CM 1986-09-02 Minutes of September 2, 1986
The City Council of the City of CoppelI met in a special called work
session on Tuesday September 2, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 255 Parkway Boulevard. The following members
were present:
Lou Duggan, Mayor
Dean Wilkerson, Councilman
Tom Morton, Councilman
Bill Smothermon, Councilman
Jim Cowman, Councilman
Mark Wolfe, Councilman
Dan Stanton, Councilman
Mayor Pro Tem Dale Ware was not present at this work session.
The following Commissioners were present from the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Coppell:
Ray Smedul, Chairman
Steve Eberhardt, Co~m~issioner
Perry Jasiecki, Commissioner
Joe Munsch, Commissioner
Frank Pope, Commissioner
Also present at the meeting were City Attorney Larry Jackson, Interim
City Manager Frank Trando, City Engineer Ed Powell, Assistant City
Manager Vivyon Bowman, Consulting Engineer Wayne Ginn, Secretary Lfnda
Grau and Secretary Linda Glidewell.
The meeting was called to order and everyone asked to stand while
Councilman Jim Cowman gave the invocation.
WORK SESSION (Open to the public)
Item 1: Work session on the Street Assessment Program and approval of
cost estimation, collection policy, and assessment plan.
Consulting Engineer Wayne Ginn made the presentation to the
Councilmembers. Mr. Ginn proceeded to explain the assessment program
for Beltline Road from I635 north/south to Denton Tap Intersection. Mr.
Ginn was asking for a consensus from the Council on four (4) items which
were as follows:
i. Will the low bidder be awarded
2. Will this be a four (4) or six (6) lane project
3. Will the assessments be based on four (4) or six (6)
lanes
4. Will they assess the maximum amount or assess the amount
required to cover the $2,000,000.00 obligated in CO's.
(See attached sheet for Preliminary Beltline Road Street Assessment
Program presented by Ginn, Inc. dated August 18, 1986)
Following further discussion Mr. Ginn introduced Mr. Schrader who
further explained the Time Line for Road Assessment - Beltline
north/south from I635 dated August 26, 1986 (See attached sheet). Mr.
Schrader suggested to postpone the public notice and hearing until the
Engineering report is submitted and the decision of DP&L concerning this
assessment program. Following further discussion on this item it was
the consensus of the Councilmembers to:
1. Accept the low bidder - which is Ed Bell Construction
Company~ Dallas, Tx. (See attached sheet "Bid Results"
July 31, 1986 - I0:00 AM.
2. Accept the six (6) lane project
3. Assessments will be based on four (4) lanes
4. Assess the maximum amount of $130.00/LF
These four items will be addressed openly at the public session at a
future Council meeting.
Those persons speaking from the audience were Jo Bob Fikes who stated
that the railroad should be assessed and Jerry Jordon representing
Hattie Mae Lesley had questions concerning the planned public hearing.
Mr. Schrader assured those present that property owners will be notified
fourteen (14) days in advance of the public hearing and a public notice
will be posted three (3) weeks in advance in all Coppell newspapers
which include the Coppell News Weekly, Citizens Advocate and the Coppell
Gazette.
Item 2: Joint work session with the Planning and Zoning Commission on
the proposed Comprehensive Master Plan for the City of
Coppell.
Chairman Ray Smedul of the Planning and Zoning Commission called the
meeting to order. Chairman Smedul referred to meetings held with J.T. ---~
Dunkin and Associates, Inc. City Engimeer Ed Powell presented the
proposed Master Plan for the City of Coppell and requested input from
the City Councilmembers concerning this proposed plan. Mr. Dunkin
explained the existing land use, future land use and thoroughfare plan
pointing out various interchanges on State Highway 121. Chairman Smedul
then turned the meeting over to Mayor Duggan and Coumcilmembers.
Following a lengthy discussion between Mayor Duggan, Councilmsmbers and
D.T. Dunkin, Mayor Duggan and Councilmembers, requested that Mr. Dunkin
review the following areas of concern:
I. Review west side corridor
2. Review rezoning of Beltlime and I635
3. Review zoning south of Beltline and east of MacArthur
intersection
4. Review industrial zoning in the left corridor
5. Review Fairway Drive and Beltlime Road
6. Review commercial property at Beltline Road and I635
7. Focus on land use of Town Center.
8. Study road location in northeast corner
9. Review MacArthur retail island
10. Study and include zoning of surrounding cities and
their thoroughfare plans and how it compares to the City
of Coppell
11. Proper location of State Highway 121. --~
Having no further business to discuss the meeting was then adjourned.
