HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-02-1990 Ile J~
Owl
Fr
r
j r AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
October 2, 1990
j
Work session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday,
October 2. 1990, at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room of City
Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the following
items will be considered:
Note: Any item listed on the Agenda for the Work Session may
also be considered as part of the Agenda for the
Regular Meeting. 1
5:15 p.m.
1. Executive Session:
A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17
V.A.T.S.
3 1. Consider action in Coun~y vs. C and
I
Woodson vs. City. f
B. Real Rotate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17
V.A.T.S.
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g),
Art 6252-17 V.A.r.B.
1. Discussion regarding procedures involved in i
the annual review of the Municipal Judge,
City Attorney and City Manager.
P 2. Consider an appointment to the Public
Utilities Board and appointments to the
Zoning Task Force,
~E
24 Hold a discussion regarding approval of the proposed
DENCO E 9-1-1 budget for the fiscal year 1990-91.
3 3. Receive and discuss a report supporting certain
statutory amendments proposed by the Texas Municipal y
League to Chapter 143 of the Local Government Code.
t
4. Hold a discussion regarding an annexation schedule
setting the date, time, end place for public hearings.
i
5. Receive and discuss a report regarding a proposed
ordinance amending Appendix A. Subdivision and Land ,
Development, Code of Ordinances, regarding Parking Lot
surface standards. (The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval.)
r i
I
1
I~
~lpNl ~}q, l
11
l
r
,H
s
City of Denton City council Agenda
r•l•• October 2, 1990
Page 2
Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday.
October 2, 191)0, at 'x1:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City
Hall, 215 E. McKinney,, Denton, Texas at which the following
items will be considert~d:
7:00 p.m.
1. Presentation of a proclamation for the University of
North Texas Centennial Celebration Extravaganza Day.
2. Receive a citizen report from Matthew Christopherson
regarding the speed limit on Avenue A not being
enforced.
3. Receive a citizen report from Robert Anway regarding
an appeal of the decision of Chief Jez in the matter
of Denton City Taxi as stated in the City Charter.
4. Receive a citizen report from Tom Kay iegatdtnc
swimming pool safety.
5. Receive a citizen report from Joe Dodd regardinu c
restoration of the Dill of Rights.
6, public Bearings
A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an
ordinance amending Appendix A, Subdivision and
Land Development, Code of ordinances, regarding
Parking Lot Surface Standards. (The Planning and s~
Zoning Commission recommends approval.)
7. ordinances
A. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending
Chapter 6 "Cemeteries" of the ,:ode of ordinances
of the City of Denton, Texas oy amending Section
6-2 (c), entitled "Plattin; and Sale of Lots or
1 Blocks" by revising the fees to be charged for q
plots; repealing all ordinances in conflict
herewith.
I, B. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending j
Article V of Chapter 26 "Vehicle for Hire" of the
Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas
by amending Section 26-66 (b), entitled
"Emergency Service provided by Fire Department;
Fees"; repealing all ordinances in conflict
herewith.
i
I
i'
1 '
1
6
Y
City of Denton City Council Agenda
C4. ober 2. 1990
p.:4e 3
C. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending
Article I of Chapter 4 "Animals" of the Code of
( Ordinances of the City of Denton. Texas by
amending Section 4-23 (b), Section 4-34 (b); and
by adding a new Section 4-24 "Euthanasia";
repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith.
D. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of
Denton, Texas, amending Article 11 "Food
i Establishments" of Chapter 11 "Food and Food
i Establishments" by amending Section 11-21 "Permit
Required" to provide for a new section 11-21 (d)
` establishing fees for inspections; and repealing
all ordinances in conflict herewith.
i
E. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of
Denton, Texas, amending Article V "Swimming
Pools" of chapter 5 "Buildings" by amending i
Section 5-•179 "Permits to Operate" to provide for
a new section 5-179 (c); and repealing all
ordinances in conflict herewith.
F. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending
Chapter 5 "Buildings" of the Code of Ordinances ,
of th,- City of Denton, Texas by amending Section
5-10 "Application" and Section 5-26 "bame Fee" to
provide for revised fees; and repealing all
ordinances in conflict herewith.
G. Consider adoption of an ordinance amendinq
Section I of ordinance 90-026 providing Rules of
` Procedure for the City Council of Denton, Texas;
amending the Order of Business for City Council i
meetings. J
H. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving an
agreement between the City of Denton, Texas and
} Greater Denton Acts Council authorizing the Mayor
to execute an agreement and providing the y
expenditure of funds therefor.
9. Resolutions
A. Consider approval of a resolution supporting
certain statutory amendments proposed by the
Texas Municipal League, to Chapter 143 of the
Local Government Code.
I If
~Fa
at
j W
City of Denton City Council Agenda
{ October 2. 1990
{ Page 4
B. Consider approval of a resolution temporarily
closing portions of Avenue E, Avenue D. West
Mulberry Street, West Sycamore Street, Edwards
Street, Highland Street, and Egale Drive on
October 18. 1990.
9. (Tabled) Consider adoption of an ordinance amending
Section 5-176 of Chapter 5, Article V (Building Code)
of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton
wsc relating to fencing and gate requirements for swimming +
pools; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount
of $500.00 for violations thereof; providing for a
severability clause; and providing a repealing
clause. (The Building Code Board recommends approval.)
10. Consider a motion to adopt an annexation schedule
setting the date, time, and place for public hearings
(A59).
I.
11. Discuss and consider an appointment to the Joint City
of Denton/Denton Chamber of Commerce Economic
Development Board.
12. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
A. Report detailing results with State Department of
Highways and Transportation Meeting of 9/24/90.
13. Official Action on Executive Session Items:
A. Legal Matters
B. Real Estate
C. Personnel
D. Board Appointments
14. New Business:
i
a section for council Members to
This item provides
suggest items for future agendas.
i 4
15. Executive Session:
A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17 ~i,
V.A.T.S. ti
~r
B. Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17
V.A.T.S.
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g),
Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S.
I
I
i
4
t
N
City of Denton City Council Agenda
October 2, 1990
Page 5
NOTE: THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO
EXECUTIVE SESSION AT ANY TIME REGARDING ANY ITEM FOR WHICH IT
IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE.
C E R T I F I C A T E
I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the
bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Denton. Texas,
on the day of
1990 at o'clock k
p.e.)
F
J CITY SECRETARY
3296C
i
i
ti ,h
y
i
1
w
Fi i
A
4+ 4
I Is
CITY
COUNCIL
Mll:
i 514 h~ ,
3 0 I
t
0aa
M~6L00~~~~0
l
,t
r
i^1 Y
X02
Q
i
CITY of DENTIN, rM# 215 E. McK1NNEY/ DENTON, TEXAS TE2011 TELEPHONE (811) 5M200 x
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 26, 1990
I
TO: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
FROM: John F. McGrane, Executive Director of Finance~~
SUBJECT: PROPOSED BUDGET FOR DENCO E-9-1-1
Attached Is the Proposed DENCO E-9-1-1 Bjdget for the 1990.91
year, Bill Munn, Executive Director for the District has been
invited to attend the 5:15 worksession this Tuesday to answer
any questions that Council might have.
If you need additional information, please advise. j
JFMcG:af
Attachment
S446F
r
t
t~
P `
4 1`[
,
~t
DENCO AREA 9.1-1 DISTRICT 1 SEP 19 IM
1660 STEMMONS FREEWAY y
, SUITE 295
LEWISVILLE, TEXAS 75067
(214) 221-0911
September 18, 1990
h
Dear City Manager/Secretary:
As Director of the Denco 9-1-1 District, 1 am pleased to have been able to participate in 1
the provision of Enhanced 9-1.1 service to the citizens of Denton County.
I am also pleased to present to your city the 1990.91 Operating Budget for the District, i
as approved by the Denco Board of Managers, September 13, 1990. We regret the late
approval date, but were waiting until after the August 18 cutover date to ensure final
dollar figures for the nen-recurring and monthly costs, which make up 60% of the
1990-91 Budget.
According to our legislation, a majority of the cities in the District must approve the
Budget. 1 would appreciate your placing this on your council agenda on the earliest
available date, and sending a copy of the resolution, or other indication of approval to the
District offices.
If you or your council have concerns or questions about the budget, please do not hesitate
i to contact me. 1 look forward to continuing our association with Denton County during
the next year.
Sincerely,
Bill Munn
Executive Director
E Enclosure
M x
I BM/cy a
i
i
r.
F
l
i
~01A
0
i
r
'
DENCO AREA 9.1-1 DISTRICT
1990-91 OPERATING BUDGET OVERVIEW
In August, 1987, Denton County voters approved the creation of the Denco Area 9-1-1
District for the purpose of implementing and coordinating Enhanced 9.1.1 Service for the
citizens of Denton County. Following three years of effort, fully Enhanced 9-1-1 service
was initiated for Denton County, August 18, 1990. a
The District is governed by a Board of Managers, comprised of the following members:
ember dpi o'nted b
Randy Corbin Denton County Fire Chiefs Assoc.
!
Olive Stephens Denton County Mayors S
David Puiifoy Denton County Mayors
Jim Ferguson Denton County
Charles Karl Denton County 1
Melvin Willis (non-voting) General Telephone
f
Legislation which created the District, Article 1432e of the Vernon's Revisal Texas ~
Statutes, provides for the District to collect up to six percent of the monthly base rate for
the primary service provider. However, the Denco District collects fees based upon three
percent of the base rate. The fee structure follows:
Residential Line .27
1
Business Line .71
Business Trunk Line 1.13 I
The non-recurring, or start-up costs for the District and recurring fees and administrative 1
3
costs will be met through the available revenues, No fee increase or financing will be
required for the District's operations. z
#
The 1990-91 Operating Budget was approved by the Denco Area 9.1.1 District Board of
Managers. Highlights of this proposed budget follow.
- ~ I
1
1
all
l fM
1
4
Denco Area 9.1-1
1990.1991 Budget Overview r
Page 2
RMNiJES
lie Fee Revenue $ 710,800
Interest Revenue 24.000
Total Revenue $ 37 4.800 I
r
Fee revenues over the past year have shown a moderate but steady increase in Denton
County, a reflection of the g! wth of the area. Fees are projected to increase rive percent
over the current year, The only other source of revenue, interest on investments, is
projected at half of the current year total, due to the fact that a large portion of the
invested funds will be utilized to pay non-recurring costs for the District.
A ~
EXPENDITURES
5100 - Personal Services
1990.91
t
Cog Ca ¢orv Budget i
5110 Salaries $ 90,424
5120 Health Benefits 91575
5130 Retirement Benefits 6,330
5140 Worker's Compensation 376
5100 - Total $ 106,705
During the implementation year, the Denco Area 9-1-1 District contracted with the Tarrant
County 9-1.1 District to coordinate and manage the final Implementation activities. This
agreement has been extended by both boards of managers until the end of the 1Q90-91
fiscal year, with the Tarrant County role being phased out and the hiring of a permanent I
C executive director for Denco,
r
( Funds provide for the continuation of two existing full-time positions, for the hiring of a
full-time Executive Director in the spring, 1991, and for the addition of a full-time Manager
of Public Education. This activity is critical to any emergency communications district and
f bears the responsibility for the management of various programs designed to educate thr
public of the availability of 9.1-1 and its proper usage.
!
I
na I 1
a
for•.• Pw w^~p
i
Denco Area 9-1.1
1990-1991 Budget Overview
Page 3
`61
Positions and salaries provided in the 1990-91 budget are:
ositio 1 Salarv
Executive Director (4 months) $ 16,000 ~
Data Base Manager 29,172
Public Education Manager 24,000
Executive Secretary 21,252
Expenditures for Health and Retirement benefits reflect an increase from two to four full-
time positions.
x
5200- Materials and Supplies
c
1990.91 i
Cody too Budget 1
5210 Office Supplies $ 2,500
5220 Printing 1,500 i
5230 Postage 11000
5240 Maps & Materials 5_,..0
5200 • Total $ LUNO
Expenditures reflect a continuation of current levels of expenditure for normal office
activities, including postage, office stationery, and maps and materials.
5300- Furniture and Equipment I~I
1990.91 i
CCod to et F
5310 Furniture $ 3,000 F
5320 Office Equipment ]2.000
9 5300 • Total $ m0o0
Funds were provided in the current budget for the acqu.%:tion of numerous items necessary
to continue the administrative activities and to initiate public education activities. These
I purchases were deferred due to the use of Tarrant County facilities and equipment.
However, the Denco Area District will need to acquire furniture and equipment for these
purposes, to include personal computers for the Director and Manager of Public
` f Education, as well as audio visual equipment necessary to produce, review and utilize
public education material:-.
Ii i I
!
k
r
1
i
i
i
i~
e
r
Denco Area 9-1.1
1990.19`1 Budget Overview
Page 4
5400 - Services
5410 Contractual Scrviccs
1990-91
Code Catezo Budget
5411 Legal Fees S 9,000
5413 Accounting Fees 2,000 y
5415 Professional Audit 2,500 t
5417 Equipment Maintenance 2,321
5419 Other Professional Services M000
Subtotal - 5410 90,821
5420 Lease Payments
i
5421 Office Lease 19,573
5423 Equipment 3.555
Subtotal - 5420 23,128 i
5430 Travel & Auto
I 5431 Auto Allowance 7,200
F 5433 Travel 5.000
Subtotal - 5430 12,200
5440 Memberships & Subscriptions u
f 5441 Memberships 400 r~
!I 5443 Subscriptions 470
Subtotal - 5440 870
5450 Utilities
1
5451 Office Telephone 41600
5453 9-1-1 Service 407.400
Subtotal - 5450 412,000
r
. ~ 1
i
1
ter. _
-lam
i
i
Y
t
Denco Area 9.1-1
1990.1991 Budget Overview
Page 5
5460 Insurance
1990-91
Code Cateeorv Budge
5461 Liability/Property 510
5463 Electronic Equipment 0
5465 Auto Liability 104
Subtotal - 5460 614
5470 Advertising
5471 Classified 300
5473 Public Education 20.000
Subtotal - 5470 20,300
Total - 5400 $ 559.933
Funds are provided for contractual services for accounting, audit, and legal services for
the Denco District. Funds are also provided for the continuation of the interlocal
agreement with Tarrant County 9.1.1 District through the end of the Fiscal Year, under
the category "Other Professional Services."
X
Funds are provided for the continuation of office and equipment leases, including an f
'IU increase in equipment lease for a new copying machine.
x
An automobile allowance is provided for the director, public education manager, and data
base manager. Funds for travel to state and national meetings of the National Emergency
Number Association (NENA) and Association of Public Safety Communications Officers
(APCO) are provided for use at the discretion of the Board and the permanent executive
director.
Funds provided in 1990-91 under the Category "9.1-1 Service" are for monthly recurring
costs. The provision of 9.1.1 service entails two basic costs: Non-recurring and Monthly
recurring. The Non-recurring costs for Denton County are estimated to be $671,881t and
o
ti
are included in the 1989-90 Budget. This expense will be covered under funds invested
over the past three years, in anticipation of the nonrecurring costs. The monthly costs will
be billed to the District by service providers, and are estimated at $407,400.
Funds are provided for the expansion of a public education program under the direction
of the public education manager, Tarrant County advisory personnel, and the executive
1
t
~4AM!
T"~
3
1
i
Elcnco Area 9-1-1
1990-1991 Budget Overview
Page 6
director. The 9-1.1 public education programs include reproducing material for distribution
through schools, telephone stickers, 9.1.1 decals for the exterior of emergency vehicles, and
other means of delivering the message of 9.1.1 availability.
Contingency Funds
The proposed 1990-91 budget includes an operating surplus of $47,000, assuming no
expansion in the number or size of Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP's) beyond those
which initiated service August 18. However, the Board of Managers have authorized an
additional $200,000 contingency category, which would be spent under the following
conditions: z
i
1. Expansion of PSAP's...The Denco Board of Managers established a criteria
under which a PSAP would be established for a given entity, namely that the
f,ntity receive and dispatch emergency, fire, police and medical calls 24 hours
per day. Should a city not currently operating under this condition change
their status on a permanent basis, and qualify under Board guidelines, a
PSAP would be established in their facility. The average non-recurring cost
for a PSAP ranges from $48,000 to $60,000, depending upon size.
In addition, if the configuration of an existing PSAP is not adequate, and
more answering positions are justified, the District would expend funds to add
additional capacity.
2. Improvement of Service. . .The field of emergency communications is
j becoming increasingly competitive, with Improved products and services being
{ introduced yearly. Before a service is available, it must go through a {
corporate review, and, often an approval by the Public Utilities Commission.
It is known that during the coming year, new offerings will be available for
consideration, including improved ability to access Location Information,
improved capability to identify hearing impaired persons and to communicate
with them through 9-1.1 equipment, and more space-efficient, cost-efficient
PSAP equipment.
I 1
1
t .,a
5 r
.Fa
r~r,r
Denco Area 9-1-1
1990-1991 Budget Overview
Page 7
PRQIECTED CASH POSITION
Projected Value Investments,
October 1, 1990 $ 556,827
Anticipated 1990-91 Revenue 734,800
i
L
Projected Expenditures, 1990-91 j
Including Contingency 887,138
Projected Fund Balance, a
September 30, 1991 404,489
The Denco Area 9.1.1 District has been receiving revenue from 9-1-1 service fees since ;
1987. In anticipation of the large non-recurring charges, these funds have been invested,
and have been earning interest, building to a current value of almost $1.3 million. +
Although it had been anticipated the District would be required to borrow funds in order
to meet cutover costs, the District will be able to meet these expenses, without incurring
debt and carry an operating reserve of $556,000 into the 1990.91 Fiscal Year.
The revenues and expenditures included in the 1990-91 budget, including the expenditure
of contingency funds, will result in the projected year-end fund balance of $404,489.
Contingency funds not expended will, of course, increase this amount available at the end
of the year. It is highly desirable for emergency communications district to maintain an
operating reserve capable of funding unanticipated costs, such as tariff increases, which I
could significantly increase monthly costs.
,
l
i
l
~r
pt j`*~yf
5 b~
Z 12
f
P
f
CITY
r
COUNCIL
112:11 :X
w 111
pol:
11,
W Vor p t
4♦ Mt
4 ~ r
O
140
T"I
IT!
r
r
L,L
9 FY
CITY of DENTON / 215 E. McKinney / Denton, Texas 70201
MEMORANDUM
a
a
To: Betty McKean - Executive Director, MSED
From: Tom Klinck - Director of Personnel/Employee Relations
Date: September 13, 1990
Subject: City Council Resolution Supporting TML Legislative Initiatives on
State Civil Service Law - Work Session October 21 1990
Betty, this memo outlines the staff recommendation requesting City Council
support of legislative initiatives sponsored by the Texas Municipal League
on needed changes to the State Civil Service Law. As activities begin to
' gear up during the next few months prior to the legislative session in
Spring, 1991, we are requesting that the Council pass a resolution
supporting our City's position. Then, as bills are drafted and sponsors
identified, we are requesting Council's active involvement in testifying
before appropriate committees and participating in other support activities
which can influence those who can favorably pass legislation to accomplish f
the changes.
Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code, referred to as the Municipal
Civil Service Act, is the body of low that governs the employment
relationship between Police Officers and Fire Fighters. Back in the 195019,
the citizens of Denton voted to include our Police Officers and Fire
Fighters under thane laws. The original intent of the Civil Service laws
were well-intentioned, however, as the years have passed and changes have
been made In the laws, it is our belief that the current laws contain
provisions which place severe constraints on management of the Police and
Fire Departments, are detrimental to the employees the laws are designed to
protect, and create an additional cost for the citizens of Denton. The
attached booklet, "What's Wrong In Texas Police and Fire Stations?",
published by TML, provides an indepth explanation of the laws, how cities
are covered, and some of the problems in the law that create obstacles in
attempting to efficiently and effectively manage our Police and Fire
Departments.
A special committee formed by TML during the last budget year (Fire Chief
John Cook was chosen to serve from Denton) has studied the problems and
developed 10 specific changes to the law's provisions that we believe will
alleviate some of the problems and ensure more equitable and fair practices.
Six (6) of the changes relate to the Hearing Examiner provisions in
1 disciplinary and termination appeal procedures. The changes are:
1. An amendment specifying certain qualifications for hearing examiners.
2. An amendment requiring hearing examiners to base their decisions on
1
I
S{S
wool
¢s Y
f r
i
.
i
i
i
September 13, 1990
Memo to B. McKean - City Council Resolution - State Civil Service Law
j Page 2
specific criteria.
I 3. An amendment requiring that hearing examiners base their decisions on a
preponderance of the evidence, not on clear and convincing evidence.
4. An amendment providing that an appeal to a hearing examiner is limited
to cases of demotion, indefinite suspension, or disciplinary actions of
ten days or more.
' 5. An amendment providing that a hearing examiner shalt uphold the lC3
disciplinary decision of the chief if the hearing examiner makes a
finding of the truth of the specific charges against the fire fighter
or ;slice officer.
f A. An amendment requiring that a hearing examiner follow the procedural
rules used by the Civil Service Commission and allowing the City to }
appeal a hearing examiner's decision for failure to follow the rules. j
' The Hearing Examiner, their process, and their power are clearly out of
balance and are in desperate need of improvement.
Other TML recommended changes relate to provisions in the law that are out- ii€
of-date, will enhance management, selection, and promotional opportunities,
or will correct inequities for the citizens right to adopt or repeal the
application of Civil Service Law In their city. These changes are:
I i
7. An amendment providing that a demotion is effective immediately,
subject to appeal.
0
A. An amendment allowing Affirmative Action Plans to be implemented in
Police and Fire Departments.
9. 0a amendment conforming repeal procedures with adoption procedures.
10: An amendment providing for alternative testing procedures for Fire E
uepartments.
Attachment A provides an explanation of each of the above changes briefly
covering the current law, proposed flange, and reasons for the proposed
change. i
Chief Cook will be providing the Gity Council an overview of each
recommended change at the work session and responding to questions. Should
`r
r !!I
~r
s
September 13, 1990
Memo to B. McKean - City Council Resolution - State Civil Service law t
Page 3
the Council agree with these changes, we will include a supporting S
resolution on the formal agenda for the October 16, 1990 session.
Please let me know if you'd like additional information.
Thanks.
9 ;
J49A
Thomas W. Klinck
i
bmmem5l.prn 9/14/90 10:20a
I
i
fi
j
rC '
4
f
S
{i{
i
i
p~p
S
1
1
g)Y~
i
ATTACHMENT A
PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO TEXAS
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 143
MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE ACT
i
r
}
y
r
I
1
1
I
dp}01A
1.
AN AMENDMENT SPECIFYING CERTAIN
QUALIFICATIONS FOR HEARING,
EXAMINERS UNDER CHAPTER 143
Current La
Owl Chapter 143,057 allows a police officer or fire fighter to appeal a disciplinary action
to a third party hearing examiner. The only qualification necessary under state law
is that the hearing examiner be a member of either the American Arbitration
Association or the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
i
Proposed Change
s
This amendment would require that a third party hearing examiner receive special
training regarding Chapter 143 or that the hearing examiner be a retired or former I
judge who 3s a member of the State Bar. 1
i 1
Reasons for ProMgsed Change
Several cities have experienced problems with third parry hearing examiners not
understanding the nature of police or fire work. Police officers and fire fighters,
because of the :eery nature of their work, interact with citizens everyday. Therefore,
when a police chief decides to indefinitely suspend a police outer because the
officer has shown a history of unnecessary violence in arrest situations, violation of {
criminal laws, or for other reasons, the exwrilrier often fails to understand the j
liability the city faces by keeping that officer on the force.
{ In an attempt to reach a compromise between the city and an officer who has been
disciplined, bearing examiners have reduced the punishment even though there is no
dispute as to what the officer did. Since there is no appeal from a decision except in
very limited situations, the city is often forced to return an obviously bad officer or
fire fighter to the force.
c
1
1
~ I
~I
i #11
i
i
e
1 ,
J
._Y1W..aw N.r ~~wb.uuw...nr..r...✓Y..r. _ _ _
„5 f.'' • ...r..-w.~u.w r.aw r..r..r. .r ~.rww... r~.a r.r,
pl Y
AN AMENDMENT REQUIRING HEARING
EXAMINERS TO BASE THEIR
DECISIONS ON SPECIFIC CRITERIA
Current Law
Section 143.057(9 states that the hearing examiner has the same duties and powers
as the Civil Service Commission as-they relate to conducting disciplinary appeals, :
including the right to issue subpoenas. j
Section 143.0570 provides for an appeal to district court of a hearing examiner's
decisioa oaiy on the grounds that the examiner's decision was without jurisdiction or
exceeded its jurisdiction or if the order was procured by fraud, collusion, or other
unlawful means.
Proposed Change
t
This amendment would c?early define the phrase: "the same duties and powers of
the commission." The proposed amendment would state that a commission or a
third arty hearing examiner may uphold a suspension or dismissal of a fire fighter
or police officer for a violation of a civil service rule by determining that the specific
charges against the fire fighter or police officer are true. This amendment would
clari.y that the same "findings" standard currently required of the commission is also €
required of the hearing examiner. In the event the bearing examiner does not make 1
a finding concerning the truth of the charges, that decision may be appealed.
.
Reasons for Proposed Change '
i The commission is required to find the truth of the specific charges against the fire j
fighter or police officer, and the hearing examiner has the same duties and powers
as the coinmissioit. However, if a hearing examiner does not make a findin as to
the truth of the charges, there is no recourse. This change would specifically state
this duty of the bearing examiner and provide for an appeal if the hearing examiner
fails to comply. I
a
i
v
i
r
r
I
{ +L+:C+11/.:tSL••.~....-a
3
AN AMENDMENT REQUIRING THAT
HEARING EXAMINE BASE THEIR
DECISIONS ON A PREPONDERANCE OF
THE EVIDENCE NOT ON CLEAR
AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
Current Law
Section 143.057(1) provides for an appeal to district court of a hearing examiner's
decision only if t77~te decision was without jurisdiction, exceeded jurisdiction or if the
order was procured by fraud, collusion, or other unlawful means. Current law does
not provide a standard of proof that must be met by the cih) in an appeal of a
disciplinary decision to a hearing examiner.
' i
Proposed hnnee
t
This amendment would specifically state that the decision of a hearing examiner
must be based upon a preponderance of the evidence and that failure to do so I
would be grounds for appeal of that decision to district court.
i
Reasons for Proposed Chan" f
Although the standard of proof in civil cases in Texas is a preponderance of the f
i evidence, some hearing examiners have required the city to produce "clear and
convincing" evidence to justify the disciplinary decision. This amendment would
clarify the burden which is required and would allow an appeal in thn event that this
standard is not utilized by the hearing examiner. j
1
I
I
I
1
I
~`r I
I '
I
• 1
1
I i
l
I 1
I
{
f
i~i1119AI~ ~1~
FY'Y'ci~
r ■1■r■■
~]1 L,L E::aa i:'i.'~..a':'W ~ i1'.~.]a if.iS1L'uff►:.fJ:~Y:...,,c.L' l.i~L' a. a..3.c.~.t _2.:..J aa.avg..r.s...~~a...wmwa~►..w.a.rr. .
4
4.
AN AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT AN APPEAL TO A
HEARING EXAMINER IS LIMITED TO
CASES OF D"MOTION, INDEFINITE SUSPENSION,
OR DISCUUNARY ACTIONS OF TEN DAYS OR MORE
Current Law
Section 143.057(a) requires that the city's letter of disciplinary action issued to afire
fighter or police officer state that to an appeal of an indefinite suspension, a
suspension, promotional passover or a recommended demotion, the appealing fire
fighter or police officer may elect to appeal to an independent third arty hearing
examiner instead of the civil service commission. Therefore, the fire fighter or
police officer is given the choice of going before the commission or before the
hearing examiner since both have the same jurisdiction in appeals.
Proposed Change
This amendment would allow the fire fighter or police officer the choice of 1
appealing to a hearing examiner only in the case of an indefinite suspension, a {
recommended demotion, or a suspension of ten days or more.
Reasons for Proposed Change
The cities under civil service have had five years of experience with appeals to F
hearing examiners. A two-day hearing often costs $1,500 or more, not Including the
hearing examiner's travel expenses. This seems particularly expensive when the '
i appeM Involves a one-day suspension. An appeal of a one-day suspension to the
civil service commissior costs virtually nothing. ThIs amendment would allow an
appeal to a hearing c<aminer in the most serious of disciplinary actions an i
indefinite suspension, a recommended demotion, or a suspension of ten days or f
i more. This amendment does not dilute an officer's right to a due process
Ei proceeding, since the promotional passover or suspension of less than 10 days is t
always appealable to the civil service commission.
j r
I
r
i
i
i
r
~ i
I1 i
1
I 1 ;
I
)S
iC .Y:t'«1GLP.LJ.w,"•..:L'aJr.'1.1. : ~.G it ~:G6.d.:.... d.[.. a. u_~._1Jlr.a.t..ar .•.t.. --s•.a.ca.+uc.o.r~
r
l
3.
AN AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A
HEARING EXAMINER SHALL UPHOLD THE
DISCIPLINARY DECISION OF THE CHIEF IF
THE HEARING EXAMINER MAKES A FINDING OF
THE TRUTH RE FIGHTER OR POLICE CHARGES NST
Current Law
The hearing examiner has the ability to alter the disciplinary action imposed by the
chief even if the hearing examiner has made a determination that the city's charges
against an officer are true.
Proposed Chang!
This amendment would clarify any confusion regarding the detemtinadon that must
be made by a hearing examiner. The hearing examiner must make a finding of the
truth of the specific charges. This amendment would also provide that once the
hearing examiner has made a finding of the truth of the specific charges against the
fire fighter or police officer, the disciplinary action recommended by the chief shall
be imposed.
Reasons for Propamed Change
In the past, hearinQ exPUniners have been confused as to the finding that must be
made at an appeal heeling and the level of proof that is required of the city in
defending its disciplinary recommendation. The amendment would clarify the
findings that must be made by the exam.1ner.
Additionally, hearing examiners, in an attempt to reach a compromise between the
chief and the disciplined uniformed officer, will: (1) find that the charges are true,
but (2) determine that the disciplinary recommendation is too harsh and redi,ce It. I
i
j
1
fllt~ ;
1
..,J. .....~..sa~n......~..~J..i.Y.i.'~YY•.'1..f. ~.C „T i__rY.at.e.rs:_- _R..~4~.a~►.
a
6.
AN AMENDMENT REQUIRING THAT A NEARING EXAMINER
FOLLOW THE P OCEDURAL RULES USED BY THE
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND ALLOWING THE
CITY TO APPEAL A HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION
FOR FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE RULES
Current Law
Section 143.008 requires that the commission adopt rules necessary for the proper
conduct of conunission business. There is no appeal of a hearing examiner's
decision to district court by the city except in very limited s'tuations.
r
1
Proposed Change
This amendment would require that a third party hearing examiner follow the
procedural rules set by the city's civil service commission. It would also allow for an
appeal of the hearing examiners decision if the examiner failed to follow the
commission's procedural rules. +
f 1
Reasons for Proposed Chgpgg
Civil service commissions often adopt detailed rules regarding procedures that must
be followed during an appeal hearing. In the absence of a specific rule,
commissions often require in their rules that the rules of civil procedure shall be
followed. I
Hearing examiners have often held hearings in which neither the commission rules
not the rules of civil procedure were followed. Under current law, the city cannot i
appeal the hearing examiner's decision for failure to toalow the commission's rules
of procedure.
This amendment would clarify the procedural rules that the hearing examiner, must
follow and would allow the city to appeal a hearing examiner's decision to district
court for failure to follow those rules.
1
i +
{
v
f
i I
}
i
i
'r
1
f
i
40
} a i.a... e. al.i a ,:-.l:r'L.., Jr .,M'. t Y... Y:,... ~1.C.r It A.~S. r:.~L }i►`~.4A~'iYrlAr~
r
,
7,
AN AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A
DEMOTION SUBJECT TOC VE tMMEDIATELYt
AN APPEAL
Current L.aw
l•pN
Under Sec. 143.054, the chief of the fire or police department may recommend in
writing to the civil service commission that an officer be involuntarily demoted. Ths
chief must include reasons for the recommended demotion and request that the
commission order the demotion. If the commission believes that good cause exists
for ordering the demotion, the commission shall love the firefighter or police officer
notice to appear before the commission for a public bearing. TThhe commission must
give the police officer or fire fighter ten days noti,x before the hearing.
i
f Proposed Change
This amendment would provide that when the chief recommends a demotion for a
police officer or fire fighter, the demotion would take effect Immediately, subject to
the appeal.
