HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 2-3-04 Names Tabs.doc AGENDA
//2404
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2004 AT 5:00 P.M.
3:30 P.M.
EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS AND
RECEIVE ADVICE FROM CITY ATTORNEY UNDER SECTIONS
551.071 & 551.074 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.
4:15 P.M. WORK SESSION FOR AGENDA REVIEW
Ie
II.
III.
INVOCATION- Mayor Pro Tem Dick Davis
INTRODUCTION OF STAFF- City Manager Bob Livingston
AWARDS
A. AWARDS' Police Department: Officer Jackie Rymer, Purple Heart and
Officer Kevin Clark, Life Saving
B. RETIREMENT RECOGNITION: Building Department: Mr. Mike
Hanson, Building Inspector, has served the City of University Park for
18 years from June 10, 1985 until January 30, 2004.
IV.
ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR
Anyone wishing to address an item not on the Agenda or having questions about
items on the Consent Agenda should do so at this time. Questions and comments
regarding Main Agenda items may be made when that item is addressed by the City
Council.
Ve
CONSENT AGENDA
A. CONSIDER' Proposal in the amount of $12,000 from Chiang, Patel &
Yerby, Inc. to provide professional engineering services associated with
the evaluation of the City's solid waste transfer station located at 2525
University Blvd.- Smallwood Tab I
B. CONSIDER' Resolution calling a City Council Election on Saturday,
May 15, 2004 for the purpose of electing a mayor and four
Councilmembers- Wilson Tab II
C. DISCUSS' Approve changing the May 26 meeting to May 24, 5:00 p.m.
in order to canvass the election and have a reception for new
Councilmembers - Wilson
VI.
MAIN AGENDA
A. PUBLIC HEARING: PowerPoint presentation regarding City Hall
expansion and the proposed use of a portion of Goar Park- Livingston
Tab III
B. DISCUSS/CONSIDER ORDINANCE: Approving the use of a portion of
Goar Park for City Hall expansion- Livingston Tab IV
C. CONSIDER ORDINANCE: Amendment to sign ordinance regarding real
estate sign regulations- McLaurin Tab V
As authorized by Section 551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, this
meeting may be convened into Closed Executive Session for the purpose of
seeking confidential legal advice from the City Attorney on any agenda items
listed herein.
VII. INFORMATION AGENDA Tab VI
REPORTS, BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
A. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
B. EMPLOYEE BENFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
C. FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
D. PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE
te
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION for October 20 & November 17,
2003
Fo
PROPERTY CASUALTY & LIABILITY INSURANCE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
G. PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
H. PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
I. URBAN DESIGN 8,: DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
J. ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
K. CAPITAL PROJECTS REVIEW COMMITTEE
Le
CAPITAL PROJECTS UPDATE for Week of February 1, 2004
AGENDA MEMO
(02 -03 -04 AG E N DA)
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
January 29, 2004
Bob Livingston
City Manager
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION, as authorized by Section
551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, for the purpose of
receiving advice from the City Attorney on personnel matters.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings~jpatrick\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK3~AM.Exe Session.02.03.042.doc 12:21 PM 01/2
AGENDA MEMO
(02 -03 -04 AG E N DA)
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
January 29, 2004
Bob Livingston
City Manager
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Consider proposal in the amount of $12,000 from Chiang, Patel, & Yerby,
Inc. to provide professional engineering services associated with the
evaluation the City's solid waste transfer station located at 2525 University
Blvd.
Background. The Sanitation Division operates a transfer station at City-owned property
located at 2525 University Blvd. The structure, built in about 1971, receives municipal
solid waste (MSW) and yard waste from collection trucks that operate within the
community. The wastes are then "transferred" to much larger trucks for transportation to
landfill and composting facilities in Garland and Mesquite respectively.
The Sanitation Division staff has done an excellent job of maintaining the transfer station.
The structure and surrounding concrete drives and ramps are kept extremely clean,
however, the practice of constant hosing down the facility during and after each load is
dumped has taken its toll on some of the metal superstructure - specifically those areas
that are inaccessible. The moisture and otherwise corrosive environment have resulted in
some severe rusting of structural components. Additionally, we believe the entire facility is
painted with lead-based paint.
Staff solicited a proposal from Chiang, Patel, & Yerby, Inc.(CP&Y) to evaluate the facility
and develop a report of their findings. The report will provide recommendations on
mitigating the deficiencies, and that information will be shared with the City Council prior
to any further action. If the Council authorizes the list of repairs, CP&Y would proceed with
phase II of the proposal - preparation of plans and specifications for the recommended
work.
Discussion. Staff would recommend City Council approval of the CP&Y proposal in the
amount of $12,000 to provide professional engineering services associated with the
evaluation the City's solid waste transfer station located at 2525 University Blvd.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings~jpatrick\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK3~AM.CPY ProposaI.MSW Transfer
Station.02.03.04.doc 12:22 PM 01/29/04
Partners for a Better Quality of Life
January 5, 2004
Mr. Gene R. "Bud" Smallwood, PE
Director of Public Works
City of University Park
4420 Worcola Street
Dallas, Texas 75206
Re:
Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Upgrade of the City's Existing Solid Waste Transfer Station
Dear Mr. Smallwood'
Per our discussion Chiang, Patel & Yerby, Inc. (CP&Y) is pleased to present this
Proposal for Professional Engineering Services to assist you and the City of University
Park with the upgrade of your existing solid waste transfer station. We have developed
this Scope of Services based upon our understanding of your intended upgrade needs
and our visits to the existing facility to observe its current condition
Scope of Services
Phase 1
........
1. In conjunction with City personnel, visit the current facility and define the extent
of the areas in need of repair, maintenance or upgrade. This definition will
identify and quantify those areas to be further investigated for structural damage,
those areas to be cleaned and/or sandblasted, and painted, those areas to be
replaced or modified, and the addition of new facilities.
2. Conduct a structural evaluation of the steel and concrete structural members
previously identified for further investigation. Develop recommendations (clean,
repaint, modify or replace) for each of the structural members investigated.
3. Develop recommendations for the cleaning/sandblasting and repainting of
defined areas that do not require structural modification. It is recognized that
some of the facility contains lead-based paint. Define the extent of lead-based
paint and develop recommendations and procedures for handling this material
during cleaning/sandblasting and proper disposal of this material.
4. Develop recommendations for those areas (non-structural) that require
replacement or modification to improve their appearance or function.
5. Develop recommendations for new facilities, if any, to be added. It is currently
anticipated that none of these modifications, upgrades or additions will require
any Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) approvals through
Permit Amendments or Permit Modifications.
Chiong, Potel & Yerby, Inc.
1820 Regal Row, Suite 200,
Dallas, Texas 75235
214.638.0500,972.263.3960 metro, 214.638.3723 fax
www. cpyi.com.
.
.
.
Prepare a brief Summary Report of the Phase 1 activities including the defined
extent of all areas investigated and the recommendations for addressing each
defined area.
Review all recommendations with appropriate City personnel, and further define
and quantify the extent of the Phase 2 work efforts listed below.
Develop a list of all improvements to be included in a construction project for
facility upgrade. Determine which, if any, of these improvements will be
accomplished with City Forces, and which will be completed by a Construction
Contractor.
Phase 2
....
.
Develop a plan for construction sequencing to ensure that at least one of the two
existing compactor units is available for use, as required. Determine if there will
be a need to completely close the facility at any time during construction, and the
extent of the closure time.
2. For those improvements to be completed with City Forces, prepare plans and
specifications. For those improvements to be completed by a Construction
Contractor, develop detailed plans, specifications and bidding documents for the
defined list of improvements, and establish the schedule and duration of any
facility closure.