GINN, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS
August 18, 1986
Preliminary
Belt Line Road Street Assessment Program
The street assessments for the Belt Line Road Improvement
project have been prepared by three different methods. These
three methods are summarized on the next two pages for
comparison. The results have been tabulated for both a 6-lane
and a 4-lane project.
Method A, as shown in the table, is based on assessing the
property owners for the total project cost that is assessible
without deducting the funds appropriated by Dallas County from
that figure. The gross cost to the City using this method
includes all non-assessible items (ie., landscaping, street
lights, and traffic signalization), 10% of the paving and
engineering costs and all non-recoverable assessments (ie.,
Public R.O.W.'s and other non-assessible property). The net
total cost to the City is found by deducting the funds
appropriated by Dallas County from the City's gross cost for the
above items mentioned.
Method B is based on assessing the property owners for the net
total project cost that is assessible which is found by
deducting the funds appropriated by Dallas County from the total
project cost. The gross cost to the City using this method is
based on the sum of the costs for all the non-assessible items,
10% of the paving and engineering and all non-recoverable
assessments.
Method C is based on deductiRg both the funds appropriated by
Dallas County and the 1984 bend funds originally estimated for
this project from the total project cost to arrive at a net
figure of which is to be accounted for through street
assessments. Since the net figure accountable from street
assessments is a fixed figure, the assessment to be applied is
directly related to the recoverable assessments. Therefore, the
actual linear footage which is recoverable is what determines
the assessment rate per front foot. The net total cost to the
City using this method is the 1984 bond funds originally
estimated for this project (ie. $3,660,000.00).
In all three methods, the front footages are the same. The
total frontage length for this project is 17,100 linear feet.
The recoverable assessed frontage with DP&L'S frontage included
is 16,710 linear feet. The recoverable assessed frontage
without DP&L's frontage included is 11,962 linear feet.
..eliminaD,
August 18, 1986
Preliminary
Method A (6-Lane)
Total Bid Construction Cost & Engineering Fees = $6,094,015.
Less Non-Assessible Items = $ -507,187.
Total Project Cost Assessible = $5,586,827,
(Assessmen%
1. Pavin9 and Engineering Portion = $3,073,137.46 x (0.90) =$2,765,823.
(Assessed @ 90%)
2. Drainage,Curb and Sidewalk Portion=S2,513,690.41 x (1.00) =$2,513,690.
(Assessed @ 100%)
*** TOTAL 1 & 2 =$5,279,514.
$ For Assessments
~essment/Front Foot:
~ = $308.74/LF
17,100 LF
w/DP & L ($308.74/LF) (16,710 LF) = $5,159,045.40
w/out DP & L ($308.74/LF) (11,962 LF) = $3,693,147.88
Gross Cost To City: (w/DP & L) ~
1. Non-Assessible Items = $ 507,187.54 $ 507,187.54
2. 10% Paving and Engineering = $ 307,313.75 $ 307,313.75
3. Non-Recoverable Assessments =~ ~
Gross Cost = $ 934,970.01 $2,400,867.53
4. Less Dallas Co. Participation = $-700,000.00 $ -700,000.00
Net Total Cost to City: $ 234,970.01 $1,700,867.53
-4-
August 18, 1986
Preliminary
Method A (4-Lane)
Total Bid Construction Cost & Engineering Fees = $5,921,699.:
Less Non-Assessible Items = $ -553.347.!
