HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 05-22-07 WebAGENDA
#2710
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK
COUNCIL CHAMBER
TUESDAY, MAY 22, 2007
5:00 P.M.
3:00-4:00 PM DISCUSS CHASE BANK PROJECT
4:00-4:15 PM EXECUTIVE SESSION: CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY
REGARDING DELIBERATION ON REAL PROPERTY, SECTIONS
551.071 & 551.072, GOVERNMENT CODE
4:15-4:20 PM FIRST PUBLIC HEARING TO ANNEX STRIP OF LAND ALONG
NORTHWEST PARKWAY
4:20-5:00 PM WORK SESSION FOR AGENDA REVIEW
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Questions and comments regarding Main Agenda items should be made when that item is
addressed by the City Council. Please be advised that under the Texas Open Meetings Act, the
council may not discuss or act at this meeting on a matter not listed on the Agenda. Other
questions or private comments for the City Council or Staff should be directed to that individual
immediately following the meeting.
I.CALL TO ORDER
INVOCATION– Councilmember Syd Carter
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Councilmember Syd Carter/Boy Scouts
–
INTRODUCTION OF COUNCILMayor James H. Holmes, III
INTRODUCTION OF STAFF– City Manager Bob Livingston
II. AWARDS AND RECOGNITION
DEPARTMENT PINS: Utilities Supervisor Lalo Garcia, 25 years, Purchasing Agent
Christine Green, 15 years and City Secretary Nina Wilson, 15 years for a total of 55 years
of service to the City.
RETIREMENT: Presentation of retirement plaque to City Secretary Nina Wilson.
III.CONSENT AGENDA
A.CONSIDER: Proposal from Alan Plummer & Associates (APAI) to provide
engineering services for development of a water distribution analysis and water
quality study for $81,105
B.CONSIDER: Proposal from R.L. Goodson to provide surveying services for mapping
the city’s stormsewer outfalls for $50,000 plus reimbursables
C.CONSIDER: Purchase of Newsracks at intersection of Preston & Normandy
(YMCA)
D.CONSIDER: Proposal for police/fire radio/telephone recording equipment and
electronic tracking system for bank robberies
E.CONSIDER: Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with the City of Grapevine for
Cooperative Purchasing
F.CONSIDER: Purchase of a sewer inspection van and associated equipment
G.CONSIDER: Resolution to canvass returns and declaration of results of Special
Election, May 12, 2007
H.CONSIDER: Approval of city council meeting minutes for May 1, 2007
IV.MAIN AGENDA
A.CONSIDER: Acceptance of FY2006 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
B.PRESENTATION: Traffic Impact Analysis of the proposed Chase Bank
Development
C.SECOND PUBLIC HEARING: To annex strip of land along Northwest Parkway
D.PUBLIC HEARING: To amend Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by amending
Section 26-100, Off-Street Parking Requirements other than in UC-1 and UC-2
Districts to require off-street parking spaces for multi-family residential dwelling
units
E.CONSIDER: Ordinance requiring off-street parking spaces for multi-family
residential dwelling units other than in UC-1 and UC-2 Districts
F.PUBLIC HEARING: To amend Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by amending
Section 22-101 (3) (a) providing for the maximum number of dwelling units in the
multi-family zoning districts
G.CONSIDER: Ordinance providing for maximum number of dwelling units in multi-
family zoning districts
H.PUBLIC HEARING: To amend site plan for Planned Development District PD-15
for the Highland Park Independent School District for property situated at 3503
Amherst and provide special conditions
I.CONSIDER: Ordinance approving a site plan for a freestanding arbor on the north
side of University Park Elementary School
J.CONSIDER: Ordinance amending building requirements to require concrete paving
between the rear property line and alley pavement
K.CONSIDER: Bids for sidewalk replacement around four Highland Park Independent
School District Campuses
L.CONSIDER: Bids for Barbara Hitzelberger Park project
V. ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR
Anyone wishing to address an item not on the Agenda should do so at this time.
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.
AGENDA MEMO
(05-22-07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 8, 2007
TO:
Bob Livingston
City Manager
FROM:
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Consider proposal from Alan Plummer & Associates (APAI) in the
amount of $81,105 to provide engineering services associated with
development of a water distribution analysis and water quality
study.
Background.
The attached proposal from APAI provides the engineering
services necessary to accomplish two tasks – development of a water distribution
analysis, and performing a water quality study.
The last water distribution system analysis was performed in 1992. Generally, the
consultant is asked to develop a theoretical computer model of the system.
Considerable field work is necessary to test pressures and calibrate the model.
There have been considerable improvements made to the distribution system in the
past fifteen years, leaving the old model unusable.
The proposed water quality study will also develop a computer model of the
distributions system which will identify areas (or pipes) that have very low flows or
pressures and are subject to low chlorine residual levels.
Recommendation.
Staff recommends City Council approval of the APAI proposal in
the amount of $81,105 to perform the water distribution system analysis and a water
quality study.
905-0020-01
ALAN PLUMMER ASSOCIATES, INC.
STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
Project No. 905-0020-01
This AGREEMENT is entered on the date of execution by and between ALAN PLUMMER ASSOCIATES, INC., a
Texas corporation hereinafter referred to as ENGINEER and the following described entity, hereinafter referred to as
"CLIENT."
CLIENT INFORMATION
Name: City of University Park Contact: Mr. Bob Whaling
Billing Address: 3800 University Blvd. Title: City Engineer
University Park, Texas 75205-1711 Telephone: 214-987-5401
CLIENT requests and authorizes ENGINEER to perform the following services:
SCOPE:
A. BASIC ENGINEERING SERVICES for Water Distribution System Hydraulic Modeling and Water Quality
Screening of the University Park Potable Water System is provided in ATTACHMENT A, Sections A, B,
and C, respectively.
B. SPECIAL SERVICES related to the project that may be included with specific authorization by the
CLIENT. A detailed Scope of Work for SPECIAL SERVICES is provided in ATTACHMENT A, Section
D.
COMPENSATION by the CLIENT to ENGINEER is to be on the basis of:
A. BASIC SERVICES Compensation for Basic Services will be a total of $66,105.00 and will be billed on a
“lump sum” basis.
B. SPECIAL SERVICES Compensation for Special Services will be on a “time and materials” basis with a
“not to exceed” limit of $15,000. Labor will be billed using ENGINEER’S standard hourly rates as
included in Attachment B. A multiplier of 1.15 will be applied to all direct expenses.
C. AUTHORIZED BUDGET The budget authorized through this AGREEMENT is as follows:
BASIC SERVICES $66,105.00
SPECIAL SERVICES $15,000.00
Budgeted Total $81,105.00
OTHER TERMS:
A. Deliverable Items. The deliverable items will be provided as listed in ATTACHMENT A.
B. Schedule. ENGINEER is authorized to commence work on the project upon execution of this AGREEMENT and
agrees to complete the services in accordance with the following schedule:
a. Completion of Hydraulic Model within five (5) months from execution of AGREEMENT.
b. Completion of GENERAL SERVICES and submittals of Final Report within seven (7) months from
execution of Agreement.
Services covered by this AGREEMENT will be performed in accordance with the PROVISIONS attached to this form
and any other attachments or schedules. This AGREEMENT supersedes all prior AGREEMENTS and
understandings and may only be changed by written amendment executed by both parties.
Approval for CLIENT Accepted for Alan Plummer Associates, Inc.
905-0101
By By
Title City Manager Title Tim Noack, PE, Principal in Charge
Date Date
Agreed to in form:
By ____________________________________
Title _City Attorney_________________________
Date ____________________________________
905-0101
PROVISIONS
1. Authorization to Proceed termination date plus termination expenses, such as,
Execution of this AGREEMENT by the CLIENT will be but not limited to, reassignment of personnel,
authorization for ALAN PLUMMER AND subcontract termination costs, and related closeout
ASSOCIATES, INC. ("ENGINEER") to proceed with costs. If no notice of termination is given,
the work, unless otherwise provided for in this relationships and obligations created by this
AGREEMENT. AGREEMENT, except Articles 8 through 15, will be
terminated upon completion of all applicable
2. Salary Costs requirements of this AGREEMENT.
ENGINEER'S Salary Costs, when the basis of
compensation, are the amount of wages or salaries 7. Payment to ENGINEER
paid ENGINEER's employees for work directly Monthly invoices will be issued by ENGINEER for all
performed on CLIENT's Project plus a percentage work performed under this AGREEMENT. Invoices
applied to all such wages or salaries to cover all are due and payable on receipt. Interest at the rate of
payroll-related taxes, payments, premiums, and 1-1/2 percent per month, or that permitted by law if
benefits. lesser, will be charged on all past-due amounts
starting 30 days after date of invoice. Payments will
3. Per Diem Rates first be credited to interest and then to principal.
ENGINEER's Per Diem Rates, when the basis of
compensation, are those hourly or daily rates charged When compensation is on a lump-sum basis, monthly
for work performed on CLIENT's Project by progress payments will be based on an estimated
ENGINEER's employees of the indicated completion percentage, and monthly invoices will not
classifications. These rates are subject to annual include a detailed listing of personnel time or
calendar year adjustments and include all allowances expenses.
for salary, overheads, and fee, but do not include
allowances for Direct Expenses. In the event of a disputed or contested billing, only
that portion so contested will be withheld from
4. Direct Expenses payment, and the undisputed portion will be paid.
ENGINEER's Direct Expenses, when part of the basis The CLIENT will exercise reasonableness in
of compensation, are those costs incurred on or contesting any bill or portion thereof. No interest will
directly for the CLIENT's Project, including, but not accrue on any contested portion of the billing until
limited to, necessary transportation costs, including mutually resolved.
ENGINEER's current rates for ENGINEER's vehicles;
meals and lodging; laboratory tests and analyses; 8. Independent Consultant
computer services; word processing services, ENGINEER shall be at all times an independent
telephone, printing, binding, and reproduction contractor and not an agent or representative of
charges; all costs associated with outside consultants, University Park with regard to performance of this
subconsultants, subcontractors, and other outside AGREEMENT. ENGINEER shall not represent that it
services and facilities; and other similar costs. is, or hold itself out as, an agent or representative of
Reimbursement for Direct Expenses will be on the University Park. In no event shall ENGINEER be
basis of actual charges when furnished by authorized to enter into any AGREEMENT of
commercial sources and on the basis of current rates undertaking for or on behalf of University Park.
when furnished by ENGINEER.
