HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-07-1991
1
i
4
Y
AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY C;kMCIy
May 7, 1991, it
' 'Mork session of the city of Denton City Council on Tuesday, May
7, 1991, at $.15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room of City Hall.
215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the following items
will be considereds
Notes Any item listed on the Agenda for the Mork Session may
also be considered as part of the Agenda for the
Regular Meeting.
5115 p.m. ,
1. Executive Session: r + ',a
A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6282-17
V.A.T.B.,
1. Consider action in Patel v. City.
2. Consider action in Kalsoe, V. City. "'6y
0. Real Estate Under Sec, 2(f), Art., 6252-17
V.A.T.S.
C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(q),
r` Art 6252-17 V.A.T.B.
1. Consider appointments to the Downtown
Development Advisory Board and the 2onirlo
Ordinance Task force.
5s45 p.m.
2, Receive a report and hold a discussion with the
Community Development Block Grant Committee regarding
allocation recommendations for the 1991"-92 proyreri
yyear. °;~'r's
30 Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding a'
proposed ordinance amending the zoning Ordinance
relating to accessory uses.
Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the f
a; final approval of report and action plan from Alan
Plummer on uprating of the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Project.
5, Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the
pilot recycling program.
x:
'A kX i , rY. .
aN
t
i
~EE
I City of Denton City Council Agenda
May 7. 1991
Page 2
g, Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding a
proposed contract with the Upper Trinity Regional 8
Mater District for the Cooper Reservoir Project.
r
7, Presentation of the revised codification of Code of
ordinances of the City.
Regular Meeting of the City in the CounciliChambersiofoCityeHall
i May 7, 1991, at 7:00 p,&. 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the following items
will be considered:
7500 p.m, A„
tir
1 Pledge of Allegiance
2, Consider approval of the minutes of the regular
sessions of March 19, and April 2, 1991, end th'e
special call session of April 9.
30 Citizen Reports
A, Receive a citizen report from Bob Powell
regarding citizen participation in Denton city t
r
government.
s 4.,
S, Receive a citizen report from Laura Srowa"
regarding safety/health/environmental measures
for residential areas on Loop 288.
C, Receive a citizen report from Rosemary.' Kitlem
regarding safety/health/environmental Measures
f
for residential areas on Loop 288.
4, Public Hearings
Ai Hold a public hearing to consider preliminary and
final replats of Donna Del Estates from parts of
Lots 3, 4, and S to Lot 04 Block 3. The site it
on the northeast cornet of U.B. Highway 11 and
Riney Road. (The Planning and Zoning Commission
'a recommends approval.)
r ~ Y
f
~y'- G ~ r r1
,
r
Fl u d r runN~Mk4~.SyarWr5 i2: y.y. r's, Aa~, l
1
i
r
Y
City of Denton City Council Agenda
May 7, 1991
Page 3
S. Hold a public hearing to consider preliminary and
final replats of the Kings Forest Addition from
Lots 2 through 7 into Lot 2R, Block A• The site
is on Nilson Street east of Bushey Street. (The
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends s
approval.)
5.
Consent Agenda
Each of these items is recommended byy the Staff and
approval thereof will be strictly on the beeie of the staff `
recommendations, Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the v
City Manager or his designee to implement each item in
accordance with the staff recommendations.
Listed below are bids and purchase orders to be
approved for payment under the Ordinance section of the
agenda, Detailed back-up information is attached to the .
ordinances (Agenda item 6.A). This listing is provided on the
Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss any item C
prior to approval of the ordinance. j:
A, Bids and Purchase Orders$ z
14 Bid 01241 - Power Transformer and Substation
Package (The Public utilities board
recommends approval.)
B. Tax Refund
1. Consider approval of a tax refund to Harpool
Farm b Darden for $3,404,06,
66 Ordinances 1
A, Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting
competitive bids and providing for the award of
contracts for the purchase of materials,
equipment, supplies or services. (5.A.1. Bid
01241
8. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a a
contract for engineering services by Alan Plummer
and Associates, Inc, for detail design of
uprating the Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Public Utilities board recommends approval.) (The
C, Consider adoption of an ordinance approving a
1 participating contrast with the Upper Trinity )
Regional Water District for the Cooper Reservoir
Project. (The Public Utilitiso Board recommends
approval.)
I
i s d
M.
I
6 "1
F
City of Denton City Council Agenda
May 7, 1991
Page 1
D. Consider adoption of an ordinance amending
Ordinance No. 91-021 to provide for certain
requirements for ex_ officio members to the
Downtown Development Advisory Board.
E C. Consider adoption of an ordinance adopting and
enacting a new Code for the City of Denton,
Texas= providing for the repeal of certain
r ordinances not included therein; providing for
the maintenance of fees previously ettablishadJ '
providing fora penalty for the violation thereof x,
a fine of up to $2,000 for violations of all such,
provisions that govern fire safety, toning, of~
public health and sanitation, including dumping r!
of refuse and not exceeding 1506 for all other, "ss a"
violations: and providing for the mannat of Y
amending such Code,
T. Consider adoption of an ordinance canvassing the
returns and declaring the results of ths; tegular
municipal election held in the City of Denton on
! May 1, 1991.
7, Oath of office administered to newly elected Council
Members.
8. Election of a Mayor Pro Tampere) g 2
9. Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for
Bob Gorton.
10, Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for '
Hugh Ayer.
ii, Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for +
Randall Boyd,
i
12. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager.
13, official Action on Executive session Itsma! 1
n
A. Legal Matters ,j
as Real Estate
C. Personnel of
D. Board Appointments
14. Nov Businesst
¢s This item provides a section for Council Members to
E suggest items for future agendas. +
1
1~ 1,6 All'
. ' A yY~y
9.
City of Denton City Council Minutes 4'
May 7. 1991
Page 5
A
t
15. Executive Sessions
.1` A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17.;
V.A.T.S.
r
1. Real Estate Under Sea. 2(t), Art. 6252-17
r V.A.T.S. '
n~ C. POCSOnnsl/Board Appointments - Undsr.'eeo, 2(9),,
y Art 6252-17 V.A.T.S.
NOTEt TILE CITY COUNCIL RESIORVES THE R14M TO, ADJOURN INTO
tf k5
i ISnCUT1VV 98651ON WT ANY TINS RI1GARD00 ANY'ITM4 1►OIt.NHIW IT y ' k F?
I8~ LEOAtLY PER11t'tlS7BLB'
+
CERT I CI C'ATE
y I, certify' that the above notice of m6etinq We posted 'one the
r biilietia bdsr_d et • the City Hail of the City of Denton, Te:ol, ,
'dh ''the d1y of , 1991 at of clock h. ~ j f i .1 f ,,AT
3S82C CITY SECRETARY
t .w:.
Id,
f
f
v,
t J f h,f 1 0"
Zr ~'t w A Ir
.a
Y n ,v
1 v~+
sy iY JG}',. 7j elfj f V t 1~
SSS/ 1 f I
I} i i
T t
tt
^ E 1 ..bt.1 • Y 'Y
yr
1
b 1 '
r
~ t.
Y ,
T CITY of DENTON, 'r "S MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. MaKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 76201
'v f J I k Vl ~'f i
,4N MEMORANDUM
~ri 1' ~ j l L ]tom +f.
r 4 . i' ! 4
DATES April 22, 1991
TO• Mayor and City Council c drr {
FROMI Frank H. Robbins, Executive Director
t + ~r
+ 1 ~ 1" Planning and Development
SUBJECTt ZONING ORDINANCE TASK FORCE
Q° .iDavid Caswell has resigned from the task force for personal
reaao'ne;. David has been a very active and effective voice On
the task force, and we will miss his insightful participation.
You may consider replacing Mr. Caswell who wad representing th
real estate broker's perspective.;
M ne,
'Y }
d w
xos Jennifer Walters, City Secretary
f rr
S= 1
i
2653x
u t, Ve
1
41
~~~,~'t1 1 rlP ~1
8171366.8200 D/fw METRO 431.2521
1?
~ r
1 „ r
DATE: 05/07/91
IT~Uunei aaPORT FORMAT
T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City manager
ock
SUBJ: Discussion of Community Developmentorli99iara1992Cgrant
Committee funding year,
MEMDAT LW
C03Q Committee recommends approval of Proposed Statement a
s
of Objectives and Projected Use of funds.
on April i8, 1991 the CDBO Committes hold funding
hearings to evaluate funding proposals. The 00*itt6e
determined allocation recommendations for it biz+888.00 .
,
in funding from the Department b0 in HrehablliL tide Urban
Development and i
repayments. Ten (10) organizations requesting' funds for. ¢-0..
various Proects war
ewhichhODShclfunds ware
list p
requested:
•m+ of Renues~ rt.
Pro_lect
18,000.00 J
l Demolition d Olsen-up
8
Kids Place S ,400.00
S
Housing Rehabilitation 3200000.00
78,000.00
Housing Assistance Program $ 16,083.00
Kid Connection (MLK)
HOPE, Inc. Transitional : 24111960.00.
Housing Program 1 28,000.00
TWU Cares 24,600.00
Prenatal Clinic $ 270806,00
Wilson 8t. Sidewalks t0i1200.00
Alexander 8t. Drainage
• 4 of bbie~*ives and
~ shad Prop
C`,a proio~
recomne~ld
Council will be requested to approve the Final StatWtA t t
vas and Projected Use of Funds on May 21-1 091
ctt ms during the
objectives and P
ore
of j
ec
r g ~rf
authorizing expenditures for p j is/p
i99i CDBa fiscal year.
r, 1 ik C w
Iwo
I
PROGRAMS DEPARTMEhTB OR fiR0UP9 AFF£ TO ED:
The Community Development staff will administer/monitor
all projects/progreme6 The Nilson St. sidewalk project
and Demolition Program will be carried out with the
assistance of other City departments.
» Al
~ " EjSrAI IMPACT: a
a Community Development staff are paid from CDBB budget.
Engineering and Building Inspections staff are generally
r reimbursed for documented personnel costs.
Res fully submIttod.
f ,
'I
V. Harrell
tl d
City MantQ*r
' Prspsrod by: r.., err j
c l W
earbira Ross
m Comnwnity Oewlopment Coordinator ~rN.
a
Ap ved:
bS
v
ip
Frank Robbins AICP
Executivs'Director for Planning 6 Development
y t
t tis;.
d ' z d w'
1 p I t • ~ , fir,
yw . {y. C4 ~ra+'
, tJ
tg ~
s , I
.+hbi,R)KfeLPdY{1~9Mp r
~wM.KNWIkNEMM.brAMrlrMiNww+Y^r ,i "M'14rA9r
d
low-
►
f
I l
l ,
Ir
j
i
Unofficial minutes ,
community Development Block Grant Committee
April 16, 199
Present: Katie Flemming, Sarah Parker, Peggy Norton. Rosemary
Rodriguez, Curtis Ramsey, Joe Morris, Fred Hill, Dennis Stephens,".{
and Rey Treso. .;L
Staff: Barbara Ross, Community Development Coordinator
Preaent: Beverly Edwards, Community Development Secretary 1.
Chairperson: Curtis Ramsey, called the meeting to order at 6146
4 Fr+
1. Marian amilton. TWU Cares
Marian Hamilton of the Oe'►ton Housing Authority stated that
TWU CARES has proven itself successful in spite the fact that it
hasn't had any good source of funding. Texas Women's University
received a grant for services to provide health care to a rural
underserved population. This was the beginning of the clinic which
was organized for the registered nurses who were returning to Texas
Women's University to get advanced degrees. I ,
Mr. Ramsey asked if there were some type of criteria for the
r nurses or did they have field experience.
Me. Hamilton stated the nurses had field experience, Some have
worked in the Valley and have worked with the people in that area
who are underserved. They have seen the same type of medical
problems with their Denton patients during the time the clinic has
been in operation. TWU, through its grants, have paid for two
nurses to administer the program. All other nurses are volunteers
and are getting school credit for what they do but other than that,
they receive no pay. Me Hamilton went on to state that the dentist ` k
is the priority and that this dentist walked in off the street. ;
He had opened a practice in Argyle, Texas and hoard about TWU
CARES. He observed what was happening and volunteered to give a i r
few hours. He is now volunteering one and afternoon a week for s "
year, initially, the dentist paid for all of his own equipment,
` I suppliee, fillings, the amalgams and the rubber gloves. Everything +
he paid for was estimated at up to $30,000 dollars in donated
services and supplies. The dentist reviewed this amount of
71
equipment and felt this was a high expense. Me, Hamilton would ; R•-
like some funding to encourage the dentist to continue to volunteer
" and to help with the supplies.
Mr. Ramsey asked if 26% of the budget would basically be
=r' personnel items, Mr. Ramsey discussed the amount of time that the
ILI
MEN
0..r
u
1
Pg. 2
dentist could give to the program.
commitment to TWU CARES at the beginning Ms-
the
foriatmonth and that
the dentist was to give one afternoon a week for a month but, the
dentist had continued because there was such a need for his
services, The Denton Independent School District has been
referring children to the Clinic who need dental care. Various
other agencies in town, the Prenatal Clinic and Drug Treatment
Clinic are referring their clients who need dental care. There are
dental hygienists from TWU that will do an assessment and *so what t^
needs to be done to the patient. If there is extensive work, the
Patients are asked to come to the dental hygiene Clinic to have "
Xraya made. Appointments are also made for them to come back And
complete their dental work.
j Mr. Stephens asked if other dentists in the City were offered
the opportunity to assist or volunteer time or services.
Ms. Hamilton stated the dentists in the area have been aware
of the services but none have come forward. Ms. Hamilton stat
there are some doctors ed
that accept referrals from the Clinic,
Ma. Hamilton advised that there may be more volunteers as the
Clinic progresses and people become more convinced of the need,
There maybe a change in attitudes but as of now, this is the only
dentist that will do anything. No other dentist would accept
referrals. The current dentist has been making dentures for
some of the ladies at Heritage Oaks and he does that at cost. NY~'
He really cannot afford to do that free of char e,
between the cost they would have to pay another dentThe d
istiandr I
they pay him is significant,
what
Ms. Norton asked if by financially supporting this dentist
would it create any problem in the community ortu there are so
many other dentist that are already working through Kwanie, They
have been providing free or nearly free services to indigent
children for years through that
Ms. Hamilton states she does notrthink this is going to cause
any problems as they are like most of the doctors who are
w
limited illing to accept referrals from us. They will accept a ' want to additionalmwork orecommit®thand emselvesdtonan unlimited any
C
work. d amount of
Mr. It is community a spirittanddthe humanitarian effortsnofuth{a the
M8, Hamilton went on to eta person, i
to
that
needs they
as far intend to children are concerned. There are no feei charged
and there are many families with four or five children.
location of the protect is the Phoenix Apartments at the cornerTof
Hickory and Ruddell on the north and of the Phoenix Apartments,
1 The clinic has three rooms and the dental office has one long room,
Me. Rose and Me. Hamilton stated the effort is between DHA and
TWU Cares but it was established that OKA will be the one funded,
Ms. Hamilton stated this is primarily for reimbursement of
4, i
1
Pg. 3
hours that the dentist has put in, ($10,000).amiThe remainder of lton stated to Mae
money is for suppliss and equipment. Me. Norton that she would be willing to have other dentists work, and
1 ^y
if there were other dentists they would cry and find a way to
purchase the necessary equipment. The current dentist has his own
equipment because he was going to include nursing home dentistry
as part of his new practice when he opened his office in Argyle so
he had purchased portable equipment. The figure for the total
project would be $266000.
rt akrbara Atk},ne HOPE. Inc.
Barbara Atkins, Director, Jim Bunyard, r as R em and Jan Lewis
were present to represent HOPE, Inc. Mr. Barbara Atkins
definition and classification of the homeless.y
f
discussed the families HOPE, Inc. would like to target in the
pilot study. They are families with dependent children that live,
work or go to school in the Denton area. They are either homeless,
` that means they can be living in their car or on the street, truly'
homeless or potentially homeless, that means they were served ant
eviction notice. The Board of Directors is beginning to put quite
a bit of thought and study into doing some long range assistance.
At present, the HOPE program assists families from a period of we
to 90 days. Most require a full 90 days financial assistance,
are not sure that type of assistance is making plegbasio for some I
subsidy
t of the families that we are working with, This
and any other type of need would be defined by the family. in
looking around at some national programs in th, Dallas and Houston
area for a start and up to Evanston, Illino'-,, many programs are k
realizing that bandaid type assistance it not doing the job.
Families are falling back into the emerger•i agencies and requiring '
constant help. HOPE is very interested in looking to see, by doing ;
this pilot study, if perhape providing assistance for these
families up to a one or two year period would allow them to gain
self reliance, they might be able to afford their own housing {
without assistance. We would like to provide constant monitoring
to the families, Get them on a budget, really setting goals for
themselves to begin to obtain self reliance
Ms. Atkins went on to state that doing a pilot study of this
length would allow them to work with a family that has much lees
in the job skill area. If a family that was not speaking English
it could be taught very extensive work with the caseworkers
would be required to sign an agreement as do other clients in our
HOPE program. They would be counseled at least once a week. A
caseworker would be employed in the HOPE, Inc. office. He or ohs
will be in charge of the situation with the family and would work {
with the committee to help choose a family that could work in this Vt
that, we would lke to
encourage community involvement} We havehvolunteers now hatiwe try
a`
.
i~ s J
nn~l ,
d'^ 1
y
Pg. 4
j to work with. They assist with clients, whether that is helping
2- with the budget sessionp, or helping them go out and do job
interviews and conatant follow up on that, It may be initially
providing transportation to get them on a job helping them learn
how to research and get into job skill training, Just whatever K-
needs are defined by the family. HOPE also anticipates being able,
to use community support from furniture to minor car repair, school 4
supplies for the children etc. P r=
' Mr" Ramsey questioned haw does HOPE see the Pilot Program
extending over a period of 24 months" The CDBG grant period is
only an annual cycle how do you see this relating to your
operation.
f Me. Atkins related that she felt that like if they could do G,
this at least a year with two to three families, they could be
weaned away from financial assistance. This is a pilot study. It
will help us learn whether this is perhaps the direction to take
1, r a "
in dealing with homeless families.
Me. Norton discussed this as being a pilot study and would,
like to know what direction would be if this prove to be workable
for HOPE as an organization. ¢r
Ms. Atkins related that if this is the direction they would
want to move HOPE in, instead of working with the family for three
months, they would go ahead and target famiilee for a year. This r,.
is something they feel they would have a better grip on. After the, o
study they may want to do both, continue with three months for some "
families and a year for others" it is hard at this time to say and
we do have a long range planning committee in action at this time.
Ma. Norton questioned if they go in that direction would they
would try to take on a greater number of families and do that f
for a whole year? Did HOPE have some source of funds to continue
the project if this worked out? s
Me. Atkins considered that it might be feasible to look at
some kind of facility maybe a small apartment complex and move I~
In that direction. The total budget for the entire year would ? e {
be between 86,000 and 70,000.
Mr. Hilt questioned that in a project like this was it going y'.
to be hard to monitor and keep it equitable? If you pick up a
family that is a homeless family and try to measure their
motivation to be employed, how do you foresee if it is a case
where both persons can be employed? Is this based on whether
the female or the male is unemployed because of the children? f ,
Should there be a one person bread winner? Now do you plan to
determine where you cut them loose? You stated you did not went'
J them to go back to the dependency of public service again. Most t y
s 1 of this will depend on how the client budgets and manages.
Me. Atkins stated that HOPE asked clients to sign an agreement,
Sometimes the eeleotion process is not easy. We're asking them to
sign an agreemen*, that they save all receipts, that they don't make
loans, they don't borrow money, they don't give out money and that, k
they meet with either volunteers or staff people on a weekly basis i
a a. r f,
r,
,
I
f I'
1
I .
h P9. 5 the ceaeworker or
a budget is planned. It is not do that theirs own and find a budget
the end of a 0111 s Ytihe I
and e that at
volunteers writcanhl{Ve budget
Wep hopeY The key
1 in which they a saving of the persons what
A period they will working towaarts the historyrogramst how long have
selection process, looking and looking
period is their work history been stable. The s°ueationedras to
^ they have been in the community, 110 Me Flemming 4
is the to a whole lot of that, licant is selected for the
key
111 what happens to CDBO funds once an app
ram. If you hays them for a couple of weeks and
ens to the
" pilot study prog
they find some means o f income or empl~Yic{p~t~ the client can get
balance of the money?
Me. Atkins explI they ained that fta t and then we begin. I ;
to a fob or job training very
Ms. Flemming asked will You continue to support them even
have income coming in? to allow them to
though they would to a certain Poin'ch
Me, Atkins ild cars,
said Yee, UP
mine their goals
` attain the goals. To 9®t into n ravings program,
J
. F
automobile repair or insurance They must deter
obi e r asked what will that do in relation to the IRB, what
Mr. Hill complications would that create?
ththe
Mr. Atkins stated this income would not be reported a to
ey
IRS. sated that many of the families
Me. Rodriguez su99won't have the income whore you i;
work with have earned income. They
d are required to pay income tax, were lucky enough to get sours
Ms. Flemming asked what if they
kind of employment that would put them above the minimum wogs level
allvo?
king at the guidelines, of
tk{ will You continue to support them finamci
~a Me. Atkins said again are You looking py
self
the Department of Human Resources poverty guidelines, The urpose
of the pilot study is to allow these families to be totall
reliant at the and of one Year.
Ms. Atkins said it maybe aftownrduthelr irentobutg they lwnNd
5 need any financial assistance
' Ms. Rosa asked Can't you be currently employed and homolers? + r
support unit.
that war commonro ram ot a hand out
Me, Atkins stated yes, n
r front. aAiho it
Ms. Atkins stated this is a working P g cles
rogram, we try to make tli®svwho reallyu don't have tithe energy or ; i
f does eliminate some farm and You are not
the went to. asked if you get a family and with their
f Mr. Rodriguez are not following
satisfied that they and either continue or not
assignments, then you will review that, ; M1+
4 continue the family? that was correct.
Me. Atkins stated yeas a in
r, Ramsey asked if HOPE was thinkin~haabfgmd iies rent at some
definitely ae A pilot
l
own fauillty rather then subsidizing
4other location. We would have this ret up
N
i
a_
Pg. 6
project.
Ms, Rodriguez asked how many families do you help on a three
month basis more or less, what is your average?
Ms. Atkins stated we're trying to increase our average to six
per month at this time. She said the reason it is exciting to me
is because when I was doing some research several years ago the
studies indicated that a very minimum of six monthAs year thee length 1.0
of time that you should work with
the families. , good but some of the studies showed that anything less than six
months was not feasible,
Mr. Ramsey commented that HOPE explored these situations so
that you have some idea of the ongoing life profile of this family
and that this homelessnose represents some event or circumstance
rather than simply the continuation of a life pattern, ;i.
Me. Atkins said you talk to the family about how they are going
to be better in three months after HOPE's help. The other exciting F,
part is in the long term will give them the opportunity to get some
Job training. It allows them the time to go through that training
and then get started in a ,lob, Sometimes it is a two month wait
to even get into a training.
Me. Norton asked do you have houses of your own that you
move people in and our or do you have any real estate at sill
Me. Atkins said no, they currently had no homes to move people + F
Y
into. d
Ma. Flemming asked where are these people placed? r
Ms. Atkins related that HOPE works closely with the Housing ~
Authority, many have been referred by the Housing Authority. HOPE
has picked up these families that r brylly trying but areistill
on the waiting list for housing. to look at theincme
say guidelines for three month } #5
level and try give them
a suitable place,
that means total financial assistance.
Me. Rodriguez asked how many were on staff?
Me. Atkins stated that right now HOPE had some wonderful
volunteers that help out on the phone and do a lot of the onto-
one with the clients. They also work with walk-ins. We're having
to ask for some case management funding for thieo We're at the
maximum as to what one person can do right now,
Me, Rodriguez asked if the additional case worker would be a
part time person rather than a full time,
Me. Atkins stated a part time person could handle it and get
the program into place,
Me. Rose discussed information on the demolition program and
the rehabilitation program. Along with the demolition request
comes the request that the Committee allow demolition of any
structure regardlese of the owner's income, A lien will be placed s,
on the properties that are not owned by low and moderate income
persons. Building inspections would also be able to demolish any s.
house in the City that is about to fail down and is a health
hazard. If the property were ever sold those funds would come back
y i
i
. a,:..u.M„ era
a,
Ya r.+,a t v yam, 1.
1
14,
s li
4
Pg. 7
into the CDBG Demolition Program. Building Inspections and Code
Enforcement are really frustrated because there are 60 many houses
around that can't be torn down and they cannot get the owners to ;y,
comply. Supposedly we can continue to cite them and eventually
throw them in sail but they are not going to throw a property owner
in ,)ail because a structure that needs to be demolished.
Mr. Ramsey questioned do we presently have a condemnation
process?
Mr. Ross replied yes we do.
Mr. Ramsey then stated we have not taken that step.
Me. Ross said some people have been cited by the judge and have
paid a fine, but there are people who will even pay a fine and
still not demolish the structure.
Mr. Ramsey stated we did go to the next step which is actually
demolition.
Me. Ross stated there are no funds for demolition except CDOG r
ttee requested that we do demolition only for
~ funds and the commi ,
low and moderate income persons. The requirement is that you spend'
at least 70% of all funds to benefit low and moderate income
families. if we fund this as a alum and blight activity we'll have
no problem with the 70% requirement.
Me. Ross discussed the allocation for previous years on
demolition as =46,000 one year, and then $40,000. Cecil Carson of. ,j
Code Enforcement and the Building Official, Jackie Doyle, 'felt
$169000 was sufficient. Last year about G were demolished, We Were
d handicapped by our policy. There is about $66000 left and it will
be used up by the end of this program year.
L Mr. Tre,)o asked is it ever a problem with the federal program.` ;
where you have money left over from the previous year?
Ms. Rose stated as long as there is not more then 1.6 times the,
grant amount for the current year which would mean we would have
to have over 900,000 on our letter of credit. We have never had k.
that problem.
lIi Barah Garry Denton County Prenatal Clinio
Ms. Carey discussed the requirement funding. She stated they
did not ask for more because of the audit. However, the Board has f .
decided to request an audit since they had submitted their funding
request.
fi Mr. Hill asked generally what the prenatal care included. 1
Ms. Carey stated that the prenatal care is provided by a
certified nurse midwife. Registered nurses who have received their
masters degree do additional clinical work. They provide ell the" u
prenatal care (standard care) wlisre patients receive ultrasound,
medication prescriptions, any vitamins or minerals that they need,
a non-stress test and lab work. The people that are being taken 1
^r care of often have more problems involving sexually transmitted
diseaeee, so there is more extensive lab work. High risk mothers
VIL
A•
4 f.
.Y
'X
h » N
I
G
pg. g
them
There is simply no one else to see . Because of the
s seen.
social workers, volunteers, Prenatal Education Program and Teen
Pregnancy Program things are better.
Mr, Ramsey requested the total breakdown of the Teenage
Pregnancy Program. Ms. Carey responded year to date welanning
visits were 6989 plus 67 home visits and 461 family p
kups and ack with All of the teen mothers are bThe et are parentingcclassesa
visits,
contraceptives and sick child care.
The sick child Tlan 4swell
goingito increase as another pediatric nurse seven months. babies
practitioner is hired whoThwill see the well babies ere are 229 teen mothers in thekp ogram }
of non-teenage mothers.
and 210 teen babies. Some of the mothers have not yet delivered. `5w ides the Kids with Kids c rtgrmothera who child dropped outs of transportation
y ,
Help is available
for children o Y
because of their motherhood and wish to return,
to these mothers in regards to their health, their contraceptives i
The mothers are then able to got back
Y and their babies health.
into school with the transportation and day care assistance.,
Me. Norton asked if the Prenatal Clinic received United Way `
r year to ib able to
Funds.
now throe is their f
Ma. Carey Paogramd is that this
apply as this Years olid st The Te nbPregnancy
Program was two years old in January. i
6 Me, Norton also questioned if the Prenatal Clinic received
j more money what would the clinic do with it?
y Ms. Carey 6tated the Prenatal Clinic would like to add to
their staff an administrative assistant who would be able to `
complete the paperwork that each of the medical providers currently
deals with. There is chart review every month where the nurses
check on each other's work to ensure that thing is mis ed. There
is currently a staff of ten people, and seven individuals are
health care providers, one is a social worker, seven are providing
Carey. In all there are
care, one is a billing person and Me.
eight professionals with no support staff.
t Mr, µ11l questioned if there were any accountability for
m' children that are parented by irresponsible parents, ?
r+ Ms. Carey stated that they keep a record of how many mothers
are married, where they come from, what part of the county, what
their living bi 1 Problem with irresponsibility ands they rwouldrvary
there is a g J
much like to start a Dad program. 1
Me, Norton questioned if the midwives actually deliver?
Me. Carey stated there are no privilege at either hospihs
and they are in the process of building a birth cater.
' midwives deal dirihn special medical intervention lstinvany oly ddthen
` intervention An
a doctor needs to be involved. The risks of taking a mother the
clinic has never s3sn, a woman who smokes, who haying ne or
high blood pressure is too great, The patient would have to be
t~
k
,f j
1
i
Pg. 9
1
healthy and ready for a normal birth.
Ms. Flemming questioned if we didn't fund the program what
" would the Prenatal Clinic do.
Ms. Carey stated if the program was not funded at the $26,000
level they have nothing in the budget right now as a salary for the
new midwife.
Me Carey stated this is her responsibility, the Board's and
the Executive Director's to get long term funding. One way 1s the
Federal Qualified Health Center Look Alike, This was started in «y
the 70's for migrant workers and the homeless. Look Alike Funding
was created by clinics so they could share when they could get 100
percent cost for medicaid, instead of getting :1.00 dollars or x
;11.00 dollars they would be able to get what it coat to deliver
the service. Medicaid would be paying the clinic what it costs to
be doing business.
Me. Flemming asked if the clinic worked with the TWU nurses'
and intern program.
4. Ms. Carey stated they do that as much as they can and they pf
are very supportive of nurses from the masters degree program.
Nurses from TWU come through and do part of their clinical work ;
y with the clinic. There will be 60 nurses doing their clinical work
this year. The nurses can got pediatric experience, teen-pregnancy
and prenatal experience and there is always one social worker
intern from one of the two Universities working with the social
worker. Me Carey discussed the clinic was covered under liability'
insurance.
a,.
IV,_ Jerry Clark Alexander St Drainage Wilson St. Sidewalka.
3
Mr. Clark discussed the Alexander Street drainage project
lacked putting in concrete, and putting in piping for a ten year
flood. The pipe will give a little protection and.stop people from
,
dumping things in and clogging up the system. It is something that
does not have to be done but, is the best solution, Instead of ~r•
putting a pipe through the park a channel was cut to have adequate s" a;F
flow from there down to the concrete. Engineering would tike: to
put the pipe through the park in order to get the best use out of 1
the park. The Parke Department would also like to have the park ,.I
` land back. The final thing lacking is taking the pipe up to
Morse Street to collect that water after it starts running down
into the *wale before it runs to th,j park. Mrs Clark stated the
majority of the problem is solved, He said the completion of
Alexander Street Drainage is already in the Capital Improvement
" Program. When the City's economic canditions improve, they will
<<; sell bonds and complete the project. the sidewalks is an immediate
need and many of people could walk between the two faoilities,
' (Fred Moore Park and MLK).
}.'lX yw !wntieJAflY.ymr.r.»w-.. . "^!~C
i'
Pg. 10
Ms. Rose questioned if this proposal included the work on
Morse Street. I
Mr. Clark stated it did.
Mr. Mill discussed the total budget for Alexander Street Is
$101,000 and the sidewalk is 5279600.
Mr. Clark stated this sidewalk also could be scheduled in the
CIP if the community felt it was a priority, it is not currently
on the list to be done.
e
.f
Steve Jofins^^ Yap cnnnaation. MLK.
Mr. Ramsey requested information from Mr.Johneon on the new r
program. . 'jit
Mr. Johnson stated the Kid Connection would be controlled by
the MLK staff. The Recreation Specialist for the Center will be
the person to regularly supervise the program. This is an after '
school type program that comes without licensing stipulations.•
Currently, during the summertime since 1979 Kid Connection program
as run. It will be as a drop in type program which can house
anywhere from 60 to So or maybe 9o kids. This can be accomplished
because licensing is not required. They could reach a lot more of
the kids because there can be different types of drop in
activities. In the afterechool program you had to sign up td
participate and parents had to check you in. With the Kid I_
Connection being a drop in program a registration form is sent home 13,
by the kids and the parents sign it and then the parents drop their a
children in. We utillia the entire center with this program if a
kid would like to join in any activity they could, on the spot.
A call is made to the oarents to get confirmation over the phone,
The problem with last year's program were the stringent
requirements, number of kids, having parents do extensive paperwork
and getting parents permission to leave the facility which web
complicated. The staff had to stay with the child until the patent
arrived to pick them up. With the drop in program it is not
necessary because it is just s drop in. There are currently 60 to -
60 kids participating on the other and of the Center in programs'
who basically drop in. The ages are 7 to 12 years. The program
is successful because we are not turning any kids away. There will
be no funding from any other source. M Mr.
Ramsey questioned the support staff expenditures, j
Johnson stated $1,300 is for on hand direct leadership and the
support staff will be the MLK Recreation Specialist who will be the
person supervising the two individuals, helping with the program
and scheduling classes, There will be a portion of Mr.Johnson's
time and a portion of the Recreation Specialist's as well. The
Recreation Specialist will be someone already trained and
;r currently on staff at the center who has a background working in i
this particular area of supervision, i ,
E ytrl j
6
I
i"
f
i
E
~ r
r
Pg. 1i
Vi, Elizabeth Garrett Ki s Place
` Me. Garrett stated this will be an emergency shelter for children `
under the age of io. She said it is almost to the point of
onin. will see a
Services nexteMonday who will padviseawhat is toibe doneeafter
s getting her license.
Mr. Ramsey questioned the need for the shelter.
under the age
Ms. Garrett stated there is a need for children
of ten who are abused sexually, physically or neglected. The
typical source of clients will ba Child Protective Services. Me.
Garrett states she has gone to both colleges here in the city
asking for volunteers and offering volunteer work with students. ; of Human.
Each child will come with some funding from the Department
Services. We will contract with them through Cecila Thome*. The r
children will come from Child Protective services or off the
street. If the child is brought to Kids Place the property
authorities are called.
Mr. Hill questioned the cause of this new placement facility. ;
Me. Garrett stated there is a lack of apace in Denton for t~.
'•x,:
~
children under the age 10. AL this time, Kids Place will not
address older children.
Ms. Rodriguez questioned Me, Garrett about her license.
Me, Garrott stated she will be licensed but is not licensed at
i this time.
Me. Garrett explained that she has several members on hor
i board at this time. Bill Midget, Virgil Lowery with Denton State
School, Mr. Falan who is General Manager of Boeing, Jane Austin, '17 "
(Mitchell), Bill Barnett, CPA, Herman Wesley, Chaplain.
Me. Garrett, stated that she will try to open as a foster
group home, which would take as many as ten children,
Me. Garrett stated she has dropped back to a single family
home and will license a foster family home as a temporary measure.
w Ms. Garrett expect to be open in the middle of May. M,r
Me. Rose asked on how many children will be served during a
years time.
Me. Garrett stated she did not know since this is a temporary
shelter, The City will only allow four unrelated unit in a single r
family zone. The house parents being one unit,-two makes one unit
as the couple is related by marriage which leaves three children
r being one unit leaving three children in a single family zone,
Me. Garrett stated she will open with the three children and
immediately negotiate looking for another place.
Me. Garrett states she hag sent out 42 grant proposals to
governments agencies, corporations, Mervyns, Wallmart and was
advised when she is open, come back and talk with them,
r-
Mr, Ramsey asked if they had a Board of Directors and a foster
Ms. Garrett 's function, Ma, <
couple to provide care, what was ~ •
r!' Garrett states she founded the corporation and she serves as the f
• :a i
.
• 'P ^K +4Fw1iQ Gai Vf P.^
1. ,
- - r r
• rl
i
t
p9. 12
Executive Director and this is a non-profit organization. The
corporation was found in 1999 and achieved the non-profit status j
on November i9, i990. Ms. Ross asked Me. Garrett if she was 11
currently Ga rettlstated there are no employees.
Mr. Ramsey questioned Ms. Garrett as to what the relationship
is between the foster couple.
Me. Garrett stated the couple have agreed to work for the
first three months without pay if necessary in order to get it
started. Room and board is what the couple will be getting.
Mr. Ramsey questioned Ms. Garrett if her request was for
funding for the cost of rent for a year.
Ms. Garrett ate, ted yes.
Mr. Rodriguez asked of funds for the rent was ail that was
keeping them from opening 1s the rent as far as their needs.,
He. Garrett responded by saying the license is the delay but if
the Committee does not fund the shelter somehow she will get the
funds for the other needs.
Mr. Ramsey pointed out that the shelter would have to be open v=r^
before there are any children.
S Me, Garrett stated yea, the shelter would have to be
officially licensed and in order to get the license they stated the .ve
to have a fire inspection and a health inspection. a ,
has talked with frank Robbins many times and that three is the
maximum number she can house. }
Mr. Hill questioned the distribution of funds on a one year !
b, rent project. How would the $5,400 dollars from this project be
disbursed?
Ms. Ross stated that all agencies are set up on a t
is
reimbursement basis and they would have to provide receipts for
Rose aske
their rent payment and then would be reimbursed. Ms.
if Me. Garrett had a commitment for and funding from any other
sources, Me. Garrett stated she had no written commitments, they ,
t went to see if we're going to open.
Mr. Ramsey stated that the key to any consideration by the
i Committee would be successful licensing. S
Ms, Garrett stated being a maximum of three children in the
home, they would only need one house parent, because the ratio is;
one to four under age five and one to eight to age ten.
Mr, Ramsey questioned would this be X21,000 personnel cost and
is this paying for the couple of one individual.
i Ms. Garrett stated the personnel cost is for the house parent
and a social worker part time which may not be needed if the
license can be obtained for a foster family home, because this
social worker would be from CPS. When we get in a foster group
home a social worker will be needed then. Ms. Garrett also related
n, that she has gotten many people from the community to do volunteer
5 relief. Ms, Garrett stated that at the and of three years she will
apply for United Way Funds. There are several corporations that
afwill not give funds for the first two years of operation. q
i
~ ME
I
I
t
I
P9. 13
Mr. Ramsey stated that we could only commit for a one twelve `
i
month period at a time. will
` Ms. Garrett stated that by the end the first year she also
have more direction ae to where they will be going. i
noand t. they
9
stated they Josten's give ahe:5 a 0lettera aid for of eintent~ but shelter
said th y would {
Garrett stated she talked to walmart and talked to all of their + fund
employees at an employee meeting and they agreed to do a That
raiser and Walmart was to match funds with the fundraiser. {
a also never happened. Ms. Garrett stated she has received $600
dollars from Home Apartment Builders from a golf tournament last
September, a $5.00 so bcommented that ashe tea currentlymusingmher
fountain . She ,
offic
office and everything is paid for through her office ea there is
no expense.'
E k _ :o-<.,., a■r,■billtatton. Housi~~ Aeeist nce.
' i, yet. earbara__B~__
Me. Ross discussed the Housing Assistance Program and the r;
i
Rehab Program. She pointed out an error in the grant request forml
the $300,000 1e our normal allocation, the 1201000 is from loan
repayments which we are projecting we will receive next year.` This,
E means the request is for 5320,000, Ms. Rose also discussed that
Al Murdock fro m SPAN
The p°og am wouldtdota Community amountpoff nrepeirs
a new grogram
a an the homes of elderly citizens. Ms. Ross explained that the
liability involved when you don't totally bring a structure up to t
code was something the City could not afford. The Committee s 4
agreed. Ma. Rose stated she would write SPAN and explain this.
She ato theiredwaitingh@listl any yelderly lcitizensa that' , nee ed
add
assistance,
Mr. Ramsey pointed out that SPAN may have clients that would
1 not qualify for our low and moderate income category.
Ms, Ross commented that Mr. Murdock stated he felt they would of
i all qualify as low/mod. a°
Ms. Ross discussed the Housing Assistance Program. She stated p,
this would be a new program for Denton but that many cities are
currently m~liee, nor if we need to cut back we can,assistua mall r
i 9 1 "
r number.
Ms. Rodriguez asked if this program were different because
C.D. purchased the house.
Me. Rose explained that the program would pay whatever it cost
for the family to get in the house; down payment, closing costs
etc. The family would make the mortgage payments. Community
DeveloKmant will work with both the prospective homeowners and the lh, d
lending institutions to help the deal go through. Obviously, no
family will receive CD6G funds if they do not already have a
commitment from a lending institution.
y i•
..~snJr'+s6~daw5rH.:.~ J1
R
I
t i
h
a
f Y
Pg. ib
Mr. Ramsey added that staff would do some research to ensure
that the families could make the mortgage payment and maintain the
property.
Ql: Ms. Ross said that is correct and a lien will be placed on the 4
property for five years. If the family does not maintain the house
or were foreclosed upon, the City could get some or all of the CO6a
funds back.
Mr. Ramsey asked if the families would qualify under the .
current low/mod income guidelines.
3 Ms. Rose said yea, 80% of the area median. '
Mr. Ramsey inquired as to the availability of homes for sale
within the economic capacity of these families.
Me. Rose stated there were even some new homes in the 60-
60,000 range that some families could afford.
Me. Norton asked if the families would qualify with the banks
first or the City.
Me. Ross replied that since the C.D. staff would be working
with the banks, approval for both loans would probably occur
simultaneously.
VIII. Discussion and Consideration-of Funding Recommandationa.
Mr. Ramsey directed the Committee's attention to their tally
sheets. He mentioned that Alexander St. Drainage was in the 61P
and would possibly funded at a later date but not necessarily' next
year.
The request total was calculated. Ms. Ross stated that the
requeats were $123,568 over the allocation amount.
Ms. Norton asked if that included the Alexander St. project. {
Me. Ross replied yes.
Mr. Ramsey asked if any carryover from previous years.
Me. Rose said yes, the $100,000 from Urban Homesteading. She
{ stated that Denton had not received final approval or denial of
their participation in that program. She continued by saying the
Committee could reallocate those funds at a later date if Denton
y were not approved for the program. She mentioned the Committee
might went to allocate the funds to Fred Moore Child Care fort,
rehabilitation or for a housing project under the Public-private
;n Partnerships for Affordable Housing Program,
Some discussion took place concerning CDBO'e participation in `
the rehabilitation of the old Fred Moore High School=
Mr. Ramsey asked Committee members to complete their tally
sheets and tell him their priorities.
Ms. Rodriguez voiced her concerns regarding KIDS PLACE and the
y
fact that they were not yet licensed. She stated that CPS does not
like to take children out of the home. She felt there were
-
r
the children.
sufficient foster homes for
Ms. Rose commented she thought they were always in need of
additional foster homes but, they do the beet with what they hays.
zgr" They try not to take the kids out of the home if at all possible. f
rr i
x tir.1.Niedlnrs.b.r. J[°'9Y .
v
,It
AH
1 i
I
,
1 Pg. 16
Parental rights are very strong in Texas.
Mr, Ramsey stated that Housing Rehabilitation was the 01
priority, second place was Housing Assistance, next was Demolition
and TWU Ceres. He continued by stating that 06 tiwould on w bei1OPE'*
request and then the Prenatal clinic. Kid connec7 with
Watson St. Sidewalks also a priority. Alexander was 09 and KIDS
PLACE was 010.
{ Meg Rose reiterated that 5123,668 needed to be cut. She f
stated that if Alexander St, Drainage were cut then the balance to
1 be trimmed was =22,368. If we also cut KIDS PLACE we still need
to find sil,368 to reach our limit.
Discussion continued concerning Me. Rose Drainage d it was and
whether it was scheduled in the CIP.
I the CIP but the bonds had not yet been sold, It might tske 2-3
•t t C!
years for the project to be funded.
Mr. Stephens suggested cutting the Kid Connection, reduce
_ Watson Sts
se Sine that e amand if ount the City Engineering can't come o up h witheadditional
a decree
funds.
Ms. Norton asked if we wanted to put sidewalks ahead of kids.
Mr, Stephens commented that the sidewalks meant safety for the
II kids. should reduce the HOPE
i Ms. Parker asked if the Committee r;.
allocation.
The committee discussed the cutting of HOPE and Kid
Connection.
R, Ms, Rodriguez felt that HOPE served a vital need and that they
are we cut very some fundingtfr mathehHousingrAssistanceePr gram mines it
is also a pilot program.
Ms. Rose said certainly both the Housing Assistance and fi
Housing Rehabilitation could be out.
The Committee agreed to cut KIDS PLACE and Alexander St, 1
Drainage.
Ms. Ross pointed out that the City has a Human g`ervices i
Committee which looks at social service agency
stated that going to HSC might be a better avenue for the agencies 4
} requesting funds from CDSG. She mentioned that HOPE had received 1
k $6,000 in previous years and that the Prenatal Clinic had also
i requested funds from HSC. HOPE has also just Tturned in WU Cares did
111 Emergency Shelter Grant application for 11 41,000.
health to HSC, perhaps because they wiCill mot fund
spends
not come
the
stated
e. Ross
M
~ care
for housing are from CDBG.
TWU Cares was discussed. Me, Norton commented that she had
some strong reservations about funding the project. She believed
that they should solicit the participation of other dentists. She
stated that the current dentist was not under contract to continue
~,:A
31
providing services.
Mr. Ramsey pointed out that the program rides on this single
0
I Ip t. ri• ti.''r l..,l nom., ~Mr'~rJ'.~"~iiil~
9
7 1'
1
f
Pg. 16 I
individual.
Ms, Rodriguez stated that the dentist was not being paid but,
that the money was being offered as a stipend. She described how
difficult to find doctors or dentists who would help medicare
patients. She related a story about how this dentist was willing
to help a small boy in pain when he had 12 people waiting. She
pointed that the money would not be paid out unless the program
continues,
Me. Norton said she was suggesting that there may be some j
alternatives. There may be other dentists who are willing to f, 1
provide some services. They provide services through the Kwanis.
Perhaps the Dental society should hear about these needs. My main'
concern is that we are giving money to a single dentist without a
contract when they are working out of the goodness of their heart.
Ms. Rose stated that Me. Rodriguez was correct. the city
would not hand over $25,000. TWU Cares would be reimbursed for
appropriate expenses. The dentist's stipend would have to be made j
on a monthly basis and we would reimburse them for the expense,
She stated however that it is very difficult to monitor service
agencies. ~
Ms. Norton reiterated that she felt the offer of a stipend i
should be made to other dentists.
Ms. Parker asked how did they get this dentist.
Mr. Stephens replied he just walked in off the street.
Mr. Stephens asked about HSC Committee funding. Was it for j
a single year? Who receives the money?
Me. Rose listed the agencies funded by City Council through
the human services budget, She stated that HSC recommends funding
for new agencies almost every year.
The discussion concerning TWU Cares continued, Ms. Rosa
stated that she felt Ms. Hamilton would be open to any suggestions i
the Committee may have regarding allowing the participation of 10
other dentists. She stated she would talk with Ms. Hamilton on the c
subject prior to any contract execution.
Me. Norton went on to mention that she ,as not sure that the
program at MLK should be abandoned, She requests that someone
discuss the changes that the new program incorporates.
Mr, Ramsey stated that the afterschool concept had not worked
well at MLK. The need at MLK is for something more flexible and K
a drop-in program would provide that.
Mr. Stephens felt that MLK was currently a drop-in Center and
Y should we i
wh pay money to continue that.
~
r The Committee agreed that if the Wilson St. Sidewalks are
funded and sufficient funds remained to fund the MLK `drop-in
program.
Mr. Stephens asked Ms. Rose to repeat her remark concerning
funding of service agencies through CDBG. ,
Mi. Ross reminded the Committee that there was a separate pot
of money for human service agency funding. She did not feel that
there was any reason not to fund the agencies requesting funds but
F
r;
ij2
xw
I 'IY ~.6>VC. fs n).u xa - - .4Nny yl V,v ,rY oP 4•i3~`'~y',y~'+' •
4
P9. 17 i
cases it may be more appropriate for those agencies to
in some c
request funds from the Human Services Committee.
The Committee again discussed the MLK Kid Connection. Me
Rosa pointed out that the program would no longer be under Brenda
Burton and the afterschool program staff but, would now be under
Steve Johnson and his staff.
Mr. Ramsey felt that the program was already paid for and that
CDBQ could offer supplies and funding for one program specialist
and the program could continue.
Mee Rose felt that Parke and Recreation would offer the
program unless they get very near the amount requested.
Mr. Ramsey mentioned the two staff members who run the program
~ will be new personnel.
Mr. Stephens brought out the possibility of reducing the
Housing Assistance Program. '
l Me. Rose requested that the Committer reduce the $rl r,
Rehabilitation and the Housing Assistance Program by equal amounta
to meet the budgets
;rJS ; The Committee agreed unanimously to fund all programs/pros~cts".
with the exception of KIDS PLACE and Alexander St. Drsinage. -the
Housing Rehabilitation and Housing Assistance Programs would each
be reduced by approximately $B,6o0 in order to accomplish this:
The meeting was adjourned at SM.
p.
i
f ly
Ali ~
t. ~r.
, r
.r
t
a a <
to i'
,
40
1 it I}
N M_w,at. •
`1ry~~+f aAf N ~ 4T1trWY.zw w. - .a.n....,...c.,w ,r... +„Le.~F.1N ',S, ~
i
I 1
' ^ ,t... r h ~ rN a ♦ tih
ti
Wool
i
i
PROPOSED STATEMENT OF q
COMMUMITY DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES j
AND PROJECTED UBE OF FUNDS
The objective of the City of Deon's Community Development Block Grant
m
Program is to support activities i,hich are directed toward the specific
objective of development of viable urban communities by providing decent '
housing, a suitable living environments and expanding economic opportunity,
principally for persons of low and moderate incomse The City anticipates i
receiving approximately 86310568 for its 1991 program year. Proposed
activities and objectives are as foliowai
Is Rousing Rehabilitation 13110516600
Continuation of the existing program to rehabilitate substandard houses
inhabited by low or moderate income persons living in the City$
objective, To bring existing housing into compliance with housing cods 0, r
and arrest deteriorating neighborhooda In the target arse+ Y
Location, City of Denton`
Census Tract's 208-SO I0 2070 209-83 1 6 9, 2100 208-80 1 6 2, '
2140 213-80 It 2120 2060090 206001-BO 10 2P 30 40 and S, J
201.03-39 20 201002-00 10 205001-BO 3 1
w 'r
2+ Housing Assistance Ptograal 1660516000
City-wide program to provide assistance to firat-time home buysra in the
{ following areal,
i ' As Minifum down payment required, I
' Be Closing costs.
CA Prepaid Insurance and esarow0
s"• D0 Pre-paid property taxee0
E0 Pre-pald interest,
funds will be available to low/moderate income families. Assistance is
originated as a second mortgage running concurrently with the first-'
Objectives To provide affordable housing for low and AWdiata in,"Ge '
fAmIIieI
LooationI City of Denton.
Census Tract's 206 ad 40 2070 202-00 1 6 20 2100 208-86 3 k 2i
2110 213-BO 10 212, 2060020 206,01-80 10 20 3i 10 and 90
0 201003.80 201002-00 40 205001-00 S
30 MLK Kid Conneotion Prograe 1190063600
A drop-!n after school program for children ages 7-120 Supervision and
activities to be provided in gymnasium, game rood, arts and crafts feom0
for i maximum of 30 children, Program will silo provide supatVislon fat i
children eight hours per day during Christmas Bresko Spring break, Teacher
f
a
I~
"
l
Proposed Statement
Page 2
Work Days, and other holidays, Program Will Provide a safe, actives
suiervised environment for children from low/moderate Income families in
t~r1 neighborhood,
Objectiveo improvement of public services provided to low and moderate
income residents. i
'F
r" Locationi 1200 Wilson St., Denton, Texas
Census Tract 212
4• Hope, tne• Transitional Housing Program 1140960600
Pilot program to assist homeless or potentially homeless families toward
establishing and maintaining self-sufficiency. Provision of rent end, w
utility assistance as well as other financial aid. Assistance will be
provided to two (2) or three (3) families for a period of twelve (12) to
twenty-four (24) months. Pilot study families will also be'asaisled'with '
assessment of educational or vocational skills and trainingi budget
skills# job skills* counseling or other social services. ~y
Objectives Improvement of public services provided to low end sodsrate" r ry°% r
r.
Income r4sidents,
Locet ion i 1213 Lodwt r Denton, Texas
Census Tract 206601 t
S• Denton County prenatal clinic 1240500600 M;` 1
1 r, 1
Provision of prenatal care for low income women from Denton county, runda $Yt
ll be used to ay a portion of the salary for an additional
M! P
nurse-Mldwife• I
Objeotivai improvement of public services provided to low and Moderate
1. 1' M /y
income resident$#
Locatloft 1 123 Pinar, Denton, Texas
Census Tract 207
d• TWu Carla 525,000.00
Provision of basic health and dental care for low income residents of
Iso p P
Denton,
Staff Provides Individual care re ~ terra
evaluations and health/dental education, Clinic is a joint project of the
Denton Housing Authority and Texas Woman's university.
Objectives The improvement of public services provided to low and
Moderate income residents,
4 tl rf y
Loeationi 306 South Rudely Denton, Texas
Census Tract 212
1 ~
1 v^
nay hkr*'0 a °'d < • - TM' N F ~ f'
..I
vet
I+ 4,,
y1~ .1
06-
k I"
Proposed statement
Page 3
76 Wilson street sidewalks $27sSOOsO0
Construction of sidewalks along Wilson street from Ruddell street to '
Bradshaw streete Project will provide safe access to children traveling
from NLX Center and Phoenix Apartments to reed Moore Parke
objectives To upgxade infrastructure In the targeted area as a part of
the process to stabilise neighborhoods,
Locations Wilson street, Denton, Texas ;
Census Tract 212
6, Demolition and tot Clearance 1160000000
Continuation of the 1961-65 program to demolish And remove vwoanto
substandard structures that contribute to the deterioration' of
neighborhoods,
objectives To eliminate spot seeaa of alum and blight partieulerly in v
low/noderate Incas areas, Spa'
Locations City of Denton
Census !riot's 206-80 10 2070 209-80 1 i 20 2100 206-Bed 1'a ss
2110 111-56 1, 2120 2060020 106,01.80 10 20 3, 1, and fs 3 ~"yr,`
201,03-80 20 904,01-10 10 206001-80 S
°
6s Administration 11270!1!.60 rr
Program managements coordination, monitoring, and evaluation aaeooiatad .t
' with carrying out eligible grant activities@ inoludings staff salaels~l
office equipment and supplies office rents maintenances and utliitiesi 1141
% j administration of rental rehabilitation, emergency shelf,! grahts`
t
i „ monitoring of Social Agencies, err
ew
f ,
< '
x r I ,I '
l .f
r
t
Y^' .
"r Am
1
1
r
DATEt 05/07/91
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
TOi Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROMs Lloyd v. Harrell, City Manager
i '
;4y SUBJECT! ACCESSORY USES
RECOMMENDATIONS
Pit recommends approval Of the attached draft ordinance f6-01. A
SUMMARY
The draft ordinance proposes to amend the definition of accessory r
to include 'customarily incidental to the principal uss and
;F
use
located on the same lot or tract and within the same eoninq,d[strict
to the principal use'. Accessory uses not to exceed 201 of theI
gross floor area of a building or buildings serving the principal i
use shall be allowed in the Office (0), Neighborhood Service (08)y a
General Retail (Oft), Commercial (04 Central Business (CB), Light
Industrial (L1) and Heavy Industrial (HO Distrieto.
~ CNOR NDr rb"~tRo February 19, 19911 With the discussion of 1-94.015, the medical j
r, ( office propose on Bonnie list near University Drive, Council F5
k directed expediting conditioned use and ineidentiel mixed (tae
j{
provUionr of the toning ordinance rewrite,
00
t~
March 7, 19911 The toning Ordinance Task Force decide not to review tt.M1
;I
t7 'piecemeal' amendments, which may be required on p high priority
basis.
a Marsh 20, 19911 Pat discusses ecceasory use options, reviews other
city's standards, and directs staff to prepare an ordiance. yrF;
' April 21, 19911 Pat recommends approval of the ordinance, '
8N Attachment 2 for a summary of other city's standards.
~ ~JE 'fIF r Yt irl 'Y~
PROORAMS, DEPIIRTMENT3 OA OiiOUP9 AFFECTEDI
Il t` ,
Mixed use developers and builders.;
r, k
r
r
}7 "
y
: iZ ,.b lea .,.I bP . .,.a, ♦ e . .a. ..r.A4..8.11M'r _ ,1.,~.pq
i y5yL
*71
Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 7s 1991
f Page 2 ,r
tISCAL IMPACTI
None
eC ully,submi Odt
Lloy • Bartell
x>,
Js, . Prepare a City Manager
tran Ao ina AICP
ulautive birector "k
kttachileAtss 1• braft Otdinancs, art
21 Othec's Btandacdao
einuteti
~ ~6S7X x M ct A
~ y
tIP i
S~ f
J
} j.
i
II ~k
A u 4 ri F~
~ TL
11 if
AI ( J!- ~ y~4.
t A Ov
E
g t.
r
~`J K AQ re df~11YG9f1'IlVR~"+M.'mrNik'1=1!f7~+6'
aPt;S' 4x'b' ';i`
Let
L
f
ATTACHMENT 1
• ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON$ TEXAS, AMENDING APPENDIX B-
Ilk ZONING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ALLOW ACCESSORY USES WITHIN
ENTIAL TS1 FOR A PENALTY IN THE
NON-RESID
SPECIFIED
F $2 000. 0 F RICVIOLATIONSITHEREOPI AND PROVIDING 1
MAXIMUM AMOUNT
`
'
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSI ,
exCTION i. That article 27 (1) of Appendix B-Zoning of the.
Code of Ordinances is amended to read as followss
A use of land subordinate to and
(1)
customarily incidental to the principal use of the
,
land and located on the same lot or tract and
within the same toning district as the principal
` i r a r
uses x,r , l
SECTION ii, That article 19 of Appendix B - Zoning of the
M Code of Ordinances is amended to add the followings
Co Accessory User in Certain Nonresidential Die-,
tricts$ In the 01 Ns: Git, C. CB. LI and HI honing dis-6, 1
tricts, an accessory use not otherwise permitted shall be
allowed it the accessory uses
fy (1) is clearly related to the principal use pit the
lot;
;e(2) Does not occupy, when added togeher with all
other accessory uses t the lot/,, ta ar area in `
the gross
excess of twenty percent
floor area of a building or bu1ldingsj r
(3) Complies with the regulations for the districts is
other than use regulations f
parson violating any provision of this
nxc~r, U M That any
on be fined a rum not oxcsedin4
ioti
oa
ordinance shaiii upon nv d
$2,000~00~ L+ach day that a provision of this ordinance is violAtr
shall constituto a raparate and distinct oftenm ;
That this ordinance shall become effective
date of its passage, and the City.
fourteen (i{) days from the
secretary is hareby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance
to be published twice in the Denton saRec within tin (10) daysf icial
newspaper of of the
the City of Denton,
date of its passage$
a ~
PAGE effit
1
i
.w.::..
-
PASSED AND ArPROVED this the day Of
I 1991, -
. 4BOB CASTLESERRY, MAYOR
I:
'd ATTESTi jr.
L JENNIFER WALTERSi CITY SECRETARY
f BY
' APPROVED A9 To LEGAL YOM
DEBRA A DRl1YOVITCH i CITY ATTORNEY f " z {ri~;ti `
I ~ rlr
ra"Y1 •~.-~1 ~.p'~"
BY,
.I
a
'd
r
~t r It
I
r ,~'i' a r ss~~
f r '
#Sr 6 r i ,f
t
k
sYr.r
t
.
PAGE 2
s .
s
'ns,5r#f3iiirJ4~
All I. .
_ mow. .-..r.. '
opm
I
{
ATTACHMENT fit
Ij
A. Arlington
Professional Business District is intended primarily for
pro ess onal o f ces. Me ca laboratory, physical therapy,
dispensing optician, and dispensing pharmacy are allowed ad s`
incidental uses, '
A single incidental use shall not exceed 25% of the gross f
floor area of the building. All incidental uses in
aggregate shall not exceed 50% of the gross floor area of 'W
the building. r,
Office District is intended for general business offices. A' r
a ens ng p armacy and a dispensing optician in conjunction
with the use of the premises by an optometrist are allows r
as incidental uses subject to the 25% and 50% gross floor
area limitation. Public access to incidental uses shall be E
from the interior of the building. k;
1r lI 31
B. Carrollton
4 The Office District is intended for all general business and
j pro eas ona o ces. Medical and dental offices and
u'
" related accessory uses including clinics and prescription l.•
pharmacies are allowed where all activities are conducted
completely in an enclosed building. An accessory building
or use is defined as a subordinate building or structure
attached to, or detached from the main building and having
a use customarily incidental to and located on he same lot
occupied by the main building, or a use customarily'
Incidental to the main use of the property.
C. rdson
d.
The Office District is intended for general business and
j pro esa ona offices including banks and financial
institutionc incidental retail and personal service
activities are allowed in an office and industrial building PA
in excess of 30,000 square feet where the total square
footage of these activities comprise no more than 10% of the
gross floor area of the building.
incidental retail or service activities are activities of a `
retail nature intended to provide bapport and personal A
f:
PAGE 3
x _
x 4 I
1~L rI
N
i
f
Attachment #2
Page 2
l services to the tenatts of a building including but not
` limited to, personal care services such as barber and bbeeauty
shops, laundry pick up stations, printing and copy shops
~i office supply and staionery stores, travel agencies,
secretarial aervicex, candy/cigar/tobacco shops, Eloriets,
optical goods ..:asp photographic supply sales, film
f developing and printing, and professional pharmacies.
j
D, Austin
Accessory use regulations establish the relationships among
principal and accessory uses and also establish provisions
governing the conduct of accessory uses.
1, Commercial type accessory uses not permitted in the same
district shall comply with all of the following controleo +
n.
a, is operated primarily for the convenience of
employees, clients, or customers of the principal o` r:^
use,.
~0
b, occupies less than 101 of the total floor area,
co is located and operated as an integral part of the
principal use and does not compriee a separate }
business use or activity.
E. PAW x County, Virginia_
' The Office District permits accessory uses and accessory l' x^
service uses. e
These include perecnal service establishments, prescription,
establishments, and the selling of pharmaceutical supplies.; `yf
Y e Subject to the following limitatioass ;
No accessory structure shall be occupied unless the
1. principal structure is occupied or utilised.
2, All accessory uses and structures shall comply with
{i applicable regulation for the zoning district of the
pr ncipal use.
PAGE 4
1
I
3575J
„I
X1,4 r
14
a~k
e
Piz Minutes
March 20, 1991
page 11
I
Jerry Cott, Chairman of the aOVernment Relations Committee `.r
of the Chamber of Commerce, stated that Mr. Robbins her
spent a lot of time working on the amendments. The thing
that needs to be emphasised is the sign review beards That
will allow people in Denton to petition their peers and get
a fear hearing. The idea for sign districts is brilliant.