Reasons for Proposed Chance
I Currently, if the chief recommends a demotion, the decision must &,vait a review
and possible appeal to the commission or a third party hearing examiner. The only
time requirement in the statute is one which requires that the commission give
notice to the affected ppolice officer or fire fighter. If the officer has been
suspended, the commission must hold a hearing and render a decision in writing
within 30 days after the date it received notice of a a1. Often, attorneys
representing the employee in a demotion appeal will delay any hearing on the
r matter, effectively blocking the attempted demotion of the o cer.
There seems to be no logic for the difference between a suspension (which has
immediate effect) and a demotion (which has effect only after an appeal).
I
}
I
~ i
r
l
i
8.
AN AMENDMENT ALLOWING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLANS
TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS
CUrrenj 1A
Under Section 143.026, when a vacancy occurs in a beginning position in a fire or
police department, the civil service director certifies to the qty's chief executive
officer the names of the three persons having the highest grades on the eligibility
list. The chief executive officer then appoints the person with the highest grade
unless there is a valid reason that the person having the second or third highest
grade should be appointed.
Propose Cha=
Under this amendment, an additional name from the eligibility list may be added to
the list submitted to the chief executive officer to fill a vacancy in a beginning
position. This additional name is allowed if the cir/ council has adopted an
affirmative action plan that has been approved by the civil service commission.
' The additional candidate from the eligibility list must meet all the other
qualifications and criteria necessary to fill a beginning position. Currently, the chief
executive officer can appoint the person with the highest grade unless there is a
good and sufficient reason that one of the other persons wined should be
appointed. Under the proposed amendment, the implementation of an affirmative
action plan would be a "good and sufficient" reason to appoint someone other than
the first person on the list.
i
Reasons fo .Proposed Change
L Ciry councils are currently being jsed for Implementation of affirmative action plans
I in their police and fire departments. Local city councils should be able to consider 1.
Implementation of affirmative action plants in hiring of police and fire personnel to
avoid court-ordered sanctions or comply with appropriate consent decrees. This
provision would also allow local authorities to consider what is best for their
community in balancing the make-up of police/fire departments in lieu of having
the courts make those determinations. The unions contend this is a violation of the I
Civil Service Act because there is no provision that allows for these appointments.
City councils should be allowed to Sire minorities and women when they have
r adopted an affirmative action plan.
i
I
'
I
i
yMer.~p~ I
~ S
y
t S
0 tqt~_•.
r
9.
AN AMENDMENT CONFORMING REPEAL
PROCEDURES WITH ADOPTION PROCEDURES
Current Law
Lskw To Adopt Civil Service
A city may adopt civil service under Section 143.004(b) if the city council recet, es a
petition requesting an election signed by 10 percent of the number of voters who
voted in the most recent municipal election. The resulting election is decided by a
majority of those voting.
LM To Repeal Civil service i
If tht voters wish to repeal civil service, the petition must be signed by 10 percent of
all the qualified voters in the city. In order for the repeal effort to succeed, a
majority of all qualifled voters In the city must vote for the repeal.
Proposed Chancre
This amendment would allow voters to petition for repeal of civil service with the
s: me number of signatures with which the voters can petition to adopt civil service. j
I The amendment would also provide that the election or repeal shall be decided by
a majority of those voting.
Beasons for Proposed Change
Since the Civil Service Act was enacted by the Legislature in 1947, nearly 70 cities
have adopted the civil service statute by election. Since that time, the civil service
statute has been ame-aded numerous times to include many more provisions than i
had been originally approved by the voters.
What was initially adopted by cities as the Civil Service Act is not what cities re
living with today. rherefor:, voters should be able to petition and vote to repeal the
city's adoption of civil service if the system no longer meets the needs or the
expectations of Lhe citizens In the community.
1
j
i
(1
k
1
t
,
I
1
1
~r
Ir
{ wlei
C
t
it
10.
AN AMENDMENT PROVIDING FOR
ALTERNA'T'IVE TESTING PROCEDURES
FOR FIRE DEPARTMENTS
Current Law
Under Section 143.035, upon the recommendation of the chief of the police
department, and after a majority vote of the sworn police officers in the department,
the commission may adopt an alternate promotional system to select persons to
M,c ly non-entry level positions other than positions that are filled by appointment
by the department head.
~I
Proposed Change
Allow the same alternative testing procedures for fire departments, f
i
Reason for Proposed Change I
Currently, only police departments 'may 41 oose alternative testing procedures. if
i
the same safeguards (a recommendation the chief and a majority vote of the fire
department) are adopted for fire departments, the commission should be allowed to
adopt an alternative promotional system to promote persons to non-entry level "
positions. T'here is no good reason that a police department is allowed to exercise ~ I
this option and a fire department is not. f
f
I
1
L
i
i
! 1
I 1
i
1 ,
i
1
M wr .wrr
i
SY
i
a
i
v
1 ~
A RESOLUTION RESOLUTIQl NO. SUPPORTING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
CERTAIN STATUTORY AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY THE TEXAS
MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, TO CHAPTER 143 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE) AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Texas Local Government Code chapter 143,
Municipal Civil Service Act), was originally enacted forty-th(the
ree
years ago to prevent mismanagement of police and fire departments,
and was a needed and well-intentioned statute: and
WHEREAS, the numerous amendments to the this law made by the
Texas Legislature since 1947 have eroded the ability of local
governments to effectively and responsibly manage their police and 1
fire departments under the Municipal civil Service Act: and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Civil Service Act should be amended to {
provide for hiring and promotion using means other than strictly
written exams, therefore allowing municipalities to incorporate
affirmative action plans in their police and fire departments: and j
prov deRthat a mhe Municipal unicipality may civil
itself from he requirements
of the Act using the same method that is used to adopt the Act, q f'f
therefore allowing cities to remove themselves from a rovion
s ]
which has changed dramatically since it was originally creatediby I
the Texas Legislature: and i
WHEREAS, Texas Municipal League has proposed certain amendments
which will assist the City of Denton in maintaining efficient,
( effective, well-managed police and fire departments, resulting in 1
better public safety for Denton citizens, which Is the goal of both
the City and the officers in the
police and fire department: and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Denton wishes to join in 1
with other cities to support the Texas Municipal League's legisla-
tive proposal for ten amendments to Chapter 143 of the Local
Government Code: NOW, THEREFORE,
i
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES$
BEC j,Q r, That the City Council of the City of Denton hereby
supports the following proposed amendments to chapter 143 of the
Local Government Code (Supp. 1990)s
1. An amendment which would clearly specify certain quali-
fications l
hearingsexfor aminers hearing be retired judges x and or that 1
they must attend training before being eligible to
serve, 1
. 1
~I~TR r,
~n YVCVt~ ~
J
ppp!
u
2. An amendment which would require that hearings examiners
base their decisions on specific criteria and which
would allow cities to appeal hearings examiners$ deci-
sions to district court in the event that this require-
ment is not met.
3. An amendment which would require that hearings examiners
base their decisions on the preponderance of the
evidence - not clear and convincing evidence - and
which would allow cities to appeal hearings examiners,
decisions to district court in the event that this
requirement is not met.
4. An amendment which would provide that hearings examiners
can be used only for limited purposes: cases of demo-
tion, indefinite suspension, or disciplinary actions of
ten days or more. K
5. An amendment which would provide that hearings examiners
can consider only whether the employee in question
actually did what he or she is accused of, but may not
question or alter the level of discipline imposed for
the employee's actions.
6. An amendment which would require that hearings examiners
follow the procedural rules used by civil service a
i commissions and which would allow cities to appeal
hearings examinerst decisions to district court in the
{ event that such procedures are not followed.
7. An amendment which would provide that a demotion, like
an indefinite suspension, would be effective immediate-
ly, subject to an appeal.
k
a. An amendment which would allow affirmative action plans
to be implemented in fire and police forces covered by
I Chapter 143, Local Government Code.
h
9. An amendment which would allow alternative testing
procedures for fire departments just as they are now
allowed for police departments.
a
10. An amendment which would provide that the referendum and
election procedures for repeal of Chapter 143 of the
Local Government Code, be Identical to the procedures
for adoption.
SECTION II. That the City Secretary shall forward a copy of
this resolution to tha Honorable Bob Glasgow, State Senator, the
Honorable Jim Horn, State Representative, and Frank Sturzl,
Executive Director, Texas Municipal League.
Y
PAGE 2
Fi
1
a
t Attachment 3
r
F
APPENDIX A
TRACT11
BEING 917.600 acres of land situated in the B.B.B.&C.R.R. Survey, Abstrad No. 158, B.B.B.&C,R.R. Survey,
Abstract No. 139, 13,13 B.&C.R.R. Survey, Abstract No. 160, O. Pettingale Survey, Abstract No. 1041. and the S.
Pritchett Survey, Abstract No. 1021, Denton County, Texas, said 917.600 acres being more particularly described
as folllyws:
BEGINN1NO at the northeast corner of the B.B.B,& C.R.R. Survey, Abstract No.158, sdd point also being the
oorthweat corner of the W. Smith Survey, Abstract No. 1182 of aforesaid county, said point da being in Johnson
Lane and Paine Road;
THENCE S 00'72'99'W, 3648.27 feet along the coal line of the said B,B.B.& C.R.R. Survey, Abstrad No. 156;
THENCE N W32'20'W, 2290.84 feet;
j THENCE N 00'38'25'E, 497,55 feet;
I THENCE N 89'28'Sl'W, 274.12 feet to the east right-of-way of interstate Highway 35W;
THENCE along the east right-of-way of Interstate Highway 35W the following calls;
1. N 2933'05"E, 84736 feet;
2. N 24'19'16'E, 203.06 feet;
3. N 29'S7'39"E, 2,716.63 feet to the beginning of a eurvt to the kh having a radius of
11,501.73 feel, a central angle of 03'06'14', it chord bearing of N 28'24WE, a chord
distance of 623.01 feet;
4. THENCE along raid are 623.09 feet;
5. N 26.51WE, 2,147.84 fat;
6. S 89'28'18'E, 470.76 fat;
7. S 7s54'06"E, 713S feet;
8. S 89'4635"E, 80.17 feel;
9. N 72`3149E, 52.80 feet;
10. N 17'13'208, 51.61 feel;
11. N 69'30'03'W, 22933 feet;
12. N 54'V14"W, 163.42 feet;
11 N 33'12'11'W, 210.76 feet;
14. N 26'51'410E, 3,16530 feet;
15. N 36.4417"E, 203.09 fat;
16. N 26'49 408, 399.43 fee;
17. N 33'24'38"E, 40030 feet;
18. N 26*05.1*E, 399.88 feet;
19. N IS'18'39'E, 30323 feet;
20. N268S4223"E, 83345 feel;
THENCE S W54'0 A 199713 feet to a point is the wear line of the 1. Edmonton Survey, Abstract No. 401;
THENCE S 00'13'STE, $21763 feet to the southwest corner of the acid J. Edmonm Survey, ti .
THENCE S 89'98'410E, 2,659.26 feet along the south W of the acid J. Edmoesoo Survey to a point in Bonnie
Brae Road;
I
3
3-1
r
7 -imam
Fill wrs~ f
t
THENCE S 00039'53E, 3,263.02 feet with Bonnie Brae Road to a point is Allred Road;
THENCE N 89' 2739'W, 3,60941 feet with Allred Road;
THENCE N 89.41'30'W, 2,122.09 feet with Allred Road;
THENCE S 00'06'52'W, 2,639.77 feet, to a point in Johmn lane;
THENCE N 89' 2T3PW, 2,353.07 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 917400 oats (39,970,671
square feet) of tend, more or kit.
r
i
i t
TRACT IV
}
BEING a 232 acre tract of Lod situated to the E. Piumo Survey, Abstract No. 994, Denton County, Texas, and
being a part of a called 69318 acre tract described in deed from W.L Granky et ux to Ake McCutchln as
recorded in Volume 321, Pogo 42, Deed Records, Demon County, Texas, said 2.82 acres being more particularly 1
dwr bed as follows:
BEGMMNG at the most southerly southeast comer of the said 69318 acre tract;
THENCE N8TI3'13'W, 399.06 feet to the cant right-ofway of Interstate Highway 37W; ;
THENCE N30101WE, 153.66 feet along said east ri&4-way lime of Interstate Highway 3SW;
THENCE N27'03'45'E, 500.93 fat gong said east right-of-way line of Interstate Highway 35W;
THENCE N2VS4'SS'E, 106.75 feet;
THENCE S00103'00'E, 689.05 fat to the POWT OF BEOINNING and containing 2.82 urn (122,881 sq. R.)
j of Lad, more or leis.
I
1
3-2
i
A
T
IfF':w I ~
' ATTACHMENT 4
ANNC'A.TION SCHEDULE
A-59
R
October 2, 1990 City Council sets date, time and
place for public hearings
October 7, 1990 Notice published in Denton Record
Chronicle for first public hearing
i'
October 23, 1990 City Council - first public hearing
October 28, 1990 Notice published in Denton Record
Chronicle for second public hearing
November 13, 1990 City Council - second public hearing
I November 21, 1990 Planning and Zoning Commission makes
recommendation
November 27, 1990 City Council institutes annexation
` December 2, 1990 Publication of ordinance in Denton
Record Chronicle
January 2, 1991 Final action by City Council
1127x
t
R
J _
,r
' i
d ~
{ ATTACHMENT 5
PETITION
FOR
ANNIXATION
TO THI PLANNING AND ZONING COMMUSION
AND
CITY COUNCIL
or
THR CITY Of DINTON, TRUW
The undersigned does hereby petition fora exation of 920.42 acres located
at The Pilot Knob Ranch (East side of 135W) n the extraterritorial jurisdiction
ry of the City of Denton, Texas. The property is more particularly described in
the attached survey description and shown on the attached map. The undersigned
also certifies that the following required information concerning the land end
its inhabitants is reasonably accurate and assumes responsibility for
completion of said information prior to scheduled action on the request by the
City of Denton.
1. Is petition being initiated by owner(s) or majority of registered voters to
area of request? Tom X No It no, what to the status
of the applicant?
2. How many dwelling units are located within the area requested for r
annexation? None i
3. How many businesses nonresidential se band a sa general located description of these
of the request? None provide
land uses including the name(s) of businesses, it known
I
I
4. Does area of request include any territory within the city liaits ~r extra-
territorial jurisdiction of another city? Yes No I
5. estimated population of the arse of request. 0 Adults 0 0
Children n Number of registered voters? I
i
I 6. At the ties of this petition, have any otter annexation procedures been i
initiated for all or any part of the area requested in this petition? j
Yes No X It yes, please explain the procedures begun
and their status.
i
7. Does a water supply district lie within the boundaries of the area proposed
for annexation? Yee No X i
S. What toning, it arty, other than airioul (A), is being requested under
separate petition? PlanneE DeyelopnMmttur►1 1
Now much of territory proposed for annexation is included in toning
petition? The entire tract
t
5-1
I
i
I
I
~i .
Petition for Annexation
Page Two
S
9. What is the purpose of annexation? The oW
t be annexed into the
City of Denton so that the property can be zone or anne v
91 lopment.
10. Planned land use (if zoning is being requested):
Proposed Unit ~
Category 6 Total Per Acre And/Or
Proposed Acreage Square Pootaee
a. Single family detached _
b. Single family attached (townhouses,
cluster, eta.)
c. Attached rat to/garden/zero lot line
d. Duplex
e. Kulti-family
C. Office
S. Neighborhood service
h. ,ensral Retail
i. Co®erolal
J. light industrial
k. Heavy Industrial
t
Proposed use(s) if aPacific use Permit or planned development (PD) being 1
requested. Business and Industrial Park uses.
11. Have petitioner(s) familiarised themselves with the official annotation
policy, land use policies, and the standard municipal service plain of the
City of Denton? IlaY X N~t _
j Hari of Owaer(s) 3Paftniar Coiporation,*lephone~ 214 788-3089
f Signature(s) Dale September
Address(es) IV. W377 Merit Drive
Suite 17M
Dallas. Texas 75251
S If petitioner is not the owner of the property: Statue
Petitioner
Kams($) Hi11WMd 4ai&rtitlon Telephone (214 1 788-3000
Stanatui+(a) Date Pentemher 1R_ 1990
j Address(es) 12177 Merit Drive Su a 1700
DellAs. xea 75 51
1
i
e Piold Notes sad Location Nap for area proposed for annotation [ %at bo
submitted along with completed petition befor* process begins.
OSS2J
i
5-2
1
i
1
J,
S
f+
P
i
S
a
4CITY
}
COUNCIL
-in 1~
~o~pc~oo a I
c Mr
O~: o
a
TI 1
i
t
1
k
I
`i
9
0-
DATE: 10/02/90
CITY COUNCIS REPO-IT FORMAT
TO, Mayor and Members of the City COUnoIl
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: AMENDING PARKING LOT SURFACE STANDARDS
RECOMMENDATION:
The Building Code Board and the Planning and zoning Ccl-d ssion
recommend approval.
SUMMARY:
The proposal amends the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations by
1. Decreasing from 5 inches to 4 inches the concrete thickness
required on existing, unpaved parking lotse
2. Eliminates lime stabilization for new concrete parking lots
with scarified and compacted subgrade.
3. Adds a standard for channeI:zed heavy load areas.
4. Enables design by a professional engineer in lieu of using the i
stated specification.
5. Adds a concrete slump range from 2 to B inches,
The new standards decrease costs and add flexibility to parking
lot paving in Denton.
BACKGROUND:
i several years ago, after numerous complaints about deteriorating
and chuckholed parking lots, our city codes were amended to
j establish parking lot paving standards. At the request of
Building Code Board members, the Building Code Board began to
review the adopted standards in February 1990. The Board took
significant testimony from several professional geotechnical
engineers, Including the City Engineer, who were knowledgeable in
this subject area. k
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Board's findings 3
and concerns with the Board,
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED,
Parking lot builders and owners in Denton.
V
4
w i
f
F i
City council Report
Page 2
October 2, 1990
FISCAL IMPACT:
i
I
Node
RespectEull ubmitted•
Lloyd V. Harrell
Prepared by: City Manager
f
4 F ank H. Robbins, AICP j
Executive Director
Planning and Development }
2397x/2 I
I
I
c
I
4 ~ 1
I
L i
I
s i
1
3
1\0( ~
sf
a
ATTACHMENT 1
NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING APPENDIX A-5 OF
THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PROVIDE FOR NEW PARKING LOT SURFACE
REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE AMOUNT OF $500.00 FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. That Appendix A-5 "Parking Lot Su . ce (Minimum
Requirements)" of the Denton Development Code is amended by the
adoption of a new Appendix A-5, as attached hereto.
,Sfl?TION 11. 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.
SE01 ION III. That this ordinance shall become effective
fourteen days(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.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990.
r
I
BOB CASTLEBERRY; MAYOR
ATTEST;
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
a
BYt
{
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
t
s
BY;NAA
E
1
r
7
f'
9
t
APPENDIX L-5
PARK= LOT SURFACE (nKLM M REQUIREM M)
Minim= Pavement Thickness and Sub ade
I *Concrete As t arers
Existiug unpaved 14 inches on existiogl 2 inches on 1 3 1/8' pavers
Parking Lot 1 base 1 6 inches flax base 1 on scarified
I I I and compacted
I I i sub rade
ter- New Par is Lots
Standard S inches on 14 inches on I scarified 6
Pavement Section I Scarified 6 16 inches line subgradel compacted
Compacted Subgrade i subgrade
***Channelized Heavy] 6 inches on 6 inches on 6 inch
load areas I scarified A 16 inches lime subgradel flex base for
(compacted subgrade I 1 grid pavers
IN LIEU OF THE ABOVE SPECIFICATIONSs A PARRIMO LOT FAT BE CONSTRUCTED IM
ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIGN MADE ET AN ENGINEER RMISTERED BY THE STATE OF TZKAS
AND SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FM REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
Construction materials and methods shall conform to North Tesas Council of
Governments standard specifications and City of Denton addsndums to the
NTCOG specifications.
Slump for concrete shall be between 2 inches sad 8 inches allowable range.
Ray La temperature available at Engineering office. i
Leveling sand when used under
~ ng parking lot pavement any act as a conduit for
water and therefore is not recommended,
1
a Concrete sections are to be reinforced with 3/8 inch bars spaced 24 inches
on center each way or 6 x 6 I6 gauge welded wire fabric. An approved
paving fiber may be substituted for the rainforesng steel. Chairs shall be
used to support reinforcement.
Nben pavers are usedo the subgrade and materials shall be according to i
Appendix A-S - Parking Lot Surface (minimum requirements for pavers). A
list of approved materials and suppliers can be obtained from the
Department of Public Works.
Over S WON lb wheel lads) beery trucks on site per week 1
J
1-2
3 F>Yy I
C
4 I
~lM
i
S
r.:...
ATTACHMENT 2
CURRENT
APPI nix A-S
PANG LOT SWACZ mm um >►JSQunzo RS)
?dgimum Pavement c ass and r
oncreta As t avers
Esistia6 unpaved I S Sachem with 12 cached with 13 1l6' pacers
ParkLug Lot i compacted bud ` 6 Sacbes flax bass Iwitb compacted
M Isub6rado
New Parkins ota I
fire dad Drive 1 S inch" rich I S Saobas rich 16 Sachs line
Lease 1 6 inch Use sub6taaal 6. tub liai subGrods Isub6rade for
I i solid pavers
Parkln4 Area 1 S iaabes.ritk I'1 '-has with I6 items lima
compacted base 6 inches flax base Isub6red4 for
I loud parrs
1 j I fuzibIsclumm
U babe" I
I I Itor.6tid
M
I I ipsrers ~
1 " 4 Y coutruetios materials and methods are to conform to North Texas Council
of Goveno mts statdmxd spsciticatlosr and City of Datoe addsodums to the +
NTCOG spsaificatioms. 1
• cement* wtio" age to be relaf wed with 3/i ls* bass as ti idea
■ costars or 6 x 6 m Ober 6 rite snse.
■ e* Whom pagers are used the emb6rede sad materials shaW be o@@M- )o
Appomdix A-3 - PedLUS Lot 6mrfsee (riiniamm Le!{e!
A list of approved materials saw suppliers "a be obtained from the
y j
Dspwtteset of lab3ls wren*
- 1
s
I
!
1
066%/3
. ~ 2-1 1
yo„~, 1
SS ~ I
i
ATTACFMENT 3
f.:
r
current amendment of this section be deleted and that Sec. 3306(c)
remain as written in the 168 U.B.C.
The exception to section 3318 was discussed and Mrs. Miller
expressed her dislike of the requirement that a sign be posted on
or adjacent to exit doors in churches when a key-locking device is
used. It was pointed out that such signs were not required if
panic hardware is used. The Board recommends that the exception
be deleted.
III. Jerry Clark, City Engineer met with the Building Code Board
at the Board's request to discuss the city's parking lot paving
requirements. At the Board's last meeting, member Wayne Allen
provided other members with paving information and letters from
others expressing their opinions regarding paving of parking lots.
Copies of this information were also provided to Jerry Clark and
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager. The majority of Building Code
Board members believe that the city's current paving requirements
are too severe. Allen was in favor of eliminating the requirement
for six inches of lime stabilization and reducing the required
concrete thickness from five inches to four inches. Allen felt
that a sand cushion several inches thick was adequate for pouring
concrete parking lots. Board members agreed that concrete was not
competitive with asphalt under the current regulations and it was
agreed that some adjustment should be made in the regulations in
order to make concrete more competitive. Jerry Clark thought that
current regulations served the city best, but he agreed to review 3
the Board's suggestions and most with them again at a future
meeting.
i Meeting adjourned.
f
'r
`i
9
s
3-1 f
i
Ile-.-
a
i
t
Minutes
Building Code Board
February 22, I990
Present: Alfred Green, Isabel Miller, Charles Ginnings, Cliff Reding, Wayne Allen, Jackie
Doyle, Building Official, Jerry Clark, City Engineer
Absent: None
1. Miller moved and Ginnin seconded a motion to table
gs approval of the minutes of I
February 15, 1990. Motion carried unanimously.
R. The Board bad a very general discussion regarding the City's parking lot paving
requirements.
Some of the comments made included:
1. lime costs .40 per square foot
2. Asphalt is cheaper but concrete is better
3. Drive and fire lanes on soils having a PI greater than 15 require stabilization.
i
4. Cement stabilization is okay if it is properly engineered.
5. Four inches of concrete is okay if no big trucks are driven on it
6. Some people use sawed joints at 12 feet on center.
7. Saw cuts should be 1/4-1/3 the thickness of the concrete.
8. Might be cheaper to pour 6 Inches of concrete with no lime stabilization
9. Saw cuts at 20 feet may not be adequate.
10. Fibermesb is okay on soils having a PI of 18 or less.
11. Five inches of concrete on a sand leveling bed is better than 5 inches of
concrete with time.
12. Two inch thickness of asphalt is not adequate.
13. Reinforcement in concrete parking must be mcdmum 24 inches on center.
14. No. 3's more than 12 inches on center are not suucwnL
15. Four inches of concrete is okay for am pickups and most trucks used for
delivery to retail stores provided a soil report indicates a PI of 18 or less and
approved saw joints arc used Industrial parking lots might have heavier loads
and require thicker concrete. j
16. Rigid or flen'ble pavement works well to this area. J
17. Asphalt is more flexible than concrete.
I8. Concrete will break in hi PI soil.
19. lbere Is lots of bad clay in Denton.
20. QiWity control is very important for concrete or asphalt.
21. Asphalt concrete is best ' everything Is done just right.
V. Asphalt parking lots can last 3040 years if properly maintained
23. concrete would be competitive coetwise with asphalt if lime stabilization was
not required under the concrete.
24. Saw joints should alwar be sealed
25, Asphalt king lots with little traffic will deteriorate. Asphalt needs to be
26. A sand bed is beneficial opposed to no sand.
27. Concrete on a leveling bed of saki even 1 inch thick is as good as asphalt
with lime stabilization
3-2 1
I
i
i
z•ts- 9~
t
28. Cost of paving requirements has caused jobs to be lost.
29. Fibermesh should be permitted in parking lots.
Jerry Clark said that variances from minimum paving requirements could be okayed
if the parking lot is properly designed by a qualified person.
M Clark explained current requirements for existing unpaved parking lots which permit
5 inches of concrete on a compacted base or 2 inches of asphalt on 6 inches of flex base.
Mr. Clark told the Board that Rhone Engineering was the company used by the City for
testing purposes. Mr. Clark asked the Board to provide him with a list of proposed
ordinance changes.
Mr. Michael Liggrin of the concrete Paving Association was present and provided
I` the board with some general information concerning the American Association of State
f Highway Transportation OfHeW's paving report
HL Allen asked that the board be advised of any proposed ordinances which affect any
private property except plumbing, electrical, and mechanical.
Meeting adjourned.
i
I~
4Ef
f
f
I
`I
1
3-3
S
• IR
• i
i
N.JPa'.p
,
^rp{y I
Minutes
Building Code Board
April 19, 1990
Present: Isabel Miller, Charles Ginnings, Ed Owens, Wayne Allen, Jackie Doyle, Building
? Official, Jerry Clark, City Engineer.
Absent: Alfred Green, Cliff Reding
1. Ginnings moved and Miller seconded a motion to table approval of the minutes of
February 22, 1990 and April 12, 1990. Motion carried unar f nously.
yyt II. Engineers David Hooper and Charlie Jackson were present to discuss parking lot
paving requirements with the board. Allen asked Hooper and Jackson if the city's
existing requirements for asphalt and concrete drive lanes and parking lots are
parallel. Allen asked if the requirements were too much, that they were the same
requirements used for streets. Allen asked Hooper to relay to the board his ideas
1 regarding parking lot paving. Hooper said that generally speaking S" or more of
reinforced concrete on a 6" compacted sub-grade would be adequate. Hooper said
that soil having a PI greater than 35 should be looked at closely. Hooper said that
{ it was always good to have some geo-technical information to look at when designing
parking lots. It is advisable to investigate soil conditions on a case-by-case basis.
Their experience has shown that S" of reinforced concrete on 6" compacted base
works well. Hooper had information from the Dallas chapter of the Construction
Specification Institute which he shared with the board and suggested its use as a
good minimum specification. Allen asked Hooper about the use of a leveling bed
of sand and whether it should or should not be used. Hooper stated that he felt that,
it should not be used because in expansive soils it provides a sort of conduit for
water to get underneath the concrete. Hooper said that if sand were used it would J
be best if it were not continuous underneath the concrete. Allen asked Mr. Jackson
for his comments. Jackson was in favor of a minimum of S" of concrete and he did
not believe lime stabilization was necessary. He did say that he had seen some 4"
parking lots that worked very well, but he recommended that for this thickness that
i lime stabilization would be best. As a bare minimum Mr. Jackson recommends
scarification and recompaction. He said that as traffic loads increase, concrete
thickness should increase. He said that recompaction will probabli keep the ground
level as opposed to not scarifying or compacting. bSr. Jackson said that a track
loader might be adequate but probably should not be specified. The main thing is f
to require a minimum compaction and moisture content. He said that the PSI of
concrete should not determine concrete thickness. Jackson said that lime
stabilization would be preferred with the use of asphalt. Hooper and Jackson agreed
that asphalt and concrete were not parallel in the City's ordinance. It was indicated
that two inches of good quality flex base is needed for each inch of asphalt thickness,
but concrete still has more flexural strength. Allen asked what in asphalt is equal
to S" of reinforced concrete on a compacted sub-grade. Hooper said 4" of asphalt
with 6" of lime stabilization. Owens asked what the cost difference was between
20,000 sq. ft. of 5" asphalt and 6" lime stabilized sub-grade and S" concrete on a
compacted sub-grade. It was believed that one would be within pennies of the other.
When asked about the use of fiber mesh reinforcement, neither Hooper nor Jackson
i
3-4
1
lIl
A i
~-N• 4e .
r+r
C
Y
had much experience with the product. Hooper indicated that he was not In favor
of specifying saw cuts. Jackson said that saw cuts should extend from 1/4 to 1/3 the
thickness of the concrete and that such cuts should be made as soon as possible after
Wdal set. Jackson said that it was better to cut the concrete, but didn't believe it
should be required. He said such cuts control shrinkage cracks.
III. Agenda item III. concerns the option of the builder to make water and sewer taps.
There was considerable concern that the builder have the option of either making
his own taps or having the city do it. There was concern regarding the cost to the 4
builder of making taps, repairing pavement, and finding properly bonded contractors
to do such work. It was pointed out that the Public Utilities Board would consider
the possible option of allowing the builder to make his own taps. Charles Ghuiings
said that he had not heard anything about this proposal at the Home and Apartment
Builder's Association. Allen indicated that some home builders had asked to be
allowed to make water and sewer taps. The board asked that a copy of the proposed
ordinance be provided.
Meeting adjourned.
J ~
9 1
J
I
# i
3-5
j
3
I
.
a
a
Building code Board Minu,es
May 3, 1990
Page 2
Allen agreed, Be said recently the Parks i Recreation Board made a
decision that was overturned by City Council and that they almost
lost the whole board.
Ginnings said when he first got on the Board he thought everything
had to go through City Council.
Doyle asked if the Board vas satisfied with the way the Board
curceatly functions, Everyone agreed.
AECOMMENDATIONs Allen made a motion to recommend to City Council that the
dutiev of the existing Boards and the systematic procedure in
which they operate be continued as is. Ginnings seconded the
motion. Motion passed unanimously. r
III. CONTINUE DISCUSSION CONCERNING PARSING LOT PAVING REQUIRBMENTSs
Allen 3
presented a revised document, from Jerry Clack, Director of ;
Engineering and Transportation, showing alternative ways to revamp
drives and fire lanes. Allen said there was some conflict with the
goo-techs. Miller said there was also some conflict between
Alternate #1 and Alternate 12.
! Allen questioned the requirement for 4' on existing base. Be asked
what happens if the elevation is what* you have to take 4' out to put
back 4'7 Miller said assumably it is compacted p"sed the surface
material. Doyle said the existing requirement was S- and now it is
4w.
Allen sa±d it is still not clear. He asked what happens if the
elevation is where you have to take out 49 to put 40 back. Then you
ate down to a subgrade, do you then scarify, recompact, and put in a i
new parking lot.
j Owens said the packing lot material could be anything. Each unpaved
packing lot when paved will be different. There should be only one
set of specifications, e
Miller said an existing parking lot would be compacted L.0 depth
from previous use. She said if you cut below a foot, you could get
into a new condition, t
I
r
Doyle said there are situations where drive approach changes would be {
required from one occupancy to another.
