Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council-Agenda Packets-6/3/2014
City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 817.503.1000 www.colleyville.com Tuesday, June 3, 2014 City Council Chambers PRE COUNCIL MEETING EXECUTIVE SESSION 5:30 P.M. EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM THIRD FLOOR CALL TO ORDER PC-1 Presentation and overview of Colleyville Center PC-2 Presentation and discussion of the development review process PC-3 Presentation of the Quarterly Investment Report PC-4 Discussion of the June 3, 2014, City Council regular agenda items 1. EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code, Chapter 551, Subchapter D Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney on legal issues raised by public hearing or action items on the agenda Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney regarding pending litigation - Keith Pardew v. City of Colleyville Section 551.072 - Real Estate - Deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property for City facilities Section 551.087 – Economic Development - Discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from business prospects that the City seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in the City and with which the City is conducting economic development negotiations; deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect City Council Agenda June 3, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 2 RESUME REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS INVOCATION: Bishop David Knight, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: City Attorney Matthew Boyle 2. OATH OF OFFICE Administration of the Oath of Office to Place 3 Councilmember Chris Putnam, and Place 4 Councilmember Jody Short 3. RECEPTION FOR INCOMING CITY COUNCILMEMBERS 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: CONSIDER AND TAKE ANY ACTION(S) NECESSARY RELATIVE TO ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION - Resolution R-14-3751 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, AND PRESENTATIONS Announcements of civic and charitable events Presentation of calendar events and updates Announcements of awards and recognition Presentation of the Texas Fire Chiefs Association 2014 Lone Star Achievement Award for Safety Innovation - Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor and Fire Chief Brian Riley 6. CONSENT: READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-14-3752 6a Approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of May 13, 2014 6b Approval of the minutes of the City Council Special meeting of May 21, 2014 6c Approval to purchase one Ford F-150 standard cab pickup truck and one Ford F-550 crew cab utility truck from Rush Truck Center, through the Texas Local Government Purchasing Cooperative (BuyBoard), in an amount not to exceed $67,427, and authorize the city manager to execute the purchase agreement 6d Approval of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Planning and Zoning Commission bylaws City Council Agenda June 3, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 3 7. RESOLUTION(S): READING AND PUBLIC HEARING 7a Resolution R-14-3753 Consideration of a special event permit to allow for amplified sound of musical instruments from 10:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight at 4800 Stafford Drive, Case GC14-010 8. CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 9. REPORTS Sign Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes - March 11, 2014 Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes - April 8, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 14, 2014 10. ACTION/RESOLUTION: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION RATIFYING COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR JUNE 3, 2014 - Reading and Public Hearing -Resolution R-14-3754 11. ADJOURNMENT I hereby certify this agenda was posted on City Hall bulletin boards Friday, May 30, 2014 by 5:00 p.m. Amy Shelley, TRMC City Secretary Any matter on this agenda may, at the discretion of the governing body, be opened for public comment and discussion. If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special accommodations, please advise the City Secretary at least 48 hours in advance at 817.503.1133, and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you. City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number PC-1 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Pre Council Department Colleyville Center Title Presentation and overview of Colleyville Center Explanation The purpose of this item is to provide an annual update and discussion on Colleyville Center performance and proposed modifications to the standard weekday rental rates, as recommended by the Colleyville Center Advisory Committee. Annual Update In January 1988, the Colleyville Center opened, and the initial construction and furnishings were funded by General Obligation debt, Colleyville Economic Development Corporation sales tax supported debt, and contributions from various Colleyville non- profit organizations. The intent of this presentation is to provide an update on fiscal year to date rentals, revenues, expenditures, cost recovery, and customer satisfaction metrics. In 2010, the Center underwent an interior renovation that upgraded the look and feel of the Center in order to remain competitive in the Metroplex venue market. Included in the presentation are several investment items that will need to be considered in the next several years in order to maintain the Center's high-end, unique look and feel that attracts clients and generates rentals. Several investment items that have been suggested by Center clients are also included, which would be enhancements to the current service level, but would increase the Center's competitiveness. Proposed Standard Weekday Rental Rate Changes The secondary purpose of this presentation and update is to present to the City Council proposed changes to the standard weekday rental rates that have been recommended by the Colleyville Center Advisory Committee. Over fifty percent of weekday client surveys indicate a perception that charging additional incremental fees for equipment usage and linens is frustrating and makes it more difficult to budget for events. Weekday clients have expressed a desire for bundled rates that are inclusive of both the rental and equipment fees. Ninety-nine percent of weekday rentals utilize a current add on service like microphones, rear screen projection system, or linens. The remaining one percent of weekday clients elect to only rent the small meeting room space with tables and chairs, providing their own linens. City Council Agenda Briefing City of Colleyville Page 2 The Colleyville Center Advisory Committee established a subcommittee for review of the weekday rental rates. The subcommittee met on March 3, 2014 and April 7, 2014, to review and discuss the current weekday rental rate structure, ultimately recommending a simplified structure that eliminates à la carte equipment and administrative fees, and increases the standard weekday rental rates to achieve a revenue neutral outcome that also improves customer service, as shown in the attached presentation. The Colleyville Center Advisory Committee proposed 50% rate increase in standard weekday rental rates will provide a revenue neutral collapse of existing add on fees. A typical four-hour, full hall rental will increase $230, one-half of the hall $125, and the small meeting conference room $75. Entire eight-hour building rentals will increase $600. The current weekend rental add-ons are limited to the rear screen projection system, and stage up-lighting and will not be changed. The proposed changes were brought forward to the full Colleyville Center Advisory Committee on May 19, 2014 and were unanimously approved. Staff is seeking direction from City Council in bringing forward the proposed changes for consideration. The recommended changes, if approved by the City Council, would take effect for all weekday rentals booked on or after October 1, 2014. Attachments 1.2014 Colleyville Center Standard Room Rates and Administrative Fees 2.Colleyville Center Presentation STANDARD ROOM RATES ROOM MAX OCC. THEATER = T BANQUET = B CLASSROOM = C WEEKDAY RATE FIRST 2 HRS / EA. ADDTL. WEEKEND RATE* FIRST 2 HRS / EA. ADDTL. *BASED ON AVAILABILITY 30 DAYS OUT NORTH CONFERENCE 396 SQ.FT T-25 B-15 C-20 $50 / $15 $125 / $30 SOUTH CONFERENCE 396 SQ. FT T-25 B-15 C-20 $50 / $15 $125 / $30 NORTH- SOUTH CONFERENCE 792 SQ. FT. T-60 B-50 C-35 $85 / $20 $205 / $40 NORTH HALL 3,155 SQ.FT. 1,664 PLUS 1491 STAGE T-200 B-100 C-70 $180 / $35 $400 / $55 SOUTH HALL 2,872 SQ. FT. 1,872 PLUS 1,000 KITCHEN T-200 B-100 C-70 $180 / $35 $400 / $55 NORTH- SOUTH HALL TOTAL 6,027 FLOOR -3,536 T-525 B-300 C-150 $350 / $60 $545 / $90 ENTIRE BUILDING 8,475 SQ. FT. 8-HOUR RENTAL EA. ADDTL. HOUR @ $250 HR. BUILDING OCCUPANCY 600 - T $1,200 WEEKDAY $1,800 Sun-Fri OR ANY WEDDING PKG $2,200 Sat Prime ADMINISTRATIVE FEES VIDEO LCD Projector per hr (portable and ceiling mount) $65 LCD 220” Rear Screen HD Projector per hour $75 with weekday max $200 Slide Projector with cart $25 Overhead Projector with cart $25 Rolling Video cart with electrical and extension $10 Gallery Flat Screen (per event) $65 TV / VCR / DVD (31” – 61”) $65 Stage Front Drop Screen $40 Portable screen (9’) $40 Conference Room pull down $20 White Board / Flip Chart with easel $20 Easel $15 AUDIO Baby Grand Piano $100 Stage Lighting (one time setting – per hour) $50 Stage Lighting and sound board (must use AV Tech) $200 + AV Tech Monitor Speakers $20 CD Player $50 Podium with Microphone $35 Corded Microphone on stand – one free with N/S Hall $15 Wireless Microphone (hand held or lapel) $50 Telephone Conferencing Equipment $30 ROOM SET Linens (per linen) Weekdays only $5 Draped and Skirted Registration Table $15 Room Change after final set (per table and chair set) $20 Repositioning room during event $400 + $10 ea. Table set CATERING Catering fee 15% of F&B with $1.50 pp min. 15% F&B Catering (client self catering – KU) Flat Fee based on set up or attendance whichever is greater $1 pp weekday and Non Profit (300 Max) $2 per person – weekends Deluxe Coffee Service with condiments 15 cup carafe - $15 Continental Breakfast (pp w/20 ) $10 pp Gourmet Box Lunch (pp w/20 min) $15 pp Break Service (beverage & cookies – pp w/20 min) $5.00 pp MISCELLANEOUS Copies 1-50 - .25 first copy, .10 thereafter .25 / .10 Copies over 51 - .85 first copy, .15 thereafter .85 / .15 Fax Machine (incoming and outgoing) $2 per page Gaffers tape per roll – cost plus 25% Cost plus 25% DEPOSITS Entire Building $500 Grand Hall $300 Half Hall ( North or South) $200 Conference Room $50 Half Conference Room ( North or South $50 ADMINISTRATIVE TOTAL ROOM RENTAL TOTAL EVENT TOTAL Colleyville Center Update Pre Council Meeting June 3, 2014 Overview •Rental History & Event Type •Revenue/Expenditures •Customer Satisfaction •Economic Impact to Colleyville Businesses •Proposed Weekday Rate Simplification Rental Category & Booking History Rental Category (2014 YTD): •Non Profit-47% •Local-9.8% •Resident-7% •Business-2.8% •City-6.7% •Non Local-36.5% Non-Profit Events-47% •Civic Organizations •32% of Colleyville Home Owner Associations •Youth Sports •Religious Organizations Local-9.8% •Residents (7%) •Business Meetings (2.8%) Non-local-36.5% •Social Events •Weddings •Quinceaneras •Diverse Cultural Celebrations •Business Meetings City Events-6.7% •Community Events •Department Meetings •Police & Fire Academy •Town Halls •Old Tyme BBQ •Public Forums-Comprehensive Plan •Red White & Sousa, June 2014 •Parks & Recreation –Winter Ball –Bunny Brunch •Employee Events Revenue Sources Rental Revenue 18%-Non-Profit 9%-Local 1%-City 72%-Non-Local 7% 2% 20% 52% 18% 1% 2014 FYTD Rental Revenue 2014 REVENUE Resident Social Resident Business Non Res Business Non Res Social Non-Profit City 47% 10% 7% 36% 2014 FYTD Rentals by Category Non-Profit Local City Non-Local Revenues & Expenditures •Oct-March FY 2014 •Revenues-$109,934 •Expenses-$127,565 •Cost Recovery-87% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Colleyville Center Cost Recovery 2011 2012 2013 2014 Customer Satisfaction •50% Average Response Rate •Seven categories surveyed •Appearance of Center •Cleanliness •Staff Service •Room Set •Kitchen Facilities •Parking •Overall Experience 98%98% 96.3% 96.8% 95% 96% 96% 97% 97% 98% 98% 99% Customer Satisfaction 2011 2012 2013 2014 Economic Impact •2014-Goal 57% •59% of clients utilize up to three local Colleyville businesses to provide services: (Ex: Food, Photography, Beverages, Transportation) •Business Weekday Meetings •Weekend Events 57% 55% 57% 59% 52% 53% 54% 55% 56% 57% 58% 59% 60% 61% 2011 2012 2013 2014 Economic Impact Maintaining Our Investment •Maintenance & Replacements •New Palladium windows for energy efficiency •Water heater •Kitchen catering equipment •To Enhance Competitiveness & Increase Cost Recovery •Additional parking •Technology upgrade for business rentals •Outdoor rental space for cocktail receptions & garden parties •Outdoor gabled awnings for Balustrada and patios •Water feature or sculpture for “destination” photos Proposed Weekday Rental Rate Simplification Background •Current weekday rental rates in effect since 2010 •Based on two hour minimum, hourly rate thereafter •All equipment fees are currently charged à la carte •Motivation for change •50%+ client surveys indicate a perception that equipment and incremental charges are “nickel and dimeing” •Business clients request inclusive pricing for event budgeting •Desire for increased efficiency in staff time required to provide price quotes Staff Recommendation •New standard weekday model •Rental and equipment fees packaged •50% rate increase required to offset elimination of à la carte charges (revenue neutral) •All audio/video equipment, linens, stage lighting, podiums, microphones, and projection systems would be included in rental rate •Advantages •Inclusive packaging easier for client budgeting •Streamlined quoting process for clients •Avoids negative client experience at end of event with additional incremental charges assessed Proposed Weekday Rates- Colleyville Non-Profit & Civic Organizations Non-Profit Monday-Friday 8am-10pm Building 8 Hour Hall 4 Hour North Hall 4 Hour South Hall 4 Hour Small Conference Room 4 Hour Weekend Rates 8 Hour Current 2014 Rate $600 $140 $80 $80 $60 50% Discount Fri & Sun 20% Discount Prime Saturday Proposed Standard Weekday Rate No Change No Change No Change No Change No Change No Change Increase None None None None None None * Tables and chairs provided to non-profit and civic organizations –linens and electronics charged à la carte non-profit rates Proposed Weekday Rates- Non-Colleyville Resident or Business Non-Resident Monday-Friday 8am-10pm Building 8 Hour Hall 4 Hour North Hall 4 Hour South Hall 4 Hour Small Conference Room 4 Hour Weekend Rates 8 Hour Current 2014 Rate $1,200 $470 $250 $250 $125 $2,200 Proposed Standard Weekday Rate $1,800 $700 $375 $375 $200 N/A Increase $600 $230 $125 $125 $75 No Change Proposed Weekday Rates- Colleyville Resident or Business Resident Monday-Friday 8am-10pm Building 8 Hour Hall 4 Hour North Hall 4 Hour South Hall 4 Hour Small Conference Room 4 Hour Weekend Rates 8 Hour Current 2014 Rate With 20% Discount $960 $376 $200 $200 $100 $1,440 Fri & Sun $1,760 Prime Saturday Proposed Standard Weekday Rate $1,440 $560 $300 $300 $160 No Change Increase $480 $184 $100 $100 $60 No Change Timeline March 3rd-Advisory Subcommittee 1st Review April 7th-Advisory Subcommittee 2nd Review May 19th-Colleyville Center Advisory Committee approval June 3rd-Pre Council meeting Colleyville Center Advisory Committee recommendations presented to Council June 17th First reading of ordinance for rate update July 1st Second reading of ordinance for rate update (City Council approval) October 1st New packaged standard weekday rates take effect Questions City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number PC-2 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Presentation and Discussion Department Community Development Title Presentation and discussion of the development review process Explanation Last year, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor requested a briefing on the City’s development process. Since that time, staff performed a comprehensive review of the development process. A detailed report of the review, titled Development Process Review, is attached to this briefing. The purpose of this item is to provide a presentation to the City Council that includes a brief overview of the overall development process, key development staff and their roles in the process, how the process works, as well as highlights of areas where staff has made, or will make, improvements that are identified in the report to ensure optimal facilitation of superior development in Colleyville. This presentation will be provided in PREZI format. Given the unique qualities of the PREZI software, the presentation cannot effectively be attached to the briefing. However, the presentation may be viewed online at the following link: http://prezi.com/1f56nxtcslm9/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share Lastly, a copy of a recent report published by the American Planning Association titled “Development Review as Economic Development” is attached to the briefing, given its highly pertinent content relative to the development process review. Attachments 1.2014 Development Process Review 2.Development Review as Economic Development 2014 Development Process Review Table of Contents PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................... 3 BEST PRACTICES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................... 5 Practices for Improving Communication ................................................................................................................ 5 BP1: Single Point of Contact ..................................................................................................................................... 5 BP2: User’s Guide for Development Review and Local Permitting .......................................................................... 7 BP3: Pre-Application Meetings ................................................................................................................................. 8 BP4: Project Technical Review Team ........................................................................................................................ 9 BP5: Interdepartmental Meetings .......................................................................................................................... 12 BP6: Physical Proximity of Professional Staff ......................................................................................................... 13 Practices for Standarizing Forms and Procedures................................................................................................. 14 BP7: Clear Submittal Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 14 BP8: Permitting Flowcharts and Checklists ............................................................................................................ 16 BP9: Predictable Fees ............................................................................................................................................. 19 Practices Regarding Resources ............................................................................................................................. 20 BP10: Electronic Filing, Tracking and Commenting ................................................................................................ 20 BP11: Maximize the Municipal Website ................................................................................................................. 22 Additional Conditions and Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 24 Plan Review Processes, Resources and Responsibilities ......................................................................................... 24 Planning and Zoning Schedule ................................................................................................................................ 25 Tree Removal and Tree Preservation ...................................................................................................................... 26 Right of Way Permitting and Inspection ................................................................................................................. 26 Drainage .................................................................................................................................................................. 26 TABLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................... 28 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................... 30 2014 Development Process Review Purpose and Background Balancing developer-friendly processes while ensuring the best final product after the development is complete can be challenging. Beliefs as to how best reach that balance can be incongruent among leaders, developers and even among staff. Demands, expectations and philosophies tend to shift as time evolves. Additionally, changes in personnel and resources can often leave knowledge gaps, especially when processes and responsibilities have not always been clearly delineated and documented. Because of this environment, and always wanting to ensure a quality end-product, we were charged in providing: …assurance that we have clear policies and procedures from the earliest possible point in the development process to the final inspection/issuance of CO’s and beyond that make certain once the project is complete, the City has done everything in our ability to ensure the highest quality development that lacks the kind of mistakes, errors or omissions that cause us or the property owner problems in the future. (Excerpt from Jennifer Fadden e-mail, October 24, 2013) From November 2013 to January 2014, several staff members of the Community Development, Economic Development, Fire and Public Works Departments met and reviewed the various steps and procedures of the development process. A total of ten meetings were held. During these meetings, many of the existing processes were discussed and reviewed in order to document what is actually happening. This allowed us to identify areas where there is ambiguity, or where opportunities for improvement exist. Outside of these team meetings, we also researched best practices for development processes. By using the gaps and findings from the mapping exercises, and then reviewing these best practices, we developed several recommendations that can potentially: Enhance and streamline processes; Reduce potential errors and oversights; Improve communication with staff and customers; Clearly delineate authority and responsibility; and Standarize processes to provide clarity for all involved. In reviewing the mission statements of the Community Development and Public Works departments, some key phrases were noted: Development Process Review Page 3 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Protect the unique beauty and quality of life of the community Guide quality, sustainable growth and redevelopment Provide exceptional customer service Enhance the quality of life Promote economic development Provide public infrastructure to the highest possible standards These are worthy standards, and we kept in mind that any recommendations developed during this project must adhere to these standards. Lastly, because the project approach was to identify areas for improvement, focus on the “gaps” may color the report as being critical of the existing practices and environment. It shouldn’t. Instead, it should be noted that some excellent procedures are already in place, and we have many dedicated staff members who manage these processes. In fact, special recognition should be given to the team who participated in this project: Bill Elliott Mary Elliott Les Folse Dan Hartman Jeremy Hutt Craig Knight Bob Lowry Robert McKeown Kelly Minor Ron Ruthven Marty Wieder Taci Wrisley Without their time, participation, honesty and dedication, and especially their patience, these efforts would not have been possible. We submit this report and hope it will facilitate superior development for Colleyville, now and into the future. Respectfully submitted, James Hubbard Beth Wimpy Management Analyst, Public Works Assistant to the Director, Public Works Development Process Review Page 4 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Best Practices and Recommendations In researching best practices for development review (A Best Practices Model for Streamlined Local Permitting, November 30, 2007, and Best Practices for Development Review and Permitting, March, 2012), practices are generally associated with the following common goals: Fostering better communication among boards, staff and applicants Standarizing forms and procedures to provide efficiency and predictability Providing sufficient resources to allow for quick and competent review Practices that are applicable to Colleyville are detailed below, along with how those practices are handled in Colleyville and any related recommendations for improvement. Practices for Improving Communication With so many parties and procedures involved in the review, permitting and inspection processes, active collaboration and communication is vital for efficiency. The following practices may be considered to improve communication during these processes. BP1: Single Point of Contact If staffing levels allow, municipalities should designate one person or department within a municipality as a single-point of contact to work with applicants regarding land development and/or subdivision submittals. Similarly, each project should have a single point of contact throughout the review and approval process. Further consideration should be given to making the department that accepts development applications the “one stop shop” for all other municipal approvals with regard to development (i.e., zoning permits, driveway permits, etc.). The duties of such a position within the department would generally include: Responsibility for intake of applications, including a review to determine if the submission is complete. Coordinating the review of the land A single point of contact can provide applicants with all of the information they need and guide them through the development, subdivision and permitting processes. Development Process Review Page 5 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review development/subdivision application among the different reviewers. Tracking the project through the review process, including clearly communicating to the applicant which meetings they are scheduled for and what the applicant needs to provide for such meetings. BENEFITS A single point of contact improves clarity, consistency and productivity for both the applicant and the City, and guides the applicant toward appropriate actions. A municipality experiences efficient permitting when this person is charged with important administrative tasks, such as reviewing applications for completeness when they are received and tracking applications through the process. CHALLENGES Staffing shortages and budgetary limitations. Time constraints. Overcoming resistance to procedural change. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS Colleyville has somewhat followed this best practice for larger projects. When a developer proposes a project, the Economic Development Director, Community Development Director, or Planning and Development Coordinator, depending upon the project’s complexity, has typically been the first point of contact. He/she then coordinates pre-application meetings when appropriate, and generally guides the applicant to the next step. Although this practice is not formally standardized, it appears to be working well. However, developers are sometimes referred to the “Engineering Department” when drainage, grading or civil plans are involved. When permit applications are submitted, dependent upon personnel and time available when the application is received, there is sometimes only a cursory or limited review to determine if the application is complete. Incomplete applications cause additional work for staff and needless delays for the developer. RECOMMENDATIONS BP1A: Assign a project manager for major projects. This might be the Community Development Director, Building Official, Planning and Development Coordinator, or Plans Examiner, depending upon the project type and scope. The project manager would not only be the official point person for the developer, but also coordinate in- house reviews, communications and administrative tasks such as project reporting and ensuring CRW entry integrity. Project responsibility would be clear, and this may help in distributing workload. Development Process Review Page 6 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review BP1B: After the Plans Examiner position is filled, appoint a primary and secondary receiver of applications to ensure an on-the-spot application review is completed for projects not assigned a project manager. This review should check all checklist requirements are met (see Best Practice 8 regarding checklists) as well as project feasibility. A schedule should be set to ensure 100% coverage. BP2: User’s Guide for Development Review and Local Permitting It is recommended that municipalities create a brief reference guide to help applicants navigate through the land development/subdivision plan review/permitting process. The document should contain all applicable information with regard to the process, including who reviews the application with contact information, and which boards and commissions make decisions and/or recommendations. The guidebook should include step-by-step directions for the application review process, as well as any applicable forms and fees. A User’s Guide to Local Permitting can help communicate clearly and efficiently with the permit applicant. It can also ensure that developers, residents, and permit granting authorities all have the same information about the permitting process from the beginning. BENEFITS Clearly explains what activities require permits and lists the permits issued by each municipal permit granting authority. Describes each municipal department, board, commission, and committee involved in permitting. Gives contact information for each permitting authority. Lists meeting schedules and timeframes so permit applicants can plan ahead. Presents the information in different formats (narrative, matrix, and flowchart) to meet the needs of a variety of potential users. CHALLENGES Review the User’s Guide for updates at least once a year. Most importantly, a specific individual should be vested with the responsibility of making sure the update happens. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS Because the permit and development types are numerous, there are a variety of checklists, guides and applications, including: Permit and Inspection Requirements for Single Family Residential Construction Permitting and Inspection Requirements for Commercial Construction Subdivision Application Packet Zoning Application Packet Development Process Review Page 7 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review However, there is no single “introductory” guide to guide the applicant where to turn for appropriate forms, timing of processes, people involved, checklists, etc. Often, one type of application may spawn the necessity of a second type of action (e.g., when is a TDLR registration required). Although staff will typically guide the applicant as to what forms are required depending upon the submission type, this information is not documented and available. (See discussion under Best Practice 8 – Permitting Flowcharts and Checklists.) RECOMMENDATION BP2A: Create a “User’s Guide for Development Review and Permitting.” Assign responsibility to a staff member to coordinate creation of this guide. Due to resources available, this project may require an extended time to complete. Links to forms should be provided in the guide. Additionally, the guide and associated forms should be checked no less than annually to ensure accuracy of the information. Consider inclusion of: Timeframe for action: This provides all parties with a schedule and deadlines for action. Process for proposed project review: This outlines how the board or commission conducts its reviews, including required public meetings or hearings. Guidelines for development: This aids a developer in planning a project for a level of impacts. Design standards: Provides clear, enforceable standards for such design elements as landscaping, architecture, parking, pedestrian amenities, vehicular access, and building layout. Process for modification after approval: This outlines the steps necessary for amendments to an approved plan. Many times situations arise that require adjustments to a plan after approval. BP2B: After completion of new forms and User’s Guide, hold a developer information session to acquaint them of new “one stop” processes. BP3: Pre-Application Meetings The purpose of pre-application meetings is for municipal staff, property owners, developers and their consultants to meet prior to the submittal of a formal application to discuss the development concept, potential issues and concerns. These consultation meetings promote better communication without determining any substantive issues. The meetings are an opportunity to explain the permit process, requirements, timetables (the sequence of board approvals) and to discuss additional information, reports, and/or studies that may be required for project review. Development Process Review Page 8 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review BENEFITS Allows for an informal review of a development in concept design stage. Permits identification of potential issues, both for the municipality and the developer. Establishes relationships early in the process. Alerts developer to potential need to meet with affected community. Reviews all permits and permissions required. Reviews time schedules for permitting. Allows a community to coordinate its response to a development proposal. CHALLENGES May be difficult to coordinate schedules. Participants must avoid tendency to make comments that may be construed to legally bind the community. Community perception of permissions granted without benefit of public hearings. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS The Community Development staff, and sometimes the Economic Development staff, already hold these meetings when the project scope warrants them. RECOMMENDATION BP3A: Continue this practice as an optional step. Document the pre-application meeting in the Best Practice 2 regarding creation of a “User’s Guide.” BP4: Project Technical Review Team Upon the submission of a completed application, the municipality may choose to conduct a coordinated review of the application during a technical review meeting. This process differs from the pre-application meeting in that, at this stage, an application has been formally submitted for consideration of approval. A project technical review team should consist of municipal staff assigned responsibility in the review process. Typically, the applicant should not be present during the technical review. In addition to providing a forum for a coordinated review, the comments, suggestions, and questions that arise from each of the A key benefit to having a pre-application meeting is that it provides a forum for informal review to discuss a proposal and the associated requirements well in advance of the submission of an application for formal consideration by the governing body. Development Process Review Page 9 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review reviewing parties can be consolidated into a single review letter/report to be provided to the applicant. A technical plan review will typically consist of at least some of the following, and may include other topics: Water and sewer services Traffic and access permitting Traffic signalization NPDES approvals Environmental issues: wetlands Transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities Erosion and sedimentation control Fire protection Code requirements Area, bulk, and density requirements Landscaping, lighting, open space Parking Trash and recycling requirements A meeting, if needed, should be held with the applicant to review the comments in the coordinated review report. BENEFITS Provides a clear understanding of the issues concerning each of the reviewing parties. Can remove confusion between departments and avoid the loss of time and money associated with conflicts. Can reduce overall review time for the applicant by establishing a regular, consistent process for the distribution of comments by the various parties. Such teams allow a community to coordinate a response to projects, including timing of separate reviews. Teams decrease “turf issues.” Staff time and energy is saved. Identifies critical issues and/or problems early in the application process. CHALLENGES Various timelines may exist throughout the different agencies with regard to certain approvals relevant to a project. When multiple timelines exist, it could be difficult to achieve a consistent review schedule without significant administrative and/or procedural changes in the agencies involved in the process. Municipalities can include review schedules on permitting checklists and flowcharts to allow applicants to better understand when to expect reviews to be completed . It is sometimes impractical to attempt to have all relevant parties involved in the review process attend all meetings on a consistent schedule. There could be significant logistical challenges to getting the same personnel to attend a regularly scheduled meeting. Many agencies have a single individual designated to conduct plan reviews or related approval reviews. When a representative with approval authority cannot be present, there could be issues or questions that remain unanswered. Development Process Review Page 10 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS Currently the Development Review Committee (DRC) acts as an internal staff advisory body for the review of cases that will be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Zoning Board of Adjustment and/or City Council as well as staff reviews of administrative site plan applications. Representatives include: Building Official Community Development Director Planning and Development Coordinator City Engineer Public Works Field Operations Manager (Previously Utility Supervisor) Fire Marshal Police Lieutenant Economic Development Director Representative from the City Manager’s Office Representative from G.I.S. Representative from Parks When an application is received, the Planning and Zoning Assistant distributes package information via the City network and notifies DRC members of the upcoming meeting. Until recently, the case information was put into the CRW system intermittently. There are approximately six (6) working days prior to the meeting; during this time, members make comments via email or the CRW system (only two members currently utilize CRW at this point). It was noted that attendance at these meetings is not consistent. Representatives may have schedule conflicts, or feel their participation may not be necessary due to the project type. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Planning and Development Coordinator prepares a “DRC Memo” that is sent to the developer with a timetable for the requisite legislative meeting(s). For building permit applications that do not involve new commercial construction, and do not require approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission, there is no DRC meeting. When commercial permits are submitted, the Permit Clerk emails reviewing parties that plans are available for review in the plans room. The Building Official then follows up with reviewers if comments are not made on a timely basis. In addition to providing a forum for coordinated review, the comments, suggestions and questions that arise from each of the reviewing parties can be consolidated into a single review letter to be provided to the applicant. Development Process Review Page 11 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review RECOMMENDATIONS BP4A: In addition to Planning and Zoning cases, the Development Review Committee should meet and review all new commercial applications. BP4B: Utilize Outlook to schedule Development Review Committee meetings, as it was noted that DRC meetings are oftentimes hard to make since members sometimes overschedule their calendars due to other commitments. BP4C: Review what representatives should be required at Development Review Committee meetings, and require attendance by all members or their representatives unless a waiver is granted by the Community Development Director. BP5: Interdepartmental Meetings Interdepartmental meetings provide the opportunity for the sharing of information and updates between departments within a municipality. All municipal departments may have input in the planning process, and a regularly scheduled meeting would help each department understand the processes specific to the other departments. This meeting is not intended for specific plan review, but is intended to provide updates on current practices and any anticipated changes in those practices. Issues to be discussed during these meetings might include: New regulations Changes in policy or procedure New development projects Permit fees, review fees BENEFITS Provides a forum for regular updates concerning each of the departments or agencies present. Can lead to better organization and coordination between or within departments and agencies regarding plan and permit review processes, timelines, and reporting. Allows for direct communication between the individuals responsible for their respective review and/or approval processes. Interdepartmental meetings can lead to better organization and coordination between or within departments regarding the plan and permit review processes, timelines, and reporting. Development Process Review Page 12 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review CHALLENGES There could be significant logistical challenges to getting the same personnel to attend a regularly scheduled meeting. Many agencies have a single individual designated to conduct plan reviews or related approval reviews. It requires significant effort on behalf of the individual/agency/department coordinating the meetings. COLLEVYILLE’S STATUS Other than the Development Review Committee meetings, there are no regular interdepartmental meetings to improve processes. The meetings that took place in the production of this report are a prime example of the type of positive results that can be obtained by having them. It was found that communication breakdowns, assumptions and absence of accountability can all be positively addressed given the proper forum. RECOMMENDATION BP5A: Hold quarterly, internal roundtable meetings with development review staff to hold “after action” reviews of closed and/or ongoing projects/permits to determine where processes could be tweaked and improved, improve communications and foster innovation. Assign an “owner” to these meetings and utilize Outlook to ensure they are scheduled on a regular and ongoing basis. BP6: Physical Proximity of Professional Staff Physical proximity of municipal staff is not always possible due to the geographic locations of individual buildings. At the municipal level, most staff is located in close physical proximity; however, there are also municipal engineers on contract, project inspectors, and others involved in the review process that may have offices in other locations, making them less available for in-person joint reviews and discussions. While a lack of physical proximity can inhibit the ability to conduct simultaneous reviews of plans, technology can be used to bridge this gap and allow for easier interaction among staff. The use of internet resources, including but not limited to email, shared document editing, and multi-user document viewing, as well as teleconferencing, would allow for simultaneous review of plans and better interdepartmental cooperation. BENEFITS Encourages informal staff discussion. Creates opportunities for staff of different departments to communicate. The use of technology can allow staff to collaborate even if unable to meet in person. Development Process Review Page 13 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Allows developers and the public to have easier access to staff for meetings, questions, etc. Allows for quicker resolution of issues that are jointly shared by different agencies. CHALLENGES Physical proximity of all reviewing entities is not possible. While internet communication could help further cooperation, the developer would still need to contact multiple individuals to obtain answers to questions unless a single point of contact was assigned the responsibility of communicating with the applicant. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS The placement of Public Works’ development engineer in the Community Development Office is a clear indicator of following the philosophy of this practice. Fortunately, Community Development, Building Inspections and Engineering are all located in City Hall. The Fire Marshal and Public Works Operations Manager must go to City Hall for plan review, but this does not appear to be an inconvenience or problem. The Fire Marshall utilizes the CRW system for review and comments. RECOMMENDATION BP6A: As noted in Best Practice 10 recommendations, all involved staff should be utilizing CRW so that each other’s comments are readily available to all and documented. Practices for Standarizing Forms and Procedures Predictability and consistency of the permitting process within a municipality advances the goal of more efficient development review and permitting. Permit applicants should know what to expect from the municipal boards, commission and staff they interact with through the process. This includes submittal requirements, plan documents, public meeting schedules, and review timeframes. BP7: Clear Submittal Requirements Well-drafted permit submittal requirements help to encourage uniformity in the review process. Such requirements let project proponents know exactly what they must submit, when, and to whom, and make it easier for the permit granting authority to evaluate the completeness and correctness of the application. Clear submittal requirements should include a comprehensive list of items an applicant must submit in order for the application to be considered complete, including format, number of copies, filing fees, notice procedures, and whether Development Process Review Page 14 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review digital copies of submittals are allowed or required. The following are useful materials to accompany submittal requirements: BENEFITS Allows for uniformity of materials to be analyzed during the project review process. Minimizes conflicts and delays in application review due to misunderstanding about what materials and information must be provided. The applicant may better plan for the expected length of time for project review and action by the reviewing board on the application. Plan submittals are likely to be more complete upon application submittal, minimizing delays during review caused by requesting and waiting for additional information. Neighbors and community leaders as well as the permit granting authority have a clear sense of what developers must provided, and what is not required. CHALLENGES Creating and adopting clear submittal requirements, and amending them as needed, require staff commitment and time. Formalizing submission requirements may require revisions to relevant bylaws,which can involve a lengthy process and may take several months to accomplish. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS Although most of the information described in this practice is available in application packages, it is not necessarily obvious. As an example, a residential building permit application requires a paper and electronic submission; however, this requirement is not listed in the “checklist” but rather in the text of the document. Incomplete applications are sometimes accepted because 1) resources aren’t available to check upon receipt (see Best Practice 1 recommendation); or 2) staff wants to help the developer move the project along. This then puts strain on staff to complete the review process “on time” when all materials were not originally submitted. RECOMMENDATIONS BP7A: Ensure submittal requirements concerning formats, number of copies, fees and notice requirements are clearly outlined with the checklists described in Best Practice 8. Include fee information in checklist. BP7B: Require complete and on-time submittals by permit applicants. Submitting partial information causes delays, and makes it more difficult for an “on-time” plan review. If partial information is accepted as an exception, the official review time count should not begin until full submittal requirements are met. Development Process Review Page 15 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review BP8: Permitting Flowcharts and Checklists Flowcharts and checklists to guide applicants through the permitting process are valuable resources. A flowchart illustrates the steps of the permit process. A checklist describes the mandatory steps and can be an integral part of the permit process itself, giving clear guidance to both the applicant and the permitting agency. Flowcharts should begin with the submittal of a plan or application, proceed through review by all necessary boards and agencies, outline public participation requirements, and describe the decision process. The lengths of time provided for each step of the process should also be shown. BENEFITS Checklists and flowcharts make the process transparent and demonstrate its uniformity. They are a valuable primer for applicants, new employees, and new board or commission members with a limited knowledge of the permitting procedures and processes. CHALLENGES Flowcharts are merely illustrative of the process. Legally, they are not definitive, and a disclaimer is appropriate. Permit granting authorities have opportunities to exercise discretion at times, including waivers of requirements. This may be difficult to include in a flowchart. Flowcharts are limited in their ability to describe the complexity of a multiple- permit approval process. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS There are no flowcharts available for the developer. Building Inspections has internal flowcharts for permit applications, but they are specific to each permit type, and do not give an overview of departmental systems. There are a variety of forms and checklists on the internet, accessed via the Building Inspections Department page. Although most applications include necessary attachments, most do not have an up-front checklist of requirements by application type. Requirements are often buried in the text of the document. As an example, on the Residential Permit Application, there is a “Permit Application Checklist” that contains various items, including “Construction Plans.” However, further in the document, there are additional required submittals under the “Construction Plans” narrative. Development Process Review Page 16 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review No forms are form-fillable. Some are outdated and different “styles” are used in the various forms. Internal forms used by individuals performing plan/permit review are not shared or uniform. This can be a barrier for employees when change in responsibilities or personnel occur. RECOMMENDATIONS BP8A: Create flowcharts to illustrate how the various processes occur, from a developer’s perspective and add to the User’s Guide discussed in Best Practice 2. BP8B: Redesign applications to be up-to-date, consistent in look, and form-fillable. Check annually to ensure information is current. Eliminate “universal” application (zoning/SUP/PUD/plats, etc.) and design individual applications based on type. BP8C: Include a checklist at the beginning of every application that outlines what attachments are required under what circumstances, including any additional permit applications. All submission requirements should be on one checklist and, in the cases where electronic submissions are required, a matrix could be provided to clarify what is required in what format. Processing times should be included. Avoid “universal applications” since the submission requirements vary depending upon permit type. As an example, the residential permit checklist would include the following information: A checklist should include, but not be limited to, a timeline for the review and approval process, clear submittal requirements, information on fees, and information pertaining to other agencies from which approvals may be required. Development Process Review Page 17 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Residential Building Application Requirements Item Paper Copies Required Electronic Copy Required Application Form 1 Yes Plot Plan 1 Yes Erosion Control Plan 1 Yes Energy Compliance Certification 1 Yes Construction Plans Floor plan of all structures Window and door sizes Elevation drawings showing exterior wall construction Foundation drawings stamped by a professional engineer licensed by the State of Texas Original letter from same engineer that sealed the foundation plans stating that the foundation was designed for the soil conditions on that particular lot; the letter must also state that the foundation design criteria comply with the minimum standards required by the 2003 International Residential Code. 1 11 x 17 1 Full Size Yes Site Specific Grading Plan (If Subdivision Grading Plan is Not Available) 1 Yes Separate Permits That May Be Required Fence Irrigation Systems Retaining Walls Swimming Pools Accessory Building Tree Permits See individual application requirements See individual application requirements Residential Permits are Reviewed and Processed Generally Within 10 Working Days Upon Submission of All Required Components Fees (collected after plan review) Water installation fee Service charge Water deposit Sewer tap fee Roadway impact fee Water impact fee Sewer impact fee Building permit fee Plan review fee Lot drainage inspection fee Contractor registration fee Other VALUE $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ VALUE $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ VALUE $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Development Process Review Page 18 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review BP8D: Create checklists assigning responsibility for various review items; include this in CRW (as in Best Practice Recommendation BP10D). BP9: Predictable Fees In order to aid applicants/developers in determining the cost of compliance with local permitting and land use regulations, fees for reviews and permits should be clear and easy to understand. Adopting fees by resolution allows for changes to be made with less procedural requirement than fees codified directly into municipal regulations. To the extent possible, all known fees should be detailed in a fee schedule. Where possible, municipalities can provide multiple options of consultants/firms that can conduct inspections, along with their fees. The fee schedule should be placed on the municipal website for quick access and printing. BENEFITS A fee schedule provides clear information to inform and aid applicants regarding the required costs and total potential costs associated with a proposed project. Information regarding other agencies and their fees will help reduce confusion and any surprise factor associated with external fees. A clear and understandable fee schedule increases the transparency of government functions. CHALLENGES Developing a fee schedule requires research into the various processes associated with plan and permit reviews in order to determine fees that are not arbitrary. Staff should be able to explain the purpose of any fees to interested parties. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS A “Development Application Fees” schedule is included on the website (http://www.colleyville.com/images/content/files/communitydevelopment/Development_Fees_9_18 _13.pdf) and in the various Community Development application packets, including zoning, subdivision, landscape, etc. In order to aid applicants in determining the cost of compliance with local permitting and land use regulations, fees for reviews and permits should be clear and easy to understand. Development Process Review Page 19 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review There is a schedule of “Miscellaneous Permit Fees” on the Building Inspection webpage: http://www.colleyville.com/images/content/files/buildinginspection/Misc._fees_9-18-2013.pdf However, the following permit fees are not listed, but calculated upon permit submission: Water installation fee Service charge Water deposit Sewer tap fee Roadway Impact fee Water Impact fee Sewer Impact fee Building permit fee Plan review fee Lot drainage inspection fee Contractor Registration fee When plans are submitted multiple times, only one plan review fee is charged. RECOMMENDATIONS BP9A: Create a “fees” webpage that includes all fees and a fee calculator per the schedule in the Table of Recommendations at the end of this document. BP9B: Add fee information to the checklists on Best Practice 8 per the schedule in the Table of Recommendations at the end of this document. BP9D: When all fees are reviewed during the annual review, consider whether resubmittal fees should be charged. Practices Regarding Resources Adequate staffing and resources are integral to efficient planning and permitting. Advancements in technology available today are neither too expensive nor too sophisticated to be useful in municipal offices. Quick and competent review depends upon both of these. BP10: Electronic Filing, Tracking and Commenting Electronic permit tracking systems have the potential to streamline the permitting process from application through project completion. An effective tracking system will allow for better management of the overall permitting process, from providing ongoing Electronic permit tracking systems can greatly improve the efficiency the permitting process and help reduce overhead cost over the long-term. Development Process Review Page 20 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review status reports to identifying potential problems early in the permitting process. In addition to filing and tracking, municipalities can utilize electronic commenting in order to quickly and easily communicate with applicants regarding the status and potential concerns with submitted plans. Electronically submitted comments can be simultaneously viewed by other reviewers and sent to applicants, engineers, and project managers when completed. Electronic filing, tracking, and commenting can be done using existing office software; however, multiple programs may be needed to perform all functions. Software packages are available that are specifically designed to allow municipalities to administer their permit processes and conduct these functions. BENEFITS Reduces staff time spent on administrative functions such as copying and filing. Cuts back on waste and administrative overhead costs long-term. Can provide more transparency and accuracy to the permitting process. Allows less room for administrative error given automatic fields and assigned numerical values. Allows simultaneous dissemination of electronic files to multiple parties,including other permit granting authorities, and provides remote access. Could provide automatically-generated reports showing statistical information for recent permits. CHALLENGES Commercially produced filing software is often expensive and cost prohibitive for smaller communities. Electronic permit systems must be continually managed, including continual updates and uniform usage from staff. Backup systems to store data must be utilized, as all software is susceptible to corruption and failure. Locally developed systems, such as those through Office Suite software, have more limited applicability and may not be as efficient as commercial programs. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS The City’s CRW software is used consistently for all permits. The Building Official does a good job in ensuring permit and plan information is uploaded into the system as well as keeping insuring system updates are installed. However, only two users use the system consistently for plan review comments and documentation. For those that don’t utilize the system for plan review comments and documentation, the Building Official attaches emails or other correspondence to verify others’ reviews. Projects (zoning, variances, etc.) are sometimes entered into CRW, but not consistently. RECOMMENDATIONS Development Process Review Page 21 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review BP10A: Provide training and require that all parties involved in the plan review process use CRW per the schedule in the Table of Recommendations at the end of this document. BP10B: Use CRW as the central repository for all development projects involved with a property per the schedule in the Table of Recommendations at the end of this document. This would include all Planning and Zoning cases. BP10C: Work with ISM/vendor to determine why the automatic emailing feature is not working. Instead of the Building Official or Permit Clerk having to create separate emails, this feature should be turned “on” to full functionality. BP10D: Using the checklists designed in Best Practice Recommendation 8D, configure CRW to require check off on those items by the responsible reviewer. BP11: Maximize the Municipal Website The use of the internet is increasingly becoming the preferred mode of communication for towns and cities. Municipalities are using the internet to conduct business and to communicate with residents, owners/applicants and non-profits via a “virtual town hall” website. While limited resources and inertia have slowed adoption of municipal web based regulatory education, administrative forms, information, and even filings, commentators agree that more universal web information would help regulators, administrators, owners, professionals, and applicants. BENEFITS Hosting a municipal website is an extension of town/city hall operations that can either be static (listing office hours and department contacts) or interactive (downloadable forms and documents, email alerts, bylaws, regulations, etc). Websites provide access to town/city hall information outside regular business hours and reduces staff time devoted to interacting with “walk ins” during business hours. A website may act as a “one-stop shop” where a user may gain access to a multitude of documents and forms from many departments without having to physically walk from one department to another. Municipal staff may use the website as a tool to post agendas, announcements, and decisions, as well as to direct users to guides, regulations, forms or documents for instant access. Often documents and forms are downloadable at no cost to the user. Communities use their websites as “one-stop” permitting and development centers in an effort to direct and streamline the permitting process. Development Process Review Page 22 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Information on a website can act as a guide in and of itself to explain the permitting process and allow the user to conduct research prior to engaging planning staff and initiating a permit process. CHALLENGES Municipalities may have insufficient access to technical assistance to create, update, and post information on the internet. Regular updating can be particularly challenging when staffing is limited. Some municipalities have not yet chosen to have internet access. A few are unable to gain access. Forms and procedures are frequently not in a digital format to upload to the internet. Many communities are using forms and procedures created decades ago which are only in a paper format, and images of applications are all that can currently be posted. COLLEYVILLE’S STATUS Colleyville has been successfully utilizing the municipal website by incorporating the CRW system into the Building Inspections page. There are several features very helpful on the website, e.g., the “Current Development Activity” map is helpful and informative to businesses and citizens alike. However, development processes and forms are separated by departmental pages, as follows: Building Inspections Community Development Public Works Accessory Building Information X Asbestos Removal Requirements X Backflow Prevention X Commercial Building Permit Application X Development Fee Schedule X Easement Abandonment X Easement Encroachment/Abandonment Application X Easement Joint Use and Encroachment Agreement X Energy Code Procedures X Erosion Control Procedures X Fence Encroachment Agreement X Fire Protection System Permit Application X Grading Permits X Irrigation System Procedures X Lot Drainage Survey Procedures X X Miscellaneous Construction Building Permit Application X Package Store Application Packet X Planning and Zoning Information and Packets X Reroof Decking Requirements for Clay/Concrete X Residential Building Permit Application X Row Access and Permits X Sign Permit Application Forms X Sign Regulations X Site Plan and Landscape Plan Application Packet X Development Process Review Page 23 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Special Event Permit Application X Subdivision (Plat) Application Packet X Swimming Pool/Hot Tub Permit Application X TDLR Requirements X Temporary Use Permit Application X Tent Permit X Tree Protection Procedures X Tree Removal Permit Application X Water Well Drilling Permit Application X Zoning Board of Adjustments and Packets X RECOMMENDATIONS PB11A: Create a “development center” page with all information and links originating from this one page. Due to resources available, this project may require some time to complete or non-departmental resources. Consider what additional information would be helpful, such as a Zoning Map. Additional Conditions and Recommendations In addition to the recommendations associated with best practices, it was found during the process mapping exercises that several gap areas exist. Recommendations concerning these gaps follow. Plan Review Processes, Resources and Responsibilities Residential Review At some point, residential plan review responsibilities were divided amongst Public Works and Building Inspections, presumably due to staffing capacity, or lack thereof. Some of the items reviewed are duplicated (e.g., setbacks). OR1: When the Plans Examiner position is filled, residental permit review should be the responsibility of the Plans Examiner. Public Works staff should work with the Plans Examiner and Building Official to create a checklist for review items, as well as parameters as to when a Public Works engineer should be consulted for variances in erosion control, drainage, flood plain and grading situations. Resources for Review During discussions, it was noted that plan review turnaround times may be unrealistic. Performance measures from FY 2013 indicate plan reviews consistently took more time than the targets. Development Process Review Page 24 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Measure 2013 Target 2013 Actual Percentage of residential plan reviews completed in five days or less >75% 21% Percentage of commercial plan reviews completed in ten days or less >75% 44% It was also noted that there is some varying opinion on whether fast turnarounds or quality reviews are the most important factor in completing the reviews. An understanding of quality being the primary factor needs to be institutionalized. OR2: After the Plans Examiner position is filled, perform a study on the activities of the Community Development and Planning Department to determine if more resources are needed or if review times should be altered. Second Reviews Current processes for Planning and Zoning Cases (reviewed by Development Review Committee), and Commercial, Subdivision and Residential applications do not have a timeframe built-in for “re-review” of plans. If plans need substantial changes, this review time is necessary. Additionally, developers have not been required to resubmit architectural plans in the case of substantial changes. Instead, written notes on the original submission are considered sufficient. OR3: Create a deadline for resubmittals, and build into the schedule a time for staff re-review. (On January 28, Community Development Director issued an email that adds a week to the Planning and Zoning calendar for additional review time.) OR4: Document that architectural plans may need to be completely resubmitted when changes warrant. Planning and Zoning Schedule While reviewing the Development Review Committee and the associated time tables, the frequency of Planning and Zoning meetings and the resultant tight schedule under which the Development Review Committee must operate was discussed, including the inability to include time for a secondary review as discussed in Other Recommendation 3. Many meetings are cancelled due to the current level of zoning cases. OR5: Consider reducing the schedule of Planning and Zoning meetings to once every four weeks, with every other week being a “tentative” date for postponed or “rush” cases. Should development activity increase, this scheduled can be reconsidered. Development Process Review Page 25 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Tree Removal and Tree Preservation Trees identified for removal from construction sites are required to be flagged. Trees designated to remain should have protective fencing. Compliance with these requirements is currently outsourced. Tree survey reviews are also outsourced. The tree consultant is not always available to ensure construction sites are in compliance with plans. OR6: Review the administration of tree requirements and determine if this could be better provided by an internal, full-time arborist. Right of Way Permitting and Inspection Currently, the Right-of-Way/Backflow Technician in the Public Works Department is responsible for issuing right-of-way permits for contractors excavating in public rights- of way. The permit triggers the technician to perform water and sewer line locates. No inspection of activity occurs. As-built drawings are not received. OR7: Review the right-of-way permitting process and adjust to ensure inspection of activities and appropriate techniques are performed by the contractor. Drainage Until recently, nothing was in place to verify subdivision drainage plans were followed. “Final Grading Letters” are now required to ensure they do. However, older drainage plans are not necessarily beneficial in neighborhoods where previously-constructed lots did not have this requirement, as the integrity of the plan may or may not have been compromised. In these cases, individual lot grading plans may be required. City staff performs onsite inspections of residential developments to identify any areas of concern that need to be addressed prior to issuing initial acceptance of the public improvements. Historically these inspections have identified deficiencies in public infrastructure; however the scope of these inspections can be broadened to include the certification of lot bench elevations. To receive approval for construction, developers are required to submit grading plans for the land being permitted for development. Grading plans vary in the level of detail to which they delineate finished pad or finished floor elevations for lots in the subdivision. When individual site grading plans are required, there is no checklist as Development Process Review Page 26 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review to what needs to be included; it is generally left up to the city engineer to make that decision. OR8: Verify that lots are properly benched before the development is accepted and home construction begins. This will promote that homes are built in conformance to the grading plan for the development. This recommendation has already been implemented. OR9: Charge Public Works with creating standards for neighborhood grading plans as well as individual site plans. Standardizing the requirements for grading plans to specify the finished pad, finished floor or both elevations is another way to increase the efficiency and accuracy of the review process. Requiring the grading plan to provide detailed information about each lot undergoing development will further enable the City to hold developers and builders accountable for maintaining a high standard of construction. This will be implemented per the schedule in the Table of Recommendations at the end of this document. Development Process Review Page 27 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Table of Recommendations Recommendation Target Date Comp. Date BP 1A Assign a project manager for major projects. 03/2014 BP 1B Appoint a primary and secondary receiver of applications to ensure an on-the-spot application review is completed upon receipt. 04/2014 BP 2A Create a “User’s Guide for Development Review and Permitting.” 12/2014 BP 2B Hold a developer information session to acquint them of new “one stop” processes after creation of User’s Guide. 01/2015 BP 3A Document the pre-application meetings in the User’s Guide. 12/2014 BP 4A In addition to Planning and Zoning cases, the Development Review Committee should meet to review all new commercial applications. 02/2014 BP 4B Utilize Outlook to schedule Development Review Committee meetings. 03/2014 BP 4C Review what representatives should be required at Development Review Committee meetings, and require attendance by all members or their representatives. 05/2014 BP 5A Hold quarterly internal round table meetings with development review staff. 06/2014 BP 6A All involved staff should be utilizing CRW so that each other’s comments are readily available to all and documented. 05/2014 BP 7A Ensure clear submittal requirements are outlined. 06/2014 BP 7B Require complete and on-time submittals. 03/2014 BP 8A Create flowcharts for major processes. 09/2014 BP 8B Redesign applications to be up-to-date, consistent in look, and form-fillable. Eliminate “universal” application and design individual applications based on type. 08/2014 BP 8C Include complete checklists at the beginning of every application/permit type. 08/2014 BP 8D Create checklists assigning responsibility for various review items; include this in CRW (as in Best Practice Recommendation BP10D). 08/2014 BP 9A Create a fees webpage. 10/2014 BP 9B Add fee information to the checklists on BP8. 06/2014 Development Process Review Page 28 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review BP 9D When all fees are reviewed during the annual review, consider whether resubmittal fees should be charged. 08/2014 BP 10A Provide training and require all parties involved in plan review use CRW. 05/2014 BP 10B Use CRW as the central repository for all development projects. 05/2014 BP 10C Fix automatic email feature in CRW. 05/2014 BP 10D Using the checklists designed in Best Practice Recommendation 8D, configure CRW to require check off on those items by the responsible reviewer 07/2014 BP 11A Create a “development center” page with all information and links originating from this one page. 12/2014 OR1 Residental permit review should be the responsibility of the Plans Examiner. 02/2014 OR2 Perform a study on the activities of the Community Development and Planning Department to determine if more resources are needed or if review times should be altered. 04/2014 OR3 Create a deadline for resubmittals, and build into the schedule a time for staff re-review. 06/2014 OR4 Document that architechtural plans may need to be completely resubmitted when changes warrant. 06/2014 OR5 Consider reducing the schedule of Planning and Zoning meetings to once every four weeks. 05/2014 OR6 Review the administration of tree requirements and determine if this could be better provided by an internal, full-time arborist. 03/2014 OR7 Review the right-of-way permitting process and adjust to ensure inspection of activities and appropriate techniques are performed by the contractor. 06/2014 OR8 Verify that lots are properly benched before the development is accepted and home construction begins. 03/2014 OR9 Charge Public Works personnel with creating standards for neighborhood grading plans as well as individual site plans. 