They can handle unique problems. The argument in laver of
r 20' signs is that they eliminate the need for face changes ;
because they are a viable alternativco
slick Smith stated that he is in the portable sign y i
business. It is a hardship on him not to be able to bring e•.
his signs in for one day to clean them up. Mre Robbins has;
said that the public does not like his signs. They can buys.
them it they want. He has had a lot of DeoPie Call his
that feel d!flecentlye He asked the Commission 1-:J please
put it in the ordinance to allow him to bring.his signs in
for cleaning, No her to put them back In the same loeatioo~
AG has people r+
because that is where they are ceglaterede
call him that want to put portable signs at their businersos end he has to tell them nog Ths, Commiaeton;has' Y z
said that they want to help businesamen. He is asking them
r to allow poeteble signs at grand oNenings for limited
period o'of time. Banners are not e►lteotlvie r.-
chairperson Brock Closed the public, hearing,
S
Mr. Holt asked the aise of the new American Crafter's mall fi
sign,
Moe Baker replied that it it 15' height. The message is 8' >d
tall and 121 wide. The area is 96 square feet. ,
Ms, Bakes showed the commission alldaa of signs around towno
f .S f;, t
The Commission discussed the proposed ordinance and phs w~
proposed sign districts,
Mrs alasscook moved to recommend approval of the proposed
sign ordinance# Motion was seconded by Mae Morgans
Mr. Appleton moved to amend that the maximum effective area
for a multiple occupant sign be 120 square lest. Motion N.
of second. ,r
k
cos
!ailsd lac ,
vote on original motion carried unanimously 0-0)o
i
Mee Holt left the malting.
w lie Dlscuaa adding inoldontlal retell and service uDes within
the Office District. i
" t k PAGE 5
•~aJ[:, . •+"Y~.3e!ey'~,a1,~4N.w8i p......,.. n..,( i`~i
7 A
S
i
P&z Minutes
march 20, 1991
page 12
I Staff Reports Mr. persaud stated that tot a recent zoning
I case on Bonnie Brae the Commission made no recommendation.
The City council approved the zoning change to an Office
Districts The petitioner plans to develop offioes, a
pharmacy, and storage. In order to allow thls# the Council
directed staff to look at the possibility of including some retail in orrice zonings Staff has surveyed other cities
and come up with a few option. Hr. Persaud reviewed the
r,
options with the Commission.
,a
The commission discussed the options,
Me. pereeud stated that other cities allow lncidontial
uses, Allowing personal services in different districts
can minimise trips, Staff is suggesting that the
incidential uses be limited to 10% of the gross floor area
of the development, That will control expansion. s
Mr, angelbreoht said that any setvioe people use would be. wa
allowed,
Not Brook noted that the ordinance could clarity that there ,
mast be a relation to the main use,
The Commission agreed on an option to add accessory uses
1 permitted in the non-residential sense but said that the F
issue of ownership for the accessory uses should be
clarified. They also wanted clarification that &doeaaory `p+
uses are those that are customarily related to the mein use,
VIII, Director's ReportN
Mrs Robbins reported that Owens Atataurant her appealed"to
d
the City Council but their cast is as yet unscheduled for
rise Council agenda, He also revlewa8 the itet"of upcoming
cases with the Commissions
IX, ruturs Agenda I t a m a
Mrs Robbins stated that the conditional use ordinance will
-t be scheduled for the first meeting in Aprils The Parke
Board will soon present a resolution to add on to existing
recreation cantata instead of building new ones- They will
r' call for a raterandum in 1902t
Hooking adjourned at Ss10 p.ms
26191
y N.
F C
PAGE 6
yfl I/
M~Y k' f I
A il~ ~f_ 11y~ Y{ G
!AN
.
4
1
AP&z pril
f ril 24, 1991
Ap D RAN
page 2
e:
Motion was made by Mr. Kamman, seconded by Mr. Engelbrecht,
and unanimously carried (5-0) to recommend approval oaf ndhe
reliminary aBlocknB, DonnatDelfEstatesof Lots 31 4, '
into Or
dation amending
IV. Hold a public nearing and consider a recommen y
the general zoning ordinance concerning accessory uses.
Staff Report: Mr. Persaud reported that at the March 20
meeting the Commission considered three options for allowing
limited retail and personal services activities in the
office District. In the discussion which followed, the
commission agreed to adopt a "comprehensive" as opposed to a
'band aid' approach, which will deal with accessory es in
specified non-residential districts.
amending Appendix B-Zoning of the code of ordinances to
allow accessory uses within specified non-residential
districts has been prepared. Section I of the draft
j ordinance proposes to amend the definition of accessory use
to include "customarily incidental to the principal use and
located on the same lot or tract and within the sametzoning
district as the principal u wf.
exceed 20% of the gross floor area of buildings devoted to
the principal use shall be allowed in the Office,
Neighborhood Service, General Retail, CommerciAl, central
Business, Light Industrial, and Heavy Industrial Districts. a
rly related to the 1
Mr. Engeibreche asked if the term 'clea
} principal use" could hold up legally.
Mr. Persaud replied that it ties in with 'customarily
incidental" in the proposed new definition of accessory use.' I
The Commission discussed examples of what could be deemed as
accessory uses. Y^
Mr. Pereaud stated that accessory uses are intended to serve
the principal use.
Mr, Morris stated that there may be some questions and he is
not sure that the exact wording can be tied down. The 20%
of floor area may be a protection.
Mr. Glasscock said that the market will take care of most of y,
j the questions.
y Mr. Persaud stated that he has spoken with Carrollton and
they don't have problems with accessory uses. The market
takes care changes could be made h later non
and if there are on,
i
PAGE 7
1
1
M PSZ Minutes
'
{ AQril 24, 1991 " "RAFT
1 Page 3
are intended
Engelbrecht said that accessory uses as are
additional service to the original target market. They are
f not intended to serve the employees of a business but the
customers of one.
Mr, Persaud stated that such a concept was discussed but odds
left out of the ordinance because of enforcement difficulty.
i
Would not be allowed allowed because they
if
Mr. Engelbrecht said that uses could
an enforcement
serve the principal market. They It is not they didn'tetoedthe custheereitial zoning.
o with in
f i sue, it has
Ms. Brock asked if there would be any control over uses once r
the zoning was granted.
fi
F Mr. Persaud said no. Accessory uses would be automatic if
the ordinance is approved,
Mr, Appleton asked who an appeal about an accessory use
would go to. 04
Mr. Morris said that it would be handled by the Board of t
Adjustment. He said that he thinks adding wording about the
convenience of customers would make the proposed ordinance
,sR
j even more ambiguous.
me. Brock asked how accessory uses work in other cities. 1 Mr. Persaud said that cities with more updated ordinances`
allow more flexibility. Carrollton is not having any
problems in this area. Arlington has 50% of floor apace yA.
theese provisions; E`.
r devoted to accessory uses. Presumably,
are working for those cities.
Mr. Engelbrecht said that the market takes care Of many ,
J^
issues. offices usually are not located in general retail
areas and general retail does not work in areas without high j
traffic counts. {
' Mr. Persaud stated that 20% limits will not result in any
significant increase in traffic generated in those areas.
No one was present to speak in favor or opposition to the
' i
proposed ordinance.
After discussion, the Commission agreed to recommend that
Section 11. C.2 of the proposed ordinance be amended tofr ad
that an area in excess of twenty percent +
' gross floor area of all buildings located on the the same
lot or tracts and"
PAGE B
i
ti
p&2 Minutes AFT
April 24, 1991 ~ILI
'k page 4
osed i;
r Mr, Glasscock moved to rUSeS a damendedal,Mof the otion waa p
ordinance for accessory carried (b
seconded by Mr. Engelbrecht and unanimously
2658X
1 f~'
JCS
.'y Y
h
pY
{r r
' h V i
r ~1
A
1
r 3
PAGE 9
I ....,,_..,..r.re ncafae;w MrPh'4::4S6iK~WMi4.rr.^ r
1
I
Y ty N
0
I
Y 1
r
i!
i
CITY
4.
COUNCTT
y I J.
a
µ,1d.
G
! r
~ ~ 1 Jim
wt.
f r I ~~~ir.
a
J pad 9
t ~0 { ,
i to S
~ Y p r?
l 1r
} 0! f
r ~
May 7, 1991
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
TO; MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
° CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE FINAL REPORT AND ACTION PLAN t !1
RE:
THEREIN FROM ALAN PLUMMER ON THE UPRATING EVALUATION OF
` THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.
RECONMENDATIONs
The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of April 29,
° i.1991, recommended to the City Council approval of the final
report for the wastewater treatment plant' "Uprating"
evaluation and the associated actions required to receive
Texas Water Commission approval of the study. a
RACEGROUNDs
Denton is in the process of changing Denton's wastewater
a. treatment plant discharge permit to allow the volume of
discharge to increase from 12 million gallons per day (MOD)
to 15 MGD with water quality standards limits of 10 m4/1
en Demand, 15 mg/l Total Sus ended Solids
Biochemical Oxygen °
'
F ,
and 3 mg/l Ammonia Nitrogen. The proposed permit includes
requirements for denitrification, an increase in the level Fy
of dissolved oxygen in the plant effluent (from 3 mg/l to 4`
mg/1) and facilities to remove chlorine from the effluent
before discharge. The main purpose of these effluent
discharge standards is to meet the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) goal of having all waters "fishable and j
swimmable". By reducing the ammonia, there is less food for
algae which depletes the oxygen in the water, By increasing a
the dissolved oxygen, more delicate fish are able to thrive 1
f
at the outlet of the wastewater treatment plant and by
removing the trace of chlorine that now exists, which is 1
used to kill bacteria and disease causing organisms, fish -
will not be injured.
r.
r : r
a
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
UPRATING EVALUATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
PAGE 2
In December 1989a Wastewater Treatment Facilities Master
would that it Plan was completedd which in icated renovations tocmeetDthese
;28,500,000 in plant ineering firms were contacted
new permit requirements. EnInitiated engineering
the and a selection ;mprovementsRequestse forireng design
necessary
were so Black and
proposals licited from Freese and Nichols,
Veatch, Camp, Dresser and McKee and Alan Plummer Selected
i
evaluating plant
Associates. Alan Plummer and Associates ev based
because of their innovatheetreatmentroach of plant capacity ba
performance and uprating performance.
on the results of plant t p lent
downrate Denton's p
The new permit lanttto as7~.4iMGDYplant even though Denton
p tly met the proposed increased
from a 12 e MGD ars, consisten
has, for y monitoring operations and quality
standards by carefully ability.
rocesses. The State bases their and pleat caperations
control P "worst case" conditions o 3
calculations on meets. sky.,
standards that are less than Denton consistently
s
aTexisU
E?d oveo to conduc
asrWater } ,4
Alan Plummer and Associates that would Popr
Evaluation Study" that Denton's plant could perform ec the i
certain specific '
commission (TWC) standards with
proposed permit the need to
modifications, but without build large and
expensive new facilities.
at their meeting of July 23►
Public Utilities Board, Council approval, of the
The 1990, recommended to the City ratio Evaluation ti;
Engineering Services Agreement for hDenton City Council i
and the Preliminary Design. 1990 '
subsequently approved this contract at the August 7,
meeting. Board received a
March 27, 1991 the public utility ,hn cook of presentation by Lee Head and Evaluation ofAthe Pecane
on Crook
Associates on the Uprating The presentation ,
i Water Reclamation Plant. {See Exhibit I)
roposed s
outlined the results of rovementstneededatoameet the previewed
the u the proposed plant imp j
permit standards at the 13 MGD design flow rate.
i
1
1
Sw•'
y
'IBM
s
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
UPRATING EVALUATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT f
PAGE 3 I
SUMMARY !
The Uprating evaluation of the Denton Wastewater Treatment }f
Plant is complete. Alan Plummer and Associates have ;
' assembled the data required by the Texas Water Commission E
(TWC) to evaluate the Denton project. Pending approval of
the final report by the Council, the next step for Denton is
to meet with the TWC and submit the uprating data for their
evaluation.
The issue of the pending permit renewal is becoming
increasingly important. Prompt approval of this Uprating
f evaluation and the associated discharge permit renewal is
needed. The Texas State Stream Standards are currently In
the process of being approved by the TWC. These stream
i standards may place additional permit requirements on the
f permit applicants currently in the renewal process.. It
would also be advantageous for Denton to have a State permit
In place prior to expiration of our EPA discharge permit on
September 19, 1991.
The Uprating Evaluatior. Study indicated that Denton could
meet the proposed standards and even increase the plant I,
r St
volume capability to 13 MGD with $7.4 million, in uprating
improvements and, in 1997, add two MGD of capacity to the i
plant for an estimated ;5.5 million. The Capital F
Improvement Plan approved by the Public Utilities Board on
April 29, 1991, which will be reviewed by the Planning and
Zoning Commission in May includes the $7.4 million uprating w`
of the Wastewater Treatment Plant
FISCAL IMPACTI
The costs associated with the Uprating Evaluation were
detailed in the Engineering Services Agreement at ;81,802.
~J
i
h
~ ,ter.-r.1.Ai~s
I
it
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
UPRATING EVALUATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
PAr-,E 4
i
PROGRAM/DEPARTMENT OR GROUPS AFFECTED:
Citizen of Denton, City of Denton Public Utilities, Alan
Plummer and Associates.
Prepared bye Resp tfully submitted,
owa : art , hector Llo d V. Harrell,
Environment 1 Operat ons City Manager
Approved by,
R.E. Nelson, + Sv
Executive Director of Utilities xF
4;. v • r
~ r x, r r . y 4°"
r Exhibit It Upratin4 Evaluation Executive summary r
II: Minutes PUS Meeting of 4/29/91
r Y
r
PUB491.17
fix;
.
I
nqn' "
r... err vpaq y.:.,. nY '.`i .MR M?'•f.;•.5 ya~.~2~h}ft'.~Wg
M 30w
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY G'
The Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant receives and treats wastewater for the r
City of Denton, Texas, The City is currently in the process of renewing the '
existing discharge permit for the plant. This Plant Uprating Evaluation has been
prepared In conjunction with the City's renewal efforts. The purpose of this
evaluation is to present appropriate operating data, results of analyses and
calculations to support an uprating of the plant's design capacity.
Five years of historical wastewater records were compiled and analyzed. A
statistical analyses of wastewater flows and waste strengths and loads was
performed and is presented herein.
A discussion of permit limits and the plant's performance in accordance with
these limits Is also presented. This comparative analysis was based on limits
which are expected to be included in the renewed permit.
The capacities of Individual treatment units were determined on the basis of the '
Texas Water Commission '0esign Criteria for Sewerage Systems.' These capacities
i
were calculated so that the maximum allowable design and peak flows to the plan
based on the criteria could be established. A hydraulic analysis for the plant
and an overview of Operating and Maintenance (08M) concerns were also prepared
and discussed in this same section of the report.
A field analysis of oxygen uptake rates was performed in two of the plant's P. I
aeration basins. This testing and the associated calculations were performed to
`
that actual values of oxygen transfer efficf(ncy under the specific field r-
conditions of the Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant could be determined.
The findings and recommendations associated with the analyses discussed = 'I
hereinabove are st4arized as follows:
i
1 I yf
1 a
tF`y r s, I
IJ
EXHIBIT
i
_
1. The 30-day average flows received at the plant over the time period r.
analyzed have remained relatively stable at a dry-weather 'base" flow
for each year of between 8.0 million gallons per day (MOD) and
e 9.0 HOD. Although the average monthly flows have increased
dramatically at times, they have typically returned to the base level. ;
j These periods of increases in flow are reflective of spring flood
events, otherwise indicating only a moderate increase in the base
level over the past five years.
2. Average and average plus one standard deviation (86th percentile)
concentrations of 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (804,), total ;
suspended solids (TSS) and ammonia nitrogen (NH,-N) have been ;
relatively tow and indicative of a wastewater which is mostly domestic
in origin. s,
G ~
3. The treatment plant has performed well during the period of record'
analyzed. Discharge concentrations of 8006, TSS and NHa'-N, as well as u
discharge loadings; of 800, and TSS, were compared to levels
anticipated in the renewed permit. These values hive aylea"Id lit'
than the expected permit limits almost 100 percent of the time.°
4. The capacity analysis has shown that the maximum theoretical hydraulic
1 flow which can be processed through the plant is approxjm tily.
a ' 27.50 MOD. The limiting factor or hydraulic constraint for the plant ~
appears to be the piping between each set of aeration basins and final
clarifiers.
' S. 4SM concerns discussed centered around waste activated sludge pumping
and leaks in the air piping to the aeration basins, Both items are
currently being addressed in conjunction with preliminary design s3r'1
efforts.'t
r
111 ;
1
1.2 t
11
1
i yy ff•
• ~ . r.. .-•.,n F -'~culev .'YnW'J./A y4U~P,~j (/K9L},yy-~r'YI' Y l.r l' l V .
f
EXCERPT
PUBLIC UTILITY BOARD MINUTES c
APRIL 291 1991
6. CONSIDER FINAL APPRbVAL OF REPORT AND ACTION PLAN
THEREIN FROM ALAN PLUMB ON UPRATING OF THE WASTEWATER
TREATKENT PLANT PROJECT.
Martin introduced this item detailing the series of
I improvements Denton will need to meet permit
l' requirements at a 12 or 13 MGD design flow.
He introduced John Cook and Lee Head of AlannsPlummer
Martin
r who :+ere available to respond to any qoestio.
and
allio advised the uprating study is finisheWater staff
xould like to take the Study to the Texas
Commission and get them started on their review as soon
as possible because:
a) The State of Texas stream standards are in the
i "
process of being reviewed and will be approved
soon. These stream standards may Impact :r
permits that are still in the review process;
b) Denton s NPDES permit will expire 9/19/91 and it
t: will be beneficial for the Denton Plant to'haVe
their new State permit at that time. ~y
Martin concluded by advising the Board that the staff
recommended approval of the uprating evaluation and
4
associated timetable outlined in the study.
Chew made a motion to accept the study and associated t FAY'-
i,
action plan. Second by Frady. All ayes, no nays,
motion carried.,
should realize that
~
unity r,.
Thompson stated that the comm A
a savings of approximately $4-$5 million has been made
I
by this investment of $81,000• Martin stated that by
et the design flow of
uprating the plant, Denton can g
13 M43D and can put off the capital expenditures
associated expansion.
with Nelson emphasized this savings is also the result of
operations activities; because of the excellent record
in plant operations, Dentor was able to prove to the
TWthat we could meet the
minor facility new
p ermit criteria
improvements.
x EXHIBIT
I Fay;
1
~s
May 7, 1991
J
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
it I i
7,.
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
p
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
RE: PILOT CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM `
` REcommENDATION ;
The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of ApNOlac29 tion 9was
reviewed the pilot curbside recycling program.
i taken pending the outcome of the council decision regarding
commercial solid waste and further review during the budget
review process. :
3UlQIARY/BACKGROUND
t ~
PILOT CURBSIDE RECvCLING PROGRAM `
: The residential division began curbside collection of tin, Sluminum,
w glass, newspaper, and plastic on November 7, 1990, in an area
consisting of 904 households located in north Denton, weet of
Sherman Drive.
of collection was once per week until January when the
The frequency
collection frequency was changed to once every two weeks. aThe
nd
program began with 235 participants and has grown to 323 by the {
of March. Selected operating results are as follows:
Once per week Collection with Two Person Crew
d.
F
Avg. No. of Homes Per Hour _ 33.5
r,
Avg. Set-out Rate 8 or 35% of participants
Avg. Volume per Set-out - .23 cubic yards
Once Ever Two Weak Collection with Two Person Crew
Avg. No. of Homes Per Hour - 25.5
- 177.3 or 60% of participants
Avg. Volume per Rate Set-out ,23 cubic yards ;t
Avg. Volume k,
Through April 1991, 535 cubic yards (bulk of material at 'yam i
curbside) of recyciablee have been collected.
, At
I
i
{
MAYOR AND MEMBERS Of TIIE CITY COLKII,
May 7, 1991
Page 2
SURVEY OF PARTICIPANTS
r
Surveys were mailed to participants in the City of Denton's Pilot Curbside `
Recycling Program in an attempt to assess satisfaction with the program as it
is currently being provided, and to gain insight into possible improvements i
Y to obtain citizen input
ed metal ,
I~ ,i, • that might be made, The Survey was conducted
regarding this program and the results are analyzed solely for this purpose.
The response to the survey was overwhelming. Of 278 surveys mailed to partici-
pants, 210 were returred on a first mailing for a response rate of 75.6%.
Survey respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the program. The
choices ranged from very satisfied to very dissatisfied, The results were as follows
Respondents Percentage
Very Satisfied 130 61.9 1
Somewhat Satisfied 56 26.7 1
Neutral 12 S.7 1
Somewhat Dissatisfied 5 2.4
Very Dissatisfied 5 2.4 1
No Opinion/No Answer 2 .951
:A
a Of 210 respondents, 20 reported having experienced some type of problem (9jS1)
Of the 20 who reported difficulties, 13 reported having had their' problems
f resolved (6S1). Of those who felt their problems had not been addressed, 611
expressed confusion as to pickup schedule.
The respondents were asked what frequency of service they preferred. The
respondents overwhelmingly preferred continuing the one time every two week
" schedule currently in place. j~
' sec,
Respondents Percentage
One Time per Week 22 ZO 1
One Time Every Two Weeks 135 64.3 1
One Time Every Three Weeks 21 10 1
A One Time per Month 30 1.431
No Answer 2 .951
Y ~1f
ylJ
k %I
fJ ,
r ,y Ll rFr.
lW2/os0191125/2
4 sr, Y h
ti'. I ,
1
i
v
_ III
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF TTIE CITY COUNCIL
May 7, 1991
Page 3 F.
The type of container preferred by the majority of the respondents was the `
stackable containers. Those had the single tub expressed dissatisfaction with
the size of the container. Other comments related to throwing the stackable
containers about the yard once they were empty. Other complaints related to
~
ti
how hard the stackable containers were to store and that for older persons, how
difficult they are to carry. The majority of respondents expressed a prefer-
ence for stackable containers as follows:
Respondents Percentage
"r
Vy ,
Single Tub 37 17.6 1
Nesting 71 34.8 1
Stackable 101 48.11
No Answer/No Preference 1 .481 t.
J{
Seventy percent (142 respondents) expressed being very to somewhat satisfied
F with their containers. X~.
r r,
When asked if they preferred to use plastic bags, 149 respondents answered no
(711) 51 responded yes (24.31) and ten answered no preference/no answer, tp.
.y
. (4.815. E M~
One hundred eleven (111) v: the 210 respondents indicated a willingness to ppaay
l-
a fee for recycling Ninety-four (94) of the respondents were unwil
ing to pay for the service (44.81). Five (5) respondents had no opinion or . ` #$A
provided no answer 41, Those who indicated t easwere not willing to pay
fees suggested using tcsidential rates based on demand.
Respondents requested recycling cardboard, other paper, motor oil, and other '
glass and plastics.
One hundred eighty (180) of the respondents stated their containers were i
one-half full to overflowing. The respondents also reported that of those.who ~s-
had full to overflowing containers, 561 reported fewer than two bags of regular '
trash. ;le
Seventy-one of the respondents were older than age 55 (341), and 62 were 26.35
(29.51) representing most of the participants in the program.
r P,l
1 A
p z
~!r IW2/050191125/3
,
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF nE CITY COUNCIL
May 7, 1991
Page 4
cinviDE RECYCLTNG
A s lemental decision package for citywide curbside recycling has been s
included with the residential solid waste budget for FY 1992. + -j
z: {
Two options were evaluated for citywide curbside collection. The first in-
volved use of truck and trailer as we are currently doing in the pilot program,yf.
The option in quire hiring four employees with less expensive equipmnt.
This option would re
eluded in the budget requires hiring two employees and purchase
more expensive vehicles and is less costly than the true and trailer method.
The program assumes up to 6000 Participants and would require hiring two
drivers and purchase of two fully. integrated recycling vehicles along with other necessary equipment. The program will cost approximately $208,973
per year with revenues of $26,929 from sale of materiel. If all residential ~x
e.: customers paid for the program whether they participate or not, the cost would be be $1,20 per month or $1,05 per month if sale of material
is used to subsidize .y YY 4".
the program. }
It is estimated that the volume collf. from the curb would be 21,528 cubic
-cted
yards. Because of compaction of plastic and breakage of glass, this would
translate into approximately 12,171 cubic yards to be hauled to market and it
is estimated that 7,520 cubic ands of space would be saved at the' landfill
# . ,
(approximately one week of life expectancy saved per year), an represents
approximately a 9.41 reduction in residential waste. i }
It is estimated that 6000 of our residential customers will participate in;the ~
' program with an average set-out rate of 601 for once every two week collection, %
r
The program will cost $2.23 per set-out with a landfill avoided cost of $.28
per set-out and a value of $.29 per set-out for material sales.
a.
. PWDGRAbiS, DEPARIIM5 OR GRAUPS AF'FEC :
rs Cus omers
:
. ,
' Residential Solid Waste wA4
Solid Waste Division
i ,
o A
btu.. v d~,
r~ Iw2/OS019112s/4 p
y'
,
5 ' I047diSWbXan~
1 ~ 1 I
I
{
r.
I
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
May 7, 1991
page 5
14
Ile
I
FISCAL IIPACT:
A " L Cost of pilot curbside program - 179272 '
o J,ly
d. J Cost of citywide program - 1208,973
Respectfully submitted;
4i
LIDO V, HARREM
CITY MANAGER
T Prepared by:
r , r
} e o
Common ty Services
t', + Director o
Vs} y *`'.:ysApproved Yyi r .:A Yli,!
I Y [
r e son. '
sMJ f' Executive Director of Utilities
f' K 't
r a
r, Attachments: Graphs and Charts Ufa,
Monthly Recycling Data
;E supplemental Packa a
Minutes of Public Utilities Board Meeting, ' .I,.
~I April 29, 1991 Sr.;
1~ A4'N
f { to /V'~ _ ;r •V
7t' y V! ~ 3 1 r, a µµ44,y{{))
M1/ ~I 1, of
1W2/050191125/5
s
T
f ~r t
77
1
1
lilili
EXCERPT f
r
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MEETING
APRIL 29, 1991
i
. RECEIVE REPORT ON CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAX,
r
Angelo introduced this item stating the teat program r '
started in July 1990. The object of the test program
was to identify the level of public acceptance and F:
participation, the volume and type of rbcyclables, "
manpower requirements, equipment requirements,
scheduling requirements, container needs, suitability,
and landfill space required.
w.
The program began with 260 participants which has i
escalated to over 350 participants (or 43% of the ;r, x•,
,
,
'vat;
i people on that route). Most voluntary programs in the
United states get a 301 participation rate. ,
one determination that was made was the "set out rate") 4v
a number of households set out quite often at first,
but then held material and set it out only once every.
two weeks. The "set out" rata continued to decrease
and in January, the city went to a once every two weep
pickup.
Overall this bears out that with a once a week pickup;{
t 35% of the participants will set out for collection) on,,
a once every two week pickup, you will get 65!
participation.
w An alo then showed comparisons of types of collection,.`
pounds collected, revenue generated and costs o '
' nk
collection. He advised that all categories show a lose. v
Denton has spent more money collecting than selling.
The markets are very bad.
A questionnaire was sent out with 751 responding. They
indicated
a) 52.91 would be willing to pay a fee, while 44.8%
were not willing to pay for this service- five
respondents had no opinion.
Frady stated he could see where the city would
gain from such a program, but how would the
individual gain? ,j
f Angelo stated by landfill space saved and impact
on environment. Frady asked if collecting every
a two weeks would cut down on the number of
;It
employees. Angelo stated this would have no impact
on the number of employees.
I .1
-M - .r....;... is
t
I
Chew asked if expanding this to a city-wide program
would cause an increase of two additional personnel)
Angelo said yes, two additional people and two
recyclable container trucks.
Laney stated he talked a friend into signing up to '
judge the service. His complaint was not service, but
he said he simply does not accumulate enough= It
apparently takes two weeks for a family to justify
taking their recyclables out to the curb. Chew stated
if staff is not contemplating including the entire city
a in the program, what areas are being contemplated?
Angelo stated the budget supplemental package in for
city-wide implementation, but that only a continuation
of the existing pilot program in the North Central part
of the city is included in the budget.
Angelo advised that the survey they did also inquired
as to container preferences the city provided three
types of containers. Stackable containers look like the
v
way to go. The response was not favorable on the clear
plastic bags used the first eight weeks. 751 did not
prefer plastic bags. 69.91 were very satisfied with
stackables, 26.74 somewhat satisfied and 2.41 somewhat
dissatisfied.
Angelo stated the supplemental budget package lncluds~
a once a week collection and a two person crew, to
expand city-wide for a total request of $208,000. This
translates into a rate increase of $1.20 per
household. If the utility takes the money from selling,
' recyclables (approximately ;26,929) the rate increase %
would be $1.05 per month charged to all customers.
He stated the utility would divert 9.41 of waste from
the landfill with this program. However, the avoided ,
cost (landfill cost (;.28/pickup) + sale of materials
revenue (.29 cts/pickup) would not offset the
$2.23/participating customer cost which indicates this
will not be a profitable operation and staff is not
recommending implementation at this time.
Angelo advised there are 14 locations across the city
for people to bring recyclables. Due to the substantial
decisionmaking that must take place regarding the solid .e"
waste system, setting a recycling program in place at
this time would not be feasible.
Angelo also stated that some of the state legislation
proposed for recycling carries financial assistance, yy
and Denton may be able to get grant money to expand the
program. Nelson noted that the ;1-;1.20 increase would s
be across the board, and is predicated on a 301
,
F -r
participation rate. The more people that use the
service$ the higher the rate has to go.
ifi•
i~.
Thompson commented that the utility must continue to
look at the program. He recognized Joyce Poole and
Mike Cockran and expressed appreciation for their r
attendance and the film they brought, and advised the
Board would look at it next meeting. Thompson stated
the staff and board need to continue to look at
different options and costs, Chew expressed
appreciation to Joyce Pool and Mike Cockran for their
4r' work over the past few weeks.
" The Board indicated a general consensus that the
existing pilot program is to be continued, but not to f
.implement city-wide curbside recycling program at this
time.
/1f
L 1 5
r { .fir" f, Y 9j1, :
• r
r
. is
l~
r
t,
t
y { ~
P j
71
Mfr +•.w.v Mir ~rWA,+... 5 Y
i°~
Olt
I
CURBSIDE RECYCLING SUMARY
PARTICIPATION
400
t
300
W 200 ssx.
63%
tt a,'
b2% f r.`
100
34%
NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
MONTH
# PARTICIPATING ® # SIGNED UP
CURBSIDE RECYCLING SUMMARY
YARDS COLLECTED x
60
of • ;
50 _
r
a X174.
W 40
J {
30
Li.n
20 4 11 1.
T
1
10 = . _ i 4x
0.
NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH AF'FL
MONTH
TIN E2 ALUMINUM 0 PLASTIC
A K+
GLASS NEWSPAPER AL:,
a
, :...cxy.i:MMrx.n,-o- 4AT.,•N7W1pAFPr y,'' r r
I
CURBSIDE RECYCLING SUMMARY
TOTAL POUNDS COLLECTED
.
` 25,000 i
{r' . `fir
20,000
i . y2
y
15,000,
"1! r
r I
CL
' r
r 1} Jm5~1
V
4 lo ,ow
I t p.r
it k
I i
r,
r
j
z off,.
NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL.
MONTH
sl
rr,
y
r
?fit,: I . .....a 'i.
r r~
Tw-
1
f
i S
rr..
CURBSIDE RECYCLING SURVEY
I
Total Pounds Collected ; a..
1
,t v
' . ? Glass
A . }
17,214
w
edit
( F]"do
TV!
41
n i, . 1.~f~ it
r Om
y 1
r , h r 4 it .
~r r Newspaper
81,W2.26 t
J t ~4
1 !
Rr 11.k ~N ,FLt ,Y. ~ ~1
1{ i, R { w.r.rnrrr.^.. . ,•f.rr~r.,ru,n.r.r,r.w-•••• •^er+tAaw6FwYtvmuiNe.w~ r:N~M
r 1
i
sa.
CURBSIDE RECYCLING SURVEY
Total Yards Collected r~Ixy`Y
M
r
} f, Plastic
208.5
r a .
39.0196
AluminuM
I
23.75
4.44%
y' e f Tin
' 5.14!6 21.5 { F i
13.4196 ,y,
GI r "t
71,725 3896
F't
M. d € I"~ T¢Y.:
s ,
Newspaper
203.25
f~ ffff~~~
' a
i
z t ,
x ~
all ~ ~ Y : , l
Jl .h. v .ae.r~.w..e.YaMSwu.wr.,;J,.r..r........ "'•`"W/FMMN.A'w rw:,!N.~arw.ae....+wwrr 1..
P
77
N
owl
:
47
I
CURBSIDE RECYCLING SURVEY
Satisfaction level
~ r 5
ti;k~rr i.•s°t!
Very Satisfied a rr
0 'A
x
0130
} {y r
o f
' 81.9%
r r' .rte No OPIAWNA
- 2.4%
VOry.~
2.4% +M s
r Somswhot iDtMatle ~
ti . Neutral
IT T
'
28.7% 0 12
j f 1 1h
P
--A yzr 4 r", Somewhat Satisfied
t' IL I I
~Ti
r p
%
F~~=1 S~ ~ r p '
~~j~JT y S r
J~•rC?gr~~.~ ~J l' 1. +..,W.,...tnr+ul,raemn.~w it
77
I ~
pa
i r
k r'
E ?rr
r
•
F ! CURBSIDE RECYCLING SURVEY
Frequency of Service )1
~ z
} s a
#1trwo Weeks
1) 0 k ~ ~ I J
# 135
~Jf
t a 1 r' I ~4 ~r
r i i n
#I /wOok
~ y 4 u ~ ~ .`Z ~y ~ r x n ~ F e .r 7 ~rkP"~1 4 i-i(ii a, r i n y 6
64.3% r
is r a ~ x
4
r ,i 1
IOU
%
1 43%
10%
1~' ~ T 7. 1 b n
V r .r. [j r Sg1T1.
w t', ftf .
#I Mtn Weeks
021
Ta 1,7 F 'f' 1 3
AN
*)br 4 M••. { f 6 4) 1
r r
4
r
YL 1
J i. •.w+m..vvw..~.. -w,,..r •woa~.ra:>,.w~..•r+w.~'.. ,r++•~+.wr.w.....r... w1
q
14 Y1 b r W~1 r•,
01' 0
'I
\ .rr qtr,. fa 4"Ip
d >
i L
r
E
"y CURBSIDE RECYCLING SURVEY 'ff
Container preference
w A
r,
3 Nesting
V 71
IIrI
Silgie Tub'
34.896 ! a' V
V
\ j 1 H t r r1};. 7.896 ,{,k ~ Y }fitl'~
ff A'
NAMI P
(404) k
Ir
ri., nom) ~ \ x~~F.
48.1 % +
! ~ r fi;4 ~ 1
St®ckabie
# 101
v t,,,i : a ~ i tl ( 4
a? a.
yy. 6 + tl 6\ j I •
r r GF c ,
R ~i+~ ~y ~ T.VrV.swro++iC" nws+.w~.w..•+~M n`wIiVMPliM1 ~ t
+ 4: t ~ ~ r ' yiiM1 !~f S
If • y,1 rr~r- 1 J o . ~ '~.Y N 1 S~ n~ V ~ 1 ~'Y, '1% 1
ell
►W "1 ,
oil
M
. *41
r f 5i
i'
4 R
CURBSIDE RECYCLING SURVEY'
Willingness to Pay for Program
it
"•a? r ~ 'k + I n gyp. ix
f i w
Willing F,~ J
h- 9
f t
1, 5
d' ~ t< I y 1 n+~
r ~4'1,r ~ tl ~ I YI ~ N `A yf
~ Y A r 1 1{/L~ {'f`~.r+ I 1 ^ ~ tl 11~ a d.
•j t ~I ~..r ,V) O into 'Lill,
2.496
SS
t 44.996
451 ~ ~ !
7 pAy* r d~~ !r
r ri ~rfy' , tt ~ I n rs
Unwilling
x rti ,r. EY, r
,a
r, R
ids i4N?, r ~ i 9
"".ruwVnasH.w w~ev....i..rfAr+.imr.w".rw*n n..•«,.~••- .y...
'
t k~
gin: 7 • , R ,
fl a~ ~ J { v d r ~r i ~ ",rM d I6
Wa' Qr I ! hde ~ y~ I f ~
N
' .gyp ,.h! s.w J
i
"
,,.,MARY OF RECYCLABLES FOR NOVEMBER
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL "
CONTAINER YARDS POUNDS COLLECTION GAIN
*-4 MATERIALS FILLED COLLECTED COLLECTED REVENUE COST (LOSS)
4
TIN 3.760 3.160 82.600 1.050 26.14 (423.40)
ALUMINUM 6.600 6.500 97.600 42.900 43.68' ($0.0)r'
PLASTIC 16.000 30.000 240.000 4.800 100.66 (><f6.76)
} t
CLEAR GLASS 8.000 12.000 2480.000 43.200 40.22 5248 `
I:
GREEN GLASS 0.760 0.760 180.000 2.700 5.03 (82.33)
BROWN GLASS 0.875 0.876 210.000 3.160 6187 (82.72)
NEWSPAPER 15.000 46.000 14o966.000 74.026M 100.66 (828.03)
err
MONTHLY TOT 47.876 98.875 18,876.00 8173.33 8320.96 (8147.63)'.`
r
j SUMMARY OF RECYCLABLES FOR DECEMBER s'
1 `f
3 J
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
i CONTAINER YARDS POUNDS COLLECTION GAIN' `x
MATERIALS FILLED COLLECTED COLLECTED REVENUE COST (LOSS)
TIN 3.000 3.000 66.000 1.320 24.63 ($23.21)
ALUMINUM 3.000 3.000 46.000 19-BOO 24.63 04.73) ' 4.
.
PLASTIC 16.000 32.000 266.000 5.120 130.83 (=126.7 U f.
CLEAR GLASS 4.600 9.000 20160.000 32.400 31.80 (64,44)
' GREEN 0LA5$ 1.760 1.750 420.000 5.300 14,31 (N.01)
bi BROWN GLASS 1.760 11760 420.000 61300 14.31 (06.01)
i•` NMPAPER 0.260 2T.T50 9,240.760 45.204 15.64 (820.43)
MONTHLY TOT -39.260 78.250 12,607.760 117.444 83'20.96 (8203061)' "
1 1 ~YTOT39,2r~r~r~w~-r .r~~. ~~rrwwr_r~r+~~ssw-+= r
' ° Pxl
x; x 31' ; 1 .fi s
n
~ J~~. ,,i. 1 " '"w'NMb.AI'.~W1MIS.IM Y. i+'p.. 4~~~ J• 11
A
Ayl:
• r.
e
f
„
ARY OF RECYCLABLES FOR JANUARY
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL COLLECTION GAIN
CONTAINER YARDS POUNDS
FILLED COLLECTED COLLECTED REVENUE COST ILOSS)
-w---~-^-^---rrr-w_"'- -
MATERIALS
79.25 (176.E4)
4.500 6.000 132.000 2.640
TIN
=ti 41.12 (120.27)
ALUMINUM 5.000 3 250 48.760 21.450
I ~a
25.600 35.000 280.000 6.800 212.79 (1217.141 r
PLASTIC "
Y. 7.000 11.000 2,640.000 39.600 58.41 (116.611 y^1~
CLEAR GLASS G
18.78 813.311 ,
250 1.600 360'000 5.400' r
GREEN GLASS 2{
18.78 (113.36) r'
.250 1.600 380.000 6.400 , 4,
2
BROWN GLASS
F
16.760 35.250 11,738.250 68.691 139.71 (561.061 ~c ° ` ^4
NEWSPAPER - ^^rw^r_rrrr;
781 !669
2$0 w93.500 15,55.000 138.
MONTHLY TOT 66.
SUMMARY OF RECYCLABLES F FEBRUAKY }
t n+
f p
w TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
COLLECTION GAIN
CONTAINER YARDS POUNDS (L086)
sw±r
MATERIALS FILLED COLLECTED COLLECTED REVENUE COST (LOSS)
f "
5.250 5.250 115,600 w 2.310 46AI (046.3011
TIN l
1C
ALUMINUM 4.150 4.150 71,250 31.360 43.63 (t12,t6),
24.000 46.000 364.000 7.660 219,93 {l212.2d~ xr
PLASTIC '
41.24 Cl9,l45 I
CLEAR GLASS 4.500 9.000 2,160.000 32.400
1.260 16260 300.000 4.604 14.45 Cld.9d1 ~I ~1k y~Y
Xa GREEN GLASS 11.45 tl6,45) i
1.250 1.260 300.000 41600 I 4,,
gROWN GLASS
x° r
s' 00 14,466.600 72.428 132.61 f1l0.441 ,
NEWSPAPER 14,600 43.6
'a r+rar_rrrrrMrrrrwww _a_ . . , + yF
68 (5
00 113.000 179816.260 155.166 16064
4 MONTHLY TOT 65.6
jjj
s ^
4 r .a 1- terry.
p
MS ,
• w~. fi./+YMJM{Y1 r'WY`+i•yM WIR. hwM44Mi/.(t
ki
4 Mr a .5,',~ 1
,Y
MARY OF RECYCLABLE$ FOR MARCH
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL L '
CONTAINER YARDS POUNDS COLLECTION GAIN 4
{ MATERIALS FILLED COLLECTED COLLECTED REVENUE COST (LOSS)
- - - - -
TIN 4.250 4.260 93.500 1.870 55.47 (163.60)
ALUMINUM 2.750 2.750 41.250 18.160 35.89 (;17.74)
' x PLASTIC 12.250 24.500 198.000 3.920 159.89 11166.97)'
11
CLEAR GLASS 3.160 7.600 1,800.000 27.000 48.95 (121.98)
GREEN GLASS 0.626 0.825 160.000 2.260 8616 (16691),
BROWN GLASS 0.876 0.876 210.000 3.160 11.42
NEWSPAPER 6;000 18.000 5.994.000 29.970 76.31 048.94)
MONTHLY TOT 30.600» 58.600 8,484.760 88.310 $398.10 (1911.79)
-r-•r
{
J
! S..4ARY OF RECYCLABLE$ FOR APRIL r.,
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
CONTAINER YARDS POUNDS COLLECTION GAIN xy
MATERIALS FILLED COLLECTED COLLECTED REVENUE COST (LOSS)
---•rrrr--r----rrr.r»»»------»•»r-----»».r»r...._..r«,.»_rr__.._r.,..r.:rr..........
j TIN 6.250 5.250 115.600 2.310 70.88 068.61)
i f ALUMINUM 3.600 3.500 $2.600 23.100 4746 024.16) ;
4 PLASTIC 19.500 39.000 312.000 8.240 263.29 (1261.08
CLEAR GLASS 4.160 9.500 2,280.000 344200 84.13 (529.09)
^
r w S GREEN GLASS 0.800 0.800 192.000 2.880 10.60 07..02)
BROWN GLASS T'S90 0.800 192.000 2.880 10.60 (17.90
NEWSPAPER 11.250 33.760 11,238.750 68.194 1$1.90 {196.70),''
~f .r.n+,...~«»+r•«»»»r•..r.r r•r»rr..r....r...ir.r~. «r«r..«»........ - ~ i~
MONTMLY TOT 45.850 92.600 14,382.160 121.604 $619.06 ($491.36)
rrrrrrrrrr•rrr«rwrrrw»rrwrr rrr•rrrr..rrr•rrrwwrr~rrrrrrrr«+~
17
.
r
~ i ......~.m✓rv.maFrlY.pFN: Y1411R:'kR.+'*w'e'1M...^vYr4tN.7r1t1 h+.A 6
y rl g{ F +FMMIMIAMYPeF'{w4+vY RUS'. c.. .H:vn. IfJ
w
ate.=.-;
1
I
aN
i
t
w
. Y,'.
IARY OF RECYCLABLES - YEAR TO DATE 5
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
~j CONTAINER YARDS POUNDS COLLECTION GAIN
MATERIALS FILLED COLLECTED COLLECTED REVENUE COST (LOSS)f ;tt
j
TIN 31,000 27,500 605.000 12,100 295.42 0283.525) t~
T
a z 9 ALUMINUN 25.500 23.780 356,250 166.760 243.01 (566626)
PLASTIC 112.250 208.500 1,668.000 33.380 1,069.71 (41s036 30 CLEAR GLASS 30.500 58.000 13,420.000 208.800 290.66 (41686)" r qY
s GREEN GLASS 7.425 6.676 1,402.000 24.030 10.76 (Wili)
BROWN GLASS 7.800 7,050 1,692.000 25.380 74.33 (14648)
NEWSPAPER 72.750 203,250 67,882,250 338.411 691.24 (W4.0) ,
YEAR TO DATE 287.225 634.726 87,526.600 798,831 120737.17 (!1,¢35.94)
- - - - -
y •.i
e r.
r ,4'fF i .'y ref
5
I,~,. 41fYf t i 7 i
'y ' 11 A ~,1tx {~~9 tlv~ f~~ r ! I
y
7f 1. 'I 1, y
i •.,^iAYMM~Nw«r'°",.. xI.NnF,WI.MLT.R>M•
r° Y;ut r'd :%Y r 1
s..
t
r
fi
COMMUNITY SERVICES PAGE 1
SOLID WASTE/0801
+ FISCAL YEAR FOAM
1991 - 1992 SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING REQUEST BF-41 GN
PROGRAM TITLE - CURBSIDE RECYCLING r
a" PROGRAM PERSONNEL REQUEST DETAILS
BEGIN DATE ANNUAL "
NUMBER OF POS. PROPOSED POSITION TITLE END DATE 0 R
f
2 RESIDENTIAL DRIVER 2084 E+;
~PROGRAM MIME D TAILS 4
ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE AMOUNT REOVESTED f k
IIII 8021 service Maintenance Salary ; 33,258
%
+ 8041 Civilian Overtime 2,172 r,
8051 Civilian Longevity O i'i
8061 F. I. C. A. 2,570 ,.w
8062 TMRS 10798 c+;'
r I 8064 Workers Compensation 50456 I
8065 Health & Life Insurance
Sub-Total Personnel $ 04 '
8101 Office supplies
(flyers & bill stu€fers) _ 2,000 r .
8104 Gas/oil/Diesel 2,752
i+ 8108 Uniforms 610
8109 Postage 51220
x
8116 Other Supplies 960
y j (5 tarps 4$196/sa) E
8121 Protective Clothing 0 E
Sub-Total Supplies
8342 Vehicle Maintenance $ 3,000
8343 Machine & Equipment Maintenance 500-
Sub-Total Maintenance $ 30500
' 8502 Special Services $ 500640
9504 Advertising 30000
8507 Motorpool Lease (3 yr financing) 86,896
2-Integrated Recycling Trucks } ?
465,000/each k
6000-Sets Recycle Bins 4$16.25/set E s
5-30 YD Open Tops 4$3,000/each
0
-053
Sub-Total Equipment $6
y
v
f'! ~ "frtf . ~ e
i
r 49C.r 49aR _ ..w.,...s+aawuraW+wi~.W 4ur.~raaiatl.
~;T
air ~ +
l
i
i
PAGE 2
PROGRAM TITLE - CURBSIDE RECYCLING
ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT _TITLE AMOUNT REQUESTED I
8808 Fire Ext Coverage $ 840 k.
8810 General & Auto Liability 4 095
Sub-Total Insurance $ 41,939
4110 Radios $ 3,000
Sub-Total Radios $ 3,0 0
lei
$208,913 ~i
TOTAL PROGRAM FUNDING REQUIREMENT
BRIEF PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONt `
Citywide program for Curbside recycling using integrated trucks for
collection of newspaper, glass, plastic, tin, & aluminum to serve
15,000 residential customers. Provide each participant with thresh
stackable containers which would be collected every other week on i yY}
designated households. Collected recyclable materials will be
hauled to the Service Center and transferr^d to 30 cubic yard open R
top containers. These containers will be hauled to market by a'
roll-off truck, as is presently being done with recyolables
generated by the pilot recycling Tential his program Will
require a rate increase of $1.20 for all r i
MAJOR SHORT-TERM P 06RAM GOAL9t
1. To respond to community desire to recycle. „
2. To increase public awareness of the need to conserve r
resources.
SPECIFIC my :f°"erro►Ar.x PROGRAM OBJECTIV_LS1
PAODVCTIVITY A OVE BASELINE INCREASE ABOVE BASBLINE ,
16 To reduce residential waste stream by 9.41 j
z'c 2. To achieve set out rate of 60t or more. 1481 TONS }
1481 TONS RECYCLED
0
SPECIFIC RODUCTIVITY MEASURES1
INCREASE ,ABOVE B E E s:
PRODUCTIVITY a~OVE BASELINE;
To reduce residential waste stream by 9.0
2. To achieve set out rate of 604 or more. 1481 TONS
o
1481 TONS RECYCLEn
1
ll~.
. r.
J
J Y~
' n r 1'
PROGRAM TITLE - CURBSIDE RECYCLING PAGE 3
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
j
A. EXPENDITURE REDUCTION s Will this program result in direct cost savings? NO a l
1 B. REVENUE ENHANCEMENTS
Will this program directly result in increased revenues? YES .a.
ai ACCOUNT NUIDER ACCOUNT TITLE ANO
3 6707 Sale of Scrap Material $26,929 3x~
>
C . NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES s
Y1
• 1 I 1 pH1
Will tangible expenses rise/revenues decline if this program E
is not funded? NO w >
P D. WILL THIS PROGRAM OBLIGATE THE CITY TO PROVIDE FUNDING IN
FUTURE YEARS? YES ~ E. ARE ANY PROGRAM COSTS RELATED TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT'S SVdt ;
AS NEW FACILITIES? NO `
F. ARE ANY PROGRAM COSTS RELATED TO GRANTS SUCH AS MATCHING
FUNDS OR SERVICES? NO
S
i`
y 13
I r v
IZ i~r { d e!)ya
Yn rrY IF'.
i v, l y i 1~
1 A i I 9 lyl r
,
I
ppyr
xb { %~k
I I k
I ~f ' ~X I °`tM6+MNt.erv .aw .•.y♦ ;'I x
~ dx ,yI ~ y
I ~ y r >r 1S rYY4. .y^'J~'ti
,
'
CCF,RE`T CLT*SICE -CROGRN-1 ;
.UMER OF YATFRIAL
r41RTTCIFPT7S 5IG1ED COLILf rED `
II t'EA UP COLLECTION PER I;iJ!iIC 11CUSES
SET Cllr
151T~.~ RtITE GcE011ENCY PARTIMA TS ?7IHrD FiOfJRS YARD PER HOUR ;
2 _8.25 84 w
168 1 X WK X35 EBAGS
A S 3.S 3C.25 42ti.
„ r, 146 1 X WK -49
.4/. ,on 1 X IN 269 BAGS 19.f 38 ,
2.5 4
F :1121/90 96 BAGS 2.S 2P b
11/26/:1 n 116 1 X WK 269
BAGS 3.5 25.75 3 r_
j is/5ig0 88 1 X WK 270 ZAGS 3.6 1; 25
r { 12/12/1'0 87 L X WK 211 2S
BAGS 2S.5 ,
is/ly/90 102 1 X WK 270 P 0 66.5 23
204 1 X 3 WKS 270 2- 29 r~,
3
lr 1G/9 i 143 1 X 2 VIM 1.79 CONTAINERS
1/30/91 163 1 X : h1CS 275 CONTAINERS 6.7S 40.75 25.
2S7 CChTA1hFR.S 8.25 66.75 2S `v
k, 2/13/91 _04 I \ 2 ?X5
- 192 L X COATAINEFiS E 46.5 24 ;i 2 W1(S 301
a, ~t
1lP ! X WICS 316 C0M'AItiEPE s,'S a:.5 11. I
y„, 0 241 1 Y ? 1~KS 3.1. COherAINMR5 -25 25.5 33 err
E
~ r.
MICE PER 1vFrK COLLECTION WITH TWO PERSON CREI~: 33.5/hour "
vraRe rur er of Mmes 05.5 or 551 cf participants
r Average set out rate 44
My
Average volume of material per set out 23 cubic yards s
..,CE EVERY TWO WM WLLECT:ON WITH Tl PERSON CRFyTa25.51110ur ~
verage n r o ones ^r ~ v,-
t Average sec out rate 177.3 or S91 of Participants V4..
i Average vnltrx of material per set out - .23 cubic yards
As of DIarch 27, 1991, there are 323 participants out of n poSSible 904. z
The participation rate on &Ncvember 1990, was 25.91.
1,sinc qo rbove information, the following is offered for citywide recyclatle collection ~v0'
once per two weeks.:
15,000 Customers
1 404 Participation
T'd~6 Citywide Participants
x 601 Set Out Rate'
";3TSa Set outs per Collection
141 Hours .
3 600 Set Outs 1 76 Crews Needed
80 ours f~•,
a x, aces r
r
,t . ± ` wo, ttro•person crews needed to provide service using truck and trailer AV k~~.,;
,
.rIsiprwTlt. The difference between 1.16 and 2 crews is a cantinpency for
ill
!
x r3 r t prnwch in participation. ,
~*Excluded from analysis because additional personnel were used to get the task aceaoplished
4. ~,~tv
and because quantities rot representative of none..
Z ~ - "riutY..YwWi4.11`r'.AM+NKMhauw lBY ,
,
d
.
~ !f
MATERIAL NO, SET AVG. PER AVG. PER EST. YD3 EST. LOS N0. ~O~DB REVENUE HAUL COOL EJ
OUTS/YR SET OUT/YD3 SET OUT/LOS to to $120 ea.
COLLECT COLLECT
rlll 93600 (116 .25 1o86 23,400 36 # 468 3 4,320
ALUI•IIUUIi 936(0 .0089 1337 833 12,521 28 50634 3,3601
h E
F
kr I n;,l't0 93600 0109271 ioa6 1023 65,9511 51 1,319 6,i2b' ,fix
CLEAP r;LA:s 93600 .0185 11.45 1732 416,520 58 6,248 6 ,960i' 5
6 215 5290212 7 700 4 to
w-:EU oII A,,., 93 )U( .0023 55
: 6 215 52 042 7 780 84b e
5
~`•*i `+4~ fik114711 ;L.A..r~ 93600 1023 .
_ uln
nktl:rAPE ll 93600 .0755 25.a 7067 2,34(,000 235 ii,7o0 7~`,2(1b.
r
2 ,929 i o c~ ~4
,S
1i
i A
! 8:1 COMPACT1011
C s2
J y e
.
9
i~
y':
- -r e -v -W
tip. .
J
V J
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
„ May 7g 1991
sM~
TOt MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
( FROMt Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
RE: CONSIDER PARTICIPATING MEMBER CONTRACT WITH THE UPPER
TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT (UTRWD) FOR THE COOPER
RESERVOIR PROJECT..:
RECOIMNDATION #
The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of April 29, 1991, I,~;, 1~k
recommended to the city council approval of the Participating
Member Contract with the UTRWD for the Cooper Reservoir
~'4Lx
Project.
SUXKARY
In August 1990, the City of Denton adopted a resolution of
• I support of the UTRWD entering into a contract with the City of
Commerce, Texas, wherein the UTRWD would nssuthe the pity of
Commerce's position In a contract with the Sulphur RIVAr Waterr j
District for 11.72 million gallons of water per day from the 1, I
now Cooper Reservoir. (See Exhibit II) This resolution ;
indicated Demon's intent to enter into a contract with the,
UTRWD for a 2 MGD priority share of water from this contract in_ ;ws
exchange for providing 33% of the upfront financial' resources
r. for the project. UTRWD would reimburse Denton approximately I ,
half of this 33% upfront guaranteed financial support when they z
had financial resources to do so. a
in January, the Public Utilities Board reviewed the initial `
' drafts of the contract. (See Exhibit III)
T:;.4 final draft of the contract is included as Exhibit I. The
City of Denton and Lewisville have jointly reviewed this with A
bond attorney and modifications have been made. The basic
change has been that the guaranteeing parties, who are Denton
(33t-2MGD), Lewisville (33l-2MGD), Highland village
(16.5t-1MGD) and Denton Fresh Water District #1 (36~5t-1M~'D) , .
will have essential ownership to the Cooper water vie the UTAWD
KGr contract until such time as the UTRWD exercises their option to ;
' the 5.72 MOD of the contract not guaranteed to the four,
:.t parties listed above. After the UTRWD exercises their optioft,;
this contract essentially becomes a "Participating Member" raw r..£.
water contract with the above rarties having the above-listed
priority rights to water from this project.
n
t
~~I
L
'
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
COOPER RESERVOIR PROJECT
i PAGE 2
{i
The contract considers the developmental nature of this water
and recognize that feasibility studies are necessary and
decision points exist in the future about whether to continue '
pursuing this water supply. All technical and legal Issues
appear very positive at this time. The UTRWD is working.
j jointly with Irving and Dallas in a possible exchange of water, as ^y
" i.e., the Cooper water could be discharged into the East Fork
of the Trinity River and exchanged for water Dallas has in the
Elm Fork of the Trinity. Irving is an owner of 40 MGD from the i
Cooper Reservoir, and they ultimately need this water delivered
to the Elm Fork of the Trinity River@ In the area of legal
issues, the Sulphur River Water District, after finalizing the
necessary sales contracts with Commerce, has been working with rte,
Commerce and the UTRWD on an application to the Texas Water pr F
Commission to get a permit to transfer water from the gulphur•
River Water Basin to the Trinity River Water Basing`
The cost of this water is very low. There is a one, time $50,OOb'. 4
payment to Commerce, and it is estimated the first year "legal t
and regulatory costs will be approximately ;661000. Th*'•„'~
payment to the Corps of Engineers is :63,241 per year for the
first 10 years of the reservoir's operation and $2550623
1 thereafter, This equates to approximately 1.50 per 1000 gallons` ct
for the first ten years and 64 per 1000 gallons thereafter4 jy,
if a pipeline were to be built, it is estimated the Cbst of
debt service on the pipeline and pumping costs are in the 251.
per 1000 gallon range (1991 dollars), in comparison, the cost
of raw water from Dallas is 48; per 1000 gallons
y There are still a few points in the contract where the
participants and the District have not reached full agreements Y
A meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 8, 19911 and it 1s<
believed that these points will be resolved. These points are!
1) Wording on certain recitals.
2) Members want a 504 per capital ceiling on "administrative
fees" that are not specifically tied to the project. The
ofPatin
ti
other par
this in an
District does not have t any
mbers to whom they e plan to sell
contracts with the nine me
treated water. The District desires to solve this by
placing this 504 per capita ceiling in their by-laws.:
3) Wording modification in section 3,01 relating to
District's option to buy their 4868% share of the raw
water.
J
Oa
t
,l
a:
1
f CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
f COOPER RESERVOIR PROJECT
PAGE 3 W'
r`
4) Section 3.01. Highland village added a provision that if t.
the District decided not to go forward with the project,
that the District must buy any participants 48.81. This
W, limits Denton to two MGU of obligation if the District '
backs out vs 5.86 MGD (33.33%) without this clause. This
appears to be okay. ! dt
5) Section 4.02. Participants want majority approval required
before District could terminate the raw water contract,
with commerce during the first year option that exists in
the District-Commerce Contract. District legally doesn't
think it can allow participants to force it to continue rR
with a contract the District does not want, but District
i has offered to let participants assume the Commerce'
Contract. This appears to be okay..
6) Section 5.09. Annual Budget
Participants want majority approval required for Anyj
amendments to the budget, even though they are "emergency
or special circumstances". District wants to limit; such
majority approval only to the period the participants orb
providing the "up front" financing and, there the
District would "consult" with the participants' before
making budget amendments, and such amendments would be
limited to emergen(tes and special circumstances. E, <
g Fx
w After the District exercises its option to pay back the ,
participants its 48.84 "up front" financing, this contract'
essentially becomes a raw water participating contract. I, r'-
r Since the District doesn't have any "approval" clause i'n
the nine (9) "treated" water participation contracts,,they
feel it is inconsistant to have such "approval" clause in+
74 +
this raw water participating contract.
IA, i
7) Section 7,04.
Participants may desire an additional paragraph stating
r that this contract is binding as to all parties listed as
parties and, in the event one party does not enter this
contract, this contract is void and, ossentially, a newt, j
agreement must be approved that correctly lists all
' participants. This assures the participants that if any
participant does not enter into this agreement, that the a
remaining cities at least are aware of their obligations, FYy ;;j
~ L Ili
and so recognize these by signing a new contract In the
' event the District is not able to carry forth its
y F UX;
i
}
el I' r ...A= a. ....r.
A 'Al
k
I r~
l:
T]P
1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM F r
COOPER RESERVOIR PROJECT
{ PAGE 4 x
8) Schedule A.'
Participants want their guaranteed rights to purchase
water stated in a percentage of the District's rights for <
Commerce water. This will give the participants a share of
Y,.
any "additional" water that may be possible from the 01,11
y Cooper Reservoir.
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS, GROUPS AFFECTED t
City of Denton, UTRWD, Cities of Lewisville, Highland Village, 0
Denton Fresh Water District il, Legal Department, City Council
and the City of Commerce. b*`
FISCAL IMPACT r,.
• W
Estimated 1991 budget $83,500
Annual obligation thereafter $30,000 (approximately)
f iZ
BENEFITS
Guarantee of two MGD per day which has a value of 404'to 5,60
per 1000 gallons. legal and regulatory costs', feasibility I 5
studies, Corps of Engineers payments and pueapng cos ii, its estimated to be in the 30-354/1000 gallon range,
? Respectfully submitted,
r Loyd Vi Harrell
y City Manager
yyt
Pr Bred/A re d bye
ell
1 RTE. Ne son t~
I Executive Director of Utilities x'
Exhibit I Draft Cooper Reservoir Project Contract u
21 Resolution R90-041~.;
111 1/16/91 PUB Agenda Item
iV Minutes PUB Meeting of 4/9/91
PUSAGN.449
v ,yr + 627-pgi. 22-25
~ii - CC AON
! r a a a:rri,,,u Cn. 0." ! r _ W 1'Iq.+/W{♦`1~1,ry'~"••.
I,. Y P (
{ Y
YN
rw.~~ N iS..;.~ r. rrn.:,. _ e.. ' w•.N'•x cy.~w.-...,..
Y•i
1 I
EXCERPT y
j PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MINUTES
APRIL 291 1991
~i
12. CONSIDER A PARTICIPATING CONTRACT WITH UPPER TRINITY
REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT FOR THE COOPER RESERVOIR Y}
PROJECT. y:
Nelson reviewed this item advising the Board that the
basic premises within the contract have not changed
since the Board's last review. As before, if Denton r.;
financial backs UTRWD in this project, Denton will
receive preferential water of 2 MGD from Cooper-
Reservoir) Denton provides the upfront money until
UTRWD's first bond sale, and they exercise an option to . `V
' fund their 48.81 of the project..
