Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-05-1993 I 1 i CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKE'P JANUARY 5, 1993 I AGENDA CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL January 5, 1993 Work Session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, January 5, 1993 at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room of City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: NOTE: Any item listed on the Agenda for the Work Session may also be considere1 as part of the Agenda for the Regular Session. 5:15 p.m. 1. Executive Session: A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. 1. Consider action in the condemnation cases of City of Denton v. John Porter, et ux; City of S?gntQn y, Fryman & W is ; and City of Denton v. M. T. Cole Trust. B. Real Estate Under Sec. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under Sec. 2(g), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. 1. Consider appointments to the Citizens Traffic Safety Support Commission and the Historic Landmark Commission. 2. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding amending the sign ordinance and give staff direction. 3. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding procedures for City of Denton elections and give staff direction. Regular Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, January 5, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Nall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the :ollow'ng items will be considered: 7:00 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Consider approval of the minutes of the Regular Meeting cf December 8, 1992. 3. Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for Carmen Morales. 5~3 City of Denton City Council Agenda January 5, 1993 Page 2 1 4. Presentation of Keep America Beautiful National Award. 5. Public Hearings A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning a 1.156 acre tract from the Multifamily - one (MF-1) District to the Planned Development (PD) District with a detailed plan on property located between Avenue A and McCormick, north of Greenlee and I-35, also known as the Greenhill Garden Apartments, for the purpose of a sorority residence and meeting hall. Z-92-022 (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval 5-0.) B. Hold a public hearing and consider a proposal for a variance to Sections 34-124 (e) and (f) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, regarding drainage improvement requirements at Lakewood Addition, Lots 1-19, BI-)ck A. The approximately 22.7 acre development is located on the north side of Orchid Hill Lane, near its terminus at Pilot Knoll Park, in Denton's extraterritorial jurisdiction. V-64 (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval 7-0.) 6. Consent Agenda I Each of these items is recommended by the Staff and approval thereof will be strictly on the basis of the Staff recommendations. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the City manager or his designee to implement each item in accordance with the Staff recommendations. Listed below are bids and purchases orders to be approved for payment under the Ordinance section of the agenda. Detailed back- up information is attached to the ordinances (Agenda items 7.A, 7.B). This listing is provided on the Consent Agenda to allow Council Members to discuss or withdraw an item prior to approval of the consent Agenda. Upon the receipt of a "request to speaklt form from a citizen regarding an item on the Consent Agenda, the item shall be removed and be considered before approval of the Consent Agenda. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: 1. Bid 01436 - Distribution Transformers 2. Bid 01433 - Bore Across 1-35 at Exposition Mills 3. Bid 01440 - Fi-:e Station 04 Driveway 4. Bid 11447 - North Lake Parks 11 Agenca qen,_ City of Denton City Council Agenda ~J of ~7 { January 5, 1993 Page 3 7. ordinances A. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a contract for purchase of materials, equipment, supplies or services. (6.A.1. - Bid 01436) B. Consider adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of contracts for public works or improvements. (6.A.2. - Bid 014330 6.A.3. - Bid 01440, 6.A.4. - Bid 01447) C. Consider adoption of an ordinance approving settlement in Smith v. City of Denton. i a. Resolutions A. Consider approval of a resolution rela0nci to the Medical Dispatch Training Program. B. Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an easement to GTE Southwea*, Incorporated, for the location of facilities upon C'_*y property. C. Consider approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of Denton and County of Denton for thA provision of library services. D. Consider approval of a resolution consenting to the exercise of the pDwer of eminent domain by the Upper Trinity Regional Water District for the regional treated water transmission line from Denton to Old Alton. E. Consider approval of a resolution declaring the City of Denton's disapproval of the proposed change in the Denton/Tarrant County boundary line. 9. Consider an appointment to the Library Board. 10. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. 11. Official Action on Executive Session Items: A. Legal Matters B. Real Estate C. Personnel D. Board Appointments -w7 Awda tta City a-- Denton City Council Agenda January 5, 1993 Page 4 12. New Business This item provides a section for Council Members to suggest items for future agendas. 13. Executive Session: A. Legal Matters Under Sec. 2(e), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. B. Real Estate Under Sac. 2(f), Art. 6252-17 V.A.T.S. C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under sec. 2(g), Art. I 6252-17 V.A.T.S. ~ I I NOTE: THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT ANY TIME REGARDING ANY ITEM FOR WHICH IT IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE. C E R T I F I C A T E I certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the city Hall of the City of Denton, Texan, on the ) _day of _ 1992 at o'clock (a.m. (p.m. ) J CITY SECRETARY ` NOTE., THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IS ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE C HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED ITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 566-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800-RELAY-TX $O THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARYOS OFFICE. ACCOOOD6 ;F CITY i. } oUNCIL f r o oaf 0 o v• O~oO~N GGOD~~~oo ~.ti a~el►oa Ma _23 - ~ r AWda ltF " DR. JOHN A. KIMMEY, JR. ZtfB~~J_'~ ~ 920 WEST HICKORY STREET DENTON, TEXAS 76201-4047 6 December 1991 Ms. Judith Abbott 100 West Oak Ste 310 Denton, Texas 76201 Dear Judith, Due to 111 health I must ask You to accePt Historical Landmark Commission of Denton, Texas. my have Enert ilyrl ved and enjoyed my short time with the commission and wish that things could be otherwise. Guod luck to you and the commission in your excellent work. Sincerely yours, John A. Kimmey, Jr., / 114, Co E} COUNCIL od~o 0 o ((~~dA. ~ b Oty 4 ON O all O n ~~a~QOGG4~~~ T-M krO M t,4COv slal 17 X11 T i i r:l. ~en4rNa e. ' AATR'19 J*Au,,e~lr~~y--S,--3993 CITY _COUN__CIRPORT L TO. Mayor ar,1 Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Sign Ordinance $~C'~MMEtJ nLT7nrr. 2S-Q- M . Staff recommends Council direct staff to prepare an ordinance for Council review. Previous P & Z recommendations have concerned cones is not an ordinanca. Council p M without holding a public hearing ndidirect t ordinance hold a public hearing a,.d makea report on the ordi- nance. If Council d3cides to review the ordinance without further reporting by P & 2, and Council directs a provision not reported upon by P & Z, before the Council could consider the ordinance, P & Z must report on it. The sign ordinance is a zoning ordinance, therefore: 1. a recommendation by P & Z to deny a change requires six (6) Council votes to approve; 2. P & Z must hold public hearings when it considers changes or the ordinance; and 3. notice in the paper must be nude a* least fifteen (15) days prior the ordinance consic3ration by city council. See attachment 3. Procedural Options. 2. R€ag1.14tL. See attachment 2 and the "Sign Book." SuMMA~.Y: See attachment 1 and the "Sign Book.', I~ BACKNp; the "Sign Book" chronology. PAGE 1 AdendtNo Agenda item ~gOGRAMS ~QEPARTMENTS,~Q$.GROUPS AFFECTED: G/ Everyone who sees Denton. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact directly related to review of ordinance changes. The economic development pros and cons of sign control are hotly debated, the studies are per- ceived by some as conflicting, and staff makes no attempt here to quantify the impact. I j Respectfully submitted: i loyd V. Harrell City Manager Approved: V rank' H. Rob in AICP Executive Direc or Planning and Development J Attachments: 1. Recommendation summary. 2. P & 2 Minutes. 3. Procedural Options. AXX002t1 PAGE 2 I Awrdi HO Attachment 1 Apendaiten__&),~ f~l fe %-.5-93 P&Z Issues and Recommendations y 71 / 1. "Face Changing". Recommends allowing non-conforming signs to be altered so long as they arc made no more nonconform- ing. The temporary use permit/comply by January 1, 1996 provision would be deleted. 2. Abandoned signs and supporting structures. Recommends a "use or lose" provision whereby abandoned signs and support- ing structures could be used and "grandfathered" like other non-conforming signs, if the sign or supporting struct.u-re had a blank face or a bona fide sign within about (date to be specified) 90 days of passage of the ordinance. r e Add "use or lose", blank face aesthetic safeguards as follows: I 1) Solid, complete, single color cover; 2) Bagging, incomplete covering prohibited; 3) If no face, the face must be one which the struc- ture was designed to carry; 4) Permit required; 5) Dilapidated or deteriorated condition must be abated; 6) "Blanking" or using not, allowed if over 60% of sign's value; 7) No Certificate of occupancy if illegal sign on premises; and 8) If supporting structure without a face, the face effective area must be conforming. 3. Effective Area Calculation Recommendations: a. Change the enclosed area shape from a parallelogram to any regular shape or combination of shapes. b. For signs with attached faces, measure each face if the angle at attachment is greater than 450. c. Measure cop; area only of signs on walls, fences or buildings (Clarification: This method is used now). 4. Special Sign District. Decrease the qualifying frontage from 600 feet to 300 feet. December 22, 1992 112500276/5 3 i 1 Agenda Iln~~. <<J~ x'7.3 5. Monument Signs: Recommends defining mondWrkt-..gns-and increasing the effective area for monument signs on Loop 298 from 150 sq. ft. to 200 sq. ft. and on IH-35 fron 250 sq. loJ ft. to 300 sq. ft. 6. Allow "banners" on building walla without a permit cr standards. P&Z recommends denial, and recommends adding a 30 day separation period between permits and requiring display of a permit tag on permitted wind devices. 7. Disallow banners over streets. P&Z recommends denial and adding a $00.00 fee to cover the cost of Uti}itie.~ to put up and take down these wind devices. 8. Temporary and stake signs. Recommends establishing n new category of regulated signs called temporary signs; put stake signs in this category. Allow any sized "stake" to support the temporary sign. 9. Sicrs on IH35. a) Recommends measuring the height of signs along IH35 from the main lanes or the ground, whichever is higher. b) Recommends a resolution to change Texas law to allow logo signs in IH35 right-of-way. 10. Flags. Recommends denial of allowing more new national flags. 11. Sign Separation: Recommends allowing 60 foot separation rather than 400 foot separation between signs on one premise where two or more signs are allowed. 12. Clarification issues. Wording changes to clarify existing standards and procedures. See Enclosure 1. 13. P&Z also heard testimony recommending other changes, but recommends no change and did not consider further research or analysis of issues listed in Enclosure 2. 14. Fees. F&Z recommends adding a fee of $75.00 for signs over 250 square feet, a $50.00 fee for special exception peti- tions, and a $60.00 fee for banners put up over the street. o«aec~ u, rvsz A00021616 .'Rene?gnt__L{,!,5 Enclosure 1 G12e _ _~-~-`J3 et, Clarification Ieeues Recommended by Yi8 for Amendment on August I?, 1992 1. Authorize an applicant for s planned development district to utilize the special sign district regulations without meeting the frontage requirement. 2. Add additional standards for approval to the special sign district regulations relating to traffic safety and aesthetics. 3. Clarify in tha PD section of the zoning ordinance the standards under which deviations from the general sign regulations will be approved within a PD district, as the same standards applicable to approval of a special sign district. 4. Add the definition of front yard: Front yard: An open, unoccupieC. space on a lot facing a street extending across the front of a lot between the side lot lines and from the main building line as specified for the district in which it is located (the "building setback line"). 5. Add to the definition of wall sign: Hall Sian means any sign, other than a wind deviceBiig wholly affixed to, supported by, or painted upon the wall of any building, and which is not a projecting sign. 6. Add wind device signs to the typs of signs allowed in the CBD: Type. Ground, wall, roof, stake, wind devic , projecting signs are permitted in central business districts. STAFF NOTE: This issue may be reviewed again in the context of the banner issue. 7. Clarify language associated with removal of unlawful signs: Kotice and Ord_U, Any sign which is erected, located, or altereds-,a#n &Ined in violation of this article may be removed by the Building official as provided herein. 's'he Building Official shall deliver or send a written notice , 8. Add definitions for collector, arterial, and freeway streets as shown on the Thoroughfare and Collector Street Maps. 9, Add the Outdoor Amusement and Recreation (OAR) zoning district to the non-residential zoning district standards section. Street maps. AXX0021616 S~ tiGendeNa _h0/ Enclosure 1 Page 2 AgerdallAm_.Z.L ~_f 10. Create a fee of $75.00 for signs larger than two hundred fifty (250) square feet in effective area. 11. Create a fee of $50.00 for special exceptions petitions. ' 12. Add illuminated sign setback standards in residential districts, the same as for non-residential districts. 13. Simplification Staff proposes to develop a separate document from the ordinance that summarizes the ordinance standards, and has detailed graphics explaining and shoring the application of the standards. i i f AXXD0216/7 AQARd1 NO 4~ n4/ , _ Enclosure 2 Pata Issues Not Recommended for review 7 by P&2 on August 12, 1"92 1 1. Treat religious signs differently. 2. Allow signs on utility poles. Allow 20 foot tall signs on streets where a 6 foot tall sign is now allowed. 4. Definition of a sign. 5. Allow the maximum size of signs up to 100 square feet where the maximum size is 60 square feet. 6. Sign height should be a function of setback. 7. Allow portable signs to be removed from premise and returned within 43 hours. 8. Allow 48 hour temporary use of portable signs. 9. Separate "face changing" from other issues and deal with sooner. i AXX002 6/9 r7 Agenda Itam~,~ #,7 P6L Minutes ATTACNNIENT Z Il118--Z~-5 December 16, Do igg2 Page 3 u( A F T Jt' ,cam deve]opment. If the drainage runoff was increased then improvements would need to be done. Mr. Engelbrecht noted that the petitioners development is not going to have an effect on the amount of flow. is wide and flat and seems like it will b~ of the year, dry during draw 4 parts Ms. Huey asked if there is presently a grass lining, Mr. Salmon said yes and there erosion. doesn't appear to be any I er. Cochran said that land wlti~. a root structure erosion. preven,;s Chairman Engelbrecht closed the public hearing, Mr. Cochran moved to grant the variances in their entirety because the criteria have been met. Special consideration is given because the petitioner is on the receiving the drainage and for aesthetic and practical considerations. Mr. Cooper seconded the motion. end of Diri Engelbrecht stated that he i un ue situation, can see the value of this ii g The channel is wide and very shallow. Motion to recommend approval of the variances carried unanimously (7_0) IX. Hold a public hearing and consider amendments to the sign ordinance, Mr. Robbins sta ldrequest d thin meeting of December e, 1992p the four issues as listed in the back-up e Commission consider Mr. Cochran stated that some of the commissioners were at that meeting, They would like to clarif taken on some of the issues in order to be no change. Y that no vote was indicate that there Mr. Cooper agreed that the commission did not recommendation because they were recommending make a Mr. Robjins said that the issues for which he oComchange. made no recommendation and which the council would like the mission D 1 1 4Q(ndagvv Dec ~ -C-7 P&Z Minutes A December 16, 1992 !ll Page 4 III'IIISSS^111VVVJ666 JI / y~ / y D Commission to consider are the height of signs along 1-?5, flags, and banners over streets. Another issue which was raised has to do with aesthetic safeguards. Chairman Engelbrecht opened the public hearing. David Piles stated that he is the Vice chai,.man of the Chamber of Commerce Governmental Affa.rs committee. The Chamber of Commerce has some specific issues about which they are concerned. Ladybird Johnson wanted beautification of highways. That started in the state of Texas and is now nationwide. As part of that, signs were incorporated into the larger issue. Ladybird Johnson started it in Texas. We took a leadership role on a statewide level. Now the federal government incorporates that into their highway funding as to how signs will be treated. The Highway Department of the State of Texas has spent millions of dollars addressing this very issue. They have a policy which is uniform across the state of Texas. They allow 42 and one-half foot signs. He is not advocating going to that as opposed to 401. It is how you calculate the height. He suggests that the Highway Department proposition is the best way to go. Denton should take advantage of the expertise that everybody else has lent us. height at 40' but look Lt the terrain Beofnthe highway. The objective of a sign is tt, communicate. They are trying to set a standard on that process of communicating by dictating the size of signs. He does not want to take that away from the community. He wants it to be a beautiful community but a degree of reasonableness and a degree of reason needs to be brought into this. The Highway Department's approach is the best way. Look at how high the highway is and at the service road and the property on which the sign is going to be put. If there is a significant disparity, then let them measure it from the mean lane elevation so that the sign can be addressed to those people that are driving on the highway. Shoney's is the example that Mr. Robbins always puts up in a slide on the screen but there is a lot of I-35 in this town that is on other hills and in other valleys. A uniform approach within our city is better than having to hold up just one poor example. Get away from Shoney's and talk about a uniform approach. People will come to town and see that Denton has the same standard as the rest of the interstate system and they already know the process. It won't require staff time and all of the badgering and battling. As he told Council, that approach will save taxpayer dollars, staff time, and will be a reasonable place ~1 P&Z Minutes Dec 1I~II C, / December 16, 1992 li II ~~~ttt Page 5 ~J to draw the line. The Chamber proposes that the City look at the way the height is calculated and follow Ladybird Johnson's leadership. Mr. Cochran stated that having a fixed sign height saves staff time. Measuring different elevations would increase s' aff time. Mr. Biles disagree. He said that staff time would be saved by having fewer variances to process. Back-up will not have to be prepared for the Sign Board of Appeals or the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Robbins stated that staff is recommending that the sign ordinance not be amended concerning the height of signs along I-35. Staff is also recommending that a resolution on logo signs be adopted. Mr. Cooper stated that he feels that the standard to measure the height of signs along the highway is a good one or it wouldn't have been adopted by the State. Denton's current standard does not seem consistent with other cities. Mr. Robbins explains that the current standard is to measure from the grosnd or the curb level of the nearest road, whichever is higher. The service road is often the nearest road. The Commission discussed ways to measure the height of signs. Mr. Engelbrecht stated that the State's approach is not necessarily the best. Their standards are probably the result of legislative wrangling. Many municipalities want a tougher standard. It is critical to have businesses advert'.sed. A logo sign does that best no matter what the topography. The city would have less sign clutter and the business would get exposure when they need it - prior to the exit ramp. Mr. Cooper stated that logo signs are great but he does not think that the Commission will have any impact on getting more of them. Another 12 feet of height in a sign won't hurt anything and will tie in with what the state is doing. Mr. Cochran asked about overpasses. Then signs might get to be very tall. The Sign Board of Adjustment is there to deal C; 1 Agando Ho A{enda liam_#~Z P&Z Dec Minutes If f1 R T FF~r December 16, 1992 III Page 6 t with unique situations. Property owners are not advocating Laller signs. The absence of people at this public hearing indicates that they are disinterested third parties. Mr. Willis disagreed. The Chamber speaks for its members. Mr. Robbins said that the Chamber distributed surveys to 760 people. 350 replies were received. 82% of the 350 favored taller signs on I-35. Mr. Engelbrecht said that if the ordinance is amended, a I number of signs will be raised higher. The trend across the country is for a different type of sign. It is not in the City's best interest to have taller signs. it goes against the national trend. We want to attract people off of the interstate. Mr. Cochran moved to recommend denial of the proposal to allow signs to be measured from the interstate and to recommend that the current standard be maintained. He also recommended that the Council adopt the logo resolution. Motion was seconded by Ms. Huey. Mr. Cochran amended his motion to delete the logo recommendation. Ms. Huey seconded the, amended motion. Mr. Glasscock said that he does not think the business community will let things stay the way they are. The intent to make signs uniform is a good one. Ms. Flemming agreed that the sign issue keeps haunting the City. Businesses and citizens aren't happy. Therefore, she thinks that the highway department standard should be adopted. Mr. Cochran disagreed. He said that the business community has little or no interest in seeing this change. Mr. Engelbrecht agreed that businesses are represented by the Chamber; however, he thinks that the issues were sent back to the Commission simply because they eid not make clear their intent, not because of a loud public outcry. He does not think larger signs will help businesses along I-35 and dues not believe that they will get more people to exit for those businesses. Motion to recommend that the sign ordinance remain unchanged Agenda No Agenda ltem_1~.~~# P&Z Minutes December 16, 1992 Page 7 Dec DRAFT concerning signs along I-35 failed by a vote of 3-4. Mr. Cooper, Mr. Glasscock, Mr. Willis, and Ms. Flemming voted against the motion. Mr. Cochran moved to recommend that the Council endorse the logo proposal. Motion was seconded by Mr. Glasscock and unanimously carried (7-0). Mr. Cooper moved to allow signs along I-35 to be measured from the main lane or from the ground on which the sign sits, whichever is higher. Mr. Cochran asked if Mr. Cooper would like to set a maximum height. Mr. Cooper said that the sign could be 401 measured from I- 35 or from the ground. Ms. Fleming seconded the motion. Motion to allow measurement from I-35 or the ground carried (4-3). Mr. Cochran, Mr. Engelbrecht, and Ms. Huey voted against the motion. Ms. Huey moved to recommend that there be no change in tl.s regulations from banners over the street. Motion was seconded by Mr. Willis. Mr. Cooper asked if City Council approval of the banners is required. Mr. Robbins said no. Mr. Cooper asked if there is a fee to place the banners. Mr. Robbins said no but staff is recommending a $60 fee. Mr. Cooper said that since the utility workers put up the banners, there should be a fee to cover the cost. Mr. Engelbrgcht asked if the fee could he waived for some groups. Mr. ©ucek said that would normally not be clone. Ms. Huey amended her motion to recommend a fee of $60 per banner. Mr. Willis seconded the amended motion. Motion to recommend to Council that there be no change in ADOAdd No AGesd~ ftbtn~~J.S_~ ILJJ P&Z Minutes December 16, 1992 DFA-t I Page 8 the regulations concerning banners over the street except to institute a fee of $60 carried unanimously (7-0). Ms. Huey stated that the Commission intent was that there be no change to the regulations concerning flags. She moved to recommend that there be no change. Mr. Cochran seconded the motion. I Mr. Cooper asked if the regulations only apply to flags visible from the right-of-way. j Mr. Robbins said yes. Motion to recommend that there be no change to the sign ordinance concerning flags carried unanimcissly (7-0). Mr. Robbins stated that the council also asked that the Commission look at aesthetic safeguards for blank signs. He reviewed the staff recommendations listed on the overhead projection as follows: SAFEGUARDS FOR BLANK FACES 1. Solid, complete, single cover color. 2. Bagging, incomplete covering prohibited. 3. Face must be as sign was designed to carry. 4. Permit required. 5. Dilapidated or deteriorated condition must be abated. 