Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 05-04-04 Names Tabs.doc AGENDA #2411 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, MAY 4, 2004 AT 5:00 P.M. 4:00-4:15 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO RECEIVE ADVICE FROM CITY ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTER UNDER SECTIONS 551.071 & 551.074 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. 4:15-5:00 P.M. WORK SESSION FOR AGENDA REVIEW I. INVOCATION - City Manager Bob Livingston II. INTRODUCTION OF STAFF - City Manager Bob Livingston III. AWARDS & RECOGNITION: RETIREMENT PLAQUE: Director of Parks Thom Hanford for 19 years of service to the City of University Park PRESENTATION: CALEA Certification to Police Department - Tab I PRESENTATION: ISO Letter to Fire Department - Tab I IV. ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR Anyone wishing to address an item not on the Agenda or having questions about items on the Consent Agenda should do so at this time. Questions and comments regarding Main Agenda items may be made when that item is addressed by the City Council. Vo CONSENT AGENDA A. CONSIDER: Resolution and approval of Amendment to Employment Agreement for City Manager Bob Livingston - Mayor Peek Tab II B. CONSIDER: Final payment for reconstruction of Vassar Drive from Lovers Lane to Turtle Creek Boulevard to Rebcon, Inc. - Smallwood Tab III C. CONSIDER: Final payment for water, sanitary sewer improvements and alley paving to North Texas Contracting, Inc. - Smallwood Tab IV D. CONSIDER: Approval of minutes for city council meeting of April 21, 2004 - Wilson Tab V VI. MAIN A. AGENDA DISCUSSION: Of responsibility for replacement of sidewalks on public rights-of- way - Smallwood Tab VI CONSIDER: Request from Shaved Ice Hut to sell in the city' s swimming pool this summer - Livingston Tab VII RECEPTION HONORING RETIREMENT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS THOM HANFORD IN CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MEETING As authorized by Section 551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, this meeting may be convened into Closed Executive Session for the purpose of seeking confidential legal advice from the City Attorney on any agenda items listed herein. VII. INFORMATION AGENDA Tab VIII REPORTS, BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EMPLOYEE BENFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE PARK ADVISORY COMYHTTEE PLANNING & ZONING COMYHSSION PROPERTY CASUALTY & LIABILITY INSURANCE ADVISORY COMYHTTEE PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMYHTTEE PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY COMYHTTEE URBAN DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMYHTTEE ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMYHTTEE CAPITAL PROJECTS REVIEW COMYHTTEE CAPITAL PROJECTS UPDATE for Week of May 1, 2004 CALEA PRESS RELEASE On March 20, 2004 City officials traveled to Pasadena, CA where the University Park Police Department was recognized and awarded national accreditation status from the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA). The formal accreditation process is the culmination of a 36 month long program designed to improve the delivery of law enforcement service by offering a body of standards, developed by law enforcement practitioners. The accreditation program is a prestigious honor bestowed upon only 700 out 17,500 law enforcement agencies nationwide. The University Park Police Department joins only 21 other law enforcement agencies in the State of Texas as accredited members. The City applied for accreditation in November of 2000, and was given 36 months to perform a self assessment of departmental operations and implement over 400 law enforcement standards. The standards cover a wide variety of topics ranging from internal affairs investigations to victim/witness assistance. "The standards have given our department the tools it needs to continue a high level of professionalism while also incorporating best management practices into our daily operations," states Chief of Police, Gary Adams. The accreditation program directly benefits the community in a variety of ways. Benefits include greater accountability within the police department, increased emphasis on community advocacy, plus potential tax savings to the citizens. Accredited law enforcement agencies have an easier time securing police liability insurance and defending against lawsuits, thereby reducing the overall costs of operating a law enforcement agency. ISO PRESS RELEASE The City of University Park was recently notified by the Insurance Service Office that its Public Protection Classification rating would improve from a Class 4 rating to a Class 2 rating. The Insurance Service Office or ISO is responsible for measuring the capacity of local fire departments to respond and suppress fires. Once an analysis has been completed by ISO, the fire department is assigned a public protection classification. A Class 1 rating represents exemplary fire protection, and a Class 10 represents the poorest fire protection category. University Park's new public protection classification puts the City with very select company across the country. Of the nearly 45,000 jurisdictions rated by ISO, only 310 received a Class 