9. ENGINEER's Personnel at the Project Site
5. Cost Opinions The presence or duties of the ENGINEER's personnel
Any cost opinions or Project economic evaluations at the Project site, whether as on-site representatives
provided by ENGINEER will be on a basis of or otherwise, do not make the ENGINEER or its
experience and judgment; but, since it has no control personnel in any way responsible for those duties that
over market conditions or bidding procedures, belong to CLIENT and/or to other contractors,
ENGINEER cannot warrant that bids, ultimate subcontractors, or other entities, and do not relieve
construction cost, or Project economics will not vary the other contractors, subcontractors, or other entities
from these opinions. of their obligations, duties, and responsibilities,
including, but not limited to, all methods, means,
6. Termination techniques, sequences, and procedures necessary
This AGREEMENT may be terminated for for coordinating and completing all portions of the
convenience on 30 days' written notice by either party work of those parties in accordance with their contract
with or without cause. On termination, ENGINEER requirements and any health or safety precautions
will be paid for all work performed up to the required by such work. The ENGINEER and its
905-0101
personnel have no authority to exercise any control AGREEMENT for any cause.
over any contractor, subcontractor, or other entity or
their employees in connection with their work or any 14. Interpretation
health or safety precautions and have no duty for The limitations of liability and indemnities will apply
inspecting, noting, observing, correcting, or reporting whether ENGINEER's liability arises under breach of
on health or safety deficiencies of any contractor, contract or warranty; tort, including negligence; strict
subcontractor, or other entity or any other persons at liability; statutory liability; or any other cause of action,
the Project site except ENGINEER's own personnel. except for willful misconduct or gross negligence for
limitations of liability and sole negligence for
ENGINEER neither guarantees the performance of indemnification, and shall apply to ENGINEER's
any contractors, subcontractors or other entities nor officers, affiliated corporation, employees and
assumes responsibility for their failure to perform their subcontractors. The law of the state of Texas shall
work in accordance with their contractual govern the validity of this AGREEMENT, its
responsibilities. interpretation and performance, and any other claims
related to it.
10. Subsurface Investigations
In soils, foundation, groundwater, and other 15. No Third Party Beneficiaries
subsurface investigations, the actual characteristics This AGREEMENT gives no rights or benefits to
may vary significantly between successive test points anyone other than the CLIENT and ENGINEER and
and sample intervals and at locations other than has no third party beneficiaries. The CLIENT will
where observations, exploration, and investigations include a provision in each AGREEMENT which
have been made. CLIENT enters into with any other entity or person
that such entity or person shall have no third-party
Because of the inherent uncertainties in subsurface beneficiary rights under this AGREEMENT.
evaluations, changed or unanticipated underground
conditions may occur that could affect the total ENGINEER's services are defined solely by this
PROJECT cost and/or execution. Such changed AGREEMENT, and not by any other contract or
conditions and cost/execution effects are not the AGREEMENT that may be associated with the
responsibility of the ENGINEER. Project.
11. Litigation Assistance 16. Liability
Unless specifically set forth in the Scope of Services, a. ENGINEER's services shall be governed by
the Scope of Services does not include costs of the the negligence standard for professional
ENGINEER for required or requested assistance to services, measured as of the time those
support, prepare, document, bring, defend, or assist services are performed.
in litigation or administrative proceedings taken or
defended by the CLIENT. b. The CLIENT's review, approval, or
acceptance of, or payment for, any of these
All such services required or requested of the services shall not be construed to operate as
ENGINEER by the CLIENT, except for suits or claims a waiver of any rights under this
between the parties to this AGREEMENT, will be AGREEMENT or of any cause of action
reimbursed as may be mutually agreed, and payment arising out of the performances of this
for such services shall be in accordance with Section AGREEMENT, and the ENGINEER shall be
7, unless and until there is a finding by a court or and remain liable in accordance with
arbitrator that ENGINEER's sole negligence caused applicable law for all damages to the
CLIENT's damage. CLIENT caused by ENGINEER's omissions
or negligent performance of any of the
12. Venue services furnished under this AGREEMENT.
In the event that any legal proceeding is brought to
enforce this AGREEMENT or any provision hereof, c. As used herein, ENGINEER includes the
the same shall be brought in Dallas County, Texas corporation, subcontractors, and any of its or
and shall be governed by the laws of the State of their officers, or employees.
Texas.
13. Severability and Survival
If any of the provisions contained in this AGREEMENT 17. Ownership
are held illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the All documents, data, drawings, specifications,
enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be software applications and other products or materials
impaired thereby. Limitations of liability and produced by the ENGINEER in connection with this
indemnities shall survive termination of this AGREEMENT shall be the property of the City
905-0101
whether the project for which they are made is to be construed as limiting the extent of the
executed or not. All such documents, products and ENGINEER's responsibility for payment of damages
materials shall be forwarded to the City at its request resulting from operations under this Contract.
and may be used by the City as it sees fit. The City
agrees that if the documents, products and materials The coverage's provided by the General Liability and
prepared by the ENGINEER are used for purposes the Automobile Liability are primary to any insurance
other than those intended by the AGREEMENT, the maintained by the City.
City does so at its sole risk and agrees to hold the
ENGINEER harmless for such use. All services There shall be included in the general liability
performed under this AGREEMENT will be conducted insurance contractual coverage sufficiently broad to
solely for the benefit of the City and will not used for insure the provisions of that Section herein entitled
any other purpose without written consent of the City. "Hold Harmless Clause."
Any information relating to the services will not be
released without the written permission of the City. In addition to ACORD Certificate, the ENGINEER
The ENINGEER shall preserve the confidentiality of shall furnish University Park for its inspection,
all City documents and data accessed for use in approval, and files such policies of insurance with all
ENGINEER’s work product. required endorsements, or confirmed specimens
thereof certified by the insurance company to be true
18. Hold Harmless Clause and correct copies.
The ENGINEER agrees, to the fullest extent
permitted by law, to indemnify, defend (with counsel 20. Assignment
satisfactory to the City of University Park), and hold Neither Party will assign all or any part of this
harmless (collectively, “Indemnify”) the City and its AGREEMENT without prior written consent to the
officers, agents and employees, volunteers and other party.
employees (individually, an “Indemnified Party”) from
any and all claims, lawsuits, losses, costs (including
attorney fees and costs), liabilities, and damages END
arising from, related to or in connection with, in whole
or in part, any of the following: (a) the ENGINEER’s or
any of its employees’ or sub-consultants’ negligent
acts, omissions, or intentional misconduct; (b) the
ENGINEER’s breach of its obligations under this
AGREEMENT; (c) the ENGINEER’s or any of its
employees’ or sub consultants’ violation of any
applicable law, rule, or regulation; and/or (d) any
claim or lawsuit by a third party, ENIGNEER, sub-
consultant, supplier, worker, or any other person,
firm, or corporation furnishing or supplying work,
Services, materials, or supplies in connection with the
performance of this AGREEMENT who may be
injured or damaged by the ENGINEER or any of its
sub-consultant, or employees, when such claim
arises from, is related to, or is in connection with the
ENGINEER’s performance of this AGREEMENT.
This article does not require the ENGINEER to
Indemnify an Indemnified Party for such portion of any
loss, cost, liability, or damage that arises solely from
the negligence or intentional misconduct of the
Indemnified Party.
19. Insurance
ENGINEER shall procure and maintain for the
duration of this AGREEMENT insurance against
claims for injuries to persons, or damages to property,
which may arise from or in connection with the
performance of the work hereunder by ENGINEER,
its subcontracts, agents, representatives, or
employees.
Nothing contained in these insurance requirements is
905.002.01
City of University Park
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Water Distribution System Hydraulic Modeling and Water Quality Screening
The Basic Engineering Services rendered by ENGINEER are to be considered
distinguishable from other services and divided into the following categories:
A. Water Distribution System Hydraulic Modeling
B. Water Quality Screening Evaluation
C. General Services
In addition to the Basic Services, other services related to the project that may be
included by specific authorization are identified herein as “D-SPECIAL SERVICES”.
These various services are herein more fully described as follows:
A. Water Distribution System Hydraulic Modeling
TASK 1 Data Gathering
The following information will be provided to the ENGINEER by the CLIENT:
1. Information from the previous 1991 Water Distribution System Study
prepared by others.
2. Electronic files containing water system pipes, valves, fire hydrants, etc.
3. Any available information related to pipe material and age within the system.
4. Electronic files containing all customer metered water usage for 2004-2006.
Electronic files should include location (address) of each meter, and monthly
metered usage at each location.
5. Operational protocols for the system, which may include pump on/off
settings, pressure reducing valve settings, etc.
6. Pump curves for all pumps serving the CLIENT, including WTP pumps and
new pumps to be installed at Germany Park Booster Pump Station.
7. Plans for piping at pump stations.
8. Run times for the pumps at the pump stations.
9. Water quality data for water system for last 5 years, including chlorine
residual, TTHMs, HAAs, temperature, pH, alkalinity and other available data.
10. Data showing diurnal fluctuations in storage tank levels.
11. Records of low-pressure complaints.
12. Best available electronic elevation contours for the CLIENT.
13. Information concerning any projected growth and development within the
CLIENT’s service area. This could include previous projections, land use
zoning, and known plans for projects.
14. Detailed information for all storage tanks, to include inlet and outlet
diameter, diameter of bowl, working level, presence of interior screening,
baffling or other mixing techniques.
905.002.01
City of University Park
15. Emergency connections to outside water sources (location, sizes, minimum
and maximum flow rates, delivery pressure)
16. Location of any special service zones, pressure reducing valves, service to
major buildings or geographic areas within the city.
TASK 2 Develop Hydraulic Model
ENGINEER will generate a new, updated distribution model that accurately
represents the existing distribution system and includes all pipes within the
distribution system. The following sub-tasks are to be completed as part of this
task:
2.1 Initial review of existing information and field testing
. ENGINEER will
review the information provided by the CLIENT and develop
recommendations for sampling to obtain additional data necessary for
model setup and calibration. The recommended sampling program will
include suggested locations, timing, frequency and duration of pressure
and flow measurements throughout the distribution system.
2.2 Develop new water system model
. All known existing pipes will be
added to the distribution system model. Electronic files showing
distribution system pipe size and location will be provided by the CLIENT.
Information provided by the CLIENT also will be used to incorporate
pump stations, storage facilities, and control valves into the model.
2.3 Develop demand distribution
. Metering records provided by the
CLIENT will be used to determine demand distributions to each model
node under maximum month conditions. Records of hourly pumped flow
will then be used to define maximum day flow conditions, identify diurnal
flow patterns, and determine additional system demands not captured by
the metering records.
TASK 3 Hydraulic Model Calibration
The objective of this task is to calibrate the hydraulic model so that it provides
reliable results for subsequent hydraulic evaluations. The following sub-tasks are
to be completed as part of this task:
3.1 Incorporate operational rules into model
. ENGINEER will incorporate
system operational rules into the model, including pump trigger rules,
minimum and maximum tank levels, etc.
3.2 Calibrate steady state model.
Model output (flows and system
pressures) will be compared to field-measured system data, as provided
by Task 2.1. Model physical parameters will be adjusted to calibrate to
the field pressure and flow measurements.
3.3 Perform extended period simulation (EPS) model calibration
.
Modeled flows, pressures and tank levels will be compared to measured
data at hourly intervals for a 48-72 hour period under maximum day flow
905.002.01
City of University Park
conditions. Adjustment of model physical parameters and/or refinements
to the demand distribution will be used to calibrate for EPS conditions.
TASK 4 Hydraulic Model Runs and Identification of Recommended
Improvements
The objective of this task is to use the calibrated hydraulic model to identify
improvements required to meet demands and provide adequate pressures to the
system under buildout conditions. The following sub-tasks are to be completed
as part of this task:
4.1 Define improvement criteria
. In conjunction with City staff, develop
criteria for evaluation of improvements. These criteria may include
measures such as maximum allowable velocities, maximum allowable
head loss, minimum and maximum pressures, and fire flow criteria.
