date (6.30-94) FY 1994 FY 1983
300 30P1DirecOor 0.00 oA0 570.97
9
302 Manager 3,316.93 7,000. 6,000 .
303 Hourly Help 31430.37 81800 4,463.68
304 FICA 656.92 1.200 968.88
906 OxnmiasiomI tncenBves 659.00 1.400 1,371.60
we musge 0.00 000 a00
307 r eaeoaf3on 0.40 0.00 0.00
308 . oontractservices 1,000.00 2.944.00 2,000.00 1
300 TOTAL PAYROLL 6,962.22 :9,444.00 18,879.01
400 Re"NOund Balance
401 ' GenoW Fund 2116.68 782 64 eM.83
r
402 OpetaWV Fund 200.00 200.00 200.00
i 403 Caahonhand 2500 2500 25.00
404 , Savings 0.00 r 0" 400 TOTAL RESERVE 2,343.86 1,007.b4 88493
TOTAL EXPENSES 25,814.78 49444.80 39,841.81
Y ' I
t
I ~
~s
r
! Date
r visitor Survey
St^ience Land - Denton's Discovery Museum ;i
` location attendance visit
source percentage plannod?
a ~~~q Q City of Denton 38.8% not
f ~47wI'YL
(20 month Denton County (not City) 31.1% asked Texas 222.1%
summary) Out of State 8.0%
' Vlaiter Ss~rVeV_
,
1894 City of Denton 33°k 8$ j
'
` E)entbn County (not City) 36%
24% 33%
Texas 79'0 28%a
Out of State
b3%**
1 f r D jI i e ~r
of those in each catagory .
percentage
peicentage of att surveyed
I a,
rf l r`''te 'i ~ 3
.e
r '
}
t
, e.Y--%
NYYaI~
ra
aOrYIlY11l~
A.~J" JJ1~Y~
rl
ANDED LEWISVILLE/DENTON COVERAGE INSIDE. PAGES ImM Texas • 600Hbbiresl
• afbt
ol-itan
trop
.e
tau ne aw errry awe ~ HUD 27 A
f
Barnes exhibit drew record crowd
By )and Kutner W tAwp tltabtas p tanlloa lee ekb
aeowratwtrtrtannglr.e. Economic impact
4% sense ma ae swim .a.a.mnnal
I
tart wt>ar11 _ fares elUsetisa nevi web a aatop MW "mom and
.:habit m t eloMd : w Kh.bm put at $102 million bald m b.we
i An Mnna &m rw Wirt MWWM of end rd ale Y y>sa nlotrlt neen~, Dn
t •w1 an a*"= Deno in Tam bwery am Tae D" MMM d Arri IM "WWI Fllloaq veto fe IR w aoord aleWlt
papa win um UM allliw into Hw wftei l AD 71" anew XSpoe polple, Mod abort the Ma►►9{'a pttyeee In Who" III
!Deal ea i mum dBctale eiW Toer NOW penono stteo 1 the How" bfss► hem
am d Act's 111 0 1 9111 mow. "Ited1mv, `Yea mm nU" we did film Beraas ahlbh
We tknrlbt w slot pt UM" people, edol %BP MM benoa we vented taon pnpM to am ft
and w up Wilk men thaa 4RW Dallas view Mooooad fa shod a as uwv, bet tw'i► was ad ft Wcomnn we
mown &*cw wmand i>fl i 8" lbird of as Barn" "IsIxth asdina, rkosgbt *0
fsaft
at uM paanwh was. a +,,is.... ,w.arrder+ f
"ibis p1WV" tkw be tesmtadere soft 004 seen tbaa mw from hd Waii 1rwV bas natl.
hen to mow d red gsa1,4 sad and ta• Abort 34 percent aar hem adwr Para of "I thlab B ►r boaa a P" tbhf ter for Iktleaelr no •ad Mlhm
pwaaw Taal Mad It petaet ham o11told thi KlabeB aaa a load ddig ke Tiua h's UM/lflllit i it bb ino
In the to web tbd eke MUMt wt at TN exMW bM ea emlawd dm all- gtvea p qk a kit d mdwmMnt abort U% OoliaodM WNd ON a TQ Mt
the Kimbell tka mtteettm kped M7,A7 r!i Lion Impact en tba Pon Warth sooaomr, sad it's memo ethse that wsln not JOIN M atbbbdd$M lrtgift fi I" at
tom of whom 4fba111 moody mw this *W. suwdi4 11121111114 h the AM= Barba . Mb w amm a hp uc at Kim" lmam&
Barnes art exhibit KimbefF
sets Texas attendance recor&
C"U"d from hge M
erlbuil Now taemwi s will onto %
backwater, but that we've lot Rbb weii slain ft r their t
bhWA that are a good se te?
h 0% Nor. 20, the Kim :to
might tea to London or Paris or open nether as mat Is
Tob~q Wherovp " Treenres from MPM 7%0 e
The e%biblt has sba bed a lest Art of Ancient XPMn," erhkh
lag tmpect on newtoi iilp. Witch tares cis d the ^
oeart7 tryled We now et an all arneotta Wutlon ad our Dpese 0
time hlgbofISM. TheIncentive of frog the 1,0Mpleee Mpff
fit
D11MIfa •~in livJnn d.r ln••etw wrnw" .y.. J.Y M. .Y Y1 ti.l.
T`..1, 'F ..Wi t ♦ Yy~Y'l Tl1 Li¢#~M Yi
Y
I
F
r,
CITY
TY
COUNCI
r
o ~
r
t
y~
. 3
,
III r
y ~ i 1 i=1j N
4; p
r
w ;l y
ti c u "s
r
}
1
C~
1
r,
4t ; cW ~
arv
r a. r 01
I,ITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNlC1PAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (817) 566^8307 j
Office ot the City Manager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO. Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
L g~A Fp ~ '
DATE: September 9, 1994
z SUBJECT: Solicitation on City Streets
L The City council has asked that this item be placed on a work
session agenda for discussion. As you know, the matter of
+r solicitation on city streets has been before the Council on several
+S occasions and is currently prohibited by ordinance.
During the most resent discussion at the regular meeting of March
aI' , 22, 1994, staff reported that a comprehensive survey had been done
regarding what other cities allowed and that a draft ordinance had
¢,t been prepared for consideration. Council had previously discussed
the ordinance and voted not to proceed and the item died at that
fI point.' Following additional deliberations or: March 22 concerning i
-0i ;t public input, council again decided not to proceed with the
l,, ,development of an ordinance permitting solicitation on city
,
streets. The minutes of the March 22 meeting are attached for your
review (See Attachment 1).
The City Council Report for the March 22 meeting has also been
provided (See Attachment 2). It includes a copy of the current
r, solicitation ordinance and a portion of the agenda backup from the
:yt a, meeting of August 24, 1993. Additionally, this item includes the
minutes from the meetings of September 29, 1992; August 24, 1993; I r,:
August 310 1993; and, October 12, 1993. Please note that the
minutes are listed in reverse order fron the way they originally
appeared in the backup. That is, the October 12, 1993 minutes $ ,
v,s appear first followed in order by August 31, August 240 and
~t ,l w September 29.
Staff has also provided the City Council Report of August 31, 1993,
akr~Wt o,
which discussed the proposed ordinances regarding charitable
( solicitation (see Attachment 3). Council may recall that the
difference in the two ordinances is that one included a provision
for insurance for the applicant who wished to solicit and the other ,
did not.
t`i, Rt
,
J, + "Dedicated to Quality Service"
40 40
AN .
I
Val
~o
w. Agenda,
The background information pertaining to solicitation on the
t roadways is reflected 3.n the memorandum of August 13, 1993 (See
Attachment 4). Th13 item documents the Staff research to determine
what other cities are doing in regards to solicitation.
Please advise if i can provide additional information.
RESPECT Y SUBMITTED,
II/,`, • i
i
fv'
hr Loy V.-Harrell
City Manager
f' .I
Prepared byt
r,
n
A7 AahAo Portug a Ant to the city Manager
Attachments: Minutes of the March 22, 1994 Meeting
City Council Report, dated, March 22, 1994
City Council Report, dated, August 31, 1993
If
t ` e 'c Memorandum, dated, August 13, 1993
r
atil r .
~~~ff2!ls S'
Ji
T
f r ~~J 1 it (I
y1 C I~hYr 1~ N)
11`` LI y • r
L
}
T
r
{ y 4r ~ i + r':
f ',1(ff
F.•i1~ f I I ' 1 n
f r ,
I ~
w_.
IWO"
1
Attachment 1 9 9
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 22, 1994 ~8e1 feNO _
Page 26 a9BBd2
r 9- Update on the "Vision for Denton" project.
Council Member Miller stated that two im act
set. A schedule of when the impact rou P groups had recently
been developed rind the project wamoving forward, be meeting had
City Manager Marrell stated that there had been a first meeting
with chairs of the various impact groups. Every
represented and the chairs continued to be very husiastic about
the project. By the and of the week, evety impact group would have
met except for the education group. The education group was in
need of two nev chairs. One had been selected, Jim Alexander, and
the group was -orking or the other co-chair,
Council Member Brock stated that the open house for the Vision Room
i would be on Surday April 10, 1994, 2100-000 p.m.
Mayor Castleberry stated that there was a great deal of interes
the project. tin
10. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
r
A. Teasley Lane Update - Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager,
stated that the City continued to work with the Texas Department of
Highways. On April 6-7 there would be meetings at Sam Houston
Elementary school for interested individuals regarding the project.
Notice of the meetings would be sent by utility bills and through
the press plus Channel 25.
The Council considered the Work Session items not considered during
the stork session.
J- The Counoil received a report and held a discussion regarding
r{, jf solicitation from the roadways and gave staff direction.
r;` 3 Miller motioned, Brock seconded to defer this item until the next
meeting.
d, Council Member Perry stated that this was the third time to
considerr.this.item. He asked why it would be necessary to postpone
j
the tem
+ Council Member Miller indicated that Council Member Chew was not at
„ the meeting.
On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott %mye", Miller "aye" smith "nay",
Peary "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion tailed with a 3.3
vote.
i
iou
gsndaNo.
City of Denton City Council Minutes ~Q6A~dl
March 22, 1994 late r
Page 27
7 l/y/ J
City Manager Harrell stated that this item had been before council
several times concerning whether or not to permit solicitation on
the roadway within the City. Currently such activity was
prohibited. A comprehensive survey had been done regarding what
other cities allowed. Council had asked for a draft ordinance at
that time, and gave direction regarding provisions for the
ordinance. Council voted 3-3 a year ago to not proceed and the
item died at that point in time.
Council Member Miller indicated that since he had been on Council,
these types of issues had been resolved by ordinances. This was
r' one issue which the Council refused to. put in ordinance form for
consideration. He felt that there was enough indication that this
was the kind of issue which should be brought to Council in the
form of an ordinance to give the public an opportunity to provide
input. He wanted Council to put this information in the form of an
ordinance and then consider that ordinance.
Council Member Perry stated that the public had had three
opportunities to address the issue. Many cities had an ordinance
which prohibited solicitation from the roadways. The City did not
deny a group a basic right. The City did pay attention to safety
hazards and to impeded access to the roadways by individuals. This
was a serious matter in a busy intersection.
{ Council Member Miller stated that this item had only been
considered by Council in a study session and there had been no
public input on the issue. There had been no consideration of an
ordinance.
Ken Gold stated that the ordinance regulations could be lessened
and that would provide some good to a national charity. While he E
could not predict tho future, there had never been a single injury
in prior years. He realized there was a constitutional question in f
that if one organization were allowed to solicit from the street
then all must be allowed. A recent court decision indicated that
charitable organizations had access to the streets.
Council Member Cott indicated that it was time to have an ordinance
to consider.
Mayor Pro Tom Smith stated that she was opposed to solicitatior on
the roadways. It was a serious traffic hazard, a bad example to
children and a nuisan:a to drivers.
Miller motioned, Cott seconded to direct staff to proceed with the 1
drawing of an ordinance for council to consider at a meeting where J
the public could respond. With the information provided at the
I`..+
,ANA
i?►Y
101
goo& No
endalt
' ag
City of Denton city council minutes late ~
March 221 1994 .S~
page 28 cgr
e
meeting of October 1993 there was a proposed ordinance. Staff
could also provide data from other cities regarding tSmiths"nay",
on roll vote, Brock "aye "t Cott aye , Killer "aye",
1. perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 3-3
vote.
b. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
"Building Communities ce in eYfor Empowerment as and EEnter nterprise
Communlties, and appli
Community.
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that the Federal 3overnment had announced that six cities
would be designated as empowerment zones. Denton probably would
much
not designated Sixty the funds r,obably would o
of Denton's sizeomight
larger er communities. .
be designated enterprise communities. He ielt it would be a
worthwhile project to go through. To be designated an enterrfrise
n an
community this city would have to develophe Depa emit o!a Mousing
area of poverty and economic services.
principles in the project - (1)
and Urban Development had four key p p
+ economic opportunity which involved the creation of jobs both
a
within the community and throughout the region, (2)
community development which involved empowerment of communities by
supporting local plans that coordinate economic, ommysica
environmental, community, and human development, (3) c y-
all
based partnerships which involved participation
change which
seq~rents of the community and (4) strategic vision involved a strategic map for revitalization. He proposed a `
small
technique which would involve me sting with individual
an to council
groups for 2-4 hours regarding the issue. A
would be presented at the second meeting in May.
!mayor Pro Tom Smith asked for the deadline for submittal of the
application.
ento be d of June the State by June
e i Federal govepr ment by the had
4oa ad I to th
Council Member Perry asked where the membership of the groups would
cone from.
Robbins replied that anyone who wished, to become involved could do
I Oweley CGrous oalition,iand the Community Development Advisory Committees
Council Member Miller suggested that church groups, police inpc.t,
the educational system such as PTA, and the judiciary be included.
r
Nin
WWI r
Attachment 2
ApendaNo 91.008 #
^ CITY COUNCIL RRPORT Date - 3 •21 r
! TOf Mayor and Members of the City council
i FROMi Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
1.
r; DATES March 22, 1994
BUBJECTt Solicitation on City Streets
The City Council asked that this item be placed on a work session
agenda. The City Council has studied this issue on several
occasions.
A copy of the City's current solicitation ordinance is included.
The ordinance prohibits any type of solicitation on the roadway.
Also included is a portion of the agenda backup from August 24,
1993 which outlines some of the items included in other cities,
rhatltable solicitation ordinances.
I
Ninutes from the September 29, 1992, August 24, 1993, August 31,
1997, nrW October 120 19931 City Council meetings have been 1...
Included for your review.
Staff will be available to answer any questions or provide i
additional information.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
e
Loy V. Harre 1~'-
City Manager
prepared byi
4&,%J,4
Catherine E. Tuck
Administrative Assistant
i i
a,
r~ ;y
~.v
i
DENTON CODE oats, qfJ2-'YV
25-3
~f
water over
Bee. 96.9. Construction of permanent drains dlscharging
building or premiiee in
i control of any
(a) It shell be unlawful for the Owner or P~a in other contr of ant drain a v to d scD+rite
the city to constructor maintain any down"ut or
water over the surface of any sidewalk.
(b) Whenever the city ea(near OW di+ocy a any dowaspout or other permanent drain oa
premises is the city which discharges water over the surface of any sidewall4 it aba)1 be
any
9 in Contra of any such W in writing, to correct the I
1111 his duty to notch the owner or person
condition within thirty (90) days !tom the date of such rwtia.
i} iCode IBBb,i 916)
Aso. 964. Pafatbng or marktat on public P"PerWYi permit for Paintlog address MW
ben for pay. paw to draw, mark or paint any alga, picture or cbar-
It shall sidewalks a (or my ~ utility polo, public bridge, public building,
aster r upon any WOW ere otherwise provided In this section.
public rlgLt of way or other public P*oPY+
(b) The prohibition of subsection W of this section shall not,,, P* to City MPlcyas,
sur their authorized agents marking P P
auveyon or public utility employees or
rveyors or of their duties or permitted construction work or to persons marldag or pal"tfn
upon a public sidewalk by making use of chalk or other similar water4oluble matarl"
(e? The prohibition of subsection W of thin section shall not apply to pis dashing to
paint hoa.se numbers upon curbs for payment by the owner at that address, in aawrdana with
a permit !saved by the city secretary. The application form for the permit shall conts:n the
name and address of the Perron M&Ung application, minimum standards for the application
House numbers shall be
of the numbering and other information as may be deemed neassan'.
Ci I
placed only on the curb in front of the dwelling on the driveway return pottion of the e,curb. In
no nt shall numbering be placed upon a curb without fist obtaining payment ~
of pomeRt from the owner of the property. AD persona soliciting MOM of Property to Provide i
i house numbering services. shall include the name, address and permit number for the person l
soliciting on any written solicitation materials delivered to the property crone:.
(Code 1988, i 91.9.Ord No. 89.091, 11, 9.7.89)
Sec. S&L Soliciting bnsiaees or CUSHtabls oontributions.
It lball be unlawful for any person to be upon any street or roadway or to be or go upon
the shoulder or median of any street or roadway for the purpose of soliciting business or
charitable Contributions of any I<d Erom the oavpant of any vehicle.
(Ord. No. 88.081,1 I191•lOW), &16.88) 1671 at seq.
Cross rderence-3olicitore and itinerant merchants geasrally, # `
100
z-
a
S' S
a
w
S
CITY
COUNCIL.
'a
.r.
-s
L
n
f
1i
ror
YAV~V
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
To: Mayor and Members of the City Council
i FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
j SUPJECT: Charitable Solicitation at intersections
DATE: August 24, 1993 1
BACKGROUND:
In 1988, the City Council adopted an ordinance prohibiting persons
from soliciting business or charitable contributions in the rights-
of-way.
In September of 1992, the City's firefighters, represented by Mt.
1►1a» Nempated, asked the City Council to allow solicitation for
chariiable contributions at intersections for their annual Muscular
Dystrophy Association Fill-the-Boot campaign. As requested, staf f
studied the ordinances from several other cities and presented the:
information to the City Counci] for the September 29, work session.
At that tine the City The firefighters areeasking again thisdyear
r1 approv4 en amendment.
that the City Council repeal or amend the ordinance.
This report highlights the information four other cities require
when permitting persons to solicit charitable contributions at
intersections. The ordinances from those cities, Lewisville,
isrthelbackuplmaterial s d minutes from the Sept mbe.r 29,o1992awork
session.
SUMMhRY3
Options
Liability and Insurance Information :t
• Provide proof of insurance, and execute a hold harmless and
indemnification agreement Grand Prairie}
I Reference: Section 20-38.1(f} (Gana
Cection 11-169(4} ( }
• Sign a liability waiver releasing the city from any claim
1 arising from the solicitation drivE+
Reference: Section 20-181 (Carrollton}
Section 11-169(5} (
µfa,W
YIM
[me's
Ap*ft
J
Proof of Charitability
• Provide proof of tax status with the Internal Rove ervice
Reference: Section 20-38.1(b)(8) (Grand Pr air e)
• Provide a copy of the organization's charter or articles of
I incorporation. If a foreign charitable organization, they
II must provide a copy of their certificate to do business in
i Texas.
i References Section 20-38.1(b)(5) (Grand Prairie)
• sign 'an affidavit stating that at least 75% of the monies
collected will go to the purpose of the solicitation
Referencet Section 20-38.1(b)(7) (Grand Prairie)
` Was and Place Regulations
Hours
• Prohibits solicitation between the hours of lam - 9am and 4pm
6paa (Carrollton)
Limits hours to 9am - 9pm Monday - Saturday (Grand Prairie)
• Limits hours to Um , 7pm (Lewisville)
• Limits to daylight hours (Plano)
Length of Time r
6, + Limit to 1 consecutive 24 hour period per year per
organization (Plano)
r. • Limit solicitation to 3 consecutive days beginning the 3rd
Thursday of March$ May, August and October each year
(Lewisville)
Y• • Limit solicitation to 2 permits per organization per calendar
y.. year for not more than 3 specifid days within a 30 day period
Section 20-38.1(f) Grand Prairie
AoLimit
Is yeave of age (Plano)
r + • 16 years of age or older (Grand Prairie)
• 14 ears of age
Y (Carrollton)
;
Other options
• Near traffic safety vests at all times (Plano)
Identify specific crossings or intersections to conduct
solicitations (Lewisville)
i
k i K
V -5
E • Prohibit walking on the main roadway at all times
(Carrollton)
• Specify length of time required to file for permit prior to
the solicitation drive. For example, Carrollton require" 3
days, Grand Prairie requires 30 days, and Lewisville 5 days
s • Require contact person information
Require organization to provide a description of the
r,
•
solicitation methods
• Each person involved in the solicitation drive must provide a'
statement disclosing each conviction of a crime. Sect 20-
38*1(b)(6) (Grand Prairie)
' Request 'per yoAr
•
Grand Prairie generally receives one requeat,per year, from
the Bhriners.
a • Piano usually receives about 6 isquesto each year, including 1
the Bhriners, the firefighters Fill-the-Soot campaign, a
Kiwanis,'aand the Plano National Letter Association.
d 4, • Lewisville generally has two organizations apply for a permit
each year the firefighters Pi11-the-Soot campaign and the 4
x ,,x Knights of Columbus.
i
RE$PF.C'fiFULLY SUSHI'iTED, -r
Ll V. Harrell
City Manager
Prepared by:
" &*rn ca S. Og ee y
r Adninistrative Intern
J'r
J'
ear, ~ ,
v+wl
r
i
N► !~M
own
AQMNo
J City of Lewisville
ORDINANCE NO, r•B• j~
AN ORDINA.NCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OT THE CITY
OF LLRISVILLE0 TEXAS, pROVIDINO FOR CHARITASLL
i SOLICITAVION IN ROADWAYS LOCATED WITHIN TYS
CITY &IHITS Or SHE CITY OF LEKISVILLEJ
PROVIDING REG"ATIONSJ REQUIRIN3 A PERMIT;
PROVIDING FOR APPEAL; PROVIDING A SEVERAEILITY
CLAUSE! PROVIDING YOR A VINALTY; PROVIDING A
REPEALER; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE OATS; AND
DECLAAINO AN EMERGENCY
VNEREASO ARTICLE 6701D sECTIOM 81, V.A,T.B. ¢S
CITY WITH THE AUTHORITY TO PERMIT CHARITAHLB SOLICIr1rloNe
rzonwAYso AND}
WHEREAS, THE CITY COUNOIL IS OF THE OPINION jpK%T St::
'.CTIVITY SHOULD HE PERl11TTED;
' NOW# TXEREFORS'o RZ IT ORDAINED By THE CITY COUNCIL C,' 7N
CITYOF LERISVILLEOTEXASJ
r 111, ,
DEFINITIONS j
The following words and phrases when used
Ordinance shall for the purpose of this ordinance have the aa:.ir ;
respootiwraly ascribed to them in this sections
A, "charitable organization" Includes assoo.at:::i
clubs,, societies, firms, partnerships CCr
p corporations as well as Itdlyiduais or f rc'.r^ :r I
individuals uhieh meet the definition of chat ! t•k!:,f !
1 4'
organization ostablishad by the Internal Re',.%,
;L . Service,
r a, "Charitable solicitations Canpaign" ceans d:,}
of conduct whereby an/ charitable crlsrizet!
I solicit money or proporty on the -,1e1 Jr
i representation that the proceeds therofr^r. c,r.r fas'
an charitable, educational, patriotic c,r
philanthropic purpose
"Solicit" or 118(%i itation" rea^3 a:i, ; r :
written raq'jest •.ct..c:ng of ette,,ptl.nq co x•,t,d,.
ro,iey or pr,zperty.
I
'ri1M 4^r :-d
Caw IRfl1r
E
I
~ ~t+C~NA?tC£ ~J, ISSi-8'44 ~A11dM
Page I
( D. "City" means the City of Lewisville.
i E. "Director'' means the City of Lewisville t:Tn,n1%
j Development Director or that person's designee.
~j~CTION II.
PERMIT REQUIRED
It shall be unlawful to stand in a roadway to solicit
charitable contributions unless the organization conduct:my si-a
and responsible therefor shall first grave obtained a permit is
compliance with the terms of thi■ Ordinance.
t i
eta tI1.
- APPLICATION FOR PERMIT
A permit to stand in a roadway to Solicit c' irlla.ab:,a
x contributions in the City shall be granted only after an
' a pplicaticn for such purpose is filed with the Director not leas
t r . khon five (6) days prior to the initiation- of the propcsa,
i w,aalioitation. Such application ah.ill be adorn to by the a;nli.;
and"sha'.1 contain that following informationi
't A. The full name and address of the charitable
organization applying for the permit to sollc.t
a roadways
B. The name and address of the person or persons why
{t f 1,' will, be in, charge of conducting the chars:ab:a
Bolicitatic~ns campaign in the Citys
C. The period within which such charitable soi:.: t+-
tions campaign shall be conducted, including
proposed date for the beginning and and of alicr. i
~y* campaigns and
' x D. (Proof that the charitable organi:al:ien r„ezt9 :,:a
definition of charitable organization estaclis,4.ed .
by the Internal Revenue Service.
> BCCT1 N IV. l , s
CONDITIOIJ OF APPROVAL
~t
i,
~ qM ♦i w y
rig goal
I
Mo
Ordinance No. ,1+570-(p
Page 3
Upon receipt of a proper application as provided fcr ir.
this Ordinance,- the Director shall approve and issue a permit tc
stand in a roadway to solicit charitable contributions for tr
period requested unless the Director determines thats
A. One or more of the statements made in th4
application arm not true; or
S. The charitable organization fails to meet t`.e
definition established by the Internal Revence
Service; or
' C. information li requirediandt'he application ce all cr.a
APfcsr. I
act r in
Any person aggrieved by the action of the Cie
application for permit as provided In Section 1v. of
an
denial of
! this Ordinancshall have the right of appeal to the City counati
a of the City. Such appeal shall be taken by filing with the City
secretary, within tsn (10) days after notice of the action
complained of has been mailed to such person's last known address,
statement setting forth fully the grounds for the aprtal.
a
hearing on such aP poil
p
written The Council shall set a time and lace for a ,
p
" within thirty (30) days, and notice of much hearing shall be gt~en
to the appellant by nail, postage prepaid, to the address listed
on the application, at least five {S) days prior to such hearing.
The decision and order of the Council on much appeal shall be final
and coaolusive.
s
l
TIME AND PIACS 12OULATIORS
s;otwithstanding any provision in this ordinance to tl.a
contrary it shall be unlawful to stand in a roadway to solic.t
charitab{e contributions in the City excepts
As For three (3) consecutive days, beginning on the 3rd
Thursday of March, May, August and October each
year; (except August, 1990, aharain such three (3)
consecutive days shall begin on the fourth (4th)
Thursday.)
f
Mf'~f fi..i tiC+ I
1
owl
AW&Itm5 W-
I
Pagon~nce No. l 1-8•_9a Qate T
g
B. At the following crossings or intarsecticrlso
i
1. Valley parkway at Bellaire;
I
2, Bellaire At Old Orchards
.1. e,ellaire at Ldzonds;
r s4c
5' h~ 4. r,ellaire at 1211
114 34
Southwest parkway at Corporatef
~,,,S` 64 Garden Ridge at Valley Parkway;
J~' C 7. College parkway at Valley parkway; I
r.' 8, Valley Parkway at Halm and
.
Ca Between the hours of 700 a,m, to ?too
•
RaPtALLR
Ever" ordinance or parts of ordinan.as found to be it
conflict herewith are hereby repealed,
is toy yrt r
"i15N8RA8iLITY i
It is hereby declared to be the intention of the City
Council that the sections, paragraphs, sentences clauses, ar!
phrases of this Ordinance are severable, and ii &nv section,
paragraph, sentence, clause or phraie of this ordinance shall be
declared unconatitutional or invalid by any judgment or docraa of
a Court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality or
w invalidity stall not affect any other reaaininq section, Para ra h,
sentonco clause or phrase of thir Ordinance; and the City Ceurcii
hereby declares it woulis have passed the remaining portions even
though it had known the affected parts would be held
unconstitutional.
SICTION TY.
ti PENALTY
Mme,'
+Q,ae~No 9 '
Ordinance No. 11-8-90_
page 3
Any person, firm or corporation who viola:cn
provision of this Ordinance shall be deamod guilty of a m:;ssr.~an~:
and, upon conviction thereof in the Municipal Court, shall to
sub5fot to a fins of not more than $2,000.00 for each offense, and
each and every day such offense is continued shall constitute a r.e+
and separate offense.
NIM-U
EFPECTIVS DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and approval and publication as the law in such cases
proviaas.
a*n
'rioN xs.
S. `AMBAGBUOY
it being tar the public welfare that these aaandtcnts to
the Code of ordinances be passed tcrd
iates an s Ordinance benread^on~LbYeo
hi
nogessity,;end the rule requiring
(3~ separate octasions'be# and the sane is hereby, waived, and this
f' 0rdinancei.shill be in full force and affect from and after its
Olean and approval and publication, as the law in such cases
provides rt
' PASS&D and APPAOVSO by a vote of to on. this
JUL day of Ausust _ 19900
1
M71YOR,oCT?Y o LEWiSVILLB, TEX1►5
ATTESTS
i
' T HENDR 9
city secretary I
r ~
ti
}
,
l . A l
r ~ 1
i
OD
No. 1lS►-8-Q~
nanc4
All
page
a~i• 6 ,(,Y
J►PPRO ED t~5 TO FOPX3
cily AttOtney
1
,~A yFIrY1 I 1 gyp:. '
♦ S , ,;'i.~ 1 I `I ^~.J ! .~l . r dry I 1 t"•
~r.
E.
.
I 4
iOl
I
City of CarroLlton
V It~Y 'Q1~`M°
IV
111~"'VvVVVPPPkG--'~Y. ,11
, i
fff U orwillow S.
aoL2C2TAaIoft DRIvU FOR CRAlt2TULi CpttSRTat t:l S
lea. 30-ltl. P#xtt RZQC2uD, APPL:CAT:0N.
A chsritabls erganisacicn dltlrlnq to solicit for :rarl`.~e
q
contributions upon the public atroate of t.`.e city,
tile. net lass than three (Si days prior to the ae:::iti::J".
drive, with the Director of Ttatfls and Tianspe;tatdcn
dasigaae, an applleatian Oct a permit, tantaiatrq Avt rat
limited to the lallovinq inioratttont
A. Same, address and phone nuceer at ys»on-s) reveatlne
the permit.
p. sotlaSee and location at the street(@$ upon vhl:T. th4
C. The data and time for the se:lcitation. IIl
or
€
D• solicitation endiev dence al the Organisation,$^not fPro
profit etataa.
Is A Witten agraasant oxecutcd by the :tar.ta::e
orr~qaniiation, agreein to irdesAity geld hold the ~►ty
d -its eieare 440 ib employees harmless a3a:+st a1o
claims of !n ury o.J 49241e to persons or proe.tl.
vhather 130 or private, atilinq out of the
aeitalae en drive.
a fee, 20-104 RtaT ICT108a.
A. Ito lesson shall olicitl9 the fungain ds , tr (Art. 67:6. d. die.
the 11(c{lyrp
p, xe selioitatten shall h iiidi ~smtisate sea ad ri=rata
i. bighvsys Komar threat y
fps,
Co so one under the age at Sa years of age shall solicit
along arterial roadways.
D, talLsiters shall be asbloat to all traffic r4r.,15=11-12
and pedestrian duties.
sack 200105. Saa4AWCi Or PC> ZT.
"aa submission. validation, slid approval of the •ppl:cation The for m th~lot.ationo datelarasatime.;eThetD rnia i 4Y ate
may edify blia health, warty
Waked at gt any tine to the intars.t et pu ~
er velfars.
.
Ste. 20-i11. OtS2AL Or #11M2T, APPCAL,
a
i Wgdn =7
Page 104
She Diraotor say deny a penSt in his cplnion the
solicitation drive You16 cause extrese disruption of the
Ealivery of City services p or axtrae hardship
cittsens. It request for a Melt is danled at modified, tho
vipptlinantwo t(s(2) a dayi of appall to denial, City 7iar.ager or his designee
AMMX X122, VIOLATIONS AND PIPALT2=S
Sea. 100115. PRCCtDLW UPON MUST FOR VIOLATIOJ :r
CNAPTtR.
when ■ parson is arrested lot viol►tinoo a prevision of t'.:o
chapter and is not W01atsly taken betera a segistrats, -he
arresting officer shall take the persons name, address, the
drivers license nusbar and regiatration of him vehicle, :f i
any, and !saw to the person, in writing on the Jere
pro-Aded by the city, a notice specifying the offense C9atgo
and commanding the person to anover to the cbergo against him
ir. not less than tan (lo) days at the U s% and place
:soitied in the notice. The arresting etfleer shall hers
era atreat ed person give his vrittan promise to answer to
specified in the notice, and upon securing such vrittsn
presloo, shall release such parson from custody.
Poo. 10-144. GIVING 1ATJ1 NAM UPON ARMST FOR TWrI:
VIOLATION.
A person, u n being arrested by a polies officer for a
er@ his true and 0orre0t ordLhonce, give the
arreatinq offic
$40. 70-117. h!A Atoms$ UPON MMfiT FOR TRAFFIC
VfOLAT2G
A person, upon being arrested by a police officer for a
violation of a traffic 16w or ordinance, shall give the
arresting officer, his true and correct address.
See. 20-110. PRO %Ml UPON FAIUM OF TRAFFIC VIOLATOR TO
A1P2AA.
It ► peraon fails to appear vdthin the vise dasignstad in the
clerk of the Municipal court shalt
notice to appee o the
proceed to suMSOnr the person and bring his tefors e.e
municipal court.
Ise. 20-14e. PAYxW Or rrmtls MY '•d ADINo CUILTT.
A person who has received a notice to appear in answer to a
charge Wider this chapter ■ay within the tins sreol9t64 it. 1
time notice appeat at the 099104 of the Clerk of the sanldipal
court nQQ and anevr the charge set forth in sueh notlee by q, a thetC. two, rwlving she hearing1In eoust, andtgivi f centest to
power of
1
1
i
` I
A4WSl
tote -
ORDINANCE NO. 91-1-9 /..2-
AN ORDIHANCS Of THE CITY OF PLANO, TSXU# REOULATiNO HOME
SOLICITATIONS. CHARITARLR SOLICITATIONS, VENDING ON PUBLIC RIGHTS-
OP-NAY AND 1TINEAANT VENDORS1 ORDAININU OTHER MATTERS ON THE SUD-
JECTI REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT AND AMMINO ARTICLE
IV,. PROOLERS AND SOLICITORS OP CHAPTER 11 OF TNr CODE OF ORDI-
NANCES or TIIR CITY or PLANO, TE%ASI PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE, A
SEVERARMITY CLAUSE AND AN MCCTiVtt DATE.
NIIYRSAS, the City Council of the City of Plano, Tlxas, upon
full consideration of the matters has determined the dectrability
and necessity of providing now regulations for hats solicitations,
charitable solicitations and vending On public right-of-way,
NON0 THEREIORS, eE IT ORDAINtD BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY Or PIANO, TRXASI .
Section it Ordinances numbered 0I-1-7 and 16-1-21 and all
!I i
other ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed ►n all
things,
Saittle,tn Ii. Article IV, Peddlers and Solicitors of Chapter
11 of the Coda of Ordinances of the City of Plano, Texas, Is
hereby amended to reed as followel
Chapter It
ARTICLE IV.
PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS
DIVISION I. GENERALLY
I
slob 11-141 Definitions.
The following words and phrases shell have the meanings
respectively ascribed to them by this sections
,r
IUSI038 DAY means any calendar day except Saturday, Sunday I
or any state, or national holiday.
CHARITABLE PURPOSE shall mean philanthropic, religious or ~
other non-profit objectives, including the benefit of poor, needy,
r`
sick, rafugee or handicapped persons) the benefit of any church
Or religious society, seat, group or orders the bsnerit of a patri-
otic or veterans' association or organisationj the benefit of any
fraternal, social or civic organitation, or the benefit of any
educational institution. 'Charitable purposs" shall not be con-
4.
stewed to Include the direct benefit of the individual taking the
solicitation, 'Charitable purpose" shall not be construed to
Gef
rw
A9etal
ordinance $0, 6a-1-f 1 "1 NQ• a
Doti
Include the benefit of any political group or political orgamisa-
tlon which to subject to finanelel disclosure under state or
{ federal lav.
CONSONsR mu ne an Indlwidual who seeks or acquirer real or
personal property, servieess money, or credit CO. personal,
family, or household purposes,
CONSWR TRANSACTION paeans a sales transaction In which one
or more of the patties is a consuumer,
SIONt SOLICITATION TRANSACTION means a consumer transaction
for the purchase of goods, services, or realty, payable In install-
meats or in cash, to which the merchant engages in a personal
solicitation of the sale to the consumer at a residence, In person
or by telephone, and the consumer's agreement or offer to purchase
to given at the residents to the merchant either in person or by j
j tslophono. A home solicitation transaction shell not inclvde a d
it sate made pursuant to a preexisting revolving charge account or
retail charge sgreenentr or a sale made pursuant to prior aogotla-
tlons between the parties at a business establishment at a fixed
location where goods or servleea are offerod or exhibited for
metal or a sale of realty in which transaction the purchaser is
represented by a licensed attorney of to which the transaction Is
being negottated by a licensed real estate broker.
INDIVIDUAL shall sun only a natural persona
d.
s s M6RCNANT suns a Party to eonsuex+r transaction other then t
ARSIDUCt means any separate living unit occupied for real- '
dankial purposes by one or more persons, contained within any
type of buildlno or structure.
SOLICIT tUNpS OR SOLICITATION OF MODS shall wean any request
p
for the donation of mon►y, property, or anything of value, or the
pledge of a future donation of moncy, property, or anything of
. j valual or the selling or offering for male of any prepetty, real
or personal, tangible or latangibls, whether of value or not,
Including, but not limited to, goods, books, pamphlets, tickets,
{
publications or subscriptions to publications. tapressly excluded
from the meaning of •sollolt funds' or 06011citation 09 foods, it
a
,jY!f y
1
I
1 bq.l•.t,. ; AQe~Idape. / • ..,r.. .r..y-►«f a...
AP W
ordlnsnce No. BL1~ ode Pape t
b
any offer of membership in any organization. A solicitation of
funds is complete when the solicitation is eosewnleated to any
j Individual then located within the corporate limits of the City.
I
s
so*. 11-142. Unlawful solicitation,
Is) No person, directly or through an agent, shall canvass
Or solicit in person or by telephone all from house to house In
the City of Plano to sell or attempt to sell goods, merchandise,
wares, services or anything of value or to tote or attempt to
{ take orders for the future delivery of goods, merchandise, wares,
or any personal property of any nature whatsoever, or take or
attempt to take orders for services to be furnished or performed
in the future, without first having e. written psrolt therefore, t
unless the solicitation is for charlU ble purposes,
Ibl It shell be unlawful for any person, directly of through
In Agent or employes, to solicit funds for charitable purposes
within the corporate limits of the City unless subh person shall
have, first obtained a certificate of registration.
(c) It shall be unlawful (cc any individual, ss the agent
or employee of another, to solicit funds for charitable purpo,u j
In the City unless his principal or employer has rncelved a
certificate of registration.
Idl It shall be unlawful for as InSivtduai to solicit funds`
without visibly dlePlaying an identification card provided by
this Ordinance. lath display wet be such that the consumer can
read the contents of the idontlficatton card.
(e) It shall be unlawful for any person to alter an identi-
fication cord.
(fl It shall be unlawful for an Individual to solicit funds
while displaying an ldbntificatfon card (ssusd In the name of
another Indivldua l,
I
(g) It shall ba unlawful to solicit for funds after the
hours of 9100 P.M. rnd Deters 900 a.m.
(pl it shall to unlawful for any person, directly or through
an agent or employees to solicit funds otter the expiration of any
permit or certificate of registration Issued as hereinafter
provided.
Its
~4
` t1pAAdaNO ~ ~ •rwr.r rafts
P•0e 1
33.E AQ6Wi
ordinance No. „L rjete (1) It
shall be unlawful for Son rsptstarln0 or
epplylnq, or the 00tnts or employees thereof& to solicit funds
for a purpose other than that set out in the Teoletratlon state'
for
or application upoq which the cortlficat• of registration or
I permit was issued.
1j) It shell be unlcvful got any person who shell solicit
tunas In the City to c•prsevnt in connection with such Solicits-
lion of funds that the issuan.a of a certificate at registration
or permit, or an ldontiflcation card by the City constltutee an
endorsement or approval of the purposes of such solicitation of
funds by the City or any officer o: employee thereof.
see. IL-141. supervision of child eclieitors,
it shall be unlawful for any person to use children thirteen i
{171 Years of sae or lees for any typo of oolieltation purposes u6-
less o said children sre ectlvely supervised by an ■dult tndtvidwl
at least eighteen 4161 years of age, who to permlttea or registered
or to the agent of the permitted or registw, depending upon the
-tYD+ of solicitation. In all cases the suporv!sinq adult shell be
within one hundred 1100) yards of the child soliaitorq
see. 11-1416 Permit--Grounds for dental,
l F 1. i
failure to comply with any of the provisions ei this Ordinance
ehe11 constitute grounds for denial at revocation of any permit or
certificate of roolatratlon sought to be issued or issued in,accor-a
dance with the previsions of this article.
so, 11-145same.-Appeal from denial or revocation.
S
a .
Should an applicant at tsglstrsnt be denied a permit or
k
certificate of registration, or have a permit or certificate of
rellatratloa eovciadr he may oppe+l that action to the City
COUn011 of the city of Plano by submitting a Letter to the City E
Secratary within tan 110) date of the action complained of. A
f hearing on the denlal will then be scheduled toe the next regular
mcettny of the City Council, or • Special sAetlnq the
1 .
council, to be held within fifteen t13) days of the appeal, The
city council atoll render a decision on the appeal within ono (1)
ryE
ral"
r Eft
No
A(~l1dS~1 page S
h ordinance No. JAIL-! Date • i/
day at the date of the hosting. such but no s 11 be an edafnl6-
trative hearing. Adherents to formal rules of evidence shall not
be required. The deotsion of the City Council shall be 1161+1•
bee. 11-116. sale of merchandise on public right-of-vay-
lt shall be unlswful for any person, to pedOls, eoltelt.
sell, offer for sale, or exhibit for site any merchandise upon
any public sidewalk, street, *%roet right-of-way, parkway, or
other public right-of-wayl swept that it is lawful for any
person t-) peddle, sell or otter to sell too's products upon any
public sidevalk, street, street sight-of-way, pt.rkvay or other
i
public right-of-way when such person has previously obtained a
permit therefore from the City's Director of Inviromental Health- j
The provisions of this section notwithstanding, no person shall
peddle, solicit, sell, otter for sale, or exhibit for sale any
good products upon any public ■idevalk, scree, street right-of-
way, parkway or other public eight-of-way within one thousand
(11000) feet of any public or private elementary or secondary
school botwoen.the hours of 700 a.m. and 400 p.n. on days when
eveh school is in session. The msasurement of the distance shall
be Made from the nearest property line of the public or private 1
s elementary or aotandary school.
sec „ 11-147, Affirmative defense.
It shall be in attirM+tfve defense toprosocutlon under this
article it the potion occupying the public right-of-way for the
Purpose of selling newspaper or publicaticnm CC other printmd
material which deal with the dissemination of information or
opinions however, this defense to not available if said act oc-
carted upon the paved surface or shoulder of any public stroeti
e
highway or toad,
f see0 It-1160 Itinerant Vendors on Private Property. t
No person shall intermittently oteuDY any privately owned
property, his own or another'!, for the purpose of vending goods
or aervigas within the City without having previously obtained a
tenootary salsa permit therefore from the Coda Intercement Dapsrt
'rt ii.4 .r TMh h'♦
~.n
r
qeWaN0
3
Ordinance No. g.......• ,Qswalt
fist
Went. The applicant tot a permit -hail pay ko the eft of vlano
a permit tee at S/a.00 prior to the issuance Of the permit. The
permit tee rsqulred by this section shall not be required of
locally basud oharitable orgsnisations or organisations engaged
in sere inaludlng, but not Waited to, bake asls$ and car washes.
The applicant shall have such permit within his personal posse-- f
$ion during the time that he is vending such goods or services
and shall display it upon request by any police or code enforce-
wont offices of the city of vleno. A permit requested under this
article shell be issued for the length of time requested, not to
emceed six (6) months. such permit shall be Issued by the Depart-
Wit of Code 6nforeerent only after the applicant hem complied
with the following roqulromants. j
(1) The vendor 1A eoodueting his buelneso on tho property
An a manner which does not violate any code of the City, includ-
iny, but not limited to, the building, zoning, health, oiactrical
or plumbing codes and
iii rho vendor possessive it valid state soles Toatertlelestes
and
(11 The vender has a lease or written permission from the
owner of the private property to be on the property.
Sees 11-149--11.160 Reserved,
i DIVISION as CAPAITASLE SOLICITATIONS
Sse. 11.161. exceptions.
The following are excepted from the *potation 'of this
divisions,
II{ The solicitation of funds tot charitabls purposoa by
any organisation or association trod its membarsi
(21 The solicitation of funds for charitable purposes by
a person when such solloltation oteure on premises
owned or controlled by the person soticiting funds or
controls
With the permission of she person who owns or
the premises, when previously invited to the yro,siees
for solloitotiont
i~
ra•
Flu
"eel
Aoendi<~o 9~'0
Ordinance No. 11-1-9
(3) The issue"
charitable eollaltatlcn will occur of which announcor
or advertises an went at which unannounced charitable
solicitation will occur.
Sao. 11-161, Registration statemont,
(a) All persons desiring to solicit funds for charitable
purposes in the City shall file with the City utility Willing/Tax ttt
Collections DepartbeAt, a registration statsmN;%t, on forme pro-
vtded by the City of plane, containinq the following information$
tll The name of the person reglstoring and desiring to
solicit funds for charitable purposes.
111 Whether the person registering is a natural person,
parknarship, corporation or association and,
a. If a natural person, the business or residence f
addross and telephone number must be given.
j b. It a partnership, the names of all partners and f
# the principal business address and telephone nvmbor of each I
partner *get be given.
E e- It 6 corporation, the
. J , person registering must state
1 whether It Is organized under the laws of the state of Texas or
Is a foreign corporation, and must show the mailing address,
t bcolnose location, telephone number, name of the Individual in
charge of the !lane office of such corporation, If any, aM the
namai of all officers and directors or trustees of sold corpora-
tions ands It a I-reign corporation, the place of Incorporation.
d. It an assoeiata, the registration statomant shill
r show the association's principal business address and telephone
number, If any, and shall show names and principal business or
residence addresses and tslepbono numbers of all members of the
v r association unless they exceed ton (141 In nuwi;.r, In which ciao
the application shall so state and the person tepistorlng may
alternatively list kho names and principal business or residence
addresses and telephone numDera
of the officers and directors or
trustees of the Association. It the association is part of a
multi-State eryanlratlon or association, the mailing address end
Ipr\r`7at/i ~ iw
r
'i
AO* No
ordinance No.
I !
E business location of its central office shall a gira~n,,ein addl.
%ion to the mailing addeass and business location of Its heal /
*fetes,
11) the noses, mailing address and telephone nuaJ»r of all
individuals who will be in direct charge or control of the 001191-
tattoo of fulls.
(e) ins time period within which the solicitation of funds
is to be cede, giving the data of the beginning of solicitation
and its projected conclusion,
(S) A daseription of the methods and foam by which the
solicitation of funds is to be accomplished.
(61 A statemsnt of ■ll foots relied on by the applicant to
h i
justify the solicitation to be for charlteble purposes.
(1) A statement to the effect that if a certificate of
rogletcation I$ granted, such certificate will not be used or
represented to be an endorsement by the City or any of Its i
officers or employees.
1 (6) Amy other information which the City of piano deems
necessary for the adminletration of this article.
tbl the reototratlon statement must be signed by the eppli-
canto If the parson registering Is an individuall It the parson
reglatecing is a partnerahip, by the partner charged vlth die.
burring lands solicited$ it a person registering Is a corporation
fig or on sasooistSoft, by 'toof(toot Charged vith dleburatno the funds
solicited, The individual signing the registration statement shall
atop the statement and swaar before anotticer outhorlied to sdaln-
inter oaths thJ% he has carefully read the registration statement
and that all the information contained therein is true and correct.
(a) information provided by applicant in accordance with the
provisions at this Section shall be subject to verielcation by the
Plano police Department.
Avery registration statement shall be accompanied by a roots-
Oration toe of twenty dollars 1120.06) to compensate the City foe
the cost of adsinistaring this article, sod such toe will not be
rotund*$ if a certificate of registration Is not Issued, However,
u,
such registration gas of twenty dollars 1120,001 shall not be
. VAri "o(Phl4hFl/lNJ ~oQt44, r',i 14 pax/. .
man u;O
III
+G
t AP* No
Ordinance M0. s6-1.9 /Z
rsqutred of duly authotiaed, non praftl charitable organisations ;jQ Q~ TJ
registerod as such with the gee a tary of State Car the State of U
Texas.
i
Sae. 11-161. Issuance of certificate of registration,
After a reviow of the tegistration statement to determine its
compliance with $action 11-162 above, and, within ten 110) working
days of the racelpt of the registration statooshte the Clty utility
11111ing/Tea Collections Department shall either issue a certificate
of registration, as provided in section 11-162, or notify the per-
son registering that the reglatratton statanant does not comply
with the requI"monla of Section 11.167 above, and %pacifically
point out whet information or explanation has not been furnished
that is required before a certificate of registration can be
j issued.
i
See, 11.165. Form of certificate of registration,
The city of Plano shell proscribe tho fore of the certificate
of registration. Bach such certificate of registration shall be
printed In black except that the following shall be printed promi-
nently thereon in rode 'The issuance of this certificate of
reglatratioa is not an endorsement by the City of Plano or any of
its officers or sapl0yse96' Each certificate of registration i
shell bear a registration number which is the some as the ills
contalninp the registration statement filed by the registrant.
Wo. 11-196, Golicltor's identification cards.
The City of Plano shall prescribe the totm for Identification
cards for solicitors, Each such identification card shall beer
the name of the parson/organisation reglsteringe the registratlon k _
i~. number, the name of the ooliattor or agent, the sapiration data }
Of the certificate of rsgtatratlon, and it shell have printed
prowtneatly thereon in reds •Thie Identification card Is not an E "
i
endorsement of the *elicitation by the City of Plano or any of
its officers or employees. it to your duty to verify all infor-
matfoa given to you by this solicitor.'
. ,+M6e w,IRY:FS►,'sP'atI*d6:ii~eia~'~'t/':. v-~~.?we-: r. ..,..•,y.... .v:. a_~.1 _
1
" AQe *Ro
Ordinance No. 141-1-9
Data
required of duly authorised, non-profit charitable organisations 2d-
registered as sue'- with the secretary of state for the State of
i
i Texas.
see. 11-161. Issuance of certificate of registration.
After a revlew of the registration statement to determine Its E
compliance with section 11-161 above, and, within ten (10) working
days of the receipt of the registration statement, the city utility
111111rg/Ta■ Collections Department shall either issue & certificate
of registration, as provided in section 11-162, or notify the per-
son registering that the registration statement dues not cosply
with the requirements of section 11.163 above, and specifically
point out what information or explanation has not bean furnished
that is required before a certificate of registration can be
1
issued.
sec. 11-16S. worm of certificate of registration.
the Cily of Plano shell prescribe the fore of the certificate
of rogistration, Each such certificate of registration shell be
printed In black except that the following shall be printed promi-
l hently thereon in reds 'The issuance, of this certificate of
registration is not an endorsement by the city of Plano or any of
its officers or employees,' Each certificate of registration
shall bear a registration number which is the some as the file I!
oontalning the registration statement filed by the registrant,
sec. 11-166. solicitor's identification cards,
tpe City of Piano shall prescribe the form for Identification
cards for solicitors. Eeoh such identification card shall bear
the name of the porsoo/organleatton registering, the registration
' A.
number, the name of the solicitor or agent, the aspiration date
of the certificate bf registration, and it shall hav nted
prominently thereon In reds "This identification card to not an
endorsement of the solicitation by the City of Plano or any of
5 its cfficare or employees. It to your duty to verify all infer-
N~.
s ration given to you by this solicitor.'
f
.nnt..~..ir831.P✓'ita.'rr\;nz,~,aA'.:
1
R.1y:a ,9
aa
Sec, 11-167. Bxpiratlon of certificates or registration snda
identification cards.
Svary certitieats of registration Issued by the city of Plano
and *wary identification card shall expire at the tormination of
the solicitation period specified In the registration statement or
one (11 year tram the data or issuance, whichever Is less.
See. 11-169. Public disclosure.
All registration statements whether or not a certificate
of registration has boon issued, shall Le a public record
and shall be available for inspection by members of the public
during regular business hours and copies may bo obtained at cost.
See. 11-169. Charitable felicitation on public rights-of-way.
Persons holding charitable solicitation permits issued under
the provlstons of Division t of thin orlinaneo nay conduct chars-
table solicitations within and upon public rights-of-way within
f the City subject to the followings
1 III No such charitable solicitations shall be conducted
upon or within the right-of-way of any street or road designated
by the State of Texas as s state highway or Tarim-to-mrrkat road.
(t) Such charitable solicitation* shall be conducted only
during hours of daylight and shall bo conducted no morn than one
consecutive twenty-fovr hour period each year per organization.
O) No person yonngar than 16 years of age shall conduct
any solicitation in and upon public rights-of-way.
111 Applicants for a charitatle solicitation ysrmlt who 1
contemplate conducting any solicitation in and upon public rights-
of-vay shall, prior to conducting any such solicitation, furnish
the City wit-, a corti(icsto of insurance complying with standards
isstablished by the City's Rick Manager.
tsl All organisationa ■nd persons conducting such charitable
solicitations shat) execute a waiver of liability In favor of the
City on a fors prepared by the City.
t (61 Sach organisation conducting charitable solicitation in
and upon public rights-of-way shall designate o person to be In
i
WO
Rawl
VefthNo.
Ordinance No. 11-1-0 ~QBf1Q~ rr -CAI
charge of and responsible for each Intersection and/or portion
of public right-or-vey upon rhich such Solicitation ill to ire
conducted.
(7) All persons conducting such solicitations shall, at all
times during which the solicitation to being conducted, weer
traffic safety vests.
Sec. 11-170-11-110. Reserved
O*Y[91011 1. NONCNAMTAMM A0CICITAT1oNs
Sec. 11-181, taception.
The provisions of this division shall not apply to a person
engaged in charitable solicitation and holding A certificate of
registration as provided for hereine
sac, 11-188a Application for permit.
U 1 Any person desiring to mats hope solicitation trsns-
Actions within the City shall file a written application for a ;
peewit to de so With City Utility ttlllity/Tam Collection@ Depart-
sent, Which application shall shove ;
ill The name of the person applying and desiring to
r
mate home solicitations.
I1) whether the person applying U a natural person,
{ partnership, corporation or association, and
` a. The business or residence address and We-
phone number of the applicant, r,
b. If a partnership, the names of s11 partners
and the principal buelrese address and telephone number of each
partner.
e. It a corporation, the parson applying shall
state whether It Is orgaila*d under the lave of the state of
Texas or is a foreign corporation, and suet s''Now the mailing
address, business loostiun, telephone number, name of the
Indivi- dual In charge of the piano attics of such corporation, if any,
a ,
and the names and eddreeres of all officer@ and directars or
r
t
f y
"SWAP
iii ~
{ ordtnana Bo. If?:P... {~(d • ,i.,/
I p1/ ~`J
trustees et said corporation, and, it • foreign corl+oraiton, the
place of Incorporation.
d. I9 an association, the application shall show
the association's principal business address and telephone number,
tt any, and shall show names and principal business or residence
i eddiessae and t6160060 numbers of all sombere of the a socistion
I} unless they exceed tan (101 In number, in which ease the appliea-
elnn shall so elate and the person registering may alternatively
` list the names and principal Wetness or residence addresses and
f tslophone nuwbors of the officers and directors of trustees of
the association. It the association is a part of a Multi-atat• i
organisation or association, the Mailing addrea• and business
location of its control office shall be given, In addition to the
mailing address and business location or IN local office,
13) The namaa, Mailing addreea and tslapMme nuMbar of
i,
all Individuals who will be in direct charge or control of the
solicitation of funds,
(4) the t[me period within which the solicitation of
funds is to be made, giving the date of the beginaning of solict-
tAtlon end its projected concluslon.
uI A description of the methods and means by which j
the s4114911tion of funds is to be sccompllshed.
(6) The names of other eommunitles in which the applt-
cant has made home solicitations In the past cis (61 month.
The nature of merchandise to be sold or offered
r for sale or the nature of the Services to be furnished,
(61 Whether such applieaht, upon any such order so
obtained, will demand, accept or receive payment or deposit of
i
money In advance of final delivery.
11) A statement to the effect that it a permit to
f wrantod, avah permit will not be used es or represented to be
an endorsement by the City or any of Its officers or eMployose.
(101 Any other information which the City of ?Ion*
leaks neceaeary for tho administration of this ordinance.
i
s
,
eeaar~
4Q8AQdNf1
z. e
s
Ordinance lie, 1e-1:1......-. AQa
Data ''L
(b) The application rust be slgnod by the applicant, if the 1 y y~'
person applying is an indivl6we11 it the person applying is s
j partnership, by the partner charged with disbursing funds so-
lioltedl It the person applying to a corporation or an sasocls-
tion, by its officer charged with disbursing the funds solicLted,
The individual signing the application shall sign the application
and swear before an officer authorized to administer oaths that
he has carefully read the application and that all the information
contained therain is truo and correct.
(c) Information provided by applicant shall be subject to
verification by the Plano police Department.
(dl such application shall also show satisfactory written
proof of the individual's authority to represent the company,
(el The application shall be accompanied by a fee of twenty
dollars 4*20.001 and no permit hereunder shall he issued until
suoh foe has boon paid by such applicant. in addition, a one
dollar (11,00) per identification card too shall be chsrge6.
sea, 11-1e30 Exemptions from permit fee.
The permit ho required by this division for the issuance of
a permit under the provisions of this division shall not be
required of the followings
III Ordinary commerolal travelers who well or eahlbit for
sale goods, wares or merchandise to pardons selling
and dealing In the some within the city
,
(f) Persons offering for sale agricultural product+, meats, poultry
or other articles
o of good grown or produced by
f
Duch psrsonel
I
431 individuals operating under licenses granted by a $tate
agency.
600. 11-1e4. Permit issuance, duration and form.
(a) h permit applied for under this article shall be Ideue6
by the City utility billing/Tee collections Department within ton
110) business days after the application to completed and filed,
r
unless It Is determined that the applicant has provided [also or
I
Incomplete information on Its application.
IM ~
I erw
b
AgAIIdBNo ll~ . ,
ordinance Wo4 18-1-9 AGO
i pate
Ibl A permit requested under this article shall be Issued
for the length of time rsaueeted, not to sexed six 161 months.
Icl The City of Plano shall prescribe the form of the '
permit, Catch such permit .hall be printed In black except that j
the followlny shall be petwie prominsntly thrreon In rods "The
j Issuance of this permit to not an endorssnent by the City Of
II Plano or any of Its offloers of anpioyess.• mach permit shall
beer a permit number which Is the same as the file containing the
application tiled by the applicant.
hoe. 11-169. Solietter'6 Identification cards.
(a) The City of Plano shall prescribe the fora. tot ldentifi-
Cotton esrds for solicitors, each such Identification card shall t3
best the osaas of the ri.;lican;, the application number, the name
of the 6ol.toitor, or agent, the aspiration date of the permit, and
and It shs11 have printed prominently thereon in reds 'This j
t
i identification card is not an sndorsesent of the sollclta,ion by
the city of ?lane or any of Its officers or employees, it is your
duty to verity all information given to yoi by this Solicitor.'
The appliant shall provide, by a separate list, the names
and addresses of all 44ants or employ*$$ for whom identification
cards are to be Issued.'
E
Sec. 11-166. Public disclosure.
All opplicatiens, whether or not a permit has been teauedr
shall be a puhllo record and shall be available for Inspection by
members of the public luring regular business hours and copies
may be obtained at cost.
sec. 11.167& mxhlbitleg card prohibiting solicitors.
W A person, desiring that no merchant or other person
enjoys In a home solicitation at his resldepci, shall exhibit in
a conapteuoue glace upan or near the main entrance to tM
real- dente, a weatherproof card, not less than three inches by tour
tnches in also, containing the word., 'NO SOLICITORS.' the letters
E shall not be 1066 than two-thirds of an lath In height.
Ap*No 9 _
Ordinance NO, , g-i-j
mate -
(b) Every Merchant upon going onto any pnmtsss upon which ~G
a residence is bested shall first examine the residence to deter-
j mine it any notice prohibiting soliciting to oaAlblted upon or
near the wain entrants to the residence, If notice Prohibiting
soliciting is exhibited, the merchant shall immodlately depart
from the provisos without disturbing the occupant, unless the
visit is the result of a request made by the occupant.
(ol s» person shall go upon any residential provisos and
ring the doorbell, or rap or knock upon the door or create any
sound to a Manner calculated to attract the attention of the
occupant of the residences for the purpose of securing an audience
with the occupant a-d engaging in or attempting to engage In a
Mae solicitation transaction, if a card as described in Sub- l
section (a) above is exhibited in a conspicuous place upon or
near the login entrance to the residences unless the visit is the
result of a ragUest by the ooeupant,
(dl No persons other than the occupant of the residences
shall remove, deface, or render ltlegibies a card placed by the
occupant pursuant to Subsection (a) above,
(e) Any Merchant Who Ass gained entrance to a residents, or
audience with the occupent, whether invited or not, shall lwss-
distely depart Ergo the promises without diaturbing the occupant
further when requested to leave by the occupant.
;c
sees, 11.168-41-1000 Reaerved.
Section ril. penalty,
AAy violation of any provision of this article shall be
punished by a fins not to exceed rive RUKDRZD DQU ARS 1000.00,
and each day such violation shall continue shall constitute s $spa-
rate offense,
gietlosyw., severability
it any provisions section, subsection sentence, clause or
phrase of this ofdinencep of the application of saes to any parson
or sot of oireumstanes is for any reason held to be unconetitu-
tlonal, void or invalids the validity of the remaining portions
I
' i
i4pe~de Na ' d
Ordinance No. t1-1-9 APMalt
. 2 l~? / r
Of this ordinance or their application to other persons or aeta
of Circumstances shall not be affected thereby, it being the r/
intent of the City Council in adopting this ordinance that no
v,
1 portion thereof or provIslon, or regulation contained herein,
f[ shall bacme inoperative or fail by reason of any uneonntltution-
ality of any other portion hereof and all provisions of this
ordinance are declared to be eever0le for that purpose.
Laotian V. This Ordinance shall become effective upon its
Poesogs and publication as required by l w.
DULY DABSr•D AND APPROVBD BY TNI CITY COUNCIL Of Nt CITY Or
FLAW, TIRABa THIS Tilt _ lltfa DAY OF January' . 1911.
r
' 6.' ~ilaJc_ 111
a
'w<~1. Jaoa narvere. eGYOR
r ATTEM
%
e ABCs y. 1 JTl(Y
APYRDVJ* AS TO PORN1
CAI ~
Cry 11410ke CITY
A
` Mfr.
r
' i
• -`~"~~'!~r ^~'ai.w~,~., .1:.. .t. 111((0
~ , n I.I. r .k 1 ♦ Y$Yi ~ t,'. IFV iij
alar~
t
I~ V 930 02 Ity of Grand Prairie
Date
PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS
1
See. 40.88. Use of thoroughfares for sales and soliciting.
It shall be unlawfttl for any Itinerant vendv. merchant or peddler, including those ex-
emptod in section 20-33, to all, offer for sale, or exhibit for the. Purpose of talwuf unleri fur sale
therefor, any goods, warea, merchandise, services, photographa, newspapers, magnzinr., farm
f i
produce, poultry, stock or agricultural products in their natural state, or any other personal
preperh•, or to solicit charitable contributions on or along the side of the public streets of the
city; provided, however, a person or organization may solicit charitable contributions on reed•
Ili ways so long as they do not impede the lawful traffic on the roadway and so long as such person
I liar previuuaty applied for and received a permit to do so by the office of the city se retury
pursuant to section 208.1 of this article and to long as such persca has a copy of such permit
prominently displaM an his person
Lord. No. 3836, 4 1, 9.2488; Ord. No. 4918, f 1, 10.1.91)
See, 2448.1. Taeuance of parralts for uaa of roadways to solicit charitable contribu• i
dom. 1
(a) An applicant for a permit to solicit charitable contributions while standing in a roadway
shall (Us an application in writing with the office of the city secretssy not leas than thirty i30)
days before commencement of the activity, and may not eemmonce such activity until such
time as the permit ho bon issued by the city secrotary.
Ib) The application must contain the following information.
(1) The full nomo and address of the person or organization applying for the permit and
the address of the headquarters in die city. If the organization is a chapter or other
affiliate of as organization having its principal off)ca outside the city, the name and
address of the parent organitation, and any local agent.
0 A description of the purpose for the Solicitation, including a listing, with addresses
and phone numbers. of whieb persons or organitations are to receive the finds col-
looted by the solldtadom
(31 A description of the method or methods to be used in conducting the activity.
(4) The period within which the activity will be conducted. including the proposed dntar
for the beginning sad orAft of the activity.
(3) It the applicant Is a charitable corporation, a copy of Its charter or artictps of incor.
applicant i+ a forciin charitable tor-
poration from its state of Incorporation. lithe
poration, a copy of its ard,Rcate to do business its this Plate.
;M A statement diselasing each eohv.;tt of a crime amounting to a felony or a miss
maanor involving dishonesty of the applicant, any person in charge or control of the
activity, or aqy ofaw. dime r, trustee or spat of U,e applicant.
1.
I i I The Applicant Mall Alen an affidavit stating that at !oast seventy-Coro 45) 5) per cent of
the monies collected by such charitable solicitations shall be used for the direct.
benefit of the ststed purpose or purposes of Lire solicitation. For purposes
SupA eta 41 1919
,
`aw
1
aps9t>aNo '
AOenda
$ 2U'3t1,1 GRAND PRAIRIF. CGDEDMe
section, tha term "the directbeneft of the stated purpose or purposes of the nUcitat ion"
4 shall mean funds expended directly for the specific purpose or purposes wh?ch the
person or organization states in its application, but nut including funds expended for
overhand, management and administration, and other items not specified in the op•
plication.
4) Whttber contributions to the applicant are tax deductible, the extent to which con•
tributions are tax deductible, and, if the applicant W expressly been granted tax•
exempt status by the United Sates Internal Revenue Service, proof of that statue.
(91 An executed copy of & hold harmless sod indemaWcation agreement prepared by the
office of the city attorney, along with an insurance policy evidenced by a certitie+te of
Insurance by an inmitncs company licensed by the Texas State Board of Insurance
insuring each of the participants in the solicitation both for injuries to themAe Ives; and
others, with the city named as an additional named insured, with the policy limits of
the insurance policy being in an amount of at least one million dollars 41,000,000.00 i
' per person, Ave million dollars t=8,000,000.00) per occurrence, and one hundred thou-
sand dollars (5100,000.00) for property damage.
(c) The fee to be charged for Issuance of such permit to condact such activities on pablie
J thoroughfares shall be twentyGve dollars ($25.00), plus the cost of preparing individual per
tr,lts to be displayed by solicitors.
(d) Alter a review of the application and collection of the appropriate fee, the city seers
tary shall issue a permit for the activities permitted in action 20.38 of this article. Such
permit is tabe prominervtly displayed on the person of the applicant or, in the appropriate case,
on the person of applicant's employee ur agent when conducting the dctivitl4s permitted in
section 2098 of tWatticle.
(e) The city rr►etmy shall have thirty (30) days to issue or deny ixruince of the permit.
It the city secr+ dis to issue the permit within thirty (30) days, it shall be considered
denied. If the i ...don contained In the application is determined by the city secretary to
r be elther Wu or incomplete, the city secretary shall deny the
permit. Any person aggrieved ; .
by the deaiai of the permit may appeal such deddon to the city council withla ten (10) days
` of the denial.
!i (1) All permits iuued pursuant to this tertian shall be valid for not more than three X31
specific days within a period not to exceed thirty (30) days. An appliewiI, shall be allowed only,
two (2) such permits per calendar year.
+S) Aetivitles permitted in action 2098 of this untie shah be prohibited prior to 903
a. ot. and after 9:00 p.m. of any day. Monday through Saturday, and shall be prolubittd at any
time on any Sunday.
t1,) Activities permitted in sartinn 20488 of this article shell not be allowed by any person
under the age of sixteen 118) years.
`J (Ord. No. 4916,12, 10-1-910 . 3
i
supp. No. sl 1920
i
} .I
it
3 6 2
City of Denton city council minutes {~d11
October 12, 1993' Date r
Page s
Council received a report and hold a
ordinance and gave staff discussion direction. rdinq
a. The n
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that at the last meeting in August,
Council directed staff to study an ordinance regarding charitable
solicitation and prepare recommendations for Council which would
allow charitable solicitations from the roadway. The draft
ordinance included many of the items of concern as expressed by
Council. The ordinance provided for proof of charitable status,
required safety vests to be worn by the solicitors, indicated where
the solicitors were to stand, and included provisions for
indemnification and time and place restrictions. A map h&d been
included with the back-up materials which indicated the main
thoroughfare plan. other provisions which were discussed for the
proposed ordinance included a requirement that an applicant not
have a previous criminal history, the application to be accompanied
by proof of insurance and a provision requiring proof that a
certain portion of the proceeds solicited would be going to a
charitable organization. staff had written Council a memorandum
j regarding actions which had occurred in other cities with those
types of provisions. The ordinance provided that in case of an •
appeal to the Council of a denial of a permit, if Council affirmed
that denial, in accordance with Fir6t Amendment laws, the City
would file legal action to declare the validity of the ordinance.
This followed federal constitutional law which indicated that if an
individual challenged the petmit licensing provision in the
ordinance, the burden would b.% on the city to justify why the
permit was denied. In the interim the individual must be allowed
to do that action. The proposed ordinance also included an age
limitation for the solicitors.
Counoil Member Brock asked about the provision on page three which
displayed on the traffic safety
required that the, valid solicitor.
vast being worn by the city Attorney Drayovitch stated
purposes. the permit would be visible
for t en
Council Member Miller stated that the proposed ordinance indicated
that the solicitors could be on the roadway between the hours of
' 7:00 a.m. - 9100 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. He thought
the intent of Council was to have the solicitation only during
daylight hours such as 7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. Perhaps the ordinance
should read a half hour after sunrise and a half hour bofore
sunset.
Council Member Brock left the meeting.
4' e
1
1 ,IR
363
City of Denton City Council Minutes AQV&NQ
October 12, 1993 AQG*It
page 6. Date
i
Council Member Miller stated that the proposed ordinance also did
not preclude Sundays.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the proposed ordinance indicated
nothing about Saturdays or Sundays.
Council Member Miller felt that the ordinance should indicate
Monday through Saturday with no Sunday solicitation.
Council Member perry felt that the proposed ordinance would be a
more complex ordinance than the current one.
City Attorney Drayovitch agreed indicating that any permitting
process would be sore complicated than Che prohibition currently in
place,
Council Member Perry asked if it would be subject to more
contention.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied yes.
Council Member Perry asked it the requirement of establishing that
the solicitor was a valid solicitor would be iubject to raising
questions on the part of the solicitors.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that the draft was written so that
the individual requesting the permit would provide evidence of not-
for-profit status. This could include having t*s individual only
check a box on an application fora which wot!id. not be a prior
restraint.
Mayor Castleberry asked for a clarification of the suggested
changes to the proposed ordinance.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that the days of the week for
solicitation would be changed to Monday through Saturday and the
hours would be changed to a half hour after sunrise to a half hour
before sunset.
Council Member Perry asked about the liability to the City it
sossone were injured in the process of roadway solicitation if the
proposed ordinance were passed.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that 'she would argue that the city
I was not responsible. However, this was not to may. that the City
I would not be named in a lawsuit and her department would have to
spend time, effort and money to defend such a lawsuit.
1 f i
p.
364
City of Denton City Council minutes
i October 12, 1993
AQAAd3) ,rZ
Page 7
We
i Mayor Castleberry asked about standing on the medians to solicit.
~ j
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that an '.ndividual could stand on
the medians and on the edge of the roadway. The intent was to keep
the individuals out of the lane of traffic but this would be very
hard to enforce.
Mayor Castleberry asked if an individual were on University Drive
and were walking from the curb across to the median, would that
make any difference.
Cityy Attorney Drayovitch indicated no if the individual were not
actisly soliciting from the roadway when moving to the median.
Mayor Castleberry asked about leaning over into the roadway.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that staff had looked at different
provisions and this was the best wording.
Council Member Miller asked about turn lanes. individuals would j
not have access to the cent:k lanes and could not walk between the
rows of cars.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that that was the intent but it
would be very difficult to enforce.
Mayor Pro Tom Smith stated that she did not want the individuals on
the side of the road. There were many ways to solicit funds
without being a hazard in the roadways.
Council Member Perry agreed with Mayor Pro Tom Smith. The current
ordinance did not proWpit any solicitation, it merely prohibited
it from the roadways.
Council member Miller suggested staff draw up an ordinance and
council could then consider whether to pass such an ordinance.
Council Member Chew agreed with Council Member Miller.
` Mayor Castleberry asked if there were a restriction on the number
of times per year an organization could solicit from the streets
and suggested including such a provision.
Council Member Miller suggested limiting the numbtir to two times
per year.
U
F ,
+ t !
i
-365
9
A016 No
City of Denton City Council Minutes "31
October 12, 1993
Page 8 33
Chow motioned, Hiller seconded to direct staff to prepare a draft
ordinancd for Council consideration. On roll vote, Cott, "aye", I
Miller "aye", Smith "nay", Chew "aye", Ferry "nay", and Mayor
Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 3-3 tie vote.
6. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
the proposed road hump ordinance.
s. Limited i
Jerry streets had Clark, becoCity me ainmajor stated somm inareaon residential
enforcement dtso to scare resources had not been able to eliminate
thin problems rho Council had been provided a draft ordinance
which was modified from a Dallas ordinance. staff was suggesting
placing test humps in a trial location to see how the provisions
would work. A suggested location was in the North Lakes Park area
near Parkside and Bowling Green. A before and an after study would
be done to verify results.
Mayor Pro Tom Smith asked if the area residents were unanimous to
try this method.
i
Clark replied that the request and interest was from the North
Lakes Homeowners Association. An actual vote was not taken in the
test site area but if the policy were adopted in the future by
Council, it would require a 2/3's vote.
contact uall of the neighbors Council before
City agreed Maner to do Harrell
the e study, that it
proceeding.
Mayor Pro Tom Smith felt that Council would not need a report
regarding the feelings of the neighborhood. She would be more
comfortable if everyone knew of the project but did not need
everyone to necessarily agree with the project.
Council Member Cott suggested tasting more tLan one neighborhood.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the test area.
7. The Council reviewed Government Services Television Network
video regarding unfunded federal nandates.
Joseph Portugal, Aosistant to the City Manager, stated that the
National League of Cities in conjunction with the U.S. Conference
of Mayors and the National Association of Counties and the
International City Management Association had joined together to
coordinate a nstional public program to curb unfunded federal
mandates. These were mandates from the federal government which
S
i ~
WP
255
City of Denton city council minutes
August 31, 1993 a•'jEl
Page 3 Date
Mayor Castleberry indicated that he understood that the Railroad
+ would wait only 6 months before destroying the building.
I Robbins replied that he had no knowledge of that.
i Council Member Chew felt that the station should be included in the j
proposal for the best chance of receiving the funding. `
Mayor Castleberry asked about the time frame for receiving the
funding.
Robbins replied that the funds could potentially be received within
6 months as next year's applications would be due in January 1994.
3. The Council considered a report and the adoption of an
ordinance amending the city's solicitation ordinance. i
€ Catherine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, stated at its last
meeting Council had requested an ordinance relating to this issue.
Options for the Council included passing the ordinance as
presented, make amendments to the proposed ordinance or ask for
further discussion. There were two ordinances for Council
consideration. One had an insurance requirement while the second
did not. The lermitting p°cocess would be through the Police
Department with a 15 day prior notice for the application process.
Two solicitation permits per year for three days each par
organization wou'.d be permitted. The hours of solicitation would
be from 7100 a.m. - 7100 p.m., Monday through Saturday. An
individual would nead to be 18 or older and the organization would
be required to provide solicitors with safety vests to be worn at
all timas. The application would includa a description of the
organization and location of its headquarters, the purpose for the
solicitation, a description of who or what organization would be
receiving the funds, a description of solicitation methods, the
dates for solicitation, a disclosure statement for each conviction
of a crime for the applicant or any agent of the applicant, an
affidavit that 751 of the money collected would be used to benofit
the stated purpose of the solicitation, proof of tax exempt status,
and the execution of a hold harmless and indemnification agreement.
The organization would also be required to provide proof of
insurance with limits of at least $1,000,000 per person, $5,0000000
per occurrence and $100,000 for prcperty damige. The approximate
cost to an organization for $1,000,000 instead of $5,000,000 of
insurance would yybe n $3, such 500 for a year coverage or $1,500 for a one
day policy. to btaie smaller organizations Because there %ta bably a puld enalty
be a
- clause associated with the proposed ordinance, the City Attorney
had advised her that the ordinance would have to be published in
I
G)
n
rd
256
bQAfIi13No Y3- !`l
City of Denton City Council Minutes Agoda
August 31, 1993 3PI
Page 4
(OW18 ~ e
I the newspaper for proper notification.
Council Member Cott asked if there were a way to bypass that
notification requirement for the newspaper.
C
ity Attorney Drayovitch stated that the law did not require the
ado
Indition of ordinance in
that no person ocould t solicit in the roadway except ethlaw
at I
a charitable organization might stand in the roadway to solicit {
contributions if authorized by the local authority. That i
authorization did not require an ordinance. If the Council
repealed the existing ordinance, which was not on the agenda, the
Council could grant an exemption if it had received such a request,
Council Member Cott asked that if the Council repealed the existing
ordinanco, could it grant an exemption.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that the exemptions would be
f granted on a request only basis or have a permitting procedure'.
Council Member Cott asked about the individuals who held car washes
on University Drive. If the Council adopted an ordinance with an
insurance provision, would they be required to have the insurance.
city Attorney Drayovitch replied that if the ordinance were
enforced, they would be required to have the insurance.
Council Member !tiller stated that there were two aspects of this
issue. one was the immediate request of the fire fighters which he
felt the Council would not be able to move in time for that
request. The second aspect was if the council wanted to repeal the
current ordinance. There were court decisions which might effect
any decision of the Council and it had bean suggested that if the
council only allowed charitable organizations to solicit, the
provision might not hold up in court. His suggestion would be to
keep this a priority item and have staff and Legal provide Council
with consequences and recommendations regarding the proposal. tie
did not want to hurry the process and wanted more information such
I as how other cities proceeded with their provisions.
Council Member Perry asked that if council maintained the present
ordinance, were there any provisions for exceptions.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied no.
Council Member perry stated that he was willing to discuss a
y proposed ordinance at this time but was not sure if he would be in
favor of repealing the current ordinance. He was not sure that the
w
"VA
2 5 7
~gen4aNo. '
City of Denton City Council Minutes s
August 31, 1993 A49Ad81t} 1
Page 5 Date
~G
current ordinance was not the beat for the City.
Council Member Brock stated that the provisions of such an
ordinance needed to be studied very closely from a legal
perspective and the Council should not rush into any changes.
Council Member Chew did not want to stud the
y proposal for an
extended period of time but to make a decision as soon as possible.
The current ordinance was not being enforced and as a result the
fire fighters were being penalized by not being able to solicit for
their charity. He questioned if there were a way to allow the fire
fighters to solicit this year.
Mayor Castleberry stated that there was nothing the Council could
do at this point unless it hold another meeting before the date
required by the fire fighters.
Mayor Pro Tom Smith stated that neither of the proposed ordinance
wore in the guideline suggested by the Legal Department. She
agreed with Council Member Chew that the Council would like to
grant a special privilege to the fire fighters but that could not
be done. She felt that the City was falli3.q down on enforcing the
ordinance and that was a dangerous situation.
City Manager Harrell stated that he would work with the Police
Chief and indicate the Council's strong desire that the ordinance
be aggressively enforced. The ordinance had been enforced but a
greater effort would be made to control those situations.
Council Member Miller indicated that he was in favor of proceeding
with a draft ordinance for future study -,:onsideration.
Council Member Brock stated that the Council had not been
continuing to discuss this item during the year as Council had
voted 4-3 to drop the issue and did not want any changes in the
current ordinance. Council was not dragging the issue as it had
decided to not consider the issue any further.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that the consensus of the Council was
that there was nothing it could do at this meeting, that it would
continue to look at the issue, to take more time to study the issue
but not a substantial period of time and was interested in stricter
enforcement of current ordinance.
4. The council received and considered a recommendation from the
191 Committee regarding amendments to the 5 year Capital
Improvement Plan and gave staff :A rection.
16 .
r~
2 3 2 ~oe~daNo. 03
r ~gendalt
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
(h18 ,
August 24, 1993 3 ,
i The Council convened into the Work Session of the City COUnci n
f Tuesday, August 24, 1993.
G PRESENT; Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tom Smith; Council Members
Brock, Chew, Cott, Perry, and Miller.
ABSENT: None
1. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss the
following:
' A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S.
10 Considered litigation against the design architects
of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation center. Ii
2. Considered claim of Charlotte Summers.
B. Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S.
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g), Art.
1 6252-17 V.A.T.S. v
1
2. The Council received a report and hold a discussion regarding
the City's solicitation ordinance and gave staff direction.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that State law prohibited
solicitation in the roadway. There was a provision that a local
governing authority could grant an exception to charitable
organizations. The important point to remember was that if Council
decided to grant the exception to ono organization, then the
exception would have to be applied uniformly to all charitable
organizations meeting the requirements. The criteria would be
uniformly applied to all charitable organizations.
Catherine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, stated that the Council's
background information indicated four ordinances from other cities
regarding this issue. Options which other cities had included
liability insurance, proof of charitability, and time and place
regulations. some cities required proof of insurance for the
organizations and some required a liability waiver. Some cities
required some proof of charitability with IRS documents or an
indication of where the money was spent. Time and place
regulations and hours were included in some ordinances. Some
ordinances limited the solicitation to daylight or not on a Sunday.
Length of time was also addressed in some of the ordinances.
Mipaallaneous provisions included the wearing of safety vests,
specific intersections where the activity would occur, and no
walking on the roadway. State law would allow ►,he City to repeal
.J the existing ordinance but would be subject to each individual
i
i
s,.. .
♦a.w
2331
AP*No
City of Denton City Council Minutes ~2-
August 24, 1993
Page 2
group requesting permission to solicit. If the ordinance were
repealed, staff felt that some type of permitting process would be
best in order to treat each organization in the same manner.
Council Member Miller stated that an organization would have to
meet all requirements.
Council Member Brock stated that she would like to sae the
ordinance changed to allow, under carefully controlled situations,
some solicitation of the type suggested for the MDA campaign.
Minimal requirements such as obtaining a permit well ahead of time, 111
showing proof of tax exempt statue, showing proof of contributions
going to charity, wearing safety vests, where to stand and solicit
would have to be addressed.
Council Member Chow agreed and liked the Lewisville ordinance.
Council Member Miller felt that the following options were
important: proof of insurance, proof of charitability, time and
place such as 7100"a.m.- 7:00 p.m., restriction of days to Monday
through Saturday, 3 days of solicitation per request with 2
r~ requests per year, specific intersections within the City where
solicitation would be allowed, a required 30 day time frame to
obtain the permit, a contact person, a description of solicitation
methods, and each person on the solicitation drive providing
certification of not having been convicted of a crime.
Council Member Perry stated that-he was not in favor of rewriting
the ordinance. Permitting charitable organizations to solicit on }
the roadways was too much of a liability to citizens and to the
City.
Council Member Cott stated that he was not in favor of a 30 day
permit period as the fire fighters would need a permit sooner than
that.
Mayor Pro Tom Smith felt that it would not be possible to do
anything by Labor Day and agreed with Council Member perry that she
was not sure she wanted to reopen this issue.
i
Council Member Miller stated that this was the reason he had asked
for the information. The surveyed cities did not have many
requests for the past year. University Drive had students
soliciting for car washes practically every weekend. He did not
want to rush through the process but wanted at least to see an
ordinance for consideration. !
I
I
1 I.1iM
If 234
gjj7r'
City of Denton city council minutes A9a1
August 24, 1993 Date
Page 3 .C~
E ~A
i
Council Member Chew felt that the current ordinance was only
stopping the fire fighters and not students on car washes.
Council Member Perry indicated that he was not clear on how the
City would get around State law but was not willing to undertake i
the project.
Council Member Brock stated that all charitable organizations would
be eligible but most would not want to go through the conditions of
any orga~nizetion,lower the numbers without
the ordinance. The ' restrictions
discriminating against
Mayor Pro Tom Smith stated that the current ordinance needed to be
enforced stricter. Last year the Council had discussed contacting
the high schools, churches and other organizations to explain that
this type of activity could not be done. She felt that greater
enforcement was needed.
Tuck replied that she had not with the high school, the junior high
schools, sent letters to churches and the university students.
Enforcement was done as a list of priorities. The ordinance was
4 enforced as bast as possible.
Mayor Castleberry asked if, under the current ordinance, a citizen
would step off a median into the path of a car, would the City have
any liability.
Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that the City would have no
liability at this time.
Council Member Cott stated that the ordinance needed to be strong
but that this was also , a unique situation. He asked for the
possibility of having the ordinance ready by the next meeting for
consideration.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that their research had indicated
that it would be better not to impose requirements such as
liability and insurance requirements as a condition for a permit.
The Supreme Court upheld that that was a prior restraint where a
} city or county tried to impose such a condition on granting a j
parade permit. She would recommend not including such a provision.
Council Member Miller felt that this was a different set of 1
circumstances as a parade permit.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that State law did not authorize a
city to impose any other conditions. it merely stated that a
person may not stand on the roadway for charitable contributions
4
235
~~,►aaNo 9 °
City of Denton City council minutes Agendalt
August 24, 1991 fJe18 '
Page 4
O
unless a city authorized him to do so.
Council Member MJ.ller felt that it would be a good idea to try and
I
impose those restrictions.
Council Member Perry felt that such solicitation impeded the smooth
flow of traffic and created hazardous situations in the city. He
felt it was an issue of public safety and public access to the
! streets.
i Mayor Pro Ten Smith asked if a permit could not require insurance
and an individual were allowed to solicit, what would that do to
the City's liability if an accident happened. f
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that she would ask the Council to
allow her to defend strongly against such a suit. She felt that it
was very unlikely that the City would be held liable in such a
situation. She had visited with attorneys from the State and had
looked at the statute and federal cases regarding the issue.
Council would need to word very carefully any ordinance regarding
the issue. it the ordinance would allow charitable organizations
to solicit on the roadway, it had to be a blanket waiver. If an
organization represented itself as charitable it would have to be
allowed to solicit.
Council Member Cott suggested preparing a draft ordinance with the
provisions indicated earlier by Council Member Miller.
Mayor Pro Tea Smith and Council Member Perry were not in favor of
preparing such an ordinance.
Council Member Chew and Brock agreed to proceed with a draft
ordinance with liability and insurance as suggested:
Cityy Attorney Drayovitch stated that State law did not require an
ordinance. Council could repeal the existing ordinance and could
grant on a voice vote to allow the event to occur.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with a draft ordinance but
to not rush the process. j
3. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction
regarding budget issues and budget questions for the 1991.94 fiscal
year.
E Due to time constraints, this item was considered during the {
r Regular Session under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager.
4 u
i
. r
r
3
9 ®
AgWaNo 31
city of Denton city council Minutes AgWoda~
September 290 1992
P (e8
~ Page 7
Perry motioned, Hopkins seconded to follow the recommendation of
staff regarding the wastewater rates. On roll vote, Brock Hays",
Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Parry ways",
and Mayor'Castlebarry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
7. The Council received a report and held a discussion on the
4 solid waste rate study and proposed solid waste rates and gave
staff direction.
Bill Angelo stated that the proposed ordinance provided for a $0.35
rate increase for residential customers. The State of Texas
surcharge for solid waste received at the landfill was being passed
on to both residential and commercial customers in the form of a
3.51 charge which would be shown as a separate item on the bill.
He presented Council a handout which detailed the rates at the
landfill and the areas of increase. There would be two now fees
established. It was proposed that the basic disposal fees at the
landfill would remain the same as last year. one new rate would
differentiate between automobile and truck tires. Another fee
would be a charge for "special waste" disposed at the landfill.
The proposed rate was consistent with the charges at the Drw
landfill and reflected the cost of administration expenses associated with this e type of waster.g and
Hopkins motioned, Smith seconded to follow the recommendation of
the Public Utilities board for the rates on solid waste. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew
"aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
Brock motioned, Smith seconded to approve the increases on tires
and spacial wastes. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller mays",
Hopkins "aya", Smith "aye", Chew "ayo", Perry "aye", and Mayor
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
8. The Council received a report and h,%ld a discussion regarding
solicitations on the roadway and gave staff dirs41tion.
Catherine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, stated that in 1988 the
Council had received an increased numbsr of complaints about
persons and organisations attempting to solicit business or
charitable contributions from the occupants of vehicles at
intersections. Croups and individuals were soliciting on numerous
busy intersections all over the city, canning traffic problems and
endangering the individuals collecting the funds. The Council
ordinance nwhifor
In March 1 88, safety Council 11 assed an soliciting
ch
motoristtss.concern
N M- ,
3 2
City of Denton City Council Minutes ApendaNo
September 290 1992 Agenda
Pegs t fTat9 ~ . 6~
prohibited solicitation on any street or roadway or be on or go
upon the shoulder or median of any street or roadway for the
purpose of soliciting business or charitable contributions of any
kind from the occupant of any vehicle. At the September 1, 1992
Council mesting, Alan Hempstead, representing the City's fire
fighters, requested an exemptioe to the ordinance on behalf of the
Muscular Dystrophy Association. The fire fighters had requested
permission to solicit for the "Fill-the-Boot" campaign. Mr.
Hempstead had mentioned two Oklahoma cities which made special
provision for the annual Fill-the-Soot campaign despite local
ordinances which prohibited solicitation on roadways. Tulsa$$
traffic ordinance did not permitted solicitation from the roadway
i} but their solicitation ordinance appeared to allow it. Tulsa
permitted only sworn public safety officers to solicit in roadways
for charitable projects adopted by their bargaining agents. The
Legal Department indicated that the ordinance should be conoistent.
Either allow all to solicit on the roadways or allow no one to
solicit on the roadways. Area metroplex cities which allow the
solicitation on roadways had a permit process which included
various requirements.
i
Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that any time there was an
attempt to regulate the first Amendment rights, there was a good
case for litigation. It was very difficult to legally make a fool-
proof type ordinance which woo not subject to some type of
} litigation.
Council Member Brock asked about the Tulsa law which allowed only
sworn public safety officers to solicit from roadways. Would this
hold up to a court challenge.
Drayoviteh replied that the Oklahoma law was very different and it
could have been part of a collective bargaining agreement.
Tuck stated that the Council could repeal the current ordinance and
follow the State law or could enact an ordinance similar to another
city with strict guidelines.
Mayor Pro Ten Hopkins stated that before the current Council
repealed the ordinance, members might want to speak to former
council Members regarding reasons for the initial ordinance. They
had been concerned about pedestrian safety and vehicular traffic.
She suggested that if the ordinance were repealed, the Council did
not want to be the entity to grant permission for solicitation from
the roadway. She felt that everyone should be allowed to solicit
from the streets or no one should be allowed. There were many
safety issues to deal with when there were individuals on the
roadway. She was particularly concerned with the youth on
u
r
1
33
apandaNo
City of Denton City Council Minutes Ag6addl
September 29, 1992 [ate
page 9 /
University Drive and how dangerous it was.
f Council Member Perry asked how fully the current ordinance was
being enforced. Was anyone allowed to solicit on the roadways.
City Manager Harrell replied from the enforcement was consistent and solicitinpermitting from te roadway as nthe
ot I.
allowed. Some groups had started to solicit on the roadway and had
been asked to leave. There were times when the police department
did not give a high level of enforcement to this event especially
on events such as oar washes on University Drive. if Council did
not repeal ordinance staff would do more enforcement of the
provisions to not solicit on the medians and would even visit the
high schools to talk with groups regarding the provisions of the
ordinance.
Council Member Chew suggested talking with university students as
well as high school groups.
City Attorney Drayovitch'sthted that a procedure could be developed
which would not include the Councilfs granting of permission to
solicit in the roadway. The State statute allowed a local
' governing body to authorize solicitation of
- contributions. Her opinion with respect to free speech candiFirst
Amendment rights would be, if the Council desired, that pursuant to
the State statute the Council authorize solicitation of charitable
contributions.
Mayor Castleberry asked what was the City liability in this matter
such as someone stepping off a curb and into an oncoming car.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that if the City were sued, it
would argue against the City's liability but that could be
challenged.
Council Member Perry asked if there had ever been a fatality or
injury in the city due to solicitation from the roadway.
Al Hempstead replied that there had been none documented in the 40
years the fire fighter organizations had been working for MDA.
Council Member perry replied that he was referring to everyone who
had solicited on the roadways and not just the fire fighters. }
Council Member Smith asked Hempstead if he had investigated other
possibilities for solicitating contributions rather than on the
streets. j
i
~a
34
City of Denton City Council Alnutes AQ9nde1
September 29, 1992 Qa19
Page 10
/7 y
Hempstead replied that they had looked at other methods but that
there was no other way to receive the same dollar amount as on the
streets. Previously the fire fighters had raised more money on the
streets than in a shopping center.
j Council Member Miller stated that the fire fighters would use good ~
judgement when going out in the streets but others might not. rf
a fir fighter came to a car, the occupant might be more inclined
to donate but might not be so with others.
Julie Shook, Denton MDA, stated that Oklahoma City and Tulsa raised
a lot of money for the event in a weekend. There was not another
type of event which would raise the same amount a: money in a
weekend.
Joe Dodd asked if the requiring of insurance and the filing of a
waiver would eliminate the problems.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that there were certain problems
with the enforceability of waivers. With the invalidation of an
ordinance there might be attorneyts fees for the other side to
consider.
Bill Burger, MDA, stated that the $1 million insurance
would cover any attorneys fees. MDA was willing to work withlthe
City in, regards to a waiver of liability, limiting the solicitation
to certain streets, limiting hours and days. Nothing had ever been
documented for accidents or Injuries associated with the HDA
program.
Council Member Miller asked if it would be
possible draft an ordinance detailing who would be able to solicit from
city streets.
Council member Perry asked who would chose who would be able to
solicit. He was not saying that the fire fighters could not was Helwas hesitant to exclud some andtheallowm to
roadways.
Council Member Miller suggested draft!
Lewisville ordinance. He was interested in hhow many aregtuoests
Lewisville had in a year. Restriations could be made to a point so
as to encourage only those who really.wanted to do the event. He
suggested a further refinement of the ordinance and look at it in
comparison with other cities.
I-
r.
g7
~s
1
a~wti ~
AQendaNo. ~a 3 5
City of Denton city council Minutes
September 29, 1992 A$eadal
Page 11 Date
Council Member Smith stated that the bottom line was that the
Council needed to decide if it wanted to have any organizations on
the streets. Deciding who or what would come next.
council Member Chew was concerned about the fact that the ordinance
I) was not enforced totally. He agreed that perhaps it would be
beneficial to look at other cities ordinances such as Lewisville.
Council Member Miller motioned, Chew seconded to direct stn!f to i
stur:y other city ordinances such as Lewisville and Gra.~11 prairie to `
determine how their ordinance worked and their experiences. On roll ,
"aYe",BPerk "aye"," Miller "aye", Hopkins "nay", Smith "na "
vote with a 7- nay ► and Mayor Castleberry "aye", Motion !ailed
1 vote.
9, The council received a report the
CityFS position regarding the Fry Street a?airia ds gave on staff
direction.
Catherine Tuck, Administrative Assistant, reviewed the history of
the Fry Street Fair over the past several years as detailed in the
r. agenda back-up.
Council Member Miller suggested forming a task force now to look at
the possibility of holding the Fair on
starting the process now to make arrangeme tstforttheHFairggested
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that a Policy
tion
Council would have to consider was that it the conditions couldtbe
negotiated with the Delta Lodge, would it be acceptable to have
this event on Fry Street, If so, he could see using s
trying to negotiate thou conditions. Until that toff time
answered, there was no reason for staff to startiythose
negotiations.
Mayor Pro Tea Hopkins stated that she saw no reason to permit the
Fair. This group was not even recognized by the Universit
not allowed to use Universit y and was
North Texas maintained, Therepwerreertoo many close a street that
during the Fair and there was no way to get in cry cut o! the area.!
The area was an area of concern for the police did not recognize this grouphecdid department n not know.
Council should give then any credibility. One year the Fair was
why the
held at Carriage Square Shopping Center and they can not return to
that area. The Fair did not work out at the Fairgrounds. She wa
opposed to spending any amount of staff time to work out Fry
as it was too small for the number of people who attended ttheSevens
1 and it could not be adequately policed,
t
i
c
i
i
F
R
I
1
A
CITY
.
COUNCIL
t
t
l 4~
O
: fir!
4~0 t`i4f
t
1
~ t
i
I
Va
[wood
s Attachme t 3
' -
~ GUS
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
T03 Mayor and Members of the City Council
I~I
# FROM$ Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager 3
SUBJECTe Draft Ordinance Regarding Charitable Solicitation at i
Intersections
DATES August 31, 1993
BACKGROUND i
At the August 24, 1993 work session the City Council directed staff
to draft a solicitation ordinance allowing charitable contributions
h In the roadmiys. The City Council specified various permitting
requirementa that were to be included in the ordinance. In
general, they included liability and insurance information, proof
of charitability, time and place regulations, and other safety
( regulations.
f
SUMMARYe
At the request of the City Council, the Legal Department has
drafted two ordinances for consideration. The ordinances amend
Section 25-5 of the Denton Code of Ordinances, Soliciting Business i
or Charitable Contributions. The first ordinance includes a
provision of insurance for the applicants. There are bl^nka.loft
for the amount of coverage desired by the City Council. The second
ordinance does not include any insurance requirements.
' Persona or organizations wanting to solicit charitable
contributions in the roadways must first apply for a permit from
the Chief of Police. This application must be submitted at least
15 days prior to the beginning of the solicitation drive. For
those who meet the permitting requirements, only two solicitation
permits would be allowed per calendar year for not more than three
consecutive days each, These activities will be limited to the,
,
hours of 7:00 am - 7e00 pm, Monday through Saturday. Only those
persons 10 years of age and older would be permitted to solicit.
Additionally, the organization would be required to provide traffic
safety vests which each participant would be required to wear at
all times.
The application includes the following informations {
• Full name and address of person applying for the permit and
the address of the organization's local headquarters or
principal office outside of the city
r,.
lv., p.p
„ •pOf/
f Genoa rro 9.~ -~3Z
s
+genda~tem Gv~ #3
• A full description of the purpose for the solici a ri ~
including the name, address, phone number of the pers or
organization receiving the funds
• A description of the solicitation methods
+ The beginning and ending dates for the solicitation drive
i
• A 'statement disclosing each conviction of a crime for the E
applicant or any officer, director, trustee, or agent of the
applicant
• An affidavit stating that 75% of the money collected will be
used to benefit the stated purpose of the solicitation
• Proof of tax-exempt status with the internal Revenue Service
• Execute a hold harmless and indemnification agreement prepared
by the Office of the City Attorney. The organization would
also be required to provide proof of insurance with limits of
the insurance at least ;1,000,000 per person $5,000,000 per
occurrence# and $100,000 for property damage.
This ordinance has been placed on this week's work session agenda
fot discussion. It has been worded such that if the council is
comfortable with the existing document it may also be considered at
the 700 pm regular session. However, if you have additional
questions or wish to study it further the ordinance will be placed ;
on a future agenda for canslderatlon.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
f
L d V. Harrell
City Manager
[
Prepared byi
Veronica S. Oglesby
w1 5
Administrative intern
i'
f
a
Am
M s:~woas~ao~saic~r.o
ALTER::4TIVE ONE--I;ITH I:9SL'F?VNCE
EtEC`UIRE~M:iT
gen~aNo 3.~~.D ~Z_
~gendalte s ~--3
Dale
ORDINANCE NO. tjL10n►~]I
i
i
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AMENDING SECTION 25-5 ("SOLIC-
ITING BUSINESS OR CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS9 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON; PROVIDING FOR A PERMITTING
PROCEDURE FOR SOLICITING CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONSI PROVIDING FOR A
SEVERABILITY PROVISION; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THERE- j
WITH; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF NOT TO EXCEED j
$500.00; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: I
SECTTQH 1. That Soc. 25-5 ("Soliciting Business or Charitable
Contributionsg) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton,
Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows:
i sea. 2S-5. Use of thorougbfares for soliciting.
It shall be unlawful for any person to stand in tho
roadway to solicit charitable contributions on or along
the side of the public streets of the City; provided,
however, a person or organization may solicit charitable
contributions on roadways so long as they do not impede
the lawful traffic on the roadway and so long as such
person has previously applied for and received a permit
to do so by the chief of police pursuant to Sec. 25-5.1
of this Code and so long as such person has a copy of
such permit prominently displayed on his person.
SECTION 11, That the Coda of ordinances, Denton, Texas, is
hereby amended by adding a section, to be numbered Soo. 25-5.1
("Issuance of permits for use of roadways to solicit charitable
contributions") which section shall read as follows:
Saco 25-5.1. issuance of permits for use of roadways to
solicit oharitable contributions.
(a) An applicant for a permit to solicit charitable con-
tributions while standing in a roadway shall file an
application in writing with the chief of police not less
than 15 days before commencement of the activity, and may
not commence such activity until such time as the permit
has boon issued by the chief of police.
C (b) The application must contain the following informa-
tion:
I
i
Date 3i 23
o
(1) The full name, address, and phone number
of the person or organization applying for the
permit and the address of the headquarters in
the City. if the organization is a chapter or
other affiliate of an organization having its
principal office outside the city, the name,
address, and phone number of the parent orga-
nization, and any local agent.
(2) A description of the purpose of the
solicitation, which includes a list with ad-
dresses and phone numbers, of which parsons or
organizations to receive the funds collected E
by the solicitation.
(3) A description of the method or methods to
be used in conducting the activity.
(4) The period within which the activity will
be conducted, including the proposed dates for
the beginning and ending of the activity.
(5) A statement disclosing each conviction of
a crime amounting to a felony or a misdemeanor
involving dishonesty of the applicant, any
person in charge or control of the activity,
or any officer, director, trustee or agent of
the applicant.
(6) The applicant shall sign an affidavit
stating that at least sevinty-five percent
(75%) of the monies collected by such charita-
ble solicitations shall be used for the direct
benefit of the stated purpose or purposes of
the solicitation. For purposes of this seo-
tion, the term "direct benefit of the stated
purpose or purposes of the solicitation" shall
mean funds expended directly for the specific
purpose or purposes which the person or orga-
nization states in its application, but not
including funds expended for overhead, manage-
vent and administration, and other items not
specified in the application.
E
r
(7) whether contributions to the applicant
are tax deductible, the extent to which con-
tributions are tax deductible, and, it the
applicant has expressly been granted tax-
exempt status by the United States Internal
Revenue Service, proof of that status shall be
provided, if applicable.
E
PAGE 2
Apen~a,em S_'= 1
Nit ~O
i
(e) An executed copy of a hold harmless and
indemnification agreement prepared by the
office of the city attorney, along with an
i insurance policy evidenced by a certificate of
insurance by an insurance company licensed by
the Texas State Hoard of Insurance insuring
each of the participants in the solicitation
both for injuries to themselves and others, t
with the city named as an additional named
insured, with the policy limits of the insur-
ance policy being in a
n amsu (t of at leas'
dollar
per person, dollars
~
) per occurrence, and or
dollars (S )
property damages.
(c) The administrative fee to be charged for issuance of
such permit to conduct such activities on public thor-
oughfares shall be ten dollars ($10.00), plus the cost of
preparing individual permits to be displayed by solici-
tors.
(d) After a review of the application and collection of
1 the appropriate fee, the chief of police shall issue a
permit for the activities permitted in Sec. 25-5 of this
code. Such permit is to be prominently displayed on the
person of the applicant or, in the appropriate case, on
the person of the applicant's employee or agent when con-
ducting the activities permitted in Sec. 25-5 of this
Code.