2 rating (42 jurisdictions received a Class 1). That places University Park in the 99th Percentile nationally for fire protection classification. The direct benefit of a reduced ISO classification to property owners in University Park is reduced premiums on homeowner insurance. Premium savings will vary from insurance companies, property values, and policies, but the estimated savings on the average price of a University Park home ($717,626) is approximately $500 annually. The new Public Protection Classification becomes effective this October. AGENDA MEMO (03/02/04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: April 28, 2004 Members of the City Council Mayor Harold Peek SUBJECT: Approval of 40lA Deferred Compensation Resolution and Amendment to the City Manager's Employment Agreement Councilmember Roberts has worked with the City Manager and myself for several months to create this agreement. Approval of the items will create a 40lA deferred compensation account and provide a vesting schedule that provides incentives for the manager to work until age 65. RECOMMENDATION: Both Councilmember Roberts and I recommend approval of the resolution and amendment to the City Manager's employment agreement. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution for 401A Deferred Compensation Account Amendment to Employment Agreement 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 C:\Documents and Settings\nwils°n'UNIVPARK\L°cal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK3\MAYOR401A050404.doc 4:29 PM 04/28J SUGGESTED RESOLUTION FOR A LEGISLATIVE BODY RELATING TO A 401 MONEY PURCHASE PLAN RESOLUTION OF (EMPLOYER NAME). ACCOUNT NUMBER: WHEREAS, the Employer has employees rendering valuable services; and WHEREAS, the establishment ora money purchase retirement plan benefits employees by providing funds for retirement and funds for their beneficiaries in the event of death; and WHEREAS, the Employer desires that its money purchase retirement plan be administered by the ICMA Retirement Corpora- tion and that the funds held under such plan be invested in the ICMA Retirement Trust, a trust established by public employers for the collective investment of funds held under their retirement and deferred compensation plans: NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Employer hereby establishes or has established a money purchase retirement plan (the "Plan") in the form of.' (Select one) ~/The ICMA Retirement Corporation Governmental Money Purchase Plan & Trust, pursuant to the specific provisions of the Adoption Agreement (executed copy attached hereto). The Plan and Trust provided by the Employer (executed copy attached hereto). The Plan shall be maintained for the exclusive benefit of eligible employees and their beneficiaries; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Employer hereby executes the Declaration of Trust of the ICMA Retirement Trust, attached hereto, intending this execution to be operative with respect to any retirement or deferred compensation plan subse- quently established by the Employer, if the assets of the plan are to be invested in the ICMA Retirement Trust. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Employer hereby agrees to serve as trustee under the Plan and to invest funds held under the Plan in the ICMA Retirement Trust; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the4k~"~,~exr~kt{use title of official, not name) shall be the coordinator for the Plan; shall receive reports, notices, etc., from the ICMA Retirement Corporation or the ICMA Retirement Trust; shall cast, on behalf of the Employer, any required votes under the ICMA Retirement Trust; may delegate any administrative duties relating to the Plan to appropriate departments; and is authorized to execute all necessary agreements with the ICMA Retirement Corpora- tion incidental to the administration of the Plan. I, ~'~.~{t~M~}~ CX~r~,.'~.,~*i,t-.~ of the (City, ~ of~,~.~t-~%lt~.,,T)[ , do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution proposed by (Council Member,~ , was duly passed and adopted by the (Council, P_~ .~,: ~ ~- of the (City, ~ of k~x~.ltg~a~.~t~..f'~'~ at a regular meeting thereof assembled this t4 day of ~t.~ ,20 ~}O~ , by the following vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: (SEAL) Clerk of the (City, County, etc.) AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER WHEREAS, the City of University Park, Texas and Bob Livingston emered into an Agreement for Professional Services and Employment as City Manager on or about September 2, 2003; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that it is necessary to amend the benefits section of such Agreement to provide for an executive compensation plan for Livingston; NOW, THEREFORE, In consideration of Livingston's cominued employment as City Manager of the City and other good and valuable consideration, including the mutual covenants herein contained and the provisions of the original Agreement for Professional Services and Employment as City Manager, the City and the Manager hereby contract, covenant, and agree as follows: 1. That Section 4 "Benefits" of the "Agreement for Professional Services and Employment as City Manager" by and between the City of University Park, Texas (the "City") and Bob Livingston (the "Manager") is hereby amended to add the following provisions: "SECTION 4. BENEFITS In addition to the other benefits provided to the Manager by this Agreement, the City agrees to make contributions to a 401(a) Executive Plan account for the Manager in the amount of $40,000.00 per year during the remainder of the Manager's employment with the City, effective January, 2004, the first payment being payable immediately for the year 2004 and annually thereafter in January, for the term of this Agreement. The Executive Plan will provide that the Manager will be 50% vested in the balance of the account at age 62 and 100% vested in the balance -1- 64094 of the account at age 65, provided however, that if the Manager should die or become disabled to the extent he is unable to perform the functions of his office, based on an independent medical evaluation, or is asked to leave his office by a majority of the City Council, prior to the age of 65, the Manager will become 100% vested in the balance of the account at that time. If, at any time prior to the time the Manager reaches the age of 62 years, he voluntarily leaves the employ of the City, no benefit will be vested or paid to him under the terms of the 401 (a) Executive Plan. If, during the course of any year after the Manager reaches the age of 62 years, the Manager voluntarily leaves the employ of the City, he shall not be entitled to all, and shall return to the City a portion, of that year's contribution, as determined by the following formula: 12 minus(months served in current year)/12 x $40,000 = Amount to be Refunded If the Manager is terminated for any of the reasons in Section 11 of this Agreement, he will forfeit any claim to the benefits provided above. The 401 (a) Executive Plan is a qualified defined contribution retirement plan and meets the requirements of Section 401(a) of the Intemal Revenue Code, as amended. The Plan will allow additional contributions to be made by the Manager, but will not require such contributions. The Manager may also contribute to a 457 Plan maintained by the City for the benefit of City employees." SECTION 2. That except as amended by Section 1 above, the terms and provisions of the "Agreement for Professional Services and Employment as City Manager" entered into between the parties on September 2, 2003, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Manager have executed this Agreement effective as provided herein. -2- 64094 CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK CITY MANAGER By: MAYOR By: Bob Livingston ATTEST: By: Nina Wilson, City Secretary (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY -3- 64094 DATE: April 28, 2004 TO: Nina Wilson City Secretary FROM: Jennifer Shell, P.E. Civil Engineer SUBJECT: AGENDA MEMO (5/4/04 AGENDA) Final Payment for Reconstruction of Vassar Drive from Lovers Lane to Turtle Creek Blvd., Project No. 42720 Consent Agenda CONSIDER APPROVAL OF FINAL PAYMENT TO Rebcon, Inc. in the amount of $33,551.14 for work performed and materials furnished for the construction of Project No. 42720 (Reconstruction of Vassar Drive). The project included the 6800-7000 blocks of Vassar Drive, 3500 block of the Greenbrier/Caruth Alley, 3100 block of the Caruth/Colgate Alley, 2800 block of Dyer, emergency repairs on Hillcrest. AGENDA MEMO (5/4/04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 28, 2004 Bob Livingston City Manager Jennifer Shell, P.E. Civil Engineer Final Payment for Reconstruction of Vassar Drive from Lovers Lane to Turtle Creek Blvd., Project No. 42720 On June 3, 2003, the City Council approved Rebcon, Inc. for the above-referenced project. The Engineering Department has accepted the completed work. The actual work performed and the material furnished as provided by the contract brought University Park's project total to $667,669.70 (114% of the contract of amount). A payment in the amount of $33,551.14 has not been made to the Contractor for the retainage on this project. PROJECT COST HISTORY APPROVED CONTRACT AMOUNT 6/3/03 $583,208.50 The total cumulative value of the contract was increased by $84,461.20, or 114% of the original contract. This was necessary because the 2800 block of Dyer Street ($95,311.00) and the emergency pavement repairs on Hillcrest were added to the contract ($76,710.00). DATE: April 28, 2004 TO: Nina Wilson City Secretary FROM: Jennifer Shell, P.E. Civil Engineer SUBJECT: AGENDA MEMO (5/4/04 AGENDA) Final Payment for Water, Sanitary Sewer Improvements & Alley Paving, Project No. 46700 Consent Agenda CONSIDER APPROVAL OF FINAL PAYMENT TO North Texas Contracting, Inc. in the amount of $39,638.54 for work performed and materials furnished for the construction of Project No. 46700 (Water, Sanitary Sewer Improvements & Alley Paving). The project included the 3200-3400 blocks of the Marquette/Colgate alley, the 7700-8100 blocks of Hillcrest and the 8000-8400 blocks of Airline. AGENDA MEMO (5/4/04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 28, 2004 Bob Livingston City Manager Jennifer Shell, P.E. Civil Engineer Final Payment for Water, Sanitary Sewer Improvements & Alley Paving, Project No. 46700 On December 10, 2002, the City Council approved North Texas Contracting, Inc. for the above-referenced