3. Assist with Bidding Activities including attending a pre-bid conference,
responding to Contractor inquiries, attending the bid opening, tabulating bids,
and making a recommendation for construction contract award.
4. Provide Construction Administration services during construction including
periodic site visits, submittal review, contractor pay request review and a final
inspection with the City.
Bas.i,s o.f Co. mpensation
For the work efforts outlined above for Phase 1, we propose to be paid on an hourly
basis for personnel plus expenses, with the total amount of compensation not to exceed
Twelve Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($12,000.00).
For the work efforts outlined above for Phase 2, we propose to be paid a lump sum fee.
The total fee to be determined, and agreed upon at the completion of Phase 1, after the
extent of improvements has been defined.
We hope that this proposal is acceptable to the City. If you have any questions, or if we
may provide additional information, please contact me at 214-589-6921 or by email at
bh i nd m a n ~ cp.vi, com.
Sincerely,
Chiang, Patel & Yerby, Inc.
William R. Hindman, PE'
Vice President
Partners for a Better Quality of Life
CP&Y
AGENDA MEMO
(02/03/04 AGENDA)
DATE'
January 27, 2004
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM:
Nina Wilson
City Secretary
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL ELECTION FOR MAY 15, 2004
The University Park City Council Election will be held on Saturday, May 15, 2004 for the
purpose of electing a mayor and four councilmembers to serve for a term of two years.
The election will be held at City Hall from 7:00 a.m.- 7'00 p.m.
Staff is proposing the appointment of Trevor Rees-Jones as Presiding Election Judge and
R.B. Murray as Alternate Presiding Election Judge. Nina Wilson, City Secretary, will be
responsible for appointing election clerks as needed for the proper conduct of the
election.
Early voting will be held at City Hall from April 28 - May 11, 2004 from 8'00 a.m.- 5:00
p.m. weekdays.
RECOMMENDATION:
on Saturday, May 15, 2004.
Staff recommends passing the resolution calling an election
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205
TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
U:\Docs\Election\2004XAgenda Memo Calling Election.doc 8:09 PM 01/27/04
RESOLUTION NO. 04-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, CALLING
AN ELECTION ON SATURDAY, MAY 15, 2004 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELECTING A
MAYOR AND FOUR COUNCILMEMBERS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS:
That the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas hereby orders that an election be held in the
City of University Park, Texas, on the 15th day of May 2004 to elect a Mayor for a two- (2) year term and four (4)
Councilmembers for two- (2) year terms.
Section 1' That the candidate receiving a majority of all votes cast for Mayor shall be elected for a two- (2) year
term and the four (4) candidates receiving the highest number of votes cast for Councilmember shall be elected for
two- (2) year terms.
The polling place for said election shall be the University Park City Hall, 3800 University Boulevard. The
polls shall be open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
None but legally qualified voters of the City shall be emitled to vote at said election.
Section 2: Notice of said election shall be posted, not later than April 26, 2004 on the bulletin board used to
publish notice of City Council meetings.
Notice of said election shall be published in the official newspaper of the City one (1) time not earlier than
April 15, 2004, and not later than May 5, 2004. The City Secretary shall secure affidavits of publication from the
official newspaper giving a record of the date and fact of publication.
Section 3: Trevor Rees-Jones, 3615 Centenary, is hereby appointed Presiding Election Judge and R.B. Murray,
4207 University, is hereby appointed Alternate Presiding Election Judge. The Presiding Election Judge shall
appoint nine (9) election Clerks and as many additional Clerks as are necessary for the proper conduct of the
election. All Judges and Clerks shall be qualified voters of the City.
Section 4: Early voting for the election shall be held at City Hall on April 28, 2004 to May 11, 2004 weekdays
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Section 5: After holding the election, the Presiding Election Judge shall promptly deliver returns to the City
Secretary and to the Mayor, and the City Secretary shall thereafter present such returns to the City Council for the
canvassing of said election. The Presiding Election Judge and Alternate Presiding Election Judge and all Clerks
appointed by the Presiding Election Judge shall be paid the sum of Six Dollars ($6.00) per hour for their services in
conducting the election, and not exceeding pay for more than one (1) hour of work before the polls open.
The election returns shall be canvassed by the City Council not earlier than the 8th day or later than the 11 th
day after the Election Day at a time set by the Mayor. The City Council shall canvass the returns as provided by
law and upon completion shall declare the results, and the person receiving the majority of all votes cast for Mayor
shall be elected Mayor and the four (4) persons receiving the highest number of votes for City Councilmember
shall be elected. Such elected officers may enter upon their duties as soon as they have qualified and have taken
the oath of office as provided by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 3rd day of February 2004.
APPROVED:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ATTEST:
City Attorney
City Secretary
RESOLUCION NUM. 04-
UNA RESOLUCION DEL CONCEJO MUNICIPAL DE LA CIUDAD DE UNIVERSITY
PARK, LLAMANDO UNA ELECCION EL SABADO, 15 DE MAYO DE 2004, CON EL
FIN DE ELEGIR A UN ALCALDE Y A CUATRO CONCEJALES; Y ESTIPULANDO
UNA FECHA VIGENTE.
AHORA, POR CONSIGUIENTE, ES RESUELTO POR EL CONCEJO MUNICIPAL DE
LA, CIUDAD DE UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
Que el Concejo Municipal de la Ciudad de University Park, Texas, por este medio ordene
que se lleve a cabo una eleccion en la Ciudad de University Park, Texas, el 15 de Mayo de 2004,
para elegir a un Alcalde para desempenar el cargo por un periodo de dos (2) anos y a cuatro (4)
Concejales para desempenar el cargo por un periodo de dos (2) anos.
Seccion 1: Que el candidate que reciba la mayoria de los votos dados para Alcalde sea elegido
para desempnar el cargo por un periodo de dos (2) anos y los cuatro (4) candidatos que reciban la
mayor parte de los votos dados para Concejales sean elegidos para desempenar el cargo por un
periodo de dos (2) anos.
E1 lugar para votar en dicha eleccion estara en la Municipalidad de University Park, 3800
University Boulevard. E1 lugar de votos estara abierto desde las 7:00 de la manana hasta las 7:00
de la noche.
Nadie mas que los votantes legales y calificados de la Ciudad tendran el derecho de votar en
dicha eleccion.
Seccion 2: Se fijara aviso de dicha eleccion no mas tarde que el 26 de Abril de 2004, en el
tablon donde se colocan anuncios empleado para publicar aviso de reuniones del Concejo
Municipal. La persona encargada de fijar el aviso anotara al colocarlo declarando la fecha y lugar
del anuncio.
Se publicara el aviso de dicha eleccion en el periodico oficiales de la Ciudad una. (1) vez no
antes del 15 de abril de 2004 no despues del 5 de Mayo de 2004. E1 Secretario Municipal afirmara
un afidavit de publicacion de el periodico oficiales dando informe de fecha y hecho de publicacion.
Seccion 3: Trevor Rees-Jones, 3615 Centenary, es nombrado por este medio Juez Acmante de
Eleccion y R.B. Murray, 4207 University, es nombrada por este medio Juez Acmante Suplente de
Eleccion. E1 Juez Acmante de Eleccion nombrara a nueve (9) Escribientes electorales y a tantos
mas Escribientes como sea necesario para llevar a cabo adecuadamente la eleccion. Todos los
Jueces y Escribientes seran votantes calificados de la Ciudad.
Seccion 4: Se llevaran a cabo los primeros votos de eleccion en la oficina del Secretario
Municipal en la Municipalidad el 28 de Abril de 2004, al 11 de Mayo de 2004, durante la semana
entre las horas de las 8:00 de la manana y las 5:00 de la tarde.
