HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 04-20-06 Names TabsA G E N D A
#2608
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
THURSDAY, APRIL 20, 2006 AT 5:00 P.M.
4:00-5:00 P.M. WORK SESSION FOR AGENDA REVIEW
I.INVOCATION
– Councilmember Syd Carter
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE –
Councilmember Syd Carter/Boy Scouts
III.INTRODUCTION OF COUNCIL
– Mayor James H. Holmes, III
IV.INTRODUCTION OF STAFF
– City Manager Bob Livingston
V.AWARDS AND RECOGNITION
DEPARTMENT PINS: Driver/Engineer Cecil Barton, Fire Department, 15 years and
Robbie Corder, Assistant to Public Works Director, 2 years for a total of 17 years of
service to the City.
GRADUATION: Leadership University Park Class
VI.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.
VII.CONSENT AGENDA
A.CONSIDER: Request to Abandon Turtle Creek Right-of-Way Adjacent to
3501 Southwestern – Smallwood Tab I
B.CONSIDER: Request for Picnic at Williams Park by The Covenant Church –
Bradley Tab II
C.CONSIDER: Request for Picnic at Curtis Park by Watermark Church –
Bradley Tab III
D.CONSIDER: Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes for April 4, 2006 –
Wilson Tab IV
VIII.MAIN AGENDA
A.PUBLIC HEARING: Planned Development Amendment for Preston Road
Church of Christ Expansion – Persaud Tab V
B.CONSIDER: Ordinance for Planned Development Amendment for Preston
Road Church of Christ Expansion – Persaud Tab V
C.PUBLIC HEARING: Amending Zoning Ordinance by Repealing Section 21-
100 (4) (c) iii to Eliminate 20-Foot and 10-Foot Limitations on Cumulative
Side Yards in Single Family Dwelling Districts – Persaud Tab VI
D.CONSIDER: Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance by Repealing Section
21-100 (4) (c) iii to Eliminate 20-Foot and 10-Foot Limitations on Cumulative
Side Yards in Single Family Dwelling Districts – Persaud Tab VI
E.CONSIDER: Speed Limits on Residential Streets – Smallwood Tab VII
F.PRESENTATION: By Charter Cable TV in Response to Community Survey –
Austin Tab VIII
G.CONSIDER: TXU Transmission Line Feasibility Study Request for Extension
and Resident Steering Committee Resignation – Corder Tab IX
H.CONSIDER: Request by Christ the King School to Use City Streets, 5K Run –
Adams Tab X
I.CONSIDER: Ordinance to Amend Definition of Approved Trash Container –
Speer Tab XI
J.CONSIDER: Resolution Adopting Fire Department Strategic Plan – Ledbetter
Tab XII
K.CONSIDER: Acceptance of Homeland Security Grant for Regional Radio
Interoperability – Ledbetter Tab XIII
L.PUBLIC HEARING: Setting Natural Gas Rates – Austin Tab XIV
M.CONSIDER: Ordinance Setting Natural Gas Rates – Austin Tab XIV
N.CONSIDER: Resolution Suspending 2005 Atmos Gas GRIP Rate Request –
Austin Tab XV
IX. RECEPTION:
Leadership University Park Class
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.
X. INFORMATION AGENDA
Tab XVI
REPORTS, BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
A.BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
B.EMPLOYEE BENFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
C.FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
D.PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of March 28, 2006
E.PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
F.PROPERTY CASUALTY & LIABILITY INSURANCE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
G.PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
H.PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
I.URBAN DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
J.ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
K.CAPITAL PROJECTS REVIEW COMMITTEE
AGENDA MEMO
(04-20-06 AGENDA)
DATE:
April 12, 2006
TO:
Bob Livingston
City Manager
FROM:
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Discuss a request for abandonment of street right-of-way along the
Turtle Creek frontage of 3501 Southwestern.
Background.
Staff received a request from the owner of the property at
3501 Southwestern for the City to abandon approximately sixteen feet of the
right-of-way (r-o-w) along his east (Turtle Creek Blvd) frontage. This is exactly
like the request the City granted to his neighbor to the north (3500
Southwestern) in 2002. Staff reviewed the site conditions, utilities, and adjacent
r-o-w widths. Even assuming the requested abandonment, there is sufficient
width in the remaining r-o-w to address utility issues. Additionally, from a traffic
perspective, we do not see a need to consider any future widening of the
existing street.
If the Council is amenable to the request, staff will determine the "fair market
value" of the subject street r-o-w. The City Attorney would then draft the enabling
ordinance for City Council consideration at a subsequent meeting.
Discussion.
Staff requests Council consideration of the request prior to
any further discussion with the property owner.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AM R-O-W Aband 3501 Southwestern 04
20 06.doc 4:19 PM 04/12/06
AGENDA MEMO
(04/06/06 AGENDA)
DATE:
April 15, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Gerry Bradley, Director of Parks
SUBJECT:
The Covenant School - Reservation Request
BACKGROUND:
Staff has received a request from The Covenant School to reserve Williams Park
for a picnic event scheduled for Thursday, May 25, 2006 from 5:30 p.m. until
8:30 p.m. This is an annual event and The Covenant School anticipates 550
participants to be in attendance.
RECOMMENDATION:
In the event that City Council considers approving The Covenant School’s
request, staff recommends that the following items be considered:
The Covenant School will pay a Park Usage Fee of $500.00 plus a
?
refundable $250.00 security deposit.
All trash must be consolidated at an agreed location.
?
ATTACHMENTS:
Letter of request from The Covenant School
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\The Covenant School Request.doc 1:59 PM 04/13/06
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\The Covenant School Request.doc 1:59 PM 04/13/06
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/2006 AGENDA)
DATE:
April 13, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Gerry Bradley, Director of Parks
SUBJECT:
Reservation Request for Curtis Park - Watermark Church
BACKGROUND:
Staff has received an annual request from the Watermark Community Church to
reserve Curtis Park for a church picnic on Sunday, May 21, 2006. Watermark
Church anticipates approximately 700 participants to be in attendance and plans
to be at the park site from 9:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. Watermark Church has
hosted several past events at the park site without incident.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending City Council approve the request from the Watermark
Church to reserve Curtis Park for a church picnic based on the following criteria:
Rental Fee is $500.00 plus a refundable $250.00 security deposit.
?
Watermark Church shall rent two (2) additional port-a-potties for
?
participant usage.
Watermark Church shall refrain from using any P.A. system or any
?
10:00 a.m.
amplified music prior to
All trash must be carried off the park site.
?
ATTACHMENTS:
Letter of request from Watermark Church
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Watermark Community Church april
2006.doc 2:20 PM 04/13/06
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Watermark Community Church april
2006.doc 2:20 PM 04/13/06
MINUTES
#2608
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, APRIL 4, 2006, 5:00 P.M.
Mayor Blackie Holmes opened the meeting of the City Council. Present were Mayor Pro
Tempore Jim Roberts and Councilmembers Syd Carter, Kelly Walker and Harry Shawver. Also
in attendance were City Manager Bob Livingston, City Attorney Rob Dillard and City Secretary
Nina Wilson.
RECOGNITION OF BOY SCOUTS: Seven boy scouts introduced themselves. Foster
Richardson, 3321 Caruth; Patrick Stasek, 4104 Caruth; Colin Stone, 3324 Greenbrier;
Huntington Biggers, 4408 Larchmont; Robert McIntosh, 4505 Southern and Will Cohn, 4529
Belfort were working on the Citizenship in the Community Merit Badge, and Mark Sehnert,
4213 Greenbrier, was working on the Communications Merit Badge.
ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR
Mr. Matt Dixon, 3448 Milton, requested placement of a sidewalk on the east side of Dickens
between Milton and Rankin. The council agreed to investigate the matter.
Ms. Diane Carson, 3433 Haynie, was concerned that the Planning and Zoning Commission had
not turned down the Legacy/Hillcrest request and asked what could be done about it. Mayor
Holmes stated that there is a process that the Planning and Zoning Commission must follow as
items are presented for consideration.
Mayor Pro Tem Roberts moved approval of the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Walker
seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the following:
CONSENT AGENDA
CONSIDER GRANT AND RESOLUTION FOR PROJECT STEP WAVE, TEXAS TRAFFIC
SAFETY PROGRAM: The police department applied for and received a Texas Traffic Safety
Program Grant in the amount of $5,000. The purpose of the grant is to conduct overtime traffic
enforcement focusing on specific traffic law violations during high traffic volume holiday
periods in order to reduce traffic accidents, injuries and fatalities.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK,
TEXAS, APPROVING A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION BY THE CITY
MANAGER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
CONSIDER CANCELLING JOINT CONTRACT WITH PARK CITIES MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES DISTRICT: As the Park Cities Municipal Utilities District (PC MUD) has cancelled
their election, it is incumbent upon the City of University Park to pay the entire estimated cost of
the General Municipal Election for May 13, 2006. The responsibility of PC MUD was in the
amount of $2,568.11. We are now responsible for that amount plus our own, which has already
been paid. The total estimated cost of the election contract will now be $5,136.22.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES: The minutes were
approved for March 21, 2006.
MAIN AGENDA
CONSIDER REQUEST FOR FUNDING OF ART ENGAGEMENT CALENDAR: University
Park resident and artist, Jennifer Culbertson, contacted the city in late February regarding city
participation in an art engagement calendar project, which would feature reprints from works by
Park Cities artists. The calendar will be formatted as a spiral bound, week-at-a-glance
engagement calendar. Once printed, the calendars will be mailed to every household in the City
of University Park and The Town of Highland Park. Ms. Culbertson proposed that the two cities
each provide $15,000 for the project, which is estimated to cost over $60,000. Mayor Holmes
moved that the City of University Park commit $15,000 on a one-time basis and that Ms.
Culbertson work with Community Information Officer Steve Mace on the project. As there was
no second to the motion, it did not carry. At the end of the city council meeting, Councilmember
Shawver asked that the motion be restated. Mayor Holmes then moved approval of the project.
Councilmember Shawver seconded, and the vote was unanimous to fund the Art Engagement
Calendar.
CONSIDER REQUEST FROM THE HILLIER SCHOOL AT HIGHLAND PARK
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH TO USE CITY STREETS FOR A 5K RUN ON OCTOBER 7,
2006: The Hillier School is a private school for children with learning disabilities. The purpose
of the run is to familiarize the community with the school and help raise funds for it. The run
will begin at 8:30 a.m. and end at approximately 10:30 a.m. and will include an estimated 250
runners. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts moved approval of the request. Councilmember Carter
seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the use of City streets for a 5K run to benefit
The Hillier School.
DISCUSSION REGARDING SPEED LIMITS ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS: The city
contracted with Traffic Engineer Dannie Cummings, P.E., to review the feasibility of lowering
the speed limit on residential streets. As detailed in The Texas Transportation Code, the
residential speed limit unless otherwise posted is 30 MPH. Recent legislation, however, allows
the city council to modify the speed limit. Mr. Cummings was asked to review traffic and speed
data collected since 1999 on 47 residential streets, conduct research through ITC, and provide
comment and recommendations on the question of whether to reduce residential speed limits
from 30 mph to 25 mph. The report does not refer to Preston Road, Hillcrest Boulevard, Airline
Road, University Boulevard or Lovers Lane, as they are not considered residential streets. The
th
85 percentile speed for the 47 locations varied from a low of 18.7 mph to 37.0 mph with an
th
overall 85 percentile speed of 29.1 mph. The main sources of the research were the Institute of
Transportation Engineers, the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Transportation
Research Board. Mr. Rick Barrett, 2817 Purdue, urged the city council to vote for the 25 mph
speed limit and disregard the engineer’s report, as he questioned whether or not the report
considered the width of the streets. Mr. Cummings then stated the width in his report was 31’.
Police Chief Gary Adams spoke on enforceability, stating that enforcement can be maintained
satisfactorily at 30 mph. Mr. Cummings will return to council with a report on the “hot spots”.
Mayor Holmes moved that the issue be tabled until the council gets that report at the next city
council meeting. Councilmember Shawver seconded, and the vote was unanimous to table the
issue regarding speed limits on residential streets.
CONSIDER RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN NEW STEERING
COMMITTEE FOR ATMOS GAS CITIES: A memo was received from Mr. Jay Doegey, City
Attorney for Arlington, Texas, inviting the City of University Park and other Atmos Gas cities to
form a standing steering committee. The group will respond to natural gas rate filings and
regulatory changes, just as the TXU Electric Steering Committee of Cities has done for electric
regulatory matters. Joining with other cities in previous gas and electric rate cases has enabled
the city to review and challenge rate changes affecting city government and residents.
Councilmember Carter moved approval of the resolution and participation agreement.
Councilmember Walker seconded, and the vote was unanimous to authorize participation in the
new steering committee for Atmos Gas Cities.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-05
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE GAS STANDING
STEERING COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT.
CONSIDER APPOINTMENT OF TREE ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE: In May 2005,
the city council approved a tree ordinance which outlined procedures for planting approved tree
species on public parkways. In 2006, due to increasing construction within our community, staff
has been directed to investigate the expansion of the tree ordinance to provide procedures for tree
mitigation associated with new construction on both residential and commercial properties.
Councilmember Carter moved approval of the appointment of a Tree Ordinance Review
Committee to include Mayor Holmes, Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, Mac Fuller and Bill Pardoe of
the Park Committee, and two builders. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts seconded, and the vote was
unanimous to form a committee to assist staff in developing an equitable and comprehensive tree
ordinance.
CONSIDER PURCHASE OF POLICE PARKING ENFORCEMENT VEHICLE: The new
vehicle would replace the existing Honda GoldWing, three-wheeled motorcycle. The GO-4
Parking Patrol Vehicle, manufactured by Westward Industries in Manitoba, Canada, is a street-
legal, three-wheeled vehicle and will be purchased from Mission Golf Cars for $25,944.
Councilmember Walker moved approval of the purchase. Councilmember Shawver seconded,
and the vote was unanimous to purchase the GO-4 Parking Patrol Vehicle.
CONSIDER PURCHASE OF REPORTING SOFTWARE FOR 3-1-1 SYSTEM: Implementing
a 3-1-1 Program is pursuant to the Strategic Goals adopted by the city council. A sophisticated
reporting system will provide relevant, accessible, and usable data and reports suited to the city’s
start-up and future needs. It will also allow the city to evaluate accurately the call volume, time
spent on calls, as well as, a vast array of information to assess staffing needs and the success of
the program. The cost of the software and installation is $27,227.38. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts
moved approval of the purchase. Councilmember Carter seconded, and the vote was unanimous
to approve purchasing 3-1-1 Reporting Software.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
th
PASSED AND APPROVED this 20 of April 2006.
James H. Holmes III, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nina Wilson, City Secretary
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: April 20, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Harry Persaud, MRTPI, AICP, Community Development Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of an Ordinance granting a zoning change from MF-2 to PD-
28 zoning district classification for a tract of land situated on the South West
Corner of University Blvd and Preston Road, and described as lots 2, 3 and
4 located in the Rhea Miller’s Subdivision, in the City of University Park;
and approving a detailed site plan for the amended PD-28 zoning district.
Background/Analysis:
Preston Road Church of Christ is expanding the existing church on McFarlin Boulevard
to include Lots 2, 3, and 4 of the Rhea Millers Subdivision located on University
Boulevard. The tract on University Boulevard is currently zoned Multi family “MF-2”
zoning district classification and the Church is requesting a rezoning of this tract to PD-
28. The concept plan and detailed site plan for the entire PD-28 has been reviewed by
staff and considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing on
February 20, 2006. The Church made changes to the detailed site plan following
comments at the public hearing and directions from P &Z. The amended concept plan
and detailed site plan was considered by P&Z on March 6, 2006. A public notice of the
City council hearing was published in the Park Cities News on March 30, 2006.
Based on DCAD information, 36% of the area of properties within 200 feet of the subject
tract are opposing the request for a zoning change. In accordance with Section 15-100
(6) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance this item will require a three fourths (3/4)
vote of all members of the City council.
Recommendation
Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval with
specific conditions attached.
Attachments:
1. P&Z Report with PD conditions.
2. PD Ordinance
Planning & Zoning Commission Report
DATE: ,
March 6 2006
TO:
Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM:
Harry Persaud, MRTPI, AICP, Community Development Manager
RE:
PZ -06-001
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
F & S Partners Inc. representing the Preston Road Church of Christ
LOCATION:
6409 Preston Road
REQUEST:
Requesting a zoning change from MF-2 to PD-28 zoning district
classification for a tract of land situated on the South West Corner
of University Blvd and Preston Road, and described as lots 2, 3
and 4 located in the Rhea Miller’s Subdivision, in the City of
University Park; and consideration of a detailed site plan for the
amended PD-28 zoning district.
EXISTING
ZONING:
PD-28 and MF-2
SURROUNDING
LAND USE:
Residential
STAFF
COMMENTS:
The applicant has submitted a request for a zoning change and
consideration of a concept and detailed site plan for PD-28. Preston
Road Church of Christ proposes to rezone a portion of land situated
south of and abutting University Boulevard and described as lots 2,
3, and 4 located in the Rhea Miller’s Subdivision currently zoned
MF-2 to PD-28. Section 20 “Use Table” of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance requires a Specific Use Permit for a church in the
MF-2 zoning district. The maximum building height in the MF-2
district is 35 feet.
