Loading...
05-16-1995 • r. w • x CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET 5-16-95 • • r~ • AGENDA a,~nl^ D/C CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL ~kid~4tem May 16, 1995 (.te__.-~2'~j•5 Closed Meeting of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, %y 16, 1995 at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense RrDm of City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas, at which the following items will be considered: NOTE: THE CITY COUNCIL RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO CLOSED MEETING AT ANY TIME REGARDING ANY ITEM FOR WHICH IT IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE. 5:15 p.m. 1. Closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE, Sec. 551.071 1. Discuss responsibility of Council Members and staff to keep information disr.ussed in Closed Session confidential. B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072 1. Discuss the acquisition of property for expansion of the City's landfill. C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.074 Work session of the City of Denton City Council on Tuesday, May 16, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: NO'T'E: A Work Session is used to explore matters of interest to one or more City Council Members or the City Manager for the purpose of giving staff direction into whether or not such matters should be placed on a future regular or special meeting of the Council for citizen input, City Council deliberation and formal city action. At a work session, the City Council generally receives informal and preliminary reports and information from City staff, officials, members of City committees, and the individual or organization proposing council action, if invited by city council or City Manager to participate in the session. Participation by } individuals and members of organizatons invited to speak ceases when the Mayor announces the session is being closed to public input. Although Work Sessions are public meetings, and citizens have a legal right to attend, they are not public hearings, so citizens are not allowed to participate in the session unless invited to do so by the Mayor. Any citizen may supply to the City Council, prior to the beginning of the session, a written report • regarding the citizen's opinion on the matter being explored. • • Should the Council direct the matter be placed on a regular meeting agenda, the staff will generally prepare a final report defining the proposed action, which will be made available to all citizens prior to the regular meeting at which citizen input is sought. The purpose of this procedure is to allow citizens attending the regular meeting the opportunity to hear the views of their fallow citizens without having to attend two meetings. • O • • Ko ~5_t)17Q City of Denton City Council Agenda _ May 16, 1995 ~ ti/t Page 2 LO ^ 6:00 p.m. 1. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding .amendments to the current Investment Policy. 2. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the Quarterly Financial Reports. 3. Discuss and consider isones for the council annual planning session including facilitator, place and date and give staff direction. 4. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding a proposed amendment to the TMPA Power Sales Contract. 5. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding a timeline for board/commission appointments. Regular Meeting of the City of. Denton City Council on Tuesday, May 16, 1995 at 7:00 p.m, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 215 E. McKinney, Denton, Texas at which the following items will be considered: 1 7:00 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Cc;nsider approval of the minutes of March 11, March 18, March 25, and May 5, 1995. 3. Consider approval of a resolution of appreciation for Harold Perry. 4. Citizen Report A. Receive a presentation on a "Kid's Guide to North Lakes Park" completed by Strickland Middle School Team 8-3. • 5. Citizen Requests A. Consider an extension to the noise ordinance exception granted to Brown and Root to conduct construction work to occur at Teasley Lane and I35E until 12:00 midnight from May 30, 1995 - December 31, 1995.. ® B. Consider an exception to the noise ordinance on June 16th • e, and 17th until 12:00 midnight for the Juneteanth celebration at Fred Moore Park. J 6. Public Hearings A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance to rezone 3.753 acres from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district to the Commercial (C) zoning j 0 d 0 City of Denton City Council Agenda AWONo•-1:.).../ 7 May 16, 1995fldAl(9 Page 3 Igfe._ J5~ . ab y district on property located on the south side of I-35E, approximately 250 feet south of Lindsey Street. (The Planning and Zoning Commission does not recommend approval with a 2-3 vote on a motion to approve.) B. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance to rezone 4.508 acres from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district to the h:vlti-Family 1 Conditioned (MF-1(C)) zoning district on property located on the east side of Ruddell street, approximately 1,000 feet south of University Drive East. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval 5-0). C. Hold a public hearing to consider rezoning 4.2721 acres from the Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Light Industrial Conditional (LI(C)) zoning district on property located on the south side of I-35E, approximately 3,200 feet north of State School Road. (The Planning and zoning commission recommends approval 5-0). 1. Consider approval of a resolution amending Appendix A of the Denton Development Plan by changing the boundaries for Intensity Areas 77 and 78 defined therein in conformity with the map attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit 1, by extending the boundary of intensity area 78 along the south side of I-35E to state School Road, and reducing Intensity Area 77 correspondingly to accommodate the expansion; and amending the concept map of the Denton Development Plan to conform therewith. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval 5-0). 2. consider adoption of an ordinance rezoning 4.2721 acres from the Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Light Industrial Conditional (LI(C)) zoning district on property located on the south side of I-35E, approximately 3,200 feet north of State School Road. 7. Tax Refunds A. Consider approval of a tax refund to Texas Commerce Bank for $1,792.95. ® B. Consider approval of a tax refund to IBM Credit corporation for $649.54. 8. ordinances A. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute all documents and agreements, as required, to obtain funding for the 1995 Summer Food Service Program. a • ra • 17 City of Denton City Council Agenda a~endaNo Pa ~l I-- May Page l4, 19950d a Ob I B. Consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute Amendment Number Two to the agreement with the City of Denton and HDR Engineering, Inc. for professional engineering services for the sanitary landfill initial site development. (The Public Utilities Board recommends approval.) 9. Vision Update 10. Miscellarno+is matters from the City Manager. 11. Official, Action on Closed Meeting Items: A. Legal Matters B. Real Estate C. Personnel D. Board Appointments 12. New Business This item provides a section for Council Members to suggest items for future agendas. 13. Possible continuation of the Closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071 B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072 C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.074 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 DE.,'-on, Texas, on the day , , 1995 at .-'clock (a.m.) (p.m.) • CITY SECRETARY NOTE: THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IS ACCESSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. THE • CITY WILL PROVIDE SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED IF REQUESTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN • • ADVANCE OF THE SCHEDULED MEETING. PLEASE CALL THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AT 566-8309 OR USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS DFVICES FOR THE DEAF (TDD) BY CALLING 1-800-RELAY-TX SO THAT A SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER CAN BE SCHEDULED THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE. ACC00277 . r • 0 1 • ~ c> a s'~ a* ( - 1 .o r . • c5 • AgMdaNo~ AAeO WORK SESSION MAY 16, 1995 X16~~ ~ CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT 14 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: REVISED CITY'S INVESTMENT POLICY RECOMMENDATIONi Staff recommends that the City Council review the revisions made to the City's investment policy (Attachment A) to bring it in compliance with the proposed changes to the Public Funds Investment f Act resulting from H.B. 2459, and S.B. 1085 (the bills). SUMMARY: The revisions that staff has made to the current policy would bring the City's investment policy in compliance with certain provisions of the bills adopted by the House and Senate committees of the 74th Texas Legislature. other changes made to the policy are intended to address the recommendations of the Municipal Treasurers' Association of the United States and Canada (MTA US&C), and the Investment Committee. BACKGROUND: During the current Texas legislative session, the House and Senate committees adopted H.B. 2459 and S.B. 10850 amending the Public Funds Investment Act (the Act). This latest amendment to the Act is intended to provide municipalities with better protection against investments that could result in the loss of public funds due to unreasonable risky investment activities. To ent.•re that our investment policy continues to comply with the Public Funds Investment Act, staff recently reviewed it to identify needed changes to bring it in compliance with the amendments • contained in the House and Senate bills. Secondly, it has been our goal to apply for the MTA US&C investment policy certification program. As a result, some of the revisions made to the current policy are intended to meet the recommendations of the MTA US&C and to enable us to secure the certification of the MTA US&C. Attachment B outlines these changes, their sources, status and where they can be located in the policy document. Staff has presented these changes to tho Investment Committee and • O • • r 4$011Q8N0. 9~Q~.. Investment Policy Revisions Lhle..~ ALL a.5 May 16, 1995 Page 2 of 2 the committee recommended approval. We are requesting that the City Council review theme changes and provide staff with direction. PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTEDs The City's investment iolicy governs the investment of City funds. Any department with investable funds will be affected by the recommended changes to the policy, FISCAL IMPACTi There is no fiscal cost associated with the approval of these revisions. RESPEC Y SUBMITTED! i 1 yd V. Harre 1 City Manager Prepared byt arlan L. Je n Director of al operations Approved byi • Kath Ou s~ Executiv Director of Finance at \wpb 1\dw&\w=cl l \pol lay9b 0 c. 0 • 0 • gOMd~~IA=.Q~.~.. CITY OF DENTON f ~3 ~ q P GE 1 OF_L- POLICY/ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE/ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE SECTION: REFERENCI? NUMBER: FINANCE POLICIES 408.04 SUBJECT EFFEiCT1V17 DATE: INVESTMENTS 08/21/90 TI'fl.Er REPLACES: INVESTMENT POLICS 403.06 1. Purpose This policy shall provide the guidelines by w!,ich the City of Denton will maintain the minimum amount of cash in its bark accounts to meet daily needs, and to provide protection for its principal ahIle receiving the highest yield possible from investing all temporary excess ca -h. '.'his policy is being adopted pursuant to the provisions of the Public Funds Investment Act of 1967, as amended, Article 842a-2, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes. II. 8oooe A. Thin Investment Policy applies to the investment activities of the City of Denton, excluding the specific funds cited hereafter. R. This policy shall not govern funds which are managed under separate investment programs. Such funds currently include; Emplc}ees' Retirement Fund of the City of Denton; the Firemen's and Policemen's Pension Funds of the City of Denton; other funds established by the city for deferred employee compensation; revenue bond reserve funds; and certain private donations. The City shall and will maintain responsibility for these funds to the extent required by: Federal and State Law; the City Charter; and donor stipulations. C. The following funds, as well as or„ jr funds that may be created from time to time, shall he administered in accordance With the provisions of this policyr Cash equivalent assets of the General Fund, Community Development Block Grant Fund, Recreation Fund, Crime Prevention Fund, Airport Grant Fund, Airport Master Plan Fund, Emily Flower Library Fund, Debt Service Fr,nd, Street Improvement Fund, General Project Fund, Electric Fund, Electric Bond Fund, Water & Sewer Fund, Water Bond Fund, Sanitation Fund, Landfill. Construction Fund, Working Capital Fund, Defensive Driving Fund, Self-Insurance Fund, Employee Health Fund, and any other fund of the city not specifically excluded in these policy guidelines. III. Obiective f A. The overall strategy of the City's invastmesit objective shall be to ensure a) the understanding of suitability of investment to the finaxldial re iremantis of the City, b) preeervation and'eafety of principal, d), liquidity, marketability of the investment, if the need Arises to liquidsts the • investment before maturity, a) diveraifioat on of the inveetmezIt portfolios • • and f) yield' in ter" of'da y to-day investment purposes, the core objaotlves of the Cityta investment policy shall be to first preserve the capital in the overall portfolio Doc MAFP)(0)I • 0 ~ger>da Na. 9.5 - ~I ~ C1., 4gendaltert~J.~s.t.~ 1 _ f POLICY/ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE/ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE (Continl~ed)'fll't.F RE FERENCF: NUMB I1R INVESTMENT POLICY 908,04 Each investment transaction shall seek to first ensure that capital losses are avoided, whether they be from securities defaults or erosion of market value. The second objective shall. be liquidity and the final objective shall be the yield of the investment. B. To prevent the possibility of loss of resources, the city will attempt to identify and limit exposure to market price risk, default risk or be invested in a manner which is contrary to applicable federal and state regulations. C. To enable the City to meet operating requirements that might he reasonably anticipated, the City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid. Liquidity shall be achieved by matching investment maturities with forecasted cash flow requirements and by investing in securities with active secondary markets. U. It shall be the City's goal, in the area of yield, to establish and maintain a portfolio which regularly exceeds the average rate of return on three (3) months U.S. Treasury Bills, or the average Federal Reserve Discount rate, whichever is higher. The first measure of nuccass in this area will be the attainment of enough income to offset inflationary increases. Even though steps will he taken to obtain this goal, the City's staff shall constantly be cognizant of risk ].imitations. E. All participants in the investment process shall aeel~ to act responsibly as stewards of public assets. offiosrs and 'employees xnvolved In Investment prOCCSW shall rof rain from poroonal buaintse activity that could aonfIiot with proper execution of the investment pro4rams, at which could impair their ability to make impatrtial investment Aaniaiona, Anyone involved in investing Cir.y funds shall disclose to the usuotive Director of Vinanas and the investment Committer any material finenoial interest in financial institutions that handle City investments. The Director of Fiscal Operations Treaewtdae, shall avoid any transactions that might impair public confidence in the City's ability to govern effectively. The governing body recognizes that in diversifying the portfolio, occasional measured losses due to market volatility are inevitable, and must be considered within the context of the overall portfol1,31a investment return, provided that adequate diversification has been implemented. I Iv. Invee mant Committe• There is hereby created an Investment Committee consisting of the City Manager, • Executive Director of Finance, Director of Piacul Operations Iri-easuror, Mayor, and one member of the City Council. The Investment Committee shall meet at least quarterly to determine general str,itegiea and to monitor results. Included in its deliberations will be such topics as; economic outlook, portfolio diversification, matarity structure, potential risk to the City's funds, authorize brokers and dealers, and the target rate of return on the investment portfolio. The committee shall establish its own rules of procedures. Q v, sa oneikbilily A A A. The management responsibi ity for the investment program is hereby delegated 1 to the Executivo Director of Finance, who shall establish written procedures for the operation of the investment program, consistent with this investment Dm. RAFF(X)E01 • 0 • +a • 4pendalle ~ POLICY/ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE/ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE i nn.r: INVESTMENT POLICY RLFEHNCI; NUMBER: 400.04 Policy. Such procedures shall include explicit delegation o: authority to the individual (a) responsible for investment transactions. The primary individual i who shall be involved in investment activities will be the Oirootok of Fioaal I Operations . No persons may engage in investment transactions except I as provided under the terms of this policy and the procedures established by I the gsecutiva Director of Finance. The ltv.idttGve(Director of Finance shall be reaponsible for all transactions undertaken, and shall establish a system o T-reaeurep f control to regulate the activities of the Director of Piscal "Operations . The controls shall include a monthly process of independent by the internal auditor, and an annual review by an external. auxevThe reviews will provide internal control by oesuring compliances with policies And procedures. B. The $x6CUtiVs Director of Finance, Director of Fiscal Operations Treew*rer, Mayor, City Council, City ManAger and othor Finance employees shall he pernonally indemnified in the event of investment lose provided the Investment Policies and (juidelines are followed. C. The Director of Fiscal Operations shall submit monthly an investment report, to the Investment Committee, that summarizes recent market conditions, economic developments and anticipated investment conditions. The report shall summarize the investment strategies employed, describe the portfolio in terms of investment securities, maturities, risk characteristics and other features. The report shall explain total investment return to date and compare the return with budgetary expectations or projections. D The Direrrtcr of Fiscal Operationa shall prepare and present to the city Council and City Manager a written report on the City's investment transactions for the preceding reporting period. The report `shall be provided quarterly, and shall 1) describe the.invastment position of the City a;r of the and of the reporting period , 2) contain a aummary statement of sect pooled fund cOVaring a) beginning ;market value, (b) additions and changes to the mark at value during the reporting period) and c) state the Camino valor of each invested aasat at the beginnint and end of the reporting period by type of fund, 4) show the maturity date of each invested asset, S) show the fund group for each individual Investment, and °6)' stater the compliance of the investment portfolio of the City as it relateg to the investment strategy of the City Within sixty (60) days cf the end of the Vi Cal Year, the Director of't+issei,operations TreaslArer- shall present a comprehensive annual report to the City Council on the investment, program and investment activity. The annual report shall provide a aepa,•ate quarterly comparison of returns and suggestions for improvements that might be made in the investment program. E. The guidelines of retaining records or seven • years, as recommended in the Texas Stets Li r M niciaal Record Manual should be followed. The Director of CArat: ohs ar nhal'i oversee the filing and/or storing of investment records. F. Wire transfer authorization forma shall be kept on file with banking institutions. Ti.,,, authorization form shall identify individuals authorized to make wire transfers and the Institutions designated to receive the wire transfer. The Director of Fiscal Operations lk ; or other authorized • • B representative of the City should complete a transfer notice and give it to t he proper Finance Department personnel. The transfer confirmation received from entrytmade. A wire transfeediniexceaesof notice and the $500,000 shoo appropriate not i be oexecuted without written confirmation from authorized city staff, i Uut, #A F17001.'01 ~ J , • 0 i ~ andaNo. gendail$Ai4 'tZ POLICY/ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE/ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE (Co>itin, 1p 'rI'I't.ti RBIBRBNCE NUMBER. INVESTMENT POLICY 408.04 G. In the event of the absence of the Director of F100al Operations 'Freaer•rer, the authority to invest in maturities beyond six (6) months shall be regulated by the controls and procedures outlined by the Executive Director of Fi.natce. VI. Investment i A. Idle funds of the City of Denton may be invested in: 0 U.S. Treasury securities (maturing in less than five (S) years); 0 Short term obligations Of U.S. Government agencies imaturing in less than two (2) years; o Fully insured or collateralized certificates of deposits at. commercial banks domiciled in Texas (maturing in leas than one i1) year); 0 Repurchase agreements collateralized by U.S, Treasury Securities. rom banks domiciled in Texas and primary brokers/dealers, as provided in the Public Securities Association (PSA) Master Repurchase Agreement (maturing in less than thirty (30) dzys); 0 other such securities or obligations permitted by Federal and State Law and approved by the, Investment Committee. B. it is the policy of the City of Denton t- diversify its investment portfolios. The diversification will protect +atereat income from the volatility of interest rates and the avoidance of undue concentration of aesets in a specific maturity aector; therefore, portfolio maturities shall he staggered. Securities shall also be selected which provide for stability of income and reasonable revised periodically by the Investment Committee. In establishing specific diversification atrategisa, the two (2) following general policies and constraints shall apply: 1. Risk of market price volatility shall be controlled through maturity diversification such that aggregate price louses on instruments with maturities exceeding one (1) year shall not be greater than coupon interest and investment inc me received from the balance of the portfolio. 2. The Investment Comm~.t;:ee shall establish strategies and guidelines for the percentage of the total portfolio that may be invented in U.S. Treasury Securities, U.S. Government Agencies, repurchase agreements, insured/collateralized certificates of deposit and other securities or • obligations. The Investment Committee shall conduct a quarterly review of these guidelines, and shall evaluate the probability of market and default risk in various investment sectors as part of its considerations. C. Security swaps may be considered an an investment, option for the City, A swap out of one instrument into another is acceptable to increase yield, realign for disbursement dates, extend or shorten mat+ rite dates and improve maxlzet sector diversification. Swaps may be initiates Ly brokers/dealers who are on • the City's approved list, u(k r,v rlKiem i 1 • c~ • y AgandaNo 44(L Agvda~ _ POLICY/ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE/ADMINISTRATIVE DIRBCTIVE(P(`s 1Lf T1TL&. RBf'FiHENCC NlIh1NER, I IMFESTMENT POLICY 408.04 D. In-vestments will be solicited on a competitive basin with at least three (3) institutions. The Investment Committee can approve exceptions on a case by cash basis or on a general baste in the form of guidelines. These guidelines shall take into consideration the invent:ment type maturity date, amount, and potential disruptiveness to the City's investment strategy. The investment will be made with the broker/dealer offering the beat yield/quality to the City. VIZ. Selection of Banks and oealere A. City Council shall, by ordinance, "select and designate one or more banking institutions as the depository for the monies and funds of the City." The batik shall be selected primarily on "solvency and stability" and secondly, on rate of inte',eat available. B. The Director of Piaoal,Operations. " shall conduct a comprehensive ' review of prospective depositories credit characteristics and financial history. C. The bank shall be selected through a formalized bidding procens in response to the City's request for proposal (RFP) outlining all services required. The Investment committee shall have the discretion to determine the time span for rebidding the banking services contract; however, a two year period will be the maximum length of time between rebidding. 1). Banks and savings and loans associations seeking to establish eligibility for the City's competitive certificate of deposit purchase program, shall submit ) financial statements, evidence of Federal insurance and other information as required by the Director of Fiscal Operations P,kreet-&r Pinar, E. The Investment committee shall be responsible for selecting brokers and dealers of government securities. Their selection shall be among only primary government securities dealers that report directly to the New York Federal Reserve Bank, unless a comprehensive credit and capitalization analysis reveals that other firms are adequately financed to conduct public business. Approved brokers and dealeua roust complete Exhibit A grid retUrit it to the Director of Fisoal:Operations, in the dealing with City funds, the Director or Fiscal, Operations Prea area shall not conduct business with any securities dealers with whom or through whom public entities have sustained losses on investments. To guard against default possibilities under these conditions, and to assure diversification of bidders, busineea with any one issuer, or • investment broker, should be limited to forty (406) ewsm6y fi+'e d9 percent of the total portfolio at any point in time. In thin way, bankruptcy, receivership or legal action would not immobilize the City's ability to meet payroll or other expenses. VIII. Principal Protection and Safekospina A. All deporits and investments of city funds other than direct purchases of U.S. • Treasury or U.S. Agency notes shall be secured by pledged collateral with a • • market value equal to no lean than 102 percent of the principal plus accrued interest less an amount insured by FDIC or FSLIC. Evidence of proper collateralization in the form of original safekeeping receipts held in inatitutiona's trust department or at a third party institution not affiliated with the bank or bank holding company will be maintained in the office o1 the D1 NAFF0001 • 0 • • 1 ac~entlalte~~ltJ a POLICY/ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE/ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVVN( TITLE: RHPSRBNCE NUMBER: TT INVESTMENT POLICY 40L`. 04 b31CegAoX' d 44 ;O~X4CiAt3N 9'reeeurer at all time, The E7cRttu4~Y~ Director of Pinance, DiXA t+7.' ESE'{ybq Og3eY'tl~4fSM 4lreaet+trer or other auEho"razed City Representative w1 Approve and release all pledged collateral. Collateral will be reviewed monthly to assure the market value of the aecuritiea pledged exceeds Inveatmenta and/or the related bank balances. The Committee shall request additional collateral in the event they deem that their deposits and invest menta ara not sufficiently protected by the pledged collateral. B, Safakeepinq procedures shall be established by the investment Committee which clearly define steps for gaining access to the collateral should the City determine that the City's funds are in jeopardy. Collateral safekeeping and substitution agreements will be apart of the procedure, i C. Only securities allowed by the Public Funds Collateral Act', shall he eligible to be pledged as collateral. However, U.S. Treasury Securities shall be the primary securities accepted as collateral. i i f f I • bnc. AAPF00E01 • • agenda No 4gandaIto Page 1 of q Aj I ? BROKER/DEALER Statement of Investment Policy Understanding I have received and thoroughly reviewed the Investment policy of the City of Denton and acknowledged that reasonable procedures and controls have been Implemented .by me and the firm which I represent In an effort to preciade Imprudent Investment activities ariaing out of Investment transactions conducted between the City and the firm that I represent. All the sales personnel of this firm dealing with the City account have been Informed and will be routinely Informed of the City's investment horizons, limitations, strategy and risk constraints, (Firm) Primary P'opresentative (Signature) (Name) • trifle) • (Date) ~ • • AFFOOE03 -v-.y..,.,.w..nrn..pw.. ~ ~ n..r~. riµ -.........:5' : a yey,... •l Y i I • 1- W, • M `t5-DI'7Q tondaN Exl"BIT B A~ontlal(©~ INVESTMENT GLOSSARY AGEN11ES; Federal agency securities, DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broer, ASKED: The price at which securities ore buying ands Seas a lling for his l own account, offered. BANKERS' ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust credit of the issuer. company, 'The acceptug fnstitutlon guarantees DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT; There ' payment of the bill, as w,. 11 as the issuer. are two methods of delivery of securities: payment delivery versus delivery BID: The price offered by a buyer of receipt. Delivery versus payment Is delivery securities. (When you are selling securities, of securities with an exchange of money for you ask for a bid.) See Offer, the securities. Delivery versus receipt is dellvciy of BROKER; A broker brings buyers and signed receipt for securities tile securities, exchange of a sellers together for a commission. DISCOUNT; Tine difference between the CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD); A cost price of a security and Its maturity when time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced quoted at lower than face value. A security by a certificate. Large denommadou CD's are selling below original offering price shortly typically negotiable. after sale also is considered to be at a COLLATERAL; Securities, evidence of discount, deposit or other property which a borrower DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-Interest pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also bearing money market instruments that are refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure issued a discount and redeemed at maturity deposits of public monies, for full face value, e.g. U.S. Treasury Bills. COMYREIiENSIVEANNUALFINANCIAI. DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing Investment REPORT (CAFR): The ofnclal annual report funds among a variety of securities offering for the it independent returns, Includes five combined statements for each individual fund and account group prepared In FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIESt conformity with GAAP. It also iuciudes Agencies of the Federal goverment set up to supporting schedules necessary to demonstrate supply credit to various classes of Institutions compliance with finance related legal and and individuals, e,g., S1&L's small business contractual provision, extensive Introductory firms, students, farmers farm cooperatives, material, and a detailed Statistical Section, and exporters. COUPON: (a) The annual rate of Interest FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ® that a bond's issuer promises to pay the CORPORATION (FDIC)r A federal 1 bondholder ort tine build's face value. (b) A agency that Insures bank deposits, currently certificate attached to a bond evidencing up to $100,000 per deposit. interest due on a payment date. SIUM Alwtkllul TIMURIS Au i dw O9e UrtW Sak1 Inh C.. d1 i Q • L 8s • `t 9enda7tolT(,~. `1t~a.;.1. EXIUBIT B E►YR PPM itP'1'1 PAGE 2 of 4 FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The talc of ' NATIONAL ' interest at which Fed funds are Iraded. This MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve Ghude Mae); Securities Influencing the through open-market operations. volume of bank- credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued anks, sav'tb gst[ ands loanbankers FEDERAL. HOME LOAN BANKS (FILLB): b associations, arnd 'rite institutions that regulate and lend to savings Other institutions, Security holder is and !call associations. The Federal hofne Loan protected by full faith and credit of the U.S, Banks play a role analogous to that played by Govenunanl, Ginnie Mae securities are [lie Federal Reserve Banks vis-a-vis member backed by the FHA, VA or FMIIM connnercial banks, mortgages, The term "pass throughs" is FEDERAL. NATIONAL MORTGAGE often used to describe Ginnie Maes. ASSOCIATION (FNAIA): NFMA, like LIQUIDITY. A liquid asset Is one that can GNMA was chartered under the Federal be converted easily and rapidly into cash National Mortgage Association Act in 1938, without a substantial loss of value. h, the FNMA Is a federal corporation working under money market, a security Is sold to be liquid the auspices of Ilse Department of housing and If Ilse spread between bid and asked prices is Urban Development ((IUD), It Is the largest narrow and reasonable size can be done at single provider of residential mortgage funds in (]lose quotes, the Uniled States. Fannie Mae, as the corporation Is called, is a private stockholder- LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT owned corporation. The corporation's FOOL (LGIP): 'rite aggregate of all funds purchases Include a variety of adjustable front political subdivisions that are placed in mortgages and second loans, In addilioa to the custody of the Slate 'treasurer for fixed-rate mortgages. FNMA's securities are Investment and reinvesln[enl, also highly liquid and are widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that ail security MARKET VALUE: The price at which a holders will receive liatefy payment of principal security Is trading and could presunably be and interest. purchased or sold. FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE MASTER RF;1'URCHASE AGREEA1ENTt (FUA1C); Consists of seven members of the A wrlllen contract covering all future Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve transactions between the parties to Federal Reserve Bank Presidents. 'f'ile repurchase.-reverse repurchase agreements President of line New York Federal Reserve that establishes each party's rights in the Bank is a permanent member, Mille the other transactions. A master agreement will often Presidents serve on a rotating basis, The specify, among other things, the right of the Cotimnittce periodically meets to set Federal buyer-leader to liquidate the underlying • Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and securities In the event of default by the seller- sales of Government Securities in the open borrower, market as a means of htflucocing the volume of bank credit and money, MATURITY. Tile date upon which the prin or s value FEDERAL RESERVE SYS'T'EM: The cental b ecomes) due andepayable, of an Investment 0 bank of the United Slates created by Congress R • and consisting of it seven member Board of MONEY MARKET: The market In which Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional short-term debt instruments • (bills, batiks and about 5,700 commercial banks that commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, are members of the sys(em, etc,) are issued and traded. Sauer. hlmlkyal 'frnwren' AlkchJai a rite nnhtd Sulft bd Ck*dl • • 1, rdaNo lQ EXHIBIT B iCtlU'dllBfTl ~1~ iL PAGE 3 OF 4 OFFER: The price asked by a seller of RATE The yield J CtF' RL" iJ1BQi~ ! securities. (When yo±, are buying securities, obtainable on a security based on Its you ask for an offer,) See Asked and Bid. Purchase price or Its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS: Purchases on a bond the current income return. and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York REPURCHASE AGREEi11ENT (RP OR Federal Reserve Bank as directed by the FOMC REPO): A holder of securities sells these iu order to influence the volume of money and securities to all investor with an agreement credit In the economy, Purchases Inject to repurchase them at a fixed price on a reserves into (lie bank system and stimulate fixed date. The security "buyer" in effect growth of money and credit; sales have the lends the "seller" money for the perloo of opposite effect. Open market operations are the tine agreement, and the terms of the Federal Reserve's most important and most agreement are structured to compensate him flexible monetary policy tool, for (his. Dealers use RP extensively to finance their positions. Exception; When PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by the Fr:d is said to be doing RP, It is lending an Investor. monoy, that is, increasing bank reserves. PRIMARY DEALER: A group of governneut SAFEKEEPINGi A service to customers securities dealers who submit daily reports of rendered by banks for a fee whereby market activity and positions and monthly securities and valuables of all lyNS and financial statements to the Federal Reserve Batik descriptions are held in the bank'ri vaults of New York and are subject to its informal for protection. oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Lxchange Commission (SEC)-registered SECONDARY 1NARKETi A market securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few made for the purchase and sale of unregulated firms, outstanding Issues following the initial distribution. PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. In some states the law requires that a SECURITIES & EXCHANGE fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money COM11I1SSIONi Agency created by only in a list of securities selected by tine Congress io protect investors In securities custody slate--the so-called legal list. In other transactions by administering securities states the trustee may Invest in a security if it is legislation, one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and Intelligence who is seeking a SEC RULE 15CM: See Uniform Net reasonable income and preservation of capital. Capital Rule, • QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A TREASURY BILLS: A non-interest financial institution which does not clnhn bearing discount security Issued by the U,S. exemption from the payment of lily sales of Treasury to finance the national debt, Most compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the bills are Issued to mature in three months, laws of this state, which has segregated for the six months, or one year, benefit of tile commission eligible collateral 0 having a value of not less than Its maximum TREASURY BOND: Long-tern 11,S, liability and which has been approved by the Treasury securities having Initial maturities Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold of more than 10 years. public deposits. &vu: Aluikyal Trnwrrrf Aimici n of tlu Urdled Sulu W cj+& • to • - a • +gendaNo - ' AgendalterR, ~EXII "l'ACE 4 4 O OF 4 a inir r I ~ IS, - TREASURY NOTES: A non-Interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are Issued to mature In (lime months, six months or one year. UNIFORM NET CAPITAL RULEi Securities and Bxchange Commission requirement that member firms as well as nonmember broker- dealers in securities maintain a maximum ratio of Indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio. Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, Including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues are spread among members 'of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital Includes cash and assets easily converted Into cash, YIELD: The rate of annual Income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. (a) INCOME YIELD is obtained by dividing the current dollar Income by the current market price for the security, (b) NET YIELD or YIELD TO MA'T'URITY Is the current Income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond. I AIIOOIiO= 1 • 3o c: MwkO Tmu r ' Aim lwbn a 6%, UNiw N w ww Gwok }r, • i r A"ITACNMF.NTB GUIDE TO CHANGES MADE IN TFif,~jBiltldW Y REECOMMEN A7YON SOURCE "5S~( TION IN POLICY 'tine overall strategy of the City's Investment Objective shag be to HA 245948.1085 Implemented in the Objective IH-A secwc a) the understanding of sWitubltiny of investment to the newpolk,y financial requirements of the C7 tyb , ) pressrvatioa and safety of principal, c) Ilqukiity, d) marketabdlty of the tnvmtmnI, it the need visa to liquidate the investment before maturity, e) dlversIfleation of the Investment portfolio, and f) yleld,' In terms of day-to-day Investment purpow. the Txrre ob}ectlse H.B.2f59/S,R 1085 Implemented In the objocaft of the City's investment policy shall be to first preartve the III-A ever POLICY capital In the OWrall port folio.' 'Muss and cmpioyees Involved In In vu Intent process all" MTA US&C Implemented In the refrain from personal business activity that Could conflict Ob}enllve III-H with proper execution or the Investment new POLICY prograeu, or which could impair their ability to make impartial iamiment decisions. Anyone Involved In lnvallrµ City funds Mail disclose Io the I= Wive Director of Proance and the Investment Commit I" any materisi financial interest in financial institutions that handle City Investments.' Herommend that we include the'Mayor'ss a member of the Investment Committee Implemented In the Investment Cammitbe IV Investment Committee. sew POLICY Recommend ICI eve add a lacguago to read 'Ihe oootrob slug Investment Committee Implemented in the R includes mon6ly process of Independent review by The Inuroal ! MTA US&C 01P Wq V-A auditor, and an maual review by an external auditor. 71 a now Ply rcview wilt provide internal control by assuring Compliance with policies and pmcedura'. II is rec4mimended IleI the policy be revised to provide for Investment Committee Implemented in the pas the indemnification of the Mayor, City Council anal City Manager, new P~tY Y-B Posey It it recommended [hat we revive the policy to Include it Isapnge H,B. 243M.B.1085 Impleavated In the peapoesibWq V-D acquiring the Director of Fiscal Operations to prepare and pmaent osw POLICY to the City Cooodl and City Manager a wrilteo report on the qty's. 'Ihe frequency and essential components of the report will be stated In the revised policy, j Revise The policy to require broken and deakm to sign'Sutemeol H.& 2459/3.8, 1085 Implemented In the Selection o(Banlu mad VII-H of Investment PWky Undemanding.' "W PdkY Dealers • lo increase the percen law of the portfolio purchased from any one Staff issuer or investment broker from 25% to 40%in order to madmiae Implemented in the D"Woa n(Battlu and YII-H Otter yieW whenever possible through com atitive yield oMm Deakerv i I c~vamaantvua.atry.wlu :u • • ~ ~ , ~r. ~ > ~ ~f r it :4 rti~v ~;i'n s '.i~. momhm 4 0 l . V MIT AM ir I l f o~ as M I v I I • • ApIl+di No. ►t ! csj l 8 CITY of DENTONr TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING • 215 E McMNNFY • DENTON, TEXAS 76201 (617) 666.8200 • DFW METRO 4342529 MEMORANDUM T0; Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager FROM: Kathy DuBose, Executive Director of Finance DATE: MAY 12, 1996 SUBJECT: FINANCIAL COMPARISONS I've attached financial year to date (6 month) budget comparisons for the General and Utility funds, I've also included explanatory notes for General Fund revenues and expenditures, l The Utility financial reports are those presented to the Public Utility Board monthly. The Electric utility is presented in adherence with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission accounting guidelines, Although the current year to date reflects a loss, revenues are seasonal and will peak during the summer months, Water, Wastewater and Sanitation funds are "on track" with each respective budget. If you need further Information, please let me know. • XD lb AFFOOEI9 ' Dedicated to Quallry Service" t ' 4tyyb'~ 1 t r i Yt 4 f-j-~~f `'(N NEW • +,u • ~geodalVa ~5- n~-,..r ~gondafiem i).S rite 5 I l1z GENERAL FUND IB REVENUES • Ad Valorem Taxes - Current year collections reflect the twenty-five (26%) percent reduction in the tax rate for the current year associated with the one- half ('/z C) cent sales tax implemented to reduce property taxes, • Sales Tax - Current year collections reflect the additional one-half ('%C) cent sales tax effective October 1, 1994 (see notation for ad valorem taxes. a Franchise Taxes - TU Electric franchise payment Is scheduled for August. Solid Waste franchise payment is based on three (3%) percent of estimated revenues. • Other Taxes - Mixod Beverage and Hotel/Motel Occupancy taxes reflect growth over prior year. Bingo tax increase is due to the City's portion increasing from one (1 percent to one and one-fourth (1 A percent. • Revenue Fees - Recreational and athletic fees are seasonal and should Increase for spring and summer. Ambulance service fees reflect the increase in base rate effective for only a portion of the prior year. Fines and Fees - Fines and fees associated with the Municipal Court reflect the implementation of a court of record. • Licenses and Permits - The decrease in building activity is reelected in the associated revenues for the current year. • Miscellaneous Revenues - For new construction, electric and plumbing { inspections are included in the building permit fee. Interest income reflects • investing a higher beginning fund balance and increases in rates for the current fiscal year. • Transfers - Transfers are annualized and transferred monthly. The City's Defensive Driving Program has been suspended and the associated transfer will not be made. The State Signal Grant and DISD DARE contributions are based e on actual reimbursement of expenditures. I • 0 i AFF00H A III I • w • GENERAL FUND qeedaNu COMPARISON OF REVENUES FOR PERIODS ENDING 03131194 AND =31/95 1ee1 Sbl~ i~V E ' f) PR10R YEAR CURRENT YEAR REVENUES REVENUES CURRENT YEAR PERCENT OF PERCENT OVER YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE BUDGET BUDGET (UNDEF0PRIOR REVENUE DESCRIPTION 03-31-94_ @ 03-31-96 1994-1996 COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATE CURRENT YEAR AD VALOREM 8,804,784 6,076,939 6,974,765 101.69% -30,98% DELINQUENT AD VALOREM 62,543 69,884 170,000 40,99% 11.42% CY - PENALTIES $ INTEREST 27,727 25,626 47,000 54,31% -7.94% PAIOR-PENALTIES B INTEREST 36,495 26,834 65,000 48,78% -26.47% TAX COLLECTION FEES 22,885 17,619 37,000 47.35% -23.45% AA VALOREM TAXES 8,954,434 6,215,602 _ 8,283,766 99,91% -30,69% SALES TAX - 1 CENT BASE 3,412,924 3,879,334 7,193,335 5193% 13.67% SALES TAX- 112CENT/PROP TAX _ 0 _1,028,921_ 3,224,068 31.91% 100,00% SALES TAX _ 3,412,924 4,908,266 10,417,423 47129 43,81% FRANCHISE-LONE STAR OAS 30A,188 280,815 304,000 92.37% -7.68% FRANCHISE-GTE 63,878 60,637 140,303 4312% -4.78% FRANCHISE-SAMMONS CABLE 140,642 151,972 290,000 64,28% 813% FRANCHISE-TU ELECTRIC 0 0 55,700 0.00% 0,00% FRANCHISE-SOLID WASTE 62,422 81,313 1821825 60,00% 3018% FRANCHISE TAXES - - 670,830 874,737 942,828 80.97% 0.6ft MIXED BEVERAGE TAX 32,721 36,483 70,000 52.12% 11.60% HOTEL/MOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX 110,967 135,356 504,000 28.W% 21,96% BINGO TAX _ 8,940 14,399 18,000 79,99% 61.00% OTHER TAXES --162,848 188,238 692,000 31.46% V 22 CC;L SWIMMING POOL FEES 101 0 48,503 6.00% 100,0096 CEMETERY FEES 8,286 4,365 10,000 43,66% -47.19% COMMUNITY BUILDING RENT 19,456 12,171 28,000 43,47% -37.44% AIRPORT FEES 39,660 37,799 63,856 59.19% -4.69% REC PROGRAM ACTIVITY FEES 4,650 31885 10,325 37.63% -14.62% ATHLETIC FEES 876 4,282 7,000 61.17% 534.37% AMBULANCE SERVICE FEES 170,102 166,808 406,000 43,13% 982% WILLIAM SQUARE PARKING FEES 1,470 1,260 12,264 10.27% -14.29% FIRE INSPECTION FEES 9,884 14,590 22,000 68,32% 60.97% ENO - CHRG TO BOND FUND 130,374 180,922 483,800 37.40% 36,77% REVENUE FEES 384,318 448,082 1,090,748 40.90% 18.0791 • WARRANTFEE9 25.7$0 28,342 50,000 66.88% 9.84% ANIMAL POUND FEES 30,223 30,818 92,000 49,87% 2,30% AUTO POUND FEES 16,881 12,870 49,000 26,27% -18,986 MOWING LIEN FEES 3,440 5,600 12,000 4867% 6279% POLICE ESCORT d GUARD FEES 8,684 14,058 20,000 70.29% 61.0% COURT COST SERVICE FEES 8,486 9,052 30,000 30.17% 6,87% ANIMAL CONTROL FINES 2,921 3,061 8100D 81.22% 479% • MUNICIPAL FINES 308,641 356,605 648,640 65.18% 15.64% • • INSPECTION FINES 8 FEES 0 750 0 100,00% 100,00% FIRE DEPT FINES 4,426 8,283 11,800 70.19% 87.14% CIVIL FINES 4,756 7,160 8,400 85.12% 5034% LINT POLICE FINES 12,045 21,056 30,000 70.18% 74.80% TWU POLICE FINES 6,916 3,925 9,000 43.81% .33,64% PARKING FINES 18,759 40,437 33,000 122,64% 141,29% 1 • • GENERAL FUND vendaNo qr,) COMPARISON OF REVENUES 4ptdatlepLulz±~ FOR PERIODS ENDING 03/31/94 AND 03/31/96 PRIOR YEAR CURRENT YEAR REVENUES REVENUES CURRENT YEAR i,ERCENTOF PERCENT OVER YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE BUDGET BUDGET 1JNDM PRIOR REVENUEDESMPTION 03-31-94 003-31-96 104-19_% COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATE COURT ADMIN FEES 39,909 135,639 200,000 87.82% 239.87% ARRESTFEES 31,751 36,699 71,000 51.3996 16.58% RESTAURANT INSPECTION 12,895 15,642 27,000 5793% 2130% GROCERY INSPECTION 4,660 6,842 11,600 50.36% 26,36% SWIMMING POOL INSPECTION 0 0 16,320 0.00% 0.DD% FOOD HANDLER INSPECTION 20,000 21,440 43,500 49.29% 7,20% DAYCARE INSPECTION 3,081 3,163 3,550 89.10% 2.66% UNIFORM TRAFFIO 16,112 17,623 32,000 55,07% 9,38% FALSE ALARM FEES 3,950 3,960 8,000 49.38% 0.00% POOL SCHOOLS 0 0 1,500 ~w 0,00% FINES 9 FEES 680,216 762,304 11381,310 - - >b.33% » 34,83% ZONE PERMI I'S & PETITIONS 18,326 9,760 26,000 39.00% -46,77% WINE/BEER LICENSES 3,505 3,193 7,700 41.47% -8.90% ELECA PLUMBING LICENSES 17,331 14,873 14,000 104.81% -15.34% VITAL STATISTICS-BIRTH 7,012 6,031 16,000 40.21% -13.99% BUILDING PERMITS 68,332 47,832 180,000 29,90% -300090, TEMP GAS PERMITS 1,416 1,305 2,500 6..20% -7,849E LOADING ZONES 11960 1,960 2,200 90,00% 0.00. RIGHT-OF-WAY INSPECT FEES 8,907 7,056 18,000 39.20% -20.78% CURB CUT PERMITS 2,039 2,070 4,400 47.05% 1.620A MOBILE HOME LICENSES 8,441 11,697 11,300 103.61% 38,'% VITAL STATISTICS-DEATH 10,885 10,076 19,000 83.03% -7.&„% DEVELOPMENT FEES 20,810 16,696 31,000 63.64% -20.83% SIGN PERMITS 6,770 6,885 16,000 03% 1.70% SALE OF DOCUMENTS 514 1,491 2,000 ) 19008% PLAN RVW FEES 10,917 7,200 28,000 27.bow -34,05% CERTOCCNEW 4,388 4,294 8,600 50.62% -2.14% REROOFING FEES 400 1,260 1,100 114.55% 215.00% REINSPBCTION FEES 120 16 350 4,29% _87,60% VARIANCE FILE FEES 200 130 300 43.33% -35,00% LANDSCAPE PERMITS 30 120 640 22,22% 300.00% PARKING LOT PERMIT 600 1,200 1,000 120,00% 140.00% FENCE PERMITS 855 570 2,000 26.50% -33,33% MECHANICAL PE14MITS 5,467 3,635 13,000 27.10% 35,34% j • MOVING PERMITS 180 30 300 1000% -83.33% DEMOLITION PERMITS 280 160 300 63.33% -38,46% POOUHOTTUD/SPA PERMITS 700 490 1,600 _ 32,67% -30pp% LICENSES A PERMITS - 200,384 159,839 --382,990 41,68% -20.33% PARKING METER RECEIPTS 9,922 7,050 21,000 33.71% -20,64% ELECTRIC INSPECTION 61280 5,897 16,700 37.68% -6.10% 6 PLUMBINOINSPECTION 8,036 4,649 16,000 30.99% -22.90% • OVERTIME INSPECTION 72 304 1,600 20.27% 322.22% INTEREST INCOME 207,012 307,662 460,000 6868% 4862% TRAFFICIPOLICEREPORTS 9,094 14,802 19,000 76.85% 60,67% MISCELLANEOUS INCOME 25,606 22,079 48,300 47,69% -13,77% STREET CUTS 1091910 191,412 275,000 69,60% 74.15% CNTYCONTRIBUTION- LIBRARY 68,582 81,342 113,330 64,13% 8.41% 2 • 0 • GENERAL FUND COMPARISON OF REVENUES Venda No FOR PERIODS ENDING 03131/94 AND 03/31/95 Afleadallem_.L~i~..#.,s~, PRIOR YEAR CURRENT YEAR REVENUES REVENUES CURRENT YEAR PERCENT OF PERCEW OVER YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE BUL`AET BUDGET (UNDER) PRKM REVENUE DE9Cf8PTlON @ 03-31-94 003-31-95 _ 1_9!4.16,'96_ _COLLECTED YEAR-TG-DATE CNTY CONTR-AMBULANCE SERV 122,767 129,793 ',45,634 62,86% 5,72% SMALL CITIES CONTR-AMBUL 30,987 39,641 79,881 50,00% 28.57% PICK UP ANIMAL CARCASSES 1,184 663 21100 31,67% -44,00% C.I.P. ENGINEERING FEES 1,878 1,264 2,500 60.18% -26.27% ATTNY LEASE 3,750 _ 4,500 _ 9,000 60.00% 20,00% MISC. REVENUES 590,880 79},078 _ 1,305,8/6- 80.69% 33886 ELECTRIC-STREET RENTAL 0 291,629 683,657 60.00% 100.00% ADMINTRANSFER-ELECTRIC 911,342 874,709 1,749,417 50.00% -4,02% ROI - ELECTRIC 1,169,190 1,180,116 21380,233 50,00% 0,9,7% ADMIN TRANSFER-WATER 316,270 380,026 720,049 50.00% 13.83% F.01-WATER 667,186 680,535 11181,089 60.00% 2.36% ADMIN TRANSFER - WASTEWATER 235,926 261,878 523,752 60.009E 11,00% F I - WASTEWATER 484,693 662,163 1,124,306 60,00% 18.98% MIN TRANSFER-SANITATION 192,006 236,747 473,493 50.00% 2130% OMIN TRANSFER-PUBLIC INFO 0 23,407 46,814 60.00% 100.00% ' TRANSFER-OFF DRIVING 0 2,000 0.00% 0.00% TRANSFER - FIRE RETENTION 88,500 25 - 80,000 60.00% -&460% S TRANSFER-INSURANCE FUND 20,000 10, 20,000 60,0046 -60.00% TRANSFER-RISK FUND 75,000 37,50V 78,000 60.00% -50.00% TRANSFER-ECONOMIC DEV. 5,000 51000 10,000 50,00% 000% TRANSFER-IMPACT STUDY 0 0 75,000 0.00% 0.00% TRANSFER-REC FUND 12,600 14,844 29,688 50,00% 18,79% STATE REIMS-SIGNALIZATION 7,943 6,097 11,000 55.43% -23.24% CONTR - DISD DARE 40,107 3J,440 _ 55,188 _ 60.60% -18.62% T'NISFERS ---4,105,663 _ 4,M,283 _40.66% 9rt TOTAL REVENUE 18,962,278 `18,687,118 31,487,1 59 00-~.e,Q j I 3 j • • IgBndall0n EXPENDITURES • Public Information and Cable TV expenses were separatea from General Government in the current year. I • Municipal Judge - Current year expenditures reflect funding for a part-time Judge position. Position was approved in a prior year but remained vacant until fiscal year 1995. • Municipal Court - Current year expenditures reflect costs for two additional clerks for the Court of Record. • Municipal Services/Economic Development - The cL , it year reflects an increase due to a vacancy in the prior year, and an in ase in office supply costs. • Parks & Recreation Admii,istrr tion - Current year exp, ;turns reflect salary savings due to vacancy (Direc'or of Parks). • Leisure Services - Current expenditures reflect fu ig for an additional part-time attendant at MLK .roation Center. • Park aintenance - Reflect n current year expenditr s is funding for th i J m-,intenance and operatic.. >outh Lakes Park. 11 racilities Management - Included in current year cost is maintenance and operation of Denton Municipal Complex. • Library Administration - Current year expenditures include ad( 'tional funding fo. the purchase of reference books. • Adult Services - Current year expenditures reflect additional funding for the j • purchase of a microfilm reader/printer and other audio/visual materials. • Denton Public Library South - Expenditures did not exist in prior years for the branch library. • Transportation Engineering - Prior year expenditures reflect salary savings due • to several vacancies (Graphic Sign Technician, Signal Technician, 2 Sign Maintenance workers). • Street Patching/Construction - Expenditures for current year reflect the increase F in street maintenance. . w QsndaNo, +geiidallsn # LL2 `:a, ~i7r, ~r / C9~j cry ~ D Page 2 EXPENDITURES • Airport - Current year funding reflects or. i-time expenditures for the purchase of a personal computer and the refurbishment of a beacon. • Fire Prevention - Prior year expenditures include a "drag up cost" in final payment to a retiree. Current year expenditures reflect a vacancy In the Arson ' Investigator position. • Drainage - Includea in the current year expenditures funding for additional channel lining and s eat and curb maintbnance. • C. ~:butions ) Agendas - Current fiscn! 3ar reflects an incrusse h ft iding o r prior yeaA • Misralldneo. b ccounting - Cur lneodi?ures liect a redcction In ins rance pre, ums. AFFOU i 4 . I i 1. i , Y 24 X41; A cry A g9ttdaNo.9 n 7 (l 1pEtudalte ~ 611 F- .5- I a GENERAL FUND ~qJ COMPARISON OF EXPENDITURES ` FOR PERIODS ENDED 03/31194 AND 03131195 PR;OR YEAR CURRENT YEAR EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES CURRENTYEAR PERCENTOF PERCENT OVER DEPT YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE BUDGET BUDGET (UNDER) PRIOR DEPARTMENT NAME _ CODE @ 0&31194 @ 03131196 1994-19% EXPENDED YEAR-TO-DATE GENERAL GOWFRNMENT 0000 2r4,668 243,555 556,394 43.77% -6.07% PUBLIC INFOF,n1ATION OFFICE 0001 0 3,087 63,923 4.83% 100.00% CABLE T. V. 0003 0 2,880 19,827 4J% 100,00% GENERAL 'ERNMENT x06,688 249,602 `8/0,144~~ 36: - ~-2,76% I ILADMINI87RA7 1 0004 164,225 205,287 _ 532,686 .1„85% 5.70% f MUNICIPAL JUDOE 0005 60,801 61,164 iB2,442 31.62% J 20.38% PLANNING oFRATION 0015 219,1 221,943 639,441 41.14% 1,^9% BUILDING ..n-tCTION 001, 226,2E 225,601 638,195 41.90% 0.11% tlAIN STREET 00' 29 k 30,565 43,643 48.03% 4.51% PLANNING _ -173,6. _ 478,009 1,141,279 41.88% 0,93% 'DANCE `OMINISTRATION 0 131, 130,450 95,218 46.7, -0,6M URCHARNG 109,751 110,053 1,501 43.1 0.281. :USTOMERSERVICE i2 421,642 420,033 92. 48 4F -0.38% 'ng:ASURY 1 115,17^ 23,298 282,: v% 7 "'u :.ING _ 229,80:, 239,902 683,0,.- 41.1616 4...v,o TAX 0026 36,697 39,907 79,911 49,94% 9.04% MUNICIPAL COURT 0026 146,9x? +'d,083 359,223 47.07% 10,10% INTERNAL AUDIT 0027 30,6y0 29,721 69,396 42.83% -5,63% FINANCE '-1,221,848 282,447 1,313,830 _ 44.87% 3,32% INFORMATION SERVICES 0080 412,669 390,619 1,063,025 36.76% -6.31% ADMINIST'. TIVE SERVICES 0081 _157,37b 16,052 321,045 _50.79% 181% INFORMATION SERVICES ___569,944 653,731_ _ 1,364,070 40.01% -2.84% A MUNICIPAL SERVICE& 4 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 0009 - 81,645 91,023 198,485 - 46.88% 11.62% HUMAN RESOURCES 0008 263.633 262,732 588,062 48,41% 3.83% ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 0036 63,245 64,393 152,662 42.18% 1.82% ANRdAL CONTROL 0039 114,684 - 123,489 284ID43 43.471 7,49% A ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 178,109 ~ 161,882 438,706 - 43.021 6-48% 1 I 1 s o , • sa • GENERAL FUND to p~ COMPARISON OF EXPENDITURES Qp FOR PERIODS ENDED 03/31/94 AND 03/31/95 PRIOR YEAR CURRENT YEAR EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES CURRENT YEAR PERCENT OF' PERCENT OVER DEPT YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE BUDGET BUDGET (UNDER) PRIOR DEPARTMENT NAME CODE @ 03/31/94 @ 03131/95 1994`1996 EXPENDED YEAR-TO-DATE PARKS 8 RECREATION ADMIN 0000 125,119 113,788 205,881 42.80% - -9.06% LEISURE SERVICES 0062 431,079 484,764 1,082,852 44,77% 12.45% PARK MAINTENANCE 0063 .165,89: 645,986 1,355,470 40.28% 17.19% PARKS 8 RECREATION 1.022,094 1,144,638 -2704,203 4212% 11,99% 'ACILITIES MANAGEMENT 0002 673,392 1,001,868 1,867,949 _ 53.92% -_--74.73% LIBRARY ADMINISTRATION 0070 113,789 147,476 244,015 60,44% 29,60% SUPPORT SERVICES 0072 140,073 151,751 363,895 41,70% 634% ADULT SERVICES 0073 136,997 181,943 347,984 52.28% 32.81% YOUTH SERVICES 0074 86,449 87,630 219,647 39.91% 1.37% DENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY-SOUTH 0075 0 100,258 243,545 41.17% 100,00% LIBRARY 477,308 - - - ------_,058 --_1_418,988 47.16% - 40. 17% ENGINEERING 0010 437,186 462,144 1,064,034 43,43% 6.71% fRANSPORTAT70N ENGINEERING 0012 174,097 191,814 431,935 44.41% 10.18% STREET PATCH INGICON STU CTION 0031 592,697 1,064,415 1,777,049 59,90% 7969% STREET LIGHTING 0034 182,680 175,141 428,000 40.92% -4,13% ENG/TRANS/STREETS _ 1,386,660 - 1,883,016- 3,701,018 36,56% AIRPORT 0019 - 34,934 - 46,110 _ 99,202 ----46.48% 31.99% POLICE 0040 2,859,488 '___1.037,218 ____!,024,119 _ 43,24,% 6,22% FIRE ADMINISTRATION 0050 314,355 315,214 724,654 43.50% 0.27% FIRE OPERATIONS 0051 1,674,031 1.774,194 3,837,243 48.24% 5.98% FIRE PREVENTION 0052 120,802 92,060 208,511 44.14% _23,79% EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE 0053 _ 512,107 483,202 _ 1,089,041 _ 44.37% -5.64% FIRE 2,621,295 2,884,_870 6,859,409 1.66% DRAINAGE 0810 164,486 173,158 367,292 48.48% 12.0916 CONTRIBUTIONS TO AGENCIES 015M 10216E'4 119,313 238,625 5_0,00% 1833% MISCELLANEOUS/FINANCE 020M -_---306,364 _ 330,968 1,068,467 30,98% 8.03% MISCELLANEOUS/ACCOUNTING 024M _ 269,043- 209,139 _ 616,368 40.68% -.._-19.26% • • TOTAL EXPENDITURES 13,077,797 L-14;841,289 - 32,740,040 --44721 11,9671 2 i • p • CITY OF DENTON FINANCE DEPARTMENT ~'8lid8N0 Apanda;tarrJULS_:,~ ( 5 r STATEMENT Of REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS • (UNAUDITED ELECTRIC OPERATING FUND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1995 AND 1994 Totals FERC CODES•• March 31, 1995 March 31, 1994 OPERATING REVENUES: 440 Residential sales 1 8,923,712 1 9,029,312 442 Commercial and industrial sales 15,006,268 14,298,846 444 Public street and highway lighting 224,482 221,591 445 Other sales to public authorities 1,129,767 11053,279 447 Sales for resale 1,360,110 3,292,555 461 Miscellaneous service 128,565 139,692 454 Rent from electric property 140,493 458 Other electric 211,050 102,849 Total Opweing Revenues 27,121,437 28,138,926 OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES: 665 Purchased power 19,607,956 19,883,762 565 Purchased power adjustment 13,062,0381 (3,109,1691 500.567 Production 4,250,169 5,472,103 680673 Transmission 31,166 49,773 680.698 Distribution 1,815,687 1,803,986 901.905 Customer accounts' 823,210 548,269 907-910 Customer service and Informational 133,822 96,109 920.936 Adminletrative and general' 840,382 Ba4.862 403 Depreciation 1,972,530 1,874,039 408 Payment In lieu of taxes (ROI) 1,471,945 1,189,190 Total Operating Expenses 27,684,499 28,522,713 Operating Lose (463,062) (383,7871 "OPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES), 419 Interest Income 1,044,310 828,908 427 Interest on long-term debt 1859,1691 1758,1151 431 Interest-customer deposits & other 121,2171 (19,9711 42e Donations 166,3431 (18,0311 i 417 Non-utility operations, net _ 1270,530) 1236,0651 • Total Nonoperaling Revenues (Expenses) 28,061 (202,276) Net Lou 1436,011) (566,0631 Add: Depreciation of fixed assets acquired with contributed capital 29,137 28,874 Decrease in retained earnings 4 1405,8741 4 (657,3891 ® ' • IFEKI FedwW Erwgy A•eul*wy Conxrr•don • • ' Indudr •drt~Ii"UM6• 4arfa to ea,asi awanrtwl AAAON" Prpmod By Finance Dep: rl-..ter • • r w.~w••~,,.•Wfi 41rY5 r W'.. _ • a a► CITY OF DENTON 7 FINANCE DEPARTMENT V~pp[li)NO_,J+S' ~ 1 SCHEDULE OF BUDGET VS ACTUAL EXPEN4b - IUNAUOITED) A IQAf1a~~e~i, LE(~ - ELECTRIC OPERATING FUND f FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1995 Vile FERC CODFS•• Plant Operation Expenses Expenses (Plant) ELECTRIC PLANT W SERVICE: 310-348 Production plant 4 14,048 6 350.369 Transmission plant 13,410 360.373 Distribution plant 1,026,179 389.399 General plant 107,570 Total Electric Plant 1,160,207 (Operation) (Maintenance} POWER PRODUCTION EXPENSES: 500.607 610.614 Steam power generation 640,677 501 Fuel 3,258,441 536.640 641.545 Hydraulic power generation 19,047 648.660 561.664 Other power generation 11 655 Purchased power 19,507,956 566.667 Other production expenses Total Production Expenses 23,426,132 560.567 688.573 TRANSMISSION EXPENSES 23,176 580.689 680-698 DISTRIBUTION EXPENSES 1,149,967 901.906 CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS EXPENSES' 620,736 CUSTOMER SERVICE 4 907.910 INFORMATIONAL EXPENSES 120,747 920.931 936 ADMINISTRATIVE k GENERAL EXPENSES, 800,486 408 PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES (ROIJ 1,471,945 NONOPERAT)NG EXPENSES: 221 Principal payments-bonds 1,016,728 427 Interest or, lo,•n•term debt 869,169 431 Interest, customer deposits A other 21,217 426 Donatinns 61,887 417.1 Non•u0ity operations; Communications 178,938 General Government 24,268 Sanitation 19,460 Warehouse 282 Water 88,689 Wastewater 22,552 Garage 7,247 • Other ther 28,489 Total Nonopereting Expanses 2,106,607 TOTAL EXPENSES 4 11180407 {Z9,_ 19, 88 • • IF(RC) Fedwd Enaay Paaddarv CormiMN•n ~rw~.~rsrrs ,iris W4kxk, adninis rRly v.r1u to o«,«d aevrrAum I AM07W i Prepared By Finance Department rti-sre...,.~w•~•...~w_, ♦ • r •ww+wr•,_W(1*hNU-A't A YM.