HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 07-06-06 Names TabsA G E N D A
#2614
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
THURSDAY, JULY 06, 2006 AT 5:00 P.M.
3:30-4:00 P.M. TRAINING SESSION ON FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
4:00-5:00 P.M. WORK SESSION FOR AGENDA REVIEW
I.INVOCATION
– City Secretary Nina Wilson
II.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE –
City Secretary Nina Wilson
III.INTRODUCTION OF COUNCIL
– Mayor James H. Holmes, III
IV.INTRODUCTION OF STAFF
– City Manager Bob Livingston
V.AWARDS AND RECOGNITION
DEPARTMENT PIN: Director of Parks Gerry Bradley, 2 years of service to the
City of University Park
VI. CONSENT AGENDA
A.CONSIDER: Right-of-Way License Agreement for 3208 Daniel – Smallwood Tab I
B.CONSIDER: Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes for June 20 and June 27,
2006 – Wilson Tab II
VII.MAIN AGENDA
A.PUBLIC HEARING: Water Quality Consumer Confidence Report –
Smallwood Tab III
B.DISCUSS: Street Closure Along Northwest Parkway – Smallwood Tab IV
C.CONSIDER: Ordinance for red light cameras – Adams Tab V
D.CONSIDER: Marking Two-Hour Parking , 6901 Snider Plaza – Adams,
Tab VI
E.CONSIDER: UP Friends of the Library/October Arbor – Mace Tab VII
F.CONSIDER: Design Concept for City Entrance Marker Program – Bradley
Tab VIII
G.CONSIDER: Award of Architectural Services Contract, Coffee Park –
Bradley Tab IX
H.CONSIDER: Award of Architectural Services Contract, Barbara Hitzelberger
Park – Bradley Tab X
I.CONSIDER: Participation in the Regional Stormwater Program through
North Central Texas Council of Governments – Smallwood Tab XI
J.DISCUSS: Date for City Council/Staff Two-Day Retreat – Smith Tab XII
VIII.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.
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.
IX. INFORMATION AGENDA
Tab XIII
REPORTS, BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
A.BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
B.EMPLOYEE BENFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
C.FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
D.PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE
E.PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes for May 15, 2006
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
(7/6/06 AGENDA)
DATE:
June 29, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM:
Robbie Corder, Assistant to the Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: ROW License Agreement: 3208 Daniel
ITEM:
The developer of a multi-family property at 3208 Daniel is nearly complete with
construction of a structure that contains an underground parking garage. Sect ion 3.103,
Amendments to the Building Code, contains language in Section 1803.3.1, Drainage
requirements, that requires all basements or below grade construction in residential units
to contain drainage systems that must be drained through enclosed pipe into the City's
storm water drainage system.
The developer opened a trench two feet back of curb in the parkway along Daniel and
installed a 1.5” PVC pipe into the inlet at the Daniel/Airline intersection. A license
agreement for use of the ROW is required.
Since the property is a condominium complex with a homeowner’s association, the license
agreement is between the City and the developer, LTN properties. The homeowner’s
association is currently not established. However, after the license agreement is executed
by the City Council, the agreement will be filed with Dallas County, thereby ensuring the
license agreement stays with the property regardless of who owns the property.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of this ROW license agreement.
ATTACHMENTS:
License Agreement and Addendum Letter
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Lic Agreement 3208 Daniel.doc 9:03 AM 06/29/06
A r-
w
(,... .-J
3 z::
)-\
c.L S-
o
1
./C)
-0 ~
~ "- '-.9
ro (Yj
J) V)
- . -
---
L- V Q)
'<t ~ 0- ....
1..- ,- .p
Q ~ ~ r:
\
0<J
R
(V)
\
~
\..:0
~
"2
k
a
-----,.. ..,-
~
-1
<t-
':s
~
\-
-
o
RESIDENTIAL LICENSE AGREEMENT
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK
******************************************************************************
This License Agreement (the "Agreement") effective as provided herein (the "Effective
Date"), is between the City of University Park, a municipal corporation (the "City"), and
I TN f fr~I'+ 'I c.." I T;"c.. , (the "Licensee").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Licensee desires to place, install, and maintain
3 'd..O$( Oo--I\'le \ Su ""f fVl\'\p \,C\~.!the Improvements") in, under, or upon City right-of-
way, easement or property (the "Property"), to benefit the Licensee's premises at
3 J...()~ 'Oo,..'^ \ e....\ ' University Park, Dallas County, Texas (the "premises"); and
WHEREAS, such Improvements are more specifically shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto,
for the purpose of for the premises; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to grant Licensee the privilege to place, install, remove and
maintain the Improvements in the City right-of-way, easement or property depicted in Exhibit "A"
upon the terms set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this Agreement,
the City and Licensee agree as follows:
I.
GRANT OF LICENSE
1.1 License to Maintain Certain Articles on Property. The City hereby licenses and
authorizes the Licensee at all times during the term of this Agreement to place, install, remove, and
maintain the Improvements on the Property depicted in Exhibit "A" attached, subject to the terms
and conditions contained in this Agreement.
1.2 Exclusive Use. The Licensee, its successors and assigns as permitted herein, may
place, install, and maintain on the Property the Improvements to be used exclusively for the benefit
of the premises.
II.
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT AND EFFECTIVE DATE
2.1 Prior Plan. With this Agreement, the Licensee hereby submits to the Community
Development Manager and the Director of Public Works of the City plans for the placement,
arrangement, and installation of the Improvements.
1
2.2 Review by City. The Community Development Manager or his representative and the
Director of Public Works or his representative shall review the plans and make modifications to the
plans that they, in their sole discretion, consider reasonably necessary or appropriate for the
preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare of the City.
2.3 Approval and Effective Date. This Agreement and the rights and obligations hereunder
shall become effective when the last one of either the Community Development Manager or his
representative or the Director of Public Works or his representative has approved the plans. The
Licensee agrees to place, arrange, or install the Improvements on the Property according to the
approved plans. The Licensee shall not place, arrange, or install any articles on the Property before
the plans have been approved. The City retains the right to remove any article or all articles placed
in, under, or onto the Property at any time and retains the right to modify or amend the plans at any
time after the Effecti ve Date of this Agreement, upon reasonable notice to the Licensee, such notice
informing the Licensee of the purpose and reasonableness of the modification(s) or amendment(s).
III.
INDEMNIFICA TION AND INSURANCE
3.1 Liabilities, Losses, or Damages. Licensee agrees to indemnify and save harmless
the City from any liability, claims or damages the City may suffer as a result of any claims, demands,
suits, judgments, costs or expenses, including expenses of litigation and attorneys' fees, arising out of
the use, maintenance, placement, installation, operation, or removal of the Improvements.
3.2 Period Covered. The indemnity provided by this Agreement will extend from
the date of this Agreement to the Termination of this Agreement.
3.3 Expenses. Attorneys' Fees. and Costs. If the City, in the enforcement of
Paragraph 2.3 of this Agreement, shall incur necessary expenses, or become obligated to pay
attorneys' fees or court costs, the Licensee agrees to reimburse the City promptly for such expenses,
attorneys' fees, or costs after receiving notice from the City of the incurring of such expenses, costs,
or obligations.
3.4 Interest. The Licensee agrees to pay the City interest at the rate ofTen Percent
(10%) per annum on any necessary expenses or costs incurred by the City in the enforcement of
Paragraph 2.3 of this agreement, or on any sum that the City is obligated to pay with respect to the
matters for which indemnity is given in this Agreement, from the date such expenses or costs are
incurred, or such sums are paid.
3.5 Notice of Claim Against. The City agrees to give the Licensee prompt written
notice of any claim made against the City on the obligations indemnified by the Licensee hereunder.
3.6 Limitation on Liability. The City and the Licensee agree that the provisions of
Article II of this Agreement shall not in any way limit the liability of the Licensee.
2
3.7 Insurance. The Licensee agrees to carry and maintain, during the entire term of
this Agreement, the following insurance policies:
A. Commercial General Liability Insurance in amounts not less than those
established as maximum recovery limits recoverable against the City under
the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as amended; and
B. Personal Liability insurance in amounts not less than those required under A.
above.
Such policies of insurance shall be issued by companies authorized to conduct business in the State
of Texas and shall name the City as additional insured. Certificates evidencing such insurance
contracts and certified copies of such insurance contracts shall be deposited with the Risk Manager
for the City. The policy limits provided in the Agreement shall change in accordance with the
provisions for maximum liability under the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Such
certificates shall require thirty days' written notice to the City in the event of default by Licensee or
termination of any coverage.
IV.
ASSIGNMENT
" . 4 1 Nonassignable. This License is personal to the owner of the premises at
3<lO~ O;..I\\e \ (the "property"). It is non-assignable, except when the property for which
this License is granted is conveyed by Licensee, in which case, this License may be assigned by
Licensee to a subsequent owner, provided such assignment is in writing, specifically requires the
assignee to agree to and abide by the terms of this Agreement, is signed by the assignee, and
recorded in the real property records of Dallas County, Texas. Any other attempt to assign this
License will terminate the License granted to Licensee under this Agreement.
V.
TERMINATION
5.1 Terminable at Will. This Agreement is terminable by either party at will by the
giving of thirty days' written notice to the other party.
VI.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
6.1 Governing Law. The validity of this Agreement, the construction and
enforcement of its terms, and the interpretation of the rights and duties of the parties shall be
governed by the laws ofthe State of Texas. Exclusive venue of any action hereon shall lie in Dallas
County, Texas
6.2 Amendment. No amendment, supplement, or waiver of this Agreement or any of its
3
provisions shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless made in writing and duly signed by all
parties.
6.3 Waiver. A failure or delay of the City to enforce at any time any of the
provisions of this Agreement, or to exercise any option that is provided in this Agreement, or to
require at any time performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement, shall in no way be
construed to be a waiver of such provision of this Agreement.
6.4 Entirety of Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement
between the City and the Licensee and supersedes all previous agreements, promises,
representations, whether written or oral, between the City and the Licensee with respect to the
subject matter of this Agreement.
6.5 Heading. The article and section headings in this Agreement are for convenience
only and do not constitute part of this Agreement.
6.6 Sole Benefit. Nothing expressed or referred to in this Agreement is intended or shall
be construed to give any person, firm, or entity, other than the City or the Licensee, any legal or
equitable right, remedy, or claim under or in respect to this Agreement or any provisions in this
Agreement. It is the intention of the City and the Licensee that this Agreement, the assumption of
obligations and statements of responsibilities herein, and all conditions and provisions of this
Agreement are for the sole benefit of the City and the Licensee, and for the benefit of no other
person, firm, or entity.
6.7 Notice. Any notices or other communications required or permitted to be given under
this Agreement, unless otherwise specifically provided, shall be deemed given, if sent by first-class
mail, postage prepaid, to such party at its address set forth below and shall be effective as of the date
of actual delivery of the notice. Either party may change its notice address by a written notice as
provided herein.
6.8 Recording. The Licensee must record this License with Dallas County and provide
written documentation that such recording has been completed.
If to the City:
City Manager If to Licensee:
City of University Park
3800 University Blvd.
Box 8005
University Park, TX 75205-0005
~T~ frcf...(~\e~/r(l(.
3;),,0 ~ DL'l"\\~ \
Uf\\'Jel<'+~~~? =rX
4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Licensee, each acting through its respective duly
authorized representative has caused this Agreement to be signed in their names and delivered as of
the date first above written. This Agreement shall be effective on the last date signed below.
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK
3800 University Blvd.
University Park, TX 75205
By:
Printed Name:
James H. Holmes III
Title:
Mavor
Date:
By:
/1) C - /7 /'
/__ --)/~---<-'h-_.
L-/ - ~ /
(. .
L 7 ,^, ILL 5 orJ
L 7 ;\/ rho!)E. /2 II E.. S
Printed Name:
Title:
---) ) ~ "-
I P<.. c --/,
Date:
G~ - 2 (~? -- C C
5
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF DALLAS
)
)
CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS
This instrument was acknowledged before mE~ on the Q f..c day of
:J0Cle 2006, by 'To'Y\ ne\~) on behalf of such property
owner at :2.,i.\~ (:,-\\\n(\ , University Park, Texas.
~,'\';~'~"I,#.
;:> '~... '~#"
l.~.' 0/",,\
~ : : !
~~. ...,,~
'\,."'I;,;;\"';"~
"'",,,,,,,,~
SARAH GRACE CAMPBELL
Notary Public, State of Texas
My Commission ExpIres
FeblUory 01, 2009
STATE OF TEXAS
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
COUNTY OF DALLAS
This instrument was acknowledged before mE~ on the
day of
2006, by
Mayor of the CITY OF
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, a home-rule municipal corporation, on
behalf of such corporation.
Notary Public, State of Texas
6
MID-CONTINENT CASUAL TV COMPANY
P. O. Box 1409 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74101
POLICY DECLARATION
Policy No.