Allen said there are situations where the new fire lane ordinance
comas into effect. Doyle said if it is a now use and there is going
to be more people in the building it could coratitute a change,
Allen Said he understood that every time there was an occupancy
change the new fire lane ordinance applied.
3-6
i
~Xl e. • OitiiRy
1
A■■y ~
y~ il y
F
d
Building Code Board Minutes
May 3, 1490
page 3
Allan said in regard to asphalt - 2' with 6' flex bass on an existing
unpaved parking lot, if you take out whatever was theca and put in 6'
of flex base and 2' asphalt, engineers have said that 2' was not
adequate.
Decry Clark arrived and addressed Allen's question on the 40 on
existing base for concrete. Clark said existing base means whatever
j
is there*
Miller asked Clark what the requirement would be for a 10' cut.
The whole it would be better to scarify re.
Clark bject wasd not to penalize the people trying todget as new certificate
O
i
of occupancy.
Allen asked Clack about asphalt - 2' with 6' flex base in regard to J
toe do away with flexible asphalt bass entirely, Clack
the o-tocho said he would like statement
Doyle recommended that the ordinance read that the owner shall
maintain the parking lot. If the parking lot was not maintained, a ~
citation would be issued. Miller agreed.
Reding said he has a parking lot with less than 2' asphalt that has
want
not
not en up
the controlkof his• property butdhe d essnot want the liability sitht more
Reding asked about the statement 'e parking lot may be designed by an
engineer approved by the City and certified by the State of Texas.
Reding asked if that meant he has to have a certified engineer draw
plans for a new parking lot if he is building a new building. Doyle
said no engineer is required. Allen said if a cartified engineer
does a PI test and recommends a lesser amunt, then you can go with
1 the lesser amounts
4 Doyle said the reason the statement says approved by the engineering
Division was there are some engineers that do not do adequate works r parkin lots.
The larger o ass are submittedwwith plans which are l~ gineered 9 Doyle
agreed,
than Son twas artso requitfaiing Qlar.d
Reding asked what the
said anything logo pavement breaking away.
allowing moisture to enter followed by p a
Ovens said the Board also eliminated the packing area and drive lanes, 4
Allen t aoapacted in grhe had no problem with S' concrete on
fid and {
3-7
1
i
1
R
t
~ a
i
h Building Code Board Minutes
May 3, 1990
f
. Page 4 that pavers were
I pour inch asphalt on 6' lime subgrade. Clark said that pavers were
not discussed previously. There has been a lot of input from people
in town, if people want to do Ltr there needs to be a
specification. Allen asked what the lime would do. Clark said a lot
of debate was going on regarding lime stabilization. The conclusion
thus eat has been that lime
heating underneath keeping capability,
water our,
it eliminates pumping based on
Allen said 2 concrete Would function the same, Clark said
structural charts he assumed it would be close.
Owens asked if they are grouting the pavers in. Clark said just the
sand. Owens $aid wi
factor. Killer asked that, would rbeethe purposelfor tthe lime a Clark
said mainly for a water barrier.
5/10% onnpavveers.a Miller psaids asphaltk would Sneed j
xasl trying askedtofgotthe
2
f
more than 5/101,
millet asked Clark his opinion on unigceen which was used at the i
Unitarian Church parking lot. Miller said these are placed blocks
that allow grass tbetween
Clark said the as tion oe paversrwouldehve
to be covered by pavers,
to be modified for open pavers.
Allen led the Board's discussion on channelized heavy load areas.
} Allen asked if you have a loading dock does the specifications mean
that you must have an engineer design the whole parking slab. Clack
said that was correct if they were running over 3 vehicles a week.
Allen said he would like for the specifications to state that an
engineer is requited just for specific pavement areas. Miller
agreed. Allen suggested 6' concrete for those areas.
Clark recommended adding another line under concrete. put 6' for
specific pavement area and leave the pavers alone. it you do
something for concrete, you also need to do it for asphalt. charts Clark
saidkhescould ddtan asterisk anddplace theaexplanation at the bottom, j
Clack recommended S heavy trucks on the site per week (19,000 lb.
axel loads). Miller said to call it 'Channelized Heavy load areas'. '
The Board agreed.
The Board discussed fiber mesh. Clack said studies have shown that
fiber mesh is a viable substitute for reinforcement to control
surface cracking. Clark said it fiber mash is used he would
recommend the long mesh. a
j
3-8
E
VN / _ .
-IMF
1
1 f Building Code Board Minutes
may 3, 1990
Page 5
Allen said where most concrete driveways fail is due to too much
water being added to the concrete when pouring. In his opinion, this
is the worse thing that can be done. Slump tests should be dvne at
intermediate intervals. Clark asked what he would allow for slump.
Allen said that On a 1000 day a 5' slump is too dry and a super
plasticizer is too expensive. Clark suggested a range from 2'- B'e
Clark asked the Board how to write up the Rey to temperatures Miller
suggested that Clark check with a company like Ron* engineering to
see what range and temperature they would suggests
Allen asked if during plan review for a ,building permits are plans
reviewed for requirements of on-site maneuvering for tractor
trailers. Clark said staff did not currently enforce on-site ;
tractor/trailer traffic maneuverse
r ~
Reding said did not think the Board should try and design I
everyones parking lot but set minimum requirements.
The Board reviewed three pages submitted for asphalt requirements and
approved staff's recommendation as attached.
Allen asked Clark to revise the parking Lot Surface requirement sheet Z
and submit the final draft for approval at the next meeting.
Clark said he would prefer submitting a draft to the Legal department ,
1
so the final draft would not have to go through another change. s
Ginnings asked Clack for a clarification on curb and gutters 30' Coll
type or non-reinforced. Clark said the City does not require
reinforcing in curb and gutters. Be said it adds to the coat and
does not do that much-
Allen said in regard to lime and cement stabilisation, he recommended
leaving it at V line stabilisation. Clack said if an engineer
designs a project for cement stabilisation, the City should require a J
goo-tech to do its
Miller said that it should be stated that sand is not recommended for
use under the parking lot pavements
Meeting adjourned.
f
I }
i
e
3-9
31065 j ~
i
r.w.
1
MINUTES
Building Code Board
May 17, 1990
Present: Isabel Miller, Charles Ginninga, Ed Owens,
Wayne Allen, Cliff Reding
Staff Present: Jackie Doyle, Building Official; Jerry Clark,
City Engineer
Absent: None
I. Allen moved and Owens seconded a motion to approve
the minutes of May 3, 1990. Motion carried
unanimously.
Ii. Mr. Don Cross, President of Sunmount Asphalt Company,
spoke to the Board about proposed amendments to the
city's parking lot paving ordinance. Mr. Cross said
that he had 25 years experience with asphalt, and
that he was concerned about changing the ordinance to
allow a lighter paving requirement without a proper
subbase or subgrade. He said that lime is very r
important to the life of pavement. Mr. Cross said
that saw joint3, sprinkler systems, poor drainage,
runoff from buildings, and freezing and thawing were
all problems for concrete. He indicated that at
least 904 compaction of the subgrade was necessary)
and that if subgrade is too wet, it will turn to mud;
and if it is too dry, it will turn to powder. He
said that a 144 moisture content was proper for soil
beneath pavement with fluctuations from 204 to 74.
Mr. Cross indicated that once compaction is lost, it
will not return. Mr. Cross said that linear
expansion will occur under pavement if moisture is
not controlled. Photos of pavement failures were k
shown. He said that to repair a concrete parking i
lot, it would cost $25-$40 per square yard.
Mr. Cross state3 again that he did not think the }
proposed amendment was adequate. t
Mr. Charles Baxter of the National Lime Association
showed slides of parking lot and street pavement
failures. Mr. Baxter introduced Dr. Little, of Texas
A i M University, who said that he agreed with the
comments of the previous two speakers. Or. Little
reiterated the need for a good subbase and said that
lime stabilization was permanent. He spoke of a
paving project in Chambers County in east Texas where f
the soil had a PI of 60. He said that the soil was
lime stabilized and several years later the PI was
3-10
i
r. Ile- 71F
.e
i
1
r
a
.
6,ECTION III. That this resolution shall become effectiie upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990.
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST: S
JENNIFER WALTERS$ CITY SECRETARY i
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORNt
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY :
BY: J~.fLLL~'
1
i
aia
i
~I
PAGE 3
i
"vv ,
i
i
t
i ,
i
to :l~:tv sz ac~r
t f• , I I^
I
t
1 • •
1
I
O
MLI C
1
CU
e y
'n 0 i cu A
i
I
fK'R I
h
5
4
I
i
Y
f
i
i
:a
I ~.U
Q
OR R
44
1
f
gm 0
(D 0
Sal
m
Nm$
Cm 2
Nom. ~ o ~
m 3 y
in 11 a
i 8a ~pp1 xp~
s o
9 o
1
gig
92
Iva
j. cr of
C m
fill. 18 [fit
y f~ ~'1 W ~ 7
i
Ag~ 7 ~ m 1 ~ ~~m ~ Z ~LT.1 ~ ?QC r~i
w yD p° c.2 C IIp 0Z „ K $ Se.
0 5,:E a
all. all, I cr
H 0 ' or,,,
a' o. Q ? n
~j. g 61S ~
W~ ngm
A s ° r
a m ~o
g
N
lm
m -
all fist
its
(J3
S
I
A`
F
CD 3
m i
S y 1°1 03
< .fax j
~ a
f4 1~
f
i ys q q
I
i Nor
4q Q '1
_ t q & ~,II
r' 15.1 5
{
s
r
y `
T^
T
C
.ma
a ~ Q
NO !
91. o wa
~1 .
Ti' w
r fD ~ ~ V
I J. C) 9
v~
!Z4
g N
~ V Rt
m
i m
0 0 ' NJi ~
34
OQL
o
oi• a » ,
9
q e z fsg
fil.
-t4~ ~,•i silly,
~a
~~isa~ ~ aala
41
~ ~ ear
,fig
fill
83r~"1 8
ie9} t~)~~i~~➢~ l~~ of z=~.
7~ae~ f~i~u~8s es g~ 9 ~a~B
J _
I
~ MAC"V'
1
6
1 t
l
~1~1 oil
t
1
CITY
y
t"ICOUNCIL'
P
T P,
9
MIMI:
I
i Him
i
t I
r I
m 1:1
+ Af I
o
c s
C
•
XT H p00~ i
G GG
s
D
S
~1
y
4
DATE: 10/02/90
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the city council
PROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 920.42 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF
AND ASUT'riNO I35W AT THE INTERSECTION OF ALLRED ROAD (A-59)
` RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the adoption of the proposed annexation schedule
setting the date, time and place for public hearings.
i
SUMMARYt
The petition for annexation of these tracts into the City of Denton
has been initiated by the owners in order to facilitate the zoning
of the tracts for planned development to allow for light industrial,
offices, commercial and institutional uses,
BACKGROUND:
The 920.42 acre site is part of the 3,346.70 acres Pilot Knob Ranch {
! shown on attached site map. This tract is the site that was
considered for the Matsushita project earlier this year,
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPSAFFECTED:
Staff will prepare a service plan for this site to be considered at
E the public hearings.
i ISC AL IMP7ICT:
NA
i
4Lloyd. y aubmi teds~
,t
Prepared by: rrel) f
C ity Manager
Harry N, Persaud AICP
Senior P)anner
App oved: a
z
tank Robbins AICP
Executive Director
Planning and Development
3399x
r
ATTACHMENT l
't
A,59 ~ r
I
DENTON 1
'1~
In-
1 f p
r ` ' IL ••t r Y ' bl\IJ, ' I y J L'Yt1~ '1. VI'4, 11
NITS ♦:::o:+ '
l I' r 4_ ,r y" _f ti I
' a r\ r Ilk %,10
t • ' , I I
NO(~ _ f ♦wr1 R♦ 1'`1_, h f 111
i ..i.l 1
♦IRI • • y - , / I, tN. III
i
41
t
111~~dG}} _l 11M1~i.
I 'i' , •r ~l , it
1 ~ y ,I J/d% 1,i 1 ' d' • `C111 „/,'t 1.~ t~ I w
a, oi
FRI
• ,rer (R y
r
RID
} v 1 s x.,•11 • 1 L K`
Y ~IIY'AP. f, .l 11] r • : `
a t I f R I C••ff .,r iL
11,1 RUf♦ I PI ,IN I, • u• 4611 f 1
644
PI,II•RI I ' WINE t •.f1
1
f • f0 IR
• ~ ♦ u•. COPPER.
11 t' ,bRRI 3 I' r fy•t R1' • ♦Y 'CANYON
CO
ror 1\olinl
. •
r~ • r 014#40 RIi11 RI. 1 ' 1
014#40 rpr 1I oil
MIRA 40,
u J11 1 Jllp U_~,... I~ • ,
• . •I DOUBLE OAK
SCALE tik5*J DATE • Z5 •`iO
1
E I~
~i
I
lid
, j
I i 1 I
In I I~ ; ~ E i E f I
;'•:u i suss n'II",1\~ / I i i f`- =r
f
I`' ~ f t N i l~il ~ I Iaa4iC+lTIL ~A><[arIIiSOilJ?it't7c~r ~ I
tr OI;t I N
64 i f
~ ~ { 3 i S~ w ' i 4.i.. •G';r" ' ~'rt.rll~t rt:, nrrt .l i
~mi<t'cwawomclm taros
3 is
Q s +I li Ittt ftN! It
I ,
A il~~ ' J 1~ i,',.fyr•1r, ~!•I",< ~iEJ',',~ I! ~fE
! i f! : r 1 r h ri air. / • 3 ! , 1 L
i :I ~ ~ + I Il+t ~ `lS'i ~;~ii •.i ~ IS ~It~~ I
I ..r1tD'; !I lid t ~ •rt..w .if!
I t , • i
CO D
A
«
aid
~`I ~ 1 . II 3 ..fir
II (fi;~Io' i . Ii1; I I l ij E
i~1
IEiI IiE,a .1 i 1
+I I 1. I ~~i I i 1
f IIi ti't
t Ii I tilIl]'E+~ If IN "f! ill.
r= I i 1. 11 I M1
65-V NOUN NNY l73st?l
Z auaufyoB~ar~
r
Attachment 3
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED ANNEXATION
A-59
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS THAT:
The City of Denton, Texas, proposes to Institute annexation
proceedings to alter the boundary limits of said City to add the
territoryy described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and Incor-
porated by reference herein, to the corporate limits of the City h
of Denton,
a
A Public Hearing will be held by and before the City Council
of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of ,
1990, at 7,00 o'clock P. M. in the City council Chem ors of-Me
Municipal Building of the City of Denton, Texas, for all persons
Interested in the above proposed annexation, At said time and
lace all such persons shall have the right to appear and be
heard, Of all sold matters and things, all persons interested in
f the things and matters herein mentioned, will take notice,
A Public Hearing will be held by and before the City Council
of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of ,
1990, at 7:00 o'clock P. M. in the City ounctl Chom ers o
r Municipal Building of the City of Denton, Texas, for all persons
intere3ted in the above proposed annexation. At said time and
lace all such persons shall have the right to appear and be
heard, Of all said matters and things, all persons interested in
the things and matters herein mentioned, will take notice.
r
r
BOB CX9TL Ar, MAYOR
r
ATTEST:
:
E
7E~TFEI~FIA
RS, CITY SECRETARY
A-55
2400x
"I W
i~
r
~r
rechecked and ik was down to 20, Dr, Little said
that clay attr(- .3 water and that calcium eliminates
water retention or limits the amount of water clay
attracts. Dr. Little said that cement should be used
to stabilize sandy soil not lime.
Wayne Allen spoke of the high cost of lime
stabilization for even small parking lots and the
burden it placed on the small businessman. Allen s
told those present about previous meetings the Board {
had had with paving contractors and geotechnical
,engineers.
Board membere thanked those in attendance for their
presentations.
Meeting adJourned at 5110 p.m.
1 i
i
I
173le
f
Y "r'
s
~ i
3uilding Code Board Minutes
r
June 7, 1990
Page 2
in getting from living quarters to fire trucks and
ambulances. This request is in regard to a new fire r
station currently under construction at 2230 West Windsor
Drive. Robert Hagemann, Fire Marshal, was present and
explained the Fire Department's request to the Board.
Hagemann painted out that the building would be full
sprinkled. Owens moved and Reding seconded a motion tha~
ti the request of the Fire Department for push plates in lieu
of latching devices be permitted and in so doing make an
example of not making an example of denying a reasonable
request. 'lotion carried unanimously.
4
~ IV. The Board reviewed proposed changes to the parking lot r
paving ordinance. Owens said that he had no reason not to
approve the proposed changes.
Allen spoke of the intent to make asphalt and concrete
parallel performance wise. Allen said that he feels the
proposal is not parallel.
Owens felt that the proposed amendments were acceptable,~~
but suggested, that the four (4) inch asphalt requirement
be changed to five (5) inches on six (6) inches of limn
subgrade.
- Reding talked about minimum specifications and questioned
the five (5) inch concrete requirement. Allen said if
minimum specifications are for everyone, five (5) inches
is best according to goo techs the Board had talked to.
Reding woke in reference to the proposed amendments which
requires that the City Engineer approve parking lot paving
plans designed by another engineer registered in this
state, Reding feels that a registered engineer's design i
should be accepted without the City Engineer's approval.
Meeting adjourned at Ss4S p.m.
r
i
i
i
6
i
s L
s
t
37679
3-12 {
i4
Yv /
r CY ^aM~ ~
I 4'
d
I P~ , r
0
P
MINUTES
Building Code Board
August 21 1990
presentt Isabel Miller, Wayne Allen, Greg Muirhead, Ed '
Owens, Jackie Doyle-Building Official
Absents Cliff Reding
r~rs~•
1. Greg Muirhead was administered the oath of office by
Betty Williams of the City Manager's Office.
III Allen moved that the minutes of June 7, 1990 be approved
as written with the exception that the third paragraph
of item IV be amended to read as follows3 Owens felt
that the proposed amendments were acceptable with the
exception that the four (4) inch asphalt requirement be
changed to five (S) inches on six (6) inches of lime
subgrade. Owens seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
III. The Board continued its discussion of the City'
parking lot paving requirements. Allen said that he ha
talked with Mr. Hooper of Hooper and Associates, a soil
engineering firm, regarding (Mr. Hooper's prior
statements to the Board) regarding whether four (41 or
five (S) inches of asphalt on six (6) inches of lime
stabilized subgrade was adequate. Allen said that Mr.
Hooper said that the four (4) inches of asphalt on six
t (6) inches of lime stabilized subgrade was adequate
because the lime provides some strength. The Board
V agreed that four (4) inches of asphalt on.six (6) inches
i of lime stabilized subgrade was adequate.
The Board agreed that their prior recommendation concerning
approval of parking lot paving plane drawn by an engineer
registered by the State of Texas should not change. The
proposed ordinance amendment previously read as followsi
in lieu of the above specifications, a parking lot may be
constructed in accordance with the design made by an engineer
registered by the State of Texas if the design is approved by '
the City Engineer.
The Board recommends that the above sentence be changed to read
as follows In lieu of the above specifications, a parking lot
may be constructed in accordance ~-ith design made by an s
engineer registeted by the State of Texas and submitted to the
City for review.
a
00235 3-13
f
1 Itr
1)
i0.Wr~
i
t
dd k.
S
t
{ Building Code Board Minutes r
august 2, 1990
Page Two
The Board feels their proposal will still give the City the }
authority to review and approve parking lot paving designs.
The Board also felt that their suggested change might lessen
the City Engineer's liability if a failure were to occur on a
job which the City Engineer may have suggested alternate design
or construction methods.
The Board agreed that a statement in the ordinance which reads
as follows would be helpfuact asv a lincgndu sand
it fora water, unddr
parking lot pavement may
therefore is not recommended. I
of concrete reinforcement, wire fabric
The shoo d a be added as believes a fnem that 60 #6 aue welded
The Board felt that the number of heavy truck loads on a
f
parking lot each week should be tan before requiring thicket
concrete or asphalt construction, The Board 'feels that whilel
concrete or asphalt fatigue faetorsignot that ht be prop riate for,
street or highways, they probably ace
parking lots,
Doyle said that he would talk to Jerry Clark, City engineer,
about the proposed changes.
1
oo., hot tub and spa
The Board reviewed proposed swimming p
enclosure requirements eas and agreed that the proposed ordinance
amendment should r followsi
i
sec. 305 Enclosure
1 (a) Enclosure, Every owner, purchaser under contract,
lessee, tenant or other' person in possession of
f ` land within the corporate limits of the City of
Denton upon which is situated a swimming pool, spa
1 or hot tub shall at all times maintain upon the
tract, lot or promisee on which the swimming pool,
swimming pool barrier
i
completely `i surrounds the fence
that or hot
hot tub, tract, lot or premises. The height of
the enclosure shall be not less than sixty (60)
inches in height measured from the adjacent
exterior grade level with e,; openings, holes or
gaps large enough thcfor ou a sphere four (4) inches in
diameter to pass
3-14j
00235
I
1
I~
s
f MMIO
r'Yi ^'f r
P
MIItiU DRAF
Planning ■nd Za,,rng Commission
September 26, 1940
The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Denton, Texas was held on Wednesday, Sepptember 26, 1990,
at 5:00 P.M., in the Gouncll Chamber of the MunfcipaI BulldIng.
Present: Jim Engelbrecht; Ivan Glasscock, Judd Holt, William
Kamman, and Fran Morgan
Absent: Eullne Brock
refs Present from Staffs Frank Robbins, Executive Cirector for
Planning and Development; Owen Yost, Urban Plsnnerl
Tanya Cooper, Assistant City Attorney; Bob Ticknor, {
Superintendent of Parks and Recrestloni Karen Fasharl,
Urban Planners David Salmon Enyineeringi Jackie Doyle,
Chief Building Official; InA Ollvia Carson, C1erP•typlst !
4 Vice-chairman Holt called the meeting to order.
I
1, Consider the minutes of the regular called meeting of
September 12, 1990.
i
It was moved by Mr, Kamman, seconded by Mr, Glasscock, and '
carried (4.0) to approve the minutes of the re ular nesting
of September 12, 1990, Mr, Holt did not vote because he had
riot been present at that meeting.
It. Consent Agenda
Mr. holt removed the Dale Brown Addition from the consent
agenda,
It was moved by Mr. Kamman, seconded by Mr. Holt and J
unanimously carried (S-0), to approve the remaining consent
a ends which consisted of the prellminaryy and final replete
o Expressway Industrial Park, Lots 6.2-R, Block B. i
V. Hold a public hearing ■nd consldel• an ordinance to amend the
Subdivision and Land Development regulations concerning
parking lot standards,
STAFF REPORT: Mr. Robbins reported that the building Code i
ppBarkinClotmsurfacepstandardstheIReoproposal eamends ther
Subdivission and Land Development Regulations by r
1. Decreasing from S inches to 4 Inches the concrete +
i thickness required on existing, unpaved parking tots. i
1 2. Eliminates lime stabllfsatlon for new Concrete parking
{ tots with scarified and computed sub grade.
3. Adds a standard for channell=ed heavy load areas,
l
r 4. Enables design by a professional engineer based on sail
tests, in lieu of using the stated specification. The
City Engineer will have design nPlroval. f
S. Adds a concrete slump range from 2 to B Inches.
I
stated N FAVOR: lfa no Allen, Chairman of tht Building Code Board,
i
parking lot specifications, complaints a about the structural
values and have come upp with these suggestions to make I
cementgmanufactures, They wereesentntesteresultseendaad
study by the State Highway Department. They asked for input
from the producers of Ilme and asphalt. They found great
discrepancies In the test results, they finally found some
Soo-technical engineers to help out. these engineers were
y
~ t!r
r P4Z Minutes D A S
eptember 26, I990 F T
Palo 2 certified to perform soil tests ano make recommendations for
parking lots and foundations. The result Is the
recommendation that lime stabilization not be a requirement
but the soil must be scarified and recompacked.
Mr. Holt asked what is meant by "scarified".
Mr. Allen replied that it is when the soil Is ripped apart
and then recompacted.
sJ Mr. Glasscock asked if the new standards will be less
expensive.
r
Mr. Allen said
yes.
t
Ms. Morgan asked if the concrete will be thicker or thinner.
tit
Mr. Allen Indicated that it will stay the some, The change t
will be how the soil beneath the concrete I.ti treated.
The Commission discussed the proposed amendment.
Mr. Holt asked if other titles ware surveyed regarding their
requirements.
Mr. Allen said yes. Denton Is parking lot standards are the
same as street specifications. That is much more stringent
than most of the other titles.
The Commission discussed the types of bases used for parking
lots and the negative effect of moisture.
Mr. Glasscock asked the meaning of a slurp range.
Mr. Allen replied that a slump test is taken to determine
the moisture level In concrete. Adding too much water to
the mix destroys concrete. The weather is also a factor.
The stump range Is based on temperature.
Mr. lessen asked if Y' concrete with no lime base will make
for quality parking lots.
Mr. Salmon said yes If the concrete Is done properly and the
j soil is s urifled and compacted, it may not be the same
d pproduct as with lime stobtlizatlon, but staff teals It will
I be adequate. Concrete Is more durable than asphalt and
requires less maintenance. With our specifications tlttht
butsthere hin t.
Aspllaltccanrl a tparlong timecost
Mr. Holt noted that the concrete streets in Denton seem to
last longer.
The Commission discussed the effect of the proposal on
existing unpaved parking lots.
Mr. Salmon said flat the definition of on existing unpaved
parking lot could be clarified.
Mr, fngetbrecht asked how adequate compaction Is determined.
Mr. Salmon sold that when a Certificate of Occupancy Is i
requested for an existing building the Issue of paving the !
parking lot comes up The City tries to encourage people to
occupy exlsting buildings and wants the parking lots paved. ;
Pivln them Is an improvement. A renter may not want to
install an entire parkin lot from scratch so the proposal
I$ a co■prorise. Staff is comfortable with that. The lots
will be Inspected to determine If they are compacted.
f
I
WIMP
1 J
j
P4z e
26, 1990 F +Y
September
Page 3 DRAFT
r
i Measurements could be taken to determine the thickness of
the gravel and amount of compactlon, but they are
expensive. Staff will Judge by observation what type of
material the parking lot consists of, tf the lot is being
used, and If there are mud puddles.
OPPOSED; Dan Cross, President of Sunmount, Box 1770,
Roanoke, spoke In opposition to the proposal. He sold that
he represents a heavy highway construction company wltil ZS
years of experience. They do both concrete and asphalt. He
f does not think it appropriate to discuss asphalt vs.
concrete but rather quality of construction. Most any
engineer in theory will say that S Inches of concrete is
enough. But there is no room for error in that theory and
the people that lay concrete are uman, The North Texas J
area has soil that Is capable of retaining and giving off a I
lot of molvture through seasonal changes, He went on to 1
explain th% various properties of soil and how they effect
pavement. He gave examples of large companies that felt It
f necessary to place a sub grade under their parking lots. He
showed the Commission pictures of what happens to soil under
an inferior parking lot. He said that a parking lot should
last and remain in good conditinn and as ■ contractor, he is
afraid that ppeople will choose to go with the minlaum
standards bein~ proposed. When the parking lot goes bad
they will not lame the low standards, they will blame his
company. He, does not want to have that kind of a
reputation. A heavy duty sidewalk Is no what Denton needs ;
for its parking lots. i
Mr. Holt asked if the proposal is ccmparable to what other
1 cities have.
f Mr. Cross said that Los Colinas has had problems with
similarly type standards.
Mr. Holt noted that the proposal concerns private parking
lots. Businessmen will have to make a decision on which E
route to take.
Earl Deland stated that he is a registered engineer
representing the time Assoclatlon. He has had 30 years
experience representing cities and it an engineer he opposes E
any ordinance that relaxes standards and re ulres no
sub -base, He would prefer to have live used as the sub-base j
but some type of stabilisation between concrete and native
soil is definitelyy needed. When Denton goes throe h Its wet
and dry cycles, the soil loses Its optimum compaction and
moisture accumulates. He explained how that can damage a
parkin lot. He urged the Commission to require some type
of $to lit On.
j
Mr. Holt asked if he knows what Plano requires,
Mr, Deland said no, The requirements vary from city to
city. He was director of public works In Farmer's Branch,
and they do require time stabillsotion. Carrollton does not
appear to because there is a ft lot on Trinity that is
less than five years old and It is already failing.
Mr Engelbrecht asked him about a reduction in asphalt
I
thickness.
Mr. Deland said that he would have to evaluate the design.
Asphalt falls because of heavy loads which put too much I
pressure on the soil beneath. It is diffiuilt to design
pavement that will not fall under certain load or soil I
conditions.
i
Fi
S
PAZ MLnutes y September 26, 1990
Page 1 DBJJPT
RECOMMENDITION: Mr. Robbins stated that he observed one of
the Building Code Board meetings. There were three
geo-technical engineers with different backgrounds that did
not reflect interest groups. They said that the proposal
would be okay. Standards in other titles vary widely from
no requirements at all to lime stabilisation. The proposed
standard is not goin to be ualouto what is currently
required. The question is heqow ch should the City regulate
private perking lots. Staff has no objection to the
proposal.
Mr. Allen stated that Mr. Cross is a friend of his and be
a preciated what he and his guest had to say. They heard
those arguments at the Board meeting and took them very
seriously. They tried to weigh out the information but
there were many conflicts between the Industries and test
results. So they went away from the Industries and sought
out the teo-techs. Concrete and asphalt will break up
eventually if there is enough traffic on it. He Is not
saying that concrete Is better than asphalt or that Ili, is
not a good product. He Is saying that small businessmen
have a financial concern. The Board Is just trying to be
fair. They have spent a lot of time on this issue. The
requirement for an existing unpaved parkin lot is goin
down from S" to They will be inspected If a park~ng i
lot has been driven on It will compact. This is an i
incentive for existing parking lots to be pared and does not
put the burden on the small businessmen.
Chair closed the public hearing.
DECISION: Mr. Engelbrecht noted a discrepancy in the
back-up and asked that It be corrected.
Mr. Robbins explained that the proposed ordinance also
eliminates a standard for fire lanes because that is now
contained in another ordinance. A fire lane is not
necessarily part of a parking lot. k
Mr. Engelbrecht sold that after listening to the discussion, I
It appears that there are wide ranging standards and wide 1
ranging results. He suspects that Is because of wide i
ranging soil composition and compaction. He does not
understand why an ordinance cannot be written that says what
the standard should be for every kind of soil condition. oled
ordinanceoIsgwritten, t.helpiopoiedgstandardswat# &a pro as i
any. `
Mr. Glasscock noted that the proposed standards are minimums I
and a builder always has the option to do note. Staff has
examined the proposed standards.
` Mr. Holt agreed that a minimum standard Is needed but the
ultimate decision should be left to the owner. He Is In
favor of the proposed chonges.
Mr. Engelbrecht moved to recommend approval of the amendment
for parking lot surface standards. Seconded by Mt. loamsn
and unanimously carried (5-0).
I 2106x ~
I
s~
T
5
I
r
i
CITY
COUNCIL
j
i
'r
I
5
I
I ~ 1
i
t ~
6 f
0
0 U"
i
I
1 ,1
1
II M~ -1d1'- 1
Denton Police Department
221 N. ELM
DENTON, TEXAS 76201
" M E M O R A N D U M
TOi Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
FROMI Michael W. Jet, Chief of police,~l
11~- I
DATEi September 28, 1990 p
i
REi Taxicab License Revocation Hearing
e '
On Friday, August 24, 1990, pursant to the Code of Ordinances of The City of Denton,
Sec 26-44, a hearing was conducted in my office regarding a complaint filed by E
Denton Taxi Service against Denton City Taxi Service. Representatives from both
companies were present at the hearing.
The complaint basically alleged that Denton City Taxi Service had diverted
customers from Denton Taxi Service by intercepting cells for service and using
false or misleading statements to potential customers which Denton Taxi Service
believed amounted to a theft of service. Additionally, the complainant alleged
vehicles of the Denton City Taxi Service were improperly marked.
j After evaluating the complaint and reviewing the applicable city ordinance I am
of the opinion that my authority to suspend or revoke a license must be supportad
by s conclusion that good cause exist to believe the license had violated a specific
provision of the ordinance (Code of Ordinances, Sec 26-440 Sac 26-47, Sac 26-48,
Sec 26-49, Sec 26-50 and Sec 26-52) or a state statute regarding operation of
Motor Vehicles.
It is my opinion that the complaint of Denton Taxi Service did not presents nor did
any independant investigation, satisfactory proof of such violations.