(e) The chief of police shall have fifteen (15) days to
issue or deny issuance of the permit. If the chief of
police fails to issue the permit within fifteen (15)
days, it shall be considered denied. if the information
contained in the application is determined by the chief
of police to be either false or incomplete, the chief of
policy shall deny the permit. Any person aggrieved by
the denial of the permit may appeal such decision to the
city council within ten (10) days of the denial.
(f) All permits issued pursuant to this section shall be
valid for not sore than three (3) consecutive days. An
applicant shall be allowed only two (2) such permits per
calendar year.
Activities permitted in Sec. 25-5 of this Code shall
be prohibited prior to 7:00 a.m. and after 7:00 p.m. of
any day, Monday through Saturday, and shall be prohibited
at any time on any Sunday.1
PAGE 1 `
M.a.•:. Ivy
r.,:.
,AW
~snea~o- VL9 -c.. 5-
, Ageoca;tem At 2
oats
is
(h) Activities permitted in Sec. 25-5 of this Code shall
not be allowed by any person under the age of eighteen
(18) years.
(i) All persons conducting such solicitations shall, at.
all times during which the solicitation is being conduct-
ed, wear traffic safety vests.
SECTION III. That if any section, subsection, paragraph, II
sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application
f thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court
{ of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City
Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have
1 enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
SE=ION I That any provisions of any ordinance which may be
in conflict with the terms of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION y, That any person violating any provision of this
ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding
$500.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated
shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.
SECTION VI, That this ordinance shall become effective four.-
teen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the city Secretary
is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be
published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official news-
paper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the
date of its passage.
I
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1993.
i
r f,
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST:i
{ JENNIFER HALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY NOT CONTENT:
} DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY
I ~
BY! 1
E
PACE 4
9
And !1\~DOCf WRON S0. S01 YS.J
ALTERNATIVE TWO--:O INSURANCE
j Apenda!~o 9.~:ggUREC?CIREMENTS
Agendailem 1.3
Date / 3 D
{ ORDINANCE NO. 7
I
{ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AMENDING SECTION 25-5 ("SOLIC-
ITING BUSINESS OR CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS") OF THE CODE OF
I ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON; PROVIDING FOR A PERMITTING
PROCEDURE FOR SOLICITING CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS, PROVIDING FOR A
SEVERABILITY PROVISIONI REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THERE-
WITH1 PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF NOT TO EXCEED
$500.001 AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
Contribution of That Sec. of ordinances of Business City of Charitable
Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 25-5, gas of thorougbfares for soliciting.
It shall be unlawful for any person to stand in the
roadway to solicit charitable contributions on or along
the aide of the public streets of the Cityt provided,
€ however, a person or organization may solicit charitable
contributions on roadways so long as they do not impede
the lawful traffic on the roadway and so long as such
person has previously applied for and received a permit
to do so by the chief of police pursuant to Sec. 25-5.1
of this Code and so long as such person has a copy of C
such permit prominently displayed on his person. +
SECTION - That the Code of Ordinances, Denton, Texas, is
hereby amended by adding a section, to be numbered Sea. 25-5.1 ,
("issuance of permits for use of roadways to solicit charitable
contributions") which section shall read as follows: i
Beo. 25-5418 Issuance of permits for use of roadways to
solicit obaritable contributions.
(a) An applicant for a permit to solicit charitable con-
tributions while standing in a roadway shall file an
II application in writing with the chief of police not less
than 15 days before commencement of the activity, and may
not commence such activity until such time as the permit
has been issued by the chief of police.
i
b) The application must contain the following informa-
(
tiont
1 I
1
ewca va '
dper~ca
Date /D
i
(1) The full name, address, and phone number
of the person or organization applying for the
` permit and the address of the headquarters in
the City. If the organization is a chapter or
other affiliate Of an organization having its
principal office outside the cityo the name,
address, and phone number of the parent orga-
nization, and any local agent.
I (Z) A description of the purpose of the
solicitation, including a listing, with ad-
dresses and phone numbers, of which persons or
organizations to receive the funds collected
by the solicitation.
(7) A description of the method or methods to
be used in conducting the activity.
The period within which the activity will
(4)
be conducted, and ending of the activity. the proposed dates for
the beginning
(5) A statement disclosing each conviction of
a crime amounting to a felony or a demeanor
` involving dishonesty of the applicant,
person in charge or control of the activity,
or any officer, director, trustee or agent of
the applicant.
(6) The applicant shall sign an affidavit
stating that at least seventy-live percent
(751) of the monies collected by such charita-
ble solicitations shall bo used for the direct
benefit of the stated purpose or purposes of
the solicitation. For purposes of this sec-
tion, the term "direct benefit of the stated
purpose or purposes of the solicitation" shall
mean funds expended directly for the specific'
purpose or purposes which the person or orgs-
nisation states in its application, but not
including funds expended for overhead, manage-
Mont and administration, and other items not
specified in the application.
(7) Whether contributions to the applicant
1 are tax deductible, the extent to which con-
tributions are tax deductible, and, if the
applicant has expressly been granted tax-
exempt status by the United States Internal
Revenue Servico, proof of that status shall be i
provided, if applicable.
i
PAGE 2
i
G lap
r
AMA* -
19
d~e•~~ fan -
ate ~ 3i ~
~ q /Q N
(8) An executed copy of a hold harmless and
indemnification agreement prepared by the
office of the city attorney.
(c) The administrative fee to be charged for issuance of
such permit to conduct such'activities on public thor-
oughfares shall be ton dollars ($10.00), plus the cost of
preparing individual permits to be displayed by soliol-
tors.
(d) After a review of the application and collection of
the appropriate fee, the chief of police shall issue a
j permit for the activities permitted in Sec. 25-5 of this
Code. Such permit is to be prominently displayed on the
person of the applicant or, in the appropriate case, on
' the person of the applicant's employee or agent when con-
ducting the activities permitted in Sec. 25-5 of this
Code.
(a) The chief of police shall have fifteen (15) days to
_ issue or deny issuance of the permit. If the chief of
police fails to issue the permit within fifteen (15)
days, it shall be considered denied. if the information
contained in the application is determined by the chief
of police to be either false or incomplete, the chief of
police shall deny the permit. Any person aggrieved by
the denial of the permit may appeal such decision to the
city council within ten (30) days of the denial.
'(f) All permits issued pursuant to this section shall be
valid for not more than three (3) consecutive days. An
applicant shall be allowed only two (2) such permits per
calendar year.
(g) Activities permitted in Sao. 25-5 of this Code shall
be prohibited prior to 7:00 a.m. and after 700 p.m. of
any day, Monday through Saturday, and shall be prohibited
at any time on any Sunday.
(h) Activities permitted in sec. 25-5 of this Cods shall
not be allowed by any person under the age of sighteen
(i8) years.
(i) All persons conducting such solicitations sha).1, at
i all times during which the solicitation is being conduct- I
ad, wear traffic safety vests.
BECTioN iii. That if any section, subsection, paragraph,
sentence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or applicatiothereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court
i
PAGE 3
~a~c~vo Q~.~.. ~ II
YY ~ ageaca tam.,.~~- •
' of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the city
Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have
enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
SECTION IV. That any provisions of any ordinance which may be
in conflict with the terms of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION y. That any person violating any provision of this
ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding
$500.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated
shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.
SECTION VI. That this ordinance shall become effective four-
teen 14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary
directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be
is hereby
published twice in the Denton Record ChronioU, the official nova-
paper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the
date of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1993' i l
i 1
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
a I
ATTESTi
JENNIFER NALTERSj CITY SECRETARY
BYs
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORK:
DEBRA Al DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BY1
PAGE 4
M1
0
a
i
7
CITY
COUNCIL
t
a
`i
Ufa
a
1
J ~
bti: rah
1410
Y r
I
i
r * .r ,ate.,. Fl a 1..:.....
Attachment 4
AQ81MgFlo.
A~d31
l
CITY of DENTON,TEX" MUNICIPAL BUILDING/ DENTON, TEXAS 70201 /TELEPHONE (817) 368.8307
Office of the City Man&per
TOs Lloyd V. 1.arrell, City Hanager
ff
FROKI Catherine E. Tuck, Administrative Assistant
DATE1 August 1S0 1993
SUBJECTI Background Information Regarding Solicitation on Roadways
Please find the attached information presented to the City Council
y last year regarding the firefighters' request to solicit charitable
1
contributions from vehiclte.
r Also included is a copy'of the minutes where this was discussed in, 1
+-`y a City Council work easeion. !
Please advise if i can provide additional information.
Catherine E. Tuck
Administrative Assistant
i`
.gyp
. 1 ,
t
f
t
~ 711(+
71 9' {'4
s
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
}n
TO: Major and Members of the City Council
FROMI Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECTi Charitable Solicitation at Intersections i
DATE. September 29, 1992
BACKGROUNDt
In 1988, the City Council received an increasing number of
complaints about persons and organizations attempting to solicit
business or charitable contributions from the occupants of vehicles 1
at intersections. Groups and individuals were soliciting on '
numerous busy intersections all over the city, causing traffic
problems and endangering the individuals collecting the funds.
In March 19880 the City Council discussed this problem at a work
t session and felt that solicitation upon roadways was dangerous for
the persons engaging in solicitation as well as a traffic
Impediment at Intersections. The Council felt that safer
alternatives for soliciting charitable contributions were available
without utilizing public streets and rights of way. As a result of
the City Council's discussion, the City Attorney was directed to
draft an ordinance addressing solicitation at intersections and
roadways. The proposed ordinance was adopted and is the current,
provision in the Code that prohibits solicitation in roadways.
J
Section 21-10(a) of the City Code reads as follows
No person shall be upon any street or roadway
or be or go upon the shoulder or median of any
street or roadway for the purpose of
soliciting business or charitable
contributions of any kind from the occupant of
any vehicle.
At the September 1, 1992, City Council Meeting Alan Hempstead,
representing the Cit!P s firefighters, requested an exemption to
Section 21-10(a) on behalf of the Muscular Dystrophy Association's
(MDA) Annual Fill-the-Boot Campaign. Firefighters have
traditionally collected funds at intersections for MDA. However,
since 1988, the City's firefighters have solicited twice at
alternate locations on private property because of Denton's
ordinance.
Mr. Hempstead mentioned two Oklahoma cities that made special
provisions for their annual Fill-the-Boot Campaign despite local
ordinances that prohibit solicitation in roadways. Because the
CHI
ti
i
r
%MIT
~a U~J
request was presented as a citizen Report the Council was unable to
take any action or make any decision at that time. A councilmember
requested that the item be placed on a future work session agenda.
i
SUMMARY:
i
Veronica Oglesby, Administrative Intern, collected information from
several metroplex cities as well as the two cities in Oklahoma
mentioned in Alan Hempstead's presentation. The results of this
survey are attached.
Ten of the 13 cities contacted currently have local ordinances
addressing solicitation on streets and rights of way. Four of the ;
10 cities permit solicitation on streets and rights of way through
their local ordinance- Grand Prairie, Lewisville, Carrollton and
cities have additional permitting
Plano. These four Texas
1 requirements. Solicitation is also permitted in the City of Allen
even though it does not have a local ordinance addressing
solicitation on streets and rights of way. In the City of Allen
the Police Department handles all solicitation problems as
E obstruction of traffic.
Grand Prairie permits organizations that register to solicit on
roadways as long as the solicitation does not impede traffic. The
ordinance requires organizations to show proof of insurance and
1'1 charter of incorporation. It also specifies tt.e dates and times
the solicitation may take place. Lewisville also limits charitable
solicitation to certain weekends and hours. In addition,
Lewisville requires prcof that the charitable organization meets
the definition as established by the internal Revenue service.
Plano requires the organization to wear traffic safety vests at all
times, to provide proof of insurance, and to sign a liability
waiver in favor of the city. The City of Plano permits
solicitation in the rights of way as long as it is not a state
highway or farm-to-market road. The City of Carrollton permits
solicitation at intersections provided the organization executes a
written agreement releasing the City from any liability arising
from the solicitation drive. It also states that no person shall
walk on the main roadway and no solicitation is to take place along
arterial highways during the morning and evening rush hours.
Tulsa, Oklahoma, one of the two cities Alan Hempstead referred to
in his presentation, permits only sworn public safety officers to s
solicit in roadways for charitable projects adopted by their
bargaining agents. {
According to the Municipal Code and the Motor Vehicles and Traffic
Code received from Oklahoma City no person shall stand in a roadway
for the purpose of soliciticg donations. However, the Police
- department says the area firefighters stand in the median without
violating the ordinance.
t 1
v ~ i
~QWIdiHO r
Sete ~ - D ,
After reviewing the information received from the 13 cities, i~ 13
tbution in
appears that the issue soliciting ofartheb cities,riregulating I
roadways is a concern. .
solicitation In roadways is a problem despite local ordinances. ,
Because of the many problems and safety concerns some cities have
chosen to prohibit solicitation in the roadways altogether. j
However, other cities have dealt with the issue by designating
specific roadways and suggesting alternative locations to solicit
funds. These alternativA locations Include parking lots, shopping
centers and grocery stores. Several of the cities are currently
researching and updating their ordinance.
In the absence of a local ordinance regulating charitable
contributions in roadways the state law prevails. Article 1X
Section 81 (c) of the Texas Traffic Laws states:
A person may not stand in a roadway for the
purpose of soliciting a ride, contributions,
employment or business from the occupant of
any vehicle, except that a person may stand in
a roadway to solicit c local charitable contributions
it authorized by y the ~
jurisdiction over the roadway.
State law prohibits solicitation on roadways and from occupants of
for
vehicles. However, it allows cities to give an xem Aption
request
charitable contributions with City Council approval.
still need to be made to the City Council. This seems to
give a City s=. Moro flexibility in determining what charitable
group may solicit. However, the Legal Department has stated that
the City Council would not be able to discriminate between two
charitable organizations. in reality, all charitable organizations
who requested an exemption from the City Council would be allowed
to solicit donations at Intersections if the City Council were to
repeal its current ordinance and go to the state law provision.
RESPEC LILLY SUBMITTED,
L oy V. Harre 1
City Manager
I Prepaxtd by:
Cat erine E. Tuck
Administrative Assistant
4,
RbsOdM.
1 I
SUMMARY OF LOCAL, AREA SOLICITATION ORDINANCES
i
h
CITY LOCAL CHARITABLE SOLICITATION
SOLICITATION ORDINANCE IN RICMr'-OF-BAYS
NO
YES OMAHCMA CITY
1.
2. TULSA YES No- only sworn public safety
Officers may aoltcit
In roadways" for. Charitable
,k ! projects adopted by LMir '
E bargaining agents
r ;
Sri
3. ' ; , ADDISON Ys8 j
2 { e. ; At,LSN, NO YE9
' NO NO prohiblti by a section ofthi j,
S. 11RLINOTON StreetCode Pedestrians' " on,
} Roadwa s
4 t'
YES
6. GIRAOLLPOIf ,
r
7r DALLAS No-repealed 8192 governed by state Law
y
Yss NO
~•ji
S: FARM" SAP"
r, No
9. GARIAND Yse
10, GRAND PPAIRIt YES YHS 1
116 LsMTEVILts YES YES
1
ra 12, P YES Vito
LAO
13.. UNIVERSITY PARK Y68
air n
t,fla _
J .I`l ,IaAll4. tr'~T ~ 4 ' i xx).
I
~ ~on0lNo ~ ~ Q'
SURVEY
SOLICITATIOIVCAL CITIES'
ORDINANCE S
1• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
1 The city of Oklahoma
i charitable solica oma City does have an ordinance
Munlclna~l reades Section 13-36 of regarding
the Oklahom_~ty
...No person or organization shall directly or
indirectly solicit money, donations of money
for charitable
patriotic or educational, religious,
streets un2easaeuch nthropic purposes, on the
has first obtained a person or organization
permit.
Section 32-158(a) Of the Motor Vehicles and Traffic Code states
that no person shall etan
shlclting a ride, donations emplo oadwey or the purposs of
occupant of any vehicle. Yment or business from
the
in response to Mr. Hempateads report that I
special provleton6 for the MDA Fi12-the - Oklahoma city made
Department said n one is a Soot Cam ai n
Of MaY• However, the firefighters to solicit In the public rtghta
violating any ordinance. g stand In the median without
2• Tulsa. Oklahoma
The City of Tulsa does have an ordinance regulating charitable
contributions, the Cit Of Tulsa Oklahoma Charter and RAvlaed
Ordi1 nei, Title 37 C e ter
P 1 Section 1105. Title 7 1
states: 1
No person shall step or stand In the roadway
or median to channel
Of solicitin traffic for the purpose
contributions of an employment, business, or 1
any vehicles any kind from the occupant of
public safety provided however, that sworn
for officers may solicit
contributions
i ofticlall a charitable
y adopted by their bargaining agproect
ents.
3. Addison, Texas
They do have a local solicitation ordinance.
organizations are exempt from
t/charitable
However, no one r Paying for permit (registration.
right-of-way, permitted to solicit on public streets or in the
j
i
IVA
1
ivenda p'
O
4. Allen, Texas
The City of Allen does not have and ordinance regulat g
solicitation rights g he situation soliciting as n becomes
obstruction problem
the Police Department handles of
traffic.
5. Arlington, Texas
They have no local ordinance regarding soliciting charitable
Pedestrians roadways on Roadwaysibited by
Street soliciting in
contributions. .05 of he Howeverr
Section 6
M
6. Carrollton, Texas
They have a local ordinance regarding soliciting charitable
contributions. Charitable solicitation upon public streets is
allowed provided the organization obtains a permit from the
' Director of Traffic and Transportation. Included in the
information needed to obtain a permit is the provision that the
it organization execute a written agreement releasing the City from
liability due to injury or damage arising from the solicitation }
drive. Other provisions of the ordinance state that no perss.:►
• shall walk on the main roadway, and no solicitation shall take {
place along arterial highways Monday' through Friday, 7am to gam and
4pm to 6pm.
u Dallas, Texas
They had a local ordinance regarding charitable solicitation,
however it was repealed August 26, 1992.
e
a g. Farm*rs Branch, Texas
The Police Department handles all solicitation permits. No one is
allowed to solicit on street corners medians or at intersections.
i
9. Garland
9soldo have a local ordinance icit on city property and noaonenissallowed nta solicit ine
to the
streets.
10. Grand Prairie ,
They do have a local charitable solicitation ordinance and it
permits charitable organizations t•i solicit on roadways a for goad ~
they do not impede traffic and hsve previously app
received a permit. Specific provisions required to receive a
permit state that the organization must file an application 30 days
prior to the activity, and provide phone numbers of persons or I
organizations to receive the funds collected by solicitation. Also
the organization must provide a copy of their charter or articles I
will an affidavit
go directly to stating the stthat at least ated charity.
monies collected sign
the moni The
,i
1
ire-.pw ;l
Genoa No
nenaait
a1f ~
organization may solicit only between the hours of 9am - 9pm Monday
through Saturday, and must provide proof of insurance. Permits are
issued for not more than 3 consecutive days within a 30 day period
and only 2 such permits per calendar year.
11. Lewisville
They do have a local ordinance regarding charitable solicitations
in roadways. Charitable organizations are allowed to stand in a
roadway provided they first register and obtain a permit in I
compliance with the terms of the ordinance. Specific terms of the
ordinance state that solicitation may take place only during
certain weekends of certain months and for no more than 3'
consecutive days. Soliciting is permitted only at specific
intersections of crossings between 7am and 7pm. The application
for the permit is to be filed not less than five (S) days before
the proposed solicitation and must include proof that the
charitable organization meets the definition as established by the
t Internal Revenue Service.
f}
I. i21 Plano
They do have a local ordinance regarding charitable solicitation on
public rights of way. Charitable organizations holding permits may,.
conduct solicitations within the city and upon public rights of way
i-, .provided no charitable solicitation shall be conducted upon or
within the rights of way of any State of 'T'exas streettroad or any ~
term-to-market road. Other provisions state that solicitation must c.
be conducted during daylight hours, for no more than l consecutive
21 hour period per year per organization. They must also provide
a certificate of insurance, execute a waiver of liability in favor
of the City and wear traffic safety vests at all times. J
r J ~
13. University Park
The City of University Park does have a local ordinance regulating
solicitations. Persons seeking contributions for a charitable
purpose must register with the Chief of Police and the Chief of
Police will Issue a certificate of exemption. Solicitation is f
prohibited on any public street, alley, or traffic island.
q _ I
i
s,
f
K
I
DENTON
R
oooaoo
9
oo~°o °ooo
O o Op }
M • 1 y fjf ~V r QC~,
1Y
Oap ~,To ~Q.~000 ; :
OOp~ N
ooa
ob
P{
CI7T ~pp0 '
ILI
COUNC
s
,
.
rwar54 •mr-'N: ftl.',;rd F'w ~.v .¢a,"qS "h` 6 ~.:x .3•.w ♦ X /i, Nr +i: eca v .i"e; w.. y....._.
} Ql~I...J ` t I
r,. l 1
CITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING I DENTON, TEXAS 76P41 I TELEPHONE (81n 66"M
Office of the City Swelery
r
kK M E H 0 R A N D U M
h<
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
` FROKt Jennifer Walters# City Secretary P'
DATEt September 6, 7994
E Tc` RE i Agenda Item
'Attached please find a copy of the City Council Commititea
Affiliations for your consideration.
t
rt
W-n-b if or a ere
141 11 lea{,i , aR
Attachment ;
F
tYY M i 3 , .
I '()4
rgr
r.
Y r .fM~yp..n.,.._ - 'rwJi.Y'..ww.w.+an..w w.rwY.M.'.•n+r......_ ;v.
;vi
b
1 1 r
r J( t } \ a
A,,I r t ' 1 ry~ ~
I i
I
1
11! i1
08s» rVG ~
r~euft~.t
y ;
CLty Council L!nw,.p<Ltww feral u_ii___
i
aaannn coxxl~rras E
Council Member Perry }
Mayor Castleberry
aonls cmncrrre:
Council Member Smith
Mayor Castleberry
Council Member Cott
Council Member Perry
Mayor Castleberry
Council Member Cott
DIlaL !
. ~ . O! amee~n , ,
Council Member
4 Chew
Council Matiber Smith
Council Membsr Miller
G
VISION ]FOR nt~rray -Aso: eswrevv
Council Member Miller E
Mayor Pro TON Brock
F.
ACCOO114
w
gandaNo
VIA
er~dalt
City Of Denton City Council Minutes`
June 1, 1993
Page 29
E
36 The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
the appointment of Council Members to various Council committees
and gave staff direction.
City Manager Harrell stated that Council committees had been listed
with current members and vacancies. Staff needed direction from
council for appointments.
Council Member Miller suggested an informal poll regarding which
Member was interested in which committee,
Council Member Cott asked for a description of the Vision duties.
City Manager Harrell stated that each sponsoring agency committed
la
two members to serve on the project cabinet in charge of directing l
the entire pruject. In addition to two cabinet members, as many
others as desiring could participate in some form on a committee.
Council Member Miller suggested adding a juvenile task force
liaison to the Municipal Court Advisory Committee.
Mayor Pro Tom Smith the Vision arepresentat i es if they would be willing, and
Brock a ,
Councl that representative and would be willing to go off the Audit
u
Committee.
Mayor Pro Tam Smith suggested appointing council Member Cott to the
Audit Committee or the Investment Policy Committee.
City Manager Harrell reviewed the duties of each committee for the
Councils
Council Member Cott stated that he would like to represent the
how to l dion a subcomittoe of rect the community the vio thati pram regarding sgi..g and
Council considered Item f12. 1
12. The Council considered appointments to various Council
committeost j
A. Agenda Committee
8. Audit Committee
C. Economic Development Committee
D. Investment Policy Committee
E. Municipal Court Advisory Committee i
k
i
e4 469
sow
City of Denton City Council Minutes
June 1, 1993
i Page 30 1
F. Vision for Denton
Chow to the following committees: nominate the following council
members Agenda Committee - Mayor Castleberry
Audit Committee - Mayor Castleberry
Mayor Pro Tom Smith
Council Member Cott
Economic Development Committee -!Council Member Perry
Castleberry
Investment Policy Committee - Council Member Cott
Municipal Court Advisory Committee/Liaison to Diversion
Program/Municipal Court of Record - Council Member Chew
Mayor Pro Tom Smith
Council Member Miller ;
Vision for Denton - 21st Century - Council lMem~ber Broockr
i
on roll vote, Brock Payee, Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith mays",
Chow Payee, Perry maysm, and Mayor Castleberry Pays". Motion
carried unanimously.
The Council considered Bork session item 14.
tt►slCityw report a hold
a~.cuaye Council
ordinancss and gave staff direction.
Nonie Kull, Environmental Realth Services Manager, stated that `
staff had received some additional concerns from the Denton Humane
Society regarding additional animals on the site. 8taff had also
i received a complaint that day from an individual who adopted an
animal from the Hartfelt Humane society and had subsequent problems
with that animal. There had also been a complaint on the Grooming
Den which was housed at 1800 Fort North Drive but was not a part of
:Harttelt. The Grooming Don was owned and operated by Laura Gill.
The City had received a letter from the Texas a x s Department
indicatedealth
An response to the Mayor's letter. that
tbere had been no request for reinspection from the owners of the
shelter. The shelter legislation was no longer an option as it had
y
j
e
99COUNCI
.
1
4 f
f 1
r
1 r r
1jp { 1 I 't
!
{1 y - 1
+ r1 1 .
Y i Y ~"r
1
l t rJ
f.
~ r f: J ♦ ~
t t O Ml,.. ~ ~ S
{
. 00
E, CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1
July 5, 1994
The Council 5015 p mn d tinto he Civil he Executive Session on on Tuesday, July 5,
1994 at PRESENT; Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members
Cher, Cott, Farry, and Miller.
ABSENT: Council Member Smith
i, The council convened into the Executive session to discuss the
followings
A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071
n{ty of Denton.
1, considered action in
B, Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE
Sec. 551.074
The Council convened into the work Session on Tuesday, July 5, 1994
kI at 6100 p.m. in the city Council Chambers.
fi pggsENT1 Mayor Castleberry; Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, and
Miller.
a
1
ABSENT: Council Member Smith and Mayor Pro Tem Brock
10, The council received a presentation and held a discussion of
the 1994-95 Major Budget Issues Report.
Mayor Pro Tom Brock joined the meeting.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that there were two purposes
t f
for the.mnjor budget issues report.
n budget rthedseaond wascto
with an early preview of the proposed e
present a highlight of the critical policy issues contained in the
ress
those 5 budget, ii also provided
make recommendations oforaeach
to
those issues and an opportunity
issue. He reviewed an explanation of the attachments included in
the back-up materials. Appendix A was a listing of the budget
packages included in the proposed budget. Those listed in Appendix
A were programs ranked by the Executive staff and proposed to
Council for consideration. There were two different rankings this ime year, capital expenditures oatt other Cement Btwas a xlpe it ofspand on-
going maintenance packages.
which were requested by department uireotors but were not
recommended to Council. Attachment C was a recap of the city
Council budget questionnaire including comments from Council.
r
1
AQW4 NO
Ape~Caq '
City of Denton City Council Minutes Ap
July 5, 1994 /
Page 2 Z ~
Attachment D was a listing of General Fund revenues and Attachment
E was the expenditure summary of all General Fund functions. This
appeared to be a fairly optimistic budget for the next year. This
budget gave major emphasis on trying to solve one-time capital
expenditure needs of the City. The budget represented $147,993,000
worth of revenues and $147,484,000 worth of expenditures.
(1) General Fund Reserve Level - this was the appropriate level of
maintaining the General Fund balance for unforeseen emergencies
that might arise. The adopted goal had been to maintain this
balance between 8-10%. Council had a strong reference for a fund
balance of approximately 10t. It was estimated that the fund
reserve level would be 14.76% which would allow $1,148,000 to be
allocated to help balance the budget. Staff was recommending that
a substantial portion of this reserve be allocated for one-time
expenditures of a capital nature or other one-time expenditures
which would not be reoccurring. In the past, all of the reserve
over the 10% had been used for operation and maintenance costs.
This year it was recommended that 62% of the fund balance be f
earmarked for those one-time expenditures and the remaining 35% i
would be used for on-going operation and maintenance expenses.
options for the unreserved fund balance level were (1) allow the
balance to stay at its current level and fund an additional
$1,148,678 of revenue or decrease expenditures, (2) use $1,148,000 i
of the balance as a resource to help fund the 1994-95 budget, or ;
f (3) reduce the fund balance below the 10% level.
(2 Re en e
A. Sales Tax - It general,purposg tax - the budget included
a 4% growth increase in receipts over the current budget amount for
the it sales tax not used to reduce property tax. Alternatives for
the sale tax receipts were (1) project less than a 4% growth, (2)
1 project a 4% growth rate for 1994-951 or (3) project greater than
a 0 growth. Recommendation by staff was to project a 0 growth
rate.
B. Sales Tax_- 1/2 cent to reduce property taxes - the City
did not have a choice in this area as to the estimate of this tax.
By State law, the city must request an amount from the State
Comptroller's Office which certified an amount of revenue which
would be generated from the half-cent sales tax. The number
certified by the State was $3,176,900. That certification allowed
a proposal for a property tax decrease of $.1672 per $100 valuation !
or a 22.8% decrease in the property tax rate. During the election
campaign, it had been indicated to the voters that the property tax I
would be reduced by at least 20% but this would allow for a 22.8%
- decrease. It was felt that tho recommendation by the State
.1
owl
~a , Duo
E City of Denton City Council Minutes ' ,/rr~777
July 5, 1994 D9t9 /
Page 3
Comptroller was conservative and any amount collected above the $3
million would go into a special reserve fund.
C. Property Tax - the property tax rate started with a rate
of $.7479. This would then be decreased by $.1672 for the sales
tax. It was estimated that the final certified roll from the
Apppraisal District would show a growth of approximately 21 in the
City's assessed valuation. If that 21 held, in order to bring the
tax rate down to the effective rate, the rate would go down $.151.
In addition, the proposed budget called for a decrease below the
effective rate of $.0D11 cents per $100 valuation. If the final
appraised numbers from the Appraisal District stayed with the 24,
the final tax rate would be $.5645. If the assessed value was more
than the 24, the rate would go down further. The proposed tax rate
of $.5645 represented a 24.51 decrease in the tax rate from the
current tax rate. Alternatives for the ad valorem tax rate were
(1) set the rate using the Property Tax Code formula at $.0011 per
$100 valuation below the effective tax rate which would be $.5645
per $100 valuation, (2) set the rate below the 24.51 percent
reduction which would require a rcduction of General fund
expenditures, or (3) increase the rate over the $.5645 rate which
could go as far up as $.6222 and still be below the rollback rate.
The recommendation was to set the rate at $.5645 which was $.0011
below the effective rate and 24.51 below the prior year's tax rate.
133 Pay Plan Adjustments - it was recommended that there be a pay
adjustment identical to last year of an average increase of 4.61
based on performance and market adjustments starting in January
1995. Civil Service employees would receive 4.61 plus any scheduled
step increases. Alternatives included (1) fully accept the Mercer
proposal which would be a 6.41 increase and require an additional
$396,350, (2) implement a range adjustment and performance based
4 pay increase between zero to 74 with an average increase of 4.00
1
or (3) delay the compensation program increases and provide no
increaue in employee compensation. It was recommended that an 1
average increase of 4.61 be given based on performance and market
adjustments. Not included in the proposed budget was an employee
incentive pay program. Last year such a program was included in
the proposed budget but was removed during the budget
deliberations. This was still a recommendation by the Executive
r Staff. The Public Utilities Board had recommended a more modest
proposal from last year. However, this program was not included in
the proposed budget at this point in time.
J41 Benefit Adjustments
A. Health insurance - included in the budget was an at
increase in the City premiums for health insurance which was a
d
AQBndaNo
City of Denton City Council Minutes ApendaIt 2' t
July 5, 1994 Die
Page 4
7
r
reasonable estimate for an increase. I
cost of that ncrease was
$66,000. Alternatives were (1) requi eethe employe sito pay that S
additional coat or (2) fund the 81 increase in health insurance.
The recommendation was to budget for the 8} increase in the
proposed budget.
B. last year the Council increased the retirement
program in TMRS from a 5t 2-1 program to 6V 2-1 rog
it had been considered to take the level to 7% asmost ~areaicities
were at a 7% 2-1 match. It was recommended that the City stay at
6% 2-1 level as the cost was too high for the 74 2-1 match. It was
felt that the one-time expenditure items were a higher priority
this year than an increase in the TMRS level, r
i
were being added to tYea Generale Fund aTho e positions that 15.5 positions
Into three categories - new facilities, resaon of previously
cut positions, and enhanced services/service levels. Of the 15.5
positional two General Fund positions were being eliminated which
would drop the total increase to 13.5 new worker years added to the
General Fund. Of those 13.5 positions, 10 were driven by new
facilities such as the Denton Municipal Complex, the new librarryy or
the new South Lakes Park. Restoration of previously cut positions
included three positions cut in previous years during the recent
economic downturn. One was in the Animal Control area, one in the
Engineering Department and one in the Building Inspection area.
-Theme were offset by two reductions in the Engineering area.
Enhanced services had two categories o
of re
was a recommendation to include $40,000 in the budget for matching
grant money to hire up to 6 new police officers. It the
money did not become available, the $40,000 would be availableato
hire two new officers. Other enhanced service
a part-time position for an administrative intern ton assist with
the weekly Council work sessions broadcasting and increasing the
current part-time prosecutor position to a full time position to
work with the Municipal Court of Record. It these positions were
not funded, there would be $320,000 to be reallocated to the
General Funds
t61 Other aap~~ - the
- --____a-.,w ontributions proposed budget recommended
an increase of $51,700 in allocations to human service agencies.
$50,000 would be from block grant funds and $1,700 from the General
Fund resources, Alternatives Included (1) fund the 1993-94 level
of $148,300 which would allow $1,700 to be reallocated, (2) fund at
the agency requested level of $876,548 which required an additional
$576,548 to be funded from additional resources or expenditure
reductions, or (3) fund the Human Services Committee recommended
level. The recommendation was to fund at the Human Services
i
' t "a
-D
i NO.
City of Denton City Council Minutes _
July 5, 1994 f~EB
Page 5
i !
Committee recommended level as amended by the Council. '
(7) Transportation - the proposed budget included a $25,799
increase from the current funding level for SPAN and Handihop.
Alternatives were (1) keep the funding at its current level which
would allow $25,799 to be reallocated but would require a reduction
of current SPAN services or (2) fund at the increased level. The
recommendation was to fund at the $25,799 increased level.
(a) Tax exemptiQn for room over 65 - In 1988-89 the Council
adopted a policy to move the over 65 exemption to a $25,000 level.
The current exemption for persons over 65 was $21,000. The
proposal included another increase to the exemption for a total
exemption of $22,000 in 1994••95. Alternatives Included (1) keep
the funding at its current level and use an additional $15,000 for
other purposes, (2) increase the exemption to $25,000 immediately
and eliminate $45,000 of expenditures from the budget or increase
revenue, or (3) proceed with the recommendation to increase the
exemption by $1,000 per year, for a total exemption of $22,000 in
1994-995. The recommendation was to increase the exemption $1,000
E for 1994-95.
j (91 Reserve Funds
A. Fire Reserve Fund - this fund was set up a number of years
ago to help staff various fire stations. In 1991-92 the Council
adopted a policy to draw down that reserve fund over a period of
time. The proposed budget continued that policy and used $50,000
to offset 1994-95 expenditures,
H. Hotel-Motel tax fund - in the 1991-92 budgeting process,
tho council set aside a small amount of the hotel/motel fund which
would be available for special projects in the community. The ?
proposed budget recommended using $124,000 of the $145,000 in the
-fund for a new roof on the Civic Center.
(101_ Street _Imcrovements - the proposed budget continued to
f increase the allocation for street maintenance.
(III Consulting Assistance - there were three major issues dealing
with consulting assistance addressed in the 1994-95 budget. Those
areas included an impact fee project, a comprehensive long range
Information services strategy study, and a revision to the current
zoning ordinance.
II (121 Cable Television - the proposed budget recommended a level of
j funding which would allow the continued televising of the formal
Council sessions and the work sessions. It had been discussed to
114 :,:«i%n.ksiK s.t
qVP
I
City of Denton City Council Minutes 6n.r•r,n~'
July 5, 1994
Page 6 Date '
possibly televise the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings and
extra oity-originated programming. If those extra steps were
taken, it was felt that it should be done in a professional manner j
with a professional position for that operation.
Due to tine constraints, this item was continued during the Regular
Sessior, under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager.
{ The council convened into the Regular Meeting on Tuesday, July 5,
f 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the council Chambers.
! PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tom Brock; Council Members
Chew, Cott, Perry, and Miller.
c
ABSENT: Council Member Smith
1. Pledge of Allegiance
The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of
Allegiance.
2. The council considered approval of the Minutes of the May 31
and June 7, 1994 City Council meetings.
Perry motioned, Brock seconded to approve the Minutes as presented.
On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye",
Parr "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
MayYor Castleberry presented Bob Nelson, Executive Director for
Utilities, an award from the American Public Power Association
t 3. Citizen Reports
ra'; A. The 'council received a citizen report from Willie
x° Hudspeth regarding a drainage problem behind his house.
Mr. Hudspeth stated that Mr. Torrez had been very helpful with his Y4
situation. He had received a letter from Lee Allison regarding the
drainage ditch behind his home. He presented a video of the
drainage ditch area. He stated ',hat there was an odor from the
channel behind his home and much debris in the channel. Mosquitoes
were a terrible problem from the channel. He ownell the channel but
could not do anything to the channel to correct the problem. He
proposed that the City take care of the debris in the channel and
he would take care of the weeds.
yP`S,
6.
L I ~~qa.,,..--, . a~ar,e..... way ,,S
U;0% ~
awl
I
City of Denton City Council Minutes
8}( i
July 5, 1994
E
Page T Dote
Council Member Chew asked if Mr Hudspeth stated that he owned the i
channel.
Hudspeth replied correct.
Public Hearings
A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance rezoning a 0.4192 acre tract located on the north
side of East McKinney approximately 2000 west of Loop 288 from
General Retail (GR) to Commercial with conditions [C(c)). Z-94-011
(The Planning and Zoning commission recommended approval 6-0).
f
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that this was a conditioned zoning request which added only
one use in the commercial category to the list of uses already
authorized in the general retail category. The additional use
would be for warehouses in the zoning district. There was no
opposition of this zoning and the Planning and zoning commission
recommended approval as it met all of the conditions of the Denton
Development Plan.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Gary Hammett stated that the proposal would allow for a storage
building for the businesses in the area. Ten warehouses would be
erected on the property.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing. } •
The following ordinance was considered:
1
NO. 94-111
i AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON* TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A I
CHANGE FROM GENERAL RETAIL (GR) TO COMMERCIAL - CONDITIONED E
' (C(c)J ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR
A 0.4192'ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF EAST
MCKINNEY STREET, APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET WEST OF LOOP 288;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller Kaye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
r i
f
1 . ~,i .ti..v~rg.. ~.-''..ti.1✓'1~~"~/ta'•. . _...x x.v..•+`•nin
r
1 406% 0. f
City of Denton City council minutes qda~
July 5, 1994
Page 7 090
1
i
Council Member Chew aeked if Mr Hudspeth stated that he owned the
channel.
Hudspeth replied correct.
I
.
4. Public Hearings
t.
A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance rezoning a 0.4192 acre tract located on the north
side of East McKinney approximately 200" west of Loop 288 from
j General Retail (GR) to Commercial with conditions (C(o)]. Z-94-011
(The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-0).
' Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that this was a conditioned zoning request which added only
one use in the commercial category to the list of uses already
authorized in the general retail category. The additional use
would be for warehouses in the zoning district. There was no
opposition •f this zoning and the Planning and zoning commission
recommended
approval as it met all of t
he conditions of the Denton
Development Plan.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Gary Hammett stated that the proposal would allow for a storage
building for the businesses in the area. Ten warehouses would be
erected on the property.
No one spoke in opposition.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The following ordinance was considerede
NO. 94-111
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A
CHANGE FROM GENERAL RETAIL (GR) TO COMMERCIAL - CONDITIONED j
(C(c)) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR
A 0.4192 ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF EAST
MCKINNEY STREET, APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET WEST OF LOOP 2881
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF? AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Perry c.conded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", -nd Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
"Mimi
No - A~
=all
City of Denton City Council Minutes July 5, 1994 Date
Page e
B. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption
of an ordinance rezoning a 17.9335 acre tract located on the east
side of Ruddell street south of the extension of East Hickory
Street from single-family dwelling (SF-7) zoning district to Light
Industrial-conditioned [LI(o)) zoning district. Z-94-013 (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval 6-0).
r
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development,
stated that this was a zoning request from 9F-7 to LI- conditioned
which was similar to the existing zoning to the east on the County
owned land. The County went through the zoning process but the
City was significantly constrained in a degree to which it could
impose zoning restrictions. The rule was one of reasonableness.
Was this a reasonable use for the property. The Planning and
Zoning Commission had recommended that on this site, the zoning be
changed from SF-7 to LI-c. This was similar to the zoning on the
property in which the County jail was located. The difference
between the LI conditioned and this site was that for the other two
tracts in the LI-conditioned zoning, a correctional facility would
be authorized if approved with a site plan and a specific use
permit. For this tract, a correctional facility was not allowed
but only two uses for governmental offices and professional
administrative offices. The condition recommended by the Planning
and Zoning Commission, other than the use condition, was that there
be no access on Ruddell Street. The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended earlier and Council approved the preliminary plat of
the site. The County was now in the process of final platting of `
Lot i which was the southern property. There was some concern for it
f access at Hickory and the County had indicated that a no access
situation was not acceptable. Staff believed that that would be a
condition which would be unreasonable to impose on the property
because zoned SF, the property needed access. As a separately
platted lot for which the preliminary plat had been approved, it
should have access. The condition recommended by the Planning and
zoning commission should be deleted. other circumstances associated
with the development dealt with emphasizing access to the entire ;
property from McKinney Street which was the plan from the County.
Staff believed that the County was sensitive to traffic on Ruddell
and would be addressed in the future in the access to the entire
property. Lot one would be developed with a small maintenance
facility. Based on the low intensity area for this entire tract,
900 vehicle trips would be generated according to intensity
allocation. The way that the County had proposed to develop the
property, that amount would be much less. It was felt for legal
reasons, Section 2.B. of the proposed ordinance should be deleted,
removing the restriction of roadway access on Raadell.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
1
V..'
Ci
ty of Denton City Council Minutes F
July 5, 1994 Agerdalt
Page 9
hate .
Mike Jones, Director of Public Works for Denton County, stated that
although the plans for the property were not firm, the planning to
date did emphasize access off of McKinney street as well as off of
j Woodrow, There was a need for a secondary minor access off
Ruddell. The county wanted to work with Staff and were receptive
to many of the conditions requested for the property such as set
back requirements. The county intended to develop the property
with sensitivity to the neighborhood.
Marion Hamilton expressed a concern regarding the
was not against the development but was concernedp about the
additional traffic which curb cuts on Ruddell would cause.
were many children in the area of the Phoenix Apartments. Shehhad
been assured by the County that they would install a sidewalk and
fencing along the property. Additional traffic was a concern as
Ruddell was a narrow street with much traffic already. An
additional traffic on Ruddell should include a widening of Ruddell
street and additional access on Ruddell should consider the effect
on the pattern of traffic on Ruddell Street. she had talked with
the County about the possibility of making a Hickory extension
coming out of the property an exit only. Vehicles would enter from
McKinney and exit on Hickory.
Willie Hudspeth stated that his property was adjacent to the
property. He had indicated no original objection to the proposal
but was assured that there would be no access on Ruddell. Now he
was hearing different)
a county would need access to Rudaii wnot hich wassaare ithe rean
dential areas
f. He felt that the County did not value individual lives which were
In the area and the County did not want to value the neighborhood.
There were small children in the area and asked why the County
needed access on Ruddell. He object
on Ruddell and felt that the County could have adequate having access
Woodrow and Hickory but as this was considered a seclassearea,~
the residents would receive no res
! ponse.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
i
Council Member Cott asked for an explanation of the proposed road
restrictions,
ij
Robbins stated that it was the staff Is recommendation that, for
legal purposes related the rule of reasonableness, the proposed i
ordinance be approved but that 2.B. be deleted which was a
condition recommended by the Planning and zoning commission for no
access from Ruddell.
i.
i
9
i ~r{Mq~aet
d Y
( • ® a
ipendaNo '
I' City of Denton city council Minutcs
July 5, 1994 1A60ddl
t page 10 latf
~a
Council Member Cott asked for Council Member Chew is
€ the effect of this proposal on the future of the neighPoositioon on
ood.
Council Member Chew stated that he was against the proposal due to
the endangerment of children in the area even with the legal
restrictions. The County had another access to the property and ii
should use it. f
t . , ' ffff
c` Council Member Miller asked if the access proposed from the County
.p had been located and was it an extension of Hickory.
Jones stated that there would be no problem limiting access to the
point at the Hickory extension. The access point would not be for
j the County's heavy equipment or trucks. The access would be for
future use for the public similar to residential vehicles,
Council Member Cott asked if the} could be written into the
ordinance.
Robbins stated that the preliminary
Street. The final plat would rov de showed additional ac esskoif
possible.
y
Mayor Pro Tell Brock stated that the City Attorney had informed them
that a governmental entity whether a university, the County or
i Federal gove;cnmLnt could not be restricted by a city's zoning
ordinances. The City did not have the authority to restrict such
entities with what they did with their property so long as it met'
the test of reasonableness. Court cases had indicated that this
proposal met such a test.
The County could build the facility
witYout going through this zoning procedure.
which was SF-7 had such access to Ruddell. This proce curront zoning, i
} work with a governmental entity as the County to sol a some or the
problems. There were not many options regarding the proposal.
I
j Council Member Perry felt that this
t proposal gave the City an {
iS opportunity to work with the county so that the County could take
into account the feelings of the City regarding the proposal.
~ i
Council Member Miller stated that he understood that the County had
worked closely with the Planning Department and knew their rights
but did not use those rights over City objections. The had
' indicated that their primary access would be on McKinney and that
the access would be for vehicle access only and not for trucks.
Miller motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance as
$ recommended by the planning and Zoning commission but striking ;%B.
from the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock *aye", Cott, "nay". Miller
( 'r try :y; ~'Ykiy
Y k
Y
i~s.w.yr
e~vs~
agendaNo, ~
City of Denton city council minutes AgeWalt
July 5, 1994
Page 11 I~1A '
/l 1/ I
"aye", Chew "nay", Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "aye",
Motion failed with a 3-3 tie vote.
Mayor Castleberry asked for a ruling on the ;
Attorney. g proposal from the City
Mike Bucek, Assistant City Attorney, stated that a 3-3 vote meant
that there was no action taken by the Council so that the present
{ zoning on the property continued as SF-7.
Robbins stated that while the zoning did not change, the County
could develop the property essentially the way the zoning would
have allowed it except that the zoning map would not be changed.
They could access at that point.
Bucek asked if there would be a problem with the preliminary plat.
Robbins replied no.
Council Member Miller asked that if the zoning remained SF-7 and
the County developed the property, would there be a restriction
where access could be developed on the property.
Robbins replied no.
Council Member Miller stated that the access could be anywhere on
Ruddell.
Robbins replied yes but that the preliminary plat for toot 1 had no
access on Ruddell ae that was where the maintenance facility would
be built. Lot 2 had a curb cut near Hickory, if there were to be
a different access point, the City could discuss that with the
County to determine if that access not the city's regulations
within the platting process at that time.
City Manager Harrell stated that there were certain conditions l
which the County had voluntarily agreed to such as 100' setbacks
along Ruddell and the prohibition of a correctional institution on
the property, Would those conditions no longer be valid now that
the zoning had been rejected.
Robbins replied that one of the conditions regarding the 1001
setbacks was on the preliminary plat and the submitted final plat
s so it would stay. The correctional facility condition was not:
spoken to with the action taken by the council.
Council Member Chew asked if the County would still have access on
Hickory through the property.
4n.rc.0
City of Denton City Council Minutes Apodal( h
July 5, 1994
Page 12 (h(9
i
Robbins replied correct and that it would be unreasonable to
preclude that access.
Mayor Pro Tom Brock stated that the problem in rejecting this
zoning change was that the City had less control over what would
happen on the property. With the proposed zoning there was a
condition which excluded a correctional facility. With the zoning
j which was already in place, there was no condition which would
exclude a correctional facility. She was very much concerned about
' having a correctional facility that close to a residential area.
r Mayor Castleberry stated that the County could develop the property
in any manner it wished.
Robbins replied yea and that he would agree with the point that
Mayor Pro Ten Brock made. The City might be putting in jeopardy
the process already started and was concerned with the on-going
process.
t_
y sr Consent Agenda
Perry motioned, Brock seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye",
Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried unanimously. ;
A. Bids and Purchase Orders:
14 Bid 11632 - 1991 Upgrade Waterline
21 Bid 11633 - Ryan Road Paving and Drainage
3. Bid 11634 - Asbestos Abatement-Sleotrie Production
Plant
4. Bid 11636 - Rear Load Refuse Trucks
} B. Plate and Replete
1. Preliminary replat of Lots iR and 2R, Block A, 3-J )
Addition. The 0.6469 acre site was located on East
McKinney, east of the Piggly Wiggly store. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval
6-0).
r 2. Preliminary replat of Lot 4F, Block A, Section 2 of
the Freeway Park Addition; into Lots 4F-1R through
r,• 4F-8R. The 6.481 acre site was located on the west
side of Mesa Drive, at Los Colinas Drive. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval
6-0).
City of Denton City Council Minutes
A88ndaNo
July 5, 1994 Apeadal
Page 13
oeae '~'Az
r3 ~7
6. Ordinances
The Council considered the Consent Agenda Ordinances A. and B.
A. NO. 94-112
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR
SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE',
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. y.
g. NO. 94-113
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE
AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING
FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Perry motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda
ordinances A. and B. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye",
Miller "aye", Chow "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye".
Motion carried unanimously.
Co The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorising the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of
Denton and ADS Environmental Services, Inc. for professional
engineering services.
P* Nelson# - Executive Director of Utilities, stated that this was
an engineering contract for inflow infiltration studies in the
Cooper Creek Basin sewer line and manholes. The total cost of the
contrast was $146,000. There had been a reasonable amount of
inflow in that area and it was felt that there was a need to detect
the locations of any breaks. The study would determine the problem E
and'provide recommendations to correct those problems.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-114
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND
ADS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. FOR PROFES81ONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
.
.v-
f
ApendaNo
i City of Denton City Council Minutes AQBtld~llt
July 5, 1994 OBte
' Page 14 z
i
Perry motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chow "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending
the 1993-94 budget of the City of Denton by appropriating the sums
of $991,672 and $201,037 from the Unobligated Fund Balance of the
Working Capital Fund to Account Numbers 710-043-0582-8708 and 710
025-0580-8710, respectively, and by appropriating the sum of
f $2,400,000 from the Unobligated Fund Balance of the Electric Fund
to Account Number 610-101-1011-5550-8204; and providing for
publication.
Kathy DuBose, Acting Executive Director for Finance, stated that
the ordinance was necessary due to unanticipated increases in the
garage, warehouse and electric divisions. The Garage Division of
the working capital fund experienced a tremendous increase in
repairs including 11 landfill and electric utility equipment i
vehicles. Also there was increased activity in construction
projects and general inventory problems. These were unforeseen
expenditures during the last budget process and required additional
appropriations to proceed. Because the inventory and sublet
repairs were internal service operations, any increased expenditure
would have an offsetting revenue in each fund.
Council Member Cott asked if this revenue was coming in this year.
} DuBose replied yes.
f 4:
Mayor Pro Tom Brock stated that this was not a net increase in the
1 budget.
DuBOSe replied no.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-115
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1993-94 BUDGET OF THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXAS BY APPROPRIATING THE SUMS OF $991,672 AND
$201,037 FROM THE UNOBLIGATED FUND BALANCE OF THE WORKING
CAPITAL FUND TO ACCOUNT NUMBERS 710-043-0582-8708 AND 710-025-
0580-87100 RESPECTIVELY, AND BY APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF
$2,400,000 FROM THE UNOBLIGATED FUND BALANCE OF THE ELECTRIC
FUND TO ACCOUNT NUMBER 610-101-1011-5550-8204; PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
I. n
r•
ApendaNo
9AgendaN '
City of Denton city council Minutes X18
July 5, 1994
Page 15 f~ i~
Cott motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
t E. The council considered adoption of an ordinance
t authorizing the retention of counsel to represent the City in
pending litigation styled Cohaaen v. City of Denton.
Mike Bucek, Assistant City Attorney, stated that this item dealt
with the retention of legal counsel in the lawsuit styled Cohaaen
y. City of Denton. The attorney representing the City in the case
asked that the ordinance also confirm that the Council concurred f
with the termination of the lusse.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-%16
1 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE RE'x ATION OF COUNSEL TO REPRESENT
THE CITY IN PENDING LITIGATION STYLED COHAG~,ET AL V. CITYET AL V. CITY
OF D~YNt AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A COUNTERCLAIM FOR
ATTORNEY'S FEES] AFFIRMING PRIOR ACTIONS OF THE CITY MANAGER
AND HIS DESIGNEES RELATING TO THE LEASE OF PROPERTY BY THE
CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. `
4 Perry motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll `
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry II
Kays", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
F.' The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending
Ordinance No. 93-176 relating to the designation of depositories
for City funds to provide for the execution of depository pledge
agreements between the City and such depositories.
Harlan Jefferson, Treasurer, stated that the City's auditors
recently informed the City that there was a potential that the City
could lose the funds held by its local depository bank. These were 1!
funds which were in the City's checking accounts. The loss could
occur if the depository bank filed for bankruptcy and the City did 1
not have certain legal documents on file. The auditors based their
opinion on a recent court case. The proposed agreement would take
care of two of the four elements and the bank would take care of
the remaining two elements.
i
a
Y/d
+~endaMo. 9 '
City of Denton city council minutes AQendal
July 5, 1994 Date
Page 16
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 94-117
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE N0. 93-176 RELATING TO THE
DESIGNATING OF DEPOSITORIES FOR CITY FUNDS TO PROVIDE FOR THE
EXECUTION OF DEPOSITORY PLEDGE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY AND
SUCH DEPOSITORIES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance, vote] Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Hiller "aye", Chew "aye"On Peroll
rry
"aye", and mayor Castleberry "aye". Notion carried unanimously.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that the items listed as Resolutions C.
and D. were ordinances and would be considered at this time.
Co The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 1 to the agreement
between the City of Denton and the Denton Chamber of Commerce for
the payment and use of hotel tax revenue.
Harlan Jefferson, Treasurer, stated that this agreement would amend
the current contract with the Chamber of Commerce to extend the
current contract to March 1995. Council included a requirement for
quarterly reports for performance and expenditures which vas a new
State law requiring such reports.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 44-118
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO. THE AGREEMENT BVIVEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE DENTON
y, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR THE PAYMENT AND USE OF HOTEL TAX
REVENUE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
• Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance.
a, vote, Brock "eye", Cott, "aye" Miller "aye", Chew nays"OnPerrl
Jaye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye*. Notion carried unanimously
.y
r
t D. 'ilia Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute Amendment No. i to the agreement
between the City of Denton and the North Texas Fair Association for
the payment and use of hotel tax revenue.
Harlan Jefferson, Treasurer, stat2&&at the ordinance would amend
a similar contract with the NorthvT xas Fair Association.
aNo
Vend.
i Agendalt
s
i city of Denton City Council Minutes 031t8 ;
July 5, 1994 J
Page 17
i i
City Manager Harrell stated that now all the contracts for the
hotel/motel tax would. come due on the same date.
The following ordinance was consideredt
NO. 94-119
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE NORTH
TEXAS FAIR ASSOCIATION FOR THE PAYMENT AND USE OF HOTEL TAX
REVENUE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye*, Miller ways", Chew "aye", Perry
"aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
7. Resolutions
A. The Council considered approval of a resolution
suspending the proposed effective date of the proposed new rate
schedules and service regulations of Texao Utilities Electric
company; providing that the rate schedules and service regulations
of said company shall remain unchanged during the period of
suspension; providing for notice hereof to said company; finding
and determining that the meeting at which this resolution was
' passed was open to the public as required by law. F
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that Texas
Utilities served approximately 700-800 customers in dual
certificated areas in Denton. They had filed four new electric
rates which included an economic development service rider which ;.4
provided for a reduced demand charge for new customera, a general
service competitive pricing rate which would provide for a
negotiated rate for commercial customers, a wholesale power
competitive rate for municipal cooperatives and other wholesale
dealers, and an environmental service rate for new technologies
such as ozone systems. The City had four options relative to the
proposed ratest (1) approve the rates as submitted, (2) deny
implementation, (3) relinquish the original jurisdiction over the
rates to the Public Utilities Commissior or (4) suspend the
f implementation of the new rates Fendtng the PUC review and
adoption. In the past, the City had retained original
jurisdiction, suspended the implementation and later adopted
whatever the PUC had approved. staff oas recommending a similar
procedure.
James Loveday, TU Electric, stated that on June b, TU had filed a
package of new rates designed to enhance economic development,
:Jid• 6 c. J a y..
t` agen6aNo.
E Citf of Denton City Council Minutes AgenOalt
E July S. 1994 oats
Page 18
improve the environment and encourage further energy conservation
by large users of electricity. The proposal was filed with the PUC
and cities in the TU electric service area. If approved, the new
rates would be offered to qualifying commercial, industrial and
wholesale electric customers as an incentive to attract new
businesses and to retain current businesses. The package also
included an incentive for qualifying customers who converted to
advanced technologies which would conserve energy or improve the
environment. The options would provide revenue that the company
otherwise would not receive thereby helping to reduce the level of
future rate requirements. It was felt that this was a vital step
in keeping TU's area competitive.
The following resolution as consideredr
N0. R94-O29
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS SUSPENDING THE
PROPOSED EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PROPOSED NEW RATE SCHEtULES AND
SERVICE REGULATIONS OF TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY;
PROVIDING THAT THE RATE SCHEDULES AND SERVICE REGULATION OF
SAID COMPANY SHALL REMAIN UNCHANGED DURING THE PERIOD OF
SUSPENSION; PROVIDING FOR NOTICE HEREOF TO SAID COMPANY;
FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS
RESOLUTION IS PASSED IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW; -
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Cott motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution. On roll i
MoteBrock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", Perry
aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
B. The Council considered approval of a resolution
appointing a member to the DENCO Area 9-1-1 District.
City Manager Harrell stated that the governing body of the DENCO 9- }
j 1-1 District was made up of two representatives appointed by
i cities. Each year the cities had to cast a ballot for i
representatives to serve on that Board. All cities in Denton
County had one vote and the majority of votes cast by those cities
elected a representative. The two current city representatives were
Olive Stephens and John McGrane. McGrane's term expired on
September 1 of this year and KcGrane had indicated that he did not
wish to continue serving. The only individual indicating a
willingness to serve on the Board was Don Franklin from Trophy
Club. Harrell had called Lewisville and Carrollton to see if they
had any other nominations but they indicated that there was no
interest at this point in time and expressed confidence in
Franklin.
d
Ifs wmW
1
II+ Agenda Yo
AAendal n4a
City of Denton City Council Minutes Q3
July 5, 1994
Page 19 /!f
I
The following resolution was considered:
1 NO. R94-070
i
A RESOLUTION NOMINATING A MEMBER TO THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF
THE DENCO Al.nA 9-1-1 DISTRICT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE. }
I
Cott motioned, Perry seconded to nominate Don Franklin as a
representative to the DENCO 9-1-1 Board. On roll vote, Brock "aye",
Cott, "aye", Miller "ape", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor E
Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
8. The Council considered nominations /appointments to the Cityls
Boards and Commissions.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that the council had made nominations
at the last meeting and those were ready for approval.
j
Perry motioned to approve those nominated at the last meeting. On
roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chew "aye", ii
Perrryy "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously. (Attachment A) i
Mayor Castleberry indicated that Vera Laney had been omitted from
the previous nomination to the Keep Denton Beautiful Floard.
Cott notio:,ed to approve the Laney nomination. On roll vote, Brock "
"aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Chew nays", Perry "aye", and
Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Additional nominations were made by the Council as indicated in
Attachment A.
i
9. vision Update
y; There was no report given at this time.
.
10. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
City Manager Harrell continued with the Major Budget Issues.
Work na Capital fund - the budget proposed to add one position in
the warehouse for a courier to pickup and deliver items such as
office supplies, mail and packages to various city departments.
,f. Alternatives were (1) fund the position to provide pickup and
delivery service among various city departments, or (2) not fund
;I
Y.
1 1 1~;~tet'++'a"^i........_ ...._...Y. . rN i...rm. _ o.ry.\Gw IMCIV4t r'~~M .
aye
1
{
i
1
AO.-
Ae
nCity of Denton City Council Minutes 9
July 5, 1994 Date
Page 2 VG the position which would allow $24,969 to be reallocated for
expenditures.
Maior Issues - Utilities
The total budget for utility operations was estimated at
$102,284,000 with proposed expenditures of $100,538,000. Revenues
were based on an electric increase of 1% in the base rate plus a
possible 1.25% increase in the energy cost adjustment if needed;
water was proposed with a 2% increase and wastewater, an 8%
increase. The solid waste revenue was based on a $.85 per month
I increase in the residential rate, a 9.95% increase in commercial
rates and $1.00 per cubic yard increase in the landfill disposal
rates. Based on these proposed rate increases, an average
residential customer's monthly bill would increase $4.16 or 3.2%.
Electric summary - it was proposed that the average residential
customer would have a $1.32 per month increase. Included within
the electric system, was the electric adjustment for lower income
individuals in the community to offset the increased sales tax. An
adjustment was proposed in the Ri rate which would decrease
approximately 6.16% in rates for those customers and resulting in
a $45,000 decrease in revenue in the electric system. This
proposal had been'reviewed by the Sales Tax Advisory committee who
unanimously supported the change as a way to achieve the stated
objective. Three new positions proposed in the electric oyster
were a senior engineer in production, an electronic technician in
communications and an operation and maintenance trainee in {
production. Two worker years of temporary hours were added plus
the Customer Information Coordinator position would be transferred
to General Government with utility support. At the request of the
Public Utilities Board, the proposed budget included a new
expenditure for a street rental fee to be transferred to General
Government and would be based on 1% of Denton~s electric rate
revenue. The new fee was suggested as % way in which the
wastewater ROI transfer could be capped at 6% of new investment but
not more than 12% of revenue. Because the new water plant was
coming on line, a drastic increase in the amount of transfer to the
General Fund was anticipated.
Water Summary - the Water Department proposed budget was based on
a 2% increase in rates. No new positions were proposed and one
senior engineer would be transferred to the Solid Waste Landfill
Division.
Wastewater Summary - the proposed budget recommended an 8% increase
in rates and included several new positions of an environmental
monitoring technician and half of the cost of the Director of
1
1
AnArAA Nr~ ~7--
` City of Denton City Council Minutes ndalism
July 5, 1994 G~1e
Page 21
-717
ff I
i
Environmental Services Position, The proposed budget also assumed
a cap on return on investment related to the street rental
proposal.
I
Sanitation s Wm+ha.
the proposed budget included an $.85 increase
in the residential rate, a 9.95% increase in the commercial rate
and a $1.00 per cubic yard increase in the landfill disposal rate. f
Three new positions recommended included one dispatcher, a
recycling coordinator and a senior engineer transferred from the
water department plus a temporary intern position.
in addition, the Community service area had been undergoing a
restructuring that resulted in the Director of Environmental
services managing the solid waste dertment. One half of that
position would be funded by the sanitation department and one half
would be funded by the wastewater department. The proposed budget
reduced .50 worker years of administrative interns that were
transferred to the General Fund to video tape the city council
meetings for cable television broadcast. The position of street
Superintendent had also been eliminated.
111 ~
Council Me
mbar Cott stated
I that many
and the last page of the report see d to organizations indicate that rev nuezand
income were going in the wrong direction. [f there were money
left, he felt that it should be given to the taxpayers and not
used,
City Manager Harrell replied that as the property tax options were
discussed, that was an option which the Council had. A rate had
been recommended which was $,011 cents below the effective rate but
i
could be lowered if Council wanted to make other decisions to have
that flexibility. The City was trying to downsixe from ast
an seen by the reduction of supervisory functions, p years
i
Mayor Fro Tem Brock asked that the charts which the City Manager i
presented be made into handouts for the Council. Me suggested
that the information regarding the public hearing on the budget published as much as possible in order to receive public input on 9
the budget.
City Manager Harrell stated that the budget calendar indicates that
August 23rd would be the public hearing on the budgot.
11. There was no official action taken on Executive Session items
discussed during the Work Sessivn Executive Session.
i
~ I
•I
gendaNo.
City of Denton City Council Minutes sgendalt
July 5, 1994 ate i
Page 22
i
12. New Business
The following items of New Business were suggested by Council
Members for future agendas:
A. Council Meml)er Cott requested a discussion regarding the
downtown fire station.
l R
Mayor Castleberry indicated that that would be a part of the b0get
4,• session discussions.
Council Member Cott stated that it needed to come relatively soon
as there was a need to discuss the item as quickly as possible.
13, There was no Executive Session held during the Regular
~ session,
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYJR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS 1.
JENNIFER WALTERS `
CITY SECRETARY
f~ CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ACCOOIFI
q..
p
R s s
I
I,:
1 M ~
r
i'
'i
ATTACHMENT A ACeW*& No
BOARD/COMMISSIO11 NOMINATIONS X16 d41
1994-55
SIBPDA? Vi80itY SO oe '7/
out
T--d ;YOMINATION
*7 John Dulemba
John Dulemba 1992-94 Mayor
*3 Nancy Hundley Don Smith
1992-94 Perry
*4 James Jamieson James Jamieson
*5 Jim Risser 1992-94 Cott
f Jim Risser 1992-94 Miller
„s..l~iLL'ls1! ADVI190AY ~~~e
DOMINATION T~ L
1 *f Mary McKay f
Joella Orr 1991-94 Smith
t ~D 01• iL*+*adn~rtrM j ,
TBBM s°~><y
11 iv *=1 Rebecca King Rebecca King 1992-94 Miller
Marcia`Stalt Larry Collister
3 VACANT ALT 1992-94 Smith
) Bob Hagemann 1993-95 Perry
i VACANT ALT Joe Eendzek 1993-95 Cott
' " lOILDiIk~ COD1! 1t wee
_NATION
~ COQ'
*3 James ~
Fykes (ALT) James P'ykes 1992-94 Perry, I
*4 Bob George (ALT) Bryon woods
*5 Steve Kniatt 1992-94 Cott
Stave Kniatt 1992-94 Miller
r tt 6 Isabel Miller Mary McCain
` *y Greg Muirhead 1992-94 Brock
Greg Muirhead 1992-94 Mayor
S
Individual nominated and approved
•
NO * - Individual nominated but not approved
no nomination
All
a4Oe r.r „.,a
1
i
01 1
AgenOaNo.
~gendatit °Z
I'► ~ I
Date
COIQfUIIITY DMLOPKEYT ADVI80AY COKKITTEE
i
DF3T CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATION TEEM COUNCIL
t ;
*5 Dorothy Martinez Dorothy Martinez 1992-94 Miller
*6 Peggy Fox Peggy Fox 1992-94 Brock
7 Fred Hill 1992-94 Mayor
*3 LVrtis Ramsey Larry Bailey 1992-94 Perry
t *5 Rey Trejo Ann Hatch 1992-94 Miller
f UTA PROCl.E8If1A 11DV28ONY BOLD
CURRENT MEMBER NONINATI~ TEEM
but i
*2 Rosa Lawton Rosa Lawton 1992-94 S.uiih
tia
3 Robert N. Minnis 1992-94 Perry
4 Brian Scott 1992-94 Cott
DOWN!'OM1 Valve RY Do=
CCMUT MEMBER NOMINATION TEEM QQUNCjL
*3 Geneva Berg Geneva Berg 1992-94 Perry
4 BOBO Olutsen Anita Creach 1992-94 Cott
*5 Fred Patterson Joy Williams 1992-94 Miller k
*6 Barbara Philips Michael Flanagan 1992-94 Brock l
E y *7 Rahna Raney Rahna Raney 1992-94 Mayor i
C4I CODt 80M
~$T-. CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATION j'
TEBM COUNCIL
f *3 John Hardinger John Hardinger 1992-94 Perry
#a David Martin Don Fox 1992-94 Cott
I ' *1 Robert Hicks Robert Hicks 1992-94 Chow
* - Individual nominated and approved `
No Individual nominated but not approved
- no nomination
{ ry
pv-- X~ - - -
im
D
,geoOaNo. ,
ageodatt
nn: co~taslou Oate cot~ciy
I, Q rrmA,ENT NEIS&EB
i 1992-94 Perry
i Kenneth Morgan
*3 Kenneth Morgan Cole 1992-94 Mayor
{ Judy Cole Judy Smith
} *7 1992-94
Mary McCain Jim Kirkpatrick
~2_
TUH "!L
NONINA=
QWWXLHWU
E !u.&
Brock
Pat Muro 1992-94
*6 Jim Bendzek 1992-94 Mayor
~,atirronce Cochran Kent Hiller 1992-94 Smith
h *2 Terry Garrett 1992-94 Cott
Sandy Kristolerssn
*4 Sandy Kristolareen
1
Gharlys Heggins 1992-94 GZ1e41
*1 Dove Boston 1992-94 Brock
Luanne Hicks Mayor
*g Gertrude Gibson Vera Laney 1992-94
*7 Betty Kimble 1992-94 Perry
Kandice Gandei Cott
*3 Kandice Gandol Bill Watson 1992-94
Bill Watson
1992-94 Mayor
Kjell Johansen
*q. Kjell Johanson Kathy Pole 1992-94 Perry j
*3 Kathy Pole 1992-94 Cott
Jean Schaake Ema Ruth Russell
*4
* - individual nominated and approved
No * - Individual nominated but not approved
•
- no nomination
9
aRM •.:>.t ,gendaNo. ' j
~gen
Oate MA
PkU8 AND RECREATIOY BOAAD ~
CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATION TE&S COUNCIL
*7 Tom Judd Tom Judd 1992-94 Mayor
*2 Loyce Wilson Loyce Wilson 1992-94 Smith
PJAMIN An SOMINg COXXI88IOtt
D= nEranENT MEMBza NOMINATION TEEM COUNCIL
*3 Mike Cochran Mike Cochran 1992-94 ferry
*5 Jim Engelbrecht Ellen Schertz 1992-94 Miller
r 46' Katie Flemming Katie Flemming 1992-94 Brock
DYBIIfC A ~f jCE:rt~RT. CODE so=
SET CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATION TE8!! COUNCI+
{
*5 Millard Heath Millard Heath 1992-94 Miller
*6 Lee Capps Les Capps 1992-94 Brock
*1 Jeff Peploe Jeff Peploe 1992-94 Chew
t
PttBii0 D4ILITIsm 8011RD
1+ CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATION TEEM COUN
*6 Roland Laney George Hopkins 1990-94 Brock
i
BIam Boin O! KPPl1~
-D= CURRM MEMBER 10MI!lATM T= CO CIL
*1 Harry Faddy Spencer Washington 1992-94 Chew
*3 Ann Houston (ALT) Ann Houston 1992-94 Perry
*7 tlke Wiebe Mike Wiebe 1992-94 Mayor j
* - Individual nominated and approved
{ No * - Individual nominated but not approved
no nomination
' I
.+Yty ti... r 1
i
■
NgendaNa.
~gandatt J
late 1 ~ffl
TAAlrIC 8"RTY COMMISSION
DI&T CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATION COUNCIL
6 VACANT L. Keith Martin 1992-94 Brock
*1 Kathy Levine Kathy Devine 1992-94 Chew
*2 Eric Jackson Eric Jackson 1992-94 Smith
*3 George Kay Mark Coomes 1992-94 Ferry
' *4 Edna Redmon Larry Luce 1992-94 Cott
CIVIL sntVICR COMMI88I0
N
CI3RREt7T MEMBER HOMINATION $rj
*3 Charldean Newell Charldean Newell 1991-94 Harrell
DlMTOIf HQG8Ilf4 110THOYIIY ' I
CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATIONj'$$1(
1 Derrell Bulls 1992-94 Hayor
2 Rudy. Rodriquez 1992-94 Mayon 1
T1~1 sOf1tD f!Y DIalCTOAB
T CURRENT MEMBER NOMINATION Ty$rj
*1 Tom Harpool Tom Harpool 1992-94 Council`
1
1
ACCO0128
j * - Individual nominated and approved
No * - Individual nominated but not approved
- no nomination
. k.
i
r
. P
gW00
3gemalt
W ~ -
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES dolo,~
JULY 12, 1994
The Council convened into the Executive Session on Tuesday, July
12, 1994 at 5:15 p.m. In the Civil Defense
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry] Mayor Pro Ten Brock: Council Members
Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith.
ABSENT: None
1. The Council considered the following in Executive Session:
A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071
1. Considered a report from the consulting firm of Reed
Stove regarding their audit of GTE's franchise fee payments.
8. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072
l C. Porsonnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE
Sec. 551.074
The council convened into a Special Call Session of the City of
Denton City Council on Tuesday, July 12, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers.
f PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members k
1. Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith.
ABSENT: None
i
1 The Council considered nominations and/or appointments to the
City's Boards and Commissions.
Mayor Castleberry indicated that nominations had been made at the
last meeting and council was now ready to vote on those
nominations.
Cott motioned to approve the nominations.
" On roll vote, Brock ;
„aye„, Cott, "aye", Miller aye", Smith "aye", Chew ":.ye", Perry
aye , and Mayor Castleberry "Aye". Motion carried unanimously. ~
Council made additional nominations as noted in Attachment A.
2. The council held a briefing on the scope of the city/Chamber
of commerce Economic Development Study and gave staff direction.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that this was a continuation of
the project proposed by the Chamber of Commerce at a previous
meeting. At that meeting, Council authorized participation in a
joint economic development project. Staff had received a draft
4 tl
`r
i
p
~gen4a!~a. 7 r ' ~
City of Denton city council minutes Agerfdai 4
July 12, 1994 Date
Page t
contract which the Chamber proposed to enter into with a consulting j
firm.
Betty McKean, Executive Director for Municipal Services and
Economic Development, stated that Council had been presented a
scope of study for the proposal. The objective of the study das to
perform an overall assessment of how the City was situated with k
competing cities, in terms of incentives, site availability, and
how the city was able to bring a deal to closure. She presented
suggestions/ changes to the proposed scope of study. Those
suggestions/changes included (1) an analysis of th9 perception of
Denton s quality of life as compared to competitors in terms of
education, location, business climate, basic services such as
health rare, housing and a profile of existing manufacturers; (2)
f an early review session with the consultants to ensure that they 1
read and understood the studyfs objectives correctly; (3) all of
the assessments were to be done on a comparative basis; and (4)
expanding the time frame to complete the study as currently it was
f suggested to begin tho project in August and complete in mid-
October.
I Mayor Pro Teem Brock stated that there was an emphasis on
competitiveness but it was not clear what that involved. The North
Texas Commission had presented information which showed that too
much time had been spent competing within the metroplex and over
it ail
I was a loss when a .,om an was region. The vision consultant had indicatedmthaanother art t there was afnethe
ed
to look at the issue regionally. A prospect needed to be attracted i
to the region and then within the region there was a need to market
the city as unique. the was concerned that the study would be
dealing with such issuer, as how long it took a development proposal
to go through the Carr.,llton City Hall as compared to Denton. Was
the study dealing with other cities in the metroplex, nation-wide
or internationally.
McKean replied that this item was layered and the competitiveness
would be addressed on several different levels. The first level
would be international and how to gain an international reputation.
The second level would be nationally so that with an initial cut,
Denton would still be included in the prospects. The third level
would be locally which would look at any possible factors which
would cause Denton to drop out of the competition. These factors
would also include concrete items in terms ,
development process and permitting of the City e
been asked to respond in terms of dllarocess. The consultant
rs fore each of the tankshso
as to be able to pick and choose if necessary, the items in the
project.
f
j
a
7
+gendaNo
°L
City of Denton city council minutes Apendalte i
July 120 1994 Date
Page 3
Mayor Pro Tem Brock referred to page 2 which dealt with the
purposes and goals. It was indicated that the study would identify
key economic trends, analyze market and retention programs, etc.
She felt that that was very specific very quickly and that a
starting point needed to be what companies were looking for when
they started looking for an area in which to locate and what
factors determined their decisions. She felt that the study also
needed to look at companies which had decided to come to Denton and
what particular/ unique qualities did Denton have which made them
decide to choose Denton.
Council Member Smith stated that proposed changes were good. On
p
15 age 6 of the scope of study, she suggested that the City receive
also felt that ha preliminary a be well as
to Chamber.
presented the
the e City She
well as the Chamber.
C
study were to ouncil Member Miller felt that it was extremely important if the f
businesse3 whrre looking gfufor t in communities, what
MUCK w of that
r
information in the scope of services was very important. but
businesses would not get to that type of information until it had
looked at such issues as .Location, what kind of conLiunity it was,
what were the educational opportunities, etc. He felt that those
! items needed to be identified not only in terms of strengths and
weaknesses, but also in terms of what they were, relative to what
was being looked for, such as what kind of labor farce Denton had.
It was necessary to look at how people located. One of the last
items which a large business looked at was the zoning laws, as they
would spend many dollars looking at those issues before deciding on
whether to explore a coAmunity further. The study should indicate
what the world `mould look like in terms of economic development
whether for domestic companies or international companies. This
was what they were looking for and based on that, here was how
Denton was analyzed. He felt it was important to have an early
monthsassessment
toohshthe ort* therenwasn that the
there had to be a short time frame for the study. Too strict a time
frame would be to the Cit;,'s disadvantage. The macro issues needed
to be looked at first to find out where Denton fit into the world
and then look at the micro issues.
Council Member Perry indicated that page 4, /3 dealt with an
assessment of Denton's business incentive programs. He felt that
that segment should grow wit from what was already discovered as
being attractive on an international, national, and local scale.
The final report should grow out of what was discovered about
Denton.
i
1
AgendIN0
Agendal ! I
City of Denton city council minutes ~l9
July 12, 1994
Page 4 `y
McKean stated that the consultant would be provided the existing
package of City incentive programs and they would do a matrix of
area cities. This would show areas where other cities could work
better with businesses easier and faster than Denton. 4
Council Member Perry stated that Denton would have some unique f a
characteristics. out of those unique characteristics Denton's IIII
particular competitive advantages could emerge. He wanted to make
sure those would be included in the study. He wanted it stated
specifically that some of the innovative strategies and
recommendations would grow out of the unique characteristics
identified for Denton.
Council Member Cott suggested that with the proposed changes a
prioritization might be neceasary as to the dollar limit on the
study and probably not all of the items could be included.
McKean suggested that the consultant advise which of the items were
felt to be more important and to place those items in a priority
listing.
Mayor Castleberry asked about the contract for the study.
McKean stated that the contract would be directly with the Chamber
and the consultant. The City would review its contract with the
Chamber and do an amendment to the contract with the Chamber to
include the city's portion of the funding for the study.
Council Member Smith stated that she had a problem with page three
of the contract which dealt with ownership of the documents.
Currently the proposal stated that the documents would become the
1 sole property of the Chamber. As the City was also contributing to
the study, she felt that the City should have some ownership in the
finished project.
Mayor Castleberry suggested equal ownership of the -iocumente.
Council Member Smith felt that the City should have similar copfas
as the Chamber.
McKean stated that that was the intent but would make sure that it
was written into the contract.
Council Member Perry stated that item number 7 dealt with
disclosures made by the consultant to the Chamber and felt that any
' disolosures made to the chamber should also be made to the City.
The City should have equal access to the documents and information
as the Chamber. He also suggested the contract be reviewed by the
r
~ ApendaNa.
AQend
City of Denton City Council Minutes rkte
July 12, 1994 q
Page 5 J.2 7/ !
j
City's Legal Department. He felt that there might be open Records
i Act issues involved which needed to be clarified in advance.
McKean stated that this had been discussed at meetings with the
Chamber.
l Council Member Perry stated that he would like that written into
the contract to make certain that it would comply with the open
Records Act.
Council Member Cott stated that it might not be good to have this {
Information accessible to open records as it was a competitive I
document. It might be best to keep the document with the chamber t
so as to not be available to competitors. I
Mayor Pro Ten Brock felt any information which was committing
public money, needed to be a part of the City's open records. She
was concerned about challenges with the fact that Denton had
contributed money for the study.
Council Member Cott stated that if the City could be a venture
capitalist, which the City might be able to be, it would have the
ability to keep this as a competitive record.
j Mayor Castleberry asked the City Attorney to review the issue and
return later with a decision.
Mayor Pro Tom Brock stated that she would like the City contract l
with the Chamber to be a art of the document. The City was ~
excluded in various areas of the documents. What kind of contract
would the City need with the chamber to safeguard the public
interest. If the City were not included in the contract, then what
was the legal relationship between the City and the Chamber.
Council Member chew suggested reviewing the possibility of th9
three entities entering into a joint contract. He had concerrs
with everything going to the Chamber and the President of the
Chamber only.
City Manager Harrell stated that all of the comments made by the
Council regarding the scope of service and modifications desired to
be included in the contract, would be presented t., the chamber and
would assume that they would be incorporated into the contract
unless the Chamber had a difficulty with those changes. The
Chamber was encouraging a fast time for solicitation of
consultants. In order to meet the time schedule desired by the
Chamber, the suggestions would have to be incorporated into the
contract and be sent out without Council review. In the meantime,
1
Apeod8NO
City of Denton City Council Minutes kamAal
July 12, 1994
Page 6 I~t9 ,
I
X33
the City Attorney's office would be working on a contract between
the City and the Chamber which would obligate the City to 501 of
the contract price. That was likely to take several weeks to
return for council consideration. if the document was modified to
make a three way contract as opposed to the separate contract with
the Chamber, the process would be slowed down.
Council Member Miller did not see a need for a three way contract
but felt that there was a need to have a contract with the Chamber
and the City before it went to the consultant. The two contracts
j would relate to each other.
I
Council Member Chew asked if a three way contract was quicker than
i another type of contract.
Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that if the City became
party to this contract. which was drafted between the Chamber and
the consultant, the City would authorize the expenditure of funds
and a separate contract with the Chamber would not be needed. It
would take time to look at the issue of confidentialitys There
were some provisions which allowed the City to keep some of this
information confidential but research must be done as to the types
of information which could be confidential. Even if it were not in
the contract and the City took possession of the documents, the
same issue could arise.
Council Member Perry stated that as the Council was meeting every j
week, there was a need to take time to make a good consensus with E
the Chamber to resolve all of the issues. He did not want to
hurry through the study.
McKean stated that an additional consideration was that if the City
had a contract with the Chamber, would the City have to go through
the normal bid process which would change the schedule.
Council Member Miller stated that if the City had a contract with
the Chamber, and the Chamber had a contract with the consultant,
the bid process through the City would not be necessary. He felt
that a contract with the Chamber was first needed in order to make
sure all areas were addressed.
Mayor Pro Tom Brock felt that if the Council had the contract
between the City and Chamber, it would safeguard the City's
interest and the public's interest. The chamber could then make
the direct contract with the consultant.
City Manager Harrell stated that the itom would be placed on the
Council's August 2 meeting.
i
City of Denton City Council Minutes agendaNo
July 12, 1994 enda
Page 7 DAIe
Council considered item 19.
9. The Council considered a motion to reconsider at the July 19,
1994 Council meeting, an ordinance rezoning a 17.9335 acre tract
located on the east side of Ruddell Street south of the extension
of East Hickory Street from single-family dwelling (SF-7) zoning
district to Light Industrial-conditiuned [LI(c)] zoning district.
Z-94-013
Cott motioned, Miller seconded to reconsider the item. on roll
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew
"nay", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry '$aye". Motion carried
with a 6-1 vote. ;
City Manager Harrell stated that the item would be on July 19th
agenda for action.
Council returned to the regular order.
3. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave
staff direction regarding median openings and funding for Highway
380 from Elm Street to Loop 288.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, presented an overview of the
proposed plans. The agreement with TxDOT would ask the City for
its 10% share of what the right-of-way costs would be for US380
i' from Loop 288 to Elm Street. TxDOT would acquire the property and
do all of the appraisals, contact the owners and perform other E
items associated with the purchase of the property. The process
{ would take approximately 30 months. There would be areas where the
City would have to acquire whole businesses and other areas where `
the City would be paying damages to businesses as portions of those
businesses would be taken. When all of the right-of-way was
acquired, a nix lane divided thoroughfare would be built. As a
median divided facility, there would have to be some discussions
r regarding access. In this section of road there was only one short
median with the rest of the facility not median divided. The
existing development plan and direction from prior Councils were
used to help make the intersection flow as much as possible as well
as the entire facility.
Mayor Pro Tom Brock asked for an overall time frame for the
project.
Svehla replied that assuming all of the right-of-way property was
bought in 30 months, the resident office would then begin the
design. The design work would go to the District and then to
Dustin. That process would take approximately one year. Planning
i '
i
y
{
17
I
I
5QendaNo '
City of Denton City Council Minutes
July 12, 1994 Agend
Page 8 ate 1
{
for the development would take a year and then the contract would
be let. It would probably be five years before actual
construction.
Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that much communication would be
with the area businesses, needed
Svehla stated that TxDOT rules indicated that the road would always
be operated. A detour might have to be constructed but the road
would be open.
Council Member Miller asked when the communicating with business
owners and homeowners along University would begin.
Svehla stated that there had been some meetings al
project moved forward, there wo;~ld be more meetings yand amore
information given to the property owners.
Council Member Miller stated that as major changes took place along
the route, there would be a need for meetings for good
communication regarding the project,
{ Council Member Smith asked about the overpass on Highway 380.
Svehla replied that it would be widened as well which would affect
some of the businesses which were near the current overpass. The
City would have to buy right-of-way and
area. pay some damages in that
Cott motioned, Perry seconded to move ahead with the project. On
roll vote, Brock "aye"," Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", smith "aye",
"aye", Perry
Chew aye , and Mayor Castleberry "aye$'. Motion
carried unanimously.
4. The Council received a report, held a discussion, and ave
staff direction concerning the bidding of the Cityls Flexible
Benefits Program (IRS 125 plan) and marketing of individual
f insurance products to City employees.
Tom Xlinck, Director of Human Resources, stated that the flexible
benefits program allowed employees to set aside before tax money
for reimbursement later for eligible expenses. employer nor the employee paid social security taxes onNthat money.
There was no cost for the program for dependent health insurance
premiums, $3.50 per employee per month for participation in the
unreimbursed medical accounts, and the dopendent child care account
cost $3.50 per employee per month. Last year $800,000 was cet
aside by employees which saved the City $60,000 in taxes. The
i.
~1
'JILT i.r-.i.6:
1
genoanc, T ~ ~
agenda ~a2
City of Denton City Council Minutes ~1e
July 22, 1994 SV/ r 4~1
Page 9 / some parogram was due f
ina three surance year
such bias . cancer and companies individual
disability, might bid and offer a free administration service in
exchange for access to City employees to market their individual
insurance products. Free administration might still include some
indirect staff time and costs. It was felt that the City's group
insurance coverage was adequate and effective and that employees
could make choices on individual insurance needs. Staff's
recommendation was to bid the flexible benefits program with the
stipulation that no individual insurance products could be marketed
to employees. The Employee Insurance Committee endorsed the
recommendation. It was also recommended that a related benefit
communication program be 'continued. The program was at no cost to
the City and provided a personalized statement of benefits to each
t employee. The statement explained the City's cost for each benefit
and provided an option for employees to increase their individual
life insurance coverage. With Council's direction the bid schedule
-would proceed with the specifications being finalized Ir July, and
a selection in August in order to begin the program in January.
Council Member Cott asked for the number of people or dollars which
had to be guaranteed.
Xlinck replied that the contract did not stipulate a minimum amount
of participants or dollaro.
Smith motioned, Perry seconded to proceed with the plan. on roll j
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew
Nays"► Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried 1
unanimously.
50 The Council received a briefing on an improvement project for
the Denton Municipal Complex.
Betty McKean, Executive Director for Municipal Services and
VEconomic Development, presented the background on the project. In
the beginning of the Denton Municipal Complex project, the Woman of
F Justice was incorporated into the project plans. At one meeting,
} Chief Jez asked the architect where the Woman of Justice would be
placed. The architect replied that no actual Woman of Justice
would be in the project but that on the plans, there were symbolic
lines for the Woman of Justice. McKean talked with an artist who
presented a proposal for a Woman of Justice and the architect
agreed to do the back drop design work for no charge, It was now
necessary to determine a way to fund the sculpture. Acme Brick
f a
the greed to donate the brick and she and chief Jez went to visit with
project.rThee regarding stated lthat he would like tonbe the benefactor
f ~
City of Denton city council Minutes gendaft I
July 12, 1994 I
Page 10 4gendaite I
i' 0ate -
lor the sculpture and associated costs.
Paula Collins was the artist who would be working on the project.
She presented a rendering of what the sculpture would look like and
how it would be placed in the building.
the first week in August and would be carved immediate) be made
sculpture should be ready for the open House of the building. The
The Council took a shl
Members Smith a d CottoandrMayor.Pro T mo Broc the re
k were ab se
absentCounoil
6. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding
the feasibility of constructing a convention center in Denton.
Rich Dlugas, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that the
Civic Center was built in 1967 and was for
recreational, culture and leisure a primarily a building
currently used for offices for the Parks and Recreation Departm nt
which resulted in few The Center was
facility had become increasinf ~r outside meetings. Renting the
consultant recommended that a compdifficult the A
regarding a convention center be years.
ehensive vfeasibility study
market for the facility and who would
done to Inclu use it what to YPe what was the
was r qquuired to satisfy demand, who was of facility
I` faailitiul that could compete with the pro providing similar
the best location for the facilit pOBd facility, what was
cost of the faoilit Y. what would be the development
such a taailit y' h°t"ixould the facility be financed, and could
facility. ity as m e timateditth at wsucha a o etudjurisdictional
approximately $30-40,000. Y would cost
Council Members
the meeting. Smith and Cott and Mayor Pro Tem Brock returned to
t'-: Council Member Smith felt that the situation in Denton at the
present time with a lack of hotel space and a lack of sufficient
t public transportation indicated a serious shortcoming to lcoking 'ergo elpensive convention center. She felt that other ems
needed to be in place either at the same time or ahead of time
i order to attract conventions to such a center.
in
tCouncil Member Miller felt that such a study would be worthwhile to
find out some of the items Council Member
would answer some questions regarding the issue.
Mayor Castleberry asked about the feasibility of the Fair being a
part of the complex area. The County had done some
discussion on an equestrian center and a relocation lofinthe
i
1
igmaAU, ~
City of Denton City Council Minutes AgendaJuly 12, 1994 Je(e
Page 11
Fairgrounds. There would have to be events going on at all times
in order to be cost effective. The County might want to be a part
of the study.
Council Member Cott stated that an equestrian center or
amphitheater would be worth a look at the possibility of such a
center.
Council Member Chew suggested a study in conjunction with UNT. The
ideal situation would be to build a center in conjunction with a
hotel. A study would help determine those issues. If correlated
correctly, it would be a great plus for Denton.
Council Member perry stated that the same complex might have a
performance hall located there.
Council Member Brock stated that in some ways, the Civic Center had
not functioned as was originally planned. When Parks moved out of
the office space which was originally intended for meeting rooms, j
a kitchen might be designed which would enhance the facility for
additional rentals.
Consensus of the council was to have staff communicate with the
f' County regarding their plans for possible joint funding and all
other possible options for such a center.
{
Council Member Smith suggested speaking with the amphitheater group
regarding the project. she agreed with the possibility of making
the Civic Center more usable for rentals.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with additional exploration
regarding the issue with the County and the universities for
possibilities.
Council Member Smith asked if a bond election would be needed to
build a convention center.
City Manager Harrell replied yes.
7. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave
staff direction regarding amending the Subdivision and Land
Development Regulations and development fees. (The Planning and
toning Commission recommended approval.)
Frank Robbins, Executive Director of Planning and Development,
stated that this was a substantial amendment to the Subdivision and
Land Development regulations. One of the most significant changes
° in the ordinance dealt with streamlining and approval of minor
t1KM 6.:....y.
i
y, D L
( ~gen4ano
t d
~ City of Denton City Council Minutes Agen
July 12, 1994 Dole ~ W
Page 12 7
i
i
plats by the staff. The proposed change with minor plats would
allow the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve minor plats.
Variances would still be considered by the Council as was the
current procedure. Major preliminary plats were now considered by
the Council and it was proposed that they be considered by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. Major final plats were not {
considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission but would be
considered by the Commission per the proposal. A major plat which
was less than five acres and with no infrastructure was currently
combined into a preliminary and final plat and considered by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. This procedure would not change.
Council Member Cott felt that in order to achieve what the City
wanted to in the ETJ, it was necessary to think in terms of fewer
restrictions rather than more. He asked what would be gained by
speeding up the process.
Robbins replied that in some cases, six days of time could be saved
for, the development and consultant fees. In some cases as much as
30 days might be saved. Most plats involved six days and the cost
savings from city review and paperwork would be $30.
Mayor Castleberry stated that it would be more user friendly.
Council Member Perry stated that minor plats were designed in the
proposed ordinance to be done by the staff and the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Everything in the Denton Development Plan
applied to minor plats and that meant if the neighborhood did not {
want a proposal, the So% rule would apply.
Robbins replied that the 80% rule would only apply in some
5 situations such as variances because of the State law on standards
and rules of variances.
Council Member Miller asked if variances would come to4Council.
i
Robbins replied correct depending on the type of variance as there i
were two kinds of variana-s. Variances to the requirements to
build public improvements ;ould go to Council. A variance to a
design standard such as a slope to a street, would still be
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The ordinance
added criteria for those types of variances. The amending of plats
was currently not addressed in the ordinance and was proposed to be
considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Vacating plats,
development of plats and conveyance of plate were also not
currently addressed in the ordinance and were proposed to be
considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The development
plat was a major change adopted by a state legislature provision
,49"
i
1
+gendaNo. 7-~ D
4pendaI
City of Denton City Council Minutes Oate
July 12, 1994 r l~n F
Page 17
and would be necessary for development. No subdivision platting
was needed.
Council Member Perry stated that amending plats, conveyance of
plate, and vacating of plats was not in the ordinance.
Robbins replied that they were not addressed in the existing
ordinance but were addressed in the proposed ordinance and were
enabled by State law.
I Council Member Perry asked if State law mandated or was permissive
. in this area. i
Robbins replied it was permissive. Another issue was the
development of a single tract subdivided prior to January 1, 1960.
Currently those were required to plat and a decision was made by
the Planning and zoning commission or the Council. The proposal
would not require platting. To develop a smaller portion of a
larger tract owned by one individual within the ETJ, currently
required a final plat on the tract. More details would be required
for a general development plan on a larger tract. Standards for
residential replat notices were inconsistent with the State law and
the proposal would follow State law. Government initiated vacation
was currently not addressed in the ordinance but was proposed to be
added. Another added provision was that utilities could not serve
an unplatted development. The final plat finished floor elevation f
s for buildings in or near the 100 year flood plain would be added.
Pubic improvement guarantees, performance bonds and escrows would
be changed to be in accordance with State law. Single family I
residential interior sidewalks would not have to be built interior
to a subdivision if the cost was $25,000 or less and that money
could be placed in an escrow account.
Council Member Cott asked for the action if a proposal was denied
by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Robbins replied that it could go to Council.
j Council Member Cott stated that if a proposal were denied by the
Planning and Zoning Commission, Council had to discuss the
proposal,
{
Robbins replied no. if an individual did not agree with a
provision before a decision had been made or before it was placed
on an agenda, he could discuss that provision with Staff, Council
° f. or the City Manager to try and change the provision. During the
} process at a meeting, those issues could be brought up again. After
f the process was completed, Council could investigate. Another issue
"-r4 ~52-
VertdaNo
i Agadal
City of Denton City Council minutes 09te
July 12, 1994 /
Page 14
was intersection spacing on a local street. The current ordinance
required a 2000 spacing between intersections reet.
a local st
The on
rest.
proposal wool
d alto 33
w a spacing of loot. A chart of current 1
fees versus proposed fees as indicated in Attachment 1 in the
s agenda back-up materials was presented.
Council Member Cott felt that much of the total cost was labor
associated with the fees and that all costs needed to be absorbed.
Brock motioned, Miller seconded to direct staff to move ahead with
j the amendments as proposed at this meeting.
Mayor Castleberry asked if the motion included moving ahead with
the procedure. {
Mayor Pro Tom Brock and Council Member Miller indicated yes.
Council Member Cott felt that there needed to be a way to discuss
the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning
and Zoning Commission might have one set of objectives and the
Council have a broader based set on how a project might fit into
the development of the city. He felt that there was a need to
absorb all costs for fees. He was concerned about a movement into
Ray Roberts with no checks and balances.
On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott, *nay*, Miller "aye", Smith "aye",
Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion
carried with a 6-1 vote. tt!
8. The Council reviewed the proposed 1994-95 budget hearing I
schedule and gave staff direction.
City Manager Harrell presented the expanded schedule for budget
hearings with the department heads making presentations following
the filing of the proposed budget at the end of the month. Staff
heeded direction on where to hold the budget discussions and
whether or not to televise them.
Consensus of the Council was that the proposed schedule was
acceptable.
Mayor Pro Tom Brock indicated support to move the budget sessions
to the council Chambers in order to make those sessions as
f accessible as possible and would like those sessions televised.
Council Member Perry asked that an effort be made to have the
sessions broadcasted on ra4lo as well if the session were going to
be televised.
• fit.. ~,'~,yij~M1.w.N4'v.......... .........r .
I
y4
.ap/ r Fk'+.+r 1
I
aQBA~aNO. ~
AQeOda
City of Denton City Council Minutes _
July 12, 1994 date
Page 15 Z
Consensus of the Council was to televise the sessions.
10. The Council considered approval of a resolution in support of
the Denton County Courthouse-on-the-Square Sprinkler System Grant 1
application.
City Manager Harrell stated that the County came to the City late
on Friday to request support of a County grant application. The
County would be applying for ISTEA funding for the federal portion
of the grant. The resolution only endorsed the effart of the
county to sprinkle the Courthouse.
The following resolution was considered: I
t. f NO. R94-031
1' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS IN SUPPORT OF THE
DENTON COUNTY COURTHOUSE-ON-THE-SQUARE SPRINKLER SYSTEM GRANT
APPLICATION] AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Miller motioned, Chew seconded to approve the resolution. On roll f
vote, Brock "aye", Cott, "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew I
"aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried
unanimously.
11. There was no Executive Session hold during the Regular
session.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
~t
II
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS l
JENNIFER WALTERS
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
A00001F6
4.
1
r. N .c~Vt,.llllr } I
,
I
Allf
l ATTACHMENT A '3Q9fld8N0,
I BOARD/COMMISSION NOMINATIONS A" I
1994-95
CURRENT KDMER NOMINATION COLYNC3L
*7 John Dulemba John Dulemba 1992-94 Mayor
*3 Nancy Hundley Don Smith 1992-94 Perry
*4 Janos Jameson James Jamieson 1992-94 Cott
*5 Jim Risser Jim Risser 1992-94 !filler
I
CURRENT ~ ER NOMINATION ~$$~J Coulml
*2 Mary McKay Joella Orr 1991-94 Smith
~ ~011D o! AD.TCISR71sYS ~
CURRENT MLI NOMINATION
*5 Rebecca Ring Rebecca King 1992-94 Miller
*2 Marcia Staff Larry Collister 1992-94 Smith
*3 VACANT (ALT.) Bob Raguann 1993-95 Perry
*4 VACANT (ALT) Joe Bendtek 1993-95 Cott
EOILDIIfQ CObN E0f1fS
T CURREliTMn I
NOMINATION. TBB!! CotimcZL
43 James Tykes (ALT) James Tykes 1992-94 Perry j
*4 Bob George (ALT) Bryon Moods 1992-94 Cott
*5 Steve Kniatt Steve Kniatt 1992-94 Miller }
*6 Isabel Miller Mary McCain 1992-94 Brock !
*7 Greg Muirhead Greg Muirhoad 3992-94 Mayor
4 J
* - individual nominated and approved
No - Individual nominated but not approved`
no nomination
,
E
tI
l
s
r
' ~M11 R r.. F.y
I
Agm*No
PN=T Amso=r comaTTER Dote
caro®rs~c_ DZY~hO 'Well
CURRJW MEMBER NOMINATION TM COUNCTy
*5 Dorothy Martinez Dorothy Martinez 1992-94 Killer
*6 Peggy Fox Peggy Fox 1992-94 Brock
7 Fred Hill Jean Ellen Rogers 1992-94 Mayor
*3 Curtis Ramsey Larry Bailey 1992-94 Perry
*5 Rey Trejo Ann Hatch 1992-94 Miller j
pI$T
CURRE)a !lE~EB NOMINATION T= COUNCIy
*2 Rosa Lawton Rosa Lawton 1992-94 Smith
3 Robert M. Ninnis 1992-94 Perry
4 Brian Scott Renas
Seely
1992-94 Cott
QI$T S MUMT M~ NOMINATION T= sOUNCIy
*3 Geneva Berg Geneva Berg 1992-94 Perry
*4 BeBe Olulsen Anita Crsach 1992-94 Cott
*5 Fred Patterson Joy Williams 1992-94 Miller
*6 Barbara Philips Michael Flanagan 1992-94 Brock
*7 Rehm Raney Rahns Raney 1992-94 Mayor (
t
c2L DNS 2=2
=RRENT XZKB R HOMINATI~ rlE~I COUNCIL
*3 John Hardinger John Hardinger 1992-94 Perry
*4 David Martin Don Fox 1992-94 Cott
*1 Robert Hicks Robert Hicks 1992-94 Chew
}
+ - Individual nominated and approved
go + - Individual nominated but not approve
- no nomination
I
3
J
A7P/
+pendal~a. ~
4pendalt
O~fe ~
. j~',l' CURRENT MFJrtAFR +~TIQb
*3 Kenneth Morgan Kenneth Morgan 1992-94 Perry
*7 Judy Cole
Judy Cole 1992-94 Mayor
•2 Mary McCain Jim Kirkpatrick 1992-94 Smith
BEM /sSVICli CaYltir~rm~e
~I&T CURRENT OMEE
NMNATI4M TEB~ ZL
*6 Jim Bandaek Pat Muro
1992-94 Brock
7 Lawrence Cochran Diana Briggs 1992-94 Mayor
*2 Terry Garrett Kent Miller 1992-94 Smith
*4 Sandy Kriatofersen Sandy Kristotersen 1992.94 Cott
CURRENT MAUER TEB~ COUXcTir
*1 Dave Boston Charlye Heggins 1992-94 Chew
*6 Gertrude Gibson
Luanne Hicks 1992-94 Brook
*7 Batty Kimble Vera Laney 1992-94 Mayor
*3 Kandics Gandel
' Kandice Gandel 1992-94 Perry
*4 Bill Watson
Bill Watson 1992-94 Cott
LIY~Y s0it2 I
SST c muT
R E
*7 Xjoll Johansen Kje11 Johansen 1992-94 Mayor
. " ' *3 Kathy Pole
Kathy Pole 1992-94 Perry
*4 Jean Schaake Ema Ruth Russell 1992-94 Cott
* - individual nominated and approved
No * - individual nominated but not approval
g.
no nomination
f
i
a
ti`1f11VY0"M Vbv vr.