Renewal of
04-GL-000608995
04-GL-000566978
Named Insured and Mailing Address
LTN PROPERTIES INC DBA
SEE NAMED INSURED ENDORSEMENT
3618 GILLlON
DALLAS TX 75205
Agent Name and Mailing Address
HOTCHKISS INSURANCE AGENCY INC
-CARROLLTON-HOMEBUILDER
4120 INTERNATIONAL PKWY #2000
CARROLL TON TX 75007
42 - 0323
Policy Period: From 10/26/2005 To 10/26/2006 at 12:01 A.M. Standard Time at your mailing address as shown above.
Business Description: HOMEBUILDER
IN RETURN FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE PREMIUM, AND SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS OF THIS POLICY, WE
~GREE WITH YOU TO PROVIDE THE INSURANCE AS STATED IN THIS POLICY.
THIS POLICY CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING COVERAGE PARTS FOR WHICH A PREMIUM IS INDICATED.
THIS PREMIUM MAY BE SUBJECT TO ADJUSTMENT.
PREMIUM
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART
$ 7,804
OWNERS AND CONTRACTORS PROTECTIVE LIABILITY COVERAGE PART $
PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS LIABILITY COVERAGE PART $
RAILROAD PROTECTIVE LIABILITY COVERAGE PART $
TOTAL
$ 7,804
REPORTING BASIS: ANNUAL
Form(s) and Endorsement(s) made a part of this policy at this time*:
ML 1191 (04/00) ML 1195(04/00) CG0300(01/96) ML 1098(04/99)
ML 1344(03/97) ML 1189(06/02) ML 1188(06/02) MI9059(04/04)
MI9002(06/00) I L0275(07/02) IL0168(05/02) IL0021 (05/04)
CG2426(07/04) CG0103(03/02) CG0001 (12/04) ML 1198(06/02)
CG2135(10/01)
MI9046(05/01)
IL0017(11/98)
CG2294(1 0/01)
ML 1439(04/97)
MI9014(03/98)
CG2639(04/99)
ML 1217 (04/01)
*Omits applicable Forms and Endorsements if shown in specific Coverage Part/Coverage Form Declarations.
Countersigned at:
Date:
CARROLL TON TX
10/11/2005
!JP~
By
Authorized Representative
ML 14 87 (01 97)
INSURED COpy
111111I11111111111111111I111111111I11 1111I 1111I II III 1111I1111I1111I1111I11111 11111111111111I111111111111111111111111I1111I1111I11111111I111111111111111111111111I11111111111111111111111111111I1111
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
LOCATION SCHEDULE
Policy No.
04-GL-000608995
LOCATION OF PREMISES
Location of All Premises You Own, Rent or Occupy:
Lac: 001 3208 DANIELS DALLAS TX 0??oo
Lac: 002 3230 DANIELS DALLAS TX 0??oo
Lac: 003 3240 DANIELS DALLAS TX 0??oo
ML 15 09 (04 97)
2
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
EXTENSION OF DECLARATION
)olicy No.
04-GL-000608995
PREMIUM
Location
Classification
Code No.
Premium Basis
A}Area C)Cost
P}Payroll U}Per Unit
S)Gross Sales T)See Desc.
Rate
Pr/Co All Other
Advance Premium
PrlCo All Other
TEXAS
Homebuilders Program -
General Contractor - Premises/Operations
900500 P)
95,000
63.880
6,069.
Hornebuilders Program -
General Contractor - Products/Completed
Operations
900501 S)
500,000
1.759
880.
Homebuilders Program -
Two- Family Dwelling
(Premium Basis: Per Dwelling)
900504 T)
4
124.208
497.
Lac: 002
Dwellings - three family
(lessor's risk only)
(Premium Basis: Each Dwelling)
Products -completed operations are
subject to General Aggregate Umit
63012 T)
1
incl.
358.418
incl.
358.
Extension of Declarations - Total Advanced Premium
ML 15 08 (04 97)
20
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART
DECLARATION
Policy No.
04-GL-000608995
Effective Date: 10/26/2005 **
12:01 A.M. Standard Time
LIMITS OF INSURANCE
General Aggregate Limit (Other Than Products - Completed Operations) $ 2,000,000
Products-Completed Operations Aggregate Limit $ 2,000.000
Personal and Advertising Injury Limit $ 1.000.000
Each Occurrence Limit $ 1,000,000
Damage to Premises Rented To You $ 100.000 Any One Premises
Medical Expense Limit $ FXCIUDFD Any One Person
BUSINESS DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION OF PREMISES
Form of Business: CORPORATION
Business Description*: HOMEBUILDER
Location of All Premises You Own, Rent or Occupy:
SEE ATTACHED LOCATION SCHEDULE
PREMIUM
Location Code No. Premium Basis Rate Advance Premium
Classification A)Area C)Cost PrlCo All Other PrlCo All Other
P)PayroJl U)Per Unit
S)Gross Sales T)See Desc.
SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE
Minimum Premiums
All Other $ 191
PrlCo
Policvwritina $ 500 Total Advance Premium $ 880. $ 6,924.
FORMS AND ENDORSEMENTS (other than applicable Forms and Endorsements shown elsewhere in the policy)
Forms and Endorsements applying to the Coverage Part and made part of this policy at time of issue:
*Information omitted if shown elsewhere in the policy. **Inclusion of date optional.
These declarations are part of the policy declarations containing the name of the insured and the policy period.
ML 15 07 (09 01)
MINUTES
#2612
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2006, 5:00 P.M.
Mayor Blackie Holmes opened the meeting. Present were Mayor Pro Tempore Harry Shawver and
Councilmembers Syd Carter, Kelly Walker and Jerry Grable. Also in attendance were City Manager
Bob Livingston, City Attorney Rob Dillard and City Secretary Nina Wilson.
AWARDS AND RECOGNITION
RECOGNITION: Mayor Holmes recognized Diane Galloway as the 2006 Citizen of the Year.
DEPARTMENT PIN: City Manager Bob Livingston presented his Administrative Assistant Kate Smith
with a two-year department pin, thanking her for her service to the city.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION: DART Representative Ray Noah presented City Manager Bob Livingston
th
an Honorary Proclamation commemorating the 10 Anniversary of the DART Rail System. He also
presented a DART flag to the city with 12 stars representing cities who joined together to open the first
sections of the DART Rail Starter System ten years ago.
Councilmember Walker moved approval of the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Carter seconded and
the vote was unanimous to approve the following:
CONSENT AGENDA
CONSIDER ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION DENYING ATMOS GAS 2005 GRIP RATE
REQUEST: The City of University Park is a member of a coalition of cities knows as Atmos Cities’
Steering Committee. The coalition’s purpose is to review requests by Atmos Energy Corporation,
formerly TXU Gas, for natural gas rate changes, which drive natural gas charges. Each year, Atmos is
permitted by state law to file a request for an increase, which allows the company to add infrastructure
investments into its rate base. After considerable study of the request, the city submitted to council an
ordinance denying a rate increase and a resolution supporting the reduction of existing natural gas
distribution rates currently charged. The proposed rates would increase the average residential bill
5.36% per month (approximately $4.02) and commercial bills 5.25% ($17.16) per month.
ORDINANCE NO. 06/14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, DENYING THE REQUEST OF
ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION, FOR AN ANNUAL GAS RELIABILITY
INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM (GRIP) RATE INCREASE IN THIS MUNICIPALITY, AS A PART
OF THE COMPANY’S STATEWIDE GAS UTILITY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM; APPROVING
COOPERATION WITH OTHER CITIES WITHIN THE ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX
DIVISION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AS PART OF THE ATMOS CITIES STEERING
COMMITTEE (ACSC); AUTHORIZING ACSC TO HIRE LEGAL AND CONSULTING SERVICES
AND TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE COMPANY AND DIRECT ANY NECESSARY LITIGATION;
AUTHORIZING INTERVENTION AS PART OF ACSC IN ANY APPEAL OF THE CITY’S
ACTION TO THE RAILROAD COMMISSION; PROVIDING A REQUIREMENT FOR A PROMPT
REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY; FINDING THAT THE MEETING AT
WHICH THIS ORDINANCE IS PASSED IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW;
AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE OF THIS ORDINANCE TO ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX
DIVISION.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, DENYING ATMOS ENERGY
CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION’S STATEMENT OF INTENT TO INCREASE THE GAS UTILITY
RATES IN THIS MUNICIPALITY; SUPPORTING THE REDUCTION OF EXISTING NATURAL
GAS DISTRIBUTION RATES CURRENTLY CHARGED BY ATMOS MID-TEX WITHIN THE
CITY; ORDERING ATMOS MID-TEX TO REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR ITS REASONABLE
COSTS INCURRED IN 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 FINDING THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THIS RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED
IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AS REQUIRED BY LAW.
CONSIDER RESOLUTION REGARDING “IN-KIND COMPENSATION” FROM CHARTER
CABLE: State legislation known as SB5 which was approved last year provides for a 5% franchise fee
to be paid by cable TV providers to cities who formerly received a local franchise fee. University Park’s
expired franchise required this same fee, which is equivalent to 5% of gross revenues earned within the
city. A secondary provision of SB5 allows cities to collect an additional 1% fee as replacement for any
“in-kind services”. University Park did not require any in-kind services of Charter Cable while the
franchise agreement was in effect. Given this background, Charter has requested that the city approve a
resolution stating that the additional 1% fee is not required.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
ELECTING TO RECEIVE THE PER SUBSCRIBER FEES PAID TO THE CITY UNDER THE
EXPIRED CABLE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH MARCUS CABLE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C.
D/B/A CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS IN LIEU OF IN-KIND COMPENSATION AND GRANTS.
CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING RAYMOND D. NOAH AS REPRESENTATIVE TO
DART BOARD OF DIRECTORS: A resolution in 1994 established a method of and appointment to a
shared position on the DART Board of Directors. The resolution presented today would affirm an
agreement with the cities of Addison, Richardson and The Town of Highland Park regarding that
selection process. As the City of Richardson has submitted the name of Raymond D. Noah as the
individual to serve in this position, the attached resolution concurs and approves that appointment.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AFFIRMING AN AGREEMENT
WITH THE CITIES OF ADDISON, RICHARDSON AND HIGHLAND PARK REGARDING THE
SELECTION PROCESS FOR A SHARED MEMBER TO THE DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT
(DART) BOARD OF DIRECTORS; AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO APPROVE A
CANDIDATE FOR BOARD MEMBER.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF TELE-WORKS KNOWLEDGEBASE SOFTWARE FOR 311 SYSTEM:
To implement a comprehensive 311 Information System requires the installation of a knowledgebase
software system to house the frequently asked questions that come from the caller but do not require the
city to perform any work. Tele-Works proposed a system upgrade for our CUPID system. The enhanced
product will provide the database of frequently asked questions with full online search capability
accessible by phone through the city Web site or internally by a 311 call taker. The database of
responses may be easily updated as new issues arise or the city responses change. The purchase of the
Tele-Works equipment and software totals $23,800.
CONSIDER PURCHASE OF GLOBAL ELECTRIC MOTORCAR FOR PARKING
ENFORCEMENT: The police department has approved two part-time parking enforcement officers to
enforce parking in and around Snider Plaza. The Global Electric Motorcar will be used as a second
parking enforcement vehicle. The state contract purchase of this car will be in the amount of $11,119
from Randall Noe Chrysler Dodge Jeep.
CONSIDER RENEWAL OF LIABILITY, PROPERTY, AUTO & WORKER’S COMPENSTION
INSURANCE: The city’s insurance coverage for liability, property, auto and worker’s compensation
expires on July 1, 2006. The renewal proposal from TML-IRP is $287,868, which is less than 1%
higher than last year’s premiums of $286,274.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES: For June 6, 2006.
MAIN AGENDA
PRESENTATION BY CHARTER CABLE TV IN RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY SURVEY: Charter
Communications is the sole cable TV provider in University Park and Highland Park. 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 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, however, 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. The presentation provided Charter an opportunity to respond to the survey in a
public forum and provide an update on the improvements that have been and are continuing to be made.
Kevin Allen, Governmental Relations Manager for Charter, made the presentation. Mayor Holmes told
Mr. Allen that the city and council appreciated Charter’s efforts in the improvements they were making
and hoped that those improvements would indeed continue.
PUBLIC HEARING FOR REQUEST OF HIGHLAND PARK INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE JOINT USE AGREEMENT AND FOR POTENTIAL
IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR UPGRADES TO THE TRACK AND EXISTING RESTROOM
BUILDING AT GERMANY PARK: Mayor Holmes opened the public hearing and announced that a
letter had been received from Cathy Bryce, Highland Park Independent School Superintendent, asking
that this item be withdrawn from the agenda. Mayor Holmes then closed the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AMENDING COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE,
SECTION 28-105(2) (a) TO PROVIDE FENCE REQUIREMENTS IN SIDE YARDS IN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS: Mayor Holmes opened the public hearing. A fence or wall in the side
yard of residential districts must meet certain requirements. Over the past year, many builders have
requested variances from the Board of Adjustment for fence height on corner lots due to the slope of the
land and the need for a retaining wall. This ordinance proposes to amend the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance to add the following language: “However, if the existing grade of the lot slopes toward the
street in such a way that a retaining wall is necessary, the maximum height of the retaining wall and
fence, in the side yard behind the front building line, shall not exceed ten feet (10’) when measured from
the adjacent grade on the street side, provided that the fence portion shall not exceed eight feet (8’) in
height”. Mayor Holmes closed the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Shawver moved approval of the
ordinance. Councilmember Walker seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the above
language for the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 06/15
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, AS
HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY AMENDING SECTION 28-105 (2) (a) TO PROVIDE FENCE
REQUIREMENTS IN SIDE YARDS IN RESDENTIAL DISTRICTS; 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.