Seccion 5: Despues de llevar a cabo la eleccion, - el Juez Actuante de Eleccion rapidamente
llevara los resultados al Secretario Municipal y al Alcalde, y el Secretario Municipal de alli en
adelante presentara dichos resultados al Concejo Municipal para el escrutinio de dicha eleccion.
Se pagara al Juez Actuante de Eleccion y al Juez Actuante Suplente de Eleccion y a todo
Escribiente nombrado por el Juez Actuante de Eleccion el total de Seis Dolares ($6.00) por hora
por su trabajo en llevar a cabo la eleccion, y no sobrepasando pago por mas de una (1) hora antes
de abrirse el lugar de votos.
Los resultados de la eleccion seran examinados por el Concejo Municipal no mas antes
del 8 dia ni despues del 11 dia a partir del dia de eleccion a la hora nombrada por el Alcalde. E1
Concejo Municipal examinara los resultados como se estipula por ley y al cumplirlo declarara los
resultados finales, y la persona que reciba la mayoria de los votos dados para Alcalde sera
elegido como Alcalde y las cuatro, (4) personas que reciban la mayor cantidad de los votos para
desempenar el cargo de Consejal se declarara elegido. Dichos elegidos oficiales podran empezar
a desempenar sus cargos tan pronto como sean calificados y hayan prestado juramento al asumir
su cargo como estipulado por ley.
APROBADA Y ACEPTADA este dia 3 de Febrero de 2004.
ALCALDE
Ciudad de University Park, Texas
ATESTIGUO:
SECRETARIO MUNICIPAL
Ciudad de University Park, Texas
AGENDA MEMO
(02/03/04 AGENDA)
DATE:
January 29, 2004
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Bob Livingston, City Manager
SUBJECT: Public Hearing Regarding Proposed Use of a Portion of
Goar Park for the Purpose of Expanding City Hall
At the February 3rd meeting, staff will present information regarding the proposed
expansion and remodeling of City Hall. These improvements are being proposed to
accommodate the need for additional space for Police and Fire operations. The needs will
be documented in the presentation.
Prior to this public hearing, the staff has reviewed the proposed plans with a number of
City Committees. They are:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Board of Adjustment
Parks Advisory Committee
Public Works Advisory Committee
Finance Advisory Committee
Urban Design and Development Advisory Committee
Former Mayors of University Park
All have viewed the presentation that will be given at the Tuesday meeting. At the
conclusion of the presentation, each Committee voted in favor of the plans as presented.
Each Committee plans to have a representative at the public hearing.
As required, notice of this meeting was published three times in the Dallas Morning
News on Friday, January 9th, 16th, and 23rd. A letter dated December 18, 2003 was also
provided to the Park Director and Chair of the Parks Advisory Committee.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205
TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local SettingsVl-emporary Internet Files\OLK21\CITYHALLPH012903.doc 7:50 AM 01/30
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council conduct the public hearing and then consider the
adoption of the Ordinance authorizing a portion of Goar Park for to be used construction
of City Hall.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205
TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK21\CITYHALLPH012903.doc 7:50 AM 01/30
AGENDA MEMO
(02/03/04 AGENDA)
DATE'
January 29, 2004
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Bob Livingston, City Manager
SUBJECT: Discussion and Possible Approval of an Ordinance
Approving the Use of a Portion of Goar Park
At the conclusion of the public hearing, Council may adopt the above Ordinance, which
will authorize the use of a portion of Goar Park for the City Hall renovation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205
TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK21\CITYHALLORD012903.doc 7:51 AM 01/30
OIIDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVEIISITY PAIlK, TEXAS, MAKING
LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS IIEGARDING CURRENT
CITY FACILITIES AND SEIIVICES; APPIIOVING THE USE OF A POIITION OF GOAII
PAIlK FOIl EXPANSION OF THE UNIVEIISITY PAIlK CITY HALL; AND PIIOVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code requires that a city must
make certain determinations prior to the approval of any project that requires the use or taking of any
public land designated and used as a park; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has provided 30 days' written notice to the Parks Director
and the Chairman of the Park Board of a public hearing to consider a proposed project to expand the
University Park City Hall into a portion of Goar Park; and
WHEREAS, notice has also been given to the public by publishing a notice once a week for
three consecutive weeks, the last of which publications was not less than one week or more than two
weeks before the date of the public hearing, and which notice was published in the newspaper of
general circulation, published at least six days a week in Dallas County, Texas; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing on the proposed project was conducted by the University
Park City Council on February 3, 2004, at which time all those desiring to do so presented written
or oral testimony; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered clearly enunciated local preferences in the
course of such public hearings; NO,V, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, finds that the
premises hereof are tree and correct and determines and finds the following facts from the public
hearing and its investigation:
A. The current City Hall is 70 years old and many of its systems have reached the end
of their useful life;
B. Operational conditions have changed since the last time the City Hall was
remodeled, requiring a more extensive use of sensitive computer systems, provision
of emergency ambulance service, provisions for protection against biohazards,
Page 1
additional and more complicated record keeping requirements, and other operations
developments required by law;
A portion of the City Hall is located in the 100 year flood plain, the main floor of the
building is only six inches above the 100 year level, and the fire equipment bays
have had as much as 21 inches of water in them in recent years during rain storms;
Meeting and training room space is inadequate for the police department, fire
department, and other city departments housed in the current City Hall building;
Additional off-street parking spaces are needed to serve the employees and public
who use the building for public business;
A centralized, secure location for the city's computer equipment, including adequate
room for maintenance, is needed;
Additional space is needed for police dispatchers so as to provide for lwo or more
dispatchers to be on duty at the same time and to provide for the addition of
dispatchers in times of emergency;
Necessary equipment for dispatch computers, CAD systems, radios, direct alarm
monitoring, and other electronics should be located so that dispatch personnel can
access them without having to leave the dispatch area;
A restroom is needed so that dispatch personnel do not have to leave the dispatch
area for a break;
Police patrol offices should be relocated to the first floor so that patrol officers can
easily access them fi'om the parking lot;
Creation of a sally port is necessary to securely transport prisoners directly to and
from the jail, without having to go through the building or outside the jail area;
Page 2
L. A secure location, adequate in size, is necessary to process DWI violators with
required video surveillance;
M. A private first floor location is necessary for officers to meet with citizens, rather
than in the public hallway as is the current practice;
N. Additional office space is needed for detectives since three detectives currently share
one room;
O. Private interview rooms for suspects are needed adjacent to the jail;
P. Adequate locker facilities for both male and female officers are needed;
Q. A detail room to assemble shift personnel for announcements is needed by the police
department;
R. A juvenile holding facility that meets current state requirements is needed;
S. Additional file and storage space is needed by the police department;
T. Operations areas, sleeping rooms, day room, clean room, training room, medical
supply room, and other rooms are needed on the first floor adjacent to the equipment
bays for quicker and safer responses by the fire department;
U. An equipment bay large enough to allow all department vehicles to be stored inside
at one location is needed by the fire department;
V. A secure, segregated facility for paramedics to safely handle equipment and clothing
contaminated by biomedical agents is needed by the fire department;
W. Locker and sleeping rooms adequate to accommodate fire fighters of both sexes are
needed;
X. Provision of any of these at the Peek Center or any other location in the City is
impractical, would result in more inconvenience to citizens, would reduce response
Page 3
times of the police and fire departments if they were moved, would not solve the flood
plain problem in the City Hall, and the cost of acquiring additional land would be
prohibitive; and
Y. Use of a portion of Goar Park, without disrupting park uses, for expansion of the current
City Hall and parking area is the best, most cost effective, and reasonable solution for
the continuance of the present level of City services.