I
1
~Qen~aNo. r
aAe~
PARKS Ln] 22 `C1tTIOM soup Date
d/G
MF }B$ XQUAATION COUNCjy
*7 Tom Judd Tom Judd
*2 Loyce Nilson 1992-94 Mayor
Loyce Wilson 1992-94 Smith
PLi1tuI1[a 11fD lO11ir0 CD101ilsreV
t2L T CMUMT MEMBER CMcTr
*3 Mike Cochran
Mike Cochran 1992-94 Per
i'Y
*
5
F I Jim En9elbrecht Ellen 8cherta .1992-94 Miller
II ? +►6 Katie Flemming Katie Plemning 1992-94 Brock
CI1r'_C~1FIiit' 1- I--~R N01[IN21TION r~ COUNCty
? a
*5 Millard Heath Millard [loath
1992-94 Milltr r
*6 Lee Capps Les Capps 1992-44 Brock
*1 Jeff Peplos Jeff Peplos 1992-94 Chew
PUBLro VVYLITIlA lb1~
1{u$Z' CURIZ_R►rr I OMgn NOMINATION 1+E8$ COUNCYT
I
*6 Roland Laney George Hopkins 1990-94 Brock
tia11 ■GsuD es sprnt. €
*1 Harry Reddy Spencer Washington 1992-94 Chew
} *1 Ann Houston (ALT) Ann Houston 1992-94 Perry
*7 Mike Niebe Mika Wiebe 1992-94 Mayor
* - Individual nominated and approved
No * - Individual nominated but not approved
no nomination
r
7 77
~r
1
, ~wr
+Qa~CaW
a$end ~
r !y' _4~Lir!lY4II Nis
y7 ~j
p3~T emm Wazz NOMINATION =NCI
*b VACANT L. Keith Martin 1992-94 Brock
*i Kathy Dsvin* Kathy Devine 1992-94 Chew
*2 Eric Jackson Eric Jackson 1992-94 Smith
*3 George Kay Mark Coomes 1992-94 Perry
*4 Edna Redmon Larry Luce 1992-44 Cott
S~IYIL ~=AVIC! @O1n111~YC~ ~ ~
~T ~m= !LElMER I
NOMINATION T~~ 1
f
*7 Charldean Newell Charldean Newell 1991-94 Harrell
t ~
alMtBlf . MOUNT" ACTtO!!TY 3. I
~LbT stt xaNT WWzR M421i~Ti4ti Tom' T
1 Derrell Bulls 1992-94 Mayor
2 Rudy Rodrigues
1992-94 Mayor ,
ZP2491LUD 61 aiiZCV~
B~ CMMST MMIM 4H T88I~
*1 Tow Herpool Tom Harpooi 1992-94 Council
ACC00128
* - Individual nominated and approvad
No * Individual nominated but not approved
no nomination
i .
41%, 40
5 I
r f 1
i
=CITY ~
r
COUNC]
e
,y
«a
~ ~ x r p
S ~
y
r
"
e
Ap Wald 5
r4&,, I
f" 0-10
Tj7 ~ Ja,u~ ~
J~irc ?lloNi~ Am,76lo?
c K~
f (07) (!W40
Arm Q6wd
' August 24, 1994
Me Jennifer Walters
city secretary
215 Sp McKinney y.'
Denton, Texas
RE'
"Citizen's Report" Agenda
SepteabeY 13~ 1994
:F 7J00 p.M.
Clam of Jennifer M. ovens and its Handling
Dear Ns. Walters:
This 4i11 confirs our telephono Conversation this date that "
on the 4111 nda for
res ct the Council seating Septssbar 13' i
Ape to above. 994 with 'a
p£.
*s Thank you.
(jy
/sIncor
r ;r
Brown
kp
for
N.
Owens
a col Ms.
Debra Dz'ayovitch ?
-
ILI
a'
Epa 1~
77
r
r
4 k F, y
1
i Ay!r
0
r
r
.
4
4 a
o.
r
CITY
COUNCI~
r
e
~ rv N ~ 1
r r
t r i ~
a
{
i
r ~ r
r
,j
SOti =OIr41' 8
~ ~ i
am w,..rsI
Agft
DATE: September 13, 1994 13
I
c11Y COUNCI FPOR'P FO ti~Ar
TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Receive the Airport Master Plan
RECOMMENDATION
The Airport Advisory Board recommends aeceptance.(5 - 0)
. 4,
In February, 1992 the City entered into an agreement with Coffman and Associates,
Airport Consultants to prepare a matter plan for the Denton Municipal Airport. -The ,
FAA, the city of Denton and coffman and Associates agreed that the master Platt
study shall emphasize the following: f
• Future role of the Airport (aircraft type, runway length etc.)
e
• Potential air carrier demand. i, • On-Airport land use.
• Potential aviation industrial development.
• Analysis of the local airspace.
• Airport development priorities.
• Future aicera0airport noise.
• Future Off -Airport land use.
• Review Of environmental issues.
• Preparation of a detailed capital improvement program. ;
The consultants worked closet with the
Y Airport Adviso Board the Airport Zoning
Commission and City staff in drafting the master pl ry
an. (A copy of the Airport Master
Plan is provided under separate cover)
The Airport Advisory Board at its meeting on Match lb, 2994 considered the
rt
Master Plan ~
and voted .
I 5 • 0 to recommend its acceptance by City Council. The
i minutes of that meeting are included in attachment #2.
14
4
r:-
M
Dale ~
BACKGROUND: oZ /.3
E
The Airport Master planning process co-,nmenced late 1988 when the Airport Advisory
Board made application to the FAA for funding of the Master Plan Study. A
chronology of activities leading up to tl:e completion of the Airport Master Plan Is
summarized and Included In attachment #I.
Respecd9z submitt
f
Boyd Harrell
City Manager ,
Prepared by; 1
z; I
Harry ' N, ud, MItTPI, AICP
Senlor Planner
by
d /it
,1 rA14J
Frank ItobbiA Ai
i Executive blrector for Planning and Development '
Attachment #1: Chronology of the Airport Planning Process
Attachment 1+2: Minutes of the Airport Advisory Board of March lb, 1994.
f
I
t
i ~deNo d
Apetba
Attac- hment jf
A_CHR'NOLOGY OF THE AlzPnpT p eNh'INC DRCk 4e
L December 1988: Theaster Airpstuortdy,Board authorized staff to make application to the FAA
for funding of a M
2. February 1992: City Council accepted grant funding of $135,000 from the FAA and
authorized expenditure of funds not to exceed 5150,000.
3. February 1992: The City of Denton entered Into an agreement with Coffman and
Associates to prepare an Airport master Plan.
4. February 1992: The FAA, the City of Denton and Coffman and Associates agreed that
the Master Plan study shall emphasize the following:
Future role of the Airport (aircraft type, runway length etc.)
a 6 Potential air carrier demand.
• On-Airport land use.
a Potential aviation industrial development,
Analysis of the local airspace.
Airport development priorities.
Future f
ahcrafdairport noise.
• Future Off Airport land use.
Review of environmental Issues.
Preparation of a detailed capital improvement program,
. , S. August 1992: Coffman and t
Associates submitted Chapter 1.4 of the Draft Airport
Master Plan for review by the FAA and the Airport Board.
6. September 1992: FAA responded
expressing some concerns with the Draft Master
Plan. (See letter dated September 2, 1992 attachment #I).
r 7. December 1992: City Council appointed three members of the P&Z and three
members of the Airport Advisory Board to the Airport Zoning commission.
In accordance with State Law (Section 241:016 of the Local Government Code) the
Airport Zoning Commission shall p) Recommend the boundaries of the zones to be
established and the regula dons for those zones, and (ii) prepare a
1 and hold public hearings on the report before submit p~ reort
Gouncil. tang a final report to the City
41 4: 8. January, 1993: Airport Zoning Commission held a work session and discussed a draft
pw- 94
.y:
I ~oMeeMo 9 - D
noe~oait
Date /
work program to prepare regulations for height hazard compatible land use
zoning in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport,
9. February, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory Board
held a Joint weak session wido Coffman and Associates and reviewed various
alternatives for future Airport Dc% .opment. The Airport Advisory Board directed
Coffman and Associates to incorporate a 10,000 feet runway as shown on Alternative
V Into the Master Plana
10. April, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a work session to discuss options
for land use control In the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
I 11. June, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a work session to further discuss
f opdons for land use control in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
12. July 15, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a public hearing with regard to
the proposed regulation for airport height control and compatible land use zoning in
the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
13. July 22, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a study session and directed
staff to forward its recommendations to the city Council.
14. September 1993: Coffman and Associates submitted Chapters 6-7 for review by the
FAA and the Airport Advisory Board.
15. September 1993: FAA responded by letter dated September 9, (see attachment #1)
advising that the Master Plan should focus on Denton Municipal Airport as a reliever
Airport.
16. September 1993: Joe Thompson Airport Manager advised the Airport Advisory Board
that the FAA held discussions with Coffman and Associates with regard to removing
the 10,000 foot runway from the Airport Master Plan. (See memo dated September
200 1993, attachment #1)
17. October 13, 1993: Airport Advisory Board requested Coffman and Associates to
remove the 10,000 foot runway from the ALP and Inserting It Into the Appendix of
the Master Plan (See minutes attachment 1).
18. December 8, 1993: The Airport Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a joint public hearing to receive comments from the public with
regard to the Draft Airpart Master Plan and the proposed land use regulations.
19. January 19, 1994: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory
Board held a special called joint meeting. Jim Barris of Coffman Associates
presented the Draft Airport Master Plan and answered questions which were raised
at the public hearing held on December 8,1993:
APP
Agendai1
A-$;W
pate
20. March 16, 1994: The Airport Advisory Board discussed the rt Master
Plan at its regular meeting and agreed to adopt the Airport Layout Plan as
recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration The Board also agreed to
apply the proposed regulations for height control and compatible land use zoning so
as to protect the possibilities for future airport Development. In this direction the
Board requested to see a foot print of an 8,000 feet runway located 2,300 feet west
of and parallel to the proposed 7,500 feet runway.
21. Ma°y 11, 1994: The Airport Advisory Board reviewed foot prints of various options
for height control and compatible lend use toning. The Board agreed to recommend
a layout which will accommodate potential future runways co be located up to 2,500. ,
feet west of the Proposed 7,500 feet runway.
22. Jul 13, 1994: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and
i t voted unanimously to recommend to the Pity Council (1) The proposed Airport
ry Layout Plan (ALP) showing the extension of the existing runway to 7,500 feet and
a proposed S,o .0 feet runway lying 700 feet west of and parallel to the existing 1 ;
runway, and (2) The proposed regulations for height control and compatible land
use zoning applicable to the Airport Development Zone as shown on Potential
Expanslon Capability Layout I.
t
1
l
}
.
j ,
~•~',:.A~'. `+:a'.✓a4~.:M:tke'%a r~.ier z?erY4~M,+•s ww.~wtrs
f
i
I ATTACHMENT 2 AQAI~'0
Airport Advisory Board Minutes A98*1
March 16, 1994
Page 3 /
Mr. John Hicks stated his reason for attending t e r
Airport Advisory board meeting was to address the zoning
changes which had been proposed for the area surrounding
l the Denton Municipal Airport. Mr. Hicks stated he has
lived in Estes Estates for 20 years which is located
near I-35 N across from Denton Regional Medical Center.
Mr. Hicks said, although he is out of the zoning area
proposed by the Airport board he can see and hear the
airplanes. Mr. Hicks stated his concerns for the need
of proper zoning were so that the air traffic at Denton
Municipal Airport would not be hampered as it is at
DFW and Love Field due to the failure to stone properly
II' a number of years ago before the current development
of houses.
Mr, Hicks stated he felt the Air
should make recommendations to rezone the Advisory board
f Denton Municipal Airport in anticipationpof arty around
development in the community. Mr. Hicks s id w he ais
' in favor of growth in Denton, Texas,
George Gilkeson, Airport board chairman thanked Mr.
Hicks for his comments and invited Mr. Hicks to stay
for the remainder of the meeting.
III. Consider Airpprt Master Plan
Mr. ,f
ght rd the
disco ssGilkioneson fi item for
he brouAgenda forwa
which was theist onsideration
of the Airport Master Plan.
Mr. Gilkeson made a motion for the board to approve
the Airport Layout Plan and the Master Plan as it is
currently written with discussion to follow.
Mr. Gilkeson opei,ed the floor for discussion.
Terry Garland, Airport board member asked for information
regarding the current status of the Airport Master Plan.
Joe Thompson, Airport Manager explained to the, board
that this Master Plan in it's preliminary draft copy
is the plan the FAA has approved as the potential Master
Plan and their recommended Air
plan has a 7500' runway which isrthe aexten ion of the E
existing 5000' runway and an alternate 5000' runway
to be built 700' west of the existing runway. Mr.
Thompson stated the FAA supports the position of Denton
Municipal Airport as a reliever airport but will only
build extensions or other runways if there Is a demand
I
i
Airport Advisory Board Minutes ~QIAdiNO r ' O~~
March 16, 1994 apendal
Page 4
ate
by aircraft.
Jim Risser, Airport board member questioned If the
Master Plan was the same as the Master Plan discussed
in prior Planning and Zoning meetings.
Joe Thompson, Airport manager explained to Mr, Risser
at tha Master Plan was the same preliminary draft
copy which had been discussed with Planning and Zoning.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager and Airport Director
stated that staff is suggesting to accept the Master
Plan and then approve or recommend to the City Council
approval of the Airport Layout Plan so we can move
forward, Mr. Svehla stated that the staff continues
to receive good re
FAA stating that reports fMuni ipal Mike Nicely is in n the
top running for a the
were informed that grant in 1994' The board members
he
{ preliminary engineering for the
1000 extension is almost complete which will put the
airport in a favorable position to accept a grant in
1994.
Mr. Svehla stated that council had ap
the
proved acquisition of the Porter tract of land e
on the
northwest end of the airport. whis means all of the
clear zone land required for. the 1000' extension to
the south, is now owned by the city of Denton.
Mr. Svehla stated it was important for the Airport
Advisory board and the Planning and toning board to
recommend to the council at this Lime so the councils
can receive and approve the recommendations in order
to move forward.
George Gilkeson, Airport Board chairman stated in order
to make the motion official and bring the motion out
of the discussion stage the Airport board needed a motion
and a second for the recommendation of accepting the
preliminary draft copy of the Master Plan and aroval
of the Airport Layout plan for Denton Municipal Airport
as written.
Jim Risser made a motion for the Airport y
to accept the Master Plan and adopt the Advisory I
Airport Layout Plan.
Mike Stephens, Airport toard member seconded the motion,
J ~
TIC • r4.
gendaft- D
aendal
Airport Advisory Board Minutes
March 16, 1994 qi+ I
Page S
Mr. Jamieson at this time asked to go into an explanation
that had been presented in public hearing and talked
about by Mr. Mike Nicely. Mr. Jamieson stated he did
not understand the rules and terminology for the airport
since this airport was designated by the FAA as a
reliever airport, yet if Denton had a 7500' runway in
place and a commuter airline had an interest in providing
passenger service would the 7500' runway be long enough
to accommodate commuter service? Mr. Jamieson asked
if the existing runway and any extensions would have
the load bearing capability to handle commuter traffic.
Mr. Jamieson also wanted to know what the terminology
runway 17 L and R or 35 L and R meant as it was
mentioned in the master Plan.
Joe Thompson, Airport manager explained to Mr. Jamieson
that if you have two runways and you approach both
runways with the end that is marked 17 the FAA requires
one runway to be marked L for left and the other one
marked R for right. if you are approaching from the
south you will see two runways, one having painted
on the end of it 35 L for left and 35 R for right.
Mr. Thompson also explained the existing 5000' runway
has a load bearing capability which exceeds 1000000 t
lbs, and if any extensions to the 5000' runway would
need to meet the load bearing capability of airplanes
coming into Denton Municipal Airport the extensions
would have to be engineered by whoever is doing the
construction plans for the airport to meet forecasted
aircraft mix that would be using Denton Municipal
Airport.
Mr. Thompson explained to Mr. Jamieson based on the
current information available and the current load i~
bearing capability, if a commuter service wished to
serve Denton- Municipal Airport it would have the
capability to do' so using certain type of aircraft
that did not exceed the load bearing capability of the
runways and taxiways.
George Gilkeson asked the board members if there would
j be any more discussion on the subject. There was none.
i Mr. Oi lkeson asked for a vote for all in favor of thb
motion to please say aye and all opposed to say nay.
The motion was carried with no one opposing the motion.
j G
N0 9 - i
Airport Advisory Board Minutes
March 16, 1994 Ap8*1
Page b ,
Iv. Consider Height zoning and Land Usage for E ng$ /"I
Mr. Gilkeson then addressed the next topic of
consideration being the recommendation to Planning ahd
zoning concerning the zoning of land around Denton
Municipal Airport. Mr. Gilkeson referred to a map
prepared with a new footprint by Coffman & Associates,
the Master Planners for the Airport which showed the
new 65 LDN and 55 LDN footprint based on a 7500' and
5000' runway 700' west of the 7500' runway.
Jim Risser observed there were obvious changes and
assumptions made other than the length of the runway
regarding different types of aircraft because of the
contours being narrower and longer than what had
previously been reviewed.
Rick Svehla explained there was no doubt that the new
footprint and the contours generated from it did not
use the 10,000' runway in the new scenario. f
Jim Risser stated the Airport Board would not want to
" find itself in this discussion again because someone
discovered that the aircraft mix we are now using was r
not in the Master Plan, or the City would be having
a zoning problem.
Rick Svehla pointed' out the two zone areas were still l
being used around the airport as originally proposed -j
in order to advise people in and around the airport Is
and there needs to be noise abatement of new construction
or to use ivigation easements over their land. Mr. Svehla j
said this concept had not changed from the original
concept discussed by the board. }
Mr. Svehla pointed out the City staff had discussed
the zones and noted there were movements of the current
zones inward but the old zones were truncated on the
ends because they were so wide and so large.
Now because it is narrow we are not truncating the i
ends of the zone because it is basically vacant farmland
oc vacant pasture land. The staff would go ahead and j
recommend the complete LDN contour rather than truncating
them off on the end.
j
r
e~aNo I
Airport Advisory Board Minutes
March 16, 1994 Ap9%al
Page 6 r~
IV. Consider Height Zoning and Land Usage for Z&I nq.
Mr. Gilkeson then addressed the next topic of
consideration being the recommendation to Planning afid
Zoning concerning the zoning of land around Denton
Municipal Airport. Mr. Gilkeson referred to a map J
prepared with a new footprint by Coffman a Associates, d
the Master Planners for the Airport which showed the
new 65 LDN and 55 LDN footprint based on a 7500' and
5000' runway 700' west of the 7500' runway.
Jim Risser observed there were obvious changes and
assumptions made other than the length of the runway
regarding different types of aircraft because of the
contours being narrower and longer than what had
previously been reviewed.
Rick Svehla explained there was no doubt that the new
footprint and the contours generated from it did not
use the 10,,000' runway in the new scenario. E
Jim Risser stated the Airport Board would not want to
find itself in this discussion again because someone
discovered that the aircraft mix we are now using was {
not in the Master Plan, or the City would be having
a zoning problem.
Rick Svehla pointed out the two zone areas were still
being used around the airport as originally proposed
in order to advise people in and around the airport
and there needs to be noise abatement of new construction !
` or to use avigation easements over their land. Mr. Svehla
said this concept had not changed from the original
concept discussed by the board.
i
Mr. Svehla pointed out the City staff had discussed
the zones and noted there were movements of the current
zones inward but the old zones were truncated on the
ends because they were so wide and so large.
Now because it is narrow we are not truncating the
ends of the zone because it is basically vacant farmland
or vacant pasture land. The staff would go ahead and
recommend the complete LDN contour rather than trure:atinq
them off on the end.
r 1 y
i
.:Alp ! ry.
{
I
~QeBCaNo ~ ~
Airport Advisory Board Minutes Age*
March 16, 1994 ~ItB
Page 7 /D
George Gilkeson asked how many homes a currently in
I Zone 2.
Joe Thompson explained there are sixteen homes currently
in Zone 2 where before there were 75 to 74 homes.
Terry Garland asked if the FAA came to the Airport
Advisory board in ten years and said there was a need
for a 10,000' runway could a 100000' runway still be
put tit or would there have to be a total rezoning of
the property at that time.
Rick Svehla said yes, a 10,000' runway could be built
if it was the request of the future Airport Board members
;nd future City Council members and there would be
a study made as to where the runway could be located
and how it would effect the zoning ordinance.
Rick Woolfolk following general discussion stated
there was no motion on the floor and the general
discussion was out of order.
George Gilkeson entertained a motion that the Airport
Advisory Board recommend to the Planning and Zoning .
board the new footprint prepared by Coffman a
Associatsu, based on the approved 7500' and 5000' Airport
Layout Plan which is going to the FAA.
Mr. Woolfolk stated he believed the motion was illegal
and out of line in that the recommendation on the part
of the Airport Advisory board to Planning and Zoning
w4, not in conformance with the State Legislation
enabling a body to make a recommendation to the Planning
t, and Zoning Commission. ,
Hr. Woolfolk stated he felt it would be best if the
Airport Advisory board sent their recommendation to
the Joint Zoning Commission who was empowered by the
City Council and instructed by the Council to make the
recommendations and not the Airport Advisory board.
to make the recommendations. Mr. Woolfolk stated as
chairman of the Joint Zoning Commission he or the
previous board members had not been contacted or given !
any recommendation on this particular footprint. Mr. 11
Woolfolk felt opposed to it because of the enabling
legislation on the part of the State of Texas, saying
+pW8No
Airport Advisory Board Minutes IQ2it
March 160, 1994
Page S aE /r l !f
we could use any runway or proposed ray which is
in a proposed Master Plan or adopted Master Plan.
r Rick Svehla said with all due respect, the staff had
discussed the matter with the legal department and that
was why the staff was making the recommendation and
no matter what the board moves the recommendation of
the Joint Zoning Commission would also be presented
to the City Council as per state law. Mr. Svehla
reminded the Airport board they were an advisory board
and could either decide to adopt the Joint Zoning
Commission board's recommendation or their own. Mr. 1
Svehla said this is what the staff is recommending to
you, since we adopted the Airport Layout Plan.
Mr. Svehla also pointed out the recommendations did
not have to go to Planning and Zoning or anywhere else.
Recommendations could go straight to the City Council.
Mr. Svehla also stated the Airport Board could recommend
it go back to the old Joint Zoning board or a new Joint
Zoning board which would have to be appointed, but
remember that at the time the City Council decidod when
they appointed the Zoning Board, that it be members
of the existing Planning and toning committee and
existing Airport Board and members are no longer on
either board. Mr. Svehla stated absolutely the Joint
Zoning Commissions recommendation has to go to the City 1
Council.
Jim Risser questioned that nothing has changed at this
point, until the Joint Zoning board decides to change
it, Mr. Risser asked if their recommendations atahd
as presented before.
Mr. Svehla commented that yes, now the City staff is
suggesting to the Airport Advisory board that we go
with this new footprint.
George Gilkeson asked if the Joint Zoning board was
still officially in existence.
Rick Woolfolk stated he thought it had never been
dissolved.
Rick Svehla commented there had been some question
regarding the Joint Zoning Commission and the City staff
would have to go back and question the City attorneys
to see if the Joint Zoning Commission was still in
existence since some of it's members were Airport board
members and Planning and Zoning members, but are no
i
1
AgendaNo ~ i
Airport Advisory Board Minutes AW31
March 16, 1994 I~1Q
Page 9
longer on the board or commission. /
Rick Woolfolk pointed out the City Charter states you
are appointed to a board until you are replaced by the
pleasure of the council for a normal two year term,
however you will serve until you are replaced.
Rick Svehla responded by saying this was a legal question
that would have to be answered by the City attorneys.
Does the zoning board still exist with it's original
members?
Rick Woolfolk said he did not think the City boards
should be shortsighted. The Airport has been here for
fifty years although for forty of those years it had
been a stepchild. only in the last ten years had there
been any real effort in rebuilding the Airport and
the Airport is the crown jewel of the City of Denton
which has absolutely been buried under the dirt.
Finally, look at what has happened out here in just
i the last 5 years, air capacity has increased over 45%
in the last two years. }
Mr, Woolfolk stated he might be willing to address a
compromise as an individual, not speaking for the Joint
Zoning Commission, to support a recommend"tion to Council
that the Airport Zoning board make a zone 1 from highway
380 on the north end to highway 2449 on the south end
of the airport making everything in between there a
zone 1. Any contour zone north of highway 380 and south
of highway 2449 would be zone 2.
~y
George Gilkeson asked Mr. Woolfolk to approach the map
r° and explain what areas he was addressing.
i
Rick Woolfolk pointed out the land area east and west i
1
of the airport be zoned in ;zone 1 and zone 2 being north
and south where the contours started narrowing past
highway 2449;and 380.
Terry Garland made a motion to recommend this plan to
the Planning and Zoning board following general
E discussion by the Airport Advisory board.
i ,
f George Gilkeson called for a vote, asking for ayes and
f opposes to say nay. All of the board members voted
nay# so the motion did not pass.
Jim Risser addressed a question to the board and to
I the staff whether there was a need to make a motion
i
Y
X14
■
r
Airport Advisory Board Minutes ^~°'A
March 16, 1994 Date
Page 10 /
to refer this footprint back to Coffman 6
for Associates
~ further study.
Rick Svehla answered Mr. Risser's question saying no,
although directions should be given by the board
explaining what the board would like to see.
General discussion followed with Airport board members
deciding they would like to see two new footprint with
the same aircraft mix that was applied to the footprint
just presented using a mix of aircraft for a 7500'
runway and a 5000' parallel of a reliever category,
The Airport Board members would like to see a footprint
for an 8000' runway 2500' to the west of the existing
runway and also a footprint for a 7000' runway 2500'
west of the existing runway.
Jim Risser stated that he believes the Airport Advisory ;
board has a responsibility to be as aggressive as
possible and still try to protect the possibilities
for this airport, 20 to 30 years out into the future,
Mr, Risser
pointed out that the Airport board had not ~
been unreasonable in reviewing for zoning or unreasonable
in their recommendation of the Master Plan, He said
this determination was made after having lengthy
discussion with the neighbor's. Mr, Risser also felt,
the issues which are being recommended would not have
a significant impact on airport neighbor's but would
leave options available for potential expansion of Denton
Municipal Airport. This option would allow future
Airport Advisory board members and future City Council
members to make's decision as to future needs at Denton
Municipal Airport.
V, Airport-Man
ager's Reuort
At Joe Thompson reviewed with the Airport Advisory board
the status of the preliminary engineering by Freese
and Nichols on the 1000' extension, explaining the
preliminary engineering process was almost complete
but there had to be some additional coat numbers
added to it due to the Federal Aviation Administration
airspRce and safety committee and maintenance group
meeting to figure the cost of mounting the glide
slope antenna on a collapsible or fringeable base
at the end runway 35, Because the PAA is paying
90% more of refurbishing this antenna, Freese and
Nichols has to submit back to the Airport Manager
the new cost numbers so a revised preapplication
can go to the FAA to increase the amount of grant ar
~ t
pir
i
c
V
i
CITY. ,
-COUNCY'
a
i
1
!
t
f Y a ~ IX t
%
ftf[F~ 1 y..
~ t
~ J ! M
1
J ! •1
S
t ~
i
R J\
1
CITY
COUNC
L.l3j2LL=LI133313=L.. L. I.
1
L ~
f'
f r'
.
r
w
L
F.
I
I
Ap~No `i.,..~
AWO q
DATE: September 13, 1994 9F
CITY COUNCIL UPORT FORMAT {U/
TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
i
SUBJECT: Consider approval of a resolution adopting the Airport Layout Plan showing the
j extension of the existing runway to 7,500 feet and a proposed 5,000 feet
runway lying 700 feet west of and parallel to the existing runway:
t
REcomMENDATION:
The planning and zoning Commission recommends adoption. (6 - 0)
The Airport Advisory Board recommends adoption. (5 - 0)
The Board of Directors of the Denton Chamber of Commerce recommend adoption.
SUMMARY:
in February, 1992 the city entered into an agreeme-nit with Coffman and Associates,
E Airport Consultants to prepare a master plan for the Denton Municipal Airport. The
consultants worked closely with the Airport Advisory Board, the /&port Zoning
i commission and Qty staff in drafting the master plan (A copy of the Airport Master
' Plan is provided under separate cover.)
The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) included in attachment #1, Proposes to extend the
existing runway to 7,500 feet and to locate another 5,000 foot runway 700 feet west
of and parallel to the existing runway. The . IP resulting from the Airport Master
Plan Study, was submitted to the Fedt:ral Aviation Administration (FAA) for their
review on April 28, 1994. After conducting an Aeronautical Study, the FAA
responded by letter dated July 26, 1994 giving conditional approval to the Airport
Layout Plan (See attachment #2)
ii The Board of Directors of the Denton Chamber of Commerce at its regular meeting
t on July 21, 1994 approved a resolution recommending the Airport Layout Plan for
adoption by the City council. (See attachment #3)
A resolution adopting the Airport Layout Plan is included in attachment #4.
r
j
uaa .:...,y.
i
0-50
Ap *1
oete ~ '
BACKGROUND: f
The Airport Master Planning process commenced late 1988 when the Airport Advisory
Board made application to the FAA for funding of the Master Plan Study. A i
chronology of activities leading up to the current status is summarized and included
in attachment #5.
4Respec lly sub mitted.
rrell
City Manager
Prepared by:
pp ,
Harry N. Perseud, MRTPI, Amp ~
Senior Planner'
. b
Ap
~A
t
rankRo AICP "
Executive Dnector for Planning and Development
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment #1: Airport Layout Plan ;
Attachment #2: Copy of FAA letter dated July 26, 1994 i
Attachment #3: Copy of Resolution from the Denton Chamber of Commerce dated
July 21, 1994 '
Attachment 04: Resolution adopting the Airport Layout Plan.
'J f Attachment #5: Chronology of the Airport Planning Process:
• } , Attachment #6: Minutes of the Airport Advisory Board, March 16, 1994
Attachment #7: P & Z minutes of July 139 1994.
a.
e~aepp v: 1
p / ■
ATTACHMENT 1 "No
AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN 4gendal
F1+~, '..!'K. ,i ~ l~1 aid ~Jr.. .l. 1
a 1~•1 IS 1 /i'! r • f , '~rv i , 1VVJ
i ! i \ f _ ' Jtm Christel Rd.. _
Propoid 7050 ' Itu-.nvi
t - `,Pro god 5,000' rianM'
oo"
- Airport Rd y
• - - L , FM 2449
loll
jjj
r
I. 3
~ ate. ~ I
QeWaNo
~gemialt
ATTACHMENT 2 ~qE -
Southwest Ragan ' Wonh. Texas 76193-mo
oil Mwnsas. toutswna,
New Mexico. Oklahoma,
Aditvsh'albn Texra
JUL
2 8 f99{
July 26, 1994
-•INIIIIIp
1
Mr. Joe Thompson
Airport Manager
Denton Municipal Airport
Route 1, Box 100
Denton, TX 76205
Dear Mr. Thompsont
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has reviewed and can
now approve the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for Denton Municipal
Airport. We
conducted an
aeronautical study of the airport
and the proposed improvements on the ALP (Aeronautical Study
No. 94-ASW-0103-NRA) and determined that the ALP would not be
objectionable from an airspace utilization standpoint. it is
approved subject to the following conditions:
a. This approval is subject to the requirements of a
favorable environmental finding prior to the start of land
acquisition and/or construction as required by the National
Rnvironmental Policy Act, the FAA Environmental Handbook
(FAA Order 5050.4A), and the grant assurances.
b. Prior to the construction of any hangars or buildings
depicted on the ALP, a separate aeronautical study of each
structure will be required. Exact description of these
facilities including coordinates of building cornt'a, height,
and construction materials will be required before a
H; determination can be made as to the Affect on aviation. f
C. This approval does not include construction
equipment, such as tower cranes, that may be used in
construction. Separate notice will be necessary for each
development.
d. The elevation of the relocated glide slope antenna
for Runway 17L will limited by the FAR Part 77, Primary
Surface associated with Runway 17R.
Akpoft 0hlsk % Texas Akpod DweroymeM Office, Fort woiV% Tx 741034660, (817) t22-H&O f
-TOGETHER WE SUCCEED- }
C
i
2 !
i
e. The airport surface observation ationr(ASOS i
s
~ typically ailed with the glide slope antenna. When the glide
slope antenna is relocated in conjunction with the extension
of Runway 17L/35R to the north, the ASOS would have to be
relocated. A separate aeronautical study will be necessary to
determine if the relocation of the ASOS can be accomplished J
within criteria and without exceeding the FAR Part 77 surfaces
associated with Runway 17Rc
Please submit 8 copies of,the ALP for our signature and formal
distribution, This will allow us to return 2 signed copies
for your use..
If you ha'oe anti qm stions, please to contact me at
(817) 222-5606. E
Sincerely,
Mike Nicely
y' ;Pr6je6t Manager'
r Texas Airport Development Office
cc:
'Mr: Scott dray
Coffman Associates, Inc.
11022 North 28th Street, Suite 240
Phoenix. AZ 85024
f j F 3,'Ili. ♦ J
%
P
1 1
1
, P
Y+~IYCwflw+.w.yu rv.w.,,:n4 sl"^:A."kkFSisr ...r
Ulkl
er4.rw
+YI
~1MyJ4 ~1Rp
ATTACHMENT 3
~Q611gAN0.
a
Date
UM i
RESOLUTION
Board of Director
DENTON CHAMBER of COMAtiRCE
Denton, Texas
WHEREAS, the Denton Municipal Airport is presently designated Reliever Status by the Federal
Aviation Administration; and
WHEREAS, with specific improvements to the exisdng Denton Municipal Airport property, based
on the recommendations of an FAA-requested Master Plan, opportunities for economic
development in and around this area will be inaeased; and
WHEREAS, the approval of the Airport Development Zone by the Denton City Counci, as
unanimously recommended on July 13, 1994 by the Planning & Zoning Commission, would
protect and preserve the property surrounding the Demon Municipal Airport for future purposes
as outlined in the proposed Master Plan;
i
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Denton Chamber of Commerce
does hereby:
• commend the Denton City Council for its consideration of a Master Plan for future use and
development at the Denton Municipal Airport, and supports and encourages formal adoption of ;
4 said plan as recommended by the City of Denton Airport Advisory Board and the Planning & I
Zoning Commission on July 13, 1994; and
r
y - supports and encourages formal adoption of the Airport Development Zone as approved
and recommended by the Airport Advisory Board and Planning & Zoning Commission on
i July 13, 1994.
Approved by the Board of Director of the Denton Chamber of Commerce during its regular
monthly meeting on July 21, 1994.
4f 4<4
Richard 0. Hayes
r Chairman of the Board
r f
ATTEST:
Charles W. Carpenter
President
j
s Aeertaotteo
' ? 414 PAMWAY • RO. MA%U P • t19rt4N ttxA UM -1719 ~ 141113024M
.,esq...
IAHPWAXEI V I RLAY .g *NNoo.
ATTACHMENT 4
RESOLUTION NO. _ Ukie A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE AIRPORT LA1C7T PLAN ON
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, CITY OF DENTON, TEXASI AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHERLe3, the Denton Airport Advisory Board at its regular meeting
on March 16, 1994 voted unanimously to recommend adoption to the
Airport Layout Plan for the Denton Municipal Airport showing the
extension of the existing runway to 7,500 feet and a proposed 5,000 I
feet runway lying 700 feet west of and parallel to the existing
runway; and
WHEREAS, the Denton Planning and Zoning Commission considered the
Airport Layout Plan for the Denton Municipal Airport at its regular
meeting on July 13, 1994 and voted unanimously to recommend
adoption of the said Airport Layout Plan by the City Councilt and
WHEREAS, the Federal Xviation Administration (FAA), after conduct-
ing an Aeronautical Study (NO. 94-ASW-0103), has conditionally
approved the said Airport Layout Plant and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Denton Chamber of Commerce
at its regular meeting on July 21, 1994 adopted a resolution
recommending the said Airport Layout Plant NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY RESOLVES=
SECTION It That the Airport Layout Plan for the Denton hunicipal
)Airport shoving the extension of the existing runway to 7,500 feet
and a proposed 5,000 feet runway lying 700 feet want of and
parallel to the existing runway, is hereby adopted.
$gCTION Ili That the Airport Layout Plan attached hereto and
identified as Sheet 2 of 10, prepared by Coffman and Associates,
dated July 26, 1994, is made a part hereof for all purposes.
SECTION 21ri That this resolution shall become effective immedi-
ately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1994.
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTESTI
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY i
APPROVED TO LEGAL FORM;
DEBRA DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BY s ~~i Q~~li c r-
7 11
- - . ::r ~•.ti: Mfg i
l
tiriw
3
Q of
elm
mleelll,,llel bell 4,
i
P
e.r
~+wrr
■ c
N
1=
all
WC3
Yw --w~ ti I • 1
~r.
R IVw.y/
• Ml.+q LyyL iTY W
9 '
w Iwww~.~~.`~'.. Ir~~.JJJJi.. I~
,~W ~Y MrM, a.
tir r Y
es rr ~wr•
1 I.H~iir 4w w.lw w/rMrM
.1. I Ir Y Y w r, rr~ rryn.~ry lq MMO~R I(
ww wa.ti. r1 AMIOAT LAYOUt PIAI ,
r~rwr i.
mom
.wtadwiftw*`N',T~~A+Ri~4bypiifjC7f +sirr~
~Yp ilsaaFr6i
1
aoendarre , . . ~
Apettdal
!
Date
v
Attachment # 5
A CHRONOLOGY OF THE AlR
t'ORT PLANN[N PFTfx' zi
1. December 1988: The Airport Board authorized staff to make application to the FAA
for funding of a Master study.
2. February 1992: City Council accepted grant funding of $135,000 from the FAA and
authorized expenditure of funds not to exceed $150,000.
3. February 1992: The City of Denton entered Into an agreement with Coffman and
Associates to prepare an Airport Master Plan.
4. February 1992: The FAA, the City of Denton and Coffman and Associates agreed that
the Master Plan study shall emphasize the following:
• Future role of the Airport (aircraft type, runway length etc.)
• Potential air carrier demand.
• On-Airport land use.
Potential aviation industrial development.
• Analysis of the local airspace.
Airport development priorities.
Future aircraft/airport noise.
Future Off-Airport land use.
• Review of environmental Issues.
• Preparation of a detailed capital improvement program.
5. August 1992: Coffman and Associates submitted Chapters 1.4 of the Draft Airport
Master Plan nr review by the FAA and the Airport Board,
6. September 1992:- FAA responded expressing some concerns with the Draft Master
Plan. (See le'!ter dated September 2, 1992 attachment #1).
7. December 1992: City Council appointed three members of the PH and three
members of the Airport Advisory Board to the Airport Zoning Comnrission.
in accordance with State Law (Section 241:016 of the Local Government Code) the
{ Airport Zoning Commission shall (i) Recommend the boundaries of the zones to be
established and the regulations for those zones, and (ii) prepare a preliminary report
hold public hearings on the report before submitting a Rnzl report to the City
and Council.
8. January, 1993: Airport Zoning Commission held a work session and discussed a draft
i
j tigenda'"° 60 ~ ~
work program to prepare regulations for hei Ageodaltgjirazard and compatible land use
zoning in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport,
9. February, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory Board
held a joint work session with Coffman and Associates and reviewed various
alternatives for future Airport Development. The Airport Advisory Board directed
Coffman and Associates to incorporate a 10,000 feet runway as shown on Alternative
V Into the Master Plan.
I
10. April, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a work session to discuss options
for land use control in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
11. June, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a work session to further discuss
options for land use control in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
12. July 15,1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a public hearing with regard to
the proposed regulation for airport height control and compatible land use zoning in
the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
13. July 22, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a study session and directed
staff to forward its recommendations to the City Council.
14. September 1993: Coffman and Associates submitted Chapters 6.7 for review by the
FAA and the Airport Advisory Board.
15. September 1993: FAA responded by letter dated September 9, (see attachment #1)
advising that the Master Plan should focus on Denton Municipal Airport as a reliever
Airport.
16. September 1993: Joe Thompson Airport Manager advised the Airport Advisory Board
that the FAA held discussions with Coffman and Associates with regard to rrmovutg
the 10,000 foot runway from the Airport Master Plan. (See memo dated September
209 1993, attachment #1)
17. October 13, 1993: Airport Advisory Board requested Coffman and Associates to
remove the 10,000 foot runway from the ALP and inserting it into the Appendix of
the Master Plan (See minutes attachment 1).
18. December 8, 1993: The Airport Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a joint public hearing to receive comments from the public with
regard to the Draft Airport Master Plan and the proposed land use regulations.
19. January 19,1994: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory
Board held a special called joint meeting. Jim Harris of Coffman Associates
presented the Draft Airport Master Plan and answered questions which were raised
at the public hearing held on December 8, 1993:
r ~
i
i
l
20, March 16, 1994: The Airport Advisory Board discussed the Draft AirportPMaster
plan at its regular meeting and agreed to adopt the Airport
apply the proposed by the the regulations for height control and compatible land use zoning so
apply t
as to protect the possibilities for future airport Development. In this direction the
Board requested to see a foot print of an 8,000 feet runway located 2,500 feet west
of and parallel to the proposed 7,500 feet runway.
21. May 11,1994: The Airport Advisory Board reviewed footprints of various oopmh~d
for height control and compatible land use zoning. The Board agreed
a layout which will accommodate potential future runways to be located up to 2,500
feet west of the proposed 7,500 feet runway.
22. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and
l
July 13 , 1994:
.
voted unanirrtously to recommend to the City Council (1) The Proposed Airport
Layout Plan (ALP) showing the extension of the existing runway to 7,500 feet and
a proposed 5,000 feet runway lying 700 feet west of and parallel to the existing
runway, and (2) The proposed regulations for height control and compatible land
use zoning ; applicable to the Airport Development Zone as shown on Potential
Expansion Capability Layout 1.
~Ka`f
j1 .
i
a.. 1.
t
•raoW utw..q
a
b
N
t . '
i
Airport Advisory Board Minutes ANO, 9~- 0~ 3Q
March 16, 1994
Page 3 ATTACHMENT 6 I~
Greenway Club Estates for 20 years which is located near
I-35W across from Denton Regional Medical Center,
Mr. Hicks said, although he is out of the zoning area
proposed by the Airport Board, he can see and hear the
airplanes. Mr. Hicks stated his concerns for the need of
proper zoning were sj that the air traffic at Denton
Municipal Airport would not be hampered as it is at DFW and
Love Field due to the failure to zone properly a number of
years ago before the current development of houses.
Mr. Hicks stated he felt the Airport Advisory Board should
make recommendations to rezone the property around Denton
Municipal Airport in anticipation of growth and development
in the community. Mr. Hicks said he is in favor of growth ff
in Denton, Texas.
George Gilkeson, Airport Board Chairman, thanked ALr, Hicks f
for his comments and invited Mr. Hicks to stay for the I
{ remainder of the meeting,
III. Consider At wrt Master Draw
Mr. Gilkeson brought forward the first item for discussion
on the Agenda which was the consideration of the Airport
Master Plan.
Mr. Gilkeson made a motion for the board to approve the
Airport Layout Plan and the Master Plan as it is currently
written with discussion to follow.
Mr. Gilkeson opened the floor for discussion.
Terry garland, Airport Board member, asked for information I
regarding the current status of the Airport Master Plan, I
Joe Teompeon, Airport Manager,
explained to
t•
h.
board
that i
this Master Plan, in its preliminary draft copy, is the
plan the FAA has approved as the potential Master plan and
their recommended Airport Layout Plan, The plan has a
7,500 runway which is the extension of the existing 5#0001
runway and an alternate 5,000' runway to be built 700' west
of the existing runway, Mr. Thompson stated the FAA
supports the position of Denton Municipal Airport as a
reliever airport but will only build extensions or other
runways it there is a demand by aircraft.
Jim Risser, Airport Board member, questioned if the Master
Plan was the same as the Master Plan discussed in prior
Planning and Zoning meetings.
i -+Ya
Fla
WOO"
Y
Airport Advisory Board Minutes AQaadaNo.O
• March 16, 1994
+ Page 4~
j Dare
Joe Thompson, Airport Manager, explaine to Mr. Risser that
the Master Plan was the same preliminary draft copy which
had been discussed with Planning and Zoning.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager and Airport Director,
stated that staff is suggesting to accept the Master Plan
and then approve or recommend to the City Council approval
of the Airport Layout Plan so we can move forward.
Mr. Svehla stated that the staff continues to receive good
reports from Mr. Mike Nicely of the FAA stating that Denton
Municipal Airport is in the tap running for a grant in
1994. The board members were informed that the preliminary
on ineering for the 1,000' extension is almost complete
which will put the airport in a favorable position to
accept a grant in 1994.
Mr. Svehla stated that Council had approved the final
acquisition of the Porter tract of land on the northwest
end of the airport. This means all of the clear zone land
required for the 1,000) extension to the south, is now
owned by the City of Denton.
{ Mr. Svehla stated it was important for the Airport Advisory
I Board and the Planning and Zoning Board to recommend to te
t Council at this time ao the Council can receive and approve
the recommendations in order to move forward.
George Gilkeson, Airport Board Chairman, stated in order to
+ make the motion official and bring the motion out of the
discussion stage, the Airport Board needed a motion and a
second for the recommendation of accepting the preliminary
draft copy of the Master Plan and approval of the Airport
Layout Plan for the Denton Municipal Airport as written.
. 4'
Jim Risser made a motion for the Airport Advisory Board to
accept the Master Plan and adopt the FAA recommended
Airport Layout Plan.
Mike Stephens, Airport Board member, seconded the motion.
Mr. Jamieson, at this time, asked to go into an explanation
that had been presented in public hearing and discussed by 1
Mr. Mike Nicely. Mr. Jamieson stated he did not understand
the rules and terminology for the airport since this
airport was designated by the FAA as a reliever airport,
yet if Denton had a 7,5001 runway in place and a commuter
airline had an interest in providing passenger service
would the 7,5001 runway be long enough to accommodate
commuter service? Mr. Jamieson asked if the existing
runway and any extensions would have the load bearing
capacity to handle commuter traffic. Mr. Jamieson also
4
sm.av~
i
Airport Advisory Board Minutes ApendeNO..
Marc 1 Pageh516, 1994 AoAAddli
g - '
Date
wanted to know what the terminology run ay 17 L and R or
35 L and R meant as it was mentioned in the Master Plan.
` Joe Thompson, Airport Manager, explained to Mr. Jamieson
that if you have two runways and you approach both runways
with the and that is marked 17, the FAA requires one runway
to be marked L for left and the other one marked R for
right. If you are approaching from the south you will see
two runways, one having painted on the end of it 35 L for
left and 35 R for right. Mr. Thompson also explained the J
existing 5,000' runway has a load bearing capacity which b
exceeds 1000000 lbs. and any extensions to the 5,000'
runway would need to most the load bearing capacity of
airplanes coming into Denton Municipal Airport. The
extensions would have to be engineered by whoever is doing i'
the construction plans for the airport to meet forecasted
alrcrafc mix that would be using Denton Municipal Airport.
Mr. Thompson explained to Mr. Jamieson based on the current
information available and the current load bearing
capacity, if a commuter service wished to serve Denton
Municipal Airport it would have the capacity to do so using
certain type of aircraft that did not exceed the load
bearing capacity of the runways and taxiways.
George Gilkeson asked the board members if there would be
any more discussion on the subject. There was none.
Mr. Gilkeson asked for a vote for all in favor of the
motion to please say aye and all opposed to say nay. The
motion was carried with no one opposing the motion.
IV.
Mr. Gilkeson then addressed the next topic of consideration
being the recommendation to Planning and zoning concerning
the zoning of land around Denton Municipal Airport.
Mr. Gilkeson referred to a map prepared with a new
footprint by Coffman & Associates, the Master Planners for
the Airport which &hewed the new 65 LDN and 55 LDN
footprint based on a 7,500' and 5,000' runway 700' west of
the 7,500' runway.
Jim Risser observed there were obvious changes and
assumptions made other than the length of the runway
regarding different types of aircraft because of the
contours being narrower and longer than what had previously
been reviewed.
Rick Svehla explained there ues no doubt that the new
footprint and the contours generated from it did not use
the 10,000' runway in the new scenario.
r
+iCW 4
ATTACEIMENT 7 iii
~endaNo {
Minutes Pis Commission did
j
ii July 13r 1994 A~e~a9
Page 2 Late
4
II. Airport.
a. Receive a report and consider making a recommendation 1
to the City Council with regard to the Airport Layout
Plan (ALP). j
Staff report given by Harry Persaud:
t
If you will recall, the background to the airport planning
process started in late 1988 when the Airport Advisory Board
authorized the city staff to apply to the Federal Aviation
Administration for funding of a master plan study. We have
included in your backup material the whole chronology of the
airport planning process and the events that have taken place
since then.
Following the work of the airport planning consultants Coffman
and Associates, consistent with our airport development in
terms of its reliever airport status, a proposed layout plan
has been prepared. It shows the expansion of the existing
runway from 5,000 to 70500 feet. The existing plan of the
airport, the Willis's Plan prepared in 1986, did show a 11000
foot expansion to the south of the existing runway which
brought it up to 6,000 feet. The proposal now is to add
another 1500 feet to the north of that existing runway.
Parallel to that runway, 700 feet to the west, is a proposed
5,000 foot runway, a general aviation and training type runway
for touch and go activity. Following the work of the airport
consultants, 60% of the current activity of the airport is t
within that category. That is expected to reduce over the
years. There is an airport layout plan showing a 7,506 foot
runway and a propose3 5,000 foot runway for your consider.
ation. The staff has been informed that the Airport Layout
Plan complies with all of the federal aviation regulations.
This Airport Layout Plan has besn submitted to the FAA and is
currently under review. I have the airport manager and the
airport support staff hero to answer any questions
ou ma
have. y y
{
? Mr. Engelbrecht: An
{ y questions for staff at this time.
Rick Woolfolk: (Reading a letter for Mr. Gilkeson) I apolo-
gize for not being here in person. The Airport Advisory Board
delayed the approval of the master plan for the Denton Airport
f for approximately 9 months in order to address all of the
C concerns of the citizens of Denton. We feel wn have done this l
in the possible interest to all concerned. It is th6refore
f strongly recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board
t
.ai
~ndaNo ~ -Q30
~ Ape~da~ `s
minutes Pis Commission
July 13, 1994 s
Page 3
approve the Airport Layout Plan as presented and currently
approved by the Airport Advisory Board. It is also recommend-
ed that this action be taken as soon as possible so as to
accommodate the potential expansion of this valuable asset.
sincerely, George Gilkeson, Airport Advisory hoard.
Dr. Huey: The proposal is under review by the Federal Aviat-
ion Administration. Do we know when we will have a report of
that review and what would the consequence be of us making a
recommendation prior to that review?
r Mr. Persaud: Joe Thor.-,,.ion, our airport manager, has been in
contact with the FAA and following the communication closely.
I will ask Joe to respond.
Joe Thu pBon: Mr. Rick Svehla and myself have btai~ %,%lking
with Mike Nicely, the airport planner for the FAA. If you
will notice in your backup material, on April 28, 1994,
drawings were sent to the FAA by Coffman and Associates for {
consideration. They have 6 divisions reviewing that foot- E`
print. We should have something by the end of July. Based on
what Mike Nicely is telling us, it doesn't appear that there
is any problem.
Dr. Huey: What would the consequence of our recommendation
without the action from the FAA?
Mr. Persaud: le there is a problem with the Airport Layout
Plan, we may have to come back to Planning and Zoning before
council. Staff does not feel there is a problem. I think the
consultors are awaiting a recommendation from the city in
order to finalize the draft plan. We understand that it is
costly for them to prepare those documents without getting
some kind of feed back from the city. Staff feels at this
point in time, that a recommendation is in order. If anything
to the contrary does happen later, we may consider coming back
to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
;t Mrs. Russell: It is perceived I have a conflict so I will
remove myself from this discussion.
Mr. Bucek: I think there may be some confusion, the Airport
Layout Plan is the city's plan. Its plan may differ from the
FAA's plan. There are a number of cities whose Airport Layout
Plana have net been approved in their entirety by the FAA E
because the FAA is only willing to approve what they will fund
90/10. Some cities will desire to do things with Airport
Bonds or whatever else and develop their Layout Plan without
the use of federal funds. The fact that we approve something
y
1
u's
a~
i
NO !Minutes Pis Commission ~ I
July 130 1994 ~l
Pag• 3
approve the Airport Layout Plan as presented and currently
approved by the Airport Advisory Board. It is also recommend-
ed that this action be taken as soon as possible so as to
accommodate the potential expansion of this valuable asset.
Sincerely, George Gilkeson, Airport Advisory Board. 1
Dr. Huey: The proposal is under review by the Federal Aviat-
ion Administration. Do we know when we will have a report of
that review and what would the consequence be of us making a
recommendation prior to that review?
Mr. Persaud: Joe Thompson, our airport manager, has been in
contact with the FAA and following the communication closely.
I will ask Joe to respond. i
Joe Thompson: Mr. Rick Svehla and myself have been talking
with Mike Nicely, the airport planner for the FAA. If you i
will notice in your backup material, on April 281 19948
drawings were sent to the FAA by Coffman and Associates for
consideration. They have 6 divisions reviewing that foot-
print. we should have something by the end of July. Based on
what Mike Nicely is telling us, it doesn't appear that there
is any problem.
Dr. Huey: What would the consequence of our recommendation
without the action from the FAA?
Mr. Persaud: If there is a problem with the Airport Layout
Plan, we may have to come back to Planning and Zoning before
council. Staff does not feel there is a problem. i think the
consultors are awaiting a recommendation from the city in
order to finalize the draft plan. we understand that it is
costly for them to prepare those documents without getting
some kind of feed back from the city. Staff feels at this
point in time, that a recommendation is in order. if anything
to the contrary does happen later, we may consider coming back
to the Planning and Zoning commission.
Mrs. Russell: it is perceived 1 have a conflict so I will
remove myself from this discussion.
Mr. Bucek: I think there may be some confusion, the Airport
j Layout Plan is the city's plan. Its plan may differ from the
FAA's plan. There are a number of cities whose Airport Layout
" Plans have not been approved in their entirety by the FAA
because the FAA is only willing to approve what they will fund
90/10. Some cities will desire to do things with Airport
Bonds or whatever else and develop their Layout plan without
the use of federal funds. The fact that we approve something
1
'4AeRdafVo ' d_3d ~
Apftf
We
Minutes Pis commission q
July 13, 1994
Page 4
that might not be funded by them, is something that might
result in us electing to change our plan at a later date.
There is no necessity that the two plans compare eye for eye.
The approved Layout Plan by the FAA could be somewhat differ-
ent from our plan.
Mr. Engelbrecht: If we approve a plan, is that sending a
message to the FAA?
r
Mr. Svehla: For clarification, the FAA is already looking at
what they are going to approve, and that is called the ALP.
They have already given us their information or changes to us
and/or the consultant. They are okay with it. The FAA will
only approve the ALP out of our plan. What we are suggesting
to everyone and what the Airport Board did was to receive that
plan and approve the ALP. It is important that it continue to
go forward simply because in order for the FAA to finalize I
this grant, the ALP has to be approved by the governing body.
We are going to recommend to you, receiving the plan and
approving the ALP. That just moves it forward so the grant
can be finalized. The expansion is well out into the future.
The FAA in fact made some the changes to the plan. They did
not want some of the runway in the ALP or the plan itself, but
rather in an appendix. They can't see that far out into the {
future. That is a good planning tool, something you ought to
look for in protecting areas and those types of things. We
think all of the changes the FAA wants have been accomplished
because they have dome the review.
Mr. Bucsk: We are trying to say the consultant has made a
recommendation to you. Coffman and Associates were hired as
the result of the FAA telling us to do so.
Mr. Cochran: I move in favor of adopting the Airport Layout
Plan as presented and sending it onto council.
Mr. Norton: I second.
t Mr. Engelbrecht: All those in favor? The motion carries
unanimously (6-o)
n CITY
COUNCI
t. L• . r
t:
;
ti
FF Y
6 4 ,
i '
•.4t~r
~o W4 : , *U
's
DATE: September 17, 1994 Urf }
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
az
TO., Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Receive a final report, hold a public hearing and
consider adoption of an ordinance amending chapter 35
(Zoning) of the Code of ordinances by adding a new
Article X regulating and restricting the height of
structures and objects of natural growth, and also
regulating the use of property in the vicinity of the
Denton Municipal Airport by creating the appropriate
zones and establishing the boundaries thereof; defining
certain terms; referring to the Denton Municipal Airport
Zoning Mapt providing for enforcementi including a
provision for severabilityl imposing penalties for
violations and providing for an effective date.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends adoption. (6-0)
Airport Advisory Board recommends adoption. (6-0)
SUMMARY i
A final report regarding height control and compatible land
use zoning regulations applicable to land in the vicinity of
the Denton Municipal Airport is included in attachment f1.
The proposed regulations are intended to promote compatible
land use development in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal
Airport.
The Controlled Area,
In accordance with the Local Government code the city may
control land use within an area ( "controlled area") defined
by a rectangle bounded by lines drawn one and one half miler
from the center line and no farther than five miles from each
end of an existing or planned runway.
In defining the "controlled area" for the Denton Municipal
Airport, consideration has been given to preserving future
possibilities for airport expansion and development. Two
options for defining the "controlled area" have been
recommended.
tt
A' M
' Apewdake ~11~' ~O
Apc.~dal _
{1) Layout I: Eide - - E
2 a 2
Layout I shown in attachment 02 has been recommended by
the Airport Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning
Commission. This option is configured around the
prdoposanoed extension of the existing runway to 7,540 teat
an
ther possible future runway located u
feet west of and parallel to the existing runway.21The
ordinance in attachment 05 is based on this layout.
{2} Layout II:
The layout shown in attachment #3 is recommended by the
Airport Zoning Commission which was a
Council to make recommendations with regardeto height
control and compatible land use zoning in the vicinity of
the Denton Municipal Airport
Commission held working 6essions with the consultants
preparing the Airport Master Plan and felt that future
possibilities for airport expansion and development
should be preserved. Zones i and 2 have been designed
to accommodate potential expansion capability for a
20,000 foot runway, located 2,500 feet west of and
parallel to the existing runway.
Additional information with regard to t
homes are he
r area in flood total numbs
for each al''.ernative Isasumma
and Of rizedeInrattachmentlt4pable land
~Il9e Cemnw*11.t t
Two overlay zones in the vicinity of the
Airport are proposed. In subdistrict i, noisee sensitiveouses
such as educational facilities, hospitals, nursing
facilities providing convalescent or rehabilitativ4 care and
uses that will interfere with navigational signals or radio
communication between aircraft and airport are prohibited.
develo
Now
ments single familyihomes shall b comernon conlormin and existing i
g uses. ~
In subdistrict 2, new residential construction and repairs or
additions to existing homes shall be permitted, the
Property owner signs an avigation easement agreement granting )
the city the right to operate aircraft in the airspace
the grantor's property. If the property owner refusoasign
the avigation easement agreement, then the
construction, repair, remodel or addition shall b e equireed
to comply with noise mitigation standards.
Height Na.,-a
i
Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 currently controls the
height of structures and objects of natural
E vicinity of an airport. The ordinance willowado to the
- P he ~
t c~.
r.u...
J
0~.. goen~Mo -ado ~1
Ag$W
Date
appropriate zones and restrictions which are included in Part
77. An isometric view diagram and a map showing VIC Airport
Height Hazard District is included in Appendix F of Attachment
#I.
~CKGROtJND
The Airport Master Planning process commenced late in 198e,
when the Airport Advisory Board made application to the FAA
for funding of the Master Plan Study. A chronology of
activities leading up to the current status is summarized and
included in attachment #6.
NOTIFICATION s
Staff mailed 320 notices to property owners with in 200 feet
of the boundaries of the "development zone" with regard to the
Planning and Zoning commission public hearing held on July 13,
1994. A map showing the area included in the notification
list is included in attachment #7. Six property owners
responded by calling and visiting with staff.'
Respe fully subm t eds
Y f
Lloyd Harrell
City Manager
Prepared bye
i
Harry N. Persaud, MRTPI, AICP
Banior Planner
Approved y~
I
Frank Robbins, AICP
Executive Director of
Planning and Development
i
i-
AQAIId~No ~ ~
Agend
Date 3
ATT&Q2MHM °
r Attachment ti: A final report regarding height control and
compatible land use toning regulations applicable
' to land in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal
Attachment /2: LayouttI
Attachment 03: Layout II
Attachment 041 Existing homes located in the Development Zone
!Attachment /6: Ordinance regulating and restricting the height of
structures and objects of natural growth and also
regulating the use of property in the vicinity of
Attachment 6: Ahe Denton Municipal Airport. chron Attachment 07: Notification mapthe Airport Planning process.
Attachment j8: Copy of FAA letter dated July 26, 1994
f Attachment tl9t Resolution from the Fenton Chamber of Commerce
Attachment#101 P i Z minutes of December 6, 1994
Attachment#ll: P i Z minutes of January 19, 1994
'Attachment#12s P i Z minutes of July 13, 1994
Attachmentilli Minutes of the Airport Advisory Board for March 16
and May 110 1994
.t
1, t
%
1
1.
AVOUM
i ,
i
rf IMNO
Ap)dal
ONO -
s- o
Attachment
A REPORT REGARDING AIRPORT HEIGHT
CONTROL AND COMPATIBLE LAND USE ZONING
REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO LAND IN THE
VICINITY OF THE DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
y ,r
i
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
i
CITY OF DENTON
JULY 13, 1994
;
Jr
i
-av
t
1
I
i
ApendaNo
Apeadalte
pate -
A REPORT REGARDING HEIGHT CONTROL AND COMPATIBLE
LAND USE ZONING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO LAND t
IN THE VICINITY OF THE DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
A
1.00 INTRODUCTION
The Denton Municipal Airport Zoning Commission has been established under the
,
'
provisions of the local Government Code Section 241.016 to study and make
recommendations for regulating airport height hazard and land use compatibility zoning
in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport. The Airport Zoning Commission
comprising three members of the Denton Planning and Zoning Commission and three
members of the Menton Airport Advisory Board, convened a series of work sessions starting
In January, 1993. The Commission prepared a preliminary report dated July, 1993
Incorporating proposals to restrict and regulate the use of land and the height and
construction of buildings in the vicinity of the Municipal Airport. ~ public hearing was
held on July 15, 1993 with regard to the proposals contained in the preliminary report.
The Commission held a final meeting on July 22, 1993 to consider comments received at
the public hearing and then directed staff to foward its recommendations to the City
Council.
The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory Board held a joint public
hearing on December 8, 1993 and received comments from the public with regard to the
Airport Master Plan and the final recommendations regarding height control and
compatible land use zoning as contained in this report. A special called joint meeting of
the Airport Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission was convened on
January 19, 1994 to review the Draft Airport Master Plan and comments received at the
December 8, 1993 public hearing. The Airport Advisory Board at its regular meeting of
May 11, 1994 voted unanimously to recommend (1) The Airport Layout Plan (ALP)
showing the extension of the existing runway to 7,500 feet and another 5,000 feet runway
lying 700 feet west of and parallel to, the existing runway and (2) That the proposed
height hazard and compatible land use zoning apply to a potential expansion capability
layout which allows for possible future runways to be located up to 2,500 west of the f
existing runway. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a final public hearing on July
13, 1994 and voted unanimously to foward the Airport Advisory Board's recommendation
f to the City Council.
2.00 COMPATIBLE LAND USE ZONING
The Denton Municipal Airport is used by the public to an extent that the airport fulfills an
essential community purpose. it is necessary in the interest of the public health, public
safety and general welfare to prevent the creation of an airport hazard. The legislative
ii
a
i
NOW
ApeAdANo - O J
AOW
1
findings regarding airport hazard contained in the Local Government Code Section 241.00 AIla
are all applicable to the Denton Municipal Airport.
i
2.10 Zoning In-the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction:
f
Under provisions contained in the Local Government Code Section 241.013, the City of
Denton may adopt, administer and enforce the proposed regulations in the area located
outside the corporate city limits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). Land uses,
buildings and structures permitted in the ETJ shall be in accordance with these regulations
as well as comply with other applicable Federal, State and local regulations and standards.
It is intended that the height hazard and the compatible land use zones proposed in this
report shall "overlay" the applicable land use and building regulations and other II
development standards of the City of Denton as may be amended frdm time to time. In
the event that the underlying zoning or build'zg regulations or standards are in conflict or
inconsistent with the proposed height hazard and compatible land use regulations, these
regulations shall take precedence.
i
2.20 Abgrt Development Zone:
The Airport Zoning Commission proposes to establish an Airport Development Zone (ADZ)
in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport in order to provide a framework for
restricting and regulating existing and future use of land and buildings. A metes and
bounds description of the Airport Development Zone is included in Appendix W.
2.30 Pemutt Uses:
All land uses as permitted by the zorsntg classifications as established on the official zoning
map of City of Denton as may be amended from time to time, shall be permitted In the
Airport Development Zone except the following uses which are prohibited:
(a) All educational uses, including but not limited to, public and private schools,
kindergartens and child care facilities, colleges and universities, and vocational schools.
However, (1) Schools for flight instruction or for vocations associated with the airport,
airplanes or aviation related activities and (H) facilities for employee; or client training or
instruction related to services or products associated with the business of the entity
providing such training or Instruction (provided such training or instruction Is not the
primary business of such entity) shall be permitted in the Airport Development Zone.
`r ~ 1
t ?
~ge,cai
~ Date o
(b) Hospitals; nursing homes, institutions or any other facilities providing convalescent or
rehabilitative care; establishments for the care, treatment or rehaWlitadon of alcoholic,
narcotic or psychiatric patients; residence homes for the aged; and institutions, homes or
rehabilitation centers for persons convicted of crimes. However, medical, dental or optical
clinics for the examination, consultation or treatment of patients as out patients, medical
laboratories, establishments for the sale or rental of or industrial facilities for the
manufacture of medical or optical supplies and equipment, pharmacies, veterinarian clinics
and related facilities, public safety or emergency medical facilities operated by or In
connection with the Airport shall be permitted in the Airport Development Zone; and a
(c) No use may be made of land or water within the Airport Development Zone that will
create electrical interference with navigational signals or radio communication between the
airport and the aircraft, or that will create interference with any intemavigation facility, 1
airport visual approach or landing aid, aircraft arresting device or meteorological device, f
or that will make it difficult for pilots to distinguish between airport lights, result in glare {
in the eyes of pilots using the airport, impair visibility in the vicinity of the airport, create
bird strike hazards, or otherwise in any way endanger or interfere with landing, taking off
or maneuvering of aircraft using the airport.
The Airport Development Zone is further divided into Zone one (Z•1) and Zone two (Z-2)
and defined as follows:
2.40. Zone One (Z-1) includes all that area located within the 65 Ldn or areas with noise
levels higher than 65 ldn as shown on the attached map. A metes and bounds
description of zone one (Z•1) is included in Appendix "B".
r j
f 2.41 Permitted Uses•
All uses as permitted in the Airport Development Zone except that new residential uses
shall be prohibited. Existing residential uses shall become non-conforming uses on
adoption of the Municipal Airport Zoning Regulations and subject to the provisions
contained In Chapter 35 Section 13 of the Code of ordinances.(See Appendix E) in
addition existing residential uses shall be governed by the following provisions.
(a) When a property owner proposes to repair, rebuild or remodel an existing residential i
structure, the City may offs to purchase that property subject to the availability of funds.
(b) if the City is unable to purchase the property at that time, the property owner may
be permitted to repair, rebuild or remodel an existing structure in accordance with Chapter
j 35-13 of the Denton Code of Ordinances, providing that the construction complies with
the noise mitigation standards contained in appendix "C"
i
r
F
t
t`
M
2.50 Zone Two (Z•2) include all that area located in the Airport Development Zone
outside of the 65 Ldn or areas with noise levels less than 65 Ldn as shown on map. A
metes and bounds description for the outer limits of zone two (which is the same for the
Development Zone) is included Appendix "A".
2.51 Permitted Uses:
F ;ly
5.
(a) All uses as permitted in the Airport Development Zone.
r.
(b) Property owners proposing to construct a new residential building or to rebuild,
remodel, add to or repair an existing residential building shall be required to sign an
avigation easement agreement with the City of Denton. A sample copy of that agreement
is contained in appendix "D"
(c) Property owners may not be required to sign the avigation easement agreement if the
proposed building, rebuilding, remodelling, addition or repair operations comply with the
noise mitigation standards contained in appendix "C"
t 3.00. FLIGHT CONTROL ZONING
All structures erected, reconstructed, altered or enlarged in the Airport Height Control Area,
and all objects of natural growth placed, replaced, planted, replanted or altered in the
' Airport Height Control Area, shall comply with height restrictions, rules and regulations
t from time to time promulgated by the Federal Aviation administration (FAA). The Airport
Height Control Area Is shown on map included in appendix T.
4.00. PERMITS:
[ - The owner of any propeir) located within the Airport Development Zone (ADZ) or the }
k, Airport Height Control Area shall obtain a permit to be issued by the Building Official of
the City before:
(a) A nonvnfotrning structure may be replaced, rebuilt substantially changed or a
substantially repaired;
(b) A nonconforming object of natural growth may be replaced, substantially changed,
allowed to grow higher, or replanted;
(c) A itew structure is con tructed; or
(d) An existing structure is substantially repaired of substantially changed.
r
p
1, 7
{ k 1
u.+a a s
R
a,
ENO Q
Ag ft
5.00. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT -7F ~oplloll~
The existing Board of Adjustment of the City of Denton shall be designated as the Denton
Municipal Airport Board of Adjustment with the following powers:
(a) ro hear and decide appeals from an order, requirement, decision or determination made
by the Building Official in the enforcement or administration of the airport height control
area zoning regulations and the airport compatible land use zoning regulations.
(b) To hear and decide specific variance applications.
5.10. VARIANCES:
(a) Any person who desires to erect or increase the height of a structure, permit growth
of an object of natural growth or otherwise use property located within the Airport
Development Zone, or the airport height control area In violation of height or use
restrictions may apply to the Board of Adjustment for a variance. i
(b) The Board shall allow a variance from the height or use restrictions ih
(i) A literal application or enforcement of the regulations would result in practical difficulty
or unnecessary hardship; and
('I) The granting of the relief would (1) result In substantial justice being done (2) not
r 1 be contrary +co he public interest (3) and be in accordance with the spirit of the Denton
Municipal oningRegulations; provided, however, the board may impose any
reasonable tions that the Board considers necessary to accomplish the
regulations, purposes of the
;r
i
t
/0.
A
i
aQblldlk0 T Q
Ag tldaf
~1PPENDD{ ate
} D 10 0 E RP g
ALL that certain lot, tract, or 1
parcel of land situated to Denton County, Texas and being
part, or all of the following surveys; G. West Survey A-1393, S. Paine Survey A-1035, J
Melberg Survey A-1610, M. Paine Survey A-I036, B.B.B. & C. R.R. Co. Survey A-176, J.
McDonald Survey A-873, A. Byerly Survey A-1458, 1. Hembrie Survey A-594, J. Bacon
Survey A-1540, Wrn. Neill Survey A-970, W. Smith Survey A-I left A. Madden Survey A. 8511 T. Tobey Survey A-1295, W. Wilburn Survey A-1419, D. Davis Survey A-356, W,
Davis Survey A-377, J. Pettingale Survey, A-1041, J. Taft Survey A-1269, J. Evans Survey
A-411, J. Gibbons Survey A-446, J. Scott Survey A-1222, A. Cobberly Survey A-1542,
Myers and Johnson Survey A-1699, G. Barb Survey A-208, W. Bryan Survey A-148, S.
Huizar Survey A-514, J. Haney Survey A-515, and the R. Whitlock Survey A-1403 and
being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the centerline of the south end of the City of Denton Municipal Airport
runway as it existed on July 13, 1993, being located in W. Neill Survey A-970;
THENCE south 0° 20' 52" west a distance of 1750.0 feet;
THENCE south 89° 39' 08" east a distance of 2300.0 feet to the Point of Beginning, in the
J. Bacon Survey t 1540;
THENCE north 1.36' 58" cast a total distance of 8754.22 feet to a point for a corner in
the J. Scott Survey A-1222;
` THENCE north 70 14'49" west a total distance of 15,132.75 feet to a point for a corner
in the R. Whitlock Survey A-1403;
THENCE north 44' 38'22" west at total distance of 3535.88 feet to'a point for a comer
in the J. Gibbons Survey A-446;
THENCE south 7° 50 37"
west a total distance of 15,331.01 feet to a point for a comer
in the M yin and
Johnson Survey A-1699;
THENCE south 10 37149" west a total distance of 13,403.36 feet to a point for a corner
in the J. McDonald Survey A-873;
THENCE south 11" 39'50" east a total distance of 9,610.41 feet to a point for a comer in
the J. PettIngale Survey A-1041;
THENCE south 69° 59' SS" east a total distance of 2972.88 feet to a point for a comer in
the J. Taft Survey A-1269;
4 THENCE north 10° 34' 24" east a total distance of 12,955.79 feet to the Point of
Beginning and containing 4544.66 acres of land.
i
i
i j u~eedaNo...~
APPENDIX "B" ~y /Ld
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF ZONE ONE
All that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated in Denton county, Texas and being
part, or all of the following surveys; J. Kjelberg Survey A•1610, J, McDonald Survey A-873,
1. Hembrie Survey A-594, Wm. Neill Survey A-970, W. Smith Survey A•1188, A. Madden
Survey A451, T. Tobey Survey A-1285, W. Wilburn Survey A-1419, D. Davis Survey A•
356, W. Davis Survey A-377, J. Scott Survey A-1222, Myers and Joluison Survey A-1699,
G. Barb Survey A-208, and being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the centerline of the south end of the City of Denton Municipal Airport
runway as it existed on July 13, 1993, being located in W. Neill Survey A-970;
THENCE south 0° 20' 52" west a distance of 1500.0 feet;
THENCE south 89° 39' 08" east a distance of 900 feet to the Point of Beginning, in the
Wm. Neill Survey A-970;
THENCE north 0° 20' 52" east a total distance of 8500.0 feet to a point in the J. Scott
Survey A-1222;
THENCE north 260 13' 45" west a total distance of 2011.63 feet to'the center of Masch
Branch Road;
THENCE north 57° O1' 00 west a total distance of 2968.34 feet to a point in the Myer
and Johnson Survey A-1699,
i THENCE south 25° 41'384 west a total distance of 2102.87 feet to a point in the Myers
and Johnson Survey A•1699;
THENCE 'south W 20' 52" west a total distance of 9000.0 feet to a point in the J.
McDonald Survey A-873;
THENCE south 26° 13' 02" east a total distance of 1341.64 feet to a point in the J.
McDonald Survey A-873; ,
THENCE south 61° 28' 23" east a distance of 3176.15 feet to a point in the J. Kjelberg
Survey A•1610;
i
THENCE north 28' 14' 42" east a total distance of 1923.54 feet to the Point of Beginning
f and containing 1130.5 acres of land.
s
lo2.
,
AOetMeNo -
~Q~da E
APPENDIX "Cl
able
NOISE MITIGATION STANDARD I.Y O/C 42J
The following standards are intended to provide for the huWadon of the interior of
buildings to an [An 4S or less from outside noise levels over Ldn 65. The Building Official
may approve of alternative standards upon the submission of plans signed by a qualified
acoustical engineer certifying that the alternative standard will reduce outside noise levels
to 45 Ldn or less inside the building. The standards shall be applied to construction of new
residential or noise-sensitive commercial uses and for reconstruction or remodeling, to
existing buildings of the types mentioned above when the value of the improvement
exceeds So percent of the value of the existing structures. The standards however, shall
apply to any addition to an existing residential or noise sensitive commercial structure.
Where noise-sensitive activities are carried on in only a portion of new or reconstructed
commercial bufidings, only those areas judged noise-sensitive need be protected.
REQUIREMENTS FOR NOISE MITIGATION
A. Geaeral
1. Brick veneer, masonry blocks, or stucco exterior walls shall be constructed
airtight. All joints shall be grouted or caulked airtight.
2. At the penetration of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or, conduits, the space
between the wall and pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with
t mortar.
i
3. Window and/or through-the-wall HVAC type units shall not be used.
4. Operational, vented fireplaces shall not be used.
i,
S. All sleeping spaces shall be provided with a sound-absorbing ceiling and '
carpeted floor.
a
6. Through-the-wall/door mailboxes shall not be used.
B. Exterior WON
1. Masonry walls having a surface weight of at least 40 pounds per square foot do
not require a furred interior wall. In areas over 70 Ldn, masonry walls having
a surface weight of at least 75 pounds per square foot do not require wall. At least one surface of concrete block wall shall be lastered or
painted with heavy "bridging" paint.
see...
1
r
r ,
r
'f ~ ~ AQeodaNo ~7-Q~~
Apdal
to IF 2. Stud walls shall be at least four inches in nominal depth and shall be finished
h on the outside with siding on sheathing, stucco, or brick veneer.
E a. Interior surface of the exterior stud walls shall be of gypsum board or
plaster at least 1/2-inch thick, installed on the studs The gypsum board
or plaster may be fastened rigidly to the studs if the exterior is brick
veneer or stucco. If the exterior is siding-on-sheathing, the interior
gypsum board or plaster must be fastened resiliently to the studs.
b. Continuous composition board, plywood, or gypsum board sheathing shall
cover the exterior side of the wall studs behind wood or metal siding.
The sheathing and facing shall weigh at least four pounds per square foot.
c. All edges of the sheathing shall be sealed with resilient caulking.
4E d. Insulation material at least two inches thick shall be Installed continuously
throughout the cavity space behind the exterior sheathing and between
wall studs. Insulation shall be glass fiber or mineral wool.
C. Windows
i 1. Glass of double-glazed windows shall be used and at leasi 1/8-inch thick,
2. Double-glazed windows shall employ fixed sash or efficiently weatherstripped
operable sash. The sash shall be rigid and weatherstripped with material that
is compressed airtight when the window is closed.
3. Glass of fixed-sash windows shall be sealed in an airtight manner with a '
nonhardening sealant, or a soft elastomeric gasket or glazing tape.
: 4. The perimeter of the window frame shall be sealed airtight to the exterior wall
'
construction with a resilient sealant.
I ; S. The total area of glass of both windows and exterior doors in sleeping spaces
shall not, exceed 20 percent of the floor area.
D. Doors
1. All exterior side-hinged doors shall be solid-core wood or insulated or hollow
metal at least 1.75 inches thick and shall be fully weatherstpped.
2. The glass, of double-glazed sliding doors shall be at least 3/16 of an Inch thick
and separated by a minimum 1/2-inch airspace. The frame shall be provided
with an efficiently airtight weatherstripping material.
3. The perimeter of door frames shall be sealed airtight to the exterior wall
I
,a(p1 +
4 ~pendaiNo. ~~~30
Apanda ~
construction.
4. Glass in doors shall be set and sealed in an airtight nonhardening sealant, or a
j soft elastomeric gasket or glazing tape.
R L Roofs
1. With an attic or rafter space at least six inches deep, and with a ceiling below,
the roof shall consist of 1/2-inch composition board, plywood, or gypsum board
sheathing topped by roofing as required.
2. If the underside of the roof is exposed, or if the attic or rafter space is less than
six inches, the roof construction shall have a surface weight of at least six
pounds per square foot, except that, in areas over 70 Ldn, the roof construction
shall have a surface weight of at least nine pounds per square foot. Rafters,
E joist, or other framing may not be included in the surface weight calculation.
3. Window or dome skylights shall be double glazed and separated by minimum
1/2-Inch airspace. In areas over 70 Wn, skylights are not permitted.
F. Ceilings
i
1. Gypsum board of plaster ceilings at least 1/2-inch thick shall be provided where j
required by Section 5.0(A)(5). Ceilings shall be substantially airtight, with !
minimum number of penetrations.
i
2. Glass fiber or mineral wood insulation at least six Inches thick shall be provided I
above the ceiling between joists.
0. Floors
The floor of the lowest occupied rooms shall be slab on grade, below grade, or over
pp a fully enclosed basement. All doors and window openings In the fully enclosed
i basement shall be tightly fitted.
M Ventilation
I
1. A mechanical ventilation system shall be installed that will provide the
minimum air circulation and fresh air-supply requirements for various uses in
occupied rooms, without need to open any windows, doors, or other openings
to the exterior.
2. Gravity vent openings in the attic shall not exceed code minimum in number j
and size. The openings shall be fitted with transfer ducts at least three feet In
length, containing approved internal sound-absorbing duct lining. Each duct
shall have a fine 90-degree bend In the duct such that there is no direct line of
AAendaNo ~Q~17
Apendal
Oete
sight from the exterior through the duct into the attic. ~G
3, if a fan is used for forced ventilation, the attic inlet and disch openings
shall be fitted with sheet metal transfer ducts of at least 20-gauge steel, which
shall be lined h one godegreembend. [n areasuovelr 70 Ldn, the uct lining shall
feet long
be at least 10 feet long.
4. All vent ducts connecting the interior space to the outdoors, excepting domestic
range and dryer exhaust ducts, shall contain at last a 10-foot length of approved
internal sound-absorbing duct lining. Each duct shall be provided with a line
g0-degree bend in the duct such that there is no direct line of sight through the
duct.
5. Duct lining shall be a coated glass fiber duct liner at least one-inch thick,
approved and suitable for the intended use.
6• Domestic range and dryer exhaust ducts connecting the interior space to the
outdoors shall contain a baffle plate across the exterior terinination that allows
proper ventilation. The dimensions of the baffle plate sb~juld extend at least
r one diameter beyond the line of sight into the vent duct. The baffle plate shall
be of the same material and thickness as the vent duct material and shall have
the same free area as the vent duct.
7• Building heating units with flues or combustion air vents shall be located in a ;
closet or room closed off from the occupied space by doors.
B. Doors between occupied space and mechanical equipment areas shall be solid-
core wood or 20-gauge steel hollow metal at least 1.75 inches thick and shall I .
' be fully weatherstripped. a
k
ra
r
q~1IV0
t
Date
t APPENDIX "D" /G 2 a
AMA"ON EASEMENT AGREEMENT fMODEL)
WHEREAS, [full name of property owners(s)], hereinafter called the Grantors, as the
owners In fee of that certain parcel of land situated in the City,of Denton, more particularly
described as follows:
[full description of property to be covered by easement] `
hereinafter called "Grantors' property," and outlined on the attached map (Exhibit
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of f dollars] and other good
and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,
the Grantors, for themselves, their heirs, administrators, executors, successors, and assigns,
' do hereby grant, bargain, sell, and convey unto the City of Denton, hereinafter called the
Grantee, its successors and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public, an easement and i
right of way, appurtenant to the Denton Municipal Airport, for the unobstructed passage
of all aircraft, ("aircraft" being defined for the purposes of this instrument as any
contrivance now flown or hereafter invented, used or designed for navigation of or flight
In the air) by whomsoever owned and operated, [Select one of the following]
1. In the air space above Grantors' property, above an imaginary plane rising and
extending in a generally [e.g., easterly] direcdon over Grantors' property, said
imaginary plane running from approximately feet mean sea level above
Point A on Exhibit I at the rate of one foot vertically for each feet
horizontally to approximately........ feet mean sea level above Point 8 on Exhibit
I, to an infinite height above said imaginary plane, J
2. In the air space Grantors' property above a mean sea level of........ feet, to an ~
Infinite height above said mean sea level of......., feet,
together with the right to cause in all air space above the surface of Grantor's property
such noise, vibration, fumes, dust, fuel particles, and all other effects that may be caused
by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off from, or operating at or on said
[airport); and Grantors do hereby waive, remise, and release any right or cause of action k
i which. they may now have or which they may have in the future-against Grantee, its )
successors and assigns, due to such noise, vibration, fumes, dust, and fuel particles that
may cause or may have been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off
from, or operating at the Denton Municipal Airport.
The easement and right-of-way hereby granted includes the continuing right in the Grantee
to prevent the erection of growth upon Grantors' property of any building, structure, tree,
or other object, (Use the option that concurs with the above selection]
i
7
Y
•A7d
~ Ap~oNo -
1. Extending Into the airspace above the aforesaid Imagi !
2. Extending into the air space above said mean sea level of,...... feet,
and to remove from said airspace, or at the sole option and expense of the Grantee, as an
alternative, to mark and light as obstruction to air navigation, any such building, structure,
tree, or other object now upon, or which In the future may be upon, Grantors' property,
together with the right of ingress to, egress from, and passage over Grantors' property for ,
the above purposes.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said easement and right of way, and all rights appertaining
thereto unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, until said [airport] shall be abandoned
and shall cease to be used for public airport purposes.
AND, for the consideration hereinabove set forth, the Grantors, for themselves, their heirs,
administrators, executors, successors, and assigns, do hereby agree that for and during the
life of said easement, and right-of-way, they will not hereafter erect, permit the erection or
growth of, or permit or suffer to remain upon Grantor's property any building, structure,
tree, or other object extending into the aforesaid prohibited airspace' And they shall not
hereafter use or permit or,suffer the use of Grantors' property in such a manner as to
create electrical interference with radio communication between an installation upon said
• airport and aircraft, or as to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish 4tween airport lights
and others, or as to Impair visibility in the vicinity of the airport, or as otherwise to r
endanger the landing, taldng off, or maneuvering of aircraft, it being understoQd and
agreed that the aforesaid covenant and agreements shall run with the land. [Appropriate
seals and signatures should be added.]
5.
}
ih
.
I
• i
} Aperd~NO
i
i K
1. Extending into the air space above the aforesaid imagxtY
2. Extending into the air space above said mein sea level of....... feet,
I
and to remove from said airspace, or at the sole option and expense of the Grantee, as an
alternative, to mark and light as obstruction to air navigation, any suc4 building, structure,
tree, or other object now upon, or which In the future may be upon, Grantors' property,
together with the right of ingress to, egress from, and passage over Grantors' property for
the above purposes. 4
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said easement and right of way, and all rights appertaining
thereto unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, until said [airport] shall be abandoned
and shall cease to be used for public airport purposes.
AND, for the consideration hereinabove set forth, the Grantors, for themselves, their heirs,
administrators, executors, successors, and assigns, do hereby agree that for and during the
life of said easement and right-of-way, they will not hereafter erect, permit the erection or
growth of, or permit or suffer to remain upon Grantor's property any building, structure, j
tree, or other object extending Into the aforesaid prohibited airspace; And they shall not
hereafter use or permit or,suffer the use of Grantors' property in such "a manner as to
create electrical Interference with radio communication between any installation upon said
airport and aircraft, or as to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish bgtween airport lights j
and others, or as to impair visibility in the vicinity of the airport; or as othehvLm to J
endanger the landing, taking off, or maneuvering of aircraft, it being understood and
agreed that the aforesaid covenant and agreements shall run with the land. [Appropriate
seals'and signatures should be added.]
4
i
p'r"
I
I
+gen(laNo. 9yQ34
4Qenda~ °
APPENDIX 'E"
Sec. 95.19. Nonconforming uses and structures.
lal A nonconforming status shall exist under the following:
(1) When a use or structure which does not conform to the regulations prescribed in the
district in which such use or structure is located was In existence and lawfully oper-
ating prior to the adoption of the ordinance from which this chapter Is derived; r
12) When, on the effective data of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the
use or structure was in existence and lawfully constructed, located and operating In
provisions of the prior zo~8 ordinance or which was a noncon•
with the
accordance
i forming use thereunder and which use or structure does not now conform to the
regulations prescribed in this chapter for the district in which such use or structure
Is located;
• I
I 13) 11".en a use or structure which does not conform to the regulations prescribed In the
district In which such use or structure Is located was in existence at the time of
annexation to the city and has since been in regular and continuous use.
(b) Any nonconforming uae of land or structures may be continued for definite periods of
time subject to su:h regulations as the board of adjustment may require for immediate pres.
ervation of the adjoining nropetty prior to the ultimate removal of the nonconforming use. The
bui(ding official may grant a change of occupancy from one (1) nonconforming use to another,
providing the use Is within the same or higher or moro restricted classification as the original
nonconforming use. If a nonconforming ube of a building may be changed to another noncon•
forming use of more restricted classification. It shall riot later be changed to a less restrictive
classification of use, and the prior less restrictive classification shall be considered to have
been abandoned.
(cl If a structure occupied by a nonconforming use is destroyed by ice, the elements or
other cause, it mry not be rebuilt except to conform to the provisions of this chapter. In the case
of partial destruction of a nonconforming use not exceeding [iffy (60) percent of its reasonable
value, reconstruction will be permitted, but the size or function of the nonconforming use
cannot be expanded.
(d) No nonconforming use maybe expanded or increased on the lot or tract upon which the
nonconforming use is located or on an adjoining lot or tract as of the effective date of the
ordinance from x hick this chapter is derived, except to provide off-street parking or off-street
loading space upon approval of the board of sdjustment.
(e) Whenever a noncoufarrning use is abandoned, aH nonconforming rights shall cease
and the use of the premises shall henceforth be In conformance to this chapter. Abandonment
shall Involve the intent of the user or owner to discontinue a nonconforming operation and the
actual act of discontinuance. Any nonconforming use which Is discontinued for or which
remains vacant for a period of six (6) months shall be considered to have been abandoned,
(Ord. No. 69.1, 4 I(App. B, Art, 22), 1.1469; Ord. No. 76.30, 6.1576)
a
7
i
C
1
• NOTE: THIS ISOMETRIC IS FOR ILLUSTRATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT AN ACTUAL
REPRESENTATION OF THE RUNWAY(S)
DEPICTED ON THIS PART 77 AIRSPACE
j DRAWING.
P
PRECISION
INSTRUMENT APPROACH
i
MSUAL OR NONPREd51aM y
APPROACH k!
44I CONICAL SURFACE
14
N' x
o r
r
r
10 A J.
IW ADM BTAKAM
JVMT MATRON y 4000' 1 ,
V.. DIMENSION VARIESAAyCCOAOOpROWO I il~ 1'
1aq~PRE SIOOK NNONPREpOSM.. NSUAL) 1
RUNWAY
CENTE"ES
ISOMETRIC VIEW OF SECTION
THRU CENTERLINE OF RUNWAYS
N.T.S.
I~
I
1 Oi . Tom' I "6 '
r
ti
III i ~ { 3 e ~ .r ~ f $
A mg
\I r i t ' t~ ACE • . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~X : . i r✓ w ~r~ ~ .,r ~ . it ~ ~ h~ . r ~ r
Lot
• r.... ~ r r . I ti. . • .x74.1 ~ ; s
002YACTOW YAKS
. wr m ~r w .y
~Y~/AWRY r~YO.N W W b ~V .r~w.win► r.~y
• rw,.,r .Mb..~ w' Mr M •I ♦rw r~urA r i
~.LSJ•r'1f1`!~.L... • rr r. r a.' ~.r w w ♦ ~ w,e j
iYC~Yi71ii2'`~"•' ~ "'iw.~'lrjr""'Y.
rrwrrr.rm.~r •i
Ift"d
PART 77 ANWA09 PLAN
' L7?d.. Ar» tr
~ao.wuuatr •r •
~w n wr
tir N Nw r y ~
' , . , v ~I V .i..l '•nki•4'+, ,d+H'a,"M V.,3v2°wlza~iu,4 urs~^,r•..+w r. ,
}
I
I
LAYOUT 1(P do ~'an~JjWRf ADVISORY BOARD)
ON
Jim 4 RR
led 11 v
a ZONE I
rt a Rd___ ,r+ y '
1 d 1 'l ~
i ' O " FM 2449.
lph
th f.
t» •.•i. (
oz
y r•~
r-- .x
V
ATTACHMENT 3
LAYOUT II {AIRPORT ZONINr COM9SIOM
all,
, it
t' 1 9 > , 1 1
~i , t,• r TT~, r I
}i 1
46
* ouia.~ e r ~ ~f
mi!
V • 1
of ZONE 2
E
owl
n ^
n.
r, r.v
w&NApo
ATTACtINENT 4
gate FI
ONS Homes homes Area in a in in of
subdi subdis Develo flood stria trict pment plains
t I 2 Zone 3665
4 43 4545 880 ayout as
ded by
Ort Board
Z.
Potential
capability for
other runways up
to a maximum of
000 feet in the
6,
future. ,
i
r LayoutIIt 13 58 5670 1281 4389
(77%)
#tunway layout as
recommended by
the Airport
2oninq
Co~nitrion.
r . potential
capability for a
10,000 feet
runway in the
future.
}
,t
r
e2 Y
r,.
s
' +gttsttlaNo
4gen0al
ATTACHMENT 5 'ale
ORDINANCE NO. C
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AMENDING CHAPTER 35
'ZONING' OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE X {
REGULATING AND RESTRICTING THE HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES AND
OBJECTS OF NATURAL GROWTH, AND OTHERWISE REGULATING THE USE
OF PROPERTY IN THE VICINITY OF THE DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT BY
CREATING THE APPROPRIATE ZONES AND ESTABLISHING THE BOUNDARIES
THEREOF; DEFINING CERTAIN TERMS USED HEREIN; REFERRING TO THE
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ZONING MAP; PROVIDING FOR ENFORM
MENT; INCLUDING A PROVISION ON SBVERABILITY; IMPOSING PENALTIES
FOR VIOLATIONS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Airport Zoning Commission held a public hearing on July 13, 1993
on the proposed regulations for airport height hazard and compatible land use zoning in the
vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport, for which notice was given as required by law and
all interested parties had an opportunity to speak; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on July 131
19% with regard to the proposed regulations for height control and compatible land use
zoning in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport and made a final recommendation
to the City Council; and
E WHEREAS, the City of Denton has adopted an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) which
provides for the extension of the existing runway to 7,500 feet and another 5,000 runway
lying 700 feet west of and parallel to the existing runway; and
WHEREAS, the City of Denton desires to preserve the potential for expansion of
the Denton Municipal Airport to accommodate future runway facilities up to 8,000 feet in
length and lying 2,500 feet west of and parallel to the existing runway; and
WHEREAS, state and federal law authorize the City to adopt zoning regulations that i
prevent establishment of airport hazards and incompatible land uses; and
WHEREAS, the airport zoning regulations herein contained are consistent with and
implement the height hazard and compatible land use objectives for the existing and planned
runways mentioned In this preamble; and
WHEREAS, the potential for establishment of obstructions to air navigation exists
In the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction; and
I
,
j 4gAlld2N0. ~
I Ag"It
Data '
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 13,1994 regarding
the proposed regulations and finds that it Is necessary to the essential community purpose
served by the Denton Municipal Airport to extend height hazard and land use compatibility
zoning controls to the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction in accordance with Tex.Loc.Gov't
Code Section 241.013; and
WHEREAS, based on the recommendations of the Airport Zoning Commission, the
Planning and Zoning Commission and its own review and discussion, the City Council makes
land use zoning in the
ble
the following findings with regard to height hazard and compattt
vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport:
(1) That the creation or establishment of an airport hazard endangers lives and
property of the users of the airport and of residents and occupants of the land in the vicinity
of the airport;
(2) That the encroachment of noise sensitive or otherwise incompatible land uses
within certain areas set forth herein below may endanger the health, safety, and welfare of
the owners, occupants, or users of land;
(3) That it is necessary in the interest of the public health, public safety, and general
welfare to limit the creation, establishment or growth of structures or natural objects that
obstruct the air space required for the taking of), landing and flight of aircxaft, or that
interferes with visual, radar, radio or other systems for tracking, acquiring data relating to,
monitoring or controlling aircraft;
i (4) That the prevention of these obstructions and land use conflicts should be
accomplished, to the extent legally possible, by the exercise of the police power without
compensation;
(5) That the Denton Municipal Airport fulfills an essential community purpose; and
(6) That the prevention of the creation or establishment of hazards to air navigation;
the elimination, removal, alteration, or mitigation of hazards to air navigation; the marking
and lighting of obstructions, and the preventing of incompatible land uses on properties in
the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport are public purposes for which the City of
Denton may raise and expend public funds and acquire land or interest in land; NOW,
THEREFORE;
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. That the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 35, of the Code of Ordinances is
amended by adding a new article X to read as follows:
Page 2
' Q
# Ape*No. -
a~tleal
Date
ARTICLE X: DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ZONIN REGULATIONS
35400 Purpose and Intent
35.401 Definitions
35402 Nature and Effect of Regulations
35403 Airport Height Hazard District
35404 Airport trompatibility Land Use District
35405 Subdistrict ACLUD-1 Regulations
35406 Subdistrict ACLUD-2 Regulations
35407 Administration
33408 Non-conformities
35404 Variances
35410 Board of Adjustment
Appendices A through C
Section 35406. Purpose and Iattot
It is the purpose and intent of this article to regulate and restrict the height of
structures and objects of natural growth and the use of property in the vicinity of the Denton
Municipal Airport. The regulations are intended to prevent the encroachment of noise
sensitive or otherwise incompatible land uses which may endanger the health, safety, and
welfare of . the owners, occupants, or users of the land to prevent the , creation or
# establishment of obstructions that are a hazard to air navigation. The regulations also are
Intended to Implement state and federal rules pertaining to the regulation of land uses In
{ the vicinity of airports.
Section 35401. Ilkflaitioas
The following words, terms or phrases, when used in this article, shall have the
meanings attached to them in this Section:
(1) Ala= means the Denton Municipal Airport.
E
(2) AkRW-hazard means any structure or object of natural growth, or use of land,
which obstructs the air space required for the taking off, landing and flight of aircraft, or that I
interferes with the visual, radar, radio or other systems for tracking, acquiring data relating
to,
monitoring or controlling aircraft.
} (3) Approach surface means a surface longitudinally centered on the extended
runway centerline and extending outward and upward from each end of the primary surface.
An approach surface is applied to each end of each runway based upon the type of
approach available or planned for that runway end.
(4) lard of Adjustment or Board means the Airport Board of Adjustment.
i
t 4
Page 3 i
Gii.Y.ill Y,k,.,,,.., - . .ws... t, ..nia ul..i N?:RdwgwM My
f
I
l
- 3Q
aWal
AoendaNo oe'~
(5) Conical soda means a surface which extends outward and upward from the
periphery of the horizontal surface at a slope of 20:1 for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet.
! (6) Director means the Executive Director for Planning and Development for the
City of Denton, or his designee. 1
I
(7) hdlg means, for the purpose of determining height limitations in all zones
established In this article and shown on the zoning map, the vertical distance of an object
above mean sea level elevation unless otherwise specified.
(8) Horkontal surface means a horizontal plane 150 feet above the established
airport elevation of, the perimeter of which is constructed by swinging arcs of 10,000 feet
radlf from the center of each end of the primary surface of runways 17L-35R and 17R-35L
of the airport, and connecting the adjacent arcs by lines tangent to those arcs.
(9) Nonco_ nf_Q means any pre-existing use or structure, {
Including an object of natural growth, which is inconsistent with the provisions of this article.
(10) M means any structure, growth, or other object, including a mobile
object, which exceeds a limiting height set forth In Section 35.403 of this article.
(11) Ec= means an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, company
associations, joint stock association or body politic and Includes a trustee, receiver, assignee, I
administrator, executor, guardian or other representative.
! (12) Political subdivision means any municipality or county.
(13) p>;Wston Lint RunM means a runway having an existing instrument
approach procedure utilizing an Instrument Landing System (ILS) or a Precision Approach
Radar (PAR). It also means a runway for which a precision approach system Ia planned and
is so Indicated on an approved airport layout plan or any other planning document.
(14) Primary d - means a surface longitudinally centered on a runway. When
the runway has a specially prepared hard surface, the primary surface extends 200 feet
beyond each end of that runway, but when the runway has no specially prepared hard
surface or planned hard surface, the primary surface ends at each end of that runway. The
j elevation of any point on the primary surface Is the same as the elevation of the nearest
point on the runway centerline.
(15) Byn= means a defined area in an airport for landing and take-off of aircraft
along its length.
(16) Transitional Surface means a surface extending outward and upward at right
angles to the runway centerline at a slope of 7.1 from the aides of the primary surface na
from the sides of the approach surface. Transitional surfaces for those portions of the
ag Page 4
y.
r
:Ltl1
~gtineai~o ~~3~
Apendai
ate r
precision approach surface which project through and beyond the limits of the conical
surface, extend a distance of 5,000 feet measured horizontally from the edge of the approach
surface and at right angles to the rune„ ty centerline. z
Section 35402. Nature and Effect of Regulations
(a) Generally. This article shall be known as the Denton Airport Zoning
Regulations. Regulations addressing airport compatible land uses generally are applicable
within an area located outside the airport boundaries and within a rectangle bounded by
lines located no farther than one and one-half (1.5) statute miles from the centerline of an
instrument or primary runway and no farther than five (5) statute miles from each end of
the paved surface of precision instrument runways.
(b) inside City [lmits. The Airport Zoning Regulations impose two types of
overlay zoning districts inside City limits that combine with existing and future zoning district
regulations. The first type of overlay zonhtg district, delineated in Appendix A, establishes
height limitations on structures and natural objects within an area generally traversed by the
flight tracks of aircraft using the Denton Municipal Airport. This type of overlay zoning
d strki shall be known as the Airport Height Hazard District (AHHD} The second type
of overlay zoning district, delineated in Appendix B, establishes land use compatibility
regulations that prohibit certain types of land uses and that impose performance standards
on other land uses that potentially are subject to noise impacts from aircraft operation in
the vicinity of the airport. This type of overlay zoning district shall be known as the Airport j'.
Compatbtity land Use District (ACLUD).
(c) Regulations in Extraterritorial lu, This article applies to lands lying
within the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction ('901as well as to lands within City bound+trieL
For propertks in the ETJ, the Airport Height Hazard District and the Airport Compatibility j
Land Use District regulations constitute zoning district regulations that shall be administered
through the permit system established by this article.
(d) Applicability and Conflict With Other Laws and Regulations.Except as
otherwise expressly provided herein to the contrary, the regulations established in this article
shall apply in addition to those regulations and standards applicable to the use of land and
structures which are made applicable by the City of Denton's zoning or other development
regulations or those of any other political subdivision. Where there exists a conflict between
any standard, restriction, limitation, requirement or regulation prescribed by this article and
any other applicable regulation, the provisions of this article shall govern and prevat7;
provided that the more stringent limitation or requirement shall control in the event of a
conflict with respect to the height of a structure or object of natural growth. In the event
of a conlict between the requirements of this ordinance and any provision of state law,
state law requirements shall prevail.
(e) Genera lProhibition onA{IportHazards, Notwithstanding anyother provisions
of this article, no person shall use land or water within any zone established by this
i
page 5 j
r
~endaNo.
Agendal
Date
ordinance in such a manner as to create electrical interference with navigational signals or
radio communication between the airport
distinguish between a'
and aircraft make it difficult for pilots to
the of apart lights and other lighting; result in are in the
eyes airport; impair visibility in the vicinity of the ai of pilots using
IC otherwise In any way endanger or interfere with the Iandin; create bird strike hazards; or F
aircraft intending to use the airport, & taking off, or maneuvering of
a
When a parcel of land lies within more than one airport zoning
subdistrict, or only a portion lies within an airport zoning district
restrictive regulations apply to the use of land and structures for the entire Pof the most
when: parcel, except
1
i
it
dete
single airport zoning subdistrict, tthhe provisionsoof bibs, subdistrict shal~ted within a
' structure or pply to such
(2) it is determined by the Director that a structure is located outside any
airport zoning district, then the provisions of the standard zoning district in which the
structure Is located shall apply.
{8) Fsderal S ft hat with Tex.LmGov1t Code
is the Intent of this Section that federal laws or rules controllin Section 241.012,
Adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of an g the use of land located
to time, that imPO1t as they may be amended from time
f~, P~ more stringent limitations than are ' herein set
anal] be un
a under
permit
imposed as the City is able tolied t
application submitted o aconform its airport zoning regulations to auh law of rule& such time
33443. Airport Heljht Hazard District
t(a) Dutrkt at■hr:~r, There is hereby established an Airport Height Hazard
Diatric(AHHD) within that area lying beneath the
Surfaces, Horizontal Surface and Conkal Surface of the DDeentoncMunki 1l Trarrsitibe
AHHD consists of the following subdu Pa Airport The
Coltman Associates, a trios, which are depicted on a map PreP41
incorporated COPY of which appear as Appends A attached hereto and
red by
by reference herein and whkh constitutes the zoning map for the district.
riotie e
that arebdescn The A11HD consists of the followin subdisW
by reference to definitions, rules, restrictions and regulations, as may be
amended from time to time, by the Federal Aviation Administration
{"FAA's, as follows;
(1) d,p~ Approach Zones for runways 17L 35R and 17R-3SL
hereby are established beneath the approach surfaces at each runway end on the Denton
Municipal Precision Instrument Airport for landings and takeoffs. The inner edge of the
approach zone shall have a width of 1000 feet which coincides with the width of the primary
surface at a distance of Zoo feet beyond each end of each runway, widening thereafter
Page 6 ~
1
i
I~•NeY '
f
1
~pendaNt►. '
Agendalt
Rate
uniformly to a width of 169000 feet at a horizontal distance of 50,000 feet beyond each end
of the primary surface, its centerline being the continuation of the centerline of the runway.
(2) Transitional 7nnLs Transition zones hereby are established beneath
the transition surface adjacent to runway's 171,35R and 1711-351, and to each approach
surface as Indicated on the zoning map. Transition surfaces, symmetrically located on either
side of runways, have variable widdo as shown on the zoning map.