In additions the complainant was advised to pursue any complaint founded on alleged
shaft, deceptive trade practices, unauthorised interception of communication or I
civil actions of interference with contractual relations through more appropriate
avenues. More specifically the Denton County District Attorney's office or
Denton County Civil Courts, f
Finally, prior to informing the complainant of my decision this entire matter was
reviewed by the City Attorney's office.
I
III
(917) 586-8181 METS0 434.2520
F
f'
r ~
d
ILL
r
i
CITY
COUNCIL.
nxc:r
d
t
i ,
X.M
li
I
J
4 ti,o
~ s
I i
~ I
a i
k ~ OQC,6r~po '
MIMIT"
I
Nos]
F1
DATIi 10/02/?0
Y CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council l(~i/ ~i
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager 1
SUBJECT: AMENDING PARKING LOT SURFACE STANDARDS
1 RECOMMENDATIONi
The Building Code Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend approval,
SUMMARYi
1
The proposal amends the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations by
1, Decreasing from S inches to < inches the concrete thickness
required on existing, unpaved parking lots.
2, Eliminates lime stabilization for new concrete parking lots
with scarified and compacted subgrads,
J, Adds a standard for channelised heavy load areas, 1
i
4. Enables design by a professional engineer in lieu of using the
stated specification. ;
S. Adds a concrete slump range from 2 to B inches, J1
i)
( The new standards decrease costs and add flexibility to parking
l lot paving in Denton.
BACKQROUND:
Several years ago, after numerous complaints 0jut deteriorating
and chuckholed parkinq Iota, our city codes were amended to
sotablish parking lot paving standards, At the request of j'
Building Code board members, the Building Code Board began to J
review the adopted standards in February 1990, The Board took
significant testimony from several professional geotachnical 1
engineers, including the City Engineer, who were knowledgeable in i
this subject areas
The Planning and toning commission reviewed the Board's findings
and concerns with the Board. !
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTEDi
Parking lot builders and owners in Denton,
1
S
S
Y
City Council Report
Page 2
October 2, 1990
r
FISCAL IMPAM
None
Respectful submitted:
Prepared byi Llo Y. Harrell
City Mat:ager d
P ank H. Robbins, AICP
Executive Director
Planning and Development
2397x/2
i
I
I
i
i
i
I
i
Ii
I
•K rur~ ~ ~
r,•,,ATTACHMENT 1
r
N0.
AN ORDINANCE Of THE CITY OF DENTONr TEXAS, AMENDING APPENDIX A-5 OF
THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PROVIDE FOR NEW PAR!(ING LOT SURFACE PENALTY VIOLATIONSTTHEREOrIDAND PROVIDING FOR IAN TEFFECTOIVE DATE300.00 FOR
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSI
e
SECTION 1. That Appendix A-s "Par'Aing Lot Surface (Minimum
Requirements)" of the Denton Development Code is amended by the
adoption of a now Appendix A-S, as attached hereto.
SECTION II, That any person violating any provision of this
ordinance shall, upon day that a convictionp be this ordinance is violated
S500.00. Each ~
shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.
arCT1~ON iii. That this ordinance shall become effective i
fourteen days(14) days from the date of its passage, and the City
Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance
ty of D ntont Texas, wi hint nc (10) days of official the ~
newspaper published hth twice
date of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , r 1990.
i
BOB CAST LEBERRY~ MAYOR
i
i
ATTtSTs
JENNIFER WAI/l'ERbj CITY SECRETARY
BYI i
r
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMI
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCHO CITY ATTORNIEY
Sl.=.
By l
i
i
j
77
APp9nu A-3
PARKING LOT 601FACR (MINIM UQML MMT3)
I Minimum Pavement Thickness aad Sub rada r
I- oncrets Aa t avers
Witing unpaved 14 inches on existingl 2 inches on 1 3 1/$" pavers ~I
Parkins Lot { base i 6 inches flax base I on scarified
1 I I aid compacted
I suhsrade
w New Par ins Lots
Standard 3 inches oa 4 inches on scarified 6
Pavement Section I Scarified i 16 inebes Use sublvadeJ compacted I
+ Compacted Subgrads i I sub=rada 'lJ
***Chaanelised Heavy 6 inches on 6 inches on 6 inch
load areas I sarifiad i ~6 inches line subgrade{ flax Use for
(compacted subgrado ( grid pavers I
i
IN LIRD Of THE AiOYR SPRCIFICATIONS, A. ?ARUM LOT HAT U CONSTRWM IM j ,
ACCOLDiva viii Tn DRS14I min R AM mum Axisum K The STArs OF inn
AND S0MrM TO In CITY FOR LM9V AID APMVALa
Construction materials and methods shall coaform to North Tessa CouscLL of
Governments standard specifications and City of Denton addendum# to the j
NTCOO specifications
Slump for concrete shall be between 2 inches and 8 inches allocable rasp.
Rey to temperature available at Ragiaeeriag officia
Leveling "ad when used under parking lot pavesesis may act as a conduit fat {
water and therefore is not roeosawndeda
J
i
* Concrete eaations are to be rata orced with 3/6 inch bare spaced 24 inches
on canter each way or 6 : 6 I6 pup welded wire fabric. An approved
paving fiber may be substituted for the reinforcing steel. Chairs shall ba
used to support reinforcement.
f
Ae When pavers are wed, the subgrade and materials shall be accord to
Appendix A-3 - Parking Lot Surface (ainimum requirn esto for pavers). A
last of approved materials end suppliers can be obtained from the
Depastatat of Public Works.
E
ass Over S (18,000 )s wheel loads) h"vy trucks on site per Weak E
i
1-2
i
I
met
i
MCY~
ATTACHMENT 2
CURRWL
APPOW
1 PNKOIG LOI SWACI (WISDOM > MUMEMlS)
minims sve C MEMO" A-17-Swerm
1-~onerata Aar t avsss
Isiating unpaved 13 Loam$ with 1 2 makes with 13 1/4' Pavers
Parking Got I compacted bas 16 Inch" flax bus Iwith compacted
I 1 Isubgrads
w as ota
fire asd Draw 1 3 L"bee With 13 iaehos with. 16 Sachs Lists
La F, 16 Inch ILm subgraasl C Inch LSai subgra4t I bgr do for
Parking Arse 13 twin wits 1 tocbas with 6 Snahas Lim
M i compacted bas 1 6 stab" tlss Use Isubgssda or
I i or 66 LaGwote
I 1 I for gtru
I I I "Vern E
I I
Corettustlen materials a" mmebods are to conlasn to Worth Xsmam Connell
' of Goreraaenes mtsadard apaitlaatiemn and Cllr Of Demme addaduam to the
NTCOG spo" icatiawo j
e Castrate meatless are to be rslalerved wlth, V6, Sash 1a26.e1i 14 leek
■ Gastswo or 6 s 6 num`ew ` Viso mesh.
■ ee When pavan are used tM wbgrade ad medals Kalil a solotllmy to
APNditt A-$ • ParkSy hoe gurdess (Miaiara igdreammts ls;o Pewrs).
A ae s! apsored aatawiais sea suppliers aan tie obtained free tha
Departamat of Pubus Motto.
1
1 '
06gle/3 I
2-t ~ 3
I
4 -4
a
r ATTACHMENT 3
current amendment of this section be deleted and that 8e0. 3304(c)
remain as written in the '88 U.e,C,
The exception to section 3318 was discussed and Mrs, Miller
expressed her dislike of the requirement that a sign be posted on
or adjacent to exit doors in churches when a key. looking device is
used. It was pointed out that such signs were not required if
~w panic hardware is used, The Board recommends that the exception
be deleted.
111. Jerry Clark, City Engineer met with the Building Code Board
at the Board's request to discuss the city's parking lot paving
requirements, At the Board's last meeting, member Wayne Allen j
provided other members with paving information and letters from
others expressing their cpinione regarding paving of parking lots,
Copies of this information were also provided to Jerry C1nrk and
Rick 8vehla, Deputy City Manager, The majority of Building Code
Board members believe that the city's current paving requirements
a
re too severe, Allen was in favor of eliminating the requirement
for
concrete thickness from five incheso toaforreInches,thAllenufal0 i
concreteaparkinghiilots, Board mehmbersagreed thaduate for at concrete W s not
competitive with asphalt under the current regulations and it was
agreed that some adjustment should be made in the regulations in
order to make concrete more competitive, Jerry Clark thought that
current regulations served the city beet, but he agreed to review
the Boards suggestions and meet with then again at a future
meeting.
j Meeting W ourned,
i
i
3-1
j
Y
1
t
t t
Minutes
Building Code Board
February 22, 1990
M
Present: Alfred Green, Isabel Miller, Char!es Ginnings, Cliff Reding, Wayne Allen, Jackie
Doyle, Building Official, Jerry Clark, City Engineer
Absent: None
1. Miller moved and Ginnings seconded a motion to table approval of the minutes of
February 15, 090. Motion carried unanimously.
11. The Board had a very general discussion regarding the City's parking lot paving
requirements.
Some of the comments ;node Included:
1. Lime costs .40 per square foot
2. Asphalt is cheaper but concrete is better
3. Drive and fire lanes on soils havio! a PI greater than 15 require stabilization.
4. Cement stabilisation Is okay If it is p rly engineered.
S. Four inches of concrete Is okay If no big trucks are driven on It
6. Some people use sawed joints at 12 feet on center.
7. Saw cuts should bs 1/4.1/3 the thickness of the concrete.
8. Might be cheaper to pour 6 Inches of concrete with no lima stabWzadott
9. Saw cuts at 20 feet may not be adequate.
10. Fibermesh is okay on soils having a PI of 18 or less.
It. Five Inches of concrete on a sand leveling bed Is better than S Inches of
concrete with lime.
12. Two inch thickness of asphalt Is not adoeuato
13. Reinforcement is concrete parking must be ma~dmum 24 iccha o0- seater.
14. No. 3's more than 12 Inches on center are not structural.
15. Four Inches of concrete is okay for can, pickups and most trucks wed for
delivery to retail stores provided a soil report iadlcatse a PI of 18 or Iou end
approved saw Joints are used. Industrial parking lots might have heavier loads
and require thicker conaete.
16. Rigid or flWbis ppaavvement works well In this area.
17. Asphalt is more fieudble than coturste.
18. Concrete will break in hiSh P1 soil.
19. IfUre to lots of bad clay In Denton.
20. Cmali control is very important for concrete or "halt.
21, Asphalt conarete is best if everything Is done just right
22. Asphalt parking lots can last 30-40 years if properly maintained
23. concrete would be tompeddvs cosoW with asphalt it Isms stalandon wu
not reed under the concrete.
24. Saw joints should alwa be sealed.
25. Asphalt Has lots with little traffic will deterionts. Asphalt Wade to be
26. A esad od ie beneficial opposed to no swA
27. Concrete o0- a levellag bed of sand even 1 inch thick Is as good u asphalt
with time stabilization.
3-2
~rNMJ ~ /
R I'r
r
28. Cost of paving requirements has caused Jobe to be lost.
29. Fibermesh should be permitted in parking lots.
Jerry Clark said thst variances from minimum paving requirements could be okayed
it the parking lot Is property designed by a qualified person.
Clark explained current requirements [or evdsting unpaved parking lots which permit
S inches of concrete on a compacted base or 2 Inches of asphalt on 6 Inches of Box base.
Mr. Clark told the Board that Rhone Engineering was the company used by the City for
testing, purposes, Mr. Clark asked the board to provide him w+th a list of proposed
ordinance ch s.
Mr. Mizael Uggrin of the concrete Paving Association was present and provided
the board with some general information concerning the American Association of State
Highway Transportation Official's paving report.
M. Allen asked that the board be advised of arty proposed ordinances which affect any }
private property except plumbing, electrical, and mechanical.
Meeting adjourned.
'
i
k
i
3-~
Y
x. r,"~ 111111
J '
Minutes
Building Code Board
April 19, 1990
Present: Isabel Miller, Charles Ginaings, Ed Owens, Wayne Alien, Jackie Doyle, Building
Official, Jerry Clark, City Engineer.
Absent: Alfred Green, Cliff Reding
1. Ginnings moved and Miller seconded a motion to table approval of the minutes of
February"22, 1990 and April 12, 1990. Motion carried unanimously.
it. Engineers David Hooper and Charlie Jackson were present to discuss parking lot
paving requirements with the board. Allen asked Hooper and Jackson if the city's
exisdug requirements for asphalt and concrete drive lanes and parking lots are
parallel. Allen asked If the requirements were too much, that they were the same
requirements used for streets. Allen asked Hooper to relay to the board his ideas
regarding parking lot paving. Hooper said that generally speaking S" or more of
reinforced concrete on a 6" compacted sub-grade would be adequate. Hooper said
that soil having a PI greater than 35 should be looked at closely. Hooper said that
it was always good to have some geo•technical information to took at when deslaning
parking tots. It is advisable to investigate soil conditions oa a case-by-case 5asis.
Their experience bas,sbown that S" of reinforced concrete on 6" compsaad base
works well. Hooper had information from the Dallas chapter of the construction
Specification Institute which he shared with the board and suggested its use as a
good minimum specification. Allen asked Hooper about the use of a levoUng bed
of sand and whether it should or should not be used. Hooper stated that be felt that.
it should not be used because In expansive soils it provides a sort of conduit for
water to get underneath the concrete, Hooper said that if sand were used It would
be best if It were not continuous underneath the concrete. Allen asked Mr. Jackson
for his comments. Jackson was in favor of a minimum of S" of concrete and he did
not believe lime stabilization was necessary. He did my that he had seen some 4"
parking lots that worked very well, but he recommended that for this thickness that
lime stabilization would be best. As a bus minimum Mr, Jackson recommends
scarification and recompaction. He said that as trM loads increase, concrete
thickness should Increase. He said that recompaction will probably keep the ground
level as opposed to not scartor compacting Mr, Jackson said that a track
loader might be, adequate but probably should not be specified. The main thing is
to require a minimum compaction and moisture content. He said thu the PSI of
concrete should not determine concrete thickness. Jackson said that lime
stabiliution would be preferred with the use of asphalt. Hooper and Jackson agreed
that asphalt and concrete were not parallel In the City's ordinance. It was Indicated
that two inches of good quality flex bas" is needed for each Inch of asphalt thickness,
but concrete still has more flexural strength. Allen asked what In Is equal
to S" of reinforced concrete on a compacted sub-grade. Hooper said 4' of asphalt
with 6" of lime stabilization. Owens asked wbst the cost difference was between
20,000 sq. h, of S" asphalt and 6" Irate sutbillud sub-grade and concrete on a
` compacted sub-grade. It was believed that one would be within parubes of the other.
When asked about the use of fiber mesh reinforcement, neither Hooper nor Jackson
` 1-4
a
i-
3
T•~y•YO
had much experience with the product, Hooper indicated that he was not in favor
of spe6Y4 saw cuts, Jackson said that saw cuu should extend from 1/4 to 1/3 the
thickness of the concrete and that such cuts should be made as soon as possible after
initial set. Jackson said that it was better to cut the concrete, but didn't believe it
should be required: He said such cuts control shrinkage cracks.
III. Agenda Item III. concerns the option of the builder to make water and sewer tops y
There was considerable concern that the builder have the option of either making
his own taps or having the city do it. There was concern regarding the cost to the uil to dder o(
such workg It wps, as pointed pavement tha the Public Uttl des `Boaarrd w uld co cue
the possible option of allowing the builder to make his own taps. Charles 0(nnings 1
said that he had not heard anything about this proposal at the Home and Apartment
Buildees Association. Allen indicated that some home builders had asked to be
allowed to make water and sewer taps. The board asked that a copy of the proposed
ordinance be provided.
Meeting adjourned.
i
i
C
I
3-3
L
I
i
r
P ~ ~ Ali
I
i
G
( IP
t
Building Code Board Minu.es
May 1, 1994
Page T
r
.
Allen agreed. Bs said recently the Parks i Recreation Board made a
i decision that was overturned by City Council and that they almost
lost the whold boards
Ginnings said when he first got on the Board he thought everything
had to go through city Council.
Doyle asked if the Board was satisfied with the way the Board
currently functions. Everyone agreodo
i
t i RtCOMMtNQATIONi duties Allen mad* a motion to recommend to City Council that the
which they operate be continued as in, Olhnings seconded the
h motion. Motion passed unanimously,
III. CONTINUS DISCUSSION CONCERNING PAW NO LOT PAVING RBQUIRiMBNT81
'
I
Allen presented A revised documents from Jerry Clark, Director of
Engineering and Transportations showing alternative ways to revamp ;
drives and fire lenses Allen said theta was soot conflict with the }
goo-techal Miller said there was also some conflict between
Alternate 11 an Alternate 12. ss
' Allen questioned the requitement tot 4' on *stating bases be asked 1
what happens. if the elevation is whets you have to take 4' out to put c
back 462 Miller said assumably it is compacted passed the surface 0
material, Doyle said the exiting requitsment was 5' and now it is
Allen said it is still not cleat. He asked what happens Lf ythe
ou
elevation is where you have to take out 4' to put 4' back. Then sea down to a oubgtode, do you than scarify, recospaots and put in a
now parking lot,
Owens said the parking lot material could be anything. Bach unpaved
parking lot when paved will be different. There should be only one
set of specifications-
i
Millet said an existing parking lot would be compacted to some depth
from previous uses She said it you out below a foots you could gat
into a new conditions
Doyle said there are situations where drive approach changes would be
rsquitod from one ocoupancy to another$
Allen said there sate situations where the now fits lane ordinance
come@ binto effects Doyle
to the building iitsconow uldueonstltutoteaiobanq 9
Allen said he understood that every time theta was us occupancy
change the now fire Iona ordinance applied,
I-6
1
4r
I■
F 7
i
Building Code Board Minutes
May it 1990
Page i
Allen said in regard to asphalt - 2' with 6' flex base on an existing
unpaved parking lots if you take out whatevec was there and put in 6' 1
of flex base and 2' asphalt, engineers have said that It was not
adequate.
I` Jerry clack %rrived and addressed Allen's question on the 4' on
existing base for concrete. Clark said existing base means whatever
is there,
rc Miller asked Clark what the requirement would be for a 10' cue,
Clark said it would be better to scarify and repack, The whole
object was not to penalise the people trying to get a new certificate {
of occupancy,
i
Allen asked Clark about asphalt - 2' vith 6' flex base in regard to i
the goo-techs statement that 2' of asphalt would not hold, Clark j
said he would like to do away with flexible base enticely,
z
Doyle recommended that the ordinance toad that the owner shall
maintain the parking lot, if the parking lot was iot maintalned, a
citation would be isausd. Millet agreed,
Reding said he has a parking lot with lass than 2' asphalt that has
not broken up. Reding said he does not want the City to take more
4 control of his property but he doss not want the liability either,
i
Reding asked about the statement 'a parking lot may be designed by an 1
engineer approved by the City and certified by the State of Texas'.
' Reding asked if that meant he has to have a certified engineer draw
plans tot a new parking lot if he is building a new building, Doyle
said no engineer is required, Allen said it a certified engineer
does a pi test and cecommends a lesser amount, then you can go with
the lesser amount,
Doyle said the reason the statement says approved by the inginsering
Division was there are some engineers that do not do adequate work,
Owens said this requirement was more for the smaller parking lots,
The larger ones are submitted with plans which ate engineered. Doyle
agreed,
Reding asked what the reason was for requiting S' oonorets, Clark
t said anything leas than S' starts having failures, cracking, and
allowing moisture to enter followed by pavement breaking away,
None said the soacd also eliminated the parking arse and drive lanes,
Allen continued by stating he had no problem with S' concrete on J
scarified and compacted subgrads surface. "'111
3-1
i
WWI
I
}
i.
Building Code Board Minui.s
r may 30 1990
Page /
Pour inch asphalt on 6' lime subecadee Clark said that pavers were
not discussed previously. There has been a lot of input frog people
in town. If psjple want to do it, there needs to be a
specification. Allen asked what the lime would do. Clack said a lot e
of debate was going on regarding lime stabilization. The conclusion
thus tar has been that lime has no structural a pabilit.e Clark said
it eliminates pumping and heating underneath keeping the water out.
Allen said 2' concrete would function the same. Clack said based on
stcugEural charts he assumed it would be close.
i
Owns asked if they are grouting the pavers ins Clack said just the
sand. Owens said with 2' concrete these would still be A shoot
factor. Miller asked what would be the purpose for the limee Clack
said mainly tot a water barrier.
i
Millet asked if there was minimum glade for pavers. Clark said staff
was trying to get 5/101 on pavers. Miller said asphalt would need
more than 5/101.
1
,
Millet asked Clark his opinion on unigceen which was used at the i
unitarian Church parking lots Miller said theme ace placed blocks
that allow grass to grow between theme Clack said those ate intended
to be covered by pavers. Clark said the section on pavers would have i
to be modified for open pavers. i
I
Allen led the Board's discussion on channelised heavy load areas. I {
Allen asked if you have a loading dock does the specifications mean J
that you must have an engineer design the whole parking slabs Clark
said that was correct it they were tanning over 3 vehlolse a wake
Allen said he would like for the specifications to state that an 1
engineer is requited just for specific poveaent areas Miller
agreed, Allen suggested 6' concrete for those atoms. I
Clack recommended adding another line under concretes Put 6' for 1
specific pavement atoms and leave the pavers alone. It you do
I something for concretes you also need to do it tot asphalts
Clack asked how the Board wanted that stated in the chart. Clack
said he could edd an asterisk and place the asplanation at the bottoms
clock recoswnd04 5 heavy trucks on the site per wek (110000 lbs
asel loads). 1111101 said to call it 'Channelis0d 80avy load a sms'e
The ooacd agreed.
The board discussed fiber moths Clark said studies have shown that
fiber moth is a viable substitute tot 1e4nforo0r0nt to control
surface cracking. Clark said if fiber mesh is used he would
recommend the long mash.
1.8
i
e
E
,
I
Ile
7
i
Building Coda Board Minutes
May 3r 1990
page
Allan said what* most Concrete driveways fail is due to too much
water being added to the concrete when pouring. In his opinion, this
is the worse thing that Can be done. slump tests should be done at
intermediate intervals Clack asked what he would allow for slump,
Allen said that on a 1000 day a S' slump is too dry and a super
plasticiser is too expensive, Clark suggested a range from 2'- Be,
Clack asked the Board how to write up the Key to temperature. Millet f
suggested that Clack check with A company Ilk* Rona Engineering to
see what range and temperature they would suggests
Allen asked if during plan review for a building permit, are plans
reviewed for cequiremente of on-alte maneuvering for tractor
trailers. Clark 4ald staff did not currently enforce on-site
tractor/trailer traffic maneuvers.
Reding said he did not think the Board should try and design
everyone, parking lot but set minimum requirements,
The Board reviewed three pages submitted for asphalt requirements and
approved staff's recommendation as attached.
Allen Asked Clark to revise the Packing Lot surface requirement sheet
and submit the final draft tot approval at the next meeting, , t~
Clark said he would prefer submitting a draft to the Legal department
so the final draft would not have to go through another change,
Ginning* asked Clack for a clarification on curb and gutters 30' roll
rtypeie at
eClark ars Said
saithe d it add does
the tcosrequire
t and
does not do that such,
Allen said in regard to lime and cement stabilisation, he recomended
' leaving It at 6' lime stabilisation, Clack sold it an engineer
designs a pro}eet for cement stabilisation, the city should require a
lea-tech to do its
millet said that it should be stated that sand is not recommended for
use under the parking lot pavement.
A
meeting ad}ouened,
i
i
I
I
i
3-9
310i~
3
p ~ 1
1
y:w
ri tea.
MINUTES
Building Code Board
May 17, 1990
Presents Isabel Miller, Charles Ginnings, Ed Owens,
Wayne Allen, Cliff Reding
Staff Presents Jackie Doyle, Building Ufficiall Jerry Clark,
City Engineer
Absents None
i
I. Allen moved and Oweno seconded a motion to approve
the minutes of may 3, 1990. Motion carried
unanimously.
,
II. Mr. Don Cross, President of Sunmount Asphalt Company,
spoke to the Board about proposed amendments to the
City's parking lot pacing ordinance, Mr, Cross said f
}
that he had 25 years experience with asphalt, and
that he was concerned about changing the ordinance to
allow a lighter paving requirement without a proper
subbase or subgrade. He said that lime is very
important to the life of pavement, me, Cross said
that saw joints, sprinkler systems, poor drainage,
runoff from buildings, and freezing and thawing were
all problems for concrete, He indicated that at 1
least 901 compaction of the subgrade was necessaryl
and that if subgrade is too wet, it will turn to muds
and if it is too dry, it will turn to powder, He
said that a 141 moisture content was proper for soil
beneath pavement with fluctuations from 201 to 71.
3 Mr, Cross indicated that once compaction is lost, it
i will not return, Mr, Cross said that linear
expansion will occur under pavement it moisture is
not controlled, Photos of pavement failures were
shown, He said that to repair a concrete parking j
lot, it would cost $15-¢40 per squathre yard. 1
Mr. Cross stated again that he did not ink the
proposer amendment was adoquate,
Mr. Ch4cles Baxter of the National Lime Association
showed slides of parking lot and street pavement I
failures, Mr. Baxter introduced Or, Little, of Texas
A a M University, who said that he agreed with the
comments of the previous two speakers, Dr, Little
reiterated the need for a good subbase and said that
lime stabilization was permanent, He spoke of a
of m 60, He unsaid In east lthe x soil where Was
the paying soil hid t o i PI Chambers
lime stabilized and several years later the Pt was
3-10 ,
I
evv ~I,
rprtrn. I
rechecked and it was down to 20. Dr. Little said
that clay attracts water and that calcium eliminates
water retention or limits the amount of water clay
attracts. Dr. Little said that cement should be used
to stabilize sandy soil not lime.
Wayne Allen spoke of the high cost of lime ,
stabilization for even small parking lots and the
burden it placed on the small businessman, Allen
told those present about previous meetings the Board
had had with paving contractors and geotechnical
:engineers, i
a~iut i
board members thanked those in attendance for their
presentations,
i
a
Meeting adjourned at 5310 p,m. 141
I
{
~ I !'I
l
1
1
1ti31e 3-11
s
ell- W- 0 MOLAR
i 1 1
INI
W If
Building Coda Board Minutes
June 7, 1990
Page 2
in getting from living quarters to fire trucks and
ambulances. This request is in regard to a new fire
station currently under construction at 2230 West Windsor
Drive. Robert Hagemann, Fire Marshal, was present and
explained the Fire Department's request to the Board.
Hagemann pointed out that the building would be fully
sprinkled. Owens moved and Reding seconded a motion that
the request of the Fire Department for push plates in lieu
of latohing devices be permitted and in so doing make an
example of not making an example of denying a reasonable
request. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. The Board re,riewad propored changes to the parking lot
paving ordinance. Oweno said that he had no reason not to
approve the proposed changes.
Allen spoke of the intent to make asphalt and concrete
parallel performance wise. Allen said that he feels the
proposal is not parallel.
Owens felt that the proposed amendments were ace* table,Wa CeTO& {
•but._o~sggsated• that the four (4) inch asphalt requirement
be changed to five (5) inches on six (6) inches of limo
subgrads.
Reding talked about minimum specifications and questioned
the five (5) inch conereto requirement. Allen said if
minimum specifications are for everyone, five (5) inches
is best according to goo teohs the Board had talked to.
Reding spoke in reference to the proposed amendments which
requires that the City Engineer approve parking lot paving
plans designed by another engineer registered in this
state. Reding feels that a registered engineer's design
should be accepted without the City Engineer's approval.
Meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
i
I
i
3767g
9.12
I' ,
r
L
t M
t
MINUTES
Building Code Board
August 28 1990
Present! Isabel Miller, Wayne Allen, Greg Muirhesd, Ed
Owens, Jackie Doyle-Building Ofiieial
Absent= Cliff Reding
as
I. Greg Muirhaad was administered the oath of office by
Betty Williams of the City Manager's Office.
it. Allen moved that the minutes of June 7, 1990 be approved
as written with the exception that the third paragraph
of item IV be amended to read as followas Owens felt
that the proposed amendments were acceptable wit). the
inches oinch six asphalti ces requirement lime
changed exception to that the four (4)
subgrade. Owens seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously. yy
111. The Board continued its discussion said that Cud
parking lot paving requirements. Allen he talked with Mr. Hooper of Hooper and Associates, a soil
engineering firm, regarding (Mr. Hooper's prior
statements to the Board) regarding whether four (4) or
live (S) inches of asphalt on six (6) inches of lime 9
stabilized subgrade was adequate. Allen said that Mr.
Hooper said that the four (4) inches of asphalt on six
(6) inches of lime stabilized subgrade was adequate
because the lime provides some pp strength. The Board
f of reed lthat four subinches of grade was adequati n.six (6) inches
The Doard agreed that theikvi q iplanscdrawn sby nan oengineer
The
approval of parking lot
proposed ordinances ameState of Txas ndment previouslyhread as ofollowei
be
in lieu of the above specifications, a parking lot may
rby
registered bythe is approvsds
egist Y the State of Texas if the
the city tngineero
as follows$scIn lieu ofaththabovevspauifications,.han parking read lot
may be constructed in accordance with design made by an
engineer registered by the State of Texas and submitted to the
city for review.
00239 3-13
J
I
a r
w,v
C
1 j.f
r= Building Code Board Minutes
August 2, 1990
Page Two
The Board feels their proposal will still give the City the
authority to review and approve parking lot paving designs.
The Board also felt that their suggested change might lessen
the City Engineer's liability if a failure wero to occur on a
job which the City Engineer may have suggested alternate design
or construction methods.
ate' The Board agreed that a statement in the ordinance which reads
as follows would be helpful: Leveling sand when used under
parking lot pavement may act as a conduit for water, and
therefore is not recommended.
The Board also believes that 6x6 06 gauge welded wire fabric
should be added as a form of concrete reinforcement.
The Board felt that the number of heavy truck loads on a
parking lot each week should be ten before requiring thicker
concrete or asphalt construction. The Board feels that while}
concrete or asphalt fatigue factors might be appropriate fora;
street or highways, they probably are not that important for
parking lots.
Doyle said that he would talk to Jerry Clark, City Engineer,
about the proposed changes.
The Board reviewed proposed swimming pool, hot tub and spa'
enclosure requirements and agreed that the proposed ordinance
amendment should read as follows:
Sec. 305 Enclosure
' (a) Enclosure. Every owner, purchaser under contract,
1 lessee, tenant or other' person in possession of
land within the corporate limits of the City of
Denton upon which is situated a swimming pool, spa
or hot tub shall at all times maintain upon the
tract, lot or premises on which the swimming po,)l,
spa or hot tub is located a fence, wall or barrier
that completely surrounds the swimming pool, spa,
hot tub, tract, lot or premises. The height of
the enclosure shall be not lose than sixty (60)
inches in height measured from the adjacent
exterior grade level with no openings, holes or
gaps large enough for a sphere four (4) inches in
diameter to pass through.
00235 3-14
1
a
A
n p
MINUTES DRAFT
Planning and Zoning Commission September 26, 1990 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Denton, Texas was held on Wednesday, September 26, 1990,
at S;00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Building.
Present% Jtm Engelbrecht; Ivan Glasscock, Judd Holt, William
Xamman, and Fran Morgan
Absent: Eullne Brock
Present from Staff: Frank Robbins, Executive Director for
Planning and Development; Oven Yost, Urban Planner;
Tony■ Cooper, Assistant City Attorney; Bob Ticknor,
s Superintendent of Parks and Recreation; Karen Feshart,
Urban Planner; David Salmort, Enpineering; Jackie Doyle,
Chief Building Official; and Ol via Carson, Clerk-typist
Vice-choLrman Holt called the meeting to order.
i
1. Consider the minutes of the regular called meeting of
September 12, 1990.
It was moved by Mr. Kamman, seconded by Mr. Glasscock, and
carried (e-0) to approve the minutes of tie regular meeting
of September 12, 1990. Mr. Holt did not vote because he had
not been present at that meeting.
11. Consent Agenda
Mr. Holt removed the Dole Brown Addition from the consent
agenda.
It was moved by Mr. Ksoman, seconded by Mr. Holt and ,
unantmously carried (S-0), to approve the remaining consent 1
a endm which consisted of the prellrinary and final replmts 1
f` o~ Expressway Industrial Park, Lots 6.2-R, Block S.
V. Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance to amend the
Subdivision and Land Development regulations concerning
parking lot standards.
STAFF REPORTi Mr. Robbins reported that the Building Code
board recommends approval of the proposed amendments for
{ pparkin lot surface standards. The proposal vends the
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations by
1. Decreasing from S inches to 1 Inches the concrete
thickness requited on existing, unpaved parking lots.
i 2. Eliminates time stabilization for mew concrete parking s
t _ lots with scarifled and compacted sub-grade.
f
Adds a standard for chmnnellzed heavy load areas. 1, 1
a. Enables design by a professional engineer based on soil i
tests, In lieu of using the stated specification. The j
City Engineer will have design approval.