PUBLIC HEARING TO APPROVE ZONING CHANGE AT 6601 TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD
FROM SINGLE FAMILY CLASSIFICATION TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND
APPROVE SITE PLAN TO ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS: Mayor Holmes opened the public hearing. Larry Boerder, representing property owner
Gerald Ford of 6601 Turtle Creek Boulevard, requested a zoning change from Single Family SF-1 to
Planned Development PD Zoning District classification on a tract of land approximately 6.236 acres and
described as 6601 Turtle Creek Boulevard in order to build a 27,000 square foot single home to replace
the existing two-story home on the subject tract. Mayor Holmes closed the public hearing and moved
approval of the request. Councilmember Carter seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the
zoning change.
CONSIDER ORDINANCE APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONING AT 6601 TURTLE CREEK
BOULEVARD:
ORDINANCE NO. 06/16
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, SO AS TO
GRANT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 32 FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS
LOT 7, BLOCK 7, UNIVERSITY PARK ESTATES ADDITION TO THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, BEING A 6.236 ACRE TRACT COMMONLY KNOWN AS 6601
TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD; APPROVING A DETAILED SITE PLAN; PROVIDING 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.
CONSIDER REQUEST FROM SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY TO PURCHASE POTOMAC
PARK: This land, on the south side of Potomac between Airline and Central Expressway, is classified as
park land by the city. Therefore, approval of the voters will be required prior to consummating any sale.
Mayor Holmes suggested that a public hearing be held before making a decision. Staff will bring this
matter back to the council.
DISCUSS RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ADVISORY COMMITTEES REGARDING INSET
PARKING: Pursuant to a citizen request, Council directed staff to ask the Urban Design & Development
Advisory Committee (UDADAC) and the Public Works Advisory Committee (PWAC) to review the
issue of inset parking along the city’s residential streets. Both committees discussed the matter and came
to different conclusions. UDADAC was concerned about reduction of green space and that the
additional concrete would exacerbate drainage problems. They recommended not allowing any new
inset parking and remove all existing inset parking along the city’s rights-of-way. PWAC had common
concerns regarding aesthetics and drainage, as well as, traffic safety issues along streets where not all of
the spaces are inset. They did, however, feel that inset parking may be appropriate in certain areas, like
the area surrounding Snider Plaza. They recommended that Dennis Wilson of Townscape speak to the
issue in his Snider Plaza presentation. In the meantime, they felt that the current policy of no new inset
parking with the existing to remain as non-conforming use should suffice. Council suggested the items
be brought back to council at a future meeting with the cost of widening the street.
CONSIDER LEASE AGREEMENT WITH METRO PCS FOR INSTALLATION OF CELLULAR
EQUIPMENT AT NORTHWEST HIGHWAY WATER TOWER SITE: Eric Stewart, representing
Metro PCS, approached the city regarding the location of a cellular antenna and associated equipment on
and around the water tower in the 3500 block of Northwest Parkway. Staff expressed concern that the
granting of this lease could cause other companies to seek space at this site, which could quickly
overburden the site. Concerns were also raised regarding the adequacy of the proposed lease payments,
bonding requirements, and security of the water tower as it relates to cell company access. Due mainly
to concern about security issues, Mayor Pro Tem Shawver moved the request be denied. Mayor Holmes
seconded, and the vote carried to deny the request with Councilmember Walker recusing herself due to a
business connection with Metro PCS.
DISCUSS LEGACY/HILLCREST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REQUEST AND PROVIDE
DIRECTIONS REGARDING PROCESS: This item is included on the agenda at the request of Council
to allow for further discussion and direction. The Planning and Zoning Commission had held a public
hearing at a special called meeting on March 6, 2006 and considered a concept plan for a total of
290,000 square feet plus 4-8 town homes. The commission then requested the applicant address the
issues and concerns, which were raised by residents, and resubmit the item for further consideration at
the April 17, 2006 meeting. The concept plan considered at the April meeting was reduced to 260,000
square feet plus 4-8 town homes. The commission then voted unanimously to recommend denial of the
zoning request. Subsequently, the applicant informed city staff of their intention to move forward with
the request to the City Council. Mayor Holmes moved that the item be taken off the agenda and that
council send the item back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to be considered at their meeting on
July 17, 2006 and to hold a public hearing on the matter on September 19, 2006. Councilmember Carter
seconded, and the vote was unanimous to return the matter to the commission and hold a public hearing.
DISCUSS REQUEST FROM REYNOLDS OUTDOOR TO LOCATE INFORMATION KIOSKS IN
SNIDER PLAZA: Reynolds Outdoor provides tailor-made information kiosks located in a right of way.
The company estimates that 14 to 15 information kiosks will provide revenue of about $30,000 per year
for the city. At the option of the city, Reynolds Outdoor may prepay a 20-year license agreement at a
discounted rate of $500,000. Council referred this item for the review and recommendation of
UDADAC at their July 11, 2006 meeting.
CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS OF STATUTORY BOARDS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES FOR
2006-2008: There were fifty-eight applicants, and 150 citizens were placed on boards and committees.
Councilmember Walker moved approval of the new boards and committees. Councilmember Carter
seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the appointments.
ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR
Mr. Matt Dixon expressed his appreciation to the city and staff for the sidewalk in the 6800 block of
Dickens.
There being no further business, Mayor Holmes moved that the meeting be adjourned.
th
PASSED AND APPROVED this 6 of July 2006.
James H. Holmes III, Mayor
ATTEST:
____
Nina Wilson, City Secretary
MINUTES
#2613
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 2006, 5:00 P.M.
Mayor Blackie Holmes opened the meeting. Present were Mayor Pro Tempore Harry Shawver and
Councilmembers Syd Carter, Kelly Walker and Jerry Grable. Also in attendance were City Manager
Bob Livingston, City Attorney Rob Dillard and City Secretary Nina Wilson.
MAIN AGENDA
FINAL REPORT FOR 138 kV TRANSMISSION LINE:
In the summer of 2005, TXU Electric Delivery
representatives informed the city of plans to employ a contractor to locate overhead utility services and
underground gas, water and sewer lines in the alley between Stanford and Amherst. In addition to the survey
work, the company told city representatives that a second contractor would be performing soil tests at various
locations in the alley. According to the utility, both contractor efforts were needed in order to initiate design
related to the reconstruction of the electric transmission line located there. In notifying the city of the need to
upgrade the line, TXU Electric Delivery noted it was also the company’s intention to install shielding to
protect against lightning strikes to further improve the line’s reliability. Therefore, the preliminary design for
the rebuild included taller, metal poles. In response to concerns expressed by residents and the city, the city
appointed a citizen steering committee to work with TXU in developing rebuild alternatives for the
transmission line. Additionally, the city initiated a study with Sega, Inc. to explore the feasibility of placing
the transmission line underground and placing all overhead utilities, i.e. telephone, cable, and electric
distribution, underground. Sega was also directed to explore above-ground alternatives, to include replacing
Representatives from Sega spoke for an hour presenting
the existing wood pole with similar wood poles.
the findings of their report and answering questions. After that presentation, Robbie Corder, Assistant to
the Public Works Director, spoke for 40 minutes discussing the feasibility study and answering
questions. Dr. Nick Hogan, speaking for the steering committee, expressed appreciation for the city’s
responsibility to the citizens and Sega and urged the council to let citizens know about the cost of the
project. Mayor Holmes asked TXU Representative Randy Newsom to find out what TXU would pay if
the option to underground is requested. It is the city’s intention to ask the steering committee to host a
community forum to garner citizen input regarding the available options based upon the study results
from Sega. Subsequently, the steering committee will be asked to develop a recommendation for city
council consideration. The date for the upcoming community forum will be forthcoming.
There being no further business, Mayor Holmes moved that the meeting be adjourned.
th
PASSED AND APPROVED this 6 of July 2006.
James H. Holmes III, Mayor
ATTEST:
____
Nina Wilson, City Secretary
AGENDA MEMO
(7/06/06 AGENDA)
DATE:
June 29, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM:
Robbie Corder, Assistant to the Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Water Quality Consumer Confidence Report Public Comments
ITEM:
Each year, municipal water providers are required to mail Consumer Confidence Reports
(CCR) to every residence within the community detailing contaminant levels in the potable
water system. The City meets and/or exceeds all regulatory standards for contaminant
levels revealed through water testing samples in 2005.
State regulations also require the water provider to offer residents an opportunity to ask
questions in open forum regarding the CCR. Staff has placed the opportunity for public
th
comments or questions regarding the CCR on the City Council agenda for July 6 and July
th
18.
RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
2005 Consumer Confidence Report
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\CCR Agenda Memo.doc 9:27 AM 06/29/06
NUAl
)A.TER Q!!ALITY>
REpORT
Water testing performed m 2005
Proudly P>-esentdil3y:
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK
Este "porte incluye Ia infonnation importante sobre su agua de beber. Para tramducir en Espafio~ llame al te/efono (214) 987-5306.
Important Health Information
Some people
may be more
vulnerable to
contaminants in
drinking water
than the general
population.
Immunocom-
promised persons
such as persons
with cancer
undergoing
chemotherapy,
persons who
have undergone organ transplants, people with
HN/AIDS or other immune system disorders,
some elderly, and infants may be particularly at
risk from infections. These people should seek
advice about drinking water from their health
care providers. The U.S. EPNCDC (Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention) guidelines
on appropriate means to lessen the risk of
infection by Cryptosporidium and other microbial
contaminants are available from the Safe
Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791.
Where Does My Water Come From?
Our drinking water is obtained from surface
water sources. It comes from the Elm
Fork Trinity River. The Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has completed a
Source Water Susceptibility
Assessment for all drinking
water systems that own
th . ,s). , 'sre
. ,".-~. m-,
with your drinking wa.ter
source based on human activities
and natural conditions. The system(s) from which we ,
purchase our water received the assessment report.
For more information on source water assessments
and protection efforts at our system contact Dall~
County Park Cities Municipal Utility District at
(214) 652-8639.
--..- ..,..-- - ----......
.....--...
--
: Continuing Our Commitment
'I Once again we proudly present our annual water
quality report. This edition covers all testing
completed from January through December 2005.
We are pleased to tell you that our compliance with
all state and federal drinking water laws remains
i exemplary. As in the past, we are committed to
I', delivering the best quality drinking water. To that
end, we remain vigilant in meeting the challenges of
source water protection,
water conservation, and
community education
while continuing to .
serve the needs of all of
our water users.
For more information
about this report, or for
any questions relating
to your drinking
water, please call Bud
Smallwood, Director of
Public Works, at (214)
987-5400.
Worki ng Hard for You
I Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA),
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
I (U.S. EPA) is responsible for setting national limits
for hundreds of substances in drinking water and
also specifies various treatments that water systems
must use to remove these substances. Each system
. continually monitors for these substances and
reports their findings to the U.S. EPA. The U.S.
EPA uses these data to ensure that consumers are
receiving clean water.
This publication conforms to the regulation under
SDWA requiring water utilities to provide detailed
water quality information to each of their customers
annually. We are committed to providing you with
this information about your water supply because
customers who are well informed are our best allies
I in supporting improvements necessary to maintain
I the highest drinking water standards.
-
... -.......--.... ~",-
......,. ------- --..... ~
Substances That Might Be in Drinking Water
· To ensure that tap water is safe to drink, the U.S. EPA prescribes regulations limiting the amount of certain
contaminants in water provided by public water systems. U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations
I establish limits for contaminants in bottled water, which must provide the same protection for public health.
I Drinking water, including bottled water, may reasonably be expected to contain at least small amounts of some
contaminants. The presence of these contaminants does not necessarily indicate that the water poses a health risk.
The sources of drinking water (both tap water and bottled water) include rivers, lakes,
I streams, ponds, reservoirs, springs, and wells. As water travels over the surface of the
I land or through the ground, it can acquire naturally occurring minerals, in some cases,
I radioactive material; and substances resulting from the presence of animals or from
~ ~,Yity.:.. S~~tances_~~!~y be p_resent in ~ce water include: _
Microbial Cont..minants, such as viruses and bacteria, which may come from sewage
treatment plants, septic systems, agricultural livestock operations, or wildlife;
Inorganic COnmmi....nts, such as salts and metals, which can be naturally occurring or
may result from urban stormwater runoff, industrial or domestic wastewater discharges,
oil and gas production, mining, or farming;
Pesticides and Herbicides, which may come from a variety of sources such as
agriculture, urban stormwater runoff, and residential uses;
Organic Chemical COntamin."ts, including synthetic and volatile organic chemicals, which are by-products of
industrial processes and petroleum production, and which may also come from gas stations, urban stormwater runoff,
and septic systems;
RadioacUft COnt.aminants, which can be naturally occurring or may be the result of oil and gas production and
mining activities.