project. The Engineering Department has accepted the completed work. The actual work performed and the material furnished as provided by the contract brought University Park's project total to $1,981,926.81 (108% of the contract of amount). A payment in the amount of $39,638.54 has not been made to the Contractor for the retainage on this project. PROJECT COST HISTORY APPROVED CONTRACT AMOUNT 12/10/02 $1,832,915.65 The total cumulative value of the contract was increased by $149,011.16, or 108% of the original contract. This was necessary because the material furnished as provided by the contract was greater than the original estimate. The following quantities were overrun the greatest amount due to field changes: Remove and Replace Existing Asphalt Pavement with Concrete Base +$99,000, 75% Raise Entire Alley Elevation 2 inches +$11,000, 100% Concrete Pavement +$30,000, 30% MINUTES #2410 CITY COUNCIL MEETING/WORK SESSION CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM WEDNESDAY, APRIL 21, 2004 AT 7:30 A.M. Mayor Harold Peek opened the meeting of the City Council. Present were Mayor Pro Tempore Dick Davis, Councilmembers Jim Roberts and Harry Shawver. Councilmember Blackie Holmes was absent and excused. Also in attendance were City Attorney Rob Dillard, City Manager Bob Livingston and City Secretary Nina Wilson. Police Chief Gary Adams introduced the members of Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES): James T. Hopper, Sr., 3200 Stanford; James Chiles, 3801 Southwestern; Stan Roth, 3829 Wentwood; Terry Muncey, 4057 Hanover and John Cotton, Jr., 3717 Purdue. Thomas Russell, 4425 San Carlos, is a member, but was unable to attend the meeting. The members of RACES are invaluable to the city during an emergency. Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved acceptance of the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Roberts seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the following: CONSENT AGENDA CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES: For April 6, 2004. MAIN AGENDA CONSIDER REQUEST FROM SHAVED ICE HUT TO SELL IN THE CITY'S SWIMMING POOL THIS SUMMER: Since Nick Mesec, owner of the Shaved Ice Hut, was unable to attend the meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved that the request be tabled until he can attend. Councilmember Roberts seconded, and the vote was unanimous to consider the request at the next city council meeting on May 4, 2004. DISCUSSION OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR REPLACEMENT OF SIDEWALKS ON PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY: As Councilmember Blackie Holmes was unable to attend the April 21st city council meeting, a decision was made to take the matter under consideration at the next city council meeting of May 4, 2004. CONSIDER REQUESTS BY VARIOUS GROUPS TO USE PARK FACILITIES: The requests were for the use of Goar Park for a concert by the Dallas Symphony Orchestra on Saturday, May 29th, Highland Park Presbyterian Day School for Field Day in Williams Park on May 14m, Watermark Community Church for a picnic in Curtis Park on May 16th and the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society for "Light the Night Walk' in Burleson Park October 24th. Each participant will be charged a nonrefundable use fee and a refundable security deposit. Mayor Pro Tem Davis moved that the requests be approved and that each of the requesting parties be charged the fees recommended by staff. Councilmember Shawver seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve each request. CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO SIGN ORDINANCE FOR REAL ESTATE SIGN REGULATIONS: As a result of some of the recent amendments to the Sign Ordinance, several important provisions were inadvertently removed. When the ordinance relating to temporary signage was revised to provide for a maximum "aggregate" area of twelve (12) square feet, the stipulation that not more than one sign of any type be permitted on a site was removed. This stipulation prevented multiple real estate signs, or even a real estate sign in addition to a construction sign. It is important that this restriction be re-instated. In addition, when the real estate sign regulations were amended in August, the provision which allowed realtors to place "riders" on these signs was also removed. Previously, the Sign Ordinance allowed the placement of up to two (2) riders totaling no more than 240 square inches in area to be hung on a real estate sign. This 240 square inch provision was in addition to the six (6) foot maximum area of the real estate sign. The allowance of the riders has been permitted for some time, and the elimination of that allowance would prove costly to most realtors. Councilmember Shawver moved that the enabling ordinance amending Article 12.200 of the University Park Code of Ordinances to restore previous provisions regulating the number of real estate signs on a site and the allowance for the use of riders on real estate signage be approved. Councilmember Roberts seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 04/15 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, CHAPTER 12, SIGN REGULATIONS, BY AMENDING SECTION 12.229 REGULATING REAL ESTATE SIGNS; AMENDING SECTION 