S. Adds a concrete slump range from I to s Inches.
IN FAVORt Wayne Allen, Chairman of the Building Code Board,
stated that there hove been complain a about the strict
parking lot specifications. They did a study on structural
values and have come up with these suggestions to make Y
parking lots more feasible, They contacted Concrete and
cement manufactures. They were sent test results and a
study by the State Highway Department. They asked for Input
from the producers of lime and asphalt. They found great
discrepancies In the test results. They finally found some
goo-technical engineers to help out. These engineers were
i 1
i
IM I
I`
.
i
p ~w~ 1
PAZ Minutes
Se
1 September 26, 1990
Page 2 D RRA F T
certified to perform soil tests and make recommendations for
parking lots and foundations. The result is the
recommendation that lime stabilization not be a requirement
but the soil must be scarified and recompicked.
Mr. Holt asked what is meant by "scarified".
Mr. Allen replied that it Is when the soil is ripped apart
and then recompacted.
Mr. Glasscock asked if the new standards will be less
expensive.
trs Mr. Allen said yes.
Ms. Morgan asked if the concrete will be thicker or thinner.
Mr. Allen Indicated that it will stay the same. The change
will be how the soil beneath the concrete is treated.
The Commission discussed the proposed amendment.
Mr. Holt asked if other titles were surveyed regarding their
requirements.
Mr. Allen said yes. Dentoa's parking lot standards are the
sane as street specifications. That is such more stringent
than most of the other titles.
The Commission discussed the types of bases used for parking
lots and the negative effect of moisture.
t
Mr. Glasscock asked the meaning of a slump range. j
Mr. Allen replied that a slump test is taken to determine
the moisture level in concrete. Adding too much water to i
the mix destroys concrete. The weather is also a factor.
The slump range is based on temperature.
Mr. gamman asked if 4" concrete with no lime base will make
4 for quality parking lots.
Mr. Salmon said yes if the concrete is done properly and the
soil Is testified and compacted It may not be the sue
roJuct as with flee stabilizaton, but staff feels It will
i
i 9e adequate. Concrete is acre durable than asphalt and
requires less maintenance. With our specificationa right
now, a concrete parking lot costs such more than asphalt.
Asphalt can last a long time but there Is more maintenance.
Mr. Holt noted that the concrete streets In Denton seem to
last longer.
The Commission discussed the effect of the proposal ea i
existing unpaved parking lots.
Mr. Salmon said that the definition of an existing unpaved
parking lot could be clarified.
Mr. Engelbrecht asked how adequate compaction is determined. }
Mr. Salmon said that when a Certificate of Occupancy to
requested for an exlstial building, the issue of paying the
pirkinw lot comes up The City trto to encoura a people to
occupy existing buildings and wants the packing ~ota paved.
Pavin them is an improvement. A renter may not want to
insta~1 on entire parkin lot from scratch so the proposal
Is a coo promise. Staff fs comfortable wltIt that. The lots
will be Inspected to determine if they ate compacted.
i
s
I
M.
~r
1
Fri
i PIZ Minutes September 26, 1990
p a ve 1 dH
DRA ~
1
°0
Measurements could be taken to determine the thickness of
the gravel and amount of compaction, but they are
expensive. Staff will Judge by observation what type of
material the parking lot consists of, if the lot is being I
used, and if there are and puddles, y
OPPOSED: Don Cross, President of Sunecunt, Box 177o, J]
Roanoke, spoke in opposition to the propposal. He said that
he represents ■ heavy highway construction company with 2S
years of experience. They do both concrete and asphalt. He
does not think it appropriate to discuss asphalt vs.
concrete but rather quality of construction, Most any
engineer in theory will say that S inches of concrete is
enough. But there is no room for error in that theory and
the people that lay concrete are human, The North Texas
area has soil that is capable of retaining and giving off a
lot of moisture through seasonal changes. Ve went oft to
explain the various properties of soil and how they effect
pavement. He gave examples of large companies that felt It
necessary to place a sub-grade under their parking lots. He
showed the Commission pictures of what happens to soil under
an inferior parking lot. He said that a parking lot should
last and remain in good condition and as a contractor, he is
afraid that people will choose to go with the minimum
standards being proposed. When the parking lot goes bad
they will not blame the low standards, they will blame his
company. He does not want to have that kind of a
reputation. A heavy duty sidewalk is not what Denton needs
for its parking lots.
Mr. Holt asked if the proposal Is comparable to what other
cities have.
Mr. Cross said that Los Colinas has had problems with
similarly type standards.
Mr. Holt noted that the proposal concerns privot• parking,
lots. Businessmen will have to make a decision on which
route t
J o take.
Earl Deland stated that he Is a registered engineer
4 representing the Lime Association. He has had 10 years
experience representing cities and as on engineer he opposes
i anyy ordinance that relaxes standards and requires no
subbase. He would prefer to have lime used as the sub base
but some type of stabilltatlon between concrete and native
soil is definitely needed. When Denton goes through its Wot
and dry cycles, the soil lows Its optimum compaction and
moisture accumulates. He explained how that Cott damage a
parking lot. He urged the Commission to require some type
i
of $to ilitation.
Mr. Holt asked It he knows what Plano requires.
Mr. Deland said no. The requirements vary from city to
city. we was director of public works in Farmer's Branch, 1
and they do require lime stabillsatlon. Carrollton does not
appear to because there is a parking lot an Trinity that is t
less than five years old and it is already tailing, j
Mr. Engelbrecht asked his about a reduction in asphalt
thickness.
Mr. Deland said that he would have to evaluate the destgn. i~
Asphalt falls because of heavy loads which put too much
pavement thathwill not failhunder cortsiniload or soilgn
conditions. f
Ile-
r~Y
Pit Minutes
September 26, 1990
Page a DBAXtT RECDAIENDATION; Mr. RoDDlns stated that he observed f
the Building Code Board meetings. There were three
geo-technical engineers with different backgrounds that did
not reflect interest groups. They said that the proposal
would be okay. Standards in other cities vary widely from
no requirements at all to time stabilisation. The proposed
standard Is not going to be equal to what Is currently
required. The quesclon is how such should the City regulate
private parking lots. Staff has no objection to the
proposal.
Mr. Allen stated that Mr. Cross Is a friend of his and he
appreciated what he and his gu3st had to say. They heard
° tAose arguments at the Board aeetIn and took them very
seriously. They tried to weigh out the Information but
there were many conflicts between the industries and test
results. So they went away from the Industries and sought
out the `ea-techs. Concrete and asphalt will break up 1
eventually if there is enough traffic on It. He Is not d
saying that concrete is better than asphalt or that lime is
not a goad product. He Is saying that small businessmen
have a financial concern. The Board is just trying to be
fair. They have spent a lot of time on this issue. The
requirement for an existing unpaved parkin lot Is goini
down from S" to They will be Inspecte if a parking
lot has been driven on It will compact. This Is an
incentive for existing parking lots to be paved and does not
put the burden on the sell businessmen.
Chair closed the public hearing,
DECISION: Mr. Engelbrecht noted a discrepancy in the J ~
back-up and asked that it be corrected.
i
Mr. Robbins explolned that the proposed ordinance also
eliminates a standard for fire lanes because that is now
contained In another ordinance. A fire lane is not
necessarily part of a parking lot.
Mr. Engelbrecht said that after listening to the discussion,
It a pears that there are wide ranging standards and wide
ranging results. He suspects that is because of wide
ranging soli composition and compaction. He does not
understand wh•t an ordinance cannot be written that says what
the standard should be for every kind of soil condition.
The technology is available. But given the way the proposed
ordinance Is written, the proposed standards are as good as
any. g
Mr. Glasscock noted that the proposed standards are alnimums i
and a builder always has the option to do more. Staff has
examined the proposed standards.
Mr. Holt agreed that a minimum standard Is needed but the
ultimate decision should be left to the owner. He Is in
favor of the ptoposed changes.
Mr. Engelbrecht moved to recommend a proval of the amendment
for parking lot surface standards. Seconded by Mr, gauan
and unanimously carried (S•0).
2/06x 1
I,
f
I
f
/ -
v
CITY
11COUNCIL
t
~O T D
99 O
0 pJ
..mm lim.
l: IMM
a
I
CITY of DENTON# TKUS 216 E. wKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 762011 TELEPHONE (817) 6668200
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 28, 1990
TO: Lloyd Y. Harrell, City Manager
FROM: John F. McGrane, Executive Director of Finance
SUBJECT: 1990-91 FEE ORDINANCES j
Please find attached six (6) fee ordinances pursuant to adoption of the City's
1990-91 Budget. These ordinances are to be considered for adoption by the
City Council on October 2, 1990.
Below is a cross reference of each ordinance as stated on the Agenda to the r
fee as stated in the 1990-91 Major Budget Issue Report, which has been
reproduced for your convenience on the following pages. Please note that a
parking fine penalty is set by the Municipal Judge and does not require an
enabling ordinance, while ordinances for auto pound storage, solicitors
permits a16, nd demolition permit fee increases are scheduled to be considered on
i
October 2 Agenda Code Major Budget Issues Report
Reference Reference Reference -
7.A. Sec. 6-2 1) Cemetery Fee
7.8. Sec. 26-65, 66 2),3) Ambulance Service Fees
7.C. Sec. 4-23 5) Animal Pound Fees (Licenses)
Sec. 4-34 6) Pick-up Animal Carcass
Sec. 4-24 7) Animal Pound Fees (Euthanasia)
7,D, Sec. 11-21 8) Restaurant Inspections
Sec. 11.21 9) Grocery Store Inspections
k Sec. 11-21 11) Daycare Center Inspections
1,E. Sec. 5-179 10) Swimming Pool inspections
7.F Sec. 5-26 14) Miscellaneous Permits (Fence
Permits)
f 5449F
i
Ott)
.Y hl\~ I
II
r/'". Fl
MAJOR BUDGET ISSUE - REVENUES
r++~,r+r~a~r+~**,ka+~++~*rrrrr~+++*+~*,~++~airt*v~~r++***+~+~r~
UPDATE
*~t~,Hr**,►**t,~x,r~x~~r~r*,r~+r+~*~+++t,r+a*~+,►+trtrk+***,r~r~er,~ *~,►~,~r+~+***f,~~+r
The proposed 1990-91 budget includes an increase in fines and fees of $100,000.
Staff has reviewed a number of sources and has identified s-tveral areas where 1
fees might be raised. In reviewing these recommendations, staff looked at
several items. First we reviewed the 1993 David M. Griffith Revenue Stud which
analyzed fees and actual costs of prov ng service. We took these tee amounts,
the date of implementation and applied an annual inflation factor. Once the new
anount was derived, staff then compared the amounts to the North Central Texas
Council of Governments (NCTCOG) fee survey and other metroplex cities charges.
If the City was still below area averages, we then contacted each department
director for input and recommendations. The following is the result and
recommendation by staff. {
CURRENT PROPOSED REVENUE
FEES RATE RATE INCREASE
l
1) Cemetery Fee: 5250/site 5350/site $ 10000
Comments:
The Parks Department is currently charging
5250/cemetery lot (between 100 and 200
lots are left) while Roselawn is charging
around 5500/cemetery lot. It was
recommended that the price for a lot not
increase to over $350 because the City
tends to cater to lower-income citizens.
i
i
2) Ambulance Service Fees: 5100/run 5120/run $50,000
Comments:
The Fire Department recommends a modest
increase from the $100 base charge for
City/County runs. The NTCCOG survey
average for all cities was $122.33 per
transport. i
i
s CURRENT PROPOSED REVENUE
7
FEES RATE RATE INCREASE
3) Ambulance Service Fees: $100/run 3300/run $14,000
Comments:
The Fire Department also recommends
increasing emergency transfers (from
Denton to Fort Worth or dallas hospitals)
to as much as $300 per run.
4) Parking Fines:
Penalty After II
1D days
Overtime Parking S 3* $ 6*
Parking/Handicapped Zone 50 100
Parking/Prohibited Zone 6 12
Parking/Sidewalk Crosswalk 6 12
Parking within 5' of driveway 6 12
Parking within 15' of intersection 6 12
Parking within 15' of fire hydrant 20 40
Parking 30'traffic control device 6 12
Parking more than 48 hours on street 6 12
Parked facing wrong way 6 12
Parked in intersection 6 12
Parked on bridge 6 12
Parked on roadway 6 12
Parked on railroad tracks 6 12
Parked in fire lane 35 70
Parking on city easement 6 12
J Parking more than 18"curb 6 12
TOTAL REVENUES $25,000
Comments:
Currently the City has no incentive in
place for prompt payment of parking
fines. Numerous parking tickets go unpaid i
because of the lack of enforcement
incentive. Once a ticket is issued, there
is generally no ability to force j
compliance because of the low fee amount.
The new structure would include a time-
related penalty for non-pay on the fine.
This, for example, may mean the fine #
doubles after 10 days non-payment. The
Municipal Judge has given preliminary
indication that she supports such an
increase as an incentive.
*The majority of parking fines are overtime parking violations. Further
discussions with the Municipal Judge will focus on adjusting this base fine in
order to enhance further compliance.
r
wea 1
r
f
CURRENT PROPOSED REVENUE
a
FEES RATE RATE INCREASE
5) Animal Pound Fees (Licenses): $5 fertile $6
3 sterile 4 $800
Comments:
This is an increase in animal license fees.
6) Pickup Animal Carcasses: $5/trip $.50/lb $4,600
Comments:
Animal Control recommends converting from
a per-trip charge to a per-pound charge
because it is currently a high cost to the
City to pick up a large load of large
animals and run the incinerator for hours
for only $5. The NCTCOG average for this
category is $21.06 per trip.
7) Animal Pound Fees (Euthanasia): $5 $10 resident
15 non-rest. $915
M Comments: t
I Animal Control believes euthanasia charges
f can be increased to $10 per resident and
$15 per non-resident. These charges are
still lower than rates set by local
veterinarians.
i
i
0) Restaurant Inspec N ons: No. of
Employees
0 - 5 S 50 55
- 10 70 7S
r 11 -
1s 90 95
16 - 20 110 115 +
21 - 25 140 150
26 - 30 160 170
31 - 35 180 190
36 - 40 200 210
41 Plus 210 220 $19010 s
r
Comments:
There are currently 112 restaurants, 142 C
of which have fewer than 21 employees. I
f
1 ` C.1
~r
r
9
r CURRENT PROPOSED REVENUE
r FEES
RATE RATE INCREASE
91 Grocery Store Inspections: No. of
EmPlo ees
u - e $ 50 55
6 - 10 70 75
11 - 15 90 95
16 - 20 110 115
21 - 25 140 150
26 - 30 160 170
to 31 - 35 180 190
36 - 40 200 210
41 Plus 219 220 $580
Comments:
There are currently 99 grocery stores, 82
of which have fewer than 21 employees.
101 S«i_ mmin9 Pool Inspections: $1501yr $160/yr $870 1
Comments:
There are currently 87 pools subject to an
annual inspection in the City, The
increase would adequately reflect the cost
of inspection.
111 Daycare Center Inspections: $25/center
Y35/center $220
Comments:
The City currently has 22 daycare centers
with an enrollment of approximately 1875
children. Our in-house survey of area
cities yielded an average of $76 per day
care.
121 Auto Pound Fees:
$101day $12,501dey $2,500 ~
Comments:
Fees are currently $10 per day after 2
days. The Police Department recommends j
tiKreasing the fee to $12.50 per day after j
2 days.
i
i
t
i 1
r ) i,
Mel
K
o*
s`
.
CURRENT PROPOSED REVENUE
FEES RATE RATE INCREASE
13) Solicitors Permit: $10/permit $30/permit $240
Comments:
The Police Department recommends
» increasing this fee substantially. Even
at $30 per permit, the City is stilt in
line with the NCTCOG survey, which
averaged about $50 per permit.
14) Miscellaneous Permits:
Comments: $10/each $15/each $665
{
Building Inspections recommends increasing
Fence Permits from $10 to $15. The NCTCOG
survey indicated an average in comparable
sized cities of $45.00 and an overall
average of $22.61.
75) Building Permits:
House Demolition Permit $ 5 $10
Commercial Demolition Permit (new) $ 5 ;50
House Moving Permit 25 $30
$290
Comments:
Building Inspections recommends breaking
f i out the demolition permits for commercial
at a higher rate than regular residential
rates. The NCTCOG survey shows an average
for demolition permits of $28.00 for
metroplex cities and an average for house
moving permits of $48.00 for comparable
sized cities.
r
TOTAL RECOMMENDED REVENUE INCREASES: $102,750
Y
e
'a
4
1
140.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6 "CEMETERIES" OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BY AMENDING SECTION 6-2
(0), ENTITLED "PLATTING AND SALE OF LOTS OR BLOCKS" BY REVISING THE
FEES TO BE CHARGED FOR PLOTS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT
~+t HEREWITH; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFE:TIVE DATE.
i
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: 1
s
fiZCTION I, That Chapter 6 "Cemeteries" of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas is hereby amended by
amending Section 6-2 (c) "Platting and Sale of Lots or Blocks",
which said section shall hereafter be and read as follows: '
F i
Sao. 6-2. Platting and Bale of Late or Blocks. ,
(c) Fees:
~
Adult lot.......... . ...$375
r
Infant lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Concrote work permit., 25
Internment permit.......................... 25
Each intant lot or space shall be in designated
areas at I.O.O.F. and Oakwood Cemeteries.
ACTION yj That if any provision of this ordinance or
application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid
by any court, such holifing shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of the
City of Denton, Texar, hereby declares that it would have enacted
such remainin:; portions despite any such invalidity. jII
SECTION III. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990. ~
• rw!
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR r
M, . e.wr r;
S r
l
wvw
V
I
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
8YS i
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCHo CITY ATTORNEY
4
BYt 61
1 i
I E
i II
I~
f
t
A
PAGE 2
i
I
h
1 ~
1 1~
vrw.. Wt >f
I
CITY
COUNCIL
r
I MM
.
a
I,
44
j ~
6
Oe ~
OQ H t , ~....1
sae oc ~
r
'I Um:
9
HH:
1
a
l
r
TMI
e
CITY
Fi
COUNCIL
IF 11 .1
i
1
E
1. IF
CT ~ 4 Mrp ~
O
J ! -
~ i
i
r- .
w
NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I OF CHAPTER 4 "ANIMALS" OF THE CODE
OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BY AMENDING SECTION 4-23
(b)o SECTION 4-34 (b); AND BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 4-24 "EUTHAN-
ASIA"; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH: AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSI
nECTION I. That Chapter 4 "Animals" of the Code of Ordinances
of the City of Denton, Texas is hereby amended by amending section
4-23 (b) "Registration and Identification of Dogs and cats", which
said section shall hereafter be and read as follows:
Sao. 4-23. Registration and Identification of Dogs and M
cats. j
(b) Procedures and fees. The owner of a dog or cat j
required to be registered herein shall register such {
animal each year on forms provided by the animal
control officer. Each animal to be registered must
have a current rabies vaccination certificate. The
registration fee for each animal shall be six dollars
($6.00) par year. owners who submit written proof,
satisfactory to the animal control officer, that the
animal to be registered is incapable of procreation
shall be charged a fee of four dollars ($4.00) per
year.
SECTION Ii. That Chapter 4 "Animals" of the Code of Ordinances
of the City of Denton, Texas is hereby amended by adding a new
Section 4-24 entitled "Euthanasia", which said section shall
hereafter be and read as follows:
Boca 4-24. duthanasia
An owner or resident bringing an animal or animals to the
city's animal control assessed and pay the following facility f for each o animal all be
i
Residents ..............................S10.00
Non-residents 150001
U&T1 IiI. That Chapter 4 "Animals" of the Code of Ordi-
regulation by amending
animals; pick hereby amended
nances of the City Dead Denton,
Section 4-34 (b)
Sim
/~Jf
AYnbr<' 1 1
1
s
which said section shall hereafter be and read as followss
Boo. 4-34. Dead animals) pick npt regulations and fees.
(b) All veterinarians and residents shall be charged for
each trip made by city employees to pick up one or more
dead animals. The fee shall be based upon the animal's
weight and shall be fifty cents ($.50) for each pound.
All dead animals shall be placed in a sealed plastic
bag grior to pick up by city employees. In order to
receive pick up service for animals weighing over
thirty-five (35) pounds, any veterinarian requesting
pick up for such an animal shall provide loading
assistance to city employees at the time of pick up.
I
SECTION IV, That if any provision of this ordinance or
application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid
by any court, such holding shall not affect the validity of the 4
remaining portions of this ordinance, and the city Council of the
City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares that it would have enacted
such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective 9
immediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990. s I
J i
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR +
ATTESTS
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
M _
T ;
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMS
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
i
BYs 1
PAGE 2
I
i
A / l
7jMW
Mal I
E
R
a r
1 a
CITY
COUNCIL
XXT:
LIXI
a
00
O
0C~ t`kwQ~
4~Q OG~~
77v :-7
owl
%
t.
` NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING ARTICLS II
"FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS" OF CHAPTER 11 "FOOD AND FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS"
BY AMENDING SECTION 11-21 "PERMIT REQUIRED" TO PROVIDE FOR A NEW
I'' v SECTION 11-21 (d) ESTABLISHING FEES FOR INSPECTIONSS REPEALING ALL
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
M
SECTION I. That Article II of Chapter 11 of the Code of
ordinances is hereby amended by adding a new Section 11-21 (d) to
provide for health inspection fees, which said section shall
hereafter be and read as follows:
Sec. 31-21. permit required.
(d) The city shall charge the following fees for each
inspection conducted by the health inspectors:
r Restaurant Inape ions.
i
Number of
Employees Amount
I
' 0-5 $ 55.00 I
F 6-10 75.00
11-15 95.00 +
16-20 115.00
21-25 150.00
26-30 170.00
31-35 190.00
36-40 210.00
41-Plus 220.00
Grocery Store Inmpsctiones
'i Number of
Employees Amount
0-5 $ 55.00
6-10 75.00
11-15 96.00
16-20 115.00 4
21-25 150.00
26-30 170.00
` 31-35 190.00
36-40 210.00
41-Plus 220.00
i
I
MVI
IU('WWI
~n
~y
l
Y
pay Care Inspections:
Each day care center $ 35.00.
SECTION IIL That it any provision of this ordinance or
application thereof to any person or oircumstance is held invalid
by any court, t:uch 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 that it would have enacted t
such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990.
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
i
i
ATTESTt
YENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
i
BYt
i~
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BYt
S
1
fif
k
CITY
f
COUNCIL
►ElN~ l
i
j
r i
I
op Ot
M -M
0
e
ME-
J~o GGOff3~~~
rnrr
s
r 7
d
y~
f' r
r
NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
"SWIMMING POOLS" OF CHAPTER 5 "BUILDINGS" BY AME DINGISECTION 5179
"PERMITS TO OPERATE" TO PROVIDE FOR A NEW SECTION 5-179 (c):
REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH AND DECLARING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE, I
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
BELT- ION i That Article V of Chapter 5 of the Code of
ordinances is hereby amended by adding a new Section 5-179 (c),
which said section shall hereafter be and read as follows:
Boor 5-179, Permits to operate. {
(c) An annual fee is hereby established for the
inspection of swimming pools in the amount of
$160.00.
SECTION IIr That if any provision of this ordinance or
application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid
by any court, 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 that it would have enacted
such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of '
1990.
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY E
i
I
BY: j
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: f
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
(
BY: j
i
I'
4 4]
We•l 1
1
CITY
COUNCIL;; !
r
i
a
IT4
s
;004~a~ a~
a' a
n
°0noe' ccaa~
k
;i
:TZI: TT
t
i t
i
NO. ;
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING OY r.HAPTER 5 "BUILDINGS" OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UcNTON, TEXAS BY AMENDING SECTION 5-10
~~rst "APPLICATION" AND SECTION 5-26 "SAME-FEE" TO PROVIDE FOR REVISED
FEFSJ REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND PROVIDING
FOP AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
a
SECTION I., That chapter 5 "Buildings" of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas is hereby amended by
amending Section 5-10 (4) "Application", which said section shall
hereafter be and read as follows:
{
Soo. 5-10. Appliaatior.
(4) Fee. The application for a permit for moving a
building shall be accompanied by a permit fee in the amount
of one and one-fourth (1-1/4) cents per square foot for
each square foot of floor space in the building to be
moved, or thirty dollars ($50.00), whichever is greater.
' SECTION ii. That Chapter 5 "::uildings" of the Code of J
I Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas is hereby amended by i
amending Section 5-26 "Same-Fee", which said section shall i IIII
hereafter be and read as follows: 1
see. 5-26. Same-Fee.
Prior to the issuance of any Permit for the construction of
~
1
a fence required by this article, applicant shall pay a feo
in the amount of fifteen dollars ($15.00). The fee must E
accompany the application for such permit and be payable to
the city.
SECTION That if any provision of this ordinance or 1
application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid
by any c^!3rt, such holding shall not affect the validity of the
re-maining portions of this ordinance, and the City Council of the
City of Denton, Texas, hereby declares that it would have enacted
such remaining portions despite any such invalidity.
r
That
ssage sand ordinance approvalshall become effective
immediately upon its pa
i
i
rjwln., ~ 4!
I
M j
I
I u~ '
I t
i
1990.
- ►
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of
I `
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR °
f r
ATTEST: :
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY f
I
BYt
i
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: I
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
By AIA
J
I11M
I I
I
A i
1
PAGE 2 f
t
r
ilNatx~
II ~cur f
4
r
44
T. T
4
C
r
CI~'Y
COUNCIL
PT -H+
fi
I
mflm: T: 7XIM
:T M 7111:::
1:117 m
I: r
ITIT.
{ ~I
°
hr
s
~ to
Tll
d
Op
r°" r• OOpJ
~~~dC GG9~
Ml:
.1
IMM
y
r.it
P
~ALa"- I
.dIW J~
r•
i
2881L
d
ORDINANCE NO. _
All ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION I OF ORDINANCE 90-026 PROVIDING
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL OF DENTON$ TEXAS; AMEND-
ING THE ORDER OF BUSINESS FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION IA. Section I of Ordinance No. 90-026 adapting Rules
of ris'oc~ure or the City Council of Denton, Texas, is hereby
amended by the amendment of the Section 6 entitled "Order of
Business" which shall hereafter be and read as follows:
6. ORDER OF BUSINESS
6.1 A ends: The order of business of each meeting shall
be as contained in the agenda prepared by the City
Manager. The agenda shall be a listing by topic of
subjects to be considered by the Council. Conduct !
of business at Special Meetings will likewise be
governed by an agenda and rules of procedure con-
tained herein.
t
6.2 Pledge of_Allegiance. Each agenda shall provide an
item or t e recital of the Pledge of Allegiance"
at the commencement of the meeting.
6.3 Presentations by-Members of Council: The agenda
s a provide s time when the-Mayor-'6r any Council-
member may bring before the Council any business
that he feels should be deliberated upon by the
Council. These matters need not be specifically
listed on the agenda, but discussion and formal
action on such matters shall be deferred until a
subsequent Council meeting.
6.4 Presentation b Citizens: Any person who wishes to
place a subject on~e`Council agenda shall advise
the City Manager's office of that fact and the
specified subject matter which he desires to place
on the agenda no later than 5:00 P.M. Wednesday
prior to the Council meeting at which he wishes the `
designated subject to be considered. Any person who
wishes to address the Council without having made
this preparation must have the unanimous consent of
the Council and will be scheduled after all other
reguls- business on the agenda has been completed.
This rule does not apply to anyone appearing at a
public tearing in response to an official agenda
notice.
IJ I~
tK.F 1
41¶y +awc+~
1 wcv. Il*kl 'are
I
a
t
6.5 Time Limit: Speakers before the Council are re-
quested to limit their remarks to five (5) minutes
or less.
4 6.6 Oral Presentations by City Manager: Matters requir-
J@ ing the Council's attention or action which may have
developed after the deadline for delivery of the
written communication to the Council may be presented
orally by the City Manager. If formal Council action
on a subject is required, such action may be taken
only if the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings
Law have been satisfied.
6.7 Presentation of Proclamations: The agenda may pro-
vide a t me or the reeentation of proclamations.
The Mayor or presiding officer may deliver and
present proclamations upon the request of citizens.
Proclamations may encompass any activity or theme i
except that proclamations with a theme religious or i
partisan in nature shall not be presented. Moreover
proclamations shall not be used for any commercial
or advertising purpose.
SECTION 11. That if any section, subsection, paragrapph,
sentenee,~ oTaauuea phase 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 validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the
City Council of the Cii:y of Denton, Texas, hereby declaring it
would have enacted such remaining portions despite any such
invalidity.
SECTION 111. That this ordinance shall become effective s
` imme ata y upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990.
i
r ~
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BY
PAGE 2
i
+}i, ~yy
fy J'.'.•„~
f
r
ITIM
ITIT
CITY
C111COUNCIL
MMIM:
r
r
IMMIlmmmi:
i
X-MM
O ► O 1
~Vkl k
Ot 4~
t ~ 1
Q 1
rOM S~4QQQ
~~OdC dG~~~
nlum
~f
' a
wr~ ~ 1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN OR*INANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND
THE GREATER DENTON ARTS COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND
oo PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the
b
to the Greater Denton est interest of the citizens of the City to provide public funds
s Council,
val able public services to be furnished by consideration t
organization to
the City of Denton; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
SECTION I. That the City Council hereby approves the
Agreement attached hereto, between the City of Denton and Community
Clinics for Denton County, and authorizes the Mayor to execute said
Agreement.
UL_~L the Council authoriz the
expendit reNoflfundsTintthe manneriand amount as specified sin the
Agreement.
f ordinance immediately NupponLitsTpassageiand approval,shall become affective
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990.
t BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR f
I 1
ATTEST}
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
I
BY: E
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM;
c ~
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY P JI
By
( I
1'
17
0
v
4
7
AGREEMENT BETWERN THE CITY OF DENTON~ TEXAS
1 AND THE GREATER DENTON ARTS COUNCIL
0
THIS AGREEMENT is made on this the
between the City of Denton, Texas, a municipal co poi tionl(the ~ da of October, o,
"CITY"), and the Greater Denton Arts Council, a non-profit
corporation incorporated under the laws of the state o! Texas (the
"GDAC").
aa~=~aLa
WHEREAS, the GDAC is a non-profit corporation dedicated r.o the
promotion and provision of artistic performances of all kinder for
the benefit of the citizens of Denton; and,
WHEREASO real propertyth together awith®theEimprovements tharsto,Plocated at
for the pur ones o e Denton, Texas, (the "Theater"
P f r storin WTand the use of private funds, and utilizingiit top othe throuh
videathe$oitizens
of Denton with artistic performances and presentations of many
kinds including, but not limited to, music, theater, and dancer
and,
WHEREAS, the GDAC has agreed to allow the CITY to use the
Theater for the purpose of holding public events, including public
mest3.ngs, events held in connection with the Denton Main Street
Project, and events sponsored by the CITY'S Parks and Recreation
Department; and,
1 e
WHEREAS, the City Council of the CITY finds that the GDAC15
performance of the terms of this Agreement will benefit CITY'S s,
{ citizens in a manner consistent with the type of benefits histori-
cally provided to citizens of municipal governments; and,
WHEREAS, the GDAC having agreed to refrain from seeking, during
the term of this Agreement, any extension or reneval of its
existing contract with the CITY for the payment of certain hotel
tax revenues collected by the CITY for the purpose of restoring and
refurbishing the Old Steam Plantt
NOW, THEREFO.Uo in consideration of the perfomance of the
mutual covenants tnd promises contained herein, the CITY end the
GDAC agree and contract as follows.
Ie COVENANTS OF GDAC
A. Use of Presisov. GDAC ugrees to use the premises for the
exclusive purposes of conducting osetings of its member organiza-
tions, and conducting artistic performances, including any
4 rehearsals thereof, for the benefit of the citizens of Denton.
`I
PAGE 1
I
I
'
1( ~1
r , I
9
l
f r
GDAC nay operate a concession in connection with artistic
~ performances, in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and
the ordinances of the City of Denton. r
GDAC will not permit Theater to be used for any event or in any
manner which will violate City ordinances, for any unlawful or
commercial purpose, or otherwise for the purpose of private profit.
GDAC shall adopt rnles and regulations which shall govern the use
of the Theater, -,,nick shall recite the covenants contained herein
and shall be approved by the CITY.