Contaminants may be found in drinking water that may cause taste, color, or odor problems. These types of
problems are not necessarily causes for health concerns. For more information on taste, odor, or color of drinking
water, please contact our business office. For more information about contaminants and potential health effects, call
the U.S. EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791.
Lead in Drinking Water . J-
T ead is a naturally occurring element in our environment. Consequently, our water supply is ex cted to contain
Lsmall, undetectable amounts of lead. However, most of the lead in household water usually co~m_th
plumbing in your own home, not from the local water supply. The U.S. EPA estimates that more than 40 million
U.S. residents use water that can contain lead in excess of the EPA's Action Level of 15 ppb. I
Lead in drinking water is a concern because young children, infants and fetuses appear to be particularly vulnerable,
lead poisoning. A dose that would have little effect on an adult can have a big effect on a small body. On average, itis
estimated that lead in drinking water contributes between 10% and 20% of the total lead exposure in young childret.
All kinds of water, however, may have high levels of lead. We maintain our drinking water supply at an optimum j
pH and mineral content level to help prevent corrosion in your home's pipes. To reduce lead levels in your . :
water you should flush your cold-water pipes by running the water until it becomes as cold as it' t (anm '
from five seconds to two minutes or longer) and use only water from the cold-water tap for dr' . -
especially for making baby formula. Hot water is likely to contain higher levels of lead.
For more information, please call the Safe Drinking Water Hotline at (800) 426-4791.
Information on the Internet
The u.s. EPA Office of Water (www.epa.gov/
warrhome) and the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (www.cdc.gov) Web sites provide a
substantial amount of information on many issues
relating to water resources, water conservation and
public health. Also, the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission has a Web site (www.tnrcc.
com) that provides complete and current information
on water issues in Texas.
17'"Community Participation
Vou are invited to participate in our public
1. forum and voice your concerns about your
drinking water. Please attend one of the city
council meetings in July to participate in the public
forum. The first city council meeting is scheduled
for Thursday July 6, and the second city council
meeting is scheduled for Tuesday July 18. All city
council meetings begin at 5:00 p.m. and are in the
Council Chambers at City Hall, 3800 University
~oulevard, University Park, 1X
!t .,
Is It Safe to Drink Water From a Garden Hose?
No. Substances used in vinyl garden hoses to keep them flexible can get into
the water as it passes through the hose. These chemicals are not good for
you nor are they good for your pets. Allow the water to run for a short time in
order to flush the hose before drinking or filling your pets' drinking containers.
There are hoses made with "food-gcade" plastic that will not contaminate the
water. Check your local hardware store for this type of hose.
What Makes Water Hard?
If substantial amounts of either calcium or magnesium, both nontoxic minerals, are present in drinking water,
the water is said to be hard. Hard water does not dissolve soap readily, so making lather for washing and
cleaning is difficult. Conversely, water containing little calcium or magnesium is called soft water.
Should I Put a Brick In My Toilet Tank to Save Water?
~ Toilet flushing uses a lot of water: about 40% of a household's total water usage. Putting something in the
toilet tank that takes up space, like a toilet dam or a water filled jug, is a good idea. But putting a brick in
the tank is not a good idea. Bricks tend to crumble and might damage your toilet.
How Long Can I Store Drinking Water?
The disinfectant in drinking water will eventually dissipate even in a closed container. If that container
housed bacteria prior to filling up with the tap water the bacteria may continue to grow once the
disinfectant has dissipated. Some experts believe that water could be stored up to six months before needing to
be replaced. Refrigeration will help slow the bacterial growth.
-
aDJ
.-.,_.-A
~
~
A
Water Conservation TIps
W;ater conservation measures
are an important first step in
protecting our water supply. Such
measures not only save the supply of
our source water, but can also save
you money by reducing your water
bill. Here are a few suggestions:
INSIDE YOUR HOME:
· Fix leaking faucets, pipes, toilets, etc.
· Replace old fixtures; install water-
saving devices in faucets, toilets
and appliances.
· Wash only fuUloads of laundry.
· Do not use the toilet for trash
disposal.
· Take shoner showers.
· Do not let the water run while
shaving or brushing teeth.
· Soak dishes befc;>re washing.
· Run the dishwasher only when full.
OUTDOORS:
· Water the lawn and garden in the
early morning or evening.
· Use mulch around plants and shrubs.
· Repair leaks in faucets and hoses.
· Use water-saving nozzles.
· Use water from a bucket to wash
your car, and save the hose for
rinsing.
Information on other ways that
you can help conserve water can be
found at www.epa.gov/safewater/
publicoutreach/index.html.
Table Definitions
AL (Action Levd): The
I concentration of a contaminant
I which, if exceeded, triggers treatment
I or other requirements which a water
system must fullow.
MCL (Maximum Contaminant
Levd): The highest level of a
contaminant that is allowed in
drinking water. MCLs are set as close
to the MCLGs as feasible using the
best available treatment technology.
MCLG (Muimum Conuminlllnt
I Levd GoaI); The level of a
I contaminant in drinking water bdow
which there is no known or expected
I risk to health. MCLGs allow for a
· margin of safety.
I MRDL (Muimum Residual
I Disinfectant Levd); The highest levd
I of a disinfectant allowed in drinking
water. There is convincing evidence
I that addition of a disinfectant is
i necessary for control of microbial
contaminants.
MRDLG (Maximum Residual
Disinfectant Levd Goal); The level
of a drinking water disinfectant
below which there is no known or
expected risk to health. MRDLGs
do not reflect the benefits of the use
of disinfectants to control microbial
I contamination.
NA: Not applicable
pCi/L (picocuries per liter): A
measure of radioactivity.
ppb (parts per billion): One part
substance per billion pans water (or
micrograms per liter).
ppm (parts per million); One part
substance per million parts water (or
milligrams per liter). 1:1
---I
I
Sampling Results
During the past year we have taken hundreds of water samples in order to determine the presence of any radioactive, biological,
inorganic, volatile organic or synthetic organic contaminants. The table that follows lists all of the federally regulated or monitored
constituents that have been found in your drinking water. The U.S. EPA requires systems to test up to 97 constituents.
The state requires us to monitor for certain substances less than once per year because the concentrations of these substances do not change
frequently. In these cases, the most recent sample data are included, along with the year in which the sample was taken.
SUBSTANCE (UNITS)
Atrazine (ppb)
Barium (ppm)
Chloramines (ppm)
Auoride (ppm)
Gross Beta Emitters
(pCi/L)
HAAs [Haloacetic
Acids] (ppb)
Nitrate (ppm)
Simazine (ppb)
TTHMs [Total
Trihalomethanes] (ppb)
YEAR
SAMPLED
2005
2002
2005
2005
2003
2005
2005
2005
2005
MCL
(MRDL)
3
2
(4)
4
50
60
10
4
80
MCLG
(MROLG)
3
2
(4)
4
o
NA
10
4
NA
AMOUNT RANGE
DETECTED LOW.HIGH VIOLATION TYPICAL SOURCE
0.47
0.016
2.98
0.3
2.7
16.5
0.56
0.5
27.4
0.47-0.47
0.016-
0.016
0.3-3.7
0.3-0.3
2.7-2.7
11.5-23.7
0.56-0.56
0.5-0.5
26-29.2
No
No
Runoff from herbicide used on row crops
Discharge of drilling wastes; Discharge from
metal refineries; Erosion of natural deposits
Disinfectant used to control microbes
No
No
Erosion of natural deposits; Water additive
which promotes strong teeth; Discharge
from fertilizer and aluminum factories
No
Decay of natural and manmade deposits
No
By-product of drinking water disinfection
No
Runoff from fertilizer use; Leaching from
septic tanks, sewage; Erosion of natural
deposits
Herbicide runoff
By-product of drinking water disinfection
No
No
------- --- - - .. .. - -,... - ..----_.... - - - - -
Tap water samples were collected for lead and copper analyses from 30 homes throughout the service area
Copper (ppm)
YEAR ACTION
SUBSTANCE (UNITS) SAMPLED LEVEL MCLG
1.3
Lead (ppb)
2004
2004
1.3
15
AMOUNT
DETECTED
(90TH%TILE)
0.28
o
1.8
HOMES
ABOVE
ACTION LEVEL VIOLATION
o
o
No
No
TYPICAL SOURCE
Corrosion of household plumbing systems;
Erosion of natural deposits; Leaching from
wood preservatives
Corrosion of household plumbing systems;
Erosion of natural deposits
TYPICAL SOURCE
Bromodichloromethane (ppb) 2005 11 11-11 By-product of drinking water disinfection
Bromoform (ppb) 2005 0.8 0.8-0.8 By-product of drinking water disinfection
Chloroform (ppb) 2005 14 14-14 By-product of drinking water disinfection
Dibromochloromethane (ppb) 2005 6.3 6.3-6.3 By-product of drinking water disinfection
AGENDA MEMO
(07-06-06 AGENDA)
DATE:
June 29, 2006
TO:
Bob Livingston
City Manager
FROM:
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Discussion of street closure along NW Parkway.
Background.
Staff met this week with residents of the 32-3300 block of Northwest
Parkway regarding the proposed screening wall. We finally have AT&T approval of the wall
alignment, and the construction drawing for the wall and relocated street can be finished.
The plans call for closure of NW Parkway along the north side of Coffee Park and at the
east side of Hillcrest (residents will effectively live on a cul-de-sac, accessible from Airline).
To accommodate utility and street construction, staff would propose the closure of the street
immediately with barricades. The City of Dallas is also desirous of the closure, so the traffic
signal (along NW Parkway can be eliminated and the “time” used for the NW Highway
signal.
We are currently soliciting bids for utility (water line) work, prior to construction on the wall
and street improvements. Staff will bring the bids to Council in July for the utility work.
Recommendation.
Staff recommends immediate closure of NW Parkway at Turtle Creek
Blvd, at Hillcrest west, and at Hillcrest east.
AGENDA MEMO
(07/06/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: June 26, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Gary W. Adams, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Red Light Cameras
Background/Analysis
Red light cameras are now being used in several area cities in order to reduce the number of
accidents caused by violations, as well as the number of violations. In a recent Dallas
Morning News article, it was reported that the Texas Department of Highways and
Transportation may be considering such equipment for installation on State highways. The
program has proven to be a success in several Dallas area cities. Not only are accidents being
reduced, but violations are dropping dramatically in cities at intersections where the cameras
have been installed.
University Park has several red light intersections where the addition of cameras can reduce
the incidence of accidents and violations. While some of the intersections have not had high
accident counts, it is clear that the cameras would make intersections, such as Hillcrest and
Daniel and Lovers and Dickens safer for pedestrian traffic.
While there has been a push in the past several legislative sessions to enact legislation for red
light cameras, the issue has continually failed to pass. However, constituents of University
Park have spoken, through the community wide survey, that traffic safety, and specifically
enforcement, are key concerns. The addition of red light cameras will supplement what our
officers already accomplish through traffic enforcement, and continue to monitor traffic when
officers are not at our most heavy traveled intersections.
Statistically, there ore more than 3 million intersection crashes across the county resulting in
9,612 fatalities each year. Intersection crashes account for more than 50% of all crashes and
225 of all injury crashes.
The City of University Park can join the cities of Plano, Richardson, Garland and Frisco in
making our streets safer by installing red light cameras. Such a move will increase traffic
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO-RED LIGHT CAMERAS.doc
9:55 AM 06/27/06
safety in our community by decreasing intersection and injury crashes as the result of red light
running, and develop a program in which costs will not exceed revenue.
Success of such programs has been nation wide. In Oxnard, California there has been a 40%
reduction in red light violations and a 29% decrease in crashes; Fairfax, Virginia has seen a
41% reduction on red light violations; San Francisco a 68% reduction in red light violations
and Los Angeles a 92% reduction in red light violations.
Dallas area cities are reporting the same results, and have had to move cameras from
intersections due to increased reductions in violations and compliance to the traffic
regulations.
The Police Department looked at numerous vendors before making a decision on selecting
Redflex as the company to go with for our project. Redflex has a proven track record, with
experience in the red light camera industry since 1986. Reflex equipment has been digitized
since 1997. Redflex guarantees a program in which costs does not exceed revenue. All
equipment, installation, maintenance, back office operations to handle the digital photography,
web-based reviewing and authorization for the Police Department and a web-based violation
viewing and payment process are included in this package. The costs of operation are taken
out of the monies generated by fees collected from violations, and the City of University Park
will receive a percentage of those fees, depending on the activity generated at each
intersection.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this project and the installation of red light cameras.
Attachments:
?
Presentation by Redflex.
?
Ordinance provided by Rob Dillard, City Attorney
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDA MEMO-RED LIGHT CAMERAS.doc
9:55 AM 06/27/06
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING
THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 10, TO ADD ARTICLE 10.1600A “AUTOMATED TRAFFIC
SIGNAL ENFORCEMENT”; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR THE IMPOSITION OF CIVIL
PENALTIES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1
. That the Code of Ordinances of the City of University Park, Texas, is
hereby amended by amending Chapter 10, to add Article 10.1600A “Automated Traffic Signal
Enforcement”, to read as follows:
ARTICLE 10.1600A AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SIGNAL ENFORCEMENT
“
Sec. 10.1601A Definitions.
