The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council-Agenda Packets-10/17/2000 ~v~ u~ 1i' 'joeA~ *~~~JJ citY Of Texas AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5400 BRANSFORD ROAD OCTOBER 17, 2000 6:45 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapter D Sec. 551.071 - Sec. 551.072- Sec. 551.072- Sec. 551.074- Consultation with Attorney a. Large Commercial Building Ordinance b. Shalimar Private Streets c. Zoning Board of Adjustments Cases Property Acquisition - Village at Colleyville Property Acquisition - Colleyville Boulevard Personnel - The City Council may consider the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline or dismissal of public officers or employees, including the City Manager, City Secretary, City Attorney, and City board and commission members. A complete list of the City boards and commissions is on file in the CIty Secretary's Office. 7:30 P.M. - RESUME REGULAR MEETING INVOCATION: Reverend David Rose, First Assembly of God Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Ross Foster, City Attorney P.O. BOX 185 COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS 76034 (817) 5n-7575 2. CORRESPONDENCE, MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS OF MEETINGS ATTENDED BY THE COUNCIL AND CITY OFFICIALS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, OR PRESENTATIONS ~ CONSENT: . " /\ ...~3. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-00-1724 - Consent Item~: ~- a. Approval of minutes of the regular City Council meeting o( October 3, 2000 b. Approval of a donation of labor and materials for L.D. Lockett House improvements from Stuart Bolerjack and Kelly-Moore Paint, Inc. c. Approval of revisions and inclusions to Chapter II - Employee Responsibilities and Conduct - Section D. Uniform & Dress; Section J. Use of City Equipment and Vehicles; Section P. Internet and E-mail; and revisions to Chapter IV - Compensation - Section C. Classification and Pay Administration of the City of Colleyville Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual d. Approval of a Final Plat for Riverwalk at Colleyville Addition, requested by Charles Searcey for D.R. Horton-Texas Ltd., 20.054 acres located on the north side of Glade Road at the future Riverwalk Drive, Case P-00-065 e. Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Barbara Gordon for the Barbara Gordon Montessori School f. Approval of Professional Services Supplemental Agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects for AudioNisual Design Services and Americans with Disabilities Consultation g. Approval of purchasing a Sign Shop Utility Truck with lift bucket through the HGAC bidding process for the amount of $57,039 h. Approval of a design contract with Halff Associates, Inc. for the Brighton Oaks Drainage Improvements in the amount of $30,260 i. Approval of purchasing three (3) Ford Crown Victoria police vehicles in the amount of $61,842 from Five Star Ford through the Tarrant County Purchasing Department Joint Venture/Cooperative Bid - by Consent PUBLIC HEARINGS: ~ 4. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1247 - Amending the PUD-C, Ordinance 0-96-1024, to allow living quarters in a ~ commercial building requested by Behjat McElroy, New Synergy Inc., on Lot 1, Block 1, Cavillino Park located at 1001 and 1005 Village Park ~. ~~6. ~ ~ ~9. 10. .~\ 11. ~ SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1248 - A Special Use Permit for an accessory building requested by Jim Gray, for Lot 3, Erickson Subdivision located at 300 Quail Run SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1249 - Amending Chapter 3, Land Use, of the Land Development Code regarding large commercial buildings SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1250 - Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Gottfredson Land Development I, L.L.C. for Tanglewood Addition SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1251 - Amending Ordinance 0-00-1234, approving a contract between the City of Colleyville and The Village at Colleyville for public improvements SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1252 - Approving the Fiscal year 2000-2001 Budget for the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1253 - A Special Use Permit for a carport requested by Steve Pence for Keith & Betsy Luttrell, on Lot 11, Block 3, Western Trails Addition Section 2 located at 7420 Overland Trail READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-00-1726 - Authorizing participation in the cause of action styled the City of Denton, Texas vs. Texas Utilities Company and Lone Star Gas Company participating in seeking delinquent franchise fees READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-00-1727 - Approval of the City Manager's recommendation of Cynthia Singleton as City Secretary effective October 20,2000. ~ .. ,~ READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution ~7" establishing Compensation for Interim City Manager R-00-1728 - Approval of STAFF REPORTS: 14. MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT REPORTS: 15. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES - September 25, 2000 PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES - October 2,2000 CITIZEN COMMENTS: 16. CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA ACTION/RESOLUTION: 17. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION RATIFYING COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2000 - Reading and Public Hearing - Resolution R-00-1725 ADJOURNMENT: 18. ADJOURNMENT I certify the above agenda was posted on the bulletin board at City Hall on October 13, 2000, at 4:30 p.m. Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary 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 577- 7575, and reasonable accommodations will be made to assist you. cceili TexaS AGENDA ITEM NO. ..1 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COLLEYVILLE CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapter D Councilman Short Councilman Taylor Councilman Feldman Councilman Marlin Mavor Pro Tem Tigue Mayor Arp Sec. 551.071 - Sec. 551.072- Sec. 551.072- Sec. 551.074- MOTION SECOND Consultation with Attorney a. Large Commercial Building Ordinance b. Shalimar Private Streets c. Zoning Board of Adjustments Cases Property Acquisition - Village at Colleyville Property Acquisition - Colleyville Boulevard Personnel - The City Council may consider the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline or dismissal of public officers or employees, including the City Manager, City Secretary, City Attorney, and City board and commission members. A complete list of the City boards and commissions is on file in the City Secretary's Office. AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT ccellili Texas AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ REGULAR MEETING OF THE COLLEYVILLE CITY COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE, MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS OF MEETINGS ATTENDED BY THE COUNCIL AND CITY OFFICIALS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, OR PRESENTATIONS MOTION SECOND AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT Councilman Short Councilman Tavlor ICouncilman Feldman Councilman Marlin Mavor Pro Tem Ticue - Mayor Arp caeili Texas AGENDA ITEM NO. ..3 REGULAR MEETING OF THE COLLEYVILLE CITY COUNCIL CONSENT: READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-OO-1724 - Consent Items: a. Approval of minutes of the regular City Council meeting of October 3, 2000 b. Approval of a donation of labor and materials for L.D. Lockett House improvements from Stuart Bolerjack and Kelly-Moore Paint, Inc. c. Approval of revisions and inclusions to Chapter If - Employee Responsibilities and Conduct - Section D. Uniform & Dress; Section J. Use of City Equipment and Vehicles; Section P. Internet and E-mail; and revisions to Chapter IV - Compensation - Section C. Classification and Pay Administration of the City of Colleyville Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual d. Approval of a Final Plat for Riverwalk at Colleyville Addition, requested by Charles Searcey for D.R. Horton-Texas Ltd., 20.054 acres located on the north side of Glade Road at the future Riverwalk Drive, Case P-00-065 e. Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Barbara Gordon for the Barbara Gordon Montessori School f. Approval of Professional Services Supplemental Agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects for AudioNisual Design Services and Americans with MOTION ---- - III&. (",. .. AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT I ...."" .' ~nllncilman Short Councilman T avlor Councilman Feldman Councilman Marlin Mavor Pro Tem Tigue Mayor Arp g. Approval of purchasing a Sign Shop Utility Truck with lift bucket through the HGAC bidding process for the amount of $57,039 h. Approval of a design contract with Halff Associates, Inc. for the Brighton Oaks Drainage Improvements in the amount of $30,260 I. Approval of purchasing three (3) Ford Crown Victoria police vehicles in the amount of $61,842 from Five Star Ford through the Tarrant County Purchasing Department Joint Venture/Cooperative Bid - by Consent RESOLUTION R-00-1724 A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNCIL ACTION UNDER CONSENT ITEMS AT THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2000 WHEREAS, 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 Council action under Consent Items as follows are hereby adopted: a. Approval of minutes of the regular City Council meeting of October 3, 2000 b. Approval of a donation of labor and materials for L.D. Lockett House improvements from Stuart Bolerjack and Kelly-Moore Paint, Inc. c. Approval of revisions to Chapter 11 - D. Uniform & Dress, J. Use of City Equipment and Vehicles, and inclusion of a new policy, P. Internet and E- mail to the City of Colleyville Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual d. Approval of a Final Plat for Riverwalk at Colleyville, requested by Charles Searcey for D.R. Horton-Texas Ltd., 20.054 acres located on the North side of Glade Road at the future Riverwalk Drive, Case P-00-065 e. Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Barbara Gordon for the Barbara Gordon Montessori School f. Approval of Professional Services Supplemental Agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects for AudioNisual Design Services and Americans with Disabilities Consultation g. Approval of purchasing a Sign Shop Utility Truck with lift bucket through the HGAC bidding process for the amount of $57,039 Resolution R-00-1724 Page 2 of 2 h. Approval of a design contract with Halff Associates, Inc. for the Brighton Oaks Creek Drainage Improvements in the amount of $30,260 I. Approval of purchasing three (3) Ford Crown Victoria police vehicles in the amount of $61,842 from Five Star Ford through the Tarrant County Purchasing Department Joint Venture/Cooperative Bid - by Consent AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. Passed by a vote of ayes, of , 2000. nays, and abstentions on the day ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor MINUTES OF THE COLLEYVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 03, 2000 The regular meeting of the Colleyville City Council was called to order by Mayor Donna Arp on October 3, 2000, at 6:48 p.m. ROLL CALL: Councilpersons Jody Short, Mike Taylor, Dana Feldman and Dennis Marlin were present. Mayor Donna Arp, City Manager, Bob Stripling, Assistant City Manager Dianne McWethy, Director of Public Services Bob Whitehead, Community Development Manager Barry LeBaron, Public Works Manager Randy Brown, Police Chief John Young, Fire Chief Mike Johnston, City Attorney Ross Foster, City Secretary Jean Harris, and Office Assistant Cynthia Singleton were also present. Mayor Pro Tem Ginny Tigue arrived at 6:55 p.m. 1. EXECUTIVE SESSION - In accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapter D Sec. 551.071 - Sec. 551.072 - Sec. 551.072 - Sec. 551.074 - Consultation with Attorney a. Large Commercial Building Moratorium b. Shalimar Private Streets c. Zoning Board of Adjustments Cases Property Acquisition - Village at Colleyville Property Acquisition - Colleyville Boulevard Personnel - The City Council may consider the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline or dismissal of public officers or employees, including the City Manager, City Secretary, City Attorney, and City board and commission members. A complete list of the City boards and commissions is on file in the City Secretary's Office. Mayor Arp explained that the Executive Session had been called in accordance with Texas Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapter D, Section 551.071 - Consultation with Attorney, Section 551.072 - Property Acquisition, and Section 551.074 - Personnel. She further explained that there would be no decisions made or action taken during this time. The meeting was recessed at 6:50 p.m., and reconvened at 7:47 p.m. The invocation was given by Reverend Rankin Koch, First United Methodist Church, after which Ross Foster led the Pledge of Allegiance. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 2. CORRESPONDENCE, MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS OF MEETINGS ATTENDED BY THE COUNCIL AND CITY OFFICIALS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS, OR PRESENTATIONS Mayor Arp thanked Fire Chief Mike Johnston, Colleyville firefighters, Police Chief John Young and the Colleyville police for their hard work at the Smith property fire. Councilman Jody Short thanked the citizens for allowing Council to attend a Texas Municipal League Symposium held in Austin, Texas. Mayor Arp welcomed Lacy West, an L.D. Bell student who attended for class credit and Andy Quinn, Eagle Scout who attended to observe. CONSENT: 3. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-OO-1721 - Consent Items: a. Approval of minutes of the regular City Council meeting of September 19, 2000 b. Approval of minutes of the City Council worksession held September 26, 2000 c. Approval of a contract for computer network support and maintenance to Management Plus, Inc., for a contracted rate of $500 monthly plus additional repairs not to exceed $1,500 'per month d. Approval of contracts for printing services to JMAC Enterprises, Hart Information Services and Graphics2 Printing e. Approval of Professional Services Supplemental Agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects for AudioNisual Design Services and Americans with Disabilities Consultation f. Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Woodvale Development, Inc., for Madison Place Addition g. Approval of a contract for construction improvements at Kimzey Park with Miller-Sierra Contractors, Inc., in the amount of $741,049 h. Approval of a construction contract with Sutton & Associates, Inc., for the Bill Simmons Road Overlay Project in the amount of $47,156 2 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 I. Approval of renewing the bid award for 1999 Pavement Repair Contract to Kat-Ran Asphalt Works in an amount not to exceed $55,000 into and through the 2000/2001 budget year Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1721 in its entirety. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. City Manager Bob Stripling requested Item lie" be removed from the agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Tigue moved to approve Resolution R-00-1721 with the exception of Item "e". Councilman Feldman seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin, and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 4. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1244 - A zoning change requested by Father Ghobrial Samaan, St. Mary Church, from AG to R20 on 3.754 acres located at 1110 John McCain Road Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1244. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Tigue moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1244. Councilman Short seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin, and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 5. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0':'00-1245 - A zoning change requested by Bankson Asiama, from AG to R40 (single family residential, minimum lot size 40,000 s.t.) on 1.35 acres located at 3203 Glade Road, south side of road Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1245. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. Councilman Marlin moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1245. Councilman Taylor seconded the motion. Councilmembers Marlin and Taylor rescinded the motion and second to allow the applicant to speak. Mr. Blankson thanked the Council for their consideration of his zoning change request. There were no others wishing to speak. Councilman Marlin moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1245. Councilman Feldman seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. 6. FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1247 - Amending the PUD-C, Ordinance 0-96-1024, to allow living quarters in a commercial building requested by Behjat McElroy, New Synergy Inc., on Lot 1, Block 1, Cavillino Park located at 1001 and 1005 Village Park Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1247. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. 4 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 7. FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1248 - A special use permit for an accessory building requested by Jim Gray, for Lot 3, Erickson Subdivision located at 300 Quail Run Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1248. Mr. Jim Gray, 300 Quail Run, applicant, was present to answer questions of the Council. There were no others wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. 8. FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1249 - Amending Chapter 3, Land Use, of the Land Development Code regarding large commercial stores Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1249. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. Discussion ensued regarding the language in the Ordinance, specifically the word "store". Community Development Manager Barry LeBaron n:lade a brief presentation regarding the proposed Ordinance. Discussion ensued regarding roof lines, exterior facades, landscaping, uniqueness, outdoor storage, the point system, colors, the number of store entrances and setbacks. 9. FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1250 - Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Gottfredson Land Development I, L.L.C. for Tanglewood Addition Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1250. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 10. FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1251 - Amending Ordinance 0-00-1234, approving a contract between the City of Colleyville and The Village at Colleyville for public improvements Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1251. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. 11. FIRST READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Ordinance 0-00-1252 '- Approving the Fiscal year 2000-2001 Budget for the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read the caption of Ordinance 0-00-1252. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. 12. READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution R-00-1723 - Approving the Economic Development Capital Improvement Program for the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation Mayor Arp opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1723 in its entirety. There was no one present wishing to speak concerning this item and Mayor Arp closed the public hearing. Councilman Taylor moved to approve Resolution R-00-1723. Mayor Pro T em Tigue seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin, and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. 6 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 TABLED ITEMS: 13. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 0-00-1241 - Amending Chapter 3 of the Colleyville Land Development Code regarding temporary buildings used for construction offices Councilman Taylor made a motion to remove this item from the table. Councilman Feldman seconded the motion. Ayes: Council persons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. Discussion ensued regarding the addition of the words "new subdivision" in Sec. 1.,3.240(1), removing the word "platted" from Sec.1.,3.24.D (2)(d) regarding the time limit for a temporary real estate building and the addition of a provision in Sec. 1.,3.24.D (1) (d) regarding temporary buildings on wheels. Councilman Marlin moved to approve Ordinance 0-00-1241 with an amendment regarding temporary buildings on wheels. Councilman Feldman seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. ACTION ITEMS: 14. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTING AN INTERIM CITY MANAGER Councilman Taylor made a motion to suspend the rules to allow citizens to speak. Councilman Marlin seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. 7 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 Mr. Rich Munson, 1905 Hall-Johnson Road, requested that the City Manager be prohibited from signing contracts greater than a determined amount and that the City Manager not be permitted to put anything in the public right-of-way with the exception of emergency equipment without the written consent of adj~cent pr9perty owners. There were no other citizens wishing to speak. Mayor Arp announced that City Manager Bob Stripling has resigned effective November 1, 2000. Councilman Taylor moved to appoint Dianne McWethy as Interim City Manager effective November 1, 2000 at 5:00 p.m. Councilman Feldman seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Mayor Arp declared the motion carried. STAFF REPORTS: 15. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COLLEYVILLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION There was no action taken on this item. REPORTS: 16. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES - September 11, 2000 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES - September 12, 2000 PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES - September 11, 2000 There was no action taken on this item. CITIZEN COMMENTS: 17. CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS REGARDING ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Chase Noble, 4528 Alexandra Drive, spoke regarding a proposal for an "aqua tunnel". 8 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2000 ACTION/RESOLUTION: 18. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION RATIFYING COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 03, 2000 - Reading and Public Hearing - Resolution R-00-1722 Mayor opened the public hearing and read Resolution R-00-1722 in its entirety. Councilman Feldman moved to approve Resolution R-00-1722, approving the appointment of Dianne McWethy. Mayor Pro Tem Tigue seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin and Mayor Pro Tem Tigue Nays: None ADJOURNMENT: 19. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the City Council, Councilman Feldman moved to adjourn. Mayor Pro Tem Tigue seconded the motion. Ayes: Councilpersons Short, Taylor, Feldman, Marlin, and Mayor Pro Tern Tigue Nays: None Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:18 p.m. APPROVED THIS DAY OF AYES, _ NAYS, AND _ ABSTENTIONS. J 2000, BY A VOTE OF Minutes taken and prepared by: Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary 9 cc.~ CITY COUNCIL 7..,. AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 3b Ordinance # : 0-00-1724 Previous Action: None DEPT. : PARKS AND RECREATION SUBJECT: Approval of donation of labor and materials for L.D. Lockett House improvements from Suart Bolerjack and Kelly-Moore Paint, Inc. Reading and Public Hearing Backoround On October 2,2000 the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board unanimously approved to accept a donation of labor, hardware and lumber from Stuart Bolerjack to construct shelving units at the L.D. Lockett House for the Kindeready Program and 35 gallons of interior and exterior paint from Kelly-Moore Paint Company, Inc. to be used for improvement of the L.D. Lockett House. Recommendation Approval to accept the donations from Stuart Bolerjack and Kelly-Moore Paint Company. Attachments Parks and Recreation Donation Policy (paper only) C' (U:'fX~ CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT HEAD FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) City of Colleyville Parks and Recreation Department Donation Policy Statement of Purpose The purpose of this policy is to provide a consistent basis for the consideration and acceptance of donations of equipment, structures, and/or cash to the city's park system. Definitions 1. A donor is a person or an entity that provides a gift, grant or contribution directed to a specific fund, project or event. Donations may include, but are not limited to, money, recreational and capital equipment, landscaping, structures, fencing and art. 2. Facility is all City of Colleyville parks, buildings and amenities. 3. Donation Fund is a special fund established for the purpose of cash contributions for the City of Colleyville park system. ",... Procedures 1. Any person or organization considering making a donation to the City of Colleyville park system should submit a proposal, in writing, to the Parks and Recreation Manager or his/her designee. (See attached Donation Form.) 2. The proposal should include a complete description of the donation, and to the extent applicable, pictures and/or detailed drawings, preferred location of the donation and any necessary installation and/or construction details, value of donation and any stipulations concerning the donation. 3. The following guidelines will be used in consideration of the donor's request: A. The responsibility for all costs related to the design, construction, purchase and installation. B. The design of all donated items for public park use, exposure to vandalism, and wear due to exposure to extreme weather elements. C. Any necessary replacement or repair costs to the item will be the responsibility of the donor. 4. The Parks and Recreation Manager or hislher designee will review the proposal and make any comments and recommendations deemed necessary. 5. The donor must submit a request, in writing, to include the description, size, wording and proposed location of any plaque to be placed on the donated item. The following guidelines will be used for the plaque request: A. The donor will be responsible for all costs related to the design, construction, purchase and installation. B. All plaques shall be made of bronze, or similar approved materials, to reduce vandalism and wear due to exposure to extreme weather elements. C. The plaque will be flush mounted at ground or surface level or as determined appropriate by the Parks and Recreation Manager or hislher designee. D. For the purpose of this policy, no plaques that serve the purpose of advertising will be allowed. In cases where contributions have been in support of the park system, consideration will be given for approving the acknowledgment of the donor(s). 6. The Parks and Recreation Manager or hislher designee will forward all donation proposals along with comments and recommendations to the Parks and Recreation Donation Committee, which shall consist of the President, or their designee, of the city cosponsored youth sports associations and two (2) Parks and Recreation Advisory Board members. 7. The Parks and Recreation Donation Committee will review the proposed donation and make a recommendation to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will submit a recommendation to the City Council for final approval. 8. The City of Colleyville reserves the right to accept or reject any item submitted for approval. 9. The potential donor reserves the right to withdraw the proposed item at any time during the approval process. 10. All item(s) will be considered for acceptance on an item by item basis. 11. All accepted donations to the City's park system will become the property of the City of Colleyville and will be used at the discretion of the city. 2 12. The City of Colleyville reserves the right to modify or remove a donated item as determined necessary by the Parks and Recreation Manager or hislher designee for accessibility, safety and/or ease of maintenance should anyone or combination of the following occur: A. The donated item becomes a hazard to the general public as may be determined by the City. B. Another use more beneficial to the general public occurs. This may include park improvements or future development, relocation or park equipment/amenities or other use of the property deemed of higher benefit to the general public. C. The City, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to make use of the area should it be necessary for the installation of any public utilities or other public improvements, the relocation of which shall be the responsibility of the City, subject to notification by City of donor(s) 13. All donations, on loan, to the City's park system will remain the property of the donor. 14. A permanent location may be designated in each park site where donations will be recognized with the item donated, the name of the donor and the date. ,- 15. Cash donations will be deposited into a Donation Fund. The Parks and Recreation Donation Committee and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will make recommendations to the City Council for the expenditure of these funds. Amended 01/22/99 3 (C~~ CITY COUNCIL Tw' AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/2000 CMO Approval: Item # : 3c Resolution # : R-OO-1724 Previous Action: None DEPT. : CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: Approval of revisions and inclusions to Chapter 11- Employee Responsibilities and Conduct, Section D. Uniform and Dress; Section J. Use of City Equipment and Vehicles; Section P. Internet and E-mail; and revisions to Chapter IV - Compensation - Section C. Classification and Pay Administration of the City of Colleyville Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual- by Consent Reading and Public Hearing Backqround In spring 2000 during budget preparation, requests were made regarding uniform changes, vehicle purchases and implementation of the computer networking project at City Hall and its annexes. On the basis of these requests, staff conducted an internal procedure and policy review, as well as a review of the surrounding cities. Based on the completed review, it is necessary to make revisions to the City of (continued) C'- \\~ CITY MANAGER , #L(fft JiI!k~ - DEPA MENT HEA . FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-00-1724 Page 2 Colleyville Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual to be effective October 18, 2000. . The policy revisions are highlighted in Exhibits A, B, C and D with significant changes as noted below. 1. Exhibit A (Chapter 11- Employee Responsibilities and Conduct, Section D. Uniform and Dress). This section has been enhanced to address uniform and dress guidelines for field and office employees. . 2. Exhibit B (Chapter 11- Employee Responsibilities and Conduct, Section J. Use of City Equipment and Vehicles). This section has been amended to include provisions for care of equipment and vehicles and guidelines for take home vehicles of on-call employees responding to emergency situations. 3. Exhibit C (Chapter 11- Employee Responsibilities and Conduct, Section P. Internet and E-mail). This section has been added to address network security issues and the employee's responsibility in the use of equipment, Internet and e- mail. 4. Exhibit D (Chapter IV- Compensation, Section C, Classification and Pay Administration). This section has been amended to include promotional guidelines for Firefighter/Emergency Medical Technician and Firefighter/Paramedic positions, related to receipt of paramedic certification. Recommendation Approval of revisions and inclusions to Chapter II and Chapter IV of the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual. Attachments Exhibit A-Chapter II Employee Responsibilities and Conduct, Section D. Uniform and Dress Exhibit B-Chapter 11- Employee Responsibilities and Conduct, Section J. Use of City Equipment and Vehicles Exhibit C- Chapter 11- Employee. Responsibilities and Conduct, Section P. Internet and E-mail Exhibit D- Chapter IV- Compensation, Section C, Classification and Pay Administration EXHIBIT A.1 of 2 EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 11- EMPLOYEE RESPONSIBILITIES AND CONDUCT D. Uniform and Dress Effective Dale: 10-18-2000 Revised Dale: 1. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to create and maintain a favorable image of the City of Colleyville to the general public. All employees regardless of work location and degree of public contact are expected to dress in a manner that is appropriate to their work environment and positions that will represent pride in the City and the citizens they serve. City employees must maintain the highest standards of personal cleanliness and grooming and shall present a neat, businesslike appearance at all times during working hours. Presenting a professional appearance and demeanor which reflects a favorable image for the City, promotes respect among co-workers and encourages higher working standards. It shall be the responsibility of the Department Head to dictate and enforce specific standards of dress and appearance. 2. Standard Dress Policy a. Office Employees (Non-Uniformed) i. Males - appropriate dress for males include dress slacks with appropriate shirt (long or short sleeve with collar) and dress-type footwear worn with socks. The Department Head will require ties in positions with extensive public contact. Shirts with City logo may be appropriate in some departments with the approval of the Department Head. Sport coats and suit coats are optional, but are recommended for a professional appearance when attending meetings outside of City offices. II. Females - appropriate dress for females include dresses, suits, skirts, or slacks with appropriate blouse, sweater, or jacket with appropriate footwear. b. Field Employees (does not include Police and Fire) i. Supervisors will administer guidelines in determining the appropriate type of clothing for field employees (whether uniform or other clothing). ii. Shirts will be neat in appearance and suggested to be worn buttoned and tucked in. EXHIBIT A-2 of 2 iii. Long pants, jeans, uniform trousers or approved shorts must be neat in appearance and free of rips, holes, tears or fraying. iv. Each Department Head will determine what type bf shoes/boots to wear based on the safety needs of the department. v. The City will only purchase or rent uniforms as necessary for the completion of basic job functions. All clothing purchased by the City will have the City designated logo. c. Uniformed Police and Fire Uniform specifications for Police and Fire personnel can be found in the department's standard operating procedures (SOPs). d. Exceptions to Standard Dress Policy The above stated guidelines will govern normal work situations; however, there may be instances where exceptions may be made. It will be the responsibility of the Department Head or immediate supervisor to determine if an exception applies. 3. Business Casual Dress Policy Casual dress may be worn on Friday's throughout the year. i. Males - appropriate dress for business casual includes slacks or khakis (shorts are not acceptable attire for any business office, excluding field employees who may retain an office). Shirts must have a collar and sleeves and be tucked in at all times. The Department Head must approve jean attire. Appropriate footwear should be worn. ii. Females - appropriate dress for business casual include slacks, split skirts and khakis (shorts are not acceptable attire for any business office, excluding field employees who may retain an office). The Department Head must approve jean attire. Appropriate footwear should be worn. 4. Personal Hygiene All employees should be aware that it is necessary to include daily bathing, the use of deodorant, and the practice of good dental hygiene in their personal hygiene habits to maintain a good professional appearance and non-offensive work environment. EXHIBIT B-1 OF 4 EXHIBIT B CHAPTER 11- EMPLOYEE RESPONSIBILITIES AND CONDUCT J. USE OF CITY EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES Effective Date: 11/18/96 Revised Dale: 1. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish uniform guidelines for all city employees who utilize city equipment and vehicles. 2. Responsibility It shall be the responsibility of each supervisor to administer this policy as it pertains to his/her subordinates. 3. Right to Use The use of City-owned vehicles and equipment is a privilege offered to designated employees in the performance of their jobs. Employees failing to follow the City's equipment and vehicle use policy shall be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination. 4. License Requirements No employee shall be permitted to operate City equipment or vehicles without the required, current and valid operator's license and authorization by his/her immediate supervisor or Department Head to operate the equipment or vehicles. Employees are required to keep supervisors informed of any change of status in their license. Suspension or revocation of the driver's license for an employee who is assigned as a vehicle or equipment operator may result in disciplinary action up to and including termination. 5. Equipment and Vehicle Utilization a. Only authorized personnel shall be allowed access to City equipment and vehicles. City equipment and vehicles are for official use only. "Official use" is defined as the utilization of City equipment and vehicles for the performance of any work assignment that is required with the City. No marked City vehicle will be used for personal business or personal errands. Exception: Designated sworn and/or certified police and fire employees are required, as a condition of employment with the City, to report to duty when summoned and, therefore, are exempt from this policy when on duty. Additionally, the City Manager may authorize Department Heads to designate EXHIBIT B-2 OF 4 certain employees to use City-owned vehicles as take-home vehicles for business purposes only. Such authorization will be based on the need for those employees to be available for after-hours and/or emergency City services. b. City equipment and vehicles should be operated in a safe and courteous manner. The driver and passengers shall wear seat belts when the equipment or vehicle is in operation, and the operator shall adhere to all traffic laws. Failure to properly operate City equipment and vehicles shall result in disciplinary action up to and including termination. Employees who are assigned tools, equipment or vehicles by their departments are responsible for them and for their proper use and maintenance. All damaged or broken tools, equipment, or vehicles must be reported to your immediate supervisor on the day of occurrence. This is to ensure no employee unknowingly uses unsafe tools, equipment, or vehicles. c. When not in use, City equipment and vehicles shall be locked and legally parked. d. City equipment and vehicles are not to be left running while unattended. 6. Restrictions on Use a. At no time may any passengers be transported who are not directly involved in Official City business. b. See Chaptor II, Soctions K and L, for 3lcohol, drug, and testing roquiromonts for city employooG. b. At no time is the use of or transportation of alcoholic beveraQes and/or iIIeQal druos permitted in a Citv vehicle. c. At no time may a City emplovee operate a Citv vehicle or piece of equipment under the influence of druQs. alcohol. or anv other substance. which affects the emplovee's abilitv to operate a motor vehicle. "Under the influence" for policv purposes is defined as the presence of anv amount of alcohol. iIIeQal druQS or other substances not prescribed and taken in accordance to instructions of a licensed phvsician. (See chapter II. section Nand 0 for alcohol. druQ and testinQ requirements for citv emplovees). 7. Care and Condition of Vehicles and Equipment a. An emplovee usino a Citv vehicle or piece of equipment is to maintain the vehicle or piece of equipment in proper workinQ order. EXHIBIT B-3 OF 4 b. Each user should complete a walk around visual inspection before drivino the vehicle. This is an opportunitv to see obvious problems (Le. flat tire) that should be reported to fleet maintenance for repair. c. The followino items should be checked at the beoinnino of each work dav/shift or weeklv before usino as desionated bv vour supervisor: 1. Enoine and transmission oil level 2. Enoine coolant 3. Fuel level 4. Windshield washer fluid 5. Belt and hoses 6. Tires 7. Brakes 8. Liohts. sionals. flashes 9. Horn 10. Back UP device 8. Take Home Vehicles a. Take home vehicles are vehicles owned by the Citv of Collewille and driven to and from an emplovees place of residence to the iob site for the purpose of respondino to Official Citv emeroencies and on-call duties as reouired. At no time will a take home vehicle be used for personal business or errands except as listed in Section 1.5.a. of this policv. b. Department services that mav reouire take home vehicle are: 1. Police and Fire emeroencv services 2. Water and sewer on-call services 3. Street and drainaoe on-call services 4. Other as desionated bv the Citv Manaoer c. Reoular assionment of take home vehicles shall be authorized and approved bv the Department Head and Citv Manaoer. d. Take home vehicle usaoe shall be reported to the Finance Department for appropriate record keepino as reouired bv the Internal Revenue Service. e. An emplovee who has a take home vehicle will have an assessment. as set bv the Federal oovernment each vear. added to their tax income for each dav of use. This assessment will onlv be added for the davs the vehicle is used, not to include vacation, sick leave or holidavs. The assessment amount is added to the emplovee's taxable income only for the purpose of calculatino the tax liabilitv. The emplovee assioned the use of the take home vehicle is EXHIBIT B-4 OF 4 f. The Use of Ci vehicles. 9. Accident Reporting Any employee operating city equipment or vehicles must report all vehicular accidents and property damage or liability claims to his/her supervisor and to the police immediately. Each vehicular accident, no matter how minor, must be reported to the Police Department in order that an official accident report can be filed. The Police Department shall notify the City Manager by forwarding a copy of all accident reports involving city equipment or vehicles as soon as the investigation is completed. A copy shall be sent to the appropriate Department Head. includin EXHIBIT C-1 OF 9 EXHIBIT C CHAPTER 11- EMPLOYEE RESPONSIBILITIES AND CONDUCT P. INTERNET AND E-MAIL POLICY Effective Date: 10-18:2000 Revised Date: 1. Purpose a. The City of Colleyville provides computer resources for the purpose of accomplishing tasks related to its mission. The objective of this policy is to establish guidelines to promote the benefits of increased efficiency through the use of the Internet and e-mail, while ensuring the protection of the City's computer resources, information assets and City integrity. b. This policy shall apply to all City of Colleyville employees and volunteers who use City hardware, software and or City-provided accounts to access e-mail or the Internet regardless of the user's location. Each user will be required to sign a statement acknowledging receipt of this policy and agreement to comply. (See Attachment A -"Acknowledgement of Receipt and User Agreement"). 2. Policy a. All of the City of Colleyville computers, electronic and telephone communications systems and all communications including stored information which is or has been transmitted, received, or contained in the City's information systems (including without limitation, e-mail, Internet, voice mail, facsimiles, and information stored on computer hard drives and City provided diskettes) are the City of Colleyville's property and are to be used solely for job-related purposes. b. While using the City's Internet and e-mail system and other City communications systems, employees' must act in a professional manner, keeping in mind they are City representatives during both business and personal (if allowed) usage. When communicating with others, the communications should reflect high ethical standards, mutual respect and civility. c. Due to the considerable risks associated with computer viruses, employees are prohibited from using their own diskettes or otherwise downloading any unauthorized software to the City of Colleyville computers. All software downloaded must be registered to the City of Colleyville. Employees should contact the City Manager's Office or designee if they have any questions. EXHIBIT C-2 OF 9 d. Employees shall be responsible at all times for the proper use of all City owned resources and other resources including Internet, e-mail and www. Users shall not reveal their password, permit unauthorized or otherwise breach security of the Internet account with the exception of the City Manager's Office or designee. e. To ensure proper use of communications systems and business equipment, and to ensure professional service and conduct, the City of Colleyville will monitor, inspect, and audit the use of these systems and equipment from time to time. Therefore, by this policy, employees are on notice that all e-mail messages, voice mail messages, facsimiles and information stored on computer hard drives and City of Colleyville provided diskettes are subject to inspection by the City at any time, with or without advance notice. Employees are not entitled to any expectation of privacy with respect to such information or use of City equipment. f. The City of Colleyville e-mail and Internet access and other communication systems may not be used for transmitting, retrieving or storage of any obscene, discriminatory or harassing communications. No messages with derogatory, inflammatory, or otherwise unwelcome remarks regarding race, religion, color, sex, national origin, age, disability, physical attributes or sexual preference may be transmitted through the City's e-mail or Internet access. Similarly, no abusive, profane or offensive language may be transmitted through the City's e-mail or Internet access. Further, electronic media may not be used for any illegal purpose or in any way that violates City policy or is contrary to the City's best interests; Conducting business unrelated to the City's mission and use of City e-mail or the Internet for personal gain is also prohibited. g. The City of Colleyville prohibits non-job-related use of its software and business equipment, including but not limited to computers, copy machines, facsimiles, printers and Internet and e-mail systems. However, the City may authorize limited personal use of this equipment where such personal use will not interfere with the City's operations or the employee's satisfactory performance of his or her job functions, so long as the employee takes personal responsibility for charges that are incurred. Even though the employee assumes responsibility for the costs incurred, this shall not create any expectation of privacy with respect to information or material transmitted, received or stored using the City of Colleyville equipment or systems. h. Violation of this policy will likely result in disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment. EXHIBIT C-3 OF 9 E-mail and Internet Procedures 1. City activities of a business nature dealing with the Internet or World Wide Web (www) such as home page development, training, establishing Internet accounts and problem resolution, will be coordinated through and approved by the City Manager's Office or designee, prior to being performed. The City Manager's Office or designee will assign an Internet e-mail address to authorized users on the City's computer network. This Internet e-mail address is for e-mail purposes only and will not provide the user with browser-based capability on the Internet. Department Heads will determine which employees are eligible for Internet or e-mail access. A request will be made in writing to the City Manager's Office or designee, who will establish the account. 