12.233 TO REGULATE AGGREGATE AREA OF TEMPORARY SIGNS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF F1NE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING COMMERCIAL BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS: The ability to construct a building up to three stories in height appears to be the primary concern of the majority of property owners in the Plaza. It was suggested that a meeting be held with the owners before drafting an ordinance. Preparations will be made for those meetings. CONSIDER TEMPORARY METAL BUILDING EXTENSION FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT: The proposed extension will be 4'6" in length, 15' wide and 12' in height and will cost less than $500.00. The sheet metal will match the current dark brown sheet metal color used at the rear of the building. This building will allow the city to comply with the Insurance Service Office (ISO) to house all Fire Department fire apparatus in one location. This extension will be only for the length of time it takes to build the new apparatus bays for the Fire Department. CONSIDER SETTING WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 2004, 7:30AM, FOR A SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING: A special meeting was called to take action on bids received for the reconstruction of Lovers Lane. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned into an Executive Session at 8:30a.m. to discuss possible pending litigation involving the city and to receive advice from the City Attorney under Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code. The Executive Session was adjourned at 9:1 la.m. No action was voted on or taken. PASSED AND APPROVED this 4th day of May 2004. ATTEST: Harold Peek, Mayor Nina Wilson, City Secretary AGENDA MEMO (05-04 -04 AG E N DA) DATE: April 29, 2004 TO: Bob Livingston City Manager FROM: Gene R. Smallwood, P.E. Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Discussion of responsibility for replacement of sidewalks on public rights- of-way. Background. Judith Patterson addressed the City Council at their 04.06.04 meeting with a request to amend Section 3 of the Code of Ordinances, which places the responsibility for repair or replacement of public sidewalks on the abutting property owner. She detailed her concerns in a memo, a copy of which is attached for your review. The overall emphasis of her request is for the City to take over that responsibility and establish a sidewalk maintenance and replacement program. This would be similar to the annual curb and gutter (C&G) program the City began approximately ten years ago. The City's sidewalk system represents an investment of about $15 million. The cost of developing an annual program is somewhat subjective, however, staff estimates that cost at approximately $750,000. The annual impact of a program of that magnitude on the tax bill of the average single-family residence is about $115. Ms. Patterson makes several good arguments. Code Enforcement staff have limited time to deal with sidewalk issues and typically respond only to complaints regarding the sidewalk conditions. The City could certainly be more proactive in the overall maintenance if we were responsible for the sidewalks. Discussion. Staff requests direction from Council regarding this issue. 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson. UNIVPARK\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK3~M SW Responsibility 04 21 04 (2).doc 2:39 PM 04/29/04 4/29/2004 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE / REPAIR PROGRAM * City of UP has approximately 400 blocks * Assume 1800 LF of sidewalk per block (1800 LF = 800 SY) 800 SY @ $40.00 $32,000.00 * Sidewalk Infrastructure Sidewalk 400 BIk @ $32,000.00 = Hdcp Ramps 1,600 Ea @ $1,500.00 = $12,800,000.00 $2,400,000.00 Total Value of Sidewalk Infrastructure = $15,200,000.00 * Assume 5% repair / replacement annually Annual SW Maintenance Program = $760,000.00 IMPACT OF SW PROGRAM ON THE AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 2003 Certified Taxable Value Annual Sisewalk Allotment Addition to Tax Rate $3,769,405,331 $750,000 $0.0001989704 Average SF Home - Market Value Less 20% Homestead Exemption Average SF Home - Taxable Value $717,626 ($143,525) $574,101 Tax Levy $114.23 In summary, the impact is 1.9 cents on the tax rate, resulting in an additional $114.23 in taxes annually for a SF homevalued at $717,626 (market). RE: Sidewalk Ordinance Dear Mr. Smallwood: Question: Who should and who must pay for the repair of public sidewalks abutting private residences in University Park? (a) the City of University Park through tax dollars? (b) the owner of the resident abutting the sidewalk? (c) the City of University Park through tax dollar should pay for the repair, but the owner of the resident abutting the sidewalk must pay out of his or her own pocket. Answer: (c). Section 3.1412 of the University Park City Ordinances imposes a "duty" on the private property owner to keep the "sidewalk, parkway, curb, or driveway abutting his property in a good and safe condition.., free from any defect and hazard." Section 3.1415 of this Article further provides that the abutting property owner shall be "primarily liable" for damages resulting from injury due to a defective