6. "Blanking" not allowed if over 60% of sign's value. 7. No Certificate of occupancy if illegal sign on premises. 8. If only supporting structure, e.g. no "can", face must be conforming. Mr. Cooper asked who will determine the value of a sign. Mr. Robbins said that if the City does not agree with the owner that they would have to get the sign appraised. If a supporting structure becomes abandoned, the owner will have to use it or add a can in 90 days. A standard is needed for the can. Mr. Engelbrecht asked if all that was standing was the pole, would it would fit fall under the 60% rule. Mr. Robbie, said that on some of the taller signs the pole is the most expensive part. AgvdaNo 'tem_ Agenda n AF P&Z Minutes December 16, 1992 J v Page 9 I Mr. Biles pointed out that several of the staff recommendations are not in line with what the Council asked the Commission to address. Councilman Miller wanted to prevent signs leaking through pain, bags, and boards that do not sufficiently cover the signs. He agrees that we need that protection. The Council did not say anything about the other items listed in the staff recommendation. He asked that the Commission not address those issues. Finding a way to ensure that same or like quality material is installed for a replacement face or a new face. If the sign originally had a plastic face, then another plastic face should be put in. If it was wood, then the new or ieplacement face should be wood. If they want to paint over a sign face, they must paint the entire face with a quality paint that will maintain coverage. Permits are a separate issue. A permit may be a way of regulations and bringing signs into compliance, but it is not what the Council asked for. Also, sign people have said that 60% of a signs value can be approached just by crafting the face and wiring it. It will probably cost 50% of the a sign's value just to make two faces. He urged to Commission to only review items 1, 2, and 7. Mr. Cochran asked about embossed signs. ~J Mr. Biles replied that with a high quality paint, the depth perception would be changed. Mark Fleege, 1516 San Gabriel, stated that the chamber should not tell the Commission how to operate. The proposed safeguards are to remove dilapidated signs. Just painting the signs won't help. The proposed standards will make the ordinance work and will provide safeguards on a continuic:g basis. The Certificate of occupancy requirement will especially work. If the Commission approves of all the proposals, the worse that will happen is that the Council will say they weren't interested in some of them. Mr. Cochran asked Mr. Fleege about the single color restriction. Mr. Fleege said that it will prohibit art work but would probably work better overall. The proposals will give to-)th to reduce the problem,;. The Chamber has not helped the problems. The abandoned "Bonanza" sign has been there a long time. it is appropriate that the Council has asked for the Commi.asion's input. He thinks the proposals are great. ~y 1 49"Ja NO ~endaMem~~ P5Z Minutes F T December 16, 1992 DRAPage 10 I Mr. Robbins said that one of the proposals is that signs not be made any more non-conforming. There would be no way to tell whether a sign is conforming or not without a permit. _ He has visited with Councilman Miller on these issues. The provisions recommended are enforcement tools for the safeguards. They will be helpful in dealing with abandoned supporting structures. if abandoned signs or supporting structures do not comply, they would have to be removed. That would be difficult to enforce without a permit process. The permit process would also catch problems before people spend their money. Mr. Cooper noted that getting a permit is the way that owners find out regulations. Mr. Robbins agreed. He said that sign contractors also need to be licensed. They take a test on the sign ordinance in order to get their license. The current ordinance does not allow unlicensed sign contractors to put up signs. Mr. Cooper asked if an owner can install the sign himself. Mr. Robbins said yes. on question he said that the feces are f bawd on the size of the signs. Mr. Willis said that the proposals are a way to get rid of some signa and to protect others that are reusable. Ms. Huey asked if the commission is precluded from some of the considerations. Mr. Hucek said that the commission may consider what was p broad osted inWh Whether staff iwordedinthee agenda amendments according pretty direction is not relevant to the commission's discu-,ions. Y chairman Engelbrecht closed the public hearing. He said that he doesn't want to be overly, harsh on those wanting to reuse their signs, he just wants to get rid of those that will never be used. These are mechanisms to get rid of some dilapidated signs. The major method of getting rid of signs is voluntary removal by property owners as their values change. Mr. Cooper said that items 1-3 and 5 are important safeguards. The other items listed a controls. He moved tor commend items are t administrative a5 ias Agend1 ftem_~1_' P&Z Minutes December 1992 Page ].1 methods to address aesthetic safeguards. Motion was seconded by Mr. Willis. Mr. Cochran said that he got a different impression of the _ scope of what the Commission should consider. The Council wanted to correct problems. Staff came up with some proposals. Staff is not supported if we no mechanisms to solve the problems are provided. A permit would help the sign owner as much as staff. A lot of people make mistakes because they are unaware of regulations. A permit is a g ate that can help achieve goals. No one wants valuable signs torn down but there are empty poles out there that won't be reused. The 60% proposal could be a valuable tool for achieving their removal.. Mr. Cooper said that there seem to be aesthetic values and administrative controls. They should be split cut. Ms. Huty said that she does rat perceive that the Commission is precluded from sending enforc^.ment mechanisms. Mr. Engelbrecht said that the last time they didn't send enough materials to the Council. If the Commission sends both the safeguards and the controls then this issue will be thoroughly addressed. The Commission discussed materials for replacing and painting sign faces. Mr. Cooper asked if the property owner could paint the signs without getting a permit, Mr. Robbins said no and a permit couldn't be issued to paint a 6ign that was not designed to be painted. Mr. Willis said that it is reasonable to allow a sign to be painted for a short per'od of time. The owners don't want y the signs to stay empty and the new occupant can change the rl face. Ms. Huey aimed if bagged signs will be grandfafhered. Mr. Robbins said yes. I a sign is auandoned but is conforming, the face must currently be blanked. Bagging is now legal and would be grandfatherpd. The ordinance could be made retroactive concernin•1 bagging but that is not normally done. Normally the new regulations would only AQeqUaNo Agenda Ilem___ 1t15~ 2 P&2 Minutes December 16, 1992 !llJ1JJJ ~ l~ 111SS5~~~ ~~~555 Page 12 ~ipn?y to future abandoned signs. Mr. Bucck said that the argument might be made that bagging is not blanking. Blanking could be clarified. Motion to recommend items 1, 2, 3, & 5 as aesthetic safeguards carried unanimously (7-0). Mr. Robbins said that a way is needed to determine whether a structure is conforming or not. Ms. Huey moved to submit items 4, 60 7, and 8 to the Council I as a means of facilitating aesthetic safeguards. Motion was seconded by Mr. Glasscock and carried unanimously (7-0). Concerning enforcement, Mr. Robbins reported that there has been no enforcement of current regulations on abandoned signs and supporting structures since May. They were all supposed to be removed by June but no enforcement has taken place because that issue was in the amendment process. The other area that staff has ceased to enforce is wind device permits. There are now over 200 banners up in Denton. It is difficult for staff to enforce standards that keep f changing or that are being considered for change. Mr. Engelbrecht stated that it may be appropriate to recommend that the provisions considered by the Commission tonight be acted on so enforcement can resume. He moved to recommend that the remaining issues of the sign ordinance be dealt with in a timely manner for enforcement and so that businesses can move forward one way or another. Motion was seconded by Mr. Cochran and unanimously carried (7-0). ATTACHMENT 3 PROCEDURAL OPTIONS 1. Council directs that an ordinance be prepared for P & Z review prior to Council review or consideration. 2. Council directs that an ordinance be prepared, Council _ receives it, asks P & Z to report on the ordinance, then Council considers the ordinance, after a public hearing. 3. Council directs that an ordinance be prepared, holds a public hearing and considers the ordinance without further P & Z review or reporting. i I AXX0027E ~J• Agenda Na agendaIten;.~~', te__ _.0`-_._ / ~1 ply Q i9 December 31, 1992 MESSAGES ON SIGNS 1. Messages or advertising on "used" abandoned signs or support- ing structures: • should allow any message. • may be off premises sign. • off premises siyn will trigger 1500 foot spacing rule, unless exempted from spacing standard. I off premises signs on IH-35, 380 and 377 regjire state f license and $10,000 bond. 2. Flags. • Allow any message, symbol, logo, emblem, national flag on the "business flag" pole now authorized. If this provi- sion were adopted it would eliminate the national flag of visitor issue raised by councilman Miller. 3. Temporary signs. • In order to regulate temporary (stake) signs, the type of message on the sign determines the application of sign standards. The City Attorney is continuing to research the legal issues this technique presents. flit 1} f tr t F ~ fix I CITY ~1~1 4 rip ICOUNCIL t O. 00 CZ e O ro k t t+ V. ~ ~~~~L'aGG00~~~ t, i 7 Ago* No. ApW ftM_._ D CITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BWLDlNQ / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (817) 566.8307 Office of the City Manager MEMORANDUM i ~ I I TO: Mayor and the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager Jennifer Walters, City Secretary SUBJECT: 1993 City Elections DATE: December 31, 1992 The 1993 City Council election will be held on Saturday, May 1, 1993. If necessary, a run-off election will be scheduled for May 22, 1993. This year the four single member district elections plus an at- large school district election will be conducted by City personnel. Any changes in voting places must be pre-cleared by the Justice Department and submitted no later than February 11, 1993 in order to meet time requirements. Over the last few years, the City Secretary's office has conducted a combined City/School District election in coordination and cooperation with the County Clerk's office. The County Clerk has been involved by making available County election equipment, tabulating machinery, software, and County personnel to tabulate punch-card ballots which were used by the City. The City paid a cost to the County for these services which last year totalled some $600 dollars broken down as follows: charge for two tabulators $500.00 (personnel) rental of equipment $100.00 These costs were split between the City and the School District. The County has indicated that these costs would increase somewhat for the next election. In preparation for this year's election, several alternatives for conducting the election have been explored. First, some investigation was done of an arrangement which would have the City contract with the County Clerk's office to fully conduct the election for us. This would involve selecting all of the election workers, staffing polling places, furnishing all equipment, and i AgSmda No tabulating the results of the election, and formally certifying, ' the o us. ~ ~ electior, would be limited. i)ersonnei involvemec untti1n the actual n el for `Nontransferable ons which the for Include fi plieCactyctiewoon onuthldresuulte bares t llotspon,sfiibllieng expe d it ure/contrlbut-ion p statements and custodian of the election documents. This t of arrang is utilized by various school districts and cPties within mDallas County and is likely in effect in other urbanized counties within the State of Texas. Following some initial exploration of this option, it was concluded that the City should retain primary control of the City election process and limit the County's functions. in that mode, thattachedvdraft agreement betweenothe City and the County was prepared as a working document for discussions between the two bodies. As noted, the city would continue to have primary responsibility for the election and the County's involvement is limited. The agreement does eclarify that the County Clerk would have control of the tabulating room, which Is used to tabulate the ballots, with the presence of City officials in the room specified. In the past, activities In the tabulation room have been a point of contention on the part of some poll watchers and it is felt that it would be highly desirable to clarify the official who is formally in charge of the room so that proper decorum and order can be maintained. The other change In the proposed agreement would specify that early voting take place at the county facilities on Oak Street versus City Hall. This change is stron^f.lY desired by the Count since he feels that a common early voting location would simplify the procedures for the Y Clerk f public Controversies have occurred i~with iIndivid alsoidurf gtearly voting at City Hall which have ultimately involved his office. It G voting occur ed that another lrontations might be lessened If early Is his offered to provide the Oak Street facilityrto they Hell. He has voting purposes at no cost. Mr. Hodges has strong feelings about this issue and may be unwilling to provide County assistance if this location change is rejected. different location for early voting %ould avo d so efconfusionaand would free up cram.jed Ci'-.y Hall space). As we were working to finalize this agreement to bring to the City Council, another complicating factor occurred. As you are are, Senator Bentsen has been designated as the new Secretary ofathe Treasury and this has resulted in a United States Senate seat vacancy. The Governor is in the process of making an interim appointment to that seat and a special election must be called to "fill out" Senator Bentsen's term. Although the Governor will set the data, speculation indicates that the date may be May let, the 4 { same date as our City elections. The selection of this tth the result In two complications to the proposed arrangement with the County. First, since the County would be conducting a County-wide election for the Senate vacancy, their tabulating machinery must be programmed and used to complete the count for that election before the City of Denton ballots could be tabulated. Thus, the results of the Denton City election might not be known until late into the evening or early in Lhe morning because of the primacy of the County election count. This would be the case unless a common ballot was utilized, which Mr. Hodges Indicates is a possibility. Other area cities such as Carrollton have indicated that they fall into a similar problem with their Dallas County tabulators. Secondly, if the Oak Street location is utilized for the City early election, the same early voting place would be utilized for both 1 elections. The City early voting would occur in one room and the 4 Senate election voting would occur in an adjacent room. This arrangement has both pros and cons. From the standpoint of the voter, it would be more convenient to go to one location to cast your early votes for both elections. On the other hand, there might be some confusion because of the two different elections. When these additional complications arose, the City Manager and City Secretary investigated other alternatives for the Council regarding this election should associati.n with the County not be desired. First, the City could abandon punch card voting and revert to the use of paper ballots. These ballots would be counted by the election workers at the individual polling places in accordance with State Law. Counting could occur periodically throughout the day so that a big delay in announcing the results would not occur C Howeverp ityheelectionis,asflathe st election. The e thuse of e 1986 paper Bond ballots in a s co elections,maincl ding then City ofoLewisvilleaper ballots for city It has also been discovered that Eome entities, including the City of Plano, the Plano ISD, and the City of San Marcos, contract with firms to provide tabulation services. These firms supply not only the equipment to tabulate results but also operators who perform the necessary pre-test of the equipment and run the equipment on the evening of the election. In the event of a run-off election, however, paper ballots would probably be used as the low number of voters would make this method of tabulation too cost prohibitive. Under this arrangement, voting booths and associated equipment would continue to be provided by the County and Tim Hodges has indicated such would be made available to us if we decide that this route is the preferable direction for the City. Should the Council decide to pursue this alternative, bids will be received from 3 ti ageeddNo Ae various tabulating firms within the next several weeks. Ho evdi,A~ the price of this service will be substantially higher than has been the case in the past. Gee firm contacted indicated a price of about $7,500. The same firm indicated that other cities will probably be in our same position and urged an early decision regarding the use of their services before all their resources have been committed. Because contracts must be drawn and pre-clearance activities must commence in the very near future, City staff desires direction from the Council as to procedures you would like for us to follow in the , upcoming election. The following alternatives are available: 1. Contract with the County for limited County services as provided In the attached agreement. Advantages: (1) this arrangement has basically been the procedure followed in the past and would involve the least amount of change; (2) the cost of such service is very reasonable ($600 for last year); (3) more moder:t voting arrangements Mould be available with which most individuals are familiar; (4) a centralized early voting location would be more convenient to the vast majority of individuals casting ballots. Disadvantages: (1) with a possible County special election for May 1, release of election results might be substantially delayed from previous years' experiences or else a combined ballot would be necessary; (2) the change of the City's early voting location could be confusing to some individuals; (3) with division of responsibility between the County and City, some confusion might remain as to responsibilities of various Individuals for different aspects of the election. I 2. Utilize paper ballots by the__City and have the City conduct the entire election. _ Advantages: (1) this is by far the least exrensive election method (total City election expenses could be reduced from $4,694 to $3,094, or by approximately ;1,600, If this methodology is utilized); (2) the release of election results on May 1st could be very timely. Disadvantages: (1) paper ballot counting would be more susceptible to errors and thus decrease confidence in the election results; (2) the use of paper ballots could be perceived by the voters as a "backward" step and a less modern way to conduct an section. 3. Contract with an election company to tabulate the ballots. Advantages: (1) the same type of election as ?.ad been in the past could be facilitated for voters; (2) the election results could be disseminated rapidly on election night; (3) the City would keep complete control of the election from start to finish, thus pin-pointing responsibility and authority. 4 ~erdsNo Ageoda Item Disadvantages: (1) this is by far the most costly method ` It is estimated that this could increase the election cost by approximately $7,500. Assuming splitting the costs with the School District, City election expenses would increase by $3,750; (2) A secure place would have to be found for the storage of tabulating equipment after the pre-test. With cramped City Hall space, this could be a difficulty as well as arrangement for spectators on election night; (3) Since the City has never been in charge of tabulation, there could be some confusion on election night with poll watchers, etc. who desire admittance to the tabulating room. Since the DISD is involved in the election process, it is important to obtain its views concerning this issue. Because of the closing of their Administrative Offices for the holidays, it was impossible to visit with their staff about this issue. Such will be done early next week, and the results reported to the Council on Tuesday evening. As you can see, there are pros and cons for each of the alternatives. We would appreciate Council providing direction so that appropriate arrangements can be made to facilitate the upcoming election. h AMM00217 i 5 A ~ Aufdalleni._. ELECTION CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF' DENTON THE DENTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE COUNTY OF DENTON FOR AN ELECTION TO BE HELD SATURDAY, MAY 1, 1993 i• Administration/Scope of Service The Denton County Election Administrator agrees to coordinate, supervise and handle all aspects of establishing a Central Counting - Station in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Election Code and as outlined in this agreement. The Denton County Election Administrator also agrees to provide the necessary equipment and an early voting polling place as outlined in this agreement. All other matters associated with conducting elections are reserved for the Denton City Council, the Denton independent school District or their employees. Ii. Early voting Polling Place The County of Denton agrees to provide its location of 215 East Oak Street for early voting by personal appearance. Early voting by personal appearance will begin April 12 and continue through April 27, 1993 during the hours of 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. An additional Saturday voting day will be determined by the City Secretary at a later date. The Denton County Election Administrator will make the East Oak Street facility available to the City Secretary during the above listed days and times and days and times necessary for set-up and take-down of equipment. No fees will be assessed by the county of Denton for the use of this facility. III. Electronic Voting System Each participating authority agrees that voting for the joint. electio:: will be by use of an electronic punch card voting system approved by the Secretary of State in accordance with the Texas Election Code. The Denton County Election Administrator will be responsible for the preparation of programs and the testing of the electronic voting system used for tabulating the ballots. The cost for everything necessary to provide a complete system ready for operation, frames for the votomatics, programming and testing of equipment used at the Central Counting Station, ballot boxes, locks, punch card voting demonstrator units and other election equipment necessary for the proper conduct of the election, and using the electronic voting system for the election, will be determined by she Denton County Election Administrator and approved by the participating authorities. The Denton County Election Administrator agrees to estab•ish a Central Counting Station to receive and tabulate the voted ballots as outlined in Section V. of this agreement. `V\I 1 IV. Election Judges, Clerks and Other Election Personnel `S The Denton County Election Administrator will arrange for the selection of a 't'abulation Supervisor and any other personnel necessary for the efficient tabulation of ballots at the Central Counting Station. The Manager and Tabulation Supervisor shall be compensated in an amount fixed by the authority establishing the Counting Station and as approved by the participating authorities. All other judges and clerks necessary for the proper administration of the election will be determined by the Denton City Council. V. Returns of the Election The Denton County Election Administrator will be responsible for establishing and operating the Central Counting Station to receive and tabulate the voted ballots in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Election code and of this agreement. The complete control of the Central Counting Station will rest with the Manager of the Central Counting Station. Access to the central Counting Station shall be determined by the Manager of the Central Counting Station and shall in.lude but not be limited to the Manager of the Central Counting Station, the Tabulation Supervisor, the Presiding Judge of the central Counting Station, the City Secretary, and any other official as deemed necessary by the Manager of the Central Counting Station. The participating authorities hereby, in accordance with Sections 127.0020 127.003 and 127.005 of the Texas Election Code, appoint the following Central Counting Station officials: Manager - Tim Hodges or his designee Denton County Election Administrator J Tabulation Supervisor - (appointed by the Denton County Election Administrator) Presiding Judge - (appoiinted by the Denton City Cou.., 'l The Manager or his representative will deliver timely cumulative reports of the election results as precincts are tabulated. The Manager will be responsible for releasing cumulative totals and precinct returns from the election to the candidates, the press, and general public. The Denton County Election Department will prepare the unofficial canvass report after all precincts have been counted, and will deliver a copy of the unofficial canvass to each participating authority as soon as possible after all returns have been tabulated, but in no event later than 10;00 a.m. Monday, May 3, 1993. Apand~N~ _ 93-ca/ AgendaIfenc_ldl_ 3.. ' V1• Run-qff Election G If a run-off election becomes necessary for any participating authority, the run-off election will be held on Saturday, May 22, 1993. The Denton County Election Administrator will provide the same level of service for this election as was provided for the May 11 1993 election. I i 1 f ACCOOOA3 { C I T'Y `COUNCIL + z r i{Tlif t ;i lit lit I l 11}Irt $ j i. $ - - - - - - - - - - - - oo~o e r c e "~°°0 1 i OQ. o~ 8 ~ :o c o ~ g p ~QO b . UT ~~~dLaaGOD~ ~t ~i~ y Ag"i No AQMIt /m AGENDA T,!9_1_, S--~..Z- CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL e., December 6, 1992 The City Council convened into the Work Session at 5:15 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins; Council Members Brock, Chew, Perry, Smith and Miller. ABSENT: None 1. The Council convened into the Executive Session to discuss legal matters (considered action in In Re: Flow and considered action in Smith v City), real estate and personnel/board appointments (considered an appointment to the Citizens Traffic Safety Support Commission). 