Nelson also noted that this contract would allow Denton
to become a "Participating Member" of the Upper Trinity 9 +I'
Regional Water District Board. Sit
Clli
Chew stated Denton should be a "Participating Member"~ !~`°'r7~ f't{
Nelson advised that Denton must enter a parEloipating ;F:
{ } member contract by June 16, 1991, or lose out on the
opportunity.
eta
Nelson advised Denton has been working with the
Lewisville Bond Attorney and Denton's Attorney.!
Laney asked if Denton is going to be paying l.St11000
gallons for water we are not using. Nelson advised',
Denton will be able to sell this water. Staff is ' ;i;•
programming the option in our water treatment plant to 1.'
sell water to the UTRWD at 804 of Dallas', market
price which presently is 184/1000 gallons,
Laney made a motion to recommend to the City Council ?
• that Denton enter into this participation contract with
t`+ the Upper Trinity Regional Water District4 Second by
Chew. All ayes, no nays, motion carried.
fl: I
71,E 'I I ~ f~.
s 5 xn,.
t i
a• I
E
y.
4
d'
ALAN
p.
Draft of 4/95/91
REGIONAL RAW WATER SUPPLY - COOPER RESERVOIR PROJECT
THE STATE OF TEXAS
• I
COUNTY OF DENTOti
x,. I THIS REGIONAL RAW WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT (the
"Contract') made and entered into as of the day of
19 (the 'Contract Date"), by and between
UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT, (the "District+), a
t'
conservation and reclamation district created pursuant to,
Article XVI, Section 59 of the Constitution of the State of
Texas, and the following! a~
City of Denton
a City of Highland Village
city of Lewisville
Denton County Fresh Water Supply'District 'No. 'I r.M
which parties are collectively or individually cetirrd to
herein as "Participating Members" or "Members").
r' WI TNES$9TH!
{ WHEREAS, each of the Pacticipatinq Mombets !s a ,duly, ,
{ incorporated city, town or other political subdivision, of'the'
• \ f .Yp
t " state of Teas operating undec the Constitution-shC lawia•of the
i
oil V
State ot, as= and #
each of the Participating Me~abers !r a- r
governmental entity located. in Denton County, , d'esas that
currently provides retail utility, se:vice of s taking
definitive steps satisfactory to the District to pcovids retail
utility service to its custamersi and
1v t. 'R L ! "!7
7
.a
~4Z 5 I rl_ ` s Z ".4
A 1,
i
F
r:
I ,
Y ty 'j v
: t v - ww,....rr rww.w, ,.....r. ,..a , 4 a... rn i r . r...,.~,, 'tt A• riii.~3N;W:rbgrGMSLYY~re.
P qq i ,
VAR T
_ _,.a t
o
wHEREAS, one of the purposes for which the District
was created was to acquire new surface water supplies for
cities and water distribution utilities of the Denton County
area; and
ti WHEREAS, in the pursuit of such purposes, the District
has by contract with the City of Commerce, Texas entered into ' "
on July 5, 1990 (the "Commerce Contract') acquired rights to ,k'
purchase water in the Cooper Reservoir on the South Sulphur
River in Delta County, Texas built by the United States of
America, Corp of Engineers (tbe 'Government'); and kr
WHEREAS, the right to purchase water covered by'thi
r `e ~ r ~,S ay '
Commerce Contract are dependant on a contract (the b•ti~~~~ ti'r
Contract') between the City of Comamatce, Texas and the, d>alp sue,
River Municipal Water District (BRMi;Dentered into
about July S, 19900 and the amount of water alloeatr, to tf
Commerce under the SRMVD Contract and contracted to' t
District under the Commerce Contract is estimated to be lk?3
million gallons per day (MOD)' on a firm'yield basisiIana, ,
WMLAEI►S, to enable the District to provide watei frog
f x~,F
the Cooper M*seivotr to the Participating Moabeis*ahd: others 11%
the arar moo! Dentoa County, SRMWD is taking at pi fir gain I7
'I • p 4,1
sppropri Govern"ntal approval to amend the vatsr'rights fnd "
for an inter-basin transfer of water front the Sulphue 'Misr yea
basin to the Trinity River basin and tranamission watar:n
r fr
will need to be constructed or other arrang"ents provided
relating to the tranafsr of water from the Cooper, 1leseirvoir to
the District; and '
-Z -
a.' • , IIj
ft~ '
nu
I
N
i 1 m•S r ~~~F~r~~ ,Ij{(
P r.•
~1 TT n"•
l
WHEREAS, under, the terms of the Commerce Contract and C~ua
in consideration of the rights to purchase water from the
Cooper Reservoir, the District agreed (1) to reimburse the City k~~~Vyf
of Commerce, Texas the sum of $500000 for prior costs incurred
i t
in connection with the Cooper Reservoir water, (i) to PAY
coats incurred for (a) the permit amendment and for the
ell
~yJ inter-basin transfer of water and (b) a feasability study '
concerning the transfer of water to, the District from the
Cooper Reservoir and (iii) to make payments to the aovarnment
for the construction and operation of the Cooper Reservoitf and?~e?t
WHEREAS, the process of obtaining the permit amendma t
and for allowing inter-basin transfer of water and t ?y'
1 construction of a 'water transmission line for the Coo l
L.` I Reservoir or acquiring capacity in an asiRtir~q of future;
! + 1 L .
j transmission line, either or both, or this Maklat of "Othse,r:
{ arrangements relating to the receipt of raw water 'and involvin
Cooper Reservoir water is collectively herdinaftdr, reie it to 1:-I
as the 'project'); and' y
WHERW, for, and to consideratioe of_'acqut=i the
right to patch"",.. 100% of the caw water..ended• 01 C640 fee COntrac ,$argiolipating Members are willin9 and hm* soteed
to conic ith the District as hereinaftat. providedt stud
1pt At,. the District and the patticipoti64 Hsmbers,r
are authorised to enter into this Coatrset piursusat- to the
r I` r
District's enabling statute, Chapter 105$, 'Acts Of .the Tlat'.
,4
r~
i+t 11
5
101,
11
Legislature, Regular 5easion, 1989 and Vernon's Ann, Tex, Civ.
St. Article 4413 (32c) (the "Interlocal Cooperation Act'), and
other applicable laws= and
WHEREAS, the District agrees that the Participating
Members shall continue to own and operate their respective ;
r` water pumping, storage and distribution facilities, and any z
respective water treatment facilities= and
' Aa
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the District on
April 5, 1990 adopted a resolution directing that a portion of
the water under the Commerce contract be made available on a.„
firmi basis to parties who contract with the District prior to
final determinations being made about the permit smendde
inter-basin transfer and the feasibility of transporting W, co
X
the District and until the District is capable'o[ sang 0
Cooper Reservoir .water as part of a regional watot0; p~lY ` V s,a
1 system= and
r x;`
'thia y?
WHEREAS, each of the Participating Membbta under,
Contract pro'"ses' to , pay • its share df costs of ~thib66 *at
Until such final determination is made regardin4 to*. IPr6j*ct j
and each Pactioipatin4Member's share of the coetsv"ot* the,
. a~
rodo'rtional 'to the respective amosa" aE; iistevc' " r
Proje6t+~
each he , loir-rchase under this Contract) and
before construction, of pipolinos to cadv~j~.si
water from the. Cooper Reservoir to District be4ine . a~/or'
of the project, i1 bt
costs
w
i
before Sands ate issued to finance
,
I
the Participating Members must give approvals
Y! r , - ~ rr1Ai
4-
1 yl r i
:
Mesa
I
I
Y ~ pis" ..•:Ja•T,'.. w'~~r~, _ »v-„
1
NOM, THEREroRE, in consideration of the mutual
covenants and agreements herein contained and subject to the t j
terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the District and ne_
each of the Participating Members agree and contract as follows: ,t
.,a ARTICLE I I
Definitions
Section 1.1. The following terms and expressions as
N
used in this Contract, unless the context clearly shows
11 xotherwise, shall have the following meanings:
1. "Act" means Chapter 10530 Acts of the 71st
Legislature, Regular Session, 1989+ which was signed by the
Governor and became effective June-16# 1969.
2a "Adjusted Annual Payment" means the Annu r' f
Payment as adjusted by the Board during or after such Annual
as provided by this Contract6 }
g7
Payment Period
`
j 3a "Administrative and Planning Expenses". mesas the
general overhead cost and expense of maniginq tt►e District t
i4r
provided, howewr~ the aggregate
1 t k
Adsinistcative and Planning Expenses paid by a Patiticipatinti'i ~~""atvl
1Naibet undo{, thi1Contract and all other cont'caeta with", ther:~p,oi,`~{ {
. g. ! a'
F
j> - . ti c• its ,(bassd~~ a
District, lits W~esceed fifty cents (sad}' pe P, '
j real published census date avefUbli Eras lM,, 1
tab b 1. E e;
on ths
the' resgectiW'
1 6a rA
rrsraent, Bureau of Gnsus? .for
unlit it 0o
41
Participating ie"Gr paying its pro. rata shah of such
N R _
AdMinistratfw and Planning expenses, Cl
1 s`.,~ J 1 HG:
,
Vf
1
Taj + E"a H
N, X
Rd. 1.
I
t
i
,p
x w` :2
i.~_ 'Annual Payment" means the amount of money to be
paid to tM District by each Participating Member during each
Annual Payment Period as its proportionate share of the Annual
•r
Requirement.
S. "Annual Payment Period' means the District's
' fiscal year, which currently begins on October 1 of each w.,
calendar year and ends on September 30 of the next following
calendar yosr, but which may be any twelve consecutive month
period fixed by the District; and the first Annual Payment
Period under this Contract is estimated to be th period of
October 1, 1990, through September 30, 1991.
6. "Annual Requirement" means, durino sn AS6,
u a a'~~~
A
Payment Period, the total amount r4quired to pay. ell Opfrati5',,
and Maintenance txpensee of the Project and eiv costa" and 41
yy;
payments due and payable for the amortisation o[ ialiebt~dness,? '
issued or incurred to finance the coats o[Usk" pe0 sctr
the
District.
7, "eoard• means the governing body 6i tl tiislciat. E
` A. •eoardmambers• means a meff"r qt.. d the . s
board - ,k
ir.
•be"a 0-4e061utlon• means any resoI t rat ` a thf ' '
Di attic
„Aulhotiaee any 6on
ds,
c^•fft&* means all bondst notes or' other '
obligations paysbie from and secured, in whale of ilk `Ailft, [roe.; ;
the payments to the District under this Coetractash the."
44 -,M4*wj~o
{
f 7~T7'',;..
a 1
wool
r
v
interest thereon, hereafter issued by the District to finance
construct and complete the Protect,
the costs to acquire'
and/or all bonds, notes or other obligations issued
subsequently to finance costs to improve, extend, operate or
maintain the Protect, and any bonds issued to refund any bonds,
notes or other obligations or to refund any such refunding
' bonds.
11. "District" moons the Upper Trinity Regional Water
District, a conservation and reclamation district pursuant to .f
Article XV1, Section S9 of the Constitution of the State of
Texas created in accordance with the Act. ;
ADO is an abtsevisrion for "million gallons„ `a
12, *V
water per day''
13. "operation and maintenance capesseA' moans'`.
during an Annual payment Period, all direct costs and QX046 , see f"
incurred by the District for the operation and s+aii►ten~i►a~, of
LJ without
~ the project, including ~EOr greater certainly b~R
limiting the generality' of the fot4goin93 ~a~ounts p!rab1~ !i'E,"
i EM commerce Contract and/or SOW Contract tb thr: 04 Arm
Cotps of sngineers or, any other federal, a" tir
V
for the ruct1o6,e operation and/or wendt . . ~ etbtsf*"t' , g•l~t~ .
other in FlItua Sn water in the Cooper Aese~tvoit, th4 cosh o!'.
Account104i auditing
utilitiepervision, engineering,
legal services, insurance premiums,,sup*lies, seieNr tKa
administration of the Project, AMinistratSW and bStnnSn9
.q.
4
u
1 and costs of operating, repairing, maintaining and
~ Bxpensee,
replacing equipment for proper operation and maintenance of the
i..
' Project, The term "Operation and Maintenance Expanses" does
1
not include depreciation charges.
14. "participating Member(s)" means the City of
`
Denton, Texas, the City of Lewisville, Texas, the City of
Highland Village, Texas and' the Denton County Fresh water 1
' J'
,
Supply ~ District go. 1.
15. "Phase I of the Project* means the period
1
f' beginning with the date of this C*)y►tracL• and ending on the date
Phase it of the Project begins (i.e,s when Bonds are issued by s
a
k
the District to finance the costs of the project` bt e
fr
construction contract or other similar kind of contraot
the District relating to the trsnsNc' and/et
I~
or executed by
r t' ' exchange of water from the Cooper Reservoir) at eight (6) years
tw
from the date of this Contract has expired without the issuance
~4 s;
r` of Bonds or the letting of such a contract, whichever occurs
first. '
int e) 0 liver • mean$ the point, degidnaEid
i
160 ' PO
ii
Ma~a1tCM
.
. i subsequent 5
t aqreemerit wheraT ,
'
~ sot of by uent
.
,
in this Coat
r
f .i~
deliydt tltt tre;est
t' 'Ptojodt" means the "Project" as disfineb' ka the "j
Y
Pr*ambI4 ;.this Contraot, ;
16, "project Advisory Committee akaAe 'the corttlitt4w 1
created to oversee implementation of the project and to advieft ;
y
4
1 ~kk
,
•respect to the project, which Committee is
the District with
composedc'k three representatives and two alternates appointed
by the Board.
19, "State" means the State of Texas. '
00
ARTICLE It
3
Board of Directors I 1
! } r?
Section 2.01, Board Aacresentation. In accordance
with the provisions of the Act, each of the Participating
Members shall be entitled to appoint one member to the board of ;f,
Directors of the District and each such director appointed by
the Participating Members shall be entitled to vote on all
matters before the Board$ including all projectsi.,to
considered by the Board in all service areas of the Diiri
j rpsrdless of whether the participating Mea+bIts'' are
,i
j participating in the project, i ? Section 7,02, Terms, soardoembers $hill nerve
r
I; staggered four N? Year. terms in accordance with prdoed~res;;, s• r ,
~iz khe Ut'
established by the soard and as provided
y l Reoresentatione N tr•fais LAW
Di cict '!M D4rst:tict, hereby repraseAt► sin! warrinli Oft tide
be"'. duly OR~.wle~. by `all
Cosnsr ~ r. - dt
here!' Coilwarce Contract is in full fore and t~e ;
y to issipa 'at t.
the Di hasp [ull, power and wthOrit
otherwise ,401kv*` t-0 the Participating Mwbiiitit the , ri* t0
purchase water to the Cooper Reservoir ita' adeerdsnce Nilf th*, r
tiV
f
d
i
K tiK
t
ypy~■cr L
Y 1
WON.
terms of the Commerce contract and the execution and deliverY
of this Contract and the provisions hereof do not and will not
conflict with or constitute on the pact of the District a
vision of the commerce Contract.
breach or a default of any pro
ARTICLE 111
Raw Water Conve ance/0 ti n to Purchasit
a,
Construction and Issuance of Son s
Section 7.01. Rea Water Conve an a ion o Far as ,
The participating Members hereby agree to purchase from the I,
is
the District hereby agrees to Nell to the
District and
ater acquired by participating Members all of the raw w the
District under and pursuant to the Commerce contract sub~wt r,
provid
the ternue and provisions hereinafter appearing;
0.
however, at'any time prior to the expiralioa ot. Pheei,t ot`the
cch0itr aM the" X41
Project, the District shall have the right to pu "
mbees hehby each tgrM to tali to the ; lVi4t,
n Me s
ici ati 9 3~ ,
art P /
P ~
wat• t tr Q_ pia I
District, a maximm of 46,8% of the caw Y.
IN/Pursuant to tM ' Cosrycoer.; Corset. `upon '.s yw;
. c
T
tM.
en tail to
aR artow► u
rs MNabe go of
sti9
payment to the Pscticip
r
all costs incurceA
percenta9w share off,
t4Y i tom``` '
tbscr; t~eNU . of this Coxtcsow
f
'eaw•watec acquired by the DistrioC/
percent, `ef the raw
tteft the Parkieipatin0 Mea~fet• e0k=
District' tree;.
trs Coa+sie esuegf 60i ion
water covered br: icar Contract pu a
ow
this Section, the District would,-r' ' the
granted by
j"
If'
•f ` , a ..1 f ♦.:Ypeit k•Zt~FtY ~lq~k/fY. i
kind'... _
l
V
r,l
Participating Members 40% of all costs incurred by the
Participating Members to the date such acquisition is
effective, plus interest on the unpaid balance of such purchase
price at the rate of 10♦ per annum (calculated on a 360-day
year of twelve 30-day months). Payment of the purchase price
for raw water by the District to the Participating Members
shall be in whole or in installments and, if in installments,
i )o
over a period not to exceed five (S) years from the date the District exercises such option to purchase raw water. tr4
`
k
~onsultinc engineers, c ^-=t ruction . of 3x
Section 3.02.
0tv
project. The District and the Participating Members agree that
the District will select the Consulting Engineers for % ,'Vol
Project and, subject to approval by a majority of t ~all'
4,1~4t`
Participating Members, may change Consulting .Engineers at the
option of ' the District. Subject to approval of all V;kkolr
Participating Members, the District may issue it* Bonds, G«
i
payable from and secured by a pledge of the Annual Paysynte
ti.
'.MK
from this Contract to finance the costs to acquire,, construct,,
extend, enlarge;, repair, renovate, equip and otherkior improvei, l I
the Project'*: Tw.,acquisitiono construction and im covem" of- w~w~?. IiI
the pt p~.~ District will be made in accordenar with i
general e41"engineoring practices. Each send Resolution
of the WO, she U specify the exact principal amount of the
Bonds to be issu*d thereunder, which shall mature within the Maximo periods and shall bear intereror net oxceedini the
{
I
-11-
.
l
1r
4k. I
r
IWIT"MWO M, M- 7-R1
1
maximum. allowable -rates, permitted by law, and each Bond
Resolutiojt shall contain such other terms and provisions
pertaining to the security and payment of Bonds and the
operation and maintenance of the Project as may be necessary
for the marketing and sale of the Bonds.
Section 3.03. aonds {
(a) It is the intention of the parties hereto that, `r
following the completion of Phase It of the Project, the
District will be responsible for operating and maintaining the
Project In a manner which will provide for the withdrawing, fYt
transporting and delivering all water from the Cooper Resirvoir
to the general vicinity of Denton County, Subject Ed, t `
r. 4 Y
approval of all Participating Members, the District meiAfr >i i 0.
time to time issue its Bonds in such amounts so ari withifi,its F
` judgment and disaretion, sufficient toy' aahleve' full
implementation of the Project, including conatiuotiai of`,'`
facilities.
(b) As noted obov*, each Issue.of suo ',,tOn rii~ll
require the tpotogaft,of all Partielpatiaq 1lemberr.
Board desires tai Bonds, and it one. or more •e9tietiwlid~ '
r s ~g k
Meahir ~w such issuance, the Distit'' of Bt A
A
resuinO,, ' i 64ifil Members, or both, shojl Have 'firsts 4 1 Y
t ~kh' r~r.
to I
a rights• R ire row water of such Partioipti llasibe
r
interest un0et, thii Contract and, if the Distiiat, ot, th* `
Participating Member tofuar to exercise such oftioe,to adgiaieey 1
r t~ ..1Zr
a a
n.
1 r,
br
t
. - .r.. awl ~ W.
the District shall have the right to convey such Participating
Member's interest in the Project to others. In such event, the
selling Participating Member will be refunded its proportionate
share of the costs incurred under this Contract plus simple
interest at the effective interest rate (calculated .in the
manner proscribed in Article 717k-2, V.A.T.C.3.) the District ra
pays on all Bonds then outstanding and issued for the Project.
or if no bonds have been issued by the District, then at the 'i.
rate of 10% per annum (calculated on a 360-day year of twelve
30-day months).
(a) Before any Bonds for construction of the Project'
are issued, the District must first conduct an en0inoia'i
,r
feasibility study and submit the rapar thereol~k
Participating Members for approv- al. t t~
AR1'ICbs IV. a,.
a
Ooeratina Aeauirements
Section 6.01, water Bales. Each of th1 Pirtio4a;,ting''
T, I
Members, respectively, shall be entitled to teraivr frois the
District the quantities of raw watet tifiiA;ia,.t"fbi!'A:
attached hereto an4 is accordance with tiio coattstio""o t thy. f
estert t iitiict'.hae acquired a per' ceatr sMt obi r
water !o'` ltv*gd& or arquircd hireundit;eenfswAt•ttl wctitla,
R,
3.01, the.'frlricb may ,sell or olh.rwiie use„iucb raM ,wat.it,
from the Project to supply treated ' welsr , ttl ath.itr.''
participating in a regional treated water system
1 r~ Y
.
1 1 r r. „W►..W iq.TLti J},a.w• •
f
e., .-uYi.«~ar.,KY,~..•~ns~nr+,tkn,NCMf .(1
i s r.
l
i
,
Section 4,02, Option to Terminate.' The Board, after
consideration of the feasibility of transporting water from the
Project, and after consulting with Participating Members, may b
J .
decide that Phase 11 of the Project is not feasible. It so,
y
s.
. the Board, with the approval of a majority of the Participating ~ Nti~& -C
Members, may elect to exercise its option to terminate the 7
Commerce Contract. if the option to terminate the Commerce ikT-
Contract is exercised, the District and Participating Members V"~
will have no further obligations under this Contract or under
the Commerce Contract except for obligations and Commitments ;khu E
incurred prior to the termination of such contracts.
:
Section 4.02, Future Water BuoolY. The Ilexcd, it consideration of, the fusibility of transporting water lydi !
project, and after consulting with partieip4'tia lNrabl►ts', taay .
~i
decide not to transport the water in thr neit fut'urei'r but to;:
maintain its rights to the water in the Co4pea! ..._.rof= fol. ;
0?
future, long tern needs of the Pfcticipa!la~. Mssilsre4aAd tM•
\f 4
District. Subject to., the . approval o! as4e ;r=.0t the.; ~fEE
participating Members, the eoard shall hgvg 044t a" d++1t`: akJta
to take such action dteioedto be- in t6s b ~ ii4tt ' of the If7O
N 4, '
he Nrt10ipetin' Mem66rsy 1ue °'Mt B~ I r; bss le '
District
trpnspor at, it this near fututd, to "ktsii> iti'tights", e!`
i to the watir, in the Cooper Resrvott, fops tons; tettl Nttti:
r' supply, or to make such other, dispositi0a kW Trite;. so ,tsar ;
be in the best interest of the Distriot, Oi*;littioip'atinq
3
w I xt
Mamgers. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, each
Participating Member will have a continuing obligation to pay
its share of the Annual Requirement.
Section 4.04. water Transfers and Exchanges. The
Board, after consideration of the feasibility of transporting
water from the Project, and all alternatives, and subject to
the approval of a majority of the Participating Members, may I
decide to transfer to or exchange the water with other entities ,r
to achieve for the District an indirect benefit of the water. Y
/r f.'..
For example, the District could deliver the water to an entity
r'
at a location other than Denton County in return for the
District being granted certain rights to water in oi, ne f
Denton County or for other good 'and valuable, codsiderstio
The, Board has the right and -duty to considcs all: optlode 'for Ldp
F
the, maximum beneficial use of thf wtteti 04#0 arbto . to the
- R *-N
s i approval of a majority of the Participating NoMh ;.t m+3+ mkt
1 1
such contracts and other arrangeaeats pertsibiuq OF thA'ue41 bt 9`.
transfer and exchange at raw wa' er covered- bgF.WWI, Contract.
accordance with the terex.' of this, Conttaeb; ; eagh
Iq
Participating Hewbibe acMowledgM..a coatin~►!n~ aOil at asn to ff,
of thi:llnAYe1 Bequlre~entr~ IV"44t, ae$tlpredtti
pay its
.p J.c. • i.•. , h 1
1 + i
'1 ,~appiicab `~l~Ueb k~'ansfeee o! escM~ngee+ ~
e~~E` ea ~ai bW, Quantity Each Participain Mt f
j agrees to take at Stint(s) of Delivery to' ber ~et►,t iiu wally '
agreed upon or to pay.' for the, Minla`wa aiouet','o +Hti"t ilf
r,pls. , y.
4 A
, .r
~'rn•✓}r .J11'llfJN•1KfE#tr+~4t1"~
OIy , I INl
dFr i'. c,
a
t
to"
indicated in Eowl
xhibit A hereto, which Exhibit is attached hereto %
and incorporated heroin for 311 purposes*
of Delivery water from the nts
Section 4.06. QOi at Lake
pool delivered at Cooper Reservoir,
eat may be water treatment
at -Lake Ray Roberts, at a Member's ifisd in a
Lewisville, Delivery ident
's Point of
plant, st the Member with the District for
Member may have
's gyrate contract the
sap another mutually agc®eabU Point
Service, or at
treated water o! the water shall be
All points o[ Delivery t
of Delivery' r
reed in writing between each Participating
mutually aq
and the District' nob
cecpectively, aqtee
4.0Tn R~a~~ Members hereby
Section '
nder this
R
rchased from District unatiis` o
r '
~ pu u
r
Bell ware a
outside such Member's cotpoNt
parson or entity [t" tias'to.`
be adjusted
ptesoribad urvice area (as may a apval [coati ths, ~i
received prior written
has 0!
retail s co~+sted by
unless Ise es o[,, wrta%
a
Approval to make ,
District. rych bounditirs
to individual customers' outside Diceelde of this Contrac or
t eiw,
may be granted by the Gonec~t Mtnapet 1t.. l6,-@ s ;water
A10tovto make wholesai~~ to ntib
the District. , . outside thr~;1`~
' this':!`~oatcaat 777 7
~ foatb+
pucsusnt c the specilio apOtb+►ai t
`
uite
rhafl' te4
service' sti4o to" the ebntessY~ x
y~", an*,ytov~sioa in this sitr"` A+
aw1t1W ; ;
ltotwiths tO
have the
ishill ha
vi~ ipatin9~ tisai;''bartis to
each ctic rfiO
Pa r
o
basis
retail
on,
continue to sell watot on •
a, ?
C loafs
. 4'a~+• . ae,....w.dda.~ ~..aw .7+rn~wrs:
~f
1 4,
.
I
all existing customers situated outside its corporate
boundaries or service area and without the approval or consent
of the District. Additionally, the Participating Members shall
have the right and authority to sell raw water or treated water received from other sources on a wholesale basis or otherwise
without any limitation imposed by this Contract or approval by
:i the District.
Section 4.08. Other Contracts.
(a) If the District exercises its right to raw water
IV
under this Contract pursuant to Section 3.01 hereof, the
" District reserves the right to supply caw water from' the
Protect to others on wholesale baste. Each such contract Vi f '
other entities shall be limited to the District's shbrrx'of r u
water covered by this Contract and shall, nok coalaia iny;
` P
provision which would adversely offset Sack` Part f'oiPatin¢:' 'f
F l4ember's percentage share of raw water covered by this Codtraot,
(b) it is further -ecogniaed end,, &9te" ihst the, f
c
District may use raw water from the Protect to su*gltrstated
a.. water from its treated water systew'to outer entities "bich sri
not Participating Memherse provided that all swh Ofaies bE
' water to , customers shall not 'ispatt tAm cawb lil . d0 the }
41. Distric i~ fulfill, its duties and obligations uadee`
r Contract' the Pattidipsting Memberas
(c) Ths parties hereto recognise. sad aaizowledgm that
the District shall have the right and suthority,ta} coiftfae! of ,
•
"17'
r:
last' q.
1
make other arrangements with respect to its percentage share of
water froll the Project without limitation or approval of any
participating Member,
Section 4.09. uolit•. The water to be delivered by
{
the District and received by each Member shall be raw surface
water from the project, Each Member has satisfied itself that {
such water will be suitable for its needs. '
Section 4.10. Metering Eaulpm•
the Project to
vexed from
,
li
(a) Before water is de
Members, each Member will furnish and install at its expense . }
the necessary equipment and devices of standard type required r;
for measuring the quantity of water delivered under 'th ki
e
ct from thContra e project to each Member's Point of POiht! k,
3 r'
Such meters and other equipment so' installed shall.
li Delivery.
be the property of the District. The District shall.insp"t►
calibrate, and adjust its meters at least annually as necessary
r to maintain accurate messurements of the quantity of water
being delivered.: Each Member shall have access to the metering
equipment at all, reasonable- times for inspotioit and .
cslibtatioar adiuetiesht
but th* readin4,
and~r ~ : eatminstioor q+
d~'ne only by omployees or a9!nte'' of the
s ; witMSS such
thereof atj:s bel ;
r District 'Mluestrd► the. affeatdd Member maY l
All readings of
readind, tion: and adjustment of meters.
motors will be entered upon proper books of record` maint~ined'
have access to aid iscord
b the District. Any Member may
' books during normal business hours.
i
-ls-
°x,}1,4
t
b.,.
}
-
(b) Under the Commerce Contract, the District is
required to'Sinstall metering devices to measure the amount of
water taken from Cooper Reservoir and purchased from Commerce.
Such metering devices shall be considered to be a part of the
Project.
Section 4.11. Treated Water Service. If a
Participating Member has a separate contract with the District
for treated water service, such Participating Member agrees
that raw water up to the quantity specified in Exhibit A for
such participating Member purchased under this Contract shall, ( .
upon completion of facilities to deliver water from the Project E
to Denton County, be used by the District to meet",
I
Participating Member's treated water needs. in such inst&a
a credit w i►t for treated wank
will be applied to the stateme
r charges from the District to such Participating Mee$e?;•_ such - E_
credit to be the amount of raw water cost otherwise included is
the price of treated water from the District.
I UTICLE V.
Fiscal Provisions
Solos S.01 Annual Requirem Ako (a) Bubjoct-•,t0 the j'
terms a~ OR* of this Contract, the District' will k
provide` pt'Kstif;'Eor and pay [or t~~e car: of the Project.
It is, ledge' and agreed that payments by the
Partieipatift Mesh Its to the District under this Contract wil
be the sole or primary source available to the Distsidt~ 'to ,
i
4
t
ss ~ ,
"provide the. Annual Requirement. In compliance with the E
District'* duty to fix and from time to time to revise the
rates and' charges for services rendered under this Contract,
the Annual Requirement may change from time to time. Each such
Annual Requirement shall be allocated among the Participating
Members and the District according to their respective
percentage shares of raw water covered by this Contract, and
the Annual Requirement for each Annual Payment Period shall be
identified in each Annual Budget and shall at all times be not
less than an amount sufficient to pay or provide for the
payment of:
(A) All Operation and Maintenance Expenses of
Project; and s_
(0) An amount to fund within a. reasonable period not I
to exceed 44 months a specisi` reservt fot the.;,
Operation and Maintenance ilpenaes of the Project
or for capital improvemento to the Project., The.:
ti total amount to be accwoulsted tot avcb opiotirio.
sod capital improvements resirvi sha1.1 ooi•: os ded-
2Sb of the annual Operatioa~' and',•Jt&i$*beiAc4'
d:pinias bE _ the Projeet (astiautfye~'~ ter 'b6" F roxiautelr three (3) months alper 10
"o);
rs9Q
all the District and PstticipAting Members "too
,r
to .issue undo to finlnct the Ceate 6f, the,
Project, a capital coappodeat,' indiudiM
-40-
k
nw
principal, interest, premium, reserve funds or
other funds established or required by any Bond {
Resolution.
Section 5.02. Annual Budget. Each Annual Budget for
the acquisition and/or operation and maintenance of the Project i
shall always provide for amounts sufficient to pay the Annual
Requirement. The Annual Budget for the Project for the Annual
Payment Period during Fiscal Year 1990-91 has been prepared and
the District based on estimates made by the
adopted by 0
District, and each Participating Member has been furnished a 0 copy /
of such Annual Budgetland each 3a[t_icipating Member hetahY`~
,
acknowledges its ability to pay its shac_ a of th. ~nnu F t
r
requirement from available funds budgeted thera[ar. ~01► f4j4 r I
ct shad
before June. 15 of each year thereafter, the Distri
furnish to each Participating Member a preliminary estimarta, oU.' .
the Annual Payment required from each Participatins► Msmb*t fqt;„
the nest following Annual Payment Period. ;
Not less than 60 days: before the comsNnCe'?
Annual Payment Period. beginning in Fiscal Year 1411~ifff,thez"'
District shall cause to be, prepared a preliffiinac l Lbt
,x d w
the Pray otC, tics past. ensuing Annual Payment 1rer31eiS'3 ~i4M
of suc elipi~naY budget shall be Elltid:= Mlt1i"-°"ictt,';
partlcip. :M"ber for review before ectiow br tb*' "arC,
Any Participating Msember may- submit comments abo.tbwy
preliminary budget directly to the Board. The Board•o~~ eds.
.21-
i
i
Mai
z
A ,T,.i
!pe preliminary budget or make such amendments thereof as to it
may seem properl provided, however, no change or amendment to
the preliminary budget will be made by the Board after such
preliminary budget has been submitted to the Participating
Members which change or amendment would in effect increase the
Annual Requirement without resubmitting such amended
preliminary budget to the Participating Members for additional
comments. The budget thus approved by the Board shall be the
Annual Budget for the nest ensuing Annual Payment Period. The
Annual Budget, including the first Annual Budget, may be
amended by the District at any time to transfer funds fcom•one
account or fund to another account or fund provided,su
transter
transfer will not increase the total budget and the
ibutable to the costs of the Project of to the Titer 1' 1
funds is attr 1
Ptoject's maintenance and operation. Subject to potitiCttion(yt '
and a royal .by the Participating Members, the anaunt !or any; pt~ara ` f
account or fund, or the amount for any purpose, in the, An<aial;"
tie l
Budget may be increased through formal action by.,the Board,,-406A, though such action might cause the total "amount 09" the 1lnhual
!ludget for the Project to be eiceeded3 provided. howeviiki.' such 'S ti'd;
a<.tion s g b ,{taMn only in the event of as ; eaarigency, or
special tances which shall be clearly stated in dths
notice t Ae Perticipating Members and in the resolution at
the time such action is taken by the Board..,
i
1
s~ir~ _22- € I
.
411.
section 5.03. Payments by Particiosting Members. (a)
For the raw water services to be provided to the Participating
Members under this Contract, each of the Participating Members
agrees to pay, at the time and in the manner hereinafter
provided, its proportionate share of the Annual Requirement.
Each of the Participating Members shall pay its part of the
Annual Requirement for each Annual Payment Period directly to
the District, in monthly installments in accordance with the
schedule of payments furnished by the District, as hereinafter
provided.
a i
(b) Each Participating Member shall pay
proportionate share of the Annual Requirement accordinq to.t
relative amount oE. water contracted to sack: 'Mnaber :a ;
tabulated in Exhibit A.' The.District shall chor",izoac* Mober
its share of pumping costs according to ths`,'"luw'l,, ort +~a'}er
M
jk actually delivered. '
r
r's-allod{ted§sbsrax,'oCthe a
(c) Each Participating
Annual Requirement for each Mnual Pay061it Peie'ibY"de
in accordenco with. a~ writtoo schedule of p~ tMs arc" the
appropriate Annual,- Nymest Pe:io¢'whicb~wil~`au ttii ,ll oaob'
Of the P iialfes 'Nears by the Otst'tioic.
F'
Notwithstanding the fotagojnf, the M>aual j
Requiresnnti sand-,tech Participating Member`s` 8144 .thetool. 1
shall be`redetervained, after consultatioe Nit* dike*, the
Participating Mesd»rs, at any time during a tAt"at t
' -23-
%lot$
i
i ~
sr
1
I` .
Petiod,• to the extent deemed necessary or advisable by the
Districto if:
111 (i) The District exercises its option to acquire raw
water pursuant to Section 1.01 hereof;
(ii) Unusual, extraordinary, or unexpected Operation
'
and Maintenance Expenses are required which are
not provided for in the District's Annual Budget rm
, F
or reserves for the Project;
(iii) operation and Maintenance Expenses of the Project
are substantially less than estimated; a
(iv) The District issues Bonds for the Project; or
(v) The District receives either significantly, mo
or significantly less revenues, or other ad0n
{
than those anticipated.
however, such Annual Requicewnt Y$be ne►t;" be
ej provided,
1
g.. redetermined in a manner that would increase a Paftieipatio4
'Member's Annual Payment without notifying suck! Pattidipatinq,
ski, Ns~De# ri
c!
' Member of such oicquwstance and such Patti
r fa
- aeknowledgeinq in wkiling ita ability to pay sue ,.lger~aaed
Annual Payment'
it ,rii swlre
hereby agrNf the
La -
pants 1y Disict required by this.-CopCractNithla} 20
days of, t . ,'date a' b~1i tot service is renddced. !E any Iissb!t. ,
at any tiwe disput" the awount to,,bs pai¢- by"ttr tee the
r
District, such complaining patty shall neNertbel0", Pto"tly
d
i'
at: -24-
j
1
f
r
t_
make such payment or payments; but if it is eubs*quentlY
determined- by agreement or by appropriate administrative,
,
board, agency or court decision that such disputed payments
sho•►ld have been less, or more, the District shall promptly
revise and reallocate the charges in such manner that the
Member will recover its overpayment or the District will
i recover the amount due it. All amounts due and owing to the i
Member by the
District by each member or due and owing to any
District shall, if not paid when due, bear interest at the rate
of ten (10) percent per annum from the date when due until paid. '
(f) Delinquent Bill . The District shall, to 'the
extent permitted by law, suspend the delivery of services
j water from the•Proiect to any Member which remains delinque
any payments due hereunder for a period of sixty days. and
i n ~ ~
r shall not resume delivery of services oar wage. while-,; such. '
1 + r~S
~
r
y: Member is so delinquent. It is further provided' sikd~ 04 to"
that it any Member should remain delinquent is aar'ps7sests duo'
hereunder for a period of one hundred twenty"deya. and it 'such', sr
t" delinquency continues during' any period therisltote such
Member's minimum amount,specified,ia Exhibit xi mbail b1r'dbea~d ;
to ha; ses4. gallons during?. all"' pdrioo' of such
i
:for the purpose of calculating.and rsdeteroining
deli i
I nq
the page of .each Annual payment to, be paid by the,
' non-delinquent Members and the District,. tbs;District "ehall
redetermine such percentage on that basis is such wee! so that -
i
4
l
.
he on-delinquent members and the District collectively shall
be required to pay all of the Annual Requirement. However, the
District shell pursue all legal remedies against any such
delinquent Member to enforce and protect the rights of the
District, the other Memb and the holders of the Bonds, if
,
ers, a
- ,
Bonds have been issued. The delinquent Member shall not be ;
relieved of the liability to the District for the payment of
all amounts which would have been due hereunder had no default
occurred or the percentage had not been redetermined as j
provided in this Section. It is understood that the foregoing
provisions are for the benefit of the District and holders of ,
the Bonds, if Bonds have been issued, so as to insure that a ,
of the Annual Requirement will be paid by the non-delidu!
each Annual lsyMnt Pe
Members and the District during
regardless riod-
the delinquency of s particular Miwtef•~ Ifl,any
of
11 placid with _ 1
the District by any
amount due and owing Msa+heit
,
such Member shall Gaya t0'`' tlw
an attorney for collection,,
in addition to a1L otltiA+fa Mfrs
District all attorneys feet,
provided for herein, including interest. y YJ
if► "tin$, any Annual Paymeo trtiik: f►ny
~ s
womb fs Annual. Payment is rao8st is aMl
icip"; ,
Part
this Saotion ki bi'stlict`
wida4 of required in .
manner ,r.
will Pr9M_ fu:nisli such Participating Member with'a► n06t
schedule of monthly payments reflecting such tedettlAinstiii+
-46• it
f ~ 1
.
I
I
I
ai
'c
_ (a) While
Section 5.04. Unconditional DI-TH-' l.•
this Contt remains in effect, each of the Members egress to
pay its pro cata share of the total cost of the Project in the
proportion that each Member's amount of water specified in ;
Exhibit A bears to the totai amount of water for all Members
r r.
specified in Exhibit A. If the District elects to exercise its '
option to acquire a percentage share of the raw water covered
by this Contract as provided in Section 3.0' hereof, the Annual
payment of each Member shall be reduced to the proportion that '
each Member's amount of water identified in Exhibit A beers to
the total amount of water, available from the Project. In other ` j
words, during Phase I of the Project, the Members agree to P r
100% of the Annual Requirement; but, once the Distil `
exercises its option to acquire tali water fruit fthe Project I~
S r
~
pursuant to Section 3.01 hereof, the P.erticipatim#~ "amber Ira and
{ the District shall share the cost of the Project ie proportion '
to quantities of caw water each is entitled to ishi, frost the
r•
Project pursuant to this Contract. }
A'
Recognising the fact that. then: Pitticioeti49
Members urgently require the facilities . iad sstricpo!- thf
tlal
h facilities and setvicsd, aN;`1E'aft
Project.; " t
for'., actual use and for standby putpoaob, and'
and recogAis ::the fact that the District will' use payments' k
5
received from then Patticipsting Members tea pay and secure the,
A!
eoetds, it is hereby agreed that each of th4 tasticiootinq ,
- j
+27-
sacra
l
1
< ALL g P
4
Members shall be unconditionally obligated to pay, without
offset or counterclaim, its proportionate share of the Annual
Requirement, as provided and determined in this Contract,
regardless of whether or not the District actually acquires,,
constructs or completes the Project or is actually delivering
water from the Project to any Participating Member hereunder, s
or whether or not any Participating Member actually receives or i~
uses water from the Project whether due to force majeure or any t
other reason whatsoever, regardless of any other provisions of
` this or any other contract or agreement between any of the `
E
parties hereto. This covenant by the Participating Members
h shall be for the benefit of and enforceable by the holders k~
the Bonds as well as the District.
' Section 5.05. Continuing Right tQ Raw Water; i!or and k ,
in consideration of agreeing to the unconditional paymenl,le .to
be made under this Contract, each Member is entitled t6,,&, firm
right to raw water from the Project, in the amounts
Exhibit A-. That right shall continui for thr-term of.. this r.
Contract and any renewals thereof, subject to this tore" of?the.
Commerce Contract. The amount of water is subject'to pre rats
reductio,';~becotdin9:, to options that Commerce enjoys under its
f
r Contract the district. Once capital charges associated
with construction of Cooper Reservoir for water in Cooper
c
Reservoir. are fully paid in accordance with the tdrma of the
Commerce Contract, such charges will be deleted from the Annual
3, t
eetre ~
yam. L. i. :J a• eil.;iMi'q
i
Requirement. Likewise, If Commerce exercises certain options
retained gnder the Commerce Contract to take water from the
Project, Members shall be entitled to pro rata refund of costa
received by District from Commerce.
ARTICLE VI '
i
Miscellaneous Provisions and Special Conditions
Section 6.01. Operation and Maintenance of Proiect.
The District will continuously operate and maintain the Project i{
I~ in an efficient manner and in accordance with good business and
engineering practices, and at reasonable cost and expense. The
District recognizes its right and duty to operate the Project
f in the most prudent and economical manner for the benelit
all Members.
M Section 6.02: Proieot Scheduler It
is. thw intent of
the parties that the project will be placed iniopsr'etioe "ii
soon as practicable, and the District agreesPratt" : `
diligently with the evaluation of feasibility,,, iecuritip of f,
r ff Y ; elf
regulatory permits and design and construction o!`; tllf . ytOjeitt
to most such schedule, subject to the other terawt; •nd
conditions in this Contract:
ion4.03,` permits, rinanci and AsrolIiablf. awe.'
r it is Istood, that any obligations on the part of the
District ` b'^'acquim, construct, and complete the project' and
related facilities and to provide raw, water frcia tlre1sro1460 to
the Flembers shall be: (i) conditioned upon the t$iettict's '
,
'xJ `r .29-
1
5 j.
{
P"
ability to obtain all necessary permits, metecial, labor, and
equipment (ii) subject to the District's final determination
p
of feasibility of transportation of the water from the Project
and upon acceptability of the terms of any inter-basin transfer
permit granted by the Texas Water Commission; (iii) conditioned {
• i. s ,
upon the ability of the District to finance the cost of the
f s
Project through tho actual sale of the District's Bonds; anala•t
(iv) subject to all Present and future valid laws, orders, „aft
rules, and regulations of the United States of America, the `
State of Texas, and any regulatory body having jurisdiction, t'
Section 6.04. Title to Water: Ind mnification. Title
to all water supplied to each Member shall be in the Distri I
up to each Point of Delivery, at which point title shall pa !
r
to the receiving Member. The District and each of thai
Participating Members shah. save and hold each other party ,
harmless from all claims, demands, and causes of actlOn which 'j
i
may be asserted by anyone on account of the. tcansportiatioil and,' i
delivery of said water while title racaains in sueh party. Tile r :'rr a
District makes no warranty that it will ever be able to 4%e Lver
the water to Denton County.
I
section 6:.O5. (a) P~N~ntR Solely ! snuoe. }
Except a day` be provided in Exhibit B, the District shall` s
never hava► ttie- right to demand payment by any P3ctioipatin4
Member of any obligations assumed by it or imposed on it under•
and by virtue of this Contract from funds raised, or to be
-30-
lash f;
.
t
i
4 4
w
raised by taxes, and the obligations under this Contract shall o
never be construed to be a debt of such kind as to require any
of the Participating Members to levy and collect a tax to
discharge such obligation. Nonetheless, any Participating
Member may make payments from its water and wastewater (sewer)
1.
system revenues, or from any other lawful sourca, including ad
.s
valorem taxes. 'Section 6.06. Operating Expenses. Each of the
Participating Members, respectively, represents and covenants
that, to the extent payments under this Contract are made with
water and wastewater system revenues, such payments shall 3
constitute reasonable and necessary 'operating expenses'. of i ;
combined waterworks and sewer system, as defined in Ve=non
Ann. Tax. Civ. St. Article 1113, and that all such payments
t• will be made from the revenues of its combined.wstacNOrka and ° .
- a.
sewer system or any other lawful source. Each Picticiptiuq_
Member represents and has determined that th4 raw water supply
to be obtained from the Project is absolutely necessaty ane f
r
essential to the present and future operation of its 'water
system and the project represents long-tern wurce'of aupply of
q, Nt rMds o! the
raw wat¢r meet current and Projected., wa
Pacticip Member's water and wastewater systep and.
facilit. 1i `and, accordingly, all payments required by this
Contract to be made by each Participating Member shall
constitute reasonable and necessary operating expenses of its
: -31-
P
•.Vl - u i i. n ILL'
1
t
I
I
that such
with the effect
( . respective system as described abover
I
uch systems shall be deducted from
pay f
payments Erom. rsvenuas of s
gross revenues of the system like other system operating and t
t
purposes of determining net revenues
maintenance expenses for PucP ~
bonds or other similar obligations heretofore
available to PeY which
or horeaftec issued by such Participating Member,
ledge of the
!
obligations are payable from and secured by a p .j , . : S
rt revenues of the system or facilities after deduction of
maintenance and operating expenses.
Section 6.07. gates for water and wastewater
Services. Each of the participating Members agrees throughout ,
rate and Plaint
the term of this Contract to continuously ops ,
slam or bet ;
'qg
(SOWK) ay
its wastewater
its waterworks system, for water
and to fix and collect such rates and _chargeic
services, wastewater (sewer) services or'botb to!" supplied by;
t } ;
stems as aforesaid as will ptod0'Ce're46RUes in
its system or sy
all o9 lh+ espnsos df'
an amount equal to at least (i)
operation and Maintenance expenses of 'auib smites ~r aY!e_two
~
,
its mnual paymsit. %a this Coattact; .
including P s ecitiCillyr' IbW a the',
and (ii) all othsc. wounts as- requlrN bp+ ' y
- autN$riiieid its'4
pcovisi fi! th ; 4:dinanee or eeeolutiod~.
or hotsaftet
revenuer or other obligations now;
inc,iudtna the amounts required' to Pty all i
autatandin~►
principal of and interest on such bonds &ad otbsa'Oblipations:
1
i
141
^ti ' i•
E i t
14 1
j,
`i3 i
Ail' _ ti. _a
a , ww~
nT LJ~
9
Section 6.08. Use of Furds and S J tem. The District
coven m the sale of
ants and agrees that neither the proceeds fro
the Bonds, nor the moneys paid it pursuant to this Contract,
of the foregoing,
tment of
nor any earnings from the inves any
relating
s, except those directly
will be used for any purpose provided in this Contract;
to the projects and the Bonds as p ;
ate any excess arbitrage%
provided that the District may reb r,
yt
y ! 4 r
earnings from such investment earnings to the United *arbitrage r
f
America in order to prevent any Bonds from becoming
meaning of the internal Revenue Code of 1986 ~,ry
;r 1 +
bonds" within the
(the "Code') or any amendments thereto in effect on the date of
}
District and each Pacticipati
such Bonds. The
issue of
enant and agree that it will not use oc per a
Member hereby cov
s<in„~r'
;I
the use of the Project be water from the Protect in am
that would cause the interest on any of the Bonds Eo be 611
6
\ become subject to federal income taxation under. the Cod, or any 1
J , J iyN
4
" ertwndments thereto in effect on the date of issue of sueb bbg8s+
MM~,aif4t hei~bY s
WsY. . (a) Each
section 6.04. Ris is-of- .a '
f;iatiict, fix
grants to the DSstcict without additional cost to the
to
rights-of-w ~!ir!/f# ~~i
the use of the streets.. easeteentgr ate'
ot,'
control 41~:.the Co~atructiorl, operations and msii►t,nindM the
~k
ovided, however, such 4cant of the use oti streets,
Project; ,
e;serpents and rights-of-way to the District is subieot to aid a
with all MOtlic~t0 .
conditioned on the District (i) complying
Patticipet~nq
ties. practices and regulations of the
poli
t
-33-
;a
`f
h
t
,t wwx~ i
v
V. J .
.l
1 r n
I~ it
j
Members governing and regulating such use Of the alrseta, 3
easements and rights-of-way and (ii) paying all costs, it any,
easements and rights-of-WaY to
such streets,
of restoring
substantially the same state of condition that existed prior to ;
the District's Use-
(b)' Each Member agrees that with prior written
approval, the District may use streets, alleys and public
rights of way within Member's boundaries for pipeline purposes.
Section 6.10. 2nsurance. When facilities. are r..
constructed, the District agrees to carry and arrange for Fire,
sr
casualty, public liability, and/or other insurance, including .
self insurance. on the Project for purposes and in amours
which, as determined by the District, ordinarily would;
;
carried by' a privately owned utility,coispany owning and
1
4 operating such facilities, except that the District'shall not
be required to provide liability insurance except to insure
41, "IF
itself against risk of loss due to claims.foc whit csn, id
the opinion of the District's legal counsel, bf;lioble under
the Texas Tort Claims Act or any similar la+r.oc judicial' i z
decision. Such insurance will provide, to,Abe es!'edt teesible
~I
and pr U. terry the restoration of ' dstsg,ed or, destroyed-
pcoperTj~ d equipaent, to minim!:e'the interruption, of the I
servicuch faces. premiums for surfs insurance that
relate directly to the Project or, under, gerietaliy accepted
cost accounting practices, is allocable to that projecto •ahell
conitituts an operation and Maintenance Upenae of the Project.
,-31- s
r;
lasts
a,
z. r. . ?r:•wa!•-w::tiYikAtA.'~+n•`e't,olY~.
.
rs
S
m. r'a
Section 6.11. Special Provisions. The parties hereto
acknowledgs and agree to the Special Provisions, if any, which
are set forth in Exhibit B hereto which Exhibit is
incorporated herein for all purposes. The Special Provisions
for this Contract reflect circumstances or issues for this i
specific Member which may be different from those of other
Members and therefore constitute a modification of or „4 F
requirement in addition to the standard provisions otherwise
contained in this Contract.
ARTICLE VII.
F,
Section 7.01. Force Ma eun. if by reason of force
maieure a participating Member shall be rendered unable whol
+ligations under this Contras
or in part to catty out its
other than the obligation of each Participftin4 Meabec•to Make '
the payments required under Section S-437ot,this Contractj then s
I if such party shall give notice and lull particulate of such t
force maieuce in writing to the o_thst Pacticipatih Menbecs''and f`.
manse of he,. I
the District within a 1e880nable tiwa'itee. orcu
e event or cause relied oh, tl~ obligati, of- the;Patticipetih¢
.
Member giving such notice, so far ashAt, UP afteotid by sit ch ~
u ~ shalt: be'susOn dwip tNi'coett"80 + of~ 04
ded ilk
force me x E
inabilit lL41 clalmdo. but for no longer period► and such Pazttcio , eg Mewwv shall endeavor ta. resbvs or. overcotiao such
inability with all reasonable disaJtco1. ; TINE. tecs" , •f6KCIS
Maieuce' as employed hereie shall meaA• aete, o!_God- , stiikirr Xf
14 .1-1
p{s~
■
%
q
lockouts or other industrial disturbances, -'acts of public
enemy, otoers of any kind of the Government of the United
States or the State of TeRas, or any civil or military
authority, insurrection, riots, epidemics, landslides#
lightning, earthquake, fires, hurricanes, Storms, floods,
washouta, drougnts, arrests, restraint of government and
r people, civil disturbances, explosions, breakage or accidents
to machinery, pipelines or canals, partial or entire failure of
water supply, or on account of any other causes not reasonable
within the control of the party claiming such inability. !
Section 7.02. Term of-Con C&!ft This contract, shall'
4
be effective on and from the Contract Date, and Shall coati
in force and effect for thirty (30) Years or for s uch Pofiild,,~ ,c•:
time that Bonds issued by the District for the project soAraid F `
1
outstanding, whichever is greater; provided~ora* tia4.- tern':, r .
of the Contract and the expiration date nuiY be istexddl me
r.:
succeeding twenty (20) year Periods at tfts optjon,~o! trio a
tft Co trig ti
Participating Member for as long is they.,, y
,
" remains in effect. It is understood .and agreqA by'. the Distrust
lbs. ~ €
~CC~r;air
and each Mewber that the lirw right toa rasa-;Mtnt
Section hotoad -sAoil continua thrahph a
i
tQ Aa
extenri this Contract. The Disttictli obiiq
pray eontracted for services shall eawe!►~'~' icoaA tho f
ide
Ew+ahi
date the project becomes operational, said
raw water to any Participating "armbet ass,- de:l~Eiei: bf the
-36-
{
.
I
itiJ4.T
.TSN,YR~
k
fill
•consulting Engineers for the Project or on such other data that
one or more of the participating Members racaives raw water by
virtue of or in exchange for raw water from the Project. This
i Contract constitutes the sole agreement between the parties
hereto with respect to the Project.
Section 7.03• Required Approval/Consent. Unlaia W !
otherwise provided herein, any approval or consent required by tkk
ions of this Contract by a Participating Member or r
rovis
the p
the District shall be evidenced by a written resolution adopted ~o V
iving such approval of-. COO
by the governing body of the party g
~i
on receipt of such written resolution dull
consent. vP CUR. ,~c
the appropriate party, the District 69, eXJ~'
certified by a 6,f•
Participating Member can conclusively act on the aatt
requiring such approval. r~
Section 7.04. Modifi_ e±tian. No Chan", aiolalpda~
f ~
of be madai oe b1 effective
modification of this Contract $hal
due e a 11,a
which will affect adversely the proOtt pa t` s
MWra~s~';ifaalN ,
moneys required to be, paid by any pasticipittft,
ti l
sitloM c~,*~A9~it~'>
aia`}ilar~, contract ae#, W.
a ~
this Contract or ear. f
be elftiltli
amenda»nt of modification, shell be made 4 .
a violatioe--~ of any pcovisdh i Oir ate" .
would
Assolut 1
Notion 7.05: lade se and 11otl4!• iArUosr. olAecwis~
provided herein#" any notiCer coeasunicatloth. L!!Vollov,
advice (herein severally and collectively, tot, coawauiie elk,: +
-37-
i
Rip
t-- kA
P, !9,11T137171W,
call" !P "'t 1' heroin provided or permitted to be given, made
or acceq*'by any party to any other party must be in writing
w~
and may b6'given or be served by depositing the some in the
United States mail postpaid and registered or certified and j
addressed to the party to be notified, with return receipt
,
requested, or by delivering the same to an officer of such
party, or by prroaid telegram when appropriate, addressed !o
the party to be notified. Notice deposited in the mail in the
manner hereinabove described shall be conclusively deemed to be
effective, unless otherwise stated herein, from and after the riff-
Notice €
expiration of three days after it is so deposited,
f •
giwd in any other manner shall be effective only it 84w
received by the party to be notified. For the purpoa"
noticier the addreaNe of the parties shall, until„ elsanqa8 ac r,
hereinafter provided, be as followet
} If to the District, to: +
Trinity Regional
Upper I
Water District
396 M. Nara Street
P. 0. Drawer- 30S
Le,tisv311et ?dates 7so67 J •
t'
Cif! Denton tot
i~
T 211
i to C(j' Pf Highland Village, to: 4.
V
V 1_.'r r
V 6 -36-
fi s+nr:~
i'4 fib. ~ , l..a. _ -.a~ ~~.~i':T', j",~ f • ~lal'.: .
%
C
j
It to City of Lewisville, to:
Mana er
t of Lew svills
p,0. Box 194002
Law svilU Texas 75029-9002
If to Denton County Fresh Water Supply District NO,
to:
President g_ LulQpl D str ct No. 1
s
=De County Fresh ..a~a.
2911 Turtle Cteek Boulevard slice 00
1 De laa Texas 75219
The parties hereto shall have the right from time to
time and at any time to change their rospective'.addr•sues and
as its address any other M
each shall have the right to specify
address by at least fifteen (15) days' written notice to';t
other parties hereto. t `
Section 7.06. at • of Fed ial Laws= 00,
Reaulstions. This Contract,. is subJoct, to sit agslicable #
licable persdts,'ocdinaiiais; ~
federal and state laws and any app
rules, orders and regulations of any local, stile of tedefal
governmental authority having, or asssttih4 irtisQi00Ai' but .
nothing contained heroin shalt be construed at •i 4' of say ;
or contest any such law; otdiei iX ,
right to question,
utia0iet~ ire
e Istlo tb.ask torus having.i
rule or yoen taelb t Yt is ! not
?~Oy~ ~ lea ~ ~
l
intend spealty, (and this Conttsats she' r►01t- be
tq
,
d,tanlt,:
considered as specifying) as •xclusiv* te10saf 909 81"t
but all such othst temedies (other than tgnaiMtibs eslalnq
4
at law of in equity may be availed of by say Ntty, be oW and II
-39-
is
shall tie cumulative. Recognizing however, that the District's
undertakia4 to provide and maintain the services of the Project
is an obligation, failure in the performance of which cannot be
adequately compensated in money damages alone, the District
agrees, in the event of any default on its part, that each
participating Member shall have available to it the equitable
remedy of mandamus and specific performance in addition to any `
a other legal or equitable remedies (other than termination) ;k
which may also be available. Recognising that failure in the
performance of any Participating Member's obligations hereunder
could not be adequately compensated in caoney damages alone,
each Participating Member agrees in the went of any default
its part that the District shall have available, to it t ;
equitable remedy of mandamir and• speoifid petfotmane* in
addition to any other legal or, equitable' ~rewNieeK (otMx - then
termination) which may also be available °ta.L tbir, Dist ict: ,
Notwithstanding anytbinq to the contrary oaNtsirMi i(►' tbit
Contract, any tight at~ rim A :sadd~ira;ik:.Wtet "Cell
r i Rsftex
* Mmt' k~lichV
the right of the Dit%tiet- terreceiYo', thenA
shall nev". be deitV"ANwrep, w'`~aivelr' ser'jt° be
conalu Ne 1 esattt r .x 9 60; Is
,
Isle or ' ty tai Aim tM4" (2) Yoam gl9ie`:6 (Y do", alter ,
the oc et 'snchr, difsult: so waives, Q;, waivers of any
breach, or default (of and eearhes 'q do4i111'tsZ ! any= path
hereto or of perfotmacei bg'' thY ottw~t; Nttl og salt- ddty of
r
•
«
Iasi@
i
t
,
V W.-M-M-01, W7 W
deemed a waiver theteof in the
obligation hereunder shall be t
' waivers. be. deemed or
future, not-, shall any such waiver or
construed .to be a waiver of subsequant breaches or d®faults of
co
any kind, character or description, under any circumstance. {
The parties
7.09. Sever] tY• hereto
or 100
agree that in cage any one re of the
specifically
sections, subsections, provisions, clauses or words of this
Contract or the application of such €ections, subsections,
i
~7covisiono, clauses or words to any situati c.a oaCiinvalidno=
should be, or should be held to be, for any
unconstitutional, under the laws of constitutions of the state
J; aj
co caves
or the United States of Amecics, or in ucAIhoal A#t
constitutions. such
ar'2` {5
such laws or
unconstitutionality or contravention shall not i#Eaea~ dthdi ' g(, wogA~ this" ,
ssctions# subsections, provisions, clauses a - Y 3
` etiongo- I
lira.ion of such secti°+~'
Contract or the sPp szy~atios or' :
provisions, clauses or words t0 ar►Y Y Atha i
xaa~r
' I.
it is intended that tbill Cda -
citcumstance, and' ~sugh f
and agAia 'i W,:
ssvetabIO and shall bo.construida/M r 111
sriMGtzi` r
invalid or unconatitutional aoctiosrr.
OL)
t; bean included hecsl: asp r G
ns! R f '
Claus*' sties hereto shall W6
obligatiF 1
for.
"ousita b thif.
;BecRion 7.0l, Venue;
All tPari~'uad~r; s
R but not limited b
Contract# including, r;
,
' t
-41-
.
t.l 7'
a
1 • ~ r
D~•
i j'f. • s .RrvS^41 C M
VIMV'
EINIIEF A
Allocillsi of later
rte Irwirieal of IN uhllit A fire a 1111 If Of Cd1r111 Ael art ~w
tc 4r' f
Ag11cA11e to the lillricl led 6 FarllciNltol IN•lerl b if let for 16
i4 their lelirlty 1" the 1w of the crletract, \ t~r1 t ^
fel rll I{I 111 itl LL c?
` lwatity dl lose Mae feraetq" of fetal c, # E,
{wlrael vieEl to Millie" WEleu ti/r le! `
1telrlet (1~tIM ~
Entity Fire Allkh Aliee Alloc ttiiie fetal
04 of leotoo 17.4" era 1ELEl>glpl aJe ~ +
r of Aif1tIM villa" 1.100 Na UAW" all
of latovillo O."Wti all 11.Eti11111 Are
L '10 {wety Free some
Wil lietrlct III. i 1.311M e/a 14.1t11A71 N" trl S 1
Tj I r, Z'' , iLlN11f1 a.MltAtf 16/,rNINM IM.IIN111 -
f:
Wider Of tern of the G•Irocl, of 11*111 w "belt" Ile »tU".to
Per NU K to the tamale I If tk aal flak N la tt wl~tw '
1" of Fra"Itl of the CmlmKtd ii/trit1 apIW Mel be OA
is all 10WIMgtla IMhn If to 1 a*p 11SM It OU6 IN ate
~r9f mTAC # r
~10.~ YttM 1
♦r `i ! '~i9•','l11iS • ~61r i '.J
W f'F.•441i46' .I>•~tR+41: r y.