Total Project Cost Assessible = $5,368,351.~
(Assessment
1. Paving and Engineering Portion = $2,854,661.33 x (0.90) =$2,569,195.:
(Assessed @ 90%)
2. Drainage,Curb and Sidewalk Portion=S2,513,690-41 x (1.00) =513~_~_~~
(Assessed @ 100%)
*** TOTAL 1 & 2 =$5,082,885.~
$ For Assessments
Assessment/Front Foot:
~ = $297.24/LF
17,100 LF
w/DP & L ($297.24/LF) (16,710 LF) = $4,966,880.40
w/out DP & L ($297.24/LF) (11,962 LF) = $3,555,584.88
Gross Cost To City: ~ ~
1. Non-Assessible Items = $ 553,347.54 $ 553,347.54
2. 10% Paving and Engineering = $ 285,466.13 $ 285,466.13
3. Non-Recoverable Assessments =~_~1_~ ~
Gross Cost = $ 954,818.88 $2,366,114.40
4. Less Dallas County Partic. = ~ $ -700,000.0~
Net Total Cost to City: = $ 254,818.88 $1,666,114.40
-5-
August 18, 1986
Preliminary
Method B (6-bane)
Total Bid Construction cost and Engineering Fees = $ 6,094,015.41
Less Non-Assessible Items = $ -507,187.54
Less Dallas County Participation = $ -700,000.00
Net Total Project Cost Assessible $ 4,886,827.87
(Assessment $)
1. Paving and Engineering Portion
(Assessed @ 90%) $2,688,089.58 x (0.90)= $ 2,419,280.62
2. Drainage, Curb and Sidewalk Portion
(Assessed @ 100%) $2,198,738.29 x (1.00)= $ 2,198,7~8,29
*** TOTAL 1 & 2 = $ 4,618,018.91
$ For Assessments
Assessment/Front Foot:
~ = $270.06/LF
17,100 LF
w/DP & L ($270.06/LF) (16,710 LF) = $4,512,702.60
w/out DP & L ($270.06/LF) (11,962 LF) = $3,230,457.72
Gross Cost to City: ~ ~
1. Non-Assessible Items = $ 507,187.54 $ 507,187.54
2. 10% Paving and Engineering = $ 268,808.96 $ 268,808.96
3. Non-Recoverable Assessments = 05~ ~
Gross Cost to City = $ 881,312.81 $2,163,557.69
August 18, 1986
Preliminary
Method B (4-Lane)
Total Bid Construction cost and Engineering Fees = $ 5,921,699.28
Less Non-Assessible Items = $ -553,347.54
Less Dallas County Participation = $ -700,000.00
Net Total Project Cost Assessible $ 4,668,351.74
(Assessment $)
1. Paving and Engineering Portion
(Assessed @ 90%) $2,482,629.46 x (0.90)= $ 2,234,366.51
2. Drainage, Curb and Sidewalk Portion
(Assessed @ 100%) $2,185,722.28 x (1.00)= $ 2.18~,722,28
*** TOTAL 1 & 2 = $ 4,420,088.79
$ For Assessments
Assessment/Front Foot:
84.420.088.79 = $258.48/LF
17,100 LF
w/DP & L ($258.48/LF) (16,710 LF) s $4,319,200.80
w/out DP & L ($258.48/LF) (11,962 LF) = $3,091,937.76
Gross Cost to City: (w/DP & L) ~
1. Non-Assessible Items = $553,347.54 $ 553,347.54
2. 10% Paving and Engineering = $248,262.95 $ 248,262.95
3. Non-Recoverable Assessments = 8100.887.99 ~
Gross Cost to City = $902,498.48 $2,129,762.52
-7-
August 18, 1986
Preliminary
Method C (6-Lane)
Total Bid Construction Cost and Engineering Fees = $ 6,094,015.41
Less Dallas County Participation = $ -700,000,00
Gross Project Cost to City of Coppell = $ 5,394,015.41
Less 1984 Bond Funds Appropriated = $-3.660,000,00
Net Project Cost Financed Through Assessment = $ 1,734,015.41
Assessment/Front Foot:
**(Must determine ahead of time whether or not the City can collect
the assessment from DP & L for this method to work)
(w/DP & L): $1.734.015.41 = $ 103.77/LF
16,710 LF
(w/out DP & L) $1.734.015.41 = $ 144.96/LF
11,962 LF
Gross Cost to City ~ $5,394,015.41
Less Recoverable Assessments = $1,734,015.41
Net Total Cost to City = $3,660,000.00
-8-
" 171
August 18, 1986
Preliminary
Method C (4-Lane)
Total Bid Construction Cost and Engineering Fees = $ 5,921,699.28
Less Dallas County Participation = $ -700,000.00
Gross Project Cost to City of Coppell = $ 5,221,699.28
Less 1984 Bond Funds Appropriated = $-3.660,000,00
Net Project Cost Financed Through Assessment = $ 1,561,699.28
Assessment/Front Foot:
**(Must determine ahead of time whether or not the City can collect
the assessment from DP & L for this method to work)
(w/DP & L): $1,561,699.28 = $ 93.46/LF
16,710 LF
(w/out DP & L) S1.56~,699,28 = $130.56/LF
11,962 LF
Gross Cost to City = $5,221,699.28
Less Recoverable Assessments = $1,561,699.28
Net Total Cost to City = $3,660,000.00
***NOTE:
If the City elects to assess for a 4-Lane roadway using Method C but
constructs the full 6-Lanes, the 4ifference in cost to be picked up by
the City would be as follows:
Assessments needed for 6-Lanes = $1,734,015.41
Actual Assessments collected(for 4-Lane) = S1,561,699.28
Cost Difference to be picked up by City = $ 172,316.13
August 26, 1986
Tine Line for Road Assessment - Beltline N/S from 635
Council ¢~t¥ ~t&~f SVB
8/26 COUNCIL MEETING -Deliver 1st
-Direct SVB not,ce of
to handle hearing to
advertisement newspaper
of hearing
no~icea [ATTACHMENT eli
-Direct SVB to
notify property
owners of hearing
9/2 WORKSHOP SESSION
* Cost Estimation
-discuss ¢ or
6 lanes
-discuss bids
-direct city atty.