The existing church building located in PD-28 on the northwest
corner of McFarlin Blvd and Preston Road is approx. 26,000 sq. ft
with a building height of 35’ 7”. The Church proposes to add
approx. 35,000 sq. ft. with a maximum building height of 35’on the
adjacent tract abutting University Blvd.In addition to a traffic
study, the applicants submitted a detailed site plan showing the
existing and proposed building sites, building elevations, landscape
plan, parking analysis and on site traffic circulation.
The parking analysis shows the need for 246 parking spaces for an
estimated 738 seats. The site plan shows 72 spaces on site and 12
additional spaces located in the public Right-of-Way on University
Boulevard. Overall the proposed development is 162 parking spaces
short of meeting requirements. The applicant will present the plans
at the public hearing and respond to questions and comments.
A public notice was published in the Park Cities News on February
2, 2006 and March 30, 2006. Property owner notices were mailed to
owners within 200 feet of the subject tract. Based on verified DCAD
information 36% of the properties within 200 feet of the subject tract
opposes the zoning change request.
Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and
considered this item at its regular meeting on February 20, 2006.
The item was tabled for further consideration on March 6, 2006.
P& Z directed the church to review the parking lot design on the
north west corner of the site with the objective of possibly
eliminating one row of parking spaces abutting the west property
line and adding a screen wall or landscape buffer between the
existing residential use and the parking lot. The screening wall and/
or landscaping should extend south so as to provide a buffer between
the existing single family home and the existing parking lot.
PD CONDITIONS:
(1) The Church will install a wrought iron sliding gate at the University
Boulevard driveway to restrict through traffic to McFarlin at peak
hours;
(2) A 7 foot masonry wall will be installed on the northwest corner of
the site to align with the front building line as shown on the approved
site plan;
(3) An evergreen hedge of Nellie R. Stevens Holly will be planted
along the west property line between the Church and the existing
duplex. Plants shall be installed so that there is no space between
them, and they shall be at least 7 feet in height when planted, measured
from grade;
(4) A 7 foot masonry wall to match the materials and architectural
character of the Church shall be installed between the Church parking
lot on McFarlin and the single family residence to the west of the
parking lot, such wall terminating at the front building line of the
home;
(5) New light fixtures to be installed on the site shall be the same
height as the existing light poles and shall a cut off luminaire;
(6) All landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved
site plan;
(7) Further review of the detailed site plan by the Planning and Zoning
Commission is hereby waived.
ATTACHMENTS: (1) PD Concept and Detailed Site Plan
(2) Building Elevations
ORDINANCE NO. ___________________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF
THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, SO AS TO
INCLUDE THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 2, 3, AND 4, BLOCK 21,
RHEA MILLER’S SUBDIVISION, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED IN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NO. 28; APPROVING A DETAILED SITE PLAN AS EXHIBIT “B”
SUBJECT TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS; 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 TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,
the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park
and the City Council of the City of University Park, in compliance with the laws of the State
of Texas with reference to the granting of zoning classifications and changes, have given the
requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and have held due hearings and afforded a
full and fair hearing to all property owners generally and to all persons interested and
situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, and the City Council of the City of
University Park is of the opinion and finds that said zoning change should be granted and
NOW,
that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended;
THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map are hereby
amended to include the property described as Lots 2, 3, and 4, Rhea Miller’s Subdivision,
Block 21, an addition to the City of University Park, Dallas County, Texas, in Planned
Development District No. 28 for the Preston Road Church of Christ, said property being
more particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made part hereof for all
purposes.
SECTION 2
. That the amended detailed site plan for PD No. 28 for the Preston
Road Church of Christ, attached hereto collectively as Exhibit “B”, is hereby approved as
the detailed site plan for said Planned Development District as required by Section 22-500
of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of University Park, Texas, subject to
the following special conditions:
a.The Church will install a wrought iron sliding gate at the University
Boulevard driveway to restrict through traffic to McFarlin at peak hours;
b.A 7 foot masonry wall will be installed on the northwest corner of the
site to align with the front building line as shown on the approved site
plan;
c.An evergreen hedge of Nellie R. Stevens Holly will be planted along the
west property line between the Church and the existing duplex. Plants
shall be installed so that there is no space between them, and they shall
be at least 7 feet in height when planted, measured from grade;
d.A 7 foot masonry wall to match the materials and architectural character
of the Church shall be installed between the Church parking lot on
McFarlin and the single family residence to the west of the parking lot,
such wall terminating at the front building line of the home;
e. New light fixtures to be installed on the site shall be the same height as
the existing light poles and shall a cut off luminaire; and,
f.All landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved site
plan;
g.Further review of the detailed site plan by the Planning and Zoning
Commission is hereby waived.
SECTION 3
. That all ordinances of the City of University Park in conflict with the
provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4.
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or
section of this ordinance or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map, as amended
hereby, be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not
affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or any part or provision thereof, other than
the part so declared to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity
of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole.
SECTION 5.
That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions
of this ordinance or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map, as amended hereby,
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 two
thousand dollars ($2,000.00) 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.
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the
th
20 day of April 2006.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
______________________________ _______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY NINA WILSON,
CITY SECRETARY
(RLD/3/24/06)
ORDINANCE NO. ___________________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF
THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, SO AS TO
INCLUDE THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 2, 3, AND 4, BLOCK 21,
RHEA MILLER’S SUBDIVISION, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED, IN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NO. 28; APPROVING A DETAILED SITE PLAN AS EXHIBIT “B”
SUBJECT TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS; 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 TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the
th
20 day of April 2006.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
CITY SECRETARY
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: April 20, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Harry Persaud, MRTPI, AICP, Community Development Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of an Ordinance of the City of University Park, Texas,
amending the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of University
Park, as heretofore amended, by repealing Section 21-100 (4) (c) iii to
eliminate the twenty feet and ten feet limitations on cumulative side yards in
the single family dwelling districts; and providing an effective date.
________________________________________________________________________
Background/Analysis:
City Council received a report from staff on October 17, 2005, and discussed specific
alternatives for regulating large single family homes in established neighborhoods.
Council directed staff to work with the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee (ZOAC)
to:
(1) Amend the side yard setback regulations to repeal the maximum required setback of
10 feet and the sum of the two side yards not to exceed 20 feet, and
(2) Review the building/plate line height on lots less than 60 feet wide and make
recommendations to reduce the volume or mass of the single family home.
As for item (1) ZOAC unanimously recommended the amendment of the side yard
setback regulations. However, with regard to item (2) ZOAC felt that the City’s Zoning
Ordinance provides enough restrictions and design limitations for lots which are less than
60 feet in width.
An ordinance amending the side yard setback regulations is attached.
Recommendation
Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval
Attachments:
1.
Summary of existing side yard setback regulations.
2. Graphic showing side yard setbacks before and after proposed changes.
3. Ordinance
EXISTING SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
Minimum side yard 10% of lot width
Lots 60 feet wide and over, two side yards = 24% of lot width
Lots less than 60 feet wide, two side yards = 22% of lot width
Two side yards can be a minimum of 20 feet.
Any side yard can be a minimum of 10 feet.
The Building footprint shown above meets the existing side yard setbacks.
Minimum side yard 10% of lot width
Lots 60 feet wide and over, two side yards = 24% of lot width
Two side yards can be a minimum of 20 feet.
Any side yard can be a minimum of 10 feet.
The side yard setbacks are increased to a minimum of 10 % of lot width and both side
yards when added together make up 24 % of lot width. There are no limitations of 10
feet for any one side yard and 20 feet for both side yards.
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY REPEALING SECTION
21-100 (4) (c) iii TO ELIMINATE THE TWENTY FEET AND TEN FEET
LIMITATIONS ON CUMULATIVE SIDE YARDS IN THE SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING DISTRICTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,
the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park
and the City Council of the City of University Park, in compliance with the laws of the
State of Texas with reference to the granting of zoning classifications and changes, have
given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and have held due hearings and
have forwarded a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, and City Council
of the City of University Park is of the opinion and finds that said zoning changes should
be granted and that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance should be amended; Now,
Therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of
University Park, Texas, is hereby amended by deleting Section 21-100 (4) (c) iii, which
limits the required cumulative side yards to twenty feet and any one side yard to ten feet,
and marking it “Reserved” for future use
SECTION 2.
This ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its
passage, as the law and charter in such cases provide.
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on
the _______ day of _______________________ 2006.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
(RLD/01/27/06)
AGENDA MEMO
(04-20-06 AGENDA)
DATE:
April 14, 2006
TO:
Bob Livingston
City Manager
FROM:
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding speed limits on residential streets.
Background.
In response to the discussion at the 04-04-06 City Council meeting, traffic engineer
th
Dannie Cummings identified the following residential streets that have 85 percentile speeds in
excess of 30 mph:
7300 block of Dickens 37.0 mph
3600 block of Marquette 36.9 mph
3600 block of Wentwood 35.7 mph
3900 block of Wentwood 34.8 mph
5900 block of Lomo Alto 34.2 mph
th
Mr. Cummings reaffirmed that both average and 85 percentile speeds along most of the residential
streets in University Park are between 25 and 30 mph. Public Works and Police staff reviewed the
above-referenced information with Mr. Cummings and jointly concluded that we could effectively
manage, through enforcement, the few “hot spots” in the community. The discussion led to the
following recommendations:
1) Conduct a series of new speed studies along these streets to verify that speeding is a
problem;
2) Identify time periods for a concentrated enforcement effort and conduct enforcement
for a one week period;
3) One week following the enforcement period, conduct speed studies to quantify the
impact of the enforcement;
4) Have Mr. Cummings prepare a report of the conclusions and recommendations for
Council consideration and action.
Discussion.
Mr. Cummings will be available at the Council meeting to respond to Council
questions and comments.
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: April 20, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kent R. Austin, Director of Finance
SUBJECT: Charter Cable TV appearance at April 20 City Council meeting
Background/Analysis
As you know, Charter Communications is the sole cable TV provider in University Park and
Highland Park. Charter is the successor to Marcus Cable and Sammons Communications. To
prepare for franchise renewal discussions with Charter, beginning in 2004 City staff met with
members of the Cable TV Franchise Review Advisory Group (FRAG). Membership in FRAG
was composed of HP and UP residents appointed by their respective City Councils.
FRAG commissioned a telephone survey of both communities to determine current attitudes
toward Charter, as well as future needs related to cable and other services. The Dallas
Marketing Group conducted the survey last summer and briefed FRAG members on the
results last fall. As expected by FRAG, the survey results reported high levels of
dissatisfaction with Charter’s service. City staff presented the complete results of the
community survey to Charter early this year
Before the University Park franchise could be renewed last year, state legislation changed so
that cable operators and other video providers need only obtain a statewide franchise, not a
local one. Despite the lack of direct franchise authority, the City still acts as an advocate for
customers and encourages Charter to improve its services. Toward that end, the City has
invited Charter to attend the April 20 Council meeting and provide a response to the survey
findings.
Recommendation
City staff recommends that the Council provide Charter an opportunity to respond to the
survey in a public forum. Kevin Allen, Governmental Relations Manager for Charter, will
th
attend the April 20 meeting to give Charter’s response.
Attachments:
News release from City of University Park, 4/10/2006
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO 04-20-06.doc
3:00 PM 04/13/06
City of University Park
News & Information
April 10, 2006
Charter Cable to address Cable Service Concerns
Last summer, in a telephone survey of University Park and Highland Park residents, only
about 35 percent said they were satisfied with the “value” of their cable subscription.
Moreover, in that same survey, only about half of the respondents (54%), who said they
had called Charter Cable with service concerns, reported satisfaction with the way those
concerns were addressed.
With these and other findings as a backdrop, Charter Cable representatives will update
the City Council on efforts to improve customer concerns during the Council’s April 20
meeting.
Additional Survey Background:
Conducted by The Dallas Marketing Group, at the request of the Cable TV Franchise
Review Advisory Group, the telephone survey involved 425 Park Cities residents. Of
that number, 350 were Charter Cable subscribers, and 175 of those subscribers were
residents of University Park. Among the other key survey findings:
?
Of ten service problems, almost half the subscribers (49%) experienced
intermittent loss of Internet at least five times in the preceding two years.
Other frequent problems:
Partial channel loss (42%)
o
Total Internet loss (40%)
o
Degraded picture (37%)
o
Slow Internet (37%)
o
Loss of e-mail service (33%)
o
Total cable TV outage (32%)
o
?
More than half (57%) of the non-subscribers had previously subscribed to a
cable service, and had done so for an average of 6.7 years. The most
common reasons for dropping: Cost (51%) and Service (47%). A third of
those questioned (35%) dropped cable service due to reception problems.
?
Of the 20 attributes associated with cable service, only two had significant
scores higher than 70 percent: Bill Accuracy (85%), and Availability of the
Programming you want (77%).
(More)
Charter Cable has been University Park’s provider of cable service since 1999 and was
preceded by Marcus Cable and Sammons Communications. University Park granted
the original cable franchise to Sammons in 1978. State legislation approved in 2005
now allows cable TV providers to obtain a statewide franchise agreement instead of a
local one. While the City of University Park no longer has franchise authority over
Charter, the City still acts as an advocate for residents in cable matters.
To see a more detailed presentation of the survey findings, go to the City’s Web site at
www.uptexas.org and click on the link in the “University Park News” section.
For More Information:
Steve Mace
Community Information Officer
214-987-5301
smace@uptexas.org
AGENDA MEMO
(4/20/06 AGENDA)
DATE:
April 13, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM:
Robbie Corder, Assistant to the Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
TXU Transmission Line Feasibility Study Request for Extension &
Resident Steering Committee Resignation
ITEM:
The City’s consulting engineer (Sega) hired to perform an underground utility feasibility study
thth
has requested to extend the deadline for a final report from April 20 to June 6.
Representatives from Sega propose returning to University Park to present the final report
th
during the June 6 City Council meeting.
th
The extension request also outlines a return trip the week of May 25 to brief members of the
Steering Committee and City Council with a preliminary draft of the report. Staff and Sega
believe this preliminary draft visit will provide a better opportunity for Council and Steering
Committee members to provide feedback prior to finalization of the feasibility report.
In addition, the City was notified by Joyce Hanson that the she is moving out of University Park
and needs to resign from her position as Co-Chair of the resident Steering Committee. Staff
requests Council consideration for filling the vacancy left by Ms. Hanson’s resignation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends granting Sega’s request for an extension of the deadline for the feasibility
study, and appointing a new member to the resident Steering Committee.
ATTACHMENTS:
Joyce Hanson Steering Committee Resignation Letter
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\TXU Study Extension Hanson
Resignation.doc 2:08 PM 04/13/06
April 12, 2006
Mayor Blackie Holmes
City of University Park
3800 University Blvd.
University Park, TX 75205
Via Fax: 214-987-5399
Dear Mayor Holmes:
Please accept my resignation from the University Park Transmission Line
Steering Committee.
As the work of the Steering Committee continues, I would highly recommend
Sandra Cude of Amherst Street to fill my position. A long-time resident of
University Park, Sandra has been an active participant in all of the residents’
activities in relation to the transmission line project. She has provided leadership
to the grassroots neighborhood group, University Park Residents in Action, and
served as moderator for the resident forum held in January. Her knowledge of
the situation and ability to work so well with her fellow residents would be an
asset to the Steering Committee.
I appreciated the opportunity to work with the City, the City Council and my
neighbors in seeking a positive outcome for this project.
Thank you,
Joyce Hanson
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: April 12, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Gary W. Adams, Chief of Police
th
SUBJECT: Christ the King School 9 Annual 5K Fun Run
Background/Analysis
Christ the King School located at 4100 Colgate has requested permission to use city streets
for the purpose of holding a 5K run to be held on Saturday, April 29, 2006. The purpose of
the run is to raise funds for their athletic association.
The run will begin at 9:00 a.m. and end at approximately 10:00 a.m. There will be an
estimated 200 runners.
Christ the King has requested to hire one off-duty officer to direct traffic at the corner of
Preston and Marquette.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this event.
Attachments:
Letter from Dennis Stoutenburgh, volunteer for Christ the King School
Map of the proposed Fun Run
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO-Christ the King School
5K.doc 3:15 PM 04/13/06
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/06 AGENDA)
DATE:
April 12, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Jacob Speer, Assistant Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Amendment to Definition of An Approved Trash Container
ITEM:
There are 293 properties in University Park that have their garbage picked up from the parkway
because they do not have alley access. City ordinances require that all trash cans have tight fitting
lids and that those lids be attached to a permanent structure. These ordinances serve to address
the problems of trash blowing on the ground, rodent infestation, and other issues. The homes
without alley access do not typically have a permanent structure on which to attach their trash can
lids. They also lack the convenience of a trash can inset or similar structure to house their cans on
non-collection days. The current ordinance also states that trash cans cannot exceed a capacity of
30 gallons. Standard trash can sizes are 20 gallons and 32 gallons. Since 30 gallon cans are not
produced, residents would have to purchase 20 gallon cans in order to comply with the current
ordinance.
To prevent these properties from being in conflict with the Code of Ordinances, staff proposes an
amendment that would make the requirement to fasten lids to a permanent structure apply only to
homes with alley collection. The proposed amendment would also change the maximum trash can
size from 30 to 32 gallons to match the sizes that can be readily purchased.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the attached ordinance amending the definition of approved trash
containers in section 11.101 of the Code of Ordinances.
ATTACHMENTS:
?