•
7
{
i n
'sir.
l
^tP+'F~;,ltr r J^rn i i!yc. , .
1
January 16► 1991
PUBLIC UTILITIES BO
AGENDA ITEM
, u irk
Toe CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD``
a
FROM= R, E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities
r REi CONSIDER 1991 BUDGET FOR COOPER RESERVOIR WATER
SUPPLY CONTRACT.
RECOMMENDATIONt ;j
For review only. Contract still under review by etas!
and bond attorneys, Anticipate return to PUS for j
approval in February and approval by Council at first
meeting in March.
SUMMARY/BACKGROUNDt
For the past two years, the UTRWD has been working with
the city of commerce in an effort to assume Commerce's
rights and obligations to water from Cooper reservoir
located on the Sulphur River in Hopkins and Delta r
-'s Counties,
f
a Cooper Reservoir is begaq constructed by the Corps of
' Engineers with the local sponsors beano North Texas
Municipal Water District (NTMWDf, the City Of Irving
and the Sulphur River Municipal Water District (SRND).
The Sulphur River Municipal Water District is composed ,r
' of the cities of Commerce, Sulphur Springs and Cooper.
p
tai yield of Cooper Reservoir is sp roximAtely
'
Thy to
r
• j
107 MOD and is scheduled to be complete it 3991. NTMitD
t'. and Irving each have rights to 40 MOD, BAWD having the
rema l n i rig .
The development of Cooper Reservoir began In 1968 and r•
was delayed for approximately 90 years due to
envlr"' ental concerns. Commerce had originally entered
into a contract with the Sulphur River Municipal Water
District for 11.71 MOD supply from Cooper Assetvolr4
J However, believing that Cooper Reservoir would not be
built, Commerce, in the 19701s,•secured a water supply
from Lake Tawakinlo When work on Cooper Reservoir was
again initiated in the mid- 990's, Commerce determined
that they did not need the Cooper Reservoir supply and
sought out someone to assume their obligations and
r1°IriA1 °IwiYw A °4 ,
A. 16.}l.grry 1 . r a i
II L*
Pi
r.,` J w F N
NIJ .I,. rte'.
i tO
rights for a period of 50 ears but would allow
Commerce the otion to resume Its obligations and
I rights in Cooper Reservoir thereafter.
j ~
Commerce first offered this option to NTMWD, but it is
our understanding that they chose not to accept
Commerce's offer on such terms. It is our understanding
that NTMWD is desiring to assume total obligations and
rights in perpetuity for Commerce's share of the water.
Commerce then offered the 50 year option to the UTRWD
r' aY
y who subsequently entered into a contract with Commerce
on such terms.
However, the UTRWD, being a startup regional water
district, lacked sufficient financial resources to
assume the obligations of Commerce's contract with the r
1,0
9RMWD and so the cities of Lewisville, Highland
Village, Denton and Denton County Fresh Water District
fl have, by resolution, agreed to guarantee UTRWn
obligations in exchange for guaranteed volumes of water
from the project. a
r;
Denton and Lewisville will be guaranteed two (3) MOD
each and Highland Village and Denton county Fresh Water
supply N1, one (1) MOD each in exchanga for each party ;
guaranteeing 334 and 15.51 respectively of the UTRWD's
costa in this project. The remaining approximately six
(6) MOD will then,be allocated to all other wholesale
and raw water customers of the UTRWD as the needs
arise.
The obligations relating to this contract involve the
annual debt payment to the Corps of Engineers which is
163,341 per year for the first 10 years and 1355,635
for years 11 through 50. There is also a 150,000 one
time payment to the City of Commerce for the costs that
i
r they have Incurred to ,date on the project
Additionally, it is estimated that it will require r,
j approximately 550000 of legal and r*gulatory fees to
get water rights transferred from the City o! commerce
to the UTRWD, plus approximately 187,000 to conduct an
engineering study to determine the most feasible method
of transporting water from the sulphur River Basin to 5
the Trinity River Basin.
Denton's share of the 1991 budget of 6351,000 is
183, 5,00, Y
Upon completion of the water treatment plant, wherein
the UTRWD will be 491 participant, and as UTRMD begins
to sell water to their customer cities and begins to ;
' `11 have a revenue stream available, UTRWO will repay the
J four guarantors 504 of the front end money that will
have been paid by those guar~entors.
E
it • , 5.. 1•,<b e•+r ~'11eT 4jYi1~-,..RY M1
G~~ , , '-"f+! sYA J".:MWtY+X err.: !
J
RESOLUTION No.
A RESO WTION Or THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, EXPRESSING ITS INTENT TO !
CONTRACT TO PURCHASE FROM THE UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT
A PORTION OF THE RAW WATER OBTAINED FROM THE SULPHUR RIVER BASIN BY
THE DISTRICT BY CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF COMMERCEt AND PROVIDING
' AN EFFECTIVE DATE, ;
WHEREAS, the City of Commerce has rights to approximately
i 31,72 million gallons per day of water in Cooper Reservoir on the f~.S
a Sulphur River, which is excess to its current needs; and t,.
{ WHEREAS, the City of Commerce approached the Upper Trinity
Regional Water District regarding its interest in purchasing the
excess water for use in Denton Countyl and
WHEREAS, the Water Master Plan for Denton County identifies j
the Sulphur River Basin as a probable future source of water'foz} ^y'i
Denton County; and
WHEREAS, the District has determined that the cost of water In
Cooper Reservoir is very favorable, compared to alternate sourcest
and
WHEREAS, the District is negotiating a contract with the City _
of Commerce which provides for the purchase of water by the
District for up to one hundred yearst and
WHEREAS, the terms of the Contract require, the District to
reimburse the, city of commerce for Its cost and to pay the cost of
obtaining regulatory approval to authorize the interbasin transfer Y
of the water to Denton County; and
WHEREAS, the only source of funds to the 0ietrict to fulfill
its financial obligations under the-contract is from contracts with
member entities to purchase the water and guarantee paymentl and
WHEREAS, the District ro ose$ to,apportion some of the water
to certain entities on the conditionithat they
financing to implement the contracts NOW, THEREFRErovide interim
r 1r
I BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON.,
c '
i SECTION ~F That the City of Denton hereby expresses its I
support to the•:Upper-Trinity Regional Water District for attempting
to assure an adequate and reliable water supply for the region.
y I !
t (r l~ P u {
HIBI
TT
I I
IY. I
,
I
L,
I
1 Sy .
Z I
i
1
r:rv 6
That the city Council of Denton indicates
urchare
fiEto a contract with the District to pr day
f~ intntion is a payment for at least two (1) ail ioncontrwot b,tuosn ; a
and guarantee PYm propG
of the raw water to be City Of Commerce, 4
the District and the City
1rI'r, i, '
'jPI
Y I"4'
That under the contract with the Distrlot, the
Cit o Dirtriot
y f Denton, obtain a portion entities therawdwatarethen for the
intends to provide to the
senior right to Commeroe,
purchases from the City of n~ of COr►,r.~rtlsj rS
District rietrtorIseelem nt the ooritra t with the Oily eogsrarY !br
the !s intended to be provided for about three Yiart'
interid financing r victory,
e estimated time necessary for obtaining sgnesrlnq
which it th
authority of the lnterbasin transfer anypottiinq thi water, tt Is report regarding alternatives for errovide4 by the City Of Deptdn n
ixpppeeted that the interim tinanoSnq p Sri.;
will be assumed and repaid by all the entities who pazt9i!?ats l
the District, on a Pro rata basis.
That this Resolution aha11 become effective
immediately upon its passage and approv 1.
da of , 1990.
t PASSED AND APPROVED this the Y 7.'
y 808 CASTL~BERRYj MAYOR ~
l,
r ,i 1 M1s
A'TTRSTI ( ,
JENNIFER WALTERS* CITY SECRETARY
BY{
« 3,i APPROVED A4 To LEGAL FORMS
ATTORNEY
QEBM A. DRAYOVITCH,
a , roe
Comm, PAGE 2
I lo
0 yl x ?l ~
- .e MeyJ.MNwl wvn. m.. ?'h1 ~
Wd....
t
°
oo
CITY or DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 19, 1991
The Council convened into the Work Session at 5:15 p-m- in the
Civil Defense Room.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Boyd; Council
Members Ayer, Gorton, Hopkins and Trent.
ABSENT: Council Member Alexander
r
1. The Council convened into Executive session to discuss
legal matters (considered settlement offer of claim against
/ Jimmy Brown and George Reaves, considered settlement offer of
claim against R. Havenhill, considered settlement in K
City), real estate, and personnel/boacd apps ntaants
(considered appointments to the Building Code Board, Community
Development Block Grant Committee, the Electrical Code boacd, A,
1 the Historic Landmark Commission, the Human Services Committee,
the Blue Ribbon Committee for Stocm Water Utility, the Downtown`
Advisory Board and the Sign Board of Appeals.)
and held a discussion
2, The Council received a report
with the Pack and Recreation Board regarding a resolution ;
modifying the use of CIP funds,
Dalton Gregory, Chair-Pack and Recreation Hoard, stated that
the Park Board was proposing that the City redirect the $2.7
million from the 1986 bond program in the recreation area,
$1.3 [pillion was to be used for a recreation center in the
h northeast part of the City and 11,4 million was to be used to
build a recreation center in the southern part of the city,
r The building of these centers had been delayed due to the }
downturn of the economy. The Board was recommending that
Instead of building new recreation centers, it would like to q
expand and renew the current recreation centers and/or use some
of the money to do major repairs to current facilities,
Reasons for this recommendation included the fact that the
current City budget was barely adequate to handle the current
facilities. This included the packs, median strips as well as
the recreation centers. The centers were not open as many
hours as they should be. It did not seem prudent to build new
facilities when the operational budget did not handle, the
eurcant facilities. The Board would like to coacentrata on
improving the current facilities and on improving the tarVices
provided at those facilities. Theca was another tolution which
was to give more money to the pack operational and maintenance
budget, To accomplish the change, the Part; Board wanted to
have a seties of pubic meetings to collect input from the
citizens regarding their reaction to the proposal and the kinds
of improvements/aodifications they would like to sea in the
current recreation cantata. After those meetir,age and meetings
with possible architects to determine if the modifications were
possible, the Board would like the Council tc place the issue
on the 1992 May election as a referendum itom. The Board was
proposing a referendum to the citizens because in 1986, the
City promised that it the citizens voted for the bondas certain
. ....ra A r , i .•.'s.'~ 4S..,':M'M'i`:~f}'fir i'(1'~tkilYe iK"tsgl~ <
N
{
E 1
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 2
facilities would be built, Gregory understood that legally the
to h vote ci did not have
they proposed bon moneyav but her feltr that it oulde note bes good
for public relations. µ
Council Member Ayer asked if this proposal had been discussed
with the 191 Committee,
1 Gregory replied no. f
€1 t i~-
council Member Ayer stated that that should be the lust pplace
A, the Board go with the proposal. Thf 191 Committee was dosi9ned
to track the bond money so that it could not be charged that
the money was used tot purposes other than what the citizens
voted for.
Gregory replied that the Board arrived at its recommendation
because it saw that there was no commitment on the part Of the
city to devote money to the operational budgets of the current
centers,
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that Gregory had correctly
Unless there Mete
stated the financial position of the City.
' as shifts to c
,
some major polidlLLicult to open two win ow acontact. He tundshadita
would be very
concern regarding timing of the referendum When the time came
to ask the citizens regarding move hangedi funding* he.Citt with the ' needed to be in a position
the City went to the voters in 1992 to ask tot a referendum, it
in order to
i needed to be sure that its financial house was
proceed with the work. His concern was not with the direction
the Park Board was taking, but rather one of timing.
Council Member Trent questioned the operational hours of the ti
reetWIon facilities. The tennis courts could net be
self-sustaining it they were closed on Saturday and Sundayi
s
Steve Brinkman, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that
the courts were mainly used on the weekends for tournaments.
iii tt they warp not being used tot tournaments, they Were J;
available fog use but no one was there to charge for the use of
the courts.
Trent felt that the City might be missing out on possible
rwenue. At felt there should be a better focus on the courts
such as having the center open, staffed and receive payment'tor
use of the courts. He also suggested equipment sales at the
center, He heard that there was a group of players who ha,
dominated the use of the courts on the weekends,
w a .1 li t , ; 1
t 1 c' j ...,..-,...Kawr..vvieh aN+k~l~•~•'rvW.vRngT f''., .S i
i
1
aN
f~t4 a' 1~
e W
Y.IA. . a
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 3
I
Gregory re lied that the tennis courts were not the main item
of discussion. The bond programa passed ie in city 1996, dd as not rge
oc
teatinn centers,
two additional too build
1 individuals to use the centers. The Board's stance was that
there were gape in the current services to citizens* Rew nua
could not be generated if the services could not be provided.
Carl Anderson, park and Recreation Board, stated that the mos Marticl Luther King, ,Yet Raccestion Catt3,130 ap.m peon a turday
Used
cantor in the City,
and was not open on Sunday. {
e Consensus of the Council was to have the Pack Board meet with ;~s J+
the 191 Committee, to meet with the north and south pacts of
the City for citizen input and to consider the timing when to
hold the referendum.
a. ,5
3. The Council received a report and held a discussion on
the 1990 consul and the redistricting process.
the
Hacry Peceuad, Senior Planner, reviewed th deg p went d the
city's population over the Islet tan Yeats.
ethnic breakdown of the various districts in the City. He
1 stated that some of the current city district lines split
,
current County precinct lines. According to the federal
guidelines, the ideal district population was equal to the
total population divided by the number of districts. Allowing
for 5% deviation from the mean, a district population should be
within the range of 15,739-17,395. District 1 andDDistrictlIt
both exceeded the equality of population range,
d fell short of the minimum size while District IV had an
acceptable number representing 3.87% deviation from the ideal
district population. Petsuad stated that he had met with the
County regarding their schedule of redistrictingCatY d possible
assured th
ss
boundary changes. The County Clerk a
county lines would not change within the Clty as their oritoris
for redistricting was that the precincts should be
approximately 3,000 population. The precincts which were undic
or wayY over wets not within the City limits. Staff felt that
tincts finis viihindthe Cityt wouldinotichangeas the Countyes
prod
Council Member cotton asked if the County used number of
registered voters Instead of population the last time it
"A
redistricted.
Parsuad replied yes that it was his understanding that total
population or number of registered voters could be used for the
district figures.
I,
A,
1 ~Y
j 1 b~ ♦ .ivr..l.M iYti1,W.~{'..T.S ✓~{{RIYY.\~N~~ ,~s
1
P,L
06091
1
A
r
City of Denton City Council Minutes
1 March 19, 1991
Page 4
Persuad suggested that the Council form a committee to work
along with staff to begin the process as soon as possible.
Mayor Pro Tom Boyd stated that the County districts were very
large. It the City were to draw its district lines so as to
not split County precincts and as a result deviated more than r
5% from the totals, could that be done with the justification
of not wanting to split County precincts.
Persuad replied yes that it would have to be justified. it the
deviation were not much beyond 5%, justification woulC have to
r r.
be written. tf it were way beyond the 5%, alternatives might
have to be looked at,
Council Member Gorton stated that last September he had ti?
requested looking at a Charter Revision Committee. . He felts
that the three-four make-up of the Council might bs`
challenged. He felt that any such Charter revisions would need
to be presented at the same time district lines were considered.
g
City Manager Harrell stated that the Council might want to wait
until the County set the precinct lines in July. The Council f'
might went to appoint one or two individuals to most with the
county commissioners and encourage the Commissioners to be more
realistic in drawing Dentonts precinct lines,
Mayor Castleberry thowtht it might be too early to meet with
the commissioners regardinq this issue.
a Persuad stated that ltatf would like to have the final
submLesion sent to the Justice Department by the end of
November so as to give them enough time to approve any changes
for the May 1992 electiot.
Mayor Pro Tom Boyd did not feel it was too early to talk with
the Commissioners regarding the City's precinct lines. He
suggested appointing one or unrs delegates to talk with the ;
Commissioners.
4, The Council received a report and held a discussion
y regarding the concepts associated with amending the Subdivision
and t,and Development Regulations,
Council Member Alexander Joined the meeting.
r,
y Drank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the
proposed amendments dealt primarily with the process of Er
t* platting rather than the development standards a development
must most when it was platted. Robbins presented a summary of ;
amendments for the process, (A detailed summary of the
s.tonhonts were located in the agenda back-up materials.)
i
r i
F
City of Denton City Council Minutes
Match 19, 1991
Page 5
The Council convened into the Regular Session at 700 p.m. in
the Council Chambers.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Boyd; Council
Members Alexander, Ayer, Gorton, and Trent.
ABSENT= Council Member Hopkins "
1. Pledge of Allegiance
afi
The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of
Allegiance,'
David Pullen, Texas Society of Professional Engineers,.
presented the City with the Government Professional Development
Award for 1991= y
Council Member Hopkins joined the meeting.
Mayor Castleberry presented a proclamation for Desert $tota .
Victory Rally Day=
2. The Council was to receive a citizen report from Carl
Williams regarding redistricting.
Mr. Williams was not present at the meeting.
3. The Council received a citizen report from Joyce Poole
regarding certain items in the proposed contract with Texas
Waste Management.
Ma. Poole stated that the original bid letting was limited to 1
the sale of commercial solid waste business including trucks
and equliiment to handle the waste. The City had the right to
direct the disposal of the collected waste to the City landfill
at a charge of 13.45 per cubic yard which was in the bid
speoiEications. According to the Public Utilities Board
minutes of February 18, 1991, Texas Waste Management had "road <
the contract and had no objections.0 There vats three;
+
relresentativgs of Texas Waste Management present who took no
exceptions to the total of the bide to it stood. Prior to the
Council meeting of February 5, 19911 Texas Waste Management y',t
i advised that they would not honor their bid if they vice' y'
required to dispose of their waste at the Denton landfill.
From that point on, negotiations evolvod and changed the
contract to that it no longer impacted on the commercial
businesses only. The revisions required all haulers who were
r"< picking up commercial waste to dispose of that waste in a Texas
t, Waste Management site, which effectively removed true and open
competition. other points which came from the negotiated
contract began to evolve with a possible transfer site. After
the City's landfill was closed, the City would be requited to
haul waste to the Dili landfill owned by Trxes haste i
i Management. That proposed cost would be approximately 114,000
)q a month over
,g=E .s.w,rxN all,wwrw..: x .~.:<.Lnh~Srr~,14~6'L`ka'~;$ ~~nry ~y
LAIN,
i M1
a. w
i
771
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 6
R '
what the City now paid to dispose of residential waste in the
City's landfill. She felt that citizens and bueinessbs were
not made aware of changes in the contracts and how it would
impact on each of them. In less than a week she had collected
over 800 signatures in opposition to the sale of the system.
She stated that should the City ignore what the citizens had
asked, individuals were willing to carry the issue to a
referendum.
4. The Council received a citizen report from Mike +
Cochran regarding the proposed contract with Texas waste ~i
Management. Nr
Mr. Cochran felt that everyone who spoke at the last public
hearing on this issue was in favor of open competition. He
presented council with a rate survey of what other cities paid.
for service from Waste Management. He felt that when 9S% of
the business was in the hands of a powerful company such as
Waste Management, there was a de facto monopoly. And when they '
controlled tot the next 20 years, where that garbage would go,
theta was an even stronger case for a monopoly. Waste
Management's reputation was not the beet and needed to be r
looked at carefully before the city went into a long term
contract with them. He was under the assumption that the
commercial solid waste division lost money but after
discussions with Sill Angelo, he learned that the division made
r $1000000 last year. Everyone was concerned to kesp the
1 residential rates low but the payments made by Waste Management
would keep the residential rates artificially low for the next
to years.
,1.
5. The Council received a citizen report from a
representative from Texas Waste Management regarding the
proposed contract with Texas Waste Management.
John Gustafson, General Manager - Texas Waste Management,
stated that the company had grown from serving 3 municipalities
in 1901 to serving over 30 municipalities in 1991. The service
and reputation of the company had been outstanding over the k
last ten year*, Waste Management was the pioneer in pollution
control and ties the first mayor waste service to address: the
problem of ground water protection. opposition to the contract
seemed concern that as a result of the proposed contract, they
would control the commercial business in Denton. Businesses
would have a choice of which company to do business with. A
' competitor was asked by Council it they could compete in a
market where Texas Waste Management controlled the disposal
facility, The response was that they would not "stand a
snowball's chance in hell of competing." Yet after the Council
passed the resolution, they began actively pursuing City
customefe, Another concern was the proposed transfer station,
As proposed to the City, the transfer station rates were
controlled by contract. Texas Waste Management would not have
4
1
i f
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 7
any special rates and no special considerations. Waste
management was guaranteeing and bonding for 20 years of
disposal for the City of Denton. opponents to the contract had
neglected the following facts: (1) Denton's residential rates
for comparable municipal services were the highest in North
Central Texas; (2) staff projected that if the City stayed in
the landfill business, the rates would go from $9.95 to $13.85
In 1999; (3) if the City stayed in the landfill business, the
cost to expand the present landfill life would be $344
million; (4) if the City stayed the the landfill business, the.
development of a new site would be required; (5) if the City
stayed in the landfill business, the cost of a new site rw
development would be 4748 million in today's dollars; (6) if
the City stayed in the landfill business, the costs would be
paid by the customere and the taxpayers. These facts along
with the information presented by staff clearly showed that the
infusion of 46,1 million of hard cash and cost savings combined
with the elimination of 410 million in expenditures for
landfill development and associated liability was not only good
for the City and its citizens, it was a gift to the environment.
,r
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd stated that one of the objections that had r
been raised most often, was the requirement that all the
carriers use the Waste Management facilities, He could
understand the City's interost in having that provision while
it was receiving the surcharge and other compensation regarding ;
the transfer station. if after the City had been fully paid;
1- would it be possible to remove that provision. That there
would not be a requirement that others use Waste Management's
transfer station.
Gustafson replied that the contracts Were in the hands of the
attorneys. That could be addressed in negotiating those items.
61 The Council received a citizen report from Winn Wilton
regarding the Pry street Tair.
Walton stated Mr. Loveless' legal argument that he would sue.
the City was a rather weak one. As he understood the
procedure, it, took someone who voted against the measure, to
recall it back to the floor. He asked if anyone cared to do
that.
Council Member Gorton asked the City Attorney to address the
issue in that the time frame for reconsideration had passed.
Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that according to the f;
Council's rules of procedure, in order to reconsider an item
C that had been voted on, one of the Council members who voted in
the majority must request reconsideration on the next
succeeding meeting, except for contracts.
l p
f lr T,'psi l `a ,
.
k
]i(f D N
F
l'
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
page 8
Walton pointed out that this was the next succeeding meeting.
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that in accordance with the t^
'texas open Meetings Lawa that item had to be scheduled on the ;
agenda 72 hours before the meeting. s
Walton did not wish to continue with t.is report and retired.
The Council received a citizen report from Bill Miller
y regarding the Fry Street Fail. S,
the Student Association of the University of
Miller stated that
Worth Texas voted to co-sponsor the Fry Street Fair. Part of
the arqumonts of the Fair in the past had been that the shops
were too close to the street, the street was too narrow, the
street was too short, it was too popular with too many people.
The proposal for a now location for the Fair would be on Avenue
A. All of the shop owners had bean contacted along that area i
and he had had discussions with Chancellor Hurley. Chancellor
Hurley had concerns regarding alcohol consumption and had been rr xj,+, the
had art
~sie.Aenttwit h it individualowho owned a large packing lot in i
11
the area to have the Fair in that location. Evecy year the {
Student Association had a banquet and it was decided that the
~
banquet would be at the Fair this year. That area could be
fenced oft and controlled and was not City property.
M,
g, The Council received a citizen report from Gary Rich
regarding the Fry Street Fait.
i
Mr. Rich was not present at the meeting.
I 9, The Council received a citizen report from Brien ~p
Noubling regarding the Fry Street Fair.
Mr. Heubling was not present at the meeting.
f ~ p ^r
10. The Council received a citizen report from Briggs
Bennett regarding the Fry Street Fair. g
Mr. Bennett wis not present at the meeting.
il. The Council received a citizen report from Gail alb
Nohlschlaegec regarding the Fry Street Fair.
.
Ms, Nohlschlaeger was not present at the meeting. ~J
12, The council received a citizen report from Becky
Slusarski regarding the Fry Street Fair.
Ms. Slusareki was not present at the meeting.
} r' t1 i _ v...n«-J r.;iro»efKrF g~ I I
I a f 1.
PV 3~1>ll~~t:ll
77
9+
1 J(~
' I
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
' Page 9
13. Consent Agenda `u
a Hopkins motioned, Gorton seconded to approve the Consent Agenda
with the exception of Items 13.A,3a and 13.A.4. Motion carried
' unanimously.
A. Bids and Purchase Orders,
I . Bid 01224 - Fertilizer 6 Herbicide
2. Bid 01227 - Police Sedans
H. Tax Refunds
~j
kYa
1. Considered approval of a waiver of
Penalty/Interest for Mike Amador - Account
0297810.
2. Considered approval of a waiver of
Penalty/ Interest for Kenneth L. Ford, Jr. -
Account 0283050
~ l 1. f
Item 13.A.3. wad considered. r
Council Member Oorton stated that he did not see any actuatoro
' j for esergenoy vehicles to be installed. He felt it would b any
ideal time to install the actuators as the University of North
Texas was paying for the hardware. Welch was a meSor street in the area and would benefit from the actuators.
City Manager Harrell stated that staff had been worXin4 With '
the University of North Texas for probably a year trying to
negotiate
acooperative
vent
ur• to •t the sl Halt ~
installed.
Rick evshla, Deputy City Manager, stated that such of the
ne otiations had evolved around the use generated by the
University, He was not sure that the opticoss systook for the '
signals was the total responsibility of the University.
Gorton sotioned, Hopkins seconded to approve consent Agenda
Item 13.A.3. Motion carried unanimously,
A, Side and Purchase Orderas
} d
@ ry ri
3. P,O. 012447 - Traffic Engineering and
Controls
J
+I~,thF
y 1 rig.. ~~Y. A.
r.
. a
I
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 10 +
z`
Item 13.A,4. was considered.
I A,
Council Member Gorton stated that thie was an unbudgated item
regarding the current landfill for approximately 134,000, k.
These were areas where the landfill continued to cost the
general fund money on an ongoing basis.
Gorton motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve Consent Agenda
Item 13.A.4. Motion carried unanimously.
y 11
Council Member Trent asked for a report on the amount of money
r spent on this type of item, $4
A, Bids and Purchase Orders: 1
4. P,O, N12446 - Ron$ Engineering
.~14. Ordinances
A, The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
accepting competitive bide and providing for the award o;
contracts for the purchase of materials, aqqutpment, supplies or
sstvices. (13,A.1, - Bid #1224: 13.A.2, Sid M1227
)
The following ordinance was considaredc k~r
NO, 91-043 y .s.
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDINGA r-
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, ZOUIPIMNT,
r- 31 SUPPLIES OR BERVIC991 PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDItUM Ole
!UNDO THERE!'ORE} AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.`
Boyd motioned# Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance,, 0h , r .
roll vote, Trent waye,Y Alexander Mays," Hopkins ~a e,"cborton
"eye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye,w and Mayor Castleberty "aye,"
f; FE.
Motion carried unanimously.
r •I ~ "
B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
providing for the expenditure of funds for purchalssi of
materials or %quipment which are available from one eeuroe' in
's accordance with the provisions of state law exempting such '
putehases from requirements of competitive bids, (13,A4.
P.O. #12447)
a .t
, r
' , Y 1 1JJ
41I ~ I i
Y
1 1 t h
I r ~
4e
F r ~ r~f. iY t
1
E
City of Denton city council minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 11
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-044
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
FOR PURCHASES OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE
AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH T48
PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM
REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING AN f,
Y EFFECTIVE DATE.
Gorton motioned, Ayer seconded to adopt the ordinance, On coil
t, VOta, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," 00tton '
"aye," Ayer "aye," Boyd "aye." and Mayor Castleberry "aye,"
Motion carried unanimously.
C, The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
for professional services - Rone Engineering, (12.A,4. - P.O. Y
r
r, #12446)
yis
i The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-045 '
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE. OF FUNDS
FOR EMERGENCY PURCHASES OF MATERIALS,' EQUIPMENT, r
SUPPLIES OR SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS`
OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM'
REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
f ? EFFECTIVE DATE.
Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance.
On roll vote, Trent Alexandar 'Wet" Hopkins Nay6,"
Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye." Boyd "aye," and mayor Castleberry
Motion carried unanimously. ;t
D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the Mayor to execute a contract between the City of
Denton and the North Texas Umpires Association for officiating
softball games for City league . (The Perk and Recreation
Board cecouaended approval.)
I
The following ordinance was conrideudi
NO, 01-046
i AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A _
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE WORTH
TEXAS UMPIRES ASSOCIATION FOR OFFICIATING SOFTBALL
GAMES FOR CITY LEA DUESi AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE'' I
DATE ,
l"
' h t ~ j I
.
f.
,
5• -...yn.*r.. aw+,~ . `$I~,~dtil'A`w{,aN Vpi~njp~' ~r.
y
{
i gl ~ ro
Q.~r
.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
page 12
Steve Brinkman, Director of Parke and Recreation, stated that
this contract would allow the city to enter into a contract for
umpires for various adult sports leagues. It was an annual
contract for theme services.
Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance.
On roll vote, Trent "Aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," ;
oorton "aye," Ayer "ayeBoyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry
"aye." Motion carried unanimo+isly.
E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
modifying certain fees and charges foe recreation and park
facilities.
Steve Brinkman, Director for Parke and Recreation, stated that
staff had reviewed the existing charges and was recommending u'
modification in certain areas, The Park Board had approved All
J '
` of the foe modifications with the exception of the tennis -r'
admission and season
pass rates. These charges were being
recommended by staff to meet revenue requirements that thl
facility generate 50% of the operation and maintenance costs ar`.
z through fees and charges,
City Manager Harrell stated that several months ago Council had ;
discussed various recreation services offered by the City,
r. Council had asked staff to survey other cities in the metroplex y~
area to determine what they were charging for various tn;
recreation programs, especially in fee areas where 50% of the
cost was paid by the general fund. As a result of the survey,
t: the Park Department determined that all of the lees got the
standard except tot in the tennis aces. Even with the general
fund paying 50% of the cost, the tennis program was In a
deficit. y
Council Member oorton stated that under the category of
"athletic fields", the rates were being deoressed for unlighted
use per hour and lighted use per hour. However, the footnote ;
stated that it did not include field maintenance charged which
needed to be arranged separately. ,
Brinkman replied that limited maintenance was provided tot the
fields. When a tournament was in progreea, there say be this
need for daily maintenanco which was a separate foe, r .
tk
tjuncil Member Ayer asked Brinkman if the proposed fees for
.ennis would be sufficient to eliminate the deficit currently ,
Brinkman replied yes that with the amount of anticipated uso,
the new rates should eliminate the deficit.
i
i
J iJi<1
W T- T"q
. L.. - ¢vem
,
V
City of Denton City Council Minutes i
Match 19, 1991
Page 13
,
Council Member Ayer stated that in the minutes of the Park
Board that they recommended the golf program be placed in the j.
same category at the tennis pptogtam. He assumed that that was
' not a pact of the tecommendatlon,
Brinkman replied that that would be in the budget process for
next year.
Council Member Trent asked for the number of season
family and individual. passes per
'F Brinkman replied 10-20 per year,
a' Council Member Trent asked how the lighted courts were
controlled, ,
Brinkman replied that there was a tee tot rental during times i
when an attendant was present. It. an attendant veto not'
E present, an additional tee was charged for the attendant to
open and close. 11, A,
E Council Member Trent asked how many times that was done, for
example, on a Saturday evening.
a
r ? Brinkman replied that was done every week.
{ Mayor Pro Tom Boyd questioned the fees for use of city meeting 43
"
C rooms. He understood the need to be reimbutsed for staff time
but the meeting coome and activity rooms at the Martin Luther
Xing, Jr. Recreation Center wets built tot the putposa 'of
i } allowing citizens to meet and use those coome. He felt that E
use of the rooms was discouraged by charging tees,
1
Dorton motioned, Hopkins seconded to adopt the ordinaneo,Au
i 7
Boyd motioned, Alexander seconded to remove from Section D
Recreation Centers, the charges for the meetings and activity
coome. f^'
r ' City Managet ,Harrell asked if that were to be tot all groups t>,
+ including such groups as a commercial group.
Ma of Pro Tom Boyd replied no. The its removal would apply S
only to non-pcotit groups.
Council auoationed it this item might be better discussed ins E
work session.
S
City Mange Harrell replied staff could prepare a report on the :,i.
monetary impact of such a decision to be discussed in a work
' session, it would be a budget item to consider. i
a,
,04
f, wYv''~IY }fit 1, T.h`Y;l
j City of Denton city council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 14
Gorton withdrew his main motion and Trent withdrew his second,
` Alexander motioned, Gorton seconded to table the item to the
next regular meeting. On roll vote, Trent "ayes" Alexander
"aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayet "aye," Boyd "aye," and j
Mayor Castleberry "aye," Motion carried unanimously.
F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance ; i
approving a contract for the exchange of certain real property
owned by NCNB and the City; authorizing acceptance of an access
easement from NCNB; and repealing Ordinance 91-023.
r ~k .y
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the attorney for
NCNB had had a problem with some of the wording of the previous ;r
ordinance. The proposed ordinance was agreeable to both
patties. Vi'i',
} The following ordinance was coneidereds r
NO. 91-047 ,t {
,r : tv5
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CONTRACT PROVIDING FOR THE
} EXCHANGE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY NCNB AND
THE CITY1 AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF AN ACCESS
f
EASEMENT FROM NCNBf REPEALING ORDINANCE 91-0231 AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. faR+R
iGorton motioned, Aye[ seconded to adopt the ordinance. On toll
1
` E vote, Trent "aye," A:exandet "eye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "ayes" Boyd "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye,"
+ Motion carried unanimously.
.y
` 15. Resolutions "r
A. The Council considered approval Of a resolution
approving an interlocal ambulance agteement between thu City of
Denton and Denton County tot ambulance eervicee.
The following resolution was coneidereds
• NO. R91-019
1 ;
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AMBULANCE
j V AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND DENTON COIJN'C1~ "c
FOR AMBULANCE SERVICES$ AND DECLARING AN`EFFECT1
DATE.
Hopkins motioned, Gorton seconded to approve the resolution.,.,
On toll vote, Trent "ayes" Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye,"
dorton "ayes" Ayer "aye," Boyd "ayes" and Mayor Castleberry y
"aye." Motion catried unanimously.
:r
"
i r
1 '
7y
+
i
city o! Denton city council minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 16
B. The Council considered approval of a resolution c
supporting legislation to create a municipal court of record
for the City of Denton.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that adoption of the resolution
was necessary in the legislative process to create a special F
court of record for the City of Denton.
The following resolution was considered=
NO. R91-020 '
'c.
A R4SOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION TO CREATE A
MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD FOR THE CITY OF DENTON06 AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EF+*ECTIVE DATE L. f
j
M
I Ayer motioned, Gorton seconded to approve the resolution. On
roll Vote, Tcent "aye," Alexander "aye." Hopkins "aye," Gorton 'x
' "ayeAyer "ayea,, Boyd "aye." and Mayor Castleberry "aye."
Motion carried unanimously.
4 fi,Y
l 16, Other Business r'
The Council received a report and held a
discussion regarding the City of Denton's involvement in solid
waste collection and disposal.
l i Bob Nelson. Executive Director for Utilities, presented the
t chronological history of the landfill. (Exhibit A) ,M1
s., City Manager Harrell stated that when the current landfill was
4 selected by the City and opened in 1982, staff report indicated
i that prior to that decision being made, some 67 potential sites {
were located. Some of thoss sites wore rejected due to sal
conditions but many others were rejected due to politidal
opposition. He felt that when a decision needed to be *Ads <j?
regarding another landfill, it would be a- very difficult x'
decision. An important date in the Oltory of the City's solid `r
waste issue was February 1986. Thtt was the date that the
fi major commercial hauler. Texas Waste Management# moved into the
i community, It bought out a local individual who was providing
commercial teach sec vices and started operating in the
community. As the SMAC Committee and the Publid Utilities
Board reviewed this item, they identified that as a kajor risk
for the community as tar as ThoheCieYtc'oul~ bcowgatae with keep
residential trash rates low.
local hauler with limited resources but not with a large
corporation.
➢ ~,r
{
Pt
i
~ k
~ < l
Y yy
#W ^nt~
i'.
e
r
-
,
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 16
r council Member Alexander asked Nelson for his assessment of the
operation costs/overages which existed over the last year and
where Nelson felt that number would be in the next two years
relative to commercial solid waste collection. Was the City
t losing money, making money or was the City having to subsidize
the operation.
s' Nelson replied that the commercial system was generally making ;
some money. It was not a lot of money, approximately 11.7 '
million of gross revenues, Commercial made some money while ,
residential lost money.
Council Member Gorton asked if commercial was paying into the rF:
motor pool for replenishment of trucks.-
j
Nelson replied that those items had been financed over the last
taw years with the issuance of certificates of obligation,
~'.Council Member Trent asked that if the City stayed in the
commercial business and the peasant landfill were closed in
1994, what expenses would be involved in choosing another.
landfill site, '
Nelson replied that 1996 would be the closing of the landfill
if the volume and population of the City stayed the same with '
City being the sole contributor to the landfill. Within
the .
,
the next year's budget, the landfill would need to be ;
s developed, It would take approximately 2-3 years to permit the
landfill with time to open the pit area. Approximats cost to
open 3,5 million cubic yards of space in and round the current
landfill, would be 13.5 million. That would last approximately
7 years.,
Council Member Trent stated that Texas Waste's proposal was
paying the City approximately 16-63 million which ujuld be rT
not be receiving if the commercial system
would
money the City
was not sold. There was an Additional 14 million to continue
the current landfill. Totally theta was an approximate 110
million difference,
Nelson replied that all of those numbers were included in the
projection of the alternatives,
~t e
Mayor Pro Tom Boyd stated that it was a veryy difficult decision
to choose the original site for the landfill, Was there any
the 0rcreme would be easier the next time,
believe
reason to
~
Z
Nelson replied that it would be mote difficult next time. It y,
x' would be vstj difficult to do in the ETJ or beyond. It was
easier for 91 veto companies to permit a landfill,
# F`
M1 h ,lb
s.. ~ I
I
s r",°~+
1 City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 17
i
Council Member Ayer stated that the assumption was that if
Denton stayed in the solid waste business- that it had no
alternative but to open another landfill He felt that was not
' the case and that there were a variety of options available.
It was not good business for the City of Denton to tie its
hands and cut off all options for the next 15-20 years.
Mayor Castleberry stated that a previous speaker had indicated
that if a commercial customer of Waste Management did not pay
his account, the service would be discontinued. Was that not M
o
true also for the City of Denton,
' Nelson replied yes but that the City tried to avoid having a
health hazard before it would totally discontinue service,
Council Member Alexander stated that when a commercial customer
did not pay an account and sufficient notice had been given
regarding payment with subsOgUtAt cut-oft of services who would
pick up the trash if it continued to accumulate.
Bill Angelo- Director of Community Services, stated that the " ~y4f
City would pick up the trash. The City would pull the
dumpster. Waste Management had a tendency not to pull Its
dumpster and let the trash pile up,
z' Mayor Pro Tom Boyd stated that the SWAC Committee and the
i r Public Utilities Board indicated that this was an area which
was a natural monopoly. if that was the calls should the City
regulate the monopoly and regulate non-paying customers end
other appropriate regulations. T`
Nelson replied that regulations could be built into a franchise
a:
tot solid waste collection,
Council Member Alexander asked it the operation could be
regulated, as to prices under a franchise arrangement. as'
_r 'yea
City Attorney Drayovitch replied that it was not a bid item.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the sale was bid both
as as exclusive and a non-exclusive arrangement. The bids
~ roc a nom-exeluslw ercanqements were better than for
! Thee bids tot an exclusive system. The feeling was that it a
f
contract were awarded for an exclusive service Kisis, theta
+ would be a cats raqulatlon concerning what that contractor
could charge. The thought tot the non-exclusive was that the
Cates would be regulated by the market assuming that there were f
competing for the customer.
collectors
several solid waste
Y/v I'
S.
I
n, P
F.• Q.. t
r,
L ,
-
[M f
1 •
p i • E'Y
.nY Mr r! City of Denton City Council Minutes
Match 19, 1991
Page 18
17, Miscellaneous Matteis from the City Managet.
A. The City has received notice from the Texas Air
Control Board recommending to the EPA that Denton and Collin
County be placed with Tarrent and Dallas County in a moderate
control arrangement tog air quality purposes and the remaining
counties in the metroplex area would not be in any compliance
category. That meant that an industry which generated any kind
of air pollution, even in a moderato amount, would have to go
elsewhere in the area and get an offset to reduce the level of
F,. pollution before they could build. Denton would be at a
disadvantage to attract industries.
a, A tentative work session had been scheduled for
April 9, 1991,
k '
C. Due to the Cityls tight budget, the Polito
Department was downsizing its case which would save the City
11500 per car and provide better gas mileage, 9 ;
D. A suggestion had been made that the Council
appoint one or two people to meet with the County Commissioners
regarding City/County precinot lines. Consensus of the Council
was to have Council Members Alexander and Gorton and Mayor Pro
Tom Boyd meet with the Commissioners.;
Items not completed during the Work Session were considered,
5. The Council received a booting and hold a discussion
E regarding a proposed Joint Development Contract for the Denton
ILL
Noth Water Trinity Regional t Water between D the , City of Denton and the Upper
Sv,
the
reviewed
Bob Wolson, Executive Director for Utilities,
history of the Ray Roberts Water Plant, He stated that the
proposed contract was a straight for`Bardopsietract the reviewct
the provisions of the contract.
provisions was included in the agenda back-up matetialf.) He
felt that the City needed to be cautious and not move into a ,
difficult position with the proposal.
i Council debated the pros and cone of the contract and
participation in the Upper Trinity Regional Mater Disttict.
The Council received a report and distribution of the
Budget Priorities Questionnaire for input regarding the 1991-92
! Budget. a,A
"I 4L City Manager Hatroll stated that the questionnaire was a '
listing of the services provided by the City and asked the ,
Council to give its opinion on how such effort should be spent
in each ales, A change in she questionnaire included a portion
on budget polioy issues. Council needed to indicate specific
budget directions in this area,
•S+ r.Y ra 4a WA,a JAI R.......
I
ti's[ nw!
o
a
City of Denton City council Minutes
March 19, 1991
Page 19
6. The Council held a discussion regarding a possible
date for the annual City Council Planning Seminar.
City Manager Harrell suggested possible dates for the seminar
of June 7-8 or May 31-June 1,
Consensus of the Council was May 31-June 1.
The Council returned to the regular agenda order.
18. Council took the following action from the Work,
" session Executive Session: x;
A. Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that one
of the Council Members wished to make a motion to authorize the
City Attorney to initiate litigation against Mr. Brown And Kra
i?
Reaves in the event that payment of the claim together with
11,000 interest was not remitted by Friday afternoon.
Boyd motioned, Oorton seconded as above. On roll vote, Trent
"aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton "ayeAyer "eyo," Boyd "ayo," and
Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously with.
Council Member Alexander abstaining as he was not present tot
the Work Station Executive Session.
19. New Business
~M
E Council Members presented the following items for future
7 con eradas
sid o
A, Council Member Aloxander requested a progress
report on the new safety regulations for swimming pools*
v
a, Council Member Gorton requested an update on how "
s charter revisions were done.
C. Council Member Hopkins stated that it seemed to y':
be a growing problem that individuals were proceeding through
an intersection after a red light. She would like to sea that
better enforced,
r` D, Council Member Hopkins questioned the vendors In
the medians selling flowers. Was that not against the
rk solicitor's ordinance. <r.
r 204 The Council did not meet in Executive Ses,.lon during ;
the Regular Session.,
VV ~ k.
1. ~
kk.
I
aH
.1 Y
City of Denton City council minutes V;
~
: Marsh 19, 1941 s{~'
Pap 20
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10140 yf
p.m.
1 rYt \ Y ' k I ,
1
'f r
%
BOB CASTLESERRY, MAYOR
CITY 0h DENTON, TEkA$
, it ~ • { ' s
yfi' 4EMPER NALTER9 f
CITY StCRETARY F
4 S 1 r I
CITY OF 4LATONo TEXAS
33100 ;
r'^ s I f, r 4
Y
1
r
j r .i t '}~f ~ 4
tt r t
Y
,
4 1'
^
r
r
(r.'1 I r r
~ 1
"~'4 i! y& I . , ' w ....w silgygpW3'ds7Yti► ' f
s
,
!d
i
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
APRIL 2, 1991
The Council convened into the Work Session at 5615 p.m. in the
Civil Defense Room.
Members Aloxandsra
PRESENT: Ayer, Gorton, a aCouncil nd Trent
Ay
Mayor Pro Tem Boyd
' ABSENT;
The council convened into Executive session to discuss
legal matters, real estate, and ern nnel/board appointments
(considetlo
A}
Development B ckn Grant Committeeu~lthengElectrical dCode mBoardy `
the Historic Landmark Commission, the Human Ssrvices Committeea 0`
the Blue Ribbon Committee for Storm Water Utility, the Downtown
Advisory Board and the Sign Board of Appeals.)
1, The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding a contract tot the collection of delinquent taxes.
Harlan Jotfersona Treaoutere stated that the City was in its ,k
6
r
j second donseeutive contract with Heard, aoggan, Blair
Williams, The contract would expire on June 30, 1991, The 1{.
1 City council had the option to renew and extend the contract
f for an additional two years under the same terms and
conditions, staff wag needing direction from Council on
whether to thew the contract or go out for bid on the tax
collection service, The Performance Report from Heard, Goggan,
Blair 6 Williams indicated that over the last five year's 12,500
demand letters had been sent out and 740 lawsuits had been
filed. This had resulted in the collection of delinquent taxes
together with The penalty illand ftrated Interest in the amount
$3 6000 a
that the City receivedo
,3x680,127.
dtutia and prolonged increase In the quantity and quality of
` l service since contracting with the firm. The tics also .k
a$listed with mowing/paving lions and bankruptcy claims for
`f. property tax and for hotel/motel occupancy tax. A new tax
system had been installed in August which was a major increase
in the level of service to the citilens and provided more
" notice in a number of areas.
Council Nesbit Trent indicated that he was in favor of the s was philosophy, no matter used,outhanttof costuto the
'
the last tesort,
City for these collections. x
Jefferson replied that theta was a 15% delinquency penalty
added to the amount due with no cost of the City$
Council discussed with representatives from the firm the
factors involved in the decline of amount of money received due tol other entitloe Joined in nolawsuits ethe firma had tfiled, extend
ti-
1 a
111 E
,
City of Denton City Council Minutes
March 2, 1991
Page 2
Council Member Hopkins stated that she did not see any reason
not to extend the contract.
Consensus of the Council was to direct staff to return with the
legal documents to renew the contract.
r
2. The council received a report and held a discussion
regarding the Employee Health Insurance program and coldiderad
future strategies.
Tom Klinck, Director of Personnel, provided a report which '
Included a performance update on the format health insurance
plan, claims "run-off" that terminated on November 30, 1990, an „
overview of the status of the current plan with 98nus/Nev York
Lite and suggestions for future strategies for improving
a employees and dependents health insurance. He stated that the
former employee health insurance plan terminated on November
30, 1999. Staff was recommending a contract with Coopers and
Lybrand to conduct a comprehensive evaluatlor, of the current
program with Genus, and assist in identifying other viable
options, The contract would authorlas Coopers and Lybrand to
most with local medical providers to negotiate artangements tot
direct contracting with the City at favorable rates, negotiate
with appropriate medical facilities within the motto lox for
tertiary services and other specialized medical setvlces not
available within the local provider market, develop and analyfs ,
" three plan alternatives and conduct actuarial projections_ and x,
ratings of the three plans based upon negotiated arrangements
with providers, develop final draft contracts with the i;
appropriate hospital, physicians and/or physician groups and
tertiaty care facilities and submit to the Cityy for approval`
and undertake negotiations with Sanus, if indiesa for
r December 1, 1991 plan year renewal.
Council Member Oorton asked what had changed dutinq the year to
indicate a change in the attitude of the local providers.
Dave Palatiste, Coopers 6 Lybrand, stated that there seemed to
be a change in the attitude on the part of the local
providers, Other considerations included the lack of providers
on the donut system and the to-tote for next yeat, If the late
ratio feaainod the same, there could be perhaps a 30% rate
inorsaoe in next year's rates.
Lloyd Harfell, City Hanagst, stated that the City might not
have any better opportunity to join with TNU and UNT but the
local providers loomed more receptive than two years aqo. r,
1•
t<
i,
,
pi.,v
L
4
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 3
Council Member Trent asked if the City was providing health
cars really did services for r people who Foredexafor mple, e pCity that art-time the
peoplat
seasonal people, that andntherpact-time peospleaesona
paid aeproportionate shareiofdthencoetA !
Council Member Trent asked if that caused the rates to go up.
Klinok replied no.
City Manager Harrell stated that the Employee Insurance
Committee was very active in this acoa. The employees
satisfaction in this area was lase than satisfactory. ,
II
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with a formal contract
with Coopers L Lybrand,
The Council received results and hold a discussion
3,
regarding the 1991-92 Budget Pciocities Questionnaire. ~F
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that the budget process
always started with the priorities of the City Council,
Council had received the survey results ranked in order.
Everyone had returned a questionnaire but not everyone answered 5{
tie all of the questions,
council Member Ayer indicated a problem with this type of a,.
Questionnaire in that some judgments were done on what aught to ;
be done and then some decisions were done on what the City
could do, It tended to be confusing.
City Manager Harrell stated that in spite of it$ import act ions, ;
f the survey gave the staff a general fool tot whets the Council
had its pciocities, Harrell saw another tight budget year and
a difficulty in raising the tax rate duo to the economy and
taxpayer resistance to an increase. The Freeport Amendment
would be activated this year which was a decrease of $1600400
in the budget. Street programs had a high ranking which needed
to be explored as a budget issue. There was a possibility of a
street only bond issue. 1991 would be the end ofp the
Court
project except tot the tout building pro We,
and the Muniolpal Court of Records was 1~sted at the top of the
list. Funding tot human service agencies was ranked 3,06 which
was just under current loyal funding, Harrell expected staff
to report to the Human Services Committee that they should
expect the same level of funding with no major increases in
funding, Major issues for the budget could include a review of
take-home police vehicle policy and in reexamination of the
w'.
whole athletic program funding with general budget funds. An area which went down in the tanking was economic development
incentives,
I ~
- ha dtYSSf:y`xFo to» r
aN
1
Cityy of Denton City Council Minutes
April t, 1991
Page
Council Member Ayer felt that the ranking might have Ions down
as everything the Council could do had been done.
Harrell concluded that the tanking for the City's pay plan
adjustment was high on the list and would be looked at in the
upcoming budget.
The Council convened into the Regular Session at 7100 pm, in
the Council Chambers.
;J. PRESENT$ Mayor Castleberryi Council Members Alexander,
Ayer, Gorton, and Trent,
! ABSENTr Mayor Pro Tom Boydi Council Member Hopkins °4.
11 Pledge of Allegiance
The City Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge
of Allegiance.'
Council Member Hopkins joined the meeting.
Mayor Castleberry presented the following pfoclamationif
r'air Housing Month
j Week of the Young Child
Just tot Kids Day
National Community Development week p
Child Abuse Prevention Month
Keepp American Beautiful Month
National Volunteer Week
National RSVP Day
Z, The Council considered approval of the minutes of they
regular meeting of Match 5, 1991.
Council Member Hopkins noted a typographical error in the ,•''1 ' minutes and asked for a correction,
4 '1
Trent motiongd, Cotton seconded to approve the minutes at
corrected, Motion carried unanimously,
s. Citisen Reports
Al The council received a oitisen report trom Mike
Cochran concerning 'texas Waste Management.
Mr. Cochran stated that he was going to ask council not to $
consider contract one without having contract two and
understood that that was a possibility. He felt that a note
informal approach might be helpful in which all sides could
' discuss the matteri
n,
f,~t"., N'wrv.ul4prtnUh-.,... .m.. a ~hn M.7al:0"I.O F.I'f`)rF.NYi'J~.x a-yyr l, t !
yI n
i`
r
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 5
B. The Council received a citizen report from Joyce
Poole regarding the sale of the City's commercial solid waste
system,
Ms. Poole stated that she was representia the concerns of
citizens about the contracts to sell th, City's commercial
solid waste system to Texas Waste Management. She stated that
the agreements changed daily. She felt that the landfill and
the waste system was a community asset and wanted to deal with
it as such. She had currently collected 1200 eignaturee of
people against the sale of the system. She strongly
recommended that the Council W cot the contracts. '
C. The Council received a citizen report from
Barbara Russell regarding the commercial solid waste issue.
y~z
Me, Russell stated that she was speaking tot the Denton Chamber
of Commerce, she stated that there had been several bits of '
misinformation about the Chamber's stance over the last few Yr`
weeks. She road a statement regarding the Chamber's position rx
on the issue. (Exhibit A) a,t
D, The Council received a citizen report from Art
Anderson of sentry Environmental regarding the Waste Management
solid waste contract.
Mr. Anderson provided the Council with a description of the
site proposal for sentry Environmental's landfill. He stated
that they anticipated tiling the final application by the end
F of the week and receiving a determination by the 'faxes
Department of Health on May 1 that their application was
complete, This meant that they would have addressed all of the
technical and engineering concerns of the Texas Department of
s` Health, They weed confident that they would receive eventual
approval, He staled that Sentry's tipping fees would b* equal
to or better than the Lea proposed by Waste Management. YY,
Currently they were estimating a tipping tee of $3,00 per cubic
yard. He understood that the flow control provisions had been
removed from the contracts and felt that it war a good r
provision not,to connect the two contracte,
E, The Counoil received a citizen report from slick
smith regarding the sign ordinance.
` Mr. Smith stated that the current ordinance did not allow a
sign owner to remove a e1 4n from a site to clean or repair the
sign, . The sign had to be repaired or eleanad on site. He
" recommended an amendment !o the ordinance to be able to reppair
signs in the shop and to return the sign to the same loeatlon.
He was requesting hel tot the small business ownee who wanted
to put a portable sign out to advertise his business, He
suggested an amendment to allow a business owner to use a
portable sign to advertise a grand opening which could be ^
permitted for a certain number of days and then would have to
x .a. be removed. He felt that the City wee trying to out him out of
business.
4 ro,
city of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 6
q, Public Hearings
A, The council held a public hearing and considered
adopption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, amending
Article 17 of Appendix B-Zoning of the Code of Ordinances
relating to signs; amending the height and setback tegutatlons
for ground signs on primary arterial streets; amending the
licensing requirements; amending the provisions relating to
wind device signs; providing for multiple occupancy signs,
regulating wall signs over fifteen toot in height; providing
tot the removal of abandoned signs (T~e stPlenningi sand diioninq
regulations tot stake signs, d
d,
Commission recommended approval.)
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planninge stated that In
the process of reviewing the sign ordinance, an attempt was
made to address all of the issues that any individual or group 4
had concerning the ordinance. The unanimous recommendation by
the Planning and Zoning Commission reflected the wants and
needs of the community.;
The Mayor opened the public heating.
C, E. 14111 stated that he owned several properties in the City `N
of Denton, He felt that businesses had the right to use a
short-time sign to advertise specials. The sign tegulatione of
1 Denton wets the greatest reason the City was wasting the {
taxpayer's money on City beautification, The sign ordinance
and dictatorial Beautification Commission prevented businesses from removing older ugly signs and roplaeing them with
} attractive and appealing signs. The sign ordinance was used by
a Commission created as an advisory committee to deter new
business or expansion and tax income for the City, eHis Y family '
business recently expanded his local business y Q
over an established Iodation, The iodation was in a vh;y y an h~
y fronted by an elevated roadway and overpass, Wet*
spending much time and money to dlu n and modernise the hi•
property and business, Ts osenti regulation hat 1102,
ly, $
present
replacing the old sign, The
small e0' high sign which was measured from the rooecty A
elevation and not the highway elevation above. That pdofght as r:<
' not high enough or large enough to be effective, L
dusto;aers would have already passed before roalising the
business was thate. The older signs must kept even though they
did not protect the image the company wanted to project,
y. . i
1
y.
I
a
,
City of Denton city council minutes
April 2. 1991
Page 7
Bob Powell stated that the amendments did not 90 far enough but
that they were a start. There was perception
portable sign companies
of Denton was anti-business.
had gone out of business. Tfelta that to the City stopped the w Jobs and stopped growth. make
lar
enc urgedf thenCouncilwto lmake mote amendmentse as so no ashpossible,He
g
jazzy Cott, Government Relations Committee-Chamber of Commerce,
stated that this ordinance was the kind of ordinance which had
} r to have compromise between the citizens who hated signs and
the
business people who needed the signs, City staff had made The
original recommendations to change the ocdinnce, The
proposals would allow tot flexibility in the ordinance,
Sign Review Board would allow for appeals to be made regarding
the ordinance. The sign district concept was a pcogceesive
concept which would add perspective to the ordinance. '
,
Mike Cochran, eeeutitication Commission, felt that some of the
corrooted with
p x{11
problems with the original ordinance would be
the propposed cringes, He did not agree with the provision of r,
a increasing the maximum effective area and the maximum height ot. ,
{ signs on primacy artscial atceets in non-tesidential
districts, He felt theta ware some special primary attecials P
which needed special attention ►ueh as Locust and Lim Stteetl,
{ Jeans Morrison, chat r-8eautittest ion Commission, stated that The
} had been a difficult task to work on the sign ordinance,
r, proposed changes would tine tune the ordinance and theta would
possibly be more changes in the futu14, She did not fail that 4
the Commission was anti-business as They had worked too hard
for businesses. ; y'
The present r.~
Joe Dodd felt that the ordinance was wty poor.
He did
ordinance did not allow balloons outside a business.
not understand the problem as the balloons did not cause of
traffic problems. He felt the coca of the ordinance was to ,
make businesses as invisible as possible. He felt the
r ordinance lacked reason.
Slick Smith stated that weather balloons ware also a part of
his b slim vlth the restrictions of the currentdoi inanai,oould
not
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
1 ~a
t!
1 I .
, .2,
,
Y
4r'
City of Denton City Council Minutes ;
April 2, 1991
Page a
j5.
T
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91.048
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING
ARTICLE 17 OF APPENDIX B-ZONING OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES RELATING TO SIGNS: AMENDING THE HEIGHT AND
SETBACK REGULATIONS FOR GROUND SIGNS ON PRIMARY
ARTERIAL STREETS; AMENDING THE LICENSING REQUIREMENTS:
AMENDING THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO WIND DEVICE SIGNS:
PROVIDING FOR MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY SIGNS) REGULATING
WALL SIGNS OVER FIFTEEN FEET IN HEIGHT: PROVIDING FOR r
THE REMOVAL OF ABANDONED SIGNS AND STRUCTURES:
AMENDING THE REGULATIONS FOR STAKE SIGNS: PROVIDING
FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR '
VIOLATIONS THEREOF: PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE: AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. a'
Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance.
P .A
Council Member Trent stated that some of the speakers had made .rq
a comment that Denton was ant!-business, He felt that the City
needed to change that perception, The proposed amendments were
not a perfect replacement to the sign ordinance and that the F'.
ordinance would continue to be fine tuned. He had heard that
it was impossible to get a sign replaced, improved, changed,
modified sines the sign ordinance came into axis tonce, lie a.
hoped that these amendments would change that atmosphere.
On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "eye," Hopkins "aye,".
Gorton "nay," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye," MOtion
carried with a 5-1 vote,
' Mayor Castleberry expressed his apprtotation for the work done ,
by the Chamber and City staff on the sign ordinance.
Council Member Ayer stated that he had voted for the ordinance
At it was a good oompromiss, Two groups had been mentioned as
having spant a great deal of time and effort On the ordinande,
„ J.
Council
the City
The 8eautifloaeion Commisalon was created by R1. by ordinance. The members were Carefully selected to represent
a broad cross section of the community, The Governmental
Relations committee was not created by the Chamber of Commerce
Board of Directors. It Was a group of individuals who had a
particular Interest in a particular issue, They had spent~a
lot of time and had made some good contributions to the city's
work but it needed to be understood that they were not a
committee created by the Chamber of Commerce with designated ,
members designed to represent a cross station of the Chamber of
Commerce,
F v
vRill,
'p ^ s
c
M
Ir.11N>rr itx•~v.1f,
City of Denton city council minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 9
B. The Council held a public hearing to consider the
preliminary and final teplats of the T.N,B.C. Additions Lot 1
and additional unplatted land into Lot 1R, Block 1. The site
was located at Hercules Dr., east of Stuart Road. (The
Planning and zoning Commission recommended approval.)
Owen Yost, Urban Plannec, stated that the original p1lt was
lees than two acres. The replat would have 6.4 acres.
a residential ceplat on land zoned S!'-7. The applicant Ar`
pro coed to add a 24, fire lane around the perimeter of the
buitdinq, a sidewalk on Hercules and a new curb on Hercules,
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
No one spike in favor.
No one spoke in opposition
r
The Mayor closed the public heating, i
Trent motioned, Ayer seconded to approve the preliminary and
final replat, On toll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," nn ,
Hopkins "aye," Gorton "aye," Ayer uaye," and Mayor raetlebertY
"sys," Motion carried unanimously.
Consent Agenda r e~
# j Council Member Trent asked that Item S,A.4, be pulled for E.
1 separate consideration. kFi
r Hopkins motioned, Alexander seconded to approve the Consent
Agenda with the exception of Item S.A.44 Motion carried ;E
unanimously.
A, Side and Purchase Ordersi'
f 1, Sid 01226 - Contact Concrete Work i
2. Sid 01236 - Highway 390 Project Irrigation
f;
34 Sid 01235 - Met Optic Cable
S, p.0. 012454 - Hersey Total Service
4 6, P.0. 1112766 - union metal Corporation
Council considered Item S,A.4.
council Member Trent asked for a justification of the expense -
' how such was the machine used, did other govecnaents have the
mess need and perhaps a Joint purchase could be done and why
, r r.
x, we# there an offer to cent the machine to others.
-J I i ii .nywKk4 a+°n°rr n... a • E y T
a
City, of Denton City Council Minutes
Aptil 2, 1991
Page 10
Council Member Gorton left the meeting.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that the
city was offering to tent the machine to the telephone company
and the cable television company in order to avoid tearing up
so many city attests and individual's driveways. The machine
allowed crews to bore a trench under a driveway, under a flower
bed and around an obstacle rather than having to do such a ti
trench above ground,
a City Manager Harrell stated that the actual cost savings to the
City would be approximately 112,000 per year. As the Council
had indicated that street maintenance was a high priority, this
machine would reduce the amount of street cuts needed.