SECTION 2. The City Council further finds and determines, after the public hearing and
testimony, and in its legislative capacity, that:
(1) There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use or taking of a portion of Goar
Park for the expansion of the University Park City Hall;
(2) The project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the Park resulting
from the use or taking; and
(3) The City Council has considered clearly enunciated local preferences, and is the
opinion and finds that approval of the project is justified in accordance with the
requirements of Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code.
SECTION 3. That based on the findings and determinations made herein, approval is
hereby given by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, to the expansion of
University Park City Hall into a portion of the property occupied by Goar Park; plans to minimize
harm to the Park resulting from the use or taking are hereby approved; and, the City Manager is
directed to proceed with the additional planning and steps necessary to give effect to the project.
SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage,
as the law and Charter in such cases provide.
Page 4
DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 3rd day
of February, 2004
APPROVED:
HAROLD PEEK, MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ATTEST:
CITY ATTORNEY
(RLD/jh/1/16/04/62020)
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
Page 5
AGENDA MEMO
(2/3/04 AGENDA)
DATE:
January 27, 2004
TO'
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Wade McLaurin, Building & Zoning Administrator
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Sign Ordinance- Real Estate Sign Regulations
BACKGROUND:
As a result of the continued usage of "real estate" signs by new home builders for the purposes of
business advertising, the Urban Design and Development Advisory Committee (UDADAC) was asked to
look at different ways to curb this type of signage in those cases where the new home is already under
contract or is already sold to an individual. We continue to receive complaints from those people that
believe that these signs should not be allowed on a property that is not, or in many cases never was, for
sale. The Committee did not want to inadvertently hurt "spec" builders that need to advertise their homes
for sale, so they determined that the best solution was to amend the definition of real estate sign in the
sign ordinance by eliminating the ability to include wording such as "Contract Pending", "Sale Pending"
or "Sold" on the real estate sign. The Committee believes that the vast majority of "custom" builders
will not maintain a for sale sign on a new home that is already under contract, nor will the individual who
is having the house built want his home advertised as such. This new amendment will not only affect
builders, but real estate agents as well.
PUBLIC NOTICE: N/A
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the enabling ordinance amending Article 12.200 of the University Park Code
of Ordinances regarding the sign regulations of the City, by amending the definition for Real Estate Sign.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, CHAPTER 12, SIGN REGULATIONS, BY AMENDING SECTION
12.202 (22) PROVIDING A DEFINITION OF REAL ESTATE SIGN;
AMENDING SECTION 12.223 TO PROHIBIT CONSTRUCTION SIGNS IN
RESIDENTIAL ZONES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF
FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1. That Chapter 12, Article 12.200, Section 12.202 (22), of the
Code of Ordinances, City of University Park, Texas, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
"(22~ Real Estate Si2n (such as a "For Sale". "For l,ease", or "For Rent" si2nl
x. j ~ x. .~ .~ ~ j
Shall mean a sign indicating that the premises on which the sign is located, or any
portion thereof, is for sale, for lease, or for rem, and comaining any of the following
information: a description of the premises offered for sale, lease, or rem; special
facilities or appurtenances; and the name, address, and telephone number of the owner,
broker, or other person offering the same for sale, lease, or rem. The sign may include
information with respect to the availability of special financing."
SECTION 2. That Chapter 12, Article 12.200, Section 12.223, of the Code of
Ordinances, City of University Park, Texas, is hereby amended in part as follows:
"Sec. 12.231 Construction Signs in Nonresidential Zones
(a) Persons shall not erect, install, maintain or use any construction sign on a
nonresidemial premises, unless the required building permits for new construction or
remodeling have been obtained from the city and said sign conforms with Section
12.245 this Article. Construction signs shall not be permitted in residential zones."
SECTION 3. That all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
University Park, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the
same are hereby, repealed.
SECTION 4. That should any word, semence, paragraph, subdivision, clause,
phrase or section of this ordinance or of the Code of Ordinances, as amended hereby,
be adjudged or held to be void or unconstitutional, the same shall not affect the validity
of the remaining portions of said ordinance or the Code of Ordinances, as amended
hereby, which shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 5. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions
of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction in the
municipal court of the City of University Park, Texas, shall be punished by a fine not to
exceed the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each offense, and each and every
day any such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense.
SECTION 6. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after
its passage and the publication of the caption, as the law and Charter in such cases
provide.
the
DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on
__ day of ,2004.
APPROVED:
HAROLD PEEK, MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ATTEST:
CITY ATTORNEY
(RLD/1-23-04)
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, CHAPTER 12, SIGN REGULATIONS, BY AMENDING SECTION
12.202 (22) PROVIDING A DEFINITION OF REAL ESTATE SIGN;
AMENDING SECTION 12.223 TO PROHIBIT CONSTRUCTION SIGNS IN
RESIDENTIAL ZONES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF
FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
the
DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on
__ day of ,2004.
APPROVED:
MAYOR
ATTEST'
CITY SECRETARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
October 20, 2003
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park met on Monday, October 20,
2003 at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 3800 University Blvd. University Park,
Texas. The following are minutes of that meeting.
Commission Members Attending
Robert West - Chairman
Doug Roach
Bill Foose
Ed Freeman
Randy Biddle
Staff Members Attending
Wade McLaurin - Bldg. & Zoning Administrator
Jennifer Patrick - Administrative Secretary
Rob Dillard - City Attorney
Mr. West opened the public hearing and introduced the commission members. He then
read the specifics of the first case.
PZ 03-18 6101 Hillcrest Group, L.P., requesting an amendment to the existing
Planned Development District 22 at 6101 Hillcrest (Lots 1 - 3 Block D, of
University Annex 2nd Addition of the City of University Park). The applicant is
proposing to add an additional floor on the existing hotel structure.
Mr. Brandon Blackburn of The Eureka Hotel Group, representing 6101 Hillcrest Group,
L.P., was introduced and made a brief statement describing the property in question.
Mr. Blackburn made note that the previously approved plans for the hotel allocated a
total of fifty-two (52) rooms for guests. After reviewing the needs of the surrounding
area, it had been determined this would be limited space, hencc the request to add a
fourth floor, which would add eleven (11 ) rooms. Mr. Blackburn explained, the hotel was
in a definite state of disrepair, and the intention is to upgrade the building to make
University Park residents proud.
Mr. Blackburn went on to explain the revised total building height would be forty-one
feet - seven inches (41 '-7"), including the screens located on top of the addition, which
would hide mechanical equipment. As well as, the exterior of thc building would have a
stucco finish, which would be the aesthetically pleasing to the surrounding area.
Mr. Blackburn noted a parking contract with a local valet service had been acquired. He
then detailed all the benefits of such an agreement such as; customer service, property
security, and basic site control. Mr. Blackburn reiterated the addition of eleven (11)
rooms for guests, with an addition of eleven (11) extra parking spaces to accommodate
these guests, and a total of sixty-three (63) rooms with sixty (60) parking spaces.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
10/20/2003
Page 2 of 7
A discussion ensued regarding average occupancy rates and average parking spaces
needed.
Mr. Roach asked if the valet service was available twenty-four (24) hours a day.
Mr. Blackburn replied, yes, the valet service is available at all hours.
Mr. Roach, then inquired of the height of the penthouse suite. Mr. Blackburn noted the
overall height including the penthouse would be forty-one feet (41 '). He added from the
ground level, the addition would not be visible.
Mr. Biddle asked if forty-one feet (41') allocated enough space for the elevator
machinery. Mr. Blackburn stated the elevator cabinet is eight feet (8') tall, with all
machinery below. He added the elevator is a piston elevator, which has refuge space.