Proposed ordinance
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Trash can amendment 4-20-06.doc
1:39 PM 04/13/06
ORDINANCE NO. _________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY AMENDING
CHAPTER 11, ARTICLE 11.100 REFUSE COLLECTION POLICIES TO
DEFINE APPROVED CONTAINERS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF
ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That Chapter 11, Article 11.100, Refuse Collection Policies, of
the Code of Ordinances, City of University Park, Texas, is hereby amended by
amending section 11.101 (5) to read as follows:
"Sec. 11.101 Definitions
…
(5)
Approved Container or Container shall mean a container constructed of metal or
plastic or other substantial material, with handles sufficiently strong for workers to
empty the garbage or trash from the container conveniently. The container shall
not exceed a capacity of thirty-two (32) gallons or a weight of fifty (50) pounds
when filled and shall be equipped with a tight fitting lid or cover. Where trash is
placed adjacent to the alley for collection, the lid shall be attached to a rack, pole,
fence or other permanent structure by metal cable, chain or other means so it
remains at the storage place for the container.
…”
SECTION 2.
That all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
University Park, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 3.
That should any word, sentence, 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
65474
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 4.
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.
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on
th
the 20 day of April 2006.
APPROVED:
______________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
__________________________ ______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
(RLD/4-12-06) (65474)
65474
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/06 AGENDA)
DATE: March 31, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: David Ledbetter
Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Resolution Adopting F.D. Strategic Plan
In January 2006, the Fire Department began developing a departmental strategic plan by
inviting and utilizing the input of citizens from the various advisory committee groups,
Fire Department members and City staff members. In February 2006 the strategic plan
was completed and clearly defined who the organization is; what the departmental values
are; and the direction the University Park Fire Department will pursue for the next three to
five years. The development of the Fire Department Strategic Plan assists in establishing
one of the first processes the department must undergo for accreditation. In order to
comply with the Commission of Fire Accreditation International (CFAI) the plan must be
published and formally recognized. The benefits of adopting the Strategic Plan by the City
Council include:
?
Validation of the planning process by the governing body,
?
Clearer communication between staff and governing body towards strategic
direction of the department,
?
Budget requests become more performance based.
By adopting the Strategic Plan it should not appear the City Council is approving the
contents of the plan; rather it is a formal action that recognizes and accepts the plan as the
basis for short range goals and direction.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the University Park Fire Department
Strategic Plan be adopted by Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
UPFD Strategic Plan and Resolution
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO Strategic Plan
Adoption.doc 1:12 PM 04/03/06
RESOLUTION NO.__________
RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT STRATEGIC PLAN
DEVELOPED IN JANUARY 2006
WHEREAS
, effective and efficient management begin with a plan; and
WHEREAS
, the fire department conducted an external (citizens) and internal
(employees) retreat to develop a three to five year strategic plan; and
WHEREAS,
the planning process resulted in a new Mission, Vision, Values and
Goals of the Fire Department; and
WHEREAS
, the Commission on Fire Accreditation, International recommends
that a fire department strategic plan become adopted by the Governing body;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
THAT,
it applauds the planning effort by the Fire Department and formally
recognizes the January 2006 Strategic Plan as the benchmark document for fire
department direction and priorities.
PASSED AND APROVED
by the City Council of the City of University, Texas on the
20 day of April 2006.
APPROVED:
_____________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES, III, MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
___________________________ ______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/06 AGENDA)
DATE: April 3, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and
City Council Members
FROM: David Ledbetter,
Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Homeland Security Grant
Last year, I made a presentation to the Mayor and City Council regarding a study that was
commissioned by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) regarding
regional interoperability. The study was administered by the RCC Consulting Company to
determine the capabilities of not only our public safety communication system but all cities
in the NCTCOG region to ensure communications could be conducted by agencies that
normally operate in our city under emergency conditions. RCC determined that our
communication system needed some upgrades and wrote a Request for Quotes (RFQ) for
eligible companies to bid on the upgrades. The study was driven by a Homeland Security
Grant that would be available for the upgrades.
The grant money has been made available to proceed ahead with the upgrades. The
Homeland Security Grant money allotted to the City of University Park is in the amount of
$29,000.00 and will be administered by the Texas Governors Division of Emergency
Management. To be eligible for the grant money a Sub-recipient Award must be signed
and forwarded to the Governors Division of Emergency Management by April 31, 2006.
The upgrades will be beneficial for the City of University Park Public Safety Departments
and will ensure our ability to communicate with other cities during emergencies.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends acceptance of the Homeland Security Grant
for the purpose of upgrading the City of University Park Public Safety Communication
system.
ATTACHMENTS:
Request for Quotes
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO for Grant Acceptance
042006.doc 5:53 PM 04/11/06
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
City of University Park, Texas
SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
FOR
A SYSTEM UPGRADE
OF A
800 MHz CONTROL STATION
VHF CONTROL STATION
UHF CONTROL STATION
LIGHTNING & AC SURGE PROTECTION DEVICES
ANTENNA AND MOUNTING HARDWARE
RF TRANSMISSION LINE, RF CONNECTORS &
MOUNTING HARDWARE
RFQ # UP071505800VHFUHFCS3
Page 1 of 33
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
Table of Contents
1.0 Instructions to Proposers 4
1.1 Purpose of the Request for Equipment and Services 4
1.2 General Conditions 4
1.3 Proposal Content 4
1.4 Proposal Submission 5
1.5 Site Visits 5
1.6 Guarantees & Warranties 5
1.7 Service 5
1.8 Supplementary Information 5
1.9 Implementation Services 5
1.10 Use of Subcontractors 6
1.11 FCC Licenses 6
1.12 Radio Site Connectivity 6
2.0 Dispatch Console Replacement 7
2.1 General Requirements 7
2.2 Console Upgrade Requirements 7
3.0 700/800 MHz RF Control Station 8
3.1 General Requirements 8
3.2 700-800 MHz RF Control Station 8
3.2.1 700-800 MHz Radio Transmitter 10
Specifications
3.2.2 700-800 MHz Radio Receiver 10
Specifications
3.3 Surge Protection 10
3.4 Antenna System 11
3.4.1 General Requirements - 700-800 MHz Antenna 11
3.4.2 Specifications - 700-800 MHz Antenna 11
3.5 Transmission Line 12
3.5.1 General Requirements 12
3.5.2 Transmission Line Specifications 13
3.5.3 Labeling 13
3.5.4 Grounding and Bonding 13
3.5.5 Lightning Suppressors 14
3.6 Implementation Services 14
4.0 VHF RF Control Stations 14
Page 2 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
4.1 General Requirements 14
4.2 VHF RF Control Station 15
4.2.1 VHF RF Control Station - Minimum 16
Specifications
4.2.1.1 Transmitter Specifications 16
4.2.1.2 Receiver Specifications 16
4.3 Surge Protection 17
4.4 Antenna System 17
4.4.1 General Requirements 17
4.4.2 Specifications 17
4.5 Transmission Line 18
4.5.1 General Requirements 18
4.5.2 Transmission Line Specifications 19
4.5.3 Labeling 19
4.5.4 Grounding and Bonding 20
4.5.5 Lightning Suppressors 20
4.6 Implementation Services 20
5.0 UHF RF Control Station 21
5.1 General Requirements 21
5.2 UHF RF Control Station 21
5.2.1 UHF RF Control Station - Minimum 22
Specifications
5.2.1.1 Transmitter Specifications 22
5.2.1.2 Receiver Specifications 22
5.3 Surge Protection 23
5.4 Antenna System 23
5.4.1 General Requirements 23
5.4.2 Specifications 23
5.5 Transmission Line 24
5.5.1 General Requirements 24
5.5.2 Transmission Line Specifications 25
5.5.3 Labeling 25
5.5.4 Grounding and Bonding 26
5.5.5 Lightning Suppressors 26
5.6 Implementation Services 27
6.0 System Block Diagram 27
7.0 Subscriber Programming 27
8.0 Price Proposal 28
Page 3 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
1.0 Instructions to Proposers
The purpose of Section 1 is to provide sufficient background information
so that the Proposer can fully respond to this Request for Equipment and
Services, i.e., a Request for Quotation (RFQ). The Proposer shall
carefully read the following information in its entirety so that a complete
and proper response can be provided to the following technical
Specifications and Requirements.
1.1 Purpose of the Request for Equipment and Services
The intention of these Specifications is to outline the technical
requirements for the implementation of specific equipment and
services for the Public Safety Agencies located in the North Central
Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) region that are
participating in an area wide program to enable and/or improve
interoperable communications.
1.2 General Conditions
The City of University Park reserves the right to reject any or all
Proposals and/or Quotations or to waive technicalities, at its option,
when in the best interests of the City.
If items in the Specifications and Requirements have been identified
by a "brand name or equal” description, such identification is intended
to be descriptive, but not restrictive, and is to indicate the quality and
characteristics of products that will be satisfactory.
The specific purchasing requirements, if any, including terms and
conditions that apply to this RFQ are included as an Addendum to
these Specifications.
1.3 Proposal Content
At the minimum, the proposal shall include agreement and
acknowledgement of the requirements in the form of a point-by-
point response to each of the specifications listed in this RFQ, as
well as a description of the equipment and services being supplied,
along with supporting documentation. A complete equipment list
with itemized pricing shall be included. Additional documentation
may be required as noted in the purchasing requirements, which
are included as an Addendum to these specifications.
Page 4 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
1.4 Proposal Submission
One (1) original (original must be marked ‘Original’) and four (4)
copies of the completed response to this RFQ must be submitted.
1.5 Site Visits
Due to the complex and interrelated nature of the proposed
interoperability systems, responders to this RFQ shall visit the radio
sites that will be used as the locations for the equipment outlined in
this RFQ, prior to submitting a Proposal. Any site visits must be
coordinated with the City. Any travel or other expenses incurred for
the site inspection are to be borne by those requesting the visit.
1.6 Guarantees & Warranties
A complete description of any warranties or guarantees provided by
the manufacturer or Proposer shall be submitted with the proposal.
1.7 Service
The Proposer shall also include information about their service
provision. Out of Warranty repair rates, after hours service calls,
and maintenance agreement options for years 2 through 5 shall
also be included for new equipment proposed.
1.8 Supplementary Information
If the Proposer wishes to include supplementary information not
specifically called for in this RFQ, this information shall be included
in an appendix to their proposal. The purpose of any such material
shall be clearly explained.
1.9 Implementation Services
Those responding to this RFQ shall be responsible for all activities
and work associated with the installation, optimization and testing
of the equipment and systems.
The Proposer, upon becoming the Successful Contractor, shall be
responsible for a complete and fully operable installation, which is
in compliance with the latest version applicable local, state or
federal codes, regulations, laws and/or ordinances. The Successful
Contractor shall prepare all required forms and exhibits required to
obtain the necessary approvals from each of the above entities.
Page 5 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
Materials furnished by the Successful Contractor shall be new and
of first rate quality as defined in industry standards. The Successful
Contractor shall not make substitutes unless prior approval has
been obtained from the purchasers of the equipment and services.
Care shall be exercised when adding or otherwise modifying wiring
and/or cabling to avoid damage to existing wiring, cabling and
equipment. All wiring, cables and connectors shall be installed in
strict adherence to standard communications installation practices
and all applicable codes.
All equipment installed shall be firmly held in place by fastening
and/or supports, which are adequate to support their loads with an
ample safety factor.
All wiring and cables shall be marked as noted in these
Specifications, or when not specifically detailed, marking shall
follow recognized standards and specifications. All wiring and
cabling shall be neatly laced, dressed, and/or adequately supported
in a symmetrical fashion.
1.10 Use of Subcontractors
The Successful Contractor shall warrant and agree that the
Successful Contractor will be solely and exclusively responsible for
compensating any of the Successful Contractor's employees,
subcontractors, materialmen and/or suppliers of any type or nature
whatsoever and that no claims or liens of any type will be filed
against the agencies requesting the equipment and services as
noted in this RFQ.
1.11 FCC Licenses
The procurement of FCC licenses is the responsibility of the
individual agency requesting the implementation of the equipment
requiring such a license, as is the posting of the license at the
proper location. Alternately, permission to operate a station may be
via an interlocal agreement with the primary licensee.
1.12 Radio Site Connectivity
Any connectivity required between radio sites, or dispatch centers,
is the responsibility of the City requesting the implementation of the
equipment at the respective sites. Coordination between the City
and the implementer/installer of such equipment requiring
interconnection will be required and shall be incorporated as part of
Page 6 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
the implementation services. In this case, the proposer shall be
responsible for interconnect cabling between consoles and control
stations and providing end-to-end optimization.
2.0 Dispatch Console Replacement
2.1 General Requirements
The console system replacement scope of work is part of an
existing project managed by University Park. The console
equipment is currently located at the Public Safety Answering
Point/dispatch at 3800 University Boulevard in University Park. The
equipment described in this document should be designed to
interface with the new consoles. Close coordination must therefore
be conducted with University Park representatives.
The scope of work in this RFQ consists of adding the appropriate
Tx/Rx Interface Controller cards to the Common Communications
Equipment (back room equipment), so that the new interoperability
resources can be controlled and operated at each dispatch
position. The new radio equipment associated with the consoles is
noted in the following sections of this Specification.
It is imperative that those responding to these specifications
complete a site visit so that the particulars of the dispatch center
and associated communication console system are known and
understood.
2.2 Console Upgrade Requirements
The existing console system shall be inspected and its current
functionality understood in preparation for the upgrade. However,
the future console interface must also be understood, including any
new location and/or cable routing requirement that may arise.
The upgrade shall, at the minimum, address the following areas:
1. The addition of Tx/Rx Interface Controller cards that allow 2
or 4-wire wireline control of one 700/800MHz control station
that will be located in the dispatch center’s radio equipment
room.
2. The addition of Tx/Rx Interface Controller cards to allow
control of one (1) tone remote controlled, eight-frequency
capable VHF control station that will be located in the
dispatch center’s radio equipment room. It shall be equipped
for 2 or 4 wire operation, which will be operating on the East
Page 7 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
VHF mutual aid interoperability radio channel as assigned by
the Department of Justice.
3. The addition of Tx/Rx Interface Controller cards that allow 2
or 4-wire wireline control of one UHF capable control station
that will be located in the dispatch center’s radio equipment
room.
4. Implementation services shall include installation of the
equipment in accordance with these specifications, and end-
to-end system optimization of each new station.
5. Reconfiguring the dispatch operator positions so that the
new radio resources are available for use.
3.0 700/800 MHz RF Control Station
3.1 General Requirements
The RF control station noted in these Specifications will primarily be
used for providing access to associated 800 MHz repeater stations
operating around the City. The RF control station will be situated at
the dispatch center and will require that connection be made to the
communication console system. The dispatch center is currently
located at 3800 University Boulevard in University Park.
The radio equipment shall be located in a suitable equipment room
and the antenna placed in a manner designated by the City. The
City must approve final placement of all equipment.
Placement of the station shall be on a rack shelf installed in an
existing equipment rack if available. If rack space is not available,
the proposer shall include a new equipment rack for the new control
stations. It will be the Proposer’s responsibility to determine and
provide the best mounting solution.
3.2 700-800 MHz RF Control Station
The two-way radio equipment being supplied shall be of the highest
quality consistent with use in a Public Safety radio system
environment and be of a compact design allowing installation on an
equipment shelf. The radios shall initially operate in the 800 MHz
band and support conventional operation on the NPSPAC mutual
aid radio channels. The station shall be capable of fully supporting
P25 radio operation in the 700 MHZ band (764-806) and 800 MHz
band (806-869 MHz) via a field upgrade.
Page 8 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
As part of the response to this Request for Quotation for Equipment
and Services, the Proposer shall list the hardware and/or
software/firmware that would be necessary to field upgrade the
station to P25 operation at some later date. An estimation of the
cost associated with the upgrade, (based on the current (2005)
pricing for this type of upgrade), shall be provided as a line item in
the pricing proposal.
The 700-800 MHz radio shall be equipped as follows:
Capable of operating in the 700-800 MHz band
Wideband and narrowband analog operation (25/15 kHz)
Upgradeable to P25 operation (12.5 kHz)
Local (front panel) control and tone remote control (up to eight
channels)
Minimum of 8 transmit and 8 receive frequencies
Multi-mode capable
2 wire or 4 wire control
Transmit and receiver CTCSS (analog modes)
The station shall be enclosed in a sturdy housing with internal
speaker and with all control functions, such as receiver volume and
mode/channel select available on the front panel. A compact palm
type microphone shall be provided with the station. The remote
control interface may be located within the radio station housing, or
an external "remote adapter" can be supplied enclosed in a
separate box.
A quantity of one (1) 700-800 MHz radio unit is to be supplied and
shall be interfaced to the new console system, tested, and made
fully operable.
med with the 800 MHz mutual aid
The unit shall also be program
channels as noted below. A common CTCSS code of 156.7 Hz
shall be used for these conventional channels
N1
Nomenclature Transmit FrequencyReceive Frequency
Calling Channel 821.0125 866.0125
Tactical Channel 1 821.5125 866.5125
Tactical Channel 2 822.0125 867.0125
Tactical Channel 3 822.0125 867.5125
Tactical Channel 4 823.0125 868.0125
N1 -
Actual naming of the channels shall follow the nomenclature
selected by the NCTCOG Interoperability Operations Committee.