F
(3) HorizD--- RtALZQ . The horizontal zone hereby is established at the area
beneath the horizontal surface of the airport.
4 nkW & The conical zone hereby Is established as the area
beneath the conkal surface of the airport.
.
shall c '
&WL.~~4. Except as otherwise provided in this article, no person
erecj alter or maintain a structure, and no person shall allow a tree or ot
object to grow in excess of the applicable height limitations established he eineforaea h
Airport Height Hazard SubdistricK.
(1) ADDroactl7nn~. t
ror runways 171.-35R and 17R-35L•
~I
(I) beginning at the end of and at the elevation of the primary
surface, one foot (1) in height for each fifty feet (50) In r
horizontal distance; and '
(Ii) beginning at a point 10`000 feet from the end of the
surface and extending an additional
' extended runway center 40,000 feet abng at1 e
r Y line, one foot (1) In height for each
forty feet (40') In horizontal distance.
' (2) Transitional nn~ l
beginning at the sides of and at the same elevation as the
primary surface and the approach surface, and extending to a
I height of 150 feet above the airport elevation (660 feet above
mean sea levels one foot (1) In height for every seven feet (T)
.Y
In horizontal distance,
(II) beginning at the sides of and at the same elevation as the
f conicalurfatxs, and extending to where they intersect the
surface, one foot (1) in height for every seven feet (1)
In horizontal distance; and
(iii) where the precision Instrument runway approach zone projects
beyond the conical zone, and beginning at the sides of and at
Page 7
NAr
j AptiedaNo
AgttnOaIt
Date
the same elevation as the approach surface, nd extending a
j horizontal distance of 5,000 feet measured at 90 degree angles
to the extended runway centerline, one foot (1) in height for
every seven feet (1) in horizontal distance.
(3) Horizonte Zone Within the horizontal zone, 150 feet In height abort
the airport elevation, or a height of 810 feet above mean sea level. a
I (4) Conical Zone. From the periphery of the horizontal zone and at
heights between 150 and 350 feet above the airport elevation, one foot (1) in height for
every twenty feet (20) in horizontal distance.
i
Section 354" Airport Compatibility Land Use District
' (a) District Fstabllshed There is hereby established an Airport Compatibility
Land Use District (ACLUDN consisting of two subdistricts (ACLUD-1 and ACLUD-2), the
boundaries of which are shown on the Airport Compatibility Land Use District oep' a copy
of which appears as Appendix B, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference
herein, and which constitutes the zoning map for the district
Prohibited Uses in Aimort Coro tib► fty And Use District. The following
uses are prohibited within the Airport Compatibility Land Use District:
public and (1) Educational Uses. All educational uses, Including but not limited to, "
private schools, Undergartens, and child care facilities, colleges and univers;des,
and vocational schools, are prolu'bited within the ACLUD; provided, however, that the
following educational facilities are permitted within the district:
(i) schools for flight Instruction or for vocatioca associated with the
airport, airplanes or aviation related activities; s &J
(h) facilities for employee or client training or instruction related to
services or products associated mth the business of the entity
providing such training or instruction and which Is not the
primary business of such entity.
i
(2) Health fa~~t~1 Health care facilities, including specifically
hospitals, nursing horses, institutions or any other facilities providing convalescent or
f rehabilitative care; establishments for the care, treatment or rehabilitation of alcoholic,
narcotic or psychiatric patients; residence homes for the aged; and institutions, homes or r
a rehabilitation centers for persins convicted of crimes are prohibited within the ACLUD;
provided, however that the following health care and other facilities are permitted within the
i district:
(i) medical, dental or optical clinks for the examination,
Page 8
$A
r~
Ag9~No
Agendas
Date '
4 consultation or treatment of patients as out patients;
(ii) medical laboratories;
(iii) establishments for the sale or rental of or industrial facilities for
the manufacture of medical or optical supplies and equipment;
...E (iv) pharmacies, veterinarian clinics and related facilities; and
!
~ (v) public safety or emergency medical facilities operated by or In
connection with the Airport.
Section 35-40S. Subdishict ACLUD-1 Regulations
The following regulations apply within the ACLUD•1 Subdistrict:
(a) Compatible _ Land Uses. All land uses allowed within the underlying zoning
district or, within the BTJ, any land use not otherwise prohibited by this article, is allowed
j within the ACLUD-1 Subdistric4 except for new residential uses, which are expressly
prohibited.
i
]don-confo-ina Residential Uses. Any residential structure that was
estabUshed prior to the effective date of this article may not be reestablished or,
reconstructed except in accordance with the provisions of Section 3340&
(c) N - Mit,igAtlon Standards. Any residential structure that was established
prior to the effective date of this article and that is permitted to be repaired, rebuilt or
35-40g shall be remodeled in accordance with the provisions of Section repaired, rebuilt or
remodeled in oompliance with the noise mitigation standards set forth in Appendix C of this
article and incorporated by reference herein
Section 3S-40ti. Subdistrict ACLM2 Regulatims
i
(a) Q= title lAnd Uses, All land uses allowed within the underlying zoning j
district or, within the ON, any land use not otherwise prohibited by this article, are allowed
within the ACLUD-2 Subdistrict.
Performance Smndards for Residential Uses. Property owners who propose ,
to construct a new residential building, or who propose to repair, rebuild or remodel an
existing residential structure within the boundaries of the district, must do one of the
following:
(l) mil itlaation Standards. Construct, repair, rebuild or remodel the
residential structure in occordance with the noise mitigation standards in Appendix C; or
4t : Page 9
a.
ryq •
r
gartdaNo.
gendal
r
a1F ~ ~ i
(2) ~~i¢at'on n . Execute an avigation easement, approved as to 4
form by the City Attorney, conveying to the City of Denton an unobstructed right-of-way
for the passage of all aircraft and rights to cause within such easement such noise, vibration,
fumes, dust, fuel particles and all other effects that may be caused by the operating or
aircraft landing at, taking off from, or operating at, the Denton Municipal Airport.
Section 354W. Admiaistntion
(a) Desanated Official. The Executive Director for Planning and Development
(Director) for the City of Denton, or his designee, shall be the official responsible for
administration of the Airport Zoning Regulations.
f
Permit Reouired--New Uses. Except as specifically provided otherwise in this
article, no o person shall make a material change in the use of land, and no person shall erect,
establish, or allow to be erected or otherwise established any structure, and no person shall
plant or allow to be planted any natural object in any zoning district hereby created ua permit for such use, structure, or plant has been granted by the Director
applying
regulations established in this article. No permit for use inconsistent with the provisions of
this article shall be granted unless a variance has been approved in accordance with Section
35-409.
(c) Permit Required--Change in EYistina Use. A person shall apply to the
Director for a permit for any substantial repair of an existing structure, or replacement
thereof, or substantial change in existing use, in order to determine compliance with the
requirements of this article. No permit shall be granted that would allow a nonconforming
use, structure or tree to be more or become higher, or become a greater hazard to air
navigation, than it was on the effective date of this ordinance or any amendments thereto
or than it is when the application for a permit is made
(d) epol tion and Decision= Each application for a permit shall be submitted
to the Director upon a form published for that purpose. The application shall indicate the
purlix ae for which the permit Is desired, with sufficient particularity to permit the Director
to determine whether the resulting use, structure, or natural object :mould conform to the
regulations herein prescribed. 'The Director shall promptly review and grant or derrf
I
applications required by this ordinance to be submitted to the Director. If the application I
! meets the standards in this article, the application shall be granted. Appikations for
variances shall be made to the Board of Adjustment by first filing said application for E
variance with the Director who shall forthwith transmit said application to the Board of
Adjustment for determination.
(e) Exceptions. No permit is required for the following uses:
(i) In the area lying within the limits of the horizontal zone and conical
zone, any natural object or structure less than 73' of vertical height
above the ground, except when, because of terrain, land contour, or
-2dy . Page 10
i
oenda Ito
topographic features, such object or structure would extend above the
height limits prescribed for such zones.
(ii) In areas lying within the limits of the approach zones, but at a
horizontal distance of not less than 4,200' from each end of the runway,
any natural object or structure less than 75' of vertical height above the
ground, except when such object or structure would extend above the
height limit prescribed for such approach zones.
(iii) Nothing contained in any of the foregoing exceptions shall be construed
as perwitting or intending to permit any construction, or alteration of
any structure, or growth of any natural object in excess of any of the
height limits established by this ordinance.
(f) Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Director to administer and enforce
the regulations prescribed herein.
i
Section 35408. Non-conformltia
(a) Regmiations of Retroactive. The regulations prescribed by this article shall
not be construed to require t}ae removal, lowering, or other change or alteration of any
structure or natural object not conforming to the regulations as of the effective date of this
ordinance, or otherwise interfere with the continuance of any nonconforming use. Nothing
herein contained shall require any change in the construction, alteration or intended use of
any structure, for which a complete application was accepted for filing prior to the effective
date of this ordinance, which is consistent with existing regulations and for which
construction is diligently pursued.
(b) Marking and ilehttn¢. Notwithstanding the preceding provision of this
Section, the owner of any nonconforming structure or area is hereby required to permit the
installation, operation, and maintenance hereon of such markers and lights as shall be
deemed necessary by the Director, in order to indicate to the operators of aircraft in the
vicinity of the airport, the presence of such airport hazards. Such markers and lights shall
be fmtalled, operated, and maintained at the expense of the City or the FAA.
(c) Nonconforming Uses Abandoned or Destr and Anolicabilily of Other
$eo&tions, Whenever the Director determines that a nonconforming structure or natural i
object within the area subject to this article has been abandoned or more than 50 percent
torn down, physica)V, deteriorated, or decayed, no permit shall be granted that would allow
such structure or natural object to exceed the applicable heights limit or otherwise deviate
from the zoning regulations of this Chapter. In all other cases, the continuation, repair,
reconstruction or remodeling of non-conforming uses or structures shall be governed by
Section 35.13 of Chapter 35 of the City Code of Ordinances, provided, however, the
Director shall apply the standards In this article.
;I
~rJ Page 11
I
VendaNo
Agendal
Date
Section 35-409. Variances -~7
(a) Apojication for Variance. Any person desiring to erect or increase the height
of any structure, or permit the growth of any natural object, or use his property, in violation
of the Airport Zoning Regulations prescribed in this article, shall first apply to the Board
of Adjustment for variance from such regulations. The application for variance shall be
accompanied by a determination from the Federal Aviation Administration as to the effect
1 ,
of the proposal on the operation of ea navigation facilities and the safe, efficient use of
navigable airspace.
i
(b) Criteria. Such variances shall be allowed where it is duly found that:
(1) a literal application or enforcement of the regulations will result in a
practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship; and
(2) the relief granted would not be contrary to the public Interest, but do
substantial justice, and be In accordance with the spirit of this
ordinance.
(c) Conditions. The Board may impose any reasonable conditions on the
variance that it considers necessary to accomplish the purposes of this article.
(d) Procedures. The Board of Adjustment shall consider the variance application
at a public hearing In accordance with its regular procedures.
Section 35410. Board of Adjustment
(a) Appgintme t of Board and Powers. The City's existing Board of Adjustment, {
as constituted under ankle 11 of Chapter 35 of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances, and
i as may be reconstituted from time to time, hereby is designated as the Airport Board of
Zoning Adjustment to have and exorcise the following powers:
(1) To hear and decide appeals from any order, requirement, decision, or ;
determination made by the Director in the administration of this
article;
(2) To hear and decide such special exceptions as the Board may be
required expressly to pass upon under the terms of this article; and
(3) To hear and decide specific variances pursuant to Section 35409.
(b) c'=Mltion. Procedures and Rules The Airport Board of Adjustment shall
be constituted and shall govern itself in the same manner as provided for the Board of
Adjustment under article 11 of Chapter 35 of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances,
txcept as expressly provided otherwise in this ankle.
op. Page 12
r
i
` =Aglt
oats
1
(c) dings. The Board of Adjustment shall make written findings of fact and ~
F conclusions of law stating the facts upon which it relied when making its legal conclusions
in reversing, affirming, or modifying any order, requirement, decision, or determination
which comes before it under the provision of this ordinance.
(d) Decision The concurring vote of four members of the Board of Adjustment
shall be necessary to reverse any order, requirement, decision, or determination of the
Director or to decide in favor of the applicant on any matter upon which it is required to
pass under this ordinance, or to effect any variation in this ordinance.
(e) A
(1) A decision of the Director in administering the Airport Zoning
Regulations may be appealed by:
(i) any person who is aggrieved by the decision;
(ti) a taxpayer who is affected by the decision; or
(iii) the governing body of a political subdivision, including the City
Council of Denton, Texas
(2) All appeals hereunder must be taken within a reasonable time as
provided by the rules of the Board of Adjustment, by filing with the Director a notice of
appeals specifying the grounds thereof. The Director shall forthwith transmit to the Board
of Adjustment all the papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from
was taken
4 (3) An appeal shall stay all proceedings in furtherance of the action
f 1 appealed from, unless the Director certifies to the Board of Adjustment, after the notice of
appeals has been filed with it, that by reason of the facts stated in the certificate, a stay
would, in the opinion of the Director cause imminent peril to life or property. In such case,
proceedings shall not be stayed except by order of the Board of Adjustment on notice to the
Director and on due cause shown.
j (4) The Board of Adjustment shall fix a reasonable time for hearing
appeals, give public notice and due notice to the parties in interest, and decide the same
within a reasonable time. At the hearing any party may appear in person or by agent or by f
attorney.
(S) The Board of Adjustment may in conformity with the provisions of this
ordinance reverse or affirm, in whole or in part, or modify the order, requirement, decision
or determination appealed from and may make such order requirement, decision or
determination, as may be appropriate under the circumstances.
r..
. . Page 13
l
R4 M1. y+
1
j Aq Wl I
t We
Appestdtas
The
i following appendices hereby are made a part of this article by reference:
~h R
Appendix A. Map of Airport Height Hazard District
Appendix B: Map of Airport Compatibility Land Use Subdistricts
Appendix C: Noise Mitigation Standards
SEMN II. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in
!
zoning district classification in accordance with the metes and bounds descriptions appearing
as Exhibits A through C, which are attached hereto and incorporated by reference hereto,
as depicted in Appendix B of Article X, Chapter 35, of the City Code of Ordinances, and
in accordance with the descriptions of the Airport Height Hazard Subdistricts contained in
Article X, Chapter 35, Section 35-403, of the City Code of Ordinances and as depicted in
Appendix A thereof, as established by Section I of this ordinance.
Exhibit A: Metes and Bounds Description, Airport Compatibility Land Use
District
Exhibit B: Metes and Bounds Description, Airport Compatibility Land Use
Subdistrict 1
Exhibit C: Metes and Bounds Description, Airport Compatibility Land use
Subdistrict 2
S jjS~ylON III, That if any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to
any person or circumstance is held Invalid, such Invalidity shall not affect other provisions
or applications, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
SE • VON IV. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon
convktion, be fined a sum not exceeding 52,000.00. Each day that a provision of this
ordinance Is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.
SECTION.V V.V. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (14) days from the
date of Its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this
ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official newspaper of
the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage,
j . PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of . 1994.
I
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
Page 14
%
yvw
,
r
case ~
ATTEST: ~~i
i JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY.
APOPOVED AS TO LEOAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCK CITY ATTORNEY
BY: c en
r
~3 F r'~V i is - t x s
14
_ f
r
y
a-
.
~ ` tTYlDOflO~OVA~20M~A
(
2 r
Page 15
'A~►daNo
~ {DBndalf
APPENDIX As ~tB
MAP OF AIRPORT Page 1 of 2
HEIGHT HAZARD DISTRICT o2 l~Y 2
w "
i -
~ ~ i ~ ~ 11 Ifs S.S". !4 j. ~ { i y~
' ~ ~ ~Liw r , w Y Yr' ti~ Y d • ~Y~r ~LLI~ rLyY~Y/~ ~
{i=r~Ld~~►.4.' err W,~~~~ /rw• VYy+
r~
~.~'~ii~YL1•~w~i}~is~w<~~ yy 1
j oiwr n AWAtx PLM
o-t
..l.. Y!. M. l~`a•. L•IY <I-Yrt.l A MN.:a`u ~ r .....~_.+.nor..rn~R."4..~w•rFYrs>rw..~.~.~
1
T'
t
r
{ t
,I
NOTE: THIS ISOMETRIC IS FOR ILLUSTRATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND 1S NOT AN ACTUAL Page 2 of 2 1
REPRESENTATION OF THE RUNWAY(S)
DEPICTED ON THIS PART 77 AIRSPACE
DRAWING.
f j
PRECISION
INSTRUMENT APPROACH
VISUAL OR NONPRECISION
APPROACH
i
CONICAL SURFACE
1 r
I V\
i
II V
SLWA(l
190'90' AWK tfiN 00
W . DIMENSION VARIES AOCOROINO
TYPE CF' RUNYfAY APPROACH
i i. g, PREas1ON, NDNpREasloN. wsuAL) RI ASS
ISOMETRIC VIEW OF SECTION
TNRU CENTERLINE OF RUNWAYS
M.T.S. .
a
r.ti
Men r,,
•rir
Page 1 of 1
APPENDIX Bq MAP SHOWING AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY LAND USE DISTRICT
. ACLUD-2
U~ rsity Dr,
\ t•
ACLUD-I ~Jy_ f
ILI
Ilk-
or,
t
b
/04
' .~rr_-.-."-, -....-.~.,...<...'s....w.~.:,-....--... ..,..~......w.....,~«.w~JML`.WMw~ir,vJMSL,</wwG,lpM _
owe
I
Wle Page 1 of 4
APPENDIX C 3U
BOISE MITIGATION STANDARDS
i
3
{
The following standards are intended to provide for the Insulation of the interior of
j buildings to an Lon 45 or less from outside noise levels over Ldn 65. The Building Official
may approve of alternative standards upon the submission of plans signed by a qualified
acoustical enghwer certifying that the alternative standard will reduce outside noise levels
to 45 Ldn or less Inside the building. The standards shall be applied to construction of new
residential or noise-sensitive commercial uses, and for reconstruction or remodeling, to
existing buildings of the types mentioned above when the value of the improvement
exceeds 50 )ercent of the value of the existing structures. The standards, however, shall
apply to any addition to an existing residential or noise sensitive commercial structure.
Where noise-sensitive activities are carried on In only a portion of new or reconstructed
` commercial buildings, only those areas judged noise-sensitive need be protected.
f
REQUIREMENTS FOR NOISE MITIGATION
I
A. General
1. Brick veneer, masonry blocks, or stucco exterior walls shall be ctmstructed
airtight. All joints shall be grouted or caulked airtight.
2. At the penetration of exterior walls by pipes, ducts, or conduits, the space
between the wall and pipes, ducts, or conduits shall be caulked or filled with
mortar.
3. Window and/or through-the-wall "VAC type units shall not be used.
IV,
4. Operational, vented fireplaces shall not be used.
5. All sleeping spaces shall be provided with a sound-absorbing ceiling and
carpeted floor.
6. Through-the-wall/door mailboxes shall not be used.
B. Exterior Walls
i 1. Masonry walls having a surface weight of at least 40 pounds per square foot do
not require a furred interior wall. in areas over 70 Ldn, masonry walls having
a surface weight of at least 75 pounds per square foot do not require a furred
interior wall. At least one surface of concrete block wall shall be plastered or
painted with heavy "bridging" paint.
Page
l
1
a
s ~ AgenddND. L - ~ ~/a P' ilr
l!
Agendalt G page 2 of 4
r -
2. Stud walls shall be at least four inches m nominal depth and shall be finished
on the outside with siding on sheathing, stucco, or brick veneer.
~ I
a. interior surface of the exterior stud walls shall be of gypsum board or
plaster at least 1/2-inch thick, installed on the studs. The gypsum board
t or plaster may be fastened rigidly to the studs if the exterior is brick
veneer or stucco. If the exterior is siding-on-sheathinZ, the interior
s gypsum board or platter must be fastened resiliently to the studs.
b. Continuous compositio, % board, plywood, or gypsum board sheathing shall
s cover the exterior side of the wall studs behind wood or metal siding.
l The sheathing and facing shall weigh at least four pour ?s per square foot.
S 3 c. All edges of the sheathing shall be sealed with resilismt caulking.
d. insulation material at least two inches thick shall be instilled continuously
throughout the cavity space behind the exteriar sh..milting and between
' wall studs. Insulation shall be glass fiber or mineral wool
C. Windows
1. Glass of double-glared windows shall be used ant at least 118-W, thick.
s I
2. Double-glazed windows shall employ fixed sash or efficiently w; atherstripped j
operable sash. The sash shall be rigid and weatherstripped with material hat
is compressed airtight when the window is dosed.
i
3. Glass of fixed-sash windows shall be sealed in an airtight mariner with a
nonhardening sealant, or a soft elastomeric gasket or glazing tape.
' 4. The perimeter of the window frame shall be sealed airtight to the exterior wall
construction with a resilient sealant.
5. The total area of glass of both windows and exterior doors in sleeping spaces ;
' . t shall not, exceed 20 percent of the floor area.
j D. Doora
solid core wood or insulated or hollow
I 1. All exterior side-hinged doors shall be
metal at least 1.75 inches thick and shall be fully weatherstripped.
i
2. The glass of double-glazed sliding doors shall be at least 3/16 of an inch thick
and separated by a minimum 1/2-inch airspace. The frame shall be provided
with an efficiently airtight weatherstripping material.
3. The perimeter of door frames shall be sealed airtight to the exterior wall
Page 2
i
j
I
sv.. t=.
A WaNc -
A~I~I Page 3 of 4
E construction. We
-
4. Glass in doors shall be set and sealed in an airtight nonhardening sealant, or a
soft elastomeric gasket or glazing tape.
i
L Roofs
I
1 With an attic or rafter space at least six inches deep, and with a ceiling below,
i the roof shall consist of 1/2-inch composition board, plywood, or gypsum board
sheathing topped by roofing as required.
2. if the underside of the roof is exposed, or if the attic or rafter space is less than
six inches, the roof construction shall have a surface weight of at least six
pounds per square foot, except that, in areas over 70 Ldn, the goof construction
shall have a surface weight of at least nine pounds per square foot. Rafters,
joist, or other framing may not be included in the surface weight calculation
3. Window or dome skylights shall be double glazed and separated by minimum
1/2-inch airspace. In areas over 70 Ldp, skylights are not permitted.
F. Odlinp
I. Gypsum board of plaster ceilings at least 1/2-inch thick shall be provided where
required by Section 5.0(A)(5). Ceilings shall be substantially airtight, with
minimum number of penetrations.
2. Glass fiber or mineral wood insulation at least six inches thick shall be provided
above the ceih'ng between joists.
G. Flom
is
The floor of the lowest occupied rooms steal! be slab on grade, below grade, or over
a fully enclosed basement. All doors and window openings in the fully enclosed
basement shall be tightly fitted.
H. Ventilation
1. A mechanical ventilation system shall be installed that will provide the
minimum eft circulation and fresh air-supply requirements for various uses In
occupied rooms, without need to open any windows, doors, or other openings
j to the exterior.
2. Gravity vent openings in the attic shall not exceed code mir. tmum in number
and size. The openings shall be fitted with transfer ducts at least three feet in
length, containing approved internal sound-absorbing duct lining. Each duct
shall have a line 90-degree bend in the duct such that there is no direct line of
Page 3
KAY
~ AAande No. ~ D
Apendall
X18_. Page 4 of 4
sight from the exterior through the duct into the attic.
I If a fan is used for forced ventilation, the attic inlet and discharge openings
shall be fitted with sheet metal transfer ducts of at least 20-gauge steel, which
shalt be lined with one-inch thick approved duct liner, and shall be at least five-
feet long with one 90-degree bend. In areas over 70 Wn, the duct fining shall
be at least Io feet long.
4. All vent ducts connecting the interior space to the outdoors, excepting domestic
range and dryer exhaust ducts, shall contain at last a IO foot length of approved
internal sound-absorbLig duct lining. Each duct shall be provided with a line
90-degree bend in the duct such that there is no direct line of sight through the
duct.
5. Duct lining shall be a coated glass fiber duct liner at least one-inch thick,
approved and suitable for the intended use,
6. Domestic range and dryer exhaust ducts connecting the interior space to the
outdoors shall contain a baffle plate across the exterior termination that allows
proper ventilation. The dimensions of the baffle plate should extend at least
one diameter beyond the line of sight into the vent duct. The baffle plate shall
be of the same material and thickness as the vent duct material and shall have
the same free area as the vent duct.
7. Building heating units with flues or combustion air vents shatl be located Ina
closet or room closed off from the occupied space by doors.
n 8. Dam between occupied space and mechanical equipment areas shall be solid
core wood or 20 gauge steel hollow metal at least 1.75 Inches thick and shall
be fully weatherstripped.
i
S
i
Page 4
i
a
• AgendeNa
AQVUlt C
Date /a~ IS Page 1 of 1 I
3
MFTESAND 80UNDS nFSrRlP7ION OF TH ArRPORTr OMPATIBI[nY .Arm USE
t
DISTRI~G`
ALL that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated in Denton County, Texas and being
part, or all of the following surveys; G. West Survey A-1393, S. Paine Survey A-1035, J
Kielberg Survey A-1610, M. Paine Survey A-1036, B.B.B. & C. R.R. Co. Survey A-176, J.
McDonald Survey A-873, A. Byerly Survey A-1458, I. Hernbrie Survey A-594, J. Bacon I
Survey A-1540, Wm. Neill Survey A-970, W. Smith Survey A-1188, A. Madden Survey A.
851, T. Tobey Survey A-1285, W. Wilburn Survey A-1419, D. Davis Survey A-356, W.
Davis Survey A-377, J. Pettingale Survey, A-1041, J. Taft Survey A-1 269, J. Evans Survey
A-411, J. Gibbons Survey A446, J. Scott Survey A-1222, A. Cobberly Survey A-1542,
Myers and Johnson Survey A-1699, G. Barb Survey A-208, W. Bryan Survey A-146, S.
Huizar Survey A-514, J. Haney Survey A-515, and the R. Whitlock Survey A-1403 and
being more particularly described as follows:
f
COMMENCING at the centerline of the south end of the City of Denton Municipal Airport
runway as it existed on July 13, 1993, being located in W. Neill Survey A-970;
THENCE south 0° 20' 52" west a distance of 1750.0 feet;
THENCE south 89° 39'09* east a distance of 2300.0 feet to the Point of Beginning, in the
J. Bacon Survey A-1540;
THENCE north P 36 SW east a total distance of 8754.22 feet to a point for a comer In
the J. Scott Survey A-1222;
THENCE north 70 14' 49" west a total distance of 15,132.75 feet to a point for a corner
In the IL Whitlock Survey A-1403;
' t
1 THENCE north 440 38' 22" west at total distance of 3535.88 feet to a point for a comer
f in the J. Gibbons Survey A-446;
THENCE south 7° 50' 37" west a total distance of 15,331.01 feat to a point for a comer
In the Myers and Johnson Survey A-1699;
THENCE south 1.37 49" west a total distance of 13,403.36 feet to a point for a comer
in the J. McDonald Survey A 873;
THENCE south T 10 39' 50" east a total distance of 9,610.41 feet to a point for a comer in
j the J. Pettingale Survey A-1041;
THENCE south 69° 59' 55" east a total distance of 2972.88 feet to a point for a corner In
the J. Taft Survey A-1269;
THENCE north 10° 34' 24" east a total distance of 12,955,79 feet to the Point of
Beginning and contcining 4544.66 acres of land.
t
'Al .
r
I
.r.r
J~
Page 1 of 1
Date 1 F ND gpUNDS DE'~PT10N OF I E;E Aifs yORT COMPATIBit i CY LAND USE
SUBDiST~T~.
ALL that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated in Denton county, Texas and being
A-873,
pact, or all of the following surveys; J. Kjelberg Survey A 1610, J, McDonald Surrey
p Ns Survey A•970, W. Smith Survey A
Hemball Survey 1188, A Madden
, T .ey ll Towin bey Wm Survey A-1285, W. Wilburn Survey A-1419, D. Davis survey
Survey A-851 999,
356, W, Davis Survey A-3771 J• Scott Survey A•1222, Myers and Johnson Survey
G. Barb Survey A-208, and being more particularly described as follows:
AMunid -9 0~ Airport
COMMENCING at the centerline of the south end of the W Neill DSurvey enton
runway as it existed on July 13, 1993, being sated in
THENCE south 0' 20' 52" west a distance of 1500.0 feet;,
'T'HENCE south 89' 39' OB" east a distance of 900 feet to the Point of Beginning, in the ~
Wm. Neill Survey A-970;
# THENCE north 0° 20' 52" east a total distance of 8500.0 feet to a point in the I Scott
Survey A-1222;
THENCE north 26' 13' 45" west a total distance of 2011.63 feet to the center of Masch
Branch Road;
THENCE north 57° 01100" west a total distance of 2968.34 feet to a point in the Myers
and Johnson Survey A•1699;
THENCE south 25' 41' 38" west a total distance of 2102.87 feet to a point in the Myers
and Johnson Survey A-1699;
THENCE south 0° 20' 52" west a total distance of 9000.0 feet to a point in the I
McDonald Survey A-873;
THENCE south 26' 13' 02" east a total distance of 1341.64 feet to a point in the J-
McDonald Survey A-873;
THENCE south 61' 28' 23" east a distance of 3176.15 feet to a point in the J. KjelbeM
Survey A-1610;
THENCE north 28' 14' 42" east a total distance of 1923.54 feet to the Point of Bigimmng
and containing 11305 acres of land.
r
o- !
i
k
0, 1
Page 1 of 2
9 EXHIBIT MFTES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF THE AIRPORTCAMPATIBUTY LAND USE
SUBDISTRICT 2
ALL that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated in Denton County, Texas and being
part, or all of the following surveys; G. West Survey A-1393, S. Paine Survey A-1035, J
Kjelberg Survey A-1610, M. Paine Survey A-1036, B.B.B. & C. R.R. Co. Survey A-176, J.
McDonald Survey A-873, A. Byerly Survey A•1458, L Hembrie Survey A-594, J. Bacon
Survey A-1540, Wm. Neill Survey A-970, W. Smith Survey A-1188, A. Madden Survey A-
851, T. Tobey Survey A•1285, W. Wilburn Survey A-1419, D. Davis Survey A-356, W.
Davis Survey A-377, J. Pettingale Survey, A-1041, J. Taft Survey A•1269, J. Evans Survey
A-411, J. Gibbons Survey A-446, J. Scott Survey A-1222, A. Cobberly Survey A-1542,
Myers and Johnson Survey A-1699, G. Barb Survey A-208, W. Bryan Survey A-148, S.
Huizar Survey A-S14, J. Haney Survey A-515, and the R. Whitlock Survey A-1403 and
being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the centerline of the south end of the City of Denton Municipal Airport
runway as it existed on July 13, 1993, being located in W. Neill Survey A-970;
THENCE south 0' 20' 52" west a distance of 1750.0 feet;
THENCE south 89° 39' 08" east a distance of 2300.0 feet to the Point of Beginning, in the
J. Bacon Survey A-1540;
THENCE north P 36' S8" east a total distance of 8754.22 feet to a point for a corner in
the J. Scott Survey AA 222;
' THENCE north 7' 14' 49" west a total distance of 15,132.75 feet to a point for a corner
In the R. Whitlock Survey A•1403;
THENCE north 44' 38122" west at total distance of 3535.88 feet to a point for a corner
In the J. Gibbons Survey A-446;
THENCE south 7' 50' 37" west a total distance of 15,331.01 feet to a point for a corner
In the Myers and Johnson Survey A-1699;
THENCE south 1' 37' 49" west a total distance of 13,403.36 feet to a point for a corner
In the J. McDonald Survey A-873;
THENCE south 11' 39' 50" east a total distance of 9,610.41 feet to a point for a comer In
' the J. Pettingale Survey A•1041;
THENCE south 69' 59' 55" east a total distance of 2972.88 feet to a point for a corner in
the J. Taft Survey A-1269;
THENCE north 10' 34' 24" east a total distance of 12,955.79 feet to the Point of
Beginning and containing 4544.66 acres of land, SAVE AND EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS:
AIL that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated in Denton county, Texas and being
.
Page 2 of 2
part, or all of the following surveys; J. Kjelberg Survey A-1610, J, McDonald Survey A-873,
1. Hembrie Survey A-594, Wm. Neill Survey A-970, W. Smith Survey A-1188, A. Madden
Survey A-851, T. Tobey Survey A-1285, W. Wilburn Survey A-1419, D. Davis Survey A-
356, W. Davis Survey A-377, J. Scott Survey A-1222, Myers and Johnson Survey A-1699,
G. Barb Survey A-208, and being more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the centerline of the south end of the City of Denton Municipal Airport
runway as it existed on July 13, 1993, being located in W. Neill Survey A-970;
THENCE south 0' 20 52" west a distance of 1500.0 feet;
THENCE south 89' 39' 08" east a distance of 900 feet to the Point of Beginning, in the
Wm. NeW Souvey A-970;
THENCE north 01' 20' 52" east a total distance of 8500.0 feet to a point in the J. Scott
Survey A-1222;
THENCE north 26' 13' 45" west a total distance of 2011.63 feet to the center of Masch
Branch Road;
THENCE north 57' Oil 00" west a total distance of 2968.34 feet to a point in the Myers
and Johnson Survey A-1699;
THENCE south W 41' 38" west a total distance of 2102.87 feet to a point in the Myers
and Johnson Survey A-1699;
THENCE south 0' 20 52" west a total distance of 9000.0 feet to a point In the J.
McDonald Survey A-873;
,
THENCE south 260 13' 02" east a total distance of 1341.64 feet to a point in the L '
McDonald Survey A-873;
THENCE south 61' 28' 23" east a distance of 3176.15 feet to a point in the J. lgelberg
Survey A•1610;
THENCE north 28' 14' 42" east a total distance of 1923.54 feet to the Point of Beginning
and containing 1130.5 acres of land.
S 1 + ,
Date 1
f
Exhibit C
Page 2
f k
"wI4y.V.v.+...R...\i W.,i :'.r...r a - ..I '.r.....W:1L<✓4.ti.•...a. a:.(wrlr✓.a~ R1..
Woi +"7s
n, a p
AGO*
Date d
Attachment #6
CHRONOLOGY OF THE AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
1. December 1988: The Airport Board authorized staff to make application to the FAA
for funding of a Master study.
2. February 1992: Qty Council accepted grant funding of $135,000 from the FAA and
authorized expenditure of funds not to exceed $150,000.
3. February 1992: The City of Denton entered into an agreement with Coffman and
Associates to prepare an Airport Master Plan.
4. February 1992: The FAA, the city of Denton and Coffman and Associates agreed that
s the Master Plan study shall emphasize the following:
• Future role of the Airport (aircraft type, runway length etc.)
• Potential air carrier demand.
• On-Airport land use.
• Potential aviation Industrial development.
Analysis of the local airspace.
• Airport development priorities.
• Future aircraft/airport noise.
• Future Off-Airport land use.
• Review of environmental issues.
• Preparation of a detailed capital improvemcnt program.
I' S. August 1992; Coffman and Associates submitted Chapters 1.4 of the Draft Airport
Master Plan for review by the FAA and the Airport Board.
6. September 1992:- FAA responded expressing some concerns with the Draft Master
Plan. (See letter dated September 2, 1992 attachment #1).
9. December 1992: City Council appointed three members of the P&Z and. three
members of the Airport Advisory Board to the Airport Zoning Commission
In accordance with State Law (Section 241:016 of the Local Government Code) the
Airport Zoning Commission shall (i) Recommend the boundaries of the zones to he
established and the regulations for those zones, and (il) prepare a preliminary report
and hold public hearings on the report before submitting a find report to the (4ry
Council.
8. January, 1993: Airport Zoning Commission held a work session and discussed a draft
VIN
K+ +vy
`f[l
f
endaNo, "Yo
4gendalt
We
r work program to prepare regulations for height hazard and compan le land use
zoning in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport, i
t 9. February, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory Board
held a joint work session with Coffman and Associates and reviewed various
alternatives for future Airport Development. The Airport Advisory Board directed
Coffman and Associates to incorporate a 10,000 feet runway as shown on Alternative
V into the Master Plan.
10. April, 1993: The Airport l
Zoning Commission held a work session to discuss options
for land use control in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport,
11. June, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a work session to further discuss
options for land use control in the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
12. July 15,1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a public hearing with regard to
the proposed regulation for airport height control and compatible land use zoning in
the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
13. July 22, 1993: The Airport Zoning Commission held a study session and directed
staff to forward its recommendations to the City Council.
14. September 1993: Coffman and Associates submitted Chapters 6-7 for review by the
FAA and the Airport Adv'sory Board.
15. September 1993: FAA responded by letter dated September 9, (see attachment #1)
advising that the Master Plan should focus on Denton Municipal Airport as a reliever
Airport.
16. September 1993: Joe Thompson Airport Manager advised the Airport Advisory Board
that the FAA held discussions with Coffman and Associates wit4 regard to removing
the 10,000 foot runway from the Airport Master Plan. (See memo dated September
20, 1993, attachment #1)
17. October 13, 1993: Airport Advisory Board requested Coffman and Associates to
remove the 10,000 foot runway from the ALP and inserting it Into the Appendix of
the Master Plan (See minutes attachment 1).
18. December 8, 1993: The Airport Advisory Board and the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a joint public hearing to receive comments from the public with
regard to the Draft Airport Master Plan and the proposed land use regulations.
19. January19, 1594: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory
` Board held a special called joint meeting. Jim Harris of Coffman Associates
presented the Draft Airport Master Plan and answered questions which were raised
at the public hearing held on December 8, 1993:
M
ft~ WV
i
i
49Wa(to er 30_
ApeRdal A
20. March 16, 1994: The Ai Dais
Plan at its ~°rt Advisory Board discussed the
a ~ layout which Mm~~ regular meeting and !greed to adopt the Airport Master
by the Federal Aviation Administration s Layout Plan to lso as to y he Proposed regulations for height control and compatible8 land use ~ to
Protect Possibilities for future airport Development. 'In this
Board requested to see a foot print of an 8 dfmhnong the
of and parallel to the ,000 feet runway located 2,500 feet west
proposed 7,Soo feet runway.
21. May 11, 1994: The
for h.Aght control and ccor patiblean
u Board foot prints of various options
accommodate potential future he runways to Board be lo recorrunerid
~
feet west of the ProP~ed 7,500 feet runway.
22. July 13, 1994: The Pl
voted unanimously to recor, nd Qo~d ~'slon held a public heating and
Layout Plan (ALP) sh ty Council (1) The prop Airport
run owing the extension of the existing
a ProPosed S,000 feet tunwa lying runway to 7,500 feet and
runway; and (2) The proposed ryg regulations 00 feet west of and Paallel to the exist4ng
use toning applicable to :he Aifor height control and compatible land
Expansion Capability La Airport Development Zone as shown on Potential
Your j,
i
l
.q
E
1
1
i
PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION AREA
all
I-351'
j .a l r
~
1 .~i ,.l' •I yN' . use ~ i' :
Universit Drive
----rte ` ' aE Jim hristM t r
t~ i t
1` t• is , Airpo oad'
;41.q bl. P . Al ~ I ~ '
r '
~(/-'ro r5! • 970 ~ ~ i .d.+~ t
> ' r • ~JO ~ ; ~ \ It - I
t • ~ i ~ t ~ • i . f .t t
. • ? iii 393 ~ ~.~(•f -f J • ~ " 1 1
. a33 FM 2449 1• , ` '~.l
.~o, 4 1
It
K l
I
,
Age* No
s ~
AgeMals
ATTACHMENT 8 Dale
`i Soulnwesl Regen yl 41 Worm, Texas 76$93-0000 1 US DBQ0~1►i1Bf1 "ansas. lowsi".
d la~sportdan New Mex", Oklahoma.
T
~i~k:iatraAlon
{
a P/4
Jul. 2 81994
July 26, 1994 3
% < 333
Mr. Joe Thompson
Airport Manager
Denton Municipal Airport
Route 1, Sox 100
Denton, TX 76205
Dear Mr. Thompson:
{ The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has reviewed and ckv,
now approve the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for Denton Municipal
s Airport.:>ce conducted study
and the p pose
No' 94-ASW-0103-NRA) and determined that the ALP would not be
objectionable from an airspace utilization standpoint. It in
Y' approved subject to the following conditions:
a. This approval is aubjecttto the start of of l of a
and
favorable environmental finding prior
acquisition and/or construction as required by the National
grFAA antg Handbook
assurances.
Act s
Environmenal FAA Ordert5050~4A)Y and,the the
(
b, -Prior to the construction of any hangars or buildings
depicted on the ALP, a separate aeronautical study of each
structure will be required. Exact description of these
facilities including coordinates of building corners, height,
and construction materials will be required before a
made as to the affect on avistion.
determination can be
C. This approval does not include construction
used in
equipment, such as tower cranes, that may be
construction. Separate notice will be necessary for each
development.
d. The elevation of the relocated glide elope antenna
for Runway 17L will limited by the FAR Part 71, Primary
Surface associated with Runway 17R.
Opwh Dlrbko4 Tan AMpm orn mant onk•, Fort War% TX 7603-oe54, (Iff) 2224450
• TOGETHER WE SUCCEED
i
y9R1aYL1Faf.~'Vn:s.H'.Ir....e r,i
t
C
! e. The airrart surface observation station (ASOS) is
typically sited with the glide slope antenna. When the glide
slope antenna is relocated in conjunction with the extension
of Runway 17L/35R to the north, the ASOS would have to be
relocated. A separate aeronautical study will be necessary to
determine if the relocation of the ASOS can be accomplished
within criteria and without exceeding the FAR Part '17 surfaces
r associated with Runway 17R. Please submit distribution. B copies will of
and formal di
reour turn signature
althe low ALP
us to for
signed copies
for your use.
I ell, if you have any questions, please to contact me at
(817) 222-5606.
1
4 Sincerely,
AL Ot ~A
Mike Nicely
Project Manager !
' Te)tas Airport Development Office !
'eel
Mr. Scott Gray
~r. Coffman Associates,2nc.
11022 Forch 28th Street, Suite 240
lIA IL Phoenix, AZ 85024 {
•I
7 '
r,
~ it
,y
1R/'IW4/Vii.l,{A•A•lyl/i'i.4M~'..r.,. . ••.n r. i
I
11
awl
t
w
,I
f.
ATTACHKE ~
AoerdaNo -D-30_
AC'd
RESOLUTION
Board of Director
DENTON CHAMBER of COMMERCE I
Denton, Texas &
WHEREAS, the Denton Municipal Airport is presently designated Reliever Status by the Federal
Aviation Administration; and
i
WHEREAS, with specific Improvements to the existing Deacon Municipal Airport property, based
on the recommendations of an FAA-requested Master Plan, opportunities for economic
development In and around this area wlII be Increased; and
WHEREAS, the approval of the Airport Development Zone by the Denton Cry Council, as
unanimously recommended on July 13, 1994 by the Planning & Zoning Commission, would
protect and preserve the property surrounding the Denton Municipal Airport for future purposes
as outlined In the proposed Master Plan; E
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Denton Chamber of Commerce
does hereby.
- commend the Denton City Council for its consideration of a Master Plan for future use and
1 development at the Denton Municipal Airport, and supports and encourages formal adoption of
said plan as recommended by the City of Denton Airport Advisory Board and the Planning &
Zoning Commission on July 13, 1994; and
j
supports and encourages formal adoption of the Airport Development Zone as approved
and recommended by the Airport Advisory Board and Planning & Zoning Commission on
July 13, 1994.
Approved by the Board of Directors of the Denton Chamber of Commerce during its regular
monthly meeting on July 21, 1994.
Richard D. Hayes
Chairman of the Board
ATTEST: }
President
Charles W. Carpenter MACCURD
1
414 PAN WAY • P.O. NAWN / • D9noK WA6 76202.1719 • p 17i 362-9693 i
y
gen'a" 9 d
A_\
ATTACHMENT 10 qeeda
Planning anMINUTES g Commission We
December Sp 1991
A joint Public Hearing of the Planning and Zoning Commission and
the Airport Advisory Board of the City of Denton,? Texas was held on
dnesdaHell December 5 E. McKinney Streeti.m. in the Council Chambers
of City PRESENT FROM Pitt Fchairman Engelbrechte Mike lemming, Dick Nort n, Dr. Mary Evelyn Huey,
Barbara Russell, and Richard Cooper.
ABSENT FROM P&Zt None SORY BO
Geor
lkeson PRESENT FROM THE AIRPORT
rla d,llJohn Dulemba M D qa J im RisserTeand
Mike Stephens.
PRESENT FROM STAFFt Frank Robbins, Executive Director of Planning
and Developments Owen Yost, Debra 11coodwin, ban Plannerl Urban Mike 1Bucek,
Assistant City Attorneyl Rick Svehla, Deputy
City Manager) Gerald Cosgrove, Engineering
Administrator for Water/Wastewaterl David
Salmon Cit El AssistantssCity t AttoyrneylineCindyeYCranford,
Secretary.
The meeting was called to order at 5ti5 p.m.
1. Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to
the City Council regarding the proposed Airport Master Plan
and the proposed regulations n the vicinity ig of the r Denton compatible
land us* Municipal
Airport.
The meeting was turned over to Mrs George oilkeson, Chairman
of the Airport Advisory Board. Mrs Gilkeson explained the
Airport Board was an advisory board only, not a decision
making body. The purpose of the board was to look at the
facts and present the Master Plan to the Planning and Zoning
Commission for a possible recommendation to Council. The
Public hearing the commission it l t address concerns and answer questions of
Mr. Robbins said the public hearing was to discuss the master
p1 An for the airport, the plan at work, and the regulations
that would be presented. Recommendations will be made to the
Planning and toning Commission and for public reviews It was
staffs hope that they could respond to the questions from the
commission and the citizens, but it may not be a good time to
make a decision.
i
VendaNo
I planning i toning +pendalt
Minutes InIF
D
eg mber 8, 1993 7G A?
Pa 2
i
PETITIONERi The City of Denton. Joe Thompson, Airport
Manager said they would address issues that make u the Master
Plan. The FAA suggested two years ago that we look at our
needs for the future. One of the thinge was to Lind a
consultant to look at issues and project our needs for 20
years into the future. They were to look at how the North s
Texas air transportation systems could be utilized. They also
looked at the maximum capability to address those needs. The
consultants hired were from Coffman and Associates and the
three things they did was get the information direct from the
FAA coo, and the users. The FAA will not fund any thing if
it Is not needed. The view was the maximum capability of the
surrounding land. He reminded everyone that the Master Plan 1
has not been adopted, it was a look into the future some 20
years to determine what we needed it a demand ever occurred:
That is where the 10,000 foot runway came about. The FAA
enforces the ALP which calls for an extension of 1000 feet to
the south and 1500 feet to the north.
Harry Persaud explained th6 airport planning process had two
major components. One component was the airport master plan
and land use compatibility. In December of 1990 the City
Council appointed a six member Airport Zoning commission to
{ work on the proposed regulations. Staff worked with the
li Commission and they have made recommendations to the Council.
The major issues were that low density housing should be
discouraged. More than 201 of the area is in the flood plain
and in a moderate activity area. He explained that the city
is required to monitor height requirements and land use
compatibility. Based on the Coffman plan the existing 5000
foot runway will be extended to 7500 ft. The plan is also
proposing a new runway of 10,000 ft, west of the existing
runway and another phase will be a 50000 ft. runway which is
intended to serve as a taxi way to the 10,000 ft. runway. The
Airport Zoning Commission is now proposing land use and height
regulations to go with the proposal. The residential
development will be prohibited from zona one because the noise
level is higher than 65 Ldn. Zone two will be outside of the
65 ldn and residential uses will be allowed. There to a
control area 1 1/2 miles from both sides of the runway and 5
miles from either end. An airport development zone has been
developed. The area is 10,000 ft. from the ends of the run
way and 3,500 ft. from the center line. It will be a much
more restricted area than The FAA is wanting. Existing homes
in tons 1 will all become non conforming uses. The property
owners will be able to repair or fix a home up, but not expand
the size of the home. The VNT research facility will be
allowed to remain as an exception.
dq ,
i
:ar
FOP
i
~gendaNo.
Planning i zoning Agenda
Minutes Date
December 8, 1993
page 3
Height hazard regulations at the approach zone and the
transitional zone that goes up and outward and a horizontal
f surface will be adopted. Part 77 of the FAA regulations will
be adopted as part of the city's regulations.
4
Mr. Cochran asked when the map was created that created zone
i and 2.
Mr. Persaud said it was reviewed between January and July of
1993.
{
Mr. Cochran asked it the Master Plan by Coffman had been E
revised recently when the 10,000 foot run way was moved to the
appendix.
Mr. Persaud said the Airport Zoning Commission based the
10,000 ft runway on possible future needs, so it was agreed to
move the 10,000 foot runway to the appendix of the plan.
Staff felt that it was an important issue and it still needed
the regulations to cover it in the future. They did not see
the need to revise the zones or the regulations.
IN FAVORI Richard Stuart, 2710 Crestwood Place, Denton Texas.
Mr. Stuart said he was on the Airport Board in 1972, and the
chair in 1975 when the first master plan was done. Jim White,
the City Manager at the time went with his to Blue Mound to
talk with the FAA and came back with the plan to expand the
airport. There were 5 parts to the plan and two more were
added in 1985. The last part was to expand the runway to the
south 1,000 ft. In addition he said he also recommended the
Light Industrial and Commercial zoning areas around the J
airport. He said he felt that aviation was one of the more
important areas to enhance economic development. rudustry
needs a good airport close for their corporate jets.
Don Smith, 2107 Emerson, Denton, Texas. Mr. Smith said he had
been a citizen of Denton since 19676 He said he had been on
the airport board and been pilot a for 36 years. Having an
airport is important to the economic health of Denton. Denton
is ;rowing whether we want it to or not, but it needs to be
done in an orderly fashion. The most efficient use of our tax
dollars is the planning of the use of land around the airport
board. It is important that planes can come in and fuel and
take off with a full load of fuel, so we read the new runway.
The city gets seven cents a gallon on that fuel. He again
voiced his support and urged the approval of the Master Plan.
i
Lob.
Y
i[I
rib
N.Yt
1
{
~gendaN0 WX a-,d
Planning i toning 4 4dai
Minutes „
December 8, 1993 date
Page 1
t
Hal Williamson; 1212 Rio Grande, Denton, Texas. Mrs
Williamson said he was a retired taxpayer. He raid he saw the
problem as vision. The City has asked people to join in the
Vision project to look at Denton"s future. The metroplex will
M grow and the DFW airport will be overorowdede Denton could be
be the reliever for the Dallas airport. If Denton does not
get the reliever airport someone else will. He told a i
railroad story about a railroad that tried to get the city
(Jefferson, Tx.) to let them go through. The oity would not do
business. He said if we do not pass the plan we will sign the
doom of the city.
Ken Burdick, 2112 Pembrooke, Denton, Texas. Mr. Burdick said
he worked with the Chamber as economic Developer. The
economic aspect of a good airport is beneficial for the oity.
The Vision project is a very important step in the community.
The key is long range planning. Everything in the Master Plan
may not happen, but it will need to be considered to handle
future growth. He strongly urged approval of the Master Plan.
Dr. Dulemba asked how important the airport was to growth and
industry.
Mr. Burdick said it was very important. We need to have area
available for new industry and the possibility of a reliever
airport. All forms of transportation are important. The
airport is no less important than Highway 35.
Rick Woolfolk, 115 West College, Denton, Texas. Mr. Woolfolk j
said he was past chair of the Airport Advisory Board. in 1941
a 65,000 bond issue was passed for the airport. It took three
years to complete. One of the original purposes of the
airport was a training facility for glider pilots, it never
trained one. In 1971 under the former mayor Dick Stewart,
the Master Plan was started. It outlined five improvements.
One was to lengthen the runway. Phase two to add 1,000 feet
making the length 6,000 ft. is currently under way. The taxi
overlay and the apron has been completed. The parallel runway
that was in the plan was never done. it was in the long range
plan, but not feasible when the time came. Our current
facility is very good and the FAA will fund the runway
extension. The FAA said they would fund the Master Plan if we
would look at the possibility of expansion. The Coffman plan
cost $130,000 dollars. The FAA wanted us to look as far ahead
as the year 2015s Planning started with phase one to look at
Dallas airport reaching maximum capacity in the next few
years. If there is a need, the FAA will fund 90 per cent of
a justified expansion.
Mr. Wooltoik explained that the Federal government has
I 1-7
QaQ0814U ~ r0
Planning i Zoning ~pe~0aita
Minutes 4zta '
December 8, 1993 `
page 5
t
regulations for height any.rhere, whether it is in the area of
the airport or not. The regulation area is b miles from
either end of the runway. It covers an area 1/2 the size of r
Denton. It is important to remind everyone that those people
who currently own land will not be forced to move. The
ordinance will prohibit the building or uses that are r
regulated. A good portion of Zone 1 is in the flood way and
{ can not be built upon anyway. At a public hearing in July of
1993 it was requeste4 to hold the issue till after the Master
Plan or to run it concurrent. City board listened to the City
and responded positively. He stated again he was in favor of
the proposals as presented tonight. +I
Dr. Huey asked about the relationship of the Master Plan and
height and notes regulations.
Mr. Woolfolk said the Master Plan was a project that was
started two years ago. In the 1986 Master Plan there was a
great deal of mention to the height and land use regulations.
But since there is new data, we decided not to stick our heads
in the sand. They are two issues that go hand in hand.
Mr. Cochran asked if the FAA came to the city and asked for us
to create a Master Plan was the request in writing.
Mr. Woolfolk said no it was not in writing. They met with Mr.
Svehla and Joe Thompson.
i
Tony Farrara, General Manager of the Radisson Hotel and the
President of the Hotel and Motel Assoo. He said he came to
f show support for the project. He felt that it would help the
community The airport promotes interest and investment in
our city. Tourism will also generate more sales tax. Sales
taxes expected to exceed 1/2 million dollars in 1994. The
Radisson Hotel would not have spent 1.7 million dollars to
develop if there had not been airport. We need to meet the
airport to build and create interest and bring in new
business.
Chuck Carpenter, 1112 Pennsylvania Dr., Denton Texas. Mr.
Carpenter said he was speaking in behalf of the Chamber. He
said he would like to point out key points. He said it is
always easier to keep what you already have than to go out and
get something new. We are making efforts to look at needs of
the business industry. He said the airport Master Plan was a
( very positive move. since 1987 there has been quasi
relationship between the city and the Council. This would
sand a very positive message. On behalf of the Chamber
Commerce we are in support. He said as a citizen he know that
i y
rd
F
rT4b
O
,genaano -
Planning i toning 4gen0alt
minutes Date
December S, 1991
Page 6
601 of the tax base is supported by business. He said he
would like to see a little more.
Chairman Engelbrecht asked for a show of hands of all
people
that were in favor of the petition. The count was 200
Mr. Engelbrecht asked for the definition of a reliever
airport.
Joe Thompson explained that Denton is a reliever Alliance is
also a reliever. A reliever is an airport that Is designated
by FAA to take traffic away from DFW, The purpose is to
relieve the overcrowding by commuter planes and corporate
jets.
Dr. Huey asked what a reliever airport can do or not do that
othars can not.
Joe Thompson said there are indirect relievers for single
' engine, pleasure or business purposes. A reliever could have
passenger service but no orally does not.
Chairman Engelbrecht asked for a show of hands for all those
opposed to the petition, The count was 47.
IN OPPOSITIONt Richard Rafes, lives 1 mile west of tho
airport on Tom Cole road. He explained he was present to
provide facts and common sense, Mr, Rafes said he did not
agree with all key points made by people in favor of. No one
is trying to shut down the airport. We want
a
responsible.
ft
airport plan. We are talkie an
extension
9 of a 10,000
tt
runway that may not be made for
' 10 years. He asked it
there a necessity for commercial aircraft and a 100000 irunway and what was the FAA1's position. The FAA continues to
have concerns over this master plan and they want it to
reflect reliever status. It is unrealistic to expect large
aircraft to ever use the Denton airport for commercial
aircraft, The COOS study will show what will be needed for the
future for the area. Follow up letter says the focus of the
master Plan has been revised and has now been showed as a
reliever airport. The FAA is not recommending a 100000 ft
runway. It is absurd to build a 101000 ft runway ir. Denton.
The DFW airport rurnray is 8500 ft. The runway at Alliance is
only 9600 feet and they service huge cargo planes. It is not
necessary to build a commercial airport in the close area of
a residential area. They are unpopular,
Airport is currently underutilized. Frank stingler said the
airport is very under utilized and there in a lot of money
i
~ol. .
i i.
i
r
.raw
-Planning E toning ~enaa~tem
Minutes
December 1993 f/ d
Page 7
spent to built for taxiways and utility service that have '
never been used. Even it it is necessary, is it a possibility
for a commercial airport and a 100000 ft runway to be at our
airport. The FAA says no. More important, there has never
been a study on air traffic study between DFW and Denton.
One of the runways at DFW lands and taxis off over the air
space above Denton. This plan is a premature act. Approval
of the plan is immature. We do not know it we will interfere
with the traffio from DPW. We need to wait for the COo study.
Even the City of Denton questions the plan. The Department of '
the Army said this proect may require authorization from
them. The Dept. of interior said two major drainage areas
known as Dry Fork and Hickory Creek could be affected. Any
plan will need to protect the wet lands. Texas Water
Commission said there are many unknowns that are not defined
and a natural resource consultant needs to do a study.
The City of Denton said one thing they are concerned about is s
the expansion of the runway to 7500 feet. Jerry Clark said
we just invested ronsy on Tom Cole Road and would prefer that
they be utilized for a while to make it cost affective. If
the bridge cost would have to be assumed by the City it would
be expensive. The further the runway is extended to the
I north, it will affect homes in the Krum area. We need to be
a good neighbor. This all came from our City Engineer, Jerry
Clark.
Cost and cost overruns--will it involve large sums of money
that we as citizens could have to pick up. Cost today would
be in excess of 100 million dollars. Funds may be available
by FAA or possibly by Dept finanoing. The 100 million dollars
is in todays dollars, but the runway is projected to be built
in 30 rears, We are concerned about the quality of life.
What is the quality of life in the area of commercial
airports? There will be dust, noise, and pollution.
What about hazards to schools? When that jet goes over, are
we going to stop classes to wait for the noise? We feel that
the money would be better spent on police, fire protection,
and parka. Ranch estates, and other areas and people in zone
one are in big trouble. Their land values will go to zero.
The people in zone Z will have to deal with reggulations on
their dead restrictions. How much trouble would it be to sell
their house. Property owners will suffer in their property
values, needless restrictions, and loss of land.
If this plan passes and in the future when the city decides it
is ill advised, will the property owners be compensated for
loss of value and needless restrictions? Why is the city
r.
nd +
FIN
~endaNor -O
planning E Zoning ApanOai
Minutes Date
December a, 1991
Page 6
3
Wanting something that the FAA does not even approve of? What
is the rush? Are we going to do this without a study just to
be first? The Airport is less than 5 miles from the City
Center. How much of the tax dollars have been spent on
airport projects that did not materialize. The big traffic at
the airport is touch and training. That will not bring in a
lot of economic development. Why is a 10,000 foot runway
lanned when a 7500 ft runway is long enough for commercial
ets in California?
Michelle Rates - 2nd grader at Evers Park Elementary, Denton,
Texas. Miss Rates said the road she takes to school would be
gone. She said she did not want the airport to be made
bigger.
Mr. Gilkeson said Mr. Rates mentioned that the airport letter
from the FAA was a surprise to the advisory board and staff.
Mr. Gilkeson asked who was surprised:
Mr. Rates said the City Planner said he did not know about the
letter.
Mr. Gilkeson said "we are looking for all the help we can get
we are not trying to cram anything down anyones throats. F
I an a firm believer in open government.
Dr. Dulemba said he owns property near Mr Rates. He asked Mr.
Rates about his statement that the airport was being under
utilized. He asked if Mr. Rates was aware there are planes
based at the airport. Texas Health Enterprise can not take
off with a full load of fuel and a passenger load. They have
to leave with a minimal load of fuel and go to Addison to
refuel.
Mr. Rates said he was not opposing the 5000 to 6000 ft.
I runway.
Dr. Dulemba said Ranch Estates was already in the flight path.
Rates said yes, but they would really be upset if commercial
jets begin to go over.
Emma B. Hance, 2312 Brooklake West, Denton, Texas said she
lived under Love Field for 50 years and left there to come to
Denton to get away from the noise. She said she would like to
forworn the city to try to avoid pome of the trouble other
j cities have had. She said she has 75 acres that will devalue
it this major plan passes. She said she was opposed and felt
that there was more study needed.
^e
4
r..~ mmDD~~~{ {
ApendaNo
Planning 4 Zoning Agenda
Minutes
December 8, 1993 Date
Page 9
= Mr. Gilkeson said we have not made plans for a 10,000 ft
runway. We are only trying to be sure that we have the 9►,aee.
I The land around the DFW used to go for S1o00 dollars a:, acre k
1 foot now is going for $6.00 a foot. s
Charles McAdams, lives in Ranch Estites, Denton, Texas. He
said he and his wife have lived there 28 years and live in the i
flight pattern. Through the years he has enjoyed watching tho
planes. The notes at the current level s not offensive.
There are 100 planes hangered at the airport and a few
corporate jets. It is a good training facility. The current
airport has attracted business and it works because it is
small and not complicated. The current runway extension would
not after the noise or pollution. If the plan passes it would
increase the noise and the pollution.
Tom Fouts, 1900 Marshall Road, Denton, Texas. Mr. Fouts said
he would like to address the fact there has been a real
communication problem. He said he was for growth, but I as
for clarity and if the people in Zone two will be affected,
then we owe then soma explanation and some written concern as
to what they intend
this plan asses. Letts makehsu eh hat will be om i
the propertyaowners
and the people know ho~+ the expansion will affect our city in
the future.
Tarry Garland said he had been a high school teacher and the
administrator asked several people to go down and see how the
DFW would grow. He said thee would be 250,000 new people
f move in around the airport. He was right. People have moved
in around the airport, but now they are fussing about the
noise. The area is going to grow. The people living around
the airport now are a valid concern., He agreed people shoule,
be aware of the possible problems in the area.
Tom Fouts said he was for the growth, he just felt there
should be some more communication.
Tim Dol.drue, 1907 Lariat Road, Denton, Texas said he lived in
tone two. He played a tape showing the noise level and how
bad It would be outside of his house. He voiced concern about
the 10,000 ft, runway. He said he had been flying about 12
years. I feel sorry for people that live close to the airport
and have to deal with the noise. The point is if we are going
to build an airport why do we have to build in the middle of
the city. There are better areas to serve the needs and build
a new runway. Living and the quality of life will go down.
Theret si still a t of eofdone
done needs,
workothat needs toe be actual
first.
{
L
fr
AQendaNo.
Planning i toning Apandafl
Minutes Its
' Decembor sr 1943
g f,~
F I
Would like to see some kind of vote to show how many people k
really want to see the expansion.
Carol Graves, 2931 W. University Drive, Denton, Texas said she
had 12 acres in the area around the airport. Some 19 years
ago she bought a home that was built like a fortress
The
~
walla were 19 inches thick. She said they could afford the
house because the value had gone down because of its location.
She said you could not hold a conversation outside when a
` plane was going over.
Dr. Dulemba asked if it would not have been better for that
f house not to have been built. If the airport does expand we
do not want people to have to be uncomfortable.
Nickey Sirkle, 501 Cardinal Dr, IB6, graduate student at UNT.
She said she moved to Denton in July of this year. Would like 0
to stay here. It is a small town with a large population.
She said sho lived by an airport and you could hear the
i
lanes.
The drum of the noise w
planes. as something that you
have to
des i
1 with not something you , y get used to. We should put the
money on education and the beautification of the City instead
of a concrete slab that will cause noise and pollution. Leavy
e the big little town alone, we do not have to build or plan for
thirty years from now.
• Jim Hiller, 2903 Croydan Street, Denton, Texas. He said he
j
had no vested interest in land by the airport. He said he
belloved the plan was not well planned. We are going to have
to do a lot a things about utilities and sewage and
transportation. We will have ever'municipality trying
Y to
expand.
Mr. Gilkenson said we are commenting that we are going to be
spending a lot of money. fie said the money is FAA money. He
agreed that there were additional needs but that the money
could not be spent on the other Asauc.•.
Dr. Dulemba said we are not doing anything till the Coo study
is done.
Gerald Mitchell, Egan Road, Denton, Texas. Mr. ?latchell said
he was not against development. He has no problem with the
expansion of 7500 feet. He made the statement that nothing is
frozen in concrete. We are going to place deed restrictions
and they will be frozen in concrete. The initial reaction to
real estate would be a down ward slide and it would take a,
number of years before it will bounce back. The FAA is a
political snivel and th-y are going to make their decision on
Planning i zoning Alpeedal
Minutes Data
December 8, 1993 Pago 11 U
where they see the need. it will not matter it we have the
4 lo,ooo ft runway in place. He asked the board to please wait
I to make decision until the Coo study has been completed.
Jean Sennett, 619 E. College, Denton, Texas. Ms. Sennett said
she was opposed to the airport and opposed to the expansion. 3
She felt that it is a waste of taxpayers money.
Joe Malloy, pays taxes on land in Zone R on west University.
He said he was confused. He had discovered we may not have
all the truth or the facts. The Master Plan does not say that
the FAA does not want this. It would lead you to believe that
everyone wants this. i would not want anyone to suffer any
allusions. He also stated that he felt that Dr. Dulemba had a
conflict of interest because of his land in the airport area.
He said he felt that all of the facts had not been presented
accurately and been made available to all of the citizens.
Dr. Dulemba explained that the board was only an advisory k
committee and they had no authority to make decisions.
So there was no conflict of interest.
Jim Wadsell, Rt 1, Denton, Texas. Mr. Wedsell said that
Chapter 7 of airport plan cost $100 million dollars with 90
percent of coming from the FAA. He said he heard It is FAA
money, but it is still tax money and the taxpayers are the
ones that will have to pay. How can the FAA pay for something
they do not want. Has the airport ever paid its way. Has it
made any raturn to the city of Denton. Cash flow analysis of
revenues are based on hopes or dreams that may never
materialise. Utilities are the second highest expense. Can
not believe voters would approve high taxes. That method of
financing is foroing the community to absorb the difference.
Lurlens Mayo, ]91] Hampton, Ranch Estates, Denton, Texas. She
said the people in Ranch Estates are very concerned about the
quality of life. She asked, if jet planes were going over
homes, would the people think they still have the quality of
life that they have now.
i Tim Roland, Euless, Texas. Mr. Roland said he employs
everyone to look at the study. The area around DPW is finding
property values will decrease. Make sure that the study is
intense. He said do not expand the runway. There needs to be
in an impact study. Everyone will be affected by the noise.
Terry Garland again explained that the proposal was just a
planning document, nothing has been set in concrete. The
issue is a small addendum in the back of the plan. Nothing
LOU -
t
Air&No 7 0 0
Planning i Zoning Agaodal
Minutes Wte '
December 8, 1993 r
Page 12
~ t
will be done without the citizens input and involvement.
Larry Luce, 2200 Pembrook, Deliton, Texas. Mr. Luce said he
owns a plane and is pro airport. He said the Master Plan is
a best guess as to what the future will hold. No one really
believes that we are going to get the 10000 ft. runway.
Wildest dreams are a far cry from our best laid plans. If we
do not believe it will happen, then we should delete all
issues that mention the commercial planes and the 10,000 foot
runway. Then we would have a very good plan that will help an
already good airport. If this is a planning document,
consider the fact that the consultant could rethink parts of
the plan and we would have a
plan that we could all afford and
live with.
Mr. Cochran said the FAA did ask for a most intensive plan.
They wanted a general aviation plan for aviation much like we
have now.
Terry Garland said he was not sure about a 10000 ft runway.
He felt like the FAA was asking for a master plan that looked I
1 far ahead.
Jerry Bayer, 2100 Carriage Hill, Denton, Texas. Mr. Sayer
j said he knew the problems that would stem from a failure to
Elan properly. We have no choice. Denton is going to be a
ig city, we can not prevent growth. He said he came to
Denton to build T. I. and there was a lot of money spent on the
i plan and it is now empty. He said he realized the plan is for
the future, but as soon as you put it on a document, property
values will go down. You have an obligation to serwri the
citizens if they are going to be affected. The plan has two
possibilities. The City will someday need the land or they
will need not need it in the future. Either we have a plan
that we do not or one that is two late and needed to be
planned 20 years ago.
Mr. Oilkeson said whether it was too late or whether we do not
need it, what are we supposed to do.
Mr. Bayer said we should have a plan so we will be able to
land 717's if we need to in the future. So we need to find a
j location where that could be feasible and let the City build
out to it.
Doyle Fowler, Ranch Estates, Denton, Texas. Mrs Fowler said
he knew the airport was there when he moved in and had no
problem then or now. It the plan is implementede lay land
would be worth a lot less. i intend to die there and would
i
1 ~9
r
=No 9
P~O
Planning i Zoning
Minutes Date t
December s, 1993 S~ d
Page 1
3 O
like for you to postpone the decision until all of the facts
are together.
Don Womack, Ranch Road, Denton, Texas. Mr. Womack said he
shared the views that have been expressed. He said he had 5
acres in :one 2. Everyone wants growth, but not larger jets.
He said he had rather think about a space port instead of R
commercial jets. You can entice business with an airport, but
Denton can serve corporate needs for the forseeable future by
an extension of the runway.
Billie Gregory, Ton Cole Road, Denton, Texas. Ms. Gregory
said she has 143 Acres. She asked what are we supposed to do?
This is for my retirement. I knew the airport was there.
When I bought the property I had an Appraisal done and there
was no mention of the runway.
REBUTTAU The planning extends a long way in the future. The 1
100000 ft runway is only an amendment. It is agreed that the
FAA is a political animal and they have had to change their
guidance to us. There is a user fee that is paid for by the
people that use the area, but tax dollars are not funding the
pproject. Yes, there is ramp space at the current time. We
hope we will need more ramp space in the future. The FAA
continues to monitor traffic around DPW. Planning is always
controversial. We are trying to look to long range planning
The airport has been within budget. The airplanes do not
( contribute a lot to pollution. We are trying to avoid
problems and law suits in the future. Law suits get paid for
with tax dollars.
i Public Hearing concluded.
Chairman Gilkeson recommended that the issue be tabled till
the January meeting. Dr. Dulemba made the motion to table the
decision till January, Mike Stephens seconded and the vote was
unanimous. (5-0)
Chairman Engelgbrecht said there was nothing to take action
! since the issue had been tabled till January.
Mr. Cochran said that the FAA asked that the 10,000 foot
runway be put In as a small part of the Master Plan. Cog said
they may not even recommend that there be a reliever airport.
The tact that some of the information had to be yanked out of
staff was unfortunate. It would have been better if it had
been presented better. He made a formal request for the
January and September letters and would like to have copies
before deliberation. The plan could stifle development in the 1
j #
L
AMA
Planning i Zoning ga~daNo s
Minutes gppndatt
December 8, 1993
Page 14 Date
area around the airport and would have • detrimen al affect.
I Who asked who first? FAA said we applied and they did not ask
us for the plan but they support the idea of planning. The
10000 ft runway undermines the whole plan. It probably is a
very good plan.
Dr. Huey said thank you for the hard work and the people for
the devotion and their time. Reminded people that planning is
what our function is. We must let the people know what is
going to help or hinder their property. She encouraged the
board to supply the variations of height and noise before the
deliberations. We also need to know the relationship between
the airport and the Visioning project. i
Mr. Norton agree with gentlemen that said we should be more
j regional in our planning and make sure that our plan agrees
with and blends with the metroplex not a separate one.
i Mr. Englebrecht said he was interested in what would happen in i
20 years and we have to look at impact. We have an interstate i
system and a rail system. Want to make sure that all issues
are looked at to meet the needs of the future. We m~1st lock
at all the potentials. We will be involved in the regional'
planning. The Master Plan sends a message that we are ready
for any possibility. He asked about a joint work session on
January 12 with the Airport Advisory Board.
Mr. Robbins suggested a special meeting.
It was decided to have a joint work session on January 19,
1993 at 6130. The location to be determined at a later date.
The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning commission was
called to order ar 9155 p.m.
1. Consider approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of
November 100 1993 and the special called meeting of November
17, 1993.
i
Ms. Russell moved to approve the minutes as written. Mr. `
Norton seconded and the motion carried unanimously (7-0).
II. Hold a public hearing to consider the preliminary and final
replete of Lot i, Block 2, Frame Addition? into lots 1R and
2R. The 3.895 aors tract is located southeast of the Texas
and Pacific Railroad tracks, generally west of Rose Street.
BTAFI REPORTe given by Owen Yost.
Ls. au
Iy~
5 .
l
Ho 9yD ~
ATTACHMENT 11~
eta -
S"9 /9d'
MINUTES
PLANNING AND TONING COMMISSION
SPECIAL WORK SESSION
January 19, 1994
The special called joint meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission and the Airport Advisory Board of the City of Denton was
held on January 19, 1994, at 500 p.m. In the City Council
Chambers, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas.
PRESENT FROM Pitt Chairman Engelbrecht, Mike Cochran, Dr Mary
Evelyn Huey, Barbara Russell, and Richard
i Cooper.
ABSENT FROM P&ZS Katie Flemming, Dick Norton
PRESENT FROM ADVISORY BOARD, Chairman Gilkeson, Mike Stephens,
J
John Dulembao James Jr Jim Risser, and Terry Garlandfeson,
} ABSENT FROM ADVISORY BOARD, Nancy Huntley
;r
PRESENT FROM STAFFS Frank Robbins, Executive Director of Planning
and Development, Harry Persaud, Senior i
Planner; Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, Rick
Svehla, Deputy City Manager. Joe Thompson,
f Airppoort Manager, Jackie Doyle, Building
Official; Mike Bucek, Assistant City Attorney;
Cindy Cranford, Secretary.
I. Hold a study session with regard to the Airport Master Plan
and the proposed regulations for height hazard and compatible
land use zoning and give staff directions.
INTRODUCTIONi given by Frank Robbins. Mr. Robbins explained
that the mission of the work session was to provide
information and answer questions to help the group in the
t decision making process. Mr. Robbins explained that Mr. i
Svehla would give the chronology on events that led up to the
work session. Jim Harris, the airport consultant from Coffman
i and Associates will go over the draft of the Master Plan. Mr.
Robbins explained that Mike Nicely from the Fkh would not be
I a speaker, but would be in the audience to answer any
f questions or to help clarify issues. Mr. Persaud would be
going over the regulations.
.r
Mr. Svehla said he was going to try to help the boards
understand the series of events that led up to the work f
, session. In 1989 the City presented a pre-application for a E
low%
If
No ~y~
ATTACHMENT 11
Oate
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SPECIAL WORK SESSION
January 19, 1994
The special called joint meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission and the Airport Advisory Board of the City of Denton was
held on January 19, 19940 at 5130 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers, 215 E. McKinney Street, Denton, Texas.
PRESENT FROM Pit: Chairman Engelbrecht, Mike Cochran, Dr. Mary
Evelyn Huey, Barbara Russell, and Richard
Cooper.
} ABSENT FROM PiZ: Katie Flemming, Dick Norton
t PRESENT FROM ADVISORY BOARD: Chairman Gilkeson, Hike Stephens,
Dr. John Dulemba, James Jamieson,
Jim Risser, and Terry Garland.
ABSENT FROM ADVISORY BOARD: Nancy Hundley
PRESENT FROM STAFF: Frank Robbins, Executive Director of Planning
and Development; Harry Persaud, Senior
Planner; Lloyd Harrell, City Manager; Rick
Svehla, Deputy City Manager; Joe Thompson,
Airport Manager, Jackie Doyle, Building
Official; Mike Bucek, Assistant City Attorney;
Cindy Cranford, Secretary.
1. Hold a study session with regard to the Airport Master Plan
and the proposed regulations for height hazard and compatible
land use zoning and give staff directions.
INTRODUCTION: given by Frank Robbins. Mr. Robbins explained
that the mission of the work session was to provide
information and answer questions to help the group in the
decision making process. Mr. Robbins explained that Mr.
Svehla would give the chronology on events that led up to the
work session. Jim Harris, the airport consultant from Coffman
and Associates will go over the draft of the Master Plan. Mr.
r Robbins explained that Mike Nicely from the FkA would not be
a speaker, but would be In the audience to answer any
questions or to help clarify issues. Mr. Persaud would be
G going over the regulations.
Mr. Svehla said he was going to try to help the boards
j understand the series of events that led up to the work
session. In 1980 the City presented a pre-application for a
w-
t
am,
j
,gendaNo ~
agendalt ~
9ata
Piz Minutes
January 19, 1991
Page 2
new airport master plan. The existing master plan was
approved in 1986. Part of the FAA process was to submit a
pre-application to the FAA for a master plan. If the FAA
approves the pre-application, an application is then
submitted. Mr. Svehla explained that the City was
unsuccessful in this endeavor for several years. In the
Summer of 1991 the City was approached by a representative of
the FAA that suggested we again apply for a master plan grant.
We did that in September of 1991 and were successful in 1
February of 1992. The FAA proposed a grant offer to us that
was acceptable to the City for $150,000. The CityOs share of
that is $15,000. February of 1992 the City executed the
agreement with Coffman and Associates to do the actual study.
In that study the FAA, the City, and Coffman agreed to look at
the future roll of the airport, potential air carrier demand,
land uses, potential aviation, industrial development,
analysis of local air space, airport development priorities,
future aircraft and airport noise, future off airport land
uses, review of the environmental issues, and the preparation
of a detailed capital improvement plan. Excerpts of all of
those were supplied in the backup. In August of 1992 the FAA
responded to the initial four chapters of the !faster Plan. In
December of 1992 the Council appointed a joint board from Piz
and the Airport Board to look at land use and land
I compatibility and noise for the airport. That was prompted by
a number of things. We knew we were going to do the Master
Plan and we would need to look at those issues. About that
time we received information from the census bureau that
Denton was over 50,000 in population. That allowed us to not
only look at noise and land uses, and possible zoning In side
the city limits but also within a certain distance from
existing or proposed runways. The law says you can be a mile
and a half from either side of OR center line and five miles
from either end of the runway. Given that the existing runway
is 50000 feet that puts the zoning box almost eleven miles
long and three miles vide. The City of Denton is 55 square
miles so roughly 6o to 651 the size of the. existing city a
limits could be zoned. January of 1993 that joint board held j
its initial work session. We tried to bring the board up to
speed on the local government code. February of 1993, the
Airport Board and the Airport Zoning Commission held a joint i
meeting with Coffman and Associates and reviewed various !
alternatives for future airport development The Airport
Advisory Board directed Coffman and Associates to incorporate
a look at a 10,000 feet runway. It was recommended as
Alternate 5. The Airport Board tried to look at trying to
see the ultimate uses. It was also of some interest to the
Airport Zoning Board. They wanted to know what might be the
ultimate limits of the airport. April of 1993 the
alternatives were reviewed and the choice of alternate 5 as
0
H4
AgWal
Date /qc
PAZ Minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 7
the one to look at for the future. Lai
Airport Zoning Board held a work session on In April
discuss the
option. Again they were looking at what to use as regulations
and how to establish boundaries. In June of 1993 the Airport
Zoning Commission held another work session to continue the
discussion. They asked staff to look at options and how they
welldaswork.
state reglations, t PA,o anknow about d what other airportaes as
doing. In July a public hearing was held in regardsttowthe
proposed regulations for the airport height zone and
compatible land uses. About 250 notices were sent to land
owners that staff felt would be affected, and other interested
parties that staff knew about. The following week the same
commission held a study session and directed staff to forward
its recommendation which is what has been discussed as zone
one and zone two along with their recommendations. In
September Coffman submitted the last chapters for review by
the FAA and the Advisory Board. Council was brought up to
speed. A letter was also received from the FAA stating that
they would like for the 10,000 square foot runway to be looked
at as an ultimate airport use, not as part of the airport
E layout plan. September 200 1994 the board was advised of the
position of the FAA In October the board recommended that
the advice of the FAA be followed and the 30,000 ft runway be
moved from the ALP and be placed in an appendix discussing
ultimate airport uses.
j Mr. Gilkeson ask if that effectively removed the 100000 ft
runway frog consideration on the master plan.
Mr. Svehla said it was a matter of semantics. Staff did not
do that. The FAA will be approving the ALP. Since the 10,000
feet runway is not in the ALP, the FAA believes that what they
are approving does not include the 10,000 foot runway. It
could still be included in the Denton Master Plan depending on
the direction taken by P&Z and the City Council. Mr Svehla
said he felt that if something was attached to a plan it would
become a part of that plan, but others might have different
ideas.
Mr. Jamieson asked about the FAA funding. He wanted to know
if the FAA funding via based only on the approved ALP and not
on the Master Plan.
Mr. Svehla said generally the FAA would not consider any grant
offers or funding if not on the FAA approved ALP.
MR. Gilkeson made the comment as it stands currently there
will not be a 10,000 foot runway in the ALP presented.
' I 1~ • I
r--
too
r,
NgeodaNo.
Agendati
Date
PiZ Minutes
January 19, 1994
Page L
Mr. svehla said that was correct.
x
Mr. Risser wanted to make sure he understood the process. He
asked if the process was made up of two activities, both which
have something to do with the airport. There is proposed
airport development zone which speaks to land use
compatibility, height restrictions which could occur without
an airport master plan. The second activity is the master
plan. It is an update of the old master plan.
Mr. Svehla said that was correct. The Airport Advisory Board
and the Airport Zoning Commission decided that it made some
sense to bring then together because they felt that it was
appropriate to look at both issues at the same time. They
could be handled as separate issues. They did start out as
separate issues.
i Mr. Risser said the focus on the 10,000 foot runway is f
specifically the use of that aspect of the master plan in
determining some of the requirements under the airport
development zone.
Mr. Svehla said he felt that was part of the issue was the t
5 Alternative. The zones were based on that possibility in
the future. Some of the concerns were the issues involving
land use and the height zone and noise levels if that runway
was needed in the future. The zoning would be in place. Mr.
Svehla said the December 8 letter included in the backup would
hopefully clarify the thoughts of the FAA.
JIM HARRIS OF COFFMAN AND ASSOCIATES a representative of
Coffman and Associates, an airport consulting firm that deals
primarily with airport planni^7 activities. Mr. Harris said
j the company had been in business since 1979 and had worked on
over 400 different planning assignments for airports all over
the country.. He said he was a civil engineer and had been
involved in airport planning and design for the past 16 years.
Mr. Harris said the master planning process began when the
City of Denton first approached the FAA about a new master
plan. Normally this process is looked at evory five years.
A couple of issues needed to be addressed. One of which is
the master plan which would address the long term needs of a
full service general aviation airport which vould serve the
business needs of the community as well as the general
aviation pilots. Also, there had been a st:!dy completed in
1990 that addressed the potential that the air carrier service
needs in the metroplex area might not be able to be handled in
the future entirely by DFN and Love Field. A study was
released that started to examine the demand and the need for
a satellite airport or airports. Denton was identified as a
~rJ .
a,
,.w
ar,.n
Age*No. Y'd d
AoWalt
Date
PH Minutes
January 19, 1991
Page 5
significant growth area. The city asked that the scope of
work in the master planning process examine the feasibility of
accomaodating commercial service at the Denton Municipal
Airport. The draft was submitted to the FAA. Funds were S
received to conduct a study dealing with those elements. The
work scope is broken down into several areas. There is a lot
of discussion between staff, the FAA, boards and the public.
Coffman and Associated delivered chapters as the work
progressed. The process started with an inventory of all
conditions that currently exist such as; type of airport,
social economic conditions, population growth factors in the
area, things that might affect forecast and the future growth
I in the area. Aviation forecasts were developed to take into
consideration the general aviation forecasts, the types of
aircraft that would be based at the airport. Coffman and
Associates did examine and incorporate some of the results of
the study that was done by Coca on the satellite airport study.
Following the development of forecasts the next logical step
was to look at the demand and the current capacity of the
facility. If there might be commercial service activity here
we had to look at alternatives to accommodate that and decide
if it is even feasible. After examining a series of
alternatives to accommodate the demand, Coffman came up with
an.updated plan concept. We also looked at an environmental
evaluation. It was not an environmental impact statement or
a full environmental assessment. We took all of the
conditions talked about during the development process and
subjected them to a review of all of the environmental factors
that FAA wanted looked at to find any red flags. It was not
meant to salve problems but to see if there were any issues
that would need to be dealt with. A lot of correspondence was
done with several different agencies which gave us a real good
frame work. Finally a financial and capital improvement
program was developed and that essentially did an examination
of the needs over the next twenty years, the cost of that, the
timing for the CIP items, from the standpoint of the FAA
eligibility what funds would be available and which items were
not available for funds. The bottom line was to find the
City's responsibility in terms of total cost.
A number of master plan meetings were held over a period of
f time. It was a process which helps you adjust the plan as you
go along so there is soma consensus when you are done.
Mr. Cochran asked if the idea of the 10,000 loot runway was
something that Coffman and Associates developed because of the
needs of the area or was it something that was suggested by
the Airport Advisory Board.
MR. HARRIS said the brat assessment looked at runway length.
f rr
~ ea o
~s~a~fl
Agendatt
Dale
Pit Minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 6
One analysis looked at several different types of aircraft and
we came up with a runway length of 8,000 feet. We had several
meetings with the Airport Board and started to examine to see
if we accommodated certain aircraft, which were a potential in
the fleet, that might require a longer runway length. There
were several types that were not taken into consideration.
one example was the MDThe possibility of that type of
aircraft indicated more of the 9,500 or 9,600 foot length. We
did re-examine, and for planning purposes felt that it was
more prudent to at least consider a 10,000 foot runway.
j
Mr. Cochran asked if that was something that was arrived at 3
In the professional judgement of Coffman and Associates.
MR. HARRIS said yes, it was. ;
t
Mr. Risser said the financial and capital improvement program
talks about the expense side of the equation. He asked it
Coffman and Associates reviewed the Denton Development Plan r
which specified the airport as a special purpose activity
c
statement that enter. A few years ago they went through an economic impact
somewhere between d10tmilli million million dollars on arse
annual basis. Is there an offset to the expense side of the
l equation that says the benefit of the airport to the community
is today or will be tomorrow X millions of dollars.
MR. HARRIS said logically there is. There is an obvious
economic benefit that it draws to the community. Our
financial plan did not have included in it an economic impact
study, By virtue of that our numbers did not try to compare
the economic impact to the capital improvement side.
Mr. Harris said Denton has a general aviation airport, it is
classified as a general aviation reliever airport, it
provides service in that it helps allow general aviation
aircraft to have another location to operate as opposed to
i operating out of VFV. It also serves the community by virtue
of the individuals that bass aircraft there, but also the
companies that use aircraft to do business in Denton. One of 1
the basic indicators when doing airport planning is the level c
of general aviation based aircraft going to be in the future.
We Started oft knowing that in the base year we looked at some
of the base data we had indicated that the level of based
aircraft was about 107. We looked at several different
' forecast to determine how many based aircraft there would be
in the future. Our forecast projected approximately 300 based
aircraft by the year 2015, That is predicated on a number of
issues such as the growth in population and the basing of
aircraft. We looked at several ways to arrive at that. It
J
i
i
I
Veadal o. 9l'~~d
Agendalt .S'
s
Date a
Pit Minutes ~f 010
January 19, 1994
Page 7
you look at several scenarios you will find that we did not
select the most optimistic. The business use of aircraft has
been on the rise. i
Mr. Gilkeson said on the business end of the equation it was
his understanding that some of the older aircraft actually
require a longer runway than some of the large transport a
planes with superior power.
MR. HARRIS said that was correct. Some of the older aircraft
do not have the power plants to provide the performance
necessary. The newer ones are more fuel efficient, and more
powerful so consequently they perform better.
over time we were able to show a modest growth in aircraft at
the airport. Those that are based there will require hangers
and tie down areas.
Mr. Cochran said he read in the report that historical trends .
on based aircraft is the most reliable means of determining
what the needs are going to be in the future. If we follow
one of the scenarios as to the historical trends it shows that
in the year 2015 it shows we will only have 41 aircraft rather
than 300. He asked for an explanation. He said it looked to
him like Coffman picked the scenario that would support their
plan rather than one based on historical facts.
MR. HARRIS said historical trends tend to be very predictive
so there is some level of confidence in what the results. If
something happens to skew that data you have to be somewhat
suspect. There has J*ist been a general recessionary trend
which has affected thk basing of aircraft and the fact that
some people by virtue of economics have not kept their
aircraft. There have also been the facts that growth of new
j aircraft especially single engine aircraft has slowed
dramatically since 1919-1981. Product lIaLility and costs have +
gone up making them less affordable. In spite of those things
the national and regional trends show an increase in the
aviation business. The FAA projections are showing a
I resurgence in growth of general aviation as a whole.
Mr. Cochran said the documentation he had from the back up ~I
F material seemed to show an increase in based aircraft across
the United States from 1982 to 1991, but according to the
j statistics the based aircraft for Denton has gone straight
down. He asked why Denton was singled out.
r,
Mr. Harris said there could be number of reasons. it could be
the airport itself or, the available facilities. If the
facilities are not competitive people will base their aircraft
i
1AW
re
I
K~d
ayenlaNa
Agendall
Date
Pit Minutes January 19, 1994 G~r-f
Page 8
u
elsewhere. It could be the price of fuel. Pilots are very
picky when finding a location to base their aircraft. They
will give up the convenience of a short drive to save a few r
dollars on the price of a hanger.
i
Mr. Dulemba said that during the time frame of 1986-87-88 he
had a plane and considered hangering it somewhere else. At
th.C time there was an individual that had a lease with the
City to run the FBO (fixed base operator). He made it not
conducive to hanger a plane in Denton. There was not enough
fuel. Business aircraft that landed in Denton could not be
refueled and the maintenance facilities were not adequate.
Hr. Cochran said the chart showed the drop off in based
aircraft was in 1989-1990, f!
Mr. Gilkeson mentioned that at the last Airport Advisory Board
meeting the fixed base operator said his business for the last f
i quarter of the year was up over 5 percent from the previous
year.
Mr. Harris said another aspect that affects based aircraft is
the fleet mix and the types of aircraft. There has been an
Increase in business type aircraft in the fleet. This
translates into take offs and landings by virtue of growth.
There has also been an increase in itenerats traffic by
aircraft that is not based at the airport.
In 1991 there was approximately 1000000 take-offs and landings
by general aviation growing to 180,000.
A Master Plan is demand based. In other words the CIP program
is based on development. If the level of activity expected
does not occur, the development program slows down in response
to that. It the activity and demand increase the development
will also increase. You do not want to develop facilities
where the need has not occurred and there is no revenue being j
generated to support that development. The plan needs to be
evaluated every year.
Because Denton has been designated by the FAA as a reliever
for general aviation it will play an important role in the
area.
Mr. Harris said the other item that Coffman and Associates was
asked to examine was the potential for air carrier (passenger)
service. We looked at the statistics from DFW and Dallas Love
field. We knew that there was discussion of and the
possibility of DFW'building two new runways. The COG study
presented was full of numbers and several scenarios. It
' I
t
i
,DendaNo. ~
Ap6s►031t a
Dalee-- '
Pia Minutes V ~~a
January 19, 1994
Page 9f
looked at the situation from a worst case to a best case
possibility. Coffman took the scenario that DFW would build
two new runways in the future.
Mr. Cochran said that on page 27 it said the study calculated
the potential number of passengers that would require air
transportation when DFW and Dallas Love Field reach maximum
capacity. For the purpose of study it was assumed that they j
would reach capacity in the year 2000. Obviously that is not
going to happen. Mr. Cochran said he had talked with COG
which told him the study was grossly out of date and because
of the two new runways the capacity of DFW and Love Field will
not reach capacity until the year 2025 or 2030 which throws
the Coffman study off about 30 years.
I Mr. Harris said that capacity is an unusual subject to deal
with. You have to look at a term called annual service
volume. An airport can reach their annual service volume and
still operate. All that will happen when they reach a number
where delays start to increase. When someone talks about
capacity they are dealing with a hypothetical number where
delays start to increase and they start to need additional
capacity measures.
Mr. Cochran asked if Coffman and Associates believed that
would happen in the year 2000.
Mr. Harris said Coffman assumed they would. He explained
they looked at a two million passenger overflow by the year
20151 and the number was very consistent with the two runway
concept. When we start to look at that two million number,
DFW will probably implane 23 or 24 million passengers. Wo, are
only talking about two million implanements some tine in the
future that may not be able to be accommodated without
significant delay. They can be accommodated, but with delays.
The airports will have to look at the economics. (When will
it not be economical for an aircraft to wait on a runway or
taxi way for 45 minutes waiting on clearance. It is a very
hard number to predict. We were not so concerned with the
timing issue as to whether the site can accommodate and to
what level.
We then took that two million number, and we by no means
assumed that they will all cone to Denton. We looked at the
area and talked about where the population growth is and the
service area, and found that 20 r1rcent of the growth is in
the northern area. Consequently, we decided waybe 20 percent
of that two million could be accommodated by the Denton
Airport. We only assigned 400,000 passenger implanements by
80 . 'l
r
1 '
Agesldako. ' ' ~v
Agert4alS {
Date
G~
PAZ minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 20
the year 2015.
Mr. Cochran said even the 400,00 could cause some skepticism
as you go back to the charts and see that there may not be
satellite airports in place by the year 2030. He said he was
having some trouble Sealing with the idea of 400,000 passenger
implanaments here per year in 20 years.
Mr. Harris explained that Coffman and Associates was only
trying to establish a number to site a facility and it happens i
at one point vs maybe ten years later, the issue will still
be, can the site accommodate the demand. The timing is not as
! crucial as the quantity.
Mr. Cochran said then the dates are strictly arbitrary.
f
Mr, Harris said yes. The dates are dealt with in a master
f plan, but the plan is demand based.
s Mr. Cochran said then the case could be for a 100 year plan in
theory
Mr. Harris said yes, in theory. If conditions or demands
change the time frame changes.
Mr. Risser asked what other things should be taken into
consideration when planning a Haster Plan for the Airport.
Mr. Harris said the factors are unlimited. The impacts of
trade, NAFTA, technological advances, and the economy should
be considered. We have no clue as to the impact of NAFTA on
aviation. We also are beginning to see some recovery in the
airline industry.
Mr. Jamieson said that during the Airport Advisory Board
meeting the prior week it was pointed out it would be prudent
} to lengthen the runways to accommodate business traffic. Some
f of the business traffic has flown many miles and at the
E present facility they can not refuel adequately because they
1 can not take off with a full load of fuel.
Mr. Harris said there are different types of aircraft and each
requires different runway lengths. If the secondary NT000
study produces different statistics it may have an effect on
our examination if the regional needs have changed.
Mr. Cochran asked if Mr. Coffman knew the runway was going to
be built at DFN when the study was written.
Hr. Harris said no, it was all tied up in the environmental
a>r
i
aacw~ 40' 'a No
L
o
Date
Jai
P&Z minutes
January 19, 1991
Page 11 yy
newe rutried nways- be optimist
lannediwith that in mind.
discussions-
qe
Mr. Cochran asked for the definition of implanement,
i Mr. Harris said it means an did individual that eat bconnectioards
1 aircraft for departure.
E1 activity but more of an originating implanement.
Mr. Harris said when the runway system wasafirst, examin d t they
looked at a general aviation runway.
j saw a demand. People were crying out for a little b 000 longer
foot
f runway. The City was already embarking on at
I extension. For the att leastja 7,so ft runwa . a%heniwe
at an air carrier runway we came up with a
started aircraft looking projected
runway re asked about it we 4,000 lofeet. In some of oked at different e aircraft. committee meetings
Some we we of
which we had not looked at originally. It was decided that a
little bit longer runway would be considered for planning
not want is how W6 came up with the 10,000 foot runway.
purposes.
We to estimate.
The runway onlengths
the h temperature different eleva elevation of ntheaairport.
depending
The FM requires that when you are planning a runway you must
take into account the elevation and the mean maximum daily
temperature of the ho la a day o,f the i rr betterwhen flower
plane
calculations. A
temperature and at sea level, underst
that
the considerslochraneverythingsaid level to is Ondi ODn feat to be still'
at sea level.
r Mr. Harris said there are some general charts you can go by,
but they are not as accurate as runiWe used individual to plug
the elevation into for calculations computer program
said the correct terminology was density altitude. i
Dr. Dulemba
It is the pressure altitude which is 0 or 6.12 or Denver at
5000 You also have to look at temperature to get the
density altitude. 612 could be significant on a hot day ve
Coro altitude. It could be a matter of need for a couple of
hundred feat of runway or not.
Mr. ailkeson said you not only need to got off the ground, you
also have to have enough runway to stop if the engine goes out
or something also goes wrong.
I sat..
T
P
Sam
t
New NO 9
~p pgenOalt
Oats ~
Pit Minutes 76 t
January 19, 1994
Page 12
Mr. Harris said that is why Coffman and Associates chose to
work with a 7,500 foot runway. From the general aviation
standpoint we decided we should focus on a 7,500 foot runway
and from a planning perspective we should consider the 10,000
foot runway.
The airport has an instrument landing system now. There are
approximately 58 hangers. We have identified the need for a
total of 172 hangers. We have seen a significant increase in
the need for transient ramp space, fuel storage, and a larger
general aviation building. We saw the need to increase the
present facility to accommodate the increased activity and
auto parking. These things gave us a lot to work with as far
t r as general aviation in terms of sizing requirements.
'Mr. Jamieson asked what dictates airport service area, with
respect to liability (fire protection and things of that
nature).
Mr. Harris said generally the fire protection is covered by
the city codes and city facilities.
We took that 400,000 passenger implanements and translated
them into terminal building requirements to determine the
size.
Then we had to look at where to place the functional areas.
We looked at seven alternatives. We wanted to submit to the
FAA a plan for a general aviation facility. We decided on a
runway 2,$00 feet from the oxisting runway which would allow
for derpa rtures to take place on one runway and approaches on
the othor. Ye did place the sir carrier possibility back in
the appendix. it the need should arise for a possible air
carrier facility you would be able to see how that could be
accomplished. The plan going to the FAA for approval shows
the runway extension of 1500 feet to the north and 1000 feet
to the south. It will also illustrate the proposed gangers
and the terminal expansion. There is also a proposal for an
additional parallel 5,000 foot runway located about 700 feet
from the existing runway. It also discusses the acquisition
of about 140 acres of land to accommodate the runway
extensions, the construction of an aircraft control tower in
I the future, the expansion of the terminal building, 136,000
square yards of additional aprons and taxi lanes, 190 T
hangers, 220 tie downs, e0,000 square feet of conventional
hangers, and a financial plan which shows only the costs of
the general aviation development.
The plan is shown in phases. Phase I is for the first five
i l
e
A"Na~- i
Agendal '
Date
Pin Minutes of January 190 1994 0
Page 13 t
years, phase 2 is for the second five years, phase 3 is for
the last ten years. The total program will run about 40,000
million dollars. About 240000 million dollars is available
for federal funding if the plan meets the criteria for
funding. A share of the costs has been put back on the
private sector with individual building of T hangers as well
as corporate hangers. The local share will be 16.5 million
dollars or 16 percent of the total cost.
In the appendix you will see what costs are involved if air
I carrier demand does occur and what some of the funding
i mechanisms would be for that. It has been placed in the
appendix as a reference document only. It will not be going
i to the FAA for approval.
Mr. Jamieson said in the ALP two runways extensions were I
mentioned. The extension to the south is to be the 1000 foot 1
runway that has already been appropriated for funding. j
The funds are not incorporated in phase 1.
r~
Mr. Harris said that was correct. At the time the funds had 4
not been received for that particular project.
Mr. Risser asked Mr. Harris if he could briefly go over the
three phases.
Mr. Harris said Phase i will be the first five years of
development, phase 2 will be the second five years, and phase
3 will be the last five years.
i /
a Mr. Risser said, so this is a 20 year plan with no commercial
traffic.
Mr. Harris said absolutely.
6r. Huey asked for correlation of the master plan with the
different stages.
Mr. Harris said the T hangers, tie downs, and apron area would
} be accommodated in all three phases. The extension of the
10000 feet to the south would occur in phase 1. The extension
of 11500 feet to the north is programmed for the year 199a-99.
The 5,000 foot parallel runway is in the later portion of
phase 20 approximately in the year 2003-2004. It will only be
built when the capacity and the demand requires it. The
terminal building would be done in a couple of expansions. it
would not be done at one time. The expansion will also be
based on the demand. The air traffic control towers are
generally built, maintained and operated by the FAA.
ALL fqq
aror r
fI
rs
r
1
i
4 ~Odi
Date
f p&z minutes
January 19, 1991
~F
Page 11 the
boa
been loo r. Gil[actormvhenoconsidering the 5 OOOa toot runway ng at a
safety Dr. Dulemba explained that when the board was looking at the
cities portion of the funding when the Master Plan was
presented. Everyone had reservations that our portion would
be hard to come up with, but if the demand is there the
economic income would warrant this or justify the expense.
answersaj had been
Mr. Harris . resonded to a list of
attached questions questions
brought up
Mr. 4ilkeson asked if there were any air space restraints
concerning the Denton Airport. {
r 1
Mr. Barris said that Coffman and Associates took the time to
go to DFN and meet with the FAA and people dealing with radar
control approaches, and air traffic. We were accompanied by
Mike Nicely of the FAA. The bottom line conclusion was that
there was not any real problems from an air space perspective.
Mr. 011keson asked what happens if the FAA does not approve
the ALP as it currently stands and does not do anything.
Mr. Harris FAA is constantly utilizing the mostcurrenttALP
they have on file as their way of recognizing projects,
are eligible for funding. if nothing is done to change the
current ALP and there is no approval, the FAA will continue to
use the old ALP that is currently on file. The old plan may
not illustrate som
aviation activity e PMr. ea Barris again neededrestatedthe that ethe
.
proposed ALP does not contain a 10,000 foot runway.
Mr. Cochran asked the maximum runway length that is permitted
under the current ALP.
Mr. Nicely said the current ALP only allows for 6,000 feet.
Mr. Gllkeson said the new one will allow for 7,500 feet.
Mr. Nicely said the ALP on file with the FAA includes the
runway extension 1,000 feet to the south. He explained for
f improvements to be made to the airport# the r►g opthctsiwould
have to be identified on a new ALP. s not
identified in an ALP that is on file with the FAA would not be {
eligible for funding. 1
Mr. Cochran said it the t :star Plan is rejected as presented, l~
what type of trouble would we have trying to make
improvements.
I
"J, I
F
. ego
Benda No.
%gendaite
P&Z Minutes "4~
January 19, 1994
Page 1s
Mr. Harris said first you would need to determine what the E
Master Plan is stating in terms of recommendations and what
things will move forward as a result of the approval of the
Master Plan, The recommendations that are in the Master Plan
are support for general aviation development of the airport.
The Master Plan approval process is essentially a trigger to
allow you to submit the ALP to the FAA for approval.
Mr. Gilkeson said the board made some changes already. We
have taken the 10,000 foot runway out. We have listened to
the concerns of people. The Master Plan as it currently
stands shows only a 7,500 foot runway and a 5,000 foot runway
located 750 feet to the west. All will take place on the
airport property without acquiring additional land.
Mr. Harris said that by moving the 10,000 foot runway to the
appendix it makes sure that there is no mistake on the focus
of the Master Plan.
Mr. Risser commented that the s.necifie recommendations are
important to the future of Denton, particularly for the
business community. whatever happens to the appendix and the {
disposition of the 10,000 foot runway, the issues addressed in
the Master Plan are critical for the Denton Airport to attract
business and economic growth.
Dr. Huey asked what the relationship was between the decision
that an airport will be established to be a commercial airport
and the determination to go ahead and build a commercial
facility.
Mr. Harris said first you would have to look at regional need.
It the NTCOG study Ooes recognise the need for a commercial
airport and by virtue of their studies they conclude that
Denton is an appropriate location. At that time the City
could mow forward on a change to the ALP in further studies.
The FAA would again have to do studies and they would not be
able to approve changes to a new ALP without regional support.
Mr. Nicely explained to help understand the role and
terminology of Airports. Denton has been designated by the
FAA as a reliever airport. Airports that have passenger
service are designated by the FAA As commercial service
airports. Designation depends on the number of passengers.
The roles of airports are driven by the activity that takes
place there. If Denton had a 7,500 foot runway in place and
an airline had an interest in providing passenger service, the
70500 foot runway would be long enough to accommodate. It
would have to be determined if the runway was strong enough to
handle the weight. The FAA has some regulations that require
R {
i
Sr V(O
. ..n a iY
re
r
j
j
r E AQft No.