Mr. Roach inquired if the addition would over view the private residences surrounding
the hotel. Mr. Blackburn noted only from the 3400 block of Binkley Ave. in the alley,
behind the day school. Mr. Roach asked if those were the only private residences
impacted. Mr. Blackburn replied, yes, with one exception. A private residence diagonally
backs the Shell station, but the residents have a carport, which would obstruct the
addition.
Mr. Foose asked if the onsite parking were to be full, where the overflow parking would
be located. Mr. Blackburn explained the overflow would be located at a secured off-site
valet parking, which would limit the cars parked in the neighborhood surrounding the
hotel.
A discussion ensued regarding the various valet parking companies and the locations.
Mr. West noted there were two (2) letters opposing the construction of the addition on the
hotel. Mr. West added there was specific concern in regards to a restaurant being onsite
at the hotel.
Mr. Blackburn stated the plan reflects an onsite restaurant to provide guests with
breakfast, lunch and light dinner. Mr. West asked if the restaurant would be limited to
the hotel guests. Mr. Blackburn explained he expects it to be occupied primarily by hotel
guests, but for business purposes would not put limitations on it.
Mr. Roach asked how large of an occupancy rate would be allocated for the restaurant.
As well as, how would the parking situation be effected, if residents utilized the
restaurant. Mr. Blackburn noted a dining area for thirty (30) guests would be constructed.
In regards to the parking concern, there would a surplus of parking available, with the use
of the valet service.
Mr. Biddle inquired if there were any plans to increase the size of the parking lot. Mr.
Blackburn stated no, there were not any plans to increase the size of the parking lot. He
reiterated if an average occupancy rate of sixty percent (60%), there would bc plenty of
Plaiming & Zoning Minutes
10/20/2003
Page 3 of 7
parking available.
Mr. Biddle asked if the valet service in question was located on Knox and Travis. Mr.
Blackburn replied yes, and gave the approximate distance from the hotel of 1.1 miles,
which is a four to five (4-5) minute drive from the hotel.
Mr. West inquired if there were any opposing parties in the audience.
Mr. Daniel Yaest, resident of 3419 Granada Ave., was introduced and made a brief
statement describing his opposition to the proposed addition at 6101 Hillcrest. Mr. Yaest
noted his main concern was the parking in terms of SMU events, and posed a question to
the owners/operators of the hotel of how they would address such an issue.
Mr. Robert Columbo, president of 6101 Hillcrest Group L.P., was in attendance and
addressed Mr. Yaest's concern from the sitting area. Mr. Columbo stated in order to
support the investment of the hotel; the hotel group would add the high expense of a valet
service. Mr. Columbo added he would like to project an occupancy rate of eighty percent
(80 %), but this would be too high of an expectation. Mr. Columbo added he anticipates
an actual thirty to forty-percent (30-40%) occupancy rate, and with lower occupancy,
more parking is available. He reiterated a twenty-four hour (24) valet service would be
under contract, to back up onsite parking.
Mr. Yaest stated it appears the general area in question already has parking overflow
issues. Mr. Yaest added imagining a valet service in the area would add to the problem at
hand. He noted he enjoyed the quiet, lazy streets.
Mr. Yaest inquired if the hotel restaurant would be serving alcohol beverages, and it' so
could the hotel commit to restricting the SMU students from consuming those beverages.
Mr. Columbo stated yes, but overall the public would be served if of legal age to
consume alcoholic beverages.
Mr. McLaurin interjected that the purpose of this meeting was not to approve/disapprove
any other items, other than the construction of the additional floor and to ensure the
parking requirements are met.
Mr. Biddle asked Mr. Dillard if the Planned Development could be amended to reflect the
use of the valet service.
Mr. Dillard stated yes, the applicant volunteered to use the valet service, and that could
be listed as a condition of the Planned Development.
Mr. Biddle inquired to what the consequences would be if the applicant did not adhere to
the condition.
Mr. Dillard stated if the condition was not met, the applicant would be violating the
ordinance of the Planned Development and the certificate of occupancy could be
Planning & Zoning Minutes
10/20/2003
Page 4 of 7
revoked. Mr. Dillard added the applicant more than likely would not risk that, because of
the investment.
Mr. Foose asked how many employees the hotel would have.
Mr. Columbo stated fifteen to eighteen (15-18) employees, whom would park at the valet
service, and be shuttled to the hotel.
Mr. Foose stated parking four to five (4-5) minutes away did not seem too convenient.
Mr. West asked for a motion.
Mr. Freeman moved to approve the requested amendment for the fourth floor addition,
and to include the tandem parking in the number of parking spaces allocated for the hotel,
with a condition the applicant must furnish the valet parking. Mr. Roach seconded the
motion.
The motion failed with Mr. West, Mr. Biddle, and Mr. Foose opposing the requested
amendment.
Mr. West, then read the specifics of the second casc.
PZ 03-19 - Southern Methodist University, requesting a rezoning of Lot 3 Block
1 and Lot 3 Block 2 of University Hills West Addition of the City of University
Park, also known as 3015 and 3016 Dyer. The applicant is requesting a rezoning
on the properties from University Campus District 3 (UC-3) to University
Campus District 2 (UC-2).
Mr~ West made a brief statement to all interested parties; those who will be speaking will
have a maximum of fifteen (15) minutes to present their opinion.
Mr. Leon Bennett, General Counsel and VP for Legal Affairs and Government Relations
for Southern Methodist University (SMU), was introduced and made a brief statement
describing the property.
Mr. Bennett stated for the last ten (10) years SMU has been working with the City of
University Park regarding the master plan for the university. He noted the plan involves
building structured parking on Binkley Ave. west of Airline Rd. Three (3) buildings,
Letterman Hall, Lambda Chi Omega, and Sigma Alpha Epsilon currently occupy the
projected site. In order to facilitate the parking structure these buildings must be relocated
to the requested rezoned area on 3015 Dyer St. and 3016 Dyer St. Mr. Bennett added the
parking structure would consist of additional parking for one hundred twenty-three (123)
cars per floor.
Mr. Bennett handed out a map of the proposed rezoned location, noting in 1997 SMU
started opening Dublin St. and began discussions/agreements with the City in regards to a
wall to be constructed along Dublin St. He stated the original conception of the wall was
Planning & Zoning Minutes
10/20/2003
Page 5 of 7
to be constructed beginning at the alley north of the Kappa Alpha House. He added Mr.
Bob Whaling, the City Engineer, had presented new ideas in regards to the wall. Mr.
Bennett stated Mr. Whaling had proposed to relocate the wall to the west side of Dublin
St., loop the streets running east to west-without any thru streets. Mr. Bennett noted SMU
has acquired thirty-six (36) of the forty-eight (48) lots on the west side of Dublin St. to
facilitate the construction of the wall.
Mr. Bennett noted SMU would like the City of University Park to abandon Dyer St. He
added a cul-de-sac would be installed on McFarlin Blvd. to benefit the
residents/neighbors of SMU.
A discussion ensued in regards to SMU working with the surrounding residents in 1997
regarding the wall.
Mr. Bennett stated there were variations, such as moving the line of the wall to the east,
which was currently under discussion with the City of University Park. He added the wall
would be eight feet (8') tall, have live oak trees planted along side, and recommends no
residential windows face towards the wall. Mr. Bennett noted SMU needed incentives for
the fraternity houses to relocate, such as adding courtyards at the proposed new Dyer St.
locations.
Mr. Bennett went on to explain the City of University Park would be responsible for
relocating any utilities, as well as the scheduling of these relocations. Mr. Bennett added
he would request the City of University Park to consult with SMU and the neighborhood.