to define aeses$1ble
cost items
* Enforcement: Default
-collection policy [ATTACHMENT #2]
* Assese~'t Plan
-FRONT FOOT
9/3-9/8 -Arty defines -Staff to
asseasible develop
cost items cost
formul&
9/5 -Mail notice
of hearing
to 9ropert¥
owner
9/9 ~OUNCIL MEETING -Deliver 2nd
-Determine the notice of
necessity of hearing to
improvement ~per
COUNCIL CITY STAF. F SVB
-Order the improvement
(4 or 6 lanes)
· ' TRIGGERS 9/9
AS THE LI~N DATE
-Adopt/award
contract
-Adopt FRONT
FOOT PLAN
-Adopt assessm't
formula
-Amend Aesesem*t
Ordinance for
enforcement of
collection
procedures
9/10-9/22 -Develop
enhancement
values on
proper~¥
9/16 -Deliver 3rd
notice of
hearing to
paper
9/23 -Public hearing
.on estimated
assessm'~8 from
the "special
benefit" derived
from the road
improvement
-Adopt special
ONCE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS OCCURRED, THE ROAD WORK BEGINS
AND ASSESSSMENT NOTICES ARE DELIVERED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
ASSESSMENT COLLECTIONS BEGIN AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE
AND THE COUNCIL HAS ACCEPTED THE WORK. THE FIRST PAYMENT
FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER IS DUE 30 DAYS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF
THE WORK BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
~TTACHMENT ~1
Schedule of Hearing Noticee for the CoDPell Gazette
Newspaper By Delivered By Publication Date
8/26 SVB 8/29
9/9 SVB 9/12
9/16 SVB 9/19
' NOTE
SVB WILL PREPARE THE NEARING NOTICE FOR ABUTTING PROPERTY
OWNERS, AND WILL MAIL THE NOTICES ON 9/5. THIS MAILING DATE
IS WELL OVER THE 2 WEEK REQUIREMENT BY THE ROAD ASSESSMENT
ORDINANCE (~85-353).
Example of the Hearing Notice
NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING
September 23, 1986
MEETING TIME: 8:00 P.M.
MEETING PLACE: City Hall Town Center
255 Parkway Boulevard
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of
Coppell will hold a Public Nearing at 8:00 p.m. at the City
Rall (Coppell Town Center) at 255 Parkway Boulevard on ~he
23rd day c~ Sepsember, 1986 for the opportunity of public
discussion concerning the establishment o~ special benefits
derived ~rom the improvements on Beltline Road North/South
~rom Interstate 635.
ATTACHMENT
TEXAS PROPERTY TAX CODE: COLLECTION POLICY
~ollections and Delinquency
Subtitle E. Coileetim and Delinquency
.', '~ ~ Chapter 31. Collections
::' ~ Sec. 31.01. Tax Bills·
· ~ S~c. 31.02. Delinquency Da~e.
.' ' ~ See. 31.03. Split Payment of Taxes.
See. 31.04. Postponement of Delinquency D~te.
i:..~ . :; ' See. 31.05. Discounts.