In this Article:
(1) Department shall mean the Police Department of the City of University
Park, Texas.
(2) Intersection shall mean the place or area where two or more streets
intersect.
(2) Owner shall mean the owner of a motor vehicle as shown on the motor
vehicle registration records of the Texas Department of Transportation or
the analogous department or agency of another state or country.
(3) Photographic Traffic Signal Enforcement System shall mean a system that:
(a) consists of a camera system installed to work in conjunction with
an electrically operated traffic-control signal; and
(b) is capable of producing at least two recorded images that depict the
license plate attached to the rear of a motor vehicle that is not
operated in compliance with the instructions of the traffic-control
signal.
(4) Recorded Image means an image recorded by a photographic traffic
monitoring system that depicts the rear of a motor vehicle and is
automatically recorded on a photograph or digital image.
(5) System Location means the approach to an intersection toward which a
photographic traffic monitoring system is directed and in operation.
(6) Traffic Control Signal shall mean a traffic control device that displays
alternating red, amber and green lights that directs traffic when to stop at
or proceed through an intersection.
Sec. 10.1602A Imposition of Civil Penalty for Violations.
(a) The City Council finds and determines that a vehicle that proceeds into an
intersection when the traffic control signal for that vehicle's direction of travel is emitting
a steady red signal damages the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City by
endangering motor vehicle operators and pedestrians alike, by decreasing the efficiency
of traffic control and traffic flow efforts, and by increasing the number of serious
accidents to which public safety agencies must respond at the expense of the taxpayers.
(b) Except as provided in (c) and (d) below, the owner of a motor vehicle is liable for
a civil penalty of seventy-five dollars ($75) if the motor vehicle proceeds into an
intersection at a system location when the traffic control signal for that motor vehicle’s
direction of travel is emitting a steady red signal.
(c) For a third or subsequent violation committed by the owner of the same motor
vehicle during any 12-month period, the amount of the civil penalty shall be one hundred
fifty dollars ($150).
(d) An owner who fails to timely pay the civil penalty shall be subject to a late
payment penalty of twenty-five dollars ($25).
Sec. 10.1603A Enforcement; procedures.
(a) The Department is responsible for the enforcement and administration of this
Article.
(b) In order to impose a civil penalty under this Article, the Department shall mail a
notice of violation to the owner of the motor vehicle liable for the civil penalty not later
th
than the 30 day after the date the violation is alleged to have occurred to:
(1) the owner’s address as shown on the registration records of the Texas
Department of Transportation; or
(2) if the vehicle is registered in another state or country, the owner’s address
as shown on the motor vehicle registration records of the department or
agency of the other state or country analogous to the Texas Department of
Transportation.
(c) A notice of violation issued under this Article shall contain the following:
(1) a description of the violation alleged;
(2) the date, time, and location of the violation;
(3) a copy of a recorded image of the vehicle involved in the violation;
(4) the amount of the civil penalty to be imposed for the violation;
(5) the date by which the civil penalty must be paid;
(6) a statement that the person named in the notice of violation may pay the
civil penalty in lieu of appearing at an administrative adjudication hearing;
(7) information that informs the person named in the notice of violation:
(A) of the right to contest the imposition of the civil penalty in an
administrative adjudication;
(B) of the manner and time in which to contest the imposition of the
civil penalty; and
(C) that failure to pay the civil penalty or to contest liability is an
admission of liability; and
(8) a statement that a recorded image is evidence in a proceeding for the
imposition of a civil penalty;
(9)a statement that failure to pay the civil penalty within the time allowed
shall result in the imposition of a late penalty of $25.00
(10) any other information deemed necessary by the department.
(d) A notice of violation under this Article is presumed to have been received on the
10th day after the date the notice of violation is mailed.
(e) In lieu of issuing a notice of violation, the Department may mail a warning notice
to the owner.
Sec. 10.1604A Administrative adjudication hearing.
(a) A person who receives a notice of violation may contest the imposition of the
civil penalty by request in writing an administrative adjudication of the civil penalty
within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of violation. Upon receipt of a timely
request, the Department shall notify the person of the date and time of the hearing on the
administrative adjudication. The administrative adjudication hearing shall be held before
a hearing officer appointed by the City Manager.
(b) Failure to pay a civil penalty or to contest liability in a timely manner is an
admission of liability in the full amount of the civil penalty assessed in the notice of
violation, and is a waiver of the right to appeal under this Article.
(c) The civil penalty shall not be assessed if after a hearing, the hearing officer enters
a finding of no liability.
(d) In an administrative adjudication hearing, the issues must be proved at the hearing
by a preponderance of the evidence. The reliability of the photographic traffic signal
enforcement system used to produce the recorded image of the violation may be attested
to in an administrative adjudication hearing by affidavit of an officer or employee of the
City or the entity with which the City contracts to install or operate the system and who is
responsible for inspecting and maintaining the system. An affidavit of an officer or
employee of the City that alleges a violation based on an inspection of the pertinent
recorded image is admissible in a proceeding under this Article and is evidence of the
facts contained in the affidavit.
(e) A person who is found liable after an administrative adjudication hearing or who
requests an administrative adjudication hearing and thereafter fails to appear at the time
and place of the hearing is liable for administrative hearing costs in the amount of $25.00
in addition to the amount of the civil penalty assessed for the violation. A person who is
found liable for a civil penalty after an administrative adjudication hearing shall pay the
civil penalty and costs within 10 days of the hearing.
(f) It shall be an affirmative defense to the imposition of civil liability under this
Article, to be proven by a preponderance of the evidence, that:
(1) the traffic-control signal was not in proper position and sufficiently legible
to an ordinarily observant person;
(2) the operator of the motor vehicle was acting in compliance with the lawful
order or direction of a police officer;
(3) the operator of the motor vehicle violated the instructions of the traffic-
control signal so as to yield the right-of-way to an immediately approaching
authorized emergency vehicle;
(4) the motor vehicle was being operated as an authorized emergency vehicle
under Chapter 546 of the Texas Transportation Code and that the operator
was acting in compliance with that Chapter;
(5) the motor vehicle was a stolen vehicle and being operated by a person other
than the owner of the vehicle without the effective consent of the owner;
(6) the license plate depicted in the recorded image of the violation was a stolen
plate and being displayed on a motor vehicle other than the motor vehicle
for which the plate had been issued; or
(7) the presence of ice, snow, unusual amounts of rain or other unusually
hazardous road conditions existed that would make compliance with this
Article more dangerous under the circumstances than non-compliance.
(8) the person who received the notice of violation was not the owner of the
motor-vehicle at the time of the violation.
(g) To demonstrate that at the time of the violation the motor vehicle was a stolen
vehicle or the license plate displayed on the motor vehicle was a stolen plate, the owner
must submit proof acceptable to the hearing officer that the theft of the vehicle or license
plate had been timely reported to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
(h) Notwithstanding anything in this Article to the contrary, a person who fails to pay
the amount of a civil penalty or to contest liability in a timely manner is entitled to an
administrative adjudication hearing on the violation if:
(1) the person files an affidavit with the hearing officer stating the date on
which the person received the notice of violation that was mailed to the
person; and
(2) within the same period required by this Article for a hearing to be timely
requested but measured from the date the mailed notice was received as
stated in the affidavit filed under Subdivision (1), the person requests an
administrative adjudication hearing.
(i) A person who is found liable after an administrative adjudication hearing may
appeal that finding of civil liability to the Municipal Court by filing a notice of appeal
with the clerk of the Municipal Court. The notice of appeal must be filed not later than
the 31st day after the date on which the administrative adjudication hearing officer
entered the finding of civil liability. Unless the person, on or before the filing of the
notice of appeal, posts a bond in the amount of the civil penalty and any late fees, an
appeal does not stay the enforcement of the civil penalty. An appeal shall be determined
by the Municipal Court by trial de novo. The affidavits submitted hereunder shall be
admitted by the municipal judge in the trial de novo, and the issues must be proved by a
preponderance of the evidence. A person found liable by the Municipal Court shall pay
an appellate filing fee of $50.00 in addition to the civil penalty and any other fees due the
City.
Sec. 10.1605A Order.
(a) The hearing officer at any administrative adjudication hearing under this Article
shall issue an order stating:
(1) whether the person charged with the violation is liable for the violation;
and
(2) the amount of any civil penalty, late penalty, and administrative
adjudication cost assessed against the person.
(b) The orders issued under subsection (a) may be filed with the office of the hearing
examiner. The hearing examiner shall keep the orders in a separate index and file. The
orders may be recorded using microfilm, microfiche, or data processing techniques.
Sec. 10.1606A Effect of liability; exclusion of civil remedy.
(a) The imposition of a civil penalty under this Article is not a criminal conviction for
any purpose.
(b) A civil penalty may not be imposed under this Article on the owner of a motor
vehicle if the operator of the vehicle was arrested or was issued a citation and notice to
appear by a peace officer for the same violation of Section 544.007(d) of the Texas
Transportation Code recorded by the photographic traffic signal enforcement system.
(c) An owner who fails to pay the civil penalty or to timely contest liability for the
penalty is considered to admit liability for the full amount of the civil penalty stated in the
notice of violation mailed to the person.
(d) The City Attorney is authorized to file suit to enforce collection of a civil penalty
imposed under this Article.
Sec. 10.1607A Traffic Safety Fund.
The penalties and fees collected from the imposition of civil liability under this
Article shall be deposited in the Traffic Safety Fund account established by the City
Council. Funds from the Traffic Safety Fund may be expended only for the costs of
automated signal enforcement under this Article, public traffic or pedestrian safety
programs, traffic enforcement and intersection improvements.”
SECTION 2
. That all provisions of the ordinances of the City of University Park in
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 3.
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or
section of this ordinance 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 decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity
of the Code of Ordinances as a whole.
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.
th
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 6
day of July 2006.
APPROVED:
_______________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
(rld/6-22-06/67526)
ORDINANCE NO. _______________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING
THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 10 TO ADD ARTICLE 10.1600A “AUTOMATED TRAFFIC
SIGNAL ENFORCEMENT”; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR THE IMPOSITION OF CIVIL
PENALTIES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
th
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 6
day of July 2006.
APPROVED:
_______________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY SECRETARY
Page 8
40571
AGENDA MEMO
(07/06/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: June 26, 2006
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Gary W. Adams, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Consideration of Marking 2-Hour Parking 6901 Snider Plaza
ITEM
The merchants at 6901 Snider Plaza have requested that the City stripe the curbs
along the front and side of their business with the wording (2-Hour Parking). They
feel that this will alleviate some of the parking violations in that area.
ATTACHMENTS
?
Letter from Nikki C. Matthews, Director of Property Management for the
Cirrus Group.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that this request be met and that Public Works mark the
appropriate spaces belonging to the owners of the property located at 6901 Snider
Plaza.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDAMEMO-Marking 2 hour parking
6901 Snider Plaza.doc 3:58 PM 06/26/06
From: Nikki Matthews [mailto:nmatthews@thecirrusgroup.com]
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 1:57 PM
To: city-manager
Subject: Park Cities Medical Plaza
Good afternoon Bob:
I have been contacted by Max Fuqua of the Snider Plaza Merchant Association. We have been
working together to alleviate some of the parking issues there in the plaza. He had requested that
we have the “2-hour Parking” striped on our curbs along Snider Plaza Blvd. We had not had this
done to date, but are not opposed to it, especially if it will help the merchants of Snider Plaza. He
said you would need something in writing from me authorizing such. Therefore, please accept this
email as authorization that you may stripe our spaces in front of 6901 Snider Plaza Blvd., Park
Cities Medical Plaza, as “2 hour Parking”. Exact wording is of no concern to us.
Please let me know if you need anything to accommodate this request. We are hopeful this will
offer some assistance to the merchants of Snider Plaza.
Nikki C. Matthews
Director of Property Management
9301 N. Central Expressway, Suite 300
Dallas, Texas 75231
214.953.1722
Fax 214.237.4145
nmatthews@thecirrusgroup.com
AGENDA MEMO
(07/06/06 AGENDA)
DATE: 6-26-06
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Steve Mace, Community Information Officer
SUBJECT: UP Friends of the Library/October Arbor
BACKGROUND:
For the past few years, the City has allowed the Friends of the Library to insert a one page (front
and back) newsletter in one of its monthly utility bill mail-outs. I recently received a phone call
from Association Past President Carol Ann Luby concerning this year’s insert. In keeping with
tradition, the Association would again like an October insert.
To accomplish this request and to avoid additional postage charges, since The Arbor is now a four-
page, full-color publication, the City will need to reduce its content that month. Recognizing that
the library is an important part of community life for so many people and, considering the fact that
City content demands are usually lighter in October than during many other months of the year, I’m
proposing that City content in the October Arbor be shortened to two pages. This will allow the
Association to use pages 3 and 4 for its content. Carol Ann and I have discussed this arrangement.
Because the Association’s insert has been presented in black and white, she is delighted with this
full-color opportunity. In the weeks ahead, I will work closely with the Association on layout
issues to assure that the October issue is uniform in look.