Page 9 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
Note that the RF control station will be subject to the FCC
Rebanding Initiative, which is currently scheduled to take place
during a period between July 2006 and March 2008. Therefore the
station and related components shall be easily field tunable to allow
for changing the transmit and receive frequencies as required by
the rebanding plan.
3.2.1 700-800 MHz Radio Transmitter Specifications
Frequency Band: 700-800 MHz (764-806) and (806-869
MHz)
Channel Spacing: Shall accommodate 25/12.5 kHz
analog operation and be field upgradeable to 12.5 kHz
digital operation
RF Power Output: 10-35 Watts
RF Output Impedance: 50 Ohms
Frequency Stability: +/-1.5 PPM
Operating Temperature Range: -30 to +60 centigrade
Input Power Source: 115-120 VAC +/- 20%
3.2.2 700-800 MHz Radio Receiver Specifications
Frequency Band: 700-800 MHz (764-806) and (806-869
MHz)
Channel Spacing: Shall accommodate 25/12.5 kHz
analog operation and be field upgradeable to 12.5 kHz
digital operation
RF Input Impedance: 50 Ohms
Sensitivity 12 dB SINAD: 0.25 microvolts
Sensitivity 5% BER - Static: 0.25 microvolts
Intermodulation Rejection: 80 dB
Operating Temperature Range: -30 to +60 centigrade
Input Power Source: 115-120 VAC +/- 20%
As part of the response to these Specifications, the
manufacturer, make and model number of the station, shall
be clearly noted and accompanied by a specification sheet
or brochure of the specific product giving all pertinent
electrical and mechanical details.
It is imperative that those responding to these specifications
complete a site visit so that the particulars of the radio site
are known and understood.
3.3 Surge Protection
Page 10 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
AC line transients and surge protection shall be provided for the RF
Control station equipment via surge protector devices. All such
individual equipment devices shall provide a minimum of 25 Joules
of normal mode circuit protection. If a multi-receptacle device is
used, the housing shall be metal and incorporate an independent
ground point on the exterior of the device. The attachment point
shall be able to allow connection of a lug sized for at least a #6
AWG conductor. An indicator lamp shall be incorporated that
indicates the power is applied and the protection integrity is
operational. The surge protectors shall be connected to the internal
ground point of the equipment room or shelter. The manufacturer,
make, and model number of the device(s) shall be stated.
As required, transient and surge protection shall be provided for
each telephone line that is connected to the system. The surge
protectors shall be sealed three-element gas filled spark gaps.
The telephone line surge protector shall be connected to the
internal ground point present in the equipment room or shelter. The
manufacturer, make, and model number of the devices shall be
stated.
3.4 Antenna System
3.4.1 General Requirements - 700-800 MHz Antenna
A Compact, lightweight, rugged broadband antenna of an
omni directional collinear array construction shall be
provided for use with the 700-800 MHz radio unit. The
radiating elements of the antenna shall be constructed of
copper alloy enclosed in a highly weather resistant low loss
fiberglass radome and allow for either top or side mounting
on a radio tower or other available structure.
As noted elsewhere in these Specifications, the Proposer
shall visit the site where the radio equipment and antenna
system are to be installed and ensure that particulars are
known and understood so that a professional installation can
be achieved.
3.4.2 Specifications - 700-800 MHz Antenna
The antennas supplied shall meet the following minimum
requirements.
Frequency Range: 764-869 MHz
Gain (dBd): 2.5 dBd
Page 11 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
Bandwidth: 100 MHz
VSWR: 1.5 to 1 or less
Type of Horizontal Pattern: Omni
Nominal Impedance: 50 Ohms
Maximum power input: 200 Watts
Lightning Protection: DC ground
Termination type: type N female
Rated Wind Velocity (for top mounted antenna): 150 mph
without ice
As part of the response to these Specifications, the
manufacturer, make and model number of the antennas, and
any mounting hardware being provided, shall be clearly
noted and accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure
of the specific product giving all pertinent electrical and
mechanical details.
3.5 Transmission Line
3.5.1 General Requirements
A High quality foam-dielectric coaxial transmission line kit
shall be provided to interconnect the associated RF control
station to its respective antenna. The Proposer shall
determine the length of the transmission line kits based upon
an examination of the radio sites.
The foam-dielectric transmission line shall be constructed of
copper corrugated outer conductor and copper inner
conductor and shall be jacketed with a weather resistant
polyethylene (or equivalent) covering.
The means of securing the transmission line shall consist of
the manufacturer's recommended components for a proper
and professional installation. RF connectors provided, as
part of the kit shall be designed to provide weatherproof
connections and low intermodulation generation. Field
installation of connectors, if required, shall follow the
manufacturers instructions without deviation.
For transmission line lengths of 50 feet or less, a 1/4" inch
super flexible foam dielectric RF cable shall be used to
interconnect the control station to the antenna. If the
transmission line length is greater than 50 feet, 1/2" super
flexible foam dielectric transmission line shall be used, along
with appropriate RF jumper cables.
Page 12 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
No splices or adapters shall be used under any circum-
stance. However, it is permissible to utilize different
connectors on opposite ends of a cable to avoid the use of
adapters. In addition, any connectors/connections used
outdoors must be protected from corrosion and be fully
weatherproof. The use of vinyl tape only is not acceptable
for any purpose whatsoever.
3.5.2 Transmission Line Specifications
Characteristic 1/4" Superflexible 1/2" Superflexible
Impedance: 50 Ohms 50 Ohms
Average Power @ 824 MHz: 0.4 kW 1.0 kW
Outer Conductor: Copper Copper
Inner Conductor: Cu Clad Al Cu Clad Al
Attenuation @ 824 MHz: 5.4 dB/100' 3.4 dB/100'
N1: Copper Clad Aluminum
As part of the response to these Specifications the
manufacturer, make and model number of the transmission
line, RF jumper cables and RF connectors shall be clearly
noted and accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure
of the specific product giving all pertinent electrical and
mechanical details.
3.5.3 Labeling
All transmission lines and interconnecting RF cables shall be
clearly labeled at both ends to allow for ease of identification.
Labels shall be permanent in nature and easily read. The
labeling shall clearly note the function of the individual
cables along with any other information pertinent to the use
of the RF cables.
3.5.4 Grounding and Bonding
The outer conductor of all coaxial transmission lines shall be
grounded at the top and bottom of the vertical run on the
tower if the height of the antenna placement exceeds 50’. In
addition, the transmission line shall be grounded at the point
of entrance of the cable to the building. All transmission line
grounds shall be connected to the nearest external ground
bar by an individual conductor for each line. If an external
ground point is not available, the proposer shall include the
Page 13 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
implementation of a single point external ground system for
all of the antennas implemented in this procurement.
Manufacturer approved grounding kits shall be used. The
instructions supplied with these kits shall be followed for the
installation of the kits.
3.5.5 Lightning Suppressors
Transmission line lightning suppressors shall be gas tube
type with blocking capacitors. Conventional air gap
suppressors shall not be used. The transmission line
lightning suppressors shall be located at the transmission
line entry point of the building and mounted to a ground bus
bar that will be included with the proposed antenna system.
The successful contractor shall bond this bus bar to the
existing equipment room ground system. If a suitable ground
system is not available, it will be the vender’s responsibility
to suggest improvements or suitable alternatives.
The coaxial cables from the antennas shall terminate at the
lightning arrestors, and flexible RF jumpers shall be provided
to interface to the individual control stations.
As part of the response to these Specifications the
manufacturer, make and model number of the lightning
suppression equipment shall be clearly noted and
accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure of the
specific product giving all pertinent electrical and mechanical
details.
3.6 Implementation Services
Responders to this RFQ are required to provide all services related
to the installation, optimization and testing of the equipment, and
are to ensure that the equipment and systems are operating
properly. This will require that the Proposer, if selected as the
Successful Contractor, coordinate with other agencies that are
participating in the implementation of interoperability equipment and
systems.
4.0 VHF RF Control Station
4.1 General Requirements
The RF control station noted in these Specifications will be used for
providing access to associated VHF repeater stations operating
within and around the local DFW Metroplex. The RF control
Page 14 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
stations will be situated at the City’s dispatch center and will require
that connection be made to the new communication console
system.
The radio equipment shall be located in a suitable equipment room
and the antenna placed in a manner designated by the City. The
City must approve final placement of all equipment.
The control station shall operate on the Dallas/Fort Worth
Department of Justice (DOJ) East interoperability channel. The
transmitter and receiver frequencies, as well as the access codes
are noted below.
TransmitterReceiverAccess
Designation
Frequency Frequency Code
DFW East 162.900 MHz 170.725 MHz 653
Use of these channels is via a Memorandum of Understanding with
the designed DOJ agency that will be responsible for the operation
of the federal interoperability system. The City of University Park is
responsible for obtaining the MOU. Additional radio channels may
be programmed at the discretion of the City. The identification of
these additional radio channels, if any, will be provided at the time
of installation of the equipment.
4.2 VHF RF Control Station
The RF control station being supplied shall be of the highest quality
consistent with use in a Public Safety radio system environment
and be of a compact design allowing installation on a desktop, or
on an equipment shelf. The station shall allow operation in a
wideband analog or narrowband analog mode and be outfitted with
digital P25 operation.
The station shall be equipped as follows:
P25 operation (12.5 kHz)
Local (front panel) control and tone remote control (up to eight
channels)
Minimum of 8 transmit and 8 receive frequencies
2 wire or 4 wire control
The station shall be enclosed in a sturdy housing with internal
speaker and with all control functions, such as receiver volume and
mode/channel select available on the front panel. A compact palm
type microphone shall be provided with the station. The remote
Page 15 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
control interface may be located within the radio station housing, or
an external "remote adapter" can be supplied enclosed in a
separate box. Remote adaptors not encased will not be acceptable.
The station shall be designed so that it can be easily field
programmed, using software available to the equipment installer
and/or to service and maintenance provider(s).
It is imperative that those responding to these specifications
complete a site visit so that the particulars of the radio site are
known and understood.
4.2.1 VHF RF Control Station - Minimum Specifications
4.2.1.1 Transmitter Specifications
Frequency Band: 150 to 172 MHz
Channel Spacing: Shall accommodate 12.5 KHz digital
operation
RF Power Output: 50 Watts
RF Output Impedance: 50 Ohms
Frequency Stability: +/- 2.5 PPM
Operating Temperature Range: -30 to +60 centigrade
Input Power Source: 115-120 VAC +/- 20%
4.2.1.2 Receiver Specifications
Frequency Band: 150 to 172 MHz
Channel Spacing: Shall accommodate 12.5 KHz digital
operation
RF Input Impedance: 50 Ohms
Sensitivity 12 dB SINAD: 0.35 microvolts
Sensitivity 5% BER - Static: 0.35 microvolts
Intermodulation Rejection: 75 dB
Frequency Stability: +/- 2.5 PPM
Operating Temperature Range: -30 to +60 centigrade
Input Power Source: 115-120 VAC +/- 20%
As part of the response to these Specifications, the
manufacturer, make and model number of the station, shall
be clearly noted and accompanied by a specification sheet
or brochure of the specific product giving all pertinent
electrical and mechanical details.
Page 16 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
4.3 Surge Protection
AC line transients and surge protection shall be provided for the RF
Control station equipment via surge protector devices. All such
individual equipment devices shall provide a minimum of 25 Joules
of normal mode circuit protection. If a multi-receptacle device is
used, the housing shall be metal and incorporate an independent
ground point on the exterior of the device. The attachment point
shall be able to allow connection of a lug sized for at least a #6
AWG conductor. An indicator lamp shall be incorporated that
indicates that power is applied and the protection integrity is
operational. The surge protectors shall be connected to the internal
ground point of the equipment room or shelter. The manufacturer,
make, and model number of the device(s) shall be stated.
As required, transient and surge protection shall be provided for
each telephone line that is connected to the system. The surge
protectors shall be sealed three-element gas filled spark gaps.
The telephone line surge protector shall be connected to the
internal ground point present in the equipment room or shelter. The
manufacturer, make, and model number of the devices shall be
stated.
4.4 Antenna System
4.4.1 General Requirements
A Lightweight, broadband directional gain antenna shall be
provided for use with the VHF RF control station. Hardware
shall be included to allow the antenna to be either roof
mounted or mounted on the tower adjacent to the dispatch
center mounted.
As noted elsewhere in these Specifications, the Proposer
shall visit the site where the radio equipment and antenna
systems are to be installed and ensure that particulars are
known and understood so that a professional installation can
be achieved.
4.4.2 Specifications
The antennas supplied shall meet the following minimum
requirements.
Frequency Range: 150 to 172 MHz
Page 17 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
Gain (dBd): 3 dB
Bandwidth: 10 MHz
VSWR: 1.5 to 1 or less
Type of Horizontal Pattern: Directional
Nominal Impedance: 50 Ohms
Maximum power input: 200 Watts minimum
Lightning Protection: direct ground
Termination type: type N
Rated Survivable Wind Velocity (for top mounted
antenna): 100 mph without ice
As part of the response to these Specifications, the
manufacturer, make and model number of the antennas, and
any mounting hardware being provided, shall be clearly
noted and accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure
of the specific product giving all pertinent electrical and
mechanical details.
4.5 Transmission Line
4.5.1 General Requirements
A High quality foam-dielectric coaxial transmission line kit
shall be provided to interconnect the associated RF control
station to its respective antenna. The Proposer shall
determine the length of the transmission line kits based upon
an examination of the radio site.
The foam-dielectric transmission line shall be constructed of
copper corrugated outer conductor and copper inner
conductor and shall be jacketed with a weather resistant
polyethylene (or equivalent) covering.
The means of securing the transmission line shall consist of
the manufacturer's recommended components for a proper
and professional installation. Cable routed through drop tile
ceilings shall be installed neatly in the ceiling. Cable shall not
be intertwined with existing cabling. Care should be taken
that cable is not bundled with any existing data cabling. In
addition, the cabling shall not rest on the drop tile ceiling; it
shall be secured so as to not cause future sagging of ceiling
tiles. RF connectors provided, as part of the kit shall be
designed to provide weatherproof connections and low
intermodulation generation. Field installation of connectors, if
Page 18 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
required, shall follow the manufacturers instructions without
deviation. Manufacturer recommended tools shall be used
with proper torque settings applied.
For transmission line lengths of 100 feet or less, a 3/8" inch
super flexible foam dielectric RF cable shall be used to
interconnect the control station to the antenna. If the
transmission line length is greater than 100 feet, 1/2" super
flexible foam dielectric transmission line shall be used, along
with appropriate RF jumper cables.
No splices or adapters shall be used under any circum-
stance. However, it is permissible to utilize different
connectors on opposite ends of a cable to avoid the use of
adapters. In addition, any connectors/connections used
outdoors must be protected from corrosion and be fully
weatherproof. The use of vinyl tape is not acceptable for
any purpose whatsoever.
4.5.2 Transmission Line Specifications
Characteristics 3/8" Superflexible 1/2" Superflexible
Impedance 50 ohms 50 Ohms
Peak Power @ 174 MHz 0.9 kW 2.0 kW
Outer Conductor Copper Copper
Inner Conductor Cu Clad Al N1 Cu Clad Al N1
Attenuation @ 174 MHz 2.4 db/100' 1.4 dB/100'
N1: Copper Clad Aluminum
As part of the response to these Specifications the
manufacturer, make and model number of the transmission
line, RF jumper cables and RF connectors shall be clearly
noted and accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure
of the specific product giving all pertinent electrical and
mechanical details.
4.5.3 Labeling
All transmission lines and interconnecting RF cables shall be
clearly labeled at both ends to allow for ease of identification.
Labels shall be permanent in nature and easily read. The
labeling shall clearly note the function of the individual
cables along with any other information pertinent to the use
of the RF cables.
Page 19 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
4.5.4 Grounding and Bonding
The outer conductor of all coaxial transmission lines shall be
grounded at the top and bottom of the vertical run on the
tower if the height of the antenna placement exceeds 50’. In
addition, the transmission line shall be grounded at the point
of entrance of the cable to the building. All transmission line
grounds shall be connected to the nearest external ground
bar by an individual conductor for each line. Manufacturer
approved grounding kits shall be used. The instructions
supplied with these kits shall be followed for the installation
of the kits.
4.5.5 Lightning Suppressors
Transmission line lightning suppressors shall be gas tube
type with blocking capacitors. Conventional air gap
suppressors shall not be used. The transmission line
lightning suppressors shall be located at the transmission
line entry point of the equipment room and mounted to a
ground bus bar that will be included with the proposed
antenna system. The successful contractor shall bond this
bus bar to the existing equipment room ground system. If a
suitable ground system is not available, it will be the
vender’s responsibility to suggest improvements or suitable
alternatives.
The coaxial cable from the antenna shall terminate at this
point, and flexible RF jumpers shall be provided to interface
to the individual control station.
As part of the response to these Specifications the
manufacturer, make and model number of the lightning
suppression equipment shall be clearly noted and
accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure of the
specific product giving all pertinent electrical and mechanical
details.
4.6 Implementation Services
Responders to this RFQ are required to provide all services related
to the installation, optimization and testing of the equipment, and
are to ensure that the equipment and systems are operating
properly. This will require that the Proposer, if selected as the
Successful Contractor, coordinate with other agencies that are
participating in the implementation of interoperability equipment and
systems.