4.2Develop demand scenarios.
Using information obtained from previous
tasks, develop demand scenarios for average day, maximum day, peak
hour, and minimum hour steady state conditions. Develop demand
scenario for a maximum day EPS condition.
4.3 Perform model runs.
Steady state model runs will be made for buildout
conditions under maximum day, peak hour and minimum hour demand
conditions. In addition, EPS model runs will be made under maximum day
demand conditions in order to evaluate system performance under tank
filling and draining conditions.
4.4 Evaluate improvements and provide improvement rationale
. The
distribution model will be used to evaluate recommended improvements
for the buildout system. A description and rationale for each proposed
improvement will be provided in tabular form. In addition, a system map
will be provided that shows all distribution piping and facilities with
recommended improvements.
4.5 Provide planning level opinions of probable cost for improvements
.
Planning level opinions of probable cost for each improvement, with
separate costs for CLIENT. Excel spreadsheets with all cost information
will be provided to the CLIENT upon completion of the project.
905.002.01
City of University Park
B. Water Quality Screening Evaluation
The purpose of this evaluation is to provide a preliminary screening-level
assessment of system water quality, prior to implementation of a detailed water
quality model calibration and simulation process.
TASK 5 Screening-Level Water Quality Evaluation
The objective of this task is to evaluate existing water quality data and perform a
screening-level water age evaluation using the EPS-calibrated model to identify
areas of the distribution system that may be susceptible to formation of
disinfection byproducts (DBPs) and/or reduced chlorine residual levels. This
evaluation will also be used to develop a sampling and calibration program for
the subsequent, detailed water quality modeling evaluation.
5.1 Evaluate and summarize existing water quality data.
Existing water
quality data provided by the CLIENT (e.g. chlorine residual, TTHMs,
HAAs, temperature, alkalinity, pH, etc.) will be evaluated and
summarized. Evaluation will include analysis of spatial and temporal
patterns associated with seasonal changes in incoming water quality and
demands.
5.2 Evaluate system water age.
Use the EPS-calibrated distribution system
model to compute water age within the distribution system under
maximum day flow conditions. Provide a color-coded map indicating
ranges of water age throughout the system for each demand condition.
Use system water age information to identify regions of the distribution
system that may be most susceptible to DBP formation and/or reduced
chlorine residual levels.
C. General Services
The following paragraphs outline the general tasks that are common to phases
A and B.
TASK 6 Project Meetings
The objective of this task is to provide time throughout the project period for
meetings with the CLIENT to review and discuss the progress of the study and to
provide time for in-house project meetings at the office of the ENGINEER.
Project meetings with the CLIENT will include a kickoff meeting and up to 4
additional progress meetings throughout the project.
TASK 7 Report
The objective of this task is to prepare draft and final reports describing the water
distribution system and Phase 1 water quality study results, providing cost
projections for improvements and recommending an implementation schedule.
Recommendations for piping changes, storage capacity, pumping capacity and
905.002.01
City of University Park
water quality improvements will be based on recognized industry standards and
State and Federal regulations.
Five copies of the draft report will be provided to the CLIENT for review. Upon
completion, 5 copies of the final report will be provided to the CLIENT. In
addition to the five printed copies of the final report, the report, figures, drawings
and data will be provided to the CLIENT in electronic format.
TASK 8 Quality Control
This task will allow time for the review of the project study by the ENGINEER’s
quality control team. Quality control reviews have been included in the Project
schedule. This review will be performed by key members of the ENGINEER’s
staff. It is anticipated that a client review will be performed at the same time the
ENGINEER review is performed.
TASK 9 Project Management
The objective of this task is to perform administrative tasks associated with
management of the project study. This task will be used for management tasks
that are necessary for the project. They include but are not limited to:
a. Routine phone calls or client contact,
b. Billing and invoicing,
c. Manpower scheduling and,
d. Producing project update documents, including routine
correspondence.
D. SPECIAL SERVICES
Special Services to be performed by the ENGINEER, if authorized by the
OWNER, which are not included in the above-described Basic Services, are
described as follows:
Special services may include, but are not limited to:
a. Additional meetings beyond the number of meetings listed in the scope
of services,
b. Additional modeling and analysis to include conditions that are not
listed in the basic services, and
c. Preliminary or detailed design of recommended improvements listed in
the Final Report.
ATTACHMENT B
ALAN PLUMMER ASSOCIATES, INC.
HOURLY FEE SCHEDULE
2007
Staff
Staff Description 2007 Rate
Code
Admin StaffA1-A3 $ 62.00
Senior Admin Staff A4 $ 70.00
Designer/TechnicianC1-C2 $ 75.00
Senior Designer/TechnicianC3-C4 $ 95.00
Engineer-in-Training/Scientist-in-TrainingES0-ES3 $ 80.00
Project Engineer/ScientistES4 $ 95.00
Senior Project Engineer/ScientistES5 $ 110.00
Project ManagerES6 $ 130.00
Senior Project ManagerES7 $160.00
PrincipalES8-ES9 $200.00
Billing rates may be adjusted by up to 4 percent annually (at the beginning
of each calendar year) during the term of this agreement.
A multiplier of 1.15 will be applied to all direct expenses
AGENDA MEMO
(05-22-07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 9, 2007
TO:
Bob Livingston
City Manager
FROM:
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Consider proposal from R.L. Goodson in the amount of $50,000
(plus reimbursibles) to provide surveying services associated with
mapping the City’s storm sewer outfalls.
Background.
The Stormwater Management Plan developed for University
Park by HDR Engineering identified numerous tasks, or Best Management Practices
(BMP’s), which are required by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
(TCEQ). One of those BMP’s is to provide TCEQ an accurate, updated map of the
City’s stormwater collection system, including specific locations of all outfalls. Staff
has created updated mapping of water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater
infrastructure as new facilities have been constructed, however, that represents only
about twenty-percent of the systems. In order to comply with State stormwater
requirements in a timely manner, staff solicited a proposal from R.L. Goodson to
provide the necessary surveying services to provide data for the mapping function.
The proposal is based on hourly rates with a maximum fee, because we cannot
provide the consultant all of the definitive locations in order for them to determine the
specific work effort involved.
Funds from the City’s stormwater utility are available for this work, although we will
be requesting Council authorization to expend those funds through a budget
amendment. If the Council should approve this proposal, the approval should be
contingent upon removal of a “limit of liability” clause identified in their General
Conditions.
Recommendation.
Staff recommends City Council approval of the R.L. Goodson
proposal in the amount of $50,000 (plus reimbursibles), subject to deleting the "limit
of liability" clause.
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 17, 2007
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM:
Robbie Corder, Assistant to the Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Purchase of Newsracks – Preston & Normandy (YMCA)
ITEM:
Attached is a quote from Rak Systems, Inc. to deliver and install a modular newsrack at the
intersection of Preston & Normandy in the amount of $6,631.88. Rak Systems, Inc. is the
same vendor that supplied the modular newsracks currently in place on Snider Plaza. Staff
elected to go with a direct quote from this vendor instead of a competitive bid to ensure that the
same modular racks are used for the expansion at this intersection.
The publications have already been notified about the installation of a newsrack at this location,
and staff has determined that the modular newsrack needs to accommodate fourteen (14)
publications.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the modular newsrack purchase from Rak Systems, Inc.
ATTACHMENTS:
City quote from Rak Systems, Inc. for modular newsracks in the amount of $6,631.88
Hillcrest & Asbury
(looking east)
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/07 AGENDA)
DATE: May 16, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jim Criswell, Director of Information Services
SUBJECT: Proposal for Police/Fire Radio/Telephone Recording Equipment and
Electronic Tracking System for Bank Robberies
BACKGROUND:
In conjunction with the creation of an alternate dispatch operation at the Peek Service
Center, the City is required to install systems to record the Police/Fire radio and telephone
traffic for playback and storage. Also, to duplicate an existing capability for Police
Dispatch, an Electronic Tracking System (ETS) for bank robberies is required.
Police/Fire Radio and Telephone Recording System
The current dispatch operation is using a Dictaphone system that is capable of recording
16 channels, and the technology is being phased out by the vendor at the end of 2007. The
proposed NICE Systems, Inc. 64 channel NiceLog recording system is new technology,
and has been sized to support the increased number of channels and telephone lines
required for radio inter-operability, 3-1-1, and Missing Child lines, as well as the existing
Police/Fire administrative and 9-1-1 lines. As part of the Inter-Operability initiative,
University Park has also been selected as a backup to Dallas County, and therefore, the
number of radio channels to record has increased from 4 to 32. The new system also
provides reporting capabilities that will assist with police and fire accreditation
compliance. It is also important to note that in the event of a disaster, the ability to replay
all transmissions would allow greater accuracy in the completion of state and federal forms
required for funding and reimbursement.
Electronic Tracking System (ETS) for bank robberies
The ETS system is currently installed and functioning in the existing dispatch center. It is
used after a bank robbery where the teller has placed a tracking device imbedded in the
stolen bills. The system allows officers from all local jurisdictions to converge on the
signal to aid in apprehending the robber. The system to be installed at the Peek Dispatch
Police/Fire Recording System and Electronic Tracking System Page 2
Center is a requirement to have identical functionality for both of the University Park
dispatch centers.
RECOMMENDATION:
Police/Fire Radio and Telephone Recording System
The City has received a quote from NICE Systems, Inc. to provide the 64 channel
NiceLog recording system for $72,385. The price includes hardware, software,
installation, configuration, training, and the first year’s annual maintenance. NICE
Systems, Inc. has a contract with the HGAC purchasing cooperative, which satisfies the
state competitive bidding requirement.
Staff recommends approval of the NICE Systems, Inc. quote. This system will be funded
using the Cellular 911 fees collected each month from the state.
Electronic Tracking System (ETS) for bank robberies
The City has received a quote from Electronic Tracking Systems to provide the hardware
and software to support the multi-jurisdictional bank robbery tracking system. The amount
is $5,950, and this is a sole source provider of this service.
Staff recommends approval of the Electronic Tracking Systems quote. Funds are available
in the Capital Projects Fund – Project number 43740 – City Hall V: EOC/Alternate
Dispatch Center.
AGENDA MEMO
(5/22/07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 17, 2007
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Christine Green, Purchasing Agent
SUBJECT:
Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with the City of Grapevine
for Cooperative Purchasing
The City of Grapevine has prepared and signed the attached Interlocal Cooperation
Agreement with the City of University Park to allow them to participate in our contract
with Cutler Repaving for in-place recycling of asphalt pavement.
This Interlocal Cooperation Agreement will also facilitate future cooperative purchasing
between the two cities.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Grapevine.
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Grapevine Interlocal Memo.doc 10:11 AM 05/17/07
STATE OF TEXAS
~
~
~
COUNTY OF DALLAS
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
This lnterlocal Cooperation Agreement ("Agreement") is by and between the City of University
Park, Texas ("University Park"), and the City of Grapevine, Texas ("Grapevine"), acting by and through
their authorized officers.