••. • as • CITY OF D£NTON _ FINANCE DEPARTMENT SCHEDULE OF BUDGET VS ACTUAL EXPENSES • (UNAUDITED) Jni1aI13R ELECTRIC OPERATING FUND FOR THE PEII00 ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 -(D~~ Budget Maintenance Total Total Percent Expenses Expanses Budget Remaining 4 i 14,048 1 230,000 94% 13,410 1,026,179 2,686,968 62% 107,570 243,607 66% 1,160,207 3,160,475 63% 176,347 816,024 3,080,896 74% 3,268,441 6,123,039 47% 3,990 23,037 242,509 91% • 11 - - 19,507,966 42,651,160 64% 179,337 23,806,489 52,097,604 - 5% 3,826 28,801 123,366 831,735 1,781,692 4,272,307 196 620,736 1,289,549 196 120,747 722,202 1.3% 3,858 804,144 2,227,512 84% 1,471,945 2,943,890 60% jj f 1,016,728 2,033,456 ,;0% 659,169 1,318,337 50% 21,217 • 81,687 490,376 87% 176,939 370,097 52% 24,268 19,460 282 68,589 129,373 47% 22,562 7,247 e • - 28,469 183,778 83% , 2,108,807 4,496,414 63% 1 818,366 131;898,348 971;332,308 8g' • Inlo•mwlan b/bq proNfda! by ow ""-v by *mom; tn,daw r•em/W N onw W MAOtOf/ Premed By Finance Department • • r CITY OF DENTON FINANCE DEPARTMENT t1BDli3N0. STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS - (UNAU131fED 5; I° 9 S WATER OPERATING FUND 3 FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1995 Totals March 31, 1995 March 31, 1994 OPERATING REVENUES: Water service 9 5,837,393 A 6,701,029 Miscellaneous 19,429 19,618 Total Operating Revenues 5,856,822 47 OPf (INO EXPENSES: nchased power 192,599 204,961 Purchase of water 37,884 35,813 Salaries and wages 1,027,348 1,059,673 Ma+ -t supplies 177,762 163,023 Mainw,,o,_. zhd •epairs 368,104 289,629 Serv;res 280,115 'p7.Fa~ Insurance 8,767 Sundry 19,681 12,030 A,ministrative7R01 1,163,074 1,103,078 Depreciation 1,024,309 884,297 TotalOpers+ aAnsee 4,277,601 4,023,1`+~ 0^ ,rcome (Loss) 1,679,221 ,,,,106 NON'JPERATINO REVENUES (EXPENSES): -r-rest revenue 60,364 Interest expense and fiscal charges ' (1,765,122) (1,606,915) Contributions to Motor Pool (23,081) Tom! Nonoperating Revenues (Expeness) (1,7,18,203} (1,656,6611 • Net Income (Loos) (208,982) 141,164 Add: Depreciation of fixed assets acquired with contributed capitol 291,840 206,460 Increase in retained earnings / 82,868 4 347,814 a..r. e • ' 1ns1e1Q of reflective the )VII payment, Rey RI`~ert1 i1 YFIMIiIMf Orl the fMenCi11 It1t1rMn11. AAA010(C Prepared By Finance Depariment • a • r CITY OF DENTON FINANCE DEPARTMENT ~#eradaNa ~5~~Cs. SCHEDULE OF BUDGET VS ACTUAL EXPENSES • (UNAUDITED) - WATER OPERATING FUND +4 +g FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1996 Budget Percent Budget Expenses Remaining CAPITAL OUTLAY: Fixed assets 8 1,867,922 9 288,138 84% OPERATING EXPENSES; Purchased power 642,860 192,698 70% Purchased water 94,900 37,884 60% Salaries and wages 2,260,412 1,027,346 54% Materials and supplies 660,691 158,831 72% Maintenance and repairs 876,495 343,812 81% Services 662,014 275,397 80% Insuranre 17,616 8,758 60% Sundry 132,676 19,881 86% Administrative Cost (General) 1,161,069 680,636 60% Return on Investment 720,049 380,024 60% Impact Fee 37,600 18,750 60% Administrative Cost - Electric _ 130,000 86,000 60% Total Operating Expenses 7,176,171 3,088,398 67% NONOPERATING EXPENSES: Interest expense ' 3,630,231 1,766,122 60% Principal payments bonds 1,466,507 727,762 60% Principal payments-Ray Roberts ' 179,:37 89,622 s0% Contributions to Motor Pool 118,000 23,081 800A Total Nonoperating Ex!+ensee 6,280,976 2,805,577 61% TOTAL EXPENSES 114,318,068 1 5,982,111 68% • J ' h,elead at eallectfna the lull P" nenl, nay Roberta N A7ortl2ed on the unmet elate ,14. AAA02rXC Prepared By Finance Department • • , ail A, 1 ~6~~'~f A•S ~ipt~ ~~i ],fr ~ ¢h' • • CITY OF DENTON FINANCE DEPARTMENT ,JOHtlfIf~U. ,g;;IUuilaln STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS - (UNAUDIT WASTEWATER OPERATING FUND !,S I FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1996 Totals March 31, 1996 March 31, 1994 OPERATING REVENUES: Wastewater service $4,648,318 $3,997,583 Miscellaneous 60 237 Total Operating Revenues 4,648,368 3,997,820 OPERATING EXPENSES: Purchased power 137,677 139,366 Fuel 17,195 13,316 Salaries and wages 1,083,642 1,026,181 Materials and supplies 79,307 81,439 Maintenance and repairs 163,121 187,886 Services 223,467 210,966 Insurance 11,204 6,603 Sundiy 8,777 6,086 AdministrativelR01 1,064,464 813,887 Depreciation _ 842,779 721,123 Totsl Operating Expenses 3,621,633 3,185,710 OParotIng Income {Loss) 926,738 812,110 NONOPERATING REVENUES IEXPENSESI: Interest revenue 29,08-P 32,837 Interest expense and fiscal charges (476,116) 1612,646) Other 1796) Total Nonoperating Revenues (Expensed (449,829) {479,8091 • Net Income ILosld 476,906 332,301 Add: DaPfeClatlDn of fixed assets acquired with contributed capital 641,098 630,664 Increase In retained earnings $1,018,004 4 862,966 AAA0200A 'Prepsred By Finance Department w.ry,... r s r CITY OF DENTON c~sy ^ FINANCE DEPARTMENT gonllaNo SCHEDULE OF BUDGET VS ACTUAL EXPENSES - fUNAUUII'ED1 I WASTEWATER OPERATING FUND I ~0 f3fi g FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1995 lJ Budget Percent Budget Expenses Remaining CAPITAL OUTLAY: Fixed assets 9 1,187,440 4 134,687 89% OPERATING EXPENSES: Purchased power 400,000 137,677 66% Fuel 17,800 17,195 2% Salaries and wages 2,234,610 1,083,646 62% Materials and supplies 243,502 76,139 69% Maintenance and repairs 429,340 130,616 70% Services 880,687 190,842 71% Insurance 22,409 11,204 50% Sundry 91,693 8,777 90% Return on Investment 1,124,306 662,152 50% Administrative Cost $23,762 261,876 60% Impact Fee 37,500 18,760 60% Reimburse Electric 600,000 100% Total Operating Expenses 6,286,098 2,497,773 180% NONOPERATINO EXPENSES: Interest expense 966,231 478,117 60% Principal payments-bonds 806,031 403,014 60% Contributions to Motor Pool 12,127 796 93% TotalNonoperating Expenses 1,71,,389 881,926 60% TOTAL EXPENSES 69,248,9.17 $3,514,368 82% . • r AAA0200A Puparod By Finance Departmartt ~E, ti,x , i fl d I~'r Pt f ~ 1 ts t I,! } S i 1" '±p,~ r ?,~`iksr ar~;A9+>4 A-lST3~ • a► • r CITY OF DENTON FINANCE DEPARTMENT gonUaPIU p c 'fjUllUilllO '1ttatN rnm,_ STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS -IIUNA SANITATION OPERATING FUND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1996 "U Totals March 31, 1996 March 31, 1994 OPERATING REVENUES: Charges for services $2,949,009 $2,617,813 Miscellaneous 67,729 12,779 Total OPwatiny Revenues 3,018,738 2,630,682 OPERATING EXPENSES: Salaries and wages 938,943 888,321 Materials and supplies 112,987 122,499 Maintenance and repairs 326,473 328,281 Services 378,939 276,370 Insurance 13,031 20,848 Sundry 99,466 70,336 Administrative 236,747 264,428 Franchise Fee 81,313 Depreciation 134,604 131,642 Closure/Postclosu(e cost 146,304 133,169 Total Operating Expenses 2,468,807 2,226,663 Operating Income !Loss) 647,931 306,039 NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSESI: Interest revenue 28,963 16,973 Interest expense and fiscal charges 168,8781 Other 172,5131 (4,120) 39,480 Total Nonopwating Revenues (Expenses) (34,036) (16,080) • Net Income (Loss) $ 613,896 i 288,978 A r AAA020CE Prepared By Finance Depm"ant • as • r i CITY OF DENTON AFINANCE DEPARTMENT g0R~UP10~ SUi12171ULE OF BUDGET VS ACTUAL EXPENSES • (UNAUDITED) SANI i RTION OPERATING FUND J $ ~j FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1996 Budget Percent Budget Expenses Remaining CAPITAL OUTLAY: Fixed assets 11, 263,872 4 26,410 90% OPERATING EXPENSES: Salaries and wages 2106612.0 938,942 56% Materials and supplies 363,!86 111,002 69% Maintenance and repairs 6e2,714 322,946 43% Services 1,002,010 363,383 66% Insurance 26,062 13,031 6096 Sundry 203,036 99,467 61% Franchise Fee 162,626 81,313 60% Administrative 473,493 236,747 50% Repayment to Electric 50,000 100% Total Operating Expensas 4,909,876 2,168,831 66% NONOPERATING EXPENSES: Interest expense 237,746 68,878 76% Principal psyments•bonds 214,242 107,124 60% Contributions to Motor Pool 18,933 31900 79% Total Nonoperating Expanses 470,921 189,902 64% TOTAL EXPENSES $6,644,669 42,362,143 68% AAA02DEE Prepared By Finance Department I "'1 • • r '71 tW~EF ,i ~1 (lyv5r H1n ,~r 5 { ~ IA.t~I • c~ u %yy T Yi ' it 1 r A _ _._~~....V.___ _ . ~ ca • NpftdaNa . Agendall -3 1 y CITY ofDENTON, TEXAS MUNICIFIL BUILDING DEN TON, TEXAS 76201 TEL EPHONE ~8 17) 566.8307 Office of the City Manager f MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager DATE: May 12, 1995 SUBJECT: Annual Council Planning Session Each year the Council convenes an annual planning session to receive reports, hold discussions, and give Staff direction concerning a number of important issues facing the City. As we have in the past, staff has prepared for your review four possible options for meeting sites. This information includes the dates the hotels are available, room rate, meals, meeting room rate, availability of audio visual equipment and a total cost per Council member. A quick review of the table reveals the Radisson Hotel would be the least expensive if the Council chores not to make room reservations for the evening. However, the Radisson is only available on June 16-17 and June 23-24. The last two planning sessions have been held at the DFw Hilton and the Marriott Solana respectively with equally good results. In previous years, the City Council has elected to hold the annual planning session outside of Denton to minimize distractions and strategically focus on the issues to be considered. Our normal practice has been to convene the planning session on a Friday and conclude our business by approximately 4:00 p.m, on Saturday afternoon. hotels exept the Friday evening dmeal. o Traditionally, w the the Council has opted to have dinner together as a group at an area resturant in close proximity to the hotel. A second issue concerning the annual planning session is the choice of a facilitator to work with the Council. Previous Councils have and ected to use Bob Saunders, consultant to many organizations. The facilitator's Missouri, ris e one of addressing Council dynamics including meetings, relationships, and the ability to form a cohesive team in the best interests of the City. One of the techniques employed by the facilitator has been a survey of the Council for critical issues. 7)edicared to Qualirv Sen,ler" A +gendaNo ,Qa.. Pending council approval, Staff will :oordinate tht".a c,. L session to include the facilitator. Please advise if I can provide ~1"iticnal information. RESP FULLY SUBMITTED, C4, L y V. Harrell City Manager Prepared by: oseph ortugal Assistant to the City anager Attachments: 1• Annual Planning Session summary 2. Table of Costs I I 1 • i s , 0 i .H... r..w...aw.~.~rYI.. Y l.Y.Y~..... ..s ~'Y:.l i'011. ~ . r'. • t 0 0 ~5114 14,~ • w • 1995 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING SESSION c OPTION 1_ MARRIOTT SOLANA HOTEL, WESTLAKE (R17j1~~9 - CONTACT PAUL MANGENELLI MARRIOTT SOLD-NA HOTEL:$62.00 PER NIGHT, SINGLE OCCUPANCY. CONFERENCE ROOM RENTAL FEE OF $25.00 FOR FRIDAY AND NO FEE SATURDAY. MEAL: $6.00 FOR MORNING COFFEE BREAK, $14.00-16.00 FOR LUNCH, AND $5.00 FOR AFTERNOON BREAK. ALSO INCLUDES PASS TO USE SPORTS CLUB EXERCISE EQUIPMENT. DATES AVAILABLX: JUNE 9&10, 16&17, 23&24, 30&JULY 1 QPTION 2: SHERATON GRAND AT DPW, 014) 929-8400, CONTACT LISA NOVOSAD $74.00 PER NIGHT, SINGLE OCCUPANCY. O SET UP FEE FOR MEETING ROOM IF WE HAVE MEALS. CONFERENCE ROOM FEE $150.00 PER DAY. AUDIO-VISUAL EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE ON RENTAL BASIS OR CAN BRING OUR OWN. MEALS: DINNERS BEGIN AROUND $23,00; LUNCH $12.00; BREAKFAST $8.75. BREAKS: $3.00 PER PERSON. CATERED LUNCH AVAILABLE FOR $50.00. DATES AVAILABLE JUNE 9-10; 16-17 I OPTION 3: RADISSON HOTEL, 565-8499. CONTACT LAURA PEGUES NO OVERNIGHT ACCOMMODATIONS. CONFERENCE ROOM FEE IS $125.00. MEALS AND BREAKS A LA CARTE. MEAL COSTS: DINNERS AVERAGE $15.00-$16.00; LUNCHES AVERAGE $9.00; BREAKFAST--DONUTS ARE $9.00 PER DOZEN AND DANISH ARE $18.00 A DOZEN, FOR BREAKS: COFFEE IS $16.00 GALLON; SODAS ARE $1.00 EACH; JUICES ARE $1.35 EACH. HAS A WIDE VARIETY OF MEAL PLANS AND THEY SUGGESTED THE "MEETING PLAN II OR III" AND THE "CONFERENCE COFFEE BREAKS". AUDIO-VISUAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL FEES BASED ON WHAT IS NEEDED: OVERHEAD PROJECTOR-$25,00; SCREEN-$8.00; T.V.- $25.00; VCR-$25,00; SLIDE PROJECTOR-$25.00. CAN ALSO BRING OWN A-V EQUIPMENT. DATES AVAILABLE: JUNE 16-17; 23-24. OPTION 4: DPW AIRPORT HILTON, EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE CENTER, j (817) 481-8444. CONTACT ANNA UNDERWOOD i • $89.00 PER NIGHT, SINGLE OCCUPANCY. $50.00 PER PERSON PER DAY PLUS TAX & GRATUITY FOR THE EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE CENTER. INCLUDES BUFFET LUNCH IN CONFERENCE DINING ROOM, TWO DAILY BREAKS (MORNING BREAK COMPARABLE TO CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST), MEETING ROOM AND AUDIO-VISUAL EQUIPMENT. DATES AVAILABLE: JUNE 9-10. ' • • • 0 • • • T 1995 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING SESSION HOTEL DATES ROOM RATE MEALS MEETING RM A-V EQUIP. TOTAL EA RADISSON HOTEL 6/16-17 conference $125.00 $35.00 $14,25 (DENTON) 6/23-24 room fee per day or can 3 includes bring your 19 0° meals & own v s snacks MARRIOTT SOLANA 6/9-10 $62.00 $27.00 $25.00 $35.00 $66.35 HOTEL 16-17 or can 23-24 bring your 30-7/1 own DFW AIRPORT 6/9-10 $89.00 included $50.00 included $94.00 HILTON CONFERENCE in per person or can CENTER conference per day + bring your room fee gratuity own SHERATON GRAND 6/9-10 $74,00 $50.00 $150.00 $5.00 or $91.75- AT DPW 16-17 catered can bring $101.75 { 6/30- lunch or your own 7/1 $12.50 per person AMMOOMA • • 1J . r 1. {i. 11 f A. k1."wY C k .~~.d a{ c a r H 4 CITY; COUNCIL z i { c s ° e r • • 05,03,95 1731 12214 855 8200 F K J, L.L.P. z 002/004 AMdaND `61`ol7a~- AgarMaltarrt_/,._ T.,... FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L. L. P. J ~f A REGISTERED I.IMITLD LIAN1~ITY pARTNCR 6NIp 2200 ROSS AVENUE- SUIT[ 280o DAI.LA$, TFMS 79201 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mike Conduff Lloyd Harrell Jeff Muzzy Ed Thatcher Ed Wagoner FROM: Bob Dransfiel DATE: May 3, 1995 E RE: Amendment to Power Sales Contract As a result of the meeting of the Mayors and City Managers of the Cities of Bryan, Denton, Garland and Greenville held May 3, 1995, with Ed Wagoner and Tom Harpool on behalf of TMPA and Corky Hall and Steven Adams of First Southwest Company and me, the following was the agreement of the cities, ft was acknowledged that the cities would need the approval of the various city councils and that the Mayors and City Managers would recommend the course of action outlined below, consultant An independent oversight of the C ty Managers to examf iethe best way to apport on he coat between the four cities in a manner consistent with the provisions of section 7 of the Power Sales Contract the percentages which will report used in establishing the pricing rate to be paid by each of the cities • the pricing *ate will be adjusted automatically on an annual basis (the initial adjustment would be uaned on the proportion the 1994 Net Energy for Load of each city bears to the 1994 Nct Energy for Load of all the cities and the subsequent adjustments would be based oi. the actual Net Energy for Load of the preceding year), with the ability of he four cities and 'rMPA to agree to a further revision in the pricing rate if the circumstances so warrant and all the parties agree to such change the amendment to the Power Sales Contract will provide flexibility to • • take into account changes such as additional users of any and all of the cities a • ~{lendalt Ylff a May 3, 1995 Page 2 cities would waive the 120 advance notice of rates and charges to be imposed by the Agency the agreed upon language to the Power Sales Contract will not negatively impact the rating of the outstanding Agency obligations Since the independent consultant report referred to above is an outgrowth of the rights the cities currently have under Section 7 of the Power Sales Contract, a copy of Section is attached hereto. Hopefully, this accurately reflects the consensus arrived at during the meeting, however, If I hale net correctly captured It, please let me know and I will recirculate a revision. • i 9 • q' r;~gpv c ~lY (i~'A#~ j~7X5 ii 1 i~~~ • • llSrOJr95 17:33 V214 855 8200 F & J, L.L.P. w 12OOJ/OGJ r Agency estimated at the time of adoption of the Annual Systern Budget would avt n delivered during such Contract Year, then the Agency may prepare an amended Annual System Budget, no amended Annual System Budget shall be timely adopted by the Agency and transmitted to the Cities. (d) In the event a budget for the ensuing Contract Year has not been adopted on or before the first day of the Contract Year, the total amount budYeted for the preceding Contract Year shall be the total amount of the temporary budget for such purposes for the ensuing Contract Year. The temporary budget shall be effective only until such time as a permanent budget has been finally adopted and approved. The chief administrative officer of the Agency shall be responsible for the allocation for expenditure of the total amount of the temporary budget until a permanent budget Is adopted and approved Section 7: Rates and Charges: (a) The rates and charges of the Agency to the Cities for Power and Energy and for services supplied shall bet (1) non4setiminatory,and (2) fair and reasonable, and be based upon the cost of providing the Power and Energy or providing the service with respect to which the rate or charge is based, and be received)~inaeach Contract Year to pay consideration provision moneys t r paying Annual System aCosts. (br When the Board of Directors proposes to establish a new rate or charge, as derermieed under Schedule B, It shalt give each City written notice that it proposes to establish a new rate or charge for Power ;.nd Energy or for services (setting forth such charge) on a date certain (which shall not be lets than 120 days from the mailing of the notice to each City, all such notices to be mailed simultaneously). Except as provided in paragraph (c) hereof, no charge or adjustment in any rate or charge made by the Agency shall be effective if any City, by resolution or ordinance of its governing body, enters an objection to such adjustment in a rate and charge by causing to be filed with the chief administrative officer of the Agency a copy of such resolution or ordinance more than 30 days prior to the suggested effective date of the proposed new rate or charge. In the event a City enters an objection tr the charge or adjustment in a rate or charge, the effective date of the charge or adjustment shtw be postponed pending the resolution of the dispute in the following manner, (1) The Cities may jointly select an Independent consultant or consultants to prepare a rate evaluation and schedule of proposed rates and charges, provided if such joint selection Is • not made within-30 calendar days of the filing of an objection (evidenced by the passage of a resolution or ordinance) such independent consultant shall be appointed by the Board of Directors of the Agency; (2) the report of the independent consultant shun be submitted to the Agency and each City for consideration; and (3) If the report of the lndepenra :t consultant is approved by the governing bodies of the • • Agency and the Cities the same shall be effective as of the date originally suggested by the Agency in Its notice, It the adjustment Is not approved or an agreement reached within 15 days after the receipt of the report of the independent consultant, then the Agency and the Cities shall each have all of the rights and remedies at law and in equity except that in no event shall any City be relieved of its obligation to the holders of Bonds under Section 13 or 14 of this Contract, 6 • 0 WOMEN • • 05/03/95 17:00 1T211 955 9200 F & J. L.L.P. ~OO.IiOCr 100{1 t NOti 1.. I a- kl~ri,lallon~~~~_., (c) The Board of Directors of the Agency may clrage or adjust any rate charge for Power and Energy or for services supplied by it to a City, if such Board determines that (I) an emergency exists and (ii) the emergency adjustment meets the criteria established in paragraph (a) of this Section. The emergency adjustment shall be effective for a period of 180 days (unless the notice from the Agency specifies a lesser period) and shall be effective 30 days after the ra"Ing of notice to the Cities (all of which notices shall be mailed simultaneously), Section 81 Meter Readings and Payment of Bills, The Agency shall read meters or cause meters to be read and bill the City for Power and Energy furnished under this Contract at monthly intervals. It shall also bill each City monthly for services rendered pursuant to Section 4 of this Contract. Section 9. Meter Testing and Billing Adjustment. The AgAacy shall test and calibrate meters or cause meters to be tested and calibrated by comparison with accurate standards at intervals of twelve (12) months, or such other intervals as the parties agree. The Agency shall also make or cause to be made special meter tests at any time at a City's request, The costs of all tests shall be borne by the Agency, provided, bowevcr, that if any special meter test made at a City's request shall disclose that the meters ere recording, accurately, the requesting City shall reimburse, the Agency for the cost of such test, Meters registered not more than th of 1%, above or below, normal shall be deemed to be accurate. The readings on any meter which shall have been disclosed by test to be Inaccur,.;e shall be cor. rated from the beginning of the monthly billing period Immediately preceding the billing during which the tests are made in accordance with the percentage of inaccuracy found by such stest, provided, that no correction shall be made for a longer period unless the Agency and City involved mutually agree thereto. Should any meter tail to register, the Power and Energy delivered durlag such period of failure sh°q for billing purposes be estimated by the Agency and the City from the best information available, The Agency shall notify the City or cause the city to be notified In advance of the time of any meter reading or test so that the City's representative may be present at such deter reading or test. Section 10: Payments to Constitute make (he payments under Ibis Contract~Iatic nstittutenaann ooperatng expenseeof Its City's electric ystem payable solely from the revenues and receipts of such electric system. Each City shall be bound and obligated to snake such payments and the obligation to make the payments under Section 14 of this contract shall be unconditional. Section 11: City Rate Covenant, Each City shall establish, mslntain and collect rates and charges for the electric service of its electric system which shell produce revenues at least mificlent, together with other revenues avaiiable to such electric system and available electric system reserves, to enable it to pay to the Agency, when due, a); amounts payable by such City under this Contract. Section 1Z: Covenants of the Agency. (a) After firsr satisfying the Power and Energy requirements of the Cities, as such requirements are established from time to time, and the requirements of other wer purchasers, the Agency sh use its best efforts to market and dispose of any and all surplusiawerand Energy available f om the System or which the Agency is obligated by contract to purchax or otherwise ae and wbich is in excess of the requirements of all Cities and other power purchasers, u gore, most ® economically advantageous terms and conditions obtainable, to the extent that It May le9wly dot o most (b) The Agency shall use reasonable diligence to provide a constant and uninterrupted supply, of Power and Energy hereunder. if the supply of power and Energy shall fail, or be Interrupted, or become defective by reason of force majeure as hereinafter provided, the Agency shall not be Hable therefrr or for damages caused thereby, 7 • c~ A F,f CITY COUNCI: c %4 .40 A a ~ ~ i ~r ~Ov c, °COGLs, • o • • r Nom. Apndalt [?ate lA I PROPOSED TIMELINF FOR BO EQ190MMjSSj0N * + DATE ACTION Week of May 15 Letter from city Secretary to current members with expiring terms with application and/or letter of thanks Week of May 15 Advertising in Denton Record- `I! Chronicle for prospective applicants Week of May 22 Advertising in Denton Record- Chronicle for briefing session May 30 Briefing for prospective board members with City Council members and staff liaison presentations - Center for the Visual Arts, 7:00 - 8:30 p.m. June 5 Deadline for board applications June 9 Board/Commission information forwarded to City Council June 13 Board/Commission appointment nominations by individual city council members in regular session Juno 20 Finalize Board/Commission nominations, if necessary July 11 Council vote on nominations in • regular session July 12 Letters sent to new appointments, reappointments board/commission members July 25 Boc, I/Commission Reception - • Visual Arts Center, 7:0!', - 9:o0 , • p.m. * Reservation dates for Center for the Visual Arts are tentative and may change depending on availability. s c. 0 w i~ t i :CITY COUNCIL c d e ~°oa N, ooo~ r ~ o d~c~w i i apenda~te . CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES X18'"~ APRIL 11, 1995 The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, April 11, 1995 at 5:15 p.m. in the Civil Defense Room. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tom Brock; Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. i ABSENT: None 1. The Council considered the following in a closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071 1. Considered adoption of an ordinance retaining a law firm to represent the city in negotiations or litigation with GTE over its failure to profluce records required by a city audit and failure to remit delinquent franchise fees. B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE. Soc. 551.072 1. Considered exchange of certain property along the ! abandoned Dallas line owned by the City of Denton and Missouri Pacific Railroad Company between Prairie and Hickory ;.treets and lease of certain railroad right-of-way for parking lot purposes. C. Personnel/Board Appointmentc Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.074 1. Discussed City Attorney applicants and selection process. 2. Considered adoption oll an ordinance retaining Katherine Theme to provide part-time municipal court prosecutorial services on certain dates between April 12 - September 29, 1995. The council convened into a Work Session on Tuesday, April 11, 1995 • at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tom Brock; Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: None 1. The Council received a report and held a discussion regarding • • the Strategic Power Supply Assessment. Jim Harder, Director of Electric Utilities, stated that the process of developing this assessment had taken almost a year. The first part of the study was an assessment of the utility operation. The IM A • • AgeodaI City of Denton Citv Council Minutes DIP April 11, 1995 `J 5 Page 2 assessment had been presented t•.s the Public Utilities Board and the City Council. The second part of presentation would be an analysis of the information gathered on how the present system worked and would make a determination from that information on where to go in the future. John Moore, Resource Management international, stated that the purpose of the assessment was to do a complete focused evaluation of the City's utility system considering the existing TMPA contract and alternatives not currently available within the terms of the TMPA contract. It was also to establish a perspective of Denton's power costs within today's competitive electric utility market. The electric utility industry was an ever changing marketplace. Some of the changes include] restructuring, which was creating new power supply opportunities; market-based pricing versus cost-based pricing; access to a wider range of power supplies; and pressure on utilities with long-term high fixed-cost resources. There were two components of the assessment. - a retrospective review which compared current costs under th- TMPA contract w'.th arrangements excluding a TMPA relationship anu 15 year power supply option assessment which compared forecasts 15 year costs of TMPA supply with other regional power supply. "he study included native generation only, Brazos purchase only, 'tu wholesale rate purchase only, native plus Brazos purchase, native plats TU purchase, native plus local NUG purchase and native plus Gulf roast NUG purchase. I Findings from the retrospective review found that almost all l options were at a lower cost than the TMPA supply; cost differences ranged up to 25-30%; and combinations involving native generation offered the lowest costs. The 15 year power supply option assessment included the fi.nding3 that the same options were available as were in the retrospective review plus a TU competitive rate and Gibbons Creek with western coal; varying levels of TMPA debt from the sale of the Gibbons Creek plant; varying levels of 4 proceeds from the sale of Denton's Spencer plant. Findings from the 15 year assessment included (1) assuming continuation of • Gibbons Creek/native ownership, TMPA with western coal was the lowest cost option; (2) only TU with a competitive rate offered lower cos;; projections which assumed a longer than 5 year term and a "native with TU purchase" equivalent to a "TU purchase only" with the sale of the Spencer plant; and (3) the "TMPA with western coal" option was typically 20-30% higher than options assuming no TMPA participation. Conclusions of the strategic assessment included O (1) the TMPA power cost placed Denton at a disadvantage in the • • competitive market, (2) future competitive problems could worsen with increased introduction of market-based pricing, (3) the value of the Spencer. Plunt under the TMPA contract was a power cost liability and witho,st TMPA contract provisions the value was greater as a generating resource than %.he value of any sale i • o • a+ • City of Denton city council Minutes 3 `r~c6 April 13, 1995 Page 3 proceeds, (4) future competitive problems could contribute to TMPA debt repayment problems, and (5) all actions should be taken to reduce future power costs within the TMPA arrangement. TMPA strategic initiatives included modifying the TMPA contract to allow greater flexibility with native generation, taking immediate steps to reduce TMPA operation, maintenance and administrative costs and exploring options for Gibbons Creek which included the conversion to western coal, contract plant operations, sale opportunities, and new relationships with power suppliers. The assessment recommended the following Denton strategic initiatives (1) actively contribute to TMPA contract revisions by participating in actions being considered and evaluating the impact of the proposed actions; (2) actively participate in the assessment of Gibbons Creek options by insisting on a consideration of a wide range of options such as fuel supply conversion, contract operating and maintenance services, and the sale of generation assets; (3) evaluate the impact of these proposed actions; (4) continue an assessment of alternatives to improve the Spencer Plant performance and increase capability by additional detail repowering reviews and investigating developer participation in repowering; (5) continuing an evaluation of potential purchase power opportunities developing in a competitive marketplace; and (6) considering demand-side options within a revised TMPA framework. The assessment recommended an approach to the Denton power supply planning which assumed a greater flexibility in the TMPA contract and developed a power supply plan considering a revised plan for the Gibbons Creek unit, additional evaluation of the Spencor unit repowering and upgrades, revised opportunities with TMPA members and power purchase opportunities. Council Member Cott asked what would be the investment cost for the Spencer Plant in order to use it. Moore replied that currently the Spencer Plant was very operable. It would be best to find a higher efficiency in its workings. To • determine what level to repuwer might cost approximately $20 million to provide 50 megawatts of combined cycle capacity at a much lower power cost than currently was available. Council Member Cott asked if this could be done while the City still had a large debt with TMPA. Moore replied that that appeared to be one of the viable options ' 0 • because it was necessary to be sure to provide cost competitive power for the community. Council Member Miller stated that Moore mentioned the up front payment of debt in order to keep from the large end payment. Was 0 0 • h p • `ate City of Denton City Council Minutes 'I April 11, 1995 S 8 Page 4 that something which could be done unilaterally or did it have to be followed by all four members of TMPA. i Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that that was something which all four members would have to handle and do at the TMPA structure itself. That would be a major issue which the four cities would have to work on in the next several months. Council Member Miller asked if the regulators would allow some of this to be phased in or would there be an automatic disadvantage to some of the older utilities. Moore felt that the process would help phase it in. Regulatory change took a long time and that should help with the adjustments. Competition would be introduced but would not be a sudden change. Council Member Miller asked if there was a state where this had been deregulated to the point where utilities which had made investments had suffered at this point. Moore stated that there had been some deregulation on the generation side which had placed pressures on the utilities. Some utilities continued to find a strategy to supply power at perhaps a higher cost. The most significant shift was the actual merging or transition of assets in an ownership arrangement. Council Member Perry asked for the advantages to Denton for native generation. Moore replied that the advantage of the Spencer Units was that there was a fair amount of installed capacity at a very low cost with a small amount of debt. That capacity should be leveraged into a more cost effective power supply program, Cogeneration and repowering was done around the country and was desirable as it did not cost as much. • 2. The Council received a report, hold a discussion and gave staff direction on the acceptance of Mastercard, Visa, and the Discover Card, Kathy DuBose, Executive Director for Finance, stated that the City had credit card proposals from Mastercard, Visa and Discover. The , • City started accepting Mastercard and Visa for payments for • • municipal court fines and fees, taxes, and utilities in 1989. In 1990 Visa stopped their acceptance by municipalities which required the payment of a surcharge. In working through the issue with the Legal Department, it was determined that the city could not pay the surcharge on behalf of the City's customers as that constituted i •+.r~._~... . • r ~rw rrr.. r+a.ia...~li~ DIY.... I ca • Agendaltem~~_ City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 5 J$ Page 5 providing free service to those customers. The City received an extension from Visa in order to work through options which allowed the City to pass though the service charge. The current proposals incorporated a surcharge which was less than the current surcharge. The proposal also included telepay to pay through the telephone. This was considered a customer service enhancement for the citizens of Denton. Council Member Cott asked if there was an additional charge to use the Discover card. DuBOSe replied that if a payment were charged on a Discover card, there would be a 1% surcharge on the payment. For Mastercard and Visa there would a 2 1/9% surcharge. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the State law did not allow the City to pay the surcharge on the customers behalf. DuBose replied correct. I Mike Bucek, Acting City Attorney, stated that the customers were now paying the surcharge where before the city was paying that surcharge. Brock motioned, Smith seconded to allow the use of the three credit cards. On roll vote, Brock "aye,', Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". f?otion carried unanimously. 3. The Council received an update on the Denton Together activities. Due to a time constraint, this item was considered under Miscellaneous Matters from the City Manager. The Council convened into a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, A1ril 11, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Chew, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: Council Member Cott M • , • 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. • • City of Denton City Council Minutes 58 April 11, 1995 Page 6 2. The Council considered approval of the minutes of March 7, 21, 22, and 28, 1995. f Perry motioned, Brock seconded to approve the minutes as presented. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 3. Citizen Requests A. The Council considered a request from the REZ Week Planning Committee for an exception to the noise ordinance for the use of amplified sound Thursday, April 20, 1995, until 12:30 a.m. Council Member Cott joined the meeting. Veronica Rolen, Administrative Assistant, stated that the Cross Road Campus Ministries requested an exception to thv noise ordinance for April 20th at the intersection of Hickory and Fry Streets. The organizat was also requesting a portion of Avenue A be closed for the cony The portion of street to be closed was 50' of the public street and included 8 parking spaces. The adjoining property owners had signed a request and there appeared te be no opposition to the request, Anthony Mauzy stated that this was a two day Christian concert series. The concept of the concert was to showcase different styles of Christian music. He was requesting an extension of the noise ordinance until 12:30 a.m., but would be willing change it to midnight if necessary. Smith motioned, Chew seconded to approve the exception until 12:70 a.m. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. • Mayor Castleberry presented the Yard of the Month Awards to: Henry Shoopman - State Farm Insurance Ms. Lain Erwin Wayne Mitchell/Marcia Staff Steve and Janice Spurgin ® Pat Cramer . • Mayor Castleberry presented the following proclamations: Professional Secretaries Week Fair Housing Month I f O r I ei City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 Page 7 National Community Development Block Grant Week Week of the Young Child Keep America Beautiful Month and Earth Day 4. Citizen Reports A. The Council received a citizen report from Dessie Goodson regarding various issues with the City, Ms. Goodson stated that for the past three years she had spoken to the Council regarding violations of SPAN. She detailed violations she noted regarding the SPAN drivers and violations on the route. She indicated that she would keep reminding SPAN and the Council of the violations. B. The Council received a citizen report from Valeree Clegg regarding parking fines on the Square, Ms. Clegg stated that when the increased parking fines went into effect, the Denton Record-Chronicle had quoted her in the paper and she felt that there were some items which needed to be brought to the City council's attention. Shop owners and business owners on the Square were the primary violators of the parking problem. They parked on the Square every day and moved their cars every two hours to avoid the parking limitation. She felt that the solution would be to install parking meters. Currently violators would not receive tickets as they moved their cars every two hours. ThL meters would make them park somewhere else. Local patrons and out- of-town patrons suffered the consequences with the higher parking fines. Parking meters would make shoppers aware that they would he paying for their parking, High fines gave a message that Denton was not customer/business friendly, it was difficult to shop all of the businesses on the Square in two hours. She asked for a solution to the problem as the high fine was not a solution. Mayor Castleberry stated that her suggestion would be passed on to the Downtown Association, C. The Council received a •-eport from Frenchy Rheault regarding the lack of accessible transportation for people in i wheelchairs in the City of Denton to outside the City of Denton. A Mr. Rheault stated that this was a serious problem in Denton. If a handicapped individual was going to or from Benton from the DFW r Airport, there was no one to call to transport that individual. He had a van with a wheelchair lift. but others in the City were not in that same situation. He cited two examples of indiv..duals in wheelchairs who were unable to get to Denton because no public • 0 Wr • Q • nrr„ENO D-1.-CL.,,._ City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 50 Page 8 transportation was available for handicapped individuals. He asked Council to look into this issue to help with the situation. Mayor Castleberry asked staff to look into this situation. D. The Council received a report from Joel Bessire regarding a change in City ordinance 6.13 - 6.13A to allow residents to keep pot bellied pigs in the City limits. Mr. Bessire stated that other cities had addressed this issue with ordinances. Irving indicated no problems since establishing their ordinance, Arlington had had no rush for permits, Carrollton had passed an ordinance in September 1991 with no problems, Garland currently had a policy in effect which allowed one pig per family and was in the process of establishing an ordinance to allow pigs in the city. Lewisville indicated a problem with individuals giving up the pigs and odor complaints. Lewisville had recently revamped their animal control ordinance with a citizens task force and the new ordinance would permit an honest responsible owner to have pigs in city limits. Possible restrictions for allowing pot bellied pigs might include no more than 2 pigs per household, pigs would be kept indoors except for limited times, and an vaccination. On application fee and the pigs had to meet the standards of the North American Pot Bellied Pig Association. He had collected 100 signatures on petitions requesting a change in the ordinance. He asked the Council to reconsider its previous decision and to change the ordinance. Surrounding communities had done so with little or no problems. Karen Cason King stated that she was aware of the swine laws in most city ordinances. She knew that no one wanted to live next to a swine operation. She appealed to the Council to chang-3 the 1\ ordinance. Pot bellied pigs were not the same as regular swine. 1 Pot bellied pigs were imported to the United States for the sole purpose of being pets. They did not meet the definition of • livestock but did meet the definition of pets. Pot bellied pigs did not howl at night, did not have an odor, and die not dig. Valorie Tynes stated that she was a veterinarian who provided care to pct bellied pigs. It was well. known that swine were very inteJli.gent and these animals made good pets. Pot bellied pigs were small, could be litter trained, and did not transmit disease. ® They were not considered an exotic pet and had to see a • • veterinarian twice a year due to limited length of vaccinations. Allowing these animals in the City limits would not cause a large increase in the numbers such as with dogs and cats. She urged tht: Council to amend the ordinance as long as the animals conformed to the standards of the North American Pot Bellied Association. i • Q • ra e Y) oil (i8 ~ U S.E~D.~r City of Denton city Council Minutes April 11, 1995 1 L~l~ rJ8 Page 9 5. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance amending Planned Development No. 18, and adopting a detailed plan. The 21.1565 acre site, known as the Safety-Kleen Recycling Center, was located on the east side of Cooper Creek Road, between Mingo Road and University Drive. (The Planning and Zoning Commission rec;mmended approval 7-0.) Frank P.obbins, Executive Director for Planning and Development, stated that this was an amendment to a planned development which was originally adopted in 1974 and had since had a number of amendments as the business expanded. Two significant changes included a 1001 tall stack to use for distillation on the facility and a treatment facility on the site. The addition would take all of the emissions and pipr. them into the treatment building before being released into the atmosphere. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Larry Eisenhower stated that he would answer any questions of the Council. fie asked for Council approval of the proposal. Council Me,7ber Miller asked if the improvements would take care of environmental issues, Eisenhower stated that one section would install emission controls and that they had contacted the State for a new air emission permit. Jcy Powell stated that she had been in opposition to Safety Kleen fir 10 years. Ten years ago it was indicated that scrubbers would take care of the fumes and at this point they had not been installed. The chemicals she had to breath were extremely hazardous. The facility might be beautiful but the smells were • not. She knew that Safety Kl.een intended to bring its Oklahoma plant to Denton which had not been mentioned. Safety Kleen had installed a railroad spur which was 160 feet from her house. The noise from the plant kept her awake now and it was hard to imagine what a railroad spur would do, Council Member chew asked if Ms. Powell was aware this proposal M might eliminate some of these • problems. Powell indicated that the scrubber was still not connected after 10 years. A chemical plant had recently exploded in Houston. If this happened here and the wind was just right, all of Denton would be destroyed. 1 f 0 s w • ~aeiia~No ILL~ ~r1(.aU~3!IdR1l fy~ - City of Denton city council Minutes April 11, 1995 Page 10 Council Member Chew asked about the scrubbers, f Eisenhower replied that the State typically took six months teo approve a revised air permit. He expected approval in the October/November time frame and planned to ask the State for permission to begin construction ahead of time. Council Member Perry asked if the process removed particulate matter and eliminated any further hazard or just cleaned it. Eisenhower stated that emission would be collected from the total site. The process would destroy any of the organics with the scrubber taking out any final chemicals. This process would eliminate emissions in the 90-95% range. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-066 AN ORDINANCE: OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE DETAILED PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 18 (PD-18) AS SHOWN IN THE ATTACHED DETAIL PLAN FOR 21.1566 ACRES OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS LOT lA OF THE MARG-SAM ADDITION SITUATED THEREIN; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Cott motioned, Miller seconded to adopt the ordinance. Council Member Miller stated that he understood the concern of the neighbors. This proposal would help improve the situation rather than detracting from the situation, f on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "ayell. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Consent Agenda Council Members Miller and Cott the left meeting at 8115 p.m. • Brock motioned Chew seconded to approve • • r roll vote, Brock "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "ayee", Consent Agenda. and mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. aye and i . fa ~1t)C~da!16R O~ - City of Denton City Council Minutes I L =O5 April 11, 1995 f (9.SG Page 11 A. Bids and Purchase Orders; 1. Bid #1727 - Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) 2. Bid #1740 - Sale of Fire Trucks 3. Bid #1741 - Polymere For Water Production 4. Bid 11745 - Wire and Cable 5. Bid #1752 - Trailer Mounted Power Rodder & 3 Reel Trailer B. Tax Refund 1. Don E. Hickey - $1,309.71 7. Consent Agenda ::rdinances The Council considered consent Agenda ordinances 7.A. - 7.B, i i Council Member Miller returned to the meeting at 8:17 p.m. A. NO. 95-067 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. (6.A.1. - Bid #1727, 6.A.3. - Bid #1741, 6.A.4. - Bid #1745, 6.A.5. - Bid #1752) B. N0. 95-068 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CONTRACT PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF CERTAIN EQUIPMENT OWNED BY THE CITY OF DENTON. (6.A.2. - Bid #1740) Perry motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinances. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry • "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Cott returned to the meeting at 8:18 p.m. 8, ordinances A. The Council consider adoption of an ordinance amending e Ordinance No. i5-054 relating to the award of Bid Number 1733 for the purchase of service bodies and crane to provide for the purchase of one crane/service body, Bid Item #3. (Bid #1733) Tom Shaw, Purchasing Agent, stated that the original award was not in compliance with the specifications of the bid. The award was • 0 I - • • City of Denton city council Minutes=1 April 11, 1995 1a ~p~ s Page 12 for a crane body and not for the standard reinforced body which was bid. He recommended that the original award be rescinded and to award the low bid meeting specifications. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-069 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 95-054 RELATING TO THE J AWARD OF BID NUMBER 1733 FOR THE PURCHASE OF SERVICE BODIES AND CRANE TO PROVIDE FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE CRANE/SERVICE BODY, BID ITEM ,f3; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye'P, Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried ' unanimously. B. The council considered adoption of an ordinance E authorizing the Mayor to execute an Amendment No. 1 to agreement between the City of Denton and Morrison Milling Company for lease of warehouse space at 601 East Hickory Street. City Manager Harrell stated that this item had been discussed at the last work session and extended the lease on the space at the Denton Municipal Complex for an additional five year period. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-070 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE j MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE 1! CITY OF DENTON AND THE MORRISON MILLING COMPANY FOR LEASE OF • WAREHOUSE SPACE AT 601 EAST HICKORY STREET; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance.. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. A C. The council considered adopt!on of an ordinance repealing ' • • Section 28-63(b) of Chapter 28, Article III of the Code of Ordinances relating to the required use of metal raceways for interior electrical work in certain types of structures; providing that Section 28-61 of Chapter 28, Article III of the Code of • d • • Fonda No Ao ofidiItorrZ.Ea, City of Denton city council Minutes 4,16-IL 9L_____ April 11, 1995 f 3 „r s g Page 13 Ordinances adopting the National Electric Code shall remain in full force and effect; and providing for publication. (-l Electrical Code Board recommended approval.) Frank Robbins, Executive Director for Planning, stated that the proposed ordinance would amend the conduit provision of the Electrical Code for wiring installation. The local amendment which had been adopted by Denton was more strict than the National Code and it was recommended that it be deleted and the National Electrical Code standards be adopted. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked how conditions had changed since the local amendment was adopted. Robbins replied that tae quality of wining had improved as had technology during the years. j The following ordinance was considered. No. 95-071 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS REPEALING SECTION 28-63 (B) OF CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE III OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO THE REQUIRED USE OF METAL RACEWAYS FOR INTERIOR ELECTRICAL WORK IN CERTAIN TYPES OF STRUCTURES; PROVIDING THAT SECTION 28-61 OF CHAPTER 28, ARTICLE III OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES ADOPTING THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE SHALL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Chew seconded to adopt the ordinance. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "a_c,", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry 'layetl. Motion carried unanimously. • D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the filing of an application with the Department of Transportation, United Staten of America, for a grant under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended. Council Member Chew left the meeting with potential conflict of interest. • Joseph Portugal, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that ' r approval of the ordinance would authorize the city Manager to apply and receive Section 9 funds to support public transportation in Denton. 3 Q 0 • ua qjonclaNa AlJDi JaIto Ri . City of Denton city council Minutes 1°~ 6 April 11, 1995 Page 14 Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if there was any indication of changes in federal funding. Portugal replied no and that the National League of Cities was monitoring the situation. There was an expectation that there might be cuts in Section 9 funds and when this might occur was not known at this point in time. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the project would move ahead with the assumption that the funding would be the same. Portugal replied correct. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-072 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORISING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FOR A GRANT UNDER THE URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 1964, AS I AMENDED; AND PROVIUING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Chew returned to the meeting. E. The council considered adoption of an ordinance approving Amendment No. 3 to an agreement between the City of Denton and the Denton Independent School District relating to holding their elections jointly in the election districts that can be served by common polling places. Jennifer Walters, City Secretary, stated that the DISD had • requested an additional polling location in Corinth so that the residents in the southern portion of its district would not have to come all the way to Denton to vote for school district trustees. The polling location would be only for those voters residing outside the City limits but inside the DIED boundaries. The following ordinance was considered: • NO. 95-073 ' • AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE DENTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT RELATING TO HOLDING THEIR ELECTIONS JOINTLY IN THE ELECTION s p A r1~C+Ird1N0._ • f M ~allz City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 l' Page 15 DISTRICTS THAT CAN BE SERVED BY COMMON POLLING PLACES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance ratifying the action of the City Manager to executing a Takeover Agreement between the City of Denton and International Fidelity Tnsurance Company relating to completion of the construction of the branch library. i Mike Bucek, Acting City Attorney, stated that this item related to the branch library. The City had had trouble with the contractor and there was much conflict with the subcontractors with a general deterioration of the quality of the work. Several months ago, the council authorized the termination of the contract with the original contractor. The Insurance Company agreed to take over and complete the project. lie stated that there had been good documentation of the work which allowed the insurance Company to detail fault of the contractor and allow take oiler of the work. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-074 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS PATIFYING THE ACTION OF THE CITY MANAGER IN EXECUTING A TAKEOVER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY RELATING TO COMPLETION OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BRANCH LIBRARY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Smith motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. G. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an interlocal agreement with the County of Denton for the reconstruction of West Shady Shores Road. A City Manager Harrell indicated that Council had discussed this item at an earlier work session. Council Member Cott felt that there would be a drainage issue here similar to tha one on Ryan Road. Q • • City of Denton City Council Minutes ia _ rr April 11, 1995 1 ~D Jt5 Page 16 Svehla replied that the drainage structure was in place with this project and would only be a paving project. This was not an overall rebuilding project. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-075 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF DENTON FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF WEST SHADY SHORES ROAD; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. H. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute a right-of-entry permit between the City of Denton and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Ft. Worth District, in order to construct a drainage ditch and maintenance road and to perform other construction work ac necessary in accordance with the approved plans and specifications for the Ray Roberts Lake Seepage and Drainage Control Project. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that this ordinance would grant a construction easement to the Corps of Engineers to build a drainage channel across City property at the new Ray Roberts Water Plant. The Corps had seepage problem at the Lake Ray Roberts Dam and the utility work was needed to correct the problem. The following ordinance was considered: • NO. 95-076 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A RIGHT-OF-ENTRY PERMIT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON A140 THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, FT. WORTH DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A DRAINAGE DITCH AND MAINTENANCE ROAD AND TO PERFORM OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORK AS NECESSARY IN ® ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE • RAY ROBERTS LAKE SEEPAGE AND DRAINAGE CONTROL PROJECT) AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew 0 0 • • City of Denton City Council Minutes J- April 11, 1995 17 Sg Page 17 "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. I. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending Ordinances 86-172, 88-003 and 88-126 by amending the detailed plan for Planned Development No. 119 (PD-119), located on the northeast corner of U. S. Highway 380 and Old North Road, with respect to 0.494 acres of the 18.24 acres therein contained, as shown in the detail plan amendment attached as Exhibit B. (The Planning and Zoning commission recommended approval 4-0.) City Manager Harrell indicated that this was a housekeeping item as the ordinance caption had not been published in the newspaper as was required by law. Council had previously approved the case and this item would again ratify the ordinance for publication purposes. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-077 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE 86-172, 88-003 AND 88-126 BY AMENDING THE DETAILED PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 119 (PD-119), LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF U.S. HIGHWAY 380 AND OLD NORTH ROAD, WITH RESPECT TO 0.494 ACRES OF THE 18.24 ACRES THEREIN CONTAINED, AS SHOWN IN THE DETAIL PLAN AMENDMENT ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT B; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. • J. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance retaining Katherine Thorns to provide part-time municipal court prosecutorial services on certain dates between April 12 - September 29, 1995. Mike Bucek, Acting City Attorney, stated that one of the City's prosecutors would be out of the office on his honeymoon and the ® other prosecutor would be on maternity leave. This individual ~ ~ • would be used for both evening cases and day cases where needed. The following ordinance was considered: • 0 • c~ • i ljOSlt~~ ivo tnn' ~r City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 Is Jrc Page 19? NO, 95-078 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS RETAINING KATHERINE THOMS TO PROVIDE PART-TIME MUNICIPAL COURT PROSECUTORIAL SERVICES ON CERTAIN DATES BETWEEN APRIL 12, 1995 AND SEPTEMBER 29, 1995; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller Faye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. i K. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement between the City of Denton and Missouri Pacific Railroad Company regarding the exchange of certain property along the abandoned Dallas line between Prairie and Hickory Streets and the conveyance of a freight depot and certain railroad right-of-way for public parking and Rails-To Trails purposes. Mike Bucek, Acting City Attorney, stated that this item had been discussed with council at a number of meetings. With the movement of the Human Resources Department and the Denton Municipal Complex there was a need for more parking spaces. The City had been negotiating with the Railroad to use its surplus property in the area and to move the old depot located in the area. The negotiations had been completed and were a benefit to both organizations. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-079 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY REGARDING THE EXCHANGE OF CERTAIN PROPERTY ALONG THE ABANDONED DALLAS LINE BETWEEN PRAIRIE AND HICKORY STREETS AND THE -'INVEYANCE OF A FREIGHT DEPOT AND CERTAIN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PUBLIC PARKING AND RAILS-TO-TRAILS PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, ® Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll ` • • vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew I "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. • e • ra • City of Denton City Council Minutes JSU April 21, 1995 I~ ,cJ sg Page 19 L. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance retaining a law firm to represent the City in negotiations or litigation with General Telephone Company of the southwest ("GTE") over its failure to produce records required by a city audit and failure to remit delinquent franchise fees. Kathy Harless, GTE Regional President, stated that this action would escalate this issue especially in light oL the fact that Southwestern Bell and several other Texas cities had come to a tentative agreement with right-of-way issues. Not all of the details of that agreement were known at this time and she believed E that more time was needed in order for the city of Denton and GTE to reach an agreement. She again offered a non-binding mediation to the City. GTE had not hired any outside attorney as they believed they could settle the matter between the City and GTE. She asked the Council to table the issue until GTE had the details of the Southwestern Bell settlement. Council Member chew asked how long Harless felt it would be before those details were known. Harless replied about 30 days. Council Member Cott asked Harless if GTE would be willing to waive any of the monies GTE might owe the City if legislation changed. Harless asked if Council Member Cott was referring from the past. Council Member Cott stated from today. If the city waited 30 days would GTE waive that. Harless stated that GTE was willing to work with the City and willing to do what was best for both entities. Mike Bucek, Acting City Attorney, stated that the question was • whether to retain a lawfirm to assist the City in the negotiations and if the negotiations failed, that firm would take legal, action on the City's behalf. The City had a certain responsibility to evaluate the franchise and the charter provisions and were they being violated. One of the problems encountered during negotiations was that the Charter preempted the franchise and indicated that 2t of the gross revenues which GTE received in the • City of Denton had to be remitted to the City for franchise fees. ' • • Non-binding arbitration could not be utilized by the City as the charter required the City to seek those funds. If a mediator indicated that GTE did owe the money, the mediator had no way to bind GTE and had no way to comply with the charter provision. Denton was one of a few cities which had a charter provision which • O • ra • i City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 ~S56 Page 20 preempted the franchise. He was not sure why GTE would need an additional 39 days as the City had been communicating with them for 1 at least 2 weeks. GTE had indicated that the new franchises of Southwestern Bell cities would be a lump sum figure franchise and would not be a percentage of gross receipts, Talking with Southwestern Bell would not help as the Charter provision prevented the City from entering into such a franchise. It was known that the settlement with Southwestern Bell and the 57 cities was in excess of $25 million. It was also known that the City proceeded knowing about that case and knowing that it might be entitled to 2% gross receipts on which GTE had not paid. The city had been requesting records and the Council, had passed two resolutions informing GTE of its failure to allow the city access to records in order to perform an audit. This was a breach of the City's Charter and a breach of the franchise. Ever since the Council had passed those two resolutions, the City had not received one additional document relating to that audit from GTE. The issue with the Southwestern case was that when " long distance carrier such as MCI or ATT paid GTE money to use the local exchange lines, that was compensation which should be figured into the gross receipts. GTE had failed to admit to that. Southwestern Bell differed in that position and eventually settled the case. The City's Charter provisions had to be complied with. Whenever there was the possibility of a shortage of funds being paid to the City by anyone who had a contract with the city, the City would take them to task. Tile City's figures indicated that approximately $4-5 million in delinquent franchise fees were due to the city. Under the State constitution, the City could not give a gift to anyone the City had a contract with. The City could only comply with the contract or had to get something for the money which was being waived, In this situation, there was $4-5 million that if the City had received, would be in the general fund which could be used to underwrite projects. The failure to do so resulted in the taxpayers having to pay higher taxes for the reason that GTE had riot properly paid the funds due to the City. The ordinance indicated that the blanks for the name of the lawfirm • would be Casstevens and Casstevens if so desired by the Council. Between this date and noon of April 25, if GTE failed to produce records or remit delinquent fees, Casstevens and Casstevens would file a suit to collect those fees. The ordinance made clear the concern of the Council that funds which GTE failed to pay was a decision made by GTE. Their failure to pay should result in their stockholders 3quity being reduced or through some source other than the ratepayer in Denton. Presently GTE had a tariff which ` • indicated that any delinquent fees assessed to them would be charged to the ratepayers. Based on that, the Council would be authorizing Casstevens and Casstevens to file an appropriate plea to the Public Utility Commission to have that automatic pass through voided. The ordinance also stated that as Casstevens and • O • • City of Denton City Council Minutes 5--- April 11, 1995 ~j( Sg Page 21 Casstevens went to the Public Utilities Commission with these issues, they should ask the Public Utilities Commission to consider the pass throughs. There was a need to look at the conditions which the monopoly GTE was using to determine whether there should be a pass through. Those three items were: if the monopoly had excess profits, if there were legal prohibitions again;;t retroactive rate making, and if ther.3 was an issue of allocation of cost among classes of users. If people were not using long distance service in Denton, why should they be subject to a pass through. The pass through needed to be allocated to the user of the service. The ordinance retained the firm of Casstevens and Casstevens to proceed on those two points. Section five woul.l note the date of April 5 for the bid date of Casstevens and Casstevens. Council Member Perry felt that there was a consideration of honoring the contract between the city and GTE. The City had done so but not GTE. He felt that it was reasonable for City, after such a long period of time, to move on to other means to obtain the records. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-080 I AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS RETAINING A LAW FIRM TO REPRESENT THE CITY IN NEGOTIATIONS OR LITIGATION WITH GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF THE SOUTHWEST ("GTE") OVER ITS FAILURE TO PRODUCE RECORDS REQUIRED BY A CITY AUDIT AND FAILURE TO REMIT DELINQUENT FRANCHISE FEES; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. Council Member Miller stated that there was no question that there • was a dispute between the City and GTE. He slid not defend the actions of GTE but did not feel that the City had exhausted all of the negotiation process. Writing letters was not negotiation and he felt there should have been more negotiations on both sides. He was concerned about the process and not being able to meet face to face regarding the issue. The proposed process was not appropriate at this time and felt it made sense to defer the process for ® another 30-40 days instructing staff to participate in personal • • J negotiations. Ii an impasse was then reached, proceed with the ordinance. It was easy to take the action but, once started might be hard to stop. He felt that not enough had been done to take this action at this time. • O u • ^17~ u,r x.17 Q~. City of Denton city council minutes April 11, 1995 ;2 ~ .S 56 Page 22 Council Member Cott agreed that writing letters was not the appropriate way to proceed. Fie recommend delaying the ordinance. Mike Bucek, Acting City Attorney, stated that one problem was that parties could not agree unless the legislation provided for such a waiver. The problem was that the Legislature was in session and an amendment might be made to the Public utilities Act to waive delinquent fees owed by GTE or Southwestern Bell to cities. There was no direction to file suit for two weeks. If the firm was able to work out the issue within that time frame, the door for negotiation would not be closed. Mayor Castleberry stated that the City had been going over this with GTE for a long time. GTE had not been responsive and kept indicating a mediator. He saw no reason not to pass the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Miller "nay", smith "aye", Chew "nay", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 4-3 vote. 9. The Council considered an appointment to the Denton County Ray Roberts Lake Planning and zoning commission. City Manager Harrell stated that the State statute specified the Mayor to serve as a member of the Denton County Ray Roberts Lake Planning and Zoning Commission. The Mayor's term had expired and a motion was needed by the Council to reappoint the Mayor to the Commission. Smith motioned, Brock seconded to appoint the Mayor to the Denton County Ray Roberts Lake Planning and zoning commission. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried ` unanimously. II • 10. The Council considered a nomination to the North Central Texas Council of Government'a 1995-96 Executive Board. City Manager Harrell stated that council Member Miller was the current representative to the NCTCOG Executive Board. The term of office on the Board was normally two years. It was recommended that Council Member Miller be renominated to the Board. • + Perry rotioned, Brock seconded to nominate Jack Miller to the North Central Texas Council of Government's Executive Board. On roll vote, Brock, "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. • m • ~gautla errij Ili C. City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 3 J Page 23 U 11. The Council considered a nomination to the Cable T.V. Advisory Board. Council Member Miller nominated Mark Burroughs. 12. The council reconsidered the motion not to amend the animal control ordinance pertaining to pot bellied pigs in the Denton city limits. City Manager Harrell stated that at the last study session of the Council, Council Member Cott, after discussion, made a motion to not to amend the animal control ordinance relating to pot bellied pigs. That motion passed on 6-1 vote. In accordance with the Council's rules, one of the Council Members who voted on the prevailing side had to ask that this item be reconsidered. Mayor Pro Tem Brock, a member of the prevailing side, could make a motion to reconsider Council Member Cott's original motion. If such a motion was made, seconded and approved, it would be back on the floor as the original motion to not amend the ordinance. That motion would be available for discussion. Council Member Chew indicated that Section 7.11 of the Council's rules indicated that a reconsideration would be at the "next meeting". Mike Bucek, Acting City Attorney, indicated that this was the first ! official meeting as the last meeting was a work session. 1 Council Member Perry asked if a work sese.ion was an official meeting of the Council. The Council's rules stated that a motion to reconsider could be made not later than the next official meeting. Bucek stated that the City's charter indicated that the Council would meet the first and third Tuesday of the month which were • interpreted to be the Council's official meetings. The Council's new rulea had not looked at that issue. Council Member Perry felt that there was a need to suspend the rules to be procedurally correct. Perry motioned, Brock seconded to suspend the rules to reconsider • the motion. on roll vote, Brock: "aye", Cott "nay", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "nay" • Motion carried with a 5-2 vote. Brock motioned, Miller seconded to reconsider the motion to not amend the animal control ordinance. ® 0 a • City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 5?; Page 24 000 Mayor Pro Ten Brock felt that it was wrong calling pot bellied pigs swine or livestock. She previously had a concern that amending the ordinance might open the door to different kinds of animals being requested to be allowed in the City. There were two issues in determining whether people had the freedom to keep certain animals as pets. One was danger to other citizens and the second was a nuisance. Dogs and cats created nuisances for neighbors. She felt there would be no danger with these animals and there might be fewer nuisances than with dogs and cats. She thought that the Council needed to be more open to the issue and requested Council reconsider the motion. Council Member Miller stated that he would vote for the reconsideration for three reasons. One was that the issue was considered at a work session at the request of Council due to a citizen report. Council asked staff to contact other :ities to determine procedures. Most of the area cities had ordinances allowing pot bellied pigs which seemed to work well. He felt there was a need to go to the next step and request staff to prepare a well drafted ordinance. This action would not approve pot bellied pigs in Denton but would allow an ordinance to be considered. f Council. Member Cott stated that Denton was one of the few i communities in Denton County which would grow into a big city and II cities did not have that kind of animal on its streets. Mayor Castleberry stated that pigs grew into hogs and were called swine. Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that an ordinance could put restrictions on the animals. Ordinances in other cities restricted the size of the pigs and had a registration fee for the animals. Council Member Perry stated that pigs could make a fine pet but he was not willing to open the door and not willing to vote for • keeping pot bellied swine in the City limits. Council Member Miller stated that larger cities allowed these animals and had controls to limit those animals. The Council would not be passing an ordinance 6t this point but he was just asking to have an ordinance tr, consider. • Mayor C. berry stated that a motion and second had been made to f • • reconsider the motion not to amend the animal control ordinance. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Miller "aye", Smith "nay", chow "nay", Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 2-5 vote. • • City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 L7 5 Sg Page 25 13, vision Update Council Member Miller stated that a report would be given to the Cabinet at its next meeting from the "work" group. There was still an opportunity for citizens to participate in the vision process. 14. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. The Council returned to the Work Session Item. 3 The Council received an update on the Denton Together activities. Joseph Portugal, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that clean- up, fix-up activities had been done by the students from LINT and TWU. Landscaping had been done at an area residence plus several f adopt-a-spot locations. The railroad bridge over Robinson had been i painted and an area church would monitor it for any new graffiti. Musical entertainment was provided to area nursing and retirement homes. The Civic Leadership Day was a success with a joint meeting of the student leadership of the two universities. A Just for Hids field day was held for area youth. He felt the activities had been a positive success for Denton and the two universities. Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, presented the following items: A. The Council received a report concerning the latest j honorees added to the Wall of Honor. City Manager Harrell indicated that another quarter had been completed for the Wall, of Honor. Sixteen new letters had been added to the Nall and would remain displayed for the next three months. This program continued to be well received by the employees and spoke well of City employees. ® B. The next meeting of the TMPA Board of Directors would be April 20th with a van leaving for Gibbons Creek early that morning. Most of the cities, through their appropriate bodies with staff input, had concluded that the switch to western coal made sense. The Garland City Council had sent instructions for their two board members to abstain from a vote on a motion to change to western coal. The other three cities felt that the switch over should d proceed. He had sent a communication regarding the percentage • • share of the Gibbons Creek cost to be assumed by each member to the other three city mangers after briefing the council. He had not heard any response to that letter which was directed to Greenville. Today Greenville responded to the letter which rejected the suggested 9.9$ share for Greenville and suggested an allocation of • 4 • • City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 S8 Page 26 9.5%. After Denton sent the Greenville communication to the other cities, the other cities looked at the allocation of percentages. Denton had been told that at the Planning and operating Committee meeting, the Garland City Council had sent specific instructions that they did not want an amendment passed which fixed the percentage of cost for each city. They wanted a floating percentage based on fixed energy load. This would hurt Greenville rather than the compromise fixed percentage. He understood that the City of Bryan would be supportive of that fixed energy load. He hed instructed Bob Nelson to press for that same percentage at the Planning and Operating Committee meeting. He felt that two recommendations would come from the Planning and operating Committee meeting, The first would be the proposed power sales contract amendment which contained the division of responsibilities for Gibbons Creek baE,?d on net energy load. That would be a floating number to be fixed each year based on the previous year's net energy load. The second recommendation from the Committee would be that the TMPA Board immediately take up the question of allocating costs to the various cities under the currant contract and that that be changed to a net energy load number. It appeared that Greenville could kill the amendment as the amendment needed an agreement of all of the cities to pass. It ,11so appeared that a recommendation would be made to the Board that the allocation and cost be changed to the fixed energy load of 11.15% for Greenville. 15. There was no official action taken on Closed Meeting Items discussed during the Work Session Closed Meeting. i 16. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Chew requested staff to research wheelchair accessibility to Denton through SPAN. 0 B. Council Member Smith asked for a discussion on a work session relating to the number of horses allowed per acre in the city limits. C. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked for a work session relating to the parking problem on the Square. A D. Council Member Miller asked that the City's policy for 41 street sweeping be looked at in terms of process and equipment /I failure. 0 0 • ca • r City of Denton City Council Minutes April 11, 1995 a-4 (9♦ SS Page 27 U E. Council Member Miller stated that the Council had approved a logo for the City but there were inconsistencies in the design such as the letterhead differing from business cards, etc. F. Council Member Miller suggested having a city-wide forum once or twice a year. G. Council Member Miller stated that lie would be testifying before the Texas Senate Natural Resources Committee regarding a bill which would allow tipping fees to be returned to the local communities. H. Mayor Castleberry stated that he had been asked to serve on the National League of Cities Planning Committee for the upcoming November meeting in 1995. He asked the Council if they had any ideas for speakers, work sessions, etc. 17. The Council returned to the Closed Meeting to discuss the following: A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071 B. Real. Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072 C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.074 I With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS • I JENNIFER WALTERS j CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS i I • • ACC00269 e a 0 CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES A090aN0.-°-~-^i+ April 18, 1995 h, i;;k1i JJJ The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesda A r 1995 at 5:15 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room. Y. PRESENT: Sg Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: Council Member Chew 1. The Council discussed the following in Closed Meeting: i A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071 1. Considered settlement in SQr, et, al v City. 2. Considered action in @rgatzel. et. al, v. City. 3. Considered action in Ervin v. Citv. B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072 1. Discussion regarding acquisition of property for j expansion of City's landfill. I I C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.074 Discussed City Attorney finalists and considered offer of employment. i Council Member Chew arrived during the Closed Meeting. The council convened into the Work Session on Tuesday, April 18, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: None I 1. The council received a presentation and held a discussion on the 1995 Community Development Advisory Committee recommendations. Barbara Ross, Community Development Administrator, stated that the 0 Consolidated Plan would be presented first followed by the Community Development Advisory Committee and Human services Committee presentations. Louisa Rodriguez-Garcia, Program Assistant, stated that the Consolidated Plan was divided into six major sections, section one dealt the purpose of the plan. Section Two detailed the resources ® for Denton including federal and non-federal resources currently available for human resource needs in Denton. Section Three dealt with the community profile which detailed the population, demographics, housing statistics, and a revised tabla dealing with affordability comparison, section Four dealt with an assessment of housing and homelessness in Denton. The housing asseasment looked at the needs of low income renters and homeowners, the elderly and ~ 0 • • City of Denton City Council Minutes ; !+'t,iilu April 18, 1995 Page 2 the homeless, and was based on the 1990 census information. The homeless information was based on the 1992 homeless assessment and the 1994 homeless count. Section Five was the Five-Year Strategic Plan. Ross stated that the Affordable Housing strategy included objectives in the area of rental housing, assistance to owners, if assistance to first time home buyers, and assistance to potentially homeless and special needs groups. The Homeless Strategy included objectives for service coordination, permanent, transitional and immediate housing, prevention of homelessness, and encouragement of case management. The Non-Housing Community De~lelopment Plan included major priorities of service coordination unit, meeting urgent needs which were uncovered in the needs assessment, agency coordination, and promoting self-sufficiency programs. Infrastructure improvements goals included improvement of accessibility for persons with disabilities, correcting neighborhood safety and helping deficiencies which might exist, providing infrastructure for affordable housing projects, providing infrastructure for economic development projects, improving human service facilities in the City, coordinating with the City's CIP process and developing a revision of funding criteria. Economic Development priorities included the creation of a community development corporation. Crime prevention was not a direct function of the department but did fund programs which would help at-risk youth. Council Member Perry asked if Fairhaven was a private operation. i~ Ross replied that it was a private non-profit facility but also a Section 202•-elderly housing project which meant they received funding from HUD to develop the project. Peggy Norton, Chair-Community Development Advisory Committee, stated that two public hearings had been held regarding proposed funding allocations and that the committee had received 30 applications for funds. The Committee recommended the following allocations; human services - $165,000; demolition and clearance - $65,000; economic development programs - $60,500; engineering projects - $111,696 which included two sidewalk projects and two • paving projects; housing projects - $379,780 in CDBG funds and $377,000 in HOME funds which included a homebuyers assistance and home owner rehabilitation program; non-profit facility projects - $117,000 which included City-County Day Nursery and Fred Moore; parks and recreation projects - $138,189 which included a project I at Evers Park, MLK and Phoenix. ® Sandy Kristoferson, Chair-Human Services Committee, stated that the • Committee conducted a needs assessment and had revised the policies and procedures of the Committee. Of the 23 agencies interviewed, 20 were funded, Adult Day Care of North Texas was not recommended for funding as it was not yet operational. Recommendations for funding included Aids Services of Denton County - $7,500 for its nutrition center; Camp Fire First Texas Council - $3,300 for the • p • City of Denton City Council Minutes April 18, 1995 p.':H^.T1)~C.21aL ,.SG Page 3 30cs~.51s Owsley and Village East area; Child Advocacy Center was not funded due to its pending non-profit status; Community Food Room - $3,500; Denton Christian Preschool did not apply for funds; Denton City- County Day Nursery - $21,000; Denton County Friends of the Family - $36,000; DISD TTRIPS - $10,000; Fred Moore Day Nursery School - $35,000; HOPE - $5,006; HOPE Transitional Housing - $25,000• r Interfaith Ministries of Denton - $7,°00; Library Project Real - $10,000; MHMR - $15,000; North Texas Community Clinics - $31,000; Parks Alter))ative Avenues Program - $5,000; Parks Kings Kids Day Kamp - $15,750; Parks Owsley Summer Playground Program - $11,750; RSVP - $7,800; SPAN - $26,000; SPAN Fairhaven - $10,009; and Special Olympics - $15,000. $166,000 would be in CDBG funding and $155,100 would be in general fund money for a total funding of $321,100. She felt that the proposals were well spent and would address issues before they became problems. Council Member Perry asked about the Child Advocacy Center. Kristoferson stated that the Center's non-profit stat•is still pending. Council Member Perry asked if funding would be recommended after the non-profit status was received. Kristoferson stated that the Committee had a limited number of i dollars and it wanted to offer maximum money to agencies already working. Council Member Cott stated that the federal government might reduce funding and asked if the Committee had a contingency plan if not all of the proposed funds were received. Ross stated that the House had passed a bill with a 9% reduction. The Committee had decided to allocate all the funding until HUD indicated that those funds were not available. At that time the Committee would have to revise the funding proposal. Council Member Cott suggested that the Committee develop an • alternate suggestion with a break even figure for each agency if the funding was not available. City Manager Harrell stated that in past years the Committee had recommended funding for the After School Action Sites and scholarship money at dLK. Both were not funded for next year. He asked how that would be handled for possible Council consideration. • Ross replied that the MLK ASAS was budgeted $19,000 last year and r • • $8,000 for t.ie scholarship program. Currently no scholarship money had been used and 516,000 was remaining in MLK ASAS account. It was projected that only $3,000 would be used for the remainder of the school year and it was projected that there would be enough money in the account for the next year. i • b • r w . • ti- City of Denton City Council Minutes 0 April 18, 1995 Page a 3 I s$ Council Members Miller and Smith and Mayor Pro Ten Brock felt it would be best to wait until it was known that revisions would be needed in the allocations rather than work on a contingency plan at this time. 2. The Council received a presentation and held a discussion on the 1995 Human Services Committee recommendations. This item was included in the discussion of Item 01. 9. The Council held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding the City's Consolidated Plan and Community Development Priorities. This item was included in the discussion of Item #1. f The council convened into a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, April 18, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Ten Brock; Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: None 1. Pledge of Allegiance The council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Castleberry presented the following proclamations: Week of the Young Child Professional Secretaries Week 2. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing on the City of Denton's Consolidated Plan for housing and community development. • Barbara Ross, Community Development Administrator, stated that the Consolidated Plan had been available for public comment since April 1, 1995. Federal requirements indicated that a 10 day public comment period was required. The Mayor opened the public hearing. • • • Sarah Burris stated that she war in favor of the ronsolidated Plan. Denton County MHMR prepared a component of the plan to provide housing and food to individuals with substance abuse problems. She felt it was a fiscally sound ).Ian and would benefit individuals coming back into the community. John Baines encouraged the Council to approve the plan. There was a plan for the development for an academy for small buriness • City of Denton City Council Minutes c_~~7 A April 18, 1995 Page 5 -1i b individuals and funding for administrative costs for the three year period. With the City participation, the banks in the area were likely to be supportive. The Mayor closed the public hearing. 3. The Council considered a variance to perimeter street improvements standards (Sec. 34-114 (5)) and underground drainage requirements [Sec. 34-124 (f) (3) ) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, for the proposed Gregory and Kathleen Pollock Addition. The Addition was approximately 14.2 acres, located near the southwest corner of Teasley Lane (F.M. 2181) and Leatherwood Lane. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Community Development, stated that this variance was associated with a large lot in the City which was zoned agricultural. The proposal was to divide the tract into single-family residential lots. The variances associated with infrastructure were paving of perimeter streets and underground drainage. To grant the variances, it must be demonstrated that the imposition of the exaction was in excess of ' arty need created and exceeded any reasonable benefit to the property owner. Staff recommended that $4500 was a reasonable i related exaction. The Planning and Zoning commission felt that as it the road was currently not paved and its base was not prepared for paving, the variance should be granted. Perry motioned, Brock seconded to approve the variance, on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith 'aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 4. Consent Agenda Perry motioned, Brock seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". • Motion carried unanimously. A. Bids and Purchase Orders! 1. Bid #1753 - Wood Utility Poles 2. RFSP #1742 - Long Range Information services Plan j B. Tax Refunds ® 1. Banc One Mortgage Corporation - $894.69 • • 5. Consent Agenda Ordinances The council considered Consent Agenda 'rdinances 5.A. - 5.B. Smith motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda Ordinances 5A, - 5B, on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. e City of Denton City Council Minutes April 18, 1995 >>?;;i i Jil;fT1 y Page 6._.~.. A. NO.95-087. 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. (4.A.1. - Bid #'1753) B. NO, 95-082 AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSAL 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. (4.A.2. - RFSP 01742) 6. Ordinances A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance accepting competitive bids and providing for the award of contracts for public works or improvements. (Bid ,1748) R.Lck Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this item was not on the Consent Agenda as staff wanted to discuss the funding for the project with Council. In the CIP process over the last several years, Council had allocated $300,000 for Payne Drive. When Payne was originally introduced into the CIP it was for a two lane road, one lane in each direction. Subsequent to that, there was development in the area which resulted in a partial split of the road. The project was bid for future development and was higher than the money allotted for the project. There was $277,000 left in the fund and staff was suggesting that the rest of the $80,000 come from two sources. one would be interest money from bonds and the second from street maintenance funds. The design of the project would allow sidewalks to be built, installation of a longer culvert and two lrnes in each direction. The proposal was unanimously recommended by the 191 Committee. The following ordinance was considered; • NO, 95-083 i AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING COMPETITIVE BIDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE AWARD OF CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", chew j "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. i B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the parking of vehicles on certain portions of Hann • a A City of Den on city council Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 7 Street. (The Traffic Safety Commission recommended approval.) Rick Evehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that the next two ordinances dealt with no parking signage in the City. These streets had no parking signs posted but no ordinances to support the no parking prohibition. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-084 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROHIBITING THE. PARKING OF VEHICLES OF CERTAIN PORTIONS OF HANN STREET; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Sm!th "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry 'laye". lintion carried unanimously. C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance j prohibiting the parking of vehicles on certain portions of Fouts Street. (The Traffic Safety Commission recommended approval.) The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-085 f AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROHIBITING THE ! PARKING OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF FOUTS STREET; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. • D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance designating and establishing school safety speed zones; and reducing the maximum prima facie speed limit for said school safety speed zones to twenty miles per hour during certain hours at Frank Borman, Newton Rayzor, Ginnings, Woodrow Wilson, Hodge, Tomas Rivera, Robert E. Lee, McNair, Sam Houston, Evers, Sullivan Keller, Fred Moore Learning Center, Strickland Middle School, Calhoun • Middle School, Billy Ryan High School, Denton High School, Selwyn, • • and Liberty Christian Schools. (The Traffic Safety Commission recommended approval.) Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this was an effort to consolidate school safety zones. The schools were grouped by time and use as were the signs which were also coordinated for each of the groups. The ordinance also incorporated the bus loading zones 0 O • p • City of Denton City Council Minutes April 18, 1995 Page 8 n c 35 5$ for each of the schools. The following ordinance was considered: NO, 95-086 AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING AND ESTABLISHING SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES; REDUCING THE MAXIMUM PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT FOR SAID SCHOOL SAFETY SPEED ZONES TO TWENTY (20) MILES PER HOUR DURING CERTAIN HOURS; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF A FINE NOT TO EXCEED TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND DECLARING EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Cott seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew II "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 between the City of Denton and the Texas Department of Transportation for bridge replacement and rehabilitation. (Mayhill Road at Cooper Creek) Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that this ordinance would allow the Mayor to sign an agreement with the Highway Department for bridge replacement and rehabilitation. The project would be funded with interest money, The following ordinance was considered: + NO. 95-087 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF' DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Perry to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock • "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry aye , and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance abandoning and vacating a 12 foot public utility easement located on Lot 2-B of the B.U.C., Inc. Subdivision. (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval, 5-0.) Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that this was a utility easement in anticipation of an electric distribution line which was never built. The City would retain a small portion of the easement for city use. Council Member Cott stated that one of the issues associated with easements was fences which caused water to be retained. He • O • oa • City of Denton City Council Minutes l a[']ilU..i.L6JJ~.~.... April 18, 1995 Page 9 3Lo (i recommended a study of the concept to only allow fences which would allow water to pass through it. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-087 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance, On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 7. Resolutions I A. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to solicit from the public, sealed bids on l property located at 1128 E. Hickory, and to consent to the sale of said property to the highest bidder, even if the bid tendered is less than the market value of the property specified in the judgement of foreclosure or the total amount of the judgement against the property, and to execute any quitclaim deeds necessary to convey the property upon sale. Jon Fortune, Chief Finance Officer, stated that the resolution J allowed the City to solicit sealed bids for the sale of a piece of property at 1128 E. Hickory which was stricken off to the City of Denton after a judgement of foreclosure was granted on behalf of the City, the DISD and the County. Once the judgement was granted there was a sheriff's sale and an attempt to sell the property for the amount of delinquent taxes due on the property. There was no sufficient bid at that time. This resolution would allow the City to sell the property to the highest bidder so as to receive money • i.~- '-he delinquent taxes plus put the property back on the tax ro.l. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-025 ® A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE a MAYOR TO SOLICIT FROM THE PUBLIC, SEALED BIDS ON PROPERTY J LOCATED AT 1128 E. HICKORY AND TO CONSENT TO THE SALE OF SAID PROPERTY TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER EVEN IF THE BID TENDERED IS LESS THAN THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY SPECIFIED IN THE JUDGEMENT OF FORECLOSURE. OR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE JUDGEMENT k AGAINST THE PROPERTY, AND TO EXECUTE ANY QUITCLAIM DEEDS NECESSARY TO CONVEY THE PROPERTY UPON SALE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. • 0 • rsa e City of Denton city council minutes April 18, 1995 i1r{r,;(1,EI~OAJ,,_ Page 10 3~~58 Perry motioned, Cott seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. B. The t-louncil considered approval of a resolution consenting to the sale of property located on the west side of 1-35 approximately 1,300 feet north of where Rector Road crosses I-35, struck off to Sanger Independent School District in trust for the payment of delinquent property taxes, accrued penalty and interest, and costs for the total purchase price of $27,925.44; and authorizing the Mayor to execute a quitclaim deed to Sanger Independent School District evidencing said consent. ion Fortune, Chief Finance Officer, stated that the property was located north of Rector Road of which two acres was is the Denton city limits. Sanger Independent School District wished to purchase the property in their district. This property also did not sell for delinquent taxes. Sanger wanted to purchase the property and the resolution would allow the City to quitclaim the deed and receiv, the amount of taxes due on the property. The following resolution was considered: NO. R95-026 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS CONSENTING TO THE SALE OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF I-35 APPROXIMATELY 1,300 FEET NORTH OF WHERE RECTOR ROAD CROSSES I- 35, STRUCK OFF TO SANGER INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT IN TRUST FOR THE PAYMENT OF DELINQUENT PROPERTY TAXES, ACCRUED PENALTY AND INTEREST, AND COSTS FOR THE TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE OF TWENTY-SEVEN THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS AND FORTY-FOUR CENTS ($27,925.44) ; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A QUITCLAIM DEED TO SANGER INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT EVIDENCING SAID CONSENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. i Perry motioned, Cott seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew e "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried { unanimously. 8. Vision Update There was no report presented. e 9. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. • v Lloyd Harrell, City Manager, presented the following items: A. Departure time for Gibbons Creek on Thursday would be 6:00 a.m, for any Council Member interested in attending the TMPA meeting. • da • City of. Penton City Council Minutes April 18, 1995 I= :!:i!I li7rT{ Page 11 J~ 3~ 5 B. The main item of business at the TMPA meeting would be various votes on the switch to Powder River coal which would result in substantial cost reductions. This was an important culmination of months of study. The power sales contract amendment was not yet ready for Board consideration. The member cities had agreed on the language of the amendment except for the allocation of cost for Gibbons Creek I. Greenville was not in agreement with the allocation. Originally a compromise position had been proposed in which Greenville would have ended up with a 9.9$ allocation. Greenville rejected that proposal twice, holding out for a proposed allocation of 9.5%. The Planning and operations Committee recommended a shifting of cost allocation to a net energy for load formula which would set the allocation price for Greenville at 11.04%. The Mayor of Greenville had recently been appointed to the TMPA Board. Within the last several days, the Mayor of Greenville had placed phone calls to the Mayors of Bryan and Denton and attempted to call the Mayor of Garland to have the cities reconsider and allow Greenville to accept the 9.9% allocation. Bryan and Denton indicated that they would be willing to listen without a making a firm commitment. The City Managers visited and agreed that at the TMPA Board meeting, they would set a time when the four City Managers and the Executive Director of TMPA could discuss the Powder River sales agreement to determine if some kind of agreement could be reached on the part of those official to take back a formal recommendation to the various governing bodies. It appeared that there might be a chance for progress in the amendment. The difference was that it would be difficult for the other cities to agree on a 9.91 allocation without some additional concessions on the part of Greenville. C. The City of Bryan was notified today and had anticipated that College Station would reject a bid from Bryan and TMPA for providing future power following the expiration of its contract at end of this year. A major wholesale customer of TMPA would be out of consideration. 10. There was no official action taken on items discussed during the Closed meeting. J 11. New Business The following items of New Business were suggested by Council Members for future agendas: A. Council Member Chew requested a study on the feasibility l • of a speed bump on Ruddell at Hickory. • B. Mayor Pro Tem Brock reminded council that Saturday was Earth Day and that the council would be cleaning their adopt-a- spot. 12. The Council returned to the Closed Meeting to discuss the following: • • City of Dentcn City Council Minutes -,,-~Q~--- April 18, 1995 Page 12 9 A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVfT CODE Sao. 551.071 B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVJT CODE Sec. 551.072 C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVFT CODE Sec. 551.074 With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS I ACCO026C i i I L • i y. It J.4 }p '~L c~~fl~nti~~~~vlf~~k{f♦ 'l! • ca • CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 25, 1995 1..&1f1 The Council convened into a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, Apt"A--2~~~ 1995 at 5:15 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room. 4 0 6~ S 7 PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock/ Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: None 5:15 p.m. 1. The Council considered the following in a Closed Meeting: A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071 1. Considered settlement offer relating to delinquent franchise fees owed the City by GTE. B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072 C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.074 1. Discussed City Attorney finalists and considered 1 offer of employment. The Council convened into a Special Call Session on Tuesday, April 25, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: None 1. The council received a presentation by John Hudson, President of the N.T.W.U.A., to the City of Denton Water Treatment Plant for Best Tasting Water in Texas. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that the City would again be receiving the award for the Best Tasting Water in Texas. Mr. Hudson presented a plaque to the Council for the Best Tasting • Water in Texas. This was the second year in a row which Denton had received this award. He also presented a plaque to the City in appreciation for City personnel who presented programs for the North Texas Water Utility Association. Mayor Castleberry presented a proclamation for Tree Appreciation Week. • • G 2. The Council considered the process of appointing individuals to serve on a 1996 Celebration committee in conjunction with the sesquicentennial year for Denton County and give staff direction. • ca • City of Denton City Council Minutes April 25, 1995 ~p Page 2 5, ~Q} t~9JSly U City Manager Harrell stated that the Mayor had received a letter from the Denton County Historical Commission asking council to participate in the sesquicentennial of Denton County. The Commission asked that the City fot.-. 1995 Celebration Committee consisting of individuals who woula like to plan and carry out special events for the celebration. The Council was also asked to name a chair for that committee who would represent Denton on the County Committee. The Committee would meet and develop a list of possible City events and suggested county events. The County Committee needed aach committee list by May 1st and a list of events by May 15th. I . Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked about the structure of the committee. Was it a City Committee, a County Committee or a Historical Commission Committee. Council Member Smith stated that the Committee she was working on was a county committee as it had appeared before the Commissioners Court and they had approved a resolution establishing the Committee. Peggy Caps indicated that Martha Len Nelson and she would be the co-chair of the Denton County Historical Commission Committee. The Commissioners Court also passed a resolution approving a committee which would involve anyone in the County who would be willing to celebrate the event. It was hoped that every community and as many people as possible would be involved in the celebration events. Mayor Castleberry stated that this would be a large county-wide group. Cape replied that anyone who wished to participate would be welcome. Eight subcommittees would be developed to work on the plans. Council Membnr Miller asked if the City needed to establish its own committee or appoint individuals to serve on the Commission's f committee. Caps stated that it was hoped that the City would have events of its own and any event would incorporate County events to celebrate. Council Member Smith suggested having someone from the Parks and Recreation staff to serve on the Committee to assist with the handling of events. • Mayor Castleberry stated that this item would be placed on the next ' • • Council agenda for consideration. 3. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding parking signs on the Square. • 0 I • 0 City of Denton city council Minutes April 25, 1995 Page 3 l ~.:'4L5~~s.Q Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager, stated that there were approximately 100 parking signs on the Square. Several alternatives were available to inform the public regarding the parking fines on the Square. one was to take down the existing signs and make new signs. That would cost approximately $25 per sign plus labor. A concern with this alternative was that the sign would have to be changed if the fines changed. The second alternative would be to add a smaller sign to the existing sign. This alternative would cost approximately $10 per sign. There were many no parking or parking for specific times in the City. If the signs were changed on the Square, it would probably be best to changed the signs at all other locations. Mayor Pro Ten Brock felt that the signs would be more effective if they were separate from the regular sign. Council Member Miller stated that he had asked for this report as he had seen the signage in another city and felt it might be a good point for Denton. He was in favor of doing the signage around the Square but felt that it would be good to have input from the Downtown Association to see if they felt such signage would help. Mayor Castleberry stated that he would like to have input from the area merchants and from the Downtown Association. Miller motioned, Chew seconded to direct staff to take this issue to the appropriate committees, receive their recommendations and place it on a future work session. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. 4. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarding changes to the sound system in the Council Chambers. Richard Foster, Public Information Officer, stated that there continued to be difficulties with the sound system in the Council chambers and with the sound system used by cable t.v. and KNTU { • radio. The existing system consisted of three components, the microphones, two amplifiers, and six speakers. At times it was difficult to hear speakers in the Chambers and if the input from the microphones was increased, there was a feedback problem. The problem with the radio reception was so bad that KNTU would probably discontinue broadcasting until the sound quality improved. The problems could be resolved by replacing some of the equipment. • In addition to replacing the microphones and the speakers, a mixing • O board should be purchased in order to individually control each microphone and control the sound in the room separately from what was being carried out over radio and television. The cost of this equipment would cost approximately $5-7000. Not all of the problems would be solved with this equipment as the voting board, • • City of Denton City Council Minutes April 25, 1995 5m Ca,---- Page 9 light dimmer switches, and HVAC unit also produced some interference. If the Council waited until the Chambers was renovated, an architect could make recommendations regarding what should be done in the audio-visual area. If the council wanted to proceed sooner and depending on the amount of financial commitment, some differences in the quality of sound could be done. Council Member Perry stated that as the renovation committee was already working on this project, he suggested that any modifications to the system wait until their report was completed and then incorporate that report with whatever was necessary to upgrade the sound system. This would result in a coordinated effort. Council Member Cott agreed that it would not be wise to do the room one piece at a time. He felt it would be best to wait until the price for all of the equipment was known. ? Council Member Miller stated that he understood that the expenditures were ones which would be used no matter how the room would be remodeled. He felt that if the project could start now and the equipment could still be used aftc,r the remodeling, it would be a great advantage to the production of the meeting. Foster stated that options 4-6 would involve equipment which could be used after the Chambers was renovated. The final version of the Chambers could be different, which would impact the equipment purchased. Waiting until later would provide the benefits of a professional consultant to provide options. Aaron Brody, KNTU Radio, stated there were many options for 1 different microphones. The engineer's opinion was that the system 111 console was the primary component needed at this point in time. Mayor Pro Tem Brock asked if KNTU was currently broadcasting the City Council meetings. Brody replied that the Station was broadcasting the first and third Ilk • Tuesdays from 7-9 p.m. After discussions with the Station Manager regarding the background hum, it was determined that if the hum could not be corrected the Station would have to discontinue broadcasting. Council Member Miller asked that if the microphones were not replaced would the speakers have to be replaced. s Foster replied that part of the problem was that if the microphones were not changed, the volume on the microphones would have to be increased so much that there would be a feedback situation. Council Member Miller asked about the speaker replacement. .~•+~r..-..~ryw•.,.~.. i, i • .emu 4.WM.: ea.... • • 0 c, 77 City of Denton City Council Minutes April 25, 1995 Page 5 X6.5$ Foster stated that if the other equipment was purchased but not the microphones and speakers there would be an improvement in the sound quality. Council Member Perry stated again that he felt it would be better to do this project in connection with the total Chambers renovation. It would be better to wait and do the project with an expert who could provide assistance in connection with the renovations of the Chambers. Miller motioned, Brcck seconded to authorize the purchase of a mixing console, transformer, distribution amplifier, compressor/ limiter and cables for approximately $3-4 thousand. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Miller. "aye", Smith "nay", Chew "nay", Perry "nay", and Mayor Castleberry "nay". Motion failed with a 2-5 vote. 5. The coat, '_1 received a report and veld a discussion regarding transit , _~r to DFW Airport. Jo..; -ti-a, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that at a pri, ..'10, ~-(juncil had received a citizen report regarding transx%~ ser.4ce :o DFW Airport. Council asked staff to research this :asue return with a report. The City received Section 9 funding from the Federal Transit Administration to provide demand response/ paratransit service as well as fixed route service. Under those Section 9 provisions, the city was prohibited from engaging in any charter activity of any sort and could not give the appearance of competing with a private provider. There was an II airport shuttle service in Denton which went to and from the Airport. Officials with the Texas Department of Transportation had indicated that that carrier was licensed by the Texas Railroad Commission. As part of their license the carrier was required to provide service to any citizen in Denton who wishes, to go to and from the Airport. The issue was the ability of that carrier to provide the service to individuals who had mobility impairments. h The private carrier did not provide that type of service as it did not have a lift equipped vehicle. The carrier asked SPAN to • provide that type of service. SPAN could not under Section 9 guidelines provide such service. As the carrier was licensed by the RRC, SPAN would be in competition with a private carrier which was already licensed to provide such service. staff had visited with the carrier and interested citizens to find a resolution to the matter. Under Section 9 provisions, the City could not engage in charter activities as it would be competing with a private ® carrier licensed to provide such a service. • • Council Member Perry asked if it would be beneficial. to use the offices of the City Council to help individuals who needed assistance and to help the carrier. • O I G.D • City of Denton city rouncil minutes April 25, 1995 Page 6 ti5cv~.5$ Portugal stated that staff was very sensitive to the issue. There was an opportunity for staff to visit with the involved individuals to try and resolve the issue. Council Member Smith asked why the carrier was not in violation of j ADA compliance if it did not provide the service. ! Portugal stated that es part of the RRC license and the ADA guidelines, the carrier was required to provide that service. As the carrier did not have the proper equipment, it asked the City, through SPAN, to assist them in providing the service, Council Member Co'ct asked if bids had been requested from people outside the City. Portugal stated that the City was not trying to do so. The City's responsibility, as a Section 9 recipient, was to provide the City paratransit and fixed route service within the guidelines of the Federal Transit Administration. The issue involved a private for- profit carrier as opposed to a public non-profit recipient of federal funds. Council Member Miller asked if it would be possible to get a waiver if the private carrier indicated a will.tng to subcontract the service and they would be ones the City would be in competition with. Pi.rt.ugal stated that the Regional office had indicated that it would not be possible to receive such a waiver. City Manager Harrill stated that the City had specifically talked about a waiver provision with the Federal agency and they gave the advice that an attempt to get such a waiver would be difficult under these circumstances, Portugal stated that the FTA indicated that this would be very diffi.calt to do. Council Member Miller asked if the Agency knew that the carrier f which the City would be in competition with was willing subcontract the service. Portugal replied that there was an RRC certified carrier which had the responsibility to provide this service as part of their license, ® Mayor Pro Tem Brack asked about the possibility that the carrier ' • might subcontract with individuals who had private vehicles properly equipped for such service. w G) City of Denton City Council Minutes April 25, 1995 Page 7_. Co ~b 58 Portugal stated that that was an excellent suggestion, There might be Other private opportunities for funding for a properly equipped vehicle, Council Member Chew recommended that staff work with citizens and the carrier to resolve this issue. Consensus of Council was to have staff pursue council Member Chew's recommendation. 6. The Council received a report, held a discussion and gave staff direction regarr.ing an amendment to the current ordinance regulating the keeping of livestock in the city limits. Mayor Castleberry indicated that a letter had been delivered to the council asking the Council to postpone discussion of the issue and allow for further discussion. Cott motioned, Brock seconded to postpone the discussion. Council Member Smith stated that she had asked for this item to be on the agenda. She was not opposed to having horses in the City limits but the current ordinance allowed for 109 horses on a single acre which she felt was too great a number. She felt that the number needed to be adjusted. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", carried unanimously,Iaye~r and Mayor Castleberry "aye", Motion 7. The council considered a nomination to the Cable T. V. Advisory Board. Mayor Castleberry indicated that Mark Burroughs was nominated at a previous meeting, on roll vote Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye', and Mayor Castleberry aye . Motion carried unanimously, 8. The Council returned to the Closed Meeting to discuss the S following: A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071 1. Considered settlement offer relating to delinquent franchise fees owed the City by GTE, 6 B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec, 551.072 r I C. Personnei/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE / Sec. 551.074 • a • City of Denton City Council Minutes ~'~"'OnoQ~~~-~^•- April 25, 1995 Page 8 1. Discussed City Attorney finalists and consider offer of employment. The Council returned to Open Session and took the following official actions Perry motioned, Smith seconded to approve the following resolution to hire Herbert L. Prouty as City Attorney: NO. R95-027 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, APPOINTING HERBERT L. PROUTY AS CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF DENTON; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR HIS TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT1 AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye" Motion carried with a 5- 1 vote with Council Member Chew abstaining as he was not present for interviews. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9s10 p.m. EOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACC00272 _ a J • a+ ' e . Icy CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 2, 1995 The Council convened into a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, May 2, 1995 in the council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Castleberry; Mayor Pro Tem Brock; Council Members Chew, Cott, Perry, Miller and Smith. ABSENT: None 1. Pledge of Allegiance The council and members of the audience recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Castleberry presented Yard of the Month Awards to: Dan and Susan Martin Braum's Nikis Brandon Ruth Watson Mayor Castleberry presented a proclamation for Arson Awareness Week. Mayor Castleberry stated that a representative from "Up With People( had asked to address the Council. Andy Hogle stated that "Up With People" was an international student program which strove to build leadership skills among youth E and encourage understanding among people with different cultures, f The group would be in Denton on the weekend for several performances. 2. Citizen Reports JJI A. The Council received a citizen report from Dessie Goodson 1 relating to the sign ordinance and SPAN. Ms. Goodson was unable to attend the meet e ingl 3. Public Hearings A. The Council held a public hearing and considered adoption of an ordinance rezoning 72,016 acres from the Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Single Family 7 (SF-7) Conditioned zoning district and the Single Family 10 (SF-10) zoning district. The • subject property was located between and adjacent to Kings Row and • • Loop 2881 (The Planning and Zoning commission recommended approval, 5-0.) I • 0 • G~ • City of Denton city council minutes May 2, 1995 Page 2 Frank Robbins, Director for Planning and Development, stated that this zoning case was located south of 135, near Kings Row. The SF- 7 zoning had a condition that it would not have an access to Loop 288. This was a decrease in the allocation of intensity in the area. The property owner had worked very closely with the neighbors and had modified his plans to accommodate ;:axe neighborhood concerns. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Fred Williams stated that the developer had worked very closely with the neighbors regarding the project. The proposal had been changed in order to be compatible with the current neighborhood and he recommended approval of the project. Brian Burke stated that development would start soon and he would answer any questions from the Council. No one spoke in opposition. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The following ordinance was considered; NO. 95-089 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANCE FROM THE AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO THE SINGLE FAMILY 7 CONDITIONED (SF-7(C)) AND SINGLE FAMILY 10 (SF-10) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATIONS AND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR 72.016 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED BETWEEN KINGS ROW AND LOOP 288; PROVIDING FOR i A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Chew motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, • Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor. Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. Consent Agenda Council Member Cott asked that Item $1754 be pulled for discussion. • Council Member Cott felt that the City was spending • $130,000 on a product which not everyone received and he felt that the City should reduce the solid waste rates or give the money back to the taxpayer. 0 e ~r / • a~ • City of Denton City Council Minutes May 2, 1995 J~ O vl 58 Page 3 Q City Manager Harrell stated that this was a traditional program sponsored by the City whereby residents, as part of their solid { waste charge, were supplied plastic bags to use in disposing of their refuse. From time to time, the Public Utilities Board did look at this issue and had considered discontinuing this program which would slightly lower the monthly charge for solid waste customers. The Board determined that this was a ser~iice the residents appreciated and expected, and there would be major concern if the City discontinued this program. The program also provided uniform bags for the trash collectors. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that this program cost approximately $.75 per month per customer. The solid waste rate could be reduced by $.75 per month but the customers would have to purchase their own bags. Council Member Miller felt that the system worked very well. Mayor Pro Tem Brock felt that the old system with trash cans was slow and inefficient. The uniform bags allowed for less breakage for the trash collectors. Mayor Castleberry stated that the Council would vote on all items except for Bid #1754. Perry motioned, Chew seconded to approve the Consent Agenda except for Item #1754. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry aye . Motion carried unanimously. Smith motioned, Chew seconded to approve Item #1754. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "nay", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried with a 6- 1 vote. • A. Bids and Purchase Orders: 1. Bid #1732 - Self Propelled Power Dolly 2. Bid #1746 - Distribution Transformers 3. Bid #1754 - Refuse Bags 4. Bid #1729 - HVAC Renovation for Recreation Centers (North Lakes and Denia) 5. Check Requisition - Texas Natural Resource • ® Conservation Commission J 5. Consent Agenda ordinances The council considered Consent Agenda ordinances S.A. - S.C. Brock • ca • City of Denton City Council Minutes J ~.~h',.5...._.. May 2, 1995 51 S$ Page 4 motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda ordinances 5.A. - 5.C. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. A. NO. 95-090 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. (5.A.1. - Bid 01732, 5.A.2. - Bid ,}1746, 5.A.3. - Bid #1754) B. NO. 95-091 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 95-045 RELATING TO THE AWARD OF BID NUMBER 1729 FOR THE PURCHASE OF HVAC RENOVATION FOR RECREATION CENTERS FROM DRT MECHANICAL AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PURCHASE OF HVAC RENOVATION FOR RECREATION CENTERS FROM ABLE SHEET METAL AND AIR CONDITIONING; PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFORE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (5.A.4. - Bid #1729) C. NO. 95-092 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT BY THE CITY FOR WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT FEES FOR THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION (TNRCC) AS PER SENATE BILL 818 EFFECTIVE JUNE 1991; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (5.A.5.) 6. ordinances A. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance, amending Resolution No. R93-026; and authorizing the City Manager to sign • and submit an amendment to the 1993 Final Statement of Community Development objectives and Projected Use of Funds submitted June 14, 1993. i Barbara Ross, Community.>.velopment Administrator, stated that the ordinance would amend the 1993 Final Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of Funds. That Statement • indicated $13,700 for sidewalk repair near Audra Lane. From the • • time the application was submitted in early June to the and of June, new income figures indicated that the neighborhood no longer qualified in the targeted area. The money would be reallocated for sidewalks on the west side of Bell Avenue between Withers and Texas • e • • City of Denton City Council Minutes J a 5$ May 2, 1995 Page 5 Streets. Mayor Piro Tem Brock asked for a review of the income standard. Ross stated that the income level for a family of four was $37,600. Fifty one percent of the families living in an area had to be below that figure. There had been new construction in the area which raised the income level. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-093 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. R93-026; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AND SUBMIT AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1993 FINAL STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS SUBMITTED JUNE 14, 1993 TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WITH APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATIONS, AS AUTHORIZED AND REQUIRED BY THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Smith motioned, Perry seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried l unanimously. B. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc. Membership Application between the City of Denton and Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc. Bob Nelson, Executive Director for Utilities, stated that City had been a member of ERCOT since late 1960. Within the last year, 1 • ERCOT had amended its by-laws and invited some independent power producers to become members of the organization. Because of that, all current members had to resubmit their applications. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-094 S AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AUTHORIZING THE CITY • • MANGER TO EXECUTE AN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL OF TEXAS, INC. MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTON AND ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL OF TEXAS, INC.; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ..--.r-. gym...:.. w O 0 • to • q..5.=_Q1.7.0., . City of Denton City Council Minutes May 2, 1995 53 A Sg Page 6 ff~I Perry motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance, On roll vote, Brock "ayelf, Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", chew "aye,', Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry Plays". Motion carried unanimously. C. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Haynes & Boone, L. L. P. for professional legal services. Mike Bucok, Acting City Attorney, stated that the firm would be dealing with the case Ervin v.Cit which was an employment matter. This firm had a particular expertise in that area. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-095 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH HAYNES AND BOONE, L.L.P FOR PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES; l AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Perry seconded to adrpt the ordinance. On roll 1 vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Millen "aye", Smith "aye'0, Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried f unanimously. f D. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance amending II Ordinance 93-164 insofar as it relates to credit card service fees; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Discover Card services. Harlan Jefferson, Director of Fiscal operations, stated that in April 1995 the City discontinued accepting Mastercard and Visa for the payment of fees and fines because Visa had indicated that the City had to stop passing the surcharge on the customers or stop accepting their cards. The City could not pay the surcharge on behalf of the customers and had to stop accepting the cards for payment. Several other options were explored such as contracting with Discover, Telepay which would allow customers to phone in their payment to their account or contract with Card Establishment Services, Inc. which would allow the acceptance of Mastercard and Visa. The Discover agreement would be a lower surcharge than what • • was currently being charged. The following ordinance was considered: • • City of Denton City Council Minutes 5 !l0 9.r2..., May 2, 1995 -5L) Page 7 NO, 96-096 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS AMENDING ORDINANCE 93-164 INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO CREDIT CARD SERVICE FEES; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH DISCOVER CARD SERVICES, INC,; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Brock motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. E. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance prescribing the number of positions in each classification of police officer; authorizing, pursuant to Section 143.014 of the Texas Local Government Code, the appointment of an Assistant Chief of Police; and repealing all prior inconsistent ordinances and resolutions to the extent of any such conflict. `l Gary Matheson, Police Department, stated that this ordinance would f authorize the position of Assistant Chief of Police which would E accommodate the realignment of the Department. There was no effect on the number of staff in the Department. NO. 95-097 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PRESCRIBING THE NUMBER OF POSITIONS IN EACH CLASSIFICATION OF POLICE OFFICER; AUTHORIZING, PURSUANT TO SECTION 143.014 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVER14MENT CODE, THE APPOINTMENT OF AN ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE; REPEALING ALL PRIOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS TO THE EXTENT OF ANY SUCH CONFLICT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 0 Perry motioned, Brock seconded to adopt the ordinance. On roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. F. The Council considered adoption of an ordinance allowing certain employees of the City who have terminated previous ® mber.ships in the Texas Municipal Retirement system, to deposit A one sums so withdrawn, plus annual withdrawal charges, and allowing and undertaking the cost of allowing any such employee credit in such system for all service to which such employee had been entitled at date of such withdrawal, with like effect as if all such service had been performed as an employee of this city. 1 J i • ca e City of Denton city council Minutes 5 5 'lam{ q6__ May 2, 1995 d Page 8 Tom Klinck, Director of Human Resources, stated that the ordinance would amend the prior service buyback ordinance under the Texas Municipal Retirement System. The provision was first adopted in December of 1993. The provision allowed employees to buy back credit in the TMRS if they had previously withdrawn their money from the System. Council Member Cott asked for the monthly cost of this provision. Klinck replied that the projected one year cost was $3,000. That would result in a slight increase in contribution rate. The following ordinance was considered: NO. 95-098 4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ALLOWING CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY WHO HAVE TERMINATED PREVIOUS MEMBERSHIP IN THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM, TO DEPOSIT THE SUMS SO WITHDRAWN, PLUS ANNUAL WITHDRAWAL CHARGES, AND ALLOWING AND UNDERTAKING THE COST OF ALLOWING ANY SUCH EMPLOYEE CREDIT IN SUCH SYSTEM FOR ALL SERVICE TO WHICH SUCH EMPLOYEE HAD BEEN ENTITLED AT DATE OF SUCH WITHDRAWAL, WITH LIKE EFFECT AS IF ALL SUCH SERVICE HAD BEEN PERFORMED AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THIS CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Miller motioned, Smith seconded to adopt the ordinance. on roll vote, Brock "aye", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye". Motion carried unanimously. i I 7. Resolutions A. The Council considered approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign and submit the City of Denton's 1995 Consolidated Plan for housing and community • development tc the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Louisa Rodriguez-Garcia, Program Assistant, stated that the resolution would adapt the 1995 Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Deve';jprc!,it. There had been no changes in the Plan since it had been presented to the Council in a previous work session. • Council Member Cott asked about the audit of the North Texas A community Clinics. J Barbara Ross, Community Development Administrator, stated that the audit of the North Texas Community Clinic was included in the • J • as ,M1 VII ~,~^I~V City of Denton City Council Minutes 5.,1.x.=-~~~~ May 2, 1995 Page 9 packet alonq with the responses to the audit. Staff intended to monitor the Clinic throughout the summer and provide Council with a status report before adopting the contract for use of the funds. Thu following resolution was considered: NO. R95-028 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AND SUBMIT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT A CONSOLIDATED PLAN FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WITH APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATIONS, AS AUTHORIZED AND REQUIRED BY THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED AND THE NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACT OF 1990, AS AMENDED; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Perry motioned, Brock seconded to approve the resolution. On roll vote, Brock "ayc", Cott "aye", Miller "aye", Smith "aye", Chew "aye", Perry "aye", and Mayor Castleberry "aye", Motion carried unanimously. 8. The Council considered appointments to the 1996 City of Denton Denton County Sesquicentennial Celebration Committee. City manager Harrell stated that Council had requested this item be placed oz. the agenda. Council had been as'ced to appoint a City of Denton Committee to work with the County Committee in planning the sesquicentennial activities, The Council needed to appointment members to the Committee and a chair for the city committee. Council Member Chew nominated Kenneth Davis, Beverly Williams, and Sarah Parker. Council Member Miller nominated Mary Evelyn Huey, Peggy Caps, and Mike Cochran. • Mayor Pro Tem Brock nominated Margaret Smith, Evelyn Miller, Troy LaGrone, Fred Patterson, and Will May. Mayor Castleberry nominated Carol Surles, Vice-President and Mrs, Bob Benningfield, Chancellor and Mrs, Al Hurley, Vice-President and Mrs. '%red Pole, Mrs. Dean Hulsey, Mrs, Louise Massey, Mr. and Mrs. • Verson Hall, and Mrs. and Mrs, Gene Gamble, J City Manager Harrell indicated that staff representatives would include Ed Hodney, hyra Anderson, Cecile Carson, Jane Jenkins, Richard Foster, and Paul Abbott. i .,rte-,r..... . y-..~~.... _ ...-....Y....d.lYi.. : li ;v_, • Ga ' • City Of Denton City Council Minutes May 2, 1995 Page 10 U 9. The Council considered an appointment of a Chair for the City of Denton Denton County Sesquicentennial Celebration Committee. Council Member Chew nominated Margaret Smith as chair person. Council Member Cott nominated Frank Martino as chair person. lo. Vision date Mayor Pro Tem Brock stated that the Cabinet had recently received reports from the four action teams. The teams were meeting weekly i to work on their recommendations. Clear goals and purposes had f beenestablished the Cabinet at the end of Juneoand the beginning of July. Council Member Miller stated that the Play Action Team would be meeting on Wednesday at the Campus The:,ter which would be the first official use of the Theate since this renovation. 11. Miscellaneous matters from the City Manager. City Manager Harrell presented the following items; A. The meeting next week was scheduled to begin at 7;00 p.m. B. The recent issue of the Main Street newsletter featured f the renovation of the Texas Bsilding. 12. New Business There were no items of New Business suggested by council Members for future agendas, 13, The Council convened into a Closed Meeting to discuss the following: • A. Legal Matters Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.071 1. Considered action in Dawson y, City of nntn, B. Real Estate Under TEX. GOVT CODE Sec. 551.072 • C. Personnel/Board Appointments Under TEX. GOVT CODE ' • • Sec. 551.074 1. Discussed City Attorney finalists and consider offer of employmFnt. i 0 O • W • City of Denton City Council Minutes May 2, 1995 15$ Page 11 2. Discussed conditions of employment relating to the Acting City Attorney, 14. There was no official action taken on items discussed in the Closed Meeting. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR JENNIFER WALTERS CITY SECRETARY CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS ACCO0273 v r • i' i • • - r4 ~V Now" m e r f - M ]1~ V1rf 1 1 I~ r 1 ® h 4 iv G k I O O r • • AVOW, 7~1K I~lilil~ AQW81tent, lntt~prcdtttiattaf Da d` `h'5~ "HAROLD FERRY" VI WHEREAS, Harold Perry hae served as a Councilmember of the City of Denton since May, 1991+ and WHEREAS, the City of Denton has been extremely fortunate in having enjoyed the dedicated and outstanding contributions of Harold Perry, and his efforts to make Denton a better city; and WHEREAS, Harold Perry, has always held the democratic process in highest regard and has often quoted Thoaau Jefferson0s words, "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"; and WHEREAS, Harold Perry, among his many contributions to the community, has served as a member of the council Agenda Committee, the City Hall Renovation Steering Committee, the Community Justice Planning Task Force, the Adult Probation Task Force, the Lalor Fund Committee, the O'Neil Ford Civic Center Complex Committee, the Tree Committee of the Keep Denton Beautiful Board, the Denton County Housing Authority and a strong advocate of the greenbelt corridor project; and WHEREAS, Harold Perry 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 Councilmembers, colleagues and citizens of Denton, and the loss of his services will be keenly felt; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES; That the sincere and warm appreciation of Harold Perry, felt by the citizens and staff of the City of Denton, be formally conveyed to him in a permanent manner by reading this Resolution into the official minutes of the City of Denton, and forwarding to him a true copy thereof; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the City of Denton does hereby officially and sincerely extend its thanks to the Honorable Harold Perry for his long and successful career as a member of the Denton City council. PASSED AND APPROVED this the V~ day of 1995. BOB B CAB MAYO EULINE BROCK- i ~ DAVID 8ILE5 MARK CHEW JERRY COTT JEFF KRUEGER JACK MiLLEA ATTESTI JENNIFER WALTER3, CITY SECRETARY BYt APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMi MICHAEL A. SUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY / 1 BY: Y C O 1 DENTON poa ono oaoo00 oo°~ ~ N°°op 00 ~ p OoD o co 0 0 a ~ p ~ °ooa ooo° aOaoaDaD CITY COUNCIL f • w • r AgendeNa 95- O/ -7rz " . Ag9rtdalta !~q CITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING DENTON, TEXAS 7620f TELEPHONE (817) 566.8307 Office of Me City IVanager CITY COUNCIL REPORT TOi Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM; Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager DATES May 16, 1995 SUBJECT; Request for an Extension to the Noise Ordinance Exception for Construction Work to occur at Teasley Lane and I-35E until 1200 midnight from May 30, 1995 - December 31, 1995. BACKGROUND; On October 4, 1994, the City Council granted a special permit to Brown & Root, Inc. to conduct construction work, including pouring and sawing concrete, until 12:00 midnight for the Teasley Lane Construction Project. That permit expires May 30, 1995 (Attachment the consDuring that time, there n activities. w However, Phillip Pfeffer dofeBrown ns Root indicates that work will not be completed until the latter part of this year. They have requested that the permit be extended until December 31, 1995 to allow the sawing of concrete at Teasley Lane and I-35 E until 12100 midnight. The letter of request from Brown & Root, Inc, and the back up material from the October 4, 1994, meeting are attached for your review (Attachments 2 and 3). As you know, Article I, Section 20 of the City of Denton Code of ordinances requires that construction noises end by 800 p.m. However, the noise ordinance also provides that the Council may issue special permits for such work to occur at other hours in case of urgent necessity and in the interest of public safety and convenience (Attachment 4). PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS, n:1 GROUPS AFFECTED; Area Residents. • • • Fiscal Impacts None. "Vedicafed to Qualio, ServIce .fir--~--r ..,-~+r-.'w.. I • .w •.rr rrri aiftlN4L: S' i W ' W f✓-" 1 • 9endaNo _Q.~ ,n 1l C~ u~endallen~ ~ Page 2 ~rF q Brown & Root Noise Exception 'a May 16, 1995 Please advise if I can provide additional .information. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: v1 4'm. Harrell _41± ger Prepared By; Veronica 5. R~len Administrative Assistant 11 Approved By, Aep Portugal Assistant to the Cit Manager Attachments: 1. Permit granted October 4, 1994 • 2, Letter of Request from Brown & Root 3. October 4, 1995 Back-up material 4. Noise ordinance ® • 4 0 • • 4~endeNo..g. agendalfeRZ„~~_ SPECIAL EXEMPTION GRANTED FROM THE CI4jftPGC1UNCIkL31C_g5 TO THE NOISE ORDINANCE TO BROWN & ROOT, INC. FOR TEASLEY LANE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT ON FM 2181 from I-35E to and including a small portion of Lillian Miller Parkway and I-35E immediately east and west of FM 2181. FROM Through May 30, 1995 FOR THE PURPOSE OF: Construction in,! M. and sawlnq concrete UNTIL 12:00 A.M. LOCATION: FM 2181 from I-35E to and IT ding a small portion of Lillian Miller Parkway and 1435E immediately east and west of FM 2181. ORGANIZATION CONTACT: Phillip Pfeffer, Brown & Root, Inc. TELEPHONE NUMBER: (817)280-0502 C E R T I F I C A T E • I certify that this exemption was approved by the City Council at its meeting on the 4th day of October, 1994 . b City Secretary • • POLICE CONTACT: Lt, Paul Abbott TELEPHONE NUMBER: 383-7942 ~a agendalterr~S 'rte ~arr~ }tea BROWN & ROOT, INC. u 6 P. O. BOX 2024 HURST, TEXAS 760,53 May 9, 1995 i Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Denton Denton, Texas 76201 RE; Noise Ordinance Permit Extension Dear Mayor and Council Members: Brown and Root, Inc, requests an extension to the permit that the City issued to us on October 4, 1994 to saw concrete at Teasley Lane and 1-35 E at night. The current permit expires May 30, 1995 but all of our concrete work will not be completed until the latter part of this year. We request an extension to December 31, 1995. Thank you for your consideration. Yours very truly, Phil lip tl' • • • . gendaliem AOI*l S,11a- a* &I CITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 / TELEPHONE (817) r,ti&8307 Office of the City Manager MEMORANDUM TOi Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager FRONS Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager DAT8i September 30, 1994 SUBJBCTs Variance to the Noise Ordinance Currently, Brown and Root and J.D. Abrams are rebuilding Teasley. Their current method of operation is to pour concrete paving from 9:00 a.m. in the morning until 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon. This current kind of pouring schedule means that they begin sawing on the concrete at about 4:00 in the afternoon and the complete the sawing at about 10:00 p.m. The existing noise ordinance which is attached indicates that construction noises must stop at 8:30 p.m. Thus the need for a variance to this ordinance. The contractor has advised that if the weather holds this variance would be needed for the next eight months, but only for short periods of time during that time period. For instance, pouring on the south bound lanes usually ends between 3:00 and 4:00 p.m. necessitating sawing until 10:00 p.m. This will last for another week or so. Later in the year or next year, the north bound lanes will be poured. Because of cooler weather, the concrete curing time will be longer so the sawing will be later; thus the midnight cut off time. Interspersed with these major pours will be smaller ones at intersections, etc, that may also run past the noises ordinance deadline; thus the eight month time frame. • I would stress the contractors statement about the sporadic time table; i.e. we will not be sawing late for the next eight months. Rather, our estimate is maybe 20 or 30 days at various locations over the whole two mile project, we have visited with the _ontractor, and he has pledged to try to minimize the noise as much j as possible. Therefore, we would recommend granting a variance to the noise ordinance until midnight through May 30, 1995, "I)edicated to Quality Service" • O • w • .gendeNn ~^,o~daNo y Lloyd V. Harrell ondaIto /!,Vd tem1....5. 448 September 30, 1994 Page 2 If you or the Council has further questions, I would be happy to try and ewer tlhem. le- kick Svehla Deputy City Manager RS;bw AMM0058F Attachment • I • ca • ~endat~o ?.u.Qo►.AVd3M0_44' --02a Brown & Root, Inc. Agendallerri f>aleeltoad TX 76083.7816 7 q r (817) 2804602 September 27, 1994 MAX: (817) 282-MA Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Denton Denton, Texas 76201 RE: Noise Ordinance Permit Dear Mayor and l ,,;n^il Members; Isrown & Root, Inc., requests a permit from the City of Denton to saw concrete until as late as 2:00 midnight on some of the days that we pour concrete. We have contracted with the State Department of Transportation to pave FM 2181 from 115E to and including a small portion of Lillian Miller Parkway as well as 1 35 E immediately east and west of FM 2181. This will be done in various phases covering intermittently a six to eight month period. In order for the construction to be done in a timely manner and the project to be completed as scheduled, our concrete crew will need to pour concrete until about 5:00 pm on certain days. The concrete will take several hours to set up enough to where we can get a saw on it to control the cracking and then it will take several hours to saw it. We cannot wait until the following morning because cracking may occur before then. Times will vary as to when we quit sawing, Sometimes it will be before 8:30 pm. Other times it may be 10:00, etc. However, it will not exceed midnight. Thank you very much for your consideration. i Yours Very Truly, Phillip P e e j PP/neb A Halliburton Company i • c~ • i r Chupter 20 Cl NUISANCES" Art. 1. In General, 20.1-2030 Art. IL Abandoned Properly, 2031-20.70 Div. 1. Generally, 2031-2040 Div, 2. Motor Vehicles, 2041-20.70 Art, III, Grass and Weeds, 20.71-20.7.1 ARTICLE 1, IN GENERAL Sea 201. Noise, in) It shall be unlawful for any person to make or cause any unreasonably loud, dis• turbing, unnecessary noise which causes or may cause material distress, discomfort or injury to persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof. bl It shall be unlawful for any person to make or cause any noise of such character, intensity and continued duration as to subatantlally interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of private homes by persons of ordinary sensibilities. +c1 The following acts, among others, are declared to be noise nuisances in violation of this Code, but such euumaration shrill not be deemed to be exclusive: ,11 The playing of any phonograph, television, radio or any musical instrument in such manner or with such volumo, particularly between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7,00 a.m , as to annoy or disturb the quie,,, comfort or repose of persons of ordinary sen• sibilitios in any dwelling, hotel or other type or residence; 21 'rho use of any stationary loudspeaker, amplifier or musical instrument In such manner or with such volume as to annoy or disturb persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof, particularly between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or the operation of such loudspeaker, amplifier or musical instrument at any V time on Sunday; provided, however, that the city council may make exceptions upon i application when the public interest will be served thereby; • 131 The blowing of any steam whistle attached to any stationary boiler or the blowing of any other loud or far-reaching steam whistle within the city limits, except to give notice of the time to begin or stop work or as it warning of danger; (4) The erection, excavation, demoilnion, alteration or repair work on any building at any time other then between the hours of 7:00 a.m, and 8:30 p.m., Monday through 'Cross references-Protected migratory bird roosts declared nuisance, § 6,84; inspection ® and abatement warrants, § 1988 at seq,; insect and rodent control in mobile home and rec. reational vehicle parks, § 32.91. Supp.No.1 1389 i i • rid • f 20.1 DENTON CODE ,W~WII) 419 Saturday; provided, however, that the city council may issue specisil`perl4fitltl work at other hours in case of urgent necessity and in the interest of public safety and convenience; 15) The creation of any loud and excessive noise in connection with the loading or un• loading of any vehicle or the opening or destruction of bales, boxes, crates or con• tainers; (6i The use of any drum, loudspeaker or other instrument or device for the purpose of attracting attention by the creation of noises to any performance, show, theatre, motion picture house, sale of merchandise or display which causes crowds or people to block or congregate upon the sidewalks or streets near or adjacent thereto. (Code 1966, 111 14-20, 14.21) Crone reference-Animal noise, f 6.26. Sec, 20.2. Odors. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to create or cause any unreasonably noxious, unpleasant or strong odor which causes material distress, di3comfort or injury to persons of ordinary sensibilities In the immediate vicinity thereof. (bi It shall be unlawful for any person to create or cause any odor, stench or smell of such character, strength or continued duration as to substantially Interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of private homes by persons of ordinary senafbilitles. (c) The following acts or conditions, among others, are declared to be odor nuisances in violation of this Code, but such enumeration shall not he deemed to be excluslver (1) Offensive odors from cow lots, hog pens, fowl coops and other similar places where animals are kept or fed which disturb the comfort and repose of persons of ordinary sensibilities; (2) Offensive odors from privies and other similar places; (3) Offensive odors from the use or possession of chemicals or from industrial processes or activities which disturb the comfort and repose of persons of ordinary sensibilities; (4i Offensive odors from smoke from the burning of trash, rubbish, tubber, ehemfrals or other things or substances; (5) Offensive odors from stagnant pools allowed to remain on any premises or from • rotting garbage, refuse, offal or dead animals on any premises. (Code 1966, Of 14.22, 14.23) Sec. 20.3, Garbage, trash and rubbish nulaaances-Generally. (a) Storing or keeping garbage, trash and rubbish. The storing or keeping of any and all stacks, heaps or piles of old lumber, refuse, junk, old can or machinery or psuts thereof, garbage, trash, rubbish, scrap material, ruins, demolished or partly demolished structures or buildings, piles of atones, brlcke or broken rocks on any promisee bordering any hubhc street • Stipp .No.1 1390 • o r CITY COUNCIL 1 t br a~ A{ 4~ ~ d 69 fl I i A w 0 +4gBRd8N0._ ~~/~CR. Agerrda►ce s~.5,g_ . "fn CITY of DENTON, TEX48 MUNICIPAL BWLDING ~ DENTON, TEXAS 76201 ~ TELEPNONE (8 f 71 566.8307 Office of the City Manager CITY COUNCIL REPORT TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager DATE: May 16, 1995 SUBJECT: Request for Exception to the Noise ordinance for the Juneteenth Celebration June 16 and 17, 1995, Until 12:00 midnight. BACKGROUND: Elihu Gillespie, representing the Juneteenth Celebration Committee has requested that the City Council grant an exception to the noise ordinance for the Juneteenth Celebration to be conducted Friday, June 16, and Saturday, June 17, 1995 until 12:00 midnight. As you know, the noise ordinance declares loudspeakers, amplifiers, and musical instruments a noise nuisance, particularly after 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and anytime on Sunday (Attachment 1), The ordinance does, however, provide that the City Council may make exceptions when the public interest is served, For several years the Juneteenth Festivities have enjoyed much j success due to the support of the community and coordination between the planning committee and City Departments, Mr. Gillespie and the Staff at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation Center have worked closely with the Committee and they anticipate another ' successful Celebration. The Juneteenth Celebration, held annually at Fred Moore Park, Q includes food and information booths, games and activities, a dance contest, softball tournament, and a parade, This year, events have been scheduled from 6100 p.m. until 1100 p.m, on Friday, June 16, and from 8:00 a.m. until 11100 p.m. on Saturday, June 17, The Committee reports that booths will be taken down at 8:00 p.m. and all other activities will conclude by 11:00 p.m. However, the ' s request is to grant the exception until 12:00 midnight to allow staff and volunteers time to remove remaining equipment and supplies. The Parks and Recreation Department has extended the regular Fred Moore Park hours until midnight to accommodate the activities, a " Dedicutrd to Qunlltl' Sen Ire O 0 • • 'ltteritltlte ~~.5 8 , PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS, OR GROUPS AFFECTED: y'r1 JAL 1~z Juneteenth Celebration attenders and neighborhood residen s. Fiscal Imoacti None. Please advise if I can provide additional information. RESPE TFULLY SUBMITTED: 1 y V. Harrell City Manager Prepared By: 1 Veronica 3. RolZen~ Administrative Assistant II Approved By: Jose Portugal mil/ Assistant to the C y Manager • !f Attachments: I. Noise Ordinance 2, Information Regarding Juneteenth Committee and Activities 3. Juneteenth Celebration Flyer r a • 'gendaNo. .+►gondalf9nZc~.. Chapter 20 NUISANCES$ Art, 1, In General, H 20.1-20.30 Art. II. Abandoned Property, If 20.31-2070 Div. 1. Generally, H 20.31-20.40 Div. 2. }motor Vehicles, H 2041-20.70 Art. III. Grace and weeds, 11120-11-20-73 ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 20-1. Noise, si It shall be unlawful for any person to make or cause any unreasonably loud, dis. turbing, unnecessary noise which causes or may cause material distress, discomfort or injury to persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof. ,b) It shall be unlawful fur any person to make or cause any noise of such character, intensity and continued duration as to substantially interfere with tt,ot comfortable enjoyment of private homes by persons of ordinary sensibilities, ~c; The following acts, among others, are declared to be noise nuisances in violation of this Code, but such enumeration shall not be deemed to be exclusive: Il The playing of any phonograph, television, radlu , any musical Instrument in such manner or with such volume, particularly between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7,00 a.m., as to annoy or disturb the quiet, comfort or repose of persons of ordinary sen• sibilities in any dwelling, hotel or other type of residence; 2; The use of any stationary loudspeaker, amplifier or musical instrument in such manner or with such volume as to annoy or disturb persona of ordinary seneibillties In the immediate vicinity thereof, particularly between the hours of 10:00 p.m, and 7 00 a.m,, or the operation of such loudspeaker, smpLLllar or musical instrument at any time on Sunday; provided, however, that the city council may make exceptions upon application when the pubho interest will-be served thereby; • +3; The blowing of any steam whistle attached to any stationary boller or the blowing of any other loud or far-reaching steam whistle within the city limits, except to give notice of the time to begin or stop work or as a warning of danger; .4; The erection, excavation, demolition, alteration or repair work on any building at any time other than between the hours of 7,0o a.m. and 8;30 p.m., Monday through b 'Cross references-Protected migratory bird roosts declared nulsence, f X87; Inspection 1 and abatement warrants, 4 1988 at seq.; insect and rodent control in mobile home and rec, ! ! 1 reational vehicle parks, 132-91. Supp. No. 1 1389 • • Agenda No.Q.~1.~.1...... 9 20.1 DENTON CODE ggere1lfont~_ ,xj,B___ , Saturday; provided, however, that the city council may issue special permits for such ~I work at other hours in case of urgent necessity and in the interest of public safety and ~V converdenco; (6) The creation of any loud and excessive noise in connection with the loading or un- loading of any vehicle or the opening or destruction of bales, boxes, crates or con• tainers; (8) The use of any drum, loudspeaker or other instrument or device for the purpose of attracting attention by the creation of noises to any performance, show, theatre, motion picture house, We of merchandise or display which causes crowds or people to block or congregate upon the sidewalks or streets near or adjacent thereto. (Code 1988,91 14-20, 14-21) Cross reference-Animal noise, 18.28, Sec, 20.2, Odors, (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to create or cause any unrumnably noxious, unpleasant or strong odor which causes material distress, discomfort or injury to persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to create or cause any odor, stench or smell of such character, strength or continued duration as to substantially interfere with the comfortable s enjoyment of private homes by persons of ordinary sensibilities. ref The following acts or conditions, among others, are declared to be odor nuisances in violation of this Code, but such enumeration shall not be deemed to be exclusive; I1) Offensive odors from crow lots, hog pens, fowl coops and other similar places where animals are kept or fed which disturb the comfort and repose of persons of ordinary sensibilities; 121 Offensive odors from privies and other simila• places; (3) Offensive odors Prom the use or posaaaaion of chemicals or from industrial processes or activities which disturb the comfort and repose of persons of ordinary sensibilities; (4) Offensive odors from smoke from the burning of trash., rubbish, rubber, chemlcals or other things or substances; t (6) Offensive odors from stagnant pools allowed to remain on any premises or from • rotting gsrbap, refuse, offal or dead animals on any promises, (Code 1988, 0114-22, 1493) Sec, 20.3, Garb&&, hvsh and rubbish nuisances- GeneraDy. (a) Storing or keeping garbage, trash and rubbish. The storing or keeping of any and all ® stacks, heaps or plea of old lumber, refuse, junk, old can or machinery or parts thereof, garbage, trash, rubbish, scrap material, ruins, demolished or partly demolished structures or r O buildings, plies of stones, bricks or broken rocks on any premises bordering any public street 9upp No 1 1390 s o • Gi 0 S~ Cir o/ DENTON, MUS MUNI; IPAL BUILDING / 215 E. MCKINNEY / DENTON, TEXAS 76201 DATE: May 9, 1995 T0: Joseph Portugal i Assistant to the City Manager FROM: Janet Simpson Superintendent of Leisure Services SUBJECT: Juneteenth Activities The staff at Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation Center have worked closely, for several months with the Juneteenth Committee to plan and coordinate the 1995 Juneteenth Celebration. A list of the committee members is attached for your information. The committee has recommended that all activities take place on the following dates and times: Friday, June 16th Gospel In The Park (6:00 p.m• - 11:00 p.m.) Coed Softball Tournament (7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.) Saturday, June 17th Coed Softball Tournament (8:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m.) Grand Parade (Line up at 10:00 a.m. at Civic Center Park) Basketball Tournament (6:00 p.m.) DJ Entertainment (Noon - ll:.00 p.m.) Bands and Dance Contest (5:00 p.m. - 11:00 p.m.) Booths and activities (9:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.) It is my understanding that the booths are taken down at 8:00 p.m. and that all other activities conclude prior to or at 11:00 p.m., leaving staff and volunteers about an hour to break down and remove any remaining equipment and supplies. 8171566.8200 D/FW METRO 434.2528 • 0 , • w I p e n d a N o. q j„,Q,, AyeedaaItoRYL.1t-E, 7t . Page 2 aie ti5.... Juneteenth Celebration As with all large special events, the Police Department is included on the committee and aware of the activities scheduled for the weekend. Please contact my office at x8274 if you have any questions or need /add al information. l Janet i>ry Attachment xc; Ed Hodney • A 0 J r+. _ 1 1. • 1 ~ 4 ~ ) i l tl `1 i' • • ' '~jaadaPJo. I~Q, w.Y M-:M.... ~Qaf,C~:91101 ~ JUli8T88NTH CBL8BRJITION C014lITT88 Willie Hudspeth, Chairman Sharon Ingram, Secretary Elihu Gillespie, Martin Luther King, Jr. Center Supervisor Bob Summers, Denton Police Department Alvis Alexander, Parks and Recreation Department Floyd Singleton, Parks and Recreation Department Robin Miles, Denton Chamber of Commerce Inersca Lochart Catherine Bell Harry Bell Lawrence Cochran Harold Jackson Al Hudson Meta Carstarphen Carolyn Mohair Sherry Boyd Food/Game/Information Booths: Elihu Gillespie - Co-Chairperson Willie Hudspedth - Co-Chairperson Parade: Inersca Lochart - Co-Chairperson Sharon Ingram - Co-Chairperson 14usic/8ntertainment: Lawrence Cochran - Chairperson Softball/Basketball: Alvis Alexander - Coed Softball Tournament Floyd Singleton - Basketball Tournament Juneteenth Pageant: • Meta Carstarphen Carolyn Mohair Sherry Boyd • fo's • b?nl%z JL1 e een g ce'le[Fation "Together We W111,Xeach for Niorha Aelghts" Friday-Sunday June 16-18 jJ1 Fred Moore Park & MLK, Jr, Center of fton 1 AD W11son Gosp4!_InThe_Rsuk, Friday, June 76, 6-71 pm knet4enth AaflYitl4s, Saturday, June 7Z 9 am-77 pm Featuring a live band, softball basketball tournaments r. and games for the entire fomlty. The celebration w111 i lead off with a parade starting at FO am from the Chic Center, 321 E. McKinney, ending at Fred Moore Pork. For Information on parade entries and booth space, call 383.767,5 Jun•to4nthAdu.ICa-_4d _Softbdl-tounamsnt, Saturday, June 77, 8 am Reglstratlon !s required for this double elimination I tournament, Team tropnles to be given to 1st, 2nd, • 3rd place wJnning teams. Fee Is $/X per team, plus $3.50 for each non-resident player, Coll 383.7575 by tune 15 to register. Min-Juneleent"- -ageant, June 18, 7,30 pm, e Margo Jones Theater-TM J Campus • • Co-sponsored by Denton Mothers of Denton County, I , TWU Intercultural Center, Junefeenth Comm#tee, and r ! Denton Porks & Recreation Department • 0 0 c. 0 CITY .ter { * COUNCIL; wa V 1 t~ L: I a 1 ~or ~ N W ` 4 i Q O 4r0 N. f QO~O , • A~iI~I No `d I Dote DATE: May 16, 1995 ,e1 CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance to rezone 3.753 acres from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district to the Commercial(C) zoning district on property located on the south side of I-35E, approximately 250 feet south of Lindsey ,Street. RECOMMENDATION; The Plamdng and Zoning Commission voted 2-3 to approve the petition. Due to the "20% Rule" and the negative recommendation, a supermajority Is needed to approve this petition. The applicant has proposed a compromise as shown in attachment 4, page 78. Staff therefore recommends that this proposal be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their consideration and report to the Council prior to Council'$ consideration. SSMARY: See Planning and Zoning Commission Report. RACKGROUND: See Planning and Zoning Commission Report, PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFEC D: Not applicable. FISCAL IMPACT: None. • Respec fully submitted: LI yd arrell, City Manager • w • +gendaNo ltiendaltttm Prepared by: rank . Robbins, 1CP Director of Planning and Development Attachment 1: Planning and Zoning Commission Report, Attachment 2: Planning and Zoning Commission minutes. Attachment 3: Ordinance. Attachment 4: Letter, Anderson, dated May 11, 1995. AXXOOA33 • II 1 • • i a • k96d3 No.9LSw 400I1daItBRLna.._,,. DENTON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REPORT 5 Case # Z-95-007 May 16, 1995 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Arthur J. Anderson 1201 Elm Street #5400 Dallas, TX 75270 Current Owner: RPS Ventures, Inc. 8202 Elam Road Dallas, TX 75217 Action: Requesting rezoning from SF-7 zoning district to Commercial zoning district. i Location: South of Lindsey Street, adjacent to the southside of 1.35E (See Attachment 1). Surrounding Zoning & Land Use North: 1.35E right-of-way. South: Apartments (MF-I) and single-family residences (SF-7), East: Desert Sands Lodge, bar, Commercial zoning. West: Single family residential use in the SF-7 zoning district. Denton Development Plan Low Intensity: Study Area #99 (Attachment 2, 117/, allocated). SPECIAL INFORMATION Transpoi9atlon Both the Interstate service road and Lindsey Street have adequate right-of-way and are improved. Sidewalks will be required along all street frontages, one driveway on the Interstate service road, If development accesses Willowwood, improvements may be necessary. • Utilities Electrical service to the property will be underground, at the developer's expense. Drainage Development on the southern portion of the tract will require significant off-site drainage improvements. • Landscaping Will be required at the time of development, • • hclondailem NOTICE g Nineteen (19) notifications were mailed on March 31, 1995, to the property owners within 200' of the subject property. Sixteen (16) notifications were returned, all opposed the rezoning request. At P &Z a file folder wns submitted containing 167 additional responses of opposition. Owners of more than 20% of the land within 200 feet have protested. Thus, six votes of the Council are required to approve the zoning change to Commercial. HISTORY The land has been undeveloped for decades. Staff fins spent considerable time and effort developing the following chronology of events concerning the subject property. Before beginning the chronology, specific parcels will be referred to by fonner city tax lot numbers. June 2, 1961 Tax lots (called lots hereafter) 14 and 34 were rezoned from the "R" Dwelling District to the "B" Business District by Ordinance 61.12 (Ordinance-Attachment 3, Map-Attachment 4). June 28 and July 2, 1961 Notice was published in the Denton Record Chronicle informing the public of the July 18, 1961, meeting to hear input prior to the final decision on the new Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map (Attachments 5). July 18, 1961 City Council (CC) holds a public hearing and gathers input from property owners requesting changes in the comprehensive zoning in fifteen areas of the city. The subject property was not one of those discussed (Attachment 6). July 19, 1961 CC makes decisions on the fifteen areas discussed at the meeting of July 18, 1961 (Attachment 6). July 25, 1961 CC approves the Nov Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map by Ordinance • 61-19. Staff has been unable to locate a copy of this map, and while the subject property was not specifically discussed, staff cannot verify that the zoning remained "13" on Lots 14 and 34 (Attachments 6.8), August 19, 1964 p&'7, held a public hearing to consider n rezoning request by Gus hfansch, et. al., • from the "R" Dwelling District to the "LB" Local Business District, on property • • 1 known as Lot 14,5, Block 350C as shown on the City Tax records. The request was denied (Attachments 9 & i0), April 17, 1968 The P&Z discussed a proposed meeting with various groups regarding the new proposed zoning ordinance (Attachment 11). • O • w • ~onr/~tNu.~,.~ June 50 1968 The P&Z recommended approval of the new zoning ordinance and that a date be st$g set for a joint public hearing with the P&Z and the CC (Attachment 12), Aagusl22, 1968 The joint public hearing is held by the P&Z and the CC. Approximately thirty. eight (38) citizens spoke either requesting a change in zoning, or rebutting a requested change (Attachment 13). January 6, 1969 A joint public hearing is held by the P&Z and the CC. The meeting is called to consider the public input from the August 22, 1968, joint public hearing (Attachment 14). January 8, 1969 Another joint public (tearing is held by the P&Z and llte CC. Consideration continues on the public input from the August 22, 1968, joint public hearing (Attachment 15). January 14, 1969 CC approves the new Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map by Ordinance 69.01 (Attachment 16). December 28, 1971 CC approves Z•1137. An overhead used in the case shows the Commercial zoning line at n location slightly east of the 1975 location. Additionally, the overhead faintly shows the zoning line as adopted in 1969. It appears that this line was changed on tite original document from which the overhend was prepared, as erasure marks are clearly visible (Attachment 17). July 16, 1975 P&Z holds a public hearing on Z-1255. Ali overhead used in the case clearly shows a zoning line which corresponds to the current zoning map. Unfortunately, the overhend does not indicate the zoning classification, September 10, 1975 P&Z holds a public hearing oil Z•125& An overhead used in the case clearly shows a zoning line which corresponds to the current zoning map, and unlike the overhead in Z- 1255, this overhead shows the zoning classification as "C" Commercial, May 18, 1977 P&Z holds a public hearing on Z-1300. Ali overhead again clearly indicates the zoning line as reflected on the current zoning map, and shows the zoning classification as "C" Commercial, Apt•11 5, 1978 Motel and restmiranl, along witit 1.578 acres, is sold, apparently, without benefit 3 ~ d I • ca • of subdivision approval. June 22, 1994 P&Z recommended approval of a rezoning from the Commercial(C) and Single Family7(Sf •7) zoning districts to the Office(O) zoning district, conditioned with site plan approval. P&Z reviewed and placed screening conditions on the site plan, A new site plan was never submitted and the applicant withdrew the rezoning application. November 30, 1994 P&Z denied a preliminary plat for a 5.381 acre tact. It was not known until after this case that the current zoning map was probably in error. January 11, 1995 P&Z directs staff to prepare for consideration and recommendation to the CC an ordinance amending Chapter 35, Zoning, of the Code of Ordinances, to clarify requirements regarding parking incidental to a non-residential use in a residential zoning district. February 22, 1995 Staff presents a report to the IW recommending the P&Z initiate a zoning case to address the apparent zoning map error. The Commission voted to allow the owner of the property to initiate a case without a fee, March 7, 1995 The owner of the property filed a rezoning application as per the P&Z's February 22, 1995, action. March 8, 1995 The P&Z holds a public hearing and recommends approval of an ordinance amendment to Chapter 34, Code of Ordinances, to clarify the code provision regarding the platting of a lot with two or more incompatible zoning districts. April 12, 1995 P&Z holds n public hearing and on a 2.3 vote fails to recommend approval of a rezoning from the "St'•7" Single Family 7 Zoning District to the "C" Commercial • Zoning District of Lots 14 and part of 12 as defined by the City Tax records. Staff has still found no evidence that the 1969 zoning map adopted by ordinance in January 1969, has ever been amended for the subject area by ordinance. The official zoning map has shown the current C zoning district boundary line since at least 1975. Based on the chronology, Lots 14 and 34 were rezoned from the "R" Dwelling District to the "B" Business District in June 2, 1961, by Ordinance 61-12 (Attachment 3). Lots 12 and 13 (Attachment 4) were not included in this rezoning, and research has not rmcovered any ordinance that ever changed these two lots from the "R" Dwelling District, or from the current SF-7 zoning district. ~I • A r • ca • UL- On July 25, 1961, the City Council adopted n ne~% rehensive Zonin .qS Ordinance and Map. A copy of this map has not been found, however, it is highly 7 tg~ unlikely that a property rezoned by Ordinance six-weeks earlier would be changed V only a few weeks later by this map, Unfortunately, without said map, verification is impossible. So, from June 2, 1961, until January 14, 1969, stuff cannot say in what zoning district Lots 14 and 34 were classified. On January 14, 1969, Ordinance 69.01 was approved by the City Council adopting a new Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map. This map is available and shows the zoning as in Attachment 18. No record of any zoning action between 1969 and the present day, can be found which changes lire zoning line shown on the adopted 1969 zoning map, Further research at the Appraisal District shows that lots 13 and 14 are valued as commercial properties, as is Lot 14.5 (Attachments 19.22). Apparently, this appraisal classification wns on the city's tax records. Unfortunately, it is not dated, but these records were used when the tax appraisal district was created, so the commercial appraisal has existed since at least 1982, OTHER ANALYSIS The subject property is located in a low intensity area. The intensity study area where this proposal is located was analyzed on the basis of what the zoning map and current land uses reflected on August 6, 1990 (Attachment 2). Since the zoning map has indicated a Commercial zoning district since 1975, apparently In error, and there has been no activity changing the August 6, 1990, analysis, the 117% intensity trip allocation already includes the subject property as vacant commercially zoned land. This rezoning will neither inerense, nor decrease, the overall intensity allocation, It should be noted that an intensity analysis done on the basis of the 1969 zoning shows it reduction in the overall intensity allocation by (ai 2282 intensity trips. The analysis is as follows: Overall intensity= 3.753 acres x 42 (rips/clay/gross acre= 157.62 intensity trips. Proposal intensity=3,753 acres x 650 t/d/ga=2439.45 intensity trips. The analysis also shows that the proposed rezoning is not consistent with the Denton Development Plan's policy on proportionate share. • The next two tests are separation and concentration. The proposal is inconsistent w;rh the separation policy in that it is within 1/2 mile of another commercial concentration. It is consistent with the concentration policy in that the subject property is less than 5 acres. • When a proposal is inconsistent with the proportionate share policy, other • • planning considerations are used to further evaluate a proposal. These other considerations are: L Public Faclllties. The subject property has access to a six (6) inch water line on Lindsey 5 A ca A Street, and sewer from an eight (8) inch line in the 1.35E access§4! Street access is available from the 1-3SE access road. Cpa 2. Topography. U T1ne property has been vacant for decades and is covered with a noticeable amount of trees and undergrowth. The southern portion of the property would require some drainage improvements, the northern portion would not. 3. Surrounding Land Use. There is an established residential neighborhood to the northwest that has been adamantly opposed to everything associated with using the subject property for a hotel/motel. However, they have made it clear, on the record, that they are willing to meet with the applicant to discuss commercial or office uses acceptable to the neighborhood. To the southeast is the Desert Sands Hotel and a building that has been used at various times as a restaurant, and as a bar. To the south is more single family development, and some multi-family development directly adjacent to the subject property. To the north is 1.35E. Thi., is an extremely difficult evaluation to make. The northern portion of the property has a number of qualities that would make it attractive for nonresidential development, the most important of which is the direct access to the I.35E frontage road. The southern half of the property possesses less of the qualities that make it attractive for nonresidential development. It currently has no direct road access, except to the north on the 1-35E access road, and across an SF-7 zoned tract (which is not part of this petition), which has frontage on Willowwood, 4. Other Policies. Depending on a particular point-of-view, this proposal would seem to support Policies 4, and 7. 'These policies are; 1 Policy 4. Promote the development of a stable and diversified economic base to generate increasing job opportunities and a broader tax base, A Vic applicants will maintain that this proposal svill broaden the ray base and increase job opportunities in that a portion of groad drat has been vacant and undeveloped would now he developed (as a morel), If the Planning and Zoning Convnlssion recummendarion 0 overturned by the City Council, A 0 Policy 7. Encourage a spatial pattern of land use development which reduces the cost of public services and infrastructure. 771is proposed will rake advantage of the fact that mater, wastewater, and trap vportatlon access IT available, thus reducing a 0 • • O~LLA. the cost of public sen-ices and infrastructiav in that no additional services are required. Addldonally, this proposal 1V "TU "infill" development in that a long tune vacant property within the city Is proposed for development rather than another location on the fringe of the city. Again, depending on point-of-view, policies that this proposal would seem to be inconsistent with are Policies 2, 9, 10, and 14. Policy 2. Promote and encourage balanced growth so that development takes place equitably in all planning areas of the city. !here are a number of other horels1motels within the immediate area, and the addition of another motel could be viewed as inconsistent with this policy. Policy 9. Protection of residential neighborhoods from the intrusion of incompatible land uses, traffic, noise and pollution. The City Council is the uhhnale arbiter (short of a fctage) of what would he an incompatible land use for this piece of property. Clearly, those opposed think Commercial zoning (rand the uses allowed therein) wotdd be Incompatible with the surroruhdhrg neighborhood. Also as clearly, the applicant thinks othenvise. However, representatives of the neighborhood have t stared on the record cat the planning and Zoning Comm&slon that they are not opposed to all commerclal uses. Generally, the impression given to staff is that the neighborhood & opposed to ulentif7able "nighitime" uses. Additionally, there has been orre retorting and site plan that received a recommendation of approval from the Planning & Zoning Comnisdon (June 22, 1994), that the applicant did not take fonvard, and subsequently withdrew. 7here is- no proposal for she plan review associated with this regtiest. Policy 10. Improve the design, image and character of the city by preserving existing vegetation and nntural topography and encouraging adequate landscaping in new developments, The current request does not include any proposal for site plan review where the Planning & Zoning CommUsion, staff, and xneral public would have (lie opporinnity to evahtate how a , • ti' 1 • Wecific request nvould accomplish this policy, Additionally, the June 22, 1994, Planning & Zoning recommendation was not j satisfactory either to the applicant (they apparently did not like III tae site plan requirements imposed by the P&-Z), or the neighbors (they do not t+-ant a hoiellmotel in (lie neighborhood irregardless of any site plan requirements that would mlilgate the • O I , • 5 l to _ project's Lrrnc+cr). 195 110 89 With that in mind, the staff initially considered recommending C or O zoning on C1(~f the northern half, and Multi-Family (MF) on the southern half to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Comparison of the C and O districts shows [hat there is it substantial intensity difference (650 trips/acre for C, 350 trips/acre for O), and the list of uses in O could he less initvsivc than uses listed in the C district (Attachments 24 & 25), FFowever, rezoning to O would create an extremely odd shaped potential lot which would make development more difficult. MF•R on the southern portion would act as a transition from the C or O zoning district to the SF-7 to the south. While a good idea in theory, the ordinance amendment prohibiting platting of lots with incompatible zoning districts made it unworkable in reality. RECOMMENDATION Ultimately, there are Iwo equally important issues to address within this; request. The first issue is the same as with any rezoning request. Whether the subject property is suitable property for non-residential development, in light of the existing regulations in the City of Denton, or whether it is better suited to the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district. The second issue, at least to the applicant, is a matter of fairness, The zoning map has reflected since 1975 an apparently erroneous zoning line. In the period between 1975 and today, a development decision was made, and property purchased, in part on the basis of that apparently erroneous line, The proposal is inconsistent with the Proportionate Share and Separation policies of the Dealon Development Plan, However, because all the analysis of the study area was done o,t the basis of [he 1975 zoning line, the proposal will not cause the study wren to be any more over allormed than it already is, nor will it reduce the amount of over allocation. Other zoning districts would reduce overall intensity, but offer other problems. Based upon its April 12, 1995, public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 2.3 to approve the request to rezone the property from the SF. 7 zoning district to the Commercial zoning district. The applicant has appealed this recommendation of denial to the Council, and thus the request before you this evening. In all fairness to the Planning and Zoning Commission, the staff • report for their meeting focussed more on the issue of the apparent zoning map error rather Ilan on whether the property was more suitable for non-residential use or single family residential use. This was partially in light of the fact that the Planning & Zoning Commission had prCt iously recommended approval of a rezoning and site plan in June 1994, and because the zoning map has reflected this apparent error since 1975. Due to the Planning & Zoning Commission • recommending denial of [his request, and "the 20% rule," a supermajority is required for City Council approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES I. Uphold Planning & Zoning Commission recommendation of denial, 1 Approve the application as requested by a supermajority vote. 3. Approve the application by supennnjority vote with conditions. s • 4, Send the application back to the Planning & Zoning Commission to recommend another alternative to SF-7 or C. 5. Postpone consideration. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map & legal description. 2. Intensity Area #99 data and map. 3. Ordinance 61.12. 4. Map of Lots 14 & 34- 5. Notice of public hearing. 6. Minutes of July 18, July 19, and July 25, 1961, CC public hearings. 7. Ordinance 61-19. 8. Detailed Ordinance 61.19. 9. Minutes of Gus Hansch rezoning (Lot 14,5) August 19, 1964. 10. Location map of Gus Hansch rezoning. 11. Planning & Zoning Commission minutes from April 17, 1968. 12. Planning & Zoning Commission minutes from June 5, 1968. 13. Minutes from P&Z/CC joint public hearing August 22, 1968. 14. Minutes from P&Z/CC joint public hearing January 6, 1969. 15. Minutes from P&Z/CC joint public hearing January 8, 1969. 16. Ordinance 69-01. 17. Overhead from Z-1137. 18. Zoning district lines from 1969 (adopted by ordinance) and 1975 (not adopted by ordinance). 19. Tax appraisal card for Lot 14.5 (29). 20, Tax appraisal card for Lot 12 (Lot 2A, Block 3), 21. Tax appraisal card for Lots 13 & 14 (Lot 20), 22. Location map for lax appraisal cards, • s ~ • M 11 111 ~+ui anrr~R .r YI M i Il 1 A. N. B. TOMPKINS SURVEY A-1246 , . , 11 aArl ma 11P rR1+wr. Rl rL~ ur 1- R1M111 "am w ~ ..p oft 1rR11yi4A ,1.14 `Y i t4: l M N ,,~~yy~~ 4 A rJ~ w K41x1d11,~ w MS1 A, fM+wl 1/. "~"p ~.r 1 1 rw Rr / / 1 ,wl.. rl / Ids f~ / 8 OWN „1011 ~1 IC 1 X11+1' 4~, / g i r y r /01 c / ~ pOgRMEi ~ • 1 I I ~ ~ i /',fib' ' ~ y/ ~ +i r w.,► l ! 6 o IMINARY PLAT o ~n>I r R CD E SLEEP-INN WTHE qq BUNG A REPLAT 0 ART ~19v 0 THE R. E. F N o w ~~v A TRACT Of LAND C f ~N.0, TOWIMS SURV CITY OF DENT 0[NT ON COUNTY, TE w GIA"IC SCALt - iRYN 00 M RRR fw wR ~ r VICINITY NA► ANA- V 6m ligh pIC r~r A111 + SCALC f ■ 1000' RRnRI Rn CR 1txL f Mr. / w► 4 M K ~Y1gR • r ALL that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated 't~f4rN, ~J B. Tompkins Survey, A-1246 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as follows, V BEGINNING at the northeast corner of a tract shown by deed to Boyd Morrison, recorded in Volume 2913, Page 161 Real Property Records Denton County Texas; THENCE west a distance of 316.23 feet to the northwest corner of a tract deeded to Harold E. Ferguson recorded in Volume 940, Page 809 Deed Records; THENCE north 0° 18' 12" west a distance of 179.61 feet to the southeast corner of a tract deeded to Denton Baptist. Association, recorded in Volume 1901, Page 698 Real Property Records; THENCE north 00, 39' east with the east line of said Denton Baptist Association tract passing at 300.65 feet it's northeast corner and continuing on said bearing a total distance of 668.20 feet to a point, in the center line of I.H, 35E; THENCE south 470 50' 42" east with the center line of IH 35E a diatancm of 199.61 feet to the Point of Curvature of a curve to the left, thru a central angle of 30 39' 24", radius of 3274.05 feet, and length of 208.95 feet to a point for corner; THENCE south 250 00' wrist a distance of 479.53 feet to a point for corner; THENCE south 550 00' east a distance of 250.27 feet to the Point of beginning and containing 3.753 acres of land. i )AT~PA&4r AEE004CB I~ • I91194:rr •su 0341.7 ANN ~ . moo.,. i DOUIPASr 018ot3rrloN east1 1-356 and tsrnard 9traat ll J; l~ wastl Dennis bras I^ SOYths Mil30wood Strait 5 v 7 C ' 1 O I C ICJ l ~ 1 I ~ijl E' li Iii i' j. r +II iI E jr r • nommo~o SI 7, Q 1000 2000 ® , mix" d • , ~r7AcI#M~N * ~ • o • • LAND Uts NANAO PIANNINO AND DDr IxPORNATION tYlTS2 C- CITY EO pEN MOT DsPAATltENT ISggJ Intensity area it 9f ---.