03/2014 Development Process Review Page 29 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review Conclusion While there are many good systems already in place, opportunities to refine these systems are present. Revising and documenting practices and processes is crucial to ensure both execution and continuity. A development review process that is transparent and streamlined enables both the City and the developer to be clear about expectations, regulations, and costs. Although initial implementation of any approved recommendations will take away from already-scarce resources, a system to create accountability for execution of those recommendations is paramount in ensuring improvements. If leaders determine resources are lacking to implement recommendations, outsourcing could be considered for some actions. During this exercise, it was evident that City staff members are committed to having a developer-friendly system while protecting and preserving the City’s infrastructure and development. It is hoped that providing enhanced tools to support their commitment will facilitate an environment where developers and the City can partner to maintain and develop Colleyville to the highest possible standards. Development Process Review Page 30 February 2014 2014 Development Process Review ZO N I N G PR A C T I C E AM E R I C A N P L A N N I N G A S S O C I A T I O N 20 5 N . M i c h i g a n A v e . Su i t e 1 2 0 0 Ch i c a g o , I L 6 0 6 0 1 – 5 9 2 7 10 3 0 1 5 t h S t r e e t , N W Su i t e 7 5 0 W e s t Wa s h i n g t o n , D C 2 0 0 0 5 – 1 5 0 3 ZONING PRACTICE FEBRUARY 2014 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 2 ISSUE NUMBER 2 PRACTICE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 2HOW DOES YOUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AFFECT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT? Development Review as Economic Development ZONINGPRACTICE 2.14 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 2 Done well, it is an economic development tool for a community to attract and secure desirable development, implement plans, and add to the local tax base. Conversely, an unpredictable development approval process can discourage development that the community wants. It can lead to difficulty in implementing plans and create the impression that the community is not a good place to do business. We’ve all been to a meeting like this: The planning and zoning commission is on its third review meeting of a major retail develop- ment on the main commercial corridor in town. The staff has worked with the developer to understand city codes and expectations, and the proposal has begun to reflect those needs. In keeping with the outline of the staff report, the commission has dutifully considered land use, zoning, site plan and circulation, traffic, landscaping, signage, lighting, light fixtures, and now, building materials. The discussion has gone as expected so far, with the commis- sion requesting “just a couple more” details on types of plant materials and a bit of discussion over which of the light fixture styles was most appropriate. Then the commission turns its attention to the awnings. The signage on the awnings for the project’s anchor tenant was within code and the color was the company’s usual red. One of the commission members suggested that while the awning was the company’s standard and was in context with the overall building, perhaps a different shade of red would be more attractive, maybe even a maroon. A second commission member chimes in that maroon is much too dark, and that something more vibrant, perhaps leaning toward orange, would be better. The debate on which shade of red was best for the awning rages on for 45 minutes. To resolve the matter, the chair suggests that the applicant return to the next meeting with three samples of shades of red they would like to propose for the commission to evaluate and then adds that it is now too late to make any formal decisions. The aftermath of the meeting is predict- able. The applicant is frustrated because there is a corporate deadline to start construction that this “hurdle” will delay. He will tell the planner how the whole project is now in jeop- ardy and that all those people who warned him not to build in this town were right! A call from the mayor or city administrator wanting to know what happened is also likely since this is a project the community wants. Development review is an essential ele- ment of municipal operations, and when done well, it provides an opportunity for planners to bring a great value to the communities they serve. The process should always improve mar- ginal developments and reject those that are inappropriate, but it should not be the stum- bling block that inhibits desirable outcomes. Development Review as Economic Development By Michael Blue, faicp Development review is more than just a series of perfunctory steps to run a project through prior to approval. Development review processes should add value to the community by evaluating proposed developments in light of topics important to the community. Te s k a A s s o c i a t e s Development Review as Economic Development ASK THE AUTHOR JOIN US ONLINE! About the Author ZONINGPRACTICE 2.14 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 3 THE WARNING Elected and appointed officials, planners, and other development process participants can become comfortable with their communities’ zoning approval processes. However, we must realize that just because a process worked in the “old” economy, prior to the mid-2000s, it will not necessarily function well today. Well- capitalized builders and developers who feel they can put a project in the ground on spec and then attract tenants are rare, if they exist anywhere. Communities are faced with a new range of development and financial challenges. For these reasons, it is time to revisit approval processes and find the next set of best practic- es to ensure that development review tasks and requirements add value to our communities. THE CHARGE A development review processes should incor- porate three essential themes: • The process must be predictable to the ap- plicant, elected and appointed officials, other departments, and the public in order to assure the best outcomes. • Each step in the development approval process must add value to the process, the development, and the community. • The process must ensure open and continu- ous communication to the applicant, elected and appointed officials, other departments, and the public. Communities should audit their processes in light of these three themes. But remember, the purpose is not just to do “more with less” or to streamline a process. Yes, efficiency and timely review are important, but we must be careful that streamlining is not just doing the same work in less time. A faster development review isn’t necessarily a better review. Rather, the question should be to look at the aspects of the review and determine if they advance the community vision. Did the commission need to review awning colors (or, for that matter, landscape and lighting, which could be defined in a code and approved administratively)? If the answer for the community is yes, these are important elements that must be considered by a formal body, and the community should continue to do so. However, if items of limited significance are being reviewed or approval through a commission process isn’t essential to enhancing development, they should be eliminated, made administrative, or set to meet clearly defined code standards. This is the type of process streamlining that will save time and money for the community by focusing effort on the issues that matter most and making it a more attractive place to pursue development. THE CAVEAT Is this about tossing out the way communities have conducted development review and start- ing over? Absolutely not. The steps in develop- ment review that reflect the unique values and Go online during the month of February to participate in our “Ask the Author” forum, an interactive feature of Zoning Practice. Michael Blue, faicp, will be available to answer questions about this article. Go to the APA website at www.planning.org and follow the links to the Ask the Author section. From there, just submit your questions about the article using the e-mail link. The author will reply, and Zoning Practice will post the answers cumulatively on the website for the benefit of all subscribers. This feature will be available for selected issues of Zoning Practice at announced times. After each online discussion is closed, the answers will be saved in an online archive available through the APA Zoning Practice web pages. Michael Blue, faicp, is a principal with Teska Associates of Evanston, Illinois, a firm providing public- and private-sector clients with services related to planning, landscape architecture, site design, economic development, and community engagement. He worked in the public sector for 15 years as a community development manager for Mount Prospect, Illinois, and Highland Park, Illinois, focusing in both locales on development review and approval, long- range planning, and policy related projects. As a consultant, Blue has prepared numerous long-range plans, development impact studies, and public participation efforts. For much of his career, he has been active in the American Planning Association at the local, state, and national levels, and he is currently the Planning Officials Development Officer for APA Illinois. Figure 1. Single-family housing sales, January 2000–November 2013. U.S. Census Bureau ZP_Feb2014.indd 3 2/7/14 11:09 AM Development Review as Economic Development ZONINGPRACTICE 2.14 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 4 needs of the community should continue. And while it should go without saying, the purpose is not about accepting development the com- munity neither wants nor needs, nor is it about assuring large profits to an applicant. The objec- tive is to strike a balance in approval processes so as to smoothly facilitate quality development outcomes for the community and its residents. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT NOW? To state the obvious, the world of develop- ment, and therefore development approval, has changed over the last several years from what it was prior to the Great Recession. Fig- ures 1 and 2 for new home sales and building permits reflect the very familiar trend line of peaking in the middle part of the last decade, falling sharply, and now returning (slowly) to an upward trend. But even as the economy begins to gain traction, it is important to ask: Will it ever be 2005 again in the development world? Can communities expect or count on that pace of development returning? Communi- ties cannot rely on securing tax-base support from desired development at the pace they did 10 years ago. That economy is past. The way in which development is done has changed, and development approval practice must reflect that reality. It must be thought of as part of the community’s economic development toolbox. The Development Business Has Changed Figure 3 (showing the familiar pattern and an uncertain 2013) indicates annual rates of pri- vate construction in the U.S. Anecdotal stories heard at building counters reflect that while developers are out there looking to take on projects, capital is hard to find and is impact- ing the number of projects being initiated. Not only will developers be limited by access to capital, but they will be more likely to seek public financial participation. More to the point of this discussion, developers will be more risk averse and less likely to pursue development where the approval process is unpredictable. Development Approval and Economic Development Have Changed The capacity of municipalities to regulate and support development has been threatened and impacted by state referenda on property rights and Supreme Court cases such as Nollan, Dolan, and Kelo. These challenges have not gutted the role of municipalities in developing their communities, but they do give communi- ties reason to be cautious. In this environment, a sound and predictable development approval process becomes an even more valuable eco- nomic development tool. Public Finance Has Changed Established revenue sources to communities have been reduced. In addition, local govern- ments all over the country are dealing with hav- ing lost, or the risk of losing, funds from state and federal sources. Further, municipalities are facing challenges imposed by funding pension responsibilities; the table below shows the increasing trend of these payments. As those obligations grow, so will the pressure to find new revenue sources to support them. Again, Figure 2. Residential building permits, January 2000–November 2013. U.S. Census Bureau Figure 3. Private nonresidential construction spending, January 2002–November 2013. U.S. Census Bureau Development Review as Economic Development ZONINGPRACTICE 2.14 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 5 the need for attracting desirable development to support fiscal needs becomes an important element of municipal finance. Government Operations Have Changed The mantras heard at budget hearings everywhere are the echoes of very real fiscal constraints: “do more with less,” “consolidate,” “share services,” “outsource,” “think like a business,” etc. These concepts have merit, but at some point (and many places are already there) budget reductions are cutting bone, not fat. A number of communities set staffing levels based on average, or typical, operations. In areas that do not have a year-round construction season, maintaining staff needed during a busier summer season allows for “catch- ing up” or project work during the winter. Commu- nities unable to carry staff in this way may move to third-party services for peak times. No matter how communities address the budget and staffing challenge, it is important to maintain the empha- sis on quality development review. Too often the concern in light of budget constraints is how to do development review faster, but the question should be how to do it better. THE WARNING SIGNS So how do you know when the process isn’t functioning optimally and you need to look at serious change? Keep your eyes open for some warning signs: A Lack of Understanding or Respect for the Process The approval process is not always going to be smooth. It is inherently a negotiation and may well be contentious. But it does not need to be mean spirited or belligerent; it doesn’t have to be cops and robbers. If there is a lack of trust, communication, or respect at meetings between staffs and applicants, realize that this is not normal and acceptable. It is time to find and eliminate the cause of a caustic working relationship. In addition, some applicants will go through the motions of the approval process with little regard for staff review or commission evaluation. This approach may be a political calculation by the applicant in the hope that a desire for their project by the community negates the need for in-depth vetting through a public process. This is not the case and should be a warning sign. A deliberative process that seeks and applies concerns brought up by the staff, commissioners, and public input cre- ates a thoughtful deliberation and brings a well-reasoned recommendation to the elected officials. Further discussion at that stage isn’t a problem, but officials should be working from a foundation established in the process. Development by Litigation In some cases an approval process will result in litigation. While always possible, the keys to avoiding this outcome are a well-crafted comprehensive plan and set of development policies, practices, and regulations that reflect that plan. In addition, a predictable approval process will lessen the chances of a commu- nity being sued by an applicant. Working from the notion that the applicant will most likely proceed if there is a reasonable chance for success, it is the denial that seems unexpected to them or comes from a late shift in the posi- tion of the community that inspires litigation. A predictable process, well communicated and well executed, can help diminish the potential for litigation. Amending Unnecessary or Inappropriate Requirements It is essential to know and be able to explain why code requirements exist. Dismissive an- swers such as “because the code says so” or “because we’ve always done it that way” do not communicate properly to applicants or the community the value of development (and building permit) review. Also, there is efficiency to be found in making sure that every step has a purpose—benefiting both the community and applicants. The question is whether the review requirement adds value to the development and the community. If it does, keep it; if not, look to amend the code. That said, change for the sake of change (or to give the appearance of progress) has no value. Likewise, a knee-jerk code or policy change in response to a single undesirable outcome (like an unusual sign or odd-sized porch) is not always necessary. But if patterns appear in approvals that are contrary to com- munity desires or a “loophole” is identified that creates unwelcome development forms, communities should be willing to amend lo- cal codes to support desired outcomes. The same is true should the need arise to consider updates to the approval process. In making changes, communities should take note that seeking out different perspectives and being open to the changes they propose (even small ones) can improve the process and are appreci- ated by applicants. A Reliance on Last-Minute Negotiation As stated earlier, development includes ne- gotiations. When that negotiation happens is important, and the earlier in the process the better. The ability to be flexible diminishes, for both municipality and applicant, as the pro- cess moves forward. A last-minute demand will either be a genuine issue or create a percep- tion of unreasonableness (from either party) and may upend a desired outcome. A Lack of Internal Communication In most communities the team that conducts development review is multidisciplinary and from different departments. Communication Continual and open communication regarding procedures, community expectations, and code requirements are essential to a successful development approval process. Te s k a A s s o c i a t e s Development Review as Economic Development ZONINGPRACTICE 2.14 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 6 among these groups is essential. A lack of com- munication will limit desirable outcomes and send the message that the community is not ready to do business. A Lack of Positive Development Outcomes Securing desired developments that advance the community’s plans, vision, and quality of life is the ultimate aim of an effective de- velopment approval process. To ensure this is working, always go back and see how the development turned out. See what the local commissioners, residents, and elected officials think. Not everyone will like every develop- ment, but finding that the community is consis- tently not pleased with outcomes is reason to reconsider how projects are approved. HOW TO IMPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS If you notice any of the warning signs above, it’s time to start an internal discussion. Identify a point person to talk with staff, commissions, and elected officials to understand what the community needs and wants from the process. Talk to the customers (developers) about their take on the process. Review your development approval steps to see that they add value. You should ask: Why do we do this? Who does it help? Is the cost for review greater than the benefit? Evaluate the system in light of the themes, truisms, and best practices outlined below. Predictability The best development approval process will have a defined structure understood by all involved. To facilitate such an outcome, com- munities should be cognizant of the numerous perspectives in the process and work to create a common understanding of how the process functions. Desirable developments that implement community plans are the most direct indicator that a development approval process is succeeding. Te s k a A s s o c i a t e s Certainty versus flexibility. Communities want to know precisely what will be built, who will occupy it, when it will be finished, and what it will look like. Developers want to make many of these determinations later (to be sure the construction material is in stock, negoti- ate leases over time, change the appearance depending on tenants plans, etc.). There is no way to completely bridge the certainty versus flexibility gap, but the answer is to provide predictability. Approval ordinances, codes, or development agreements should spell out what can change after approval, including what can be signed off on administratively and what will require a new hearing. Different game for the little guys. Large developers or businesses may have a team of attorneys, architects, traffic engineers, land- scape architects, and other professionals to as- sist with review processes. Smaller applicants will not. They may have never been through an approval before. The process will be full of jargon and intimidating meetings. They will need assistance (and time) from staff to make it through the process. Many communities note a desire to emphasize locally owned busi- nesses as part of their economic development program, and having an approval process they can navigate is a great place to start. Conduct commissioner training. The com- munity members sitting on various develop- ment-related boards and commissions more often than not have no technical training or professional expertise in development review or code preparation. Even the best staff reports cannot make them experts in the field, and many will be unwilling to ask questions they feel are too simple. They are on the commis- sions because of their interest in and commit- ment to their community. Further, as residents they will certainly have a keen understanding of the town’s quality of life, expectations of community members, local history, etc. While volunteer board members will bring these insights to the commission deliberations, staff can help enhance the efficacy of these boards and commissions by finding the time and op- portunity to provide training in commission operations and development review practice. Communicate the process and expecta- tions. Developers should know early in the process what information, studies, meetings, and approvals will be required. This need not be sugarcoated; it should be realistic. Part of this communication is also to understand the applicant’s position (with an open mind). Be Development Review as Economic Development VOL. 31, NO. 2 Zoning Practice is a monthly publication of the American Planning Association. Subscriptions are available for $95 (U.S.) and $120 (foreign). W. Paul Farmer, faicp, Chief Executive Officer; David Rouse, aicp, Managing Director of Research and Advisory Services. Zoning Practice (ISSN 1548–0135) is produced at APA. Jim Schwab, aicp, and David Morley, aicp, Editors; Julie Von Bergen, Assistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design and Production. Missing and damaged print issues: Contact Customer Service, American Planning Association, 205 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 1200, Chicago, IL 60601 (312-431-9100 or customerservice@planning.org) within 90 days of the publication date. Include the name of the publication, year, volume and issue number or month, and your name, mailing address, and membership number if applicable. Copyright ©2014 by the American Planning Association, 205 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 1200, Chicago, IL 60601–5927. The American Planning Association also has offices at 1030 15th St., NW, Suite 750 West, Washington, DC 20005–1503; www.planning.org. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the American Planning Association. Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber and 10% postconsumer waste. ZONINGPRACTICE 2.14 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 7 aware of that position and take time to under- stand it. However, it doesn’t change the need for high-quality development standards to be met. Further, the community planner must maintain a position as supporter of the vision, goals, and processes of the community, but these objectives can be accomplished in a way that keeps the community’s process from being an impediment to economic development. Incorporate community plans. The com- munity’s comprehensive and subarea plans must be incorporated into the approval process from the outset of discussions with potential applicants. This establishes community needs and desires as the benchmark for consider- ation and helps the developer understand expectations. A clearly defined vision will help an applicant focus on that outcome; most ap- plicants will avoid an uphill climb with limited chance of success. When a developer or prop- erty owner walks into the planning department and asks what type of development project the municipality wants in a specific location, hav- ing a sound, thoughtful answer will encourage appropriate development proposals and dis- courage projects that are inconsistent with the community’s vision. Establish and communicate meeting protocol. Most residents don’t spend a lot of time in public meetings (though they may watch on local cable). An essential element of development approval is to make it a public process. It should make the community com- fortable that the review process is not a mere formality. Take a few minutes and explain to the public how the review process works at the beginning of the meeting, or create a simple brochure that explains the process and meeting protocol. Value Added Each step in the development review process and each of the codes the process applies must have a specific purpose for advancing the community’s vision, comprehensive plan, and quality of life. They need not be limited, easy to address, or common in other towns, but they should have a purpose that can be reason- ably explained to applicants, commissioners, elected officials, and residents. Review steps must add value. As sug- gested above, program enhancement is about understanding and explaining the purpose of a review task. To be beneficial to the community a task must add value to the process and help make the development proposal better. Dealing with limited staff resources. Frequent applicant communications, in-depth technical analysis, and being available to elected and appointed officials can be difficult for planners in communities with limited re- sources. However, this does not diminish their importance. A review of the approval process should certainly consider how to meet local objectives with limited staff resources. Little efforts can make a big difference. Revisiting a development approval process does not require wholesale change, especially just for the sake of change. It may be that an updated explanation or diagram of the process, or con- solidating steps, serves the community and ap- plicants well. In addition, involving the develop- ment and business community in the evaluation provides value by showing that the community is committed to reviewing proposed develop- ment in the most effective manner available. Communication Open and continuous communication with ap- plicants, community officials, other staff, resi- dents, and other stakeholders is foundational to all of the concepts described in this article. This point is often forgotten, either because it is so basic or because in some situations it is inconvenient, but no approval process can succeed without this key ingredient. No surprises. The city manager, public commissions, and elected officials should be well informed (early on) of issues or questions that are likely to be controversial. Likewise, a developer should be made aware of what they may expect in the process; again, it should be realistic and reflect an understanding of previ- ous project approvals. Communicate early and often in the pro- cess. A clear and comfortable path for commu- nication is essential. This must exist between the staff and the applicant and between staff and appointed and elected officials. This can be formal or informal, but it must be present. If you haven’t already, consider establishing single points of contact for such communica- tions. Communicate internally. Organizational “silos” are problematic in many instances. This