Be City Use. GDAC agrees to permit the CITY, its agents,
officers -And employees to utilize the Theater, without charge, for
the purpose of holding public events, including public meetings of
any and all kind, events held in connection with the Denton Main
Street Project, and events sponsored by the City's Parks and
Recreal.ion Department.
Co Other Consideration.
1. GDAC agrees it will not seek an extension or renewal of
its existing contract with the CITY which provides for the
payment of hotel tax revenues to GDAC for the purpose of
renovating the Old Steam Plant, said contract being authorized
by Ordinance 90-034 of the City Council.
1. GDAC represents and warrants to CITY that it has not t
expended any monies received from CITY'S hotel tax revenues for
the acquisition of the Theater, and agrees that no such
revenues will be expended on the Theater during the tam of
this Agreement.
3. GDAC agrees to recognize and acknowledge the financial
contributions of the CITY to GDAC in written documents prepared t
and distributed by GDAC, including, but not limited to,
programs, press releases and pamphlets.
4. GDAC agrees to pay when due all utility bills, taxes,
licenses, permit fees, or any other fees rendered or levied r
against the Theater.
5. GDAC agrees to work with CITY to design and implement
programs which will further the public purposes of this Agree- s
went.
6. GDAC agrees to operate the Theater in an energy efficient
manner so as to maximize energy conservation. GDAC will use
night setback thermostat equipment for the heating and air
conditioning system. In months when the air conditioning
system is utilized, GDAC agrees it will maintain the Theater,
when it is occupied, at a temperature of not less than 744F.
In the winter months when the heating system is used, GDAC
PAGE 2
Ml`Y Ir
J'
F
tai
agrees to maintain the Theater, when it is occupied, at a
temperature of not more than 70'F.
II. TERM
The term of this Agreement shall be for twenty-five (25) years,
commencing October 1, 1990, and terminating at midnight on
September 30, 2015, provided however that if CITY is unable to
appropriate funds for subsequent fiscal years to continue the
funding provided for in Article III hereof, CITY may terminate this
Agreement at the and of the than current fiscal year and shall not
be obligated to make further payments under this Agreement.
III. COVENANTS OF CITY
A. Utilities. Beginning October 1, 1991, and continuing
through the billing cycle for the period including September 30,
19930 CITY, in consideration of the services performed by GDAC,
agrees to reimburse GDAC monthly a sum calculated upon utility
services provided to the Theater by City of Denton Utilities and
Lone Star Gas Company based upon a fixed annual allotment of
electricity, water, solid waste volume and natural gas, as
reflected on Schedule "A", attached hereto and incorporated by
reference herein.
Not later than May 31, 1993, GDAC shall most with CITY'S
representatives and mutually agree to a schedule of utility
consumption to replace Schedule "A", commencing with the first
billing cycle after September 30, 1993, for the remainder of the
term of this Agreement. The schedule shall be calculated based
upon the Theater's utility consumption during the previous two
years. If the parties are unable to mutually agree to a new
schedule of consumption, the decision of the CITY shall be final.
D. other payments. Commencing October 1, 19910 CITY shall
reimburse GDAC for expenditures, made to pay for repairs to the
Theater. Such expenditures shall be reimbursed only if CITY has
approved reimbursement prior to the performance of the repairs.
The CITY shall not reimburse GDAC for any annual expenditures for
repairs in excess of $5,000. It is agreed that the CITY will not
approve reimbursement for renovation or janitorial expenses, or
expenses incurred to remove asbestos or other hazardous substances
from the Theater premises.
The total sum of all amounts
paid by CITY pursuant to Section
III A. through the billing cycle,v for the period including
September 30, 1993 shall be applied as a credit against the CITY'S
obligations set forth in Article III 13. By way of example, if the
CITY were to pay $13,000 to GDAC for utility services through the
billing period including September 30, 1993, the CITY's obligations
pursuant to Article III B. would not commence until October, 1993
and the City would be obligated to pay not more than $2,000 during
the following year.
i
PAGE 3
I
r
hfVf.~ i 1
f 1
r
C. Energy Efficient Improvements. CITY recognizes that GDAC
may choose to invost $750000 or sore for the purpose of construct-
ing major structural or equipment improvements to the Theater
which, in the opinion of this CITY: (1) are energy efficient; and
(2) will extend the life of the hu!.ldina for a number of years.
F, Should GDAC expend $75,000 for improvements to the Theater, the
CITY'S obligation under Article III B. shall be increased to
provide for approval of payment for expenses to repair the building
in an annual amount not more than $7,500 ifs
1. GDAC has submitted the plans for each proposed improve- ,
l
!Went included in the $75,000 sum, to CITY;
2. CITY has determined that construction of each such im-
pravement would meet the requirements of this sections
and
3. GDAC provides the CITY with proof of payment for con-
struction of each such improvement on or before September
' 30, 1993.
IV. TERMINATION
A. Default. Should GDAC breach or fail to comply with any
provision of this Agreement, such breach shall constitute an Event
of Default on the part of GDAC. If an Event of Default occurs, the
CITY shall give GDAC thirty (30) days to remedy the breach. If the 3 J
breach continues after thirty (30) days, the CITY may terminate the ,
Agreement immediately upon written notice and shall not be
obligated to make any additional payment to GDAC.
B. Unavailability of Mds. The payment of money by CITY under
this Agreement is contingent upon the availability of funds
1 appropriated to pay the sums pursuant to this Agreement. In the
event funds become unavailable due to non-appropriation, CITY may
notify GDAC and terminate the Agreement.
C. Other Nvents. This Agreement shall automatically terminate
upon the occurrence of any of the following events; (1) If the
Theater is damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty to such
an extent that in the CITY'S opinion the continued operation and
use of the Theater is not feasible; (2) The termination of the
corporate existence of GIAC; or (3) T4s insolvency of GDAC, the
filing of a petition in bankruptcy, either voluntary or involun-
tary, or an assignment by GDAC for the benefit of creditors.
V. RNPORTS
I
GDAC shall furnish to the City a report of the acrvices
performed by the GDAC under this Agreement within thirty (30) days
fiscal after the end of each reports shall summarize theactivities of the i GDACrin performance
PAGE 4
1 .1 V. 11
i
j
i
4
of the services specified in section I and enumerate expenditures
and receipts for the preceding quarter. oDAC shall also notify d~
CITY in the event any lien is filed against the Theater premises in
the Denton County Real Property Records.
GDAC shall provide City and its Executive Director of Finance
or his designee with full access at all reasonable times to the
Theater and to the books and records of the GDAC which may relate
to the Theater.
VI. INDEMNIFICATION 1
A. Indeaaification. GDAC agrees to indemnify, hold harmless,
and defend the CITY, its officers, agents, and employees from and
against any and all claims or suits for injuries, damages, loss, or
liability of whatever kind or character, arising out of or in
connection with the performance by the GDAC of thcee services
contemplated by this Agreement, including all such claims or causes
of action based upon common, constitutional or statutory law, or
based, in whole or in part, upon allegations of negligent or
intentional acts of GDAC, its officers, employees, agents,
contractors, licensees and invitees.
B. Insurance. GDAC shall obtain and maintain general public
liability and property damage liabilit; insurance in the amount of '
not less than $1,000,000. Such policy or policies shall be issued i
by companies licensed to transact business in the State of Texas
and shall name the CITY as an additional insured. GDAC shall
submit proof of such insurance satisfactory to CITY. Any policy or
policies must include 30 days notice by carrier to the CITY of its
intent to cancel, materially change, or refuse to renew coverage
provided. CITY reserves the right to adjust or increase the
liability insurance amounts required of GDAC, and GDAC agrees to
meet any such insurance requirements as CITY may requires provided
however, that any requirements shall be commensurate with insurance
l requirements at other public use theaters similar to the Theater, i
in size and in scope of activities, located in Texas. GDAC agrees
to comply with all adjusted insurance requirements that the CITY
may require within sixty (60) days following the receipt of a
notice in writing from CITY stating the adjusted requirements.
Co Benefit. This Agreement is entered into for the benefit of
CITY and GDAC only and is not intended to benefit third parties.
VII. sTATUA Of PARTIES
it is understood and acknowledged by the parties that the
relationship of GDAC to CITY is that of an independent contractor.
GDAC shall have no authority to employ any person or employee or
agent for or on behalf of CITY for any purpose. i
PAGE 5
Ile
19
r'
i
i
vill. HISCELLANEOUS
A. Assignment. GDAC shall not assign this Agreement.
s. Notice. Any notice required to be given under this
Agreement or any statute, ordinance, or regulation, shall be
effective when given in writing and deposited in the United States
mail, certified mail, return receipt requested, or by hand-
delivery, addressed to the respective parties as follows:
City: ~r a er Denton Arts~o~:
City Manager Executive Director
City of Denton Greater Denton Arts Council
215 E. McKinney 207 South Bell
Denton, Texas 76201 Denton, Texas 76201
0. Application of Laws. All terms, conditions, and provisions
of this Agreement are subject to all applicable federal laws, state
laws, the Charter of the city of Denton, all ordinances passed
pursuant thereto, and all judicial determinations relative thereto.
D. Exclusive Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire
understanding and constitutes the entire agreement between the
parties hereto concerning the subject matter contained herein.
There are no representations, agreements, or understandings, oral
or written, express or implied, between or among the parties
relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, which are not
fully expressed herein. The terms and conditions of this Agreement
' shall prevail notwithstanding any variance in this Agreement from
the terms of any other document relating to this transaction. This
Agreement shall not be changed or amended except by instrument in
S.1 writing executed by CITY and GDAC. S
S. Headings. The headings and subheadings of the various
sections and paragraphs of this Agreement are inserted merely for
the purpose of convenience and do not express or imply
limitation, definition, or extension of the specific terms of the
section and paragraph so designated.
7, Notice of Keating, GDAC shall give CITY'S City Manager ;
advance written notice of the time and place of general meetings of
the GDAC Board of Directors. Such notice shall be given in the r
same manner and at the same time as notice is given of such
meetings to members of the board. CITYfS City Manager, or his
designee or any city councilmember may attend any board meeting at
which any matter relating to the Theater is scheduled for discus- i
sion.
G. Nondiscrimination, GDAC agrees to comply fully with all
applicable federal, state and local laws, and rules and regulations
promulgated thereunder, rega all nondiscrimination. Specifically, ,
GDAC agrees that no person h be denied or refused service or
PAGE 6
4
q~
4
M t
other full or equal use of the licensed facilities, nor denied
employment opportunities by GDAC as a result of race, creed, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age, or handicap unrelated to
ability.
H. Nonvaivere The waiver by CITY of any breach of any
provision contained in this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a
waiver of such provision for any subsequent breach of the same or
any other provision.
M Executed this the day of , 1990.
411 CITY OF DENTON
Ik
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTESTt
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY.
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
` DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BY:
GREATER DENTON ARTS COUNCIL
BYt
JOANN WHEELER, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
BYt
SECRETARY
PAGE 7 _ „•,.a ya
- -
A
r7
S
i
CITY
COUNCIL
44
ono, a,
t
e ,~a
OGGG b~
r _
1 /
~My
R ~I
J
I
r4
f
D CITY of DENTOAt / 215 E. McKinney / Denton, Texas 76201
MEMORANDUM
yye To: Betty-McKean - Executive Director, MSED
From: Tom Klinck - Director of Personnel/Employee Relations
Date: September 13, 1990
Subject: City Council Resolution Supporting TML Legislative Initiatives on
State Civil Service Law - Work Session October 2, 1990
Betty, this memo outlines the staff recommendation requesting City Council
support of legislative initiatives sponsored by the Texas Municipal League
on needed changes to the State Civil Service Law. As activities begin to
gear up during the next few months prior to the legislative session In
Spring, 1991, we are requesting that the Council pass a resolution
supporting our City's position, Then, as bills are drafted and sponsors
identified, we are requesting Council's active Involvement in testifying
before appropriate committees and participating in other support activities
which can influence those who can favorably pass legislation to accomplish
the changes. r
Chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code, referred to as the Municipal
Civil Service Act, is the body of law that governs the employaent
relationship between Police Officers and Fire Fighters. Back in the 1950180
the citizens of Denton voted to include our Police Officers and Fire
IE Fighters under these laws. The original intent of the Civil Service laws
were well-intentioned, however, as the years have passed and changes have
been made In the laws, it is our belief that the current laws contain
provisions which place severe constraints on management of the Police and
Fire Departments, are detrimental to the employees the laws are designed to
protect, and create an additional cost for the citizens of Denton. The J
attached booklet, "what's Wrong in Texas Police and Fire Stations'", `
published by TML, provides an indepth explanation of the laws, how cities I!
are covered, and some of the problems In the law that create obstacles In
attempting to efficiently and effectively manage our Police and Fire
Departments.
{
A special committee formed by TML during the last budget year (Fire Chief
John Cook was chosen to serve from Denton) has studied the problems and
developed 10 specific changes to the law's provisions that we believe will
alleviate some of the problems and ensure more equitable and fair practices. J
Six (6) of the changes relate to the Nearing Examiner provisions in
disciplinary and termination appeal procedures. The changes are:
1. An amendment specifying certain qualifications for hearing examiners.
1
2. An amendment requiring hearing examiners to br,se their decisions on
,;Mtii
Ile
~ F
i
P
i
1
•
S
September 13, 1990
Memo to 8. McKean - City Council Resolution - State Civil Service Law
Page 2
II
specific criteria.
P
3. An amendment requiring that hearing examiners base their decisions on a
preponderance of the evidence, not on clear and convincing evidence.
a. An amendment providing that an appeal to a hearing examiner is limited
to cases of demotion, indefinite suspension, or disciplinary actions of
ten days or more.
i
5. An amendment providing that a hearing examiner shall uphold the +
disciplinary decision of the chief if the hearing examiner makes a
finding of the truth of the specific charges against the fire fighter
or police officer.
6. An amendment requiring that a hearing examiner follow the procedural
rules used by the Civil Service Commission and allowing the City to
appeal a hearing examiner's decision for failure to follow the rules.
~ JI
The Hearing Examiner, their process, and their power are clearly out of
balance and are In desperate need of improvement. 1
Other TML recommended changes relate to provisions in the law that are out-
of-date, will enhance management, selection, and promotional opportunities,
i or will correct inequities for the citizens right to adopt or repeal the
application of Civil Service Law in their city. These changes are:
7. An amendment providing that a demotion is effective immediately, l
subject to appeal.
S. An amendment allowing Affirmative Action Plans to be implemented in
Police and Fire Departments.
9. An amendment conforming repeal procedures with adoption procedures.
W. An amendment providing for alternative testing procedures for Fire
Departments.
Attachment A provides an explanation of each of the above changes briefly
covering the current law, proposed change, and reasons for the proposed
change. i
Chief Cook will be providing the City Council an overview of each
recommended change at the work session and responding to questions. Should
I
i
1'
~I
S~
nA
`r
t ~
t
I
September 13, 1990
Memo to McKean - City Council Resolution - State Civil Service Law
Page 3
the COUn:il agree with these ch?nges, we will include a supporting
resolution on the formal agenda for the October 16, 1990 session.
Please 1et me know if you'd 11ke additional information.
Thanks.
Thomas W. Klinck
bmnemST,prn 9/14/90 10:20a
i
I
I
I
r
~ j
r '
P '
{
Y
i
ATTACHMENT A
PROPOSED
i
AMENDMENTS TO TEXAS
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 143
MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE ACT
I
i
i
i
r
s
ti
S
v
L
AN AMENDMENT SPECIFYING CERTAIN
QUALIFICATIONS FOR HEARING
EXOHNERS UNDER CHAPTER 143
Current Law
Chapter 143.051 allows a police officer or fire fighter to appeal a disciplinary action
to a thit d party hearing examiner. The only qualification necessary under state law
is that the hearing examiner be a member of either the American Arbitration A
Association or the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
Proposed Change
This amendment would require that a third party hearing examiner receive special
training regarding Chapter 143 or that the heanng examiner be a retired or former
judge who is a member of the State Bar.
Reasons for PraMed Change j
Several cities have-experienced problems with third party hearing examiners not ,
understanding the nature of police or fire work. Police officers and fire fighters,
because of the very nature of their work, interact with citizens everyday. Therefore,
when a police chief decides to indefinitely suspend a police officer because the
officer has shown a history of unnecessary violence in arrest situations, violaOn of
criminal laws, or for other reasons, the examiner often fails to understand the
liability the city faces by keeping that officer on the force. I
In an attempt to reach a compromise between the city and an officer who has been
disciplined, hearing examiners have reduced the punishment even though there is no
dispute as to what the officer did. Since there is no appeal from a decision except in
very limited situations, the city is often forced to return an obviously bad officer or
fire fighter to the force.
J
' Y
1
i 1
1
a
i
I f
AN AMENDMENT REQUIRING HEARING
EXAMINERS PECIFIC CRITERIA
DECISIONS ON
h
Secu io n 13.057(f) statss that the hearing examiner has the same duties and powers
I
.r„) as the~Ci4vik Service Cctnmission as-they relate to conducting disciplinary appeals,
i including the right to issue subpoenas.
Section 143,0570) provi&s for an appeal to district court of a hearing examiner's
decision only on the grounds that the examiner's decision was without jurisdiction or
exceeded its jurisdicuon or if the order was procured by fraud, collusion, or other
unlawful means. ,
i
Pirpposed China
powers of
or a
This amendment would d Ja prly osed amendment would state that duties and
the commission." The pno
third party hearing examiner tray uphold a suspension or dismissal of a fire fighter
or police officer for a violation of a civil service rule by determining that the specific
charges against the fire fighter or police officer argued of the me~ion would also
clarify that the same findings star .vd currently r
required of the hearing examiner. In the event the hearing examiner doe dnot make
a finding concerning the truth of the charges, that decision may be appeale.
~ s t2nwaent for P*ono~ed Chan,z
The commission is required to find the truth of the specific charges against the fire
fighter or police officer, and the hearing esaminer has the same duties and powers
as the commission. However, if a hearing examiner does not make a findin as to
the truth of the sexthere is aminer and provide !orraaa achange ppeal if the heari g examiner
` this duty of the bearing fails to comply. ,
' i
E
f
i
1 i
I~
i
i
s
I
AN AMENDMENT REppUIRING THAT
HEARING EXAMINE IfS BASE THEIR
DECISIONS ON A PREPONDERANCE OF
THE EVIDENCE NOT ON CLEAR
AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE t
~nrreetLaw v
.r Section 143.057(j) provides for an appeal to district court of a heariq examiner's
decision only if thhe decision was without jurisdiction, exceeded jurisdiction or if the
order was procured by fraud, collusion, or other unlawful means. Current law does
hearing examiner. must be met by the city in an appeal of a !t
nocp Ovid a n co standard a of
I
Pronoced Change
This amendment would specifically state that the decision of a hearing examiner
must would be gbased round sfor appeal of that decision lto district courttd that failure to do so
I
$4~gp~Q~ Proooaed Chae~t
Although the standard of proof in civil cases in Texas is a preponderance of the
evidence, some hearing examiners have required the city to produce clear and
f convincing" evidence to justify the disciplinary decision. Tbis amendment would
claS the burden which is required and woc ld allow an appeal In the event that this
standard is not utilized by the hearing examiner.
f
1
WWW"
P
t
4.
AMEND ING
EXAMINER IS TLIMITED TO APPEAL TO A
CASES OF DEMOTION, INDEFINITE SUSPENSION,
r OR DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS OF TEN DAYS OR MORE
~yrrent Laa~
Sectiort 143.057(a) requires that the city's letter of disciplinary action issued to a fire
fighter or police officer state that in an appeal of an indefinite suspension, a i
,uspen ion, promotional passover or a recommended demotion, the appealing fire 1
fighter or police officer may elect to appeal to an independent third parry hearing
examiner instead of the civil service commission. Therefore, the fire fighter or
police officer is given the choice of going before the commission or before the a
hearing examiner since both have the same jurisdiction in appeals.
{ t
J Proposed Cha=
This amendment would allow the fire fi titer or police officer the cho+x of
appealing to a hearing examiner only in the case of an indefinite suspension, a
recommended demotion, or a suspension of ten days or more.
Rpgaone for Proposed Change
E
The cities under civil service have had five years of experience with appeals to
hearing examiners. A two-day hearing often costs $1,500 or more, not including the
hearing examiner's travel expenses. This seems particularly expensive when the
appeal involves a one-day suspension. An appeal of a one-day suspension to the
civil service commission costs virtually nothing. This amendment would allow an
apppeal to a hearing examiner in the most serious of disciplinary actions - an
indefinite suspension, a recommended demotion, or a suspension of ten days or
more. This amendment does not dilute at, officer's right to a due process
proceeding, since the promotional passover or suspension of less than 10 days is
always appealable to the civil service commission.
I
i
i ~
t
f
i }
}
ti
r
4
i
AN AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A
i HEARING EXAMINER SHALL UPHOLD THE
DISCIPLINARY DECISION OF THE CHIEF IF
THE HLUUNG EXAMINER MAKES A FINDING OF
THE, R~RE FIGHSPECIFIC PLICE OFFFF[ACER NST
,rr n O
i astdi i
The hearing examiner has the ability to alter the disciplinary action imposed by the
chief even if the hearing examiner has made a determination that the city's charges
against an officer are true.
Proooted ChattQe atio beimade by a hearinglexaaminer.nThe onfusi~ng egxaminer must magna finndthat must
of he
9
truth of the specific charges. This amendment would also provide that once the
i has +
hearing t raor nonce officeer, the d sciiplinary action re ompmen edhbyghe clief shall
fire fig p
i be imposed.
~1.~1~11fig
i
In the past. heum examiners have been confased as to the findiaa that must be 9
r made at an appe2 hearing and the level of proof that it requiredd of the city in
defendin iu disciplinary recommendation. Tha amendment would clarify the o
findings t at must b made by the examiner.
Additionally bean 'ng examiners, in an attempt to reach a compromise be a k t truehe
,
chief and the disciplined uniformed officer, wilL (1) find that the charges
but (2) determine that the disciplinary recommendation is too harsh and reduce it.
r ~
'
i
i
4
P
P
i f
f 1
,ura~ II
.
y
Y
AN AMENDMENT REQUIRING THAT A HEARING EXAMINER
FOLLOW THE P OCEDURAL RULES USED BY THE
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND ALLOWING THE
CITY TOFO~R FAILURE HEARING AOW THE RULESCISION
Current Lam
Section .143.008 requires that the commission adopt rules necessary for the proper
conduct of commission business. There is no appeal of a hearing examiner's
decision to district court by the city except in very limited situations.
PronosCd han e
i
'This amendment would require that a third party hearing examiner fellow the
I procedural rules set by the cityry''s civil service commission. It would also allow for an
P appeal of the hearing examiner's decision if the examiner failed to follow the
commission's procedural rules.
1 ~ 1
gpACOnc 'or Proposed hanae
Civil service commissions odbearrin . in thereabsennceepof a srocedures cific that must
rile,
cofollowed during appeal g
commissions often require in their rules that the rules of civil procedure shall be
followed.
Hearing examiners have often held hearings in which neither the commission riles
nor the riles of civil procedure were followed. Under current law, the city cannot
a peal the hearing examiners decision for failure to follow the commission's rules
oI procedure.
't'his amendment would clarif the procedural riles that the hearing examiner must
follow and would a!,low the city to appeal a hearing examiner's decision to district
court for failure to fo4ow those riles.
G
x
i
` i
j '
4 ! I
i
f 1i
7{
s
9
f
i
7.
AN AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A
DEMOTION IS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY,
SUBJECT TO AN APPEAL
Curretj Law
Under Sec, 143,054, the chief of the fire or police department may recommend in
writing to the civil service commission that an officer be involuntarily demoted. The
chief must Include reasons for the recommended demotion and request that the
commission order the demotion. If the commission believes that good cause exists
for ordering the demotion, the commission shall give the fire 6¢bter or police officer
notice to appear before the commission for a public bearing. The corttmbsion must
give the police officer or fire fighter ten days notice before the hearing,
Proposed Chansre
This amendment would provide that when the chief recommends a demotion for a
police officer or fire tighter, the demotion would take effect immediately, subject to f
the appeal. i
k Reasons for Proposed Change
Currently, if the chief recommends a. demotion, the decision must await a review
and possible appeal to the commission or a third party hearing examiner, The only
time requirement In the statute is one which requires that the commission give
( notice to the affected police officer or fire fighter. V the officer has been I
suspended, the commission must hold a hearing and render a decision in writing
within 30 days after the date it received notice of appeal. Often, attorneys
representing the employee in a demotion appeal will dela any hearing on tTie
matter, effectively blocking the attempted demotion of the officer.
` There seems to be no logic for the difference between a suspension (which has
1 immediate effect) and a demotion (which has effect only after an appeal).
I
i
i
i
wwv: ~
p waxr~ 1 ~
st ~
i
.
f
7~ tr.1
r
8.
AN AMENDMENT ALLOWING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLANS
TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS
Current Law
Under Section 143.026, when vacancy occurs in a beginning position in a fire or
police department, the civil service director certifies to the city's chief executive
officer the names of the three persons having the highest grades on the eligibility
list. The chief executive officer then appoints the person with the highest jlrade
unless there is a valld reason that the person having the second or third highest
grade should be appointed.
Proposed Change
i
Under this amendment, an additional name from the eligibility list may be added to
the list submitted to the chief executive officer to fill a vacancy in a beginning
position, This additional name Is allowed if the city council has adopted an
affirmative action plan that has been approved by the civil service commission.
The additional candidate from the eligibility list must meet all the other
qualifications and criteria necessary to fill a beginnin osidom Currently, the chief
executive officer can appoint the person with the 4g%est grade unless there is a
good and sufficient reason that one of the other persona named should be
appointed. Under the proposed amendment, the Implementation of an affirmative
action plan would be a "good and sufficient" reason to appoint someone other than I
the first person on the list.
k
Reasons for Proposed Chanat
City councils are currently being sued for Implementation of affirmative action plans
In their police and fire departments. Local city councils should be abie to consider
implementation of affirmative action plans in hWag of pollee and fire personnel to
avoid coun•ordered sanctions or comply with appropriate consent dacrees. This
provision would aU6 allow local authorities to consider what is best for their
community in balancing the makeup of police/rue departments in lieu of having
the coups make those determinations. The unlons contend this is a violation of the
Civil Service Act because there is no provision that allows for these appointments.
City councils should be allowed to !iro minorities and women when they have
adopted an atflrmadve action plan.
a
~er"` MMey V
~ l
9.
AN AMENDMENT CONFORMING REPEAL
PROCEDURES WITH ADOPTION PROCEDURES
rrr nt ~w
Law To Adopt Civil Servic
A city may adopt civil service under Se; tion 143.C04(b) if the city council receives a
peti ton requesting an election signed by 10 percent of the number of voters who
voted in the most recent municipal electiop. The resulting election is decided by a
majority of those voting,
i
Law To Repeal Civil Service
If the voters wish to repeal civil service, the petition must be signed by 14 percent of l
&H the qualified voters in the city. In order for the repeal effort to succeed, a
majority of all qualified voter in the city must vote for the repeal. ?
Proposed Change S
This amendment would allow voters to petition for repeal of civil service with the
riTC "uraroer of signatures with which the voters can petition to adopt civil service.,
The amendment would also provide that the election for repeal shall be decided by
a majority of those voting.
r
Reasons for Proposed Change
Since the Civil Service Act was enacted by the Legislature in 1947, nearly 70 cities
have adopted the civil service statute by election. Since that time, the civil service
statute has been amended numerous times to include many more provisions than
had been originally approved by the voters.
What was initially adopted by cities as the Civil Service Act is not what cities are
living with today. Therefore, voters should be able to petition and vote to repeal the
city's adoption of civil service if the system no longer meets the needs or the {
expectations of the citizens in the community. j~
r
i
R
j
4
Y t ~ ICI
1I
{
AN AMENDMENT PROVIDING FOR
ALTERNATIVE TESTING PROCEDURES
FOR FIRE DEPARTMENTS
Current .Rw'
1
Under Section 143.035, upon the recommendation of the chief of the police
department and after a majority vote of the sworn police officers in the department,
the coounission may adopt an alternate promotional system to select persons to
occupy non-entry level positions other than positions that are filled by appointment
ACOF by the department head.
I
Allow the same alternative testing procedures for fire departments.
Reason f~cp~~~ ~ 'Currentl onl alternat the same'safeguaprdsc(a recommends on by the chief ndia majority vote futhe fire
department) are adopted for fire departmenu, the commission should be allowed to
I adopt an alternative promotional system to promote persons to non-entry level
positions. There is no good reason that a police department is allowed to exercise
this option and a fire department Is not.
i
~ i
i
f
i
i
i
r
i
! a
V
RESOLUTION NO..
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
SUPPORTING CERTAIN STATUTORY AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY THE TEXAS
MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, TO CHAPTER 143 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE? AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,. Texas Local Government Code Chapter 143, (the
Municipal Civil Service Act), was originally enacted forty-three
years ago to prevent mismanagement of police and fire departments,
and was a needed and well-intentioned statutel and
WHEREAS, the numerous amendments to the this law made by the
Texas Legislature since 1947 have eroded the ability of local
and
departments under effectively te Mand resonsibly manage tir nicipal Civil Service Actt police and
fire governmants
WHEREAS, the Municipal Civil Service Act should be amended to
provide for hiring and promotion using means other than strictly
written exams, therefore allowing municipalities to incorporate
affirmative action plans in their police and lire departmentso and
WHEREAS, the Municipal civil service Act should be amended to i
provide that a municipality may remove itself from the requirements
of the Act using the same method that is used to adopt the Act, i
therefore. allowing cities to remove themselves from a provision
which has changed dramatically since it was originally created by
the Texas Legislature) and i
WHEREAS, Texas Municipal League has proposed certain amendments
which will assist the City of Denton in maintaining efficient,
effective, well-managed police and fire departments, resulting in j
better public safety for Denton citizens, which is the goal of both
the City and the officers in the police and fire departments and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Denton wishes to join in
with other cities to support the Texas Municipal League's legisla-
tive proposal for ton amendments to Chapter 143 of the Local
Government Code) NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES1
g i N , That the City Council of the City of Denton hereby 3
supports the following proposed amendments to Chapter 143 of the
Local Government Code (Supp, 1990)!
1. An amendment which would clearly specify certain quali-
fications for hearing examinerst for example, that
hearings
must examiners
attend training retired being h
eligible they to
serve,
i
I
i
.
p VY
Y■■p■
ffj.T
P
S Y
2. An amendment, which would require that hearings examiners
base their decisions on specific criteria and which
would allow cities to appeal hearings examiners' deci-
sions to district court in the event that this require-
ment is not met.
3. An amendment which would require that hearings examiners
base- their decisions on the preponderance of the
evidence - not clear and convincing evidence - and
which would allow cities to appeal hearings examiners'
decisions to district court in the event that this
requirement is not met.
i
4. An amendment which would provide that hearings examiners
can be used only for limited purposes: cases of demo-
tion, indefinite suspension, or disciplinary actions of
ten :lays or more.
5. An amendment which would provide that hearings examiners r
can consider only whether the employee in question
actually did what he or she is accused of, but may not
question or alter the level of discipline imposed for i
the employee's actions.
6. An amendment which would require that hearings examiners
follow the procedural rules used by civil service
commissions and which would allow cities to appeal
hearings examiners' decisions to district court in the
event that such procedures are not followed.
7. An amendment which would provide that a demotion, like
an indefinite suspension, would be effective immediate-
ly, subject to an appeal.
S. An amendment which would allow affirmative action plans j
to be implemented in fire and police forces covered by ?
Chapter 143, Local Government Code.
9. An amendment which would allow alternative testing M
procedures for fire departments just as they are now
allowed for police departments.
10. An amendment which would provide that the referendum and
election procedures for repeal of Chapter 143 of the
Local Government Code, be identical to the procedures
for adoptions
SECTION Ir. That the city secretary shall forward a copy of
this resolution to the Honorable Bob Glasgow, State Senator, the
Honorable Jim Horn, State Representative, and Frank Sturzl,
Executive Director, Texas Municipal League.
PAGE 2
v
~.n
r
~F:4TION III. That this resolution shall become effective upon
its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ~A 1990.
f
i
BOB CASTLESERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST.,
14
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMS
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
j BY:
IJ ~
1
f
I
1
PAGE 1
r
J
Y
`rr...• wnnr
y
I/ IA 1.