Staff recommends that we proceed accordingly. The November issue of The Arbor will return to
the usual four pages of City content.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
AGENDA MEMO
(07/06/2006 AGENDA)
DATE:
June 29, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Gerry Bradley, Director of Parks
SUBJECT: City Entrance Marker Program - Design Concepts
BACKGROUND:
During the past few months, staff has been working with GGOArchitects to develop
concept for a secondary “City Entrance Marker” in an effort to create visual
identification of the City’s limits.
The Park Advisory Board has reviewed the marker concepts and has requested staff to
present these concepts to City Council for consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the provided marker concepts, staff is requesting City Council to provide
direction on how to proceed with the project. Once a concept is approved, staff will
work with the architect to verify applicable marker locations citywide as well as cost
estimates.
ATTACHMENTS:
Architect’s Concept Design - Secondary City Entrance Marker Program
?
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
City Entrance Marker Program – Design Proposal 11-13-05
0
~:
m Polished
iil I l' A" I
:::J Aluminum
()
CD
s:
OJ 19 19 19
;;!- ~t? fil
g;
u
0
:0 U U U ' U U
~ N. ~ N N N
I I I I I I
0 \' V \' \' V
CD
(/J E E E E E
:6
:::J R R R R I R
u S S S S S
I 0
v I I I I I I I
0
(/J T T T T T
~ Y Y y \' Y
~
I ~ p 4' 6" p p . p
Cf' P
0 A A A A ,\
(J1
R R R R i R
K K K I K K
Brick
Cast Stone
<f-- ~
<f-- .-
A B C D E
Examples: Secondary City Entrance Markers
AGENDA MEMO
(7/6/2006 AGENDA)
DATE:
June 29, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Gerry Bradley, Director of Parks
SUBJECT: Architectural Services Contract – Coffee Park
BACKGROUND:
In May 2006, the Park Advisory Board hosted five (5) different architectural firms to
present their firm’s background, work experience and park design philosophy. Based
on the presentations, the Park Advisory Board is recommending GGOArchitects
provide architectural services for site upgrades to Coffee Park. Gary Olp with
GGOArchitects is currently under contract with the City to design the Northwest
Highway Wall Project, which will provide screening for the northern boundary of Coffee
Park. The following is a breakdown of costs associated with proposed architectural
services.
Architectural Services:
1. Concept Design $ 600.00
2. Schematic Design $ 3,500.00
3. Design Development $ 5,500.00
4. Construction Documentation $ 15,465.00
5. Bidding and Negotiation/ $ 2,300.00
Construction Administration
6. Storm Water Protection Plan $ 1,500.00
Total Proposal $ 28,865.00
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is requesting City Council approve the design contract with Gary Olp of
GGOArchitects in the amount of $28,865.00 for upgrades to Coffee Park. Funding for
the design portion of the project has been identified within the Parks Department’s
2005/06 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
ATTACHMENTS:
Architect’s Design Proposal – Coffee Park
?
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
Coffee Park – GGOArchitects – Design Proposal 7-6-06
15 June 2006
Proposal
City of University Park
Gerry Bradley
For
Coffee Park
.
Our understanding of the Project scope includes the Design Concepts and
Construction Implementation for the approximate four and one-half (4.5) acre
Coffee Park, located near the southwest intersection of Hillcrest Road and
Northwest Highway.
Based upon the concept Plan sketch prepared by GGOArchitects dated 3/20/06, a
preliminary probable cost of construction suggests a working budget of $295,000 to
$325,000.
.
1.
Basic Services
A. Pre-Design/Product Research
1) GGOArchitects will meet with you to discuss the Project requirements,
review the Project schedule and identify the key components and issues
related to the Project.
2) GGOArchitects will obtain available maps and plats for existing
developments and facilities within and surrounding the site, and we will
review them for their impact on the proposed park development.
3) Based upon the information collected, GGOArchitects will perform a site
analysis of the Project area and prepare an exhibit showing the location
of all site features including, without limitation, vegetation, paving,
natural features, existing utilities, circulation and surrounding
development. We will meet with you to review our findings.
4) GGOArchitects will collect and provide manufacturers' information related
to proposed improvements (including splash pad products and site
furnishings) to the client. Additionally, we will incorporate these
specialty items as part of the Conceptual Design Phase.
B. Conceptual Design
1) Based upon the preliminary Concept sketch prepared by GGOArchitects
dated 3/20/06, we will prepare a refined conceptual plan and two (2)
sketches (perspective and/or elevations) for the proposed park. This
plan view and supplemental sketches will show in greater detail the
proposed spatial arrangement and layout of the programmed elements
and Project character.
2) GGOArchitects will meet with City staff to review these sketches and to
receive their input.
To
.
.
"tect5
fafa\\\\ l' cltJ .
.
718 North Buckner Boulevard
Suite 316
Dallas
Texas
75218
City of University Park
Coffee Park
Page 2
C. Design Development
1) Based on the approved Concept Plan, GGOArchitects will work in coordination with the City to
provide design development documents, which will finalize the Master Plan layout and consist of
drawings, sketch details and other documents to establish and describe the size and character of
the Project as to the programmed design elements.
2) Based on the design development phase, GGOArchitects will prepare a preliminary probable cost of
construction for the park. This cost estimate will be detailed and itemized to show our opinion of
cost for each of the proposed park elements.
D. Construction Drawings- Based on the approved design development documents, GGOArchitects will
prepare construction drawings for the Project for approval by the City. These shall include, but are
not limited to, the following:
1) Cover sheet showing vicinity map for the Project site, signature block, index of drawings and
contact list;
2) Final site plan in accordance with the requirements of the pertinent City Landscape and
Development Ordinances;
3) Existing conditions/demolition plan showing existing site conditions as well as the removal and/or
relocation of any existing elements as required to accommodate the proposed improvements;
4) Layout, dimension control and materials plan;
5) Grading and drainage plans;
6) Site construction details;
7) Erosion control plan;
8) Landscape and automatic irrigation system plan;
9) Site lighting and site electrical plans;
10) Additional plans and/or details necessary to show design intent for all the proposed improvements;
and
11) Specific plans necessary for construction of the programmed design elements.
The preliminary probable cost of construction will be modified and updated to reflect the construction drawings.
GGOArchitects will provide three (3) sets of plans for the City's review and comment at approximate fifty percent
(50%), ninety percent (90%) and one hundred percent (100%) complete milestones and will incorporate the City's
comments into the plans.
Final Deliverables of the construction documents include one (1) set of full size reproducible final drawings and an
electronic file of the construction drawings in AutoCAD format.
E. Technical Specifications- GGOArchitects will prepare technical specifications for the work included
in the construction plans (CSI format) and assemble a complete Project manual. The general and
supplementary conditions of the contract, bond forms, etc. shall be provided by the City.
GGOArchitects will also prepare a bid form for the proposed Project improvements, including, without
limitations, material quantities, unit prices, total base bid and alternate items. One (1) set of
unbound technical specifications shall be provided to the City.
F. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)- GGOArchitects shall prepare a SWPPP in
accordance with current Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines and assist in filing the Notice of Intent (NO I) for coverage
under the TCEQ State permit.
G. Bidding-Based on approved construction documents, GGOArchitects will provide bidding services to
include, but not limited to, the following:
1) Attend pre-bid conference and prepare meeting notes;
2) Prepare addenda items (if necessary);
3) Answer questions during the bidding process;
4) Review bids, as requested by the City; and
5) Make recommendation for awarding the construction contract.
City of University Park
Coffee Park
Page 3
H. Construction Administration-During construction, GGOArchitects will perform, without limitations, the
following construction administration services:
1) Attend pre-construction conference;
2) Review shop drawing, submittals and mock-ups as required;
3) Respond to contractor Requests for Information (RFI);
4) Make periodic site visits, as required, to observe contractor progress (not continuous site
inspection) to determine if the work is proceeding in general accordance with the Contract
Documents (a total of ten (10) site visits are anticipated). Neither GGOArchitects nor any sub
consultant guarantee the performance of any contractor and shall have no responsibility for furnishing
materials or performing any work on the Project;
5) Prepare punch list ofitems to be completed or corrected;
6) Perform final inspection review; and
7) GGOArchitects shall attend progress meetings and record meeting minutes for distribution.
2. Additional Services
A. Topographic Survey
1) Boundary Verification-An on-the-ground boundary verification of the park site will be required in
order to confirm the limits of the park property.
2) Topographic Survey-An on-the-ground topographic survey of the park site (within the limits
described) will be required to be used in our Design Development and Construction Document
phases. This topographic survey will show the elevations at a one-foot contour interval as well as
the locations and spot elevations of pertinent existing features on or adjacent to the site. Such
features include without limitation paving, trees, vegetation masses, drainage structures, visible
utilities, etc. The completed survey of the site will be submitted to the City.
B. Texas Accessibility Standards- GGOArchitects will submit a full-sized set of construction documents
to the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation or an independent contract provider for
Texas Accessibility Standards review and will work with their staff for plan approval and final
project inspection. Based on the plans review, GGOArchitects will revise the construction documents
accordingly.
C. Charges for reimbursable expenses expended by the Architect, the Architect's employees and
consultants in the interest of the project will be billed to the Client at 1 .15 times the actual incurred
cost of the expense and are not inclusive within the stipulated fee structure.
1) Typical Expenses are: Telecommunications, mileage, plotting services, printing, all reproductions,
postage, courier and overnight services, art supplies, photographic film & processing, drafting
mylar, etc..
2) It is anticipated that GGOArchitects will produce all required printing for permit and construction
purposes.
Exclusions- The intent of this scope of services is to include only the services specifically listed herein and no
others. Services specifically excluded from this scope of services include the following:
1) Construction staking;
2) Field survey outside the defined project area;
3) Environmental impact statements or assessments;
4) Platting services;
5) Consulting services by others not included in this proposal;
6) Services beyond those described in Section 1 or Section 2;
7) CLOMR or LOMR reports or submittal to FEMA
8) Hydrologic or hydraulic studies;
9) Corps of Engineer permitting;
10) Wetlands determination/delineation;
11) Renderings beyond those for Conceptual Design or to show design intent;
12) As-built field surveys; and
13) As-built plans.
City of University Park
Coffee Park
Page 4
Information to be Provided by the City
A. All "as-built" plans including all pertinent paving, drainage and utility plans for the park and
surrounding developments (includes proposed or existing).
3. Cost of Services
A. GGOArchitects will perform the Scope of Services delineated above for the following Stipulated Lump Sum
Fees:
B. Professional Services:
Twenty-Eight l1n.Jsard Eight H.Jrdred Sixly-F1Ve & 0011 00 Dollars
$ 28,865.00
C. The fee shall be billed as:
1) Pre-Design/Product Research
2) Schematic Design
3) Design Development
4) Contract Documents
5) Construction Administration
6) Storm Water Pollution Prevention PlanlDocumentation
D. Invoices are due and payable:
1) In Dallas County, Texas.
2) Within 15 business days of date of invoice.
E. Interest charges shall accrue at the per annum rate of 18 % if payment is not received within 45 business
days of the invoice date.
F. The entire scheduled amount for the Construction Documents shall be paid in full before the Architect shall
release the documents to the Client, Appraisers, Lenders or General Contractors.
$600.00
$3,500.00
$5,500.00
$15,465.00
$2,300.00
$1,500.00
4. Additional Services
A. Changes to the Construction Documents, requested after completion and final plot, shall be performed by
the Architect only after receipt of written confirmation of the Architects estimated cost of the changes and
payment in full for said changes is received.
B. Compensation for additional services performed shall be billed on the basis of the following itemized billing
rate schedule:
Principal
Associate
Project Architect
Architect
Intern
$ 2 0 0 . 0 0 Ihr
1 5 0 . 0 0 Ihr
1 2 0 . 0 0 Ihr
6 5 . 0 0 Ihr
4 5 . 0 O/hr
C. Topographic Survey
D. Texas Accessibility Standards Review
$4,000.00
$1,500.00
City of University Park
Coffee Park
Page 5
5. Miscellaneous Provisions
A. Subsequent to the acceptance of this Proposal for Professional Services a formal AlA Contract B 141
Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect will be drafted to consummate the agreement
between the parties.
B. This proposal is predicated on all services being rendered within 18 months of the date of signing, or the
fee will be adjusted, if necessary, to accommodate any increased costs due the AlE.
C. The Client and/or the Architect shall have the right to abandon the Project or any portion therein at any
time. If such event occurs the Architect shall be paid the full amount for services rendered through to the
date of termination, plus all reimbursable costs incurred in connection with the Project.
D. GGOArchitects will secure adequate foundation design for the Project based on current geotechnical
investigation.
E. GGOArchitects will secure a topographic survey that identifies the meets and bounds of the property and all
topographical features in 1 '-0" intervals. The survey will also include a dimensional location and species
identification of all mature trees that may be impacted by the siting of the Project. GGOArchitects will prepare
all required site and grading plans.
F. GGOArchitects is providing professional services based on our expertise in Sustainable Residential
Architecture and shall be so identified where appropriate. The Architect retains the right to identify the
Project, without compromising the Client' interests, for promotional/marketing purposes.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for allowing us to submit
this proposal.