AQOW
Date -
piZ Minutes
January 19, 1994
page 16
Yy
some security measures, such as fire fighting capability.
airport has to meet certain standards in terms of the safety
areas, The airport would then have to get a certificate that
would allow for passenger service to take place. There can be
an evolution from a general aviation airport
provide passenger service. It is a very sl to one that could ow evo is driven by an interest from an airline to providelcommercial
ution. it
service and the demand for such service.
Mr. Cilkeson said just because an airline decides it wants to
1 fly into Denton, that alone would not be enough for the FAA to
change the designation of the airport, They would have to
prove to the FAA there is a demand and a market at that
airport.
Mr. Nicely said the only thing the airline would
need assuming
the runway is to and stron enou would the
certificate from thFAenough The certifl ate hindiatesethat
there are safety areas and fire fighting capabilities. The
airport could then begirt service.
Mr. Jamieson said it was mentioned that the Denton airport has
been designated as a reliever airport, but at the current time
we have a very limited capacity as far as relief goes. There
are different stages of relief that the FAA approves,
Mr. Nicely said there are different capabilities that reliever
airports have. One example would be Grand Prairie. They have
no precision approach. They do have a large number of planet
based there, but most are single engine piston driven. The
runway is short. The airport provides a place for general
aviation aircraft to go.
Dr. Huey asked if an airpor: has the certificate from the FAA
s reliever airport could, in fact, be operating in the manner
of a commercial airport without being designated as such.
Mr. Nicely explained that when an airport receives passengers,
the designation would automatically change due to the activity
taking place there,
Dr. Huey said, but, the designation is not mandatory before
passenger service can exist.
Mr. Nicely said no, it does not have to be designated.
Mr. Nicely said there is an airport near Houston owned by the
City of 8ugarland, The airport is designated a reliever to
Houston's intervontinental and Hobby airports. Conquest
thelSugarland Airportito,DFN providing pa sengersiboafrom
d a
a
t .
1
r
AQe *No 4 D~
ApWalt
Date
Pit Minutes
January 19, 1994
I Page 17
plane in a years time the designation will change to a
commercial service airport. If they have 10,000 passengers In
a year they will be designated as a primary airport. The
change in designation would also affect the funding that the
airport receives. When they reach a primary status they are
guaranteed $400,000 a year for improvements.
Mr. Gilkeson asked where the $400,000 comes from.
Mr. Nicely said a trust fund has been established from ticket
taxes and fuel taxes. This fund is used to make Improvements, -
Mr. Harris said the de-regulation act in 1978 opened the
opportunity for free entrance and exit into and out of the
market by the airlines. They can desire to develop service in
any market they want. The Part 119 Certificate is only
I~
required when. you are. serving the airport with 30 passenger ~
! aircraft. A small commuter service that handles less then 30
passengers would come in and offer passenger service and not
have to have a certificate.
Dr. Dulemba ask Mr. Harris since he had been involved in
several airport planning projects had he noticed homes
developing in the area around the airport, or was in unique to
the DrW area.
t
Mr. Harris said it was everywhere. It is called competing
G development. The airports are trying to protect their future
and serve the aviation needs of the area, It is also competing
with development. The land that is suitable for airport
development is also very suitable for housing developments.
That's why future long range planning is taking place to make
sure problems do not occur later.
Dr. Dulemba said at the last Airport Advisory Board meeting
there was a citizen that made the comment that the airport was
40 years late in its planning. The comment to that was we do
not went to be 42 years late. We are trying to make the right
j decisions. There are currently 75 homes that will be affected j
1 by our decisions. If we wait longer there may be more that 75
E affected. Denton County is the fifth fastest growing county
in the nation and we need long range planning.
Terry Garland said Ranch Estates was built in tho late 1960's
and early 1970'x. Because of the flood plain there has not
been any major developments go in near the airport. There
have been a few houses built that have filled In the area.
The area is unzoned and gets pretty bad near the airport. DFW
did not zone when they built and now they are having problems
with the people that have moved in after the fact. Mr.
i'y I
' I
I
I
Age &No
adan
Date
Pia Minutes
r
January 19, 1994
Page is s
Garland asked Mr. Harris what his experience was around the
country concerning city zoning around airports in regards to
noise.
Mr. Harris said the advantages are clear. It provides the
City with the opportunity to have flexibility in the future.
The down side is terrible. It can be seen at DFw as well as
airports all over the country. It has been the airports fault
for not planning. The comprehensive planning process is {
fairly new (within the last 20 years) . A lot of land use
compatibility studies are being done. They want to address
the problems now instead of later.
` Mr. Cochran asked it the areas where there was no long range
planning were located within 17 miles from the airport.
Mr. Harris said a number of airports came to mind. Examples
would be Houston Intercontinental and Houston Hobby.
Mr. Cochran mentioned there was to be a new rosd opened in the
near future that would go straight to DFW and cut off even
more time.
Mr. Engelbrecht said that road would travel both directions.
The road will not only carry Dentonites to DFW, but in the
event that the projections are correct that road will carry
people to Denton as well.
Dr. Dulemba said one of the Issues discussed was to move the
airport to a non-populated area. The FAA does not allow you
to just move an airport. It it were moved it would no longer
be in the city limits of Denton and no longer close to
transportation.
Mc. Harris said if the airport were not fully capable of being
developed in its present location there would have to be site
selection study done, There has been a tremendous investment
on the part of the FAA and the citizans of Denton in the
existing facility. That investment would be thrown away.
That would not be a good expenditure of public funds.
Mr. Gilkeson said one of the concerns has been the devaluation
of property it the airport plan is approved and the zoning
takes place. He asked Mr. Harris had seen that happen. f~
Mr. Harris said not at all. If that were the case Mr. Perot I
would not have put an airport smack dab in the middle of his
property. There is documentation showing property values do
o up. The latid will be worth X amount per square foot
Instead of per acre. The types of usrs would be commercial or
i
Ap ~ O O
eerieNo
1
pelt 'Date
PiZ Minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 19
industrial. Those types of uses would be compatible with the
airport devolopment.
Ms. Russel! made the comment that there is a lot of flood
plain land in the area of the airport. There are quite a
number of restrictions for that area. She asked if there
isn't some type of compensation if there was the taking of
property.
M Mr. Bucak said the issue was raised at the joint Airport
zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory Board meeting.
when we talk about the 140 acres needed to extend the runway
and add the 7,500 foot and 5,000 foot runways, the City would
buy the property. Anyone that is located in zone one or two it
now will be able to be compensated whenever the noise levels
go over 65 decibels. We will either go out and purchase
avigation easements on our own or the property owners can sue
for inverse condemnation if we donOt. ,he reason for the zone
one and two is to prevent homes from building in an area where
there could be problems. This will help insure that the
development could be kept to LI or Commercial. The argument
now is "I can't sell the land for residential purposes and
that is the only market, so I am losing money". All
throughout the City we zone for other things besides
residential. We do not pay for approving a zoning district
someone does not want. We are planning our City. The point
is that once the 7,500 foot and a 5,000 foot runway are put
in, certain properties will no longer be functional. The Love j
Field Issue is that if you have a house in the area of the
airport and are trying to sell it as residential, the value
has gone down. The appropriate zeninq is commercial or
something other than resider.Iial. If you are selling that
same piece of property with a commercial use in mind the
property value goes up.
No. Russell asked when the restrictions that mill go into
place with the zoning will go into affect.
Mr. Bucak said they would go into affect when the ordinance is
passed. Everyone keeps talking about the 10,000 foot runway.
r What occurred when they came up with the Mastar Plan instead
of going with the five miles on each end of the airport and 1
{ 1/3 wiles on each side, the Airport Zoning Commission narrowed
the area down. They took the worst case scenario which could
be a 10,000 foot carrier runway and took the 65 LON and same
up with a zone for that. They then looked at 55 to 60 LDN and
came v with a zone for that. The restrictions will take
place Immediately in those two areas. The restrictions are
meant to be tough because we do not went homes going into
}
I
r;
Gate dp
PLZ Minutes
January 19, 1991 `
Page 20
those areas.
Mr. Engelbrecht asked if there were any environmental issues.
1
Mr. Harris said there was nothing that came to the surface
that will be a major issue . There are areas where mitigation
measures take place. That is common for any project.
Mr. Engelbrecht asked if it looked like there could be a major
cost incurred from dealing with the mitigation activity.
Mr. Harris said we do not know exactly. The review was meant
to be a very broad review. To know exactly, there would have
to be a great deal more study. The FAA in their letters
stress prudent planning should include short tern
recommendations that would not foreclose future expansion to
accommodate potential air carrier and passenger service.
Thatls what Coffman and Associates was asked to do. The FAA
has reviewed the study the way it has been drafted and the way
1 it has been structured. The FAA is very comfortable with the
s plan as it is.
Mr. Harris said he applauded the City for looking into the
issues and attempting to resolve them. They are tough issues
and just as any long range planning. Whether it be
thoroughfare planning or aviation planning or general planning
there can be implications. He said he felt the city had taken
the steps to move forward.
Mr. Svehla sail there was one part of a question that he had
heard Mr. Harris answer before, and he was not sure he had
answered it. Mr. Svehla said someone asked if costs were
estimated or allocated con^srning the environmental and
mitigation issues. Mr. Harris has said the estimates were
done in todays dollars with a contingency added to each of
those improvements. He said he thought the amount added was
25 percent. The dollars estimated for you are calculated at
todays costs bumped up 25 percent. Normally from an
engineering standpoint we work with 8 to 10 percent.
RECUlATIONSt
1 Mr. Harry Persuad said that Mr. Svehla mentioned that the City
Council had appointed an Airport zoning commission in December
of 1990-92. The Commission was made up of three member of the
Planning and zonir.g Commission and three members of the
Airport Advisory Board. The local government code provides
that the Commission shall prepare the regulations for land use
compatibility and height hazard in the vicinity of the
Airport. The Commission held a number of work sessions, met
j
- ql.
e
~a
S;j61d3N0•
4g811dd1I
PiZ Minutes
January 190 1994
Page 21
with consultants and looked at various proposals for airport
expansion and proposed development in that area. The
Commission considered a number of factors with regards to
local government codes. Staff presented you the Planning and
Zoning commission earlier the airport controlled area. That
is the area in which the city is authorized to prepare
regulations to control land use. The a controlled area has
been drawn up based on the existing Master Plan which is
currently enforced. The box is 1 1/2 miles from the center
line of the existing runway and five miles from each end of
the runway. It is 7,920 feet from the center line to the
west. The area shown in the box is such larger than the area
we will be talking about. The area the Airport Zoning
Commission decided to do the regulations for will fit neatly
inside the box leaving 2,000 feet on the west side. The
Airport Zoning Commission considered a number of factors in
coming up with its recommendations. They looked at the Denton
Development Plan with regards to land use development within
the City. They looked at State and Federal regulations with
regards to land use compatibility. They also went to the
American Planning Association,'s Planning Advisory Service with
regards to noise mitigation measures. They consulted
technical reports and looked at what other communities were
doing. Alliance Airport for example, drew a development box
7,000 feet from the center line of the runway and 10,000 feet
frog the end of the runways. Our development box is 10500
feet from the center line. The Commission was concerned that
if we did a :,000 foot area, it would cover a such larger area
where restrictions would apply. The Commission tried to
straighten lines along the 65 LDM lines. It is much easier
for the staff and property owners to work with straight lines.
In the airport development zone all uses are permitted except
all educational, hospital or nursin- homes, and penal
institutes, and uses that will create electrical interference
in navigational signals between airppoort and aircraft. These
uses are listed in the Master Plan in Appendix "D".
Mr. Cochran asked what was meant by uses that will create
interference in nsvigational signals (ham radio operators).
Mr. Persaud said any time there is conflict or interference
with the signals the problem will be researched and it would
be decided at that time if the use would have to be
prohibited.
In zone 1 the noise level will be more than 65 LDM. All uses
rohibited in the airport development zone will be prohibited
!n zone 1. All existing residential uses In zone 1 will
become non-conforming uses. They will be able to stay as long
as they want to, but they will not be allowed to expand or add
qa
aN0
er4l
p
E ~,aandaIt
-
We
Pi2 Minutes dip ae
January 19, 1994
page 22
on. They can only rebuild if there is damage to the structure
that is more than 50 percent of the value. The City may also
be able to purchase property in zone 1 if the funds are
available to do so.
All uses prohibited in the airport development zone will be
prohibited in zone 2 with the exception of the UNT water 3
research field station which is currently existing at the edge
of zone 2. New residential construction plus repairs,
rebuilding, or remodel operations on existing homes shall be
I required to sign an avigation agreement with the city. If the
property owner refuses to sign the avigation easement that
will trigger compliance with the noise mitigation standards.
The intent of those standards will be to send a message to
land owners that they are near to an airport and there will be
noise. Where the 65 decibel line is drawn does not mean that
is exactly where the 65 decibel noise will stop. The noise
could be at that level 200 feet from that line. The message
will be clear to people to discourage heavy investment into
single family homes. By signing the avigation agreement you
will be accepting the fact that you are living next to an
airport and there will be aircraft flying over your home. If
you refuse to sign the agreement, the city will tell you that
you will have to comply with noise mitigation standards.
Mr. Persaud briefly went over the noise mitigation
requirements (see attached).
Dr. Huey asked if question i 5 meant area rugs as well as
wall-to-wall'carpetea
Mr. Persaud said he thought it meant wall-to-wall carpets
only.
Mr. Cochran asked about change of ownership in the area.
Mr. Persaud said change of ownership would be an ordinary
occurrence. All new owners would be bound by non-conforming
regulations in the zoning ordinance. There will be no
restrictions on the change in ownership. The occupancy will
have to be known to determine the use.
Mr. 8ucek explained that if a property owner did not want to
do the noise mitigation they would have to sign the avigation
easement. When a person buys one of the homes they may not be
told what is going on at the airport. Title companies will
run checks on the outstanding easements and the property
owners will be told at closing that they will have planes
flying over the house and there will be noise. The avigation
agreement is there to put the now property owners on notice
i
e! aNo
Agendas
Dote '
Piz minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 27
E that his home is not noise mitigated.
3
Mr. Engelbrecht asked if they were referring to new buildings
f built after the toning is in place. j
Mr. 6ucek said yes.
Mr. Engelbrecht asked about the existing homes that are there
III now.
Mr. Bucek said they will not be made to do anything as long as
there is no destruction or additions to the property.
i
Mr. Persaud explained that if the building is destroyed by
fire (more than 50 percent of its reasonable value), it can
not be rebuilt. If the destruction is less than 50 percent of
the value the property owner will be allowed to rebuild to the
j original size.
I Mr. Engelbrecht naked what happens if the owner wants to add
{ on a room.
Mr. Persaud said in zone 1 they would not be allowed to add
on. In zone two, the property owner could add a room., but
would be asked to sign the avigation agreement. The city
home that to
wants you to know you are investing money on a
located around an airport and it will be noisy.
Mr. Persaud pointed out a copy of the avigation agreement in
the back up. He also said there was some confusion at the
public hearing held December a concerning aircraft flying 25
feet above the homeE. This is not so. He said an aircraft
coming down the approach zone one mils away from the airport
runway will be flying about 300 feet above the ground. The
height regulations of the FAA limit the height of buildings
one wile away from the runways to 105 feet. in the area which
is called the horizontal zone, the aircraft will be flying
about 1,000 feet above the ground. Building height, however,
will be limited to 150 feet.
Mr. Risser said the lines were straightened out for
racticality, but they still coincide with the LDN lines and
to forth. Is there a legal reason why 65 IAN Was picked and
Adjusted down to 45. Now were the two zones determined?
Mr. Persaud said the federal guidelines with regards to land
use compatibility in the vicinity of the airport as part 1.
l Because the city is concerned about the quality of life in
those areas around the runways, and the noise and the
1l~
M V
7
i
VOW&
" I p9onddtit
t cote 102
i
PiZ Minutes
j January 19, 1994
II Page 24
i
potential problems of home owners complaining about the noise
in that area. The Airport Zoning Commission saw it fitting to
even go somewhat outside of those areas as recommended by the
FAA to preserve the quality of life. The local government
code allows the city to control land use in a much wider area
square miles).
Mr. Gilkeson asked about the west side of the green area on
(l the map (zone 2). He said he did not think it extended
outside of the airport boundary.
1 Mr. Thompson said it extended about 1/2 mile outside of the
airport boundary.
Mr. Gilkeson asked if the area to the south was almost all
flood plain.
Mr. Persaud said yes, about 40 percent was in the flood plain.
Mr. Bucek said he wanted to clarify something. He said the
MA does not tell local government what to do at all. The
state gave us the big box. All we were given is the statutory
requirements of 1 1/2 miles on each side of the runway and
five miles on each end. There is nothing in the state
statute that says you follow FAA guidelines or anyone else's
to determine how much of that area is to be zoned. We know .
that if we were going out to build a primary airport anyone
that fall in the 65 LDN area will have to be compensated for
the reduction of the value of their property.
Mr. Engeibrecht said you are saying there is case law with
regard to 65 LDH, or there is state law that says that if the
court says you will, you will compensate beyond 65 LDN. The
City can impose whatever they want. However, It we do not
impose that and in the future we decide that we want even the
5,000 foot runway and there are more homes constructed out
there, we could be liable if the decibel level reaches 65 LDN. i
if the noise level is below that we should still have some j
moral obligation to inform folks in the future, but rye do have
a legal obligation if noise levels reach 65 LEON.
Mr. Bucek said the problem you have if you never have carrier
service but you had the 1500 foot and the 5009 foot runways,
it there is enough utilization of that airport by enough
planes those projections of where those 65 L04 can move out
i farther. The key thing is for you to try to make that loop
around there and still try to come up with a balance.
"I o Mr. Engelbrecht said the state gives us the area in which we
can apply these regulations (how many feet each side of the
i
ApdaNO.
~ } Apr
AGOW
Date
P&S Minutes ~3 ~Z r
January 19, 1994
Page 25
runway and how many feet from each end).
Mr. Bucek said it was 5 miles from each and and 1 1/2 miles
from each side of the runway.
Mr. Robbins said the box in question was the one with the
10,000 foot and the 7500 foot runway.
Mr. Cochran asked if the box was calculated with the lo,oo0
foot runway in mind.
Mr. Robbins said the box was for the 10,000 foot runway. The
enabling legislation allows us to regulate within the big box,
Mr. Cochran said it was not a legal instrument at this point.
The box is hypothetical.
Mr. Engelbrecht said it was the box that we could regulate in
! if that 10,000 foot runway is where.
E Kr. Gilkeson said if
you take the 30,000 toot runway out of
the box. Mr. Gilkeson explained that if the concept of the
100000 foot runway were not planned for in the box, the box
would just move 2500 feet east.
Mr. Engelbrecht asked when it would become the zoning box as
shown. would it be when the 10,000 foot runway is in our
Master Plan or in the ALP.
Mr. Persaud said it would be when the City Council adopts an
Airport Master Plan showing the 10,000 foot runway.
E Mr. Cochran said why are we sexing this today, because the
10,000 foot runway is not even a proposal at this point.
Mr. Engelbrecht said but still it could be.
Mr. Roubin said the enabling legislation says you can plan
within the big box for the ALP. who's ALP? It could be 1
Denton's ALP, not the ALP going to the FAA for approval.
Mr. Cochran said he had understood that the 10,000 foot runway
was delegated to the appendix and was not part of the plan.
Mr. Robbins said that was an important distinction to make.
Mr. Cochran said if we are going to use a box like this the
status of the 10,000 foot runway is elevated to a proposal.
i
96.
Ny
.
Age*No
Agendas
once
Pit Minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 26
Mr. Robbins said whatever we call it. One of the things
have called it is a plan. It could be the City of Dentonys
f plan. It is not going to be in the ALP for the FAA. we can
{ plan legally for that 10,000 foot runway and have regulations
around that. Wlations
Mr. Cochran said but, we have been saying that is not one of
our plans.
Mr. Svehla said what we have been saying all along, and what
we have been proposing and what you have had hearings on is
that box and that box is drawn based on the 71500 foot and the
10,000 foot runway. For a couple of reasons: 11 those were
decisions that we tried to show you in the chronology that we
ware advising groups, airport board, council and they were
j development, le It c uld aoccurf basedauon thew r ultimate
judgement of the consultant that we hired. Finally It was f
staffs position that we do not have the prerogative to bass or
decide one way, in this case which is PiZ who is a decision
making board, and or Council who is the ultimate decision
making board. Again, just like the consultant who said we
chose the moat intensive, conservative, biggest area to advise
the most people on and we chose to do that.
Mr. Cochran said but that choice seems to run contrary to a
c1
statement heard several times during the meeting, and that is
the 10,000 foot runway is not part of the plan.
Mr. Svehla said what we wanted to tell you is just that. The
ALP that the FAA is going to adopt has a 7,500 toot runway
and a 6,000 foot runway only. You have also been informed
this evening that there may be a need or a demand in the
future. Whether you choose to tone for that to protect it and
to enlighten the prospective owners, buyers or builders is
certainly the prerogative of the decision making boards. I i
think I would say that the joint Airport Zoning Commission
thought that was reasonable to at least pursue and again to
recommend so that could be discussed and evaluated. There has
been a lot of discussion about (we decided to do this that or f'
the other) the decision making boards, the boards that were f
set up by law, are the ones that made those choices. I want I
to make sure that everybody understands that. We (staff) did
not decide this that or the other. Secondl that was
certainly value judgement that the board made. They thought
there were options that should be at least discussed and
reviewed. It has been the goal of the staff to provide that
intoraation. I think that is what we are trying to do and
will continua to do. We will continue to try to move forward.
The Airport Zoning Board also tried to fins' that balance.
atlas.
f
f`
1
AOWNO '
!t
"
Data
P&Z Minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 27
That is why we tried to go through the regulations for you.
To show you that they tried to again find the balance.
Mr. Gilkeson said the enabling legislation with respect to
the black box, by the state, does that specify that a specific
runway has to be designated as a primary runway.
Mr. Svehla bail no sir, that as I understand it the enabling
legislation says you can zona based on the box that either
takes into account existing runways and improvements and or
proposed runways. How we interpreted that from a legal point
of view is, there in fact, could be two ALPs. one of them
could be the FhA's ALP, the other could be the ALP that has
the 7,S00 and the 10,000 foot runway or 7,500 and 5,000
runways. Those are choices that the boards as policy makers
and recommending boards make.
f Mr. Sucek said the possibility of a 10,000 foot runway was the
highest intensity use, so that was used as the guide to
determine the overlay zoning. He said he understood that
the board might want to take the 7,500 and the 50000 and find
out where the 60 to 65 LDH area would be and apply those
contours.
Mrs Cochran said the map he was looking at implied that the
100000 foot runway was a done deal.
Mr. Svehla said if he was given that impression he Wes sorry.
That box is drawn on both runways being there. rf we are only
talking about the 7,500 and the 5,000 foot runway the box will
move in.
Mr. Gilkeson said the box ta.,nuld move in '800 feet on tha
north.
Dr. Huey said regardless of whether the box is the size shown
or smaller, the zones can be established as proposed.
Mr. Svehla said yes the two zones would be able to fit into I
the box based on 7,500 and 5,000 feet.
Drs Huey said the whole matter of these zones is completely
independent of the questions of any recommendation from the
advisory board and or the Planning and toning Commission in
regard to the Master Plans
Mr. Svehla said yes, they were separate issues that were
brought to you as a result of the Airport Zoning joint boards
public hearings when there were suggestions made that we
should zone for what we are planning for.
q8.
i
Po nd&
gpandal
r~
Date '
Piz minutes
January 19, 1994
Pago 28
Mr. Engelbrecht said the Council would have to make two `
separate decisions.
stab ish ordinanc. the zoning,They will
and have to
Mr. SSvehla said they
accept the plan
legally have to reduce the zones in
Dr. Huey said we would to.
size we rhos not
Mr. Svehla said that is correct.
I
Mr. Engelbrecht said if we do reduce the zones and twenty five
years later we see a demand and want to have a 10,000 foot
i runway, then we have the potential of having additional
development out there that has none of these regulations l be imposed and a epthattis 65ndecibels.or lower by
back to paying for anything
then.
Mr. Svehla said thtt was one of the main driving concerns that
the Airport Zoning Board looked at. We need to protect the
airport. We do not want to have the same problems that DFW is
having now.
Mr. Engelbrecht said when the issue came back, assuming there
is no 100000 foot runway and the zones are moved to the east.
We are going to move somewhere within the special purppoose
activity center. I don't see any reason to move those lines
inside the special purpose activity center. I do not want to
encourage any residential development within that area anyway.
We daoided that with the land use plan some years back. If
you move east with the zones you will back into the special
purpose activity center.
Dr. Huey said she was a member of the COG board when DFW was
designed and established. We were building for 50 years down '
the road. Here we are twenty years later and look at all the
problems and what is going on now.
Mr. Svehla said there are 12 structures currently in zone one,
and somewhere between 63 aril 10 structures in zone 2.
Mr. Engelbrecht said when the plan is presented again he would
like to see how many structures are in both zones. He said
the box drawn differently and be able to do a comparison. He
said he would like to do a visual comparison. He said he
would also like to know how much property is involved if the
boxes are changed and how much of Viet land can be developed.
tt the boxes are moved not to consider the 101000 foot runway
how many structures would fall out of the sons and how such of
(fin ~
3
111 i
gA.CM.Y e.-6~
Ulm
R
I
i
1
AG"No
Apal16d1
Gate
Piz Minutes
January 19, 1994
Page 29
that land could be developed.
Mr. Svehla said it only the existing runway were used the area
is only a 33 square mile box. He said he believed zone one
about s 0 an aea oil*$o Ne Yll get little that informtion the total Yox is
Mr. Svehla said there was one last point he vented to cover.
It is the famous air carrier study done by COG. I talked to
Mr. Nicely from the FAA, and Julie Dunbar from COG , and Jim M
Alexander, or the sfichairman of that rst part of March, dthoseuthr et pethe ople dare
February
telling us that study group will make a decision on additional
airport facilities (translated to satellites or satellite).
Then they will take another 12 to 15 months to decide where
the satellites will go. obviously 6 weeks from now we may be
talking about a very remote issue. in six weeks it the COG
group says we are not going to do additional airport
facilities, then it makes the conversation more mute, because
Mr. Nicely has already said if there is no demand, or it is
not on the plan, it will not base on the FAA plan because the
plan is being funded by COG and the FAA. Timing wise has been a lot of questions about waiting a year or two,
certainly that is the choice of the decision making body, but
think with w inllroughly have a piecweekspretty important information
for you
Mr. Nicely commented that trio Master lan as the city of
Denton's Plan. The FAA does not approve the
pIan. Ns.only provide whatever assistance we can in reviewing
it and helping the city prepare and finalize tnat plan.
the FAA will approve anal what they are going to scrutinize the
most is going to be the Airport Layout Plan.
Mr. Risser said as the airport board looked at the Master
Plant it not only was to talk about what we knew would happen,
but it also was to see what that may whetherthe
you ucanebu Sd ra
are some good questions
10,000 toot runway or not and that is dictated by land. The
city brow tined the scope of the Master Plan. The problem with
the io,ooo foot runway is not vhethMr it is in the runway, in
fact you could make a good case that it still belongs in the it talk
about the
kindsofath thingsr welawill tfaceenshouldt we a er have the
possibility of doing that. The challenge here is when we
begin to use it to make decisions. The Airport Advisory Board
felt that it was appropriate to as those
what qwe knew, uestions aI hove
E the best opinions available today given 1 no problem with how it comes out, but I would submit that it
' III
nIYM rr.».i.+.
e ,
1
Age*No
Oele
Pia Minutes err
January 19, 1991 j
Page 10 S
would be Irresponsible of us to not take that on and talk `
about what Is possible. It would be assuring that if we as
leaders felt that we somehow had to take it off the table
because of our inability to explain what we are really about.
I do not envy you having to decide on the zoning, but from an
airport board point of view that it is valuable to have that
and we just need to figure out how to determine and tell the
" story about what we will use and what we will not.
Dr. Huey asked if the 7,500 foot runway has been in a plan for
I some time, and is true that it would be a necessary addition
with the present assignment of the airport.
Mr. Svehla said the 1986 plan is currently in affect. The ALP
e that vas adopted by the FAA only has 61000 feet of that runway
in it. It does not have the last 10500 feet or the northern
extension. If we just maintain the existing plan we would not
be able to move forward at some point to ask for inprovemo"ts
or the runway extension. We would have to adopt a new pla )r
whatever. However, the FAA hds said they will continue to
look at the 70500 feet for the purpose of a general aviation
airport.
Mr. Engelbrecht thanked everyone for coming and the
information that had been provided.
Meeting adjourned at 10x15 p.n.
4
~ r
'r
o r. i
I +
1
)gendaNo. '
ATTACHMENT 12 Agsndalt /
~dte
minutes Pia Commission
July 130 1294 0
Page S
i
b. Hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation
to the city council with regard to the proposed regula-
tions for height control and compatible land use zoning in
the vicinity of the Denton Municipal Airport.
Staff report given by Harry Persaud.
j The second item looks at the area for land use control around #
the airport based on our long term plans for development of
the airport. I want to point out to the commission that we
have done this before. The local government code allows the
I city to control and regulate the land use within an area 1.5
miles from the center line of an existing or planned runway on
both sides and 5 miles from both ends of those runways
(existing and planned). I would like to point out on the map,
the boundaries so you can get an idea of the area we are
authorized under the local government code to do land use
control. On the north side, PH 1173 and Ganzer Rd, on the
west side, Wolf Road and 2449, to the south, Crawford Road,
on the east side, it is I-35 west. it is a large area for
land use control. You are aware the whole idea of preparing
land use regulations for the airport has been a-matter of
consideration of the Airport Zoning Commission. The commis-
sion is comprised of 3 members of the Airport Advisory Board
and the Planning and Zoning Commission. That commission was
appointed by the City Council specifically to determine the
area and the type of regulations we should have.
What we have for you tonight are two options for defining the f
area and the regulations that would apply to those areas.
Option I: This one comes as a recommendation from the
Airport Advisory Board. You just made a recommendation to
the council with regards to the Airport Layout Plan. That
plan showed a 7,500 foot runway and a 50000 foot runway
700 feet to the west. You will notice that this layout is !
far less than the controlled area I just showed you, there
is a Zone I and II. This layout does allow for the
Airport Layout Plan we just recommended. It also provides
for opportunities for further development to the west,
possible future facilities to the west. Both the Airport
Zoning Commission and the Airport Advisory Board in E
considering future options for development of the ai
strongly recommend that we do not closethose opt~ns.
They recommend that we prepare our land use plan in such
a way that those options would remain open for the future.
This layout does provide for accommodating possible future
runway development 2,500 feet to the west of the existing
rs
i
AQendaNo.
lips t
ate -
Minttes Pis commission f!J
July 13, 1994
Page 4
runway. This is the layout the staff is also recommending
to the commission.
option II: The second option is the one that came from
the Airport Zoning Commission. As you can see it is a
wider area. It was developed to accommodate a 10,000 foot
_ runway, 20500 feet to the west. I would be pleased to
respond to any questions.
The Airport Board in consideration of these two options has
come up with the recommendation of option II.
Mr. Cochran: What are the various widths of the each of the
tones? How much narrower is Layout I than Layout II?
Mr. Persaudt Those were done in such a way they could be
super imposed.
Mr. Engelbrechti Any other questions for staff? Would you
just review the regulations that are imposed inside Zone I and
Zone II?
Mr. Persaud: On the layout we showed there were two zones, I
i It. Both zones constitute the development zone. That is
the area in question that is going to be affected by airport
plhnning. In the airport development zone all uses as allowed
n the Denton Zoning Ordinance will be permitted except
prohibited uses listed hares
Educational Facilities (incl ding public and private
schools), kindergarten, childcare facilities, collE+ges,
universities, vocational schools, hospitals, nursi.r.;
Lopes, institutions providing for convalescent or rehabil-
itative care, residence homes for the aged, institutions
for persons convicted of crimes, uses that would create
I+ electrical interference with navigational signal or a, %y
communication between the airport ?nd the Aircraft, uses
that will endanger or interfere with lancing, taking o!!,
or maneuvering of an aircraft.
These are all uses that are sensitive to noise around the,
airport and are prohibited within development zone. The
l development zone is divided into Zone I and It. There are
f some differences between Zone I and Zone II that I would like
to point out.
Zone I is all the area with noise levels higher than 65 LDN.
That is the tone closest to the runway. In Zone I, all of the
uses that I read to you as prohibited in the Development Zone
z-
.x
[77-
o. 'GVd
Ag"daN
Agaadal
ninutes PiS Commission Late
July 13, 1991 9~ ~i?d
Page 7
are also prohibited in Zore I. New residential developments
are prohibited. Existing residential developments will
become nonconforming uses. The existing homes can stay there
as long as they don't expand their existing site. In Zone I,
property owners who want to rebuild or repair their homes, the
city may offer to 'purchase these homes %Aapendi%~g upon the
availability of funds. If the city does not purchase for some
reason, they will be allowed to repair and rebuild providing
they follow Noise Mitigation Standards in the regulations.
Those regulations are intended to reduce inside noise levels
to less than 45 LDN from external sources. You will recall
that those Noise Mitigation standards say for example you
couldn't have a fireplace that is vented outside. That would
bring in noise from outside. There were some other features
in there with regard to construction, walls, and venting A/C i
vents, etc. Based on questions from the past public hearings,
staff did work with some local builders in that area. The
bottom line was that a 2,000 square foot home constructed in
Zone I, complying with Noise Mitigation Standards would cost
$101000- $15,0000 more. Zone I is the place where we would
like to discourage residential development because it is
higher than 65 LDN.
Mr. Engelbrecht: I undexetand there are four homes in Zone I
under the proposal you are recommending.
Mr. Pareaud: Correct.
In Zone II, all uses prohibited in the Developnent Zone I will
be prohibited in Zone It except the UNT Water Research Field
Station, it will be permitted.
The new residential construction, repair,. remodeling, and
rebuilding operations shall be required to sign an Avigation
Easement Agreement with the city. T1%9 purpose of that
Avigation Easement Agreement is basically to let property
owners and homeowners know before they make an investment, !
that airplanes will be flying in this area. The Avigation E
Easement Agreement gives the city the right to fly aircraft
above their homes. I must point out thit Zone it is outside
of the 65 LDN line. The noise levels in Zone II will be less
than 65 LDN. You can live in areas less than 65 LDN based on
National and FAA Standards. The city would like to go a step
further to inform the property owners that this is an area
near the airport and to have them take necessary steps to
reduce the noise levels. If the homeowner decides that he
doesn't want to sign the Avigation Easement Agreement, then
the city will require them to comply with the Noise Mitigation
f Standards. Those standards are inttnded to reduce outside
~7i6A'.M!;>..y)k'h;.+5s,..n.,... , . , . fi c :r uJ.:i.
I
AgendaNo. ~ -
Agendait
Date QQ
Miantes Pi8 Commission A a
July 13, 1994
Page 0
f
noise levels to less than 45 LDN inside the house. There in
no problem in terns of living in Zone II.
Mr. Robbins: Could you address the Height Hazard Standards?
Mr. Persaud: I want to'present to you the isometric view of
the runway and the approach zone. on the drawing, the
approach surface is 50,000 feet from the primary surface going
to the approach zone. The slope for the first 10,000 feet is
1 foot for every 5o feet of slope. For the next 40,000 feet,
it is 1 foot for every 40 feet. That shows us that aircraft
? landing on the runway requires certain ground slopes. if
buildings project above that slope, it could pose a danger to
the buildings. The horizontal surface around the runway is
10,000 feet from the center line. Then, there is a conical
surface that has a slope of l foot for every 20 feet as you go k
out. There is a network of building heights that has to be
maintained under Part 77 of the FAA regulations in order to
zt protect any danger or hazard to human life in that area. The
Noise Standards and Height Regulations will work together.
The Height Standards will be !roved from Part 7; of the Federal
Regulations Into our Zoning Oedinance.
Mr. Engelbrecht: There was a gentleman concerned about an oak f
tree, will your height regulations have any iiupaet on the f
tree?
Mr. Persaud: Yes, that tree is within the conical surface.
1
Mr. Engelbrecht: So the tree is all right? f
Mr. Persaud: Right, the tree is all right, it is less than
150 feet.
Mr. Woolfolx: Mr. Gilkeson, the current chairman of the
Airport Advisory Board has asked for me to address you as the
petitioner for the plan that is currently on the screen. The
1 Airport Advisory Board delayed the approval of the consider-
ation of the Height Zoning Noise area for approximately 9
months to address the concerns of the citizens. We feel we
have done this in the best possible interest of all concerned.
It is therefore strongly recommended that the Planning and
Zoning Commission approve the land use plan as currently
approved by the Airport Advisory Board which is this plan. it
is also recommended that this action be taken as soon as
'a possible so as to accommodate the rotential expansion of this
valuable Denton asset. I must switch hats because i was also I r
the chairman of the other board which Woo recommended this I
particular zone to you. As Mr. Persaud has pointed out to
.
' ' IkNdl';MiaxU'k•G 3J+taF,., r,c n}b:dr w+ .
v 1:SriFl~
f
Agenda No. '
agendal
Minutes Pi8 commission r'e , M
July 13, 1994
Page 9
YOU* this is a larger zone on the east and west sides of the
new proposal. The current Airport Advisory Board has actually
brought this zone in approximately isoo feet on each side from
east to west. It has been extended slightly on the north and
south. This was worked out in consideration with Mr. Rafes
and a number of the folks who were originally concerned about
this proposal. That is how the new proposal came into being.
As the chairman of the Height Zoning Noise Board, I cannot go
- a against tl:e recommendation of that particular board. However
because we have not had an official in
with a few of the other board membersetweg feand after el the zone ithat
the Airport Board has presented to you is an acceptable
modification and negotiated settlement in being able to
satisfy all of the people involved in this.
leave this particular proposal on the table because ithisethe `
particular recommendation of that board, I would tell you that
I believe we are in agreement that the other plan may be
better.
f Mr. Enqelbrecht: Is there anyone
speak in favor of this present who would tike to
petition?
Jim Risser: I am on the Airport Board. I want to strongly
p support the proposal on the board. The Airport Board has two
responsibilities as far as I am concerned. one is to project
the value of the airport. The second is to protect the safety
of those in the air and on the ground. We feel that this in
faot makes that compromise by providing for future zoning of
that area, i think it is also important to note that there i
are no implications whatsoever in terms of any specific future
configuration. This simply protects the area, as well as the
j, neighboring home owners in future plans. I will add my
comments for support for this recommendation.
Dr. Hueys Are you it support of this
I onel proposal or the other
Mr. Risers I am in favor of recommendation of the smaller
foot print.
Dr. Hueys What are the advantages of this one over the other
one,
I! Mr. Risser: There aro only 4 existing homes in this one
versus 13 in the previous. It still maintains all of the i
options possible for accommodating aircraft that may likely
someday be involved. I do believe the size of this footprint
will accommodate any future possibilities for the Denton I
Airport and minimize the area affected for zoning protection.
f
t
OIII
AgeodaNO,
ApendaI
a3te
Miautea pis Commission 91;001 pf
July 13, 1994
Page 10
Mr. Engelbrecht: Anyone else who would like to speak in
favor of this petition? Anyone who would like to speak in 3
Opposition to this petition?
Warren Meyer: There is a possibility of what was presented
tonight would be returned to you in the near future for some
changes, is that what you said?
Hr. Engelbrecht: No sir, we are considering this proposal.
I believe the indication was that in the event that we wanted
to make changes it would come back to us. In the event that
the Federal Aviation Administration wanted to grant funds
based on a plan different than ours, then it would come back
to us.
Mr. Meyer: Then it is not really set in concrete as it
appears to be?
Mr. Engelbrecht: If it is approved by us and the City
Council, then that is our plan. That doesn't mean we can't
change our plan at some future date. Is there anyone also who
would like to speak to the issue?
S
Richard Rafes: I reside at Rt. 1 Box 391, Ponder, Tx.
to make sure this is absolutely cletr for the citizens aof
Denton. The plan as I understand it, is the only
table that the FAA is supporting, As I understand it,~ tthe
he
master plan, which is used as a basis for this footprint or
any other footprint, is lobbed with errors. This committee is
addressing the zoning for the 5,000 foot extensions, not a
10,000 foot extension. I think it is very important that the
citizens know this is only for the 5,000 foot west or whatever
it is. I would like to state that I received a notice of
public hearing, it indicated nothing about a 10,000 foot
runway. Any consideration of this committee of anything
bigger than a 5,000 foot runway, 700 foot west and parallel,
should be based solely on that amount. Otherwise, I think you
have not provided the citizens with the correct notice of what
the public hearing was about. These are tta acceptable LDN's
for noise restrictions as depicted in the most flawed master
plan. If you look at these, in the upper left hand corner, it
says residential acceptable sound levels at below 65. The
zoning requirements address 45 LDN's being acceptable within
-'r a house and making their footprint based on that. I only ask
the committee to consider that this is far more taxing on the
citizens than the 65 LON which is permissible under the law.
I want you to consider that when you draw this front foot-
excess of whatdIsrrequiced underethefootprint.
it It is far in
` Q,
going to
Y;
•9Wl
1
• AgNI~tNO '
AP*1
Minut*s P62 Commission
July 13, 1994
page 11
I
affect a lot of citizen.
{ The other issue is the aviation easement agreement that !
residents would be required to sign. This is something that
I do have a major concern about. This is a very damaging
statement to individuals who have to sign this. From my
perspective it seems unfair. The grantor must agree that they
will be subject to noise, vibrations, fumes, dust, fuel
particles and other effects that may be caused by operation of
aircraft landing, etc. There maybe some requirement to
legally inform an individual in order to avoid litigation. I f
think a property owner who signs this unfortunately stigmatiz-
as his property value severely. it would seem to me that if
they agreed that they lived in an airport zone, that would
communicate the message to any future person buying that
property. I would ask some of the building requirements, such
as fireplace, be changed. I would ask the committee to please
consider the excessive easement agreement, the footprint goes '
beyond the 65 LDN, and the zoning notice only talked in terms
of a 5000 foot reference.
Mr. Cochran: Could I get a copy of the overhead?
r
Mr. Rafes: It is in the Airport Advisory Plan.
Mr. Cochran: Have you discussed the latest development with
your neighbors?
Mr. Rafael No, I cannot say I am representing the people
here. I have been very vocal with the Denton Chamber of
Commerce and extremely vocal against the 10,000 foot runway.
There has been no factual support. We have not had any group
meetings. I am not speaking for or against any other plan.
I aim speaking of the stigmatization of a large runway be.'ng
put there.
Mr. Engelbrecht: Is your property within 200 feet of Option
I or are you in Option II?
Mr. Rafes: I an out of option I II. Because my home is
built, I have no worry about these types of things. I am more
concerned about the citizens stigmatization on the 10,000 foot
a runway because I thought that was completely ludicrous and
still do.
Ken Bohnsons I reside at Jim ChryStal Rd. I am in Option I,
Richard speaks for me.
Don Coles I haven't been privileged to be at other meetings.
~s
7Cx[t
R4'4'A9y
~endaNo. 91/-
ale
Apneal
Date
Minutes Pis Commission
July 13, 1991
Page 12
I live next to Ken Bohnson. I am in favor of buying me out
and sending me down the road. I have been here for 25 years
and I am ready to sell it. I think it is great for Denton and
I think it ought to go.
Billie Gregory: I reside at Rt 1 Box 370B, Denton, Tx 76207.
I am in Zone I. 1 would like to go on record as saying I
oppose the width of Zone I. I don't think it is necessary,
with what they are proposing. Even though they have brought
it in, it still looks like they are planning for the lUtOoo
foot runway.
Mr. Engelbre.cht: It would appear to me there was some
opposition and indifference. Would the petitioner like to
make a rebuttal?
Mr. Hoolfolk: We understand the opposition. No rebuttal at
this time.
Mr. Engelbrecht: The public hearing is closed.
Mr. Persaud: The notice sent out stated the city is autho-
rized to control land use within a 5 mile area from the end of
the runways and 1/2 mile from the center line. The reason for
that is, we thought it necessary to point out the larger area
so people who live in those areas will be concerned. Hopeful-
ly they will call for further information or attend the public
hearing. for land use control purposes, that was mentioned in
the public notice. For the ALP, it did mention the 7,500 and
f the 5,000 foot runway.
Tho Avigation Easement Agreement is only intended to implement
the Height Hazard Regulations. In the Aviation Easement
-Agreemenf:_ you will notice that there are distances that you
have to sign that the city will be flying aircraft above your
home. :host distances will be calculated at the time of the
building permit. For example, there is a permit for location ~
within Zone It which the maximum height is 150 feet. We will
say that the airport will be flying 150 feet over your
ii property. Those are federal regulations and we can't change
those. The purpose of the regulations however, were intended
to tA': property owners that aircraft will be flying above
theii properties. It wasn't intended to be restrictive, it
was simply implementing i federal regulation for the city to
draw the attention of L-perty owners that aircraft will be
flying r` ove their prof, ty. The fact of dust, noise, and
fumes q< 1 with aircraft flying. It may not however, be
applicable to all properties in Zone II.
w
Z;%
f
f
j
i Date
Minutes Pis Commissioa
July 13, 1994
page 13
4
I also want to point out the land use chart ,shown, it is a
e our . All
chart staff con pe our d when we mad is thatmin dZonen II the
we are saying ortunit to sign the agreement, or
property owners have the opp Y
to noise mitigate. it is nOOwnernt to be restrictive, but
informative for the property
he layo for c
tAirportuAdvisoryt Board and onsiderthe
I also want to mention the
ation, recommended by
staff, in no way would accommodate a 10,000 foot runway.
r' Mr. Cochran: The avigation agreements exists purely to put
the property owners on notice that there will be airplanes
flying above them. You characterize this is not intended to
be restrictive. The coercion used says that if they do not
sign this agreement, they have to take some extreme measures
to soundproof their houses. I am uncomfortable ivotin s oh yin
favor of making eeiflaechhave angetofdownership of a piece of
comment. What happens
property?
Mr. Persaud: It goes with the property not the owner.
Mr. Cochrans Will they have to sign the agreement or sound-
proof their house?
Mr. Persauds Nothing happens. In Zone II there is no need to
do anything unless you expand or build a new home. i would
like to point out that based on direction from the commission,
we have made the Noise Mitigation standards more accommodat-
ing. The homeowner or developer does not nece'ssaril have to
do anything that is written i 65 tLDNOs where hose Noise yMiti ou canf liv tail
dards, in the areas less the less
than 45 LDN#
you build a house, &nd the inside noisedis You may never have
no Noise Mitigation Standards are app
to Noise Mitigate in some areas in Zone 11 to achieve that
standard.
Mr. 8ucek: All of the green area, is looking at a possible
noise level 20-30 years down the road. They
{
who lives in that green area rigt renow. ach At such compensable point as the
damage. !j
noise level reaches 65 LDN, you
What you are trying to say to people is that iri 30 years there
may be something here. The problem you see is if you don't do
those p ople tdon't have that hat h ve built. ease-
that, you ay people build, if
meat, you pay
Mr. n epub]ic hearingel free to talk to Yr. 8ucek at the
end this t
a.1:r
# r
I
II
I
~en4aNo yD O ~
tt
Minutes pis commission
July 11, 1994 Date
nags 14
Mr. Bucek: As soon as this program is over V will be avail-
able. I think the confusion is the same thing on the yellow. 4
Those are over 65 LDN, but that is somewhere down the road.
Right now, if you are in the yellow, what we are flying right
now does not reach the 65 LDN. If there is any area in the
yellow right now where the 65 LAN did occur,' that would be
compensable right now.
Dr. Huey: I want to be sure that something is clarified: the
authority of this commission in zoning actions. Mr. Rates
said we are limited by the number of feet set but in a notice
sent to the citizens. My understanding is that infact, that
is not true. We are limited by the state law and it would
extend to b much greater area than is outlined in either of
these footprints. I wanted the record to be sure that it is
clear, and that a restriction on our authority is not inserted
on the record.
'Mr. Engelbrecht: With regard to the maximum limits of
possible zoning, what are these limits based on?
Mr. Persauds it is based on the definition of a controlled
rr area as incorporated in a local government code. It is 165
smiles from the centerline of an existing or nlinned runway and
5,000 feet from both ends of the runways. That encompasses
the controlled area that the city is authori#ed to regulate
land use.
Mr. Engelbrecht: The eastern and western boundaries of this
particular limit were based on the center line'of the proposed
E 7,500 foot runway which is currently existing it 5,000 and the
proposed 5,000 foot runway to the west of that. Is that
correct? Is that what you have used to establish the eastern
and, western boundaries?
Mr. Persauds That is correct. It is 1.5 miles from the
center line of the existing run way and 1.5 miles on the west j
I side of the proposed 5,000 foot runway. When we sent a notice
to the property owners, we mailed notice within 200 feet of
the larger layout. We did point out to them that we were
going to do land use control in a larger area, including both
options.
Mr. Engelbrechts Other questions for staff?
Mr. Cochran: The city may offer to purchase property subject
to the availability of funds. What if a person does not want
to sell?
r yyy~]]]
I
JIMA%
ugenda',b. d
Minutes Pis Commission
j July 13, 1991 [~19 i
f Page 15
eel
'top
Mr. Persaud: The areas within the 65 LDN are subject to
acquisition from the city. Because those lands are unsuitable
for residential development, the FAA recommends the city
acquire those lands. Those cases would have to be worked out
individually.
Mr. Robbins. Refer to page 91 of your back up for permitted
uses. Provisions 35:13 of the Code of ordinances says: Thou
shalt not expand, thou may not expand a nonconforming use.
Those four houses in Zone I are nonconforming uses. Even if
' funds were available, and the person did not want the city to
sell the house, he cannot expand it under 35:13. If he
chooses to expand it, he can do that, but he has to comply
with the Noise Mitigation Standards. If funds are available,
he has three options:
1. He can sell.
2. He can decide not to do anything.
3. He could expand under the Noise Mitigation Standards.
Mr. Engeibrecht: Are there any other questions for staff?
is there a comment or a motion? Please review the two options
and the recommendations of those options. There were public
hearings by the Airport Zoning Board and Airport Advisory
„ Board, the Planning Commission along with the Airport Advisory,
Board. As a result, correct me if I am wrong, the Airport
Advisory Board reassessed the issue, and made,a recommendation .
for the other option which we are calling option I? The
Airport Zoning Board could make no comment on Option I because
they had already disbanded at that time.
Mr. Persaud: They made their recommendation to the City
Council and the Planning and Zoning commission.
Mr. Engelbrecht: At that time, they ceased to exist?
Mr. Persaud: Right, then you continued working with the
Airport Board. I don't think they ceased to exist, we just
haven't had a formal meeting together since that time.
Mr, Robbins: Their terms expired.
Dr. Huey: I would like to take a moment to express the grati-
tude for all the interest and the citizens coming to the meet-
ings. I would like to say thank you to the staff who have j
reworked the plans in accordance with expressions of concerns
from citizens at earlier hearings. I realize that no plan or
zone is always satisfactory to everyone. I do think this is
a forward looking proposal. I move that we approve and pass
F., i~a
LIM AV.
17+
i
O
!
.aQendeNo
ggen~alt
xinutes Pis commission pate' p
July i31 ,994 O 010
gags 16 I f
' on to the council the recommendation for Option il.
<3
Mr. Norton: I second that.
Mr, Engelbrechts I has been moved and seconded to recommend
approval of option I to the City Council.
Mr. Cochran: T can vote for that. This is a pretty loud
signal that things in the future will get. iauaer.
Mr. Engelbrecht: I would like to recoynizb the Airport Zon!.nq
Board# representatives from the FAA, North Central Counoil'of
Governments, hnd the Denton Chamber of Comzerc6. All those in,
favor? This motion carries unanimously 1(6-0)
i
. y ; I i I :5.
}
o-i
r
f* I
I
fy1 ~11V 1~ Y~.f rr I
Y. ..l ~.rr. -A
771
1
U
ATTACHMENT 13 ~etrdaNO.
Airport Advisory Board Minutes A90*1
March 16, 1994 Date
Page 3 /Gl ~/O I
Mr. John Hicks stated his reason for attending the `vV a
Airport Advisory board meeting was to address the zoning
changes which had been proposed for the area surrounding
the Denton Municipal Airport. Mr. Hicks stated he has
lived in Estes Estates for 20 years which is located !
near I-35 W across from Denton Regional Medical Center.
Mr. Hicks said, although he is out of the zoning area
proposed by the Airport board he can see and hear the
} airplanes. Mr. Hicks stated his concerns for the need
of proper zoning were so that the air traffic at Denton
Municipal Airport would not be hampered as it is at
DFW and Love Field due to the failure to zone properly
a number of years ago before he current development
J of houses.
Mr. Hicks stated he felt the Airport Advisory board j
should make recommendations to rezone the property around
Denton Municipal Airport in anticipation of growth and
development in the community. Mr. Hicks said he is
- in favor of growth in Denton, Texas.
George Gilkeson, Airport board chairman thanked Mr.
Hicks for his comments and invited Mr. Hicks to stay
for the remainder of the meeting.
III. Consider Airport Master an,
Mr. Gilkeson brought forward the first item for
s!` ; discussion on the Agenda which was the consideration
of the Airport Master Plan.
Mr. Gilkeson made a motion for the board to approve
the Airport Layout Plan and the Master Plan as it is
currently written vIth discussion to follow.
Mr. Gilkeson opened the floor for discussion.
Terry Garland, Airport board member asked for information
regarding the current status of the Airport Master Plan.
Joe Thompson, Airport Manager explained to Cre board ii
that this Master Plan in it's preliminary draft copy
Master I
potential
the
i
FAA has approved as
the
is the plan '
Plan and their recommended Airport Layout Plan. The
plan has a 7500' runway which is the extension of the
existing 5000' runway and an alternate 5000 runway
to be built 700' west of the existing runway. Mr.
Thompson stated the FAA supports the position of Denton
Municipal Airport as a reliever airport but will only
build extensions or other runways if there is a demand
nII1:.h 6R+'
M+
r
J ~gendaNo.
Airport Advisory Board Minutes
March 16, 1994 Apeodalt f.f
Page 4 It9 I
' by aircraft. je
k Jim Risser, Airport board member questioned if the
Master Plan was the same as the Master Plan discussed f
i. ! in prior Planning and Zoning meetings. I
l Joe Thoapson, Airport manager explained to Mr. Risser
that the Master Plan was the same preliminary draft
. copy which had been discussed with Planning and Zoning.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager and Airport Director
€ stated that staff is suggesting to accept the Master
Plan and then approve or recommend to the City Council
Gr approval of the Airport Layout Plan so we can move
forward. Mr. Svehla stated that the staff continues
to receive good reports froe. Mr. Mike Nicely of the
FAA stating that Denton ►Sunicipal Airport is in the
top running for a grant in 1994. The board members
were informed that the preliminary engineering for the
1000' extension is almost complete which will put the
airport in a favorable position to accept a grant in
1994.
Mr. Svehla stated that council had approved the
final acquisition of the Porter tract of land on the
northwest And of the airport. This means all of the
clear zone land required for- the 1000' extension to
the souk1h, is now owned by the City of Denton.
°i Mr. Svehla stated it was important for the Airport
r- Advisory board and the Planning and Zoning board to
recommend to the council at this time so the councils
g can receive and approve the recommendations in order.
F to move forward.
George Gilkeson, Airport Board chairman stated in order
to make the motion official and bring the motion out
k of the discussion stage the Airport board needed a motion
and a second for the recommendation of accepting the
preliminary draft c:py of the Master Plan and approval
of the Airport Layout plan for Denton Municipal Airport
as written.
j Jim Risser made a motion for the Airport Advisory board
1I to accept the Master Plan and adopt the FAA recommended
1 Airport Layout Plan.
f Mike Stephens, Airport board member secondod the motion.
i
0
4
i y~
rso
r
1
4penC2Na
I Airport Advisory Board Minutes Agendalt
~ March 16, 1994 Date Page 5 C9 J
Mr. Jamieson at this time asked to go into an explanation
that had been presented in public hearing and talked
about by Mr. Mike Nicely. Mr. Jamieson stated he did
not understand the rules and terminology for the airport
since this airport was designated by the FAA as a
reliever airport, yet if wanton had a 7500' runway in
place and a commuter airline had an interest in providing
passenger service would the 7500 runway be long enough
to accommodate commuter service? Mr. Jamieson asked
if the existing runway and any extensions would have
the load bearing capability to handle commuter traffic.
Mr. Jamieson also wanted to know what the terminology
runway 17 L and R or 35 L and R meant as it was
mentioned in the Master Plan.
Joe Thompson, Airport manager explained to Mr. Jamieson
that if you have two runways and
runways with the end that is marked 17 othepFAAar quiboth
res
one runway to be marked L for left and the other one I
marked R for right. If you are approaching from the
south you frill see two runways, one havin
on the end of it 35 L for left and 35 R for prighta
Mr. Thompson also explained the existing 5000' runway
has a load bearing capability which exceeds 1o0,o00
lbs. and if any extensions to the 5000' runway would
need to meet the load bearing capability of airplanes
coming into Denton Municipal Airport the extensions
would have to be engineered by whoever is doing the
construction plans for the airport to meet forecasted
aircraft mix that would be using Denton Municipal
Airport.
Mr. Thompson explained to Mr. Jamieson based on the
cur-ant information available and the current load
bearing capability, if a commuter service wished to
serve Denton Municipal Airport it would have the
ff capability to do so using certain type of aircraft
f that did not exceed the load baring capability of the
runways and taxiways.
George Gilkeson asked the board members if there would
be any more discussion on the subject. There was none.
Mr. Gilkeson asked for a vote for all in favor of the
motion' to please say aye and all opposed to say nay.
The motion was carried with no one opposing the motion.
r
F 1
~ ~Aeneauc 1~D.~ ~
Apenaatt ~
Airport Advisory Board Minutes D219
March 161 1994
Pages 6 O
i
IV. Consider Height zoning and Land Usage for zonii .
Mr. Gilkeson then addressed the next, topic of
consideration being the recommendation to Planning and
zoning concerning the zoning of land around Denton I
Municipal Airport. Mr. Gilkeson referred to a map
prepared with a new footprint by Coffman & Associates,
the Master Planners for the Airport which showed the
new 65 LDN and 55 LDN footprint based on a 7500' and
j 5000' runway 700' west of the 7500' runway.
Jim Risser observed there were obvious changes and
assumptions made other than the length of the runway
regarding different types of aircraft because of the
contours being narrower and longer than what had
previously been reviewed.
Rick Svehla explained there was no doubt that the new
footprint and the contours generated from it did not
use the 70,000' runway in the new scenario.
Jim Risser stated the Airport Board would not want to
find itself in this discussion again because someone
discovered that the aircraft mix we are now using was
not in the Master Plan
or
the
# City would be
having
a zoning problem.
Rick Svehla pointed out the two zone areas were still f
being used around the airport as originally proposed
in order to advise people in and around the airport
and there needs to be noise abatement of new construction !
or to use avigation easements over their land. Mr. Svehla
said this concept had not changed from the original
I concept discussed by the board.
Mr. Svehla pointed out the City staff had discussed j
f the zones and noted there were movements of the current
zones inward but the old zones were truncated on the
ends because they were so wide and so large. '
Now because It is narrow we are not truncating the
ends of the zone because it Is basically vacant farmland
or vaotnt pasture land. The staff would go ahead and
recommend the complete LDN contour rather than truncating
them off on the end.
{
j
t
~Wrrrr
+gsndaNo, ~ 0 '
Apeadalt 1
Airport Advisory Hoard Minutes ~t9
March 16, 1994
Page 7 f
George Gilkeson asked how many homes are currently in
ZOlie 2.
Joe Thompson explained there are sixteen homes currently
in zone 2 where before there were 75 to 74 homes. f
Terry Garland asked if the FAA came to the Airport
Advisory board in ten years and said there was a need
for a 10,000' runway could a 10,000' runway still be
put in or would there have to be a total rezoning of
the property at that time.
Rick Svehla said yes, a 10,000' runway could be built
if it was the request of the future Airport Board members
and future City Council members and there would be
a study made as to where the runway could be located
f and how it would effect the zoning ordinance.
Rick Woolfolk following general discussion stated
there was no motion on the floor and the general
discussion was out of order. Ff
George Gilkeson entertained a motion that the Airport
Advisory Board recommend to the Planning and zoning
board the new footprint prepared by Coffman 3
Associates, based on the approved 7500` and 5000' Airport
Layout Plan which is going to the FAA.
i
Mr. Woolfolk stated he believed the motion was illegal 1
and out of line in that the recommendation on the part
of the Airport Advisory board to Planning and Zoning
was not in conformance with the State Legislation
enabling a body to make a recommendation to the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Mr. Woolfolk stated he felt it would be best if the
f Airport Advisory board sent their recommendation to
the Joint Zoning Commission who was empowered by the
f City Council and instructed by the Council to make the l
f recommendations and not the Airport Advisory board
to make the recommendations. Mr. Woolfolk stated as
chairman of the Joint Zoning commission he or the
j previous board members had not been contacted or given
any recommendation on this particular footprint. Mr.
Woolfolk felt opposed to it because of the enabling
J lo*-islation en the part of the State of Texis,.saying
W
A-
JWI 4L
AQ6ndaNo
Apendal 1
Airport Advisory Board Minutes Date
March 16, 1994
Page 8 ~O10
we could use any runway or proposed runway which is
in a proposed Master Plan or adopted Master Plan.
Rick Svehla said with all due respect, the staff had
I discussed the matter with the legal department and that
was why the staff was making the recommendation and {
no matter what the board moves the recommendation of
the Joint Zoning Commission would also be presented
to the City Council as per state law. Mr. Svehla
reminded the Airport board they were an advisory board
and could either decide to adopt the Joint Zoning
Commission board's recommendation or them
own. Mr.
Svehla said this is what the staff is recommending to
you, since we adopted the Airport Layout Plan.
Mr. Svehla also pointed out the recommendations did
not have to go to Planning and Zoning or anywhere else.
Recommendations could go straight to the City Council.
Mr. Svehla also stated the Airport Bi.ard could recommend
it go back to the old Joint Zoning board or a new Joint
Zoning board which would have to be appointed, but
remember that at the time the City Council decided when
they appointed the Zoning Board, that it be members
of the existing Planning and Zoning committee and
existing Airport Board and members are no longer on
either board. Mr. Svehla stated absolutely the Joint
Zoning Commissions recommendation has to go to the City
Council,
Jim Risser questioned that nothing has changed at this
point# until the Joint Zoning board decides to change
it. Mr. Risser asked if their recommendations stand E
as presented before.
Mre Svehla commented that year now the City staff is
suggesting to the Airport Advisory board that we go
with this new footprint.
George Gilkeson asked if the Joint Zoning board was
t still officially in existence. 1
Rick Woolfolk stated he thought it had never boon
dissolved.
Rick Svehla commented tnere had been some question
regarding the Joint Zoning Commission. and the City staff
wouI.d +ve to go back ind question the City attorneys
to see .f the Joint Zoning Commission was c.till in
j' existenc( since some of it's members were Airport board
members cid Planning and Zoning members, but are no
s--
.M.
iRM ~'r
1 •
ru
1
~penQaNa. d' ~._3'D
i Airport Advisory Board Minutes ~8~a
! March 16, 1994
Page 9 Rte
longer on the board or commission. ! 7 ~°f a
Rick Woolfolk pointed out the City Charter states you I
are appointed to a board until you are replaced by the it
pleasure of the council for a normal two year term,
however you will serve until you are replaced.
Rick Svehla responded by saying this was a legal question
that would have to be answered by the City attorneys.
Does the zoning board still exist with it's original
members?
Rick Woolfolk said he did not think the City boards
I should be shortsighted. The Airport has been here for
fifty years although for forty of those years it had
been a stepchild. Only in the last ten years had there
' t been any real effort in rebuilding the Airport and
the Airport is the crown jewel of the City of Denton
which has absolutely been buried under the dirt.
r Finally, look at what has happened out here in just
' the last 5 years, air capacity has increased over 451
in the last two years.
Mr. Woolfolk stated he might be willing to address a
compromise as an individual, not speaking for the Joint
` Zoning Commission, to support a recommendation to Council
4 that the Airport Zoning board make a zone 1 from highway
380 on the north end to highway 2449 on the south end
of the airport making everything in between there a
zone 1. Any contour zone north of highway 380 and south
of highway 2449 would be zone 2.
George Gilkeson asked Mr. Woolfolk to approach the map
and explain what areas he was addressing.
Rick Woolfolk pointed out the land area east and west
of the airport be zoned in zone 1 and zone 2 being north
and south where the contours started narrowing past
highway 2449 and 380.
i
Terry Garland made a motion to recommend this plan to
the Planning and Zoning board following general
discussion by the Airport Advisory board.
George Gilkeson called for a vote, asking for ayes and
opposes to say nay. All of the board members voted
nay, so the motion did not pass. i ,
i. Jim Risser addressed a question to the board and to
the staff whether there was a need to make a motion
}
{fir"
1
AQft o.
Age~Oalt j
Airport Advisory Hoard Minutes [k~',e
March 16, 1994
Page 10
to refer this footprint back to Coffman 8 Associates
for further study.
Rick Svehla answered Mr. Risser's question saying no,
although directions should be given by the board
explaining what the board would like to see.
General discussion followed with Airport board members
deciding they would like to see two new footprint with
{ the same aircraft mix that was applied to the footprint
just presented using a mix of aircraft for a 7500'
runway and a 5000' parallel of a reliever category.
The Airport Hoard members would like to see a footprint
for an 8000' runway 2500' to the west of the existing
runway and also a footprint for a 7000' runway 2500'
west of the existing runway.
Jim Risser stated that he believes the Airport Advisory
board has a responsibility to be as aggressive as
possible and still try to protect the possibilities
for this airport, 20 to 30 years out into the future.
Mr. Risser pointed out that the Airport board had not
been unreasonable in reviewing for zoning or unreasonable
in their recommendation of the Master Plan. He said
this determination was wede after having lengthy
discussion with the neighbor's. Mr. Risser also felt
F' the issues which are being recommended would not have
a significant impact on airport neighbor's but would
leave options available for potential expansion of Denton
Municipal Airport. This option would allow future
Airport Advisory board members and future City Council
members to make a decision as to future needs at Denton
Municipal Airport.
V. Airport Manager's Report
A. Joe Thompson reviewed with the Airport Advisory board
the status of the preliminary engineering by Freese
3 and Nichols on the 1000' extension, explaining the
preliminary engineering process was almost complete
but there had to be some additional cost numbers
added to it due to the Federal Aviation Administration
airspace and safety committee and maintenance group
meeting to figure the cost of mounting the glide
slope antenna on a collapsible or fringeable base
at the end runway 35. Because the FAA is paying
90% more of refurbishing this antenna# Freese and
Nichols has to submit back to the Airport Manager
` the new cost numbers so a revised preappiicat:on
can go to the FAA to increase the amount of grant
1
1
71
Airport Board Minutes 5-51-94 pale
Ageavej?op
Pg. 3/rC C
if there had been a parallel runway, large aircraft
could have continued using the Denton Airport and
the construction project could the been mpbeing
faster by totally closing
`i resurfaced.
Mr. Rafes said he would not have an argument against 5ool apart.
parallel 7500' runways,
George Gilkeson asked if there were anymore comments
for public sessions
rted that he and Mr. Rafes spoke
Rick F'oolfolk repo . The 1 club to the Riwaniextensionf for toDenton w Airport regarding The
the runway the Denton Airport j
projected needs for from now were
that may be needed 30 Years
discussed, both the positive and the negative.
. issues.
DISCUSS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM COFFMAN 6
III.
ASSOCIATES AIRPORT NOISS CONS-_ asked the Board
Joe Thompson, Airport Manager, the footprints,
z to review the maps illustrating Option I
Option It Option II, and Option Ii I. with a
displays General Aviation traffic only
and a 5000' runway. There are no homes
7500
Y; in Zone 1 andthBoGeneralheAviationg andesCcOption
II displays
tra homeaw in Zone and in Ozone n2a thereearea26 and no out that Mr. Rafes
homes. Mr. Thompson Pointed
for both Option I and
lives outside the zoning
y option ii.
4 Mr. Risser asked what informationas, used to
determine the length of the new footprint
Thompson said the airplane mix, the number
E of~ operati,)ns and the types of aircraft used in
the planning, causes the footprint to widen or
and the
to lengthen. The number of operations General
t types of aircraft are consid~o~porateijetsriGeneral
1 single engine, twin engine,
Aviation traffic only.
I I
w.yy l+laa Ks''t t-t.n+eav ,YF
1:
w
I
1
~ ApenOaNo, ~
Airport Board Minutes 5-11-44 AQWI
Pg. 4 Date
//a /Qj
' Option II has the same mix of aircraft with some
commuter jet operations, with 18 or 19 passenger
seat type aircraft. It is the frequency of the
operation that determines the shape of the
footprint.
i Rick Svehla brought to the Airport Board's attention J
11 that noise contours are modeled by a computer. a
There are two things that happen, the model is
I, affected by the frequency of operations, and by
" the actual noise. The frequency of the commuter
traffic would increase the noise factor.
i
Mr. Risser asked what were the assumptions of
frequency based on.
Mr. Svehla said the assumptions were based on the
frequency of the flights. Coffman 6 Associates
are using the interim numbers from COG because
these are the only numbers that have been printed.
In this case the assumptions were based on frequency
which elongated the contours, because there will
be passengers involved. Option III is the same
numbers of airplanes being split to two runways.
The commuter traffic is shifted over to the 8000'
runway,
r'
Mr. Thompson showed the Board members Option III.
The footprint includes the 7500' and the 8000'
runways, which the members had requested during
the March 16, 1994 meeting. This footprint shifts
the emphasis of any commuter service over 2500'
to the west, to the 8000' runway. In Option It
Lone 1 has no homes in it, Zone 2 includes 27
homes. It was noted again that Richard Rafes'
home is not is either zone.
Mr. Risser noticed that 737's had been added in
`.p. the aircraft mix for Option III.
{ Mr, Thompson stated that for the 8000' runway,
there would be 222,)00 operations per year, when
the 737 Boeing 300 becomes a user. This means
more passenger capability and/or more !argo
capability.
.
Mra Risser expressed his concern that 737's are
mentioned in Option III as part of the aircraft t s
mix. He feels this may cause public concern.
i
;gef&N01 .f a
eodalt
A
Airport Board Minutes 5-11-94 Q
/
Date
Pg. 5
Mr. Svehla remineed the board that the staff has
not changed their recommendation. The staff's
thought is twofold: They feel the passenger
enplanement numbers will be adjusted down in the
air carrier study and there will not be a
recommendation for a satellite airport in the
C.O.G. study. Finally, the staff feels that 1
commuter traffic should be provided for.
1
Mr. Risser mentioned that the Board had specifically
asked for two 7500' parallel runways and he did
not see this in any of the Options.
Mr. Svebla said that two. 7500' parallel runways
j Mould not have changed tho mix of airplanes and
would have put the zoning inside the Option III.
Also, the cost would begin to be significant for
additional plans and tha staff wanted to check
with the Board members for further direction.
Mr. Jamieson naked if the 737's needed to be i
included in the mix and could the 7500' runway
be extended 5001?
Mr. Svehla said it was not necessary to lengthen
a the runway for the 737 mix, both the commuter
traffic and the 73713 could, land on the runway.
"1+ Mr. wooltolk stated the 737 aircraft is more
efficient than some of the 19 or 20 passenger
aircraft which would be using Denton sooner than
the 7371x, which is why the longer runway was i'
included in the first place.
Mr. Rafes stated the footprint which the Federal
Aviation Administration has approved, a General
Aviation/Reliever Airport, a 7500' and a 5000'
runway, 500' apart, would be acceptable to most !
people and the zoning would be in place for future
proposals, should another 500' be added in the
future to make the runway 8000' long.
Mr. Rie'er recommended the footprint with two
7500' r nways. In his opinion he felt the Board
should consider the value of having the runways
2500' apart because of 'ne airplune mix and the
j
noise .n+n*.ours.
i
4z ;
~ ~gsodaNo. ~ ~
Agertdalte
F Airport Board Minutes 5-11-94 IM !/2
Pg. 6
Mr. Jamieson asked for the minimum requirements
by the Federal Aviation Administration for runway
separation.
Mr. Thompson said the minimum requirement ie 500
apart. The minimum requirement for simultatious
operation is 25C0' apart. Mr. Thompson remir.Jed E
the Board of their conversation with Coffman 8
Associates in the summer of 1993. The Board
discussed that there would be a temporary runway
5000' long that would be made into a taxiway with
high speed exits. Coffman d Associates had asked
for the Board's recommendation. The Board had
recommended a 10,000' runway, 2500' west of the
existing runway.
Mr, Rafes suggested combining option II and Option
III, using the 5000' and the 7500' runways. The
land could be zoned for future projects, such as
the 8000' runway, making the zoning box larger
i~ for future growth and still meet the Federal
Aviation Administration's Airport Layout Plan
requirements.
Rick Woolfolk reminded the Airport Board that the
Joint Zoning Board and the Height Zoning Board
had reviewed the Options and made it's
recommendation based on the 100400' runway 2500'
west of the proposes extended runway which will
go to 7500' using the 65 L.D.N•1 and and t the 5 Zone L.D.N4
noise contours for the tone footprint.
Mr. Svehla drew an illustration combining Option
II and option III footprint using the contours
of the 65 L.D.N. and the 55 L.D.N.. This would
include the 5000' runway and the 7500' runway that
the Airport Board sent to the Federal Aviation
I Administration as the Airport Layout Plan. He
reminded the board that the box can be made larger {
within the five mile and a mile and a half area
using .'is existing runway to create a footprint.
Jim Risser said that. after lookil:g at the larger
footprint, the Board may want to make a different
s recommendation.
f 1
1 ro1,rJ . t
~a 1
wpm
r
Am"N
,4gaNo 9i' .~D 1
Agendait
Airport Board Minutes 5-11-94 Date
Pg. 7
Dr. Dulemba felt that the zoning should be in place
so homes cannot be built in the area where a future '
1
runway might be built.
Mr. 'aid commuter traffic has more j
Svehla 1
federal regulations for noise contours. The
commuter fleet is nct the noisy fleet. Corporate
r aircraft make more noise and need longer runways
than a commuter fleet. had not made
Mr. Svehla reminded the Board theYThe Board had
i a recommendation on the zoning. F rove
to receive the Master aa7500' approve
recommended the Airport Layout Plan show500' to the west of {
and a SOUO' parallel runways runway making
the proposed extensions to the 5000'
it the 7500' runway*
rt Board
Mr. Gilkeson reminded staff that oa the wiaepostii1 in
had asked if the Joint Zoning
existence The Board dation for zoninginformation before
r
making Mr. Svehla informed tle oardrecommothe attorneys
have said that by law, the t ions made
by the Joint Zoning Board must be taken to the
City Council. The Airport Board has a choBice of
agreeing with the Joint Zoning Board
recommendation, have the Joint Za in5 separate f
reconsider it, and or
have
recommendation. The attorneys lsthe advised
: the staff that the cou»cil appointed ~
Zoning Board and since that board hasu less it's
recommendation, it will 9o Board to reconvene. li
council wa Council would Zeither reappoint the old
E The City how the Joint
t members and change legislbecause some of the old
Zoning Board was set uP,
1 members are no longer part of the Airport Board
Commission, or they
and the Planning and Zoning
could appoint new members. The attorneys are saying
that th4 Joint Zoning Board's recommendation must
be taken to the City Council.
The Board had general discussion on what to
recommend for r zone 1 and zone 2 footprint.
i
i
AoMNa 9 Age Airport Hoard Minutes 5-11-94 Dat~I
Pg. 8
i
Mr. Svehla reminded the Board of the Airport Layout
Plan, which is the 7500' and the 5000' runways,
500 apart, even though the zoned box is larger,
if the Board chooses, the staff would combine both
options and put the corners in and define them
for futur3 builders concerns.
Mr. Woolfolk explained to the Airport Board how
the Joint Zoning Board chose the dual runways using
a 10,000 runway.
Mr. Risser asked which option involves more homes.
Mr.. Svehla discussed with the Board option I,
which is General Aviation use only and bypasses
most of the homes in the area.
Dr. Dulemba expressed concern for futuru builders
{ and how they would be affected by the traffic.
Mr. Thompson said the Federal Aviation
Administration would do a NOISE MITIGATION PART
150 STUDY, and if the home was in the 65 LDN
footprint, the Federal Aviation Administration
would ask that the home be noise mitigated to meet
the zoning guidelines and requirements.
Mr. Gilkeson asked if the Board had a
recommendation.
Mr. Risser asked how the recommendation should
be worded.
Mr, Svehla said the staff could combire the Option
II footprint, having the 7500' and the 5000' runway
with the General Aviation
commuter traffic and .
the Option III footprint, having the 8000' and
the 7500' runways and tie the two footprints
together.
Mr. Risser asked how similar is this new plan with
the one previously recommended.
Mr. Svehla said if the Board will give she staff
the latitude, they would square up the footage
in a legal description.
F
C
I SL
I~
Mel
j AAenQaMo ~4 d
Airport Board Minutes 5-11-94
Pg. 9
Mr. Riss,)r moved to recommend a footprint that
combines the General Aviation Commuter, Option
II footprint which includes a 7500' runway and
a 5000' runway with the Option III footprint with
a 7500' runway and an 8000' runway, 2500' apart.
Mr. Gilkeson asked for vote. With no opposition,
the motion catried.
Mr. Gilkeson said when the footprint comes back,
' the Board will review it again in it's final form,
e combining the option II and Option III footprints.
r Mr. Svehla said the staff will give the Board
members copies of the new footprint along with
copies of the recommendation and will then ask
for the Airport Board's opinion.
dr
IV. AIRPORT MANAGER'S REPORT
Mr. Thompson discussed Jim Huff's hangar proposal
with the Board members.
Rick Svehla reported that he has been working with
Jim Huff and tho City of Denton legal department
and will have the proposal ready for Jim Huff to
review and will then forward it to the City Council
meeting on May 17th.
Mrd Thompson reported that he and Rick Svehla will
be attending a meeting on Monday, May 16th at 2:00
pm in the Denton Municipal Airport Terminal
Building, to review the plans for the runway
extensiun with Freese & Nichols representative
zta, i'`: Jerry Fleming and the Federal Aviation
Administration's representative Mike Nicely,
The topic of discusjion will be the final drawings
needed from Freese 8 Nichols, hoping when Congress
approves the remainder of the A.I.P. fundingi
i staff will have the drawings ready and receive
a grant offer.
Mr. Svehla said staff is going to propose to the
Federal Aviation Administration funding the 1000'
runway extension now.
r
TCITY
COUNI:
r
s,
,rte
t .
t
h
fro M. ~ 1 `4w r~
1
1
J
P
A9~M
Do V21 --q U
q69
DATES September 13, 1994
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager i
SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat - FUF Addition
B~~M2~ENDaTION!
The Planning and Zoning commission recommended approval (6-0)
at its August 24, 1994 meeting.
ByMHARY=
r.
i
The 9.603 acre tract is located on the northeast corner of
interstate 35 and U.S. Highway 77.
City services and facilities, including water, sanitary sewer,
electrical, and solid waste, are available.
No additional right-of-way or street improvements will be
required on I-35 or U.S. Hwy 77.
°'dewalks will be required along the frontage of all three
perties at final platting.
water service will be provided from a new sixteen inch water
'Vint, along the frontage of r-35.
sewer service for all three lots will be provided from a lift
station on located on Lot 1 and pumped into an existing line f
across U.S. Highway 77.
Twenty foot utility easements will be provided along I-35 and
Hwy 77. a
Drainage on this 9.603 acre tract is generally to the existing
channel on the north side of Lot 2. The developer is
proposing that the channel be concrete lined with future '
development.
The plat conforms to the minimum requirements of the
1 Subdivision and Land Development Regulationst Chapter 34 of
} the Code of ordinances.
i
J
5
BACKGROUND.
The 9.603 acre tract is comprised of three lots of 3.101
acres, 3.129 acres and 3.373 acres. The property is currently,
vacant. It is zoned "C" Commercial District.
Loot 2 is being considered for development for a truck stop.
A final plat for Loot 2 will be processed in the near future.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTEDI
Engineering Department
Building Inspections
Planning and Development Department
h FISQ1L. IKPACT!
N/A
ATT TS s
11 Location map
2. Preliminary plat
3. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of August 24, 1994
Reap ctfully submit Odt
O d . Harrell
City Manager
Prepared by:
'I 1
Debra Goodwin
Urban Planner
App dt
Frank He R bins AICP
Executive Director i
Planning and Development
f
u
a
+
Law
[",:---k
,a0,ad~~ut► 9y'~~
ATTACHMENT 1 Aptind2ti~
FUF, Inc. Preliminary Plat NORTH I
ell
t t
s ^ r
SITE -
J
t
~ t
Location Map l
Date; 8904 Sala None
r-
C
i
t
~pendaNo. d
ATTACHMENT 2 agenda!
FUF Inc. >ate - - NORTH
i
i. - r rtw tt,e
I
~ r.M t
~ t
tt ~ I
i ~ t F I
l
~ N9f0
MAP** USTA
iJt t\ rtrtiw tM. ~IN ft Mtow 4~ttJ
%
%
` M M= \
Q
\ •M M,
}I}T
\ tr~t LO
`r fI r~A t
%
ddOy ua trx~
LID 3
i s a k
r.0 4
maw or UP 0" mo,
gg ~
i WON if WUN Stop `
i
j Preliminary Plat
I Date: 911,94 Stair. None
E
t ,
7
Y
y. .
r
Ate...
, O
~ ko
Minutes Pia Commission ATTACHMENT 3
~ i
August 24, 1994
Page 11 S
t
{
Ms. Goodwins Yes, that is all included in the 56 acres. The
56 acres is broken into two uses, on is the urban center which
indicated in red and the remainder of the property is low
intensity designated as agriculture.
Mr. Dillards All we did is take the current DDP and put it on
the nap and we moved the road a little bit. This is not a
proposed zoning plan. All we are required to do is reflect
what is on the DDP.
Mrs. Russells Any other discussion or a motion?
Mr. Cochrane I move we approve the GDP for the FUF addition
with the modification.
Mr. Nortons I second. 4
Mrs. Russells All in favor? All opposed? Motion carries (6-
0)
Dr. Huoys I would assume "FUFS is an acronym for something.
I an curious what it is.
Mr. Nilshires First United Financial
b. Consider the preliminary plat of Lots 1, 2, and 3, PUP
Addition. The 9.603 acre site is located on the
northeast corner of I-35 and U.S. Highwar 77.
Staff report by Ms. Goodwin.
This is a 9.603 core tract on the south east corner of I-35.
City 'services a_A facilities are available. We will be
looking at no additional right of way or street improvements
along I-33 or U877. Sidewalks would be required along the
frontage of all of the properties at final platting. There
# will be a 16 inch water line required. Sewer service will be
provided from a lift station. On the northern portion of Lot
i, there is a little flag lot indicated as Lot 4. This to the
answer to the lift station. It was originally proposed on Lot
2 in order to better serve more of the property. Utilities
has asktd that the station be moved to the north oast corner
of the property and that the property actually be a designated
separate lot that the city would own.
There will be a tez+porary grinder pump that will be allowed on
s J Lot 2. The preliminary drainage study is acceptable. Lot 2
1~0 _
Kinutes PEE Commission r ^
F` Auqust 24, 1994 C!-~
Page 12
t
is the lot that is being considered for the truck stop. We
will be seeing a final plat for that particular lot in the
near future. This property is currently toned commercial.
The DRC would recommend approval of the preliminary plat
conditioned on it being revised prior to submission to council
to show Lot 4. The final sides of Lot 4 still need to be
worked outs It is a very small piece of property. There will
be some easements added across the back of Lot 1 to access Lot
4.
i
Kr. Cochrans Across the east side of Lot 1?
i
Kos Goodwin: Yes sir.
Kr. Cochran: Just on Lot i?
No. Goodwin% There would be another easement.
Mrs. Russells Any other questions?
Kr. Wilshiret On the preliminary plat, the 9.6 acres, the
flag lot labeled Lot 4 came from a discussion that we had with
the t.:blic works department yesterday. That was one of the i
options we discussed, we did discuss other options. one was
to leave the lift station on toot 2, but it not be a public
lajility. At this time I don't think that we have resolved
that issue because our intent was for the truck stop to
physically build that facility. At this point in time, we
have not had the chance to talk to his about the likelihood of
him building it offsite. I would suggest that the condition,
if added, resolve this prior to council, we understand the
need for a lift station. We also understand the potential
limitation of capacity of the sewer system to the south.
't'here is no sewer to the north of this property. I warn
locking this to a toot 4 solution may not be the appropriate
solution. I would rather have the condition be more general.
Perhaps your condition could be worded with a little more
generality than a specific Lot 4 requirement.
Kra. Russell: Any questions for Kr. Wilshire? Is there a
problem with leaving this to be worked out with the r-gineer-
ng staff prior to submission to the city council?
Ks. Goodxins No.
- Mr. Cochran: That doesn't s6-- like a lot of notice to make
preparations for something this large.
I
i
r,
AQ611diNa
Minutes Piz Commission - - 9
August 24, 1994
Page 13
Mrs. Schertzt Why does the city not want to put the lift sta-
tion on Lot 4?
Mr. Cosgrovet To be able to provide service to a greater
area. Got 2 would serve a very limited number of lots. Lot
4 is a drainage area, it would serve more areas.
Mrs. Schertst Does the city or the developer pay for that?
Mr. Cosgrove: The city owns and maintains it after the
developer builds it. We want to minimized the number lift
stations that we have.
mr. Norton What is thrr difference in cost?
Mr. Cosgrovet our solution at the present time for Lot 2 is '
if you wanted to put the grinder pump in at the present time,
it is okay. At the same time, he would build the sanitary j
sewer across the back of his lot. As Lots 1 i 3 develop, we 1
could actually put that lift station in at a'later time.
Their desire to to have the developer of Lot 2 pay for that
lift station. There would be the ability, if they built, to
enter into a "pro-writer" agreement also where they could re-
coup some of their costs at a later date.
Mr. Norton: The date is unknown to everybody?
I Mr. Cosgrovet Right, that agreement has a 20 year time {
period. Anyone who would hook onto that facility within that
20 year time period would pay a portion of the cost.
Mrs. Russelit Any other questions?
Mr. Wilshire: The coat of the lift station is the same
regardless of where they put it. The difference is the cost
of 500 feet of pipe from the location on Lot 2 to the proposed
location on Lot 1. The other issue with regard to that is
f whether or not that actually has to be a city-owned piece of
right-of-way or could it also be an easement. Mr. Cosgrove
told us that the policy is that it must be city owned proper-
ty. He has tried to help us by letting the staff of the flag
k ' be in the flood plane.
Dr. Hueys Mr. Cosgrove suggested that Lot 2 would be accept-
abls if the sewer line were installed at the back of Lot 2?
Mr. Wilshiret r am not sure that is what he said. I think he
said it would be permissible for us to use just a grinder pump
ai ,o
1
J
ap---No 9 Q
Minutes Piz Commission
August 24, 1994
Page 14
to serve lot 2 only, we would still be required to put the
sewer line across the back of the property.
Dr. Huey: Is that acceptable to you?
Mr. Wilshiret That is one option the truck stop has, That
does not deal with the ultimate solution of whether the future
big lift station goes on Lot 1 or 2. I an only suggesting
that from the time we met with Mr. Cosgrove, we have not had
a chance to talk to the truck stop user to see if he is
willing to pay this. We would simply like for your condition
to be worded general enough to let us arrive at a solution
that Mr. Cosgrove would sign off on.
Mrs. Russell: Should this station end up on lot 4, who would
be responsible to pay for the 500 fer.c of line?
Mr. Wilshire: The developer pays for it, the city maintains
r"1 Mrs. Schertas Does anyone know the cost to run that line?
Mr. Wilshire: We haven't done any figures. our experience.
would tell us the cost of the potential sale of the land could
be such bigger than the cost of pipe. I would estimate $25-
$40 per foot. You also have a small 4 in. force main from the
lift station back to the sewer line and across US77. You have
the cost of two pipes plus the potential decrease in the sale
price of the lard.
Mrs, Russell: In further comments, questions, or a motion?
Mrs. Schertz: if we recommend approval, how will it come back
to us?
Ms. Coodwins The preliminary plat will not come back to you. i
You will see the final plat of Lot 2. The preliminary plat
> will go straight on to council with the changes or conditions. i
4 Mrs. Russells The recommendation could be made with the !
provision that the site of the lift station would be worked i
out with the engineering staff prior to the submission to the
city council.
Mr. Cochran: I think it is a reasonable thing to stipulate.
I don't have a problem moving we approve the preliminary plat
j of Lot 1,2, a 30 Block A of the FUF Addition with the condi-
tion that the position of the lift station be worked out prior
s
:.a
pool
Ap ftUND.
Minutes pit Commission AgWal /
August 24, 1994 Date
Page 15 La 9
C ( #
to going to council.
Mrs. Schertze I second.
Mrs. Russells All in favor? All opposed? Notion carries
(6-0).
iv. Receive a report from the Historic Landmark Commission,
hear a staff report, hold a public hearing and consider a
recommendation to the City Council concerning encroach-
ments in street right-of-way t!round the square.
Sullett Lowerye I reside at 1500 Angelina Send, I an vice
chair of the Historic Landmark Commission. The HLC met in an
emergency session and after extensive discussion, we passed
two motions. The first motion urged the Planning and Zoning
1 Commission to reconsider its decision of the previous meeting
recommending to city council to allow the owner of 112 N. Oak
to put pillars in the city right-of-way. The second urged the
commission to adopt a policy which would forbid future similar i
encroachments on city right-of-way on the square. We respec-
tively draw the attention of the members of the Planning and
Zoning Commission to those recommendations. I have been
involved in the historic preservation of Denton for many
years. There is always a need to balance any proposal for
historic preservation against economic interests. I believe
in fact, that unless preservation makes economic sense, it is
going to fail.
This situation deals with a very sensitive area of Denton, the
square. The proposal for pillars, the Landmark commission
feels, is insensitive to the historic character of the square
and its current ambience. These pillars fall under city
review because they involve the city allowing the owner to use
city property. That becomes a city decision. There is no
obligation on the part of the city to allow someone to do
that. I respectfully urge you to reconsider the decision you
made at your last meeting. I would also urge you to develop
a policy that would forbid similar encroachments around the
square. I call your attention to the letter from the Texas
Main Street architect.
Mr. Cochrane What was the architects comment? Was there a
problem with the Engineering Department? Would it be appro-
priate for us to put establishing a policy on a future agenda?
Mrs. Russells I believe we have direction from staff. I hope
the Landmark Commission looked at the proposed guidelines.
1
i
n ;
NITYA
ICOUNCH
t M ~ ' t ` d+ V.~`4
1
1
4
i
,.Ago
f
~ AQendaNo. qN -030
Agen~at
oete -Azt3 -q F
ORDINANCE NO.
'
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR
THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES;
PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated
competitive bids for the purchase of necessary materials,
equipment, supplies or services In accordance with the procedu_es
i of state law and City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the ;lty 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 ORDAINSt
SECTION I. That the numbered items in the following numbered
bids for materlals, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the
"Bid Proposals" attached hereto, are hereby accepted and approved
as being the lowest responsible bids for such items:
BID ITEM
NUMBER NO VENDOR AMOUNT
1653 ALL NORTH PACIFIC LUMBER S 32$30.00
1655 ALL S.D. MYERS 360906.95
1658 ALL SCI MECHANICAL $ 24,825.00
1660 1,3-8, LAKE CITIES EXHIBIT A
1660 11,12 LAKE CITIES EXHIBIT A
1660 2 REDI MIX EXHIBIT A
1660 9,13-18 B i B SAND EXHIBIT A
1660 10 GIFFORD HILL EXHIBIT A
1660 19,20 CHEMICAL LIME EXHIBIT A
1663 ALL TRUMAN ARNOLD COMPANIES EXHIBIT B
1664 ALL NAZTEC INCORPORATED : ^5,587.20
h
SECTION 11. That by the acceptance and approval of the above
numbereaitms of the submitted bids# the City accepts the offer of
j the persons submitting the t•.Js for such Items anc agrees to
i! purchase the materials,,. equtnmont, suppifes or sot-vices ~
accordance with toe terms, specification., standards, gkNrt!tI a
and for the specified sums contained in the Bid Invitations, Bold Proposals, and related documents.
M-,
R,. ,.wy
a~
j
f
r' e UU A(]f~
Date - 3 --a4
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR
THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES;
PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated
competitive bide 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 it 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
siaterials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted
herein; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSe
SECTION 1. That the numbered items in the following numbered
bids ormateiials, equipment, supp .9-,, or services, shown in the
"Bid Proposals" attached hereto, arms hereby accepted and approved
as being the lowest responsible bids for such itemsi
BID ITEM
NUMBER NO VENDOR AMOUNT
1653 ALL NORTH PACIFIC LUMBER $ 32,530.00
1655 ALL S.D. MYERS i 36,906.95
1658 ALL BCI MECHANICAL 624,825.00
1660 1,3-8, LAKE CITIES EXHIBIT A
1660 11,12 LAKE CITIES EXHIBIT A
1660 2 REDI MIX EXHIBIT A
1660 9,13-18 B i B BAND EXHIBIT A
1660 30 GIFFORD HILL EXHIBIT A
1660 19,20 CHEMICAL LIME EXHIBIT A
1663 ALL TRUMAN ARNOLD COMPANIES EXHIBIT B
1664 ALL NASTEC INCORPORATED 6 25,587.20 f
SECTIQN II. That by Life acceptance and approval of the above
numbers items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of
the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to
purchaso ;he materials,. equipment, supplies or services in
f accocdan..a with tha ape Afications, standtrda, qu,atities
and for tte specified sums cuhtained in the Bid Invitations, Bid
Proposals, and related documents.
u
14W I
Ag"No 9
SECTION III. That should the City and persons submitting
approved and accepted items and of the submitted bids wist. to enter
into a formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance,
approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his
designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the !
written contract which shall be attached heretop provided that the (i
written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions,
specifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained
in the Sid Proposal and related documents herein approved and
accepted.
SECTION IV. That by the acceptance and approval of the above
numberree -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 V. That this ordinance shall become effective
r,w Immediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1491.
1~ J
Ili
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
' f
j
ATTESTI
~ E
JENNIFER HALTERSr CITY SECRETARY
v
r
` BY$ I`
APPROVED AS TO Ltan FORMt }
DEBRA A, DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY 4
I
BY I
1 f
. . .r
ok i.~ .r - , .
~ i~~JiYiuY~w...-. •.pK4.h.Ykt~1y T4tl.(r . li ^41A
1
~pendaN0 ~`3D
Agenda
EXHIBIT A Oats
ITEM DESCRIPTION VENDOR PRICE
1. Portland Cement Lake Cities Concrete 4.35 ak
2. Bulk Cement To Plant Redi Mix 65.00 to
3. Bulk Cement Jobsite Lake Cities 78.00 to
4. Redi Mix Concrete 5sk Lake Cities 50.00 cy
51 Redi Nix Concrete I. Oak Lake Cities 37.75 cy
8. Redi Mix Concrete lsk Lake Cities 38.00 cy
7. Redi Mix Concrete
3000 pal-4.6 Lake Cities 48.25 cy,
8. Redi Mix Concrete
3000 psi/ash Lake Cities 48,25 cy
9. FieldlBackfill Sand B & B Sand 3.50 cy
10. Pit Sand Gifford-Hill 9.40 to
it. Manufactured Sand Lake Cities 8.08 to
120 Concrete Aggrepte314" Lake Cities 9.83 to
r Cotcrete Aggregate 318"down B B Sand 10.03 to
14
14.
~ Flexbase B & B Sand . 8.53 to
is. Crushed Stone B & B Sand 8.58tn'_
Screened Sand S & B Sand 4.00 to
Limestone 1 112" B B Sand 10.03 to
18. Limestone Rip-Rap B. & B Sand 10.03 to
~ , ' - hydrated Lime Chemical Lim .37 cwt
10. "
Slurry Lime Chemical Lime .425 cwt
" + .
t f
, I
I '
N-
wu..v.,.. _..,.,..awM..iXa Y..s+$;::..rJ+.e.4.i✓rea.Jeti.1Yf..: r......
r
e,
LD GASOLINE A DIESEL. TAC AUGUST 23, 1994 D EXHIBIT B
ESCRIPTI ~DO
1• EST ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR
200,000 GA PURCHASE OF UNLEADED
GASOLINE
DFW O.P.LS. AVERAGE NET
PRICE WITH SUPERFUND
INCLUDED = .6569
(+MARKUP)(-MARKDOWN) +.0099
SELLING PRICE PER GALLON .6643
1
2 EST ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR
150.000 0A' PURCHASB OF #2 DIESEL
I DPW O.P.O.S. AVERAGE NET e
a PRICE WITH SUMRMND
INCLUDED = .5296
(+MARXt"-MARKDOWN) +.0109
SEILINO PRICE PER 0AI,LON .5403
r_
}
+.0623 FOR
BOBTAIL
GADS<7K
GALLONS
Ili
a'
E
I
AgvdaNo
i
DATE: SEPTEMBER 131 1984
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: BID # 1853 - WOOD UTILITY POLES
RECOM1tSNDATIONs We recommend this bid be awarded to the low bidder, North
Pao c Lumber, the amount of $32,530.00.
SUMMARY: This bid is for the purchase of copper naphtenate treated wood utility
poles or warehouse inventory. The Electric Distribution Department will use these
poles, throughout the City of Denton's system for overhead construction,
maintenanoe and repair.
There are only two vendors treating poles with cooper naphtenste in the United
r States, the City of Denton received a bid from each of them.
18ACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
f PROdRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Warehouse, Electric
Distribution, VUHty Customers o the city o Denton.
f FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted Warehouse Working Capital for 84 Account / 710-043-
0582-870 with a lance of $740970.00.
Respe ul*sub ed s
o City ManagPrepared By:
ame s De se Harpool
Title: Senior Buyer
I
Ap roved:
Name: TomcD. haw, C. P.M.
k
Title: Purchasing Agent ll
SI~.AOpDA
. .1w&7NpftR~k6~/dKOYY~e~ew«n••,,......
3
,
i
10*
CID NAME WOOD UTILITY POLES NORTH HOM ON
PACIFIC LUMBER
PEN DATE AUGUST 2, 1994 LUMBER CO
i 1. . 36 EA POLE 66' CLASS 3 $336.00 5371.62
2. 86 EA POLE 45' CLASS 3 $246.00 $274.00
10 EA POLE 80' CLASS 2 $488.00 $532.70
3.
DELIVERY 21-28 DAYS 21 DAYS
r
y .
i
f r
'IF F,
17
r• l4 l+11e ,V
OF.
i
........~«..........,..r..v.r►Fa+ft.mBWYMdWY~tJt~Cl101/1~N1 ...f
x
°r 40%
P
r r Mal
.1 A
ois b
DATE: September 13, 1
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: BID 8 1655 - DISPOSAL OF PCB EQUIPMENT 6 DEBRIS
i •
REC01111 I)ATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the low overall bidder,
i S. D. yens, at an estimated cost of $36,906,95.
SUIOIARY: This bid is for the disposal of PCB contaminated transformers,
capecors, switches, and other debris which have been taken out of service by the
Electric Distribution Division. This vendor has all required certification and has
I` oompleted previous PCB contamina0d disposal contracts for the City.
f Five bid proposals were received to response to eight bid packages nailed to
vendors.
BACKGROUND. Tabulation sheet, Memorandum from Joe Cherri dated 08-17-94
PRO(iSA113 DEPARTi[SNTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Electric Distribution
v on, ti ty Customers o to ty o Denton
FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted funds for Electric Distribution Maintenance for 1994
Account um r 610-103-1031-5950-8334 with a balance of $825,788.35.
Res ally sub
oy ...acre 1
City manager
Prepared Byt i
I
ame: se Harpoo
Title: Senior Buyer
i
t
Approved:
y ~
am Tom D. Saw, C.P.M.
Title: Purchasing Agent
vt.:..4+i
■
No
Q DMendat +
7 ~?J
CITYof DENTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES/ 901•ATe sS1reet / Oenlon,TXT5201 l
E
KE140RANDUM
i
TOo Denise Harpool, Senior Buyer ,
7CfRdNi
Joe Cherri, Electric Engineering Administrator
J ,
DA181 August 17, 1994
BUBJBcTt BID NUMBER 16550 PCB DISPOSAL
The Utilities Staff recommends acceptance of Bid No.,1655 for the
dieppoosal`of:PCB equipment, oil, and debris to S.D. Myers at,ah
j estim6ted 'cost. of $36,906.95. Attached are copies' of the PUB
Aianda:item and bid evaluation,
cc:. Jim Harder, Director of Electric Utilities
r .
Ra1ph,Klinke, Superintendent of Distribution
tr ~
we td 1.
i
'
•
,}r r rre '
1
Y
* 08174019
,Y.
i
ITEM #6
DATE: August 15, 1994
gpendaNv
Apenda 1
nets ~
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD AGENDA
i
TOt CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
FROM$ R. E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities
SUBJECTi CONSIDER APPROVAL OF B.D. M:ERS FOR DISPOSAL OF Ka
AQUIPMWi OIL, AND DEBRIS, BID NO. 1655 ,
RECOMMENDATION
The utilities staff recommends the approval of S.D. Myers`
proposal for Sid No. 1655 at an estimated cost of $36,906.95
8t1MNARY/RACxGROUNb
On August 9, 1994, the city received five 15) 'bids for the
disposal of PCB contaminated material. Bids were submitted on
a price per pound basis using the estimated weights provided {
by the City for transformers, capacitors, barrelsi and debris.
From the evaluations, it was found that `S.D. Myers provided
the low bid using the estimated weights. Refer to. Exhibit I
for a breakdowp of all bids received. Under column''oil less
than 500 ppm, the vendors Rixewy Iron i Metal Co. and
Westinghouse used cost per drum while other vendors used cost
per pound. Westinghouse vendor added transportation cost of `
$5,160.00 which included five trips for 344 miles at 13.00 per i
mile. S.D. Myers is an EPA certified disposer and previously
was 'awarded contract for disposal of 'PCB contaminated
trans formtier-debris in*PY32. Transformers and capacitors
disposal will be completed by destruction. Debris will, be
sent.to a landfill in New York by Chemical-Waste Management. {
Oil disposal will be completed by chemical detoxification.
P11001AMf, D28ART/liNT8 OR GROUPS AFFECTED
The City of Denton Rate Payers, Electric Utilities Department.
i
3
,
. WrN, as fir'
i
r
Page 2KO
S
Hate z~
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of this contract, is approximately $36,906.95. Funds
are available in the capital budget for the fiscal year 1994
1995.
Respectfully submitted,
E. Nelson
k Executive Director of Utilities
Prepared by:
Joe ti POE. 01
Electric Engineering Administration
Approved bys
r.,4 ;
Jim Kerder,
director of Electric Utilities `
Exhibit I Sid Evaluektion
r i
I ~ '
l
EXHIBIT
L BID # 1655, PCB EQUIPMENT AND DEBRIS DISPOSAL
TRANSFORMER TRANSFORMER CAPACITOR OIL DEBRIS
<so"M >500PP1a1>500PPM <50oppm I <500 T&ANSPO.RT TOTAL
24304 LBS 25555 LBS 90 LBS 5 DRUMS 2750 LBS 13000 LBS 1720 MILES
QUANTITY -124304-LB-8-
1 VENDOR NAME
Rumwy Iron & Metal Co. Unit cdt (S) 0.174 08004 135 109 0.92 a
OPT104Y#1 Subtotal cost $21,628.90 $20,70225 _}t2420 $545.00 111?2 9600 jg.695.44y
Al arwy lion & Metal Co. Unit cost i$) 0,05 08004 1.38 109, 0 92 ii
..9944.32 _.,,-$20,702.35 ¢12!,20 _ ___¢5 500 512898,00 544.01181,
OPTION /2_ Subtotal cost __.J9,944 3
UNISON Unit cost (S) 0,159 0.433 1.227 0195 1.127
Saabtdalcuet ...10764-3I-----}11,109b5 _199 $535,25 „_X15,55280 247,15 18 .
C. RUST SUna cost (11) 0,17 1.15 3.1 D.35 oss
ut>totalctxt _ _ .t!21,13! _ _ 42gL0 :_4q _ 0 $96250 ~7,590t~0
a,.