-..r.-----' _ Trallio survey tones: 6643 $66o Intensity trips/ac b Boundary Deecriptlon: sil South: xtllowood at. Date: Oi lasts I-352 and Bernard St. /06/90 west: Bonnie Brae r.-------...r.. LAND vas 1XISTINO LAND USi - - OVRRENT ZONINO C-----RY UNITE ACRE! INTUSITY ACRD INTENSITY A PWMD DMX4PXZNTS SP-16 < 52 31 520 0-10>16 135 50.79 0 0 0 0 1350 0 O 87-7>10 Leis s1-7 360 11.97 1670 52.29 2146.18 0 ° "On. Mons p 0 0 0 0 0 OOPLiX 0 0 0 10*•R 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 ° 0 0 II'-162 10 1.98 320 0 0 OC~~ 0 6.46 5759 12 0 2510 0 0 INDUSTRY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p INSTIINAL 0 116.17 12169.9E 0 0 0 PARRS R/O/SPAcs 0 0.88 0 0 0 A A ° O 0 ` 0 TRANSPORT 0 31.63 A 0 ~ 1A>t,IC. 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 VACANT 0 64.99 0 0 0 ° 0 0 _ 0 TOTOLL « 22069 22069 64.99 1736 0 0 INTENSITY CALCVIATIONs (1) intensityy or" total trips (2) TsLps allooate to exlstinq land 3/1.77 tisws 60 22905 (3) Tripe a1loAate to current u~ loninq inci. P W 22019 (1) Trips (5) notisa allocated to vacant lands not tone plui~t iouilaonl 1736 ted unallocated tripe o (6) P--antags of intensity intensity trips allocate ) (2o ) 3 ( ) (1) .3199 1 - .-...r 1 ■ nus ~ ......•--......,.r.....rrr...........r....r 117 ....r....-...._ AnAr."Em-vT Z r3 • ca • • 'r AN ONSI MANU AM{ WINO rU ZMNO AND Wl DIATUC? IW OM1% MW, AS IT AMLIN To culAIR MOMITY AT HI^R 1 1NTWICTION 01 U MAID $IU91 AND U, 8. HIOWAYiOCK", TLW, AMD MORE PAAT2CUSa1RLY Dt3CMIgn "tiltSAID PROPINTY n110f5 THE OWCUINO DISj410Tt PLACI JTTi WSINR7! DI7TR[CT'; AMb DICT.ARINO Alf MOTIVE DATE, TIES COUNCIL Or THE CITY OP DENT" MEREEY ORDAIN711 iSECTION I. That the Zoning and Use District Map of the City of Denton, Texas, ? be Awnded as follow: All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being altvated In the City and County of Denton, State of Texas, betng out of the A,N,B. Tompkins Survey, Abstract No. 1146, W4 particularly described as follows: SWINNINO At A Pol At 125 fast North of the Southeast carne, of a certain 10.376 acre tract of land conveyed by Vtttanty deed frog Wylie H. germs at ux to A, N, fLrnbuil and US le, Vlolot Turnbull, thown irk Vol. 449, Page 628, Deed Records of Denton County, Texas, said beginning point Also being 125 feet North of the Southwit corner of a certain 2,02 acres tract conveyed by warranty dud from N. N, Turnbull and wife, Violet Turnbull, to John S. Morrison And wife, Arleen Morrison, shown of record to Vol. 461, Page M. Dead Records of Denton County, Texas; TNINCI Yost 255.51 feet parallel with the North boundary line of Wllloswiood Street for a cor r; 0 THENCE North 0 31' East 480.69' for a corner; MINCE South 88° 14' West 272.18' for a corner, THENCE South 41° 45' East 286' for A corner. THENCE South 40° 34. 33" ''deft 260' for a corner; rlim;f south 0' 21' Seat 82.06' to the place of beglnning, contalnln, 4,9 a.res more or lose. 1cc TTGN 2•, 'The Ctry Counrtl of the City of Denton, Texas, hereby finds that such change to In Accordsnci with A comprehensive plan for the purpose of prom°ting the genersl wlfara of the City of Denton, and with ressonable c our ideratlon, among other things, (or the charACter of the district and for its Peculiar sultablilty for particular uses, AM with a view to eonserving the value of buildings and encourAglng the soot appropriate use of such land for the ssaxi.vm benefit to the City of Denton, Texas, and Its citizens, That this ordinance shall be in full force And effect ismedlacely attar its passage ud approval, the required public hearings having h4r4to- fora been held by the Planning and toning Cosnisiton and the City Council, PISSED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of June. A.D. 196L. I frank R. lurow Wyor City of Denton. Texas AT-M r: e. W p Bute rill City Secretary City of Denton, Taxes APPROVED A3 TO IECAL FOM s_ ids E Holt Ct•:, Attorney Cit, of Denton, Texas r 1~ • w r ~ rl ~ 1e rl 1/ i/ iT 14 X14 r 1 N IS,I F 4 1 : I t 1 1 Io n ♦ / It woo ' 11 141 lob ) ti 4 a / I/,1 u / 1 A : IT ~ ~Iwo' M./ 1 1.1 1 its 14A I l A N 44 all M.1 w.1 44.44 rr~jr~ 7 >1 1 1.4 I I I - Val NOWN.Vissiaii • cu • PHOTOCOPY woce Or MUG a"= `~8 88 M 1 , E I. II At ►le•alet ad 14-4106 Cealnta Atr ►tererw • ►t•- lWaery tort t••tattftt •at t twmsoWW tbe eiattle• of E • ew eM►r•Wrer• aMlet •r4l"W f•I oft III&I of Woo", t •Nra~lrera~p,►11 We/m eMlb~ i = f+ee propsood • } ant" tlte•rd.C►rattele.leawa el ►leee• M Mrltet ut1 take "tle• At" tt• ►iaaalrm ed tasty ptrata•len e! the City of Mateo, Meet, will be14 e 1 ►d1l• beetle{ w the al•ruW FtelWWp t0"" talc ►w ►••N a••iry owie ae a , •t to the Mate • ti a to ttael rq•rt to tbe aty Qt••tit of as fatty, •of Matsu, Mawr. Net ►nprty, beariw et•te, go "emit to the M/ttrtet *War {let pre"" • t•eree ea/ U tr•pt r Matrtet water the ►rgee•t •4i=. j W" ugly ?"et, ~ w A a>,tttdll • ai •f Not", Mtt•a r Ar AcAmEm - 5- i C~ • July II 196i S6, It rtes r•piteN 68tl•ta1• of Twi ingrate. ~etwt.u, Isom ref•rew to t wLloslet of 9. tart Street at tut il1q~~g e to provide an eddittosel left of traffic, but this utfriew'K'ii"!Z 13, OaReratiom ►y the city for eight Vardt prorlde(`Ak ~oFAtoi • cussed with reference to the ea"ast of flreatme cod mot Wisll mm""" r ea glaed pollee or5aslaatSom, Tt ewe eu5geated a apeolelyeltti" •ald~i'ry eft 49011054 police officers he established and the city Attorney toe Imatnreta l to iQ prepare es ordiumo. 16. It war reported that ptaiidnary tr-ffic plena would be presented at the next regular seating. Has tjet adloureal at 41:45 a.m. Mayer Secretary •+tr+t, w r e» coos t e e e e a July 16, 1961 Spacial setting of the City Council, July 1$, 1961, 2:00 p.m„ )bwniolpal bolding, ` City of Canton, Texas present: Mayor Frank Barrow, Councilmen $puller, Meat, grooka, Taylor; City Manager, City 5acratary Item 1, Mayor Barrow announced the City Council received a final report from the Plaanlag and Zoning Commission rtcowanding the adoption of the new and comprehensive coning ordiums and aecompenying map for the City of Denton, Taxes, said opened the public hearing for the consideration of the adoptlo0 of this ordinemee. Item 2, Royce ktwitten, Attorney, ropreseatlog B. 1. Banks, end Mr. Racks appeared tp request 8.6 acres of land located on the southstde of Interstate 339 and located seat from Avenue I be clesalfied at a part of the guatntss District of the City of bantam, ?use, under the present ord/maset. A recemsedatim was presented from the Planning sad Zoning Commisstom recormnMlag only the portion of th tract south of the proposed Interstate Rigbway MW be classified as a part of the Ouslsees District, After conaldarstlos by the Council of eridanda prossottd by Mr. khltte, ed Mr. Banks a motloo was "do by Ibel second by brooks to classify the entire 4.6 sere tract as part of the gulf use District. Nation carried -431 g4 Kr. J. C, groyles, 912 W. Oak Street, rogwstad property located en the north olds of Kean Aveaut, and the earl side of N. Locust be Ossified to a part of the 'U" Local 6uelaeas District astpposed to the "A-3" Dwelling DistrSSt as recorsttdad by the Planning and Zoning Casrlilon. Mr. groyles pregated tentative plane for the construotica of a drive-in grocery store to be located on this property. Cara NO, 2 wtldon Knight, Attorney, and J, D, Nagil1, rape ting the Kappa Alpha Profanity, requested City Lots 2 and 0. Cloak 3034 be clesalfled as a part of the 44" Dwelling District rather than the "9" Dwelling u racomrnded by the Planning mod toning Comet es too. Mr. Knight presented aerial photograph 01 the area reporting this pro- party had been purchased in 1956 and contained approximately 4 acres retch would pro- vide eaplt o'f-street parking 1;; fraternity use. Nils Merte S6nttz requested prcp.rry descr bed as $11 aM 623 N. 91m St„ being City Lacs 2 and 8, Stxk 423, be classified as s part of the "Lb" Local tusinasi District, rather than the "D" Dwelling District, at recommended by the Planning ed Zoning the e"LS"oLocalugusinall Dfs tract, this later changedwbyrt he laanmeings ad part of Zoning • Commission as a part of the "0" Owelling District. • I~-rr~n~Kr 6 • _ aD • Ia,eµtr eL Wlu~arr ' v~11 lldl Dr. lob Home", Mro, Jmba rtor, VA. ~ We. Dtll Wlbk!'!;'llra;, Dr. Molter Yaoa a" Mr. Jobs tombou Appear" to protw el oo Ahab sue of loan ltrast from ponder i,- *1w street b6`a':►'ef1~~ District, r"wooting tbLa property be alassttied me it part of tba "1" trlat. It woo reported tkta property rime (trot ulasatfied as'rpaxr 11 I&$ District aed After aoatderatlee ky too Plaanlng sod taming Onsets Lee e• desigmated as a part of else "D" Dwlltng District, aO Chat ft. S *a. Hal Nargaard r"%adted City Lotatt and IS, Blaei 417 be classified u a part of the '.u" Local lualmess District reportiall, those lots Von reeaameaded for the 11J" soalng clasotficatloa by the consulting angimease and further reporting property immediately vast oo North Ala Street is to the 'U" District. liable Many, Mr. Sddle Craig, Notts Sbulu, Cleva Yeddelt And Marian Miller aM others appeared to regmeet City Lots 14 mad IS, Block 4!S rwth to the "d" Dwelling District as raccmms"ed by the Planning Aid Using Ccsseloaeon. CasR lb. 6 t. C. Doyle requested City Let 42, 1106 42) be classified as a part of the "LB" Local Business District or "LA" Local Wall rather than the "A•2" Duelling District. , Mr, Doyle reported several tun ago this property, prior to construction of a protect busiaass bulldlog, thra l "sing procndurss under the present ordimence was clasilfied as a part of the 1ueioass District. Mr. Doyle reported plans for the construction of additional facilities In the operation of his present bwiness which would not he paeeltted in the "A•2" Dwelling District. Cow 00, 1 Nat toles requested City Lot 14, Block I18-0 be classified top perelt the aern• traction of An office building. Mr. Iola reported plans have oat base drew, but classification was oesdad prior to the ampeame Involved in preparing place, Cass 00, It. Robert R. Nohlis requested a change to the proposed r"mireernts for huapftols, Cass An, 9 Mrs. Mary Claude Gambill reported property located at 1657 Bariptura Street K" bean recommandad to be classified as a part at the '41" Local Retstl District. Mrs, Cambfll registered no protsot mod reported she though this olAsomi4Kioft to be ptoper; however, she raquastad ptoperty located on the north side of Valvttstty Drtvt eastfrom the present location At the Piadly Riyly Bu►srearkat to the metal storage barn belonging to lox" Woussa's Univaritty, be classified as A part of the "U" Local Retail District. rasa NO. I0 Pat Hamilton and 0, J. Mocker protested classlfic Atfoo of City Lot l 116 . 143 located on the southolda of Maple and the eastside of Avenue 0 as a part of the i "A-l" Duelling District mad requoAtad this property bit elassiFled as a part of the "A•2" Duelling District, Mr. Hamlltoa pported plans tot the construction of a eultipla fatally dwelling oft this property, Case No. Il • Toa tiller presented A latter to the Couaeil requiting an amendment to the Ard- inanco that would provide for proNeslonak persona to carry on work at same pro• alru as his realdenee, Cote No, IJ 4ancy Mailicoco requested property located on the north skit of Wet Oak street and the east ride a( Bryan street be classified as a pact of the "it" Local Sttalaase Otttrtat, Mrs, Msliicoro reported all property owners on the northslde of Vert Oak from try to Bryan Street was in Accord and would like for their property to be clue- • ified as A part of the "LI" Local lueinaes District, but reported no Ia wdlAte • • plant for development. • ca • IwvuirAi, RiliDtlG AID u, t~l*7 "Or" u w T41411600ted property located south of the ENNA'Samilttif/ ~ ►►--11 Of 771 ant "mat of the railroad be olossifted ae a part of the ' " Lt t al ~ - otstriat. cc p Caen 14 .I~- O O Dr. gamy WChadors semi ft. 0, 1. Adams requested property located on the north aide of W. Wk Street and the out side of Carroll Street a alaaified as a part of the "B" huimaer District, It was reported this property Is preaaatly blind Operated as a doctor's office buldltg •ith a boomty :hop being operated in the building north of the office building and a vaout lot vast of the said office buildly is prueatly being used for of1-str44t parking, Item 3. The public besting was continued until LIM a.m., July L9, MI, Item 4, Keith MamwIl discussed proposed development of property mouth of the 100P Cemetery and out of Bernard Street ad discussed piano for the construction of $4 eparodat unltu, consisting of six units to each building and plans for a proposed mbopping diAtrict on the south side of falls Drive. kr, Maxwell reported the property was properly am" for this development. Item S. Councilmen $puller "reporting for the Nominating Committee, recommended the reappointedat of Almond Allen, 1, A. Miley, end Col. Lloyd 11, Wrrisoo to members 1 of the Board of Adjustment; L. A."-Nelson me a weber of the Flow Newrial Nompled Board, Mrs. prestos Naymas, Welter Parker sad Noble bllaod me members of the park and k- creatloa Board, May gaup u 6 member of the planning and Zoning Commission, sod fd J. Williams to be reappointed as a member of the Policemen And Fireman's Civil Service Board, bottom by Spuller meaod by boll to appoint members as recommended by the Nominating Committea, lotion carried. Nestled adjourned, 5100 p.m. July l9, l%l Spacial meeting of the City Council, July 19, 1961 at 11:00 a.m., Mueielpel building, City of Denton, Texas Present: leayor Barrow, Councilmen $puller, Brooks, teal; City Hassler, City Steretar•~ Ahtest: Councilmen Taylor Item I. There being no visitors protest for the public hedrlng to offer evldence as to Ole Classification of property, the City Council reviewed information and avid- enee proslot" at the public hearing July IB, 1961, with rofsrana to the recaernds- tlom of the Pliantnl sad Z441 ad Commission lot the adoption of a dowrehauive toning ordinance and imp of the City of Deata, Tau, Case NO, ( infatuation (umished by Mr, J. C. Broyles raquesting property located on the north ride of Haw Avenue and the east side Of It. Locust ves considered. Wilda made and eeeonded and carried that this property remain a part of the "A•1" Owning District. Cue Na. Z Information furnished by Wmtdon Knight, Attorney, representing the Kapp$ Alpha Fneer- aity requesting City iota 7 and B, Block 3036 ba clualfied to a part of the "A•2" • Dwelling District for the proposed construction of a (:eternity house vas connlderwd, lotion wed made seconded and culled that this property be cluslfled is a part of the "A" Dwelling District, I case No, Inforestlon presented by Was Matte 9hulta, re wsting property Jaocri bed as 82l end 3 N. Its S erest, being City Luca 7 AM Bl 82 ock 413 be classified as part of the "LB" Local Susiness District, vu considered. Motion made seconded and carried that this property be classified as A put of the "b" Dwelling District, . • ATw..ox%EMT6 0 w • 0"ICIML WILDING ,htly It, 13161 tvtdemee tern/sped by Dr, Bob Mayquts, Mro, Jake lldtwat;,t~'.'r Ml~'~.•{[t7' seed others, requesting that property as aasp IWe at IS" Street tree Ibeder to Mttlooe be elaaslfted as a part of tW 1" Dwellimg Dletriet uer ceatLtde was Bade seconded ood carried that thle property be classified as part o qg Dwelliag District, which would include the aotirs block from Ilea Street to Coagta sad Bryan to Lovell, VVVV C4l1 No. information furnished by Mrs, Pat Mergurd, f4llui lod City Lots 14 and 13, Block 41) be classified as a part at tlr "LS" total wiosa District, sod evidence presented by yAble elAffifiedd8eya yarteOf thig, e "II"t tOw1110f ViStadritt. was o nsidered. said Mootion ws ymode, seconded and carne; to classify this ptoperty as A part of the "1e" Oil District, Cats No. 6 Ividenca presented by I. C. Doyle, requesting City Lot 42, Black 423 be clatsiflad As part of the "LB" local Buelotsa District or 'RJI" Local Retail District was COa- sideted. Notion cede seconded and carried to classify this property as part of the "A-2" Dullltng District. Case lb. 7 Not Notes pteeeated information regtleating City lot 14, Stock 138.0 be classified as to permit the construetlon al in office building, After conslderstiou it was moved seconded and carried to classify this property as port of the "I" Duelling Dtetrir. Case No. B All evidence preaanttd was considered and it we delerminad upon the request of the Flaming and 20ning Cc siesion the oif-streec psrkloa requirements for hospitals to changed as follows: One spact for each bed; one space for each staff doctor; one space for each two employees. 0494 No- Information j furnished by Kra, Lary Claude Gambill requesting property located on r` the north side of Ualverelty Drive east tram the present location of tpe plggly Niggly Supermarket to the metal stomp barn belonging to Texas Wool University be claatfted is a part of the '1d" local Betall District, was eooeldered. It was moved seconded end carried to classify this property es part of the "A-1" Welling District. Cost No, I0 Ividanca end information presented by Mt Asallton and 0. J. Ionakur requesting City tot 1. Black 393 be claseifted as a part of the "A-I" Duelling District cos considered. It was moved seconded and carried to classify alt property abutting on the southelde of Maple Seat from Avenue D to Avenue C as A part of the "A-2" Owmliing District. Gse No. I1 Ivideac• presented by Tom Mellor was discussed with no change being reco oded in the ordinance. 12 A M&" Information presented by Nancy Mallicote, requestina property located on the north side of West Oak Street and the east side of Bryan Street be classified as part of the "LS" local Business District , was conaidorsd, lotion vas medo s"oonded and carried to classify this property as part of the "A•2" Welling District. Game No. U Information ptessnted by George Insal requesting property located south of the tnotl Subdtvision and north of 339 and cast of the railroad be classified is part of the "L1" Light Industrial District was considered, A motion was made seconded and • carried to classify this property to "I" Dwalting District. 7a ~ O a; • ts,+ • lmky 19, iKi.. lU1, Dr, Ratty Maisano did !N, 0. B, Admml preasnted MftdesMe •'„rt_ 00 the earth tide of W, Dark Strut sad the daft ripe of Carroll 1 •edo part of the "S" Business Distri g, wA1cA e t ofe m bar seconded and carried that this propertonsred be leasitied u a t e part Lt~iw t d, District. a u a ~ h $ n, Cafs No, lS A letter was presented from Mark Waldrip and others requesting property abutting on N. gin Street from University Drive south to College Strut be alafslftdd as a part of the Notass District, Notion made seconded and carried t1awalle.peoparty should remain in the classifications as recommended by the planning and Zoning Comeleslon. MeetlN NJou"64 at llr63 a.m. aweeseeeaee July 25, 1961 Regular meeting of the Cit, Council of the City of Den[dn, Tsxse, uLly 25, 1961, 8,40 a.- t prasent: Mayor Barrow, Councilmen S9411or, Brooke, Taylor and Noel, City Manager, City Attorney and City Secretary., 1, The Invocation vat given by the Rev. Edward Campbell, Saint David's 1platopal Church. 2, Motion by Taylor secorul by Spuller to approve the minutes to include the weting of July l9, 1961. Motion carried, 3. The following visitors were present: a. Or, Marlon Deshato die cussed toning of property located on the nosehside of fgan Street lmeedistely north of the Row Memorial Hospital, requesting this property be placed in the "D" Dw I1inS District rather than the 'V' Dwelling District as pro- poasd under the proposed comprehensive Cooing ordinance and accoepuylas map. Dt. Dashaao reported other apartment ualts were located in this area, it was dataratned by the Council this property should resWn in the "R" Nailing District, b. J. C. Broyles toques tad property located on the sesteide of N. Locust and north- side of Hann Avenue be clsettled as a part of the "is" local Bussniss District, and presented proposed plans for the construction of A drive-in gtoeary. It wa dater- mined by the Council that this property should remain to the "A-l" Duelling District and Mr, Broyles vas advised to follow provltoms of the ordinance and proceed through the regular tonlog channels, a request for roc less l fleatien, c. Royce Whitten, reproaentlnS Dr. H. McClendon, requested propasty located on the northside of Wit Oak Streit extondiaS vest from Carroii Street be classified in the "lit" local Retail or "B" Business District, Mr. Whitten reported the property owned by Dr. Md CleiWOn is a vacant lot imradiately was, of the doctor's office bulidinS on West Oak Street and Immediately to the rear of this property a beauty shop is befog operated. Mr. Whitten reported this property to be adjacent to property ttassifted as a part of the "B" must rose District and reported It was not known at this time as to what improvements might be put on this property, It ws dater. mined by the Council this property should roams In the "A-2" Dwelling District until tueh time that a petition, through regular toning channels, could be consldersd, d, Aoycu Whitton, representing S. C. Doyle dtoeuaesd oroporty located on the south. side of First Street between Doltvar and 9, It* Streets, reporting en existing bustnees It located an this property, and Mt. Doyle, several years prior, clrculatsd a pett• clan anJ pretested chit oaf czar through regular channels and the property was clsa l- fied as a part of the "B" Sue lness District. It was determined by the council this property should remain in the "A-1" Dwtling District. a, J. P, Raretion dlrcusseJ the proposed ordinance regulating the use of laud f speakers or amplt(ters in the City streets to the City of Denton, hit. Harttson evg• Sesced the Waco ordinance regulating sound equipment be studied and requested per. mits be carried on in annual baits for the use of ouch equipment, • A-MACKWONr YA r a, a OUWAM NO, 61.10 Q AN 001 YAKS AMIDM AID SUMARTM ~r' 2f, THE COW or oRDI msen or or wrom, T : Ttry OGNPREMnIVE ZONING O MNANCR 0TAUUMNO IOINO DI3 11f1(!, AND SIZE Or witDiNCS AND OTOR Sritoog R0 AID TEE PE~OR or I4t M OCCUPIED, rMS SIZES Or TAM AND plot o►IN SPACES, IS DOE THE LOCATION AID USES or AMLolMS, ST1OCTJW AND LAND FOR , 1110 MERCE, ROIDERCE 01 OTM ►URPOSES AND A'Menotf, MM IMO,I00 ALTERATION, REPAIR Olt USI Or BUILDIKI, STRUCSVRES OR ' ON, PROVIDING poll or►•STRIIT FMXIMG; APEI 1 C MAW iTTEiN SUCH STRICTS; INAVCES of THE CITY or DINTON, 7"", fly ADOPTING AI ZO3, III TKII OOD4 or DID. NINOtW SOWVZM THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF SUCH DISTEICTS; PROVIDING METHODS OF ENFORCXNM FOR CERTIFICATES Of OCCUPANCY AND COMPLIANCE, FOR METHODS OF INTERPRETATION CP THIS ORDINANCE; DEFINING CERTAIN WORDS; PROVIDING MR A BOARD Of ADJUSTTDfT; PROVIDING RNALTTIS FOR VIO, LATIORS; PROVIDING FOR AXDMWNTS AND CNANCES IN THE IERPo or THE CRDTNANCI; ES• DIALING WMnfCTINC ORDINANCES; PROVIDING A SAYINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (See rile No. 4463 for conclusion of ordinance) e++aeeArsers GRD[NANC[ N0. 61.20 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CANpUS PATROLMEN! FOR NORTH TMAS STATE UNIVERSIn AND TEXAS WtlAN'S UWIVIRSITY TO RE APPOINTED "SPECIAL POLICEPEN"; AUTWRIEIM SUCH OFFICERS TO CANDY ARM' PROVIDING THAT "SPECIAL POLICEMEN" SMALL NOT jig DWLCY• EES OF THE CITY Or DEMON, TLw, NOR BE SUBJECT To ANY or THE LIAAILITIO, OR ENTITLED M ANY OF THE DENIMS OF THE FIREMEN'S AND POLICI}EN's CIVIL SERVICE Ar'T, NOR TO AW OOMPINSAIION PROD THE CITY OF DEMON, TEXAS MR SERVICES PER. FORMED; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND DECLAIMING AN trFt TTVE DATE, MILUS, North Texas State Univarsity and TAxas Unman's University re;,ularly a• ploy patrolmen to preserve the public peace And protect the property of the State of texas on their caeapusss; and WIMIIAS, each of the said pa t rolma regularly receives to excess of forty Dollars (540.00) per aenth froe the State of Texas for his sdmicee; and MAW, it is in the public interest that the &foretold patrolsrn be authorised to carry Atom; now therefore GTE COUNCIL Or THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS! SECTION 1, net each casompue patroleen regularly employed bL' North Texas State University and TaxAS Noeen's Veiva refry vhu is paid a aootl.a; salary in axcass of rorty Dollars (}40,00) by the state of Texas Is hesaby ;,,thorised to carry Arno In the performnce of his duties in the City of Denton, Texas. N 2 That each such patrolmn, as aforesaid, Is hartley appointed a "Special Policeman" under the authority of this ordinance, and shall, in order to make such appointment effective, take en oath of office in the fora provided by the Conud- tutlon of the State of Texas. SIMON 3 That nothing In this ordinance shall be so construed as to render any such "Special POllcesan" An employ** of the City of Denton, Trtas, or so as to subject any such "Spatial policeman" to the discipline of the DAntoa police Department, or eo as to create any rights or Ilabilitiea for any such "Special Police"[%" under the Pirern'f and Pollceean's Civil Service Act, and on such "Special Pol(camn" shall be entitled to any compensation free the City of Denton, Texas, for Any act perforsed, or any liability or injury incurred in the perfor- mance 0I' his duties; It being the purpose and intent of this ordinance only to tuthertae such officers to carry area. SLCriON 4 or That if any section, rabsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this otdtnancs, the application thereof to any person or clrcum CancA is held In- valid by any court of competent Jurisdiction, such Invalidity shall hoc affect any provision or application of this ordinance which can be given Affect without the Invalid provis(on or application, and to this And tha provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. • SECTION 5. That this ordinance shall become effective I"diately upon Eta pa iaAz. ` Q1PASSED AND APPROVED this 15th day of July. A.D. 1961. 7 • • PHOTOCOPY ATTlIl~~iME 8 ~S`)&. ne°swsni rL°Cl"tt0mm a !p oop0t>. p~p~oru= mj&1aos tag ORT 41111411. to a R is400►ttOa O► A IN AID coataaasam aerro Dhabi !alAUtsrttt aorsto on. tuna s00Lds tlq !o oTOnAl~ aI31s N aoaatsoa A0 etaaa ienoTOSa mar Aat7l Aaatl !aA! tuT a oooo►ts TTOaraa alp Tlma=Or rdX uo eava 5.1 Atla is in GO, POPWATI00, tits tatOJe►l ttaaa of atnuraoa, ataootaaaa At0 LAaO pea f"m AI. ! Dona! oatwaaa antagaoa o! am PUSH= W6le1 1 hew o6 wa o► iata°aobeasOes Inu a Laoo it An 3 ,how araataal MPIZ o sett orr-eaaea ►uatno d. I asotR taoOttT o► 1 mmiT0 13 Mn trt or TU am f/ OMOaa O► Oa 1UM Q OUT 0 A NNW W a~nlt AOTOAt, to~utott b► a0O1 atosiolhiQ 0jID'a~,,~+uormnto ►Oa l~aooa ofll~~a~aait~~auil~"'?. o1Y°0 OayAt ~tlgV tm p~ptolAt,Tca poatTt 1441040• Tmda PON a001a0'►0tyO~ rI !!7 talllal or !a a SAID" QLMMMIII Um ID AN Avg. i TO OOO" O► I= CITY OF bWW MOT 01MAtOyt f„ BKLM.L that Artlola 13.10 through SS.at, lealuatee, or tha coda at Ordlaaaoo or the city of Doetoo, Texas, an an MMIF aradad W oW►lu44, for the pur►aao of adopting a l' haw awl oagnMalta aMtaa ordleams for the City of 04140, ` Taaaa, 161sh Halt haroartar road of follows, to mitt F; La'rt0ig 0.10 04atrl"S 11 r Cartale Wide to part 11 of this Charter Apo As. .t f1oM ran the Purrs" heroof ad rallw$* (a) YWS r I (1) thWords e fused IN the prdapt taaaa 1w1uN the wSwv, i (1) Yards to tn. 411a,lar aada.ar lealu" the plarol daptpdr, sea NW49 is ttr plural wwor isf., the alagalar. (3) TheNWe"hu lid 1M&:,! Uwe* the wrd I the word mp 3!. tat laataJds (h) tls word •aball• L aaa0atarr and eat d1 rod e lost, fhl Ado•neri Ohlltlee The ward elaaOaerT• rase a ralordlaa4 sea or halld4g dastoaar llr two ld.dt to aM if. dated on the lot Muu►ldd hl' t1U Y1p tlM Of taudiag, • • L .i 23 ~ O • c> • PHOTOCOPY • ArAcomew rel Allev \ As alloy is a u Mieh axis aaa 0447 "aa"ary r"a or 6:0084 to awttla NaNry. (a) et f M afarMal ra" a rear x flee W rfaro Is b 40t onset Mua " taseenat haaly~e.•, " aouPtod a tM rfalU"* eTda alrlA.el~uy~ tea tvlNal ar ~ra~ at ia. , S (e) Arertrat tauee r u aP"beset tau" 1a a lulldta` " P"tlea tlwreat %rraat r", dertoned a =44 17 throe ee 0 as111ea 11v1as l"yoonoolly of seek after. A leanly left" as a tvlidly e1Mr ftaa a 116%01 Wr" le by a" 00444 for rive or an rewf" are "rnd r" oowu"tlef. r~J 2"toaarr now ""Nations A weatwary wr "euP411M to as o"uyatlea awteaarllr ferried M to pee man ey a a"t. °j eltawtlo" lr Iiat]WAIWA/lr"tom et itia~, Wftettt fte tast44lalSns ar roll"A( or "441. S tinsel $40"PM"t fiber We %Mt a off" Meal 2ou"hald oyoratl", without the 4g1qq, Beat se a"ltiaa44 Pero":, eltkeut tM u" of a nfp to "vent" 4e otowtlns, "d tdebh aeao net oaths at ""rail" or "LO, its. qrW" or additional UmMs L the otront. {2{ >!wft K Let The Both of let Nall be 444oulatod "the W raarlJet t&l llaoi tone between tM treat (1) 1Mftt_ of Near Ya • Tie "004 or roar racy shall be aalaalat" u IY roan Mrlailt dLMrns MMaa 4o rw,r llaa at a Mildly after ftra Y ""Herfr LAS u W7 eexiis ttsia geerrviss *4 at rw iilei lwArf (J7 faD trio! A 4utriat shall eves a "stir or $be altr of aster for Alan 1M r~tlalin ioo+rrLas tin 40004&, lei+t, or wade at lelldiya a» where. lal ?wlltae. 120111.1• 4 feltiPla 04011126 is a lu1114 W" or M- f Las 'f vlpns Y a realdaa" far 4ew !71 at, - tnssliee or M0"►dU llvly yeadeatly of hook soar. ~ r z • • PHOTOCOPY AnAcmwow $ b& z - _ fi) 11~111at. oM.pMltr A sM.faalSr Owlllag tea dat"ba4 Wnl3diaa her lag Mssawaa tie" far sal ssngied y ad eM fsallr. (l.1 pelt lat. t.e-raalh t,efaall! aellly is • Oat 6tl44 Mtllalbg ►a ; "pars!. aauoe 116:1ra for W 046u. i fled u, el. to be o4eup U4 as a Ow11144 for mil two re"114s, fa1 pwslilen, aroue Rect. Orowp b4r8a 4109111nOa aM "tithed or 604!1• j Ntashed 404111q a wilt ea eae (1) let, u9wallf In appo ly reoa aeraratad lv a Walkwy of Meet. ,1 f e) ty~t A faallr to w or we aaa.triestset porseaa llglag u a siy1$. aaa-profit hw"uuply wit, U alattaptaled fret a Neupp . a 41r►, baara , ledg a rratereltr, e"ieeeltpi~ pap atrNlhltthtaar (p) tgiidgtr, larartb or arm HWea~NMM- A bel14124 so weraird bf &04 rtataiaed as. elootselr r4r etaats arrillited with as MaNafe M M+fatrlenal tell♦tg*e el. wigs»Sq, M 4-00 ydl leatltutie4 h[aMr latrelns, W tdwa wgel4ted ►•we1 lIgttiea, ' . (1) a~ae rar• A Ma! Tao to ed opsn and ed ued boo s pM4 to the ear lee With d bundled, , MIw4s 4114 MA44r aM the p ry use uumdiag same he front of uw lot, (r) Urems, privets A Cravats prop to a 0= rlta sapidtr rev w were thu Igo p) IM-arena gaU4lsa fed Ne4Np N17 Y for private, r", (aj Oarap,rublls A labile la day pramedd net a private Prep . es "fie bona, awd red hasty or Y an" tbaa three (3) aetor-drivra nblslas w Wart Ms ""dales are l.paLW fed aperltted, or hept rev wtpntl", 114-4 » dale, ~ (t) 6an~0L ateraM A atorap parya is sat prealsN, sm"pt theao T., Nr1Md Y a "tvets or pab114 t - eaalwlvelt fed the atnrye of rptwA ~ llai, ' (ul Oroy Yleer Are4 i• the red floor area at u epartr4t bm" eha11 N rawuN b7 taring ewts/N alwsaslaw • at the apartrat bundle at seek final. 14,01, *Aoludldy, Weever the floor 4,94 rf bite. fete ar 4!!199 041 reed far resldsxa MrpeNa, t 2.~ • C) • PHOTOCOPY k r ~ /r dlt. UUU (e) if Sd t1) the WrdA ar • wild td~ r pw%144 of A Wlldldp =1 w ws=d free time trertp tata►]talod pade at the Normal let it" or from the • "lard, Vowed lava, 1t !t!~at ar It M et=t pace W wu 6eta►Ltebe, to tie uat Nlot of tha reKa nvtode Lt a flat a&Koo* to the c- seek it" at eratard Peet., ad to tha was height level wtwea oona ad Pup ter tap er p016 OWO. (2) IS waeart" tho Mllbt of a wildlap the t411erty stwetureo OWL w o"IM4441 ei SdMts, eM1l 4 two". radio there, ertawotal tuupp~ad, dome or opired, dlrvatar oa=!44, peaehduao, "a. Water taw" aN parapet Walla met os. i eeodlas tally toot to k+takt. (v) >fOfel f A hotel to a ►ulldlas Oaeupted u a am" or lose t "Sma" paoo of ldloleuals WINS a►e= rill of Wlt►wo w►1o. is Wtttek, j r a rule, new arl 0"0104 did r far hire is akrdl "totem to aN Wade for sook• lot tkdri'oan me" k1d" it s1wiyLss t Pam A pollo ~ elalas raeo tar the MealwdAtlw at MM'S tau 12 pat., a" pmral "takes. ,.(a) LaattWyw I, ~ i AS laalal to • ofiry or DuSld tndµ aeuplN ?q oer{{ash utiu or for seek wd ooa a a" of re day or at of Oa-protle ostaDltd►a6ae •91 t. (I) [loserasrtdm 1 a ktdatrsartea to a $""I for aqn tit" dta oklldroo at poo.adhoel ass V WUok Stoatms• tin didsaeera ob)"t laaaaae N Wl~~t~t1l pwS are impoataut FoatWres at the ewrxarlta. 'y t (t) WALM SWAM A IaeeLS ha"o is a loudly ether tku A + INetol Whore 1Mdlas tar tied ar acre peredN Is pevidea fee 00"Oemett". a • ✓ (4) fat (1) A tot is Ladd "aupiN or to be aevpS d r a wWtldiaa or its aseosderp ►Wlidid LMI§dlas mob op" a""& u an ~ re Lr a Wddr pert n of this popter, see wvSee 1%$ "valid froatye UP" a Delta at"dt er "WOOL wir ofW"*4 plus. P (2) A tradtlo"I let is a pertlM of t lot that has been out Ott a former let, havlae j tae $1" llm K u ad)adoot lei to Its ( roar lime, odd the rear ItM of tie re- "1446? of the soreor lot u a tide It". I (11 A treat let lime is two ow"rshlp its of ae ralt lot vhSept! U adraeoO! to tae street, M :t'" le a todt lot l `Z ~ a Q a PHOTOCOPY a $ ltae Is tr prsNap llsa of %M trdit warship lw of Wssetaat late for lets w ulllnallt platte/. 141 As tatarler let to a lot otbar qND a owner let. , thrVa (5) is t" (t)loNral lei, " sppprrotattastye par'dlol sonata, { (N) Le t, o_M ► eoraar lot it a let sltaat" At tw 7faaaaetiea . of We or Mee streets W havtaa a xtdq or _ ao greater then 100 tool, (ees Wt LIMA , bt Slwe are tae pro9erty ovanlip lla■ , tautly a let, to deflaeA larola, j (N) 1atela- feudal cwres } A argot ar torrlat so"% is a Wilotod ts sratp ffl of Wlldtep lesttlyd, arnapL or Lad ter tegarerf Moeyyaatattf La►!at eaaMaDeatlMa for partly aule~a list to dots "I. H4 to we Parton 44440 too 11t" soar of weir aataaNllas Wad prov14104or tans ()I or sraa of wao "Ptah, (ts! +e~deatarNae wn rer.smewal■ya we rre a Wilal■S or pre. Waa NDwp/w by a us. qal tat at WIMM to we eeadatims J ge dlotrlst IN 0161 it la siAtlN, •.'r ~ (tt! Lafoa. 0allMa~a ~ iii A ealidrND4 auraq to • plase Ulan we ft" alts sotldees an 3Mt ter ewe. IMi at■a rasa ~ no tart open .pats tsar tr Lees. ialud" in .rA aq side, wLr er treat tar'd er r'f uatswpiad ' 81041014 ND L lei that is spots ate eno►akWW la we ay, ergl for qe eNtaaty pre eelsoe' at ooeetaes, Lana or poeehes, J peroso TU gotr a►arsaea WAND U44 L hrt It at thid IgaMUr taall arr ay rtawl poeeND waeeia• peeeeoa, artar■1! •anwa~La w ■wiatrft W tats Oro aMeeao ohalt 144144e low ataptlar W Ivnl W Owl IaIW '40 ~ faAla W W raar~ir Mader. r (li) PIANO 4 tL to LOLL UM601*4 tore r the 1H toArt Is is sp opaa "A orelstwlad to the ~ ee• I ' amts per tap Iur1?ae of waNDS to LMll ttas p►ew t7• 4 (JJI rhaaite_919 i) yl' A private alai L aat Wlldtar, W related s: :,6r~e p dodial er reareattenal W. posts opsret" y a private 1 woo o • w • PHOTOCOPY S r aa•rrat It Ssatltutla or or4aa(Nl tr see bro et ttd radwro from Warty Nom ~eebofa ia0ila to aulWed, , sad wore be NSaeltlN U4 darrla4 a tar motif, &ALU!r i A rear rd It a speed uaeeapted amok ►y 'i a willta el s Of a00aa@MylylW4 a1 AINta Mrs. Wtwie 4 Wildly ether tlMM:da` YL11 Me lot /94406017 We a44 IM roar lot 3t", } (ill 1Nnrrod preabn Jr` the tan rovoraad lreatap waao a porlloa l of a serer let treaties to street wbbb was Orlpaallf rlatted u a aide stroot. (arl ld6 a Yar+ ( ll A 0140 yard to u apes u660oup(sd spate 4•. ON the ea" let VIM a w(ldlatts elt"tod , betrese W butl4tas w Ms 0140 1166 at to lot saw sate"( Ureuo tree the street Or free tM !Flat yard to Me 'S Mar ll66 K the lot. (11 401 Us !lee Not a rear We or a fral it" Noll be 400"4 a $ld$ it". ,;1V o (ul AhUO, mils to i, U' A rr ot oo fa to a stable tb I&O"Ity far 66t ea thaws lour homes, , miss s o r sMa etor ~Y. 4orst10 uLrld, ..'j (66) 4la►1 psibito A Mlle stable (d a stable Vitb a ea1N I" p, tar care Um tour bores, W11ee r 0 be s. deeestla ulna, (pp) jLtyQ i G, , r A sores Is that of • build toms /e OW ourt1 Whores „ lwat Me timeraa or my flit, W, /M . .M. r, 3000 of tw timer cut w &bwra it, ap r, if lore 300 00 flaw d►ara tIt, ootM eas" ed bit oue► M ~.S oen se4 to eHlies seat sore it, , (44) Ron, fs.lt A balf eterp la a etdry waddr a '~'obis, bjp t pebrol rest, use wail plated of sea" an or at lout tw (t) extorter Valle wt mere tt1M /w fast sews to treat of pub alert', r. I+ (rr) swot The era strwt srws 4ulaato4 to the aa dVNoO YteFlt1o!t at eater 1, r 1 (sa) 4troe fur al Alterat(oas ,i i' derw rural alterstia0a us ebsep IN the j = 411lM lr~eelurra MuN ~Nra, f • c] • PHOTOCOPY, Ani4cf - -~5 3r ~~s {UI Trosiar papa t A trollop park to an area do 14:4 , arrasp! J or 00ee ter tee ta.Porary ea ay yes o- aaNlU tretler0 as! prorldle~ fx tee (ll or F4 inatsedod elot a~vuan~7, u a nW. L04 W air fasillpo, parlors by ",TOM (W) Oend cap fwaa A»e She tore used aar )ttaa a»e saes AS apes area other th" a street, 0110y s P1N4 mpo for ISaratllee ar w.alae used w{s• seotl40, or ter the start", sale or dueri ee or dlenatled ep w»ehod sue W their parts. !!L (nl 1W iddtb of We Yard r' The width of the aide Tu'd shall he taleulated ` as the sae hsria"tel dletanaa net w on a aid ,all of a luildlee "d the aide Ilea at the lot, } ARICri 1),ll mraee itt (al Coshrohaaa I" PIae J The " See at the res"Alloas provieod le +di~ ►utd II W 171 of this chapter is to aaae tls Where as0 of EDentted Texas late $is- t trista wls, dIvIl 6q sw 117 Art a%*$ tei of the Seat lolls t26 the 0 lTtf, as aataadel, is aeeer"004 with a eon- pte seat" attar plan for the pur►sre of pro- i the ne1Sq tfo healq sateh, awra s add sepal so rare of the penal pUlle Is the ty of paaees, lox". i f►) Prelp They ht" boss deals"" tot att. (11 140040 aaepeties in the senate) (21 ensure safety from fire, patio, am other Iaepr 1 prerido "*"&to liot add slrl j (dl) Propose the eroro"Wims of laedl (SI 0Told "due eeateetretf as of poCl3atSeal am 16) fsellttato the adepata provieiesa of tp%W3Wt4tios, •-ater, 04werae0, eeh"Isio papas, and other 90114 »tutrwata. q They have bass 01000 with pe"006h10 ossHers- tile, somm'ther thiaea ter the aharester of the dlrtrlot ad for its part tanl ar rstt- Ntlity fee particular Was, Was with a view r to aosse"lus the value of buildings sad ea ..,ragtag us seat appraprlete use of the 1. Ire1 threueaaut the City of Deotoa, Tana. t f AIR I= 13.11 DlettlcT3 ~ (a) Districts The city ar Iwatea is hony dteldad late aim 19) elsesaa at we dlatriate, tots" reopeutive. 171 ~.7 - • PHOTOCOPY • AU*JVAEW (i) 'R" - Dwlily Dte trio t, (2) W • Dwllly Dlatriot. UI 'A•10 . DW1Ily Dlotelet, f41 "A•R• • DWllty Dtatrlet. (S} OU" • Leval Retail Diatrlot. (6) "N• • toad WNaeoa Dls18.1e0. ITT 'x" - BuIln.u District, (6) "LT' Light laduttrial Dittrlos. a 1 (9) ONTO Neag laduscrtd Dlstri4t, u~ ;VICLE 1).12A -OxDIO NAT OF SIR 0317 Or DUTOM, !R%R!, d1 1961. } (al a)teb)lrohrnt and 4dertler of My 1 The bouwartea of the various dlatrleta se{. forth to Rrelde 13,1R a» kenbt atabllshad lM1aWaop ado tqaU` tlN aaam0 aareI d a ea the II, le'nbl . " III at, aitpp0laaFltr af`lh 14Pf_lI) iN CkyUrsaal ►7 "do at full7 as a tkataaampwfe set forth Q Mrets. tb6 teal My of the city of 049460, whi" Toaes, ohell be, aY IN aasr to harey adeDUd is sae artdtwl aM tuna duplUata amps to M eslitteo tee t7 1ttU aeaarding , swR r' whisk ohall nar ! alpatur► of tli Ily er a.,d W tl to hallos et tka Olf~l NerolaarrfT far ldeatltl• tift r even 4610 With Use final dpaSmW of his sea ord 1N a ee . (b) Vn of Wtva Mara ~y y Ill DThe 061 NtwutexNU196 F, shalat the Olt l W dlsplalsatd to the afties of the Olt? &"rotor$ to the Mwidtpal pulldlty of tke City of Deatoa, Oxu. (2) Ow 11NU 7:Nly =lot eMe Oltp of Iota, loaaa, 1963, Diroa be at IsRed Is the Wio* K lbe Dl aster at }tars lxd of ebs My of Iatos, Tara, (J) beat@ ,llsaxam, 19611rd Mllebe ths Al/Dli~feaaddt to ebe afflu of she put16104 iasposter F . of the My of Tat". ton". (4) ft e roamtriet Duyiteate toolad mm at the Olty of DNtoa Texas, 1961, shall be 416• Dlayed V Itw Alt]? Oouheell Mwtlatt nos Tor tM we sad lhewtit at tho pablle. ! (o) oeamnfs tam Nod?'"m map 2c the Otty at ee e e (1) It shall be the Nth of the D1rNtor at to "d ' cd of the Ottr of ?as", to ks.p Ilse ON61141 Nd D"llo DuDSIeaU Zoatst • Nspo of the Oltrr e( Ioten, T#1&46, 1961, lls tsd to Article 1). 12A (h) (1) ough -B- 30 Oe" 0 0 r PHOTOCOPY 0 ,3 ~ 8Fs • s aN lueledt06 Arelsls lJ•l2A (Ill ur•te• dote lad to fbit/'to 060 tee to rpa all slueoe a, ar tNosa ta, ar add letwa 14, aM the Dtreater of ptaala ,hall 10644 ea sash auah w W trdlaaa surthar and the data of usoe er tha wlaw• au Mersaly ash rush ohoadle of arMrat. (2) Is the event of a sootllet hatlNa the orto- Sal ialy 1ty 0 W Clty of Dootoo, toms, 1941, oN sly Daolleata 2aia~ IMr of qN CSy of Daatea aoae, 1941 th• 11441 al Mop shai1 M oe•elw ~sal7 pre~urd 2eola4 to abok tha Wlelal ►wWorla of tM dlr. trleta designated themes. , A1CICtJI 1).121 "MUTIOKS ;77LICARES 10 ALL DDITIIIDfa The fellwln`` "oulallone $hall apply to all Dlr- trlata list ad to article 13.12, and as he"lnaftor danced In Part It of this Chaptort P' r (a) nu No bulldlda er strustvre ,hall be +"4140 raised, y• rrW p1WH, extended, solar 4d sector kad, eea• struotoa, relowtA%Qted, or otmoEu"117 Litsred, sa4ept to eoatomity with the reoYletioaa Ira aerlbod or doots"d to be u44d or *coupled for sn7 pYrpad•a ether than ruitted by theao real. talztureisethiaNsUleltva14dl•h took ►ulldly, i 106 1a1tt Ile ►ulldta w structure SM11 be .noted, ralNd, construct 44, eAts"44, ala/ad, reoe•atrkoted er struoturoll3 altered se as to Wand the holght ` t Of too for M ld 14lrlell1, la.t7svahlW ildtihis erpit y ruetun I to altvat46, ll lol t~ 106 lot shall be reduaod or diflAtahad 60 that the 7reaar Ndt►7rTaw 01 Iper this CUPUP1 amrSmthan all the do"Ity at' pdPUlaelea N lrreao41 L ay eNaea► eawpt LA seafernit7 kith the we rdp . latload Mrelt atalish". 10 at""a"" 'F ter a pedal!,, atoll he LealMdd as A part of the "tflred drag Of day ether ptlldldt, 16 0 park to1.'w:' lark ~ dpao do 16"lof opae vh leh • eMlcIr the" ragala load N• sofa effati" or vhlsh wbdatkdd thdrote if pprt"Ided for 1hd PWIDOO of .agl7taa kith part a-i SI at this Chapter shall t1womettsr F roldatulah- ad or "ouocd. to say "ease bales the retYl". rata ataallaed 0 tart is or this Wytorl erory buildiae !w"att•r srwtN shall W le•a140 'J t th m a at be aws,# than d ooe bulldialt oto two r "a $ Pao a a" 11 ' let, st0eet as ba"lnaltdr prof Lded, i MCI= 1),1) ill' - W=I10 DIVIIICT The tollwlo` "tulattoas dMll apply to 411 al' - Dwlllap Dia rls st Ous heal t`_dd (a) (1) Coo faatly dvalleda. • I2) Public parks playfsvade, cb"hsa, publia or deeoel"tlocal ebsela (sloratar7. lnoW aldh am blob. adheols), "llspo a: ueitsr• at lss. . 9 . • • PHOTOCOpy ti ATrAc&4 vet- $ _ f)I arlataytlr~ea-or.ra) oee eraey,, r nut eel s«ludly a, *to" 1042 or lean tra•k,, aw t•h 141 Galt raar«a f•aaludlttt herever, akloln. "Ora. ° r'r' w ir3.3nR aaten w'Ma ntal im"bles , fS1 rep tnetWprNM er.Laty. er twreaH« Arorla«~ne°YraFw Maa,t;~«•~wa ..a w.,, t lr lel« erg eaMv. tae ee e u•• ae. >ret lded "At as be llNet P+rUNa, Yd to tM l eead r hen t«l hMld vote eheiaarhtrlat~ r le •M,lovedred (100)6114044% at any vtrwry Slw (a7 Ae«ppn•ry artidlasa, lna3vdinR . yrlre t• not more teu aflan •l.afftt,t ors, rloos 1«atod front Prep, rty lraa fafso) Cost from the tort free "I ehaar orarpa1•a, thee via (6) that «Id rjr~tat7pllaa provided ooavpr se excess o fifty e30) r'~iri*at at ~ e l NOr 7u„ a the ei • 1 eeae~il.ry anr7~j asst of the taiataar +as " forty (40) par- lorries srr. tvo.•t007 allala , 7U.4eush or roeNaatt~t"y' ~r, "f M 141.004 i 1 M7•ae other the$ to the r ,4 [~ell77 •tbt~,a fsNp) rise Nrrasl slyly Mfr t7w• to elo.(t°tautj «Mt at ra 'a ta ,•relal1, 1 _ SUFi44 the pr el•« rullrlg, t4M MH•aar7 Mt a ly'ia pessary this Uatast Ma N vaaa for pwure~p«•• t!M to s em"ralal M+a11 i«lyd• a.„Lt#o Wilea,ijrpa«+ ' f)1 NateearP Yew aaavNel«e, ` f11 1«ta114ttans or tale o~aq Nlll•l or privately G b sfIr lotatiess, 'tall 77 and al« Itall , Irsd'ilj"r dtatload; «tl ties, either prtvatsly ar W>l' t►) cerltl^_ ate` The tealow "Na W be Nrelttea . ftrw to fpr ~la,eet esiP uaa• JA the +R• A, Coadlelewl a« Otl610 1),d4,fi to the ateevr specified in f (1) Alrport• or aircraft 14ndle Nelda and alryrt fa•111tisd. R • ftl snlo~ra~ Ildlep far we tr- , Cotuy, yoder,l seteraarato1y ~O) day lpuree pies'led al Islas, Private ,oheels, sf say (1) oare orAmasers~'rtaa «,tt« (41 Metoa« televialae t+ees at autie teMa. t traareaalessnail e, re awtatateth or I fromft.•f.dldtt aed utll Mentor otetlma, asp ether rt4foear ® oPsrat «re Paquin" «at teaa «aosaary one to teR a, ~ • t • 10 . • o M MUNIOPAL BUILDING August 19, 1964 Regular meating of the Planning and Zoning commissAbe'kl *l i In the Municipal 6ullding, City of Denton, Texas, Present: Chairwoman Mrs, Lonnie Yarbrough, Hugh ~At 'Ayd~i'1j e, nk Camp, Dr. Robert Lockwood, City Cnyineer, City Secretary. I A motion was made by Ayer, seconded by LaRue to epDrov0 tax of the meeting of August S, 1964. Motion carried, 2. Petitions: a. The Commission discussed the petition of Fay Hunt that had been deferred from the previous meeting, After considerable consideration, a motion was made by Lockwood, seconded by Ayer to deny the petition. Motion carried. b. The petition of A. I, Brewton, deferred from the previous meeting, was dis. cussed at length. A motion was made by Lockwood, seconded by Camp to approve the petition and so recommend to the City Council. Motion carried, C. A public hearing was held on the petition of Henry A. Thompson, at al, requeshnq the zoning classification be changed from the "D" - Dwelling District to the "h-2" - Dwelling District for property described as the entire City block 342, excluding lots I and 2, owned by the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, and City lots 13, 14, 15, and 16 already zoned "A-2". A motion was made by Lockwood, seconded by Ayer that the petition be denled because of lack of adequate plans. Motlon carried, d. A public hearing was held on the petition of Gus fk mach, et at, requestm the toning classification be changed from the "R" - Dwelling District to the "LB" - Leca. Business District for oroperty described as Clty lot 14, S, block 350C. After hearing Interested cttlzens, a motion was made by Ayer, seconded by Lockwood to deny. the pent.:. Motlon carried, . Plats: a. The final plat of the Greenwey Club Estates was reviewed. A motion was made by Ayer, seconded by Lockwood to approve this final plat. Motion carried, b. The final plat of the Northwood Subdivision, Section 2, was reviewed, A motion was made by LaRue, seconded by Camp to approve this final plat. Motion carries c. The final plat of the Lincoln Park Subdivision was presented and discusse:. A motion was made by Ayer, seconded by Camp that the final plat be approved. Motlon carried. I d, The Loop 288 Subdivision was discussed, A motion was made by LaRue, seconded by Ayer to give preliminary approval and give the owner the choice of eliminat:c; alleys and tying on the City sewer system. Motion carried. e. The preliminary plat of R. B. Denton was discussed, A motion was made o•; Lockwood, seconded by LaRue to disapprove the plat because of inadequate plans, Mot:: carried. 4. Conditional Use Permits: a. A motion wad made by Lockwood, seconded by Ayer to submit an unfavoraba report to the Board of Adjustment on the petition of Mrs, A. M. Guess. Motion larded. b. A motion was made by Camp, seconded by Lockwood to submit a favorable recommendation to the Board of Adjustment on the petition of Di, G. E. Adaml. Morior carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. _v^ Chairwoman + A C Secretary 33 • • PHOTOCOPY ■Y M M p ~ " r • • • M r • i ~ i a r --w--- u ..r U V + i i i r • I i i t iy ~ ~ • ~ C ~ wi 1 ~-1IL ~ w + • M ~ y ( 7 r i h i s' • ~ i R J M o ~ F ~ 7 • i r.r • a~ A PHOTOCOPY 1V4 r t 3 1tRjlp , RM6'~J~ CHI J c. Bsplat of Lots 1 and 2, Block 12, Oneler /tack eras cede by Lockwood, seconded by $peaks, that the ~IA Motion carried, Meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m. Chairman City Secretary e e ~ a f e a a a MUNICIPAL BUILDING Aptil 17, 1968 Regular meeting of the Planning and 2oni,p Comreission at 4:00 p,sa. wednesday, Aprit 17, 1968, In the Council Room of the Municipal Building, City of Denton, Tarry s, Present; Chairman L. L. LaRue, Jack Browder, Fred Freemen, Director of Community Development, Acting City Manager, City Planner, City duaatery, Absontr Speaks and Lockwood, 1, Motion was made by Browder, seconded by Reereem, that the ednutes of the regular meeting of April 3, 1968, be appmyed, motion carried. 2. Potations: a, Public hearing was held on the petition of Herold Buckler requesting that the zoning claeslfication be changed on City Lots 6-U, Block 404!/A from "R4 Residential to "D" Duplex. The property is further described as being located en the north side of Cordell between Ponderend Malone Streets, motion s made by the petition be approved and so recommended to the City yCCouncil, Unt oo that carried. 3• Plats: a, Replat of City Lots 8 and 9, Block 3022, Into one lot was reviewed, Motlon was made by Browder, seconded by Freeman, that this replm be approved. Motion carried, I Fteplat of City Motion "a made by Bro aenlseconded by Freemen, that this l repls be approved. Motion carried. A 4. The Board discussed a proposed meeting with various interested groups relative to the proposed now zoning ordinance, S. A revised replat of the portion of SoutMdge was reviewed, Motion was made by Browder, seconded by Freemen, that the revised rephal be approved. Motion carried. 3s • • PHOTOCOPY ,►r RefpLr aaeeting of the Planning and WI*t, 191111 at 4100 4.m. in the Cc uttoii Ran" of Wo guidalPelMenton, Tetlae, Present: Chairman L, L. LaRue, Dr, Robert Lockwoo> Freenan, Robert Bpeake, DlrWdir of Community Development, City Planner, City Beet. ry, I, Motion was made by Lockwood, eeoonded by Freemen, that the minutes of the regular meeting of May 15, 19611, be approved. Motion carded, 2. Petitions: a, Public hearing was hold on the petition of Neel C, Hays, requesung zoning reclassification of City Lute 16 and 17, Block 169, from "R" Single Family Dwelling to "A-2" Apartment Dwelling, After hearltg p>t+Ponents and opposition, INhAdI09 a petition containing aLxty-one 1621 names opposing the change, motion was made by Lockwood, seconded by Spke, that the petition be denied on the basis that tots was not proper use of the land In this particular area. Motion carried, 3. Replat8t e. The Commission reviewed the replat of Lot 2, Block C, Brentwood Addition. Motion ryas made by Browder, seconded by Freeman, that the replat be approved provided that additional (cotage to the lot be provided. Motion carved, b The l HaightaAddition, Exiension3. Motion l weImadeeby t Spof Lot 25, Block Q, k, seconded by Crestwood , Motion arrfed, a The Commission reviewed the replat of City Lots 1 and 1. 2, Block 23=. Motion was made by Lockwood, seconded by Bm- 1,r, that the replat be -deals/. Motion carried. 4. Motion was made by Lockwood, seconded by Browder, that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed new toning ordinance and that the Council set a dale for a joint putlic hearing, Motion carried. Meeung adjourned at 5:15 p, m. - Chairmen City Secretary i ' I t:OfrlCtlOna: b, The Commission consldered the replat of Lot 25, Stock 0, Crestwood Heights Addiuon, Extension 3, Motion was made by Speaks, seconded by Browder, that the replat be denied, Motion carried. C. The Commission reviewed the replat of City Lots l and 1. 2, Block 232. Motion was made by Lockwood, seconded by Browder, that the replat be approved. Motion carried. - . ,~1-rr~c-N~►e~'r 1~. • ~7`~"~!~ MINT 13, ~ MUMCIPAL BUILD(gO + August 22, 19611,;;, Joint Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commit of on Texas, and the City Council, Thursday, August 22, 1968, in the M tp~l Building, 39 1 Present: Planning and Zoning Commission: Jack Browder, Robert laka, Fred Freeman, Charles Thompson, Dr, H. C. Roberts, City Council: Mayor Zeke Martin, Councilmen J. T. Jones, Marvin Loveless, L, A. Nelson, and Dr. Alex Finlay, City Planner, City Secretary, and Marvin Springer, Planning Consultant. 1, This meeting was called for the purpose of presenting the proposed new zoning )rdinance. 2. Jack Browder, Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission, explained to the audience the purpose of the meeting and Introduced Mr, Marvin Springer who presented a brief resume of the ordinance under consideration, Browder opened the ?ubllc Hearing. 3. The following citizens were heard: (1) Gary Brommer, Jr., 305 Mounts, requesting D to MF-1, Reason; It will raise ",a property value and improve the neighborhood, (2) Kathleen Floyd, Lots 9, 10, It, 12, 13, and 13, 1, Mock 446 , requesting Sr to GR. Reason: The ^roperty is located across the street from Demos Center and the fair Grounds. She believes this is undesirable for residential zoning. (3) Francis Mahoney, 1508 McCormick, lots I, 2, 3, and 3.1, Block 377/0, requesting SF to MF-1. Reason; The property to 70,000 square feet, and he feels this Is the only desirable usage for the property, (4) James K. Vaughn, Lot I , Block 4027, requesting 6R to C. Reason: This area Is surrounded by commerci+I zoning, Therefore, Mr, Vaughn feels the property would be better used it it is zoned commerclaI too. Lots 3 and 24, Block Jolt, Request: MF-I to 0, Reason: Property was purchased by the Medical Surgical Clinlc for future expansion, (5) Ruby Sauls Allen, Block 139, requesting SF-7 to MF-2. Reason: MF-2 would raise the valun of the land, and the surrounding property is mostly rental. (6) Bill Woods, 2021 West Oak, Lot 4, Block 3010, requesting that the proposed MF-I be returned to sr (south side of Oak west of legoe), Reason; H~ feels that there are enough apartments around his property. (7) Helen Wright, Lot 18, Block 386, requesting that the proposed MF-1 cldssification be returned to NS. (8) Harry Rey, Lots 19-11, Block 412, Lots 4-16, Block 419, requesting O to C. Reasont hlr, Ray feels that Elm Street 13 the only legltim3te street for business development between the downtown area and Denton Center, (9) RrucQ Coates, 407 Bonnie Brae, Lots 4-14, Block 4027, requesting MF-1 to sr. (10) less Coffey expressed concern with acreage south of new Junior High • ' School. NO %Its. Robert Pruett, I.ot I, Block 4056, requesting OR to OR in the . L..~ar~.~..~w.rM~.. , • w rM/, W~Y~:Y11:1'YY IO-.n • I e ~ ~ j i • • S • - „i escort °A X29`11140. northern tall c(the lot and SF In the s6bthem half,-- around this property is zoned residential. For the neighborhood attractive, Mrs. Pruett would like 'a'Ap n' Mg for the property. y/0 ra< (12) Robert Pruett, Lot 23, Block 350/0, requesting A to U. Rea on: The - property Is located adjacent to Acme Brick. (13) Jack Mcfarlln, lot 7, Block 4074/D, expressed his Interest In proper ProtecUon of his home. (14) Thomas Hall, J211 Westgate (2 acre lot), expressed his Interest in proper protection of We home, and does not want commercial zoning, (15) George Hopkins, Lot 18, Block 4049/A and Lots 1.4, Block 4049/8, requesting SF to O. Reason: These Iota are planned for office space. (16) Bob Miller, tots 1-12, Block 453/8, requesting SF to 0. Reason: The property Is surrounded by retail zoning now and would not be suitable for residential zoning, (17) J, H. Jones, M. D., Lots I and 2, Stock 489, requesting 2F to MP-2 and Lot 1, Block 4027/A, requesting MF-1 and OR to C. (18) James Jackson, south of Smith Street, bath sides of Duncan, requesting C and LI to SF. (19) Joe Skiles, City Block 20$ (30 acres), requesting 0 and OR, and City Block 2002, requesting O to OR. (20) Fred Minor, Lot 16, Block 4014, requesung MF-1 to Sr. Reason: The residences on West Oak are being crowded out by the apartments, He presented a petition signed by residents opposing change, (21) Earl Coleman, Lots 7, 8, 9, 10 and part of 6, Block 445, Lots 16, 11, ind 18, Block 443/8, requesting SF to MF-1 or GA. Reasont A portion of ;his property was zoned A-2. Lot 10, Block 4011, requesting O to OR. Reason: The property was purchased for LR, Lot I I, Block 171, requesting SF to OR, Reason: It Is located near the City Service Censer and is suitable for no other classification, City Service Center, requesting SF to C. Reason: The Service Center now has a conditional use permit. (22) Harry McClendon, IS acres bounded by Emory Street on the south, University Cave to the north and Bonnie Brae on the West, requesting OR to C. Reason: He fools that zoning to OR would be downgrading the property. (23) R, J, Milliken, Lots 11, 12, 12, 1, 16, and 18 of Block 4026, requesting SF to Mr-2. Reason: The property In request would be suitable for MF-2 zoning, (24) Grant Jacobson, Lots 1-24, Block 5, and Lots 1-7, Black 6 of the first extension of Sequoia Park Addittun, requesting SF to MF-„ Reason, Mr-1 would fit in better with development they hags planned. • (25) Wendell W1114ams, Lot B, Block 2WE, requestingA to SF. Reason: wants to keep the area residential only, • _ w • i +MUNICIPAL SUILDIN August 22, 1968 j+, Mr. Williams was also interested In obtaining pla for the area around Loop 288, 11 (26) Frank Mayfield, Lot 10, Block 422, requesting North El Strut be made GR, (27) W. D. Buttrill, Lot 2, Block 305, requesting that the C zoning be extended to the creek on West Mulberry, (28) R. H, Reesdr asked if the requests would have to go before Planning and Zoning Commission or it they would be added ty this request, (29) Larry Brinkley, Lot 10, Block 337, asked If fratem(tles are permitted In the University zoning classlflcation. (30) Duane Archer, Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13 and 14, Block 350/k, requesting LI to M. Reason: The property was zoned HI, and he would like for it to remain that way. {J I) M. D. Bishop, 2 acres on the north side of University Drive east and east of Mayhull Road, requesting A to C. Reason: He bought the property with the Intent of placing a business on it. (32) J. C. Miller, Lot 2, Block 276/E, requesting Lf to SF. (33) F. G, Ballard, Lot 24, Block 4024, requesting SF-7 to MF-I, Reason: If the south side of Oak Street Is zoned MP-I, north side should be also, (34) Gerald Brenholtz, Lot 29, Block 4024, requuUng that the north side of Oak Street along this property be zoned MF-l as long as the south side Is. (35) Mary Claud Gay, Lot 1, Block 4013, nsquastlnq O to GR. Lots 28, 283 , 28,2, 29, and 30, Block IV, requesUng MF-1 to GR. Reasow The property is located next to Texas Women's University, and Mrs. Gay Would tike for the property to have retail stores placed on It. (36) Kenneth Bahasen, Lots 2, 3, and 4, Block 376, requesting sr to MF-l. Reason: He does not went the single family zoning next to business zoni ng. (37) Don Hell asked the mechanics of the apartment zoning, (38) Bob Miller asked the mechanics of the apartment zoning; asked that it be a six mor.th period instead of a one year period before Ono can repeat a request for a dented petition; and asked that the minimum lot size for apartments be changed from 60' to 50', • 4. Chairman Browder closed the Public Hearing and Mayor Martin commanded the Planning and Zoning CommissWn, Mr. Springer, and Joel Albrecht, City Planner, 1 br their outstanding work, i Meeting adjourned at 9:35 P. M. • Chairmen, Planning and 7 ning Cor%-.Lssio- • Me yo r u City Secretary • w • MMFPA WW 4. Iw faa669aadl 22. City We IA awl 1 throtilk 4, 191ock 4649/9i k'dd"4Q - n ^ Block 4019/A; Lots 2 througb 6, Block 404!/A, leafed betresa tM 11rfE'.~ -_S_,{I.LJ, Bapttat Church property and Newtoo-Bsysor school, eateiiatog iul b 466 feet. 4 d ~6 P It Z--Morton was made by 71bompeo6, seconded by Frft&a that lots 1A and I through 4, Block 4049/B aed Lots t ad is, Block 404!/A, for "a'; and City Lots 2 thronsk 6, Block 4049/A for " Mourn carried, Council--Motion wee tn&& by Iavelsss, seconded by Netsoa to accept the rscommeodation of the Planting sad Zomlog Commission. Motion carried. 23, City Block 463/9, located on the wet sick of Fvltoa betweso Emory and Westway Streets. P k Z-Motloo wa mach by Speaks, aconded by Freeman that the Property be shown ss "O-04TWO." Motion arrted, Council--Motion was mr'a by Nelson, wooded by Loveless to accept the recemnrdstlon of me Planning art Zontsg Comm lost". motion carried. 24. CII7 fated sod 6. I theougb 6.4, Block 234, located oo the south side of Smith Street, reel N Duncan. P a Z--Motion we* made by Speaks, wooded by Th mpeen, that the property be sbowa as "SF-6.,, Motto carried. Connell--Motto was made by Netsca, seconded by pinky to accept the recommendation of the Ptaoelog and Zoaheg Cemmtsston. M MU carried. 26. City Lots 3 ad 6, 6 and 11, Block 266; tats 6 mad 7, Block 2011; Lots 2, 2.1, 2.2, 3 and 4, Block 266, located bstwae SovWldp and Teasley Line, edoodiy south from IatersUls I!g►way 36E ap+roalmeuly 1, 400 feel. P 4 2--Motto was made by Freemss, aecoeded by Speake that City Late S and 6, 6 tad 11, Black 266; and tats 6 and 4. Block 2014. be shown so 110-Mte"; aed Lots 2, 2.1, 2. 2. 3, and 4, block 265, be shown as "GR." and that the reeidests of Southrtdp be notified when the plat for this area Is cooetdered by the Plamieg and Zoatng Commission, Motion carried. Coemtl--Motion was tea•1a by Loveless, seconded by FINay to accept the recommeodatioo of the Plaming said Zoolag CommUaloe. Motlm carried. Meeting ad}ou toad at 1266 p. m. . ~ww'V/ w 1I a City Secretary • A-c~~irnr- 1q r . • 1 0 hfumcIPAL BUS DUIp lt7aautlaq //~J`1] 16. City Lop 1 through 3 sad S.1. Block $TT/a, ~tooO tip rthw~ corer of Mtcbsel sad McCormick Stolow. P 0 2--Motion was made by Tboa by peed, seconded by Awr1a that the property to shwa as "MF•i." Motion carried. Coua a_wyor Margo rellaµtphad the chair to Mayor Pro Tom Loveless. Motion WAS made by Nelson, eecaded by lnnlay to accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried. Mayor Martin returned to the chair. 17. City Lop 3 and 24, Block 4012, which extend from Normal Avenue to Bryan. Approximately 166 feel scab of Scripture, P A Z--Norton was made by !peaks, wooded by Freeman that the Property be sb"n as "o-of Ace," loolaxNng LM 2, )ust north of the property In Question. Motion carried. ilJ ..r Cocactl--Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by Ftalay that the recommendation of the Plaaolsg and Zoning Commission be aceepted, Mot ton ca rr led. le. All of Block 130, which Is bounded by Cherrywood, Greenwood, Roberts aril Sault Streets. P L 2--Motloa was made by Speaks that the property be shows as "MF2." This motion died for lack of it wood. Motion was than made N' Freeman, seconded by Thompson that the re"t be doaled. Motion carried. Council--Motloo wit made by Netsoa, seconded by Flapy to accept the recommendation of the Pianeiag sad Zoatag Connotation. Motion armed, 19. City Lots I through 3. 1. Block US; City Loy 3 through S. Block 3010 sod City Late 1 through 4, Block 3011, located along the south side of West Oak Street, between Avenue C and Avenue 0. P L Z--Motion was made by 3pooka. seconded by Thompson that the property be shows as "SF-7." Notion canted. Councll--Motloo wits made by Loveless, seconded by Ftday to accept the recommendation made by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried. 20. City Low through 12. Block 4027, localod cc the west aide of Bonnie Brae between West Oak and Scripture Streets. P i 2--Motion was made by 9psalts, seconded by Thompson that City Lots 2 through 13. Block 4027 be shown as 11WF.1." Motloo carried. Council-- Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by Finlay to accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried. 21. City Lem I through 3. Block 4066, Coated between Emory, Bootie ' Brae and Rghway 24. with the west aide of the property fronting en Eebr i P 4 Z.- Motion was made by Thompson, seconded by Speaks that the property be shown as '.C-Co cannarc ai" with the stipulation that there be no ' exits or entries to and from Emory Street, and that a six-foot masonry well or ® evergreen fence be placed between the property sad Emory. Motion carried. a C(srooll tanning aannd Zby Loveless, oning Commission accepted to hat the recommendation of the pl specific use permit for commercial we se, Meet" ca"ied, ki • m~ • MUMCEPAL SULLOM rCanllaM O I~(1 Jamry 1, 1/s1 P' ' 11 , University Drive. J ~V P It 2--Motion was made by Roberts , seconded by Freema the property be shown as "OR." Motion carried. q q th Council--Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by Finlay accept the recommendation of the Planning and Using Commission, Motion carried. 