is certainly the case for effective development review; the process must include discussion among all work groups on a regular basis (this cannot be stressed enough). The process may be led by a planning or community develop- ment department, but must involve public works, fire, police, parks and recreation, corporation counsel, and other internal stake- holders. These groups should meet regularly to assure consistency and be available to the applicant to clarify matters early in the review process. CONCLUSION It is not the place of any municipality to swing open the doors and allow development at all costs or to tilt the process in favor of anyone’s profit motive. That is not the intent of the con- cepts raised here. The point is that to conduct development review as if it were 2005—or to use the same process that was in place in 2005—is detrimental to the community. Creat- ing an environment that facilitates a good de- velopment process leads to desired outcomes that benefit the entire community; it is a role for which planners are uniquely qualified and should be leading in their municipalities. Cover image by Micha? Po?om/ iStock/Thinkstock Development Review as Economic Development ZO N I N G PR A C T I C E AM E R I C A N P L A N N I N G A S S O C I A T I O N 20 5 N . M i c h i g a n A v e . Su i t e 1 2 0 0 Ch i c a g o , I L 6 0 6 0 1 – 5 9 2 7 10 3 0 1 5 t h S t r e e t , N W Su i t e 7 5 0 W e s t Wa s h i n g t o n , D C 2 0 0 0 5 – 1 5 0 3 ZONING PRACTICE FEBRUARY 2014 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 2 ISSUE NUMBER 2 PRACTICE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 2HOW DOES YOUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AFFECT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT? Development Review as Economic Development City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number PC-3 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Pre Council Department City Manager Title Presentation of the Quarterly Investment Report Explanation During the period of January 1, 2014 through March 31, 2014, the City of Colleyville had an average of $49,456,289 invested on a daily basis, which earned $23,330, with an average yield of 0.19%. The average yield on investments for this quarter is .01% lower than the prior quarter's average of 0.20%. As of March 31, 2014, the City had $50,191,493 invested in the LOGIC Investment Pool, CDARS Certificates of Deposit, and various debt instruments in the following percentages: Logic 47.45% FFCB Notes 22.51% FHLB Notes 17.43% CDARS CD’s 10.02% Treasury Note 2.59% These percentages are within the guidelines for portfolio diversification in the City's investment policy. The market value of the City's investments on March 31, 2014 was $21,392,578 as compared to a purchase price of $21,400,073 (this excludes LOGIC Investment Pool and CDARS Certificates of Deposit). The Colleyville Economic Development Corporation currently holds a Treasury Note ($500,000) with a market value of $500,449 and a purchase price of $500,395. Additionally, $997,570 was invested in the Corporation's name in the LOGIC Investment Pool. These funds earned interest of $467 for the quarter. This report was presented to the Audit Committee at their meeting held on May 13, 2014. Attachments 1.Quarterly investment report for quarter ending March 31, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number PC-4 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Pre Council Department City Secretary Title Discussion of the June 3, 2014, City Council regular agenda items City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number 1 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Executive Session Department City Secretary Title Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney on legal issues raised by public hearing or action items on the agenda Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney regarding pending litigation - Keith Pardew v. City of Colleyville Section 551.072 - Real Estate - Deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property for City facilities Section 551.087 – Economic Development - Discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from business prospects that the City seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in the City and with which the City is conducting economic development negotiations; deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect Attachments City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number 2 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Oath of Office Department City Secretary Title Administration of the Oath of Office to Place 3 Councilmember Chris Putnam, and Place 4 Councilmember Jody Short Attachments RESOLUTION R-14-3751 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY COUNCIL ACTION REGARDING EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 3, 2014 WHEREAS,following discussion in Executive Session, and in full accordance with the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, the City Council determines that the following action is in the best interests of the health, safety, and welfare of the public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1.THAT the following actions of the City Council are hereby adopted and approved: a.THAT AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. APPROVED BY A VOTE OF ____ AYES, ____NAYS, AND ____ ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2014. ATTEST:CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Amy Shelley, TRMC Mike Taylor City Secretary Mayor Pro Tem City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number 5 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Announcements, Proclamations and Presentations Department Fire Title Presentation of the Texas Fire Chiefs Association 2014 Lone Star Achievement Award for Safety Innovation - Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor and Fire Chief Brian Riley Attachments RESOLUTION R-14-3752 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY COUNCIL ACTION UNDER CONSENT ITEMS AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 3, 2014 WHEREAS,City Council has taken action on certain items on the agenda under Consent Items. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1.THAT the agenda decisions approved by City Council action under Consent Items as follows are hereby adopted: a.Approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of May 13, 2014 b.Approval of the minutes of the City Council Special meeting of May 21, 2014 c.Approval to purchase one Ford F-150 standard cab pickup truck and one Ford F-550 crew cab utility truck from Rush Truck Center, through the Texas Local Government Purchasing Cooperative (BuyBoard), in an amount not to exceed $67,427, and authorize the city manager to execute the purchase agreement d.Approval of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Planning and Zoning Commission bylaws AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. APPROVED BY A VOTE OF ____ AYES, ____ NAYS, AND ____ ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2014. ATTEST:CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Amy Shelley, TRMC Mike Taylor City Secretary Mayor Pro Tem City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Minutes - Draft City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 817. 503.1000 www.colleyville.com Tuesday, May 13, 2014 City Council Chambers Mayor David Kelly called the Pre Council meeting of the Colleyville City Council to order on May 13, 2014, at 5:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Mayor David Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor and Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart. Councilmember Stan Hall was absent. City Manager Jennifer Fadden, Assistant City Manager and Chief Financial Officer Terry Leake, Police Chief Mike Holder, Captain Robert Hinton, Economic Development Director Marty Wieder, Recreation and Library Director Mary Rodne, Public Works Management Analyst James Hubbard, Human Resources Director Michelle Reyes, Colleyville Center Manager Leslie Hill, Public Works Director Bob Lowry, City Engineer Jeremy Hutt, Finance Manager Karen Hines, Community Development Director Ron Ruthven, Communications and Marketing Director Mona Gandy, Strategic Services Manager Adrienne Lothery, Information Systems Manager Chris Pena, City Attorney Matthew Boyle, and City Secretary Amy Shelley. PC-1 Update and discussion on the status of street infrastructure City Engineer Jeremy Hutt presented this item and briefed the City Council. Councilmember Mogged questioned staff regarding the effects on the street of the normal, daily traffic. Engineer Hutt replied it really depends on the road type, and he explained the various road types. Public Works Director Bob Lowry added that trash and moving trucks add to the deterioration of streets. Councilmember Hart questioned staff regarding if the subgrade was packed prior to the repair, as seen in slide number 22. Engineer Hutt replied he could not speak for how the repairs were made in this example; however, he stated the policy is to excavate and asphalt so that the patches will actually outlast the existing street. Mayor Kelly questioned staff regarding if filling the cracks eliminates the water from getting in them. Engineer Hutt replied there is a crack seal program in place for that situation. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated catastrophic events, such as an ice storm, would speed up the deterioration of the streets as well. Engineer Hutt concurred. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 2 Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated, for future reference points, inflation costs need to be included in the charts. Councilmember Mogged questioned staff regarding if the maintenance costs go down, as the streets are repaired/reconstructed. Engineer Hutt replied staff utilizes a pavement management software, Street Saver, to determine the maintenance needs on the street network, as a whole. He stated the model allows for a ten year maintenance period, with an average of $ 1.2 million to $6 million, depending on the products allocated. Mayor Kelly stated the need for road repairs will cycle back around, in that the maintenance will always be there. Director Lowry added there will always be maintenance. City Manager Jennifer Fadden stated this being predicated on the goal to reconstruct all of the unimproved streets, within the next 25 years. She stated the picture changes if the goal changes. Councilmember Hart stated being concerned about the revenue to provide for this goal. Mayor Kelly stated there may need to be another worksession in the fall to discuss street maintenance and street construction. He added staff is taking funding direction based on City Council priorities. Councilmember Short questioned staff regarding the pavement maintenance software and its scenarios. Engineer Hutt replied there are different scenarios that can be ran. Director Lowry stated the model assumes the streets have been constructed correctly, versus how some were actually built. He stated it will take several years to get the data in the software to allow for a more accurate model. Mayor Kelly stated the local streets were the ones of focus; however, the emphasis now can be more of the non-local streets. Councilmember Short questioned staff regarding if the software can assess different funding models. Engineer Hutt replied yes. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated the numbers on the charts are static, and not realistic. Mayor Kelly stated the discussion of additional sources of revenue will help with the funding of these projects. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 3 Director Lowry stated the purchasing power goes down each year. Councilmember Mogged questioned staff regarding if the curbing had been kept during the Ambleside Drive construction. Engineer Hutt replied yes. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor questioned staff regarding if the collector volume has been evaluated. Engineer Hutt stated it is more cost effective to maintain an improved section of roadway, than it is to wait for that section to become in the red (PCI 0- 50), or yellow (PCI 50-70). Mayor Kelly questioned staff regarding the difference between one percentage point. Director Lowry replied in the 50-75 range, it is more significant than the 85-100 range; however, if it drops below 50, the options are very limited. Mayor Kelly questioned City Council regarding if the City Council would like to have a worksession in the fall. City Councilmembers concurred. Councilmember Wollin stated she would like to see some options too. Councilmember Hart stated the objection was the amount of money to fix the streets; however, the value added to those neighborhoods far outweighed the cost to fix them. Mayor Kelly stated the non-local streets have the same effect, because no one will want to come to town. Director Lowry stated realtors will call and question when the street will be repaired since it will affect the sale of a home. Councilmember Mogged requested late summer for a worksession, so that they can discuss the issue now rather than later. Mayor Kelly stated the budget process continues through September, therefore meeting early fall would be good. Councilmember Mogged and Short stated early fall would be good. Mayor Kelly stated he does not want to take away from the budget process. PC-2 Discussion of the Performance Management Report Strategic Services Manager Adrienne Lothery presented this item and briefed the City Council. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 4 Mayor Kelly questioned staff regarding if the Community Development Department needs more help, given the increase in plan reviews. City Manager Jennifer Fadden stated the first two quarters were greatly affected, since the new plans examiner position was vacant; however, this new staff member is now on board. She added the Community Development Coordinator position is now vacant. Community Development Director Ron Ruthven stated as soon as he is able to fill this vacant position, he feels certain the staffing levels will be good. Councilmember Wollin stated she liked the citizen survey results being included in this report. Mayor Kelly stated there may be more dashboard reports coming, especially when new modules are added to the financial software. Manager Lothery replied yes. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated he still wants the details with the dashboard reports. PC-3 Discussion of dates for future worksessions of the City Council City Manager Jennifer Fadden presented this item and briefed the City Council. City Council stated both the June 24th and June 30th dates are available for worksessions. City Manager Jennifer Fadden stated staff will check with the Colleyville Center Advisory Committee regarding a date that is good for them. PC-4 Discussion of the May 13, 2014, City Council regular agenda items Mayor Kelly questioned staff regarding the time for the wedding chapel operation, asking if the time includes other events, such as general business meetings. Director Ruthven stated it is at the discretion of City Council. Mayor Kelly stated being concerned, especially for the neighbors, for the time to be set at 7:00 a.m., even if there will be no weddings at that time. Councilmember Short questioned staff regarding how a business meeting and wedding will be differentiated. Director Ruthven stated there is not a definition in the Land Development Code for the uses allowed in the wedding chapel provisions. Councilmember Short stated it does not really matter the purpose of the gathering, be it a wedding or a business meeting, if it is loud, it will be a problem. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated this is in a commercial area. He then questioned staff regarding the current hours, can she operate 24/7? Director Ruthven replied yes. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 5 Director Ruthven stated the Piazza is the only other wedding chapel and there are no restrictions on hours of operation, and it allows for conferences and business meetings. Mayor Kelly adjourned the Pre Council meeting at 6:40 p.m. The regular meeting of the Colleyville City Council was called to order by Mayor Kelly at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL: Mayor David Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor and Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart. Councilmember Stan Hall was absent. City Manager Jennifer Fadden, Assistant City Manager and Chief Financial Officer Terry Leake, Police Chief Mike Holder, Captain Robert Hinton, Economic Development Director Marty Wieder, Recreation and Library Director Mary Rodne, Public Works Management Analyst James Hubbard, Public Works Director Bob Lowry, City Engineer Jeremy Hutt, Finance Manager Karen Hines, Community Development Director Ron Ruthven, Communications and Marketing Director Mona Gandy, Strategic Services Manager Adrienne Lothery, Information Systems Manager Chris Pena, City Attorney Matthew Boyle, and City Secretary Amy Shelley. 1. EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code, Chapter 551, Subchapter D Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney on legal issues raised by public hearing or action items on the agenda Section 551.071 - Legal - Consultation with attorney regarding pending litigation - Keith Pardew v. City of Colleyville Section 551.072 - Real Estate - Deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property for City facilities Section 551.087 – Economic Development - Discuss or deliberate regarding commercial or financial information that the City has received from business prospects that the City seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in the City and with which the City is conducting economic development negotiations; deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect Mayor Kelly explained the Executive Session had been called in accordance with the Texas Government Code, Chapter 551, Subchapter D, Section 551.071, Legal, City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 6 Section 551.072, Real Estate, and Section 551.087, Economic Development. He further explained there would be no decisions made or action taken during this time. The meeting was recessed at 6:40 p.m. and reconvened at 6:41 p.m. INVOCATION: Father Gabriel Popa, St. Mary's Romanian Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: City Attorney Matthew Boyle 2. EXECUTIVE SESSION: CONSIDER AND TAKE ANY ACTION(S) NECESSARY RELATIVE TO ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION - Resolution R-14-3747 This resolution was not needed. 3.ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, AND PRESENTATIONS Announcements of civic and charitable events Presentation of calendar events and updates Announcements of awards and recognition Mayor Kelly announced the Colleyville Police Department will conduct a brief memorial service for fallen peace officers on Thursday, May 15, at 10:00 a.m. The service will be held at the Colleyville Justice Center, 5201 Riverwalk Drive. It is open to the public. Mayor Kelly announced the Colleyville Fire Department will host their annual open house on Saturday, May 17, from 10:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m., at the Central Fire Station (5209 Colleyville Boulevard) Fire personnel will be on hand to demonstrate a vehicle extraction, provide fire extinguisher training, and aerial water demonstration. Information will be available about the Citizens Fire Academy and Alumni Association (CFAAA). He stated CFAAA will be selling hot dogs too. He stated this is a great opportunity to get an up-close look at fire trucks and firefighting equipment. He added everyone is welcome to this family friendly event. In recognition of Colleyville's featured business – Lee Lighting, 5501 Colleyville Boulevard – Tim Kenny, Regional Manager - Mayor David Kelly and Economic Development Director Marty Wieder Mayor Kelly and Economic Development Director Marty Wieder recognized Lee Lighting and Tim Kenny, Regional Manager, as the featured business of the month. Mr. Kenny thanked the Mayor and City Councilmembers for the recognition and explained his business. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 7 Proclamation in recognition of National Public Works Week - Mayor David Kelly and Public Works Director Bob Lowry Mayor David Kelly presented Public Works Director Bob Lowry with a proclamation in recognition of National Public Works Week. Operations Supervisor Don Baker, Operations Supervisor Jon Escamilla, Field Operations Manager Ken Tywater, Equipment Operator Robert Lynch, City Engineer Jeremy Hutt, and Public Works Management Analyst James Hubbard James Hubbard were also present for this recognition. Proclamation in recognition of National Police Week - Mayor David Kelly and Police Chief Mike Holder Mayor David Kelly presented Police Chief Mike Holder with a proclamation in recognition of National Police Week. Captain Robert Hinton and School Resource Officer Gary Moore were also present for this recognition. In recognition of the Texas Comptroller Silver Leadership Circle Award for the City of Colleyville's continued progress toward achieving financial transparency - Mayor David Kelly and Finance Manager Karen Hines Mayor Kelly presented Finance Manager Karen Hines with the Texas Comptroller Silver Leadership Circle Award, which recognizes the City's continued progress toward achieving financial transparency. 4. CONSENT: READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-14-3748 4a Approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of May 6, 2014 4b Approval of the Agreement for Professional Services and Employment of the City Manager 4c Approval to purchase one Ford Fusion administrative vehicle, from Philpott Ford, in an amount not to exceed $ 18,523.75, through the Texas Local Government Purchasing Cooperative (Buy Board) 4d Appointment of a Contracting Party Representative and Alternate Contracting Party Representative to represent the City of Colleyville at the Trinity River Authority's Tarrant County Water Supply Project Customer City meetings City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 8 4e Appointment of a Contracting Party Representative and Alternate Contracting Party Representative to the Advisory Committee of the Trinity River Authority's Central Regional Wastewater System 4f Approval of the Park Land Dedication Committee Bylaws 4g Approval of a monetary donation from Betty Sanders, in honor of Mark and Jodi Sanders, to the Colleyville Public Library 4h Approval of the disposal of obsolete computer equipment and printers, and authorize the city manager to execute the agreement Mayor Kelly read Resolution R-14-3748 in its entirety. Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing at 7:51 p.m. There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the public hearing at 7:51 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor moved to approve Resolution R-14-3748. Councilmember Hart seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried by the following vote: Aye: 6 - Mayor Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor, and Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart Absent: 1 – Councilmember Stan Hall 5. ORDINANCE(S): SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING 5a Ordinance O-14-1915 Consideration of a request for a Special Use Permit for a wedding chapel on Lot 1R1, Block 1, of the Monterra Place Addition, located at 1700 Tennison Parkway, Case ZC14-002 Mayor Kelly read the caption of Ordinance O-14-1915. Community Development Director Ron Ruthven presented this item and briefed the City Council. Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing at 7:53 p.m. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 9 Greg Scheuerman, applicant and property owner, presented this item and briefed the City Council. There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. Mayor Kelly questioned staff regarding if this business is in a commercial area, with a separation from the neighborhood. Director Ruthven replied yes. Mayor Kelly stated this property is part of the overall Planned Unit Development (PUD), with this section to be the commercial area. Director Ruthven concurred. Mayor Kelly questioned staff regarding if there is a wedding chapel in another PUD with no restrictions on hours of operation. Director Ruthven replied correct. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor questioned staff regarding the occupancy. Director Ruthven replied the 125 occupancy is for the indoor events, and the 65 occupancy is limited to the outside events, including no more than 10 staff members, for a total of 75 limited to outside events. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor questioned staff regarding who will monitor how many will go in and out of the building. Director Ruthven replied the applicant will have to police themselves; however, if there is a complaint, the City will be called to check into the compliant. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor questioned staff regarding if the occupancy for the building is 125. Director Ruthven replied the occupancy, as it relates to the Special Use Permit, is 125. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated being concerned about how the outside occupancy can be monitored. He added a police officer, on site, for the outside events will solve that concern, especially if alcohol is being served. He stated the outside occupancy should match the 125 total occupants for the building, in other words, no more than a total of 125 occupants, either inside or outside. Mayor Kelly stated the motion can include that change. Director Ruthven stated that was the original application, and part of the concessions made by the applicant for the neighbors. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated being concerned the outside occupancy regulation would be difficult to manage. Mayor Kelly concurred and stated limiting the total to 125 eliminates that issue. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 10 Councilmember Hart questioned Mayor Kelly regarding if the 125 would be the maximum. Mayor Kelly stated that would be the maximum occupancy level. Councilmember Short questioned staff regarding if the intent is to limit the total number of the gathering at the facility to 125. Director Ruthven stated the intent is to limit the number to 125. Councilmember Mogged stated inside and outside total. Councilmember Short stated if the occupancy was accumulative, there would be parking problems. Mayor Kelly stated the applicant has indicated there will be no receptions held outside; therefore, once the wedding is finished, the guests will move inside. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated it is not an aggregate of the two numbers; it is simply no more than 125 occupants on site. Mayor Kelly stated currently the ordinance states 125 at any one time, and no more than 65 occupants for outside events. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated the outdoor restriction could be removed. Councilmembers Wollin and Mogged stated the regulation would then have to be updated to include indoor and/or outdoor events would be limited to a maximum of 125. Director Ruthven concurred. Mayor Kelly stated the noise level for a wedding is less than the noise level for a reception; therefore, the receptions would have to be held inside. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated the regulation could read that the maximum number of attendees for the event is 125, whether indoor or outdoor. Mayor Kelly stated in Section 4.1.b, the second sentence, the maximum number of attendees for outdoor events could be removed. Mayor Kelly moved to approve Ordinance O-14-1915 with the removal of Section 4.1.b, second sentence, and that the maximum number of attendees for any event is limited to 125. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried by the following vote: Aye: 6 - Mayor Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor, and Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 11 Absent: 1 – Councilmember Stan Hall 5b Ordinance O-14-1916 Consideration of a request for a Special Use Permit for on-premise alcohol sales on Lot 3, Block 1, of the Tara Addition, located at 1009 Cheek-Sparger Road, Suite 122A, Case ZC14-003 Mayor Kelly read the caption of Ordinance O-14-1916. There was no update needed for this item. Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing at 8:04 p.m. There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the public hearing at 8:04 p.m. Mayor Kelly questioned staff regarding if the spelling of the restaurant is “Ana” or “Anna”. Director Ruthven replied it is spelled “Anna”. Councilmember Hart moved to approve Ordinance O-14-1916. Councilmember Wollin seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried by the following vote: Aye: 6 - Mayor Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor, and Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart Absent: 1 – Councilmember Stan Hall 5c Ordinance O-14-1917 Consideration of a request for an amendment to the Special Use Permit for a Package Store development requirements for Lot 1, Block 1, Atlantic Oil and Gas Addition, located at 7990 Precinct Line Road, Case ZC14-005 Mayor Kelly read the caption of Ordinance O-14-1917. Community Development Director Ron Ruthven presented this item and briefed the City Council. Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 12 There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. Councilmember Hart questioned staff regarding if this is simply a name change for the owner and no other building modifications are going to take place. Director Ruthven replied correct. Mayor Kelly moved to approve Ordinance O-14-1917. Councilmember Mogged seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried by the following vote: Aye: 6 - Mayor Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor, and Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart Absent: 1 – Councilmember Stan Hall 6.CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA There were no speakers for this item. 7.REPORTS Park Land Dedication Committee Meeting Minutes-September 14, 2009 April 2014 Monthly Financial Report There was no discussion of this item. 8. ACTION/RESOLUTION: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION REATIFYING COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR MAY 13, 2014 - RESOLUTION R-14-3749 This resolution was not needed. 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the City Council, Councilmember Mogged moved to adjourn, and Councilmember Hart seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried by the following vote: City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 13, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 13 Aye: 6 - Mayor Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor, and Councilmembers Carol Wollin, Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart Absent: 1 – Councilmember Stan Hall Mayor Kelly adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:07 p.m. APPROVED BY A VOTE OF _____ AYES, _____ NAYS, AND _____ ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2014. Minutes taken and prepared by: Amy Shelley, TRMC City Secretary City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville Special City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 817. 503.1000 www.colleyville.com Wednesday, May 21, 2014 City Council Chambers Mayor David Kelly called the Special City Council meeting of the Colleyville City Council to order on May 21, 2014, at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Mayor David Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor, and Councilmembers Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart Absent: Councilmembers Carol Wollin and Stan Hall City Manager Jennifer Fadden, Assistant City Manager and Chief Financial Officer Terry Leake, Communications and Marketing Director Mona Gandy, and City Secretary Amy Shelley. 1. RESOLUTION(S): READING AND PUBLIC HEARING 1a Resolution R-14-3750 Canvassing the results of the City of Colleyville General Election held May 10, 2014, for Councilmembers Place 3 and Place 4 Mayor Kelly read Resolution R-14-3750 in its entirety. Mayor Kelly opened the public hearing at 4:01 p.m. There was no one present wishing to speak and Mayor Kelly closed the public hearing at 4:01 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor moved to approve Resolution R-14-3750. Councilmember Hart seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mayor Kelly, Mayor Pro Tem Mike Taylor, and Councilmembers Chuck Mogged, Jody Short, and Tom Hart Absent: Councilmembers Carol Wollin and Stan Hall 2. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Kelly adjourned the City Council meeting at 4:04 p.m. City Council Minutes - DRAFT May 21, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 2 APPROVED BY A VOTE OF _____ AYES, _____ NAYS, AND _____ ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2014. Minutes taken and prepared by: Amy Shelley, TRMC City Secretary City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number 6c Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Number Resolution R-14-3752 Type Resolution Department Public Works Title Approval to purchase one Ford F-150 standard cab pickup truck and one Ford F-550 crew cab utility truck from Rush Truck Center, through the Texas Local Government Purchasing Cooperative (BuyBoard), in an amount not to exceed $67,427, and authorize the city manager to execute the purchase agreement Explanation Reading and Public Hearing The cost of the F-150 pickup is $15,466 plus a $400 administrative fee for a total cost of $15,866 as shown in Attachment 1. The cost of the F-550 is $51,161 plus a $400 administrative fee for a total of $51,561 as shown in Attachment 2. Both trucks are being purchased from Rush Truck Center through the Texas Local Government Purchasing Cooperative (BuyBoard). A meter reader will use the new F-150 pickup truck and the new F-550 utility truck will be used as the water division crew truck. The two trucks are replacements for a 2001 F-550 with 113,294 miles and a 2005 F-150 with 129,850 miles, which have met the replacement criteria of either 120,000 miles or 12 years of age. The 2001 and 2005 trucks will be taken out of service when the new vehicles arrive and will be disposed of in the next City vehicle auction in the fall of 2014. Financial Impact Funding for these vehicles is available in the Utility Fund. Recommendation Approve Attachments 1.Attachment 1 - Price quote for Ford F-150 2.Attachment 2 - Price quote for Ford F-550 TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURCHASING COOPERATIVE BUYBOARD Vendor RUSH TRUCK CENTER Date Prepared 2/5/2014 DREW NEUBAUER Phone 830-626-5254 End User:City of Colleyville Tim Mathis Phone/Fax 817-503-1373 Ford F150 A: Base Price in Bid/Proposal Number:430-13 Series: 150 Pickup $13,800.00 B: Published Options(Itemize Below ) DESCRIPTION AMOUNT OPT #DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Ford F1C Price Level 420 230.00$ RTC0051 1,236.00$ RTC1058 200.00$ Subtotal Column 1:1,666.00$ Subtotal Column 2:-$ Published Options added to Base Price(Subtotal of "Col 1" & "Col 2")1,666.00$ C: Subtotal of A + B $15,466.00 D: Non Published Options Subtotal Column 1:Subtotal Column 2:-$ Unpublished Options added to Base price (Subtotal "Col 1 + Col 2") E: Contract Price Adjustment (If any, explain here ) F: Total of C + D +/- E 15,466.00$ G: Quantity ordered Units: 1.00 x F 15,466.00$ H: BUYBOARD Administrative Fee %400.00$ I: Non-Equipment Charges & Credits (I.e.: Ext. Warranty, Trade-In, Delivery, etc.) -$ J: TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE INCLUDING (G+H+I)$15,866.00 Contact for Vendor: End User Contact: Product Description: PDI Make Ready Attachment 1 - Price quote for Ford F-150 TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURCHASING COOPERATIVE BUYBOARD Vendor RUSH TRUCK CENTER Date Prepared 2/10/2014 DREW NEUBAUER Phone 830-626-5254 End User:City of Colleyville Tim Mathis Phone/Fax 817-503-1000 Ford F550 A: Base Price in Bid/Proposal Number:430-13 Series: 550 $25,500.00 B: Published Options(Itemize Below ) DESCRIPTION AMOUNT OPT #DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Ford 6.7 L V8 Diesel 8,130.00$ RTC-0051 1,236.00$ Ford 4,275.00$ RTC0053 2,438.00$ Ford 190.00$ RTC-1058 Ford Make Ready 200.00$ RTC-0459 6,450.00$ RTC1059 93.00$ Subtotal Column 1:12,595.00$ Subtotal Column 2:10,417.00$ Published Options added to Base Price(Subtotal of "Col 1" & "Col 2")23,012.00$ C: Subtotal of A + B $48,512.00 D: Non Published Options $2,649.00 Subtotal Column 1:$2,649.00 Subtotal Column 2:-$ Unpublished Options added to Base price (Subtotal "Col 1 + Col 2")$2,649.00 E: Contract Price Adjustment (If any, explain here ) F: Total of C + D +/- E 51,161.00$ G: Quantity ordered Units: 1.00 x F 51,161.00$ H: BUYBOARD Administrative Fee %400.00$ I: Non-Equipment Charges & Credits (I.e.: Ext. Warranty, Trade-In, Delivery, etc.) -$ J: TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE INCLUDING (G+H+I)$51,561.00 Body prep package Brand FX Service Body Upgrades 9' Model Service Body Lot Insurance Contact for Vendor: End User Contact: Product Description: Crew Cab Upgrade & 515 level 6-speed Auto PDI Service pack Attachment 2 - Price quote for Ford F-550 City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number 6d Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Number Resolution R-14-3752 Type Resolution Department City Secretary Title Approval of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Planning and Zoning Commission bylaws Explanation Reading and Public Hearing In an effort to provide consistent bylaws and attendance requirements and to assist new members appointed to a board, commission, or committee, staff developed a standard template for bylaws that mirror the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission attendance requirements. The standardized template also outlines the responsibility of each board, commission, and committee and identifies the resolution or ordinance by which the board, commission, or committee was created. Staff liaisons were asked to present the bylaws for discussion and adoption at a scheduled board, commission, or committee meeting. As the City Council creates, establishes, and appoints boards, commissions, and committees per the City Charter, (excerpt attached) and reviews the minutes of each board, commission, and committee, under the Reports section of the City Council agenda, staff is seeking City Council approval of all bylaws approved by each board, commission, and committee, as they are approved. As some boards, commissions, and committees, meet on an as needed basis only, bylaws will be attached to the Consent Agenda as they are adopted and approved by the board, commission, and committee. The Zoning Board of Adjustment approved the attached bylaws at the April 8, 2014 meeting. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the attached bylaws at the May 12, 2014 meeting. Financial Impact There is no financial impact to the City. Recommendation Approve City Council Agenda Briefing 6d City of Colleyville Page 2 Attachments 1.City Charter Excerpts 2.Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws 3.Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws City Charter Excerpts ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BYLAWS ARTICLE I – Identification and Purpose The Zoning Board of Adjustment was established by the City Council of Colleyville, Texas, by Ordinance number 500 on March 8, 1966; however, several amendments to this ordinance have been approved and codified through the Colleyville Charter and the Colleyville Code of Ordinances. The purpose of the Zoning Board of Adjustment is to consider requests for a variance of a zoning regulation or to hear an appeal from an administrative decision on a regulation in Chapter 3 – Land Use Regulations; Chapter 4 – Landscaping and Buffering; and Chapter 6 – Building Design (except for requests regarding tree mitigation requests which are considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission). The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall additionally have the authority to consider requests for an interpretation of any regulation or definition contained in the Land Development Code. ARTICLE II – Membership 2.1 The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall consist of five (5) members and two (2) alternates, who shall be appointed by the City Council for a two (2) year term. Places on the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall be numbered one (1) through five (5), and Alternates one (1) and two (2). 2.2 Members must be residents of Colleyville, Texas unless City Council waives the residency requirement. 2.3 Members shall serve without compensation and until their successors are appointed. 2.4 Members and alternates of the Zoning Board of Adjustment may be removed from office by the City Council for just cause upon receipt of written charges and after public hearing. 2.5 Vacancies which are created by resignation, or for any other reason, shall be filled by the City Council for the remainder of the term of the member or alternate affected. 2.6 If a member of the Zoning Board of Adjustment fails to maintain a seventy-five percent (75%) attendance record for all regularly scheduled meetings, the Chair or staff liaison will notify the City Secretary. City Council may, at its discretion, declare a vacancy, Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 2 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 advertise the open position, or appoint a replacement without advertising. ARTICLE III – Officers 3.1 The officers of the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall be the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman. 3.2 The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall elect the Chairman and Vice- Chairman from among the members once a year, at its first regular meeting following the appointment of its new members, or as deemed necessary. 3.3 The Chairman shall preside at all meetings and be a voting member. 3.6 The Vice-Chairman shall preside at Zoning Board of Adjustment meetings in the absence of the Chairman, and shall fulfill all of the duties of the Chairman. Should the Chairman resign, or that office become vacant for other reasons, the Vice-Chairman shall act as Chairman until the election of a new Chairman. 3.7 The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall appoint a Recording Secretary to record the minutes of the proceedings of every meeting. The Recording Secretary shall be the custodian of the minutes and other official records, shall attend to the correspondence of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, and shall cause to be given such notices as are required and in the manner prescribed by law. The Recording Secretary appointment shall be made at the time of the election of the officers. The Recording Secretary is usually a staff member. ARTICLE IV – Duties and Responsibilities 4.1 Zoning Board of Adjustment shall consider requests for a variance of a zoning regulation or to hear an appeal from an administrative decision on a regulation in Chapter 3 – Land Use Regulations; Chapter 4 – Landscaping and Buffering; and Chapter 6 – Building Design (except for requests regarding tree mitigation requests which are considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission). 4.2 The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall additionally have the authority to consider requests for an interpretation of any regulation or definition contained in the Land Development Code. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 3 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 4.3 The Zoning Board of Adjustment members will take the Attorney General Texas Open Meetings Act on-line training course, available at this link: http://www.oag.state.tx.us/open/og_training.shtml#22; or the member may obtain a DVD of the training course from the City Secretary, and provide a copy of the Certificate of Course Completion to the City Secretary. The training must be completed no later than the 90th day, after the date the member takes the oath of office, or otherwise assumes responsibilities as a member of the governmental body. 4.4 The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall follow these bylaws, and these bylaws shall govern the procedures of the Zoning Board of Adjustment unless otherwise provided for by statute. ARTICLE V – Meetings 5.1 Regular meetings shall be held on the 2nd Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., at City Hall, unless otherwise provided for by the Zoning Board of Adjustment, or unless no application has been scheduled for consideration by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. 5.2 Special meetings for any purpose may be held (1) on the call of the Chairman, or (2) on request of three or more regular members, and by giving written notice to all members deposited in the mail at least 72 hours before the meeting, or (3) as may be scheduled by a majority of the Zoning Board of Adjustment at any previous meeting. 5.3 Except as legally permitted executive session discussions, all deliberations of the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall be conducted, and all of its decisions shall be made, at a meeting that is open to the public. 5.4 All meetings shall be held in full compliance with the provisions of state law, the Zoning Ordinance of the City, and these bylaws. Any party in interest shall appear before the Zoning Board of Adjustment in person, by agent, or by attorney. 5.3 A quorum shall consist of four (4) members. If a regular member is absent, the senior alternate will fill the position. If two regular members are absent, the second alternate will fill in as a regular member. Prior to the opening of the public hearing on the first application request being considered, the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall indicate the voting Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 4 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 members to the audience by show of hands. Any regular or alternate member arriving after the opening of a public hearing shall not make motions, seconds, or vote on the agenda item being considered, but may participate in the discussion. 5.4 Meeting agendas will be posted on the City Hall bulletin boards, and the City’s website 72 hours prior to a meeting. Meeting agenda packets will be available to the public on the City’s website 72 hours prior to a meeting. 5.5 Additionally, the approved meeting minutes will be included in the City Council agenda packets under Reports. 5.6 The Chairman shall secure from staff all such materials and analyses as may be useful to the Zoning Board of Adjustment in considering any matter before it. ARTICLE VI – Official Records 6.1 Definition: The official records shall include these bylaws, and minutes of the Board, together with all findings, decisions, and other official actions. Notes of the Recording Secretary and recordings of proceedings and discussions shall constitute the official record of the Board. 6.2 Recording of Vote: The minutes of the Board’s proceedings shall show the vote of each member on each decision of the Board, or if absent or failing to vote shall indicate that fact. 6.3 Notice of Decision: All decisions of the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall be in writing, in a format provided by the City Secretary, and shall be filed in the Board’s office immediately after the meeting in which the matter was decided. For the purpose of this rule, the Office of Community Development shall be designated as the Board’s office. 6.4 Files – Retention: All appeals and other matters coming before the Board shall be filed in the City’s records. Original papers of all appeals shall be retained along with other special matters as the Recording Secretary deems essential for permanent record. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 5 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 6.5 Public Record: The official records, appeals accepted for filling, and other matters presented to the Board in regular or special meeting shall be on file in the City Hall, and shall be open to public inspection during customary working hours. ARTICLE VII – Appeal Procedures 7.1 Refusal Required: No appeal shall be taken to the Board until and unless the Enforcing Officer has first refused a permit for plans submitted or has rendered an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. When needed and at the Chairman's request, the city manager and/or appointed official shall be present at the public hearing. The Board may consider a waiver of this requirement when the Board determines that the cost of such plans would be an unnecessary burden. 7.3 Application Requirements: Every appeal shall be filed on application forms provided by the City, shall be accompanied by the prescribed fee, and shall be complete in all respects before being accepted for filing. The application shall bear the signature of the owner of the property under appeal or shall be accompanied by a letter from the owner acknowledging taking of appeal. An incomplete application or a communication purporting to be an application and not made in the form prescribed shall be regarded only as a notice of intent to appeal, and shall not be considered or acted upon by the Board. 7.4 Guidelines for Application: Every appeal shall be prepared by the applicant according to the guidelines continued in the Appendices for the type of appeals by statutes or ordinances. Where two or more different types of appeals are included in the same application, each set of guidelines shall apply. 7.5 Filing Deadline: An appeal shall be filed with the Board within ten (10) days after the date of decision of the Enforcing Officer. Every appeal shall be filed with the Recording Secretary of the Board no less than twenty (20) days prior to the scheduled meeting date of the Board. Appeals filed after the deadline shall be scheduled for the next regular meeting. When the filing Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 6 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 deadline falls on a city holiday the following workday shall be observed as the filing deadline. 7.6 Notice: A. Public notice of any appeal affecting a specific property shall be given as prescribed in the Land Development Code by means of a written notice deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the scheduled hearing. The notice shall identify the applicant, the location of the property in question, and the nature of the request. B. All property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the property seeking the appeal shall be notified. C. Public notice of any appeal seeking an interpretation on applicable Land Development Code regulations which would apply throughout the City, shall be given by means of a legal advertisement appearing in the official newspaper of the city not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the scheduled hearing. Written notice shall also be given to the applicant and his agent. The notices shall identify the affected provisions of the Land Development Code. 7.7 Submission of Evidence: Evidence supporting the grant or denial of an appeal shall be submitted only through the Recording Secretary or to the Board in public meeting. 7.8 Withdrawal of Appeal: Any appeal may be withdrawn upon written notice to the Recording Secretary; but no appeal shall be withdrawn after giving of public notice and prior to the Board action thereon without formal consent of the Board. 7.9 Expiration of Time: In each decision of appeal, the Board will include a specific expiration time for compliance. ARTICLE VIII – Hearing and Decisions 8.1 Public Hearings: Hearings on all matters on which a decision of the Board is required by law shall be open to the public. The applicant may appear on his own behalf or be represented by counselor agent. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 7 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 8.2 Order of Business: The Chairman shall call the Board to order and the Recording Secretary shall record the members present and absent. The Chairman shall publicly advise those present of the procedures followed in the hearing and disposition of appeals; the Chairman shall call each appeal and shall announce the name of the applicant, the location of the property involved, and the nature of the request. Each case may be taken under advisement until all have been heard. 