Page 20 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
5.0 UHF RF Control Station
5.1 General Requirements
The RF control station noted in these Specifications will be used for
providing access to the City of Dallas’ UHF radio system. The City
of Dallas currently operates over a conventional UHF radio system.
The RF control station will be situated at the City’s dispatch center
and will require that connection be made to the modified
communication console system.
The radio equipment shall be located in a suitable equipment room
and the antenna placed in a manner designated by the City. The
City must approve final placement of all equipment.
Use of these channels is via a Memorandum of Understanding with
the City of Dallas. The City of University Park is responsible for
obtaining the MOU. Additional radio channels may be programmed
at the discretion of the City. The identification of these additional
radio channels, if any, will be provided at the time of installation of
the equipment.
5.2 UHF RF Control Station
The RF control station being supplied shall be of the highest quality
consistent with use in a Public Safety radio system environment
and be of a compact design allowing installation on a desktop, or
on an equipment shelf.
The station shall be equipped as follows:
Wideband and narrowband analog operation (12.5/25 kHz)
Local (front panel) control and tone remote control (up to eight
channels)
Minimum of 8 transmit and 8 receive frequencies
2 wire or 4 wire control
Transmit and receiver CTCSS (analog modes)
The station shall be enclosed in a sturdy housing with internal
speaker and with all control functions, such as receiver volume and
mode/channel select available on the front panel. A compact palm
type microphone shall be provided with the station. The remote
control interface may be located within the radio station housing, or
an external "remote adapter" can be supplied enclosed in a
separate box. Remote adaptors not encased will not be acceptable.
Page 21 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
The station shall be designed so that it can be easily field
programmed, using software available to the equipment installer
and/or to service and maintenance provider(s).
It is imperative that those responding to these specifications
complete a site visit so that the particulars of the radio site are
known and understood.
5.2.1 UHF RF Control Station - Minimum Specifications
5.2.1.1 Transmitter Specifications
Frequency Band: 450 to 512 MHz
Channel Spacing: Shall accommodate 25/12.5 KHz
analog operation.
RF Power Output: 50 Watts
RF Output Impedance: 50 Ohms
Frequency Stability: +/- 2.5 PPM
Operating Temperature Range: -30 to +60 centigrade
Input Power Source: 115-120 VAC +/- 20%
5.2.1.2 Receiver Specifications
Frequency Band: 450 to 512 MHz
Channel Spacing: Shall accommodate 25/12.5 kHz
analog operation.
RF Input Impedance: 50 Ohms
Sensitivity 12 dB SINAD: 0.35 microvolts
Sensitivity 5% BER - Static: 0.35 microvolts
Intermodulation Rejection: 75 dB
Frequency Stability: +/- 2.5 PPM
Operating Temperature Range: -30 to +60 centigrade
Input Power Source: 115-120 VAC +/- 20%
As part of the response to these Specifications, the
manufacturer, make and model number of the station, shall
be clearly noted and accompanied by a specification sheet
or brochure of the specific product giving all pertinent
electrical and mechanical details.
Page 22 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
5.3 Surge Protection
AC line transients and surge protection shall be provided for the RF
Control station equipment via surge protector devices. All such
individual equipment devices shall provide a minimum of 25 Joules
of normal mode circuit protection. If a multi-receptacle device is
used, the housing shall be metal and incorporate an independent
ground point on the exterior of the device. The attachment point
shall be able to allow connection of a lug sized for at least a #6
AWG conductor. An indicator lamp shall be incorporated that
indicates that power is applied and the protection integrity is
operational. The surge protectors shall be connected to the internal
ground point of the equipment room or shelter. The manufacturer,
make, and model number of the device(s) shall be stated.
As required, transient and surge protection shall be provided for
each telephone line that is connected to the system. The surge
protectors shall be sealed three-element gas filled spark gaps.
The telephone line surge protector shall be connected to the
internal ground point present in the equipment room or shelter. The
manufacturer, make, and model number of the devices shall be
stated.
5.4 Antenna System
5.4.1 General Requirements
A Lightweight, broadband directional gain antenna shall be
provided for use with the UHF RF control station. Hardware
shall be included to allow the antenna to be roof mounted or
tower mounted depending on what best serves the City.
As noted elsewhere in these Specifications, the Proposer
shall visit the site where the radio equipment and antenna
systems are to be installed and ensure that particulars are
known and understood so that a professional installation can
be achieved.
5.4.2 Specifications
The antennas supplied shall meet the following minimum
requirements.
Frequency Range: 450 to 470 MHz
Gain (dBd): 3 dB minimum
Bandwidth: 10 MHz
Page 23 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
VSWR: 1.5 to 1 or less
Type of Horizontal Pattern: Directional
Nominal Impedance: 50 Ohms
Maximum power input: 200 Watts minimum
Lightning Protection: direct ground
Termination type: type N
Rated Survivable Wind Velocity (for top mounted
antenna): 100 mph without ice
As part of the response to these Specifications, the
manufacturer, make and model number of the antennas, and
any mounting hardware being provided, shall be clearly
noted and accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure
of the specific product giving all pertinent electrical and
mechanical details.
5.5 Transmission Line
5.5.1 General Requirements
A High quality foam-dielectric coaxial transmission line kit
shall be provided to interconnect the associated RF control
station to its respective antenna. The Proposer shall
determine the length of the transmission line kits based upon
an examination of the radio site.
The foam-dielectric transmission line shall be constructed of
copper corrugated outer conductor and copper inner
conductor and shall be jacketed with a weather resistant
polyethylene (or equivalent) covering.
The means of securing the transmission line shall consist of
the manufacturer's recommended components for a proper
and professional installation. Cable routed through drop tile
ceilings shall be installed neatly in the ceiling. Cable shall not
be intertwined with existing cabling. Care should be taken
that cable is not bundled with any existing data cabling. In
addition, the cabling shall not rest on the drop tile ceiling; it
shall be secured so as to not cause future sagging of ceiling
tiles. RF connectors provided, as part of the kit shall be
designed to provide weatherproof connections and low
intermodulation generation. Field installation of connectors, if
required, shall follow the manufacturers instructions without
deviation. Manufacturer recommended tools shall be used
with proper torque settings applied.
Page 24 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
For transmission line lengths of 100 feet or less, a 3/8" inch
super flexible foam dielectric RF cable shall be used to
interconnect the control station to the antenna. If the
transmission line length is greater than 100 feet, 1/2" super
flexible foam dielectric transmission line shall be used, along
with appropriate RF jumper cables.
No splices or adapters shall be used under any circum-
stance. However, it is permissible to utilize different
connectors on opposite ends of a cable to avoid the use of
adapters. In addition, any connectors/connections used
outdoors must be protected from corrosion and be fully
weatherproof. The use of vinyl tape is not acceptable for
any purpose whatsoever.
5.5.2 Transmission Line Specifications
Characteristics 3/8" Superflexible 1/2" Superflexible
Impedance 50 ohms 50 Ohms
Peak Power @ 174 MHz 0.9 kW 2.0 kW
Outer Conductor Copper Copper
Inner Conductor Cu Clad Al N1 Cu Clad Al N1
Attenuation @ 174 MHz 2.4 db/100' 1.4 dB/100'
N1: Copper Clad Aluminum
As part of the response to these Specifications the
manufacturer, make and model number of the transmission
line, RF jumper cables and RF connectors shall be clearly
noted and accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure
of the specific product giving all pertinent electrical and
mechanical details.
5.5.3 Labeling
All transmission lines and interconnecting RF cables shall be
clearly labeled at both ends to allow for ease of identification.
Labels shall be permanent in nature and easily read. The
labeling shall clearly note the function of the individual
cables along with any other information pertinent to the use
of the RF cables.
Page 25 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
5.5.4 Grounding and Bonding
The outer conductor of all coaxial transmission lines shall be
grounded at the top and bottom of the vertical run on the
tower if the height of the antenna placement exceeds 50’. In
addition, the transmission line shall be grounded at the point
of entrance of the cable to the building. All transmission line
grounds shall be connected to the nearest external ground
bar by an individual conductor for each line. Manufacturer
approved grounding kits shall be used. The instructions
supplied with these kits shall be followed for the installation
of the kits.
5.5.5 Lightning Suppressors
Transmission line lightning suppressors shall be gas tube
type with blocking capacitors. Conventional air gap
suppressors shall not be used. The transmission line
lightning suppressors shall be located at the transmission
line entry point of the equipment room and mounted to a
ground bus bar that will be included with the proposed
antenna system. The successful contractor shall bond this
bus bar to the existing equipment room ground system. If a
suitable ground system is not available, it will be the
vender’s responsibility to suggest improvements or suitable
alternatives.
The coaxial cables from the antennas shall terminate at this
point, and flexible RF jumpers shall be provided to interface
to the individual control stations.
As part of the response to these Specifications the
manufacturer, make and model number of the lightning
suppression equipment shall be clearly noted and
accompanied by a specification sheet or brochure of the
specific product giving all pertinent electrical and mechanical
details.
Page 26 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
5.6 Implementation Services
Responders to this RFQ are required to provide all services related
to the installation, optimization and testing of the equipment, and
are to ensure that the equipment and systems are operating
properly. This will require that the Proposer, if selected as the
Successful Contractor, coordinate with other agencies that are
participating in the implementation of interoperability equipment and
systems.
6.0 System Block Diagram
One 800 MHz
NPSPAC RF Control
Station
One UHF RF Control
Station operating on
the City of Dallas
System
One VHF Control
Station operating on
the DOJ VHF system
Upgrade the New
Console System to
Accommodate the Three
New Interoperability
Stations
Console Electronics
7.0 Subscriber Programming
The Proposer shall include pricing for reprogramming of subscriber units
on a per unit basis and at a daily rate. Programming shall take place at a
specified location within the City. It should be noted that multiple locations
might be required. Also, it will be the responsibility of the Proposer to
develop programming templates in accordance with the different
requirements of the City radio users, pricing on a per template basis,
should also be provided.
Page 27 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
8.0 Price Proposal
The Proposer shall include a complete detailed equipment list for all items
as called for in this specification and include the cost of all related services
for the installation, optimization, and testing of the equipment and/or
systems being provided.
The Proposer shall complete the following statement below and include it
with the pricing proposal.
I, _________________________________________, an authorized
representative of ___________________________________ do hereby
submit the following pricing options to the City of University Park pursuant
to the Request for Equipment and Services, i.e., a Request for Quotation
(RFQ) #UP071505800VHFUHFCS3.
Page 28 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
ADDENDUM TO RFQ # UP071505800VHFUHFCS3
NOTE: TO UNIVERSITY PARK PURCHASING
DEPARTMENT
IF THERE ARE ANY SPECIFIC PROCUREMENT TERMS
& CONDITIONS, OR OTHER ITEMS REQUIRED BY THE
CITY IN REGARDS TO THIS RFQ, PLEASE ADD THEM
HERE
Page 29 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
UNIVERSITY PARK, TX
BUDGETARY EQUIPMENT LIST
FOR
A SYSTEM UPGRADE
OF A
800MHz CONTROL STATION
VHF CONTROL STATION
UHF CONTROL STATION
LIGHTNING & AC SURGE PROTECTION DEVICES
ANTENNA AND MOUNTING HARDWARE
RF TRANSMISSION LINE, RF CONNECTORS &
MOUNTING HARDWARE
RFQ # UP071505800VHFUHFCS3
Page 30 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
The console
Dispatch Console Upgrade Qty
upgrade is
Channel Interface Card 3
based upon the
Installation, Optimization & Testing 1
premise that
Reconfiguring/Reprogramming Console Positions 1
the new
dispatch
700-800MHz RF Control Station
positions can
700-800 MHz Control Station 1
support three
Conventional operation - Upgradeable to P25 1
new channels
Local/Tone Remote with 4 Wire Interface 1
AC & Telephone Line Surge Protectors 1
The equipment
list to the left
700-800 MHz Station Antenna
indicates the
2.5 dB Gain Broadband Antenna 1
items that
Antenna Clamp Set & Mounting Hardware 1
comprise a
700/800 MHz
700-800MHz Station Transmission Line Kit
control station
Connector - Antenna End 1
system
Connector - Station End 1
including
Cable Weatherproofing Kit 1
accessories,
Transmission Line Grounding Kit 1
antenna, and
Transmission Line Surge Protector 1
antenna
100' of 1/4 Super Flexible LDF Transmission Line 1
transmission
Cable Ties 1
line for a
quantity of one
(1) station.
The example
illustrates a
100'
transmission
line.
Page 31 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
The
VHF STATION
equipment list
VHF Station 25-50 W. 1
to the left
150-172 MHz Radio Band 1
indicates the
Intermittent Duty 1
items that
Tx/RX Access Code Equipped 1
comprise a
VHF and UHF
Local/Tone Remote Control 1
control station
AC & Telephone Line Surge Protection 1
system
P25 Compliant Operation 1
including
VHF STATION ANTENNA
accessories,
3 dB Gain Broadband Antenna-Exposed Dipoles
1
antenna, and
Antenna Clamp Set & Mounting Hardware
1
antenna
TRANSMISSION LINE KIT
transmission
line for a
Connector - Antenna End
1
quantity of
Connector - Station End
1
two (2)
Cable Weatherproofing Kit
1
stations.
Transmission Line Grounding Kit
1
Transmission Line Surge Protector
1
The example
100' of 1/4 Super Flexible LDF Transmission Line
1
illustrates a
Cable Tie Kit
100'
1
transmission
line.
UHF STATION
UHF Station 25-50 W. 1
Accessories
450-512 MHz Radio Band 1
for the control
Intermittent Duty 1
stations
Tx/RX CTCSS Equipped 1
include
Local/Tone Remote Control 1
microphone
AC & Telephone Line Surge Protection 1
power cable,
Tone remote
UHF STATION ANTENNA
adaptors, and
3 dB Gain Broadband Directional Antenna
1
power
Antenna Clamp Set & Mounting Hardware
1
supplies
TRANSMISSION LINE KIT
Connector - Antenna End
1
Connector - Station End
1
Cable Weatherproofing Kit
1
Transmission Line Grounding Kit
1
Transmission Line Surge Protector
1
100' of 1/4 Super Flexible LDF Transmission Line
1
Cable Tie Kit
1
Page 32 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
Request for Equipment & Services NCTCOG Region Wide Interoperability Project
Total Implementation Estimate
Dispatch Console Upgrade Equipment $ 6,000.00
800MHz NPSPAC Control Station $ 8,500.00
$ 6,000.00
UHF Control Station
HF Control Station Equipment $ 8,500.00
V
Total Implementation $ 29,000.00
The previous table provides a projected estimate of the cost for equipment
and services as specified in this RFQ. This is only an estimate that can be
used for reference when reviewing responses from the different venders.
Page 33 of 33 RFQ # 071505800VHFUHFCS3
DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Office of the Governor
RICK PERRY
Governor
Mailing Address:
PO Box 4087
Austin, Texas 78773-0220
Contact Numbers:
512-424-213 8 Duty Hours
512-424-2277 Non-Duty Hours
512-424-2444 Fax
Physical Address:
5805 N. Lamar Blvd.
Austin, Texas 78752
STEVEN McCRAW
Director
Office of Homeland Security
JACK COLLEY
Chief
March 17, 2006
The Honorable Harold Peek
Mayor, City of University Park
3800 University Blvd.
University Park, TX 75205-1711
Dear Mayor Peek:
The enclosed Notice of Sub-recipient Award for the 2005 Homeland Security Grant Program is being sent
to you as the chief elected official for University Park. The intent of the sub-grant is to aid in improvement
of your jurisdiction's ability to enhance capacity of local jurisdictions to prevent, respond to and recover
from acts of terrorism and natural disasters.
The Notice of Sub-recipient Award must be signed by an individual authorized bv the e:overnine:
board of the iurisdiction or ore:anization to accept grants and returned to GDEM in order to activate
the grant. At the city and county level, individuals authorized to accept grants may include county judges,
mayors, city managers, or chief financial officers. Other signatures will require an accompanying
statement from the senior elected official authorizing the individual to sign for the jurisdiction. For
agencies and organizations, authorized individuals typically include the Executive Director or Director.
The deadline to return the signed Notice of Sub-recipient Award and the Direct Deposit Authorization
is April 30, 2006. The signed notice must be mailed or postmarked by the due date. The offer of award
will be withdrawn if the signed Notice of Sub-recipient Award is not returned by the due date.
Please mail the signed Notice of Sub-Recipient Award and Direct Deposit Authorization to:
Governor's Division of Emergency Management
Attention: SAA Section
PO Box 4087
Austin, Texas 78773-0270
If you have any questions, or require further information regarding this award, please do not hesitate to
contact Ben Patterson, SAA Section Manager at 512-424-7809.