2. The Council received a report and held a discussion with the 191 Committee regarding improvements to the Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation Center and sidewalk projects and gave staff direction. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the 191 Committee had reviewed the conditions and proposals for the MLK Center. They agreed that t;ie phased approach was an excellent idea and felt that as the projects were long term and not maintenance, it was appropriate to use the bond money. The current CIP program was completed. There was $300000 of sidewalk money left and the Committee reviewed possible locations for usage. All of the proposed areas were connected except for one with other bond projects. If the Council agreed with the locations, bids would be done shortly. Council Member Brock asked if the current sidewalks and not new sidewalks. Svehla replied yes that they would be rebuilding the p°esent sidewalks. Consensus of Council was to procefd with the projects. 3. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the day care licensing of Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation Center's Kid Connection Program, and the transfer of the program to After School as an After School Action Site under the management of the Children's Programs Supervisor. Lloyd Harrell, indicated that items three and four would be considered at the same time. Rich Dlugas, Superintendent of Parks, stated that the Kid Connection Program started as a licensed program in 1990-91. At that time, the requirements of the license :stated that children in 11911d4 No Q _ c?o age%da!!em__. X02 !e - City of Denton city council Minutes y 3 December 8, 1992 Page 2 the program could not mix with other children in the area. That limited the interest in the program. A second concern was that the forms were very cumbersome to complete as required by the licensing agency. The attendance at the program dropped with an average of 10-15 children by the end of the school funding was threatened due to the low attendance. CDBGlrequested that the program be reevaluated. For the 1991-92 school year, the program had been run as a non-licensed program. This did not allow for a crirLnal background check on employees. Staff was recommending to relicense the program which would allow criminal history checks. Due to a change in the cooperation with the area residents, staff would work with the residents in completing the necessary forms. A waiver would be requested to allow the participants of the program to mix with other children in the Center. Council Member Perry stated that an additional concern was that the program be the same as all the other programs in the City. That ` was very important to him. Mayor Pro Ten Hopkins asked if there had been a meeting between the residents and staff regarding this issue. Council Member Chew replied that it had been determined that there was no need for the meeting as it was not the parents who discontinued the licensed program. The parents were now in favor of a licensed program. The program was changed due to a potential loss of funds. Council Member Miller asked if the children in the program would be able to intermix with children in the recreation center. Council Member Chew stated that the program could continue without the waiver but it would enhance the program to have that ability. Dlugas stated that another issue was the possible inequity in the programs in terms of staffing the programs. Originally it had been recommended that the MLK program be staffed with volunteers from TWU as opposed to paid stiff. staff was now recommending that the program at MLK be funded with enrichment leaders paid with CCSG funds. Thus all of the sites would be have paid staff. A third concern was providing the same amount of time for enrichment activities at all of the sites. A schedule of enrichment classes was receivedo5eh ursdofl nrichmenty during the month at each student would final concern was if the parents involved in the program were still interested in an enrichment program even with an increase of the fees. The overwhelming response by the parents was yes and they City of Denton City Council Minutes a Y- December 8, 1992 Page 3 indicated teat they wanted the program to start as soon as possible. Consensus of the Council was to proceed with the proposals as presented by staff. 4. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the city Council's concerns regarding the addition of an enrichment Program for the Parks and Recreation Department's After School Programs. This item was discussed ,,ith Item 13. The Council convened into the Regular Session at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins; Council Members Brock, Chew, Perry, Smith and Miller. ABSENT: None 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of the Regular Session of November lo, 1992, and the joint session of November 16, 1992 with the Denton Independent School District Board of Trustees. Smith motioned, Chew seconded to approve the minutes as presented. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", ind Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 3. Presentation of the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award as an "Especially Notable Communication Device" from the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1992. Kathy DuBose, Director of Accounting and Budget operations, presented the award to the Council for the City's Annual Program of Services for 1391-92. ti I!e <f City of Denton City Council Minute:: December 9, 1992 Page 4 4. Citizen Reports A. The Council received a citizen report from Tommy Richardson regarding the Denton Youth Football Association. Mr. Richardson stated that he represented the Denton Youth Football Association and he wanted to thank the City for furnishing the fields to play on and to thank the Park staff for their cooperation in working with the Association. He also thanked Council Members Chew and Brock fcr their interest and participation with the Association. He felt it was the job of the Association and the city to provide adequate fields for the children to play on and thanked the Council for providing such. 5. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance approving a rezoning of a 32.045 acre tract of land from the Agricultural District to the single Family-10 District, with conditions, SF-10(c), on property located on the east side of Country Club Road, approximately 920 feet south of Hobson Lane. Z- 92-023 (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommendel approval with conditions 6-1 at its meeting of November 11, 1992.) Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated this was a zoning change request from Agricultural district to SF10- conditioned. The condition was that the adjoining lots between Forrestridge and the proposed zoning would not be smaller than 1300 square feet in effe tive area. Twenty reply forms mailed out with 2 received in favor, one returned undecided and four returned in opposition. The infrastructure to support the proposed zoning was in place or would be in place after platting by the developer. Only the use of the lots would be considered at this meeting and the layout of the property would be considered at a later meeting. There was one zoning case and district in the City as an SF13 buffer. The case might be a precedent setting case in terms of how far the Council should go regarding buffer zoning. The Denton Development Plan had a strong statement regarding housing diversity. It stated that housing diversity was strongly encouraged in Denton and as a whcle. Housing diversity was defined in units per acre. SF10, SF13, and SF16 were zoning districts in which the units per acre would be in the low category. The housing pattern should be well planned to maintain neighborhood integrity. One of the issues was that there did not need to be a great deal of transition between housing types in the same density category. In addition, the principle policy was the intensity policy and was the proposal in accordance with the intensity allocated to the area. This was a low intensity area. The proposed zoning was for a age'!da No City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 7 Page 5 i category in which the density allocation was approximately one- half of the allowed intensity and actually decreased the intensity which was allowed. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Tom Jester, representing the owners of the property, the owners were requesting SF10 zoning which was the onlyaitemtthe Council would be considering at this meeting. one of the conditions was for SF13 on the lots which abutted Forrestridge. It was his opinion that the property would not hinder the development of Forrestridge or devaluate the current property. He detailed the conditions which would be imposed on the development of the property. He felt that the development would provide alternatives for the housing area. Council Member Miller asked how many lots would be SF13. Jester replied that there would be a cul-de-sac with no through street which would have four lots zoned SF13. Council Member Smith indicated that there would be a fence along the south side of the property and asked if there would be one on the east side of the property. Jester replied that there had been no decision made at this time regarding the east side of the property. The developer had agreed with property owners to construct the fence on the south side of the property. Mayor Castleberry asked if the developer had proposed SF13 on the cul-de-sac lots. Jester replied yes. Mary Tisher stated that the land adjacent to the south border was her property. She had concerns on the effect of the development on her property. It could either hinder or add to future development. Mr. Todd had worked very hard with her family in addressing her concerns and reservations. She felt that there would be no adverse effect on her property with the proposed development. Perry Slack stated that he was the president of the Forrestridge Homeowners Association. one of the members had received the original notification letter. He felt that the zoning from SF16 to SF10 might have detrimental effects on the current property values. The homeowners association had met with the owner of the property. They felt it was too mach of a down zoning to reduce the zoning to VON 141f) AgvUaltem_ City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 6 SF10 in one area of the development. He asked the members of the audience in opposition of the zoning to stand. There were many individuals in the area who felt that this would not be good planning. Sam Rosson pre:,ented some background information regarding the development of the area. Th., development was moving in a southwesterly direction. The proposed development would be a block to that trend. He felt that the continuity and integrity of the neighborhood should be maintained and was concerned with the reduced zoning. It was no concession to have the cul-de-sac as there was no other way to plat that part of the development. The Planning and Zoning Commission, as long as the development met the guidelines, was obligated to approve the development. The Council needed to determine if it was good planning to reduce two zoning levels. He asked Council to maintain the continuity and integrity of the neighborhood and vote against the proposal. John Massey stated that he was very proud of the beauty of Denton. He felt that the challenge of the Council was to maintain that quality which had been in Denton for many years. He felt that a pattern would be established for the area and asked Council to vote against the proposal. Amy Quate stated that there was a positive momentum in Denton for development. The Planning and zoning commission had the responsibility of examining the proposal to indicate to Council if it were consistent with the policy. It was the job of the council to provide judicious management. The residents in the area paid a lot of tax money. The developer indicated that small lots and small houses needed to be built. That was not true. It was an advantage to the tax base to have larger homes. What was proposed was lots which would be smaller with smaller homes with possible back alleys. The developer would make the maximum amount of money by maintaining the integrity of the current neighborhood. Bill Reed indicated that the neighbors had invested a great deal of money and time in their neighborhood. They relied on the council to take a close look at what was happening in the area. Did the proposal meet the wishes of the residents of the area. He asked that the Council keep the neighbors concerns in mind. He asked Council to reject the plan until a specific plan had been developed. Lynn Dower stated that she was very directly affected with the proposal. She felt that it was imperative that the Council realize that the neighbors were not totally against the development of the area but urged the Council to maintain the integrity of the Ae3n~larJO ~3_'G'c~/ City of Denton Cit December 8 Y Council Minutes Page 7 r 1992 neighborhood. Jane Gidder stated that she had recently area. She was concerned with the developmenthofethe area behind her home. The lots ranged in excess of 1600 square feet and some of the larger tots were 2200 square feet. The disparity between the lot sizes was too great. The petitioner was allowed a five minute rebuttal. Tom Jester stated that the as as this time and that the exacttlayoutwof the2pr only for Iand use at at this time. The layout needed to be approved property was not known Zoning Commission. The lots would be 10000 squa a feet with the lots selling between $35-45000, It would be a qualit There was only 300 feet of the proposed develo Forrestrid e. Y development, The developer wasetryirglto benoa street going into Forrestridge. SF13 lots between the developments good neighbor by providing the The Mayor closed the public hearing. Council Member Miller asked if there were alleys proposed for this development. Robbins replied that alleys were not addressed. Proposed but could be Council Member Miller stated that the Planning Commission minutes indicated a proposal for 16-17 adjacent to the Forrestridge area. Were those lotslstillpart of the proposal and would there he a fixed number of lots in the ordinance, the Robbins replied that a condition could be added that adjacent lots to Forrestridge would be SF13. The Planning and Zoning minutes reflected what happened at the neighborhood meetings. Council Member Miller asked what was the adjaaant Zoning. 04 was a includned aethree acre sq alre for commer ial re s t development which a road on the eastern end which was zero lotlail ineuhomes plan. There was any development there would be public review of the detai Before led site council Member Miller asked about the east and south side of the development. Agenda No -CiLi City of Denton City Council Minutes s - 9 December 8, 1992 d 7 Page 8 Robbins replied that that property was agricultural zoning and was largely undeveloped. Council Member Brock asked about a discussion Council had had about establishing procedures for the expiration of planned developments if there were no development in a certain time frame. Robbins replied that currently there was no procedure for the expiration of planned developments. Council Member Smith asked about a proposed street which seemed to go nowhere. Robbins replied that city regulations required that a cul-de-sac f could not be longer than 1000 feet. The stub out street would fulfill that requirement. oruvalueMofbtheMhomes issue the size of the lots homes placed on a lot be addressed in zoningould the value of the Robbins replied no it could not. C City Manager Harrell stated that the plat shown was a concept plat given by the developer. The developer was under no obligation to configure the property in that way. a proposed plat would have to be iledjwith staffnforeplza-ring and Zoning Commission and Council approval. Wng and Council Member Perry asked Robbins to review the scope and percentage of the opposition. Robbins replied that 20 notices were mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the proposal. Two were returned in favor, one was undecided and four were returned in opposition. The opposition percentage was 6.4% of the land area within 200 feet of the area. Mayor Castleberry asked if SF13 was between SF16 and SF10, how that would be formulated in the ordinance. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that the ordinance included a provision that the lots directly abutting the Forrestridge addition would be SF13. Robbins replied that the SF13 condition could be extended but it would be necessary to determine how that would be defined. 1 ~gandaNo __._~.3. -oo! AaEa~affar~_ ~S City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 9 Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins asked what that would do to the stubbed street if that were done. Robbins replied that that could not be determine at this time. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins stated that since the layout that ha.i been shown was not a set plan, a minimum number of lots would have to be indicated which would be adjoining the abutting lots. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that if Council were considering adopting a different type of ordinance than the one requested, her staff would like to look at that ordinance and return at a future meeting. Council Member Perry felt it might be beneficial to havo the developer and the neighbors negotiate again for a more agreeable solution. Council Member Miller stated that given the Denton Development Guide there probably would be a time when the property adjacent to Forrestridge would not be all SF16. He would like the developer and the homeowners to try once more for an agreement for buffer zoning. It was not realistic to think that all of the undeveloped property would always be SF16. City Attorney Drayovitch stated that Council might want to consider postponing the item to a data certain or to table to a date certain or indefinitely as the public hearing requirement had been met. Council Member Brock state P, that diversity was an important. goal in housing but there was a ;seed for housing in the higher property range. She was roncerne9 with lots which could build a sizeable home but also preserve the trees in the area. She was concerned about protecting neighborhood integrity and concerns. Miller motioned, Perry seconded to postpone the item and asked the City Manager to put it back on the agenda after the developer and homeowners met again to try and work out a more agreeable solution. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry Olaye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. The Council held a public hearing concerning amending the sign ordinance and gave staff direction. Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission had made a report to Council. If the Council had other issues it wanted to deal with other than oaerda n~, _ __.93.-co Ader,13II2m__. cL~S-1 ? qrl City of Denton City Council Minutes ~d A December 8, 1992 G' Page to those in the report, there might be a situation where those might have to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A proposed ordinance was provided in the backup materials for Council review. Staff needed direction on how the Council, wanted to proceed with the proposed ordinance. Council Member Chew stntPd that he would like to follow the process the council had already established with a public hearing followed by a work session. After that work session, the Council would then consider the ordinance. Council Member Brock stated that she was concerned about items 7, 9 and 10 on the list of recommendations. The Planning and Zoning ' Commission did not make a recommendation on those issues. Council might benefit from a more explicit indication from the commission. Council Member Miller indicated that he might like to consider some issues before a work session and then proceed with the ordinance. City Manager Harrell stated that the only guidance staff needed which would help the process but not speed it up, was that if there were an issue which was raised by someone but never addressed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council wanted it addressed in an ordinance revision, it would be helpful for council to identify those issues and they could be presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission with a full report to the Council at its January meeting. Robbins presented slides of signs in the area which represented the proposed issues. City Manger Harrell asked Robbins to mention those issues which the Planning and Zoning commission did not address. Robbins indicated that the Commission addressed all of the issues but did not make a recommendation on some of those issues. Council might want to ask the Planning and Zoning commission to make a recommendation on a particular issue. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Fred Gossett spoke in favor of the amendments. He stated that he recently saw a letter from Jostens to the Chamber of Commerce. It stated that recently Jostens doubled its size and felt a positive business climate in the City of Denton and an outstanding work force available in Denton. During the orientation visits for the Peterbilt move, he had heard a number of times how Peterbilt was impressed with city efforts in helping to make the move a reality. 4~srda N~ `13..-.0. City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 11 140 r-from the Hunt organization would not give a testimony indicating city ,s help in opening the outlet mall. If one woul~. take out UNT, TWU, FERIA, the Denton State --chool, 80% of the businesses in Denton would be classified as small businesses. They depended on signs for effective business. He hoped that if changes were made to the ordinance, that it would not be "put to )ed" and if it were found in the future that items needed to be changed, it would be considered. He suggested that Council had the opportunity to show slapport for small businesses in Denton. The Council should not regulate signs so much that effectiveness was severely limited. He encourage Council to adopt the proposed changes. Carl Anderson, Ciiairman-Denton Chamber of Commerce, stated that Council tad shown an effort to work with all businesses and groups in Dento i. The Chamber Board had approved statement. He asked Chamber members whowere7 presentp intthe audience who supported the chamber statement to stand for a show of support. He stated that the Chamber would appreciate a favorable response to these proposed issues. David Biles stated his appreciation from the Chamber to council N;emberi Miller and Brock who attended the early morning chamber meet+.ngs regarding this issue and to Frank Robbins for his assistance. Denton was his home and he was concerned about the avisua future of the the businesses t who needed to make a living in Denton. The seven position points from the Chamber corresponded with items 1,2,3,6,8, 9 and sub-issue 12 of the Council's recommendations. Denton was growing and an issue was whether the growth would be acceptable. The sign ordinance with the proposed amendments was a reasonable balance between business and beautification efforts. If Council adopted the 14 issues, it would eliminate 90-95% of the complaints regarding the sign ordinance. If the 14 issues would be adopted, he would not be in favor of addressing the issue again for quite a while. The Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation was acceptable and reasonable. Joe Dodd stated that he had to speak against the amendments as personally they were insufficient. He did not believe any of the ordinance should exist except for those £tcros dealing with structural safety and public safety. The original intent of the ordinance was to eliminate portable signs. Much of the trouble with Ohe ordinance rested on the Record Chronicle which did not convey the breadth of the ordinance's problems and the depth of its opposition in the business community. Several slanderous stories were written to speak for the law as it existed. Change would be unfair to those who had already complied with the ;urrent ordinance. The premise that the proposed changes would unfairly I Ali City of Denton City Council Min:,ces 3 / 3 December 8, 1992 Page 12 benefit old Denton business was not true. It would affect new businesses and might adversely affect new small business construction. He urged Council to place most of its emphasis on individuals who spoke before the Council. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Consensus of the Council was to hold a work se-7~ion in January regarding this issue. j Cou,icil took a short recess. h Council Member Brock was not present after the recess. Council Member Miller felt that some type of safeguard was needed to be built int-i the sign ordinance regarding face changing in which the change could not be plywood hammered over the existing sign or a second rate paint job. with the abandoned sign. It should not hbegallowedvtohhaveothe sign painted over or boarded over. He suggested that some type of language be included in the ordinani-e to provide that protection. Council Member Brock joined the meeting. Council Member Miller stated that the 'Planning and Zoning Commission had made no recommendation on the height of signs on IH35. Currently there was a 401 provision. Ee suggested to allow the higher of either the elevation of the laird or the elevation of the interstate to he used for the height of the sign. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins wanted to address the issue of banners over streets. She did not consider thSt the Planning a Zoning Commission had to make a recommendation as they did consndider the issue but had no recommendation for C against banners over the streets. ouncil. she was very much Council Member Smith agreed. City Manager Harrell asked Council Member Miller if he wanted the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss the two hie menti:.ned. he had Council Member Miller responded yes that he would like it discussed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and made part of the work session for Council. Mayor CastlEberry asked if staff needed any further direction. { Age~,da1,om__ .42S City Denton December 8, 1992City Council Minutes /3 a`r Page 13 R work seion in obbins replied that '-ounc+l would consider this item at its first considersabando ed Sign January. anThe d signs i on IH35 with aorecommendation from the Commission for Council. ^ Council Member Chew indicated that he would like the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a recommendation regarding national flags. Council Member Smith stated that the face change recommendation indicated no limit on how many times the face could be changed. Robbins replied correct. Council member Smith stated that then there would be no way of knowing when it would be conforming. i Robbins indicated that Council had asked for a Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for flags but not for banners across streets. Council Member Smith stated that if the other issues were going to ' the Planning and Zoning Commission, that item should be considered also. Council Member Perry indicated that he was concerned with a way to eventually make the signs conforming. He wondered if there might be some sort of incentive to rake the sign conforming. He would like the council to consider a time frame for non-conforming signs to becume conforming. Mayor Pro Tem Hopkins indicated that she would like to have the Legal Department review of the possibility of having an end to the non-conforming signs which would be grandfathered. Could it be legally done or could a tax abatement be given to make tLe signs conforming. Was there a way to help the businesses make the signs conforming. Council Member Miller felt that those issues were a other segment o f the sign ordinance. It could be a future issue tc insider once the and proposed amendments were approved. The issue was pry complex would take x great deal of time to consider. Council Member Perry indicated again that he would like * •onsider this item the next time the sign ordinance was considereL City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 14 C. The council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance approving the rezoning of a 77.6 acre tract of land from the Planned Development District to the Agricultural District on property located on the east side of FM 2181, approximately one- half mile north of Ryan Road. Z-92-028 (The Planning and Zoning commission recommended approval 7-0 at its meeting of November 11, 1992.) Frank Robbins, Etecucive Director for Planning, indicated that this was a request for downzoning in the area for the purpose of j developing a ranch. Six notices had been mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the proposal and one was returned in favor. The Planning and Zoning commission had recommended approval as the proposal complied with the Denton Development Guide. Mayor opened public hearing. Bud Johnson stated that he had purchased the property with the intent to develop a small ranch on the property. There was no need for the planned development zoning. The property would be agricultural as long as he was on the property. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: No. 92-202 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANCE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT No. 68 TO AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 77.6 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FM 2181 APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF RYAN ROAD; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $20000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye" Chew aye , Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. D. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance approving a request to rezone 10.0868 acres to a Conditioned General Retail District. The tract was located on the north-northwest side of Mayhill Road, adjacent to the MK&T Railroad ~1~br~a P.o ~3 - City o: Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 15 tracks. Z-92-026 (The Planning and zoning commission recommended approval 4-0 at its meeting of October 28, 1992.) Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that this was a conditioned zoning district. The only use permitted was to install an antenna on the site. The one lot site would not be developable and a building permit would not be issued until the antenna had an FCC license. Originally the 20% rule had been in effect but the opposition had been withdrawn. The preliminary plat was on the Consent Agenda and could be considered separate from the zoning request. Infrastructure was very minimal for the development and was in place. A substantial amount of right-of-way would be dedicated if the property were ever developed. Current City regulations did not include much regulation of this type of development. He had reviewed other model ordiiances and developed a list of issues. One issue was that whatever was on the tower would not interfere with other frequencies. Structural standards would require a structural engineer to certify that the structure was safe. As far as landscaping was concerned, the proposal would take out very few trees. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Mike Ramos stated that the facility would be 4501 high. The tower would be servicing such areas as cellar phones and pagers. Tower space could be rented to whoever might need such a service. Only the tower could be built on the site. A minimum number of trees would be removed from the area. Approximately two acres of right- of-way would be dedicated for a future Loop 288. Rick Woolfolk stated that the Airport Advisory Board would like to review any future tower requests over 250' high. The Airport Board was not opposed to the tower as it met regulations. He asked that any future requests for towers be reviewed by tha Airport Advisory Board before final action by the Planning and Zoning Commission as certain Federal regulations concerning airport safety needed to be considered. Russ Tinich, representing Andrew Corporation, stated that the Corporation was in favor of the proposal. The design of the tower would be of the highest quality. No one spoke in opposition. f The Mayor closed the public hearinE*. The following ordinance was considered: City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 16 No. 92-203 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM AGRICULTURAL "A" TO GENERAL RETAIL-CONDITIONED (GR-C) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 10.087 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTH-NORTHWEST SIDE OF MAYHILL ROAD, WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO THE M K & T RAILROAD TRACKS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. Mayor Castleberry asked about the effect the tower would have on the proposed hospital in the area. Robbins replied that currently there was no proposal in the area for a hospital. He felt that it would not have an effect if such a proposal were done. Mayor Castleberry asked if the right-of-way dedication was guaranteed. Robbins stated that the City would have the right-of-way when the plat was recorded at the County. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "ayelo, perry 'layell, and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. E. The Council held a public hearing to consider a variance request on behalf of Schneider & Justice, Inc., for East Oaks Addition - Phase III. The request was to exempt the applicant from the Subdivision Regulation requirement of Sec. 34-124, Paragraph f- 3, pertaining to drainage regulations. The 6.697 acre site was located north of McKinney Road, east of Audra Lane and was accessed by Timber Trail Road. V-63 (The Planning and zoning commission recommended approval 5-0 at its meeting of December 2, 1992.) Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the request was for a drainage variance from having to put the drainage in a pipe. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to grant the variance based on the fact that it met the three criteria for a variance. one was that it did not violate a master plan - there was not a master drainage plan in this area. A second criteria was that special or particular conditions were present to grant the variance - in order to comply with the ordinance, the developer would have to build a pipe almost one-half mile to McKinney and, as 1 A~eidaITarr~ City of Denton City Council Minutes y December 8, 1992 Page 17 . there was such a small amount of water it was deemed unnecessary. ! The third criteria was that the conditions were not caused by the owner of property or any prior owner - the developer did not create the lay of the land in the area. Due to the small amount of water, the pipe was unreasonable. 11 The Mayor opened the public hearing. r I No one spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Hopkins motioned, Brock seconded to approve the variance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins Faye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. F. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance approving the rezoning of a 6.033 acre tract of land from the Planned Development District to the office District on property located northwest of N. Bonnie Brae and west of Oak Street, also known as the Vintage Retirement Community. 2-92-029 (The Planning and zoning commission recommended approval 7-0 at its meeting of November 11, 1992.) Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that 17 notices were mailed with one returned in favor. The zoning was consistent with neighboring property. The intensity allocation was consistent with the Denton Development Plan. The Mayor opened the public hearing. No one spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: ti ~1Qsnda Pdo -_~,3 -4_ .Q. City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 18 No. 92-204 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT NO. 69 TO OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT CIASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 6.033 ACRES OF LAND KNOWN AS LOT 1, BLOCK 1 OF THE DENTON RETIREMENT CENTER ADDITION; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE E MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 6. Consent Agenda Chew motioned, Hopkins seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. A. Bids and Purchase Orders: 1. Bid 11429 - CDBG Sidewalk Repair Program 2. Bid 11442 - Fully Insured Managed Care Health Insurance Program 3. P.O. 031330 - Xerox ~I 4. P.O. 1313590 131360, 131361, 131395 - Xerox 5. P.O. 131331 - Bobby V. Gray/EIS Support Services 6. P.O. 031332 - Weston Consulting 7. Check Requisition - Texas Water Commission B. Plats and Replats 1. Considered approval of the preliminary plat of Lot 2, Block A, Exposition Mills, being a 1.609 acre tract of land located on the east side of 1-35N, approximately 200 feet south of Loop 288 and a Comprehensive Pedestrian Access Plan. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval.) 2. Considered the preliminary plat of Lot 1, Block A, and Lot 1, Block B, of the D. Lombard Addition. The 10.0868 acre tract was located on the north- northwest side of Mayhill road, adjacent to the MN.T railroad tracks. (The Planning and Zoning commission recommended approval). I 1 City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 19 U 7. Ordinances N. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and awarding a contract for purchase c,f materials, equipment, supplies or services. (6.A.4.- P.O. 031359, 031360, 0'31361 0`31395) The following ordinance was considered: l No. 92-205 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. The council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of contracts for public works or improvements. (6.A.1. - Bid 11429) The following ordinance was considered: No. 92-206 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUr?DS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew Ye, Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried 4 unanimously. C. The Council t for the xpe diture of consider adoption ipurch purchases tofnamaterialsdioor equipment which are available from one source in accordance with the provisions of state law exempting such purchases from requirements of competitive bids. (6.A.3. - P.O. 031330, 6.A.7. - Texas Slater Com,nission Check Requisition) The following ordinance was considered: 1 City of Denton City Council Minutes 1-1 3 lr December 8, 1992 °7G Page 20 NO. 92-207 LN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR PURCHASES OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE AVAILABLE FROM O NLY ONE SOURCE IH ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW EXEMPTING SUCH BIDS; AND PROVIDINGCANSEFFECRTIVEEDATEEMENTS OF COMPETITIVE i Hopkins motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll voote11 Brock "aye"~~ Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", ye, Perry aye, and Mayor Castleberry "aye'1. Motion carried unanimously. i D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Bobby t', Gray d.b.a. EIS Support Services for personal services relating to annual maintenance of the EIS 131331) (payroll) software, (6.A.5. - P.O. The following ordinance was considered: No. 92-208 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BOBBY V. GRAY d.b.a. EIS SUPPORT SERVICES, FOR PERSONAL SERVICES RELATING TO ANNUAL MAINTENANCE OF THE EIS (PAYROLL) SOFTWARE; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING THE EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew, Smith to adopt on roll vote Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye", Motion carried unanimously, E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Weston Consulting for personal services relating to annual r the CIS (Customer Service Utility Billing) software. (6.A.6. of P.O. 131332) No. 92-209 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH WESTON CONSULTING, FOR PERSONAL SERVICES RELATING TO ANNUAL MAINTENANCE OF THE CIS (CUSTOMER SERVICE UTILITY BILLING) SOFTWARE; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDINE THE EFFECTIVE DATE. Agy,daNo ~~endal?am^~S /0~ _ City of Denton city council minutes y December 8, 1992 Page 21 Smith motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll Vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew aye", P rry "ayes' and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried " unanimously. F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Philadelphia American for City of Denton employee health insurance. (6.A.2. - Bid 01442) The following ordinance was considered: No. 92-210 j AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF EMPLOYEE GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE TO PHILADELPHIA AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FIrNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll voter Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance approving an agreement providing for the lease of office space at 324 East McKinney Street. City Manager Harrell stated that this lease would continue the lease agreement for space across the street. The following ordinance was considered: No. 92-211 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE LEASE OF OFFICE SPACE AT 324 EAST MCKINNEY STREET; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew motioned, Smith seconded to edopt. the ordinance. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew y , Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 1 AgendaNa Ageidaftam__~S City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 L. Page 22 8. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of a resolution DAntoniandgthe City of tCorinth for the impoundment wand disposition of dogs and cats. City Manager Harrell stated that this was a continuation of an annual agreement with the City of Corinth. The following re--olution was considered: No. R92-076 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DENTON TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DENTON, AN INTERLOCPL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CORINTH FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOLDING AND DISPOSING OF DOGS AND CATS FOR THE CITY OF CORINTH; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Hopkins motioned, Perry seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. ' B. The Council considered a enccuraging the Texas Department of Transportati n to continue in its efforts to insure the continued existence of an exit ramp from Interstate Highway 35 to U. S. Highway 77. Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the State had considered cloning the ramp. Area land owners had expressed conce-n with the closing and had asked the Highway Department to aenew rathe cu Therent ramp open until Highway Department a had asked for a eredone solution rfrom the City expressing support for the new ramp. Council Member Chew indicated that the resolution would not commit the City to any money in the project. It merely expressed support for the project. David LaBrac indicated that he was pleased that the Council would consider support of such a resolution. He asked for Council The local nosuppsorturviofvthe withoutlthatnramp in that 1 o ation9 in the area would Robert Raymond, Manager of the Real Estate Division of Unia 1, stated that the ranp was necessary for the continued success of the City of Denton City Council Minutes December 8, 1992 Page 23 truck stop in the area. He strongly supported the resolution being considered by Courcil and asked for their approval. Mayor Castleberry stated that with increased traffic in area, there was a need for the exit ramp. Council Member Miller stated that the idea of trucks going past the new mall was not agreeable to him. The following resolution was considered: I No. R92-077 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, ENCOURAGING THE TEXAS DEPARTMEMT OF TRANSPORTATION TO CONTINUE IN ITS EFFORTS TO INSURE THE CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF AN EXIT RAMP FROM J INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35 TO U.S. HIGHWAY 77; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Miller moticned, Perry seconded to approve the cesolution. On roll vote, crock "aye", Miller Faye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 9. The Council considered appointments to the Lirport Zoning I Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission ank' the Airport Board each recommended three members for appointment. Frank Robbins, Executive )irector for Planning, stated that a number of positions had expired on the Commission. The consultant had just about completed the work on the Master Plan of the Airport. Perry motioned, Brock seconded to appoint Rick Woolfolk, Allie Miller, George Gilkeson with John Dulemba as alternate from the Airport Advisory Board and Ivan G?,asscock, Richard Cooper and Melvin Willis from the Planning and Zoning Commission. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Hopkins "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry aye,, anr, Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 10. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. City Manager Earrell presented the following items: A. There would be no work sessions on December 22 and December 29. In January t`-ere would be a mid-year planning session and continued evaluations of Council staff. Agenda Nu City of Denton City Council Minutes December U, 1992 Page 24 B. A notice had been received regarding a TML briefing on February 8. It would be helpful if some of the Council could attended that briefing. Mayor Castleberry asked Council Membera Perr/ and Brock to assist him with the mid-year planning session. 11. There was no offic,lal action taken oo Executive session items discussed during the Work Session. 12. New Business 4 The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Chew thanked Council for attendance at his Saturday apprecit.tion day. 13. There was no Executive Session held during the Regular Session. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned 10:13 p.m. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS l~ 3ENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACCOOOD4 1 1 f 4 r {T4 ti 1$~COUNCIL p~ o, a, r CS . A A O ~ZOOQaeaccao~° ITITM EMIT- AQMdlfpm ..S 3 _ RESOLUTION in appreoiation of "CARMEN MORALES" WHEREAS, on December 31, 1992, Carmen Morales resigned, after serving as Maintenance Mechanic since July 24, 1972; and WHEREAS, during the past 20 years, Carmen has represented our City in the Community Services Division as an example of a quality service employee; and WHEREAS, the City of Denton has been fortunate in having enjoyed the dedicated and outstanding services of Carmen and wish to recoginze same; and WHEREAS, Carmen has always served above and beyond the efficient discharge of his duties in promoting the welfare and prosperity of the City, and has earned the full respect of his fellow employees, colleag- ues, and citizens of Denton; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the sincere and warm appreciation of Carmen felt by the citizens and officers of the City of Denton, be formally conveyed to him in a permanent manner by recording this Resolution upon the offi- cial minutes of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas and forwarding to him a true copy thereof as a token of our appreciation. PASSED AND APPROVED this the 5th day of January, 1993. BOB C\STLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: C~!~ j Mfr fr 2 I 4 CITY Tf; .,'COUNCIL t 4 + h Ta, o i to o° pe 5 o~~~~~0000~UO~o1 Ml- ~J r ~r? it .1?.: II I i i DATE: J~jt rar ~1 ~3'/~ 9-IU COUNCIL RErpR Agoda TO., Mayor and Members of the City Council I FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Z-92-022, Alpha Delta Pi Sorority House I , The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval (5- 0). 4 ~ j SUMMARY. Rezone a 1.156 acre tract from the Multifamily-one District to the Planned Development District with a detailed plan on property located between Avenue A and McCormick, north of Greenlee Street, also known as the Greenhill Garden Apartments. BACKGROUNQ: See Planning and Zoning Report. PROGRAMS. DEPA, RTM= NTS OR GROUg5 AFFECTED: Surrounding neighbors. Planning and Development Department. Code Enforcement. Building Inspections. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A Respectfully submitted: rrell ' V Prepared by: Z Lloyd V. C Harrell City Manager i ,i Karen K. feshari, Urban Planner Approved: rank H. Robbin AICP Executive Director Planning and Development AXX00272 I PLANNING AND ZONING COMMIS OXON REPORT Tot Mayor and Members of the City Council Case No.t Z-92-022 Meeting Datel 1/05/93 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicants Alpha Delta Pi Sorority r./o Kay Lamb 2224 Woodbrook Denton, TX 76205 Current Owners Ruth N. Cooper Davis 606 Roberts Denton, TX 76201 Requested Action, Rezone a tract from the Multi-family-one (MF- 1 1) district to the Planned Development (PD) district and consider a detailed plan for purpose of a Sorority Residence and chapter meeting room. Location and Sigel A 1.156 acre tract located south of Underwood with the eritern boundary being Avenue A and the western boundary being V.'r,-aIck, also known as the Greenhill Garden Apartments. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - SF-7; vacant and residences South - GR 6 SF-7 (SUP); gas station, convenience food store and Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity East - SF-7; residential West - C; Texaco station Denton Development Plant Low Intensity Area I I r I AQs IaNn Aieidi 10r)_ r (Case Z-92-022) Page 2 L SPECIAL INFORMATION - Transportation: r As the property is already platted and only remodeling of the existing building will take place, public unwarranted improvements are , Utilitieat a Water: An eight-inch water line exists in Avenue A and a 16-inch exists in McCormick. A two-inch water meter serves the complex from the elght- inch line in Avenue A. Sewer: An eight-inch sewer line exists in Avenue A and in McCormick. Fire: Fire hydrants exist at the northeast corner of Avenue A and Greenlee as well as the southwest corner of Underwood and McCormick. Fire flow is adequate for the intended use. Electric: Changing apartments to a Sorority should have no effect on electric utilities. Building Inspeotionsl { An on-site inspection was done. The proposed assembly area building can be altered to provide handicap ramp and toilets. A building permit is required for the ramp and proposed addition to the front of assembly building. New Certificates of Occupancies are required. HISTORY It appears as though this property has been zoned multi-family since 1969. On or about February 1982, the Greenhill Garden Apartments were constructed on this site. On September 6, 1992 the Planning and Zoning commission heard this case and recommended approval with the conditions that: i (Case Z-92-022) Page 3 HISTORY (continued) i I Prior to City Council approval, the applicant shall present the City with a Declaratien of Restriction assuring the City that condition #4 of Section 35-112 of the Code of Ordinances will be complied with. ~ I The applicant was unable to secure this document. Therefore, in order to deviate from the parking regulations, the applicant has changed their request from a specific Use Permit to the Planned Development district. On December 2, 1992, the Planning and Zoning Commission heard this case and recommended approval (5-0). ANALYSIS This site is located in a low intensity area, according to the Denton Development Plan. The proposal is to take an existing apartment complex and phase it into the Alpha Delta Pi Sorority house and assembly hall. The Greenhill Garden Apartments consist of 24, two-bedroom units. Eventually, two of the units will be converted into a 1,878 square foot meeting hall. As the only substantial change to the use of this tract is to have a meeting hall, the intensity trip allocation does not change. The stiff believes that changing apartments to a Sorority residence and meeting hall is virtually the same type of use and should have minimum negative impact in the community. One concern pertains to off street parking regulations. The site, if used only for residential, meets parking requirements howover, once a week, the sorority conducts chapter meetings. An additional 36 spaces is required for these meetings. The applicant attempted to arrange shared parking with the Royal Suites Hotel, located south of this site but was unsuccessful in their endeavor. The applicant agrees that they will be responsible for a shuttle service to and from these meetings for all members not living on-site. (See attached.) y f 1 f ~ i i AgeidjaItem_ - ~ f~_ (Case 2-92-022) .5 i Page 4 G' F I ANALYBIB (continued) - In reviewing other Planned Development districts, a simil , situation happened when the Chi Omega Sorority requested a Planned t Development district classification on their property located at the northwest corner of Fannin and Welsh Streets. The minutes of 1 this meeting reflect discussion of pedestrian traffic for this use as their proximity to the University of North Texas was approximately 300 feet. In looking into the parking issue for the Alpha Delta Pis, it M appears as though the residences would also be utilizing pedestrian travel versus automobile transportation. The Alpha Delta Pis are located approximately 1500 feet from UNT. In accordance with a provision in the Planned Development district of the general zoning ordinance, if there is any type of deviation from the regulations (zoning, subdivision, landscape, etc...) the plan should be designed in such a way as to provide ccorresponding benefit in order to merit the deviation. 1 Staff's opinion is that with appropriate conditions placed in an ordinance approving this request, the detailed plan complies with I all regulations with the exception of parking. Increased landscaping and common areas on the property is one of the main benefits of a Planned Development district. The plan has a landscaped area of 38%. The requested rezoning complies with policies of the Denton Development Plan. RECOKKENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of 2-92-022 with the following condition: The sorority may not use on-street parking. S~ I Agon4aNo __Jaza2-1 Agendalten~_#5 ` Ile (Case z-92-022) Page 5 ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve petition. 2. Approve petition with additional conditions. 3. Deny petition. 4. Delay consideration. i ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map. 2. Reduced detailed plan. 3. Agreement with applicant to provide transportation for sorority members. 4. Minutes of Planning and zoning meeting of December 2, 1992. 5. Ordinance. I i I J I 1 I 1 J Z-92-022 VWANo r,TTAcrtrtt:N`r i A K04rA y~l /5- 7 i i . t L-l :4' LE ids w...L I'•?~ _ 2r-!--n1 .r l llr isrL~cxr ♦ A1'IOiI fAf17C ~ ~ r- ' I 1 I KCAL/ tJCNL OAT1 J I i ATTACHMENT 2 AgvdaNo =G's2! - FF r r fr 1 Nktr li U « ~ ~ ti ~ r r .f x I j 7~ r~Gf v7 i1 ~ r Y Z~~ a yrr N F S; J R w ZIO A y D 7 N u \Y r ~ ` LJ A E N~,e /A 1 I, ATTACHMENT 3 1 October 26. 19C92G I Gamma Upsilon Housing Corporation of Alpha Delta Pi sorority hereby with the city of Denton, Texas to use any or all of the methods outlined below to comply with the terms of a Specific Use Permit for the property located at 122b-32 Avenue A Denton, Texas, and commonly referred to as the Greenhill Garden Apartments. Said I _ I - property is to be used as housing for members of the Alpha Delta Pi sorority attending the University of Nort) Texa^, and also as a meeting place for its members. The procedures outlined below guarantee to the city of Denton that the members of ADH sorority will confine themselves to parking only on the parking lot presently existing on said property, i and will not use on-street parking adjacent tI or near said property. Responsibility of enforcink said re?trif.Llrns rests solely with the officers, members, and advisors of AG:'i sorority and Gamma Upsilon I Housing Corporation. i 1. Contract with the University of3!erth Texas to provide shuttle bus service from the dormitories to said property on meeting nights. 2. Formation of car-pools with designated parking lot spaces to bring members to meeting. 3. Require members to walk from their dormitories, as the distance is not greater than that which most students travel to walk to classes on a daily basis. 'I' li/1~1AnIV~,' ~ ' Shaun Morawski,President Nancy irs, President Alpha Delta Pi Sorority Gamma Upsilon Housing Corporation 382-3605 (214) 373-7299 Ve.,„ 1 _a,Y,,,b E Kay La b, Chapter A visor Alpha Delta Pi Sorority Erma Stockman Financial. Advisor 383-1247 Alpha Delta PI Sorority 383-1035 7 ATTAC1iMENT 4 Aprtl'i~2^n~__~' !S_ .__MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONItJG COMMISSION December 2, 1992 The special called meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Denton, Texas was held at 5:00 p.m. on December 2, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 215 East McKinney. Present: Mike Cochrao., Jim Engelbrecht, Katie Flemming, Ivan Glasscock, and Mary Evelyn Huey Absent: Richard Cooper and Melvin Willis Present from Staff: Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development; Mike Bucek, Assistant City Attorney; Owen Yost, Urban Planner; Karen Feshari, Urban Planner; David Salmon, Civil Engineer; Gerald Cosgrove, Water/wastewater; and Olivia Carson, Secretary Chairman Engelbrecht called the meeting to order. Executive session Mr. Bucek explained that normally the Commission holds public meetings to deal with general items. Exceptions are discussions of law suits and real estate transactions or when a public meeting could effect negotiations. Tonight's executive session requires no action it this time. It is just a discussion. The item will be brought back during an open meeting for the Commission to take action. In executive sessions, the Commission may deliberate on the item. In a briefing there is no deliberation. A briefing is just to make the Commission aware of a situation. There is no discussion. For the commission to be informed of a liability is a briefing, a discussion of a specific law suit would be done in executive session. The commission adjourned to the City Manager's Conference Room for an Executive session to discuss park land acquisition. $-2gul4r session 1. Minutes The acreage amount on page 7, item four, was corrected to read 6.033. Motion was made by Mr. Cochran, seconded by Mr. Glasscock, and unanimously carried (5-0) to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of November 11, 1992, as curreetec'. II. Hold a public hearing and consider rezoning and a detailed plan on a 1.156 acre tract of land located between Avenue A and McCormick Street from the Multi-family 1 district to the IG. ~ I f I~ P&Z Minutes -5--_ December 2, 1992 ` l /S Page 2 ~ Planned Development district. 17 notices were mailed to property owners within 200' 1 site; 1 was received of the were in opposition. in favor of the zoning request and 2 I STAFF REPORT: Ms. Feshari presented the staff report (attached). Ms. Huey asked about enforcement of the condition forbidd on-street parking, ing Ms. Feshari replied that if there are complaints from the i neighbors about parking in the street it would be a code enforcement Issue. They would be able to enforce the condition. Mr. Cochran said that there are three legitimate on-street parking spots in front of the apartments. He asked if , forbidding on-street parking would be taking a right away from the sorority. Ms. Feshari said that the letters received regarding this indicated case on-street parking. the parking issue on the fraternityTlocated to the south of this tract. The condition about parking was ` the only way that staff could recommend approval of this f zoning change. Mr. Cochran said that if the residents of the sorority are prevented from parking in the spaces in front, others will use them unless a no parking zone was established, He asked if this is an extra hoop for the residents to jump through. sitreeted if the guests of the sorority could park in the Ms. Feshari said that the condition would apply only to the sorority. Their weekly chapter meetings are why there is great concorn about on-street parking. They have enough on site parking for the residents and their guests except for the chapter meetings. In the daytime there is along the street b parking all y people going to the university, f' PETITIONER: Kay Lamb, 2224 Woodbrook, stated that she is a chapter :advisor. The sorority is over 100 years old. It was founded in the 1600's and has been at the University of North Texas since 1951. They have longevity and want to be I -.5._.._. P&Z Minutes December 2, 1992 Page 3 p ' I good neighbors, There are chapter advisors at every meeting. They have their own means of enforcing the no parking requirement. They want this site to work for i themselves and the neighbors. They want to keep the girls safe and keep the neighbors happy. They may buy adjacent property in the future and add more parking. Mr. Engelbrecht asked about the meeting times. Ms. Lamb said that they meet from 6:30 to 8:30 or 9 every Monday night. The manager of the Royal Suites hotel was i willing to work with them about parking. Ile has agreed to let them use his parking lot in a pinch but was not willing to put that on paper. Many of tl.c residents of the Sorority either don't have their own cars or they carpool. No one was present to speak in favor c r in o request. pposition to the RECOMMENDATION: Ms. Feshari stated that staff recommends approval of Z-92-022 with the condition that the sorority may not use on-street parking. chairman Engelbrecht closed the public hearing. I Mr. Glasscock moved to recommend approval of Z-92-022 with the condition. Motion was seconded by Ms. Flemming and unanimously carried (5-0). III. Consider a detailed plan for part of Planned Development 142 for the purpose of a restaurant and private club. STAFF REPORT: Ms. Feshari stated that the detailed plan does not require a public hearing so notices were not mailed to surrounding property owners. She presented the staff report (attached). Mr. Cochran asked what is meant by an outdoor bar. Ms. Feshari replied that it is an outdoor eating area. Alcoholic beverages may be consumed there. It will look out on the landscaped area and mall parking lot. The applicant has requested a comprehensive pedestrian access plan that will eventually tie in with Locp 288. It will be shown on the plat as a pedestrian access easement. Mr. Engelbrecht asked if it will be visually identifiable as e:%wpdocs\alpha,ord A,D rida~I:,,.__" ATTACHMENT 5 J ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF' THE CITY OF DENTON, 'TEXAS, CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FOR 1.156 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED EAST OF McCORMICK STREET, WEST OF AVENUE A, AND NORTH OF GREENLEE STREET (CO11MONLY F.NOWN AS GREENHILL GARDEN APARTMENTS) FROM MULTIeAMILY-1 DWELLING DISTRICT ()IF-1) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH CONDITI014 (PD (c]) ; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF A DETAILED PLAN; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THERE- OF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Alpha Delta Pi Sorority has applied for a change in zoning for 1.156 acres of land from Multifamily-1 Dwelling District (MF 1) to Planned Development with condition (PD [c]) zoning dis- trict classification and use designation and for approval of a detailed plan for a sorority residence and chapter meeting room; and WHEREAS, on December 2, 1992, the Planning and Zoning Com- mission recommended approval of the requested change in zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the change in zoning will be in compliance with the Denton Development Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the zoning district classification and use designation of the 1.156 acres of land legally known as Green Hill Garden Addition and more fully described in Exhibit A attached and incorporated into this ordinance by reference is changed from Mul- tifamily-1 Duelling District (MF-1) to Planned Development with condition (PD [c]) zoning district classification and use designa- tion under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas. SECTION I1. That Exhibit B, attached to and incorporated into this ordinance by reference, is approved as the Detail Plan for this district. SECTION III. That the district shall be subject to thr fol- lowing condition: Sorority members shall not use on-street parking while attending chapter meetings and functions. $F ~CTION IV_ That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. I3, f SECTION V. That any person violating any provision of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. j SECTION VI. That this ordinance shall become effective four- teen (14) days from the date of its passage, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, the official news- paper of the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the _ day of , 1993. I I _ BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR i ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTEP.S, CITY SECRETARY BY: I I APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM, ,I DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY i I BY: 'I 1 I Paye 2 / V, i { EXHIBIT A yl9nddNn~~L~ ~r I Adem,!a~tem__..r~5 CS,Wi Tr OF OS 1704 c /Jr /Jr ! VHEREAS, Putty e it. Conner CA vls It the direr 0f A 1,1;6 acre tract in the 1 Puc na1511 Survey, 4b%tract 996, nentnn Ca unty, Te Funene aA S. end beint ell of a in toractrdDesC i lti oed in de eed iron 2nh0 L. Herr is and wa tt lr G. 4a rrl 1 Cnneev! n Oecemhder Zn, r979, recorded In volume 997, Pa 99e 7?SCO realty Fecnrds Of 9en[On Ca inty, Texas. and belnn, more fu11 de sc r Toed as fotra.s: AcrINNr NG at the Southre st corner of se Id !,156 AC no trACt At an Iron pin, Slid ?oint hem p the out heist corner of A 0 1249 Acre tract from Jahn L. MA rris and salter Harrit to the Cite of lentln on (I cto ber la, 116 J, reCOreed in 'IOlyme 507. Pa It 539, Deed Records or Centon Countv; THENCE wfth a cur re to the ri h of Z35,0 feet, a coo rd of N. a t a central ee of )2' 37", a rant 4l; / 1 3 1 . 0 f e e t t o an I r o n n i n ; A S J I So " C r 7 1 . ? J f e e t and an arc c lennth of III rIght-af-wey,a f6A veb.^py'e nistance of .177.67 fee: to en iron pin In the vest T H E 4 C F 5. r' 17, 43 y, alCnq and with the Ia esi rl n taoce of 123.11 feel to an Iran nfn 9 l df-way oe air "A" a di s• T MENOE 4. D,R' Ol' S0" v, a distance of 41A,96 feet to t h r place 01 negldnf n And CO ntalnino in del 1.156 acres of land. I '.0' T"ERFPORE cNOd TMFSr HE 'I nI rhr rE D0ESF47It - TN'•Put1, 5. C^Oner Oa, IS, liner, Ants ne. tin, Ann Y' to II II Al nesiynatlnl the nr e,n 4% r"hed 'IrOner tY AR the cr ten II I, e'ArAen n111t on t0 the C,tr Of OCR'. ran, II 1.1% And 110t% ha r e'1I Jet tC A td tai the nunliC use err Cie,. the Street' Alin enp 0nts shC.n tare en, I YILI r A . Con per-0erfs~ I STATE of TE'.At t Ln'J NTY of At r04 1 At' Ore me, fhe unders!nned No l a rr 0u hi `c In rn 1 r •,a In rount, and St at! 00 the sn eA s0 newnose l 1. oupe% d'e II Cu tn11 en. Coo"Cr naols~ 1"her, sn0~l n to 'ne t0 he tOrer 0109 a and ill Ant, Ann t or,t - fd led to it thAt Ahe eAoe ten '"hr I Ai'ie tfor tn merel1 e A 0 r a Sl ad, and In r 0u inn le and caniide rAln tnr ca lac sty Ire rein; FIa EN t1HJER III HA40 APIr ;r"L nr n; r ICE Tr i 15 rHf .n AY rr ?ir.tti'v b'isil III-ayn r' •r` oR4`)F7,11h C'Gi,Ntr I sIP vE r QR'S (ER71f IcA rE I tli00 T4ESf MEN Sr 1HF5E PPESE415: that I,prapsrtd HATS e Ot It le P e I a i t n n e d ernfesslonal 5,rresor, do nerlhJ ca r :Ify ,aj .Lf .1 that Ire Heel plan SOe e ( v a I and accura t! survey of the lane, a,a accordance with O r dl n an CeSt off t it Ci te ail neundlr m' persons! Su Of rriSlpn :n Y tnton,/ b: f~ r/m• "a Tmltt, F.D. S, Trr316__~.• . LJ a • ` Wpl rrMAWvErl a nA TE' nL( , ........y -f LEGAL DESC1'?TION t /S, [ Irl L ..~r. r~ rrrlr ~i..~,.+ ♦+Irr-1 irj~ Fijjr a r~ i t +f tl I tl::~ tT} I' 1 C I T Y~ , COUNCIL j: t +x j{+ f+r r~ TRf r 1 T-M ooaao ocg7 T: IM PA4 TI-14 o~ a ~ CZ ADO ~ ~~IIQQGG00~~ f4 14 t~t TIT, T, t . t't I i DATE: January 5, 1993 I CITY COUNCIL REPORT ACKAN _-3 Cx~~ Ap r4a H4m 7 - TO: Mayor and Member of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed Variance No. 64 regarding drainage improvement requirements at Lakewood Addition, Lots 1-19, Block A. RECOMMENDATION: i The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval, 7 to 0, at its meeting of December 16, 1992, It was observed that the request satisfied the criteria as set forth, hence the recom- mendation of a full variance from the applicable sections of the Subdivision & Land Development Regulat4_nns. i SUMMARY: The application was submitted by Mr. Tim Fleet, of RTLC Inc., developer of Lakewood Addition, formerly known as Pilot Park Estates, in Denton's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). Lakewood Addition is proposed as a 19-lot sinqle-family residential subdivision, with all loth being at least one acre. It is located on the north side of orchid Hill Lane, near its terminus at Pilot Knoll Park. The variance would exempt the devolopment from certain drainage improvements required by the Subdivision & Land Development Regulations. Section 34-124 (e) and (f) require that all drainage that can be carried in a 48-inch pipe at normal ground slope be carried in pipe to an appropriate discharge point, and that all channels with a drainage area of less than one square mile be concrete-lined to carry a 25-year storm. The developer proposes to leave all off-road drainage in its natural state with the exception of minor grading near the culverts under the interior road. Easements of appropriate size would be dedicated on the final plat to carry a 100-year storm. BACKGROUND: In order for the City Council to approve a recommended variance, it must be demonstrated that all three criteria set forth in Sec. 34-7 of the Subdivision & Land Development Regulations, are met. The three criteria, and the responses of the Planning & Zoning Commission, follow; F 1. Granting of the request would not violate any master plans as defined by Sec. 34-5 of the Subdivision & Land Development Regulations. PAGE 1 I I i I 1 I ~Q8fld8 ND ~ C~ / AGOIdaItem _Styts master drainage plan does not extend to this f°{!d!_5-99 property, so the proposal would not violate this or any other ,VymasterpIan. 2. The special or peculiar conditions upon which the request is based relate to the topography, shape or other unique physical features of the property which are not generally common to other properties. "This property is unique in that it is located on a ridgeline and abuts Corps of Engineers property on three sides. Install- ing a pipe system would require the developer to obtain U.S. Corps of Engineers permits to do off-site drainage work in order for the pipes to drain correctly. Also, the natural drainage patterns are worth preserving, as is the rural character of the land." 3. The special or peculiar conditions upon which the request is based did not result from or was not created b the owner's, or any prior owner's, omission. by 1 "The uniqueness of the property or an was not caused by the owner, any prior owner, of the land." The Commission went on to comment favorably on any preserva- tion of natural drainage patterns and materials, pointing out the positive aspects of naturally vegetated, meandering drainage swales. PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Engineering & Transportation Dept. FISCAL IMPA m• None. Prepared: Respectfully submitted: G. Owen Yost, ASLA Urban Planner ` L1 yd V. Harrell City Manager Approved: rar nK H.-R bb-bins, A1CP Executive Director Planning and Development AXXOD27D PAGE 2 Z ATTACHMENT 1 ABemdafta7l~_ s Lakewood Addition 5.-13 = 3 ' } , r ~ Jr.J f r ``Q~ a r. •+J E $ I Ihly ~ ~.y, S i 1 fpm ,J .5 ` a .I' ` t 1 rJ ` 'v 1 s ! J! t ~ ~ P 5 c°i r y S vt~ 1 rm ~ f . 1 'nl ~~r e;i t R 'ny y.~ t / m + r 7 /r~ I ti~4'~ r oti ,P^f If I r N NOTE: The requested drainage variance is within the / three indicated areas. } i Dole: 12/10/92 Scale: NONE 3 ~C_-Ltq/mot: C. y i ATTACHMENT 2 Apend3No LL+C c':`~~c~ CGC. r'c /.1 !5 aI./ LSJ~•~ :.Or L~t~L'C LGf'.r..~:a~T ~ ~1G ~.Clx./~ 9 ~rcc C-E~.rs vlcL<. : ✓v f'~.csE>,~Y ! ; 'I .~/Ti:G 7tiU d~or:~ F] 2 • ! IAG~vV/1T1 Oi. kr CQp/J.Cµ fo`?J raJrl s~x..xca /T. 7l/,-S azni✓.oe.E co✓~.p CarL,~f ~ ~ 6 :co ~✓'.C E`..~.;I V~r.~ f'v71-ciY c~ 57 Gc.RIL Cry F~'~ SE~C✓p NnJl~J GJ 6a'/Sf'/✓ YJ/QED' 7,lCf~ L/4E2~ C/'d/✓w]ca 6+' ~/Gr/, 7,Lr- Gl7f Oi fYr3~j~I„J .~C4i V/LET (4~-/7• . of Cc.JCC•v^r Ltiti~-tj Cs1e.Wa-~S : S 'T1~ G~rro_/.a hti' ^Z•r/. ~Y Tj v'OI O. ' ~ 7Lft-CE N/ILL 6C ~ C-cd. ytnc.j' ~N~vnJ :Zfe' ,cc~cits~v Fro~r..4 SFLJ7C✓ w,~PeE' ,CIS . C~•£#'L Crc S.r'Ct/ i'~GYit atYLL !.6- Son;C .VO~L5~c/~ G.Gna~~..Y/ ~ /~T 'THIS rL~laJf" G'4 cc..JLVT~C.JS hcv tic ✓,C EtiJ w,.;JlU T.Jr' fY/ar-'3 S,IF ur../4 '7.~1E .cTKf7L1y G.lt"k~s Ci+.-^vc,ry 2 cd t~. -ls+~ d`-~ ;'>-!r: ~Zr-~5ly.aJ GLha.tY~~rL SC-ZT1C t~ ViSTXaFA.t.~ tA'se of nJer 4F67b1k. Lo wcr I.X.v L.~ lf.ew' 7a M4 laJlk7l..l. r'J of n.J ,n r~'i'sa~~ c o o C F CrCsOiwJB WC f/ Qtitl i'+fc lit-fir 72-W r" M //.'YhJ.4(,_ ,Lf~7l~./~ `vrlL At44N. lie=~GYG ^iJE' SucGC:YS OF /?-f!S ~iC-Cr7C✓CL1C fk-'b!'710 L1 l/C'X72/J F3J ~.~'[Ktl /P nr C'-I..) L46FJ. 7 L"•eA /.Ja e,r ~yqJ> /U SIn dr..~ t1>T /.v7Yc G\ler A erwcerlF- FiWf G✓/q.v.✓GZ.. JL G ;'rY~~ C.-I~^tC3 G..1~y{,L~ 7~167'IJAS ~•.~-s.J ..:cJ.~e n~^„~/,.~f L}'o ii'ze_y a1 ~.r7 /5 vOdww 770a.J 4e,-c f, t. VndaNo i -•M ~•e~:..i-.'../"FC.:._! Gtif c'rw!lcrs b-,ck [e- t..5 .-AC, <.,a'l,•1' Lk:^n,5 r~L./ flF i i r /-C G Fk"- O. !71 ETL I C-r . , F'G`G 7'/7-I W/Lt~n a I 1 it ATTACIIMLNT 3 r~pnla tum_..c~'S d MINUTFS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 16, 1992 The special called meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of + the City of Denton, Texas was held at 5:00 p.m. on December 16, 1992, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 215 East McKinney. Present: Mike Cochran, Richard Cooper, Jim Engelbrecht, Katie Flemming, Ivan Glasscock, Mary Evelyn Huey, and Melvin Willis Present from Staff: Frank Robbins, Executive Director fc.r Planning and Development; Owen Yost, Urban Planner; Karen Feshari, Urban Planner; David Salmon, Civil Engi- neer; Mike Bucek, Assistant City Attorney; Janet j Simpson, Parks and Recreation; Gerald Cosgrove, Water/Wastewwater; Robbie Baughman, Building In- spections; and Olivia Carson, Secretary Chairman Engelbrecht called the meeting to order. VII. Hold a public hearing and consider a variance to Sections 34-124(d)(1), 34-124(c) (5)b and c, and 34-124(f) (3)a of the Code of Ordinances concerning drainage improvements within the proposed Lakewood Addition subdivision. Mr. Salmon presented the staff report and recommendation (attached). Ile said that the is.3ue is whether the drainage channels should be lined or not. The surrounding property is all owned by the Corps of Engineers except for one tract belonging to Mr. Bishop. This tract of vacant farm land drains through the Lakewood Subdivision. For the most part the property falls away from the proposed road which is on a ridge. The developer will dedicate drainage easements with his plat. H,1~ proposes to leave the drainage channels in a natural state. The ordinance ..quires that pipe be installed in tEe. channels. A variance is needed to go from pipe to open channel. Channels must be lined but the developer waits to leave them natural. Staff agrees with channel vbvinnce and partly with leaving them in a natural state; however, staff proposes that the western easement have some sort of lining. It is the Commission's preroga- tive to decide what type of lining would be appropriate. Gabions are large wire boxes filled with rock. They are used frequejitly in Dallas and Carrollton. Paving is brick and grass crete has holes for the grass. The lining would just be on :he bottom of the easement. There is a mainte- nance issue. Maintenance is the County's responsibility. Mr. Willis stated that he has read articles saying that waterways should be left in their natural state to slow down the water and filter it. i i i I P&Z Minutes December 1G, 1992 l 1 Page 2 r i 1 Mr. Salmon agreed. Large channels and flood plains are left natural,. The problem is that concrete channels are easier i to maintain. In the future there may be more soft lined channels. Until maintenance can be geared up in Denton, concrete will continue to be used. This subdivision is about a mile and one-half to two miles from the city limits. It is almost on the intersection of the ETJ line with Copper Canyon. Grass crete would be a good option. It would have the hard bottom and give the green look. Ms. Huey asked if there are many trees in the area and if they would have to be removed for drainage improvements. I Mr. Salmon said yes but the channel doesn't have to be in a straight line. That is a design issue. Petitioner: Tim Fleet, 2424 Rogers, Fort Worth, stated that I he proposes to leave the drainage channels in their natural stated. There will not be much water from this development and improving the channels would mean the removal of trees. The lots in the subdivision will be a minimum of 150' wide and at least an acre in size. one easement drains from the Bishop property across the subdivision to the Corps of Engineers property. It is a natural draw that works well. The easement can be extra wide and he will not allow building in the easement. Mr. Cochran asked if the whole site is wooded. Mr. Fleet said yes. A wide easement will not be a detri- ment. The1 00 year storm would be 5' wide and 1 foot deep. People won't want a concrete flooo. The County will be i responsible for the drainage easement. They don't have any requirements. People will sod their lots and mow. He feels that he has unique physical features with the existing draw, No one was present to speak in favor or in opposition to the variance. j Mr. Engulbrecht asked if drainage improvements would have to be done in this subdivision if the Bishop property were to develop. Mr. Salmon said that it would depend on the type of develop- ment. If the drainage runoff was increased then improve- ments would need to be done. , i 7 P&Z Minutes December 16, 1992 Page 3 Mr. Engelbrecht noted that the petitioner's development is not going to have an effect on the amount of flow. The draw is wide and flat and seems like it will be dry during parts of the year. Ms. Huey asked if there is presently a grass lining. Mr. Salmon said yes and there doesn't appear to be any erosion. Mr. Cochran said that land with a root structure prevents erosion. Chairman Engelbrecht closed the public hearing. Mr. Cochran moved to grant the variances in their entirety because the criteria have been met. Special consideration is given because the petitioner is on the receiving end of the drainage and for aesthetic and practical considerations. Mr. Cooper seconded the motion. Mr. Engelbrecht stated that he can see the value of this unique situation. The channel 1s wide and very shallow. Motion to recommend approval of the variances carried unanimously (7-0). IX. Hold a public hearing and consider amendments to the sign ordinance. Mr. Robbins stated that at their meeting of December 8, 1992, the Council requested that the Commission consider four issues as listed in the back-up. Mr. Cochran stated that some of the Commissioners were at that meeting. They would like to clarify that no vote was taken on some of the issues in order to indicate that there be no change. Mr. Cooper agreed that the Commission did not make a recommendation because they were recommending no change. Mr. Robbins said that the issues for which the Commission made no recommendation and which the Council would like thr, commission to consider are the height of signs along I-35, flags, and banners over streets. Another issue which ryas raised has to do with aesthetic safeguards. ,f~ I 1 i '~•21i i}tta i' * i 4~ S {II ~ if1♦ ~:~I~kilkYflIt:I;.t17, .