8.3 Procedure for Hearing: A. The Chairman shall ask staff to outline the applicant’s request, advise the Board of any communications received, and present copies of any supporting evidence for or against each case. B. The Chairman shall call upon the applicant to present his case and all evidence supporting his plea. C. The applicant shall then have the right of rebuttal to arguments presented by the opposition. Following the rebuttal, the Chairman shall order the hearing closed. D. Each side shall proceed without interruption by the other and all arguments and pleading shall be addressed to the Board. No questioning or arguments between individuals will be permitted. E. The Board may not hear an appeal when the applicant fails to appear unless the applicant has requested that the Board act without the applicant’s presence at the hearing; provided, however, the Board may hear those persons appearing in response to the notice of hearing. 8.4 Board’s Questions: The Chairman may direct any question to the applicant or any persons speaking in order to bring out all relevant facts, circumstances, and conditions affecting the appeal, and will call for questions from other members of the Board and from the staff. 8.5 Decision: After all appeals have been heard, each appeal shall be reviewed and acted upon. The Board shall make such findings as required by law. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 8 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 8.6 Disposition of Appeals: The Board may approve, approve with modifications, or deny an appeal. The Board may also defer action on any appeal whenever it concludes that additional evidence is needed or that alternate solutions need further study. An appeal may be dismissed when the Board finds that the appeal has been improperly filed or upon notification by the Enforcing Officer that permits have been issued for a conforming use or development of the property. 8.7 Vote Required: The concurring vote of four members shall be necessary to approve, or to approve conditionally, any matter appealed to the Board. When a motion in favor of an applicant fails to receive a second or four affirmative votes, the Recording Secretary shall record that fact and shall include in the minutes an entry stating that the Board has denied the appeal. ARTICLE IX – Appeal from the Board 9.1 Review of Decision: Any person or persons, or any board, taxpayer, department, commission, or agency of the City aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Board of Adjustment may seek review by a court of record of such decision, and under the time limit specified within Section 211.011 Texas Local Government Code. If no appeal has been taken from the Zoning Board of Adjustment ruling within the time limit specified under the above mentioned Article, the Board’s ruling shall be final. ARTICLE X – Certification and Amendments 10.1 Certified Copy: A certified copy of these bylaws, and of any amendments thereto, will be placed on record in the office of the City Secretary within ten (10) days following their day of adoption. 10.2 Repealing Clause: All previously adopted rules and regulations of the Board shall be and the same are hereby expressly repealed. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 9 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 10.3 Amendment Procedure: Amendments to these bylaws may be made by the Board at any meeting, upon the affirmative vote of four members; however, Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code requires the regulations be adopted by the governing body. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 10 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 APPENDIX A TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS BYLAWS: INTERPRETATION APPEALS A-1. INTERPRETATION: BASIS FOR FILING Whenever it is alleged that there is an error in any determination or application of the requirements of an applicable section of the Land Development Code, an appeal for interpretation of the regulations, or map designations may be filed with the Board. A-2. INTERPRETATION: PAPERS REQUIRED An appeal shall include a STATEMENT by the applicant describing the way it is alleged the Regulation should be interpreted, together with diagrams and charts illustrating the erroneous and the proper application of the map or text provisions. A-3. INTERPRETATION: ADDITIONAL PAPERS REQUIRED A letter by the administrative official shall be forwarded in the packet giving the section and page number of the Colleyville Land Development Code that was used as a basis for the denial of the request. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 11 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 APPENDIX B TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BYLAWS: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS B-1. SPECIAL EXCEPTION: BASIS FOR FILING Whenever the Land Development Code requires specific approval by the Board for the development or use of property, an application for a special exception shall be approved by the Board before the Enforcing Officer shall issue a permit for the proposed construction or use. B-2. SPECIAL EXCEPTION: PAPERS REQUIRED An application for a special exception shall include a site plan, drawn to scale, showing all lot dimensions, and the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed lot improvements. B-3 INTERPRETATION: ADDITIONAL PAPERS REQUIRED A letter by the administrative official shall be forwarded in the packet giving the section and page number of the Colleyville Land Development Code that was used as a basis for the denial of the request. Zoning Board of Adjustment Bylaws Page 12 of 12 Approved by ZBA on April 8, 2014 APPENDIX C TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BYLAWS: VARIANCES C-1. VARIANCE: BASIS FOR FILING Whenever, owing to exceptional and extraordinary conditions, the literal enforcement of the provisions of a zoning regulation will result in unnecessary hardship in the development of the property, an appeal for a variance may be filed with the Board of Adjustment. C-2. VARIANCE: PAPERS REQUIRED An appeal for variance shall include: 1) A site plan, drawn to scale, showing the location and dimension of the lot and of all existing and proposed improvements; and 2) A statement of facts and reasons why the zoning regulation should not be applied to the property in question. C-3. INTERPRETATION: ADDITIONAL PAPERS REQUIRED A letter by the administrative official will be forwarded in the packet giving the section and page number of the Colleyville Land Development Code that was used as a basis for the denial of the request. C-4. VARIANCE: SPECIAL INFORMATION REQUIRED When an appeal is based upon hardship resulting from shape changes in topography or unusual terrain features, the site plan shall include topographic information related to known base points or surveys, and profiles of the particular problem involved, including relationship to topographic features of adjoining properties. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BYLAWS ARTICLE I – Identification and Purpose The Planning and Zoning Commission was established by the City Council of Colleyville, Texas, by Ordinance 08 on May 18, 1956; however, several amendments to this ordinance have been approved and codified through the Colleyville City Charter and the Colleyville Code of Ordinances. The purpose of the Planning and Zoning Commission is to act as an advisory board to the City Council relating to all physical development, proposed changes to zoning, the platting and/or the subdividing of land in the City. ARTICLE II – Membership 2.1 The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consist of seven (7) members, who shall be appointed by the City Council for a two (2) year term; three (3) members shall be appointed each odd-numbered year and four (4) members shall be appointed each even-numbered year. Places on the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be numbered one (1) through seven (7). 2.2 Members must be residents of Colleyville, Texas, unless City Council waives the residency requirement. 2.3 Members shall serve without compensation and until their successors are appointed. 2.4 Vacancies created by resignation, removal by vote of a majority of the City Council, or by any other reason, shall be filled by the City Council for the remainder of the term. 2.5 If a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission fails to maintain a seventy-five percent (75%) attendance record for all regularly scheduled meetings, the Chairman or staff liaison, will notify the City Secretary. City Council may, at its discretion, declare a vacancy, advertise the open position, or appoint a replacement without advertising. Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Adopted by P&Z on May 12, 2014 Page 2 of 6 ARTICLE III – Officers 3.1 The officers of the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman. 3.2 The Planning and Zoning Commission shall elect the Chairman and Vice- Chairman from among the members once a year, at the first regular meeting following the appointment of the new members, or as deemed necessary. 3.3 The Chairman shall preside at all meetings and be a voting member. The Chairman shall rule on all procedural matters, subject only to being over-ridden by the contrary vote of four (4) Planning and Zoning Commission members. 3.4 The Chairman shall call special meetings and/or worksessions as may be needed for the orderly conduct of the business of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3.5 The Chairman shall sign all plats approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3.6 The Vice-Chairman shall preside at Planning and Zoning Commission meetings in the absence of the Chairman, and shall fulfill all of the duties of the Chairman. Should the Chairman resign, or that office become vacant for other reasons, the Vice-Chairman shall act as Chairman until the election of a new Chairman. 3.7 The Planning and Zoning Commission shall appoint a Recording Secretary to record the minutes of the proceedings of every meeting. This appointment shall be made at the time of the election of the officers. The Recording Secretary is usually a staff member. ARTICLE IV – Duties and Responsibilities 4.1 The Planning and Zoning Commission shall be responsible to and act as an advisory body to the City Council, and shall have and perform such additional duties as may be prescribed by ordinance. 4.2 The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends a City plan for the physical development of the City. Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Adopted by P&Z on May 12, 2014 Page 3 of 6 4.3 The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval or disapproval of proposed changes in the Zoning Plan. 4.4 The Planning and Zoning Commission exercises control over the platting or subdividing of land within the corporate limits of the City and outside same corporate limits to the extent authorized by state law; provided, however, this grant of authority shall not limit the City Council’s right to provide that the City Council shall have final approval of plats, as provided by state law. 4.5 The Master Plan for the physical development of the City of Colleyville shall contain the Planning and Zoning Commission’s recommendation for growth, development, and beautification of the City. A copy of the Master Plan, or any part thereof, shall be forwarded to the City Council, which may adopt this plan in whole or in parts, and may adopt any amendment thereto after at least one (1) public hearing on the proposed action. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall act on such plan, or part thereof, and again forward it to the City Council for consideration. 4.6 All amendments to the Master Plan recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be submitted in the same manner as outlined above to the City Council for approval, and all other recommendations affecting the Master Plan shall be accompanied by a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. 4.7 Upon adoption of the Master Plan by the City Council, no subdivision, street, park, or any public way, ground, or space, public building, or structure, or public utility, whether publicly or privately owned, which is in conflict with the Master Plan shall be constructed or authorized, by the City until and unless the location and extension thereof shall have been submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission and approved by the City Council. In case of Planning and Zoning Commission disapproval, they shall communicate their reasons to the City Council, which shall have the power to overrule such disapproval. The widening, narrowing, relocating, vacating, or change in the use of any street, alley, or public way, or ground, or sale of any public building, or real property, shall be subject to similar submission and approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and failure to approve may be similarly overruled by the City Council. 4.8 The Planning and Zoning Commission members will take the Attorney General Texas Open Meetings Act on-line training course, available at Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Adopted by P&Z on May 12, 2014 Page 4 of 6 this link: http://www.oag.state.tx.us/open/og_training.shtml#22; or the member may obtain a DVD of the training course from the City Secretary, and provide a copy of the Certificate of Course Completion to the City Secretary. The training must be completed no later than the 90th day, after the date the member takes the oath of office, or otherwise assumes responsibilities as a member of the governmental body. ARTICLE V – Meetings 5.1 Regular meetings shall be held not less than once a month at City Hall, located at 100 Main Street. Regular, special, or worksession meeting date, time, and location may be changed as necessary. 5.2 Public notice of meetings shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act. All meetings and deliberations shall be open to the public, except for properly noticed closed session matters, and shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act. 5.3 The Planning and Zoning Commission may conduct closed sessions as allowed by law, on properly noticed closed session matters, such as consultation with attorney on legal issues raised by public hearing or action items on the agenda. A recording or certified agenda shall be made of all closed sessions of Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. 5.4 A majority of the members shall constitute a quorum; however, no action shall be approved with less than four (4) affirmative votes. 5.5 Meeting agendas will be posted on the City Hall bulletin boards, and the City’s website 72 hours prior to a meeting. Meeting agenda packets will be available to the public on the City’s website 72 hours prior to a meeting. 5.6 Approved meeting minutes will be included in the City Council agenda packets under Reports. 5.7 The Chairman shall secure from staff all such materials and analyses as may be useful to the Planning and Zoning Commission in considering any matter before it. Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Adopted by P&Z on May 12, 2014 Page 5 of 6 5.8 Any person seeking a change in zoning, or presenting any other matter to the Planning and Zoning Commission shall appear before the Planning and Zoning Commission in person, by agent, or by attorney. ARTICLE VI – Conduct of Meetings 6.1 The Chairman shall call for each application or proposal. The Chairman shall read the public notice and request staff to present the facts on the application or proposal. The Chairman will subsequently open a public hearing. 6.2 The applicant and any experts, invited by the applicant, of said application shall have up to 20 minutes to present their case for adoption of their application. If necessary, the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman may allow for an extension of time. In addition, the Planning and Zoning Commission may ask the applicant and/or experts questions during the presentation. 6.3 The Planning and Zoning Commission shall hear other interested parties, individually and separately. Each person shall be allowed no more than five (5) minutes to address the Planning and Zoning Commission; however, the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman may recommend that the Planning and Zoning Commission allow an extension of that time. No questions nor debate shall be permitted during the public hearing. 6.4 The public hearing shall then be closed by the Chairman; after which, the applicant or citizens may NOT present additional testimony unless the public hearing is reopened by the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman. 6.5 As a general rule, the applicant shall be permitted up to a five (5) minute rebuttal; however, the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman may recommend that the Planning and Zoning Commission allow an extension of that time. 6.6 The Planning and Zoning Commission may direct questions to the applicant, proponents, opponents, or staff, following the rebuttal. 6.7 The Chairman may request a recommendation from staff, or call for a vote. Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Adopted by P&Z on May 12, 2014 Page 6 of 6 ARTICLE VII – Voting Procedure 7.1 To call a measure for vote requires a motion being made and the same motion being seconded. Once made and seconded, debate shall follow. Once made and seconded, a motion can only be disposed of by a vote of the Planning and Zoning Commission, unless both the movant and the second agree to either revise or withdraw the motion. 7.2 When the question is put to a vote, the Chairman shall call the roll with each member answering “Aye,” or “Nay” or “Not Voting.” Consistent with the City Charter, the affirmative vote of at least four (4) members of the Planning and Zoning Commission is required to take any action. Any member of the Planning and Zoning Commission “Not Voting” shall give a statement of his reason for not voting. On completion of the roll call, the Chairman shall announce the results and the effect of the motion. 7.3 The Planning and Zoning Commission shall comply will all applicable conflict of interest laws. 7.4 The Planning and Zoning Commission members shall not leave the meeting table to discuss pending matters with members of the audience, nor shall members of the audience discuss matters with individual Planning and Zoning Commission members during the meeting. ARTICLE VIII – Amendments 8.1 These bylaws may be amended by a majority vote at any regular meeting, if all members have been notified of the proposed amendment(s) 72 hours prior to such meeting. Amendment(s) must be in compliance with applicable City ordinances and the Colleyville City Charter. 8.2 The bylaw amendment(s) shall become effective upon an affirmative vote of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 8.3 Approved bylaw amendment(s) will be included in the City Council agenda packet under Consent. City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number 7a Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Number Resolution R-14-3753 Type Resolution Department Community Development Title Consideration of a special event permit to allow for amplified sound of musical instruments from 10:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight at 4800 Stafford Drive, Case GC14- 010 Explanation Reading and Public Hearing DFW Events, the applicant on behalf of Cindi and Michael Dunham, is requesting a special event permit to allow for the amplified sound of musical instruments from 10:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight as part of an outdoor wedding reception to be held on Saturday, June 14, 2014 at 4800 Stafford Drive. Administrative approval has already been granted for a special event permit to conduct the wedding reception on the property. However, given the request to go beyond the hours that amplified sounds and musical instruments can be played, based on the requirements in the Code of Ordinances below, the applicant is seeking City Council approval for a special event permit to allow the band to play until midnight. Explanation of Request. Section 42-27(13)c(1 and 2) of the Colleyville Code of Ordinances states the following: “The following acts, among others, are declared to be nuisances, but such enumerations shall not be deemed to be exclusive: 1. Musical instruments. The playing of any radio, phonograph or other musical instrument in such manner or with such volume, particularly during the hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., as to annoy or disturb the quiet, comfort, or repose of persons of ordinary sensibilities in any dwelling, hotel, or other type of residence. 2. Loudspeakers and amplifiers. The use of any stationary loudspeaker or amplifier of such intensity as to annoy and disturb persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof; the use of any stationary loudspeaker or amplifier operated on any weekday between the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or at any time on Sunday.” As stated in the attached statement of planning objectives, the applicant proposes to provide amplified music from a live band for an outdoor wedding reception. The applicants are requesting the band be allowed to play until 12:00 midnight. Based on City Council Agenda Briefing 7a City of Colleyville Page 2 the noise provisions listed above, 10:30 p.m. is the latest amplified music, of any kind, may be played and 10:00 p.m. is the latest that musical instruments may be played. The applicant states that 300 guests are expected with seating for up to 400 guests, according to the attached seating plan. The seating area and stage will be covered under a large tent in the backyard of the home, per the attached tent layout exhibit. The stage will be located behind the principal structure, and will face eastward toward the home. Guests will be shuttled to the property. The applicants state two off-duty Colleyville police officers will be on-site during the event. Special Event Permit Requirement. As stated above, a separate special event permit for the event has already been granted administratively, subject to the band stopping at 10:00 p.m. However, Section 3.24(D)1 of the Land Development Code states that the building official may recommend a special event permit application be considered by the City Council where it has been determined by the building official that the proposed temporary use may have significant public interests. Therefore, the request to have the band play music beyond the 10:00 p.m. cut-off necessitates the additional special event permit request by the applicant to the City Council. According to the attached decibel chart, compiled by the University of Washington as part of a comprehensive noise study, a jazz concert creates a minimum noise level of 77 decibels at the source. Given an average ambient neighborhood reading of 53 decibels over a 24 hour period according to the noise mitigation study produced for gas well drilling at 7504 Pleasant Run Road, staff recommends that the decibel levels generated by the live music, authorized by the permit, not exceed 60 decibels when measured at any point of the property line for the subject property strictly for the period of time between 10:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight. Examples of noises at 60 decibels include air conditioning units and automobiles driving by. This requirement has been added to the proposed resolution. Public Notification. As a courtesy, staff mailed notices to seven property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. To date, no correspondence has been received regarding this request. Summary. The applicant is requesting approval of an additional special event permit from the City Council in order to allow the band to play until midnight as part of a wedding reception on June 14, 2014. A special event permit for the reception has already been approved by staff for the reception with live music to stop at 10:00 p.m. Financial Impact There is no financial impact to the City. Recommendation Approval with the following conditions: a. This permit shall only apply to the event mentioned above, and shall expire at 12:01 City Council Agenda Briefing 7a City of Colleyville Page 3 a.m. on June 15, 2014; b. All amplified noise shall be directed, where possible, away from any adjacent properties; c. Any noise created by the live music permitted herein shall not exceed 60 decibels as measured at any point on the property boundary of 4800 Stafford Drive; d. The stage, where the band will play, shall be located behind the principal structure on the property, and said placement of the stage shall be consistent with attached Exhibit “A”; e. A minimum of two off-duty Colleyville police officers shall be present on the premises for the duration of the event; f. All requirements of the Code of Ordinances shall be met except where specifically amended herein. Attachments 1.Location and Zoning Map 2.Aerial 3.Statement of Planning Objectives 4.Tent Layout 5.Seating Layout 6.Decibel Chart 7.Resolution R-14-3753 Lo c a t i o n an d Zo n i n g Ma p Ae r i a l DUNHAM/PAIR WEDDING 6/14/14 DFW Events represents the Dunham family in their application for a variance to the current City of Colleyville noise ordinance. The Dunham’s wish to extend the use of amplified music to 12:00 am as opposed to the current regulation that states that no amplified music is allowed past 10:30 pm. The event on June 14, 2014 will begin at 8:00 pm and will conclude at 12:00 am. The Dunham’s are hosting 300 family and friends for their daughter’s wedding at their home located at 4800 Stafford Drive in Colleyville, Texas. Amplified music will be supplied by a live band located in a tent in the back yard of the Dunham property and the level of sound can certainly be controlled. All neighbors will be notified of the event in advance and there have not been any concerns expressed. Two off-duty Colleyville police officers are scheduled to be in place for the duration of the event for any needed security concerns and to ensure traffic direction runs smoothly. Parking will be off-site and guests will be shuttled in. This is a one-time event and the goal of our clients, Cindi and Michael Dunham, is to take all possible precautions to prevent shutdown of amplified music. Thank you for your consideration. Sarah Kane DFW Events, Inc. 2410 Boll Street Dallas, Texas 75204 www.dfwevents.com Statement of Planning Objectives WHITE BOX SHOWS TENT LOCATION Tent Layout 4848 ca k e Dunham 6-14-14 Family Home Drawn 3-4-14 1/16” = 1’0”Floor Plan 10’30’ 30 x 8 18x8 bar 30 x 8 18x8 bar 30 x 8 18x8 bar30 x 8 18x8 bar restroom Se a t i n g f o r 4 0 0 EN T R Y CI G A R P O R C H Se a t i n g L a y o u t St a g e We s t North Ea s t So u t h SO U R C E : Un i v e r s i t y of Wa s h i n g t o n , De p a r t m e n t of En v i r o n m e n t a l an d Oc c u p a Ɵon a l He a l t h Sc i e n c e s , Se a Ʃle WA De c i b e l Ch a r t RESOLUTION R-14-3753 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST BY CINDI AND MICHAEL DUNHAM TO CONDUCT A SPECIAL EVENT THAT INCLUDES AN AMPLIFIED OUTDOOR MUSIC PERFORMANCE BY A LIVE BAND ON JUNE 14, 2014 LOCATED AT 4800 STAFFORD DRIVE WHEREAS, Cindi and Michael Dunham are requesting approval of a special event permit in order to have amplified music performed by a live band on their property located at 4800 Stafford Drive from 10:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight on June 14, 2014 in conjunction with a wedding reception; and WHEREAS, Section 42-27(13)c(1) of the Colleyville Code of Ordinances states that the playing of any radio, phonograph or other musical instrument in such manner or with such volume, particularly during the hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., as to annoy or disturb the quiet, comfort, or repose of persons of ordinary sensibilities in any dwelling, hotel, or other type of residence is declared to be a nuisance; and WHEREAS, Section 42-27(13)c(2) of the Colleyville Code of Ordinances states that the use of any stationary loudspeaker or amplifier of such intensity as to annoy and disturb persons of ordinary sensibilities in the immediate vicinity thereof; the use of any stationary loudspeaker or amplifier operated on any weekday between the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or at any time on Sunday is declared to be a nuisance; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the request and received comments from all persons wishing to speak on the request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1. THAT the special event permit request described above is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a. This permit shall only apply to the event mentioned above, and shall expire at 12:01 a.m. on June 15, 2014; b. All amplified noise shall be directed, where possible, away from any adjacent properties; c. Any noise created by the live music permitted herein shall not exceed 60 decibels as measured at any point on the property boundary of 4800 Stafford Drive; Resolution R-14-3753 Page 2 of 2 d. The stage, where the band will play, shall be located behind the principal structure on the property, and said placement of the stage shall be consistent with attached Exhibit “A”; e. A minimum of two off-duty Colleyville police officers shall be present on the premises for the duration of the event; f. All requirements of the Code of Ordinances shall be met except where specifically amended herein. AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. PASSED BY A VOTE OF ___ AYES, ___ NAYS, AND ___ ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THE 3rd DAY OF JUNE 2014. ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Amy Shelley, TRMC Mike Taylor City Secretary Mayor Pro Tem 4848 ca k e Dunham 6-14-14 Family Home Drawn 3-4-14 1/16” = 1’0”Floor Plan 10’30’ 30 x 8 18x8 bar 30 x 8 18x8 bar 30 x 8 18x8 bar30 x 8 18x8 bar restroom Se a t i n g f o r 4 0 0 EN T R Y CI G A R P O R C H St a g e We s t North Ea s t So u t h Ex h i b i t "A " SPEAKER CARD Date: �o• 3 � ►� Agenda Item Number: �a- For example: 5a lthis can be found on the far /eft side of the aaenda covv) �I wili speak In Support of this item. I will speak In Opposition to this item. I do not wish to speak, but please record my: support opposition Name: �)�'-3'�QA_ � �Y1 t- l Address: _1i �'S`�OS�Ci.'I�E�'lc� �r . City: C���� v� � e� � I understand I am /imited to speaking for five minutes. For agenda items not /isted on the agenda as a Public Hearing, City Council cannot respond to speakers in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551 of the Texas Local Government Code. Th)s inc/udes persons speaking under the Cltizen's Comments section of the agenda. Signed:%L��d\��t,� This information is a Public Record SPEAKER CARD Date: Agenda Item Number: For example: Sa (this can be found on the far /eft side of the aaenda covv) �will speak In Support of this item. �will speak In Opposition to this item. Name: I do not wish to speak, but please record my �hn�I�U I�.�.���oo� Address: support opposition Gity: I understand I am limited to speaking for five minutes. For agenda items not listed on the agenda as a Public Hearing, City Council cannof respond to speakers in accordance with the Texas Open Meeti r 551 of t Texas L cal Government Code. This includes persons speaking und the " n's Commenta�n of th�ag . /' Signed: This �r� r� �I is a Pub/ic Record SPEAKER CARD Date: Agenda Item Number: r�� For example: 5a (this can he found on the far /eft side of the aoenda covv) I will speak In Support of this item. I will speak In Opposition to this item. I do not wish to speak, but please record my: support opposition Name: Address: n Gity: �� fi� � � �2_ I understand I am /imited to speaking for five minutes, For agenda items not listed on the agenda as a Pub/ic Hearing, City Counci/ cannof respond to speakers in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551 of the Texas Local Government Code. This inc/udes persons speaking under the Citipen's �omme�5 segtjgn of the agenda. • Signed: is a Pub/ic Record . SPEAKER CARD Date: Agenda Item Number: � For example: 5a (this can be found on the far left side of the aaenda conv) ,� I will speak In Support of this item. I will speak In Opposition to this item. I do not wish to speak, but please record my: support opposition Name: Address: ���� ���n.-d 5�i c�ty: ��Ce�1 fii` lC� I understand I am limited to speaking for five minutes. For agenda items not listed on the agenda as a Public Hearing, City Counci/ cannot respond to speakers in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Law, Chapter 551 of the TeXas Local Government Code. Thls includes persons speaking under the Citizen's Comments section oi tl�e agenda. Signed: is a Public Record City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville City Council Agenda Briefing City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 www.colleyville.com Agenda Number 9 Agenda Date 06/03/2014 Type Report Department City Secretary Title Sign Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes - March 11, 2014 Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes - April 8, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 14, 2014 Attachments 1.Sign Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes - March 11, 2014 2.Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes - April 8, 2014 3.Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - April 14, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville Sign Board of Appeals Minutes City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 817. 503.1000 www.colleyville.com Tuesday, March 11, 2014 City Council Chambers Call to Order The Sign Board of Appeals meeting of the City of Colleyville was called to order by Board member McNosky on March 11, 2014 at 7: 28 p.m. Roll Call Present: Board members Mike Patino (Alternate 2), Larry Kainer (Alternate 1), Mark Collier, and Dee McNosky Absent: Board members Jason Elms, Mike Leathers, and Judson Orlando Staff Present: Ron Ruthven, Mary Elliott, Marty Wieder, and Taci Wrisley 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board member Collier made a motion to approve the minutes as written. Board member Patino seconded. The motion to approve the minutes as written carried by the following vote: Aye: 4 – Patino, Collier, Kainer, and McNosky 2. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS 2a Request for multiple variances to the provisions of Chapter 7-Sign Regulations in the Land Development Code on Lot 1, Block 1, of the Highland Meadows Christian Church Addition located at 2600 Hall - Johnson Road, Case VC14-001 Mary Elliott presented the case and briefed the Board. The public hearing was opened at 7:35 p.m. Hannah Bartee, applicant, and Luis Murillo, on behalf of Compass Church, came forward and presented the case. Board member Collier questioned Mr. Murillo regarding whether the proposed sign would be in the same location as the existing sign. Mr. Murillo replied correct. Sign Board of Appeals Minutes March 11, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 2 There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:37 p.m. Board member Kainer made a motion to approve Case VC14- 001. Board member Collier seconded. The motion to approve Case VC14-001 carried by the following vote: Aye: 4 – Patino, Collier, Kainer, and McNosky 2b Request for multiple variances to the provisions of Chapter 7-Sign Regulations in the Land Development Code on Lots 1R1, 4, 5a, 6a, 7a and 9R, Block 2, Village Park Addition located at 4701, 4709, 4717, 4725, 4801 and 4843 Colleyville Blvd, Case SC14-001 Mary Elliott presented the case and briefed the Board. The public hearing was opened at 7:42 p.m. Matt Wilson, on behalf of the applicant, came forward and presented the case. Board member Patino questioned Mr. Wilson regarding whether the signs were illuminated and would they be on 24 hours a day. Mr. Wilson replied the signs will be on timers and he did not anticipate the signs being on after hours. Board member McNosky stated she feels the signs are appropriate for the size of the buildings. Board member McNosky questioned Mr. Wilson regarding who the monument signs were intended for. Mr. Wilson replied the monument signs would be shared between tenants. Discussion occurred between staff and the board regarding other tenants and signage. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:47 p.m. Board member Patino made a motion to approve Case SC14- 001. Board member Kainer seconded. The motion to approve Case SC14-001 carried by the following vote: Sign Board of Appeals Minutes March 11, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 3 Aye: 4 – Patino, Collier, Kainer, and McNosky 3. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:48 p.m. The minutes were written and prepared by: Taci Wrisley Planning and Zoning Assistant The meeting minutes were approved on May 14, 2014 by a vote of 4-0. City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 817. 503.1000 www.colleyville.com Tuesday, April 8, 2014 City Council Chambers Call to Order The Sign Board of Appeals meeting of the City of Colleyville was called to order by Board member McNosky on April 8, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Present: Board members Jason Elms, Mike Leathers, Mark Collier, Larry Kainer (Alternate 1), and Dee McNosky Absent: Board member Mike Patino (Alternate 2) and Judson Orlando Staff Present: Ron Ruthven, Mary Elliott, Amy Shelley, and Taci Wrisley 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board member Elms moved to approve the January 14, 2014 meeting minutes as written. Board member Patino seconded. The motion to approve the minutes as written carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 –Elms, Leathers, Collier, Kainer, and McNosky 2. REGULAR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 2a Approval of the updated bylaws for Zoning Board of Adjustment Amy Shelley presented the case and briefed the Board. Board member Collier asked staff to revise Article 2.1 to spell out the number five (5). Amy Shelley replied she would make the correction. Board member Leathers made a motion to approve the updated bylaws for Zoning Board of Adjustment with the following condition: 1) revise Article 2.1 to spell out the number five (5). Board member Kainer seconded. The motion to approve the updated bylaws for Zoning Board of Adjustment with the following condition: 1) revise Article 2.1 Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes April 8, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 2 to spell out the number five (5) carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 –Elms, Leathers, Collier, Kainer, and McNosky 3. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS 3a Request for a variance to the rear yard setback requirements of the Land Development Code on Lot 5, Block 6, of the Bridlewood Estates Addition, located at 405 Bridlewood South, Case VC14-003 Mary Elliott presented the case and briefed the Board. The public hearing was opened at 7:14 p.m. Travis Motley, the applicant, came forward and presented the case. Monty Mann, 4101 Wellington Drive, came forward and spoke in support. Palmer Keith, 409 Bridlewood South, came forward and spoke in support. Clint Hart, the builder, came forward to address any questions or concerns. Board member Collier questioned staff regarding whether there were similar proposed structures in the same neighborhood. Mary Elliott replied there are no similar structures immediately adjacent to the subject property. Discussion continued between Mr. Motley, staff, and the Board regarding other residences in the neighborhood having similar structures. Board member Elms questioned Mr. Motley regarding what his argument was that there is a hardship; what has changed from the previous request. Mr. Motley replied given the layout of their house and their property there is no other place to put the proposed structure. Board member Kainer questioned Mr. Motley regarding whether he has tried to contact any of the neighbors who have similar structures to see how they were able to construct theirs. Mr. Motley replied no. Board member Kainer questioned Mr. Motley regarding whether he has contacted his homeowner’s association board to see if what is Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes April 8, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 3 proposed is allowed. Mr. Motley replied no, he wanted to see what the Zoning Board of Adjustment would say first. He further explained he did not believe they would have an issue with it. Discussion occurred between Mr. Motley and the Board regarding the opposition from the homeowners to the South. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:32 p.m. Discussion occurred between Mr. Motley and the Board regarding drainage. Board member Kainer questioned whether a precedent was being created. Board member Elms stated there was not a hardship with the previous denied request and there is not one with the current request. Discussion occurred between Mr. Motley and the Board regarding what constitutes a hardship. Board member Elms made a motion to deny Case VC14-003. Board member Kainer seconded. The motion to deny Case VC14-003 carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 –Elms, Leathers, Collier, Kainer, and McNosky The public hearing was re-opened at 7:41 p.m. Palmer Keith, 409 Bridlewood South, came forward with questions regarding changing the setback requirements as a homeowner’s association. Discussion occurred between Mr. Keith, staff, and the Board regarding options for changing the setback requirements. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:45 p.m. 4. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:46 p.m. Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes April 8, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 4 Minutes were written and prepared by: Taci Wrisley Planning and Zoning Assistant The meeting minutes were approved on May 14, 2014 by a vote of 4-0. City of Colleyville Page 1 City of Colleyville Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes City Hall 100 Main Street Colleyville, Texas 76034 817. 503.1000 www.colleyville.com Monday, April 14, 2014 City Council Chambers CALL MEETING TO ORDER The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of the City of Colleyville was called to order by Chairman Byerly on April 14, 2014 at 7:12 p.m. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Larry Knox, Carel Tornes, David Wheelwright, Jim Gotcher, and Chairman Byerly Absent: Commissioners Don Davis and David Phelps Staff Present: Ron Ruthven, Taci Wrisley, Rob McKeown, Marty Wieder, and Matt Butler (City Attorney) 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Tornes made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Commissioner Wheelwright seconded. The motion to approve the minutes as amended carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 – Knox, Tornes, Wheelwright, Gotcher, and Byerly 2. CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA AS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM There were no citizen comments/presentations regarding items not on the agenda as a public hearing item. 3. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM 3a Request for a Special Use Permit for a wedding chapel on Lot 1R1, Block 1, of the Monterra Place Addition located at 1700 Tennison Parkway, ZC14-002 Ron Ruthven presented the case and briefed the Commission. The public hearing was opened at 7:10 p.m. Planning and Zoning Commission MinutesApril 14, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 2 Robin Schuerman, the applicant, came forward and briefed the Commission. Lisa Conkwright, 1424 Savoy Court, came forward and spoke in opposition. Michelle Dacus, 1417 Douglas Avenue, came forward and spoke in opposition. Gary Shipp, 1401 Tennison Parkway, came forward and spoke in opposition. Mark Harrison, 1421 Douglas Avenue, came forward and spoke in support. Ben He Kije, 1505 Tennison Parkway, came forward and spoke in opposition. Kenneth Lopez, 1412 Douglas Avenue, came forward and spoke in opposition. Amy Wey, 1509 Tennison Parkway, came forward and spoke in opposition. The following also wished to record their vote but did not wish to speak: Farqoq Bana, 6601 Sapphire Circle South, opposition Amy Branson, 6619 Sapphire Circle South, opposition Juliet Shipp, 1401 Tennison Parkway, opposition Miranda Mars, 1429 Douglas Avenue, opposition Mark Mars, 1429 Douglas Avenue, opposition Grace Groesbeck, 1608 Douglas Avenue, opposition Frank Conkwright, 1424 Savoy Court, opposition Gary Groesbeck, 1608 Douglas Avenue, opposition Cheryl Swart, 6811 Milton Drive, opposition Steven P. Jackson, 1501 Douglas Avenue, opposition Joyce Moseley, 1428 Savoy Court, opposition Dee Kamerman, 1521 Tennison Parkway, opposition Betty Moseley, 1428 Savoy Court, opposition Bob Kamerman, 1521 Tennison Parkway, opposition Suresh Vashisth, 1604 Douglas Avenue, opposition There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:41 p.m. Planning and Zoning Commission MinutesApril 14, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 3 Commissioner Tornes questioned staff regarding whether the business owner could install directional signs to guide patrons out of the parking lot and to Highway 26. Ron Ruthven replied yes, the Land Development Code does allow for directional signs. Commissioner Tornes questioned staff regarding what other types of businesses would be allowed at this location. Ron Ruthven replied the ordinance allows for all uses from the CC1-Village Retail zoning district, which includes retail stores, offices, restaurants, drive-thru restaurants, etc. Commissioner Wheelwright questioned staff regarding how code enforcement would work with regards to parking along the street. Ron Ruthven replied as long as vehicles are not parked in a No Parking Zone or in front of a fire hydrant they can park along streets for 24 hours before being tagged by a police officer for removal. He further explained if the vehicle is not removed it will be towed. Chairman Byerly questioned staff regarding whether the required parking was available. Ron Ruthven replied correct. Mrs. Schuerman came forward to address parking, signage, and alcohol consumption on the premise. Commissioner Wheelwright questioned Mrs. Schuerman regarding her plan to keep patrons from being outside after 9:00 p.m. Mrs. Schuerman replied she does not see any reason for patrons to be hanging around outside. She further explained she would prefer that patrons not hang around outside. Commissioner Wheelwright questioned Mrs. Schuerman regarding the use of a security guard. Mrs. Schuerman explained the security guard will be used to monitor the events and patrons. Commissioner Knox made a motion to deny Case ZC14-002. Due to the lack of a second, the motion to deny failed. Chairman Byerly made a motion to approve Case ZC14-002. Commissioner Tornes seconded. The motion to approve Case ZC14-002 carried by the following vote: Aye: 4 – Tornes, Wheelwright, Gotcher, and Byerly Nay: 1 - Knox Planning and Zoning Commission MinutesApril 14, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 4 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 4b Request for a vacating plat on Lot 13-R, Block 8, of the Oak Crest Hills Addition located at 313 Oak Valley Drive, Case PC14-005 Ron Ruthven presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Wheelwright questioned staff regarding if there were properties along Bransford Road with a 50 foot Right-of-Way dedication versus the 80 foot that is now required. Ron Ruthven replied yes. Commissioner Tornes questioned staff regarding whether the City could take the land in the Right-of-Way, if needed in the future. Ron Ruthven replied correct. Discussion continued between staff and the Commission regarding Right-of-Way. Gary Panno, applicant, came forward and briefed the Commission. Discussion occurred between Mr. Panno, staff, and the Commission regarding the required setbacks and Right-of-Way. Commissioner Gotcher questioned Mr. Panno if he would like an opportunity to come back before the Commission with the proposed changes or would he like the Commission to approve what they currently had in front of them. Mr. Panno replied he was unsure. Discussion occurred between staff and the Commission regarding Mr. Panno’s options moving forward. Chairman Byerly made a motion to deny Case PC14-005. Commissioner Knox seconded. The motion to deny Case PC14-005 carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 – Knox, Tornes, Wheelwright, Gotcher, and Byerly 5. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS 5a Request for a Special Use Permit for on-premise alcohol sales on Lot 3, Block 1, of the Tara Addition located at 1009 Cheek-Sparger Road, Suite 122A, Case ZC14-003 Planning and Zoning Commission MinutesApril 14, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 5 Ron Ruthven presented the case and briefed the Commission. The public hearing was opened at 8:17 p.m. Betty Dickson, the business owner, came forward and briefed the Commission. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 8:18 p.m. Commissioner Wheelwright made a motion to approve Case ZC14-003. Commissioner Tornes seconded. The motion to approve Case ZC14-003 carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 – Knox, Tornes, Wheelwright, Gotcher, and Byerly 5b Request for an amendment to the Special Use Permit for a Package Store development requirements for Lot 1, Block 1, Atlantic Oil & Gas Addition located at 7990 Precinct Line Road, Case ZC14-005 Ron Ruthven presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Tornes questioned staff regarding if the ownership change included both the liquor store and the convenience store. Ron Ruthven replied no, the convenience store will still be owned by the current owner. The public hearing was opened at 8:20 p.m. Ken Baca, on behalf of the property owner, and Charanjit Singh, the applicant, both came forward and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Tornes questioned Mr. Baca regarding who the owners were. Mr. Baca replied his company owns the real estate and Mr. Singh would be the operator of both the liquor store and the convenience store. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed at 8:22 p.m. Commissioner Wheelwright made a motion to approve Case ZC14-005. Commissioner Gotcher seconded. The motion to approve Case ZC14-005 carried by the following Planning and Zoning Commission MinutesApril 14, 2014 City of Colleyville Page 6 vote: Aye: 5 – Knox, Tornes, Wheelwright, Gotcher, and Byerly 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 4a Approval of the updated bylaws for the Planning and Zoning Commission Amy Shelley presented the case and briefed the Commission. Commissioner Tornes questioned staff regarding whether there were any real changes made or was the change just the formatting. Amy Shelley replied the formatting has been updated and the requirement for training. Discussion occurred between staff and the Commission regarding possible changes. Commissioner Knox made a motion to table Item 4a: Approval of the updated bylaws for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Commissioner Tornes seconded. The motion to table Item 4a: Approval of the updated bylaws for the Planning and Zoning Commission carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 – Knox, Tornes, Wheelwright, Gotcher, and Byerly 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. The minutes were written and prepared by: Taci Wrisley Planning and Zoning Assistant The meeting minutes were approved on May 12, 2014 by a vote of 6-0. RESOLUTION R-14-3754 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY COUNCIL ACTION UNDER BUSINESS AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 3, 2014 WHEREAS,City Council has taken action on certain items on the agenda under Business. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1.THAT the agenda decisions approved by City Council action under Business this date and not otherwise adopted by Ordinance and/or separate Resolution as follows are hereby adopted: AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. APPROVED BY A VOTE OF ____ AYES, ____ NAYS, AND ____ ABSTENTIONS ON THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2014. ATTEST:CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Amy Shelley, TRMC Mike Taylor City Secretary Mayor Pro Tem