Council Member Trent askod it staff was investigating tentin
the equipment or sharing the purchase with onothat governmental
entity. ~r
Nelson replied that rental was a first choice but that the cost
E was substantial. He was not sure who the City could enter into
e coopetative venture with the machine. Some entities did not
join into such agreements,
i
Trent motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve consent Agenda item
S.A,4. Motion passed unanimously,
A. Bids and Purchase Orderss
i .
4. Sid 01230 - Doting Machine
60 ordinances
A. The Council considered adoption Of an ordinance
accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of
contracts for the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or
+ services, (51A434 - Sid 01235, S.A.4. - Bid 01230) ! The following Ordinance was considered)
NO4 91-049 ; .
a+
i AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE SIDS AND AWARDING A
CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERtAL94 EOUIPKENT,
SUPPLIES OR SERVICESI PROVIDING FOR THE tXPENDtTURE OF
FUNDS THROSPOREI AND PROVIDING FOR $64 EFFECTIVE DACE,
A~ Alexander motioned, Ayer seconded to adopt the ordinance,
call Vote, Trent "ays," Alexander "aye," Hopkins Naye," Ayer ~q
"eye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye," Motion carried unanimously, r ,
6
.
'f
City of Denton city council minutes
April 2, 1991 i
Page 11
9
( B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
accepting competitive bide and providing for the award of
contracts for public works or improvements, (S.A.I. - Bid
01228, 5.A.2. - Bid 01136)
! The following ordinance was considered;
NO. 91-050
i
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING
t FOR THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR
IMPROVEMENTSI PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS
THERMFORi AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
F n . q,
Ayer motioned. Trent seconded to adopted the ordinance, On
roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Ayer
"aye," and Mayor Castleberry 1,aye." Motion carried unanimously,
C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
providing for the expenditure of funds for purchases of
materials or equipment which are available from one source in ;
accordance with the provisions of state law exempting such
purchases from requirements of competitive bide. (5.A,S, -
P,O. 012454, 5.A,6. - P.O, 012766)
The following ordinance was considered:
j
NO, 91-051
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OC FUNDS
FOR PURCHASES OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE
I AVAILABLE FROM ONLY ONE SOURCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH PURCHASES FROM
REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDSI AND PROVIDINO AN
" EFFECTIVE DATE.
Ayer motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance. On
roll vote, Trent "Ayes" Alexander "aye," Hopkins "ayeAyyer
"aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Castleberry stated that the contracts for Items 6.D.,
consideration of adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor
to execute documents necessary to close an asset purchase
egteement between the City of Denton and Waste Management of
Texas, Ino „ for the sale, transfer and assignment of the
City's commercial solid waste operations, subject to applicable
provisions of Article IV of the Charter of the City of Denton,
Texas and 6.E., adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor,
subject to applicable provisions of Article IV of the Charter
of the City of Denton, Texas, to execute a transfer station
agreement between the City of Denton and Waste Management of
K Texas, Ina, requiting Waste Management of Taxes to acquire,
JAJyI&ivi
,
t ~ .
+c
r u ,
I r
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 12
u;
construct and operate a transfer station tot handling solid
waste, said agreement being a condition of closing of the
purchase agreement for the sale, transfer and assignment of tho
City's commercial solid waste operations, were not completed ;
and would not be considered. Staff would make a presentation t d,
regarding the items,
rIr
Council Member Gorton returned to the meeting.
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, stated that staff had been working'
hard to finalize the contracts for council, The transfer x tr.
y station contract had not been finalized by the meeting time. -b0
Staff recommended not taking action on the sale of the system
until all of the Council was present for the consideration. a:
Harrell stated that the Council had four alternatives in ?t
disposing of the issue.
' ,Ott
.
OPTION I REJECT BOTH CONTRACTS AND CONTINUITIM $fATU9 OU4
CITY AND PRIVATE COO] DISUBAL i , I p1 '
Advantages:
A, This alternative continued the current. system and fir{
did not require the city and/or any customers to I a
make any changes in their operations, i;
B, Free competition for commercial service would
continue within the community,
;
Disadvantagsss ,
A, The two citizen committees which had studied this
E.
issue and the staff had concluded that this , t
' strategy would subject residential and coeaierelAl;.
customers to long range detrimental risks in the,
form of prices and service,
I I
B, Following Council's announcement of it's intent to
sell the system, several private solid waste fitmr
launched major marketing efforts within the .t
Community for commercial customers. several of
the City's commercial customers had terminated l
city service as a result of council action And
these marketing efforts. The departure of theca
customers, and others who may leave because of the
related publicity, would have a further negative
effect on the financial performance of the solid s
Y 1
waste fund.
j
y~'. ~ , 2 a r r
Cs'',1 1~sr
r l , r
t ~ ,r
.V
City of Denton city council Minutes
April 2, 1991 '
Page 13
C. This alternative required the city to begin j~
immediate action which would ultimately lead to
the expansion of the city's landfill. At the same
time, the city would be forced to deal with
increasingly stringent state and federal
regulations governing the disposal of solid waste.
D. The selection of this alternative would eliminate
the profits in the amount of $4,116,000 or 114 "
;13,059,400 by the year 2005 associated with the
other alternatives available to the city at this
time. As Council was aware, these profits were
earmarked to retire landfill debts and moderate.
future solid waste increases. Should this revenue
source not be available, these objectives would
not be realized. ;
OPTION 11 REJECTBOTH CONTRAS AND HAVE THE CITY ASIUM THE
k,
EXCLUSIVE COLLECTION OF CONMRCIAL SOLID NAS'1'R
advantacess'
A. This alternative was
consistent tirith
recommendations forwarded to Council by the Public
M ; Utilities Board and the solid waste Alternatives
Committee,
g~f
g B. This alternative would result in the most x
desirable financial return to the City by the year
2005 - $13.1 million,
C. Council would retain complete control over solid
waste fees for both the collection and disposal of
commercial and residential solid waste.
Disadvantacee:
A. The financial return to the city during the next
few years would be minimal and the cumulative net '
gain to the city would not exceed the "sell"
option until 1497,
B, The financial gains projected were based on many
cost assumptions which could fluctuate
substantially at the time of implementation. It
was for this reason that the staff had cautioned
that this financial scenario, more than the others
analyzed, contained substantial uncertainties and
the projection needed to be considered as "soft."
1
i
I
r
r~er 4ynW„ I
.
t 1
C
r.
. I
i
City of Denton City council minutes
. I
April 2, 1991
Page 14
-.rt
C. This alternative would require the City to begin
and
on a long range alternatives basis.
Immediately be involved with disposal
commit to
D. The selection of this alternative would generate
substantial community opposition from those who 1
argue for free competition in the area of
collecting commercial solid waste.
THE
t --K=-
OPTION 11 ACCEPT THE CQNTRACT w1TH "'Li W
SALFL OF OUR EQUIPMENT A►?D C3lSTOMER _ I ^OR,Tnanm a
0
MILLION AND E T T
(This assumed the c ty would d sect commercial
waste to the Denton Landfill at the same rate ae {
currently was the case $3.o0 per cubic yard and 4
$3.45 effective 10-1-91.)
Advantaces:
A. This alternative would provide the city with $9.7
million by the year 2005 (Scenario 0) to be used
to retire debt and moderate residential rates.
This option would provide free competition for
commercial solid waste within the community, thus
eatietying those who argue for a free enterprise r-;
system.
s ,
C. This portion of the sale ptopoeal may be
enceptable to most of the outside parties who had .
expressed an intorest in this subject - Chamber of
commerce and the ad hoc citizen group.,
Disadvantages:
A. Texas Waste Management had indicated that their
$1.9 million bid contemplated their ability to use
their landfill in Lewisville for d1e00631.
Therefore, Waste Management may refuse to accept
this contract if the city directed a portion of
the waste stream to its landfill. Such a
rejection would jeopardize their bid bond
($95000) but would place the city back at equate
one in dealing with its solid waste problem. tiA
'a
. ~s
J
s
1
to-:
i ~
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 15
B. Waste Management had indicated that if they did
accopt this alternative, they would be required to
increase commercial rates immediately although
competition within the community may temper such
an increase.
C. The selection of this alternative would still
leave the City with future solid waste disposal
problems and delays dealing with such,
r
OPTION IV t.CCLPT BOTH CONTRACTS
Advantages:
A. This alternative generated net income for the City '
of 44.1 million by the year 2005 which would allow
the City to retire all landfill debt and moderate
residential solid waste rates.
,r
B. Although the revenue generated from this
alternative was substantially less than that ,
generated from the exclusive city service
alternative, the funds were received by the city
earlier and tend to be firmer because cf
contractual commitments. P
C. This alternative would solve the city solid waste
t disposal needs for at least the next fifteen years
and avoid future coat and liabilities associated
with running a solid waste disposal site.
1 D. The implementation of this alternative would
generate approximately 470,000 annually in citye
county and school district taxes because of the +:'3
establishment of the transfer station within the "
city boundaries,
Disadvantaase:
A. of the 45.1 million due the city, approximately ,
12.5 million was tied to waste Hanagenentes
ability to permit the transfer station. Although
this permitting was not thought to be a problem
and contract provisions had been included which
will help guarantee its establishment, there was
still a risk that for some reason such a transfer
~station would not happen and the city would not
receive all of the funds due under this contract,3
a
sk
.w.m. a•",Va^., ,;t y`'v~~$C{,~.rc73~n;~~~,M7^,
mill
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 16
B. This alternative provided a transfer station that
mast be used by companies collecting solid waste
within the community. Such a monopoly disposal
situation could weaken the ability of other solid
waste firms to effectively compete and could leave
Waste Management with exclusive control of the
business. This "flow control,, provision had been
eliminated for other commercial carriers. The
City would still have to take residential waste to
the transfer station but other haulers would not
be required.
C. The selection of this alternative did commit the
city to utilizing a transfer station for future
disposal needs over the next fifteen years. Thus,
the city would be prohibited from taking advantage
of favorable alternative disposal arrangements ;}Y
which may develop such as other area landfills and
technological improvements which could enhance the
possibility for waste-to-energy plants and other r~
alternative disposal methods.'
The Council took a short break.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, reviewed the
provisions of the contracts. The solid waste management
service contract provided (1) Denton would sell trucks,
w dumpsters, roll-offs, packers and commercial customer list, (2)
F Waste Management would pay Denton 11.9 million, (3) Denton
agreed not to complete for five years, (4) Waste Management
i would hire Denton employees, (5) Denton would continue to
operate in a normal manner until closing date, (6) the closing
date would be 4/30/91, (7) Waste Management would provide
commercial service to all who request service, (8) Waste
Management would not raise commercial rates for 90 days
provided Denton did not require Waste Management to haul solid q
waste to Denton's landfill.
Council Member Ayer stated that he thought one of the key {
points was that Waste Management would be required to haul
solid waste to Denton's landfill in order to fill it quickly in
is months.
Nelson replied that on this contract, as a stand alone
contract, t would be at a $3.25 rate not the 11.25 rate. The
$1.25 rate dealt with the transfer station contract.
Council Member Ayer replied that that was one of the reasons he
could not see considering one contract without the other. - !I,
7
f t.
owl
- rte,
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 17
City Manager Harrell replied that the sale contract could stand
alone and had no bearing on the transfer station contract. The
sale contract was what was bid.
I
Council Member Alexander stated that the second contract would
modify some of the provisions of the first contract.
City Manager Harrell replied that the only thing it would
modify would be the direction, as a city, for Waste Management
to haul to the City's landfill at the same rate they were now
hauling.
Council Member Ayer asked if the contract was a substantial
difference from the original bid. It was his understanding
that the waste would be directed to the City's landfill at the
City's established price.
Nelson replied that City felt, through the license arrangement,
that it had the option to go either way.
Council Member Ayer stated that Waste Management offered to buy
the system for 41.9 million and did not say anything about Y~,r
41.25 tipping fee. The license agreement authorized the City,
to have Waste Management put the waste in the City landfill at
the City's established price.
City Manager Harrell replied that the contract proposed to the
Council was a stand alone contract was the specifications that f.
wore bid and that Waste Management bid 41.9 million, '
4 r~
Council Member Ayer asked it the original bid was that they
would not direct the flow to the City's landfill unless the
City lowered the price.
City Manager Harrell replied no. The acceptance of the 3' +
contract did not bind the City to the 41.2S rate. The
acceptance of the contract still gave the City the right to t'
direct the waste stream as the City so desired. That would be
modified only if the Council accepted the transfer Station
agreement. ,
Nelson continued with the provisions of the transfer station
agretmentt (1 Waste Management would construct and operate a
transfer station in/near Denton, (2) the term of the agreement F ''f
wo yid be 20 years with the City being able to cancel the last
flee years of the agreement, (3) location of the station to be
in Denton or it its ZT,1, (4) Denton would assist Waste ;
Management in locating a site by making information available, y
(5) Waste Management would pay all permitting, site
development, construction and operating costs, (6) if waste
Management could not locate, buy or permit a site, Denton would
offer to sell 10 aorta east of its landfill for a transfer
station, (7) the price of the City property would be determined
by the appraisal process. '
~ I
"Mori
171
iCityy o[ Denton City Council Minutes
Aprl1 2, 1991
Page 18
4
Council Member Gorton asked If the City could sell the site of
the old landfill for the transfer station site.
Nelson relied that that could be a possibility. He continued
with the provisions (8) Denton would have the right of first
refusal to buy the City site back it Waste Management decided#
to sell, (9) Denton had the option to buy the City site back it d
Waste Management was unable to get a permit, (10) if Waste
Management did not build the transfer station, Waste Management
would make available to Denton, 1,272,800 cubic yards of solid a
waste disposal at their DPW landfill at SSO per cubic yard less
than gate rate or at 62.00 per cubic yard plus CPI (1991), (11)
the City would close its landfill upon initial operation of the
transfer station, (12) the city would haul or direct all
residential solid waste into the transfer station, (13) the
rate for residential solid waste would be $5,20 plus CPI (1991) '
plus regulatory increases, (14) the rate for commercial solid
waste would be $6.00 plus CPI (1991) plus regulatory increases,
(15) regulatory increases would be subject to Council approval,
(16) Waste Management would pay the City $1 million upon ,r.
initial operation of the transfee station and $175,999 each
s year for four years, (17) Waste Fanagement would levy 2S/ pet
cubic yard surcharge on all solid waste delivered to, the
transfer station and pay this amount to Denton until 11,5000000
had been paid then the 25R surcharge would be discontinued (18)
Waste Management would deliver up the 650,000 cubic
r'
yards waste to Denton's landfill at the rate of $1.25 of
(19) it Denton's landfill was filled per yards r?.
j prior co completion of the
transfer station, the rate to Denton at the DPW landfill would
be 12.00 per cubic yard plus regulatory increases, and (20) v
Waste Management would employ 4 of the City's existing landfill
employees.
Council Member Ayer asked if the CPI factor was in effect w'
Immediately even before the landfill was closed.
Nelson replied yes. The regulatory increases were subject to
council approval.
Council Member Ayer asked it the Council would have the
authority to reject a regulatory increass.
Nelson replied that the Council would have the authority to
reject a regulatory increase. It probably would not do to as
long as it -ould be proven that the increase was a direct pass
through.
a
r'
.A
4
f
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 19
City Manager Harrell stated that the basic option three stand y?
alone contract for $1.9 million was ready for formal Council
consideration. As Mayor Pro Tem Boyd was not present for the
meeting, staff asked that the item be held for consideration.
A special meeting of the Council had been scheduled for 5:30
p.m. on Friday at which time the only item of business would be cont the consideration of th oved within theltimehconstraints eof
approved, it would be app Formal
the bid bond which would expire on Monday.
consideration of the transfer station contract would be on the i
rpril 16, 1991 agenda.
Heto wconsider
Council Member Ayer stated that he was reluctant
one contract without the other before him.
concerned about acting on a matter of this significance at an
irregular time. if it were going to be done in this manner, he ti
would like to have a number of exhibits mentioned which he had
yet to see.
City Attorney Drayovitch stated that several of the exhibits
needed to be prepared as of the time of closing. There was no
j guarantee that they would not change before the time of closing.
Council Member Hopkins stated that she did not want to vote on
one contract without the other. She felt that the Council p,
E needed to have both legal contracts together. She also did not
like to do such on a Friday afternoon. M
F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance '.4
prohibiting the parking of vehicles on the north side of Shady
Oaks Drive, from its intersection with Woodrow Lane to a point
100 feet west of the west right-of-way line of Woodrow Lane,
for a distance of 100 feet. (The Citizens Traffic Safety
Support commission recommended approval,)
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this would remove r
Oaks at the request of
parking on the north side of Shady
Turbo. This would help facilitate the movement of trucks in ,
the area.
The following ordinance was considered;
NO. 91-052 ;
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROHIBITING
THE PARKING OF VEHICLES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SHADY OAKS
DRIVE, FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH WOODROW LANE TO A POINT
100 FEET WEST OF THE WEST RiaRT-OF-NAY LINE OF WOODROW
LANE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 100 FEET; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED
TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
1
1
City of Denton city council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 20
Hopkins motioned, Trent seconded to adopt the ordinance. On
roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton
"aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carried
unanimously.
r r:
0. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
approving a compromise settlement agreement between the County
of Denton and City of Denton.
The following ordinance was considered:
NO. 91-053
r
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING A
COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF
DENTON AND CITY OF DENTON: AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE {
DATE. ,
On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye,":a
Horton "aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion
carried unanimously.
H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinancA
ti retaining the law firm of Bickerstaff, Heath 6 Smiley to , P
re resent the City of Denton in connection witt~ the proposed w,
sale of the City's commercial solid waste operations to Texas r~
Waste Management.
Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that at the beginning
of negotiations, her staff had recommended to the City Manager x?`
I and Executive Director for Utilities that outside counsel be
f,at
retained to represent the City. Reasons for the outside
counsel were the quick time frame in which the agreements were
ti desired and the desire to retain someone who had an expertise;
in environmental issues. originally it was contemplated that t
the expenditure would only be several thousand dollars.
However, it was possible that the expenditure would exceed the
$100000 limit.
The following, ordinance was considered)
NO. 91-054
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON RETAINING THE LAW FIRM
OF BICKHRSTAFF, HEATH b SMILEY TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF
DENTON IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED SALE OF THE CITY$$
COMIMERCtAL SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS TO TEXAS WASTE y
MANAGEMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
I
rf rare w.....n ^
New P♦
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 21
Hopkins motioned, Gorton seconded to adopt the ordinance.
Council Member Trent asked who was paying the $10,000.
n' City Manger Harrell replied the money would come out of the
solid waste fund.
F ;
Council Member Trent asked what the city was receiving for the
money spent as it seemed that the City Attorney and Executive
Director for Utilities was doing all of the work.
City Manager Harrell stated with the very complex issues
involved in the process, outside expert counsel was needed and
they had been very helpful in the negotiations.
On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins Mays," A
Gorton "aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Citetleberry "aye." Motion
carried unanimously.
S}1 '
1. The Council :onsidered adoption of an ordinance
} amending Section 15-3.t of Chapter 15 of the Code of Ordinances'
relating to facility and program fees of the Department of
r
Packs and Recreation,, and setrblishing user tees for certain ai
park and recreation facilities. (The Park and Recreation Board
~kf'^
recommended approval.)
City Manager Harrell stated that additional developments had ;
E occurred dealing with non-profit status and start was
recommending that the ordinance be approved but all sections
dealing with non-profit be deleted. Sections A3, C and C would a'
be pulled from the ordinance and current rates would continua
until the ordinance was amended.,
The following ordinanco was considered: ?
NO. 91-OSS '
J.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING
SECTION 15-3.1 OF CHAPTER is or THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
RELATING TO FACILITY AND PROGRAM FEES OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF TION,, ESTABLISHING FEES FOR
CERTAIN9PARKIAND RECREATION FACILITIES; ANDSPROVIDING POE
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.'
Ayer motioned, Alexander seconded to adopt the ordinance with
the mentioned changes, On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander '
"aye," Hopkins "aye," Colton "aye," Ayer "eye," and Mayo[ t
" Castleberry "aye." Motion carried unanimously,
^
T
T
E , z iC! r{{tLcS:
w e. .
.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 22
J. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement between
the City of Denton, the City of Dallas and the Texas Parke and
Wildlife Department relating to maintenance and supervision of
recreational facilities at Lake Ray Roberts.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities, stated that this
was an operations agreement between the Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department for all recreational facilities on Ray
Roberts Reservoir and turned the operation of those parks over
+ the the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. The City would l
build the parks to the Department's standards and they would
collect all of the fees.
The following ordinance was considered:
r#
NO. 91-056
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN z,`<.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, THE CITY OF DALLAS
AND THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT RELATING TO a}!'
MAINTENANCE AND SUPERVISION OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AT
y' LAXE RAY ROBERTS: AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Ayer motioned, Trent seconded to adopt the ordinance. On.roll
vote, Tent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Garton
j "aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion carr'l.ed
l ? unanimously.
i Mayor Castleberry noted that Stem 7.E. contained,' a r
typographical effort and should have been listed as 'an
ordinance and not a resolution, ;w
E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance
approving a revised tariff and rate schedules for electrical
services provided by Denton County Electric Cooperative, Inc.
to its customers in the City of Denton, Texas.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities, stated that the
Denton County, Electric Cooperative, Inc. which served a few
Denton customers had filed for a rate increase with the Public
Utilities Commission.
i
i
F
.
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 23
The following ordinance was considered: °
NO. 91-057
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A REVISED TARIFF AND RATE
SCHEDULES FOR ELECTRICAL SERVICES ITS CUSTOMERS INNTHE it
COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. TO
CITY OF DENTON. TEXAS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
Gorton motioned, Ayer seconded to adopt he ordinance. se•" on toll Gorton
vote, Trent "aye." Alexander "aye," "aye." Motion carried
"aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry
i
unanimously.
7. Resolutions ;
revel of a resolution }r'
A. The Council considered app the North Texas
relating to the issuance of obligations DY
Higher Education Authority. Inc.: approving the issuance of t his
ion "
such obligations and the use 0 f ti dings ocinda con ectsuch
obligations: and making certain
therewith.
E John ycacane, Executive Director for Finance, stated that this ;4
vas a request from the North Texas Higher Education Authority,:
4t.
Inc. for approval of tax exempt student loan revenue bond.
' Kathryn Bryan, North Texas Higher Education Authority, stated r
. chat the Authority had recently received funds from the west
Texas Higher Education Authority. This money would facilitate &,js
providing students with loan money.
Council Member Trent asked what this would do for Denton.
~
Bryan replied that it would help the City's students and
unlvorelties to be able to provide loans for its students.
without It, students would have a difficult time obtaining
loans. '
council Member Trent asked what would happen it the City would
not approve the sale of the bonds.
anecessary ould onot ttl a able to do the
Bryan replied that he Authority
bonds as pp' both s. l had Council Member Hopkins asksd it the City's boondcleacnsel any
looked at this to be sure that the City w
responsibility.
;E
gal
i
city of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 24
MCGrane stated that the Authority did have bond counsel wh:^h r.
tendered opinions on the sale of the bonds. There was a clause
in tho resolution which did not hold Dorton liable for a
default. The last time the Authority came for approval to sell
bonds, the question had been asked. He had asked the City's
bond attorneys and they had stated verbally that there would be
no liability on the pact of the City. i
The following resolution was considered:
'f
NO. R91-021
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ZHE CITY OF UENTON,
TEXAS, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF OBLIGATIONS BY THE
NORTH TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION AUTHORITY, INC.: APPROVING
THE ISSUANCE OF SUCH OBLIGATIONS AND THE USE OF THE ru
PROCEEDS OF SUCH OBLIGATIONS; AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS ,
IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.
Alexander motioned, Gorton seconded to approve the resolution.
On roll vote, Trent "nay," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye,"
Gorton "aye." Ayec "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion 'sA
carried with a R-1 vote. "4
ar
B. The Council considered approval of a resolution k
authorizing the City 14ae*aer to execute an agreement between
the City of Denton and the Texas Historical Commission for
services toe the Urban Main Street Pragram.
Jane Biles, Main Street Manager, stated that this was an annual'
cont-act With the Historical Commission.
The tollowing resolution was considereds
~
NO. R91-022
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN ±
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE TEXAS
HISTORICAL COMMISSION FOR SERVICES FOR THE URBAN MAIN ;
STREET EROGRAMi AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTV*9 DATE.
Gorton motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the resolution,
On roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," ;
Gorton "aye," Ayec "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Motion
carried unanimously.
C. The Council considered approval of a resolution
supporting the enactment of House Bill $25 which allows
M•:nicipal and County Governments to charge certain fees on new T
and used tires sold within their jurisdictions.
t
i
rr{• 1iiP
j
i
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 25
The following resolution was considered:
NO. R91-023
" j
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
` SUPPORTING THE ENACTMENT OF HOUSE BILL 825 WHICH ALLOWS
MUNICIPAL AND COUNTY GOVERNMENTS TO CHARGE CERTAIN FEES
ON NEW AND USED TIRES SOLD WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTIONS;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Ayer motioned, Gorton seconded to approve the resolution. On
coil vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "dye," Gorton ,
"aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "aye." Notion carried
unanimously. i'
D. The Council considered approval of a resolution
temporarily closing Congress Street between Alice Street and
q
Denton Street on Friday, May 10, 1991 for the annual Day of the
Cougar for Calhoun Junior High School.
Catherine Tuck, A9ministcative Assistant, stated that this was r
an annual fund raiser for Calhoun Junior High School. The
school was requesting the street be closed for space and safety
for the participants. The D1SD was the only property owner
a A,;r
affected.
r ~ The following resolution was considered. ,
NO. R91-024
A RESOLUTION 1EMPORARILY CLOSING CONGRESS STREET BETWEEN v `
ALICE STREET AND DENTON STREET ON FRIDAY, MAY 10,1991. ' A
j AND ON MAY 17, 19911 IN CASE OF INCLEMENT WEATHER ON MAY y
10, 1941; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Trent motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the resolution. On
roll vote, Trent "aye," Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye," Gorton' f'
"aye," Ayer "aye," and Mayor Castleberry "tys." Mlot on carried
unanimously.
aneous matters from the City Manager.
8. Marcell
Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, presented the following items: {t,
A. Bob Nelson asked the Manager to mention that the
initial fee for dumping at the transfer station for commercial
customers would be set at f6.00 per cubic yard. He an3 Waste Jyt`
Management had discussed this after his presentation to council
t and he was reminded that when the flow prohibition was taken
out of the contract, the fee would be market prices. f
ii
fI °t
c1
d
a4
r
i
i
r
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 2, 1991
Page 26
B. Staff was trying to secure from Waste Management
an extension of the bid bond. it that was possible, both r:•;'
contracts would be dealt with at the same time. If not, the
1 sale contract would be considered on Friday.
The Council took the following action from the Work
Session Executive session:
A. Hopkins motioned, Gorton seconded to nominate the ?
following individuals to the Storm water utility Comoint sameand
direct staff to prepare the necessary documents to app
Bob Copland-Chair John Thompson
Roland Laney Roy Appleton Ill
Bill Angelo
Karen Feshari
Bob Nelson Bob Ticknor
Skip Beard Mark Hannah, Jr.
Charles ylahlect George Gibson e~h
z;y
Don Smith Don Mickel ,
Ted Coe r 9a~
' Dorothy Adkins Gloria Stephens
r,
Vera decshner
Mel Willis sx
on toil Vote, Trent Alexander "aye," Hopkins "aye,"
d i
Gorton "ayeAyer "aye," and mayor Caetleberay "aye."' Notion , ?
carried unanimously.
„ lo. New Business ar
The following items of new business were suggested by Council
Members toe future council agendas,* f
A. Council Member Gorton requested a item on the next
Council Meeting regarding a cepoct on the redistricting meeting .„lYr
with the County.
11. The Council did not meet in Executive Session during,the
Regular session.
with no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 ~
p.m.
BOB CABTLEBERRY, MAYOR ?
' CITY OF DENTON* TEXAS
9y,
JENNIFER HALTERS
CITY SECRETARY <
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
3379C
.
F
k
f
F
P c+exv~ ~
f,
i
r
,
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 9, 1991
The council convened into a Special Call Meeting on April 9,
1991 at 5:15 p.m. In the Civil Defense Room.
PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Council Members Alexander,
Ayer, Dorton, Hopkins and Trent.
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Boyd
x,
Jp
Y 1, The Council convened into Executive Version to discuss
legal matters, real estate, and personnel/board appointments
(considered appointments to the Building Code Board, Community
Development Block Grant Committee, the Electrical Code Board,
the Historic Landmark Commission, the Human Services Committee.
the Downtown Advisory Board and the Sign Board of Appeals.)
The Council then convened into a Work Session at 5:45 p.m. in
the Civil Defense Room.
i. The council received a report and held a discussion
regarding a proposed ordinance related to the parking of
certain vehicles on the street and to the parking of vehicles
over 7,000 pounds. `
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this item had y'
' been referred by the Council to Planning and Zoning. Staff was
needing direction from Council on how to proceed with the
proposal.
, Y
Cecile Carson, Administrative Analyst, stated that the
recommended ordinance was two-fold, It included a
recommendation for a change in the zoning ordinance which dealt
with the parking of vehicles within single-family,
multi-family, office and neighborhood service districts. A
second portion dealt with parking on the street. The amendment
increased, In the zoning ordinance, the limit from one ton to
3.5 tons. The Planning and Zoning commission reached that i
level by looking at specific types of vehicles. The 3.5 ton
limit or 7r00O pounds would allow for double cab pickups,
pickups with wreckers built in, utility trucks, Anything over
that would be prohibited. TWO were exceptions in that it the
vehicle were temporarily parked for the purpose of
loading/unloading or for construction, if it were not visible
from a public street or an abutting residential property, of it
it were an integral part of a nonconforming use, The second
part of the ordinance would amend the Code by Increasing the
time limitation a vehicle could be packed on a street from 20
continuous hours to 48 continuous hours. It also prohibited
parking, placing or leaving boats, campers, recreational
vehicles, trailer or other vehicles which were not
self-propelled on the street unless it was connected to a
r,; self-propelled vehicle.
i
rn . ~svar~ ati
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 9, 1991
Page 2
Council Member Gorton questioned the definition of "park"
versus "storage". He felt the definitions were too vague.
My Carson replied that there were certain places where there was
confusion in the mixing of those two words. The head%aj should
have been corrected in order to make it consistent throughout
the ordinance in relation to pack and leave. }
t !
' Debra Drayovitch, City Attorney, stated that the ordinance had
gone through five-six drafts. There used to be "storage"
language in the ordinance but that the Planning and Zoning
Commission, in order to clarify it, changed It to "parking" but
the caption did not get changed. a'r
Carson stated that the Commission also felt that the only way
to determine "storage" was to impose a time limitation. That
was an extremely complicated point to settle on. ti.
Council Member Alexander asked for a clarification on the M'
existing regulations, Could a truck/tractor be packed In a "
driveway of a residence zoning district under present rules and
regulations.
a Carson replied that a legal opinion stated that the judge or
the jury, in each individual case, would have to make a ,
determination of what "store" meant. How long being there
would constitute "store", Up until the legal opinion, the Code
Enforcement Officers had enforced that it it were more than one
ton, it was in violation and notices were sent.
Council Member Trent asked the number of violations Vero
received in the past year.
Carson replied that since August theca had been nine complaints
and an additional one had just been received,
Council Member Hopkins felt that the proposed ordinance was too
restrictive and too discriminatory, The Council did not intend r'
to have this- type of ordinance prepared, She was opposed to
adding ceoreationai vehicles to the ordinance. There was a
safety factor involved in that it vehicles could not be left in
the police pound without vandalism occurring, how could there
vehicles be kept in an area without security such as in a
public storage facility. She did not have a problem with not
allowing unhitched trailers on the street, She did not see how
the City could afford the extra code enforcement employees to
handle such an ordinance.
s! Council Member Ayer stated that the original concern of Council
was with tractor-trailer rigs. Council did not ask for
investigation of recreational vehicles. He asked if there had
been complaints regarding recreational vehicles.
r4a A"JL.tM~
I
f
y
I
City of Denton City Council Minutes
I
April 9, 1991
Page 3
Carson replied yes but that records had not been kept of
those. Complaints dealt mainly with view obstruction.
Council discussed whether to revise the current ordinance or to {
proceed with the proposed ordinance, the definition of
"storage", time limits for "storage" and "parking".
Consensus of the Council was to table the item. ra,
2. Council received a report and held a discussion on a
proposed resolution regarding a plan for Greenbelts.
Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the 4_.
proposed resolution recommended amending the Denton Development `
Plan by adding a delineation of the 100 year flood plain as a '
greenbelt on the concept map and by adding a greenbelt specific
area policy section. The plan for greenbelts included such
issues as environmental protection and quality of life, water ;5.
quality and water supply, flood toss avoidance, recreation. and
open space opportunities, minimize fiscal impact by maximizing
beneficial natural aspects of flood plain and federal
assistance. He stated that accomplishing the goals of the
greenbelts would require the use and balancing of regulatory
prohibitions, public incentives, public acquisition and use of
some of this resource, and continued recognition by real estate
market forces of the amenity value and the dangers inherent in
the flood plain resource. Robbins reviewed the policies
involved in the plan and the work plan involved in implementing
the greenbelt plan. (Detailed information included in agenda „r
back-up materials).
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the resolution for
Council consideration.
4. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding a proposed sprinkler ordinance.
John Cook, Piro, Chief, stated that when he was first hired
thorn, veto several areas of concern that needed to be dealt
I with. Those included the apparatus replacement and equipment
policies, the number of tics stations in the City and the
staffing patterns. Personnel figures were down as compared to
the site of the City. Current economic conditions did not
e•llow the hiring of new employees, Analysis of service demands
determined that 75% of the service demands were for emergency
medical services, 20% for grass/wild land [ices and vehicle
fires and only about 51 wore for structure fires. However, 05%
of the potential loss was in that areas It was determined that
automatic sprinklers were a way to help even the load without
having to hire new firefightsta. Many meetings had been held
with the Governmental Affairs Ccemittee-Chamber of Commerce and
.Y.-
III r
't q
v'
'l
l
y y C ,
,nraanQ
,rraa •
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 9, 1991
Page 4
other citizen groups and individuals, hays were explored to
make it economically feasible and viable for the business
community, which was the target area for the sprinklers due to
the size of the building, to install the sprinkler systems. A
series of trade-offs were agreed on such as fire flow and
utilities. The proposed ordinance would ptovide a credit of a
50% reduction in the fire flow requirement if the building were q a
sprinkled. Other areas looked at were corridor fire ratings, *k
' smoke controls, FNAC, wire glass in an effort to pay for the
system. It was felt that through insurance incentives and
reductions in costs of the building construction, enough
economic incentives might be provided to males the system w
economically sound. A compromise had been reached regarding
the ordinance. In the area of new construction, if a building
was of combustible construction at 5000 square feet, it would
be required to be sprinklered, All new non-combustible
buildings of 10,000 square feet would be required to be f
sprinklered. The single issue of greatest controversy dealt
with existing buildings. The compromise worked out was that
two situations would trigger an existing building to be
sprinklered. One would be if the building were enlarged past
`
the existing footprint after the date of passage of the
ordinance and the other if the enlargement caused the building
to be more than 10,000 square feet and more than 35% increase
in the size on the date of the ordinance passage,
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the Building Code
Board and the Mayor's Committee had not seen the final .
ordinance. It was suggested that a special meeting be hold on
April 30 to consider the item.
4. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding the City of Denton's Municipal Court of Record.
Tanya Cooper, Assistant City Attorney. stated that a proposed
draft of legislation had been returned to the Attorney's office
by Senator Born. She had reviewed the draft and noted several
changes. Those Included (1) how to create the Municipal Court
of Record the Council had the alternative to appoint by
ordinance the Judge, calling an election by ordinance to
determine the Judge or call an election to let the voters
decide whether to appoint or elect the Judge. (2) jurisdiction
an ability to have jurisdiction over the bail bond
forfeitures was not included. That could be corrected and Senator Horn could amend the legislation to include that
provis On, (3) allowing the use of video recordings - these
would a allowed in order to preserve the record.
Mayor Pro Tea Boyd joined the meeting.
t' „err. r
1
,
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 9, 1991
Page 5
Cooper continued with change (4) which did not include the
right of appeal. This was not essential at this time and could
be added later.
Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the changes If
ti they did not delay the process.
City Attorney Drayovitch suggested several Council members '
visit with the county Court-at-Law Judges regarding this
issue. Also when the item was introduced and set for Committee
hearing, speakers would be needed to speak in favor of the
legislation.
5.
The Council received and discussed the Utility
Department's 1991 Forecast.
Bob Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities, stated that each
year the Department did a forecast for all of the utility
systems. The primary objective of the annual Forecast was, to
determine a projection of demands upon the utility system as
the basis for planning and budgeting needed capital
improvements. This process was accomplished in two general
phases. The first phase involved gathering available r,
historical data and analyzing trends. Since demands were
s related to growth as well as changing use patterns,
characteristics related to each other were reviewed. Growth
I analysis included population, commercial/industrial activity
and land use. The second phase involved projecting Denton's
growth and customer use patterns and combining them to project
i future utility demands. Nelson presented detailed analysis of
these projections, a copy of which was included in the agenda
back-up materials.
6. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding Council Member Gorton and Mayor Pro Tom Boyd's
meeting with Judge Moseley concerning redistricting.
Mayor Pro Tom Boyd stated that Council Member Gorton was not
able to be present for the meeting. He had indicated to Judge
Moseley that tM City's concern was that the precincts were too
large and the population was too large to draw the City's
districts in order to accomplish all goals as required by the
Attorney General's Office, Judge Moseley indicated to him that
the County would be agreeable for the City divide County
precincts for City use but that the current boundaries of the
precincts had to remain the same. For example, precinct 410
could be divided into 410 and 410A but the boundaries of 410
s would not be changed.
Consensus of the Council was to have the three non-returning
Council Members (Boyd, Gorton and Ayer) participate with staff
on a redistricting committee,
1
City of Denton City Council Minutes
April 9, 1991
Page 6
7. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding an analysis of the Charter review process.
Jesus Nava, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that the last
amendments to the Charter had been done in 1980. At that time,
a Citizens Charter Review Committee had been formed. An
ordinance was passed submitting the proposed changes for a
special election and the election was held in January 1980. He
presented the legal guidelines necessary for a charter election.
Consensus of the Council was to review a list of issues for
consideration of charter review and then consider appointment
of a committee as it might be possible for Council to consider
the items without a committee. ;
8. The Council received a report and held a discussion
regarding a proposal from the Union Pacific Railroad to lesse
railroad eight-of-way from Lake Dallas to Denton.
Jesus Nava, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that in
December 1989, the city lsarned that DART had obtained a
fifteen year option to purchase Union Pacific isailroed.
right-of-way from the Dallas County line to Lewisville, just
north of Lake Dallas. At that time, the City sent a
City-Chamber delegation to request that DART include the
remaining right-of-way, from Lake Dallas to Denton, in the tong
term option. DART indicated that it could not be included and
would petition the tnterstate Commerce Commission for
abandonment of the call line given the lack of feasible
economic use and the deteriorated condition of the track.
Staff researched federal law which would allow the City to work
with the Railroad to acquire
the right-of-way for •
transportation long term
purposes in the future. As a result of a `
meeting with Union Pacific, Union Pacific informed the City of
their intentions to pursue abandonment and to allow the City
the opportunity to negotiate the acquisition and/or transfer of
the right-of-way at a reasonable rate for trail use, staff was
in the process of collecting information from Union Pacific,
including what was meant by ■reasonable rate" and to evaluate
the costs and benefits of the proposal.
9. Miscellaneous utters from the city manager.
Rick Svehla, Deputy City manager, stated that staff would like
to schedule a spacial meeting on April 23 and April 30, 1991.
Council Member Gorton requested a return to Executive Session
to update Mayor Pro Ten Boyd on board appointments. -
i
I
RM
F
l'r, s
4
y ~t9 ;N
r ~
Cit of Denton City Council Minutes
April 9, 1991
. x.
Page 7
Council returned to the Executiv6 Session to discuss legal
matters, real estate, and personnel/board appointments
(considered appointments to the Building Code Board, Community
Development Block Grant Committee, the Electrical Coda Boar4, mr
;i the Historic Landmark Commission, the Human Services Committee, k'
r ; the Downtown Advisory Board and the Sign Board of Appeals.)
No official action was taken.
;j with no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
f
4
308 CASTUDERRYi MAYOR
CITY (W DVWTON, TOXAS
r k.. , 1 r t 1 ,4tr
f JENNIFER HALTERS a+~
CITY SECRETARY
:r DE11'MM, TEXAS
1380C
, M'
r ,
a 3
• I
0= , i
1 A
rr^. y r i 'i 15'`
F~x
„ t
{ M'
17
air
NMI
1
r
7"
l
DATEt 05/07/91'
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
F'
Tor mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
{ SUBJECTS PRELIMINARY AND FINAL REPLAT9 OF DONNA DEL ESTATBSO PROM PARTS OF `
4r
" LOTS 3, 4 AND 51 TO LOT 0s BLOCK B
,
RECOMME DATIONs
The Planning and Boning Commission recommended approval (5-0)"4t its
April 240 1991 meetings:
i SUMMARY
This is a 1.515 acre tract located at the northeast corner of,
U.S. Highway 77 and Riney Road. E{
Public improvements and dedications includes
I o approximately 390 feet of concrete sidewalk, '.t
o .011 acre of right-of-way dedication for Riney Road,
o .231 acre of right-of-way dedication for U.S. Highway 77, and
o one manhole and 17S feet of sewer line, ~t+ +
property is toned Single-family 1SP-16)# and" residential
The
I development is anticipateds x
i BACKGROUNDS
The land is toned for single family use, and Is currently aced by
17
i restdencee. This replat takes portions of three (3) 'lots, f't3,~
;
originally platted in 1963, and replats them in conformance with
their proposed residential uses
r r i 3;
City services and facilities, including water, gas, sanitary sever,,
telephone, electrical, and solid waote, are available.
The replat conforms to the minimum requirements of the benton
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations.
G
' PROOIUMS DEPEARTMENTB OR CROUPS AFPECTEDs
1 Owners in the vicinity. `
~1SCAL IMPACTt
None
,
.
e
CHID
mayor and Members of the City Council
Page 2
May 7, 1991 °
r~
Rsape fully su i eds
i"
Lloy Hat all
Prep city manager
r n ei,
p, Oven Yost, a8L
Urban Plannee
a}.
~'°ac r
ins, AI CP
+ Executive Director yh
Planning and Development
2033e r, fi r,
r, 4 1
15 1
y t r
t
4 tirl f s fa
5 ` ~f;,5
k
•,1 A~j
1 k
dt A I Y• S 1+ nq
%
7
v r v~Q
Yll
4
r e~" yt ey. b~if
41
r ~f
• ~ r
Y~`~~ f~ r ; ai ~ :r r, Aw ^rn r+k 1
Yql~, { d .x
r p`
t
r~ .
"~4¢.~' ! ~1 { ~ _ T'.~w,da+.hwr+Fwww:.~ws~ +{Va ~i
I t - '
r, t
f 1,0 ,
1
SA
1
w
I
ATTACHMENT A
P 91-007 Donna Del Estates
{ r
RNEY ROAD
y... Y
a
t?
rl
s
I iF
IT
4
H c4AAa LN.
i
I ,
4-0
LEJV
• ~cAU OATS 3/12!91 ~
NONE
.5
i13
c,
i
I
: r
ATTACHMENT B
P 91-007 Donna Del Estates r
Ijt
f~
` a
i DEL DR(VE
1 ~ ~ r
1~, tKy~ I \ 1 N 1a ,r lry'ruiF:.,
1 c 14, OWL O*d L MI 1 - 1 'r r'NP,tttC°°°f
1 ~.y r 1
1 ` L07' 4R
~q 1 9 dr b V IWOAC#tJ IS j
♦~'e •'4 w C" s,..
r ♦ ~1~ y~f~L y
' , e r r, ~ ~Ir ~OL. 1111 /C b0. OA'. yr.
dir f In
0 still"
' J ♦arl ~f - Ztr.
a ♦ ■
r r ~ t rk
~ f, 1 /yam ~T..
l ,r
t ~~1 d*
! r 1 k ,
Final Replat
-41 Aa r."
,
rr
NONE •AT! 3/1WI w
i
tt '
F
R v
1 ,
` ATTACHMENT
P 91-007 Donna Del Estates
MONTH
, q
q
~t
noteK . ot,m 4
aowir•twt DEL DRIVE;,
w R
a '
` r,' = tf• If' 00" t 1 1.60' r - ww Aim"
ClM ~wYt r~r A
Y ~
:aim are re
,b B L 0 if k
aor ut~ot 4
4 I!
10 a
q1• i1 ii~ 1
y ,t
Preliminary Repfat
r i,4 c r
snow
a 1 r, ew" NONE µn 3/10/91 '
3
w wnw
' a ' /k pl
Irxr. a, rp~ I IL t rl 11'I ,
ATTACHMENT D
MINUTES DRAFT Planning and Zoning Commission
April 240 1991
t The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Denton, Texas, was held at 5:00 p.m, on Wednesday, April
24, 1991 in the Council Chambers of City Hall.
Present: Roy Appleton III, Euline Brock, Jim Engelbrecht, Ivan
t'
Glasscock, William Kamman, and Fran Morgan a
Absent: Judd Holt
Present from Staff: Frank Robbins, Executive Director for i;
i; Planning and Developments Joe Morris, Assistant City
Attorneys Karen Feshari, Urban Planners Harry Persaud, a,
Senior Planners Owen Yost, Urban Planners David Salmon,
Engineerings and Olivia Carson, Secretary ,
Chairperson Brock called the meeting to order.
I. Consider the minutes of the regular meeting of February 13,s
f 1991. l
x,
t It was moved by Mr. Appleton, seconded by Mr. Glasscock, and
unanimously carried (5-0) to approve the minutes of February,
~13, 1991.
114 Hold a public hearing a,nd consider a recommendation
concerning the preliminary and final replats of parts of k
Lots 3, 4, and 5 into Lot 4R, Block B, Donna Del Estates.
Staff :report: Mr. Yost reported that tract is 1.518 acre
located at the northeast corner of U,S. Highway 77 and Riney
Road. Public improvements and dedications include:
Approximately 390 feet of concrete sidewalk,
.014 acre of right-of-way dedication for Riney Road,
.234 acre of right-of-way dedication for U.S. Highway 77, and
one manhole and 175 feet of sewer line.
The property is zoned single family and residential
development is anticipated. The replat takes portions of M.r
three lots, originally platted in 1963, and replats them in
conformance with their proposed residential use. The replat
conforms to the minimum requirements of the Denton
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations.
E; No one was present to speak in favor of or opposition to the
~ replat.
Recommendation: Mr. Yost stated that the Development Review, Committee recommends approval.
:~1s ; •'A Mr. Robbins clarified that the zoning of the tract is SF-16.
I Yi
~f e ro3
t
b 'r
n
N
R1 ~11'y
Md.
Mal
1 P&2 Minutes RDA
Aprigel224, 1991 D €
FT
Motion was made by Mr. Kamman, seconded by Mr. Engelbrecht,
and unanimously carried (5-0) to recommend approval of the
preliminary and final replats of parts of Lots 3, 4, and 5
into Lot 4R, Block B, Donna Del Estates, {
IVs 'Hold a public hearing and consider a recommendation amending
the general zoning ordinance concerning accessory uses.
,
Staff Report: Mr. Persaud reported that at the March 20 i
meeting the Commission considered three options for allowing
limited retail and personal services activities in the
Office District. in the discussion which followed, the
Commission agreed to adopt a "comprehensive" as opposed to a
"band aids approach, which will deal with accessory uses in
specified non-residential districts. A draft ordinance t•?
amending Appendix B-zoning of the code of ordinances to F`
allow accessory uses within specified non-residential
districts has been prepared, Section I of the draft ,
ordinance proposes to amend the definition of accessory use
to include "customarily incidental to the principal use and
located on the same lot or tract and within the same zoning
district as the principal use". Accessory uses not to z•„
exceed 20% of the gross floor area of buildings devoted to
the principal use shall be allowed in the office,
Neighborhood S^rvice, General Retail, Commercial, Central
Business, Light Industrial, and Heavy Industrial Districts.
i l Mr. Engelbrecht asked if the term "clearly related to the .
principal use' could hold up legally,
Mr. Persaud replied that it ties in with "customarily
incidental" in the proposed new definition of accessory use. I
The Co:r.A ssion discussed examples of what could be deemed as
accessory uses.
Mr, Persaud stated that accessory uses are intended to serve
the principal uses
I Mr, Morris stated that thera may be some questions and he is
not sure that the exact wording can be tied down, The 20%
of floor area may be a protection,
Mrs Glasscock said that the market will take care of most of
the questions,
Mrs Persaud stated that he has spoken with Carrollton and
they don't have problems with accessory uses, The market i'
takes care of most of it, Denton can try out the amendment
and if there are problems changes could be made later on.
4 . ap
fii
w.r..:,.
DATE: 05/07/91
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT
JJV~ ,
TO., Mayor and members of the City Council
FROM., Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
SUAjWrs PRELIMINARY AND FINAL REPLhTS OF THE KINGS FOREST ADDITION: FROM ,k
LOTS 2 THROUGH 7 INTO LOT 2R, BLOCK A.
RECOMMENDATION. "e
The Planning and Zoning commission recoar.~ended approval (6-0) at its
April 10, 1991 meeting.
} SUMMARY:
This is a 2.431 acre tract located on Wilson Street, east of Bushey
Avenue. The property is zoned single-family (SF-7), and development
' is anticipated of a pla::e of worship and a related parking lot.
Although zoned single-family, the land is undeveloped. There is
some flood plain located on the northwest corner of the site, f
1 City services and facilities, including water, gas, sanitary seater,
telephone, electrical, and solid waste, are available. An existing
fire hydrant, on the south tide of Wilson Street, will provide
sufficient fire protection.
Approximately 373 feet of sidewalk is planned along the lot's
frontage, within the right-of-way to be dedicated to the City.
where a straight sidewalk would conflict with a protected tree (30'
elm), the sidewalk will curve to the back of the existing curb. ;
4 BACKGROUND Plattirg originally occurred in 1986, and resulted in narrow, deep
lots. The replat conforms to the minimum requirements of the Denton
I 1 .CAL,.
Subdivision and Land Development Regulations...,
There is currently a house on the front half of Lot 11 but the
subject tract is vacant.
s,..
PROGR&M, DEPARTMENTS OR GROM AFFDCTED7
Owners and users of Mt. Calvary Baptist Church.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
Reaper lly su ted:
k Prepared bys L1 d . Harrell ,
Y~ City Manager ° r t=,
1Z /-,or
n Yost, k
r~ urban Planner'
, p
AICP f ,
rank H. Robbins,
9xecutive Director
Planning and Development
2029e
N
t
n .
Oil
l
e ...3 rti :13
ATTACHMENT 1 ;
A6
P 91-011 Kings Forrest Addition NORTH
fi tO/p 71-f IOC M-f taw lOtO ' •^k I ,a..
N. SI~c0 ! RYL r A - J l 1I t0~M-7 K-7 M-7 , a'
W L _ . F.1
7 -1.
~IVtID ter 0 1 1C14 r
Leo
ts?
Lot lot I
fim t t V Y s
f, 6111e770 iYr
i ~ ! I ~ ? * ,1xtt
A p i
!4~ ~IitTl~l JaIdF 1100 r-
M L !
Utl G .
V •.r~ ' V A t r ;
u AA
4' 1
_ was
low JII-7
J. C. NJAAN SV0YfY 4 •f19
euet>r '
Y ~
Preliminary Replat
1' 1~~1~! 1 4 r Yr S ice.
9 i
r , y~r
rr'' 9CAID MONK DATFi 411"1
0
A t 1'"t •
.
T.
tF
er
.
ATTACHMENT 2
,z
P 91-011 Kings Forrest Addition *NH ^
L I
c- ~ r . t- L 5 1
p
x. rtrto 8 URYr1' A-1111
Y }
0 LOT m &ock A w
1UNG9 FOREST AMMON
2.368 AGi1ES
•M~/ /~~11~ ~IYM M V ,rl
a, "Lug ! a
r
CIO 1
p 1 1?'T F
•
,
f~
y N N'~1'ii' M /11 y;
y N , a
+p dry..
a. cr h~R,rM auRrtr ~•r1r k"6•N` " 4 p
N ea619,31, F,t
! ch ~N 67.17."0 Y 1
%
Final Replat 4 ;
5
3 rl N \ 1 ~ ',1 <
t•
{:f f !
ac" NOW DATb 4A"l
Le 5 y 4 sywka
i ' R l 1
S~rY" l ig i ►Yb' •+tp EFKfW Y r.r... _ . , r . ~ h
dyNy~f•, Loh :
a
1
ATTACHMENT 3
p 91.011 Kings Forrest Addition
06
OAK LJ LJIJ Qd #
r
~ P
J
v
ALEGRE VITA 1
d
1 J
SCALID PONS DATE NN„
yr
V,
I
April Minutes
tes 1991 D T
ATTACHMENT 4 AprPage 2
RAF
Ms. Brock asked if some of the trees were too small to be
protected. '
I~
Mr. Yost said yes.
Ms Morgan asked if there will be sidewalks on both
University and Nottingham.
Mr, Yost said yes. The one on University will be built with `
the church expansion and the one on Nottingham at a later E^
date The Development Review Committee recommends approval
.
of the roplat.
Bud Nauptmann of Metroplex Engineering stated that he was s.
available to answer questions.
Motion was made by Mr, Holt, seconded by Ms, Morgan, and
unanimously carried (S•0) to recommend approval of the final
replat of the Denton Bible Church Addition from Lot 1 plus
additional unplatted land to Lot 1R, Block A.
11i. Hold a public hearing and consider a recommendation
concerning the preliminary and final replats of the Kings
Forest Addition from Lots 2 through 7 into Lot 2R, Bloc A.
Mr, Yost sated that the tract is 2.431 acres located oe
Wilson Street, east of Bushey Avenue. There is currently a
house on the front half of Lot 1, but the subject tract is
vacant, The property is zoned SF-7. Because this is a
} residential replat, Council must take final action, There
are at least a dozen protected trees on the site and the
applicant is making every effort to save them. Where a ,
straight sidewalk would conflict with a 30" Elm the ; f
k sidewalk will be moved to the back of the existing curb,
Mr Appleton asked if there has been comment from the
neighbors,
Mr. Yost said that there has been none in writing, He
explained that normally the sidewalk would run on a straight
line but instead it will be curved around the elm treo. The
tree is 6' from the curb. The sidewalk will be at the back
of the curb. It will cover the drip line but the way the
roots are angled there should be enough left to save the tree, r
A` Ms, Morgan asked if there is flood plain on the back of the
property.
a Mr. Yost said yes. The slopes are difficult there and it
would be hard to build in that area so the applicant will
probably choose not to.
n
^y I
r
t - •'M1.•H%4i./+%MI:"ntiWN4O'•.fiJ.W'.W1W.teRtl
* I S 'iR1~N~l` r+fltp'.i^w47"y....«
i
a.w
p&Z Minutes
April 10, 1991
Page 3 DRAFT
Mr. Appleton arrived at the meeting.
Mr. Appleton asked how the City insures that the trees will
be protected.
Mr, Yost replied that the Building Inspector will inspect f'
the sidewalk. The current regulations say that there can be
no paving nor can a building extend into the drip line of
protected trees. That is checked on the building plans, k ;
Bud Hauptmann of Metroplex Engineering stated that he and
the pastor of the church were available to answer questions.
Mr Appleton asked if they had heard from any of the f "
neighbors.
Mr. Hauptnann replied that they had heard nothing adverse at It..,
all. Their developpment will be a definite improvement to
the than one-half block from
property. It is located less
the Martin Luther King Center. There has been no opposition
,~^yk
s to their plans.
Mr. Kamman moved to recommend approval of the preliminary
and final replats of the Kings Forest Addition from Lots 2.
f through 7 into Lot 2R, Block A. Motion was seconded by Mr, ;
Appleton and unanimously carried (6-0). ,J, Nr
1V. Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance amending the
Zoning Ordinance by adding provisions for Conditioned Use .<<
1 Zoning. I
Mr. Robbins stated that conditioned uses are a simple '
concept. Conditions can be placed on a straight zoning or
rezoning. Several examples of conditions are listed in the
proposed ordinance. Standards could be set in place and a,
uses could be limited. The problem where straight zoning
would be okay except for certain uses that are allowed in
that type of district would be solved, The Zoning Task
Force has recommended approval of conditioned use zoning,
Mr. Kamman asked if there would be an obligation to lo the
a same thing on a tract adjacent to one that had canaitional
s zoning.
Mr. Robbins replied that the conditions would apply only to
the district being zoned,
Mr. Xamman asked if there would be problems with
discrimination. Could the City be more strict on some than
on others.
.
- 71K
I
I
F
I
CITY COUNCIL REPp"T FORMAT Al
r
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM. Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
' SUBJECT: Approval of a tax refund to Harpool Farm & Garden
RECOMMENDATION: *'a K^
' Harpool Farm & Garden has shown roof of
P payment and the Tax
Technician recommends a refund.
' SUMMARY:
Chapter 31,11 of the Texas Property To, Code requires the approval 6V
the governing body of the taxing unit to% refunds in excess of 500.`60,
Harpool Farm & Garden has requested a refund in the amount of $ 3,0.08,
due to an erroneous payment on Account q 27033.
BACK_ GROUND:
On 3-25-91, Harpool Farm & Garden made a payment of $ 3,404,08 bn•
' the account of Harpool Seed Inc. They are now requesting a refund
f of their payment made in error. a y
PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFFCTED:e'
The Tax Department and the tax account of Harpool Seed Inc,
FISCAL IMPACT:
1} $ 3,404,08
• +i
+ ESP FULLY9 S B IT to,
C at U.
oy arre
City Manager LL
Prepared by:
y
Name Vic Schneider
Title Tax Technician
Approved:
Name H ersbn
sl Title Ta urer rf,`
4.t. 2633C/3
e ~
yJ
yyy
yp~ y - „;.wh~~J+tiyr➢ ~YS'~f4F?Vf*~'R4~K'•'wf,'.
Y 'A 9' e 1 i~~e l
n
f atida •r":k
A
a
4
t yy
g
awarree«rrr.xe.are APPLICATION FOR TAX REFUND
a.fw.a ae►uesea st.t tfuht
Collecting Office Name: C T
Collecting Tax For. 0 - %
ax ng rnb
St P D
Address.
City. Stab. Zip Code
wa~~raaaraa_aaaa a a... r r a a r.rw.. r a s a ra a a r r r r...a
In order to apply for a tax refund. the following Information must be provided by the taxpayer.
IDENTIFICATIO F PROPERTY OWNER,
Name: - 17 12
Address: C Y c . TY 7Kt1 9
-j M
` Telephone Number (if additional In ormatio a needed):
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY: I//
DsscrlptionofProperty f✓~fQh"- Q/aCk D7~
Addr"s or location of Property. R - `
Account Number of Propeny: or Tax Receipt Number. 1
INFORMATION ON PAYMENT OF TAXES,
Name of Taxing Unit Year for Amount of `
From Which Refund Which Refund Dale of the Amount of Tax Refund
Is Requested is Requested Tax Payment Tax" Paid Requested
1.C h10 Qt7 to 2L s r0 S ,3YQYi,0e
10 / to- S !
i es Wt° rt f~c', s h t`-'rror v
Taxpayer's reason for refund (attach supporting documentation): ~ 1
F ~d r r 1c4r Xto rl rd, A4, r)lft ctr 44
` P ' !n o1 Ye V J, r d J
1 hereby apply for the refu d of the sboved ribed taxes and certify that the Information I have given on this $ofm
2e a " ~ ~5- 9/ ►
Signature N oy)~f a3 Oslo of Application for Tax RMund
.fir ararrrrr rrrrrrrrr.R.Y.iIJ~r.. ~~/~.Lr r"i rrrrrrrrrrrrraaararrrr
' I
I DETERMINATION FOR TAX REFUND Approval Dieapproval I
{ Signature of Authorized Met Oats
Mgnature~of Areeldlq Officer(s) of Taxing Dots
t" Unit(s) for refund applications over S!!00 I
AnypreenrrMa+aM«eMNeenMyWa►MwNreNln140" ehasbesubfessboost" ble 0/reaMMee, 4. MWISrvaMfef r
not au'w Man to yeses nor Ins than a years andler a tae of nN anre Men 10.000 a beln Posh Ins aM l(
In+pAeenowt 1. cononenreM le f eI fa • term u► to t y ea► a a Ins net Ie exceed 1! 000 er bell, such one sad tMpleenenenl w eel
forts in leetien 31.10, Penal Cede.
g
I
1
. M,':CM "'t. y Y-., a . ....GIJY A01.; o, W Or -W
~f
Mfg. v, .m.,.._~.. yx.
mom
F
-
n( KT
i
°zT
a
y J d
v 1
vyL ~ ) , jv1~.
I` ✓J
I S
,
11 J w 1 a
03644
NARTOOL FARM , OARCLNw INC.'
0. Fox tm ~~r of oei~
e OtNfON, Yx YOU ♦ L4 '.~f t w~l I I
R, L °
X11 i~ '11 /n y r
r t'' I' ~ I r' F ~ i ~^I+ 1 .0(dlf. Q,L4 14
C= AC
r . rJ•
Ilk, ~~003644~ X41 Lpr9 4742: r~04 0964
11 rq 1. ` y ~ Fi°
N' ~ A
r4
i .4
F q ~i~~ r,, fks
v1 G" 7 ' y k„t
y
yy o "
01
ABC N^S"@•
,
A.
W
2651L-3/3689
6' • 1 /y~/~/~
q
7.
. ! N0.
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE. BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE tt
FUNDS THEREFOR; IMPROVEMENTS RFORDIAN t
AWARD F EXCONTRACTS YENDITUREF OF PUBLIC
FOR THE '
EFFECTIVE DATER
WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated
s' competitive bids for the construction of public works or
improvements in accordance with the procedures of state law and ,
City ordinances; and
r w.
WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has
received and recommended that the herein described bids are the
lowest responsible bids for the construction of the publYco warms
or improvements described in the bid iNvOfta~REFORE, p
and plans and specifications therefore; I
,
1 0,
THE COUNCIL 01`' THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:, a
I .
E SECTION 1. That the following competitive bids for the
I
construct onoublic works or improves8ndaapdescribed in ecificationeton
"Sid Invitations ti, Did Proposals" or plans g file in the Office of the City's Purchasing hereby filed
ecceptedrdi And
Y to the bid number assigned hereto, ar d >
a'• approved as being the lowest responsible bids.