11. City Block 2481 City Lot 1, Block 347 and City Lots 6 through 15, Block 249, which is the Morriebo Milling Cow" property, P 4 Z--Motloo was toads by Roberts, seconded by Spaske that the property be abwo as "Fa." Motion carried. Coutoil--Mottos was made by Nelson, seconded by Lovelea to accept the recommendation of tbe Planning and Zoolog Commiusloo. Wilton carried, 12. City Lots W. and 10E. Stock 316, located n the oortheul corner of Collins and Bernard Streets: P ar 2--Motion was node by Thompson, wooded by "it* that the property be shown as "MF-I." Mottoo carried. Couocli--Motton was made by Nelson, seoooded by fovolea that the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission be approved end that the City Engineer be requested to assure that the bulldingeode U rigidly adhered to to this case. Motion carried. 0. City leas 07 through 42, Block 3017; and Lots 11 thratgh 17, Block 3018. located on both sides of Wast Prairie, west of Avenue E. P 4 Z--Motion wu made by Spoke, seconded 4 Bolcom that the property be abowo as "OR." Motion carried. Council--Motion was merle by Nelson. seconded by Finlay that the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission be accepted. Motion carried, 14. City W I0, Block 4011, located on the north Bide of Scripture, between Lovell and Bryan Streets. P h Z--Motioo was made b' Roberts, seconded by Speaks that the property be shown as with Thompson abeteloing. Motion carried. Ca ncil--Motion was made by Loveless. seconded by Nelson . that the rail re area bounded by Scripture on the south, Congress on the north. Lovell an tba west and Bryan on the out, being all of Block 4010 and Block 4011, be shown as "OR, " Mottos passed wills Flelay aboteleing. • 13. City Lots 10 through 13. 1. Block 446, located on the east aide of Beaumont Street between Re s and the proposed Neely Street. J P t, 2--emotion was made by Spasye seconded by Thompson that the property be shown as "GR." Motion carried. Council.-Molioo was atade by Loveless, aeeorAsd by Fiala) that the recommrndatioe of the Planning and Zoning Commission be accepted. Motion • carried. , AwAc"mvqr 1 LM s • January 4, IN# 6. City Lots 17 through It. block 386, located on I'll, 'w"C west Hickory, between Avenue B sad Aveme C. ,~J P 8 Z--Motion was toads by #peaks. seconded by Thomp~bahat the property be shown as "OR. 11 Mottos carried. Counell--Motloo was made by Finlay, sooonded by Nelms to scow the reeommootkttioo of W Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried. 8. City Lot 1, Block 312/A, located on the south side of Lindsey Street, toot of Bernard Street P & Z--Motton was made by Speake, wooded by Thompson that the property be aboem as "MF-1." Motion carried. Couscil--Motion was made by Loveless, wooded by Finlay to -2 accept the recommendation of W planning sad Zoning Commission. Motion L'3 carried. j 7, City Lots 8, 9 sad -10, Block MS, located at the 00rtbeast onrmor of Beaumont and Fein Streets, P 8 Z--Motion w made 4 Freeman, seconded by Roberts that the property be shown as "MF-1." Motion carried, Council--Motloo was made by Nelsoa, aeoooded by Finlay to Accept the recommeodation of the Planning sad Zoning Commission. Motion carried, 8. City Blocks 2SO, 222, 203, 304 and Lots 6 throt1h 10, Bloe t 324, 1•3c*W between Sycamore and Mulberry, estebt ing west from Blount StrM. P 8 Z--Notion was made by tbompsoo, seconded by Speaks that the ar.a between Mulberry add Sycamore Streets, beginning at Austin steeling to the Cr,ek, befog Block 222; 203; Lots 11►rougb 26, Block 306 and Lots 6 through 10. Block 324, be shown as "Central Business District"; sad the resulader be shoe n as "Commercial," Motion carried, CoutteLl--Motloo was made by Nelson, seconded by Finlay that the recommendation of the Ptadning and Zoning Commission be ace carried. opted. Mottos 9s. City -'ock 311-C: Lots I through 17, 37, and 38 through 44. Block 330.0, located between the railroad tracks a Acme Street and the west side of ,Highway 377. P 8 Z--Motion wee made uy Spanks, seconded by Thompson that 1 the entire area be obow„ as "Lt " Motion carried, Council --Motion was made by Finlay. secoaded by Nslson to accept the recommendation of the Phsoing and Zoning Comm'salon. Motion carried, 9b. City Blocks 208, 209, 210, 311 ssd 311, B. In an area between Mghway 377, oast to the railroad tracks, ssteoding north from Acine Street to Eagle Drive P Z Z--Motion was made by Thompson, seconded by Freeman that the property be shown as "C-CommeroW." Motion carried, e Council--Motion was made by Nelson. aeconded by Finlay to accept • the recommendation of the Planolog and Zoning Commission. Motion carried. 10. City Lacs 0 through 32. Block 412 and Lots 3 through 16. Block 11',. sated ,n >t.,th ,1ile!'f rtF Airinkammr1 _ a 43 • m • WIN MUNICIPAL BUMPING January 6, 1968 Spec lal jolt meet) of ng the City Couraoll and Planning and Zoning Commtaston, tJf_, J City of Denton. Yews, Monday, January 6, 1%$, at 7:00 P. M, in the Councll7 tp~ Chambers, Municipal Building, Presoot: Mayor Mario; Mayor Pro Tom Loveleas; Councilmen Nelson, and Finlay; Jack Broader, Chairman of the planing and Zoning Commission; Tbompson; Roberts; Freeman; Speaks; City Manager: City Attorney; Director of Community Development; City Plantar and City Secretary, Absentr Counclinan Jones, The purpose of this meeting wan to direct the City planner to 411er the proposed toning map which war presented to Denton cltt-fns on August 22, IM6, These alterations refer to toning classifications shovm on the map. Mayor Martin opened the public hearing and I itroiuced Jack Browder, Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission, who took the chair. The following cases were considered: 1, City Lots I through 6. Block 261 and Clty Lots 1 through 4, Block 157 and City Lots 1 and 2, Block 258; this is Trinity Steer property. P 4 Z--Slotion was made by Thompson, seconded by Roberts that the toning be continued as "M." Motion carried and was recommended to the Council. Councll--Mntion was made by Mayor Pro Tom Loveless, seconded by Finlay to accept the recommendation made by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried. plant. Cltv lots 1. 6, and 7, Block 233 IC; this is adjacent to Acme Brick I P 6 Z--Motloo was trade by Tbompeoo, seconded by Roberts that this request for Specific Cse Permit fcr stay mining only and recognlxlngOrdinance tin' 66-44. be approved. Motion carried. Courtcli--Mottr n was made by Nalsoe, seconded by Finlay that the J recommendation of the Plannir,d ant Zoning Commission be accepted. Motion carried, 3. City Lots 9 through 25. B1oe't 261 and City Lots t through 4, Block 263. located on both sides of East Pralete from the railroad tracks east to Lakey Street. P G Z• •.Slotion was made by Speake. seconded by Roberts that the City Loll 1 through 4. Block 363 and City Loa 15 through 19. Block 281 and Citv Lots I and 2. Block 245; City Lots I 2. 2.1. 27. 2A. 2B. 1. Blook 248: • Clty Lots 2 and 3. Block 247 and City We 9 through 14 and 20 through 23. Block 261. be shown as "NF-I. " Motion carried. Ca nctl --Motion was made by N.tlson. seconded by Loveless to accept the recommendation of the Planning and ion ng Commisolon. Motion carried. 4. City tots 7 through 10. Block 483, located at the corner of Anderson and Mounts Streets. ' ® P E 2--)lotion was nude by Thompson, secondedi by Roberts that • • this area be shown as "Setg1t6orNmd Semlce." (lotion parried. Council--Motion was made by Finlay. a,,ronided hr Netsnn to accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning C•iminisstm. n c: mad, ATTACOAAVKr /Y t • o i / MUMCIPAL 1MLgQ16 Jamutry 6, loss I . ' Special joint meeting of the CltrCc9noll and Planning and Zoning City of Denton, Teas, W4dnen8ay, Jawary 6, INS, at ?.Do p.m, in the Counell Chambers, Municipal Building, it coetlouatton of the meeting of January 6, 1969. Present: Mayor Martin; Mayor Pro Tom Lawlor; Coumetlmeo Malay and Nelson. Jack Browder, Chairman of the Naming sad Zoning Commtssloo; Thompaa; Freeman; Speaks; City Manager; City Attorney; Dire itor of Commuaty Develops ent; City Planner, sod city Secretary, Absent; Councilman Jones and Roberts of the Plemtag and Zoning Commission. The purpose of this meeting was to direct the City Planner to alter the proposed toning map which wan preissoted to Denton citizens on August 22, Is". These alterations refer to zoning clasalflateons sheers on the map. Mayor Martin op wd the public hearing sad Introduced Jack Browder, Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission, who took the chair. The following "sea were considered: ' 26. City Service Center area, located North of Paisley tied the railroad - tracks. P 6 2--Motion woo made by Speaks, seconded by Freeman that the property be approved for a Specific Use Permit sod shown as "SF-7." Motion carrbul, Counoll--Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by Finley to accept the recoetsesdation of the Planning sad Zooing Comminloo, Motion carried. 30. City We 1 through 3. Block 305, located so the mouth side of Sycamore between the creak and South Elm. P 4 Z--Motloo was made by Spenke, seconded by Thompson that the property be shown as "Commercial," Motion carried. Council--Molios was made by Nelson, seconded by Finlay to ti:cept the recommendation of the Planning sod Zootog Commission. Motion carried. 31 . City Iota 16 through I E, Block 167.1; City sets 1J.. 1C, 4 through 10. 1 D. I E, 11. 13. 1 K. and I L, Block 147-3 Lots t through 3, 3A, 6 and 9. 2A through 2C, Block 197.4, located on both old** of Rtghway 24, beginning 1000 feet not of loop 266 and extending to the seat to the City Limit Items. P 4 Z--Motton was sude by Thompson, seconded by Speaks that City Lots 2A through 2C, Block 197-4, the southern 1/3 of 18, Block 167.1; 4 IA, the sot-therit 1/2 of IC, the western 1/4 of 11, 10, 1E, Ii. the sorthem 400 feet of IK, and IL, Block 162.3; be shows as "Commeroial"; and City Lob kE. Block 10.1; Wts 1 through 3, 3A, S. and 9, Block 1674, be shown as "Agriculture." Motion carried. Council Million was made by Nefsos, seconded by Finlay to accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mottos carried, 32. City Wt 1, Block 40131 located on the southeast corner of Ugoe and Scripture. P 4 Z--Motloo was made by Speaks, oecooded by Freealaa the t the e property bi shown as 'OR" along with the Wt to the east. Lot 2, Block j 4013. Motion carried. i Council--Motion wan made by Nelmoc, seconded by Loveless to accept the recommee;ietbo of the, Lleaalal W 36619 g Co94sts9ba, with Ftnlai abetalnVng. 7.lotlon carried. Arwamemr 15 0, 1 0 • • MUMCDAL BUILOO q,rAMLN"d1 gWr3' 1. 1Mt 33. City tots 28 through 30, Block 127, located ^00 tRthway 24 between Plgtly Witgty sad the TWU Baru. V P A' Z--Mottos was made by TbnmP001. sseaaded by FriA~ I" the property as "M?-! " with Speaks Abstaining. Motion carried. Cotmall--kfotioe was made by FlIday, 6ecoaded by Holman to a-w"t the recommeadi iou of the Plaemtne std ZoMq l7 mmissloo. Hotta carried with Loveless abeimining. 34. City tots 2 through 4, Block 376, located between McCormick mod Avenue A. north of Cresolee Street. P 6 Z--Motloa was made by Tbompsoa, seconded by Spatke that the property be shown as "MF-1." Motion armed, Couac ll--Motion was made by Nolma, seconded by Flalay to accept the recommendation of the Planning led Ualag Commiseloa. Modoo carried, 35. City Lots 2 Lod 6, Block 4015, located between kfaloae amt Gabor Streets P 4 2--Motion was mach by Tbompeon, seconded by Speeke that the property be shown as "O." Motion carried. Council--Motion was made by hats" that the rsyuesl be defiled, hilt the map show that all of Blov:k 4015 be shows a 10-O}fled.11 The motion died for lack of a second. Motion was made by Nelaon, 06coadod by Martin that the p toperty be shows so "011 a reammendod by the Planntst mad Zoning Coma lrion. Motion carried with FIWy ahafainint, 38. City Lois 3 through S. Block 133, located on the weal aide of Bell Avenue tad Peach Street. P All, Z•-Motion wad nude by 9peake, seconded by Tbompoon that the Property be shown as "D." Motion carried. Cmncil--Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by Firday to accept the recommeodation of the Planning and Zoning Cemmlala. Motion carried. 37. City Lots tD, 10. L 10.2, and Ii. L Block 377,'B, located between McCormick and Knight Streets, south of Greenlee. P L Z--Motion was made by Speake, seconded by Thompson that the property be shown as "SI " Motion earned. CouocU--Motion was made by Ftday. seconded by Nslmoa to accept the recommend.non of the Planning aid Zoalog Commiatlon. Motion carried with Mirtin abstmining. • 3e. City Bloclia 137/A, 137/8. 137/C, 137'0. 137/t137, F. and Block 135, located between Stuart Road and Locust, south of the Strickland Junior Nigh School. P M Z-- Motlofi was made by 1'bomPwo, seconded by 3Neake that the property east of Bell Avenue be shown Am "ST-7.11 In a planned development. Mellon carried. • • Councd Motion was made by Finlay, seconded bt Nelson to accept the redommeack ins of the Planniat mod Zalot Commission with the stlputaUoa tbat lh►PitaalyaaLZyiat 130"406we slmpseve them site Olin a it develops for the "9F-7" property east of Bell. Motion armed. ATT.4cnMer 15' Id" • • p • t . I MUNICIPALEU[LDI)W ~1h{1 'CO 40. City Lou 6 sod T, Block Ml, located on the west Itiq of - r• between the esirttq Henry Street std the proposed Henry Bt y 9 M P 6 Z--Motloo was made by Freeman, seconded by Thompoo ~~y that the property be shown sm -MF•I." Motion carried. Council --Motion area made by Nelson, seconded by rialay that the City Lou 4 and 7. Book HI be showo as "MF•1," and that City Lots 6, and 6.1. Alook 441 and City Lou 6. 9, 1, 6, 3, block 446, also be shown as "MF-I" Metioc carried. 42. City Lou i sod part of tA, block 247.A, located om both sidAol Loop 266, west of the railroad Lraoks. P i Z•-Mottos was made by Speaks, wounded by Thompson that tks properly be sbrwo to "Ll." Mothm carried. y t:Z Councll--Mutton was made by Nslsoo, eecotded by Finlay to +rcept the recommendation of the Phoning sad yooiag Commission. Matron ' carried. 43. City Lou I through 3, Block 236/A. located between park tArA end Clambers Street In the Lincoln Park Subdivision. P A Z.-Motion woo made by F'w~6 secoadsd by Thommpson that the request br++Mlhbr41oo1eseMa teetog be desiod, •YoHoe carried, Council--Motlon was made by Nelson, oeconded by Ftnlsy b accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried. 44. City Lot 1, Block 4016, located on the southwest morose of MaJome and Sens Sireea, P 6 Z--Motion was made by speaks, seconded by Freeman that the property be shown se 110, " and rocnmmended that the Council eorulder the property to the west. Motion an. Ned, Cousell--Motion was made by Nelsoo, sseoodsd by Martin that the City Lou 1, 1, i through T.4, Block 4016, be Included In the 110" olssslhcstlon. Motlon carried with Finlay abstaining. 45, City Wtv 7. 4, and 44 1. Block 4016, located on the northwest corner of Scripture and Malone. P 0 Z--Motlon was made by Speaks, that the request be si,proved but the motion died for lock ni a second. Motion was trade by Freeman, seoontod by Speake that the property be shown as "NV Motion carried. Councti.-Motlon wee made by ,Nelson, seconded by Martin to accept tl#4 re-otnmendatloo of the Plamlcg and Zoning COmnlteelnn. Motlon ♦ carried r11h Finlay absub.log. 411. City Lou 2. 2.1, 2.2. Block 4011, located on the southwest curter of Broadway std Malone Stteau, P 6 Z--Motloo we$ made by Speaks. secooded by Thompson that Lite property be -lone as ,0. Motion carried. ♦ Counell--Motion wait needs by Nalsoc, eecorded by Finlay to accept the recommendation of the Planning Sod i: imy Commieabn. Motlon car,!ed. 47. City Lou 14 through 14, block 871. located on the mouth side of Center between Nlclary W Mulberry . ~ ~ 13~ • ca • MUNICIPAL 111YOW'(Cosm4iiiiii / Jswmry 1, lid/ f P +4 2--340110n was made by Thompson, the property be shorn u "OR." Motion carried, CO ob~ Counoll--Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by li to an opt the recommendation of the planning and Zoning Commlutoa. Motion carNad. Meeting ad)ourned at 11:01 p. m, Agqf'~~ 4 r retry MUNICIPAL BUILDING January 11, 1949 "01 iar meeting of the City Council, City of Umton, Tens, Tuesday, January le, 1909, at 1,00 p. m. In the Council Chambers, Mumotpak Building. Present Mayor Martin, Mayor Pro Tam Lnvelees, Councilman Finlay and Nelson, City Manager, Assistant City Manager. City Attorney, Acting City Sec reU ry . Abli Councliman Joan, 1. Motion was made by Loveless, seconded by Fii to approve the minutes of the regular mealing of Docambor b, 1184, sad the special meetings of December 11, 1148, January 1141, and January 4, 1089 Motion carried. 2 Rids a. Bid No, 44.3412 Level transmitter and ii Motion was made by Iovelese. seconded by Finlay, that the bid be er■r{_J w B, I. F. on the recommendation of the Clty Manager and the Purchasing Agent Motion carried 34 %lotion r as made by Finlay. seconded by Nelson, that the recommendation of the City Mr-a4ler to install scidwotal equipment for a turn eigtaal at University Drive and his law street intersection be approved and that the City Manager proceed with this acquisition. Motion carried, 4. Petitions a. Public Hoorlog was held oa the pelltwn of Mildred Casey, At al. • requesting tooing recleutficaUeo of City Lou 24.24. Block 413. from "R. - Single family, to 'A-2,^ MOttl-lamtiy. Motion sou nude by Finley. seconded by Nelson, (hat this be rafarred book to the Planning sod 201 Commission and that the City Planner Idom them of the Irtffie problem in that area which was revealed to the Council at this meeting, Motion carried. b. public heattag was hold on the appeal of Joe Bklue, of aL "osting toning reclassllica b of City Lou I.4, Block 301, from "A. ^ 8tagle Family. to "LB. ° local Buatneu. After conaiderebls diaCYeatnn. mottos was nude by • Finlay, seconded by Loveless, that INa Council accept Mr. Sklle's rpuesl to • wtindraw this item from the agen6a. Motion carried. i i ' o p PHOTOCOPY 'j , 7r-r W \ ~`M' l((( r W A AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLES 1 THROUGI S2 NCLUSNE of TW S} m ' CODE OF THE CITY Of DENTON, TEXAS, ESTAILISHING Ale PROVgMQ fOR ZONING NEpULATpNS AND CREATING ZONING OISTRICT= M ACCORD. AWA WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WITHIN $I" DISTRICTS REG- ' ULATIIO THE USE OF LAIC, /UILDNIOS AND STRUCTURES, THE IRNGNT, BULK AND LOCATION OF N1101104) ESTABLISHING MOW" RE4lIM . MF.NTS FOR Off-STREET PAAKWG, REGULAYWO THE ERN;CTION, REM" AND ALTERATION OF ALL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES PROygwp FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMITS FOR CERTAIN USES? RECOGNIZ NO44"FORW ING USES AND STRUCTURES AND PROVIDING RULES IN TIR O ULATNOI THEREOFI CREATING A BOARD OF AAMTWAT AM UT M MM z RULES IN ITS ORGANIZATION, JU"DICTON AND POIE[RNI RITANLISN 00 THE REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING SITES AND TW WA MM OF. TNEII CREATIONS PROVIDING FOR CERTWICATES Of OCCUMMCY~ ANCEi DEFININO CERTAIN TEW ADOPTING A Ep 04 01suffCI IIAP ANp PART ING MAARKINGIS S MBOLSS ANO C MTS COII+TAIIEO 1 S" f L tT~RRS, „ SHOWNON THE MAP A PART W SUCO ORBMAM O PR4MM~IR TNNiD 'f' ' OF AMENDMENT) PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIKA NA 0~0M NCE AND FOR ILIUNCTM'E REL XIr" ERtOMN ~i L. VIOLATION Of SAO OROSMNCEI NMIOViDN10 A SAVLNOS C1AilIt AIM 1t• CLARING AN EMERGENCY /j WIR:REAS, wtwe Ifa *1i.d ~t1:Y40 of T : ' doe" of Doctor, YOU, to ooloMMM t1M111W ii~w 014 ak t4 IN W/QM W "Wire w wu $I NMI AW 04"b" NNa 6"14 641 ice" y to , ' end ft 4oeDOeu" In do Polk ib"u a" M. Wows, IAo INNo M"NI, NttIM4 toe" "N W IeMI we*m N►arnhels NAIL K wItI:ILEAS, >w rMwar~ 4e>t x rwalM "Iw,M,~e w ft City Ca4Ktl e>w. w IM +«N N.N.I~a `I M NM r a City ot Dorton cwt I O&W of coca Ian Nhio iY NNOerelo111 tiat;Noe „l 'i in the I" eeOvNIJmwj od, WHEREAS+ IA/ CRY Cif 0411~i! N*d ` i • \,.4 3 , ` CwmW 1w~atl N rt p6h Mw vq eN,Mermw ,140 0 j Sjy N~ ;t { a4ltoe a •11 eoNl owrnr 4f ~r NRo11N,~4 r tUN~ ta~NtirRl NNw tell Mf • • ' i _ 1 4s 1MWMetilMy IAwi. , - , '•~►'?:~i"; re` ; Fes,, 1. 1k11. an 0 Ui OJIM , W 14efnl Care Mw a-isl*rlq all 66 p WIN" MI cysts wa at Na pwk lorNo Ilt wanlut fr wteloM, _ "Iftaw IN flat NM 4010 w11EREA9, dr Caerell.k' ~Iihi ijM+aw INtil w~q1~i i1 witirwl Z" 0 is weoo &W Ia 4eiaes.ooN a/ w,Nev111..4f od 0olteewtoN N to r , NIloooot Mi A4NrI roeoo tw r of do home, ow*4 "!i AW Jim" WON" J w CNyr NOW Yllue RE, ; T11E COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTOM Itil, UIV ORDAMNSt 0 0 • • PHOTOCOPY VVXTMa OAM Z n o~rn St M~oiu~1V of IM tab of to c" d a ~ %m mm Ih~ and u fellewf, 4MtlNr rlw mil +~d b 0000 is ~ "WMd M lee r ARt1C1E I ~ . kv p1uhr~IMOIMhou are MrWM hlYlhhy yiN1N~~ wMmemo P M r, • tMy Yw bm da~ 900111 1 b" e 1W 0 r i iMNd www IMM i Nb b pMl~ i% ovum on we"" pa* he" bm=L6 t+M1Mk/~M •Mtir OW ~.~M~M1rMd1 !tom Mwl11i ~wM1pM~► Ai► lk timMtlr rw «nM~ ft vow N rwmkm III N» r.•f.lr Mw. Clgr e•n~tibnt wNM t+ C•~h1K1 M ►I I IAie fwt+M~1Mn ~,1 iflry ~d~ ; . ' . ARMS I Zama mi TUTS tmcm or besm. TftA& M i , OMTRICTS. Ai ANA WNW In IV 9~45mvm UfllFOllM MI GICH 011f11ICt I SMAU. K KllolMll All • IN OMIUN mints li~~ y 5 IF-10 : . • W yb+rMN"ra, tlrtiw0lwirt OhMlit • i r ~ • 0 ILL] • • PHOTOCOPY Msi~i wOLi+ swlw orra3 OC Ow~rd RwII Dow* CrwMrobl %im LI I t1~lit I OWNot ro o Lo" NOW AITW I zom mmiCT 00 TW •OUM U96 OF TILE ZOMMO DSTRrTS S T OVY Nimik Mit OtLNWAVW "TW TONING 08"I" W1P OF TM eM OF OtMTOM SO MO %W A NARY. OP YW OMOWMCt Ai PIN.LY AS V TNM SAW WVS >K1~laOMTN WS M r A, Thw d) r Wei* ~NM1H W Mm"I 0061 i/Mi ii gq' rt,?~ ~ W w ewor i d , a but" go $**on :hr be fOW &W W%WW of bkvi (l) 00 o" Aw b tow wa Im 04 so"" Ml iti>MM'~A~4M fry W "I i1 M d*vW Y am orr, a) ar ary ~.n hw wa w wiiwM rr o w'.rwt~it Rrlriff by wtly MwrM ~N d•6101~wMMwt wW»NI Ar rMuwW~ M.. !I OIM+M1 CM~fMyM W M►Mh ,600 FWMIPA f&c U) on eN)1 del k hIN irM► Mn Cif Mifiwt Ar IAIM~ MI IndNr1 yrh dtM by PWIN dw+iii 1N ti O New 14 A~. (4) hPW*l%oio Or trfiirMlM 1•NwM fir; ~ I~ f~, M.iMl~~trllf oftw two Dbmok wrr ` ATrAcweN* 116, -i ...u - i'`f!•y ;♦~a r .~ICY 1{ ~1• s ca PHOTOCOPY 4 r f ,1 A 1 ; J 1 ~ l 1 S • ca • PHOTOCOPY 11 owl 101 '71► #xPACNilt1!'! , R ILE r J6 .7 ss S1167 Ir a r PD•31 1975 to Present District Boundary M711 "as 411MOMML r 1969 • 1 District Boundary a ~ , .rms. ~ • _ to In NrACAM • • • t -.9l. IIP 7 I r In I,:III t rAXIMENTIT P OPEIRTY. ID: R20909 RP8 VCNTURT*B INC (344'/60) 001 SOD C05 11/G9/Ap4 E,IFOR SUB, BLOCK 3, 1.01 2A 4409 SCENIC CIR ORC t OARL,AND, T% 79043 r.xLMPIlaIN9 N41I „L, JED: 4/23/95 VALUE CHO, 03/R3/95 9 PROPEIV Y snus AuullES9 31 , h I' ND~EY NBHD: IMP I'm I faUNGA1NIN 141 iINA11 INI MIMI nppl BIYII 11 rHl IItlM _.-,-10-- 5 3 .1 Q 1. HAD 2/94 CONTRACT FOR (99,000-ZONED 32 t' COMMERCIAL. MA I1. DU32, DR3.9, DU3r DR 10, DD32, DL 10, DD3 3d, DLIO, DU4, DL10. DD4, DL12 aA1E PNICf bFl U NaaN n w ,!r0401 VA01 0 94-0021760 0 94-0021781 fOADOAAIYIY g1111bEF AfCF tie I'mr 1!11411 ~-10'-- Y L WEO p X.._,..18---- 4 4--10---3 M00 N} IV" 0"CmP1104 sPIU 01. A9% ill Z's AgCA AOJU8T UN YEAR y,A t PNY. [CON r1im V NI NNmFACTUq AREA pgICE' BUILT r"`Y' aaoO + , vam I1 R RESIDENCE Al Y UN 37 s, 1.1 MA MAIN AREA R 4+ 1304 443 3.37 E-63 60 33'93'7 • 33, 9.33 • NB otal 33,93 a[erAmraA' NBHYA (CLASS) IV" APIA AMA DINT RII[[ u rAAAnwuut YL, AavAlIf RESIDENT LOT Al L 20$59 1.20 1017o32 L T BILE - 77XR6T BILE - 771126 otrf 0, 472 Total 17132 A c► • • i 012SCII)PTION OWNER NAME AND ADDRESS IAXING I Ic s I PROPERTY.ID: R76391 RP8 VENTURES INC 13247601 (401 SOS C05 01/01/95 A1746A A. TOMPKINSI TRAC1 201 ACRES 4405 SCENIC CIR ORC 6/95 TR 12C VALUE CHO: 04/~b/94 EXEMPTIONS APPOA0510 Yn I u( GARLAND, TX 75043 791 34 OPERTY 51 fUS ADDRESS NSHD: n. 0E;D12pn D P Amwism r. IKM EII rip4mi 1111 IINIFII PLN)f NIY14 IWODVI NE 1 OM61F41 M;VYA .IUdl,, .pfa"d'47 SY'. LIMITED ACCESS. I~ it 0 Mfg PIKE IM I O eOVA Ie Of Ie NOOK MO! 04/11/94 83400 94-0028678 01/10/04 50000 1321 06111 rOPDOFANIY UIIIIIFti ACCT 91 I,mr 91 O1 II lEMItNr trFr MscamunN SPIN °I AREA AbJUSI Ukli YEAR to M0, 11M CLASS AREA r YU FACTOR AREA PRICE BUILT I"^ e VAIm • • OIFc FIFtIMI IYN too" „ X'm' AafA IIIAt PARE ,.L Ir N8H% (CLASS) IAAFMtI MI M y. lyl 1 ABlhtll[ COMMERCIAL i C" SFI 113343 017 79134 Ett Site 4.33A Legal Acres 2. 2 ctal 2.602 Total 79,34 • m • r • PROPFItTY J I D 1. J T El? PJAMr AND J DPIE 919 AV f c r 1 I AU, I IIJIAISAI PROPERTY.I 834090 RPS VENTURE'. INC (324760) 001 C09 01/01/99 A12 6 A. MPKINB, TRACT 29, ACRES 4409 SCENIC C;R HTO 0, LD AD TR 1 2F IL {liMPTION3 809 AI•mAwnl rnI In r PR 6/93 VALUE CHO: 06/10/93 GARLAND, 7X 75043 PROPERTY$ITUS Awnes8 9r 971 110 OD BT NBHD; O 1'U AtION EMT /INIVN INV rINIMII Rour of wte 1100MINA l NIATNt414 ~O WVYMINO /,}1M'L .N2JdJ•r Nkl'd^p;q;' _p C. N' ADJ TO LISTING Ar LIMITED ACCESS. I r OAR PP1of or rV NOME IO. rxfo Moog Nor I 0 94-0028678 101/01/84 20000 2956 518 01/01/84 2 000 TRANS IN ERR fOM1011APNY UrRlilE5 ,Acct Sa lUllr OoIUI f WSEG P 804E Nf rrPf ID mrcmnu°'r snrR CL ABR AIJ'A AREA ADdU87 UNIT YEAR a ur urn' VACTOIt AREA PRICE M AU nulNl P;r n:`rN rune color • of MC RN IIVrJ 1YM rofM yr AkU UNIT MIIC[ n I. IAL tEffSitv {CLASS) AuANfr wtur »ro ~,w, AID YAI Ur C 0.818 3244 3.7 9r q71 LUI' SIZE 38846%l 4,33A Legal Aerar 0. 78 of 1 0.878 Tatri 9rg71 I • • PHOTOCOPY a ~ I. (*1449 Jn' All rw S!.~ L U•~p, ST, Q' -y'1 • • , _ ' 11 r~ a JI K DR. t IOU r.s~IAe ' ~p h p ~~p its trio! Q UA ~r\ y jig' p ~ Pp v .t. sH Ar ?S + • • M l,sl Ae ~ Me 41011,6011 8 AR, i • • A • I Minutes P&z LO April 12, 1995 p Page 8 their desires. By taking another look at the apartnient: in District 41 think it would be to everyone's benefit and to the development of Denton. Mr. Cochran: Would anyone else like to speak in favor of this petition? Would anyone like to speak in opposition to this petition? The public, hearing is closed. Mr. Burke I do have a question, You made a statement about noise being louder on one side as opposed to the other side, Can you explain that to me. Mr. Burke: I wish that I knew the reason. The land on the south side of the Loop is lower and the hill is increasing as you go northward, It just seems like It is loader when you go over the brow of that hill and I don't know the reason. Mr. Reeves: There Is one condition that is proposed and that is that there will he no access to loop 288 from these districts. It was proposed by the applicant. Mr, Cochran: Any comments Comm issioncrs7 Mr, Norton: I would like to compliment Mr. Burke and Mr. Brown on the way that they worked with the community. I move that we approve the amended plan for District 1, 2, and 3 of this proposal as SF-10 and SF-7 wllh the condition of no entrance to Loop 288.E I Mr, Cooper: I'll second. I Mr. Cochran: All those in favor please raise your Ight hand. All opposed same sign. Approved. (5-0) Vil. Hold a public hearing and consider rezoning about 3.7 acres located south of Lindsey Street adjacent to 1.351, from Single Fantlly-7 (SI'-7) to Commercial (C). Mr. Reeves: As you will recall at life January 25th P&Z meeting Mr, Robbins brought • forth a request to initiate a rezoning because an error was found and there was no documentation to support the zoning map and the area as it was presented since 1975. On the 25th the Commission decided not to initlate a rezoning on this property but to instead allow the owners of the property to apply for rezoning without a fee. That has happened and that is why we are here tonight. I am not going to get into a long Intensity analysis of this because the property, when the development plan was done, was analyzed • 0 • not on the basis of It being commercially zoned property because that Is what the zoning map reflected at the time. I will say that If the 1969 zoning map Is affirmed then the area is over allocated at one hundred and seventeen percent and there will he 5$ i • 0 1 • 4~-017/ Minutes P&'l_ April 12, 1995 r Page 9 approximately a ten percent reduction in the over allocation making it about one hundred and sc,,en percent, By making it SF-7 is brings up several other problems given the commercial areas to the east, the multi-family area to the southeast, I-35 directly to the north, based on that and some discussions that have been held with various real estate professionals in Denton it is not likely that this property would ever be developed as single family. Staff also looked at a few other options, perhaps office zoning on the front and multi-family on the back. As you can see from this drawing it creates a few problems. First with the office zoning there is not a substantial difference as opposed to the commercial zoning. If the back half of the property was rezoned to multi-family district, because of the recently passed ordinance amendment that would prohibit platting of lots with incompatible zoning districts, You would have a land locked piece of multi- family and you would create a situation where anybody trying to plat and use that property would have to conic back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to rezone a small strip to get the required street frontage. We have come to the conclusion that we are going to recommend that the 1975 zoning map as it currently shows the zoning line be affirmed. Mr. Co.:hran: Are there any questions at this time? Mr. Reeves We sent out eighteen notices including one to the Texas Department of Transportation. We received sixteen back, all opposed. There was no response from Mr. Morrison. If this goes to the City Council then the 20 percent rule will he invoked. Mr. Cochran: Would the petitioner like to speak? Mr, Art Anderson: My name is Art Anderson and my address is 5400 Renaissance Tower in Dallas, I am representing the owner/applicant RPS Ventures, This is kind of a unique zoning case. Usually I am trying to show why the zoning map should be changed. People make decisions all of the lime based on the city's zoning map. People buy property, they sell property, they decide whether they are going to develop property 0 based upon what the zoning map says and what the zoning is not only on their property but on the property around It, In this case the city zoning map has shown the line here since 1975, for twenty years. People have owned property in that area and In fact previous owners of this property have made their decisions and made transactions based upon the city's zoning map and representations that were made with this particular tract of land zoned C for commercial district, This case is not a surprise. We are not coming in and asking to rezone the SF-7 which was a previous zoning case before I came to represent the Ranas'. We are just reaffirming the line as it was represented for the last twenty years, My clients specifically relied on the zoning map when they purchased the Land. They paid a purchase price based upon the commercial zoning and they paid a non j I • ua • s Minutes P&Z I April 12, 1995 Page 10 U refundable thirty thousand dollar franchise fee based upon the commercial zoning, From a planning standpoint we are in agreement with staff that the tract is undevelopable for single family, In addition to the location, the other problem that you have is that there really is not any room down there where you could cut a street to develop single family residential. We are in agreement with what the staff says in their recommendation. Their recommendation states that, "ultimately what this request reduces to is a matter of fairness. The zoning map has reflected since 1975 an apparently erroneous zoning line. In the period between 1975 and today a development decision was made and the property purchased in pan on the basis of that erroneous line. Therefore, we are going to request approval to reaffirm that (tie zoning map show the line that has been there since 1975." Mr. Harris who was the original broker is here to make a presentation. Mr. Robert Harris: My name is Robert Harris and my address is 5311 1-35 N. I was the original broker for 3.4 acres of this tract, 2.68 acres of that was represented as being zoned commercial. On my listing I checked with the city staff and I represented it as commercial. This was in the early '90s. I have had it listed for several years. The Central Appraisal District showed it as being commercial. We represented it as commercial all along with the other portion being SF-7. Mr. Cochran: Do you know how many people have owned this property since 1975? Mr. Harris: The gcntleman that 1 represented had sold the property in the mid '80s. It i was repossessed in the late '80s so he now had in back in the '90s. I know of two owners that have had It but it has been under three different ownerships. Mr. Cochran: Any further comments or questions? When you represented this property as commercial did you go to the city? Mr. Harris: I went to the city and obtained a zoning map. I visited with city staff about * the possible uses. Mr. Cochran: Would anyone like to speak in favor of this petition? Mr. Gerald Yenson; My name is Gerald Yenson and I live at 2286 W. Oak, When this I property was sold to the current owners I did a survey of this property and after I had I! ® surveyed it the city notified roe of the zoning line. When I prepared the plat later I used that Information and confirmed it with the zoning map that I have. I would like to point • • out as a matter of expenses that the current owner has paid twenty-five hundred dollars for platting property and the plat has been denied. All of the work that they have had me do Is based on their knowledge of this same 1975 map. I would like to say that I • • r Minutes P&I .J~ April 12, 1995 Page 11 think that it is only reasonable for the city to honor a map that they have made public knowledge for twenty years. It is not standard practice for surveyors, engineers, developers, or realtors to research specific ordinances when they go to find out what the zoning is. They go and look at maps like this and I have done this for over thirty years in California, Illinois, and Texas. My procedure has always been to go to the city planning department and look a! their map. I feel like the fact that it was researched to f find the ordinance to justify the map, that is something that is just not standard procedure. The fact that they are here now trying to rezone this, I think affirming the existing zoning is a more accurate way to look at this. They are supposedly rezoning something that has been zoned this all along as far as any public knowledge. I would like for the city to do the right thing as far as honoring the information that they make public. I would also have to say that for the city to push the issue and to force it Into a lawsuit, this would be expensive for me as a taxpayer, for the city, it would be expensive for everybody and going to court is usually the worst possible solution for a case like this. I would just ask the city to he reasonable and to honor what the map has shown. Mr, Cog an: Is there anyone else that would like to speak In favor of this petition? Would anyone like to speak in opposition? Ms. Mary Jo hill: My name is Mary Jo Hill and I live at 1203 Lindsey, We are the adjoining property owners to the house that was burned, We have lived there for forty- eight years. We were originally in the county and when I-35 was proposed we were not notified because we (to not have frontage to I-35, Mr. and Mrs. Pred Hansel owned the property to the east of us and across the street from us, There were no hotels, motels, honky Conks, or gas stations in our area, because we were in the county. We have never been notified when any of the property was changed to commercial zoning, t do know that the property in question, part of it was commercial in 1969, That is the only time that the property has beer zoned commercial. I know for a fact that the Hanseis' would not have ever alloweo any of their property to be zoned commercial. Mrs. Hansel died • in 1982. All of thn property that is fenced in was their homestead, We have all of the commercial zoning that we need. It is the entire area and we have banded together, We are in opposition to any correction. Leave the 1969 zoning as it Is. Mr. Cochran: When did it first come to your attention that this property was thought to be zoned commercial'? s • ~ Ms, Hill: In the early 1980's there was a sign 1 hat said the property was for sale and it said (hat It was commercial. It was on the property adjacent to the Hansel's property to the east. • Q • ea • Minutes P&Z April 12, 1995 Page 12 Mr. Cochran: How many people have owned this since 1975? Ms. Hill: Mr and Mrs. Hansel bought it in 1947 from Monk Clearman and they owned it until they died and !hen their heirs inherited it. In 1993 the original heir died so it passed on to his mother and sister, Ms. Kathy Turner: My name is Kathy Turner and I live at 2110 Mercedes. We have been there for eight years and we have seen improvements in the neighborhood. We live on Mercedes wt it dead ends into the open field. There are a lot of young families that have mot into this area. We have Borman Elementary at the other end of Mercedes street, there is a recreation center down there, we have a scout camp a little farther out. These developments in my opinion are better for the neighborhood overall. Currently the development that has taken place along 1-35 and I7t, Worth Drive is primarily commercial and is more for profit and not for the good of the community. We do not welcome another motel. We need to look at it for the long term and not just develop it for immediate profits. I thir.:c that if the land is up for consideration of development 1 think there are things that can be done that would benefit the surrounding area over the long term. I am aware of the money that has been paid by the owner but I would like for them to consider the neighborhood around them. Jimmie McMakin: My name is Jimmie McMakin and I live at 1211 Lindsey, We are here tonight as a neighborhood. 1 am In agreement with Ms. Hill and I have lived there for forty-four years. We have never known that land to be commercial and to rezone this land commercial is to put another mote) in our area and we are against that. Our future is in your hands tonight and we. ask you not to rezone this property. We have sonic letters of opposition that we would like to present tonight. Ms. Schatz: How do you know that it has always been residential'? • Ms, McMakin, We have tried to confirm when we were brought into the city, I think that if it had been commercial we as neighbors would have known It. Ms. Schertz: As people come up and talk if they have any documents, records, or anything that will give the Commission some direction as to why it Is residential? Ms. McMakin: We have all kinds of records like warranty deeds. ' • s Mr. Cochran: When did you go the central appraisal district? Ms, McMaklm It was about six months ago. ~P7- r Mi11UieS P&Z y/~~ _<7 April l2, 1995 Page 13 Mr. J. E Tadlock; My name is J. E. Tadlock and 1 live at 1911 Mercedes. I have lived there since 1965. Since I moved there we have had a school built, two churches, and four motels. This has all been built within a mile's distance so we sure don't need another motel. I have done a lot of community work so I have not just been Idle while my community was growing. I worked with them and as far as I know it has never been rezoned. We have fought rezoning attempts and they have never passed. I think it makes a lot of difference to tear up a whole community for one plot of land. Ms, Joyce Nay; I am Joyce Nay and 1 live at 2077 Westwood, I am a new homeowner there and I have lived in Dentor since 1969. I have spend my money on Improving my home. I hope that some day I can say that I have lived in my home for forty to sixty t years. That might be an emotional concept but that is what Denton and Visions is about. That is what we talk about when we live in Denton, when we choose to live in Denton. We really don't want this motel here, What I do in my business is to sell Denton to all kinds of organizations from all over the state of Texas for seminars and such. I book the Radisson hotel and some of the other motels for overflow and I would not use that particular area as a business person. It is not attractive to shopping or conducive to some of the events that are going on. I have really thought that over as a business person. Personally as a homeowner and secondly as a business person this project does not really have good merit. It is not a vision for Denton, Ms. Rachel Maysr My name is Rachel Mays and I live at 1505 Kendolph Street. I am speaking against this for several reasons. It seems to me that if it was drawn In 1969 and there are not any accords of It legally being it changed then someone has obviously made a mistake and I am sorry about that. We too have acted In good faith. I have chosen to make this my home for a good many years and I Intend to continue to. We feel very fortunate because we are conveniently located, It Is an ideal location for families and for the communities that are there now, We regret that mistakes have been made and we regret that money has been lost but we too have acted in good faith and we bought this for family homes and we would like to preserve the neighborhood as it is now. We need to go back to whal was legal, we need to go back to the 1969 map. John Alexander: My name Is John Alexander and I currently live at 617 Tennyson Trail in Southridge but I do own property at 711 Mercedes. I lived on Mercedes for six years and at the time that I moved to Tennyson Trail I did look at the city's plat maps which A were the 1955 Wiley Barns Iract maps that do show the whole area as residential. It was • • all platted out as residential. I recently put my house up for sale and 1 had a buyer for the house. The buyer came to me and asked if I knew about what was going on with the property down the road and at that point I asked to he let out of the buyer's contract, At that point I did not feel that it was fair for me to hold them to the contract. My ~ 0 • c~ • • Minutes P&'L April 12, 1995 Page 14 realtor has told me that my property value will go down if this commercial project comes ! in. Mr. Cochran: What year did you move over to Mercedes? Mr. Alexander: I moved there in 1979. Mr. Cochran: So in '79 you did some checking as far as the zoning'? And where did you check on that'? Mn Alexander: I checked the zoning at the plat department and I recently got a copy of the plat map. (Discussion) Ms. Jennifer Phillips: My name is Jennifer Phillips and i live at 1114 Oakwood. My concern is that [here has been all this publicity that Denton is opposed to new business and I feel that there is a lot of pressure to approve this deal because of all of the publicity. Just because there is pressure I don't believe [hat you need to make a bad business decision and I do believe that this would he a bad business decision. I think that if the owner would work with us then we could come up with a solution, There are things that we will agree to, Dr. Kathleen liiland: My name is Dr. Kathleen Eiland and I live at 3919 Lariat, I am here to talk about intensity, They claim that the intensity is not going to change but It is currently over allocated by one hundred and seven percent, The Radisson Hotel is 'Nt given a specific university rating even though it is not owned by [he University, It Is given eighty five trips per day because of the university rating. Obviously tile Radisson • is not a Monday through Friday, eight to five classes kind of a business. If it were given the allocation for commercial property at three hundred and sixty [rips per day, there would be a dramatic increase in the intensity, That alone would probably raise the intensity up to one hundred and fifty percent in our area. This is negatively affecting our neighborhood, and our property values, I was lucky enough to sell the property on Lindsey street that I owned and I did tell the people that bought my property about the proposed hotel, The Denton Development Plan says that the purpose and intent is to protect our neighborhoods and if yot going to change the zoning and the intensity of M • an area you need to snake sure that in ot, residential areas you have small nodes of non- residential establishments intended to of, mainly convenience goods and services at the neighborhood level, This hc[cl is not something that the neighborhood needs nor wants there. If the Ranas would meet with us then perhaps we could agree on something. To Gq • c> C Minutes PRr7. ~1 r^ April 12, 1995 Page 15 change the intensity according to the Denton Development Plan you need to have a study done before you can change the intensity, Ms. Tammy Brakeen: My name is Tammy Brakeen and I live at 1213 Lindsey. I am a recent homeowner and I have lived there for twenty-four months. 1 too have invested thousands of dollars into my home, I have made an investment in our neighborhood and I care about it. Mr. Austin Smith: My name is Austin Smith and 1 live 1305 Lindsey street, Our neighborhood is a unique neighborhood, We have a lot of different homes in the area. Mrs. Hill and Mrs. McMakin were here in this neighborhood before 1-35 was there, they have never received a notice that this land was going to be zoned commercial. There was never a public hearing for it, there is no record for a public hearing ever. There have only been three owners of this property. The original owners show that they made on agreement with the Church of the Rock to allow the use of the land, Then the land was taken back and sold to RPS. If you look at Ft. Worth Drive you have an array of businesses including a lumber yard, a pawn shop, a night club. When you go down 1-35 there are five hotels starting with the Radisson, Royal Suite, Days Inn, Desert Sands and La Quinta, To the west there is heavy industry, and to the south we have Acme Brick, We can only grow to the east where there is a cemetery and the boy scout camp. You can either help our neighborhood grow and prosper or you can hurt us. You should know what the heartbeat of our neighborhood is because we have been down here for eight months. We need to know what the heartbeat for RPS Ventures Is? We want RPS Ventures to meet with the neighborhood, We want you to put it on them to work with the neighborhood. We want to work with them and we want it to be developed correctly. We are asking you to help us turn In a new direction and we are asking RPS Ventures to work with us. 1 Mr. John Weber: My name is John Weber and I live at 1300 Lindsey. There is a variance on this. It looks like the commercial property tried to follow the commercial • lines for the existing hotel and club. The 1975 lines don't follow the property lines. There are discrepancies in the maps themselves and I assume that is why we are not showing actual zoning maps here. I am on the Visions Committee and in there we are talking about promoting neighborhoods and promoting entryways. The entryway south of us is not very pretty. 1 think neighborhood development would he a lot prettier and I think that is what we should concentrate on, That land was origin, Ily supposed to be ® a park, that Is what the original owners wanted It to be. That is what t would like to see • • it used as. It is not a good family area and it is not a good commercial area. Let's beautify the area, let's not continue to look like we have looked. We would like to work with the Ranas if possible but so far it just hasn't happened. I would ask the city to look j 1I • • Minutes P&Z 5- April 12, 1995 Page 16 very carefully about developing that area around the church as a park area. Something that would help the entire area. Mr. Cochran; Is there any more opposition? I would like to call a te.; minute recess at 7:00 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 7:15 p.m. Mr, Cochran: There is another gentleman that would like to speak In opposition so let's give him an opportunity to speak. Mr. Lynn Brooks: My name is Lynn Brooks and I live at 2314 Mercedes. I am the president of the Denia Area Community group and I am representing that group . There has been a lot of talk about money and it was my understanding that the original sale had a condition to it and that It would not be final until the final platting was done and the zoning was in place. It is also my understanding that they jumped the gun and if they had waited until it was all done then they would not have been out all the money. As far as I can see that was just had business on their part, What it comes down to is that they are going to put a motel in our neighborhood, There are a lot of places around Denton that could use a motel much more than our neighborhood. I would like to have everybody stand that is opposed to this. (Approximately thirty people.) Ms. Roberta Dunsbach; My name is Roberta Dunsbach and I live at 1426 Kendolph, We have appreciated the neighborhood for its diversity and for its stability. One aspect is that we have some of the most beautiful gardens In Denton and we have some houses built by local architects. This is an aspect of the neighborhood that should be valued. Ms. Carol Brantley: My name is Carol Brantley and I live at 2146 McCormick. 1 am opposed to the hotel, one of the main reasons is that we have four motels in the area. Most of the motels in Denton have less than fifty percent occupancy every night so we • do not need another motel in the area. Mr, Cochran: Mr Anderson you are allowed five minutes for rebuttal, r Mr. Anderson: 1 would like to respond to the last gentleman who spoke. The information that he gave to you was incorrect. That Is the concern that I have in this , • case, information that is being conveyed by various parties that is not exactly based upon • first hand knowledge. To the best of my knowledge that gentleman has never read the contract nor talked to anyone first hand. His comments concerning the conditions of the contract are totally incorrect. 11 Is like his comment that they are going to put a hotel • I c, • Minutes P&cZ April 12, 1995 ~Q Page 17 within thirty feel of a bedroom of somebody's house. That Is the type of information that helps to create problems because if you look at the zoning map as it stands today, the tracts of land are separated from the developed residential by a significant distance. When we are talking about why someone may not have received notice of the zoning change, I don't know. I am trying to find a way to correct it in an equitable manner but as you are aware on our zoning statutes notices only have to go out for a distance of two hundred feet. When this case came before you Iasi time and they were talking about rezoning this SF-7 Iraq to the left that is what I believe to be a legitimate concern, I think that it can be designed in a way to minimize the impact on the neighborhood. The bottom line is that was viewed as an intrusion even though it was just a parking lot into a developed neighborhood. It was considered to be an extension of the commercially zoned property. 'To the best of my knowledge during the zoning case no one ever doubted or even questioned whether or not that line was appropriate for commercial zoning. The real issue at that point was should you intrude, should there be access to Lindsey, all of those types of issues that are appropriate when you are trying to change a zoning classification, We are not trying to change the zoning classification here we are trying to confirm and reaffirm where that line has been shown for twenty years. I understand that the neighborhood is different and It has been affected by the impact of 135. 1 think the neighborhood is doing the best they can to try to address those types of issues and in a normal zoning case I would he the first one out there trying to talk to the neighborhood. 1 did not do that in this case because In my opinion and I think the opinion of (lie staff we are simply reaffirming the line where everyone has known and understood it to be since 1975. In terms of the facts that we have, the facts are that we have a zoning map that from 1975 to the present has shown that line to he commercial. I think everybody agrees that it has been in the city records, it has been open to public inspection, I know that the city requires me to he aware of city laws and documents and knowledgeable of those. As has been staled by the broker that property has been shown as being taxed at a commercial tax rate for a number of years. I don't know for how many. There have also been signs posted on that property for sale for commercial development. With regard to the plat issue, I think that It is Important to know that the property has never been platted before so (here can't be any reliance to that being a residemial plat. Now it may be different for the SF-7 part and that part I understand because that looks like it was part of that subdivision when It was originally platted. And as you are aware both the statute and the city ordinances provide special protection for the neighborhood in case you go In and try to replat or try to change that use, There is a reliance issue on that residential replat. Well that doesn't apply In this case because • the public records never showed that property that we are discussing as ever being platted • • residentially or otherwise. 'There can't he any reliance on that as being a residential replat. 1 hate to go into the issue of whether or not this Is an appropriate zoning change from a planning standpoint. I haven't heard anybody get up here and say that SF-7 Is i • O~ a t«~ °15~ff7~ Minutes P&'1. ~70 April 12, 1995 Page 18 V an appropriate, developable zoning on this particular tract of land. I think that it is clear that it is not. I have heard discussions saying, "maybe if the applicant would come in and we could discuss some other type of use like office." I haven't heard anybody say, "well SF-7 that makes a lot of sense right there." Now I have heard that a park makes a lot of sense and we may be able to work out something with the city in that regard in order to resolve this issue, but as the staff points out this tract of land is undevelopable for single family use. I think that is clear that when you have frontage, you have a drainage ditch that cuts across the property, and you have got such a narrow waistline that you really can't develop that tract of land for a reasonable single family development, Our architect is here if you have any questions regarding what the specific developmew plan is for this tract of land. Because of cite way this lays out the property is really going to be developed right in here with the frontage and all of the access is going to come off 1-35. If you are talking about Impact on the neighborhood, all of the access is going to come off of I-35. 'there is no access to Lindsey, You are talking well over two hundred tcet in terms of there being any Impact. We would be willing to work with file neighborhood, If there are questions or concerns about whether we might access Lindsey, we would be willing to shut off access to Lindsey to make sure that doesn't happen. We would be happy to talk with the neighbothood if they want to consider ways to close off Lindsey to I-35. In terms of needing any sort of hammerhead or cul-de-sac or those sorts of filings. From a traffic intensity Issue I think the point was made by the staff that when the comprehensive plan was put Into effect by the city and when this traffic intensity study area I think that the basis when that plan was put together 1 am assuming that it had to havo a basis of showing and taking Into consideration the zoning map, To me the real issue on traffic Is where is the traffic going to come from and where Is it going to go, and to make sure that it just comes off of due frontage roads and is limited to 1.35 which is a major freeway and to make sure that it doesn't go into the neighborhood we would lie willing to work with the neighborhood. 1 think because the C district is located well away from the neighborhood or any of the developed areas it will all he accessed and oriented towards the freeway, I really don't believe there will be a problem. We are willing to meet if there am some issues. I think Dr. Eiland had the best point, Dr. Eiiand had a house on the samt that everybody is talking about and she told her perspective buyers. If you have bey.. out there you will see that there are a lot trees that separate this property from the rest of the neighborhood, There is a kind of interesting topography in terms of grade separation, She told her perspective buyers and they Bald fine. I believe that their thinking was, "that probably makes sense to have a commercial use fronted on 1.35 and being developed towards the freeway. I know that this is a political issue and I am sorry ■ that it has become one. From my clients standpoint I believe that they have done what is fair and reasonable. They have in the past, I have been assured and Mrs, Rana Is here it' you would like to hear from her personally, have met with the neighborhood in the 1 J • a~ • G5 Minutes P&Z J " ~LC April 12, 1995 Page 19 U v past. From my standpoint I would he happy to met with theta also, This property is not suitable for 814-7 and it has been shown on the city's zoning map for twenty years. Your staff has looked at it and they agree [hat the zoning line should be reaffirmed where It Is, Mr. Cochran: Mr. Anderson I have a couple of comments and a couple of questions as well. This isn't a political issue for us, we are a citizen panel and this is more of a citizenship issue and a zoning issue. The question I have for you concerns the definition of zoning and as to whether or not in your field, is zoning by ordinance or by clerical error? Mr. Anderson: Generally the zoning is enacted by ordinance and then it is transposed to the zoning map. I believe that the ac[ of traiiJerring it to the zoning map and the legislature validating actions such as those when [hey pass the validation statutes every two years basically validates the zoning lines according to the zoning map. The rationale for that is that the zoning map is the record that people look at in terms of trying to determine what their rights are. What happens on ma .y occasions for example on annexations and things like that. I have been involve!' where courthouses have burned down and you go back and by to find the ordinance, You show the annexation map and every judge that 1 have ever been before says that is a valid record to show where the lines of the city are. I think the real issue Is an Issue of reliance in a public record and if the city had believed that this zoning was inappropriate they had the power to change it over the last twenty years. Cities that 1 am aware of have gone in and initiated zoning cases if there was a big enough concern by the citizenry, by the staff, by the members of the Commission, or by members of the Council, That has never happened. I agree with you on a strictly legal interpretation with regard to ordinance but I alsc believe that the zoning map has been validated by the legislature and Is valid in showing where the zoning Is on the property. Mr. Cochran: We will close the public hearing now and I would like to give the Ranas • and opportunity to say something. Ms, Pushpa Rana: My name Is Pushpa Rana and I live in Dallas and I represent RPS Ventures, We have met with the neighborhood two times between June and November. The reason for not doing the final platling was because we had a lot of opposition when we met with [hem so we felt that the zoning would not pass. When we were going to • do the second lot which we thought was commercial we did not think that we would have • • any problem with the neighborhood because It was already zoned commercial and we didn't have to go through a zoning change. The second week of November we scheduled a meeting with the neighborhood, I was there and we got a fax from the neighborhood to r • w a Minutes P&Z 199 74 April 12, 1995 Page 20 I saying that they were not going to meet with us and we would hear from their attorney. At that point we decided not to do a zoning change, we would just go with the commercial zoning. We are not here to upset the neighborhood. Mr. Cochran: We realize that this is a sticky question and that some circumstances have arisen here and that you are a victim of. I am sorry to see that happen. Are there any final comments? f! Mr. Reeves: I don't have any, E Ms. Schertz; Can you summarize why staff is recommending that w^ adopt the 1975 zoning line? Mr. Reeves: We studied several different options. We looked at office zoning but we did not feel that it would make a subwntial difference in uses. We thought about having the back half of the property zoned for multifamily use but that would create a piece of property that would be land locked and it would require further zoning to gain access to a street. Looking at the surrounding land uses to the east and to the south, if the 1969 zoning line was reafflnted then the land would probably be undevelopable, The zoning map has shown the line since 1975 and the Intensity analysis was done in 1990 and chat was based on where we have shown the line to be since 1975. Reaffirming tho 19'15 zoning line dnes not make things any worse, it still stays at one hundred and se teen percent. It doesn't make it any better it just doesn't make it any worse. Ms. Schertz: If I understood Mr. Anderson correctly he gave the example if everything burned to the ground but the zoning map remained. That is why they affirm every two ,ears where the lines are on the zoning maps and I wanted to ask if that is common policy within the City of Denton to follow that? Mr. Robbins: It is an interesting theory that I am not familiar with but I think that it is • a legal issue. i Mr, Drake: My research shows that when you have a variance between the zoning map and a set of ordinance then the ordinance govern. Now there may be some situations like what Mr. Anderson was talking about where you don't have access to your ordinances and somebody has to make a call based upon something, Ms. Schertz: So what do our ordinance's reflect right now, the 1975 boundary or the 1969 boundary'? • 0 • a 149 Q5.