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, this Agreement is authorized by Chapter 791 of the Texas Government Code and
Subchapter F, Chapter 271, Texas Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS, Section 271.102 of the TEX. Loc. GOy'T CODE authorizes a local government to
participate in a Cooperative Purchasing Program with another local government or a local cooperative
organization; and
WHEREAS, a local government that purchases goods and services pursuant to a Cooperative
Purchasing Program with another local government satisfies the requirement of the local government to
seek competitive bids for the purchase of the goods and materials; and
WHEREAS, each party has and will on an annual basis obtain competitive bids for the purchase
of goods and services; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into a cooperative purchasing program which will allow
each party to purchase under goods and services under each other's competitively bid contracts pursuant
to Subchapter F, Chapter 271 of the TEX. Loc. GOy'T CODE;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained herein,
the parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Agreement is to establish a cooperative purchasing program between the
parties, which will allow each party to purchase goods and services under each other's competitively bid
contracts pursuant to Subchapter F, Chapter 271 of the TEX. Loc. GOy'T CODE.
63149
ARTICLE II
TERM
The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of one (1) year commencing on the last date of
execution hereof ("August 1, 2007"). Thereafter this Agreement shall automatically renew for
successive periods of one (1) year each under the terms and conditions stated herein, unless sooner
terminated as provided herein.
ARTICLE III
TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing thirty (30) days prior written notice to
the other party.
ARTICLE IV
PURCHASING
The City Manager or designee for each of party is authorized to act on behalf of the respective
party in all matters relating to this cooperative purchasing program. Each party shall make payments to
the other party or directly to the vendor under the contract made pursuant to Subchapter F, Chapter 271
of the TEX. Lac. GOV'T CODE. Each party shall be responsible for the respective vendor's compliance
with provisions relating to the quality of items and terms of delivery.
ARTICLE V
MISCELLANEOUS
5.1 Relationship of Parties: This Agreement is not intended to create, nor should it be construed as
creating, a partnership, association, joint venture or trust.
5.2 Notice: Any notice required or permitted to be delivered hereunder shall be deemed received
when sent in the United States Mail, Postage Prepaid, Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, or by
hand-delivery or facsimile transmission addressed to the respective party at the address set forth below
the signature of the party.
5.3 Amendment: This Agreement may be amended by the mutual written agreement of both parties
hereto.
5.4 Severability: In the event anyone or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall
for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or
unenforceability shall not affect the other provisions, and the Agreement shall be construed as if such
invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained in this Agreement.
5.5 Governin2: Law: The validity of this Agreement and any of its terms and provisions as well as
the rights and duties of the parties, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas; and venue for
any action concerning this Agreement shall be in the State District Court of Dallas County, Texas.
63149
5.6 Entire A2reement: This Agreement represents the entire agreement among the parties with
respect to the subject matter covered by this Agreement. There is no other collateral, oral or written
agreement between the parties that in any manner relates to the subject matter ofthis Agreement.
5.7 Recitals: The recitals to this Agreement are incorporated herein.
5.8 Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of whom
shall be deemed an original and constitute one and the same instrument.
EXECUTED this _ day of
,2007.
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
By:
T. ROBERT LIVINGSTON, CITY MANAGER
3800 University Park Blvd.
University Park, Texas 75205
ATTEST:
By:
CITY SECRETARY
EXECUTED this _ day of
,2007.
~>;~ GRAPEVINE, TEXAS
BRUNO RUMBELOW, CITY MANAGER
By:
By:
""",--
"'~O~~~
!),,;\! "'... .., ~1~
/"),, ..,,~\
/' ./ '\,w ,
" ! ~ ,""' l
, '1 i gn'
. .~,
'\ '~I
" I.. '/
""I" .. H....
'\ ... ",'.
'"",-~"."'t/"
............
200 S. MAIN ST.
Grapevine, Texas 76051
ATTEST:
APPROVED BY COUNCIL 4/1'1/07
63149
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 15, 2007
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Jacob Speer, Assistant Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Purchase of Sewer Inspection Van and Associated Equipment
ITEM:
12 years ago, the City purchased a sewer inspection system. The system consists of a small
remote-controlled video camera transporter, a computer to store the video with inspection data, a
VCR to record the footage, and associated monitors and accessories. All of this equipment is
housed in a cargo van for mobility. The current system can inspect lines ranging in size from 6 to
18 inches in diameter. The current camera system and electronics are failing with increased
frequency causing significant down time and work delays. In addition to replacing the existing
equipment, there is now additional equipment available to increase the City’s sewer inspection
capabilities. A second, larger transporter would allow for the inspection of our large trunk sewer
mains. We cannot currently inspect these large mains with our equipment. This new transporter
is also steerable, giving us the ability to navigate the storm sewer system. This will assist the City
in meeting a new state and federal mandate to accurately map our storm water system within the
next 5 years. The larger transporter utilizes the same camera as the small transporter. This would
give us two interchangeable cameras to minimize down time. Additionally, the vendor offers a
small “push camera” unit that can inspect lines as small as 2 inches in diameter. This system
would be invaluable for settling disputes with residents regarding back-ups involving residential
service lines. The new push camera system interfaces with the video inspection computer and
recording equipment in the truck via wireless technology. This would allow us to inspect lines in
locations that we cannot access with the truck. The additional equipment increases the space and
payload requirements of the truck. Our current cargo van cannot handle all the equipment
involved. Therefore, this upgrade will also require the replacement of our current van with a
small box van type vehicle. Funding for this purchase will come from the equipment replacement
fund and utility fund expenditures.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the purchase of a truck chassis and box from Henna Chevrolet in
the amount of $26,285.00 and the purchase of video inspection equipment and customization of
the vehicle interior from Cues, Inc. in the amount of $185,149.00. Both items would be
purchased via the TML BuyBoard to fulfill all necessary requirements for competitive bidding.
ATTACHMENTS:
?
Price quote and worksheet from Renfro Equipment, the local authorized Cues dealer
Pricing Worksheet
City of University Park
ComponentsQuantityPriceComments
BaseBasic TV,Interior,Labor Gas Gen
1$68,169
Options for Box
in lieu of roof mount
Side Mount A/C1$800
Sliding Drawer Storage1$653
Storage Closet1$784
Bench Seat1$517
No Sink
Washdown System1$2,570
Kemlite Covering in Equipment Room1$1,254
Lonseal Lonplate in Equipment Room1$1,520
Vise1$78
First Aid Kit1$68
Front & Back. No Strobe Lights
Arrow Stik Traffic Control Light Bar2$1,905
90 Degree Rear Door1$295
Truck Back up Monitor System1$795
Bumper Crane1$4,703
TV Options
Delete HPL 8 Lighthead1($690)
Extenders for Ultra Shorty 211$650
Steerable Pipe Ranger1$22,500
Electronic Lift1$4,990
Rear View Camera for Pipe Ranger1$4,500
Additional OZ II Camera1$18,810
Sonde for both OZII2$4,500
Controls Transporter from Rear of unit
Rear Foot Pedal Control Rear1$1,698
Flat Screen with Mounting Arm
17" Rear Monitor1$1,550
Granite XP1$18,500
1 year Enhanced Support Plan for GXP1$1,400
1
Mini Push System
Mini 20201$7,227
100' additional cable1$523
Digital Locator Kit1$1,410
Built in Sonde1$575
Wireless Receiver for Truck
Package 9131$533
Wireless Transmitter for 2020
Package 3141$424
Auto Upright1$888
Digital Video Recorder1$800
audio1$100
Pole Camera
ï
Pricing Worksheet
City of University Park
ComponentsQuantityPriceComments
Lite Stick1$4,587
Package 9131$533
Additional Option
Spare Part Kit1$4,405
Additional Day of Training for 3 days
Training1$625
Total Price less Chassis$185,149
î
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 17, 2006
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Nina Wilson
City Secretary
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION TO CANVASS RETURNS AND DECLARATION
OF RESULTS OF SPECIAL ELECTION, MAY 12, 2007
On May 12, 2007, a Special Election was held to authorize the sale of Potomac Park to
Southern Methodist University.
The attached resolution canvasses the returns and declares the results of the Special
Election.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend passage of the attached resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution
Election Results
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
U:\Docs\Election\2007\May\Memo to canvass votes 2007.doc 2:26 PM 05/17/07
RESOLUTION NO. 07-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK,
TEXAS, CANVASSING THE RETURNS AND DECLARING THE RESULTS OF AN
ELECTION HELD IN THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, ON MAY 12, 2007,
CONCERNING A PROPOSITION TO AUTHORIZE THE SALE OF POTOMAC PARK
TO SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS
, on the 6th day of March 2007, the City Council of the City of University
th
Park, Texas, duly called an election to be held on the 12 day of May 2007, for the purpose of
considering a proposition authorizing the sale of Potomac Park to Southern Methodist University,
as permitted and required by Section 253.001 (b) of the Texas Local Government Code; and
WHEREAS,
immediately after said election, the Presiding Judge and other election
officials holding said election made their returns and the results thereof to the City Council
according to law and duly authenticated that the written notice of said election was published and
posted for the time and in the manner provided by law and by the resolution calling the election,
and all proceedings pertaining to said election having been shown to have been done and
performed at and within the time and within the manner provided by law, and all papers pertaining
thereto having been returned and filed with the City Council, and no protest or objection being
made to or regarding any matter pertaining to said election; and
nd
WHEREAS,
on the 22 day of May 2007, at a meeting of the City Council of the City of
University Park, Texas, a quorum being present, the meeting was called to order; and
WHEREAS,
upon motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously ordered that the
th
City Council consider the official returns of an election held in the City on the 12 day of May
2007;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That after examining said returns and opening and canvassing the votes for
Precinct 1216 of the City cast at said election on Proposition 1, which read: “Shall the .80 acre
tract known as Potomac Park located on the south side of Potomac Avenue just behind the
Mockingbird Plaza Shopping Center between Airline and Central Expressway be sold to Southern
Methodist University in the manner provided by law and the proceeds used only to acquire and
improve property for public park purposes?” the results of said election are found by the City
Council as follows:
That there were 2202 votes cast, according to the returns, in the following manner:
Number of Votes Cast For Proposition 1: 1782
Number of Votes Cast Against Proposition 1: 420
Total Votes Cast: 2202
See Returns and Results tabulated in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made part hereof for all
purposes.
SECTION 2.
That a majority of the votes having been cast “For” Proposition 1, it was thereby
approved by the voters of the City of University Park for all purposes, and such result is hereby
declared by the City Council, and shall take effect immediately from and after the passage of this
Resolution, and it is accordingly so resolved.
nd
DULY ADOPTED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22
day of May 2007.
APPROVED:
James H. Holmes, III, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nina Wilson, City Secretary
16833
5/12/2007 7:38 PM
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK SPECIAL ELECTION
Unofficial Combined Election Results
May 12, 2007
Ballots Cast
Early Voting - Mail
Early Voting - In-Person
Election Day - Optical Scan
Election Day - ADA Ivotronic
Total Ballots Cast
Provisional Ballots
Reg Voters
% Turnout
259
997
950
o
2,206
2
14,596
15.11 %
Early Voting Early Voting Election Day Election Day Total Vote %
Mail In-Person Optical Scan ADA Ivotronic
Proposition
For 240 813 729 0 1782 80.93%
Against 19 181 220 0 420 19.07%
TOTAL 259 994 949 0 2,202 100.00%
v
MINUTES
#2709
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, MAY 1, 2007, 5:00 P.M.