BID NLfiIBER CONTRACTOR AMOUNT
'
a _ X804.450.00 a s
~ZGI .~bdgDCf ..b V1 en Frlc - _~...r. ~ ! , 'L AMY
1
i
~ `
"
That the acceptance and approval of the above
IS
SECTION 11
comp itute a contract between the City
et t ve s shall not const
and the person submitting the bid for conbtructir oc aunt 1 ublic
4; ? such
works or improvements herein accepted and app
a ` • ~ , i
person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice
] !ry ~11 1 V ~ i•.
f f
v }
.t Yui
I
I
i
Y
1 H l a 4. a tY
nn:.. tl r. 1.°t' ni♦ r l e .7 i. oT. • wil FA ,
~g'jt}.1i+4` IP4 wu e y, •~..ran. ~'A'6 ~'r*~
• =fir':..
to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract
is and furnishing of performance cmd payment bonds, after notifi-
cation of the award of the bid.
4AZ
SECTION III. That the City Manager is hereby authorize0, to
execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of
the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance
with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such;
contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Biddore and
' Bid Proposals, and documents relating thereto specifying the ~t
terms, conditions, plans and, specifications, standards, quantities,
-i and s;lecified sums contained therein, t;
y r 'k
4~t J
SECTION IV. That upon acceptance and approval of the above r d`
competitive bids and the execution of contracts for the public'-
works and improvements 3a authorized herein,` the City Council { r t'1
3 hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds in the manner rand in
the amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized' 'r4VV'•"
contracts executed pursuant thereto.' RL« ' 1 r
s r r 1~r
SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective
-s
imme at~ie y upon n its passage and approval. 1
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of IL
~ p Y
~i. F J } Y 4'jl ~n
%
r ! . BOB CASTLEBF"Yo MAYOR
ATTEST:
%
s! 5 "t '4~rrr
ell:.
3ENNIFER I r
r
i 1
> r APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: a tk
DEBPA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
'b
BY:
1 CPS r.: - ~ ,4.
1 } 1
`lµ PAGE 2Ea
1
Y
1 • •
DATE: MAY 1, 1941
t~~ . r" TOi Mayor and Membt,a of the City Council
FAOMI Lloyd Y. Harrell, City Manager
1 SUBJECTi BID #1241-POWER TRANSFORMER AND/OA SUBSTATION 1 >r
2
~PACKAOE
fl~~Qah1E~PdTI413s Council approve award of Sid 01241-Posner
Transformer and Substation Package to, the lox bidder meeting`
speoifications, Magnetek Electricfor a total of
1804,450.00. c,: f s~,~
V &StMMAAli This bid is for the purchase of a power transformer, and/or substation package for the ARCO substation) It is.':a.` fc
fir:
v capital project in the Utility Department Capital
Improvements Plan. Six bidders bid on the transformer
alonei two on the substation package alone (but these '.tOo e
s ° s k
e did,not meet speoifiostioneand one bid on the oombined'
r
J a 3 package. ; rt w '
' `~$A$KQfl9S!1111s Tabulation sheet, Memorandum from Olenh Fidher,
Public Utility Board Minutes
Efl4Bbl~~ pEPAHTdE11T_4fl.IlH43tP$.AFEkrB~s Utility Department.
w,t~. ~ LI$S64_IMPA4Ts Utility Department Capital Improvements P]en.
Respectfully subm;tteds
Loy Y. Harrell
City Manager yY .
f , iM , 1 f 1,
Approvedt
~ + to A f ' ~ r r r ~r Oi yr r_~ ~_.._.r___. , J y~
Names -Melanie Barden
1 Titles Cuyer
MH/Ih 1~ '
.
Y
4'•11 t 1 yy ~ nn
al~li 4~ h .i f 4~~~.
tow
r
t
r.
rbY' \
1
f r
BID 8 1241
f I I I I f
BID N POWER 'rPArlnM f MAMM I DISMAN I 0" COW. I PHliaW 1 IM MY I
a 910TATION PACK". i ELMC I PrCDJOTS I I "FLY I n.ECmc f
CPEN APFUL A, 1991 I I I I I I '
` I f I I ICI ,
imi n,24 CMtM(Y 11 f vW)R I VEUR I xEMM I VMR I
i I I I ~l I .I I -
i I I I I I 5442,724.001
,s .w~. , 1 I marls: I 1 I I I I 3 ~
2 1 SWATIOrrs I 1 $316,478.000 f 1 $213"380.000 1 E }
3 1 7FAWWSJ13$TM01 PMM. I X09,450.000 ! E I I I a
' 4 I I 1 1 MAY PM M I I SNORT CIAWIT
j { 08,135.00 TM 1 °
1 1 I f +$140300
1 3 $9Y513-000 I
xti F J I' I ~ +Kn ~ ~ .Ikl rY ff n
c y~ " r r + rLf~+l~q +
J + t
Oli
Y
jJ'i Yl+x e BED 0 1241 I i 1 I ( 1 + tl j~,i ~l' ~!f'yr9
a I I ! I E 1 v3
1 1' x tJ ~i
aTn N m I o. E. I DELTA Rra f 00cm Pon
1f
SYSJ'FM I suePt I ,
6 SI~Sr'ATION PACt01OE I ( I I }
= tetN AM 4 1991
r.
I VMR I Vi " ! YE7'ID0R
rrErt[ ITEt! >tescltrprtoN 1 mm
ull
1 I TRMWO, I 5375,700.000 1 $4tt,092.000 I $425,384.000 ( $453,275.000 1 001%0.600 1
_ 12 I SWAStON:
Y a Y
TanrtslsE$SrATiCH >stui. I I I 1 1 1 ,
q!w fYt+6.'. Ja l „ I . f - I - _L_.. - _'-1.+++ I 1 1 1 ' +/x
I
v 1 Y
XX~~ f Y `j ,
e, ' yip{
,
L' 4'S:*~}~4ra Fa; Ou 17...E - tiZ i'"?a^ 40. +'a44 '>J.y j ~0 'y' hh r
r Y
Inl 15
p.
CITYof DENTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES 1901 -A Texas Street I DOMONTX76201 'r
} rj~
ME M 0 R A N D U M + TO: Tom Shaw, Puchasing Agent t R•V'-
' w FROMs Glenn-Fisher, Electric Engineering Associate T it fa
DATES April 12, 1991°`
SUBJs BID (1241 FOR Is POWER TRANSFORMER AND/OR SUBSTATION
z PACRA.GE
Bid #1241 for a power transformer and/or substation package were
opened on April 4, 1991. After review, it was found thit,two
bids for the substation package from Distran and Priaster dice not
meet specifications.
Distran did not provide for breaker bypass arrangement while
- Priester did not include the circuit breakers:
Based on this, the staff recommends the acceptance of'the
proposal by Magnetek Electric for a total of $809,450.00
I pi ) . . r Y A 7 `Zi ll ,lT
This bid has bee so edu ed for the April 29 Public Utilities, + r+ ~ r fx
'r a
r Poard meeting
i
OFtth r
04121,,213 - ? r
Attaclvnents Evaluation Bid Sheet
Y
! p d
a itr.
41
t . s 1
•
IL
'rkN'# d'7~1";N)g~3{J"160Ni'V'f7F
r1^ X. '
}a f
4
l
r
do~
e
p
i
May 7, 1991
j
} CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
TO- MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROMs Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager r'r ^s
f{ RE: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MAGNETEK ELECTRIC PROPOSAL '
FOR SUBSTATION EQUIPMENT FOR USE AT THE TMPA ARCO.
SWITCH SITE, BID NO. 1241, APRIL 41 1991.
r ,
(i{ RSCONMMATIOdf F r`
The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of April
29, 1991, recommended to the City Council approval of
Magnetek Electric's proposal for Did No. 1241 at A cost
of $809,450.
` SLgVMY/8ACX ROUND WA new station will be constructed at the ARCO switch a-
site, (approximately 1/2 mile aoath of Us 380 and 3/4 $r
mile east of Mayhill road).
It will relieve loading on existing adjacent substation
(Kings Row and Spencer) and provide serVide ' for } anticipated load growth in the area including Ryan
High School. The substation will consist of* 15 MVA
C transformer with 3-13.2 KV distribution feeders, with
provisions for future duplexing.
This bid was divided into two items. Item 1 was fora
power transformer and Item 2 for the substation
package. The City received six (6) We for the { a4>
transformer alono, two (2) for the substation package
alone] and 1 {1) for the transformor and substatioA ' wa
package combined.y
r from the evaluation, it was found that the Kuhlman
transformer evaluated low for Item 1 alone. For item
2, one bidder did not meet specifications, one bid and
incomplete package, while the third provided all '
F desired equipment. Refer to Exhibits 1 and 2 fora
more detailed description of the evaluation. y
;
The staff recommended to the Public Utility Board At
their meeting of 4/29/91, that the low evaluated bid
meeting specifications from Magnetek Electric be ki
accepted at a cost of $809,450 and it was approved.
C
t I
r{
t , 1 _ y,l y L , 'x:wisi•P 41 'til:'/.,~
rr r ~
1 ~ •
` i
city council Agenda Item
Page 2 -
rr
b ~tr 1a
f ' 4
AFFEC'PED
DEPARRtUN'1'3, M "S
} ! f i
The City of Denton Ratepayers TMPI►, Electric `f
Substations and Metering Department for maintenance
i and Operation!
r s' yy' 4AF.
1
a FISCAL IMPACT
f
This project is in the 1991 Capital Improvement Plan }~f
*c , P~
under Project No. 91-0255-01 in the amount of r
i f
01,200,000 '
4 ~ 9
Respectfu ly submitted, , s
!
a yr, a a i ~ r s ~r
r Lloyd V. Harrell, City alter 9
lris i
k q I I i
r of J a ~ 1 a a ~ fl I'~ ~='~1}i.
Prepared bye I r
Ic ~ I Y~tr,
h
r y a!~ 7 1 i rloly*sdo 8 Tu; 46t ctor'
a
Electric Utib.itiejV__- Y.
~a l ! Y I p a { y
1 y6 id Yb .L.. yR'1yy.
! I 1 fa i.1 1i L,, I~I
w
4 1 J 1' y b A
y 1 y Js
Approved byi
b
i. e a
tt n
`tC ' Of i Y>~• r ny
R. .Nelson, E ecut ve D rector:
~r
Department of Utilities
i.
I 1
r 3
n )I
t+' Exhibit I Evaluation of Side t-' a
! r f , err ~f a t r' , ~ 'S~
r cr!!
II Evaluation of 'Sid 01241
III Minutes PUB Meeting of 4/29/91x,
,ql
Fr 'p , I Y Y i Y 1
, 1 r a
i it r , ti 1 V f C.
1, It
} A ~L 3 i ~ i ~ V t 'J
a
a ~ a' I Y
Ism'^~'~' ° .nwas.sbwdn m•x. + r i
VC , `
~ rr
r q+ f k
I
laI ~t44~ ~ h4 E ..Ili t
1,
L
r rnq> 4r.;!~;
i _ Exhibit I
. ~ a
EVALUATION OP BIDS
General
on April 4, 1991, bids were opened for a power Thisnbidrwan and/or
substation package foc the Arco switch site.
divided into two sections. item 1 was for the power transformer 1
and item 2 the substation package. Exhibit Z shows a breakdown
of all vendors.
r.'
% power Transforoar
1c r,
The Electric Utility Department received bids for Item 1, the
power transformer, from six vendors. As shown in Exhibit 2, the
low total evaluated cost of $638,489 came from Kuhlman. The a
power transformer, however must be purchased in conjunction with `
the substation package.
s' Substation Package
5 Item 2, the substation package was bid by two vendors. IAlI
1 bid outdoor, stand alone ewitchgear, not metal
Priester supp Y
clad ewitchgear, either of whicchb~e
required circuit breakers. The akerscwere required ineSeetion.
3E and therefore the bid does not meet specifications. This 4 `
arrangement would also require the construction of a building, at
r, approximately $50,000 to ;60,000, to house
` a cost to the City of
I the indoor relay control panels. The inclusion of the breaker$
would add $95,000.
Also, due to space limitationr, at the site, it is not feasible to
utilize this type of set up :.accuse it would be impossible to.
maintain a safe operating environment and also be able to expand.,
the substation in the future as was called for in the a
specifications. This would require thP;purchase of additional
I ! land at the site.
This makes their actual installed cost ;?18,380 plus =60,000 plus
;75,000 plus additional land price for a total of $3330380 0109 r6'
i
land.
The other vendor quoting the substation package, Distran, bid
metal clad ewitchgear but did not make provisions or note
r, exceptions for'.bypassing the circuit breakers for routine
maintenance and replacement as called for In the specifications.
1 Technically, therefore, their bid does not meet specifications.
r
o 41,
~ v
*'P xMr VYeW.Y.r'►..,rs`fi.V .4i.V
i
A. 1
~ VY. . 1 ♦ r.YY'h j' Yaf ryA.YN:..e r.
_ . _.,r. max. . a.~
r
page 2 Exhibit I
Discussions with the Purchasing Department revealed that, because iI E•
of this, we could not legally accept their bid. To establish a
basis for comparison, the addition of the bypass arrangement was
discussed with the sales representative. e'
This revealed that supplying the arrangement would add
ip;
tx f approximately =60,000 to $10,000 to their quoted price of „
;316,478 for a total of $376,478 to $386,478 depending on the
final purchase price of the extra equipment.
One bidder, Magnetek Electric quoted both Items 1 and 2 in an all
.}q
or nothing bid. As can be seen, their total evaluated cost Is
;18000,677.20.
Comparing the costs of the two substation package bids with the
additional required equipment as discussed above combined with y~
the low evaluated transformer bid and the Magnetek bid shows ~r
y ,
1
~ Total
Purchase Evaluated
Bidder Price Cost ?
Priester\Kuhlman ;T 9008 ; 1,86 + an „
Distran\Kuhlman $762,118 $10034,467
' .
Magnetek .$809,450 X1,000,677 •
It is worth reiterating that, although the Priester/KphlMit bid 9i
appears to provide the low evaluated cost, Priester does not include the circuit breakers and therefore does not meet
r t specifications. It also does not allow for future expansion aL
this site unless additional land is purchased.
>''r
It is the recommendation of the Staff that the low evaluated bid
Y., meeting specifications from Magnetek Electric be accepted,st a.
cost of $809,450.00. '
f fi,
t
i ; y r
A.
i
,i
lubitatichallOMU.pus
ar
.e•' S, r.EtiAlnIVtFIJ~Ji,rr. .r.
L
Exhibit 2
I ^ EVALUATION FOR BID i12d11, POWER TRANSFORMER 1
AND[OR SUBSTATION PACKAGE
For hem 1, Power Transformer;
Xfmr Xfmr Toml
Transformer FOB Shipped Field Field Total KW Loss Evaluated
_ Price Pad _ Complete Dress Testing Warranty Lasses Dollars Cost
H BV I 15UTY' . , $442,724.00_- , - - - (52,500} $0.00 48,94 $199,284 $639,507.68
GE $411,092.00 $1,913 $1,300 $7,600 $0.00 54.70 $222.738 $644,643.40
KUHLMAN $375,700.00 $1,300 $7,600 $0.00 62.31 $253,889 $638,489.20 '
DELTA STAR $425,384.00 - - - - - - - - - ($2,500) $0.00 63.30 $257,758 $680,641:60
COOPER $463,275.00 - - - - - - $7,600 - - - $0.00 52.60 $214,187 $685,06220
ABB $468,500.00 $6,260 - - - $7,600 - - - $0.00 60.86 $2479814 $730,173.78 ' ~k
1
For hem 2, Substation Package:
Total
Substation Pad Evaluated
Celt
Price Design _
a' DSTRAN $316,478.00 • ($3,000) $313,4780 r'
PRIESTSR S218,38000" $218,3800
f
For hems 1 & 2.
Substation & Xfmr Xfmr Total ,tt
Transformer Pad Field Total KW Lou Evaluated
Price _ Design Testing Warranty losses Dollars Coit
1,0 6?720 c
MAGNETEK $809450.00 ($3,000)($21500) ($48,000) 60.10 2449727 $
;
Bid does not meet epecitications. DWren does not provide for breaker bypass arrangemertt. Approfdnptti
coed - $80,000 to $70,000.
° Bid does not mot speciftationer Prieeter does not include chouh txeaken or houeinq for Indooroontro(panele; t
r° C
Approximate cost 119,000 to =135,000.
+ ~ araararaeulaaa_wu.au
r ~
i`
Vii. , l Li JP^..
Cj,
J r Cff:
r
If tid.
A 1 r f
,4 a r, t.>M" .
1.
(
J
%
%.i i 1 -
7-1
r
t .
EXCERPT
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MINUTES
APRIL 291 1991
17. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MAGMETFR ELECTRIC PROPOSAL FOR
SUBSTATION EQUIPMENT FOR USE AT THE TMPA ARCO SMITCH
w SITE, BID NO. 1241.
Nelson introduced this item stating that the Board had,
asked several serious questions about the previous bids
r'•" received and Staff's research into these questione"has,
a A.
resulted in a re-bid of the project. This is a capital i'.
project for the ARCO substation and is in the Utility
Department Capital Improvements Plan. it will taWone
year to receive the equipment on which we have taken FM'
{ bids.
, A
Tullos advised that six bidders bid on the transformer f
`r alone two on the substation
. ~ , package alone, and one on the transformer and substation combined: ,~r4
" The only qualified bidder is Magnetek Electric: The
project has a total evaluated value of $lA17,0004 The;
actual bid for this substation equipment is X8090450:
Ridens made a motion to accept the bid of Magnetek w
111. llj-
Electric in the amount of $809,450. Second by.Laney~
All ayes, no nays, motion parried.
t E ~ l
f
i
i 9
r ;
1 1 G . T
j 1.
h MI '
` Iy1hyF~}lI ,~4. . f 1 of 1 I C ~,L
r
^ 1 ,
P
ply~ner.o
i
xx
ORDINANCE N0.
AN 0k71INANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DENTON AND ALLAN PLUNLRSER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. RELATING
TO ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE)
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
M THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS:
,~TION I. That the Mayor is authorized to execute an agree-
ment between the City of Danton and Allan Plummer and Assooiates,
Inc. relating to Engineering services for the design of Pecan Creak
Wastewater Treatment Plant under the terms and conditions contained
within said Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
SECTION II. That the City Council hereby authorizes the ex- ht,
j penditure of funds not to exceed Six i'undred Thousand Nina Hundred
Ten and No/100 Dollars ($600,910.00).
nE Io=;. That this ordinance shall become offactive
immediately upon its passage and approval. F4eA
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1991.
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
r T ,n
ATTE89' x
JENNIVER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
, t1
a '
' x
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORK;
DEBPA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTCANEY r
yr
,
st
.
BYE
rr
1+ . i.. r.a.w ars3.:Y PY'1~,yy3~,~ 1 +
d.
AH.
i
r
i
may 7# 1991
j CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
TOt MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ,dJ Y
3 FROM1 Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
i t2Ei CONSIDER CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICEB,,BY ALAN r'
PLUMMER AND A930CIATE$, INC., (APAI), FOR DETAIL DESIGN
OF UPRATING THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT TO 12 (OR r
13) MGD AND THE EXPANSION TO 15 MOD AND PRELIMINARY
DESIGN FOR MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS.
i r
RECOMMENDATION
~1 i , a,
The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of April 29,
19910 recommended to the City Council approval of the
contract for an amount not to exceed $558,960 for detail
design of the Wastewat+r treatment Plant (WWTP) improvements
and $41,950 for the preliminary design of the miscellah+outli
improvements. The total contract amount is $600#910, t'
BACKGROUND F'
Alan Plummer and Associates was selected by Denton to .,r
provide engineering services for the WWTP improveMents
because of their innovative proposal. APAI recommended that
an uprating analysis would provide increased rated capacity
I in accordance with current regulatory renuiremente+ 4r~'
Otherwise, a very expensive construction project would bo
required to expand the downrated capacity.
.
I On August 7, 1990# the City entered into a contract with
APAI for preliminary engineering services for the 12 (or
13) MGD uprating and the 15 MOD Expansion of the WWTP. l" l'r
The original contract was based upon the actual cost
times a multlpliex with a fee not to exceed amount, The
original contract addresses the general Scope of Work for
several phases of engineering.
t
I ' v,n. n.: r'iFNrVn94y ~.,,M1T V
1
}
a
The precise scope of work is determined and the engineorinq;
fee is negotiated as each phase is initiated. The various
phases are preliminary design, detail design, bid and
.onstruction.
The preliminary dosign phase was included in the initial j
contract document at a fee of $81,802 for the Plant Uprating
Analysis and $105,897 for the Preliminary Design Report for R
4 a total of $187,699. r,
SUMMARY
APAI has completed the uprating evaluation and is in the
process of completing the preliminary design for the WWTP
improvements. Detail design in the amount of 3550,960
approximately 6% of the estimated construction costs, is for
' the following improvementsi
r ,
12 MOO imDrovemants
CONTRACT
ITEM DESCRIPTION.
b {ti.
3 a. Equalization basin, Including return pumping and
1 mixing.
1
b. Chlcriration/dechlorinetlon facilities.
c. Slo+dge belt press, including sludge holding and pumping
facilities, pp'
f d. Centralized grit removal and flow splitting facility ~kr
including required piping. "
as Improvements to Aeration Basins 1-5 (north plant), 'r}
f. Flower building improvements and air piping.
k. Waste activated sludge handling facilities for the
north plant. i sr
yeti { A;'
1S MdD Improvements
I'
4 n
CONTRACT
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Primary clarifier and final clarifier for the north
g plant. £
h. Final clarifier for the south plant.
I. Ono continuous backwash filter facility. aF '
S. Hydraulic improvements for 15 MOD
Scum handling and processing equipment.
t ,
t.: .a
I
. 'Op
P''• I .rY.
P
_ I
I
1
awl
(4j
amm
6 t .p9
1 F
I
The w/wW Utilities Engineering Staff met with APAI monthly
to review the uprating evaluation and preliminary design and
to consider possible improvements regarding construction
costa and operation and maintenance costs.
During the preliminary design phase the following
miscellaneous items were identified as needing improvement
for a preliminary design fee of $41,950 which is
approximately 1.7% of the estimated construction costst;
CONTRACT
ITEM DESCRIPTION +i
m. Electrical distribution and alternate power supply
at the wastewater Treatment Plant.,
n. Total plant instrumentation and control.. s°f.o-
o. Renovation and expansion of the present MaintenanceV
Building.
p. Renovation of the south Positive Displacement Blower
Building. yak
q. Renovation of the South Plant cyclone degritter t;
building.
J ~
AGENCIES AFFECTED
Citizens of Denton, Denton Municipal Utilities and Alan 'f f}
Plummer and Associates, Inc.
FISCAL IMPACT P
ti:r
See Exhibit 111, "Fund Analysis", for further information. i,
The contract addresses detail design for X5580960 or 6% of
estimated construction cost of the facilities. It also
,
~1~950 or 1.7! of th
addresses preliminary design for $
estimated construction cost of the facilities. After y
completion of the preliminary design of miscellaneous items
m. through q. listed above, APAI will submit a proposal for
detail design. L~
` P ed I ► Respectfully submitted, {
d ar Pn rector
Environments ations Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager N r;
Appr d by Exhibit I Contract ~i
' 11 ordinance
III Fund Analysis a}.
R.E. a son, xecut ve-"Tetor IV CIP ¢4+
Department of Utilities V VI Mi Project
utes LOCa PUS
1 P'~' r
r
,
J •
9 r A i
...r -
1
~OCM~
Y
.
EXCERPT
MIKu.rES OF PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD
APRIL 29, 1991
7. CONSIDER CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES BY ALAN
PLUMMER AND ASSOCIATES INC., (APAI) FOR DETAIL DESIGN
OF UPRATINa THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT TO 12 (OR ;
13) MGD AND THE EXPANSION TO 15 MOD AND PRELIMINARY
DESIGN FOR MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS.
Nelson introduced this item advising the Board this
1 contract is for $556,960 for the deeign phase of the
upgrade of the plant, and ;41,950 for the preliminary A.
design of miscellaneous items identified as needing
improvements.
Martin stated that regarding the uprating, staff is
looking at plant improvement to meet nitrification and
dechlorination requirements for a new permit/and
dechlorination facilities. Looking at this year's c
Forecast, based on flat growth, staff Who able to push
to late 1996 with construction
the plant expansion back
starting in January 19971 however, the upratinq
facilities are tied to improvements needed for 11 1, o
expansion; therefore, staff recommends that the
detailed engineering design address bath the upratinq
improvements and the expansion at the jams time, Then
if Denton has to bring the project forward quickl for
unanticipated population growth and/or new industryy ial
development, we will be ready, P I r x1,r
For the "uprating" improvement, the detailed design-
addressesi
1. flow equalization facilities ~~Tm
Lion (renovation of blower system)
.
f I 2~ nitrification
3, dechlorination facilities
c' 4. sludge handling, conditioning and treatment `#i`•
facilities ; w #,c
5+ central grit and flow splitting facilities
1 For the expansion from 12 MOD to 15 MOD, tt,e detailed
design addresses t'
+ 11 primary clarifier north plant
2. final clarifier north plant
3, final clarifier south plant
4. additional on sand filter cell
5. miscellaneous hydraulic improvements r `
6. Improved scum handling facilities `
ti
a
n
i
. , WWI
F
,r
4
The miscellaneous items ($41,950) identified in the
preliminary design phase needing impri;ment are outlined in
the contract, Article Iii 3.10 (m-q) ower supply
1, electric distribution and alternate p
2, plant instrumentation and control
3, renovation/expansion of ng and l cyclone building
bldg, maintenance building .
building
1
Thompson asked if Alan 6 plumper will continuo to be
available for consultation as the construction process p i
begins. Nelson advised the city has not entered into a°I
constructomaconstructionamanagementeactivitieeam will
handle the major
wherein it the
Thompson referencing the thetconatruclion periodjeAllieon ,
will be available during
explained the Consultants will be available insofar as
review of all shop drawings submitted, evaluation of those y 11
drawings, a once a mouth site visitthe QwillObehresponeiblAn x 'r
agreement with the epecifications, Y with
for testing, submittals on concrete mix design, working f
various laboratories, etc. However, David Hamssee that w "a
.
project construction manager, to
res, all oved is installbd. The big item tl~lti
what was presented and appr
A~ A
on construction management is a daily representative and
that's where Davin Ham comes iin.Thiscresults in a
significant reduction in Ong g
Thompson asked about the time schedule.;
Martin advised that construction for uprating improvements
will begin in May 1992, and be complete in approximately 24, 7
" months. The expansion to 15 MGD has been pushed back to
begin the bid process in late 1996 with construction
starting in January 1997. A 21 month construction schedule
is anticipated for the expansion. All improvements should
be on line by September 1999.
Laney made a motion to recommend to the City Council
approval of subject contract. Second by Chew. All ayes, no r ! CV~
motion carried.
nays,
CCC i ~ ,
' {L ~ r
F .ff `
Is V
A a r,ral
9 Mi 1
Jame L. Altif , P, E.
Alm Ph mnwir John H. Cook, P.E.
k
and Aisoio ateso hwe Pa9aV W. GLa. Ph D.
Alan H. Numme, Jf. P.E.
ENVIRONMENTAUCIVIL ENGINEERS Rkhard H. Cmhh, P.E.
457-0410/2
a ! March 28, 1991
I
Mr, Robert E. Nelson, P.E. Executive Director for Utilities 4 4
215 E. McKinney Street
IJI #r
v Denton, Texas 76201 l r,
a•
Re: Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (IIiITP)
Engineering Agreement • Detailed Design Phase o 4"T
I
Dear Hr. Nelson:
We are pleased to submit our Engineering Services Agree"nt for the Detailed s1G
Design Phase of the Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements. We have
M 111 included fo'r your information a list of anticipated plan sheets (Attachment
No. 1) and a breakdown of our estimated hours and cost (Attachment 0, 2)
' We have enjoyed working with the City on the Preliminary Design Phase of this' ' protect and look forward to proceeding with Detailed Design.
r 7
Please let us know if you have any questions or require any additionalh
r it
information concerning this matter.
Sincerel
+ ALAII PLUMMER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. `
r; 1
y, k
A. tee Head 111, P.E. ~'r+
Y.I ALH:Vlw
Enclosures
Y cc: Mr. Howard Martin City of Denton
Mrs tiWIAllimp City of Denton
y
910W#0 Sixth Snat + SuU 100 + fat Worth. Tau 761024F01 a 18171 i124M + Metre (8171 629.956! + PAx (817} 1084526
! Sy",` era ~ '
,
i
rX iY
j ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR THE DESIGN OF
I PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
• r
' l
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the day of !
1991 by and between the City of Denton, with its principal office at 215 East ,
McKinney Street, Denton, Denton County, Texas 76201.9 ("OWNER") and Alan Plummer
and Associates, Inc., with its principal office at 841 West Mitchell Street, tie
Arlington, Tarrant County, Texas 76013, hereinafter called tho ("ENGINEER") ,
a;ting herein, by and through its representative, duly authorized so to act for }
and in behalf of said ENGINEER.
W17NESSETHo that in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein
contained, the parties hereto do mutually agree it follows: a.
~ `6,4rz
AkTICLE l
EMPLOYMENT Of ENGINEER
' The OWNER agrees to employ the ENGINEER, and the ENGINEER agrees to perform
professional engineering services in connection with the Project as stated in the Y,
sections to follow, and for having rendered such services, the OWNER agrees to
pay to the ENGINEER compensation as stated in the section to follow.'
Tho Project shall include design of wastewater treatment facilities It the w
:r. Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The ENGINEER agrees to egfkile
the same degree of care, ski11 and diligence in the perfomaode of these services
, h.
as is ordinarily provided by a professional consultant under sisiirer
I circumstance; and ENGINEER shall, at no cost to OWNER, "reparform" services which vq
fail to satisfy the forNoing standard of performance.
E, ~ Y r
Page I of 23
.1, 61
a'' -
gas
M!.•1
1 '
ARTICLE II
PERIOD OF SERVICE
This Agreement shall become effective upon execution by the OWNER and the
ENGINEER and shall remain in force for the period which may reasonably be
required for the design, aware of contract, and construction of the Project,
Including Additional Services and any required extensions approved by the OWNER. >
~4
i ARTICLE III
BASIC ENGINEERING SERVICES
The ENGINEER shall render the following professional services for
development of the PRWECT=
Upon execution of this Agreement the ENGINEER shall:
` 4--
A. Consult with OWNER: (1) to review the scope of work, (2) to Ver(fy
' the OWNER's requirements for the Project, and (3) to review eviita!bte =~,f
data.
B. Advise OWNER as to the necessity of OWNER's providing or obtaining~ r;
data or services from others, and assist the OWNER In connection with i`
any such services.
C. Prepare a flow chart showing key project milestones. The flow chart it
will be updated monthly and sent to the OWNER. The E1464kek
understands that the OWNER desires the final construction phase of the 1 K'
a,- project {facilities required to meet the new wastewater discharge
permit requirements at a flow rate of 12 or 13 MOD) to be in operation
within 30 months of issuance of the new wastewater discharge oir'siti`
k however, the OWNER acknowledges that the ENGINEER is only one of the 'many parties involved in the project and that the ENGINEER cannbt
assure completion of the project by a specific date, I a ry
r
~ F.
Page 2 of 23
4 ' - - t. `a lF.tC aSXw..W^.YS?".lta*J'YA l ~
1
1
F
~ I
D, All formal workshops and quality control reviews will be held in the
ENGINEER'S office.
E. Detailed Design Phase
! The ENGINEER shall provide professional services in this phase as
follows:
d
1. Prepare detailed plans, specifications, contract documents, r
r
designs, and layouts of improvements to be constructed. 6Y,,
2. Provide the OWNER with advice, when requested, with respect to „
the making of all subsurface investigations$ including borings, 16
test pits, soil resistivity surveys, and other subsurface
exploratioasi however, the making of such investigations and the
interpretations of data and reports by special consultants argil`
not a part of the services to tie rendered by the ENMNEER,'and r r.
the cost therefore shall be paid by the OWNER.
a The ENGINEER shall monitor and review the work of tes(ing
` laboratories and inspection bureaus required for thl testing nr'
a, inspection of materials, witnessed tests, factory testing,''etc.
for the Project, but the cost of such laboratory testa or
inspection shall be paid by the OWNER. ff„
3, Furnish the OWNER, when requested, the engineering data necessary;
for applications for routine permits required by local) state and
federal authorities, Preparation of detailed applications Ind ,
supporting documents for government grants planning advantei, or
discharge permit renewals will be provided as Addltiootl
Services, if required..,
,
1'• 1,X
Page R of 2J y
r r,
owl
Nr
1
s
600aml
4. Submit plans, specifications, and contract documents to the k
applicable federal and state agency(s) for approval, where
required.
S, Furnish such information necessary to utility companies whose
facilities may be affected or services may be required for the
Project.
5 1,
6, Prepare revised opinion of probable construction cost, and
bidder's proposal forms (project quantities) of the improvements
to be constructed, is
1 c,
7, Conduct Quality Control (QC) workshops utilizing senior staff
members with experience acceptable to the OWNER. QC workshop`s
approximately 30, 60 and 9S percent complete
are to be held at PP 60 and 9S percent complete
`
,
,y.
milestones of Detailed Design.
,
! 8. Furnish the OWNER three (3) sets- of copies of 'Plinio
specifications, and bid proposals marked 'Preliminary or
f a1
a roval by the OWNER. Upon final approval by the OWNER" the
i , ENGINEER will provide the OWNER ten (10) sets of copils of , r
"Final" plans. !1s directed by the OWNER, additional sell. Of
plans, specifications and bid documents as are necessary inthe
r
receipt of bids for construction and as are required in thb
execution of the projects shall be furnished by the ENGINEER and,
shall be paid for by the OWNER at actual cost of rsprodotion. y
0. Detailed Design will consist of the following items as shown in.
the Preliminary Design Report and approved by the OWNER!
Design of equalization basin improvements Including' return
k pumping and mixing. ,
d
b, Design of chlorination/dethlorination facilities, ~
n
Page 4 of 23
4 'r
k j ~ _ ._.v .w v.~ ~-..ui_xvM•,,d4t.,i~+"tXa.~'1~t1M"`'~I~~~"~
tin o-k ~ _
7,f _
i
r
I
c. Design of a sludge belt press installation including sludge
holding and pumping facilities.
d. Design of a centralized grit removal and flow splitting ,
facility including required piping. FA';
le,
e. Design of improvements to Aeration Basins 1-5 (north plant).
`r.
f, Design of blower building improvements and air piping.
g, Design of a primary clarifier end final clarifier for the
n;
north plant, t
h. Design of a final clarifier for the south plant. G`
1. Design of one continuous backwash filtar facility,
Design of hydraulic improvements for 15 MGD; w~,f
.r
k. Design of waste activated sludge handling facilities for the
, it
north plant.
11 Design of scum handling and processing equipment.
1
k The project will be divided into two construction phases, items'.
required for 12 (or 13) MGD maximum monthly design flow efid items ,p .
regi fired for 15 liGD maximum monthly design flow. The OWNER ishall ,1;
notify the ENGINEER of any requnted modifications of items to, be
included in each phase no later than Moiety (90) days prior to A°
the beginning of advertisement of the project for bids. One set r
of prepurchase (or preselection) documents for equipment wail b!
4eveloped, advertised, distributed, and recomemndation for award
"r made as required to accommodate the construction schedule or `
equipment selection.
a
i ,
r ' page 5 of 23
,
" a ~ r ,rY ~1
owl
10. In addition to Detailed Design of Items a. through I. listed t
above, Preliminary Design will be developed for the items listed
f below as Additional Services. The Preliminary Designs will be
presented as Technical Memorandums and incorporated into the
Preliminary Design Report.
M. Electrical distribution and alternate power supply at the
wastewater Treatment Plant.
1
n. Total plant instrumentation and control.
o. Renovation and expansion of the present Maintenance
Building.
P. Renovation of the South Positive Displacement Blower F
Building.
q. Renovation of the South Plant cyclone degritter building.
Prior to proceeding with Detailed Design of any of Items m. through q.
listed above, the ENGINEER will obtain authorisation in writing by the
OWNER.
-1 F. Construction Phase Services '
Prior to completion of the detailed phase and approval of "Final` 1
plans and specifications by the OWNER, a detailed scope of work for
Construction Phase Services will be furnished to the OWNER.
After written authorization from the OWNER, the ENGINEER will proceed
with the performance of services in this phase as follows:
1. Assist the OWNER in securing bids, issuing notice to bidders and
notifying construction news publications. The notice to bidders
.Y .
e.
Page 6 of 23
i
j
i
I
will be furnished to the OWNER for publication in the local news
media. The cost for publications shall be paid by the OWNER.
i
2. Assist the OWNER in the opening, tabulation, and analysis of the
bids received and furnish recommendations on the award of F
contracts or the appropriate actions to bo taken by the OWNER. `
3. Assist in the preparation of formal contract documents for
construction contracts.
4. Assist in conducting pre-construction conference(s) with the
Contractor(s), review construction schedules prepared by the
Contractor(s), and prepare a proposed estimate of monthly cost
requirements of the project.
5L Make two visits each month of the site (as distinguished from the
continuous services of a Resident Project Representative) to.
observe the progress and the quality of work and to attempt to
determine in general if the work is proceeding in accordance with l
the contract documents. In performing these' services, th®
ENGINEER will endeavor to protect the OWNER against defects Ind;`, P
ri deficiencies in the work of Contractors, The ENGINEER Will
report any observed defects of deficiencies Immediately to the
4 L~7.
OWNER, Ho,+ever, it is understood that the ENGINEER does, not
guarantee the Contractor's performance nor is he responsible for
supervision of the Contractor's operation and employees.
ENGINEER shall not be responsible for the means, methods,
techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by
Contractor or the safety precautions and programs incident to the
work of the Contractor.
b. Consult and advise with the OWNER during construction, make
recommendations to the OWNER regarding materials and workmanship,
and prepare change orders with OWNER's approval.
Page r of 23
y
I
I
I
fN.1~
1
i
7. Review samples, catalog data, schedules, shop drawings,
laboratory, shop and mill tests of material and equipment and
1 other data pursuant to the General Conditions of the Construction
Contract.
8. Assist the OWNER in arranging for testing of materials and
laboratory control during construction to be conducted at the
OWNER's expense.
} 9. Interpret the intent of the plans and specifications for the
and studies
Contractor(s)Investigations analyses,
,
OWNER and
•
requested by the Contractor(s) and approved by the OWNER, for
substitutions of equipment and/or materials or deviations from
the plans and specifications will be considered an additional
service. NOTE: Such studies conducted by the ENGINEER, if
determined to be inadequate, due to incompleteness of ENGINEER
prepared plans and specifications, will be redone without
additional compensation. Any defective designs, plans of
specifications furnished by the ENGINEER shall be promptly,
.1 corrected by the ENGINEER at no cost to the OWNER,
4F(
10. Review and comment on monthly and final estimates for payment to
Contractor(s), pursuant to the General' Conditions of the
Construction Contract.
11. Conduct, in company with the OWNER's representative, a final
inspection of the Project for conformance with the design concept 3
of the Project and general compliance with the contract
documents, and review and comment on the certificate of
completion and the recommendation for final payment to the ;
Contractor(s).
12. Revise the construction drawings in accordance with the i
A ' information furnished by construction Contractor(s) reflecting ;
changes in the Project made during construction. One set of
page 8 of 93
r
owl
F
i
."u
.
I
l reproducible prints of $Record Drawings" shall be provided by the
ENGINEER to the OWNER.
1
r
13. The ENGINEER will contact the OWNER's operating staff ten
i . (10) months after the date of final acceptance to determine
warranty items to be addressed by the Contractor. '
ARTICLE IV
r ~a
'ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Additional Services to be performed by the ENGINEER, if authorized by the
OWNER, which are not included in the above described Basic Services, are
j described as follows:
A. Field Surveying required for the preparation of designs, drawings a
and plans including topographic survey of the plant site.
B. Field layouts or the furnishing of construction line and grade;,
i surveys.
C. Investigations involving detailed consideration Of oparatton;
maintenance and overhead expenses, and the p'raparation,of rita
schedules, earnings and expense statements, feasibility studils,,, ,
appraisals, evaluations, assessment schedules, 'and material
audits or inventories required for certification of force account
construction performed by the OWNER.
D. Making necessary property, boundary and right-of-way surveys,
preparation of easement and deed descriptions, including title
search and examination of deed records. Providing a land agent
or public relations specialist to assist the OWNER in obtaining
easements.
s ~ •y.VQ
1
Page 9 of 23
t
and supporting documents for government
applications
E. Preparing advances and providing data for
grants, loans, or planning
detailed applications. ;
i ,
F. Providing shop, mill, field or laboratory inspection of materials r
and equipment.
•
G. Preparing any required Operation and Maintenance Manuals or
conducting operator training and preparing Environmental Impact
Assessments or Statements.
H. Appearing before regulatory agencies or courts as an expert
,
witness in any litigation with third parties or condemnation of the proceedings arising from the devameonf oengineeringidata and
Project, including the preparation
reports for assistance to the OWNER.
I. Furnishing the services of a Resident Project Representative to
act as the OWNER's on-site representative during the construction k,
phase, if requested by the OWNER: If the ENGINEER is requested
visits each 0Ah.
i to visit the site more frequently than twr.(2~ a,
.j
as set forth in Section III, Paragraph N.S,'the requested visits. 3 j
' shall be considered as an Additional Service and the_ENGYN£0~
shall be entitled to additional.compensatioM if OWNER det red
the service of a resident project engineer, i separate agreement
shall be executed by the parties.
J. Assisting the OWNER in claims disputes with Contractor(s). y_.•'
K. Performing investigations, studies and analyses of substitetion
of equipment .nd/or materials or deviations from the plans and
specifications.
L. Assisting OWNER or Contractor in the defense or prosecution of
litigation in connection with or in
~
f~Page 10 of 21
T T_~T
L
owl
L
./1R
contemplated by this Agreement. Such services, if any, shall be
furnished by ENGINEER on a fee basis negotiated by the respective
parties outside of and in addition to this Agreement.
M. Sampling, testing or analysis beyond that specifically included
in Basic Services.
N. Preparing copies of Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) electronic data
r bases, drawings, or files for the OWNER's use in a future CAD
system.
0. Providing video camera with video tapes of construction phase to
be used as a historical record and for operator training.
P. Attendance at additional meetings beyond those specifically noted
in Basic Services required by TWC, other regulatory agencies or
the OWNER.
pp Preliminary and/or Detailed Design of support facilities and
buildings, additional sludge digestion facilities, and ultimata' ;
sludge disposal facilities (sludge only landfill or additional
sludge injection acreage and equipc.ant) recommended in the
1990 Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan.
' t
R. Preliminary Design of Items m. through q. listed in Article IIi,
Paragraph E.10.
S. Any additional services required by the OWNER not included in
Basic Services.
E ARTICLE Y
RESPONSIBILITIES OF DOER
The OWNER shall do the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the
services of the ENGINEER:
Page 11 of 23
i
S
representative
.l a person to act as the oWNfR's A' Designate in writing services to be rendered under this Agreement-
the ' with respect to contract authority to transmit instructions,
interpret and define the owNER's Policies and
Such person shall have ;
,
receive information,
l s with respect to the ENGINEER'S services for the PRDJfCT.
decision the oWNER's
information as to
es and
{
provide all criteria and f design Object"
ull including
8' for the projects uirements+ flexibility 3
4
requirements capacity and performance re and
constraints, space, }imitations; furnish copies
and expandability, and any budgetary
and construction standards which the OWNER will requ!re ~
of all design s and Specifications'
to be included in the Drawing disposal all
lacing at the Ojec including revious
C. Assist the e NGINEER b
informaticn pertinent to the Pr construction of the
availab
reports and any other data relative to design or
project. the
ENSINEER ass to and make all Provisions, Arrange for acc as rquir
,r
enter upon public and private property
r
perform services under this Agreement,
s ecifications, a ~~4
YeQort%, sketches, drawings P
s the ENGINEER, obtain ~dviee
E. Examine all studies,
proposals and other documents presented by
insurance counselor and other consultants as th1.OMNER
decisions
of an attorney, ins the
dea exatslnattontlme so as not t In vritin uch o delay
ms A PS ropriats for s
pertaining thereto within a reasonable services of the ENGINEER.
overnmental authorities having
F. furnish approvals and permits from all g royals and consents from
-h ae project and suc
jurisdiction over ecessary for completion of the Projecto
others as may be n
make or arrange to have mad` a est pits,soil
G. The OWNER shall
including but not 1lmited to borings, {
investigations, ;
Pa•1e 12 Of 23
~ i
1
r
, • is
resistivity surveys, and other subsurface explorations. The OWNER
shall also make or arrange to have made the interpretations of data
and reports resulting from such investigations. All vests associated
with such investigations shall be paid by the OWNER.
The OWNER shall make or arrange to have made all testing sampling
required at the wastewater treatment plant or in the collection system
m
including flows, BOD and suspended solids, concentrations, aeration
basin solids levels, and other pertinent information relevant to
` operation of the treatment plan. All costs associated with such
testing and sampling shall be paid by the OWNER.
1. Provide such accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance
counseling services as may be required for the Project, such legal
services as the OWNER may require or the ENGINEER may reasonably
request with regard to legal issues pertaining to the Project,
Including any that may be raised by the CONTRACTOR(s),
J. The OWNER shall determine, prior to receipt of construction bid, if sr
,A
i the ENGINEER is to furnish Resident Project Representative service so
the Bidders can be informed.
K. If OWNER designates a person to represent the OWNER at the site'who is
not the ENGINEER or ENGINEER's agent or employee, the duties,
responsibilities and limitations of authority of such other person ind
the effect thereof on -the duties and responsibilities of the ENGINEER'
will be set forth in an agreement that is to be identified, Attached
to this Agreement, and a copy of which shall be furnished ENGINEER,
before such services begin.
L. Attend the pre-bid conference, bid opening, pre-construction
conferences, construction progress and other job related meetings and
substantial cc:.pletion inspections and final payment inspections.
v
r
Page 13 of 23
1
t "
r
M., Give prompt written notice to the ENGINEER whenever the OWNER observes
or otherwise becomes aware of any development that affects the scope
or timing of the ENGINEER's services, or any defect or nonconformance
of the work of any contractor.
N. Furnish, or direct the ENGINEER to provide, Additional Services as
stipulated in Article IV of this Agreement or other services as
required.
Y
0. Provided transportation such as airline fare, automobile rental or
subsistence required for the OWNER's personnel to attend project •
3
meetings or inspection trips. f
P. Bear all costs incident to compliance with the requirements of this
Article V.
ARTICLE VI
f
'I COMPENSATiO.. N
rl. ~ b
A. COMPENSATION TERMS:'
1. 'Salary Cost" is defined as the cost of salary (payroll) for
engineers, draftsmen, stenographers, surveyors, clerks, laborers,F
etc., for time directly chargeable to the Project, plus Social,
4 Security contributions, unemployment compensation, insueant*
retirement benefits, medical and insurance benefits, disability
payments, sick leave, vacation and holiday pay applicable thereto
(Salary cost is equal to 1.35 times salary.) ,
j
2. 'Subcontract Expense" is defined as the expense that is incurred by { {
the ENGINEER in employment of others in outside firms for services in
the nature of foundation borings, testing, surveying, and similar
services.
Page 1/ of 23
i
i
y
j
s
3. 'Direct Non-Labor Expense' is defined as that expense for any
assignment incurred by the ENGINEER for supplies, transportation and
equipment, travel, communications, subsistence and lodging away from
home and similar incidentals in connection with that assignment.
B. BASIC SERVICES:
For and in consideration of Detailed Design of the Basic Services
(Article III, Paragraph E) to be rendered by the ENGINEER (Items a. through S
1. listed in Article 111, Paragraph E.9), the OWNER agrees to pay based on
the Schedule of Services shown in Exhibit A, with the total fee not to
exceed $58,960.
For and in consideration of Preliminary Design of Items m. through q.
listed in Article III, Paragraph E.10, the OWNER agrees to pay based on the
schedule of charges shown in Exhibit A. The total fee for Preliminary
Design of these items shall not exceed '41,950.
Detailed Design shall not proceed with any of Items m, through q. without
prior written authorization by the OWNER.
If
Prior to proceeding beyond the Detailed Design, the ENGINEER shall submit
a maximum fee for Construction Phase Services and Resident Representation
During Construction for approval of the OWNER.
Partial payments to the ENGINEER will be made on the basis of monthly
statements rendered to and approved by the OWNERI however, under no
circumstances shall any monthly statement for servicas exceed the value of
work performed at the time a statement is rendered. The OWNER may withhold
the final 5 percent of the contract amount until completion of the project.
Nothing contained in this article shall require the City to pay for any
work which is unsatisfactory as reasonablf determined by the Executive
Director of Utilities or which is not submitted in compliance with the
terms of this Contract. The City shall not be required to make any
Page 15 of 23
,(''jj
Saw
}
b
payments to the ENGINEER when the ENGINEER is in default under this
Contract.
f
s It is specifically understood and agreee that the ENGINEER shall not be r'.
~I authorized to undertake any work pursuant to this Agreement which would
•fi
require additional payments by the OWNER for any charge, expense or
reimbursement above the maximum fee as stated without having first obtained
Britten authorization from the OWNER. ENGINEER shall not proceed to 4
perform the services listed In Construction Phase Services, without
obtaining prior written authorization from OWNER.
r C. ADDITIONAL SERVICES
1, For Resident Representation During Construction and Construction
Layout. X'
For the resident representation during construction and construction K~
layout (Article iV.l), the ENGINEER shall be paid based on the
Schedule of Charges in Exhibit A. Payments for resident pro)ect„ t"'a
j representation and construction layout shall be due and payable upon
submission of statements by the ENGINEER. Statements shill not be submitted more frequently than monthly.
jqpr
For additional services in Article IV, the ENGINEER shall be paid'
based on the Schedule of Charges shown in Exhibit A. Payments for
additional services shall be due and payable upon submission by the
ENGINEER. Statements shall not be submitted mor iquently than r;
monthly. y
D. PAYMENT
y:
If the OWNER fails to make payments due the ENGINEER for services and
expenses within sixty (60) days after receipt of the ENGINEER's statement r
therefore, the amounts due the ENGINEER will be increased at.the rate of
1 percent (1%) per month from said sixtieth (60th) day. In addition, the
Page 16 of 23
A
. ,
WWI
F
wool
L
ENGINEER may, after giving seven (7) days' written notice to the OWNER,
suspend services under this Agreement until the ENGINEER has been psid in
full all amounts due for services, expenses and charges. Any applicable
new taxes imposed upon services, expenses, and charges by any governmental
body after the execution of this contract will be added as necessary to the
ENGINEER's compensation.
ARTICLE VII
TIME OF COMPLETION
The ENGINEER will commence work on the Project immediately upon execution
of this contract. The ENGINEER shall complete the work in accordance with the
following schedule: d
11~M Tc ) IEW BY CAER
i
Preliminary Design of items 150 days after receipt of authorization
listed in Article III, to proceed
'Paragraph E.10.
Detailed Design of items 270 days after receipt of authorization
listed in Article III, to proceed
i Paragraph E.S.
ARTICLE VIII
OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST
The ENGINEER will furnish an opinion of probable construction cost of the
work, but does not guarantee the accuracy of such estimates. r
Opinions of probable construction cost, financial evaluations, feasibility
studies, economic analyses of alternate solutions and utilitarian considerations
of operations and maintenance cost prepared by the ENGINEER hereunder will be
made on the basis of the ENGiNEER's experience and qualifications and represent
the ENGIK ER's best judgement as an experienced and qualified design
professional. It is recognized, 'However, that the ENGINEER does not have control $
over the cost of labor, material, equipment or services furnished by others or
Page 17 of 23 ,
r
i
i
I
d
j
j over market conditions or contractors' methods of determin!ng their prices, and
that any utilitarian evaluation of any facility to be constructed or work to be
performed on the basis of the Report must be necessity be speculative until
completion of its detailed design. Accordingly, the ENGINEER does not guarantee 1 '
that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from opinions, evaluations or j
studies submitted by the ENGINEER to the OWNER hereunder.
ARTICLE IX
a REVISION TO PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 'x
The OWNER reserves the right to direct substantial revision of the Plans and
' Specifications after approval by the OWNER as OWNER may deem necessary, but to
such event the OWNER shall pay to the ENGINEER Just and equitable compensation
for services rendered to making such revisions.
I i
ARTICLE X
OBSERVATION AND REVIEW OF THE YORK
The ENGINEER will endeavor to protect the OWNER against defects and
deficiencies in the work of contractors, by observation of the work as it
progresses, by interpretation of the plans, specifications and other contract,
{ documents to and with the contractors, by the disapproval of defective work as
f-
may be observed and the issuance of stop-orders from the OWNER with respect to
defective material and workmanship where they are observed, and the ENGINEER will z'
~I exercise due diligence to assist the OWNER in requiring that the work be done in
accordance with plans and specifications; but the CONTRACTOR will remain i
independent contractir with the OWNER, a,id the ENGINEER does not guarantee the }
performance of such coostruction contracts. As set forth in Article 111,113 and
Article IV.10 the ENGINEER shall not be responsible for the means, methods,
techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected by the CONTRACTOR,
or the safety precautions and programs incleent to the work of the CONTRACTOR.
Page 18 of 23
j;
r
I
'y {
1
i
p~uy
Y
ARTICLE XI
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
All documents prepared or furnished by the ENGINEER (and ENGINEER'S
independent associates and consultants) pursuant to this Agreement are
instrument: of service and ENGINEER shall retain an ownersbip and property '
interest h,r-;in. The OWNER may make and retain copies for information and
' reference; however, such documents are not intended or represented to be suitable a
for reuse by the OWNER or others. Any reuse by the OWNER without written
verification or adaptation by the ENGINEER will be at the OWNER's sole risk and
without liability or legal exposure to the ENGINEER, or to the ENGINEER's
independent associates of consultants, and the OWNER shall indemnify and hold
harmless the ENGINEER and ENGINEER's independent associates and consultants from
all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees arising out
of or resulting therefrom. Any such verification or adaptation will entitle the
ENGINEER to further compensation at rates to be agreed upon by the OWNER and the
ENGINEER.
ARTICLE XII
INDEMNITY AGREEMENT
The ENGINEER shall indemnify and save harmless the OWNER and its officers,
agents, and employees from the liability of the OWNER on account of any injuries
1 or damages received or sustained by any person or persons or property, including
court costs and reasonable attorneys fees incurred by the OWNER, proximately i
caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the ENGINEER or its officers, s
agents, or employees in the execution, operation, or performance, or performance
of this Agreement,
In the event of liability from suits, actions, or claims arising out of or
occasioned by the negligence of both the ENGINEER and the OWNER, their agents or
employees, in the performance of this Agreement, each party shall contribute j
toward the satisfaction of the liability its proportionate share, which share
shall be equal to the percentage of negligence attributable to the party.
Page 19 of 23
S
ly.. ~yiar
1
I
S
ARTICLE XIII
ARBITRATION
No arbitration arising out of, or relating to, this Agreement involving one
party to this Agreement may include the other party to this Agreement without the
other's approval.
M
ARTICLE XIY
TERMINATION OF CONTRACT
This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days'
written notice. In the event of any termination, the ENGINEER will be paid for ,.r±
all services properly rendered and reimbursable expenses incurred to the date of roily
termination and, in addition, all reimbursable expenses directly attributable to
termination. Should the City subsequently contract with a new Consultant for
continuation of services on the Project, the ENGINEER shall cooperate in a
providing information.
ARTICLE XV All
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNMENTS 3
The OWNER and the ENGINEER each are hereby bound and the partners, f 1;
successors, executors, administrators, and legal representatives of the OWNER and
the ENGINEER are hereby bound to the other party to this Agreement and to the
partners, successors, executors, administrators and legal representatives
said assigns) of such other party, in respect of all covenants, agree auants and i
obligations to this Agreement.
Neither tha OWNER nor the ENGINEER shall assign, sublet or transfer any
rights under or interest in (including, but without limitation, monies that may
become due or monies that are due) this Agreement without the written consent of,
the other, except to the extent that any assignment, subletting or transfer 1s
mandated by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written
consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor
from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. Nothing contained in this
.
Page 20 of 23
.~•'.aar .a srS.~.,ila(\i4f+'4>iw;~s'ap'
I
l
II~lM~
i
i
E'!JRY'pti■■;
•
paragraph shalt prevent the ENGINEER from employing such independent associates
and consultants as the ENGINEER may deem appropriate to assist In the performance
of services hereunder.
Nothing under this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or
benefits in this Agreement to anyone other than the OWNER and the ENGINEER, and
all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement will be for
J the sole and exclusive benefit of the OWNER and the ENGINEER and not for the
l benefit of any other party. This Agreement, consisting of pages I to _ with
Exhibits as listed in Article AVI constitutes the entire Agreement between the a,
f OWNER and the ENGINEER and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings,
i This Agreement may only be amended, supplemented, modified or canceled by a duly
executed written instrument.
E ARTICLE XVI ti.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES
Approval by the City shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the
responsibility and liability of the ENGINEER, its employees, associates,. agents, p
and consultants for the accuracy and competency of their designs or other work;
nor shall such approval be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility by '
the City for any defect in the design or other work prepared by the ENGINEER, its t."
employees, subcontractors, agents, and consultants.
ARTICLE XVIi
NOTICES
Y
All notices, communications, and reports required or permitted under this
Contract shall be personally delivered or mailed to the respective parties by
depositing sine in the United States mail at the addresses shown below, certified
mail, return receipt requested unless and until either party is otherwise
notified in writing by the other party at the following addresses. Mailed
notices shall be deemed communicated as of three days mailing.
r
Page 21 of 23
r dxr~
If Intended for the City, to. If intended for the ENGINEER, to:
City of Denton Alan Piuamer and Associates,'Inc.'
Attn: Robert Nelson, P.E. Attn: John N. Cook, P.E.
Executive Director for Utilities 210 West Sixth Street, Suite 400
215 East McKinney Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Y
e
Denton, Texas 76201
ARTICLE XVIII
t S { MISCELLANEOUS
'It A. The following exhibits are attached to and made a part of this Agreement:
Exhibit A Schedule of Charges -
B. A waiver by either the ENGINEER or the City of any breach of a prbvision`of: !
t this contract shall not be binding upon the waiving party untbss such .
11
waiver is in writing In the event of a written waiver, such a waiver sha11
,r not affect the waiving party's rights with respect to any other, or. future s;.
breach.
I'
p
S '
r "!1' 1 a'1 'n ' nt L'
,Y F
t' Page 22 of 73
s
t
a '
` s
f
This contact is executed in two counterparts.
CITY JF DENTON, TEXAS
Bob Castleberry, Mayor
, r 1 r,i
ATTEST: d
Jennifer Walters, City Secretary
N ,
by:
s APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
Debra A° Drayovitch, City Attorney ,
• by:
° MY ~r
ALAN PLUMMER AND ASSOCIATES,: INC.,
r
x
Engineer
111 " '
tt
Alan H. Plummer, Jr., President
r
k" ATTEST: ,
Jon H. Cook, Vice President a
E I
f
1 r
I
pFvtiL E < ~
~y h1 R Y~ • E ~ C"
" Page 23 of 23
1
it
' eexnvn
f
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE Of CHARGES
Staff Members (Salary x 1.35J + (Salary x 1,755)
Resident Reoresentat n (Salary x 1.35 + (Salary x 1.355)
Salary is defined as the cost of payroll of engineers, drafters, stenographers,
,.x ! surveyors, clerks, laborers, etc., for time directly chargeable to the protect.
{Salary Cost is equal to 1,35 times salary.}
J
~y~on u1~ tams Chases Actual Cost Times Multiplier of 1.15
All Other 6(X;4t Expenses Actual Cost Times Multiplier of 1.00
Other direct expenses shall include printing and reproduction expense,
communication expense, travel, transportation and subsistence away fron the
°
Engineer's office other miscellaneous expenses directly related to the work,
including costs of laboratory analysis, tests, and other work re0i0od to be done,:
by indeperdent persons or agents other than staff members or subconsultints:
41~
F •r
.
t
i
F
0
i
~ • rJ
. tY
y L"
. E
a
{
ii~~a'12" i .
ATTACHMENT NO. 1 y
CITY OF DENTON
PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
PKELIMINARY LIST OF PLAN SHEETS
1. Cover Sheet 38. Basin Sections
2. Location Yap/List of Sheets 39'
3, Plant Layout/General Notes NORTH PLANT1PRiMARY CLARIFIER
Cwai ~NfCILb3i1CAl/STRUCTURAL 40. Plan and Sections f
BELT PRESS BUILDING 41. Structural Details
4. Layout 42, Structural Details !
5. Sections 43. 'isc. Details
6. Sections and Details 44• tffluent Box/Scum Box
7. Details 45. Details
t BLOWER BUILDING FINAL CLARIFIERS
8. Plan 46. Plan and Sections-North Plant
9. Sections 47. Plan and Sections•South'Plan!
10. Sections and Details 48. Effluent 804/Scum Box
11. Details 49, Structural Details
AIR PIPING 50. Structural Details
12. Plan 51. Misc. Details
13. Sections 52. Misc. Details
14. Structural Details CONTACT BASIN MODIFICATIONS
15. Details 53. Plan and Sections North k
AERATION BASIN IMPROVEMENTS $4. Plan and Sections South
16. Plan $5, Sections
II. Sections $6. Details
S7, Details
18. Details SLUDGE HOLDING TANK
19 Wall Details
20. . Misc. 58. Plan
Details
4 CHLORINE/DECHLORINE BUILDING 59. Sections
21. Demolition Plan and Sections 60. Sections
' 22. Building Layout 61. Struttural Detail3
' 23. Sections 62. Structural Details ;
24. Details 63. Misc. Details
GRIT CHAMBER FILTER
64. Plan
25. Plan 6S Sections
26. Sections 66, . Details
27. Sections structural 67. Details
h 28. Sections structural STATION
29. Sections (structural) NORTH PLANT WAS PUMP
30. Oetalli 68. Plan and Sections
3l. Details 69. Details
LITTER BO
~ BASIN 5P
EQUALIZATION BOXES
~ 32. Area Plan 70. Plan and Sections
33. Profiles 71. Details
34. Pump Sta./Blower Bldg. Sections 72. Yard Piping
35. Pump Sta./Blower Bldg. Sections 74. Grading
Roadwork
36. Details
31. Details
k•.i
ATTACHMENT N0, 1
CITY OF DENTON
PECAN CREEK VASTEVATfR TREATI-FRI PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
` PRELIMINARY IST n01 ?W SHEETS
115. One Line Diagram .r
j 116. Sections and Details
117, Control Schematics Plan
BLOVEuNG
75. Architectural Plan 118. Primary Clarifiers Elect, w.
76. Elevations 114, Final Clarifiers Elect, Plan
77. Elevations 120, WAS POP Station Elect. Plan
78. Sections 121. One Line Diagram
79. Sections 122. Schematic
80. Details 123, Dechlorinatlon Basin Area Plan ~F
124. Gne Line Diagram '
z' 81. Details "
82. Details 125. Chlorine/DechlorinP Building
83, Electrical Plan Electrical Plan
84. Electrical Details 126, Control Diagrams
BELT PRESS BUILDING 127 Sections and Details
85. Architectural Plan 128, Belt Press Building Area Plan
86. Elevations 129, One Line Dfa"ram ,
87, Elevations 130. Electrical Plans
88, Sections 131, Sections and Details
89. Sections 132, Control Schematics
90, Details 133. Filters Electrical plans- °r
91, Details 134, Sections, Details and Schematics
92. Details 135. Instrumentation Plans
93. Electrical Plan 136, Instrumentation Plans
94. Electrical Details 137. Panel and Fixture Schedules
E CHLOQINE/DECHLORiNE BUILDING 138, Details, Symbols ar.l Legend y,
gs, Architectural Plan 3
96, Elevations
97, Sections
98. Details d
99. Electrical Plan and Details
1. km 100. Sipe P1an•1 101° Situ Plan-2
102. Flaw Equalization Site Plan 4
103. Flow Equalization One Line Diagram j
101. Flow Equal. Mc... Bldg. Conduit Plan
105, Flow Equal, Sections and Details
lOb, Flow Equalization Schematics r'.