-a~2r~ q Minutes P&`I. April 12, 1995 73 Page 21 Mr, Reeves: There is a 1969 ordinance for the zoning map. Mr. Cochran: I have a question concerning the intensity analysis and the University of North Texas. For the purposes of figuring intensity there is a higher use there than what is reflected? Obviously zoning laws do not apply to State property but never the less as they specifically affect adjacent property I wonder whether that was the intent of the statute with the Stale. If the University exceeded the allocation then we could not stop them, but they still have an affect on the surrounding property, We are participating in a public fiction if we allocate intensity (rips on the basis of the Radisson being part of the campus. Mr. Robbins: I am not sure that I can answer your question unless Walter has the intensity analysis where that piece of ground is actually shown, Somebody has done some research that I haven't done. When that area was allocated so much intensity there was a study done that took a look using aerial photography and on the ground surveys of what actually was on the ground. That study is the basis for the intensity numbers in that study area. The point that was made was that when that study was done they allocated the institutional allocation of cigh[y-five intensity trips rather than a hotel's intensity trip allocation that would be three hundred for that site. Did we do that? I don't know. Mr. Reeves: I don't either. Mr, Cochran: Then you can't refute what was stated here but we can't really take the time I was just curious as io your opinion. Mr. Cooper: On the backup about the nineteen notifications mailed. It says that at the time this report was preparrd no replies were received. We have a petition but I guess that it does not reflect the property owners within Iwo hundred feet of this pr-)p,;iiy. { Have you received any notices as of today? • Mr, Reeves: There is a red folder that has the replies that we received. We rccPlved approximately sixteen back and all were in opposition. Mrs. Hill is actually outside of the two hundred foot notification. Mr. Cooper: The other question that I have is that also in the write up it says the • southern portion of land will require significant off site drainage improvements. Is there , • someone here that can tell me how [hat is proposed to be done and If we are talking about off site where off site will this take place? • Q , • . m • nn Minutes P&Z April 12, 1995 74 Page 22 D Mr, Salmon; The southern portion of the subject property falls to the south and west and then the northern part of the property falls toward I-35, The drainage toward the I-35 side is adequate. Coming back down the other direction there is very little if any drainage structures in place, If someone came in and developed this area to the youth with some kind of use that included a lot of pavement and roof tops they would be required to install drainage facilities from this point down to the creek which is a couple blocks away. They would have to take the drainage facilities all the way down Willowwood to the creek. It would be on their property and then on city right of way. They are off site in the fact that they are downstream of their property, Mr. Cochran; Does anyone have any more question? Does anyone have any comments th,it they would like to make at this time? Mr. Norton: I am still hung up on this legal issue. The fact that we have a map from 1975 that says it is commercial and I think we are making an assumption if we say that it is a clerical error. I think we have to be careful how we refer to it because we don't know flow it came into existence. We have a twenty year old map and you are saying that the map is not legal? Mr. Drake: I don't believe that I said the map was not legal. I believe what I said was that in cases where there is a disagreement between ordinances and a map that the ordinances will govern. To the best of Mr, Robbins research the ordinances do not show the property to be zoned commercial at this time. We don't know how the map was changed and we don't know why it has been changed, The map and the ordinances should reflect the same thing. Part of the r_ason we are here tonight is to decide if we are going to rectify it or not. Ms, Schertz; If we go with the 1969 boundary but we were told that the 1975 boundary was how taxes had been assessed are taxes refunded? • Mr. Cooper; Do we even know that the property owner has been paying taxes on this property for twenty years based on the belief that it was commercial property? Has anyone researched that? It seems like that would be something that should be lied into it. Mr. Drake: I don't know if anyone has checked into that. I don't consider it to be a • zoning issue. ♦ Mr. Cooper: II may not but it would be a good indication as to what the property owners believed the zoning to be over all of those years. • ca • Minutes 7S - April 12, 199 1995 Page 23 i Mr. Cochran; Still the situation is that we have some property owners here that bought a piece of land that does not have the zoning that they thought it did, I believe that they made a good faith effort and they did what was reasonable and they checked with a broker. It is a bad situation to buy a piece of land and then to find that it has a clouded zoning issue. There are some folks that are going to be affected by this no matter which way we go with this. The question is who are we going to go with on this. We have three different property owners involved, A misconception has been perpetuated through at least two sales of this property. We have a number of other people who have spent longer time in a neighborhood than I have been alive and have been laboring under an assumption and a bond with the city that they lived in a single family neighborhood and that this was something which they could depend on. When there is a zoning change there is notification and that is one of the ways that neighbors would be alerted as in this case. We have a lot of people who have a large investment in our decision here tonight. We have heard the Rana 's situation and personally I feel terrible about it. I think it is an awful situation and I feel bad that I am in a situation where I need to make a decision. I also feel that making a decision on the basis of correcting the zoning map error . I would hate to think that we would start making policy on the basis of clerical errors. I am comfortable with the fact that this is a clerical error. I may be wrong but it is a matter of opinion. I don't think that it is a compelling reason to want to affect these t peoples lives. Mr. Anderson said that he was not going to argue the benefits of commercial zoning on [his site because to him it was so obvious that it was a mistake that needed to be corrected and so he didn't. If it is just on lire merits of reaffirming a zoning map mistake then we owe it to the residents who have been paying their taxes all these years. When you look at the issue of tight and wrong here and you think about who it is going to affect I am comfortable being apposed to affirming the 1975 zoning map error, because it would set policy on the basis of what we presume is a clerical mistake and because it is going to affect a community in a negative way. Ms, Schertz: I would like to state that my decision has not been made yet. I can't agree v-ith Mr. Cochran that it is a clerical error because it could just as easily be a misplaced ordinance. There was a sign on the property and it wasn't just a real estate sign that said commercial and no one took the time to say anything about it before now. I am impressed with this group and how you have handed together and for tbe beautification of the neighborhood and what Is best. I wish tha[ joint effort could have happened before we came here. If you didn't like what the sign said I wish that your group could have ® investigated it and have it resolved. If the applicants were not sitting in this audience and • • we did not know what they were proposing to do the outcome could he really different, I specifically asked staff why they were making the recommendation based on the 1975 1 boundary line and not the 1969 boundary line and they said that 11 is the best use of the • w e 95-IJI y April 1 1,, Page 24 7b $ t land. If we didn't know that a motel was going to he there In my opinion that is the right decision, you can't put houses on there. I understand and I appreciate staff having to make as difficult recommendation to us as we are getting ready to vote on tonight in front of everyone. I am in agreement with staff on that point but I am not going to sit here and discount each and every, one of you that have come forward and spoken to us on this matter. The last point that I want to make is that as we talked about property values I am not truly convinced that one more motel is going to decrease the value of your property that significantly. That is a hard question to answer, you can all have opinions but until you try to sell you homes you don't know what is going to have a negative effect on your property value. I have a problem blaming them for your property values. Mr. No-ion: We are all sitting here thinking about what we have to decide and it is not easy. You should be complimented on how you have come together and I hope that it will not change with the outcome tonight. I cannot help but return to the fact that there has been in existence, on file, and available for everybody to see a commercial map since 1975. The fact that there has also been a for sale sign that has said that this land is commercial that weighs a lot in my mind. 1 am also a commercial appraiser from past experience and based on distance many of the values are not affected and in fact some of them are increased. So you cannot necessarily say that the motel will affect your saleable value. There are arguments on both sides concerning property values but the distance and the topography and every thing else comes into play on how much of an impact that has on your value. So I have to lean toward the decision that we have to honor what the city has represented even though I know that is not a popular decision. But I do feel that the best use of that land is commercial. We have a responsibility to the total City of Denton and all of the people within the city. Ms. Flemming: If I am understanding everybody correctly did we not say that an ordinance governs what actually takes place. If the 1969 map is what is in the ordinance shouldn't that be the final word? • Mr. Drake: This isn't an issue for us to decide which does govern or which should govern. This is an issue of which zoning is appropriate for this land and I think that is the focus of the Commission, I think we should take it as a given that in the absence of finding an ordinance to the contrary that the status of the zoning of this area is not commercial as it stands right now. Clearly there is the issue of the way that it has been • • e for years and years but there is also the situation of Is SP-7 appropriate zoning for this area, is commercial an appropriate zoning for this area? This is basically a standard zoning case with the presumption that you are starting off with SF-7 and trying to decide if commercial is appropriate under these circumstances. I ~ k. • 0 • I Minutes P&Z 71 8~'s April 12, 199 1995 Page 25 Ms. Flemming: Our records here and the documents don't state that. This says that we are to correct a zoning map error. Therefore, I think we need to look at what was there first and what governs, the zoning ordinance or the zoning map. If you say that the ordinance governs then that is what I think we need to base our decision on and not necessarily what is the best use for that piece of property, Mr. Robbins: Let me just point to the staff report in the action section. This is requesting rezoning from SF-7 zoning to commercial zoning district to correct a zoning map error. It' you wish you could delete "to correct a zoning map error." We are requesting a rezoning from SF-7 to commercial. I think that the point that Ms. Flemming is making may be a point of confusion. This is a zoning case to change the line from where it was shown in 1969 to move it to where it has been shown since 1975. This is a zoning case to change the boundaries of that district. Mr. Cochran: We can use the Denton Development Plan to help in our decision. It has a very strong proponent in there for the preservation of neighborhoods. Ms. Flemming: I don't have anything else to say, 11 is hard for me to make a decision to say what the best use for the property is when I have too many people here in the audience objecting to this particular use that we are trying to sell everybody. Mr. Drake: i think that this language here "to correct a zoning map error" I took it as being undisputed that the zoning map is in error and it doesn't reflect the current ordinances to the best of our knowledge, There are two ways to resolve this and that is to either change the map or change the ordinance, This is an application to change the zoning from SF-7 to commercial. Mr. Norton: We are saying that it was SF-7 yet we had a map that represented it as commercial to the public. We a5 a city have mislead the people In more ways than one if we still say that (his is SF-7. The commercial was out there for the neighborhood to • see. (Discussion in audience.) Mr. Cochran: We have a couple of options, we can move to approve or move to deny. • Mr, Norton: 1 move that we approve the staff's recommendations to change the zoning • • from SF-7 to commercial as what existed on the city zoning maps for the last twenty years. • b !r bl~ ~ q yarn'{- Jy • a~ • p Minutes P&Z 7$ April 12, 1995 Page 26 Ms. Schertz: I'll second. Mr. Cochran: All those in favor of the motion please indicate by raising your right hand. All opposed same sign. Denied. (2-3) Opposed Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cooper, Ms. Flemming. Mr. Cooper: I am not sure that we are through here. (Discussion,) Mr. Cooper: I still have a concern. I still haven't seen any evidence one way or the other as to which the valid zoning is right now. I have heard arguments about the 1975 line and that is what the zoning should be because it has been on the map for the last twenty years. I have heard that the 1969 line is what it should be because It was by ordinance. It seems that there ought to be some way to research this situation and find out what it really has been all these years other than looking for an ordinance. I don't know what that way is but I mentioned tax records a while ago and It was said that it was not a zoning issue. It seems that if the owners or that property were paying taxes at a commercial rate. Mr. Drake: I have researched it, not the issue with the tax records but this issue of where we stand in a situation such as this and there are cases that indicate that were you have a deviation between the ordinances In place and the zoning map that the ordinartc..e govern, Mr. Cooper: What I am asking is if there is another way of researching this to verify what it really was? Mr, Robbins: Regardless of what the Appraisal District says or regardless of what somebody was paying taxes on. • Mr, Cooper: What I am saying is that they don't make those decisions just right off the top of their heads as to whether it is commercial or not. I atr, assuming that they base it off of a zoning map. Mr. Robbins: If they based it off of a city zoning map then the zoning line that was • shown in 1969 the line that was shown in 1969 was changed in 1971. Now that line was moved again sometime . Mr. Cooper: So the only ordinance that we can find is the 1969 ordinance. ~ a I • • w Minutes P&ZJQ April 12, 1995 Page 27 Mr. Robbins: Right and then tonight's action that you have taken is to recommend that the !.Im: not be moved from where it was in 1969. Mr. Cooper: I am comfortable with that until somebody proves that it was moved for some reason other Than just a clerical error. I don't think it was moved by clerical error and if someone could come forward with a reason why that was moved then I would be willing to reconsider my position on it. Mr, Norton: You can find out through the Denton Central Appraisal District what taxes f are being paid on that land by the year. They normally get that information from a zoning map. How good are twenty year old tax records? Tax records are probably more accurate than our twenty year old zoning map. (Discussion.) Mr. Robbins: The options for the applicant now are to appeal. If they want to appeal then they can let us know and City Council will hear their case, Or :he applicant could submit another case. (Discussion) VIII, The Gregory and Kathleen Pollock Addition. The 14,242 acre site is located on the west side of Teasley Lane (FM 2181), immediately south of Leatherwood Lane, a. Consider three variances to the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations f concerning variances for: 1) Consider a recommendation on perimeter strut paving and sidewalk • constriction on Leatherwood, 2) Consider a variance for sidewalk construction on Teasley. 3) Consider a variance concerning underground drainage construction. Mr. Salmon: Gregory and Kathleen Pollock are the owners of about 14 plus acres out , • • on Teasley Lane near the intersection of Leatherwood which is adjacent to the Old Alton Baptist Church. They are proposing to divide the property into two lots for single family use, zoned agricultural. All they can put on there with the zoning is two single family homes if their replat is approved. Teasley Lane is a state maintained PM highway and • m • Ti A (1 q WINMAD (o~ 5400 Renaissance 7tmn SECHREST DO ~ 4) 745.5100 1201 Elm Sneer & MINICK lilm(r*r (214) 745.5390 DeILu, Texas 75270-2199 A PsofessMMI Corysorns 'il r]In.AS HwsroN AUSTIN AnonKys h Coup :m Ms-xscoOrr Dims Dial 745-5745 May 11, 1995 VIA Fb,URAL EXPRESS Mr. Frank Robbins City of Denton 215 E. McKinney Denton, TX 76201 Re: RPS Ventures, luc. Case Z-95-007 Dear Frank: After reviewing file stall recommendation, our client is willing to accept a compromise zoning oil its property in order to settle this potential litigation matter. Specifically, the "C" District line on the 2.602 acres (Tax Tracts 13 and 14) would be relocated as shown on tite attachment. A portion of the 1969 "C" District zoning area would be rezoned to SF-7. Pursuant to this compromise, the "C" District boundary would be located at least 100 feet from any existing residential structure. We would also be willing to present a site plan to the City staff and neighborhood representatives prior to development to ohtain their input, Existing residential properties would be buffered by significant free growth, and no visibility of the site on I-35B is possible from the existing houses clue to the severe change in grade elevations, Further, nn access would be allowed to the commercial property except from the 1-35 frontage road, and • there would be no traffic circulation through the neighborhood. This proposal is being made in furtherance of compromise and settlement. Since 1975, the official zoning district map has shown Tracts 12, 13, and 14 as "C" District. The zoning district map is ,in integral (if not most important) clement of the City's compre}lcnsive zoning ordinance. 'faxes have been appraised in accordance with the commercial s zolliog shown on tale map, and at least ten conveyances of the various tracts constituting the • property have been based on the City's official slap. • A • • r Mr. Drank Robbins May 11, 1995 Page 2 Our client purchased the property in reliance on the City's official zoning map and the representations of the City staff. 11 is clear that the City has misplaced a number of zoning maps and ordinances in the past, and the City may have lost or misplaced one or more ordinances in question. Nevertheless, this case is rather clear-cut, I. The property has been shown "Commercial" on the City's official zoning map which is pan of the City's comprehensive zoning ordinance for over 20 years. Enclosed is a copy of the circular which was located on a portion of the property commencing in 1990. 2. The property has historically been appraised by the City and the Appraisal District as commercial properly, Enclosed is a copy of the Denton County Appraisal District records on the 1.3 acre tract which was not included in the staff report, 3. The property has frontage on, and its only access to, an interstate freeway. 4. The compromise we have proposed would ensure that, in addition to the topography and heavy row of trees, the nearest residential structures would be buffered by more than 150 feet from any potential commercial strictures, 5. The property is undevelopable as a single-family subdivision, G. Our client paid commercial prices based upon official City documents and t !presentations, 7, Our client paid a non-refundable $35,000,00 franchise fee based upon official City documents and representations. 1 would appreciate your forwarding a copy of Tuesday night's agenda by fax. As previously slated, our preference is to settle this matter as outlined hereinabove. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely yours, Arthur J. Anderson AJA/plg Attachment I CC! Dr. Pushpa Rana (w/attach.) • Ashwin Parikh (w/attach.) • DdvA 1hU1A Gf llY~plrl ICY II IU11 __.....r.,.w.,,. .L... r...'ro~+rnu ,r wo-. l ;.~.,`:.Sn.,l e. • ca • _ r AT ACHNA t'r 45 MEN 2U 90 r WO A9' 19~It\ONI1q LIRE MIN I . j x.11 ~ or ams 1 w 1~ OfILLONNDOD • y ~ 1 I -'f9~ W 9' t 1901 ,per • ~ -mommummmummad v • • PROPERTY. ID; R39415 RPS VENTURES INC (324760) 001 805 7 R E FORD SUB, BLOCK 3, LOT 3, ACRES 1.30 4405 SCENIC CIR 09 0 0[1//tli/95 DWP PRINTED: 05/05/95 VALUE CHG; 04/25/94 GARLAND, TX 75043 EXEMPTIORS AP"Ai SID VALUE PROPERTY SIMS ADDRESS 56,62 701 135E NBHD: me ~ONST 6?YLE f0bNDA,0N eXT. OWN Off "mm Mod# 6TIO.e FEOO MO NEAMOIA.C. KIMONO 41MA ,Mgibl, e,(l n vim* PLAYGROUND FOR CHURCH CHILDREN, ALSO PARKING. OAV[ "fee mm IA. cltD MM 0 94-0021760 0 94-0021781 0 93-b061042 fOPO0NA1'NY IfWTH6 Acate WHE , 1. WEO P mPtR i s¢owren VPE I D. DeseAwtiron ease CLASS AREA uw AR MEBOD ,Oo+o 1 M MW. eDONn,NO. FACTOR ro. AREA PRICE BUILT 0000 « x , VALUE • • vP,WLi :~w.i lfxi 1.1 NBH% (CLASS)" WWWA COMMERCIAL 6 C SF bd62p 1.0 . L10 756,62 Logo) Acre 1. 300 of 1 1, 300 6,60 p q I • ca • 'All ROBERT 28111S 211ITY .9099 O Interstate 331F A $ E L E f o~ ~J J ACHES, TN7URtSTA.TE 315E DENTON, TEXAS * I-35 is the major transportation artery from Mexico to Canada, The property enjoys frontage (approx, 114 feet) along the south bound service road and has adequate space for a distinctive entrance, m Cxcellent opportunity for development or investment in commercial proper- ty (approx, P S acres) on I-38E with traffic count estimated at 39,000 vehicles/day, The property also includes the abutting residential tract. * Uses allowed in Commercial Zone include., Hotel/Motel, Educatio;nl R Institutional, Church, Auto Service, Retail 6 Service, Recreational 6 Entertainmant, Veterinary Hospital, etc. * Kasy at.' r•" to I-3861 US 377 (Ft, Worth Dr,), the University of North Texas, .7n dc•antown central business district, restaurants, bank, and retail service along rt. Worth Dr. Ideal for a small retail/office strip complex or professional offices that need Interstate visibility, * The commercial tract, approx. 2,602 scree, to irregular in shape with surroundi,rg land uses th.,t, include vacant commercial land, motel 6 night c «b, aperzaents, church, and single family. The residential tract is rectangular in shelve and is plated for five SF-7 Iota fronting on a ROW • for Jacqueline Stroat (currently undeveloped), * Utilities are available (watr,r, electricityiewer, & gas) along I-386 and Willowwood Street, A combination of utlity service from both direc- tions would be feasitle and would allow adequate service to both tracts. * Owner In a motivated seller, willing to offer OWNHR rl.( 0IId0 I * Priced at only $185,000 ($1.22/sf) Call Robert Harris 817/566•-9099 KOff: Information furnished Is from data sources believed to be reliable bet is sot ,arramttd ad Is subJect to change otthmot notice. licensed Ital (state protected. ` ~ / `J tR'b 4 L No 1110=011M I mow.. ....w..~.ry.r~.nu~,r.....r. %b tww~,. %14 5f , I j^rr{n n e ~1lMirwiliY~y#tMlir~it/I~If•~~~0~~~~i~'~~rn~ISf11M~F I :mar".inlrs' ,roJi, in eppr u_ 11111' i,•l~tfi :i,nnr l:rl 17 +1rr GIl',' nr Ilrnrru.,.,n,; ],lln I'HJ^ V I'.:' I.,rs 1r~v1~l,~utri r~.u-+ rt7H r.. 1 Fru,Wrip,, NIAr•ir 11 .11,111-oxlnlnlr-lt' Ii l tF-1 I 11111 ~.I I ih to n 1 41V. !l t 1 of wim(l 7. 116, ti rl ~.;w r'. 1111:: V Inrhi I. u,{ Hi'ilr:'~>rwuud ;ewer rlug h I)lid 'd!if{ YS f 1c~11 :11„nk Wlll:,Ir}+nrul 1..ir vrir l Sri 1l 1 r~'~ ippr~ox l rn, r r I , ,.'Iq' 11:11 nr r„, Irvrl with tn ',It !'rlu I ~wrl ?'Inr~i ''i~,l u: I': 11) '.'n1 F1rnu1 ~f'Inl1t Il?Mrh: i I1a 0:1va [NI Lnm❑8f j I~~ y~ 4 ' raw ! 1 `r• a.~.. • f . ~#i Q!N'~r #4~ iiit f R ~1' . ' ~.~..'.1f~,. r ,ruRi~ -.411110 »'~~t p!'''' T' notnl r IF .1 A r Ha x AT, to a i `rr II ~rctI t a n " f rIM.. ~ • 2-95-007 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY (SF-7) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO THE COMMERCIAL (C~ ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICA- TION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR _.753 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THR SOUTH SIDE OF I-35E, APPROXIMATELY 350 FEET SOUTHEAST FROM ITS INTLI'SECTION WITH LINDSEY STREET, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT 1, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, WHEREAS, Arthur J. Anderson, on behalf of RPS Ventures, Inc. (owner of the property), has applied for a change in zoning for 1 3.753 acres of land from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district classification and use designation to the Commercial (C) zoning district classification and use de;+i.gnation; and WHEI EAS, on April 26, 1995, the Planning and Zoning- Commission recommended denial of the requested change in zoning by a 3-2 vote; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by a 3/4ths supermajority, finds that the change in zoning will be in compliance with the D Development Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, enton THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION T That the zoning district classification and use designation of the 3.753 acres of land described in Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated into this ordinance by reference, is changed from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district classi- fication -nd use designation to the Commercial (C) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas. O SECTION TI That the Cityle official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION 111That 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. ' A • • SECTION IV That this ordinance shall become affective 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, a daily newspaper 0 O w • b ii 9 8 published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its pasvage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1995, BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: MICHAEL A. BUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY BY i j • d 0 0 • r em • ALL that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land situated in the A.N.g B. Tompkins Survey, A-1246 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas and being more particularly described as Yollows: BEGINNING at the northeast corner of a tract shown by deed to Boyd Morrison, recorded in Volume 2913, Page 161 Real Property Records Denton County Texas; THENCE west a distance of 316.23 feet to the northwest corner of a tract deeded to Harold E. Ferguson recorded in Volume 940, Page 809 Deed Re:ords; THENCE north 00 18' 12" west a distance of 179.61 feet to the southeast corner of a tract deeded to Denton Baptist Association, recorded in Volume 1901, Page 698 Real Property Records; THENCE north 0" 39' east with the east line of said Denton Baptist Association tract passing at 300.65 feet it's northeast corner and continuing on said bearing a total distance of 668.20 feet to a point in the center line of I.H. 35E; THENCE south 470 50' 42" east with the center line of IH 35E a distance of 199.61 feet to the Point of Curvature of a curve to the left, thru a central angle of 30 39' 24", radius of 3274.05 feet, and length of 208.95 feet to a point for corner; THENCE south 250 00' west a distance of 479.53 feet to a point for corner; THENCE south 550 00' east a distance of 250.27 feet to the Paint ,,f Beginning and containing 3.753 acres of land. i I AR0004CB r ..n.. ww'^T.'1-'.... y.. ~ r YYY .......Y44Yt1."AVY' , DENTON y oaa~°°°°°~oo 00 ~ oo 00 . o 0 G c~ G CJ f I d O ~ j OOfi app 000~~,0 ~ pp~ 0000 : oopQ N 0000000 CITY COUNCIL i I ~ o } • • eNo JrL7a_ A~It DATE: May 16, 1995 1 d~ j CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT TO: Mayor and Membe•s of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance to rezone 4,508 acres from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district to the Multi-Family 1 Conditioned (MF•I(C)) zoning district on property located on the east side of Ruddell Street, approximately 1,000 feet south of University Drive East. RECOMMENDATION: The Planting and Zoning Commission voted 5.0 to recommend approval of the petition. SUMMARY: See Planning and Zoning Commission Repo,i. BACKGROUND: See Planning and Zoning Commission Report, PROGRAMS. DEPARTMENTS OR GROUt'S AFFEr►Fn- Not applicable, SAL IMPACT; None. • 4ResWpectful submitted: • ll City Mana ger ....rte-.-...."...... Yr... • r ~rrwRwiY1K1141t':,. 4.ti....:. Y 4 ,Yl ~ ii' ~ i ul~ • • +gendaNu.~,~,~.~ Prepared by: a ~ alter E. Reeves, Jr. RL~ ` Urban Planner Approved; > rank H. Robbins, AlCP Director Planning and Development Attachment #1: Planning and 'laming Commission Report. Attachment #2; Planning and Zoning Commission minutes. Attachment #3: Ordinance. i i • 1 • I rya 0 loorda No ;rrr S'..IID.'_. Denton Planning and Zoning Commission 3e ` Case # Z-95-008 May 16, 1995 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Landmark Surveyors, Inc. 4238 i-35N Denton, TX 76207 Current Owner: Timbers Apartments, LTD. 1920 Ruddell Street Denton, TX 76201 Action: Requesting rezoning from SF-7 zoning district to MF-1 (Conditioned) zoning district, Location: East side of Ruddell Street, approximately 1,000 feet south of University Drive Easi.(See Attachment 1), Surrounding Zoning & Land Use North: Apartments, commercial use, MF-1 & C zoning, South: Single family residences, MF-1 zoning East: Single family residence/ranch, SF-7 zoning. West: TWU Golf Course. Denton Development Plan Low Intensity: Study Area #49 (204% allocated), SPECIAL INFORMATION Transportation & Drainage Platting necessary prior to development. Norma: platting requirements will apply; dedication of street right-of-way, sidewalks, and drainage Improvements. Landscaping • Will be required at the time of development. BACKGROUND This petition is generated out of a request by the applicant to develop a parking lot (for the existing Timbers Apartments) on the property shown on the plat of Block A, Lots 1 & 2 of the Timbers Apartments Addition, Section 3. • ' o Review and discussion of the request at DRC revealed that the apartments • were built on property in the SF-7 zoning district, and further research indicates construction occurred in 1972. At the direction of the DRC, the applicant submitted the request for rezoning, and the Commisslon has voted (6.0) to • • Agenda] lernlI recommend approval of the petition, The property is being oiatted I~' otrt~f obtain a permit for a parking lot. 4 i NOTICE Nine (9) notifications were mailed on April 14, 1995. Two replies were received, both in favor of the request. INTENSITY The subject property is located in a low intensity area (#49, 204% allocated). The overall intensity analysis is as follows: 4.508 acres x 60 t/d/ga = 270.48 Intensity trips. Project intensity is calculated as follows: 64 existing apartment units x 8 trips/unit = 512 Intensity trips. 2,352 acres x 200 t/d/ga = 470 intensity trips. Total Intensity trips = 982 Clearly, the proposed project is inconsistent with the general policy regarding proportionate share. However, this analysis is somewhat misleading. The existing apc rnent complex was constructed in 1972. Intensity Area #49 was last analyzed on November 22, 1989. Thus, the current 204% overaliocatlon includes the 64 existing apartments. The actual effect Is the 470 intensity trips generated cn the 2,352 acres being platted. Even taking into consideration the apartments have already been accounted for, the project is still over the proportionate share allocation. SEPARATION & CONCENTRATION The proposed rezoning Is also inconsistent with the concentration and separation policies of the DDP. The existing apartments (64 units on 2.156 acres) have a density of 28.68 traits per acre. Additionally, they are only a matter of feet away from the apartments to the north (also owned by the applicant) DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE CRITERIA From the DDP: If a specific request violates the general policy of proportionate allocation a determination should then be made whether there are • planning considerations that would warrant approval of a disproportionate allocation of intensity. The Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council should consider the following items, but are not limited to these items: 1. Public Facilities. • • • The proposal has access to water and sewer from Ruddell Street, which is classified as a collector level street. Drainage Improvements might have to be made to develop the southern portion of the property. 2. Topography, Part of the area being rezoned already has 64 apartment units. It can be s • AgeadaNo Agandaltem reasonably assumed that property was graded and prepared for tha use. Then j$ area being platted indicates a fall of @4 feet over a 280 foot distance, This is not a significant slope which would restrict or limit development, however, it is enough to require attention for drainage, 3. Surrounding Land Use. To the west is the TWU Golf Course. To the south is a strip of residential development along Ruddell Street. To the north are more apartments owned by the applicant. To the east Is a single family residence/ranch. The proposal does not appear to be Incompatible, particularly if the density is limited. 4. Other Policies. The project would support policies 12 and 13 of the DDP. Policy 12. Promote land use diversity to encourage housing and community facilities in close proximity to employment centers. Polley 13. Promote the development of a land use pattern conducive to the successful implementation of a mass transit system. SUMMARY Analysis of this request indicates that it is inconsistent with the Proportionate Share, Concentration, and Separation Policies of the DDP. However, there are other planning conditions that would support this request. The applicant has requested the rezoning at the direction of the DRC, and the request will take an existing non-conforming use (64 apartments) and make them a conforming use. The remaining property needs to be rezoned and platted to be used as parking for the 64 units. That part not being platted (2.011 acres) for parking could be more consistent with the DDP by limiting the number of units that could be developed at a future date. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends this rezoning request be approved subject to the condition that the 2.011 acres of Block A, Lot 2, have a maximum density of 24 units (11.93 du/scre). 0 ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend another zoning district or combination of zoning districts. 2. Recommend application with additional conditions. 3, Postpone consideration, s ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map. 2. Project Map 3. Intensity Area #49 data and map, i o 0 s Armcamrwr / ~►~D $ ..NORTH iL..JLJ I__j MOM ue AX yih ~ 6{ _ -SITE WA;t 111nmp AIWL r / ILi -r r C~ PAi r ~ =.11%-~LJ PA~SLET ~ii~ nuale }}jM aee io t NNEk ~-JL_J J ' 0 1 - - , tooatiee may • low, f , I o ~ ~ f I f 0 f f 0 0 f f 0 f • f • 0 • f:J I pall INTINSITT ARIA ~ 9 one m •OUNDART DIACRI►TION 10 I / I ~j~ Cy 1~1i~ !7 h n~ Cast; village east Drive west; Ruddell Street $ 1 North; University Drive East (Highway )901 South: TP and MKST Railroad ~f f ~ j r `N1 ~II'I `t j ~ ~ yMi~ JJ ~rri 6.1 0 't~I oil 0 1000 2000 ~ it ~ \ I ®errr w wanoA; ►rrA9 7 13 • s~ • ATWCr 3 J~=ndar)o lenLR LAND USE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTI CITY OF DENTON Intenrity area ti 49 c Low Y _ Traffic survey zones: 6366 6570 Intensit trips/ac 6c Boundary Descriptions Northt University Dr. East Southi TP i NKiT Railroad Data: 11/22/89 East$ Villagqe East Dr. West: Ruddel1 St. LAND USE EXISTING LAND USE LO CATEGORY UNITS ACRES INTENSITY ACRES INTENSITY ACRES~NEUNITS iNNENSCT _--_---o_ SF-16 < 9 7,88 90 0 0 SF-10>!-6 0 p 0 0 0 C SF-7>30 181 60.1 1810 54.56 2291.52 0 0 G LESS $F-1 10 2.46 100 0 0 0 0 0 MOB.HONES 0 0 p 0 0 DUPLEX 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MF-R 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~i22 2002 14.54 1616 1.04 208 00 G G' OFFICE 0 0 0 0 0 14.32 0 9365 INDUSTRY 0 0.91 95.55 0 0 30 0 1050' II PAR 0 NSSTKSI'NAL 0 4.93 419.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R/0/SPACE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C TRANSPORT 0 20.94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.64 0 0 0 CANT 0 108.56 TOTAL 402 220.34 4131 64.24 2500 44.32 0 19808 19808 CALCULATIONS (1) Intensity area total trips 220.34 times 60 13220 ~2~ Trips allocated to existing land use 308 3 Trips allocated to current zoning incl. P Ds (nob built) 2} 24131 4 Trips allocated to vacant lands not zoned plus Agic. zoning 518 (5) Estlsated unallocated intensity trips 1)sinus(2)+(3)+(4) -13736 __--_-(6)-r Percentage of intensity trips allocated ----------------------204 • • • • 3 i 1 r 4 i r 1I u: l • e P & Minutes In 18 April 26, 1995 ' Page 7 following staff recommendations and the condition change for number seven so that the sentence include the statement that all trees with a two inch or greater trunk diameter and within twenty-five feel of the property line be maintained. Mr. Norton: I'll second that motion. Ms. Russell: Any discussion? All in favor of the motion please raise your right hand. All opposed same sign, Approved. (5-0) 111. Timbers Apartments. A 4.505 acre tract located on the west side of Ruddeli Street, approximately 1,000 feet south of East University. a, Hold a public hearing and consider the rezoning from the Single-Family 7 to the Multi-Family 1 (conditioned) zoning district. Ms. Russell opened the public hearing. Mr. Reeves: This is a request for rezoning that came out of a request to replat a piece of property for a parking lot. 11 is on Ruddell street directly across from the TWU golf course. At DRC we noted that the zoning line was not where it was portrayed and there were apartments constructed on property [hat was actually zoned SF-7. There area approximately sixty-four units that were built in 1972. At the direction of DIRE they applied for rezoning. The total area to be rezoned includes the property that the apartments are on and the property for the parking the lot. The intensity analysis shows that this request it actually over the allowed intensity. The intensity that is allowed Is two hundred and seventy intensity trips. The total intensity of the request is nine hundred and eighty-two trips. Concerning separation and concentration, the existing apartment complexes that is owned by the applicant so it does not meet the separation requirement, nor does it meet the concentration requirement, The level of apartment development on the property [here is at a density of almost thirty units per acre, It fails • these three criteria so we have to go to the other four criteria. It has access to utilities from Ruddell street and the apartments are currently receiving service. There is nothing to say concerning the topography. The area to the south where they are proposing to put the parking there are no problems. There will need to be some drainage considerations made at a later date. It is a SF-7 piece of land surrounded by MF-1 zoning with the TWU golf course across the street. We recommend approval with the condition that the ® following preliminary plat for the 2.011 acres of Block A, Lot 2 have only a maximum e • density of twenty-four units total which keeps it at a density of 11,93 dwelling units per acre. This is lower than our multifamily concentration criteria in the Denton { Development Plan. • O • • P & 'Z. Minutes April 26, 1995 Page 8 Mr. Norton: You say that the request is to build a parking lot how is the intensity increased when there are no buildings proposed? Mr. Reeves: The way that we do the analysis is on the basis of what the zoning being requested is. MF-1 zoning according to the appendix to the DDP has an . Mr. Norton: Are we saying that the approach to get the zoning right is what has changed the frequency? The parking lot by itself unless there is construction for additional use is not going to increase the density, Mr. Robbins: 'rho first step is for parking but they could build apartments at a later date. Ms. Russell: Would the petitioner like to speak'? Mr. Brian Burke: My name is Brian Burke and I live at 1318 Auburn. I would like to speak to you about this zoning change request, This came about because parking along Ruddell Street is being discouraged and the owners of the Timbers Apartments have been told that they need to provide parking for their residents. They have purchased the property to the south in order to provide parking. In the course of preparing the request for the platting of the lot i, was discovered that the zoning was SF-7. It is zoned multi- family to the north and south and it makes sense to make the whole four and a half acres rnulti-family. Mr. Norton left at 6:00 p,m, Dr. Huey: Are we just being asked to rezone the parking area? Mr. Burke: The rezoning is for the whole four and a half acres. There are no immediate plans for anything other than the parking lot right now, • (Discussion) j Dr. Huey: Would the density recommended together with the existing density being the whole area into compliance? Tell me the reasoning behind it, • Mr. Reeves: No it wouid not. The reasoning behind It is that we have to recognize the ~ • ~ fact that the density level there is already higher than it should be according to the Denton Development Plan. If we rezone that entire 2.4 acre piece below the existing apartments and they are only going to use A acres for a parking lot then that leaves • ® 11 1 '~I l •t '1 • • ~idirllQU...R~(\~..LILIA~M1.. P & Z Minutes i' I® April 26, 1995 Page 9 approximately two acres left that will be mulli-family zoned. A . asity that would bring everything into compliance with the DDP it would be so low as to be undevelopable for multi-family use. This is a compromise so that the land could still he developed as multi-family. By rezoning it we are saying that we think this is the best use for the property. Ms, Schertz: Mr. Burke is the owner happy with the conditions? Mr. Burke: Yes. Ms. Russell: Would anyone like to speak in favor of the petition? Would anyone like to speak in opposition to the petition'? Mr, Albert Ellis: My name is Albert Ellis and I live at 1604 Ruddell. I have lived there for a little over forty-five years. I am not speaking in opposition to this petition but I would like to say something about the storm drainage and the sewage system. Since the apartments have been built we have had a problem with storm drainage and sewage. 1 believe [hat there is only a six inch sewer line out there and it is not adequate. I have no objection with a parking lot but I do have a problem with the storm water. Dr. Huey: Is there a sewage backup problem out there? Mr. Ellis: Yes and I wish I had documented all the time:; that I have had to call the city to come and clear it. I have had it backup into my house and my yard. It is just raw sewage that backs up into my yard and I finally put an overflow in so that it would not backup into my house. Ms. Russell: Is there a vacant lot on the south side of your house? Mr. Ellis: No. • Discussion about sewer line and storm water. j Mr. Glen Ford: My name is Glen Ford and my family lives next door to Mr. Ellis. I used to live there when I was a young man. My family Is unable to get here tonight and that is why I am here speaking to you. My family owns two lots. The sewer does • backup and when it rains it washes across their back lot, We don't have a problem with • the rezoning. We would like to see something done about the drainage and the sewer system. I- f^, r 1f 1 I" ~ P & l Minutes'; Aprii 26, 1995 Page 10 vv I Ms. Russell: Would anyone else like to speak in opposition? Would the petitioner like to make any comments? Mr. Burke: We believe that Mr. Ellis and Mr. Ford have valid concerns. A large area from Ruddell eastward including that pasture to the east of this property is like a bowl. When we looked at the shape of the property we realized that we needed to look at drainage. For the parking lot we are going to drain it to the west, to the gutter in Ruddell. I did a drainage study for both lots and in the future when Lot 2 is developed something will have to be done to accommodate the runoff. The things that I have suggested are on site detention for that lot, or an underground pipe system, or an open channel, or a combination of an open channel and underground pipe system with an easement from one of these gentleman or successive owner across that property to an ultimate drainage outfall. The applicant is aware that something will have to be done before they develop Lot 2. As far as the sewage problem I am concerned to hear about that. The applicant is not aware of any systematic problems up there at the apartments, As Mr. Ford suggested before this property is developed that needs to be considered too, Ms. Russell: We will close the public hearing. Are there any further statements? Mr. Reeves: The drainage and the sewage are part of the platting and not part of the J zoning process. They are important but it was an attempt on my part to keep the issues separate. Dr. Huey: Please address the issue of the raw sewage and it seems to be an over building of the area, Please address the situation. Mr. Cosgrove: I was not aware of any problems. We will take a look at this because this is unacceptable. The city is responsible to take care of existing problems and we will take a look at this. w Ms. Russell: 1 would like to see this problem addressed because I go through this area twice a day. There is some vacant space that stands in water a great deal of the time, I definitely see water standing around this area a lot. It is not an occasional thing, I would consider it to be chronic, Mr. Salmon: We made some storm newer improvements a few years ago and at this , • e point in time there are no plans to do any more capital Improvements out there in regards to drainage. This is the first I have heard that it is not adequate. Ms. Russell: I think the sewer is more of a concern for just health reasons. I think we ~ 4 • • t "a~Jt~j~lrlyl# '~I~• P & Z Minutes April 26, 1995 1$ Page 11 have to deal with this. Mr. Cochran: If the sewer is over flowing into Mr. Ellis' yard then that is unacceptable situation. Ile shouldn't have to wait for a capital improvement. Dr. Huey: There were not any responses of the notices that were sent out? Mr. Ellis and Mr. Ford handed their responses to the public notice to Mr. Reeves. Mr. Reeves: Just these two. Mr. Cochran: 'those are clearly serious problems even though they do not address this zoning issue before us. There are apartments in place and It would seem reasonable that we would proceed with this zoning therefore, I move for approval of the rezoning from SF-7 to MF-1 conditioned zoning district including the entire lot. Ms. Schertz: I'll second, Ms. Russell: Any discussion? All in favor please raise your right hand. Opposed same sign. Approved, (4-0) b. Consider the preliminary plat of Lots 1 a xi 2, Block A of the Timbers apartments Addition, Section 3, Mr. Reeves: This is the preliminary plat for two lots and they will be final platted as soon as sidewalk plans are submilted. Lot 1 is proposed to be used as a parking lot, The DRC recommends approval. Ms. Russell: Any questions? • Dr. Huey: What is Lot 2? All the rest of it? Mr. Reeves: Yes. Dr. Huey: I move for approval for the preliminary plat for Block A, Lots 1 and 2 of the Timbers Apartment Addition. 9 Ms. Schertz: I'll second. Ms. Russell: Any discussion? All in favor of the motion please raise your right hand. • • Ga 2-95-008 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DEN'TON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY (SF-7) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO THE MULTI-FAMILY 1 CONDITIONED (MF-1(C)) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 4.508 ACRES OF LAND LOCAPED ON THE EAST SIDE OF RUDDELL STREET, APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEE:' SOUTH OF UNIVERSITY DRIVE EAST, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT 1, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED BY REFER- ENCE HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Landmark Surveyors, on behalf of Timbers Apartments, LTD (owner of the property), has applied for a change in zoning for 4.508 acres of land from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district classification to the Multi-Family 1 Conditioned (MF-1(C)) zoning district. classification; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the requested change in zonin; and r 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 4.508 acres of land described in Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated into thin ordinance by reference, is changed from the Single Family 7 (SF-7) zoning district classi- fication and use designation to the Multi-Family 1 Conditioned (MF- 1(C)) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehens:.ve zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, sub- ject to the following condition: i That no more than twenty-four (24) dwelling units total exist at any one time on that portion of the subject property described by Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. I SECTION.-U, That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION III. That any person violating any provision of this ® ordinance shall, upon conviction, be fined a sum not exceeding 0 $2,000.00. Each day that a provision of this ordinance is violated shall constitute a separate and distinct offense. ,,SE9,1ION IV. 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 J.-•..r--r ...wu•...,•M . • r r•r r.M I. YY}i1~1.{.. ♦ JIYP 4 , • i r ulsnd)No S: Ro.A 18 published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1995. BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: MICHAEL BUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY s 1 I • a> • I M17 sit wo~- ~Lj ez>= 99~ j rr~f f ~~j !lf f E"~ U W= W- r Mtn nz YZ[ t l;. f# oza°u z lltj~E ft`f k kt' t'~~ e v a cn- z 41 10 TMABER5 SUBYV40c SCC10N 2 r~ CAP i m 1: l ~R g n 290 -,5107' A ~ 1r CONC~ rc n H '~t 4 ?1 I ' ~ ~~~RAIk LAWREN(L C LICCAL0U1- ""'MMM-----"'---'- TO qq ASOrUt 1 I➢ TW TkYgAS ORAPARriC05SlTD iV ti + (r E i y < j tl ZONED Mr-1 FARKND fe } f .G.C ~y e r r S +JI'SrpO' E L01 S6 also, V L9 1 NLW ALftIG SON PORER CJISOHI6 ri g H 1 D157, LK LK ALL BULDNOS NOT LAB(LCD i. l/l, 117 ARE EkISTM 7-sty BRICx I, W e t h 9 A R FRAIA APARTIQNIS Cn • 1 OA CONC. sIAB p- RIC P Cu51s71 w 1 D (L' I A To C N ASPHALT BALM !I N Y08Vy SvSTCNS, ' W CAROL VOL MM 1, SO, PG D56, h PARKlr' C~ i 1 II L01- RP ADC 1. O -ps. ASPHA . PA (I 18* eltE~~ ern ~ d"' WS 0, L ADOfsON p W5 DOHA GRISSOV V0. 3706tPG !79 79 ~ DA 1 J EEt5T9W PORTABI( (MISTN" S R y~ I-SfY ON . q 17 YC'AL FRAVJ MRS D. C ADOISON P CA RA R lf ~CAY RCS B 10 GpGp C r ! *j`4---•a VOL Ro cP 7t ~ . (V O uN: ! II • • ^OR;N CON! RAIk R i All - ' ~EwltOar, a I ~ Ado 'cr'SIPI; , d vi cAAW ZONED SF-7 s• ' CRENSHA SURVEY A-31 •w N N•M M SN,57' i(. D. i NI/~7 ZONCO MF-1 s..vt' a 011 • c~ e i - r n ~ r .N ~ Y~ 16 4 SURVEYQ r ~^C r FIRR.Y ~V 1. :..r a y,. U A,~J r,~14' ~ 2.011 ACRES BEING all that oe►t O lot, but or parcel of land sklated in the William Crenshow Survey Abstract Number 318, In the City and County of Denton, Tom, being a part of that curtain tract of land conveyed by deed from Mrs, D. C. Addison to Mrs, Donis Grissom recorded In Volume 370, Page 379, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, and being all of that certain tract of land conveyed by deed from Mrs. D. C. Addison to Mrs, Donis Grissom, recorded In Volume 318, Page, 71, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas, and being more particularly, d►sufiIOW as follows; BEGINNING at an Iron rod set for comer in the east line of Ruddell Street, a public roadway having a right-of-way of 40.0 feet, sold point being the northwest corner of that certain tract of land cmveyed by deed from R. P. Denton to J. A. EIIis recorded in Volume 349, Page 600, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas; THENCE N 020 28' 00" E, 211.95 foot with said east fine of said Street to an iron rod set for comer; THENCE S 89° 31' 00" E, 228.75 feet, to an Iron rod sat for corner THENCE N 020 15' 38" E. 65.00 feet to an iron rod set for comer In the south line of that certaln tract of land conveyed by deed from Lawrence E. McCullough to the Timbers Aartments Ltd, recorded in Volume ON, Page 795, Deed Records, Denton County, Tee; THENCE S 890 31' 00" E. 135.02 feet with said south line of said Tlmtats Apartments tract to on iron rod found for corner in the west line of that cwtwn tad of land conveyed by deed from Richard B. Cushman and Carolyn S. Cushman to Mobility Systems, inc., recorded In Volume 2850, Page 958, Real Property Records. Dentin County, Texas; e THENCE S 01. 49 02" W, 284,52 feet with said west line of acid fi+le* Systems, Inc. tract to a fence comer for comer, sold point being the northeast corner of said tract of land conveyed by deed from R. P. Denton to J, A. Ellis, recorded In Volume 349, Pogo 800, Deed Records, Denton County, Texas; THENCE N 88. 19' NJ" W, 388.57 feet with the north line of said Ellis inset to ~ • • ® the PLACE OF BEGINNING and vntaining 2.011 acres of land. + r:xHIRIT ~ti~rrtl 0 O i 3 DENTON o~oaooaQOO~p° 00" oo°~ 0000 00 oD O. ~D a G ~ ° o i 00 ~es UD O N °°QaCOnoa~~°°° .ITT q ~ } a NCIL ! { • • ,og~dahc 0~lt , 3 DAI"F.: +ay 1 1995 I CITY COUNCIL, REPORT FORMAT TO: Mayor and Membeis of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consider an ordinance to rezone 4.2721 acres from the Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Light Industrial Conditioned (LI(C)) zoning dishicl on properly located on the south side of 1356, approximately 3,200 feet north of state School Road. RECOMMENI)ATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the rezoning (5-0). SUMMARY: See [Tanning and Zoning Commission Report. BACKGROUND: See Planning and Zoning Commission Report. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: Not applicable. FISCAL IMPACT: None. • Respeelfully submitted; v, • Cit arrei) Ciry ~ • Manager Prepared by, • _Ij A 0 Venda No ~ a3 alter E. Reeves, Jr. Urban Planner Approved: "PR F ank H. obbins, A 4C VP Director Planning and Development Attachment #1: Planning and Zoning Commission Report. Attachment #2: and Zoning Commission minutes. Attachment #3: Ordinance. Attachment #4: Resolution, i r wrwFI YNIII~~M1'.l Wrr'•• j Russ" • vIsntlaNo,. tgeadaite+n ~ Denton Planning and Zoning Commission Report Case #Z-95-006 May 16, 1995 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant Robert Raynor 1108 Dallas Drive Suite 310 Denton, TX 76201 Owner: Paul Lc,;khart 1108 Dallas Drive, Suite 310 Denton, TX 76201 Action Requesting rezoning from Agricultural zoning district to Light Industrial (Conditioned) and amendment of the Denton Development Plan. LoCOV011; Adjacent to the south side of 1-35E, 3,200 feet north of State School Road (Attachment 1). Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: 1-35E. South: Vacant, Agriculturally zoned land. Bast: Vacant, Agriculturally zoned land. West; Vacant, Agriculturally zoned land. Denton Development Plan(DDP)t Low Intensity, Study area ##77 (187% allocated). SPECIAL INFORMATION Water/Wastewater * Water available from line in 1.35E access road. * Sewer available at State School Road. * Fire hydrant will need to be installed when property is platted, Engineering * Plauhtg necessary prior to development. * Norrnat platting requirements will apply. * Only one driveway access. * Need to evaluate possible location of future collector street. BA GIC 1ND • 77ris petition Is largely a speculative rezoning on the pan of the property owner In • • order to maximize the marketability of the subject property (Attachment 2). This request included a condition limiting the number of uses allowed in the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. Again, this list of conditioned uses was pared slightly to exclude only the most obviously odious ones, or those for which considerably more 11 0 0 • ca • property would be required, 'O~ TICE ,,Jx (6) notifications were mailed on April 14, 1995. All replies received were favorable. ANALYSTS Intensity The subject property is located in a low intensity area (1177, 167% allocated). The overall intensity analysis is as follows: 4.2721 acres x 60 trips/day/gross acre (t/d/ga) - 256 intensity trips. Project intensity is calculated as follows: 4,2721 acres X 350 t/d/ga - 1303 intensity trips. Clearly, the proposed project is inconsistent with the general policy regarding proportionate share. Separation & Concentration The proposed rezoning is consistent with the concentration policy of the DDP, by being under 5 acres in size. The proposed rezoning may not be consistent with the separation policy, as a large retail area is located approximately 1,000 feel to the north along 1-358. Disproportionule Share Criteria From the DDP: If a specific request violates the general policy of proportionate allocation a determination should then he made whether there are planning considerations that would warrant approval of a disproportionate allocation of intensity. The planning & Zoning Commission and City Council shaald consider the following items, but are not limited to these items: 1. Public Facilities. The proposal has access to water along the 1-35E access road. Sewer is available 03,200 feet away at State School Road. 7'Ite property has • direct access to the 1-35E frontage road. 2. Topography. 'llte property has a cleared area roughly in the center of the property where a former nightclub once stood. The property slopes sharply away to the north and southwest of this location, and more gently to the • southeast and south. 97he northern portion of the property is heavily r wooded, and contains the property's major drainage feature. As the property moves toward the southeast, it becomes significantly less wooded. The topography of the properly lips the potential to make • S • • tr~nm,laNu q~'~~- ~1~,~,.•- 5 development difficult without extensive grading. Drainage is also a S3 concern. 3. Surrounding Land Use. The surrounding land is currently vacant. Approximately 1,000 feet to the north is a large commercial/retail area (Luby's). Approximately 2,500 feet to the south is Jostens. To the north is [-35E. 4. Other Policies. This proposal would seem to support Policies 4, 7, & 9. Policy 4. Promote the development of a stable and diversified economic base to generate Increasing job opportunities and a broader tax base. Policy 7. Encourage it spatial pattern of land use development which reduces the cost of public services and infrastructure. Policy 9, Protection of residential neighborhoods from the Inintsion of incompatible land uses, traffic, noise, and pollution. Summary Analysis of this request indicates that it is inconsistent with the Proportionate Share and Separation Policies of the DDP. However, the disproportionate share analysis indicates there are other planning conditions that could suplor1 this request, DDP AMENDMENT The DDP describes (lie procedure for raising an areas intensity standard. If the City Council or the Planning Commission wants to raise the intensity standard for a low or moderate area, the Planning & Zoning Commission arO the City Council Gould conduct it special study session, focusing on the intensity question and the impact of changing the intensity standard. The specific study process shall be determined by the Commission or Council, but the study must examine the intensity allocation for the city as it whole and how that level will be maintained. • However, if the standard is increased, this action does not mean automatic approval of an individual proposal..,. .-The intent of the allocation Policy is to maintain an intensity baldnce iu each area so that the intensity in the City is equally distributed. Tlrc general policy is to not allow a disproportionate share of intensity; ® however, depending on the area and planning reasons, certain parcels • may receive more that u proportionate share. T}re specific rot-mula for calculating intensity is located in Appendix A. • e t G► • (#77)- In__9S a3 'f}te DDP adopted in September 1988, designated the area tinder consideration as a Low Intensity Area. The primary purpose of low intensity areas is to ensure the overall land use/Iransportatiou balance by controlling the overall density and intensity. Further, these areas represent primary housing areas in the City of Denton. Thus, these areas should emphasize residential use instead of a mixture of residential and nonresidential. 17he current boundaries of Area #77 are shown in Attachment 3. This area encompasses 2225,76 gross acres. The DDP, through the Concept Map, to a large degree recognizes the attractiveness of the 1.35 Corridor to nonresidential land uses. The area shown on Attachment 4, will only become more attractive for nonresidential development as time goes on, Another factor is the Visions effort which has brought additional focus to the entrances into the City of Denton, and the impression made on people as they enter and leave the eity. The area shown in Attachment 4, is the area the staff has identified its being suitable for consideration as an intensity amendment. 11te area encompasses approximately 145 acres, and properties in the Agricultural, General Retail, and Light Industrial zoning districts, and PD 20. Attachment 5 illustrates the zoning both inside, and outside, the proposed amendment, As can be seen from Attachment 5, a large portion of the amendment area (C100 acres) is already at a moderate or greater intensity use by virtue of its zoning as Light Industrial and General Retail use, and by PD 20. For (his 0 100 acres, a move to moderate intensity would bring consistency between the actual zoning and the DDP. The remaining 45 acres is located in the Agricultural zoning district, and is largely vacant. Across 1-35E is all area designated an "Urban Center," and directly to the north is another moderate intensity area. On its face, a move to a moderate intensity area is supportable. However, there are other factors to be taken into consideration. 17he DDP states that the specific study process shall be determined by the Commission or Council, but the study must examine the intensity allocation for the city as a whole and how that level will be maintained. Apparently, this requirement has not been strictly followed in the past, and has not been followed in this case. A second consideration is that the DDP is to he reviewed in its entirety within the next few years. Piecemeal amendment is not a good approach when review of the entire document is to take place in a relatively short lime frame. Finally, this is it large intensity amendment when considered against other moderate intensity amendments. Such an amendment will almost certainly prompt other property owners in the area to proceed with similar speculative rezonings. It is shnilar to a Plan amendment made with PD zoning on 1- 35E about a mile south of this site (#76, see Attachment 7) This case is very much a precedent setter. ® Alternative Approach + In conjunction with the proposed DDP intensity amendment, the Commission has considered an alternative policy approach. In recognizing the Importance of entryways into Denton, the Planning & Zoning Commission, and the City Council, has generally required that projects along these entryways be Planned Developments (PD's). In light • 0 4 c.+ of efforts to make the City of Denton more "riser friendly," the Commission is 7 ra3 considering the following approach regarding entryway projects. U Recognizing that property along the 1-35 corridor is especially auracHve for nonresidential development, tire Commission feels ()lot a redesignation as a moderate intensity area is not out of keeping. The approach suggested by the Commission in this particular case is a,; follows. A. The list of conditioned uses was substantially pared to reach a level of consistency with PD-72 (see Attachment 6). R. The moderate intensity measure of 350 t/d/ga was used to calculate the maximum floor area of any and all buildings to be constructed on the property, The calculation used: (Total acres of the project x 350 t/d/ga)/Table 1, Appendix A Trip Gen. Factor x 1,000, In this case the calculation works in this manner: (4.2721 acres x 30 Intensity trips)/60 trips x 1,000 - 25,000 square feet. T'lie total square footage of the property is 186,093 square feet. This yields a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.1343. This is an extremely low floor area ratio, and should result in a large portion of the property remaining free of buildings and parking, and in open space. C. Considering that the city has no architectural standard to apply and the high visibility of the loc[rtion, a condition has been adapted from PD 134, across 1- 35E from this site, to recommend in this approach. That corrugated, or any other metal exterior, will riot be allowed on any building elevation visible from 1-35E. D. As this is a speculative rezoning, and considering the location, the Commission would also recommend a condition in this approach that would prohibit all "off-premise" signage on the subject property. This condition would effectively prevent the use of the property for billboard signs during and after the marketing process, lherehy reinforcing the entryway policy. • E. As a possible light industrial location, the potential for a loading dock area and dumpster location is very high. 71iough necessary, these areas are not the most aesthetically pleasing. Therefore, t}te Commission would also recommend that tiny loading dock ureu and/or dutnpster location(s), he screened by a minimum six (6) foot opaque screen (fence, wall, vegetation) from view from 1-35E. • 1r. Due to the heavy vegetation on the property, the Commission feels that no r formal bufferyard is required provided all existing trees having trunks at least / two inches in diameter, within 25' of the property lines, are maintained, and the property is located in it Moderate intensity Area as defined by the DDP. I 1 • rv;;;l ~plu C t,P , r Should the property remain in a Low Intensity Area, then t appropriate $c~a3 bufferyard would be required. There Is a substantial difference between this approach and the PD approach currently in use. This approach would limit the Commission's ability to review, in detail, all aspects of a project along an e,tryway. Thus, this is a rather large policy question that the Commission has considered in this case. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of this request (5-0 vote), subject to the following conditions; I, The list of peen fitted uses is as per Attachment 6. 2. The maximum total floor area for all hnildiag(s) constructed on Itre 4.2721 acres is 25,000 :square feet. 3. No off premise signage will be permitted, 4. All loading dock and dumpster areas will be screened from the view of 1.35E by a minimum six (6) foot solid, opaque, screen (fence, wall, vegetation). If vegetation is chosen, it must remain opaque throughout the year. 5. That corrugated, or any other metal exterior, will not be allowed on any building elevation visible from 1-35E. 6. No outside storage of tiny kind, 7. All trees with having trunks at least two inches in diameter, and are within 25 feet of the property lines, be maintained, ALTERNATIVn 1 Approve the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation. 2. Send back to Plarminp and 7Aming Commission for further consideration. 3. Postpone consideration. • A TA HMENTS 1. Location Map. 2. Zoning Exhibit, 3. Intensity Area #77 Map and Data. 1 4, Intensity Amendment Area. • 5, Amendment Area Surrounding Zonings. • • 6, List of Uses, 7. Intensity Area #76 Map and Data, • 0 • ca • Amin I 9 a NORTH ~a J • SITE taeatin imp • oa • 0 Ap~ndr; l40 ~ Arr~cµ ~ Enrr 302 0 ~ 0 • • Y ~IMYtTMI-yRY1®~ I.~Y WIC ~ ` In.~~S ?nd yr:~;q ,t ~r f f f /~77#fry~/In- 3.,3rda LAND USE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM 5 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMEN'T' CITY OF DENTON Intensity area A: 77 Traffic survey zones: 66008 6613A Intensity trips/ac 60 Boundary Description: North: A line separating 2F and GR zoning Data: 11 South: Robinson, State school Rd, city limit to I-3 /20/89 East: I-35E __west:`- Lillian Miller Pkwy, and FM 2181 LAND USE EXISTING LAND USE CURRENT ZONING PD CATEGORY UNITS ACRES INTENSITY ACRESS INTENSITY ACRFS NNEUNITS INTENSIT SFSF--16 10> < 17 15.79 170 16 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 1.63 498.9 41.02 124 1240 SF-7>10 125 42.66 1250 5 5.69 238.48 136.74 LESS SF-7 0 0 0 0 0 536 5360 MOS.NOMES 270 71.64 2700 0 86'23 766 7660 DUPLEX 0 0 0 17.1 0 0 0 MF-R 0 00 0 1368 35.63 32 3020 MF-1i2 0 0 0 4.7 3 32 256 COMT 0 17.805 11602.0 4.53 2944.5 878. 7.52 1616 12928 0 0 17. b-I 0 56888 INSDUSTRY 00 13.6 1428 6.7 703.5 33,52 0 6139 'NAL 145 12325 0 0 0 3519.6 PARKS 0 43.09 1292.7 0 0 0 0 0 R/0/SPACE 0 13.15 p 0 0 0 TRANSPORT 0 68,16 0 52.63 0 0 AGRIC. 0 0 0 10.26 6 0 0 0 0 26:.9 0 VACANT 0 897.41 0 0 0 0 - 0 r TOTAL 412 1328.35 30768 97012 \ -------323_81 _5754 ----573-6-----]376_-------- INTENSITY CALCULATIONS (1) Intensity area total trips 1328.35 times (2) Trips allocated to existing land use 60 79701 68 (3) Trips allocated to current zoning incl. P Ds (not built) 10276 4 4 Trips allocated to vacant lands not zoned plus Agqric. zonlnq 15774 (5) Estimated unallocated intensity trips 1)minus 2 + 3 + (6) Percentage of intensity trips allocated ( ) ( ) (4) •69606 ---------------------------187 • a y. • • NNN I I`UNSITi AREA .A 77 f` T AJ • -f • Scal• t: • m • ATTACHMENT 6 2F PD in ~ d C - - - - - - PDL 28 . B V-10 PO x • U • MP ( PD A 1 • GJ • .15-4(0 qS_ 1H ai CASE. #Z-95-006 PERMITTED USES Primary Residential Uses Dormitory, Boarding or Rooming House Hotel or Moiel E ca ional. Institutlonal & Spgclal Uses Art Gallery or Museum Church or Rectory College or University or Private School i mmunity Center (Public) Day Camp Day Nursery or Kindergarten School Fairground or Exhibition Area Group Homes Home for Care of Alcoholic, Narcotic or Psychiatric Patients Hospital (General Acute Care) Hospital (Chronic Care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthropic Nature Public Library Monestary or Convent Nursing Nome or Residence Home for Aged Park, Playground or Public Community Center School, Private Primary or Secondary School, Public or Denominational School, Business or Trade r Utility, Accessory & Incidentyl Uses Accessory Building Community Center (Private) Electrical Generating Plant Electrical Sul.-tation • Electrical Transmission Line Temporary Field or Construction Office (Subject to apnoval end control by the Building Inspector) Fire Station or Similar Public Safety Building Gas Transmission Line and Metering Station Private Swimming Pool Telephone, Business Office • Telephone Line anti Exchange Switching or Relay Station • • • tJ • ra • ~,,daft 10 .95- Recreational & Ent il"I"menr_Uffs a Amusement, Commercial (indoor) ! , t Country Club (Private) with Golf Course U Public Golf Course Commercial Golf Course Public Park or Playground Public Playfield or Stadium Roller or Ice Skating Rink Swim or Tennis Club Theater, Other than Drive-In Type Bus Station or Terminal _Trysnorfation Retilted Useks Hauling or Storage Company Motor Freight Terminal Auto Laundry Aulonroblfe Service uRs Gasoline Service Station (Interpreted as gas slat ion/con Yenfence store) Antique Shop Mall nd farylce Tyne Usec Bakery or Confectionery Shop (Retail) Cafeteria Cleaning and Pressing Small Shop and Pickup Custom Personal Service Shop Drapery, Needlework or Weaving Shop Florist or Garden Shop Greenhouse or Plant Nursery (Retail) Handicraft Shop Household Appliance Service and Repair Laundry or Cleaning Self Service Mimeograph, Stationary or Letter Shop Mortuary or Funeral Parlor Offices, Professional and Administrative Off Premise Sale of Deer and/or Wine On Premise Sale of Beer and/or Wine Licensed Private Club Restaurant Retail Stores and Shops-4,000 square feet or less Retail Stores and Shops-over 4,000 square feet Studio for Photographer, Musician, Artist or Health Agricultural Tyne Ulna Greenhouse or Plant Nursery • o~ Comnwrclal Tyne uHs (pA~ a 3 Bakery (Wholesale) f_u Building Material Sales Cabinet and Upholstery Shop Cleaning and Dyeing Plant (Commercial) Cleaning Plant, Bags or Carpels (Special Equipment) Clothing Manufacture or Light Compounding or Fabrication Job Printing or Newspaper Printing Laundry Plant (Commercial) Milk Depot, Dairy, or Ice Cream Plant Paint Shop Petroleum Products, Storage-Wholesale Plumbing Shop Scientific or Research Laboratories Storage or Sales Warehouse Transfer, Storage and Baggage Terminal Wholesale Office and Sample Room General Maeufaclurina a r a ~►^W uses Light Manufacturing or Induetrial Uses which meet the performance standards prescribed by Section 35-328. Permitted Uses With Approved Specific Use Permit Correctional Facilities Fraternity, Sorority, Lodge or Civic Club 0 I i _ W..... t i `;rsi ill , t?Yt„ 3 ~~is~3i m lllt/M/ltt AlfA 1 /~~'MM of r ebal ACIN G I~VMOAlT Ot/C/IfTICN ~JG,'1dhC 8._1 D_95 ___.'j; Woeli i•li/ !7 +tottR~ Unlon 1'oeitlo Relleoo/ Itotutiy Mkt Ralltee/) eM ►oettus RotA ')utnt City ilaleo lino eoutk of Sh*dy Ikotoo Raid p. q t 'ehyaf ~ ' t t A vim".^.~,~•~•'._ ~ - ~ em « ~artwl ras i .3a- • a qS a P 7 Minutes +I 1 1~~ Il 19 April 26, 1995 Page 2 , IL [-fold a public hearing and consider a request to rezone 4.2721 acres from the Agricultural zoning district to the Light Industrial (conditioned) zoning district; and an amendment to the Denton Development Plan, changing the intensity area from low to moderate in an area on the south side of IH35, roughly from the Southridge shopping center to State School Road. The subject property is located on the southside of I-35H, approximately 3,200 feel north of Stale School Road. Ms. Russell read the public hearing procedure rules, Ms. Schertz arrived at 5:07 p.m. Mr. Reeves: In this case the rezoning and the PD amendment are tied together. This rezoning is located on the south side of 1-35 east of Lillian Miller. This area is 4.2721 acres. The proposal is for a rezoning to light industrial district with a list of the conditioned uses. Hasically we took the list of allowed uses in a light industrial district and paired them down to a number and type of use that was more consistent with the other PDs in the area and the area zoning districts. When looking at the proposal to go to light industrial the first test according to the Denton Development Plan is to see if it meets the intensity requirements of the plan. On page 15 of the staff report is the intensity analysis. The intensity allowed by the plan is two hundred and fifty-six intensity trips for the entire project and a light industrial use would actually result in about four hundred and forty-nine intensity trips. This would mean that the proportionate share test of the development plan is not met by this. Additionally the big three are intensity, separation and concentration, As originally proposed it does not meet the intensity requirement or the separation requirement because it is only about a thousand feet from the general retail area to the north. It does meet the concentration requirement being that it is less than five acres. When the proportionate share isn't being met then the next criteria is to look at four disproportional share criteria. The first on is public facilities and this property has a water line along I-35 and the sewer is available to the south along State School Road. The property has direct access to the I-35E frontage road so there is no problem with access. The second consideration is topography and this piece of property has a cleared area. To the northwest the property slopes off rather sharply and to the southeast it slopes off but not as severely. A large scale development would probably require a certain amount of grading to be done. It is not so severe that ® it would be a determent to the development. It would just be part of the consideration ' fa for the development of the property. The third consideration is the surrounding land use and all of the surrounding property is vacant. The property to the west is agriculturally zoned, to the south is PD 20 which has light industrial land use In the area directly to the soulh. To the southeast it is retail and then farther back into PD 20 it is multi- 0 O e 0 P & Z Minutes j I ` ll IL fir) Q3 s April 26, 1995 Page 3 family. There is no real impact at this lime to the surrounding land uses, The fourth consideration is the policies. This proposal would seem to support policies four, seven, and nine of the Denton Development Plan. The analysis of this request indicates that it is inconsistent with the proportionate share and separation policies of the DDP, however, the disproportionate share analysis indicates there are other planning conditions that could support this request. The Planning and Zoning Commission can amend the Denton Development Plan to either a higher or lower intensity plan. The area along 1-35 is very attractive for uses other than single family and therefore suitable for a higher intensity. It is currently in a low intensity area and it has frontage all along I-35G. Through the concept map as you can see a lot of the area on both sides of 1-35 is either in moderate intensity areas or urban center areas. The plan recognizes that the land along I-35 is very attractive for something other than residential development which is the major purpose of a low intensity area. In the past when property along I-35 has come up for rezoning they have been zoned as planned development and address concerns through the PD process. In this case we are offering an alternative approach. First it would involve an intensity amendment to make this area a moderate intensity area. Then if you look at page 18 we have paired the list of uses to uses that are consistent with some of the uses in the area. Then we used a moderate intensity measure of three hundred and fifty trips per day per acre to calculate a maximum floor area for all the buildings on this piece of property. Using the formula there we came to a total square footage of twenty- five thousand square feet. This is a floor area ratio of .1343 which is thirteen percent. Basically thirteen percent of the property would have a building on it and that is exclusive of parking areas and things like that. The next suggestion was that considering that the city has no architectural standards to apply PD 134 condition involving corrugated or metal frontages on any buildings on the property, we adapted that to read that there he no corrugated or metal exteriors on any building elevations that would be visible from I -35. To the extent that we can address that kind of issue, making sure that the building, as it is on an entryway, will at least present a pleasant appearance to people driving into Denton, In addition because there is no specific use being proposed for this e property at this time by rezoning to light industrial use it would open the property up for an off premise signs along the interstate. We are proposing the condition that there would be no off premise signs allowed on this property. When someone comes in and develops the property they could put signs up for their own use but in the interim when the property is vacant or even when it is developed they can not put a sign up advertising another business. This is a way to keep that area free of billboard signs. With light industrial use comes a loading dock, a dumpster area and we are simply proposing as a e condition in this approach that those areas he screened by a six foot opaque screen, e fence, wall, or plants so that they will not be visible from 1-35, We are trying to keep the visible aspect as pleasant as possible for the City of Denton. Because there is a lot of vegetation currently existing on the property we don't feel that a formal bufferyard e 0 • • JU .4 P & 7. Minutes I1' ,i l~l ap a3 April 26, 1995 Page 4 would be required but instead we propose the condition that any existing trees with trunks within 25 feet of the ptolray lines be maintained. This is an important policy statement that you will be making here, You will changing the current approach from requiring these things to he a planned development to an approach that doesn't use a PD. You will be losing your ability to look at a site plan with this. This area is more suited to a moderate intensity as opposed to a low intensity. Those are the two most important things in this case and you are basically changing your direction as far as how you want to approach these kinds of things. Ms, Russell Your statement about changing policy and that we will be losing the ability to review a site plan, can you explain what you mean? Mr. Reeves: With a PD approach a detail plan has to be approved and in this approach we are not requiring them to submit any kind of detail plan. We are simply telling them that they can go ahead and use it for this list of light industrial uses. You cannot have an off premise sign, the building cannot have any metal elevations that can be seen from I-35, the loading dock and the dumpster area has to be screened, and we are not going to require a buffer area but you have to maintain any trees that are within twenty-five feet of the property lines. Those are all things that would normally appear on a site plan, i What we are saying is that we don't need to see a site plan, you do it like this and we J can live with that. 1 Ms. Russell: We are putting the conditions in now so it is a little more streamlined and would affect what we look at later in a site plan? Mr. Reeves: It would streamline the process because you would not have to review a site plan. Ms. Russell: These conditions have been discussed with the petitioner? • Mr. Reeves: Yes. Dr. Huey: Discuss you reasoning for condition four and five and what about the residential area that abuts this property. Mr. Reeves: There is no residential area that abuts this property it is currently vacant ® land. Mr. Robbins: Those conditions apply only to the area of the zoning case which is the area in green on the overhead. ' 1 • r .YY `1. r~w.W'WliY:Y.J H:IM,." . • • r :11...1,. P & 7. Minutes April 26, 1995 Page 5 Mr. Reeves: The rezoning case and the way that we approached it is dependent on the intensity amendment. Mr. Robbins: To compare the PD issue versus the detailed issue. None of those areas in the PD have a detail plan approved so before a building permit could he issued you would be reviewing a detailed plan of the layout of the buildings, the parking lot, and the landscaping. t Mr. Reeves: We did send out six notices and we received two back, both in favor. Ms. Russell: Would the petitioner like to speak? Mr. Robert Raynor: My name is Robert Raynor and I am at 1108 Dallas Drive, Suite 310. I am speaking for the owner Paul Lockhart and I would like to thank the staff for their progressive thinking in this approach, I think this is a very good case for the type of zoning that you are looking at. The petitioner has agreed to all of the conditions except for the one concerning the trees and we would like to just have a size stipulation. Dr, H,iey: What has prompted this request? M1. ';laynor: The market, we are seeing the market increase along the 1-35 corridors and it is time to prepare these tracts so they can be sold, but they can be sold so that the city knows what is going to happen. The owner had enough foresight to do it in advance of selling it. Ms. Russell: Is there anyone to speak in favor of the petition? Anyone to speak in opposition? We will close the public hearing. Does the staff have any further comments? Mr. Reeves: Seeing as this requires a DDP amet..iment as well as a vote on the rezoning • you may want to vote oil these separately. Mr. Drake: If you had consensus to vote on them together I don't see a problem. Ms. Russell: On the size of trees don't we have a landscape ordinance that would ! address this? ' e ~ • Mr. Robbins: The only standard in the ordinance is that ten inch trees are protected. The other number that is out there is two inches which Is the minimum size to plant for landscaping purposes. Is two Inches all right? i think the applicant is nodding yes on • as • P & Z Minutes April 26, 1995 Page 6 two. Ms. Russell: Could we just change that to put on the condition number seven that all trees with two inch or larger trunks and within twenty-five feet of the property line be maintained. Dr. Huey: On I6 the statement Is made a page bout the topography of the land has the potential to make development difficult without any extensive grading, That follows tha statement about considerable trees in the area. Is that grading going to encroach upon that wood area? Mr. Reeves: Probably. Given the layout of the site there is a cleared area there but it is not large enough to accommodate a twenty-five thousand square foot building so there will have to be some additional clearing. The property slopes away from that cleared area, and if there is some grading required for the building it will mean that some of the trees there will have to he removed. That is part of the reasoning behind the condition for maintaining the trees within twenty-five feet of the property lines. We are recognizing that some of the trees will be lost to accommodate a building. Dr. Huey: I also need someone to clarify for me our authority to make or recommend modifications to the existing Denton Development Plan. Mr, Reeves: You have the authority to do that and I assume that the final decision will be made by the City Council. You will recommend to them that they make this intensity change to the Denton Development Plan and the Concept Map, Mr. Cochran: Do we have the authority to recommend approval of this proposal without recommendation for a change of the DDP7 • Mr, Reeves: You can assign the disproportionate share of trips to the piece of property without making this amendment to the DDP. !14r. Robbins: From what we have been doing the Denton Development Plan adopted in '88 has had about a dozen amendments to the map and many of those were made at the J same time as we were reviewing a land use or zoning case. The DDP is adopted by resolution and so the Council will have a resolution and an ordinance on their agenda that • night. We usually do handle both at the same time. • • Mr. Cochran: I move that we approve this requested rezoning from agriculture to light industrial conditioned with the amending of the Denton Development Plan with the • w • 9S:.Q,17.G 'RS #(VZd ~ ~ 3.lto•~RS P & "l. Minutes April 26, 1995 sue: a;S ~3 Page 7 following staff recommendations and the condition change for number seven so that the sentence include the statement that all trees with a two inch or greater trunk diameter and within twenty-five feet of the property line be maintained. Mr. Norton; I'll second that motion, Ms. Russell: Any discussion? All in favor of the motion please raise your right hand. All opposed same sign. Approved. (5-0) Ili. Timbers Apartments. A 4.508 acre tract located on the west side of Ruddell Street, approximately 1,000 feet south of East University. a. Hold a public hearing and consider the rezoning from the Single-Family 7 to the f Multi-Family I (conditioned) zoning district, Ms. Russell opened the public hearing. Mr. Reeves: This is a request for rezoning that came out of a request to replat a piece of property for a parking lot, It is oil Ruddell street directly across from the TWU golf course. At DRC we noted that the zoning line was not where it was portrayed and there were apartments constructed on property that was actually zoned SP-7. There area approximately sixty-four units that were built in 1972, At the direction of DRC they applied for rezoning. The total area to be rezoned includes the property that the apartments are on and the property for the parking the lot, The intensity analysis shows that this request it actually over the allowed intensity. The intensity that is allowed is two hundred ano seventy intensity trips. The total intensity of the wquest is nine hundred and eighty-two trips. Concerning separation and concentration, the existing apartment complexes that is owned by the applicant so it does not meet the separation requirement, nor does it meet the concentration requirement. The level of apartment development on the property there is at a density of almost thirty units per acre. It fails • these three criteria so we have to go to the other four criteria. It has access to utilities from Ruddell street and the apartments are currently receiving service. There is nothing to say concerning the topography. The area to the south where they are proposing to put the parking there are no problems. There will need to be some drainage considerations made at a later date. It is a SF 7 piece of land surrounded by MF-1 zoning with the TWU golf course across the street. We recommend approval with the condition that the • following preliminary plat for the 2,011 acres of Block A, Lot 2 have only a maxlm,um • density of twenty-four units total which keeps it at a density of 11,93 dwelling units per acre. This is lower than our mull-family concentration criteria in the Denton Development Plan. • o . DENTON o~oooaoanooo 00 ~ 00 o°d © o o a o o ~ { o 00l 000 00000 p~oo oaaaao CITY COUNCIL r* o • • r J4QlIP~iiNo T 20 A~endalt DATE( CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: Consider a resolution amending the Denton Development Plan by extending Moderate Intensity Area #78, and reducing Low Intensity Area #77 between Lillian Miller Drive and State School Road along the south side of 1.35E. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of Denton Development Plan amendment (5-0). SUMMARY: See Planning and Zoning Commission Report. BACKGROUND See Planning and Zoning Commission Report. PWGRAMS. DEPARTi1 ENTS OR.-ROUPS AFFECTED: Not applicable. KCAL IMPACT: None. Respectfully submitted: • Lloy Harrell City Manager • Prepared by; 0 • i r s i~fl ~4'~i `•i!s` N4 • • ~gendaNo.,q~0, 4oandaCIlemlas* (vu- eves, Jr. #UrbanPlanner : J A4Hank d F Ro bins, AICO O - Director Planning and Development Attachment #1: Planning and ;coning Commission Report, Attachment #2: Planning and Zoning Commission minutes. Attachment #3: Ordinance. Attachment #4: Resolution. ]i I f w air vwr.- Yn'°• - , • 4 y I • - as • Z95006RS ApandaNo 011© AgeadaRem~z-~~ RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION AMENDING APPENDIX A OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT PLAN BY CHANGING THE BOUNDARIES FOR INTENSITY AREAS 77 AND 78 DEFINED THEREIN IN CONFORMITY WITH THE MAP ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT 1, BY EXTENDING THE BOUNDARY OF INTENSITY AREA 78 ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF I-35F TO STATE SCHOOL ROAD, AND REDUCING INTENSITY AREA 77 CORRESPONDINGLY TO ACCOMMODATE THE EXPANSION; AMENDING THE CONCEPT MAP OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONFORM THEREWITH; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Paul Lockhart has petitioned the City of Denton for a zoning change for 4.2721 acres located within intensity area 77 as defined by Appendix A of the Denton Development Plan; and WHEREAS, the zoning change would require amending the Concept Map by expanding the boundary of Moderate Intensity Area 78 and reducing the boundary of Intensity Area 77 by a corresponding amount; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval cf the amendments; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF DENTON, TEXAS: SECTION I. That Appendix A of the Denton Development Plan is hereby amended by adopting revised boundaries for Intensity Areas 77 and 78 as shown on Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, SECTION II That the Concept Map of the Denton Development Plan is hereby amended to conform with the revised boundaries herein established for Intensity Areas 77 and 78. SECTION III That this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval, PASSED AND APPROVED this the " day of 1995. • 130B CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR _ ATTEST: • JENNIFER WALTBdS, CITY SECRETARY • BY: i • 0 • • ,Vondak-gg 4g oil tnm " ~ ~ Li A APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM; MICHAEL A. BUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY j Y • 3 I Y t t - t r S+ ~i4 t t rt t"j 7 t~ Z ~~7~~~'~Y~~~F,.tM t151 • a► • r *LOU s 1-c INTENSITY AREA N 77 I • 1 •Y•r was/~MM~YY ~-w•~__ ~ Y l ) t - • 1 1~ fie r~ ' Y l l • c0 f/ l DENTON OF D oo°~ ~ ~ °00 00 Op O~ oD O D { C7 Q ' ppp Op~o o N ti pp0 A CITY COUNCIL ~i • • 2.95.006 i ~(paNa. Ape Olt -a ORDINANC2 NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE FROM THE AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION TO THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONED (LI(C)) ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION FOR 4.2721 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 1-35E, APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET SOUTH OF SOUTHRIDGE SHOPPING CENTER, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT 1, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Rob Rayner, on behalf of Paul Lockhart (owner of the property), has applied for q change in zoning for 4.2721 acres of land from the Agricultural (Ai zoning district classification to the Light Industrial Conditioned (LI(C)) zoning district classifi- cation; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission 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 D2NTON HEREBY ORDAINS; SECT N 1. That the zoning district classification and use designation of the 4.2721 acres of land described in Exhibit attached hereto and incorporated into, this ordinance by reference, is changed from the Agricultural (A) zoning district classification and use designation to the Light Industrial Conditioned (LI(C)) zoning district classification and use designation under the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, with the following conditions: 1. Permitted uses are restricted to the uses described in Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. • 2. The total floor area for all building(s) constructed on the 4,2721 acres shall not exceed 25,000 square feet. No "off premise" signs (as defined by section 33-2 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Denton, or its succes- sor) will be permitted. • • • 4. All loading dock and dumpster areas shall be screened from the view of I-35E by solid, opaque, screens (fences, walls, or vegetation), reaching a height of at lest six feet above grade. If vegetation is chosen, the owner of • a • l' rends No 4geedaIten, n ~ _1.4a 35-_- the property shall maintain such that it remains opaque throughout each year. 5. That corrugated, or any other metal exterior, shall not be allowed on any building elevation visible from 1-35E. 6. No outside storage of any kind shall be permitted. 7. The owner of the property shall maintain all trees larger than two (2) inches in diameter, where any portion of their trunks are located within 25 feet of any property line, and this ditty shall attach to the zoning. ,TION II. That the City's official zoning map is amended to show the change in zoning district classification. SECTION III. 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, "~FCTION Iy. That this ordinance shall become effective fourteen (19s days from the date of its paesaje, and the City Secretary is hereby directed to cause the caption of this ordinance to be published twice in the Denton Record-Chronicle, a daily newspaper published in the City of Denton, Texas, within ten (10) days of the, date of its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this the _ day of 1995. i BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR i • ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CI"Y SECRETARY • BY r , m_. c • A i. ~ ti r. E f~ J ,tiY1 Neu{ ,n ifl ~ i` 1 f tigondaNO. q S-oiln, 4~endaltom~5.~1G-rte-- APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: `U MICHAEL BUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY • 9r ~ 'ihc r P1i Sf' f ~~1iy,~g fr gf,.; 17~{,~~~ h~ • btt ; t5 6t ~p ~b~ nrlo~idaltnm 44- plig ii Ili a u i p 4 by F, p. Zg t1 p N s ~ t ~P 'Q ''p~ ~E RMpb gg biyB YS i lip YS~EgiB r Gf °b glip =b r ebb v " J ill 11 u irN aA 4 4P~ # ti a • " F S k z ' • • ri C 4 de t • • EXHIBIT 2 CASE #Z-95-006 PERMITTED USES Primary Residenlial Use c Dormitory, Boarding or Rooming House Hotel or Motel Educatiottal Institutional & Sl iai Uses Art Gallery or Museum Church or Rectory College or University or Private School Community Center (Public) Day Camp Day Nursery or Kindergarten School Fairground or Exhibition Area Group Homes Home for Care of Alcoholic, Narcotic or Psychiatric Patients Hospital (General Acute Care) Hospital (Chronic Care) Institutions of Religious or Philanthropic Nature Public Library Monestary or Convent Nursing Home or Residence Home for Aged Park, Playground or Public Community Center School, Private Primary or Secondary School, Public or Denominational School, Business or Trade I t s o' Gt i t l Accessory Building Community Center (Private) Electrical Generating Plant Electrical Substation • Electrical Transmission Line Temporary Field or Construction Office (Subject to approval turd coarol by the Building Inspector) Fire Station or Similar Public Safety Building Gas Transmission Line and Metering Station Private Swimming Pool Telephone, Business Office ® Telephone Line and Lxchange Switching or Relay Station At • i • 0 G7 • Ofill^~~(f qI .,7.) i RecredLollal & EntertainmeiList (b c Amusemem, Commercial (Indoor) U Country Club (Private) with Golf Course Public Golf Course Commercial Golf Course Public Park or Playground Public Playfield or Stadium Roller or Ice Skating Rink Swim or Tennis Club Theater, Other than Drive-In Type Bus Station or Terminal Jtn~irrJftflQA_&jated USgS Hauling or Storage Company Motor Freight Terminal nn nhiie Service Uses Auto Laundry Gasoline Service Station (Interpreted as gas station/convenience e:ore) t Retail and Servroe Tyne rl Anlique Shop Bakery or Confectionery Shop (Retail) Cafeteria Cleaning and Pressing Small Shop and Pickup Custom Personal Service Shop Drapery, Needlework or Weaving Shop h Florist or Garden Shop Greenhouse or Plant Nursery (Retail) HandicraR Shop Household Appliance Service and Repair Laundry or Cleaning Self Service Mimeograph, Stationary or Letter Shop Mortuary or Funeral Parlor Offices, Professional and Administrative Off Premise Sale of Beer and/or Wine • On Premise Sale of Beer and/or Wine Licensed Private Chub Restaurant Retail Stores and Shops-4,txlp square feet or less Retail Stores and Shops-over 4,000 square feel Studio for Photographer, Musician, Anist or Health Agricullural Type Uses Greenhouse or Plant Nursery • 1 ~ilanal~ Itoin~s._~.~,O.S..~.-...• Contnterclal TyUg Uses 7 Bakery (Wholesale) Building Material Sales Cabinet and Upholstery Shop Cleaning and Dyeing Plant (Con:rnercial) Clearing Plant, Bags or Carpets (Special Equipment) Clothing Manufacture or Light Compounding or Fabrication Job Printing or Newspaper Printing Laundry Plant (Commercial) Milk Depot, Dafry, or ke Cream Plant Paint Shop Petroleum Products, Storage-Wholesale Plumbing Shop Scientific or Research Laboratories Storage or Sales Warehouse Transfer, Storage and Baggage Terminal Wholesale Office and Sample Room General Manufacturing, and Industrial Ums Light Manufacturing or Industrial Uses which meet the performance standards prescribed by Section 35-328. Permitted Uses With Approved Specific Use Permit Correctional Facillties Fratemily, Sorority, Lodge or Civic Club I F e c, 0 r DENTON oo0000 0Dpp00 00~~ op flF 00 ~ 00 oo` oo p O O O ~ OQ OOO ti ~ ~ Opo 0000 ~ N ~ tioo~o ~Qaao ~ aao° e r e CI-70TY COUNCIL 0 0 r i • AMjNo W-/ CI TY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT AgOndalte TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council t t9~ FRO;: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager UU SUBJECT: Approval of a tax refund to Texas Commerce Bank RECOMMENDATION: The Tax Department has mailed an Overpayment Letter and an Application for Refund to the taxpayer. All comPlet:ed forms and necessary documenta- tion have been returned, requesting this refund, which the Tax Technician recommends. SUMMARY: Chapter 31.11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the governing body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $ 500.00. Texas Commerce Bank has requested a refund in the amount of $ 1,792.95 because they overpaid Waugh Children's Trust account #040118. F BACKGROUND Texas Commerce Bank mfade aapayment of $ 1,792.95 on December 90, 1994 and a mortgage resulting in an overpayment. Aataxnrefund Is7due9J on January , 1995 PROGRAMS DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED: The Tax Department and the tax account of Waugh Children's Trust #1-XIR28 FISCAL IMPACT: $ 1,792.95 *YM ULLY SU TED: arre ager Prepared by: amN- e _ ch ~ Vic Schneider Title Tax Technician : n tune A+2633,/3 le finance Offi ceI • a~ • Stale Property Taw Board Refund Application N. 1 1(1/ e2) APPLICATION FOR TAX REFUN4lndaNo,_IS;, ti - Cotlecting Office Namr, _r9fl OF nfTt'rl 111 Colfecling Tax For; T l eKINNEY (ax ng n s) ` OFNTDN, TEXAS 76201 A; dress _ ty, Slate, Zip Code In order to apply for a tax refund, the foltowing information must be provided by the taxpayer. - IDENTIFICATION OF PROCP!RTY OWNER; Name; ~L c DR- .5 "~Zu, r W -/4 k l Address: I i u f D 'Roy 2 3ZC~ pew Telephone Number (It additlonal information Is needed): -y-~-~ - 5 zzc1 IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY: Description of Property: 11//t.Srr~G 5 i-Fk I)A"ek y (>r 0c k_ _ o Address or Locallon of Property; ti'rv0 e:,dy 7~k M Account Number of Property: F yv or lax Receipt Number: _ INFORMATION ON PAYMENT OF TAXES: Name of Taxing Unlf Year for From Which Refund Which Refund Date of the Amount Amount of n Is Pequested Is Requested Tax Payment Tax Refund Taxes Paid Requested f r17ctJ 19 e i.C/>= 19 ~y ~s $ 3. 19 Z / 19 - $ _ S Taxpayer's reason for refund (attach supporting documentatlon); LYE, 1•r jil/II"Ut c_ _&Ak ~ cJc tit A4 J2 I-N2: 7l2kf s ON rv/ c /J Qi~QLt c n f.urr crF /,yl fAy'1HEIJT /fKils eomto J2t r5 a:Vkl ,e 4~u,sir' .It hereby ~ Ftl~tlD, Y ply for the refund of the above•descrtbad lames and certify that the informatlon I have given on this form i+uen correct." F-0,C AM5 0,71 M tic: E, ----WA j~g~, TMOMPSON ,J~r ci( SI 9 ~ Date of Application for Tax Refund 6il.S1DF.NI_---- - 0 DETERMINATION FOR TAX REFUND., _ Approval -Disapproval Signature of Authorized Officer - Date • Signature of Presiding } of Taxing Date • • Unit(s) for refund applications over 351n Any parson who makes a lots entry upon lha tmapo}ng uroord shall be sublecl to ons of the loifowlnq poneH ooij 1. Imprisonmonl of not more than 10 years nor lass than 2 years and/or a Ilea of not nim than $$,000 or both such On* and fmprlsonmenf; 2, conanernsnt in 1a4 for a farm up to 1 year or a fine not to exceed $2,000 or bath ouch Nne and imprfaonmanl as sell forth In Section 37.10, Penal Code. ~EEVHO )I n • • PHOTOCOPY f~ t~ ' ! ~}t' ~I ~fs'!i+` 1 ~ S rYC3l It ~~•,i}i X61.'{ Y i,~\}k{ ~ ~Yr y 1' Rq 0 V, kRAfflm!~a'i'p •,pprlRigf,~mR!!tR ~1,}~~►P to rl , ,~u~`J ty { ' f r', ~0 ,v'~,i 1/+ ~ ~4.?r`Y~, r, tal~l'• i :IRfI L4iS F514J ~!~'Iy/~ : . , yI r ~ r 7~~j ' ~~t1 1r, It ulr~ 1' ,Ir 1 I t 'I7 1 t' r ^ , r r4`! 6i c Ati I I I • PAYMENT SPRUCES (AR 1001/1 88038s 950105 000000016467751 00000179295 9504144250 W51WES02 OPRI20 payment services , e lit+, ;.L ttllL V~ tit.tl 4ai \\h t+ ~ Y•Fr • va • • REPORT F10R05OW 04,'24/99 AT 19:38 O V E R P A Y M E N T S PAGE 6 ACCOUNT NO. RECEIPT NO. NAME ADDRESS AMOUNT STATUS OF PAYMENT 02197000000 94/06/2'/ 0045 ADAMS, JOHN H NEFF ST 2.84 OVERPAY 02266400000 94/06/27-0046 ADAMS JOHN MOOORMICK ST 1.64 OVERPAY 03263800000 94/09/27^0047 ADAMS, JOHN H E RIOKORY • 21 0.62 OVERPAY 90016800000 94/06/27-0048 ADAMS OFFICE MACHINES A SERVICE W AIOKORY ST 1,41 OVERPAY 90087100000 94/08/27^0086 :JAY'S UPHOLSTERY S ELM ST 22.62 OVERPAY 11121400000 94107/03-0060 EVERS PARK LTD N LOCUST ST 0.01 OVERPAY 61268500000 94/07/24-0062 O'NEILL, JOHN K 1EASLEY M144 L 0.10 OVERPAY ' 61324700000 94/07/24-0173 HARGROVE, BERNIOE S MAYHIL. A 11 82.77 OVERPAY ' .~--o89fi8.3Q➢.DRo R4/o; /_Zq_,Q2Q§_S~fiU.GK a cHF,f.SE P11]_IhIF - torn 4R.z9 pyE RPev o~ eo~ooo 94/02/24-6348 WAUGH CHILD N'S__RU M1»» U 6l 7 2. b R 91267300000 94/07/24-0366 COLOR CUSTOMS UNLIMITED DALLAS OR 71,61 OVERPAY 12640700000 94/07/24.0396 191A CREDIT CORP 982S11 OVERPAY 08210600000 94/07/24-0360 L02ANO, LEONARD POCKRUS M 18 R 8,13 OVERPAY TOTAL OF OVERPAYMENTS 22,792.96 yy I~ 1 i I.~ r i ! I • d , • f;1 r +r r DENTON oooooaQOOOO~,^. oo~ O D ~O o ~p oG ~o c a o o 0 o~O~~ ~ Oqo OOH ~,o N e~ o0 oo°oa 00000 0 00000 ® CITY • COUNCIL r • • aAendBNo. CITY COUNCIL REPORT FORMAT Apeatlalte TO: Mayor and Members of th. City CouncilLilte._, FROM: Lloyd V. Narroll, City Manager O~ 3 SUBJECT: Approval of a tax refund to IBM Credit Corp. RECOMMENDATION: The Tax Department has received a supplement from the Appraisal District for 1994 making a correction to the appraised value based on a protest by IBM Credit Corp. reducing the tax they owed in 1994, IBM Credit Corp, i..q due a refund which the Tax Technician recommends. i:N,1ARY : Chapter 31,11 of the Texas Property Tax Code requires the approval of the governing body of the taxing unit for refunds in excess of $ 500.00. IBM Credit Corp, is due a refund of S 649.54 on City account #126407 due to a reduced appraised value in 1994, BACKGROUND: IBM Credit Corp, paid their 1994 tax in N31 on January 31, 1995. A supplement causing a roduction in appraised value reduced the taxes due for 1.994. This reduction in taxes warrants a refund of $ 649,54 due to IBM Credit Corporation. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFECTED; The Tax Department and the rax account of IBM Credit Corp. FISCAL IMPACT: $ 649,54 4PFULLY SUB TER; 'rloM arre City Manager Pre)ared by: • Name Vic Schneider Title Tax Technician A roved: • Na KY\ J Fortune • • r Tit e Ch f Finance Officer 26 C/3 • 0 0 o • PHOTOCOPY -•-^-------------------------------aiizo.-ns - oz:zap - n Carttral pppp~~raisal Oistriat ACA D SYSTEM , T-- OROIP, INC. 1944 SUPPLEMENTAL ROLL N7 FOR: CITY OF OW04-(COS) PAOE 1 IIME Aw ADORERS PRIPER'TY DESIRIPTIO( RECEIPT M LTIiRENT VALUES PRIOR VALUES DAIN/LOSS ~n (307295) PRQPERTY- AUTOMY 4--- moo T ION: TX 7 ! opt 6203-7244 717 DAUM DR T17 RECEIPT COS T 9.900 - 22228 1 750 4 2t730 N 347, fAX 34.47 T1.31 ENTITIES: 001, S05, - - - s BUPP CODE; C - CORRECT PER RETO P13'1628._(27431 EASTiiMf••KOOAI( PERSONAL LM ED PERSONAL $ COWWA x 3 STAWTE T COPIER/ST TTCON: DET(TON ! 455ES ! 4, 240 _ 44.140_ . -4140-- WE 343 START PETERfltl.T ASSESSED { 0 4, I40 4, 140 ROCFES 14630-0904- SITUB: ' TET~ILr MOTORS N TAX AMT S 0. 73.222 -23.22 ENTZ OHS: DELETE - DELETE - ASSESSED WIrN P410122 P126107 (274603) IEM CREDIT CORP PERSONAL PROPERTY - DATA P}ipGE58INO PERSONA(. $ 55717►6 671601 ATTN. PERS PROP TAX EQUIP LOCATION. VARIWS, DENTON PC BOX 120046 ISD, CITY- COS ASSESSED $ 357x746 673.601 11S,a08... STAMF'0R0, CT 06913-1081 SITUS: DENTON ISO, CITY RECEIPT TAXA19LE f 557,796 671601 -111,803 ENTITIES: 506, COS N 1167 TAX AMT S 3120.68 3778.23 -644.53 EXEMPT low: SUPP CODE: C - 0*10E COMM DMMU ASSESSMENT P149234 (164 STAR CLI ALNDRY NI PERSm4AL PROPERTY SERVICE { 68,000 0000 CO COLE CLEANER LOCATI 6 LILLIAN AI11iR-fKYY- ON 0 DENTpb 76W--..'778 SITUS: 2416 0 LLIAN MI LLER PIN RECEIPT TAXABLE $ 0 68)000 -1&000 N 2-148 TAX AMT f 0.00 301.41 -381.41 09ITI€2; _ z - E-)aw f j SUPP DELETE - DELETE .•-BIB-Y413163--_ fi • r~ i • 1 c:, • • RFPORT FIOROLOW 04/27/95 AT 19'.31 O V E R P A Y M E T S m-y~ ACCOUNT NO. RECEIPT NO. NAME ADDRESS AMOUNT STATU 1 10 ,02383700000 94/03/28-0142 JUSTUS, DONALD BILL WESTWAY ST 3.00 OVERPAY 03239700000 94/03/29-0067 WHATLEY, HAROLD N BLUEBIRD OR 2.00 OVERPAY 12642900000 94/03/30-0141 AKERS DALLAS OR AUTOMOTIVE DALLAS DA 1.29 OVERPAY 03119800000 94/04/04.0913 SPPABARY, CLEO C SAGEBRUSH DR 248,28 OVERPAY 02935800000 94/C,4/05.0375 DOBBS, WILLIAM R ROBINWOOD LN 183.89 OVERPAY 02045400000 94/04/05-0834 LOGAN, WILL SR KERLEY ST 93.30 OVERPAY -f Y_ I 02997000000 94/0,4!05-0903 ELLEN, MARK W SYCAMORE ST 157.61 OVERPAY 12099900000 94/04,'06-1101 HOWRV, JENNIFER M BRITTANY -818 409 19 OVERPAY 02193100000 94/04/09--0146 MANNING, ROBERT W ECTOR ST 2.00 OVERPAY 02484800000 94/04/09-0163 NOONING, MICHEAL L NOTTINGHAM OR 41.97 OVERPAY 51242900000 94/04/10-0045 TRACHT, RONNIE POCHRUS X 42 R 36.68 OVERPAY o, 13105400000 94/04/13-0081 ROH£RSON. DEWEY 0 DOUBLEOAK ST 80.88 OVERPAY r 02224400000 94/04/17-0141 HARRIS, THOMAS L IMPERIAL DR 467.54 OVERPAY 02208400000 94/04/17-0142 SMITH, REBECCA F CORDELL ST 326.29 OVERPAY 03281500000 94/04/17.0186 ABBOTT, JOSEPHINE E MCKINNEY ST 2,00 OVERPAY 02349600000 94/04/11-0141 HOURDEAl1, JOHN E CHURCHILL OR 30.00 OVERPAY 91489100000 94/04/24-0074 PROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE SRVC LONDONDERRY IN 45.43 OVERPAY 10423400000 94/04/24-0186 HAU, CHI SING KENNETH ETAL PARK51DE OR 33.10 OVERPAY 02161500000 ^4/04/25.0122 KEY, KENT WESSEX CT 31.11 OVERPAY 30972900000 84/04/26-0208 RICK MOORE HOMES FORT WORTH DR 47.06 OVERPAY 02030800000 04104/30-•0860 HARDIN. GLADYS T MCOONALD OR 62,37 OVERPAY 03319200000 04104131-011A BEATY, JACK E SYCAMORE ST 9.77 OVERPAY 02264200000 94/04/31-0178 CGFFEY, FLORENE THOMAS ST 247.99 OVERPAY 02864300000 94/04/31-0194 JOHNSON, J LYNN OAKWOOD DR 167.42 OVERPAY 11977200000 94/04/31-0501 SHAFER, ERVIN D AVE E 2.38 OVERPAY 91482100000 94/04/31-0636 SOUTHSIDE AUTO FORT WORTH DR 11.35 OVERPAY 08669200000 94/04/31-0870 SCLLERS, LAURIE C NORTH LAKE TR 566.01 OVERPAY 9104740L000 94/04/31-0894 CHINATOWN CAFE W UNIVERSITY N 31,36 OVERPAY 91477600000 94/04/31-0939 RINEY HARRY ENTERPRISE INC S ELM ST 160.16 OVERPAY 5$2509000)0 94/04!31-0961 ADAIR, EDWARD TEASLEY N 99 1. 2.01 OVERPAY 91279200000 94/05/01-0002 MANLEY. STEVE C PHO W HICKORY #113 1.04 OVERPAY 'f. 02118700000 94/05/02-0131 PASKO, CRAIG 8 MARGARET LACY WESTCHESTER DR 351.08 OVERPAY OLT57900000 94/05/02-0132 LACY, JAMES A CORDELL ST 361 20 OVERPAY 02634600000 94/05/02-0133 LACY, MARGARET M VANDERBILT CT 381,20 OVERPAY 02636000000 94/00/02-0134 LACY, MARGARET M VANDERBILT CT 361.20 OVERPAY 03-1-1 4.8•Annnn oe ~0513I.2.~D s 76 LACY 'AM6 s A ng 4 4NIQ00 no JAI In m"vRPAY ^t_'j,_6407Q00f?1jYQ~/0I3_~Q2_Q1~3 ~I11M CREDIT CORP _ BA4 e<4 OVERPAY 11703100000 94705/02-0197 CMH PARK INC E MCKINNEY ST 131 OVERPAY 91249400000 94/05/03-0008 JONATHAN LOGAN 1-35 #204 50.34 OVERPAY • 90139000000 94/05/08-0008 REVCO DISCI DRUG CTRS OF TX #3744 W UNIVERSITY D 3.06 OVERPAY 91312400000 94/05/23-0018 CLARIDGE FINANCE CORP DENTON TEXAS 31.09 OVERPAY 03045600000 94/05/24-0021 HUTCHISON, ELLEN J CHEBI LN 1.83 OVERPAY 91280900000 94/6/27-0027 HIDDEN OAKS LEARNING ACADEMY TEASLEY LN 1,31 OVERPAY 14747500000 94/06/27-0064 GODFREY. WILLARD LYNHURST LN 161,22 OVERPAY 60334200000 94/06/27-0086 BEAUCHAMP, RICH L TEASLEY #239 L 26.70 OVERPAY 51167400000 94/05/20-0018 EPPS, PATRICIA TEASLEY #359 L 3.00 OVERPAY 03368700000 94/05/28-0051 BROWN, DALE 6 SCOTT ANNA ST 9.38 OVERPAY 02962600000 94!06/10-0019 HEROD, HERMAN 8 JEWELL E OAK ST 48.27 OVERPAY 15922700000 94/06!13-0021 ANDRUS, ANN 0.98 OVERPAY ® 08338600000 94/06/14-0004 STUDNICXI, RAYMOND FORT WORTH # 2 2.83 OVEFfIAY 03874400000 94/06/22-0005 VOOEL, RUJSELL 8 ANNA ST 2,48 OVERPAY • 02$96600000 04106/27-0044 ADAMS, JOHN H NEFF ST 3,18 OVERPAY i {t~ i I ZO r DENTON ~5~an0aadQD 0000 CD C3 CZ3 o° 000 r ~ ~ Opp 000 No ~~aoO~aDD~O CITY COUNCIL r • m • a s~S _ j CTTY COL~,~77. REPORT FORMA T TO: Ma}or and Members of the City Council FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM DATE: April 17, 1995 RECOMMENDATION. Approve the implementation of the Summe-. Food Service Program from May 30 - August 11 for children in the City of Denton, who are located in low-income areas and arc between the ages of 1 and 18. SUMMAgy: This free lunch program is designed to serve children in areas of low-income populations during the summer months when traditional school lunch programs are not being served. This program is sponsored and funded by the United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Cold sack lunches will be prepared by the Denton Independent School District and served at the following locations: 1) MLK Pecrration Center, 2) Phoenix Park, 3) Denia Park, 4) civic Center Park, 5) j Owsley Neighborhood, 6) TWU Clubhouse Program, 7) Village Fast Apartments, 8) Rivera Elementary Summer School, and 9) Wilson Elementary Summer School. The total estimated cost for this program is approximately $61,364.49 • BACKGROUND: In March, 1992, the Parks and Recreation Department discovered a federal grant through the U.S. Department of Agriculture that sponsors a free lunch program for children ages 1 through 18 in low-income areas. This Summer Food Service Program is a ® continuation of the free lunch program that is offered during the • school year. The Texas Department of Human Services has made an effort through ol:treach to increase the number of cities participating in the program. • 0 • m • s ~gendaNo3,.5...~ Agenda lt C Summer Food Service Program oof( ((AA{{UU Page 2 During the summer of 1992 the Summer Food Service Program was offered at Dania Park, Phoenix Park, Fred Moore Park, Civic Center Park, and two summer school locations. At these six locations a total of 14,776 lunches were served to children one through eighteen years of age. The Summer Food Service Program expanded to eight locations during the summer of 1993. The additional locations were the TWU Clubhouse Program and the Oweley Neighborhood. The total number of lunches served throughout the mummer was 14,748. In 1994 the Village East Apartments were identified as a low income area and became a summer Food Program Site. Throughout the summer 15,094 lunches were served at the nine feeding sites. The Denton Independent School District will be recommending approval to contract the preparation of cold sack lunches for this program w1:en the issue is presented to their board in May. The program is scheduled for implementation <+n May 30th. PROGRAM . DEPARTMENTS OR GROUPS AFFFECTgn: The Leisure Services Division of the Parks and Recreation Department will be administering this program. A Summer CoovdinaLor will be utilized in addition to the Children's Programs Supervisor to monitor the program and ensure all requirements are mot as well as the proper paperwork completed for all reports and reimbursements. FISCAL IMPACT: • All costs associated with the program will be reimbursed by the Texas Department of Human Services which administers this grant. j R . AgendaNo Apendallen 5-- summer Food Service Program ~1ti±6.15 Page 3 3 t' Allowances are made to reimburse administrative costs, to cover all food costs and supplies, and to cover costs required to transport the food to each site. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Lloyd V. Harrell City Manager Prepared by: -Z Ed Hodney Director of Wks and Recreation Approv Betty McKea Executive ector, Municipal services and Economic Development . 1 Y. ~ L Ili 1 A 5 ~Y71~fi I • 1 ~ • A:\SU MER.BRR ~~lqnndaNo.~Jr tem Agill dal ORDINANCE NO. v AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS AND AGREEMENTS, AS REQUIRED, TO OBTAIN FUNDING FOR THE 1995 SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS TO ADMINISTER THE PROOR:uM; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, WHEREAS, the City of Denton, Texas will submit an application foi funding under the National School Lunch Act, to the Texas De- partment of Human Services for the purpose of making meals avail- able to eligible children at the City's Summer Action Site pro- grams; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the grant, if received, the City will con- tract with the Denton Independent School District to provide the meals at the various sites; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES: SECTION I. That the City Manager is liereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the City, an application for funding under the National School Lunch Act, and if funded, the Summer Food Ser- vice Program Agreement with the Texas Department of Human Services, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION Il. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a contract with the Denton Independent School District to provide meals for eligible individuals at the various sites, and such certifications as are necessary to carry out the 1995 Food Service Program, and to hardle all fiscal and administrative matters relating to the application and the program, • SECTION III,. That the expenditure of funds necessary to administer the 1995 Summer Food Service Program is hereby authorized. 1,ZCTION IV. That this ordinance shall become effective immed- iately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of 1995, BOB CASTLEBERRY, MAYOR a► • A~sr~dal lenL~_ ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: MICHAEL A. BUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY BY: \ .y an 1 s r Page 2 . a . 4~andalton ~S # ~ Q L511a_95..__ ATTEST ; JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED A:: TO LEGAL FORM MICHAEL A. SUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY • 1 I Page 2 s e Ga e r w ip ;t / F t' 4 DENTON oooQO~aaoaooQ . Da b & 0000 b G ~ Q t d O ~ © d Lzj O a~ ~ O 000 ,y r ~ ~ ADO 00~0aN .~tiO~pO aoQaoaaooo e ITS' e COUNCIL r • to • Agent'a No ~ ~ Agendalferrt ~htn 6 May 16, 1995 j CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM t I TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF TIIE CTTY Comm FROM: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager SUBJECT: REVIEW AND CONSIDER APPROVA* V4120 TO TE[E HDR CONTRACT RECOMMIMATION: The Public Utilities Board, at their meeting of October 17, 1994, recommended approval of the proposed amendments o the HDR contract to Include Expenditures In Phase I, H and III of the existing contract. SUMMARY: The City of Denton contracted with HDR on June 15, 1993 for engineering service related to the expansion of the existing landfill site. The original contract was developed In six phases of activities Indicated below: Phase I: Completion cf the Preliminary Master Plan for Municipal Solid Waste i Phase 11- Addresses the current landfill relative to Subtitle D and State Requirements Phase III: Design and Permitting of a new landfill adjoining the current facility Phase On site construction observation and liner inspection/testing during • construction/ins' allation Phase V: Assist Denton In obtaining any other permits needed to Implement the Solid Waste Master Plan Phase VI: Design and Permitting of Associated Solid Waste FkcIII1:es ® Of the six phases, only Phase 11 and III were developed • • a Phase II activities were estimated at $110,755 and PhasewM activities were estimated at $473,270. The total contract amount for Phase H and III is $584,025. • o • m • AgendeNo 4gandalferr(,~.~ The proposed amendments are required to include project activities exx g TOT) estimated cost and/or that were not in the original scope of the contract. Exhibit 1 provides a detailed outline by task of expenditures to date for the landitll project. The following amendments are required to in corporate these activities into the original contract. Phase 1 Amendment - $12,000 Total Solid waste master planning activities were added to the contract by the Solid Waste Master Plan Advisory Committee. Phase II Amendments - $40,670 Total Expenditures for Phase II activities were $8,185 over the original contract estimated for various tasks Identified In the scope of work. Required expenditures that were not Included In the orlglnal scope of work for Phase II activities total $32,485. Phase III - No Increase The contract contained $45,000 in section 3.4.2 for geotechnical Investigation to be performed by 1®R. A decrease In the section is required because $27,500 of related work was shifted to and performed by EMCON. The contract Identified only twelve months of project management and administration (PMSA) in section 3.8. A contract amendment Is needed to include $19,150 for an additional twelve months of project management and adminWration. PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS FOR GROUPS AFFE TJV. Citizens of Denton, City of Denton, Minton Solid Waste Landfill Operation • J • 0 I • • r Agenda No Agaadaltn j~S CAL ]IMPACT- Otte FIS 3q The total increase In the HDR contract as a result of these proposed changes is $44,320. The total estimated contract amount increases from $584,025 to $628,345 Re& fly Ru ed, Lloyd . Harrell, City Manager Prepared byo R. . Nelson, Executive Director Department of UtiRties Exhibit is Ordinance Exhibit M Lotus Spreadsheet • • • • CONTRACT ESTIMATED SPENT TASK DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL COST TO DATE (CONT - ETC) (CON - STD) LONT~-- - (ETPI_- - -LSTISL - - 1.0 Master Plan $0 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 x,000 PHASE I TOTAL $0 $12,000 $12,000 ($12,000) ($12,000)-- : i f 2.1 Sfte Operating Plan $12,100 $12,100 $16,000 $0 ($2,9W) 2.2 Site Development Plan $1,360 $1,380 $3,000 $0 ($1,840) f 2.3 Site layout Pia. $1,600 $1,600 $2,600 $0 ($1,000) + 2.4 Fill-Cross Scations $3,380 NA NA $3,300 $3300 2.6 NA NA NA NA $0 $0 2.6 Geology Report $4,600 $4,600 $4,6W $0 $0 2.7 Oroundwater Protection $12,000 $12,000 $13.4300 $0 ($1,600) & Drainage Plan 2.8 NA NA NA NA $0 $0 t 2.9 Cost Batimates For Closure $4,600 $¢,600 $4,600 $0 } & Post-Closure Care 2.10 NA NA NA NA $0 • 2.11 Final Closure Plan $6,190 $8,000 $7,000 ($1,820) `n • 1 2.12 Post-Closure Care Plan )p $3,300 $6,000 $4,000 ($1,700) i. 2.13 l.andl,11 Ons Management Plan $22,000 $22,000 $22.000 $0 t V' 0 0 • • CONTRACT ESTIMATED SPENT TASK DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL COST TO DATE (CONT - ETC) (CON - STD) ~CONTL-_ ETC STQJ- ~E_-- 2.14 Applicants Statement $130 $130 $130 $0 $0 i 2.16 Cenlficution Of Ground- $890 $890 $890 $0 $0 Water Monitoring Syslem 2.16 certification of Compliance $20,080 $20,080 $20,090 $0 $0 E With Location Restrictions 2.17 Maximizing Remaining $1,476 $1,476 $0 $0 $1,476 Site "if, 2.18 Regulatory Me, tings $6,640 $8,640 $6,640 $0 $0 i 2.19 Phase Two Project $10,620 $10,620 $16,000 $0 ($4,380) h Management & 'Amin. i TOTAL PHASE II $110,766 $110,896 $118,940 ($140) ($8,186) M.1END 1 Methane Precauttlons $1,100 $1,100 ($1,100) ($1,100) AMEND 2 Orcundwater Certification $24,000 $14,000 ($20,000) ($14,000) AMEND 3 I leight increase $6,000 $610!:0 ($6,000) ($5,000) ,4MEP0 4 Project Management $886 $886 ($886) ($996) AMEND 6 Oas Monitoring Training $600 $300 ($5w) ($300) AMEND6 Groundwater Sampling & $6,000 $3,000 ($6,000) \rn J`6 i Analysis Plan Phase II Amendment Subtotal $32,485 $24,285 ($32,486) ($2 ,206) o • Phase II CON STD $er- is , PHASE II TOTAL $110,766 =161,4211 $143,226 ($40,670) 0 I i • • • CONTRACT ESTIMATED SPENT TASK DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL COST TO DATE (CONT - FiTC) (CON - STD) (ETC) (STD) 3.1 Project initiation ..W .-$4,620 ~W $4,520 __.,....__.~._..$2,1500 _W....__._.......... $0 .._.............,......;'020.:.: & Data Colleclion 3.2 TNRCC Conference $3,1*7r. $3,170 $3,000 $0 $170 3.3.1 Develop Praminary $5,000 $5,000 $2,000 $0 $3,000 Landfill Uoslgn 3.3.2 Collect Documentallon $9,370 $9,370 $6,000 $0 $3,370 i 3.3.3 Coliecl & Compile Current $2,910 $2,910 $1,000 $0 $11910 Planning Data ~ 3.3.4 Review Subsurface Work $2,720 $2,720 $2,720 $0 $0" Performed By Others 3.4 Field & l-eb Investigations $0 so $0 $0 $0 ~ 3.4.1 Prepare Preliminary $8,140 $8,140 $6,000 $0 $2,140 I~ Soil Boring Plan 3.4.2 0cotechnlcallnves•igation $2,780 $2,780 $2,780 $0 $0 Plan q 3.4.3 oeoicchnicallnvestigatlon $46,000 $17,f+00 $14,x00 $27,500 $30,600 1 (RW,ed 127,100 Tv 1145) 3.4.3 SLJH Surface Walcr/hydrology $8,200 $8,200 $8,200 $0 $0 e Study 3.4.3.1 OblainSurface Water Data $1,300 $1,300 $500 $0 $800 I 3.4.3.2 Identify Additional $600 $600 $600 $0 $0 Survey Requlrememn 1 3.4.3.3 Analyze Surface Woe Date $4,300 $4,300 $4,300 $U 1 S 7 • - 3.4.3.4 Evaluate Flood $2x700 ,.,700 $2,700 $U _ • Profile Models ' S 3.4.3.6 Describe Drainage systems $5,900 $5,9w $4,000 $0 $ , And F1oodPlains ( 4i V' a► • • CONTRACT ESTIMATED SPENT TASK DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL COST TO DATE (CONT - ETC) (CON - STD) ' ~CONT) ~ETCL 8 D) nue .....................-.._............_.............,.............~_._._W.__.._......_W......~_.... A 3.4.3.6 Identify SUrfeceWater .....~...~$1,800.._._._......_.. $1 13odtcA OnTupo Map 00 $0 $0 $1,600 3.4.4 aeotechnlcal Report $22,000 $22,000 $$,000 $p Preparation $17,000 3.6 Permit Appliention & $270,000 $270,000 $13,420 if Landfill Design S,$OQ 3.6 Permit Application $36,000 $36,000 Resubmittal $0 $36 ppp 3.7 Public Hearing $19,000 $19,000 $0 Participation $19,000 3.6 Phase 3 Project $18,060 $18,060 $18,060 $0 $0 ! Management & Adminietrellon `phase III Subtotal $473,270$446,770 07,28p §L AMEND 1 Project Management $19,160 $9,750 & Administrmior ($19,150) ($9,78-j) PHASE III TOTAL $473,270 $484,920 $107,030 $8,350 $386,240 - lr^r) $321,770 tu.rcc,vt!tru~ttxuuFlamtr e r a Di W t n ' a 0 • • ~ ~ ~woxs~arounR, z Ionia No ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF D£NTON AND HDR ENGINEERING, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE SANITARY LANDFILL INITIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT! AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY ORDAINSr SECTION I. That the Mayor is authorized to execute Amendment Number Two to the Agreement between the City of Denton and HDR Engineering, Inc, for professional enginserincr services for the City's Sanitary Landfill Initial Site Development, a copy of which is attached her©to. SECTION Ir That the City Council is hereby authorized to expend funds in the amount of Six Hundred Thirty-two Thousand Six Hundred Ninety-five Dollars ($632,695.00) as specified in the amended Agreement. SECTION III That this ordinance shall become effective immed- iately upon its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of ~ , 1995. BOB CASTLEBERRY, 14AYOR ATTEST; JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY • BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORMr MICHAEL A. BUCEKt ACTING CITY ATTORNEY By. I • ( _ ca • g0ri o AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF DENTONo TEXAS AND MDR ENGINEERING, INC. DATED JUNE 15e 1993 WHEREAS, on June 15, 1993 the City of Denton ("City") and MDR Engineering, Inc. ("HDR") entered into an Agreement for Profession- al Engineering Services for the Sanitary Landfill Initial Site D evelopment, which was amended by Amendment No. 11 (the Agreement: for Initii Professional Site n Davelopment inas S amend d bfor the y Amendment Sanitary Lan o Idfare hereinafter called the "Agreement"); and WHEREAS, Exhibit A to the Agreement provides that Phase I is to be completed as additional services with the Scope of Services and Fee Basis to be mutually agreed upon at a later date; and WHEREAS, City and HDR desire to define the Scope of Services for Phase I and Designate Fees for Phase I in the amount of $12,000; and WHEREAS, Phase II is approaching completion and City and HDR desire to replace the Preliminary Man-hour and Fee Estimates and Estimated Man-hours and Fees for Phase II with Final Anticipated Fees; and WHEREAS, City and HDR desire to add additional services to the Scope of Services for Phase II for Final Anticipated Feen of $32,485; and WHEREAS, City and HDR desire to delete Geotechnical investiga- tion from the Scope of Services for Phase III resulting in a reduction of fees for Phase III in the amount of $27,500; and WHEREAS, City and HDR desire to add an additional 12 months of project management and administration to Phase III for fees of $19,150; NOW, THEREFORE, • W I T N E S S E T Hr Pursuant to Section 7.12 (Changes and Modification) of the Agree- ment, City and HDR hereby agree; 1. The Scope of Services for Phase I is hereby and herewith defined as solid waste master planning. City shall pay HDR $12,000 ' • for Phase I. * • 2. The Scope of Services for Phase II is hereby and herewith amended to include the following services in addition to those listed in Exhibit A to the Agreement in exchange for the following Final Anticipated Feesc ..y.-...~.-.__.«....'c'.~. ~ . ....-..c `-i~.:.e... .emu s 70 b~il 2.20 Methane Precautions $ 1,100 2.21 Groundwater Certification $20,000 2.22 Haight Increase $ 5,000 2.23 Project Management $ 8B5 2.24 Gas Monitoring Training $ 500 2.25 Groundwater Sampling Analysis Plan $ 51000 3. The Preliminary Man-hour and Fee Estimates and Estimated Man- hours and Fees for Phase II Contained in Exhibit A of the Agreement are hereby and herewith deleted from the Agreement and replaced with the following Final Anticipated Fees; 2.1 Site Operating Plan $15,000 2.2 Site Development Plan $ 31000 2.3 Site Layout Plan $ 2,500 2.4 Fill-Cross sections $ -0- 2.6 Geology Report $ 4,600 2.7 Groundwater Protection & Drainage Plan $13,600 2.9 Cost Estimates for Closure and Post-Closure Care $ 40600 2.11 Final Closure Plan $ 7,000 2.12 Post-Closure Plan $ 4,000 2.13 Landfill Gas Management Plan $22,000 2.14 Applicant's Statement $ 130 2.15 Certification of Groundwater Monitoring System $ 890 2.16 Certification of Compliance with Location Restrictions $20,080 2.17 Maximizing Remaining Site Life $ -0•. 2.18 Regulatory Meetings $ 6,540 2.19 Phase II Project Management and Administration $15,000 Additions to Phase II Scope of Services (Paragraph 2 above) 2.20 Methane Precautions $ 11100 2.21 Groundwater Certification $20,000 2.22 Height Increase $ 5,000 2.23 Project Management $ 885 2.24 Gas Monitoring Training $ 500 2.25 Groundwater Sampling & Analysis Plan $ 5.000 Total Final Anticipated A Fees for Phase II $151,425 4. Exhibit A , Task 3.4.3 Geotechnical Investigation of the Agreement is hereby and herewith amended to delete Geotechnical Investigation from the Scope of Services for. Phase III. Fees for Phase III shall be reduced by $27,500 as a result of the deletion of said Geotechnical Investigation from the Scope of services. PAGE 2 A p I • t_ m • Ag arid aNo AUZ Jtzitera # 5. Exhibit A, Task 3.8, Phase III Project Management and Adminis- tration of the Agreement is hereby and herewith amended cc include an additional 12 months of project management and administration. Estimated fees for said additional 12 months of project management and administration shall be $19,15,1. 6. Total Estimated Fees and Preliminary Fee Estimates for Phase III shall be $469,270. 7. In all other respects, the terms and conditions of the Agree- ment, as executed by the parties on the June 15, 1993 as amended by Amendment No. 1 remain in full force and effect. Executed this day of , 1995, CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS BOB CASTLEBERRY, OR ATTEST: JENNIFER WALTERS, CITY SECRETARY BY: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: MICHAEL A. BUCEK, ACTING CITY ATTORNEY BY., f Vin.. t • HDR ENGINEERS, INC, TI Gl~ t • TLEt J:\Mxloca klhdremend,k PAGE 3 -...~..~.r .~rr...b. «.r.w rrY rLGYiW".°i r h'w.. r,••, _ I. i i • w • i r i i i ~EENI) C)F I FILF _j I