Sincerely,
Ja~~
Chief
Enclosure: 2005 Sub-Recipient Agreement
Direct Deposit Authorization
GOVERNOR'S DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT (GDEM)
NOTICE OF SUB-RECIPIENT AWARD
FOR
HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM
(HSGP)
University Park
1. SUB-RECIPIENT NAME AND ADDRESS:
City of University Park
3800 University Blvd.
University Park, TX 75205-1711
2. FEDERAL GRANT TITLE:
HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM
3A. FEDERAL GRANT AWARD NUMBER:
2005-GE- T5-4025
3B. FEDERAL GRANTING AGENCY:
OFFICE OF GRANTS AND TRAINING (G&T)
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY DHS
9. SPECIAL CONDITIONS
This Subaward is subject to the ODP FY 2005 Homeland Security Grant Program Guidelines and Application Kit. The Guidelines and
Kit can be accessed at http://www.ojp.gov/fundopps.htm. The ODP periodically publishes Information Bulletins to release, update,
amend or clarify grants and programs which it administers. ODP's Information Bulletins can be accessed at
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docslbulletins.htmandareincorporatedbyreferenceintothisSubaward.This Subaward is also subject
to the current Texas Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) Grant Instructions, the Federal Grant Award and to the grant guidance
imposed upon GO EM by DHS. The current Texas HSGP Grant Instructions can be accessed at http://www.texasdpa.info. The Texas
Grant Instructions are intended to complement rather than replace the Federal Program Guidelines published by the ODP and are
inco orated by reference into this Sub-award to ether with the attached S ecial Conditions.
10. STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR GRANT
This project is supported under Public Law 108-334, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2005.
4. SUB-AWARD NUMBER:2005 HSGP - 74492
5. PERFORMANCE PERIOD:
FROM OCT 1, 2004 - FEB 28, 2007
6. DATE OF FEDERAL AWARD TO GDEM:
AUGUST 27,2005
7. AMOUNT OF SUBA WARD:
$29,000.00
8. SUBA W ARD DATE
OCTOBER 11, 2005
10. ACTION
INITIAL A WARD
11. A-133 REPORTING REQUIREMENT:
All sub-recipients must submit an audit report to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse if they expended more than $500,000 in federal funds
in one fiscal year. The Federal Audit Clearinghouse submission requirements can be found at http://harvester.census.gov/sac/. A report
must be submitted to GDEM - SAA each year this grant is active. Sub-recipient shall comply with the audit requirements set forth in
OMB Circular A-133.
12. METHOD OF PAYMENT
Primary method is reimbursement. See the 2005 Texas Homeland Security Grant Program Guidelines for further instructions on
obtainin reimbursement. 2005 Guide will be sent under se arate letter
13. DEBARMENT / SUSPENSION CERTIFICATION:
By signing in block 19 below, the sub-recipient official certifies the jurisdiction is not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for
debarment, declared ineli ible or voluntaril excluded b an federal de artment or a enc at ht ://www.e Is. ov.
14. NON-SUPPLANTING CERTIFICATION:
By signing in block 19 below, the sub-recipient official certifies federal funds will be used to supplement existing funds, and will not
replace (supplant) funds that have been appropriated for the same purpose. Sub-recipient may be required to supply documentation
certifying that a reduction in non-federal resources occurred for reasons other than the receipt or expected receipt of federal funds.
AGENCY APPROVAL
15. APPROVING GDEM OFFICIAL
Jack Colley, Chief
Division of Emergency Management
Office of the Governor
SUB-RECIPIENT ACCEPTANCE
17.TYPED NAME AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED
SUB-RECIPIENT OFFICIAL
JAMES H. HOLMES, III
MAYOR
ROVING GDEM OFFICIAL
~
19. DATE
eJ~
20. AWARD BREAKDOWN
CFDA 97.008 UASI 2005 $29,000.00 CFDA 97.073 SHSP 2005 $ 0.00 CFDA 97.074 LETPP 2005 $ 0.00
CFDA 97.071 MMRS 2005 $ 0.00 CFDA 97.053 CCP 2005 $ 0.00
GOVERNOR'S DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT (GDEM)
NOTICE OF
SUB-RECIPIENT AWARD
FOR
University Park
HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM
AWARD NUMBER 2005HSGP~74492 AWARD DATE: OCTOBER 11,2005
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1) Purpose: Sub-grant funds will be used to provide law enforcement and emergency response communities with
enhanced capabilities for preparing and responding to the potential threats of manmade and natural disasters.
2) Overview: Funds provided shall be used to provide law enforcement and emergency response communities with
enhanced capabilities for detecting, deterring, disrupting, and preventing acts of terrorism as described in the
Federal Program Guidelines, specifically: planning, equipment, training and exercise needs. All costs under these
categories must be eligible under OMB Circular No. A-87 Attachment A, located at
http://www. whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html.
3) The Notice of Sub-recipient Award is only an offer until the sub-recipient returns the signed copy of the
Notification of Sub-recipient Award in accordance with the date provided in the transmittal letter.
4) Sub-recipient agrees to comply with the applicable financial and administrative requirements set forth in the
current edition of the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) Financial Guide located at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/oc/.
5) Sub-recipient agrees to comply with the organizational audit requirements of OMB Circular A-133, Audits of
States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations, as further described in the current edition of the OJP
Financial Guide.
6) Sub-recipient agrees to make no request for reimbursement prior to return of this agreement and signed by the
authorized sub-recipient representative.
7) Sub-recipient agrees to make no request for reimbursement for goods or services procured by sub-recipient prior
to the performance period start date of this agreement.
8) Sub-recipient agrees to comply with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2005 Homeland
Security Grant Program Guidelines and Application Kit and the Notice of Award from ODP to GDEM.
9) Sub-recipient agrees to monitor the activities of program participants as necessary to ensure that federal awards
are used for authorized purposes in compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant
agreements and that performance goals are achieved.
10) Notwithstanding any other agreement provisions, the parties hereto understand and agree that GDEM's
obligations under this agreement are contingent upon the receipt of adequate funds to meet GDEM's liabilities
hereunder. GDEM shall not be liable to the Sub-recipient for costs under this Agreement which exceed the
amount specified in the Notice of Sub-recipient Award.
11) Projects identified in the Domestic Preparedness Assessment website (www.texasdpa.com) must identify and
relate to the goals and objectives indicated by the applicable Texas Homeland Security Strategic Plan for the
grant period of performance.
12) Sub-recipient agrees to comply with all reporting requirements and shall provide such information as required to
GDEM for reporting as noted in the 2005 Federal Grant Guidelines.
13) Sub-recipient must prepare and submit quarterly performance reports to GDEM for the duration of the grant
performance period or until all grant activities are completed and the grant is formally closed. Sub-recipient may
also be required to submit additional information and data requested by GDEM.
14) GDEM may perform periodic reviews of sub-recipient performance of eligible activities and approved projects.
These reviews may include, without limitation: performance of on-site audit and compliance monitoring -
including inspection of all grant-related records and items, comparing actual sub-recipient activities to those
approved in the sub-award application and subsequent modifications if any, ensuring that advances have been
disbursed in accordance with applicable guidelines, confirming compliance with grant assurances, information
provided on performance reports and payment requests, needs and threat assessments and strategies.
15) GDEM may suspend or terminate sub-award funding, in whole or in part, or other measures may be imposed for
any of the following reasons: failing to comply with the requirements or statutory objectives of federal law,
failing to make satisfactory progress toward the goals or objectives set forth in the sub-award application, failing
to follow grant agreement requirements or special conditions, failing to submit required reports, filing a false
certification in the application or other report or document.
16) GDEM will close a sub-award after receiving sub-recipient's final performance report indicating that all approved
work has been completed and all funds have been disbursed, completing a review to confirm the accuracy of the
reported information, and reconciling actual costs to awards modifications and payments. If the close out review
and reconciliation indicates that the sub-recipient is owed additional funds, GDEM will send the final payment
automatically to the sub-recipient. If the sub-recipient did not use all the funds received, GDEM will issue an
invoice to recover the unused funds.
17) Sub-recipient understands and agrees that it cannot use any federal funds, either directly or indirectly, in support
of the enactment, repeal, modification or adoption of any law, regulation or policy, at any level of government,
without the express prior written approval ofODP.
18) The sub-recipient agrees that all allocations and use of funds under this grant will be in accordance with the Fiscal
Year 2005 Homeland Security Grant Program Guidelines and Application Kit and must support the goals and
objectives included in the State Homeland Security Strategy and the Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies.
19) When implementing the Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness (SLGCP) funded
activities, the sub-recipient must comply with all federal civil rights laws, to include Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act, as amended. The sub-recipient is required to take reasonable steps to ensure persons of limited English
proficiency have meaningful access to language assistance services regarding the development of proposals and
budgets and conducting SLGCP funded activities.
20) The sub-recipient agrees that all publications created with funding under this grant shall prominently contain the
following statement: 'This Document was prepared under a grant from the SLGCP, United States Department of
Homeland Security. Point of view or opinions expressed in the document are those of the authors and do not
necessarily represent the official position or policies of SLGCP or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.'
21) The sub-recipient agrees that any equipment purchased with grant funding shall be prominently marked as
follows: 'Purchased with funds provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.' Exceptions to this
requirement are limited to items where placing of the marking is not possible due to the nature of the equipment.
22) The sub-recipient agrees to cooperate with any assessments, national evaluation efforts, or information or data
collection requests, including, but not limited to, the provision of any information required for the assessment or
evaluation of any activities within this project.
23) Approval of this award does not indicate approval of any consultant rate in excess of $450 per day. A detailed
justification must be submitted to and approved by GDEM prior to obligation or expenditure of such funds.
24) Sub-recipient acknowledges that SLGCP reserves a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to
reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and authorize others to use, for Federal government purposes: (1) the
copyright in any work developed under an award or sub-award; and (2) any rights of copyright to which a
recipient or sub-recipient purchases ownership with Federal support. The Recipient agrees to consult with SLGCP
regarding the allocation of any patent rights that arise from, or are purchased with, this funding.
25) Sub-recipient shall provide the assurances required by ODP. Failure to comply may result in the withholding of
funds, termination of the award or other sanctions.
26) Sub-recipient must register as a user of the Texas Regional Response Network (TRRN) and identify all major
resources such as vehicles and trailers, equipment costing $5,000 or more and specialized teams/response units
equipped and/or trained using grant funds (Le. hazardous material, decontamination, search and rescue, etc.).
This registration is to ensure jurisdictions or organizations are prepared to make grant funded resources available
to other jurisdictions through mutual aid.
27) Sub-recipients must implement the National Incident Management System (NIMS) at the local level. The
requirement to train personnel on the IS-700 course, National Incident Management System (NIMS), An
Introduction, has been extended into FY 06. Grant recipients should still complete the following other four
aspects of this task no later than October 1, 2005: (1) Formally recognize the NIMS and adopt the NIMS
principles and policies, (2) Establish a NIMS baseline by determining which NIMS requirements are met, (3)
Establish a timeframe and (4) Develop a strategy for full NIMS implementation and institutionalize the use of the
Incident Command System (ICS).
28) Sub-recipients must maintain an updated inventory of equipment purchased through this grant program.
29) Sub-recipient may request an advance for expenditures incurred under this program. Requests must be made in
writing from the chief elected official and submitted to GDEM. Letters for advance payments must be certified
by the financial officer of the sub-recipient organization. GDEM will make the determination whether an
advance will be made. Conditions for use and reporting of the advance payments will be available with the
forms. If a sub-recipient is approved for an advance, the funds must be deposited in a separate interest bearing
account and are subject to the rules outlined in the Uniform Rule 28 CFR Part 66, Uniform Administrative
Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, at
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/28cfrv2_ 04.html and the Uniform Rule 28 CFR Part 70,
Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements (including sub-awards) with Institutions of
Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations, at
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/28cfr70_03.html. Any interest earned in excess of $100 must,
on a quarterly basis, be remitted to:
United States Department of Health and Human Services
Division of Payment Management Services
P.O. Box 6021
Rockville, MD 20852
Sub-recipients must report any interest remitted to GDEM.
30) Notice. All notices or communication required or permitted to be given by either party hereunder shall be
deemed sufficiently given if mailed by registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, or sent by
overnight courier, such as Federal Express, to the other party at its respective address set forth below or to such
other address as one party shall give notice of to the other from time to time hereunder. Mailed notices shall be
deemed to be received on the third business day following the date of mailing. Notices sent by overnight courier
shall be deemed received the following business day.
City of University Park
3800 University Blvd.
University Park, TX 75205-1711
Jack Colley, Chief
Division of Emergency Management
Office of the Governor
PO Box 4087
Austin, TX 78773-0220
12\-- 74.158
~..= (Rev.12.02/7)
For Comptroller's use only
DIRECT DEPOSIT AUTHORIZATION
INSTRUCTIONS
. Use only BLUE or BLACK ink.
. Alterations must be initialed.
. Section 7 must be completed by the paying state agency.
. Check all appropriate box(es).
For further instructions, see the back of this form.
TRANSACTION TYPE
z ~ New setup
o 0 Cancellation
1=
&l 0 Interagency transfer
en 0 Exemption
(Sections 2, 3 & 4)
(S€lctions 2 & 3)
(Sections 2 & 3)
(Sections 2 & 5)
o Change financial institution
o Change account number
o Change account type
(Sections 2. 3 & 4)
(Sections 2.3 & 4)
(Sections 2, 3 & 4)
PAYEE IDENTIFICATION
N
Z
o
1=
()
UJ
(/)
2. Mail code (If not known, will be
completed by Paying State Agency) I
AUTHORIZATION FOR SETUP, CHANGES OR CANCELLATION
9. Pursuant to Section 403.016. Texas Government Code, I authorize the Comptroller of Public Accounts to deposit by electronic transfer payments
owed to me by the State of Texas and, if necessary, debit entries and adjustments for any amounts deposited electronically in error. The Comptroller
"" shall deposit the payments in the financial institution and account designated below. I recognize that if I fail to provide complete and accurate informa-
~ tion on this authorization form, the processing of the form may be delayed or that my payments may be erroneously transferred electronically
1=
&l I consent to and agree to comply with the National Automated Clearing House Association Rules and Regulations and the Comptroller's rules about
(/) electroni transfers as the exist 0 the date of my signature on this form or as subsequently adopted, amended or repealed.
17. Customer account number
FINANCI
...
z
o
1=
()
UJ
en
---L-J-LJ
21. Represenlative signature (Optional)
EXEMPTION:
I claim exemption and request payment by state warrant (check) because;
l!) 24. 0 I hold a position that is classified below group 8 in the position classification salary schedule.
z 25. 0 I am unable to establish a qualifying account at a financial institution.
0
1= 26. 0 I certify that payment by direct deposit would be impractical and/or more costly to me than payment by warrant.
()
UJ 128. Printed n."", j29~ Date
en 27. Authorized sign~lure i
CANCELLATION BY AGENCY
[i] 30. Roo.on
! 31. D.t.
PAYING STATE AGENCY
32. Signature 133. Printed n.me
.....
Z 135. Agency numb~r
0 34. Agency name
1= I I I I
()
UJ I r Pho,e nUmb)' 138. D.te
en 36. Comments
WHITE - Comptroller
YELLOW - Agency
PINK - Payee
AGENDA MEMO
(04/20/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: April 13, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kent R. Austin, Director of Finance
SUBJECT: Actions related to Atmos Gas rates and 2005 GRIP request
Background
Two natural gas-related action items are included on the April 20, 2006, City Council meeting
agenda. The first is a follow-up to last November’s “show cause” resolution, and the second
denies the Atmos request to make a Gas Rate Infrastructure Program (GRIP) increase for
2005.
As you know, University Park is a member of a coalition of cities known as Atmos Cities’
Steering Committee (ASCS). The coalition’s purpose is to review requests by Atmos Energy
Corp. (formerly TXU Gas) for natural gas rate changes. Because cities have original
jurisdiction over natural gas rates, and Atmos serves an area common to many Metroplex
cities, it makes sense for University Park to be part of this group, which can hire expert
counsel and analysis.
Analysis
First is the follow-up to last November’s “show cause” resolution, which University Park
approved along with other Atmos gas customer cities. The resolution required Atmos to
demonstrate the reasonableness of its rates and is the first step in initiating a full rate case.
The company responded by filing documents on December 30, 2005. Consultants and
attorneys for ASCS have reviewed the information and concluded that Atmos should reduce
its rates, in alignment with $73.4 million in recommended adjustments. A model staff report
from Lloyd Gosselink Blevins Rochelle & Townsend, PC, legal counsel for ACSC, is
attached, as is a hard copy of a PowerPoint presentation from the ASCS consultant. Also
included is an ordinance adopting reduced rates. A more detailed report from the consultant
is available but not included here for the sake of brevity.
Next is the response to the latest Atmos GRIP filing. Each year Atmos is permitted by state
law to file a request for a GRIP increase. This is designed to allow the company to add
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO gas rate action and denial of
2005 GRIP filing 04-20-06.doc 7:30 AM 04/14/06
infrastructure investments into its rate base without going through the time and expense of a
complete rate case. The rate base is one of the factors that drive natural gas charges.
University Park rejected the two earlier GRIP filings, first in January 2005 for 2003, then in
November 2005 for 2004. On March 31, 2006, Atmos filed its latest GRIP request, this one
for the year 2005. If the City takes no action before May 30, 2006, the GRIP changes take
effect.
Atmos typically appeals these rejections to the state’s Railroad Commission, which has
appellate jurisdiction over gas rates. In October 2005 the Commission disregarded the
comments filed by ACSC Cities and upheld the 2003 Atmos request. The 2004 GRIP request
is under consideration at the Railroad Commission.
Another model staff report, again from the Lloyd Gosselink law firm, is attached explaining
the basis for the 2005 GRIP suspension. The suspension resolution would provide an
additional 45 days for study of the GRIP request. A resolution achieving the same is attached.
Recommendation
City staff recommends approval of the rate ordinance and the GRIP rate denial suspension. If
the City does not act within 60 days of the GRIP filing (May 30, 2006), the GRIP increase
will become effective.