Mayor James H. Holmes, III, convened the city council into an executive session in the
conference room at 4:02 p.m. for a consultation with the City Attorney regarding potential
litigation under Section 551.071 of the Government Code. The executive session was closed at
4:13 p.m. No action was voted on or taken during the meeting.
Mayor Holmes opened the regular city council meeting at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber.
Present were Mayor Pro Tempore Harry Shawver and Councilmembers Syd Carter, Kelly
Walker and Jerry Grable. Also in attendance were City Manager Bob Livingston, City Attorney
Rob Dillard and City Secretary Nina Wilson
Three Boy Scouts introduced themselves and stated the badge upon which they were working.
They were Nick Hudson, 3412 Granada, Apt. 202; Clayton McIntosh, 4108 Stanhope; Kelso
Hartley, 3502 McFarlin.
Councilmember Walker moved approval of the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Carter
seconded, and the vote was unanimous to approve the following:
CONSENT AGENDA
CONSIDER COFFEE PARK MASTER PLAN HISTORICAL TIMELINE DESIGN
PROPOSAL: Three (3) key design elements of the project include design of a sculpture donated
by the Coffee Family, construction of a barrier-free playground, and the development and
installation of a historical timeline exhibiting significant events associated with the history of the
city. The goal of the project is to educate residents and students on city history. The contract for
interpretive design services with Museumscapes is $9,800.
CONSIDER REPLACEMENT OF MAIL/UTILITY BILLING VEHICLE:
The current van is 11
years old. It shows marked wear and tear on the interior, and the air conditioner no longer functions
properly. The new van is a Chevrolet Uplander, accommodates seven passengers and provides the cargo
capacity necessary to move mail and packages.
CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDING TEXAS FOOD ESTABLISHMENT RULES WITH REGARD
ordinance amending the Texas Food Establishment Rules with
TO CATERING TRUCKS: The
regard to catering trucks requires the name of the catering service to be permanently affixed on
both sides of the truck and requires the permit holder to permanently display the health permit in
the catering truck.
ORDINANCE NO. 07/14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE CODE
OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED,
BY AMENDING THE TEXAS FOOD ESTABLISHMENT RULES WITH REGARD TO
CATERING TRUCKS; REQUIRING THE NAME OF THE CATERING SERVICE TO BE
PERMANENTLY AFFIXED ON THE TRUCK AND REQUIRING THE PERMIT HOLDER TO
PERMANENTLY DISPLAY THE HEALTH PERMIT IN THE CATERING TRUCK;
PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE
SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
CONSIDER RESOLTUION APPROVING EXEMPTION FROM BILINGUAL
REQUIREMENTS OF THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE: The 2000 United States Census for the
City of University Park shows that only 3.1% of the city’s population is of Hispanic or Latino
descent and that the election precincts or parts thereof wholly within the City of University Park
are exempt from the bilingual requirements of the Election Code pursuant to Section 272.003.
RESOLUTION NO. 07-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK,
TEXAS, APPROVING EXEMPTION FROM THE BILINGUAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE
TEXAS ELECTION CODE FOR PRECINCTS OR PARTS OF PRECINCTS WHOLLY
WITHIN THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION THAT SUCH PRECINCTS
QUALIFY FOR THE EXEMPTION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES: For April 17, 2007.
MAIN AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
ORDINANCE BY ADDING SECTION 28-106 (a) TO PROVIDE FOR A SPECIAL
EXCEPTION FOR A FRONT YARD FENCE IN THE SF-2 ZONING DISTRICT: Gilbert J.
and Patricia Besing, property owners at 6023 St. Andrews, installed an 8-foot wrought iron fence
in the front yard of their home in violation of city codes. The city requested they bring their
property into compliance with the codes. The Besings applied to the Board of Adjustment for
consideration of a variance. The board considered the item at its August 28, 2006 meeting and
denied the request. The Besings then requested an amendment to the zoning ordinance to
provide for a special exception which would allow the fence to remain. Mayor Holmes opened
a public hearing. Mr. Besing made a presentation to the council for a special exception to the
zoning ordinance. Ms. Beverly Dale, 6019 St. Andrews, spoke supporting the special exception.
Mayor Pro Tempore Shawver stated that he had received two letters in opposition from Clyde
Jackson, 6001 St. Andrews and George Seay, 6007 St. Andrews. Mayor Holmes closed the
public hearing. Mayor Holmes stated that the zoning ordinance applies to all houses and that Mr.
Besing house is not a special exception. Mayor Pro Tempore Shawver moved to deny the
ordinance for a special exception. Councilmembers Carter and Grable recused themselves due to
personal involvement with the issue. Councilmember Walker seconded, and the vote was 3-0
with 2 abstaining to deny the ordinance for a special exception for a front yard fence in the SF-2
District.
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE APPROVING
SNIDER/HILLCREST STRATEGIC PLAN: The city contracted Townscape, Inc. in early 2005
to conduct a study and prepare a strategic plan for the future development of Snider Plaza. In
developing the plan, Dennis Wilson and his team held a series of neighborhood meetings with
property owners, residents, and merchants from July 2005-March 2006 to discuss the issues and
draft proposals. The city council also convened a joint work session with the Planning and
Zoning Commission on November 13, 2006 and discussed the draft of the plan. At that meeting,
council directed staff to move forward with the formal adoption of the plan. The Planning and
Zoning Commission held a public hearing on February 19, 2007 and considered the plan at its
regular meeting on March 19, 2007. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of the plan with two conditions: a building height of four (4) stories must be defined,
and the Rosedale opening should be implemented in the short term. After further consideration
of the public comments provided, staff wished to add the following recommendations: (1)
residential-over-retail development shall not be allowed specifically by zoning. Rather, it would
require an amendment to the existing PD zoning on a case-by-case basis. Council asked that
special standards be developed if such a request occurs, so that restrictions would already be in
place to deter the use of units as student housing, such as parking requirements and unit
configuration. (2) Standards shall be established for new developments in Snider Plaza with a
specific height envelope. That height envelope should be a maximum of 42’ at the alley property
line and extend at an angle of 3’ for every 1’ in additional height toward the Plaza. The
maximum building height, including the parapet, shall be 60’, excluding mechanical, which shall
be set back within the envelope, and the maximum number of stories shall remain at four, but
must fit within this envelope. Present zoning on the Plaza allows four stories. There is not a
specific height limitation. Depending upon individual floor heights and equipment screening
needs, buildings under the current standards could exceed 55’ in height. (3) The Plaza “Green”
is just a concept. No action shall be taken on its implementation until any parking that may be
displaced, plus 150 additional spaces, are secured for customer and employee use. (4) Move the
opening of Rosedale for better circulation from “mid-term” implementation to the short term.
(Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation.) Five parking spaces will be lost by this
change. Before Mayor Holmes opened the public hearing, he made the following statement:
“The city has received approximately 2,000 letters from University Park residents, as well as,
visitors to Snider Plaza in opposition to the Townscape Master Plan for Snider Plaza. Letters
have also been received from 60% of the business owners in Snider Plaza. I move that this
council reject all aspects of the Townscape Master Plan for Snider Plaza that recommends
removal of street parking and presence of a village green and residential development in Snider
Plaza and that all references to the removal of street parking, the presence of a village green, and
residential development in Snider Plaza, which are contained in the Townscape Master Plan, be
deleted.” Frank McIntyre, 3439 Westminster, spoke in favor, with reservations, of the
Townscape Master Plan for Snider Plaza, and Mary Graves, 6716 Hursey, stated that she did not
agree with everything in the plan; but, thought it was a good plan, and she wished the council
would move forward with it, taking a look at the parking situation. Jeff O’Neil, 3117 Bryn
Mawr, who owns a business in Snider Plaza at the corner of Westminster, spoke in opposition to
underground parking. John Jackson, 3425 Colgate, stated that he was in favor of some things
and against others. He was in favor of an advisory committee of citizens, merchants and owners.
Kitty Ritchie Holleman, 3939 Marquette, feels that Snider Plaza streets should be one way.
Albert Huddleston, 4021 McFarlin and owner of the Chase Bank Building, suggested tabling the
issue. Max Fuqua, owner of Plaza Health Foods, 6717 Snider Plaza, agreed that the issue should
be tabled and that other solutions be brought up in committee. Councilmember Grable asked Mr.
Fuqua for his solutions to the parking situation. Mr. Fuqua suggested that the garages at the
Medical Arts Building and SMU could be used with people paying to park. Robert Reeves, a
planning and zoning consultant retained by the merchants, requested no underground parking,
residential uses or green space, and that provision for these items be deleted. Karl F. Kuby,
owner of Kuby’s Sausage House, 6601 Snider Plaza, requested the council move forward in
unison. Duncan Fulton, 3524 Rankin, felt that the short term recommendations were good, but
did not feel the residential uses and parking were good. Roger Fullington, 3801 McFarlin, stated
that 60% of the owners think the issue should be tabled. They are opposed to the green space
and parking regulations. Councilmember Grable stated the council was not in favor of removing
parking from Snider Plaza and that standards were needed on height restrictions and that the
council is not in favor of damaging Snider Plaza or the owners. Councilmember Walker
emphasized the process of everyone working together on Snider Plaza. Councilmember Carter
stated council was concerned about parking and moving traffic through Snider Plaza and that
Dennis Wilson of Townscape, had presented an idea and that a great deal of misinformation had
been given out with regard to it. Mayor Holmes then made the following motion: “I move that
this council reject all aspects of the Townscape Master Plan for Snider Plaza that recommends
removal of street parking and the presence of a village green, and residential development in
Snider Plaza, and that all references to the removal of street parking and the presence of a village
green and residential development in Snider Plaza which are contained in the Townscape Master
Plan be deleted and that the plan be revised and brought back to the city council.” He then
amended the motion as follows: “I move the issue on the master plan be tabled and brought back
to the council in revised form for consideration, and I will leave the public hearing open and
deny the ordinance at this time.” Councilmember Grable seconded, and the vote was unanimous
to approve the motion and amendment. As there was no further business, the meeting was
adjourned.
nd
PASSED AND APPROVED this 22 day of May 2007.
James H. Holmes, III, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nina Wilson, City Secretary
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/07 MEETING)
DATE: May 17, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kent R. Austin, Director of Finance
SUBJECT: Presentation of FY2006 audited financial statements
BACKGROUND
Included on the May 22 meeting agenda is a visit from the City’s external auditors,
Weaver & Tidwell LLP. Transmission of the financial statements to the City Council is an
annual event following conclusion of the audit. Jerry Gaither, Audit Partner of Weaver &
Tidwell, will attend the May 22 meeting to transmit the Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report and answer any questions you may have.