~ee. 31.06. Medium of Payment.
::,.,, See. 31.0'/. Certain Payments Accepted.
· . ~; Sec. 31.08. Tax Certificate.
, ~: ~ Sec. 31.09. Reporls and Remittances of State Taxes.
· v · ,,~ See, 31.10. Reports and Remittances of Other Taxes.
~4 Sec. 31.1 I. Refunds of Overpayments or Erroneous Payments.
Coil, ons and Delinquency
Chapter 32. Tax Liens and Pemmal Liability
.Sec. 32.01. Tax Lien.
Sec. 32.015. Recording Tax Lien on Manufactured Home.
Sec. 32.02. Restrictions on a Mineral Interest Tax Lien.
Sec. 32.03. Rcslric~ions on Personal Properly Tax Lien.
Sec. 32.04. Prioritim Among Tax Liens.
Sec. 32.05. Priority of Tax Liens ov~ Other Properly
Interests.
Sec. 32~6. Transfer of Tax Lien.
,Sec. 32.0'/. P~n, onal Liability for Tax.
ctions and Delinquency
Clmpter 33. Delinq~eocy
Su~pter A. ~ml ~s
33~1 I. Waiver of Pen~t~ ~ lineal
33~7. Additional Pe~ly For Coll~ion
[~fions 33.08 to 33.20 ~ for ex~n~ion]
Su~h~pter B. ~ure of P~l ~o~y
33.22. Institution of ~u~.
33.~. ~nd for Payment ofTen.
~.~. Notice of Tax ~c.
[~ions 33.26 to 33.~ ~ for ex~on]
Su~pter C. ~Unq~nt T~ ~its
33.41. Suit to Coll~ ~li~nt Tax.
33.42. Taxes Includ~ in Fo~l~u~ Suit.
33.~. Joinder of ~her T~ing Units.
33.45. Pl~ding and An~n8 to Claims Fil~.
33.~. Partition of Real ~y.
33A7. Tax Records ~ E~n~.
33.~. Recove~ of C~u and Ex~n~.
33.49. Liability of Taxi~ Unil for C~.
33~. Adjud~ Value.
33.S2. Ju~mem for Cu~t T~.
273
Col .ions and Delinquency /7~
Clmpter 34. Tax S~les m~l Redemption'
Subchapter A. Tax S~les
Sec. 34.01. Sale of Property.
Sec. 34.02. Distribution of
Sec. 34.03. Disposition of Excess Proceeds.
Sec. 34.04. Claims for Ezc~s Proceeds.
S~e. 34.05. Resale by Tazin~ Unit.
Sec. 34.06. Distribution of Proeee~ of Ret, ale.
Sec. 34.07. Subrotation of Purchaser at Void
~c. 34.0~. Repealed.
[Sections 34.09 to 34.20 ~rve~ for expaMion]
Subchapter B. Redemption
Sec, 34,'~'1, Right of Redemption.
Sec. 34.22. Evidence of Title to Redeem Rea] Property.
~ec. 34.7.3. Distribution of Redemption Proceeds.
297
BELT LINE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
JULY 31, 1986 - 10:00 AM
BID RESULTS
CQNT~ACTOR 6-LANE 4-LANE
Ed Bell Construction Co. 5,540,642.41 5,368,326.28
Dallas, TX
L. H. Lacy Company 5,577,852.20 5,395,896.80
Dallas, TX
Glenn Thurman, Inc. 5,843,142.40 5,634,878.32
Mesquite, TX
Goodbrand Construction 5,894,287.70 5,623,768.50
Irving, TX
Southwestern Contracting Co. 5,907,850.93 5,694,943.03
Dallas, TX
Austin Paving Company 6,019,881.84 5,812,020.30
Dallas, TX
Tiseo Paving Company 6,055,798.45 5,821,494.65
Richardson, TX
Jenson Construction Company 6,180,544.66 6,039,850.31
Dallas, TX
Martin K. Eby Construction Co. 6,280,214.70 6,034,806.70
Fort Worth, TX
Charles Cohen, Inc. 6,550,413.28 6,130,362.17
Dallas, TX
W. T. Stephens Contracting Co. 8,785,314.35 8,385,172.85
Houston, TX
Lou Duggan, Mayor
ATTEST:
Linda Grau, Secretary
MINUTES 090286
MNITS