Mr. Freeman inquired on the amount of time anticipated to build the fraternity houses on
Dyer St.
Mr. Bennett stated SMU would like to have the wall built first, and be in agreement with
the neighborhood.
Mr. Roach asked what plans had been made in regards to emergency access.
Mr. Bennett stated the proper radicals are in the development stages, and he noted SMU
would loose two (2) lots on Fondren Dr. with this development.
Mr. West inquired if there were any opposing parties in the audience.
Mr. Weldon Mills, resident of 3106 Fondren Dr., was introduced and made a brief
statement. Mr. Mills stated he has been residing in University Park for thirteen (13) years,
and is opposed to the construction of a wall. He noted his main concerns were students
driving too fast in the neighborhood, the residential block would be too long, and he
didn't know if emergency vehicles could access the area. Mr. Mills stated his concerns
also included sanitation issues, and the wall would cut off the fire hydrant located near
his residence, which could affect his home insurance. He added there were currently six
(6) families on Fondren Dr. and to close off the street would be silly. He noted the wall
should not be constructed unless SMU owns all properties.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
10/20/2003
Page 6 of 7
Mr. West stated he understood Mr. Wells did not want a wall constructed, and noted the
case in question for this specific meeting was to consider rezoning for the two (2) lots on
Dyer St., not construction of a wall along Dublin St.
Mr. West asked if there wcrc any other opposing parties in the audience.
Orlando Deacutis, resident of 3028 McFarlin Blvd., was introduced. Mr. Deacutis made a
brief statement in which he objects to the zoning change. He stated the fraternity houses
were close to his residence, which has resulted in increased traffic and various activities.
Mr. Deacutis stated he enjoys living next to SMU, but that would be too close. He
reiterated his objection, and thanked the board for being heard.
Michael Donnenfield, resident of 3004 McFarlin Blvd., was introduced. Mr. Donnenfield
stated he objects to the rezoning of the lots at 3015 and 3016 Dyer St. He stated he would
be faced with unnecessary hardships such as: lower property values, traffic, and increased
noise. Mr. Donnenfield added he felt all residents would be faced with these same
problems. He noted he admired Mr. Bennett for making the plan more agreeable to work
with the residents/neighbors. Mr. Donnenfield noted the bottom line was that the quality
of life would be affected.
Ms. Mary Lacy, owner of property near SMU, was introduced. Ms. Lacy stated she had
heard of plans of a wall to be constructed, but the plans had been changed on three (3)
different occasions. She added she has not been contacted in regards to her opinion
regarding the wall.
Mr. West interjected and stated the wall was not on the agenda for this evenings meeting.
The topic for discussion was rezoning for the two (2) lots on Dyer St.
Mr. Harold BootS, resident of 2941 University Blvd., was introduced and made a brief
statement. Mr. Boots stated the rezoning of the two (2) lots on Dyer St. would affect the
wall. Mr. Boots added that he felt the proper notification had not been placed in the
paper, and there had not been enough input from the leaders of the neighborhood. He
added he felt SMU tells the local residents, what they want to hearo Mr. Boots went on to
describe the conditions of his neighborhood, such as: various trash in yards, speeding by
SMU students, and numerous car accidents. He noted he was against the rezoning of the
two (2) lots on Dyer St., to enable the wall being constructed.
Mr. West closed the public hearing.
A discussion ensued regarding the rezoning of the lots on Dyer.
Mr. West asked Mr. Bennett how the proposed location on Dyer St. for the fraternity
houses would be separated from the neighborhood. Mr. Bennett stated by erecting a fence
structure, along the west side of Dublin St.
Mr. Dillard asked Mr. Bennett why the exit of a proposed parking lot to the east of the
Planning & Zoning Minutes
10/20/2003
Page 7 of 7
two (2) lots on Dyer did not exit on SMU Blvd.
Mr. Bennett stated that was a difficult proposition, and not necessarily viable for the plan.
Plus, the fraternity house would be fifty feet (50') to the east.
A discussion ensued regarding the wall, in which Mr. West interjected and reiteratcd the
wall was not up for discussion.
Mr. Foose made a statement his concern would be emergency vehicle access if the wall
was constructed, and the streets were reconfigured to loop. Mr. Foose added head in
parking would not be an option for the houses on McFarlin Blvd.
Mr. Roach noted SMU could build fraternity houses on McFarlin Blvd. with the property
owned by SMU.
Mr. West asked for a motion.
Mr. Foose noted the neighborhood needed to consult with the Planning and Zoning Board
and the City of University Park to discuss details regarding the university's plans and to
note the neighborhood concerns.
Mr. West stated residents could discuss the issues with Public Works Director, Bud
Smallwood.
Mr. Biddle stated there was confusion with the wall being discussed in tonight's meeting.
Mr. Biddle added only the two (2) lots in question could be rezoned. He noted Mr.
Bennett had stated the wall could be built to the west of Dublin St. Mr. Biddle made a
request that the wall be constructed not too close in proximity to Dublin St.
Mr. Biddle moved to approve the requested rezoning for 3015 Dyer and 3016 Dyer St.
Mr. Freeman seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously.
Mr. West asked for a motion on the minutes from the September 15, 2003 Planning &
Zoning meeting. Mr. Freeman moved to approve the minutes, with a second from Mr.
Roach. The motion was approved unanimously.
There being no further business before the Commission, Mr. West adjourned the meeting.
Approved by:
Robert West, Chairman,
Planning & Zoning Commission
Date: 11/17/2003
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES
November 17, 2003
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park met on Monday, November
17, 2003 at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 3800 University Blvd. University
Park, Texas. The following are minutes of that meeting.
Commission Members Attending
Robert West - Chairman
Doug Roach
Bill Foose
Ed Freeman
Randy Biddle
Staff Members Attending
Wade McLaurin - Bldg. & Zoning Administrator
Jennifer Patrick- Administrative Secretary
Rob Dillard - City Attorney
Mr. West opened the public hearing and introduced the commission members. He then
read the specifics of the first case.
PZ 03-18- 6101 Hillcrest Group, L.P., requesting an amendment to the existing
Planned Development District 22 at 6101 Hillcrest (Lots 1- 3 Block D, of
University Annex 2nd Addition of the City of University Park). The applicant
has submitted revised building plans which conform to the parking
requirements originally approved for this planned development and which
addresses the primary concerns that were voiced by the Commission at the
October meeting.
Mr. Arthur J. Anderson, Attorney with the firm, Winstead Sechrest & Minick P.C.
representing 6101 Hillcrest Group, L.P., was introduced and made a brief statement
describing the property in question.
Mr. Anderson stated the off street parking had been modified since the last application
presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission in October 2003. Previously, there had
been a total of sixty-three (63) rooms with forty-nine (49) "countable" parking spaces, the
revised site plan indicates this has been brought down to fifty-two (52) rooms with fifty-
two (52) parking spaces. Mr. Anderson noted that repainting the parking lot had enabled
more parking spaces.
Mr. Anderson stated he felt as if the hotel improvements, as per the new site plan would
be a better project benefiting the residents, the City of University Park, and applicants.
Mr. Anderson added he had personal conversations and letters of support from local
residents impacted by the hotel project.
Mr. Anderson requested that if there was any opposition speaking this evening that he
have the chance to rebut.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
11/17/2003
Page 2 of 2
Mr. West inquired if there were any other people in favor of the project, who would like
to speak. No one came forward.
Mr. West then inquired if there were any opposing parties. He noted there were a total of
nine (9) opposing letters submitted to date in regards to the specific project at 6101
Hillcrest.