sidewalk. Moreover, under section 3.1426, the property owner who fails to repair a defective sidewalk within 30 days of notification from the City is guilty of a misdemeanor. Objective: Repeal the Sidewalk OrdinanCes outlined above. I would appreciate your advice on how to achieve this goal.. Shouldn't public sidewalks be maintained .by public tax dOllars? For the safety and financial good .of the residents of UniVersity Park, aS well as for the good of the City itself, I propose the repeal of the three ordinance section imposing a financial burden on the home owner to repair public sidewalks and driveways. How does the City of University Park identify public sidewalks in need of repair? Is it a result of an injury due to a defect or numerous complaints by residents? No. According to Russell Craig, a Code Compliance Inspector emploYed by University Park, a single complaint, even if anonymous, prompts him to inspect the sidewalk on the offending street and issue notice to the residents that they have 30 days to replace their sidewalks. The day after residents on my street received these notices, a Concrete Contractor had left a letter that indicated he was aware of these notices and would proVide a "good" bid to repair the sidewalks. The quick timing of this Concrete Contractor leaves one suspicious as to the identity of the "anonymous" complainant. In contrast, when asked about possible repairs to the street, Mr. Craig said that while University Park had received many complaints about the street, there were other streets in even worse repair and that it would be at least two years before repairs would be made. In other words, a private resident has 30 days to fix a cracked sidewalk, but the City can leisurely schedule repairs to a severely pitted road more than two years out. So, am I writing this letter to avoid paying someone a couple thousand dollars to fix my sidewalk? No. I cannot hope to benefit by a repeal of this Ordinance since the notification of sidewalk defects says repairs must be completed within 30 days. Rather, I am writing this letter because I firmly believe that repeal of this Ordinance benefits the residents of University Park as a whole. What are these benefits? 1. Financial: Assuming that the residents must pay more taxes as a result of the City paying for sidewalk repairs, the residents may deduct these increased taxes from their Federal Income Tax liability. Conversely, if the resident must himself pay for the sidewalk repair, it is not a tax deduction. Moreover, the City could pay for repairs more economically than private residents since the City would be dealing in a greater quantity of work, thus reducing the cost to the contractor. Further, the City would be a savvier consumer than a single resident would be. 2. Safety: if the City assumes the responsibility of repairing or replacing the sidewalks, the work will be done by one contractor for the entire block, thus resulting in greater uniformity in the completed work than if individuals procure the cheapest bidder they can locate. Moreover, even if the entire sidewalk block is not defective, the City may elect to replace the entire sidewalk at one time, thus reducing the number of work projects over time. Conversely, an individual homeowner would be motivated to make the minimum repair necessary to pass inspection, designed to last only so long as he will own the home. 3. Insurance: Homeowner's insurance does not typically cover this liability for an individual homeowner. Generally, sidewalk cracks and other defects are due to settling of the ground over time, not a single identifiable event such as a hailstorm. If sued, attorney fees, court costs, and medical expenses of the injured party could easily bankrupt the homeowner. Most homeowners are surprised to learn they are responsible for this maintenance and do not know to seek out special insurance coverage. Conversely, the City could either elect to self-insure or procure insurance to protect against liability. The same lawsuit would not "cripple" the City as it would an individual. 4. Work priorifization: The City could fairly assess and prioritize the sidewalks most needing repair. Currently, the City operates on a "complaint" basis. If someone complains, then the City checks the particular block that has been complained about. The sidewalk block that received the complaint may be in far better condition than a sidewalk two blocks away. However, via the complaint or "squeaky wheel" system, the better sidewalk is repaired while the truly hazardous sidewalk is neglected. This results in patent unfairness and does little to further the safety of the residents. 