1
F
i i
~t r
t
1
r pp
r
N
1
4
f
1 c ,
f a~ ~
j7Tj
cu
I
F
i
F AAA {
k
~i
Or
I
I
I
I
i
I
r
1
s
i~
I
1
I
o
~lu
y H•
E
I i
I
~ww, tram>~ ~ 1
i
I e
+ N _ r
(D N 99
gal ~~r..
'
m ctv.l C, `e m m
511 it V- z
ago a
z
e~Q
`s
d9 QhSt
y X91
Atli
Q x
eAl 18 [fit a w 9 9
1
JIM
A■cy
I
stir-a~ 1
f. a
a
Ills m 0C"
3 aCL go CD
61
a9 w W~ $ 'fl lot
m
Q ttteee~~ W YY R
(pGQQ~1 • ~j ~ A a `G m
O1 i Q (9
op
a 11-1.
g~
1 $
gal
01g~
91
{ ~ 1
i
I
e
x I•
r
•!I
~ ~ w or
.n
_ C
N
N _
70 F03i 73 La
~7p7f9~
O O 3 r ~ ~ ~ Q41 ~ fD a a. 0. CD N
d 3 37iN Qpp `Z L'~I•, 41111 ~0
.4 q5 o
~ N~3aO0.3 .3
0 3~ _ c
a
a0 CD
3 ORnn R pm4~P ..O ~pOC7 6 En
~:t
Qv g» <D
N O7 DO
1~0
{
i
x
r
' R Q.N •&2 w
loco
9-
9. I I.
3•
m EL
5 ft .1 N
Q N O
t 0~ 5
5*
A' 3' R
{ i
JI }raa~ /
d
_m C Q
ay4
N g ~
a
C
~ Nro ca~i ru
CD C03
X CL
W R' W. d I
W 2' Fy fD
MA _ m to 3 rn (ba m
yy_ X
QQ~~ '9 ~m r•3 .,03~M o~iO c~`Z 0 044- m
2 go
4 - O. ro 7 Vj p t1. w , .a -pp w - C 6a
p X1 '7 ~y'p {p A~ ~ m C a c 0
0 CL K of
-C SOR
'COD
AA N ANA A~ 1 3~'.t
W 47 J 3 x~+ Itz a
9§ M ISM
O O $e O
0 (0 ct -x
p3 0
00
s y o
"
f
i gg
gSN~cav~ cb3 0~~~~
c~ro0 , 3-
om`t'6=2 08 U39 0 0 0 0 0
A
rod. Jco rncT gr 2 °a ro~ av_i~ 03 roo
~N Q tin of v ~ x Q. o77r mm' m ° 5 'Tpml Q'~ oroi a - Q, `n N
M~ Cy §oa WO aro ~ 03a
3i
IQ
y 7 O 70 76i 1 0~ 3$
3 0 onto
10 0'0. 3o9 a ro 03 o?^gog » CL
3.ro o » »F Y_~
= ro O 5' Ld) 0 x ~ j my g ' Q to ? » » _
3O0w v q 2L
3 Or-77~.$~ i a5cn a- 0 3
y
pm92 ~7i'x 09
j R9»a y ~ 0.a 0 . C 52 ~t4 ro o 0)C
ro Oro l cM DJ v~~»
ro3o
c o IS 3
-A - L4 a
3_RS~ 3 m I. i o~~ go' boa ;
oa°:3 W da
1:4 3 m o$ 3a
CD 0 iv a
0m@ 3 i''IR
I
f
l
~~0 Q a
mc~ i Na
~ma~ ~~-(8 Q
& 9 ~z I U
1 O
` all la u ro~
qE*
sa
gs •m
c .ono
. , laps.
5,00 E J
gli 11 3 $51
og m $
1 ~1
V '
w.rwc~ '1
S oaf 3n 0 rmm0 c
'i - v 9 & 9 7 of
w a H
-0 &
m
a ~ ~ s y
°a gm a Jo(0 yacaa
A 12 2 .5 03
36- 00 FL cd
_
3•,
09
M 9 a, Is
S 3 ~ 8 y a
CL IRE 6 0
mo
05.
.D N to a g N i 7. r N 26 ~hS 'D
lei R 1 35' COMB
CL 3 430 1A
a (09 0 q H . go
a
log ~ ~$8 f a:rL Or $
I
A
Ile
1146
m ifs.
sQ
1:# 1
s s m
g 4 3
M fit
al
J
j
1
5
M. mi
y
CITY
COUNCIL
a
I
I
O~0104, 0
0
~oou4c ~~ipV' 000
4
t
jr i
ClTYoi DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 78201 / TELEPHONE (817) 566.8307
Office of the City Manager
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: TEMPORARY CLOSING OF STREETS FOR UNIVERSITY OF
NORTH TEXAS EXTRAVAGANZA
E
DATE: October 2, 1990
i
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the Resolution Temporarily Closing
the following streets on October 18, 1990, from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00
p.m.:
1. Avenue E, from Eagle to W. Prairie;
2. Avenue D, from Maple to Highland;
3. W. Mulberry Street, from Avenue D to Avenue C;
Ir 4. W. Sycamore Street, from Avenue E to Avenue Ci
5. Edwards Street, from Avenue E to Avenue D;
6. Highland Street, from Avenue E to Avenue C;
7. Eagle Drive, from I-35 service road to Avenue C.
SUMMARY: i
Capt. Mike Amador, representing the University of North Texas, has
requested that the streets named above, be closed to through j
traffic from 6:00 P.M. to 10:00 p.m. for the UNT Extravaganza. The
main event will occur at Fouts Field and the streets are requested
to be closed for traffic control purposes. The UNT Police
Department will be manning each barricaded intersection to direct
traffic to the appropriate parking areas.
AS the parking lots are filled, the officers will remove the
barricades from the streets and transfer them to the parking lots
to close them. All residents and business customers will be
allowed to pass through the streets as well as these with the
appropriate parking designation and any emergency vehicles.
The signed petitions attached reflect the property owners affected
by this request. There are several properties which are not
i
4
~ ME
1
T
Lloyd V. Harrell
UNT Extravaganza
street Closing
page 2
represented on this petition. These are:
Brentwood Apartments 502 S. Avenue E
Apartments 1928 W. Sycamore
Residence 1916 W. Sycamore
Vacant house Kendolph and Eagle
Eagle Car Wash 1900 block of Eagle (no address
or phone number found)
Capt. Amador is waking an effort to contact these property owners
prior to the City Council meeting and will be available to answer
questions at the October 2 meeting.
The City of Denton Police and Fire Departments have been contacted
and concur with this request. Please advise if T can provide
further information.
I RESPE FULLY 5USM5TTED~
V P ~
Lloyd V. Harrell
City Manager
Prepared by.,
Catharine E. Tuck
Administrative Assistant
i
E I
f
1
I r
t
I
i
A
F
r• REQUEST FOR STREET CLOSURE
s
r
Organization requesting street closure
University of North Texas Police Department
Contact Person: Capt. Mike Amador
Address: 902 Ave E., Denton, Tx 76201
Phone Number: (817) 565-3012
Street To Be Closed: Ave. E from 5400-5800 blocks
Date and Time To Be Closed: Thursday, October 18; 6:00pm-10:00pm
Intersecting Streets: W. Prairie, Highland, Eagle
Reason For Closure: Traffic Control for University Extravaganza j
f
Please complete the bottom portion of this form. ALL residents
and/or businesses affected by the street closure MUST be
contacted and sign below with an indication of being in favor
or in opposition to the street closure. 3
g~
NAME AUTHORIZED
or BUSINESS S14396TURE _-FAVORjoppon
1 Texas Pick-Up
2 The UNiversity of North Texas owns the remaining affected property.
3.
4.
~ 5.
9.
10.
2983C/5
i
I '
,4
I
A
i
e ~I
YI
i
REQUEST FOR STREET CLOSURE
Organization requesting street closure
University of North Texas Police Department
I Contact Person: Capt. Mike Amador
Address: P n. Box 13467, NT Station, 76203
Phone Number: (817) 565-3012
Street To Be Closed: S.600-s.700 Ave. D
Date and Time To Be Closed: Thursday, Oc'ober 18, 1990; 6pm-10pm
Intersecting Streets: Maple, Highland
i '
Reason For Closure: Traffic Control for University Extravaganza
I
Please complete the bottom portion of this forme residents
and/oc businesses affected by the street closure BUST be
contacted and sign below with an indication of being in favor
I or in opposition to the street closure. v
1 NUM AUTHORIZED i
OF BUSINESS SIGNATURErAVOR/OPPOSE
i
The University of North Texas owns all of the affected property.
i 2.
` 3.
4.
r 7. ~
8.
i
9.
10. a
E
i 2963C/S
REQUEST FOR STREET CLOSURE
Organization requesting street closure
s" University of North Texas Police Department
Contact Person: Capt. Mike Amador
Address: P.O. Box 13467, NT Station, Denton, TX 76203
Phone Number: (817) 565-3012
Street To Be Closed: W1700-W1800 West Mulberry
Date and Time To Be Closed: Thursday, October 19, 1990; 6pm-10pm
intersecting Streets:-Ave-.-D. Ave. C
Reason For Closure:_ _ Traffic control for University Extravaganza
Please complete the bottom portion of this form. residents 7
and/or businesses affacted by the street closure MUST be
contacted and sign below with an indication of being in favor
or in opposition to the street closure.
NUM AUTHORIZED
OF BUSINESS tit
GN
W, fV1 jl be rr n0►~tJ
3. 1 r Y, jq
j 4._ the Utniversity of North Texas owns the remaining
affeced property.
5.
6.
7
S.
9.
's
10.
2993C/5
i
71
i
REQUEST FOR STREET CLOSURE
Organization requesting street closure
University of North TExas•Police Department
Contact Person: Capt. Mike Amador
Address: P.O. BOX 13467, NT Station, Denton, TX 76203
Phone Number: (817) 565-3012
W1700-W2000 West Sycamore
Street To Be Closed:
Date and Time To Be Closed:Thursday, October 18, 1990; 6pm-10pm
intersecting streets: Ave. E, Ave, D, Ave. C
41
I
Traffic control for University Extravaganza
Reason For Closure:
cloahLL reessrents
Please complete the bottom portion toe his form
and/cc businesses affected by street re be
# contacted a on n bolo with an indication of being in favor
! to the street Closure
or in ti
i
NAME AUTHORIZED
01F BUSINESS slow
1' ~r affected property
2. T e University of North Texas owns the rercaining
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. 1
9.
9.
10.
2993C/5
t
J~I
F
I, ~n
REQUEST FOR STREET CLOSURE
r ~
r
organization requesting street closure
University of North Texas-Police Department
Contact Person: Capt. Mike Amador
Address:--P.O. Box 13467, NT Station, Denton, TX 76203
r
Phone Number: (817) 565-3012
srb Street To Be Closed: W1900-W2000 Edwards
Date and Time To Be Closed. Thursday, October 18, 1990; 6pm-10pm
Intersecting Streets: Ave. E. Ave. D r
Reason For Closure: Traffic Control for University Extravaganza
Please complete the bottom portion c', this form. ALL residents
and/or businesses affected by the street closure MUST be
contacted and sign below with an indication of being in favor
or in opposition to the street closure.
NAME AUTHORIZED
or BUSINESS SIGNATURE FAVOR/OPPOSE
1, The UNiversity of North TeAas owns all of the affected peoperty.
3.
q
4.
5.
0.
10.
2963C/5
i
i
i
r
+r
REQUEST FOR STREET CLOSURE
t
P
Organization requesting street closure
University of North Texas I3olice Deoattment
Contact Person: Capt. Mike Amador
Address: P.O. Box 13467, NT Station, Denton, TX 76203
Phone Number: (817) 565-3012
i.
" SC[eot To Be Closed: W1700-W2000 kiighland
Date and Time To Be Clued Thursday, October 18, 1990; 6pm-10pm
Intersecting streets; Ave. E, Ave. D, Ave. c
Reason For Closure: Traffic control for University Extravaganza
Please complete the bottom portion of this form. U residents
and/or businesses affected by the street closure MUST be
contacted and sign below with an indication of being in favor
or in opposition to the street closure.
i
NAIL AUTHORIZED
OF BUSINESS SIGNATURE FAVOR/OPPOSE M
1, The University of North Texas owns all of the affected property.
1 J 2.
it 3.
5.
7.
;
l 9
L
f i
} 10.
2993C/s
I
1
RSOUEST FOR STREET CL0 -01
s Organization requesting street closure
University of North Texas Police Department
Capt. Mike Amador
Contact Person'
Address: P.O. Sox 13967, NT Station, Denton, TX 76203
Phone Number: (817) 565-3012
W1700-W2300 Eagle _
Street To Be Closed:
u Thursday, October 18, 1990; 6pm-10pm
Date and Time To Be Closed:
I-35 Service Road, Ave. E, Ave. D, Ave. C
Intersectinq Streets:
Kendolph
r
xtravag
Rea,ton Yoc Closute:Traffic Control £or University Eanza
,r
Please complete tt+e bottom portion of this form. BLIP residfnts y
and/or businesses affected by the street closure Md be
ocaincopposition to the below streat closucelcatioa of being in favor
NAM AUTHORIZED
O! BUSipESa SIGNA~'t * FAVOR//OPPOSE
.
~J
~ r•
3. V~
T
4. too
s /CI 3/ r'
6, The University t Notth_Texas owns the remaining affected property.'
I 7. '
I
l 8.
9.
10.
2983C/S ,
i i
k
h
I
~MS O4Xr'1-~
~Ar> t4r:v4 , y
i
2981L
o-
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION TEMPORARILY CLOSING PORTIONS OF AVENUE E, AVENUE D,
WEST MULBERRY STREET, WEST SYCAMORE STREET, EDWARDS STREET, HIGH-
LAND STREET, AND EAGLE DRIVE ON OCTOBER 18, 1990; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Eric Jackson, representing the University of North
Texas, is requesting that the following portions of the following I
named streets be temporarily closed to public vehicular traffic 1
between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. on October 18, 1990,
for the purpose of having an Extravaganza:
k
1. Avenue E, from its intersection with Eagle Drive to its
intersection with West Prairie Street;
r
2. Avenue D, from its intersection with Maple Street to its
intersection with Highland;
3. West Mulberry Street, from its intersection with Avenue D
to its intersection with Avenue C;
4. West Sycamore Street from its intersection with Avenue E g ?
to its intersection with Avenue C; i
5. Edwards Street, from its intersection with Avenue E to its
intersection with Avenue D;
6. Highland Street,from its intersection with Avenue E to its
intersection with Avenue C; I
7. Eagle Drive, from its intersection with the I-33 service
road to its intersection with Avenue C, public streets within
the corporate limits of tha City of Denton, Texas, and
WHEREAS, Eric Jackson, representing the University of North
Texas, has assured the City that the property owners in this area
~
have agreed to the temporary closing of this road; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES:
SECTION I. That the following portions of the following named
public st`ree[a within the corporate limits be temporarily cloned
to ppublic vehicular traffic between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and
10:00 p.m. on October 18, 1990:
1. Avenue E, from its intersection with Eagle Drive to its
intersection with West Prairie Street;
2. Avenue D, from its intersection with Maple Street to its
intersection with Highland Street;
i
I
r
~~rn
lAAlYR
}
3. West Mulberry Street from its intersection with Avenue D
to its intersection with Avenue C;
4. West Sycamore Street, from its intersection with Avenue E
to its intersection with Avenue C;
I
5. Edwards Street, from its intersection with Avenue E to its
intersection with Avenue D;
b. Highland Street, from its intersection with Avenue E to
ita intersection with Avenue C; and
7. Eagle Drive, from its intersection with the I-35 service
road to its intersection with Avenue C.
SECTION II. That the City Manager is hereby directed to direct
the appropriate city staff to work with the police department and
the University of North Texas to erect barricades at each of the
intersections designated in Section I hereof at 6:00 p.me and to
ha-.-4 the same removed at 10:00 p.m. on said date.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990.
I
BOB CASTLEDERRYO MAYOR
}
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BY:
i
PAGE 2
1
`
Lo,ESCENT
-~~-j CAPLION Z ii
j
f ~ O ~ II
F,:... L I `I
W , a y Is . If l3 LiNOfN 17
1 ~ L__SJ ~3-_.-~ PAUMANOLE 1
A 1 --'---t LLr IfL~
e f ~V ELAN •
SVIA
SCR'PTURE a r~ gi 77 J~!
I L~JL~ a RIPTyRf ,T • ~ W
s
is o i
o I
I W
I I i, ~ ~ k I GAEOO
y n w OaK• 75 7A l"77 SIB- w. 0 9 Lf~~l--l----~L~~~L. ~fl 1•~i n I!► L~~ o
26
`J I
w, HICKORY L
W _
ID
CID
NARLOTT W+I Q
1 Z . S ST-AMORE °
d e YAP04 , - - "f
1 OuiEE`1 ,lo
1 '11 3 J NTH 1 . _ • • ; T T
{ 1
Ir ~L~l1 LPRA 1£ li J ,a
f ~26 75 21 77 ZI 1 ~ ~i
L iP4IR f
o Q, s
FOUTS _K s I~ y Ir
Flo
FIELD I 4N
AGL£ Q ~I
11\ 11 . Ili $f +•---JL a j EE-AGL
` \ 1 A , 6 1 II 17 17 p r
1 • 4 S L~ 'ewt $ $
MAACK I
tt B
ow Q 9
WII J l.~.J
999 4 LLL--JJJ.J_ ry !1 LJ 1 1
W ~I I n~ ~ CREE~EE~
y ~ r o NCNLA +rj`~ ~ N-APAIN ~t WPPID00 1 a. • I~\F
• / r 1 It p •ESTPaGE I 17 Q 16 -15
II 13
OAKM000^
1
i
l )
pi{{ /111
I ~.a
7
1: m:
r
r
Mali-
IT:
CITY
COUNCIL;
-MIMMMM:
~ ova F , , J
171
e ,
I ~
I ~4pp GC'
M: 1-
1
won
i
`Q(Q r
.M tRt'
i
~r raga qe~~ i
` DATE; 10/02/90
r o
I
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and members of the city council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment of Swimming Pool Fencing Requirements
RECOMMENDATION:
Building Code Board recorunends adoption.
SUMMARY:
I` Proposed amendment adds gate and Goor latching requirements which are not
ordinance
' presently included in our ordinance
existing swimming pool, spa and
except for gaps in the enclosure around the pool.
BACEGROUND:
Dr. Daniel L. Levin, Medical Director Pediatric Intensive Care Unit at
children's Medical Center in Dallas requested that the city review its
swimming pool fencing ordinance and amend it if necessary in an attempt to
reduce the number of injuries and drownings of small children.
i i
i
Council review the ordinance on August 29, 1990. t;
Between that meeting and the Council meeting of September 18th, an issue was y
raised concerning the requirement in the draft ordinance to retrofit pool i
enclosures if gaps in the enclosures were larger than four inches.
The Building Code Board met onSeptember 20# 1990 to consider this issue, it
recommends 'grandfathering' pool which are six inches and
am"ller, Six inches was the previous Uniform Building Code standard,
The revised ordinance with those changes is attached.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED-
Swimming pool, spa, and hot tub owners }
FISCAL IMPACTt p
N/A
ly u itte t
4eectfu
d V Harrell
City Manager
r
Appr
i
Fran Aobbina AICP
Executive Direct r
Planning and Development
0023S
R
ATTACHMENT 1
r
6.ST1 09"Oll cool d.ITT
S1SC. 106.
i
Section 30L Fnc mg.
All print* swhnmiMg pods shall be bowed in a mane
to reasonably deter MW tc aaeh pod bona Adjdaiog or
i7" a (6) (00 It bd*ht bm I o lawi and ompktthu
*
.MOWN the n►immtag P" Aa a
a hove or seowNr, WOW my be W
sedown If at least fi" (6) tact in blow ~
No fnN er emdoolue sbMdMrs may be wed it aWr.
d$PP" or doggerad r to brits oft"& or wM& doe
not rwom * ddw d mM*& by &a m Mdw Mg t47
(1!).
All baaiag must be bvt&IW before tho swimming pool }
b", a baaard or as attraeo" nulaaaae, and is &U cu" a
bdoe mopwtiea at the swbuni* pow
date Pod was completed prior coine elfeetlre
at thig
`W hsn oW ka the owwr, tenant or mamager tbead
thirtY (30) dap from aneh dfeettss data to
COMA 44 the foodag re9nhrd br tl& SWUM (Ord No. J
71-60, Pt. 1, 104M.71)
II
CURRENT ORDINANCE PASSED IN 1971
h
~ I
rt
1
f
.,.way
I
Y
n .
I
I
I
ORDINANCE NO.
I
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5-176 Of CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE V
j (BUILDING CODE) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTON
RELATING TO FENCING AND GATE REQUIREMENTS FOR SWIMMING POOLS;
,i PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $500.00 FOR 4
VIOLATIONS THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUS21 PROVIDING
A REPEALING CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
I
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
I
SECTION i, That Sec. 305 of Section 5-176 of Article V,
Chapter 5 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, Texas is
hereby amended to read as follows: r
i
Section 5-176. Deletions and Anenduents.
A new Section 305 is added to said code which shall hereafter
read as follows:
Sao. 305. Enclosure.
f
9
(a) Ep010/Vre.
(1) Every owner, lessee, tenant or other person
in possession of land upon which is situated
a swimming pool, spa or hot tub shall at all
times maintain upon the tract, lot or promis-
es on which the swimming pool, spa or hot tub
is located a fence, wall, barrier or other
enclosure that completely surrounds the ;
swimming pool, spa, or hot tub.
I
(2) The height of the enclosure shall be not less 1
than sixty (60) inches in height measured f
from the adjacent exterior grade level.
(3) The enclosure shall have no openings, holes
or gaps large enough for a sphere four (4)
inches in diameter to pass through.
(b) Gates. Any gate opening directly into a swimming
pool, spa or hot tub enclosure shall be not less than
forty-eight (48) inches in height when measured from
III the adjacent exterior grade level and shall be r
equipped with self-closing and self-latching devices
designed to keep, and capable of keeping such gate
securely closed at all times when not in actual use.
The latching device, when located on the pool, spa or
hot tub side of the gate, shall be attached not less
` r
I
f
3 ,
r.
)s` Y
«i
7
than forty (40) inches above grade when measured from
the adjacent exterior grade level. If provided on the
non-pool, (exterior) side of the gate, the latching
device shall be a minimum of fifty-four (54) inches
above adjacent exterior grade.
(c) Moors. A door in an exterior wall of a dwelling unit
which allows direct access to a swimming pool, spa or
hot tub shall have a latching device installed on the
interior side of -.he door which does not require the
use of a key in order to exit the dwelling unit. when
more than one (1) latching device is provided, at .i
least one (1) such device shall be attached forty (40)
to forty-eight (48) inches above floor level. When a
single latching device is provided, it shall be
attached not less than forty (40) nor more than
forty-eight (48) inches above floor level.
i
An accessory building which forms part of the swimming
pool, spa or hot tub enclosure may have doors opening
on either the swimming pool, spa or hot tub side or
the non-pool, spa or hot tub aide, but not on both
sides.
(d) New Installations The owner of property on which a
private or semipublic swimming pool, spa or hot tub is
built after the effective date of this ordinance shall
comply with the provisions of this section before the
swimming pool, spa or hot tub becomes an attractive
nuisance and in all cases before filling the swimming
pool, spa or hot tub with water.
(e) Existing swiping pool, spa or Not Tub Enolosures.
(1) Each owner of an existing private or semi- p
public swimming pool, spa or hot tug having a 1
depth twenty-four (24) inches or more at any
point shall comply with section (a) hereof on
or before the 30th day of April, 1991; pro-
vided however, that each owner of a pool, spa
or hot tub shall not be required to comply
with See. 305(a)(3) if the enclosure sur-
rounding the pool has openings, gaps or holes
of such a size that a sphere six (b) inches
in diameter will not pass through.
(2) Each owner of a private or semipublic swim-
ming pool, spa or hot tub enclosure shall
comply with the provisions of subsection (b)
hereof on or before the 30th day of April,
1991 or whenever an addition, remodeling or
repair made to any structure ou the same
PAGE 2
1
-N 71
i
A'
- E
r
r
e
tract, lot or premises exceeds a valuation of
ten thousand dollars ($10,000), whichever
occurs first.
SECTION Ii. 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 III. That if any section, subsection, paragraph,
sentence, clause phase or word in this ordinance, or application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by any court
of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of thin 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 the repeal of any ordinance or any portion
thereof by the preceding sections shall not affect or impair any
act done or right vested or accrued or any proceeding, suit or i
prosecution had or commenced in any cause before such repeal shall
take effect) but every such act done, or right vested or accrued,
or proceedings, suit or prosecution had or commenced shall remain
in full force and effect to all intents or purposes as if such
ordinance or part thereof so repealed had remained in force.
SECTION 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
j date of its passage.
1 f
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1990.
t
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
i
BY:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
E ~
BY:
PAGE 3
i
i
~r
i
ATTACHMENT 2
MINUTES
Building Code Board
august 2, 1990
Present: Isabel Miller, Wayne Allen, Greg Muirhead, Ed ,
Owens, Jackie Doyle-Building Official
Absent: Cliff Reding
k
xzr
1. Greg Muirhead was administered the oath of office by }
Betty Williams of the City Manager's Office.
II. Allen moved that the minutes of June 1, 1990 be approved a 1
as written with the exception that the third paragraph i 1
of item IV be amended to read as follows: Owens felt
that the proposed amendments were acceptable with the
exception that the four (4) inch asphalt requirement be
changed to five (S) inches on six (6) inches of lime
subgrade. Owens seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously. 4 3
III. The Board continued its discussion of the City's i {
parking lot paving requirements. Allen said that he had
talked with Mr. Hooper of Hooper and Associates, a soil
engineerin-; firm, regarding (Mr. Hooper's prior
! statements to the Board) regarding whether four (4) or
i five (S) inches of asphalt on six (6) inches of lime
stabilized subgrade was adequate. Allen said that Mr.
Hooper said that the four (4) inches of asphalt on six
(6) inches of lime stabilized subgrade was adequate J
because the lime provides some strength. The Board
agreed that four (4) inches of asphalt on six (6) inches
of lime stabilizsd rubgrada was adequate.
The Board agreed that their prior recommendation cor.cocning
approval of parking lot paving plans drawn by an engineer
registered by the State of Texas should not change. The j
proposed ordinance aalendment previously read as follows:
In lieu of the above specifications, a parking lot may be
constructed in accordance wikh the design male by an engines
registered by the State of S item if the design is approved by
the City Sngineer.
The Board recowmends that the above sentence be changed to read
as follows: In lieu of the above specifications, a parking lot {
may be constructed in accordance with design made by an
engineer registered by the State of Texas and submitted to the
City for review.
00235 2-1
9 1
p.. .i
i
11 I
.
i
9
Building Code Board Minutes
August 2, 1990
Page Two
)
i
The Board feels their propusal will still give the City the
authority to review and approve parking lot paving designs.
The Board also felt that their suggested change might lessen
the City Engineer's liability if a failure were to occur on a
job which the City Engineer may have suggested alternate design
or construction methods.
~y* The Board agreed that a statement in the ordinance which reads
as follows would be helpful: Leveling sand when used under
parking lot pavement may act as a conduit for water, and
therefore is not recommended.
The Board also believes that 60 16 gauge welded wire fabric
should be added as a form of concrete reinforcement.
The Bor.rd felt that the number of heavy truck loads on a
parking lot each week should be ten before requiring thicker
concrete or asphalt construction. The Board feels that whil
concrete or asphalt fatigue factors might be appropriate to
street or highways, they probably are not that important fo
parking lots.
t
Doyle said that he would talk to Jerry Clark, City Engineer,
about the proposed changes.
i
The Board reviewed proposed swimming pool, hot tub and spa
enclosure requirements and agreed that the proposed ordinance
amendmint should read as follows:
Sec. 305 Enclosure
(a) Enclosure. Every owner, purchaser ender contract,
lessee, tenant it other' person in possession of j
land within the corporate limits of the City of
Denton upon which is situated a swimming pool, spa i
or hot tub shall at all times maintain upon the 1
tract, lot or premises on which the swimming pool,
spa or hot tub is located a fence, wall or barrier
that, completely surrounds the swimming pool, spa,
hot tub, tract, lot or premises. The height of
k the enclosure shall be not less than sixty (60)
inches in height measured from the adjacent
exterior grade level with no openings, holec or
gaps large enough for a sphere four (4) inches in
diameter to pass through.
0023S 2-2
RNA
Building Code Hoard Minutes
1 August 2, 1990
j pr.ge Three
t (b) Gates. The height of all gates opening directly
into a swimming pool, spa or hot tub enclosure
shall be not less than forty-eight (48) inches in
height when measured from the adjacent exterior
grade level and shall be equipped with
self-closing and self-latching devices designed to
keep, and capable of keeping such gates securely
closed at all times when not in actual use. The
latching device when located on the pool, spa or
hot tub side of the gate shall be attached not
less than forty (40) inches above grade when
measured from the adjacent exterior grade level
where the latching device is not readily
accessible to small children from outside the
enclosure. A latching device if provided on
the non-pool, (exterior) side of the gate shall be
a minimum of fifty-four (54) inches above adjacent
exterior grade.
(c) Doors. A door in an exterior wail of a dwelling
unit which allows direct access to a swimming
pooh spa or hot tub shall have a latching device"-
installed on the interior side of the door which
does not require the use of a key in order to exit
the dwelling unit. When more than one (1) s
latching device is provided, at least one (1) such f
device shall be attached forty (40) to forty-eight
(48) inches above floor level, when a single
latching device is provided, it shall be attached s
forty (40) to forty-eight (48) inches above floor ;
level. ?
An accessory building which forms part of the
swimming pool, spa or hot tub enclosure may have
doors opening on either the swimming pool, spa or
hot tub side or the non-pool side, but not on both '
sides.
(d3 NOW Installation, The owner of property on which
a private or semipublic swimming Pool, spa or hot
tub is built after the effective date of this
ordinance shall be responsible for assuring
compliance with the provisions of this section
before the swimming pool, spa or hot tub becomes
an attractive nuisance and in all cases before
filling the swimming pool# spa or hot tub with
water,
2-3
00233
J 11
it
4
Building Code Board Minutes
r
August 2, 1990
page your
fe) (1) The owners of existing private and semipublic
swimming pools, spas or hot tubs having a
depth of twenty-lour (24) inches or more at
any point shall comply with section (1)
hereof on or before the 30th day of April,
1991.
(2) The owners of all private and semipublic
swimming pool, spa or hot tub enclosures
shall comply with the provisions of
subsection (b) hereof on or before thirtieth
day of April, 3991 or whenever an addition,
remodeling or repair made to any structure on
the same tract, lot or premises exceeds a
valuation of ton thousand dollars (#10,000),
whichever occurs first.
i
Meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m.
EE~
k
i
a
t
t
2-4 f
00235
3
1
1 I
I
t
I
1 n,K e,. 111111 1
I
i
0/11/66
ORDIt1AltCt i;+o. 19937
-
1
An ordinance amending Section 6104, Ofencing of Swimming
Pools,' of CHA6'1 O !S, 'DALLAS BUILDING CODR,' of the Dallas
city code, as amended; increasing the minimum height for fences
succcuo4ing swimming pools; requiring self-closing and
I
sal!-latching devices on all gates and doers that open directly
into a swimming pool enclosure, except on those that access
certain nonhabitable buildings; providing grandfather
provisions for existing installations; providing a penalty not .
to exceed $20000; providing a s w aq clause; providing 6
severability clause; and providing an effective date. `
6= IT ORDAII;RD BY THE CITY COMM Or TMR CITY Of DALLAS:
SRCTLON 1. That Section 4204s 'fencing of Swimming pools,'
~ t
of Subthaptec 430 'rewing,' of CMAPM', S!, •DUW WILDING
COOR►' of the Dallas City Code, as sanded, is amended to read
as follows:
•rencing of SwimisiM Pools
Sao. 65046 (a) ranee Resulted. Rvery owner, purchaser
under contract$ losses, tenant. Ti-censee of other person in
possession of laid within the corporate limtiit$ of the
rMOIt ty of Dallas =Sin is situated a swimming pool
shall at .all times maintain upon the tract, lot Or promises on
which the swimming pool is located a fence, well or barrier
that completely surrlundS the swimming 6010 tract, lot or
premises. The fence, wall cc barrier shad be not less than
ii(= t/:1 feet in height with no oponings, holes or gaps
Iarge(!1 dt iltlld iNf~Nid
1
2-5
I
J i
A
. w n 1 M
n w
V It y
i k 2t4arylat -Maintained n m aacc* with
411 other provisions at this codet
(b) Oates and Doors: AL Mates and doors opening
directly into w jftq_ 0114) enclosure sltall be
i equipped with sale-Closing art sell-latching devices designed
to keep, and capable of keeping, such doors or gates ,%*cutely
closed at all times when not in actual use. The Iatchinq
device 22 A 9112 shall be attached w
xA art pit latching v ot Sai V
cc* Me c ,
v door Mall
AM Am I ~m
r v x
v v
wh V loco
V Popl;_*;P PP lit 00411l u V!f wid widao Add mom in mg di
0610 01 fool/ Mflood fool too r~tr>rt~~ 444141401 1444 dii< w 41 444100").