Once again the City received an unqualified audit opinion, which attests to the fair
representation of the City’s financial position. This year there is no accompanying set of
management letter comments. The auditors found no reportable conditions or material
weaknesses. I am proud of the job that Controller Tom Tvardzik and the finance staff
have done in maintaining a high level of accuracy and accountability with the City’s
finances.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council accept the FY2006 CAFR. The Finance Advisory
Committee is scheduled to review the document at its June 21 meeting.
ATTACHMENT:
?
FY2006 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
AGENDA MEMO
(05-22-07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 16, 2007
TO:
Bob Livingston
City Manager
FROM:
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Receive presentation of Traffic Impact Analysis of the proposed
Chase Bank Development.
Background.
Jody Short, P.E., representing Lee Engineering, will present his
findings of the Traffic Impact Analysis he developed for the proposed Legacy (Chase
Bank) Development. Staff met with Mr. Short, Elizabeth Crow, P.E. (DeShazo-Tang
Associates, representing the adjacent residential neighborhood) and Jeremy
Wyndham, P.E. (Jacobs Engineering, representing Legacy Development), and
Dannie Cummings, P.E. to review the results of the TIA and allow them to provide
technical comment.
Following the aforementioned review, Mr. Short completed the TIA. Both Ms Crow
and Mr. Wyndham were subsequently notified that the only item on the 05.22.07 City
Council agenda will be a presentation of the TIA, and that the public hearing on the
zoning case had been closed at a previous meeting. I suggested that they or their
clients submit any written questions or comments prior to the meeting so the Council
would have an opportunity to see them.
Discussion.
No questions or comments have been received to date.
ORDINANCE NO. 07/08
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS,
ANNEXING THE TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED AND DEPICTED IN
EXHIBITS “A” AND “B”, ATTACHED HERETO AND EXTENDING THE
BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY SO AS TO INCLUDE SAID
PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS; PROVIDING FOR AN
ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT “C”;
AND GRANTING TO ALL INHABITANTS AND OWNERS OF SAID
PROPERTY ALL OF THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF OTHER
CITIZENS AND BINDING ALL INHABITANTS BY ALL THE
ORDINANCES, ACTS, RESOLUTIONS AND REGULATIONS OF SAID
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF SAID ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS,
the City Council of the City of University Park has heretofore entered into a
Boundary Adjustment Agreement with the City of Dallas for the annexation of the land described
herein into the corporate limits of the City of University Park; and
WHEREAS
, such tract of land is contiguous and adjacent to the corporate limits of the City of
University Park and does not exceed one mile in width; and
WHEREAS
, after notice was duly published, public hearings on the proposed annexation
were held by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, all in strict compliance with
chapter 43, Texas Local Government Code; and,
WHEREAS
, the following described land is adjoining the present city limits of the City of
University Park and the members of the City Council of the City of University Park have concluded
NOW,
that said area should be annexed and made a part of the City of University Park, Texas;
THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That the hereafter described tract of land is hereby annexed to include the said
tract of land within the city limits of the City of University Park, Texas, and the same shall hereafter be
included within the territorial limits of the said City, and the inhabitants thereof shall hereafter be
entitled to all rights and privileges of other citizens of the City and shall be bound by the ordinances,
acts, resolutions and regulations of said City of University Park, Texas. Said tract of land situated in
-1-
Dallas County, Texas, is more fully described and depicted in Exhibits “A” and “B”, attached hereto
and made a part hereof, the same as if copied in full herein.
SECTION 2.
The Annexation Service Plan which is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit
"C" is hereby approved and incorporated herein as part of the ordinance.
SECTION 3.
That it is not the intention of the City of University Park to annex any territory
not legally subject to being annexed by the City, and should any portion of the above-described areas
not be subject to legal annexation by the City of University Park, such fact shall not prevent the City
from annexing such territory which is subject to legal annexation by the City, and it is the intention of
the City of University Park to annex only such territory as may be legally annexed by it within the
above described area.
SECTION 4.
That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage, as
the law and Charter in such cases provide.
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 3rd day of
April 2007.
APPROVED:
_________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
__________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
(RLD/ORD16152)
-2-
EXHIBIT A
-3-
EXHIBIT B
-4-
EXHIBIT C
ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN
In connection with the annexation of an approximately .2120 acre tract of land by the City of
University Park, Dallas County, Texas, described in Exhibit “A”, the following service plan is
adopted as required by Section 43.056 of the TLGC.
EXAS OCAL OVERNMENT ODE
The City of University Park will, to the extent it provides or authorizes such services itself or
through contractual arrangements with other entities, provide the following services in the area
upon the effective date of the annexation of the area:
(1) Police protection;
(2) Fire protection;
(3) Solid waste collection;
(4) Maintenance of water and wastewater facilities in the annexed area that are not within the
service area of another water or wastewater utility;
(5) Maintenance and operation of roads and streets, including road and street lighting;
(6) Maintenance and operation of parks, playgrounds, and swimming pools;
(7) Maintenance and operation of any other publicly owned facility, building or service;
and
(8) Emergency medical services.
The City of University Park will also provide other services such as planning, zoning, code
enforcement, subdivision regulation, animal control, court, construction codes and general
administration, to the extent it now provides any such service, on the effective date of the
annexation.
Full municipal services will be made available to this property immediately upon
annexation.
Miscellaneous Provisions:
(1) This service plan is valid for ten years. Renewal of the service plan is at the discretion
of the City of University Park.
-5-
(2) This service plan does not require a uniform level of full municipal services to each
area of the City, including the annexed area, if different characteristics of topography, land use,
and population density are considered a sufficient basis for providing different levels of service.
(3) This service plan shall not be amended unless public hearings are held in accordance
with V.T.C.A., Local Government Code, Section 43.052.
(4) This service plan is adopted as Exhibit “B” to the Ordinance annexing the property
described in Exhibit “A” to the City of University Park. The City shall provide the area or cause
the area to be provided with services in accordance with this service plan.
-6-
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/2007 AGENDA)
DATE: May 22, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Harry Persaud, MRTPI, AICP, Community Development Manager
SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consideration of an ordinance amending the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by amending Section 26-100, Off-street Parking
Requirements other than in UC-1 and UC-2 districts to require off-street parking
spaces for multi-family residential dwelling units.
Background/Analysis:
On January 16, 2007, City Council received a report and discussed issues relating to multi family
construction. Council then directed staff to draft an ordinance to amend the parking standards for
multi family developments which was presented and discussed at its regular meeting on February
6, 2007. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the draft ordinance on
March 19, 2007 and further considered this item at is regular meeting on April 16, 2007. The
draft ordinance proposed to regulate the number and location of driveways as follows:
The aggregate of driveway approaches shall not exceed:
(i) One driveway per street frontage per platted lot, provided that additional
driveways with a minimum of 100 feet of street frontage, measured from center
line to center line, separating them, shall be permitted;
(ii) Multiple driveways that provide direct access only to an alley shall be
permitted.
In addition the draft ordinance provided for an increase in off-street parking spaces in the
multi family zoning districts from 2 spaces per dwelling unit to one space per bedroom
plus one additional space per ten bedrooms or fractions thereof, for visitors parking.
Recommendation
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 – 0 to deny the proposed driveway
standards and to approve the increase parking requirements excluding any additional
visitors parking. The draft ordinance as recommended by P&Z is attached for
consideration.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Ordinance
2. P&Z Minutes of April 16, 2007
3. Letters from Chuck Barnett and Jan Harbour
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY AMENDING SECTION 26-100 OFF-
STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS OTHER THAN IN UC-1 AND UC-2 DISTRICTS
TO REQUIRE OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES FOR MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; 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 have forwarded a full and fair hearing
to all property owners generally, and City Council of the City of University Park is of the opinion
and finds that said zoning changes should be granted and that the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance should be amended; Now, Therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That Section 26-100 “Off-street Parking Requirements Other Than in UC-
1 and UC-2 Districts” of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of University Park,
Texas, is hereby amended in part by amending g the uses and spaces required for off-street
parking as follows:
Section 26-100Off-street Parking Requirements Other Than in UC-1 and UC-2
“
Districts
Use Spaces Required
….
SF, SF-A, D Minimum of two off-street paved parking
spaces per dwelling unit
MF Minimum of two off-street parking spaces
per dwelling unit or one off-street parking
space per bedroom, whichever is greater.
….”
SECTION 3.
All ordinances of the City of University Park in conflict with the provisions
of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4.
Should any word, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or
section of this ordinance, or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended hereby, be
adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of
this ordinance as a whole or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so declared to be
invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance as a whole.
SECTION 5.
That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this
ordinance or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended hereby, shall be deemed guilty of
a misdemeanor and, upon conviction in the municipal court of the City of University Park, Texas,
shall be punished by a fine to exceed the sum of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for each
offense, and each and every day such violation shall continue 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.
nd
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22
day of May 2007.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
(RLD/01/25/07)(13249)
ORDINANCE NO. ___________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY AMENDING SECTION 26-100 OFF-
STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS OTHER THAN IN UC-1 AND UC-2 DISTRICTS
TO REQUIRE OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES FOR MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; 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.
nd
Duly passedby the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22 day of
May 2007.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
MINUTES
April 16, 2007
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park met on Monday, April 16,
2007 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3800 University Blvd., University Park,
Texas. The following are minutes of that meeting.
Commission Members AttendingStaff Members Attending
Robert H. West - Chairman Harry Persaud – Community Dev. Mgr
Bill Foose Lorna Balser- Planning Assistant
Doug Roach
Randy Biddle
Reed Shawver, III
Present and Seated
Jerry Jordan
Bea Humann
Ed Freeman
Mr. West opened the meeting, welcomed everyone in attendance and then read the specifics of the first
case. He stated that there would be no public discussion of the driveway standards ordinance because
public discussion had been taken at the previous meeting in March.
PZ 07-006: Consider an ordinance amending the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the City of
University Park, by amending Section 27-100(1) general driveway requirements to regulate
placement of driveways; and by amending Section 26-100 off street parking requirements to
require off street parking spaces for multi-family residential dwelling units.
This item was tabled at the March 19, 2007 meeting.
Bill Foose asked staff for the current driveway requirements within the city. Staff informed the
commission that there is a maximum for cumulative drives of 24’ along the front street and a
maximum cumulative of 40’ along the side street, or a maximum of 30% of the lot depth.
Whichever is smaller.
Rob Dillard commented that engineers recommend 12’ for maneuverability off the public streets.
Bob West asked Harry Persaud about the current parking requirement vs. the proposed parking
requirement. Harry Persaud responded that it protects the frontages of the residences for on
street parking.
Discussion continued between commission members pertaining to the location of drives on
different size lots.
Rob Dillard reminded the members of the commission that they were to make a recommendation
to the council.
Discussion among the commission members pursued concerning what recommendation might
encourage better design and promote better access to driveways.
Reed Shawver asked staff if 40’ was workable and practical. Harry Persaud responded, “Yes”.
Bill Foose asked whether or not the hired consultant could also be looking at this issue.
Harry Persaud stated that the consultant is looking at a list of issues.
Bob West asked if there were any further questions or recommendations.
Reed Shawver made a motion to leave the ordinance as it is.