Attachments:
?Memo from Lloyd Gosselink attorneys dated 3/30/2006
?Model staff report – Atmos Mid-Tex rate ordinance
?PowerPoint presentation, “Atmos Energy Mid-Tex Rate Ordinance: Explanation and
Impact,” dated April 2006.
?Ordinance adopting specific new rates
?Memo from Lloyd Gosselink attorneys dated 3/31/2006
?Model staff report on Atmos Mid-Tex GRIP suspension resolution
?Resolution suspending the effective date of the GRIP adjustments
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO gas rate action and denial of
2005 GRIP filing 04-20-06.doc 7:30 AM 04/14/06
Ms. Doyle’s Direct Line: (512) 322-5820
Email: kdoyle@lglawfirm.com
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Seventy-Six Cities That Initiated Show-Cause Rate Actions Against Atmos Gas
FROM: Geoffrey Gay
Kristen Doyle
Georgia Crump
DATE: March 30, 2006
RE: Atmos Mid-Tex Rate Ordinance
______________________________________________________________________________
Representatives of Mid-Tex Cities Served by Atmos Energy met in Arlington last
Thursday, March 23, 2006, to discuss the report prepared by Cities’ consultant Karl Nalepa, and
to discuss the next steps in the show cause action involving Atmos’ natural gas rates. The
Steering Committee unanimously approved distribution of a rate ordinance that sets rates for
Atmos Energy in the Mid-Tex region in accordance with Mr. Nalepa’s findings and suspends the
collection of the GRIP surcharges. The Steering Committee also approved a recommendation
that cities adopt the ordinance.
Attached to this memorandum is a model rate ordinance and staff report. In addition, we
have attached Mr. Nalepa’s report and a brief Power Point presentation regarding the history of
this proceeding and Mr. Nalepa’s findings. Please place the rate ordinance on your council’s
agenda for action as soon as possible and inform our paralegal, Barbara Kimmell
(bkimmell@lglawfirm.com, 512/322-5871), of the date the ordinance is to be considered. To the
extent that you find it necessary, Geoffrey, Kristen, or Georgia will be available to attend council
meetings to answer any questions and discuss the basis for the ordinance for the first dozen cities
to take action. Once action has been taken on the ordinance, please forward a copy of the
ordinance to Barbara.
Process for Considering the Atmos Rate Ordinance
A general guideline for the hearing process at the city level is discussed below.
Individual city charters will control the details of the city hearing process (number of readings,
timing of the readings, etc.) that must occur when considering the rate ordinance. Please consult
your city charter and your city attorney if you have questions regarding the specific requirements
applicable to your city.
A hearing must be held before the council in conjunction with the consideration of any
rate ordinance. Besides city staff, only the affected utility should be granted a formal
opportunity to address the council as part of the hearing process. However, citizens attending the
Page 2
April 14, 2006
meeting may be invited to address the ordinance briefly. It is within the city’s discretion to set a
limit upon the amount of time that the company representative has to address the council.
Because the record of the hearing before the city council will not be considered by the Railroad
Commission if the Company elects to appeal the rate ordinance, we encourage the city designate
that company representatives have ten to fifteen minutes to address the council regarding the rate
ordinance. To the extent that the Company believes that it has more information to provide the
council than can be accommodated in a fifteen minute presentation, you may wish to direct the
Company to file any additional information on paper with the council members’ offices.
The opportunity to formally address the city council affords the Company reasonable due
process. Due process does not require an evidentiary hearing, or that the Company be provided
an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. In approving the rate ordinance, cities are
functioning in a quasi-legislative fashion. Therefore, written findings of fact and conclusions of
law are not required and will not be considered by the Railroad Commission in the review of an
appeal of the ordinance.
A copy of the approved ordinance shall be sent to Atmos Energy Corporation, c/o
Richard Reis, 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1800, Dallas, Texas 75240. Please forward a copy to
our office also. Once the council has approved the rate ordinance, Atmos will likely appeal the
ordinance to the Railroad Commission. The first city to pass an ordinance will establish the
timetable for Commission jurisdiction over an appeal from rates set by the municipalities. There
were 137 cities represented in GUD No. 9400 (the last TXU Gas system-wide rate case). An
intervention will be crafted so that cities that did not initiate a rate review can nonetheless
participate in Commission proceedings to set Atmos’ rates.
C:\DOCUME~1\Jbp\LOCALS~1\Temp\Metasave\Mmo060330kpd Rate Ord, Stf Rpt, Ppt.Doc
MODEL STAFF REPORT
ON ATMOS MID-TEX SHOW RATE ORDINANCE
Purpose of the Ordinance:
Late in 2005, seventy-six Texas cities served by Atmos Mid-Tex determined that Atmos
should be required to establish the reasonableness of its current rates. The “show cause”
resolutions required Atmos to file by December 31, 2005, support for its current rates. Atmos
filed schedules with the cities, which have been reviewed by the cities’ consultants. In addition,
the cities’ consultants requested additional information from Atmos. As a result of their analysis
of the filing and the additional information, the cities’ consultants have issued a report finding
that Atmos’ current rates are excessive and should be reduced.
Overview of Consultants’ Report:
1. Rate of Return. Atmos’ filing used the same rate of return approved in GUD No.
9400, based upon the capital structure and component costs of TXU Gas. Atmos’ filing does not
reflect the change in ownership; Atmos’ capital structure is markedly different from TXU Gas,
and the rate of return should be adjusted.
2. Rate Base. Atmos has allocated plant assets to Mid-Tex that did not come from
TXU when Atmos purchased the system, and that may already be included in the rates of
customers served by other Atmos operating units. Additionally, Atmos has failed to recognize
the accumulated deferred income taxes and investment tax credits that were on the books of
TXU when the assets were acquired, resulting in a loss by ratepayers of the benefits of the
deferrals. As a result, Atmos’ rate base should be reduced by $185 million.
3. Depreciation Expense. A service unit was removed from rate base, but Atmos has
not reduced its depreciation expense associated with this removal. As a result, Atmos’
depreciation expense should be reduced by $3.1 million.
4. Operating Expenses. Atmos has improperly adjusted its operation and
maintenance expenses, resulting in a reduction of $35.8 million to these expenses.
5. Service Charge Revenue. Atmos has not included service charge revenues to
reduce its revenue requirements. These revenues need to be accounted for, and reduce Atmos’
base rate revenue requirements by $927,576.
As a result of these adjustments, Atmos’ revenue requirement should be reduced by $73.5
million from that reflected in its show cause filing, and by $34.7 million below the revenue
requirement approved in GUD No. 9400. The rates recommended by the cities’ consultants are a
reduction from both the monthly customer charge and the commodity rate established in GUD
No. 9400.
1668\14\Rate Ord\oth060330kpd 1
Explanation of “Be It Ordained” Paragraphs:
1. A public hearing on the proposed rate ordinance was held on _____________,
2006. At that time, Atmos and interested members of the public were given the opportunity to
address the Council on the proposed rate ordinance.
2. Atmos’ filing and its responses to requests for additional information, as analyzed
by the cities’ consultants, failed to show that its existing rates were just or reasonable, thus
triggering the need for the City to take action to ensure that the regulated utility’s rates are just
and reasonable.
3. The rates in Attachment “A” are those rates recommended by the Cities’
consultants that will meet the requirements of the Gas Utility Regulatory Act (“GURA”). That
is, the rates will produce revenues for Atmos that will permit Atmos a reasonable opportunity to
earn a reasonable return on its invested capital, but will not yield more than a fair return.
4. The rates ordered by the City will be effective immediately. GRIP surcharges
will cease immediately. The GRIP statute contemplates that the investment associated with such
surcharges will be reviewed for reasonableness and prudence in subsequent rate cases, and the
surcharges will cease thereafter.
5. It is expected that Atmos will appeal the rate ordinance to the Railroad
Commission. The City will intervene in that appeal in conjunction with the Atmos Cities
Steering Committee. A full hearing on the merits of Atmos’ appeal will be held at the
Commission. It is expected that the hearing will take place later this year.
6. GURA requires the utility to reimburse the City for its reasonable costs associated
with the City’s activities related to the show cause proceeding.
1668\14\Rate Ord\oth060330kpd 2
Atmos Energy Mid-Tex
Rate Ordinance:
Explanation and Impact
Presented By:
Steering Committee of Cities
Served by Atmos
April, 2006
Timeline Regarding Atmos Rate
Investigation
May 2004
•–Railroad Commission approves rates for TXU
Gas Co. in GUD 9400
October 2004
•–Atmos acquires TXU Gas Co., states that it
will realize $20 million in expense savings from current rates
December 2004
•–First GRIP filing is made for 2003
incremental investment seeking a surcharge of $6.7 million
Summer 2005
•–76 Cities pass “Show Cause”resolutions
requiring Atmos to provide evidence justifying natural gas
rates charged by the Company
September 2005
•–Second GRIP filing is made for 2004
incremental investment seeking a surcharge of $6.7 million
2
Timeline Regarding Atmos Rate
Investigation (cont.)
October 2005
•–Atmos begins levying 2004 GRIP surcharge
December 30, 2005
•–Atmos files schedules claiming to
support its current rates
January –February 2006
•–Steering Committee consultant
analyzes Atmos schedules, investigates rate request and drafts
report that finds rates currently charged by Atmosare too high
February 2006
•–Atmos begins levying 2005 GRIP surcharge
March 2006
•–Steering Committee reviews report and
recommends cities adopt ordinance that sets Atmos’rates in
accordance with report
3
Summary of Recommendations
•Reduce Atmos’Revenue Requirement by
$73.4
million from that reflected in show
($34.7
cause filing million off current rates)
•Eliminate GRIP surcharges
•Reduce residential customer charge by $1.50
•Reduce commodity charge by 4.75 cents/mcf
4
Residential and Commercial
Bill Impacts
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division
Cities Show Cause Rate Filing
Residential Bill Comparison (6 Mcf Without Gas Costs)
$19
$18.40
$18
$17.31
$17 2004 GRIP
2003 GRIP
$2.59 reduction from
$16
current rates
$14.72
$15
$14
$13
$12
$11
$10
GUD 9400 Final Order (CurrentAtmos Response to Cities' ShowBased on Cities' Review of Atmos'
Rates) Plus GRIPCauseCosts
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division
Cities Show Cause Rate Filing
Commercial Bill Comparison (30 Mcf Without Gas Costs)
$50
$45.03
$43.76
$45
2004 GRIP
2003 GRIP
$7.00 reduction from
$40
current rates
$36.76
$35
$30
$25
$20
GUD 9400 Final Order (CurrentAtmos Response to Cities' ShowBased on Cities' Review of
Rates) Plus GRIPCauseAtmos' Costs
7
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division
Cities Show Cause Rate Filing
Residential Bill Comparison (6 Mcf With Gas Costs)
$100
$98.54
$97.42
$98
$96
$94.86
$94
$92
$90
$88
$86
$84
$82
Note: Includes Jan 2006 PGA of $12.61 per Mcf.
$80
GUD 9400 Final Order (CurrentAtmos Response to Cities' ShowBased on Cities' Review of
Rates) Plus GRIPCauseAtmos' Costs
8
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division
Cities Show Cause Rate Filing
Commercial Bill Comparison (30 Mcf With Gas Costs)
$450
$445.15
$443.88
$445
$440
$436.87
$435
$430
$425
$420
$415
$410
$405
Note: Includes Jan 2006 PGA of $12.61 per Mcf.
$400
GUD 9400 Final Order (CurrentAtmos Response to Cities' ShowBased on Cities' Review of
Rates) Plus GRIPCauseAtmos' Costs
9
Significant Adjustments to Atmos’
Show Cause Filing
Rate Base
•
–Atmos fails to provide documentation that it is not double-dipping on return
and depreciation associated with $36.5 million of net plant investment
–Atmos fails to appropriately reflect accumulated deferred taxes and tax credits
benefiting ratepayers
$185 million
–These two adjustments reduce rate base by
Rate of Return
•
–Atmos used TXU’s capital structure and cost of debt
–Using Atmos’actual capital structure and cost of debt reduces required return
$22.6 million
on investment by
O&M Expenses
•
–Remove early transition inefficiencies and one-half of the transition
adjustments recommended by Atmos
–Account for one-half of the savings claimed by Atmos to the financial
community
$35.8 million
–Total O&M expense reductions are
10
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division
Cities Show Cause Rate Filing
Revenue Requirement
$910 million$949 million$875 million
$1,000
$35 million reduction from current rates
$900
Return ($82 million)
Return ($64 million)
Return ($59 million)
$800
$700
Expenses
ExpensesExpenses
($282 million)
($312 million)($332 million)
$600
$500
$400
$300
Gas CostGas CostGas Cost
$200
$100
$-
GUD 9400 Final Order (CurrentAtmos Response to Cities' ShowBased on Cities' Review of Atmos'
Rates)CauseCosts
11
Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program
(GRIP)
•The statute permits gas utilities to seek surcharges to recover
return, depreciation and taxes associated with incremental
capital investment in the system
•Investments reflected in GRIP filings may only be surcharged
until a rate case incorporates the investment in rate base
•Atmos has been surcharging customers for $6.7 million in
GRIP costs since October 2005 and an additional $6.7 million
since February 2006
•Cities’analysis shows that Atmos is already collecting
sufficient revenues to earn its allowed return so the surcharges
were unnecessary
•The rate ordinance ceases the collection of the GRIP surcharge
12
Atmos Energy Corp Stock Price History
2004 GRIP
Hurricane Katrina
2003 GRIP
Show Cause Filing
Hurricane Rita
Acquired TXU Gas
13
Steering Committee Recommendations
•Approve Rate Ordinance that sets rates for
Atmos’customers served within city limits in
accordance with Steering Committee
consulting expert’s recommendations
•Prepare for possible appeal of rate ordinance
to Railroad Commission
•Pursuant to statute, municipal expenses related
to rate investigation and possible appeal are
reimbursable and will not impact city budgets
14
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT THE EXISTING NATURAL GAS
DISTRIBUTION RATES OF ATMOS MID-TEX SHOULD BE REDUCED;
ORDERING ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION, TO
REDUCE ITS EXISTING RATES WITHIN THE CITY; ADOPTING
SPECIFIC NEW RATES R, T & C AND ORDERING ALL RATES,
SERVICE CHARGES AND TARIFF LANGUAGE NOT INCONSISTENT
WITH ATTACHMENT 1 TO REMAIN OPERATIVE EXCEPT THAT
ALL GRIP SURCHARGES SHALL IMMEDIATELY CEASE;
ORDERING ATMOS MID-TEX TO REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR ITS
REASONABLE COSTS INCURRED IN THIS SHOW CAUSE AND ANY
RELATED RATEMAKING PROCEEDINGS OR APPEALS OF SAID
PROCEEDINGS; AUTHORIZING THE ATMOS CITIES STEERING
COMMITTEE TO ACT ON BEHALF OF CITY AND INTERVENE IN
ANY PROCEEDINGS BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL
BODIES; REQUIRING DELIVERY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE
COMPANY AND LEGAL COUNSEL; AND ORDAINING OTHER
PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT MATTER HEREOF.
WHEREAS,
the City of University Park, Texas (City) is a regulatory authority under the
Gas Utility Regulatory Act (“GURA”) and has original jurisdiction over the gas utility rates of
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division (the “Company”); and
WHEREAS,
the City has the authority under §§ 103.001 and 104.151, GURA, to initiate
a proceeding to determine whether the existing rates of a gas utility are unreasonable or in any
way in violation of any provision of law; and
WHEREAS,
the City previously authorized participation with the Atmos Cities Steering
Committee (ACSC); and
WHEREAS,
on November 8, 2005, the City ordered the Company to show cause
regarding the reasonableness of its existing natural gas distribution rates within the City; and
WHEREAS,
the Company filed its rate filing package with the City on or about
December 31, 2005; and
1
1668\14\Rate Ord\ord060330kpd Rate Ord
WHEREAS,
the City’s representatives obtained additional information from the
Company through written requests for information; and
WHEREAS,
the City’s consultants and representatives through cooperative efforts under
the direction of the ACSC have reviewed the rate filing package and responses to information
requests and have made a recommendation to the City regarding the rates to be charged by the
Company within the City; and
WHEREAS,
on April 20, 2006, a public hearing was held, at which time the Company
was given an opportunity to address the City Council regarding its current rates; and
WHEREAS,
GURA § 104.151(a) provides that if a regulatory authority, on its own
motion or on complaint by an affected person, after reasonable notice and hearing, finds that the
existing rates of a gas utility for a service are unreasonable or in violation of law, the regulatory
authority shall enter an order establishing the just and reasonable rates to be observed thereafter,
and serve a copy of the order on the gas utility; and
WHEREAS,
GURA § 104.151(b) provides that the rates thus ordered by the regulatory
authority constitute the legal rates of the gas utility until changed as provided by GURA; and
WHEREAS,
after affording reasonable notice and hearing to the Company, it is the
City’s opinion that the Company’s current rates are not reasonable; and
WHEREAS,
based upon such hearing, the briefing of staff, and the consultants’ findings,
the City has made a determination of the reasonableness of the existing rates of the Company,
and has determined just and reasonable rates to be hereafter observed and enforced for all
services of the Company within the City;
2
1668\14\Rate Ord\ord060330kpd Rate Ord
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1. That the Company was given reasonable notice of the hearing held on
April 20, 2006, and the Company had a reasonable opportunity to show to the City that its rates
were just and reasonable.