ME top: $*If - -
reguirs; op Gatos of w ocov a tAe on r •ce~~s_ n
non op tab a storage oc equipment pull dines, roo'au, U
enelosoc* .
w Pik 29A& P.Ic4y GAS
Y y
1
I- i
r Y V
water section Mort placiod w
I
E w w
y -
v
nevic the an-
w
•
cot
SECTION 2. That a Ncsoa violating a provision of this
,
ordinance, upon conviction, is punishable by a fine not to
exceed 12,000.
SECTION 2. That CIIAM A S2, 'DALLAS WILLING CODE,' of the
Dallas City Code, as amended, shall remain in full locce and
2
2-6
.f
17y3/ ~..i*v
Watt, Sava and escaPt as aiaended by this Ordinance.
5=1011 1. That the terms and Provisions of this ordinance
ace severable and are governed by Section 1.4 of CHA MR 1 of
the Dallas City Code, as siainded.
SECTION 5, That this ordinance shall take effect June
3lsi~
APPROVED As TO TORN:
Amrsuz WJKTO City Attorney
P
f
Ass Snt XtYAtocner ~ j
Passed AN 2 7 10
' 1ofsJ
i
i
i
E
7 i
2-7
i
Z . 7
4
i
1■■■cl Fr ap, 411
k ti
2
ORDINANCE NO. 1244
3
t AN ORDINANCE Axwoo Na SECTION s-S Or THE HURST CODE OF
4 ORDINANCESt AMENDING THE REQULATIONS TOR POOL ENCLOSURE111
REQUIRING SELF-C1rOSING AND SELF-LATCHING DEVICES ON GATZS
y pROVIDING ACCESS TO SMIl042NG POOLSI PROVIDING FOR EXISTI.vG
INSTALLATIbNS TO 1% WWUGHT INTO COKFLIJNCi WITHIN TWENTY-rOQR
A KONTHSA PROVIDING EXCEPTIONSA PROVIDING A PENALTY AND AMMORIZING
PUBLICATION.
Z WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the provisions hereinafter
enacted further the safety and general welfare of those
g 1 within its corporate limitsA NOM, TMMYQRZ,
A HE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HVRST, TZXASI
Sec. 1. THAT Section 3-S of the Hurst'Code of Ordinances be
10
amended to read as follower
11 "Section S-S. ?oncinq of Swimming Pools.
12 (a) ,~R11Cl..>'~i.~d• Every owner, lessee, tenant,
licenses or other person in possession of land withia
the corporate limits of the City of all times ret upon which as
13 situated a swimaLnq pool Mall fence, wall or barrier that completely surrounds the
{ 14 swiamiag pool. The fence, wall or barrier shall be not
less than lour (4) feet in height with no openings,
holes or gaps large enough for a sphere lour (4) inches
15 in diameter to pass through. A singla family, duplex or
accessory building may be used as a part of such
i 16 enclosure, provided that all -otiUJOA . outcome* into the
swimming Poo: area or court are equipped with gates as
17 described in this section.
(b) g". All gates opening directly into a swimming
lA I pool enclosure shall be equipped with self-closing and
devices designed to keep, and capable of
eel! latching
18 ~ ksopLngi gates securely olased at all tiger when`isl-
in actual uss. The gate handle must be at least
20 j forty (40) inches above grade. Self-closing and self-
latebirg devices are not required on gates which provide
21 access into buildings. ;
(a) stallattoffie A person %ho, on or alter March '
22 310 19S90 obtains a permit to install a swimming pool is
responsible for assuring compliance with the revisions
23 of this section before order is placed an the swimming `
} pool.
24 1~
I
25
1
26 2-R
r ~ J
I
1t
~ Fil
3 ATTSSTI
s
A1yoo . erInq
S City secretary
8 Appr s to fora and legalityt j
? j
Oagf . # r•
a City Attorney ti
9
10 }
11 e
12
13
14
18
to
\ 19
ZO i
.i
21
i
ZZ
23 j
24 i
ZS = r
26 ' 2-9 4
i
tar`
I
1
Il.f y'I•
I +
yt
9
ORDINANCE ,-,9 Ci
AN ORDiMNCE Of T'NI CITY Of DlEATOS, lE1W REpOIRIIq tENCT110 OF 007DOOR
POOLS, MY TOSS, SPAS, SELF CLO12104 Ally SELF-LAICSINO DEVICES 00 OATIS,
►ROVTDINO ACCESS " SYMI110 POOLS NOT TOMS, SPAS, PROVIDtNO Pat QISTINO
' t"TALIATIONE TO St IRMIff INTO COMIAKS IT JAMARY 1, 1111, PROVIDING
FOR A PENALTY, 39"BASILITT, AND 1FMIVI CATS RRIOI.
)
WMIAS, the Ctt1 Council fends that the ptevlsions hatoin4ft0f onalttA further
the saf41y sod pedrst welfare of thaw With La its corporate Usitat NOV. TWUM",
IS IT ORDAINID IT TER City COONCIL OF TIE CITY OF OICATR, TnAS,
SECTION I. Deflattlon.
1. The ten `Sviainl peel". ed used hotels shall sees an artificial or $=I-
artiftalal tecepteeU or container desllefd to csetain fluid, Mahar actualq
Contacted: a fluid of net, uhlah if lithef IMNWarilf of PIMMOatly located
outdoors and it mood or intended to be mood for "Ito, seat-pcblte, or private
hudaa we Involving subversion of all or part of the body, ahothot of net a too
is paid for such use. Such use my Include, but is net limited to sainSaS, Wedius,
144kial, floating at rectution&% bathing by amp number of persona. These tons de
net apply to a raagt"le or container two% is located outdo-" led to net used of
Wended to be used for publta, erg-public or private WAga use tavelviag submersion
of all of part of the body, such as fountains and nfleetioa pools, This tots lmalu&
hot tubs sad sped.
SECTION 2. Applications,
1. The egutr4van;• of this Ordinaaas shall be applicable to all omtdoev sWismint
1 Pools which have a depth capacity of eisntea taches (lo") or safe of fluid at any
I point, uhotMr actually contatalal fluid or empty.
pICtION 7. Rguteesaner.
1. Nett o"41`0 141404, t""t, 11440444 of ether parses in possess 121111 LMIC24
of Ln rlth a the~aeryetate limits of the city of Decatur up" Which is situated a r
swimming pall shall at all time maintain a famos, well, at banter that completely
iurrounds the swimming peat. The feel*, wait of bafrter shell be not loge than
four (U feet is betght with no apaings, beta at gap Jorge eeogp few a ghan
four (e) lnchas in diameter is lead threush, A single twill, duplex of alealaary 4
building may be used as a pact of such 4salosete, provided that all aatslda gatvaseet }
into the f
oatmmias pact ate of level on etgipped atth pia as d satibed Is ibis
scants.
2 2Ltgg All pHs "Les directly tale a tWtmmlag pool 4salosun shall be *quill,
Withi4Cf-elaltaa led salt-latoktg devices duet m" to temp, W aspate of kalpinl,
shah gets seevesiy eland at sit times able sot to actual ale. The Rate handle out
be at teat tent (40) Lambed sbe" slide. Self aledtas led self-titebl" devioor sr,
not ntutred n gates which provide eeeas tale buildtdss.
1
1. ~ A pats" Who, as Of after gulp 1, 1110, obtolms a permit to
instill a oW as past to ngnmsthle for alsewtng eamplis a With We pwevHle"
of this Ordla"44,
4. Castrasta" later$ the peel to filled With water, the saiswins j
Feel eoetfwta is ealFoos f d feel
A. Imeurieg that the tealelsselasuwe is acmplas.
3. Rosaries that all required Rats latches bad allt-oleowne an LA plead and
epnting.
C. A tisal Lnspeattes shalt be Maid" tram the city of Deedta prior to
this setnet ado of the ovimmiaa past.
f. hg"sl jutallatis" All Names aid total aremsd Miami as Pools Utick Ieafglly
esisl~Fit-er to July 1110 shall be eerie to fully amply With tha pavlete" at
this Miasmas bete" Jemmaty 1, M.
Ism" 4. Nedlty.
Ay Persons, fin at aerpermtiev vielattel a pfevista of this Ofdidrloo shall be deem
guilty of m misd41Ldemoe and ups final basvtatta that**( tided to an cwt net Loa
than 041 Dollar (11.00) net am thad led suedfod Dollard (6200.00). Iseh day of
Soft-eae*lisaad shall aautitut4 a separate violatta. My vtetatiod at this OMta"a
is A Class "C" misdmmdseee u set out is the Tenn P4eal Code.
2-l0
L
01
I
R
lgDTtOD devoeabillty.
In the want of my provision a9 this Ordtnuwo or the application thereof to key
parson or atraurtaaese being held Invalid, such invalidity shall not aftest
other provtalona or applications of the Ordinance which can be given Offset vithaut
the !nvslLd provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this
Ordln►nos are declared to be uvetable.
3WTl0/ G. affective Dots.
This Ordinaaes shall beeom sffeettve July 9, 1990, pandLng publication of duertptive
caption and penalty olauae to oeuspaper at gamest circulation to Decatur, Tues.
lAg70 ADD ADORg9 gT 1'Sg CTTT 00011CIL OF TQ CITT Of DgCATOg, T9TAg,
TBIS !A OAT OF 1590. i
e
yen ~
9
F
ATrUTt f
City Eearetaey
Af9t017D U TO r M ADO LM "Ms
I ~
i
i I
hor e?
~ j
1
i
2-11
ri
FIKtn I
1
y
r,
I~ MINUTES
Building Code Board
` September 20, 1990
Present: Wayne Allen, Greg Muirhead, Ed Cwens, Cliff '
Reding
ffical, Debra
Staff Present: Jackie Doyle, Building Attorney
,Absent: Isabel Miller I
I~
I, Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney was present and
discussed the Building Code Board's duties and legal
i4 responsibilities. Wayne Allen asked whether or not a
board member could represent a client at a board
meeting when the client was seeking a variance,
smnot all iquantities conflict ijanitorial
Ed Owens nterest for asked himhtohsell or
' i
supplies to the City.
Cliff Reding asked if he could get inDtrouble f said
bidding on signs for the City.
that there was no problem with board members bidding on
City jobs. However, if a member is awarded a contract,
he must resign from the board.
i
Allen said that the awarding of contractsoFto board
f boards.
members could be a way of getting people
Mrs. Drayovitch told board members that they should not
violate the conflict of interest law if they know it is
a conflict of interest.
Mrs. Drayovitch indicated that there were items related
to the City Charter which the Council had been looking +
at and that the conflict of interest portion should
+ also be reviewed. { +
I 3i
i
00265
i
` I
1
4 1
II
..,rryae~
A~.
MINUTES
Building Code Board
September 20, 1990
Page Two
Wayne Allen asked about the law relating to the
granting of variances from the building and fire
codes. Doyle read Section 5-14(A)(2))c) of the Code of
Ordinances which permits the board to grant variances
to any proovision of Chapter Five, other thAn Article
IV, minimum housing and building standards, subject to
+x appropriate conditions and safeguards, and after a
determination by the board that a hardship exists which
would be cured by the particular variance sought. At
least four votes in favor of granting a variance is
required.
Allen asked if membership on the board dropped to less ti
than four could a variance be grante9. A definite
answer was not provided.
II. Reding moved and Owens seconded a motion to approve the
minutes of August 23, 1990 as written. Motion carried
unanimously. a
A
III. Agenda item III concerned the election of board
officers. Reding nominated and Muirhead seconded the
nomination of Wayne Allen as Chairman. There were no
other nominations. Allen was unanimously elected. a
Allen nominated and Owens seconded the nomination of
Cliff Reding as Vice Chairman. There were no other t
nominations. Reding was unanimously elected.
IV. An amendment to the proposed swimming pool, spa, and
hot tub enclosure ordinance was discussed. Doyle said
that there had been concern expressed about the 6
proposed ordinance which would prohibit holes, gaps or 6
openings in enclosures large enough for a sphere four ;
inches in diameter to pass through. Doyle said that
the current standard was to allow holes, gaps or `
openings of a maximum size which would not premit a ~
sphere six inches in diameter to pass through. Doyle
said that other cities in the metroplex were changing
to four inches and that an article in Building
Standards Magazine which is published by the
International Conference of Building officials suggests
four inches. s
0026
s
,
.ur]
I
MINUTES
Building Code Board
t September 20, 1990
Page Three
Owens said that he would favor allowing six inch
openings, gaps or holes in existing pool fences.
Muirhead moved and Owens seconded a motion to amend the
proposed swimming pool, spa and hot tub ordinance to
permit existing enclosures to have openings, holes and
gaps of such size that a sphere six inches in diameter
-will not pass through.
asav y, Allen spoke about proposed amendments to the parking
lot paving ordinance and whether the length of fibers
in fiber reinforcement products uhould be regulated.
Allen was in favor or allowing the contractor choose
whether to use 3/4 inch, 1 inch or 1 1/2 inch fibers.
Allen also spoke about reducing the number of boards
and commissions which a person must 1o to in order to
get a building permit. Allen is of the opinion that
any questions related to private construction which
takes place on private property should be addressed by
the Building Code Board with the exception of plumbing,
electrical, mechanical, site drainage and platting.
Allen wants to draft a document regarding streamlining
{ of the process.
1 Meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m.
~ I
1
l 1
0025
't
i
-
I,
rx `
T: I
1
r
Trrll~
e{ ~t.
y
s
CITY
CO NCILr,
ri
s
r
I
f dQ°o' ° •
+ r
4
r
~~40C ~]Ga~~~
444"o a
)
.r
w D
ra;.rr
o- DATE: 10/02/90
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 920.42 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF
AND ABUTTING I35W AT THE INTERSECTION OF ALLRED ROAD (A-59)
h
ar5'
RECOMMENDATION! }
Staff recommends the adoption of the proposed annexation schedule j
setting the date, time and place for public hearings.
1
SUMMARY!
The petition for annexation of these tracts into the City of Denton
has been initiated by the owners in order to facilitate the zoning
of the tracts for planned development to allow for light industrial,
offices, commercial and institutional uses.
BACKGROUND:
The 920.42 acre situ is part of the 3,346.70 acres Pilot Knob Ranch
shown on attached site map. This tract to the site that was
considered for the Matsushita project earlier this year.
PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED!
Ftaff will prepare a service plan for this site to be considered at
the public hearings.
FISCAL IMPACTS ( i
' NA
R ctf ly su t dt
I ~
Prepared by: loy V. Harrell
City Manager 4
aµoL s ~
Harry N. Pereaud AICP tj
Senior Planner 1
I
~ App Quad:
drank Robbins AICP
I Executive Director
I ~
Planning and Development
i
2399X
I
I
I~
I
1
i
1 Fla,^ r•,'ey~
1111 ~ ,
• 1
I
ATTACHMENT 1
Aw59
NORTN
l
DENTON
^ t
wrJ.
•.L 1 ' 1^D[iraY L: ~_4' re•u I'
~ 1 Yu•br.. t f ~ 4 ~ .
LIMITS
ow I, A
e~u
06 rj"ll
rr/ Aim. -C
.1. :If •'t `fir/
Q: - t~(1
1 L r
1 P''r~r ~.3 • r i ' i' ~j Gay r •`i 1 •
C t. A / .1 ••.4j
y ~ I/ ••••'''l. iii• •r • • • IYb•I
J
Ole
i . ■ f/(~•
1 NORf,4LAMt
r '
I I ~ t I1 M jl~~ I •1 L;•Ae• Y ••1 Mrtr'iA. ~~rt"N p•,r ~t S ,IA r~ti ~
• lh1 41 WIN h •r~ l rr 0. 14t I
A 1 . • e1.94
. + doors no A. w,al. t t
r t Ir.t to 1a 1
f I ,CO~eRllt~ +l i. tn.Il,, • 'ClNtON
i ror noitq
1 'CITY 11 } ,
•pr t• "t • • 1 --J,M 1166y Midi p. • r
. rl I An • ♦ 1.' • • 7
d, oI
So, -A
61
I ~ ~ ~rl I my µ ~i , ,
I
I
I I
SCALK &A;*JLL OAT! 4 1 Z e-70
i
I
{
r
~lMn {IEI~•"q '
1■■]yA ~
• MPit
~ y 1
t ~
1. ~ r t -13j~ J (I
,n t I i t f l
O , tJ ~ i l . „
h ~ i E I I~ 1 +f i E /~r
z !e .
Its
ij
t'tt I, `r ;i W D t ; tt ~tP81411H1iz!!;till !1»11i-n.
! 1 A ' ~ 4 \ ~ i!il.I]IEt IzJ11NJl1t11 t
1 1 "1 ~ri r~ W ~ 1 Gt .:j~ ! ~tn-,e e: Iiut,toezl,:fll ~
Ap III
S EJI n-}- I•~ i....... i69'b'{.....C{ fTiOQ
ft fk J 1._ III 1 ~I ~~~{f~ti{tia rii'~~ '17
~ I I Sf i11 Ill,i ~f,l z! z IG~.-Y ,
N-1 - 1Z '""•-'~f-•---~' j 11, LiflG111941 iL:i~ E!! vri
t If i, r, 1.11..lileJr
t 'tb k p r ,,•.J t ti, I I
y .1
t , 1 ~t'i ill?}•. ;fit
k J 1 f i •,'r F • Ii ~ a.l' M1-. 1 ` its; S6 It
jE, 'I lit t • Ei: • d".-+_
I gyp" 1 "d•
F I fir' ~s.
''a 1~ J' 1 i V
; ~ ! c> > Ji %LI ! ,Ji{?•''i• Eio t0 -1
I 1
I:i1~14~, F isz• ; I i Ii1 l 1 I A
+if i ~ F..~Y7 n r i
• t r;F•
I; ~Ill:~i~+) I I A~1•II ~'II I''i;l 111 ~i l; ~r C': 1 I I ' i , JJ ~ i
~IH A s ',)r
I :i t rI i t iEf t. IR tII~ I i iE~ i 111 E1 I
ite I ;f11
a,~ t, I f
t•~!':E>2 X11 t~~~ I, t;~re I !E~ It. ~ II•
x F ~ I1~;~f1' 'ti•I I J ~ {i i li
_ 65-V NOI1KY.3NNK a3SOd02id
- 7-j
f{ 1
IAN • r+ezn f ,
i ~
i
Attachment 3
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED ANNEXATION
l
A-S9
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS THAT:
i
The City of Denton, Texas, proposes to Institute annexation
proceedings to alter the boundary limits of said City to add the
territory described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incor-
porated by reference herein, to the corporate limits of the City
of Denton. +
A Public Hearing will be held by and before the City Council 1
of the City of Denton, 'iexas, on the day of
}
1990, at 7:00 o'clock P. M, in the Clty founcil Cham ers a the
Municipal Building of the City of Denton Texas, for all persons
interested in the above proposed annexation. At said time and
place all such persons shall have the right to appear and be
heard. Of all said matters and things, all persons interested in
the things and matters herein mentioned, will take notice.
A Public Hearing will be held by and before the City Council {
of the City of Denton, Texas, on the day of +
1990, at 7:00 o'clock P. M. in the City uncil Chamm eers o t e
Municipal Puilding of the City of Denton, Texas, for all persons {
Interested to the above proposed annexation. At said time and
place all juch persons shall have the right to appear and be
heard. Of all said matters and things, all persons interested in
the things and matters herein mentioned, will take notice.
j
~I
I
ATTEST:
I 7~'R'IrIFES~ +
A-5S
24DOx
i
i
I'
Attachment 3r1
APPENDIX A
' • TRACT f l
q ~
BEING 917.600 acres of land situated in the B,B.B.&C.R.R. Survey, Abstract No. 158, B.B.B.&C.R.R. Survey,
Abstract No. 159, B.B.B.&C.R.R. Survey, Abstract No. 160. G. Pettiagale Survey, Abstract No. 1041, and the S.
Pritchett Survey, Abstract No. 1021, Denton County, Texas, said 917.600 acres being more Particularly described
as follows:
BEGINNING N the northeast corner of the B.B.B.& C.R.R. Survey, Abstract No. 158, said point also being the
oortbwtst corner of the W. Smith Survey, Abstract No. 1182 of aforesaid county, said Point also being in Johnson
1,ane and Paine Rgad;
„ THENCE S 00'02'WW, 3648.27 feet along the cast line of the said B.B.B.& C.R.R. Survey, Abstract No. I ;
THENCE N 89'32 WV, 2290.84 feet; II
R
THENCE N W582M 49755 feet;
THENCE N 89'28'51"W, 274,12 feet to the east r&-of-way of Interstate Highway 35W;
THENCE along the east right-of-way of Interstate Highway 35W the following calls;
1. N 2905ME, 84736 feet;
2. N 24.19 46"E, 203.06 feet; i
3. N 2957'39"E, 2,716.0 feet to the beginning of a curve to the kit basing a radius of
11,501.73 feet, a central angk of 03'G't'14', a chid bearing o( N 28'24'WF, a chord
distance of 623.01 feet; a
4. THENCE along sold are 623.09 felt; I
5. N 26'51'24"E, 2,147.84 feet;
` 6. S 89'28'11M, $70.78 feet; j
If 7. S 75'54'OM 7135 feet; '
& S 89'46'35'E, 80.17 feet;
9. N 72'34'4M 52.80 feet; 1
10. N 17'13'20'E, 51.61 feet;
11. N 69'30'03'W, 22933 feet;
12. N 34W14*W, 163.42 feet;
13. N 33'12'11'W, 210.76 feet;
14. N W51'41'1r, 116530 feet;
15. N 36'447PE, 20109 feet;
16. N 26'49 4M 399.43 feet;
17. N 33'24'38/E, 40030 fee!;
it N 26'035'E, 399.88 tut;
19. N i5.48'590E, 305.23 feet; I
20. N26'S4'134E, &13.65 feet;
THENCE S W34'0 A 1997.83 feet to a point in the weat line of the J. Edmomon Survey, Abstract No. 401; 1
THENCE S 00'13'SPE, 2,217.65 feet to the southwest corner of the said J. Edmonton Survey; II
THENCE S WW414E, 2,65916 feet along the south line of the said J. Edmowa Survey to a Point In Bonnie
1
Brae Road; I
t
3
3-1
1
i
~ J
MN'V
11
I
1
r'J('•JI
THENCE S 00039'SM 3,265.02 feet with Bonnie Brae Road to a point in Allred Road;
THENCE N 89'.M9'W, 3,6091,1 feet with A!lrad Road;
THENCE N 89'41%-W, 2,12709 feet with Allred Road;
THENCE S 00'06'S2'W, 2,639.77 fat, to a point in Johnson Lane;
THENCE N 89' 27'34'W, 2,353.07 feet to the POW OF BEGINNING and containing 917.600 aces (39,970,651
square feet) of land, more or kss•
i
TRACT IV t
e
BEING a 2.82 Rae trap of Gad situated to the I- Pizeao Suety, Abstract No. 994, Deotoo Count,,, Terri, and c
being a part of a called 59318 acre trail described In dead from W.3., Oranky et ux to Alex McCutdin as
recorded In Vohvme 321, Phr, 42, Reed Records, Denton County, Texas, said 222 acres being more particularly
described as fotlovW
BEGINNING at the moat southerly southeast corner of the saki 69318 acre tract; a
THENCE N8T13'", 339.06 fact to the east right of way of Interstate Highway MW;
THENCE N3nI 3g E, L53.66 feet along said east rigMW way lice of Intestate Highway 35W;
THENCE N27W'4M 300-VI fed along said east right-d-way line of Interstate Highway 35W;
THENCE N29'S4'55'E, 106.75 fed;
;
THENCE S00'03I F, 669.0 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 282 am (322,881 sq. R.)
of land, more or le&L +
y
f
I ~
I 1~
t
3-2
j
a
I
ATTACHMENT 4
ANNEXATION SCHEDULE !
A-59
i
October 2, 1,990 City Council sets date, time and
place for public hearings
October 7, 1990 Notice published in Denton Record
Chronicle for first public hearing
October 23, 1990 City Council - first public hearing
October 281 1990 Notice published in Denton Record
Chronicle for second public hearing
November 13, 1990 City Council - second public hearing
November 21, 1990 Planning and Zoning Commission makes
recommendation
November 270 1990 City Council institutes annexation
December 2, 1990 Publication of ordinance in Denton
Record Chronicle
January 2, 1991 Final action by City Council
1127x
i
{
i
l €
E
i
+ Y. 1
1
IMF i
~YiM {
I
y
I
d
ATTACHMENT 5
PiTITION
r.. FOR
ANNIXATION
TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING CONUSSION
AND
CITY COUNCIL
Of
THR CITY OF DBNTON, TEXAS
The undersigned does hereby petition for xation of 920.42 acres located
at The Pilot Knob Ranch (East side of 135Wn the extraterritorial jurisdiction
of the City of Denton, Texas. The property is more particularly described in
a the attached survey description and shown on the attached map. The undersigned
also ce:titiss that the following required information concerning the land and
its inhabitants is reasonably accurate and assumes responsibility for
completion of said information prior to scheduled action on the request by the
City of Denton.
1. Is petition being initiated by owner(s) or maiority of registered voters in
area of request? Yes X No It no, what is the status
of the applicant?
2. How many dwelling units are located within the area requested for
annexation? None
3. How manly businesses or nonresidential land uses are located within the area
of the request? None Please provide a general description of these
land uses including the name(s) of businesses, it known
a
4. Does area of request include any territory within the city limits ~r extra-
territorial jurisdiction of another city? Yes No
S. 9stimated population of the area of request. 0 Adults 0
Children n Number of registered voters?
' 6. At the time of this petition, have say other annexation procedures been
initiated for all or any put of the area requested in this petition?
Yes No X, It yes, please explain the procedures begun
and their status. s
E
t
7. Does a water supply district Its within the boundaries of the sees proposed
for annexation? yes No X
s
8. What zoning, it asp, other than agricultural (A), is being requested under
separate petition? Planned 0eveloownt
Now such of territory proposed for annexation is included i' soning
petition? The entire tract
5-1
1
I
ISM I 1
Petition for Annexation
Page Two
9. What is the purpose of annexation] i ti annexed into the
City of Denton so that the property can be ices or an v
10. Planned land use (it Janina is being requested):
Proposed unit j
Category m total Per Acre And/or
Proposed Aortas* Square ►ootua
s,;vr a. Single family detached
b. Single family attached (townhouses,
cluster, eta.)
c. Attached patio/garden/sero lot line
d. Duplex
S. Multi-family
f. Office
g. Neighborhood servta4
h. Oensral Retail
i. Cossseroial
3. light industrial
k. Heavr Industrial
Proposed use(s) it specific use permit planned development UP) being
requested. Business and Industrial Parkoruses. j
U. Have petitioner(s) familiarised themselves With the official annexation.
polior, land use policies, and the standard municipal service plan of the
City of Denton? yy~~ III X
Name of OWaer(ejYgE°~p°r°tion, 214 188-3089
Signature(s) 'telephone
Date r
Address(es) 0377 ftr
Site 1100
nd11dS. Texas- 75251-
It d
It petitioner is not the owner of the propertyt status
Petitioner
s) QrTrwatlep ?alepbone 1214 ) 788-3000
Name( re1.
signature(:) .J Data Seatamher 18. 1990
Address(es) .12 77 Merit Drive Suite 1700
~eLtes. Texew 75751
s field Notes MA Loaatton Kap for area proposed for aaeesatioa must be
submitted along vith completed petition before process begins.
og6: f
5-2
Ii
I1
i•
1
1
CITY
COUNCIL
a
oho°aDea ~
ok
Q
p S
III 0
I I •
r L I
G
( I~
{{i ~
1 }
r 1
{
7
CITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 78201 1 TELEPHONE (817) 100.8307
Office of the City Manager
E
M E M O R A N D U M
i
TO: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
{ FROM. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager
DATE: September 27, 1990 {
a
SUBJECT: Results of Meeting with State Department of Highways
and Transportation on 9/24/90
Out meeting with the Highway Department was extremely t.
informative although they did not tell us a lot of things that
we wanted to hear. The Districts overall problem and the
Highway Department's overall problem bolls down to the fact II
that they do not have enough money to fund and build all of the
projects that they have in their five-year letting program.
They are now attempting to review the program to lay out new
scheduling for all of the projects that were in the five-year
letting plan. In particular, those include the one-year
letting plan which ace the projects they feel most comfortable
with and are able to predict with the most accuracy. f
€ For instance, we were told that the 2181 project that had been
scheduled for 1991 will now be scheduled for January of 1992.
They also indicated that U.S. 377, or Fort Worth Drive, will be
j backed up to at least 1992 and maybe further. What complicates
{ the issue even more is the fact that they are totally committed
+ to the North Central project In Dallas, and that will take
I funding in tho magnitude of $100 million to W o million for
three years in a row beginning in 1993. Since the District
only has $150 million to spend each year, that will severely 1
curtail their ability to fund other projects. i
With that in mind, Jerry and I focused on giving them our
priority needs, Thoso revolved basically around three
projects. Those belne- 2181 or Teasley, U.S. 77 or the older
Sanger Highway near Ti, and construction of the Loop and Spur
and 2499. As mentioned, they advised that 2181 has been pushed #
back a year. The news on U.S. 77 to that it continues in its
current timetable which Indicated a construction date early in
s
1993. They will have the environmental assessment public 1
k 9
1
howl
i
l
Lloyd V. Harrell
September 27, 1990
Page 2
t
meeting this tall. Our joint plan is for this project to
continue on track so we can get right-of-way maps and begin
purchase of the right-of-way and relocation of utilities. That
will enable us to take advantage of Tl's half million dollar
pludge•
They were not optimistic about 288. The did say that the
Council's direction to do an at-grade crossing would certainly
W help the project, but because of the funding problems for the
North Central project. they did not give that project very high
hopes. The U.S. 380 project is the last project that we were
interested, There will be a public meeting in mid December on
the section of 380 from U.S. 77, or Locust Street, out to U.S.
?89 which is 15 or 20 miles east of Denton. They are working
on right-of-way and schematics for the section from U.S. 77 to
1-35 here at the Resident's office and that wilt be of benefit
to us. We have good relationships with the Resident Engineer.
Dwight Bird, and we can continue to try and nudge that project
along.
We also followed up on the notifications we received late last
week on the beautification projects boing cut. We were able to
prevail on them to reinstate the grant on Dallas Drive totally, i
and we were also able to make them feel bad enough about the
University project to agree to allow us to remove and replace
all of the dirt, install our irrigation system, and to seed the
medians in grass. The only thing that will be lacking will be
the pavers and the "large" vegetation such as trees, bushes and
shrubs that the Highway Department will have to contract for.
It was out understanding and their indication that they would
look to doing those final parts of the project during the Fall
and Winter of 1991. At least we were able to get these two
projects to-instated. They had been cut in the initial funding
proposals.
In some ways, it was a pretty dismal meeting since all of out
projects have been set back. We tried to suggest to the !
District out priorities and the needs of the city. 1 think Mr.
Huffman was particularly sincere when he pledged that they will
continue to look for ways to fund our projects. He obviously
does not like the role he has been put in of telling cities
` that their projects will be delayed since a number of them have
been promised for a number of years. I think he will truly
continue to look at ways to put our projects into the funding
schedule as soon as he can. I think it is imperative that we
j continue to visit with them to keep them advised of out
priorities and needs. To that end, in another 30 days or so, w
we'll be trying to schedule another meeting with the District
people and the Mayor since he was ill and unable to attend this
last meeting. 1 think that continued presence down there will
help us, at the very least, continue to maintain our position
and, hopefully, improve it as we continue to visit and
represent out needs.
i
s
l
Lloyd V. Harrell
September 27, 1990
Page 3
it you or the Council has further questions, I'll be happy to
try and er them at your convenience,
1
s Rick Svehla
Deputy City Manager
RS:bw
S107K
i
f
I A
i
j
f
I
i
i
1
1
I
M/M1M
1
ILr«A~
~Y
f~
ty1
Y
1
II
't
i
N
OF
l n~ ,
~ Ey ~ I
w,
i
Fl L E
I
1
r