8.0 tYSYERS^ 8uUna cost (S) 0.15 0.49 2 0.21 035
bldalcosl }18,845.60 112,67385 -21E0.00 535,90695
I WESPWAHOUSE Unit cost (5) 011 0.65 1.15 75 06 3 r
Sub101a1 ems, _-A13&j3.444 218812 gS _11" _tM 00 __ta A7o 0Q ..4s,i60 00~ $40,09j 10
dC 4M
a NOTE- WeslMptaotate bansporta9an IS 5 trips, 9 344 n ee n $3.00
aw
The low bid is provided by S. D, Myers for an estimated total =36,908.95
t
E a pcb wk14,6N31 12-Aug-94 00 42 Afyl
WIN"
:.l 1.
I
P
r,R:aury
cVO
k
t
Nam
i
i
RUST
RIXEY
BID NAME DISPOSAL OF PCB IRON & UNISON REMEDIAL S D. MYERS WESTING 1
HOUSE
EQUIPMENT AND DEBRIS METAL CO SERVICES i
OPEN DATE AUGUST 9, 1994 INC
-VENDOR =rRooff
{ 1, TRANSFORMERS, >50 BUT
31 <600 PPM .174 .169 .17 .16 .11
12. rRA NSFORMERS, >500 PPM .8004 .433 l A b .49 65
CAPACITC AS, >600 PPM 1.38 1.227 3.10 2.00 1.15
4, OIL, > 50 BUT < 50OPPM 109.00 DRUM .195 .35 .21 76.00 DRUM
16. 4 OIL, > 600 PPM 126.00 DRUM .195 2.10 .43 85.00 DRUM
d, f DEBRIS, '600 PPM .92 DRUM 1.127 .65 35 .65
7) .65 R
000 PPM
} PRIG DESCRIPTION, :,VENDOR . TRANS.
PER PD s3A0 LOADED',
RANSFORMERSA >60 BUT MILE
i <600 PPM .08
f i
2, RANSFORMERS, >500 PPM .8004 -
CAPACITORS, >600 PPM 1.38
'4; oil-; 60 BUT < 60OPPM 109.00 DRUM
OIL, > 600 PPM 126.00 DRUM
d ,
d DEBRIS, SW PPM 92 DRUM `
T
W 1.
r
;Y
1
q0~4 '
DAte 12 r 23 DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager {
i SUBJECT: BID f 1658 - ROOF TOP 13VAC REPLACEMENT FOR SENIOR CENTER i
i
RECAMOIiiNDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bidder, BCI
ache the amount of $24,825.00.
SUID[ARY: This bid is for the replacement of three (3) beating ventilation and air
oon tioaing units at the Service Center. These three units are heat pump type,
3 over ten years old and have exceeded their economical life expectancy. The new
tuiits will be natural gas units and more economical to operate in this particular
application.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Park and Recreation
rtment, Fa es Management Divls n Se r Center Operations and
Depe participants.
FISCAL DVACT: Funds for this HVAC Replacement project will come from
cerunoate 0 tioa funds sold for capital improvements to buildings and
maintenance of facilities. Account Number 445-032-BLDG-9226-9141 with a balance
of =350000.00.
*Bu ly sub ed y ger
} Ap roved:
i
ame: om . S w, C. .
Title: Purchasing Agent
t
.
r
r
M
M
BID f 1656
BID NAME ROOF TOP HVAC REPLACEMENT BCI CBS '
SENIOR CENTER MECHANICA MECHANICAL
OPEN DATE AUGUST IS, 1994
t
TOTAL BID AMOUNT $24,825.00 =30,81=.00
BOND 100 DAYS 45 DAYS
r
J .1
y4F ~SY n r 1 i 1,(i
1r ~ I 1 I r 1 i
?.i + ~ 1.. / 1 1 r t y ,
Y r r
I N
i ~
Sa 1
;Y. 1 ie.
wes.*w
Na 9
DATE: SEPT 13, 1994
CITY COUNCIL REPORT {
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: BID # 1660 - CEI[ENT, LIPS A AGGREGATE
F
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the low bidder for each
Item as listed:
1. Portland Cement Lake Cities Concrete 4.35 sk
2. Bulk Cement To Plant Redi Mix 65.00 to
3. Bulk Cement Jobsite Lake Citles 78.00 to
4. Redl Mix Concrete Bak Lake Cities 50.00 cy
5. Redi Mix Concrete l.5sk Lake Cities 37.75 cy
6. Redi Mix Concrete lak Lake Cities 36.00 cy
7. Redi Mix Concrete
3000 psi-4.5 Lake Cities 48.25 cy
8. Redi Mix Concrete
3000 psi/ash take Cities 48.25 cy
9. Field/Backfill Sand B Is B Sand 3.60 cy
10. Pit Sand Gifford-Hill 9.40 to
11. Manufactured Sand Lake Cities 8.08 to
12. Concrete Aggregate 314" Lake Cities 9.83 to
13. Concrete Aggregate 318"down B & B Sand 10.03 to j
14. Flexbaae B & B Sand 8.53 to
15. Crushed Stone B & B Sand 8.58tn
18. Screened Sand B & B Sand 4.00tn {
17. Limestone 1 1/2" B & B Sand 10.03 to
18. Limestone Rip-Rap B & B Sand 10.03tn ,
19. Hydrated Lime Chemical Lime .37 cwt
20. Slurry Lime Chemical Lime .425 cwt
The estimated annual expenditure for these materials Is $446,026.00.
SUMMARY: This bid Is for an annual contract for cemant, premixed concrete
i aggregate and lime which willbe used by severel City of Denton Departments in their
field services. Each Item will be ordered as needed In dporoprlate quantities.
The lower bids on Item 11,13,14, 15 and 17 were not acceptable due to the fact that
the vendor bid "all or none". When adding the totals of all next low bid and Cary
Stevens «ail or no
ne« the
combined bidders are $5,064.00 lower.
Eight (8) bids were received in reaponse to twenty-one (21) bid packages mailed to
vendors.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
i
sh 1
}
1Q811t1a,
CITY COUNCIL REPORT 131P
SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 X
PACE R OF 4
I
PAO(iSAMS DEPARTl~NT80A0ROUPSAFFECTED: City otDepartu►ents, Citizens ` .
an Utility Customers o the City o Denton.
FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted funds for 1994 for various Departments.
Respe iiy submi ted:
to r Sarre
City Manager
Prepared By.,
aroei arpoo z
Titles Senior Buyer
Appsov.Rds t.;~
r ` I 't mss- oat N, .P.M.
tftat purch"Ing Agent `
lx itsrorral
• F-
t.
~:vwr«r r. u.n.ww,.•ry..M.m a...- r.aw•_ w e.x • a,-;::m,.r r .y;.s v r..
.
,gandaNo. '
ufendal
CITY COUNCIL REPORT tt1P
SEPTEMBER 131 1994 f~-~ 23
PAGE 4 OF 4
I
pApGRAY3 bF.FAgTYENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: City of Departments Citizens i
p31 U ty Customers o t e City Denton. >
FISCAL rWACT: Budgeted funds for 1994 for various Departments.
f Reaps By submi ted: 1 '
o . Harre
City Manager
i
{ Prepared By
stoet a se arpoo
TWO, Senior Buyer
N, Approved t;
A
S w
Tiltlos Purchw&g Agent
I. i{
r
.,.«:«.aa.wxm+..xlr1i.,ar.,r,«... _ ..r en',.•aJSFa:r.... la ..,.,n.e..,,
aa•.,~.r.
n uw
ND I'.._,.._ lIS
09 IAYf CNY43IT, IJYN•ADOaNDATa aaM war CNYY/GA/ YAIWAII •I IaND uTM t1A~7LLN o D111WN ImTM
rl[ rraV[N1 UNUCO WHLr CDNCar1T L1µ1NT
WIN UATO 4.0 IN
rjrnm A
A I » N1 Nr A
µN W
l DIY pOTAOy1AlOY1PY IAL'a PLY }O A we IACI[ ~L1A OS::NNN` DCIT7 MI
01 DOI/I'DN MSlaSa O I
TaY[SI.DAD OVART AN we A r;rpr N} 111E
113,110 NL Nl }O NO `
[ 7YN a111a plYLAA pYSNf
TalICN1dAD LH1IYNaLD tO » SAM A "in
ma 11AMT NL A PO A SN1s
L 1-WM T1 SMa.[COAaT A ISTNUM
mouvpLDMIOL NIL
'so- NON aws WrIll
IaADY YI[CDNCa17a
&SLID }a » » NL IxM A trs A NL
A ND »
CO TD 431.15 No
A » A »
L e»CYD UMK[YO 1115 NO NO » NO »
1 fIACO OEM 43111 IN A
a easwLD
2,- cy To A A as pip S" ON me go
L I-' CO TD No to -l7 MLA I" N1L17 Rf RL NO A
NO A th » NA 04 as » ON
pLI L CS TV /1111'O I US I PAIR We I1 A NO A A ON TOYCOTtAUAY1tAW 1_, NA
wlAU t.DADeNAaDOS an M ON A A A
»
mrs
NR7CNt1/: » NAN A A A /UI „ )A A '
NAtl AorogrmwT 1_NaL 13, YM
oK'T1Da L A
A 1µa1 A
ON » 43,µ of
a mWeT POLO NIID - DACE ALL A 43.00
' NO 13,71 A OO A IUM no TILT ►M NL
LI11tR PRNA»(DDOCLNTaI NO » Ms ON INM A A ,
{ IM7N NWW o:Oa A ON INIM wa 11Lµ Smso A No
CLAM ,A 1111 ON A I..
A90LaDAT[
aMTN lD'**sWk
maksmocks R ON
AOU&WAYS A K* ON ON 11111 11111 NL $I%" NL
IsTR CO}CaO
IV DOMO MWIL NO
. 4343 ON A /a1 NL I1:M 113,5 A
11r 7R, TM A smile" I PL.Nmaa A
f1AaD fa71 A 11aµ IYLN rla ND .
ON I3,« A ON
Mstfl CoowsreDNa S-71
to" d a OaDN oDMrNf7a 1
acmN/Dakwast A 1µµ we ON
ILU is
A A ON
r ' iL11
43MCY aWDIKOSMD RN
IDf1 »
.1 ~NNI N'.. tl} 11N No skills
. '.!11LO w
MTON. 1 W1lee+
K:uwmn
IIaM A A SIAM » 1b
Is}r{ ♦-a'a11 WLYar1DN! » 11tH » 01 yi
SI.
la[ D
YlSS » is •
mtvf sin ON we
~
"JOIN
Y/RIMOM Yu b" 43A15
t ° MAOMW Tax DOL ~.~:433,5
» A ND M A A ,
11IU A
. 11aN1R'AD wnarnaarAlaafuw A N
NNWOMT"DQ- CAa IIN I SIN No
WWyyM Tao DS•~~fllDl Mw RO A' NO
ALL AO~Oaa"711
t DAYL / a co" ■
N OOLDOO ALL Oa RG11/. fOAT f "To
PM
wr WHOM
VftNo
t, ~ ~ r r
i 4geadako C,
Agenda
We AQ
DATE: SEPTEMBER , ION
CITY [.'OUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the city Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
i SUBJECT: BID # 1863 . GASOLINE f4 DIESEL
RECOM MDATION: , We recommend this bid be awarded to the low bidder, Truman
Arno Compa es, or an estimated annual expenditure of $414,035.00.
SUKKARY: This bid Is for the annuel contract to purchase gasoline and diesel
st TWO from the City of Denton fuel Island to all City Departments. This
contract Is awarded for one year with a renewal clause If all conditions remain the
same. Prices are Indexed and based on the daily on-line net average Oil Mee
Information Service Dallas/Fort Worth market for the day of delivery plus the
company's mark-up.
Six bids were received In response to thirteen bid f
packages maned to vendors. i
ii BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
j PROOR"A DEPAR
T1iSNT5 OR GROUPS AFFECTED: All City Vehicles and
to Equipment. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted Funds for Fleet Working Capital for 94-85 Account ;
i Nuij . 0-043.0580-8705.
t Res tfully su eds
F ! U
Harrell
{ City Manager
Prepared By:
bfatae: a sa Harpoo {
Title: Senior Buyer
Approved:
I f
• f#. aot9 t ~ . 3 w, C.P.M.
TiPurchasing Agent
~ _ ~ su.l~aw
~ c
r.,
Tk+cet t.•kl:Jta....r G'+:,c,s...,.~.... ~
Ir
BID I 1663
f 4
E ID NAME GASOLINE A DIESEL REEDER TAC DOUGLASS LUCKY MARTIN SIMONTON
I DIST. DIST LADY EAGLE
PEN DATE AUGUST 23, 1994 INC. OIL cyry D81K IPTION V
-VEN
I ENDOR r ,VENDOR` :c.VENDOR DOR VRNDG VENDOR'
1. EST ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR
200,000 OA PURCHASE OF UNLEADED
GASOLINE
i
DPW O.P.I.S. AVERAGE NET
i
PRICE WITH SUPERFUND
INCLUDED t A598 AS69 AS" X6598 6598 4750
I.
(+MAR3 UP)(-MARKDOWN) +.0115 +.0079 +.0140 +.0120 +.012 obs
4
SELLING PRICE PER GALLON X6713 6648 6738 6711 6718 .74 }
2. EST ANNUAL AOREEM)INT FOR
1$0,000 GA PURCHASE OF 02 DIESEL
DFW G.P.O.S. AVERAGE NET !
PRICE WITH SUPERFUND i
INCLUDED 8 .5324 .5296 .1321 .5324 5324 5460
(+MARKUP)(-MARKDOWN) .012 +.0109 +.0150 +.0140 +.012 .065
SELLING PRICE PER GALLON 3444 .5405 5474 3464 3444 . 611 J.
k +.0625 FOR LOADING PEE <84Sd QAL
BOBTAIL +50 UNLEADED +
y OADS<7e +37.50DIBSEL
' k GALLONS
6 i r r-
4 Y 1
.r
I
Ir7
r
ANc
Agenda
Date '
DATE: SEPTEMBER 13 1
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council ((v//
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
1
SUBJECT: BID iF 1864 - EMERGENCY PREEMPTION SYSTEM EXPANSION
(OPTICOM)
RBCOWMDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the low bidder, Naztec
ncorpomat , n tie total amount of $25,587.20.
SUMMARY: This bid is for the purchase of optical communication equipment, to be
added to the existing system. This equipment will identify designated priority
vehicles and caurAs the traffic signal oontroiler to advance to and/or hold a deslrA
traffic signal.
Two bid proposals sere received in response to six bid packages mailed to vendor
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet, Memorandum from Jerry Clark dated 9-1-94.
1
PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED; Traffic Department, Citizens
o the C ty o Denton.
FISCAL IMPACT: Bond Funds for Traffic Signal Construction Account i1448.020-
5 -9'1 0.
ted:
Res ull6rH
I
L d ;
~ .
City Manager
prepared Bq:
I
. r
r ♦
Me: Des ae arpool
Title: Senior Buyer
a
A rolled I
a. ame: Tom D. S w, C.P.M.
Title: Purchasing Agent
SMACUM"
{
,
t
I
Dete '
( DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 1 A~
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
f TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: BID If 1664 - EMGENCY PREEMPTION SYSTEM EXPANSION
(OPTICOM)
iI
RECOADMDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the low bidder, Nazteo
acorporate , t 9 total amount of $25,587.20.
S
UNWRY: This bid Is for the purchase of optical communication equipment, to be
added to
vehicles andec a ues nthe traffic signal controller n to advance to a ddesinated /or hold a d sired
j traffic signal.
Two bid proposals were received in response to six bid packages mailed to vendors.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet, Memorandum from Jerry Clark dated 8-1-94.
PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPSAPFECTED. Traffic De
o 00 City o -ton. partment, Citizens
FISCAL IMPACTr Bond Funds for Traffic Si i
goal Construction Account 1448-020-
Res ully qrl ted:
Lloyd V. Harrel
f City Manager
~I
Prepared By;
i
Bme: De so erpoo S }
Title. S@nior Buyer L
E
:
NrOVld
m D. S w,
C.P.M.
Title: Purchasing Agent
sr3JAWA
{
~`va►v
i
BID
r~
BID NAME EMERGENCY PREEMPTION CONSOLIDATED NAZTEC INO. TRAFFIC 3M
SYSTEM EXPANSION TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
OPEN DATE AUGUST 18, 1994 CONTROLS & CONTROL
1. 12 EA MODEL M621 OPTICAL $426.00 $595.00 NO BID NO BID
DETECTOR
2. 12 EA MODEL M621 MOUNTING $15.00 $37.80
1 BRACKET
3. 2F00 LF MODEL 138 OPTICOM 10.39 $0.30 i
CABLE !
4. 10 EA MODEL CA360 CARD RACK $176.00 $188.00
5. 10 EA MODEL 282 DISCRIMINATOR $1,636.00 $280.00
MODULES
e. 10 EA MISC ELECTRICAL SPLICES $10.00 $5.00
F AND MATERIALS PER
INTERSECTION
TOTAL
7. 4,24,15.000 ALTERNATE 810 A DOUBLE $48.710.00 $25,687.20
20,20,20 LS ALL UNITS ABOVE
8. $2,12,2600, ALTFRNATE BID B 52:40456.00 $12,863.80 ;
O,1X1,10L8 ALL UNITS M600 SERIES
i s
.
. - V
'NIO
` R wad
f I!`
Oa/0l/a~ 10:66 0961766664a6 CITY OF DLNTON Q0011002
No 30
~~It
Data
m" e# Dffrr TNXA6; MUNICIP&MLOfNO / 21b 6 Mc10NNEY / DEMN. TSM 76201
1~IOAANDOIt
DATE: September 1, 1994
Toe Tom Shawl Purchasing Agent
!'i"t Jarry.Clark, Director of Snglti+aeriaq a Transportation
SVBJ EC'i's saargenoy promotion Syetem Expansion Bid
The low preemption bid opened on August 180 1994 by mastea,
Incorporated is aco*ptable, No reoom end award of nombar sleven.Yor
a total o! 825,697.20.
Naateo. Inoorporatodl has done basittesa with us and we rind thsm to
be sj r tabu contractor. We have elciatil~q vorkir►q 0411 P"nt
our 8" Isioa and . they' art aora+atible with the 31t'O0 e<NiP t
that SAM $ up moat of our sx sting syeter. Thereioreiotpi"+ bidj~o~r ~
ltastea the mano enoy treea6ption System Expans ;
25 jS97.20.
please advise it you need further intonation. 4
Cl k i
AE80047E/3
I
I
e171586•a2oo D/FWMEM04,3-2528
50175666236 PAGE.002
SM 2 '94 10307
' anVSw'm.....
FS
'Ail
Z ate 2 3
z 2Z~
Y
N ' F
3 FB~N[H70
i 3WI
•e r
q
,s 4 l3 1 ~
C 7iGO7
ll3 J
'f ' ' ros+~ar
13 'S
w D LJCJ ❑ ~ 7UWA
e
l1i111D1 ~ ~ \
dwwm
~J®tJ ~ Na38 w LJ 1.-_--~
t ~
w AA
r NOllfl! ® 131 ~ ~
r ~ ~ \ 'IVY1N7~ r
EILJ
MAN
r
e., ..e ,ors, d.S .+M. w•~ ~....r»a
6+«M19'
r ,
f
4
lfl9NINJ
a
F
a
r~
13~
y Mm
roswa'
IVMA
D~~paD 13 'S Q
oo D
D lG D DC]o ru"
~[lf }
lyl
CU3
M 110aMtlJ 'DS \ ;
tntn+ VN o
~ J
AWN
t ~flQ
tj IL
NOLIN
d
,l,.
i
ITY~
1`F =
COUNC1
a~
rR i,,4 li
s
0, 0 yj
E 4
1 I F
s ~ 1
i
k
J
. xay `
oval
Apenda~lo 94 _a
i
Date
V 3
ORDINANCE NO. / /
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD
OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE
EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR) AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated
competitive bids for the construction of public works or
improvements in accordance with the procedur6s of state law and
City ordinances and
1 WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee ties
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:
ECTION 1. That the following competitive bids for the j
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 bidet
BID NUMBER CONTRACTOR AMOUNT
1661 HAWN POWER SERVICES INC, ; 51,628.00 f
1666 BRITTON BLDG EXHIBIT A
1666 MEMBER BUILDING MAINT EXHIBIT A
1669 W.F.C. CONSTRUCTION INC. $ 39,489.00
SECTION ii. That the acceptance and approval of the above
compet Live b s 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 contra.-t and
furnishing of performance and payment bonds, and insurance
certificate after notification of the award of the bid.
i
SECTION 111. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to
execute a 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.
04 i
e
Wo
~a
SECTION IV. That upon acceptance and approval of the above
competitive. ids and the execution of contracts for the public
works and improvements as authorised herein, the City Council
hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds In the manner and in the
aunt as specified in such approved bids and authorized contracts
executed pursuant thereto.
SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective
iswed ate y upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ,1994.
.~t k
BO CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTESTS
JENNIFER NALTERSt CITY SURETARY
By #
-
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMS j '
DEBRA A. VRATOVITCtt, CITY' A'T'TORNEY
BYE
i
P
I
elDrr lut
"In NAME JANITORIAL
SERVICES BRITTON MEMBERS 9~jo3o
PAOB 1 OF 1 IILDO BUILDING
' OPEN DAYS AUOUST 11. 1901 MAINT
Age:ulal
De,IC~umD 1~ ~ R ~
317 n,-7F
SecnON 1. Oa1A !
1 1. 11 MOS CITY HALL CLZANINO (15.0003Q P'1) !1.905.09
DU491T A (7
It. 1: CITY IIALLCARPBT(1TIMESAYR) $Sw.0o
all. 1 CITYHALL WINDOWS(2nMEAAYR) 1149.N
V
SECTION It
L 11 MOS TRAFFIC CONTROL BLDG CLEANINO MAN
L 12 MOS CITYANIMALCONTROLIENVIRO It"
HEALTH OMCE CLEANING ONLY
St. IMOS CITY ANIMAL CONTROL WINDOWS 160A0
. (STIMSS A YR)
C UWOS EQUIPMENT SERVICES CLEANNO !150.00
r. J. 11 MOs SERVICE CENT"/PURCHASING 1100.00
lM.09 1
} SS. 3 SERV.CENTERIPURCHAMNGCARPET
(1 TIMSS/TRAR)
ISMOS sERVICBCENTERAIITLCLEATGNO stWL"
11 MOs COMMUNICATIONSICOMPUTER 1109.99
11 NOS VICE CENTER MEN'sDOWNSTAIRS $IM.M
i RSSTROOM IS TO SB CLEANED TWICIS
- DAILY
fs t 1RRVICII CENTESAML CARPET lb0.09
I URVICSC11"URAITH.WINDOWS 1156.44
(1 TIMES AYR) ;
4 SECTION ITi ` .
` SECTON "mCLPAL COMPLEX (OMC)
i
1 Is NOS MCMISAN RESOURCIIJ (1.700 s0 F 1) 14"
`
IS M01 DMCAN"NATION ISRVICES 1150.00
fr.ISNOS DIICAMNICIPALCOURT(MILSQPI) Mt.M
t 13 Mw DMC"u(m DEPT (Skm s0 Pt') 11.919.99
t~. 1 I)MC CARPETS (1 TIMES A YR) N35M i
71. 1 DMC WINDOWS (I TIMES A YR) !156.09
L 1l MO PAC16117EI MOMT SLDO (1.900 SQ PT`) I115.t!
11N10
0. 13 moll VIMONINOOFFICES
f E
j
f'
91111
vv
le
N
0017
YY.el:~
sra • 1K~
RID NAME JANITORIAL
jO~o
SERVICES RRITTON MEMBER! NO
PAOE I OF I BLDG BUILDING Qp
r OPEN DATE AVOUST73.110/ IOAINT `
♦ DB$M
'
Qd~B
/EcnoN I.
I. II ICOS CITY IIALL CLEANING (I3.0008Q PT') II.011s.oo !1 f~
dQ(I&T A (7 I
I0. 2 CITY BALL CARPET(MMES A YR) 63!11.00
71. 7 CITY HALL WINDOMS(7flM6/ A YR) $144.00
SECTION It
S. 171[0/ TRAFFIC CONTROL BLDG CLEANINO 8300.00
S. 11 MOB CITY ANIMAL CO)ITROIJBNVIRO 1344A0
HEALTH OP7IC2' ClZAMNG ONLY
1
IMOS CITY ANIMAL CONTR01.WINDOWS Isom
(ITIMBSA YR)
f. IS YOS EQUIPMENT SERVICES CLEANING 8150.00 {
S. If MOO SERVICE CENTER/PURCHASING 8300.00
~ i
3a. S NOV. CENTER/PURgtAMNOGRPBT $0030
I,
(3 TIMBS/TEAR)
13 MOS SERVICE CENTERAITIL C1lANINO 11.100.00 .
It mot Norm COMMUMGTTONSIOOMFUTER 1100.00
t! MOB RVICE CENTER MEWS DOWNSTAIRS II00.M
RESTROOM 11 TO IIE (IMMEDTWICE
DAILY
k S SERVICE CENIERRITTL CARPET 84311.M
I
O SERVICE CENTERAITIL. WINDOW/ It30.N
(3 TIMES A YR)
SECTION In
0ENTO1I MUNICIPAL COMPtAA (DMC
IL 13 MOO MCAIUMAN RESOURCE/ (!.7011 W FP) 64"m
TA 11 MOB DMCANPORMATIONSERVICE& $fl0./0 1
($.100 SQ m
It. I I M03 0MC/MUMCIPAL COURT (6.191 10 FI) OSHA
7 ll MOS 1)mc" ICE DEPT (f1.IN SQ F1) f t.0Sf.00
f0. S DMC CARPETS (S TIMES A TO.) 10!!.44
i
7L S DMC WINDOWS (7 TIMES A TR) f 130.00 1
L 13 MOS FACILITIES MO MT BLDG (1.010 W FT) 117!.110 ' .
0. 11 MOS VISIONINO OFFICES IINA11
j
r
AJIR'
I
APWNo
Agardal
DO* DATE: September 13, 1994
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager f
SUBJECT: BID i 1661 - REPAIR OF FEED HATER HEATER
RECAIOFlDIDATIONs We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest.bidder,
anion Power Services Inc. in the amount of $51,628.00.
SUN AMY: This bid 18 to supply materials and labor to repair the Feed Water
Heater on Turbine Unit 5-3 at the Electric Production facility. Public Utility Board
reoommonds approval.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheetl Memorandum dated August 30 prepared by Jim
Time, PlaEtTlanager.
PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Electric Production Plaut, ~
Muhl
olp&I Utility Department.
FISCAL IMPAC'l!s Funds for this maintenance project will come from 1993-94 budget
I funds allocated or maintenance of generating equipment. Account t 810-101-1011- s`
5140-8399-55000000 with a balance of $55,431.48.
es allysub eds
LloVd V, Harrell
City Manager
Approved s
Aamei Om lsatl, C. .
Title: Purchasing Agent
~ I
1 f
s ,
l
owl
rmmw
Vol
i
ID NAIiAE REPAIR FEEDWATER HEATER SENIOR YUBA HAMON
ENGINEERING HEAT POWER
Eid DATE 8-18-94 TRANSFER SERVICES
v,,
1. 1 REPAIR/RETUBE 6-3 $44,687.00 $42,800.00 $44,078.00
FEEDWATER HiATER
2. 1 ADDITION AT COST TO $1,100,10 $14,160.00 $6,700.00
PERFORM 111.9.8
3. 1 INSPECT TUBE SHEET/ $400.00 $14,260.00 51,676.0(1
CHMNELY 111.8.4
4. 1 SUPPLY CHANNEL SHELL $360.00 $20.00 $276.00
EE
DELIVERY 16 WEEi<8 126 LaAY8 10-12 WKS
45
Y. f I .
A
' . ywgffl~
r
a
F .
j
i
ID NAME REPAIR FEEDWATER HEATER ENGINEERING S I HEAT POWER
PEN DATE 8-18-94 TRANSFER SERVICES
e>
3L` N'3'.` ' .fir f.?~ a .r.: 1 :,i`. `c i* ra Fd . 3
1. 1 REPAIR/RHTUSE 6-3 $44,687.00 $42,800.00 $44-078.00
FEEDWATER HEATER
1 ADDITION AT COST TO 51,100.00 :14,160.00 16,700.00
PERFORM 111.8.6
3. 1 INSPECT TUBE SHEET/ =400.00 114,250.00 =1,676.00
CHANNEL 111.8.4
4, 1 SUPPLY CAN TO SHELL 5350.00 I 1200.00 $276.00 f
KET
10
DELIVERY 18 WEEKS 126 DAYS -12 WKS
`
l t
~ Gw ' 3
kA j
F
jl l . \
,II ~ !
a~
dk•
r
I
q y,
t
I {
y
Ci.. o. a
wr
1
t September 1, 1991
CITY COUNCIL AGEhMA ITEM N~
=A01
Date
TOs XAYOR AND XWERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
{ ~ 7J
gRpMI Lloyd V. Harrell, City kanager (v~/ I
L
5-3 FEEVMTER HEATER REPAIR
RE
`s
RFCOSb1MUM&TIM.'s
r The Electric Utility recommends contracting with Hamon Power
r Services Inc. to retube and repair unit 5-3 Eeedwater heater
bundle. The Public Utility Board approved this recommendation
September 6, Exhibit I.
StaomY s
Spencer unit 5-3 Eeedwater heater has failed in service to the
extent that reliable steam cycle operation cannot be maintained.
Repairs anticipated include replacing the tube oundle and repair or
replacement of the tubesheet/support elements. This work has been bid to qualified competitively. provided low evaluated bid for contractors.
woerk n Power Services Inc
BACEG'ROUHD s
Spencer Steam Generating Units incorporate feedwater heating in the
steam cycle to improve overall unit efficiency. Feedwater heating
-in this case is accomplished by closed feedwater heaters utilizing i
4 extraction steam from the turbine. By design, Eeedwater flows
through hundreds of small diameter tubes and is heated by
extraction steam which surrounds the small tubes: operation of the
clsoged ~fiek at
steam cycle relies on the integrity of the
pa
In the event of tube
heaters. to
fai..urefee , dwat the steam
which operates at, much lower pressure.
side of the heater
When this occurs, the possibility of water induction to the turbine
resu~iler could occur.
and/or
ase,c mechanicl supply damage ewwillt likely the
In either
in 1972. Heater tubes
installed
I The Unit 5-3 Eeedwater heater was
consist of copper nickel material. Years of service, including
cycling, have resulted in deterioration of the copper nickel tube
material through a process known as exfoliation. This results in
deterioration of the exterior tube surface effectively weakening
the pressure capability of the tubes. The process is irreversible
and can only be minimized by controlling the environment
surrounding the tubes. Since the tube exterior is exposed to
atmospheric conditions off line and since the units are cycled ~
repeatedly due to Pool dispatch economics, tube failure is somewhat
common. In the severe case experienced with Unit 5-3 Eeedwater
heater, many tubes failed which limited the ability to maintain
proper feedwater regulation to the boiler drum.
tubes The tubes
with in the
failed past.
tested failures
This hr has incurr%A ydrostatically several
have been h
!
r
i
1
Exfoliation has occurred to the extent continued operation would
place the turbine and boiler at unnecessary risk.
A specification was issued to qualified vendors soliciting costa to
retube the feedwater heater tube bundle. The specification
requested stainless tube material which has a much longor life
expectancy in cycling service applications.
PROGPJW, DBPARTK T, GROUPS A"ECTED3
Electric Production Division, operations D6partment, Fuel cost,
City of Denton Customers
FISCAL n(PACTt
Evaluated Cost Comparison HA= =bA SgaiDz
Aetube cost $44,078.00 $42,800.00 $44,687.00
( Estimated tube support cost $ 6,700.00 $14,150.00 $16,797.00
Gasket cost $ 175.00 $ 200.00 $ 350.00
f Inspection of tubesheet cos,'. 5 1.575.00 $14.250.00 5 400.00
Total $51,628.00 $710400.00 $62,234.00
L
Respec fully,
l
,
Llo Harrell
City Manager'
Prepared bys
Jim T une, Plant Manager
'4N0
Wroved bys
Dnttb nom'
" I R.S. Nelson, Executive Director
Electric Utilities
.
Exhi'oit Is Public Utility Hoard recommendation
u
.1
r•
Apend:No V
. Ap9tl4
not DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council j
FEOM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager {
J
SUBJECT: BID # 1688 - JANITORIAL SERVICE
RECOMMENDATION: Council approve award of Bid #1666 -Janitorial Service to the
ow ders meet ng specifications as shown on the attachment (Exhibit "A").
SUMMARY: This bid Is for the annual Janitorial service requirements for city
li6'ild nin ga excluding the recreation facilities (which are bid on a separate cycle).
This bid has the option to be renewed for an additional one year period based upon
the mutual agreement of both parties. Window and cleaning to be performed on an
"as needed" basis.
BACKGROU)'D: Exhibit "A", Tabulation Sheet, Memorandum from Mary Ragusa]
Facill as nagemont.
PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Facilities Management, City
Buildings as Tabulated
FISCAL DFPACT: Funding for thin cleaning will be available In the 195 Fiscal Year
u get or Fac lltles Management and Fleet Services which Is estimated to be
$103,998. Of this estimated total $98,988.00 is for daily cleaning and the balance of
$50010.00 would be for bi-annual carpet and window cleaning if requested.
Reap ully sub t d:
oy arre
City Manager J
Prepared By:
{ ame: a Ha
Title: Buyer
i
Approved:
i
' a m e Tom n. Sbaw,t;. . .
Title: Purchasing Agent
i
i
BID NAYS JANITORIAL '1 y
SERVICES BAI770N YE14
B87S PAGES Up a OPEN DATE AVOUJT 7IMI ELDO 6UWIL,1) 1Q9f1d811
SECTIONS
1. tl MOs CITY FULL Cl1!ANINO (73,000SO FT) 11,111.00
CITY HALL CARIET(7TI MESAYA) 13si.00 EMIBIT A
s►. I CITY HALL WINDOWS(317MES A YA) 1140.00
SECTION
f. It YOB TRAAPIC COMMOL BLIDG CLEANING
~ 1700.40
f. 1=M00 CITY AJCYALCo".oL/ENVIRO lulw
HRAL7Tl OPPICE CLEANING ONLY
$1. 7MOB CITY ANIMAL CONTROL WINDOWS iS0A0
(777MRS A YR)
1. 17 YOS BOUI►MRNI'SERVICES CLEANING 1i70.00
II MOB SERVICE CBNIEII/PURCIIAIINO 11100.01
!a. B SBRV.CENT"JPURCIIASINOCARPET
110.00
(2 TIMEH/YEAR)
i. 17 NO$ BBRVICB CENTBRIUTIL CLEANING
II,1wA0
1L 13 NOS OTRI COYMUNJCAYIONSICOMPUTER I1w.0/
H. 13 MOB RVICB CBNTEk MBN71 DOWNSTAIRS ISKI#
RBSTIIOOY 11 TO BB CIEANRD MCR
DAILY
' i /1. t SEANCE CBNTRRAML CARPET lslO.OB
(0'17YBHTR)
N s
. 't SERVICE CKMAJUTIL WINDOWS
(7 TIMS$ A YA)
IBCI70N 111
DEMON MUNICIPALCOMPLRR (OMC)
14 11 MOB MCAIUMAN JimBOUACEI (l,m IO PY) Ilw w
7L IsNo$ DUCyMNUA720MUJJVTCBB 113110 ~1,
(l,la W PT)
is Is YOB DMCfliUNICIIALCOURS (lull SO PT) Il3IJN
f1 Is No$ DYCIPOWCR DEPT (3s,119 40 Fn lux"
DMC CARPETS (3 TIMES AYR) 19f3.40
It s DMC WINDOWS (7 t1MSt AYR) 1130.00
S, 17 MOB PACILITIBS MOMT SLDO (1000 BO PI) 112103
S. 13 MOt VISIONING OPPICBB 11M w
i
}
a
x . j
i
i
i
ifli kv
BID NAME JANITORIAL BRTITON MEMBERS BILL
SERVICES ~ABAdd11
i
PAOEI OF s SLDO BUILDING COTTRELL late
AUGUST M 1994 MAINS'
OPEN PATE
SECTION L 11.905.00 13.000.00 NO BID
1. U NOS CITY HALL CLP.ANINO (130030 PT) 1
1~. 1 CITY HALL CARPaT(3T1MES A YIN) Siss.N $50.00
31. 3 CITY HALLWINDOWS(ar[MREJITR) 100-00 1100,00
SECTION It
L 11 NOS TRAPPIC CONTROL BLDG CI MNINO 1979 00 120.09
' 117!.00 130000
L as MOS CITY ANIMAL CONTR04BNY1R0
• 14 IIBALTII o"ICR C'LEANINO OR"
iu aNOS CITY ANIMAL CONTROL WINDOWS 113 A0 153.00
(3TIMRS A YR)
1. is Moo BQUIPMENTSaRVICESCLEANINO !113.00 11f3.N
3. It MOB SERVICE CENTELIFURCR431N0 12m.N 1100.00
IBRV.CEM'aRA'URCNASINOCASPET 17101 100.00
'r (3 TIMBUNSAR)
ti NOS SuRVICs CaKr%RAITIL CLEANING 01.311.00 11.100.00
N. It NOB OTRS COMMUNICATIONNQOMPUTSR 1119.00 110030 i
` N. S3M01 BRYICBCBNTBRMBN'SDOWNSTAIRS t3is.46 110000
ON IS TO BB CLBANBP TWICE
O
RSBTR
DAILY i
S%RVICBCENTBR/UTILCARPBT (100.00 IISO.N
(MMUNR) i
11 ! SBRVICBCaNTRRJUTILWINDOWS I1N.N 115000
(t TIMES A YS)
• SECT!)N111
D ENTON MUNICIPAL COMPLEX ON(-)
Is. 13 Not MCAIUMAN 09SOUIlC61(S,70 W rn 1400.00 1100.00
16. 12M01 DMCITNPORMATIONSSRVICEI l)fsN 910000
(S.ISs W M
Ts. I3 NOS PNCYMUNICIPAL OOURT(3,Tf1 W PT) ISS1 N !!9100
13. it NOS DNCItOL1Ca Dart (13,11f SQ r r) q,ULN if "I m
N3f 1o (440.00
T4, 1 DMC CAMPS" (3 Tibias AYR)
c k 1L 3 DMCWINDOWS (3TIMaSAYE) 1130.00 $Iffm
S It MOs PACH.ITIES MONT BLDO (IAN SQ ft) 1115.00 1171.00
t
Vi110N1NOOPPIC61 $INA 1171.00
1. I3 Moo
` BID BOND tai Tai
RaPERaNCaS vat TES
j
J
■
~pelldaNo.
Agar It
Dale
GITYofDENTON, TSXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TEL PHONE(811) 566•a200
MORANDUM
f TOs Melanie Harden, Buyer
PROMi Mary Ragusa, Administrat?.ve Assistant
DATSZ September 2, 1994
SUBJECTa Janitorial Bid 1666
Please award the following sections of the bid to the specified low
bidder.
Bidder 81d Qrica
Section
Section I Britton $24o240
Section II Members $270020
Section III Britton $520738
If you have any estions please call me.
a R usa m n stmt ve Assistant
17 2.FM ,
i
,
0
. wrN.QKYA7WJESNVl.W'U"+'.ra°"r.
^1
emu
p ~ ~ 1
igoodeNo r ,
Aged
Gale DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
"T/--l CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM. Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
4
4 SUBJECT: BID # 1889 - CANOPY AND FOUNDATION FOR WAREHOUSE
RECOMMXNDATIONs We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bidder,
W. V, C. Construction Inc., In the amount of $39,482.00.
SUMMARYe This bid is for a metal cane and the support foundation to cover an
existing ' x 125, concrete slab. The slab Is located on the north end of the
warehouse facility. This tingle slope shed will be 20' high on the highside and allow
for storage of wire and PVC conduit.
As the City of Denton Utility Departments move from metal pipe to PVC and from
overhead Electric Distribution to underground distribution, protection of Inventory
stock from sun damage becomes critical. Underground wire does not have the UV
protection that is built into overhead wire and sunlight causes PVC pipe to become
bclttle. I
This shed area will be open on two sides and will offer weather protection for
approximately $250,000.00 in Warehouse stock.
BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Warehouse Operations
FISCAL IMPACTS Funds for this warehouse facility addition were approved in the
i 1993-94 budgeprocess. Account Number $710.0430.0582.9101 with a balance of
$59,760.00.
Reap ully s it ds
arre 1
City Manager
Approved:
Name: Tom S w, C.P,M.
Title: Purchasing Agent
l71.A6iICA
i
A
Awl N
ID 1669
ID NAME CANOPY & FOUNDATION JONES & SOUTHWEST W.F.C.
FOR WAREHOUSE JEFFREY IND'L CONST.
PEN DATE 0-30-94 CONST ING
R"
1. 1 CANOPY FREE STANDING $44,726.00 $29,304.00 530,871.00
{ 2. 1 FOUNDATION FOR CANOPY $8,650.00 $8,980.00 $7,800.00
3. LT COMBINATION ITEM 1 & 2 $63,376.00 $39,182.00 $38,271.00
COMPLETE
4. EA OPTIONAL: ADDITIONAL NO $15 EA $74 EA
COST OF SKYLIGHT PANEL
(OTY TO BE DETERMINED)
Y 6. LT OPTIONAL: GUTTER AND $6c 8.00 $1,017.00 $1,211.00
DOWNSPOUT AS DESCRIBED
IN BID DOCUMENTS
r '
,
P .
F
~ wCITY
COUNCL
;C
~I w
11 i
k
0~ a1
~4 d
i
f
410k 41
I 1,
i
I
y
AOMNO. 4
. A~dalt
DaleZ9
ORDINANCE NO. I V J
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORISING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT WITH THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY TO AUTHORIZE
PARTICIPATION IN THE PURCHASE OF VARIOUS ELECTRIC METERS;
AUTHORISING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS► AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
f THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS1
SECTION I. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to
execute the attached agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto
and incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION II. That the City Manager is authorized to expend
funds pursuant to the agreement for the purchase of electric
meters.
SECTION III. That this ordinance shell become effective
t., inmad ate y upon lts passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1994.
f
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTESTi
JENNIFER NA ''xRSj CITY SECRETARY
II
SYt
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMt
DSSRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY I
Byl-
'i
_M
1
i
I `
J
1
1
bx..
- bpd _ !
AP01 O
QJ!! DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 1994
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Mayor and Membors of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH TEXAS
MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY FOR THE PURCHASE OF ELECTRIC
METERS
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this ordinance, for the cooperative purchase
of 13 electric meters between the City of Denton and the Texas Municipal Power
Agency be aprroved in the amount of ;42,090.00.
SUKdARY: The authority for one entity to purchase for another is permitted in
Chapter 1 of the Texas Government Code, the Interlocal Cooperatlot. Act.
Approval of this interlocal agreement will allow the City of Denton to purebe9e 13
electronic meters, at a quantity discounted price, from T.M, P. A. in acoordanw with
all competitive bidding requirements. These electronic -solid state meters will be
utilized by all T.M.P.A. member cities to assure uniform KW and KWH meter
readings.
BACKGROUND:, Interlocal Agreement
x } PROG1tAM3 DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Electric Production and
` blst bu on Divisions, Utility stomers o the City o Denton.
IIFISCAL 1%ACT: Budgeted funds for Electric Production 1810-101-1011-5130-8332
i t a nnce o X8,577,809.58.
Respe 11y qu ttedt
Lloyd V. ro
City Manager
Prepared By:
ame: De se arpoo
{ Title: Senior Buyer
Approved:
ame: Tom D. Saw, C.P.M.
Title: Purchasing 4gent
~ s7o.roe~
t
f
~endaNo fVw 0
~ Apendaat C'
tTate _ ~ THE STATE OF TEXAF
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
j COUNTY OF DENTON
I
k 7
This Agreement is made this day of ,
1994, by and between the Texas MuTrpal Power Agency TMPA), a
municipal power agency of the State of Texas organized pursuant to
TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 1435a S 4a (Vernon 1980) hereinafter
referred to as "TMPA," and the City of Donton. a home rule
municipal corporation of Denton County, Texas, hereinafter referred
to ao "CITY."
Pursuant to the authirity granted by the Texas Interlocal
Cooperation Act, now TEX. GOVT CODE ANN. S 791.011 (Vernon 1994),
formerly TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN art. 4413 S 32c (Vernon 1976),
TMPA and City, the parties hereto, in consideration of the premises
and mutual promises contained herein agree as followsc
I.
CITY makes, constitutes and appoints TMPA its true and lawful
purchasing agent for the purchase of a minimum of 13 multi-
function, bi-directional solid state meters with electronic
registers. The CITY agrees that TMPA shall be the purchasing agent
' for said items, the TMPA agrees to conduct the bidding of such f 4
f purchases in accordance with the applicable statutes and laws in
effect dLring the term of this Agreement.
II. I
E CITY agrees that the specifications for said items shall be in
accordance with TMPA Specification Title "Inter-Tie Revenue
Metering" No. 17-E-ZZZ-41.
III.
CITY shall be responsible for payment directly to TMPA in the
amount of lowest responsible bid awarded by TMPA for the items
purchased and THPA agrees to remain the agent for City until the
j vendor has (a) complied with all conditions of delivery, (b) met
applicable merchantability and fitness standards and (c) honored
the warranties, on the items purchased by CITY.
IV.
TMPA agreus to serve as purchasing agent for the CITY without
payment of co:apensation for such services, since tho purchase of
the subject meters by CITY and other cities of Texas Municipal
Power Pool improves the efficiency of TMPA in providing services to
such cities under its contracts with such cities and the
installation of such meters will be advantageous and cost effective
for TMPA.
.j
' ~ ,eadaNa ¢~Q.~O
' oendah G
I atF
V.
This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement
between THPA and CITY and supersedes all prior negotiations,
a ! representations and agreements, either written or oral. This
1 agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both
TMPA and CITY.
I j
4 VI.
This agreement shall take! effect upon execution by the
signatories and shall be in effect from the date of execution until
delivery, acceptance and payment for the specified material has
been completed.
VII.
In the event that any portion of this agreement shall be found
to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties heroto that
the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full force and
effect to the extent possible.
VIII.
Any liability of a party hereto for payment of fees accruing
from the performance of governmental functions or services shall be
paid only from funds available from current revenues.
IX. j
{ The undersigned officers or agents of the parties hereto are
the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority
to execute this agreement on behalf of the parties hereto, and each
t party hereby certifies to the other that any necessary resolutions
or ordinances extending said authority have been duly passed and
are now in full force and effect.
r
Executed in duplicates originals this the day of ,
1994.
F CITY OF DENTON
j BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
j
•I
PAGE 2
} 4
h
1
r
I
e~
gendeNo
ATTEST:
JENNIFER HALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
1 BY=
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM.
DEBRA As DRAYOVITCH; CITY ATTORNEY
o/lw
r'
TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY
BY:
ATTESTS
1 r
1 l('.
BYi
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORF :
E
((rS By l
y` ATTORNEY FOR TMPA
F
1
~ 1 r tt 1
1. E _
je\wpdoes\k\tepamtr.k
PAGE 3
f.:
,
! ~2N0
ATTEST O
JENNIFER WALTERSo CITY SECRETARY
,
f
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITC1i, CITY ATTORNEY
Fn ti.; ~BYl~1,we
t f' TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER.AGENCY
r
Y^^ l
BY:
i r ATTESTi
r ,
4 t , By t
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM I
r
1
i
r
A BY i ATTORM EY FOR TMP1\
i4
r , , r
r
k r 1
r Si\wpdoc•\k\tmp& Mtr.k
PAGE 3
r
r
:C ITY
~ cg's
+
=M
l~y~ kf. J
I,
J ,F S
t
1
l ;
Y
t
q 4 -030
r
te3l
i
r
MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 21 b E. McIC1NNEy / DENTON, TEXAS 78201
a" pQJiftpN, =X"
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 13, 1994
11 i T0: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
~ t~~ts
FROM: Jon Fortune, Management Services Administrator
SUBJECT: RESULTS OF COUNCIL BUDGET BALANCING
w~ Please find the attached summary of the City Council budget balancing meeting held
on September 60 and an ordinance adopting the 1994.95 operating budget. The
vs'. F f proposed General Fund revenues have Increased to 931,467,182 which is 4165,349
above the staff proposed amount of 931,301,833. Expenditures have Increased to '
00" r i
$32,740,040 which is 9185,349 above the staff proposed amount of 932,674,691.
Council suggested taking $1,272,858 from fund balance and 9124,180 from ,r
,r c hotel/motel tax reserves to help pay for expenditures. In addition, Council suggested
t ;
lowering the ad valorem tax 9.1870 to 9.6609 per 9100 valuation.
Also, Council suggested that electric rates Increase one 1196? percent, water rates
Increase two 12%) percent, and waste water rates Increase eight (896) percent over t
the 1993-94 rates. Residential sanitation rates are expected to Increase by seven t `r
point six seven (7,6796) percent, while commercial rates Increase by eight 18%)
percent over the 1993-94 rates. The landfill charge Increases $1.00 per cubic yard
of landfill disposal.
If you need further Information, please advise. Thank you.
J
v[PaS ii I 1 I a "~fl.
WON"
l'
, fl,
r~. y 817156"200 D/FW METRO 434.2529
,
. v.~rYM IN'YWN.~s-nr arwY4M#FJIW]~
l ?I
.Map l.,a....~
`
1101
~ at~ndaMo•
;gendai
lrte -
oZ I,
a' 1994-95 BUDGET i
SUMMARY OF SEPTEMBER B, 1994
COUNCIL BUDGET BALANCING
I
M
. . General Fund Amoun
Street Lights e '
Teat Rate 25.0% 0,000) 201,910
Health Inatxance (66,2 1,709
,2886 5 21188,994
Sr. Center Doors 65(7$000 2119"
r City Hall woo {77393 134,E
Juviniie Diversion Task Force
TTAIPS {22,00g~ 11206M ,
Visual Arts Center - Fans 8,000 108,996
t 1,600 1114,9A6
MUC Part-Time Position {71494 97,492 .
Denton Library South 0
Balance
E S ducPrrop~ Ad Valorem Tax Rats 0.5w
i Council Reduction In PProposed Tax Rata -0.0038
Ad Valorem Tex Rate 0.5609
Staff taff Prop Revenues 31,301,833
S
Proposed E4widitures 32 574 691
From Fund Balance 1272,SW
Council ftwssted Revenues
Co"Il SuD **W Expenditures 31,487,182
32 740040
From Fund
,272, ~
04tlghf Itl/p/M 1
r I
I
III
3
:
r
W"J
~ nvoo>t.~uo
Agm*No,
4gend3~t ' ~
Hate
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING ON OCTOBER It 1994, AND ENDING ON SEPTEM-
BER 30, 19951 AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the budget for th- City
of Denton, Texas, for the fiscal year 1994-95 was heretofore pub-
lished at least fifteen (15) days in advance of said public hear-
ingi and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the said budget was duly held on
the 23rd day of August, 1994, and all interested persons were given
an opportunity to be heard for or against any item thereof1 NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSI
SECI,ION 1. That the budget for the City of Denton, Texas for
the fiscal year beginning on October 1, 1994, and ending on
September 30, 1995 prepared by the City Manager and filed with the 1
City Secretary, as amended by the City Council, is hereby approved 1
and adopted, a copy of which budget is attached hereto and
incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION 11, That the City Council hereby appropriates fror
available resources to the following funds:
General Fund
r • $32F7401040
Recreation Fund 6478335
General Debt Service Fund 4,6050679
Electric Fund 71,332,308
Water Fund 14,3170568
' Wastewater Fund 902440427
Sanitation Fund 50644,669
Fleet Services Fund 20413,893
Warehouse Fund 413550607
Motor Pool Fund 215630806
E'
Total $148,0650332
SECTION III. That the city Manager is hereby authorized to
transfer the amounts of money for employee benefit and salary
adjustments as contained in the 1994-95 budget to the various
departments.
j SECTION IV. That the City Manager shall cause copies of the
budget to be filed with the City Socretary and County Clerk of
Denton County.
viol
i
61
~pendANo
AgAAdAI
We UCT Q V. That this ordinance shall become effective immed-
9atOly upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of
~ 1994.
d
BOB
CA3TLEBERRYt MAYOR
1 ATTEST)
JENNIFER WALTERSo CITY SECRETARY
HYt
t'
i APPROVED AS TD LEGAL FORMt
'DEBRA A. DRAYOVI
s, ;a 9'CfiO CITY ATTORNEY
SYt
1
" ask ~ _ tl i
Its Ji
}
PAGE
a
y
i
t
a
~S
-"CI~rY
C0 NCI
t
1
e
1 f ~
1f 1
1 Y 1~
a ,
1
a
t
41
i ,
n
No.rq~~ -V
~13
OM of MN70K TNX" MUNICIPAL BUILDINQ / 215 E MclUNNEy / DENTON, TEXAS 7e201
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 8, 1994
TO: Kathy DuBose, Acting Executive Director of Finance
F FROM: Harlan L. Jefferson, Director of Treasury Operations
` SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF THE AD VALOREM TAX RATE FOR 1994
{ E The attached ordinance'will serve to adopt the ad valorem tax rate for the year 1994.
Pursuant to preliminary consensus by Council on September 6, 1994, a tax rate of
4.6609 per 3100 of assessed value would be required to support the amended
General Fund portion of the 1994-95 prcposed budget. If adopted, 02465 of this
rate would be used to fulfill General Debt Service Fund requirements, and 03164 to
lass s
provide for General Fund coerstions and maintenance, The 4.6609 tax rate Is
than the City's 1994 effective rate of 4.5689 per $100 of assessed value. For your
Information, a tax rate worksheet is also attached which Illustrated the tax rate
' r calculation. `
i
' FF
e
00
Alt~chnMi
j A"O"
•r
t i
p
8111588-8200 D/FW METRO 434.2529
j1
1
l
1
,ipaa,
Dale -i
A
W"*fDrWWN, T'sXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 216 E MCKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 76201
I
+
a MEMORANDUM
i
r DATE: September 8, 1994
•;1 r
TO: Kathy DuBoss, Acting Executive Director of Finance
FROM: Harlan L. Jefferson, Director of Treasury Operations
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF THE AD VALOREM TAX RATE FOR 1994
The attached ordinance will serve to adopt tha ad val.-rem tax rate for the year 1994.
Pursuant to preliminary consensus by Council on September e, 1994, a tax rate of
9.6609 per $100 of assessed value would be required to support the amended
General Fund portion of the 1994.96 proposed budget. If adopted, 9.2466 of this
rate WOVId qe used to fulfill General Debt Service Fund requirements, and $.3164 to
" provide for General Fund operations and maintenance. The 9.6609 tax rate Is leas
than the City's 1994 effective rate of $.6689 per 9100 of assessed value. For your
Information, a tax rate worksheet ~ j also attached which illustrates the tax rate
calcule!lon.
1
a w r
~ Anknnw+e ~ t.
APFMI
j
l
' 81716666200 D/FW METRO 434.2629
~whW'.,.r-..L'.:W.v:*o.n. - , .~,...::.,a rdl ELI
~y
1
E i \W0=\01trj\ADVAL011
;gendeNo.
Date '
ORDINANCE NO.
I
AN ORDINANCE LEVYING THE AD VALOREM TAX OF THE CITY OF DENTON,
TEXAS, FOR THE YEAR 19941 ON ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN 11HE COR-
PORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY ON JANUARY 1, 1994, NOT EXEMPT BI LAW; i
PROVIDING REVENUES FOR PAYMENT OF CURRENT MUNICIPAL EXPENSES, AOD
FOR INTEREST AND SINKING FUND ON OUTSTAmurma CITY OF DENTON BONDS; 1
PROVIDING FOR LIMITED EXEMPTIONS OF CEFfAIN HOMESTEADS; PROVIDING
FOR ENFORCEMENT OF COLLECTIONS) PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENT0.3 HEREBY ORDAINS:
UCTION-1A. That b
Denton, Texas, and the laws authority the State of Texas,, thof the City of
ere is hereby
levied for the year 1994, on all taxable property situated within
the corporate limits of the City of Denton on the first day of Jan-
uary 1, 19940 and not exempt by the constitution and laws of the
State of Texas or by this ordinance, a tax of $ on
each $100 assessed value of all taxable property.
UTI4p_L L That of the total tax,
of assessed value shall be distributed t$ the GeneraI Fundcof$the
City to fund maintenance and operation expenditures of the City.
SECTION III. That of the total tax, $ of each $100
of assessed value shall be distributed to pay "a City's debt ser-
vice as provided by Section 26.04 (e) (3) of the Texas Property Tax
Code.
SECTION Iv. That pursuant to Article viii, Section i-b of the
Texas Constitution, $5,000 of the assessed value of resident home-
steads shall be exempt from City ad valorem taxes.
k SECTioN V. That pursuant to Article Viii, Section 1-b of tha
Texas Constitution, $22,000 of the assessed value of resident home-
steads of persons sixty-five (65) years of age or older shall be S
exempt from City ad valorem taxes. i
BZCTION Vi That pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1-b of the
Texas Constitution, $10,000 of the assessed value of resident home-
steads of disabled persons shall be exempt from City ad valorem
taxes.
i
j}ECTiON Vx~ That for onforcement of the collection of taxes
hereby levied, tho City of Denton shall have available all rights
and remedies provided by law.
R
i
i
3pendaNo
Date '
SECTION VIII. That if'any section, subsection, paragraph, son-
tence, clause, phrase or vord in this ordinance, or application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court
of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the City
Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have
f „ enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
SECTION Ix. That this ordinance shall become effective imsed-
lately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 19946
BOB CASTUBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST i
I JUNIPER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
w , •
by l APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM!
DEBRA A, DRAYOV
ITCHr CITY
ATTORNEY
BY1
Zhou)i"aeld-
.1
f
}
PAGE 2
hr.. vy~
O~
dexpeel
1994 PROPERTY TAX RATES IN CITY OF DENTON
6 for at =trtAru ta~e~~ a~ ft Cut yar+i'l+tut rate lr tkeyacc ailed rate the tax! +uaito" tl. to
am"
daterwine Property taus last year. r TAU riftanedte can deL+ see bock Yaar►. thl/ yaer~+ ro110
tax total rate axes is the Let year algha►c It tar youate CM t coepa Pa: ng yyee to can start tax
by dividing the total amount Of
by by procedure!, in each lava !heed ratas are pound by
rollback
case the tax ban* (CM total vela" of taxable propercyl rlth adjustments as rpeir"d by
state law. The rates era given per goo at property value.
Nee year's tax rates 1 I, iii J6S
} Last year's operating taxed 3 1,397,si1
Let year's debt texas 9 11,077,177
L!t yea['a total taxed 9 I'll$,i1 f, 701
Lett year's tax bap 9 .7a 711.100
Last year's total tax rag
IwueY+ar'slaA ustedt taxers k
9 11,!77, tl1
attor's edjuutad t" base lust PropertYl
i LrfDI,IOI A77
. Tblj
. This 17H/0500
►yeur'seffecti ve tax val.-t row gropertyl
/
16168 tax adjusc'ceat rate .1611/9600
/ 1396!/1100
I!laeeive tax rate
x 1.01. Ra ~ rate un al.=~ it wishes g .s69fllSOtl
noticea f ;
1WO yesr'+ gcoda6a tax rear
Net year's adjusted operating taxes 79,Uf
Satter subtractl taxer ea lost property) 2,1
3 IJO`11791,140
. Thle year's adjusted tax bus
This year's at active Operating rate ` 71 too
x 1.06 . This year's sexWa eparstitq rate ,46 jl ,77111 too
. 4 This ye4r'e debt race 1730+/9100
TAla year's rollback rote 9 ,11!7/9100
Iglu tax adjustment rate .1lHJ0100
Wllbielt tax [ace
SCHEDULE As Unencumbered Fund Balances
3 ffi" tollovia~0 estieated aloaeo will probably be left is the ualba Property tax edd4uhtt
at tall end et tM !Laea1 year, The" balanced are set ewuvbered by a eortedpoodirg debt
r obligation.
UP" sreearty ru Iuad
,
General. Dead / 4,117 ta7
177
a general Wee Arvin Iutd 111, .
SCHEDULE B4. 1994 Debt Service
The unit GGlee to pry the lollarSe4 assets toe ~t•tVt debts that ore so
axes.ustthede "'counts will be paid from prow Y .
tewns, is applicable) .
Principal 6 tatarut se"ire'caats tar
A YNI•f!
principal zaterart Total !
>iL am pad j,e a fate UAL it
G9LGflYL1i4.LL.G~j
it$$ (maspl Obligatian Refunding 111011,101 171,111 11,611,11! ,
t!N Gearal ObligatLos 116,400 111100 111,000 ,
` 1087A Certificates of Obligation 116,000 17,7s0140,710
SN7 Certificates of Obligation 7711 coo .600 11,104 17!,100
1161 0"4141 Obligation ,004 14,711 - 100,111
too$ Qeapt Obligation 171,Ut 1,070 tolls i
lost Certificates of Obligation i1111,316 /0.027.. 7701110
1196A certificates Of Obligation f, Na 440 7, 20
1191 Certlficata► of Obligation 13,000 077
171N1 17, `
r tool Certificates of Obligation 30,000 1N,701 1111033 I
1193 Cen+rd Obligation 01,161 11,071 11.114
Ulf Certificate of et Obligation 1p0,000 t61, 773 111,770
lots General Obligation 1961000 4/71311 961,131
tsotA ""Sol Obligation eelunding ..0HO 47,7`4 119,174 ~
d r 1117E Certificates Of Obligation a 100,644 LOS
SIN Certificates of Obligation ~L
1111 paaep1 Obligation A.LI1
t1.la4.to6 1• +1~ 0~1
Total to it" for 1091 debt service 91,111,619
IN ' Aaount li! an) pate !rod fords Meted it Iehedule h 11,711
/x141 celleo lens last year g~;7~1~307 .
r . Total to be paid tree taxes is 1994
a . Amount added in anticipation that the unit will
coital. long of Its toms to Ms
t . Total Debt service Lary 1
SCHEDULE Co. Expected Revenue from AdditloW Sales Tax
In calculating Ltd ettactlve and rollback tax totes, the unit a►tisated !bat /t will receive
17,114,044 in additional dales sad "a tut revenues.
4 Thla settee eentaln6 a 15areary of aetwt atfedtlw std rollback tut me eala.tatla'►111Yt
f can taepect a espy of the full Calculations at the office of the City Isentarv' ill
r - tlciLinney, Deaton, Texas.
OpaaLloes
td e. Map Paxson eced~tden Preparing this eotlru 01rt L, Jefforeca
Name
title Olr eceot►r of Treasury
i
)
July 31, 1904
..seat au,nwcWrvw~x,.....•.,,, .
,
1,
x
R
f
.i CITY
COUNCI+
t I
t .
~ 1'' C 4V, va
r
tS ,
,
i i
s
i
a
r
• i
f
=CITY
~COUNC
E
t ~
i
y ~
N y '2
s i
r
f
r b
j
A
t f
S
ANT A~ 11r, j
Ap*Ro q4
September 13, 1994 ~~?Q
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA IT= i
i
+ MAYOR AND MBM8BRS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
t
FROMs Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
E
} R$s FISCAL YEAR 1995 ZI`WnIC/MATER/MASTENATER/sOLiD WASTE
UTILITY RATES
RXCOKWMATIONI
city council approve the fiscal year 1995 utility rate
ordinances.
1,r
smaguYs
The followi
ng'rata increases are recommended for approval for
:fiscal year 19051
Electric
cK 1.0t base rate
i,. Water 2.0V
Wastewater - 8.04
'Solid Waste
Residential 7.671 011.15 to $12.00 per 30 days)
Commercial 8.04 (Average •N0 customer to exceed 154)
bumpster - 11.14 +
Open 'fop - 2.84
Compactor - 2.34
0.0
, 4 r
Landfill 20.004 ($5.00 to $6.00/cubic yard)
(to n0n-City trucks)
' RACEOROUIID s j , '
The Electric Utility rate increase is applied across the
board, except in a, few cases. The resider
electric usage customers (R1) decreases b 51a1 rate for low
commitment to offset the sales by 54 as part of a
tax , the
Experimental Weekend (M) ratefacilityachargeddoes not
change as the current rate covers all costs. In addition, '
lift
~IeNo d
r
CITY COUNCIL AOSNDA
Page 2
change as the current rate covers all costs. In addition,
some lighting rates are rounded off as they consist entirely
- of a facility charge.
The Energy Cost Adjustment (ECA) previously had been projected
to increase by 1.0t in 1995. However, the price of natural
gas, the primary determinant of energy costs, has decreased
i the past few months and it is possible there will be no SCA
rate increase required in fiscal year 1995. The ECA rate
schedule has been revised to allow for quarterly changes to
the ECA rate based on changes in costs of $500,000 or more.
A new Power Cost Adjustment (PCA) rate schedule has been added
that provides a rate component that reflects changes in fixed
purchased power costs, if fixed purchased power costs
(currently TMPA costs) increase by more than $100,000 over a
base year cost of $23.390 million, customers with energy or
demand charges would pay for this increase through the PCA.
Fixed purchased power costs would be reviewed on a quarterly
basis and revised as necessary. Since TMPA fixed purchased
power costs do not increase from 1994 to 1995, the beginning
PCA in 1995 will be zero.
The 2* Water Utility rate increase is generally spread equally
across all rate classes. Rate changes for outside the city
customers have been adjusted to reflect 1151 of inside the 1.
city rates, except that no rates decrease from 1994 to 1995.
Water tap and loop fees have been revised on the basis of cost
of service. The wholesale water rate has been adjusted based
on a combination of projected 1995 costs and changes to
consumer price index.
i Some rate schedules have been combined. The Residential Water
MR) and Residential Water Service not Connected to Sewer
(WRN) have been combined into the WR rate schedule, and the
Commercial/industrial Water (WC) and Commercial /Industrial
Water Not Connected to Sewer (WCN) rate schedules have been j
combined into the WC rate schedule.
The Wastewater Utility rate increase is also applied equally
across the board. The wholesale rate is based on contract
f rate methodology. Outside the city rates have been adjusted
to reflect 1154 of inside rates, but no rates have decreased.
Sampling and analysis fees are unchanged for 1995 and
wastewater tap fees have been updated to reflect cost.
The Residential (SR) and Residential Without Water Service
(SRN) rate schedules have been combined into the SR rate and
and
Commerci Industrial W ithouthe Re
WaterlService (SCNjlha(ve been combined ial/
the SC rate schedule.
~y
- 9
CITY comm AGENDA DO - 10
Page 2 ~ ~ 70
change as the current rate covers all costs. In addition,
some lighting rates are rounded off as they consist entirely
of a facility charge.
The Energy Cost Adjustment (ECA) previously had been projected
to increase by 1.0% in 1995. However, the price of natural
gas, the primary determinant of energy costs, has decreased
j the past few months and it is possible there will be no SCA
rate increase required in fiscal year 1995. 7'he SCA rate
schedule has been revised to allow for quarterly changes to
the ECA. rate based on changes in costs of $500,000 or more.
A new Power Cost Adjustment (PCA) rate schedule has been added
that provides a rate component that reflects changes in fixed
purchased power costs. if fixed purchased power costs
(currently TMPA costs) increase by more than $100,000 over a'
base year cost of $23.390 million, customers with energy Or
demand charges would pay for this increase through the PCA.
Fixed purchased power costs would be reviewed on a quarterly
basis and revised as necessary, Since TMPA fixed purchased
power costs do not increase from 1994 to 1995, the beginning
PCA in 1995 will be zero.
The 2t Water Utility rate increase is generally spread equally
across all rate classes. Rate changes for outside the oily I
customers have been adjusted to reflect 1159 of inside the
city rates, except that no rates decrease from 1994 to 1995.
Water tap and loop fees have been revised on the basis of cost
of service. The wholesale water rate has been adjusted based
on a combination of projected 1995 costs and changes to
consumer price index.
Some rate schedules have been combined. The Residential Water
(WR) and Residential Water Service not Connected to Sewer
(WRN) have been combined into the WR rate schedule, and the
Commercial/Industrial Water (WC) and Commercial /industrial
j Water Not Connected to Sewer (WCN) rate schedules have been
combined into the WC rate schedule,
The Wastewater Utility rate increase is also applied equally
across the board. The wholesale rate is based on contract
rate methodology. Outside the city rates have been adjusted
to reflect 1151 of inside rates, but no rates have decreased.
{ Sampling and analysis fees are unchanged for 1995 and
wastewater tap fees have been updated to reflect cost.
The Residential (SR) and Residential Without Water Service
(SRN) rate schedules have been combined into the SR rate
schedule, and the Regular Commercial (SC) and Commercial/
industrial Without Water Service (SCN) have been combined into
the SC rate schedule.
r
T
1
~go~diNo -
alCITY COUNCIL AGMMA
r Page 3
Solid Waste Utility rates vary by residential, commercial and
landfill categories. The residential rate is proposed to
increase from $11.15 to $12.00 per 30 days. Commercial rate
increases vary significantly between dumpster, open top and
compactor categories and within categories. Dumpster rate
increases vary from 64 to 154, while open top and compactor
rate increases vary from 2t to 34. The landfill rate increase
of 204 applies to outside the city trucks.
The recocranded rates for temporary dumpster service have been
raised significantly. 8xisting rates are below cost of
service and provide no incentive for customers to use open top
<<" i or compactor containers, and this existing rate disparity
encourages customers to use dumpstere instead of open tops.
In addition, the construction and demolition debris placed in
these containers is destructive to our vehicles and dumpsters,
as they are not designed to handle this type of material.
Some additional fees and charges are recostimended for
commercial solid waster
open Top/Compactor Qelocation Fee - $20
open Top/Compactor same Day Service - $15
Lock/Chain $25
The relocation fee is needed to cover the cost of customer
requests to relocate containers to different locations at the
site. The same day service fee is needed to cover the
additional cost (primarily overtime) of providing same day
service and to encourage customers to allow more effective
scheduling by providing at least 24 hour notice of required
service. !
The lock/chain fee covers the cost to furnish and equip the
container locks/chains to City specifications. This does not
j address the service issue associated with the extra time i
required to lock and unlock the container for service. ! 1
The delivery fees for temporary dumpsters are recommended.to
increase from $15 to $25, while the open top and compactor
delivery fees are proposed to decrease from $50 to $35. These j
changes provide additional incentive to use open top or
compactors and are more in line with competitor delivery
rates,
In addition, a landfill fee discount of 254 is proposed for
customers that bring unbagged leaves/grass clippings or brush
directly to the landfill. This type of material can be
diverted from landfill and used by the Wastewater Utility in
{ its composting program.
6
1 ..4
Y
ilk
KOO ta» T+a
7
i
aQe~deMo ~ 4'
CITY COUNCIL ~d! f
Page 4
~d
FISCAL SU10Myt
The recommended utility rates provide the basis for charges to
utility customers and provide the necessary revenues to cover
anticipated costs and to maintain quality service to
customers.
PROGRAMS DRPARTN=TS OR GROVPS AFFXCTHDo
Citizens of Denton, Wholesale Water/wastewater Customers,
Denton Municipal Utilities, Legal Department, Finance
Department, Public Utilities Board, and City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
a
Ciq4tnargelr Prepared byi
i
Y 1
R: 8; a son, Bxecut vs
Director of Utilities r,
Sxhibitdi
I Current vs. Proposed Blectric Rates
{ II Blectrie Utility Rate ordinance with Schedules
IIY Current vs. Proposed Water Rates
~
IV Water Utility Rice Ordinance with Schedules
V Current vs. Prunose,:& Wastewater Rates
VI Wastewater Utility Rate Ordinance with Schedules
VII Current vs. Proposed Solid Waste Rates
VIII Solid (Paste Rate Ordinance with Schedules
I
PILBtAt\95ratord.cc
' '.~./l~.{'4a:ial.i+...w .'-.•r.a ....o- .:.tier-a'
. N,;nS.br..1f-,y.i~MNJr ,k o.
i ME
1
CITY ORrnrip ENTON ELECTRIC UTILITY
.
OURR N , , YERSUS PROPOSED RATES
ttt~ Rate, Schedule 1995 1994 %
:r' _ Rates Rates Increase
84_!L4!>ow - ~ $1
Facility Charge $ 6.70 6.65 0.76%
Energy Chargo/conts per KVM 3.85 4,30 -10.47%
Avers
go Cuotomet 81A at 400KVVFVMonth 29.70 31.45 -5.66%
Avorago Monthly Diller Increase (1.7G) j
I
i ftt(d2 W1-- R~
FacpRy Charge $ - Single Phase 7.73 7.65 1.05%
i Fac4Py Charge $ Triple Phase 15.45 15.30 1.J0%
Energy Charge/cents pot KWH:
0 - 1,000 KWH (Wintor) 4.34 4.30 1.00%
AN additional KWH (Winter) 3.94 3.90 1.00%
0 - 3,000 KWH (Summer) 6.61 6156 1.08%
AN additional KWH (Summer) 6.21 6.15 1,00%
Average Customer IM At 840 KWH/Month 70.81 70.23 0.83%
Average Monthly DoW Increase 0.58
General Set&* Win --Q%
Faor ty Charge 60,60 60.00 1100%
' Demand ChargelS per KW 9.60 9.60 1.05%
Energy ChargoOnte par.KWM 1.41 1.40 0.71%
Rlden: Energy ChargeXicania per KWH
For Primary Service 1.31 1,30 0.77'X,:
For Pr *n $or** d, Omwmhip 1111 1.10 0191%
8111 tit 1,000 kW Demand and 385,000 KWH/Month 21,742.10 21,805,00 0.63% I
Average Monthy Dollar [notes" 137.10 fl
j Soul BeMce Smell t3SS
Facility Charge ti - SNIs Phase 16.16 16.00 1100%
{ Facility Charge $ - Triple Phase 20.20 20.00 1.00%
Dramand Charge/S per KW 7.68 7.60 1.07%
(First 20 KW W Budd)
Energy Chargolonts KWH (0 2,600) 8.77 8.70 1.04%
Energy Charge All additional KM 3.38 3,95 0.90%
Bil~t 00 KW and 3g6~ 0p0pp K WH/Month 2,483.66 2,488.26 0,70% r
AWN go Mormy'DO% Increase 17.30 i
r1mo al Weekend Rate - Eft
Facility Chagp = - Single Phase 22.00 22.00 0.00%
Facility Charge $ - Triple Phase 27.00 27,00 0.00%
Demand Charga/5 per KW 8.08 8.00 1.00%
Demand Charge, (First 20 KW not Billed)
I
Energy Cta►rpleents KWH (0 - 2,600) 6.77 6.70 1.04%
a' F M Addklo utl KWH 3.38 3.3S 0.90%
Local Qovommont - 01
FacMity Charge $ - Single Phase 15.16 15.00 1.00%
Facility Charge II; - Triple Phase 20.20 20.00 1.00%
Demand Charge/8 pot KW 6.31 6.26 1.00%
Energy Chargaksoils per KVM 3.03 3.00 1.00%
EXHIBIT 1
SYYYfrinfl a41Y.'.vn~ ..wur r:e...,
Y AHh6" a. L7=,4' I xr14a+YJjy~ad]y
1
I
1
1
CITY OF DENTON ELECTRIC UTILITY
~JRRENT,,"VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
% Rate Schedule;, 4996 4994 %
_ Ratos Rates Increase
eel &n_4l Tkne W Use - TR
Facpny Chirps $ - Single phase i6r46 15.30 1.0096
F401fity Charge 6 - Triple Phase 20.60 20.40 1.00'%
Energy Chargoonts per KVM On Peak 25.56 26.30 1.00%
Energy Chap Dents par KWH Od Peak 1.41 1.40 1.00%
NnMI Service Tkno of Use - TQS
Faci ty Charge $ 70.70 70.00 1.00%
Demand Charga/S per KW On Peak 10.40 10.30 1.00%
Syetam Demand Charps/S per KW 4.19 4,15 1.00%
Energy CfutrgeJcents per KVVH
r ffY,IH 0.61 0.60 1.00%
Aldan: Energy Charpekente pe
For Primary Servk o 0.404 0.40 1.00%
For Pr4nary Service A Ownership 0.202 0.20 1.0096
6odfurn
WOW Facolty Chargos 4.90 4.85 1.00%
6186 8.90 0.72%
40 W 8.75 8.86 1.16%
we'reu
rf.
176,W FacRy Charges 6,56 6.80 0.89%
BJiu 8.66 0.76%
46O W 8.60 8,40 1.19%
c : y 1,000 W 15.45 16,30 1.00%
Energy Cog Monthly Bub Wattage Factor x
Current Energy Cost Adjustment
Monthly Bub Wattage Factors:
100 W 48.00 48,00 0.00%
260 W 106.00 106.00 0.00%
4W W 159.00 169.00 0.00%
Mercury;
F 175W 70.00 70.00 0.00%
WW 98.00 98.00 C.00%
400 W `
j'000 w 153.00 163.00 0.00%
3e0.00 380.00 0.00% ~
r
- - Energy har4 per KVVH
260 W Sodium 5.30 6.25 1100% j
` 4O W Sodium 5.30 5,26 1.00%
b 400 W Merdury 5.30 6.26 4,00%
1,000 W Morcury 5.30 6.26 L00%
f Monthly Bulb Wattago Factors:
200 W Podkutt 106.00 106.00 0.0096
' W Sodium 169,00 169.00 0.00%
4M M
uo'cury 163.00 163.00 0.00%
1,000 W Mercury 380.00 380.00 0.00%
q _=AT
v rW Per KWH 6.30 6.28 0.90%
~s
J
r CITY,4.OF DENTON ELECTRIC UTILITY
CU~ONT VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
F,.
_Reja' &hedyle 1995 1994 %
_ Rates Rates lncmass
j~georat(y~~lghUno=~
Fac* Charge S 3.8s 3.80 1.32%
Energy charge Montnty Bub Wattage Factor
x KWH Per Customer.
QASW -I.4-Q k_=.42
Sodium;
loo W Facgky Charger{ 7.75 7.65 1.3196
2$0 W 10.05 9,95 1100%
400 W 12.35 12.25 0.82%
Mercury;
176 W Facility Charges 6.45 6.40 0176%
250 W 7.60 7.45 00%
400 W 8.35 8.25 1.21%
Energy Costs Monthly Bulb Wattage Factor x
Current Frwrgy Cost Adjustment
Monthly Bub Wattage Factors:
100 W 48.00 48.00 0.00%
260 W 106.00 106.00 0.0096
4M W 159.00 169,00 0.00%
Mercury:
176 W 70.00 70.00 0,00%
280 W 98.00 95.00 0.0096
400 W 163.00 163.00 0,00%
1,000 W
>Amoora~tr $enke - It
A Faeft Charge S - Single Phase 15.15 16.00 1.00%
Facility C
harpe S - Triple Phase 20.20 20,00 1.00%
Energy ClurgeMnta per KWH 8.71 6.70 00%
labo#/Eg4ment S per Hour - Regular Thw 60.00 60.00 0.00%
ubor/Equlpment $ Per Hour - Overtlow 76.00 76,00 0.00%
jalble Prtmanr SoMca - Pt
Fr+oN6y CtWge i 70.70 70,00 1100%
pgrrtmd Ctwuga/S per XW 4.20 4.16 1.20%
Eneroy,Gwpel~ants par KWH 0.20 0.20 1.00%
Facility Charge $ Single Phase 20.20 20.00 1.00%
- y
FacNNy Charge $ - Triple Phase 30.30 30,00 1,00%
Demand ChargeK per KW:
October through May 1.11 1.10 1.00%
June through September Ott Peak 1.11 1.10 1.00%
June through September On Peak 4.70 4,66 1.00%
Energy ChargeacenU per KWH:
October through May 3.79 3.75 1.00%
Juno througtr September Oft Peak 3179 3.76 1.00%
Juno through September On Peak 7.68 7,60 1.00%
. s
R
~r"'~RffirH✓JTtWLd~~i;y.y,..v+•M,...._. .,..~,r...,..,,,.~e.» v.. wy,~.a a4.e . s,.....
-~--CITY, c.(D DENTON ELECTRIC UTILITY
' -I ~v'~CUF~KKA VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
Rata u1e" 1995 1994 %
Ji1 !f
Rerss Rates Increase
Unlnterrunbble Power Suppy - UPS
Fscilrty Charge $ 250 W Power Standby Unlt 7.80 7.70 1.30%
Facility Charge $ 1,20O W Power Standby Unk 31.85 31.65 0.95%
Installation Charge $ 26.75 25.60 0.96% I
Standby. Supplementary & Maintenance Fervios - ES
Facility Charge $ - Primary Service 60,60 60.00 1.00%
Facility Charge $ - Secondary Service 25.25 25.00 1.00%
Demand Charge Pr%ury/S per KW On Peak 11.45 11.35 0.88%
Demand Charge PrtmaryJ'j per KW On peak 4.20 4.15 1.20%
Demand Charge Secondary(S per KW On Peak 11.45 11.35 0.88%
Demand Charge Secondary/S per KW Off Peak 4.20 4.15 1.20%
Energy Charge Primary/cart par KWH Emergency 5.25 5.20 1.00%
Energy Charge Primary/cerds per KWH Non-Emerg 0.20 0.20 1.00%
Energy Charge SecondaryJcents per KWH Emergency 5.35 5.30 1.00%
Energy Charge Secondary/cents per KWH Non-Emerg 0.51 0.50 1,00%
ndustrlelrEconorrk De"Lopment Alder - IDS
Reductlon to System Demand:
Year 1 0.50 0.60 0 00%
Year 2 0.40 0.40 0.00%
Yeaf 3 0.30 0.30 0.00%
Year 4 0.20 0.20 0.00%
Year 5 0.10 0.10 0.00%
Ihennal Storage lno@ntlve - TS
KW Demand shifted to Oh Peak
s Fh) SOb KW - $ per KW 250.00 250.00 0.00% I
AI Addktonni KW - S per KW 125.00 125.00 0.00%
EMIgY.SQ Adiustmont ECA
ECA Cants W KWH (by quarter) 1.90 1.90 0.0096 ;
r y ! paki WtrMa9t~ r r, t r, j
PCA Cert per WM (by q"** 0.00
PICA Cents por KW (by quarter" 0.00 - - - - - NN//A }
r. ,
rk ~
!
Vol
1
WM1
71
yJ\W dots\ord\95*1rato.ord AQAAddND A~'~
a o ^
E ORDINANCE NO. NO ~
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF ELECTRIC RATES CO INED I
94-098 AND 93-1601 AMENDING THE METHODOLOGY FOR REVISING
ORDINANCES N
THE ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT (ECA) RATE) ADDING A POWER COST ADTUST-
ENT RATE DATE.ING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE) AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: k
That the Schedule of Rates for electrical services I
as provided for in chapter 26 of the Code of Ordinances, is amended
to read as follows: C
ARTICLE I. ELECTRIC RATE BCSEDULEB PAGE j
R1 Residential Service Rate 2
R2 Residential Service Rate 4
TR Residential Time of Use Rate 8
GSL General Service Large
GSS General Service Small 14 11
TGS General Service Time of Use Rate 18
EWK Experimental weekend 21
01 Local Government Lighting & Power Service Rate
(City, County, Independent School District) 24
LS Street Lighting 26
LT Traftic. Lighting 26
LO other Lighting
{ Dp Dusk-to-Dawn Lighting (Security Light) 29
31
DL Decorative Lighting 33
T1 Temporary Service schedule 35
Pi Interruptible Primary service 38
gg standby , Supplementary i Maintenance Service 43
e y
iDR Athletic; Field
Industrial Development Rate 46
46
TS Thermal Storage Rate 48
APR Appliance Rebate 58
ACR Air Conditioner Cycling Rebate 54
MTR Premium-Effioiency Motor Rebate 56
UPS Uninterruptible Power supply 56
1 ECA Energy Cost Adjustment
P" Power Cost Adiustment 59
59
special Facilities Rider 61
1
, f
E EXHIBIT 2
i
f
.~r
~4pendaN0 O
h
SCHEDULE R1d I
RESIDENTIAL. SERVICR
(Effective 10/01/44) (f ,
APPLICATION
AT' icable to all electric service used for residential pur-
poses a single family dwelling or an individually metered apart-
ment; supplied at one point of delivery and measured through one
meter where usage is not in excess of 700 RwH per 30-day month
during the billing months MAY through OCTOBER. If usage in any
such month exceeds 700 KWH, billing will be rendered that month
under Rate Schedule R-2 and thereafter for a period extending
through the 12 billing months of the next year ending with the
October billing. Annually, in November, the customer may again
qualify for the R-1 rate provided that consumption has not exceeded
700 KWH per 30-day month during the previous six summer months.
Where individual dwelling units are being served through the
same meter and the RWM in the billing months of MAY through OCTOBER
exceed 700 Mi times the number of dwelling units, the billing for
that month and thereafter will be rendered under Rate Schedule R-2.
NET MONTHLY RITE
(1) Customer Facility Charge $6.70/30 days
(2) Energy charge 3.850/KWH
(3) Energy Cost Adjustment Schedule LCA {
(4) Power Cost Adjustment Schedule PCli
MINT Of BI LING
Facility Charge
9 1
a
r' I TYPE OF SERVICE
i The City will supply single-phase service at any standard volt-
ages available from the city's distribution system through one
standard transformation.
PAXKM
k Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
PAGE 2
f.
~ i
j
t
ApendaNo ~ 1
MWAI
SPECIAL FACILITIES Q
All services which require special faoilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PRORATION OF UTILITY BILLS
Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing periods using
j the following forwala.
Formulas
Actual days In reading period x customer facility charge
30 days
ENERGY CHARGE
1 t
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con-
sumption during the billing period.
Formula: I
KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate block i
ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with Schedule M.
POWER COST ADJUSTMENT f
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fixed purchased power cost
!
calculated'in accordance with Schedule PCA.
i
.14
P
i i
"d r r PAGE 3
•
I'
i
owl ell&
~peno31
,
BcaRDVLE R2 Data 40
RESIDENTIAL SERVICE
(Effective 10/01/94)
ADPLICATION
Applicable to any customer for all electric service used for
residential purposes in an individual private dwelling or an indi-
vidually metered apartment, supplied at one point of deiivery and
{ measured through one meter. Also applicable to any customer heat-
ing with electric energy, resistance or heat pump.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nor to tempo-
rary, standby, or supplementary service except in conjunction with
applicable rider.
NET MONTHLY RATE WINTER SUMMER
Billing months of Billing months of
NOV through APRIL MAY through OCT
(1) Customer Facility Charge
Single Phase $ 7,73/30 days $ 7.73/30 days
Three Phase $15.45/30 days $15.45/30 days
(2) Energy Charge '
First 1,000 KWH 4.340/KWEi
Additional KWH 3.940/KWIi
First 3,000 KWH 5.620/KWH
Additional KWH 6.210/KWH
` (3) Energy Cost Adjustment
1 n !F y
F
Schedule ECA Schedule ECl►
(4) Power Coat Adjustment
Schedule PCA Schedule PCA
MINIMM BILL No
Single Phase Facility Charge
Three Phase Facility Charge
:14 j
PAGE 4 J4'
a ~
r
f
f
► ANo •
agendalt
TYPE OF SERVICE R1tA a
The City will supply single-phase service (or thre -phase ser-
Y vice if available at the point of delivery) at sixty (60) cycles
and at any standard voltages available from the City's distribution
system through one standard transformation. Where service of the
type desired by the customer is not already available at the point
I of service, special contract arrangements between the City and the
customer may be required in advance. I
PAYM
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customers service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PRORATION OF UTILITY BTLL
Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing periods using
the following formulas
Formula:
Actual days in reading neriod
30 days x customer facility charge
ly~
ENERGY CHARGR
Billing for the energy-charge shall be based on actual KWN con-
surption during the billing period.
Formula:'
' KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate , block
ENERGY COST ADJUSTlt
~ s I
A charge per KW8 of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with Schedule ECA.
a .
s POWER COST ADJUSTMENT
A charge per KWB of energy taken for fixed purchased power cost
calculated in accordance with Schedule PCA.
PAGE 6
fa.ca f
r~
BannuLE TR (1~(! O
RESIDENTIAL TIME OF USE /
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to any customer for all electric service used for
i residential purposes in an individual private dwelling or an indi-
vidually metered apartment, supplied at one point of delivery and
measured through one meter. Customers applying for the TR rate
must remain on this rate for twelve (12) continuous billing per-
iods.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nor to tempo-
racy, standby, or supplementary service except in conjunction with
applicable rider.
NET MONTHLY RATE
}
(1) Customer Facility Charge
i E Single Phase
$15.45/30 days ?
Three Phase $20.60/30 days I
(2) Energy-Charge
On-Peak Hours 25.550 /KWH
Off-Peak Hours 1.410 /KWH
(3) Energy Cost Adjustment Schedule ECA
(4) Power Cast Adjustment Schedule PCA
MINIMUM RILLNo
The minimum monthly bill shall be the customer Facility Charge.
'f.YPE Or finmCE
Single-phase or three-phase at sixty (60) cycles at secondary
distribution voltage. Where service of the type desired by the
customer is not already available at the point of service, special
contract arrangements between the City and the customer may first
be required.
DEFINITION OF OH-PEAK HOURS
f
The City's on-peak hours, for the purpose of this rate ached-
ule, are designated as being from 2:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. each
I Monday through Friday, starting on June i and continuing through
f Septea~ar 30 each year. The City's on-peak hours may be changed, i
PAGE 6
0
rl
i
AP*
I
Ag a,
Date
from time to time and the customer, will be notified twelve (12)
months before such changes become effective.
~ J
DEFINITION OF OFF-PEAK HOURS
i The City's off-peak hours, for the purpose of this rate sched-
ule, shall be all hours not designated as on-peak hours.
SPECIAL FACILITI
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
custom4r's service requirements shall be provided subject to the d
' special facilities rider.
PRORATION OF UTILITY BILLS
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter periods using the
following formulas
i
Actual days in reading Deriod x customer facility charge
30 days
ENERGY CHARGE
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con-
sumption during the billing period.
Formula:
KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate block
' ENVY COST ADJUSTMENT
A'charge per''KWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with schedule M.
r. POWER COST 4DnSTMENT
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fixed purchased power coat
calculated in accordance with Schedule PCA.
~ f
YdYlfEN'r
:i Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days frog date of issuance.
<s
.
PAGE 7
j
Woo
r
I
~enoaHo. 4f~ 03d
SCHEDULE IDOL Ag9oda
De ee
k GENER.1.L SERVICE ARC
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
The GSL Rate is applicable to any customer having a minimum
actual demand of 250 KW for all electric service supplied at one
point of delivery and measured through one meter.
Customers with an average actual demand equal to or greater
than 180 KW during the previous twelve month period may be
allowed service under this rate, subject to the minimum billing
provision.
j Customers who elect to discontinue service under this rate are
ineligible for service under this rate for twelve months.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nor to tempo-
rary, standby or supplementary service except in conjunction with
applicable rider.
NET MONTHLY RATE
I
} (1) Customer Facility charge $60.60 per 30 days i
(2) Demand Charge $ 9660 per KW demand/ 30 days
(3) Energy Charge 1.410/KWH for all KWH
i
(4) Energy Cost Adjustment Schedule ECA
(5) Power Cost Adjustment Schedule PCA
y
MINA M 11 LLI G
r
An amount equal to the facility charge plus the greater of: i) I
demand 'charge ,as calculated on 250 KW, or 2) seventy percent (701),
of tho maximum monthly demand. charge for any month during the pre !
ceding months of.May through October. {
TYPE Of SERVICE
II
t Secondary or primary service available to commercial and indus-
trial customers. Primary service is rendered at one point on the
customer's premises at a nominal voltage of 13,200 volts.
PAGE S
:,:00. ....G..d 4...31 p'v HN.t::6 i... M., Viii
M4
1,~
I~ k': / ley
I
I
I
AQWNO i0
Agend
P-Ar9-7- eo
PRIMARY SERVICE ISCOUNT I~19 A
I
Customers who own, operate, and maintain all facilities neces-
sary to receive three phase primary voltage service and all trans-
formation facilities required for conversion to utilization voltage
shall receive a discount of 0.30/KWH. Primary service customers
utilizing City owned and operated facility and transformation
equipment necessary to receive primary voltage service shall
receive a discount of 0.30/KWH. The City shall own, operate and ;
maintain all metering facilities, either at primary or secondary I J
voltage. 1A~
PAYHETST
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid j
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
DETERMINATION OF DEMAND
The demand shall be determined by the KW supplied during the
15-minute period of maximum use during the current month as deter-
mined by City's demand meter, but shall not be less than 70% of the
highest monthly demand determined during the billing months of MAY
through OCTOBER in the 12 months immediately preceding the current
month.
POWER FACTOR
The City reserves the right to make tests to determine eligi-
bility for the GSL rate, and to determine the power factor of the
customer's installation served either by measurement during periods
of maximum demand or by measurement of the average power factor for
the ronthly billing period. If the power factor is below ninety
J percent, the demand for billing purposes will be determined by
multiplying the uncorrected KW billing deman6, by 90% and dividing
by the determined power factor.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
j PRORATION OF UTILITY BIL9
(a) Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 bill-
ings annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formulas
Formular
~ If
Actual days in wading period x customer facility charge
30 days
PAGE 9
+
No.. z
Agenda
ogle
(b) Billing for demand shall be calculated on a 30 day per I
month basis and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formula:
Formula:
Actual days in reading period x demand x Rate
30 days
~ t
ENERGY CHARGE
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con-
sumption during the billing period.
Formula:
j KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate block
3
P
ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with Schedule ECA.
POWER COST AWUSTMENT
A charge per KW of demand for fixed purchased power cost
calculated in accordance with Schedule PCA.
i
? PAGE 10
1
6(YV14e.`VA(L}l.4Mli AiYMPr~rwr. r . 1:...,:'.n. \rd:.u n., iiN "f brlh{~ea+I -
OPT
1 '
f
4AendaNo. ~
AW f-
SCHEDQLa GOO X19
GENERAL SERVICE Sliaii.
(Effective 30/01/94)
i
APPLICATION
The GSS rate is applicable to any commercial or industrial
customer having a maximum demand less than 250 KW for all electric
service supplied at one point of delivery and measured through one
motor.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nor to tempo-
racy, standby or supplementary service except in conjunction with
p I applicable rider.
NET MONTHLY RATE
f
(1) Customer Facility Charge
3 Single Phase $15.15 per 30 days
Three Phase $20.20 per 30 days
I
(2) Demand Charge $ 7.58/KW (first 20 KW not
billed)
(3) Energy Charge
First 2500 KWH 6.770/KWH
All KWH over 2500 3.380/KWH
(4) Energy cost Adjustment Current ECA Schedule
(5) Power Cost Adjustment Current PCA Schedule
MINIMUM BILLING
An amount equal to the facility charge plus the greater of: 1)
I the demand charge calculated on the actual KW demand, or 2) seventy
percent (70%) of the maxitium monthly derkand charge for any month
during the preceding months of May through October.
T'LPS OF SERVICE
Secondary service available to commercial and industrial
customers.
The City will supply single-phase service (or throe-phase ser-
vice if available at the point of delivery) at sixty 60) cycles
and at any standard voltages available from the City's distribution
system through one standard transformation. Where service of the
type desired by the customer is not already available at the point
PAGE 11
t
r.a.
.5101M ~
~QendeHo. ' .D O
Apo all Otte
of service, special contract arrangements between the City and t
customer may first be required.
88iMkRY SERVICE DI CO nrr
customers who own, operate, and maintain all facilities neces-
sary, to receive three phase primary voltage service and all trans-
formation facilities required for conversion to utilization voltage
shall receive a discount of 0.3C/KwN. Primary service customers
utilizing City owned and operated facility and transformation
equipavAt necessary tc receive primary voltage service shall
receive a discount of 0.10/KNH. The City shall own, operate and
maintain all metering facilities, either at primary or secondary
voltage.
• Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
DST 1INATION OFD AND
The demand shall be determined by the Kw supplied during the
15-minute period of maximum use during the current month as deter-
mined by City's demand meter, but shall not be less than 70t of the
highest monthly demand determined during the billing months of MAY
through OCTOBER in the 12 months immediately preceding the current i
month. in no case, shall billed demand be less than 0 Kw.
In cases where the connected load is constant, the City may, at
its option, estimate the KW demand. For neon signs, one volt am-
pare shall be considered the equivalent of 3/4 watt.
The city rsserves the right to make tests to determine the
power factor of the customers installation served either by
measurement during periods of maximum demand or by measurement of
the average power factor for the monthly billin
power factor is below ninet
y percent the g period, if the
emand for billing
purposes will be determined mull p, ying dthe uncorrect
billing demand by 901 and dividingby the d termined power factor.
SPECIAL. FACILITIES
,
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
„ customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PACE 12
i
'f_
1
~A
Age
Date r
PRORATION OF ~~'IL•ITY_BIId,S
(a) Billing for the Facility charge shall be bas on 12 bill-
ings annually and prorated for longer or shorter periods
' using the following formula:
Formulas
i
" ~~yywt days in readina cer x customer facility charge
30 days
(b) Billing for demand shall be calculated on a 30 day per
month basis and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formulas
1
Formulas {
~t„wi aeva in readina neriosf x adjusted KW demand x Rate
30 days
ENERGY CHARGE
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con-
susiption during the billing period.
Forsu1as
EE KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate block
- f ,
ENRRGY COST AMLQM t4T -
A charge per KWN of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with Schedule HCA.
I POWER G"4ST A~$THFd'1T
I A. charge per KW of demand for fixed purchased power cost
calculated in accordance with schedule PCA.
PAGE 13
1
kr.rir
+pendaNo. 9y Q30
4pendalte
SCHEDULE TOB We
GENERAL SERVICE TINS OF U
i (Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to any customer having a minimum demand of 250 KW
for all electric service supplied at one point of delivery and
measured through
o
one meter,
with the City providing all facilities
necessary to receive PTinar'voltage
service. Sup
lament
a ser-
vice will be available P ry
subject to the
applicable rider. Not appli-
cable to resale or temporary service. Customers electing this rate
must remain on this rate for a minimum of twelve
(12) continuous
biding months.
NET MONTHLY RATE
(1) Customer Facility Charge $70.70/30 days
(2) On-Peak Demand Charge $10.40/KW of on-Peak Demand
(3) System Demand Charge $ 4.19/KW of System Demand
(4) Energy charge 045101KWH
(5) Energy Cost Adjustment: Per Schedule ECA
(6) Power Cost Adjustment: Per Schedule PCA
MIt~IlIUX $ILLINa
The minimum monthly bill shall be the sum of the Customer i
Facility Charge, the System Demand Charge, and the On-Peak Demand
Chargsi this October through May on-peak demand charge may not be
less than 100% of the maximum monthly on-peak demand charge for any
month during the preceding months of June through September.
( TYPE Or ARRVICE
Secondary or primary service available to commercial and indus-
trial customers. Primary voltage service is available to any cus-
tomer with a minimum demand of 250 KW. Primary service is rendered
at one point on the customer's premises at a nominal voltage of
13,200 volts.
The City will supply single-phase service (or throe-phase oar-
vice if available at the paint of delivery) at sixty (60) cycles
and at any standard voltages available from the City's distribution
system through one standard transformation. Where service of the
I type desired by the customer is not already available at the point
r ~
F.
PAGE 14
agendaN0,
Q
of service, special contract arrangements between the City and the
customer may be required.
PRIMARY SERVICE DISCOUNT
Customers who own, operate and maintain all facilities neces-
sary to receive three phase primary voltage service and all trans-
formation facilities required for conversion to utilization voltage
shall receive a discount of 0.30/KWN. If primary service is provi-
ded and the City owns and operates all facilities and transforms-
.
tion equipment necessary to receive primary voltage service, a
discount of 0.10/KW will be applied to the customer's bill. The
City shall own, operate and maintain all metering facilities,
either at primary or secondary voltage, at the City's option.
DETE NTRATION OF ON-PEAK DEMAND
.
The on-peak demand shall be determined by the KW demand sup-
plied during the fifteen (15) minute period of maximum use each
month during on-peak hours as recorded by the City's demand motor
and adjusted for power factor, but not less than one hundred per-
cent (100%) of the maximum on-peak demand similarly determined dur-
ing the billing months of June through September in the twelve (12)
months immediately preceding the current month. If the customer is
new or does not have a history of use for June through September,
the on-peak demand shall be determined by the customer's maximum
on-peak demand from the previous billings. The on-peak demand will
be billed every month.
QETERBINATION OF_SYSTEK DEMAND
The system demand shall be determined b the maximum KW dersnd
supplied during the fifteen (15) minute period of maximum use each
month as recorded by the City's demand meter and adjusted for power
factor.
POWER FACTOR PENALTY
The City reserves the right to make tests to determine the
power factor of the customer's installation served either by
measurement during periods of maximum demand or by measurement of
the average power factor for the monthly billing period. If the
power factor is below ninety percent, the demand for billing
purposes will be determined by multiplying the uncorrected KW
billing demand by 90% and dividing by the determined power factor.
I
PAGE 15
i
+~enOaNo.
Agendas a
DEFINITION OF ON-PF,x uQ (ba te
I The City's on-peak hours, for the purpose
ule, are designated as being from 2:0o , tot~100 p M, each
f Monday through Friday, for the months of June through September.
{ The City's on-peak hours may be changed from time to time and the
customer will be notified twelve (12) months before such changes
become effective.
DEFINITION OF OFF P ix Np ma
I
The City's off-peak hours, for the purpose of this rate ached-
ule, shall be all hours not designated as on-peak hours.
j
SAL M ER RIDER
Customers requesting standby or supplementary power shall be
allowed service under this rate schedule; however, the determina-
tion of system demand shall be adjusted to read:
The system demand shall be the sum of the maximum KW
demand supplied during the fifteen (15) minute period of maxi-
mum use as recorded by the city's demand meter plus the KW
nameplate rating(s) of the customers generator(s). In the
event the customers generator(s) is/are off-line at the time
of the establishment of the maximum system demand, the KW
nameplate rating of the generator(s) unavailable for service
shall be removed from the determination of the system demand.
In no event shall the system demand be less than one hundred
percent (1000 of the maximum system demand similarly doter
mined during the billing months of June through September in
the twelve (12) months immediately preceding the current month.
SPECIAL. rACILITIPS
All services which require
special the oustomer's service requirementsshallibeties in order to meet
special facilities rider. provided subject to
P90RATION OF :7`I ITY AU"
} (a) Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 bill-
ings
i annually and
prorated for longer or shorter periods
us ng the following formula:
rea ner n~~
30 days x customer facility charge
(b) Billing for demand shall be calculated on a 30-day-per-
month basis and pro rated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formula:
Actual-days in reading nariod ~
30 days x KW Demand x Rata
PACE 16
y
AJ+4'
Agendaft Owl
Agenda
Oete _ v
r ENERGY CHARGE r
' Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con.
i sumption during the billing period.
Formulas E
XMI in rate block x Rate per M in rate block i
r,
ENERGY COST n rttnrurun
A charge '
per KWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated. in
accordance with Schedule ECM.
POWkM COSTAMSTMENT
A charge per, Rst of demand for fixed purchased power cost
calculated in accordance with Schedule PCA.
P
hills ails due When rendered, and become past due if not paid,
within 45 calendar days from date of issuance.
}
r
t.
.
AW-l
PAGE 17 j
y4i r
kk
a. r
i
1
r
I
I
t
~gendaNo -
~endat F. .L
SCHEDULE E
EXPERIMENTAL WEEKEND RATE
(EFFECTIVE 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to any commercial and industrial user whose maximum
demand load occurs during the period from Thursday at 12 midnight
through Sunday at 12 midnight and does not experience a demand load
during the period from Sunday 12 midnight through Thursday 12 aid-
night that exceeds SO of the maximum demand load.
Customers who violate the M requirement more than tour times
during the month, or more than twice on the same day of the week
r
duriny the months of June through September are ineligible for
` service under this rate for twelve 12 months.
f
any poNot applicable to resale service in an event, nor to tempo-
rary standby or supplementary service except in conjunction with
applicable rider.
NET MONTHLY RATE
s
(1) Customer Facility Charge $22.00/30 days--Single Phase
$27.00/30 days--Three Phase
(2) Demand Charge $ 6.06/K41 (first •20 Kw not
billed)
' (3) Energy Charge
First 2,500 KWH 6.770/KWH
All over 2,500 KWH 3.380/DM
(4) Energy Cost Adjustment Per Schedule ECA
(5) Power Cost Adjustment Per Schedule PCA
MIEN-MM BILLING
An amount equal to the demand charge as calculated below plus
$22.00/month for single phase service or $27.00/Lonth for three
phase service, per 30 day billing.