107, Grit Facilities Site Plan
108. Grit Facilities One Line Diagram
109. Grit Facilities MCC Layout
,
Conduit
!E
6 Details
110. Grit Facilities Sections
111, Grit Facilities Schematics
112, Blower Building Area P130
Old ew Ae+^ation gains Area Plan
114. N
+ r
1
•
• ` t{':f.,Y ti .`.ir wS~Vi11.~in~i✓~1~A~`
t
c
,
ATTACHMENT h0. 2
CITY OF DENTON
PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
ENGINEERING BUDGET - DETAILED DESIGN
•E `
f
1 Description Classification Hours Rate Cost
(1/hr) (S) '
Equalization Basin Engineer 120 SO S 7,200
a- Technn 180 48 8,640
Chlorine/Dechlorine Engineer 160 60 9,600 f
Technician 180 48 8,640
3 Belt Press/Sludge Holding Engineer 160 60 9,600
Technician 240 48 11,620
Grit Chamber/Flow Splitting Engineer 160 60 9,600
Y Technician 240 48 11;520
t
{ Aeration Baffin/Blower Bldg. Engineer 240 60 14' 466
Technician 360 48 17,280
Primary/Final Clarifiers Engineer 160 60 9,600
Technician 240 48 I1;620 .
Filter Engineer 80 69 1,800.
Technician 80 48 40,
Mist (VAS, Piping, Site „ y
r Grading, Scum, etc.) Engineer 240 60 14,400.,°
E` Technician S00 48 24,b00
Review/Corrections Engineer 160 60 9,600 r
Technician 400 48 19,204 1.
PID and Operations Memorandum Engineer 120 66 ];200
Specifications Engineer 240 60 14,4QO
Word Processing 120 40 4,8000
Preselection Specifications Engineer 80 60 40800
QC/Workshops Engineer 120 60 1,200
Technical
Review Board 160 9S 15,200 l
'fV Final Quality Take off and Engineer 80 60 41000 w
Cost Estimate
4ll
t r r r a
If f
1 ' k4 it I .,:~,f
J.c .
7-1
i' KAI
1 O l
a vx c~
AfTAC"EHT NO. 2
CITY OF DEN70N
I PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
ENGINEERING BUDGET - DETAILED DESIGN
(continued) r"
t ~
Description Classification Hours Rate Cost i. ,
• is ~ r,.
Site Visits Engineer 60 70 4,200
Technician 60 48 2,860
1 k { ,
Meetings Client/1WC Engineer 120 75 90060 T
Project Management Project Manager 360 80 280804 y p'
v a Word Processing Word Processing 120 40 4A.QQQ
~i
Total labor $313,040 o,f
i Expenses
a Electrical Subconsultant Chiang Patel) $16,800 x 1^15 68,320
Structural Subconsultant (LWF) 43,000 x 1.15 49,450
- j Architectural Subconsultant
• Architectural Collective) 26,000 x 1.15 29,900
£
urveyin9 (Walker Associates) 39000 x 1.15 31450
~ 15,000.
P' # Computer
t, I Reproduction 31000
Mileage/Travel 9.00
Other/Misc. ;
o Total Expenses 5195,120 y
e p r'.
j Total Estimated Amount (labor and Expenses) $508,160
P~
SO.80Q ,
10% Contingencies I- T "
TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT SS581960
r
V t {
T
s
a _
n
3 °PY4d°~
. $a
rrNR7~ :
t
4
6
March 19, 1991 j
12 MGD UPRATE AND 15 MGD UPGRADE
WWTP IMPROVEMENTS !
FUND ANALYSIS a'• jj
a,
WW TREATMENT $ (x1000)
FUND SOURCE
a
91-0470-06 $180560.0
TOTAL FUNDS ;18,560.,0
15
j` EXPENDITURES
Design 938.6
i; Ph I (Prel. Design) i.
Uprate Analysis (Conf*act) 81.8 i?.
Prol. Design (Contract) 105.9
Ph II (Detail Design)
* Amendment No. 1 (Contract) 600.9
y Misc. imprvmts (Estimated)' 150.8
Testing (Contract) 7.3}
Construction 12000040 3 x`.
12 MGD Imprvmt (Estimated) 5.750.0
15 MGD Imprvmt (Estimated) 3,750.0 s
r Misc. WWTP Imprvmt (Estimated) 20590.0
Inspection (Estimated) 854.1
TOTAL EXPENDITURES s13,800.G A
AMOUNT O ER/(UNDER) BUDGET (54,760,60}
,I
Indicates contract under consideration.
,:p' r
j
e"
{
0
, t
n-,
{
r' { 11
ITy
40
` ` 1 -'1 A' • Y' ` yf711>71~{1.
l
~i i
Z N fff
C
PROD TITLIi WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EEPANSION - 1SNOD '
ESTIMATED COSTi $17,640 (x 1000) EVALUATION SCORE, 9l
' DESCRIPTION, This project addresses the necessary improvements to the ,
wastewater Treatment Plant required to meet caw TWC effluent standards '
and to expand the capacity of the plant from 12HOD to 1SHOD.
PURPOSE, To expand the capacity of the WWTP to keep pace with inereued flow r
t due to growth and to achieve compliance with more stringent
effluent limits regvired by the TWC. '
COST from the Deeuber 1919 Draft - "Wastewater Treatssot MCULATIONi Facilities Matter Plan" by Freese and Michele, fat. All t „fir
cost estimates were adjusted from 1919 dollars using as r
annual inflation factor of Si.
FUNDING REQUIREMINTSiCASH PLOWS/RNCUNSUANCES (In Dollars a 1000)
EMC CASH INC CASH &PC CASH RHO CASH INC CASH ENC CASH,
1991 0 125 t N t 20 D t 20 J t 20 P t 26 M t 26 i
A t 25 M t 105 J 635 t J t 35 A t 35 S 3$
1 1992 0 t 70 N t 70 D t 70 J t 70 F t 70 N 5363 t 75
A t 360 M t 360 J 1452 t 360 J t 481 A t 441 S t 461
t 1993 0 t 411 N t 481 D t 481 J t 461 F t 461 M t 411
A t 411 N 3 481 J t 444 J t A t B t
INCUNIRRANCRI CASH EXPENDITURES
FOND REV AIC MU TOTAL NOD IRV AIC OTOU ` TOTAL I
' TOTAL 1ST YR 1760 $0 $0 10 $760 $335 $0 $0 40 1346
TOTAL 2ND TO 1611S $0 10 $0 $6815 12944 $0 $0 WAS
TOTAL 3RD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 44292 40 $0 $0 $4291
SUS TOTAL Ylk $7575 $0 $0 $0 17575 07575 $0 $0 40 17375
' IMCtlM8RIANCE DATES, f
PHASE DATE AMOUNT
I~ Prelim, Ecgineeftng 10/90 1123
tagiaearing IA 6191 $635 r
tagiaoariat to 6192 11452
Coattructiod 3192 $5363 a 5
Coaatructtoa 10/93 $10165
Prelim, Engineering 3144 $160
ENCVNSERAMCE TOTAL $11640
r.~Y CONNIX11I This is a multiyear project beginning in 199E
Eacum1eraaceei Prier to 1991 1 0
Current CIP 117,840,000
a~ Total Project Budget 017,140,000
ry, f ~
fifooo,
4119/90 9140
r
561
~ .a. '.w-.,~. am...,W _ . .~..v3'F ivi«gt.'F!~'~~~1 "gyp
i
i
Opp
~1 1 r - r
V NAY 1 rM1S ri ~r r'I'~ "I '
f
t
J
r 1 '
4
g 01
w g
I ,7 J I 4;~1 11JJ
I M1'
K. 1 J q ~~I
_ _ y~/~~ N J 1 I iA~ 1 j
I t
b
r
- LrANT i t; s .yw'tq ff qK ~
} tir r.i ~ , ! J.~r
r ' r C 1' rtr9}'
J q f t i~ '?V
J a
" ~ t J ~ ray`.
w°~~ q"17 ~ I,-,~ _ ~r r
f^q,'
f .M
a q4,
4 41'
"
} n' 1~ Kati.
5%! SJ + t
'ILI
r.
PROJECT LOCATION
~ I A
I r r
J ~
t d .Sl~.. I' Y J r 1 - 2w ,
v
iq rqn 'f
~ vs E N !
a ' r
E t .l:
o
t} I . ~.u.w",,..n.,,.•,r• .wn..r.wiM,YfWfrYvwJ11'IMILJNYLA~btif7w . t
! a~ ~ q ~ r,1 'p*ir.rK.Z ' Jv rv
A.L. .
i
"WAJ
Nsdo
i
ORDINANCE NO.
I
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON, AND THE CITY OF` HIGHLAND
VILLAGE, THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE AND THE DENTON COUNTY FRESH WATER i
SUPPLY DISTRICT N0. 1 RELATING TO THE ACQUISITION OF SURFACE WATER
FROM THE COOPER RESERVOIR) AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS AS
PROVIDED IN SAID AGREEMENT) AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
N
fiECTION I. That the Mayor is authorized to execute an Agree rn
ment between the City of Denton, the City of Highland Village, the
City of Lewisville, and the Denton County Fresh Water Supply Dis-
trict No. 1 relating to the acquisition of surface water from`ths,"
Cooper Reservoir.
SECTION Ii. That the expenditure of funds as set forth in the "
Agreement is hereby authorized.`
SECTION 111. That this ordinance shall become effective im-
mediately upon its passage and approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 19916 BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
YAL
1 ,
ATTESTS
1-4
JENNIFER WALTERS; CITY SECRETARY 4:
r;.
BYS
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMS
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY '
,
BYS yy t
;1`~' 1 nlf;
st
's E
%
j 4
9
xy r
i
4 ~ ~~.+1. ~ ' ~ r i ~ k • I , a~, s k E' E"sc"
dta&da
ORDINANCE N0.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTONI AMENDING
SECTION 2-75 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DENTONI
PROVIDING FOR THE CHANCES IN THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS OF THE
DOWNTO' DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARDI APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE
BOARDI AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ,
i THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: I 10
SECTION I. That Section 2-75 of the Code of Ordinances of the
City of Denton is hereby amended to be and read as follows:
Sea, 2-7S. Downtown Development Advisory Board.
The Denton Downtown Development Advisory Board is hereby
established. The Board shall cons st of eleven (11) members, eleven r
of whom shall be appointed by the City Council and two (2) ex-
officio members to be nominated by the Central Business District
Association and appointed by the City Council. All Members must be
residents of Denton except that one ex-officio member may resids in
Denton County if he maintains or represents a business within the +'f
boundaries of the Central Business District. The ex-officio t
members shall not be entitled to vote. Members shall be appointed
to serve two (2) year terms, commencing July i of the year
appointed, provided that seven (7) members shall be appointed to
serve each odd-numbered year and six (6) members each even-numbered r ;
year. Of the initial members appointed, six members shall be
appointed to serve a term to expire June 30, 1993 and five member's
shall be appointed to serve a term to expire June 30, 1992. 4
Members shall serve until their successors are appointed and
qualified. The Board shall elect a chair from among its members
who shall serve for one (1) year or until his successor is elected.
The Board shall serve without pay and shall adopt such rules as may
be necessary for the regulation of its business and affairs.
SECTiOM ii. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in force
when the provisions of this ordinance become effective which are
inconsistent or in conflict with the terms or provisions contained
in this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of any such
conflict.
AVCTTON iii. That and
are hereby appointed as ex-officio members.
gECTION IV. This ordinance shall become effective immediately
upon its passage and approval.
4W
Ii +
1. h ,..r~M n.•. a.Y..ar♦ . r. .nc : M'y rl fHC rG+:.I!~ip
.17
1
1991,
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of -
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR
, y ly.r t tklt~~ ' jfj#..
ATTESTI
JrENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
r;
r
BY$
~ ~•7 sir ~ i ~'3-,
APPjtOVEO AS TO LEGAL FORIts " .4 k°Y,
ozwkA A. DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY y' 'z
' s I t ~ ~ ~ L : I 'i4Q h
/ b
BY r y,
4 bl
+ fr'.
~ ' ttifJ
Tay".,.
7 {
V.
jj .
r
r J r - ~ ~ ref M1~
r „'LV.,' Y1 a pr 1 t !
i
dye, ,
I PACE 2
r rx'~r ~ at ,
^r~+ J, /v~~' ~ .,,...A;wux.re.«.~aww,.+,.vr..wrwM1•kail~Wl'+S'?~j1}Mb#''J~~I!Q~ ~
•
Win
t
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
~w
TOt Honorable mayor and members of the city council f
a+: FROM$ Debra A. Drayoviteh, City Attorney
SUBJECTS Recodification of the Code of Ordinances tkV 0 of
Ir
DATES May 9, 1991
• Fit.
On May 1, we recaivod the long-awaited reaodification of the Code
"F of Ordinances oP the City of Denton and i hive scheduled a few
rr' minutes to review it with you at Tuesday's meeting. This
inuteliaation, which includes ordinances passed through September ~
)'a
recodi
41
41 19400 bars
(1) Eliminated obsolete ordinances; t
(2) Eliminated duplicate and redundant ordinancest and ,
E (1) Rearranged the chapters in alphabetical order by subject
matter classification.+~~r
F... this s1. The City Council her exercised fiscal isereciommendedathatna city,`
recodification for over 30 years.
should recodiiy its code of ordinances every 15 years
•lease adviro« `
.
Should you have any questions in this regard, p
Respectfully submitted,_
1
i
Dobra A. Dray v tch
>t`. ~ ' it
n { DAD/lkh 1
r v t `
)a~ Attachment
1 fy .
xoe Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager
l
« r
iWkated to Quality Servkr*
Wes
1 F :
1
yyAw
~Irtr,^ 3
4i S~y ai r- .k ~.a9x K
I, n
F
C
f 1\6"ocsNwWt\cod0
L
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AND ENACTING A NEW CODE FOR THE CITY OF
DENTON, TEXASi PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CERTAIN ORDINANCES
NOT INCLUDED THEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF FEES
PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION
THEREOF A FINE NOT EXCEEDING $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS OF ALL SUCH
" PROVISIONS THAT GOVERN FIRE SAFETY, ZONING, OR PUBLIC HEALTH AND
SANITATION, INCLUDING DUMPING OF REFUSE AND A FINE NOT EXCEEDING ,
$500 FOR ALL OTHER VIOLATIONS OF THE CODE1 PROVIDING FOR THE MANNER ;
OF AMENDING SUCH CODE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS:
ARCTION I. That the Code entitled "Code of Ordinances, City of
Denton, Texas," published by Munioipal Code Corporation consisting
of Chapters 1 through 35, each inclusive, is adopted.
SECTION U That all ordinances of a general and permanent
nature enacted on or before September 4, 1990, and not included in. the Code or recognized and continued in force by reference therein,
are repealed.
¢FCTION III. That the repeal provided for in Section iI hereof
shall not be construed to revive any ordinance or part thereof that
has been repealed by a subsequent ordinance that is repealed by
this ordinance. i'
sFCTiON That unless another penalty is expressly provided,
every person convicted of a violation of any provision of the Code
or any ordinances rule or regulation adopted or issued in pursuance t.
thereof, shall be punished by a fine of $2,000 for violations of
all such rules, ordinances and police regulations that govern fire
safety, zoning, or public hea
of refuse, and a fine not l exceeding and $500 loriall otherwiolationsg
Each act of violation and each day upon which any such viola-
tion shall occur shall constitute a separate offense. The penalty
provided by this section, unless another penalty is expressly pro-
vided, shall apply to the amendment of any Code section whether or
j not such penalty is reenacted in the amendatory ordinance. In
addition to the penalty prescribed above, the city council may
pursue other remedies such as abatement of nuisances, injunctive
relief, and revocation of licenses or permits.
9U.CTION y. That additions or amendments to the code when
passed in the form as to indicate the intention of the City Council
to make the same a part of the Code shall be deemed to be incorpo-
rated in the Code, so that reference to the code includes the
endments.
additions and am
:k
t
• Ll.
(i
71,
e ~rPriJ?'~P S.4t
°TI
r
iii?..t , - ,
I
SECTION Vi, That ordinances adopted after September 4, 1990 r".
that ascend or refer to ordinances that have been codified in the
Code, shall be construed as if they amend or refer to like
provisions of the Code. a
SECTION VII, That this ordinance shall become effective June
1, 1991 from the date of its passage, and the city Seoretary 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 tan (10) days of the
date of its passage. slr'`
PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 1991.
r
P
0 ;
BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR '
' j r` FAY•IM
i
~ I
ATTEST:
JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY
r' APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORHs d
DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
Aj-
BYt
Y
r
14
a, t,, PAGE 2 i
.
LyY!' „ F Y S
' i
1
1 1110111
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE CANVASSING THE RETURNS AND DECLARING THE RESULTS OF , j
THE REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD IN THE CITY OF DENTON ON MAY 4,
1991. r R
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, HEREBY ORDAINSI
SECTION 1, The City Council finds and declares that the May 4, ~
1991 regular municipal election was duly ordered for the purpose of
alecting four Councilpersons to Places It 2, 7, and 41 that proper.
notice of said election was duly given and election officials Ap-
ointed# that said election was duly held and the returns of the
o the council, *11 in ao-
p slootion officials have boon delivered t
cordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the charter and
ordinances of the City of Denton.
` 40
sECTION II. The official returns of the election ofticials t°
c^ having been opened, examined and canvassed, the Council harabp y
f, finds and declares that votes were cast at said sled
tion, and that the votes cast for each place on the Council Vets; as'
follows:
ABSENTEE VOTINGS
FOR PLACE is
Mark R. Chew votes w
Carl G. Young votes
Gene A. Luster votes is
' Rev. N.M. Jamerson votes
~
r. G
Steven A. Zaralla votes
i a FOR PLACE 21
Derrell Bulls votes V
Margaret Smith votes
,
FOR PLACE 91 '
Harold T. Perry votes
Gene Gamble votes
FOR PLACE 41
Joe Dodd votes is
votes
Jana Hopkins
fr ':cn' i
.i
r
0
r
a
d Va'xhA'>~~~ ~ 1
'r
~Y
i
I ri
TOTAL YOT A CA&Tt
` r
R FOR PLACE
y 4~ votes
Mark R. Chew votes
Carl G. Young votes '
I, w Gene A. Luster votes ^t . ` k's
Rev. W.M. Jamerson votes
Steven A. 2arella
FOR PLACE 21
votes
Derrell Bull$
votes
Margaret Smith
FOR PLACE 31
votes
Harold T. Perry votes s5
I
Gene Gamble
FOR PLACE 4:
votes
Joe Dodd votes
Jane Hopkins , xd
tY, , ryl
" A>CTiON III. The Council finds and deolares that each cendi-z_ r
for each
of the votes Cast
data listed ~iow received a majority ,
place on the Council and that each candidate listed below is hereby
declared to be elected to the Citf Counoil of the City of Dentorft
± '
FOR PLACE It
FOR PLACE 21
FOR PLACE 31
tsi
FOR PLACE 4t
and such candidates shall assuna the duties of their office on the
date that they take the official oath of o!lioe.
Rrcr„__ tGM iY. The Council finds and declares that n endnthAiate,
at
eived a tea ority of the votes cast for Placin accordance with
sec a
run-off election is hereby ordered to be held,
of Nay, 1991.'
' the provisions of Ordinance 90-037, on the 18 day
. day of , 1991.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the
a r n't t
+ 1
,ak2 808 CASTI.ESERRY~ MAYOR `rJ
I,
..I. . Page 2
1
+ :.F 4 Z
i, y •
-h I
~ M Y
T T
I lop-
w 71 i..
i
J~
t I
s.
5a
1
I err,
ATTESTI
LrPERB# CITY SECF,STARY 7
JENNIFER W11 4
w ! 3i
BYS
r ~rF ~
I y• L~ ~ ~wvf li i'~a r. 'r x~C'~'
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMt
"pr DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH# CITY ATTORNEY r.k+
X
BY sI;
! p.
' r S
~ ~ L+. F+1 k J y X~X ~
rl ''1 ~ 1 If V 11 .1 1
Sfl
ary~,~'a-y
7 ~ ~ r I 5 'N 1 n
err l~~. ' 1 F p r~ j k t) ~f~^(}
i
rr s$' , L]'1 1
' vyJ
re,~~+ ~rr J wf.
page rl p
~ A 44G~" i71 i t `r r 1 1 yye~~ r I ~h~~ ~ ~I
I F~
y~f~s 3
Y y~ P ),r s ~ 1 'I
)
q
,ry 3` _ J i 1'. VIM :
r~" A4A , A r ¢~~~f J,, tiny :
1ti y d T c 'k ' 't `r eSSr ilt r r ~rF~4 .I M r ` ) al M1,
I 1
!
CITY OF DEWON, TEXAS
r
Pecan Creek
Wastewater Treatment P16'nt
13
PLANT UPRATING EVAUATtwN . r
PRESENTATION 1-11614LINT8
,
Alan, Plummer, ai d Associates, Ind.
CIVILANVIRONMENTAL 6NOINEERPARUNGTON AUSTIN-pOR7 kOttm TEXAS
It p
y
le ~
s t~. jr }aa !PIJ
a~. Gr~A9~s"1•9~? r1..ti ;.'yrYCH ~M» „v.•-a 6-r.°'1~Y,1,~#y.n i o- T. .l
e ~
py,
m.
4
1 1987
.-....a --MAMJJAS
25 ~..J A.1S 0 _N D F_M A-M J J A S O N O J F '
Ito,
t \v,
- -
20
FLOW
10
5 -4- 4 -1
\
---1985 6 - --19 7 4
J J A S 0 N 0 J FMAMJ J A S 0 N D J F MAMJ$ AS i'
BOD
a>;
*F \ h--1985 - 1988 1987
JJASONOJFMAMJJAS0NOJfYA11J"JA`:5
5 25 T-r t-
7SS
r
f
F----1985 -1986
• `era
Y JJAS0NDJFMAMJJAS0ND
10 JfMA1fJJAS
t T -
NHS .N -d
1' 0 l I J 1
{m A gy _ t
r
9 vt d
4-4 F PECAN 0I5EK WASH pa
e ~ vi Ay I " r
FLOW AND`FL r'
.
7 a.
NI
,v
Y AI i j♦p~`G G
r19a• ~Lyl i f '....+v..- 1 E .u. .n+e wc.av.~rm+~ dh " A .~•v , e l: r l
aN
v q ✓r,9~7 of ~'H ~ .fi h I } iYq Lt" Rp>r1~` IL'
{4 ,
Alen Plummer end Assodstes, Inc
0NpJFMAMJJAS0NDJFMAMJJAS0NDJFMAM125
~r
15
10
1
0 a
a9$8 I 1989 1990---4 r`r 0N,DJFMAMJJAS0NDJFMAMJJAS0NDJFMAMJ
r
5
r ky~r
r
r
asa. 1. _J ..L_ .S.J+1 ko +
ND'JFMAMJJASOPA DJFMAMJJAS0N0JFMAMJ +
25
t 1988 - i - 1989 -;=1990 4
w. 4'N0'J.FMAMJJAS0N0 J F M A M J JAS0N0JF0AMJ
~ 10
A.
t. a'.
PERMITTED 30-DAY AVERAGE
DENTON TEXAS F
T
ATER TREATMENT PLANT A
:
r i 1 ' a ~lT, `OUALITY SUMMARY
J/ }•RjK
a
1
~a Ilk
I r
} ti Y~~~•,na„,~~a'm++,H.- •.,ur,ap Ay4'j'i:yF.,~.~1~,•. 'f' r i
.
, raj, th' ;1
E' IS 444 A
114, ~11
llY - 11
"AUi T > n i.T - .~r u4.
"AUr
~x v~*rr ~V~r p,t . A" fwd. r9 .~A~ .f7.r,fg
r •tl'I'fc"F•'.~,tiS"•~~n~,1!~tar~h,.,. YK M„",t'fr -
0p
HISTORICAL s PPOJECTED (BASED ON CITY O
_R
30
29 v
28
IW x
27
26
25
IiV Jr tt,' 24
.
r, 23
ujj2
22 Im
u O ya
21 wig ^Ih y
, 20 -
C
_ I a i
1 r 19 I-
z Z
G
18
17
MOD
r
15
14
Y
13 - `12.0 MOD 1•:7 MO[~ - ~x s
12
~ ~I a, _ ~ 8 MOD _ E ~ ~ ~ `
. , , ~ 11 r+.._ - .-iii" r ,i..r • p .,.tL
10
61
n E _ _
' I
rya Arv ;1 •_~t`t 1~ 3 ` - _ '...1~ -er• y~. '1
T
2
.L-~
LL M ~ 1 ~1
~r 1985 1990 1005 20b0
t n V
E PI 'A
rl'' a CITY OF O V
PECAN CREEK WAST
HISTORICAL AND p' OJEC
y
a al
t
F'*..
o"T I
i
Alan Numntt'r and Awisexlates, Inc
DENTON 1991 POPULATION FORECAST}
a
,p
Y a h ~ ~,n
N! ~ , _ ~ ~ Y` aka
\ g_
,,..,....:r,.. _ Jla MAXIMUM MONTHLY FL
~ • ,a,
21.0 iAGD
~ k . /w ~a~r w~ , wow wr •..r _ . _ . 'c rt ~ ~
..18,9 MGD
• Y
13.ls MGM
f ...r .
ANNUAL
_
AVERAGE FLOW
j
.A. ~.___~,.v...._ . i _.~w_. j+ 1~'!', ~45k
POSSIBILITY OF
EXCEEDING RATED
PLANT CAPACITY
: 2005 2010 2015 2020 } tk
,s
i '
SEAR a
z~ r u
IV
J Y ( F JY I d~ ,y i+. ,
RATED PLANT CAPACITY y~
4' 1 0,N~ TEXAS .r . 90% OF RATED CAPACITY r"
' 'RPATMENT PLANT
N NTHLY DISCHARGE
1
V ~t~1 S 1 ~ ' w
0.0.0.0.5
rp
•I ~4 ,I .T .{.V 3y f~ A
Ia9h:!
+f
I
I
I c•
IS y i Y"*` f r 4.':•.~' e ~'M!' i l r +~~q~dt~'~5 r1"'fq~ ~yg// p C
o f ~n1 r d i 'AiC
t >
.~fIRM1,Mt1M^+~f ~^,x..r......,.,,~, se . F'aw .•,r NW iR '..d'M,i~C'fF'a .r?iY ir,w nw rK.+: qA,
r
a
~4 Y
LL i
n i.
~ I 1 fr r sd kr:,
DESIGN 13115 MOD IMPROVEMENTS
ADVERTISE 13 MGD IMPROVEMENTS ` ~ E ! I ` , ~a
' r (PHASE 11
% i lI t I f I I r r>;..
RECOMMENDATION/AWARD OF f
CONTRACT FOR 13 MOD I ' r fix,
IMPROVEMENTS
M j; r I I~ J r' ~ I I IM1,
" CONSTRUCTION OF 13 MOD f ` I
IMPROVEMENTS
yt , E' 1 } # J x °'~MMtt~pp
l,.
Yet ; + Y 11 I I ' ( ! 41 All
I I1 l ~ r ~ T S'
' DESIGN/ADVERTISE 15 MOD V 1 1 , '
.
;,IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE 11)
i``tE! r +
RECOMMENDATION/AWARD OF I i ? r"r
CONTRACT FOR 15 MGD'
M k~r.~;
IMPROVEMENTS 1
tS,~M1
t+ i I ~ I t i, Ih„
CONSTRUCTION OF 15 MOD ! {f r j
IMPROVEMENTS
+.,ra. ; I`~ I'1 ~1YAM,1lASOND~►NAYJJASO!!0
a ~,ki aJ r~~. r
r 1\i
j e +Yi ~ I ~!r K'
CITYf 4""I,~1 r ,r ~xf.. Q
lA ~~,'~r PECAN cREE WA
r I
,a c
~ J ~ ~ f ~ Y d r 1 lY p
f a ,p `
~ v.. rl~e ~ ~ ....,.....(ww Y-nYn X~'4+~r-~~':t~2r9Nl.fi'~~43fAnR p~ ~.~I~ f ~ ,r ~ r •!IC
b ' N e ~y1~f'SIFA e~ I
,>Ky- .',r~4 a rdv'g.ro _ ,wN.x.r~crjt`t+:
~Yr
b I.P„'~'Jln°A~rY!.H},'Y~'~S'TCiIM`YiKi •TrY.T 1Y Y.1!n.... '.n.:.. 1,
~ 4A~1.Aw tor
1
1
Alan PIumnlat and daeoclales Inc
a : 4r
~4 I + _ i it
1, ] ~ I i ! ~ t ~ I I 1 I f I i 1 ~ I I I ~ ! ~ ~ I ~ ! , Yh„
_ M, v ~ I, 1 I I f I. I I r I ~ ti~J,
v ~ I I I r I
I
1 II
I i I t r i~ l } ~ I h I'.
I ( I
I 1 I f r ~
it ~ f a
' r
1 I , } f I ~ ~x
r
+ 111 r
r ~ 1,~ 1 ~ I I i 1 I~ I! I ` { y
t
(I it ! I
' ~ ~ f I I~ I f I i . r j i` i I, ~ 1 4{ I r yv
i rl
v I i t . 1~ I~ I r 1
I I I! 1 i I / L i
d , ~ I ~ ' I ~ ~ ~ r . ~ I 11 1 I ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 ( ~ - ~ 7rT;'•
k.
l 1
J~YAYJJASONDJ/YAYJJ JIYAYJJASONDJfYAYJJAS0K9JiYAYJJAS,ON
1If~. '
1994 1998 1997 1998
"Al •q1 YEAR
h hq
a4 ENTON, TEXAS ~4.
ATER TREATMENT PLANT
IMPROVEMENTS x1 .
7+ i +g' °v'tc "L•W
t W ~1 V, I T~
+ Y ~ t it :p v n 7
h h~ 4 f , )
~ 5~'n `~1Mf,AI.1N"s;IM'lilYH"wna~,YMM>•'+•r"nr...v rn ~..enw....nwwavk yMMAgpgyttykj~~,!S;. + '
~ Y~ 4~1 Vi 9
4
4
Ott
" ans~R?~i ~rcQ :'~*a^'hNyp S*S, t •<,4r I rr I
x .;;p7w~w,.,rt+7rur nM1y,,,,.+'p,,.v.s++ . nf'NkN°'ri''tw,i.l7t`1.~!~ r
1 BELT PRESS
eUuiNG
1.
•
" s
ITT
DUSTER ; DICAVER r
' *SLUDGE HGLDING
► i TANK \ y
a. .
♦ # GMT 4
4 MANTCNNANGGE
n `a BU~101 ~o
I
stuDOI oaYrNG BEDS M
' ~ PRMIMT 9.WGE YR'yrJ
S P<uP SutroN
~
kt 1
tr !
' L PRALARY It
SLUM
AN
l D GRIT Dsw'klqlcy~ UiOENO NO WOING.~, ~#IH
CR 4r¢ - ~j
+ CLMIFl
BOX
t >&$PUTlER~ I~ ~ ~PRgIMY PRIdARY ;r
! 80>< "IFIER CLAM z r a - NMY PRINMY #BlGY7E.R NeS No! 1,, sy f!
d+ Q►HR[R CLARfEA
Nn.l Ne.S Ap1M ,8 r e
III MATO It
t # AB GRADE AIR HTJOER
cl, /uR HEADER # AIR HEADERr'
I CHASE <
A9 ~9 Ae A6 ?
AERARtM t' AInS RLU 5 1 S
t # PIV11C ~ r J ter
~ ' 3 ~ REPUICEHEi1T + , ~'iw'r;
4L i ~I
. •v' ~ 'LYE
Iy W rl'~yyt
ri r 4FINAl 5 +
rtv ~r.p Tk'S ~ CLA'RIPIER G `Oe r ~ '
a 1 t'I
♦
Y ~ r_~ # 111xERS a liFINAL
' d,cw r J Fr+x " I s Ciur tR 'r CLAW
+ CNtoeat iE
i ~ i' a a ~ r.~ + ~ ~ IANF,i f'~y wv
~r ~rY^, 1~ " 0. R(tiJRN t r YNAL t
ti* ~~PCt I
' - ; 1 etunnu r
e"r', uaAn A
u STAN*
#A ;7 *FINAL Awc EFfLUEN
lrEN1
yY n/ a 0~ y~
It I'. rr y`y~okf ~,lPt r
r I
C Y"tii
'C ~.ww+~rMS'swMWArNwt•.m wr«i+ikt47iRd~fW4t~ , , !W lJ,. ~ I , lr 7
r,
~a
4•
k
t+ I..7'1 ° {A,'!y rl'J"`r. ~,e..,a.,,.., ..:.w•~°+cf^N'!9:`4'L'., ~ .
I r
rr
Atom Plummet and Mxelalm lat.
t ~rB
,
r'
.1 I C 'L I , NMl
r r..
7' { } , AN41STRAOM 3~
7} 1 exoC,c LEGEND
Ali 13 MW MPRO+ rs alp"
ARY 15 MGD lW*0YVarS it
~ifY'__l
WE ?E%
VAUT
MSTINC STRUCTURE j{ > ,u
PROPOSED PIPE
y
r
,
a ~'(gllt ~ ERlSTING FIFE q ~
WIN
NqT1 ! r 3~
b s 4~ EOWSLILATION BASINS I aLM , ~7w
AS PART OF THE 6XIM WmPROVEMENTS >
" In y BUT wEBE NOT SHOW FOR amly.'
r MBLOKq BUUNG N*A CONVERSION TO j TO CHL"ATION/ RAW iCaAC[
~No2 0 OECNLORINATIOtt puma S1AxN
r ~I . - 1fiq ~A
i
IT S
mo 11100h
SLUDGE PUMP
,f{~~pyy~ S1AilON ~ ~ ~ ;,Y
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATI&NY PLANT
,a " > sTOaACC HYDRAULIC WROVE-WENT8 I
r 2+ / ~ J A CxISTWG CHIORPIE ' je
a r*~ CONTACT BASIN
i f pr~ Y f' CONVERSION TO ,
rig ~1 " a , DECNLORINATION
x
.1 i( yy v 4
OECHIO O
CTilUENT TO 10 OUTFAtI
t ~,fi'i w - 7'
n w,w x+W+xwur•.~~v.- .'w nl+MM4M`~ M k , f
IN 1 1 "
e
p. ~
Alan Plummer and Associates. Lac.
ITEM OPINION OF PROBABLE COST I
i
13 MGD 15 MGb j
IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS
REnUIRED PREFERRED REQUIRED PREFERRED
EQUALIZATION FACILITIES 51.17
SLUDGE HANDING FACILITIES
k Includes sell Presses, Sludge Holding 1.53
Tank, North WAS Improvements
AERATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
Includes Piping, Blowers, Diffusers 1.63 w'
P.' and Slower Building 4 'y
CHLORINATION/DECHLORINATION FACILITIES 0.62 N~
GRIT BASIN/SPLITTER BOX 0.60
CLARIFIERS`
Includes a` Primary and two Flnat
50.96
i µ Ciariliers
FILTER 0.21
0.28
HYDRAULIC IMPROVEMENTS 0.36
Ml$O, PLANT IMPROVEMENTS 1.00
`MISC. ELEO./INSTRUMENTATION 1.00t'•
RENOVATE EXISTING MAINTENANCE 0.80 '
BUILOINO (allowance)
.
y~j 1
R ~ t
fy , .r
Y Y a M11R
" I
A R j , 'r r ] Y
r r .
VIM
i
ro' ,
e` RENOVATE ABANDONED NORTH BLOWER 0.15
E' I BUILDING (allowance)
RENOVATE ABANDONED CYCLONE OEGRITTER 0.10
BUILDING (allowance)
RENOVATE PLANT INSTRUMENTATION 0 7b
3 . AND CONTROL tallowance)
PLANT ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION 100 TOTAL
IMPROVEMENTS (allowance)
' TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $5,95 $0.75 $3.42 $1.75 $11.87
ENGINEERING, INSPECTION, r
TESTING 0 15% tallowance) $0.89. $4,11. Q 51 $0.27 78 j
k' TOTAL $6.84 $0.86 $3.93 $2.02 '$13.6$.ru w.
{
*NUMBERS SHOWN ARE IN MILLION 1901 DOLLARS.
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION OOS '
A. .jr L41!R
r 1 7 S Y r Y iS
k y
{r, r p° rt.v..
,r
PS ,
I~
j t 4Y.. Y 1 .1 L i
L0 ,
l ~x If ~~f I
ro
nt r'r i
1. ~ Ar
i ,
aC, Z" 1"I
F r~}, gr J1 a _ X49`.
r k I, "'ri r fi x•, r K
i
. t
r
~a
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
ar ~
,fa
1r
r Pecan yfCreek
} Wastewater Treatihentr' Plaint
PLANT UPRATINO ~~~lX~~b~`< < a
Mareh 0, 061
Y
i L3
w ` Alaii Plummer and Assoailates, Inb,
~nt,/sxvnayaaartw aaaonnraae rrinasoar=wean-r+oitr roarr~ ts~uR ,
Io.
W
IiM' Alan Mma nnw J+mn L. Akd&rba, P,E
John H. Cook, P1,
x111[1 Aamnclates+ Inc. Fem W. 06". Ph.D.
r. ENVIRONMENTAL/CIVIL ENGINEERS Alan H. P}umme, Jr. P E. ,
ROW H_ &rA, P.E,
457.0300/2
March 27, 1991
r,
Mr. Robert E. Nelson, PA, k
Executive Director of Utilities
215 E. McKinney Street rti
Denton, Texas 76201
Res Pecan Crook Wastewater Treatment Plant «
Plant Upeating Study
t
Dear Mr, Nelson.
We are pleated to submit the Plant Uprating Studyy for; the City's'poc'o eek
Wastewater Treatment Plant Currently, the C1trr 1s lk the process of amQn f
Its wastewater dlscharrgge permit from 12 to l5 ipi1llon"ggaliogs per,day!(HGb fit"th
discharge l imi is of ::10 mg/L BODs, 13 1ng/L TSS," lid °.3 „mg/L HMsiN, , ah with
reouirements to dechlorlnater As a t :Of the,permlt amendmbnt phacess,;the
City has agreed to undertake the f~o1T_owing.imProvements: "
t construct flow equalltali0h facilities
con'strdet dechlorinatlon facilities r
replace aeration' equippmmeent `in fiv.$` older aeration basins a',Y
66struct tlud9e dewatering facilities
This
this upratingg study has evaluated the.overallAlint operations td dtitersi16 the ' ' AL
capacity of
maximum treat the troatmontant,',includlnq the'r"opbIf3 e~
~
facilities,.,to meet the new di$char a permit; A. statistical evaluation It
infIvent 'data was PArforaled'to es aelish approppriate load ng! 0"tW p.1At ;
proeess units and actual 'performance data'fro:a the'Various'prbcess units Was
W evaluated to proioct the maximum capacity,
The Pacan Creek Wastewater.Treatment Plant is operating exceptMorSalj Ira 11°e d
with the installation of additional, blowericapacity asp C~ecaind,~3~
coAcueeont Preliminary Design,Repport and the improvements included ai part df,'t 411
ppermit awh6ehtt we recomrpend that the plant be rated at•a.design'~tapacity of .
13 MGb with l peak flbw rate of 23,9 MGD, „
We - appreciate` the. assistance of M1+, 'B,J, Miser', Mr. ,tarry iaylei~r Mr, `Jia1'
Coulter, Ms. Renee Baker, Mr, Asa Brown, Mr, "Howard Martin, and othora"Wails , '
City of Denton" in performing this study: We would like to ackihbwl e;afi'
, par lcipation of He. Frank Payne Mr, Jeff Caffey, Mr,'John Kiser,and >i~Bett,
Jordan of our staff and Mr. David Nowerton of the City'of benison (formerly kith
Alan, Piumrtier and Associates, 16c,) in this challenging assignment,
!
210 Wd W strut + Sikh 400 + Fort Word,, Tnw 161024W3 +0171 S324085 + Metro 011► 429.4561 + FAX: (0) 13~4636 ' '
j
t
Mr. Robert E. Nelson, P.E.
Page 2
March 27, 1991
N
if you have any questions regarding this Uprating Study or require my additional
14 information, please let us know,
Sincerely,
ALAN PLUMMER AND ASSOCIAYES, INC.
Ar' Lee Head ill, P.Eo ,
' 7~ ALHiVIw
Encloturl,
A
t.l t I J:!
1 ~
a . 1'1 I f ~ . .S A~
, 1 t t
t
~ 7 § 4441
}
1 l J
k '
11 t P f
I
, A 1
f ( 1 k
r
Y ,
r
1
I
1 ~ r
OF DENTON, TEXAS
CITY
e
I ~
r
~ r
Pecan Creek
ent P1, ht
Q . Treatm
wastewater
k { +Y
' 1. ,ti}
TING ~VALV AT
. PLANT UPI2A r~
4"o
r
44
IQ4 4!h
, ..r r 1
tdr, Mash `
7, 19$1
WIN
, all ~
LL
l
- Jy rJ^ 6 11
1 It. .
V 1j,
` Alan plummcr and Associates, Inn,
Op1(CNTAL voiNuR9~ARf]N07ON~AU9TW~IOR! YON1}L Tt
r if. +I I' r
' S~~ckf ~ ~ ~»~iM147Yf/rNdaM+w+ea.~Ya~rlk...• ~ _ ,.mow k .~1,y,a;*k iV ~ Y
1
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
r Paa
. A
• .r;, 11 i ,
LIST OF TABLES ' ' ' '
iy
LIST Of FIGURES .
Iq' 1,0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l•1 ,
IiH Yi. a 2.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . • . • . .
2-1
2.1 Purpose and Scope + 2.2
2.2 Methodology
3.0 HISTORICAL INFLUENT FLOWS AND HASTE STRENGTH + 3'1
3.1 Historical Influent Flows < . 3.1
r
3.2 Historical Waste Strength
4+0 PERMIT LIMITS AND PLANT PERFORMANCE 4=1
A--,
4.1 Permit Limits . . 441
4.2 Plant Performance . . • • • • • • ' • •
i
5.0 EXISTINO TREATMENT PLANT CAPACITY EVALUATION S•1
5.1 OaOlcity Analysis Per Texas Water
Commission Criteria S.1 s s,";+
5.1.1 Liquids Handling Facilities
~
Raw Wastewater umping • ' ' ' ' ' 66
5.5
Primary Clarification °k
Aeration Basins
Aeration Supply System X
5•I1
Final Clarification
Effluent Filters + 5.12
Disinfection , + . 5 14
5.1+2 Solids Handling Facilities + • :514=
Bar Screens . . . . . . , . , . . 6A4
Digesters
L i., Thickener
Sludge Handling . 5=15 w'
. + ~ + + .5.18 .
4 5+1.3 Summary 15
5.2 Hydraulic Capacity • '
5.3 Plant Operation and Maintenance Concerns + • ' 5.18
„ '
3
c
r
7.,
,
,..caPin!Ma4~.1'2~~'~}j p~r~f~~',y~y'~~r''~~I''t'i1, a sxoA, n ! ! r ur. Y Kn: w.t.e:, -r. :,r,:•.
F^
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page ' ,rf
6.0 OXYGEN TRANSFER EFFICIENCY SAMPLING
n AND TESTING PROGRAM , . • • • 6•1
1.0 PLANT CAPACITY EVALUATION RESULTS f;'<
AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . i Am 7•I z
7.1
1.1 Flow and Waste Loadings for Design II
7 .2 Final Plant Capacity R cults
t,
} !f
V
l y
44
Y 1 • oi.,r ~
r i, ~ ~ ! fr Syr
M:4
\
AEI ~ Ifs 1~ F (I ! ,
{
y a 1 c .
} 1 r
f;
1 , ~rtJ . a
t ~ t r 1!r 1 .ux. 3
7f {I I a~as~..y~y ~
i1Y Jt,.., _.w.. A.-
41 Y
LI5T Of TABLES
~ I
J i paae ;
g~cri,_ of on
eek Plant 3.2
3.1 Historical Flows Received at Pecan Cr
3.2 Pecan Creek wastewater Treatment Plant 3.5
Historical Influent Quality Summary • • • f
s Historical Effluent Quality Summary 4.2
r 4-i s
June 1985 through June 1940
9.6
Rated Capacities of Primary clarifiers • •
5-1,.
Aeration Basin Size and Space Loading 6.9
5.2 Capacity Summary
n Aeration Basin Capacity eased on Aeration
i J 5.3
Equipment Limitations . . •
6.4 Rated Capacities of Final Clarifiers • .h FT
i
Oxygen Uptake Rates, December 4-'S, 1990 r
fi 6-l
6.~ Distribution of Air in Aeration Basins ~ -
1990 6' 7 Vii. M
Nos. 6 and 71 December 4.6,
6.3 Denton Pecan Creek Aeration Study,
6.8
' December It. 1990 , .
7.1 Proposed Design Flow Summary t-7
` w
r'r}.
NZ2
' ( big. 1~' L ` /
d r
r'
w J i
F .
?y r .{r ff i ~ ~ ~ Pry? •:1 ~
r
Ito
owl
r-
x
• ...a-, r :.nr .yq~ ...r .fn.gl".v'1T`i, xi7, rnpi4'Nnna,M.J y,0.r't ap n.: ~S•l:.:e. .Y.... w+..
LIST OF FIGURES
.°ti dumber Description pa°e
^ 3•I Average Monthly Plant Influent Flow 1 3.4
i! d • • • • • . 1 • 1 • n
3.2 Average Monthly 60D Loading 3.1
Y 'y I
3-g
3.3 Average Monthly TSS Loading . , d . «
+ i
`f 4•1 Flow and Effluent Quality Summary . . . . 1-4
5.1 Liquids Process Schematic . d S-2
5.2 Solids Process Schematic . 5.3'
5.3 Capacity Evaluation Summary . 5.17
r 6.1 Aeration Basin Sampling Plan
Oxygen Uptake Rate Aeration Study G-3
r
6.2 Oxygen Uptake Rate Testing B
b'r ( 1.1 Average Monthly Effluent TSS North 1.4
1) 7.2 Average Monthly Effluent TSS South
f
.1 I rr ~ d •yJ~ i
e r
11 k~r
4
f
YYY
I
4'. 1
C'
I
T
,
I w + . f• r
p 4F
1 y' y
WY U
e
r
1,0 EXECUTIVE SUKURY
n The Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant receives and treats wastewater for the
City of Denton, Texas. The City is currently in the process of renewing the
n existing discharge permit for the plant. This Plant Uprating Evaluation has been
prepared in conjunction with the City's renewal efforts. The purpose of this
evaluation is to present appropriate operating data, results of analyses and
calculations to support an uprating of the plant's design capacity. ,S
h
Five years of historical wastewater records were compiled and analyzed. A
statistical analyses of wastewater flows and waste strengths and load$ was
n performed and is presented herein.
A discussion of permit limits and the plant's performance in accordance with
these limits is also presented. This comparative analysis was bated on limits ~r r<
which are expected to be included in the renewed permit. }}i ~F
The capacities of individual treatment units were determined on the, basis of the
Texas Water Commission 'Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems.'
These c#aclt,iex
were calculated so that the maximum allowable design and peak floats to the plant '
i.
' based on the criteria could be established. A hydraulic analyst: for.tbe pi`h{;
t. and an overview of Operating and Maintenance (O&N) concerns were 4106 prepared
and discussed in this same section of the report.
A field analysis of oxygen uptake rates was performed in two of.thi plan!'s
aeration basins. This testing and the associated calculations were plrfo' d, so
that actual values of oxygen transfer efficiency under.'the speClfic fl"®ld
conditions of the Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant could be doteroli oC
The findings and recommendations associated with the analyses discussed
hereinabove are summarized as follower
f"3 r E ti,
l
lk.l
r
Y~ 1 k 1
yt49 ~ t i ..,,,,...ta:.aV,bL~f!#hdfNt,T`Mr
n
1 f-
I
III
Y
A
4
1. The 30-day average flows received at the plant over the time period
analyzed have remained relatively stable at a dry-weather "base" flow p~ for each year of between 8.0 million gallons per day (MGD)
and
9.0 MGD. Although the average monthly flows have increased
dramatically at times, they have typically returned to the base level.
' These periods of increases in flow are reflective of spring flood
i ~
events, otherwise indicating only a moderate increase in the base
level over the past flue years.
,R
2. Average and average plus one standard deviation (86th percentile) x!
concentrations of 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BODs), total t
n suspended solids (TSS) and ammonia nitrogen (NNa•N) have been
relatively low and indicative of a wastewater which is mostly domestic'.
in origin.
nn 1,
3. The treatment plant has performed well during the period of record
analyzed. Discharge concentrations of BOOS, TSS and NHs-N, as well as
discharge loadings of BODs and TSS, were - compared.,to ' levels
anticipated in the renewed permit, These values have averaged less
than the expected permit limits almost 100 percent of the time.
~s; r 4. The capacity analysis has shown that the maximum theoretical hydraulic
flow which can be processed through the plant is "approximately'
27,50 MGD. The limiting factor or hydraulic constraint for thili olnt ;w-
.
m appears to be the piping between each set of aeration basins and final
clarifiers. ~r
5. O&M concerns discussed centered around waste activated sludqt pumping
i and leaks in the air piping to the aeration basins. Both items are
currently being addressed in conjunction with preliminary design ~r
1 efforts
1 4 1 Y
f iii J 1 lli
F j
1,2
f:
1 r
r~ 5
i
1 Y 1, ~ l
p v
y v
~.~72g4)~f r.
S l
f r ni~ I 6 f {w i3
r raLy , - ~ ' ~16 -
tr[f[fr
6. Actual oxygen transfer efficiencies (OT(s) in the aeration basins
tested are higher than expected for the type of diffuser in use. The
overall performance of the existing fine pore diffuser systems was
deemed excellent and judged to be satisfactory for anticipated
increased flow conditions.
1. Concentrations of BOOS, TSS and NNE-N for use in design of plant
!r
s 1~• improvements are presented. -
'f 8. It is recommended that the Pecan ureek Wastewater Treatment plant be
rated at a design, or maximum monthly average, capacity of 13.0 MGD
and a peak capacity of 23.4 NGD. These flows rgpresent' fiptl,
clarifier surface loading rates in excess of those listed in the` texas
Water Commission criteria; however, the plant has shown the ability to ,
meet the anticipated permit limits at the proposed flow rates and the
plant's current hydraulic capacity is in excess of 26 KO,
r q kP
P Z a
ye ~'q 1
r.1.
+
11
r r^ i - X, h
r + 44..11
' Y
1
r ~
~~~a~rrl ~u ..+wwwnwaeruM r..wew.euw..r.•...,..
l i
4.
1
F
2,0 INTRODUCTION
iy The City of Denton's Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTf) is a well-
operated and well-maintained treatment facility. The existing Texas Water
Commission (TWC) discharge permit for the plant expired in July 1988, and the
City is currently in the process of renewing and amending this same permit. It
is anticipated that the amended permit will allow an increase in maximum monthly
average or design flow from 12 to 15 million gallons per day (NGD) through phased
improvements, will maintain the current effluent limits of 10 sg/L 800 and
l.! 15 mg/L 755, will require nitrification, i.e., significant reduction of am•nonia
to 3 mg/L, and will require dechlorinatlon, or removal of the chlorine used for 4 .
disinfection, prior to discharge into Pecan Creek. During the permit amendment
process, the City agreed to perform certain limited facility improvements to
allow the plant to both nitrify and dechlorinate the wastewater prior to
, discharge. ,
' In general, increased treatment plant capacity and efficiency of basins and
equipment, as well as increased operator attention and control, are required in
.1V F
order for a plant to achieve a nitrification level of treatment, it is in the
I best economic interest of the City to thoroughly evaluate the perform'anci "and
maximize the utilization of existing plant facilities prior to committing to,
constructiig new plant improvements that might be unused for a period of time and
` that may be significantly excessive in rapacity,
2.1 Purpose and Scope
The purpose or goal of this plant operations study or "upratinq evaluation" 13
ti ( to determine the maximum treatment capacity of the existing facilities, including
Improvements agreed to In the discharge permit, without reducing the plant's'
ability to meet the discharge permit requirements. It is anticipated that, the
results of this study will provide for an increase in the rated capacity of the
Pecan Creek WWTP and for an efficient and economic phasing of the construction,y
of plant improvements as they are needed. The basis for this anticipation Is '
a,•
sM
2.1
t i SV ' ij
r
,'A1,:'<'a 'k." F~
k
. k..
A l t
I
that, due to both a proven operations record by City staff as well as apparently
conservative sizing of existing facilities, the plant is currently performing at
a much higher performance level than is actually required by its discharge
f permits,
ILI
The scope of this evaluation has been to perform a detailed plant process and
a ~f
operational evaluation to determine an appropriate maximum amount of treatment ,
capacity for which the existing facilities sb M d be rated" This determination
has been made with consideration of the improvements proposed within the City's
application for an amended discharge permit. The primary efforts within this
1°f scope include; 1) preparation of a thorough statistical analysis of historical
n plant data, 2) performance of a complete set of field tests to determine the
w+ actual performance capacity of two of the plant's existing aeration basins, 3)
determination of the plant's actual capacity based on available plant operating
data and test resifts, and e) determination of appropriate design loadings from
the results of the statistical data analysis. The intent of this work is to
determine whether the TiiC rated treatment capacity of the existing units can be
Increased without maJor new construction and the associated large capital r.
expenditures. The prime benefit of this approach and these efforts will be to z
.la
reduce to a minimum the construction of additional, costly treatment units to
.
meet the new discharge permit requirements.
2.2 Methodology
f , 's
The City of Denton has agreed to perform certain limited plant improvements is rr"r
part of the TWC discharge permit amendment process. These improvements include
necessary new facilities and equipment for the achievement of nitrification and
~
I dechlorination.
The approach for this evaluation ha; been to determine the necessity improvements
required for ammonia reduction and chlorine removal and determine the actual
capacity of the existing facil Mast The results of this study will be utilized
,f-
i
I I (c,
M1.
rF
1
2.2
, R411~
a,~ ,
w
i
~ cur
to determine additional improvements necessary for the plant capacity to be
increased to 15 MGD, as requested in the amended permit.
One of the major tasks for this study has been the collection and evaluation of
several years of existing plant performance data. The data collected has been
•t It statistically analyzed and ranked according to magnitude of the event and the
frequency of occurrence. This ranking process was performed because, in most
cases, the days with the highest influent pollutant concentrations are typically
i
days of low flow and, conversely, the days during which high flow conditions A ,
' occurred are normally typified by low influent pollutant concentrations. A
statistical evaluation of the product of flow and pollutant concentration, i.e.,
loading in pounds per day, was identified as the best representation of the it
actual treatment capacity needed. Since sizing of facilities is directly
proportional to the magnitude of the loads expected to be received, utilizing the ,
W maximum pollutant concentration in combination with the iPaximum flow effectively ,
leads to significant over-design. The results of this analysis provided the
A information needed to evaluate the actual capacity of the existing plant and to p.-
develop design loadings for the expansion to 15 MGD rated capacity.
R..
Full-scale field testing of two of the existing aeration basins was also
performed to determine actual oxygen transfer efficiencies and process yKr
performance. This task was accomplished by conducting steady-state tests to
measure the rate of oxygen utilization by the mixed culture of microorganisms in
the aeration basins. Actual oxygen uptake rates (OUR) Versus the amount of air
supplied during the testing allows for determination of the actual oxygen .S.
transfer efficiency (OTE) of the air distribution equipment. Measured OTEs have
been considered in the evaluation of the actual capacity of all of the plaht's
'y aeration basins.
s,
Secondary treatment process modifications have been considered during this
evaluation based on the need for the plant to provide s nitrification level of•
treatment. One process modification evaluated for application to the Pecan Craek `
WTP is 'selector technology." To acH eve nitrification in the activated sludgy
I 2.3
,r
~+Aiskea*ii"iali
r
h rr
i
ew
owl
I
1 M process, it is necessary to operate at somewhat longer detention times and lower
' organic loading rates. These conditions coupled with an ins-.`,°icient supply of
oxygen can lead to the development of a microbiological .:;pure with poor
settling characteristics. In order to reduce and minimize the growth of specific
~F microorganisms that are difficult to settle, utilization of a process technique,
lselector technology, involving selective culturing of a mixture of microorganisms
with better settling characteristics has been recommended for the plant's older
aeration basins. Tare selector technology process promotes the development of and
helps to maintain control of a better compacting and more settleable sludge. _ J
t ,
The last task performed in conjunction with this evaluation was the determination
k I' J
of actual treatment plant capacity from all available information, including
performance data, field test results, TWC design criteria, etc. A discussion of '
s E
I
the recommended rated capacity from the results of this study is presented in the ,
last section of the report.
4"~ a
JJ~r~~l
r v
4 ~ ,F
%
I
I ~ 1 H~x
j
2.,
a
41
3,0 HISTORICAL INFLUENT FLOWS AND WASTE STRENGTH
~ f
This section of the evaluation presents an analysis of historical wastewater
flows and waste strengths and loads received by the City of Denton Pecan Creek
~fj
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Historical wastewater records for the period
J of June 1985 through June 1990 were compiled and analyzed for this presentation.
3.1 Historical Influent Flows
Historical annual average, maximum 30-day average, minimum 30-day average and ;
r ~
maximum daily flows recorded at the plant for the last 5 years are shown in
r Table 3-1. The flow figures shown for years 1988, 1989 and 1990 are reflective 4
+ of a drought year in 1988, followed by two consecutive years of unusually-high
flows resulting from severe spring flood events. Record-breaking rainfall events
_I occurred in numerous communities in North Texas in the spring months of both 1989
and 1990.
Although the return frequency of these storms varied greatly across the region, a
} f"1 the significance of these storms may be illustrated by streamflows measured on
J the Trinity River below Dallas, Texas. As a result of storms in April and May
of 1989, the USGS streamflow gage denoted as 'trinity River Below Dallas`
recorded a flow of 63,800 cfs on May 18, 1989. Information provided by the U.S.
# M Army Corps of Engineers (COE) indicates that this flow represents a flood event
corresponding approximately to a 24-year return frequency. On May 4, 1990,
however, a higher flow of 86,000 cfs was recorded for this same gaging station.
Information provided by the COE indicates that this flow approximately
corresponds to a 50-year return frequency flood event. During this period, the
rainfall events north of Lake Ray Roberts corresponded to a greater than 100 year 1
j return frequency flood event.
During the weeks and months surrounding these flood events, local stream levels
were significantly elevated for extended periods of time. The ground throughout
most of the Pecan Creek service area remained saturated for an extended period
]t ry.
99 3.1
r
4
,C.~YIl Yn;.i .'Y ».•1 Y it n .n . .
11
1{r1I ~ fr`.
I a
Y'
I ~6
TABLE 1-1
HISTORICAL FLOWS RECEIVED AT KCAN CREEK PLANT
11-3
Maximo Mfnimun %aximus ky
4 'A Annual 30-day 30-day fay
year over&QQe over$ average (MGD)
("GO) (MGDg IMGO)
19851 8.718 8.623 7.788 11.S3D " - ~
v ~ 1986 9.60) 11.734 7.698 13.197 I 'I t
1981 9.150 11.120 8.361 16.069
1988 8.556 9.435 7.634 12391
1969 9,414 12.074 8.061 17.743
19902 11.165 14.[35 9.040 18,575
4
IBased on data for June through December,
` eased on data for January through June. ;
' 11
, I
,
' H k i Syr.
t ti cr.
f.
M1I yy
HN;w AWQOIL
4 I
r;
of time as well. Unusually high flows were recorded during this period not only
by Denton but by many other municipal wastewater systems in the Borth Texas area.
11 A condition of sustained periods of high flow to a wastewater treatment plant tis
normally indicative of the occurrence of infiltration/inflow (1/1) within 1
plant's collection system. Sustained flows occurring over a limited period of
time in this manner would not normally be attributed to high growth or „
development rates within the plant's service area and, in fact, this is not the
case for the City of Denton.
Figure 3-1 presents a historical record of 30-day average flows received at the r
OR Pecan Creek iiWTP for the past five years. The dry-weather 'base' flow for each
has remained relatively stable at between 8.0 million gallons per
of these years
day (MGD) to 9.0 MGO. In 1989, the monthly average increased during the spring
floods in the first part of the year, but decreased again after the floods
subsided. In 1990, the flows increased again dramatically, but have since
returned to the base level. These periods of increases in flaw are indicative
of spring flood events, otherwise reflecting only a moderate increase in base
dry-weather flows over the past five years.
• YIY. c I
i e 3.2 Historical Waste Strength
Table 3.2 presents a summary of a statistical analysis of historical blochemical
,J
oxygen demand (BOO) and total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations in the Pecan F„
Creek WTP primary influent from 1985 to 1990. The point of measurement for a
~ b
influent BCD and TSS is after the introduction of all recycle streams, meaning
that the actual influent BOO and TSS into the plant should be less than shown in
this evaluation.
Analysis of the data indicates that the plant's average influent BOO
concentration has been 141 milligrams per liter (mg/L). The 86th percentile
+ value (average plus one standard deviation or, simply, the value which the data
set analyzed will be equal to or less than 86 percent of the time) is 161 mg/L.
x
3.3
C
1 7-1 ~ - 1
i
I
FIGURE 3-1
AVERAGE MONTHLY PLANT INFLUENT FLOWII 3
l
I
-
FLOW (mgd]
16
~ i
i
14 s a
12
10
i
6 s.
4 1986 1987 1988 1999 1990
MONTH
PLATT tA?ltiEnT FS.Ow EQVA13 PW1U1lY FS.OW
m" lmzmxmm now
DLA"f
1 ~1-1
IY
r
1
{I
I
r
t. f y i
to
3
!'A14' i~`+'Sht:•.,a?n.. r.a.•rn.,uwuT ::«t^„c. rn+ M.,
fy:
~y!
TABLE S-2
PECAN CREEK wAsl ATER MATKOT KART
HISTORICAL INFLUENT QIJOLITY SU4 Y
s
Standard 1
Average Standard Naan corresponding Standard Haan tortes Ing
s . Parameter concentration deviation to peak day flow deviation to nsx Mont flow deviation >e
;4", Boo lmg/ol 111 20 111 66 l23 25
F 1
TSS (mg/0 IM 73 131 191 215 42 }f /
(Based on monthly reports for June 1965 through dune 1990.