Sincerely,
GGOArchitects
Gary Gene Olp, AlA, NCARB
Principal
Cr 7 q 0 ~gnature)
~.15.~
(date)
AGENDA MEMO
(7/6/2006 AGENDA)
DATE:
June 29, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Gerry Bradley, Director of Parks
SUBJECT: Architectural Services Contract – Barbara Hitzelberger Park
BACKGROUND:
In May 2006, the Park Advisory Board hosted five (5) different architectural firms to
present their firm’s background, work experience and park design philosophy. Based
on the presentations, the Park Advisory Board is recommending Talley Associates
provide architectural services for the design and construction administration of Barbara
Hitzelberger Park (intersection of Lovers Lane and Hillcrest). Talley Associates has
provided similar services to the City for Elena’s Children’s Park. The following is a
breakdown of costs associated with proposed architectural services.
Architectural Services:
1. Concept Design $ 5,000.00
2. Schematic Design $ 14,000.00
3. Design Development $ 17,500.00
4. Construction Documentation $ 26,500.00
5. Bidding and Negotiation/ $ 12,000.00
Construction Administration
Total Proposal $ 75,000.00
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is requesting City Council approve the design contract with Coy Talley of Talley
Associates in the amount of $75,000.00 for Barbara Hitzelberger Park. Funding for the
design portion of the project has been identified within the Parks Department’s 2005/06
Capital Improvements Program Budget.
ATTACHMENTS:
Architect’s Design Proposal – Barbara Hitzelberger Park
?
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
Barbara Hitzelberger Park – Talley Associates – Design Proposal 7-6-06
Planning
Landscape Architecture
Urban Design
1925 San Jacinto Street
Suite 400
Dallas, Texas 75201
T 214-871-7900
F 214-871-7985
www.talleyassociates.com
15 May 2006
Mr. Gerry Bradley
Director of Pa rks
City of University Park
City Hall - 3800 University Blvd.
University Park, Texas 75205
Re: Proposal/Agreement for Landscape Architectural Services
Barbara Hitzelburger Park
T A 6020
Dear Gerry:
Talley Associates, Inc. ("Talley") is pleased to submit to the City of University Park ("Client") this
proposal for landscape architectural services for Barbara Hitzelburger Park ("Project"), located at the
intersection of Hillcrest and Lovers Lane, northwest and northeast, in University Park, Texas ("Site").
Upon acceptance of the terms and conditions provided herein by Client (as evidenced by the execution
of this document by Client in the space indicated below). this document shall become the fully binding
and exclusive agreement between the parties with respect to the Project (this document, whether
accepted or not, shall be referred to herein as this "Agreement"). Based on our understanding of the
Project, Talley proposes to provide the Client with the following schematic design, design development,
construction documentation and construction administration services.
A. BASIC SERVICES
1. Concept Design. Talley Associates shall quickly develop concept ideas, up to three, which
explore design options and possibilities of park features. These features may explore gateway
and arrival; more interior passive pocket parks and possible combinations. Mood images of
great parks of this scale will further provide image character.
These ideas will be sketch-like to be presented to the park director, staff, and key board
personnel.
2. Schematic Design. Based on input and direction as defined in concept design, Talley will
prepare a schematic site design. The schematic design will illustrate and address the
following design considerations:
a. Water features/fountains occurring on one or both sides of the park;
b. Fencing;
c. Hardscape/paving, including sidewalks, however, pedestrian access might be limited;
2
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
I.
J.
Softscape/planting, including the potential preservation of existing trees, botanical
plantings, seasonal color, street trees and other plantings;
Incorporation of the existing DART station into the park design;
Park identity signage;
Site grading concept;
Lighting, including pedestrian and special feature lighting, fixture selection and location
only;
Furnishings, such as benches, trash/ash, pots/planters, etc.; and
Talley will prepare a cost estimate, based upon the schematic design package.
The schematic design drawings will be drawn at a scale sufficient to explain the design intent.
Drawings will include a rendered illustrative site plan, and necessary cross sections and enlarged
plans, as required, to explain the design character and materials.
3. Design Development. Based on the approved schematic design package, Talley will prepare
a design development package including the following:
a. Materials plan, at a design development level, including hardscape/paving, light fixtures
(selection and location only), water features/fountains, park identity signage and Site
furnishings;
b. Grading plan, at a design development level;
c. Landscape planting plan, at a design development level;
d. Enlarged plans as necessary to convey design character;
e. Design development level details of water features/fountains, park identity signage,
paving, site furnishings, planting and lighting, as required; and
f. Preliminary specifications.
The design development drawings will be developed at a scale sufficient to explain design intent.
Drawings will include cross sections and enlarged plans, at an appropriate level of detail, as
required, to explain the design character and materials
4. Construction Documentation. Based on the approved design development package, Talley
will prepare a set of contract documents sufficient to describe the work necessary for
construction (the "Contract Documents"). The following documents will be prepared:
a. Layout and materials plan; including hardscape/paving, light fixtures (selection and
location only, electrical engineering by others) and site furnishings;
b. Enlarged layout and materials plans as required;
c. Grading plan;
d. Enlarged grading plans, as required;
e. Landscape planting plan;
f. Enlarged planting plans as required;
g. Irrigation plan;
h. Details and sections at appropriate scales necessary to convey the sizes, appearances,
finishes, and colors of water features/fountains, park identity signage, paving, site
furnishings, planting, lighting, and irrigation equipment. as required; and
3
I. Complete Technical Specifications (CSI format) describing all elements of the proposed
work.
General and supplementary conditions of the construction contract and the necessary contract
forms will be provided by the Client.
5. Bidding and Negotiation/Construction Administration. Upon the completion of the other
Basic Services provided above, Talley proposes to assist Client in the retention of qualified personnel to
provide the services required to complete the Project, as follows:
a. Preparation of any addenda to the Contract Documents as may be required during the
bidding or negotiating process;
b. Evaluation and assessment of bids or negotiated proposals;
c. Propose and/or evaluate value engineering and substitutions with respect to cost
implications and effect on quality and/or scope of the work;
d. Attend one (1) pre-construction meeting and assist the Client in conducting this meeting;
e. Review shop drawings and contractor submittals as they relate to the overall site
development and general conformance of the design as set forth by the contract
documents;
f. Assist in the review of substitutions, change orders, contractor schedule reports and pay
requests;
g. Make one (1) trip with the selected contractor for the selection and tagging of plant
material;
h. Visit the Site to observe and report on the progress and quality of work and to determine,
in general, if the work is proceeding in accordance with the contract documents. Site
visits shall be limited to 9 visits.
I. Provide a written report of each Site visit. including a summary of any corrective work to
be performed;
J. Assist the contractor in the preparation of a list of items requiring corrective action prior
to the contractor's final pay request and Client's acceptance; and
k. Determine and certify substantial completion.
B. ADDITIONAL SERVICES. The following additional services related to the Project may be
provided if mutually agreed upon by the parties, and if so provided shall become part of the
Services:
1. Environmental graphics package;
2. Surveyor base map preparation of the Site;
3. Any rezoning related services;
4. Services for special Site features or amenity, i.e. fountain MEP;
5. Professional model building services;
6. Additional travel and/or meetings beyond that provided in this Agreement;
7. Civil engineering services; storm water calculations, subsurface drainage and utility
layouts as they relate to any aspect of the Project;
8. Illustrative renderings beyond those described in this Agreement;
4
9. Construction document revisions due to Client requested changes once construction
document level design has commenced;
10. Construction administration services beyond those described in Basic Services;
11. Special investigations involving detailed consideration of operations, maintenance, and
overhead expenses; special feasibility studies, appraisals and valuations; and material
audits or inventories required by Client;
12. Environmental impact studies or assessments or audits and/or Regulatory Agency
Permitting; and
14. Maintenance manuals.
C. EXCLUDED SERVICES. The following services will not be provided by Talley, and shall not be
considered part of the Services:
1. Payment requests by others;
2. Subsurface conditions;
3. Soil issues (including geothechnical and groundwater issues, level of compaction);
4. Lot line and utilities locations;
5. Existing plant inventory; and
6. Subsurface drainage design.
D. CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES.
1. Client agrees to provide Talley with all information, surveys, reports, and professional
recommendations requested by Talley in providing the Services, and acknowledges that
Talley may reasonably rely on the accuracy and completeness of any items so provided.
2. Talley is not responsible for any subsurface soil conditions at the Site.
3. Talley is not responsible for any necessary permits from authorities having jurisdiction
over the Project and Site. Talley will assist permitting process by completing and
submitting appropriate paperwork and forms to Client or governing authorities.
4. Client agrees to comply with the responsibilities provided in this section in a timely
manner so as not to delay the orderly and sequential progress of the Services.
E. ESTIMATED SCHEDULE AND PROJECT BUDGET.
1. Talley shall render its services as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and
care. During the course of the Project, anticipated and unanticipated events may impact
any Project schedule.
2. As of the date of this Agreement, Client's Project budget is understood to be
approximately $750,000. Client agrees to promptly notify Talley if Client's schedule or
budget changes. Client acknowledges that significant changes to the Project schedule,
budget or the scope of the Project may require Additional Services from Talley.
5
F. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENTS. Client agrees to pay Talley as follows:
1. Basic Services:
1. Concept Design
2. Schematic Design
3. Design Development
4. Construction Documentation
5. Bidding and Negotiation/Construction Administration
$ 5,000
$14,000
$17,500
$26,500
$12,000
Total
$75,000
2. Additional Services: On an hourly basis, in accordance with the Hourly Rate Schedule
below:
Hourly Rate Schedule
Principal
Associate Principal
Associate
Professional Staff - Level Three
Professional Staff - Level Two
Professional Staff - Level One
Administrative Support Staff
$150.00
$125.00
$90.00
$80.00
$75.00
$65.00
$45.00
3. Reimbursable Expenses: All reasonable expenses incurred by Talley in providing the
Services, multiplied by 1.10, including, but not limited to, reproduction, postage, document
handling, long distance and facsimile charges, authorized travel, and Client requested
renderings and models.
4. Billing: Talley shall bill Client for Basic and Additional Services, as well as Reimbursable
Expenses, once a month. All payments are due upon receipt of invoice. A service charge of
1.5% per month will be charged on all amounts due more than 30 days after the date of
inVOice.
G. TERMINATION.
1. If the Project is suspended for more than 30 consecutive days, for reasons other than the
fault of Talley, Talley shall be compensated for services performed prior to notice of such
suspension. When the Project is resumed, Talley's compensation shall be equitably
adjusted to provide for expenses incurred in the interruption and resumption of Talley's
services.
2. If the Project is abandoned by the Client for more than 90 consecutive days, Talley may
terminate this Agreement by giving written notice.
6
3. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon not less than seven days' written
notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the terms of
this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination.
H. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Client and Talley agree to mediate claims or disputes arising out of
or relating to this Agreement as a condition precedent to litigation. The mediation shall be
conducted by a mediation service mutually acceptable to both parties. A demand for mediation
shall be made within a reasonable time after a claim or dispute arises and the parties agree to
participate in mediation in good faith. Mediation fees shall be shared equally. In no event shall
any demand for mediation be made after such claim or dispute would be barred by the
applicable law.
I. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS.
1. All documentation prepared by Talley, including, but not limited to, drawings and
specifications, are the property of Talley, and these documents shall not be reused on
other projects without Talley's written permission. Talley retains all rights, including the
copyright in its documents. Client or others cannot use Talley's documents to complete
this Project with others unless Talley is found to have materially breached this Agreement.
2. Client hereby grants Talley the right to include descriptions of the Project in its
promotional and professional materials.
J. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement is governed by the law of the state in which the Site is
located.
K. ENTIRE AGREEMENT AND SEVERABILITY.
1. This Agreement is the entire and integrated agreement between Client and Talley and
supersedes all prior negotiations, statements or agreements, either written or oral. This
Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both Client and Talley.
2. In the event that any term or provision of this Agreement is found to be void, invalid or
unenforceable for any reason, that term or provision shall be deemed to be stricken from
this Agreement, and the balance of this Agreement shall survive and remain enforceable.
L. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party can assign this Agreement without the other party's written
permiSSion.
M. LIMITED CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES.
1. Notwithstanding any other term in this Agreement, Talley shall not control or be
responsible for another's means, methods, techniques, schedules, sequences or
procedures, or for construction safety or any other related programs, or for another's
failure to complete the work in accordance with the plans and specifications applicable to
any portion of the Project.
AGENDA MEMO
(7/06/06 AGENDA)
DATE:
June 29, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM:
Robbie Corder, Assistant to the Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
NCTCOG Regional Stormwater Program
ITEM:
The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) has developed a regional
stormwater program designed to address stormwater quality issues affecting the region.
Participation in the program provides municipalities with resources for staff and developer
training, public education, and other technical resources to meet state and federal
regulations for stormwater runoff.
Participation in the program will cost the City of University Park approximately $2,572.
Resources from the program will be used for the City’s permit application for a general
stormwater permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the letter.