TYPE OF SERVICE
The City will supply single-phase service (or three-phase ser-
vice it available at the point of delivery) at sixty (60) cycles
and at any standard voltages available from the City's distribution
system through one standard transformation. where service of the
type desired by the customer is not already available at the point i
PAGE 18
.
,
i.+W4
geaQaNo.9 O
aendafte '
atr
of service, special contract arrangements between the City an the
customer may be required. L 7
PAYKEN
Bills are due when rendered and become past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
I'
DETERMINATION OF DEMAND
i
The demand shall be determined by the KW supplied during the
fifteen (15) minute period of maximum use during the current month
as determined by the City's demand meter. Billing shall be based
on an adjusted KW demand, which is the actual demand less 20 KW.
Ths adjusted KW demand will subsequently be used for billing the
demand portion of the utility bill. In no case, shell billed
demand be less than 0 Kw.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
! All services which require special facilities in order to meet {
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
opeoial facilities rider.
PRORATION OF UTILITY BILLS
Billing for customer facility charge and demand shall be calcu-
latod on a 30-day basis and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formula:
f III
z „ (a) Billing for the Customer Facility Charge shall be based on
s 12 billings annually. ;
Formulai
t
Actual dgya in reading period
30 days x customer facility charge
(b) Billing for the Demand Charge shall be based on 12 bill-
ings annually.
Formulas
Actual days in reading period x adjusted KW demand x Rate
30 days
I
l PAGE 19
1
igendaNO.J
` ~gee0al
ENERGY CHARGE
.2 O 74
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con-
14 sumption during the billing period.
I Formula;
KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate block
j i ENERGY COST AWUSTlIENT
E A charge per KWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
rr accordance with Schedule ECA.
P
kVIER COST ADJUSTHENT
A charge per KW of demand for fixed purchased power cost
calculated in accordance with Schedule PCA.
s
r
r
°yYl
%
r}
L i
PAGE 20
r
f
r ~++.r.:wwnau.+rri aer....~,...-_.. ._..._.....s.,,a4 a,.'...r,Lw m.. w.ew: _,..~ur♦awr.:r.rs.:au,f.:~eaUN4:a..J.k~►.
r~ ~
Mr+.-axa
7
i
i
S
~ 4geo0alt -t
SCHEDOLS 01 natA
i tnn1T C.[~VERNL ~ 9 ff V
(Effective 10/01/94)
I
I aoor~TION
s County or School District for all
i Applicable to any local City, int of delivery and measured
y electrio service supplied at one po
1 through one meter.
i aonlg to resale service in any event, nor to tempo-
in conjunction with
rary, standby or supplementary service excel
applicable rider.
(1) Customer Charge
single Phase $15.15 per 30 days
Three Phase $20.20 per 30 days
$ 6.31 per KV of demand
(2) Demand Charge
(3) Energy Charge 3.030 per KM for all RWH
Current ECA Schedule
i
(4) Energy Cost Adjustment
Current PCA schedule 1
(5) Power Cost Adjustment
~(jNIMUM eItj,tK4
low but
r An amount equal to the demand cos rtheamaximumlmonthly dement
not lets than fifty percent (50%) hs of May through
the preceding mont
charge for any month during base service or iesa than .
October plus $15.15/month for single p 30 day billing period
$20,20/month for three phase service, per
~myyP OF 6ERYI4B
The City will supply single-phase service (or three-phase
0) cycles
int of delivery) at sixty
vice it available at the po i
and at any standard voltages available from the City's distribution
Where service of the
system through one standard transformation.
' type desired by the customer is not already available at the point
o! service, spcial contract arrangements between the city and the
e
customer may be required.
F
r Ifs . R W~
sills are due when rendered, and becomo past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
PAGE 21
at
a
r
VIM
E aen"No -D
r
oentla~t
ah
I DETERMINATION OF DENAND JAd G
7
The demand shall be determined by the KW supplied during the
15-minute period of maximum use during the current month as dater-
mined by City's demand meter.
POWER FACTOR
i The City reserves the right to make tests to determine the
power factor of the customers installation served either by
E measurement during periods of maximum demand or by measurement of
k the average power factor for the monthly billing period. If the
power factor is below ninety percent, the demand for billing
j purposes will be determined by multiplying the uncorrected KW
billing demand by 901 and dividing by the determined power factor.
6PECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
F
PRORATION OF UTILITY 8?LT-9
(a) Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 bill- {
i ings annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formula:,
Formula!
Actual days in reading period x customer facility charge
30 days
1 (b) Billing for demand shall be cal+alated on a 30 dap per
i month basis and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formulat
' Formulas
Actual days in reading period
x KW demand x Rate
1 30 days
ENERGY CHARGE
z~ s
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con-
sumption during the billing period.
Formulas
KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate block
PAGE 22
1
I ~ r
I R
a i ....s-w1+. r.wl b.iMkSrrMYVw..r...e .
M
5
W~j
tP
ep~*' No
ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with schedule ECA.
I
POWER COST ADJUSTMENT
kf A charge per KW of demand for fixed purchased power coat
calculated in accordance with Schedule PCA.
! '(,,F III
J
y
r
rr
%
PAGE 23
rdr'u Cap t4 J~ lr
- W
e
1
r.
F
~peedaNo 9 ' Agend - L
SCBBDOLE LS Date r
STREET LIGHTING ~L O 7D
(Effective 10/01/94)
t ,
t
t
APPLICATION
Applicable to all street lighting owned and maintained by the 4
City of Denton.
x
NET. MONTHLY RATE
(1) Faoility Charg2 See table
' (2) Energy Cost Adjustment Current ECA x Monthly Bulb
Wattage Factor
t
l
Facility Charge Bibb Wattage factor
L&
LSA 100W Sodium Vapor $ 4.90/30 Days 48 KWH
LSB 250W Sodium Vapor $ 6.95/30 Days 105 KWH
S LSC 400W Sodium Vapor $ 8.75/30 Days 159 KWH
LN
LMA 175W Mercury Vapor $ 5.65/30 Days 70 KWH
LMB 250W Mercury Vapor $ 6.70/30 Days 98 KWH
LMC 400N Mercury Vapor $ 8.50/30 Days 153 KW}1
LMD 1000W Mercury Vapor $15.45/30 Days 380 KWH
TYPE OF SERVICE
~ I The City will supply single-phase service. (or three-phase ser-
vice if available at the point of delivery) at sixty (60) cycles
and at any standard voltages available from the City's distribution
system through one standard transformation. Where service of the
type desired by the customer is not already available at the mint
of service, special contract arrangements between the city and V._c
customer may first be required. '
i
PAYMENT
k Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
1 within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
X j
} PAGE 24
;w
6001
obte ~ -
PRORATION OF UTILITY BILLS Q
i 3.3 0 ~
E a) Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 bill-
ings annually and prorated for longer or shorter periods
using the following formuiai
Actual days in reading period flights customer facil-
3o days x per type ity charge
£NMQY COST ADJUST?[E!M'
1 A charge per XWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
} accordance with Schedule ECA.
y
r
t
I !
'r
I
j
I
PACE 25
. v.n......•nw; env:e.w•owr a. rv. . r.r ..I, -+•:.!..h. a+.♦r.i 4i ♦'jf t
I
rte,
' i AQAIIQdNp
•S
APW3
i
SCREDOLE LT
• /J/
TRAFFIC LIGHTING
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to state and Local Government agencies that operate
and maintain their own traffic signals.
NET MONTHLY RATE
All KWH 5.300 per KWH
f TYPE of $RRVICE
At the City's available secondary voltage and phase.
PAYM
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
fiAINTWANCE CHARGE
Maintenance expenses billed at cost.
SPECIMA FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
speolal facilities rider.
ENERGY CHARGE
{
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH con
sumption during the billing period.
Formula
KM x Rat e
e per K'RH
I
I
ri
RJygGY COST AU71 )SMI T
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with Schedule ECA.
. v. i
i
PAGE 26
i
a.r.a. y
i
sCKEDULE L
Apan*,Ot
O Ape OTHER LIGHTING We (Effective 10/01/93) APPLICATION '
Applicable to State and Local Governor ctherethans thetCityaof
' and maintain their own street lights,
Denton.
BULB WATTAGg
►r~n vnamttt$ RATE ~~B
5.300/ 105 KWEi
< LSi 250W Sodium Vapor 5.300/KWH 159 KWH
i LS2 400W Sodium Vapor 5.300/KWH 153 KWH
r LM1 40OW Mercury Vapor 5.300/KWH 380 KWft E
LM2 1000W Mercury Vapor
APPLE rICATION
other unmetered lighting services.
to
Applicable
NET KONTHLSLBBTE
TRtal Wati x Hours used per Month x 5.300/KWH
1,000
Type OF~VICE
City's available secondary voltage and phase.
At the
PAYMENT
i
ome past due it not paid ls are
rendered
when
# and withinii5 cafe dar days from date of is issuance.
i
ell
Maintenance expenses billed at cost.
SDFCI,.~ L FACILITIES.
ire special facilities in order to meat
All services which re
to the
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject t
special facilities rider.
i
PAGE 27
p
roenO~Hv 9' ~ d
ERGY COST ADJUSTH Date 0
A charge per KWA of energy taken for fuel coat calculated fn
accordance with Schedule ECA.
+
+ I
1
yr .g r I r,'.
r
{ `p I is
~4 u,r, js ,r7,.
r
4.1 r r.
w
e r
.
1, .
f
3
1 1
n I r r+ a,1 1
r~' r PAGE 28
Y
r
LXW
Agenda o
SCHEDULE DD Agendait
Date 9/~~_._y.-
us TO DAWN LIGHTING ~f ~~'6
(Effective 10/01/94) aJ
~i•ICl~TI N
Applicable to any customer within the area served by the City's
electric distribution system for outdoor area lighting when such
lighting facilities are operated as an extension of the City's
distribution system.
F
t F~ MONTHLY $aTE ~ i
(i) Facility Gharae See table
Monthly Bulb
;s. (2) me Adjustment Current ECA x Wattage Fictor
Faci~ty k •ae Bulb Wat~ace Paotor '
DSA 100W Sodium Vapor $ 1.75/30 Days 48 KWH
DSB 250W Sodium Vapor $10.05/30 Days 105 KWH
DSC 400W Sodium Vapor $12.35/30 Days 159 KWH
DMA 175W Mercury Vapor $ 6.45/30 Days 70 KWff
98 KWS Mercury DM~C 400W Kerciry Vapor $ 8.35/30 Days 153 KWN'
TYPE OF SMQ1 s
{ - I
The City shall. furnish, install, maintain and deliver electric
service to automatically controlled, mercury or sodium vapor light-
ing fixtures conforming to the city's standards and subject to its
published rules and regulations.
Where necessacy 'or proper illumination or where existing poles
are inadequate, the City will install or cause to he installed, one
(1) pole for each installed light, at a distance not to exceed
eighty (800) feet from said existing lines, at no charge to the
customer. Each &dditional pole span shall not exceed a span spac-
stall a g one hundroad (1001) feet. Additional poles required to in-
ing of
desired location, and specifically ii
ht in. a customer's not having alight installed on same, shall bear the cost.
i
F411s are due when rendered, and become past due if
iicit pa wil:hin 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
1
9
PAGE 29
1 ~
(
._..-rte.
.aa
D
Age~daNo 00
Afl9nOal
TERM OF CONTRACT j j A two (2) year contract shall be agreed to and signed by each
customer desiring Dusk-to-Dawn Lighting Service authorizing fixed
monthly charges, which may be reviewed annually, and to be applied
to the monthly municipal utilities bill. In the event that a cus-
toner desired the removal of the unit or discontinuance of the ser-
vice prior to completion of two (2) years, the remainder of the
contract period shall become due and payable. After the end of the
initial two (2) year contract, service shall continue on a month-
to-month basis and may be canceled by either party upon thirty (30)
days notice.
f SPECIAL FACILITIES
ill I
All service which requires special facilities in order to meet
the customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to ~
special facilities rider.
PRORLTION OF UTILITY ATLLLS
Billing for the Facility charge shall he based on 12 billings
:r annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing periods using
the following formulas
Formula:
1 ,r E
Actual days in reading period x customer facility charge
30 days
ENERGY COST AD.I'S
A charge per RF'N of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with Schedule ECA.
k
k I ,
PAGE 30
r
i
ApendaNo 3d
gm y
BC}iEDIILE DL Agodalt
DECORATIVE LIGHTING Dais
(Effective 10/01/94) ?O
APPLICATION
Applicable to any customer on the perimeter of the square ser-
ved by the City's electric distribution system for outdoor area
lighting when such lighting facilities are operated as an extension
of the City's distribution system.
NET MONTHLIX R&T
(1) Facility Charge 93.85/30 Days
. s
f (2) Energy Cost Adjustment Current ECA x Monthly Bulb
if Wattage Factor, based on 415
KWH per Customer
TYPE OF SERVICE
The City shall furnish, install, maintain and deliver electric
service to automatically controlled lighting fixtures conforming to
a the City's standards and subject to its published rules and regula-
tions. The service is prov ded between duck and midnight.
r
Y~YiSEtiT
4 it r
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL FACILITIES f
All service which requires special facilities in order to meet
1 the customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to
special facilities rider.
t;
{ PRORATION OF UTILITY BILLS
Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 billings
f annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing periods using
the following formulae
t Formulas
„ Actual days in reality period
30 days x Facility Charge
E
I, PAGE 31
j
1
,J
ApendaNo. ~ ~ 3~
Agenda!
Date
ENERGY COST ADOM23= 1fd
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fuel coat calculated in
accordance with Schedule ECA. ,
, 1 SI ` III
t
1
+l' +1
I k 'r1.~F r
t '
E ~ r
f
y,, ~ JX
1• r i..`
i
. ra'. Pia f, ,ry .I
s '
yr 1 i 1
PAGE 32
r
r
r p
v 1 ,...:..r.~ r.... i.,
1
( r ~N{(N'o Ai►+111/Mh f.:
1 ,
4rr.rritiMwr
•I
agendaNa ~
ecEEUOr.E TI Agenda
TEKPOR~RY SERVICE D019 ~Q
(Ef[:ctive 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
applicable when a customer requests electric service on a short
term or temporary basis where a customer has received a permit from tmant. This rate the City of Denton's Building
after the certificate of occupancy has been issuedg
n pp
NET MONTHLY RATE
(1) raoility charge
$15.15/30 days
Single Phase $20,20/30 days
Three Phase
(2) Energy Charge 6.770/1CWH
Cost Adjustment Current ECA Schedule
(3) Energy
MirMTR[7M BILLM
raoility charge
TYPE Or SERVS4'Pi
At the City's available secondary supply.
EAY1~T 1'
V' Bills calendar days from date of issuance past due if not paid
within 15
Labor (Regular Time) $60.00 minimum up to 1 hour. $60.00
for each additional hour one(to -quarter sea
sured to the nearest one-qu
each hour. $75.00
Labor (Overtime) $75.00
one-quarter hour).
nearest
sured to the
M e applica-
added where
time to be
ble.
Transportation To be billed by hours or miles, as
applicable, according to the estimated
cost of operating the equipment.
PAGE 33I
k
1
. agendaNo ~ •
Agendall
Date 270
Material Material that cannot be salvt.ged to be
billed at stores cost plus 25% and
applicable sales tax.
At the time a temporary service is re-
moved or converted, any loss in the
material installed due to negligence erwill be
willful action by
the billed and saes customer r at Shores
separately
cost plus 25%
SPECIAL FACLLI=
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
the customeres requirements
j special
quirements.
nQnRaTION OF ITP7T.iTY BILL;i
y ,
Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter periods using the
following formulas
Formulae
- readinat period x customer facility charge
30 days
, ENERG~CH_A84E
Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWFI con-
sumption during the billing period.
Formulas
Kw}I in rate block x Rate per 1CWH in rats block
} ENERGY CAST ~
A charge per RWH of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
I
accordance with Schedule ECA. 1
j ~
i
> PAGE 34 f
w1 M\:N~:~J,y
4
~i
i
Ape►,a.Ne ~
AgeMa!
SCHEDULE P1 note
INTERRUPTIBLE PRIMARY SERVICE a
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to all customers taking primary service at a firm
power load exceeding 1,000 KW during the months of June; July,
August and September and is, by contract, provided service aubjeot
to load interruptions. The City retains the right to limit the
number of customers on this rate if the City's load reduction goals
are met.
NET KONTHLY CHARGE (Estimated transmission firm)
(1) Facility Charge $70.70/30 days
(2) Energy Charge 0.200/KWH
E
(3) Demand Charge $ 4.20/KW
(4) Energy Cost Adjustment Current ECA Schedule
(5) Power Coat Adjustment Current PCA Schedule
PIlYMEt3T
Bills are due when rendered, and become pant due if not paid
within 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
MINIMUM BILLING
An amount equal to the dep a,id charge as calculated below but
not less than one hundred percent (100%) of the maximum monthly KW
similarly determined during the previous billing months of MAY
through OCTOBER in the 12 months ending with the current month, nor
LESS than 1,000 KW.
j TYPE OF SERVICE
Interruptible primary voltage service (transformation equipment
owned by customer) is available to any customer with a 12-month
minimum monthly demand of 1,000 KW or greater. Interruptible pri-
mary service rendered at one point on the customer's premises at a
nominal voltage of 13,200 volts or 69,000 volts three-phase at the
option of the utility. `
I The primary voltage service customer shall own, operate, and
j maintain all facilities necessary to receive three phase primary
voltage service and all transformation facilities required for
conversion to utilization voltage. The City shall own, operate and
maintain all metering facilities, either at primary or secondary
PAGE 35
i
K:rxp
t , Qgen~aNo 9
Agen " e
r is option. whore the City elects to metery
voltage, at the Utility percent shall be added to the demand
at secondary voltage, two cost adjustment charge to
charge, the energy charge and the energy
accou^t for transformer losses.
i 'ION 0~ F QEI~Q
The demand shall be determined by the KW supplied during the
the current month as of the
15-minute period of maximum use during
determined by city's demand meter, but not less billing months
maximum monthly KW similarly determined during receding the
of MAY through OCTOBER in the 12 months immediately p
current month, nor less than 1,000 KW.
eAtiTRF~(E~ITS ~ND~T~
istallatione setests to rved hereunder during
The City rese~ve urergs right
` power facto of t hould
e!r. S S the
i periods of maximum demand for the monthly billing periods.
(ll the power factor so deter m ill be determined by multiplying the
demand for billing purposes 90) percent and dividing
uncorrected KW billing demand by ninety (
by the determined power factor.
anon~F1►C~
All service which requiri~empnteam`allibe provided In order to meet
the pecial tfacilities vrider.
s
`p84B~TjQi3 OF CM'rr.IT__~ Y_ BILLfl
(a) Billing for the Facility charge shall be baited on is bill-
ings annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing j
periods using the following formulas
Formulas
x customer facility charge
30 days
(b) Billing for demand shall be calculated on a 36 day per
month basis and prorated for or shorter billing
I periods using the following formn
Formulas
d,an Yanneriad x KW Demand Y. Rate
30 days
f
1
PAGE 36
ell
~ ~endaNc D
4pe~da ~
]mERCY CHARU date
Siding for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWH
consumption during the billing period.
Formulas
KWH in rate block x Rate Per KWH in rate block s
ENMM COST ADn T
A charge per Kw'H of energy taken for fuel cost calculated in
accordance with schedule ECA.
POWER COST Amanmm
a
A charge per KW of demand for fixed purchased power cost
calculated in accordance with schedule PCA.
1
ra
Ie _
I
t 1 ° r 1 11
r l ,r.
y
PAO1 97
b u Lv,lab Y,n ~ i a.r M.Y bC QINVNM•,W'p 4W~
iY -'Ly.4 r oh°~-,.
i
~ Q
~e~faNo
' Agenda!
SCHEDULE E8 (hte 3~ 40, 00Q
STAFpBY. SUpELIZENTARY MD MAIZITUMCE SERVICE
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable in all areas served by the City to customers who:
(1) own and/or operate an electric power generation facility
mainly used for non-emergency uses and which has a total
nameplate or effective capacity (whichever is lesser) of
fifty (50) KW or more in parallel with the City's electric
system for the purpose of generating power for the custom-
er's own consumption, and
(2) employ equipment which is compatible with the City's elec-
trio system at the customer's delivery point and which
will cause no damage to the City's electric system or
equipment or present undue hazards to City personnel, and
(3) own and/or operate an electrical generating facility which
has been certified annually by a registered professional
engineer practicing in the utility or independent Power
Production Industry to be a functioning and reliable
generating facility.
(4) operate an electrical power generating system at least
6,500 hours annually.
(5) execute an agragkment for interconnection and parallel
operation with the City.
INTIECONNECTION COSTS
The customer shall reimburse the City for any equipment or #
facilities required as a result of the installation by the customer
of generation in parallel with the City's electric system.
The customer shall pay all costs of the City to extend its {l
facilities or modify them at the time of interconnection, or at
some future time in order to permit parallel operation of the
customer's facility.
TYPE OF SERVICE
The City shall supply alternating current at sixty (60) cycles
and at the voltage and phase of the City's electric system most
available to the location of the customer. The primary voltage
customer shall own, operate and maintain all facilities necessary
to receive three phase primary voltage service and all transforma-
tion facilities required for conversion to utilization voltage.
The City shall own, operate And maintain all metering facilities,
PAGE 38
i
~ ub
AgendaNo
Agendal .S !
Date - 9'9 ~9d
either at primary or secondary voltage, at the City's option.
Where the City elects to meter at secondary voltage, the secondary
energy and on- peak demand charges shall apply.
NEZ~l4ltTlil+Y RATE
Primary Secondary
service gexvice
(1) Facility Charge $60.60/30 days $25.25/30 days
(2) Demand Charges:
On-Peak D=emand $11.45/KW $11.45/KW ti
System Demand $ 4.20/KW $ 4.20/KW {
(3) Energy Charges: H
Non-Emergency Energy 05..20C/K254/KWH H 05..354/514/KWKWH
Emergency Energy
{ (5) Energy Cost Adjustment Per Sch ECA Per Sch ECA
(6) Power Cost Adjustment Per Sch PCA Per Sch PCA
MINIMUM BILLING
The minimum monthly billing shall be the higher of the follow-
ing:
i (1) The sum of the Customer Facility Charge, the On-Peak
Demand Charge, and the. System Demand Charge; or
(2) A charge of $1.00 per KVA of installed transformer capaci-
ty. i
nMEEwINATION OF ON-P aT K )ZMM
The on-peak demand shall be determined by the KW demand
supplied by the City during the fifteen (15) minute period of
maximum use during the on-peak hours as recorded by the City's
demand motor and adjusted for power factor, but not less than one
hundred percent (100%) of the maximum on-peak demand which occurred
during the billingg months of June through September in the twelve
r (12) months immediately preceding the current month.
DETPRNYNATION OF ON-PEAT D.MM - MENMUION STS NO'T
' Q $aTINC AND CUSTOMER'S PFD DI17 N01.CQNTRIBUTE TO UTY'B AttiUAL
$'L8T PYAI{
It a customer's cogeneration unit(s) is/are off during peak
hours, and the customer's peak did not contribute to the City's
tho cogeneration unit is one (1) MW or
annual system peak, and
larger, then the nameplate rating of the customer's unit(s) shall
be deducted from the peak demand. j
PAGE 39 1
{
gloom
I'
r. Ift
~enCaNo ~ •"••nandalter!
The customer shall ba charged the appropriate on-peak demand
charges for the KW supplied by the City for the succeeding twelve
(12) months.
nETERHMATION OP SYSTETt WZW
f The system demand shall be determined by thw sum of the KW
demand supplied during the fifteen (15) minute period of maximum
y's demand meter, plus the KW nameplate
use as recordeheby the Cit gensrator
rating(s) customers (s)o
In no event shall the system demand be less than seventy per-
cent (701) of the maximum on-peak demand similarly determined dur-
ing the billing months of June through September in the twelve (12)
months immediately preceding the current month. j
1~ NATI ENERGY
All energy supplied to customers whose generating units are
less than one (1) MW capacity.
nrrwttTTOu ~o x~FUr~NCY ENERGY
all energy supplied by the City during peak
is
energy t
om-
s
Emergency
hours of operation to displace energy normally supplied by cu
er's one (1) MW or larger unit.
DER PACIQR p,Ed~LTY
The city reserves the right to determine the of mwer aximum factor of
demand k
the customer's installation served during p
or by measurement of the average Tom factor for the monthly bill-
ing period. if the power factor is below ninety percent (90%) der- j.
oses will be det
' ing on-peak hours, the demand for billing purp
901 and demand. mined by th l determthe ined power uncorrected or bil The a is as fol-
` dividing by b'~
lowst
x .9
l VnaAj'at~llin uAnd
Determined power factor
neslNiTION OP ON~F~K.li44~ ,
k The City's on-peak hours, for the purpose of this rate ached-
? ule, are designated as being from 2:00 P.K. to 7:00 P.M. each
Monday through Friday.
, . - ~ D PTNIT O~ QF,~'L'PFf~x HOS1R3
The City's off-peak hours, for the purpose of this rate ached-
uls, shall be all hours not designated as on-peak hours.
FACE 40
I
17r
1
Agen4 1
APECIAL-UMLITIES Date
t4dol 41
All services which require special faoilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
REORATION OF_LUJLITY BILLS
(a) Billing for demand shall be calculated on a 30 day per
month basis and prorated for longer or shorter billing f
periods using the following formula:
Actual days in reading period x customer facility charge
30 days
i
I (b) Billing for demand shall be ':alculated on a 30 day per
month basis and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formula:
&qtual days in reading period x KW Billing Demand x hate
30 days
i s XURO HARGE .
Bi3.ling for energy shall be based on actual KWH consumption
during the billing period.
Formula:
KWH in rate block x Rate per KWH in rate block r
b EDIT F'0R ENERGY DELT,V=n INTO CITY'S SYSTEM DURIN4 .O~i-pE~
ti43l13&
If Customer-produced energy is fed back into the City's system
during on-peak hours, an amount equal to fuel cost calculated in
accordance with Schedule SCI, as applicable to such energy is
cred- ited monthly, provided that customer has paid the City for neces-
nary added metering, protective and other equipment as determined
by the City.
CRI21.T FORENKaY DELIVERED INTOCITII'S SYSTEM DURING_&FF-PEAK
HOTYRS
If Customer-produced energy is fed back into the City's system
during off-peak hours, an amount equal to $0,01328 per KWH (for
' each KWH delivered back into the City's system) will be credited
monthly, provided that Customer has paid the City for necessary
added metering, protective and other equipment as determined by the
city.
i
i
PAGE 41
1¢.r n-i
..QOI
goadehio._/ ~
;gsnda
- letf '
ENEMY COST ADJUSTMENT jO D 7a
A charge per KWH of energy taken for fuel cost' calculated in
accordance with Schedule ECA.
POWER COST ADJUSTMENT
A charge per KW of demand for fixed purchases power cost
calculated in accordance with Schedule YCA.
i
PAYMENT
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid
within twenty (20) calendar days from date of issuance.
J 7
yw r, LATE SAYMEM'P OUGES i
Sills are considered past due it not received within twenty, $
(20) calendar days and shall be accessed a,late payment; charge ,6f
one a f
; and ohs-halt percent (1.54) per ~eonth on any unpaid balance.
10
( t
!
I.
} Y "'~y~ ( rvi lJ~.
? PAGE 42
.f.e J'•
Mal
r
i
Um 0"i
AgendaNo 7 r
BM. DULa Ap Agenda a •
ATHLETE FIB [bete
(Effective 10/01/94) S/ 70
APPLICAT.1
Applicable to all electric service metered at one point for use 1
to light specified areas for athletic events where such electrical
toe will not occur between the hours of 2:00 P.H. and 7:00 P.M. for
the months of June through September.
NET KQ T LY R]aTE
(1) Customer Facilities Charge
Single Phase $20.20 per 30 days
i ; Three Phase $30.30 per 30 days
(2) Energy. Charge
t f
Billing months of June through SeotYmbgrz,
ti All Other Hours (Off Peak) 3.790 per 1CWH
rw
2:00 PM to 7:00 PM (Peak) 7.550 per KW1i
Billing months of October through Kav:
All hours 3.790/K;fH
(3) Demand Charge
r' Billirg-=thL_g~Liune through
All Other Hours (Off Peak) $1:11 per KW per 30
days 2:00 PH to
7100PM
{;F (Peak) $4.70 per KW per 30
days
} i Bl~~on~~of~tober through Hav:
All hours $1.11 per KW.per 30
days
(4) Energy Cost Adjustment Current ECA Schedule
j (5) Power Cost Adjustment Current PCA Schedule
Yjyj HZZ
Facility Charge
y
f PAGE 43 I
.
p .u►y
I
O
lot) gandaNo~~'
igendal '
1 + TYPE OF SKEYICE tilt '
At the City's available sec(.ndary voltage and available phase.
For use ' t Sepembetween the hours ber and all hours of from O OcP.M. and 2:00 tober through P.M. June
through
h I I $QWER FACTOR I
The City reserves the right to make tests to determine the
power factor of the customer's installation served during periods
of maximum demand or by measurement of the average power factor for
the monthly, billing period. If the power factor is below ninety
percent, the demand for billing purposes will be determined by
multiplying the uncorrected KW billing demand by got and dividing
by the determined power factor.
AECIAL FACILITIEI
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
• customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
i speoial facilities rider.
PROPWION OF UTIIIITY BILLS
(a) Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 bill-
ings annually and prorated for longer or shorter periods iii
using the following formulas
' Formulas
Actual days in reading RUiod x customer facility charge
30 days
(b) Billing for demand shall be calculated on a 30 day per
month basis and prorated for longer or shorter billing
periods using the following formulas
Formulae
Actual days in reading period x KW demand x Rate
30 days
4? ,
1 ENrJLQY CHARGE
' Billing for the energy charge shall be based on actual KWII con d
sumption during the billing period.
I
Formula:
KWH in rate block x hate per M in rate block
F
PAGE 44
Fw,
i
I vrpd$%O
I agendatt
44
1 ,,.,aT ~s~vs» gate 3
} per. ICwH of energy taken for fuel coat calculated in
. charge
accordance with Schedulek6
` ~ ~ ' onwBR COST_~TMFdiT '
of demand for fixed purchased power cost
J► charge per a with Schedule PGA.
anc
d
or
c
ac
in
calculated
r
I r° `
r , f r z
,
r1r i i
. I '
1 r .
at
41
r is
Y k
1r { phGB 45
4
1
I
gendaN
r ~gen~al '
SCHEDULE IDR qtE ' r
INDUST TAt/BCONOMIC DEVEMPMENT RIDER O ~t7
(Effective 10/01/94)
This s available to the customers who receive service
AVxid~ er~i
j
from Rate Schedules GSS, GSL, or TGS.
f
AkPL CATION
This rider is available to electric service supplied at any one location
and measured through one meter. This is for fire electric
service applicable to new customers and existing customers as de-
scribed below.
j (1) New customers whose electric service represents demand not
previously served by the City at any location in the
City's service area in the last 22 months and where such
metered demand is in excess of 200 KW.
111 (2) Existing customers served under Rate Schedules GSS, GSL or
TGS who add additional metered demand of at least 200 KW
on top of their existing level of demand. This additional
load will be separately metered.
Under no circumstances may this rider be used to reduce the
x current amount of other firm service billed to the customer. Dur-
ing the term of this agreement, the customer may not reduce other
firm service peak demand.
i
.41T KONTHLY RATE
The customer shall be charged under the appropriate applicable
rate schedules with the exception that the monthly billing demand
or system demand will be adjusted in accordance with the following
tables
j Reduction to Billing
Time Per 24 Demand or System _ sand
{
t First Year 5o%
Second Year 40%
Third Year 30%
Fourth Year 20%
Fifth Year 10%
1 CONTRACT PERIOD
1
The term of the contract will be a five-year period.
' PAGE 46 E
I
1 r.
r: . q.
■
r
1
SCHEME TB ~g9lidaKO '
~^w~r aTORAGj; INCENTx~E Agenda4
(Effective 10/01/94) date J0
Ss' `
APPI,ICATIOA[ i
}
Applicable to any customer who agrees to be on Time- of-Uea rate
for live ca years and who has a thermal storage facility of a min-
i imum storage capacity of 500,000 BTU.
at,,~ STORiCE INCENTIVE pAYlSENTS
First 500 KW shifted $25n/KW
to off-peak hours
Additional KW shifted $125/KW
to off-peak hours
Thermal storage incentive payments shall be made to qualifying
customers based on the following method:
A design shall be submitted to the Director of Electric Utili-
ties, The thermal storage equipment shall be checked
es for approval,
Y BTU ;
for input electric demand (KW) and output capacity (BTU). The
'•~~`c' system shall be limited for incentive payment to a maximum of
12,000 BTU per 500 square feet for the conditioned area of the
facility to be served, if such facility is used for office such purposes. It the facility is used for other purposes, urpos st
an exception
example, an industrial use, the customer say request
The City Electric
, from the City of Denton F.leo2ric Utility.
Utility will study the request for exception and make recommends
tions to the Electric Utility Director and the Executive Director .
r of Utility s the to whether a
Executive DArectoreof Utilities will be final The
decision
Upon completion, the input-output of tThe thermal
customer may observe
will be measured by the City of Denton.
and verify all information and calculations for the actual size of
the facility, Auxiliary equipment used to circulate fluid or air
handlers which uculd opernte under normal peak periods will not be
included in calculating the KW load for incentive payments.
~ i
i
~E
PAGE 47
1
SCHEDULE APR Vend&
APPLIANCE REBATE 4gend
(Effective 10/01/94) 0ete
Annlic='+on/Program Su_~arv
The City of Denton Utility Department is offering cash payments
to customers who purchase and install high efficiency air condi-
tioners or heat pumps in new or existing residential or commeroial
facilities.
The program's objective is to reduce energy demand and consump-
the
of the City dollars of Deon thir utilit bills ntones electric systems
tion,,
the y peak saving load customers
reducing
g3ggram guidelines
1. All installations must be for accounts served by the City
of Denton Utility Department ant must meet all applicable
national, local, and manufacturers' codes and specifica-
tions.
2. To qualify for a rebate, equipment must be new when in
stalled.
3. pAll urchased equipment willqualify purchased. for No calossed or sh rebate. lease/
p
4. installations mutt be made by licensed contractors and/or
dealers.
5. No rebate will be paid o!+ . partial replacement of an air
conditioner. The compressor, condenser and the evaporator
coil must be replaced to qualify for a rebate.
6. Payments for residential central cooling systems# which
include apartments and mobile homes, will be limited to a
capacity based on a minimum of 500 conditioned square feet
3 per tan.
i
7. The conditioned area in square feet is required on each
,
residential central system request for payment.
8. The rebate will Is paid to the purchaser of the qualifying
equipment upon verification of compliance with program
guidelines.
ctor of
Dire
9. Requests for payment must be received inby the stt installation.
Electric Utilities within 60 days
PAGE 48
.I,
r
sCREDDLE APR VpdaN4 .
APPLIANCE REBATE
(Effective 10/01/94) V?
~i~leroaram summarx
The City of Denton Utility Department is offering cash payments
to customers who purchase and install high efficiency air condi- i
tionere or heat pumps in new or existing residential or commercial
facilities.
The program's objective is to reduce energy demand and consump-
tion,
ystem.
load customers Citydollars
Dentonesrelectric sbills and
reducing they peak saving
PE ram GuLdLUMU
}
1. All installations must be for accounts served by the City
of Denton Utility Department and must meet all applicable
national, local, and manufacturers' codes and speoifica-
tions.
2. To qualify for a rebate, equipment must be new when in-
stalled.
3. All equipment must be purchased. No leased or lease/
purchased equipment will qualify for a cash rebate.
' 4. Installations Isust be made by licensed contractors and/or
dealers.
5. No rebate will be paid on a partial replacement of an air I
conditioner. The compressor, condenser and the evaporator
coil must be replaced to qualify for a rebate.
61 Payments for residential central cooling systems, which
include apartments and mobile homes, will be limited to a
{ capacity based on a minimum of 500 conditioned square feet
per ton.
7. The conditioned area in square feet is required on each {
residential central system request for payment.
The rebate will Lie paid to the purchaser of the qualifying '
S. i
equipment upon verification of compliance with program
guidelines.
9. Requests for payment must be received by theaDirector of
Electric Utilities within 60 days of .
PAGE 48
i
T---f
~lgondalt
10. Equipment and installation are subject to inspection by f~
the City's Building Inspection Department before final
approval for payment is issued.
11. The Appliance Rebate Program guidelines and payments are
subject to change without notice.
12. The Appliance Rebate Program may be discontinued without
prior notice at any time by the City of Denton.
1. GENERAL PROCEDURES
A. Application
To determine who qualifies for a rebate, an appli-
cation for rebate rust be completed and sent to the
Director o: Electric Utilities' within 60 days of
instal htion of the equipment. Participating
dealers have rebate application forms and will
complete those forms for the purchaser. It is the
f purchaser's, responsibility to see that the dealer
completes the form and submits it to the Director
of Electric Utilities.
B. Inspections
Installations of central systems will be inspected.
by the City's Building Inspection Department and
must be approved before rebates will be processed. 1
j C. Payments to Participants
Cash payments will be made to the purchaser of the
qualifying equipment. Participating retail equip- {
ment dealers will receive a cash payment of $20 per
unit for the sale of window units; central air
conditioning systems, or heat pumps to offset their
cost for properly filling out the applications for
purchasers. Program participants are responsible
for submitting the correct information. The Utili-
ty Department will not issue any additional payment
unless the payment was incorrect due to a mistake
in processing by a city employee.
1. The twenty dollsr ($20.00) payments to
dealers will be made only if they supply the
qualifying equipment to the customer or
builder who is paying for the installation
of the equipment. Dealers and purchasers
may be denied payment for failure to follow
program guidelines such asi failing to
supply correct square footage or SEER/EER
figuresl installing equipment which is not
i
PAGE 49
WWI
r01
VeMaNo.!_
ageitdai
hSF
new; replacing part of a split system; or
fai'wre to fill out rebate forms properly.
2. Payments will be made to customers who pur-
chase and install nev qualifying equipment.
If a tenant purchases and installs qualify-
ing equipment, the payment is made to the
tenant. If the owner of rental property
purchases and installs qualifying equipment,
the payment is made to the owner. If the
purchaser of a mobile or custom horn; selects
and pays for a qualifying unit, the purchas-
er will receive the rebate.
It. CENTRAL ELECTRIC AIR CONDITIONERS AND HEAT PUMPS
j
A. Anew condensing unit with an inside evaporator
coil will qualify if matched, as specified, in the
j current issue of the ARI Directory of Certified Air
{ Conditioners and Air Source Heat Pumps slid the unit
meets the minimum ratings as specified in the 1992
Appliance Rebate Program. If the unit is not in j
the current ARI Directory, the manufacturer's 1
latest data approved for publication will be ac-
cepted.
If the unit is not in the current ARI Directory or
data approved for publication, the average of the
S` high and low SEER/EER coil only, not including
blower coil, will be, accepted as listed in the
current ARI Directory.
8. Computer simulations may be used if ratings are not
listed in the current ARI Directory, provided the
following criteria hre met:
1. Systems using mix-matched coils must meet
1= `E; all established program guidelines to quali-
fy for a rebate.
2. The computer simulations must be signed,
certified, and dated by a 2.29jjt2>`ed ors es- I
sional minor and an Offire of the compti
ny making the submittal. c
3. The engineer who certifies a simulation must
attest to the accuracy of the input data,
the validity of the calculation procedure
used, and that the results are in accordance
with D.O.E. approved methodology.
4. A complete. set of the input data and an
indication of the source of the data must
aocompany the simulated ratings.
PAGE so
4
f
soe~d t r~ ~
t,Se rf4
` 5. The simulated ratings mush, be based on the
f condensing unit's tested combination as
listed in the current ARI Directory or
latest data approved for publication and
identified by the correct model numbers of
both the condensing unit and toil as listed
in the current ARI Directory.
6. Simulated ratings must not exceed 1051 of
the SEER rating of the tested system used as
a base.
7. An open file of computer simulations will be
maintained at the Energy Management office.
Supplying erroneous ratings or data can lead
to disqualification of those involved from
further program participation.
I
C. Program Capacity and Payment Formula
1.
The maximum allowable BTU per hour capacity
eligible for a residential rebate is dater
r mined by dividing the square footage of the
conditioned area by 500 and multiplying by
12,000.
Exam lat The Program Capacity fez a 1,500 square
} foot house ist
L' 3.0 x 1.2,000 • 36,000 BTU8
500
The City will pay a rebate on a unit that seats
2'. prograx efficiency standards &id is sized at !
36,000 BTUS or less.
~E 2. Actual payment will be determined by dividing the
o STUH of the installed unit (up to, and including
E the Program Capacity) by 12,000 and multiplying by
E the incentive.
The incentive amounts and BEER ratings are refer
snood on page 5 of the 111992 Appliance Rebrite
Prograast Methods Used in Determining Equipmont
Efficiency and Eligibility," and are incorporated
herein as if fully set forth at longths
;
<Y;r Example At A person in a 1,500 square foot house
installs a 300000 BTUH central air
conditioner with a SEER rating of 12.0.
800 3 x 12,000 36,000 Program Capacity
PAGE 51
rw«
Bowl
r
A4~1t
704004 - 2.5 x $100/ton $250.00 Rebate Amount
12,000
Example B° iA person nstalls is 6020000 BTUUHr c ntral pair
conditioner with a SEER rating of 12.0.
= 4 x 12,000 a 48,000 Program Capacity
500
48,000 4 x $100/ton - $400 Rebate amount
12,000
Example Cs A peruon in a 2,000 square foot house
installs a 600000 BTUH central heat pump
with a SEER rating of 12.0.
2,000
- 4 x 120000 48,000 Program Capacity
Soo
480000 ' 4 x $100/ton - $400 Rebate Amount; {
mLUn
Mini
;
SEER/EER
. 5 t } can rai r Condit 3 on; a MWILM in s t+va
$100/tort♦t
%
Single Phase (SEER) 12.0
4 ,
z Three Phase (EER) 12,0 $100/t6n
. ',1:` ~ 4 ~~rnl !{sat Pumt]s
Single Phase (SEER) 12.0 100$100/ton
ton
Throe Phase (EER)
g=_Air Conditioners 10.0 $ 50/unit
1010 $ 50/unit
%
goo>i Heat Pum>zu _
:a $500/unit
Cloths A Heat PUUH 12.0 i
r?' ♦ Refer to "1992 Appliance Rebate Programs Methods used in i '
x Determining Equipment Efficiency and Eligibilityr
x' { For calculation purposes, one ton equals 12,000 BTUH
PAGE 52 {
{
d¢m4Ai14 k3q ~'A
Y
r^
w s:-., r
r WIN
1 UK]
ApenOaNo ~
SC92DULE ACA D
AIR NDIT OVER CYCLING REBATE
(Effective 10/01/94)
ApPLICA=
Thin schedule is available to any customer of the City of Denton
Utility who is served and billed pursuant to rate schedules R-1, {
R-2, GSS/GSL and 01, has a central air conditioning system with a
minimum connected compressor output of 2.5 tons and who agrees to
permit the utility to install a control device to his or her air
conditioning system. The device will enable the utility to control
the operation of the air conditioner compressor during periods of
{ the utilityts peak load and emergency conditions. The utility shall
r" havri the right to interrupt service to the compressor unit for
{ appitoximately seven and one-half minutes of each thirty minute
I interval during peak load conditions. Peak load conditions are
defined as being from June i through September 30 of each year.
TMMS AND CONDITIONS
A customer may apply for this schedule at any time by applying
and entering into a contract with the City of Denton utility. The
contract shall be for a term of one year and shall be renewable for
;Y additional one year terms. Upon approval of the application and
r installation of the load reduction device, the customer shall
receive a monthly credit on his or her utility bill, the amount of
which shalt be based upon the customer's compressor output (tons).
The start date for receiving credit shall be the date the load
reduction device is installed on the compressor and tested for
proper operation. The amount of the credit is bared upon thirty
(30) day billing cycle and prorated according to the start date.
Tits amount of credit on an eligible customer's bill shall be
determined in the following manners
Compressor output in Tons Credit per Billing Cycle
2.5 to . $10.00
over 5.0 $ 2.00 per ton
w, Any credit on a customer's electric bill shall not exceed fifty
" percent (50;) of said bill. The Utility shall rebate applicable
ctedits to customers in the months of June, July, August and
September.
PAGE 53
v
17
ly '
ApendaNo '
Apendal a '
VCHIDULA MTR Date f
PRENIIlN-EFf'ICIENCY M4T48~E1}~TE 1_a~~
(Effective 10/01/94)
PP 7 j~TIQN/PROGR,~! SLTM~nRY
The City of Denton Utility Department is offering cash payments
to customers who purchase and install premium-efficiency motors and
adjustable speed drives in facilities serviced by Denton Electric
Utility.
The program's objective is to reduce energy demand and consump-
tion, thereby saving customers dollars on their utility bills and
reducing the peak load of the City of Der,ton's electric system,
thereby conserving energy and improving Me power factor.
' t
PRORAH GUIDELINES
1. All installations must be for accounts served by the City
' of Denton Electric Utility and must meet all applicable
national, local, and manufacturers' codes and speoifica-
tions.
2. To qualify for a rebate, equipment must be new when in-
stalled. All equipment must be purchased; no leased or
lease/purchased equipment will qualify for a cash rebate.
Removed motors must be properly disposed of after inspec-
tion and not re-used with the Denton Electric Utility
system. Method of disposal oust be stated.
3. The City will pay the rebato to the purchaser of the
qualifying equipment upon verification of compliance with
program guidelines.
4. Equipment and installation are subject to inspection by
the City's Electric Utility before final approval for
payment is issued.
5. Replacement motors ms~st be the same horsepower or lower
than the original motor. Exceptions must be approved in
S I' writing by the City's Electric Utility. Only motors 20
horsepower and above are eligible for the program.
' b. All information must be complete on the Motor Rebate
Application in order for a rebate to be issued (see Motor ~
Rebate Application).
7. Thu Premium-Efficiency Motor Rebate program guidelines and
payments are subject to change without notice. This
program may be discontinued with prior notice, at any time
by the City of Denton Electric Utility.
PAGE b4
i
w~.
i
i
f AgW;NtRE1~EHFJIi4~Y Date Rebates for the Premium-Efficiency Motor Rebate Program will be
based on the following methodology:
i.
REPLACEMENT MOTORS:
1. The Denton Electric Utility staff will visit the site to
determine the existing motors efficiency. If the existing motor is
non-operational, an ostimate will be made.
2. The customer must provide all information on the rebate
application concerning the proposed motor purchase.
3. A new motor must not exceed the horsepower of the existing
motor without exprose written consent by the Denton Electric
utility, which consent shall be given only if the utility finds an
I increased efficiency.
4
4. The information concerning the existing and the proposed
motors will be entered into the Motor Master software program to
calculate the kilowatt (KW) savings yield. The calculation is based
on horsepower, efficiency, RPM, and load information.
S. The Kid yield will be multiplied times the rebate incentive
4
amount of $1001Rids
i
XW yield x $1001Kid
6. The Denton Electric Utility will to the site to verify
installation, and following successful installation, a rebate check
!r will be mailed to the customer.
NEW MOTORSt
New motors will follow the procedure outlined above for
replacement motors but the efficiency comparison will be made
against a standard now motor, to be determined by the Motor Master
' software program used by the City, Department of Energy standards,
or the Denton Electric Utility.
ADJUSTABLE SPEED DRIVESs
The Denton Blect:ric Utility will visit the customer site to
determine KW savings from the proposed Adjustable/Variable speed
Drive. Those savings will be awarded on a $100/KW basis. A watt
meter will be used beftre and after installation.
KW SAVINGS:
Rebates in excess o $1,000.00 require advance approval of the
Director of Electric Utilities.
PACE 55
j.
1
ApeWaNo
Agendas
8C8EDULE OP9 riate '
.,,,..,r„sooriDTI8L8 POWER~1tY.
(Effective 20/01/94)
~DDt.I~CATYON '
}applicable to any customer whor by written agreement, receives i
service for uninterruptible power supply for a computer or other 4
electrical' equipment.
DD_8, livable for resalein service in any event, nor to conjunction with applicable rider.
rary or standby service eXCADt
i ~ 1tDNTHLY RATE
(i) Customer Facility Charge:
250 W Power Standby Unit $ 7,80/30 days
10200 W Power Standby Unit $31.85/30 days.
'
(2) Installation Charge $25.75
For any W Power Standby Unit other than above, the monthly
customer charge will be based on the following formulas
(1) Monthly Chargai
5% of ~►nnual xaintenance cost PLUS
12 months Y:;
Rs },,.,+,wl Return et Ynveatment PLUS
1--x-12 months
8% Interest on a 5 Year Life
+'~PE OF 8 VICE
The city all furnish, install, Maintain an automatically
,
shall
controlled alternating current power backup unit conforming to the
city's standards and subject to its published rules and regulations.
~[I um=
f Bills 15 calendar days from date of is issuance. dud if not paid
within
envntft. FACtr.ITIES
All servives which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the special !aa
t s rider.
ti
ill
PAGE 56
r
Jw~
t1i971, rm : ~~rf
i
ageadaFlo
Agendal
PRORATION OF UTILITY BILLS
(a) Billings for the Facility charge shall be based on 12
billings annually and prorated for longer or shorter
billing periods using the following formulas
Formula
i
Actual days in reading period
30 days x customer facility charge
,
i ;t l
3F 4
,
I
,
r i s r• ro,
7{f PAGE 57 ; +
r `
I
► +QendaNo_
4peodal
r - '
' 9CREDULE ECA We
ENERGY COS'L ADJUSTMENT ~000W
(Effective 10/01/94)
ENERGY COST ADJUSTMENT
All monthly KWH charges shall be increased or decreased by an
amount equal to "X" cents per KWH, to be known as tho energy cost
adjustment (ECA). The ECA shall be computed during the last month
of each fiscal year quarter (December, Parch, June and September) to
be applied to the arter immediately following. The City shall in 111
r
no cafe change the energy cost adjustment more than once in any
f I three (3) month period. The ECA shall be calculated using the
following formulae a
_ext quarter
6CA Projectodenergy cost for n
it Projected KWH sales for next quarter j
I ~ E
In the event that actual plus estimated cumulative costs of
fuel, Variable costs of Texas Municipal Power Agency (TMPA) energy
and purchased energy (excluding TMPA's fixed charges) are greater
than or less than the actual and projected ECA revenues by $500,000
or more, during the next quarter, the Director of Electric Utilities !
or his designate shall recompute the Energy Cost Adjustment and
re-establish an ECA that collects or returns such difference over
the next three month period. Such change in ECA shall be applied
f`. evenly to each month during' the three month period.
I
The above formula results in an October - December 1994
' estimated ECA as follovat
j o ECA . 1.90C/KWH
' f
'I
7
}
PAGE 58
R
r y~
r ,
I
a_.
~orM
i
*0
~gendalVc 9 0 ~
Agendas -
I~ ec8aaac8 PCA ate
DER COST ADJUSTMENT
(Effective 10/01/94)
~[inpOSE A_ND EFFECT
~I
The Power Cost Adjustment (PGA) provides for the recovery of
fixed purchased power coats, including Texas Municipal Power Agency
(TMFA) costs, as they ins.-rease or decrease from the base year costs.
The 11CA will be calculated based on fixed purchased power costs, to
be effective the first day of each fiscal quarter. The PCA shall
apply to customer classes as listed in this schedule.
Al: monthly KWH charges for customers with an energy charge but
without a demand component in the applicable rate schedule shall be
assessed a PCA surcharge based upon KWH usage.
All monthly KW demand charges for customers with a demand com-
ponent in the applicable rate schedule shall be assessed a PCA
surcharge based upon KW demand, but not usage.
The PCA will be calculated relative to a base purchased power
cost of $23.390 million per year, as of the first quarter of fiscal
year 1995.
QUART LY ADA7US=T FACTOR_ (OAPI - WHEN CHANGED
A quarterly adjustment factor (QAF) shall be used in the calcu-
lation of the PCA to account for significant changes in fixed pur-
chased power costs. The QAF shall be adjusted in any quarter where 4
fixed purchased power costs increase or decrease by an integer mul-
tiple of $1000000, compared to the base fixed purchased power cost
? of $23.390 million per year. Each $100,000 increase or decrease
' from the base cast represents a "thresholA" interval for adjusting
the OAF (e.g., at $29.290 million, $29.490 million, $29.590 million,
and so on). In any, quarter in which the annual fixed purchase power
cost "crosses" above or below one or more of these "thresholds", the
QAF shall be adjusted, otherwise it shall remain the same.
QU RTrror.Y AMSTNENT FACTOR - CALCULATION
In any quarter in which the QAF is to be adjusted, the QAF
shall be calculated by subtracting the base fixed purchased power
cost ($29.390 pillion per year) from the current fixed purchased
power cost per year and dividing by 100,000.
ohs
Current cost $23,6200000
Base cost 523.390.000
Change S 230,000/100,000 + QAF a 2.3
PAGE 59
I
1
t
r.
43M N
VendsNo.
Agenda '
~cP - Gy 74
Note that the QAF for the first quarter of fiscal year 1995
for all rate classes, yielding an initial PCA of $0.00 for all
classes in the first quarter of fiscal year 1995. Note also that
subsequent decreases in cost below the base coat will yield a s
negative OAF which, in turn, would generate a PM rebate for all
rate classes.
Pte.RAT11
f
The PCA Rate for each customer class may be determined from the
following tables
Cssstosmer class Rate Schedule
Residential R1,R20TR 0.000134
Small Commercial/ GSS,TGSFEWK 0.039780
i Other PLIES
3 Large Commercial GSL,IDR 0.039332
I ~ covarnment G1,AF 0.055326
° C1M C T.M_ IT.1MT~
The PCA for any given customer class with a KW demand component
gi. maybe calculated as follows, and rounded to the, nearest cents
PCA-(p~ n OAF x PCA Rate (C/Rw) x X41
r The PCA for any given customer class with a M energy compo-
r nent,'but without a KW demand component, may be calculated as fol
-lows, and rounded to the nearest cent:
. ~ i
"A (4) QAF X PCA Rate
(C/RWN) x itWH
,r
t.
PAGE 60
t
_ J
1
w.
pdaNo
~gendal
`r till '
F BP In PACILI'11i6a alks rQ
(1) All service shall be offered from available facilities.
If a customer service characteristic requires facilities
and devices which are not normally and readily available
at the location which the customer requests service, then
the City shall provide the service subject to paragraph of
this rider.
(2) The total coat of all facilities reburied to meet the t
1• customer's load characteristics which are incurred by the
City shall be subject to a special contract entered into
between the Utility and the customer. This contract
shall be signed by both parties prior to the city provi-
ding service to the customer.
9{l
i'T
t
1 f.:
E
I! ii I M 4.;
i I
1
r
k1 r
s PAGE 61
(i ,
t~M
■
+gendal
Jost ~ d
O
SECTION II. That the Executive Director of utilities is hereby
authorized to expend funds to issue rebates to electric utility
customers in the form and type set forth in Schedules ACR, APR and
MTR, as the temporary cycling of air conditioner compressors and the
use of more efficient compressors and motors are in the best inter
eat of the City of Denton, as such will xeduce the peak load and
conserve energy, which are public purposes of the City.
SECTION 111. That if any section, subsection, paragraph, son- '
tence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application
! thereof to an person or circumstances is held invalid by any court
of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the valid-
ity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Coun-
cil of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have
enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
=,'TIQN IY. That the Schedule of Rates herein adopted shall be
effective, charged and applied to all erergy usage occurring on or
after October 1, 1994.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1994.
11
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST.
r JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY E
;Ys 3
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM.
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
r= ~~111
1~.
` PAGE 62
i
i
COUNOI~
mow.
~ s
6
h,
v it
i '
it
SST
F
'JON
r
I
■ CITY OF DENTON WATER UTIL.Wilm s #
CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED
Rates Rates Increase
esid"al - WR
et~M er - y~ 9.35 9.15 2.19%
1' Meter 11.17 10.95 2.00%
! t 1/2 Meter 15.91 15.60 2.00% I
21 Meter 17.76 17.40 2.00% 1
E AN Gallom Block Rafe Winter 2.65 2.60 2.00%
i Pat Block Rate - Summer 2.55 2.50 2.00%
Second Block Rate - Summer 3.42 3.35 2.00%
Third g~Bllock Rate Summer 4.28 4.20 2.00%
1ncYeas lons/Month 310.0 30.40 2.06%
AV averagetomes ll a8~
Residential outside Corporate L qKs =WRE t
4' Teiar 11.16 11.15 0.00%
1' Meter 12.85 12.60 2.00%
1 112' Meter 18.30 17.90 2,23%
2' Meter 20.40 20.00 2.00%
All Gallons Block Rate - Winter 2.95 2.95 0.00% '
First Block Rate - Summer 2.95 2.96 0.00%
Second Block Rate - Summer 4.00 4.00 0.00%
Third Block tote - Summer 5.00 6.00 0.00%
CommerCUq n_dustrtat - WC 19,80 19.40 2.06%
4 " 21.75 21.30 2.11%
I ' Metter
I 112" Meter 25.25 24.76 2.00%
2'. Meter. 31.06 30,46 1.97%
3' mew 65.00 65.00 0.00%
* 4`. Meter 120.00 120.00 0.00%
61 - Meter 150.00 150.00 0.00%
W Meter 175.00 176,00 0.00%
10' Meter 210.00
Volume CharoloW Gallons 2.81 2,78 2.00%
Awararpe Bill At 40,000 Gallons/Month 133.95 131.30 2.0296
i AVgrage Monthly volTar increase 2.65
yCommercial outside Corporate Limits - WCE
W-Miter 20.85 20,00 4.25%
1' Meter 22.90 22.00 4.09%
4 112' Motor 29.00 28.00 3.67%
7 Meter 33,30 32.00 4.06%
3' Meter 87.90 87.90
4' Meter 147.40 147.40
6' Meter 188.90 188.90
8' Meter 214.88 214.05 -
10' Meter 241. -
Volume Charge11000 Gallons 3.20 3.16 1.59%
EXHIBIT 3
i
f . a .
4W 1
i OVA-
CITY I
OF DENTON WATER UTILI
CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
Rates Rates Increase
Wholesale - WWI
aFc Charge, 1 0.00 155.00 -100.00%
WWI De1 Gallons 0.00 19.42 -100.00%
Readiness to serwoo0 Gallons 0.4826 0.4891 2.88%
Volume Charge/1000 Gallons 1.2532 0.9500 31.92%
3/4' ter 14.55 14.25 2.11%
Met -
1' Meter 16.25 15.90 2.20%
11/2' Meter 20.15 19.75 2.00%
7 Meter 627.30 26.76 2,06%
6.00 66,00 0.00%
3' Meter
l 4' Meter 93.00 93.00 0.00%
6' Meter 124.45 122.00 2.01%
W Meter 145.85 143.00 1.9996
10' Meter 210.00
Volume Charge/1000 Gallons 2.76 2.70 2.00%
Local Goverrvnent Irrlgatian - WGI '
3146 14.55 14.25 2.11%
r 1' Meter 18.25 16.90 2.20%
1 117 Meter 20.15 19.75 2.00%
`t 7 Meter 27.30 26.75 2.06%
< Volume Charge/1000 Gallons (Interrupptible) 2.35 2.30 2.00%
Volume Charge11000 Gallons (Non-lntemiptlble) 276 2.70 2.0096
s
K~ t times annually) 9.35 9.16 2.1996
1'' Meter 11.17 10.96 2.00%
1112 Meter 16.91 15.60 2.00%
7 Meter 17.76 17.40 P-00%
Volume Charge/1000 Gallons 2.76 270 2.00%
Government Raw Water, - WGU 150.45 147.60 2.0096
Facllty 8<ge
Volume Charge/l000 Gallons 1.48 1.45 2.00%
etered draM - 1NFFt
31.80 31.20 1.9296
Char
V e Charrge/1000 Gallons 2.81 2.75 2.00%
DeQol 665.00 660,00 2.31%
Inalalation Charge $3.00 62.00 1.9296
i
R
fins..
I
K
)'%W dMAWA95wratcord
Q*SNO 9 .o,3a
xaendal
btE
r ORDINANCE NO.
j
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR WATER SERVICE; ,
COMBINING THE RESIDENTIAL (WR) SCHEDULE AND RESIDENTIAL NOT
CONNECTED TO SEWER (WAN) SCHEDULE INTO THE RR SCHEDULE; COMBINING
THE REGULAR COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL (WC) AND COMXZRCIA.WINDUSTRIAL TO
USERS WITHOUT CITY OF DENTON WATER SERVICE (WCN) SCHEDULE INTO THE
MC SCHEDULE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: I
seCTiox That the Rate Schedules for water service as pro-
f vided for in Chapter 26 of the Code of Ordinances, are amended to
read as follows:
{
h WATER RATE SCHEDULES
f WR Residential Water Service ~ 2
i KRE Outside Co 2
rporation Limits Residential Water Service 4
WC Commercial/Industrial Water Se
rvice Rate b i
WC$
~ Outside Corporation Limits commercial i Industrial
Water Service 8
NG Intra-Governmental Sales of Finished Water
+ lO
Val Local Government Sprinkler Irrigation Rate
• 1 12
NGA Local-Governmental Ratei service for Adopt-a-Spot 1e
f WGU Intra-Governmental Sales of Untreated Water 1
WFH Metered Water from Fire 1b
• ' Hydrant
I.
F' WW1 Interim Treated Water/Raw Water Resale and Transmission 117
8
r`f Service to Upper Trinity Regional Water District
Water Tap and Loop
20
Special Facilities Rider 22
i
i
i
7-
i
EXHIBIT 4
1
4nxo q•
y
gyp'+c..
AP&NO 'Qua
A ff&I
y -
SCREDIILR UR
RESIDENTIAL WATER SERVICE
(Effective 10/01/941
APPLICATION
Applicable for single family residential service, and individually
metered apartments or mobile homes or multi-family facilities with
less than four units.
I
Also applicable where the metered water is not returned to the
wastewater system for collection and treatment, i.e. lawn sprinkler
or septic system.
Not applicable to resale, temporary, standby, or supplementary ser-
vice except in conjunction with applicable rider.
W_MONTNLY RATE
i
(1) Facility Charge ))illing Per- 30 Da"
3/4" Meter $ 9.35
3" Meter $11.17
1-1/2" Meter $15.91
2" Meter $17.75
rr ,
` (2) Volume Charge Rate Per 1,000 Gallons
i" BATE BLACK PER 30 DAYS WIRT SUMM
r Billing months of Billing xonths.of
NOV. through APRIL MAY through OCT.
0-150000 gals $2.59 $2.55
15,001-30,000 gals $2.55 $3.42
Over 30,000 gals $2.55 $4.28
' HMMUM BILLING: Facility Charge
' Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within ~
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to most
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
A", I special facilities rider.
PAGE 2
Y
r.,
Mawl
+peadaNo. 94
11~ 6!
j
pROR~TYON OF FAGILI Y CI;ABSE
Billing for the Facility Chap a shall be based on 1ibilliS
annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing pe
the following formulae
Formulas
M~t+al d sir. readino tierl4d x customer charge
k 30 days
you= CIA=
Billing for the water consumption Shall be based on the gallon
consumption during the billing period.
Formulae
lei in rate block x rate per 1,000 gal. in rate block
1000 gallons
k r 'r r f
et'
it
r
i~ , 5 A .pry r
1
t
r ( f
K
w
PAGE 3
4AVg en~aNo ~Cr
~geodal
Oats j
SCURDULE "It
OUTSIDE CORPORATE LIMITS RESIDE_NTLAL WATER SERVICE
(Effective 10/01/941
APPLICATION
Applicable for single family residential service, and individually
metered apartments or mobile homed or multi-family facilities with
In. leas than four units outside the corporate limits of the City of
Denton.
NET MONTHLY-RATE
(1) Facility Charge Billing Per 30 Days
3/4" Meter $11.15
l" Meter $12.85
1-1/2" Meter $18.30
2" Meter $20.40
4
(2) Volume Charge Rate Per 1.000 Gallons
$aTB BLOCK PER 30 DAYS P.~lSB
Billing months Billing months
NOV. through APRIL MAX _LhYgllgh OM
0-150000 gals $2.95 $2.95
15#001-30,000 gals $2.95 $4.00;
Over 30,0uo gals $2.95 $5.00
z
MINIKUM BILLINGS Pajility Charge
P
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order ^to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
speoial facilities rider.
1
PAGE 4
I U1,
w
ApesidaNo. ~
A~gy pal
DO r
PRORATION OF FACILITY CHARGE
Billing for the Facility charge shall ba based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing pariods using
the following formulas
Forsulai
Actual days in reading period x customer charge i
30 days
VOLUME CHARGE
Billing for the water consumption shall be based on the gallon
consumption during the billing period.
Formula:
Gal, in Rate Block x Rate per 10000 Gal. ih Rate Block
1,000 gallons
tl
t I ~
1
_ a
.I f
PAGE 5
i
-ser
~endaNo 9~
Agendall ~ 9Td'~
data
SCHEDULE WC
CO""^^C'AL/INDOSTRIAT• WATER uEBYIS ATE
(Effective 10/01/44)
APPLICATION
Applicable to all commercial and industrial users, or other water
users not otherwise classified under this ordinance, for all water
provided at one point of delivery and measured through one meters
Also applicable where the metered water is not returned ti the
wastewater system for collection and treatment, i.e. Water used in
production or irrigation or where the wastewater flow is measured
separately.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nor to temporary,
standby, or supplementary service except in conjunction with
applicable rider.
NST MO[iTNLY RATE
r -41
(11 Facility Charge sa~lina Per 30_Dav!
3/4" Meter $ 19.80
Meter $ 21.75
1-1/2" !toter $ 25.25
2" Meter $ 31.05
3" Meter 9 65.00
4" Meter $120.00
6" Mater $150.00
a" Meter $175.00
ION Motor $210.00
(2) Volume Charge $2.81 per 1000 gallons
XTHI M BILLING: Facility Charge
PAYMENT
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
BPECIAIL FACILITLI;q
All services whiLli require special .facilities in order to most
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PAGE 6
1
AWONo d-,
Apdal
fete
PRORATION OF FACILI'~Y CAE
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing periods using
the following formulae
Formulas
ACtual days in reading period x cuntoner charge
30 days
VOLOM CHARGE
ption
Billing for the water consumption shall be based on the consun
during the billin eriod.
Formula: ~
Gallons consumption rate per 1,000 gallons
10000
ell
e '
IS l.
r
M
i
,
i ~
PAGE 7
a
FV
gendaNo
agendatte
late
SCHEDULE ICE }
OUTSIDE CORPORATE LIMITS COMMERCIAL i INDUSTRIAL
WATER SERVICE
[Effective 10/01/94) `
~pPLICA.TION
Applicable for all commercial and industrial users or other users
not otherwise olansified under this ordinance outside Of the cor-
porate limits of the City of Denton for all water service provided
at one point of delivery and measured through one meter.
Not applicable to temporary, standby or supplementary service,
except in conjunction with applicable rider.
NET MONTHLY RATE
(1) Facility Charge Aillina Per 30 eve
3/4" Mater $ 20.85
In Meter $ 22.90
1-1/2" Meter $ 29.00
2 Meter $ 833.30
7.90
N Meter 11
4" Meter $147.40 I
6% Meter $188.90 i
Meter $214.05 I
ion Mater $241.50
a
$3.20 per 1,000 gallons
12) Volume Charge
'NiMUM_8 LI LINGO Facility Charge
Bills ara'due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
om date of issuance.
.
days !r
15 calendar
i ~
SPECIAL FACILITIES 1
All services which require special facilities in order to most
customerts service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider. '
PAGE 8
.ti
1
~n nb
"MIA
gendINo PAP
late /i
gRORATION OF FACILITY (,'URGE
I Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing periods using
the following formulas
Formulas
Actual days in reading neriod_ X customer charge
3 30 days
VOUM CHARGE f
Billing for the water consumption shall be based on the gallon
oonoumption during the billing period.
Formula:
t - gallons Consumption X Rate per 1,060 gallons`
t 1,000
PAGE 9
t
gendat3o,
4gendall .
late
h,
SC86DOL8 NO
INTRA-GOVERNMENTAL SALES OF FINISHED NAM
(Effective 10/01/94)
j
~QPLICATION ii
j )Applicable to sales of finished water to all City of Denton ~
Departments and accounts supplied at one point of delivery and
measured through one meter.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nor to temporary,
standby, or supplementary service except in conjunction with
applicable rider.
MET MONTHLY RATE
j
(1) Facility Charge Billing ~P Per 10_D xs
3/4" Meter $ 14.55
1" Meter S 16.23
i. 1-1/2" Meter S 20.15
2" Motor S 27.30
3" Meter $ 56.00
4" Meter $ 93.00
6" Meter $124.45
Meter $145.85
10" Mater $210.00
;2) Volume Charge $2.75 per 1,000 gallons {
U NIMM RIL•LINOt Facility Charge
PAYMM
Bills are due when .rendered, and become past due if not paid within
j 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL MILL=
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
ii
I
F?GE 10
t
w-
..rw.ar'kw:alw~S::w.:...,.:.. A.... v.,;i•n 1
. ,
~ s
WAIal
~f
i
AV*I
RRORATION QF FACILITY CHARGE
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and prorated for longer or shorter billing periods using
the folloving formula:
Formula :
Actual days in reading period
30 days x Facility Charge
x ,
you= CM U
' r~r max` Billing. for the water consumption shall be based on the. gallon
k consumption during the billing period.
Formulas'
Gallons Consuation
1,000 x Rate per 1.000 gallons
I
♦ r
S rfr
I
r i
,r
r 1
.1 F . 1
.'1r
t. ,
PAGE 11 1I
•v+4Y VY.......y... Ww.-NY iF'...w.n..... n ♦w 41.~.:~lii. : 4~'p'
~~xar
rurr
aOAnd~Nc
. Apendaq G'
Data
SCHEDULE W01
i
(Effective 10/01/941
Applicable to sales of finished water for irrigation purposes to all NN measured
local accounts supplie rat will be o Point vided onlavnon-int rruptible
through one meter.
basis or on an as available basis, interruptible as needed to sset
j peak requirements.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nor to temporary,
standby, or supplementary service except in conjunction with
applicable rider.
~ II
MET KoNTHLX-BM
(i) Faciliiv C arse @i111io Per 30 Dave
' ~ ' (A) t~~r Charge 11
3/4" Meter` $ 14.55-;.
Meter $ 16.25
1-1/2" Meter $ 20.15
2" Meter $ 27.30
3" !later $ 56.00 ~
ti 4" Meter $ 43.00 i
6" Meter $124.45
g" Meter $145.85
(2) Volume Charge
Interruptible $2.35 per 1,000 gallons
Non-interruptible $2.75 per 1,000 gallons
I gLK1K2t BILLING: Facility Charge
Hire due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
!5 calendar days from date of issuance.
~1iCI~ u~etLITIE3
All services which require special facilities in order to most
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PAGE 12 !
i
;j .1. ~rw w•
crd0~ wv:xJy
.d
AgendaNO
Ageodal
Date '
PRORATION OF FACILITY CHARGE
JE Billings for th»j Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually.
Forsulat
Actual days in reading Deriod
30 x Facility Charge
VOLUME CHARGE I!
Billing for the water consumption shall be based on the gallon
M
consumption to be charged during the billing period.
r.
Formulae t.
r. Gallons Consumption Rate per 1,000 gallons -
1,000
'z
f ,
s ~ .r
n
q~w
1 PAGE 13
P
AO
Apndalt
Date
l~ aJ
8689DULE W0A
i
LOQA GOVEP ENT WATER SERVICE FOR "ADOPT-A-SPOT"
(Effective 10/01/941
i
II ~
I APPLICATION
Applicable to sales of finished water to all local government ac-
counts supplied at one point of delivery and measured through a
meter with a quick coupler and hose bib for the Keep Denton
Beautiful Board's Adopt-A-Spot program.
Not applicable to resale service in any event, nar to temporary,
standby or supplementary service except in conjunction tiith appli-
cable rider.
N= ANNUAL RITE
(1) Facility Charge P@r P1I3111q
3/4" Meter $ 9.35
1" Netter $11.17 3
.1-1/2" Meter $15.91
2" Meter $17.75
(2) Volume Charge $2.75 per 1,000 Gallons
MINIliiM B LUNG. Facility charge
PAYM~
f Billd are due when rondered, and become past due if not paid within 15
r calondar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to meet custom-
er's service requirements shall be provided subject to the special
facilities rider. I
FACILITY CHARGE 1
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on three billings
annually in the months of October, April and July.
Y 1
j
PAGE 14
i
mom
IMI
it {
I ApWalt ;
r r_
Date
~10M ME CHA_RGF
Billing for the water consumption shall be based on the gallon
consumption during the billing period.
Formula:
t~
r Gallons Consumption
10000 x Rate per .1,000 gallons:
e
o f 4
U ~ yy r f Y 1J'.
E
r , 'I•
Y /Yr ~
t '
PAGE 15
I ,
r~S ~5 ,ley a '
F
I
♦.T7M ~
1
`9
Otto
`E sCBaDM 11130
i INTRa GOVERNMENTAL SAUS OF UNTREATED WATER
[Effective 10/01/94)
I APPLICATION
Applicable to all City of Denton Departments and accounts for untreated E
water supplied at one point of delivery and mearured through one meter. f
Not applicable for resale except in conjunction with applicable rider.
Al 1 l
i NET NONTILY RATE
e,
(1) Facility charge $150.45 per 30 days
(2) Volume Charge $1.48 per 1,000 gallons
IiINI![U1L SILL.LNd ~ I'
p' Facility Charge
PAY=
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if rot paid within 15
calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL PACU TIES I
meet custom-
x facilities in order to
e soaoial
I
orlss services
ice requirements which rit shall be provided subject to the special
facilities rider.
QxLITY CRARCB
PR0 TION OF FA
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billingo annually.
Pormvlac I
Actual uay_a in reading 20riod x customer charge
I 1 30 y
VOLUME CHKROE
1
Billing for the water consumption shall be based on the gallon
consumption during the billing period.
Formula:
fial.ons Consumnt on x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1,000
PAGE 16
~ NfaR~!■V■■
i
Rot owl
AgodaNo
aAW.
ll 3
Oats
BCMSDOL3 WYK r
en onnx FIRFs_HY-C!~~
(Effective 10/01/941
.,W 1c10N licable for all water taken through a lire hydrant or other di-
rect distribution line source at one location for private or commer-
cial use not associated with fire fighting.
DIV= $665.00 sit for each use of each of the city's hY-
veer shall place Deposit will be returned when meter is re needed.
drant meter(e)
turned and final bill is paid.
MATS $2.81 per 1,000 gallons l
Votums Charge= the beginning met~t
volume shall be computed by subtracting 1,000, and
Monthly from the ending meter reading divided by y.
reading Upon the monthly return of the
multiplied times the volume t rereading.
„r mater to the water Depa
$31.80 per 70 days
vir**TmY CEBSiB meter per installation
$59.00 per
Pam
and become past due it not paid within
Bills and due when rendered,
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
i
.1 M4 1 t ~ !`I
i i
. r ~
v ,
4' PAGE 17
VtO
i
AperdaNo.
Agendal, y
Date__
SCHEDULE WWI
INTERIM TREATED WATER/&1W WATER RESALE AND TRANSMISSION SERVICE TO
i
UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE
92 12 1 AND VAU PS`ION R92-03fl
(Effective 10-01-94)
Applicable to to all interim treated and raw water sales and transmis-
sion service to the Upper Trinity Regional Water District (UTRWD)
f for the period June 1, 1994 through May 310 1998.
Not'applicatls for temporary, standby, or supplementary service
exc,;pt in conjunction with applicable rider.
~T,KLY C'xlAR~iES. '
The monthly charge for all service shall be expressed as a total
y N; unit price per thousand gallons based on the following cost
components t
1 i
(1) water Treatment ree $ .4753 per 1,OO0 gallons ,
(2) Transmission Sal.vice Fee S .1056 per 10000 gallons
(3) Variable Treatment Charge $ .2502 per 1,000 gallons
.0119 per i,ooo gallons
(4) Variable Transmission Charge $
(5) Raw Water Charge S .4102 per 1,000 gallons
f
-c" Total Unit Price $ 1.2532 per 11000 gallons
CPI-U Formula I
I The water treatment and transmission service fees shall be
adjusted annually on or about October 1 of each -ear to reflect
costs according to the CPI-U, using
increases or decreases in
the last bimonthly index ublished prior to the adjustment.
The e times adjustment a fraction (the CPItAdjustmentiFormula),eas lollowal licable
7 7~
fe
Water Treatment/
n~rrent CPI-U Inds x Transmission
Previous CPI-U Index service Fee9 k
' PAGE IS
I
awr
' r
gendaNo
Agend e
'late ' - z
P2/
Variable treatment and transmission charges shall be 'cased on
the operating budget costs for the fiscal year for which the
rates are applicable. Raw water costs for UTRWD shall be bared'
on 85% of the rate charged by the City of Dallas to DE,nton for
raw water purchases, as adjusted at the beginning of each
fiscal year.
PAXM
Denton, shall render bills on the tenth (loth) day of each month.
Hills shall be due and payable when rendered. Sills are considered ?
delinquent if not
aid within 20
calendar p days of the date a bill
for service is rendered, There shall be a ten percent (lot) per
annul interest charge on the amount due from the date when due until
paid if not paid within 20 calendar days of the date a bill for
service is rendered.
kk
r'
r
f
PAGE 19
h;, ar p
I
Fit
gendaNo 4
►gendaftem s
~a1t ~ ~///fJ/ ~ 3
WATER TAP AND IMP PERO lv/
[Effective 10/01/941
APPLICATION
This schedule applies to the installation, removal, or relocation of
water tape and loops by the City of Denton Utility department at the
request of a person, firm, association or corporation.
TI.Q AND LOOP FEES
i Any person, association of persons, or corporation that requests
that a water main top, water meter loop, be removed, installed, or
relocated by the utility Department shall pay in advance to the
i Utility Department the following applicable fees:
WATER TAPS WITH U*P
Sip of Tau an noter Paved Dtmt Qpayed Street
3/4 inch $ 900.00 $ 400.00
1 inch $1,000.00 $ 450.00
112 inch $10200.00 850.00
- 2 inch $10400.00 $1,100.00
WATER TAPS WI0OUT LOOP
Hite of Tan and Mater ggved Street Unpaved Street
2 inch $10200.00 $ 350.00
WATER LOOPS
~ @jze of Loop
3/4 inch $ 265.00
i inch $ 330.00
1/2 inch $ 400.00
2 inch $ 525.00
{ METER RELOCATIONS
Si go o Tap and Meter Relocation of 10 Feet or Lose
3/4 inch $ 120.00
i 1 inch S 140.00
2 1/2 inch $ 270.00
i
PAGE 20
xr'~~r
I ,
i
~gendaNO. ~ I
Aperdall r
We
FEES FOR 7NST]LI~~TIOM NOT rr TFD e13
For installation of a top or loop for which a fee is not specified,
the requestor shall pay in advance a deposit based upon the estima-
ted cost of such installation, or similar work, plus an administra-
tion charge of 20%. Upon completion of the installation or similar
work requested, the applicant shall be billed at actual'cost# as
f' determined by the Utility Department, plus a 20% administrative
charge. Any excess deposit shall be refunded to the applicant.
I The installation charges may be waived by the Utility department for
d request to illitall taps exclusively dedicated to fire sprinkler
systems
r t.
r
r
I
{
I. i
i
l
r.
i < f
PACE 21
r~
I
1
1
i
;enaana -
•Qeadatterrt
^ZPECIAL FACILITIES RIDER
If
All service shall be offered from available facilities. If a custo-
mer service characteristic requires facilities and devices which are
not normally and readily available at the location at which the cus-
tomer requests service, then the City shall provide the servico sub-
ject to paragraph 2 of this schedule.
The total cost of all facilities required to meet the customer's
load characteristics which are incurred by the city shall be subject
to a special contract entered into between the city and the custom-
er. This contract shall be signed by both parties prior to the City
providing service to the customer.
v .
%
9 f r . 1
1
Y
1
n
PACE 22
T-
..;.ter
VIM
mum,
f
.duo
JWaN0
Apendal _
Date
SEC IQU IT. That if any section, subsection, paragraph, son-
tence, clause, phrase or word in this ordinance, or application
thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid by any court
of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the valid-
ity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Coun-
oil of. the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have
enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
water Rates herein adopted shall
effective, III. That a the Schedule l all of
be
' , charged and applied n9
on or-after October 1, 1994.
' PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1994.
_ I
f
i
I
I BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTESTS
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY t
-Nf
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMi
DEBRA At DRAYOVITCR, CITY ATTORNEY
i
a
I:
BYs
} I
.
Y 3
{
PAGE 23
~Y
1 4-1
s
? C ITY
COUNC.I
3
L ,
r
wrj
t ~ S ~ 1 S
t)tS~ y Y I
}
r;
41
4 `
p r;
((f
rrrr~
`i
~r
t
q`+ -o3a
CITY OF DENTON WASTEWATER U
CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED RAC -f
Rate Schedule 3
Rates _ Rates Increase
Residential - SR
Facility Charge 6.10 5.65 8.00%
{
Volume Charge/1000 Gallons 2.32 2.15 8.00%
Average Customer Bill At 6100 Gallons/Month 2p 2 18.77 8,0096
Average Monthly Uolfar increase 1.60
y` Residential outside Corporate Umfts
and with City of l gntoo Water Service - SRW l
r Charge 7.00 6.50 7.69% I
Volume Charge/t 000 Gallons 2.67 2.50 6.61%
gal Commercial - SC 16.88 14.70 8.00%
Volddurne Charge/1000 Gallons 3.02 2.80 8.00%
SampMg Charge As Regvired) 35.00 35.00 0.00%
St~ircharge harge ( IRoequ!red) 16.00 15.00 0.00% l
char See
Customer Bill At 32,000 Gallons Disoharge/Month 112.84 104.30 8.00%
Average Monthly Uoilar Increase 8.34
C~-ommercial with Dedicated Water Meters - SCD twaw rah ME)
t N , W4' Meter. 20.85 20.85 0.00%
1' Meter' 22.90 22,90 0.0096
1 t/2' Meter 29.00 26.65 9.23%
r 2'. Meter 33.30 $2.60 2^16%
„ 34 Meier 74.75 68100 9.93%
2 4' Meter 138.00 124,60 10,84%
6": Meter 172.60 158,00 9.18%
Ir Meter 201.26 186.60 7.91%
!
Isampung Charge(( G4s Reeeeqgquuired) 35.00 35.00 0.00%
VoMi ne Ctihev~ 1000 R(iaffons~ 13 02 12.80 8.000%
Surcharge See Below
R ar Commercial outside Corporate Umks
and with C of Denton Water Sqn ce - K
Facility Charge 17.60 16.30 8.00%
Volwne Charge/1000 Gallons 3.46 3.20 8.00%
Saamffyyplling Charge (As Required) 35,00 35.00 0.00% l
Surchar 9e CharV I~IRequired) 16.00 15.00 0.00%
E
EXHIBIT 5
Y
1
IF
CITY OF DENTON WASTEWATER UTILITY
G NT VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
Ra~~e ie . - - -~ss5 l gsa 1 ss5 9b"
Rates Rates Increase
Pretreatment - SPT SPA or SP8 16.88 14.70 8.00% t
ac lty C arge
Volume Charge/1000 Gallons 3.02 2,80 8.00% 1
Adminlstrative/Program Categorical (SPA) 370.00 365.00 1.37%
Administratlve/Program Non-Categorical (SPB) 45.00 42.00 7.14%
Sampling Charge 35.00 35.00 0.00% I
Analysis Charge 16,00 15.00 0.0096
Surcharge - See Below
Metered Wastewater - SM
f--' y~haarns 196,65 182.00 7.99%
F% sty Charge Outside dy) 226.05 210.00 7.64%
Volume Charge/, 000 Gallons (Inside) 3.02 2.80 8.00%
Volume Cturge1000 Gallons (Outside) 3.46 3.20 8.00%
Sampling Charge 16.00 15.000 0 0.000%
Analysis Charge
Surcharge - See Below
Metered Wastewater Cat rty _ 198.65 182.00 7.99%
Facility Chwrg"e Outside C 226.06 210.00 7,64%
Volume Charge] Gailons (Inside) 3.02 2.80 8.0096
Volume Charge~ 1000 Gallons (Outside) 3.48 3.20 8.00%
f AdministrativeAlrogram Categorical 370.00 365.00 1.37%
Sampling Charge 35.00 35.00 0.0096
Anat"Is Charge 16,00 16.00 0.00%
Surcharge See Below
Metered Worst ater Non-Cate orical - SMB
F cffrly Charge a 196.65 182,00 7,99%
Fadlity Charge CA Ida ity) 228,05 210,00 7.64%
Charges 000 G
Volume allons (Inside) 3.48 3.20 8 ~
r Volume Charg~el1000 Gallons (Outside)
Administratlve/Program Non-Categorkal 46,00 42.00 7,14%
I Sampling Charge 636.W 35,W O.W%
.00 5.00 0.00%
Analysis Charge
Surcharge - See Below
Eating aces - SEP
Facility Charge 16.88 14.70 8.00%
Volume Charge/1000 Gallons 4.16 3.85 8.00% i
Sampling Charge a Required) 35,00 35.00 0.00%
AnaalIyysais Charge (9 Required) 16.00 16.00 0.00%
Sur go -See Below ALSom
Facif Charge ces - SES
EPNI Char 1648 14.70 8.0096
Volume Charge11000 Gallons 4.16 3.86 8.00%
Sampling Charge (A& Required) 35.00 35.00 0.00%
Malvsis Charge (As ReQulred) 15.00 16.00 0.0096
Surcharge - See below
1
Y{
re
CITY OF DENTON WASTEWATER UTILITY
CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
Rates ~4
Increase
em
ment - S4
Fac I harga
Volume Charge/1000 Gallons 16.90 14.70 8.1696
6
Surcharge - See Below 2.65 2.45 8.0096
t r - SG
F eaeE
a 108.00 100.00 8.0096
Volume ChArg~e/1000 Gallons
Surcharge - Sse Below 1.19 1.10 8.00%
ac esae - SSC
Volume Char 1000 160.00 7
gel Gallons 6.00 113.70%
%
Suroherpe See Below 1,90 1.85 2.7096
Sur
em Oxygen Demand - SOD
rota suspended Solids 7SS 0.00 0.00207 a.00%.00%
0.00277 0.002b7 802ND ~o ~ J i
1
P
4 r
J
v l
, R
.
u:W
..I
ATM
E \wpDOCS\ORD\ 9 4 WWl1TER .O
gendaNo j
4andall
1t1P
ORDINANCE N0.
THE CITY OF DENTONr TEXAS# AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF THE AL RATE
AN ORDINANCE OF
RATES FOR WASTEWATER
RESIDENTIAL WITHOUT'IWATER SERVICEIRATEiSCHEDULE
SCHEDULE: DULE (SR)
(SRN)
CHEDULE (SC) ND SR SCHEDULE; COMMERCIAL/I DUSTRIA WITHOUTT W TER~SERVICE RATE
SCHEDULE (SCN) INTO THE SC SCHEDULE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
a~CTioN That the of the Code of Ordinancest are amend
,
provided for in Chapter
p
to read as follows:
WASTRWATEB RATE BCEEDULE8
y
SR Residential Wastewater Service 4
SRW Residential WastewateerL erviceitoUsers Of Denton s thin City of Denton Corpo
Water Service G
Sc Regular Commercial industrial wastewater Service
r ,
{
SCD commercial /industrial Wastewater Service with 8
{
s;
SCW Commercial/ Industrial Wastewater ervicei utsidee he 10
City of Denton Corporte Limits With of ton
Water Service
SEP Restaurants L Food Service Wastewater Service
15 f
SES Equipment Services Wastewater Service
BPT Commercial/ industrial Pretreatment Wastewater Services 2G
gM Metered Wastewater Inside/Outside Corporate Limits
23 ,
SO Intragovernmental Wastewater service
25
SGE Sale of Treated Wastewater Effluent to Municipal
Utility Customers
26
f sgc Goeerrnmental Agencyo DivisionSorvsutx~ivieion
28
Wastewater Tap Fees
29 '
Special Facilities Rider ):XHIBIT 6
T.
M~f
+gendan:, -C019
date
SCHEDULE OR $E$IDENTIAL• WASTEWATER SERVICEv'J 9~
(Effective IVIVI/Vqj
APP dgATION
Applicable for single family residential service, and individually
metered apartments or mobile homes or multi-family facilities with
less than four (4) units. Also applicable for wastewater service
without City of Denton water service. i
Not applicable for sub-billing or other utility billing by service
user in any event.
~y0ti^;~~,1 WITH CIT OF DFl1TON WATER SERVICE j
(1) Facility Charge $6.10/30 days
(2) Volume Charge $2.3s/1,000 gallons effluent
Monthly billings shall be calculated by using ninety-eight percent
(981) of water consumption for the month as determined herein, up
to a maximum of thirty thousand (300000) gallons per 30 days.
Monthly billings *or the months of December through February shall
be based on 981 of actual water consumption up to a maximum of
30,000 gallons per 30 days. Monthly billings for the months of }I
March through November shall be based ovs an average daily usage for
the preceding months of December through February, or 98% of actual I
water consumption, whichever is less. Any customer that was not
billed at the current service address through the preceding months
of December through February shall be billed at 981 of the cue-
tomer's actual water consumption for the months March through Nov-
ember up to a maximum of 981 of 6,500 gallons per 30 days, which-
ever is less.
MINIMUM BII t INO WITH CITY OF DENTON WATERSERVICE
Fao~lity Charge $6..0/30 days
V~~~~C° WITH CITY 4F DENTON WATER SERV__=
Billing for the wastewater volume for the consumption months of J
December through February shall be based on the wastewater volume
calculated from actual water consumption.
Formula:
~~~~~alwater vole x9 8 x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
I
Billing for the wastewater volume for the months of March through
November shall be based on the average wastewater volume calculated
waconsumption ter consumptint,swhichever~istlessgh February, or 981
during tual the
of ac
I
i
Page 2 i
r.
i 4
t '
r
f
1
i
i
i.
I
r
} ~GJV
lptnQlNe_ 'Agge~balte
r Formulas,
r
S Average water volume x .98 x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
s:
s. If the customer did not have water service during the preceding
December through February, billing for the period March through
November will ae based on 984 of actual water consumption or 984 of
a 6,500 gallons, whichever is less.
I
NET NO1~TliLY RATE - WTTHO F~' ITY OF DEN ON WATER SERVICE
Inside Corporate Outside Corporate
Limits Limits
' (1) Facility Charge $6.10/30 days $7.00/30 days
(2) Volume Charge
$2.32/1,000 gals $2.67/1,000 gals
Customer shall pay a minimum volume charge on four thousand (4,000)
" gallons per month.
MINIMUM BILLING - WITHO rrTV OF DENTON WATER SERVICE
(a) $15.38 pAr 30 days per resident unit inside City limits
(b) $17.68 per 30 days per resident unit outside City limits
2 Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on wastewater vol-
ume calculated during the billing period.
Formula:
Avoraae water vol+m2 _g98 x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
PAYME
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
I 15 calendar days from date of issuance.
4 if
s SPECIAL FACILITI„gS
c All services which require special facilities in order to meet cus-
tomer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
F '
PRORATION OF FACIL•iTY CuanrR
Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 billings
f,. annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas
i
Actual days In reading per W x customer charge
30 days
i
L
f M I*
Page 3 .
a~iM
4gWaNo- are
ApeWA
Note -9 '
8CKEDULE SRW
RESIDENTIAL WASTEWATER SERVICE TO USERS
OUTSIDE CITY OF DENTON CORPORATE LIMITS WITH
CITY OF DENTON WATER SERVICE
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable for single family residential sewer customers, individu-
ally metered apartments or mobile homes or multi-family facilities
with less than four (4) units outside of the corporate limits of
the City of Denton and also receiving water from the City of
f Denton.
NET MONTHLY RATE
(1) Facility Charge $7.00/30 days
(2) Volume Charge $2.67/3,000 gallon effluent
j
Monthly billings shall be calculated by using ninety-eight percent
(98t) of water consumption for the month as determined herein, up
to a maximum of thirty thousand (30,000) gallons per 30 days.
Xonthly.billings for the months of December through February shall
be based on 98% of actual water consumption up to a maximum of
30,000 gallons per 30 days. Monthly billings for the months of
March through November shall be based on an average daily usage for
the preceding months of December through February, or 98% of actual
eater consumption, whichever is less. Any customer that was not
billed at the current service address through the preceding months
of December through February shall be billed at 98t of the cus-
tomer's actual water consumption for the months March through Nov-
ember up to a maximum of 98% of 6,500 gallons per 30 days,
whichever is less.
MINIMUM BILLING
$7.00/30 days
i
Bilks are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to meet cue-
tomer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PRORATION OF FACILITY CHARGE
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings an-
nually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas
'r
Page 4
`E ,ay
1
1
[#.VOW
' +gendaNo. 9~0 4~getada~e
' date
Actual days in reading period x customer charge d ~2
30 days
VOLUME CHARGE
Billing for the wastewater volume for the consumption months of
December through February shall be based on the wastowater volume
calculated from actual water consumption.
Formulas
Ac&ual water volume x .98 x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
i
Siding for the wastewater volume for the months of March through
November shall be based on the average wastewater volume calculated
during the consumption months of December through February, or 98%
of actual water consumption, whichever is less.
Formula
Average water volume x .98 x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
if the customer did not have water service during the preceding
December through March time period, billing for the period March
through November will be based on 98% 6f actual water consumption
or 98% of 10,000 gallons, whichever is less.
. it
4
f '
1f
Page 5
9irK'LY6.W61GiiW'ic:«a•. r.~..,..,..,. ~'W
"Owl
' ageedaNo.
Agejj
[its
8C86DULE OC 9
1 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER SERVICE
i (Effective 10/01/941
REGULAR COMURCI L.
APPLICATION
Applicable to all commercial and industrial wastewater service
users and to all wastewater service users not otherwise classified
under SEP, SES, SPT, SCD, or SH listed herein.
Also applicable to all commercial/industrial facilities not also {
I
{ receiving metered water service from the City of Denton, including
sub-divisions, for apartments, mobile home parks, or other com-
mercial/industrial users. The monthly charge for apartments and
mobile home larks shall be based on the maximum number of units
served during the month.
r
NET MONTHLY RATE -WITH CITY OF DR= WATER SERVICE
(1) Facility Charge $15.88/30 days
,e
(2) Volume Charge $3.0211,000 gallons effluent
Billing based on eighty (80%) percent'of monthly water consumption.
MINIMUM B2L►_.TWC
$15.88/30 days
VOLUME CHARGE
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the wastewater
volume calculated during the billing period.
} Formula:
Water volume x .8 x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
NET MONTHLY RATE - WITHOUT PTTV A4 nvmmO►t WATER eanv*na
inside Corporate outside Corporate
i LinLCB Limits
(1) Facility Charge $15.88/30 days $18.25/30 days
(2) Volume Charge $3.02/1,000 gals $3.46/1,000 gals
Minimum volume charge will be for four thousand {
gallons per
month. (4,000)
t ~
Page 6
_ _ apendaNe e.~o 'Ap4alt
Date p
WsD LULLM
(a) $27.96 per 30 days per unit inside the City limits
(b) $32.09 per 30 days per unit outside the City limits
Billing for the wastewater volume shall ib abased on the wastewater
volume calculated during the billing p
Formulas
x Rate per 1,oo0 gallons
-
,~01^,.~,.tea water vol+m x .B ~
1000
Bills re due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
AyFnr► FI►CILITI$$
j
All services which require special facilities in order to meet cus-
toner's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
~ ~...,R~►TIOh_ O~ACILITY CFU►~
Billings an for shall be
the Ollowing formulasng$
nOlly and shall be pro
a lea+di d v ;n readinc neri~ x customer charge
30 days y
,L
Y
1 4r r
Page 7
~11.+YN.44t/WU.'.yyMY F.... _.~.-...)is .4... ..'!+F♦ Fn.... ..M...a.. .
. 4gendaNa.
Agen t '
Date = I
6C86DOLE BCD
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER SERVICE WITH ~vvJ J
DEDICATED WATER METERS
(Effective 10/01/941
APPLICATION
Applicable to all commercial and industrial wastewater service
users and to all wastewater service users not otherwise classified
ruder this ordinance whose wastewater is measured by a meter
dedicated to water which is returned into the wastewater collection
and treatment system. j
J Not applicable for sub-billing or other utility billing by service
user in any evant.
MET MONTHLY RATE
(1) Facility Charge, Billing per 30 Days
3/4" Meter $ 20.85
i" Meter S 22.90
1-1/2" Meter $ 29.00
2" Meter $ 33.30
3" Mater $ 74.75 M1`
4" Meter $138.00
6" Meter 172.50
8" motor 201.25 v;
(2) Volume Charge $3.02/1,000 gallon effluent
Billing based on ninety-sight (98%) percent of monthly water flow.
MINIMUM BILLING
$20.85/30 days
PAYMENT
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance. f
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the i
special facilities rider.
PRORATION OF FACILITY CHARGE
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas
'r
Page 8
i
M.• A+A rr.Nr
T
i'
1
aNo.
AnAmblim
tote
Actual days in reading period x customer charge /2-
f 30 days v
VOLUME CHARGE
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the wastewater
volume calculated during the billing period.
Formula:.
} Water volume x .98 x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
r s 5,
F a%
a
.S s , .
x
Il ~
I
y
j Page 9
low
be W, NO Q
AQendaff
Date
SCHEDULE SCR
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER SERVICE
OUTSIDE CITY OF DENTON CORPORATE LIMITS
WITH CITY OF DENTON WATER SERVICE
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to all commercial, industrial users or any other users
of facility not otherwise covered under this ordinance outside the
corporate limits of the City of Denton and receiving water and
wastewater service from the City of Denton.
NET MONTHLY RATE
(1) Facility charge $17.60/30 days
(2) Volume Charge $3.46/1,000 gallons effluent
j Billing based on eighty (80%) percent of monthly.water consumption.
SAMPLINGIANALYSIS CHARGE t
Sampling charge (each) $35.00
Analysis charge (per test) $15.00
INDUSTRIAL StMCHARGE
In addition to the above charges for commercial and industrial oar-
there will be added to the net monthly rate an industrial
s ,vi'ces
surcharge based on the following formulae
Surcharge Unit Cost Factor $0.00223/mg/l of Biochemical
Oxygen Demand (DOD)
r $0.00277/mg/1 of Total
Suspended Solids (TSS)
CuwVu ((Bu-2501 B + (Su-250) S1)
Wheret Cu is the surcharge for user X.
Vu is the billing volume l"9r 1000 gallons for user
X.
Bu is the tested BOD level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
i
F` B is the unit cost factor for treating one unit
1 BOD per 1,000 gallons.
Su is the tested TS9 level for user X or 250 mg/l, j
whichever is greater.
Page 10
r ~ I
AW*No
Ap r&
s
Nate u~t unit of
s is the unit cost factor for treating to ing ne unit of
! TSS per 1,000 gallons.
MINIMUM BILLING
017.60/30 days
PAYM
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
! SPECIAL FACTLITIE9
l All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PRORATION OF FACT r
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 17 billings '
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas
_ 'Actual days in readin.= period x customer charge
30 days
You= cua~:r.
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the wastewater
volume calculated during the billing period.
Formulas ;
Water Vol de x e x Rate per 1,000 gallons
r. 1% 1,000
E
r
~ i
A r'
1
i
i ,
j
Page 11
s
M
4";. ~kte
SCEEDOLE 8Ep 81r..z^TAURANTS i FOOD SERVIGR WAUMjAT R RRRVrna
r [Effective 10/01/94]
Il ~l'PLICATION
Applicable to all restaurants and food service operations which
prepare and serve food directly to customers and are categorized by
standard Industrial Code Numbers 5812 or 5813.
NE4MONTHiy nnm•
(1) Facility Charge $15.88/30 days
,r.
_ (2) Volume Charge $4.16/1,000 gallons effluent
Billing based on eighty (so%) percent of monthly water consumption.
!
rf
i
Sampling Charge
$35.00/each
Analysis Charge $15.00/teat
SEP x trrrnue
t (1) Customers sender the SEP rate shall be charged the SC rate
if only Rrewrapped and preprocessed foods are served from
their premises and no food processing is performed on the
premises so that only minimal organic material is dia
charg6d to the sanitary sewer. The exemption for the SEP !
class shall }+e determined by the City of Denton Environ-
mental Health Services Food Inspection Division.
u ! (2) Customers under the SEP rates shall be charged the SC rate
t plus the applicable industrial surcharge if the customer.
(a) Installs a wastewater sampling manhole on the sanitary
;f sewer discharge line=
' I (b) Agrees to,
pay for the City to sample and analyze,
quarterly, the wastewater discharge for the following! Y
Biochemical oxygen Demand (BOD), Total Suspended
Solids (TSS), and Fete, Oils and Grease (FOG), based
it on the actual costal and
•e
! (c) Agrees to pay, based on the industrial surcharge for-
mula, a surcharge on all wastewater discharged that is
f in excess of 500 mg/l of BOD and 550 TSS as determined
by the monitoring performed in Section 2(b).
Page 12
z--
,gendaIM y ~
AgendaI em
KI uffi BILLING Oele , ,30~
/G
$15.88/30 days
INDUSTRIAL SURCHARGE
The industrial surcharge calculation that applies to restaurant and
food services claiming the SEP exemption shall be based on the fol-
lowing formulas
Demand nOf Biochemical
Surcharge Unit Cost Factor $0.00223/mg/loxyge
$0.0027742g/l of Total Su pended
Solids (T
Cu-Vu ((Bu-5001 B + (Su-550] S])
Where: Cu is the surcharge for user X.
Vu is the billing volume per 1000 gallons for user
X.
Bu is the tested BOD level for user X or 500 mg/10
whichever is greater.
B is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of,
DOD per 1,000 gallops.
Su is the tested TSS level for user X or 550 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
S is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
E TSS per 1,000 gallons.
YwYB=
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
ApECT L FACILITIM
order to the
All services which require special facilities in
customer's service requirements shall be provided special facilities rider.
PRORATION OP FACILITY CttAi2G8
Billings for' the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and shall be prorated based. on the following formulas
y~i days in readings o d x customer charge `
30 days ~
Page 13
suc,.wrj.
"
ap"No
AP*I
` VOLUME cog Date
Billing fir the wastewater volume shall be based n the wastewater
volume calculated during the billing period.
Formulas
Water volume x a x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
}
i
•
~ l
f
, •
s
i Page 14
,
- ..r.,.rar+wtaedrrautir-.w....,..._.
r
- _ v R:»++dw pia Win; {R~
x
[ I+..n k,a
1
i
' gendaNo.
yD Q
agenlalt
eCKEDULE Sea 'ate
EQUIPMENT SERVICES WASTEWATER SERVICE
ttt (Effective 10/01/941
R
APPLICATION
Applicable to establishments which perform washing, cleaning or
servicing of automobiles, trucks, busses or similar equipment and
"K are categorized by Standard Industrial Code Numbers 5541, 7549 or
7542.
sl NET MO NTUX& RATE
k:. (1) Facility charge $15.98/30 days J.
II
(2) Volume Charge $4.16/1,000 gallons effluent
Billing based on eighty (80%) percent of monthly water consumption.
' (3) Pretreatment/Program Charge
Categorical (30 days) $370.00 i
Noncategorical (30 days) $ 45.00
The appropriate Pretreatment/ Program charge will be applied if the
customer qualifies as either categorical or honcategoricals These
charges &re not to be applied if the customer is not designated as
either a categorical or noncategorical customer.
SAMPLINGIANALYSIS CHARGE
(1) Sampling Charge $35.00/each
(2) Analysis Charge $15.00/test
SES EXEMPTIONS
Customers under the SES rates shall be charged the SC rate plus the
a applicable industrial surcharge if the customer:
(a) Installs a wastewater sampling manhole on the sanitary
F sewer discharge linel
+=4 (b) Agrees to pay for the City to sample and analyze,
quar- terly, the wastewater discharge for the following: Bio-
chemical oxygen Demand (DOD), Total Suspended Solids
(TSS), and Fate, Oils and Grease (FOG), based on the
actual costs; and i
(c) Agrees to pay, based on the industrial surcharge formula,
a surcharge on all wastewater discharged that is in excess
of 500 mg/l of DOD and 600 TSS as determined by the
f'
monitoring performed in paragraph 2(b) of this section.