2. Any City employee requesting Internet Access or Internet e-mail will be required to complete the "Internet Access and Justification" form (See Attachment B). The employee shall be required to sign the form stating he/she has reviewed, understands, and will comply with the City's Internet and e-mail policy. 3. The employee shall then forward the completed request to their Department Head. After review and approval, the Department Head will then forward the form to the City Manager's Office or designee for final approval. 4. Upon receipt of an approved "Internet Access and Justification" form, the City Manager's Office or designee will provide the employee with the necessary hardware and software to access the Internet and www. 5. All departments requesting home page creation or development shall forward a completed "Request for Internet Services" form (See Attachment C) to the City Manager's Office or designee. The Department Head prior to being sent to the City Manager's Office or designee must approve all requests. 6. When an employee leaves the City, the Department Head shall notify the City Manager's Office or designee immediately at which point the account will either be terminated or transferred. 7. All Internet users are required to sign the "Acknowledgement of Receipt and User Agreement" form (See Attachment A). EXHIBIT C-4 OF 9 8. When accessing information the user needs to be aware that uploading, posting, reproducing, or distributing material protected by copyright without permission of the copyright owner is prohibited. 9. All communication by the City's computer systems must be made or transmitted by one's own identity as a City of Colleyville employee. 10 Attempting to circumvent, assisting someone else, or requesting that someone else circumvent any security measures or administrative access control that pertains to City computer resources is prohibited. 11. Any act that purposefully or negligently endangers, damages, disrupts operation of, or malfunction of computer software, hardware, program, network or the system as a whole, whether located at the City or elsewhere, is prohibited. Training 1. Any authorized Internet user needing training on the City's approved www browser, software installation and/or home page development will contact the City Manager's Office or designee via the "Request for Internet Services" form (See Attachment C) to arrange for a training session. 2. Whenever possible, each department shall have at least one person trained in the area of software installation to provide assistance to other employees. 3. Users of City-provided Internet accounts may not assume any level of anonymity. Outside users wishing to identify users associated with the City can do so easily. Each time an employee logs onto the Internet, the Internet Service Provider assigns the user an Internet protocol address, which allows the user to be traced at a later date. Home Page 1. All requests to develop a new home page or substantially modify portions of an official City home page shall be approved by the Department Head and forwarded to the City Manager's Office or designee. Such requests must also be approved by the City Managers' Office prior to development. All such requests should be submitted to the City Manager's Office or designee via the "Request for Internet Services" form (See Attachment C). EXHIBIT C-5 OF 9 2. All departmental home pages approved for individual websites, separate from the City's official home page, will be maintained by a designated departmental webmaster. 3. Each departmental webmaster will be responsible for maintaining the department's website and ensuring information provided is current and accurate. 4. The City Manager's Office or designee will periodically audit departmental web sites for timeliness and accuracy of all information. Questionable or inappropriate content shall result in removal of website duties by that department and appropriate disciplinary action may be taken. 5. Each City website must have a counter or statistics program to monitor web site activity. All webmasters shall provide City Management with monthly reports on website activity. 6. All city-related home pages must reside on the City's contractually designated home page provider. All system changes or assistance from the home page provider shall be coordinated through the City Manager's Office or designee. 7. All home pages that are maintained by a designated departmental webmaster must be coordinated with the City Manager's Office or designee. Failure to do so will result in removal of departmental webmaster duties and appropriate disciplinary action may be taken. 8. Links made to the City Web site and all Department Web sites are restricted to other governmental agencies, and not for profit community or civic organizations. No links will be made that include commercial advertising, promote any specific business, religious or political group, cause or issue. The City Manager's Office or designee will review all link requests for approval. Attachment A EXHIBIT C~ OF 9 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE ACKNOWLEGEMENT OF RECEIPT AND USER AGREEMENT for Internet and E-mail Policy and Procedures I have received a copy of the City of Colleyville policy guidelines on Internet and E- mail use. I understand that use of this equipment for private purposes is limited as set forth in the policy. As part of the City of Colleyville organization and user of the City's gateway to the Internet and e-mail system, I understand that this e-mail and Internet system policy applies to me. I have read the policy and agree to follow all policies and procedures that are set forth therein for the duration of my employment with the City of Colleyville. I am aware that violations of this policy may subject me to disciplinary action, up to and including termination. I acknowledge I have no expectation of privacy. Furthermore, I understand this document can be amended at any time with or without notice to me. Print Name Date Signature of employee 1 0/12/2000 Attachment B EXHIBIT C-7 OF 9 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE INTERNET ACCESS AND JUSTIFICATION FORM REQUESTOR I Name Date of Request: Dept. Phone Number: I JUSTIFICATION I Each Internet user will be required to explain the need for access to the Internet or World Wide Web (www). Job requirements for Internett or www access: (Attach additional paper if needed) IACCEPTANCE I have read the Internet and e-mail Policy as listed in the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual and agree to aibde by the provisions. I understand I have no expectation of privacy. I also understand that violation of the provisions stated in the policy may constitute suspension or revocation of Internet access and related privileges and may also result in disciplinary action or termination from the City of Colleyville. Violations of local, state, and federal laws carry additional penalties. Employee Name (Please Print) Employee Signature Date BAPproved Denied Department Head Date 10/12/2000 Attachment B EXHIBIT c.a OF 9 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE INTERNET ACCESS AND JUSTIFICATION FORM I Approval Forward to City Manager's Office or Designee DApproved DDenied Comments: City Manager's Office or Designee Date Date Acct. Set-Up: Log Number: ITraining Required: User Name: Additional Equipment Needed: Date installed: Password: Follow-up: Comments: Attachment C EXHIBIT C-9 OF 9 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE REQUEST FOR INTERNET SERVICES IREQUESTOR I Name Date of Request: Dept. Phone Number: I REQUEST I Check all that apply: ~ Training Home Page Creation Home Page Modification Purpose/Expected Accomplishment: Expected Total Time Commitment: Anticipated Costs (hardware/software): Additional Comments: Approval Circle one. Approved Disapproved Department Head Date Approved Disapproved City Manager's Office or Designee Date 10/12/2000 EXHIBIT 0-1 OF 6 EXHIBIT D C. CLASSIFICATION AND PAY ADMINISTRATION Effective Date: 11/18/96 Revised Date: 10/18/2000 1. Purpose The purpose of this classification and pay plan is to organize personnel matters and to make personnel decisions in an orderly and fair manner for all city employees. Specific objectives of the classification and pay plan are to: a. Properly determine the duties, responsibilities, and necessary qualifications for each position within the City; b. Assist employees and job applicants in understanding each job and the relationships among jobs; c. Group similar positions into classes that can be described by the same job titles, organize these positions, and assign them to pay ranges with other classes that should be paid approximately the same; d. Provide an organized system of pay ranges and steps to be used to (1) assure equity across departmental lines and (2) reward employees for exceptional performance through pay for performance; and e. Establish procedures for administering and updating the plan. These procedures for classification and pay administration apply to all employees of the City. They are adopted to provide both an orderly and fair system of compensating employees for their services and a merit basis for personnel decisions. 2. Types of Positions a. Classified Position - A classified position is an authorized and budgeted position, which is assigned to a job class and to a pay range of the City's pay plan. A classified position can be part-time or temporary. b. Unclassified (Special) Position - An unclassified position is an authorized and budgeted position for which the pay is set by individual determination. Unclassified positions of the City are (1) the City Manager, and (2) those EXHIBIT 0-2 OF 6 hourly, part-time, or seasonal positions which, in the judgment of the City Manager, should not be placed in a regular classified position. 3. Classification and Pay Administration a. Hiring - New employees are hired into classified positions unless specifically designated as unclassified. New employees normally are hired on Step 1 of the pay range to which their position is assigned. A new employee may not be hired above Step 1 in the appropriate pay range without specific written approval from the City Manager. The City Manager's approval to hire above Step 1 will be conditioned upon the following: 1) The prospective employee's unusually high qualifications or significant experience that clearly warrants higher pay; 2) Hiring above Step 1 will not disrupt current internal salary relationships; 3) Funds are available in the City's personnel budget to finance the higher pay rate for the remainder of the fiscal year; and 4) The action is in the best interest of the City. A Department Head must submit written justification based on the above criteria to the City Manager who, after careful review, makes the final decision for all new hires whose entry salaries will be above Step 1. b. Hiring in a Lower Pay range - A new employee, or existing employee being considered for promotion, whose qualifications or experience for the position sought are marginal, may be placed at a step on the pay plan below Step 1 of the pay range for the position. An employee hired below Step 1 will be advanced to the proper step after a period of probationary employment not to exceed six months, if the employee is to remain in that position. The Department Head is authorized to extend the probationary period beyond six months for a period of time not to exceed an additional 90 days. Probationary hiring should not be used for current employees who meet all job qualifications, but only for those whose qualifications fall short of the job's stated requirements, and who may take a longer than normal time to meet the job requirements fully. c. Introductory Increase - With the exception of sworn and/or certified police and fire employees who serve a probationary period of one (1) year, all new permanent employees serve a probationary period of six months. Following their initial six months of employment, all employees are eligible to advance from the pay step on which they are hired (usually Step 1) to the next step within their assigned pay range on the pay schedule (usually Step 2) based EXHIBIT 0-3 OF 6 on adequate performance during their first six months of emplo}'ment. An employee whose initial six-month period of employment has not been acceptable or is in question will be denied the initial six-month step increase. All future step increases are based on exceptionally good performance of an employee in an assigned position. d. Merit Increases - A merit increase is an advancement to a higher step in the same pay_range and is granted to recognize good or excellent performance in the same position. 1) A merit increase cannot increase an employee's base salary beyond Step 15 of the position. Merit increases are not used to recognize increased duties and responsibilities (a promotion). Since the intent is to recognize exceptionally good performance, merit increases should be granted in conjunction with a review of the formal performance evaluations of the employee for the current evaluation period. Merit increases are recommended by the employee's Department Head and approved by the City Manager within authorized budget limits. For the City of Colleyville, merit increase calculations are based on the employee's performance evaluation rating and any limitations imposed by the City Council and/or the City Manager during the budget process. Employees in pay ranges 101 through 212 may receive no increase, a one-step, a two-step, or three-step increase based on their performance evaluation ratings and fund availability. Once an employee reaches Step 15 in pay ranges 101 through 212, he/she is eligible for a lump sum merit increase. This increase is based on the employee's performance evaluation rating and funds for this purpose having been set aside by the City Council. Employees may receive no increase, a one-step, two-step, or three-step lump sum increase paid on the first pay cycle in October with the approval of the Department Head, and City Manager. An employee is considered for a merit increase once a year, provided that funds for this purpose have been set aside by the City Council. 2) Employees in pay ranges 213 through 218 receive varying amounts of increases, depending upon their performance evaluation ratings, as determined by the City Manager and budgetary limitations, provided that no employee receives a merit increase which exceeds 15 percent of his or her current salary. e. Promotion - A promotion is a change in the duty assignment of an employee from a position in one classification to a higher position in another classification in a higher pay range. A promotion recognizes advancement to a higher position requiring higher qualifications and involving greater responsibility. Promotions are recommended by the employee's Department Head and are approved by the City Manager within the staffing pattern and EXHIBIT D- 4 OF 6 budget limits approved by the City Council. An employee receives a five percent increase if the promotion is to a classification which is one pay range higher, a 10 percent increase if the position promoted to is two pay ranges higher, but not more than a 15 percent increase unless the employee would receive more than 15 percent to go to Step 1 of the new pay range. (For exceptions involving marginally qualified current employees, see Chapter IV, Section C.4.b. Hiring in a Lower Pay range.) Firefighter/Emeroencv Medical Technician (EMT) oositions bv receiot of oaramedic certification receive an adiustment to the Firefiahter/Paramedic oav orouo as outlined in the oromotion ouidelines above. f. Demotion - A demotion is a change in duty assignment of an employee from a position in one classification to a position in another classification in a lower pay range. An employee who is demoted will have his or her pay reduced to a rate at least one pay step below the rate received before demotion, but not more than the top pay step of the employee's new classification. Demotions are made by the employee's Department Head with the concurrence of the City Manager. g. Appointment to a Position in an Acting Capacity - An employee may be appointed in an "acting" capacity in a position that is temporarily vacant pending the hiring of a replacement, temporarily vacant due to an extended illness or approved leave of absence, or when the City Manager deems the appointment is in the best interest of the City. Sworn and/or certified police and fire employees are exempt from this policy, and will be compensated for out-of-class pay as dictated by state law. The City Manager's consent to appoint an employee in an "acting" capacity will be given upon satisfaction of the following criteria. All four numbered paragraphs listed below must be considered together in making a determination about whether to appoint an employee to serve temporarily in an acting capacity: 1) When a position is vacant or if the incumbent is expected to be absent for at least three weeks, an employee may be appointed to serve in an "acting" capacity until the position is filled or the incumbent returns to work. While serving in an Acting capacity, the employee shall be paid the minimum rate of the higher classification (but not less than five percent above his/her normal rate of pay) for the period in which he/she serves in an Acting capacity; 2) "Acting" appointments and temporary assignments with higher pay may be made only when the continuity of an operation requires the designation of an employee in the higher classification and are not intended to be made for casual assignments of supervisory or administrative responsibility; EXHIBIT 0 -5 OF 6 3) A Department Head must receive written approval from the City Manager before appointing an employee to an "acting" position or temporarily assigning an employee to a higher classification when that assignment would result in higher pay; 4) At the conclusion of the "acting" time period, the affected employee's salary will be returned to the rate of pay received prior to the "acting" appointment. h. Reclassification of Positions - A reclassification is a reassignment of a position to a lower, higher, or different class job title based on current duties and responsibilities of the position. Upward reclassification does not automatically receive a pay increase unless an increase occurs to place the employee on the first step of the new pay range. When a position is reclassified to a lower pay range, an employee in that reclassified position whose salary is above the top step of his/her new pay range shall be placed at the top step of his/her new pay range one year from the effective date of his/her reclassification. Reclassifications are recommended by the Department Head and approved and implemented by the City Manager within budget limitations (see Chapter IV, Section C, 4.b(3)). L Reallocation of Classes to Pay ranges - Reallocation is the reassignment of an entire class of positions to a new pay range. Reallocation can be to either a lower or a higher pay range. Reallocations are recommended by the Department Head and approved and implemented by the City Manager within budget limitations. j. Cost-of-Living Adjustment to Pay Schedule - The City of Colleyville has an interlocking and progressive pay schedule. Interlocking means that the pay rates are repeated several times as one moves from lower to higher pay ranges. For example, Step 3 of Pay Range 101 is the same as Step 1 of Pay Range 102. Progressive means that within each pay range there is a series of merit steps; each step is separated from the next lower step by a constant two and one-half percent increment; and each pay range is separated from the next group by five percent. Overall increases or decreases in the pay schedule are authorized only upon approval of the City Council. The interlocking and progressive nature of the pay schedule simplifies across-the-board salary adjustments. To adjust the entire pay schedule by a constant percentage increase, multiply the hourly amount for each step in Pay Range 101 by the appropriate number (Le., multiply by 1.05 to achieve a five percent increase). After multiplying each hourly step amount in Pay Range 101 across, multiply the constant percentage increase amount times each hourly figure in Steps 14 and 15 for the remainder of the pay range. The remaining numbers of the revised hourly pay schedule can be inserted EXHIBIT 0.0 OF 6 from the preceding pay range (Le., Step 1 of Pay Range 102 is the same as Step 3 of Pay Range 101; Step 3 of Pay Range 102 is the same as Step 5 of Pay Range 101; etc.). After all hourly amounts for the revised pay schedule have been calculated and inserted, figures for the appropriate pay bases are calculated as follows: (1) for annual amounts, multiply the hourly figure by 2080; (2) for biweekly amounts, multiply the hourly figure by 80; and (3) for monthly amounts, divide the annual amount by 12. For 24-hour certified fire department positions, the hourly rate calculations are performed differently. Employees in these positions work different numbers of hours from other city employees. To determine the hourly rate for these certified fire department positions, divide the annual salary amount in the appropriate pay ranges and steps by 2920. For biweekly amounts, divide the annual figure by 26; for monthly, divide the annual figure by 12. cc~~ CITY COUNCIL 700; AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 3d Resolution # : R-OO-1724 Previous Action: None DEPT. : COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: Approval of a Final Plat for Riverwalk at Colleyville Addition, requested by Charles Searcey for D.R. Horton-Texas Ltd., 20.054 acres located on the north side of Glade Road at the future Riverwalk Drive, Case P-00-065 - by Consent Reading and Public Hearing Backoround D.R. Horton-Texas, represented by Gordon Jones, is the owner of a 20.054-acre parcel of land located on the north side of Glade Road at the future intersection with Riverwalk Drive. The owner has submitted a Final Plat of the property for review and consideration by the City Council. The plat will create 56 lots for the construction of single family residences. The following is an analysis of the major issues associated with this request. Zoning. The property is zoned PUD-R Single Family Residential. The approved PUD- R requires a minimum lot size of 6,331 square feet, a minimum lot width of 60 feet, and a minimum lot depth of 115 feet. The lots meet these minimum requirements. The smallest lot size is 6,900 square feet, with an average lot size of 9,027 square feet. (continued) FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-00-1724 Page 2 Riverwalk Drive. The developer, in coordination with the adjacent property owner, will construct Riverwalk Drive as part of this development. Right-of-way for the road is being dedicated with this plat. Construction plans for Riverwalk Drive have been submitted with a plat for the property on the opposite of Riverwalk from this development. Open Space. Open space is being dedicated with this plat. A significant portion of the open space is being used for drainage detention areas. The PUD-R ordinance for this property requires the development to detain eight acre-feet of water on the site. The detention amount exceeds the normal requirement due to a negotiated arrangement for the development of the commercial property to the north. While the open space amount is less than 20% for this portion of the PUD-R, when the office property adjacent to Glade Road develops, the entire PUD-R will exceed the minimum 20% requirement. Trail System. The developer is required to construct a 12.5-foot wide hike/bike trail along Riverwalk Drive. The trail will be located adjacent to Riverwalk Drive and the detention ponds on the property. The requirement for the trail and the extra storm water detention were both included in the PUD-R ordinance for this property. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this Final Plat at its September 25, 2000 meeting by a unanimous vote. Recommendation Approval. Attachments · Location map · Plat (see paper copy) Location Map , ! 11.1. .J lli=-=u "1- "T~~~t ". 0'--' ~.- --ITT- -: ~ l:~lLLL-- -1:~~1 ~I _~~ I /(,. i i~"'-"'-'-'--l--! (~,=. . ."! '- ""'~r- /" '" ,:<<r. ,..._-_..,.J-...,.....,"_......rl.;........4-,... '--H=J-'. i---<. '.- .L--L-.l:',==j ~~='.'_ "'~ /L,_.:;:::::--:: 0 ' , . . .... -J-j_~J;~~NALCT il~____.J I ~~"~!c--= ~-i -_~_~~-il--TI~I~Jt~L~ 'I .~-i}Jr~. I !~ s--: ~II .' ,,-,,,<'i ,: -'Q;' j Ji' \ "-- .,; I' ~J LJ--L+,~ ~. "'~ /~,~ _; ;~-~ -~'- r l iJ AOl:]:-""-' [--r'!Ii.,J L_::=~~::.:::::.='~ji'::r:~,-i' ~~..~~.c$~~~~~i~."2J;:l .... 1 +~ ri] R~JII~.........~! . ...,:':>'/< >- ~~.:~~ ,/ '1..". .i. '.' .... I . i~I\"'_ I ".' I ;'.-1.. t 'E. t-- . c' :.""'" ~ .I'.::t '. .' "'~.".'.r~~~7]-.-L~-~~) ~ t"--' ,_I L! .....~ .:1J , 'U ~..~.jT~:-:?---1__.:._.J., ,</"-""! Ii? i I -'1,~'-'-1 ,., /~.~> h~. ;,:r~;CT ." -' \ . ! .-'- 'I~ "j-' II C--.J~-i--' i · "--']-- :J!iclJ. .. . ..~. 1 !~V~I~f:f-.' '. 1 .-. '..' ,." ....,..,'..'1 1-', ; '.' . i... I I: 1"-'''''1' '.'-'''''''''v' "'-.a:" '. . ,.. I'" ,. ~.~ ,-,.,--' --!---"1 . '. . ,,/ '~>._- 'if1-o ;'.7~1~. '. .~~."" 1'8.... ..~1/~WORTH · tij' I~ r-"-j ~- 1---1 L- ./ / ! ~~:..-,:-,,-.- i~~}1~' . . . ,.: / []!J' i . I r-1 11O"~"! ) I ' I ~p^ / ...;J-~:.J -";".._:"_ , . : I . / i i i i' '1 J:JJ ':JJ ! I. _.1...-. ,.,RKno.. ''(!)'W,,"- . . ' . ,_ ....--ar-..-..l4-:.-.... . - . r-----I j-' i j I tII1L...J ...L---1 ~~_~~'=-~ I 0.2 o 0.2 0.4 Miles N w J~ ~t~ E s cae,. CITY COUNCIL Tms' \J,7 AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 3e Resolution # : R-OD-1724 Previous Action: None DEPT. : ENGINEERING SUBJECT: Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Barbara Gordon for the Barbara Gordon Montessori School - by Consent Reading and Public Hearing Backaround The plat of the Colleyville Montessori School was filed with Tarrant County on June 6, 2000 in Cabinet A, Slide 5903. Public improvements associated with this project are currently underway. Staff has reviewed the subject agreement with Barbara Gordon and finds it to be consistent with developmental policies and ordinances and offers the following: Item #3 states that all perimeter street fees will be waived in exchange for right- of-way for the Hall-Johnson Road Reconstruction Project which was approved March 21 ,2000 by Resolution R-00-1626. Item #7 states that the Developer agrees to reimburse the City $3,450 for the installation of a manhole and a 6-inch stub out along Bluebonnet Drive. ( continued) ~0k~&~ ~ANAGER ~ffl~~f/ D ARTMENT HEAD .. IAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-OO-1724 Page 2 Financial Impact No public funds are to be expended as the result of executing this City/Developer Agreement. Recommendation Approval of a City/Developer Agreement with Barbara Gordon Montessori School. Attachments City/Developer Agreement Resolution R-OO-1626 (paper copy only) CITY OF COLLEYVILLE CITY/DEVELOPER AGREEMENT BARBARA GORDON MONTESSORI SCHOOL STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Barbara Gordon Montessori School, hereinafter called "Developer", and the City of Colleyville, Tarrant County, Texas, hereinafter called "City", enter into the following agreement. In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained and for the purpose the Barbara Gordon Montessori School Expansion Project in the City of Colleyville, as filed of record on June 6, 2000, in Cabinet A, Slide Number 5903 of the Plat Records of Tarrant County, Texas, the parties hereto do agree: 1. Barbara Gordon Montessori School has donated the right-of-way needed for their property for the improvement of Hall-Johnson Road. 2. Barbara Gordon Montessori School waived any compensation for its loss of the stone and brick entry walls, perimeter fencing, irrigation system, brick mailbox, and landscaping improvements caused by the Hall-Johnson Road expansion. 3. Hall-Johnson Road and Bluebonnet Drive Perimeter Street fees for the Barbara Gordon Montessori School were waived by Resolution R-00-1626. 4. Due to the construction of sidewalks within the Hall-Johnson Roadway Expansion Project, Barbara Gordon Montessori School is exempt from the Colleyville Pathways Plan. 5. The Developer will contract for paving, drainage, water and sewer requirements with reputable contractors. All contract documents shall be prepared under the supervision and bear the seal of the Registered Professional Engineer who shall be licensed in the State of Texas. Before acceptance of the public improvements by the City, the contractor or contractors will furnish a two year maintenance bond or place funds in escrow with the City for two years, such bond or escrow to be in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the construction cost of all public improvements. 6. The Developer agrees to pay all fees associated with development within the City of Colleyville including but not limited to the a 5% plan review and inspection fee, parkland dedication fee, and all Project Inspector overtime charges. 7. The Developer agrees to reimburse the City in the amount of $3,450 for the installation of a sanitary sewer manhole and 6-inch stub out along Bluebonnet Drive. 8. Developer agrees to reasonably inform Contractor of the drainage requirements set by the City approved drainage and lot grading plans. Developer is to assist, at no additional cost, in resolving any and all disputes concerning the construction of any retaining walls facilities or other necessary structures regarding lot drainage and compliance with the approved lot grading plan. No deviations from the City approved plans will be accepted. 9. The Developer and City understand that each may only cancel or amend the terms of the agreement (upon mutual agreement of the parties) with specific written authority of the City. 10. If for any reason the ownership of the property should change prior to the acceptance by the City of the water, sewer, storm drainage and paving improvements in Barbara Gordon Montessori School, it is agreed that these conditions will pass from this Developer to the next owner and the City will require proper signatures of the new Owners agreeing to the terms of this Agreement. 11. Upon completion of the work, good and sufficient title to all facilities constructed, warranted free of any liens or encumbrances, is hereby vested in the City of Colleyville. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have executed this contract in three (3) counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original on this _ day of ,2000. DEVELOPER CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Barbara Gordon Barbara Gordon Montessori School Donna Arp, Mayor Jean Harris, City Secretary RESOLUTION R-D0-1626 A RESOLUTION WAIVING PERIMETER STREET FEES FOR THE BARBARA GORDON MONTESSORI SCHOOL WHEREAS, the City wishes to acquire property from the Barbara Gordon Montessori School for the Hall-Johnson Road improvement project; and WHEREAS, representatives of the school are willing to donate this right-of-way to the City of Colleyville and forgive any damages to the landscaping and other improvements within the right-of-way in return for a waiver of perimeter street fees that may be levied at a future date when the property is platted. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1 THAT the perimeter street fees that may be due from the Barbara Gordon Montessori School for both Hall-Johnson Road and Bluebonnet Drive are waived. AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. Passed by a vote of 4.. ayes, I 2/.tf day of J Vf a.ri J? nays, and tJ abstentions of this ,2000. ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE JJ~ E7!C 7s Mayor J n Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary .$ CITY COUNCIL Tm' AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/03/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 3f Resolution # : R-OD-1724 Previous Action: None DEPT. : POLICE SUBJECT: Approval of Professional Services Supplemental Agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects for AudioMsual Design Services and Americans with Disabilities Consultation - by Consent Reading and Public Hearing Backaround On February 2, 1999, the City Council approved an agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects (R-99-1456) to provide architectural services for the design of the Colleyville Justice Center. During the programming and design phase it was determined that an audio/visual design service should be consulted as part of the project. The audio/visual service consultant will ensure that the courtroom and the training/EOC will have the appropriate acoustics, sound systems and visual media equipment. They will review and coordinate power and telephone as well as the acoustical engineering. Additionally they will handle the specification, bidding and installation review of the sound system, including final tests of all systems and training of city staff in the sound system. We also determined that an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) consultant should be included. The consultant will ensure that we are in compliance with all ADA standards and conduct the state-required inspection of the completed facility. (continued) c- (UU~ CITY MANAGER ~~~(J CIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-00-1724 Page 2 Section 12.3 of the original agreement states, "should construction budget be increased by owner, architects fees will be adjusted by 7% of the adjustments. The AlE' supplemental fees are based on the difference between the original construction base of $5,280,000 (Schematic Phase) without construction contingency and final construction base of $5,335,263 (Final Development Phase) which includes construction contingency and landscape budget of $160,000. The difference between the Schematic Phase construction budget and the Final Development Phase construction budget is $55,263 x 7% = $3,868 Financiallmoact This supplemental agreement includes consultant costs for AudioMsual ($7,000) and ADA ($2,275) and Architectural Supplemental fees ($3,868) for a total of $13,143 to be funded from the current Colleyville Crime Control Prevention District (CCCPD) construction budget. Recommendation Approval of Professional Services Supplemental Agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects for AudioMsual Design Services and Americans with Disabilities Consultant. Attachments Professional Services Supplemental Agreement (paper copy only) . - Professional Services Supplement AlA Document G604 - Electronic Format TInS DOCUMENT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES; CONSULTATION WITH AN AITORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO ITS COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION. AUTHENTICATION OF TInS ELECTRONICALLY DRAFI'ED AlA DOCUMENT MAY BE MADE BY USING AlA DOCUMENT 0401. In accordance with the AGREEMENT dated: January 27. 1999 BETWEEN: Citv of Collevville P.O. Box 185 Collevville. TX 76034 and: Brinklev Sargent Architects 5000 Quorum. Suite 123 Dallas. TX 75240 for the Project: (Insert Project name and address as it appears in the Agreement.) Collevville Police and Courts Facilitv Collevville. TX [2(1 authorization is (requested) (giwB) (strike one) [2(1 to proceed with Additional Services [] to proceed with revised scope of Basic Services [] to incur Reimbursable Expenses OR [ ] notification is made [ ] of the need to proceed with Contingent Additional services [ ] of the need for other services AS FOLLOWS: 1 AudioNisual Desion Services (Exhibit A) 2 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Consultant (Exhibit B) 3 Architectural Suoolemental Fees oer Article 123 of contract (Exhibit D) 7% of increase in Construction Bueaet from Schematic Phase of $5 280 000 to Final Desion Develooment Phase (Exhibit C) $5 335 263 dated 5/1 0/00 The following adjustments shall be made to compensation and time. Compensation: (Insert provisions in accordance with the Agreement. or as otherwise agreed by the parties.) 1. AudioNisual Consultant $7.000.00 2. ADA Consultant $ 2.275.00 3. AlE Supplemental tees 5.335.263 less 5.280.000 = 55.263 x 7% = Total Fees $3868.00 -$13.143.00 AlA DOCUMENT 0604 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUPPLEMENT - AlA - COPYRIGHT 1993 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCJnTECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20006-5292. WARNING; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to legal prosecution, This document was electronically produced with permission of the AlA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as noted below. Electronic Format G604 - 1993 User Document: 3G604.DOC -- 7/26/2000. AlA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/6/2000 - Page #1 Time: (Insert pruvisions covering time of commencement and completion of authorized services as appliCDble.) N/A Prompt written notice is required if the services indicated are not needed. (Signature) AUTHORIZATION IS GIVEN or NOTIFICATION IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY: SUBMITIE BY: Harold E. Saraent (printed name and title) (Signature) (printed name and IiIle) (Date) June 2. 2000 AlA DOCUMENT G604 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUPPLEMENT - AlA - COPYRIGIIT 1993 - THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCl-DTECTS, 1'7~' NEW YORK AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON D.C. 20006-5292. WARNING; Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and is subject to I prosecution. This document was electronically produced with pennission of the AIA and can be reproduced without violation until the date of expiration as nolt.u below. Electronic Format G604 - 1993 User Document 3G604.DOC - 7/26/2000. AlA License Number 100804, which expires on 10/6/2000 - Page #2 ~ ~ ACOUSTIC DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. ~CONSULTANTS IN ACOUSTICS E-.H,e'T ,4. ~_. ~.- t . " May 17, 2000 Mr, Denny Boles Brinkley Sargent Architects 5000 Quorum Drive, Suite 123 Dallas, TX 75240 RE: Proposal for Acoustical Consuhing Services Sound Reinforcement and Audio-Visual Design Services Police and Courts Facility Colleyville, Texas Dear Denny: This proposal is an addition to our previous proposal of October 6, 1999. In this proposal, we outline services for design of sound reinforcement and audio/visual systems for the Courtroom and Training Room in the new Colleyville Police and Courts Facility. A. SCOPE OF BASIC SERVICES: 1. Courtroom Audio Svstem Desi2ll: Boner Associates of Austin, Texas, will provide Audio System design services as our sub-consultant. We will provide design services for the Courtroom Audio system with hard-of-hearing capabilities to meet ADA requirements, including complete specifications and drawings. The system will be zoned so that the rear area can be cut offwhen the operable partition is drawn across the room, dividing it, Service will include the following: a. Discussions with Architect and Owner's representative to determine precise operational requirements for the sound system. b. Detennination of a preliminary budget, c, Coordination with the Architect regarding loudspeaker locations, integration of the loudspeakers with the architectural design, control location and design, microphone and speaker jack locations, and other issues. d. Actual system design; preparation of detailed drawings (Autocad v 14) and specifications, suitable for bidding. e. Confumation of sound system budget; identification of prioritized items, ifaltemates are needed, f. Assistance in bidding; review of bids, Acoustic Design Associates, Inc. 2520 Electronic Lane, Suite 812 Dallas, Texas 75220 Voice: 214-350-4546 FAX: 214-350-4586 e-mail: ..acousdsn@flash.net.. Brinkley Sargent Architects May 17,2000 Page 3 4. Invoices: Invoices will be submitted monthly for all fees and reimbursable expenses incurred during the previous month, payable upon receipt to Acoustic Design Associates, Inc., Dallas County, Dallas, Texas. We sincerely appreciate your inviting us to submit this proposal. A returned signed copy of this proposal will serve as our agreement and authorization to proceed. Please call me if you have any questions about our proposal. Sincerely yours, ACOUSTIC DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INe. Bill Johnson President BJ:del Accepted by: Title: Representing: Date: "Justice. doc" 04/19/00 15:32 FAX 9723532798 ACCESSOLOGY,INC. ~OJ E"MI.,r ", Work Order Form For Projects Under $10,000,000 Accessology. Inc. has been contacted by Brinkley Sargent Architects to perform extended services for the below mentioned facility: CoJleyviUe Justice Center River Walk Drive, Colleyville This service and fee break down is as follows: SchematIc Design Phase . Unlimited telephone consultation regarding project, with priority status (within 24 hours). . Unlimited review of faxesle-mail questions regarding project. with priority status (within 24 hours). Design DevelopmenI Phase . Unlimited telephone consultation regarding project, with priority status (within 24 hours).State required filing fees. . Unlimited review of faxes/e-mall questions regarding project. with priority status (within 24 hours). . Attendance at three design development and planning meetings. . One preliminary plan review. Construction Document Phase . Unlimited telephone consultation regarding project, with priority status (within 24 hours). . Unlimited review of faxes/e-mail questions regarding project, with priority status (within 24 hours). . One state required plan review (official). . State required filing fees. Construction Administration Phase . Unlimited telephone consultation regarding project, with priority status (within 24 hours). . Unlimited review of faxes/e-mail questions regarding project. with priority status (within 24 hours). . Three site visits for consultation during construction andlor verification of field conditions. . One preliminary inspection to occur during .punchY list. . One state required inspection (official) to occur within one year of substantial completion. 1:z'2:7? $5 __.sse Cost ~ S ~ te5 ~~ ~ ~ $385 520 $20 $575 $125 $20 $20 $'50 $385 $575 Payment is expected within )4"Ciays (two weeks) of ordering the services, unless other arrangements are made. 30 ~ . Signing this work order fonn and faxing it back to our office will allow us 10 begin a file on the project. Signed Date Company Title Aca!SSology, Inc., 302 E. Church St. Lewisville, TIC 75057-4006 972-434-0068 V ITDD 972-353-2798 Fax 04/19/00 WED 15:29 [TX/RX NO 6440] Colleyville Justice Center Project Budget May 10,2000 eM...-,r c. 711.9/99 4/5/00 4n100 4/14/00 5/10/00 Land Cost 650,000 650,000 650.000 650,000 650.000 Building Costs Testin~ Services SubsurFace Soil 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 Construction Materials 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 26.000 Construction Building 5,023,824 5,845,000 5.414,706 5,200,154 5.075,263 Note A Off-Site Utilities and Roads 45,000 0 0 0 0 Landscape 60,000 216,400 100,000 100,000 100.000 Construction Contingency 281,042 290,324 165,000 160.000 160,000 ~ Furniture 230,000 289,414 309,000 285,000 285,000 Telephone 45,000 123,315 123,315 45,000 45.000 Communications System and Moving (T-I) 140,000 168,000 208,000 140.000 140,000 Computers 0 0 0 0 Moving Costs 0 40,000 0 0 Detention FurniturelKitchen 25,000 25,000 15,000 15.000 14,820 Note B Lab Equipment 12,000 12,000 12,000 0 0 Note C AudioNideo Equipment 0 0 0 24,000 24,000 Indirect Costs Programming 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 AlE Design Fees 396,000 396,000 396,000 396.000 396.000 Supplemental AlE Services 0 0 27,979 12.600 3.283 Notes B,D Site Selection 0 0 5,000 5.000 5.000 Cost Estimating 6,500 6.500 6.500 6.500 6.500 Civil Engineering 23,500 23,500 23.500 23.500 23.500 AudioNideo Consultant Fee 0 7,000 7,000 7.000 7,000 Note 0 ADA Consultant Fees 0 3.000 2,500 2.500 2,500 NoteD Landscape Design 14,000 14,000 14,000 14.000 14.000 Acoustical Engineer 3,500 3,500 3,500 3.500 3.500 Interior Design & Furniture Selection 27,000 27,000 27.000 27.000 27.000 Detention Equipment Selection/Coordination 5,000 5.000 5,000 5.000 5.000 Reimbursables (Budget Only) 27,000 27.000 27,000 27. 000 27.000 8,221,953 7.592.000 7.198.754 7.064.366 Total Budget 7,064,366 7.064,366 7.064,366 7.064.366 Budget Status (1.157.587) (527,634) ( 134.388) ~ Note A: Proposed cost reductions (133.250) dated May 10.2000, (Exhibit A) Adjusted due to May 10. 2000 cost reductions. Not included in this budget New Professional Fee not currently authorized, NoteS NoteC: NoteD: I E_I-I_,r I:) Colleyville Police and Courts 9115199 Project Cost Estimate Preliminary Land Cost Building Costs Testina Services Subsurface Soils Construction Materials Construction Building (reference construction budget) Off Site Utilities and Roads Landscape Construction Contingency (5%) FF&E Furniture Telephone Communications System and Moving (T-1) Computers Moving Costs Detention Fumiture/KitchenlLaundry Lab Equipment Total Building Cost Indirect Costs Programming NE Design Fees Cost Estimating Civil Engineering (Utilities,Site Survey & Platting, - Budget Landscape Design Acoustical Engineer Interior Design & Furniture Selection Detention Equipment Selection/Coordination Reimbursables (Budget Only) Total indirect Costs Bond Cash $650,000 $650,000 $4,000 $26,000 $0 $30,000 $5,280,000 $5,023,824 $45,000 $60,000 $264,000 $281,041 $5,544,000 $5,409,866 $100,000 $130,000 $10,000 $35,000 $0 $140,000 $0 $0 $25,000 $12,000 $0 $147,000 $305,000 $5,544,000 $5,586,866 $20,000 $20,000 $396,000 $396,000 $6,500 $6,500 $23,500 $23,500 $14,000 $14,000 $3,500 $3,500 $27,000 $27,000 $5,000 $5,000 $27,000 $27,000 $522,500 $522,500 $6,716,500 I $6,759,366 I /Total Cost .~ CITY COUNCIL Tc,~; AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 3g Resolution # : R-OD-1724 DEPT. : PUBLIC SERVICES SUBJECT: Approval of purchasing a Sign Shop Utility Truck with lift bucket through the HGAC bidding process for the amount of $57,039 - by Consent. Previous Action: None Reading and Public Hearing BackQround On September 5, 2000 the City Council adopted the 2000-2001 Fiscal Year budget, which included the replacement of the Public Works Sign Shop % ton pickup with a utility truck with lift bucket. ( continued) c-~~~ ' CITY MANAGER ~ CIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-00-1724 Page 2 The Houston-Galveston Area Contract (H-GAC) lists this equipment as follows: 550 Truck (Philpott Motor Company) Lift Bucket (Equipment Technology) HGAC Fee Delivery Fee ( Oklahoma City to Colleyville) $ 27,466.00 $ 28,352.00 $ 921.00 $ 300.00 $57,039.00 Total Financial Impact Funds are available in the line item account 001-33-6650, Motor Vehicles. Recommendation Approval of purchase of a Public Works Sign Shop Utility Truck with lift bucket through the Houston-Galveston Area (H-GAC) Contract Attachments · H-GAC Bid Contract (paper only) ....:;> ~.:-.,:?L_V J (,..- ..... ~ [Del User lJlO VE CUSTOMIZED 'RODUCI" PRICING SUMMARY BA.SED ON CONTRACT r c.n -::~ T'" I C4J L. L. e:. 'I V, (A_ c..- -' ~oo I f:::;:P~O ~GSo ~-A .'" ";;"':'" . ......'... ., ProcNC1 D.scrlptlfl.: .\: Bid Sft'1a _Della..'riA 1ft BidlPn't1MI B "'.'Ish'" 0 Bid S..... IJ F1 6 e s ,;;.4, /1} 1.01) : )Dllens 11..... an tt.Ift below) CODE OPtIONS H-C:;AC lid .RICE CODE OPTIONS H-CAC tna-fRrCE f5 7 J, ~I z.... ("oA/O, liON s (; Sg. 00 s c/(,{J 17 fA oJ, , lOt iC..,f.o^/hL $ , -00. aO s ,;)o.v~ .c":;";;:A'. S 00-00 S , ,- LJPW/.:./1 RJe.,q'JClEE~ $ 00.00 s. c.r/l'/~? bl.;q.~7~ S 00. 00 s ';~?we e~,.n s 1t.J.7.oo s ,~ c..5~ M fl '^ /-I!Or/1 .:::.".\~p. S ~35. 00 $ '~ -ro L 71U7JV'b () It.. l: s eqo..,~ oS Tocal Publllbtd Opllons S ='_ u.f. o. <10 J S"sc BId PrIce S .2 '-I~_I. 'i (. .1 T"'I:l1 B S i \", C. (Jftpultll.fh<<d OplJllns [lclltNu each item bclo\.., !lnt II) c"lc..aod a 15'" S.. "'" . r jJ t? W,;A.. ~I("r t(} c r= S~?O .OJ) S r\i : IT l.ofTO. yrcfl rJt;J. ( 4.~q) .J..~~5 ~11 ~ . ' S - . ~ S 3 I I s s -.,,1 I s s f .);~ "-4 T"I.' C (Jnpu"'i~aod QlUllns addcclln 8... P,-klJ ~ ~ I. '1{P~, ~~~. ~ ---- ~ S ~.(;1~ ~J.-1'~: '. ~ S::l "1", 1./-~ c'. Q ~ ~ S -';',-7..4 C, fA 011 4.~3./f> s ". C..ntr'oK1 Prle. AdJwlm<<nlU' _",.. up/.ln her"" E. "~II...ry Ch_l'I'CI,lr afty. upl;,'n hcr., f. Tllwhr B + C + D. E Q , C, Q\I~nclty Ordvcd (1JR1b:--1- II FJ =;> H. H.(;AC Admlnga.....'.... Fee lFffttl\ FN Schedule., T-bk -t1J => I; N",,,.l:qu1pm.flt Cb..,,_.Ie Credits {ESl. W.~ ...._+.... ............----...-- J. TOT~l PIIRCH.\SE PRICE INCLUD'NC H.Cr\C FE[ .................... ~ S;;. ~ qj ~13' 1 ~fb/. ~ ..' \ , . ..t,,_ ";7} t ~. -~-~ - PRODUCt PRiCING BASED ON CONTRACT . ..,..,....., .......,.. 'AelolltIWi1f1 detttib MUS'! H pmndltl wit}, aft'll pamtUt! ~ "DIII all &4 USeI'l11 H.cAC lnd User AleDCJ': (J, Iv 11 ~ OJ/kXJh I~ ~ ~ 1PF t' Product Description: ~TZ ~~' 1J.L~'4 / (l..{v( CP J. o-v fJ~ 4C ~A.NI r k J. C k!,Il r f I {' HE Date Prepared by COfttractar /t1-~ '"a2t:IdO t:ih ~ y -:r^ r -Fe //./J d A: Sue Price in BidI.ProposaJ Number Hi'1' - (!) ~ Series /tJ 7 $ S $ $ S S Subtotal Column 1; S .3Jt!6& ~ Subtotal Column 2: S 4" ~ ,.,tV ~ , I Published OptiOIH added to Base Priee lSd/Mal Df "CDI J" + "CDll"} S ~ ~ /f'r,/ ~ Subtotal of A + B a> s.:L~ 7(/ ~ B: Published Options (Tlemize below) E7"4 ~q7:.u.. S (?~,~ /j, 'AJI-,:;-~If..'JOILy' A~L. s ~n e ~-$'A,J ~.".l &'~r,/) S II (;1, e. /htJ,...- / &/T~ ~ rr s:1 ,/ l!2 ,. SI-r.tu..J/' c.~1 S /~t~ - 1(IJ,v-S'KiJ t:4<C16.u' S ,:zW. C: D; Unpublished Options (ltmri# IHI-l UllpublWtad - 0/. Non: Uap.bti.laccl OptiODI caaaot Itc u.ed to cruCe l.Dorber model. J- s-f.4/J it ,i,l..r s 38'9 ~ I - ?~I- L, J It- s ,J4 ~ !.:. S E: F: G: H: I: S '-<!!11,/_" Subtotal Column 1: :::!... ~ ~Jp RJ/, kMek 3J'11 ~.It.-', -fr.~ f!!g,r-t..n ~e~ v* It- 7/.... .~( ~vI/V s~ /?J. WI""" "..44-' f7t:. fife ..., $ ~,/17 , 011 - /4'1 ~ - s-1o- ,:1..I;L ~ 3/" ~ ~r-~ s s s Subtaal Column 2: S ~ Total oC C + D .../- F. [Not {ru/wtilltt H-GA.C ':..1 ",,> Quantity Ordered [Uaits:} " F J ....:> H-GAC AdministrAtive fg: (From Fcc SdlcdYlcl. Table. ] -> /. (r~ Non. Equipment Charges It. Credits (i~: EZL W'arrlrfl/)'. T,."dt'I,~ l)t/;v.". .,e.} ~"iv.A-f n atJl4!,., fI., s I t:! $ Sup total of Non-Equipment Charges 1: TOTAl. PURCHASE PRICE INCLUDINC [G .~. H ... I I OIl> ~Icn.lnc: h:'cQQPpur'i'omu\hllo(onn.n. . s 0/ fl. - Unpublished Options added co Base Price/SubtDtal of"Co/1" + "CoI2"] Ccm.r:ract Price Adjustment {(Ifni). ap/a;" lien} s -tJ- s;!Jj 3D ~ $.,2.8f~ ~ . ~/? L! s CD _ 'l(~- ...s ,-g()o.......... x_=5 S 3tJO < s :l.'f; )/ 9, 8 J ,.1 NW 122'" Street Okllhame City, OK 73114 Phone: 1-) 741-3141 Fu: (405) 755-1129 Equipment Technology, Inf.-mail: ..~1.com . Quoted price docs not include any applic:able taxes. . Quoted price is F.O.B. CoU.yvllle, TX . QUOte valid for 45 days. . Tenns are Due Upon Receipt unless prior credit anulements are made at the time of order. . Please note if chassis is furnished. it is as a conveniCl1ce and terms are Net Due on Receipt of Chassis at ETI. QUOTATION Page2of2 \;~ ~ .~ CITY COUNCIL T..M AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 3h Resolution # : R-Oo-1724 Previous Action: None DEPT. : ENGINEERING SUBJECT: Approval of a design contract with Halff Associates, Inc. for Brighton Oaks Drainage Improvements in the amount of $30,260 - by Consent Reading and Public Hearing Backaround Brighton Oaks was identified by Council as one of the priorities for the 1995 Municipal Drainage Utility System Revenue Bonds. Halff Associates, Inc. has conducted a preliminary drainage study of Jackson Creek in Brighton Oaks to determine the floodplain boundaries. In addition, two public meetings have been held to discuss the flooding and address concerns of the residents. The proposed plans have been discussed with the residents of Brighton Oaks along Springhollow that are directly affected by Jackson Creek and they are in favor of the planned improvements. ( continued) CI~S2J~ G!lTMrJti~ . IAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-00-1724 Page 2 The improvements will include the addition of box culverts at Sherwood Lane that will accommodate the 100-year storm event and various channel improvements approximately 600 feet upstream of Sherwood Lane. The improvements to Sherwood Lane will decrease the base flood elevation and will shorten the response time for Police and Fire during large rain events; that overflow both Cheek-Sparger Road and Sherwood Lane. Financial Impact Funds are available from the 1995 Drainage Utility Revenue Bonds. Recommendation Approval of a design contract with Halff Associates, Inc. Attachments Halff Associates, Inc. (paper copy only) Iii HaIff Associates ENGINEERS . ARCHITECTS . SCIENTISTS PLANNERS . SURVEYORS 4000 FOSSIL CREEK BOULEVARD FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76137 (817) 847-1422 METRO (817) 429-9975 FAX (817) 232-9784 October 3, 2000 1008-00-1081 Chris Steubing City of Colleyville 5400 Bransford Road PO Box 185 Colleyville, Texas 76034 Re: Amendment No. 1 - Proposal for Engineering Services Brighton Oaks Drainage Plan - Design Dear Mr. Steubing: Halff Associates have completed the Phase I Conceptual Plan for the referenced project. In response to your request, Halff Associates is pleased to submit this Amendment No.1 for design of the approved Brighton Oaks concept drainage plan. The proposed Scope of Work and associated fee is presented in Attachment "A". The General Terms and Conditions were provided in our original contract. Halff Associates is prepared to dedicate the necessary staff to this project, and anticipates commencing upon receiving notice-to-proceed. If this proposal meets your approval, please sign and return one copy for our files. Halff Associates appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the City of Colleyville. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions or comment regarding the enclosed proposal and scope of work. Sincerely, HALFF ASSOCIATES, INe. ~ {A1U~ Michael A. Moya, P .E. Approved: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS By: Title: Date: FORT WORTH . DALLAS. HOUSTON . McALLEN TRANSPORTATION . WATER RESOURCES . LAND DEVELOPMENT . MUNICIPAL . ENVIRONMENTAL' STRUCTURAL MECHANICAL. ELECTRICAL. SURVEYING . GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE . LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE . PLANNING ... fA. I III Half sSOclates, nc. ENGINEERS . ARCHITECTS . SCIENTISTS . PLANNERS . SURVEYORS 4000 Fossil Creek Blvd. Fort Worth, Texas 76137 (817) 847-1422 Metro (817) 429-9975 Fax (817) 232-9784 Attachment " A" Scope of Services for Design of Brighton Oaks Drainage Plan in Colleyville, Texas The scope of the project includes the advanced planning and engineering work required to complete the design and construction of approximately 700 linear feet of channel improvements, transition sections upstream and downstream of the project, and new box culverts at Sherwood Lane. Preparation of this proposal is based on the following assumptions: I. The design will be confined to the open channel and existing side drain(s) outfalls to the channel. No other drainage improvements will be designed beyond the channel limits. 2. The proposed channel will generally follow its existing alignment. The channel side slopes will be re-graded and protected with a gabion mattress, rock riprap, or erosion mattress. The channel bottom will remain a natural earthen flow. 3. The condition of the existing utilities adjacent to the existing channel is assumed to be satisfactory. No utility replacements will be designed. 4. Channel design will be based upon peak flood discharges computed for the Conceptual Plan. No additional hydrologic analysis will be conducted for this project. The proposed work plan has been divided into four phases: Phase I - Concept Design Study (complete); Phase II - Preliminary Design; Phase III - Final Design, and Phase IV Construction. The scope of services to be performed for each phase is described as follows. I. PHASE I - CONCEPT DESIGN STUDY (complete) ll. PHASE n - PRELIMINARY DESIGN A. Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit I. Develop a plan of improvements with appropriate mitigation. 2. Coordinate project with Corps of Engineers. Note, recent conversations with the Corps of Engineers indicate this project could be permitted under Nationwide Section 13. 3. Prepare documentation for a Corps of Engineers Nationwide Section 13 Permit for channel bank stabilization. B. Design Surveys I. Establish the proposed centerline or a suitable reference base line on the ground. 2. Obtain complete and accurate cross section data at a maximum of 50' intervals and at major grade breaks. 1 ... fA. I III Half sSOclates, nc. ENGINEERS . ARCHITECTS . SCIENTISTS . PLANNERS . SURVEYORS 4000 Fossil Creek Blvd. Fort Worth, Texas 76137 (817) 847-1422 Metro (817) 429-9975 Fax (817) 232-9784 3. Conduct a complete topographic survey of all existing features that would affect proposed construction. These features shall include: telephone poles, power poles, all other utilities located on or above the ground surface, fences, retaining walls, water meters, manholes, vaults, sprinkler heads, structures, etc., in close proximity to the limits of construction. Also, all buildings, trees, steps, and other topographical features which would be of interest to the property owner in discussing the plans with the City must be shown accurately and drawn to scale. The Surveyor will reference street numbers and property owners of all existing homes, structures, and developed properties. 4. Determine the horizontal and vertical location of all known underground utilities. 5. Provide all field surveys necessary to determine limits of existing right-of-way and/or easements. C. Preliminary Design 1. Prepare preliminary design plans at a scale of 1 "=20' horizontal and I "=4' vertical. Four (4) sets of plans, dated and stamped "preliminary" will be submitted. Channel Plan/Profiles shall include the following: a Existing channel centerline, existing top of channel bank, existing structures as covered under Section B.l.c. of this Contract, existing and proposed right-of- way on plan and profile sheets. b. All drainage computations (if necessary) as is pertinent to the drainage system design using hydrology based on fully developed conditions or other criteria as set forth by the City of Colleyville. c. Top of channel bank, channel flowline, and channel profile. d. Typical proposed channel cross sections and field surveyed existing channel cross sections. e. Natural and man-made features affecting the design, including dimensions of right-of-way, and/or easements. 2. Prepare Sherwood Lane box culvert plan/profile. 3. Prepare Sherwood Lane plan/profile for roadway grade adjustment. 4. Prepare Right-of-way plan. 5. Submit plans to City for review and approval. D. Right-of-Way Determination 1. Prepare permanent easements for three (3) properties. 2. Prepare temporary construction easements for three (3) properties. E. Utility Coordination 2 I!! HaIff Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS . ARCHITECTS . SCIENTISTS . PLANNERS . SURVEYORS 4000 Fossil Creek Blvd. Fort Worth, Texas 76137 (817) 847-1422 Metro (817) 429-9975 Fax (817) 232-9784 1. Provide utility companies, including, but not limited to franchised utilities and pipeline companies, which have facilities within the limits of the Project with preliminary construction plans for the Project. The Engineer shall obtain, from the utility companies, their best estimate of time required for any necessary relocations. 2. Coordinate with utility companies any necessary utility relocations/adjustments that may be required due to the Project and indicate on the preliminary plans said relocations/adjustments. F. Project Manual (proposal, special provisions, specifications, and contract documents) G. Preliminary Estimates of Probable Cost and Preliminary Anticipated Construction Schedule H. Meet with City Staff to discuss the results of Preliminary Design Phase. m. PHASE III - FINAL DESIGN Upon acceptance of preliminary plans by the City, the Engineer shall prepare final plans (each sheet to be stamped, dated, and signed by the Engineer) and a Project Manual containing the proposal, special provisions, specifications and contract documents. A. The final plan submittal shall include the following: 1. City title page with location map and revision block in the lower right corner showing date of revision, revised item and initials of the revisor. 2. Horizontal and vertical control sheet. 3. Plan and profile sheets of channel improvement (1" to 40' horizontal and 1" to 4' vertical scale). 4. Special detail and standard detail sheets. 5. The location and size, of all trees and shrubs within the limits of the drainage improvements ROWand/or temporary construction easements, shall be shown on the plan and profile sheets. If due to the density of the growth it is impractical to show all trees and shrubs, the approximate limits of dense stands of trees and shrubs will be shown. In any case, all trees 3" in diameter, or larger, are to be shown, unless directed otherwise by the City Engineer or his designee. The Engineer is to indicate on the plans those trees which are to be removed. 6. Typical channel cross sections at 100-foot intervals. 7. Two sets of plans shall be submitted, dated and stamped "preliminary". Upon approval of the plans, the word "preliminary" shall be removed and the plans stamped "final" and dated. B. Project Manual - Includffig proposal, special provisions, specifications, and contract docwnents. (Technical Specifications will be based on TXDOT and NCTCOG.) C. Final Cost Estimate and Construction Schedule. 3 iii HaIff Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS . ARCHITECTS . SCIENTISTS . PLANNERS . SURVEYORS 4000 Fossil Creek Blvd. Fort Worth, Texas 76137 (817) 847-1422 Metro (817) 429-9975 Fax (817) 232-9784 IV. PHASE IV - CONSTRUCTION PHASE The Engineer will provide minimal construction observation and contract administration services for the project. Daily construction inspection services will be performed by the City. Construction services provided by the Engineer will include the following: A. Bidding and Contract Documents 1. The Engineer will make available for bidding, upon request by the City, twenty (20) sets of plans and twenty (20) sets of the Project Manual, containing the proposal, special provisions, specifications, and contract documents. 2. The Engineer will provide the City with one (1) set of mylar reproducables of the "final" approved and dated plans. One (1) unbound set of the Project Manual will also be provided. 3. Bid documents will be submitted to the City of Colleyville in digital format. If necessary, attend pre-bid conferences. B. Contract Administration 1. Make approximately two (2) periodic visits to the site at the determination of the Engineering Department or his designee to observe the progress and quality of the executed work and to determine in general if the work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. 2. In performing these services, the Engineer will endeavor to protect the Owner against defects and deficiencies in the work of the Contractor, but cannot guarantee the performance of the Contractor, nor be responsible for the actual supervision of the construction operations or for the safety measures that the contractor takes or should take. C. Construction Control Staking 1. The Surveyor will establish basic construction horizontal and vertical control, but the Contractor will be responsible for staking the separate aspects of the project. The Surveyor will provide construction control staking as follows: 2. Verify and re-establish if necessary the design baseline and monuments set for horizontal and vertical control. 3. Provide quality control verification of Contractor's staking at critical locations as requested by the City. D. Record Drawings 1. Prepare and deliver "As-Built" drawings, based on City inspector "red lines", to the City of Colleyville by means of digital format-CD or diskette, one (1) set of mylar and one (1) set of blue line drawings. 4 III HaIff Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS . ARCHITECTS . SCIENTISTS . PLANNERS . SURVEYORS 4000 Fossil Creek Blvd, Fort Worth, Texas 76137 (817) 847-1422 Metro (817) 429-9975 Fax (817)232-9784 SUMMARY OF FEES 404 Permit (Item ILA) Design Surveys and Construction Control (Items II.B and IV.C) Easements (Item II.D) Design (Items ILC, E, F, G, H and III) Construction (Items IV.A, B, & C) Total Lump Sum Fee $ 3,500 $ 4,300 $ 2,400 $16,150 $ 3,910 $30,260 The estimated engineering fees established for this project shall be based on the estimated manhours required to complete the work. The fees will be 2.3 times salary cost. Salary cost is defined as payroll cost times fringe benefit factor established for the company. The 2.3 multiplier is a factor which compensates for G & A overhead, and profit. The established estimated fees also include direct non-labor expenses which, in general, include expenses for reproduction, sub-contractors, supplies, transportation, equipment, travel, communication, subsistence and lodging away from home, and similar incidentals. These direct non-labor expenses shall be reimbursable at the actual invoice cost plus 10%, except for living and travel expenses when away from the home office on business connected with the project. 5 cc&~ CITY COUNCIL 7m~ AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 3i Resolution #: R-OD-1724 Previous Action: None DEPT. : POLICE SUBJECT: Approval of purchasing three (3) Ford Crown Victoria police vehicles in the amount of $61,842.00 from Five Star Ford through the Tarrant County Purchasing Department Joint Venture/Cooperative Bid - by Consent Reading and Public Hearing Backaround The Colleyville Police Department through a joint venture/cooperative purchase bid with Tarrant County submitted bid specifications for 3 Ford Crown Victoria police vehicles. Notice of the County's intent to bid was advertised in local newspapers, as required by State statute. The County received 11 bids and 1 no bid. The low bid for Ford police vehicles was received from Five Star Ford. Tarrant County Commissioners Court awarded Bid No. 2001-001 for full-size police package vehicles to Five Star Ford on October 10, 2000. ~~~ CITY MA AGER (continued) DE~~O FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-00-1724 Page 2 Financiallmoact Funds are available in the Colleyville Police Department FY 01 budget for capital, budget line item #6650. Recommendation Approval of Resolution-00-1724 to purchase three (3) Ford Crown Victoria police package vehicles at the cost of $61 ,842.00 from Five Star Ford. Attachments Approval letter to all participating entities from Tarrant County Purchasing Department Tarrant County Commissioners Court Communication of bid award ............. ..' ~ COUl\>:t'J-... ""'ll~ ;,'. l:'.~ ~.: :< >: ~~ fJJi .. .. . . -. . .. .- ....:..~.:.... TARRANT COUNTY PURCHASING DEPARTMENT JACK BEACHAM, C.P.M. PURCHASING AGENT ROY EDWARDS, C.P.M. ASSISTANT October 10, 2000 TO ALL PARTICIPANTING ENTITIES: Bid No. 2001-001-Joint Venture/Cooperative Purchase of Police Package Vehicles Today the Tarrant County Commissioners Court awarded Bid No. 2001-001, Joint Venture! Cooperative Purchase of Police Package Vehicles, to Five Star Ford for full-size Police Package Vehicles and to Classic Chevrolet for mid-size Police Package Vehicles. The contact persons at these dealerships are: Dealership Contact Phone No. Five Star Ford Emmitt Cone (817) 366-1858 Robbie Merritt Classic Chevrolet Mike Temple (817) 421-7287 Your entity must have a Ford Fleet 1.0. number to order Ford products. If you need information on securing an 1.0. number, contact Emmitt Cone at the number listed above. Attached for your information are: · Copy of Commissioners Court Communication with spreadsheet · Vehicle Warranty information from Ford and Chevrolet You may start ordering your vehicles immediately through these dealerships. If you need additional information, please do not hesitate to call. jfm Attachments (2) Respectfully, #//L, Roy Edwards, C.P.M., A.P.P. Assistant Purchasing Agent TARRANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, ROOM 303 1 nil. r '.rro 4.'1"'ut;'D'[;'f"\DT\ ....nOT'VnDTU T1<'V"'" "''(10':;; R1"~Rsr:.J_ldl.d Rl"_stsr:.J_"~"C) (F-=-v) " ." &4 0Jt~ /}10. · ~?q 1 (p fJ.~ ~g~~~;:g::r~~ COURT . ....:...~.:.... REFERENCE NUMBER 2-a PAGE 1 of 9 DATE:.-!.Q. I 10 /.lS' SUBJECT: Bid No. 2001-001 - Joint Venture/Cooperative Purchase of POLICE PACKAGE VEHICLES - Various DepartmentsNarious Entities ACTION REQUESTED: AWARD TO LOW BID MEETING SPECIFICA TIONS. The Honorable Commissioners Court to award Bid No. 2001-001, Joint Venture/Cooperative Purchase of Police Package Vehicles, for various departments and various entities to the following vendors: Item 1.......Five Star Ford .............. $19,564.00 per basic unit, plus options and delivery Item 2....... Classic Chevrolet......... $18,132.00 per basic unit, plus options and delivery BACKGROUND: Notice of the County's intent to bid was advertised in local newspapers, as required by State statute; shown on cable television for two (2) weeks; and posted on the Internet and at the Fort Worth Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce and the Fort Worth Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Bid specifications were mailed to fifty-five (55) vendors. Eleven (11) bids and one (1) no-bid were received. This is a joint venture/cooperative purchase of Police Package Vehicles, with the following entities participating: Tarrant County, Bexar County, Ellis County, Hood County, Johnson County, Rockwall County, Travis County, Tarrant County College District, Mansfield ISO, Azle, Benbrook, Cedar Hill, Cleburne, Colleyville, Crowley, Denton, Desoto, Duncanville, Euless, Flower Mound, Fort Worth, Garland, Granbury, Grapevine, Hurst, Irving, Keller, Lewisville, McKinney, Mesquite, Midlothian, Piano, The Colony, Rockwall, Rowlett, Saginaw, Selma, Southlake, University Park, Waxahachie, Westover Hills, and White Settlement. An estimated total of five hundred (500) vehicles will be ordered from this bid. The low bids received from Five Star Ford for Item 1 and from Classic Chevrolet for Item 2 meet all specifications. Therefore, the recommendation is to award Bid No. 2001-001, Joint Venture/Cooperative Purchase of Police Package Vehicles, to the vendors listed above. FISCAL IMPACT: FY-2001 Capital Budget items. DISPOSITION BY COMMISSIONERS COURT D APPROVED D OTHER [describe] 0;;' .- SUBMIITED BY [DEPT.]: Purchasing PREPARED BY: Roy Edwards, C.P.M. (Qe~ CITY COUNCIL Tm; AGENDA BRIEFING For mtQ. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 4 Ordinance # : 0-00-1247 Previous Action: 10/03/00 DEPT. : COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: An amendment to the PUD-C, 0-96-1024, to allow living quarters in a commercial building requested by Behjat McElroy, New Synergy Inc., on Lot 1, Block 1, Cavillino Park located at 1001 and 1005 Village Park. Second Reading and Public Hearing First Reading and Public Hearing BackQround Behjat McElroy has applied to amend the PUD-C zoning ordinance for property located at 1001 and 1005 Village Park. The applicant proposes to construct living quarters in two buildings located on this site. The existing PUD-C ordinance for this property (0-96-1024) allows office and service uses on the property. In order to mix commercial and residential uses in the same structure, the PUD-C must be amended to specifically allow the residential use. Similar combinations of uses were approved for the Ritz Office Building (4901 Bransford Road) and the Village at Colleyville projects. (continued) FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1247 Page 2 The applicant proposes a single living unit in two buildings on site. The following table summarizes the parameters associated with this request. Leasable Area 5,000 sf 5,041 sf 3,342 sf Residence Size 2,000 sf 850 sf 1,867 sf Staff sent notices of the zoning change to 14 property owners within 200 feet of the property under consideration. Staff has received letters from six property owners opposed to allowing residential units in a commercial structure. Copies of the letters are attached. The letters of opposition to the requested rezoning change constitute a written petition. Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code states in part "...if a written objection to a proposed rezoning request is signed by the property owners of at least 20% of the area within 200 feet of the property in question, the affirmative vote of three-fourths of the City Council is required to approve the request." Staff has analyzed the petition and determined that the owners of more than 20% of the land area within 200 feet of this rezoning request submitted letters of opposition. Therefore, a "super majority" vote by the City Council is required to approve this rezoning request. The Planning & Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered this zoning change request at its September 11, 2000 meeting and recommended approval of the request by a 4-2 vote (Edwards and Fletcher opposed), subject to the following requirements: 1. The construction of a 6-foot tall masonry fence, from the notch in the existing metal fence, east along the common property line to the eastern property line on Bedford Road. 2. The fence must be built when the exterior of the third building is completed. 3. The maximum residential living area square footage be included in the ordinance Recommendation Approval of Ordinance 0-00-1247. Attachments · Location map. · List of Property Owners Within 200 Feet Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1247 Page 3 · Correspondence . Planning & Zoning Commission minutes · Ordinance 0-00-1247 Location Map $ . .. t . ,m .....,.. : .77 IC . t . . I I I I : I I - _ i ~ ~o I I lR 4Al : .7 Itr. : , ,. : .. 4 a 7 I JO CiROL a '7 DR . 4\ List of Property Owners Within 200 Feet Barbara Redding or current owner 909 Glade Road Colleyville, TX 76034 T U Tutt, Jr. P.O. Box 6 Colleyville, TX 76034 Floyd & Billie Sue Latham P.O. Box 44 Colleyville. TX 76034 Dale King Attn: Carol A. King. POA P.O. Box 371 Colleyville. TX 76034 Robert Salter 5401 Coventry Place Colleyville, TX 76034 Axel & Ursula Holland 1100 Jo Carol Street Colleyville, TX 76034 Maurine Moore P,O, Box 134 Colleyville, TX 76034 Cavallino Properties Ltd 4511 Lakeside Drive Colleyville I TX 76034 Golden Games II 1517 Jacksboro Highway Fort Worth. TX 76114 Thomas Miller 5513 South Drive Colleyville, TX 76034 D. B. Couch 1704 Oak Knoll Drive Colleyville, TX 76034 Estates of Village Park Inc. 1905 Industrial Blvd, Colleyville, TX 76034 Jame McElroy 4925 Lakewood Drive Colleyville. TX 76034 Golden Games II 1009 Village Park, Suite A Colleyville. TX 76034 Case Z-00-061 According to the last published Tax Records dated 09-01-99, individuals who own property that is within the 200' of the proposed zoning change request are listed above. I certify that the parties listed above have been notified of the proposed zoning change request as required by Section 211 the Local Government Code. (Notices dated: September 1, 2000) Jan Levy ~ Planning & zonl';;;Assistant Letters SEPT. 5,2000 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RE: CASE Z-00-061 I OWN PROPERTY AT 1201 GLADE ROAD, CORNER OF GLADE ROAD AND BEDFORD ROAD, WITHIN 200 FT. OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGSREQUESTING A ZONING CHANGE. WANT IT TO BE ON RECORD THAT lAM OPPOSED TO ALLOW LIVING QUARTERS IN THESE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. II { r~ ROBERT SALTER SEPTEMBER 4, 2000 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RE: CASE Z--OO-061 WE, D.B. AND EVELYN COUCH, OWN PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET, CORNER OF GLADE ROAD AND THOMPSON TERRACE, OPPOSE ALLOWING LIVING QUARTERS IN THESE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, ~ ./f? ,.-r-i ft'., ,'-~ --l ~, _ ,7" '-- D.B. COUCH ~'~~~ EVELYN OUCH- SEPT. 4, 2000 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RE: CASE: Z-00-061 T. U. TUTT AND DOROTHY TUTT RESIDE AT 4800 BEDFORD RD. NEXT TO THIS PROJECT. WE OPPOSE ALLOWING LIVING QUARTERS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. ~~ T. U. TUTT -L' L' / / - -1 ,rjli-Uf.t t-~j- ~.zz:- (! DOROTHY TUTT SEPTEMBER 6,2000 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RE: CASE Z-00-061 WE ARE PROPERTY OWNERS AT 1100 JO CAROL LANE, ACROSS THE STREET FROM COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. WE OPPOSE ALLOWING LIVING QUARTERS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. if10~ HoJ?f~~'W) !4ff~~j AXEL HOLLAND 1100 JO CAROL LANE SEPT. 4, 2000 CITY OF COLLEYVILLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RE: CASE Z-00-061 WE, THE UNDERSIGNED. LIVING IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, DO PROTEST THE CHANGING OF THIS PROPERTY TO ALLOW LIVING QUARTERS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. .'..U i.~... --/ ~/ -),~ /r. tk~~'Uf_~,.u. /'c't[ . -,r '-""" ',- .1 rfj/;'~$:t'it.4~,; ~ {"._-_..~ /{ ,I :~ , . ,. ',/''',4 L. . ( l .( i~ ,,' ,-p /1 ~ '-- " \------ "" " i '\ l / ( 1 /1 r)J I..' f"j ;-:- /-1. ',--, --, '--, ~,' --_. ~ . ~ b l;--~~---- ~ \." IBY CDMf/l;Jl,,~ .iE',;., r ....... ) ~ (4'1 () ( \ ,. ~ (... ,.1 DALE AND CAROL KING ARE PROPERTY OWNERS AT 5000 OAK TIMBERS AND GLADE ROAD, ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT. WE OPPOSE ALLOWING LIVING QUARTERS IN THIS PROJECT. .:. :. ,1....' '-' I. " ~ ,.),0., . t t ............U.',....'t\ ' >J v-v- ." (' DALE KING ehM~ 11,1(:1 CAROL KING ('~I-'''''!.'''', ," ~ \I\};'~l't....."t I ...-'. ~ By ---- ~ .. . .-.:.~=--=::--j~.l_:-' J ~ \ , r'--', ' V,- ~ /"\, -~: (, \ (, ''r '" i ..' \ \/ \....1 " \....; t \..,. ",. ("'+'t'. ,---,,-/,,-,:v \, I') r,f ,~ i "'" ~1 ; '"\"\ r) (,- ~/ ( ,.- -~ : ' ' I~\. r'L. 1_, '\ \.( ~1- ( . ( f' I '-.-.' f' (I I ~i i "',AV\! . l' . \.)", ",,'_'- Uk.'\..~r,--l I \ . I , ' _/ i \ \.. ( '~r ')"V\' - - "" I \.J . ' \),....1...'....)\ _ 't.Y'\''\.....--/ \.~( C, ~ . \ \0{iL'\.i. \'-<-..~ l'. \' \" _~ {-\,i""'- / - !j' ~ '-../-\_1- (,. ' ~~; \ \. f, f, I I _;_.,1," \<JJr'--- I A .t ',-- ,,,\ ).J ~'\''l' ,*, ~ ,J,' l 'd.....' ' f ,-J j" I ~~, '-..,_ "'. . \..- \~. .-.J I l' {. .~ --r-r;,' (. J'-j -,):--<. ........ ,'':.' \..... .,-:l hJ ....----~., / " ,. f ,n I ",,\ - L-'" ~ ._,~ , .i ,'\- .) i' ",.-- \, j' \ \ '-'i \ " '.. \ ';.. r. /' A 'I.. ........ _,/ ",~ I '; \ j ,i.' \ \ '" \ {, j,,\ i~' .,'\J' (' ,,-,,) "'- A.. , ,1" 'f' '~::- (l '^ , ,...,-f' . - ~ _~( ;:-rK (-r . ,',' \.. ....t _.~_ C -i , l ^ l C" l ),[J ,.f~__~ ~ (__\.". \),' /<-J I"~ ! ' -rf' I \ ,___ '-J\......./ i , ' -1 1 n y' \ /,"" :,'/f ( ( ;J l' 'j 'Y,' --." (1 c.r) . r- '- (I{IV' ( \ \,,+ (j}I../\).,jr'~) v.l I \(,,~ II: , o-:k , (, I ' "':'d-,f \A,t.._'''', t ,\ ; '_i"-...-/' I, A-' t, ('" v'\. ' \, "",) V j' \ ' :1 :' '\1,""\'\:.. /"" , , '--",- ,Ii ( )Iry\{ (!ni!. y ~,\ ...... \.-..._.,/.- ......... _.,',;/..; -... ,~' --..,' \ '--- f \ft'cL ~ 'If' \ ,) rj\ .., I I -\ \ . cry? ( \l~(~tP - 8 DJj I ~! \ em Of COLLD'V1LlE COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT (J By f\ " Cl_U',,",c,"K.A_, I Y:'./: (1 "'..;~ l \ _ ~i _ (~(": '\0\ -So (f\RO\ C c \\ <.;:"! \! \ \ \ e.. \y- llc 0:) l-~ Planning & Zoning Commission minutes PUBLIC HEARING - An amendment to the PUD-C, 0-96-1024, to allow living quarters in a commercial building requested by Behjat McElroy, New Synergy Inc., on Lot 1, Block 1, Cavillino Park located at 1001 & 1005 Village Park. Case Z-00-061 Barry LeBaron presented the case to the Commission. He told them that the original PUD on the property was approved in 1996 and allowed uses for offices and service uses and the applicant is requesting to add a residential component. The one building that is 5,000 s.f. will have 2,000 s.f. of residence and the building that is about 5,000 s.t. will have 850 s.f. residence. He said that a number of written letters of opposition have been received and are included in the packet. Commissioner Edwards said that staff noted that the residential use would have an immediate positive impact and she asked staff to explain their reasoning. Mr. LeBaron said that combined commercial/residential use has been a fairly new phenomenon and for years cities tried to separate the uses. He said that over the last five years there has been a trend to combine the uses and Colleyville has already done that. He said that by getting additional eyes that live within a commercial area, a security benefit is added by people still being in the development rather than vacating at the end of the work day. Commissioner Edwards asked if a mixed use would change the rear yard setbacks. Mr. LeBaron said that they wouldn't unless the Commission wanted to change them in the PUD ordinance. Commissioner Edwards said that the 1005 building is located very close to the property line and she hopes that there are no windows on the back side of the building. She asked if a residential use is approved, could they still use a 10' setback with no windows. Mr. LeBaron said that they could build it to the site plan or any other conditions imposed by the Commission. . Commissioner Tyler said that he read the opposition letters and asked staff if anyone called to identify what their particular complaint was. Mr. LeBaron said that he did not talk to anyone. Commissioner Tyler asked if there was a restriction as to how many people could live in the residential unit or is there a way to limit the number. He said that he would like to hear from the opposition. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: Mehrdad Moayedi, 3708 San Taiga, Irving, said that he is the owner of the property and his mother, Behjat McElroy is the applicant. He said that the project was not initially envisioned for residential use, but is a recent concept because of requests for purchase and lease of the two buildings. He said that the 800 s.f. unit will not be a permanent residence as the people leasing the building are an investment firm out of California. He said that they wanted to have a place to stay for people who come from out of town on a temporary basis. Mr. Moayedi said that there is a person trying to purchase the second residence and if that does not materialize, his mother who is a single person, will be living there on a permanent basis. Mr. Moayedi said that he believes that the problems the neighbors have stems from the fact that the project has taken so long to develop and relates to the fence and other issues on the property line. He said that he has been working with.. staff and the changes in the road design to connect Glade and Village Park have delayed their project. He said that he cannot start the last building until the design for the road is completed. He said that once staff gives him the proper elevation for the road they will know where to construct the slab. Commissioner Hill asked the owner if the smaller guest quarters will be used by people on a temporary basis with them coming and going. Mr. Moayedi said that he cannot tell the Commission how many times a week the living quarters will be used, but it will be used by employees from California and New York and will remain a residential type of use. He said that the second property will be more of a permanent residential property. He said that it will be more toward Village Park across from LaPlaza that also has a same situation. Commissioner Fletcher asked Mr. Moayedi if he has met with the neighbors and he responded that he has not, but he has met with the staff to try to resolve the problems. He said that he cannot resolve the problem unless he gets building permits to complete the project, but he will be willing to meet with the neighbors. He said that his mother has met with the neighbors. He said that as the owners, they are required to provide some sort of screening and they have upgraded it to a masonry wall and that should make the neighbors happier. He said that they are not required to use masonry but they are willing to. T. U. Tutt, 4800 Bedford Road, adjacent to the south said that originally they had no opposition to the commercial project as it would be better than apartments. He said that apartments do not belong in a residential area and all six landowners within 200' have written opposition. He said that there is a rented house in the area that creates problems and the occupants cannot be evicted because of laws and a similar situation may happen on this proposed rental property. Mr. Tutt said that people typically do not take care of apartments. He said that when the project was passed in 1996, the minutes reflected that a 6' masonry fence along their property would be constructed. He said that staff advised that the 6' masonry fence would be constructed and the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the change with staff's recommendations. He said that the original zoning exhibit includes a proposed masonry fence along his property. Mr. Tutt said that they probably don't need to build a masonry fence along the entire length of the property because he has a good steel fence along a portion of the joint property line. He said that it is a steel fence on a concrete footing and the applicant has piled dirt along his fence as high as 2 to 3 feet high and it will rot the fence. Mr. Tutt said that he has asked the owners to fix the problem. He said that he has a very bad drainage problem created by the runoff from this property. He said that the City Engineer has looked at the situation and there is a gully that has eroded off the commercial place and it needs to be filled in. He said that the problem he has with the request is that the owners already don't care what happens to the neighbors and transient residents will care less and not take care of the property. He said that the owners tell him that they will fix the problems and then they totally ignore his requests. Mr. Tutt said that he has lived in Colleyville for 40 years. He also said that the parking spaces are very limited and he is not interested in selling his property to increase parking. He said that this is not the place for residential. He said that he has to clean up from roofing materials, trash bags, paper cups and other debris. Mr. Tutt said that if a family moves in with children, there would be no areas for children to play and the owners cannot discriminate if a family wants to move in with children. He said that he has tried to be a good neighbor and agreed with the original zoning change request, but the fence has not been constructed and the drainage has gotten worse, dirt is piled against his fence, so he is opposed to the current request. Commissioner Edwards asked Mr. Tutt to indicate where his existing fence is located on the overhead. He said that it was indicated earlier that the setbacks are limited by windows and the building closest to Bedford Road does have windows on the second floor facing their property. Commissioner Fletcher asked staff if they were aware of the requirements for a brick wall in the original ordinance. Mr. LeBaron said that he was not, but would have to research. He said that this proposed ordinance does have provisions for a masonry wall and the Commission can place restrictions and conditions on their recommendations. Commissioner Rutherford said that the applicant has agreed to do that. Axel Holland, 1000 Jo Carol Lane, directly east of the 1005 Village Park building. He said that he had the opportunity to come to the meetings four years ago and at that time they heard a lot of promises from the developer as they have heard tonight. Mr. Holland said that the neighborhood has a problem with the credibility of the developer as he has promised a lot of things and has not fulfilled his promises. He said that staff has spoken about mixing residential with commercial property and one of the benefits is someone to keep an eye on the property and he would like to assure the board that he lives directly to the east and will keep a good eye on it too. Mr. Holland said that not only did Mr. Tutt not get a fence, there should be a drainage plan. He said that there is runoff going into the existing neighborhood and part of the drainage will not be restrained by a fence alone. Mr. Holland said that four years ago, the issue of multi family property was addressed by changing the area property to single family fora mile or so down the street. He said the issue of multi family was addressed and voted down and he finds it difficult to believe that they are sitting at this meeting to consider rental units in the neighborhood. He said that he is not in favor of a favorable consideration of the request. Mehrdad Moayedi responded that the developer that originally zoned the property was not them and they did not make any promises that they did not uphold and Mr. Holland needs to get that straight. He said that the conditions were made by Mitchell Properties and they bought it already zoned. He said that they were not aware of a requirement for a masonry fence yet they were voluntarily going to construct one. Mr. Moayedi said that Baker Development built the buildings and went out of business and left the property with a bigger drainage problem that currently exists. He said that they have spent about $170,000 across the street to correct the problem that eventually affects the Tutts property. He said that he wants it made clear who they are and how they got there. Mr. Moayedi said that they are not creating apartments and the building that is closest to Mr. Holland will have a permanent residence. He said that the other building would have an executive suite for people to come and go. He said that the Highway Department is responsible for the road alignment to connect Thompson Terrace and Glade Road in the next thirty days. He said that the engineering firm had to correct all of the elevations for the area before they could be advised where to put the slab for the new building. He said that he would construct the retaining wall once the road is designed. He said that the comment on their credibility may have been made without knowledge of all of the facts. He said that his site plan turned into the city does not state a masonry fence, but that is something that they are voluntarily doing. He said that there will be a drop inlet that will be put in when the slab on the next building is poured. He said that the drainage cannot be fixed in such a small area without the inlet and the slab being poured. The grass cannot be planted to help the drainage until the building is finished. Commissioner Hill asked Mr. Moayedi when he purchased the property. He said that it was about two years ago. He said that he has sent guys on tractors to clean up the debris and dirt piles against the fence. He said that there couldn't be erosion because of no rain and how dry everything is. He said that staff asked him to do a temporary fix while they review the road design plans and elevations. T.U. Tutt displayed a copy of the zoning exhibit that was approved with the zoning change. He showed where it indicated a "proposed masonry fence" along his property. He talked about the erosion and said that he has fine irises and roses and they are being washed out when there were rains in the spring. The Commission discussed with the applicant the number of parking spaces and the requirements for a mixed use. Commissioner Edwards said that there would be shared access and parking and it appears that it is adequate. They discussed taking 2,000 s.f. out of the office parking ratio and how the residential would require less parking than an office use. Mr. Moayedi said that the tenant of the smaller unit would have a 3 year lease with an option to buy. He said that this would be their D/FW headquarters and they would use the suite when they had someone working from out of town. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Staff said that they did not know why the masonry wall has not been built yet if it was required with the PUD. Mr. LeBaron said that if the Commission wanted to make that a part of the conditions, they need to indicate beside the specifics, the time that it is to be constructed. He said that it is possible that the language was not clear in the previous PUD. The Commission asked the applicant to address the timing of constructing a masonry wall. Mr. Moayedi said that he will be willing to construct the wall once he has a permit to construct the slab and get the framing structure of the third building in place so that it doesn't damage the wall once it goes up. He said that he doesn't need to have the inside done, just the framing in place, structurally with the roof on then he can build the fence, landscape and put grass in so it doesn't hurt anybody's yard. Commissioner Rutherford asked Mr. Moayedi to get with Mr. Tutt to work out the drainage situation. He said that he would be glad to. Commissioner Hill asked Mr. Moayedi about the location of the masonry fence. He said that there is an existing fence placed in a concrete wall. He said that he could put a masonry fence in front of the wall, but he couldn't insert a masonry fence inside of where the wall is now. He said that he hopes that with the Tutt's permission, they could take their fence down so that there aren't two fences on top of each other. He said that he would get with the Tutts to work out the details. They determined that there was 235' along the common property lines. Commissioner Edwards said that she is a little confused because Mr. Tutt said that he would prefer to keep his steel fence and Mr. Moayedi would only need to build a masonry wall on the front part of the property. Mr. Moayedi said that from his side there would be two different fences and that would be o.k. because he plans on heavily landscaping the area. Mr. Moayedi said that he would be all right with leaving Mr. Tutt's fence and constructing a masonry wall, and if Mr. Tutt wants a wall built along the entire length of the property, he would do that too. Chairman Hart told Mr. Tutt that they wanted to make sure that they are taken care of. He asked Mr. Tutt if he was o.k. with leaving the metal fence on the property. Mr. Tutt said that the metal fence was fine with him and he has a concrete footing that comes up 12" high, but they have piled dirt up against it and have not gotten it out of it like they said they would. Chairman Hart asked Mr. Tutt if the first portion of masonry wall was built, would it improve what they are looking at Mr. Tutt said that it would and he has tried to diminish the buildings by putting lattice up and planting rose bushes, but he can't cover it all. Mr. Moayedi asked Mr. Tutt if he knew whether or not he knew if the steel fence was on his property or theirs. Barry LeBaron said that if Mr. Moayedi was required to put up a masonry screening wall, it is his responsibility that it is on his property and a surveyor can determine the location. He said that the requirement for the fencing is placed on the commercial and not the residential. Commissioner Rutherford moved to recommend approval with the construction of a masonry 6' fence approximately 235' in length to be built on or about after the third building is in place structurally. Commissioner Hill questioned what structurally complete means. Commissioner Rutherford said that it would be when the exterior of the building is completed. Commissioner Rutherford amended his motion to when the exterior of the building is completed. Staff asked for a clarification. Barry LeBaron said that there is 235' from the southwest corner of the property to the first notch along the point where the existing metal fence is located. He said that there is an additional 181' to Bedford Road. He said that the motion mentioned a specific distance that was on the side where the existing fence is located. Commissioner Rutherford amended his motion to be approximately 181' from the southeastern property line to the notch where the metal fence begins. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. Commissioner Edwards said that she has some concerns about the smaller residential unit. She said that she is aware that the developer has some plans for it in the next few years, but what is going to happen three to four years later. She asked the Commission if that is something they want to get into. She said that she actually likes mixed uses, but there was a lot of opposition with this request. She said that she does not have a problem with the larger residential unit because someone will always be living in it, but the smaller one the company may sell and then it becomes vacant. Commissioner Fletcher said that he has to agree with Commissioner Edwards' statement. He said that it is not the fence or the drainage that concerns him, but he is concerned about the compatibility of zoning. He said that with an existing structure in an existing neighborhood, they would be changing the character of the neighborhood by approving the request and the 800 s.f. unit lends itself to becoming a rental property. He said that it may not be the intent of the applicant, but it could not be controlled in the future and he would be opposed to this ordinance. Commissioner Hill said that he sees two points, one being the residential use and the other being the neighborhood's concerns because the project has not been built in a way that they are happy with. He said that he does not have the concerns with the residential use because of the Village being built right around the corner and this is a good use for a transitional area. He said that he believes that the motion on the table is the right way to go. Commissioner Rutherford said that he agreed with Commissioner Hill and there is a comparable situation at the Ritz property because there is commercial on the one side of the road. Commissioner Fletcher said that there was no citizen opposition to the Ritz zoning change. Commissioner Rutherford said that he does like the mixed use and hopefully they can make sure that the owner of the property takes care of it through the enforcement of City ordinances. He said that in 3 to 4 years it may be sold and made a permanent residence. Commissioner Tyler said that if the property were to sell in the future, the new owner would probably want to make the entire building commercial and tear out the residential to make the entire area able to be rented for commercial use. He said that the amount of rental space would be important to investors. He asked if there was a way to make sure the residential area could not be expanded from 850 s.f. Barry LeBaron responded that the proposed ordinance could stipulate the maximum and minimum square footages. Commissioner Tyler said that he would not need those limits to approve the ordinance as set forth, but he is only making the recommendation to help move this item forward. He said that he believes if the property was sold in the future, a smart investor would get more money from commercial rentals than residential. Commissioner Hill asked staff if the site plans have the square footages on them and if they are included as attachments, do they need to add the maximum square footages to the ordinance. Barry LeBaron responded that if there are areas that may become a point of contention, he would prefer to see them listed in the language of the ordinance as the exhibit could be subject to interpretation. Commissioner Rutherford amended his motion to include the maximum residential living square footage within the language of the ordinance and the site plan. Commissioner Hill seconded the amendment. The vote being: Ayes: Rutherford, Tyler, Hill, Hart Noes: Edwards, Fletcher ORDINANCE 0-00-1247 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND AMENDING ORDINANCE 0-96-1024 SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION WHEREAS, an application for a zoning change was filed by Behjat McElroy on August 11, 2000, under Case No. Z-00-061; and WHEREAS, notice of a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission was sent to real property owners within 200 feet of the property herein described at least 10 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, notices were posted on the subject land as provided by the zoning ordinance; and WHEREAS, public hearings to change the zoning and the Master Plan on the property herein described were held before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and the Planning and Zoning Commission has heretofore made a recommendation; and WHEREAS, the City Council is of the opinion that the zoning change herein effectuated furthers the purpose of zoning as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Colleyville. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1. THAT the Master Plan, the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas, and the accompanying Zoning Map (Exhibit A) are hereby amended insofar as they relate to certain land located in Colleyville, Texas, described as Lot 1, Block 1, Cavillino Park Addition, by allowing residential units with a commercial structure, with all site plans which are conceptual in nature, supporting documents, and any conditions and restrictions imposed and approved by the Council which are incorporated herein by reference including, but not limited to the conceptual site plan (Exhibit B), conceptual floor plans (Exhibit C); and subject to the following conditions: Ordinance 0-00-1247 Page 2 of 2 a. One (1) residential unit shall be allowed in those buildings noted on the conceptual site plan (Exhibit B). Not more than two (2) residential units shall be allowed on the property. b. The maximum size of each residential unit shall be as follows: 1001 Village Park Drive - 2,000 square feet 1005 Village Park Drive - 850 square feet c. A six (6) foot tall masonry fence shall be constructed along the southern common property line from the notch in the existing metal fence east to the eastern property line on Bedford Road, as shown in the conceptual site plan. d. Construction of the masonry fence shall begin no later than when the exterior walls of the building at 1001 Village Park Drive have been completed. Sec. 2. THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance as read together with the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each and every day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such. Sec. 3. THAT the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by law. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the 2000. day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000. day of ATTEST: Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Donna Arp Mayor Exhibit A - Zoning Map ~ I .. I . . TR 4AIM : .71 At . . I . . . f : 1 t L10 oa i R ~o I I 1R ""I : .1 /tC. : , ... : 13 . 14 15 J 8 7 DR I Exhibit B - Conceptual Site Plan -- A. 'Q--r ..M.... .. __""'1_ . : _ .....;.. 11...... -,,- CWO.. GIIOMllIff , .J i.' , ~ :: "" '.. ~~. ~ :,.,~ . ". /:.y , 'x ,/ ,/ '<" l' . I III HI I;'., J, {' JI f!! lit I ~d ~r.! II II' { I ! t!{ ill jlj ! ~'11IJ '{PI:; 1 (tIlj 't 'I't' 111~;' it P~I:' Iii;, 'II' 1,.,1 II! lit II I , ,.dl IJI iU fibi ~,.j .fit:; i fif' fIi , m )'. 1.1:IIrfJ' Ifli~'1 -1",li t 'fl!, J~ It: t I' 'f' ei r. ;;i'~ =.i: !l , ::. ..- .I'~ .:-------: ,.<~';.>. '. :J- ~~'. f~ . . = cr ~ ... ~ <<.= .. ~~:: at~: .~. 4" r. . '~ - . . l' :2! " .J ;+; . ~~l ~ ;r,- rl !to -+; I ~~J Exhibit C - Conceptual Floor Plan for 1001 Village Park Drive i ~ L ~ ~ , "'- ~. ", "" ''. '" ~ 'I i' I , ~ I ._----- _m..__._._._.......__....: ~ a: Exhibit C - Conceptual Floor Plan for 1005 Village Park Drive ". 7 '<:l -1 lL ~ 8 -1 u. n {S u UJ <II -1 <:{ ::> t- IL ~. G o .... - - ~ , ". : ',.~ " "" ....... " , '''. " I< I I I !: i~"-- n Ii 1-)) I ' ! 'j)A . ! ' :'~:l---lJ_ ~: '" /11 III .; '" 21 I I ~I "(...."..._._u_...__..____n_._..__,,.______..::~ . I ..--~ ccea CITY COUNCIL Tw' AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 5 Ordinance # : 0-00-1248 Previous Action: 10/03/00 DEPT. : COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: A Special Use Permit for an accessory building requested by Jim Gray, on Lot 3, Erickson Subdivision located at 300 Quail Run. Second Reading and Public Hearing First Reading and Public Hearing Backoround Jim Gray is the owner of a house located at 300 Quail Run. The owner has submitted a special use permit application (SUP) to construct an accessory building on the property. This SUP request is the first request for an accessory building under the new regulations adopted by the City Council in July 2000. A letter from the applicant is attached. The owner proposes to construct a 2,871 square foot garage on the property. One of the purposes for the garage is to house his collection of antique automobiles and his personal vehicles, The property currently has a one-car detached garage, approximately 1,024 square feet in size. (continued) FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Ord inance 0-00-1248 Page 2 The property at 300 Quail Run is 2 acres in size. The garage would be located on the north side of the house, approximately 230 feet from the street. The new accessory building regulations included size and location standards. All requests to exceed the base standards must be authorized by a Special Use Permit approved by the City Council. A comparison of the regulations and the proposed building is shown below, The proposed building meets all the requirements of the regulations except for the size, The applicant has requested a variance from this requirement, as allowed by the Code. CARPORT ZONING COMPARISON Category Zoning Requirement Applicant Proposal 1, Max. Size 1,750 sf 2,871 sf 2. Max. Number of Buildings 3 2 3. Side Setback 5 feet 20 feet 4, Rear Setback 5 feet 180 feet 5. Max. Height No taller than main building Less than height of main building The accessory building regulations limit the total square footage of all accessory buildings. basing the maximum on the size of the lot. The maximum square footage of all accessory buildings for this property is 1,750 square feet. Since both buildings exceed this requirement. a special use permit is required. If approved. the ordinance granting the special use permit will allow both the existing and proposed building, but restrict any future buildings to being approved by another special use permit. The Planning & Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered this zoning change request at its September 11. 2000 meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the request. Recommendation Denial Attachments · Location map · List of Property Owners Within 200 Feet · Letter from Applicant · Planning & Zoning Commission minutes · Ordinance 0-00-1248 Location Map : ..'lit: I.'. :: 0- ~I',~:;, . ~T'~'I ..1....~ lit "aIJ ~ = . . . .. .. 5' . I' ~ =. I p __ ~ · JIIC J. K" n ___ 4 Q "tit ,... ~ rs;~I}J,.. j. i- . ,_ \ ,. .,. 1 J I 1 _ ~ ~ $iCl '" c. --- .. ~ 18, 1 ")~ . I t: 6::- ~ . " · ., Ie ., Ie, 1 1 .. .. ....;, .. II I ~ I~.. ____ ,..~. I I 1 .... CI' ' ! ~ q I!r"'WIl ~ ~ ' !!!i I ... rAtCCIJI CT \[fa.,., ~ l I- ' ;,.:l"':;D ':'t"~': - I ."'. I' ...n....---, - b r~~' I I . IS, J _' I~ - ,31 i 11 "" -.,....."" T 1- I Wb/ \,J 1 I JIll,. . · I \" 1 ........... J. I I U .,' . . .... ... /'1--, . 'J'~!" _' :....~.. -- ~4 ""::1J'':'2.0,l~ '111, 111 3 ..lit:. .' . \ J I, t . 1_ . . J'. ~ ,..,. IrC. l' :':I~t: ...... List of Property Owners Within 200 Feet Terry Stallings James & Norma Glenn Judith Conway 208 Quail Run 212 Quail Run 3516 Meadowlark Lane Colleyville. TX 76034 Colleyville. TX 76034 C~lIeyville. TX 76034 Theodore & Rene Nophsker Joseph Cutlip Elliott Young 3512 Meadowlark Lane 3513 Blue Quail Lane 3717 Blue Quail Lane Colleyville. TX 76034 Colleyvme. TX 76034 Colleyville. TX 76034 John & Carol Morrow Ming Chiu & Sau King Leung Davis & Dorothy Shular. II 404 Falcon Court 400 Falcon Court 3513 Meadowlark Lane Colleyville. TX 76034 Colleyville. TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Emmett & Barbara Doss Harold Burgert, III Owen & Mary Long 3517 Meadowlark Lane 405 Wooclbriar Court 401 Wooclbriar Court Colleyville. TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville. TX 76034 John Hall Ralph Doughty Cleo Watson P.O. Box 820344 404 Woodbriar Court 313 Briarwick Lane Fort Worth. TX 76182 Colleyville. TX 76034 Colleyville. TX 76034 Charity Duckworth Curtis McGinley James Mobley 209 Chapelwood Drive 305 Briarwick Lane 301 Briarwick Lane Bedford, TX 76034 ColleyvilJe, TX 76034 Colleyville. TX 76034 Jerry & Cheryl Hatfield Thomas & Sharon Taylor 213 Bnarwick Lane 209 Briarwick Lane Colleyville. TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Case 5-00-062 According to the last published Tax Records dated 09-01-99. individuals who own property that is within the 200' of the proposed zoning change request are listed above. I certify that the parties listed above have been notified of the proposed zoning change request as required by Section 211 the Local Government Code. (Notices dated: September 1,2000) Jan Levy ~ . Planning & Zoning ~sistant Letter from Applicant Date: 8-15-2000 To: City of CollcyviHe From: Jim Gray Re; Planning and Zoning Assistance My wife and I would like to build a 2,871 square foot garage/storage building, which would be used daily for our personal automobiles and our classic auto collection. We currently do not have a garage for this kind of use. Presently, we have a barn that was converted into a guest quarters with a one car garage unit. This 'was an existing building when we purchased our home in 1998. The new garage will be designed to coordinate with our home and to improve our property. Planning & Zoning Commission minutes PUBLIC HEARING - A Special Use Permit for an accessory building requested by Jim Gray, on Lot 3. Erickson Subdivision located at 300 Quail Run. Case S-00-062 Barry LeBaron presented the case to the Commission. He told about the location, size, and style of the proposed structure. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing, Those present wishing to speak were: Fran Gray, 300 Quail Run, said that the structure will blend and look like the existing house and be out of sight from the street. She said that her husband collects very expensive automobiles and needs a place to keep them. She said that there would be no commercial use of the building. Royce Brewer, 3504 Meadowlark, said that the property had been used for a commercial landscaping business for many years and they don't want commercial activities. He said that they do not want vehicles coming and going as was happening with the lawn service. Fran Gray said that her husband will not be doing repairs on the cars. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hill said that this is a very large structure and he was surprised at the lack of opposition. Commissioner Rutherford agreed. Commissioner Edwards moved to recommend approval of the special use permit for an accessory building. Commissioner Rutherford seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Rutherford, Edwards, Tyler, Fletcher, Hill, Hart Noes: None ORDINANCE 0-00-1248 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY AUTHORIZING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING ON LOT 3, ERICKSON SUBDIVISION; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION WHEREAS, an application for a special use permit was filed by Jim Gray on August 18, 2000, under Case No. S-00-062; and WHEREAS, notice of a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission was sent to real property owners within 200 feet of the property herein described at least 10 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, notices were posted on the subject land as provided by the zoning ordinance; and WHEREAS, public hearings to change the zoning and the Master Plan on the property herein described were held before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and the Planning and Zoning Commission has heretofore made a recommendation; and, WHEREAS, the City Council is of the opinion that the zoning change herein effectuated furthers the purpose of zoning as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Colleyville. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec, 1. THAT, the Master Plan, the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas, and the accompanying Zoning Map (Exhibit A) are hereby amended insofar as they relate to certain land located in Colleyville, Texas. described as Lot 3, Erickson Subdivision, by authorizing a Special Use Permit for an accessory building, with all site plans which are conceptual in nature, supporting documents, and other conditions and restrictions imposed and approved by the Council which are incorporated herein by reference including, but not limited to the conceptual site plan (Exhibit B), and subject to the following conditions: Ordinance 0-00-1248 Page 2 of 2 a. The maximum size of the accessory building shall not exceed 2,871 square feet in floor area. b. The maximum number of accessory buildings allowed on this property shall be two (2), Any additional accessory buildings must be approved by special use permit. c. The accessory building shall not be used for commercial or other non-residential uses. Sec. 2. THAT, any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance as read together with the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each and every day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such. Sec, 3. THAT, the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by law. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000. day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000, day of ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney Exhibit A - Zoning Map 11 .' ..~- -I ~r:v-:l:; : :", lil: : I~ I : ~ '1 ~~, .- - 1\ U I ~:1 /..'" t' " '. I) '~/. . J 41~~ It 8' 'Ill t. . 1 J J. <Ie I'~'M: III" ~ ~. J. S' ~ ... WOOIIIIWl 3 _ &II .... · -~ 11) - , · I ~~~~: '0 ._lA~' ,," I(S01lJ;,f~. ~ . __ 'I,',' ." 1 I' " 1:.- .11e .11e p' ~/J . : Icli. ~ -.... . " I "0::- ~ : . ':'fJl>>': :.~ _ · I - .' ~); "" __ L.. ,. ~ I - ~ I ~~: ' · .: .\" ... \" \"/~ · .J_'.. I. .. u., ~': · _' :-.- Ok -- _ ~'t.:;:. mr..:: ~..J \)4~ ~rJL ...,. <lC .. Ie J J. \. . J I, . I.. f, , 1 \ /1 i... _ Z __ 0- flR-,-IOA ,F.' . ..I_1M &~ - ,..-. , ~ . . , I t , , - I ' .. . 1 iI Exhibit B - Conceptual Site Plan 'I ., .'1 0, ;-, I ~ It ,. '. . " - '1 .~. , :\ 1 I I 1\ f<' . \'.... "! . !1 '. ; . '. -. " I I , ~~ .' .' I_ ." " 179.04 . . " : : Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 2 2. One question has been raised regarding how this ordinance will apply to the buildings proposed for the Village at Colleyville proje,ct. To avoid a potential problem with the "big box ordinance" and any future buildings that may locate within the Village at Colleyville project, specific language has been included in the proposed ordinance to exempt buildings within the limits of the Village at Colleyville PUD from the "big box ordinance." You may recall that the Village at Colleyville PUD has its own site design and building construction criteria. 3. The "outdoor lighting" regulation has been relocated from the section dealing with "rezoning application requirements" and placed in the latter part of the ordinance where the actual "site development standards" are found, 4. The table, which contains maximum lot coverage, maximum building height, and minimum setback requirements, has been expanded to incorporate additional building size categories. The minimum front, side and rear building set-back distances have also been increased by incorporating a formula that increases the set-back distance requirements as the size of the building increases. 5. The reference to the "commercial building design point system" has been deleted as suggested, To compensate for the removal of this particular building design regulation, the fa9ade articulation language has been refined with additional criteria regarding the design of front building facades, For example, one of the comments from the City Council suggested that sloping roofs and covered walkways should be an important design feature, This provision bas been included in the building articulation requirement. 6. The requirement for a second customer entrance when the building is situated on a corner lot has been deleted. 7. One of the City Council's recommendations was to delete "earthen berms" as an optional feature within the landscape buffer along public streets. The concern here was that berms along major streets might pose a potential problem for "airlifting" a vehicle that has run off the road. However, staff feels that this option should be retained, since earthen berms have proven popular and acceptable as landscaping features in many new commercial developments. 8, The regulation for loading dock screening has been completely revised from the original staff recommendation. Initially, staff recommended a solid 12-foot screening wall to block the view of a. truck loading dock which faced a public street or a residential property. At the October 3rd City Council meeting, there was a suggestion that this screening wall requirement be increased to 14 feet. However, staff is concerned about the long-term stability of such a tall, and often unsupported, Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 3 structural wall. Another review of the loading dock screening requirements from a number of cities around the country suggests that a combination solid masonry wall with a live landscaping screen is the preferred requirement. Staff is recommending an 8-foot tall solid wall with a 6-foot live landscape screening in front of the wall. Since most loading docks are sloped and depressed below grade to gain better truck access, most of the vehicle, but not all of it, is hidden from view. 9. The language regarding outside storage has been revised to specifically prohibit outside storage areas, After reviewing the original language, which required outside storage areas to be screened with a solid wall, it appeared that language was actually prohibiting outside storage by allowing outside storage areas to be within "a building having no roof." Therefore, there would actually be no outside storage allowed. Staff revised the language to make this requirement very clear that outside storage of plant materials or merchandise is prohibited. An additional regulation prohibits the visibility of merchandise above the solid screening wall. First Reading and Public Hearing Backqround At the September 19th City Council meeting, an ordinance was approved which places a moratorium on the issuance of permits for any commercial store containing 55,000 square feet or more. The moratorium will expire in 61 days, on or about November 19, 2000. This time frame will allow the City time to complete the process for adopting new regulations for large commercial stores. Staff has prepared a draft ordinance to establish regulations regarding large commercial stores, which, if approved by the City Council, will become effective on or before the date when the moratorium expires. The draft ordinance attached to this agenda briefing has been prepared by using copies of similar ordinances from a number of cities around the country and from information on large commercial stores provided by the American Planning Association. Large commercial stores, more commonly referred to as "big box retailers," vary greatly in size, but they typically range from 50,000 square feet of building space to as large as 200,000 square feet in the "supercenter" category. Depending on the population size and transportation characteristics of a community, the issues associated with development of a big box retailer often become first noticed when a structure of approximately 50,000 square feet is proposed. Citizens residing near a proposed large commercial facility generally perceive a big box retailer as a nuisance to their particular neighborhood, Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 4 Big box retailers usually have several common characteristics; they are large rectangular single story structures, seldom have any visual architectural appeal and generally have large concrete parking areas. Big box retailers require very large sites of about 10-12 acres, or more, Sites of this size are generally only found in industrial areas of many cities, where it is much easier to accommodate the large parking areas required to satisfy the needs of a large building footprint. Typically, the siting of a big box retailer is such that the parking lot is highly visible from the adjacent roadway and the building is situated to the rear of the parking lot. In addition to the huge size of the building fa~ade, it is the large concrete parking area that is often cited as one of the primary objectionable features of the big box retailer. The attached ordinance, if approved, will amend the Colleyville Land Development Code by inserting a new section to establish regulations for large commercial stores. The proposed ordinance contains minimum site criteria intended to mitigate many of the objectionable features of these big box retailers. Historically, big box retailers have focused on sites served by Interstate or U. S. highway routes, as evidenced by the fact that virtually every community surrounding Colleyville, where these types of major transportation routes exist, has attracted at least one big box retailer over the past few years. Since Colleyville is primarily a residential community and is not served by a major Interstate or U. S. highway facility, it has not in the past become a targeted location for the big box retailer. However, recent economic development trends indicate that many large corporations are changing their retail development strategies to place their big box facilities closer to residential neighborhoods in order to tap new markets, Due to Colleyville's small population size and the absence of any Interstate or U. S. Highway transportation routes, it is more likely that "mid-box" retailers rather than "supercenter" stores would find a suitable location within Colleyville. From a perspective of proportionality, a "mid-box" concept in Colleyville would probably have many of the same adverse effects on adjacent properties, as would a superstore in a larger city. The attached ordinance has been drafted to affect any commercial store, whether it is a single store or a combination of stores, which occupies 50,000 square feet or more. The ordinance will amend the Land Development Code to allow a large commercial establishment containing 50,000 square feet or more of building footprint the option of either locating "by right" in the ML-Light Manufacturing District or requesting rezoning to a Planned Unit Development - Commercial. Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 2 of 12 Large Commercial ~ Building. A eeR;:II~~9rsial steF9, er aRY e8R=1siFlatisR ef 8eFFlFFleF'sial steres v:itRiR a siFl~19 building containing one or more commercial businesses and, Qccupying fifty thousand (SO,OOO) square feet of floor area, or more. Sec, 2, THAT Chapter 3 - Land Use, Section 3.24.C, Table of Permitted Uses, of the Land Development Code is hereby amended to add a permitted use, such permitted use to read as follows: Large Commercial ~ Buildina: (see Section 2S.1) Sec. 3. THAT Chapter 3 - Land Use of the Land Development Code is hereby amended by adding Section 2S,1 Large Commercial StsFes Buildings, such section to read as follows: Section 2S.1 Lan::Je Commercial ~t9f9S Buildings 2S.1.A Applicability The criteria in this Section shall be applicable to the construction of any new large commercial ~ building "ermitted for construction on or after November 19. 2000, '.\'RetR9r alls'.v9s BY Fi~Rt er as aR a~~Fevee PlaRR9a 61Rit ge~:els~RMleRt CSRMlRMl9F8ial. These criteria shall not be applicable to the following: 1- the use, re-use, modification or consolidation of existing commercial stsFes buildings developed prior to November 19, 2000, or to the expansion of commercial stsres buildings existing as of November 19, 2000, provided the expansion does not exceed ten percent (10%) of the existing building footprint, or 2. buildings constructed within the limits of the PUD-C established bv ordinance 0-99-1141. 2S,1.8 General Provision No new large commercial stefe building shall be permitted for construction within the city of Colleyville, except where allowed as follows: a. Large Commercial &kM:e Building: allowed by right in the ML - Light Manufacturing District Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 3 of 12 b. Large Commercial ~ Buildina: (Permitted as a PUD - C) c, No large commercial ~ buildinQ shall be permitted within an area approved for a Planned Unit Development - Commercial or a previously approved Planned Unit Development - Commercial, unless the approving ordinance contains a specific provision for a large commercial EMef:e buildina as provided in this Section. The requirements and procedures for a Planned Unit Development - Commercial contained elsewhere in the Colleyville Land Development Code and the additional requirements set forth in this Section shall be used in the review of an application for a large commercial ~ buildina. The City Council may establish such terms and conditions as are necessary to protect life. health, /Jro/Jerlv, /Jublic /Jeace and the general welfare of the public and the adjacent properties. For purpose of this regulation, a commercial ~ buildina which contains fifty thousand (50,000) square feet of floor area, or more, shall be declared a large commercial ~ buildina and be subject to these criteria, 25.1.C Application and Development Requirements Every large commercial ~ buildina must comply with the requirements of this Section. All site plan reviews required by the Colleyville Land Development Code or applications for a rezoning request for a Planned Unit Development - Commercial for a large commercial ~ buildina shall include all the information outlined as follows. a. Site Plan - A site plan, drawn to scale, showing the property boundary, all proposed buildings, water features, creek channels, the 1 DO-year flood plain, 81ltts8sr BtsrElge ElFlS outdoor display areas, proposed driveways, parking lots, landscaped areas, loading and delivery docks, refuse and recycling facilities and other physical features which may influence the development of the site. b. Elevation Drawings - Building elevation drawings, drawn to scale, indicating the type and percentage of each exterior building wall material. e. OblteBsr Vg.Rt.;Rg f. ligRtiRg ~lfjlXl tRat esm~lies witf:1 tf:1e reEifWiremeFltB sf tRis paragral'R. b.igRt I'eleB sitwates i::itf:1iFl Jgg feet ef reBisEmtial ~r8~eFty BRallR8t eKsees tv/eRty (2Q) feet iR f:1eigf:1t. Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 5 The ordinance establishes minimum site criteria regarding parking lot lighting, parking lot landscaping, landscaping buffers along public rights-of-way and where the development is adjacent to residential property, as well as establishing criteria for the exterior appearance of the building. The City of Colleyville adopted building design criteria in 1996 and the attached ordinance enhances those requirements by specifying brick or stone as the only acceptable exterior surface material. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the proposed ordinance at its September 25th meeting and recommended approval by a vote of 6 -1 (Commissioner Hill voting against). Also, there were several items recommended by the Commission for inclusion in the ordinance. The suggestions included shopping cart storage, security lighting intensity, varying the building set back according to the size of the building, an option for alternative exterior surface materials and a few other small items that have been incorporated into the ordinance. Recommendation Approval Attachments · Ordinance 0-00-1249 · Memo from Bob Whitehead with maps ORDINANCE 0-00-1249 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 2 - DEFINITIONS AND CHAPTER 3 - LAND USE, OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AS AMENDED. BY APPROVING REGULATIONS FOR LARGE COMMERCIAL STORES BUILDINGS; PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION WHEREAS, Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Code authorizes the governing body of a municipality to adopt zoning regulations to regulate the height, number of stories, size and bulk of buildings and other structures; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the unregulated development of large commercial stEnes buildinQs presents unusual land use concerns for the City, tend to have irreversible adverse impacts on adjacent neighborhoods, and promotes dangerous congestion in the streets; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Colleyville desires to amend Chapter 2 - Definitions and Chapter 3 - Land Use of the Colleyville Land Development Code, Ordinance 0-00-1214, by approving regulations for large commercial steFes buildinas; and WHEREAS, notice of a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public hearing and forwarded its report and recommendation to the City Council for consideration, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1. THAT Chapter 2 - Definitions, Section 2.5, Definitions, of the Land Development Code is hereby amended to add a definition, such definition to read as follows: Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 4 of 12 i)Q:8Fi8r ligl-1tiRg mwst 88 l><Iigl-1 IRteRsily Qis81-1arge (1)<110) ligl-1ts sl-1iels88 aRS sir8stes a'l:ay frem aEiija88Rt f!JrefiJeRies aRS sI-1all fJr8SW8e liSl-1t Re greater tl-1aR eRe fest 8aRsle at tRe f!Jref!J8rty liRe, 8)(8efJt at sri\'8y:ay eRtFSR88S 1.':I-1isl-1 81-1all 88 lififRteel aS8~wately te fJre\'iBe fer safe a898SS te tl-18 fJF8f!JeRy. 'NeeseR liSRt f!Jeles sRall 8e fiJreRi8ites as aR iIIwmiRatieR staRsarB. Se8wFity ligRtiRS at tl-1e rear aRB sises ef tl-1e I3wilsiRg sI-1all 88 BesiSRes te fiJreveRt s9je8tieRa8le slare sRts aRY f8siBeRtial f!JrefiJeRY. 25.1.D Development Requirements a. Building Height, Set Back Requirements and Maximum Lot Coverage - The maximum building height, minimum front, side and rear building set back lines, and maximum lot coverage shall be in accordance with the following schedule: Minimum Building Set Back Max. Max. S. F. of Primary Building Requirements Building Lot Front Side Rear Height Coverage 50,000 - ~ 74.999 ~ 100ft. 100 ft, ~ 100ft. 35 ft. 40% 75 000 - 99 999 4.QQ 125 ft, 125 ft, 4.QQ 125 ft. 35 ft, 40% 100,000 14Q,QQQ124.999 .+QQ.150 ft. 125 ft, ~125ft. 35 ft, 40% 125 000 - 149 999 ~ 175ft. 150 ft, ~ 150 ft. 35 ft, 40% 150,000 1QQ,QQQ174999 ~ 200 ft. 150 ft, ~ 150ft. 35 ft, 40% 175000-199999 4iQ 225 ft. 175 ft, 4iQ 175 ft. 35 ft. 40% 200,000 & laroer 4iQ 250 ft. 175 ft. 4iQ 175 ft, 35 ft. 40% 8. F-.<r-eFlt Ff1f1Bfis i.eR~tk Fer eV8!)' 8Re RWRBres (1 QQ) feet sf 8wilsiRg elevati8R 8f tl-1e fFeRt ta8age, as Vi8'NeS trem tRe fJw81ie street at tRe 8eRter sf tRe let, tReFe sRall 8e at least eRe wall f!JlaRe fiJr9jeetieR er re8eS8 sf at least fift8eR (1 Ii) fe8t. Saig reeess er f!Jr9jeetieR sRall eHteReJ a miRimwm sf tuveRty ~':e (28) feet. . b. Facade Articulation - All lar.Qe commercial buildinas shall have front facades which comlJlv with the followinQ reQuirements: i. Horizontal Articulation - No front buildina facade shall extend "reater than three (3) times the heiaht of the wall's heiQht without havina a minimum off-set of fifteen (15%) lJercent of the wall's height. and such off-set shall continue for a minimum distance eQual to at least twenty-five (25%) of the maximum lenath of either adiacent IJlane. Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 5 of 12 ii. Vertical Articulation - No front horizontal wall shall extend for a distance areater than three (3) times the heiaht of the wall unless the horizontal wall contains at least one of the followina features and every front buildina facade shall have no less than two of the followina features: (a) ParaIJets which chanae the roof line. The IJaraIJet heiaht shall be a minimum of fifteen (15%) IJercent of the wall's heiQht, and such heiaht chanae shall continue for a minimum distance eQual to at least twenty-five (25%) IJercent of the maximum lenath of either adiacent IJlane. (b) Overhanaina eaves. extendina no less than three (3) feet IJast the sUIJIJortina walls. (c) SlolJinQ roofs that do not exceed the averaQe heiQht of the sUIJIJortinQ walls, with an averaQe sloIJe Qreater than or eQual to one (1) foot of vertical rise for every three (3) feet of horizontal run and less than or eQual to one (1) foot of vertical rise for every one (1) foot of horizontal run. (d) Three or more roof sloIJe IJlanes. (e) A covered walkway alonQ a minimum of fifty (50%) IJercent of the front facade lenQth, c. Side Facade Features - Side building facades, which face a IJublic street, shall include a minimum of three architectural changes, such as (1) a changing plane not less than five (5) feet in width and twelve (12) inches in depth, (2) a surface material change of not more than thirty (30) feet in length, as measured horizontally, or (3) a combination of these elements. S. ibJi.~iRg 9ssigR Tl:le site r;IBR BRS 8..ilsiR~ elevatieR r;laRs sl:lall G8mr;ly ',:it!;! tl:le reEtwiremeFlls ef C!;!BfJter 8 awilsiRS QesiSR ef tl:l8 Cslleyville LaRS QS\'SlersmsRt Cese, e)(8erst w!;!ers mesifies ~y t!;!e r:e"wiremeRts iR tl:lis SleetieR. Tl:le miRimwm e..ilsiFl~ sssi~F1 se8re sl:l911 8e Jg fi)8iFltS. d. EXIJosed Columns - EXIJosed structural SUIJIJort columns shall be constructed of. or clad in, the same masonry material as the IJrinciIJal structure. Architecturally sianificant columns (e.Q. fluted, etc.) may be IJermitted. Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 6 of 12 e. Exterior Surface Materials - A minimum of seventy-five (75%) percent of each exterior wall, excluding door and window openings, shall be constructed of clay-fired brick, native stone, cast stone, or a combination of these materials. Tilt - up concrete construction is permitted, provided the exterior surface is covered with clay-fired brick, native stone, cast stone, or a combination of these materials. Stucco and EIFS (Exterior Installation Finished System) are permitted for not more than twenty-five (25%) percent of the exterior surface, Proposals for surface materials which produces textured-natural exterior surfaces may be considered as an alternative. f. Exterior Surface Colors - The exterior surfaces shall be of a natural finish or painted, provided the colors are low reflectance, subtle, natural, earth tone or neutral colors such as sff wl:lite, beige. tan, brown or gray. Trim and accent areas may feature brighter colors, including primary colors, provided not more than ~\'eRty (29%) ten (10%) percent of the wall surface area, excluding door and window openings, may be painted with a company logo color. High intensity or fluorescent colors are prohibited. S, CbJsteme.r ~Rt~aRges ,111.11 siaes sf a la~e sSF,u:t~erElial stefe tl:lat aiFeetly faEle aR a91!i1ttiRS pl!il91ie street sl:lall featwFe at least eRe Ell!iIste~8r eRtraRse. 'PJl:lere a la~e ae~~erElial stere ta8es ~sre tRaR tIl:e a91!i1ttiRS pl!il91ia streets, tl:lis re~laIire~eRt sRall sRI~' appl~' te h'le siasl; ef tRe 91a1i1aiRg. Rg, General Landscaping Requirement - The landscaping of the development shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 4 - Landscaping and Buffering of the Land Development Code, except where modified by the requirements of this Section. All ground surfaces not used for buildings, sidewalks, roadways or other impermeable surfaces shall be covered with live grass, turf, shrubbery, trees, ground cover, flowering plants or appropriate mulching. In order to insure for a variety of plant materials the following minimum requirements for grass, shrubs, and trees shall be provided: I. Minimum Landscaping Coverage: Not less than twenty percent (20%) of the total land area of the development shall be, landscaped. At least fifty percent (50%) of the total landscaped area shall be located in the street yard(s). ~Je 8fesits fer Fesl!iIBiRS tl:le Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 7 of 12 The overall minimum percentage of required landscaping &RaU 88 allev:88 may not be reduced bv the a/J/J/ication of /andsca/JinQ enhancement credits. II. Trees: Landscaping shall include the retention or planting of one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree per each forty (40) feet of street frontage. These trees to be planted within the landscaped buffer adjacent to each street frontage. th. Landscape Buffer and Screening Wall Adjacent to Residential Property - Along the entire length of the common property line adjacent to residential property there shall be a landscape buffer, a minimum of twenty (20) feet in width, provided along the entire length of any property line adjacent to any residential property, The landscaped buffer shall contain lawn grass or ground cover and be maintained as a permanent landscaped area. There shall be no buildings, parking areas, driveways, sidewalks or structures contained within the required buffer, The landscaping buffer shall include the retention or planting of one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree per each forty (40) feet of common property line with an adjacent residential property, In addition to the landscape buffer, there shall be a solid screening wall constructed of clay-fired brick, native stone, cast stone, or a combination of these materials, not less than eight (8) feet in height nor more than ten (10) feet in height. Said screening wall shall be constructed generally ~arellel tB eFtS tWBRty (2Q) fe8t ffBFR a/onQ the common property line with the residential property, but its terminus shall not encroach nearer than twenty-five (25') to a street riQht-of-wav. fl. Landscape Buffer and Screening Adjacent to Public Streets - There shall be a minimum twenty (20) foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to all street rights-of-way. There shall be no buildings, parking areas, driveways, sidewalks or structures, except permanent signs, contained within the required landscape buffer. A driveway or sidewalk may cross the buffer to provide access to the site. Within the landscaped buffer, there shall be either one or a combination of the following landscaping features: I. Earthen Berms: A minimum of thirty (30) inches in height with a maximum side slope of three feet to one foot of rise. The berm shall be entirely vegetated with lawn grass or groundcover. Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 8 of 12 II. Shrubs: A row of shrubs consisting of individual shrubs planted not less than twenty-four (24) inches on center which will form a solid continuous visual screen of not less than thirty (30) inches in height within a two year period after planting. Shrubs shall be maintained so as to not exceed six (6) feet in height. The shrub row shall be located along the portion of the landscaped buffer that is the furthest from the street right-of- way. iii. Low A9reeRjfl~ Solid Wall: A solid eeH~8FliFl~ wall constructed of clay-fired brick, native stone, cast stone, or a combination of these materials, not less than thirty (30) inches in height. Said eer88FliFl8 wall shall be constructed generally parallel to and twenty (20) feet from the street right-of-way k,i. Parking Lot Landscaping - Parking areas shall contain a minimum of one (1) landscaped island per sixteen (16) parking spaces. No landscaped island shall be less than three-hundred (300) square feet. Every landscaped island shall include one (1) three-inch (3") caliper shade tree with the remaining area covered with grass, shrubs or ground cover. Landscaped planting areas shall be located so that no parking space shall be more than seventy-five (75) feet from the trunk of a shade tree, Existing trees located within rights-of-way, but outside medians, may be used to meet the distribution requirements of this paragraph, Where a landscaped island is adjacent to a landscaped buffer, the parking spaces adjacent to the landscaped island shall be paved with a pervious material pave-stone, The parking lot landscaping requirements contained in the paragraph shall not be applicable to the interior parking spaces of a parking garage, tk. Irrigation - All landscaped areas shall be irrigated in accordance with the requirement of Chapter 4 of the Land Development Code, m!. Curbing of Landscaped Areas - All landscaped islands and landscaped areas shall be protected from vehicular encroachment by concrete curbs 9r I/:A991 8t8~e a minimum of six (6) inches in height. Rm.Permanent Ground Signs - The development shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 7 - Sign Regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code, except that only one monument sign per street frontage shall be allowed, Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 9 of 12 The maximum height of the monument sign structure shall be eight (8) feet. The maximum area of the monument sign structure shall be one-hundred (100) square feet. _ Only external illumination shall be allowed. Each side of the monument sign structure shall contain an architectural feature of clay-fired brick, native stone, cast stone or a combination of these materials. The architectural feature shall be equivalent to fifteen (15%) percent of the total area of the sign structure, en.Attached Building Signs - The development shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 7 - Sign Regulations of the Colleyville Land Development Code, except that the total square footage of all wall signs shall not exceed ten (10%) percent of the wall face, ~.2. Tree Preservation - The development shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 5 - Tree Preservation of the Colleyville Land Development Code. q~. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements - The development shall comply with the requirements of Section 3.29 - Off-Street Parking Requirements of the Colleyville Land Development Code. The minimum number of parking spaces shall be one (1) space per two-hundred and fifty (250) square feet of gross floor area. fg. Delivery / Loading Spaces - N~ delivery or loading space shall be located within one-hundred (100) feet of a residential property. All delivery and loading spaces shall be screened from public view from a street right-of-way or an adjacent residential property by a an M'sl\'B (12) eiQht (8) foot tall solid screeninQ wall constructed of like material to the building. Additional tJlantinQ materials shall be tJrovided so that no more than two-thirds of the surface area of the solid screenina wall is visible from the street or residential DroDertv. The live Dlant screenina shall consist of shrubs. a minimum of three (3) feet in heiaht when tJlanted. and which can be extJected to reach six (6) feet or Qreater in heiQht within three (3) years of tJlantinQ. Shrubs shall be stJaced so that there shall be no QatJ Qreater than four (4) feet between tJlant materials. iais '/:all sRall 9GFFlJily witR tRB Ial;dilliiiFl~ sBt8a81~ liFlBs BstalilisRBs fer tRG 28FliFl~ Elistriet. No delivery or loading area shall be operated between the hours of 11 :00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 10 of 12 fiI[. Outdoor Display Areas - Outside display of merchandise shall be allowed, provided that it shall be limited to an area within eight (8) feet of the front wall of the primary building and further provided that emergency pedestrian access to the building is not blocked. No merchandise shall be displayed between the hours of 11 :00 p. m. and 6:00 a. m. For purpose of this regulation, the front wall shall be the front containment wall of the structure and not the front of an overhanging walkway cover. t!. Outside Storage and Sales Areas - Ne There shall be no outside storage Qf:9Q or outside sales areas of landscaIJinQ materials. IJlants or Qeneral merchandise. exceIJt for an outside disIJlav area. as IJrovided in the above IJaraaraIJh. 8Rall Be le8atei ':/itRiFl eRe RWFlsres (1 gg) feet ef a re8iseRtial fjFefjeRy. g",t8ise 8tera~e aRs 8ale8 areas 8Rall Be allev:es BeyeRs eiSRt (2) feet fr9~ tRe freRt wall ef tRe fjFi~ar;y BwilsiFl~ fjFevises tRat it 8Rall Be Ii~ites te 1 Q% ef tRe ~Fe88 Jleer aFea ef tRe BwilsiR~, BWt Fie laFser tl:laR 1 g, ggg 8~waFe feet. Tl:le ewtseer 8tera~e aRS 8ale8 area 81:16111 8e S&FeeReS fre~ 'Jie':/ fr8~ aEljaeeRt resilileRtial fiir8fiier;ty er fF8~ view fre~ a fjwBlie street BY aR ei~Rt (2) feet tall selia FRaS8RPj 8GrBeRiFl~ ':Jall 88F1strw8telil 8f like FRaterial t8 tRB BwilsiFl~. t~ReR fa8iRS a fiiWBli& risl:lt 8f'l:ay er FBsiseRtial ~r8fjBr;ty, tl:le s&reeRiRS '!Jail 81:1all e8FR~ly 'f:itl:l tRe BwilsiFl~ set8ael\ liRe8 Bsta81isRes fer tl:lB z9RiRS ai8triet. For IJurIJose of this regulation. nothina shall IJrohibit the sale or disIJlav of landscaIJing materials. IJlants or Qeneral merchandise located behind an enclosed solid screening wall constructed of like materials to the building. IJrovided merchandise is not visible above the tOIJ of the screening wall. w1- Refuse Collection - No refuse collection shall occur within 100 feet of residential property. All refuse containers, including recycling containers, and trash compactors shall be screened from view from a public street and from adjacent residential properties by an enclosure constructed on three sides with an eight (8) foot high solid masonry screening wall constructed of like material to the building. When a refuse container, trash compactor or recycling container is situated adjacent to a residential property, the screening wall enclosure shall comply with the building setback lines established for the zoning district. "!!,. Screening of Mechanical Equipment - Roof or ground-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened to mitigate noise and views in all directions from adjacent property. If roof mounted, the screening material shall be designed to conform architecturally with Sec4. Sec 5. Sec 6. Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 11 of 12 the design of the building. Ground-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened by a solid masonry screening wall constructed of like material to the building and be of sufficient height to block the view and noise of the equipment from adjacent property. w~. Cart Storage - All shopping cart storage areas shall be contained within the primary building. Temporary shopping cart parking within parking areas shall be allowed, provided carts are removed to within the primary building on a frequent basis. w. Outdoor Liahtina - Liaht 1J0/es situated within 300 feet of residentiallJrolJertv shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in heiaht. Exterior liahtina must be Hiah Intensity Dischar.Qe (HID) liahts shielded and directed away from adiacent IJrolJerlies and shall IJroduce liaht no areater than one foot candle at the IJrolJertv line. excelJt at driveway entrances which shall be liahted adeQuatelv to IJrovide for safe access to the IJrolJertv. Wooden liaht 1J0/es shall be IJrohibited as an illumination standard. Security liahtina at the rear and sides of the buildina shall be desianed to IJrevent obiectionable alare onto any residential IJrolJertv. THAT Ordinance 0-00-1214, the Land Development Code, as amended, shall remain in effect, except where amended by this ordinance, THAT it is hereby declared to be the intention of the City Council that the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and sections of this ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional by the valid judgement or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs and sections of this ordinance, since the same would have been enacted by the City Council without the incorporation in this ordinance of any such unconstitutional phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section. THAT any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each and every day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such, Ordinance 0-00-1249 Page 12 of 12 Sec 7. THAT the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by I~w. AND IT IS SO ORDERED, The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000. day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000, day of ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Jean Harris, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney Memorandum Date: Bob Stripling, City Manager _/1~ Bob Whitehead, Director of Public Servi~ ' October 12, 2000 To: From: Subject: GIS analysis of the set backs of the "Big Box" ordinance I asked our Geographic Information System (GIS) analyst from Southlake to do a study to show the impact on commercial property of the following set backs from residential property: . 80 foot minimum for the smaller size building i.e. 50,000 sqJt to 75,000 sq.ft. . 175 foot maximum for the larger size building . 500 foot buffer and, . 1,000 foot buffer The base document used was the City of Collewille Future Land Use 2025 map. One correction was made to this map as the Office use north of Glade Road and 'Nest of Blue Bonnet Drive has recently been zoned as residential, the analysis shows that property as residential. The attached maps show the Land Use 2025 map as a comparison to the above four buffers. .~ CITY COUNCIL 70.0. AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 7 Ordinance # : 0-00-1250 Previous Action: 10/03/00 DEPT. : ENGINEERING SUBJECT: Approval of City/Developer Agreement with Gottfredson land Development I, L.L.C, for Tanglewood Addition Second Reading and Public Hearing First Reading and Public Hearing Backaround The plat of the Tanglewood Addition will soon be filed with Tarrant County, Zoning for Tanglewood Addition was granted by Ordinance 0-99-1191 under Versailles Estates, Public improvements associated with this development are currently underway. Staff has reviewed the subject agreement with Gottfredson land Development I, L.L.C. and finds it to be consistent with developmental policies and ordinances. All items in this agreement are standard with the exception of item #6, which states that the City agrees to pay the Developer a sum not to exceed $2,200, for the construction of additional sidewalks along John McCain Road, to conform with the City's Sidewalk and Trail Master Plan. (continued) C~.~ CITY MANAGER ~L D PARTM T HEAD - CIAl REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1250 Page 2 Financial Impact Funding for the additional sidewalks will be available from FY01 Sidewalk Construction Account # 001-33-6388. Recommendation Approval of the City/Developer Agreement with Gottfredson Land Development I, L.L.C, Attachments City/Developer Agreement Site location map (paper copy only) Ordinance 0-99-1191 (paper copy only) Ordinance 0-00-1250 - - -- == -... - - - - --~. '. ::.~'n.~-':" .,,' " .~. '.. '.,.;:" . . ,,' .... ,:~~ -: , :--,...J.!. ~c'~:-;"'li": .'. - .' .0..: " . , ,0" :0. ~~ 'lL"'lr~:. . . , .0 ", .. _yoro- _~_" iJ ' . , -.. . "'. . - 'i!: u, " ~ . .A ~ ~II~':'~'''';- (rii~~..............-" C' ~ ,.---, .4 ~ ~,. ~!i/ '1 / I ::.; (Ll III 'I'. "'-.&' ---: ""1: .: ~ '& \ .Zl..~ ~I.... \i \.~ l ,~ '- ~ ~\. '.~~~ I~,,-.,~' ~~~: ~ \~ ~:.{. ~.-;'. .... : ~"h,...N ~~. "l'x" .. c I. .. Y::-' iN~a1' . . ~J~. ~ ~~~ (.... " · ~ ~i~~.: . . '""~ - _ '~. ~~~", ~'./ ;~ · ,,-J · --.... -...lj ~ - ~... " . ' , I ~ . ~'. .. '1!..~~ .... ~ 1"7' '~ .1 . . i1 H -- "1 / v ~ J · o~o oo~i=l-- % _ . . . .'.I.~~I.I. .I.J.' y ~ -p I ~L~ . - - +1. I ~ . - - - . I' · , .,. · I' \. f · I ~ ~ . · I .- Y)--'"'" ~ 0 I~, , uu ' : -1-1- I ~ f - ~ I . · g ~ " \' ~ · i-'1' - . . · . . ~ - · ~ a. .\ " - r- ; t.'i " · i' -- ~~, ".c: 9 - at. ~ .,.., r-"" \\ W!. " _ \ !-I [ . n ... ! - .\\1, ~~~ ,.. '<'.~ ~i~d ~ . --; & \:. -"\~.~\11>{ k ~~... .!~ 1-. oJ 01' . ~~. . I pI.: .. :11. o. ';I :/-HI:1.hili~i .. 8~! !: J ~ '\.. !-- ~'tp' l ~~~ II - .~. :;. 1'- ~ _ '. ~~~..... : ~ : t',c;i) .~ - ! 1:, \ I, ~ t;.:) - ]r ! ' f~'\. -~l oL' jf=' ; )1 :n ~ ,~~ .;," !J .1"t.~~~ ~. !~/ , i / ~ -l- ~ ~: ': c~ 'p! ~-- ,V )~. " ~ .. u " '- l~""; ~, . . 7.7 :;:1 ~ g. " ~- I'll: \~:(i~:; ~ ~. :,' I ; ~ ) 'r-. ~ . ~ "8 ~\ \.. ~\.~ i ' f# : I : ~~ ~ ,Ill ~ ., ~ _~\~ . __ ~ : "1)... ...... ~l _ '1' III. ._{r ..,..,. ___ .......... ..... v, .' ~ ." .~ "~~\ \ ~~ ~;. '-- ,~I'" · · : · ~~~ '\ .::J :l _w!, '::: I c." - I r~ ~1.":." ~ 0 --.,... -'=i."':.. ..~ ~ ..... ~ -. .0:; . ~.... "'...~= ~ I""" ,....-;" ~ .. "'~~ ~ . ; .... 1:1 .., I 1';, . 01 . ':.~ it _ "m- . -. - ~ ~; 1;-, - . ,\ ~\ \~ I. ". :: .. ;I. t"\"'; ~ .IJ( ~i"!:' ;\11'" I ',\ · '~i. ..,'" _ ~ ~.. \";. . . ~\~ .. I. .\ .~ . :a' \~\ ~ =~ ~~ - !. : . ~ " ~ ,. 1ft 1 ~ _ _ . ~ :i '..~~ _, .. ,@ --- --.="'::1_----- r(!) ~~...- .. ORDINANCE 0-99-1191 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE. TEXAS. BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AND CHANGING THE ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 21.63 ACRES COMPRISING A PORTION OF LOT 17, BLOCK 3, PEBBLE HILL PLANTATION ESTATES, AND ALL OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, BEAR CREEK PLANTATION ADDITION; FROM THE AG AGRICULTURE ! DISTRICT TO THE PUD.R (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ! RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR I VIOLA nONS AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION: I WHEREAS, an application for a zoning change was filed by Mark Gottfredson. Gottfredson Land Development LLC., on September 17. 1999. under Case No. Z-99-071; and I ! WHEREAS, i i ; WHEREAS. /: I: I! WHEREAS, I! I i WHEREAS, WHEREAS, notice of a hearing before tl1e Planning and Zoning Commission was sent to real property owners within 200 feet of the property herein described at least 10 days before such hearing; and notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days before such hearing; and notices were posted on the subject land as provided by the zoning ordinance; and .' public hearings to change the zoning and the Master Plan on the property herein described were held before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. and the Planning and Zoning Commission has heretofore made a recommendation; and, the ~ity Council is of the opinion that the zoning change herem effectuated furthers the purpose of zoning as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Colleyville; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1, THAT. . the Master Plan, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyv.lle. Texas, ~nd the accompanying Zoning Map (Exhibit A) are hereby. amended Insofar as they relate to certain land located in Colle~lIle. Texa~, described by metes and bounds (Exhibit B), by changing the zontng of said property from the AG Agricultural district CITY OF COLLEYVILLE CITY/DEVELOPER AGREEMENT T ANGLEWOOD ADDITION STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TARRANT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Gottfredson Land Development I, L.L.C., hereinafter called "Developer", and the City of Colleyville, Tarrant County, Texas, hereinafter called "City", enter into the following agreement. In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained and for the purpose of developing lots in Tanglewood an Addition to the City of Colleyville, as filed of record in Cabinet , Slide Number of the Plat Records of Tarrant County, Texas, the parties hereto do agree: 1. The Developer will provide a complete service connection at each lot, including tap, service line, and curb stop and tap for sewer, The charge for the right to connect to the system shall be in accordance with the City's current water and sewer tap fees. Fees will be charged and paid at the time building permits are issued, 2, The Developer will contract for street, drainage, water and sewer requirements with reputable contractors. All contract documents shall be prepared under the supervision and bear the seal of the Registered Professional Engineer who shall be licensed in the State of Texas. Before acceptance of the public improvements by the City, the contractor or contractors will furnish a two year maintenance bond or place funds in escrow with the City for two years, such bond or escrow to be in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the construction cost of all public improvements. 3, The Developer agrees to pay all fees associated with development within the City of Colleyville including but not limited to the a 5% plan review and inspection fee, parkland dedication fee and all Project Inspector overtime charges. 4. Developer agrees to reasonably inform builders of the drainage requirements set by the City approved drainage and lot grading plans. Developer is to assist, at no additional cost, in resolving any and all disputes concerning the construction of any retaining walls facilities or other necessary structures regarding lot drainage and compliance with the approved lot grading plan. No deviations from the City approved plans will be accepted, 5, The Developer and City understand that each may only cancel or amend the terms of the agreement (upon mutual agreement of the parties) with specific written authority of the City. 6. City agrees to pay the Developer a sum not to exceed $2,200, for constructing an additional three feet in width, 208 linear feet of sidewalk unto the proposed five- foot sidewalk along John McCain Road. 'This proposed eight-foot sidewalk would conform to the City's Sidewalk and Trail Master Plan, 7. Upon completion of the work, good and sufficient title to all facilities constructed, warranted free of any liens or encumbrances, is hereby vested in the City of Colleyville. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have executed this contract in three (3) counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original on this _ day of ,2000. DEVELOPER CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Mark Gottfredson Gottfredson Land Development I, L.L.C, Donna Arp, Mayor Jean Harris, City Secretary Ordinance 0-99-1191 Page 2 of4 to the PUD-R (Planned Unit Development Residential) district. together with all site plans which are conceptual in natu.re, supporting documents. and other conditions and restrictions Imposed and approved by the Council which are incorporated herein by reference including, but not limited to the conceptual site plan (Exhibit C) and the statement of planning objectives (Exhibit. D); and subject to the following conditions: 1. GENERAL a. The purpose of this PUD-R is for single-family residential development, constructed at an approximate density of 0.45 dwelling units per acre. b. This property is subject to all the regulations contained in the Colleyville Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations. and other land development ordinances, except where amended by this ordinance. . 2. PERMITTED USES Ii a. Single family residences. detached b. Parks and open space 3. LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS a. Minimum Lot Size 30,000 square feet " b. Minimum Lot Width 125 feet c, Minimum Lot Depth 125 feet d. Front Building Line 30 feet e. Side Building Line 15 feet .t. Rear Building Line 25 feet 4. OPEN SPACE a, This development shall provide a minimum of 20% common open space for the leisure and recreational use of the develop~~nt's resid~nts. . The open space shall comply with the provIsIons contained In the Zoning Ordinance. All open space areas shall be landscaped. 9.':-,- Ordinance 0-99-1191 Page 3 of 4 5. PLATTING a. The developer shall submit a final plat of ~he pro~~. in accordance with Section 2 C of the Colleyvllle. Subdl~I~lon Regulations. The concept~al ~ite plan .a~ched as ExhIbIt C to this ordinance shall constitute the preliminary plan, b. This development may be developed as a gated community with private streets in accordance with Section 15 of the Colleyville Subdivision Regulations. The development shall contain a minimum of twelve (12) residential lots. , 6. OTHER a. Each single family residence shall contain a fire sprinkler system in accordance with applicable fire and building codes. b. The exterior wall surface of each dwelling shall be constructed of brick or stone, except for door and window openings, Roofs shall be constructed of a highly fire resistant material, such as cementeous material or other similar non-combustible material. c. The developer shall build a minimum six foot (6') high brick and mortar (hand laid-common brick) wall constructed from the southwest comer of. Lot 13, Block 1 " Pebble Hills Plantation Estates to a comer that is approximately forty-six feet (46') north of the southwest comer of Lot 6, Block 1, Pebble Hills Plantation Estates, Said wall may provide for a visibility set-back from John McCain Road, if required by the City Engineer. Said wall may be eight feet in height if the adjacent property owners so request. The exact termination point of the wall may be adjusted to accommodate drainage easements. The roadway surface or back-of-curb of Trianon Court shall be no closer than ten (10') feet to the common property line with Pebble Hill Plantation Estates. d. Fire hydrants shall be installed by the developer at such intervals that all building sites shall be within 500 feet of a fire hydrant. e, The secondary access to this development is hereby waived. I I I I I I I I I DESCRIPTION oF PRdftER'rV SUR\ltVEO Oestr'ptklh bf o. 21.~30 "Cr. tro~l .i\uottd Irt lh_ Hall Nl&clin S\.Ir\le~. Ab,trad No: 10~7 dnd lh. H.R. WolI su,~~. ~drdet. No. 1913. c,,~ of Collle)MIle. Tront Cbunty. T.hcos. 'dltt. troel b..nCJ to":"rl.'~ bf p~\ ~f lot '3R, Block ,Ptob1f H'ltt PlOr\totiOt\ E.t~t~S. Gh odd""'" td th' Clt~ ~f Conle~le. Ttwtotlt ebllnt)'. lthcos. QccOl'dw-9 'e. Ih~ Ar'urn~d Pldt t.r=ot'd8d Ir'\ Cobine' B. S..tie '894 o( th" Plot ~et.,,~ or Torrant.CtMlht,Y..T'JCd' Of1d l.l 2. Ilo~ 1. "elr C,ftk plor",ttlori. dn addition t~ thi City of Col~e~I.1 10r'ant Cbt.thty. ,Teoxch cttctM'dinq .to the ~ot r.tof'd~d _ in \'oIum_ j~-tt9"'.Pb9to i6 of Iht! Plelt tteeotds bf tc.rrdrtt county. Telltos; toiG 21.IJd dcr~ trdt\ be'"4 mot. p6rhc\J!orly ~~et'ib~d ds fotlOWS: , IIEOINNINC ot 0 1 d-in~ it'bn rW With .Poct-teed I'o<;n" cob tet tit tttf ~o"~hect~t . ct-m'" of .old Lot 2. 8'ocl; 1. 8w tr4l8 ~Iontation; IO'd pOint be"i4 tttf s6utn.l!st cother of l.dt 1 j. 81bctt 1. P~I" Hill. PICIr1talion [sl~tes. on addition' tD th~ City of CoItetwll'.. 10rtant CQlJnty. T~lC.. actbrdlng ld \ht4 tJld.t retClrdtd Irt tabln.t A. Slid. l4s& of the Plot ~etOrd' of Torront Cbuhty. T.lCd~ said ~O""t bl!tb ~i"9 "" tftt nbt\h right-oi--.oy 'int- or McCoin _MoOd (0" ~-foot wid~ ricJt1\-6'-WOY); TH~NCE. Nort~ 19 d~dre"s. 08 rrlii1u\~. ~t s.contht We~l. deatart1r\CJ the ...1 lihe .,f said Pebbl~ Mill Pldntb'i~ t.ta'es Ond bldnt It,. iO'd hOrth lirl_ of MeOo'n ROdd. d d\st~c' M 208.38 fwt \0 d 1/2-inCt1irtlr'l tbd fbund for ' t"orn...: " tiobj point beincj 'he southeast eorn'- of ...ot 1. tMoc:lc 1. Bear Creek Pldf'\totibh; - l'HENtE. North 00 d~rees. ~6 rr1i"ut~~. 42 .~ortds Eo_t.. denortit\cJ the tdid hott", lil\' ot ~eCain "odd oiad ctton9 the east \in. of said lot 1. b di'tcance Of i016,1i f~~\ \0 d 1/2-inCh iton red _ith "Poehl!~ '.oc"''' Cob ,.t at 01\ onfe p6lnt: ,,,.ts \)oIr\\ ~ein~ the f\OI"thW8!1t cttrn~ of sr.Jid lot 2: liollj pOint b'~ belh4 tht ~tnwes\ C'oi'ner of ~id Lot 13Rt BIOCIl 3. Pt!bb'e ""n5 . J'lotltttJtiOft tatates: " l'HENtE, Hofth 01 dtqt.~. oi minu\e.'.'. t~e~ds to.'. contir1uihg dl~9 the told ~c2t\ 11ft. 01 lot- i. b dittar\ce 0..836.21 feel \0 a ~I~-Iheh iron tod lound d\ oti an41e ~oihtl TH~JNtt Not\h 01 ~C7... H~ mh\utftl. 51 second. to'\, continuincJ 0'0"' 'he ~IO eatt '''''e 01 lot -'. b dittor\ce of 423.59 feet \0 0 ~... inch irc)A pbt found fOf c6r~ttr; ~aia ~dint belhq tht f\or'H~st corher of sClid Lo\ f; ;oid ~ol~H dI.o beih~ th. northwest eorhtr ~f Sbid Lot 1JR; said f)oint also Deir\g In t"~ ~outt1 lin' 01 a trott of 'I)nd ~t'n~1"d to Joe .ight d~ retordt!d in Volume 8007. poqe 10a4 bf th~ O~.tJ p.~~ord~ of'lotto"t Couhty. lelldsi THENCE. SOll'h ts3 de9re~~. ~O "'inul~*. 26 ft,~"d, East, dePorUr\Q i"eo soid t'os\ lin~ of L~l , and d'ohQ .he .oaJth Ithl! of !.o'd "IVht tratt. a tji!lton~ of ~99 3\ llte\ .\0 tJ 1/2-ine'" ..tit! Ylith ..tba~t!eeo K~C~" cop 9~t III on tJnqle p~~t ' THENCE.. Sollth -). ~9re~s, ~8 tnir\~te*. '15 !teeof'\ds Eo!-t. (0"ti"uln9 010n9 th~ LC.IU~h l~n~ df said ~i4ht \roe\. d diS\Dne~ of ~28 83 f~l!t' \0 D point In tl1e nottt'l h"~ ttt "5t)ld LO' ,jp. -Exn'blt B - Metes and Bounds Descrintinn 'J tHENct SIloII~ 01 lIeOree. 15 ",.."IH, 01 _ilndt Wdt. _otling the soulh I'ne of ~6id Wright trdel. a di*lbnte of 269.e9 feet to 0 point f~r corner: tHENCE SIloII~ oidetrM' ~ rni""tes. '9 ~endll Eo~t. G d1",""d 01 119.SO ffet to' G polht ft.t cllw'ne"; tHENCE. 5oIl1~ II ""-"" 02 mlhutd. )6 seeon. "...L 0 d1lt..;te 0' 116.00 I.et to d polht tot ~"e": '. " . \>tEllct..9O lIogt.... 3t "';i....ies. 15 ;eo-. West. 0 ~tdi>ce 0' 107:tl leel Iii 6 po'''' '~or c;omtft: ,. tHENct.' 5& ~e9".el;. 03 rhit,,:'\es. 2tJ tKonds. 0 dl.tdr\'ce of ,i6.sd 'eetl to a ~ol"l for corn..; 'tHENCt. $oLllt, 62 d'-tJrett*. 28 mh-.&lttt'- ot; S41~on.' *..t. d dlt;tance df 111.11 feet \0 a poInt f. eOrn.r; tt'tENct. So",l.., 7. dlitJree,. S9 rn'hLlt~'a, ~ .coneSs "t. CI dt'tanee df 111.58 t..et to d pO(hl fOt c6rne~; tHENCE. 5OIl1i. 36 degret!$. 12 minllt... 12 seton. ~. 0 disltlnCe of 1011.65 feet t~ 0 po ht for cor,..er; I" tHENCt, Sc\Jlh .., rnihut.!~. 31 ,,,It,,Jt8.29 sfconds "'est. a dlstante ~f "'.",0 4eet to d p\)lnl fOt corn."; tHENet. SO'" It'l 23 d.;tJreeL. 08 rntr".t"ta. 33 sttcond, ''!It. d dtS\OI)c.e of 112.70 feet to 0 po[".l fOt cwn.t;" 1HEHCt. 90Llln 22 df.,ee~. ., ",lh"'t~~. 0' s~ond W_t. d distohce of 88.10 fftt to 0 pO\ht for cornet; ., .. ... 1'HEWer. St:>>u\., 12 de.r~e'. 11 m"'\I\e~ 5,4 seeondS W.\. ,0 dl.tdnce (Sf 28.5~ f,eel \0 0 point tor COrnet'; said POint beih9 ih tht nm-th lihe of sbid Lot 2. *aid pbiri\ 0\10 btinq i~ thf soutt\ I'nt of said lot 1 JR; , l,HENCt.. So\Jb, a. de","s. 1 j ntiftutes. 32 '5eeond~' Et.l. OlonO \ht! north "n~ of !did Lot 2 CIn~ thl south lin~ bf ..~ lo'. '3R, 0 .t'Cll1~ 6f 2'.1:! feet \0 o pdln\ 'or s:t1rn!'t: soid poi'" be\nq ''''~ nortkea.' c~ ot soid Lot 2.; , tHEHCt. sc-",\n 00 dttt)n!t!~. 56 rn''''U.... ~2 setonds ~It, olong \h~ edst l\ne of sold Lt,t 2: dt d dls\~ncl! ~f 41 2~ fe~\ pa~sh19 the ,b\J'''ernrr\~t eorner df ~o\d Lot 1 ~p and beinq ~ tn~ we.l line 0' ~ebble HU.- Plonta\\on ES\d'es' ~or.'\t".inCJ oU>n') the ttdst line ~f said Lot. 2 ond the ...est line of Pebble . ~~~:':;:~~\Ion ESlbte.. in 011 0 dlil""ce o.!, 1016.40 fftt to t~e pOllIT Of CONtA'NlNG 942.\9' sQuore fee\ Or 2\.630 ottes of land. m~t! Or less I=vhihit R _ Moto~ !:IIn'" R",,,nrtct "'~e-r-..i",.i,.,," " Ordinance 0-99-1191 Page 4 of4 ... ) f. The entry into this subdivision shall be a dual entryway and be designed similar to that shown on Exhibit E. g. The street pavement section for the development shall be ~ minimum of forty feet (40') in width. The street pavement shall maintain the minimum width throughout the entire length of the cui de sac beyond the dual entryway shown in Exhibit E. Sec. 2. THAT, any person, finn or corporation violating. any of the provisions of this ordinance as read together with the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each and every day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such. . Sec. 3. THAT I the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by law. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the 1 -Ii day of D, f.,trnb.t..r , 1999. . . ' The se~d reading and public hearing being conducted on the 2/ sf day of _L2I.J'_'A712.1 r ,2000. TABLED BY COUNC I L AT SECOND READ I Nr:. BY COUNCIL ON 1/18/00. APPROVED .;J~ CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: J n Harris, CMC City Secretary Dt~~ Mayor flVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross l te, City Attorney ~ b~ ! i hV -- ~ .... \ ~---- ~. J I ...,.-... ~- . \ .0.011 Gol1 'fJ~~;S-' · # ..,.. I N9 . -. , _.~, , ;'" r-A ," /Fc - , 'J- \ .. . "". :\ L_ )c - TJaI~OJl ., -. . ~ , - M "'R> PlJD-v:. ...:. - - 1/ I .'"1 J ~'"Y ,,- ~;z ~R~. ..:y~ 1/ f-~{-""0~~ ~ ,..i: 0.. ,",c r:J ~ . ~ t.;...l LJ::......y' &'. tv:."": 'to · · .~-. ~.:.- 'Ill' -. , . ~ _~,A< ~,:.. ~ ~.~~ '. ~I .:1:1 - Iiiiii I -H. . . l~ oll .J)~ 'fJ:~OUr:1 - ;w t..J~ I ... , l", :4t ~. 1'. . .If II( if I 1111n " 1;;1'-. f i. .'. b. 5 ~!J; i! i Ii ..;.0111 ; ~-il~ .... -It"fill ! , 11-; J. I il~i.': a " ~I! I Jills;: I ..w ...' i :fji:az ; I~i=r . !!:tr .. i II ..~ ~ . 21 I; i'l Oil-it I'. P- tll I 1 ! II' 11'I'tl l-t. 61t \flH Of',' I'll liE~~ a r I ~ .. i! ti zl .::I < .,1 ,,~ ~ ... slila: ~...~ ;; I A_OC ... .. I r- z.- ' i ""-_Z "~. ~ 1"9'1 5~ ~ ~. h'LJ)..... ~ ~1:~51 ....... . l:I5~~::;: 1'; ~~&Xl-;~ ~ 5- :. ~ ~ - e _ ~ ~ .~ .1 I .. . BlIiI 'I !l.E.iIH!If I' II -ii'ii!iI i ;.:Ii It i! 5\;1 I J ~g,,5! I.- 10'1; a :5. , ~ It: ~m..Jt~~ jail p'; 1.1. ;~. " '\ II emIiiI~9!9'95!I'ilS~3 tti~ !!L m. iJ. iJ.. iJ- iJ. if. iJ: · ~ if. ic. ~ i rili:' Jia ~... 1& ~ ~ ~ ,a ~ If ,~ ,a i:" I :r~~~~Il~~~~~~ c .~~~ ; iir.t,m t t ~I tt!! tin ! fii!i lm i i i i i i ~ Iii I · !~~!t; ~ ~ ! ~ ! ! ~ ! j ! ~ ~J l i~:~~!r!!!nH~Jl .t~, I , ~ :. l ; ; ~ I .. . ~ .. a Ie: . & . General Brick Wall Location Exhibit C - Conceptual Site Plan T. H. PRlTCHErr / Associates ~ Art:I*t:bnI .DI )1fI MIl SlIt PaW" .71UNl. r~ on. F_.... T__~ ~~~"'.~f23D ......... 17. 1881 City 01 Ccl~-"" A8: VWII".I &:1 " , TmcI an Jahn ~... oIP** .. Pt........ STATEMENT' OF PLWNNJ OBJECTIVES n.--inD _ ""' *11.. .......121a1a far...... ..lia..... ....... . All' ~.... PUD" 1he1alll" be.... .._-.-It-="..... _.. p.~""~ ~...ao...... 1heCll*l..... be............" . - bra ~ AI. ~ :.."Dft. 1he dIII..I~" ...........,... be..~ ~ ."r, A(~ -10" c-.......__ wiI be JIIvwid8d 10" ~.. N11"ltwD -... cI8ed AI L~_ DE'JELOPIENT SCI..rouLE the ...._ ""DtIrMm. .....1Ied 10 ~...-uctiIIII wItin 6 mal'" 01 za-IO chII.... 1he.........1aI *.I'llt4._ .. be __~ 1 . f _....... cI CDI8trucIian.... 12- 161_._ T... prallrMlian. ~Il far..,:njId....... gnIIIII.....be ~ D __... mIIf~"" ...MIID.. 01..,__ an'" __I" ~. STATEIENT OF PROPOSED 0WtERSHIP The devwICl~II" be -*i lID ~ far.... f8miIy canIIructian JIUI1'C.I I STAl'EIENT OF UTUIES 10 BE PROVIDED. The ."1.;'. ... d88ign 01.. aDI..... wiI ~far" ..... ........ sam drIIinIIoe- AI the City uIiIitiea .. "'''I'JbIe wIIh in c:k.-IM~._" CC. t.Wk GuIIf.~ SEP 1 "7 1999 ctTY OF COLLEYVllLE BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . '--." Exhibit 0 - Statement of Planning Objectives %I! II i:' - 148.40' - - .-ME : : , - , I ..;u, I ,~~\ I lPg' r- I ~o \ S I, -q \ , ,- , , I ..~\ ~ . U \ ~ .....hJ ~ ~ \ . o ~ (:) \ rl \~ : i \ \ 'w, \ \ I ~ I 40' ,IILDING UNE -)1 , " 191. PG.~' . I , · I ..3B.:.. -- 208.38. - "" "" - - .... ::0- o~ O. ."z " I McCAIN RbADi (80' R.O. W.) · a: -- -- -- ! N <:J: o ~> Z.z - ......en 20 " U'I en '''' s>> ~ :;0 -u ~ I 5=l ...., _C-. I'" 0)::0 o .. - w at N ~ ~@~~:Ji~~ ~ 1:!~1:~1~8r5 )> i@~i;a"'''''3I z _Jet lita21& .~ IntI - rTJ 60 ...~...~~8 Z :-4.: il88~i;:j za ;;j~""za~--t 0_ IIIf1t3l0CII ::0 ~~ III ~ o~ z - ~ ci3!",-< fltZ ifi fit,.!!" iI 0 @c::oz R g ia~Qd-o ;: i! ~fIt!iitJ r p ~ ~~I:i)> :IE : ~!=:~~ Z Z,.>--c Itl>-Z ~~ a Exhibit "E" - Typical Entryway ORDINANCE 0-00-1250 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE DEVELOPER PARTICIPATION IN CONTRAC I FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN GOTTFREDSON LAND DEVELOPMENT I, L.L.C. AND THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS FOR TANGLEWOOD ADDITION WHEREAS, Gottfredson Land Development I, L.L.C. (Developer) shall construct public improvements and the City of Colleyville, Texas shall participate in the cost as determined by municipal ordinance under Subchapter C. Developers Participation in Contract for Public Improvements, Local Government Code, State of Texas; and WHEREAS, The City of Colleyville and Developer hereby entered into a City- Developer Agreement/Contract for the Tanglewood Addition, which specifies certain construction costs that the City has agreed to participate in with the Developer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec,1. Sec. 2. Sec, 3. Sec. 4. Sec. 5. THAT the Developer shall construct the improvements and the City shall participate in their cost. THAT the City's total cost participation ($2,200) does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the total contract price. THAT the Developer must execute a performance bond for the construction of the improvements to ensure completion of the project, said bond must be executed by a corporate surety in accordance with Chapter 2253, Government Code. THAT the City shall be reimbursed by the Developer the total cost participation by the City if City finds there was any undue loading of cost, collusion, or fraud. THAT all of the Developer's books and other records related to the project shall be available for inspection by the City. Ordinance 0-00-1250 Page 2 of 2 AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000. day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000, day of ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Jean Harris, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney CiI}. "! ~~ CITY COUNCIL ~mS AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 8 Ordinance # : 0-00-1251 Previous Action: 10/03/00 DEPT. : ENGINEERING SUBJECT: Approval to amend Ordinance 0-00-1234 which approved a contract between the City of Colleyville and the Village at Colleyville for public improvements. Second Reading and Public Hearing First Reading and Public Hearing Backoround Colleyville has entered into a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Agreement and Council approved Ordinance 0-00-1234, a contract between the City of Colleyville and the Village at Colleyville for public improvements on September 5, 2000, This amendment would allow for the replacement of the existing 6-inch water line along Pleasant Run Road with approximately 225 feet of 12-inch water line. The Water Master Plan calls for a 12-inch main along Pleasant Run Road. This portion of the water main was overlooked on the original review of the plans and needs to be constructed to enhance the system. Also, this would improve circulation in the system for the area by connecting the new 10-inch water line along Colleyville Blvd into the new 12-inch main along Pleasant Run Road. (continued) l~ ~6:k~~ CITY MANAGER r:li:;.tJ ~ ~-L ; PARTMENT HEAD CIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1251 Page 2 Financial Impact The Local Government Code, Subchapter C., paragraph 212.072 requires: (a) Under the contract, the developer shall construct the improvements and the municipality shall participate in their cost. (b) The contract must establish the limit of participation by the municipality at a level not to exceed 30 percent of the total contract price. In addition, the contract may also allow participation by the municipality at a level not to 'exceed 100 percent of the total cost for any oversizing of improvements required by the municipality, including but not limited to increased capacity of improvements to anticipate other future development in the area. The developer, Village Monticello Partners, Ltd. Village Management, LLC, will construct all of the improvements. The total cost of their contract for the improvements is $3,228,129.69, Therefore, the 30 percent maximum participation by the City is $968,438.90. 1. City agrees to pay Developer to construct 225 feet of 12-inch water line. The cost to the City is $16,225. This amount will be funded out of the water and sewer impact fees. The total cost to the City in the Developer Agreement is $279,944.50 with this amended agreement, which is 11.5% of the total contract cost. Recommendation Approval of Ordinance 0-00-1251. Attachments Ordinance 0-00-1234 Ordinance 0-00-1251 ORDINANCE 0-00-1234 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE DEVELOPER PARTICIPATION IN CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN VILLAGE MONTICELLO PARTNERS, LTD., VILLAGE MANAGEMENT, LLC. AND THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS WHEREAS, Village Monticello Partners, Ltd" Village Management, LLC, (Developer) shall construct public improvements and the City of Colleyville, Texas shall participate in the cost as determined by municipal ordinance under Subchapter C. Developers Participation in Contract for Public Improvements, Local Government Code, State of Texas; and WHEREAS, The City of Colleyville and Developer have entered into a City-Developer Agreement for The Village at Colleyville, which specifies certain construction costs that the City has agreed to participate in with the Developer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec, 1, Sec. 2. Sec. 3. Sec. 4, Sec. 5, Sec. 6. THAT the Developer shall construct the improvements and the City shall participate in their cost. THAT the City's total cost participation ($263,719.50) does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the total contract price. THAT the City's participation in the oversizing of public improvements required by the City does not exceed one hundred percent (100%) of the total costs of the oversizing so required, THAT the Developer must execute a performance bond for the construction of the improvements to ensure completion of the project, said bond must be executed by a corporate surety in accordance with Chapter 2253, Government Code. THAT the City shall be reimbursed by the Developer the total cost participation by the City if City finds there was any undue loading of cost, collusion, or fraud. THAT all of the Developer's books and other records related to the project shall be available for inspection by the City. Ordinance 0-00- 12 4 Page ;- AND IT IS SO ORDERED. ~~~;mng and public hearing being conducted on the IS~ day f ,2000. The s~con: reading and public hearing being conducted on the ~fl, day f ,~D .,AI if ,2000. , ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE JJ~ .~c~ Donna Arp Mayor J n Harris, CMC City Seaetary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: ORDINANCE 0-00-1251 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPER PARTICIPATION IN CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN VILLAGE MONTICELLO PARTNERS, LTD., VILLAGE MANAGEMENT, LLC. AND THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS WHEREAS, Village Monticello Partners, Ltd., Village Management, LLC, (Developer) shall construct public improvements and the City of Colleyville, Texas shall participate in the cost as determined by municipal ordinance under Subchapter C. Developers Participation in Contract for Public Improvements, Local Government Code, State of Texas; and WHEREAS, The City of Colleyville and Developer have entered into a City-Developer Agreement for The Village at Colleyville, which specifies certain construction costs that the City has agreed to participate in with the Developer; and WHEREAS, The addition of the 12-inch water main was determined to be necessary to comply with the Water Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: See, 1. THAT Section 2 of Ordinance 0-00-1234 is amended as follows: City's total cost participation of $279,944.50, which does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the total contract price. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000, day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000. day of ATTEST: Jean Harris, CMC City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney Ordinance 0-00-125'1 Page 2 of CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Donna Arp Mayor cc@n~ CITY COUNCIL Tm$ AGENDA BRIEFING For mta. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 9 Ordinance # : 0-00-1252 Previous Action: 10/03/00 DEPT. : FINANCE SUBJECT: Approving the Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Budget for the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation Second Reading and Public Hearing First Reading and Public Hearing Backqround Per the by-laws of the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation (CEDC), the Board of Directors of the Corporation must adopt a budget of proposed revenues and expenditures. This budget must also be approved and adopted by the City Council. On September 26, 2000, the CEDC Board adopted the Fiscal Year 2001 budget proposed in Ordinance 0-00-1252. This budget contains FY 2001 expenditures in the Economic Development Capital Improvement Program FY 2001 - FY 2005 adopted by the Board. Attached is the Board approved budget with estimated revenues and expenditures for Fiscal Year 2001 (Exhibits 1A - 1C). The revenue estimate is 1/2 of the sales tax revenue estimate in the City's approved FY 2001 budget. Expenditures include Bransford Park restoration ($75,OOO), Pleasant Run Park ($122,915), the second year payment on the G-CISD land for soccer fields ($105,270), and $7,400 for office ~ \U..,e~O- CI ANAGER ~ ~~~ PART D (continued) FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1252 Page 2 of 2 supplies, board expenses, insurance, and arbitrage rebate services. Kimzey Park development ($427,618) was carried forward from the FY 2000 budget and will be funded from use of fund balance. Additionally, $122,915 of bond proceeds remaining from the 1996 bond sale will be used to fund the Pleasant Run Park ($122,915) project. Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt Ordinance 0-00-1252. Attachments CEDC Budget Exhibits 1A, 1B, 1C COLLEYVlLLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FY 2001 PROPOSED BUDGET SUMMARY BEGINNING FUND BAlANCE REVENUES SALES TAX REVENUES INTEREST INCOME USE OF BOND PROCEEDS USE OF FUND BALANCE TOTAL REVENUES LESS EXPENSES ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES DEBT SERVICE CAPITAL PROJECTS BRANSFORD PARK RESTORATION CITY ENTRANCE MARKERS COMMUNITY CENTER CAPITAL START-UP KIMZEY PARK DEVELOPMENT MC PHERSON LAND PARK PLAN PLEASANT RUN PARK SCHOOUSOCCER FIELD PARK LAND TOTAL EXPENSES EXCESS REVENUES OVER EXPENSES EXHIBIT lA FY 2000 ANTICIPATED FY 2001 PROPOSED $ 778,006 1,091,438 $ 853,091 895,746 $ 92.500 67,886 $ 72,085 122,915 $ 372,267 494,317 $ 1,389,943 1,580,864 $ 7,400 7,400 $ 534,666 601,901 $ 0 75,000 $ 30,785 0 $ 19,308 0 $ 0 427,618 $ 22,085 0 $ 0 122,915 $ 90,000 105,270 $ 704,244 1,340,104 $ 685,699 240,760 NOTE: A COVERAGE RATIO OF 1.4 IS REQUIRED TO MEET THE SAlES TAX BOND COVENANTS, FOR FY 2001 REVENUES MUST EXCEED EXPENDITURES BY AT LEAST $240,750 COLLEYVILLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FY 2001 BUDGET EXHIBIT 1B PROPOSED FY 2001 ENDING FUND BALANCE AT 9-~ WHICH INCLUDES S122,915IN BOND PROCEEDS TO BE USED IN FY 2001 S 1,091.438 REVENUES: SALES TAX REVENUES $ 895,746 INTEREST INCOME S 67,886 USE OF BOND PROCEEDS $ 122,915 USE OF FUND BALANCE $ 494,317 TOTAL REVENUES $ 1,580,864 LESS EXPENSES: ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES $ 7.400 DEBT SERVICE $ 601.901 CAPITAL PROJECTS: BRANSFORD PARK RESTORATION S 75,000 KIMZEY PARK DEVELOPMENT $ 427.618 PLEASANT RUN PARK $ 122,915 SCHOOUSOCCER FIELD PARK LAND $ 105,270 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 1,340,104 EXCESS REVENUES OVER EXPENSES $ 240,760 NOTE: A COVERAGE RATIO OF 1,4 IS REQUIRED TO MEET THE SALES TAX BOND COVENANTS, FOR FY 2001 REVENUES MUST EXCEED EXPENDITURES BY AT LEAST $240,750, COLLEYVILLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FISCAL YEAR 2001 BUDGET ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE ACCOUNT NUMBER 6203 6226 6233 6293 6301 6308 EXPENSE ACCOUNT AMOUNT BUDGETED INSURANCE $3.600 MISC CONTRACTUAL (ARBITRAGE) $2.500 BANK SERVICE CHARGES $500 BOARD AND COMMISSION $500 sh 00 OFFICE SUPPLIES PRINTING $200 TOTAL EXPENSES $7.400 EXHIBIT 1C ORDINANCE 0-00-1252 AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAr APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE COLLEYVILL~ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2000 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2001, A COPY OF SAME BEING ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY SECRETARY, TO BECOME EFFECTIVE UPON PASSAGE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. -, WHEREAS, the by-laws of the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation require the Board of Directors of the Corporation to adopt a budget of proposed revenues and expenditures and the budget must be formally approved by the City Council; and, WHEREAS, on September 26, 2000 the Board of Directors of the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation approved the following budget for expected revenues and expenditures; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1. THAT the budget of the proposed revenues and expenditures for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2000, and ending September 30, 2001, for the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Secretary, is hereby made a part of this ordinance L reference and is hereby approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Colleyville, Texas, as the official budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2000, and ending September 30,2001, Sec, 2, .' ' THAT the revenue and expenditure amounts for the Fiscal Year 2000 budget for the Colleyville Economic Development Corporation are hereby fixed as follows: Revenues Expenditures $ 1,580,864 $1,340,104 AND IT IS SO ORDERED. The first Reading and Public Hearing being conducted on October 3, 2000. The second Reading and Public Hearing being conducted on October 17, 2000. ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Jean Harris, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor Ordinance 0-00-1252 Page 2 of 2 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney ~ea CITY COUNCIL 100; AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item#: 10 Ordinance # : 0-00-1253 OEPT. : COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: A Special Use Permit for a carport requested by Steve Pence for Keith & Betsy Luttrell, on Lot 11, Block 3, Western Trails Addition Section 2 located at 7420 Overland Trail. Previous Action: None First Reading and Public Hearing Backoround Keith and Betsy Luttrell are the owners of a house located at 7420 Overland Trail. The owner's representative, Steve Pence, has submitted a special use permit application to construct a carport on this property. The property at 7420 Overland Trail is located on the west side of the road, near the intersection with Sagebrush Street. The lot is O,54-acres in size. The carport would be located at the southwest side of the house, approximately 80 feet from the street. The carport would be attached to the house, and the roofline of the carport integrated into the roofline of the house. The carport regulations include design and location standards for carports. A comparison of the regulations and the proposed carport is shown below. (continued) ~ FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Ordinance 0-00-1253 Page 2 The proposed carport meets all the requirements of the carport regulations. Staff recommends approval of the SUP due to technical compliance with the regulations. CARPORT ZONING COMPARISON Category Zoning Requirement Applicant Proposal 1. Maximum Size 480 sq, ft. 400 sq. ft, 2. Longest Dimension Allowed 24 ft. 20 ft. 3. Maximum Height 15 ft. to highest point of roof 14 ft. 4. Side and Rear Setback 5 ft, 20 ft, side I 80+ ft. rear 5, Located in Rear Yard Required Yes 6. Maximum Number Per Lot 1 1 7. Paved Parking Surface Concrete, asphalt or pavestone Concrete 8. Roof Pitch 2:12 minimum 4:12 9, Construction of Posts brick, stone or decorative metal 12" wide brick column supports between 12" and 48" in width Staff mailed eleven notices to adjacent property owners regarding this request and has received no correspondence or letters in support or opposition at the time the agenda was prepared. The Planning & Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered this special use permit request at its October 9, .2000 meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the request. Recommendation Approval, due to technical compliance with the carport regulations Attachments . Carport Drawings List of Property Owners Receiving Notice of Public Hearing Planning & Zoning Commission minutes Ordinance 0-00-1253 . . . List of Property Owners Receiving Notice of Public Hearing City of Colleyville Evelyn McLain James & Durinda Gawrys 512 Sagebrush Street 7501 Overland Trail Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Philip Torgeson Bobby & Diane Weaver Wesley Eaves P,Q, Box 479 7420 Overland Trail 7409 Overland Trail Colleyvifle, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Lavonne Berg Roland & Kathy Kirkland John & Kathryn Griffin 513 Sagebrush Street 7416 Overland Trail 7412 Overland Trail Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Colleyville, TX 76034 Everett & Vicki Johnston City of Keller Keith & Betsy Luttrell 7405 Overland Trail P.O. Box 770 7420 Overland Trail Colleyville, TX 76034 Keller, TX 76244 Colleyville I TX 76034 Case 5-00-071 According to the last published Tax Records dated 09-01-00, individuals who own property that is within the 200' of the proposed special use permit request are listed above. I certify that the parties listed above have been notified of the proposed special use permit request as required by Section 211 the Local Government Code. (Notices dated: September 29,2000) 't Jan Levy './ Planning & oning Assistant Planning & Zoning Commission minutes PUBLIC HEARING - A Special Use Permit for a carport requested by Steve Pence for Keith & Betsy Luttrell, on Lot 11, Block 3, Western Trails Addition Section 2 located at 7420 Overland Trail. Case S-00-071 Clayton husband presented the case to the Commission, He informed the Commission that it meets all of the existing criteria and technical aspects for a carport. Jan Levy informed the Commissioners that she received a call from the neighbor across the street, Wesley Eaves, at 7409 Overland Trail. He said that he could not be at the meeting and had no objections to the carport. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Steve Pence was present to represent the case. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Gasper moved to recommend approval of the special use permit. Commissioner Hollis seconded the motion, The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Edwards, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: None ~~ s ~ 0\ - ~ ; m Carport Drawing I '0 ... + '- L/~e: ~ ~ ~ !)I t:J 1'iI - <: e\\ - .. .... ~..". - ~, -< ...."'- "'-., i I I I I ".J ./ T I I rrl ~ I: ;;l ~ L r ~ r'\~: ~ ~ I' I ~ 2. I I I ~ I I -J--------J --- .J.~ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ , ~ o ~ '" ~ '" ~,~ o o I 3 j I ~ \ '2 ~~ \ 'Z - - ~ '\ ~'" - ~ .a 't .,.. - -xCI: ~ ~~ - 'r< act III '3 ~ ~ ~ < ~ e. 0 " ~ < \a. \J J 0 ';H G/ A < ~ tt ~ ~ J ~. 1:. ':5' J () \j 'J. ~ ~ Carport Drawing ORDINANCE 0-00-1253 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY AUTHORIZING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A CARPORT ON LOT 11, BLOCK 2, WESTERN TRAILS ADDITION SECTION ,2; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION WHEREAS, an application for a special use permit was filed by Steven Pence for Keith and Betsy Luttrell on September 15, 2000, under Case No. S- 00-071; and WHEREAS, notice of a hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission was sent to real property owners within 200 feet of the property herein described at least 10 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation in Colleyville at least 15 days before such hearing; and WHEREAS, notices were posted on the subject land as provided by the zoning ordinance; and WHEREAS, public hearings to change the zoning and the Master Plan on the property herein described were held before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, and the Planning and Zoning Commission has heretofore made a recommendation; and WHEREAS, the City Council is of the opinion that the zoning change herein effectuated furthers the purpose of zoning as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and is in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Colleyville. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE. TEXAS: See, 1. THAT, the Master Plan, the Land Development Code of the City of Colleyville, Texas, and the accompanying Location Map (Exhibit A) are hereby amended insofar as they relate to certain land located in Colleyville, Texas, described as Lot 11, Block 2, Western Trails Addition Section 2, by authorizing a Special Use Permit for a carport, with all site plans which are conceptual in nature, supporting documents, and other conditions and restrictions imposed and approved by the Council which are incorporated herein by reference including, but not limited to the conceptual site plan (Exhibit B), Ordinance 0-00-1253 Page 2 of 2 Sec, 2. THAT, any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance as read together with the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Colleyville shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00). Each and every day such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such. Sec. 3. THAT, the City Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to cause publication of the descriptive caption and penalty clause hereof as an alternate method of publication provided by law. AND IT IS SO ORDERED, The first reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000. day of The second reading and public hearing being conducted on the ,2000. day of ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: Ross T. Foster City Attorney 0.06 o Exhibit A - Location Map o-'^ WAGONWHEEL CT ~ ..J - a: Z r- 0 "AGEBRUStil SI-~ ..J i(J 0:: ~ UJ ~ 6 ~ CHtSOLMCT Q, -I C <! 0.06 0.12 Miles ~ :A ~ ~ c~ ( e~~O\1 N w E s .. ..)( Exhibit B - Conceptual Site Plan tOT 11 J'OWt:R I'Or#. tz2 ~ , '.:~ .~~:.:; ~. '.#..,~t. .,.;: ::-: ~ ": . .' I ....."1.... . ,: , . \ .: ", t ',' '0 . 'I,' , ,I ~. .... ," ", lit ,0 " :. .. ., II ." ..... ':.. ',.:', . .0.. ". ._ '.! , : ". . .~. ,h ...: , J. . .:',... I\) o C>> . N o .. . . , . r )(.- I . I . , . I - .....- ---- - ---- ..~ .... - ... _1--. ~ o I , ... .. . . ....... i ..: " ::':.. It ....)' " .. ,I .' , " . tl .. ; ":" ". ~ I.. "" ".~'~' , It' , .:...' '0 :. \ , ~'.. ....-... . . ..',.'~ to . I I I 1/2" a _ _ a _ _ _ _ 1\11fA_ 113.60' -- SOUTU " ... -.. --.. '..or- ~~& ..,,~...... . ......I:_~ 74.20 OV~;HL^NV THAlL cc.~ CITY COUNCIL Tm' AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 11 Resolution # : R-00-1726 Previous Action: None DEPT, : FINANCE SUBJECT: Authorizing participation in the cause of action styled the City of Denton, Texas vs. Texas Utilities Company and Lone Star Gas Company participating in seeking delinquent franchise fees Reading and Public Hearing Backqround Recently, the cities of Pasadena, Galveston, and Wharton were awarded actual damages of $4.2 million against Houston Lighting & Power Company for excluding certain revenues from franchise fee calculations. In June, the City of Denton filed a lawsuit against TXU after an electric and gas franchise fee audit revealed revenues were excluded from their calculations. Denton is requesting that other TXU-served cities join the lawsuit and a steering committee will be formed of plaintiff cities. Per Mike Bucek of Bucek & Frank L.L.P. (a law firm representing Denton), a franchise audit conducted for the period of 1987-1999 for a city in east Texas population of approximately 5,000 revealed underpayments of over $200,000 for that time period. The Lawton Law firm, also representing Denton, reviewed our electric and gas franchise ordinances and stated they are consistent with other cities participating in the lawsuit (letter of September 11, 2000). Staff is proposing that Colleyville join the lawsuit and the steering committee (see attached resolution). C'_ \\~-t~ CITY MANAGER t~~l/ DEPART D ' FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Agenda Briefing Resolution R-00-1726 Page 2 Financial Impact Colleyville's cost to join the lawsuit would be $6,362 ($3.181 due by October 31, 2000 and $3,181 due at a later date) for legal fees and expert witnesses. This cost is based upon our 1990 census population of 12,724 times $.50 and funding is available in account 001-16-6216 (legal fees). Recommendation Approval of Resolution R-00-1726. Attachments 1. Letter from Bucek & Frank - August 18.2000 (paper copy only) 2. Letter from The Lawton Law Firm - September 11. 2000 (paper copy only) 3. Letter from Bucek & Frank - September 21,2000 (paper copy only) Bucek & Frank, L.L.P. Attorneys at Law 2250 State Hwy, 114 West, Suite 200 Grapevine, Texas 76051 Phone: (817) 949-2161 Fax: (817) 906-2043 August 18, 2000 VIA REGULAR MAIL Mr. C. Robert Stripling City Manager of Colleyville P.O. Box 185 Colleyville, Texas 76034-0185 Re: Legal action against TXU for delinquent electric and gas franchise fees. Dear Mr. Stripling: Strasburger & Price, L.L.P. and Bucek & Frank, L.L.P., in behalf of the City of Denton, have filed suit in the 393rd District Court in Denton County regarding the above referenced subject matter. The City of Denton has requested that we notify cities in Texas served by TXU of this pending litigation and provide such cities the opportunity to participate. A packet of information regarding this litigation is enclosed for your perusal. Should your city desire to participate in this case or would like to have additional information regarding this case, please contact me at 817-949-2161 or Strasburger & Price, L.L.P. attorneys David J. LeBrec at 214-651-4752 or Kurt Meaders at 214-651- 4701. Sincerely yours, )}frf~%.J Mike Bucek Enclosures STR,\SBURGER OO'RI CE, up. ATTCJIlINI!Va AND COUN.I!U)". ..~~ L ..... aUITE aGO _, MAIN 8TfIl.-T DAUAa. ftXAa "'.R02-S"'_ (214) ..,-4_ ~AX (214) ..,_ -..-.......,"""" CITY OF DENTON v. TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY, d/b/a TXU CORP., d/b/a TXU ELECTRIC COMPANY f/k1a Texas Utilities Electric Company, d/b/a TXU ELECTRIC AND GAS and d/b/a TXU LONE STAR GAS, and LONE STAR GAS COMPANY, a division of Enserch, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Texas Utilities Company. Cause No. 2000-30109-393 IN THE DISTRICT COURT DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS 393RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT Filed June 7, 2000 61 092 I ,1/SPOI2912110104106202000 AUST'N HOUSTON SAN ANTONIO MEXICO CITY STMSBURGER (S(pRICE,LLp. AUSTIN ATTOANEYS ANO COUNSEL-OAS A~~~~1'IOHS HOUSTON DA VII> ], LABREe (214) 6S 1-47S2 ~.com SUITE .300 80' MAIN STREET OAL-L.AS. TEXAS 75202-37_ (21.) 811''''300 SAN ANTONIO MEXICO CITY FAX (21.) 8111-.330 www~.tra.burg.r.com August 18, 2000 Mayors and City Managers of Cities Served by TXU RE: Legal action against TXU for delinquent electric and gas franchise fees On March 30, 2000 a Houston jury awarded the cities of Pasadena, Galveston and Wharton actual damages of $4.2 million against Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P) for excluding revenues from calculations used to derive the franchise fees owed such cities for the rental and use of their public streets, easements and public properties, On April 4. 2000 the jury found that HL&P had acted with malice by intentionally underpaying these cities for decades and awarded each city $1 0,000,000. HL&P's attorney stated in an article entitled HL&P Hit Hard in Three Cities' Franchise-Free Suit of the April 10, 2000 edition of the Texas Lawyer (Copy attached) ,that "What HL&P has done, its done for 43 years. It follows industry practice." On August 24, 1999, the City of Denton retained Diversified Utility Consultants, Inc. to perform a review of TXU-Electric's franchise calculations and TXU-Lone Star Gas's franchise calculations. DUCl's summary confirm their conclusions that the practice of the electric and gas industry is to miscalculate the franchise fees paid to cities. DUCI estimates that TXU-Electric owes the City of Denton delinquent fees of over $256,000 for the years 1987 - 1998.1 TXU-Lone Star Gas owes the City delinquent fees of over $861,000 for the years 1982 - 1998, 1 Although this figure is not a significant amount. it is when you consider that less than 300 of Denton's 28.000 electric customers are on the TXU system. The remaining customers purchase electricity from Denton Municipal Utilities or CoServ Electric. 609424,I/SPOII2299/0 1 01/01112000 STR,lSBURGER (StpRI CE., LLP. Mayor and City Managers of Cities Served by TXU August 18, 2000 Page 2 On June 7 2000 Strasburger & Price, L.LP. and Bucek & Frank, L.L.P. filed suit against'TXU on behalf of the City of Denton in the 393rd District Court in Denton County. The Court issued a TRO restraining TXU from ~removing, altering and/or destroying records relating to payments of franchise fees to municipalities in the State of Texas and the City of Denton from January 1982 to present. The City of Denton has asked us to seek out other cities in the TXU service area to join in this lawsuit while an Agreed Temporary Injunction is in place that protects records of all Texas cities which TXU serves. As we have done in the prior utility cases, your City can join this suit by passing an ordinance or resolution (similar to the one attached) by October 20, 2000 by which your City agrees to contribute $.25 by October 31,2000 for each resident, based on the 1990 U.S. Census and another $.25 if later assessed by the "Steering Committee of Cities Participating in the TXU Franchise Litigation, "toward underwriting the cost of a multiple party Plaintiffs' suit. The fee can be prorated if your city has electric ~nd/or gas utilities provided by entities other than TXU, however, the minimum contribution is $1,000 per assessment. The size of the Steering Committee will be ultimately determined by the number of cities participating, If 29 or less cities participate in the litigation there will be a 3-member committee. If 30 or more cities participate there will be a 5-member committee. Denton has agreed to serve as Treasurer for the collection of the underwriting fees, and therefore Denton will have one representative on the Steering Committee and the other members will be elected by the participating cities. The overall strategy and trial will be directed by Strasburger & Price, L. L. P. with the Steering Committee serving as representatives of the cities regarding coordination of effort and flow of information, retention of experts, consideration of settlement offers and consultation with us as needed relating to media issues. We plan to hold at least two meetings before October 13, 2000 for cities interested in joining this lawsuit. At the meetings, DUCI and our attorneys will be available to address questions that the city officials may have 609424.1/SPO/82299/0101/08182000 STMSBURGER (StpRI CEo u.p Mayor and City Managers of Cities Served by TXU August 18, 2000 Page 3 and provide available information obtained through the DUCI audit. In particular, we will discuss the types of revenue accounts that TXU has failed to include in gross receipts/revenues calculations. A reasonable determination of the amount of delinquent fees owed each city will not be possible until TXU produces all of the requested records. Also in some franchises, certain revenue accounts are specifically removed from gross receipts/revenues so DUCI will have to review each city's franchise to determine the amount of delinquent franchise fees owed such city. Should you have any questions, please contact me at the address indicated above, by phone at 214-651-4300 or by fax at 214-651-4330 or contact Mike Bucek by letter at Bucek & Frank, L.L.P. at 2250 State Hwy. 114 West, Suite 200, Grapevine, Texas 76051 , by phone at 817-949-2161 or by fax at 817-906-2043, If you would like copies of the petition and the orders entered in the Denton case, please contact us. DJUhdb enclosures cc: Attorneys for the Cities 609424, I ISPO/82299101 01108 I 12000 Tariff for Electric Service ncu Electric Company 2.0 Clli.. and enuntJes Se,.".d Al:lpllc:able: El1tire SYlItem Erfedl..,. Ca'.: JUlW 14. 1999 F:\I.':~' .' ~~~'I~IO" --"", ~h...,,' 2.1 Cities AbtlOft Adcerty AIIdi!a'1 A1eoo Al*l Alma Alvarado Alvonl Andrews Anpa .Anna AlaNna "nnena NOI1h AllNlna Souttl Annona Applety Atf#wr CIty ArQ1Ie Arlington All'lens AUftll'a Aualn Azle Balch Springe Bange e..awen BIIny Banle" 8edfco'd S"eltue 8e11meed "". Balton a.ncraok I~y Hilla Big Se>>rtno Stanlcel I!l~ln; Grave 81_ Mound lIanhem ~ Bnidl.nncl~ 8~~ Brcwnstlara BrDM. ..d Brucevllle-Eddy B~ &ut9ala Bu~ Bun. Burie&eln Bynum CaOdO UWI c.meron carnp~ caney CIty c.nlart C.aroan CarralllDn Cedar HID Celina QanlleMle CMnGIer D*D Clllreno o.rtcaviUII OAY,.,. COItIama CoacIInII HI' ~'1Ie CoIJI..... CclIcndDCSt)' ~ CA......". camo caa Cacoer CClPPDl! ~ CcMi Colfrm Corwl~ Cr8ndd C,..,. CnIl:bIl Cn:IutDad, Oow\ey Cumbr cu.Nng c.n.. OalwOl"lNnglDn Garde". O-..an Dan oc.lUr D&Dan o.NIan 0.._ o.soa CIIIaaII Dodd CIty DclrcNa.- Dulllln DuncarwlUe i_ Eulerld &cMr EdDlldlft' E~ ~ EIecn -- at..rt I!!mhcluM IncNnIMl Oalal ~ ~ !uNka eu.c. e"."." ........ (CallI" Co.) FaIMew M'se Co.) II. m.er.s Branch Fa. ~"'. F10renca Ft_r Mound fIonI51 11111 Famey Far.IIII'\ Fort WOI"8I FItsco ~~t GaInesville a...."d GarNIt ~\awI'I ~ Gte"" ~ts Godley GaI,naa Gocldtow GGmuln GnIfDrd G..,.rn Gl'Wtd F>>rairie a...nd..lle Grandvl_ Granget' GIa~Jand o..pevlna GYn 8.".ell City Gun..' HaltDm elf)' '"'-ker Helol'lts l-tua.l lo4e:ll'" Hebron rtenrteua HewItt HldtoIy Creek HlgtlIlIN:t Pant Hilteboro Halland HaIIlCIay HeMiy car-. ~ IolUbDllI'd Hudaorl Mudsan 0.. MuntnvlClf'l HYmt HW:Nft1 HuGo I~ Park Irw,g l~ ltuca JackstllClrO Jew.11 CI:I1198 TxU Elec:trte ~ ~ e - o ~e ;> !~ == - :) u i ~ . ~ ""\ eN ="-f · r:~I: ~ . ~ ~- ;.:- ~ : l"'"" "" - . 0... and Colina., Ser..." 2,0 Cities and Counlles Sa,...,~ Applicable: El'\b" Slfslem ElflletlV8 Oate: Jun. '4, 1999 JDIy JOMI)rlIM JcMlA Juatln Kaufman 1<_,,- Keller !(em,>> I<en"4lda'e K.,.M Kill_n Jo(I\CIIhloood l(rum Laey-lAkeYI_ ~OI\i. Uk. Btlc:loepol't U1c. !)alia. ~Ilo Wot!t\ VII~ge L.a..toe ~kaaoct. CIty L.lme~ ~"ca.t.r ~lexo La_ Leorlll LAroy l.ind_ ~&aY Upan UlIle Fawr Academr L . "=11M L;J'Wna l.owI:tdJ Lawry Croaaing L.lICIIae luftdn ~aiIanlt .....I.k~ ""-loft.. ~natleld Milrq".z Yarar\all Cr_1t ~ypean Mc:GnIgor M~ln".,. Md.anden-C"lshCllm ....1Issi Men.na M.Qui" MIdland M1d1altl1M M..,. MIIcnd M1lfQn:1 MIII_D Mine,., W.... MotIUe CI~ ManMIIN MDIIIt)I Manlan', PoInI "-art Mount Calm M'*'8* Murcne~ Murphy Muatano Total Number a' elll_ :I,. TXU &Jeetrtc Com.",. 370 Tariff for Electric Service TXU EI.c:trlc Company ~1ICla9d0ct\8S Nav;,rro NhllCta ..., O1apel Hili -..nc NeytandYl'1e NaI..v111e NcxlnG~ NontUke NerI'I ~land HIls O'Donnell 08k Vallay o.k I...f Celt PolIIr Oak~ OalLw:lcc:l Odesu Oglesby ~.. PiI_llne Pillmlr ~ p~ .--.. Perk.r ~ SprInp Peeln G8p ~HlI Penalopa ~. PI8na PlRlant \'-alley Pandw PoeIOak Bend PoIIebaro ~1\ ~ PrtnClllllft ~ P)'OW Quln.... Ra~t ~ A.d Oak ~ ~m., C4" AeM (,..,., CO.) Rti"'l IlVMltM RIae ........., R1dl1Md "left..., HIlI RMr DIlks AoeMQ ACIIMMon Roc*d_ /i:I......n ....... ~ ~ Round ~ "CMIeIt Aalctr:In "CPfM Cl1y ~)' a.,. Sach_ Sadl. Saginaw S.nscrn Parte Vlll.~ Se""Y Se:l9OYlIIII SIuIOy m-w. SMnnan S~ Souttllakll SCILIII'Ima~ Spri"&IWM'f'l SL Paul S18"lan Swphemn.. S"'trna" SulphurS~ SWWIywie SunMl S~NtlJter Taylor Temple T .....11 The Coiany Tbornaalll ThomlDnvllle ThraR Tira Toa' Ttlnldad TfaPhy Club TI8)' Tyt.. Unllfer:slly Pal1t Valley V1ew Van Van As.1)IM Venus W..-s Waa.ug. W.-attac:n.. W.ehrfan:2 Weir W.a. w..r W.1DnIdl W_~ Hills w.atwott'l WhIWlGuM VtIh... Setlemenl WIlWllI ,.... WIO;aa WlIcNr Parte WUIe "aIIIl WIImw W1P1Oam wtnk Wow. en)' WCll:lll6w8'1 "'~'1I. Yantla Zavalle ::; 1""~'t1:. ~ O~qtJ 2 ~. , ~t""SIO" '~'." ~ 0 - - Q ..:. z cae ( ;> ':. ~~ -c .. " . , ... ;.: :! -', ~ - - r ~ ~-. S:a ':'...~ -' = _. ";:) ~ ~ a... and Countl.., 5Er ... . 5@p 11 00 05:18p ~9/11/2~0e 09:38 Buc@k and F~ank LLP 817 906 2043 p.3 5122572243 DUG I PA-3E e: THE LAWTON LAW FIRM 12.113 ROlne DrNt, SUite 110 . Auut", TeX:l6 78729 . 512./l5HOIO . Fu 51Z/:'5i.22~3 September 11, 2000 Mike Bucek Bucek &. Frank, LL.P, 2250 State H~'Y- 114, Suite 200 Grfl.pevine, Texas 76051 Sent VlI\ Fi\X (817) 906.2043 RE: ColLevvUle Franchise Dear Mr. Bucek: Yau rlliked that 1 review the City of Colleyville gas l\nd eiemic franchise agreemell~ and report back to your offlce. 1 have revIewed both OrdInance 0.93.913 (TXU - Elec:tric:) ~l\d Ordinance 0-88. 673 (LoneStar GilS) per your request. Both the gas and electric franchise agreements are conSlSrent with the agreements in other cItIes that fire pamclp:mng III t~IS lawsuit ed any additional information, please caU, Sep 21 00 04:28p Bucek and Frank LLP 817 906 2043 p.2 Bucek & Frank, L.L.P. Anorneys at Law 2250 State Hwy. 114 West, Suite 20[' Grapevine. Texas 76051 PhOI~e; \ S i -: 9';9-:: 6: Fax ,S :-1906.2("':: September 21, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE NO, 817-57"7-:555 :t-.ls, Terry Leake City of Collevville - ~ P. O. Box 185 Colleyville, Texas 76034-0186 Re: Denton vs. TXU Utilities Comnanv. et at case relating to delinquent franch~se fees Dear Terry: Per my conversation with you earlier today, enclosed is the following information you suggested I forward to you: 1. September 19, 2000 memo regarding "Issues relating to the fonnation of the Steering Committee of Cities Participating in the TXU Franchise Litigation'. 2, September 19, 2000 memo to City Attorneys with audit of 5 cities attached. 3, Fact Sheet regarding underpayment of franchise fees-City of Denton vs. TXU. Should you have any questions please give me a call. Sincerely yours, -114 ' // M.7(:.) Mike Bucek Enclosures Sep 21 00 04:28p Bucek and Frank LLP 817 90S 2043 p.3 Bucek & Frank. L.L.P. Attorneys at Law 2250 State Hwy, 114 West, Suite 200 Grapevine, Texas 76051 Phone: (s:,) 949-:10: fax 1S:~i90S-:0J: September 21. 2000 VIA FACSIMILE NO. 972-286-7531 Ms, Cindy Gross City of Balch Springs 3117 Hickory Tree Road Balch Springs, Texas 75180 Re: Denton VS, TXU Utilities Company, et at case relating to deiinquent franchise fees Dear Ms, Gross: Per my conversation with you earlier today, the deadline for approving the resolution to join the above referenced suit is October 20,2000 if your council desires to (1) be considered as a nominee on the ballot of cities selecting the officers of the steering committee and/or (2) have a vote in electing such officers to the steering committee. If you council has no interest in the voting issues, then the deadline for passing the resolution is October 31, 2000. Enclosed is the following information you suggested I fOllvard to you and your attorney: 1. September 19, 2000 memo regarding "Issues relating to the [onnation of the Steering Committee of Cities Participating in the TXU Franchise Litigation'. 2, September 19,2000 memo to City Attorneys with audit of 5 cities attached, 3, Fact Sheet regarding underpayment of franchise fees-City of Denton vs, TXU. Should you have any questions please give me a call. Sincerely yours, lJt.f~ ~uuP Mike Bucek Enclosures cc: Julie Tebbets, Ayers & Ayers, 214-757-9088 Sep 21 00 04:28p Bucek and Frank LLP 817 S06 2043 p.4 Bucek & Frank, L.L.P, Attorneys at Law 2250 State Hwy. 114 West, Suite 200 Grapevine, Texas 76051 Phone: (81"') 949-2161 Fax: (81 '7) 906-2043 September 19, 2000 FROM: CITY ATTORNEYS OF CITIES THAT ARE INTERESTED IN JOINING THE "STEERING COMMITTEE OF CITIES PARTICIPATING IK THE TXU FRANCHISE LITIGATION" Mike Bucek /1'1 (j TO: On August 18, 2000 our firm in cooperation with Strasburger & Price, L.L.P. forwarded to you a packet of information on behalf of the City of Denton regarding the formation of the above Steering Committee. We have received a number of calls from City Attorneys representing cities both larger and smaller than the City of Denton inquiring as to the amount of delinquent franchise fees their cities may be owed by TXU. The delinquent fees vary from city to city based on the language of each city's specific franchise. For instance, the percentage of gross receipts a city receives changes from city to city and some franchises have exclusions of certain revenue accotUlts from gross receipts. We asked Dan Lawton of Diversified Utility Consultants, Inc. (DUCI) to prepare some preliminary estimates of delinquent franchise fees for a few cities of varying populations. We suggested he find a city with only a TXU-Electric franchise, another with only a TXU-Lone Star Gas franchise and a couple of cities where electric and gas service is provided by only TXU, Attached is a copy of the report that DUCI prepared for my firm and Strasburger and Price, L.L.P. on behalf of the City of Denton. Should you have any questions please give me a call or David LaBree at 214.651.4752. Sep 21 00 04:29p Bucek and F~ank LLP 817 906 2043 ~.5 eg/lB/2~~~ l~:ZJ ~l :a':l/uQ J uu..; . '-Alx C': DIVERSIFIED UTILITY CONSULTANTS. me. 1.U. JtO~ g.zvJL 8VlTZ uo. Al7,'!'DI, TX 'I".' T"C..ZP8o,,-, .". ..,'.... rlo.lt tlU' ..,..... Sent Via Fax (817) 906.2043 Mike Bucek Bucek & Frank L.L.P. 2250 State Highway 114, Suite 200 Grapevine, TX 760S 1 Re: Franchi!e Fee Calculations TXU Electric and TXU Lone Star Gas Dear Mr. Bucek: I have n::c;c:ived letters from a few cities requesting a computation or estimate of franchise fee underpayments for TXU Electric and/or TXU Lone Star Gas (formerly Enserch ILone Star Gas) for the upcoming meetings In AIlington and Austin. Some of these requests I have previously dIscussed with you along with some of the issues "garding the computations, The cines for which I currently have: specific infonnatlon or requests are I ask that you send this information on to the CIties so that they may evaluate the potenttnl dollar Impact ofpanicipatmg in these cases ASSUMPTIONS: ^. Electl1l; Franchise Fee Underpayment l. The analysis evaluated the yean 1987 through 2000; 2. Revenue data for Texas Utilities Electric for the period 1987-1998 is based on the Company reponed revenue in the annual FERC Form 1. Revenues for 1999-2000 were estimated; 3. For the period 1987.1!~92 the total Company franchise fee obligation was assumed to be 2.5% and Cor the period 1993.2000 the franchise fee obhgation was set at 4%; 4, Gro\l,,'th on the system for any year was assumed at 3%; 5. Bad debt expense was set at 0.25% bl1sed on prior filings at the Public Utility Commission of Texas by the Company; G. Franchise fee underpayments were calculated for: miscellaneous revenues, rental revenues, sale tax revenues, and bad debt expenses; and 7. The total calculated franchise fee ovc:rpayment is prorated to neb city based on a total revenue aUoeator. Sep 21 00 04:29p Bucek and Frank LLP 817 906 2043 p.: e~/1B/2eee le:23 5122572243 ax: I Pt:ll"JE e 3 S. GiS Franchise Fce Underpayment I, Analysis evaluated the years 1987 through 2000; 2. Revenue data based on Company reported revenues in lhe AnnUJJ Re;Jon to the Railroad Commission of Texas for the years (1994-1999) - CS1imalC'S made in other years; 3. Growth rate 0(3% assumed in years 1987-1993 and 2000; 4. Assumed a 0.4SY, bad debt ratio based on prior Company fil1ngsi 5. Assumed a 2.5% franchise fee rate for the period 1987.1993 and a 3.5% franchise fee rate for the period 1994-2000. Based on all the above assumption~1 the electric and gas franchise fee underpayments are about S204,941,ooO and S33,S38,OOO respectively. These amounts were prorated to the cities baSed on I revenue allocalor. Please keep in mind that these are rough estimates without the benefit of an audit or any sp~ifie discovery. But, these estimates are based on Company specific data filed at the FERC and Railroad Commission ofTexa5. Obviously, this dati and lhese calculations will change as we get into the case. Please keep in mind other issues will be developed IS we get morc data in this case, for example, the Dallas franchise excludes specific items that are not excluded in other Clty agreements, In addition, the Dallas agreements pay I franchise fee on some items which a.re not paid to other cities, Le., a dual definition of gross receipts, The: following table contains an c.stimate of Wlderpayment of franchise fees for the cities that have requested such calculations, City Electric as LPopi.Jla tio 5214,245 530,950 I' 5101,331 S2,'742.82~_ t S3,518;099 S517,6 7 S2,471,116 S309,668 If you have any questions or need any additional infornution, please feel free to call my office. L/~ Daniel ], Lawton Sep 21 00 04:30p Bucek and Frank LLP 817 906 2043 p.8 FACT SHEET REGARDING UNDERPAYMENT OF FRANCHISE FEES CITY OF DENTON VS. TXU . A franchise fee is a rental fee that a city has the right to charge a utility company for the rental and use of city rights-of-way, easemenUl and public groW1ds for the placement of pipelines, poles and utility ca.bles. TXU is using public property for private gain. . The public right of way that TXU uses to provide gas & electrical service belongs to each city and its residents. Why shouldn't TXU pay reasonable value for the use of this property? . In Texas, utility companies generally have agreed to pay cities a franchise fee of2% to 4% of the total collected monies that the company realizes from the sale and rental of its services. . Texas law states clearly that gross receipts means the "whole; entire; total; without deduction." In a franchise fee arrangement, "gross receipts" and "gross revenues" are considered the same, Utility companies must report ALL revenues collected then pay a 2% to 4% franchise fee of these revenues. Sep 21 00 04:3010 Bucek and F~ank LLP 817 S06 2043 F.S Fact sheet! Daee two of four . Research for the Denton case concludes that it is common practice of the electric and gas industry to miscalculate the franchise fees paid to cities. . The City of Denton lawsuit alleges that TXU Electric and TXU Gas intentionally miscalculated and excluded a variety of revenues received for services sold or rented. This intentional miscalculation resulted in years of underpayments in franchise fees to the city, . TXU has refused to allow a complete audit of their records. They have refused to allow representatives of the city of Denton access to the requested records that Denton has tried to obtain in good taith. . One of TXU's questionable tactics used in Denton and other Texas cities is to pass- through to residents a franchise fee, then not deposit such fees collected into a separate account for the benefit of the city. In other words, TXU charged Denton residents for its use of city roads for utility services, but it cannot prove that all of the fees collected from residents was remitted to the city for the rental of the right-of- way. Sell' 21 00 04:3010 Bucek and F~ank LLP 817 SOS 2043 F. 1 C Fact sheet/Dave three of four . So far, financial auditing experts have calculated an underpayment in franchise rees due to the city of Denton in excess of $1.17 million. This is rightfully the city' S money and could have been used for: . The purchase of 58 new police patrol cars . Thousands of library books and reference materials . Technology advancements/computers for the city . City park beautification projects/maintenance . Major street improvements . The TXU/Denton case parallels similarities of a recent case involving three Houston- area cities (\\'hanon, Galveston, Pasadena) who sued Houston Lighting & Power Co. (HL&P). A Houston jury awarded the three cities $10 million each in punitive damages and found that HL&P acted with malice by intentionally underpaying these cities, The total damages were $33.4 million. This is one of the first cases to address punitive damages against a utility for failure to pay franchise fees. . The Houston case involved the electric utility only, Denton's case involves electric and gas, Gas issues are similar in part, but involve other types of charges that were also excluded from TXU's calculation of "gr055 receipts," Sep 21 00 04:30p Bucek and F~ank LLP 817 S06 2043 p. 1 : Fact sheet/Dare four offour . TXU has maintained that the Houston jury was in error when it found tha~ certain revenue accounts were excluded from the "gross receipts" calculation. TXl' also argues that its franchises are different from HL&P's when such differences are insignificant. . ThU cannot escape State Law on the issue of sales taxes, In the same service area, TXU has a contract with another city that specifically excludes sales taxes from "gross receipts." Denton's agreement does not speak to sales ta.xes. State Law is clear on this contracmal issue. If one agreement excludes sales tax and the other is silent on the issue, then the legal inference is that sales taxes should have been included in the franchise that did not exclude sales tax (Denton's case). TXU chose not to do so. . The franchises are drafted by TXU and if TXU does not want to include sales taxes in gross receipts, TXU should specifically exclude them. . TXU has protited at the public's expense, Texas dollars should not be allowed to be invested in places such as Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Mexico City, continental Europe, the United Kingdom and Australia at the expense of Texas cities. Sep 21 00 04:31p Bucek and F~ank LLP 817 S06 2043 p. 12 Bucek & Frank, L.L,P. Anomcys at Law 2250 State Hwy, \14 West. Suite 200 Grap~vll1e. Texas 7605 : Phon~ ,8\-) 949-2161 Fax IS: ~\ 906-204~ TO: REPRESENTATIVES OF CITIES INTERESTED IN JOINrKG THE "STEERING COMMITTEE OF CITIES PARTICIPATING JJ\ THE TXV FRANCHISE LITIGATION" FROM: Strasburger & Price, L.L.P. and Bucek & Frank, L.L.P., Legal Co:mse: for the City of Denton, Texas SUBJECT: Issues relating to the formation of the Steering Committee and the transfer of the coordination of the litigation effort from the City of Denton to the Steering Committee Officers DATE: Septembcr 19,2000 David LaBree and I have received inquiries from representatives from in excess of sixty (60) cities interested in joining the "Steering Committee of Cities Participating in the TXU Franchise Litigation" (Steering Committee). Several administrative or procedural questions have been raised by City Representatives that are not answered in the original packet of information we sent to Mayors and City Managers of Cities served by TXU 011 August 18th or in our notice of meetings letter dated August 29th. We felt it would be appropriate to memorialize in writing our oral answers to these questions before the September 20th and 29th meetings that have been scheduled to respond to audit and legal issues concerning the delinquent franchise fees owed by TXU. They are as follows: 1. The City of Denton will adopt an appropriate resolutlOrVordinance prior to October ISth to confinn it will (a) serve as Treasurer of the Steering Committee and (b) remit the applicable assessment to the Steering Committee by October 31 st. 2. On November 151 the Steering Committee assumes the responsibility for paying the future legal, consulting and court fees that accrue in prosecuting the delinquent franchise fee case against TXU presently pending in Denton County, 3. The City of Denton assumes the responsibility for all legal, consulting and court fees that accrued prior to November 15t, 4. The Steering Committee will seek a judgment or settlement that reimburses (a) every city, that remains in this litigation to its conclusion, the assessment fees it has paid and (b) the City of Denton for the legal, consulting and courl fees it has paid since the retention of Strasburger & Price, L.L.P. and Bucek & Frank, L.L.P. on June 6, 2000. Sep 21 00 04:31p Bucek and F~ank LLP 817 906 2043 p. l::; Page 2 September 19, 2000 5. The Officers elected by the Steering Committee or a s'.lbcommittee a?poi:1ted by sl4ch Officers will audit the legal, consulting and court fees a.'1G fo:\\'ard tne appropria~e invoices to the Treasurer for payment. 6. No city's assessments shall exceed 10% of the amou::t of delinque::t franchise fees that the a~dit ref1ects such City is owed by TXU. 7, Each city shall be entitled to cast 2 votes for the officers of the Steering Commi:tee if only two officers other than the Treasurer stand for election and 4 votes i: the size 0 f the Steering Committee warrants four officers other than the Treasurer. The canvass of:he votes shall result in 50% of the officers other than the Treasurer representing cities of under 30,000 population and 50% ofthc officers other tha.'1 the Treasurer representing cities of 30,000 or more. The cities may cast all their votes for themselves or for cities in either category mentioned above. 8. Should Steering Committee funds collected by the two assessments be depleted, the payment of all subsequent assessments will be on a voluntary basis and the failure 0: a city to make a voluntary contribution will not result in the removal of such city from the lawsuit. 9, .<\11Y city can remove itself from the litigation at any time without any liability to the Steering Committee for future assessments, but no refunds will be made by the Steering Committee of funds previously contributed by such city or subsequently recovered by judgment or settlement. 10, The assessment fee shall be reduced by 50% if a City is served by only TXU-Electric or TXU-Lone Star Gas. Should a city have either 2 natural gas companies and 1 electric company, or vice versa, the applicable 50% portion of the assessment applicable to the two competing entities (one of which is TXU), will be adjusted by multiplying such portion of the assessment by a fraction, the nwnerator of which is the total TXU-Lone Star Gas (or electric. if applicable) customers in the corporate limits as of January 1, 1999 and the denominator of which is the total of all natural gas (or electric, if applicable) customers, including TXU-Lone Star Gas's customers, in the corporate limits as of January 1, 1999. 11. Assessment checks are to be written to the order of the "City of Denton, Texas, Treasurer of Steering Committee". We look fOl"\\lard to meeting you at either our September 20th or September 29th meeting to discuss the legal and auditing issues in this case. Oct 11 00 02:1210 Bucek and F~ank LLP 817 906 2043 10.2 Bucek & Frank, L.L.P. Attorneys at Law 2250 State Hwy. 114 West, Suite 200 Grapevine. Texas 7605: Phone: (81~)949-2161 Fax: (81-) 906-:043 October 11, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE NO, 817-577-7555 Ms . Terry Leake City of Colleyville P. O. Box 185 Colleyville, Texas 76034.0186 Re: Cities that have already passed resolutions to join steering commillee of cities participating in the TXU delinquent franchise fee litigation Dear Ms. Leake: The follo\\1ng cities have either provided my office the above referenced resolution or have called my office advising that such resolution has been approved: 1. City of Lewisville (78,500) ,., City of Denton (76,993) 3, City of North Richland Hills (56,250) 4. City of Cleburne (26,569) 5. City of Paris (25,513) 6. City ofWatauga(23,213) 7. City of Greenville (23,018) 8, City of Cedar Park (22,231) 9, City of Kaufman (6.529) 10. City ofIowa Park (6,363) 11. City of Sanger (5,200) 12, City of Lake Worth (4,829) 13. City of Bridgeport (4,376) Should you have any questions please give me a call. Sincerely yours, $~j!t{C i/ Mike Bucek cc: Herb Prouty Dave LaBree RESOLUTION R-OO-1726 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PARTICIPATION OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS IN THE CAUSE OF ACTION STYLED THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS VS. TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY AND LONE STAR GAS COMPANY OR SUCH OTHER CAUSES OF ACTION AS THE "STEERING COMMITTEE OF CITIES PARTICIPATING IN THE TXU FRANCHISE LITIGATION" MAY DETERMINE SEEKING DELINQUENT FRANCHISE FEES FROM TXU, LONE STAR GAS AND OTHER ENTITIES ASSOCIATED WITH TXU; AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR ATTORNEY AND EXPERT WITNESS FEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on March 30, 2000 the 269th District Court awarded actual damages to the Cities of Wharton, Galveston and Pasadena of $3.4 million and on April 4, 2000 punitive damages of $30 million against Houston Lighting & Power Co. (HL&P) for underpaying franchise fees by excluding revenues from the gross receipts upon which such fees are derived; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 1999 an audit on behalf of the City of Denton estimated TXU Electric and Lone Star Gas owed delinquent franchise fees in excess of $1,000,000 based on findings that revenues similar to those at issue in the HL&P case were excluded from the calculation of gross receipts/revenues; and WHEREAS, the law firms of Strasburger & Price, L.L.P. and Bucek & Frank, L.L.P. have filed suit against TXU and Lone Star Gas on behalf of the City of Denton in the 393rd District Court in Denton County for delinquent franchise fees; and WHEREAS, a consolidated action by cities in the TXU service area seeking delinquent franchise fees will reduce duplication of effort and the attendant legal, expert and court cost. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec 1. THAT the City of Colleyville agrees to participate with other similarly situated Texas cities in the TU/LONE STAR GAS system and join the City of Denton in pursuing causes of action against Texas Utilities Company, Lone Star Gas Company and other entities associated with TXU to collect delinquent franchise fees. Sec2. THAT the City of Colleyville agrees to contribute $.50 for each individual residing within its corporate limits based on the 1990 U.S. Census (except for such portion of its population that may not be residing within the Resolution R-00-1726 Page 2 of 2 TU/Lone Star Gas service area) or $2,000, whichever is more, to underwrite the cost of legal and expert witness fees and related costs to be expended on behalf of the cities in this matter, $.25 [or $1,000 if applicable] being due on or before October 31, 2000, and the other $.25 [or $1000], if assessed, being due and payable on the date the Steering Committee of Cities Participating in the TXU Franchise Litigation authorizes such assessment. Sec 3, THAT Terry Leake, Finance Director or her designee shall be the City's primary contact and liaison in this matter and such individual shall be eligible to serve on "Steering Committee of Cities Participating in the TXU Franchise Litigation" if she is elected by the cities participating in this litigation. Notices to the City should be addressed as follows: NamelTitle: Terry Leake, Finance Director City/Address City of Colleyville, P.O. Box 185 Colleyville, Tx 76034 Telephone 817-577-7589 x 218 Fax 817-577-7555 Sec4. That the liaison named above is authorized to take those steps reasonable and necessary to comply with the intent of this resolution. Sec 5. That this resolution shall take effect immediately from and after its passage. AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. Passed by a vote of, by a vote of on this the day of ayes, ,2000. nays, and abstentions ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor e,r~. or ~ CC~~~ CITY COUNCIL 1"'0$ AGENDA BRIEFING For mta. : 01/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 12 Resolution # : R-OO-1727 Previous Action: None DEPT. : CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SUBJECT: Approval of the City Manager's recommendation of Cynthia Singleton as City Secretary effective October 20, 2000 Reading and Public Hearing Backqround Jean Harris has resigned as City Secretary effective October 20, 2000. The City Charter provides that the City Manager appoints the City Secretary with the approval of the City Council. An internal application process has been undertaken and the City Manager is submitting Cynthia Singleton for approval by the City Council to fill the position of City Secretary. Cynthia is currently an Office Assistant in the Parks and Recreation Department and has served as primary backup to the City Secretary. Although certification is not a requirement, she will complete her certification as a City Secretary in the near future. Ms. Singleton's resume is attached. r:Q4t*~ CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT HEAD FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) Resolution R-00-1727 Page 2 Recommendation Approval of Cynthia Singleton as City Secretary for the City of Colleyville. Attachments: Excerpt City Council Charter (paper only) Cynthia Singleton Resume (paper only) (5) prepare and submit the annual budget and capital program to the City Council; (6) submit to the City Council and make available to the public a complete report on the finances and administrative activities of the City as 01 the end of each fiscal year; (7) make such other reports as the City Council may require concerning the operations of the City departments, offices and agencies subject to the City Manager's direction and supervision; (8) keep the City Council fully advised as to the financial condition and future needs of the City; (9) make recommendations to the City Council concerning the affairs 01 the City; (10) provide staff support services for the Mayor, Council members, and appointed commissions, boards, and committees; and (11) perform such other duties as are specified in this Charter or as may be required by the City Council. (Amended January 18, 1992) Section 7.02 City Secretary: The City Manager shall appoint a qualified individual to fill the position of City Secretary, with the approval of the City Council. The City Secretary shall not be appointed for a definite term, but may be removed from office by the City Manager with the approval of the City Council. (1) Give notice of and attend all official public meetings of the Council; (2) Record the minutes and proceedings of all official public meetings of the Council: provided, however, that only the title and caption of duly enacted ordinances shall be recorded in the minutes; (3) Act as custodian of all official records of the Council; (4) Hold and maintain the Seal of the City and affix this Seal to all appropriate documents; (5) Authenticate by signature and Seal, and record in a book kept and indexed for the purpose, all ordinances and resolutions of the City; and (6) Perform such other duties as may be required by the City Manager, the City Council, this Charter, or by the laws 01 the State of Texas and not inconsistent with other provisions of this Charter. Section 7.03 Department of Police: There shall be established and maintained a Department of Police to preserve order within the City and to secure the residents of said City from violence and the property therein from injury or loss. 15 September 25,2000 Dianne McWethy Assistant City Manager City of Colleyville P.O. Box 185 Colleyville, Texas 76034 Dear Ms. McWethy: The purpose of this letter is to formalize my interest in the position of City Secretary with the City of Colleyville. I believe my studies and current and past experience is an excellent match for the duties and responsibilities of this position. I serve as primary back-up support, in the absence of the City Secretary, including providing staff support for City Council meetings. During the past two elections, I have assisted the City Secretary with the election administration. I am currently enrolled in the Texas Municipal Clerks Certification program. The required course work and seminars have provided special knowledge and training in the election process, records management, and budget preparation and administration. I have attended workshops that enhanced my understanding of the Public Information Act and the unique requirements of city government. My present position in the Parks and Recreation Department has provided many opportunities to interact with elected officials, department heads and the general public. As secretary to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, I prepare and proofread agendas and briefings for the Board packets and take minutes during the Board meetings. These experiences broadened my understanding of the needs of our citizens and provided me with insight and skills for meeting those needs. I have received commendations from my superiors, co-workers and citizens for my dedication and professionalism. I look forward to the opportunity to discuss how my experience and skills can benefit the City of Colleyville. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, cyn~~/~ Cynthia Singleton enclosure Cynthia D. Singleton 6000 Ronna Court Colleyville, Texas 76034 817.488.1011 Excellent problem solving skills and a strong orientation in interpersonal skills. Able to work under pressure in fast-paced, time sensitive environment. Proven ability to manage multiple projects from planning through execution and completion. 1997 - Present Office Assistant City of Colleyville Parks and Recreation · Serves as primary back-up support for City Secretary and enrolled in Texas Municipal Clerks Certification Program · Assists City Secretary in conducting city elections · Prepare agenda, briefings and minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board · Researched feasibility for optical imaging system for City Secretary's office · Served as department liaison for Continuous Process Improvement Program developing recommendation for records management · Administer department payroll, accounts payable and activity and facility reservations · Served as department liaison to Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District · Planned, organized implemented recreational programming 1990-1996 Administrative Assistant Whitehall-Robins HealthCare · Coordinated sales efforts between National Account Manager and major corporations · Designed and created sales presentations · Researched and provided Nielsen market share data to vendors 1985 - 1990 Area Coordinator Baxter Edwards Critical Care · Planne?, staffed and directed all office management functions for region office expansIon · Developed procedural and documentation manuals · Compiled data and prepared monthly sales reports and forecasts RESOLUTION R-00-1727 A RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY SECRETARY APPOINTMENT WHEREAS, the City Secretary has resigned her position effective October 20, 2000; and WHEREAS, the City Charter authorizes the City Manager to appoint the City Secretary with the approval of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has appointed Cynthia Singleton as City Secretary effective October 20,2000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1. THAT the appointment of Cynthia Singleton as City Secretary for the City of Colleyville effective October 20,2000 is hereby approved. AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. Passed by a vote of day of ayes, nays, and ,2000. abstentions, on this ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor C,IY Of ([;ecs CITY COUNCIL v Te,:. AGENDA BRIEFING For mtg. : 01/17/00 CMO Approval: Item#: 13 Resolution # : R-OO-1728 Previous Action: None DEPT. : CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SUBJECT: Approval of the establishing Compensation for Interim City Manager Reading and Public Hearing Backqround The City Council has appointed Dianne McWethy as Interim City Manager effective November 1, 2000. Given the additional responsibilities and duties she will assume an increase in compensation would be appropriate during her service as the Interim. Neighboring cities have provided compensation increases for Interim City Managers and the City's Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual calls for such adjustments. Recommendation Review salary survey information and approve an appropriate increase in compensation for the Interim City Manager. C~~.. CITY MANAGER ~ DEPARTMENT HEAD FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) RESOLUTION R-00-1728 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION FOR THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER WHEREAS, the City Council has appointed Dianne McWethy Interim City Manager effective November 1, 2000; and WHEREAS, she will assume additional responsibilities and duties; and WHEREAS, the City of Colleyville Personnel and Policies Procedure Manual requires that employees who are temporarily assigned to a higher job classification be compensated accordingly; and WHEREAS, a survey of other cities indicates that Interim City Managers received additional compensation during their services as Interim. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEYVILLE, TEXAS: Sec. 1. THAT the City Council establishes an annual salary of $ for Dianne McWethy, Interim City Manager, effective November 1, 2000 and ending at the conclusion of her Interim City Manager status. Sec. 2. THAT the City Council authorizes a car allowance of $ per month during her tenure as Interim City Manager with payment to be made on the first of each month beginning November 1,2000. AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. Passed by a vote of day of ayes, nays, and ,2000. abstentions, on this ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE: Jean Harris, TRMC, CMG City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor ([;ecs CITY COUNCIL Tm. AGENDA BRIEFING For mta. : 10/17/00 CMO Approval: Item # : 14 Report : Previous Action: None DEPT. : FINANCE SUBJECT: Monthly Financial Report - September 2000 General Fund Current year tax collections finished the year at 98.88% of the roll. Sales tax revenue was down by 14.32% ($29,102) as compared to August 1999. The September sales tax payment was up almost $11,000 (9.78% increase). The October payment will be accrued per accounting rules, but we have not received it as of this date. Residential permits are down by three as compared to the month of September 1999 (9 issued in September 2000), but they remain up by fifty-two for the year. Municipal Court revenues are up due to greater citations issued in prior months of the fiscal year and greater efforts in warrant collections. The average amount expended by the departments at the end of September is 94.4% Utilitv Fund Water sales and usage are higher than the prior year due to the heat and drought conditions we experienced last fall, early winter, and this summer. Building related installations are up due to greater activity. Interest income is now up due to timing of maturities. The average amount expended by the Utility Fund at the end of September is 99.9% but there may be a final September settle-up bill from TRA due to high water s~ L-:%-:t~ CITY MANAGER ~L. FINANCIAL REVIEW (IF NECESSARY) MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2000 Current Taxes Delinquent Taxes Penalty & Interest $4,369,195 30,500 28,100 $4,459,465 33,208 32,750 $4,369,195 30,500 28,100 $3,913,323 30,433 38,113 .$qIAt..~P:vat..qR$Mt;.Ii~m: ................................. ..................................... ...................~...-.-_..,..,._... :H:$~i~~t~t~? :... ..:..H;~.?$il~~::: ...:$~+4g?t~~~:.: .::...$~i~~~;~~9;..: 13.96~, 9.12% .14.07% TU Electric $665,000 $656,715 $665.000 $699,145 .6.07% Tri.County Electric 27,885 27,630 27.630 26,061 6.02o/c Lone Star Gas 147,000 105,713 147,000 111,323 .5.04~ Southwestern Bell 153,693 151,162 153,693 139,249 8.56% General Telephone 18,296 23,924 18,296 17,772 34.62o/c Refuse 79,206 85,285 79,206 83,608 2.01 '?c Cable TV 99,000 116,843 99,000 97,442 19.91% ..........................,......'.....................................................................;.................".... mQTA~'.Nqffl~$ttIA~g$:.. .. .. ......... ................................. ....................................... ................................-. ............--.....',....",.... ::..~~~.~Q~~Q:: :.:.::Ii;i~?ig?g'. ':.$.:~:~~:~~~~?$..:.' :'$l.;t?4;~..': Sales Tax Mixed Beverage Tax $1,901,848 22,000 $1,582,694 18,053 $1,901,848 22,000 . ...........-.................................... .................................................... :tdtAtfSAlmS?tAX:IJ .-..,........,..-................................. .............................................. .................... . .................................... . ':'$1 +92BS48 :;: .... .:~:~)j~jm~j~~~i~ir~ ~;~~:~ ~]~t$l ;923~S48" .... ........................... .....................,... . ..................... ............ ... Building Plumbing Electrical City License Building Plan Review Fee New Business Animal Sign Permit Fence Permit Fire Permits $520,000 101,000 91,000 40,000 57,000 1,000 1,510 2,900 3.000 225 $752,514 148,068 106,817 40.588 101.093 1,006 2,031 3,640 4,831 775 $520,000 101,000 91,000 40,000 57,000 1,000 1,510 2,900 3,000 225 $1,664,567 22,542 ........,....................... ....................,-...'...... .....$.........68......7......1...09........ ))1.;)) ...........) $574,737 107,979 91,969 35,163 5,800 1,155 2,000 2,730 3,430 425 ...........................,...,........................................ . .,........-..,........,....,............................................... ,.(}:r~fGIBS~~~~lf:A;R:M!m~::): .... ::::$.~~7;~~~:::$+;JPf;~BjU ... ...::::.$:~.7~~~$::::>..~?$,$~ Fines False Alarms $424,091 7,320 $571,468 3,300 .-..................-...........-......,....,..-........... .. .....,.........,..".,...-........ ....................$. "5.. .,]"4" ....7. "6. "s' ..... .......".... . . ." .. ..-.......'... ... ... ... .-.. .".... . ... -... .. :::::::::::::::::~::::::::..-::::;.::~.::~:.::.::(:;::::.:::.:.:::.::::~ $424,091 7,320 $421,130 10,075 )I.........$4aJ.;~o-$I .... ..... .."..--.."....".. ..... . - ......".....".. .4.92% -19.9] Q1~ 30.93% 37.13% 16.14% 15.43% 1642.98% .12.90% 1.55% 33.33% 40.85% 82.35% 35.70% .67.25% MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2000 Re-zoning $10,506 $14,000 $10,506 $12,877 8.72% Plat Fee/Site Plan 10,000 23,287 10,000 17,597 32.34% Board of Adjustment 2,500 2,125 2,500 1,625 30.77% Sale of Material 3,000 3.636 3,000 3,189 14.02% Weed Mowing 7,500 635 2,000 9,835 -93.54% Animal Impoundment 3,250 3,165 3,250 3,422 .7.51% Ambulance 62,400 77 ,450 62,400 62,520 23.88% Recreation Program 57,775 98,452 56,000 40,263 144.52% Non-Resident Fee Parks 16,000 21,130 16,000 15,585 35.58% Field Use Charge 29,430 21,815 21,815 23,787 .8.29% Engineering & Inspection 75,000 140,031 75,000 106,393 31.62% Chgs & Reimbursements 8,000 19,408 8,000 16,328 18.86% Commumity Center Rental 151,000 185,168 151,000 141,136 31.20% Lot Drainage Insp Fee 25,000 32,375 25,000 25,125 28.86% .........,.-..............--..-......,............-.......-.-...............-............-....................'.......... ...................................,.-.. ,;,.,;".;.;.;.;<.;.;.:...;.;.;.;.:.;.;.;-:.:.;...;,;,;".;.;..,;,;,;,;.;,;,;".:.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;<.;.:.;.;.;.;.;.:-:-:.;.:';';';';';', ........,...............-............ ....'...-..................-......-... 19IAP..Pt1~R@g~FPR:$.;i]RY!:PI::::::..:::::::.i::.:::::::.:::Hii~.W'i}:: .... ::::::::::$~f::iP.ff/::::i:::i:tt:::M~p:i~tt::::::: :i.:::~?~ii~?: .:t:::.:~~;~. DARE Officer Reimb COPS FAST Grant $57,750 25,000 $57,881 o $57,750 o $55,125 10,555 5.00% 0.00% .,.,............<.,.,>'...:-....-..,....'......,....:-.-.-:.:-:>.....'..;...;.>:-:->-...;.-.:;:-:...;.;.:.:-;.....;.<::>.-:.:..-:.;.;.:...... ............................................................................... ........,.................,........ TOTA.L...INTE:RGOM~RNMgt1l1'~M::::: ..:H::~?;Z!Q:i.::~~?~~~ :::.:$~7;Z~: ...:i.....:.$651aSO Sale of Surplus Property $10,000 $0 $0 $27,595 100.00% Interest Income 296,500 348,873 296,500 257,316 35.58% Miscellaneous 13,260 16,353 13,260 21,206 -22.89% Murray Const Lawsuit Settlement 0 195,000 0 0 100.00% Tower Rental 69,925 47,189 69,925 45,410 3.92% TA..rA:t...o,A I. t;,,;i:tliiit.ti:tOq i.iS.... .:;::::.::::::;::.,:<::::.::::;::::::::;::..:;:::::::::::::.::::::$...:68.::..9..=.:;.:;;65......::: :;:::::::.:;::;::::;t;iiA#<i(l.:f::: q.. q: ::~~~^ ~o.ti!:: ..:...ylH......j~J~9~41...;1~;.....;;....... ::......\.::.:.:...:::..:...\L...R:...)99.): i:...):~~/d.:9r:..:.:#~;~i~ij: Transfer from Utility Fd $382,817 $447,005 $382,817 $417,784 6.99% :i:.~~'~719Q~: ...........-.-....................'....-.-. ....... .................... ...ir:~0'':;:.8. ..1. ...;.:t. f~:m~~5~;.:::.:::.:>{~: tgT~g~ffi$ffl~~:f~.~q.Rgygrngg~::::...1~9;~9R;~g:...$.ip.f!M;$$1..:.~~g;P~1;~~7 ...............$Q,4M4J~44 ...i.............?..H.Ht;~~: MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2000 TOTAL PERCENT THROUGH THROUGH INCREASE INCREASE 9/30/00 9/30/99 (DECREASE) (DECREASE) % OF CURRENT TAX ROLL COLLECTED 98.88% 99.01 % .0.13% .0.13% RESIDENTIAL BLDG PERMITS 246 194 52 26.80% COMMERCIAL BLDG PERMITS 11 20 (9) .45.00% PLUMBING PERMITS 1,081 818 263 32.15% ELECTRICAL PERMITS 578 486 92 18.93% CITATIONS ISSUED 8,743 8,853 (110) .1.24% CITATIONS APPEALED 171 101 70 69.31% City Council and Secretary City Manager Finance Legal Economic Development Engineering Building Inspection Community Development Fire Police Parks Recreation Community Center Streets & Drainage Municipal Court Fleet Maintenance Merit Pool Compensation Study .......-_.-...........-.--_............-.-.. .............-................-.. .TO:TAJ..S(p~N$aS)<'< $226,119 616,416 427,111 100.000 144,470 601,335 270,325 357,831 2,310,063 2.328,012 991.322 151.547 241,890 1.373,417 109,892 135.005 o 223,326 ....... --- .- .......... . ::...$.~q~~9f$:~~~ $219,657 546,120 410,068 114,195 139,792 599,090 265,006 348,681 2,307.965 2,324.553 856.288 145,566 234,672 1,261,029 105,375 132,493 o o ~$~9;q~m;~~~9: $226,119 616,416 427,111 100.000 144,470 601.335 270.325 357,831 2,310,063 2,328,012 991.322 151.547 241,890 1,373,417 109.892 135,005 o o ......................'......'.....-.-..-.-....'............... ...................................... ...........$. "}.O. .....S...84........7...5...5...... . . . . .. . . . .. . . . r~:~:~~~::. ..~:..:::.::.i::,....:..::...J::.:::.:..::.::.:?~~ . . ,....--.. ....................... 97.1% 88.6% 96.0% .I 14.2% 96.8% 99.6% 98.0% 97.4% 99.9% 99.9% 86.4% 96.1% 97.0% 91.8% 95.9% 98.1% 0.0% $6,462 70,296 17,043 (14,195) 4,678 2,245 5,319 9,150 2.098 3,459 135,034 5.981 7,218 112,388 4.517 2,512 o 223,326 .:.......:........$$~Z;~$~{ .....".....-............ MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2000 Water Sales Sewer Sales Sewer Installation Water Installation Sewer Tie.on Charges Engineering Charges Penalties Miscellaneous $4,868,869 1,606,264 22,000 61,600 45,000 25.000 145.690 7.500 >:'~~;7IM~g~: Interest Income $245.000 $6.449.614 $4,868,869 $5.800,468 11.19% 1,972,086 1,606,264 1.649.745 19.54% 23.100 22.000 19,300 19.69% 77 .332 61.600 58,612 31.94% 51,973 45.000 46,542 11.67% 64.675 25.000 44,274 46.08% 145.343 145,690 141.915 2.42% 11,854 7.500 11.729 1.07% $392,304 $245.000 ...................................... .................................... ....................................... U:::::$$.$.4.~aq~n:: 1~;;;;!d!l :=lm GALLONS OF WATER SOLD THROUGH 9/30/00 THROUGH 9/30/99 2.100.650,700 1,882.301.850 NUMBER OF WATER CUSTOMERS 7,282 7.002 TOTAL INCREASE (DECREASE) 218,348,850 280 PERCENT INCREASE (DECREASE) 11.60% 4.00% Administration Billing Operations Debt Service Merit Pool Compensation Study Transfer to General Fund $152.529 135.796 4.874,555 1.097,761 o o 382,817 $146,446 135.160 4,829,176 1,084,220 o o 447,006 $134.309 117,531 4,230,327 1,084,220 o o o 96.01% 99.53% 99.07% 98.77% 0.00% 0.00% 116.77% ~:f/t;r$p~p~4~pp~ff) .. ~,?~~g~~~l)i~ifH!j~!r .... $6,083 636 45,379 13.541 o o (64,189) :.r;:$~.14~Q:' Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 1 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Hart at 7:00 P.M. on September 25, 2000. Roll Call: Present: Luann Edwards, William Tyler, Mike Collins, Jim Fletcher, Bryan Hill, Tom Hart Rob Rutherford Barry LeBaron, Clayton Husband, Tom Niederauer, Jan Levy Absent: Staff: Invocation: The invocation was given by Commissioner Tyler. Approval of Minutes: September 11, 2000 Commissioner Fletcher moved to approve the minutes as corrected to reflect the vote on item #1. Commissioner Edwards seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Edwards, Tyler, Fletcher, Hill, Hart Noes: None Abstained: Collins Recognition of Outgoing Commissioners: Rob Rutherford, Mike Collins, William Tyler, and Jim Fletcher Chairman Hart presented a plaque to each of the outgoing Commissioners other than Rob Rutherford because he was absent. Commissioner Fletcher said that it has really been an honor and a privilege for him to serve on the Commission. He said that he would like to thank the Honorable Mayor Sauder from Hurst who is seated in the audience for appointing him to the Zoning Board of Adjustment ten years ago. He said that it has been a pleasure to work with the Council members and other Commissioners over the years. He said that the citizens are fortunate to have the staff they do and the behinds the scenes work that they do, it makes the Commissioners jobs easier. He thanked everyone very much. Commissioner Collins said that it has been a rewarding experience to serve on the Commission. He said that he has spent most of his adult life serving in the community. He said that he appreciated working with the Commissioners, with Jan, with the City and with staff. He said that it has been a real eye opening experience and he hoped that he added value and he enjoyed it. Commissioner Tyler thanked everyone for allowing him to serve with them and it has been a privilege. He said that after serving on the Zoning Board of Adjustment and Planning and Zoning, he has an appreciation for folks who commit themselves to this community and donate their time. He said that before he ever complains, he will remember the work that he's put in and appreciate those who serve and give their time. He said that this experience has shown him who we should Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 2 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. appreciate those who serve in the community, and though we may not always agree, we can agree to disagree and be professional. He said that it has been a privilege to serve on this Commission and he thanked them. SWURING IN OF COMMISSIONERS: Place 1 - Jo Ann Gasper Place 2 - Joe Hocutt Place 3 - Mark Hollis Place 4 - Jeffrey Wall Jan Levy, Planning & Zoning Assistant, administered the oath of office. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Commissioner Edwards nominated Tom Hart for Chairman. Commissioner Gasper seconded the nomination. Commissioner Hocutt nominated Jeffrey Wall for Chairman. Jeffrey Wall declined the nomination. There being no other nominations the vote for Tom Hart for Chairman was: Ayes: Gasper, Edwards, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: None Commissioner Hart was elected Chairman. Commissioner Edwards nominated Bryan Hill for Vice Chairman. Commissioner Wall seconded the nomination. Commissioner Hocutt nominated Mark Hollis for Vice Chairman. Commissioner Gasper seconded the nomination. There being no other nominations the vote for Bryan Hill for Vice Chairman was: Ayes: Edwards, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: Gasper, Hocutt, Hollis Commissioner Hill was elected Vice Chairman. 1. PUBLIC HEARING - A Zoning Change requested by David Bagwell, from AG to PUD-R (planned unit development-residential on 54.93 acres located on a portion of Bluebonnet Hills on Hall Johnson Road - Broughton. Case Z-00-064 Tom Niederauer presented the case to the Commission. Commissioner Edwards asked what the percentage of open space was. Staff responded that it was 20%. Mr. Niederauer said that the open space is designed differently than staff normally sees. He said that there are strips of open space that allows viewing from the Highland Meadows Addition. He said that open space is normally used for detention and this plan does have some of that. He said that the open space is disbursed throughout the subdivision. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 3 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Commissioner Gasper asked what the fire department has said regarding the narrow streets. Mr. Niederauer responded that they are opposed. He explained the Development Review Committee procedures and said that they support the existing regulations for development and in most cases do not support anything that varies from the ordinances. He said that on that basis these streets do not meet the City standards. Barry LeBaron said that this property had been considered for an R20 zoning change request and the cemetery said that this property is surplus to their needs and they have advertised it for sale. He said that Mr. Bagwell initially asked for R20 and Highland Meadows directly to the east is also zoned R20. At the public hearing Mr. Bagwell said that he would like a subdivision like Highland Meadows, but there were a number of citizens from Highland Meadows who said that they thought this property would remain open forever. He said that there was concerns about where the property abuts the Highland Meadows Addition and the R20 was denied, but their was interest that in the proposal being resubmitted as a PUD to offer the opportunity to customize the request to mitigate some of the concerns. Mr. LeBaron said that one of the concerns was the view from Highland Meadows and Mr. Bagwell has added a 30' greenbelt where the property abuts Highland Meadows that connects to the greenbelts that go through the subdivision. He said that Mr. Bagwell has lined up the streets and greenbelt areas to provide some sort of vista down through portions of this development. He said that Mr. Bagwell is required to provide 20% open space that it can either be private or public and in this case it is private. Commissioner Edwards asked if one of staff's objections was because of the private gates and traffic patterns. Mr. LeBaron responded that initially the subdivision was proposed with 83 lots with an entrance on Hall Johnson and an entrance to the north. He said that staff has received a request from a number of citizens in the Ross Downs area requesting to close Wyatt Drive, and while it is not directly related to the zoning change request, it does have an impact. He said that Mr. Bagwell has said that he will probably do the subdivision as a gated subdivision and the north access would be closed off and only used as an emergency access. He said that staff is concerned that 83 lots is a large number to use basically one entrance and staff would like to see a different entrance design. With the subdivision being located on a major collector street, it creates more concern. Commissioner Edwards asked if the entrance is offset far enough from the streets on the south side of Hall Johnson Road. Staff responded that it was. Mr. LeBaron told the Commission that this request does not include any request for future fire station property. He said that initially, Mr. Bagwell was going to try to find a location off site and try to negotiate some kind of exchange so that the current fire station site would go away and ultimately become a part of the development. Staff recommended that the fire station be taken out of the equation. Mr. LeBaron said that the current station property is % of an acre and they are looking for approximately 3 acres. Commissioner Hocutt asked what the response time by the fire department would be if the Hall Johnson entrance was blocked and they had to drive around to the emergency entrance to the north. Fire Chief Johnson said that the response time would be significantly increased. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 4 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Commissioner Hill asked about the lengthy development standards that were submitted by the developer and how they matched up with the current city code. Mr. LeBaron said that they would address the development standards after the public hearing. Commissioner Hocutt asked if there were any significant trees or natural ponds or anything to be disturbed currently existing on the property. Mr. LeBaron said that the property is significantly open, but there are a number of trees in the northern section that will need to be retained. Commissioner Hocutt asked for a tree survey in order to retain them to add to the natural beauty of the addition. Commissioner Wall asked about the road that comes in off Highway 26. He said that he drove on Sanders Lane and asked if there would be any impact to the properties on Sanders by this subdivision. Mr. LeBaron said that Sanders Lane does not currently go through, but the Master Plan indicates that it will loop around and connect to Wyatt Drive and then Industrial. Commissioner Edwards said there have been plans to straighten out the intersection of Sanders and Tinker Road. Commissioner Hollis asked if this was the appropriate place to consider and put in place the developer's standards that refer to customary engineering standards. Mr. LeBaron said that they have been included as per the developer's request as a part of the ordinances in the past. He said that staff is opposed to those kinds of developments because the standards are in the Lane' Development Code that was adopted earlier in the year. He said that the developer's standardL should not be a part of the land use zoning ordinance and would recommend against using them. Commissioner Hollis asked if they approve the ordinance with the development standards, would they be granting a waiver from the City's land development standards. Mr. LeBaron said that according to the zoning ordinance, the PUD can establish the terms and conditions. Commissioner Hollis asked if the property would be final platted at a later date and if the plat would be the more appropriate instrument to incorporate the engineering standards. Mr. LeBaron said that the terms and conditions with the zoning change request are really plat development and infrastructure issues that should be addressed at time of platting. He said that the applicant would like to lock them in now in order to make sure that the City would not change the standards next month. Commissioner Gasper asked what the drainage issues are associated with this property. Mr. LeBaron responded that the developer is required to keep the runoff on this property like it is today. He said that he is proposing to incorporate a number of detention sites throughout the property rather than one large detention site. He would use the open areas as detention ponds. Commissioner Gasper said that it seems in the development standards that the applicant does not want to provide any off site drainage structures. She said that it seems he anticipates there will be significant run off into the drainage system. Mr. LeBaron said that he is not sure the applicant can determine the amount of detention that is needed or if improvements are needed. He said that the language in the standards addresses it suggest that if there is a later surprise according the standards, the developer would not be responsible for it. Commissioner Gasper asked if that was the normal practice because she thought that developers were supposed to absorb the cost for development of property and not pass it along to others. Mr. LeBaron said that Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 5 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. she was correct. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: David Bagwell, 8222 Douglas Ave., Dallas, Texas, introduced his staff and said that they have a small business development for the last 10 years have concentrated on Colleyville and it is his business strategy to develop high end developments. He said that they have learned quite a bit about what the demand is for that kind of product and how to go about developing it. He said that there are certain things about the way they develop that differentiates them from a number of other developers. He said that it is their business strategy to reach for as high of end product as they can house wise in the market place. He said that he talked to someone that was complimentary about the consistency of their architecture and landscaping in Leyton Grove. He said that one of the things that they do is develop a set of standards that they use as a kind of rule book to get everyone up to a certain level of attractiveness. He said that if the Commission understands where they are coming from they will be able to comprehend where they want to go. He said that some of their developments have been R20 like Ashmore and Leyton Grove. He said that because the property on the east side of the cemetery was zoned R20, it seemed reasonable to him that they should ask for R20 zoning. He said that there was opposition that suggested that a PUD might be in order and the principal element for a PUD is that there is open space to be used to ease some of the concerns by the residents who opposed the R20. Mr. Bagwell said that they take the position that the property will be sold by the cemetery and be developed. He said that if it is to be sold, it would be used for residential and it seems that it would be used for a product like they mentioned. He said that because they are experienced in the community and use high standards, they are the best to of the prospects to develop the property. He said that if things cannot be worked out with the community, there will be others to develop the property. He said that besides pointing out the quality product they develop, he wanted the Commission to know that none of this is personal to them. He said that he understands that it is personal to people in the neighborhood and all he is here to do is advocate some ideas. He said that if they are worthy ideas they will be approved and if not the Commission will turn to someone else to develop the property. He said that he would like to discuss the ideas that they are recommending for the project. Mr. Bagwell discussed the topography of the land. He said that basically the property falls away to the west and they incorporated that into the land plan. He said that they put the access road at the low point of the property. He said that the neighbors would have an interesting view at anyplace along the development. He said that they think that the land plan works with the natural topography of the property and the use of the green space creates a very beautiful property. He said that in response to the objections by the neighbors to the east, they wanted some sort of buffer and he was never able to get any sense as to what size of buffer that would be. He said that he had to make some business sense of the property and have suggested a 30' buffer and everyone that lives to the east will have attractive views off to the west. He said that he understands that it will not be same as they have today, but if this property is to be developed, they will still have very attractive views off to the west. He said that if the property that was once vacant is developed, the developer will never make everybody happy. He said that he cannot Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 6 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. keep the property open, but can create something that in lieu of being open, will be attractive and he feels that the substantial amount of open space will benefit the people across the street or passing by. He said that he is a substantial planter of trees and the property will be reforested. Mr. Bagwell said that he borrowed techniques for development from the River Oaks addition in Houston where the looping street technique has been used very successfully. He said that there are other developments in the country that use the same approach and one of them is the Greenway Parks development in Dallas where the green belts in back yards have been used. He said that as they combine the two techniques, it will make for a very novel and attractive subdivision. He pointed out the views from various locations around the subdivision. He said that one of the reasons that the community as a whole would find the project attractive is what it does for the community. He said that not only in terms of high quality of development, but the contribution that it makes for tax revenue and shoppers for the retail that the community is interested in. He said that his company evaluated some of the less expensive homes in Oakbrook Hills from a tax standpoint. He said that considering the ad velorum tax and a projection of sales tax that is derived from Oakbrook Hills, this Broughton looks like it will produce approximately $1,000,003 in revenue to the community per annum. He said that the property is currently producing $0.00 in tax revenue. He reviewed the special conditions. He said that of the four PUD's each one has some special condition that is contrary to the published standards for the community. He said that Oakbroor Hills has 40' wide rights-of-way instead of 50' wide. He said that some of the streets in Westmon. and Glenwood will be 40' rights-of-way. He said that sometimes staff is opposed to changes and sometimes not, but it seems that they are always opposed to their changes. He said that in May of this year, two of the things that they have proposed have been approved for Remington Park and staff did not object to it. 50' rights-of-way for cul-de-sacs and 15' side yards on lots that side on side streets have been approved on Remington Park. Mr. Bagwell said that they agree to disagree with the Fire Chief on 50' right-of-way for cul-de-sacs. He said that he has information that is a survey of cul-de-sac widths in the Dallas/Fort Worth area and Colleyville is the only city that requires a wider stem to the cul-de-sac. He said that every subdivision that they have developed has only had 50' rights-of-way on the stems to the cul-de-sacs. Westmont, Ashmore, Oakbrook Hills, and Glenwood have them as well as Remington Park and others throughout the Dallas/Fort Worth area. He said that they are not unique in proposing changes to the City development standards. Mr. Bagwell said that staff proposed changes to the City Council for changes to the development standards for thickness of streets in subdivisions. He said that for every street that is in a residential area is 5 inches thick concrete with number 3 rebar and 18 inches on center and 3,000 psi concrete in it. He said that staff proposed to Council that it should be 6 inches thick concrete and they supported that aspect of change to the ordinance. He said that they are proposing the equivalent in the Broughton development by using 5 inches thick concrete with 3,600 psi. He said that scientists would testify that they are the same. He said that what he is asking for is less expensive and they would spend the difference in amenities for the development. He recapped the reasons they want to develop the property in the manner they are proposing. He said that he hoped that when the Commission makes a recommendation to the Council they would consider Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25. 2000 Page 7 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. the different elements and if there are ways he could modify the plan to make it more attractive, he would be very interested in hearing them. Commissioner Hart asked if Mr. Bagwell had preservation in mind for the trees at north end of the property. Mr. Bagwell said that if the trees are in the rights-of-way, they will do whatever they can to avoid cutting them down. He said that if they are in a front yard or out of the building plan, his standards deal with how to preserve them. He said that he does not allow grass to be put under native trees because what kills them most of the time is over watering them. He said that they have worked with arborists to develop the standards and they let the native trees alone as far as irrigating them. Mr. Bagwell said that every subdivision needs a plan to preserve trees and add trees and in their Westmont Addition they are planting over 2,000 trees of their own volition. They are required by the wetland provision to plant 800 but they are planting 1,2000 additional trees. Kirk Roger, 2001 Reynolds Drive, around the corner of Reynolds and Wyatt Drives at the north end of the property. Mr. Rogers said that he was really impressed that Mr. Bagwell could develop this plan since he told the Board on two other occasions that it was not economically feasible to do a PUD and yet he has found 20% green areas. He eluded that anyone who could do a PUD is a less than quality developer. He has said that there are no guarantees that the plan will end up like presented and he hopes it doesn't because he is at the north end of the development. Mr. Roger said that he is concerned about the City of Colleyville bending over backwards for Mr. Bagwell. He said that the fact that he was going to get turned down for his R20 request, that they were willing to negotiations with Bluebonnet Hills Cemetery to lower the price to allow him to do a PUD-R, and now that he has a PUD they didn't have to do that. He said that he is concerned that there are only 5 active commercial cemeteries in Tarrant County and the closest one is in Fort Worth. He said that with so much growth in the Mid Cities and with more people dying, it won't be long before Bluebonnet will be trying to condemn land to take in more cemetery property. He said that he called Bluebonnet hills five years ago to see what their plans are behind his house and was told that they would probably there in about 75 years. He said that with this property being sold, they may now run out of land in 15 to 20 years. Mr. Roger said that Bluebonnet Hills came to him and yet the Fire Chief who has been trying to buy land didn't know about the sale of the land by Bluebonnet Hills. He said that this is cemetery property and institutional land and the City has never planned on getting any tax money from this land and they have paid extra for their properties. He said that he added a balcony to his game room, tore down an 8' privacy fence and put in a 5' picket fence so that they could enjoy the view and now they will have a house sitting in his back yard. Mr. Roger said that he did not realize that Mr. Bagwell proposed a fence at the north end of the property to prevent traffic from passing through their neighborhood and he does appreciate that. He said that if there isn't a gate, everyone in his development will cut through Mr. Bagwell's development to Hall Johnson Road. He said that currently to get to Hall Johnson is a very lengthy trip. He asked the Commission to turn the request down. Ruth Heidel, 1712 Gatehouse Court, called the Commissioners' attention to the correspondence and petitions that represents owners of over 30% of the property within the 200' of the zoning request. She said that 29 petitioners have signed twice stating opposition to the plan for residential use. She displayed an overhead showing the area of opposition. She said that the owners of the surrounding property represent four distinct neighborhoods: Stone Crest Estates, Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 8 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Montclair Parc, Highland Meadows, Ross Downs, and 11 individual property owners. She said that there is no one single person who could represent this entire group and yet the developer has contacted the president of one homeowners' association to try to negotiate features of his proposed development to circumvent opposition at the hearing. She said that the president does not own property adjacent to the land and had not been in touch with any of the residents who do. Ms. Heidel said that the residents in Ross Downs consider the original plan that they showed without a gate posed such a threat to their children's safety that they have requested that Wyatt Drive be closed, and she supports that request. She said that all of the traffic from the addition will be forced onto Hall Johnson Road through an uncontrolled intersection. She said that one of the former Commissioners noted that there were many challenges to developing the property and one of them being the fire station at the entryway. She said that there will be emergency vehicles competing for road access along with cars from 83 lots all behind her house. She said that she and her neighbors are greatly affected because they have to enter on Hall Johnson in the area and Mr. Bagwell did not try to contact them for input. She said that at the last hearing, Commissioner Hill commented that the property could be developed as residential in the AG district and have 3 acre lots. She said he said that some kind of buffer and park would make the development less dense and Mr. Bagwell responded that he cannot do the kind of developments he does and include buffers and open space. She said that apparently that is so because he has provided very little buffers and open space for the existing homes. She said that some of the homes have no buffers and some only have a shallow road to look across and some have cul-de- sacs abutting their back fences. She said that Mr. Lucas at the north end of the property will havp headlights shining into his living room and bedroom windows. Ms. Heidel said that the buffers anL open space are being provided in the new development among the new structures yet to be built while existing homes lose their backyard privacy. She said that a portion of the cemetery property is paying taxes and provides $365,900 taxes per year and a portion provides $568,395 per year totaling $934,395 to the tax rolls just by sitting vacant. She encouraged that Commissioners to take a long hard look as to what this single zoning change will mean to Colleyville. She said that she came here for some peace, quiet, and privacy and thought that living near a cemetery was a perfect solution and if the property is developed it will destroy the reason many people chose this location to call"home". She asked the Commission to deny the request. Rich Munson, 1905 Hall Johnson Road, passed out photographs to the Commission. He said that the subdivision needs to connect to the north and to the west to provide a direct connection to Highway 26. He said that he knows that it is a burden to some residents who live in the area, but we are a community and street networks are very important, not a series of cloistered subdivisions. He thinks that it is a good idea to provide access for Ross Downs residents to have access to Hall Johnson and to the Community Center and access to the north to go to Dallas or Trophy Club. He said that the applicant wants a gated subdivision and he is opposed because of the social implications they provide. He said they are bad for the community and bad for the social structure and they serve to isolate people. Mr. Munson said that the perimeter street fe4es should apply to this subdivision to reimburse the City for some of the costs to reconstruct Hall Johnson Road. He said that in the wet Spring of 1990 the soil became saturated and the drainage structures couldn't either. He said that the water came down at such a rate to cover Hal' Johnson Road and the drainage structure clogged and the water had no place to go and f100dea his property. He said that he had 3" of water in the garage. He said that he currently has a brick Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 9 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. wall with several openings and if the water ever comes across the road it will be trapped in his property. He said that he does not want a road dumping into his property and there needs to be retention ponds not detention ponds that hold the capacity to prevent him and others in the area from being flooded. There are serious drainage problems that need to be addressed. Mr. Munson said that the property needs to remain a cemetery and is pleased to hear the amount of tax revenues the cemetery is generating. He said that if the property were not built on, the city would not have the cost of infrastructure maintenance, the police and everything else associated with it. He asked the Commission to deny the request. Dave Baucum, 6108 Highland Hills Drive, displayed panoramic photos to show the view behind his home and the trees in the area. He had a plat showing the location of an aqueduct that is on his and four other properties. Mr. Baucum said that nine years ago he moved to the most beautiful home he could have ever wished to live in with a wonderful neighborhood with a spectacular view, peace and tranquility. He said that the only reason they are here for this meeting is because of greed. He said that the cemetery corporation has overextended, overbuilt, and got into hot water with the SEC, the main holding company and now they need cash. He said that they say everyone is living longer and business is slow, yet when they were expanding they must not have looked at the statistics. He said that now the citizens of the community are having to pay for the cemetery's problems. Mr. Baucum said that if the project goes through, he wants to make sure that they continue to have drainage on their property and if the aqua duct is not needed, he wants his 25' of land back. He said that there is a potential for destruction of wildlife with the development of property and the animals will relocated into the community and this could be dangerous to the children in the neighborhoods. He said that Colleyville is only 12 square miles in area and he asked if we have to have concrete on every square foot of it. He said that we need to protect the reason people moved here in the first place - the tranquility and the rural atmosphere of the city that makes Colleyville so unique. Pete Fedynich, 5512 Coventry Court, said that he lives across the street and is against the building in the cemetery. He said that he does not know how he will get out of his entry way if the subdivision is built. He said that it tough enough now in the mornings and evenings without additional traffic coming out straight across the street. He said that he was in favor of widening Hall Johnson Road because it would alleviate the traffic coming through, but how will it be handled later on. He said that with so much development in the area he has had a raccoon and a possum taken out of his attic and has captured 5 possums and a skunk in his backyard that he let go in the wildlife area. He said that with more digging there will be more wildlife in the neighborhoods. He said that he is against the rezoning because it will bring more traffic than anticipated for the widening of Hall Johnson. Hope Alcorta, 1708 Gatehouse Court, Stone Crest Estate, said that she is concerned about the widening of Hall Johnson Road and all of the traffic that it is going to create with a new subdivision. She said that she is concerned for the schools. She said that her son is in the first grade and the three first grade classes are almost up to full capacity. She said that with two other new subdivisions being built, she is not sure how the City or the School District will handle it. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 10 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Pete Fedynich, 5512 Coventry Court, said that when the Fire Chief was asked if the streets will be wide enough, he responded that they wouldn't. He said that the community should not go back to what was ten years ago and say that we did it before, why can't we do it again. He said that time means progress and progress means that you don't do things like you did before, as we don't ride horse now, we ride cars. He said that the developer should not be granted variances for regulations put in a year ago and that alone should keep the builder out of specific areas. Rich Munson, 1905 Hall Johnson Road, said that he moved to the area in 1977 and there has been some talk as to where to move the fire station. He said that the piece of property next to the utility center was purchase for the fire station and that is where the fire station needs to go. He said that the site was desirable because it is at the top of a hill and the people don't have to worry about accelerating up a hill and they have better site lines to get onto the road. He said that the fire station needs to go at that location not opposite Stone Crest. Cindy Wilson, 2406 Twelve Oaks Lane, the president of the homeowners' association for Ross Down. She said that they have 350 homes and have been working actively with the police department with traffic going through Ross Downs during rush hours and school times. She said that they discussed speed bumps, stop signs, as people have jumped curbs and nearly hit homes. She said that when she heard about Wyatt Drive being widened, she would want assurance that there would not be any access onto Reynolds. She said that she previously lived in Houston and does not want any standards to be changed for a developer. Ms. Wilson said that she has concerns about the drainage. She said that she loves living in the City of Colleyville because the~ listen to the citizens. She said that the widening of Pool Road has been successful because they have three schools eventually lead onto Pool Road and Highway 26 is a nightmare in the morning because of Grapevine High School traffic. She said that she would suspect that the one entrance and exit to the proposed subdivision would be a scary thing especially for the emergency vehicles. She said that the reason they have been told that they couldn't have speed bumps in Ross Downs is because of the necessary access required by emergency vehicles through their subdivision. She said that the residents who live against the cemetery are assured that nothing will every develop behind them and it will be very quiet and she can imagine that this has been a big shock to people in Highland Meadows and Ross Downs. She said that she is concerned about the fact that the fire station will need more property and if there are going to be more homes developed in the area, there certainly will be commercial to follow. She said that she has concerns about traffic, entrances and exits, the small buffers, and drainage. Marge Angers, 6104 Highland Hills Lane, said that she came and spoke at the last meeting and this plan has not addressed any of the major concerns which are entrance and egress from the subdivision and Hall Johnson not being able to support this kind of building, drainage, fire department. She said that now all Mr. Bagwell has done is made so that now most of the traffic is facing into their back yards. She said that that is not a way to raise small children as their fence will face onto a street and the street will be aimed into their back yard. She said that her property will not retain its value in a situation like that. Don Learman, 58008 Highland Hills Lane, said that the buffer zone is supposed to be 30' wide and it is only 5' to 6' where it is abutting cul-de-sacs. She said that most homes will not get the Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 11 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. benefit of the beauty proposed in this subdivision. She questioned the sincerity of the presentation by Mr. Bagwell and stated opposition to the zoning change. Scott Jostus, 6300 Wyatt Drive, said that he did his due diligence three times and has called Bluebonnet Cemetery and was told that this property would always be a cemetery. He said that City, he was also told that this was cemetery property and no development was being planned in the area. He said that records showed there were conversations going on with the fire department and the City Council about a fire station while he was asking the questions. He said that he is concerned about the infrastructure, the impact on the schools, the increase in traffic on Hall Johnson Road and he is against the zoning change. Dave Duzack, 2301 Wilkes Court, Ross Downs, said that this development will have an impact on the community and drainage is a big problem. He said that this is the beginning of the drainage that goes to Kimsey Park in Ross Downs and it impacts the Bear Creek erosion. He said that the City should buy the property and make it a park. Kipp Whitman, 3402 Crossgate Circle South, said that the Commission should consider some logic. He said that the trees in Highland Meadows are not original trees as the developer scalped the property. He said that Mr. Bagwell has a reputation for developing special subdivisions. He said that the longer the property is vacant, the more expensive it becomes to develop and less amenities will be offered. Scott Jostus said that maybe the cost is rising, but maybe it needs to stay a cemetery. Steve Apaliski, 2003 Reynolds Drive, said that he has concerns about the green space as there are none proposed for the areas that abut Ross Downs. He said that he wants buffers for all lots. He said that the property currently slopes down to his yard and he has concerns about the drainage. He said that there are safety concerns as they have even had cars vandalized in his subdivision and he wants to make sure that the streets are closed off. Tona Reynolds, 6108 Highland Hills, said that she is very passionate about this wonderful area. She said that when they were looking for a home, they were told by the homeowners on the street, the real estate agent, the City and the cemetery, that this was an institutional use and used as a cemetery. She said that David Bagwell said that he could not do a PUD-R. He made it sound like an ultimatum. She said that the citizens of Colleyville that were already here deserve something for being here before the development was proposed. She said that she is from Texas and when you are from Texas and somebody tells you something, you generally take it like a handshake. She said that when a director of a cemetery or people associated with a city tell you that something is not going to happen, you assume you can believe them. Ms. Reynolds said that currently behind their house is a park like setting and to be reduced to 30' of open ground is unacceptable. She said that she. came here to ask the Commission to vote this down. She said that they should contact other cemeteries and see if they could purchase the land or build a park. AI Zim, 7209 John McCain Road, said that he has tried to contact Mr. Bagwell twice through his attorney regarding water drainage that could possibly come on his property from the development Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25,2000 Page 12 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. he is doing on the corner of Westcoat and John McCain and neither time has he replied. He saio that he is prepared now to be in a regressive law suit against him and possibly against the City of Colleyville for allowing him to have water go across his property which is illegal. He said that we hired a Fire Chief in Colleyville and he is a smart man and we need to listen to his suggestions and to what he thinks is not going to work rather than wait until we have a fire and find out that the streets are too narrow for a fire truck to turn around and can't get people out. He said that if there needs to be 50' streets, Mr. Bagwell needs to do it. If there needs to be a 50' cul-de-sac, then that is what we need to do. He said that both the police department and fire department need to be listened to in their suggestions on platting. He said that he wanted to talk about water drainage and how everyone here has talked about water flooding over their property. He said that this subdivision is going to have streets made out of concrete and these streets do not retain water, but shove it down to the next lowest spot. He said that each house that is on the property is going to take that much water retention off the property. He said that the City of Bedford has imposed a drainage water tax based on how much concrete you have on your property as opposed to how much grass. He suggest that the Commission table the case and take their plat to the City of Bedford and have them look at the amount of water that will be running off this property and have them make suggestions for Hall Johnson. He said that the Commission is grossly underestimating the amount of water that is going to be running off the property. Mr. lim said that on the development at John McCain and Westcoat, he has changed the water flow from what he has proposed to the City and he isn't sure that anyone has looked at it. Anne-Marie Apaliski, 2003 Reynolds Drive, in Ross Downs, and said that she is in the north cornE of this development and they have no buffer. She said that her property backs up to Bluebonnet Hills. She said that the cemetery property is higher than theirs and there is currently a big drainage ditch and she is concerned about how it will be grated and the water they will get. She said that what happens in the morning for people who live in Ross Downs, Wyatt is just a gravel path, the only way to get to schools is to go down Reynolds to Meade to Connie and out to Twelve Oaks. She said that people have to turn left to go to Cross Timbers and Grapevine High School and a right to go to Glenhope. She said that Highland Meadows also has to come down Twelve Oaks to get to these schools and all of the traffic backs up in the morning and you can't get out. She said that people have to content with work traffic, and the traffic on Hwy. 26 is backed up and children will be late for school so they go through Ross Downs. She said that 83 plus houses with 83 plus children and 83 plus cars and they will be going down her street to get to school. She said that this piece of land, the City won't care about aesthetics for the neighbors, but the valid points are the drainage, traffic, fire department, the danger of criminals entering Ross Downs from Wyatt Drive, commercial traffic, construction traffic and traffic problems in reverse. She asked the Commission to keep the property AG because it already has too many problems to begin with. Skip Kinch, 6202 Highland Hills Lane, said that he is one 15% of the people that has the 25' drainage ditch in the back and if this project goes through he would like a resolution about how that issue will be treated before it moves forward. He said that the unique design that creates headlights coming into 25% to 40% of the homes on Highland Hills Lane and that is bizarre. He said that the last zoning meeting there was mentioned that there was a speed issue with a straight north/south street. He said that they felt that they learned a lesson with Highland Hills Lane anc. didn't want to repeat is in this subdivision. He said that he is opposed to it and just because there Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 13 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. is land there it does not mean that it needs to be turned into a residential subdivision. David Richardson, an attorney have handled representation of Bluebonnet Hills in there sale of property to David Bagwell, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 2300, Dallas, TX, 75214. He said that he lives over by White Rock Lake in Dallas which is a pretty popular area of Dallas. He said that most of the people who oppose the project abut the cemetery and they each purchased their lots but did not purchase the lot that is owned by Bluebonnet Hills. He said that for them to say that Bluebonnet Hills now owes them some sort of obligation of open space or view of scenic country side is simply not the law in Texas. He said that Bluebonnet Hills is very regretful of the fact that this has touched off such a fire storm in the City of Colleyville, but they're owned by a publicly traded company that has made a business decision to sell property. He said that that is dictated by market factors that people simply don't bury people in the same manner that they used to. He said that it is much more prominent these days to use mausoleums and to use cremation. He said that it's real important for the Commission to understand that the folks that are asking for this to remain open space simply have no support for their position under Texas law. It is clear and has been litigated in Texas that if someone next door to you restricts your view you can't do anything about it. He said that you can't sue them as they don't owe you rights of a view or the right of open space. He said that the cemetery has made projections about how much longer the land they have outside of this land is going to last them and the projection is that it will last longer than anybody in the room will be alive. He said that is important to look at where these people live who are in opposition in relation to the cemetery and realize what they are asking the Commission to do. He said that they will have to set up with Mr. Bagwell if he can build the development he wants to build in a way that is suitable to the City of Colleyville and the zoning and fire codes. He said that if it is not Mr. Bagwell, somebody else is going to buy the property. He said that there are a number of developers who are willing to buy the property and the cemetery has made zero marketing effort. He said that while he has heard some very legitimate concerns this evening, but a lot of them are requesting the Commission to do what they can't do under the law and to infringe upon the constitutional rights of Bluebonnet Hills to use its property. Mr. Richardson said that the' best use that Bluebonnet Hills has identified for this property is to sell it and it's their constitutional right to do it. He said that an attempt to handcuff them into leaving it as open field is simply an abuse of the process. Commissioner Hill said that it is a unique piece of property and he doesn't think that there will be houses built on it unless the zoning changes. He said that it seems to be a part of the process to gain the sales price that Bluebonnet Hills is asking and Mr. Bagwell mentioned previously that this is the highest price that he has ever paid for property in Colleyville. He said that saying that the property will be sold is only half of the equation and the other half is appeasing area residents and City concerns, then rezoning the property and putting it to that use. He said that he asked if the representative from Bluebonnet Hills was in attendance at the last meeting to dialog modifying the purchase price to allow less density and more buffer zones. He said that Mr. Bagwell may be trying to put more homes on the site because of the purchase price he is being demanded to pay. Mr. Richardson responded that he agreed that the property needs to be rezoned in order to build homes. Commissioner Hill said that it takes other factors to put to use the property other than cemetery. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 14 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Commissioner Gasper asked Mr. Richardson if Bluebonnet Hills anticipates selling any more 01 its private property or does this sale assume to be the last transaction in the foreseeable future. Mr. Richardson said that the only other transaction that has been contemplated is selling a portion of the land immediately at the southeast corner of the land in order for Colleyville to build a bigger fire station. Commissioner Hill told Mr. Richardson that it may be possible to obtain a very handsome return of the investment while still allowing for a much less dense residential development. Mr. Richardson said that he thinks what Commissioner Hill is trying to say is, "Will you cut the price so that this guy can build fewer houses out there?" Commissioner Hill responded that that is between Mr. Richardson and Mr. Bagwell, but he is seeing a lot of legitimate concerns. He said that although there may not be a right under Texas law to make the claims that the neighbors are making, it is under the purview of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to take those concerns into consideration in allowing a rezoning. Mr. Richardson responded that Commissioner Hill is absolutely right and he is not here to say that he will sell the property and just completely circumvent the Commission and is asking them not to take anything he has said at face value. He said that he is sure that the City of Colleyville has very able representation and has counseled them on the constitutional issues that come into play when persons and corporations are entitled to use their land. Commissioner Gasper said that one of the citizens talked about Bluebonnet Hills possiblv condemning property in the future to expand the cemetery. She said that it is her understand in, that condemning property can only be done by sovereign entity and Bluebonnet Hills is a private corporation and therefore would never be able to condemn property. Mr. Richardson responded that she is absolutely right and there is no way that they could do that and there is no risk to the homeowners. Chairman Hart said that Commissioner Hill stated what his concerns were and he understands that under state law the neighbors can want what they want but they are not necessarily guaranteed to get what they want. Mr. Richardson responded that that is absolutely correct. Chairman Hart stated that the seller can sell his property as it is zoned. Mr. Richardson responded that absolutely they can sell it as it is zoned now. Chairman Hart asked Mr. Richardson if Commission has no obligation to change the zoning from AG to any other type of zoning. Mr. Richardson said that the Commission is not obligated to change zonings. Mark Hollis said that he agreed with Mr. Richardson completely that the owner of the property has the right to sell it and Mr. Bagwell certainly has the right to buy it, but the Commission is under no obligation whatsoever to make it suitable by Mr. Richardson's definition for his use. Mr. Richardson agreed. Steve Apaliski, said that he appreciates the legal opinion rendered at the meeting and it is good to see that a representative from Bluebonnet Hills is at the meeting. He told Mr. Richardson that his clients and representatives were asked the question by a number of people if they coulc' purchase some of the property initially. He said that they were told that the property was intendeL to be cemetery for the unforeseeable future. He said that he does not like casting dispersions on Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 15 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. people that the only reason they are opposed because they want an unrestricted view. He said they are here because they had beliefs when they bought their property about the way the land is arranged and now find that it is not as it was represented. Ruth Heidel, told Mr. Richardson that they had heard initially that the reason the cemetery was selling the land was because the economics of dying have changed. She said that the representative from the corporation was quoted in the Fort Worth Star Telegram saying that that is not the issue. He said that they needed the money and now he's back to saying because the economics of dying have changed. She said that Mr. Richardson and the corporation need to get their stories straight. She said that Bluebonnet Hills has a right to sell the land and Mr. Bagwell has a right to buy it and ask for a zoning change. She said that the property owners within 200' of the land have a right to oppose the request. She said that the thing that gulls her the most is the corporation that is not even in the state of Texas, but based in New Orleans, Louisiana, coming to the Colleyville Planning and Zoning Commission and trying to tell citizens that they better change the zoning, because if you don't accept this plan another one is right behind it. She said that she thought they still had home rule in this city and in the state and the citizens are the home and this is their home and please respect that. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Edwards asked if staff has researched the right-of-way that is available along Wyatt Drive. Barry LeBaron responded that it looks like Wyatt Drive was left over from adjacent developments and it is difficult to pin point what is defined as right-of-way. He said that it does not show up on any of the plats. He said that the City has received a request from a number of citizens in Ross Downs to close a segment. He said that a meeting will be held to discuss the matter with the citizens. Commissioner Edwards said that she remembers the discussion with Ross Downs V that the portion of Wyatt Drive to the north of Reynolds was abandoned as a part of the Ross Downs V plat. She said that it was done in order to have the size of lots wanted, there was not enough right-of-way left for a road. Mr. LeBaron said that his research shows that there is no dedicated right-of-way and it is just a street that has existed for a number of years. Commissioner Edwards asked if staff has asked the school system about the impact of this addition and is that something that staff can do? She said that the Pulte development is going on this year and they are bring on other projects. Mr. LeBaron said that staff could ask for correspondence from them. Commissioner Edwards said that a decision needs to be made to abandon the 25' drainage easement and ask Mr. Bagwell to take care of any problems that currently exist on the property. She said that the problem is really associated with the cemetery problem. Mr. LeBaron responded that when they come in with their drainage plans, the City would make a decision at that time. Commissioner Gasper said that the Commissioner heard that many other cities do not require as wide of street to permit fire access and she asked the Fire Chief if there are special considerations in Colleyville that makes it different than Dallas. Chief Johnson said that he can't give the exact Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 16 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. reasons why they made the streets wider for cul-de-sacs to have 36' of paving width requiring 56' of right-of-way. He said that from a fire fighting stand point, crews have more difficulty on narrow streets when fighting a fire on a large home because of the amount of equipment, hoses, and people needed. He said that most cities require a wider width on cul-de-sacs that normal street widths as does Colleyville. He said that the 36 feet becomes significant when looking at street lengths going to the cul-de-sac. He said that in Colleyville they are allowed to be 1,2000 feet long which is enormous compared to other cities' standards. He said that most cities' only allow 600' on cul-de-sac streets except for Southlake and they allow 1,000'. Commissioner Gasper recapped the reasons identified by Chief Johnston. Commissioner Gasper asked about the equivalency of a 6' vs. a 5' thick pavement. Mr. LeBaron responded that from a lay person's point of view that a 6' thick pavement has so many sacks of cement in it. He said that if you add more sacks, you can reduce the thickness and get the same strength. She asked if it is possible when it is correctly engineered. He responded that yes it is, but the engineering department says there are other factors, in terms of brittleness, ability to withstand shifting soils, etc. He said that is why the city is staying with 6' of thickness. Commissioner Gasper said that it sounds as if the numbers work out right, if someone wants to put a swimming pool in their back yard and has a dump truck removing loads of soil the street may not stand up to that kind of usage. Mr. LeBaron said that is true. Mr. LeBaron said that a lot of the heavy loads are during the development process with concrete trucks on fairly young pavement. Commissioner said that she understands that the more pavement ages, the stronger it becomes. Commissioner Gasper said that she has some various significant concerns about the drainage. She said that having lived in Colleyville for 8 years and having grown up in the area, she has seen when the water went over the spillway of Grapevine Lake. She said that they said it wouldn't happen for 100 years and if happened the first year they lived here. She said that she is not seeing anything that makes her comfortable with how the drainage is being treated. She said that she assumes that to fix the drainage, it would reduce the yield on the property. Commissioner Gasper asked Mr. Bagwell if he was able to fix the drainage so it wouldn't go over other people's property and be able to retain and take the water into storm sewers so it wouldn't go on public property without damaging anybody. Mr. Bagwell responded that he could. Commissioner Gasper said that she has a great deal of concerns that people will be driving down streets and car lights will be going into people's back yards. She said that when people buy property they have a reasonable expectation that things are kind of going to stay the way they are. She said, however, when a business decision is made and property is being sold, she doesn't think that homeowners expect to have headlights. She told Mr. Bagwell that he talks as if this is a new design and wanted to know if the development could be reconfigured so that the streets are wider, the headlights do not shine into people's properties, and the drainage is solely contained on property. Mr. Bagwell responded that those who design property, live around it, and live in it, need to take ultimate confidence in the City of Colleyville engineering staff and the development standards set by them. Also, developers hire licensed Texas civil engineers who are trained and experienced Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 17 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. to not produce bad drainage. He said that we do not live in a perfect world and does not know as a lay person what more can be done than to rely upon the drainage standards of the community that they are obligated to adhere to and the experience of licensed engineering firms to follow them. Mr. Bagwell said that what would be between the lights arid backyards would prevent that. He said that he is happy to commit that to the ordinance as it is not his intent for anyone to have lights in their backyard. He said that to the extent he can he puts himself in the position of people living around the development and considers what it would be like. He said that he would be glad to attempt to add to the buffer along the east side by eliminating it in other areas. Commissioner Edwards said that the people who have existing homes would, like as much open space as possible along the eastern side of the development and she asked Mr. Bagwell if he had considered that. He responded that he heard something different that was about existing views and they served that objective as well as the buffering objective. He said that he has never received a figure as to the buffer size, but tonight it was stated that 30' is too little and in some cases it looks as if there is only 5' to 6' and that is not correct. He said in some cases he could pull the bubbles back. Commissioner Hocutt asked if anyone on staff has talked to Bob Moore Sports Center as far as the impact of lights and foul golf balls. Staff distributed a letter in support of the zoning change from the owner of Bob Moore Sports Center. Commissioner Hocutt asked if there would be nets protecting the homeowners from golf balls going over the fence and what will be done about the lights late at night shining into the residential subdivisions. Commissioner Edwards stated her concerns about the open space, her opposition to a gated community since everyone should share the traffic, the special rules have caveats for drainage and streets, item's #5 & #5 relate to drainage. Mr. Bagwell responded that pilot channels are not favorable in the soil in Colleyville and one of the things that they are trying to establish if approved for zoning, they are trying to nail down all of the elements for development. He said that they have done that in their other subdivisions. She said that the layout of the private space is inefficient for the homeowners association to take care of. Commissioner Hollis asked why Mr. Bagwell added a condition that in lieu of concrete pipe they would be allowed to use another product. Mr. Bagwell responded that there are new products that come to market at gradually gain acceptance upon their use. He said that there are new products that have proven to be very effective and less expensive. If it is less expensive yet equivalent he should be allowed to use them and the proposal stimulates discussion at a technical level. Commissioner Hollis said that he agrees, however Mr. Bagwell needs to propose it to City staff and not the Planning and Zoning Commission and if the staff supports it, possibly the Commission can. Mr. Bagwell said that he has never found a Zoning Commission that is inclined to support different standards. Commissioner Wall asked questions of Mr. Bagwell about gated subdivisions and if there are other areas of Colleyville that have similar traffic patterns with this many lots entering and exiting without a stop light onto a thoroughfare. He said that there is a problem with the existing traffic Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 18 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. and it will compound it with this subdivision. Clayton Husband said the criteria for a signal to be installed at this location will be reviewed. Commissioner Wall asked if staff was assured that the drainage coming of the proposed development can be handled by existing city off-site infrastructure without improvement. Mr. LeBaron said that it i~ a concern to get too many drainage issues wrapped up in a land use question. He said that they are platting issues and until they have done the drainage analysis which is a part of the subdivision for the plat, it is premature to develop them for a zoning case. He said that they are simply asking if they can use the property for something, and staff does not have enough information at this point to determine if down stream improvements will be required, etc. Commissioner Wall said that at this point there is no rational to approving special conditions. Mr. LeBaron said that is true. Commissioner Hollis asked the Fire Chief if he ever has more than two vehicles at the scene of a fire emergency and if they have room to reposition vehicles on a 36' paved cul-de-sac. Chief Johnston responded that it depends on parked cars and the fire vehicles will block the street in a house fire. He said that they might not have room to set up on a 21' pavement depending on parked cars and that is why they have a minimum of 31' of pavement. Commissioner Gasper asked if there were two cars parked directly across from each other on a residential street, would the fire department have enough space to get through. Fire Chief Johnson responded that in reality, according to state law, cars can park up to 18" away from the curb and not be ticketed. He said that even when cars are parked next to the curb 15 feet becomes unusable and leaves less than 15 feet for fire fighting equipment. When the doors ope. and equipment is set up there is not enough room to work around the area if the fire is at that location. Mr. Bagwell said that no one else has as restrictive regulations as Colleyville and homeowners will self police no parking on the inside of looped streets. He said that another possibility is to pull the cul-de-sacs back. Mr. Bagwell said that he was asked to do a PUD by the community and at the time he presented his first case for R20 he did not know how to do a PUD for the property, but he has designed one and has been criticized for it. He said that he will continue to work on the plan. Commissioner Gasper moved to table the case to allow the developer more time to meet with the residents that will be impacted by the development as he has heard some of the issues raised tonight. She said that he has new members on the Commission and has no idea where they are coming from. She said that in fairness to Mr. Bagwell and the community she would like to see the case tabled and ask him to find some sort of forum to meet with the residents to work out the concerns. She said that she sees a trade off of vista and privacy. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Edwards, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: None The Commission took a 15 minute recess. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 19 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. 2. A Final Plat for Riverwalk at Colleyville, requested by Charles Searcey for D. R. Horton-Texas Ltd., 20.054 acres located on the N. side of Glade Road at the.future Riverwalk Drive. Case P-00-065 Clayton Husband presented the case to the Commission and explained the conditions of the PUD. Commissioner Gasper asked for instructions on what they are permitted to consider since an ordinance for the development is already in place. Clayton Husband spoke about the items to consider when reviewing a plat. Commissioner Edwards said that the issue of maximum lot coverage on the small lots should be addressed. She discussed the problems she sees with The Villas at Caldwell Creek that has very large houses on very small lots. Commissioner Hill asked if there is a time limit for the commercial development associated with this plat. Mr. Husband said that the commercial development would be subject to the requirements of the PUD and there is not a specific time that it is required to be constructed. Commissioner Hocutt asked about the Development Review Comments pertaining to item #4B and the size of cul-de-sacs. Clayton Husband said that the plat as proposed is what was established by the PUD. Barry LeBaron went over side yard requirements within the subdivision. Chairman Hart said that Riverwalk Drive was proposed many years ago and this development would construct one half of the roadway and the developer to. the east will build the other half. He said that this is the beginning of Riverwalk Drive off Glade Road and the City will not have to build this portion. Commissioner Wall asked if people who will be purchasing lots in the subdivision would be aware of the future development and what will be built to the north of them. Commissioner Edwards said that the property is zoned for high commercial and no plans are in place currently for the property. Jennifer Hile, representing the developer was present to address the Commission. The Commission had no questions. Commissioner Hill moved to approve the final plat. Commissioner Gasper seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: Edwards 3. A Minor Plat for Rodgers Acres, requested by Joy Rodgers, 2.01 acres located at 3601 San Bar. Case P-00-066 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 20 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Barry LeBaron presented the case to the Commission. He told them that the purpose for the plat was so that the applicant could build a perimeter subdivision fence and they have addressed all of DRC's comments. He said that the plat meets all of the technical requirements. Commissioner Gasper moved to approve the minor plat. Commissioner Edwards seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Edwards, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: None 4. PUBLIC HEARING - An amendment to Chapter 3, Land Use, of the Land Development Code regarding large commercial facilities. Case Z-00-069 Barry LeBaron presented the item to the Commission. He gave the history of the request by City Council to develop an ordinance. He said that the proposed ordinance addresses the issues that staff has heard and has met with the Highway 26 task force. He said that they also contacted a number of communities that have had to deal with the same issue and also the American Planning Association. He said that some of the issues are huge vastness of parking lots, sterile facades, landscaping, dumpster screening, outside storage, screening, outside displays, construction materials, exterior colors and logo colors. Commissioner Wall asked if the ordinance has been reviewed by the City Attorney. Staff responded yes. He asked if there have been any users identified for the commercial property south of Hall Johnson Road and Colleyville Blvd. Mr. LeBaron responded that there are no applications pending for any buildings or zoning requests that have fallen under this category. He said that we only have a plat submitted and it does not require the identification of buildings. Commissioner Gasper asked since they have applied for a plat, would they be covered by this ordinance? Barry LeBaron responded that this is a zoning issue and it would be applicable since zoning is not a part of the vested rights statute, but an attorney would have to verify that. Commissioner Hill said that is his fundamental concern. Commissioner Hocutt asked about parking on the current Albertsons and Mr. LeBaron responded that he has concerns about establishing requirements that do not allow over parking on lots. Commissioner Edwards discussed the possibility if including regulations for road worthy brick and shared parking requirements. Commissioner Hill asked staff what cities ordinances were mirrored. Mr. LeBaron said that they used several but were impressed with Fort Collins, Colorado and Fort Worth. Commissioner Hocutt had questions about parking cart racks. There was discussion abou. overlaying the current regulations in the ML zoning district. Discussion arose about the need to Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 21 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. elaborate on lighting designs. Commissioner Edwards raised the point that there are no provisions in the ordinance for abutting residential streets. The Commission also discussed the building design score criteria. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: Rich Munson, 1905 Hall Johnson Road, asked questions about the display area and suggested that it should be more defined. Doug Henderson, told how the design scores were established for the City when he was the Director and how establishing too high of a design criteria could cripple large buildings. Kipp Whitman, 3402 Crossgate Circle S., said that he is a member of the Highway 26 Commission and they had a meeting with some of the Council present to help give input for the ordinance. Linda Baker, 404 W. McDonwell School Road, said that one box size doesn't fit all. She said that Albertsons and K-Mart may not be able to develop on Precinct Line Road and if Colleyville makes the regulations too strict for certain parts of the city, the may be a proliferation of people selling their property to churches. She said that Precinct Line Road is the last change to get large commercial shopping centers. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hollis questioned would happen to a business that came to the community and was well received but could not meet all of the criteria, are there variance possibilities. Barry LeBaron said that they require a PUD and the criteria are established in the PUD. Commissioner Wall began discussion about how many areas are left to develop large commercial. Commissioner Hill asked what the rational was for the 50,000 s.f. criteria vs. the 55,000 s.f. in the moratorium. Mr. LeBaron said that the criteria were established at the joint meeting with the Highway 26 Committee and Council. Commissioner Hill restated the position of the City Attorney and staff that this ordinance will apply to a property that is zoned commercial for which a preliminary plat has been filed with the City. Mr. LeBaron responded that it would apply. Commissioner Gasper questioned the typical size of a side wall as it relates to three changes to prevent bland walls. She raised questions about screening from residential properties and the possibilities of having the grass on the outside of the fence nearer the residential areas, and outdoor display when a business is open 24 hours. There was discussion about having a minimum of 50,000 s.f., but no maximum and the possible formula for set backs, and a formula for distance of garbage collection away from residential areas. Commissioner Hocutt initiated discussion about permitted signage. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 22 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Commissioner Edwards initiated discussion about screening from residential areas located adjacent or across the street from a big box. They discussed 20"grass with berms, berms with shrubs, low stone walls as another option. She said that she wanted to see more landscaping areas in the parking lots. Commissioner Gasper recommended that language could be added to consider comparable materials. She initiated discussion of considering language added for: grasscrete as an option for overflow parking; HID lighting terms; cart storage; security lighting in the back of buildings; outside storage locations; setback requirements; low masonry walls as an alternative; a general statement for alternative materials; 20' of land and a brick wall to allow some buffer for trucks. Staff said that they would try to incorporate all of the Commissioners' comments into an ordinance to present to City Council. Commissioner Hill said that he agrees with everything that has been said and also thinks that with a dozen or so spots in the city a well written big box ordinance is a good thing and should continue to work on it. He said that there are two issues. He said that one is the specifics of the ordinance and the other is who it applies to. He said that he wants to go on record as stating that he has a fundamental concern about the wording of the ordinance and the City's position with regard as to who it applies to as they relate to the conflict of vested rights in Texas. He said that namely to people who have already begun their development process by filing a preliminary plat prior to thE=' moratorium and then the big box ordinance being considered. He said that the wording exposE the City to risk of a legal challenge especially in light of the circumstances and the timing of the moratorium. Commissioner Hill said that he would suggest that they avoid that problem at the outset by clarifying who it applies to and he would make the suggestion that they do so. Commissioner Gasper said that if the draft if run by legal counsel, the legal staff needs to be trusted to look at the changes also. Commissioner Hill said that he respectfully disagrees with that statement. Commissioner Gasper moved to recommend approval of the ordinance with instruction to the staff that they develop and provide information in the ordinance presented to the City Council as stated above. Commissioner Hocutt seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Edwards, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hart Noes: Hill Commissioner Hill said that his vote was based solely on the vested rights issues. 5. TABLED ITEM - A Zoning Change requested by Doug Henderson representing Kipp Whitman, LaVaca Trail, LLC, from R40 to PUD-C (planned unit development-commercial) on 6.335 acres located at the southeast corner of Lavaca Trail and Precinct Line Road. Case Z- 00-070 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 23 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Commissioner Gasper moved to remove the item from the table. Commissioner Hocutt seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Edwards, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: None Barry LeBaron presented the case and told that that there is an added feature of an 1,800 sq. ft. caretakers facility associated with the request. He said that the kennel plat areas are on the west side and would be detrimental. He said that the open play area is located inside the kennel and after staff heard the issues raised at the last public hearing, they have made a recommendation of denial. Chairman Hart opened the public hearing. Those present wishing to speak were: Kipp Whitman, owner, said that he wanted to dispel the notion of a kennel. He discussed the overall site plan and how this location does not lend itself to a strip shopping center. He discussed the building design and the ability to baffle the sound. He said that the outside play are makes best use of the flood plain area. Mr. Whitman said that the kennel services will bring in taxes and the other alternatives for the property are offices that do not generate tax revenues. He said that the overall site is not big enough for a large box. Mr. Whitman said that one of the benefits to the owner of the kennel building in this location is that she has 7,000 active customers and 900 of them are Colleyville residents. He said that there would potentially be 700,000 cars per year coming to the location. Lewis Martin, 1013 W. Lavaca, said that the kennel could raise the elevation of the property and all of the water will go over his property. He said that he does not want runoff from the kennel on his property. He said that dog kennels are not a good deal. He said that he does not have a problem with a gas station at the corner. Danny Ogel, 1009 W. Lavaca, said that he has 5 acres and a kennel is not a good draw for the area. He said that the area is currently very quiet and he does not anticipate that a kennel will produce much tax revenue. Bill Souder, 305 Brook Ridge Court, Hurst, said that he should the property south and the master plan shows for commercial to be located in the area. He said that there are many houses being built in the area and this will become a choice center of higher scale commercial. He said that a dog kennel does not belong and his is opposed. Kipp Whitman said that Mr. Martin's concerns about drainage will be addressed at time of platting. He said that the kennel owner will contract veterinary services. Commissioner Hocutt asked Mr. Whitman what he would see this building used for if it was not used as a kennel. He responded that it could be used for an athletic club or office complex. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25, 2000 Page 24 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. Judy Martin Rejeri, 1013 W. Lavaca, said that she has been in the area for 18 years and does n01 want to see a kennel or hear a kennel. She said that there is nothing to be gained by the city. She said that there have been times when the property is knee deep in water and the kennel will create more water. She said that there are other uses that could be more appropriate in the area like a bridal shop or a Krispy Creme Donuts. She said that a kennel will make her property values decline. Linda Baker, 404 W. McDonwell School Road, said that when the original PUD was placed on the property the City lost control of the commercial development of the area. She said that if the city keeps piece-mealing the parcels out, no large commercial development will happen in the area. She said that the City needs to begin thinking in longer terms than next year. She said that she is speaking in behalf of the Western Gateway. Kipp Whitman said that there has been no loss of control for commercial development and restaurants are on hold because of the lack of business in the area and the kennel would bring customers. Doug Henderson, representing Mr. Whitman, talked about building setbacks. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hocutt made a recommendation to deny the zoning change request base, on the information presented. Commissioner Gasper seconded the motion. Commissioner ensued about amending the ordinance and striking the provision for the kennel. They discussed possible other uses. Chairman Hart called for the vote. The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Hocutt, Noes: Edwards, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart The motion to deny failed. Commissioner Gasper moved to table the item to allow future discussion about Lot 4. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. The vote being: Ayes: Gasper, Edwards, Hocutt, Hollis, Wall, Hill, Hart Noes: None 6. Citizens' comments regarding items not on the agenda: There were none. 7. Staff comments, reports and discussion items: Barry LeBaron told the Commission about a training session to be held on Thursday October 5th in the Community Center at 6:30 p.m. 8. Commissioners' comments and reports: There were none. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes - September 25,2000 Page 25 of 25 - Approved on 10/09/00. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 1 :00 a.m. Respectfully Submitted, Levy Planning & Zoning Assistant Approved on: October 9,2000 as submitted. NOTE: As a matter of public record, an audio recording of the above Planning and Zoning Commission meeting is available upon request. DRAFT PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES Monday October 2, 2000 7:00 p.m. Chairman Rich Hendler called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. on Monday, October 2, 2000 at the Parks and Recreation office. ROLL CALL: Members: Chairman Rich Hendler, Councilman Mike Taylor, Joe Noorlag, Dan Witte and Karen Birkes, Ken Crooks, Steve Magee and Vince Rosen ABSENT: Roger Nelson STAFF: Monica Sue Walsh, Parks and Recreation Manager, Craig Dishman, Recreation Supervisor, and Cynthia Singleton, Office Assistant 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of the September 11, 2000 Minutes Dan Witte moved to approve the September 11, 2000 Parks and Recreation Advisory Board minutes and Karen Birkes seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. 3. Update of Park Land Monica Walsh provided an update of seventeen available parcels of land consisting of 10 acres or more within the city limits of Colleyville. After discussion, the Board requested that Ms. Walsh present at the November meeting, the top ten parcels of land that meet the City's park needs. DRAFT Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Meeting October 2, 2000 Page 2 4. Discussion and Consideration of Proposed Donations for L.D. Lockett House Improvements Steve Magee moved to accept the donation of labor and materials for L.D. Lockett house improvements from Stuart Bolerjack and Kelly-Moore Paint Company. Joe Noorlag seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 5. Other Informationalltems* Dianne McWethy, Assistant City Manager introduced Dixie Cawthorne, Marketing Specialist. 6. Adjournment Dan Witte moved to adjourn at 8:40 p.m. and Vince Rosen seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted: Cynthia Singleton, Office Assistant Approved: Monica Sue Walsh, Parks and Recreation Manager RESOLUTION R-00-1725 A RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNCIL ACTION UNDER BUSINESS AT THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2000 WHEREAS, 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 Council action under Business this date and not otherwise adopted by Ordinance and/or separate Resolution, as follows are hereby adopted: a. THAT AND IT IS SO RESOLVED. APPROVED THIS DAY OF AYES, NAYS, AND ABSTENTIONS. , 2000, BY A VOTE OF _ ATTEST: CITY OF COLLEYVILLE Jean Harris, TRMC, CMC City Secretary Donna Arp Mayor