'I
k
t'!
1, . 1 •Y. d R~Yr.
y
y. ~ i fir. ftf~Yw+~j _ r •I Ayf
t 1 4
.f w
r f
1
r E ~1:, f ~/aL
k r f ..lie Y
~ p a r i t ~r;
r
t 'ys, r t r ~1t ,
JJ / ~ bf
1
ktisd.Y;r'3vs ::4V~'d~i`AvrNR '
. ,
71
ti
use of this 86th percentile value in evaluating the plant's capacity was
considered appropriate because the level of risk associated with exceeding this
value is acceptably low and the treatment facilities are not oversized to handle
an event which will rarely occur. If the average value was utilized to the LL
evaluation, however, there would be a 50 percent risk of exceeding it.
The monthly average BODs corresponding to the maximum 30-day average flows for
each of the years examined were lower than the average influent 800s. These ,
values averaged 125 mg/l, with an 86th percentile value of 150 mg/L. BOO
concentrations corresponding to the peak daily flow during each of these years
t varied more widely, averaging 131 mg/l.
i r
" The plant's average influent TSS concentration has been 186 mg/l, with an 86th
percentile value of 259 mg/L. Table 3-2 summarizes statistical data for TSS
corresponding to the other flows discussed.
Figure 3.2 represents a plot of influent BOD loadings to the Pecan Creek WilTP
primary clarifiers as a function of influent flow. Figure 3.3 represents a plot
of influent TSS loadings to the clarifiers as a function of influent flow. A a`M
linear regression analysis of these data sets yields no discernable relatlon`ship
between flow and ODD or TSS loadings. This lack of correlation indicates that ~'rr
the high flows which occurred over the period analyzed were characterized by
dilute 800 and TSS concentrations and did not result from significant growth and
development within the service area, Ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) information was available for a much shorter time
period. The data set analyzed included NH3-N concentrations measured ahead of
r,
aeration and in the plant's final effluent from November 1989 through
i
August 1990. For this time period, the average NH3-N concentration entering the
-q primary clarifiers was 15.5 mg/L, with a standard deviation of 4.1. The average
NH'N concentration in the plant's final effluent was 1.7 mg/l, with a standard
deviation of 2.8.
x`~, t a
"L j
4'
3-6
i
=r1
i i
FIGURE 3-2
AVERAGE MONTHLY BOD LOADING
rr,
i
INFLUENT BOD LOADING I1bld x 10001
25 r
>
v'
20
r~ p
~~4 ,et A ■ Kk=,
15 all 11
10
T-
i
~ +f
0
5 10 15 20
PRIMARY INFLUF.NT FLOW IMGD)
01A91
;
.
~e III 3±. 1
-
I
y y
""fad,
n fi ~ y , ; „3f
41
:T
r
fr';
~a
FIGURE 3-3
AVERAGE MONTHLY TSS LOADING
.i.
INFLUENT TSS LOADING Db/d x 10001
k.
70
1 F4
+T '
F,
i
^ S'
60
i SO
4
. s
40 30
~i 20
T~~R b
'
10
I
0 5 la 15 20
PRIMARY INFLUENT FLOW IMGD1 s'
e ~ flIiMARY AIFLU@f[Q 4`>a.UDP'l StDt:~TI1LAMQ '~~''t?f
WLL MTULOADI3LOADTOPIU AM
• _ _ _ _ A
1-7 7
rA
a
' a
4a ;ia '
r
n .,c
I
,
~ t.
Sid 7y'~ a ~ i r i
{A $3
{ r ' 'Y
}
r
"e5rf~.4 AAW u
y...,'~MO'h'.Vr>nY~'yWYRt'.T)..•Nr{.wv..v»r.x.rY,A a.. •.R•n..rr v,.. .`~:r'a~ n... .a.~..,a.eM <k,f 1,n .0 lq lr lP...
The concentrations associated with these three 'quality" parameters are fairly
typical of a relatively weak wastewater. The majority of the constituents of
a-
this type of wastewater are domestic in origin.
1 f i ?
M' +
1 ~
i
n K w
3 iit { ' I v A}ii.
. fit. ~ r ;Y ~ ~ yy. f 'gyp r~
5 .
I (
y
4 ,l 1
4 t.
1 l : 4 { ` ~ , Fy ?
x 3-9
lual
' ot[
4.0 PERMIT LIMITS AND PLANT PERFORMANCE
This section presents a discuss on of current and proposed permit limits for the
Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Also presented is a discussion
,t of the plant's treatment performance, taken from an analysis of historical
operating records for the period of June 1985 through June 1990.
4.1 Permit Limits
j The City of Denton's Pecan Creek WWTP is an advanced secondary treatment facility
with primary treatment, conventional activated sludge secondary treatment,
j~ filtration and chlorine disinfection. The plant is currently permitted to
l} discharge a maximum F'+nthly average flow of 12.0 MGD with concentrations of 10
t. mg/L BODs and 15 mg/i SS. The existing permit which includes these limits, TWC
Permit No. 10OV-03, expired on July 4, 1988.
k
The City of Denton is in the process of renewing and amending this permit. Some
of the anticipated changes resulting from the amendments include an increase in -
~y permitted maximum monthly discharge flow (design flow) from 12.0 MGD to 15.0 NGD, }
an ammonia limit of 3 mg/L, and the removal of chlorine residual from the a=:
effluent prior to discharge to Pecan Creek.
cr.c f 11 t;r^
4.2 Plant Performance
Table 4-1 summarizes the Pecan Creek WWTP's effluent quality for the period of -
June 1985 through June 1990. Average effluent 800 and TSS concentrations of
2.2 mg/L and 1.5 mg/L, respectively, are much lower than the permitted values of
10.0 mg/L and 15.0 mg/L. Effluent BOD and TSS loadings are only 18 and
8 percent, respectively, of the permitted values. NM3-N concentrations averaged
only 1.7 mg/L, which is 57 percent of the anticipated permit value of 3.0 mg/L.
f
.
4.1 '
,
ti
i
1 " .
TABLE 4-1
11 HISTORICAL EMUENT QWITT SOWNNI F
JUNE 1985 THROUGH JUNE 1990
r. Maximum r . ,
% Parameter Average parafttedfvalueI 30-day average Pervltted valuel «1
Vl'
. recorded
f 9t
Boo (ag/l) 2.2 22 4.8 10
r.
Boo (1b/day) IMS 18 501.1 1,0003
rx
TSS (mg/L) 1.5 10 6.3 1S
i~
M Ob/day) 120.9 8 139.2 1,5013 "
NH (mg/L, 1.1 ST 10.12 3
13/84-8194)
Cl (mg/L) 1.6 1.0 nq/L dally
1 min.
a!
18ased on proposed permit requirements unless otherwise noted.
r
a4
20ccurred during March 1990.
41
38ased on a discharge flow of 12.0 MGO.
t
a r
i
16 L I ,
oaf ~l. 4~IY
4 ` 6 A I-.
~A. r 1;ry}} r ~ i
r rAA ~ ' ya Fi Y ,
1 ~ I~ !1
S
q
It is important to note that these comparisons are made to proposed permit 3'
values, as adjusted by the City of Denton's amendment request. The plant has !
been operating well within the permit values with regards to effluent . '
concentrations and loadings, with the exception of effluent ammonia nitrogen
levels.
- k Tie periods during which effluent NHO concentrations exceeded expected permit r~ }
iy limits were, without exception, cold winter months, as woald be expected. The
r.. plant has only recently attempted to maintain a nitrification cycle within the
r treatment system, with the addition of improved equipment and capacity, as will 'k l
be discussed in Section 1.0, it is anticipated that the Pecan Creek WWTP will be
able to consistently meet all permit requirements.
Figure 4-1 is a graphical representation of average monthly effluent flows, 800,
TSS and NHa-N values. Permitted values for each parameter are also shown. From r_
an examination of Figure 4-1, it is evident that the Pecan Creek `WTP 'has
Q performed well over the past five years,
1 1 P~
1 ~ rn .
r.
.t 5 { I
1
4 Yi
r
pa 1a
I . i s {IY75' I
rAli
•
y. # 4.3
y' I 'M..n.MIrM-..rrt"v r-fn.lw uru _axo.v u.
1
f
X•w
+--1985 ---F---1986 1987
25JJAS0NOJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJAS
{ ilr I , '
20
FLOW -
rr I.~' J ~(MV)
i
10 - 4; ' 010 a . y,
r
L : 5
r 0
►--1985 + 1986 - a 19$7
25J J A 5 0 N 0 J F M AM J J A S 0 N D J F M A M
r,
B00
r (m9M _ _ ` rda
4
1.
` tr O , ,r. 4 1 r
F--1985 + 1986 + 198y'
25 J J A S 0 k 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 J i M' A. M J 'J, 'A SS
j:I 1 ^ e F,f
t (m9A) "
1 0 a: r';,;
+ 1985 - 1986 a 198 - - ; E ;
10JJASONOJFMA9J4AS0NDJFMAMJ JA'S
NHs-N
j f (m9/1)
CITY
PECAN CREEK WAS
FLOW AND EFF'
t~ 1~ ~a '+y~'1 b jtro r
4 I
' " t~ 'ww~`"`•~p'VvppE~I;Ii~lYid~d44AaZ4Mi'ltuai'-.m [i99/iaWl:rr,50'i8,:i,$°~' {t/'#J1~..)iYY`'Af~+►~` ' r
z.a. .
7, 7
i
Alan Plamrer end A_twc4ates, tnc
1988 -4-1989 1990---
i FMAM J J_A50N0 JFMAMJ J AS_0 DJF_MAY_J25
- - - - - - - - - - 20
Is
10
_ 0 f
1988 + 1989 ~--1990---1
I
t 0 N D J F M A W J J A S 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 J F M A M J
25
~ - - - - - Iii!
1988 { 1989 i--T-1990--+
-NDJFMAMJ J A S 0 N 0 JFMAMJJ A S 0 N 0 J F M A M J "r
25.;
t
IA-
_jj
1988 1989 --*-1990--+
NDJFMAMJJAS0N0JFMAMJJAS0N0JFMAMJto Y>
HUI
0
1
? - - - -___PERMITTED 30--DAY AVERAGE
URE 4-1
r.' OF DENTON
EWATER TREATMENT PLANT
ENT QUALITY SUMMARY
Ili, h J~
~P r
~v
4~~ff y i"~'tyS~hW'n[Lx ih v'sar.axF«tl'JGtiJ~~'}~ij S t
,v.. _ 71 o
_
t{N
I~
_ saw
Alan Plummer and Arsoclalcs, Inc.
v,
1988- 1989 --1990 -a
NDJFMAMJJA_S0NDJFMAMJJASONOJFMAMJ25
a'
15
- 10
bX - - - 5
Ye _ .Ji •
.r
0
f w;
1988 + 1989 0 -1990--4
O N.0,J F M A`41 J J A S 0 N D J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 J F M A M J25 { ;s4
f
0
-1988 + 1989 F--1990---+
Q,NO.JF,IAAMJJA50N0JFMAMJJA50N0JFMAMJ
25
r
' r
1988 + - 1989 ---T-1990--a
0'N 04 FMAM4 JA50N0JFMAMJJAS0R0JFMAMJ10
-1-1 AJA
.
J
5 .
r t
- -PERMITTED 30-DAY AVERAGE
URE 4-1
A
OF DENTO x
N
r,
1 EWATER TREATMENT PLANT }
ENT QUALITY SUMMARY
,r
.
y
t'
s `sue
f
P
5.0 EXISTING TREATMENT PLANT CAPACITY EVALUATION
This section covers three specifications: An evaluation of the capacities of the
treatment units at the Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant on the basis of the
current Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems issued by the Texas Water
Commission; a hydraulic analysis of the treatment plant; and a discussion of
' Operating and Maintenance (O&M) concerns.
5.1 Capacity Analysis Per Texas Water Commission Criteria
The Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment P1 ant was originally constructed to 1964 and ' All,
included the following units: Primary Sewage Pump Station, Primary Clarifier - `x
to No. It Aeration Basins No.1 and 2, Final Clarifier No. It an anaerobic digester
(Secondary Digester) and the Sludge Drying Beds. The plant was expanded in 1970 c.
to include Primary Clarifiers No. 2 and 3, Aeration Basins No. 3, 4 and 5, Final
' n Clarifiers No. 2 and 3, and a chlorine contact basin. These facilities make up
the "north plant" (facilities in place prior to the most recent expansion).
p In 1982 the "south plant' was constructed. The 'south plant' was simply an r4 '
expansion of the existing plant to includes Primary Clarifiers No. 4, 6 and 61 ;r
Aeration Basins No. 6 and 7; Final Clarifiers No. 4 and $I Filter3 No. 1, 2 tnd a,a 1
3; Chlorine Contact Basins No. I and 2 (replacing the original baf;-j; Primary w.
n Sludge Thickeners No. I and 2; Primary Sludge and Grit BuildiW Flotation
Thickener; Primary Digester; and Sludge Lagoons.
r Figure 5.1 is a process flow schematic that shows the plant's main 11Quid process
q
units. Figure 5.2 is a process flow schematic that shows the plant's main solids
handling units.
The Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is permitted to treat a maximum
monthly average flow of 12.0 million gallons per day (MOD). The City of Denton
is currently in the process of renewing and amending the plant's discharge.
permit. An increase in the permitted maximum monthly average or design flow to
15 MGD is expected.
r', v Y
,L ..1, q~ r It
i
Alan NtLmmer and AssxYetem, lne.
P%AR T "
TO BIINONC
I r _ 'p ANNLfFXI wE LL
oIANOrII EAVA A7 V
f .1 Sup. .r` HEAD 04 Of MART j
NORTH PI11NC I !E
KRATCO Orf LIECTRIC
FNAL ' COOUNe WATER
PLAAT BAR PRIM.0Y AERATION
NM1UEN7 "(ENS GASINS CLAR1'ERS dASMS CLARMERS
I
' I RAW SEWAGE WA
SACS I PS @ PAS I K1 ,
NAKXNG e~wAER _ _ J I f ,
RECYCLE WATER SEWAGE bU0.ONC I` - pE Nan : RSAN7 to"
PS. A A ] y sluocE M %m 7NRxtNEN
N, I PS A : YOKE-UR. YfATCR'
I O7AN7Y CNLdlI,AC ^
SANG CONTACT PINT t
BLOwCR rILTERS eA4NS E!n4kt y
lUILONo ;
E
h ROW MITER RAS I RAS 70 °
(YrP.) r----
SLUDGE
B r, ~t
LrCEND
I
t r I TREATMENT' ~ Igt~'
.L. I ,yF
PRNAIIY AtRAMN FINAL
SQLLH PidSNT STREAtif 3T.A"
~ ARWO dorms CLAVERi •./~1 REEYCLE
oR MAR, scwa SOODS
r
L eias ^w,
AIR
%
r
FIGURE 5-I
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
PECAN CREEK WWTP
LIQUIDS PROCESS SCHEMATIC Lr
T
r
PA A,l
1 J , }
j^
9~ I
r
x i'
r., ,71
-1 NM, !Mr,
I I 1 i
Alan Plummer and AssoclsEes, Inc.
t
k
UNDERROM TO
MAD Or PLANT
NORTH PIANT
DISSOLVED AERATED
MAS SLUOOE
Notnr+e I
1
I l__tAltr____ ISLugs A°40lKAn011 (Mr.j YUOQ IO LAAD
___-_-_-.._-..-..---------------------7 I
Yi. i I ls1 , (Ml.) I
1 I
O'=o +TO (ALI.)- SLYDDt TO LAD
PA71T ; i - UDOONS APR1CAnaN d„
` ar I I f
4_ cvaats
"10 UN0 , '
SLIAfL I , 55Y[RS I SLIAOC DRAMIY ANA[ROBK _ PRMMr COVDM
r DLENDR4 AAIAERO9`C MJ(CIION ,r.
r MEIi ICKEN dOCSTER dCESiER k..
, .
l__J66 l
I' ; M T ..__-J I............... *........~arCAAN to
1{IJ
TREATMENT
r,. STREAM -
' RECYCte F.
FIGURE 5-2 $cxsds
CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS
aF PECAN CREEK WWTP
SOLIDS PROCESS SCHEMATIC
r
„
ra t
~l I
y
•
i ~f,
1 1. n
1~ N
4
M
A
In this section, the treatment units have been evaluated solely on the basis of
Texas Water Commission (TwC) Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems. This
I! evaluation consists of determining the treatment capacity of each unit from the
physical size of the unit and from the requirements set forth in the TWC
R criteria.
5.1.1 liquids Handling Facilities
1 I
Raw Wastewater Pumping
The TWC criteria states: "The firm pumping capacity of all lift stations shall {
be such that the expected peak flow can be pumped to its desired destination. ~csti
Firm pwrping capacity is defined as total station maximum pumping capacity with
.
the larSest pumping unit out of service."1
,
The treatment plant's Main Plant Lift Station is actually a combination of two
> "
separate lift stations. The original lift station was constructed in 1964'and
contains four dry-pit centrifugal pumps, Two constant speed units rated at 30200:
gallons per minute (gpm) and 48 feet of total dynamic head (TOR) each and two
w
variable speed units rated at 5,000 gpm and 55 feet TDH each at maximum capacity.
One of the variable speed pumps 1s diesel engine-operated for operation d#ifiq
instances when electric power is lost to the pump station. The two constant
speed units and one variable speed unit (engine-operated) have been in service
since 1954. The other variable speed unit was installed in 1960.
t.
The new lift station was constructed in 1982 and contains four additional dry-pit
centrifugal pumps: Three constant speed units rated at 5,000 gpm and 58 feet TDH
each and ore variable speed unit rated at 5,500 gpm and 58 feet TDH at maximmm
capacity. ;
Raw sewage enters the wet wells from a common bar screen. The wet wells of both
I1ft stations are connected to maintain a constant level and the discharge piping
is connected prior to the influent wastewater flow meter. ;
r 1M E
5.4;
s J
. r . •W t... .:'r ALA 'MW," `.til Ail n~ » „ ~ t y.
doff]
ii
Wet well levels in the stations are sensed by an air bubble type of level
controller. Various pumps are started, and their rates varied if applicable, in FV.
response to changing water surface elevations I. the wet wells up to the combined
"firm" capacity of the Main Plant Lift Station of approximately 45 MGD.
Because the plant influent flow is metered after pumping, the actual peak flows
into the plant cannot be precisely determined. The average dry weather flow
t# through the plant over the last four years has remained between 8.0 and 9.0 MGD. rF.
" With a firm pumping capacity of approximately 45 MGD, the pump station will rs tk,
{
accommodate up to a S to 1 peak to dry flow ratio which is reasonable for a
system the size of Denton's.
Primary Clarification
The TWC criteria outlines two separate capacity criteria for the design of
primary clarifiers: jae.
A. Weir loading "...loadings shall not exceed 30,000 gallons per day
peak flow per linear foot of weir," ~q
6 w+, w
s'; r
B. Surface loading - The maximum allowable surface loading at pesk'flow T
is 1,800 gallons per day per square foot of surface area. The maximum 4
allowable surface loading at design flow is 1,000 gallons per day per
square foot of surface area. Kr,
r :w
# J The treatment plant currently has six circular center-feed primary clarifiers. LL.y
Primary Clarifiers No, 1, 2 and 3 serve the "north plant", and Primary Clarifiers ^i
F ~ No. 5 and 6 serve the "south plant", Table 5.1 summarizes the sizes and the
rated capacities of each of these clarifiers.
~J
From an examination of Table 5.1, it can be seen that the peak flour to the "north 4 '
plant" primary clarifiers is controlled by surface loading or, In other words,
the peak flow rate calculated on the basis of maximum surface loading is less l
S-5 rf,
~t 1
117
. w . .
11
LADLE 8-1 v -
A RASED CAPACITIES 0f PRIPMY CLARIFIERS ,
[ ! Total Design Q Total / 6r
a ils! Effective Peak Q city
Clarifier Basin feedwll surface opacity peak Q craclarifier) ' UP60ty ' .
per clarifier capacity pe MGO) (MGO• n l''•
number diameter d4ftter area
} a (ft•) (ft.} (sQ. IMfA) I y
ft.) (RGD)
I lr90 ' ~
o-. 1,3 SG 10 1,297 4.131 12.39 2.30 u
19 bo 3.77 11,3t
4•6 70 10 3.770 6.602 i>
32.19 18,21 .4w I
A
Tote
r
x M
gpd/aq. ft. 9 peek flow. f
leased on a surface loading rate of 1,800 M u
I 1
I: t
a' teased on a weir loading rate of 30,000 ppd/lf 0 peak f1or4
36ased an a surface loading rate of 1,000 gpdha. it. 1 design liar.
T r ~Si
it
LA
L ~ ~ 1 { tv,~fT~
ti
7, I 1. ,.w 1 a ~
i
L • 1
y s. "
r
I :l .F t 1. +.1
{ I1 L ~ 1 3
S1 D' ifs
7 ~ r' 1
I,YrJI _ w I,.nRw-+1~^I«s wr..,., ~ Y Mj
i 1
X.
a
K
Ii than the peak flow rate calculated on the basis of maximum weir loading. The
total peak flow rate for these three clarifiers is 12,39 MGD.
Conversely, the peak flow rate to the "south plant" primary clarifiers is
controlled by weir loading. The total peak flow rate for these three clarifiers
n is 19.80 MOD.
The total peak capacity or allowable peak flow rate to the primary clarifiers is
the sum of these two numbers, or 3:.19 MGD.
The design flow rate to all of the primary clarifiers is determined on the basis
of the maximum allowable surface loading for each clarifier at the design flow.
For the "north plant" clarifiers this flow rate is approximately 2,30 MOD per
clarifier (as shown in Table 5-1), or 6.90 MOD total. For the "south plant"
clarifiers this flow rate is approximately 3.77 MGD per clarifier, or 11.31 MGD
'
q J,2
total
The total design capacity or allowable design flow rate to the primary clarifiers
ki is the sum of these two numbers, or 18,21 MOD. '
Aeration Basins r`.
Q 7WC criteria requires that the minimum aeration volume be calculated on the basis ,
of design organic loading. For an aeration basin with single-stage,
nitrification, this loading rate is 35 pounds of five-day biochemical oxygen
demand per day per thousand cubic feet of basin volume (lb BWVday/;,000 fta),
i Aeration systems installed in conjunction with this type of aeration basin are y
required to provide at least 30200 standard cubic feet of air per pound of IlOUS '
applied per day (scf/1b BMVday).
t The treatment plant currently has seven aeration basins. Aeration Basins Nos. 10 2, 3, 4 and 5 serve the "north plant," and Aeration Basins Nos.
6 and 1 serve the
z'
L Y
4 y
ih
7F.✓.Ahk,Nuir
r ~a
1
.
• rwa"~
t' "south plant.' Table 5-2 summarizes the sizes and the rated capacities of each
of these basins.
t'
Design flow capacities for the "north' and 'south plants' are determined from the
listed space loading and BODs concentration in the basin influent (assuming 35
i; percent removal in the primaries). As listed in Table 5-2, the total design;
r F ~ I•
rb , R capacity of the aeration basins determined in this manner is 18.36 MGO and g r
includes an allowance for sidestream bedding. Because sidestream loading is
r included in the influent 600 measurements, the design capacity shown is~
conservative. A`
Aeration Supply System
k 'V
The treatment plant currently utilizes two separate air supply systems: four
positive displacement blowers for the north plant and two centrifugal blowers for
the south plant. The south plant system has space for a third idenH tali
centrifugal blower.
Table 5.3 summarizes the capacities of the basins on the basis of aeration, `I
equipment limitations. As listed in the table, the total design capacity of the
aeration system determined in this manner is 10.30 MGD, 6.58 MGO for the north
a R; plant and 3.12 MGD for the south plant. (With the addition of a third blower in
fy the south plant, the south plant capacity would increase to 1.44 MGD.) the
u design capacity based on air supply is less than the design capacity calculated ;w r
Y+
on the basis of space loading and, therefore, is the limiting or controlling flaws
value. Because an allowance has been made for sidestteam loading and ldfluent ~F
80 Measurements include sidestream loading, the design capacity shown is
{ coh`servative.
The TWC criteria assumes an oxygen transfer efficiency (OTE) of 4 percent "in Y'
wastewater for all activated sludge processes except extended aeration,
This efficiency would be typical for a coarse bubble system and, in fact, is
conservative even in this case. For the medium-pore membrane typo diffusers in
`'Y
6, m, S9
d.
t~
CSS sv
TABLE 5-2 3
AERATION BASIN SIZE AND SPACE LOADING CAPACITY SUMPRT
Total volume BOO capacity based ani 000 loading attributable: Remaining 000 load Allowable design flow
Basins Train served space lading criteria to recycle flows capacity available 1 161 eq/L BOD
(gallons) jibe BOD/day) (ibs BOO/day) (lba/day) (MW):
r
1-5 North Plant 1,123.392 10,080 11092 0,988 1040
6,2 South Plant 1,685,16E 7,681 OS6 1,029 6.06 '
Total 31406,860 17,967 11950 16,011 14.16
i5md on a design organic lading for nitrification of 35 lb B00/day/1,000 cu. ft. ! 3F r
i" [Based on average values of sldeatreem flow and BOO concentration with 3S percent 000 reduction In the primary clarifWe. I
r Y:"
rl a , I f~ 1.
ie-V
M
' al
f.i '1 .
r vy ~
ei tr4r.2g
r
x " 14 -^...~a..rwsww~w+rw.rrwwxH~MllelweeFyl,~~ F
g I~ l h i;t x:
r~, Y ~ irk ✓ _ ~ f ~r~_ ~~f1 I
1t" r tr2 ( v .(I k,,
a- ' d
ryr anti, n=, r';; n ~ r
~r
reog n !""4 ! 1~ '
TABLE 5.3
AERATION SAM CAPACITY BASED ON AERATION EQUIPMENT EIMIATION'a
Basins Aeration Air available Oxygen delivered SOD treatable5 SOD attribuhble0 Remaining 000 Allowable desipA
x'
type (ecfm) to wastewater to sidestreams load capacity flow 9 ( 16/da 0I little
(1b/day) y} (ib/day) (lb/day) BOO 191 little
1-5 Medium fore 1,5001 15,0313 0,034 1,092 5.742 Membrane y
0,7 Ceramic 3,0002 9,D204 4,100 ass 3,242 3,72 '
r° Dane a
- Totat 10,9,14 1,956 0,984 10.30
pp':
14.2,SOO efs blowers available, One is out of service. Fla
22.3,000 cfm blowers available. One is Assumed to be out of service. 1s, ,
'Based on an oxygbn transfer efficiency of S percent.
4Based on in oxygen transfer efficiency of It percent,
SBased on in oxygen requirement of 2.2 lb. oxygen per lb, 000. t 'ell
r. , B 1. y
K{.
Baled an average values of t4destreaM f'. ow and B00 concentration with 35 percent 00D reduction In the primary clarifiers.
N, p
J
' .
a'.
f
,
r
v S, i , ~Lf i r'
_ J a _ ~aE.u
s
r I / 4~^ i
ty
4
r
r
' i
,
,
r.
A ty
ell
r , yr4
1 rv l1 Jt j 1 l .
aei YA 'r r ,
1
:!r !w
i
use in the 'north plant' Aeration Basips I through 5, an OTE of 8 percent is
typically used. An OTE of 12 percent has been used for the fine bubble ceramic
domes in 'south plant' Aeration Basins 6 and 7 (refer to Table 5.3).
It should be noted that Aeration Basin No. 5 is currently in use as an aerated Ak.
sludge holding basin. Anticipated improvements at the plant include returning st'
Aeration Basin No. 5 to use as an aeration basin, and this assumption has been x'
incorporated in these calculations.
Final Clarification A
The TWC criteria outlines four separate capacity criteria for the design 0f'final
clarifiers with nitrification.
A. Weir loading - This requirement is identical to that listed for the,• „ M y
y primary clarifiers, or 30,000 gallons per day per linear foot of weir
at peak flow, fr.
B. Surface loading The maximum allowable surface loading at peak flow N'.
Is 1,200 gallons per day per square foot of surface area. The maximum
LJ allowable surface loading at design flow is $00 gallons per day per
square foot of surface area.
C. Detention time -The maximum allowable detention time at peck flow.is
1.5 hours. The maximum allowable detention time at design flow is 30
hours.
0. Solids handling 'The final clarifier solids loadingfor all
activated sludge treatment processes shall not exceed 50 pounds of j
solids per day per square foot of surface area at peak flow rate.'
The treatment plant currently has five circular final clarifiers. Final
J Clarifiers No. I, 2, and 3 serve the 'north plant,' and Final Clarifiers No,''4.
r
I i. y 6 s.
vp
~F ~ ! } n•l, iYa l
5.11
v
, e
.•I MEI [b rvn.-ro~.rw,w..an~r~w. w.v.«.,,.. 'e++1.4N3M - E f .a .
6 sv -
E
l1 .dlo uy.r / T,
and 5 serve the "south plant." Table 5-4 summarizes the sizes and the rated
capacities of each of these clarifiers.+
From an examination of Table 5-40 it can be seen that the peak flow rate to the
"north plant" clarifiers is controlled by detention time. The total peak flow
ki rate for these clarifiers is 11.61 MGD. s
I ;
The peak flow rate to the "south plant" clarifiers is controlled by overflow
rate. The total peak flow rate for these clarifiers is 9.50 MGD. '
The total peak capacity or allowable peak flow to the final clarifiers is the sum: j
p of these rates, or 21.37 MGD.
f'9 The design flow rate to the "north plant" clarifiers is controlled by detention
time. The total design flow rate for these final clarifiers is 5.93 MAO. s„r
The design flow rate to the 'south plant' clarifiers is controlled by overflow
rate. The total design flow rate for these clarifiers is 4.76 MGD. 4'.
The total design capacity or allowable design flow to the final clarifiers is the tf.
sum of these rates, or 10.69 HGDr
Effluent Filters
J
The TWC criteria states. "Filtration rates shall not exceed 3 gpm/ft: for single h"
media filters and 4 gpm/ftz for dual media filters based on the design flow rate
applied to the filters." The criteria further requires that the area used shall
E„n be calculated with one unit out of service. "One unit", in this case, refers to
a single cell within the filter bed.
The treatment plant currently has three multi-cell, automatic backwash, „
travelling-bridge type filters. Filters No. 1, 2, and 3 serve the entire
treatment plant. Each filter is classified as single media and has an effective
'A
y s
5-12
r ~ 'r
J
y~II''yyyy
f
r;
TABLE 5-4
kATED CaPACITIEt Of r11U1 CtA11IT1Ett
, an
d
7MY l
1 leak 0 ONlpn 0
f'A , +,i gaetn taedwell tidewater Effective Effeetl capacity
clarifier dfenrter diameter depth surface area Volume peteelulfler per clarifier
+ 7 number, (ft.) (ft.) (ft.) (sq• ft.l (cu. ft.) (M0D) (k0o~ d
~r .
ii F.
63 10 12 3,240 29,665 3.372 1.99 - ' dry''.
t 2 t
2,3 70 1i 12 s,64S 34,6sd i.1S t.b74 RYA!
n 13 3,939 41,460 4.753 1.363 tl
r~ 4,S 71 ,
21.37 10.69
lots(
loosed on the volume occupied above a 3 ft. sludge blantet.4
llo~
1 • ' r, is ~ '
a 2blod on a detention time of 1.3 hours st peak flaw.
3oafed on a Burfaca leading tats of 1,200 opolsq• It. at peak flow. '~dA
4oasod oo a detention time of 3.0 %"s at design flow.
` 3oaeed on a surface lorllrq rate of 600 sfd/sq' It. at Peak flaw. ,
I
V 1'
I
` t r f
r
' S
Y~ re
ll
sI' -0
I
r• ~
1 : _ ra;... s tc .H l~m~ et: ti L-:::rfh-?
i
Y
filter bed area (bed area with one filter cell subtracted) of approximately
1,365 square feet. At an allowable filtration rate of 3 gpm/ft:, the total
allowable design flow rate to the filters is 12,285 gpm, or 11.69 HGD.
Yn
Disinfection
Disinfection at the Pecan Creek WWTP is provided through chlorination of the
filter effluent. TWC criteria requires that "Contact chambers shall be designed
to provide a minimum average hydraulic residence time (chamber volume divided by
flow) of 20 minutes at the design peak hydraulic flow" and "Chlorination
equipment shall have a capacity greater than the highest expected dosage to be `
applied." -r.
The treatment plant currently has only two basins in use for chlorination of
plant effluent. Each of these basins is 30 feet wide by 121 feet long. by
8.83 feet deep (depth to effluent weir crest). Dividing this volume by the
required detention time and adjusting the depth for flow over the weir yields
O total allowable peak flow capacity of 24.16 HGD through the Chlorine Contact is
p Basins.
C 4r: ~
Using the calculated flow rate and an assumed chlorine dose concentration of
8 mg/L (assumed concentration to yield a residual of 1 mg/L after 20 minutes
detention), the chlorine used per day at the peak flow rate may be calculated as
approximately 1,600 pounds per day (ppd)Y The plant currently has one 2,000 ppd
chlorinator and two 1,000
pl ppd chlorinators; therefore, the chlorination equipment ;
6i capacity conforms to TWC criteria,
.
6,1,2 Solids Handling Facilities ,
it f
r' Bar Screens
The TWC criteria for bar screens requires that "The channel in which the screen i
J s..
Is placed shall allow a velocity of 2 feet pcr second or more at design flow.'
'~f P Y rY
till
Ar ;r J 5.14
t-
tiJe +4 I
r
The treatment plant currently has two screening channels that are 4.50 feet wide
each.
The velocity requirement is intended to ensure that solids deposition does not y
n occur in the approach channels to the screens. Since this requirement applies
to an operational characteristic of a particular treatment unit rather than
II
overall plant capacity, it does not affect this evaluation. Preliminary
calculations have shown, however, that the existing channels will pass more than
20.0 MGD of design flow at the listed velocity.
Y,
Digesters
The TWC criteria for anaerobic digesters applies to single-stage digesters. The
treatment plant currently utiiizes a two-stage digestion system; therefore, the a
TWC criteria does not apply.
~ ry
un Thickener t4
a The TWC criteria doEs not contain requirements affecting the rated capacity of
i the Gravity Thickeners or of the Dissolved Air Flotation Thickener.
Sludge Handling
The TWC criteria requires that 5.85 square feet of drying bed area be'provided
per pound of 800 load in this area. The BOD load in this case refers to that
which is received by the plant in the influent flow.
is
The plant currently has six drying beds. Each of these beds is 55 feet wide by
100 feet long, resulting in a total drying bed area of 33,000 square feet
Dividing this area by 5.85 yields an allowable COD load of approximately
t,
5,610 pounds of 800 per day. At a concentration of 200 mg/l, this loading
equates to a design flow of approximately 3.38 MOD.
. l
w R: ,
5-15
M
F.f~`I• _ T` Ail~C..
low
1
1
i
i
i
t,
The plant currently only utilizes the drying beds in an emergency, during wet
weather, or when draining the digesters. The normal final node of sludge
treatment is land application through liquid infection. For this reason, the
sludge drying beds have no real effect on treatment capacity. "
The plant also currently has a total of nine shallow lagoons. Seven of the
lagoons are approximately 135 feet wide by 300 feet long, and two of the lagoons op 1~
are approximately 110 feet wide by 300 feet long. These lagoons are also used
only rarely and, when in use, essentially as drying beds.
As stated, the primary means of final sludge handling/disposal is by liquid
infection, Approximately 219 acres are available for land application of the
sludge in this manner. The TwC criteria has no listed requirements for, thisK
disposal method which would affect rated plant capacity,
Y.~
6.1,3 Summary +
Figure 5.3 summarizes the design and peak flow capacities discussed herein, 1hia
I
~ . ~ limiting design flow capacity for the south plant occurs as a result of existing s.. aeration equipment limitations and is 3.72 MGD.
The limiting capacity, if n additional aeration supply is provided, occurs as a result of the final
clarifiers surface loading rate and 1s 4.76 MGD, The limiting design flow
capacity for the north p
lant occurs as a result of detention time limitations
within the final clarifiers and is 5.93 MGD. The total design flow capacity is
the sum of these two 'limiting' values, or 9.65 AGO (10.69 MGD discounting south
plant air supply). 4 ,
The limiting peak flow capacity occurs in the final clarifiers. For the north sr:
r plant clarifiers, peak capacity is determined by detention time and is 11.87 MGD.
For the south plant clarifiers peak capacity is determined by surface loading
rate and is 9,50 MGD. The total peak capacity is the sum of these two values,
or 21.37 MGO. c<
~ rt
h. ^ 1
- 111 5•Ib 'rI ~ `
r'
i
a
M4
i
Alan Plummer end Assocletes, Inc
N0 rt h Plant RAW INFLUENT South Plant
PRIMARY
UI'f SECONDARY
F45 00 * Lin
n (COMBINED) STATION STATION
1!
1De
M Y e. eo 11.31
PRIMARY PRIMARY PRIMARY PRIMARY PRIMARY PRIMARY
r CLSIIFIER CLARIFIER CLARIFIER CLARIFIER CLARIFIER CLARIFIER"
N0,2 N0.3 i NO.4 NO.6 NO.e
10,30 '
AERATION BASIN 4.68 i 3.72 AERATION BASIN B.O6
N0. N0. NO. NO. NO.
0. 1 10.
1 2 3 4{ 6 AIR ' R_ 7 Ne 7
n I SUPPLY SUPPLY,
11.87
~ 960 ~
6.43 FINAL FINAL '
1 p CLARIFIER CLARIFIER CLARIFIER ~ CLARIFI
ER ;
NO.1 N0.2 NO.3 CLARIIRItI!
NO.4 NO.6 as '
17.8
Key EFFLUENT FILTERS
"Deelgn' Capacit
rant TMC y N0. N0. N0.
Par O cti u 1 2 3
Value derived from
T11C criteria for Ll 1 r `
peak flowe,
Limiting unit CHLORINE
CONTACT BASIN
t Boxed veluee are In NO. NO.
r . unite of MOD.
%
TO PECN CREW
FIGURE 5-3
rer` ` CAPACITY EVALUATION SUMMARY '
J
a M
t
1
k
5"2 Hydraulic Capacity
A hydraulic evaluation of the existing Pecan Creek wwTP was made to determine the
maximum hydraulic capacity of the plant. Maximum historical flow rates through
the treatment process have been approximately 25 to 27 MGO. All flows into the ;
plant are pumped from the raw sewage pump station and split between the north and
south plants. Peak flows from the collection system into the plant in excess of
w,
25 to 21 MGD are stored in the collection system interceptors until they can be t,
pumped into the plant. As a part of the permit application process, the City has
committed to the construction of flow equalization facilities to allow peak flows ar T'
up to 45 MGD (raw sewage pump station capacity) to be pumped into the plant r
without backing up in the collection system.;
Raw wastewater is pumped directly into the primary clarifiers for the South,.
Plant. Flow into the north plant is into a grit chamber with a weir crest that
is seven feet above the south plant primary clarifiers. The flow split is t
controlled by manually operating buried plug valves at each of the three south`
a
plant primary clarifiers. A new grit removal flow splitter facility, has been
proposed as part of a concurrent Preliminary Design Report to provide controlled ,
grit removal from the entire plant, to allow peak flows to be diverted to 'a <I
1 proposed equalization basin and to allow flow to be appropriately split between
n
the north plant and the south plant.
41
J The maximum theoretical flow which can be processed through the existing plant
t
is approximately 27.5 MGO, which agrees well with the historical maximum flows,' The limiting factor for both the north plant and the south plant appears
to be
the piping between the aeration basins and final clarifiers.
i
5.3 Plant Operation and Maintenance Concerns
other than hydraulic limitations addressed in the previous section, there are two r'
7 process related, but not necessarily capacity related, items that should be
addressed during the next phase of plant improvements. One of these items is
1• 3 5r
,Y 1. _ t 'I
4
i
I -
r
` hydraulic limitations to activated sludge pumping facilities for the north plant.
item is an apparent substantial leakage of air from underground air
The second
piping for both the north and south plants. s
` 11
The existing permanent north plant waste sludge pumping system is hydraulically
1
limited and does not allow for effective process control by the plait operators.
The system pumping capacity, whether pump or piping related, requires the
n
operators to continue sludge wasting over a 12• to 14- uatpmostdl bas in a ~ I
s is typically performed plants
{
,
current wasting rates. This r oces P period
" period of several hours, certainly less than an B -hour shift. The long
required to waste sludge from the north plant aeration basins makes it more,
_ difficult to control the MLSS concentrations in the basins and could lead to +Mn
effluent quality deterioration at higher flow rates. For this reason, north;
I plant sludge wasting is being addressed in conjunction with the preliminary '
design efforts that are being pursued concurrently with this study.
The second item of concern 1s that a substantial amount of air is being "wasted',
through leaks in the underground air piping. large patches of ground at various
locations within the plant have been left bare through drying of the soil as a
process concern asso,lated with this
result of leaking air. The primary
1 condition, however, is that leaking air is not being delivered to the aeration
v.
basins for treatment, which can become very significant when the pant
experiences high load conditions. In-place internal or external repair methods
' for these joints are normally only marginally effective, in addition to being
very difficult to accomplish without significant down-time. The installation of
aboveground air piping to replace all existing underground air piping is being
evaluated as a part of other aeration system modifications currently planned. {
I ! This improvement will allow for recovery of "wasted' air, will significantly
improve the sequencing of construction for other aeration improvements, and will
provide permanent air piping that is easily accessible for maintenance and
repair.
JJ o'.
S s.
5.19
1`"
4+J87
;a.
71
j~
6.0 OXYGEN TRANSFER EFFICIENCY SAMPLING AND TESTING PROGRAM
The City of Denton's Pecan Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant currently operates
six aeration basins: four for the north plant (one original north plant aeration
p basin is being used for sludge holding) and two for the south plant. The two {'r
t~ south plant aeration basins contain fine pore disc diffusers and the four north %2.
plant aeration basins contain medium pore tube diffusers, The tube diffusers are ;rr
planned to be replaced with fine pore discs to improve the oxygen transfer
nn efficiency in order to provide sufficient oxygen for nitrification as the plant
flow increases. Testing was performed to determine what the oxygen transfer.
!t
efficiency (OTE) of the existing fine pore system was under the specific field
conditions at the Pecan Creek plant. r.'.
The existing fine pore diffusers were installed in 1981 as part of the expansion
that was completed in 1982. The City had scheduled cleaning of the fine pore '
diffusers, therefore, OTE testing was scheduled after the cleaning of one basin's
diffusers and prior to the cleaning of the diffusers in the second basin. In
this way a comparison could be made to determine the improvements in OTE of the ~+1 3 ,
diffusers from before and after cleaning. When the first basin was taken out of
A,
se.wice to clean the diffusers, the City decided to replace the existing
diffusers with spares and to clean the diffusers that were removed from this...
r Irk
J' basin for use in the next basin to be taken out of service. This procedure would,
minimize the time that the aeration basin would be out of service. The resulting
GTE improvement comparison was then between new diffusers and diffusers that 41.
4
been in service for approximately 9 or 10 years.
The oxygen transfer efficiency evaluation was performed using a steady-state
analysis, which consists of measuring the oxygen uptake rate (OUR) of the mixed
liquor in the aeration basin and comparing it with the oxygen supplied by the air
supply system. In a plug flow basin, DURs are typically higher in the influent.
section of the basin where the activated sludge first contacts the incoming;
wastewater and air. This effect is considerably dampened in a completely mixed
.
4yptaf?~4,r~ ~ 1'T
.
.
basin or in a basin in which the waste is fed at intervals along its length, as
it is in Denton.
r
Each aeration basin to be tested was divided into segments, The OUR for each
I~ segment was measured by taking multiple, representative samples of mixed liquor r
fs over a day's time. The OUR was determined by measuring the drop in dissolved
n oxygen over a period of time in each sample collected, This measurement provided
the quantity of oxygen used as a function of time (mg/t/hr). The OURs were integrated over the entire segment to determine the total oxygen used
(i.e.,
+ lbs/day). Oxygen requirements for all segments are then summed to calculate the "
n total oxygen utilized in the aeration basin. The dissolved oxygen (00) level Was
recorded at each point where an OUR was measured.
F~
a ke;
` The oxygen transfer efficiency of the aeration equipment was determined by
dividing the oxygen used (as measured by the OUR) by the oxygen available, The '
oxygen available was calculated based on the quantity of air supplied to they
basin. For the OUR analysis at Pecan Creek, Aeration Basins Nos. 6 and l were divided
r into 6 essentially equivalent cross sections, 1 through 6, from west (influent) ~h„
to east (effluent). Figure b-1 shows the basin divisions. The OUR measurements
i were used to calculate the oxygen requirements under actual field conditions as
n described hereinabove. Table 6-1 and Figure 6-2 summarize the results of this
testing.
Each aeration basin 1s supplied with air by a header with 2 downcomers, Airflow
.j is measured into the total basin and not at the indivlduil downcomers. To
determine the air supplied and subsequently the oxygen available in each segment, r
it was assumed that the air supplied was directly proportional to the numbed of
J diffusers In each segment. The total air supplied to the basin was distributed
c
f~ r
6.2
t '
1 i
r
hil~
I
br
II 1
1
i
Afar. Plummer and A+aocfatee, Ina.
RETURN SLUDGE
1 INFLUENT FROM INFLUENT FROM
PRIMARY CLARIFIERS~ METER NG METERING PRIMARY CLARIFIERS
I ~
h
I II" 1 INFLUENT
Io'
/"Y 11 ate/ Y i " 0 1 ` 1
I
I 2V ~i
0 2 `
25' J ' zM1T
25
N1y
25' ' f
E / { t
F ~ ~ t r i
ExTlNDED 25' ~r
INFLUENT
CNANNlLS
NORMALLY 9 1.
cloecD +o
EFFLUENT EFFLUEN
r TYP, TYP.
AB-7 AD 6 I:
a . _ AERATION BASIN SAMPLING PLAN
OXYGEN UPTAKE RATE AERATION STUDY
j DENTON PEOAN CREEK WWtP
FIGURE 6.1
r3
Y ,
'I J
9 1 I
+
7
r
16 1c
f
TAILE 8.1
Killow PECAA CREEK YASIE5M1Et TAFATOOI PLANT
Li OXYMX UPTAO ARIES ,
KCEMU 4.5, 19Po '
t, r " r
leyment Aarga OM Averall OUR Oxygen Wed e,
ro. faglllhrl fagJl/l r) Owdey)
1 , ♦ 1
"at Aeration Iaa1n Ao. 6 (New diffulan) _
MIS
v 1 1 9.3.37.0 27.1 627 4!
2 6.0.31.0 21.6
20.2 SIM
r S 3.3.2b.S 797 , l.c
Total l~
8
Aantien Ia4Sn No. 7 (taut/d dff(uaera) "
1 13.3.31.0 25.0 651
+ 23.2 6A6 r
2 9.6.32.0
7 6.0-14.3 21.3 618 ' g
v ~ G' 6 5.6.313 tb.1 543 ~ " tl;4'
S S.1.30.8 9.S A M3
507
'
s' 6 4.S•29.0
F( ,
l
~ tl f
r ra
i
(
r i /t
r .a , r
7771
Alan Plummer &M AmocWt%, Inc
I i g
4 1 4~
DENTON PECAN CREEK `
OXYGEN UPTAKE RATE TESTING t
T
I I
k
30
25
F r E 20
01
10
a.
1 ~yl>,
r
I;o
i
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1d0.'
DISTANCE 00 FROM INFLUENT ENO
C k• `
AERATION BASIN 8 AERATION BASIN 7<':
FIGURE 8
r f
z + 0 I a
it.
r V a ~ ~ t~ ~'r r
i
M ~ ~ ,S k X'~IM1 ~i
j '0
f. r
r
r ~ ~r
A T,
I
v
i
1
Y
as a function of the diffuser distribution. The diffuser distributions are shown y
in Table b•2. The oxygen (02) available was calculated as:
1
02 available (lb/day) ■ Q x 60 x 24 x 0.0724 x 0.232
d
where: 0 air flow, scfm
I 60 min/hr
24 ■
n 0.0724 • lb air/cuY ft. at standard conditions
hf 0.232 ■ percent Ot in air by weight at standard conditions
The efficiency of the aeration diffuser is then calculated by dividing the oxygen
used by the oxygen available. The resulting efficiency was associated with ,a
specific field temperature and dissolved oxygen (00) concentration. The field ,
` oxygen transfer efficiencies (OTEs) were normalized to standard conditions (20°C,
I 0 mg/L DO) using the following equatt,in:
20-t
OTE ■ OTE X [C%20/(C C x 1.024
20/0 f N e ,
+r ° , W where: OTEolo ■ OTE at standard conditions
OTE2; 07E under fteld conditions
C saturation concentration of a! 20°C {ooq/l)
'2O ■ saturation concentration of Do at test k.
C't temperature (mg/L)
4 Ct concentration of 00 in;the basin during
test (mg/L)
t ■ temperature of mixed liquor during test ( C) -
Results of the analysis performed for Aeration Basins Nos, 6 and 7 are shown in.
r
Table 6.3, The standard condition OTE for the clean diffusers in Aeration Basin
No, 6 was 19.8 percent and the OTE for the fouled diffusers in Aeration Basin
No. 7 was 183 percent, The difference of 1,3 percent WE between the bo ins s;
4
represents an oxygen transfer efficiency difference of BY3 percent. The field
t OTEs (actual operating conditions) were 16.9 percent for Aeration Basin No.
(cleaned) and 15.6 percent for Aeration Basin No. 7 (fouled), The overall
performance for both the clean and the fouled diffusers was excellent and should
iq' provide adequate oxygen transfer capacity for the plant under the anticipated
y
increased flow conditions.
rfiA ~ b-6 ~~t
.i'
N •
t
i'
v IMF- T.
M i
.
f^
j~Y"y{ t 7 r
F INIE 6.2 '
_ A KNIdt iEGK CREEK WSIMIEti TEEATIOT K"T
R Ii blSjalEUII9Y Of All 10 AERMON W[IN me. 6 AN T F
M DEWK1 1'S, T"*
Airflow Airftew tulk~
tepme~t 01!}aara (x) A16 AN
no. cw*or)
46.9 tA1 170 ai a
wd` 1 106 201
2 22.6 191
02 3 511 11.8 ;n 159
381 17.7 116
s 17.5 SW t124
t5
6 272 11.6
rt
100 6511 !96 «
e MI 2151
Total
rtod.
q ! tAwa,o airflow to 10681A durlrq tMltlnE pa
~ t e ~ 1 (tip
S
y
r
.i
q. 1 die::
1 *4
6 7,
i tai. P. v s 1'~ M e
i,
r
r
0
y~
I
i
„
e lABlf 6-3
j r ~DENTON PECAN CAEEX AERATION STUDY 2^
DECEMBER 19. 1990 f
f ' 1
t , I
OUR DO 0 avatsed Air 0 0;b/dIt OTE 01E
1211-S/iO nq/t/fir mp/1 Itchy af~ y x f 0/b
; Aeration Basin 6 ,
F
r, 1 tJ,l 1.22 Jos 161 3,891 16.1 t0.1
2 tLb LY8 627 191 4,620 13.6 IS.6
1 20.2 1,31 586 125 3,023 19.4 22.1 i
4 22,5 1183 653 lSl 3,652 I1A l1,,9 f '
1" 5 19.5 1.95 568 its 2,654 19.6 24.6 { # rt
6 15.t 1,93 393 108 2,612 1510 16.6 t , 't t
,r
fot+Ts 2,571 626 15,150 16.9 19.8 w
Aeration Basin 7 ~'f~• : i,4
Lp.
' l 25.0 1.13 651 110 I,llt 15.6 17.! + q
i M
2 23.1 1.21 688 tot 1,662 14.1 16.1
3 21.3 1.18 618 l3l 3,169 19,5 t3.1,,,
4 16.7 1 A8 643 159 5,646 14,1 1J.6
r n 5 20.1 1,66 583 121 1,999; 19.5 23.4 t+ ` . - t
! 6 19.5 1.82 Sol IS3 2,733 i6.6 1L)
Tot+U 15.988 15.6 11.5
2,489 661'
• f,, ti , ,
ltst0 ' 10.0 mg/1, Cst • 10.1 nail and t • 16.1°C.
r 1 .i. tlC~°
1
. i s r 1 i t ~ t ,Y1 rrT: ' rf
} d
1 rl ~t f
r 7' 1 .ti d 'i Rey
t
. ` a
~l t' r 4 r t i 1
+ r Y
r'
1 I .,l . I V .«...,,a.. «-..•v. wrw-... hJy,iy( q J
r .
1~ 1
1
L
b~
F
r
414
7.0 PUNT CAPACITY EVALUATION RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section presents the results of this evaluation as well as recommendations
regarding design loadings and an 'uprated' plant capacity. The necessary minimum
plant improvements to provide the uprated capacity are also discussed.
7.1 Flow and Waste Loadings for Design
Id ,
f As was discussed in subsection 3.2, the City of Denton Pecan Creek WWTP has '
w historically received and treated a relatively weak wastewater. The
concentrations of conventional pollutants, i.e. 800, TSS and NH, .146 that were
statistically analyzed for the period between` June 1985 and June 1990 are '
,
indicative of a wastewater that is primarily domestic in origin. The 86th
percentile values (average plus one standard deviation) for 800, TSS and INHH ,
.
were determined to be 161 mg/L, 259 mg/L and 19.6 mg/L, respectively: As noted`.,
earlier, these concentrations include all in-plant recycle flows due to the
' location from which influent samples are collected. This fact Indicates that the.'
average influent concentrations to the plant are probably slightly ;1ower.0
weaker than the recorded data demonstrates.
R All of the available historical BOO, TSS and NHj•N data was tabularly presentedk
and statistically ranked for a joint workshop with the City's='ft$ff on
October 30, 1990. After sufficient discussion, it was agreed that the following
" influent concentrations should be utilized for design capacity of facilities for Mj
the 15 MOD improvements,
s I
BOO 200 mg/l rF.
A+
TSS 250 mg/L
W
I' ' NH -N 20 mg/L jr
It was noted that these design concentrations are Intended to include all recycle r
4 .
flows.
4"
, i~ fySK
r
i
i
,
l
.3
y
A N
i
7.2 Final plant capacity Results
based on current TWC criteria, as reported in
The rated TWC design capacity 5.93 MGO and 3.72 MGD for the
r Section 5.1 and illustrated in figure 5-3, are ant capacity of 9.65 MGD.
north and south plants, respectively, for a total PI to air south lant design capacity 1s limited to 3.72
tations.1e As part ofpthe
The s p
limitations and 4.76 MGD due to final clarifier lima
} permit renewal and amendment process for the Pecan Creek plant, the city has {9
~rI p improvements.
agreed to perform the following
ion basins air diffusers in the five north plant aerat,
14
Construct flow equalization facilities
, Construct a sludge dewatering belt press facility
Construct dechlorination facilities
design protect recommends that additional blower.
A concurrent preliminary
In
be provided for the entire plant. ti}e south plant imminent becomes the final
a available air supply, the limiting unit for the by
r As shown on Figure S•S, ,
clarifiers, as determined by overflow rater
' flow to the plant based on these two treatment units is 06
based on TUC criteria, allowing for
allowable design
MGD. The revised total design flow capacity
improvements in the plant's aeration system, becomes 10.69 MGD.`
fi
historical performance data for the Pecan Creek plant has shown in excelient
She hi ermit limitations ov r
' compliance record with existing p
Figure 4-1 illustrates historical flows and ef'antnhas been concentrations n oper linga~rObelow
cY 3,
and NHa•N. As the figure demonstrates, the p
d 1S mg/L TSS concentrations throughout the entire period, and A
`r> 0 BDO an
the 1 mg/L
has been achieving nitrification with increasing e primary exclption to
sampling effluent ammonia-nitrogen in November 1984ci~The
this performance is during the middle of winter in January 1990. A
1
Iti ~ d 1.{
4- 7-2
!s
,
"owl
t
Two important process parameters for achieving nitrification are sufficient
oxygen supply and adequate detention time. The most difficult period of the year
to achieve nitrification is during the coldest portion of winter.
Recommendations from the concurrent preliminary design report address the need
for providing sufficient oxygen supply and adequate basin detention time for the
4 ; plant to nitrify.
r4 7, k! The addition of two new 10,000-12,000 scfm centrifugal blowers to supply the
entire plant is recommended. These blowers, along with the two existing
~ 3,000 scfm centrifugal blowers (the existing positive displacement blowers are " r° ;
to be relocated to other areas of the plant), are intended to serve the plant k
through the 15 MGD expansion in order to provide a sufficient oxygen supply. The
construction of a separate waste activated sludge holding facility and the
3 n necessary modifications required to return Aeration Basin 5 to its originally
designed function are also recommended to provide adequate detention time. The
result of these two major changes is a firm air supply capacity of up to,
~ 18,000 scfm (71 percent increase) and an increase in basin volume and deted°tioni '
time of approximately 13 percent. In addition to these Improvements, north plant
Aeration Basins 1.5 are recommended to be retrofitted with new fine pore ceramic
diffusers to increase the oxygen transfer efficiency in the basins. An anoxic.
selector zone is also recommended to be constructed in each of these basins.;
These improvements will allow improved performance in the basins and will produce
r a more settleable floc to reduce solids carry over from the final clarifiers,
A flow equalization basin is recommended to allow peak wet weather flows to be .
contained at the plant and to allow diurnal flow variations to be dampened. Two
2-meter sludge belt presses are recommended to be installed to allow final '
disposal of waste activated sludge at the municipal landfill. r.
r l~,
Based on the excellent past performance of the Pecan Creek i1HTP over the past T"
five years, the improvements included in the Tk'C discharge permit application,'
and the installation of ntw blowers, it is recommend that the Pecan Creek WTP "s
be rated at a design (maximum monthly average) capacity of 13 HGO and a peak
r ^ -J
A1. III .w '
1 I Sy°
7.3
t 1
i"p
L
.t
J .
r
i
capacity of 23.4 MGD. Although these flows represent a final clarifier surface
loading rate in excess of current T41C design criteria, the plant has demonstrated
the ability to meet the permit limitations at the proposed flow rates. The
current hydraulic capacity of the plant is in excess of 25 MGD. `
figures 7-1 and 7.2 are plots of effluent TSS loadings from the north and south
plant final clarifiers, respectively, as a function of the effluent flow from
q those clarifiers. A linear regression of these data sets yields no discernable ,
relationship between effluent flows and TSS loadings. This lack of correlation a
indicates that thti Pecan Creek WTP final clarifiers have historically perform,
well, even during periods of elevated flow. Due to the excellent past tt,
performance of the final clarifiers and because the plant also includes effluent
filtration, the plant should more than adequately meet the TSS discharge
limitations at a 13 MGD design flow.`
f
a
x During the period March through May 19901 the monthly average flows varied
between 12 and 13 MGD; however, the effluent ammcnla-nitrogen. concentrations were I.= =i
below 3 mg/l in each of these months. The return of Aeration Basin 5 to 3e OO$
W the improved aeration equipment in Aeration Basins 1-5, and-the increased air
supply should allow the plant to meet all of the proposed discharge permit
requirements at a design flow of 13 MGD.
. 9
Table 7.1 shows a listing of design parameters for the treatment plantwith
recommended improvements (improvements previously agreed to by the City in they
permit application plus additional blower capacity) at a 13 MGD design flow rate.
wadi;
rA 1
a
, y
tl, s
I -V~ Y ~R
r
y I yy ,Y f1! f
i.
T~
B t}~a f tl"~ 7.4
r i
r
:
71 J7"
F e , . . , „r q. R.. _;y a v - • 1 1 ~ 1~ ~ T'~7 ~ ~ !r7
r
F
s
FIGURE 7.1
AVERAGE MONTHLY EFFLUENT TSS NORTH
EFFLUFNr TSS LOADING [lb/d) r..
ki 800 r .,a.
14
600
t, ~aL~r ::~7j7yy r • +Npf~
YYdd • op tt{fi r
~ Y+
4W f:
me di
+ ~r
J 20(} as ■ '9i
h~.• R y
!'1. ygCa ~ O 6 F fi
4; a 2 a
NORTH FINAL CLARIFIER FLOW [MOD] a
a
' o
i! ~ ~ FA I} L t ~ PJ l
•
Y a
yj R ~ 4'~f S y 'y r alY~~
t', F Y
t' r S r L, 'Yr Ma.
i ~ t : ~ a ! ps
W'ii
6 ay} ~
i?J Skill
r
3
I
FIGURE 7-2
AVERAGE MONTHLY EFFLUENT TSS SOUTH
EFFLUENT TSS LOADING jib/dj
500 1
x
400
■
300 .'.r
200
r ■ t
r ■ ■ ■
'u
■r
100 tp
d ~ ~ ~ ~ A# 1 {A~
0 1 2 3 4
SOUTH F NAL CLARMR PLOW [MOD)
wry .
A
,14
Ir
0, W
}
"'eel
A
TABLE 1.1
PECAN CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT fLAN1
PROPOSED DESIGN FLOW SUMMARY
+ Major treatment process Applicable design parameterl TVC requirement
c'. unit "
n Ra* sewage Pump station 45 MGO IfIn$ capacity} o
k Equallutton basin Approximately 14 MGO total storage -
Primary clarifiers 1,335 gpd/SF 1 s
~r ~ peek flow 1,800 gpolSF 1 peak flow
r
714 gpd/SF 1 design flow 1,000 gpolSf t design flow
20,620 gpd/LF welt 1 Ptak flow 30,004 gpd1LF were design flow ,
Aeration basin 25 Tbs/day/1 000 cw. ft. 35 1Sa/day/1,000 Co. ft. 1 design flow lr$
/ design flow r'
3.9 lb oxygen per lb BOO 1.2 16 oxygen per 1D 1106 1 design flow
1 design flaw
final clarifiers 1,310 gpd/SF 1 peak flow3 1,200 gpd/SF I peak flow
S
700 ppd/SF 1 design flow3 $00 gpd/Sf 1 design flow dR"
20,400 gpd/LF welt I peak flow 30,000 gpdhF 1 peak flow
s M 1,35 hes dote lion time 1,3 hrs Martian time I peak slow F
1 peak flow9"
R' N~g 2♦S hrp detention tine 3 hrl detention tsms 1 design flow r
fl 1 design rlow;
+ Ltt Wilts 21 gpelft2 1 design flow1 3 gpm/ftt 4 design flow
kt-'
t Chlorine contact basin 20 ninutes 1 peak flow 20 ninutee 1 peak rids
1lased on reeommerled Improwemente.
L U 111 N00 design flow (iaxinim monthly flow), 23,4 NOD peak flow, 1
e
3Yalus exceeds lA design eritarls,
l/uk flows In exuu of It MOD are diverted around litters,
4
4(,
t
f
X
S
Ij el
J' 1
u
B
~ A.
` L
ti ! ^^•+•w~wvr r~.r.+w.w^ ,.......,y,ca. x.~,nmi.NiiiHlPKYlA LMSie,niy3V
Tt
r { / f
9 11',, I_u a e j