Page 15
wM~F.
~IMM
^twtl
~gendaNO.
i Ape~4
i MINIMUM BILLING De
` $15.88/30 days
Plus the appropriate Pretreatment/Program charge if
applicable.
INDUSTRIAL SURCNARGS
The industrial surcharge calculation that applies to equipment oar-
vices claiming the SES exemption shall be based on the following
formula
Surcharge Unit Cost Factor $0.00223/mg/l of Biochemical
II Oxygen Demand (BOD)
$0.00277/mg/l o Total Suspended
Solids (T)
Cu-Vu ((Bu-500) 8 + (Su-600] S))
f Whores Cu is the surcharge for user X.
Vu is the billing volume per 1000 gallons for user
X
Bu is the tested BOD level for user X or 500 mg/l,
whichever is greater.
B is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
BOD per 1,000 gallons.
Su is the tested TSS level for user X or 600 mg/10
whichever is greater.
S is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
TSS per 1,000 gallons.
PAVWT
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
13 calendar days from date of issuance.
l SPECIAL FACIkj=
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be
special facilities rider. provided subject to the
PRORATION OF FACILITX CHARGE
Billings for the Facility Charge shall be based on X2 billings
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulae
r
Page 16
.,ON f
. +genQaNo. 9 -~..~0 ;
Date
Actual days in reading nariti~ ~d
30 days x customer charge
yo . MIR gar:
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the wastewater
Volume calculated during the billing period.
Formulas
slater vol tai x -s x Rate per 1x000 gallons
1000
:
4
i
}
1
f I
1
1
1
r• ,
Page 17 ~`'r
i
Venda No.
4gendal
gate
OCRRDULE OPT
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT WASTEWATER SERVICES
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to all major commercial and industrial customers subject
to EPA Pretreatment criteria or such other commercial and industri-
al customers that have the probability of discharging extra
strength wastewater or which may have substances in their waste-
water which are listed on EPA's categorical pollutant list.
NET MONTHLY CHARGE
(1) Facility Charge $15.88/30 days
(2) Pretreatment/Program Charge
Categorical $370.00/30 days k
b. Noncatsgorical $ 45.00/30 days
(3) Volume Charge $3.02/1,000 gallons affluent
Billing shall be based on 80% of water consumption or 100% actual
motored wastewater.
SAMPLINf#/ANALYSIS CHARGE
Sampling charge (each) $35.00
Analysis charge (per test) $15.00
INDUSTRIAL, SURCHAWK
In addition to the above charges for commercial and industrial nor
vices, there will be added to the net monthly rate an industrial '
surcharge based on the following formula:
Surcharge Unit Cost Factor $0.00223/pg/l of Biochemical 1
oxygen Demand (SOD)
$0.00277/29/1 of Total
Suspended Solids (TSS)
Cu-Vu {(Bu-250) B + (Su-250) s))
r
Whores Cu is the surcharge for user X.
Page 18
,au
A -14
+g811QdN0. *05
Date
'
Date
Vu is the billing volume per 1000 gallons for user
X.
Bu is the tested BOD level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
s,
B is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
DOD per 1,000 gallons.
Su is the tested TSS level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
S is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
TSS per 1,400 gallons.
M NI MUH BILLING
,I
$385.88/30 days Categorical
60.88/30 days Non-Categorical
PAYKEHT {
s Sills are due when rendered, and become past due if, not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
8P AL FACILITIES
Ail services which regriire special facilities in order to meet
` customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
PROBATION OF FACILITY CHARGE i PR_ETRFATMENT/PROGRAM CHARGE
Billings for the Facility Charge and pretreatment/program charge
shall be based on 12 billings annually and shall be prorated based
on the following formula
s Actual days in reading ueriod x customer charge
30 days
f VALUNS CHARGE
_tt Billing for the wastewater volume shr,ll be based on the wastewater
1 volume calculated during the billing period.
j Formula:
Water volume x .8 x Rate per 10000 gallons
1000
or
Wastewater volume x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1,000
r' Page 19
Rac r(:
low
2~jdta q ' 0
3
ACHEDULE SK s
METER SID
(Effective 10101/941
r.~
APPLICATION
Applicable to any wastewater service customer desiring to meter all
wastewater discharge from a single customer location and not other-
wise classified under this ordinance.
xxr McNTHLY RATE
Inside corporate outside corporate
Limits
(1) Facility Charge $196.55/30 days $226.05/30 days
(2) Volume Charge $3.021discha1,000 $3.46/discharges
1
(3) Pretreatment/Program Charge
Categorical (30 days) $370.00
$ 45.00
Noncategorical (30 days)
The appropriate Pretreatment/ Program charge will be applied if the
customer qualifies as either categorical or noncategorical classi-
fication. The categorical and noncategorical classifications are
not bound by corporate limits. These charges are not to be applied
if the customer is not designated as either a categorical or non
categorical customer..
cwor.T~tc/~uf~L.Y8I8 CHARGE
Sampling charge (each) $35.00 '
Analysis charge (per test) $15.00
INDUSTRIAL SURCHARGH
In addition to the above charges, there will be added to the net i
monthly rate for commercial and industrial, an industrial surcharge
based on the following formula:
Surcharge Unit Cost Factor $0.00223/mg/l of Biochemical
Oxygen Demand (BOD)
surcharge unit Cost Factor $0.00277pmg/lof T ids (T89)
Page 20
N
I
17
4genCaNo. ~
A" I
Cuwyu ([811-250] 8 t (Su-2501 SD Oate
Wheres Cu is the surcharge for user X.
Vu is the billing volume per 1000 gallons for user
1 X.
Bu is the tested SOD for user X or 250 mg/l,
whichever greater.
B is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
BOD per 1,000 gallons.
Su is the tested TSS level for user X or 250 mg/l,
whichever is greater.
S is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
TSS per 10000 gallons.
IT-LING
Within Corporate outside Corporate
'
rdsita 1.4eits -
$196.55/30 days $226.05/90 days
Plus the appropriate Pretreatment/ Program
charge if applicable.
Sills are due when rendered, and become past duo it not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
On,rar. FACHATISS
All services which require special facilities in order to most
customer's service requirements shall be provided subiecs to the
speaial,faciiities rider.
oa[+ttaTYON OF FACILIT~L~i1S4L I
Billing for the paailitl' Charge shall be based on 12 billings a ,
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas
dn_readina period x customer charge
90 days
j VOLMU OA8S3f.
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the wastewater
volume calculated during the billing period. j
+ Page 21
Art..
f
r`4
w
_ s
lggft K0. ! O
' 4genda~t
Data
Formulas
WastewateX volume x Rate per 1,000 gallons
2000
f
i
10
Y
n
ire L :r,j 1 -z ti.
I'V
i
I, r
1
I
Page 22 I"r
, ~f,LY+{i•e4+TM''^' ..w.........wi~r~..a!u-~,r.e i~ti r. ti.V. iw.L rc sa~.na.~,..w,... ........a w>.r~.w..~.a sr+i.wsa~~a.wl',
. ~gnQaNU ~ /D /1
( Agendalt
vale
scasDOCa ea
1G~
(Effective 10/011941
APPLICATION
Applicable to all City of Denton Departments and agencies for all
wastewater service. '
MET HORTHLY RATE
(1) Facility Charge $15.90/30 days
(2) Volume Charge $2.65/1#000 gallons effluent
Billing shall be based on eighty (80%) percent of water consump-
tion.
INDUSTMAL SURCHARGE
in addition to the above charges for commercial and industrial
Isorvices, a wastewater surcharge may be added based on the fol
lowing foraulai
Surcharge Unit Cost Factor $0.00227/mg/1 of Biochemical '
c y Oxygen Demand (BOO)
$0.00277mg/I of Total
Suspended Solids (TSS)'
Cu=Vu ((Bu-250) B + (Su-250) S))
Whores Cu is the surcharge for user X.
Vu is the billing volume per 1000 gallons for user
X.
Bu is the, tested BOD level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
B is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
SOD per 1,000 gallons.
Su is the tested TSS level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
S is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
TSS per 1,000 gallons.
x
,
Page 23
r
^ww,wnx4,w.AJ+tW4i/i+waw+....,....., ; r
! _
Agenda
MINIMUM BILLI
$15.90/30 days
PAYM
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
SPECIAL MILL'jlFi$
All services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
I special facilities rider.
PRORATION OF FACILITY CHARGE
Billing for the Facility charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas
hgtu&l davs in reading garjod'x customer charge
30 days
VOUJO dHARGE
water.
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the waste
volume calculated during the billing periodi'
% formulas
" Water volume x .8 x rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
Page 24
i
Jv~
1
Mmi
VendaNo. '
AgGWIP
soaeDOLE floe Date y
SALE OF TREATED WASTEWATER EFFLUENT TO
KUNICIPAL UTILITY CUS MERE
[Effective 10/1/94)
APPLICATION
1 Applicable on sales of treated wastewater effluent to any municipal
utility.
Not available for resale :n any event.
NET MOMLLY RATE
11 (1) Facility Charge $108.00/30 days
(2) Volume Charge $1.19/1,000 gallons effluent
MINIIM BILLING
$108,00/30 days
PAII=
Bills,ars due when rendered, and become past due if, not paid within. .
15 caleiular days frog' date of issuance.
SPECIAL FACILITIES
All sorvices which require apeoial facilities in order to seat:
custoserjs service requirements shall be provided subject to the i
special facilities rider.
' 9ROR_s~fION OF FACILITY CHARGB
'Billing 'for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulae
Actual days in reading period x customer charge
30 days
t ~
r . , • yoLt~KB CHARGE
l Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the effluent f "
volume calculated during the billing period.
Formula:
FStlu nit volume x Rate per 1,000 gallons .
1000
l
i
Page 25
,
~r
WPM
INe
Apendalt
' Date '
SCaswLE Sac 9
WHOLESALE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SERVICE IOR A GOVERNMENTAL
SIMBIV~
AGENCY
EEffective 10/01/941
APPLICATION
Applicable to any municipal corporation, or other governmental
agency or subdivision which operates a wastewat t collection system
and contracts with the City of Denton for vastewater treatment
service. r
NET MONTHLY RATE
(i) Facility charge $160.00/30 days !
(2) Pretreatment/Progra Charge
a. Categorical .00/30 Noncategorical $345.00/30 days
° b
(3) Volume charge $1.9011,000 gallon of effluent
Billing shall be based on one-hundred (100%) percent of actual
gallons treasured.
A~uot.TWela►t~r.vgl8 CHABGB
Sampling Charge (each) $35.00
Analysis Charge (per test) $15.00
C
MINIMUM BQLIN(i
$160.00/30 days
In addition to the above charges for commercial and industrial
services, there will be added to the net monthly rate an industrial.
surcharge based on the following formulas +
}
Surcharge Unit Cost Factor $0.00223/mg/1 of Biochemical.
I Oxygen Demand (DOD) f
r
T7Imgll of Total
0.002
Suspended Solids (TSS)
i
i
` Page 26
w, rw
,.a 1
4QeedaMo ~ ~
ApeWI
f Cu-Vu ((Bu-250) 8 + (Su-250) S)) pie
Wheres cu is the surcharge for user X.
Vu is the billing volume
per 1000 gallons for user
x. I
Su is the tested DOD level for user X or 250 mg/l,
' whichever is greater.
~ f
J B is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
SOD per 1,000 gallons.
Su is the tested TSS level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
S is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
TSS per 1,000 gallons.
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due it not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
1
TIES
All services which require special facilities in order to moat
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
speeial.facilities rider.
r,
PRORATION OF FA II TTY iurR
i billing, for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas
Actual davs in reading
i x customer chargs i
10.days ~
VOL= CHARGE
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the wastewater f
volume calculated during the billing period.
Formulas
Wastewater volume x Rate
1000 Per 10000 gallons
EFFECTIVIR DATE
The charges stated herein shall be applied to all wastewater
- j services provided on or after October It 1994.
t
j Page 27
s
acr {
1
WOW ,
Agen4aft
CU-Vu ((HU-2501 a + [Su-2501 s]) Date 30 1 where: Cu is the surcharge for user X.
Vu is the billing volume per 1000 gallons for user
X.
Bu is the tested HOD level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater. }
H is the unit coat factor for treating one unit of 1
I BOD per 1,000 gallons. i
1
su is testiedgreaterTSS for user X or 250 mq/1,
S h ii 0 cost factor for treating one unit of
gallons-
Tss Per
PdY
Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
is calendar days from data of issuance.
..Mar FaCTLLUFB
Nil services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer's service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
o90aiT10H OF F11GIt ITY CHI1BSrE
Billing for the Facility-charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formula:
'n reading ueriod x customer charge
30 days
~uae shall be based on the wastewater
Failing for the wastewater vol rind.
volume caloulcted during the ',)illing pe ! .
l
Formula:
~s ewe er volume x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000 I
rFFECTIY D1
The charges stated herein shall be applied to all wastewater
October It 1994.
after
=
or
j services provided on
Page 27
f.. 1
k: msr~
1
AgeoOa&N'&Z
AgenbaEt CUMVu ((Bu-2501 B + (Su-250) SI) Dale 3 ~ y"
Wherei Cu is the surcharge for user X.
W is the billing volume per 1000 gallons for user
x.
Bu is the tested DOD level for user X or 250 mg/lo
whichever is greater.
E
D is the unit cost factor for treating one unit of
DOD per 1,000 gallons.
Su is the tested TSS level for user X or 250 mg/1,
whichever is greater.
factor for treating one unit of
S is the unit cos gallons.
TSS per 1,000 Bills are due when rendered, and become past due if not paid within
15 calendar days from date of issuance.
aevn7►T. R1►GIL T; IFS
Ali services which require special facilities in order to meet
customer-in service requirements shall be provided subject to the
special facilities rider.
Dnn41TI0N OF F7iCIyZ'rY.~~
Billing for the Facility Charge shall be based on 12 billings
annually and shall be prorated based on the following formulas I,
x customer charge
1r' is as - -
90 days
; . ~wnrs~ H lCH1,8~8
Billing for the wastewater volume shall be based on the wastawater
volume calculated during t4%e billing period.
I Formul.0 i
~.-+e~A*er volume x Rate per 1,000 gallons
1000
Ia~D
The charges stated herein shall be applied to all wastewater
j services provided on or after October 1, 1994.
y' f
j
page 27 . 1~
,
+noz~aTZ M sass ~garsdalt
Date prJ~
(E![ective 10/01/94) / ~PLICATION
This schedule applies to the installation, removal, or relocation
of wastewater taps by the City of Denton Utility Department at the
request of a person, firm, association or corporation.
rson association of persons, or corporation that requests a,
wastewater main tap be removed, installed, or relocated by the
Utility Department shall pay in advance to the Utility Department
the following applicable fees:
WAcTFwsTER TAF5 WITH CLF.ANOt1T
sise of Tao paved Street Ungave Street
4 inch $1,050.00 $440.00
6 inch 10150.00 475.00
8 inch 11250.00 500.00
10 inch 10350.00 525.00
ME LINE REPATRIREPLACEHM
giia o~ Paved Street Unoa ed Street
4 inch $20200.00 $700.00
6 inch 2,400.00 800400
8 inch 2,600.00 900.00
~ ~~va vntt INCT ~t~Ti0N3 NOT LISTED ~ ;
For installation of a tap for which a fee is not specified, the
requestor,shall pay in advance a deposit based upon the estimated`
j` cost of, such installation, or similar work, plus an administration
charge of 20%. Upon completion of the installation or similar work'
a
roVaoied, the customer shall be billed at actual coat, asdater-
,lined by the Utility Department, plus a 20% administrative charge:
"•i Any excass"deposit shall be refunded to the customer.
s f'
f
,
I To
Page 28
■ 1
AQ"W"O'
00 Date
Agen(1) All service shall be offered from available if
customer service characteristic nd rT readily available at the
lly service, then the City
devices which are not nora4l
location which the customer requests paragraph 2 of this
shall provide the service subject to schedule.
(2) The total cost of all facilities reburied to meet the City
tomer's load characteris ecial contract entered into between
shall be subject to a Sp
the Utility nd pthe rior custothe mer. Citys prcontract shall be oviding service to signed
by both parties customer.
section, subsection, paragraph, son-
41P~"t'IOH II. That if any or application
, cl~phrase or word in this ordinanc e,
tence court
thereof to any person or circumstances is heldhallinvalid
not baffect the
of competent jurisdiction, such holding
validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City
Council of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares it would have
enacted such remaining portions despite any such invalidity. 13
sweTiON III. That the schedule otoaall herein adorted shall service
vat - charged and applied copy of said rates
be e€fec
accruing on or after October 1, 1994 and a Secretary, rat.
shall be maintained on file in the office of the City
day of 1994.
PISSED AND APPROVED this the
{
tom. sc, - ,
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
;r
ATTESTS CITY SECRETARY
JENNIFER WALTERS,
BY:
i APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
,DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BY:
Page 29
• ~....et~e4 a.6edF.'rvzy+ft..,•:•...,.. - '
I
WIN CITY
COUNCI
r
v ~
E
Jo M. 1 ~ f
s y
f
F
1
Il No qN ~
CITY OF DENTON SOLID WASTE z
CURRENT .VERSUS gROPOSED -t -a
Rate Schedule 1995 1994 %
Rates Rates Increase
ResklentW - SWR
Faciq Charge $ 11.65 10.80 7.87%
Surcharge 0.35 0.35 0.00%
Brush - Per CY (Over 1 Ct" Yard) 4.00 4.00 0.00%
OrassA.oaveo Per Bag Owr 8 Begs (1 CY) 0,60 0.60 0.009E
AppflanoeCodection (PerAppianco) 10.00 10.00 0100% j
Commercial - SWC
DUMPSTER C.W tak*r Service:
2 Yard Dumpolor.
Number to Times Co w-0A por Week Rate Por 30 Dan
- i 23.25 20.25 14-81%
2 37.35 32.50 14.92% .
3 65.75 48.50 14.95%
4 71.85 62.50 14.96%
6 8£"10 78.00 15.00%
6 105.75 92.00 14.95%
7 123.00 107.00 14.95%
3 Yard Dumpstor.
Number of Tinws Collected Per Week Rate Per 30 Dan
1 28.90 25.25 12.089E
? 50.90 45.60 11.62%
3 75.00 66.70 14.1696
4 97.95 86.40 13.37%
6 122.40 107.25 14.13%
6 145.05 127.80 13.60%,
7 168.30 148.05 19.68%
i I 4 Yard bi~mpotir:
Nwtor of Tk"" C MO*d Pot Week Rate Par 30 Days =
$3.40 91.00" 7.74%
2 64.60 b9.20 8.96%
3 94.90 88,40 ` 9 84jG
Ty' ul. ,'.4 123.95 112.00 .1087% E
r, 6 164.06 139.00 • _ ` 1 }
6.83%
6 187.20 '165,60 19.04% '
r:. 7 21.30 191.80 19.90% "
6 Yard Dumpslor. i
Number ofTmoe Co6octod Per Week Rata Per 90 Davs
1 47.60 44.60 6.74%
2 88.40 82,00 7.80%
3
130.95
121.00 6.22%
i 4 173.40 160.00 8.37%
6 216.26 198.00 8.11%
6 263.60 242.00 9.0196 t
7 306.00 277.20 10.3996
EXHIBIT 7
~ r ~ ~1'11X'Wat Wf~liwr..rve.+..o. _ ....w.,.,n~:u:snwaw.rKYwYrsy.'.../.Y.s.iw.~~•.31-.t+d+:.r..ra.er.rt.mr.~.,. ..,.....-~,.r «..usr,.yy"Mts'4A1~'~'~
i i
r CITY OF DENTON SOLID WASTE l
CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED RXT
4
Rate ScMdule - i~995 -
1994
I - _ Rater Rates Increase
8 Yard DuWsler.
Number of TknO2 Collected Per fNaok RetO Per 30 Days
1
2 115,00 56.00 8.25%
3 172.00 108.00 6.48%
4 229.40 161.00 6,83%
208.00 7.40%
8 O 261.00 8.45%
7 314.00 8.82%
384.55 363.00 a.94%
TEMPORARY CwVoor Service.
Type of Corokwr
Renf P_ et 30 paw
9 Cubic Yard Dumpster 7.60
4 Cubic Yard Our rpsbsr 6,00 25,00%
6 Cubic Yard Dumpsler 1
10.00 9.75 97.25 .00 4842,66%
8 Cubic Yard Dumpsbr .65% i
16.50 11.00 50,00%
TYPO of Corfther
Sorvice ChaMPickun
9 Cub{o Yard Dumpobr 27.00
4 Cubic Yard DumpNOr 18.60 45.16%
6 Cubic Yard Dumpsisr 97.00 24.80 49.19% {
8 Cubic Yard Dumpsler 52.00: 35.40 48.8996 !
69.00 48.40 95.78% ,
REF1WEkTRA PICKUP D i
un~»br SOnrFw:
2 Cubic Yard 0
urnpslsr , .
9 Cubic Yard Dumpafx 11.00 10.00 10,00%
4 Cubic Yard Dumpstar 216.60
2.00 15.00 10.001
{ 6 Q" Yard f)urnpsio 20.00 10.00%
1 B Cublg'Yird D, wVsipr 33.00 90.00 10.0096
'444.00
40.00 10,009E s'
OPEN TOP Co irw BdMca:
TY" of Conte**
Rent Per 30 pays
15 Cubic Yard OW Top
35
20 Cubic Yard OW Top
00 30.00 16.67%
30 Cubic Yard Open up 45.00 40.00 12,50%
66.00
f 40 Cubic Yard Open Top
65.00 0.00%
( 70.00 70.00 0.00%
Typo of Contakwr 8O1vice _k up
f 20 Cubic Yard OOpen Toopp 95400 87.00 9.20%
90 Cubic Yard Open Top 122.00 118,00 3.39%
Open Top 170.00
40 Cub1c Yard 189.00 0.59%
215.00 215.00 0.00%
CITY OF DENTON SOLID WASTE UTILITY
CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
Rate Schedule 1995 1994 %
Rates _ Rates Increase _
COMPACTOR Contakrer Servk:e:
Type of Contalner Rent Per 30 Days
6 Cubic Yard Compactor 45.00 43.00 4.65%
12 Cubic Yard Compactor 90.00 87.00 3.45% r
16 Cubic: Yard Compactor 100.00 97.00 3.09% Q
20 Cubk: Yard Compactor 118.00 116.00 1.72%
25 Cubic Yard Compactor 140.00 135.00 3.70%
30 Cubic Yard Compactor 170.00 165.00 3.03%
42 Cubic Yard Compactor 220.00 215.00 2.33%
i Type of Container Service Chargefflick_p
6 Cubic: Yard Compactor , 40.00 38.00 6.26%
12 Cubic Yard Compactor 82.00 75.00 9.33%
15 Cubic: Yard Compactor 94.00 88.00 6.82%
20 Cubic Yard Compactor 126.00 121.00 4.13%
25 Cubic Yard Compactor 147.00 145.00 1.38%
30 Cubic Yard Compactor 170.00 170.00 0.00% !
42 Cubic Yard Compactor 222.00 222.00 0.00% }
Brush - Per Cubic Yard (Over 1 Cubic Yard) 4.00 4.00 0.00%
Appliance Cokctlon (Per Appliance) 10.00 10.00 0.00%
Commercial Surcharge 3.5% 3.b% 0.00%
OxAdw MOM to prow tiN co L# r 671p 4 Maly Imft
TemporaryDuropster Delivery Fee 25.00 15.00 66.67%
Open Top/Compactor Delivery Fee 35,00 50.00 -30.00%
Open Top/Compector Relocation Fee 20.00 - N/A
Open Top/Compactor Same Day Demand Sor*9 Fee 16.00 - - - - NIA
Look/Chdn 26.00 - - - - N/A.
`f UndlfA %ryke - SYVL
j Private Commercial Servke Use of Landfill 8.00 5.00 20,00%
Special WasY (Par Cubic: Yard) 7.60 7.50 0.00%
" Unsecured Loads (Per Load) 10.00 10.00 0.00%
y Tire CuOy Charges:
Automobfb Tires 2.30 2.30 0.0D%
Truck Tires 4.60 4.60 0.00%
j Cardbowd ReoyeAng -
DUMPSTER Recycling Service (8 Cubic Yard Only):
I
u be, of Times C!h4a4Per Week Rate Per 30 Oaya
1 50.00 60.00 0.00%
2 100.00 100.00 0.00%
g 1$0.00 160.00 0.00% E
4 200.00 200.00 0.00%
• w.... ......may««. i4,:.a.: ,,+Wen1>ivi:+i' w.~
' 'Myv,rF~gXYFrYi4fawrwu '
f 1
A
r,
CITY OF DENTON SOLID WASTE UTILITY
\ CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED RATES
Rate Schedule 1995 1994 %
Rates Rates Increase
O OPEN TOP Recycling Service:
Type of Container Rent Per 90 Days
30 Cubic Yard Open Top 60.00 60.00 0.0096
40 Cubic Yard Open Top 65.00 65.00 0.00%
Type of Container Service Char eg Elckky
195.00 135.00 0.00%
30 Cubk: Yard Open Top
40 Cubic Yard Open Top 135.00 135.00 0.00%
COMPACTOR Recycling Senrloo:
i
Type of Container Bent Per 30 Days
30 Cubic Yard Compactor 125.00 125.00 0.00%
42 Cubic Yard Compactor 150.00 150.00 0.00%
Type of Container Service_ Pic ug
30 Cubic Yard Compactor 135.00 135.00 O.W%
42 Cubic Yard Compactor 135.00 135.00 0.0046 ,t
F t
` yid i y
Iw.«.*a~'.u. ~...wa.. .w-rr:.h•...+::wa+r.,w..,..~.-... wS:Wliu.irhll'~6.yYfCLiW4i'N". .
rs I
• e~\scswsre.aw
~oeadeNo I'f~~a
} Oita ~ ,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AMENDING SOLID WASTE RATES FOR
RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND RECYCLING COLLECTION SERVICES, AS
AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 24 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
DENTONI ESTABLISHING A CHARGE FOR RELOCATION OF commiRCIAL CON-
TAINERS; ADDING A COMMERCIAL CHARGE FOR SAME DAY OPEN TOP DEMAND f
RESPONSE SERVICEI ESTABLISHING CHARGES FOR LOCKS AND CHAINS;
AMENDING THE CHARGES FOR USE OF THE LANDFILLI AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSt
r
$ECPION i. That the charges for solid waste collection ser-
vices as authorized by Section 24-42(b) of Artic)e II, Section 24-
66 of Article III and Section 24-4 of Article I of Chapter 24 of
the Code of ordinances are hereby established as follows.,
SOLID WASTE RATE SCHEDULES
SWR Residential Solid Waste Collection Service 2
SWC Comnercial and Institutional Solid Waste
Collection Service
3 I
SWL Sanitary Landfill Use S
I
SKY Commeroial and Institutional Recycling Service ,
j
I
!333{
.
EXHIBIT 8
Ali
rq w:,..,v{
~daHo ~ E
SCEEDt1LE ettn
REOIDENTIAL BOLID T]t COr L~erntnr neevtn.
(Effective 10/01/94)
11PPLICATION ~ y
Applicable to individual family unit solid waste collection
service. Individual family unit includes each sifle of a
duplex, each living unit per subdivided lot, and any unit or t
living space in which a person or single family resides.
MONTHLY RATE
4. $11.65 per 30 days
(State of Texas statutory charge for landfill use) 1
$0.35 per 30 days
The surcharge referenced above is hereby authorized to be
remitted to the State as required by law, and should the State
Legislature increase this fee, such increase is hereby autho-
rized to be charged and collected.
MINIMUM BI .r.nan
$12.00 per 30 days
j OTHER CHAMPS
The charge for the collection of grass clippings and leaves in
excess of six (6) bags per week
cents ($0.50) per bag. (one cubic yard) is fifty E
The charge for the collection of brush and tree limbs in
excess of i cubic yard is $4.00 per cubic yard collected per
week. one cubic yard of brush has the dimensions of three I
feet by three feet by four feet.
1
The charge for the collection of appliances is $10.00 per
appliance.
i
PACE a
..,:ter
QAI*
gendaNo !
S
,aendait~Q/
p» ~
07
acxeDOLa BWC
~ ~n►. enTID WASTE COLLECTION
K±m'RCIAL/INST
(Effective 10/01/94)
- 1DDi.TCAY'I N i
Applicable for all commercial or institutional solid waste
collection service. t
A. DIJMPSTER3 (Regular Service)
' 1. 2 YARD "PSTER
Number ct Times Cubic Yards Cubic Yards Rate Per
rn118ct~d Per week carewer, ek PeY xOntls_ ~4~D~CR
1 2 lb $ X23
2 4 24 905
1 b 92 71.86
4 8 40 89.80.
5 12 48 X6.75
6 14 56 24A
2. 1 YARD DVMPSTER
Number of Times Cubic Yard Cubic Yards Rats Per
Per week Per. liont~ 22JAIn
Col le "ted-22xit"k
g 28.35
1 3 212
4 50.90
6
2 27
4 12 48 1~ 0„
15 60
6 18 72 fib`
7 21 84
T ,
9 } PAGE 1
0"4%
'n M
' ApendaltenL0-.C-5 '
Date 3.9
3. 4 YARD DUMPSTER
Number of Times Cubic Yards Cubic Yards Rate Per
Collected Per Wee Per Week per Month 30 Dave
1 4 16 $ 33.40
2 8 32 64.9D
3 12 48 94.90
4 16 64 223.95
5 20 s0 154.05
6 24 96 38'!.20
7 28 112 217.30
4. 6 YARD DUMPSTER
Number of Times Cubic Yards Cubic Yards rate Per
Collected Par Waek Ear Week Per Month 30 Days
2 6 24 S 47.50 L
2 12 4s 80.40
3 is 72 130.95
4 24 96 173.40
5 30 120 215.25 F
6 36 144 263.80
7 42 168 306.00
5. 8 YARD DUMPSTER
4 Number o! Times Cubic Yards cubicYards %to Per
Collected Par Week Per Week per Month
o Dave
1 8 32 $ 59.50
3 16 64 115.00
`K 24 96 172.00
4 32 128 223.40
5 40 160 283,05
6 40 196 341.70
7 56 224 384.65
The 2 yard dumpster service at more than once per week
%
pickup is only available to existing customers receiv-
f ng 2 yard dumpster service on October 10 1993. Now 2
yard dumpster service will not be offered to any cus-
tomer except on a schedule of once per week pickup.
Existing customers rocoiving 2 yard dumpster service
that discontinue 2 yard service may not reinstate 2
yard dumpster service with more than one pickup per
week.
PAGE 4 ~
III, .-1..-,._,
i
,14
aw~+vw
{
+gendeNo 9 ~
~gendelt
'ate
1 B. DUMPSTER SERVICE (Temporary)
Type of Rent
Container Per 30 DaV_s Service Charge
3 cubic yard dumpster $ 7.50 $27.00 per pickup
4 cubic yard duspster 10.00 37.00 per pickup
6 cubic yard duspster 13.75 52.00 per pickup
8 cubic yard duspster 16.50 63.00 per pickup
r
i
E C. DUMPSTER SERVICE (Refill and Extra Pickup)
.
Type of
Container Service Charas
2 cubic yard duspster $11.00 per pickup
;t 3 cubic yard duspster 16.50 per pickup
4 cubic yard duspster 22.00 per pickup
b cubio yard duspster 33.00 per pickup
8 cubic yard duspster 44.00 per pickup
D. OPEN TOP CONTAINERS
Type of Rent
container Egg 30 Days Service Charge
15 cubic yard open top $35.00 $ 95.00 per pickup
20'cubic 'yard open top 45.00 122.00 per pickup
30 cubic yard open top 55:00 170.00 per pickup
40 cubic yard open top 70.00 215.00 per pickup
So COMPACTORS
i° Type of Rant
l Container Per 30 Days service_Cjiargg
' 6 cubic yard compactor $ 45.00 $ 40.00 per pickup
.'i 12 cubic yard compactor 90.00 82.00 per pickup
15 cubic yard compactor 100.00 94.00 per pickup
Y 20 cubic yard compactor 118.00 126.00 per pickup j
25 cubic yard compactor 140.00 147.00 per pickup
` 30 cubic yard compactor 170.00 170.00 per X'.ckup
42 cubic yard compactor 220.00 222.00 per pickup
j
PAGE 5
p %
I;
~gendaNo
igettdal!
~a
strncHAcE
r'
An additional 3.5% charge will be ssessed for each 30 day
period (excluding rental charge) to c pensate for the State of
Texas surcharge for solid waste race ved at landfills,. The
City staff is hereby authorized to r mit such charge to the
State, and should the State Legislature ncrease this fee, such
increase is hereby authorized to be cha ad and collected.
i
r
e
r
, y.
y e
x
1 I
O f
I
ti A,
s. i I
i k
1
( PACE 6
•,r
+MW'^°«....._,. .:_Y...,.,,... ..r .:P,,._. ..,:tea
%
7y,1~ r ~ ha. Vii,
r r
Vvdako all,
{ ~ER~ ~fv
A delivery fee of $50.00 per container will be charged to all
customers for open top containers and compactors, A delivery
` Pee Of $15.00
for tea per container will be charged to all customerporary dumpster service.
A relocation fee of $20,00 will be charged for each open to or
s' f compactor container that is rel p
orated at the customers site.
A $15.00 fee will be charged for each re i
pickup service for open quest for same day
pickup service u pen tOp and compactor customers who receive
pan demand.:
A $25.00 fee will be charged for container locks or chains pro-
vidsd by the City of Denton. 11?
The charge for collection of appliances is $10.00 per item. i
The charge for collection of brush outside the container is
4`.00 for.each cubic
yard of brush over i cubic yard.
M_
P;•
35
i,
•r. V d F:
{ Ir I;
r
1 S 1 1.
i
PAGE 7
W"i
9
apett08No
4pbr~al ~
j Oete ~ )--y'
SCHEDULE BWI.
S1~uITl~RY Li►NDFILL _U~E
(Effective 10/01/94)
1►PPLICATION
Applicable to individuals and commercial entities that use the
M City's sanitary landfill site.
RATES AND CHARGES S
A. INDIVIDUAL USERS
Charge Per
~6m 4_2Lshicle Vehicle Per Load
yfor Automobiles and station wagons, S 6.00
4 pickup tttCks less than one-half ton.
2. Motor vehicles with a carrying $ 21.00
load capaoity of 2 cubic yards y'
but less than 5 cubic yards such
as one-half ton pickups.
3. Pickup trucks with aids boards $ 60.00
and all othor vehicles with a
carrying capacity in excess of
5 cubic yards but less than 10
cubic yards: E
4. Vehicles with carrying capacity $ 90.00
in excess of 10 cubic yards but
less than 15 cubic yards: Y,
5. Vehioles with carrying capacity: $120.00
in excess of 15 cubic yards but
lass than 90 cubic yards.
' 6. Vehicles with carrying capacity $180600
In excess of 20 cubic yards but 4
less than 30 cubic yards
7. Vehicles with carrying capacity $240,00
in excess of 30 cubic yards but ;
less than 40 cubic yards.
8. Vehicles with carrying capacity 3300.00
of 40 cubic yards or more.
G
s
~ PAGE 8
4
•yaw
ApendaMo ~ -
Apendatt
Date '
Customera who submit for deposit uncontamina ed and unbagged
leaves, grass clippings and brush shall pay the following
ratess
Charge Per
ti< Type of Vehicle ye,*icle Perd
1. Automobiles and station wagons, $ .4.50
pickup trucks less than one-half ton.
2. motor vehicles with a carrying S 15.75
load capacity of 2 cubic yards
y but lass than 5 cubic yards such
i as one-half ton pickups. ;
=1f 3. Pickup trucks with side boards $ 45.00
and all other vehicles with a
€ carrying capacity in excess of j
5 cubic yards but less than 10
cubic yards.
? 4. Vehicles with carrying capacity $ 60.75
in excess of 10 cubic yards but
less.than 15 cubic yards.
5. Vehicles with carrying capacity $ 90.00
in excess of 15 cubic yards but
leap than 20 cubic yards.
6. Vehicles with carrying capacity $135.00 ,
In excess of 20 cubic yards but
1 less than 30'cubic yards
7. Vehicles with carryinq capacity $180.00
in excess of 30 cubic yards but
less than 40 cubic yards.
8. Vehicles with carrying capacity $225.00
of 40 cubic yards or more.
B. REGULAR COMMERCIAL USERS
` The city manager may enter into contracts with private commer-
oial collection service companies for regular use of the
sanitary landfill site at the following rates:
Residential and commercial $ 6.00/cubic yard or
garbage $ 19.80/ton
Rubbish (trash) $ 6.00/cubic yard or
$ 19.80/ton
r
PAGE 9
b4y,4.L'. J
d
~gendaNo eelO D
Apesdal
Date ~
Uncompacted residential and $ 6.00/cubic yard or
commercial garbage $ 19.80/ton
All such contracts may contain conditions of operation, dia-
posal and delivery as the City Manager or his designee shall
determine necessary for the efficient operation of the landfill
site and the method of billing and collection for such use.
C. TIRE CHARGES merge Per Tire
1. Automobile tires not shredded, $ 2.30
quartered or halved.
2. Truck tires not shredded, $ 4.60
quartered or halved.
D. SPECIAL WASTE Rate Per Cubic Yard
Disposal of "Special Waste" as S 7.50
defined by the State of Texas
Municipal Solid Waste Management
Regulations. Acceptance of special
vast* is subject to Federal and
State laws and regulations, and the
City has the right to refuse to
accept waste.
8. UNSECURED LOADS Rate For Load
;s. Applies to solid waste load that $:10.00
are not secured with a tarpaulin
or other equipment that prevents
material from spilling along and
within the right-of-way of public
access roads serving landfill site.
LIMITATIONS
Landfill permits issued by the City of Denton prior to the
effective date of this ordinance may be redeemed for their face
value. The customer mur't pay the difference between the
current rate and the face value of the permit. The customer is
not entitled to a refund if the face value of the permit
exceeds the current rate.
PAGE 10
44ki.1aalYi✓isiul.l',"Wv. ,
AQ"NO. f~i0 7
y
Det
~r
SCRBDULB OWY
COMMERCIALZINSTITUTIONAL• CARDBOARD RECYCLING
(Effective 10/01/94)
APPLICATION
Applicable to commercial or institutional customers that
receive separate recycling service in dedicated recycling
containers.
$(~NTMLY RATS '
i
k 1 A. DUMPSTER RECYCLING SERVICE (B YARD DUMPSTER)
Number of Tines Rate Per
Collected Per week 30 days
F
1 $ 50.00
2 100.00
3 150.00
4 200.00
S. OPEN TOP RECYCLING SERVICE
Type of Rent
Container Per 30 Days Service charge ;
30 Cubic Yard $50.00 $135.QO
40 Cubic Yard 65.00 135.00
r rs
C. COMPACTOR RECYCLING SERVICE
Type of Rent
Container Per 30 Data service charge
30 Cubic Yard $150.00 0135.00 ;
} 40 Cubic Yard 200.00 135.00
r
PAGE 11
r :
i
daN0.
. • 4Q91~2.I
Oats
ordinance shall become effective for solid
°QC H V. That this or 1994.
waste service rendered on or after April It
day of 1994.
PASSBD A.'D APPROVED this the tl
t
j
BOB CASTLESERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST
ER NAIsTER9, CITY SECRETARY
ATTESTS.
jmmIt
J. ,c
,
BYs
FORMS
APPROVED As TO
E.L CITY A"MOPREY S
DB$RA'A. DRAYOVITCH,
BYt
1 'J'•'
r ~ , I
1. '4
PACE 12
L
i
P
r
CITX9
COUNCII
fir.. a
low
I
9 ww~
September 13, 1994
CITY COUNCIL pQepdtlNo - D3
AGENDA ITEM 1
9- 3-g
TO. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCUP0
FROM: Lloyd V. Harreilo City MI"W
RE: CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE FUNDING OF PAYMENTS
PROM UTILITIES TO GEMAL GOVERNMENT
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff and Pabbe Utility Board recommeads that the Electric Utility pay a sired rental
fee of 1% of grow electric revenue to the General Government Fand.
SUMMARY:
It b customary for utility systems to pay a frsoehbe or stmt rental fee for the matt to
nerve in a city NO as eoaspersation for the use of strreb and ri -of-ways. Tie City of
Data presently don not make web a payment but rather snakes payments to the Sa wal
I~
government fund equal to 6% of net plant iavestweot, i e., a retws-oa-hwe"eat (ROI)
psyment. Tbb payment pr"wre b basal on the city charter. nis payment essentially
correspond, to the rdnrn.on-egdty (ROE) payment that a petvate comp M world make
is lbd r steak holders. As on ruslogy, the ckktaltaxpayers of Denton are the
of t1N: nwddpany owned utility. The 6% ROI payasent that the
dectric utaky pays is approsimat* 4.5% of grow tdectrie revenlses.
I
Tema Utihtks pays Deaton 4% of gross revenge of the t1t10 customers they serve Is Pentea
as a street rentai fee. Tbey also pry an estimated equk&kmt of.3% of Brow revenaw for
property taxes to Dwf&L
The Public Utility Beard and staff has expressed that k means appropriate that the ° o tee to the
rectal 6
should pay a stroll type electric a
pvernasent for the use of the streets andrigbt-4waysbadditiontotheROIpaymentthat
R. considered a payment to the eithwashxpuyers wbo are the owna*Woekhokkn of the
The ekrlrk Brass r" rerense b approximately $579M.00&0 r. "Pte 1%
electric "014,11.
sired rental foe would equate to $snow Per yeaw.
~ i
i
l
I
r f
..r
Alm j
q
E AQg1~2~10•
Age1'01
Date
A partial ermsideration !or the reeommemdad" to implement thin I% [ee nu the Eledde
Utility is to offset the iost revenue to the general Govemmesit rmuW v from the '
reoomme : Ltlom to lower the ROI peraaftV on the Wastewater ■d* from 6% to
approsisrate y 4.5% This 4.5% ROI ecrrrspm& to 12% of gram Wastewater Utility
rerermm Ut>te Wastewater Uhi ty were to entimme to pay 6% RO;a 11.5% Wastewater
nit Imemse wmldt be meeaary verses the BOA that b recommem"
Respoctf nbmiitted:
: Prepared by:
R E. Nelson, Executive Director Uoy V. Harrell, City Manager
Utilities
y
Y i
3 i
i
{ 1
r
r I~
i
. ..u ryw(MMw°'.•,,..«... .:n.:.,a...Yi„'tied 1
i
per
I
I ~
E t \IiP00Ef\ORD %$I NEE 1.EEM
~~gNo 7
APd
F ~
ORDINANCE NO.
s
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A STREET RENTAL FEE, TO BE TRANSFERRED
FROM THE ELECTRIC FUND REVENUES TO THE GENERAL FUND OF THE CITY;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I
WHEREAS, Sec. 12.03(a) of the City's Charter provides that the
City Council shall fund all necessary expenses of operation and
maintenance of the utility systems; and E
WHEREAS, Sections 13.02 and 13.03 of the City's Charter pro-
vide that the City Council shall have the power and right to col-
lect from every public utility operating in the City, a reasonable
sum as compensation for the right and privilege enjoyed, as the
Council may determine by ordinance or contract with such util.'.tyt `
and
WHEREAS, the City's Electric Utility is an enterprise functiv.3
r and public utility of the City of Denton; and
WHEREAS, the Electric Utility utilizes and occupies the
streets and rights-of-way of the City to provide utility service to
the citizens of Dentont and
WHEREAS, it is customary that electric utilities compensate
the cities which they serve for the right to utilize and occupy the
City's streets and rights-of-way as a street rental, or franchise
feel and
WHEREAS, the Public Utility Board has recommended that the
Electric Utility System pay a fee equal to one percent of the
electric utilities gross revenues as payment for use of the City
streets and rights of way; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is a necessary and
proper expense of the operation and maintenance of the Electric
System to compensate the City's General Fund for the use of the
City's streets and rights of way in the amount of one percent of
the System's gross revenuest NOW, THEREFORE;
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. That the City Council adopts the pindings set
forth in the preamble hereof.
SECTION II. That the City Manager is hereby auhcrized to
j transfer a sum equal to one percent of the gross revenues of the
City's Electric Utility Fund to the City'e General Fund as com-
pensation for the use and occupancy of the City's streets and
rights-of-way.
i
E
l
' P
I
'I
NO qy~~~
t
A041
i oats v y
l
aFrrr,O, N III. That this ordinance shall take a et on October
10 1994.
.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1994 `'BOS CASTLEBERRY, KAYOR
ATTESTS -
JENNIFER NALTERSt CITY SECRETARY
1
BYs
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORKS
TCH# CITY ATTORNEY
D$BRA DRI►YOVI
b.
!
BY
1
i
t 5
1= '
p's
Page 2
♦w1N,NYN M• ,
Y .
~ -i V .
COUNCIL
I
I ~ a
1i
,
1
I
I
i
1 ~
04
I~;t
'
,
i
,
i
1
September 13, 1994
AQe*NO
i
CITY COUNCIL q -13 -q4
AGENDA ITEM
a
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT; CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A COMMCT WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS, I
DEpAItTME?,T OF TRANSPORTATION, FOR THE INSTALLATION AND i'
CONVERSION TO THE ALTERNATE FUELPROGRAM FOR FIFTEEN VEHICLES,
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $47,518.95.
t 4
RECOMMENDATION:
I IL,
royal of a contract with the Texas Department of Transportation !or the
staff recornmends app
to convert fifteen vehicles to an alternative fuel program on a 3-
purchase and installation of oquiptnent
year contract.
SUMMARY1
r' The Federal Clean Air Act regulates that alternate fuels be utilized wherever possible to reduce ozone
emissions Into the W. As a City, we am working towards that goal by converting fifteen vehicles to the
alternative fuel program during FY94-95. The proposed contract would provide for parts aid labor.
BACKGROUND:
,
Because Denton County is an ozone "non-attainment" area, we are snaking a concerted effort to reduce
ozone emissions by converting fifteen units to alternative fuels. Working with North Ceatrai Texas
of Transportation, we have secured a
Council of Oovermrnemts (NCTC0(3) and the Texas Department
$33,000 grant to assist us in this project.
l
PROGRAMIDEPARTMENT OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
l
Fleet SeMca and the appropriate department:
i
II
r;~ ~ r I
r .
i
A4elldaI
e, NO'
FISCAL W PACT: nee f
This project would r initial budgetary funding of $47,518.95. With CTC~ gran!, the City
would be reimbursed $33,000 once the project Is complete, leaving a total cost of 514,518.95 for the City
of Denton. Funding for this would originally come from Fleet Services' 8710 Commission Account with
subsequent billings to each participating departrnent through their appropriate EM1S Maintenance
accounts.
Res submitted,
\
i ff Lloyd V. Harrell
P
City Manager
c
' r
Prepared by,
%
•'i
F, Mi"O t 1: Stue of Texas Agreement for Funding of Alternative Fuels Program
Exhibit 11: Exhibit 'D`, Cast PAtimate
'
Exhibit III: Fleet Services Department Vehicle Deaignation Report
E
r ;
090794
5 r
c,lccagen.wp51
r T.
r
t.'c rr)
I
III
Ei\SiPDOtf\DRD\NEtiA0.0AD / a
agas►daNo
aQendati
Dais 2
ORDINANCE NO.
i
i
AN ORDINANCE OF 'THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR FUNDING OF ALTERNATIVE
FUELSt AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
"THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS1
SECTION I. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to
execute an Agreement between the City of Denton and the Texas !
Department of Transportation for funding of alternative fuels, a
copy o: which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference
herein.
` SL>CPION 21 That the City Council hereby authorizas the
expenditure of funds as provided in the Agreement.
That this ordinance shall become effective immed-
iately.upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1994.
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST]
JENNIFER WALTERSj CITY SECRETARY
BYE _
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMi
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BYt
)&A
r. ~
r"
w.e.mk."s YiM'.M:iLt..s.fi:E.Y Ib;µ. ~iaa N. ..:•b' AS. zi,• , rr ,a.., n.y }.1:.t r, . r- i ~
W~
i
± Agreement No. V A~ II
STATE Or' TEXAS + i
COUNTY OF TRAVIS • "
AORSE30M FOR FINDING OF
ALTERNATIVE FUELS PROGRAM
TNIS AORESNENT, is made by and between the State of Texas, acting Loy a
, 9 Y and
"through the Texas Department of Transportation, hereinafter called the "state"
and the City of Denton, acting by and through its authorised officials,
hereinafter called the "Recipient".
M I T N E S S E T N
WHZREASr the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991,
("ISTEA") codified under Title 23 U.S.C. section 101 at seq., establishes the
National Intermodal Transportation System that is economically efficient and
„ environmentally sound # I
provides the foundation for the nation to compete in the
global economy, and will move people and goods in an energy efficient manner) and
WHEREAS, Title 23 U.S.C. Section 149 establishes a congestion mitigation
~r and air
f quality improvement program ("CMAQ") to contribute to the attainment of
a national ambient air quality standard to be implemented by the States$
Transportation Agencies) and
WHEREAS, Title 23 U.S.C. Section 134 establishes that Metropolitan f
Planning OrganisaLions ("MI am) and the StatesI Transportation Agencies develop
Ili
transportation plans and F. programs for urbanized area
of
the elate and
WNERTAS, Title 23 U.B.C. Section 120 establishes that the Federal share
of funding for CMAQ programs will not exceed eighty percent (604( of the cost of
the desired activity) and
WHEREAS, Dallas, Tarrant, Collin and Denton Counties have been designated
by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 as an ozone nonattainment area, and thus
qualifies for CMAQ funds) and
' r
WHEREAS, the North Central Texas Council of Governments, hereinafter
identified as "NCTCOG", as the Metropolitan Planning organisation for the Dallas-
Tort Worth Metropolitan area and Denton and Lewisville urbanised area, has the
7/2S/94
Page 1 of 7
I
•kYfW1YF+i~dkM:W.rnwr.a~.._..... _ ~
`r
a
I .77L
alt
rNe-I
esponsibility for developing transportation control measures Eo the State
r
implemention plan to assist in the reduction of ozone-forming mobile emissionsl
and
vehicles from
t itHBStEAS, a program of convecting 'new and existing
conventional fuels to alternative fuels is desired, to be hereinafter identified
ss the "Alternative Fuels Program"; and
o ysNgRgAS, CMAQ funds have been made available to the State through the O.S.
Department of Transportation for the advancement of the Alternative Fuels
Programs and
W"Rus, NCTOW has submitted the Alternative Fuels Program through the Ik
to the U.S. Texas Natural Resource conservation Commission Environmental
a
for incorporation in the State implementation plan to assist's
Protection Agency
" in the reduction of ozone-forming mobile emissionsl and
NiitREAS, the state and the Recipient desire to enter into this agreement
i
to establish the parties' obligations and responsibilities associated with the
' Alternative Fuels Progrml and '
19_0 the Recipient's
. ; NlxRSAS, on the day of
i attached hereto and identified &a
ruling board, passed Resolution No.
? s1sOt19It At authArising the Recipient's participation in the Alternative Fuels
Program! and
vaRiAs, on the 2.2 11 day of "U it 192,1, the State's Texas Transportation
Commission passed Minute order No. },4',1-W, attached hereto and identified as
atlve Fuels Program through the State
ern
t
authorizing the ,
6RNLBI Al
T s,
Transportation Improve"nt Programs
A 0 R 9 C N R N T
NOW, TNERSFORS, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual
covenants and agreements of the parties hereto to be by them respectively kept '
and performed as hereinafter set forth, it is agreed as followsr
r
1 ~ rrvrrmacT P6RIQO
This agreement shall become effective on the date of final execution by i•
the State and shall terminate upon completion of all vehicle conversions
, E
7/25/94 Page 2 of I
!
i 111 ..n i 1f \ a l .i.
ra~
I
i
~ '40eA0akp'
subject to this Agreement or unless terminated or modified as hereinafter
i
1
provided.
~ I
2. SOOPE OA PROJECT
The Recipient shall agree to thl terms and conditions of the
S ificatione for public Sector. Non-Transit Alternative Fuel Vehicles,
attached hereto and identified as EXHIBIT C.
3. FUFDINO RESPONSIBILITIES
The maximum amount payable under this coat reimbursement agreement in
S- _ This amount is based on the Coat Estimate, attached
hereto and Identified as EXHIBIT D. The Recipient will be responsible for
securing the non-foderal funding share required for financing the
1
Alternative Fuels Program. The Recipient will not incur any cost for
reimbursement until authorised by the State. State authorisation will not
be granted until both THNA authorisation, to b:+ attached hereto as EICNIBI~f
Ng is grantedl. and, this Agreement is fully executed. Costs incurred by
the Recipient prior to the above conditions will not be eligible for
z s
reislburaement. The Recipient shall comply with the cork principles 1
established in OKB Circular A-87, "Cost Principles for State and Local
covernmenta•.
RE IN9UM BRIM
The State will reimburse the Recipient for properly supported costs'
incurred under the terms and conditions of this agreement. The
reimbursement of costs will only include those applicable federal
G, participating funds. The Recipient shall submit the State's ram 137,
Billing Statement, or other type of invoice acceptable to the State to the
following addres u
Texas Department of Transportation
9700 East R.L. Thornton
Dallas, Texas 75278
All billing atatements shall be properly dccumentedo summarizing the costs
by description of work performed and other incidental costs. The State
will make payment to the Recipient within thirty (30) days from receipt of
7/25/94 Page 3 of 7
tlwaA,,,p. n..rir:.+i'sW bra:^.Yy.. ~41...w'r,:.W , . . • . r wt
r is
, apenOaFio {
Apendalte
Date
the Recipient's request for payment, provided that the r eat is properly
prepared, executed, and documented. Unsupported charges or chargna after
final acceptance by the State will not be considered eligible for
reimbursement. If applicable or necAs ary the State will prepare a final
audit upon completion of the services authorised herein or at any time an
audit is deemed to be in the beat interest of the State.
S. TERMINATION
This agreement may be terminated by one of the following conditionst MM
(1) By mutual agreement and consent of both parties.
y (2) By the State, upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Recipient
as a consequence of failure by the Recipient to perform the services
and obligations set forth in a satisfactory manner and within the
limits provided, with proper allowances being made for circumstances
beyond the control of the Psoipient as determined by the stets.,
(3) By either party, upon thirty (30) days written notice to the other.
Termination of this agreement shall extinguish all rights, duties,
obligations or responsibilities established under this agreement. The
%
Recipient will not incur any costs eligible for reimbursement during the
i .-1 ,
f thirty (30) day notice periods established h•rasbova. '
6. INDSMITZ"Tr2a
f
The Recipient acknowledges that it is not an agent, servant, or *MAOyee
of the State, and that it is responsible for its own acts and deeds and
y for those if its agents or employees.
7. M$DIBS
} Violation or breach of contract terms by the Recipient shill be grounds
for termination of the agreement, and any increased cost arising from the
Recipient's default, breach of contract, or violation of terms shall be
paid by the Recipient. This agreement shall not ,pe considered as
specifying the exclusive remedy for any default, but all remedies existing
at law end In equity may be availed of by tither party and shall be
cumulative.
7/25/99 Page 4 of 7
' y ~y`~j.1~~~~..~.~. . . r • 1 A 1 Y r .1 nlLrti I<..'ARd~~
I
X•
Owl
AgftNo'
• Apandalte
We
S. ,ENDHENT6
to Changes in the time frame, character< responsib sties, or obligations j
authorized herein shall be enacted by written amendment. Any amendment
to this agreement must be executed by'both parties.
g, ~UBLBTTiH6
i
The Recipient shall not assign or otherwise transfer its rights or
obligations under this agreement without the prior written consent of the
state.
x S BOORS AND REOORDS
10. INSPECT[O." or RECIPIENT I
The State will, for purpose of termination of the agreement prior t-
completion, examine the books and records of the Rucipler.t for the purpose
of checking the amount of the costs incurred by the Recipient at the time
of contract termination. The Recipient shall maintain all books,
documents, paper, accounting records and other documentation relating to
costs incurred under this agreement and shall make such materials
o available to the State, Yoder&% Highway Administration (YHMh) or its duly
authorised representatives for review and inspection at its office during
the contract period and for three 13) years from the date of final payment
under, this contract or until impending litigatiGn is' resolved.
Additionally, the State, MA and its duly authorized representatives
,
shall' have access to all records of the Reaipient which are directly
j. applicable to this agreement for the purpose of making audits, ,
a• H
examinations, excerpts and transcriptions.
it. 11E0A4 OON9TRUC=
In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this agreement I
shall for any reason, be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable In 3 l'
any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not
affect any other provision thereof and this agreement shall be construed
t as If such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been
Rr contained herein.
i
a
7/95/94 Page 5 of 7
'i
"
I
wa. t
r~ ~
~gend~ho.
12. 0148 CIRCULAR NO A-128 AUDIT REQUIREMENT Oate
The Recipient shall comply with the requirements Of he i~ a Avd[t Act
of 1981, P.L. 90-502, ensuring that the single audit report includes the
coverage stipulated in paragraphs 6, 8 and 9 of OMB Circular No. A-128. '111
13. COMPLIANC8 WiTN LAND
The Recipient shall comply with all federal, state and local lawn,
statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations, and the orders and decrees of
any court, administration bodies, or tribunals in any matter affecting the
performance of the agreement.
11. E4
All notices or documentation to either party by the other required under
this agreement shall be dalLvered personally or sent by certified or U.B.
I mail, postage prepaid, addressed to such party At the following rssgsctive
y addrsssssl
t states Texas Department of Transportation
9700 East R.L. Thornton freeway
Dallas, texas 75228
j.` Recipisnte
y{`
* All notices and documentation shall be deemed given on the date o0
dalLvered or so deposited in the mail, unless otherwise provided herein.
Either party hereto may change the above address by sending written notice
of such change to the other in the manner provided herein. i1{
1 8011E AORERMENT
This agreement constitutes the sole and only agreement of the parties
hereto and supersedes any prior understandings or written or oral
agreements between the parties respecting the within subject matter.
7/2S/94 Page 6 of 7
.wa:4~w.y .~Jd~'3YF+.k'Sb-iv.t, ~~'M14ti?+CW t ..x,, . b
1`l+l..r .f 4.L,~, Ll~1l M.1 .:4 •.4M.' -
„cr
, A~endaNo
IN TESTIMONY HEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed
in duplicate cnimterparts.
r' Name o Recip ent ,
p
Bye
Type Name
Title
i Date
}
ATTESTt
a ~ r
THE STATE OF TEXAS
F Exoouted for the Executive Director and approved by the Texas TranaportatiQA
OomeiseLon udder the authority of, Minute order No. 100002 and Adainlietrative
{ E , Circular, 76-931 for the purpose and effect of activating and carrying out the
" orderst established policies or work programs heretofore approved by the Texas
r Transportation Coweslssion.
f a ~ Eye , ft
-Deputy Executive Director for Transportation
< Planning and Development
ti Date
x, {
e
1
A 7/2S/94, Page 7 of 7
n .'r-.:»A»
~+.~Jr~.~.«i'.t,Pa!~'^F;ArTr •`4'7'6'.v'`,l, .~rv ,t:v't a. r. 4s'e',":'d.4..t;.
"i7
1
• ~elidaNo 9~ /i
Oote~' EXHIBIT
' IiXAS IRANSPOR1AIIOR COW ISS IOR
VARIOUS County M1HU1l ORDIR I'd9e )of Pdyes
District No. VARIOUS
WIIERtAS, the Project Uevelupment Plan (PUP) of the texas
Oepartmcclt of Transportation is a ten year plan which authorizes
protect planning and development, and is submitted to the lexas
Transportation Commission for approval on an annual basis; and
WHEREAS, the 1993 Transitional POP was structured and developed
" with.categories to utilize the Intermodal Surface transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA); and
WHEREAS, development and construction of many projects in the
POP are subject to the approval /concurrence of the Vetropolitan
l ; Planning Organizations (MPl and
WHEREAS, the MPOs have recently made significant modifications
to the* list of projects which they propose to include in their
Transportation Improvement Programs (IIPs); and
t~ WHEREAS, the letting to contract of projects contained in the
1 PDP is further subject to the availability of projected funds; and
WHEREAS, the structure of the various categories of work,
including the description, the restrictions, the method of allocation
and policy of the 1993 Transitional PUP was outlined in Minute Order
101105.dated June 24, 1992 and amended in Minute Order 101590 dated
i
I October 28, 1992; atld
WHEREAS, Minute Order 101588 dated October 28, 1992 approved
i the structure of the allocation program portion of the 1993 ,
ti I'vansitional POP, and authorized projects in various allocation }
progralil and
WHEREAS, an update of these previously authorized projects and
i policies is required to more accurately depict and properly guide
1 ,
planning and development; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate to address the status of the 1593
transitional POP and the approval or the 1994 POP separately with
respect to mobility and allocation rategories; and
llif i I 1" yll 1 r :c!I I! ( 1
i 1 If 1+1 i.S7, 1:7~C-ltll.( l
EE! \ 7
7\ C% V / i11I . ~ ~i I',..1111~I1~ • ' 17~ •CC I1. ti• t
~ II1.i~ ~ l
^ iN L,... e. b.,a+A ..4:n Pi.N444 :rf ,F.b an.LLJv"1.Y✓b'V
iY9(-G~}M1"~'i~Dti5H1,R114S6vJV3'F ~a„d''~fay-e VH,.! t'~ .,.r.Ea`- r~' ^J
t
1
i
w ,..o
# jaridANO#
oarld1[XAS 1RANSPOkiAIION COMMISSION
vAItIUUS county MIHUfI ORI[[R Page 2_ of 5 I ages i
District No. VARIOUS
• Minute Order 101106 and
Wb "
ER[AS, for mobility categories,
subsequent Minute Orders 101586 and 10158T dated October 28, 1992
approved specific projects for various levels of authorization in the
1993 Transitional POP in Category 1 - Interstate Construction, Category
3A - National Highway System (NHS) Mobility, CategorNH3ETexµµS
F drunk System, Category 3D - NI1S Traffic Management, Category
Miscellaneous, Category 12 - Commission Strategic Priority and Category
13 - Stale Nobility; and
r'. WHEREAS, for moat t categories, Minute Order 101588 and
subsequent Minute Order 101765 dated December 22, 1992 approved
specific projects for various levels of authorization In the 1993
+ Transitional POP in Category 4C - Surface Transportation Program (SIP)
' Metropolitan Mobility/Rehabilitation, Category 40 - SIP Urban
° Mobility/Rehabilitatlon, Category 4E SIP Rural r
Mobility/Rehabilitation, Category 5 - Congestion Mitigation and Air
t Quality Improvement; and
MiEREAS, for allocation categories; Minute Order 101588 and
subsequent Mireite Order O=5 approved specific projects in the 1993
transitional POP in Category 4A - 1993 Ifighway Safety Improvement
Program, 1993 federal Railroad Signal Program, and 1993 Railroad School
Bus Signal Program, Category 6 - 1993-1995 On State System Bridge
Program, and 1993-1995 Off State System Bridge Program, Category 8 -
' 1992-1994 farm to Market Road Program, and Category 16 - 1993 Railroad I
Grade Cross Replanking Program; and ;
fi WHEREAS, several of the alircation programs approved in the
s .5 1993 Transitional POP currently ave unob igated balances for which
projects have now been identified as additions to the previously
approved programs; and
MIEREAS, Minute Order 101165 authorized district allocations _
for the allocation program portion of the 1994 POP, and directed that
when the projects have been selected for allocation programs (other
than "bank balance" programs), the programs be returned to the ,
attention of the Commission for approval of specific projects; and
i
Y .
- n ee,:[.Wy Ir{t'.64 M/e'!Ax .LiFr?O.a
4
,
i
Apendal
i1XAS IRANSPORIAIIOH COMMISSION 'late
i'
VARIOUS County M1NU11 ORHIR Page 3 _of S_ 116ges
Otstr ict No. VARIOUS
r'.
NISEREAS, projects have now been identifled for the allocation
programs of the 1994 POP;
+ NOW, THEREfORE, 11 IS OROEREO that the structure of the various
categories of work, includliq the description, the restrictions, the
method of allocation and policy outlined in Minute Orders 101106 and
101540 is hereby cancelled; an<i
l ` IT 1S FURTHER ORDERED for mobility categories that the
authorization for the Category 3A _-_NHS Mobility, Category 3B - NHS
vJ.. Texas Trunk Sytem,'Category 30 - NHS Traffic Management, Category 3E
NHS Miscellaneous, Category 12 -Commission Strategic Priority and i
Category 13 - State Mobility projects listed in Minute Orders 101106,
101586 and 101587 are hereby, cancelled; and
IT IS FURTHER OW RED for mobility categories that the
authorization for Category 4C - SIP Metropolitan
Mobility/Rehabilitation, Category 40 - SIP Urban
K Mobility/Rehabilitation, Category 4E - SIP. Rural a,
Mobility/Rehabilitation and Category 5 Congestion Mitigation and Air
i.; Quality Improvement projects listed in Minute Orders 101588 and 101765
fa+ , .4 are hereby cancelled; and
IT IS FURTHER OROEREO for allocation categories that the
projects approved as a part of past aTlocaLon programs that have not
been selected for other categories of thG 1994 POP shall retain their
authority in those programs; and
y-
1
;r A
1 ` tl
11.E r
♦J
p'
'ts! L S P4 t1-n.J 'F146'1.W~bWtiJd+I.q VK.'.Ai;1E0.ie..b'.•.MWN it,
A.,
F'iawV
13
r
r ~ l
• : 'ApendeNb ~
ggfo S
k IiXAS IRANSPOR1AI104 COMMISSION DAN
/ y 2V
YARi0U5 County HINUII 09DIR Paqr 4 of 5 Pages
A. A
ilislrict No.. VARIOUS
t 11 IS FURTHER ORDERED that the 1994 PROJECi OLW IOPHENi PI.AN as
shown in the following exhibits is hereby approved:
Exhibit A - Structure of the various categories of work,
including descriptions, restrictions, methods of allocation and
policy.
Exhibit 8 - Interstate Construction (Category 1).
«r Exhibit C - National; Highway System (Category 3):
r NIIS' Mobility, NHS Texas trunk System, NHS iraffis Management
f Systems, and NHS Miscellaneous.
" Exhibit 0 - Surf are'TransportAtion Prograrz (Category 4):'
r4 , 994 Highway Safety Improvement program, 1994 Federal Railroad
Signal Prograa,'1994 Railroad School Otis Signal Program
S: " t 1993-2002 Metropolitan Mobility/Rehabilitation Program,: 1993•
' 2002 Urban liability/Rehabilitation Program, 1993.2002 Rural f
f,y
r Mnbility/Rehaliilltntlon and 1994 Railroad Grade Separations
t R> Program.
e Exhibit E Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (Category 5): .
Cpl
Exhibit F - Bridge ReplacementiRehabiIitation, (Category 6):
(Additions), 1996 On
On State System Bridge Program
' State System Bridge Program, 1993-1995 Off State System Bridge
Program (Additions), and 1996 Off State System Bridge Program.
1
try .1
4 r
F. { 1
e. .
x
1 _
' . fw
V~Si~A~.kr~{1rrtW~atn:wl¢+A~.4hv+wa n e.. . .5,7.:::e A.lr ~.;r~~ J a ei'F~'ar r Smti. 45 dd i
fr ~ `
?,r r
T-
i
AAentlaNo, 00
1
' AQQMiI
p 111AS IPANSPURINION UWISSII~K
tt MIRIIII ORIl4 t ('a lc h u1 li I'dges (((II/
` VARIOUS. County
4i 1lktitrsrl NO. YARIUIIS
,
i txhibit G - farm to Ndrkel RoaJ Program (Category f1):
X191-1444 Farm I.0 Markel Road Program (Additions) and Moto farm to
Market Road Program.
Exhibit It - Commission Strdtegic Priority (Category 11).
Exhibit _I - State funded Nubility (Category 13).
Exhibit ) - Miscellaneous Programs (Categor; 16):
1994 Railroad Grade Crossing Replanking i'rogram.
IT 1S fURTHER ORDERED that the Executive Director is hereby I
authorized to proceed in the most feasible and ec+fcsl manner with
project development for the projects included in Exhibits 8 through J
to include any necessary agreements, right of way acquisition, utility
z adjustments, and relocation assistance, subject to the policies of the.
1 Iexas,Department of Transportation and all applicable Federal and State
15ition policies for acquiring real property.
the acQu t
laws governing
t 11 IS FURTHER ORDERED that the specific allocation programs, ,r.
' authorized by Minute order 101765 for the 1993 Transit nal Project ,
Development Plan shall remain active and in effect.
r 4 ; IT IS fURTHER ORDERED that the sections of highway shown In r
` Exhibit K are hereby designated as a part of the State Highway System
o the conditions indicated.
,
t
ec
ub
s
11 IS fURNLIt ORDERED that this Minnie Order be effective as of
September 1, 1993.
r
Y
}
{ I+nmined an,l ecomneluled by: j
Suhn+llleJ toy. ,
r,>>ruvs',! r,::u<idte I),,out"vo 4linrcI(d
1lirertur of Iltghuay hCSign II ,
` t
} t
Minute Humbvr IU75A7
I Vale fassc,f •IUI 1') 93 j
~F „n,• ,yr,ak t~„csGSa
YXi:dw~R:.4,iJ+~;rt.w iwi~:'W>:w]oera.," {
h
b.> a..y
r
i
' . A~endaNo ~y ~.~D
aperba ern
Gale
SPECIrICATION FOR PUBLIC SECTOR,
l NON-TRANSIT ALTERNATIVE MEL VEHICLES
"
s. FUNDIN,Q
• The funds provided by the State under the "Agreement for Funding Alternative
Puels Program", hereinafter referenced as the "Agreement", will be used to
reimburse the Recipient for costs incurred for the incremental cost of the
r purchase price of a new alterative fuel vehicle or conversion of an existing
4r
vehicle to operate on an alternative fuel. The "Incremental Cost" is defined as!
the cost of a certified conversion of an existing vehicle to use
at least one alternative fuell or
4
" the additional cost of installing an alternative fuel system on now
' vehicles which may be purchased by the Recipient over the normal cost of
b the now vehicle to,operate on a conventional fuel..
ff ?he maximum available funding eligible for reimbursement for each approved
ype is derived from. the programmed funding tables, approved. by the
vehicle t
Regional Transportation council, attached hereto and identified as Attachment 1.
i The amounts established in Attachment i shall include the cost of tho,actual
installation of the alternative fuel system, the cost associated' idith the
"Lesions tests and applicable costs incurred by.the Recipient in implementing
w, y.. the Alternative ruals Program. Under no circumstances will the federal
1y- reimbursable share exceed e0% of the total incremental cost.
Vehicles operating on the following fuel types are eligible for funding under the '
Alternative Fuele Program,
%
% b Natural gas - Compressed natural gas (CNO) or liquified natural gas (LNO)
b Propane (LPG)
Electricity
f Ethanol
Methanol
j ~
I
Page 1 of 3
aw
~~~Ib1~Wl~"~i'n..6Jini•3:a:.r.... o.........i, , ..v v.. .M V;'n+f'.F1!'.%%fLi
s r
CAM
' aoenQi+No. 9~ ~3~
~ apea4a ~
~-ILll~e CONVERSION APro°TncayE'hTa /
The vehicle must be registered and based in the Dallas-Fort Worth nonattainmont`(~j( f/
1 '
k area to qualify for funding under the Alternative Fuels Program. The Recipient
4 will provide to the State written verification of existing or planned alternative
r fuels stations from which the Recipient plans to obtain the required fuels. The f
verification must be submitted to the State
~ prior to the States issuance of
authorization to begin work. The conversion kit for the alternative fuel must
-be In compliance with the certification
process
Conservation Commission t•TNRCC• accepted by the Texas Natural
1 order
to
quality for fu
nd
in
under
hi 4
r
program.
An emissions test demonstrating air quality benefits will be
required by the State for each vehicle at the time of purchase or conversion.
The emissions test must measure volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides
I in a loaded mode (e. ,
, g•, IN 240 or similar). When appropriate, tests before and
after the conversion is performed should be conducted. Until the In 240 or
similar test is available, emissions tests using existing technology (e.g., four-
gas analyzer, Bar-90) will be acceptable. As a minimum, the emissions with the
alternative fuel in use must meet the traditional fuel emissions standards for
the model
~r year and classification of the vehicle. BI-fuel vehicles must be
tested in operation on both the traditional and alternative fuel. The State has
~ I
made arrangements with the North Central Texas Council of Governments (•NCT000•)
to act as its representative to review and approve various tests and reports
required under the agreement. The Recipient will forward the emissions teat
,
documentation directly to NCTCOC at the following address
i
North Central Texas Council of Covernm
616 six Flags Drive, Conterpoint Two sots "
.O So 8
x 588
Pi
Arlngton, T% 76005-5888
The States reimbursement of funds to the Recipient will be determined b
° approval of the emissions test, Y the
Page 2 of 3
e
~i~d+%~;,rA~el4aw~$r:KcaMC;P~i1 r +
of
L Y-.UF H
'sees
1
k
9~ Cf 4
A" A
` Ape~da
VEHICLE CONVERSION REOUIREMENTS
The vehicle must be registered and based in the Dallas-Fort North nonattainment
area to qualify for funding under the Alternative Fuels Program. The Recipient
will provide to the State written verification of existing or planned alternative
fuels stations from which the Recipient plans to obtain the required fuels. The
t' verification must be submitted to the State prior to the State's issuance of !
authorization to begin work. The conversion kit for the alternative fuel must
be Ln compliance with the certification process accepted by the Texas Natural
z, Resource Conservation Commission (•TNRCC•) in order to qualify for funding under
this program. An emissions test demonstrating air quality benefits will be
r
required by the State for each vehicle at the time of purchase or conversion.
The emissions test must measure volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides
in a loaded mode (e.g., IN 210 or similar). When appropriate, tests before and
after the conversion is performed should be conducted. Until the IN 210 or
similar test is available, emissions tests using existing technology (e.g., four-
gas analyzer, ear-901 will be acceptable. As a minimum, the emissions with the
alternative fuel in use must meet the traditional fuel emissions standards for
the model year and classification of the vehicle. BL-fuel vehicles must be
tosted in operation on both the traditional and alternative fuel. The State has
made arrangements with the North Central Texas Council of Governments (`NCTCGG•) +
t to act as its representative tn revie4 and approve various tests and reports
F, required under the agreement. The Pa:ipient will forward the emissions test
drxumentation directly to NCTCOG at the following address:
4i
North Central Texas Council of Governments
'S 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two
P.O. Box 5888
Arlington, TX 16005-!BBB '
I s~,
a
a
The State's reimbursement of funfls to the Recipient will be! determined by the
approval of the emissions test.
Page 2 of 3
i
1* ,
,rks',;'...,,...;M1•:et'C.E::':+,riMowXt' ~8.
t y~ `
M rRLV.~aarirFeWdl a':1W3!«v"71~ur aa~Y,r,1+Cr~: .hrt':'~ii?1r Ct'•`Ph~.Kai,4. ✓'i.a c-i V
t
m.
D3o
ApeiidaNo.~,~~ ~ j
Agendas
Date l °~t!i ~ .
FUEL EHICLE USE REQUIREMENTS
I
Regardless of the age of the vehicle at the time of convorsion, the Recipient
will be required to operate the vehicle using the alternative fuel for a minimum
of ninety percent (90%) of the vehicle miles traveled and maintain the vehicle
in its fleet for a period not leas than three (3) years. Additionally, each
vehicle funded through this agreoment must travel a minimum of 9,000 miles per
year in the Dallas -Fort North nonattainment area. Documentation verifying the
-usage requirements established hereabove must be provided to the NCT000 on an
J annual basis or at any time required by the State and/or NCTCOQ. If records are
not provided to the NCT000 by the Recipient or the records which have been
z'
provided by the Recipient reveals that the vehicles have not met the usage
requirements established in this agreement, funding for future vehicles under the
r ' Alternative Fuels Program may not be allocated. Some vehicles may not meet the
9,000 mile per year requirement because of unique circumstances. In those caaes',
special consideration for funding may be made if reasonable documentation is
,a r
S provided to the State.
In the event an alternative fuel vehicle funded under this agreement is destroyed
or lost through lice, theft, accident, or force maSeur0, the state will not seek
Y r: % ,
reimbursement of funds. However, should the Recipient decide to sell the vehicle
or otherwise voluntarily take It out of service, a prorated amount of funds
c provided under this program will be refunded by the Recipient to the State. The
Y
amortized amount of the refund will be based on the number of months the vehicle
was driven on the alternative fuel (up to 36 months) for at least ninety percent
(901) of the vehicle miles traveled during the ,ronth.
' OWN RSHIP ANp DISP09IYION
r At the and of the three (3) year operation period, the ownership and disposition
`c of the alternative fuel conversion equipment purchased under the agreement will
+4# be assumed by the Recipient. Continued use of the alternative fuel vehicles by
the Recipient is highly encouraged.
R Page 3 of 3
f:
KWWdX~w~ ~T~ I^W , V ~M YJr i:iiln~J1•
rf~F1t•lPsewR$'N..': :'-Ylk. {y~t..ri 75re `x~:.',{.L+:. , ;,+f.. h :Lf.;." ~
yeswv
k, agendas
tkte
ATTACHMENT' 1 '
PUBLIC SECTOR
4
ALTERNATIVE FUELS PROGRAM
EASTERN SUQREGION VEHICLE AND FUNDING ALLMAMNS
r
t y ~i t 9ti r ! ° 3> >eL i ~ a qE , s°~ ~~Q ~'b..? ~.6fi~' ~ a~ ~ e e•+ ~ro .kin, ; y
~.e~ y ~ °X, ~F ^?y"' ~ '3'' ~'.,A <S• r.P•..,f. 'y,
k NLl'
S
43.4. i°r
io (w~ CC ~R~
9 $14,416 2 $3,130 11
3
` $17,548
"(p§ $5.040 2 13.360 5 i8,400
- , 6 $13,200 32 $78,000 48 $118,600 86 $209,800
~ D ( 0'r3 20 $48.000 20 $48.000
'o- 18 $23.283 16 $23,283 I
4 $9.600 20 $28,640 24 $38,240 I
302 $661.968 1± 230 $507 136 92 $202,570 624 $1,374,674
r y' 28 $61,600 60 $132,000 88 $193.600
15 $33,000 15 $33.000
19 $33.410 19 $33.410
2, 155.000 25 ;51.000 50 $106,000
( 30 $66.000 30 $681000
31 $102,000 10 $22,000 10 $22,000
31 $102.000
.X" b $13,200
6 813,200
27 $51,840 2 $3,840 2 $3,640 31 U9,520
22 $49,800 20 $15.200 20 645.200 62 4140.200
k 6 $11,100 8 $19,200 8 $19,200 22 $52,800
P~ 10 $90.000 10 $89.200 40 468.000 120 $267,200
W hYV
12 $26,400 12 $26.400 12 $26.400 36 $79,200 j
M e" 2 $3.526 2 $0.528
n'. 32 s7n,400 6 $17,600 14 $3,800 54
$118,800
$7.280 7 $7,280 7 $7,260 21 821,640
28 $53.920 32 $62.060 50 $97,600 110 $213,600
A 39 $93,600 4 $6,400 7 1111,200 50 $111,200
t 27 08,643 12 $26,400
39 $85,013
12 $13,600 12 $13.600
~;rs 6 $13,200 6 $13,200
57 $125.400 60 0132,000 5o $110000 167 $387,400 `
Y t' n 1 A 6,
X ;y ' ~ ~ s i9 ~ 7 1
> r4•t'"~' Y~f.ry YR w,. 1rw~~Xy yV t`
" Q83 00~ {
r MN 0,1 %N1000
' s j A' Tn~yIIi 44~ ~~p•.~'L
i.
1 (1) Fu" approval based upon written verif"tlon tf refueling availability and
reapportionment of fund+by YOU consisienl with TOOT funding caps. '
r
(2) Commitment to number of vehicles and funding but not co09lxaUon a fuel type. i
(3) A1lecallon assumes $32,0$)0 for electric vehicle as requested.
(4) /Application received after deadline.
REVISED. S74M
F
eeenrr~
. ~o.3a IkQ
EXH18lT "D" uentlaNo
COST ESTIMATE ~ 'oendalte ,
/ r
t! a(f a t? ONO
P:
{ • fuel Vrps Vohiole Type No. of Conversion Conversion
Vehicles Coat per Coat
Vehicle bummar
CHO Automobile
CHO Ltgkt-duty
Truck
cNa Heavy-duty
Truck I
j
LNG Automobile
E LNG Light-duty
truck
LNG Has. duty
t Truek
+
' LPG Automobile
u' LPO Light-Duty hs;
.
Truck y.
v
LPO Heavy-duty r
Truck
e:+c
Total ■
Lama lend. Participation ■ ( )
Local PAKL1,CiPAtj0n. Cost it
(nttterencel
k Notes Federal Reimbursement is 60% of the Conversion Cost pas
vehicle n2l to exceed maximum Funding per vehiole as shown in
fblloving table.
The maximum available funding for each eligible vehicle type is as { s;
folloW9i
y•
Vehicle Tvoo Haximom rfunding Available
s
si-Fuel Dedicated
Automobile $2,200 $2,400
Light-duty Truck-under 8,500 lb GVwR $2,200 $2,400
Heavy-duty Truck-over 8,501 lb GVNA $2,400 $2,600
(including school Buser(
a Fuel Types Natural Gas (cNG)
. Liquified Natural Gat: (LNG)
Propane (LPG)
i
k
awll
Omni
-d V Ex t •1 ~E0
U. e. DEPARTMENT OF TFU.N,PORI1- ON rE0CAA4AID FROlECT N~.
~YY,~" IlU14V $"MAY MI *S Nn• ~{Al1Vw
grei-W 18418
OBt9 j
LETTER Of APPROVAL AND10R AUTHOftl2AT`O aGCruAM No. xA. GoIX4TY# ~ 41994
frank M• May f. ITEM No. Da as
Division Administrator
Aus&%Texas 78701
F (:113
MF. fioeeFt c.w ❑ Fttt P'?~ Mgt 1 i
Director. De Division /
Texas t of Transponation ..~1 11 13 ❑ f
E Please Hendlo,
egos 78701
f. fTATE ROUTE NgREeER
S. FEDERAL ROUTE NUWEA
'r 7. ATE AUTHOMEATWN EFFEGTM . ~
63.94
10. OENEMI LOCATION: ' -
WOOL:
" 11 OEIIERAL "SCWTw0 Of WOM
r , CoEnrersion of pc Peet to alternative fuel vehicles.
' 13. YOU ARE AU..O.D TO ►ROGEED WI TNE. WORE GHEGKEO BELOW
v ® ADYI'M FOR RECEIPT Of BIDS
FREIbAWMY E7NiIkiPNO TO (7ETF.MCN! IODATION cow fTRUGTiON • y..
' : ❑ OMY WGE 0*"
CONiTRUCTN)N FfnOtt.EO ON AN AGREED F t~'..
F NELRAW ARY p161NLE MG FOR CONTMCT KM FORCE ACCOUNT SAAB I!.
C3 FREPAMTION
OTHER ltNdtd
AOOEAMTION OF pOHTOF•WAY
I
r t 1,
it. K.,W
ed to proceed with projexenvtect to eri ons a~ndoversi0hc acid this uttwEi:ation is
ppaEtrlbnE is auttwri:
pGanee with as provisions of the Oversight Agreement.
Projects dated Septerritief 30• 1992. This prolxt
made with the understanding ftt Elie Department witl ensure com
The amount of federal funds obroated for this project is $1,666.400.00. {
'I A t~j• 1 ~ \1
} I
cc: T%DO7° Budget b finance Division
lf. not f
t4. OATE ts. unto *n
District Engineer
1.' 060M nabinet
.1 of Mi. 30
' ~ 1if~?t~'k~[A.'r+~~.E~t~NK'a!}`^~j~,`, .+f~A•v5sp d. 1, ~ I. •t r-:;•, r q~"..F iI'J;:'. r., . _ ~1
r a
. - "c+rasy
wool
r
w Mi
VendaNo
4g6ndaltem
Alternative Fuels Program (CMAQ} .Z.~ ~'2l/
INSTRUCTIONS FOR BILLING STATEKENT {FORM 112)
~ (See Example).
j Op PAYa6s Agency•name as shown in the agreement Tabulated.
19.g Type in date this Billing Tabulated.
DATE
AppRggg Agency addresa as shown in the agreement. (BOA Example).
t;ITY i STATES Complete
i DSLIVKRY DATES Leave Blank
' VEND" =pygg; ID number assigned by State Comptroller to each vendor.
LINK, Le3Ve Blank.
g/xs Leave Blank.
x r YNVOYCE DAR'Es Leave Blank.
r INVpICS 1R7li8RRs consecutive number for each billing beginning with 001,
tYS Fiscal Year, (For 6xetnplet Sept. 1 1997 thrv )Lug. 31. 1994 is
" considered FY-94) '
"p" for partial payment of contract amount. ,X
"F" for Final.
BOUitCB UNITI Always 740.
IMCRIPTiON1 Type • Alternative Fuels Program (~4) s ServiTO'Pariod (Time
for which this billing reflects) Fri J
A,.. QUAxTYs Show the number of vehicles being converted for the appropriate
unit price.
UNIT PRICES The coat per type of conversion.
ANOMM: Represents the Quantity times the unit price. ur
TOTALS sum of Items shown in Amount Column. .zr
1
C6wrpAcT N0. Contract Number assigned by Fort Worth District as shown on the
upper right corner of agreement. a
r a I
DATSs The executed date as shown on Agreement,
YUNCTION CODE: Use number 163,
page 1 of 2
~~.~as` yre~L. ^r..° r,. n, r~' hl, A .o~ i 'l,4litck<a4V7k B$rF i~}ti r, ~'~'=~ii'~"~''~li'•4 ~l
+~~J'fb~ 'Yi ;i iw iv'~•:..~11 A'~F..~.._ ~'v{~Si/;gG ~w ~y; y r I~1lSfk.5.4+1N
lpYLfiQ
r.
-r ~
,
Qer~aNa
age~daft
ate
RECAPITULATION °Z3 aG
TOTAL PAYM M!' DUB THIS PERIOD: Same as TOTAL.
TOTAL ALL PREVIOUS PAYKRNTS: Sum of all previous payments.
j
'T'OTAL EARNED To DATE (INCLUDING THIS CLAIM►s Sum of Total Amount due this
Period + Total All Previous Payments.
TOTAL AGRNENW? AMOUNTS Maximum Amount Payable an shown on Page 3 of the
agreement.
c BOTT014 PORTION OF BILLING STATEMENT
Llttxs Leav9 Blank.
_ 88Q: Loav9 Blank.
t , UIST. OR DIv.t'Atway6
YRG. I,b. s '1►lways 76 x;
DETAILS Control, Section, Job (CSJ) Number for the project (furnished to you
s, by tha PAL(.A5 District)
1 : rf AN00li'Pr. Total amount this billing period.
t` PU10C.t` Always 163. ,
O8J. OF BXP,'t Always 316,
:r
COLlssn6 61; thru 76'LaAVa BLANK
814natUra biock'on,left bottom to be completed by agency.,
Subunit ''one original and one copy.
t' r
l'
Page 2 of 2
, '~.'~~'~?4~~'cw.t,~,~i+'t'vv.+~`~,%~t'•aai~'`~`~~k~r''ia~`ar<i,r !~'Sw~aKr~+i~,'~,,k~cec~k:!
1
a'
i
««./w rIV.M «..,..IIYYI niLL{N4 STATEMENT, . P.002 ' PDIrPta194-06-29 15:04 Tr-rv 837-6459 ..,rA.r c..r..«.+. 1`
tw•N w r i.Y^~ . r4..r. o 1
.sralRp.a. 4 rr+. L. 1 ..'o ~ti. 0.
11 WA of PAYA"d op brw.oM .M~ ..►+'~Orhi WNrnnl«-.~N►~"
t ~Y~wMTSa.pr.~.b ~.W r«~.RPr~'.MMI•sv>YA Yr P.►wf O.N --_19 i~
` ciI,xw1._11t _ i
i A>tlnfs
I ~ YENDOR b NU46E N:
CKLr4RYOATE! NIp y1
fESS rr1oR m i war PAIGE
EIxP 1 DIIf y1Nf(l h 3 -
_ .ado ire
a
ewr
tad o K 7CC, S. 6 tS
tx NutfT •
T AL
OWR ATSND O 12 4
UG M YIf C ec
OIR RK Mx y .
' njP 011i1 N1CIAli fplfY[Mrj01.RU ,~0
un -~Iw 114 ~
N fr0u111 • WOOL
,y > 1 ~ if Y xax ' t0a t(1R{f f<1
V° 4 Licn
` Halt af. aglwr r Y
„u, xw f1"I Ev - c
uu Do M
fAAra f fQarn {rf *UUI[I-~;~Vri tC {
_ II H - _ U M 11 y 4 11 M M 11 /t I/ M IS M 11 M 11 M /1 11 q u >tlK~ 1 b 10 •
UANNHH INN r 4..
1> IN
h
aMr.4r u~MI ►GENCV Ct R1WCAIN. -
I CI NTOI I wl t4 WA If "Kff wf Rf KUMnED. UE LOOM Rf TI+vkD
~ fe!MI tHatTHEICWE"D WEVERY PUIt+CIl HI vn1A TIIE CWOACI UNDI II WHC~
wr~ tMIM tf Ya qN1 T,~y VAW HWJjRi'i1►ND INAI 14 m.dit it IRA. AND UNPdO
11*MIOPwAMNO~MO Mn oMfo'I'~ob W M boAl at IN Now "m" MM4
14r/M1 onF1i M1 MA Wry rY..1~ 4nIW toAhM M H1 MBA' k1A,frY.H. -~klWl 1A/E
i M*Ar4i a+db wvlw.eYHat4.
W WWII GECUI►tiON$ AhO PooTywf nIIRKD -
. KyPplltsb 000tIMEME00w►ICTi 1+
i
4
- 3 M
Cf1U~$IrT.eY1td1'.[y!!(~F'~d"i3 t'JW+~~nr d :;sl « . 'v'•~.? Y , n ,
~S
. ~ y~
EY110T'D• QendaNo
en
COST ESTIMATE
C-1~
3
. p,,.,l Type Vehicle Type Ito. of conversion conversion
vehicles cost per Cost
Vehicle aummar i
CNO Automobile
C I
HO Light-duty
Truck 14 3167.93 44,351.02
CHO Has -duty 1 3167.93 3,167.93
Trvrk
n ~
L)IC Autcoobile kl
LNG Light-duty
Truck
LNO Heavy-duty
Y
muck
LPG AutoaWblle - E
L!0 Light-putt'
truck
LP4 Heavy-duty
~•.c Truck e rt•.
Total 47,S18.95
Lsae Fed. Participation • t 33,000.00
Local Participation Coat 14.518.95
(Difference)
r
Notot Federal Reimbursewent is 801 of the conversion cost per
vehicle »A, to exceed snaxlmum Funding per vehJuic as shovn in
relieving table.
' u. The maximum available funding for each eligible vehicle type Is as
i fellowsI
• V*filale nroo maxim L aIn41a4 Qedtedtca&ed
Autcooblle $2,200 $2,400 i!E
Light-duty Truck-under 8,$00 lb cV" $2,200 $2,100 ~y
Heavy duty Truck-over 8,501 lb GVWR $2,400 $20600 1t
;lncludinp school eueel) ,
u
i a Fuel Types Natural Gas (CHO)
y Liquified Natural Gas (1,NG)
Propane (LPG)
• .
u
tr .
L••ASW
. 1
V8fI~H0 `r
AC I FLEET SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ALTERNATE FUELS--CNG PROJECT
Time Period: August 1, 1993 to August 15, 1994
4
w Pon Daft: 09MA4
.
4 WING BEGINNING YEARLY ' 1=NGINE
DEPARTMENT EM1S #E. R16MILEAGE- MiLEaGI~ AGE , a $
~ b "Y ,:3 , f_ , . z...~< i w • ' • . , '.a ° «~~a' , x "z v w?.1~~":, f
Water D st. r. < 9306 6101 69804 557 51247 6.2(310) Water Dist./Mtr. 9222 6111 289709 17,791 10,918 5,0 302
,
Electric Dist, 9310 5210 130688 505 13,i83 5.0 3m
Electric Dist. 9100 6214 17,146 12,791 4,355 5.8(36j
Electric Mtr. 9303 3406 249217 4 685 190632 3.9 2.39 V
Electric Mtr. 9304 3408 149919 3,130 110789 5.2 318
8 .
Electric Mtr. 9305 3404 22,295 4,930 17,365 6.2(11
'Electric SubStat. 9213 5516 39,100 19,816 19,284 4.9-1300
"i. Solid Waste 9311 1971 121677 21958 9,619 6.7 350
Solid Waste 9111 1700 32,056 219390 100666 4.9(300 Solid Waste 9037 1706 38,632 29,158 91474 6.2 318
445 3,939 13 606 6.9 360 I
Parks 9333 3580 1 '
71
; Water Prod. 9312 6007 1101374 21961 7,413 6.7 350
Er! /Bld In . * 9413 1105 21407 43 2,364 4.9(300
A:L
En /Bld Ins p. 9418 1165 116W 46 10614 5.0 302
r._.. * Mileage recorded from 6/19/94
Mileage recorded from 7/05/94
y;.
.
..!ryMWw.... r---... ....._._.__._..,a~..Wd;pikpy4l~~ry¢J:r:rwv:A ,n........_-... _.~_.o.~„Liyfy:~r•~
r,
~+4
f
t
Fr iTy
~COUNrO
3
a
r f
I i !
at~ t °
J
h I
:W
~a
1 1 Ir
f:
I .
{
6
i
1
f
1
1
no
r
A 7
i
I j
3
CITYo/DLIIIT K TKUS MUN10PAL BUILD1NO / 215 E McKfNNEY / DENTON. TEXAS 76201
MEMORANDUM i
,y TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
t r FROM: Jon Fortune, Management Services Administrator
~ 11
DATE: September 13, 1994
SUBJECT: 1995-99 CIP RESOLUTION
3r
`
r Please find attached a resolution to approve the first year of the 1995 99 Capital s r j
Improvement Program. , A summary of the 1994 95 year as recommended by thg -
Plennmg' and Zoning Commiseton and amended by Council during the annual Planning i
V.
a w s,^ Session is also attached. ! R" .
~ra r}
d, If you have any questions, please advlsel
All
AMONG
J{ r, ~'r d Y
I'~ ~l rt - jr
eft ~ a r`:.
~ 1 r I r .'.(.a
C
8171688-82M D/FIN METRO 434.2529
1
f
~'r ~'a~t.r..Gr~fv r V&e rF i
Jw~ it
r ::.p
TO
*,&Um
Es\YPWAREs\WL TAI. IN
j gendaNo
+geRda1 ~
VF
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROPOSED BY THE
PLANNING AND ZOVING COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, on the 25th day of May, 1994 the Planning and zoning
Commission recommended the capital Improvements to be constructed
E during the forthcoming year; and
WHEREAS$ the City Manager furnished a copy of the recommend-
tions to the city Council on the 7th day of June, 1994; and
WHEREAS, all of the above actions were taken in o!;mpliance with j
the requirements of Section 10.01(a)(6) of the City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to formally adopt the recom-
mendations of the commissions NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES:
SECTioN I. That the Council approvea.the attached list of
.capital- improvements proposed to be constructed during the
forthcoming year.
SECTION II. That this resolution shall become effective-
immediately upon its passage and approval
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of r 1994. s
BOB CASTI.EBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY;
Y
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
I
BY;
i
r ~l#7A1 . 4w . w Mxe.
iOeAdaNo ~D ~ '
Dole
1995-99 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN `s
GENERAL GOVERNMENT S+u~w~crr~wr~rwan
TOTA
r * ' J, r ~ t1EClM~f °Alb" Td1'11L~~
s~F . ~nWC~ E=nO A i Y~AY1.ls. Q1v}4^, } Y . Pk .',.E~,}.,5f 1
s~•,,µ. .ul.~'.' ° ~0"r'.~ ~~y.~ s a; , p >2 ~ s ~ Maw F #
i~rMF 1V~1 P .~Y~G F 90;. UN"0V.. UN'MUEO 5
04-06 FAP000
04-060 006318 FAMKVBOPSWWOR"UT 26o.DO "o,oo0 260.000 7000.
001014 9TREETREOON9IRUO" 151.760 151,760 134,760 ~i
04 -96 PAC woMT 000X1 NEW ROOF FOR 9 oENBUL PWD OL006 3m.m 399,000 30,000
94-M 04 0010101 M46 BI 16ET CONMWOO01CONFRUCTM 206,26o 106,260 206,260
04-96 PAPWMIO 006312 PAM AO0Wrt10N NOIIT *Mff 200.000 200,000 200,000
41-l6PANWC 006316 90UT11LwlPARK0ENi0PMENT 500.000' 300,000 500100
04-06A91"T 0016006 CON61'fo00'WWAYANDlgFrt1NOWS. M r&.660 22!,660 2.04100 .2.266,600
94-01i DRANUM MA"*1 &NOWATOOPPM 20.000 20.00o 20,6CO
91-96 ORmm" CAA9FOB.L STREET WWNAOE 90.000 00,000 S0 000 c
91-96"DA4IAOE 061061 A"s1TWYDRAl11A0E 100100 100.00 100.000
N-96 wAiw ! • ARCN6R TRALXMBMON NEAR NOT UGHAM 26.000 26,000 26,000 ; y
M-66 DRANOM PEOAN Mm CHAN K lNNNO 16,OOo 16,000 16AR1
4-66,DK~ NLLOMKRl9TDRNNAOE 60.000 60,606 60.00.
Y S 4i-06 N10 OFDt*U$ALONO W*WAY PROJECTO 760.000 160000 760ADO
TOTAL 200.260 1.634.760 0 926.060 9.768066 2,011,660`.4,607,600-" 76,000
r,
N
r •
,
~ri1~O R1Ar" 60ww (NOh/4M OwWb" of OblQA11011, hmid b01A1f06, NO get" W fNOUroft ],d
t
s
t
-C ITrYM
t
-WOUNCI
4
i
. 3
f ; t ei eRt4jb. I
4 ti+
r r 0 r. 41
r ar...
ar.+'aWP
x4W
L"NaftW gue Wwh om o c Araw,e N.W. a 0 Q nQ S
MIS (220004 0*
M 626-3000
Of
Far: (202) 6283043 Frr ltr ibaL#F-' V
CouMaaam {spa A6nWDaoab
August S, 1' )94
same w Forest _
Hal cb+a+
Nap, aru ftbw%CWaeil
MEMORANDUM boll Ar, Pawllwifar
GLdaE HmA 1 '
LAyor. G Wft Flab
Eftn" VFW"
f, To. City Clerks of Direct Member Cities °v °°"°"A
From: Donald J. Borut, executive Direc E
Subject; Designation of Vcr,ig and Alte to Voting Delegates, f
Annual Congress of Cities, December 1-4, 1994, Minneapolis, Minnesota
DUE OCTOBER 10
The National League of Cities' Annual Business Meeting will be held Sunday, December 4,
1994 at the Congress of Cities in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Under the Bylaws of the National
League of Cities, each direct member city is entitled to cast from one to 20 votes, depending
upon the city's pofuladon, through its designated voting delegate at the Annual Business
Meeting. The table on the reverse side of this memorandum shows the breakdown of votes
by population categories.
,
To be eligible to cast the city's vote(s), each voting delegate and alternate voting delegate
must be designated by the city using the attached form which will be forwarded to NLC's
Credentials Committee. NLC's Bylaws expressly prohibit voting by proxy. Thus, the
designated voting delegates must be present at the Annual Business Meeting to cast the city's
vote or votes.
%
To enable us to get your credentials in order and to provide your voting delegates with
proposed National Municipal Policy amendments and proposed Resolutions prior to the
Congress of Cities, we ask that you return the IVORY copy of the completed form to NLC r`
on or before October 10, 1994. A pre-addressed envelope is attached, Upon receipt of
these names. NLC will send each voting and alternate voting delegate a set of instructions on
registration and rr,e7: governing the conduct of the Annual Business Meeting.
To assist your state, municipal league in selecting delegates to cast votes on behalf of the state
municipal league, please forward the BLUE copy of the credential form to your state league
office and keep the MMI copy for your records.
I
If you have any questions, please contact Lesley-Ann Rennie at (202) 626-3020.
M PnFIAMNw W" bwW#* . Nayw, M a Omura to • fM Nw"l Nays komf4 No& NaOi Cwao,a • CMr grymalW . CarWMnnw M1+W. D~, CobWO
wwbra: Lary E. OAm" LftA" WO Cwo6m • ABM Adr4 WYO', Fan Crass CWwaoo • Lad aaadwn 4. twHnar4 Yowpslorn CriO • Don aamtna W"ek [ anAM
Daub. Laapw a Calav++a C . • ik" EwW, Nayw. Ow Puy T* a • k0am CWzld. Gry Conntiniwrr, DWw.0a+o • Cwt ClnaaA Fanver• Dwc9w. Wyanvq AuoO~ of
M.+wME.a • L w. Cranwlb, IL Caacnnrt CA r" `ou nt C-W • Ceuta A. DOW", T4ayw. AvV" DawVa' hhh O"W Comm"", saw. naror • WMbr Eny,
Nayw, badoribn Fbrea • Ilwtln DbaoA Atlwmw4 Nort LNN nod Ar4Mta • Ileeart A, •baaraan, Cowroarwiaw Larwgton, Ic.raaay • Arran L Mh.f' FaaolMr D.Mar,
v.ma+ WP+ a can and tors • waiW F. aNr• tarn ceva fruEwA FiNrf rar,r • AeOa LwM• wrw Pro r. n• .wr ~r+md Caulwnr , G,.oory , , _•a Nayw,
CeLrrAa. Colo • aNW Aadorn laa, CawrdmamOw a trp. HuuNal Tarq • Aarr lb0armaA NaYa, LaaAarM, Fb+b• afn•i L Uwp. EeaNOw OarM RrrluOry lagA tl '
' CNM • MaM MaeLaN. CAM Wmear, lkornaa0. 4ma.a!a • y4rFwn NaAwb1. Gry Cowl An1Mn, Dwra7. Mcr• i+n . ThwW a4 Y•Nro, Nayar aoabn, WauwwFNb
4 INrm1a P. alraYf, Jr• Via WYw. AnxeaN. A,'awr • J. EE YwNm, tbFw, HamasWq ►N+~aa4p • ~7n Nad. Vra Mayor Pa adwr CeAarq • Mr, ► Ma, Frrf•q,a.
Albania • rwT n+u4 CourrA NanOer. Nn roil Nn roA • sown hYat cn Dnaa. LAN RaA. Ananw • Cwoyn Mb, Laud Narioar runorA~ CaFOma • w nar•l Wn.
p~w~p~.p Tarrea,a • 1. lynn Irt, E•aam.a haoly. laapua d NArada LN1~nKg4uw • AGCY K tanolr4 CowtMnrJw. Par Huron N,cRgan • aaymanE C. alDla, ErrCwnr
Daw,b. Fb6 lpw w CNL • wwben /lnbF. N4~Fort N~C'p•n' FrM aM.tl, E.anRa. CrMa Tnaa Nuncpl Upw' OFn 7rwnPasn F••MM Gr•dw.lw¢w al
Wsarrn Mrt0almH • Yaa W. Was►Cand+rmow, Daaaa Torn • /fm w. MTIr, COYikamanOw, Nanl WaWplw •!w1 a. wanrro,Yayv, fiwrun ►an, rlnor
. It FAMW Pow
i
f
}
j"NO
qer lalt
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
ANNUAL CONGRESS OF CITIES
N=W of Votes - - T
Direct Member Ci
ttec
a
Article IV, Section 2 of NLC's Bylaws specifies as follows the number of votes which each
member city of the National League of Cities is entitled to cast at the Annual Congress of i
Cities:
J a
or,
b h 0
00 to
,999 2 votes
100,000 - 199,999 4 votes
200.000 - 299,999 6 votes
(r ,
300,000 - 399,999 8 votes
400.000.499,999
10 votes
300.000 - 599,000 12 votes
600,000 - 6991000
14 votes
700.000 799,000 16 votes
t 800,000 899,000 18 votes
900,000 and above
20 votes .
Note: Member cities'are required by the Bylaws to cast unanimous votes.
t
R; " III
,
""i "Ol
1
1I
fi
i
}t
s
V
i
Ei 1'4 C)
y
E
1 s
1 -4
I I mEE