5. Time saved: Under the "complaint" system, the City inspects the sidewalks piecemeal whenever it receives a complaint. Rather than this piecemeal City, the City could inspect the sidewalks once, prioritize the work, set a schedule, and efficiently complete the work according to a plan. Society abhors "profiling" by law enforcement. Residents of University Park have been "profiled" as rich people. Among those on my street who have received notices to repair their sidewalk are two single moms and an elderly woman. We cannot easily afford to replace the sidewalk. Judith Patterson-Piauche' Twelve Year Resident University Park, TX 75205 AGENDA MEMO ( O$/04/04A G END A ) DATE: April 21t, 2004 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Bob Livingston SUBJECT: Shaved Ice Hut On April 6, 2004 the City Council considered a request from Mr. Nick Mesec regarding a business proposal to sell shaved ice at the City's swimming pool. Mr. Mesec is a junior at Highland Park High School, and hopes to establish a summer business. Approval of the proposal would allow Mr. Mesec to sell shaved ice during the summer swimming season in return for a city fee. The item was tabled at the April 6th meeting to determine the status of the City's agreement with the current vendor, Mr. Bill Maxvill. Mr. Maxvill operates the concessionaire service out of a permanent facility located at the pool. The vendor has operated at the pool for a number of years with a verbal agreement with the City. However, there is no exclusive right given to Mr. Maxvill under the verbal agreement. In exchange for use of the pool facility, the vendor has paid the City a fee of $6,500. This item was also briefly discussed and tabled during the April 21, 2004 Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not recommend approval of this request. The City is satisfied with the current service provided by the vendor. The space at the pool is limited, and allowing an additional facility would further congest the area for pool patrons. In addition, the patrons of the shaved ice hut would be limited to those individuals that also purchase admittance into the pool. To serve other customers, the shaved ice hut would need to be located outside of the pool facilities, and current City Code does not permit this activity. ATTACHMENTS: Email 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 C:\Documents and Settings\nwils°n'UNIVPARK\L°cal Settings~Temporary Internet Files\OLK3\Shaved Ice 5 4 04.doc 4:26 PM 04/28J From: Bob Livingston Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 1:17 PM To: Robbie Corder Subject: FW: Tce Hut ..... Original Message ..... From: Mark A. Mesec [mailto:mark@mesec.com] Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 10:09 AM To: Bob Livingston Subject: Re: Ice Hut Bob, Thanks for your prompt reply...appreciate it. I know this is not the most pressing issue you guys face, but it is pretty important in our world, especially in terms of life lessons for a young man "dipping his toes into the water of the adult world" with this venture, plus there is some principle involved here too! -Mark ..... Original Message ..... From: To: Mark A. Mesec Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 8:38 AM Subject: RE: Ice Hut Mark I have asked Robbie Corder in my office to follow up on this since Thom Hanford has retired. He started working on it yesterday, and should be contracting you shortly. Bob Livingston ..... Original Message ..... From: Mark A. Mesec [mailto:mark@mesec.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 4:49 PM To: Bob Livingston Subject: Tce Hut Bob, This note is a follow-up to the consideration by the Council last week of the Ice Hut proposal submitted by my son, Nick. As I understood how it ended, the Council tabled it for final determination at a later date, and suggested we contact the individual who currently has the food and beverage contract at the pool. I also thought the Council was going to do a little research to see what the status really was of the current food and beverage contract at the pool (see below). While I think I know how any meeting with that individual will go, we cannot proceed with that suggestion without a little more information. Therefore, at your earliest convenience, we would appreciate information on the following (by the way, Nick and/or I would be happy to stop by your office to go over any of this, if you believe that would be more efficient): 1. I do not have the name, phone number, address, etc. of the current operator for the food and beverage service at the pool; 2. I am unable to find any City Ordinance that provides that the contract currently in place for food and beverage service at the pool specifically names the current operator, or provides for an exclusive contract for such service; 3. Has anyone (City Attorney or Tom Hanford, etc.) located a copy of the contract with the current operator, and has anyone determined whether such contract is exclusive (in any event, I would like a copy)? If such a contract does exist, I would like to know a couple of things about it, such as the following: (i) who entered into the contract? (ii) what authority is or was there to enter into an exclusive agreement? (iii) what oversight is there in connection with the awarding of an exclusive contract, particularly if what Tom said was true, that this individual has had it for 25+ years (forget actual number he said), and who reviews the reasonableness of its terms? (iv) if what Tom said was true that the City derives $6,500 a year from the pool contract, has anyone reviewed that to see if that's reasonable or the best the City can do (the overly defensive tone about this business relationship makes me wonder)? (v) does this same operator have the exclusive food and beverage contract at basketball, football, gymnastic, baseball, etc. games? I appreciate your attention to