ATTACHMENTS:
Authorization Letter
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\AGENDAMEMO (11) (2).doc 12:49 PM 06/29/06
AUTHORIZATION LETTER
Regional Storm Water Management Program
of North Central Texas:
North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG)
FY2006 Administrative and Implementation Assistance
City of University Park
The NCTCOG and the (hereafter referred to as the "participant") have executed an
Interlocal Agreement to provide a structure through which the participants can pursue initiatives that assist with
the Regional Storm Water Management Program. The Interlocal Agreement established a structure by which a
Regional Storm Water Management Coordinating Council may identify specific activities to be carried out by
NCTCOG, and/or professional agencies, with cost allocations to be determined through Coordinating Council
consensus. The participants to this agreement have reviewed the NCTCOG proposed work plan for FY2006,
which includes NCTCOG assistance to the participants for administrative and implementation support of storm
water related activities and the cost-share arrangement for funding of this effort.
In accordance with Article 2, Paragraph 5, and Article 4 of the Interlocal Agreement, the purpose of this letter is
$2,572.00
to authorize the participant's cost-share of for the FY2006 Work Program.
Execution of this Authorization Letter is considered a formal part of the Interlocal Agreement, and obligates the
participant's cost share as identified above. Billing of the participant by NCTCOG for these services will be
made no more frequently than quarterly, and, if quarterly, will be based on the prorated share of deliverables
received by the participant. NCTCOG will invoice the participant for its costs incurred resulting from the
FY2005 work program, and the participant shall remit the amount of the invoice to NCTCOG within thirty (30)
calendar days of receipt of the invoice. In the event that the participant does not accept the goods or services
or finds an error in the invoice, the participant shall notify the NCTCOG Manager who is responsible for
executing this program as soon as possible within the 30 calendar day period, and shall make payment not
less than ten (10) calendar days after the problem(s) are corrected or the error is resolved to the satisfaction of
all parties. In the event that payment of invoiced goods or services is not received by the NCTCOG within 30
calendar days of receipt of the accepted invoice, NCTCOG is authorized to charge the participant interest in
accordance with the Prompt Payment Act.
Work under this program will be carried out from October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006. It may become
necessary for work to continue beyond September 30, 2006 in order to complete the authorized FY2006 work
program. However, costs for the work program will not exceed the participant’s cost-share as agreed to in this
authorization letter.
The undersigned, duly authorized to make such obligations, represent the agreement of NCTCOG and the
City of University Park
to these provisions.
________________________________________________________________________________
(Signature)Mike Eastland, Executive Director
North Central Texas Council of Governments
________________________________________________________________________________
(Date)(Date)
AGENDA MEMO
(07/06/06 AGENDA)
DATE: July 6, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kate Smith, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: Set date for City Council and Staff retreat
BACKGROUND:
In October 2004, a City Council/Staff retreat was conducted and facilitated by Drs. John and
Carol Nalbandian. At the conclusion of this process, Council and Staff members alike
recommended that we continue to conduct a retreat every two years. The goal is to provide a
longer period for Staff and Council to interact, as well as to update the Strategic Goals and vision
for the City. Staff is currently working to obtain a proposal for the retreat from the Nalbandians,
but would like to set the retreat date as soon as possible. The retreat proposal will then come
before Council in the coming weeks.
RECOMMENDATION:
After reviewing the Nalbandian’s schedule and the City Council meeting schedule, Staff
thth
recommends that the retreat be held on Thursday, October 26 and Friday, October 27.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
June 29, 2006
To: Bob Livingston
Fr: John and Carol Nalbandian
Re: Proposed retreat for October 26/27
Bob,
I would divide the proposed retreat into four parts.
Part I—Introduction
What is it about University Park that we appreciate, value, and want to make sure that we
reinforce in our actions, decisions, and in our own behavior as a governing body? What
is it that we should consider changing?
Part II--Council-staff relations
No matter how effective relationships are between the governing body and the staff, both
may value the opportunity to review what is working well and what could be improved. I
think that we might facilitate this session by doing a survey of council members and
department heads prior to the retreat. We could use the results to structure the discussion.
Part III—Goals setting
You have been working on the goals established in the 2004 retreat. While we should
review progress on those goals, the primary purpose of this part should be to review the
goals themselves. What have we been doing well? What do we need to continue to
emphasize? Where do we need to change course or start down a new path?
Part IV—Council relations
In my experience, councils rarely evaluate their effectiveness. This contrasts to our
everyday working life where we are continually asking ourselves “Are we living up to
our own expectations?” We would utilize this time to ask the governing body members:
?
As a governing body, what are we doing well that we need to continue doing?
?
What is the one thing that we could change that would increase our effectiveness?
Again, these questions provide opportunity to gather information from the council ahead
of time, utilizing our time together to discuss the results.
We should plan on meeting all day Thursday, possibly Thursday evening, and half day on
Friday.
Carol and I would facilitate the retreat. I have included our bios. More about my work is
available at www.goodgovernment.org.
Cost: In 2004 the consulting fee was $5,000 plus reasonable expenses, and we would
propose the same fee for this year.
Bios for Carol and John Nalbandian
Carol Nalbandian, Ph.D.
has been a consultant and trainer for over
twenty-five years. She was a senior consultant with the Menninger
Leadership Center in Topeka, where she worked with executives from
both the private and public sectors. She played an integral role in
developing and delivering the Center's nationally renowned executive
development seminars. She was also the director of management
programs at the University of Kansas School of Business.
Carol has extensive experience in the areas of organizational
development, interpersonal communication, change management,
leadership development, and team building. Carol consults extensively
with local elected officials, as well as with senior staff in the areas of
strategic planning, goal setting, team building, and communication. She
has also provided mediation and coaching to all levels of employees.
She has written articles on stress management, leadership, surviving job
loss, and appreciating diversity.
Dr. Nalbandian has a Ph.D. in communications studies from the University of Kansas, with an emphasis
in organizational psychology. She received a bachelor’s degree in international relations from the
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, and a master of science in counseling from California
State University at Los Angeles.
John Nalbandian, Ph.D.,
chairs the department of public administration at
the University of Kansas where he has taught since 1976. Since 1998 US
News and World Report has rated the University of Kansas' graduate
program in public administration number one in the country for local
government education. In addition to his faculty position, Professor
Nalbandian served on the Lawrence City Commission from 1991-1999,
including two terms as mayor.
Professor Nalbandian grew up in Southern California and completed his
doctoral education at the University of Southern California. He specializes
academically in human resources management and local government and
has written extensively about both topics, including two books,
Professionalism in Local Government
, which was published in 1991, and
Public Personnel Management: Contexts and Strategies
now in its 5th
edition.
In addition to his writing and teaching, he has consulted with city councils and staff, conducted training
sessions, workshops, and made presentations to local government officials throughout the United States,
in the United Kingdom, and Canada.
In recognition of his lifetime contributions to the field of public administration, he was inducted into the
National Academy of Public Administration. Also, he has received national awards for teaching
excellence and research. He is an honorary member of ICMA and received ICMA's Sweeney Award for
Teaching Excellence. For the past five summers, he has been a member of the Senior Executive
Institute's faculty at the University of Virginia.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
MINUTES
May 15,2006
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park met on Monday,
May 15, 2006, 2006 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3800 University
Blvd. University Park, Texas. The following are minutes ofthat meeting.
Commission Members Attending
Staff Members Attending
Robert H. West - Chairman
Randy Biddle
Bill Foose
Ed Freeman
Bea Humann
Harry Persaud - Community Dev. Mgr
Rob Dillard - City Attorney
Jennifer Deaver- Administrative Assistant
Bud Smallwood- Public Works Director
Absent & Excused
Reed Shawver, III
Doug Roach
Mr. West opened the public hearing and then read the specifics of the first case.
PZ 06-008 - Consider a request by Larry Boerder, Architect representing Gerald Ford,
to change the zoning on a tract ofland located at 6601 Turtle Creek Boulevard from
Single Family SF-l zoning district classification to Planned Development District and
approval of a site plan to allow for a single family home with specific development
standards.
Mr. Persaud gave a brief over view ofthe specifics via a power point presentation.
He then stated there were two responses in favor of the rezoning.
Mr. West inquired ifthere was any favoring / opposing parties that wished to speak.
Mr. Larry Boerder, owner / resident of the property situated at 3505 Greenbrier came
forward representing the property owners as the architect for the proposed project. He
stated that the square footage of the existing house is just under 10,000 square feet and
the proposed house is 27,000 square feet with a basement. 11,000 square feet on the first
floor. He explained that his goal was to orient the entrance ofthe house on the Turtle
Creek side in order to maintain the address. He stated that the property is zoned Single
Family District 1 (SF-I) and due to the height limitations of, the need for proper
drainage, as well as placing a balustrade on the roof would require increased roof pitch.
He suggested that this is typically not an issue in other parts of the country and feels that
it should not affect any of the neighboring property owners being that it is the only house
on the block. He then urged the commission to rezone the lot Planned Development
District (PD).
Mr. West inquired ifthere were any other parties that wished to speak, and none came
forward.
Mr. Foose inquired if the front yard faced Hunters Glen.
Mr. Boerder stated yes.
Mr. Dillard inquired if the walk was on the north side.
Mr. Boerder stated yes.
Mr. West closed the public hearing.
Mr. Freeman made a motion to approve the request to change the lot zoned SF-l to PD,
with a second from Mr. Biddle the motion was approved unanimously 5-0.
Mr. West then read the specifics of the second case.
PZ 06-006 Consider an Ordinance of the City of University Park, Texas, amending the
comprehensive zoning ordinance, as heretofore amended, by amending Section 21-100
(4)(b) to regulate features allowed in the required front yards of Single family Districts,
providing for a repeal of all ordinances in conflict and providing for effective date.
Mr. Persaud gave a brief overview of the ordinance as it exists, via a power point
presentation. There was some discussion of items located in front yards of single family
homes, primarily recreational equipment such as swings, soccer goals, and other item,
some of which impede on the city's right of way. Mr. Persaud concluded by stating that
the current ordinance has no structure and needs improved definition.
Mr. Freeman inquired if there were complaints from citizens.
Mr. Persaud stated yes there have been several in the past.
Mr. West then closed the public hearing.
Mr. Foose stated that he would like to examine the issue further before making any
decisions.
Ms. Humann and Mr. Biddle agreed that the change should be seasonal to prevent
eradicating neighborhood outdoor activities.
Mr. Biddle made a motion to table the decision until the June 12th meeting, with a second
from Mr. Foose the motion was approved unanimously 5-0.
Mr. West then read the specifics of the third case.
PZ 06-007: Amend the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of University Park,
as heretofore amended, by amending Section 28-105 (2) (a) to provide fence
requirements in side yards in residential districts; 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.
Mr. Persaud briefed the commission via a power point presentation showing existing
ordinance and proposed changes.
Mr. West inquired if there were any parties who wished to speak for or against the
request, none came forward. He then closed the public hearing.
Mr. Foose inquired if this change would only pertain to comer lots.
Mr. Persaud stated yes.
Mr. Foose stated that most people do not wish to have a ten foot (10') wall; he then
suggested not changing the ordinance, but adding verbiage.
Some discussion ensued regarding the city engineer approving such projects and the
verbiage of the proposed reading.
Mr. Foose made a motion to approve the reading after deleting the word "fence" from the
third line and add "retaining wall and fence", remove the word "when" and add
"however, if', with a second from Ms. Humann the motion was approved unanimously
5-0.
Mr. West then read the specifics of the fourth case.
PZ 06-005: Hold a public hearing and consider an Ordinance of the City of University
Park, Texas, amending the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of University
Park, as heretofore amended, by amending Section 13-100 (1) to require a permit for a
fence; amending Section 28-105 (l)(d) to provide fence requirements in residential
districts; amending Section 11.106 (a) regulating waste collection; 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. A public hearing was held on March 20, 2006
and this item was tabled for further consideration on May 15,2006.
Mr. Persaud briefed the commission via a power point presentation stating that the need
to the current ordinance was due to persons attempting to evade the permitting process.
Mr. West inquired if there were any favoring or opposing parties that wish to speak, and
none came forward.
Mr. Foose inquired if the permitting process required measurements and what were the
Mr. Foose inquired ifthe permitting process required measurements and what were the
requirements for a permit.
Mr. Persaud stated that the permitting process required an initial inspection before a
permit can be issued that includes measurements to be taken of alley right of ways, insets
and to go over requirements of fence height with the fence contractor and I or
homeowners.
Mr. Freeman inquired if the inset has to have a slab poured, Mr. Persaud answered no.
A discussion ensued regarding properties that have automatic gates and no inset resulting
in the garbage cans being placed in the city right of way.
Mr. Foose stated that picking up garbage cans would be a way to prevent cans being left
in the city right of way.
Mr. Smallwood stated that there are numerous property owners that are leaving cans in
the city right of way and picking them up would be far too many for one person to
handle.
Mr. Dillard suggested that if a citation is issued for parking a vehicle in the alley way
then why is it not possible to cite those who have left garbage cans in the alley.
Ms. Humman inquired ifthere could be a red tag left on the cans left in right of ways by
the sanitation department.
Mr. West concluded that the item would be tabled until the next meeting of the Planning
& Zoning Commission.
Ms. Humann made a motion to approve the minutes of the Aprill 7th meeting with
corrections, with a second from Mr. Freeman, the minutes were approved unanimously
5-0
There being no further business before the Commission, Mr. West adjourned the meeting.
Approved by: