Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda 08-03-04 Names Tabs
AGENDA #2419 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 2004 AT 5:00 P.M. 3:30-4:15 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING PARK PETITION AND CITY HALL PROJECT UNDER SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 4:15- 5:00 P.M. WORK SESSION FOR AGENDA REVIEW i. INVOCATION - Mayor Pro Tempore Jim Roberts ii. INTRODUCTION OF STAFF - Finance Director Kent Austin iii. AWARDS & RECOGNITION: PRESENTATION: Plaque to Widow ofLindsay Branton EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AWARDS TO PARK DIVISION STAFF: For willingness to "go the extra mile" following the recent storm concurrent with the removal of trees along the Lovers Lane corridor: Luis Alba, Agustin Chavez, Tony Cruz, Simon Gonzalez, Mario Montoya, Jose Munoz, Jeremy Oates, Robert Ramon, George Romo and Ricardo Sarabia - Smallwood Tab I PROCLAMATION: Constitution Week September 17-23, 2004 - Tab II IV. ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR A. WATER QUALITY: Taking public comment regarding water quality Anyone wishing to address an item not on the Agenda or having questions about items on the Consent Agenda should do so at this time. Questions and comments regarding Main Agenda items may be made when that item is addressed by the City Council. Vo CONSENT AGENDA A. CONSIDER: Approval of minutes for city council meetings on July 21, 2004 - Wilson Tab III VI. MAIN AGENDA A. FINAL REPORT: Chase Bank Building Task Force - Lane Tab IV B. PUBLIC HEARING: For abatement of nuisances at 4305 Greenbrier - McLaurin Tab V F. G. H. PUBLIC HEARING: Specific Use Permit for Canterbury House/St. Alban's Chapel, 3308 Daniel -McLaurin Tab VI CONSIDER: Ordinance to change zoning on property at Canterbury House/St. Alban's Chapel, 3308 Daniel, from Multi-Family District 3 (MF-3) to Multi-Family District (MF-3) subject to Specific Use Permit - McLaurin Tab VI CONSIDER: Resolution of appointment for members of Cable TV Franchise Review Advisory Group - Austin Tab VII REVIEW: City Manager's proposed FY2005 Budget - Austin Tab VIII CONSIDER: Proposal from CarteGraph Systems for asset management software and consulting services - Criswell/Smallwood Tab IX CONSIDER: Amendment to agreement with GSWW Engineering to extend the flow monitoring of sanitary sewer collection system - Smallwood Tab X CONSIDER: Appointment of city council representative as liaison to meet with various school PTA representatives - Livingston Tab ×I As authorized by Section 551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, this meeting may be convened into Closed Executive Session for the purpose of seeking confidential legal advice from the City Attorney on any agenda items listed herein. VII. B. C. D. E. F. H. I. J. K. L. INFORMATION AGENDA Tab XII REPORTS, BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes for June 28 & July 8, 2004 EMPLOYEE BENFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes for May 18, 2004 PARK ADVISORY COMMITTEE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PROPERTY CASUALTY & LIABILITY INSURANCE COMMITTEE PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY COMMITTEE URBAN DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE CAPITAL PROJECTS REVIEW COMMITTEE CAPITAL PROJECTS UPDATE for Week of August 1, 2004 ADVISORY AGENDA MEMO (07-06-04 AG ENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 30, 2004 Bob Livingston City Manager Gene R. Smallwood, P.E. Director of Public Works Employee Recognition Award for Park Division staff. Background. My nomination of the following Park Department staff for the Employee Recognition Award is the result of their willingness to "go the extra mile". Following the recent storm, they were required to work long hours to address the significant damage to trees and other landscape materials in the community. Concurrent with that effort, the crew managed time to assist the Engineering Division with the removal of twenty-four large trees along the Lovers Lane corridor and allow the contractor to move onto the job on schedule. It would have been very easy to delay the tree removal until after the storm cleanup, but the Park staff felt it was important to honor a prior commitment. Theirs efforts in this situation exemplify the characteristics of service excellence with their cooperation, responsiveness, and teamwork. The Park "team" included Jose Munos, Luis Alba, Tony Cruz, Augustin Chavez, Marlo Montoya, Ricardo Sarabia, Robert Ramon, Simon Gonzalez, George Romo, Jeremy Oates. We sincerely appreciate your assistance. 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, September 17, 2004 marks the two hundred seventeenth anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America by the Constitutional Convention; and WHEREAS, ~t is fitting and proper to accord official recognition to this magnificent document and its memorable anniversary, and to the patriotic celebrations which will commemorate the occasion, and WHEREAS, Public Law 915 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation each year by the President of the United States of America designating September 17 through 23, 2003 as Constitution Week, NO IF, THEREFORE, ~, James H. Holmes, III, by virtue of the authority vested in me as Mayor of the City of University Park of University Park, Texas do hereby proclaim the week of September 17 through 23 as CONSTITUTION WEEK And ask our citizens to reaffirm the ideals the Framers of the Constitution had in 1787 by vigilantly protecting the freedom guaranteed to us through this guardian of our liberties, remembering that lost rights may never be regained. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of University Park to be affixed this third day of August of the year of our Lord two thousand and four. MINUTES #2418 CITY COUNCIL MEETING/WORK SESSION CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 2004, 7:30 A.M. Mayor Blackie Holmes opened the meeting of the City Council. Present were Mayor Pro Tempore Jim Roberts, Councilmembers Harry Shawver, Kelly Walker and Syd Carter. Also in attendance were City Attorney Rob Dillard, City Manager Bob Livingston and City Secretary Nina Wilson. Councilmember Shawver moved acceptance of the Consent Agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the following: CONSENT AGENDA CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES: For July 6, 2004. MAIN AGENDA CONSIDER ORDER FOR DEMOLITION OF 4420 AMHERST: At the July 6, 2004 City Council Meeting, the Council approved staff's recommendation of an order requiring the demolition of the residence at 4420 Amherst. The request was due to the existing structural, fire, and safety hazards that currently exist at the property as a result of a fire on December 27, 2003. The Council has given the owner of the property, Mr. Marvin E. Thompson, until July 31, 2004 to have the structure demolished, after which the demolition will take place by a contractor working for the City. Cost of such demolition would then be billed to the owner or a lien placed on the property. As requested by the city attorney, an order was brought before the council for formal approval. Councilmember Carter moved approval of the order. Councilmember Walker seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the demolition of the residence at 4420 Amherst. A copy of the order will be sent to Mr. Thompson, the Texas Department of Insurance and The Hartford Insurance Company. DISCUSS MANAGEMENT LETTER COMMENTS (MLC) FROM FY2003 AUDIT: Ms. Reem Samra, Director at Deloitte & Touche, outside auditors, gave a report noting that the FY2003 MLC is brief and contains no comments regarding significant corrections or changes that must be made. The City Council accepted the FY2003 MLC and the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and referred them to the Finance Advisory Committee for further examination. DISCUSS PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (SF-A) DISTRICTS: An email was received from Carol Allred, 3668 Asbury, regarding the lack of parking in the Single Family Attached (SF-A) zoning district north of the middle school. As a result of no parking zones and density in the area, Ms. Allred is concerned that there is no requirement for builders to provide off-street parking in addition to the requirement of two off-street parking spaces. As an example, she cites the new single family attached residences going up across the street from her that have eliminated a circular drive that provided parking in front of the property. The new residences will not have a circular drive, and she is concerned this will create even more parking problems along the street. She requested the city consider requiring future construction have additional parking in the form of a circular drive if potential parking problems already exist. The issue was referred to the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee (ZOAC) for further discussion. CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDMENT OF SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT FOR ORVIS SPORTING GOODS STORE AT THE PLAZA AT PRESTON CENTER: On July 12, 2004, the Urban Design and Development Advisory Committee (UDADAC) approved an amendment of the special sign district for the Plaza at Preston Center. The amendment allows an additional business identification sign for Orvis Sporting Goods, 8300 Preston Road, Suite 300. The Committee felt the request was justified due to the two-story tenant space, visibility issues and size of the proposed signs on the west elevation of the building. Councilmember Walker moved approval of the enabling ordinance amending Ordinance 90/6, the Special Sign District for the Plaza at Preston Center, allowing for an additional business identification sign for the referenced tenant. Councilmember Shawver seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the amendment. ORDINANCE NO. 04/22 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 90/6, A SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT FOR THE PLAZA AT PRESTON CENTER, BY AUTHORIZING SIGNS FOR ORVIS SPORTING GOODS, 8300 PRESTON ROAD, SUITE 300; PROVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT "A"; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF F1NE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. CONSIDER APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS TO COMMITTEE FOR SITE INVESTIGATION OF CHASE BANK BUILDING: The committee studying the Chase Bank property met on July 1, 2004 to identify areas of study and assign tasks to various members. Committee members were asked to study their assignments and recommend proposals for outside consulting, if needed to accomplish their tasks. A second meeting took place on July 13, and the following requests were made: Property Condition Assessment Report $10,000, Environmental Assessment $4,000, Architectural Layout Services $6,000 for a total of $20,000. There will be another committee meeting July 22 with The Friends of the Library to ascertain their needs and also with the architect for Albert Huddleston. Mayor Holmes moved approval of the request. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the request for funds to complete the evaluation of Chase Bank Building. CONSIDER ACCEPTANCE OF HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT: The City of University Park has been awarded $38,604.00 for the 2004 State Homeland Security Program. In 2003, the city was awarded $99,000.00 to purchase items for mitigating possible terrorist attacks in our community. This year, the amount was lessened based on community population. The city spent $98,907.15 of the 2003 grant money on items that will benefit citizens, city personnel, city council and surrounding communities as requested by the North Central Texas Council of Governments. The new monies will be spent primarily on personal communication equipment for first responders in the Police, Fire, Public Works, and Administrative Departments, which includes the city council. Fire Chief Ledbetter spoke in favor of the grant. Councilmember Shawver moved approval of the grant. Councilmember Carter seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve acceptance of the 2004 State Homeland Security Grant in the amount of $38,604.00. CONSIDER CHANGING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 2004 FROM TWO MEETINGS PER MONTH TO ONE MEETING PER MONTH: During the last several years, the council has changed the meeting schedule during the holiday months of November and December from two meetings per month to one meeting per month. Council decided to leave the November meetings as scheduled, cancel the December 7th and 22nd meetings, and schedule one meeting on December 14th at 7:30 a.m. Mayor Holmes then called the meeting into Executive Session at 8:17 a.m. for a consultation with the city attorney regarding litigation under Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code. The Executive Session ended at 9:20 a.m. No action was taken during the meeting. PASSED AND APPROVED this 3rd day of August 2004. ATTEST: James H. Holmes III, Mayor Nina Wilson, City Secretary August 3, 2004 The Honorable James H. Holmes, III: The Chase Bank Investigation Committee met July 22, 2004. Presentations were heard from a delegation from the library and Albert Huddleston and his architects. In the meeting with Mr. Huddleston he informed the committee that no one had oral or written authorization to offer the Chase Bank building for sale and that they were in the final stages of finishing their plans for a redevelopment of the property and it was not for sale. He did offer to build the city space in the new project. The committee felt that it was no longer needed and filed this as a final report. Sincerely, Olin Lane, Chairman Chase Bank Review Committee Cc~ Kelly Walker, Committee Member Thomas Stewart, Committee Member Robert Clark, Committee Member Bob Livingston City Manager DRAFT CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS CHASE BANK BUILDING REVIEW COMMITTEE JULY 22, 2004 MEETING MINUTES ATTENDANCE: Committee Members Olin Lane, Chair Bob Clark Kelly Walker Tommy Stewart Staff Bob Livingston Kent Austin Kate Hays Library Lee Shuey, librarian Ellen Greenberg Carol Ann Luby Vann Phillips Other Guests Albert Huddleston Craig Meldi, Architect Gary George, Architect 12:00 Noon-Meeting with staff librarian and members of Friends of the Library The committee met with UP Library Executive Director Lee Shuey and members of the Friends of the Library to discuss space needs of the library. The group presented the committee with a list titled "Physical Criteria for a New Facility for the University Park Public Library." These criteria included specifications for: · Stand-alone, 30,000-square foot, state-of-the-art building · Minimum 60 parking spaces · Outside bookdrop · Collection space for 145,000 books and other materials · Meeting space Olin Lane thanked the members for attending and said that their needs would be considered in the future. 12:30 pm-Committee Meeting and lunch Regarding use of the Chase Bank site as an alternative to City Hall reconstruction, the committee identified four options: 1. Move all City Hall functions to the Chase Bank location. 2. Leave all City Hall functions at the present location and resume measures to continue with remodel. 3. Move Police/Fire/Dispatch to the Chase Bank location and leave administration at the current City Hall building. 4. Leave Police/Fire/Dispatch at the current City Hall building and move administration to the Chase Bank location. Olin Lane noted that the Council had approved the committee's $20,000 request to examine the Chase Bank building and site. Members of the committee expressed concern that they needed to know how serious Albert Huddleston was about selling the Chase Bank building and site before they committed the $20,000 to perform the necessary studies. DRAFT Bob Clark suggested the committee ask for an option to buy the building in order to find out how serious Mr. Huddleston was about this. Tommy Stewart noted that this may cost the City anywhere from $100 on up in order to do this. Members were satisfied with this idea and stressed the need to ensure that the property was for sale before committing the appropriated funds to the project. 1:00 pm-Meeting with Chase Bank Building Owner Albert Huddleston and Architects Mr. Huddleston said that he had been "working quietly" for several months with architects to develop a mixed-use development on the Chase Bank site and parking lot directly to the west. The development includes a mid-rise office building, an open plaza, town homes and restaurant space, and underground parking. Mr. Huddleston's architects had met with neighborhood representatives about the proposal and received a favorable response. Mr. Huddleston said that he was very close to filing an application with the Planning and Zoning Commission but chose to delay when he heard of the City's interest in the Chase Bank site. Mr. Huddleston said that he wanted to be responsive to the City. He also said that he and his wife Mary had two goals: 1) to accommodate the University Park library's needs, and 2) to provide office space for his own companies. When asked by the committee if anyone had been designated to represent the property as available, Mr. Huddleston said that there was no oral or written directive authorizing anyone to offer the site for sale. He further said that he and his family were out of the country when the site was proposed to the City and that he had no knowledge of the proposal before he returned. Mr. Lane asked why the property was presented to the City as a potential prospect to purchase. Mr. Huddleston said that he tells his employees that their properties are always for sale, for the right price - for example, if someone offered him $25 million today he would likely sell the property. He said that nothing was off the table but that his primary goal was to redevelop the property. Bob Clark asked if sale of the property to the City was a possibility. Mr. Huddleston said no. Mr. Huddleston said that he did not think it would be in the best interest of the City to rent space on the redeveloped site. He noted that he was not aware of the specific City needs and functions but that his architects were more familiar with the City's architectural program. He then turned the discussion over to them. The architects presented plans for a mixed-use development. Plans included: · A multi level office building in place of the existing Chase Bank Building. The library would reside in the lowest levels. Chase Bank would occupy the next level and have space for a drive through. Mr. Huddleston's offices would occupy the remaining floors of the building. · The current alley directly west of the Chase Bank building would become an open-air plaza with restaurants and shops lining both sides. For the south end of the plaza, the architects proposed a small terraced, semi-circle area for dining and entertainment purposes. DRAFT · A site for City-related space was proposed by the architects directly west of the plaza. Specific square feet requirements and needs were not discussed, but they believed that there was sufficient space available from the information they had gathered. · The architects said that the planned redevelopment would have space for all City functions except the fire department. The architects had designed space for a sally port and private elevator entrance for police. It was not clear if they intended City Hall to be the only occupants of this structure, or if other occupants would be in this building as well. · Residential housing was proposed directly to the west of this space with an underground parking facility below. Architects noted the parking facility would accommodate approximately 600-700 vehicles. A row oftownhomes would face Haynie. A block of multi-family homes would face Daniel. Residents would have front door access to their homes from these two streets and also through the parking structure. · The main entrance to the underground parking facility would be from Daniel, to the west of where the current alley is. They also proposed a pedestrian tunnel under Daniel that would connect Snider Plaza and the parking structure. There was discussion following the presentation regarding how the City could be involved as a participant in the project and as an owner of space in a condominium style agreement. Mr. Huddleston said that he would not consider selling a portion of the property to the city for construction of a separate, free standing building as this would not fit into mixed use development plan. Mr. Lane thanked Mr. Huddleston and the architects for their presentation and information. Committee Discussion following the meeting with Albert Huddleston and Architects The committee felt that the $20,000 approved by the Council on July 21, 2004 was no longer needed for evaluation of Chase Bank building property because of the information presented by Mr. Huddleston and architects. Further, committee members concluded that their work was complete because the Chase Bank property was not for sale. Committee Chairman Olin Lane stated he would write the final report to the Council. It was decided that the findings of the committee and final report would be presented at the Council meeting on August 3, 2004. Mr. Lane said that he would be out of town at that time. Committee members Bob Clark and Tommy Stewart said they would present the information to the Council. Respectfully submitted, Kate Hays, Administrative Intern AGENDA MEMO (8/3/04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: July 29, 2004 Honorable Mayor and City Council Wade McLaurin, Building & Zoning Administrator Hearing for Abatement of Nuisances at 4305 Greenbrier BACKGROUND: A complaint was filed with Code Enforcement on October 13, 2003 regarding the condition of the property at 4305 Greenbrier. The property, owned by Mr. Kenneth D. Crozier, was found to have quite a bit of overgrowth and junk in the back yard, along with the structures in need of painting. Mr. Crozier was contacted about the problems and said that he would try to get someone to start on the painting for him within a couple of weeks. We attempted to work with the property owner to get the violations resolved, but finally on April 1, 2004 we issued a citation to Mr. Crozier for the overgrowth and junk in the rear yard. In order to properly document the condition of the property, we obtained a search warrant to enter the rear yard of the property and photograph the violations. After discussing the possibility that Mr. Crozier might ask for a jury trial with the City's prosecutor, Dick Wood, and Judge Barklow, it was their opinion that the case should be brought before the City Council so that the violations might be eliminated in a more expeditious manner. As a result, staff is asking that the Council order the immediate removal of all junk, debris, and overgrowth on the property, as well having the structures painted as has been previously noticed. As stipulated in Section 3.202 of the Code of Ordinances, the Council may order the Director of Public Works to proceed with the specified work, or grant additional time for the property owner to carry out such work. PUBLIC NOTICE: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council order the complete elimination of the stated nuisances on the property at 4305 Greenbrier. In the event that the property owner does not meet the Council imposed deadline, the City will proceed to carry out the work called for by the Council's order and the cost of such work shall be levied as a tax against the premises. 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 C:\Documents and Settings\nwils°n'UNIVPARK\L°cal Settings~Temporary Internet Files\OLK3\COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 4305 Greenbrier Hearing.doc 1:56 PM 07/29/04 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DALLAS CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK ORDER FOR ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE On the day of ., 2004, the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, considered a notification by the Director of Public Works that a public nuisance existed at 4305 Greenbrier and that the owner, Kenneth D. Crozier, or occupant had failed, neglected or refused to comply with notice from the Director of Public Works to commence the required demolition, improvement or repairs, and the City Council, having considered the complaint of the Director and the response of the owner at the public hearing on this date, finds and determines that: 1. The yard and premises surrounding the buildings on the property contain an accumulation of trash, debris, refuse and junk which tend to block ingress and egress to the premises, block passage through the premises, pollute the atmosphere, and are dangerous to the health and welfare of the community because they have become a haven for rats and mosquitoes; 2. The buildings on the property are unsightly due to lack of paint and general condition; and 3. That the condition of the property constitutes a public nuisance within the meaning of Section 3.201 (c) of the University Park Code of Ordinances. The City Council further finds that the owner has been given notice as required by Section 3.202 of the University Park Code of Ordinances and has failed, neglected or refused to comply with said notice to abate or remove the junk, weeds, grass, and trees and to paint the buildings at 4305 Greenbrier both of which conditions constitute public nuisances. The City Council further finds that a diligent effort has been made to discover each mortgagee and lienholder having an interest in the building or in the property on which the building is located, and has determined that there are no mortgagees or lienholders having any such interest. It is therefore ordered that the owner, Kenneth D. Crozier, and any occupant proceed with the work specified in the notice given to the owner to remove the trash, debris, refuse, and junk from the premises at 4305 Greenbrier and repaint the buildings on the property, and if the owner or occupant of said premises fails or refuses to do so within __ days after a copy of this Order has been delivered to the owner in person or sent by letter to his last known address by certified mail, the Director of Public Works is directed to perform such work and the cost of such work shall be levied as a tax against the premises and the owner 66495 premises and the owner thereof, which cost shall be and become immediately due thereon. Park, This Order has been passed by a vote of the City Council of the City of University Texas, Council Members voting in favor of such Order, and Council Members voting against such Order, on this day of ,2004. APPROVED: Mayor ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 66495 ARTICLE 3.200 ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDING AND PREMISES Sec. 3.201. Nuisance Defined (a) Any building, fence, shed, awning or any property constructed or erected of any kind, or any part thereof which is liable to fall down and/or endanger persons or property, or is a fire hazard, or is a dangerous structure which is located within this city or whenever any property shall, from age, neglect or faulty construction become dangerous or dilapidated or unsightly, the same shall be a public nuisance, and upon complaint being made to the director of public works, such public nuisances shall be abated, as hereinafter provided. (b) All building or structures or premises which are: (1) Structurally unsafe; or (2) Do not provide adequate ingress and egress; or (3) Which constitute a fire hazard; or (4) Which are otherwise dangerous to human life; or (5) Which in relation to the use of other existing property constitute a hazard to safety, health or public welfare, by reason of inadequate maintenance or dilapidation or obsolescence, or abandonment; are declared to be dangerous structures and the same shall be a public nuisance and upon complaint being made to the director of public works, such nuisance shall be abated, repaired, rehabilitated, demolished or removed in accordance with the procedure specified in this article. (c) All yards or premises surrounding any building on which any of the following items, namely trash, cans, bottles, boxes, debris, refuse, junk or other unused personal property, is permitted to accumulate and which tend to: (1) Block ingress or egress to the premises; and/or (2) Block passage through the premises; and/or (3) Pollute the atmosphere; and/or (4) Are dangerous to the health and welfare of the community; and/or (5) Create a fire hazard; and/or (6) Are dilapidated or unsightly. (d) The same shall be a public nuisance and upon complaint being made to the director of public works, such nuisance shall be abated by rehabilitation, removal, demolition, or repair in accordance with the procedures specified below. (1981 Revised Code of Ordinances, Chapter 3, Section 2A) Sec. 3.202 Procedures for Abating Nuisances (a) Any resident of University Park, Texas, or any employee of the City of University Park, Texas, who observes any public nuisance defined in Section 3.201 hereof, may make a complaint about such nuisance to the director of public works of the City of University Park. (b) The director of public works or his representative shall observe and examine every building, structure, premises, or portion thereof upon which such complaint has been made, and if it be found to be a public nuisance as defined in this article, the director of public works shall give the owner or occupant of such premises, building or structure written notice stating the defects and objections and the violations of this article upon which complaint has been made. Such notice shall be sent to the owner or occupant by delivering such notice in person or sending such notice by registered or certified mail, and such notice shall require the owner or occupant to commence the required demolition, improvement or repairs or the removal of such debris, building or portion thereof or structure within three (3) days from the date such notice is delivered to the owner or occupant of said premises or deposited in the mail to him. Such notice shall also require that all work to eliminate the violation shall be completed within thirty (30) days from the date of such notice unless otherwise stipulated by the director of public works. If the director of public works finds that such structure or portion thereof is dangerous to the life or health of the person or persons occupying the same, the director of public work may require that such structure, building or premises be vacated until the required changes, repairs, demolition or improvements are completed, inspected, and approved by the director of public works. (c) In case the owner or occupant shall fail, neglect or refuse to comply with the notice of the director of public works to repair, rehabilitate or demolish the building, structure, or portion thereof, or to rehabilitate the premises described in such notice, or appeal therefrom within five (5) days, the director of public works may file a complaint with the city court charging the owner or occupant of such structure or premises with a violation of this article or other applicable parts of this code. (d) The director of public works may, in the alternative, notify the city council of the City of University Park of the complaint and the fact that the owner or occupant has filed, neglected or refused to comply with the said notice from the director of public works. The city council of the City of University Park may, after notice to the owner or occupant of such building, structure or premises, hold a public hearing and order the director of public works to proceed to carry out the work specified in such notice in order that such building or structure or premises may be repaired, rehabilitated, demolished or changed to comply with the terms in this section. The city council shall set the time for such public hearing and give written notice by delivering such notice in person or by sending such notice by registered or certified mail of such public hearing which shall be mailed by registered or certified mail to the last known address of the owner or occupant of said premises at least ten (10) days before the date of such hearing, and the city council will give such other and further notice of such hearing that may be required by the laws of the State of Texas. A diligent effort shall be made to discover each, mortgager and lienholder having an interest in the building or in the property on which the building is located. A notice of violation shall be sent to each discovered mortgagee and lienholder. (e) Upon a public hearing of this complaint, the city council of the City of University Park may order the director of public works to proceed with the work specified in such notice or may grant additional time for the owner or occupant of such building, structure or premises to carry out the terms of such notice or may render such other order which may seem necessary and proper after having a hearing thereon. In the event the director of public works is direct to repair, rehabilitate or dismantle and remove any building, structure or debris from the premises, the cost of such work shall be paid by the owner and/or occupant of said property, and the cost of such work shall be determined and levied as a tax against said property which shall be and become immediately due thereon. (f) ff the owner or occupant of the building, structure or premises on which complaint has been filed shall appear before the city council, no further notice or order of the city council made at such hearing shall be required to be furnished to the owner or occupant thereof. In the event the owner and/or occupant of said building or premises fails to appear at the public hearing before the city council, the city council may order the director of public works to comply with the work specified in the notice in order to bring the building, structure or premises into compliance with the terms of this section, and levy the cost of such work as a tax against the premises which shall be immediately due, and in that event a copy of the order of the city council made at such hearing shall be delivered to the owner or occupant of said premises in person or by a letter to the last known address by certified mail or registered mail and by publication of a copy of such order, at least one time, in the publication which is designated as the official publication of this city. (g) Upon the expiration of thirty (30) days after a copy of the order of the city council has been delivered to the owner or occupant of said premises in person or sent by letter to his last known address by certified or registered mail and by publication of a copy of such order as required above, the director of public works shall proceed to carry out the work called for by the order of the city council and the cost of such work shall be levied as a tax against the premises and the owner and/or occupant thereof which shall be and become immediately due thereon. (h) In the event the owner or occupant of the premises shall fail or refuse to discharge the expense incurred in correcting the violation of this article within thirty (30) days after receiving notice to pay such expense, or within thirty (30) days after such notice is published, that and in that event, the City of University Park may bring an action in any court having jurisdiction to recover the expenses which were assessed against the owner or occupant of such premises by the city council. (1981 Revised Code of Ordinances, Chapter 3, Section 2B; Ordinance adopting Code) Sec. 3.203 Appeal of Decisions of Director of Public Works In the event the owner or occupant desires to appeal the decision of the director of public works and have a hearing before complying with such notice from the director of public works, he shall make a written request for such hearing to the city council of the City of University Park within five (5) days after the date of such notice, and the owner or occupant shall specify his reasons for not complying with the notice from the director of public works or any reason that he may have that such notice should not be enforced. Such appeal shall be set for a hearing by the city council, and the owner or occupant of the premises shall be notified by delivering written notice in person or by sending such notice by registered or certified mail of the date of such hearing so that he may appear and personally present his case to the city council. (1981 Revised Code of Ordinances, Chapter 3, Section 2C; Ordinance adopting Code) AGENDA MEMO (8/3/04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: July 29, 2004 Honorable Mayor and City Council Wade McLaurin, Building & Zoning Administrator Specific Use Permit- Canterbury House/St. Alban's Chapel BACKGROUND The St. Alban's Episcopal Collegiate Chapel at 3308 Daniel was damaged by fire last year to the extent that the church has decided to demolish the existing structure and construct a similar facility. This religious use is considered a non-conforming use in the residential district in which it is located (MF-3). The Zoning Ordinance provides for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for uses of this nature in residential zoning districts. An SUP must be approved before a building permit can be issued for the reconstruction. The use of the building on this property as a college chapel & meeting place has been in existence for quite some time, as our records do not indicate exactly when the original residential use ceased. At its June 21, 2004 meeting, the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended the approval of the Specific Use Permit in order for the structure to be rebuilt and St. Alban's to continue in its service to the community. PUBLIC NOTICE: · For P&Z - 5/27/04 · For Council- 7/15/04 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the approval of the Specific Use Permit for 3308 Daniel, which permits the continuance of the religious use on the property within the proposed rebuilt structure. 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES June 21, 2004 The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park met on Monday, June 21, 2004 at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 3800 University Blvd. University Park, Texas. The following are minutes of that meeting. Commission Members Attending Staff Members Attending Robert West - Chairman Doug Roach H. Reed Shawver III Bill Foose Bea Humann Bud Smallwood - Public Works Director Wade McLaurin - Building & Zoning Administrator Jennifer Patrick - Administrative Secretary Rob Dillard - City Attorney Mr. West opened the public hearing and introduced the commission members. He then read the specifics of the first case. PZ 04-15 - Analytical Surveys, representing the owner of the property, requesting a replat of Lot 3 Block 5, of Walker's Addition of the City of University Park, more commonly known as 3449-51 Normandy into two (2) Single Family Attached lots. The property is zoned Single Family - Attached (SF-A). Mr. West inquired if the replat conformed to city regulations. Mr. McLaurin stated yes. Mr. West inquired if there were any favoring/opposing parties in the audience. None came forward. Mr. West asked for a motion. Mrs. Humann moved to approve the replat, with a second from Mr. Foose. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. Mr. West, then read the specifics of the second case. PZ 04-16 - St. Alban's Collegiate Chapel, requesting a Specific Use Permit (S. U.P.) for Lot 4 Block A, of SMU Heights Addition of the City Of University Park, more commonly known as 3308 Daniel. The request is to allow the reconstruction of the existing structure that has been damaged by fire, along with the continuation of the current use as a student center & chapel. The property is zoned Multi-Family District 3 (MF-3). Mr. West inquired if there were any favoring parties present. Planning & Zoning Minutes 06/21/2004 Page 2 of 8 Mr. John Wright, President of JCW Inc., was introduced and made a brief statement in support of the project. The Canterbury House and St. Alban's Collegiate Chapel were severely damaged by a fire, and the owner would like to redevelop and expand with a new similar structure. Mr. Wright stated there were three (3) parking spaces, accessible via the alley, and one (1) handicap space via Daniel Ave. As well as, Southern Methodist University (SMU) agreed to allow the Chapel use of parking spaces during non-permit-parking times. The function of the facility would remain as it was, serving the same community as before. Mr. West asked if the footprint remained the same. Mr. Wright stated yes. Mr. West noted three (3) parking spaces were added to the site plan. Mrs. Humann inquired if there was a SMU parking garage agreement. Mr. Wright stated yes, the same students would be utilizing the parking garage, and an agreement was executed three (3) to four (4) weeks ago. Ms. Barbara Kelton, Episcopalian Chaplin, was introduced and voiced her support of the project. Ms. Kelton noted she has been St. Albans chaplain for the past eight (8) years. The chapel has been an ongoing, viable asset to the community for over fifty (50) years. Ms. Kelton noted the students did have parking areas, and inquired if there were any questions. Ms. Kelton expressed her support of the redevelopment of the chapel and thanked the board. Mr. West closed the public hearing. Mr. Foose stated he had personally been in the immediate area, and did not observe any parking issues. Mr. West asked for a motion. Mr. Roach moved to approve the request, with a second from Mrs. Humann. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. Mr. West, then read the specifics of the third case. PZ 04-17 - Consider staff recommendation to amend Sec. 24-500 of the University Park Zoning Ordinance to update the parking requirements for Southern Methodist University. Proposed amendment replaces the outdated Ownby Stadium requirements with those for Ford Stadium, and updates the provided parking count as a result of the on campus parking structures now in existence. Mr. West inquired if there were any favoring parties from SMU present. Mr. McLaurin noted he would brief the board on the specifics of the staff recommendation. Mr. McLaurin stated the parking requirements/ordinance needed to be updated for the University Districts. Staff had prepared current wording, versus the proposed wording, with SMU providing the Planning & Zoning Minutes 06/21/2004 Page 3 of 8 the numbers and counts. The residential wording had been eliminated. As well as the parking space credit numbers and percentages had been adjusted to reflect credit for mass transit. Mr. McLaurin stated the Planning & Zoning Commission would need to review and forward a recommendation to the City Council. Mr. West asked Mr. Dillard if this was just staff recommendation. Mr. Dillard noted this was an advertised public hearing, not in ordinance form. Mr. Leon Bennett, General Counsel and VP for Legal Affairs and Government Relations for SMU, was introduced and made a brief statement. Mr. Bennett stated SMU wanted to get the best utility out of the parking for the campus, the goal being to get the parking up to serve the numbers on campus. Mr. Dillard asked Mr. Bennett if the total parking spaces allocated (5,723) included parking for the University Campus 3 (UC3) and University Campus 4 (UC4) districts. Mr. Bennett stated no, the 5,723 encompassed east of the campus (Central Expressway), north (Rosedale) to south of the campus (SMU Blvd.) Mr. Dillard stated UC3 and UC4 districts, had been included in previous submittals and had their own separate requirements. He added this was comparing apples to oranges by not including all UC districts into the total parking count. The Dyer parking lot was not included as well. Mr. Bennett stated the total parking number could be adjusted to reflect all University Campus District parking. Mr. Foose noted he wanted to ensure he was following the discussion properly; the parking total did not include all university districts. Mr. Dillard noted the number indicated as the total (5,723) misrepresents by three hundred (300) spaces. Mr. Foose referenced to the current wording on page six (6), noting there was not any proposed information/changes. Mr. Bennett stated the area indicates SMU would have to add more parking, if adding more students per the proposed agreement. He added SMU was moving away from new construction, therefore eliminating the reference to such. Mr. Dillard inquired if the total population count of 9, 770 included all students, staff, and facility. He referenced to the ordinance, every two (2) beds requires one (1) parking space. Mr. Dillard added he observes more parking on the streets, than students walking to class. Mr. Roach asked where the percentages were derived from on page six (6), section two (2) in regards to the parking credit for mass transit. Planning & Zoning Minutes 06/21/2004 Page 4 of 8 Mr. Bennett noted he would assume the information came from DART authorities. Mr. West noted this proposed addendum was not a part of the old ordinance. Mr. Bennett stated Mr. West was correct, the information was added due to an opportunity from the ozone criteria, move employees to Dart serviced areas to help enable credit for the parking requirements. Mr. Foose asked if the students, facility and staff of SMU would utilize the mass transit system. Mr. Bennett informed the board a relationship was established with Dart (numbers were not) enabling students to ride at no charge. Mr. Foose asked if the parking number was locked in. Mr. Bennett stated yes, if the campus were to expand, the parking must increase accordingly. Mr. Foose stated in the zip code, 75206, thousands of people would fall in the credit area (assuming they would ride Dart), therefore SMU would ask for the credit. Mr. West inquired if there were any more questions for Mr. Bennett from the board, there were none. Mr. West closed the public hearing. Mr. West stated he would recommend the complex issue be continued to the next meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. West asked for a motion. Mr. Foose moved to continue the SMU parking requirements to the August 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning meeting, with a second from Mr. Roach. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. Mr. West read the specifics of the final three (3) cases. PZ 04-18 - Consider staff recommendation to amend the height regulations found in Section 18-800 of the University Park Zoning for the General Retail (GR) zoning district. PZ 04-19 - Consider staff recommendation to amend the height regulations for Planned Development District 1-R (PD-1-R) - Snider Plaza. Proposed amendment would set maximum wall and roof heights in feet, rather than the current maximum of four (4) stories. PZ 04-20 - Consider staff recommendation to amend the height regulations for Planned Development District 2-R (PD-2-R) - Miracle Mile. Proposed amendment would set a maximum building height in feet, rather than the current maximum of two (2) stories. Planning & Zoning Minutes 06/21/2004 Page 5 of 8 Mr. West then asked Mr. Dillard if it was appropriate to combine the three (3) cases. Mr. Dillard stated case PZ 04-20 Planned Development District 2-R (PD-2-R) - Miracle Mile had not been an issue. Mr. McLaurin then briefed the commission on the history of PZ 04-19 and PZ 04-20. In March 2003, the commission took up discussion regarding height restrictions in the following districts: General Retail (GR), Planned Development District 1-R (PD-l-R) - Snider Plaza and Planned Development District 2-R (PD-2-R) - Miracle Mile. Mr. McLaurin quoted the draft ordinance pertaining to the General Retail (GR) District and the Planned Development District 1-R (PD-l-R) - Snider Plaza outlining the details of the proposed height changes. Mr. McLaurin noted after the Planning & Zoning Commission completed discussion, many property owners (within the GR District and PD-1-R - Snider Plaza District) came forward with the concern of the proposed ordinance affecting; reconstruction of the current structures and parking concerns. He noted the proposed ordinance under discussion, has almost identical wording when compared to the ordinance for the Planned Development District 2-R (PD-2-R) - Miracle Mile. Mr. McLaurin read the wall height and roof slope section of the proposed ordinance. Mr. McLaurin stated the ordinance was worded to encourage pleasing aesthetics, and to discourage flat roofs. He concluded there would not be a generic recommendation. Mr. McLaurin noted Taylor Armstrong, Chairman of the Urban Design and Development Committee, had drawn/designed the proposed design to maintain the ecliptic type architecture found in the districts. Mr. Dillard and Mr. McLaurin came up with the proposed wording of the proposed ordinance, which would be somewhat easy to enforce. Mr. West asked if there any favoring/opposing parties in the audience. Mr. Chris Jordan, representing Intercity Investments Inc. owner of the property from 6700-6900 Preston Rd., was introduced and stated his opposition to the proposed height reduction in the GR District. He noted he felt it would be impractical, damage the company asset and it would not adversely affect the Multi-Family District to the west. Mr. West inquired if there was anyone else in the audience who opposed the GR District height change. None came forward. Mr. West asked Mr. Dillard if the two cases should be voted separately. Mr. Dillard stated yes. Mr. Peter Smith, representative of 7000 Snider Plaza, Tom Thumb, was introduced and stated his opposition. Tom Thumb is the largest property in Snider Plaza, and the current allowable height of four (4) stories should remain intact. Mr. Smith noted 7000 Snider Plaza is the best opportunity for redevelopment. Over the past year, Mr. Smith has had discussion with Mayor Peek, City Council Planning & Zoning Minutes 06/21/2004 Page 6 of 8 Member Blackie Holmes, and Planning & Zoning Commission member, Randy Biddle. Other issues were addressed such as: parking, the fact the site is not contiguous to residential property, decrease in tax revenues (25%) and dislike of the verbiage used in the proposed ordinance. Mr. Smith noted Mr. Armstrong's drawings were arbitrary and more time was needed to discuss any changes. A discussion ensued regarding the proposed drawings (staff's attempt to use the drawing as a directive for architectural design), the added economics of using %tories" versus ;;feet", strict verbiage in the ordinance and the purpose of utilizing a sloping roof in the ordinance. Mr. Roach asked how tall was the medical building located in Snider Plaza. Mr. McLaurin noted it was forty-one feet (41 '). Mr. Bob Teeter, owner/resident of 3309 Colgate, was introduced and stated his opposition. Mr. Teeter referenced to a diagram of Snider Plaza, pointing out his support to Mr. Smith's dialog. He added he wanted what was best for the City of University Park and its residents/building owners. Mr. Teeter noted there should not be any rush to come to a decision. The parking issue could be addressed concurrent with the height issue. The Chase Bank building could possibly be utilized to help solve the parking issue, and hopefully this idea will be entertained. Mr. Teeter added that Tom Thumb is an excellent site for future expansion. Mr. Teeter stated he believed the city would regret changing the height regulations, and encouraged the commission to let Mr. Armstrong design any drawings. Mr. Teeter asked to approach the commission, referencing to a plat map of Snider Plaza. He noted he had meet with Mr. Biddle previously, and pointed out the medical building was compliant with the zoning ordinance in regard to height and required setbacks. He added that city staff should meet with the building owners and come up with an agreeable solution and requested further discussion before the commission approached Council with a decision. Mr. Karl Kuby, owner of 6601 & 6605 Snider Plaza, was introduced and made a brief statement Mr. Kuby stated he had moved to Dallas in 1961. He noted the business owners needed to meet and work together to encourage growth and success. Mr. Kuby added if this was not the case, many businesses could close their doors. Mr. Roger Fullington, owner of 6817 Snider Plaza, was introduced and noted his opposition to the proposed height change. Mr. Fullington stated Snider Plaza was developed over time, which had its advantages and disadvantages. He noted this had enabled multiple owners in Snider Plaza, with no one necessarily to look out for the future of the area. In regards to the parking issue, Mr. Fullington referenced to Highland Park Village and its underground parking. He added he supported Mr. Smith, and he would recommend to Council, not to adopt the proposed ordinance. Mr. Fullington referred to projects within the city such as: the Dubow building, seventy feet (70~) along Preston Rd. and Lovers Ln., and the SMU Daniel parking garage, noting the pleasing aesthetics of the tall structures. Other Planning & Zoning Minutes 06/21/2004 Page 7 of 8 structures. Other cities were noted, Chicago and New York, and the use of creative architecture used to work with the density and the population. Mr. Fullington stated he was representing the majority of the property owners with his statements. He urged the board to place these cases on hold, noting this was the first time property owners were working together to find a solution. Mr. Wayne Thompson, representing the JP Morgan Chase Bank of 6615 & 6617 Snider Plaza, was introduced and made a brief statement in regards to his opposition. He noted after discussion with other property owners, it was determined there were not any favoring parties to the height change. The property values of the area would diminish due to the change. He added there various meetings with an architect he was unaware of, and desired more time to discuss, plan and give/receive input. Mr. West closed the public hearing. Mr. Roach stated he was unable to make a ruling or vote on these issues. He added there were many valid points made tonight and more discussion with interested parties was needed. Mr. Roach added he would propose to continue the proposed height amendments to the next meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. Dillard inquired if the SMU parking issue and the height issue discussion would continue to the July 19, 2004 meeting or the August 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. West stated both cases would defer to the August 16, 2004 meeting. Mr. Foose stated more definition was needed when using the word "story" when referring to a building height. He noted this could be discussed as the property owners and city staff convenes. Mr. Dillard stated the definition of a %tory" has been established at eleven and one-half feet (11 6") %tory~, and that the purpose of the exercise was to get away from this terminology. There are competing interests, some want the verbiage to remain and others want it to change. Mr. Dillard stated people had no directive, just objections. He added the City Council could leave the height regulations as is. Mr. West stated something pleasing could be created, and architectural issues could be addressed. Mr. Dillard noted if the property owners could assist with the verbiage, this would be helpful. Mr. West asked for a motion. Mr. Foose moved to continue the proposed height changes allowing additional discussion to the August 16, 2004 Planning & Zoning meeting, with a second from Mr. Roach. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. Mr. West asked for a motion on the minutes from the May 17, 2004 Planning & Zoning meeting. Mrs. Humann moved to approve the minutes, with a second from Mr. Roach. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. There being no further business before the Commission, Mr. West adjourned the meeting. Planning & Zoning Minutes 06/21/2004 Page 8 of 8 Robert West, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Date ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY CHANGING THE ZONING ON THE PROPERTY AT 3308 DANIEL FROM MULTI FAMILY DISTRICT 3 (MF-3) TO MULTI FAMILY DISTRICT (MF-3) SUBJECT TO A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A CHURCH, SAID PROPERTY BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 4, BLOCK A, SMU HEIGHTS ADDITION, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park and the City Council of the City of University Park, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas with reference to the granting of zoning classifications and changes, have given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and have held due hearings and afforded a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally and to all persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, and the City Council of the City of University Park is of the opinion and finds that a zoning change should be granted and that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended; Now, Therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map of the City of University Park, Texas, as heretofore amended, be, and the same are hereby, amended by granting a change of zoning from Multi-Family 3 (MF-3) to Multi-Family 3 (MF-3) subject to a Specific Use Permit for a Church for the property at 3308 Daniel, more particularly described as Lot 4, Block A, SMU Heights Addition, an addition to the City of University Park, Dallas County, Texas. SECTION 2. That the development of the property shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of University Park, as amended hereby, and the approved site plan, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made part hereof for all purposes, the same as if fully copied herein. 65768 SECTION 3. All ordinances of the City of University Park in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as amended hereby be, and the same are hereby, repealed. SECTION 4. 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 decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and the same shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 5. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance or of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended hereby, shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of University Park, Texas, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the sum of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense, and each and every day such a violation is continued shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the publication of the caption, as the law and Charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 3rd day of August 2004. APPROVED: JAMES H. HOLMES m, MAYOR 65768 ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY CITY ATTORNEY (RLD/6-22-04) 65768 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY CHANGING THE ZONING ON THE PROPERTY AT 3308 DANIEL FROM MULTI FAMILY DISTRICT 3 (MF-3) TO MULTI FAMILY DISTRICT (MF-3) SUBJECT TO A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A CHURCH, SAID PROPERTY BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 4, BLOCK A, SMU HEIGHTS ADDITION, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 3rd day of August 2004. APPROVED: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY SECRETARY 65768 AGENDA MEMO (08/03/04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: July 29, 2004 Honorable Mayor and City Council City Manager Kent R. Austin, Director of Finance Appointment of Cable TV Franchise Review Advisory Group INTRODUCTION: Included on the August 3 City Council meeting agenda is a resolution appointing residents to the new Cable TV Franchise Review Advisory Group (FRAG). City Council members and staff proposed candidates for appointment, and the Finance Director contacted each individual to determine their interest and availability. Some initial nominees either could not be reached, had moved out of the city, or were not cable customers. The final candidates for service on FRAG are: · Beth Blankenship, 3300 Rankin · Tony Cornett, 3512 Stanford · TomMcConnell, M.D., 3636 Amherst · Terry Muncy, 4057 Hanover · Charles Scott, 4508 Emerson #4 The Town of Highland Park has appointed a similar committee and will be working together with University Park's FRAG to fashion a new cable franchise agreement. The groups will begin working once the formal appointments are made August 3. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the resolution appointing the members named above to serve until a new franchise agreement is completed. ATTACHMENT: Resolution appointing FRAG members 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 C:\Documents and Settings\nwils°n'UNIVPARK\L°cal Settings~Temporary Internet Files\OLK3~AGENDA MEMO FRAG appointment 08 2004.doc 4:16 PM 07/29/04 RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING THE CABLE TV FRANCHISE RENEWAL ADVISORY GROUP (FRAG) FOR THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of University Park appoints numerous statutory and advisory boards and committees, and; WHEREAS, Charter Communications has requested a renewal of its cable television franchise with the City, which expires in April 2005; WHEREAS, the community will benefit by the involvement of interested residents who will work with City staffto develop a new cable TV franchise agreement; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS: THAT, the City Council of the City of University Park does hereby formally appoint the following individuals to serve on the Cable Television Franchise Review Advisory Group (FRAG) until a new franchise agreement is completed: BETH BLANKENSHIP TONY CORNETT TOM MCCONNELL, M.D. TERRY MUNCY CHARLES SCOTT PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas on the 3rd day of August, 2004. APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: JAMES H. HOLMES, iii, MAYOR ATTEST: CITY ATTORNEY NiNA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY MATERIAL AVAILABLE AT TUESDAY'S MEETING AGENDA MEMO (08~03~04 AGENDA) DATE: July 28, 2004 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Gene R. Smallwood, P.E. Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Cartegraph Asset Management Software Background: For the last year and a half, staff has been looking for a solid, cost effective asset management/inventory software solution to help us comply with the new federal accounting and reporting standards. Federal mandates such as GASB34 and NPDES Ph. 2 have forced the City to identify, account for, and map infrastructure assets. Our research led us to the conclusion that the most efficient software solution was one that could not only meet our asset management needs, but also address our work order and customer service response needs while integrating with our Geographic Information System (GIS) and other existing databases. In 2002, staff began researching software packages to help with the collection, storage, and retrieval of that data. Our initial goals were to find a solution that was user-friendly, easy to maintain, flexible, scaleable, and that could utilize the information in our existing GIS and mapping system. We found several products that could meet most of these needs, but only two vendors offered a product that could directly interface with our existing Intergraph/Geomedia GIS and mapping system. Those two vendors were Hansen and Cartegraph. The City has used Hansen's work management system in the past and found it very rigid and cumbersome to use. For those reasons, we replaced that system and similarly felt it was not a good solution to address our future infrastructure management needs. We have been researching and evaluating the Cartegraph solution in progressive levels of detail for the past 16 - 17 months. After numerous meetings with Cartegraph representatives and discussions with other area communities already using Cartegraph, staff has determined that their solution will not only meet our infrastructure inventory and mapping needs, but it will also provide us with a medium to integrate numerous systems in every department of the City. The ability to share information across departmental lines without any duplication of effort will allow us to make significant improvements in operational efficiencies. Product Overview: Asset Management: The software provides a comprehensive Asset Management / Infrastructure Inventory system for the City's PW infrastructure (streets, water mains, sanitary sewer mains, storm sewers, traffic signs, signals, & pavement markings), which is compatible with our Geographic Information System (GIS). The Cartegraph solution will: Provide budgetary accountability (CP / Operating); specifically, the Cartegraph solution will function as a planning tool in providing detailed information regarding the condition of infrastructure, which is crucial in the efficient expenditures of tax dollars; · Function as an accounting system for tracking financial history of infrastructure in connection with federally mandated GASB34. · Provide a "gauge" to monitor operational productivity and performance; · Identify maintenance trends; · Link to work orders updates mapping systems information; · Fulfills NPDES Ph.2 requirement for mapping of stormwater system Customer Service Requests: · Internal and external request recording functions · Establish standard operating procedures for each request received · Monitor requests and complaint status · View and/or print caller history · Track and log call-back activity · Automatic transfer of key information to a work order · Facilitates centralized customer call system without additional software needs. Work Orders: · Assign resources (labor, equipment, material, contracts, etc.) to work activities · Schedule and track work orders through stages of created, started, open and completed · Create work orders independently or from requests · Charge costs for resources--direct or indirect--at a defined rate · View or print work orders with all estimated and/or actual resources · Reporting functions will better facilitate performance-based evaluation of City operations. · Allows for a future migration to a paperless, wireless work management system for field 2ersonnel without additional software or upgrades. Cost: The contract with Cartegraph is a not-to-exceed amount of $263,925. Staff was successful ~n securing a Homeland Grant in the amount of $25,000 as a credit for this software (the grant amount has already been calculated in the not to exceed amount). The funds for this purchase are currently available. Approximately half of the total cost ($122,000) is associated directly with acquiring the software. The remaining balance of $141,925 is allocated for professional services (training, data management, installation, etc) and customer service support. The City will budget approximately $30,000 on a yearly basis for customer service and maintenance support of the Cartegraph software system. Recommendation: The Public Works Advisory Committee (PWAC) received an overview and demonstration of the software program during its meeting on July 28, 2004. PWAC unanimously recommended approval of the software purchase. Staff recommends approval of the attached software and services agreement with Cartegraph Systems for the purchase, installation, and training of an asset and work management program in the amount of $263,925.00. Attachments: · Software and Services Agreement with Cartegraph · Minutes of 7/28/04 Public Works Advisory Committee meeting PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES July 28, 2004 Committee Members Present: Chairman Thomas Stewart, Paul Pulliam, John Farris, Michael Collins, John Walsh, Randy Hagens, Mike Moore, and Todd Foster. Council Members Present: Kelly Walker. Staff Present: Director of Public Works Bud Smallwood, City Engineer Bob Whaling, Civil Engineer Jennifer Shell, Information Services Director Jim Criswell, IS Support Tech Jason McCallum, Webmaster Russell Haddock, Finance Director Kent Austin, Human Resources Director Luanne Hanford, Assistant to the Public Works Director Jacob Speer, Robbie Corder, and Management Intern Kate Hays. Bud Smallwood began the meeting by introducing the staff and consultants present. Consultants attending the meeting included Tim McAndrew from Cartegraph, Ray Flemons, and Jeff Ground from Bucher, Willis & Ratliff. Agenda Item No. 1: Bud Smallwood introduced the Cartegraph software system as a tool staff proposes to utilize in meeting federal mandates GASB 34 and Phase II of NPDES. In response to these mandates staff researched various software packages to help with collection, storage, and retrieval of data related to the city's infrastructure system (streets, water mains, sanitary sewer mains, storm sewers, traffic signs, signals, and pavement markings). Several products are available for use, but only two systems are capable of integrating with the City's existing Intergraph/Geomedia Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The two systems are Hansen and Cartegraph. The City has used Hansen's work in the past and found it difficult to use. For the past 16 - 17 months, staff has consulted with Cartegraph to develop and implement an infrastructure asset management software system. After meeting with Cartegraph representatives, staff is recommending the purchase of the Cartegraph software. The software system will give staff the ability to provide greater budgetary accountability for both capital projects and operations. In addition, Cartegraph can provide detailed reports, trends analysis, overall condition indexes (OCI), and the ability to track and monitor customer service requests. Cartegraph representative Tim McAndrew provided a demonstration of the customer service and work order modules. Mr. McAndrew also demonstrated the program's ability to place field survey data on a map and develop an up-to- date inventory of the city's infrastructure. Committee Member Mike Moore asked how many cities use this program, and Tim McAndrew noted that the company has about 150 Texas clients, including the Texas Department of Transportation. Staff has contacted the City of Denton for references and Denton provided glowing reviews of the software. A discussion also ensued regarding the costs of the software and implementation. Bud Smallwood indicated that the total costs of the software and consulting services needed to implement the system is about $250,000. The actual cost of the software system is only about $100,000, and Jim Criswell indicated that an annual maintenance fee would be a recurring cost. Other costs that are associated with the software, but aren't included within the overall cost, include data collection and mapping services. However, these costs are independent of the software system. A motion was made by Paul Pulliam to recommend approval of this purchase by the City Council. Mike Collins seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Agenda Item No. 2: Bud Smallwood provided a brief history of the Germany Park Booster Station flooding that caused a water shortage for approximately three days. The water shortage prompted the City Council to request staff research the feasibility of providing an emergency water connection to a Dallas Water Utilities line. The engineering firm of Bucher, Willis & Ratliff, completed a feasibility study, which detailed three alternative sites for the proposed connection: Northwest Parkway Water Tower, Fondren Water Tower, and Gillon Pump Station (in Highland Park). The final recommendation of the study indicated that a connection near the Northwest Parkway Water Tower was the most desirable location since most of the improvements on this location would be in the City of University Park (as opposed to City of Dallas) and for cost efficiency reasons. The cost estimate for this interconnection would be $1.2 million. University Park currently has an emergency connection near the Fondren site. However, due to differing water pressures between University Park and Dallas Water Utilities, the City was losing water out of its distribution system when connecting to the emergency interconnect. Flow, pressure issues, and cost considerations make the Northwest Highway Water Tower location better suited for an emergency interconnect then the Fondren site. Committee member Moore questioned whether the City would have neighborhood issues by placing a booster station at the proposed site. Mr. Ground from Bucher, Willis & Ratliff indicated that the facility would be screened and built like a residential one-story structure. Kent Austin asked if the emergency interconnect would be metered, and Mr. Ground indicated that it would be metered in conformance with the agreement between the City and the Dallas County Park Cities Municipal Utility District. A discussion ensued regarding Highland Park's emergency water supply. Bud Smallwood indicated that Highland Park currently used the Gillon booster station. Committee member Walsh questioned how the improvements would be paid for. Kent Austin indicated that utility revenues would fund the proposed project. Mr. Walsh also asked how frequently the City has experienced emergency water shortages, and Bud Smallwood indicated that we have had three occurrences in the past 15 years - two were construction related and the other was the problem with the M.U.D. pumping station. A discussion ensued regarding alternatives to the Northwest Highway and the condition of aging water lines from Germany to City Hall. The committee questioned whether the money would be better put to use in replacing aging water lines and scaling back the emergency interconnect. Committee member Farris indicated that it was difficult to support the proposed emergency interconnect when they are unsure of the facts surrounding the condition of various water lines throughout town. He suggested staff bring facts regarding water lines to the committee in coordination with the study completed by Bucher, Willis & Ratliff. Bud Smallwood indicated that this could be completed at the next meeting. Agenda Item No. 3 Bud Smallwood indicated that the City Council referred the issue of sidewalk maintenance to the PWAC for discussion and recommendation. There have been several recent requests from residents that the City take over responsibility for sidewalk maintenance rather than placing that responsibility on the abutting property owners. When a complaint is received about a sidewalk, a code enforcement officer inspects the sidewalk to determine if it is in violation. If not in compliance, the property owner is sent a notice requiring them to fix the sidewalk (typically within thirty days). The proposed City program would work similar to the City's mile per year program, whereby the City would replace a given amount of deteriorating sidewalk and repair sidewalks that were in violation. As an example, the staff proposed budgeting $750,000 worth of repairs in a fiscal year. The increased tax burden equates to an additional $115 per year per house. Committee Member Foster questioned if there was evidence of contractors calling in complaints to receive work. Mr. Smallwood indicated that the City has no evidence of this occurring. Committee Member Collins indicated that there would be ancillary issues associated with the City taking over this responsibility. Mr. Collins specifically pointed out issues related to drainage and trees. Committee Member Walsh suggested staff collect data related to number of sidewalk notices and citations issued, number of claims (if any), and repair costs for a period of 24 months. The PWAC would be in a much better position to discussion this issue with more specific information. The staff will collect data and provide information to the PWAC for their consideration and recommendation. The PWAC voted unanimously to defer action until staff provided the requested information. Agenda Item No. 4: Bob Whaling and Jennifer Shell distributed a handout detailing the status of the City's current capital projects and a list of upcoming projects. Bud Smallwood also included a note about the Northwest Highway screening wall. The City currently has thirteen of the fourteen property owners that have agreed to donate the fourteen feet of ROW for the wall. The city is waiting for one property owner before beginning this project. Chairman Stewart indicated that the City ought to delay the work scheduled for Hillcrest since it would cause congestion problems with Lovers Lane. Bud Smallwood indicated that Council considered this, but wanted to move forward because of drainage issues. John Walsh commended staff on their communication with residents prior to the start of the Lovers Lane project. He further indicated that that effort should continue on future projects. Agenda Item No. 5: Committee members indicated that meeting quarterly on the last Wednesday of the month was a good time. The next scheduled meeting will be held on October 27, 2004 at 8:00 a.m. City of University Park, Texas Software and Services Agreement July 27, 2004 With rt .G Ca raph 3600 Digital Drive Dubuque, IA 52003 (563) 556-8120 800.688.2656 www.cartegraph.com Cart Graph Table of Contents Scope Of Project ................................................................................................................................. 3 Project Assumptions ........................................................................................................................... 7 City of University Park Responsibilities ............................................................................................. 7 Project Investment .............................................................................................................................. 9 Payment Terms and Conditions ........................................................................................................ 10 Delivery and Invoicing ..................................................................................................................... 10 General Terms ................................................................................................................................... 10 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION: City of University Park acknowledges that all materials' and documents' associated with this project are proprietary in nature. This specifically includes pricing information, training materials' and consulting documents' as described. City of University Park further agrees not to copy or otherwise make available such materials' outside of City of University Park and its' divisions and departments' without the prior written consent of Cart~Graph System& Inc., except as required by law. City of University Park, Texas Software and Services Agreement THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into between, City of University Park, Texas, hereinafter referred to as "City" whose address is City of University Park, 3800 University Blvd, University Park, TX 75205 and Cart~Graph Systems, Inc. 3600 Digital Drive, Dubuque, Iowa 52003, hereinafter referred to as "Cart~Graph". Scope Of Project Software Licenses Platinum Maintenance Professional Services Software Licenses CARTl~GRAPH shall license the following Software License(s) in the quantities and for the amounts listed in Software Costs And Professional Service Fees: · CALLlink · MAPdirector (s.a.) · SIGNview · W©RKdirector · SIGNALview · MARKINGview · WATERview · STORMview · VERSAtools · SEWERview · PAVEMENTview Platinum Maintenance Platinum Maintenance provides updates and upgrades to all licensed products for the term of the maintenance agreement. Services And Products Covered: Platinum Maintnenace applies to the Software Product(s) listed in Software Costs and Professional Service Fees. During the term of this Agreement, Cart~Graph will provide the following services or products as part of this Agreement 1. Technical Support The City will receive unlimited toll-free support via phone, fax or e-mail through the Cart~Graph Help Desk for technical issues relating to the use of the licensed software. Telephone support will be available Monday through Friday between the hours of 7:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m. Central time by dialing 800-688- 2656 ext 6200 (support~cartegraph. com). 2. PLATFORM. Cart~Graph software is supported within the following operating systems: Windows, ME, NT4, 2000, 2003, XP. Supported operating systems will be listed on Cart~Graph's web site. (http://www.cartegraph.com) 3. DATABASE. Cart~Graph software is supported within the following database environments: Access, SQL 7.x, Oracle 8.x. Professional Services CartSGraph shall provide the following Professional Services to implement and deploy the following Software Licenses. · CALLlink · WATERview · WORKdirector · SEWERview City of University Park, Texas Cart~Graph shall be responsible for the timely performance of all Professional Services and warrants that all professional and technical services provided to City of University Park pursuant to this Agreement shall be of good and workmanlike quality and will meet or exceed standards of similar professional services within the industry. Cart~Graph makes no further warranty, representation or promise not expressly set forth in this Agreement. 1) Project Management Services. Cart~Graph will provide guidance in the management of this implementation project and will take responsibility for the resources Cart~Graph allocates to the project (i.e., education, installation and support). Cart~Graph will provide a project manager for the project for the entire duration of the project and will provide administrative support for Cart~Graph staff and activities. Throughout the Project Management Task Cart~Graph will attend status meetings and employ ongoing Project Management techniques to ensure a comprehensive Project Work Plan is developed, monitored and maintained upon initiation of the project to reflect agreed upon dates and services. Specific efforts include the following Services: a) Data Collection and Import of R.L. Goodsen Data i) Cartegraph will be responsible for attending meetings and leading the effort related to the development of standard naming conventions and standard operating procedures related to field data collection. This will involve facilitation with Cartegraph and the City of University Park to develop the materials, documents and procedures that will be put in place as part of this effort. ii) Cartegraph will meet with the City of University Park and Cartegraph to develop Standard Naming Conventions (SNC) for data collection. This data will be collected and attributed in the field by R.L. Goodsen and delivered to Cartegraph as an ASCII text file. This data will be delivered to Cartegraph on a monthly basis for conversion and import into the Cartegraph asset management database. iii) Cartegraph will work with the City of University Park and Cartegraph to develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the collection and attribution of field collected data. Each SOP will be developed for the particular type of asset being collected. For example, field personnel will locate an asset, identify the appropriate SOP for collecting information about that asset and then populate the information in the appropriate data fields on the computer, based on the instructions located in the SOP. 2) iv) Cartegraph will review the data for adherence to data collection standards and will accept or reject the data. This data will be imported into a SQL database that will be linked to the appropriate Operational Consultation Services. Cart~Graph will provide a seven (7)day on-site consultation package focused on gathering City of University Park workflow and process requirements that will allow CartSGraph to tailor Professional Services to specifically address those workflow and process requirements. These services are more particularly described as: a) Review process requirements for work and asset management and provide recommendations on usage of the software licenses to accomplish your objectives. b) Review workflow requirements and provide training curriculum and agenda to meet those requirements. c) Review Standard Naming Convention and Data collection standards recommendations. d) Review and recommend structure for data collections and importing of data from RL Goodsen into CartSGraph applications. e) Review New World Utility Meter database conversion. f) Cartegraph will work on-site to discuss programming options and integration strategies for accomplishing all integration activities. This will require support from City IT personnel as well as subject-matter experts from the City that have been assigned to this project. g) Review Integration requirements including: 4 City of University Park, Texas 3) 4) i) Inventory is currently managed inside of Maximus. Actual material cost fields, material description, part number, quantity and Work Order # and average cost in CarteGraph work Orders will be populated from the Maximus Fleet Program. This will be a one way feed from Maximus to CSI. Estimated quantities may be entered by the field crews but are not for final calculation of cost. Non stock items to be entered in Workdirector directly. ii) Review requirements to develop a Master Address List. New World Utility db, Public Safety HTE db and Impact db will be used for address conversion. Phase I will be a conversion from both db's to CarteGraph. Make recommendations on developing a routine for converting the New World, Impact and Public Safety db's into a single SQL db. This will be a master address list. iii) Review importing Labor Rates in New World imported into CSI. Import routine to be developed to update Labor and employee data. iv) Make recommendations for field data collection solution. h) The above Services are partially contracted for as part of CarteGraph Agreement dated November 24,2003. The costs included herein are the additional fees required to complete the scope of this Agreement. Installation Services. Cart~Graph will provide through Internet access, expert technical resources to work with City of University Park's Information Systems personnel to install, configure, and optimize the Cart~Graph software suite in City of University Park's SQL database environment. Service assumptions include: a) City of University Park will purchase and install the database software but CarteGraph will configure and optimize City of University Park's SQL database. b) Database replication/synchronization is not required. c) The License Server will be installed on the database server. d) System Implementation and Testing Cartegraph will upload all programming code to the Cartegraph server and test all integration activities to ensure that data integrity is in place and all data is updating correctly. It is important to note that Cartegraph is responsible for linking to the data that is being maintained by the City and all primary data integrity issues (data entry) will be the responsibility of the City. e) Cart~Graph will stage one (1) PC client with the appropriate application(s) and a knowledge transfer will take place that will allow City of University Park to stage and maintain the remaining PC clients. f) Cart~Graph will provide data backup recommendations. g) City of University Park IT staff will be present and available at all times during Installation. Modification Services. Cart~Graph will provide up to 72 hours of time in creating forms, filters, and reports to City of University Park specifications. Education Services. Cart~Graph will provide the following training and education services. On-site training will be scheduled at mutually agreeable times in City of University Park facilities. Intemet Training will be scheduled at mutually agreeable times. Training will occur both on the Cart~Graph training database, "Carteville", and City of University Park's database utilizing any customized forms, filters, and reports as mutually determined through the Operational Consultation report discussed in Item 2. Cart~Graph will provide all instructors and all appropriate course materials and instructor visuals. City of University Park will provide facilities and any equipment required for the training, including server and client computers as necessary. These services are more particularly described as: a) City of University Park will approve agendas prior to the training. Cart~Graph agrees to consult with County prior to developing the training agenda. b) All training done in City of University Park facilities. City of University Park to provide all training computers and stage them with the appropriate Cart~Graph applications. c) City of University Park will advise Cart~Graph as to the number of expected attendees for any particular class. d) Onsite Training will occur in minimums of two-day increments and more specifically as follows: i) On-site classroom training - 9 days City of University Park, Texas ii) On-site desktop mentoring - 7 days iii) On-site Go Live Mentoring - 5 days iv) On-site Post Production - 2 days v) Internet classroom Training- 12 sessions vi) Internet desktop mentoring - 4 sessions vii) Integration Knowledge Transfer- 1Trip (1) Follow-up support and Knowledge Transfer. The trip will focus on integration 'tuning' and training of the personnel who will be maintaining the links to other data sources. The focus in these meetings will be on enabling City personnel to fine-tune and manage the programming activities put in place as part of this project. 6) Data Management. Cart~Graph will provide conversion services and assistance in moving City of University Park's current New World Utility Meter into the Cart~Graph Version 6 SQL WORKdirector database tables in a Test environment. City of University Park will be granted thirty-days upon receipt and load of the converted data in which to review the data. If, within the thirty-days, any discrepancies are found between the agreed upon conversion specifications to be mutually developed and agreed upon and the actual data delivered, Cart~Graph will correct the data at no additional charge. Upon direction from City of University Park, Cart~Graph will provide conversion services to move City of University Park's current MS-Access, Excel files, and Word document information into the Cart~Graph Version 6 WORKdirector database tables in the City of University Park's Production environment. The Utility billing meters will be imported into WATERview and will include the following fields of information: a) Meter Number b) Meter Size c) Meter Location (Northing and Easting) d) Address Two files have been identified for use in the import process. One is a "Meter-related file" and the other is a "Service address file". Both of these files will be used in the import process and it will be the responsibility of the City to identify which fields will be used in the import routine. 7) Integration. Cart~Graph will work on-site to discuss programming options and integration strategies for accomplishing all integration activities. This will require support from City IT personnel as well as subject- matter experts from the City that have been assigned to this project. All integration will be designed and tested prior to deployment. Service Warranty Period initiates at the time of deployment and productive use. a) Inventory Management Cart~Graph will program a one-way link from MAXIMUS to Cartegraph that updates the actual materials used for a particular work order. The following information will be updated on a nightly basis: i) Part Number ii) Part Description iii) Quantity Used iv) Work Order Number v) Average Cost All non-inventory items will be added directly into the Cart~Graph database by the City of University Park and Cart~Graph will customize the work order materials form to accommodate the addition of this data. Cart~Graph will also create a report that will identify the quantity of non-stock items to determine if they should be added to the order list. City of University Park, Texas b) c) Master Address List Cartegraph will create a script that generates a master address list from three databases provided by the City of University Park, Texas. These address lists will be conflated to generate one SQL table that is designed to contain the most accurate address information by using data fields from all three databases. The three databases have been identified as the following: i) New World Utility Database ii) IMPACT - Parcel-based information iii) Public Safety (HTE) Database CartSGraph will provide an Entity-Relationship Diagram to the City that illustrates the tables and relationships that will be used to generate the master SQL table. The City will identify the fields to be used from each database table and provide that list back to Cartegraph within 10 working days of providing the Entity-Relationship Diagram to the City. Labor Rates and Payroll Information Cartegraph will generate a script that contains logic for updating payroll information on a biweekly basis. This script will update any payroll information related to promotions, pay raises, hiring, terminations that have taken place since the last pay period. The logic contained in the script will complete the following: i) Validate the pay rate for each employee by comparing it to the last pay period's rate. ii) If the pay rate is identical - DO NOTHiNG iii) If the pay rate has changed (1) Enter the current pay period ending date in the current Cartegraph pay period field. (2) Create a new record for the labor table with the current pay period date. (3) Enter the new pay rate. (4) Enter the current employee grade. (5) Commit to SQL database. iv) Synchronize with Cartegraph database using a scheduled routine on the CartSGraph server. Project Assumptions Professional Services are based on the following assumptions: 1) Onsite Professional Services shall be completed at the facilities listed below. Main Office: City of University Park, 3800 University Blvd University Park, TX 75205 2) 3) Professional Services are Cart~Graph's not to exceed estimates or fixed fee quotations (see Software and Professional Service Fee Table) based on projects of similar size and scope and on City of University Park's assumption of designated responsibilities. A Project Work Plan including project start date, delivery of Professional Services and specifications will be mutually agreed upon and provided within 14 days from contract signing. The length of the Project Work Plan may not reflect the length of the full product deployment. Deployment completion (productive use) is a customer-driven initiative based on resource allocation and/or organizational requirements. Both parties recognize that time is of the essence and will provide staff resources and efforts to ensure deployment completion occurs as soon as is reasonably possible. Final project dates will be determined and progress will be monitored through joint regular and periodic status meetings. Staffing City of University Park, Texas The most critical element in the successful completion of any engagement of this nature is the personnel assigned to carry out the responsibilities. Responsibilities of each project participant: 1. Project Manager- TBD This individual is entrusted with the day-to-day coordination and responsibility for the asset management implementation project. It is their responsibility to see that the detailed project approach steps are completed and that efforts of the other project team members are coordinated to provide for the efficient and timely completion of the project. This person is also directly involved with performing the project tasks. 2. Project Consultants - These individuals are responsible for providing advice and direction relating to specific technical aspects of the project, including database management systems and software application installation. CartSGraph professional staff members are highly qualified consultants with broad and detailed knowledge of the CartSGraph asset management applications and the public works asset management industry and are responsible for application knowledge transfer to the designated University Park City employees. 3. City of University Park Project Coordinator- Russell Haddock. This individual is responsible for coordinating the efforts and involvement of City of University Park with the CartSGraph project team members. This person will help identify the internal personnel who are best qualified to assist CartSGraph on specific matters and will act as the communication focal point between CartSGraph and City of University Park City personnel. City of University Park Responsibilities City of University Park accepts responsibility for all aspects of project planning, management and execution not specifically described under "Scope of Services." On-going management of the day-to-day allocation of City of University Park resources, and management of City of University Park project tasks is the responsibility of City of University Park. City of University Park will provide overall guidance and direction for the project and will direct the project accordingly. Further, and with regard to the Cart~Graph obligations listed under the "Scope of Project" section, City of University Park understands that it is vital to the success of the project that City of University Park provides assistance in the following matters: 1) For those services listed under "Professional Services", Cart~Graph personnel will conduct information gathering and evaluation sessions with various City of University Park users and management. While Cart~Graph respects the time and workload of City of University Park staff, dedicated time on the part of the appropriate City of University Park resources is necessary to complete these services. 2) The installation process requires the periodic assistance of City of University Park personnel and suitable access to hardware and systems (e.g., security clearance). City of University Park is encouraged to supervise the installation process while systems are accessible to Cart~Graph. It is assumed all hardware, both Personal Computers and Network and Database servers, will be installed and operating in a manner that delivery and execution of Cart~Graph Professional Services will not be impeded. 3) City of University Park understands that the successful performance of Professional Services depends upon City of University Park fulfilling its responsibilities. The Project assumes that City of University Park will provide all personnel required to achieve a successful implementation. 4) City of University Park shall install and network it's own hardware and communications and this will not affect the timing or the delivery of Cart~Graph services. 5) City of University Park will provide Internet access and IT staff support as required. City of University Park, Texas Project Investment City of University Park will compensate Cart~Graph for the software, services, and expenses provided pursuant to this Agreement in the amount listed below and in accordance with the Rebuilding Our Homeland Grant Program. Software is the most currently published standard version at the time of installation. SOFTWARE AND SERVICES INCLUDED IN PROJECT SOFTWARE: (Licensed for use with MS-SQL database) CALLlink WORKdirector WATERview SEWERview MAPdirector (s.a.) SIGNALview STORMview PAVEMENTview SIGNview MARKINGview VERSAtools Gross Software Cost Platinum Maintenance (software) Software Credits (Homeland Grant ) Adjusted Software and Maintenance Cost PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: Implementation Services included as described: Project Management Operational Consultation (Total fee is $20,500.00 with $12,900 to be paid under separate Cart~Graph Agreement dated November 24,2003) Installation Modification Services Education Services On site Internet sessions 1 72 Fixed 1 year Units 1 Fixed 1 Fixed 23 16 Data Management 1 Integration 1 Professional Services Cost I Custom Services Support 1 TOTAL PROJECT COST-CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK I Estimated ExpensesI (billed and due separately) Concurrent Licenses 5 10 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 $122,500.00 $24,500.00 ($25,000.00) I $122,000.00 $19,425.00 $7,600.00 Fixed $6,000.00 Hours $12,600.00 Days $38,300.00 Sessions $10,000.00 Fixed $14,000.00 Fixed $28,000.00 $135,925.00 year 6,000.00 $263,925.00 $13,000 Future years' annual Platinum Maintenance for all purchased Cart~Graph modules will be 20% of the then listed purchase price. This is currently estimated to be 24,500.00 for the listed modules. Custom Services Support is quoted on a annual basis. Additional Services. In the event it becomes apparent to Cart~Graph that service efforts detailed in the Agreement will be exceeded due to any changes in the scope of services required, Cart~Graph will notify City of University Park prior to exceeding the approved efforts. Actual out of pocket and travel expenses will be billed as incurred on the project. Client will approve all travel prior to scheduling and booking. City of University Park, Texas Cart~Graph can also provide such additional professional services, including consultation services, customization, data conversion, integration services and training sessions, as may be requested by City of University Park. Payment Terms and Conditions In consideration for the Services and Products provided by Cart~Graph to City of University Park, and in accordance with the Rebuilding Our Homeland Grant Program, City of University Park agrees to pay Cart~Graph Software Costs And Professional Service Fees in U.S. Dollars as described below: Delivery, Invoicing and Payment Terms 1) Delivery: Software shall be licensed upon acceptance of this Agreement and Platinum Maintenance services will begin upon licensing of the Software. Professional Services will be scheduled and delivered upon your acceptance of this Agreement, which will be considered as your notification to proceed. 2) Invoicing: Software and Maintenance will be invoived upon licensing of the Software Products and at which time the Rebuilding Our Homeland Grant Program matching funds will be applied. Professional Services will be invoiced as incurred on the project 3) Payment Terms. All payments are due Net 30 days from date of invoice. General Terms This Agreement takes precedence over all attachments in the event of conflicting terms and conditions. The terms and conditions of any and all Exhibits and Attachments to this Agreement are incorporated herein by this reference and shall constitute part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. Article and Section headings used herein are for reference purposes only and shall not be deemed a part of this Agreement. This Agreement, together with all Exhibits and Attachments hereto, constitute the entire Agreement between the parties and supercedes all previous Agreements including promises and representations, whether written or oral, between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. Service Warranty Period. The Warranty period for Professional Services provided under this Agreement will begin on the date of acceptance of this Agreement and will terminate 90 days after first productive use, as determined by the Project Work Plan, of Software listed in this Agreement. Limited Warranty - Software. Cart~Graph warrants that if Software fails to substantially conform to the published Software specifications and the nonconformity is reported in writing by City of University Park to Cart~Graph within 90 days from the date of installation, then Cart~Graph shall, at its option, either correct the nonconformity or offer to terminate this Agreement and refund licensing fees previously paid by City of University Park upon return of all copies of the Software and documentation to Cart~Graph. In the event of such a refund the license conveyed by this Agreement shall terminate. This Limited Warranty is solely for the benefit of City of University Park. Limitation Of Liabili _ty. The total liability of Cart~Graph, including but not limited to liability arising out of contract, tort, breach of warranty, or conditions, claims by third parties or otherwise, shall not in any event exceed the license fees paid by licensee for the Software Product which gave rise to the claim. Cart~Graph shall not be liable for direct damages hereunder and in no event shall Cart~Graph be liable for loss of profits, loss or inaccuracy of data or any indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages (including without limitation the cost of any substitute procurement) even if such party had been advised of the possibility thereof. Cart~Graph's liability for its failure to perform under this Agreement shall be limited to the fee paid under this Agreement. No action, regardless of form, arising out of this Agreement may be brought by either party more than one year after the cause of the action has occurred, except that an action for non-payment may be brought at any time. Disclaimer of Warranties. Cart~Graph makes no warranty, representation or promise not expressly set forth in this Agreement. Cart~Graph disclaims and excludes any and all implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose. Insurance.. Carte'Graph carries commercial general liability insurance with a limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence and a $2,000,000 aggregate limit, business auto liability insurance with a limit of $1,000,000 and workers compensation 10 City of University Park, Texas insurance with statutory coverage. Upon request, Carte'Graph will fumish Customer with an insurance certificate indicating the same. Remedies~ Notice and Cure. In the event of any material breach of a nonpayment provision of the Agreement by either party, the aggrieved party shall give written notice thereof, including a reasonably detailed statement of the nature of such breach, to the breaching party. The breaching party shall have ten business days after notice is given to cure such breach, or, if the breach cannot reasonably be cured within ten business days, shall provide a written estimate of the time needed to cure such breach, shall commence to cure such breach within ten business days of notice from the aggrieved party and shall diligently continue to prosecute such cure to completion. If the breaching party fails to cure, commence to cure in timely manner, or diligently prosecute such cure to completion, the aggrieved party, at its option, shall be entitled to invoke the Non-Performance clause. Notwithstanding the above to the contrary, if the breach occurs with respect to only a specific Application or Applications, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect with respect to other Applications. Non-Performance. In the event that City of University Park reasonably determines that Cart~Graph is not performing in a manner consistent with the Terms and Conditions of this Purchase Agreement, then City of University Park will have the right to, in the sequence shown: (a) formally notify Cart~Graph of specific non- performance issue; (b) if after a mutually agreed upon reasonable period of time the non-performance has not been resolved, then reserve the right to withhold any and all payments pending, including Maintenance Agreement fees, until the non-performance is corrected, not excluding on-site visits; (c) request a joint meeting of Cart~Graph and City of University Park representatives to attempt to resolve the non-performance; (d) if after a reasonable period the non-performance remains unresolved, request arbitration in Illinois pursuant to the terms of the American Arbitration Association. Cart~Graph has the right to invoke this Section as well and to follow the same sequence of escalation. Relationship of the Parties. Cart~Graph and City of University Park are independent of each other. This Agreement does not and is not intended to create in any way or manner or for any purpose an employee/employer relationship or a principal-agent relationship. Neither party is authorized to enter into agreements for or on behalf of the other, to create any obligation or responsibility, express or implied, for or on behalf of the other, to accept payment of any obligation due or owed the other, or to accept service of process for the other. Cart~Graph is an independent contractor, customarily engaged in the performance of similar services for other parties. Severability. The terms and conditions of this Agreement are severable. If any term or condition of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, this invalidity shall not affect the other terms, conditions or applications which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition or application. Transfer of Agreement. Cart~Graph shall not transfer or assign any of its rights or obligations under the agreement to any other party without the prior written consent of City of University Park, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. Legal Proceedings. This contract shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas. Venue for any legal proceedings shall be in Dallas County, Texas. Notices. All notices or communications required or permitted as a part of this agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered at the address set forth in this Agreement. The parties, each acting under due and proper authority, have executed this Agreement as of the day, month and year written below: Accepted: CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, Accepted: Cart~Graph Systems, Inc.' Bob Livingston - City Manager Date Mark Weber- Chief Finance Officer Date 11 AGENDA MEMO (08-03-04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: July 29, 2004 Bob Livingston City Manager Gene R. Smallwood, P.E. Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Consider addendum to proposal from GSVWV, Inc to provide engineering services associated with sanitary sewer collection system flow metering and analysis. Background. At their 10-22-03 meeting, the City Council approved a contract with GSWW, Inc. to provide the engineering services associated with flow monitoring and analysis of infiltration / inflow in the City's wastewater collection system. Staff has asked the consultant to determine to what extent the I/I has been reduced by the installation of new sewer mains over the past several years. GSWW has been metering flows for through the winter months, however, there were not any significant rainfall events. In order to determine I/I, there is a definitive relationship between "wet-weather" and dry-weather" flows. The proposed addendum provides for an extension of contract time to allow for additional flow monitoring during a "wetter" period. The $9,100 addendum is a 24% increase of the consultant's original contract. Recommendation. Staff recommends City Council approval of the addendum to the GSVVW, Inc contract to provide engineering services associated with sanitary sewer collection system flow metering and analysis. July 5, 2004 City of University Park P.O. Box 8005 Dallas, TX 75205-0005 Attention: Reference: Mr. Gene R. "Bud" Smallwood, P.E. Director of Public Works Flow Monitoring Pedod Extension Dear Mr. Smallwood: Our Post Rehabilitation Flow Monitoring proposal dated October 3, 2003 included a base 60-day flow metering period which began on April 14, 2004. An optional metering extension charge or $65.00/day was included. As discussed recently, wa request your approval for extension of the Ih flow monitoring pedod through Sunday July 4 to take advantage of the recent wet conditions and ongoing rainfall episodes. This would result in a 24% increase ($9,100.00) in the $38,080.00 contract, to a revised maximum contract amount of $47,180.00. This is a unique opportunity since we are experiencing what may be the wettest June on record in the Dallas area. Sincerely, GUTIERREZ, SMOUSE, WILMUT & ASSOC., INC. pCrhe~aril~eSnt~Wilmut, P.E. ACCEPTED: CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK Bob Livingston, City Manager AGENDA MEMO (08/03/04 AGENDA) DATE: TO: FROM: July 21, 2004 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Councilmember Walker SUBJECT: Meetings with School Groups Because of my involvement with various school groups, I frequently hear comments regarding issues and changes the City might make in order to assist them. Based on this, I feel it would be beneficial to meet with PTA Presidents of the HPISD schools along with similar representatives of our larger private schools. The meetings could be held on a quarterly basis for approximately an hour. It would provide an opportunity to learn of issues and respond to questions. I would also request that a member of staff, probably the City Manager, attend as well. If the Mayor and members of the City Council are agreeable to this proposal, I am willing to serve as the Council's representative and organize the meetings. RECOMMENDATION: Allow Councilmember Walker to establish the meetings. ATTACHMENTS: None 3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644 C:\Documents and Settings\nwils°n'UNIVPARK\L°cal Settings~Temporary Internet Files\OLK3\PTALIASON072104.doc 3:35 PM 07/22J BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES June 28, 2004 The Board of Adjustment of the City of University Park met on Monday, June 28, 2004 at 5:00 P.M. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 3800 University Blvd. University Park, Texas. The following are minutes of that meeting. Commission Members Attending Staff Members Attending Jerry Grable - Chairman Steve Metzger Lon Housemen William Hitzelberger, Ilk Beth Dargene Wade McLaurin - Bldg. & Zoning Administrator Jennifer Patrick - Administrative Secretary Rob Dillard - City Attorney Mr. Grable opened the public hearing and introduced the commission members. Mr. Grable asked for a motion in regards to the minutes from the March 22, 2004 Board of Adjustment meeting, Mr. Hitzelberger moved to approve the minutes, with a second from Mr. Housemen. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. Mr. Grable read the charge of the Board of Adjustment and asked that all those that would be speaking to please stand to be sworn in. Mr. Housemen read the specifics of the first case. B.O.A. 04-04 - Rudy Pena, owner of the property at 4523 Shenandoah, requesting a variance to Section 9-602(1) of the University Park Zoning Ordinance to allow a one foot, five inch (1'-5") variance to the eleven foot, five inch (11'-5") combined side yard width requirement. The applicant is proposing an addition to the existing home that will maintain the current non-conforming side yard setbacks on both sides of the property. Mr. McLaurin noted the applicant had informed staff of his inability to attend this evenings meeting due to an out of town business meeting. Mr. Grable inquired if there was anyone else present to represent the applicant, no one came forward. Mr. Grable asked for a motion. Mr. Housemen moved to continue Mr. Pena's variance request to the next Board of Adjustment meeting, with a second from Mr. Metzger. The motion was approved Board Of Adjustment Minutes 06/28/2004 Page 2 of 4 unanimously 5-0. Mr. Housemen, then read the specifics of the second case. B.O.A. 04-05 - Harold & Bunny Ginsburg, owners of the property at 4433 Stanhope, requesting a variance to Section 9-602(2)(a) of the University Park Zoning Ordinance to allow a vertical wall surface in excess of twelve feet, six inches (12'-6") in height to be closer than forty (40) feet to the rear property line. The applicant is proposing a vertical wall height of twenty-one feet, nine inches (21 '-9") adjacent to the side street. Mr. Harold Ginsburg, owner of the property at 4433 Stanhope, was introduced and made a brief statement. Mr. Ginsburg, then introduced, his architect, Tim Broadhead, resident of 1730 Clearlake, Houston, TX. Mr. Broadhead, presented a copy of the site plan of the proposed residence of 4433 Stanhope. He went on to describe the need for the variance, noting the property hardship was due to the lot depth being shallower than the "norm" or "compression" of the lot due to the depth. Mr. Grable inquired what property hardship did the applicant believe he had. Mr. Broadhead replied that the applicant lost out on twenty feet (20') of area, due to the lot size being one hundred-thirty feet (130')deep verses one hundred-fifty feet deep. Mr. Grable asked if the lot size had changed, and if it had ever changed. Mr. Broadhead replied no. Mr. Grable inquired if the other lots in the area were one hundred thirty feet (130') deep. Mr. Broadhead noted the other lots in the area were one hundred fifty feet (150') deep. Mr. Grable asked Mr. McLaurin to explain the adjacent area. Mr. McLaurin noted the two (2) blocks north and south of 4433 Stanhope all had depths of one hundred thirty feet (130'). Mr. Grable asked Mr. Broadhead if he was familiar with the University Park Ordinances, specifically the lot depth required to accommodate the size of structure indicated on the plans submitted. Mr. Broadhead replied the required lot depth should be one hundred fifty feet (150'). A discussion ensued regarding the other issues with the submitted drawings namely, the structure being beyond the maximum forty-two percent (42%) of the lot depth for wall heights in excess of twelve feet, six inches (12'6"), and the two story wall height extending twenty feet (20') past the Board Of Adjustment Minutes 06/28/2004 Page 3 of 4 required forty foot (40') rear setback. Mr. Broadhead noted the west elevation, aesthetically held strictly to the ordinances as outlined per the City of University Park. Mr. Grable inquired if there were any favoring or opposing parties present. Mr. Jim Neubauer, owner/resident of 4424 Shenandoah, was introduced and noted he was in favor of the applicant's request. Mr. Neubauer stated he liked the design of the structure, and favored the circular drive, which would keep automobiles off the street. He noted the site plan had other safety features as well; a taller building height, which would provide security for his residence. With his residence being directly behind 4433 Stanhope, and having a three (3) car garage, the proposed structure would block the view, deterring thieves. Mr. Neubauer stated he felt he would be the most affected by the proposed structure. Mr. Harold Ginsburg, resident of 4500 Potomac and owner of the property at 4433 Stanhope, was introduced and made a brief statement. Mr. Ginsburg noted he had a petition signed by the adjacent property owners, voicing their support of his variance request. Mr. Housemen read correspondence from Mr. Dan Baird, resident of 4429 Stanhope, voicing his support for the variance request. Then, Mr. Housemen read the following names and addresses off the petition in support of Mr. Ginsburg's request: David M. Reichert Jr., resident of 4501 Stanhope, David R. Evans, resident of 4424 Stanhope, Chris & Debbie Teesdale, resident of 4420 Shenandoah, Leigh J. Hahn, resident of 6231 Lomo Alto and Michael Shannon McCraig, resident of 4408 Stanhope. Mr. Grable closed the public hearing, and inquired if the board members had any questions. Mr. Hitzelberger asked staff if the front yard setback was inline. Mr. McLaurin stated yes. Mr. Grable stated he had a hard time understanding the property hardship as outlined by the applicant, and noted the lot has always had a depth of one hundred-thirty feet (130'). He added when the lot was purchased, the lot depth had already been established. Mr. Grable noted there would not be a precedence set if this variance was granted, resulting in all one hundred-thirty foot (130') lot owners wanting to over-build and apply for variances. He stated the vertical wall surface request was exceeding regulations by twenty-six percent (26%) and the forty-two percent (42%) requirement of the lot depth, was exceeded by thirty percent (30%). Mr. Grable noted he had personally observed from Lomo Alto, a residence with an estimated chimney height of twenty-two feet (22'). He added the proposed structure would have an estimated chimney height of twenty-eight feet (28"), with the seventy-eight feet (78') deep and wide. Mr. Grable stated this was a self-imposed hardship, designing a large house on a lot not suitable in size. Mr. Grable asked the board members if they had any comments. Board Of Adjustment Minutes 06/28/2004 Page 4 of 4 Mr. Housemen stated he agreed with Mr. Grable's comments. He noted he had met with Mr. Ginsburg, and liked the design of the structure presented for the variance request. Mr. Housemen stated the Board of Adjustment could not rewrite the zoning ordinance to accommodate this request, and reiterated the lack of hardship. He added he struggles with the size of his own lot, in regards to design. Mr. Housemen stated he believed this issue should not be presented to the Board of Adjustment, but before Planning and Zoning to address the possible change of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Housemen added the board could not reinterpret the zoning ordinance. Mr. Grable asked for a motion. Mr. Hitzelberger moved to deny the requested variance, with a second from Mr. Metzger. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. There being no further business before the Commission, Mr. Grable adjourned the meeting. Jerry Grable, Chairman, Board of Adjustment Date BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES July 8, 2004 The Board of Adjustment of the City of University Park met on Thursday, July 8, 2004 at 5:00 P.M. in the Council Conference Room of City Hall, 3800 University Blvd. University Park, Texas. The following are minutes of that meeting. Commission Members Attending Staff Members Attending Jerry Grable - Chairman Roy Kull - Secretary Steve Metzger William Hitzelberger, Ilk Bill Lang Wade McLaurin - Bldg. & Zoning Administrator Jennifer Patrick - Administrative Secretary Rob Dillard - City Attorney Mr. Grable opened the public hearing and introduced the commission members. Mr. Grable read the charge of the Board of Adjustment and asked that all those that would be speaking to please stand to be sworn in. Mr. Kull read the specifics of the first case. B.O.A. 04-04 - Rudy Pena, owner of the property at 4523 Shenandoah, requesting a variance to Section 9-602(1) of the University Park Zoning Ordinance to allow a one foot, five inch (1'-5") variance to the eleven foot, five inch (11'-5") combined side yard width requirement. The applicant is proposing an addition to the existing home that will maintain the current non-conforming side yard setbacks on both sides of the property. Mr. Rudy Pena, resident/owner of 4523 Shenandoah, was introduced and thanked the board for convening for review of his request. He noted his inability to attend the last meeting due to an important out of town business meeting. Mr. Pena referenced to his correspondence dated April 30, 2004, requesting to construct a second story addition inline with the existing structure's setbacks. Mr. Grable asked Mr. Pena if the new addition extended into the front of the structure. Mr. Pena, stated yes, the addition would extend out as per the plans. Mr. Grable inquired where the off-street parking would be. Mr. Pena noted Mark Hardin, the city's plan reviewer, had referenced the off-street parking requirements, on his approved construction drawings. Board of Adjustment Minutes 07/08/2004 Page 2 of 3 Mr. Grable inquired what rooms would be included in the new addition. Mr. Pena stated the front portion of the first level would house a formal living room and a formal dining room. The second floor portion of the addition would consist of two (2) bedrooms, a game room and a spare room. Mr. Grable asked what was the distance of the new addition on the second floor. Mr. Pena stated the addition was seven hundred thirty five square feet (735 s.f.), and added he was not an architect. Mr. McLaurin noted the width of the new addition was seventeen feet (17'). Mr. Hitzelberger asked if the sides of the addition would be wrapped slightly in brick. Mr. Pena, stated yes, the sides would be wrapped slightly, with the second floor addition consisting of siding, with the brick on the existing lower portion of the home. He noted he had looked at a mixture of materials, and would be consistent with the architecture of the neighborhood. Mr. Metzger asked how the siding would be placed above the brick on the first floor. Mr. Pena replied that the siding would be flush with the existing brick. Mr. Hitzelberger asked Mr. Pena if he had started construction on his residence. Mr. Pena replied, yes, he had permitted drawings from the city. Outlining the structure as per ordinances, to start work, until he could get before the board to request a variance. He added the demolition process had started. The board members reviewed the construction drawings. Mr. Dillard stated at the current time, there was not any parking. Mr. McLaurin noted there had been a single car garage in the front of the structure. Mr. Dillard added the structure would have to have rear entry parking. Mr. Pena stated there would be a parking pad at the rear of the structure. Mr. Grable asked if there was any correspondence. Mr. Kull noted there was not. Mr. Grable asked for any general comments. Board of Adjustment Minutes 07/08/2004 Page 3 of 3 A discussion ensued regarding flashing down materials to avoid the need for a variance request on the side-yard setback, it was determined with the need of the other variance, Mr. Pena would not need to redesign the structure. Mr. Pena stated his main concern was the second floor addition, again staying flush with the existing structure. Mr. Grable stated the Board of Adjustment does not like to set precedence, and does not do such. He added the board has approved requests similar to Mr. Pena's in the past. Mr. Grable stated Mr. Pena's request was different in the case of the "new" section of the addition in the front of his home. Mr. McLaurin asked Mr. Pena the year the structure was constructed. Mr. Pena stated 1942. Mr. Grable asked Mr. McLaurin if the proper front yard setback was indicated on Mr. Pena' s drawing. Mr. McLaurin stated there had been some confusion with the average front yard setbacks, when discussed in the case of an addition. He noted in the city ordinance, it reflected the average front yard setback use only when an existing structure was demolished, and a new one took its place. Mr. Dillard noted Mr. Pena's request was more or less average compared to previous requests. Mr. Grable asked for a motion. Mr. Kull moved to approve the variance, with a second from Mr. Hitzelberger. The motion was approved unanimously 5-0. There being no further business before the Commission, Mr. Grable adjourned the meeting. Jerry Grable, Chairman, Board of Adjustment Date CAPITAL PROJECTS UPDATE Week of August 1, 2004 Project No. Description Cost Major Tasks Uncompleted Target Date 42450 Fondren Tower- Fire Station No. 2 $30,000.00 (E) In-house construction (FD & FM) RLG completion of structural design TBD Complete 42730 Lovers Lane Reconstruction II - Hillcrest to NCE (1) Water & sanitary sewer construction (2) Pavement & Drainage Improvements $4,000,000.00 (E) Utility (Water - Hillcrest to Thackery) Utility (Sanitary Sewer - Hillcrest to Thackery) Utility (Water / San Sewer - Hillcrest S to alley) Pavmt & Drain (Baedeker E to Cleburne) Pavmt (Baedeker to Willard) Aug-04 O~-04 Nov-04 Complete Dec-04 42903 NCE Wall - Streets - Landscaping Tree / Street Lighting - Sidewalks $150,000.00 (E) Street light equipment installed "Entry Plaza" construction Complete Sum-04 42980 42980 C& G Replacement FY00-01 C& G Replacement FY00-01 Change No 1 (**) (continued) $2,223,254.65 (A) $351,523.50 (A) Amherst, Durham to Airline Amherst, TC Blvd to Preston Asbury, Golf to High School Baltimore, Lovers Lane to Hanover Bryn Mawr, Baedeker to Airline Baedeker, Hanover to Southwestern Complete TBD TBD Complete Complete Complete Page 1 42980 C& G Replacement FYO0-01 (continued) Page 2 Caruth, Turtle Creek Blvd to Thackeray Centenary, Thackeray to Baltimore Glenwick, Preston to Westwick Glenwick, Preston to HPHS parking garage Grassmere, Preston to Westchester Granada, HJllcrest to Key Glenwick, Preston to HS Garage Greenbrier, Preston to Douglas Hanover, Preston to Baltimore Hyer, Preston to Westchester Larchmont, Armstrong to Lomo Alto Marquette, Baltimore to Pickwick Marquette, Turtle Creek Blvd to Thackeray McFarlin, Preston to Westchester Normandy, Armstrong to Lomo Alto Preston, San Carlos to McFarlin Purdue, Durham to Dickens Rosedale, Thackery to Golf San Carlos, Preston to Armstrong + Lomo Alto Shenandoah, Douglas to Armstrong Shenandoah, Roland to Armstrong Shenandoah, Hillcrest to Auburndale Stanford, Airline to Hillcrest Stanford, TC Blvd to Prteston Stanhope, Douglas to Lomo Alto Stanhope, Preston to Douglas Complete Complete Delete Complete Complete Complete Delete Complete Complete Complete Sept-04\ Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete TBD Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete Corn ~lete TBD TBD 46310 43700 43710 43710 48100 48200 48300 MPY-Caruth Park Area Water / San Sewer / Stm Sewer City Hall - Renovation and Expansion City Hall II - Drainage Improvements City Hall III - 24" Water main Installation Paint Fondren Elevated Tank MPY-Auburndale-Key / Water / Sanitary Sewer / Storm S~ Automated Meter Reading $2,135,000.00 (E) ............. (E) $3,000,000.00 (E) $630,000.00 (E) $300,000.00 (E) $555,000.00 (E) $1,200,000.00 (E) Page 3 Thackeray, Rosedale to Milton University Blvd, Golf to alley east of Haynie Wentwood, Tulane to Pickwick Williams Pkwy, University to McFarlin (partial) Windsor Pkwy, Douglas to Preston Pkwy Windsor Pkwy, Douglas to Lomo Alto Design Bids Conceptual Design Construction Plans & Specs Design Corps of Engineers 404 Permit Wetlands Mitigation Credits Bids Water main construction Pavement Repairs Specification / Bid Documents Bids Design Bids * AMR installation - Cycle 1 (N of Lovers Lane) * AMR installation - Cycle 2 (S of Lovers Lane) * AMR installation - Cycle 3 (Parks, large meters, TBD Complete TBD Complete Complete Complete Complete Sep-04 Complete Fall-04 May-04 Complete Complete Fall-04 Complete Complete Complete TBD Spt-04 TBD Complete Complete Complete Training of City staff (Mobile Unit) Complete Page 4