Mr. Daniel Yaest, resident/owner of 3419 Granada Ave., was introduced and made a
brief statement opposing the addition/renovation at the hotel. Mr. Yaest noted many of
his concerns such as: delayed/scattered construction work, lower property values, parking
issues, and the location of the hotel (i.e. next to church and childcare facility). Mr. Yaest
added there had not been any effort on behalf the developer to meet with the
neighborhood. Mr. Yaest went on to explain he felt as if he would be giving up a chunk
of his equity in his home. He then thanked the board for the opportunity to be heard.
Mr. Kevin Robertson, resident/owner of 3424 Binkley Ave., came forward and stated he
had been a resident at 3424 Binkley for one (1) year and had been observing with intrigue
the progress of the hotel. Mr. Robertson noted various concerns such as: a vacant shell of
a building, lack of work in progress on site, heavy traffic thru the neighborhood, lower
property values, and the lack of room for a dumpster in the alleyway. Mr. Robertson
stated the hotel was a nice structure for the neighborhood, but noted his main concern
was the lack of parking. Mr. Robertson added with the middle school nearby, parking is
rarely available at any given time of the day.
Ms. Julie Noble, resident/owner of 3433 Granada Ave, stated her main concern was the
lack of public awareness in regards to the hotel project, with her notice being from a local
neighbor, three (3) days prior to tonight's meeting. Ms. Noble noted she was not
opposing the construction of the hotel, and would rather like for it to succeed. Ms. Noble
stated her concerns were; lack of public communication, ramifications of living past the
two-hundred (200') feet legal notice area, and parking issues. She requested that the
Planning and Zoning Commission promote a public hearing to inform residents of an
exact timeline of the hotel project, allowing the community a clearer picture of the
project.
Mr. West inquired if legal notifications had been mailed/sent out.
Mr. McLaurin replied, yes, the notifications had been mailed as required by state law. It
requires all property owners within a two-hundred (200') foot radius of the property to be
notified.
Gregory Pillsbury, resident/owner of 3455 Shenandoah Ave., noted he would like the
chance to speak in favor of the project at 6101 Hillcrest. Mr. Pillsbury stated his
residence was one (1) block away from the property in question. He added he felt the
parking was within the rules of the City of University Park, the project as proposed would
be an asset to the local community, and a strong asset to the city.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
11/17/2003
Page 3 of 3
Mr. Daniel Yaest stood to make an additional statement that he was not in opposition to
the hotel construction. Mr. Yaest noted he was in opposition to the fourth floor addition
to the existing structure and to the bar/restaurant on the ground level of the hotel.
Mr. Art Anderson noted he would address the issues brought up by the residents
opposing the hotel, or its intent. Mr. Anderson said there was never any intent to
disregard the local neighborhood's input. Mr. Anderson added there had been two (2)
different hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commission and one (1) before the City
Council.
Mr. Anderson noted the only residents who had attended meetings regarding the hotel
previously were the Yaest's. He added, Mrs. Yaest was in support of the project in
question and submitted this opinion to the City Council.
Mr. Anderson stated the developers/contractors were not on site making progress, due to
the issues being addressed before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council.
Mr. West inquired as to how long the developers have owned the land.
Mr. Anderson stated the applicant has owned the property for fourteen (14) months.
A discussion ensued regarding the various changes the developer would make to improve
the hotel.
Mr. Anderson stated the hotel rooms would have an asking price of anywhere from one
hundred twenty-five dollars ($125.00) to two hundred dollars ($200.00) a night, which
was comparable to all other major cities.
Mr. Anderson added studies done by the developer have indicated the hotel would not
endanger residential property values, and in fact the data shows property values would
increase.
Mr. West asked Mr. McLaurin to explain how the occupancies and parking restrictions
are determined.
Mr. McLaurin stated the city zoning ordinance defines the parking requirements.
Typically the planned developments are created/amended in conjunction with the various
uses of the particular buildings within the boundaries. Mr. McLaurin went on to explain
the hotel is the primary use of the property; with the restaurant being an accessory use,
therefore the hotel parking regulations are enforced. Mr. McLaurin noted if the site's
primary use were a restaurant with an accessory use as a hotel, the restaurant parking
regulations would have to be met. If restaurant use were considered more than just an
accessory use, as a result of the restaurant's size or location, then the restaurant parking
would be required in addition to.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
11/17/2003
Page 4 of 4
Mr. West closed the public hearing in regards to the hotel matter.
Mr. Freeman stated that the public needed a clear understanding of what the board was
here to approve/disapprove; the fourth floor addition and to ensure the parking
requirements were met. Mr. Freeman noted the board had no control over the
bar/restaurant.
Mr. West stated that Mr. Freeman was correct.
Mr. Freeman asked the developer for an explanation regarding the fourth floor plan, the
space allocated for the "back of house".
Mr. Robert Colombo, president of 6101 Hillcrest Group L.P., noted the "back of house"
space was for storage of housekeeping supplies.
Mr. Freeman asked if this included towels, sheets, and toiletries for the hotel rooms.
Mr. Colombo stated yes.
A discussion ensued regarding the occupancy of the restaurant, the square footage
allocated, and the location of a kitchen to prepare foods for the hotel guests.
Mr. Biddle inquired if the ground floor plans were the same as submitted at the Planning
& Zoning meeting in June 2003.
Mr. Colombo stated the ground floor plan had not changed.
Mr. Biddle asked if five course meals were to be served in the restaurant.
Mr. Colombo stated various finger foods, sandwiches, and hamburgers would be on the
menu.
Mr. Biddle inquired if a valet service would still be utilized for the hotel.
Mr. Colombo stated yes, the valet service would be used for many reasons such as:
quality service for patrons, security, and control of parking in the area. He added there
was a significant increase in the investment with adding the fourth floor addition with
valet parking.
Mr. Biddle asked how many employees would be employed at the hotel.
Mr. Colombo stated there would be roughly fifteen (15) employees, which would use the
offsite parking.
Mr. Biddle asked if the valet parking and tandem spaces were allocated for guest use.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
11/17/2003
Page 5 of 5
Mr. Colombo stated yes, and made note the valet service was owned by one of the
investors of the hotel.
Mr. West asked for a motion and noted the property in the planned development was
approved with fifty-two (52) rooms and forty-nine (49) parking spaces in a previous
meeting. He added before the board was the same fifty-two (52) rooms, with an
additional three (3) parking spaces, which increases the parking to fifty-two (52) parking
spaces. Mr. West noted the request of the applicant complies with all zoning ordinances
as per the site plan. Mr. West stated last month the applicant was turned down by the
Planning & Zoning board due to extra rooms on the site plan and convoluted parking.
Mr. Biddle asked Mr. Dillard if the use of a valet service could be listed as a requirement
in the planned development in question.
Mr. Dillard stated, yes, this had been addressed at the previous Planning & Zoning
meeting. Mr. Dillard added legally the developer could get by without the use of the valet
service, since the parking requirements were met. He noted in a General Retail district
this would not be a requirement. Mr. Dillard stated if necessary an amendment could be
made to the planned development to include the use of a valet service.
Mr. Freeman moved to approve the requested amendment for a fourth floor addition with
the condition of the use of a valet service. Mr. Roach seconded the motion. The motion
was approved, four (4) to one (1), with Mr. West in opposition.
Mr. West then read the specifics of the second case.
PZ 03-20 - David Hille, representing the owner of the property, requesting an
amendment to the existing Planned Development District 2- Retail (PD-2-R) at
4520 Lovers Lane. The request is to add a fifteen-foot addition to the rear of the
subject address. Any change to the existing site plan requires an amendment to
the planned development.