this, and appreciate your support and encouragement when Nick went through the licensing process last year (following the mix-up with Nina about the permissibility of setting up on the pool grounds)! I must say, however, that the hearing last week raised more questions than it answered. First of all, it is too bad Nick (or me for that matter) did not expect he would be asked to do a formal presentation of the proposal in addition to the written materials he provided, as it appeared by a couple of the questions that either some at the meeting did not have the proposal or had not read it. Secondly, the "search" by some to find out why it would not work took us by surprise, as it seemed to me to be inconsistent with an objective review of a business proposal, particularly one that would benefit the City and one that was proposed by an enterprising high school student who is well-regarded in the community...I speak of items such as (1) "1 think there is a City Ordinance against such a proposal" (none cited), (2) "there is an exclusive contract with the operator" (none produced, no details), (3) "we have a long-term relationship with the current operator, and the agreement has been very good to UP...bringing $6,500 a year in revenue" (if true, I think approximately $70.00 a day to the City hardly constitutes "very good"), (4) "if someone else is there, he may quit" (if that's the case, the City should reconsider who it is contracting with, with that type of attitude, as the operator could also upgrade his food and beverage operation and customer service or, understand that having the Ice Hut there would very likely benefit him (and the City), not hurt him financially), and (5) "if we let the Ice Hut in at the pool, we would have to let in anybody with a permit sell food or beverage items at the pool" (a wild exaggeration and hardly true). Again, thank you very much to your attention to this, and please advise on the above or let me know if you would prefer that I (and/or Nick) arrange to come by in person to further discuss these matters. -Mark Mesec (214) 265-7060--work dd CAPITAL PROJECTS UPDATE Week of May 1, 2004 Project No. Description Cost Major Tasks Uncompleted Target Date 42450 Fondren Tower- Fire Station No. 2 $30,000.00 (E) In-house construction (FD & FM) RLG completion of structural design TBD Complete 42730 Lovers Lane Reconstruction II - Hillcrest to NCE (1) Water & sanitary sewer construction (2) Pavement & Drainage Improvements $4,000,000.00 (E) Design Utility construction Interlocal agreement with City of Dallas Design Bids Complete Oct-04 Complete Apr-04 May-04 42903 NCE Wall - Streets - Landscaping Tree / Street Lighting - Sidewalks $150,000.00 (E) Street light equipment installed "Entry Plaza" construction Complete Sum-04 42980 42980 C& G Replacement FY00-01 C& G Replacement FY00-01 Change No 1 (**) (continued) $2,223,254.65 (A) $351,523.50 (A) Amherst, Durham to Airline Amherst, TC B!vd to T,J!3,qe Baltimore, Lovers Lane to Hanover Bryn Mawr, Boedeker to Airline Boedeker, Hanover to Southwestern Caruth, Turtle Creek Blvd to Thackeray Complete Delete Complete Complete Complete Complete Page 1 42980 C& G Replacement FYO0-01 (continued) Page 2 Centenary, Thackeray to Baltimore Glenwick, Preston to Westwick Glenwick, Preston to HPH8 parking garage Grassmere, Preston to Westchester Granada, Hillcrest to Key Glenwick, Preston to HS Garage Greenbrier, Preston to Douglas H~over, Presto~ to B~!timore Hyer, Preston to Westchester Larchmont, Armstrong to Lomo Alto Marquette, Baltimore to Pickwick Marquette, Tudle Creek Blvd to Thackeray McFarlin, Preston to Westchester Normandy, Armstrong to Lomo Alto Purdue, Durham to Dickens Rosedale, Thackew to Golf San Carlos, Preston to Armstrong + Lomo Alto Shenandoah, Douglas to Armstrong Shenandoah, Roland to Armstrong Shenandoah, Hillcrest to Auburndale Stanford, Airline to Hillcrest Stanhope, Armstrong to Lomo Alto Thackeray, Rosedale to Milton University Blvd, Golf to alley east of Haynie Williams Pkwy, University to McFarlin (padial) Windsor Pkwy, Douglas to Preston Pkwy Complete Delete Complete Complete Complete Delete Complete Complete Delete Complete Complete Apr-04 Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Com )lete Complete Complete Complete Windsor Pkwy, Douglas to Lomo Alto Complete 46310 MPY-Caruth Park Area Water / San Sewer / Stm Sewer $2,135,000.00 (E) Design Bids Complete Jun-04 43700 City Hall - Renovation and Expansion ............. (E) Conceptual Design Construction Plans & Specs Complete Fall-04 43710 City Hall II - Drainage Improvements $3,000,000.00 (E) Design Corps of Engineers 404 Permit Wetlands Mitigation Credits Bids May-04 Complete Complete Jun-04 43710 City Hall III - 24" Water main Installation $630,000.00 (E) Water main construction Pavement Repairs Complete Complete 48100 Paint Fondren Elevated Tank $300,000.00 (E) Specification / Bid Documents Bids Complete TBD 48200 MPY-Auburndale-Key/Water/Sanitary Sewer/Storm S~ $555,000.00 (E) Design Bids Spt-04 TBD 48300 Automated Meter Reading $1,200,000.00 (E) AMR installation - Cycle 1 (N of Lovers Lane) AMR installation - Cycle 2 (S of Lovers Lane) AMR installation - Cycle 3 (Parks, large meters, Training of City staff (Mobile Unit) Complete Complete Complete Complete Page 3