Bill Foose seconded the motion.
Bob West recommended denial of the proposed amendment to the ordinance as presented on the
driveway standards.
With a vote of 5-0 the motion was motion was denied.
Bob West presented the second section of the ordinance which calls for amending the off street
parking requirements for the City of University Park.
The commission members discussed the current requirements in addition to the current staff
recommendation of 1 space per bedroom with visitors allowance. Concern was expressed for the
visitor’s requirement.
Doug Roach made a motion to approve the section of the ordinance as requested but without the
visitor’s requirement.
Randy Biddle seconded the motion.
Bob West recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the ordinance without the
additional visitors parking.
With a vote of 5-0, the motion was approved.
Mr. West asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the March 19, 2007 Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting. Bill Foose made a motion to approve the minutes. With a second from
Randy Biddle, the motion was approved unanimously.
With there being no further business before the Board, Mr. West adjourned the meeting.
_________________________
Robert H. West, Chairman
Planning & Zoning Commission
_________________________
Date
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/2007 AGENDA)
DATE: May 22, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Harry Persaud, MRTPI, AICP, Community Development Manager
SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consideration of an ordinance amending the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance by amending Section 22-101 (3) (a) providing
for the maximum number of dwelling units in the multi family zoning districts.
Background/Analysis:
The zoning ordinance provides the minimum lot area in square feet per dwelling unit in the multi
family zoning districts. The requirement is 2,400 sq. ft. in the MF-1 district, 1,800 sq. ft. in the
MF-2 district and 1,200 sq. ft. in the MF-3 district. The ordinance also provides a methodology
for determining the maximum number of dwelling units which may be constructed on a specific
lot or tract of land. Section 22-101 (3) (a) “Maximum Number of Dwelling Units” states as
follows:
In determining the maximum number of dwelling units, fractional units shall
be rounded up to the nearest whole number.
In practice staff has interpreted and used this language to round up any fraction when dividing
the lot area by the minimum square feet required per unit. The proposed amendment states as
follows: (a) Maximum Number of Dwelling Units
“In determining the maximum number of dwelling units that may be
constructed on a lot or parcel of land, if there is remaining lot area which is less than 100% of
the required minimum lot area for an additional unit, but which is greater than 50% of the
required area, an additional unit shall be permitted.”
The proposed ordinance will only allow fractional units of 0.5 and over to be rounded up to the
nearest whole number.
Recommendation:
The Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled to consider this item at its regular meeting
on May 21, 2007.
Attachments:
Proposed ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. _____________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY AMENDING SECTION 22-101 (3) (a)
PROVIDING MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS IN MULTIPLE-FAMILY
DISTRICTS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT;
PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE
NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH
OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,
the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of University Park and the City
Council of the City of University Park, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas with
reference to the granting of zoning classifications and changes, have given the requisite notices
by publication and otherwise, and have held due hearings and have forwarded a full and fair
hearing to all property owners generally, and City Council of the City of University Park is of the
opinion and finds that said zoning changes should be granted and that the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance should be amended; Now, Therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That Section 22-101 (a) “Maximum Number of Dwelling Units” of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of University Park, Texas, is hereby amended to
read as follows:
Section 22-101 Multiple-Family Dwelling Districts
“
…
(3) Development Standards
(a) Maximum Number of Dwelling Units
In determining the maximum number of dwelling units that may be constructed
on a lot or parcel of land, if there is remaining lot area which is less than 100% of the required
minimum lot area for an additional unit, but which is greater than 50% of the required area, an
additional unit shall be permitted.”
SECTION 2.
All ordinances of the City of University Park in conflict with the
provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 3.
Should any word, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or
section of this ordinance, or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended hereby, be
adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of
this ordinance as a whole or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so declared to be
invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance as a whole.
SECTION 4.
That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this
ordinance or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended hereby, shall be deemed guilty
of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction in the municipal court of the City of University Park,
Texas, shall be punished by a fine to exceed the sum of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for
each offense, and each and every day such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute
a separate offense.
SECTION 5.
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 22 day
of May 2007.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
(RLD/04/18/07)(15946)
ORDINANCE NO. ___________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING
THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY
PARK, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY AMENDING SECTION 22-101 (3) (a)
PROVIDING MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS IN MULTIPLE-FAMILY
DISTRICTS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT;
PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE
NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH
OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Duly passedby the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22 day of
May 2007.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
RECE'YED MAY 1 4 lOO7
([5}[J/JeJtt q; ~Jliel
j{) j _" lun! ild fL'
/)(/!/II\. Te.w,-_'_)5
\ fur j (COW
Honorable Blackie Holmes, Mayor
City of University Park
3800 University Blvd
University Park, TX 75225
Subject: Off-street Parking MF
Dear Sir:
First off! want to tell you that I own some old apartments that come under the above restriction,
I hope that I am not biased for I want to be fair to all concern.
I am against the purposed change unless you change all property, especially single family. I live
on a street that is really one way for at least one home that has 3 bedrooms has five cars and they
have parking problem. That is not only the case in our beloved Park Cities. Try to drive down
most any street and you will find the same condition.
Now, the people who live in the apartments are tax paying citizens for tax is a part of their rent.
Should you choose to pass the ordinance for only MF zoning, I feel that you would be
discriminating against those who occupy apartments. I have had tenants who have been my
clients for more than eight years and I know it would not have been fair to them.
I appreciate the problem we have in Park Citiies with parking. The real problem is that we are an
older generation or close to it, and each person in a household has an automobile. I hope that
you will consider this in your debrilation for I know you to be a fair person and this ordinance
would not be fair to all citizens in my opinion.
Everybody can't be a home owner, but why should we discriminate against those who can't? I'm
not a lawyer, but I don't think your ordinance would stand the test of non discrimination. Your
ordinance will not affect me in any way for I do not rent to S.M.U. student unless they are
graduate students and then I require one year rent in advance plus a security deposit. This is in
spit of the fact that I'm a graduate ofSMU, a veteran who graduated in 1948.
Let's find another solution to our parking problem that is fair to all concern. I love living in UP
jilt;~z(
RECEIVED MAY 15 1007
Jane S. Baskett
3421 Rosedale Avenue
University Park, Texas 75205
jsbaskett@aol.com / 469-232-0190
May 15,2007
Mayor James H. Holmes
University Park City Hall
University Park, Texas
(hand delivered)
Dear Mayor Holmes,
I am writing to you and members of the City Council about the zoning proposal to require a
minimum number of parking spaces for multi-family dwellings in certain parts of University Park. I hope
you will not enact the ordinance passed by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
I own and live in a townhouse on Rosedale Avenue west of Snider Plaza. If enacted as is, the
ordinance would immediately make our four-member homeowners association in violation of city
ordinances and subject to a $2,000-a-day fine.
The problem with parking on Rosedale -- and other streets near Snider Plaza -- is not with multi-family
units. It is with shoppers, university students and construction equipment. In fact, at one of the Snider
Plaza master plan input meetings, a townhouse owner said that the valet attendants at one Snider business
parked the customers' cars in front of her townhouse on Hursey Street.
I cannot stress enough the extent that construction contributes to congestion. The oversized equipment
takes up multiple parking spaces and often makes the street difficult navigate. For months, there has been
construction next to my townhouse. Three other properties in the same block are for sale as teardowns,
meaning construction equipment probably will be on the street for a long time to come.
When the shops are close, classes are out and no construction is going on, there is no parking problem.
At night, the street is deserted.
I also believe the ordinance unfairly targets multi-family dwellings. I've been down many single-family
area streets in University Park that are clogged with parked cars. Purdue Avenue east of Preston Road is a
good example of such a bottleneck.
To ease congestion, I would suggest:
-- have the ordinance apply to new construction only.
-- bar parking on one side of the street.
At the very least, I would request this change: Give property owners at least six months to comply.
Several months ago, when my neighbor told me that such a proposal was being considered, I told him
not to worry, that University Park wouldn't make such a requirement of existing dwellings. From what I
had seen of the University Park City Council in the half-dozen years I've lived in the Dallas area, it had
been a shrewd but fair-minded body. I hope that I was correct in that assessment.
Thank you for considering my arguments.
Sincerely,
~./ .-6~
J& S. Baskett
cc: City Manager Bob Livingston
Community Development Manager Harry N. Persaud
Larry Ley, president of Snider Plaza Owners Association (my homeowners association)
RECEIVED MAY 16 Z007
Nancy and Will Fulton
11415 Royalshire dr
Dallas, TX 75230
Dear Sirs and Madame,
I am writing in opposition to the proposed requirement of lon-site parking place per
bedroom for MF zoned property (plus continuing the requirement of 2 parking spaces for
1 bedroom units).
My husband and I and my sister and her husband (John and Maureen Stacy) own
duplexes at 3231-33 and 3235-37 Rosedale respectively. We bought the MF-3 zoned
properties in 2000 with the intention of maintaining the properties in good condition as
rental units until we could either sell them or redevelop them. When we bought the
properties we understood that the MF-3 zoning was the highest density zoning in
University Park and we estimated that in the future these lots would be worth more as
development sites.
We have owned these properties for 7 years we have added many thousand of dollars in
improvements, including additional parking spaces. All of our residents have their own
parking spot, none park on the street.
Our street is unique in that it is a one way street going east and there is parking allowed
only on the north side of the street. What that means is that regardless of what is built on
that street there will not be any additional parking on it than currently exists today.
No one on our street has had a problem with parking despite being so close to SMU and
Snider Plaza. Yet to fix a problem that does not exist on our street you propose the drastic
measure oflimiting what the property owners can do with their property. Our orooerties
will not be worth what they could be worth under the MF-3 zonin2 if this law is
enacted. In effect you will be taking away the capital appreciation we dreamed of to fund
our childrens' college funds and our retirement. Other areas of the city have parking
problems but you are not proposing to fix those parking issues on the backs of those
property owners.
We lived in University Park for 22 years. Our 4 daughters attended HPISD. We have
been very involved in the schools and the community.
Now we ask that you consider the full ramifications of what you are proposing. Rather
that decrease our property's value we would encourage you to look at enacting the same
parking rules on the west side of the shopping center as you have on the east. This would
be a good starting point.
Sincerely,
~/~ -Ct-jzfL)
J-j~ #CUj
N;tA ~~ --
r #acd-' .
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/2007 AGENDA)
DATE: May 22, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Harry Persaud, MRTPI, AICP, Community Development Manager
SUBJECT: Hold a public hearing and consideration of an ordinance approving an amended site
plan for Planned Development District PD-15 for the Highland Park Independent
School District, for property situated at 3505 Amherst Street, City of University Park
and providing for special conditions.
Background/Analysis:
HPISD is requesting approval of an amended site plan for Planned Development District PD-15
to allow for a free standing arbor to be located on the North side of the University Park
Elementary School. The proposed arbor to be constructed of cedar wood is 20 feet in length by
16 feet width and 10 feet high measured from existing grade. A site plan showing the proposed
location and details of the proposed arbor is attached.
Recommendation
The Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled to consider this item at its regular meeting
on May 21, 2007.