SECTION 2. That the Company failed to show that its existing rates are just or
reasonable.
SECTION 3. That the rates set forth on Attachment “A” to this Ordinance, which
attachment shall be incorporated herein as if it were fully set forth herein, are just and reasonable
rates:
a. The rates set forth in Attachment “A” establish the Company’s overall revenues at an
amount that will permit the Company a reasonable opportunity to earn a reasonable
return on its invested capital used and useful in providing service to the public in excess
of the Company’s reasonable and necessary operating expenses, in compliance with
GURA § 104.051; and
b. The rates set forth in Attachment “A” do not yield more than a fair return on the
adjusted value of invested capital used and useful in providing service to the public, in
compliance with GURA § 104.052.
SECTION 4. That the Company shall immediately begin charging the rates set forth on
Attachment “A” hereto, and shall, pursuant to GURA § 104.301, immediately cease the
imposition and collection of all Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program (“GRIP”) surcharges.
SECTION 5. That the existing rates, service charges and tariff language not inconsistent
with Section 4 and Attachment 1 shall remain operative.
3
1668\14\Rate Ord\ord060330kpd Rate Ord
SECTION 6. That the City is authorized to intervene in any appeal of the City’s action
filed at the Railroad Commission of Texas and to otherwise participate in any litigation
associated with the Company’s rates charged in the City, in conjunction with the ACSC.
SECTION 7. That the Company shall promptly reimburse ACSC for ratemaking costs
associated with the City’s activities related to the show cause proceeding, including appeals to
the Railroad Commission or Courts, in accordance with GURA §103.022.
SECTION 8. That a copy of this Ordinance shall be sent to the Company, care of
Richard T. Reis, at Atmos Energy Corporation, 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1800, Dallas, Texas
75240, and to Geoffrey Gay, legal counsel to ACSC, at Lloyd Gosselink, P.O. Box 1725, Austin,
Texas 78767-1725.
SECTION 9. That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately from and after its
passage, as the law and charter in such cases provide.
SECTION 10. That it is hereby officially found and determined that the meeting at which
this Ordinance is passed is open to the public as required by law and that public notice of the
time, place and purpose of said meeting was given as required.
DULY PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS,
on the 20th day of April, 2006.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES, III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
4
1668\14\Rate Ord\ord060330kpd Rate Ord
Attachment A
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division
Ordered Rates
Line Ordered
No. Rate R - Summary Rates
1 Customer Charge $ 7.50
2
3 Block 1 Commodity Rate (0-3 Mcf) $ 1.1915 per Mcf
4 Block 2 Commodity Rate (over 3 Mcf) 0.9415 per Mcf
5
6 Average Monthly Bill (6 Mcf without Gas Cost) $ 14.72 per Month
7
8 Average Monthly Bill (6 Mcf with Gas Cost) $ 34.75 per Month
9
10
11
Ordered
Rate C - Summary Rates
12
13
14 Customer Charge $ 12.50
15
16 Block 1 Commodity Rate (0-30 Mcf) $ 0.7417 per Mcf
17 Block 2 Commodity Rate (30-350 Mcf) $ 0.4917 per Mcf
18 Block 3 Commodity Rate (Over 350 Mcf) $ 0.2417 per Mcf
19
20 Average Monthly Bill (30 Mcf without Gas Cost) $ 36.76 per Month
21
22 Average Monthly Bill (30 Mcf with Gas Cost) $ 136.78 per Month
23
24
25
Ordered
Rate T - Summary Rates
26
27
28 Customer Charge $ 300.00
29
30 Block 1 Commodity Rate (0-1,500 MMBtu) $ 0.4977 per MMBtu
31 Block 2 Commodity Rate (Next 3,500 MMBtu) $ 0.3477 per MMBtu
32 Block 3 Commodity Rate (Next 45,000 MMBtu) $ 0.1977 per MMBtu
33 Block 4 Commodity Rate (Over 50,000 MMBtu) $ 0.0477 per MMBtu
34
35 Average Monthly Bill (300 MMBtu without gas cost) $ 475.07 per Month
36
37 Average Monthly Bill (300 MMBtu with gas cost) $ 1,474.93 per Month
5
1668\14\Rate Ord\ord060330kpd Rate Ord
816 Congress Avenue, Suite 1900
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: (512) 322-5800
Facsimile: (512) 472-0532
www.lglawfirm.com
Ms. Doyle’s Direct Line: (512) 322-5820
Email: kdoyle@lglawfirm.com
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL
LAWYER-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Cities Served by Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division
FROM: Geoffrey Gay
Kristen Doyle
Georgia Crump
DATE: March 31, 2006
RE: Atmos 2005 GRIP filing
Atmos began serving its 2005 investment year GRIP filing on the Atmos Energy Mid-
Tex cities yesterday. The application states that the residential surcharge will be $.51 per month.
This is significantly higher than the previous two GRIP surcharges for residential customers of
If no action is taken on the filing, the surcharge will become effective on
$.29 per month.
May 30, 2006.
The Gas Standing Steering Committee will soon initiate the process of reviewing
the filing and analyzing the effect that the pending rate investigation has upon the ability of
Atmos to seek a GRIP surcharge. You will be informed of Committee findings, conclusions, and
recommendations, and you will be provided with draft resolutions or ordinances reflecting those
recommendations.
At this time, we recommend that you adopt a resolution suspending the effective date of
the 2005 GRIP filing for an additional 45 days. A model resolution is attached for your use, as
th
well as a model staff report. Although you have until May 30 to take action on the filing, you
may schedule the suspension resolution for adoption by your governing body at any time prior to
th
May 30. By adoption of the resolution, you will have until July 13, 2006, to take final action on
the filing.
Please contact Geoffrey, Kristen or Georgia if you have any questions or require
additional information.
C:\Documents And Settings\Nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Mmo060331kpd GRIP 3 Filing.Doc
MODEL STAFF REPORT
ON ATMOS MID-TEX GRIP SUSPENSION RESOLUTION
Purpose of the Resolution:
The law mandates that a Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program (GRIP) surcharge request
cannot become effective until sixty (60) days following the filing. The effective date may be
suspended by a city for 45 days. If the City does not take action to suspend the filing, the
Company may begin implementing a monthly surcharge ($0.51 on all residential customers,
$1.75 for commercial customers, and $$78.47 for industrial customers) on or after May 30, 2006.
The resolution suspends the effective date to the maximum extent permitted by law to allow the
cities time to evaluate the filing, determine whether the filing complies with law, and if lawful, to
determine whether the surcharge is reasonable. This is particularly important given that the Gas
Standing Steering Committee initiated an investigation of the current rates charged by Atmos
Mid-Tex and concluded that Atmos already collects sufficient revenues to earn its allowed return
without the necessity for a surcharge to recover incremental investment.
What is GRIP:
GRIP is piecemeal ratemaking and would be illegal under traditional ratemaking that is in
the public interest. Atmos persuaded the legislature in 2003 to make an exception to the
prohibition against piecemeal ratemaking to encourage increased investment in transmission and
distribution pipe by allowing prompt recovery of investment, despite the possibility that
increased revenues and declining expenses could more than offset increased investment.
Unfortunately, utilities have used the GRIP filings to include other costs unrelated to
infrastructure improvements. GRIP surcharges are only allowed until the next general rate case.
NOTE: IT IS CRITICAL THAT ALL CITIES PASS THE RESOLUTION TO SUSPEND
BEFORE MAY 30, 2006.
Explanation of “Be It Resolved” Paragraphs:
1. A city is authorized to suspend the effective date for 45 days. However, since the
Company controls and can extend its effective date during settlement discussions to increase a
city’s jurisdiction and the period of time necessary to reach settlement, the resolution refers to
suspension “for the maximum period allowed by law” rather than a specific date.
2. This paragraph authorizes participation with the Gas Standing Steering
Committee and coordinated control over legal counsel and consultants. Along with paragraph 3,
this paragraph avoids the necessity of returning to the City Council with another resolution to
authorize efforts related to an appeal of the Council’s ultimate decision on the Atmos
application.
3. This paragraph authorizes the intervention of the city, assuming such is
recommended by the Gas Standing Steering Committee, in an environs case or an appeal
pending at the Railroad Commission. It further authorizes the handling of appeals from Railroad
Commission decisions to the courts in Austin, if the Gas Standing Steering Committee believes
that effort is desirable.
4. Texas law requires utility companies to reimburse cities for all costs (legal and
consulting) associated with ratemaking, whether the case is initiated by the utility or a regulatory
authority. Implementation of a tariff that imposes a surcharge is ratemaking, entitling the
participating cities to reimbursement. Legal counsel and consultants approved by the Steering
Committee will submit monthly invoices to the City of Arlington which will then forward the
invoices to Atmos for reimbursement.
5. This paragraph directs that a copy of the signed resolution be sent to a
representative of the Company and legal counsel for the Gas Standing Steering Committee.
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
SUSPENDING THE MAY 30, 2006, EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
PROPOSAL BY ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION TO
IMPLEMENT INTERIM GRIP RATE ADJUSTMENTS FOR GAS
UTILITY INVESTMENT IN 2005; AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION
WITH THE GAS STANDING STEERING COMMITTEE IN A REVIEW
AND INQUIRY INTO THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE FILING AND THE
BASIS AND REASONABLENESS OF THE PROPOSED RATE
ADJUSTMENTS; AUTHORIZING INTERVENTION IN
ADMINISTRATIVE AND COURT PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE
PROPOSED GRIP RATE ADJUSTMENTS; REQUIRING
REIMBURSEMENT OF REASONABLE LEGAL AND CONSULTANT
EXPENSES; AND REQUIRING DELIVERY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO
THE COMPANY AND LEGAL COUNSEL.
WHEREAS,
the City of University Park, Texas (“City”) is a gas utility customer of
Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division, (“Atmos Mid-Tex” or “the Company”) and a regulatory
authority with an interest in the rates and charges of Atmos Mid-Tex; and
WHEREAS,
Atmos Mid-Tex made filings with the City and the Railroad Commission
of Texas (“Railroad Commission”) on or about March 30, 2006, proposing to implement interim
rate adjustments (“GRIP rate increases”), pursuant to Texas Utilities Code § 104.301, on all
customers served by Atmos Mid-Tex, effective May 30, 2006; and
WHEREAS,
a recent rate investigation conducted by consultants for the Gas Standing
Steering Committee has indicated that Atmos Mid-Tex is already collecting sufficient revenues
to earn its allowed return and does not require a GRIP surcharge; and
WHEREAS,
the sufficiency of the filing by Atmos Mid-Tex and its compliance with
statutory mandates is in question and needs to be determined; and
WHEREAS,
ratepayers of Atmos Mid-Tex, including the City and its residents, will be
adversely impacted by the proposed GRIP rate increases; and
1
1668\15\ord060331kpd Suspending GRIP
WHEREAS,
the City and its residents could benefit from coordination with the Gas
Standing Steering Committee in a review of the reasonableness of the proposed GRIP rate
increases and joint participation in any proceedings at the Railroad Commission related to the
proposed GRIP rate increases; and
WHEREAS,
the reasonable costs associated with the participation of Cities in this rate
proceeding are reimbursable from Atmos Mid-Tex;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, THAT:
1. The May 30, 2006, effective date of the GRIP rate increases proposed by Atmos
Mid-Tex is hereby suspended for the maximum period allowed by law to permit adequate time to
investigate the sufficiency of the GRIP Rate Increase filing, review the proposed increases,
analyze all necessary information, and take appropriate action related to the proposed increases.
2. The City is authorized to cooperate with the Gas Standing Steering Committee to
hire and direct legal counsel and consultants, to negotiate with the Company, to make
recommendations to the City regarding the proposed GRIP rate increases, and to direct any
administrative proceedings or litigation associated with the proposed GRIP rate increases.
3. The City is authorized to intervene in any administrative proceedings or litigation
associated with the proposed GRIP rate increases.
4. Atmos Mid-Tex shall promptly reimburse the City’s reasonable costs associated
with the City’s activities related to the proposed GRIP rate increases.
5. A copy of this Resolution shall be sent to Atmos Mid-Tex, care of Richard T.
Reis, at Atmos Energy Corporation, 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1800, Dallas, Texas 75240, and to
2
1668\15\ord060331kpd Suspending GRIP
Geoffrey Gay, legal counsel to the Gas Standing Steering Committee, at Lloyd Gosselink, 816
Congress Avenue, Suite 1900, Austin, Texas 78701.
DULY PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS,
on the 20th day of April, 2006.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES, III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
3
1668\15\ord060331kpd Suspending GRIP
19
PARK ADVISORY BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
March 28, 2006
The Park Advisory Board of the City of University Park met on Tuesday, March 28, 2006
at 4:00pm at City Hall, 3800 University Blvd., University Park, Texas. The following are
the minutes of that meeting.
Committee Members Attending:
William Pardoe - Chairman
Jim Roberts - Council Liaison
Bruce Collins
Darrell Lane
Mac Fuller
Liz Farley
Julia Baltser
Jacky Spears
Staff Members Attending:
Bob Livingston - City Manager
Gerry Bradley - Parks Director
Amber Lively - Administrative Secretary
Absent & Excused:
Lucy McRae
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Mr. Pardoe.
Approval of Minutes
Mr. Pardoe asked for any comments on or changes to the February meeting minutes.
There being no changes, Mrs. Baltser moved to approve the minutes. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Lane and approved unanimously by the board.
Reports
1. Tree Ordinance - Tree Preservation Ordinance
The expanded tree ordinance was discussed in both the January and February
meetings of the Park Board. During the February meeting, it was decided by the
Board that Staff should seek further counsel from the Mayor to determine the
criteria for the expanded ordinance before going any further. After meeting with
the Mayor, who feels that an ordinance is necessary due to the large amounts of
new construction and remodeling, Staff is requesting feedback from the Board
before a preliminary ordinance is completed.
It has been decided that the ordinance will only be enforced in situations where
new construction or remodeling is taking place. Under these circumstances, the
builder or homeowner must obtain a permit through the Building and Zoning
Department before removing a "protected" tree. Along with the permit, a tree
replacement plan must be submitted and approved by Park Staff. For the
replacement tree, a formula has been established which gives the value of the
tree being removed along with what it will take to replace it. There will be three
(3) options for the replacement of the tree(s). One, if there is room, the tree(s)
can be replaced with another on the site. Two, if there is no room for a
replacement tree(s), contributions can be made to the City's tree fund for the
replacement of trees on public property. Third, a combination of option one and
two can be done if there is only room for a portion of the tree(s) to be replaced.
There will be exemptions to the ordinance in situations where the tree is dead or
diseased, the tree is of an undesirable species, or the tree is damaged by a
natural disaster such as a storm or high wind. Once the removal has been filed
and approved, the builder will also be given a protection plan for any tree(s) that
will remain on the property during construction.
After the details of the ordinance had been outlined, the floor was opened to
Board discussion. While most Members are in agreement that an ordinance
needs to be installed so that the Park Cities can retain its aesthetic qualities, they
are concerned with the guidelines, response from the public as well as legal
issues. The main concern is over the cost of the replacement trees. Board
members feel that the cost to replace a large tree will simply be too much and
will ultimately end up costing the homeowner and affecting the property values of
homes with such trees. Board Members also want to know who will enforce the
ordinance. The concern here is that due to the high number of builders and
construction in the area, there will be those who try to get around the ordinance
or those who will simply ignore it all together.
The Board did offer several possible suggestions for the ordinance. These
included offering an incentive to builders who work around rather than remove
trees and changing the replacement portion of the ordinance so that the size of
the removed tree(s) does not have to be equally matched by the replacements.
For example, one large tree could be replaced by two smaller trees that don't
have to equal the larger tree. If the trees are not replaced, then a fine could be
assessed based on the value of the removed tree. It was also suggested that a
committee be formed to review the ordinance. It would then be up to the
committee to form a plan that would be fair and consider all involved. Board
members felt that forming a committee would be a good way to consider every
aspect of the ordinance and formulate a plan.
With this, Mr. Pardoe asked the Board if they were willing to form a motion based
on the suggestions. Mrs. Baltser moved that a committee be formed to further
develop an expanded version of the City's Tree Ordinance. The motion was
seconded by Mrs. Spears and approved 7 to 1. Mr. Lane was opposed.
Work in Progress
Mr. Bradley included a brief outline of current projects being completed by the
Parks Department. This information was included in the agenda packet mailed to
board members.
Mr. Bradley also briefly talked with Board Members on the status of the City
Entrance Marker program and the Kerwin Memorial. Preliminary designs for the
entrance program have been received but need some fine tuning. Mr. Bradley
will report back to the Board at a later time with further designs.
The statue has arrived and work has begun on the Kerwin Memorial. However,
the project will not be complete by the anticipated deadline due to the stonework.
The Kerwin's have been notified and are okay with the extra time needed to
complete the project.
Adjournment
There being no further business of the Park Board, the meeting was adjourned
by Mr. Pardoe.
The next scheduled meeting of the Park Board will be held on Tuesday, April 11 ,
2006 at the Peek Service Center. At this meeting, five (5) landscape architects
will be on hand to give brief presentations on their design style and on projects
they have completed. Staff feels that this will be a good opportunity for the Board
to see what different styles and firms are available for the City's future design
needs.
~f.R~
William Pardoe, Chairman
Park Advisory Board
~.!..oh
Date