Mr. David Hille, representing the owner of the property in question and resident of 8351
San Fernando, was introduced and made a brief statement describing the property in
question.
Mr. Hille stated the addition would not decrease the number of parking spaces for the
site. Mr. Hille added the addition would create additional storage for the building, as well
as, provide room for additional customer service.
Mr. Karl Black, co-owner of 4520 Lovers Ln. and resident of 3448 Stanford, was
introduced and made a brief statement. Mr. Black noted the site plan submitted actually
shows a sixteen (16) foot addition, not a fifteen (15) foot addition as noticed by staff.
Planning & Zoning Minutes
11/17/2003
Page 6 of 6
Mr. McLaurin noted the application stated a request of a fifteen (15) foot addition.
The board determined that the additional one (1 ') foot needed, did not have an impact on
the logistics of the site, and therefore did not see the discrepancy as an issue.
Mr. West closed the public hearing.
Mr. West asked for a motion.
Mr. Foose moved to approve the requested amendment based on the plan submitted
showing a sixteen (16') foot addition, with Mr. Biddle seconding the motion. The motion
was approved unanimously.
Mr. West asked for a motion on the minutes from the October 20, 2003 Planning &
Zoning meeting. Mr. Freeman moved to approve the minutes, with a second from Mr.
Roach. The motion was approved unanimously.
There being no further business before the Commission, Mr. West adjourned the meeting.
Approved by:
Robert West, Chairman,
Planning & Zoning Commission
Date: 01/19/2004
CAPITAL PROJECTS UPDATE
Week of February 1, 2004
CAPITAL PROJECTS UPDATE
Week of January 1, 2004
Project
No. Description
Cost
Major Tasks Uncompleted
Target
Date
42450 Fondren Tower- Fire Station No. 2
$30,000.00 (E)
In-house construction (FD & FM)
RLG completion of structural design
TBD
Complete
42730
Lovers Lane Reconstruction II - Hillcrest to NCE
(1) Water & sanitary sewer construction
(2) Pavement & Drainage Improvements
$4,000,000.00 (E)
Design
Start utility construction
Interlocal agreement with City of Dallas
Design
Bids
Complete
Feb-03
Complete
Mar-04
Apr-04
42903 NCE Wall - Streets - Landscaping
Tree / Street Lighting - Sidewalks
$150,000.00 (E)
Street light equipment installed
"Entry Plaza" construction
Complete
Sum-04
42980
42980
C& G Replacement FY00-01
C& G Replacement FY00-01
Change No 1 (**)
(continued)
$2,223,254.65 (A)
$351,523.50 (A)
Amherst, Durham to Airline
Amherst, TC B!vd to T,J!3,qe
Baltimore, Lovers Lane to Hanover
Bryn Mawr, Boedeker to Airline
Boedeker, Hanover to Southwestern
Caruth, Turtle Creek Blvd to Thackeray
Complete
Delete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Page 1
42980
C& G Replacement FYO0-01
(continued)
Page 2
Centenary, Thackeray to Baltimore
Glenwick, Preston to Westwick
Glenwick, Preston to HPH8 parking garage
Grassmere, Preston to Westchester
Granada, Hillcrest to Key
Glenwick, Preston to HS Garage
Greenbrier, Preston to Douglas
H~over, Presto~ to B~!timore
Hyer, Preston to Westchester
Larchmont, Armstrong to Lomo Alto
Marquette, Baltimore to Pickwick
Marquette, Tudle Creek Blvd to Thackeray
McFarlin, Preston to Westchester
Normandy, Armstrong to Lomo Alto
Purdue, Durham to Dickens
Rosedale, Thackew to Golf
San Carlos, Preston to Armstrong + Lomo Alto
Shenandoah, Douglas to Armstrong
Shenandoah, Roland to Armstrong
Shenandoah, Hillcrest to Auburndale
Stanford, Airline to Hillcrest
Stanhope, Armstrong to Lomo Alto
Thackeray, Rosedale to Milton
University Blvd, Golf to alley east of Haynie
Williams Pkwy, University to McFarlin (padial)
Windsor Pkwy, Douglas to Preston Pkwy
Complete
Delete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Delete
Complete
Complete
Delete
Complete
Complete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Windsor Pkwy, Douglas to Lomo Alto Complete
45210
45600
46310
46510
46700
46700
Traffic Signal - Hillcrest (~ Normandy
$71,ooo.oo (E)
Infiltration-Inflow Remediation
* MH rehabilitation
$104,429.04 (A)
MPY-Caruth Park Area
Water / San Sewer / Stm Sewer
$2,135,000.00 (E)
MPY-Sanitary Sewer / Water / Pavement
(1) 4100 blk - Emerson / University alley
(2) 4100 blk - Emerson / Glenwick alley
MPY - Sanitary Sewer / Storm Sewer / Water / Pavement $2,100,000.00
(1) 32-3300 blk - Colgate / Marquette alley (Hillcrest to Airline)
(E)
MPY - Sanitary Sewer / Storm Sewer / Water / Pavement $2,100,000.00 (E)
Page 3
(2) 3400 blk - Colgate / Marquette alley (Hillcrest to TC Blvd)
Materials / equipment ordered
Signal installed, waiting for TXU elec service
* MH Rehab
Design
Bids
Water line installation
Sanitary Sewer Installation
Storm Sewer Installation
Alley pavement replacement
Water line installation
Sanitary Sewer Installation
Storm Sewer Installation
Alley pavement replacement
* Water line installation
* Sanitary Sewer Installation
* Storm Sewer Installation
* Pavement repair/replacement
* Water line installation
* Sanitary Sewer Installation
Complete
Complete
Complete
Jan-04
Mar-04
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
Com )lete
(3) Airline, Colgate/Marquette alley to NW Hwy
(4) Hillcrest, Colgate/Marquette alley S to Caruth Pk
(5) Marquette / Colgate Street - Alley, 32/3300 blk
Pavement repair/replacement
Water line installation
Sanitary Sewer Installation
Storm Sewer Installation
Pavement repair/replacement
Misc / Cleanup
Water line installation
Storm Sewer Installation
Pavement repair/replacement
Misc / Cleanup
Storm Sewer Installation
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
Corn )lete
43700 City Hall - Renovation and Expansion
............. (E)
Conceptual Design
Construction Plans & Specs
Complete
Spt-04
43710
City Hall II - Drainage Improvements
$3,000,000.00 (E)
Design
Corps of Engineers 404 Permit
Wetlands Mitigation Credits
Bids
Jan-04
Complete
Complete
Mar-04
43710 City Hall III - 24" Water main Installation
$630,000.00 (E)
Water main construction
Pavement Repairs
Complete
Feb-04
43720
Vassar Street Improvements
43720 Vassar Street Improvements (Continued)
$590,000.00 (A)
Remove &
Remove &
Remove &
Remove &
Remove &
Remove &
Cleanup &
replace street pavement (SBL)
replace street pavement (NBL)
replace driveway approaches (SBL)
replace driveway approaches (NBL)
replace sidewalks (SBL)
replace sidewalks (NBL)
punchlist
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Page 4
48100 Paint Fondren Elevated Tank
$300,000.00 (E)
Specification / Bid Documents
Bids
Complete
TBD
48200 MPY-Auburndale-Key/Water/Sanitary Sewer/Storm S~ $555,000.00 (E)
Design
Bids
Jan-04
TBD
48300 Automated Meter Reading $1,200,000.00 (E)
AMR installation - Cycle 1 (N of Lovers Lane)
AMR installation - Cycle 2 (S of Lovers Lane)
AMR installation - Cycle 3 (Parks, large meters,
Training of City staff
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Page 5