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