Attachments:
1. Proposed ordinance
2. Site plan and elevation drawings of the proposed arbor.
City Council Report
DATE: May 22, 2007
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Harry Persaud, Community Development Manager
RE:
PZ-07-008
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
John Polando, HPISD
LOCATION:
3505 Amherst Street, the same beingthe Planned Development District
PD-15, a tract of land situated North of Lovers Lane and West of Dickens
Ave, University Park, Texas.
REQUEST:
Requesting approval of an amendment to Planned Development District
PD-15 which will incorporate a free standing arbor to be located on the
North side of the University Park Elementary School.
EXISTING
ZONING:
PD-15
SURROUNDING
LAND USE:
Residential: North - SF-4, West – SF-2, East – SF-A & SF-4,
South – SF-3
STAFF
COMMENTS:
Planned Development District No. 15 was established in July, 1990, for
the Highland Park Independent School District on property commonly
known as 3505 Amherst Street, University Park, Texas. HPISD has
submitted an application requesting an amendment to the Planned
Development District, PD15 to allow for a free standing arbor to be
located on the North side of the University Park Elementary School. The
proposed arbor is 20 feet in length by 16 feet width and 10 feet high
measured from existing grade.
Property owners within 200 feet of the subject site were notified of the
public hearing and a notice was published in the Park Cities News on May
3, 2007.
RESPONSES:
At the time of this report, no one responded.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. PD application and supporting documents.
2. Proposed Ordinance.
3. Original Ordinance for PD-15.
4. Exhibit showing proposed free standing arbor.
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 APPROVING AN AMENDED SITE PLAN
FOR A PORTION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 15 FOR HIGHLAND
PARK INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, SAID PROPERTY BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO; PROVIDING
SPECIAL CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY
OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00)
FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
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 approval
of an amended site plan for that portion of Planned Development District No. 15, University Park
Elementary, said property being more particularly described in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and
made part hereof for all purposes.
SECTION 2
. That the amended detailed site plan setting forth the authorized land uses for
the property and the elevation drawings of a new proposed arbor is attached hereto as Exhibit “B”
and made a part hereof for all purposes, the same as if fully copied herein. That such site plan
contains the data required by Section 17-101 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 3
. That the granting of this amended site plan for a portion of Planned
Development District No. 15 is subject to the following special conditions:
A. Development of the property shall be in accordance with the approved amended site plan
and all provisions of Planned Development District No. 15 and the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance of the City of University Park, as heretofore amended and as amended hereby;
B. Additional special conditions for development of the Planned Development District will
be as follows:
1.The free standing arbor will be 16 feet by 20 feet in size and will not exceed 10 feet in
height as measured from grade.
2.The arbor will be constructed of cedar wood;
3. That except as previously amended and as amended hereby, the special conditions of PD
15 shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 4
. That all ordinances of the City of University Park in conflict with the
provisions of this ordinance or the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as amended hereby are hereby
repealed.
SECTION 5.
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section
of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not
affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part
decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and the same shall not affect the validity of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole.
SECTION 6.
That 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 7.
That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage
and the publication of the caption, as the law and Charter in such cases provide.
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22 of
May 2007.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
NINAWILSON, CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
(RLD/5-4-07)
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 APPROVING AN AMENDED SITE PLAN
FOR A PORTION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 15 FOR HIGHLAND
PARK INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, SAID PROPERTY BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO; PROVIDING
SPECIAL CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY
OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00)
FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22 day of
May 2007.
APPROVED:
____________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
CITY SECRETARY
AGENDA MEMO
(05/22/07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 17, 2007
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Bud Smallwood, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Ordinance Amending Building Requirements to Require Concrete Paving Between
the Rear Property Line and the Alley Pavement.
ITEM:
Property owners are currently required to add or repair sidewalks to meet city requirements as a
condition for granting a permit to build or remodel a home when the project is valued at $10,000
or greater.
The city continues to face problems in the alley such as tree and shrub encroachments and rutting
of the soil next to the alley pavement. This proposed ordinance would require residents to pave
with concrete the strip of land between their rear property line and the alley pavement. This
would eliminate the problems of rutting, encroachments, and overgrowth behind these properties.
The proposed ordinance would also change the threshold for requiring such changes to include all
improvements in excess of $10,000 instead of just home construction and remodels. This change
would affect projects such as swimming pool installations and major fence replacements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances to provide
requirements for the addition, repair, or replacement of public walks, alleys, and driveway approaches.
ATTACHMENTS:
?
Proposed Ordinance
?
Sample photo of alley rutting problem
?
Sample photo of alley encroachment problem
?
Sample photo of fully paved alley right-of-way
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Alley ROW paving ord 5-22-07.doc
2:05 PM 05/17/07
ORDINANCE NO. _________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, CHAPTER 3, BUILDING &
CONSTRUCTION, BY AMENDING SECTION 3.1413 TO PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE ADDITION, REPAIR, OR REPLACEMENT OF PUBLIC WALKS, ALLEYS, AND
DRIVEWAY APPROACHES; 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 FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00) FOR EACH
OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK,
TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
That Chapter 3, Article 3.1400, Section 3.1413, of the Code of Ordinances, City of
University Park, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 3.1413 Requirements for the Addition, Repair, or Replacement of Public Walks, Alleys,
and Driveway Approaches
(a)As a condition for the granting of a building permit for any improvements to real property, when the
estimated or readjusted cost of said improvements is ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) or greater:
(1)all public walks, if not existent or if, in the opinion of the director of public works, existing public walks
and driveway approaches are in a state of disrepair or constitute a hazard to pedestrian traffic, shall be
constructed on both the front and the side of the property; curb openings for abandoned driveways will be
closed and existing public walks and driveway approaches, where required, shall be repaired or replaced in
accordance with city specifications; and,
(2)all improvements and encroachments, including all landscaping materials (grass, trees, shrubs, and plants),
in the existing alley right-of-way abutting the property for which the permit is required shall be removed or
relocated onto the abutting private property by, and at the sole expense of, the abutting private property
owner, and the portion of the alley right-of-way between the edge of the alley paving and the property line
shall be paved with reinforced concrete at approximately the same grade as the alley paving, allowing for
proper drainage from the abutting property to the alley, such paving to be done in accordance with City
specifications for alley paving and by, and at the sole expense of, such abutting private property owner.
(b)When repair of public sidewalks on corner lots is required by this section, it shall be the responsibility
of the city to repair or replace existing handicap ramps or, in the absence of such a ramp, place or cause to be
placed, handicap ramps which comply with the requirements of the Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS) and
the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).”
SECTION 2.
That all provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of University Park, Texas, in
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Alley ROW paving ord 5-22-07.doc
2:05 PM 05/17/07
SECTION 3.
That should any word, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this
ordinance or of the Code of Ordinances, as amended hereby, be adjudged or held to be void or
unconstitutional, the same shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of said ordinance or the Code
of Ordinances, as amended hereby, which shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 4.
Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall
be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction in the municipal court of the City of University Park,
Texas, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each offense, and
each and every day any such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense.
SECTION 5.
That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the
publication of the caption, as the law and Charter in such cases provide.
nd
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22 day of May
2007.
APPROVED:
______________________________
JAMES H. HOLMES III, MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
________________________ _________________________________
CITY ATTORNEY NINA WILSON, CITY SECRETARY
(RLD/5-15-07)
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Alley ROW paving ord 5-22-07.doc
2:05 PM 05/17/07
ORDINANCE NO. _________________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS, AMENDING THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, CHAPTER 3, BUILDING &
CONSTRUCTION, BY AMENDING SECTION 3.1413 TO PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE ADDITION, REPAIR, OR REPLACEMENT OF PUBLIC WALKS, ALLEYS, AND
DRIVEWAY APPROACHES; 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 FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00) FOR EACH
OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
nd
DULY PASSED
by the City Council of the City of University Park, Texas, on the 22 day of May
2007.
APPROVED:
______________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY SECRETARY
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Alley ROW paving ord 5-22-07.doc
2:05 PM 05/17/07
Ruts along edge of alley
Encroachment into the alley right-of-way
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Alley ROW paving ord 5-22-07.doc
2:05 PM 05/17/07
Fully paved alley right-of-way
C:\Documents and Settings\nwilson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK31\Alley ROW paving ord 5-22-07.doc
2:05 PM 05/17/07
AGENDA MEMO
(05-22-07 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 17, 2007
TO:
Bob Livingston
City Manager
FROM:
Gene R. Smallwood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
SUBJECT:
Consider bids received for sidewalk replacement around the four
HPISD campuses.
Background.
Pursuant to discussions at the 12.05.06 Council regarding the
condition of sidewalks around the four HPISD campuses in the community, bids
were received on Friday, 05.18.07. The proposed project calls for the work to be
accomplished during the summer recess.
Please note that the scope of the project was increased significantly. The estimate
previously discussed was based on a brief survey by Code Inspection staff, who
apparently only designated the sidewalk with vertical displacement (“toe-trippers”).
As engineering staff developed the project documents, a number of other issues
were discovered, primarily relating to ADA accessibility. An example is the entire
length of sidewalk along the east side of Hyer Elementary. The sidewalk is in good
structural condition, but there is a severe cross-slope which should be corrected.
The result of adding ADA compliance to the “toe-tripper” list increased the
replacement square footage from 6,164 SF to 15,543 SF.
Consideration.
Bid tabs will be presented at the pre-meeting with a
recommendation for Council award.
AGENDA MEMO
(5/22/2007 AGENDA)
DATE:
May 17, 2007
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
Gerry Bradley, Director of Parks
SUBJECT: Barbara Hitzelberger Park Project Bids
BACKGROUND:
On April 25, 2007, staff opened sealed bids for the construction of Barbara Hitzelberger
Park. Of the four (4) bidders, two (2) bidders were immediately rejected for incomplete
bids. The high bid submitted by American Civil Contractors was 1.4 million. The low bid
for the project including all bid alternates was received from The Fain Group for
$709,000.00.
After reviewing the bids, the Park Advisory Board Chairman, Bill Pardoe and the Project
Architect, Coy Talley expressed their concerns about the price difference between the
two bidders. Staff has met with the President of the Fain Group, Larry Frazier, who
insured staff his company could build the park at the submitted bid price and meet
project specifications. Staff has also contacted The Fain Group references (City of
Rowlett and City of North Richland Hills), all of which were highly supportive of the
contractor’s performance and workmanship. Finally, in an effort to reduce concerns,
staff has also requested that Gallagher Construction be retained to help oversee the
inspection, coordination and project management of the project.
The total projected project budget is as follows:
Fain Group Construction Total Project Fees: $709,000.00
Remove Alternate # 1 ($18,310.00)
Remove Alternate # 3 ($ 6,941.00)
Total Construction Costs $683, 749.00
Gallagher Construction Fees (3%) $ 21,000.00
Project Contingency (10%) $ 68,375.00
Material Testing $ 7,500.00
Total Project Costs $780,624.00
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is requesting direction from City Council on how to proceed with the bid award to
The Fain Group for the construction of Barbara Hitzelberger Park Project.
ATTACHMENTS:
Barbara Hitzelberger Park Project Bid Tab