~~♦-~.t~i.~ r~~ C I T Y ~~~~~#I=~ I~iTt~ H'f1COUNCIL 1 'I +4~11 EI ♦ 1 E Y . ~1i{~T.1♦., ♦ ri}21L;.~ I ifa I 1 I :ITIM ~~.pp or o 0~.0% ~o O to _ 7: T I o 0 ro f4, `*OJ` FOOD DppG~~ ~ I i I ALL0001F ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES OR SERVICES; PROVID- ING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated com- petitive bids for the purcl,a•-,e of necessary materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the procedures of state law and City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has reviewed and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the materials, equipment, supplies or services ds shown in the "Bid Proposals" submitted therefor; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided in the City Budget for the appropriation of funds to be used for the purchase of the ma- terials, equipment, supplies or services approved and accepted herein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COU14CIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the numbered itew3 in the following numbered bids for materials, equipment, supplies, or services, shown in the "Bid Proposals" attached herto, are hereby accepted and approved as being the lowest responsible bids for such items: BID ITEM UMBER -Y-0 VF,~ID0~1 AMOUNT 1436 1,2,4,5 TECF[LINE $61,474.00 1436 3,6 WE:SCO $34,181.00 SECTION I~. That by the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City accepts the offer of the persons submitting the bids for such items and agrees to purchase the materials, equipment, supplies or services in accordance with the terms, specifications, standards, quantities and for the specified sury contained in the Bid Invitations, Bid Proposals, and related documents. I~ I ~ SECTION III. That should the city and persons submitting ap- proved and accepted items and of the submitted bids wish to enter I into a formal written agreement as a result of the acceptance, approval, and awarding of the bids, the City Manager or his designated representative is hereby authorized to execute the written contract which shall be attached hereto; provided that the written contract is in accordance with the terms, conditions, spec- i ifications, standards, quantities and specified sums contained in i the aid Proposal and related documents herein approved and accepted. SECTION IV. That b[ the acceptance and approval of the above numbered items of the submitted bids, the City Council hereby authorizes the expenditure of funds therefor in the amount and in accordance with the approved bids or pursuant to a written contract made pursuant thereto as authorizers herein. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective imme- diately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 1993. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR 1 ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY I BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY I BY: I 1 I i I i I Agenda Ilem__-,~12 6 ° 7fj DAft!-JANUARY•5, 993 1 CITY COUNCIL REPORT { TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager 1{ SUBJECT: BID / 1436 - DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest evaluated bidder for each item as follows: Items 1,2,4 & 5 to Techline In the total amount of $61,474,00 Items 3 & 6 to Wesco in the total amount of $39,181.00 SUMMARY: This bid is for Distribution Transformers to be stocked for use throughout the Electric Distribution System of the City of Denton. Ten bids were received In response to 21 bid packages mailed out. BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet, Memorandum Fastus Okolie December 15, 1992. PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Utilities Department and the Citizens of City o D~ en ton, FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this purchase are available from Budget Account #610- 080-0252-9222 the balance is $1,002,080.96. Respectfully submitted: Lloyd V. }carrell / City Manager Prepared by: Name: Denise }larpoO Title: Senior Buyer Approved: ~L L ame Tom D. 5h ew, C.P.M. Q ~ r BID 4 t\ 1436 J J I I I CENTRAL MOLONEY~ 1 BID NAME DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS CUMMINS NECO C/0 PCLELINE STUART C. 1 PREFERRED 1 IRBY 1 OPEN DATj NOVEMBER 17, 1992 1 1 1 SALES 1 N ~QUA?(TI Ip DESCRIPTION 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR 1 TRANSFORMERS, PADMOUNTEDS { 1 { J 1 1. 15 50 KVA SINGLE PHASE 120/240V $1,176.00 NO BID 1 $1,265.00 $1,173.00 { NO BID + 2. 10 1 75 KVA SINGLE PHASE 120/240V $1,485.00 NO BID ( $1,361.00 11,375.00 1 NO BID II II ~ I ~ I I ~ I I I 3. 3 { ~OKVA THREE PHASE 277/480V 15,565.00 $6,590.00 1 NO BID 1 $5,549.00 1 NO BID 1 1 J ~ I I I ~ I ~ 4. 1 3 500KV% THREE PHASE 120/20BV 1 $7,404.00 ( $7,827.00 NO BID 1 $7,394.00 I NO BID 1 I I I I I ~ I ~ I 5. 1 2 1 75OYVA TH&SE PHASE 277/480V 1 $9,920.00 1 $10,235.00 NO BID 1 $9,863.00 1 NO BID 1 I I I I I ~ I I 6. 1 2 1 1500FVA THREE PHASE 277/480V 1 $13,747.00 1 $13,421.00 1 NO BID $13,598.00 1 $15,145.00 1 I I I ~ I ~ I I BID N 1436 I I { I I I I I I I I I BID NAME DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS 1 TECHLINE { WESCO PRIESTER 1 TEMPLE 1 VANTRAN } ~ ~ I I I I OPEN DATE NOVEMDER 17, 1992 1 I I I I _i I _I I I i N 1QUANTITY{ DESCRIPTION 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 VENDOR 1 1 1 TRANSFORMERS, PADMOUNTEDf I I I I I I I I I I I I I i 1. 1 15 1 50 KVA SINGLE PHASE 120/240V 1 $935.00 1 $985.00 1 $1,039.00 1 $1,280.00 1 $1,277.00 1 2. 1 10 1 75 KVA SINGLE PHASE 120/240V $1,118.00 1 $1,113.00 1 $10290.00 1 $1,411.00 1 $11618.00 1 'f I I ~ ~ I I I I h 3. 1 3 1 300KVA THREE PHASE 277/480V ( $4,865.00 1 $4,935.00 $4,900.00 $6,048.00 1 $6,094.00 1 I I I I I I I I 4. 1 3 1 SOOKVA THREE PHASE 120/208V 1 $6,181.00 I $6,570.00 1 $6,830.00 1 $7,050.00 1 $7,957.00 1 I I 1 1 ! I I I 5. 11 2 1 750KVA THREE PHASE 277/480V 1 $8,548.00 1 $8,910.00 1{ $8,980.00 1 $10,379.00 1 110,864.00 1 h a i O I tcnnwl. muosIP uupon n991AOn., I •fi &At nn I ►59 too nn I •ld 1nn nn 1 b.r rin nn 1 nw f r Agenda Qrr- CITY Of DENTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES/901•A Texas street/ Denton, TX 76201 MEMORANDUM TO: Denise Harpool, Senior Buyer FROM: Festus Okolie, Engineering Associate DATE: December 15, 1992 SUBJECTi PURCHASE OF 50KVA, 75KVA, 300KVA, 500KVA, 750KVA AND 1500KVA TRANSFORMERS . BID #1436 I k The Electric Utility Staff recommends the purchase of the padmounted transformers listed on Bid #1436 for the total cost of $100,655 from TECHLINE AND WESCO, as sho,..;n below: TRANSFORFER TOTAL PRICE BIDDER SIZE, VOLTAGE, PHASE QUANTITY TECHLINI 50KVA, 120/240V, 10 15 $14,025.00 TECHLINE 75KVA, 120/240V, 10 10 11,810.00 WFSCO 300KVA, 277/480V, 30 3 14,805.00 TECHLINE 500KVA, 120/208V, 30 3 18,543.00 TECHLINE 750KVA, 277/48OV, 30 2 17,096.00 WESCO 1500KVA, 277/480V, 30 2 24,376.00 TOTAL SUM = $100,655.00 The evaluation was based on the calculated cost (initial and losses resulted Transformers in higher calculated costs nit Seestheu attached transformer evaluation sheets. FO:tn 12152004 Attachment cc: Jim Harder, Director of Electric Utilities Joe Cherri, Electric Engineering Administrator Ralph Klinke, Superintendent of Electric Distribution I AQ9n9i 110 l/a3.-C'01- AQe11i!d!I.nl_._~t.'S.~ C-% -BANS-ORVER E'JALJATION SHEET JECEM3ER 10 992 PREPARED BY. =ESTUS OKOI.IE LOSS/CCST EVALUATION OF A 50KVA PADMOUNT, 1201240V SINGLE PHASE TRANSFORMER _ MADE ( NL TL DELIVERY I BID UNIT (CALCULATED BIDDER 8Y -_1OSSESILOSSES _%Z TIME YM-! S)! _ COST UNIT COST NECO _NO BAD _ SD 00! STLART TA-BY- MGM NO BID.- _ $0001 TECHLINEHOVlARD-- 111 1 632: 1.8 12-14 5935A0~ 511 98f.01 PRIESTER -YCOOPER t10 --.597: 55 7 039001S12.454.451 C'MOLONEY MOl01VEV 125453 -N!S iG S1_265CDi 513107.661 JAN TRAN VANTRAN 96 530 '-35 99 41,277 CO' 513.497./81 - CUMMINS UNITED 90 685 NIS 8-10 S1, 176C01 $13913291 POLELIN_C {UHLV4N 901 703 2210-12 _ 51,1'30_0+-514,023,031 TEMPLE. GE~ 125 5931 2,19 14-17 41,2-8000 $14,231.061 WESC 0 ABB- 61 92B^ 2.07 9-10 $985 00 5141851.43 I 1 LOSSICOST EVALUATION OF A 75KVA PADMOUNT~1201240V SINGLE PHASE. TRANSFORMER MADE NL TL DELIVERY BID UNIT ALCULATED .BIDDER BY GSSES~ LOSSESI %2_ TIME. KS COST UNIT COST -NECO__ NO BID $0001 STUARi RBY _ NO BID i _50.001 T ECHLINE {OWARD 184 t _7601 1.9! 12- 14 $f,181,00 S1S, T7.12 PREIS-iR _ COOPER 1581 7081 1.71 7 S1290,001 513,377.421 ClMOLONEY Cr1MOLONE'/ 134/7251 N/S t0 31,361.001 518,826.17 pOl[L'N~E KUHLMAN 125 972' 2 10-12 _ S1.375,00_ S16.928.191 VANTRAN - JAN TRAM 105 7155~1_6i 9 $1.618.001 517,352,121 CLY)ViNS_!_ ~JNI-7ED - 478701 N1S 8-10 51,685,001 517,847.891 TEMPLE 3E -1661 9401 2.2214-17 51,411001 _ 51797, 40b1 - WESCO_ 2172951 t 91 9-1G~ 51,113.00! 518.827.761 - - 1 i LOSSr_COST EVALUATION OF A 300KVA PADMOUNT 271//480V 3 PHASE TRANSFORMER MADE NIL TL DELIVERY I BID UNIT CALCULATED h BIDDER BY __LOSSESLLOSS£S. %Z TIME, M~VKS~L COST ~UNIF COST C IACLONEY NO BID $0, 0D 1 STCART'RBY - - NO BID $0.001 WESCJ lgg 547 L_ 28061 1,31 ' I _A _ $4,935.001 SSS 177.21 ~ECHLAI -UWARD 515 3002 2 1310 - 12 54.865,001 $55,478.671 16 $4 900,01) P~&E- NE A UWE LS -6-3-7 2-3 --10-- 12- S5,549 00! $59 311819 I C Mh11NS _ ? UWELS - 637 _ 3004 3 34 1 NrS2 t2 14 _ S5165 001 _459 606.031 TENPIE 13 5352333 268 14-i -5604600' __$60,291131 VAN _ PAN ~/AD TRAN 440 _ 3240 _3.6. 9 _ S6,094 00 564,769.92' NEB 0 3 AL1 AU --774' 3859 5 12- 14 $8 590 00 _ $_74.69260_1 i -,iANS--CRMER EVALJAT ON SHEET 3ECE ;'SER 10 1592 PREPAnED By. -ESTUS OKOLI-c - OSS COST EVq LA-.'ON OF A 500KVA PADMOL'NT 120;208V, 3 PHASE TRANSFORMER MADE NL 7L ~,ppE~ OELfVERY 81D UNIT I CALCULATED BY -;LOSSES LOSSES- %Z TIML(VyKS) COST UNIT COST CIMOLCvEV STt!nRT'RB_Y _NOBID _ $0.001 TECHLiNE HOWARD L NO BID 50.001 774 5037` 1,98 100=12 _ $6,181 OO I- STB 32213 WESCO --aBB __998+ a3041 61 9-10 - - 56,570 00 578,489.14 + POLE' NE IAUWELS 721 - -2640 3 39 10_-12 CUfAM%S - ~AUWELS - 5739400 $84,190,361 721_-640_ N/S 12-t4 ?RE!S .R COOPER - - - - $7,40600 584.260.761 TENIPLE 984 _ SC1-9_ 3_81 76 _ -58.830,00 _ $84.684,74 _ 798 j4 -j3 4 39 14-17 g~,050.00_ 586,899.4 J `_AN T-.RAN ---VAN TRAN 710 7890-_ d,1_9_ 57,967.001 569,506'42I INECO BALTcAU 1105 5922'` 5' 12-14 - $1,827 00 $97,783.67 LQS CC3T _VALU4T!ON OF A 750KVA PADMOUNT. 2771680V. 3 PHASE TRANSFORMER _ --MADE I NL i T1 OELI'IERY 810 UNIT CALCULATED 8Y BIDDER LOSSESLLOSSES%Z ;TIME KS COST UNITC037 OIM.O'_ONEY 57U~AF? R$Y NO BID 50.00 Y SQONE ;yo- AR81 _6267+ 573'10-12 - NO BID $0.00 1066 + $8,848,001 $104,694.421 PREIS'_6R ;DOPER 1028 1 60811 5 7219-10 _-$8,910,001 $106,115.21 pOLEL N. ~PAUWEIS 848 1 7329 5.72116 $8,980.001_ 5117 03!5,88 ghjp - GF 699+1 5.75+10-12 $9,863.00 $11x,7791 1038' 6075 561 14_17 - $10,37900 S1'1541.111 C_Ub11.~ N9 - - ;AUWEIS - - - 9481 6993 N/S_12-14 $9,920.110 $11t.119.071 VAN T P< N _-VA,1% TRAN NECC 3A~TEAU 15'06 6800' 5.75' 9 510.881_0+ S112.167141 b- /4<_-5,75'12_14 S10.236 O0, +$132,330.551 095 C ST_ Y-A Li- LON OF A 1500KVA PADMOUNT. 2771_480V 3 PHASE TRANSFORMER _ 1ADE NL TL DELIVERY ' DID UNIT -'CALCULATED a'0`ER 3Y LOSSES LOSSES - wZ 'TIME C MO_QIlc- VKS~ C097 --.,LUNITCOST WESCO 488-- 65,7 I 195" NO BID $0.00 10648 1 5- _ j 5121188.OOL 182250.77 L'4E ,LS 1516 1670 5 8 .75 10_12 513598.00 317J,875 A4 1I ~UI4N,NS ~JWE~S_' _1518 -_11610 N13 12-14 -----513,74700 5174,92/40f I C _NE JYIAAD _ 1734 11379 5710-f2 Tf 41P-i 51384500 $175,971.711 PREIS' R -COOPER - - ~e47 1722' S7 14-t7 $1457200 $184003,61 928 1 11617 5.73_14 - $14, 700 00 $185.054 78 1 ST. RBY i :L'ARE 0 2108 12005 5,75 13 VAN _AN_-_- 915,14500' $191,954,02! '-AN'=-A-N-- _ _._fiAN_- 1640 --11540 S, 73 9 NECC - .AL iAU 62600 5195,592121 913A21 00 5198,215.93! r f Zit ti llr~y*1{ ~ i F~~t rf2i+l~ ..I. rat ;~}+T.I CIm iT+ x YNHI 1: ,.,.,.,COUNCIL ~rf.f}$1 F{} Ll+_.ra ~lI~:jri1 ~1. TI~:'II{}}j~ 1iS 44++j}j}+44 +ij}j~ I t Ii'f, Tt fit E3p~ i 'f i++I# r. Ii Y lj I +i ; +l.{ € { . } ,tt , k~~ { 2~ ~ } f1t, rfi. i F 4F 00 a A 1 00 . p ~iJ_ s T~Q c 0 O ndO ~ ~4 OO M1M1 r +T r,:~ l 1 # fs~Tt.: I + 4t A4endiNo Agenda tem. ORDINANCE NO. U 1 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS A14D PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD 1 OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR All EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City has solicited, received and tabulated com- petitive bids for the construction of public works or improvements in accordance with the procedures of state law and City ordinances; anc: WHEREAS, the City Manager or a designated employee has receiv- ed and recommended that the herein described bids are the lowest responsible bids for the construction of the public works or im- provements described in the bid invitation, bid proposals and plans and specifications therein; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTC14 HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION I. That the following competitive bids for the con- struction of public works or improvements, as described in the "Bid Invitations", "Bid Proposals" or plans and specifications on file in the office of the City's Purchasing Agent filed according to the bid number assigned hereto, are hereby accepted and approved as he- 1 ing the lowest responsible bids; BID NUMBER CONTRACTOR MOUNT 1433 DICKERSON CONSTRUCTION $36,750.00 1 1440 FLOYD SMITH $18,841.00 1 1447 CLIFFORD E. FOCUS CO. $424,600.00 I SECTION II. That the acceptance and approval of the above competitive bids shall not constitute a contract between the City and the person submitting the bid for construction of such public works or improvements herein accepted and approved until such person shall comply with all requirements specified in the Notice to Bidders including the timely execution of a written contract and furnishing of performance and payment bonds, after notification of the award of the bid. SECTION III. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute all necessary written contracts for the performance of the construction of the public works or improvements in accordance with the bids accepted and approved herein, provided that such contracts are made in accordance with the Notice to Bidders and Bid Propos- als, and documents relating thereto specifying the terms, condi- i i A~eatla ryem_,~..~.71~ . tions, plans and specifications, standards, quantities and speci- fied sums contained therein. { SECTION IV. That upon acceptance and approval of the above competitive bids and the execution of contracts for the public works and improvements as authorized herein, the City Council here- by authorizes the expenditure of funds in tha manner and in the amount as specified in such approved bids and authorized contracts executed pursuant thereto. SECTION V. That this ordinance shall become effective im- mediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of - 1993. i I I i BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR i ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY I f BY: J APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTOR14EY BY: Apend211Gm_ s DATE: JANUARY 5, 1993 CITY COUNCIL REPORT TO: Mayor and lllembers of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: BID # 1433 - BORE ACROSS 1-35 AT EXPOSITION MILLS RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the only bidder, Dickerson Construction In the total of $36,750.00. SUMMARY: This bid is for all labor and materials to bore under 1-35 near Exposition Mills Mall. This bore which will be used as a utility crossing, is approximately 300 feet in length and the contractor will install two 5" schedule 40 PVC conduit, one 12" waterline and one 21" internal diameter steel casing. One bid was received in response: to six bid packages mailed. BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet, Memorandum from Festus Okolie, PUB Meeting Minutes December 14, 1992. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Utilities Department and the Citizens of City of Denton. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this project are available from Budgeted Account #610- 080-0252-9220 the balance Is $1,002,080.96. Respec ully submitted: `Lloyd V. Harrell City Manager I Prepared by: Name: Denise HarpooI Title: Senior Buyer Approved: Name: Tom D. Shaw, C.P.M. Title: Purchasing Agent ~gPnd~.727 I ~,geadaltem~~~ Z~ BID / 1433 I~~~7 + SID NAME BORE ACROSS 135 @STA. 634 &30 DICKERSON I CONST. I I I OPEN DATE NOVEMBER 17, 1992 I I I 1 IQUANTITYI DESCRIPTION I VENDOR I VENDOR I VENDOR -I- 1-• _I I I I I I I i I i 1. IBORE ACROSS 135 @ STATION 634 I I I I I 6 30 IN PROXIMITY OF I I I I I EXPOSITION MILLS MALL I I I I I I I I I I I 1 300 L.F. I I IALT.1 @122.50LFI I I I I I I I I I IALT.2 @110.00LF1 I I i I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I ! I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I t 1 Agvdaiia~__~'S d Dz-\) CITY of DENTONAIUNICIPAL VITLITIES/901-A Texas Streetinentcn,TX 7620 M MORANDUM - i T0: Denise Harpool, Senior Buyer FROMi rq; Festus Okolie, Engineering Associate DATE: L November 23, 1992 SUBJECT: PORE ACROSS I-35 AT STA. 634+30 - BID #1433 aaaoaave=eaeoeavoavaeaav==cecaae=aaaav>qp aavasvvaaoea~aeova3aaaxo The Electric Utility Staff recommends the award of the contract for the bore across I-35 at Station 634+30 to Dickerson Construction for alternative I at $122.50 per linear foot. The total footage for the bore is 300 feet, for the total cost of $36,750.00. 11232002 { FO:tn cc: Jim Harder, Cirector of Electric Utilities it Joe Cherri, Electric Engineering Administrator Ralph Klinke, Superintendent of Electric Distribution y DEC-21-'92 Ma1 09:05 ID: 1 TY OF CeJ014 LIR TEL rU: 817-566-8120 $3344 P01 Ageela No Agrdallem, 2 _ EXCERPT PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD MINUTES X17 1 DECEMBER 14, 1992 1 12. CONSENT AGEVDA: b) CONSIDER BID f 1433 FOR BORE ACROSS I-35 NEAR EXPOSITION MILLS. Motion by Laney to approve the Consent Agenda in toto, second by Glees. All ayes, no nays, motion carried. 'I I {I, I { { { I LrEr 21 '92 0';:03 1T'e CF 1EN1 +JrI 1,17 PRGE,001 D TE: JANUARY 5, 1993 7 1 CITY COUNCIL REPORT ~~ll TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: BID # 1440 - FIRE. STATION 44 DRIVEWAY I RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bidder, Floyd ~I Smith in the amount of $18,841.00. SUMMARY: This bid is for the construction of driveway improvements and a turn around at Fire Station #4. The major components of the project are the removal of 332 square yards of concrete and the installation of 650 square yards of 6" lime subgrade and 650 square yards of 6" reinforced concrete driveway. BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Fire Department, Engineering and Citizens of Denton. I r FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this project will come from Certificate of Obligation funds approved by Council for building renovation. The original budget was $27,000.00, engineers estimate was approximately $20,000.00. Account #445-020-PRKG-9220-91"7 current balance $22,700.00. t Respe fully submitted: l-~ !G Lloyd V. Harrell City 6Ianager Approved: Name: Tom D. Shaw, C. P. Al. Title: Purchasing Agent nganae.]21 BID i 1440 { { BID NAME FIRE STATION #4 DRIVEWAY FLOYD GLENN MANNING INC. { DICKERSON {JONES 6 JEFFREY{ AND TURN AROUND SMITH CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION OPEN DATE DECEMBER 2, 1992 E E (QUANTITY{ DESCRIPTION { VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR VENDOR ' 1. { TOTAL BASE BIDi { $18,841.00 { $23,683.00 $26,655.00 =20,4'37.96 { BID BOND YES YES YES YES \0 I C b O U ~ 11 i { 1 1% - P7 i Ags°da DA7ELJANiUARY 5`,1993 CITY COUNCIL REPORT TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: BID # 1447 - NORTH LAKES PARK PHASE II RECOMMENDATION: We recommend this bid be awarded to the lowest bluder, Clifford E. E'ogus Co, in the base bid amount of $368,400.00 plus alternate #1 for 6" Flex base on parking lots at $56,200 and alternate #2 for 5" concrete roadway in lieu of asplialt at zero ($0). Total bid award $929,600.00. SUMMARY: This bid is for the construction of North Lakes Park Phase II in^luding softballt,alds, soccerfields, backstops, playground equipment, picnic un.ts park benches, water/sewer lines and hike/bike trails. BACKGROUND: Tabulation Sheet and Memorandum from Bob Tickner, Superintendent of Parks. PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Parks and Recreation Departments and Citizens of Denton. FISCAL IMPACT: This is a 50/50 jointly funded project between the City of Denton and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. The budget estimate for this phase was $565,000.00. City of Denton funds will come from Park Bonds #465-038-0063-9009 and Texas Parks and Wildlife Project #20-00401. Respec fully submitted: Lloyd V. Harrell City Manager Approved:` l Name: Tom D. Shaw, C.P.M. Title: Purchasing Agent 3MACMA {ccr~__~~~ A ;7 city of DENTQN, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. MCKINNEV / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 - M E M O R A N D U M TO: Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent FROM: Robert K. Tickner, Superintendent of Parks DATE: December 18, 1992 BJECT: Recommendation on Bid 01447 North Lakes Park Phase II Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Project #20-00401 We have reviewed the bids received for Bid 01447 North Lakes Park Phase II Texas Parks and Wildlife Department project #20-00402. Wq wish to recommend the low bidder of Clifford E. Fogiis Company, 23 7 Hinton, Irving, Texas 75061 in the amount of $368,400.00. I We also recommend to add alternate 11 in the amount of $56,200 for the installatiun of 611 flex base in the two parking lots as well as accept alternate 82 to construct roadway with 511 concrete in lieu of asphalt at zero (0) dollars increase. These alternates will make the project a total of $424,600. This part of the project includes all dirt excavation and grading, for the construction of four softball fields, nine soccer fields, ballfield backstops and fencing, playground equipment and installation, five picnic units, five park benches, one mile of 8 foot concrete hike/bike trail and water sewer lines. The budget estimate for this phase of the 1.45 million project was $565,000. The next phases of the project will be bid in the next few months. These phases includes lighting four ballfields, and four soccer fields, restroom/concession building, large group picnic pavilion, fishing pier concrete flat work around restroom/concession building, irrigation system and hydro-mulching for turf grass. 8171566.8200 D,iFW ME fR0434 2529 4 Agenda Na rl.~_.G_'QL_ Agenda iiem-/mil e-5-y3 December 18, 1992 1 7 Page - 2 v There were eleven bidders for the first construction phase. I have attached the bid tabulation sheets. Please advise if I can provide any additional information. r~ obert K. Tickner Copy to Rich Dlugas, Director of Parks & Recreation ATTACHMENT AJJ00610 I f i 1 i I CITYoI DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / 215 E. McKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 M E M O R A N D U M i _ a_ a a= a a a , DATE: December 23, 1992 TO: Rich Dlugas, Director of Parks and Recreation FROM: Bob Tickner, Superintendent of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: NORTH LAKES PARK PROJECT BUDGET ESTIMATE AND CONSTRUCTION PHASES 1 Bids were received for the first construction phase of the North Lakes Park project December 15, "592. The low bidder was Clifford E. Forges Company of Irving, Texas in the amount of $368,400. An alternate bid to supply and 'place six inch (611) flexbase in the parking lots for $56,200 is ~.Iso being recommended for a total of $424,600. This phase .include.; the following items: I 1. Dirt work and grading. 2. Backstops and ball field fencing;. 9. Soccer field drainage. 4. Water and sewer lines. 5. Playground equipment and installation. 6. Picnic tables, grills, benches, and their installation. 7. One mile of concrete trail. 8. Flexbase parking lots and concrete approaches and roadways. The second construction phase will involve bidding for athletic field lights on tht. four (4) softball fields and four (4) of the nine (9) soccer fields at an estimated $345,000. The third 1 construction phase will take bids on the restroom-concession pavilion and the large group picnic pavilion along with all associated concrete aprons and connecting walkway. Cost estimate for the building and flatwork is $375,000. 1 6171566.6200 D/FVV METRO 434.2529 f k_.I Rich Dlugas l/ December 23, 1992 ` Page 2 The following details the total project estimate for the North Lake III Park Project. I Construction Phase I $ 424,600 M Construction Phase II $ 345,000 Construction Phase III $ 375,000 Irrigation materials to be installed $ 130,000 by Parks crews M Hydromulching for turf $ 87,120 I Fishing pier and installation $ 35,000 Water and sewer taps, fire hydrants $ 20,000 Architect and Engineering fees $ 65,000 Contingency $ 14,916 i TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $1,496,636 Sources of funding for this project is from this 1986 bond program. 1987 Athletic field bonds $ 9,410 1988 Athletic field bonds $ 287,237 t 1989 Athletic field bonds $ 2490989 1989 Northeast Recreation Center $ 450,000 I The $450,000 athletic field bonds scheduled for sale in 1991 were k not sold when it was decided not to build the Northeast Recreation Center. Bonds for the Northeast Recreation Center were directed to be used to complete the athletic field projects. A grant from Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in the amount of $500,000 will complete the project. i 1 i I I Rich Dlugas 17 December 23, 1992 Page 3 I expect the majority of this project to be completed and paid for in 1993. The budget is very tight for this project. The only way it can be accomplished is for the Parks Division to install the irrigation controls system as well as establish the turf grass. The appearance of a large savings from the first phase bid is misleading. The only way the entire project can be completed within budget is if we receive very good bids on the remaining phases or the parks crews assume a larger share of the construction which will slow the project dramatically. Until we receive bids on the other phases for athletic field lights, rostrooms, concession, and picnic pavilion, we will not have the ability to add additional item,e to the project such as the west .ntrance road from Bonnie Brae. The road construction item was not listed in the project submitted to Texas Parks and wildlife nor would it be eligible for matching grant funds. Please advise if any additional information is necessaty. 46bickMner wp AAA01136 i i I i { I BID f 1447 ~ I I I 1 BID NAME I 1 I NORTH LAKE PARK PHASE II A.U.I. I M.A. I J N I CLIFFORD I RODMAN !ARCH UTILITIES VINSON I CONSTRUCTION I FOGUS I EXCAVATION OPEN DATE DECEMBER 15, 1992 INC. I 1 1 A iQUANTITY i DESCRIPTION J VENDOR I VENDOR VENDOR I VENDOR 1• ~ VENDOR 1TRENCH SAFETY I ~ I I_ I $200.00 + $418.00 68,000.00 I ;500.00 I I I $850.00 2. I IBASEBID WITH TRENCH SAFETY I $499,499.00 I $656,334.08 I $530,121.00 I $368,400.00 I $395,809.00 + 1 3. 1 (ALTERNATE $1 1 I I I 1 I I i $8,500.00 ~ $88,556.00 ~ ;65,000.00 I $56,200.00 ~ $103,295.00 4• IWATER 6 SEWER LINES I $12,800.00 I $38,507.50 I $20,625.00 I 1 I I I I I I $9x500.00 i $17,850.00 5. I IADD/DELETWALKWAYS /SQ. FT. I 1.93 I 2.25 I 2.15 1 1.45 I 1.90 6• (ADDENDA 41 j YES I 1 I I I I I i YES I YES I YES ~ YES 7. I (ALTERNATE $2 I $250.00 $12,645.00 I I I I I I i 1 $13,920.00 I -0- I $1,890.00 I I I I I I I 1 BOND I YES I I I f I I i YES i YES i YES ( YES ~ I r. 0 2 O ~i i 0 In A W N O 61 tr1 A' cndZl~till. " J FI ~I w O O to 0 0 x w /lv dy ~7 z y N ~ E m n] or, t0a ~n as N z x o x m ~ z yy y0 H ~ tq P M ~ y M S ~N b f+ T. N ~ }C I / 0 H ~~ii p NN H N x N by A z H L x N 5C N N z N b A P N ~y H N • It N N N N Y H VI N N N A K ~ C K A (A M cm w co N O y A O O N 1n 2 O O O O J O ~ O O VI p 1 O O O O O N N A C ~ L9 m N W p P7 ~ ~ y O N Y1 N O O o A O H O O O O O N Z O O O 0 O N 44 44 d~ 44 (n ri 1 K N K N N N t'1 W 0~ ~ 01 W N CO to a N cn 0 0 00 O O p 00 'ro b y O o 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 I N N O N N A N O N co b N N co I O O+ .7 N 4 tq H Y O O O UI L'• O P O O O O V o O O O O O 0 N N z N N 0 40 e y~ O ' 91 03 y 0 rA v+ O N m O LM p N v lV N ~0 A ("pCOCll7d 0 d 0 00 00 H m z °v 0 00 0° 0 0 J O% Lm A W N O y to Agenda O o x ' 17 17 I ~J M K ~r y~ ~ N IyC E N tA9 x H Tbl O b r y N ~ r O C4 H y v °z 4 In N ~ K ~ N N N N VI J N ~a c~ N r S z CA co N cm N N m J n 5a ~q J O A N O [~j frii O O O O p Qz i O I i { I 11~4 r~ CITY F} COUNCIL I 1 it~TI,_ It of r_ 1 1 y. . ~t OF 0#+ t. 1 ° CZ 00 0N i~ ~~JJv K! QOQ~OGL00~ 1JLl Tirr t e:AI it 1A,wth µ.Ft lnw ni.o Ago Va Ddte. L aft, All ORDINANCE 140. / AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPROVING AND AUTH- ORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A RELEASE IN THE MATTER OF SMITH V. THE CITY OF DENTON. TEXAS; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. r THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: i SECTION I. That the attached Mutual Release of Claims in the matter of Smith V. The city of Denton, Texas, providing for the settlement and compromise of the litigation now pending between the parties in the 158th District Court, Denton County, Texas, Cause No. 90-20599-158 is approved in accordance with its terms, and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute same on the City's behalf. SECTION II. That this ordinance shall become effective immedi- ately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of. 1993. SOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY B Y : _~~~)LC 3~ i I Cause No. 90-20599-158 DAVID L. SMITH AND LAVON S IN THE DISTRICT COURT 6F I SMITH S i VS. S S 1 S ERNEST CALVERT, Individually; $ DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS CALVERT PAVING CORP; S THE CITY OF DENTON; S MAR-TIERRA INVE:3TMENTS; 5 HARRY J. NORTON, Individually; S and G.S. XLEIN, Individually S 158TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ~ r r i RELEASE M KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: For and in consideration of the payment of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND i FIVE HUNDRED ($18,500.00) DOLLARS, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, we, DAVID L. SMITH and LAVON SMITH, (Plaintiffs) do hereby release, acquit and fully discharge THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS (Defendant), its manager, city council persons, agents, servants and employees of and from any and all controversies, claims for damages, injuries, losses, costs, and expenses, of any nature, whether known or unknown, in any way growing out of or in connection with the alleged incident made the basis of the above f styled and numbered suit and all alleged damages resulting from said incident, including such circumstances which either were or could have been alleged in the above styled and number cause. By execution of this agreement, Plaintiffs shall be barred completely from making any further claims or bringing any other actions or suits in connection with such occurrence, and agree to hold Defendant harmless from, and to defend and indemnify it against, any and all further claims, whether such claims are made directly or indirectly, for contribution or otherwise. Further, Plaintiffs expressly warrant that no member of their family, including minors, other than parties to this lawsuit, has suffered any psychic injury, mental anguish, or damage to the familial relationship as a result of the dispute described in this release, save and except the alleged damages and injuries suffered by Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs agree to hold harmless, indemnify, and reimburse Defendant from any claims for damages, injuries, losses, costs, expenses, or losses of consortium, mental anguish, or damages to the familial relationship, including court costs, expenses, and reasonable attorney's fees, as a result of a breach of this warranty. Release - page 1 cjt/dentoa2/re1ease.ord.121892. r~ Plaintiffs agree that the terms of this release Gin~k~ 3 Plaintiffs, their predecessors, successors, heirs, executors, administrators and assigns. Plaintiffs represent and warrant that they have read this release, understand it, and execute it voluntarily upon their own best judgment. There are no promises, terms, conditions or obliga- tions between the parties other than those contained in this release, and this release supersedes all previous communications, representations, or agreements, either verbal or written, between the parties to the above-styled lawsuit. Plaintiffs acknowledge that no representations of fact or opinion were wade to them by Defendant, or anyone on behalf of Defendant, to induce Plaintiffs to execute this release of their claims against Defendant. Plaintiffs represent and warrant that they will execute an Agreed Motion to Dismiss all claims against The city of Denton with prejudice to the right to refile the same. DAVID L. SMITH LAVON SMITH THE STATE OF TEXAS S COUNTY OF DENTON S S This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of December, 1992, by David L. Smith and Lavon Smith. Notary Public, State of Texas Release - page 2 c~!/danlool/r~l~as~.ord.121B92. it i { i 1+ t: i1I T tt~itf 1 t:#k~;~;~II.' ,,4C I T Y fi= za € ill COUNCIL t4 f tit ~~jjo~oaoaCococ~o O"a of 1) T: TIM 0 c4~0O~^ • DOS i 0 1 n. 0 s T -T c o o~olot UO f 0 f + nv`J ~~~OQQOGG00~'~v. TL-IL r ~I A~ 0Y* No D CITYot DENTON, TEXA!~ MUNICIPAL BUILDING /DEN TO4, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE(811) 566 8307 Office of the City Manager momanANi3um TO: Lloyd V. H,irrell, City Manager FROM: Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager DATE: December 21, 1952 SUBJECT: 9-1-1 Resolution The attached resolution provides for additional training money from DENCO 9-1-1. We have been chosen to servo on an Emergency Medical Dispatch Task Force to talk about problems that exist for all the i dispatchers In the county. The discussion centered on the fact that since there are multiple jurisdictions having different kinds of training and responses medical calls. In addition, most jurisdictions have not had formal training in this area. DENCO 9- 1-1 had taken the lead in trying to see if there vas a way that dispatchers could be helped by instituting some kind of protocol and to see if there was agreement by the other jurisdictions. As you can sea from the resolution, DENCO has also taken the lead in trying to make this a reality by trying to help us wit!. funding. The City has begun to train dispatchers with the yarn protocol chat has been chosen by Denco 911. However, because of funding constraints, we were only able to train a limited number of people. This funding would enable us to train the rest of our dispatchers. The City of Denton agrees to insure that all of our dispatchers will be trained, and we will pay for any labor costs involved with '-he training. Staff has reviewed the offer and the resolution. We think it is an excellent proposal whereby the city gains in expertise while averting the cost of the training. If the cil has any further questions, I would be happy to try and r 91DOn to t}iem t their. convenience. Rick Svehla Deputy City Manager RS:bw AMM0020B AAAOl0A6 13 t' 0 4i% RESOLUTION NO. ll A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE MEDICAL DISPATCH TRAINING PROGRAM; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, an Emergency Medical Dispatch (EMD) Training Task Force appointed by the Denco Area 9-1-1 District has evaluated the need for emergency medical dispatch training for jurisdictions operating public safety answering points (PSAPs) provided by the Denco Area 9-1-1 District; and WHEREAS, the task force has recommended that the Denco Area 9-1-1 District Board of Managers support and fund the implamenta- tion of the Medical Priority Emergency Medical Dispatch Training Program in jurisdictions that operate Enhanced 9-1-1 PSAPs provided by the Denco Area 9-1-1 District; and i WTHEREAS, the Denco Area 9-1-1 District Board of Managers has approved the funding for the materials and training cost for the implementation of the Medical Priority Dispatch Training Program for telecommunicators of member jurisdictions during Calendar Year, 1993 contingent o:, the following: 1. That each participating jurisdiction dr,%,slop a stand- and operating procedure for emergency medical dispatch- ing; 2. That each participating jurisdiction agree to provide EMD certification training for all new telccommunicators and re-certification for all telecommunicators after December 31, 1993; and 3. That each participating jurisdiction agrees to hold harmlesE and indemnify the Denco Area Q••1-1 District in matters directly related to emergency medical dispatch training; and VHEREAS, the City Manager having recommended to the CC adoption of this resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION 1. That the City agrees to commence development of a standard operating procedure for emergency medical dispatching. and re recertification for all of it rtelecomounicators Dafter certification December 31, 1993. SECTQiLj• That in consideration of the foregoing, the City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Denco Area 9-1-1 District in all matters directly related to emergency medical dispatch training. ApardaNa Apida ltem,__ 5 APPROVED and ADOPTED on this day of 1993. 80B CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: k JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: I APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCN, CITY ATTORNEY BY: d ' tl PAGE 2 I l.~ H ♦1~.~11 ♦ 1111 j t t st r ~ Il { C I Y tI~} COUNCIL 7117 ~ ,.I. 2 r-r. # 114 ~_I ♦ t o~oaaap 4 1 G ~n o ~ s L7u c Q q ~~QOOOGGa~~c~ i I AQW8 No bgoIaItam._.!,J-A- 5 CITY COgNC~L REPORT FORMAT ✓J 1 "'0: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: GTE Southwest, Incorp - Easement RECOMMENDATION' I Approve resolution authorizing City Manager to execute easement to 1Y(-RTE Southwest Incorp SUMMARY: GTE Southwest Incorporated proposes to place a 914E Metro Cabinet at the northeast corner of the Fire Station No. 4 property Sherman Drive and rings Row. Fire Chief, John Cook has been advised and does not object with the proposal. AACEG JD As part of the telephone facilities, these cabinets are necessary ii-: specific places to provide telephone service to the area. There are several of these types of facilities with the City (i.e., - Mayhill Road, Payne Drive). GTE will landscape around the cabinet with shrubs or install a fence. P13O~ItAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Fire Department FISCAL IMPACT: None AEE00168 ALL003D5 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN EASEMENT TO GTE SOUTHWEST, INCORPORATED, FOR THE LOCATION OF FACILITIES UPON 1 CITY PROPERTY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE. CITY OF DENTON RESOLVES: SECTION I- That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute an easement to GTE Southwest, Incorporated for the location of facilities upon city property, a copy of which is attached i hereto and incorporated by reference herein, SE TION j1. That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1493. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY f 1 ~ BY, L.LL t.t lc_~ n ti e AQeca Fro %a _ 6c'(1 _ Rg ALL Eti yr ,:E:G`: n m . _ r,isFh vT AND sI 4 ;f•,nr y ~tx bo: _[It 'Df Den ton 4 ea9 ✓rd 'C the __C_~on t_`of Denton for and in consideration or the s,.m of lrrs ,110,001 to u~ in hanJ ten_ paid 3'+ i,ITE Southwest Incorporated, a Delaware ccrpor,ticn, ".r :erel;t or whi"h to hereiv ac;i,,wledged and confes,ed, have they dry granted and conveved 1=` hs t"111 ptnente, grant all c,nvey untO ,'E Southwest Ir.c,rporated, it, rucce9lirs 1991 ins, eaaementa t! URs tree t, 7 (ace, , Opt [s[e, Lnepec r, ma lr~[o 1n, cepa[r, replace and n°.o;e su:h haled :,mmunlcatl,n cable, eyulpment, 'pads, •~at kexa, fenCea, and lce991[c fixtures and appurt ens..... Uve r, 3cr019, "der and ',1 y:!n the Fo (iJwing described t pr':e rt'; tr w1t; Ses eahlbit "a' and "B" attached hereto and made a part here,!. I 1 ! 1 Sib~eted In - Deatun County, State of ie ass Then- 1 e •ire-ehr-6r+tnrerH+Tec-agn.tt~~l 444-41 e, ntTTbrZ~r11''t~t~~~r ~~~'Me ~"1"ttr'~'{irettlOf-(! H-re rt ,vet rd, i-1 ' Grantor covenan '.s for hlm9ftf, his successor, and assigns, not to pJaca or maintain any hullding at structure on said easement. Grantor grant, to the Grantee the right of ingress and egra n over my (cur) adjacent land, to or from sail right-af,way for the purpose of in,pectlrg, aaintilriLng, constructing, receastructing, operating end removing its burled cammun LtatiOn cable and associated appurt- enance Over, under, acress and upon the above described property, and the Hgh: to place mariers and other devlcas to support or mark said censcructlon where necessary. The .rancor afro WA'S to include the right to relocate said burial coml,unlcatlon cabte 1'1 sold premises to conform to any future highway relocarLon, widening or improvement, The Grantor acknowledges that the c0n9Ldaratlon recited above includes com,eneatl,so for any and all d,Mages to the r, rface or grass or crops located thereon resulting from original C'not trction by Grantee. Shuuld frintes or let agents or employees, subsequent to original Sn1C11lation of Communication face Litlet within the easement described above, have occasion to enter upon the premises to perform maintenance upon such facilities. Crgrtes agrees to pay Crantor the actual cash Value of that portton of crops destroyed in the source of performance I of such maintenance; and .rantot agrees to receive such amount in fu)t discharge of any claim fcr damage, which might have been advanced. ro NAVE slit To HOLD the above described easement and rights unto the said Crantee, tts 9,tccess_tt and asolgne, until 'laid line shall M abandoned, And f (we) do hereby bind mvself 'ourselves), my (o1r) legal representatives, to wartant and Corlver defend, all and singular the above described ee_ement rLg)tr unto the Bald I ~lrmtei, its successors and assigns, against every person vi.omacaver Larfully claiming or to I claim rha same or any part thereof. E.SECIlTED this { J +II I ua ~ I -IIE 5'1TE r;F _ I~em FE FC FE FIE Ja mdarn pod euNcn h. as tw dar ;wcu~I, atp+rd earn + Te r~ :o Ce ;•mo tr +huw mma P L 'ual avkes y.l U t'r lcghme metr~rrn and rana~~t(~' - r vr,v l~1 •!a r-.r for rF.r Pur;rw rod o:uldm eca th KVw eryrmd, 17.'\'£Y C'NDEA MY HAND AAD SEAL OF CMCI r14__ _ _.-_!l1 1. D 17.. I ; _ 11 Y i } * - S f A I e~ ~ _ i R i r +j I lei a _ V 9 Q I _ LqZ i ~ ~ I ELI ' T~ -c I II I ^ tr . 9~ I I'Y ' ~ I~ L C I J E 1 i e~ I I ' y Cf-R771CAn OF AQNOWLE1x06fFINT FOR LNDrvml•,F1 THE STATE 01.. c,m11 of FEFORE MI, tlr nodr pal vetch m oe" drr por.awEF oppnrd Iacrt to me le kr as Perna W -how wmr '17 y 1") eebrvtbed le"lorafo'Aj Imuna rat said oJ=.idtrd to M that--_ oraewd t!r for de rgWM red cewld"a" thrale rrprerwd. CT.24 ONDER MY HA•N'D A.M SEAL /•F OMCI ILL,.___ dmy I A. D 17._._ Notary Febhe__ Ceuep', COAFORATIUM ACI:NOWLMGMEN'T THE STATE OF. Cesah of SEFOPE SIE, <Ne radrM,rd, a No" PubUc is old Iw mid County Aid Ssy eo"day PammaJF Appwrrd Imi" to ms m be " Pna end offices thew auae Y rubbed is Iha forvlrl 1 1w4umeor erd teieorldod to me I,LI lh rTr "I the Itt of the ■Id.V...___. red Oat he a<nv',d %f, move w the M of furA mryomam fop the PuNosm rod roWW meea timid rr7rrnd, rod to Le A awv Iarale rand, O(CEN 1'NDIA MY KA." oD sm or OFT1lt tide No. drF ItkU Noes Rik Ae W and fm comm. 1 ~~enda o _C1.3 :GQ L . _ 42381,95 North TANDMAR.K Denton. Texas 76201 _ .5.9,3 (81 n 382.4Q16 SURVEYORS, INC., Fcac(817)387-9784 MRIBIT "A" 1 1 FIELD NOTES 0.0138 ACRE ; BEING all that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated in the J. Carter Purvey, Abstract Number 274, in the City and County of Denton, Texas, being a part of that certain tract of land conveyed by deed from Foxworth- Galbraith Lumber Company to the City of Denton, recorded in Volume 496, Page 561, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows; BEGINNING at an iron rod set for corner in the south line of Kings Row, a public roadway having a right-of-way of 60.0 feet, and in the east line of said City of Denton tract, the southeast corner of said City of Denton tract { bears S 02'21100" We 145.16 feet) THENCE S 02'21100" We 30.00 feet with said east line of said City of Denton tract to an iron rod set for corner; THENCE N 89'16'24" W, 20.00 feet to an iron rod set for corner; THENCE N 02' 21'00" E, 30.00 feet to an iron rod set for corner in said south line of said Kings .Row; -J THENCE S 89416'24" E, 20.00 feet with said south line of said Kings Row to the PLACE OF BEGINNING a.5d containing 0.0138 acre of land. AG;datvo !ClwG5 Jeow ri ` ` so eo I p 1 s I P 1 f Y r ~J 1 1 7 t l J o< i;J .v y r _ i i'ARTER vURVEY A-274 s a J r ~fc clry eF 00Vro..! rl ACr v wSC P 561 ) The Plat hereon is a true and accurate represontalinn of the property as delermined by survey mode on the ground, the lines and dimensions of said property being as rndKaled on the Ptal. The site. location and type of buildings end Improvemenis sm as shown, all mprovements bung within the boundaries of the property, except as shown, setback from the property lines is as ehcvvm and the distance from the nearael elree I0 oad is ae Shown on the Plat. There are no visible encroachmanls, visible protrusi enl essements. except me shown on the Plat ao ~ PEP( PROF MARK 4238 135 NORTH DENTON, TEXAS 76201 SURVEYORS, INC. (817) 382.4016 011AWN illy D SCALE "Z--' OAT[ ! 9 r< cgfe ~2 ice NO ~ s4 74- exaa~ws_ I~ I GTE Telephone Operatlons Central Area December 17, 1992 Roger Wilkinson City of Denton 215 E. McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 Re: Proposed Easement - Kings Row This communique is in reference to the proposed easement request by GTE Southwest Incorporated for a 20 foot by 30 foot site located along Kings Row in Denton, Texas. GTE will utilize this site to place a 914E metro cabinet similar to the carrier cabinet recently constructed at Pecan Creek Mobile Nome Park on Mayhill Road in Denton, Texas. This cabinet will provide service to homes and businesses in this area of Denton. Construction of this site may cause the removal of one exisintg bush. GTE will be responsible for teplacing this and any additional plants damaged by our construction. After construction is completed, GTE will be responsive to additional landscaping requirements by the city around this project. Should you require any additional !nformation, I may be reached at 2141318/1556. Respectfully submitted, Steve Brannan GTE Southwest Incorporated 4 part of GTE Co,ourabon ~ . ~ ~ ~C~ a c. - -~f-✓~~ - Tr7 7' JIII_' I ; N1 r taunt ` ~ • O p LgMr rM MM'ro4 LR 1 J~ [I R L-' ~ A ~ Q Y~IDlal gyp= ~rww«na m1o h \ 'WINDS DDI AlDDI W MIL w~M CvUV`~t~'^^^'" A r~ OR M\E~'k~~ _ Ifs rG~ Mp,1 4 n • NIL 004 it ~{~C-~~L~ ~ t ~ ~ • ~ a 9L!4~_J - P ( Y ~ ~ i . • L'J ~~Inu~aa i ,~~uttt oDirr61E ~ .wm, d II ~ ® -emrmm ~ i oa~"''] ]L ~ ~nl'p~f o el n o~ P,W / C~1 ~ ~ VfR5j5 i~ 'J R It u' tt M NM r. 7w0 ~ , 1 ~ J F,, ' EJEJ 'AWQA I= 1 1 ~ J MA R wI NEA?JUl_! 1 FIR `PAIS vA6lEr 992 10 ~ +r~cl -J Of ' t f~ tt ~ rtFS} tip 41 tt C ITY , E €ff COUNCIL }ff r f irz E t , { 4 rE~~I~I4 t. TT. of o r~ o° 0 000 ~ ~ O a + o H t ♦ ~~O ~~GpQpGG9~~ TIM_ J 1 crrY oXKI-L REICFG FUMT ACV** ` O: MAYOR AND MF1MERs OF THE CITY COUNCIL ApM~h"W `>S Fes: LLOYD V. HARRIIL, CITY MANAGER /D SUBJWr; RE90LUTTCN AU11C&IZDC mE Yaycp To ExwjrL' AN A[ 7I BEIWUV DIE CITY OF DWIUN AND COWN OF DFNNU Fit LIWARy SMVICTS DATE: DWF?^.BER 28, 1992 RF~IEMYn7R(N• The Library rc-oamennds that the City Council review n.-I approve the Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an Denton and the County of Denton for Library Services for a I ,Xcjood from October 1 1992 through September 30, 1903. ' l The Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Libr3cy &;yices ,yetween the city of Denton and Denton County that vas approved by the Cour.iil and signed by the Mayor on October 6, 1992 has been changed by the County G:~mnissioners thereby negating the original document. This revised Agreement is the same as said document except for 1) The addition of Section V1, Page 3 which stipulates that the City of Denton Library will have to its staff a Librarian who holds a County Librarian's certificate from the Tfexas State Library, and 2) A written change in the allocated amount chown in Section XUI, Paqe 5. Although the total. County allocation amount did not change from $108,126, t, e Co:ty Caronissioners wanted to delineate the allocation amount of $100,E26 From t.v $7,500 in matchinq funds. The City of Denton Library has now served the county on a contractual basis for a total of 22 of the last 23 years. This Agreement •i)1 allow the City of Denton Library to continue providing library services to out-of-city library users living in Denton County for another fiscal ytvar: October It 1992 through September 30, 1993. Il~ACr: vim Since the City of Denton Library's total organizational budget for FY 1902- 93 is predicated on the County allocation of $108,126, it is crucial that this Agreement be approved and signed. RE%DCnjTJILY SLWMlTTjD: r Lloyd V. llarrell, .^it'y-t3anager PWAARID BY APPRDVFD BY: Eva le Joell$ Orr l~f_ - Library Services Man.•uger LibraCry Director ecvtFxZx ve Director Mwz cipal Serv oes/m.C a Development AllIO0308 lcrdaNo e; ~liFserv.r~F100.',1 AQFnda RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND COUNTY OF DENTON FOR THE PROVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION I That the Mayor is authorized to execute an agree- ment between the Citr of Denton and the County of Denton for the provision of library services under the term„ and conditions con- tained in the agreement attached hereto. SSEEC_T QN__II_ That Resolution 92-060 is hereby repealed and the City Secretary is hereby directed to inscribe on the face of Resolution 92-060 the fact that it was repealed with the adoption , of this resolution. I SECTION III. Tt:at this resolution shall become effective 1 immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of y 199) . BOB CASTLEBEkRY, MAYOR 1 ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY., APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: /~r~L 1 Lr.1 I Agenda ST'1TE 01' TEXAS, ) ss. COUNTY OF DENTON. ) INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR LIBRARY BERVICEB THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between DENTON COUNTY, a political subdivision of Texas, hereinafter referred to as "County," and the CITY OF DENTON, a municipality of Denton County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "Municipality." WHEREAS, County is a duly organized political subdivision of k the State of Texas engaged in the at1 inistration of county gov- ernment and related services for the benefit of the citizens of Denton County; and WHEREAS, Municipality is a duly organized municipality of Denton County, Texas engaged in the provision of library service and related services for the benefit of the citizens of Municipality; and WHEREAS, County and Municipality mutually desire to be subject to the provisions of V.T.C.A., Government Code Chapter 791, the Interlocal Cooperation Act; Qnd V.T.C.A., Local Government Code chapter 323. NOW, THEREFORE, County and Municipality, for the mutual consideration hereinafter stated, agree and understand as follows, I. The term of this agreement shall be for t)le period from October 1, 1992 through September 30, 1993. INT"FAIAWALCN)TIAMON -I ARM' DF.%TON C OLNTY • C III (IF 14N TON' 1 For the purposes and consideration herein stated and contem- plated, Municipality shall provide Library services for the residents of County lithout regard to race, religion, color, age and/or national origin, Upon proper proof by individual(s) of residence in Denton County, Texas, such individual(s) shall be entitled to be issued at no cost a library card to be used in connection with said iibtaty services, ~ III. County shall designate the County Judge to act on behalf County and serve as liaison officer for County with and between County and Municipality, The County Judge or his desi substitute shall insure the designated j performance of all duties and obliga- tions of County herein stated and shall devote sufficient time and r attention to the execution of said duties on behalf of County in full compliance with the terms and conditions of this agreement, and shall provide immediate and direct supervision of County's employees, agents, contractors, sub-contractors, and/or laborers, if dh ~ Y, in the furtherance of the purposes, terms and conditions of this agreement for the mutual benefit of County and Municipality, IV. Municipality shall designate --i+lQQed V _U3rmU _ to act on behalf of Municipa?ity and to serve as liaison officer of I Municipality with and between Municipality and County to insure the perforjr,ar,ce of all duties and obligations of Municipality as herein i 1NnUU,0C4L C0014AA7t0-4 4CQFE'W T - UBR,4R4' DF_YTo*4 cOt7'TY. cnTY of vk.-,7qi I i f stated and shall devote sufficient time and attention to the execution of said duties on behalf of Municipality in full I compliance with the terms and conditions of this agreement, and, shall provide ir,mediate and direct supervision of Municipality's employees, agents, contractors, sub-contractors, and/or laborers, if any, in the furtherance of the purposes, terms and conditions of this agreements for the mutual benefit of Municipality and Ccur.ty, V. The Municipality shall be solely responsible for all tech- niques, sequences, procedures, and means and for the coordination of all work performed under the terms and conditions of this agreement, shall insure, dedicate and devote the fuli tima and 1 attention of those employees necessary for the proper execution and completion of the duties and obligations of the Municipality stated in this agreement and give all attention necessary for such proper supervision and direction. VI. The Municipality agrees that its library department shall assume the functions of a county library and agrees to provide a librarian who holds or secures a county librarian's certificate from the Texas State Librory and Archives Commission. Local Government Code, section 323.011(b). VII. County agrees to and accepts full responsibility for the acts, negligence and/or omissions of all County's employees, agents, sub- h Illi LtX; U, C[N11},g,l71Uy A~ ~kF'E~IF.~ ! LIhR tA}' 14ATON COl1TY•01i 0 PINrO,Y 3 t~gend~'Vo ___9.132! R ' contractors, and/or contract laborers and for those of all 3th~4 ~O persons doing work under a contract or agreement with the County. VIII. The Municipality agrees and accepts full responsibility for ' the acts, negligence, and/or omissions of all the Municipality's employees, agents, sub-contracts, and/or contract laborers, and for { those of all other persons doing work under a contract or agreement with said Municipality. i I IX. This agreement is not intended to extend the liability of the parties beyond that provided by law. Neither Municipality nor I County waives any immunity or defense that would otherwise be available to it against claims by third parties. X. Municipality understands and agrees that the Municipality, its employees, servants, agents and representatives shall at no time represent themselves to be employees, servants, agents and/or representatives of County. X1. County understands and agrees that county, its employees, servants, agents and representatives shall at no time represent themselves to be employees, servants, agents, and/or representa- tives of Municipality. IN IVALOCAL C OOITk kl ION Ae; R" 114.17 • I III R.%R PLNTON CO('?''n' • 011 OF II V TO% 4 aJc~Jdllarr~_,~S X I I . The address of County is: l~ County Judge Denton County Courthouse-on-the-Squai_e 110 West Hickory Denton, Texas 76201 Telephone: 817-565-8587 The address of Municipality is: City Of Denton 215 East McKinney Denton, Texas 76201 Attention: Lloyd V. Harrell Telephone: 817-566-8200 XIII. j For the services hereinabove stated, County agress to pay Municipality for the full performance of this agreement, ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED TWENTY-SIX DOLLARS ($100,626.00) to be payable in equal quarterly installments to the City of Denton commencing October 1, 1992. In addition, the County agrees to pay Municipality an amount not to exceed SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($7,500) in matching funds upon the following conditions. Municipality shall attempt to secure funding from sources other than Denton County. Upon receipt of additional funding, Municipality shall provide proof of the receipt of such funds to the Denton County Auditor on a quarterly basis. Denton County shall match Municipality's additional funding in an amount not to exceed $7500.00. Payment by County to Municipality shall be made IN1}.ALOCU.(C 00MRA110% ACRI}:\ i.NI • 1184%% 1' b}_\ t0\ Cpl"~1 Y • Clil' OF I)KNI( 9 5 In accordance with the normal and customary processes and business Procedures of County, and payment shall be satisfied from current 1 revenues of the county. X.IV. This agreement may be terminated at any time, by either party giving sixty (60) days' advance written notice to the ather party. In the event of such termination by either party, Municipality rhall be compensated pro rata for all services performed to termination date, together with reimbursable expenses then due and as authorized by this agreement. In the event of such termination, I should Municipality be overcompensated on a pro rata basis for all services performed to termination date or be overcompensated for reimbursable expenses as authorized by this agreement, then County shall be reimbursed pro rata for all such overcompensation. Acceptance of such reimbursement shall not constitute a waiver of any claim that may otherwise arise out of this agreement. XV. This agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between Municipality and County an9 supersedes all prior negotiatic is, representations and/or agreements, either written or oral. This agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both Municipality and County. XVI. Tho validity of this agreement and any of its terms or provisions, as well as the rights and duties of tho parties hereto, \TEKiAJC A1, l'001'F.KA710A 1r.µ1,}.,%W%T• LA MM IONS WR Cot 1T\ • I'I 101' UI.\ 10\ 6 Agenda No Apendaltem._ -Ae # C'~ 9 /D shall be governed by thr, laws of the state of Texas. Further, this agreement shall brn performable and all compensation payable in Denton County, Texas. XVII. In the event that any portion of this agreement shall !)e found to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties hereto that the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full force and effect to the extent possible. ~I XVIII. The undersigned officers and/or agents of the parties hereto are the properly authorized officials and have the necessary authority to execute this agreement on behalf of the parties hereto and each party hereby certifies to the other that any necessary orders or resolutions extending said authority have been duly 1 passed and are now in full force and effect. ' [\7txl rx11. urotrt,x.~7io\ ncl[rr_~Irsr . r lnKna~ I!L_\i0V Co1171' • f171' of P4NTY~A 8 Agenda Na Agandaltem_,~c'~fi~~ _ r~3 /a is Executed in duplicate originals in Denton County, Texas by the authorized representatives. COUNTY MUNICIPALITY By B COUNTY JUDGE y Name: Date: Title: Acting on behalf of and by the Date:~_ - authority of the Commissioners Court of Denton County, Texas Resolution ATTEST: ATTEST: By Denton County Clerk By C i t .y Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM; APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ass stant D str ct Attorney City Attorney I,Y1?J(1,0CALC00117(.1111)V Abk,'.1',111:\Y• 1711RARV bF.\'TOR CO(1Tl' • C I71' by llF\YO\ 8 1 t t'. + r~ XITY I tt;, ::;XOUNCIL ,r. i #1~ 1~J ~p600000 ~ ' or or 4 a o 0 ' ~~lM^N t~ n +i r 4prtdlNo agenda lwnL 2 Fl{te sanua xy_-a._j,p 3 "h " . TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: LLOYD V. HARRELL, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTI014 CONSENTING TO THE EXERCISE OF THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN BY THE UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT FOR THE REGIONAL TREATED WATER TRANSMISSION LINE FROM DENTON TO OLD ALTON RECOMMENDATION: I I Staff recommends adoption of the resolution. I SUMMARY: I The Upper Trinity Regional Water District (District) cannot exercise its power of eminent domain within the city limits of a municipality unless it has received prior consent as evidenced by a written resolution. The proposed resolution will serve as evidence of Denton's consent in regards to the water transmission line portion of the project. Consent is not intended nor implied for any other District activities. BACKGROUND: Denton has contracted to provide District with a wholesale treated water .qupply until 1998. Service will commence when District constructs sufficient facilities to receive, transport and deliver treated water to its member cities. District is now in the process of preparing final design plans and obtaining right of way. A portion of this system is within Denton's city limits. District's enabling legislation requires that it obtain prior consent in order to exercise its power of eminent domain within a municipality. The proposed resolution was prepared in response to District's request for Denton's consent. District has not yet needed to exercise eminent domain and is not aware of any pending situations. Denton is currently negotiating a Participating Member agreement for a portion of the line. District will be the owner and Denton will have the right to utilize a portion of the line. The proposed agreement includes options for Denton to purchase the line from District when it no longer nerves District's purposes. Any associated right of way would be assigned to Denton. The line could be converted in phases as a main feeder within Denton's distribution system. I Agenod No 7_✓~,. ~ ~ Aprida ll~m__ 'S f J ~ MAYOR AND MEZVOERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL v? dl J January 5, 1593 l Page 2 PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Citizcm s of Denton, Denton Municipal Utilities, Upper rrinity Regional Water District. FISCAL IMPACT: I None, L1 y V. Harrell, City Manager Prepared by: r `'-fit &/A - Lee K. Allison, P.E, Director, Water Eng. & Operations Approved by, - J4- R. E. Nelson, Executive Director of Utilities 'rr ,~a rya ~ ~ -VG, 3 f{ 6 i RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE EXERCISE OF THE POWER OF EMINENT DO- MAIN 13Y THE UPPER TRINITY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE REGIONAL TREATED WATER TRANSMISSION LINE FROM 1{ DENTON TO OLD ALTON, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Upper Trinity Piigional Water District (the Dis- trict) was created pursuant to H.B. p 3112 (the Act) passed by the 71st Legislature in Regular Session 1989; and WHEREAS, the Act authorizes the District to exercise the power of eminent domain in a municipality in Denton County upon receipt of prior consent of the municipality as evidenced by a written res- olutiont and WHEREAS, the District's Board of Directors has approved its "Regional Treated Water Project" (the Project) pursuant to an eng- ineering report by Alan Plummer and Associates dated June of 19921 and WHEREAS, the Project requires the District to acquire land, easements, right-of-way and praporty and improvements within the City of Denton's boundaries; end WHEREAS, the City Council supports the Project and is agre- eable to giving its consent to the District to exercise the power of the eminent domain within the City, if necessary, to obtain the necessary and required land, easements, rights-of-way and other property to carry out that portion of the project consisting of a water transmission line from Denton to Old Alton as generally de- picted on Exhibit "A", a copy of which is attached hereto; Now, 'THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY Of' DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECT ON_I. That all matters stated in the Preamble are found to be true and correct and are hereby incorporated into the body of this Resolution as if copled in their entirety. S~CT[ON I1. Thai;tho City of Denton does hereby give its con- sent to the District to exercise its power of eminent domain within the City limits to obtain this necessary land, easements, rights-of- way and other property and improvements to carry ovt the referenced portion of the Regional Treated Water Project in accordance with the engineering repor` if Alan Plummer & Associates dated June of 1992, all pursuant to tLr Act, as indicated on Fxhibit "A". ;~$STLSt[t LIB. That this Resolution shall becane effective im- mediately upon its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1993. I I IIOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYCR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DPAYOVITC'H, CITY ATTORNEY BY Page 2 A6©oJa Rio rr• - t•~r... 'r~~~r~~~ ~~Pi711a !`iYAi~~J / NORTH UTRWD DEVELOPMENT OF WATER _ TRANSMISSION FACILITIES :trig. 1 ~4 ~ ~l'.rl . I ILA ~ , TEASLEY ` _ ~ ---r-Y Y 1 l ~ .C t. 1\ 4 110 A r ia. n, , r y • 4 I ••I1. i 1 HICKORY CREEK ' CJNI h T H t OLD ALTON nrr OF o[NtoN, ruu EXHIBIT A ~~IlR/~I[f[M11111 [N{INIt RIM ` ~wr.r~...+wr.rs.....yww~~wrrws~.rrrnwrr1►t~ II 11 i I tit, CITY `E"tll COUNCI.I .t-~ r:tr-rr ' t~ ~ t 'tf r~t2: I,1 l }L 1 ~pppp00 0~,0 or o~~Qj ~ ~ ~fl 4 ~ ~ ♦ Li. t vJUa~U ~rpO~1j 3i 0 V Z 1 J t~ t c:1tr„ph,.res Age61►tNr_i > fF_4 _ 1 A r RESOLUTION NO. I/ A RESOLUTIOIJ OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENFON, TEXAS DECLARING THE CITY OF DENTON'S DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN THE DENTON/TARRANT COUNTY BOUNDARY LINE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas is a home rule nunicipality located wholly within Denton County, Texas; and WHEREAS, Tarrant County has initiated action which would redraw the boundary line between Denton County and Tarrant County; and WHEREAS, the Tarrant County Commissioners Court has already accepted and approved a surveyor's report which establishes a new northeast corner of Tarrant County approximately 2,200 feet north of the County's current northeast corner, which point, if connected to the current northwest corner of the County, would result in a substantial part of land presently in Denton county being located in Tarrant County; and WHEREAS, this action on the part of Tarrant County would affect approximately •?,000 acres of Denton County property and numerous Denton County residents and business concerns; and WHEREAS, Denton County has taken action to prevent Tarrant County from seeking to alter the boundaries between the two Counties; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton is of the opinion that confusion and hardship to all the citizens of Denton county would llkely occur if the property in question should be Incorporated into Tarrant County; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Denton finds that the passage of this resolution disapproving the proposed change in the Denton/Tarrant County Coundary line is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Denton, Texas; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: ESE-gT34N__a, That the City Council of the City of Denton hereby supports Denton County in its disapproval of the proposed change in the Denton/Tarrant County Boundary line. ECiION ,131. That the 7ity Council of the City of Denton hereby finds and declares that the proposed redrawing of the Denton/ Tarrant County Boundary line so as to remove approximately 4,000 acres from Denton County its not in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of that affected property or the I Vnaa No Aga e~da citizens of the city of Denton and that the City Council of City of Denton opposes the said redrawing. the SECTION III.That the City Secretary is hereby authorized to deliver to the-'Denton County and Tarrant County Commissioners Courts a true and correct copy of this resolution. - SF,9T ON -;V. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of k 601i CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR I ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SFCRLTARY BY• APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: DEBRA A. DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY BY: Page 2 y SCOTT ARMEN xx I'kFl IM I 3 December 22, 1992 2 Jennifer Walters } City of Denton 215 E. McKinney Denton, TX 76:01 Dear Mayor Castleberry and Council Mumbers, i The quality of life that we have worked so hard to achieve here in Denton County is uow being threatened. Tarrant County is attempting to seize our economic future with their recent land { grab scheme. Claiming a 150 year-old survey error, the Tarrant County Coranissioners Court is trying to move tt:eir northern boundary farther north, taking away parts of Alliance Airport, Trophy Club, Roanoke, and Flower Mound. Not only will this double the amount of county taxes for those homeowners who are forced into Tarrant County, but this I will mean a $60 million cut in our current property tax valuations. This area forms part of the foundation of our economic growth here in Denton County. The potential value of this land is astronomical with the intense growth that we are experiencing. I am asking that every city in Denton County join in our opposition to Tarrant County's effort to wrench land from Denton County's borders. We need Denton to pass a resolution in support of the existing boundary between our two counties. I have enclosed a copy of our recent press packet which may help you in considering this. I certainly appreciate all the hard work that you have done in making Denton County the rising star of the Metroplex. Please contact me if you have any questions or if I can be of service to you. Sincerely, Scott Armey County Commissioner Pct.3 SRA/ebd Enclosure copyl Commissioners Court; Jim Allison Carmen Rivera-Worley 111 P ~I SIN L<111 Fl\\I1\1 1 }\II H • IVO'.nlllll 1 U 1 f5 f 1NAN 11 • I INI\1111f. 1\ 1,11167 . =1321'+1571 1 n1 11111M 4 u\ 1111 \Ci( 01 • Ila %%I %1 111( WORT • 61 N111%, 11A 76201 6 1 AUO ~UrSIAV • 41171 50 9651 ~~1EL ~ 181 738208 15 la.rrwra~-- Dec 16.92 11 .72 NO-019 P.04 Vi~da No JEFF IMOSELEY COUNTY JUDGE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE UECIMSER 16, 1992 For Additional Infonnation Contact: John Polster (800)'46-3189 (811)383-0288 COUNTY STANDti GROUND i (DENTON, Tx) ---TODAY, DENTON COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS VOWED TO FIGHT TARRANT COUNTY'S AT'TEMYP '110 ALTER DENTON COUNTY'S SOUTHERN BOUNDARY. THE 41000 ACRE AREA IN QUESTION IS VALUED AT APPROXIMATELY $60 MILLION. AT THIS MORNING'S PRESS CONFERENCEO DENTON COUNTY OFFICIALS MADE CLEAR THEIR RESOLVE TO STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY CHANGES IN THE CURRENT HOUNDARY SHOULD TARRANT COUNTY PURSUE ITS "LAND- CRAH" SCHEME. "DENTON COUNTY STANDS UNIFILD AGAINST ANY ACTION TO ALTER THR CURRENT BOUNDARY, WE FEEL THAT THID IS A FRIVOLOUS, BASELESS CHARGE THAT 15 TOTALLY WITHOUT MERIT," DENTON COUNTY JUDGE JEFF MOSELEY STATED. COMMISSIONER SCOTT ARMY SAID "WE WILL NOT LET TARRANT COUNTY ` STEAL OUR ECONOMIC FUTURE. WE WILL FICHT TO PROTECT THE QUALITY OF ~f LIFE WE ]LAVE WORXED $0 HARD TO ACHIEVE HERE IN DENTON COUNTY." TARRANT COUNTY CONTENDS THAT AN ALLEGEU MISTAKE MADE 150 YWS AGO ENTITLES IT TO OVER 4000 ACRUS OF PRIME DENTON COUNTY VJAL LwTATR. BUT DENTON COUNTY OFFICIALS S'PA'CED THAT BOTH T'ARRANT AND OUNTON RATIFIED THE 150 YEhR OLD BOUNDARY IN 1940. INFORMATION, INCLUDING A JOINT COMMISSIONERS COURT ORDER ARE) A MAP OUTLINING THE BOUNDARY AS IT CURRRNTLY EXISTS, WAS PRESENTED AS EVIDENCE AT THIS MORNING'S PRESS CONFERENCE TO aUHSTANTIATE DENTON COUNTY'G POSITION. JUDOS MOSELEY ALSO PRESENTED A LETTER FROM A LICENSED STATE LAND SURVEYOR WHICH 1NDICATEU THAT THE ACTUAL BOUNDARY IS APPROXIMATELY 423 FEET SOUTH OF THE CURRENT BOUNDARY, It IT IS OUR FIRM BELIEF THAT IF TARRANT COUNTY WISHES TO PURSUE THIS MATTER, THEY RUN THE RISK OF 1,OSIdG 1-HE IBM/SOLANA CYIMPLEX, SOUTHLAKE AND PARTS OF W2,7TIJIKE," MOSELEY t'AID. HOPE DILNTON COUMCO NMIBSIONRRS COU14T • C;OVNT'IIUUdg-UN-TlI6•SAUAJUO i UO W, IIICKOAY ~ OENION, TCJ(Ay 7~~p1 • IA~T1 ON!•D!N • I•eaa~u•olso TEL 18173£2045 Duc 16,92 1142 140.019 P.05 ny6'fiddPJO VU aQ/ ~ge~oa!lem VA ! 1 DENTON COUNTY OF1"ICIALS VOWED TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS OF D 100 ENTON COUNTY FROM THE ECONoNIC RAVAGES PERCENT OF WHAT WOULD AMOUNT TO A EXISTING BOUNDARY IS TRUE AND CORRECT. SOT MAKE NO =TAM. THERE WILL BF. NO NEW LINES." COMMISSIONER ARMEY STATED. WHEN ASKED ABOUT TARRANT COUNTY COMNISSIONZR BOB HAMPTON'S ASSFkfION THAT TARRANT COUNTY'S TAXES WERE LOWTR" XUDCE MOSELEY SAID, "DENTON COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE A COUNTY-WIDE HOSPITAL TAX OR JUNIOR COLLEGE TAX AS DOES TARRANT COUNTY. IY THOSE ARE NOT COUNTY TAXESo I bON'T KNOW WHAT ARR. THE COUNTY TAXER IN TARRANT COUNTY An 90 PERCENT HIGHER THAN IN DENTON COUNTY. AND I DONIT RELIEVE THERE ARE MANY AMONG US THAT COULD WITHSTAND THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OF THEIR COUNTY TAXES INCREASING FROM 29 TO 54 CENTS OV$R-NIGHT." AFTER MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, THE DENTON COUNTY C THE SERVICES OF AND o AN IN BASED OMMISSIONERS COURT RE-ACTIVATED THEIR BOUNDARY FILE AND RETAINED AND OUTSIDE COUNCIIL TO THE TEXASOASSOCIAT NAOF COUN IES. ALLISON AND ASSOCIATES REPRESENTED THE DENTON COUNTY THE LAST TIME THIS ISSUE WAS RAISED IN 1989. 30 i r IRS. v w.Y - . rr y w Mua. v.. u.yq.~ M W MM.d..r..H r I I AyerdaNo Q~~_QQl ' Agoida r lo ~ 7 II. o m n o a La m r-o r m o o a to IT rt a ~y G~ O O W f. o m tz 0 m ~ n I- a La E3 r 0 r h b Id U O r x + a, ED o O ,-3 O p C~ m oa LL A G r lu r+ O a D p ~ U Q O h W C 1"' Dl A. W A tr y O 00 N y la m p Z; A r r' 'e U h O i. m # N i+ m Co H m Ea a cr m b 1 N rd CU F~ r M n 2 C4 C') r O r 'i m O ti Ol s nOj a CO p m tit p N a r II w b rr o yy ;S p ry b $ p• f m c' H p' h 7C U~' a m O P cai li H r m m P; m cr a p fo U Ito h1 H O O m to cr V n p i- m w i E°, ti n p a a o U u to m CAS r D In to f oi a c3 m O m a to °e m C m a a' q h CY ~3 Fm O P) .G r O O H N y M P~ O x a+ r y r rt u m 9 t7 A n t1 O H r p ID W •f w d `ti C) b m m (m7 D• 'P' Q N ►4 k: 1~ rd O m O O ` p SNi CC~.q, a r A n ID m C13 to C+ C4 t7 t1 F3 N ~ C N p m O O CIP IL-4 m a m fl n C r u~ ti N O p V C: C+ to W n a m m N b r O tp A 61 , H O N ct m r p p F C) O a r ti q H n m m iK o Pion n C~y p ~7 t + r p ;e f, rte 0 p cr c* tY cpr 6 ►a O 5 q h cr oc Fc O '3 to p k tT m rr m 1• O O h C m m L p & R~ in Oro ~ a p N h Cr f4 ` m O O W P. Pa A u tan H fb V a r A n w - d H er O A b p G '~7 m K rl A H I~ H m P is w m O W H c 0 A r N C+ r. b A ~ O IT H n t- co O Py r % la # to to a . ti a U RS- 1~• ° m r \V Coo m m c y 0 c d IV m p H W fi m r~- r. h to 1+ b1 4' G! O It V } J C h m N tY a tiI 1111 m r {d o b to o Or cr Ili go m r m o a+ r- o & Ibj 11 to ~C m ~lh m O f•~ y W Ur 1 p W a d C a m I~ / UJVL 4~~VAaNn 1735 V512 4so V902 ALLISUS S AMC ' l ELI ISON n ssoc AXES x11f ~l'T ~7~!lo~nrys al.c?aw 208 Wn'r 14TU Slvxrr JAMCS P. ALL.isor, Ar*.Mv.TaA976701 • RevcAT T. F3Ai■ ~auiurtaloi DAVID C. YAYHr rAx Tsui awa~os C. Rex HALL, JR. ANTHONY J. NL"am Docamber 14, 1992 ~'ILF2lS~nsrrn , Mon. Jeff-Moseley Denton County Judge 110 W. Hickory, Room 207 Denton, Texas 76201 I Re: Tarrant County - Denton Connty'Soundary Dispute Dear Judge Moseleyt In 1989, we obtained a survey review of the Denton County Tarrant County boundary by Mr. John P. Slbpson, a licensed State Land Surveyor. The preliminary report of Mr. Simpson indicated that t1o actual boundary between the counties . in located approximutely 425 feat south of the presently established boundary. Since noithor oounty initi:atod log-al aotion,wo.hava'net +sa:ruuatad a Cindl report from Mr. Simpson% We,would be pleasod to contact Tarrant County on _{our. be-halt if requested by the,Conimissioners Court. Pleaso lot. me know if we can be of further assistance. Yours viry t.-uly, ' Rob ss BBrdw Enclosure - dent MIMI l lu/mse 1 ty.OU